Loading...
Item 6F TIATRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR PROPOSED SOUTHLAKE COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS Prepared for: Barker Rinker Seacat Prepared by: Lee Engineering, LLC 3030 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1660 Dallas, Texas 75234 Phone: (972) 248-3006 Fax: (972) 248-3855 P. 0 97 September 30, 2014/�'O/I Lee Yrajen T1607-01 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................... 1 SITEACCESSIBILITY.................................................................................................................. 3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT...................................................................................................... 6 TRAFFICVOLUMES.................................................................................................................. 11 CAPACITYANALYSES............................................................................................................. 18 TURNLANE ANALYSIS........................................................................................................... 22 PARKINGASSESSMENT.......................................................................................................... 24 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................... 25 APPENDIX................................................................................................................................... 27 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: ITE Trip Generation Rates for ITE Recreational Community Center ............................. 8 Table 2: ITE Estimated Trip Generation........................................................................................ 8 Table 3: NRH Recreation and Senior Center Count Data.............................................................. 9 Table 4: Trip generation Rates based on NRH Count Data............................................................ 9 Table 5: Comparison of Trip Generation Rates.............................................................................. 9 Table 6: Estimated Trip Generation for Southlake CRC............................................................. 10 Table 7: Historical Daily Traffic Volumes on Southlake Boulevard (FM 1709) ........................ 11 Table 8: Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections.................................................. 18 Table 9: Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections .............................................. 19 Table 10: Capacity Analysis Results for the Shady Oaks at FM 1709 Signal ............................. 19 Table 11: Capacity Analysis Results for the existing unsignalized intersections ........................ 20 Table 12: Capacity Analyses results for the proposed driveways on Shady Oaks ....................... 21 Table 13: Left Turn Bay Demand................................................................................................ 22 Table 14: Right Turn Bay Demand.............................................................................................. 22 LIST OF FIGURES Figure1: Map of Study Area......................................................................................................... 1 Figure 2: Existing Roadway and Intersection Lane Configurations .............................................. 4 Figure 3: Proposed Access Locations and Lane Configurations................................................... 5 Figure 4: Preliminary CRC Site Plan............................................................................................. 6 Figure 5: Conceptual Master Plan.................................................................................................. 7 Figure 6: Existing (2014) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes............................................................... 13 Figure 7: Build -Out Year (2018) Peak Hour Background Traffic Volumes ............................... 14 Figure 8: Assumed Directional Distribution................................................................................ 15 Figure 9: Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic Volumes................................................................. 16 Figure 10: Build -Out Year (2018) Peak Hour Total Traffic Volumes ........................................ 17 INTRODUCTION This traffic study was conducted to determine the potential traffic impacts of the proposed Southlake Community Recreation Center located in the southwest quadrant of the Bicentennial Park complex. Bicentennial Park is located on the north side of Southlake Boulevard (FM 1709) between White Chapel Boulevard and Shady Oaks Drive in Southlake, Texas. The Community Recreation Center (CRC) consists of a senior center, a multi -purpose recreation facility, community meeting space and an indoor aquatics facility. A vicinity map of the study area is shown in Figure 1. The study area for this project consisted of the following intersections: • Shady Oaks Drive and FM 1709 • Unity Way and Shady Oaks Drive • Unity Way and CRC driveway/northern parking lot entrance • Northern CRC Driveway along Shady Oaks Drive • Southern CRC Driveway along Shady Oaks Drive This analysis assumes complete development of all Phases of the CRC site will be complete in 2018. The following unique elements were included in this study: Figure 1: Map of Study Area Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page I Data Collection • Obtained the proposed site plan regarding parking lot layout and number of spaces • Obtained and reviewed the Bicentennial Park Master Plan • Obtained and reviewed previous traffic studies for the Bicentennial Park Complex • Performed a field visit and gathered other relevant information. • Collected traffic counts at a similar facility in North Richland Hills • Collected PM peak hour and Saturday turning movement counts at the study intersection Traffic Analysis • Estimated the number of trips generated by the proposed CRC and assigned the estimated traffic to the street network • Performed capacity analyses for the study intersections within the study area. • Analyzed the impact of the proposed development on the area roadways. Recommendations • Recommended roadway improvements to accommodate projected traffic increases generated by the proposed development. Documentation • Prepared a report documenting the study procedures and results. Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 2 SITE ACCESSIBILITY Site accessibility describes the ease with which vehicles can get to and from a development. A site's accessibility is affected by the geographical location of the development with respect to other activity areas, the roadway system, and physical restraints such as rivers or lakes. The proposed Southlake Community Recreation Center (CRC) is located on the north side of Southlake Boulevard (FM 1709) in the southwest quadrant of the existing Bicentennial park complex between White Chapel Boulevard and Shady Oaks Drive in Southlake, Texas. The site is bordered to the south by retail development along Southlake Boulevard (FM 1709), to the east by the north -south pond/water feature within Bicentennial Park, to the west by Shady Oaks Drive, and to the north by Unity Way, the east -west spine road through Bicentennial Park. The roadways will provide direct access to the site via proposed driveways from Shady Oaks Drive and Unity Way. Three site access points have been shown on Site Plans for the CRC. Two proposed driveways along Shady Oaks Drive and one proposed access point on Unity Way. The southern driveway along Shady Oaks Drive is proposed to provide shared access to the commercial and retail development along FM 1709 south of the site. This driveway would replace an existing driveway to the commercial property. The northern driveway along Shady Oaks Drive is proposed to align with Nightengale Way, a future residential roadway on the west side of Shady Oaks Drive serving the Glenmore residential development that is currently planned. The proposed driveway along Unity Way would align with an existing parking lot access that serves the 300+ space lot north of Unity Way in the northwest quadrant of Bicentennial Park. The existing lane configurations for the study intersections are provided in Figure 3; a brief description of the area roadways is provided below: Southlake Boulevard (FM 1709) — Southlake Parkway (FM 1709) is an arterial roadway extending east -west through the City of Southlake, Texas. Southlake Parkway (FM 1709) is a six -lane divided roadway and has a posted speed limit of 45 mph. There is a hooded median opening serving the Bicentennial Park access roadway east of Shady Oaks Drive. Shady Oaks Drive — Shady Oaks Drive is two-lane, undivided roadway with a posted speed limit of 30 mph. Shady Oaks Drive extends generally north -south from Southlake Parkway (FM 1709) north to Dove Road, through the City of Southlake. Shady Oaks Drive is a 22- foot, asphalt roadway, but expands to a 40-foot, concrete roadway beginning approximately 350 feet north of Southlake Parkway (FM 1709). The proposed access locations and lane configurations for this development at build -out (2018) are provided in Figure 4. With the presence of these roadways in the study area, the proposed development will have good accessibility from all directions. Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 3 Z O 0 H L W N 0� Q> N mW W J D 0 L Z W m W CD r W J D H (n WHITE CHAPEL BOULEVARD u/ Z rn O_ (n ~ O Q -- => C2 H- O u 0 0 Lv Q u7 Li LLJ � O m U Z W a W Z � i Q 0 o CD c �111 z C/-, Z �Q rrrW cn Y Qr 00 0 DW A QU) N W W 1 �I in SN WHJ o i zoa Q z Q I J CD Q (n r H O �D W Z ----------------- ------ - -' �N� W a Q M * OAKS pRNE OAKS r r r CD o > 0 N C SHADY W N(] NX W D Z N o_oor Q A LLIF w m Y Q m'_``' (,� moo C LL�r� U WWZ Qcn ro�nm o�g� C O ~ ~ O J� =w Z 0 — O N maiorn IY IY IY J Z O H U O O C � H Z � w W r J p p � Q cn LLJ J • 0 O m w Y a �'111 0 � ttt z O Q Q� Oo Q U -3�: } LL_ W ----------- 0 (n Q z > 0 =i�ww =N O '—' U � DW A DRIVEWAY 1 < ZO IW W *r �I I _J�� 0J� paZ z Q � �oD J CQa w Ld Q U OUZ LLJ O Q C) Q(n0 wNU J w O D N ooC)f mHw �- } Q Q wWZ Q (n w w i = w > --------------------------------� ------------------------------------------------------------- ----- --------------' ----- O SHADY OAKS DRIVE M J V a C Y X Fr J Z moo IY Q o LL��� C U cn U) w m�SN V W C m H < N 7'Z p 2a orn IY ~ ~ O w � IY Ll z D PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed CRC is being developed in the southwest quadrant of Bicentennial Park. Bicentennial Park is located on the north side of Southlake Boulevard (FM 1709) between White Chapel Boulevard and Shady Oaks Drive. The proposed CRC will be constructed in two phases. Phase I consists of the Senior Center, Community Rooms, and Amphitheater. Construction will begin in August 2014 and will be completed in August 2015. Phase II, if approved by voters, will consists of the fitness center, indoor aquatics facility, indoor playground and other amenities. Phase II is projected to begin construction in the summer of 2016. This study has assumed that both phases will be ultimately be constructed and will be operational by 2018. A preliminary site plan for this development is provided in Figure 4. BALL FIELDS Figure 4: Preliminary CRC Site Plan k _.. BICEN ALfua LMlll4 -9RICCiE/ q41 M09id srrnox GAK DRIYE Bicentennial Park is located on approximately 75 acres total and consists of numerous amenities including: Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 6 • regular baseball/softball diamonds, • tennis courts, • walking/jogging trails, • multiple playgrounds, and • an outdoor hockey court. A more conceptual figure depicting the entire Bicentennial Park Master Plan is shown in Figure 5. The connection to White Chapel Boulevard is currently under construction, along with other improvements within the park itself. The Master Plan image below shows the location of the CRC in relation to other portions of the park. It is important to note that the proposed CRC occupies a portion of Bicentennial Park that was previously considered for a 2,000 seat baseball stadium. This stadium facility was included in previous traffic studies for the park conducted in 2008. The CRC will likely generate less trips during a peak period than the previous conceptual baseball stadium land use. Figure 5: Conceptual Master Plan Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 7 The number of vehicle trips generated by the proposed development at build -out are often estimated based on the trip generation rates and equations provided in the publication entitled Trip Generation, Ninth Edition, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The Recreational Community Center (Land Use 495) land use in ITE Trip Generation may be somewhat similar to the proposed CRC. The land use description from ITE is quoted below: "Recreational community centers are stand-alone public facilities similar to and including YMCAs. These facilities often include classes and clubs for adults and children; a day care or nursery school; meeting rooms; swimming pools and whirlpools; saunas; tennis, racquetball, handball, basketball and volleyball courts; outdoor athletic fields/courts; exercise classes; weightlifting and gymnastics equipment; locker rooms; and a restaurant or snack bar." The ITE trip generation rates for Recreational Community Center are shown in Table 1. Table 1: ITE Trip Generation Rates for ITE Recreational Community Center Land Use Rates' ITE Average AM Peak PM Peak Saturday Saturday Description Code Weekday Hour Hour Daily Peak Hour Recreational Community Center 495 T = 33.82*X T = 2.05*X T = 2.74*X T = 9.1 *X T = 1.07*X 50% in / 66% in / 49% in / 50% in / 54% in / Directional Splits 50% out 34 /o out 51 /o out 50% out 46 /o out 'T = Trips Ends; X = 1,000 square feet Based on the size of the CRC, the number of trips predicted to be generated on a weekday and a Saturday were estimated and are shown in Table 2. Table 2: ITE Estimated Trip Generation Size Average Weekday AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total 104,000 ftZ 1,759 1,759 3,518 141 72 213 140 145 285 Saturday Daily Saturday Peak Hour Out Total In Out Total R60In 473 473 946 51 111 While similar, the proposed CRC is twice as large as the average center in the ITE dataset. The CRC also may have elements that are not typical of previously studied centers. In addition to reviewing ITE trip generation data, Lee Engineering also documented trip generation characteristics at the North Richland Hills Rec Center which is very similar in size and scope to the proposed Southlake CRC. Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 8 Traffic counts were collected at the North Richland Hills Rec Center for a Saturday through a Tuesday interval allowing the number of trips occurring both on a typical weekday (Tuesday) as well as a Saturday to be quantified. According to information on the City of North Richland Hills website, the Rec Center is approximately 86,000 square feet in size. The trip data collected and the resulting trip generation calculations are summarized in the following tables — Table 3 and Table 4. Table 3: NRH Recreation and Senior Center Count Data Size Average Weekday AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total 86,000 ft2 792 874 1 1,666 69 62 131 76 66 142 Saturday Daily Saturday Peak Hour In Out Total In Out]1�5 al 456 490 946 87 71 3 Table 4: Trip generation Rates based on NRH Count Data Land Use Calculated Trip Rates' Description Size Average AM Peak PM Peak Saturday Saturday Weekday Hour Hour Daily Peak Hour NRH Recreation and 86,000 ft2 T = 19.37*X T = 1.52*X T = 1.65*X T = 11.0*X T = 1.78*X Senior Center Directional Splits 50% in / 53% in / 54% in / 50% in / 54% in / 50% out2 47% out 46% out 50% out2 46% out 1 — T = trip ends; X = 1,000 square feet 2 —Directional splits for Average Weekday and Saturday Daily are assumed to be 50% in and 50% out. Actual splits for both weekday and Saturday were 48% in and 52% out over the 24 hour period. All hourly splits reflects actual collected NRH count data A comparison of the ITE and NRH based trip generation rates appears in the Table below. The higher trip rate for each trip generation time period is shaded. Table 5: Comparison of Trip Generation Rates Land Use Trip Rates' Average AM Peak PM Peak Saturday Saturday Description Weekday Hour Hour Daily Peak Hour ITE Trip Rates — Recreational T = 33.82*X T = 2.05*X T = 2.74*X T = 9.1 *X T = 1.07*X Community Center NRH Recreation and Senior Center T = 19.37*X T = 1.52*X T = 1.65*X T = 11.0*X T = 1.78*X As shown in Table 5, the weekday and AM/PM peak hour trip generation rates surveyed in ITE Trip Generation are higher than those calculated based on our NRH count data. However; the Saturday Daily and Peak Hour rates are higher in the NRH data set than the ITE data. The shaded cells depict Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 9 the rates used for the trip generation for the Southlake Community Recreation Center. The number of trips generated by the CRC development were generated using the trip rates shaded along with the corresponding directional splits to obtain the trip generation estimate for the Southlake CRC. The calculated trips for the 104,000 square foot Southlake Community Recreation Center are shown in Table 6. Table 6: Estimated Trip Generation for Southlake CRC Size Average Weekday AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total 104,000 ftz 1,759 1,759 3,518 141 72 213 140 145 285 Saturday Daily Saturday Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total 572 572 1,144 100 85 185 Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 10 TRAFFIC VOLUMES EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES. Turning movement counts were collected at the intersections of • Shady Oaks Drive and FM 1709 Unity Way and Shady Oaks Drive Unity Way and the northern parking lot drive (future CRC intersection) Bicentennial Park entrance from FM 1709 Weekday PM Peak hour counts were collected on May 5, 2014 at the study intersections. The weekday PM peak hour counts were collected between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM. Saturday peak period turning movements were collected on March 22, 2014 at the study intersections. These counts were collected on the opening day of spring baseball at the park. Based on discussions with BRS, this is traditionally a heavy traffic day at the park complex. The counts were collected between 10:00 AM and 12:00 PM. The raw count volumes are included in the Appendix. The existing traffic volumes are shown in Figure 6. PROJECTED BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES TxDOT annual count map information in general vicinity of the site shows steady volumes over the past five years. This growth rate is based on historical growth on Southlake Boulevard (FM 1709) in the vicinity of White Chapel Boulevard located east of the Bicentennial park complex. These historical volumes were obtained from TxDOT traffic count maps and are shown in Table 8 using the most recent five years (2008-2012) of traffic data. Table 7: Historical Daily Traffic Volumes on Southlake Boulevard (FM 1709) Year Daily Traffic Volumes 2008 43000 2009 46000 2010 41000 2011 39000 2012 41000 While the historical counts show little growth over the last few years the analysis has assumed that the 2014 volumes will grow at a rate of annual rate of two (2) percent. The two (2) percent growth rate was then applied to the existing turning movement counts for both the PM and Saturday peak Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 11 hours in order to grow the background traffic from the existing year (2014) condition to the build out year of 2018. The background build -out year (2018) traffic volumes are shown in Figure 7. Turning Volumes for Nightengale Way (the proposed roadway serving the anticipated residential development opposite Driveway 2) were obtained from the traffic study for the Glenmore Development dated 10/28/2013. 171:7prom 0 to) 0M07130t'lI1IaI 0I1z1 For the Southlake Community Recreation Center the directional distribution of traffic entering and leaving the various access points was developed based on the layout of the development, locations of principal roadways, a review of existing traffic counts in the vicinity of the study, and previous studies conducted for the Bicentennial Park Complex. The trip distribution assumed under build -out conditions is shown in Figure 8. SITE TRAFFIC VOLUMES The estimated site generated traffic volumes for the PM and Saturday peak hours under build -out conditions were assigned to the area roadways and site access points based on the directional distribution identified in Figure 8. The estimated PM and Saturday peak hour site generated traffic volumes for build -out of the Bicentennial Park are provided in Figure 9. TOTAL TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AT SITE BUILDOUT Total traffic conditions at build -out of the Southlake CRC were obtained by adding the projected background traffic volumes from Figure 7 to the site generated traffic volumes from Figure 8. The estimated total traffic volumes (background + site) are shown for the PM and Saturday peak periods in Figure 10. Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 12 w Z O —) Q U � U U O N �-Z O n g CO p H 00 p W Z Z < Q L J Ld J H D O — LL (n m LU N � � N V (n Mc0 t0 N .' 1 34 (69) 1 F- n no V N N cn O Z Z O U Q W I— i � Z W -1 �W O DW A > (24) 6 48 '1 T I W N CD (75) o CD z z U Un Z H I 1 x z I W I � o O �m L 36 (1) 7 (1) L. r 35 (9) ---- M M M� <27 (29) M N (83) 99 --t *1} F- 4 4— 163 (101) (2) 3 � o � o M 35 (37) 169 (89)� OAKS DRIVE ' SHADY c N U M� C Y rr Q A LL W IY O W O C 05¢C m`norn IY u w Z O -) Q U � U U O (wn —==z::Y-Z W W H 0 O p J W H � O — LL (n m LU N M O M (n [O T (0 N .' 1 37 (75) - 1 N ..h vO W M � J 00 O O N 0 S Z Q O 26) 6 tj DRIVEWAY 1 W Q 81> 52 @� i O m O Z Q M Q Q I, W } Q -3�: W W I � p LLj O N� p m 39 (1) ONN ~ 8 (1) L J II . 38 (10) r ion 4 205 (140) no MM 29 (31) tJ L. i 205 (140) 18 (18) (90) 107 } * F- 4 4— 176 (109) (2) 92) 3 117 oo^ ` � (154) 224 dO NM 38 (40) 213 (143) 1 (1)� o N N(ON 183 (96)� r � c? OAKS DRIVE SHADY w �u J `y (D Z Q ALL ,■ W IY LL ~ M z oFg� V 05¢1. C �Zno. IY IY Ll _ z � w a L Ln O U X O cn F-- 1 � 00 o H r O o Z Z LLJ Z R W 0 W J \ D cn 0 0 LP of LL • N > w M J D O m Ld Q O J � u) 0 z 0 lo% T e m N C / Hti 0 N L (25L) i z r DRIVEWAY 1 W U W 0 L < U o r i LIJ H N U M b I a 3: a 3 o W _> W > L R N L25/ M .J L. � r M M L 35% I i -- - N )o% l )o% (35 .) - ? r 4 4— (3%) (35%) n ♦— LC) 3% ? f (45/.) 2% � 8'/.) —► � �♦ 3% Ln OAKS DRIVE M SHAD,( W N N L% J \ v rn r Nx Q A LL z w Ln w IY LL r M Z Ln oujg- V 05<� C 2uno'. IY IY Ll Z O w J Q U cn rn U (n O cwn O o F- o z z o 0 o N w z -- M a J J H cn O 07 LL • W Y Q 2 H O 0 U7 v �' 1 N I j 0 (0) o 14 (10) 0 r LLJ D N 0 O > QW ` U N LL n L 36 (21) LL tJ �► 0 (oil) i 15 (93 Q W t r DRIVEWAY 1 CD ~ � I N ! W W �_ Q I U LLJ 6 I a a a_ w 3: W _> _> N M rn � t V n L35 (25) L 49 (35) s� l �► �63 (25) L14 (10) i 14 (10) 51 (30)- ? - r 4 4 (3) 0 (0) 51 (30)� 4 (3) --t ? 66 (38)� rn r 3 (2) 12 (7) —► 4 (3) OAKS DRIVE r -3- � M SHAD,( N N _j J Q M � C X Z w T Y N � A LL w 1Y moo IY LL H M z oFg� V 05¢1. C �Zno. IY u w Z 0 J Q U cn rn U C) O (wn 0 a O o w Z 0 0 LO o N z Q L w r w J a D — (n 07 LL- • Ld Y Q 2 H V M N OA W N .' 1 W 37 (75) f Cn N r N } if1 NLL r � D Y O Q c /LLJ LL y U --------- 00 m h�N �ti a°0n L36 (26) O N .J 1 L. *--0 (0) (/) ,F-15 (9) W [DRIVEWAY � 1 Q (811)) 52 LLJ J — i O i � U r I i LL- D j a a w > w > m I— 0 0 Q ��N om CNN L 39 (1) 0 O con L36 (25) .J i 38 (10) �� r L 49 (35) sj 1 �268 (185) aN L .J L. 43 (41)+ �— 219 (150) 18 (18) (120) 158 } * F" 41 4 4— 180 (112) 0 (0) ( 12 2) 3 168 4 (3) -} *1 r 290 (192)� Z � o M 41 (42)--� 225 (150) —► 1 (ll om� 187 r � OAKS DRIVE M SHADY W N N J Q M � X Z Y N � A LL w T w 1Y moo IY :D LL�p~M z oFg� V 05¢1. C �Zno. IY IY Ll CAPACITY ANALYSES The Level of Service (LOS) of an intersection is a qualitative measure of capacity and operating conditions and is directly related to vehicle delay. The LOS criteria for a signalized intersection are shown in Table 8. The LOS criteria for an unsignalized intersection are shown in Table 9. LOS is given a letter designation from A to F, with LOS A representing very short delays and LOS F representing very long delays. Table 8: Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections Level -of -Service Average Control Delay Description (LOS) (seconds/vehicle) Very low vehicle delays, free flow, signal progression A < 10.0 extremely favorable, most vehicles arrive during given signal phase. B 10.1 to 20.0 Good signal progression, more vehicles stop and experience higher delays than for LOS A. C 20.1 to 35.0 Stable flow, fair signal progression, significant number of vehicles stop at signals. D 35.1 to 55.0 Congestion noticeable, longer delays and unfavorable signal progression, many vehicles stop at signals. Limit of acceptable delay, unstable flow, poor signal E 55.1 to 80.0 progression, traffic near roadway capacity, frequent cycle failures. F > 80.0 Unacceptable delays, extremely unstable flow and congestion, traffic exceeds roadway capacity, stop -and -go conditions. SOURCE: Highway Capacity Manual, HCM 2010, Transportation Research Board, 2010 The intersection lane configurations provided in Figure 3 and Figure 4 were used for these analyses. The intersection capacity analysis results for these intersections are provided in the following sections. Traffic analyses were conducted for the existing intersections and the 2014 traffic volumes. The analyses was conducted using the Synchro traffic analysis package. For the signalized intersection, existing cycle lengths and splits were utilized and the intersection was included in the FM 1709 coordinated signal system. Analyses were conducted under existing conditions (2014), background conditions at build -out (2018), and background + site (total traffic) conditions in 2018. Table 10 presents the signalized intersection analyses for Shady Oaks at Southlake Boulevard (FM 1709). Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 18 Table 9: Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Level -of -Service Average Control Delay Description (LOS) (seconds/vehicle) No delays at intersections with continuous flow of traffic. A < 10.0 Uncongested operations: high frequency of long gaps available for all left and right turning traffic. No observable queues. No delays at intersections with continuous flow of traffic. B 10.1 to 15.0 Uncongested operations: high frequency of long gaps available for all left and right turning traffic. No observable queues. C 15.1 to 25.0 Moderate delays at intersections with satisfactory to good traffic flow. Light congestion; infrequent backups on critical approaches. Increased probability of delays along every approach. Significant D 25.1 to 35.0 congestion on critical approaches, but intersection functional. No standing long lines formed. Heavy traffic flow condition. Heavy delays probable. No F.. 35.1 to 50.0 available gaps for cross -street traffic or main street turning traffic. Limit of stable flow. Unstable traffic flow. Heavy congestion. Traffic moves in forced F > 50.0 flow condition. Average delays greater than one minute highly probable. Total breakdown. SOURCE: Highway Capacity Manual, HCM2010, Transportation Research Board, 2010. Table 10: Capacity Analysis Results for the Shady Oaks at FM 1709 Signal Shady Oaks at FM 1709 (Signalized) Traffic Condition Peak Hour Intersection' EB WB NB SB PM 14.1 (B) 9.6 (A) 8.6 (A) 132.9 (F) 47.2 (D) Existing (2014) SAT 10.0 (A) 4.4 (A) 13.8 (B) 25.5 (C) 33.6 (C) Build -Out Year PM 18.2 (B) 11.1 (B) 15.4 (B) 124.5 (F) 46.6 (D) SAT 10.5 (B) 5.0 (A) 14.2 (B) 24.5 (C) 33.8 (C) (2018) Background Build -Out (2018) PM 27.8 (C) 14.9 (B) 19.6 (B) 265.5 (F) 74.5 (E) SAT 12. (B) 6.0 (A) 15.4 (B) 24.1 (C) 36.2 (D) Total 1 Delay in seconds/vehicle (Level of Service) Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center - Southlake, Texas Page 19 The existing northbound approach fails during the PM peak hour. This is a low volume single lane approach and poor operational performance is common for a cross street on a coordinated arterial. Based on the growth of traffic on the southbound approach and eastbound left turn at the intersection due to the CRC traffic, this intersection will require minor signal timing adjustments after the CRC is fully operational in order to improve performance. The existing unsignalized intersections analyzed are presented in Table 11. The proposed driveway 1 ties into an existing intersection along Unity Way. Table 11: Capacity Analysis Results for the existing unsignalized intersections FM 1709 AT BICENTENNIAL PARK DRIVE (TWSC) Traffic Condition Peak Hour Intersection'° EB Left WB NB SB Existing (2014) PM --- 45.6 (E) 0.0 (A) --- 21.4 (C) SAT --- 17.2 (C) 0.0 (A) --- 13.7 (B) Build -Out Year (2018) Background PM --- 63.4 (F) 0.0 (A) --- 24.4 (C) SAT --- 19.5 (C) 0.0 (A) --- 14.6 (B) Build -Out (2018) Total PM --- 64.6 (F) 0.0 (A) --- 24.4 (C) SAT --- 19.7 (C) 0.0 (A) --- 14.6 (B) Shady Oaks Drive at Unity Way (TWSC) Traffic Condition Peak Hour Intersection EB WB NB SB Left Existing (2014) PM --- --- 11.2 (B) 0.0 (A) 2.1 (A) SAT --- --- 11.0 (B) 0.0 (A) 2.6 (A) Build -Out Year (2018) Background PM --- --- 11.6 (B) 0.0 (A) 2.2 (A) SAT --- --- 11.3 (B) 0.0 (A) 2.7 (A) Build -Out (2018) Total PM --- --- 12.4 (B) 0.0 (A) 2.3 (A) SAT --- --- 11.7 (B) 0.0 (A) 2.7 (A) Unity Way at Driveway 1 (AWSC) Traffic Condition Peak Hour Intersection EB WB NB SB Existing (2014) PM 7.4 (A) 7.5 (A) 7.4 (A) --- 7.2 (A) SAT 7.7 (A) 7.7 (A) 7.5 (A) --- 7.8 (A) Build -Out Year (2018) Background PM 7.5 (A) 7.6 (A) 7.5 (A) --- 7.3 (A) SAT 7.8 (A) 7.8 (A) 7.6 (A) --- 8.0 (A) Build -Out (2018) Total PM 7.7 (A) 7.6 (A) 8.1 (A) 7.5 (A) 7.5 (A) SAT 8.0 (A) 7.8 (A) 8.1 (A) 7.5 (A) 8.2 (A) 1 Delay in seconds/vehicle (Level of Service) 2 Intersection level delay is not included in the two way stop methodology Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center - Southlake, Texas Page 20 Based on the analyses, no major operation problems are predicted at any of the existing unsignalized intersections. The eastbound left turn from FM 1709 experiences LOS F operation due to the very high westbound through movements along FM 1709 during the PM peak period. The two proposed driveways to the Southlake CRC along Shady Oaks are shown in Table 12. Based on the analyses, no operational problems are predicted along Shady Oaks Drive. Table 12: Capacity Analyses results for the proposed driveways on Shady Oaks Shady Oaks at Nightengale Way/ Driveway 2 - Northern CRC Drive (TWSC) Traffic Condition Peak Intersection'° EB WB NB SB Hour Build -Out Year PM --- 9.8 (A) --- 0.7 (A) 0.0 (A) (2018) Background SAT --- 9.3 (A) --- 1.0 (A) 0.0 (A) Build -Out (2018) PM --- 10.0 (A) 14.5 (B) 0.6 (A) 0.2 (A) SAT --- 9.4 (A) 11.8 (B) 0.8 (A) 0.2 (A) Total Shady Oaks Drive at Driveway 3 (TWSC) Traffic Condition Hot r Intersection EB WB NB SB Left Build -Out (2018) PM --- --- 14.0 (B) 0.0 (A) 0.0( SAT --- --- 11.5 (B) 0.0 (A) 0.0 (A) Total 1 Delay in seconds/vehicle (Level of Service) 2 Intersection level delay is not included in the two way stop methodology 3 This driveway appears in the background analysis in 2018 due to the Nightengale Way leg of the intersection serving the Glenmore residential development to the west of Shady Oaks. Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 21 TURN LANE ANALYSIS An auxiliary lane is defined as the portion of the roadway adjoining the traveled way for speed change, turning, and provides storage for turning, weaving, truck climbing, and other purposes supplementary to through -traffic movement. For the purposes of this analysis, auxiliary lanes are defined as right turn lanes and left turn lanes. The two proposed access points along Shady Oaks were evaluated for left and right turn lane needs. Each intersection was evaluated based on the projected traffic volumes for the analysis year (2018). LEFT TURN LANE ANALYSIS The City of Southlake driveway ordinance recommends left turn lanes when the cross product of the left turn volume and the opposing approach volume exceed 25,000. Table 12 shows the results of the analysis. Table 13: Left Turn Bay Demand Left Turn Opposing Cross Study Intersection Approach Volume Approach Product Volume > 25,000 2 (Northern CRC) SB 4 268 NO -Driveway Driveway 2 (Northern CRC) NB 18 230 NO Driveway 3 SB 0 304 NO The southbound left turn into driveway 3 would require approximately 80 left turns per hour before the cross product exceeded the guideline value of 25,000. Based on the results shown in Table 13, as well as the capacity analysis already presented, no left turn lanes are necessary along Shady Oaks Drive at the two new CRC driveways. RIGHT TURN LANE ANALYSIS The City of Southlake driveway ordinance requires a right -turn lane when the right -turn volume is predicted to be greater than 50 vehicles during the design hour. Table 14: Right Turn Bay Demand Right Turn Exceeds Study Intersection Approach Threshol Volume d Driveway 2 orthern CRC SB 1 NO Driveway 2 (Northern CRC) NB 1 49 1 NO Driveway 3 NB 1 36 1 NO Driveway 2 serves as the primary entry to the proposed Southlake Community Recreation Center. This will be the primary entryway and provides access to all parking areas on the site. This entryway was shown with a right turn lane in the site plan analyzed and the right turn lane was Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 22 included in the capacity analyses. Though the threshold is not exceeded, the predicted turn volume is only one (1) vehicle below the threshold and Lee Engineering recommends construction of a right - turn lane at this driveway. Because Driveway 3 will likely be a shared access point with the existing commercial developments south of the site it is likely that the northbound right turn lane threshold is exceeded at this location. However; due to lack of available right of way, the parallel trail, and parking near the existing right of way, a right turn lane into to proposed driveway 3 is unlikely to be feasible. For this reason we recommend that a right turn lane not be constructed at Driveway 3. Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 23 PARKING ASSESSMENT The CRC is proposed to have approximately 193 parking spaces in Phase I with an additional 104 being constructed with Phase II. This would provide a total of 297 spaces. This would provide a ratio of 2.86 spaces per 1,000 square feet of space in the CRC. The Institute of Transportation Engineer's publication Parking Generation, 4ih Edition, includes minimal data for Land Use 495 — Recreation Community Center. The data set for this land use contains six (6) suburban samples. For the six reported samples, the parking demand exhibited considerable variability and ranged from 1.4 vehicles per 1,000 sq.ft of floor area to 7.38 vehicles per 1,000 sq.ft. The average parking demand in the data sample was 3.2 vehicles per 1,000 square feet. If the CRC operated with similar average demand of 3.2 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft then approximately 333 parking spaces would be necessary. Though the CRC is projected to have 297 spaces, the Bicentennial Park Complex has parking available for any overflow from the CRC. Within the Bicentennial Park Complex there are an additional 922 parking spaces available for use. The two closest lots to the CRC, immediately north across Unity Way, and to the east across the pond, provide approximately 332 and 248 spaces available in close proximity to the CRC for overflow purposes. The majority of these spaces are less than 1,000 feet from the CRC. The outdoor amphitheater is expected to host occasional special events. For a special event an average auto occupancy of 2.5 persons per vehicle to 3.5 persons per vehicle would typically be assumed. For an event with 400 to 600 people in attendance would likely result in 170 to 240 vehicles. An event with 1,000 people in attendance may result in 285-400 vehicles. Again, there is ample parking within the Bicentennial park Complex to absorb this number of vehicles. As with any type of special event facility, it will be necessary to coordinate events so that an major amphitheater event does not overlap with a major baseball or tennis tournament where the overflow parking would be needed for both users. Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 24 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Lee Engineering makes the following conclusions based on the data collected and analyses performed: • The site is predicted to generate 3,518 trips on a daily basis and 1,144 on a Saturday. During the weekday PM peak hour the site is predicted to generate 285 trips —140 entering and 145 exiting. During the Saturday peak hour the site is predicted to generate 185 trips — 100 entering and 85 exiting. • The site appears to be slightly underparked based on available parking demand data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers, as well as parking supply data for similar facilities provided by the architect. However; over 500 parking spaces are available for overflow purposes within Bicentennial Park within 1,000 feet of the site. • No significant operational issues were predicted by capacity analyses at any of the existing unsignalized intersections or at the two proposed access points along Shady Oaks Drive. • The Shady oaks Drive at FM 1709 signal will likely require signal timing adjustements due to traffic generated by the site. • Lee Engineering has assumed that All Way Stop Control will be in place at the intersection of Unity Drive and Driveway 1. Recommendations from previous studies As part of this study effort, Lee Engineering reviewed previous studies for the Bicentennial Park to determine if any recommendations in those studies would impact the Southlake Community Recreation Center site. A previous analysis was completed to determine the potential for cut through traffic along Unity Way between Shady oaks and White Chapel Boulevard. Previous studies recommended that multi - way stops be installed at each parking lot intersection along Unity Way, and that raised crosswalks be installed at any mid -block pedestrian crossing location. • Based on these previous recommendations, Lee Engineering has assumed for the purposes of this study that the Unity Way and CRC northern driveway (Driveway 1) would be all -way stop controlled. Lee Engineering recommends it be an all way stop. Lee Engineering also recommends that the raised crossings considered in previous studies of the park be considered at this location. The all way stop would facilitate pedestrian crossings at this location along with discouraging the use of Unity Way as a cut -through route to White Chapel Boulevard. Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 25 Recommendations from this study Based on the data collected and analyses performed, Lee Engineering makes the following recommendations to accommodate traffic related to the Southlake Community Recreation Center • The southernmost driveway to the CRC along Shady oaks Drive should be shared with the adjacent retail development to the site. This will likely require closure of the existing retail driveway and construction of a shared access for the two sites. This will minimize driveways in the vicinity of the signalized intersection. • At the northernmost driveway to the CRC along Shady Oaks, Driveway 2 opposite the proposed Nightengale Way, a northbound right -turn lane should be constructed to facilitate right -turns and to emphasize this entry as the preferred primary entrance to the site. • The traffic signal timing at Shady Oaks Drive and Southlake Boulevard should be adjusted to accommodate changes in volumes related to the operation of the Southlake CRC. Timing adjustments will be necessary after Phase 1 is operational and then again after Phase 2 is operational. As with any traffic signal, volumes should be monitored to determine if any additional adjustments are necessary. • The City of Southlake will need to coordinate special event and althetic tournament schedules so that a major sporting event does not occur in Bicentennial park at the same time as a major event at the Community Recreation Center. The CRC will likely require the overflow parking capacity of Bicentennial Park during some events. Thus coordination between the entities will be necessary. It is important to point out that major events at Bicentennial Park will also likely take advantage of the overflow capacity of the CRC parking areas. • No other roadway improvements are necessary to accommodate the estimated Southlake Community Recreation Center traffic volumes. Traffic Impact Analysis for Community Recreation Center — Southlake, Texas Page 26