Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-02-05 Traffic Correspondence III SPR � Mitt Romney Kerry Healey Oaniel A. Grabauskas John Co Nano Governor Lt, Governor Secretary COMM" ' nor Office of the Commissioner MAY a Pow I' �udIVliV�a!�l f'1"sl#i Vi1-INT April 30, 2004 p Ross Hamlin Eaglewood Properties, LLC P,O. Box 337 Topsfield, MA 01983 Dear Mr. Hamlin: Please find attached the Massachusetts Highway Department's M.G.L. Chapter 30, Section 61 Finding for the Eaglewood Shops project (EOEA# 13041) in North Andover. The finding will be incorporated into Massachusetts Highway Department permits issued .for this project. If you have any questions regarding this finding, please call J. LioneI Lucien, P,E,, Manager of the Public/Private Development Unit, at(617) 973-7341, incerely, r John Cogliano JC/ksn1 11,k�s ac°husetts Highway Department Ten Park Plaza, Boston, IVIA 021 i 6-3973 !6 U) :,73-700) I i Cc Astrid Glynn, Deputy Secretary Luisa Paiewonsky, Deputy Cornmissioner Thomas Broderick, P.E., Chief Engineer Kenneth S. Miller, P.E., Director, Bureau of Transportation Planning and Development James Hunt, MEPA Director, EOEA John Blundo, P.E.,Deputy Chief Engineer, Projects Gregory Prendergast, Deputy Chief Engineer,Environmental Stephen O'Donnell, District 4 Director William R. Bent,P.E., State Traffic Engineer Stanley Wood, P.E., Highway Design Engineer, Highway Design Gerald Solomon,Director,Right of Way Bureau David Anderson,P.E., Manager, Project Management Public/Private Development Unit files (2 COPIERS) . Planning Board, Town of North Andover Men.ima.Q.1t.Valley Planning Commission Margaret Dwyer,Project Director, MassRides i 1 MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT FINDING PURSUANT TO M.G.L. CHAPTER 30, SECTION 61 PROJECT NAME: Eaglewood Shops PROJECT LOCATION: North Andover PROJECT PROPONENT: Eaglewood Properties EOEA NUMBER: 13041 I, Prot Description Full-build development of the proposed project involves the development of 77,000 square feet of retail space in the town of North Andover. The retail project will be located on a 13.3 acre site on Route 114, across from the Eagle Tribune, The retail project will provide 440 parking spaces and is estimated to have a cost of approximately 15 million dollars. The project proponent will apply to the Massachusetts Highway Department (MassHighway) for a permit under M.G.L. c. 81, § 21 for access to Route 114 and will apply for a traffic signal permit to be issued to the Town of North Andover under M,G.L. c. 85, § 2, II. MEPA History The proponent prepared and submitted, pursuant to M.G.L. c. 30, § 61 and 62A-H of the _VaS<�s'1'us—',:; ! �1',n.2'�`rynental. Pol ,^y i ct(�_'FPA) and.i"s ? llr; e 2:rtting s`..`. ,l:l :t?.n2.� 13t01-11"MR 11.00), an Expanded Environmental Notification Form (May 24, 2003)1 and a Single Environmental Impact Report (September 24, 2003), both of which analyze the environmental impacts of the development of 77,000 square feet of retail space, On October 31, 2003, the Secretary of Environmental Affairs issued a certificate stating that the SEIIt adequately and properly complied with MEPA and its implementing regulations, Dates in parentheses refer to when notice of availabi.l.ity for public r_evi,ew was published in The Environmental monitor for ;_.)ie reopective environmental disclosure document . MassHighway has reviewed and commented on the above MEPA submissions and has considered the comments of various parties on the Expanded ENF and SEIR, in connection with the permit applications to be submitted by the proponent, This Section 61 Finding is based upon information disclosed and discussed in the MEPA review process. in. Overall Project Traffic Impacts Full-build occupancy of the retail project is expected to generate an additional 5,900 vehicle-tripsZ to and from the site during an average weekday, including 540 vehicle-trips during the weekday PM peak hour. Full-build occupancy of the retail project is expected to generate an additional 7,950 vehicle-trips to and from the site during an average Saturday, including 755 vehicle-trips during the Saturday peak hour. MassHighway hai assessed the impacts of this anticipated traffic load on the surrounding regionai roadway network based upon information set forth in the Expanded ENF and SEIR. In the absence of mitigating highway improvements, Eaglewood Shops-related traffic would be expected to have generally detrimental operational and safety impacts in a number of primary areas. In North Andover these include; the Route t 14/main site drive intersection; the Route I I4/Eagle Tribune driveway intersection; the Route 114/Northmark Bank Entrance driveway intersection; the Route 114/Northmark Bank exit driveway intersection; the Route 114/Waverly Road/Cotuit Street intersection; the Route I I4/Route 133/Peters Street intersection; the Route 114/Route 125/R.oute 133 intersection; and the Route 114/Andover Bypass intersection. In Andover, this includes the Route 133/High Street intersection. The specific traffic impacts at each of these locations and the mitigation measures required to address them are detailed in Part IV and Part V of this Section 61 Finding. IV. Specific Project Im acts and Mitigation ation Measures MassHighway has analyzed the operational and safety impacts in the affected state highway area due to the proposed retail project and has determined that the mitigation measures outlined below are required to minimize the traffic impacts of thus project. Based on discussions way, the project proponent has committed to under4ake the following mitigation measures in cooperation with the identified parties. Technical terms used in this Finding are as defined in the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacii:r Manual. (2000) . 2 Route 114/Eaglewood Shops main site driveway The 2008 Build with traffic mitigation scenario indicates that LOS for this new signalized intersection will be at Levels BB (Average Delay= 12/16 seconds) during the weekday PM/Saturday peak hours, Prior to any site occupancy, the proponent will construct this intersection in accordance with conceptual and 100 percent plans to be submitted to and approved by MassHighway. The proponent will construct an exclusive left-turn lane on the Route 114 northbound approach and exclusive right turn lane on the Route 114 southbound approach. Any work that would require breaking the pavement surface, such as installing conduit, must be completed during the construction of the site access drive, If approved, and as directed by MassHighway, the proponent will �-fgaalize this intersection. If not approved, we may require alternative mitigation. For a description of additional mitigation measures at this location, see the section entitled Traffic Signal TnterconnectioiVCoordination S stem. There are no additional feasible means to avoid or minimize the project's traffic impacts at this location that the proponent could be required to implement. Route 114/E_aRle Tribune site driveway intersection For the 2008 No-Build scenario, weekday PM/Saturday peak hour LOS at this unsignalized intersection will be at Levels B/A(Average Delay=25/1.1 seconds). The 2008 Build without traffic mitigation scenario indicates that LOS for this movement will be at Levels C/A (Average Delay= 34/1.6 seconds) during the weekday PM/Saturday peak hours, There are no additional feasible means to avoid or minimize the project's traffic impacts at this location that the proponent could be required to implement, Route 114/Northmark Bank Entrance driveway intersection For the 2008 No-Build scenario, weekday PM/'Saturday peak Hour LOS at this unsignalized intersection will be at Levels A/A (Average Delay= 1.0/1.0 second). The 2008 Build without traffic mitigation scenario indicates that LOS for this movement wil l be at Levels A/A(Average Delay= 1.0/1.0 second) during the weekday PM/Saturday peak hours. There are no additional feasible means to avoid or minimize the project's traffic impacts at this location that the proponent could be requited to implement. 3 Route 114/Northmark Bank Exit driveway intersection For the 2008 No-Build scenario, weekday PM/Saturday peak hour LOS at this unsignalized intersection will be at Levels A/A (Average Delay=2.0/1.0 seconds). The 2008 Build without traffic mitigation scenario indicates that LOS for this movement will be at Levels A/A (Average Delay= 2.6/1.2 seconds) during the weekday PM/Saturday peak hours. There are no additional feasible means to avoid or minimize the project's traffic impacts at this location that the proponent could be required to implement. Route 114/Waverly Road/Cotuit Road intersection For the'2008 No-Build scenarios weekday PIVVSaturday pea.'*hour LOS for this si,;,=rlized i€,te:section will be at Levels a!Ia (Average Delay=66/38 seconds). The 2008 Build without traffic mitigation scenario indicates that LOS far this'intersect.ion will be at Levels E/D (Average Delay=73/46 seconds) during the weekday PM/Saturday peak hours. With mitigation in place, the 2008 Build scenario indicates that the intersection will operate at LOS E/D (Average Delay 67/45 seconds) during the weekday PM/Saturday peak hours. For a description of mitigation measures at this location, see the section entitled Traffic Signal IntercoruiectioCoordination System, There are no additional feasible means to avoid or minimize the project's traffic impacts at this location that the proponent could be required to implement Route 114/Route 133/Peters Street intersection For the 2008 No-Build scenario, weekday PM/Saturday peak hour LOS for this signalized intersection will be at Levels E/E (Average Delay= 60/59 seconds). The 2008 Build without traffic mitigation scenario indicates that LOS for this intersection will be at Levels F/F (Average Delay= 85/87 seconds) during the weekday PM/Saturday peak hours. With mitigation in place, the 2008 Build scenario indicates that the intersection will operate at LOS E/E (Average Delay= 61/68 seconds) during the weekday PM/Sat-irday peals hour,;. For a description of mitigation measures at this location, see the section entitled Traffic Signal Intercojulectiorl/Coordination System. There are no additional feasible means to avoid or minimize the project's traffic impacts at this location that the proponent could be required to implement Route 114/Route 125/Route 133 For the 2008 No-Build scenario, weekday PNI/Saturday peak hour LOS for this sig-realized intersection will beat Levels F/F (Average Delay_ 102/102 seu,-mis). Thl-. 2008 Build without 4 h'affic mitigation scenario indicates that LOS for this intersection will be at Levels F/F (Average Delay— 108/105 seconds) during the weekday PM/Saturday peak hours. With mitigation in place, the 2008 Build scenario indicates that the intersection will operate at LOS F/F (Average Delay= 109/91 seconds) during the weekday PM/Saturday peals hours. For a description of mitigation measures at this location, see the section entitled _Traffic Signal Interconnection/Coordination System. There are no additional feasible means to avoid or minimize the project's traffic impacts at this location that the proponent could be required to implement Route 114/Andover Bypass intersection For the'l 0o No.-Build scenario, weekday PM/Saturday peat hour.LOS for this signalized intersection will be at Levels E/C (Average Delay= 66/23 seconds). The 2008 Build without traffic mitigation scenario indicates that LOS for this intersection will be at Levels E/C (Average Delay= 69/28 seconds) during the weekday PM/Saturday peak hours. There are no additional feasible means to avoid or minimize the project's traffic impacts at this location that the proponent could be required to implement. Route 133/High Street intersection For the 2008 No-Build scenario, weekday PM/Saturday peak hour LOS for this signalized intersection will be at Levels B/A (Average Delay= 19/8 seconds). The 2008 Build without traffic mitigation scenario indicates that LOS for this intersection will be at Levels C/A(Average Delay=21/8 seconds) during the weekday PM/Saturday peak hours. This intersection is not under MassHighway jurisdiction. If necessary, the determination of appropriate mitigation measures at this intersection should be made between the proponent and the Town of Andover. V. Other Mitation Measures Traffic Signal Inters„oiinectioti/Coordinati6ia System If warranted and approved and as directed by MassHighway, the proponent will install all necessary equipment in order to operate certain traffic signals in the vicinity of the project as a "closed loop" interconnection/coordination system prior to any site occupancy. This traffic signal system will be implemented in accordance with conceptual and 100 percent plans, specifications and estimates to be submitted to and approved by MassHighway. This plan will be refined as the design progresses to the 100 percent level. The traffic signals to be operated in this system inchjde those located at the following intersections; 5 • the Route 114/Waverly Road/Cotuit Road intersection; • the Route 114/Englewood Shops intersection; • the Route 114/Route .133/Peters Street intersection; and • the Route 114/Route 125/Route 133 intersection. Trip Qeneration Reduction Measures The proponent will conduct Transportation Demand Management (TDM) treasures aimed at reducing site trip generation. These TDM measures shall include, but are not limited to; the designation of an on-site transportation coordinator, promoting the use of flex-tune work scheduling by employees at the site, and the provision of project parking supply as preferred parking spaces.rgr.employees participating :n carpools'and vanpoois. Also, the propoilort w+il inst•ffl on-site,bi;.ycle storage racks for employees and Matrons and will ensure that the site is designed appropriately to comply with the Merrimack Regional Planning Commission's bicycle control committee design standards, 'The proponent should work with MassRides, the,new travel options provider, in order to develop and market the TDM program. Effective marketing by the proponent should include regular dissemination of appropriate commuter information and other techniques such as running yearly events to promote transit and shared ride commuting modes. 6 E FINDINGS For the reasons stated above, MassHighway hereby finds that, with implementation of the mitigation measures described above, all practicable means and measures will be taken to avoid or minimize adverse traffic and related impacts to the environment resulting frown the Eaglewood Shops project, Appropriate conditions consistent with this ,Section 61 Finding will be included in the access and traffic signal pern-iit to be issued by MassHighway in order to describe more fully and ensure implementation of these measures. A ril30.t_L_�_j_-' w DATE J o h i i C o g-o iano Commissioner 7 i APR-19--2005 10 :27 AM ANDOVER STRATEGIC ALLIAN 978 470 4800 P. 02 j I Tranoporintlan Land Owolopment gnteltottmootb� Affik 11arvlaQa 1tn WalnutS�tt ', P.0.3"9161 Weberkmn,iv1A M71-9131 617 924 im FAX 617 924 U" fdentarendutn To; Boss Hamlin hose: April 18,2005 Sagiewood Properties,LLC ProlactNO., ot3 % From l'ttlrick 17uttfor+d,l".lw. Re: Proposed Georgetown Savings Batik Project Manager Saglewood Shope North Andover,Massachusetts The Iiaglewood Shops development in North Andover,Massachusetts is currently under Construction and final tenants are In the process of beini;secured for the remsWng retail space within the site. One such tenant will be the Georgetown Savings Bank,which will occupy approximately 4WD square feet(of)of building space and will feature two drive-through lanes. The bank will be located In the retail space south of and adjacent to the 23,60t1 square toot Staples building at the northerly end of the site. With the addition of Georgetown Savings Bank to the cite the overall retail area will retrain unchanged from the 77,5M of of retail space that was approved in February 2004 by the North Andover Planning Board. Furthermore,the total Mail splice to be constructed remains lower than the 79,925 of of retail space that was analyzed in the traffic studies submitted ae part of the project permitting.Regardless,to help identify any traffic impacts that might be associated with this individual tenant,VHB reevaluated the hip generation associated with the overall project as discussed below. TRIP GBNBRATION The Traffic Impact and Access Study conducted as part of the project permitting esthn ated the trip generation associated with the project based on rates provided by the Institute of Transportation Snglneevs(ITE)in its Trip C-aw ban'report. The Shopping Center land use code(LUC W)was deemed the most appropriate for the project,and this approach was approved both locally and by MassHighway in its review of the project. Although IN.,tenants are now more defined,irlaludirlg the bank,the overall approach for trip generation eetimtites remain valid. According to PIE,the trip generation rates for LUC 820("ping Center)were developed based an data from a variety of shopping centers. Moreover,some of these centers contained non-merchandlsinS facilitles such as restaurants,poet offices,fig,health clubs and recreational facilities. 'Therefore,the trip generaittm rates utilized Rcounted for a variety of retail uses including banks. With the tednetioik in the overall retail spate from the 79,925 square feet analyzed in the original traffic study to approximately 77,500 square feet,no significant changes in trip generdtlon are expected. In fact,with ttre rWuced building area there should be a corresponding reduction in traffic as compared to the original development program. In keeping with standard traffic engineering practices,the trip generation for the project should PH11 be calculated by comidering the overall shopping center as a single entity,and not by evaluating each individual tenant separately. Regardless,for general comparison purposes,VHB also obtained data and general operational information from Georgetown Savings Bank which could be compared to standardized bank data from ITE. 'Institute of Tramportatlon Enders,Trfp Gtatnrtbfl,6"Iiditlan,Washlopm U.C.,1997, 1��4adf1�Qot�MloraOwe�l'G Gasp trlHq APR-19•-•2005 10 :2T AM ANDOVER STRATEGIC ALLIAN 978 470 4800 P. 03 te: ApM 18, I t*roied Nos DM GeoRdgmn savinjo.Rana[Data Georgetown Savings Rank presently operates at two locations: its main headquarters in Georgetown,Massachusetts and a branch facility located in Rowley,Massachusetts. The Rowley branch is more similar in size(approximately 3,500 sf)and operation to the North Andover site as compared to the larger(14,400 af)main Georgetown Savings Rank headquarters in Georgetown, The Rowley branch also features both lobby service and a drive-thmugh window and drive-through ATM. Accordingly,VHB reviewed daily trawaction data collected at the Rowley branch and compared it to the standardized ITH data for banks featuring drive-through operations. The data from Georgetown Savings Sank are for transactions only and do not translate directly into vehicle trips. However,it can be cmwervatively assumed that each transattion corresponds to one vehicle and consequently two vehicle trips(one entering and one exiting).In foot,some customers MAY snake multiple transactions or a single vehicle at the site could contain more than one costorm. These and other factors could reduce the resulting trip generation from the totals based on the two- trip-per-transaction assumption. Table 1 compares the estimated bank daily trip gsenerAllon using the Georgetown Savings bank dolta to that estimated using the ITE data, TABLE1 GEORGIRTOWN SAVINGS BANK DAILY TRIP GENIRRATION COMPARISON ROWLEY,MA BRANCH DATA VS.ITE DATA Rowley branch transactitm data* lTB Datta"" D11,9e0ance Vehicle Vehfde Thas Perlod Drive-through Lobby Total Trips Trips Weekday 115 70 185 370 767 .397 Saturday, 125 45 170 340 hits +160 • Total dolly customer trartaectim Beta for lobby,drivt•t mi letter end drive-gsrnush AM as provided by Georgek wn SavisV bmk for Rowley branch from Pebruary 14,2DO6 d=ugh Mareh isj 2M, Two vehkle tripe per haeu ction assumed. " As calculated fn Table 1,based on lu lute of Teaneportatkm E4nen%Trip Coneratlaa,TO 9di6m Weehingtan,U.C.,2000, LUC 917(Chive-in Bank). As can be seen in Table 1,the calculated weekday daily trip generation based on actual data from the Rowley branch of the Georgetown Savings Dank is far lower than that estimated using the ITE data. In fact,the weekday daily trip generation based on the branch data is lase than half of that which would be expected based on the ITS data, The Saturday comparison is inconsistent with the weekday results in that the ITE data indicate 160 fewer trips than the Rowley data, This may be the result of the rM database being somewhat outdated. The sites in the database were surveyed from the mid-1970s to the 2OW9. With the some of the older data points changes in traffic pattems resulting from the prevalence of AM is likely not reflected. Before the introduction of ATMs banking activity was confined almost exclusively to nortnal banking hours,which would Consist of a M to 5•-hour working day on a Saturday. With more banking now occurring after hours at the ATM, the Saturday daily trip generation figures based on the ITS date may not reflect true conditions today. Therefore,actual data from an existing branch of the Georgetown Savings Bank should be more representative of conditions at ihe'Eaglewood Shops than the ITS-baud projections, As noted earlier,customer tramaction data typically ens not used for estimating trip generation Regardless,the conservative assumption of two-trips-per-transaction likely overstates the trip generation figures discussed above,Considering the bank as me of multiple tenants within the overall shopping center remains the moot appropriate racists for calculating trip®erteratfan. The occurrence of shared trips between the Individual tenants,combined with the definition of a shopping center clearly including uses such as bank,further validate this approach.Use of the �1�nnl�deMssvawsll�camp arson APR--19-2005 10 :28 AM ANDOVER STRATEGIC ALLIAN 978 470 4800 P, 04 i We: April 13,2006 Pr*d No,, 0M Georgetown Savings Bank data is beat utilized for analyzing the operation of the proposed drive- duw8h,as discussed in the following section. 121j -e•Throg,glt_Utilization As noted in Table 1 the Rowley branch currently serves between 115 and 125 customers on a da4 basis through its drive-through operation. This represents a far leas traffic-intensive use than other drive-through operations,such os fast-food service,which can typically procese that many customers on an hmLtJX basis under peak conditions. Based on these reported volurnes,VHB hss found that the drive-through area as designed should be'able to process this volume of traffic without adversely affeoing the operation of the rest of the site. Over 125•feet of protected storage space will be provided for each drive-through lane adjacent to the southerly side of the bank building. Customers will access the drive-through by traveling in a counterclockwise direction around the rear of the overall building. To Avoid conflicts,the area behind the building will be signed as one-way heading in the direction of the drive-through flow, CONCLUSION In summary,the Wluaion of a bank as one of the tenants at the Raglewood Shops should not result ° in a significant changie In the trig Veneration associated with the site. The proper method for estimating trip generation for the site continues to be by considering the entire site as a stropping center,with the bank only being one of the multiple tenant*within the site. As there has not been any change in the overall retail building area on site there should not be any slgnificant change in the overall project trip generation. YKB's review of data from the bank found that daily use of the drive-through may only tall in the 115-to 125-customer range,which Is a for less intense use of a drive-through operation than would are found at a last-food drive-through operation. The layout of the proposed drive-through has been configured so as riot to adversely affect the overall operation of the site. As the overall project traffic n-dilption was developed from traffic studies based on 79,925 of of retail apace as compared to the actua177,5W of that will be built,the proposed roadway improvements are still appropriate for the current development. i\1�Ndooitxrtloo\'rC GoenP a�bdA