Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBB_Traffic Impact Study Traffic Impact Study East Main Street Development Bozeman, Montana July 2016 East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 1  Introduction ............................................................................................................... 2  Study Area ............................................................................................................. 2  Study Intersections ................................................................................................ 2  Methodology ........................................................................................................... 4  Data Collection ..................................................................................................... 4  Trip Generation .................................................................................................... 4  Trip Distribution and Assignment ............................................................................... 4  Capacity Analysis .................................................................................................. 4  Signal Warrant Analysis ........................................................................................... 5  Turn Lane Warrant Analysis ...................................................................................... 5  Access Spacing Analysis ........................................................................................... 5  Existing Conditions ....................................................................................................... 6  Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities .................................................................................. 7  Signal Warrant Analysis .............................................................................................. 7  Intersection Capacity Analysis Results ............................................................................ 8  2016 Development Scenario ............................................................................................ 9  Trip Generation ....................................................................................................... 9  Trip Distribution and Assignment ................................................................................. 10  Signal Warrant Analysis ............................................................................................. 16  Intersection Capacity Analysis Results ........................................................................... 22  Access Spacing Analysis ............................................................................................ 25  Other Access Spacing Considerations ............................................................................ 25  Queuing Analysis ..................................................................................................... 25  Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities ................................................................................. 28  Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 29  East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Figures Figure 1 - Study Area ................................................................................................... 2  Figure 2 - Preliminary Site Plan ....................................................................................... 3  Figure 3 - Study Methodology ......................................................................................... 4  Figure 4 - Existing Traffic Conditions ................................................................................ 6  Figure 5 - Existing Traffic Volumes ................................................................................... 7  Figure 6 - Alternative 1 Trip Assignment ........................................................................... 11  Figure 7 - Alternative 2 Trip Assignment ........................................................................... 12  Figure 8 - Alternative 3 Trip Assignment ........................................................................... 13  Figure 9 - Alternative 4 Trip Assignment ........................................................................... 14  Figure 10 - Alternative 5 Trip Assignment .......................................................................... 15  Figure 11 - Alternative 1: 2016 Development Traffic Volumes................................................. 17  Figure 12 - Alternative 2: 2016 Development Traffic Volumes................................................. 18  Figure 13 - Alternative 3: 2016 Development Traffic Volumes................................................. 19  Figure 14 - Alternative 4: 2016 Development Traffic Volumes................................................. 20  Figure 15 - Alternative 5: 2016 Development Traffic Volumes................................................. 21  Figure 16 – Alt 1 & Alt 2 Anticipated Queuing ..................................................................... 26  Figure 17 - Alt 3 & Alt 4 Anticipated Queuing ..................................................................... 27  Figure 18 - Alt 5 Anticipated Queuing .............................................................................. 28  Table of Tables Table 1 - Highway Capacity Manual Level of Service Thresholds ................................................ 5  Table 2 - Bozeman City Code Access Spacing Requirements ..................................................... 5  Table 3 - Existing Intersection Capacity Analysis Results ......................................................... 8  Table 5 - Development Trip Generation Summary ................................................................. 9  Table 4 - Development Trips by Land Use Category ............................................................... 9  Table 6 - Development Trip Origin/Distribution Summary ...................................................... 10  Table 7 - 2016 Development Scenario Intersection Capacity Analysis Results ............................... 22  Table 8 – Alternatives’ Benefit & Weakness Summary ........................................................... 24  Appendix Appendix A – Turning Movement Counts Appendix B – Capacity Analysis Worksheets Appendix C – Signal Warrant Analysis Appendix D – Queuing Summary East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This traffic study was completed for the proposed East Main Street development in Bozeman, Montana. Two traffic scenarios were evaluated for the proposed development. These scenarios include: Existing Conditions and 2016 Development Conditions. The following recommendations for the study roadways are based upon the results of the analyses completed for each scenario. Signalization of the Haggerty Lane and East Main Street intersection is recommended as it would reduce delay and improve LOS under both existing and development conditions. Signalization would greatly improve the northbound approach from LOS “E” under existing PM peak hour stop-controlled conditions to LOS “B” under development PM peak signalized conditions. Alternatives analysis assumes the Haggerty Lane and East Main Street intersection is signalized. If this intersection was left unsignalized, it would result in higher delays and operate at LOS “F”. Analyses were performed for the following site access alternatives:  Alternative 1: Full accesses off of Highland Boulevard, East Main Street and Haggerty Lane  Alternative 2: Full accesses off of Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane (no development access on East Main Street)  Alternative 3: Restricted access right-in and right-out (RIRO) off of Highland Boulevard, Full accesses off East Main Street and Haggerty Lane  Alternative 4: Restricted access RIRO off of Highland Boulevard and East Main Street, Full access off of Haggerty Lane  Alternative 5: Restricted access off Highland Boulevard right-in and right and left-out (RIRLO) and East Main Street left and right-in and right out (LRIRO), Full access off of Haggerty Lane Based on the analysis conducted on five alternatives for access to the development, it is recommended that further discussions with the city of Bozeman and MDT be undertaken to determine the desired access alternative for implementation. It is recommended that three alternatives be further discussed: Alternative 1: Alternative 1 is preferred by the developer and would be the easiest to implement. It does create issues with LOS at multiple locations and falls furthest from meeting Bozeman city code for access spacing. However, it is the only alternative that would not have potential impacts to other private establishments’ access across the road along both Highland Boulevard and East Main Street. Alternative 4: Alternative 4 provides the best traffic operations for all adjacent roadways and comes closest to meeting Bozeman city code for access spacing. However, access to the development from the east is limited to Haggerty Lane, and traffic leaving the development to travel south on Highland Boulevard must use the Haggerty Lane exit or find another route/U-turn to access Highland Boulevard. Alternative 5: Alternative 5 provides good traffic operations for all adjacent roadways and provides slightly less access restrictions than Alternative 4. Access to and from the development is superior to Alternative 4 as traffic to and from all directions has good options for entering and leaving the site. It is recommended that Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 be eliminated from further consideration due to LOS impacts and minimal benefits in comparison to the other alternatives. The proposed site plan shows how sidewalks are proposed to connect to building and parking areas within the development. The site plan also shows sidewalks proposed along Highland Boulevard, East Main Street and Haggerty Lane which may connect to existing and future sidewalk facilities off-site. It is recommended that sidewalks be installed as is shown in the proposed site plan. Concerns have been voiced by local citizens regarding safety for pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Highland Boulevard. It is recommended that these crossings continue to be promoted at the East Main Street traffic signal and at the crossing located south of East Curtiss Street. East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 2 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to identify traffic operations or safety issues that could be triggered by the addition of traffic related to the proposed East Main Street development in Bozeman, Montana. This report has been developed to provide technically sound mitigation options to development-related issues identified during the analysis process. This traffic impact study assumes the proposed development will be constructed in 2016. Study Area This study was completed for the traffic impacts corresponding to the proposed development. Initial plans indicate three new buildings on the site including a grocery store, retail shops, office spaces, and residential spaces. The proposed development site is located on the south side of East Main Street, between Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane in Bozeman, Montana. The surrounding land is of mixed usage with businesses along the north side of East Main Street, a residential neighborhood to the west, and a softball field complex to the south. The proposed development location and latest site plan can be seen in Figure 1 and Figure 2 respectively. East Main Street is classified as a principal arterial, Highland Boulevard is classified as a minor arterial and Haggerty Lane is classified as a major collector. Under current conditions, East Main Street has a posted speed limit of 40 MPH, Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane have a 35 MPH posted speed limit and all other roadways within the study area operate under a 25 MPH speed limit. Study Intersections The following intersections were evaluated within this study (see Figure 1): 1. Highland Boulevard and East Main Street – Currently signalized 2. Highland Boulevard and East Curtiss Street – Currently two-way stop controlled on East Curtiss Street 3. Haggerty Lane and East Main Street – Currently two-way stop controlled on Haggerty Lane 4. Cypress Street and East Main Street – Currently two-way stop controlled on Cypress Street Figure 1 - Study Area East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 3 Figure 2 - Preliminary Site Plan East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 4 Methodology Within this study, the following traffic conditions were analyzed to evaluate traffic impacts of the proposed development: 2016 Existing Conditions – Existing Conditions based on field collected data prior to proposed development 2016 Conditions with Development Traffic – Traffic Conditions expected with construction of proposed development Mitigation Strategies – Possible improvements identified to mitigate development-related deficiencies Figure 3, to the right, illustrates the planning process used within this study. Data Collection Weekday AM and PM peak hour turning movements collected at study intersections in October 2015 were provide with the exception of Highland Boulevard and East Curtiss Street with was collected by KLJ in May 2016. Average daily traffic volumes (ADT) within the study area were obtained from the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT). Trip Generation Site-generated volumes were estimated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual. Trip Distribution and Assignment Trip distribution refers to the origin for entering trips and the destination for exiting trips to and from the proposed site. Trip assignment is the designated routing of trips between origin and destination. Both origins and destination for trips generated by the proposed site were estimated based on average daily traffic volumes obtained from MDT. Trips were assigned to the existing road network based upon engineering judgement, estimating the most ideal and reasonable route between origins and destination. Capacity Analysis Capacity analyses were performed using the Synchro 9 software, which implements an analysis methodology based on that in the Highway Capacity Manual to determine intersection delay and level of service. Level of service (LOS) is the qualitative measure of operational performance of transportation infrastructure using grades ranging from “A” to “F”, with “A” being the optimal level of service and “F” indicating breakdown of traffic flow. A breakdown of the HCM grading scale can be seen in Table 1. •Data Collection •Capacity Analysis •Signal Warrant Alanysis 2016 Existing Conditions •Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignment •Capacity Analysis •Signal Warrant Analysis •Access Spacing Analysis 2016 Conditions with Development Traffic Mitigaion Strategies Figure 3 - Study Methodology East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 5 For intersection analyses within this study, intersection operations at LOS “C” or better are to be considered to be acceptable. Table 1 - Highway Capacity Manual Level of Service Thresholds Signal Warrant Analysis At all unsignalized study intersections, KLJ performed signal warrant analyses in accordance with guidelines in the 2009 Manual on Traffic Control Devices. Turn Lane Warrant Analysis MDT turn lane warrants were analyzed at all study intersections. Turn lanes will be considered based on the results of operational analyses. Access Spacing Analysis The minimum access spacing found in the Bozeman City Code can be seen in Table 2. For the purposes of this study, queues from the capacity analysis will be used to determine whether there will be potential issues with proposed access spacing. Access spacing analyses were performed for development accesses off Highland Boulevard, East Main Street and Haggerty Lane. Table 2 - Bozeman City Code Access Spacing Requirements Access Located on Arterial Streets Access Located on Collector Streets Average Spacing In All Districts In All Districts Partial Access1 315' 150' Full Access2 660' 330' Minimum Seperation 315' 150' 1: Partial access includes right turn in and out only 2: Full access allows all turn movements, in and out Signalized Unsignalized ≤ 10 ≤ 10 A F > 10-20 > 10-15 B F > 20-35 > 15-25 C F > 35-55 > 25-35 D F > 55-80 > 35-50 E F > 80 > 50 F F Control Delay (sec/veh)Volume < Capacity Volume > Capacity East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 6 EXISTING CONDITIONS Analyses performed for the existing transportation network traffic scenario include the identification of existing roadway/traffic characteristics, signal warrant analysis, and turn lane warrant analysis. Existing daily traffic volumes can be seen in Figure 4. Intersection geometries and peak hour traffic volumes can be seen in Figure 5. Figure 4 - Existing Traffic Conditions East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 7 Figure 5 - Existing Traffic Volumes Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities On-street bicycle facilities are located on both sides of the East Main Street and Haggerty Lane roadways. Sidewalks running along East Main Street conclude at Highland Boulevard on the southern side and between Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane on the northern side. A shared-use path runs along the western side of Highland Boulevard Signal Warrant Analysis Unsignalized intersections within the study area were analyzed to determine if installation of traffic signalization would be warranted per guidelines published in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The eight-hour warrant, four-hour warrant, and peak hour warrants were analyzed for this study. The four-hour volume warrant and peak hour volume warrant were met at the intersection of Haggerty Lane and East Main Street under existing traffic conditions. All other unsignalized study intersections do not meet signal warrants under background traffic conditions. Signal warrant analysis results are found in Appendix C. East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 8 Intersection Capacity Analysis Results Intersection capacity analyses were performed for existing weekday AM peak hour and PM peak hour traffic conditions at all study intersections. Intersection capacity analysis spreadsheets are found in Appendix B. All study intersections with the exception of the Haggerty Lane and East Main Street intersection were found to currently have acceptable operations, per MDT standards. (See Table 3) The Haggerty Lane and East Main Street intersection currently operates at an overall LOS “A” during the AM and PM peak hours. However, deficiencies are experienced with LOS “E” reached for the PM peak hour on the northbound approach. Table 3 - Existing Intersection Capacity Analysis Results Overall EB WB NB SB B BBBB 13.4 13.5 14.2 10.9 13.1 B CBBA 17.0 23.6 14.8 11.7 8.8 A AAAA 1.1 6.33.40.90.9 A AAAA 1.2 7.89.40.90.9 A AABA 1.5 0.4 1.8 12.4 2.3 A AABB 1.5 0.8 2.0 10.4 13.4 A AABB 2.7 2.1 1.8 12.3 10.0 A AAE C 7.1 3.5 1.8 42.3 24.4 East Main Street & Haggerty Lane Existing NB/SB Stop Control AM Peak PM Peak Highland Boulevard & East Curtiss Street Existing EB/WB Stop Control AM Peak PM Peak East Main Street & Cypress Street Existing NB/SB Stop Control AM Peak PM Peak Intersection Lane Geometry Traffic Control Time Period Level of Service / Delay (seconds) East Main Street & Highland Boulevard Existing Signalized AM Peak PM Peak East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 9 2016 DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO The 2016 development scenario analyses were performed for conditions with site generated traffic added to the existing transportation network traffic. Analyses performed for this scenario include trip generation, distribution, and assignment, signal warrant analysis, turn lane warrant analysis, and access spacing analysis. These analyses were performed for the following site access alternatives:  Alternative 1: Full accesses off of Highland Boulevard, East Main Street and Haggerty Lane  Alternative 2: Full accesses off of Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane (no development access on East Main Street)  Alternative 3: Restricted access right-in and right-out (RIRO) off of Highland Boulevard, Full accesses off East Main Street and Haggerty Lane  Alternative 4: Restricted access RIRO off of Highland Boulevard and East Main Street, Full access off of Haggerty Lane  Alternative 5: Restricted access off Highland Boulevard right-in and right and left-out (RIRLO) and East Main Street left and right-in and right out (LRIRO), Full access off of Haggerty Lane The intersection of Haggerty Lane and East Main Street was analyzed as a signalized intersection for each site access alternative as it was found to meet signalization warrants under existing peak hour conditions. Trip Generation Site generated traffic was estimated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. Applying the applicable ITE land use categories, daily, AM and PM Peak hour trips were calculated for the proposed development as seen in Table 4 and Table 5. Table 4 - Development Trip Generation Summary Square Footage Independent Variable Trip Generation Rate AM Peak Hr Trips (avg.) Trip Generation Rate PM Peak Hr Trips (avg.) Trip Generation Rate Weekday Trips (avg.) Trip Generation Rate Weekday Trips (min.) 33000 1000 sf 1.56 51 1.49 49 11.03 364 3.58 118 10800 1000 sf 10.81 117 9.85 106 127.15 1373 73.51 794 12 units 0.46 6 0.58 7 6.59 79 5.10 0 3000 1000 sf 2.39 7 3.57 11 36.13 108 23.16 69 12404 1000 sf 1.80 22 1.74 22 11.65 145 5.33 66 17000 1000 sf 0 2.71 46 44.32 753 21.30 362 23736 1000 sf 3.41 81 9.48 225 102.24 2427 68.65 1629 2991 1000 sf 0.30 1 0.32 1 3.56 11 1.51 5 102943 285 467 5260 3044 General Office Building High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant Low Rise Apartment Land Use Category Development Totals by Land Use Category Medical -Dental Office Building Single Tenant Office Building Specialty Retail Center Supermarket Warehousing Entering Leaving Entering Leaving Entering Leaving General Office Building 45 6 8 41 182 182 High‐Turnover (Sit‐Down) Restaurant 64 53 64 43 687 687 Low Rise Apartment 1 4 5 2 40 40 Medical ‐Dental Office Building 6 2 4 7 54 54 Single Tenant Office Building 20 2 3 18 72 72 Specialty Retail Center 0 0 26 20 332 422 Supermarket 50 31 115 110 1213 1213 Warehousing 1 0 0 1 5 5 Total 187 98 224 242 2585 2675 Land Use Type Trips AM PM Weekday Table 5 - Development Trips by Land Use Category East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 10 Trip Distribution and Assignment Trip distribution refers to the origin for entering trips and the destination for exiting trips to and from the proposed site. The origins and destinations for site generated traffic were estimated based on existing average daily traffic on functionally classified roadways in the study area. Estimated site generated trip distribution can be seen in Table 6. Table 6 - Development Trip Origin/Distribution Summary Trip assignment is the designated routing of trips between origin and destination. Trips were assigned to the existing road network based on engineering judgement, estimating the most ideal and reasonable route between origins and destination. It is assumed that most traffic to and from the proposed development site will use major roadways and avoid unclassified roadways, as roads provide the most direct route to the site. The assumptions seen in Figure 6, Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 9, and Figure 10 were applied in order to estimate trip assignments within the study area. Entering Exiting Entering Exiting E Main St (W of Site) 12680 40.1% 75 39 90 97 E Main St (E of Site) 7440 23.6% 44 23 53 57 Highland Blvd 8640 27.4% 51 27 61 66 Haggerty Ln 2830 9.0% 17 9 20 22 31590 Trip Origin/Destination % Origin/Destination ADT AM PM East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 11 Alternative 1 - Full accesses off of Highland Boulevard, East Main Street and Haggerty Lane Origin/Destination E Main St West of Proposed Site- 40.1% of site generated trips o Route: E Main St to Highland Blvd Access (50% of trips from this origin/destination) o Route: E Main St to E Main St Access (50% of trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination E Main St East of Proposed Site – 23.6% of site generated trips o Route: E Main St to Haggerty Ln Access (50% of trips from this origin/destination) o Route: E Main St to E Main St Access (50% of trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination Highland Blvd – 27.4% of site generated trips o Route: Highland Blvd to Highland Blvd Access (100% of trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination Haggerty Ln – 9.0% of site generated trips o Route: Haggerty Ln to Haggerty Ln Access (100% of trips from this origin/destination) Figure 6 - Alternative 1 Trip Assignment East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 12 Alternative 2 - Full accesses off of Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane (no development access on East Main Street) Origin/Destination E Main St West of Proposed Site- 40.1% of site generated trips o Route: E Main St to Highland Blvd Access (100% of trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination E Main St East of Proposed Site – 23.6% of site generated trips o Route: E Main St to Haggerty Ln Access (100% of trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination Highland Blvd – 27.4% of site generated trips o Route: Highland Blvd to Highland Blvd Access (100% of trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination Haggerty Ln – 9.0% of site generated trips o Route: Haggerty Ln to Haggerty Ln Access (100% of trips from this origin/destination) Figure 7 - Alternative 2 Trip Assignment East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 13 Alternative 3 - Restricted access (RIRO) off of Highland Boulevard, Full accesses off East Main Street and Haggerty Lane Origin/Destination E Main St West of Proposed Site- 40.1% of site generated trips o Route: E Main St to Highland Blvd Access (50% of entering trips from this origin/destination) o Route: E Main St to E Main St Access (50% of entering trips and 100% of exiting trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination E Main St East of Proposed Site – 23.6% of site generated trips o Route: E Main St to Haggerty Ln Access (50% of trips from this origin/destination) o Route: E Main St to E Main St Access (50% of trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination Highland Blvd – 27.4% of site generated trips o Route: Highland Blvd to Highland Blvd Access (100% of entering trips from this origin/destination) o Route: Highland Blvd to East Main Street Access (50% of exiting trips from this origin/destination) o Route: Highland Blvd to Haggerty Lane Access (50% of exiting trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination Haggerty Ln – 9.0% of site generated trips o Route: Haggerty Ln to Haggerty Ln Access (100% of trips from this origin/destination) Figure 8 - Alternative 3 Trip Assignment East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 14 Alternative 4 - Restricted access (RIRO) off of Highland Boulevard and East Main Street, Full access off of Haggerty Lane Origin/Destination E Main St West of Proposed Site- 40.1% of site generated trips o Route: E Main St to Highland Blvd Access (100% of exiting trips from this origin/destination) o Route: E Main St to E Main St Access (100% of entering trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination E Main St East of Proposed Site – 23.6% of site generated trips o Route: E Main St to Haggerty Ln Access (100% of entering trips from this origin/destination, 50% of exiting trips from this origin/destination) o Route: E Main St to E Main St Access (50% of exiting trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination Highland Blvd – 27.4% of site generated trips o Route: Highland Blvd to Highland Blvd Access (100% of entering trips from this origin/destination) o Route: Highland Blvd to Haggerty Lane Access (100% of exiting trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination Haggerty Ln – 9.0% of site generated trips o Route: Haggerty Ln to Haggerty Ln Access (100% of trips from this origin/destination) Figure 9 - Alternative 4 Trip Assignment East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 15 Alternative 5 - Restricted access off of Highland Boulevard (RIRLO) and East Main Street (LRIRO), Full access off of Haggerty Lane Origin/Destination E Main St West of Proposed Site- 40.1% of site generated trips o Route: E Main St to Highland Blvd Access (50% of entering trips from this origin/destination, 100% of exiting trips from this origin/destination) o Route: E Main St to E Main St Access (50% of entering trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination E Main St East of Proposed Site – 23.6% of site generated trips o Route: E Main St to Haggerty Ln Access (50% of trips from this origin/destination) o Route: E Main St to E Main St Access (50% of trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination Highland Blvd – 27.4% of site generated trips o Route: Highland Blvd to Highland Blvd Access (100% of trips from this origin/destination) Origin/Destination Haggerty Ln – 9.0% of site generated trips o Route: Haggerty Ln to Haggerty Ln Access (100% of trips from this origin/destination) Figure 10 - Alternative 5 Trip Assignment East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 16 Signal Warrant Analysis Peak hour turning movement volumes including both development generated traffic and existing traffic volumes can be seen in Figure 11, Figure 12, Figure 13, Figure 14 and Figure 15. These volumes were used in the signal warrant analyses for each development scenario. The eight-hour volume, four-hour volume and peak hour volume warrants were met at the intersection of Haggerty Lane and East Main Street under development traffic conditions. The four-hour and peak hour volume warrants were also met under background traffic conditions. If left unsignalized this intersection is expected to operate at LOS “F” during peak hour operations. No other unsignalized study intersections warranted signalization under development traffic conditions. East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 17 Figure 11 - Alternative 1: 2016 Development Traffic Volumes East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 18 Figure 12 - Alternative 2: 2016 Development Traffic Volumes East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 19 Figure 13 - Alternative 3: 2016 Development Traffic Volumes East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 20 Figure 14 - Alternative 4: 2016 Development Traffic Volumes East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 21 Figure 15 - Alternative 5: 2016 Development Traffic Volumes East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 22 Intersection Capacity Analysis Results Intersection capacity analyses were performed for weekday AM peak hour and PM peak hour traffic conditions at all study intersections under the 2016 completed development scenario. (See Table 7) Capacity analyses were performed for the following site access alternatives:  Alternative 1: Full accesses off of Highland Boulevard, East Main Street and Haggerty Lane  Alternative 2: Full accesses off of Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane (no development access on East Main Street)  Alternative 3: Restricted access (RIRO) off of Highland Boulevard, Full accesses off East Street and Haggerty Lane  Alternative 4: Restricted access (RIRO) off of Highland Boulevard and East Main Street, Full access off of Haggerty Lane  Alternative 5: Restricted access off of Highland Boulevard (RIRLO) and East Main Street (LRIRO), Full access off of Haggerty Lane Existing Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 OverallOverallOverallOverallOverallOverall BBBBBB 13.4 14.8 15.5 14.5 15.1 14.8 BBCBBB 17.0 17.8 21.1 17.2 19.6 19.2 AAAAAA 1.1 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 AAAAAA 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.1 0.9 1.1 AAAAAA 0.4 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 AAAAAA 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 ABBBBB 2.7 12.1 11.9 11.9 13.2 12.1 ABBBBB 7.1 12.2 13.8 11.6 12.2 11.9 A AAA 2.1 2.2 1.9 2.1 A AAA 3.1 3.4 2.1 2.4 AAAAA 1.2 1.8 1.1 0.8 1.0 AAAAA 2.8 4.9 2.3 1.9 2.2 AAAAA 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.0 AAAAA 1.9 2.9 1.7 2.1 1.7 Highland Boulevard & East Curtiss Street AM Peak PM Peak Intersection Time Period East Main Street & Highland Boulevard AM Peak PM Peak East Main Street & Cypress Street AM Peak PM Peak East Main Street & Haggerty Lane AM Peak PM Peak Development Access & Haggerty Lane AM Peak PM Peak Development Access & East Main Street AM Peak PM Peak Development Access & Highland Boulevard AM Peak PM Peak Table 7 - 2016 Development Scenario Intersection Capacity Analysis Results East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 23 All study intersections were found to perform above minimum standards for each alternative. However, deficient delay is expected for several intersection approaches and intersection movements. Under Alternative 1 conditions, the Haggerty Lane and East Main Street intersection eastbound left-turn movements are expected to experience 39.4 seconds of delay (LOS “D”) during AM Peak hour operations. Deficient level of delay (35.1 s, LOS “E”) is also expected for left-turning vehicles exiting the development at the East Main Street access during PM peak hour operations. Under Alternative 2 conditions, the Highland Boulevard and East Main Street intersection is expected to operate at LOS “B” during the AM peak hour and LOS “C” during the PM peak hour. During PM peak hour conditions, traffic is expected to cause deficient levels of delay (35.5 s, LOS “D”) for westbound left-turn movements. These delays are likely linked to the additional vehicles using Highland Boulevard to enter and exit the development instead of an East Main Street access. The increased traffic volumes on Highland Boulevard under Alternative 2 conditions are also expected to cause deficient levels of delay (34.1 s, LOS “D”) for left-turning vehicles exiting the development at the Highland Boulevard access. Alternative 3 is also expected to experience deficient delay (39.8 s, LOS “E”) for left-turning vehicles exiting the development at East Main Street during PM peak hour operations. This increase in delay for left-turning exiting vehicles leads to deficient levels of delay for the northbound approach (25.9 s, LOS “D”). Alternative 4 is not expected to experience deficient levels of delay at any of the study intersections, approaches or movements. Alternative 5 is not expected to experience deficient levels of delay at any of the study intersections, approaches or movements. A summary of the proposed alternatives’ benefits and weaknesses is provided in Table 8. Detailed capacity analysis results are provided in Appendix B. East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 24 Table 8 – Alternatives’ Benefit & Weakness Summary Benefits Weaknesses Alternative 1 Full accesses off of Highland Boulevard, East Main Street and Haggerty Lane  Full accesses off East Main Street, Highland Boulevard, and Haggerty Lane.  Haggerty Lane and East Main Street intersection eastbound left-turn movements experience 39.4 s delay (LOS “D”) during AM peak hour conditions.  East Main Street access northbound left-turn movements experience 35.1 s delay (LOS “E”) during PM peak hour conditions. Alternative 2 Full accesses off of Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane (no development access on East Main Street)  No private access onto East Main Street  Highland Boulevard access westbound left-turn movements experience 34.1 s delay (LOS “D”) during PM peak hour conditions.  Highland Boulevard and East Main Street intersection westbound left-turn movements experience 35.5 s delay (LOS “D”) during PM peak hour conditions.  No access from East Main Street. Alternative 3 Restricted access (RIRO) off of Highland Boulevard, Full accesses off East Main Street and Haggerty Lane  East Main Street access northbound left-turn movements experience 39.8 s delay (LOS “E”) during PM peak hour conditions.  East Main Street access northbound approach experience 25.9 s (LOS “D”) of total delay during PM peak hour conditions. Alternative 4 Restricted access (RIRO) off of Highland Boulevard and East Main Street, Full access off of Haggerty Lane  This alternative is not expected to experience deficient levels of delay at any of the study intersections.  Access for development traffic wanting to head south on Highland Boulevard is convoluted due to left turns prohibited from exiting the Highland Road and East Main Street accesses.  Access into the development for cars travelling west on East Main is limited to Haggerty Lane. Alternative 5 Restricted access off of Highland Boulevard (RIRLO) and East Main Street (LRIRO), Full access off of Haggerty Lane  This alternative is not expected to experience deficient levels of delay at any of the study intersections.  Resolves weaknesses attributed to Alternative 4.  Restricted access configurations require special median or channelization treatments to control traffic movements. These can increase maintenance. East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 25 Access Spacing Analysis The proposed site plan shows single accesses centrally located in the development connecting to Highland Boulevard and East Main Street. This equates to one new access onto Highland Boulevard and four fewer accesses onto East Main Street. Two accesses are proposed onto Haggerty Lane, which matches the number of accesses present at this time. The northern access onto Haggerty Lane is proposed to be moved south to provide further separation from the Main Street intersection. No access connection from the development to the existing private road across from East Curtiss Street is being proposed due to grade issues. The existing 465 ft on East Main Street between Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane only allows 213 feet and 237 feet between accesses under the current site plan (See Figure 2). This does not provide the minimum access spacing distance prescribed by Bozeman city code. According to the code, development access would require 660 ft for a full access or 315 ft for a partial access. A Highland Boulevard access requires 660 ft of spacing distance for a full access or 315 ft of spacing distance for a partial accesses under city code. A distance of approximately 545 ft is available between East Main Street and East Curtiss Street. The proposed access provides 327 feet or separation from East Main Street and 197 feet of separation from East Curtiss Street. Assuming partial access, it is possible to satisfy the minimum spacing requirements between a Highland Boulevard development access and East Main street, however, this access would fail to meet minimum spacing requirements with East Curtiss Street. The proposed full accesses on Haggerty Lane do not meet the minimum 330 ft spacing for full access on collector streets. One planned access is located approximately 146 ft south of East Main Street and the proposed J & H Inc. access is located only 32 ft north of the alley and 60 ft south of the other proposed site access. The Haggerty Lane accesses were analyzed as a single access. The Haggerty Lane access was evaluated to determine the level of benefit that could be seen by using left and right turn lanes. Left and Right turn lanes at the Haggerty exit only reduce delay from 12.0 to 11.4 s. The northbound lane only experiences 1.2 s of delay and 3.0 s delay for LT vehicles. Therefore, insufficient benefit was realized by the addition of left and right turn lanes at the driveway for the development. Proposed development access spacing can be seen in Figure 2. Other Access Spacing Considerations Aside from concerns regarding access to the proposed development, there are other private accesses across from the development and along both Highland Boulevard and East Main Street (See Figure 1). These private accesses currently have full access and do not meet minimum access spacing distances found in the Bozeman city code. If access to the proposed development were to be restricted, many of these existing establishments could have impacts to their own level of access. Queuing Analysis Queues from the capacity analysis were used to determine whether there will be potential issues with proposed access spacing. Under average peak hour queuing conditions the proposed development accesses are not expected to experience any blockage. However, under 95th percentile queuing conditions access blockages become an issue for the following turning movements:  Right-turning vehicles entering and exiting at the Highland Boulevard access  Left-turning vehicles entering and exiting at the northern Haggerty Lane access  All vehicles exiting at the East Main Street access.  Left-turning vehicles entering the East Main Street access East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 26 Queues for the westbound left-turn movements at the Haggerty Lane and East Main Street intersection are expected to exceed the existing 65 ft left-turn bay length. 95th percentile queues for the westbound left-turn movements are expected to be approximately 110 ft long during peak hour conditions while average queues are expected to be 70 ft. Anticipated average and 95th percentile queues at the study intersections are shown in Figure 16, Figure 17 and Figure 18. Full queuing details can be found in Appendix D. Figure 16 – Alt 1 & Alt 2 Anticipated Queuing East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 27 Figure 17 - Alt 3 & Alt 4 Anticipated Queuing East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 28 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities On-street bicycle facilities are currently located on both sides of the East Main Street and Haggerty Lane roadways. Sidewalks running along East Main Street conclude at Highland Boulevard on the southern side and between Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane on the northern side. A shared-use path runs along the western side of Highland Boulevard. The proposed site plan shows how sidewalks are proposed to connect to building and parking areas within the development. The site plan also shows sidewalks proposed along Highland Boulevard, East Main Street and Haggerty Lane which may connect to existing and future sidewalk facilities off-site. Concerns have been voiced by local citizens regarding safety for pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Highland Boulevard. It is recommended that these crossings continue to be promoted at the East Main Street traffic signal and at the crossing located south of East Curtiss Street. Figure 18 - Alt 5 Anticipated Queuing East Main Street Development Traffic Impact Study 29 RECOMMENDATIONS Warranted signalization of the Haggerty Lane and East Main Street intersection is recommended as it would reduce delay and improve LOS under both existing and development conditions. Signalization would greatly improve the northbound approach from LOS “E” under existing PM peak hour stop- controlled conditions to LOS “B” under development PM peak signalized conditions. Each alternative analysis assumes the signalization of the intersection of Haggerty Lane and East Main Street. If this intersection was left unsignalized, it would result in higher delays and operate at LOS “F”. Based on the analysis conducted on five alternatives for access to the development, it is recommended that further discussions with the city of Bozeman and MDT be undertaken to determine the desired access alternative for implementation. It is recommended that three alternatives be further discussed: Alternative 1: Alternative 1 is preferred by the developer and would be the easiest to implement. It does create issues with LOS at multiple locations and falls furthest from meeting Bozeman city code for access spacing. However, it is the only alternative that would not have potential impacts to other private establishments’ access across the road along both Highland Boulevard and East Main Street. Alternative 4: Alternative 4 provides the best traffic operations for all adjacent roadways and comes closest to meeting Bozeman city code for access spacing. However, access to the development from the east is limited to Haggerty Lane, and traffic leaving the development to travel south on Highland Boulevard must either use the Haggerty Lane exit or find some other route/U-turn to access Highland Boulevard. Alternative 5: Alternative 5 provides good traffic operations for all adjacent roadways and provides slightly less access restrictions than Alternative 4. Access to and from the development is superior to Alternative 4 as traffic to and from all directions has good options for entering and leaving the site. It is recommended that Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 be eliminated from further consideration due to LOS impacts and minimal benefits in comparison to the other alternatives. The proposed site plan shows how sidewalks are proposed to connect to building and parking areas within the development. The site plan also shows sidewalks proposed along Highland Boulevard, East Main Street and Haggerty Lane which may connect to existing and future sidewalk facilities off-site. It is recommended that sidewalks be installed as is shown in the proposed site plan. Concerns have been voiced by local citizens regarding safety for pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Highland Boulevard. It is recommended that these crossings continue to be promoted at the East Main Street traffic signal and at the crossing located south of East Curtiss Street.