Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/01/2019 - TEC Traffic Peer Review #2 - - 'A EE7 1600 Osgood Street- North ndover, MT, Peer review# Traffic Review April 1, 202 Page 9 of 9 Lang�en Response, Crash rate worksheets for all the Intersections analyzed are included n the reprised TIAS as part of our traffic study are attached. A Road Safety Audit was conducted on February 18 2 2 and is appended to theTAS, TES`Response.-e. Comment Close haw Comments: '.Several unsignalized locations within the study area seem to show Improved delay and levels-of-service with new traffic volumes, added and no mitigation presented. This is generally not the case except with extremely low volume conditions. Please elaborate Can these locations. 23.The Applicant should discuss opportunities with the Town and I" assDC T to provide mitlgation measures at several locations as Budded to the study area since the Original review. Several Iodations as added show significant impact from the projecfs opening; including.- Town of North Andover Jurisd Iction Main Street Waverly Road od Sutton;,Street 1 Chadwick Street High Street MassDO T Jurlsdlctlon ("with Town side-street approaches): * Route 133 Osgood Street/Colgate Drive Route 125/Bradford Street 0 Route 125 Farrwood thrive' [Haverhill] 0 Route 125/Boston Road Cross Road Haverhill 2 M s noted in Comment# ,the Town should consider conditioning the Applicant to conduct traffic monitoring of the site post-ocouupanoy to prior comparison to the project site trip generation and site impact can the Burro lending intersection.n. The Applicant and the Town should discuss as pert of this monitoring the threshold of Increased impact which may require the Applicant to propose additional measures to mitigate the Impacts of the development. Please do not hesitate to contact nee directly if y ou'have any questions concerning our comments at 97 - 9 -17912'.Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, TECH, Inc. "The Engineering Corp rat onfil am el W. Gregorio, E, PTOE, RSPB Senior Design Engineer Transportation Planning & ITS z Signal warrants for intersection of Route 125 l arwood Drive by Applicant shows signal not warranted. :\T 758\TO758.1 `Doc\\. tters T075 .10 Traffic PR Review#2.,docx 1600 Osgood Street forth Andover, MA TEE Peer Review#2—Traffic Review April 1, 2020 Page 8 of should provide gawps ire the mainline traffic that wild allow vehicles to exit out of these driveways. TEC Response: TEC recommends that the Applicant monitor s site driveways post- occupancy to ensure that degraded'levels-of-servlde and or other safety r 0 issues, such as blockage�►�'orssite eatures. It III s likely that many vehicles within the site will actually utilize the signalized driveway locations to exit the site as It guarantees green time to exiting traffic. This should he monitored toned post-occupancy anc to,ensure that mitigation efforts met target., the Applicant should also consider modifications to the site,plea,as necessary, to not preclude the relocation of drive aisles and ,parking that may he affected by queuing as noted above. Theconcern Is that when queuing occurs ors-site, vehicles attempting to exit the site may in-tum he blocked and potentially extend out into Route 125. Comment No. 19 The TIAS notes that the Holt Street approach to Osgood Street will experience an extensive addition of vehicle delay and shift the approach to over capacity during the morning generator peals hour of the day which will directly, impact other businesses along the Holt Street corridor. The Applicant should evaluate addition opportunities to address the, impact to other businesses along Molt Road ;as a result of the extensive side-street Impact. LanganResponse-. Based on, our analysis, this approach operates at L OS F during the morning peak-hour periods evaluated for the existing g and projected no-build conditions as well.Considering the free-flowing chiannelized right-turn at this approach and the volume of vehicles exiting Bolt Road' during the peak-hour periods, aw traffic signal would not be warranted at this location.The traffic signal at the 16 s ood Street south driveway should help to provide some gaps In the mainline,, traffic that will allow left-turning vehicles to exit from dolt Road. Langan will coordinate with 1'illa ssDOT to determine if' any Improvements should be considered at this intersection. TEC Respon, e,1 The Applicant,should continue to word' with MassDOT to determine what other mitigation options may he avallable at this location. Comment No. 20 TEE concurs that ;sight lines at the unsignali,zed driveway along the westerly,side of Osgood street meet minimum requirements as defined by ASHTo. Langan Response: No, response required. C Response: Comment Closed Comment No 21. The Applicant has indicated that a Road Safety Audit for the intersection of Industrial Avenue Shelley Road HillAve in Haver ill is to he conducted In coordination with Maas,DO:T bused on its designation as a Highway Safety Improvement Program eligibIle intersection and a Top 200 crash location in the Commonwealth. Additional crash related materials, such as crash rate worksheets sheets should he provided in the Tl S for review and to Mas,sDOT as part of the Access Permit process. T:\T0758\TO758.I0\Docs\L+tters\T0758.101 Traffic PR Review#2,docx 1'600 Osgood Street- North Andover, l A TEE:, Peer Review#2—Traffic Review April 1, 22 Page 7 of 9 ether signalized intersections were also analyzed utilizing the Percentile Delay methodology as well. TECResponse.,, TEE agrees with the Applicants methodology and reasoning. Comment Closed Comment No 16 The 1600 Osgood Street North Driveway eastb,ound approach is analyzed under signalized conditions for the 2026 Build scenario. As the signalization of the intersection is called-Duet as mitigation ' r the project, this scenario should normally reflect an unaignalizad condition. TEC,notes that thiis change would have no affect on the mitigation for the location which operates at acceptable levels-of-service in the mitigated condition. No response required. Langan Response: No response required. TEC Response. Comment Closed Comment No. 17: The TIAS notes that the 'intersection of Osgood Street Great bond Road 1 Casa Blarica. operates at degraded levels-of-service during the weekday mornin,, peak hours. The Applicant should coordinate with assI)OT who holds jurisdiction, as part of the Access Permit process to discuss other improvements that may be necessary at this intersection. ManganResponse,: Per the revised TIAS, we are recommending silgn l timing optimization at this location for bath the morning and evening peak IN periods. Coordination with MassDOT is ongoing. O Response. Under o timiz' ed s"final timings the location i still expected to operate at elevated level.-of-service as compared to the No-Build condition (Week � venln condition), The,Applicant should continue to wort with MassDOT to determine what+egret mitigation options may be avallablel at this location to bring Build" with Mitigation operations closer to No-Build Comment No. 1 The TIAS notes that the site unsignalized driveways operate at a significant L S during the peak hours. This delay and extended queues are contained within the site. The Applicant should seek addition modifications to the site's southerly unsignalized driveway which does not provide storage for more than four vehicles prior to blocking the first cross drive aisle; including a new drive aisle as part of the site's modifications. Langan es anae For all periods analyzed the two unai nali ed site driveways operate at the same or improved levels of,service when comparl I ng the 2026 No-Build to 2,026 Build conditions. The site driveways also generally operate with anther similar or reduced delay, vehicular queues when comparing no-build to build conditions We expect that traffic conditions during the morning and evening roadway peak-hour periods will actually Improve based on the anticipated reduction in roadway peak-hour trip generation for the build condition. The two traffic signals at the northernmost and southernmost driveways :T 758\T 5 .1 Does\Letters\T 758.10 Traffic PR Review#2.docx 160 sgoed Street- North Andover, MA TEC Peer Review#2--Traffic review April 1 v 202 Page 6 of 9 Comment No,. 12: 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 analy§ia as presented at this time.TEC reserves the right to provide additional comments and improvement recommendations, upon completion of the peer review comment responses. Langan Response. Noteda TEC Response: No response rre , lred". Comment No. 1'1 3 The Applicant has provided two separate capacity and queue analyses that project traffic operation impacts during the adjacent street pear hour and the site pear generation peak hour. Bath analyses were provided as the elevated trips experienced by the site occur slightly before both the typical weekday morning and weekday evening pear hours. Langan Response No response required'. TEE Response., Comment Closed" Comment No. 1 : The TlAS indicates that traffic signal warrants,are met for the existing signal in flash mode at the northern-most driveway. The Applicant should confirm this condition with MassDOT as Mass DOT typically requires that,Warrant I is met for signals within State highway Layout SHLO , The TIAS appears to indicate that only peak hour warrant warrant 3). Langan eap nae The four (Warrant ) and plea hour (warrant 3 traffic ,signal warrants are met at the n rthern most driveway(see attached signal warrant summary spreadsheet), Considering the volume of traffi+ expected at this driveway during the peak-hours and the continuous p .4oliurne of truck traffic exiting this driveway throughout the days, we elieve a fully actuated traffic sig�inal Is warranted at this location. Coordination with li' assDO T I w on,gloing. TEC Response: The Applicant should inform the Board regarding the outcome of these discussions. Comment No:. 15. The capacity and queue analysis analyze the signalized Intersections using the Synohro Percentile Delay methodology instead of the industry standard Highway Capacity Manual (H'CM') 2010 or 6th Edition methodology. Although TEC does not necessarily disagree with the usage of Synohro methodology, the Applicant should provide justification for its use over HCM,. This becomes increasing noticeable for traffic signals in the mitigation condition which wound be in coordination. Langan Response: There are a number of signalized Intersections within the sturdy area that operate sunder Non-l'EMA or atypical phasing, which Include the two site driveways, Industrial Avenue at Shelley Road/Ward Hill Jive and Industrial Avenue at South lain Street. These intersections cannot he analyzed utilizing the HCM 6th edition or HCM 2,010 Edition methodologies;therefore,the Synohro Percentile Delay methodology was utilized. For consistency throughout the capacity analysis, the T:\T075 \T 75 .1 \Docs\L tt rs\T075 .10 Traffic PAR Review#2.docx 1600 Osg�o�od Street- forth Andover, MA. TEC Peer Review#2--Traffic Review April 1, 22 Page 5 of 9 data to suipport the 20% reduction bused on specifc Amazon fulfillment locations and their proximity to public transportation and the usage of carp offing and other such TDM measures. TEC notes that the Applicant does highlight ht the potential for additional MVRTA service through future coordination as a Project T M measure. Langan Response. Please find the ,attached supporting trip generation Information suubmItt d to Mass DOT which Includes count data collected at the Fall River Amazon f cifflit In August st 20�19. TEE Response The attached materials related to the Southeastern Regional Transit Authority service In Fal/River depicts only one burs services to the proposed Amazon facility, directly from Downtown Fall River which is the primary source of travel to ,from the noted facility based on the population distribution in the southeastern MA region. At the propose Forth Andover facility, travel is not specific to Haverhill, the point of origin for the MVRTA burs;but could also he from Lawrence, Lowell,Andover, Salem, etc.At rain headw ys and the sizing of buses with MVRTA, the likelihood of up t 2 public transportation andlor oarpool usage Seems to be high. The Applicant should provide information related to discussion with MVRTA about out expanding service or current utilization to ensure that up, to 20 of employee traffic can be accommodated on the existing MVRTA services. In addition, the Applicant ,hound provide information and updates on discussion with other regional public transportation options; such as Merrimack Valley TEA and Middlesex 3 T MA. Upon review of the attached materials, TEC notes that the 2 credit for mass transit and o, rpooling combined may not be reasonable, FuHhor anal Is results may he affected when additional Applicant Information Is provided. Comment No,. 1 lam The Applicant has provided no back-uup information or description of trip distribution for the site over the study area. At a minimum, the Applicant should provide listing of documents reviewed to confirm the utilization of this trip distribution. In addition, as a workplace 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. Langan, Response Trip distributions were based n 20171 Journey to Work data for North Andover.See attached Journey to Work data spreadsheet. TEC Response: TEE has reviewed the Journey-to-Work data as presented by the Applicant Although TEC does feel that certain distribution percentages could he slightly altered based on analysis conducted by TEC and include the potential for vehicles to utilize other,side-streets not presented in the trip distribution model, the, overall change in trip distribution percentages would not significantly change. Therefore, TEC finds the distribution presented by the applicant reasonable. For future reference, use of Tcwn City names is preferable;to alp codes to:denote locations rns in case of review by the general public. Comment Closed. T:\T ?5 TO .10'D cs'L tt rs\T 7 ' .10"Traft PR Review#2.docx 60 Osgood Street_forth;Andover, MA TEE:' Peer Review#2 Traffic Review r(V1,11OV1,110 April 1, 2020 Page 4 of background ro h applied to the existing traffic.As requested under Comment No. 2 above, Langan has Included operational analyses in the revised TIAS for additional intersections her the site-generated traffic Is ntici t to be more than 100 vehicles lurin the peak- hour periods. As part of this additional analysis, we included the traffic volumes associated with these o background develo nt,s. TEC Response.- TEC has not objection to the description of specific developments byothers above and the use of additional volumes for those"new'Intersections within the analysis. For previously evaluated intersections, the additional volumes as reported would have a negligible effect as compared to the overall background,growth rate. Comment Closed. �ct to the n��� ��� Comment No. . TEC does not obi rvetivo application of reoccupancy tripe generation for the vacant office space within the existing site as part of the to-Build scenario. The Applicant has confirmed the methodology with MassDOT. Langan Response: o response, re uir dd. TEEResponse.- Comment Closed Comment No. 9. Site trip generation calculations for the proposed uses were generated based on empirical data provided directly by Amazon and tales into account bothemployee and truck traffic. TEC concurs with this methodology. Although the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE) Trip Generation, 1011, Edition does provide similar data under Land Use Code (LUC) High-Cube Fulfillment Center Warehouse, the data as presented under this LUC is a small sample size and does not reach the square footage level to compare to the subject project. The Applicant should provide supporting materials to confirm the employee and truck information as issued by Amazon. Langan Response. Please find attachedthe approval of the v l mnt' proposed average dlai'ly trips, dated January 31, . Please final the attached supporting trip generation information submitted in September to MassDOT which includes count data collected t the all River Amazon facility. Also, attached is peak hour trip generation information!submitted to MassDOT on February 3, 2020. TEE Response: TEC concurs with MassDOT on the trip generation methodology and new traffic totals as presented in the attached data. Comment Closed. Comment No., 1 o The TIA indicates that a 20% adjustment to site generated trips based on Amazon empirical data for carpooling and proximity to mass transit,. ,Although TEC generally concurs that a reduction may be warranted, the level of reduction 20% 1s elevated over comparable sites. MVRTA service is provided along Osgood Street; however, the service is provided ,along only one hue line us Route 1 with 60-minute headways,which connects the site to Downtown Haverhill. The number of buses and the strict route to only a small sagrneht of the workforce population does not project heavy public transit utilization. TEC asks that the Applicant provide additional Etigirveering N i r r ! f IIII � f r � / � 1 r .. ob 4k a ok OF .� I IV IF oopip �» • .. .u. ru . '!' ! ' ' wr dr ".`... .. • , , 40 I a �N �I ,� ,' • � � � � � M � Ali r r 1600 Osgood Street- forth Andover, MA TEE: Peer Review #2—Traffic review Me CWP April I, 2020 Page 2 of 9 generated trips increase the peak hour traffic volume by more than 5 percent and/or by more than 100 vehicles per hour per 'lassDOT'a T A Guidelines(Section 3.I.C)I. TEE recognizes that the'generator' peak hour traffic (not peak hour of roadway) will generate in excess of 100 vehicles per hear at additional Town Intersections not 'Included in the study area, namely along Sutton Street. Figures 7 and 11 as provided in the TIAS depict a 2026 Build scenario where traffic post-construction is generally equivalent during the 'generator' peak hour and the `roadway' peak hoar along Sutton Street. They Applicant shouild evaluate the potential trip generation Impact further to the west along Sutton Street at its Intersection with High Street/Chadwick Street and with Main Street. where an Impact of greater of 100 trips persists, the Applicant should provide additional operational analysis and site related mitigation as warranted. Langan Response: Additional operational analysis for these two Intersections and additional intersections that experience more than 100 new peak-hour trips our included In the revised TIAS. T C Response: Tl e Applicant has expanded the study area to provide evaluation to those locations with more than 100 newpeak-hour trips. Comment Comment No. 3: Although Comment #2 above indicates TEC'a concurrence with the study area as defined In the TIAS, TEC notes that the Applicant should coordinate with MassDOT on the potential project impacts at the intersection of Osgood Street / Barker ,Street which Is currently under reconstruction as part of off-ante mitigation for a separate project. As this intersection's new traffic signal is to be part of a larger coordination stream it Is important that the projected traffic volumes from the 1600 Osgood Street site are utilized in additional mitigation in coordination with Mas,sDO"I""". Langan esponse Noted. WE will be submitting: out TIAS to MassDOT" ,as part of the Highway Access, Permit review and will coordinate with Mass,DOT accordingly. TEE Response: Comment Closed Comment No. : The Applicant has provided traffic data collection along Osg,lood Street and at the study area intersections during the weekday morning and weekday evening peak periods. TMCs,were conducted on Thursday, September 6, 2018. This date represents a period while forth Andover High School schools were in session; but daring the week of Labor lay. Typically, counts during holiday weeks are potentially skewed; however, the days following Labor Day are generally seen as conservative as schools and colleges are back in regular session, and the workforce is generally back from typical vacations. It is expected that any fluictuations in traffic volumes would be negligible. Langan response: No response required. TEE Response. Comment Closed T.*T 758'T0758.10\Docs\Le ters'\T0?58 w 10 Traffic PR,Review#2.docx 146,Da rib Rued Andover,MA 01810 978,794.1792 The Engineer ngCorp.com create I Mslyn Innovate TIIEE: e Engineering Corp Ms. Monica Gregoire April 1, 2019, Staff Planner Planning Department Town of North Andover 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Ref.: T0758.1 Re* Peer Review# -Traffic Review 1600 Osgood Street Dear Ms. Gregoire: n behalf of the Town of North Andover, TEC, Inc. (TEC) reviewed documents as part of the transportation engineering pear review for the proposed residential development located at#1600 Osgood,Street in North Andover,,er,,Massachusetts.Langan Engineering&Environmental Services, Inc. submitted the fbllowin� documents on behalf of 1600 Osgood Street, LLC (the"Applicant"), which TEC reviewed for conformance with the Town of Forth Andover Zoning Bylaws and generally accepted industry standards: • Traftici Impact and Access Study—Proposed Redevelopment 1600 Osgood Street �- North Andover, Massachusetts; prepared by Langan Engineering Environmental Services, Inc., as remised March 2 2 • Response to TES` Traffic Peer Review Comments—Amazon Fulfillment Center— North Andover, MA prepared by Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc., dated March 25, 2020. Per consistency, the original comment numbers have been retained from the moist recent TEC Peer Review fetter dated September 10,, 2019. The Applicants responses to the comments are shown as bold;TEC'a responses are shown as italic. Traffic Imnact,and Access Stud Comment No. 1 Osgood Street in the vicinity of the project is under the jurisdiction of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation Ma.a OT . The Applicant should further coordinate with Ma sDOT on the issuance of a Permit to Access State Highway. Langan Response: Noted. Coordination with MassDOT Is ongoing. TEE Response Comment Closed Comment Nol.2 The traffic study area includes tan 1 intersections in the vicinity f the site; including four ) existing site driveways. Eased upon the size and scope of the development,TEC finds that the study area as provided In the ""I""'IA Is sufficient to capture the effects of the project on surrounding roadways based on, Traffic Impact Assessment (T'IA) guidelines ,set forth MassDO . This Includes an evaluation of intersection In which the site T:\T 5 T a .10 cocs L t rs TO758.1 Traffic PR Review#2.docx