Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-09-17 Traffic Peer Review SPR Proposed Residential Development 505 Sutton Street North Andover, Massachusetts Transportation impact Assessment Summary Prepared by- Varrasse � 4ssocrates� lnc �'rran$portation Engineers&Planners 35 New England Business Center©rive Su[tc 140 Andover,MA 01810-1066 i i 3 3 k :1/ � e II ! f h 1,\ �. 1 h i k MM Yi - S .,,"1 3.l 1 d i F Locationa Count S S - _ - QY 1 1 -?E 4 " 3 r Y - �'4 {L •'yf - 1 j N k 13 v:. S . �`' _ '•.z1 i �4 1' lit f� \ ]. h I( t" ,fig 2 `�4 ! -sue L .d , n a - s- F_; f al`4`j� r y 3_ t s Y, l _ i" i S \ V _ S Yt I z .♦ js' -Y f a 1v x 4 1 S ! �l } - �, s r i y f � s Z , � ' - .� '- `} ", ' r ice '' l ''�" `~ r n \'cam§', CLIIQ,% —1 ka T ' i�- ram/ Esn `ti. 3' �;} - 3 -> [!1 s `�'"s.i ,�.� ` "A f v1 1 -{ �h " � 0AI , , , 0,,,��!� , �, v �. ` �r - - • . -•,� -- ►.. Trip Generation Summary Time Period/ Directional Distribution Vehicle Tripsa Weekday Daily 740 Weekday Morning Peak Hour: Entering 13 Exiting 36 Total 49 Weekday Evening Peak Hour: Entering 37 Exiting 23 Total 60 a Based on ITE LUC 221 - Multifamily Housing (Mid - Rise)— 136 Units _Vanasse &Associa#es, lnc Transpoftation Engineers&Planners E5 New England Business Center Drive Suite 140 Andover.MA 01 81 0-1 0 6 6 n Morning Project-Generated — Weekday Legend: XX Entering Trips ()M Exiting Trips 125 LA WRENCE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT S�R��� SUTTON 6 STREET 7--* 4) f* (14)- ► (7} v� PROPOSED SITE DRIVE SITE 0 In 13 Out 36 0 Total 49 /anasse.&.Assocra es, Pn ., Transportation Engineers&Planners 35 New England Business Center Drive Suite 140 IA� Andover,MA 01810-1056 r- roject.,Generated — Weekday Evening Legend: )0( Entering Trips pW Exiting Trips 125 LA WRENCE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT SUTTON 4-14 4 14 STREET �o PROPOSED S1 TE DRIVE SITE 0 In 37 Out 23 p Total 601 `1%anasse &Assacrates, 1rre; Transportation E€gincers Planners 35 New Eng9and 6u$ine3s CeRter Drive Suito 140 Andover,MA 01810-1066 mght Distance Evaluation . ..... . ... J ? 45 Dis0 hA P ' Requirement4 H) f 14.50 .�-_;•- -. 54' Sight 47istance 35 M-Pik) Regsairement { IT OF - -UMT 0' CLEAR VEGETATION AS NEEDED WITH! SIGHT TRIANGLE TO PROVIDE 1 �—^� ACCEPTABLE SIGHT DISTANCES FOR s j THE RECIPRQCAL 3.5—FOOT DRIVERS .::,_.-•- '. }' EYE MEASUREMENT ' j. f ' . . - 4 F 1ti 'OMIT OF WORK F 7f Outdoor fXISTtNG 6'TALL PVC 1AIVarrasse &y#ssvciates. hxc Transportation Engineers&Planners 'S New England Business Center Drive Suite 140 ' Aridover.MA 01 81 0-1 0 66 Recommendations and Summary Site Access; STOP-sign control with a marked STOP-line. Any landscaping (trees and vegetation) or signage in the vicinity of the driveways should be chosen and located so that sight distance is not obstructed (typically less than 24 inches in height). Landscaping should also be maintained in the area of the driveways to maintain safe lines of sight for exiting and approaching vehicles. On Site: Bicycle racks will be provided on-site. Summary: Project can be safely accommodated as planned. TVarrasse &Assocrates, !nc Transportation Engineers&Planners 35 New England Business Censer Drive Suite 140 Andover,MA 0181 Q-1466 i i MEMORANDUM TO: Ms. Karen Pollastrino FROM: F, Giles Ham, P,F,and Sutton Redevelopment, LLC Jennifer Conners 231 Sutton Street, Suite 1 B Vanasse&Associates, Inc. North Andover, MA 02135 35 New England Business Center Drive Suite 140 Andover, MA 0 18 10 (978)474-8800 DATE: August 1,2019 RE: 7378 SUBJECT: Supplemental Information Proposed Adult Community Center 477 Sutton Street,North Andover, MA Vanasse & Associates, Inc. (VAI) has provided information which was requested at the July 9, 2019 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, Specifically, traffic counts were requested for the Sutton Street and Surrey Drive intersection. This information is presented below: On July 16, 2019, weekday morning (7:00 — 9,00 AM) and weekday evening (4:00 — 6:00 PM) traffic counts were conducted at the Sutton Street and Surrey Drive intersection. The peak hour data is presented in Figure 1. As shown in Figure 1, Surrey Drive during the peak hour accommodated 17 vehicles (5 i»/12 out)during the morning period and 28 vehicles(18 WI out) during the evening period, Delays were also measured exiting Surrey Drive. Of the observed four (4)-hour period, the morning delays ranged between 1 and 36 seconds with an average delay of 12 seconds, The evening delays ranged between 2 and 18 seconds with an average delay of 8 seconds, The maximum queue observed exiting Surrey Drive was two(2) vehicles. 0:17379 North Andover,MAWcmuIK Pa11ustrlao OH0119 dock 1 jW LDAY MO,RNiNG'pEpIK;H0_0 <-826 SUTTON J4 STREET 452— (r jZ us n a W �.W �KaAY V �NG P AWHOUFt(V .—467 SUTTON r14 STREET 839---► (� 4- r� t� &IM sa w a a Q a N a 0 C rn 3 Note: Traffic Counted July 16,2019 c � � n m }iV� 2019 Existing ConditionsalAsae n ff 1 ;pol�afloji @8( Hour Traffic Volumes a n a Coprtryhi n 20151 by YAI, NI Rlghts RdoHYM1. 1 i i DELAY MAX QUEUE MAX QUEUE Left Right 7:00 0 4:00 0 7:00 18 2 7:05 1 4:05 1 18 7:10 1 4:10 1 7:15 11 7:15 0 4:15 1 31 _ 7:20 0 4:20 1 32 7:25 1 4.25 1 7:30 14 7:30 1 4:30 1 7:45 6 7:35 0 4.35 0 16 7 7:40 1 4:40 0 5 2 7:45 0 4:45 0 8:00 36 7:50 1 4:50 0 1 7:55 0 4:55 1 6 8:00 1 5:00 1 8:15 4 8:05 1 5:05 0 23 1 8:10 1 5:10 1 8:45 10 2 8:15 0 5:15 1 Average 18.33 3.13 seconds 8:20 1 5:20 1 Approach Average 12.25 Lett Right 8:25 1 5:25 0 7 4 8:30 0 5:30 0 23 8;35 0 5:35 1 4:00 3 8:40 01 5:40 1 17 5 8:45 1 5:45 1 4:15 5 4 8:50 1 5:50 2 4:30 11 8:55 0 5:55 0 4:45 3 9STH 1 95TH 1 5:00 12 2 50TH ? 50TH 1 2 5:15 5 9 i 5:30 7 9 6 5:45 4 18 Average 9 7.29 seconds Approach Average 7.8 E MEMORANDUM TO: Ms. Karen Pollastrino FROM; F. Giles Hain, P.E. and Sutton Redevelopment, LLC Jennifer Conners 231 Sutton Street, Suite 1 B Vanasse& Associates, Inc. North Andover, MA 02135 35 New England Business Center Drive I Suite 140 Andover, MA 0 18 10 (978)474-8800 DATE: August 1,2019 RE: 7378 SUBJECT: Supplemental Memorandum Proposed Adult Community Center 477 Sutton Street,North Andover,MA Vanasse & Associates, Inc. (VAI) has prepared this supplemental memorandum to identify the traffic impacts of the proposed 13,700 sf Adult Community Center(ACC) to be located at 577 Sutton Street and 1 Surrey Drive in North Andover, Massachusetts (hereafter referred to as "The Project"). This Project will be completed with a separate and independent application from the adjacent residential development located at 505 Stitton Street, The purpose of this inemorandurn is to provide an updated analysis of the anticipated trips to be generated by the proposed ACC, This evaluation consisted of a review of the proposed adjacent residential development access with the addition of the new ACC development with regard to the adequacy to afford safe and efficient access and supplements the traffic study completed for the 505 Stitton Street project. Included in this document is additional Appendix materials including Site Plan, Trip-Generation calculations for the ACC, intersection Capacity Analysis and recommendations. DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION The proposed ACC entails the construction of a 13,700 sf building with approximately 80 parking spaces. The proposed new center is a relocation of the existing senior center located on Main Street in the North Andover downtown. Access to the ACC will be provided via two (2) driveways; one main full access driveway onto Stitton Street, which also provides access to the 505 Sutton Street development; and one exit right-turn only driveway onto Surrey Drive. Figure 1 depicts the site location in relation to the existing roadway network. TRIP-CENERATI ON In order to establish traffic characteristics for the new ACC, existing senior center data provided by the North Andover Elder Services were analyzed (see data in appendix). The existing North Andover senior center operates Monday, Wednesday and Thursday from 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM, Tuesday front 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM, and Friday from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM with most activities starting after 9:00 AM. Currently, the existing facility accommodates approximately I J employees and welcomes an average of 126 adults per day. G%7378 With ATAovu AIAISIor02-Ms K Vallarriuo 073019 Jncx 1 Transportation Impact Assessment-Proposed Residential Development-North Andover,Massachusetts wry' ,� z Z. %r pUA ONCE ItiDP1nENT ` ¢ F ..mot1. ;r� , - R &AEJTO 3 AIR'OF `L M ;a� ., ga govmeemnte nt ' �,. r �-� O� - i ', %�. , Count � I a�®� i 1=s F i ♦ ta""' � 7 u-- -t t ` ' E - EY:.: �,� -t 'V E Y 41 ', O .. O� 1 Vr J ( rC y "�,,,::!,,..'..,,;,w..,�:.,1.,.1:�V'�.,:.L:�.,...r�­I",,,2,,,.�,..--1",,.", \ ` 7 u "� _ , 1 r l ,. : I } y+ 3 ti.� 3 'a k si"' 4 6, _ � !— ^SS l.� �. �, r I 5 ' pal; r z 5� ' w .a { IN I .. 1VaDYER` F F k k��5 (" E is f _ t >< l } .. 1 1�r,k�,I1N.—I,��"�,......I.�I.�Iv,_.1-N,-.,�..`.1_1,�:��i.1 I,....), . _ l '� k �V h�. ,� p 1 a >, ?f 1 i •• V .. i. r � { �' 70 ;} :� O y - • :� k . x 11, Source G'oogle Ea�tt�t412212018 LL, ....._ ,ems' _ ,:,.-_.i 160 40 Scale in Feet Figure . - 1 $ 0 . a .— 0 0 0 e P 6 I 7 i For the purposes of this study, the trip generation of the existing facility were estimated during weekday morning(7:00 to 9:00 AM) and evening(4:00 to 6:00 PM)peak hours, Based upon analysis, it was found that trips during weekday horning peals horn- are exclusively derived from employees and that approximately 12%percent of the visitors attend the center during the weekday evening peals period. The new ACC building is more extensive than the current North Andover center and for purposes of this study, the number of patrons attending the new ACC is expected to increase by 50%. Due to the project location, a discount of 10-percent non-auto trip was applied to account for the senior center van service provided for the North Andover elderly community. A summary of the expected vehicle trip-gencration is summarized in Table 1. Table 1 TRIP-GENERATION SUMMARY (D) (A) Existing Existing (B) (C=A-B) Senior (F—E*500/4) Senior Center shuttle New Center (E (C/l.5)+(D/l.0)) Proposed Person Trips Reduction Person Person Trips Existing Senior New ACC Time Period/Direction (Seniors) 1( 0o/u)` Trips (employees) Center Vehicle trips' Vehicle Trips Weekday Morning Peals Hour a Entering 0 0 0 11 11 16 Exitin 0 0 0 1 1 2 Total 0 0 0 12 12 18 Weekday Evening Peak Hour Entering 15 2 13 1 10 15 Exiting 15 2 13 11 20 30 Total 30 b 4 26 12 30 45 'No traffic adjustment or reduction was applied during the weekday morning, the majority of trips are from employees. 6 12%percent of the seniors attend the center during this period of Clio day.(Average of 126 ciderlies per day) `Transit reduction were only applied on Seniors trips d Based on field observation.Assumed 1.5 Senior/vehicle As seen in Table 1, the project will generate approximately 18 new vehicle trips (16 entering and 2 exiting) during weekday horning peak Hour and 45 new vehicle trips (15 entering and 30 exiting) during weekday evening peak hour. The weekday horning and weekday evening peals-hoar traffic volumes expected to be generated by the Senior Centex'were assigned on the study area roadway network and shown on Figure 2. TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS The proposed 505 Sutton Street residential development analysis was updated with the new ACC traffic projections. The traffic networks with the addition of the Senior Center is shown in Figure 3 and summarizes the 2026 build networks. The updated sununary of the level-of-service (LOS) and delay analyses for these intersections are shown in Tables 2 and 3, As shown in Tables 2 and 3, there are no changes on LOS at the study intersections with the addition of the Senior Center with exception of the intersection of Sutton Street at Surrey Drive. G;}737g mill, 2 1 s.WEEKDAY MORNING PEAK IiOU 125 LA WRENCE MUNICIPAL. AIRPORT SUTTON s s STREET 10—► 41 v LTotal 6 p 1 � 2 SITE DRIVE"A w o' � p to Ify— �(1) PROPOSED SIZE DRIVE B No WEEKDAY EVENING PEAK HOUR 125 LAWRENCE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT M SUTTON rs t 6 STREET W SITE � In 15 q Out 30 >- Total 45 SITE DRIVE A w � a a a o � o 'k-30 PROPOSED00 O S17E DRIVE 8 tno rn 0 cv i m n 3 a o e e c " 00 ;Vanasse'& Associates, fhc I Project-Generation U Peak Hour Traffic Volumes u 0 r m i Cvpyrlght Q 2019 by VA4 All Rights Reserved. WEEKDAY MORNING PEAK HOUR LAWRENCE 12 MUNICIPAL. AIRPORT 4--17 CO ca j 4 SUTTON 4--937 STREET 538—► 4) f- 528—i 14-} 443� 4, t 1--y tou3 17� a 528---► 60 y �I n 00 �3 r7 >- SITE x�j Vn SITE DRIVE A 0 PROPOSED � SITE DRIVE B a WEEKDAY EVENING PEAK HOUR, 125 LAWRENCE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT �41 a d•T � r150 SUTTON �-201 E-577 STREET 98fi� 41973—► sl�► 4 9385 32--+ n o 979—► m Fy SITE n SI TE DRI VE A 00 00 I Q IN + �3a PROPOSED a 1 S1 TE DRI VE R o 14 r-I r 3 {dote: Imbalances exist due to curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. a o _ Y 00 0. u 1AVanasse Associates, Inc': 2026 Build f I:1il �i=)I'i:liitF'rl r 11 0ii]='::i:; I' i`�>iirfi.?Y:s Peak Hour Traffic Volumes •� i r m tr ��j Copyright ©20f9 6y VA1. All Rights Reserved. Without the addition of the ACC, the critical movement (Left-turns from Surrey Drive) at this unsignalized intersection is expected to operate at LOS C during weekday morning and evening peak hours. With Addition of the new AAC,the critical movement at this intersection(Surrey drive approach) is expected to operate at LOS C during weekday morning peak hour and at LOS D during weekday evening peak hour. It has been dctcrmined that the new ACC will not have a significant impact on the roadway network and will have an increase of 10 seconds on motorist delays or I vehicle queue along this approach. TABLE 2 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE SUMMARY 2026 Build Proposed Residential Development 2026 Build 505 Sutton Street` Addition of the ACC Signalized Intersection/Peak Hour y/C, Delay, LOS` Queues' WC Delay LOS Queues Osgood Street(Route 125)al Sutton Street Weekday Morning. Sutton Street EB LT 0.58 22.5 C 97/142 0.58 22.5 C 97/142 Osgood Street(Route 125)NB LTlTH 0.39 7.l A 48195 0.40 7.2 A 48/97 Osgood Street(Route 125)SB TH 0.82 13.2 B 190/379 0,82 13,2 B 190/385 Overall 0.75 13.9 B -- 0.75 13.9 B -- Weekday Eveldvg: Sutton Street EB LT 0.84 25.7 C 232/371 0.86 26.6 C 241/378 Osgood Street(Route 125)NB LT/TH 0.79 17.7 B 182/260 0.79 18.2 B 185/264 Osgood Street(Route 125)SB TH 0.52 111 B 82/133 0,52 12.1 B 821133 Overall 0.81 18.4 B -- 0.82 18.9 B -- ,volume-to-capacity ratio. 'Control(signal)delay per vehicle in seconds. `Level-of-Service. 'Queue length in feet. 'Includes signal timing modifications under future conditions. NB=northbound;SB=southbound;EB=eastbormd;LT=left-turning movements;TH=through ntavenienis;RT=right-taming movements. GA7378 worth Andover,NfA%1cml2-his.K.Polostrino 073019.doex 3 Table 3 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE AND VEHICLE QUEUE SUMMARY 2026 Build Proposed Residential Development '2026 Build 505 Sutton Street Addition of the ACC Queue Queue Unsignalized Intmccliou/ 95d, 95h Peak HourAMovement Demand' Delayb LOS` Percentile° Demand Delay CAS Percentile Sutton Street of Lawrence Ahporl Driveway Weekday Morning: Lawrence Airport Driveway SB LT RT 11 22.3 C 4 11 22.4 C 4 Weekday Evening: Lawrence Airport Driveway SB LT RT 15 29.9 D 8 l5 30.6 D 8 Sutton Street at Proposed New Site Drive Weekday Morning: Proposed Site Drive NB LT RT 36 25.7 D 14 36 26.4 D 15 Suttau Street WB LT 6 0.2 A 0 12 0A A 0 Weekday Evening: Proposed Site Drive NB LT RT 23 28.6 D 9 23 29.6 D 10 Sutton Street WB LT 14 0.2 A 0 20 0.8 A 0 Sutton Street of Surrey Drive Weekday Morning: SurTey Drive NB LT ICr 13 19.4 C 4 14 21.6 C 5 Weekday Evening: Surrey Drive NB LT RT 11 22.9 C 4 41 34.7 D 26 Surrey Drive of Sile Drlvervay Weekday Morning: Site Driveway EB RT 1 8.4 A 0 Weekday Evening; Site Driveway EB RT 30 8.5 A 2 'Volume-to-capacity ratio. 'Contra](signal)delay per vehicle in seconds. 'Level-of-Service. 'Queue length in feet. NB=northbound;SB=southhound;LT=left4urning movements;Ti I through movements;RT right-turning movements. G17378 North Andover,htA\?%I amor2-Ms.K.Palloslrinn 073019.doex 4 RECOMMENDATIONS A transportation improvement program has been developed that is designed to provide safe and efficient access to the Project and minimize the project impact. The following improvements have been recommended as a part of this evaluation. Project Access The following recommendations are offered with respect to the design and operation of the Project site driveway; ➢ The Surrey Drive driveway be placed under STOP-sign (Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Designation RI-1) control, with a painted STOP-bar included. In addition, " Do not enter" and "Right-turn only"signs should be installed. ➢ The driveway alignment should be designed to discourage the prohibited left-turn. ➢ All signs and other pavement markings to be installed within the Project site shall conform to the applicable standards of the current Manual on Uniform Traffic Devices(MUTCD). ➢ Any landscaping (trees and vegetation) or signage in the vicinity of the driveways should be chosen and located so that sight distance is not obstructed (typically less than 24 inches in height). Landscaping should also be maintained in the area of the driveways to maintain safe lines of sight for exiting and approaching vehicles. Travel Demand Management(TDM)Plan The following measures should be implemented: ➢ Provide transportation services for seniors through the North Andover Council on Aging (COA) and maintain the existing Seniors Center van/shuttle. ➢ Bike racks should be provided on site. The above strategies can encourage an alternative mode of travel. CONCLUSIONS The proposed Project will not have a significant impact on overall operations. With the implementation of the above recommendations,safe and efficient access will be provided and the proposed Project can be constructed with minimal impact to the area as designed. GA7378 Noah Andover,MA\Mf nto%2-8ts.K.Pallostrinn 073919.do" 5 APPENDIX SITE PLAN SURREY DRIVE TRAFFIC COUNT EXISTING ANDOVER SENIOR CENTER DATA-TRIP GENERATION CAPACITY ANALYSIS SITE PLAN F7-- 6� i 11 • j' i `_�, 34 09 SURREY DRIVE" -i`•1 st Tr.'T---�•' � 5�T[� I i Fri ph CD A4 JTJ F u .s•+I 11 .5 Jl r z -,...-.-. _.._. .--.._.,_. ....�.—.. ��. _ '-Irtr r?Y.W Try i'y.�• `).. ,1.q.._y,i�..... 1 al IFSrOtiS g5•l1 M1i r+ji: S�vI1 ;YYtt MULTI}AMILY 511E DEVELOPMENT PLANS111e, "�""" / Mo'i l;n Cameron SITE LAYOUT IR PLAN NORTH ANDOVER,MASSACIIUSETTS (/[�3 q R o it P, INC. 505 SUTTON STREET ,pFf' J -. ;.•..:., (Ani S`.'Hl VIP 7r.ON ZX-1 K51) ��i„r i 1•,)114 li114 In.!i�t,ll Ivsua 0,4 SUfTM STREET RETSE.o rVELOPMENT.LTC ! 1 1 SURREY DRIVE TRAFFIC COUNT i Vanasse & Associates Sutton Street at Surrey Drive Andover, MA Weather: Overcast File Name : 737801 am Site Code : 00737801 Start Date : 7/17/2019 Page No : 1 Groups Printed-Cars 5utfon Street Surrey Drive Sutton Street From East From South From West Start Time Thru� Left Peds]App.Total Right Left Peds App.Total - Ri9ht Thru Peds App,Total Int Total _. _ 07:00 AM 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 07:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 07:30 AM 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 4 07:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 2 w..._. ..._...._. Total 0 1 0 1 1 7 0 8 1 0 0 1 10 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 5 1 0 0 1 8 08:15 AM 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 08:30 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08:45 AM 0 3 0 3 2 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 7 Total 0 4 0 4 7 5 0 12 1 0 0 1 17 Grand Total 0 5 0 5 8 12 p 20 2 0 0 2 27 Apprch% 0 100 0 40 60 0 100 0 0 Total% 0 18.5 0 18,5 29.6 44.4 0 74.1 7.4 0 0 7,4 Vanasse & Associates Sutton Street at Surrey Drive Andover, MA Weather: Overcast File Name : 737801 am Site Code : 00737801 Start Date : 7/17/2019 Page No : 3 Sutton Street Surrey Drive Sutton Street From East From South From West Start Time v ime Thru Left Peds App.Total Right Left Peds App,Total Right ThrEa �� Peds App. tal ,_lnt.Total __. _ _ .. ---To _ _l Peak}lour Anai sis From 07:00 AM to 08:46 AM-Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 6 0 0 1 6 08:15 AM 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 08:30 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 08:45 AM 0 3 0 3 2 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 7 Total Volume 0 4 - 0 ---4 --- 7 5 0 12 —— 0 a 17 %App.Total 0 100 0 58.3 41.7 0 100 0 0 PHF .000 .333 .000 .333 .683 .417 .000 600 _-.250 .QOQ .250 .607 Peak Hour Data NT E 43 C _ C Peak Hour Begins et DB:OD AM r e b [Cars .�qD Dl_ �n Q 41 r Lett Right Peds 47 out In Total i j Vanasse & Associates Sutton Street at Surrey Drive Andover, MA Weather-, Overeast File Name ; 737801 pm Site Code : 00737801 �I Start Date : 7/16/2019 Page No : 1 Printsd-Cars Sutton Street Surrey Drive _ _ _ Sutton Street From East _ From South From West Start Time Tttru Left_I Peds I App.Total Right Left, Peds1Ap .Total Righl( Thru Peds App.Total _lni.Tate! ----- 04:00 PM 0 3 0 3 3 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 7 04:15 PM 0 4 0 4 2 2 0 4 1 0 0 1 9 0430 PM 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 6 04:45 PM 0 4 0 4 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 6 Total 0 14 0 14 7 3 0 10 4 0 0 4 28 05:00 PM 0 2 0 2 1 1 0 2 1 0 0 1 6 06:16PM 0 4 0 4 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 6 05:30 PM 0 2 0 2 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 5 05:45 PM 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 4 Tote! 0 8 0 8 7 3 0 10 2 0 0 2 20 Grand Total 0 22 0 22 14 6 0 20 6 0 0 6 48 Appreh% 0 100 0 70 30 0 100 0 0 Total% 0 45.8 0 45.8 29.2 12.5 0 41.7 12.6 0 0 12.5 i Vanasse & ,associates Sutton Street at Surrey Drive Andover, MA Weather: Overcast File Name ; 737801 pm Site Code : 00737801 3 Stark Date : 7/16/2019 Page No : 3 ----_-- ____ — --- Sutton street--'--""-- Surrey Drive Sutton Street From East From South From West Start Time Thru Left Pads I App.Total Right Left Peds App.Tote[ RighE Ttiru Peds App.Total Int.Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM-Peak 1 of 1 �— Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:00 PM 04:00 PM 0 3 0 3 3 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 7 04:15 PM 0 4 0 4 2 2 0 4 1 0 0 1 9 04:30 PM 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 6 04:45 PM 0 4 0 4 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 6 To#al Volume fl 14 0 14 7 — 3 0 10 0 �- 0 4 _ 28 %App.Total 0 100 0 70 30 0 100 0 0 PH F .000 .875 .000 .875 583 375_.__„..w.,._....._.._ .625 _500 _ _ , .flflt} .000 .000 ,500 _....,778 Peak Hour Data llorth 4—2 ,t v v � v« ��— pe It Hour Begins atU-,M4 PM 15' o H [gars on Left Right Peds CA] i.__.j0) 28 Out Ih Talal I i �f i i I i 9 i I EXISTING ANDOVER SENIOR CENTER DATA-TRIP GENERATION i i i i Date range from 01101/2018 to 1213112018 Filters:. Age: >=O Site(s): All Checkin Count 35232 Days in Range 279 Avg Duplicated 126.29 Avg Per Weekday Sunday 74 Monday 153.49 Tuesday 176.39 Wednesday 154.33 Thursday 103.44 Friday 118.12 Saturday 6.27 January 83.96 February 80.68 March 67.63 April 158.26 May 139.04 June 139 July 154.18 August 155.48 September 134.35 i i i CAPACITY ANALYSIS Osgood Street (Route 133) at Sutton Street Sutton Street at Lawrence Municipal Airport Driveway Sutton Street at Proposed Site Driveway Sutton Street at Surrey Drive 3 i 3 Osgood Street(Route 133) at Sutton Street HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 No-Build Weekday Morning 3: Osgood Street & Sutton Street 07131/2019 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SOT SBR Lane Configurations )y +Tt t3+ Traffic Volume(vph) 443 60 67 387 803 879 Future Volume(vph) 443 60 67 387 803 879 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width 12 16 12 12 12 16 Total Lost Gme(s) 4,5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util.Factor 0.97 0.95 0.96 Frt 0,98 1.00 0.92 Fit Protected 0,96 0.99 1.00 Said.Flow(prot) 3407 3494 3262 Fit Permitted 0,96 0,59 1.00 SM.Flow(perm) 3407 2077 3262 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0,94 0.94 0,92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow(vph) 471 64 73 421 873 955 RTOR Reduction(vph) 15 0 0 0 218 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 520 0 0 494 1610 0 Heavy Vehicles % 2% 0% 0% 3% 2% 2% Turn Type Prot Penn NA NA Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green,G(s) 15.6 38.5 38.6 Effeclive Green,g(s) 17.6 40.5 40.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.60 0.60 Clearance Time(s) 6.5 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extensions 3.0. 3.0 3,0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 893 1253 1968 v1s Ratio Prot c0.15 c0.49 v1s Ratio Perm 0.24 v1c Ratio 0.58 0.39 0.82 Uniform Delay,d1 21.5 6.9 10.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1,00 Incremental Delay,d2 1.0 0.2 2A Delay(s) 22.5 7.1 13.2 Level of Service C A B Approach Delay(s) 22.5 7.1 13.2 Approach LOS C A 13 Intersection Summary, HCM 2000 Control Delay 13.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 67.1 Sum of lost time(s) 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group S:IJohs173781SynchrolSenior Center\NO BUILDI5-B AM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 No-Build Weekday Evening 3: Osgood Street & Sutton Street 07/31/2019 Movement EBL. EBR NBL NBT S8T SBR Lane Configurations 4T 0 Traffic Volume(vph) 932 67 71 850 503 545 Future Volume(vph) 932 67 71 850 503 545 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 19€0 Lane Width 12 16 12 12 12 16 Total Lost time(s) 4,5 4,5 4.5 Lane Utii.Factor 0.97 0,95 0.96 Frt 0.99 1.00 0.92 Fit Protected 0,96 1,00 1,00 Satd.Flow(pro() 3486 3563 3297 Fit Permitted 0,96 0,70 1,00 Satd.Flow(perm) 3486 25114 3297 Peak•hour factor,PHF 0.92 0,92 0,92 0.92 0,92 H2 Add,Flow(vpli) 1013 73 77 924 547 692 RTOR Reduction(vph) 7 0 0 0 269 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 1079 0 0 1001 870 0 Heavy Vehicles % 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% 0% Turn Type Prot Perm NA NA Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green,G(s) 24.0 33.7 33.7 Effective Green,g(s) 26.0 35,7 35,7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0,37 0,50 Mo Clearance Time(s) 6.5 6.5 6,5 Vehicle Extension(s) 3,0 3,0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(Vph) 1281 1269 1664 vls Ratio Pro[ c0.31 0,26 v/s Ratio Perm 0,40 VIC Ratio 0,84 0.79 0.52 Uniform Delay,d1 20.5 14.4 11,8 Progression Factor 1,00 1100 1.00 Incremental Delay,d2 5.2 3,3 0.3 Delay(s) 263 17,7 12.1 Level of Service C B B Approach Delay(s) 25,7 17.7 12.1 Approach LOS C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay18.4 HCM 2000 Level f.. o Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0,81 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 701 Sum of lost time(s) 9,0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 96,9% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 c Critical Lane Group S:1,lobs173781Synchr6Senier CenteANO BUILDl6-8 PM,syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 1 Timings 2026 Build Weekday Morning 3: Osgood Street & Sutton Street 08101/2019 4 Lane Group EBL NBL NBT SBT Lane Configurations 'ty R1� Traffic Volume(vph) 443 70 387 803 Future Volume(vph) 443 70 387 803 Lane Group Flow(vph) 535 0 497 1832 Turn Type Prot Perm NA NA Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 2 Detector Phase 4 2 2 6 Switch Phase Mininidm Initial(6) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split(s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 Total Split(s) 31,5 46.6 46.5. 46.5 Total Split(%) 40.4% 59.6% 59.6% 59.6% Yellow Time.'(s) 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.5 All-Red Time(s) 2,5 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4,5 4.6 4.5 Lead/Lag Lead-Lard Optimize? Recall Mode None Min Min Min vlc Ratio 0.59 0.40 0.84 Control Delay 23.8 8.7 12.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 218 8.7 12.4 Queue Length 50th(fl) 97 48 190 Queue Length 95th((t) 142 97 4385 Internal Link Dist(fl) 463 734 896 Turn Bay Length(it) Base Capacity(vph) 1394 1294 2259 Starvation Gap Reductn 0 0 0 Splllback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Storage Gap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced Wo Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.61 lnlerseclon Surin�ar ', Cycle Length:78 Actuated Cycle Length:67,2 Natural Cycle:70 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue maybe longer, Queue shown Is maximum after Iwo cycles. Spllls and Phases: 3:Osgood Street&Sutton Street p4 06 S:Wbs173781Synchro\Senior CenteA5-B AM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Timings 2026 Build Weekday Evening 3: Osgood Street & Sutton Street 08101/2019 Lar�eGrau Bt3L NBL NBT SBA'. Lane Configurations Traffic Volume(vph) 938 74 860 503 Future Volume(vph) 938 74 850 503 Lane Group Flow(vph) 1499 0 1004 1143 Turn Type Prot Perm NA NA Proteoted Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 2 Detector Phase 4 2 2 6 Switch Phase ivlinirrium Initial{s) 5;0 5,0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split(s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 Total Spill(s) 31,6 46.5. 46.5 46.5 Total Split(%) 40.4°% 69.6% 59,6% 69.6% Yellow Time(s)„ 4:0 4.6 4.5 4.5 All-Red Time(s) 2.5 2.0 10 10 Lost Time Adjust{s) -2.0 -2.0 .2.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.5 4.6 4.5 LeadlLag Lead-Lag Optimize? Aecall Mode None Min Min Miry vie Ratio 0.86 0.80 0.59 Control Delay. 30.3 20.4 7.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0,0 0.0 Total Delay X3 20.4 7.2 Queue Length 50th(ft) 241 185 82 Queue Length 95th(R) #378 264 133 Internal Link Dist(ft) 463 734 896 Tern gay Lengthh(ft) Base Capacity(vph) 1342 1478 2186 Siarvation Cap Reductri 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reducln 0 0 0 Slorage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced vie Ratio 0.82 0,68 0.52 ntetsecBo�1 Stuima , Cycle Length:78 Actuated Cycle Length:71.4 Natural Cycle:60 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue maybe longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Spills and Phases: 3: Osgood Street&Sutton Street t.A2 04 06 -. mow_, S:IJobs173781Synchro\Senlor Centerl6-B PM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Sutton Street at Lawrence Municipal Airport Driveway HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 No-Build Weekday Morning 5; Sutton Street & Lawrence Ai port Drive 07/31/2019 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SW Lane Configurations 4' 1'+ Traffic Volume(vehlh) 14 528 931 17 4 7 Future Volume(Vehlh) 14 528 931 17 4 7 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% .0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 15 550 1001 18 4 8 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ftls) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) 543 pX,platoon unblocked E vC,conflicting volume 1019 1590 1010 vC1,stage 1 con vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 1019 1590 1010 tC,single(s) 4.1 `6.0 '6.0 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 2,2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 98 97 97 cM capacity(vehlh) 689 140 311 DImiloni Lana ft - Es 1 W91. ; 891. Volume Total 565 1019 12 Volume Left 15 0 d Volume flight 0 18 8 cSH 60 1700 22.1 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.60 0.05 Queue Length 95th(ft) 2 0 :4. Control Delay(s) 0.6 0.0 22.3 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay(s) 0.6 0.0 22.3 Approach LOS C Interseoti0h Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 User Entered Value S:Uob03781SynchrotSenior CenterANO BUILDi5-B AM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 No-Build Weekday Evening 5: Sutton Street & Lawrence Ai port Drive 07f3112019 Movement E13L EBT W13T W13R SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 14 Y Traffic Volume(vehfh) 4 967 571 3 11 4 Future Volume(Vehlh) 4 967 571 3 11 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.94 0,94 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 4 1040 607 3 12 4 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(fVs) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) 543 pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 610 1656 608 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 610 1656 608 tC,single(s) 41 k6.0 '6.0 tC,2 stage(s) IF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 100 91 99 cM capacity(vehlh) 979 130 516 bisection;Lane f Et3.1 Wp 1. 561. Volume Total 1044 610 16 Volume Left 4 0 12 Volume Right 0 3 4 cSH 979 1700 160 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.36 0.10 Queue Length 95th(fl) 0 0 8 Control Delay(s) 0.1 0.0 29.9 Lane LOS A D Approach Delay(s) 0.1 0.0 29.9 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 User Entered Value S;1Jobs173781SynchrolSenior CenleANO BUILDL6-B PM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 Build Weekday Morning 5: Sutton Street & Lawrence Aiport Drive 07/3112019 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBa .SBL. SBR Lane Configurations Y Traffic Volume(veh/h) 14 528 937 17 4 7 Future Volume(Veh/h) 14 528 937 17 4 7 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0°/0 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.93 0.93 0,92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 15 660 1008. 18 4 8 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Medlars storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) 543 pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 1026 1597 1017 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 1026 1597 1017 tC,single(s) 4,1 16.0 *6.0 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 2,2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 98 97 97 cM capacity(veh/h) 685 138 308 Direction,Lane 11 EB.1;: -WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 565 1026 12 Volume Left 15 0 4 Volume Right 0 18 6 cSH 685 1700 219 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.60 0.05. Queue Length 951h(ft) 2 0 4 Control Delay(s) 0.6 0.0 22.4 Lane LOS A C Approach delay(s) 0,6 0.0 22.4 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60,3% ICU Level of Service B. Analysis Period(min) 15 * User Entered Value &:Job03781SynchrOSenior CenteA5-B AM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 Build Weekday Evening 5; Sutton Street & Lawrence Ai port Drive 07131/2019 i Movernent. EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Conflgura€ions +T t+ 3� Traffic Volume(vehlh) 4 979 577 3 11 4 Future Volume(Vehlh) 4 979 577 3 11 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0,93 0,93' 0.94 0,94 0.92 0.92 Hourly flaw rate(vph) 4 1053 614 3 12 4 Pedestrians Lane Width(fl) Walking Speed(fUs) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(It) 543 pX,platoon unblocked VC,conflicting volume 617 1676 616 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 617 1676 616 tC,single(s) 4.1 '6.0 '6.0 tC,2 stage(s) IF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 100 91 99 cM capacity(vehlh) 973 127 512 Direction,Lane f# EB I WB 1 �SB:.1 Volume Total 1057 617 16 Volume Left 4 0 12 Volume Right 0 3 4 cSH 973 1700 156 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.36 0.10 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 8 Control Delay(s) 0.1 0.0 30.6 Lane LOS A D Approach Delay(s) 0.1 0.0 30,6 Approach LOS D Ihterseciloh Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 ' User Entered Value SAJobs173781Synchro&nior Centerl6-B PM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 3 i 3 Sutton Street at Site Driveway HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 No-Build Weekday Morning 7: Proposed Site Drive & Sutton Street 07/31/2019 Movement Et3T IwBR UtlBL WOT NBl NBR Lane ConficduraliwIs Traffic Volume(vehlh) 528 7 6 932 22 14 Future Volume(Vehlh) 528 7 6 932 22 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0,93 0.93 0.02 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 550 7 6 1002 24 15 Pedestrians Lane Width(fl) Walking Speed(ftrs) Percent Blockage Right turn{care(veh) 6 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(0) 868 pX,platoon unblocked VC,conflicting volume 557 1568 554 VC1,stage 1 conf Vol vC2,stage 2 con vol vCu,unblocked vol 557 1568 554 tC,single(s) 4.1 `6,0 *6.0 tC,2 stage(s) IF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 99 84 97 cM capacity(vehlh) 1019 146 553 Direclior;Jana tE EB,) W8.1 18,1. Volume Total 557 1008 39 Volume Left 0 6 24 Volume Right 7 0 15 cSH 1700 1019 237 Volume to Capacity 0.33 0.01 0,16 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 14 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.2 25.7 Lane LOS A D Approach Delay(s) 0,0 0,2 25.7 Approach LOS a Intersection Summa"r Average Delay 0.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 User Entered Value S:1Jobs17378\SynchrolSenior Center\NO BUILD\6-B AM.syn Synchro 10 Report Pago 4 HCM Unsignalized intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 No-Build Weekday Evening 7. Propose Site Drive & Sutton Street 07131/2019 -- -4\ (A� Movement EBT EBR. WBL WOT N8L NOR, Lane Configurations 11 4 ' Traffic Volume(vehlh) 961 23 14 561 13 10 Future Volume(Veh1h) 961 23 14 661 13 10 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 1033 25 15 597 14 11 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ftls) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) 6 j Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) 868 pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 1058 1672 1046 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 1068 1672 1046 tC,single(s) 4.1 '6.0 '6,0 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3,3 p0 queue free% 98 89 96 cM capacity(vehlh) 666 126 297 Direction,lane ff EB:1 W13 4 NB 1 Volume Total 1058 612 25 Volume Left 0 15 14 Volume flight 25 0 11 cSH 1700 666 224 Volume to Capacity 0.62 0.02 0.11 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 2 9 Control Delay(s) 0,0 0.6 28.6 Lane LOS A D Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.6 28.6 Approach LOS D lnterseclion Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 * User Entered Value SA,Iobs173781SynchrolSenior Center=BUILD16-B PM,syn Synchro 10 Report Page 4 I HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 Build Weekday Morning 7: Proposed Site Drive & Sutton Street 07131/2019 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR,. Lane Configurations T+ 4 1 Traffic Volume(vehfh) 528 17 12 932 22 14 Future Volume(Vehfh) 528 17 12 932 22 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 650 18 13 1002 24 15 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(fUs) Percent Blockage Right turn Bare(veh) 6 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) 868 pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 568 1687 559 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 568 1587 559 tC,single(s) 4.1 "6.0 '6.0 10,2 stage(s) IF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 99 83 97 CM capacity(vehl11) 1009 141 549 Direction,Lane i� EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 568 1015 39 Volume Left 0 13 24 Volume Right 18 0 15 cSH 1700 1009 230 Volume to Capacity 0.33 0.01 0.17 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 1 15 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.4 26.4 Lane LOS A D Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.4 26.4 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 User Entered Value S:IJobs173781Synchr6Senior Cenlerl5-B AM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 Build Weekday Evening 7: Propose Site Drive & Sutton Street 07012019 i .-- 4 Movement FIST FBR WBL WBT N6L . N13R . Lane Configurations 4 j Traffic Volume(vohfh) 973 32 18 561 13 10 Future Volume(Veh{h) 973 32 18 561 13 10 E Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 1046 34 19 597 14 11 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Talking Speed(Ells) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) 6 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) 868 pX,platoon unblocked VC,conflicting volume 1080 1698 1063 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 1080 1698 1063 to,single(s) 4.1 6.0 `6.0 tC,2 stage(s) IF(s) 2.2 3.6 3.3 p0 queue free% 97 88 96 CM capacity(vehlh) 653 120 290 Dlrectlon' Lane It E131 WB 1 .` NBJ Volume Total 1080 616 25 Volume Left 0 19 14 Volume Right 34 0 11 cSH 1700 653 215 Volume to Capacity 0.64 0.03 0.12 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 2 10 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.8 29.6 Lane LOS A D Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.B 29,6 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay 03 fntersection Capacity t7tilization 63.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 User Entered Value S:Uobs173781SynchrolSenior Centerl6-B PM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 4 Sutton Street at Surrey Drive HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 No-Build Weekday Morning 4., Surrey Drive & Sutton Street 07/31/2019 Movement EST EBR WBL WBT NBL. NBR Lane Configuralions T 4 Y ' Traffic Volume(vehfh) 528 1 4 950 5 8 Future Volume(Vehlh) 528 1 4 950 5 8 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 00/0 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 574 1 4 1033 5 9 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type Noire Norte Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) 1198 pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 575 1616 574 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 575 1616 574 IC,single(s) 4.1 16.0 '6,0 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 2.2 3.6 3.3 p0 queue free% 100 96 98 cM capacity(vehlh) 998 137 536 Difectioh, a"ne ft`. ER 1 WR 1` ;,'N131; Volume Total 575 1037 14 Volume Left 0 4 5 Volume Right 1 0 9 cSH 1700 998 263 Volume to Capacity 0.34 0,00 0.05 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 4 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.1 19.4 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.1 19.4 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 User Entered Value S:Uobs173781SynchrolSenior Center=BUILD15-B AM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 No-Build Weekday Evening 4: Surrey Drive & Sutton Street 0713 1120 119 41 I� Movement EBT EBR WBL W8T NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1'+ *T Y Traffic Volume(vehltr) 977 4 15 560 3 8 Future Volume(Veh1h) 977 4 15 560 3 8 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peals Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 1062 4 16 609 3 9 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(Ns) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 1066 1705 1064 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 1066 1705 1064 tC,single(s) 4.1 16.0 *6,0 tC,2 stage(s) IF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 98 97 97 cM capacity(vehm) 654 120 289 �ireclloi►;Lane1' EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 1066 625 12 Volume Left 0 16 3 Volume Right 4 0 9 cSH 1700 654 213 Volume to Capacity 0.63 0.02 0.06 Queue Length 951h(ft) 0 2 4 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.7 22.9 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.7 22.9 Approach LOS C lriterseclion Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 " User Entered Value S:IJobs173781SynchrolSenior CenterlNO BUILDl6-B PM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 2 i HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 Build Weekday Morning 4. Surrey Drive & Sutton Street 07/31/2019 Movemerit EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR' Lane Configurations T� 4 Y Traffic Volume(vehlh) 538 1 4 950 6 8 Future Volume(Vehlh) 538 1 4 950 6 8 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0,92 0,92 0,92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly€tool rate(vph) 585 1 4 1033 7 9 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ftls) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None !None Median storage veh) Upsiream signal(ft) pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 586 1626 586 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 586 1626 586 tC,single(s) 4.1 16,0 "6.0 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 2,2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 1.00 95 98 cM capacity(vehlh) 989 135 529 Direction,Loh edf Eta i WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 586 1037 16 Volume Left 0 4 7 Volume Right 1 0 9 cSH 1700 989 233 Volume to Capacity 0.34 0.00 0.07 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 '5 Control Delay(s) 0,0 0.1 21.6 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay(s) 0,0 0.1 21,6 Approach LOS C Intersection.Summary Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 User Entered Value S;IJobsl7378tSynchro\Senior Centerl5-B AM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 Build Weekday Evening 4: Surrey Drive & Sutton Street 07131/2019 i Movement EST CBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurallons 1'+ 4 Y Traffic Volume(vehth) 986 4 15 560 21 20 Future Volume(Vehlh) 986 4 15 560 21 20 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0%Q 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 1072 4 16 609 23 22 Pedestrians Mane Width(ft) Walking Speed(fYs) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(fl) 1318 pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 1076 1715 1074 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1076 1715 1074 1C,single(s) 4.1 '6.0 16.0 1C,2 stage(s) IF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 98 81 92 cM capacity(vehlh) 648 118 285 Direction,Ler 01 t B 1 -WS 1 NB 1 Volume Total 1076 625 45 Volume Left 0 16 23 Volume Right 4 0 22 cSH 1700 648 165 Volume to Capacity 0.63 0.02 0.27 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 2 26 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.7 34,7 Lane LOS A D Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.7 34.7 Approach LOS D lnterseclion sommarY - Average Relay 1,1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 User Entered Value i S;IJobsV378tiSynchro\Senior CenterW•B PM,syn Synchro 10 Report Page 2 i Surrey Drive at Proposed Site Drive i i HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 Build Weekday Morning 10: Surrey Drive 07/31/2019 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBl SBT Lane Configurations it T T Traffic Volume(vehm) 0 1 13 0 0 5 Future Volume(Vehlh) 0 1 13 0 0 5 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0°/° Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 1 14 0 0 5 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking:Speed(fUs) Percent Blockage Right tum flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 19 14 14 v01,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 19 14 14 tC,single(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 16 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 cM capacity(vehlh) 998 1066 1604 Direction;Lame.# WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 1 14 5 Volume Left 0 0 .0 Volume Right 1 0 0 cSH 1066 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.01 0,00 Queue length 95th(ft) 0 0 0 Control Delay(s) 8A 0,0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay(s) 8.4 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A Interse6tion'Summary Average Delay 0A Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 S;1Jobs1737t31SynchrolSenior Centerl5-B AM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2026 Build Weekday Evening 10: Surrey Drive & Site Drive B 07/3112019 i f- 1 Movement ► 13L WBR. NBT NBR SBL- SBT Lane Configurations ` T T Traffic Volume(vehlh) 0 30 10 0 0 19 Future Volume(Vehlh) 0 30 10 0 0 19 Sign Conlrol Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flour rate(vph) 0 33 11 0 0 21 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(itis) Percent Blockage Right turn are(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(it) pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 32 11 11 vC1,stage 1 can(vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 32 11 11 tC,single(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC,2 stage(s) IF(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 97 1100 cM capacity(velilh) 982 1070 1608 Direction;Lane it WRI NB I. 56.1 Volume Total 33 11 21 Volume Left 0 0 0. Volume Right 33 0 0 cSH 1070 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.01 0.01 Queue Length 95ih(ft) 2 0 0 Control Delay(s) 8.5 0.0 0.0 Lane LQS A Approach Delay(s) 8.5 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A Intersecliori Sunimar Average Delay 4.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 S:Wobs173781Synchro\Senior CenteA6-B PM.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 5 1 i 146 0ascornb Road Andover,MA 01810 978.794.1792 The EngineeringCorp.com Create I Design I Innovate TEE: The Engineering Corp Ms. Monica Gregoire August 12, 2019 Staff Planner Planning Department Town of North Andover 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 j Ref.: T0758.08 Re: Peer Review#1 -Traffic Review 505 Sutton Street Dear Ms, Gregoire: On behalf of the Town of North Andover, TEC, Inc. (TEC) reviewed documents as part of the transportation engineering peer review for the proposed residential development located at#505 Sutton Street in North Andover, Massachusetts. Vanasse & Associates, Inc (VAI). submitted the following documents on behalf of Sutton Redevelopment, LLC (the "Applicant"), which TEC reviewed for conformance with the Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaws and generally accepted industry standards: • Transportation Impact Assessment—Proposed Residential Development—North Andover, Massachusetts; prepared by Vanasse &Associates, Inc, dated July 2019; • Site plan entitled "Multifamily Site Development Plans in North Andover, Massachusetts," prepared by The Morin-Cameron Group, Inc., dated May 2019 Upon review of the documents and plans, TEC has compiled the following comments for the Board's consideration: Traffic Impact Assessment 1. The traffic study area includes four (4) intersections in the vicinity of the site; including two unsignalized site driveways. Based upon the size and scope of the development, TEC finds that the study area as provided in the TIA is sufficient to capture the effects of the project on surrounding roadways based on Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) guidelines set forth by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT). This includes an evaluation of intersection in which the site-generated trips increase the peak hour traffic volume by more than 5 percent and/or by more than 100 vehicles per hour per MassDOT's TIA Guidelines (Section 3.I.C). 2. The Applicant has provided traffic data collection along Sutton Street and at the study area intersections during the weekday morning and weekday evening peak periods. TMCs were conducted on Wednesday, June 5, 2019 and ATRs were conducted on Wednesday, June 12, 2019. Both dates represent a period after North Andover High School seniors were no longer In session. In addition, TMCs conducted on June 5, 2019 coincide with an early release day for all North Andover public Schools. The applicant should provide additional documentation T;\T0758\T0758.08\Docs\Letters\T0758,08 e a m Traffic PR Review#1 8-12 19.docx 505 Sutton Street- North Andover, MA Peer Review#1 --Traffic Review The EnghwerIng Corp August 12, 2019 Page 2 of 4 to the adjustment or need for readjustment of traffic volumes as presented in the TIA. This may include the recounting of traffic volumes. 3. No adjustment to the counts were made to reflect seasonal fluctuation as June represents a month greater than the average-month conditions. TEC confirmed the usage of MassDOT's 2017 seasonal adjustment factors as published. 4. The TIA provides a crash analysis generally centered on the intersection of Sutton Street at Osgood Street. TEC's review of the MassDOT Crash Portal indicates up to 27 crashes during the study period defined in the TIA with additional crashes experienced along Sutton Street within the study area. The Applicant should revise or provide supplemental information to the TIA and provide additional information, as needed,that describes potential crash trends within the study area. 5. The TIA did not provide support materials related to the ambient growth rate of 1.0% per year. At a minimum, the Applicant should provide a listing of documents reviewed to confirm the utilization of this ambient growth factor. 6. The TIA provides information related to other developments in the area; including #4 High Street and #1210 Osgood Street. Upon inspection, site generated traffic from the #4 High Street site appears to be incorrect base d on the Project's Traffic Evaluation dated June 27, 2019 for both the Osgood Street (Chickering Street) and Sutton Street approaches. These volumes may also be updated as part of the subject Project's Town review. The Applicant shall update the TIA to reflect the most recent available information from the #4 High Street project. 7. Site trip generation calculations for the proposed uses were generated based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 101h Edition for Land Use Code (LUC)221 —Multifamily Residential (Mid-Rise). TEC generally concurs with this methodology as the ITE Trip Generation Manual is an industry standard and was utilized with the latest edition as issued in September 2017. 8. Site generated trip distribution for the site is based upon existing traffic patterns and a review of existing trip distributions utilized for other local developments. The TIA provides no documentation of how these trip distribution percentages were evaluated. At a minimum, the Applicant should provide a listing of documents reviewed to confirm the utilization of this trip distribution. In addition, as a residential development with peak hour analysis, the Applicant should seek to evaluate the trip distribution based on the most recent US Census Journey-to- Work data that is publicly available. 9. The comments as noted above may result in modifications to the results of the capacity and queue analysis and therefore TEC has not provided direct comment on the analysis as presented at this time. TEC reserves the right to provide additional comments and improvement recommendations upon completion of the peer review comment responses. 10. It appears that data provided in Table 7 related to sight distance might be switched between "Looking West" and "Looking East" based on our information provided. Sight distance measurements provided in the TIA indicate that intersection sight distance looking west from the site driveway marginally meet requirements for posted speed; but not operating speed. The TIA provides description of potential vegetation clearing to mitigate this obstruction, The Applicant should provide a commitment to provide the necessary clearing, to maintain the T:\T0758NT0758.08\Docs�Letters\TO758.08 Traffic PR Review#18-12-19.docx Engineering Tomorro 's Solutions Today. 505 Sutton tto Street- North Andover MATECPeer Review#1 —Traffic Review August 12, 2019 I Page 3 of 4 clear area, and to install all new vegetation and signage outside the minimum sight line triangles. 11. The capacity and queue analysis analyze the signalized intersection of Sutton Street at Osgood Street using the Synchro Percentile Delay methodology Instead of the industry j standard Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010 or 61h Edition methodology. Although TEC does not necessarily disagree with the usage of Synchro methodology, the Applicant should provide justification for its use over HCM. Site Development Plans 12. The size and scope of the project may result in a significant number of children needing access to buses during the school year. The Applicant should dedicate space along the site driveways to support sidewalks connections to Sutton Street to, at a minimum, provide access for school children to the potential bus stop location. In addition, the Town should consider a requirement that the Applicant provide, at a minimum, a standing pad along the roadway edge to serve as a safe location for children to gather while waiting for a school bus. 13. There are currently no sidewalks provided along Sutton Street in the vicinity of the project. With a significant increase in potential pedestrian traffic to/from the site, the close proximity to the McEvoy Fields, a need for safe location for children to gather while waiting for a school bus, and available Town right-of-way; the Town should consider requesting the Applicant provide new sidewalk along the site frontage with connection to McEvoy Field to the east. 14. The project proposes to provide 215 off-street parking spaces including ten (10) handicap spaces. For the proposed 136 housing units, the Town of North Andover requires 224 off- street parking spaces (§ 195-8.4). The TIA denotes that the site will provide sufficient parking for the site; however, the Applicant has not provided back-up data to support the statement (i.e. ITE Parking Generation or Urban Land Institute,etc.). The Applicant should provide back- up data to support the request for Special Permit. 15. The Site Plans do not provide the layout of garaged parking within each of the buildings on- site. The width of the buildings and the potential location of support columns may not provide sufficient maneuverability for vehicles within the building. The Applicant should provide a parking layout/traffic circulation plan for the proposed parking garages. A key aspect of the plan should note whether each garaged space is assigned by resident as the building width may not support a passenger vehicle or pick-up truck to turnaround should spaces not be available. 16. Ensure the project will provide sufficient space along the private drive for a Town of North Andover fire apparatus to turn around. Upon application of a turning template, should a fire apparatus not be able to complete a full U-turn, the Applicant should consider modifications at these points to further enlarge the roadway hammerheads and/or provide for an engineered pervious area beyond the asphalt to allow for complete turns. 17. The Applicant should provide a vehicular circulation plan which shows that a garbage truck (front-loading) can adequately circulate the site and access the dumpster enclosures. Note that the truck should maintain the same directional flow during pick-up as traditional vehicles. 18. Several locations within the site are candidates for stop-signs and stop-bars to control perpendicular traffic at a main drive aisle; or at the major entrancelexit points. Where stop- T,\T0758\T0758.08\Docs\Letters\T0758.08 Traffic PR Review#1 8-12-19.docx Engineering Tomorrow's Solutions Today. jjjjjjMgj;: M;�! M!:jll: 505 Sutton Street- North Andover, MATEC Peer Review#1 --Traffic Review ThnFngtr eerlrfCop August 12, 2019 Page 4 of 4 signs are shown on the plan, a stop-bar should be included to accompany the sign.Some key locations on the plans depict both bar and signage. The Applicant shall consider installation of stop sign and stop-bar at all those perpendicular locations where minor drive-aisles meet main drive aisles. For instance, the garage exit from Building #2 onto the garage exit from Building #1. 19. There is currently no depiction of stop-sign at the site driveway at Sutton Street. 20. Where additional sidewalk connectivity (from previous comments) is added to the plans, the Applicant shall provide pedestrian crossing signage at the marked crosswalk / uncontrolled location within the site. This signage would be superseded should a stop-sign be warranted at this location. Please do not hesitate to contact me directly if you have any questions concerning our comments at 978-794-1792. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, TEC, Inc. "The Engineering Corporation" 10 amuel W. Gregoria, E, PTOE, RSPI Senior Design Engineer—Transportation Planning & ITS T:\T0758�T0758.08\Docs\Letters\T0758.08 Traffic PR Review#1 8-12-19.docx Engineering 7morri o rr ovv's Solutions Today. i :36 Now(:;ii(.land lt[i::dno!;:,i Conter Drivo :iiNtl-140 Blti4t .�rti;4� Sat�,pY� i S¢.�Shita3�a s :,�!'1 2iledr.� Andover, MA 01810.40'11 Offic<:W111,474-8800 Ref: 7378 I August 20,2019 Ms.Karen Pollastrino Sutton Redevelopment,LLC 231 Sutton Street,Suite I North Andover,MA 02135 Re: Responses to Comments Peer Review-Traffic Review 505 Sutton Street Residential Development North Andover,Massachusetts Dear Karen: Vanasse & Associates, Inc. (VAI) is in receipt of the peer review comments dates August 12, 2019, prepared by The Engineering Corporation Inc. (TEC). For ease review, we have provided the comments followed by our responses: Comment l: The traffic study area includes four (4) intersections in the vicinity of the site; including two unsignalized site drivewa}s. Based upon the size and scope of the development, TEC fllyds that the study area as provided in the TIA is sufficient to capture the effects of the project on surrounding roadways based on Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) guidelines set forth by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT). This includes an evaluation of intersection in which the site generated trips increase the peals hoar traffic vol7une by more than 5 percent and/or by more than 100 vehicles per' hour per AlassDOT's TIA Guidelines (Section 3.1 Q. Response: No response is necessary. Comment 2: The Applicant has provided traffic data colleaion along Sutton Street and at the study avert intersections daring the weekday morning and weekday evening peak periods. TAICs were conducted on Mednesday, June 5, 2019 and ATMs were conducted on Wednesday, June 12, 2019. Botli dates rept•eseltt a period rafter North Andover•Iliglt School seniors wel•e no lollgel•in session. In addition, TMCs conducted on Jane 5,2019 coincide with an early release day for all North Andover public Schools. The applicant should provide additional Llocllmentatioll to the adjustment or need for readjustment of traffic volumes its presenter) in the TIA. This may include the recounfing of traffic volumes. Response: As stated below in conunent 3 no seasonal adjustment was necessary based upon MassDOT procedures for average month conditions. The school Hours are between 7:30 AM to 2:30 PM and have a little impact during weekday evening peak hour. Comment 3: No adjustment to the counts were made to reflect seasonal fluctuation as Julie represents a month greater than the average-month conditions. TEC confirmed the usage of AlassDOT's 2017 seasonal adjustment,factors as published. Response: No response is necessary. Ms.Karen Pollastrino August 19,2019 Page 2 of 5 Comment 4: The TIA provides a crash analysis generally centered on the intersection of Sutton Street at Osgood Street. TEC's review of the MassDOT Crash Portal indicates rap to 27 crashes during the study period defined in the TIA with additional crashes etperienced along Sutton Street within the study area. The Applicant should revise or provide supplemental information to the TIA and provide additional information, as needed, that describes potential crash trends within the study area. Response: VAI reviewed the most recent five-year period available (2014 through 2018) of crash data acquired front the MassDOT Crash portal. The data is summarized by intersection, type, and severity, and is presented in Table 1. The majority of accidents occurred at the Osgood Street (Route 125) intersection with Sutton Street. Eleven (11) of the 24 recorded accidents involved angle type collisions which appears to be caused by vehicles failing to yield the right-of-way. G:\737S North Andover,MA\Letters\1-Ms.Karen Pollastrino.do 1 E I I Ms,Karen Pollastrino August 19,2019 Page 3 of 5 1 TABLE 1 ACCIDENT SUMMARY Sutton Street at F Osgood Street Lawrence Sutton Street at (Route 125) Sutton Street at Old Municipal 477 Sutton Sutton Street at ji at Sutton Street Clark Road Airport Drive Street Surrey Drive i Scenario (Signalized)° (Unsignalized)e (Unsignatized)e (Unsignalized)e (Unsigoalized)e Year: 2014 0 0 1 0 0 2015 7 1 0 0 0 2016 9 0 0 0 0 2017 5 0 0 0 1 2019 3 1 1 1 0 Total 24 2 2 1 1 Averageb 4.8 0.4 0.4 0.2 0,2 Crash Rate` 0.32 0.07 0.03 0.03 Significane No No No No Type: ! Angie l l 1 1 0 0 Rear-End 3 1 1 1 0 Head-On 2 0 0 0 1 Sideswipe 5 0 0 0 0 Fixed Object 3 0 0 0 0 Unknown/Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total 24 2 2 1 1 Time of Day: Weekday(7:00-9:00 AM) 4 1 1 0 1 Weekday(4:00-6:00 PM) 1 0 0 1 0 Remainder of Pay 19 1 1 0 0 Total 24 2 2 1 1 Lighting Conditions: Daylight 14 2 2 1 1 Dawn/Dusk 1 0 0 0 0 Dank(lit) 8 0 0 0 0 Dark(untit) 1 0 © 0 0 Unknown 0 0 0 0 0 Total 24 2 2 1 1 Pavement Cmiditions Dry 21 1 2 1 0 wet 1 1 0 0 1 Snow 1 0 0 0 0 lee 0 0 0 0 0 Unknown(Other) 1 0 0 0 0 Total 24 2 2 1 1 Severity. Property Only 16 1 1 1 0 Non-fatal-hrjury Accident 7 1 1 0 1 Fatal Accident 0 0 0 0 0 Hit and Run 0 0 0 0 0 Other 1 0 0 0 0 Total 24 2 2 1 1 'Source: MassDOT,2014 through 2018. Average crashes over five-year period. `Crash rate per million entering vehicles(ntev). `Unsignalized intersections are significant if rate>0.57 crashes per million vehicles 'Signalized intersections are significant if rate>0.73 crashes per million vehicles G:\737RNotth Andover,n4A\Letters\I-Ms.Karen Folla.;Wao.docx i Ms.Karen Pollastrino August 19,2019 Page 4 of 5 Coniinent 5: TIA did riot provide support rnateHals related to the annbient growth rate of 1.0%per year.At a rnininlunt, the Applicant should provide a listing of documents re►dewed to confirm the artilization of this atnbientgrowth factor. Response: The detailed daily traffic growth is provided in the appendix. In addition,prior traffic studies in North Andover utilize the l%growth rate. Continent 6: The TIA provides information related to other developments in the area, including#4 High Street and#1210 Osgood Street. Upon inspection,site generated traffic front the#4 High Street site appears to be incorrect base d on the Projects Traffic Evaluation dated June 27, 2019 for both the Osgood Street (Chickening Street) and Srtttoan Street approaches. These vohunes may also be updated as prat of the subject Project's Town review. The Applicant shall update the TIA to reflect the most recent available information front the#41Iigh Streetproject. Response: The traffic study of the 4 High Street Residential Development was not available at the thne that this study was completed. A comparison between our estimates and the actual study, indicates a net difference of two (2) more vehicles during weekday morning peak hour and three (3) more vehicles during weekday evening.These changes do not warrant any finther analysis. Comment 7: Site trip generation Calculations for the proposed uses were generated based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for Laud Use Code (LUC)221—Multifamily Residential(Mid-,Rise). TEC generally concurs with this methodology as the ITE Trip Generation Manual is an industry standard and was utilized with the latest edition as issued in September 2017. Response: No response is necessary. Coininent 8: Site generated trip distribution for the site is based upon existing traffic patterns anal a review of existing trip distributions utilized for other local developments. The TIA provides no documentation of how these trip distribution percentages were evaluated. At a nrininnnn, the Applicant should provide a listing of doem nests reviewed to eonfarmn the utilization of this trip distribution, In addition, as a residential development with peak hour analysis, the Applicant should seek to evaluate the trip distribution based on the most recent US Census Journey-to- Work data that is publicly available. Response: The journey to work data is provided in the appendix. Conintent 9: The comments as noted above nnay result in modifications to the results of the capacity and queue analysis and therefore TEC has not provided direct comment on the analysis as presented tit this tune. TEC reserves the night to provide additional comments and improvement recommendations upon completion of the peen review comment responses. Response: These changes do not warrant any further analysis. Cominent 10: It appears that data provided in Table 7 related to sight distance might be switched bet►veen "Looking West" and "Looking East" based on our information provided. Sight distance measurements provided in the TIA indicate that interseetiou sight distance looking west front the site driveway marginally meet requirements for posted speed, but not operating speed. The TIA provides description of potential vegetation clearing to mitigate this obstruction. The Applicant should pro►fide a eonnnitment to provide the necessary clewing, to maintain the Clear area, and to install all new vegetation and signage outside the minimum sight line triangles. Response: Table 2 presents the updated sight distances direction in the table. G:\7378 Norih Andover,MA\I.ettcrs\t-Ms.Karen Mlasirino.docx i 1 Ms. Karen Pollastrino, August 19,2019 Page 5 of 5 i B TABLE 2 � SIGHT DISTANCE MEASUREMENTS Required Minimum. (Feet)a Measured Exiting Sight Distance Measurement 30 mph 35 tnph 37 mph (Feet) Stalon Street at Proposed Site Driveway: Looking Gast 200 250 268 +300 Looking West 200 250 268 2501 '11ccommcsldcd minimum values obtained from A Policy on Geometric Design of 1llglnvays cord Streels,Fifth Edition;American Association of Stato Highway and Transportation Officials(AASIiTO);201 I, requires clean vegctation. COMMCIit i 1: The capacity and queue analysis analyze the signalized Intersection of Stilton Street at Osgood Street using the Synchro Percentile Delay methodology Instead of the industry standard Highway Capacity Manual(HCM) 2010 or 6th Edition methodology. Afthougli TCsC does not necessarily disagree Wth the usage of Synchro methodology, the Applicant should provide )nstification for Its use over HCM. Response; As noted in the capacity analysis reports, the gaps for vehicles exiting onto Sutton Street have been adjusted to reflect actual field observations. The HCM 2010 methodology standardizes its parameters,and technical adjustments are only possible following the HCM 2000 methodology.In addition,Route 125 northbound approach is a left-through shared lane.The Signalized HCM 2010 methodology cannot compute turning movements with share lanes,To provide a consistent study, the entire study intersections were analyzed following the HCM 200 methodology. We trust that the above satisfactorily address the comments and if you should have any questions or require additional information,please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, i VANFL r" S, INC. F. Gi Ham, P.H. Managing Partner Enclosure CC' G,.\737a North Andover,MA\Collets\1-Ms.Karen Pollastrino,docx I APPENDIX CRASH DATA GROWTH RATE JOURNEY TO WORD-TRIP DISTRIBUTION CRASH DATA Sefeci fields Query Type DefmE Query MR U11 - � — I'42 \O l 3;y�i � w 'S}✓� ¢cif�Z:. ����a. IA 4 D �iSGilGiobe�EsrE HEAE Garmia,iPC :; __.__- �. _..._. _. ..: weredbEsr l. Data Level:CRASH :Total.Records3l FilteredResus3€ Gm T-ois: MaTlx� ChaRTotx n 6VortToo50 SelectedOnlyFJ a ' = o o a JL A2 _.. tz ��l �'A i z�� z ��° ��� g� •�� a�� •`s2 a�_'= i�E s zA_ zA zA zA z zA zA 2 2 t 2 t 2 2 i 2 <c y w n° n 21 a a il` p ' i . :ea'. ati 'at 'g; �n ��A xy6L 8$ s F g g o a E a o a s s z° s �3gi - } z roa�oY z z z z e z z z z z a a a - - A isky n' a a5- R av2 am n a n n n"m2 r3°'2 n' t5 I SEA BEDS sEg SEAS SEs SEA SEA sE SE E2S z°x� eej z $aee zap z`A z z >m w— n o g E E o ro a n` o v o v o z z z z zSd z z z � z z z_a 2 t yy o z o z a z o z a z a z o z a z ZZ z Z a zz a� gg v..n - �� -.�n: r' raewewwordewuw tMrMimN1[wm urasmaaxha. w»Mrw ewx>er .a.e.w �� •w� smhGaerri Y.rruP..rwvaovsa w.uaw.mdm wt ie.u.,w..4.r o.a.wk xuwoavn .s,nwlau. se-4 �Lour. wewr Nre. uwxn. uor 'Nuepr 4nYwn Wmr�-6w1W :.Irufiir,.dr� pnb_ pn«r.,.WI9M�•1 Coaxer ae4W 6Knle,NbknYYM • puulruTYPu .. ..vMd.l ulatl.Wm9xon• AMnhW RMK. unxr Pwkr � .. LN.vaa llKeexQ eNxuu .. i 1 l OSG0OD5T&amp; DI:Ilrtattenr3onl,iFaOetl '. Yes, E SU7014 ST I12Ss [ Non-fahl 2 to ylold dehtofwsyl I Coill9on with iT- TI At No,school devlce /OSGOOD STREET Rte NORTH 1 3nlury• DL-[Me Improper motor vehlde In 1lnters-this control Two-way,not Vi;Tumingieft/V2; VLN InMr'Y`rrEe]jNe hit Is.net funcdnnl =SS/SMON 43453SI ADII 66/24f20261Non-fatal lnu 7:"AM Pessi6le ddvin I traffic O Il tat An le 41 Dry 'n 0 2 VI oWedmmmm 7-11En,Wal tah¢ad/V2;S[Jeer D 3snd run Involved 60 . 231252! 94M76 42,7124 -71.1155 SfREEf 15IiW 2014 Yes, Property 2 1INO Improper Calllslanwlth Dads- I VLSlowingarstopped VLIN INo,school devlce NORTH ldamage only tlrWingI ID2t motorveh[dc in ilghted 1Notiet Two-way,no, In WIfIC/VL Slowingor lV2: No hit bus not funse- 4345386ANDOVER 1213 OlG noncM ere 7:D5PM No Inv €nsift .1 tmiflC readw R¢arend 4I D ivnttlon 0 ONo controls dlvldcd r. petl In trnfllc N Clear AtAddrgss;and run Involved 40 23123Z 940237 42.7121 -71.110946 OSGOD➢STREET 15050 2D73 3 , ! Ycsr E Property 2 1INo Improper CoIE:Jonwlth ISldoswip T- V1 Tmvolnnea lght No,school device I NORTH da—K—rly drivinrj IDx motor vehlde In in,same inMrs¢dtlo Two-way,oat ahead/V2:Chang]ng VLS Operatpi Np hit bOS np[ fOnCClpnl OSGOOD 5TREE7 Rte 4345395 ANDOVER ❑9I03/2017 none In vrotl r7:47 AM No Inv (Inattention tmfflc D Il t Idlrocdon 4 D 0 0 No o-I elvidod Ian¢. /V2:S Clear Des1 affid and run involved 40 n 231257I 940316 42.7128 -72,1M4 1255 15754 2013 Yo I 71 Nonfatal 2 PA:IN.Improper Lolilslan with Park- T. 3 Traffle { VI:S At No,sehenl devlce NORTH I I lnlurv- drWingl/D2:IFalledtp mpiarrehlde In lighted imarSeNol I wnm CI TwpwaY.not EEVy7mveIFrC alght Iv2; Inter—do No h:t bus not f—jnl OSGOOD STREET Rta 4498813 ANDOVER [ IWIAP2017 Nonfatal Injury17:14 PM Possible €eidd,ht of wa [raffle road iAn e 4 0 n Oi 2 sl,nal dwidw fahead/V2:Turning,left \ Clear in and run involved nR 231252 940276 42.7124 -71116E ]25/SLR7ON mlR r 1S=2¢LR Yes, 1 Non-fatal 2 02:[Failed to yield right Call[slan with T. 3 Tmffk: € At No.school dcvlec NORTH Injury- of way}/❑L No mote vehlde In Inters cent—I 7w—y,not ,VI;Tiring left/V2; VI;N Cloudy InterseeJo No hh busnot fvnctlonl Sl7ff0N 5f/OSGOOD 4S2A575 ANDOVER { 11113120/7 Non-fatal Injury i1222 PM Pessiblo 1m ro erdHvl , traffic D light LAn Io 4 Wet n I Oi 1 xl nal dvided i7.W1 In stral tahead/V2:S/Raln and nun €mglved 40n 231252 940276 4Z7124 •7LI185 ST 15050 2013 - I E n vea, Property I 2 DI:IFallad m Vleld Hght Wilson with T- Treffls A- No,school devlce NORTH damage only I orwayy lDL INo mptarrehtde In intersecdo? 1 wnaoE Two-way,not ivy Turning left/V2: V1:N In[emeclo No hh bus not functWnl 51F7'TON ST/OS0000 4U47080.NDOVER € 12/I9/201 n no In ercdl 16:26 PM NO Inv ]mpro erdrivingl [raffle D IlItht 1Ncadon 4 D 3 OE 0 d na1 dlvldnd ;T—III stral ht ahead/V2t5 Cl— n and run involved 40 ng 231252 =276 42-7124 -72.1185 S7 15D50 7013 o n i 02:IN.Improper 1 I ll7-111ng smileht VI:S yes, € Properly I 3 dHVing1/D21FaEled to Cell with iFour-Way; Traffic lahead/VL Tuming left//V2: At No,school device NORM [ damage only i yield right of—A/D3: motorwhlda in intarsoctlo 1 eorr-ra1 Two-way'net M.slow[ng orr-opped N I Clear/ Inte—Ho No hit Iwc not ivnetlonl OSGOOD 57/SU70N 45247I ANDOVER I ]222f2017 none inured 112ds6 PM No Inv ��N.lm ro rditIn traffic D II a (Head-en 4 Dry n D'; ❑ sl nol divided 11.traffle V3:E Other n and rvn Involved P. 2SI252 940276 42.7124 -71-1165 57 15050 2013 1 I property 1 Dark- 'Single 1 I No,school rt NORTH damage only I 131;INo Improper Celllslon with IEghted vehlde Notat Two-way,not No hit bus not Not 453G757 ANDOVER ` 04/2]f2018(none Injured) j9:29 PM NO[,JurydHNngl animol-deer road wash 4 D unction 0' O No oonm.I'divided IVL-Mang. V1:5 dear MAW—and run Involved 40Irosoned 2312521 9402371 42.7121 -711185546 056005T 150$0 2033 E i € Two-wpy, Ycs, - property f 2 CallEslon with S[deswlpl T- ] . Traffle divided. At Ilia,school devlce No, daI.ZT.nly DL IDnlmeVo l IDL motorvehE4e In c,samo i Inters Jo oonA01 unprotected Vy Tumingleft/V2: VS:E Intem.e[da Na tall bus oat fvnttlan[ SUTTON STREIT/ d5571g20.NDOVER O6/I9f20]8 none In vrod 9:04AM. NO Inv i (vnknownl tmfflc 9NII tat dlmc[[on 4 Ory n 0 01 sl nal medlar Turn[n left lV4;E Clear n and run Invphrved 231252 34027 42.7124 -7L1185 OW00D STREET i15D50 2013 OL•INe Improper 1 VL Tmvell€ngslralght Yes, I Propery 3 dHWngl/D2:(No Coliislan with T- Trafflt ahead/VZTnvcllEng VI:I At No,srMall =dcuke E NORTH damage only lmprepordrlvingl/D3: motorvehldeln Interectlo control ilWo wpy.11 gvalght ahead1V31 /V2:5 I�KM3nWo Noh1t busnot � �funm-1 OSGOOD ST Rt¢1255 I 4589171 ANDOVER Og110R0]S none In vredl 7729 PM No Ina No Improper drlvN enrl Dusk An[¢ 4 0 0 sl le, Idlvldod 7-111 strai ht ahead V3:E Clear n and I I—led ; 35 n 231252 94D2741 42.7=4 -7=1115 /SIfTTON ST 150SO 2013 j Yes, preppRy 2 Collision with T- Vl:Tmu¢Iling straight V1:W A.t No,ichpol devlce NORTH III only 01:IDnknawn)/D2: motarwhldc In Interseedo 7wwway,rwt ahead/V2:T—sIIng IVL• Ooudy lntervoctle No hit bL¢not function€ I.RCWtK ROAD/ 4166145 ANDOVER 031'S12DISI ne lnuredl BF6 AM Na Inv (Unknown) traffic IDayl[ght Angle 4 Wet n 0 0 YleldsIg divided stmlght ahead W /pain and rvn Involved 3Snr 2311JM 940264E az71291-7L1193 �S-1=- N5TREEr SI684 2013 E DL-(No€mproper E`Non-htpi ddvin8l/02; i V1:Slowing or stopped V1:W €Injury-No 3 pnattentlon),IFe lowed Coll w[th Y- In traffic/V2:Trav4111ng /VL• At No,school €[ 1 NORTH In©padust[ too desely)/Ds.(No rooter-InIde In 1 Interordo T—ty,not st,Irhtsheod/V3: W/ mtersectlo NoI busnot Not I i 1UTTONSr/OW I 4551931 ANDOVEA 06/03M018 Nan-fatal En u 655 PM �n Improper lWln tra r dffic E❑a h hi Reartnd a ❑ 0 1 No contols dl Trovo In stral tat ahead V3:E ocar and run I—Ved 30 m rmd 231184 940254 42,71231-7LI153 C1ARK RD S188e 2033 asslcj ! Yes, Property 2 DI:(Ito yle[d right 1PI11I with € T- Vl:Entering traffic Wne/VI:S No,sdwol dcvlec i 1 NORTH domoge only ofway}/DL(No motorv¢hlde In [[[ Intersepup 7--y,not V2:Tmvelling malght /V2: No hit bus not function I 3992590 ANDOVER Ol/D3/SE115(none In uredl 2:05 PM �Ne Ina lir roper driVI.g mef c DWI[ght AnRle 4 D 0 ()Sto SE is dlvldad ahead W Clou At Addross and= liwolved 35 nR 231170 960259E 4L=3 -7L1I95 492 SSIrTON STREET [11527 3009 € OL IFallewed tee % I NarrvMl 2 closcly),(Dlatr l/ Callblan with VL'Travdilne stra6t V1:W No,school f NORTH injury- )2;(NO Improper motor vehlde In Notat ITwawoy,not ahead/VL 51-mg or IV7: Nc hit 6dsrwt 7� ENot I 463S225 ANDOVER 12/D4/2D2&Non-fatal ErJ.ry 7:47 AM Possible drlvin traffic Oa I[ht Ro—dI D vnttEon 0 S Np contralsidlvided xa ed In traffic w dear AtAddrr... aad rvn Involved 7 3SI.P.Aedi 231170 9402S9 42.7123 -7L1195 492 SVrl 112894�2.- DI:IS—Mry Hor vold€nC due to wend, slippery sufam v Wh , ] oblxt.Iw —torE,t In VS:W 1 +` roadway,et0/A2:(N. /VL. 1 Imp roperdrlving).I D3: W/ (NO Improper dA4[e I Vl:T-11l 9s leht V3:W ! device I i Property ' D4:{No lmpropor Celllsion wlih ahead/V2T Parked/V3:IV4: Ne,Sc l eet 1 N)HTH damage�,I, I 4,M,3I/05:(No packed maw, ENatat Twoway.pet Parked/V4:parked/VS:W/ NohR Sus rtat fuecdoN I f- ' 4536763ANDDVER 05/06 018 noneln ured 5:05 PM �Ne Enu Im ro Crddvin veh[de D II r Acar�nd 4 Dry E UOtt 0 ONceemreE•,dM&d Parked VS:W Lear 0.t Address and— €-10 d 30n 23loi 9a1'227. 4LTI2 --lL 03477 SNTTON ST 1188420I3 Vl: Net IN—!atal 2 DI:IN.Improper C.Uld.n wI:h Aep0f yen, NDRTH Injury- drtvinCl/02:IFaEled to motorvehlcleN 6tersec3o Two+eay,not VS:Trav¢dlnc sbaleht ted/ Op—.r Nohit sh-1 bus Not o lded4432850 ANDMH 07/11t2017N—faW n ' Pombi Wdd fw a0c Da II t Ncda 4 We 0 d]r ivlad 3Sm 230977_ 94027j 42,M:5 -7LI219 sari LDN 6TNEF7 A CRASH RATE WORKSHEET i ; CITYITOWN : North Andover COUNT DATE : 2019 € MWn USE ONLY DISTRICT: 4 UNSlGNAL1ZEb : SIGNALIZED : Source#� INTERSECTION DATA MAJOR STREET : Osgood Street Route 133 ' .E ST# MINOR STREETS) : Sutton Street h ST# ST# ST# ST# INTERSECTION North 889 l INTERSECTION DIAGRAM I zl < 4 0 REF# (Label Approaches) � V 876 3 805 Peak Hour Volumes APPROACH : 1 2 3 4 5 Total Entering DIRECTION : NB SB EB WB Vehicles VOLUMES (PIA) : 805 889 876 2,570 K" FACTOR : D,D80 APPROACH ADT: 32,125; ADT TOTAL VOL!"K"FACT. ' it TOTAL#OF #OF AVERAGE#OF ACCIDENTS : 24 YEARS : 5 ACCIDENTS (A) : CRASH RATE CALCULATION : 0.4[ RATE (A'1,000,000) (ART 365) Comments : Accident Rate for District 4 signalized intersections= 0.73 Accident Rate for District 4 unsignalized intersections " 0.57 S:Wobs173781Crash DataiCrash Rates Worksheet-update 1 CRASH RATE WORKSHEET I CITY/TOWN : North Andover _ COUNT DATE : 2019 M-ID USE ONLY i DISTRICT : 4 UNSIGNALIZED : SIGNALIZED : j Source# INTERSECTION DATA MAJOR STREET : Sutton Street ST It MINOR STREETS) : Lawrence Municipal airport ST# ST# i ST# ST# 3 INTERSECTION North 15 INTERSECTION DIAGRAM n 483 REF# (Label Approaches) 850 I 3 ) �V 0 I Peak Hour Vo[umes APPROACH : 1 2 3 4 5 Total Entering `j DIRECTION : NB SB EB WB Vehicles i VOLUMES (PM) : 15 850 483 1,348..:'. E i K" FACTOR : 0.080 APPROACH ADT : 16 850 ADT-TOTAL VOLM"FACT TOTAL#OF #OF AVERAGE#OF ACCIDENTS : 2 YEARS : 5 ACCIDENTS (A) 0 40 CRASH RATE CALCULATION : 0,07 RATE = (A`1,000,000) (ADT'365) Comments : Accident Rate for District 4 signalized intersections= 0.73 Accident Rate for District 4 unsigna[ized Intersections= 0,57 S:1Jobs173781Crash Data\Crash Rates Worksheet-update A"1 0 1�w N---mw--Iwmwr CRASH RATE WORKSHEET CITY/TOWN ; North Andover COUNT DATE : 2019 MHD USE ONLY DISTRICT : 4 UNSIGNALIZED : SIGNALIZED : Source#� i 'i INTERSECTION DATA MAJOR STREET : � Sutton Street�6E�l�s�aa�a��.,`_'�...=�'mmm�.v'-^__,r.m sT# MINOR STREETS) : Site drive A ST# ST# ST# ST# i E INTERSECTION North D e INTERSECTION DIAGRAM 482 REF# (Label Approaches) 846 K 1 � Peak Hour Volumes APPROACH : 1 2 3 4 5 Total ,f Entering DIRECTION : NIB SB EB WB Vehicles VOLUMES (PM) : 1 846 482 1,329 4 " K" FACTOR : Q.013Q APPROACH ACTT : 16,613 ADT TOTAL Vou"K"FACT TOTAL#OF 1 #OF 5 AVERAGE#OF ACCIDENTS : YEARS : ACCIDENTS (A) : (A.1,000,000) CRASH RATE CALCULATION : 0,0$ RATE (ADT*365) Comments : Accident Rate for District 4 signalized intersections= 0.73 Accident Rate for District 4 unsi nalized intersections = 0.57 S:1Jobs173781Crash DatalCrash Rates Worksheet- update I AUffma CRASH RATE WORKSHEET CITY/TOWN : North Andover COUNT DATE : 2018 i MNp USE ONLY DISTRICT : 4 UNSIGNALIZED : SIGNALIZED : Source#� -� INTERSECTION DATA ...MAJOR STREET:. ..... ... . ....�. .... .��, .... ..T.,a.....� ,..._. _._.._. .... .. ................ _..... .... .... . . ...,..,. Sutton Street ST# MINOR STREET(S) : Surrey Drive ST# 5T# ST# I ST# INTERSECTION North �0 INTERSECTION DIAGRAM i zI 481 REF# (Label Approaches) 843 3 10 Peak Hour Volumes APPROACH : 1 2 3 4 5 Total Entering DIRECTION : NB SIB EB WB Vehicles VOLUMES (PM): 10 843 481 1,334 K" FACTOR : Q.080 APPROACH ADT : 16,675 ADT=TOTAL VOL!"K"FACT TOTAL# OF #OF AVERAGE#OF ACCIDENTS : 1 YEARS : ACCIDENTS (A) : 4 20 i CRASH RATE CALCULATION : p p3 RATE = (A.1,000,000) (ADT"365) 3 l Comments : Accident Rate for District 4 signalized intersections = 0.73 Accident Rate for District 4 unsignalized intersections= 0.57 S:IJobsi73781Crash Data\Crash Rates Worksheet-update I i GROWTH RATE Proposed Residential Dcvclopmcut 505 Sutton Street North Andover,MA General Background Traffic Growth Daily Traffic Volumes Average C1TYlTOWN location lb LOCATION 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Annual North Andove 5071 INTERSTATE 495 AT LAWILENCE 101300 101,000 108,363 111,078 113,187 114,452 126.074 126.074 2.87% North Andovc 502 JROUTE.114NORTH OF ANDOVER BY-PASS 38,056 37,586 36.(W) 1 37.710 37,026 37,999 37,998 38,917 39,I14 40,029 -IS7% 0.65°/a S:Vobs173781Averaoe Annual Growth RatelCrowth North Andover 8/19l2019 JOURNEY TO WORK-TRIP DISTRIBUTION Table 4. Residence MCD/County to Workplace MCD/County Commuting Flows for the United States and Puerto Rico Sorted by Workplace Geography: 5- Year ACS,2011-2015 For more information on sampling and estimation methods,confidentiality protection,and sampling and nonsampling errors,see Universe:Workers 16 years and over. Commuting flows are sorted by place of work state,place of work county,and place of work minor civil division. Top 15 locations Residence Place of Work Commuting Flow Matrix% Workers in State .Minor Civil Division State Minor Civil Division Margin of RT 125 RT 125 Sutton St RT 125 RT 125 Sutton St Workers in Commuting Name Name Name Name Error North South wesT North South wesT Commuting Flow Flow MA NorthAndovertowh W. N irthAndavert0" 3,313 381 22/0° 0.1 0.9 100% 0 331 2982 3313 M North Andovertown M §ostdn'dty" 1,49E 207 10% 0.5 0.5 100% 748 D 748 149E MA NorthAnrlovertown MA` Andovertovun 1,155 221 8% 0.4 0.6 100% 0 462 693 1155 MA North Andover town MA; Lawrence city 933 260 6% 1 100% 0 0 933 933 MA North Anelovertow MA WobLIrn city 544 178 4% 0.7 0.3 100% 0 381 163 544 MA North Andover town MA, Burlington town 405 150 3% 0.7 0.3 100% 0 284 122 406 fUTA North An.dovertown MA' Cambridge city 397 110 3% 0.2 0.8 100% 0 79 31$ 397 MA North Andover town MA;' HavL.. city; 385 186 3% 1 100°% 385 0 0 385 MA North Andovertawn MAi L3an erst4wn 343 92 2% 0.8 0.2 100% 274 69 0 343 ]VlA NorthA"ne[nvertarivn MA' Metf uenTavun city 300 116 2% 1 100% 0 0 300 300 MA North Andayer town MA! Wilxriington town 270 98 2% 0.7 0.3 100% 0 189 81 270 MA North Andover town MA Waltham city 255 123 2% 0.7 0.3 100% 0 179 77 256 IVIA North Arrdbver town MA` Salem town 254 127 2% 0.8 0.2 100% 203 51 0 254 MA North Andovertowr MA: Beverly city 245 96 2% 0.8 0.2 100% 196 49 0 245 MA North Andovertbwn MA Lowell city 224 136 2% 0.4 0.6 100% 0 90 134 224 14,888 =�� -' 10521 17% 21% 62% 100% Adjusted 20 20 60 100 Untitled map ��«_ -"' rlancocx; - New Boston lla "., '� tf[entwootl �-rKonn BooEd.xisx Hampton rrisvllle Greenfield Bedford' Kingston Hampton 177 2a2 121A ,110. 50B Sutton Street,North � Dublin Andover MA - s, - Mcnt vemon ®Boston city,ma .. Peterborough Amherst Merrimack Londonderryrry Hampstead-. - Amesbury Andover town,ma 24. 101 WfRon Milford _ _ - Plaistow - Salisbury Lawrence city,me _ _Jaffrey Temple ryp lo, ,ol Windham- Newbuort _ .>._. Woburn city,ma zaz at _ Salen W ,l a n _ _ rl H Haverhlll city,ma 1A Burlington town,ma 119 las Greenville ,a Nashua '� ..- Newbury Randge ... Mason - ,Ho€Els - MethueriTown'Gry,mal r :Plum island Cambridge city,ma New Ipswich tea Brookline O zla Haverhill city,ma .,........ La, n 1 SoS Sutton 5treet�Nort Rowley v.. .., 0 Danvers town,ma Winchendon 9 m Lawrence chyt�na' las Spswich_;. 4D Methuen Town city,ma .Townsend - - Dracut tz7 A rMdavertown m_a Rockport Wilmington town,Ina Ashbumham l - To sliield - . �L iLowell chy;ma P Essex 127A Waltham city,ma Groton Gloucester Lunenbur Chelmsford _ - 97` - lA dD Salem town,ma lao Fitchburg g Westford" �. Gardner ,e D rDamerstown�m5sterby-the Sea Beverly city,ma Templeton Ayer - - - 'tn" _ Billerica. gv ty Westminster Devens WlSrr9ngtonlown rna Beverljrmy ma 4D Lowell city,ma Littleton } s, Leominster 3 � Salem;own ma - Harvard �. '- - Bu . :Hurungtontown ma ., . In Acton ` 'AWobum city,ma Lancaster - - ConcordLynn . 62�Pr1nceton ea Sterling Inne Hudson • -- Cambridge Hudson 7o Waltham chy M: lm - -.. Rutland West Boylston Holden Q- .01139 } Marlborough Newton Brookline Northborough- - Paxton _.Shrewsbury... O Wellesley' North - Westborough Framingham rookfield Worcester. 20 - Ashland - Quin - Spencer .Leicester. '" -- -Dedham cY. ...... Hingham set z7 Westwood'.. ri m has ..... -::Braintree .zee O CO -Auburn - Millbury lab Norwood : - Schuate _ Map data 02019 Google' 146 Dascomb Road Andover,MA 01810 1 970.794.1792 The EngineeringCorp.com 0-eate Design I Innovate TEC The Engineering Corp Ms. Monica Gregoire August 22, 2019 Staff Planner Planning Department Town of North Andover 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Ref.; T0758.08 Re: Peer Review#2 -Traffic Review 505 Sutton Street Dear Ms. Gregoire: On behalf of the Town of North Andover, TEC, Inc. (TEC) reviewed documents as part of the transportation engineering peer review for the proposed residential development located at#505 Sutton Street in North Andover, Massachusetts. Vanasse &Associates, Inc (VAI). submitted the following documents on behalf of Sutton Redevelopment, LLC (the "Applicant"), which TEC reviewed for conformance with the Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaws and generally accepted industry standards: • Transportation Impact Assessment—Proposed Residential Development--North Andover, Massachusetts; prepared by Vanasse &Associates, Inc, dated July 2019; • Response to Comments—Peer Review Traffic Review--505 Sutton Street Residential Development— North Andover, Massachusetts; prepared by Vanasse & Associates, Inc, dated August 19, 2019; • Site plan entitled "Multifamily Site Development Plans In North Andover, Massachusetts;" prepared by The Morin-Cameron Group, Inc., dated May 2019 For consistency, the original comment numbers have been retained from the most recent TEC Peer Review letter dated August 12, 2019. The Applicant's responses to the comments are shown as bold; TEC's responses are shown as italic. Traffic Impact Assessment, Comment No. 1: The traffic study area includes four(4) intersections in the vicinity of the site; including two unsignalized site driveways. Based upon the size and scope of the development, TEC finds that the study area as provided in the TIA is sufficient to capture the effects of the project on surrounding roadways based on Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) guidelines set forth by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT). This includes an evaluation of intersection in which the site-generated trips Increase the peak hour traffic volume by more than 5 percent and/or by more than 100 vehicles per hour per MassDOT's TIA Guidelines (Section 3.I.C). T:\T0758\T0758.08\Docs\Letters\T0758.08 Traffic PR Review#2 8 22-19.docx i i 505 Sutton Street- North Andover, MA *` Peer Review#2—Traffic Review The En9Jneerngcorp' August 22, 2019 Page 2 of 5 VAI Response: No response is necessary. TEC Response: N/A Comment No. 2: The Applicant has provided traffic data collection along Sutton Street and at the study area intersections during the weekday morning and weekday evening peak periods. TMCs were conducted on Wednesday, June 5, 2019 and ATRs were conducted on Wednesday, June 12, 2019. Both dates represent a period after North Andover High School seniors were no longer in session. In addition, TMCs conducted on June 5, 2019 coincide with an early release day for all North Andover public Schools. The applicant should provide additional documentation to the adjustment or need for readjustment of traffic volumes as presented In the TIA. This may include the recounting of traffic volumes. VAI Response: As stated below in comment 3 no seasonal adjustment was necessary based upon MassDOT procedures for average month conditions. The school hours are between 7:30 AM to 2:30 PM and have a little impact during weekday evening peak hour. TEC Response: TEC agrees that weekday morning peak hour volumes would be generally representative of a typical weekday morning and the school related traffic would have minimal impact on traffic volumes for the weekday evening peak hour. As the site impact is likely to change with additional modifications to traffic volumes through the Intersection, TEC finds that the use of traffic counts on this date are acceptable. Comment No. 3: No adjustment to the counts were made to reflect seasonal fluctuation as June represents a month greater than the average-month conditions. TEC confirmed the usage of MassDOT's 2017 seasonal adjustment factors as published. VAI Response: No response is necessary. TEC Response: N/A Comment No. 4: The TIA provides a crash analysis generally centered on the intersection of Sutton Street at Osgood Street. TEC's review of the MassDOT Crash Portal indicates up to 27 crashes during the study period defined in the TIA with additional crashes experienced along Sutton Street within the study area. The Applicant should revise or provide supplemental Information to the TIA and provide additional information, as needed, that describes potential crash trends within the study area. VAI Response: VAI reviewed the most recent five-year period available (2014 through 2018) of crash data acquired from the MassDOT Crash portal. The data is summarized by intersection, type, and severity, and is presented in Table 1. The majority of accidents occurred at the T:\T0758kTO758.08\Docs\Letters\TO758.08 Traffic PR Review#2 8-22-19.doul Engineering Tomorrow's Solutions Today. i P 505 Sutton Street- North Andover, MA Peer Review#2--Traffic Review Ilia EnglnecrrngCoy � August 22, 2019 Page 3 of 5 j Osgood Street(Route 125)intersection with Sutton Street. Eleven (11) of the 24 recorded accidents involved angle type collisions which appears to be caused by vehicles failing to yield right-of-way. TEC Response: VAI has redocumented crash data for the study area intersections. The additional data has not altered a depiction of crash trend, including the j Intersection of Osgood Street at Sutton Street which experiences a crash rate well below the statewide and MassDOT District-wide average. No further response required. Comment No. 5: The TIA did not provide support materials related to the ambient growth rate of 1.0% per year. At a minimum, the Applicant should provide a listing of documents reviewed to confirm the utilization of this ambient growth factor. VAI Response: The detailed Daily traffic growth is provided In the appendix. In addition, prior traffic studies in North Andover utilize the 1% growth rate. TEC Response: No further response required. Comment No. 6: The TIA provides information related to other developments in the area; including #4 High Street and #1210 Osgood Street. Upon Inspection, site generated traffic from the#4 High Street site appears to be Incorrect based on the Project's Traffic Evaluation dated June 27, 2019 for both the Osgood Street (Chickering Street) and Sutton Street approaches. These volumes may also be updated as part of the subject Project's Town review. The Applicant shall update the TIA to reflect the most recent available information from the#4 High Street project, VAI Response: The traffic study of the 4 High Street Residential Development was not available at the time that this study was completed.A comparison between our estimates and the actual study, indicates a net difference of two(2) more vehicles during weekday morning peak hour and three (3) more vehicles during weekday evening. These changes do not warrant any further analysis. TEC Response: No further response required. Comment No. 7: Site trip generation calculations for the proposed uses were generated based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for Land Use Code(LUC)221 —Multifamily Residential (Mid-Rise). TEC generally concurs with this methodology as the ITE Trip Generation Manual is an industry standard and was utilized with the latest edition as Issued in September 2017. VAI Response: No response is necessary. T:\T0758\TO758.08\Docs\€.etters\TO758.08 Traffic PR Review#2 8-22-19.docX1 Engineering Tomorrow®s Solutions Today. 505 Sutton Street- North Andover, MA TEC Peer Review#2—Traffic Review The Engineering Cmp August 22, 2019 Page 4of5 TEC Response: N/A Comment No. 8: Site generated trip distribution for the site is based upon existing traffic patterns and a review of existing trip distributions utilized for other local developments. The TIA provides no documentation of how these trip distribution percentages were evaluated. At a minimum, the Applicant should provide a listing of documents reviewed to confirm the utilization of this trip distribution. In addition, as a residential development with peak hour analysis, the Applicant should seek to evaluate the trip distribution based on the most recent US Census Journey-to-Work data that is publicly available. VAI Response: The journey-to-work data is provided in the Appendix. TEC Response: No further response required. Comment No. 9: The comments as noted above may result in modifications to the results of the capacity and queue analysis and therefore TEC has not provided direct comment on the analysis as presented at this time. TEC reserves the right to provide additional comments and Improvement recommendations upon completion of the peer review comment responses. VAI Response: These changes do not warrant further analysis. TEC Response: No further response required. Comment No. 10: It appears that data provided in Table 7 related to sight distance might be switched between "Looking West" and "Looking East" based on our information provided. Sight distance measurements provided in the TIA Indicate that Intersection sight distance looking west from the site driveway marginally meet requirements for posted speed; but not operating speed. The TIA provides description of potential vegetation clearing to mitigate this obstruction. The Applicant should provide a commitment to provide the necessary clearing, to maintain the clear area, and to install all new vegetation and signage outside the minimum sight line triangles. VAI Response: Table 2 presents the updated sight distance direction In the table. TEC Response: No further response required. As clearing of vegetation is identified In Table 2, the Applicant should provide a commitment to clear this vegetation to the maximum extent possible within the public or Applicant's Right-of- Way. Comment No. 11: The capacity and queue analysis analyze the signalized intersection of Sutton Street at Osgood Street using the Synchro Percentile Delay methodology instead of the industry standard Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010 or 61" Edition methodology. Although TEC does not T:\To758\To758.08\Docs\Letters\T0758.08 Traffic PR Review#2 8-22-19,docxl Engineering omorrow's Solutions "Today. 1 505 Sutton Street- North Andover, MA TEC Peer Review#2—Traffic Review rr:of:nUrneerrngcafy August 22, 2019 Page 5 of 5 necessarily disagree with the usage of Synchro methodology,the Applicant should provide justification for its use over HCM. VAI Response, As noted in the capacity analysis reports,the gaps for vehicles exiting onto Sutton Street have been adjusted to reflect actual field observations. The HCM 2010 methodology standardizes its parameters, and technical adjustments are only possible following the HCM 2000 methodology. In addition, Route 125 northbound direction is a left-through shared lane. The Signalized HCM 2010 methodology cannot compute turning movements with share lanes. To provide a consistent traffic study, the entire study intersections were analyzed following the HCM 200 methodology. TEC Response: No further response required. Site Development Plans No responses for Comments 12 through 20 where provided by the Applicant. As VAI is not the Applicant's site engineer, the comments should be addressed under a separate cover. Please do not hesitate to contact me directly if you have any questions concerning our comments at 978-794-1792. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, TEC, Inc, "The Engineering Corporation" i amuel W*Gregaorio, , PTOE, RSP1 Senior Design Engineer—Transportation Planning & ITS T.,\T0758\T0758.08\Docs�Letters\T0758.08 Traffic PR Review#2 8-22-19.docxl Engineering To morrow's Solutions Today. I