Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBATCH - Supplemental - 0935 0937 Shelburne Road (2)�0 AGF�c� STATE OF VERMONT DIVISION OF ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION 133 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05602 `0� July 7, 1981 Mr. David H. Spitz City Planner 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Burlington M5000 (1) Dear Mr. Spitz: I must apologize for the excessive delay in responding to your letter of May 13, 1981. This project has recently reached the point where it could be circulated for internal review; so we have been re-evaluating some aspects of the design. However, I am now con- fident we can answer your questions. In your letter you refer to a report received from Ron Bacon. I will use this letter to respond to questions similar to yours which were posed for us by Mr. Bacon in a letter dated May 11, 1981. Current plans for this project affect traffic signals on Shelburne Road, from Home Avenue to Baldwin Avenue. This discussion will be confined to those intersections in South Burlington from Swift Street to Baldwin Avenue, all of which will be interconnected. The three affected intersections north of I-189 will also be coordinated with each other but not with the system in South Burlington. All modifications will be part of this project. The questions which have been raised are: 1. Will signalization equipment on Shelburne Road be upgraded? a. In addition to the coordination system mentioned; we plan to: 1. Replace the controllers and redesign the systems at Swift Street and Queen City Park Road. 2. Replace the controllers at Baldwin and Brewer, and add semi -actuation at those intersections. 3. Adjust the offsets and provide more flexible timing plans. Mr. David H. Spitz July 7, 1981 Page 2 2. Will level of service (LOS) "C" be achieved? a. Yes and no. We consider LOS "C" to be an unrealistically high design goal for an urban arterial highway such as this; recognizing that we calculate LOS for peak traffic volumes, not for average day in - day out conditions. In the absence of pedestrian actuations, we expect all these intersections to operate at LOS "C" or better when the project is complete. LOS will gradually deteriorate to "D" before the design year at Swift Street and Queen City Park Road. We have not made similar predictionssuuth of Queen City Park Road be- cause our only objective in that area is to maximize the efficiency of the traffic signal systems. This project cannot be used to improve the capacity of Shelburne Road outside the project construction area. 3. What are current implementation schedules? a. This project is currently scheduled to be open to traffic by late 1984. If built, the South Burlington Shelburne Road Bypass is scheduled for completion by late 1986. 4. What would be the design LOS for the Brewer Parkway intersection? a. Since our only goal is to maximize the efficiency of the signal system (and not to improve capacity by building wider pavements) we would not assume a design LOS. 5. What is VAOT policy on re -timing traffic control signals on the state highway system? a. This is a routine responsibility of the Agency, which unfortunately is not always attended to as often as it would be if adequate main- tenance funds were available. Please let me know if there are further questions, and I again apoligize for the delay in this response. Since y yours, i 6gier en C. Design E cc: Ron Bacon, Dufresne -Henry Mr. David Spitz, Municipal Offices Dorset Street South Burlington, Dear Mr. Spitz: Dufresne -Henry, Inc. Precision Park North Springfield, Vermont 05150 802-886.2261 City Planner Vermont 05401 Engineering Disciplines Civil Environmental Transportation Municipal Mountain Structural Electrical Mechanical Industrial May 6, 1981 Re: Traffic Study Burlington Plaza South Burlington, VT D-H o9-0143 Associated Disciplines Planning & Urban Development Landscape Architecture Surveying Construction Management Applied Sciences Water Quality Geologic Hydrologic Computer As a result of our earlier conversations please find enclosed a copy of the Traffic Study done in anticipation of an application by the Owner of the Burlington Plaza to permit construction of an additional 5000 s.f, of retail area to the Martin Foods Supermarket. As you will gather from the report, I feel the permit should be looked upon favorably by the City of South Burlington. It is my opinion that the impact on traffic operations is insignificant, that the real impact is due largely to increased traffic due to normal growth south of Burlington and the resultant impact on U.S. 7 as a through route or "Burlington Feeder Arterial." Incidentally, I agree with your philosophy that South Burling- ton should establish Level C of Service as a good planning criteria and for general design practice. However, I would caution that your planning process be tempered to include the flexibility needed to accommodate the realization that this may be impractical or unrealistic in certain specific instances. Most traffic engineers, including those at the Vermont Agency of Transportation accept level of Service D (load factor of 1.0) in certain areas according to the principals of deter- mining acceptable degrees of congestion as enumerated in "A Policy on Design of Urban Highways and Arterial Streets" 1973 Edition by AASHTO pages 293 through 299• North Springfield, Vermont 05150 Montpelier, Vermont 05602 Portland, Maine 04103 Manchester Center. Vermont 05255 New London, New Hampshire 03257 Concord, Massachusetts 01742 St. Johnsbury, Vermont 05819 Manchester, New Hampshire 03103 Mr. David Spitz, City Planner May 6, 1981 Page 2 If I can be of further assistance or should you have any questions, please call me. Very truly yours, DUFRESNE-HENRY, INC. Ronald L. Bacon Environmental Engineer RLB/j f cc: Mr. Doug Kennedy Mr. John Dell'Anno City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 863.2882 May 13, 1981 Loren Jones Vermont Agency of Transportation Montpelier, Vermont 05602 Dear Mr. Jones, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658.2486 The City of South Burlington is currently requiring applicants for ccnumercial development to evaluate traffic conditions at their proposed site. The evaluation must show that a level of service C for the nearest signalized intersections can be achieved for projected traffic volumes 5 years hence. We have just received a traffic report from Ron Bacon of Dufresne -Henry for a Martin's supermarket addition in the Burlington Plaza shopping center on Shelburne Road south of I-189. The study assumes that the Burlington Southern Connector will be built by 1986. In connection with that new road, the study makes the following statement: "Mr. Dave Ross, of the V.A.T. Traffic Design Section has indicated that the State would hope to replace the signalization equipment presently existing in the study area (mechanical, pretimed controllers) with equipment capable of efficiently moving more traffic at a higher level of service (multiphase, electrical, traffic actuated controllers). Could you please verify whether the State does plan to upgrade the signal- ization equipment on Shelburne Road? Could you also tell us which intersections will be included and whether the improvements are expected to achieve a level of service C? Finally, would these improvements be done within the time frame of the overall Burlington Southern Connector project? Thank you for your help. Sincerely, David H. Spitz, City Planner DS/mcg BURLINGTON PLAZA PROPOSAL TRAFFIC STUDY AND RECOMMENDATIONS SUBMITTED TO: SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 MAY 1981 INTRODUCTION The Owner of "Burlington Plaza" Shopping Center proposes to expand the present facility by the addition of approximately 5,000 square feet of retail area to the front portion of the Martin Food. Supermarket. This study therefore determines the probable increase in traffic due to the proposed addition to the Supermarket, analyzes the impact this would have on the operational characteristics of the adjacent intersections in the year 1981, and in a design year (5 years after completion) of 1986, draws conclusions as to what the impacts would be, and makes specific recommendations for the Planning Commission to consider. The specific intersections in the study area are the inter- section of Shelburne Road (U.S. 7) at Brewer Parkway and The Shopping Center Access, designated as Intersection A on all figures and calculations contained herein and the intersections of Shelburne Road (U.S. 7) at Lindenwood Drive and Queen City Park Road, two intersections presently signalized to act as one, designated as Intersection B on all figures and calculations pre- sented herein. TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND FORECASTS The traffic volumes for these intersections were developed based on peak hour volumes obtained from the Vermont Agency of Transportation and the application of a normal growth factor of 2.5% per year. This growth factor was chosen after discussions with V.A.T. Traffic Research Engineer, Larry B. Willey. Mr. Willey indicated that there are two permanent counter stations near the project area. D2 is a counter located on U.S. 7 south of the study location which reflects a growth fac- tor of 2.5% per year. D99 is a counter located on I-189 north- easterly of the project location and reflects a growth factor of 3.1% per year based on historical data. The consultant chose 2.5% as being more representative because of its proximity and other characteristics. The probable generation of traffic caused by the specific addition to the supermarket was calculated using the Institute of Traffic Engineers, Trip Generation, handbook 1979 Edition, Summary of trip generation rates for supermarkets. The appendix contains plans showing peak hour traffic move- ments generated due to the supermarket's proposed expansion and assigned according to observed and estimated origins/destinations of traffic generated by the Burlington Plaza complex. Also included in the appendix are plans showing the estimated 1981 peak hour volumes including the volumes or trip assignments due to the proposed addition to the supermarket. After discussions with Mr. David Spitz, South Burlington City Planner, the peak hour volumes anticipated, including the proposed addition, were projected to 1986 to reflect a 5 year design period. These volumes are also shown in the Appendix. Peak hour traffic has been used in this study since the peak hour traffic presents the most critical traffic operations problems. The V.A.T. estimates the heaviest peak hour to be the evening rush hour (P.M. peak hour) from 4:00 - 5:00 P.M. METHOD OF ANALYSIS The operational characteristics of the intersections were analyzed using two approaches or sets of conditions as follows: 1. 1981 Design Year a. The geometric configuration of the intersections and pertinent dimensions were taken from available mapping at the V.A.T. and were confirmed by on site inspection and/or collaboration with V.A.T. staff. b. The estimated 1981 peak hour volumes were used and a level of service was calculated using the existing geometric configuration and the existing signalization phasing. This was done using methods set forth in the 1965 Highway Capacity Manual, Highway Research Board Special Report 87. c. The calculations and results are discussed later. However, since level of service C was not achieved on each and every leg using the existing geometry and signal equipment, the data was reworked to determine whether or not level C could be obtained by adjusting the green time and rephasing the existing equipment. 2. 1986 Design Year a. The geometric configuration of the pertinent inter- sections were altered to reflect the proposed changes to be incorporated into the V.A.T. proposed Burlington Southern Connector, project M 5000(1). This information, derived from V.A.T., basically indicates that construction of the Burlington Northern and Southern Connector would not substan- tially affect the traffic flow patterns or growth characteristics southerly of its connection to U.S. 7 at the present Queen City Park Road intersection. It further asserts that V.A.T. expects the Burlington Southern Connector to be constructed and open to traffic prior to 1986. (The Act 250 permit appar- ently gives July 1, 1984 as the completion date.) Mr. Dave Ross, of the V.A.T. Traffic Design Section has indicated that the State would hope to replace the signalization equipment presently existing in the study area Cmechanical, pretimed controllers) with equipment capable of efficiently moving more traffic at a higher level of service (multiphase, electrical, traffic actuated controllers). Assuming this, the 1986 peak hour volumes were assigned and the intersection capacity analysis was performed using the existing geometry at Brewer Parkway and the proposed geometry at Queen City Park Road. C. Signalized intersections were analyzed using the "Critical Movement Analysis" as promoted by the Transportation Research Board. This determines what level of service may be obtained given specific geometric requirements. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Conclusions: Generally speaking, the additional square footage of retail area creates additional traffic generation at an existing retail outlet but the increase in traffic due to this proposed expansion is insignificant in light of the total pattern for U.S. 7. 1. 1981 Design Year a. The estimated 1981 peak hour traffic volumes, including the additional volumes anticipated with the proposed supermarket expansion, can be served at both intersections with no major geo- metric changes. However, the reallocation of green time to certain moves might have to be ,�`,-✓wj. made, i.e., retiming the existing traffic sig- 6 /:nals. It is within the capability of the exist- ing,to accommodate this. b. The areas requiring more green time on intersec- tion A (see enclosed plan) include subapproaches 1 and 3 and possibly 5 and 6. A few seconds of additional green time can be obtained from sub - approaches 2 and 4 to balance the level of service at C . c. The areas requiring more green time on intersec- tion B (see enclosed plan.) include subapproaches 1 and 5 and 6 and 8. The existing equipment could be retimed to provide level of service C for 1 '� all legs of this intersection except that some ,�+rJ';��'�f+,� ,..�---------• uncertainty exists with suba y pproach 6. This particular leg of the intersection is hindered by the poor geometric configuration of the I-189 ramp producing a short weaving section and short storage. This is not an area for which the developer should assume any responsibility as the probable increase in traffic, peak hour volumes, caused by the developers proposal is two vehicles per hour on this particular approach. (See enclosed plan showing hourly increase breakdown by direc- tion.) 2. 1986 Design Year a. The estimated 1986 peak hour volumes including traffic generated by the proposed addition to the supermarket exceeds level of service C at th intersection of Brewer Parkway but the inter- section with "Ramp 6" of the Burlington Southern Connector at Route 7 would be designed to obtain as high a level of servicelpreferably level C) as the State felt economically feasible. b. The existing intersection at U.S. 7 and Brewer Parkway would not be geometrically altered by the State with construction of the -Burlington Southern Connector but according to V.A.T. repre- sentatives, the signalization would be upgraded to traffic actuated, multiphase, more sophisticated equipment to obtain as high a level of service as possible and to integrate the signalized inter- sections with other intersections to the north which would be modified by the V.A.T. project. With this new equipment it should be possible to maintain level of service C on all legs. The -.-,.maintain markings noted on the enclosed plan should w`',r� help assure a level of service C with the new signalization. c. The intersection at Queen City Park Road and Route 7 is to be geometrically modified as part of the construction of the Burlington Southern Connector. V.A.T. officials have indicated this project, M5000(1), has proceeded to Step III in the State's design process. Furthermore it was indicated that preliminary design was active with Step III design plans due for submittal for O 1',4 review this month. Not only will geometry at this location change but a new connection between the Queen City Park Road and the I-189 and Burling- ton Southern Connector will be provided. The State has not completed its signalization design but will attempt to achieve the highest level of service feasible. B. Recommendations: For 1981 Design Year, it is possible that after the open- ing of the addition a minor adjustment of the existing signal equipment might be required at both Brewer Park- way and Queen City Park Road intersection. The State is responsible for maintaining these signals. If traffic did increase as predicated and difficulty was experienced, the State would, upon request by South Burlington, per- form a peak hour count and revise the signals as needed at no cost to South Burlington. For 1986 Design Year, the existing signals throughout the study area will have been revised by V.A.T. as part of the Burlington Southern Connector and it should be possi- ble to obtain level C with the new signal progression and the State's geometric revisions. If the estimated volumes should be low or inaccurate the following points ought to be considered by South Burling- ton. Our estimates are in line with and based upon Ver- mont Agency of Transportation data. Also the V.A.T. would consider this area to fall under an urban classification. SUMMARY It is felt that the South Burlington Planning Commission should consider the proposed addition to the supermarket as a minor expan- sion and not as a major new development. The proposal would cause a very minor or insignificant increase to peak hour traffic volumes - an additional 37 vehicles per hour exiting via two separate exits and an additional 30 vehicles per hour entering via two separate access points. The immediate future, 1981, holds no real problem because a level C can be obtained at both intersections, if need be, by revision to the timing sequence of the existing signals. This can be accomplished by the State on request at no expense to the City of South Burlington or to the Developer. The 1986 design year traffic will not be accommodated at a level of service C unless either signalization revisions or geometric changes are made. The Vermont Agency of Transportation expects to do both in the immediate future and to complete same prior to 1986. It is therefore unrealistic and unreasonable to request that the Developer undertake any work which will be addressed by the State. This would involve duplication of effort by many parties including additional review and administrative expense on the part of the City of South Burlington. It is hereby indicated that the proposed addition of 5000 square feet of retail area to the Martin Food Store at Burlington Plaza will not have a significant or negative impact on area traffic operations. No Text BY 0 G s DATE a,'s. 7 DUFRESNE-HENRY, INC. SUBJECTSHEET NO. OF_,__ :Z / JOB NO. O 1,5U.eL /.vc< % DAl (q ) _'4 Cto) _.__Ar'o' —.—( a) r N d 3 1J A � � J u, 5, 7 2e1,e,!! you144'rr1CS •� ,S O G O S f . �v�>G r/�j �i� �i�C t' �'�'GG-I /�G C 71-io,-r y % �5 S i q .1-r A77 err 11- CG = P M PCr A ic. 1 /A: • /l/2 L-% 1/0 L . - J Q L 440 U F- a 0 Y i SHOPPING CENTER DRIVE Y I' U uj = / O NOTES: j \ 1. (000)=1986 DIRECTIONAL P.M. PEAK HR. TRAFFIC VOLS. DERIVED FROM V.A.T. TRAFFIC VOLUMES \ DATED 8-I9-80 EXTkAPCLATED BY 2.51'/YR. �� \ EXPANSION FACTOR (INCLUDING TRAFFIC GENERATED BY STORE EXPANSION). 2. ALL LANES 12' WIDE UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE. 3• SUB -APPROACH NUMBER I� 463 4- U.S.. ROUTE 1 An F ,`-NO LEFT TURNS INTERSECTION B PLAN SCALE: I "=40'+ ✓ , I7 • 6,.c. t J r rsi c. r) 7� e ri C0/14; rpIr � 2 �► 2 I�b \ -- TRAFFIC SIGNALS/ SPANWIRE 1 K C> O O i 1`J 34J 8 6 s �? (� 5 -*. --- TRAFFIC SIGNALS/ SPANWIRE �i e OiY1 G /,/ j$ I i I 8 SHEET 2 OF 2 NOTES: I. (0 0))= 1986 DIRECTIONAL P.M. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLS. DERIVED FROM V.A.T. 1983 VOLUMES DATED 8-19-80 EXTRAPOLATED BY 2.5'/YR. EXPANSION FACTOR (INCLUDING TRAFFIC GENERATED BY STORE EXPANSION) 2•' ALL LANES 12' WIDE UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE. 3. , SUB -APPROACH NUMBER IQ s U.S. ROUTE 7 PETCO GAS A OVERHEAD SIGNS INTERSECTION G. PLAN SCALE: 1" 40', /s be 1717 1r, ev �5ra,,7 Ile.r 17"7car2 �G i� c.cf 0� 7,C�orla174's,9 e* 1 1i r 5459 L „J +--- -Y-- -- I 3 n \ 6 �)or- A. 91 2 Fl tJ� --- TRAFFIC SIGNALS/ SPAN WIRE HEET I OF 2 462 J �o = c-3 OVERHEAD SIGNS ►— Q NOTES: I. (000)z-1981 DIRECTIONAL P.M. PEAK HR. TRAFFIC VOLS. DERIVED FROM V.A.T. TRAFFIC VOLUMES DATED L-!:)-dC E,TF}'.POLATED by 2.5'/YR, EXPANSION FACTOR (INCLUDING TRAFFIC GENERATED FY STORE EXPANSION). 2. ALL LANES 12' WIDE UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE. 3. SUB -APPROACH NUMBER Al U . S . ROUTE 7 (63 S) NO LEFT TURNS INTERSECTION B PLAN SCALE. I "=40'+ r` c+m m LO N m z z m SHOPPING CENTER DRIVE M N N 1' - s \ e _ 7 5 c� b TRAFFIC SIGNALS/ 111 + SPANWIRE s CC O O O O 3 z l �-- TRAFFIC SIGNALS/ SPANWIRE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS SHELBURNE ROAD-BURLINGTON PLAZA ���pj�p�/ 1981 CONDITIONS Precision P k 1�' 7 SOUTH BU RL I NGTON v SHEET 2 0 F Vermont O51No. Sprin 'S0 Client No. p- g - O 1 4 3 Proi. Mgr. Date VERMONTI NOTES: I. ! 0001= 1981 DIRECTIONAL P.M. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLS. DERIVED FROM V.A.T. 1983 VOLUMES DATED 8-19-80 EXTRAPOLATED BY 2.5 /YR. EXPANSION FACTOR (IN CLJIjIN'G T,,AFFIC GE41�AT:D BY S'OgE 2. ALL LANES I' WIDE UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE. ?, SUB -APPROACH NUMBER A PETCO GAS I � L LJ c� Lu Z w U c� Z , a- �• � [„� : y :.� i r' f GJ '.7 ,Q /`Jja. tI t.. !7 � r"/i-� � � CL CD 1. �.y i J © . 16 r� 5 ~ Z� �s9 L + u U.S. ROUTE 7 Z2 (��7,�- 3 9;.= OVERHEAD SIGNS [Y INTERSECTION A m P LA N "' w SCALE: I' 40r?' co NIP, + SHEET 1 0