Traffic Impact DocumentsConsulting Group, Inc.
Transportation • Civil • Structural • Environmental • Planning • Traffic - Landscape Architecture • Parking
SRF No. 0962471
MEMORANDUM
TO: David C. Hempel
Assistant City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
FROM: Dennis R. Eyler, P.E., Principal
Marie K. Cote, P.E., Senior Engineer
DATE: August 9, 1996
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF EAW TRAFFIC IMPACT -VILLAGES ON THE POND
As you requested, we have completed a review of the traffic analysis and
forecast for the Villages on the Pond EAW. This included a review of the trip
generation, traffic forecast and analysis, and mitigation.
Based on our review and analysis, we offer the following comments for your
consideration:
• According to the information in the EAW, we concur with the trip generation,
traffic forecast and capacity analyses for the unsignalized and signalized
intersections. The 10% multi-purpose reduction mentioned on page 22 did
not seem to be applied to the trip generation rates or calculation. However, it
is possible that the reduction was made manually in the trip distribution.
• An analysis of recommended geometrics for the proposed development was
conducted to determine whether the intersections of Market Boulevard and
Lake Drive West, and Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive East could
operate as right -in, right -out only.
Shown on the Site Plan, Figure 3, the intersection of Market Boulevard and
Lake Drive West is approximately 400 feet south of TH 5. According to
Table 6, the proposed geometrics for Build conditions are two through lanes
and a right turn lane for the north approach, a left turn lane, two through
SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55447-4443
Telephone (612) 475-0010 • Fax (612) 475-2429
An Equal Opportunity Employer
David C. Hempel - 2 - August 9, 1996
lanes and a right turn lane for the south approach, a right turn lane for the
east approach, and a right and left turn lane for the west approach. It is
recommended in the EAW that the east approach operate with right -in, right -
out access.
According to Mn/DOT guidelines, full access intersections should be located
a minimum of 600 feet from a major signalized intersection. Since this
intersection is less than the required 600 foot minimum, we would concur with
Mn/DOT's guidelines and recommend that this intersection operate with right
in/right out access only. In regards to access circulation, Lake Drive West
extends to Power Boulevard to the west. This connection would provide an
alternate access to and from the proposed developments. The full access
intersection on Market Boulevard at Lake Drive to the south would also
provide an alternate route to and from the proposed developments.
The intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive East is
approximately 450 feet south of TH 5. The proposed geometrics for this
intersection are a left turn lane, a through lane and a right tum lane for the
north and south approaches, and a left turn lane and a through/right turn lane
for the east and west approaches. This intersection includes two private
roadways and two public roadways. Great Plains Boulevard provides local
access to the proposed development and through traffic is not the main
issue. Therefore, we would recommend that this intersection remain a full
access intersection.
July 9, 1996
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 0 FAX (612) 937-5739
Mr. Dennis Eiler
SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
One Carlson Parkway North
Suite 150
Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443
Re: Review of EAW Traffic Impact - Villages on the Pond
Land Use Review File No. 95-17
Dear Dennis:
Enclosed please find a copy of an EAW for Villages on the Pond prepared by BRW, Inc. dated July 1,
1996. Would you please review the traffic analysis and forecast within the document and let me know
if there are other traffic concerns that may have been overlooked. We are especially concerned with the
proposed full intersections at Market Boulevard and Lake Drive, as well as Great Plains Boulevard and
Lake Drive. We feel that these intersections may be able to function as right -in, right -out only. I
would appreciate your comments back as soon as possible as this item is going forward for preliminary
plat approval on July 17, 1996 at the Planning Commission level and City Council on the August 12,
1996 Council agenda.
Please call me with a cost estimate for the services requested herein: If you have any questions or need
additional materials. ease do not hesitate to contact me.
1
1
I
I
1
1
I
I
1
1
I
Sincerely,
'
a tTSF
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
'
David C. Hempel
,
Assistant City Engineer
DCH.-jms
'
Enclosure
'
C, Charles Folch, Director of Public Works
Kate Aanenson, Planning Director
,
g:engWavcVelles\ illegezeew
y
�'
m
I
Villages on the Ponds
July 17, 1996, July 24, 1996 and
August 12, 1996
Page 40
believes that all the sanitary sewer and water lines with the exception of the individual building
services should be owned and maintained by the City upon completion.
' The applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide
financial security in the form of a letter of credit to guarantee compliance with the terms
stipulated in the development contract. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be
required in conjunction with final platting. The construction plans and specifications shall be
prepared in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates.
' The construction plans and specifications will be subject to staff review and formal approval by
the City Council in conjunction with final plat approval. Fire hydrant placement and revisions to
the utility plan layout will occur during review of the construction plans and specifications.
During construction of the utilities, the applicant's engineer shall provide on-site inspection
services to certify upon completion that the utilities have been constructed in accordance with the
approved plans. As -built construction plans will also be required before acceptance of the
' utilities by the City.
The site contains an existing home on Lot 1, Block 2 west of Trunk Highway 101. This structure
' will eventually be razed in conjunction with the development. The existing residential well will
need to be abandoned per State health codes and sanitary service will also need to be
disconnected at the main.
1 Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the sanitary sewer
and watermains. The easement width will depend on the depth of the sanitary sewer. At a
minimum, a 20 -foot drainage and utility easement should be dedicated over each line.
STREETS
' Subdivision of this parcel will require the vacation of Great Plains Boulevard (Old Trunk
' Highway 10 1) and portions of Trunk Highway 101 (Market Boulevard). At this time, the City
does not have the authority to vacate the right-of-ways since MnDOT has not formally turned
back the road jurisdiction to the City and/or Carver County. The tumback involves a
conglomerate of agreements that need to occur between MnDOT and Hennepin County, Carver
County, Scott County, and the City of Chanhassen. These agreement are anticipated to be
finalized and signed by MnDOT sometime this fall. Portions of this plat are dependent upon the
' vacation of these right-of-ways before being recorded.
Streets within the subdivision are proposed to be private with the exceptions of Trunk -Highway
101 (Market Boulevard) and a small portion of Lake Drive at the easterly end of the plat. During
conceptual review of the development, staff indicated that Lake Drive is designated as a collector
street on the City's Comprehensive Plan as well as listed as a Municipal State Aid Route.
H
ri
Villages on the Ponds
July 17, 1996, July 24, 1996 and
August 12, 1996 '
Page 41
Therefore, the street would have to be built to State Aid standards. Given the issue of on -street '
parking and some unique aesthetic design elements, staff has re-evaluated its position. With the
current design proposal, Lake Drive will actually function more as a main street for this
development rather then a collector through street for the City. For this reason and given the type
of unique pavement design, parking configurations and landscaping improvements, staff has
decided to allow Lake Drive to be built, owned, and maintained as a private street. This will '
improve building setback requirements, construction costs for the applicant, and reduce
maintenance demands on the City, i.e. snowplowing. As a result of this action, the City will need
to request MnDOT to revoke the MSAS status. A small portion of Lake Drive at the easterly end
of the project will be dedicated and built as a public street which will provide a new street access
to Grandview Road. Currently, Grandview Road is a private gravel street serving six homes with
the potential of further subdividing once sewer and water becomes available. A secondary access
point is also being provided to Grandview Road through Lot 10, Block I (St. Hubert's Church
site).
The preliminary plat proposes to dedicate a 25 -foot wide right-of-way along the east portion of '
the plat through Lot 8 and 10, Block 1. Upon review of the existing Grandview Road alignment,
it appears the 25 -foot wide right-of-way could be reduced to 17 feet, however, it needs to be
extended southerly to parallel Grandview Road until Grandview Road turns easterly. This will
,
impact the location of the retaining walls and parking as shown on Lot 10, Block 1.
The preliminary plat is proposing to dedicate right-of-way for Lake Drive and the new access
street to Grandview Road. Staff believes that the cul-de-sac street for Grandview Road can be
reduced down to a 31 -foot wide street with a temporary turnaround. The street section for the
public portion of Lake Drive shall be constructed to 36 feet wide, face-to-face with concrete curb
and gutter. The street section which access Grandview Road within the plat shall be construction
to 31 feet wide, back-to-back with concrete curb and gutter. A temporary cul-de-sac with a 50-
,
foot radius will also need to be constructed at the end of the public street (Grandview Road).
Private streets shall be constructed in accordance with the City's private street ordinance which
requires a minimum 26 -foot wide drive aisles. The development proposes to meet these drive
'
aisle requirements with the except of the hotel/restaurant site where the narrative on the plans
indicated 22 -foot wide drive aisles in these areas. The drive aisles will need to be increased to
facilitate turning movements, delivery vehicles, and public safety apparatuses.
'
Thd plans are proposing full access points onto Trunk Highway 101 (Market Boulevard) at Lake
Drive, Great Plains Boulevard (Main Street), and across from Rosemount's driveway.•,Staffhas
serious safety concerns with the full access across from existing Lake Drive given the_close
proximity to Trunk Highway 5 and existing roadway geometrics. Staff believes that a right -in,
right -out only may be permitted after further traffic studies are compiled and reviewed by the
City.
1
u
zo 4,1
I
' Villages on the Ponds
July 17, 1996, July 24, 1996 and
' August 12, 1996
Page 42
A development of this size will require traffic control improvements along Trunk Highway 101
(Market Boulevard) and Great Plains Boulevard, as well as, Main Street. This includes
t constructing all or portions of future Trunk Highway 101 to four lanes with auxiliary turn lanes
and traffic signals at Trunk Highway 101 and proposed Lake Drive. Staff is also concerned that
' eventually a traffic signal will also be warranted at Trunk Highway 101 and Main Street (access
south of Lake Drive). Both traffic signals will require meeting a signal justification report prior
to installation with MnDOT. All Trunk Highway 101 improvements will need to meet State Aid
standards. MnDOT will also be required to approve all access points on Trunk Highway 101.
A cost-sharing agreement for the installation of any traffic signals will need to be drafted. A
' breakdown of the cost participation would be based on jurisdictional entrance percentage. For
example, a signal on Trunk Highway 101 at Lake Drive would be split 50% MnDOT, County or
City, 37% Villages on the Pond, and Rosemount 12%. Depending on phasing of the
development, traffic signals or improvements to Trunk Highway 101 may not immediately be
warranted, therefore, staff recommends that the applicant set up a financial escrow account with
the City to guarantee future modifications along Trunk Highway 101. The financial guarantee
may be in the form of a letter of credit or certificate of deposit assuming that these improvements
are not installed with Phase I.
' Upon review of the interior drive aisles and parking lots, staff has concerns with the northerly
east/west drive aisle west of Main Street. This drive aisle will act as a thoroughfare for traffic.
The proposed parking stalls will create turning movements and pedestrian crossings which could
' lead to a potentially hazardous situation. Staff is recommending that the northerly parking stalls
be eliminated and parking permitted only on the south side of the drive aisle adjacent to retail
shops. These parking lot configurations will be further evaluated with the individual site plan
' submittals. For the most part, the main street drive aisle configurations throughout the
development appears acceptable with the exception of drive aisles at the intersection of Trunk
Highway 101 and Great Plains Boulevard. At these intersections, the streets are narrowed down
' from 44 feet wide to 26 feet wide. Staff believes that an additional right turn lane will need to be
incorporated which will increase the drive aisle width to 38 feet to accommodate the turn lanes.
' A right turn lane should also be constructed on northbound Lake Drive at Great Plains
Boulevard.
' In conjunction with private streets, cross -access easements and maintenance agreements will
need to be prepared by the applicant. The cross -access easements should also qualify the
secondary access road for public use to Grandview Road.
Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required for all public streets. The plans
and specifications should be prepared in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard
C
0
4
9
r
I
I
I
1
Villages on the Ponds
July 17, 1996, July 24, 1996 and
August 12, 1996
'
Page 43
Specifications and Detail Plates. The construction plans and specifications will be subject to
'
staff review and formal approval by City Council.
Some of the plans indicate Lake Drive being dedicated with an 80 -foot wide right-of-way.
,
However, the preliminary plat indicates the street will fall within Outlot A which is proposed at
60 feet wide. The proposed private street segment, 44 feet in width, will fit within the 60 width.
However, portions of the sidewalk area will need to be located on the individual lots to facilitate
,
the pedestrian plaza and wide sidewalks envisioned for Lake Drive.
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
,
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 17, 1996 to review the proposed
development. The Planning Commission tabled the item to permit staff and the applicant the
opportunity to clarify the vision for the Village Pond, to analyze parking, to permit the Park &
Recreation Commission to make a recommendation on the location of the proposed soccer field,
to create a written definition of the "village character", and to modify the Development Design
'
Standards.
The Planning Commission held a second hearing on July 24, 1996 to review the development.
The Planning Commission voted four for, zero against, with one abstention to recommend
approval of the development subject to the conditions, as modified, below.
'
The Planning Commission did express some concern regarding the open-ended approval
provided with a PUD, with the potential for portions of the project to remain undeveloped for
'
several years and changing conditions and ordinances taking place that are not applicable to this
development. Staff had proposed language that would require the development be reviewed by
the city five years after final development approval to determine if the design standards and
'
conditions of approval were still appropriate and permitted the city to revise the conditions then.
However, the applicant and Planning Commission were concerned that the uncertainty contained
in such a condition may preclude financing for the project. The Planning Commission requested
that staff and the city attorney develop some language that addressed this concern.
Staff has discussed this issue with the city attorney. He suggested that the following language be
"For two years following final approval of the development, no changes in official
controls of the city shall affect the development."
I
1
I•
i
j
I
Villages on the Ponds '
July 17, 1996, July 24, 1996 and
August 12, 1996 '
Page 5
mitigation is done on site. Based on the city's tree preservation ordinance and without additional
t
tree preservation or loss, the development would be required to provide replacement plantings of
206 trees.
'
Traffic: A traffic operation analysis of the proposed development was completed to document
the intersections affected by the proposed development, to estimate the average daily traffic with
the proposed development, to identify capacity limitations, and to identify potential mitigative
measures. Regional access to the site is provided east and west by TH 5 and north and south by
TH 101. Local site access is through TH 101 (Market Boulevard) on the west and Great Plains
Boulevard and Lake Drive East on the east.
'
The analysis demonstrates that the change in operations from the existing conditions at the '
intersection along TH 5 are not solely due to the proposed development. The background traffic
growth in the area accounts for 45 to 65 percent of the traffic forecast at the two TH 5
intersections. Even without the project generated traffic, traffic volumes are expected to be near '
or over capacity due to background traffic growth.
The traffic analysis concluded that the predicted traffic generated by the site does not '
significantly change the level of service that would occur without the project. Mitigation
measures suggested do not alleviate the problem. The source of traffic congestion is beyond the
control of this project. Traffic mitigation would require the provision of an alternate traffic ,
system on TH 5 such as proposed on TH 212.
Conclusion: There appear to be no significant environmental issues requiring further '
investigation prior to project commencement. Required on site utility and transportation
improvements will be designed and constructed as part of the project. The wetland loss will be
mitigated in full compliance with city, state, and federal requirements. Tree loss will be replaced '
pursuant to the city tree preservation ordinance and site plan landscaping requirements. The
project has been planned to minimize future environmental impacts and will be constructed with
significant emphasis on control of erosion and sedimentation control. 1
Staff believes that there are numerous potential benefits for mixed use projects. A mixed use '
development would be unique to the city and would provide a focal point on the fringe of the
downtown area and additional_ vitality to the community. The village concept provides a
pedestrian friendly environment and the provision of transit services where people can live
work, and play, elements which are found in neotraditional development principals and the .
livable communities act.
1
4
}
I
Villages on the Ponds
July 17, 1996, July 24, 1996 and
' August 12, 1996
Page 48
' 29. The applicant shall develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's
Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Type III erosion control fencing will be
required around the wetlands. The site may also require additional erosion control fence on the
slopes and/or temporary sediment basins. Wood fiber blankets shall be utilized on all slopes in
excess of 3:1.
' 30. Drainage and conservation easements shall be dedicated over all wetland areas within the
subdivision including outlots. Wetland mitigation measures shall be developed and subject to
' approval by the City. The mitigation measures shall be completed in conjunction with the site
grading and restoration.
31. The applicant reduce the impacts to Wetland 2000, create a larger on site mitigation area and
present a sequencing plan showing reduced impact to affected wetlands.
' 32. City staff and the applicant shall investigate the origin of Wetland 6000 to determine if this
area can be exempt from the Wetland Conservation Act.
33. Buffer strips shall be provided around Wetland 5000. The buffer strips shall be 10 to 30 feet
in width with an average width of 20 feet.
' 34. The street section for the public portion of Lake Drive shall be constructed to 36 -feet wide face-
to-face with concrete curb and gutter. The street section which accesses Grandview Road
within the plat shall be constructed to 31 -feet wide back-to-back with concrete curb and gutter.
' A temporary cul-de-sac with a 25 -foot radius shall be constructed at the end of the public street
for Grandview Road. All private streets shall be constructed in accordance with the City's
private street ordinance which requires a minimum 26 -foot wide drive aisles and built to 7 -ton
design.
35. Depending on the phasing of the project, Trunk Highway 101 may need to be upgraded to four
' lanes, as well as, turn lanes and traffic signals. This will be further evaluated contingent upon
the outcome of the traffic study being reviewed by SRF. The applicant shall incorporate the
' necessary traffic improvements as recommended by SRF accordingly. Should the traffic signals
not be required with the initial phase of development, the applicant will be required to escrow
with the City their fair share of the.cost for future installation. Security shall be a means of a
' letter of credit or a certificate of deposit. All Trunk Highway 101 improvements shall meet
State Aid standards. The applicants responsibility for the traffic signals along Trunk-Eighway
101 shall be 37% of the total cost. A cost sharing agreement between the applicant and City
' shall be drafted for the installation of any traffic signals.
v
y
r
r
r
u
January 28, 1997
Ms. Julie Long
BRW
Thresher Square
700 Third Street South
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Re: Great Plains Boulevard Street Modification - Villages on the Ponds
Project No. 96-13
Dear Julie:
VIA FACSIMILE
Upon review of the memo from BRW dated July 29, 1996 regarding development traffic, we are
requesting the following modifications to Great Plains Boulevard to accommodate trip
generations from the Villages on the Ponds development:
1. Provide a 14 -foot wide right turn on southbound Great Plains Boulevard into the
development at Lake Drive East as shown on the attached drawing.
2. Provide an auxiliary 14 -foot wide turn lane on northbound Great Plains Boulevard at
Lake Drive East as shown on the attached drawing.
3. Restripe painted median and turn lanes as shown on the attached drawing. Redo the
driveway entrance to the development off Lake Drive East for a 28 -foot minimum wide
drive aisle into the site centered upon existing Lake Drive East. Currently, the drive
access is 52 according to MnDOT plans.
4. Provide a raised concrete median on Great Plains Boulevard south of Lake Drive East as
shown.
In the future, as development occurs on the American Legion site, the existing access to Total
Mart may be closed off and traffic routed via the American Legion driveway. The Legion's
driveway will also be restricted to a right -in right -out only in the future. We will require the
developer of that site to extend the median south, thus closing of the access point.
Ms. Julie Long
January 28, 1997
Page 2
Please incorporate these changes in your street construction plans for the development. The
section of Great Plains Boulevard from Trunk Highway 5 to Grandview Road will be a public
street, therefore, plans should be prepared in accordance with the City's Standard Specifications
and Detail Plates.
If you have any questions in this matter, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
David C. Hempel
Assistant City Engineer
DCH Jms
Attachment
c: Charles Folch, Director of Public Works
Anita Benson, Project Engineer
Vemelle Clayton, Lotus Realty
gAmg\projects\vi11agm\street modification.doc
0
22. Traffic. Parking spaces added 2,192. Existing spaces (if project involves expansion) 0.
Estimated total Average Daily Traffic (ADT) generated 14,800. Estimated maximum
peak hour traffic generated (if known) and its timing:vparoximately 1.500 for both the
AM peak (7-9,00 AM) and the PM peak (4-6.00 PM). For each affected road indicate the
ADT and the directional distribution of traffic with and without the project. Provide an
estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on the affected roads and describe any
w traffic improvements which will be necessary.
Response: A traffic operations analysis of the proposed development was completed in
order to document the following issues:
• Identification of principal roads, highways, and intersections that will be used by
motor vehicles moving to or from the proposed project.
• Estimates of average daily traffic volumes and peak hour traffic volumes
anticipated to occur one year after the proposed project will be substantially
complete and operational.
• Identification of traffic impacts that would result given the capacity limitations of
the roads, highways, and intersections and the forecast post -development traffic
volumes.
I
I
I
I
0
I
I
J
I
• Identification of mitigation measures that can be implemented to address traffic
impacts.
ACCESS ROADWAYS AND INTERSECTIONS
Access— Roadways
Local access to the proposed site is to be provided directly by Great Plains Boulevard
and Trunk Highway (TH) 101/Market Boulevard and indirectly by TH 5/Arboretum
Boulevard. The project location and adjacent roadway system is shown in Figure 1.
Great Plains Boulevard will act as one access to the development. In addition, five
accesses are proposed off of TH 101, three accesses to the east and two accesses to the
west. North of TH 5, Great Plains Boulevard is a north -south, two-lane roadway with
no parking and a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour (mph). South of TH 5, Great
Plains Boulevard is proposed to be designed as a two-lane roadway with parking bays
on both sides of the street and a maximum posted speed limit of 30 mph. The purpose
of this section of Great Plains Boulevard will be to provide a direct route for the
heaviest movements into and out of the development.
North of TH 5, Market Boulevard is a north -south, two-lane roadway with no parking
and a posted speed limit of 30 mph. For approximately 1,000 feet south of TH 5, TH
101 is a north -south, four -lane divided highway with left- and right -turn lanes before
tapering into a two-lane roadway. TH 101, from TH 5 south to County State Aide
Highway (CSAH) 18/Lyman Boulevard, is planned to be upgraded to a four -lane
divided roadway with left- and right -turn lanes. This section of TH 101 does not allow
parking and the posted speed limit is 40 mph. TH 5 is an east -west, four -lane divided
highway with left- and right -tum lanes at major intersections. Access onto TH 5 near
the proposed development is excluded to major cross -streets with no driveway access.
#D585 20
I
TH 5 does not allow parking and the posted speed limit is 55 mph. The site plan is
shown on Figure 3.
Regional access to the proposed site is provided east and west by TH 5 and north and
south by TH 101. TH 5 provides direct access from the southwest suburbs to I-494 and
the rest of the regional road system. TH 101 provides access to TH 212 and TH 169
approximately 3 miles south of the proposed development.
The two intersections on TH 5 are controlled by traffic signals. The remaining access
intersections are proposed to be unsignalized with no control on TH 101 and Great
Plains Boulevard and stop control on the minor roadways (Lake Drive and Main
Street). The existing road geometrics and traffic control are shown in Figure 10 and
Table 3.
EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Existing traffic data is collected because the information is a key component used in the
�j analysis of existing conditions and in producing forecast volumes. The existing data
y gathered includes:
f� The existing two-way Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes on T11 5, TH 101/
u Market Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard were recorded by BRW, Inc. on
March 22-24, 1996.
The existing peak hour turning movement volumes and geometrics were collected
by BRW, Inc. on March 23, 1996 from 6:00 to 9:00 AM and 4:00 to 6:00 PM at the
following locations:
(1) The intersection of TH 5 and TH 101/Market Boulevard
(2) The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard .
• The existing traffic signal timing was obtained from Mn/DOT for the AM and
PM peak hours of operation at the following locations:
(1) The intersection of TH 5 and TH 101/Market Boulevard
(2) The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard
11
#23585 21
N
Access Intersections
Six critical intersections were identified for analysis:
TH 5 and TH 101 /Market Boulevard
TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard
• Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive East
• TH 101 and Lake Drive West
TH 101 and Lake Drive (through development)
TH 101 and Main Street
The two intersections on TH 5 are controlled by traffic signals. The remaining access
intersections are proposed to be unsignalized with no control on TH 101 and Great
Plains Boulevard and stop control on the minor roadways (Lake Drive and Main
Street). The existing road geometrics and traffic control are shown in Figure 10 and
Table 3.
EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Existing traffic data is collected because the information is a key component used in the
�j analysis of existing conditions and in producing forecast volumes. The existing data
y gathered includes:
f� The existing two-way Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes on T11 5, TH 101/
u Market Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard were recorded by BRW, Inc. on
March 22-24, 1996.
The existing peak hour turning movement volumes and geometrics were collected
by BRW, Inc. on March 23, 1996 from 6:00 to 9:00 AM and 4:00 to 6:00 PM at the
following locations:
(1) The intersection of TH 5 and TH 101/Market Boulevard
(2) The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard .
• The existing traffic signal timing was obtained from Mn/DOT for the AM and
PM peak hours of operation at the following locations:
(1) The intersection of TH 5 and TH 101/Market Boulevard
(2) The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard
11
#23585 21
N
D
The resulting existing ADT volumes are documented in Figure 9 and the AM and PM
peak hour turning movement volumes are illustrated in Figure 11 and documented in
Table 3.
SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC
Trip Generation
The trip generation of the proposed land uses are based on national average trip
generation rates from the Trip Generation Report, Fifth Edition published by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in 1991. The number of daily, AM and PM
peak hour trips expected to be generated by each of the proposed land uses are
shown on Table 4.
The proposed site includes nine areas of development and eight different land uses.
The proposed plan contains 391,000 gross square feet (so of mixed use commercial
development and 266 dwelling units. The proposed development includes:
#23585 22
0
• 16,800 sf for three restaurants
• 47,000 sf church
• 53,000 sf elementary school
• 104,500 sf of office space in six buildings
• 122,500 sf of retail space in four locations
• 106 -room motel
• 154 apartment units in four buildings
• 112 condominium units in two buildings.
The proposed development also includes an alternative land use plan. This
alternative plan involves adding 13,000 sf of office space in Area 6 and replacing the
32,000 sf of office space in Area 7 with 56 condominium units. For purposes of the,
trip generation analysis both the proposed land use and the alternative land use were
analyzed and compared. The proposed land use generated greater AM and PM peak
hour volumes; therefore, the volumes generated by the proposed land use were used
for further analysis in this report.
Because of the mixture of land use types proposed for this development, some of the
trips generated are expected to be internal, multi-purpose trips. The Trip Generation
Manual suggests developments with a mixture of residential and commercial land
uses produce the highest multi-purpose trips. Based on this information, 10 percent
of the trips generated were assumed to be internal, multi-purpose trips. In addition, a
number of the trips generated by the site are expected to be vehicles traveling on the
adjacent roadways which utilize the convenience of the direct access to the
development and make an intermediate stop even though the proposed site was not
their primary destination. The Trip Generation Manual refers to these intermediate
stops as "pass -by trips". The pass -by trips were not taken into consideration when
developing the trip generation for the proposed development. Therefore, the site
generated traffic will probably be lower than the trip generation indicates, and the
analysis based on the higher trip generation will produce conservative results.
p�
#23585 22
0
P.
It
Ww
r
C
Q
O
z �
W
0
It
Z
Q
z �
02
P:
J
®O
Z
O
L) D
W Z x
J F- Y
W
Q X
F W 0.
It
N
O)
� C
N —
L c
0z
N O
CE
O 0
c °
d m
C T
O L
• C
C L
d R
'O
C
d
O
O ° O)
Em.CL
O O «
O«
L
.Lr. V ~
O) N w
« = v
32
N N O
N y
EN
N
N O) —
W N C
W O c
L Om
Of = G
-0 O
c
E v d
w n
o° E
E a
r M ,
L «
O 3 O
'O
Im—
L d U
O m.
c a
U N
3 N W y
c3�
m
E
° « m
U
An
v _
v T, r O
a
O C C N
A o N N
O °
E c c L3
N m 4)
o w E
0 m
c0i o E C
ID O
�¢Fa
H
O — —
z
D
U,
C
r
Q
~
N_
O
N
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
W
i
C
N
s
N
M
0
0
0
V
O
O
0
0
0
(D
IJ
N
N
N
O
O
01V
SD
O
O
0
0
0
S
�
U
O
IL
N
i0
N
N
N
N
N
N
Q
�'
u]
N
N
r
V
OD
m
N
O
C
N
w
V
S
f
O
W
tN0
�I
W
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Nw
co
(D
Jn
1D
a
N
w
V
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
S
Q
O
cc
M
m
M
Q~
O
n
N
N
p)
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
�
r
W
W
C
O
N
o
^
ID
ED
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
U
Ov
C'
O
<J-
fD
M
N
N
n
M
O
O
N
V
N
O
C
r
O
z
C
N
N
N
O
O
O
OW
a
O
O
O
O
O
>
O
>
O
7
O
>
O
>
>
7
>
>
>
>
>
W
w
2x
S
O
_=
O
0
O
S
O
x
0
•r
O
x
O
x
.y U
O
x
O
x
'r0
Wx=0
r
r
r
w
w
E
w
w
E
w
w
E
w
w
E
ww
E
wwE
EL
d
4)n
n
0d
w
DO
N
d
d
W
1
d
w
,
a
M
2C9
2
2
CD
2
2
0
2
0
2
2
0
2
2
0
CL
¢
a
¢
a
¢
a
¢
a
¢
a
O
N0
O
O
CO
fqL2
fLOn
z
c
O
.Ln
LON
LO
to
H
H
H
H
O
>
u
m
a
m
0
N
W
N
W65
�
d
U
O
O
r
O
OS
N
oD
N
a0
or
r
xi,
H
a
a
=
x
c
x
z
N
J
N
J
A
z
N
O)
� C
N —
L c
0z
N O
CE
O 0
c °
d m
C T
O L
• C
C L
d R
'O
C
d
O
O ° O)
Em.CL
O O «
O«
L
.Lr. V ~
O) N w
« = v
32
N N O
N y
EN
N
N O) —
W N C
W O c
L Om
Of = G
-0 O
c
E v d
w n
o° E
E a
r M ,
L «
O 3 O
'O
Im—
L d U
O m.
c a
U N
3 N W y
c3�
m
E
° « m
U
An
v _
v T, r O
a
O C C N
A o N N
O °
E c c L3
N m 4)
o w E
0 m
c0i o E C
ID O
�¢Fa
H
O — —
z
D
I
I
0
1
a
I
m
j�
U W z
m F
W Q
A
Ow
� 0: Z
d W
J
mea
Qat
0
e2fi8cE@
e
k 3
S=•
8 R.o-, ^�8SIc
to p
S
^
R 8
xx
$ S$
X X##
e 8 e$ 8 e$
X X
$
X
X
I$
X M X X
$ 8 8 8
X X X
8 $ 8
5g
`d
-1 n
$
i
i
R 8
8 S
S
R S
R
F-
d
Iv
E
S
F
R
8 n $ R
s�
SvwS
x e e# v e e
X x
S 8
R R R R
E
E
6
4
C
t G G
G t C t G 6 C
6°:
°n e $ 4 ° n i°n °m
° $ ° H
.°n
m
v°, °m .4 w
Q °
E f 8
@
a
e2fi8cE@
e
11
I
Background Traffic Growth
The background traffic growth was determined from two sets of information: by
analysis of historical traffic counts for the roadways in the area and from historic land
development patterns in the Chanhassen Central Business District (CBD) provided by
the City staff. The ADT volumes reported on the Mn/DOT Traffic Flow Maps from
1978 to 1994 were used in combination with the 1996 ADT count conducted by BRW,
Inc., to develop average annual growth rates along TH 5, TH 101/Market Boulevard,
Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive. These growth rates were then adjusted based
on the City of Chanhassen's assessment of growth in the area.
An average annual growth rate of three percent was determined for TH 5, TH 101
south of TH 5, and Lake Drive west of TH 101. A growth rate of one-half percent
was used for Market Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard, both north of TH 5, due
to lack of area remaining for new development in the downtown area. A one-half
percent growth rate was also used for Lake Drive east of Great Plains Boulevard.
Finally, a zero percent growth rate was used for Great Plains Boulevard south of
TH 5. The residential neighborhoods in the area east of Great Plains Boulevard are
mostly built -out and Great Plains Boulevard will be designed to provide direct access
into the proposed development. Any growth in traffic along Great Plains Boulevard
will be accounted for by the site -generated traffic.
I
43585 25
I
The development is expected to generate 14,810 vehicle trips per day, 1,520 AM peak
hour trips and 1,490 PM peak hour trips. Fifty percent of the total daily trips are
expected to be inbound to the development and 50 percent are expected to be
outbound from the development for a total of 7,405 vehicles per day (vpd) both
entering and exiting the development. The distribution of vehicles in the AM peak
hour is expected to be 56 percent inbound and 44 percent outbound or 855 vehicle
trips entering and 665 vehicle trips exiting. The distribution of vehicles in the PM
peak hour is expected to be 48 percent inbound and 52 percent outbound or 715
vehicles entering and 775 vehicles exiting.
Directional Trip Distribution
The directional orientation used to distribute the site -generated trips to/from the
proposed development is based on two sets of information: the existing traffic
demands and the regional traffic model for the twin cities metro area. The directional
trip distribution assumed for the site is shown on Figure 15.
TRAFFIC FORECASTS
In order to analyze the potential traffic impacts that the expected future development
will have on the adjacent roadway system, traffic volumes were prepared for the
forecast Year 2002 background (no -build) and post -development (build) conditions.
The forecast no -build volumes consist of the existing volumes plus a background
traffic growth. The forecast build volumes consist of the background volumes plus
the site -generated trips for the proposed development distributed over the roadway
network.
Background Traffic Growth
The background traffic growth was determined from two sets of information: by
analysis of historical traffic counts for the roadways in the area and from historic land
development patterns in the Chanhassen Central Business District (CBD) provided by
the City staff. The ADT volumes reported on the Mn/DOT Traffic Flow Maps from
1978 to 1994 were used in combination with the 1996 ADT count conducted by BRW,
Inc., to develop average annual growth rates along TH 5, TH 101/Market Boulevard,
Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive. These growth rates were then adjusted based
on the City of Chanhassen's assessment of growth in the area.
An average annual growth rate of three percent was determined for TH 5, TH 101
south of TH 5, and Lake Drive west of TH 101. A growth rate of one-half percent
was used for Market Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard, both north of TH 5, due
to lack of area remaining for new development in the downtown area. A one-half
percent growth rate was also used for Lake Drive east of Great Plains Boulevard.
Finally, a zero percent growth rate was used for Great Plains Boulevard south of
TH 5. The residential neighborhoods in the area east of Great Plains Boulevard are
mostly built -out and Great Plains Boulevard will be designed to provide direct access
into the proposed development. Any growth in traffic along Great Plains Boulevard
will be accounted for by the site -generated traffic.
I
43585 25
I
r 1
1
k�
A.*
n
I
F
7
I
%23585
These growth rates were applied to the existing daily volumes along TH 5, TH 101/
Market Boulevard, Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive to develop background
growth traffic volumes. These results are shown in Figure 11 and Table 5 for the
intersection turning movement volumes as Year 2002 no -build volumes.
Forecast Traffic Volumes
In order to analyze the potential traffic impacts that the proposed development will
have on the adjacent roadway system, post -development traffic volume forecasts were
prepared for the Year 2002 conditions. The forecast volumes consist of the existing
volumes plus background traffic growth plus the site -generated trips for the proposed
land uses. The resulting forecast Year 2002 build AM and PM peak hour turning
movement volumes for the two intersections along TH 5 are illustrated in Figure 12.
The existing peak hour turning movement counts were not available for the four
unsignalized access intersection; therefore, the following assumptions were made in
developing the AM and PM peak hour turning movement volumes.
The AM and PM peak hour volumes were assumed to be 10 percent of the ADT
on Lake Drive.
The directional distribution along Lake Drive was assumed to be a 50/50 split for
both the AM and PM peak hours.
The directional distribution along TH 101 and Great Plains Boulevard was based
on the peak hour turn movements at the two TH 5 signalized intersections. The
directional distribution along TH 101 was assumed to be a 40/60, northbound/
southbound split in the AM peak hour and a 60/40, northbound/southbound
split in the PM peak hour. The directional distribution along Great Plains
Boulevard was assumed to be a 60/40, northbound/southbound split for both the
AM and PM peak hours.
• The geometry assumed at each access entrance included a left- and right -tum lane
off of the major street (TH 101 or Great Plains Boulevard) and two lanes
outbound from the development (either a left -tum lane and a right -turn lane or,
where appropriate, a left -turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane).
• For the forecast build conditions at the intersection of TH 101 and Lake Drive
West, the east approach from the development was assumed to provide right -in
and right -out movements only.
No site generation volumes were available for the Rosemount, Inc. building
which will share the west approach to the intersection of TH 101 and Lake Drive
through the site as one of its accesses. Therefore, only the trip generation from
the proposed development was used for this west approach only.
The Year 2002 forecast build AM and PM peak hour turning movement volumes for
all six intersections are documented in Table 6.
26
I
E
0
10
Z
Z-
0 ,.
O�
h U
z
Z
8w
2
00
o
m
Z Q
C1W
O M
N
}
H D
Q O
Lu2
< O d
7
N
N U
N
C
>>
O O
w E
O N
C 0
d N
O >
d
N .D
C N
O
E
C
O
d
p O 0
E m n
m o
y
L_ L
c
v m40
N N
y E
W O
>
N N
N
m W �
N N C
W C O
N O C
L O 0
n
N s C m
v o_
NC
d
E O N
W O. V
0--
c
M C
N
=:E
O 3 O p
L d O V
O 00 `
c n "J
d w m 0
t d y N u
cyuo E
d
v a o Y E
V
C
N
N oH
O N
.0 6 r >' 0
E mc d U Y
p C N 3 6
o m u
o E c
m d= ;
F Q H L
ID
" - —
Z0 0
JII
O
p
O
O
OSI
�i
Q
m
N
m
N
O
O
O
O
O
(D'
O
N
dc(
�
N
W
i
3
�i
O
O
O
n
N
0
0
O
O
O
N
co
N
V
IJ
0
N
N
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
7
co
yoj
U
Q
S
IL
S
O
OO
O
N
O
N
O
N
N
O
Kl
Q
tD
N
Y
O)
h
N
N
N
N
N
N
S
m
N
KO
O
On
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q)
�
cop
f00
to
o
N
v
N
v
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
J
No
N
U
S
W
N
N
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
L
f
N
N
W
f.
O
O
O
O
N
tO
o
O
O
o
O
O
O
O
C
N
N
W
N
o
0
O
OO
ow
0
oN
OO
OO
OO
OOM
O
Ov
tOOD
O
0
OM
O
N
NMNM
MF�ii
co
O
w
V
ar
7
O
N
>
>
H
0
7
0
7
O
>
O
>
O
U
7
O
J
O
F
2�
2
S
�c
O
2
O
2
��
O
2
2�
`
2
2
2
2
2
W
lu
y
y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
E
Y
Y
E
d)
4)EwwEwwEwwEwwE
E
E
0
E
a
a
a
a
a
w
a
a
w
a
a
w
IL
a
w
a
v
w
Qa
U'
C7
0
2
a
a
s
a
s
¢
a
a
s
¢
a
U JO
d
N
O
o
O
O
li
N
N
N
(_n
Z
O)
OI
L
L
t
L
F V
N
F
H
H
f
V
O
O
CO
m
M
W
w
C_
LUO
U)
O
O
oa
aC
1
p
.6
m
S
S
v
Z
I
N
t�f
I
V
10
tD
7
N
N U
N
C
>>
O O
w E
O N
C 0
d N
O >
d
N .D
C N
O
E
C
O
d
p O 0
E m n
m o
y
L_ L
c
v m40
N N
y E
W O
>
N N
N
m W �
N N C
W C O
N O C
L O 0
n
N s C m
v o_
NC
d
E O N
W O. V
0--
c
M C
N
=:E
O 3 O p
L d O V
O 00 `
c n "J
d w m 0
t d y N u
cyuo E
d
v a o Y E
V
C
N
N oH
O N
.0 6 r >' 0
E mc d U Y
p C N 3 6
o m u
o E c
m d= ;
F Q H L
ID
" - —
Z0 0
I
E
u
U
0) U3
0�
!, O O
0 w0
Z
ma
ocW
N
WO
r>
F 5
(pQ0
W 0x
F Q d
iL'
d
W U
N C
� C
O 0
E
L �
0 y
O
C 0
�
N 4
C T
o �
c O
C O 2
a E Ca
a
C
O
a)
O U m
E o y
rno
mm
a
«
« c
m m
« y d
E
rO
0
E w a
y
N d —
W O C
N O C
OC o O
y C C
c
'v o
E U m
a
a
EC, y=
(6 y
`0 3 0
L N U
O 0
O
N 0 ry
t N a
c y
d
U
y
v N « w O
W
A C O N
A
y
O N F
a — y 3
N C1 a) U
o o rn
E9
L 0 J
HQHa
N
o —--
U
N
N�
Q
f
t0
N
NI
O
O
B
O
O
OI
O
O
�j
O
O
N
H
A
A
A
I
J
O
O
NCD
S
U
O
K
ILIf
N
OO
Q
L=
N'
CO
tO0
N
oM1
N
N
S
H
oOO
M
O
O
h
Cn
M
N
M
00
N
O
N
Q
N
M
co
O
N
N
O
N
JO
O
O
M
N
O
O
O
CD
N
M
O
O
O
N
O
O
mm
M
N
vv
Q
CO
S
U
O
rc
o
m
0
0
a~
N
N
CN
D
M
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
f
N
N
QN
W
A
A
A
K
N
N
�-
O
O
CIY
CvNj
aOO
CD
CO
Obi
N
Q
O
N
O
JO
CO
O
lw
O
Coco
O
a
O
O
O
M
M
O
S
M
U
O
C
i=
CD
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
¢
CO
0)
N
01
V
W
M
N
O
Q
N
W
M
S
Q
Ln
Q
Q
Q
N
K
O
2
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
(0
Q
CO
n
CD
n
N
M
M
M
w5
o
5
o
>>
o
o
0
o
5
5
5
5
F
x
x
x
x
S
o
0
x
0
o
2
0
o
x
o
x
o
x
0
0
W
Y
Y
y
Y
Y
y
Y
Y
y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
y
a10i
v
E
ai
a
E
at0i
af°i
E
v
E
E
E
E
E
a
a
y
a
-i
a
v
a
a
O
a
ami
a
0
aoi
a
ami
a
0
4)i
a
(D
D.
0
a
C7
(7
o
m
m
o
2
m
(D
Q
a 0
=LL c
$
N
o
o
a
a
0
0
!L F
ja
(A
2
(O.1
Om
(a
m
y
.O••
U
CO
O
CO
0
W
y
W
U)
d
W
aa
x
o
x
c
x
F
Y
y
H
al
F
t0
H
Zr
N
M
Q
d
W U
N C
� C
O 0
E
L �
0 y
O
C 0
�
N 4
C T
o �
c O
C O 2
a E Ca
a
C
O
a)
O U m
E o y
rno
mm
a
«
« c
m m
« y d
E
rO
0
E w a
y
N d —
W O C
N O C
OC o O
y C C
c
'v o
E U m
a
a
EC, y=
(6 y
`0 3 0
L N U
O 0
O
N 0 ry
t N a
c y
d
U
y
v N « w O
W
A C O N
A
y
O N F
a — y 3
N C1 a) U
o o rn
E9
L 0 J
HQHa
N
o —--
U
Site -generated trips were assigned to the roadway system for the forecast Year 2002
build condition based on two assumptions.
Vehicles using TH 5 will use the road closest to their land use, either TH 101 or
Great Plains Boulevard, to gain access to TH 5.
When the east approach left -turn movement off of TH 5 at the Great Plains
Boulevard intersection exceeds 300 vehicles in the peak hour, vehicles are
expected to by-pass this intersection and turn left at the TH 101 intersection to
access the development.
FORECAST TRAFFIC ANALYSES
Capacity Analysis
(1) The intersection of TH 5 and TH 101/Market Boulevard
(2) The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard
(3) Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive East
(4) TH 101 and Lake Drive West
(5) TH 101 and Lake Drive (through development) dvoW+ l tndd. G.t,r5&r coWN4 s
r (6) TH 101 and Main Street
The capacity analysis of the signalized intersections used the SIGNAL94 software and
the procedures documented in "Chapter 9: Signalized Intersections" of the 1994
Update to the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM).The unsignalized intersections were
analyzed using the procedures of "Chapter 10: Unsignalized Intersections' of the
HCM. The existing traffic signal timings were used for the existing conditions and
forecast no -build analysis and optimized timings were used in analyzing the forecast
build conditions. The existing cycle length during the peak hours is 145 seconds.
This cycle length was maintained for the future conditions analysis. The existing
timing is set to provide as much green time as possible to the heavy east and west
through movements on TH 5. By providing extra time for the major movements, the
cross -street movements and the major street left -turn movements will experience more
delay. A similar timing plan was used for the build conditions where extra green
time was provided for the TH 5 through volumes.
I�
#23585 29
A capacity analysis is a qualitative measure, of traffic flow through an intersection or
along a roadway segment. The basic output from a capacity analysis is a level of
service (LOS) letter grade (A through F) with LOS A representing minimal delays and
no congestion, and LOS F representing substantial delays and congestion. LOS E is
considered to be the actual capacity of an intersection or movement. Level of service
D is generally considered to be an acceptable level of traffic operations in urbanized
areas during the peak traffic hours. Level of service E and F are common during
peak hour conditions in urbanized areas for left -turn movements at unsignalized
intersections.
Capacity analyses were conducted using the traffic volumes and geometrics illustrated
previously in Figures 10, 11 and 12 and documented in Tables 3, 4 and 5, at the
following six locations:
(1) The intersection of TH 5 and TH 101/Market Boulevard
(2) The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard
(3) Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive East
(4) TH 101 and Lake Drive West
(5) TH 101 and Lake Drive (through development) dvoW+ l tndd. G.t,r5&r coWN4 s
r (6) TH 101 and Main Street
The capacity analysis of the signalized intersections used the SIGNAL94 software and
the procedures documented in "Chapter 9: Signalized Intersections" of the 1994
Update to the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM).The unsignalized intersections were
analyzed using the procedures of "Chapter 10: Unsignalized Intersections' of the
HCM. The existing traffic signal timings were used for the existing conditions and
forecast no -build analysis and optimized timings were used in analyzing the forecast
build conditions. The existing cycle length during the peak hours is 145 seconds.
This cycle length was maintained for the future conditions analysis. The existing
timing is set to provide as much green time as possible to the heavy east and west
through movements on TH 5. By providing extra time for the major movements, the
cross -street movements and the major street left -turn movements will experience more
delay. A similar timing plan was used for the build conditions where extra green
time was provided for the TH 5 through volumes.
I�
#23585 29
'•s, re- :Pt"M1 t.' ,.
I
The results of the capacity analysis for the existing, Year 2002 no -build, and Year 2003
build conditions are shown in Tables 7 and 8 for the two signalized intersections and
for the four unsignalized intersections, respectively. The signalized intersections level
of service table provides the intersection level of service and intersection delay results
for the AM and PM peak hours. The unsignalized intersection level of service table
provides the major and minor street level of service and delay by movements and the
intersection delay results for the AM and PM peak hours.
• For the existing conditions, both intersections along TH 5 are reported to operate
at LOS C in the AM and PM peak hours.
• For the forecast no -build conditions, both intersections along TH 5 are expected to
operate at LOS C and D in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.
• For the forecast build conditions, the intersection of TH 5 and TH 101 is expected
to operate at LOS D for both the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of TH
5 and Great Plains Boulevard is expected to operate at LOS F for both the AM
and PM peak hours.
All four of the right -turn movements at the intersection of TH 5 and TH 101 /Market
Boulevard have their own lane and a channelization island. There are also right -tum
lanes and channelization islands for the east
and west approach right -turn movements
on TH 5 at the Great Plains Boulevard intersection. Therefore, these right -turn
movements were analyzed as free right conditions which means they do not effect the
signal timing operations at the intersections. The remaining two right -turn
movements for the north and south approaches on Great Plains Boulevard have their
own lane but do not have a channelization island. The analysis assumed that for
every two vehicles turning left during the protected left -turn phase on TH 5, one
vehicle would turn right -on -red from the north and south approaches on Great Plains
Boulevard.
volumes is from 1,200 to 1,400 vehicles in the peak hour the intersection is expected to
The capacity analysis is an indication of how conditions are likely to be during
weekday peak hours only and not at other times of the day or on weekends. The
results of the signalized intersection analysis are as follows:
• For the existing conditions, both intersections along TH 5 are reported to operate
at LOS C in the AM and PM peak hours.
• For the forecast no -build conditions, both intersections along TH 5 are expected to
operate at LOS C and D in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.
• For the forecast build conditions, the intersection of TH 5 and TH 101 is expected
to operate at LOS D for both the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of TH
5 and Great Plains Boulevard is expected to operate at LOS F for both the AM
and PM peak hours.
0
"23585 30
9
When the volume approaches or exceeds the capacity for a movement the delay
grows at an increased rate. Rather than report an approximation of this increased
delay, the analysis reports the movement(s) which are above capacity and does not
report delay for the intersection. In order to compare the no -build and build
conditions where the intersection level of service is F and no intersection delay is
reported, the planning analysis from the 1985 HCM was used to supplement the
results of the 1994 Update to the HCM analysis. The planning analysis is a method
which provides a basic assessment relative to whether the capacity of an intersection
is expected to be exceeded. The analysis sums the volume for the critical movements
at an intersection. If
the sum of the critical volumes is below 1,200 vehicles in the
peak hour, the intersection is expected to be under capacity. If the sum of the critical
volumes is from 1,200 to 1,400 vehicles in the peak hour the intersection is expected to
be near capacity. If the sum of the critical volumes is greater than 1,400 vehicles in
the peak hour, then the volume is expected to exceed the capacity of the intersection.
0
"23585 30
9
a
El
a
a w
U
w
w
LL
Q
J
LU
w
J
Z
_0
U
-71
J
ZZ Q d '� 'm
O m U; m m m
i F0anU L) L)
wg o c¢I� v
F Z O
o
Q_
U 0 0 �'o o ri
N_
V
I1' VJ O O
W;I
^ N Q a0
N
° VVv
m m m m
N ' o
'A
pi
n n nN
�I
NII
Olam
U Owa
I
i
I
F U
fl
(DN
O
(O
O
v
m' O
N O
O
N
O K
O
cr
-.
N
-
a
.-
N M
-I O
p
(O
U
= H FII
I
0
Z J w a1
a
al
m
m
m
m
m
m
01 m
0� O
m
¢ a > d
C
CI
m
Z
ml
ZI
m
Z
>
O
C
m
ZI
m
Z
>� >
OI O
>I >
O, O
>
O
a s J o1
❑
❑II
❑
N z
O
L)
yUj
Q
I (D
m
Z
Z
Z
N
Z
Z
z
z
I
J W
U
J W
N
iH
T z N
R
<
V
U
-
W
J
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0,
2
2
2
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
W a
Y
m
Y
m(0
Y
Y
@
Y
(0
Y
(0
Y
tp
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
(0
m
m
(0
m
t0
f0
F
a
0.
a
a
a
a
a
n
a
a
a
a
a
a
m
<
<
EL
<
<
EL
¢
CLI
¢
a¢
a
¢
a
I
¢
m
a¢
a¢
(L
Z
O
N
N
N
� v
CO
W
w
m
L)
>
Z
Y
W
}
Z
JI
�
U
LL K
N
N_
¢ z
�O
m
N
rn
UI
n
U)
>
>
OI
m
m
m
~
E
m
N
C
`
N
m
d
C
m
NI
0:
0
m
N
a
�
Q
o
F
F
d i
Z Z
N
J
ZZ Q d '� 'm
O m U; m m m
i F0anU L) L)
wg o c¢I� v
F Z O
o
Q_
U 0 0 �'o o ri
N_
V
I1' VJ O O
W;I
^ N Q a0
N
° VVv
m m m m
N ' o
'A
pi
n n nN
�I
NII
Olam
U Owa
I
i
I
L-1
1f
11
,1
11
IN
L.
IN
0
IN
d
TABLE 8
LINSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
Nu ms:
(1) All four intersections are controlled with stop conditions on the eaat/west streets and time flowing through conditions on the north/south street.
(2) The direction and movement is reported. For example, WE LT identifies the Westbound left -tum movement.
(3) The intersection delay represents the overall delay in seconds Per vehicle entering the intersection.
(4) The movements to and from the west approach of this intersection do not include the volumes for the trips generated by the Rosemount, Inc.
building which will share this access.
(5) The results with -NA" identity the movements which are not present in the existing and no -build conditions.
SOURCE: BRW, Inc. using HCS Unalgni lbed Intersection Analysis and Ne Highway CapaeKy Manual.
06126/96
UAUNSIGLOS.WK4
INTERSECTION
(1)
TRAFFIC
CONTROL
CONDITION
TIME OF
DAY
STREET
MAJOR STREET
i2)
INTERSECTION
DELAY
SECNEH
NO.
NORTH/SOUTH SMEEIMINOR
a
EASTNIEST STREET
- (3)
MOVEMENTI
LEVEL OF
SERVICE
DELAY
SEC/VE H
(3)], LEVELOF DELAY
MOVEMENT SERVICE SECNEH
Existing
AM Peak Hour
WB LT
WB RT
I A
A
4.6
3.0
SB LT j A j 2.6
1.5
3
Great Plains Blvd,
8
Lake Drive East
Thr/Stop
PM Peak Hour
WB LT
WB RT
B
A
5.6
3.3
SB LT j A 2.8
I
i Fes'
Year 2002
No-Buikl
AM Peak Hour
WB LT
WB RT
I A
A
4.7
3.0
SB LT
1.5
PM Peak Hour
WE LT
WE RT
B
A
6.6
3.4
SB LT
A
3.0
1.8
Year 2002
Build
AM Peak Hour
EB LT
EB TH/RT
WB LT
C
A
B
12.2
3.8
9.4
NB LT
SB LT
A
i A
3.2
3.2
1-7
WE TH/RT
A
3.9
PM Peak Hour
EB LT
EB TH/RT
C
A
TS.7
4.0
NB LT
SS LT
A
A
3.4
3.7
2.0
WB LT
C
12.2
WE TH/RT
A
4.5
4
TH 101
8
Lake Drive West
Thru/Stop
Existing
AM Peak Hour
EB LT
EB RT
B
A
8.5
3.2
NB LT
A
3.2
1.1
PM Peak Hour
EB LT -
EB RT
C
A
17,6
3.3
NB LT
A
3.5
1.5
Year 2002
No -Build
AM Peak Hour
EB LT
EB RT
C
A
70.1
3.3
NB LT
A
3.5
1.3
PM Peak Hour
EB LT
EB RT
D
A
28.2
3.4
NB LT
A
3.8
2.3
Year 2002
Build
AM Peak Hour
EB LT
EB RT
D
A
21.0
3,9
NB LT
q
q_7
1,7
WB RT
A
3.4
PM Peak Hour
EB7RT
EBA
F
723.3
3.8WBA
NB LT
B
5.0
6.6
4.4
4)
5
TH 101
8
Lake Drive (She)
Thr'/Stop
Existing
Year 2002
N"uiltl
Year 2002
Build
AM Peak Hour
EB LT
EB RT
NA
NA
NA
NA
(6)*A3..
NA
NA
(5)
NA
NA
0.0
PM Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour
ES LT
EB RT
EB LT
EB RT
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA -
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
PM Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour
EB LT
ES RT
EB LT
EB TH/RT
WB LT
NA
NA
C
A
E
NA
NA
16.9
3.3
41.4
NA
A
A
A
NA
NA
3.8
4.5
0.0
5.0
WE TH/RT
A
3.3
PM Peak Hour
EB LT
EB TH/RT
VVB LT
F
A
F
51.8
3.5
475.6
NB LT
SB LT
A
B
3.8
7.7
38.7
WB TH/RT
A
4.2
6
TH 101
S.
Main Street
Thru/Stop
Existing
AM Peak Hour
WB LT
WB RT
NA
NA
NA (5)
NA
SB LT
NA
NA (5)
0.0
PM Peak Hour
WB LT
WB RT
NA
NA
-NA
NA
SB LT
NA
NA
0.0
Year 2D02
No -Build
AM Peak Hour
WE LT
WS RT
NA
NA
NA
NA
SB LT
NA
NA
0.0
PM Peak Hour
WB LT
WB RT
NA
NA
NA
NA
SB LT
NA
NA
0.0
Year 2002
Build
AM Peak Hour
EB LT
ES TH/RT
Vv8 LT
C
A
C
76.5
4.9
16.8
NB LT
SB LT
q
A
3,7
3.8
1.4
WB TH/RT
A
4.4
PM Peak Hour
EB LT
EB TH/RT
WB LT
D
B
E
27.5
5.1
42.4
NB LT
SB LT
A
B
q.i
5.4
2,3
WE TH/RT
B
6.8
Nu ms:
(1) All four intersections are controlled with stop conditions on the eaat/west streets and time flowing through conditions on the north/south street.
(2) The direction and movement is reported. For example, WE LT identifies the Westbound left -tum movement.
(3) The intersection delay represents the overall delay in seconds Per vehicle entering the intersection.
(4) The movements to and from the west approach of this intersection do not include the volumes for the trips generated by the Rosemount, Inc.
building which will share this access.
(5) The results with -NA" identity the movements which are not present in the existing and no -build conditions.
SOURCE: BRW, Inc. using HCS Unalgni lbed Intersection Analysis and Ne Highway CapaeKy Manual.
06126/96
UAUNSIGLOS.WK4
s,v
E
The planning analysis helps demonstrate that the change in operations at the
intersections along TH 5 from the existing conditions are not solely due to the
additional traffic generated by the development. The background traffic growth in
the area accounts for 45 to 65 percent of the traffic forecast at the two intersections
along TH 5, varying by intersection during the peak hours. Even without the
additional site -generated traffic in the forecast year, the volumes are expected to be
near or over capacity due to the background traffic growth.
Table 8 shows the results of the unsignalized intersection analysis. The analysis
indicates that all of the unsignalized intersection movements currently operate at LOS
C or better in both the AM and PM peak hours. For the forecast Year 2002 no -build
condition, the analysis indicates that all of the intersection movements are expected to
operate at LOS D or better in both the AM and PM peak hours. For the forecast Year
2002 build conditions, the analysis indicates all of the intersection movements are
expected to operate at LOS D or better, with the following exceptions:
• The TH 101/Lake Drive West intersection eastbound left -turn movement is
expected to operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour.
v The TH 101/Lake Drive (Site) intersection westbound left -turn movement is
S� expected to operate at LOS E and F in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.
4 The TH 101/Lake Drive (Site) intersection eastbound left -turn movement is
3 expected to operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour.
.23585 33
Table 7 shows the AM and PM peak hour results of the planning analysis for the
signalized intersections along TH 5. The results indicate:
• For the existing conditions, the intersections of TH 5 and TH 101 is reported to
operate under capacity in both the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of
TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard is reported to operate under capacity in the AM
peak hour and near capacity in the PM peak hour.
• For the no -build conditions, the intersection of TH 5 and TH 101 is expected to
operate near capacity in both the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of TH
5 and Great Plains Boulevard is expected to operate near capacity in the AM peak
hour and over capacity in the PM peak hour.
• For the build conditions, the intersection of TH 5 and TH 101 is expected to
operate near capacity in the AM peak hour and over capacity in the PM peak
hour. The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard is expected to operate
over capacity in both the AM and PM� peak hours.
• The analysis indicates that in comparing the sum of the critical volumes for the
AM
and PM peak hours from the existing conditions to the forecast Year 2002 no -
build conditions there is an increase of 13 to 17 percent.
• The analysis indicates that in comparing the critical volumes for the AM and PM
peak hours from the no -build to the forecast Year 2002 build conditions there is
an increase of 4 to 27 percent.
The planning analysis helps demonstrate that the change in operations at the
intersections along TH 5 from the existing conditions are not solely due to the
additional traffic generated by the development. The background traffic growth in
the area accounts for 45 to 65 percent of the traffic forecast at the two intersections
along TH 5, varying by intersection during the peak hours. Even without the
additional site -generated traffic in the forecast year, the volumes are expected to be
near or over capacity due to the background traffic growth.
Table 8 shows the results of the unsignalized intersection analysis. The analysis
indicates that all of the unsignalized intersection movements currently operate at LOS
C or better in both the AM and PM peak hours. For the forecast Year 2002 no -build
condition, the analysis indicates that all of the intersection movements are expected to
operate at LOS D or better in both the AM and PM peak hours. For the forecast Year
2002 build conditions, the analysis indicates all of the intersection movements are
expected to operate at LOS D or better, with the following exceptions:
• The TH 101/Lake Drive West intersection eastbound left -turn movement is
expected to operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour.
v The TH 101/Lake Drive (Site) intersection westbound left -turn movement is
S� expected to operate at LOS E and F in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.
4 The TH 101/Lake Drive (Site) intersection eastbound left -turn movement is
3 expected to operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour.
.23585 33
r:
;:
Although these mitigations are expected to improve the intersection operations, they
do not improve the overall intersection level of service. The intersection is expected
to operate near capacity due to the heavy through movement on TH 5. No mitigation
was identified to deal with the high volumes of traffic traveling in the through
movements on TH 5. The through movements on TH 5 already receive the majority
of the green time at the signalized intersections and are expected to continue to do so
in the future. Therefore, the mitigation discussed above is aimed at improving the
conditions for the other movements at the intersections.
A common form of mitigation for unsignalized intersections is to install a traffic
signal. Volumes at the unsignalized intersections were compared to the Peak Hour
Volume Warrant as discussed in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
#23585 34
• The TH 101/Main Street intersection westbound left -tum movement is expected
to operate at LOSE in the PM peak hour.
The traffic for the minor street left -tum movements at the unsignalized intersections
are expected to experience some delay during the peak hour conditions. However,
the intersection operations for the majority of the volume entering the unsignalized
intersections are expected to operate at LOS A. This volume includes the through
movement and right -turn movement volumes along the major street which are not
required to stop.
RECOMMENDED MITIGATION
The following traffic mitigation measures are recommended based on the results of
the preceding traffic capacity analysis and planning analysis. Mitigation is
recommended for intersections where the volume approaches or exceeds the capacity
for the current geometrics. The signalized intersections of TH 5 and TH 101/Market
Boulevard is expected to operate at LOS D or better which is a satisfactory
condition
for the peak hours of operation. The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard
is expected to have movements which approach or exceed the capacity; therefore,
different forms of mitigation including adding double left -tum lanes, channelizing free
right -tum lanes or a combination of both were considered. Table 7 shows the results
of the most effective and reasonable mitigation at this intersectionv, K� ' 0%n bust„^}
When the volume for a left -turn lane exceeds 300 vehicles, an additional left-tdm lam nejZ
should be considered. The volume for the east approach left -turn movement into the
development is expected to be near or over 300 vehicles in the peak hour. The
addition of a second left -tum lane for the east approach on TH 5 is recommended at
the intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard. Adding a second left -turn lane
is expected to improve the conditions at the Great Plains Boulevard intersection.,
Another form of mitigation which should be considered at the TH 5 and Great Plains
Boulevard intersection is either providing a free right for the south approach or
extending the right -turn lane. This right -tum movement is expected to be heavily
used by vehicles traveling east on TH 5 or north on TH 101. Although the through
and left -tum movements for this south approach are low compared to the right -turn
movement, extending the right -turn lane could help prevent the right -turn queue from
blocking access to the through and left -turn lanes.
Although these mitigations are expected to improve the intersection operations, they
do not improve the overall intersection level of service. The intersection is expected
to operate near capacity due to the heavy through movement on TH 5. No mitigation
was identified to deal with the high volumes of traffic traveling in the through
movements on TH 5. The through movements on TH 5 already receive the majority
of the green time at the signalized intersections and are expected to continue to do so
in the future. Therefore, the mitigation discussed above is aimed at improving the
conditions for the other movements at the intersections.
A common form of mitigation for unsignalized intersections is to install a traffic
signal. Volumes at the unsignalized intersections were compared to the Peak Hour
Volume Warrant as discussed in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
#23585 34
,:
'Y�
I.1
7
Devices (MMUTCD). Neither the AM nor the PM peak hour combination of major
and minor street volumes were found to meet the Peak Hour Volume Warrant
conditions for signalization at any of the four intersections. As stated earlier, level of
service E or even F for left -turn movements from minor streets at unsignalized
intersections during peak hour operations is common in urbanized areas. Gaps in
traffic created by the traffic signals at the two TH 5 intersections will also improve the
conditions for the left -turn movements from the development accesses. Therefore, no
mitigation is recommended at any of the unsignalized intersections.
23. Vehicle -related Air Emissions. Provide an estimate of the effect of the project's traffic
generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of
traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. (If the
project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult EAW Guidelines about whether a
detailed air quality analysis is needed.)
#23585
Response: The proposed project will have 2,192 associated parking spaces.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) rules require an Indirect Source Permit
(ISP) for new development with over 2,000 parking spaces. The ISP regulates
vehicular emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) from vehicles generated by proposed
developments.
The air quality impacts of the proposed project were addressed by modeling future
traffic flow to predict carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations in the project area. The
microscale air quality analysis was based on the traffic forecasts and operational
analyses documented in Question #22 - Traffic. Total expected CO concentrations are
the sum of local CO (determined through modeling) and background CO (determined
by monitoring in the project area). Impacts were determined by comparing the
forecast CO concentrations to the state ambient air quality standards for CO, shown in
Table 9. These standards were established at levels to protect the most sensitive ,
segments of the population and are not to be exceeded more than once per year.
TABLE 9
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CO (PPM)
State
1 -HOUR AVERAGE 8 -HOUR AVERAGE
30
The air quality impacts of the project were addressed by estimating future CO
concentrations at the two busiest intersections in the project area:
TH 5 and TH 101 (Market Boulevard)
• TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard
35
35,600
1,950
Villages on the Ponds
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
The City of Chanhassen
0
0
w
0
ti
Legend:
45,800
Traffic Signal
XXXX Existing Average
Daily Traffic Count
Source: BRW, Inc. Counted
on May 22-24,1996
and MnDOT 1994
Flow Maps.
61
0
0
44,400
2,100
Figure 9
Existing Average Daily Traffic Volumes
Nu M1
/ QRI
►07
54/96
60/110
1,550/1,080
1,850/1,290
77/50
90/60 +
r"
0
1--1
Villages on the Ponds
111,11vonmental Assessment Worksheet
The City of Chanhassen
Y
104/267 49/81
120/320 60/100
�o
1,073/1,786 11777/1,544
00
da
N
11280/2,130 2,120/1,840
CO p
ti
NCO
"0�
�\,O
Y
104/267 49/81
120/320 60/100
4
L10.
N
1,073/1,786 11777/1,544
O
oo
N °O
ti
N
11280/2,130 2,120/1,840
CO p
ti
m
N
165/204 24/35
200/240 30/40
o
r.4N
O�
n No
Legend:
N p
N \
Traffic Signal
XXX/XXX Existing Conditions AM/PM Peak Hour
Turning Movement Volumes
XXX/XXX Year 2002 No -Build AM/PM Peak Hour
Turning Movement Volumes
Source: BRW, Inc. Counted
on March 23, 1996.
4
L10.
N
CD
Ln
O
oo
N °O
ti
N
N
CO p
ti
m
N
00 pp
4
L10.
63/174
80/210
1,283/1,915
1,530/2,290
31/45
40/50
Figure 11
Existing and Year 2002 No -Build AM and PM
Peak Hour 1brning Movement Volumes
9606-0081
N
u)
N N
M �
00 pp
63/174
80/210
1,283/1,915
1,530/2,290
31/45
40/50
Figure 11
Existing and Year 2002 No -Build AM and PM
Peak Hour 1brning Movement Volumes
9606-0081
600
110 (0)
1,850 (0)
1,290(0)
210 (115)
160 (100)
Villages on the Ponds
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
The City of Chanhassen
00
MooO tOC� ti�
41 + Y
O
CD
N
61
00
110 U)
r-�
1200 80 (15)
320 (0) 120 (20)
1,280 (0) 2,200 (75)
2,130 (0) 1,930 (85)
300 (95) 30 (0)
330 (85) 40 (0)
Legend:
® Traffic Signal
XXX (XXX) Year 2002 Build AM Peak Hour
Turning Movement Volumes
(Site Generated Volumes)
XXX (XXX) Year 2002 Build PM Peak Hour
Turning Movement Volumes
(Site Generated Volumes)
Source: BRW, Inc. Using ITE Trip
Generated Manual, Fifth
Edition, 1991.
0o
W)
�C
0 CD
•.
U)
�o
CDCD
I"�
N�
QO1�
61
t
tj0
cr Ln
Lo.
000 O
N M
`L 80 (0)
210 (0)
1,620 (85)
2,370 (75)
300 (255)
280 (225)
Figure 12
Year 2002 Build and Site Generated AM and PM
Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes
Noah t R
9606 0081