HomeMy WebLinkAboutTraffic Impact StudyBUCKINGHAM PROPERTIES, INC.
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
CARMEL, INDIANA
5 APRIL 1999
Prepared for:
Buckingham Properties, Inc.
Prepared By:
Pflum, Klausmeier Gehrum Consultants, Inc.
47 South Pennsylvania Street, 9 Floor
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 -3622
317.636.1552
Cincinnati, Ohio Hudson, Ohio Charleston, West Virginia
Pflum,
Klausmeier Gehrum
Consultants
April 5, 1999
Ms. Lynette Williams
Development Associate
Buckingham Properties, Inc.
333 North Pennsylvania Street, 10th Floor
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
Re: Transportation Impact Study
Old Meridian Development
Carmel, Indiana
Dear Ms. Williams:
This is to transmit ten (10) copies of our Transportation Impact Study and its separately bound
Technical Appendix for the above referenced project.
We have found that there are current traffic operational deficiencies during the peak hours along
U.S. 31 and Old Meridian Street. However, we have learned that the City of Carmel and the
Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) intend to make improvements to US 31 and Old
Meridian Street. The improvements are intended to address the current and anticipated traffic
demands, including the development of the subject parcel, eight other vacant parcels included in
the study, and increases in background traffic.
Please let us know if we can answer any questions you might have, or to clarify any items for you and
the City of Carmel, Department of Community Services.
Sincerely,
PFLUM, KLAUSMEIER GEHRUM CONSULTANTS, INC.
Jennifer A. Pyrz
Enclosures
#3009
47 South
Pennsylvania
Street, 9th Floor
Indianapolis, IN
46204 -3622
Tel: 317.636.1552
Fax: 317.636.1345
Engineering
Planning
Landscape Architecture
General Partners:
John E. Pflum, PE
James P. Klausmeier, PE
John E. Gehrum
Offices:
Cincinnati, OH
Indianapolis, IN
Hudson, OH
Glasgow, Scotland
INTRODUCTION 2
EXISTING CONDITIONS 4
DESCRIPTION OF ANTICIPATED DEVELOPMENT AND
CONTEMPLATED IMPROVEMENTS 6
TRAFFIC GENERATION 7
Internal Capture Rate 7
Pass -By Trips 9
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT 11
FUTURE CONDITIONS 12
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13
Current Traffic with Existing Roadway and Intersection Configurations 13
Future Traffic with Existing Roadway and Intersection Configurations 14
Future Traffic with Anticipated Roadway and Intersection Configurations 15
15
Mitigation
TABLE OF CONTENTS
#3009
PREPARER QUALIFICATIONS
I certify that this Transportation Impact Study has been prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of traffic and transportation
engineering.
No. %%/31.
14798 Lc
d
STATE OF
/4 /0 NAL
James P. Klausmeier, P.E.
Indiana Registration 14798
Pflum, Klausmeier Gehrum Consultants, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
Buckingham Properties, Inc. of Indianapolis, Indiana is proposing to develop 28 acres of a 41 -acre
site in Carmel, Indiana. The study area is located along the east side of Old Meridian Street,
between Carmel Drive and West Main Street as shown in the location map, Figure 1. The
development will likely consist of a mix of multi- family residential, and office, hotel, retail, and
restaurant development arranged in a village -like setting. Although the specific site plan has not
been finalized, a hypothetical development has been assumed for purposes of this TIS. The
development mix assumed herein is the best estimate of proposed land use available at the time the
study was undertaken.
Based on guidelines developed by the City of Carmel, Department of Community Services, the
following four intersections were analyzed:
1. West Main Street and Old Meridian Street
2. West Carmel Drive and Old Meridian Street
3. Pennsylvania Road and West Carmel Drive
4. West Carmel Drive and US 31
The existing conditions of each intersection were determined, and using procedures outlined in the
Applicant's Guide, Transportation Impact Studies for Proposed Development, adopted by the City
of Carmel Resolution 021892, 2/18/92, the following scenarios were developed and analyzed:
Scenario A: Existing Conditions
Scenario B: Development proposed by Buckingham Properties plus existing traffic and
background growth
Scenario C: Development proposed by others on nearby sites plus existing traffic and
background growth
Scenario D: Developments proposed by Buckingham and others plus existing traffic and
background growth
Scenario E: Developments proposed by others plus existing traffic and background growth
and the subject site As Zoned
2
A background growth rate of 3% per year was used for Scenarios B, C, D and E to approximate
Year 2009 conditions. Zoned buildout of eight vacant properties as indicated by the City of
Carmel Department of Community Services was assumed in Scenarios C, D, and E.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Turning movement traffic counts at each of the four intersections were conducted during morning
and evening peak hours in March 1999 as part of the analysis of existing conditions.
Intersection capacity analyses were then conducted for AM and PM peak hour conditions at each
of the four study intersections. The Highway Capacity Software (HCS) was used to produce Level
of Service (LOS) ratings for each traffic movement or combined traffic movement (if a lane is
shared)'. These LOS ratings are measured in terms of average control delay, where delay is a
measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and lost travel time. The term
"control" refers to the inclusion of deceleration delay, queue move -up time, stopped delay, and
acceleration delay in the final delay measure. LOS A is the best operating condition, and LOS F
has the longest delays, therefore being the worst operating condition. LOS ratings of D or better
during the peak hours are acceptable in many municipal settings. The city of Carmel, Indiana has
set a standard goal of LOS ratings of C or better during peak hours.
Table 1 provides the criteria for the various LOS ratings for a signalized intersection in terms of
control delay. Table 2 provides the LOS criteria for unsignalized intersections. Table 3 provides
the LOS results for existing AM and PM peak hours at each intersection in the study area.
LOS results are based upon the peak hour of an average weekday. These LOS results will occur
during the peak hours, and will improve during the remainder of the day.
The Highway Capacity Software (HCS) program is associated with the latest release of the Highway
Capacity Manual (HCM) as published by the Transportation Research Board.
4
It is important to note that the LOS analysis for the intersection of Pennsylvania Road and Carmel
Drive does not account for the congestion at the adjacent intersection of US 31 and Carmel Drive.
During the PM peak hour, westbound left turning vehicles at US 31 and Carmel Drive currently
queue back through the intersection of Pennsylvania Road and Carmel Drive. Because of this
situation, vehicles at the intersection of Pennsylvania Road and Carmel Drive will actually be
experiencing lower levels of service than the computer software is indicating (see Table 3).
DESCRIPTION OF ANTICIPATED DEVELOPMENT AND CONTEMPLATED IMPROVEMENTS
The study area to be developed consists of multiple uses including multi family residential units,
offices, retail, a hotel, and restaurants arranged in a village -like setting. Although the site layout is
conceptual, it has been hypothetically quantified for this study as shown in Table 4. In addition,
eight other nearby undeveloped sites were included in this study as though they were developed as
currently zoned.
Roadway improvement projects are also being planned by both the Indiana Department of
Transportation (INDOT) and the City of Carmel. With buildout of the subject site estimated for
the year 2009, it is possible that many of the following improvements will be either completed or
under construction before site development is concluded.
In March 1997 a Major Investment Study (MIS) of US 31 in Hamilton County, Indiana was
completed by the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) The MIS examined the US 31
corridor between I -465 and 196th Street; approximately 11 miles of highway that directly affects
traffic patterns and access issues at the proposed development. Nine alternatives were analyzed,
two of which considered an upgrade of the existing facility to urban freeway standards, with the
remaining seven considering realignment. The MIS concluded that US 31 should be upgraded to
urban freeway standards between 103rd Street and 196th Street, and possibly further south through
the I -465 interchange. The existing intersection of US 31 and West Carmel Drive would be
upgraded to an urban interchange (grade- separated) under this proposal, with US 31 carrying eight
(8) lanes of traffic. In conjunction with this upgrade, the MIS recommends a "frontage road"
system that includes widening Pennsylvania Road to four lanes between 103rd Street and 131st
Street. The entire project has recently been added to INDOT's Capital Improvement Program, and
'US 31, Hamilton County Major Investment Study Summary Report, March 1997
a contract is being negotiated with a consultant for environmental work. At present, construction
is expected to begin in the year 2007. There is no known timetable for when construction would
begin at the West Carmel Drive 126th Street interchange.
Old Meridian Street improvements are being planned by the City of Carmel as well, although no
specific intersection configurations or roadway characteristics have yet been determined. In a
March 30, 1999 telephone conversation with Mr. Mark Orton, a representative of the engineering
firm Butler, Fairman and Seufert, Inc., it was learned that the firm is finalizing a contract with the
City of Carmel to prepare plans for these improvements. The contract will include a large portion
of this study area, including Old Meridian Street and its intersections with West Main Street and
West Carmel Drive.
TRAFFIC GENERATION
Table 4 summarizes the results of the trip generation for the proposed site. All calculations are
included in the separately bound Technical Appendix. The calculations are consistent with the
methodology prescribed by the 6th Edition, Trip Generation as published by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (1997). Traffic volumes were generated assuming buildout of the entire
41 -acre site and the following data and assumptions refer to such a study area. At this time,
Buckingham Properties is seeking to rezone only a portion of this study area encompassing the 28
acres shown by Figure 2.
Internal Capture Rate
Because the proposed study area is to be developed with a mix of uses, it can be expected that a
certain percentage of the generated trips will have both origins and destinations within the site. In
this case, these internal trips will not use any of the four study intersections, but only internal site
drives and roadways. The internal capture rate was calculated using the ITE Trip Generation
Handbook (October 1998) procedure for Multi -Use Developments. Based on studies of actual
multi -use developments, a 15% internal capture rate was calculated for the proposed Buckingham
study area during the PM Peak hour. The capture rate was applied only to office, retail, and
residential sites during the PM peak hour. Internal trips are likely during the AM peak hour as
well, but were not considered due to lack of sufficient data. Calculations are included in the
separately bound Technical Appendix.
7
Pass -By Trips
Pass -by trips are those that make an intermediate stop on the way to another ultimate destination.
The trips are attracted from an adjacent roadway, in this case Old Meridian Street, while passing
by the site. They add traffic to the site driveway traffic, but do not increase volumes on the
adjacent street system.
Table 4
Trip Generation Estimates Proposed Buckingham Development
80 Residential Condominiums plus
6 Live /Work Units (ITE Code 230)
40 Residential Condominiums plus
2 Live /Work Units (ITE Code 230)
450 Low -Rise Apartments
(ITE Code 221)
8,500 SF General Office Building
(ITE Code 710)
3,000 SF General Office Building
(ITE Code 710)
25,000 SF General Office Building
(ITE Code 710)
11,250 SF General Office Building
(ITE Code 710)
140 Room Business Hotel
(ITE Code 312)
6,000 SF High- Turnover (Sit -Down)
Restaurant (ITE Code 832)
6,000 SF High- Turnover (Sit -Down)
Restaurant (ITE Code 832)
25,000 SF Shopping Center
(ITE Code 820)
44,000 SF Shopping Center
(ITE Code 820)
11,250 SF Shopping Center
(ITE Code 820)
Sub -Total
Internal Capture
Pass -By Trips
TOTAL NEW TRIPS
5
2
38
23
10
55
29
48
29
29
43
60
26
397
397
16
4
153
3
1
7
4
33
27
27
27
38
17
357
357
21
6
191
26
11
62
33
81
56
56
70
98
43
12
3
164
15
14
18
16
52
39
39
121
175
71
754 739
-91
-184
9
2
85
74
69
89
76
35
26
26
131
190
77
889
-121
-184
21
5
249
89
83
107
92
87
65
65
252
365
148
1,628
-212
-368
754 1 464 584 1,048
9
Table 5
Pass -By Trip Percentages
and
25,000 SF Shopping Center
44,000 SF Shopping Center
11,250 SF Shopping Center
High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant
y ,Percentage
58%
49%
73
43%
Pass -by trips were calculated using the research and procedure outlined in the ITE Trip Generation
Handbook (October 1998). Based on that procedure, Table 5 shows the pass -by trip percentages
that were calculated for the PM Peak hour. These pass -by trip percentages were applied only to
the external trips made by each land use during the PM peak hour. Calculations are included in the
separately bound Technical Appendix.
The vacant sites to be included in this analysis were dictated by the City of Carmel, Department of
Community Services. Eleven (11) sites in total were to be analyzed, with the Buckingham Site
covering three of these parcels. Traffic generation data was provided by the City for each of the
vacant sites. These volumes were developed as part of another study (unpublished) for the City of
Carmel, conducted by A &F Engineering. Table 6 provides the trip generation from each of these
vacant parcels.
The Buckingham site covers three currently vacant parcels. Table 7 lists the existing zoning for
each of these parcels and the estimated trips that would be generated if the parcels were to be
developed as zoned.
10
Table 6
Trip Generation Estimates Vacant Properties
Parcel 63 46 Multi Family
Residential Units
Parcel 78 500,000 SF Office
Parcel 82 104 Multi Family
Residential Units
Parcel 83 115,000 SF Business Park
Parcel 87 87,000 SF Retail
Parcel 88 146,000 SF Retail
Parcel 98 82,000 Retail and 100
Room Hotel
Parcel 99 259,500 SF Office
TOTAL
6
594
13
154
94
128
112
357
1,458
20
103
41
27
55
75
71
46
438
26
697
54
181
149
203
183
403
1,896
20
103
42
42
300
418
288
64
1,277
12
505
24
151
300
438
309
312
2,051
32
608
66
193
600
856
597
376
3,328
Table 7
Trip Generation Estimates Subject Site as Zoned
Parcel 84 130,000 SF Business Park
Parcel 85 240 Multi Family
Residential Units
Parcel 86 48,000 SF Retail
Total
174
29
66
269
31
92
39
162
205
121
105
431
47
92
206
345
167
52
206
425
234
144
412
770
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
Traffic was distributed for each of the scenarios using information provided by the City of Carmel.
In a previous study for the City, maps were developed by A &F Engineering for each currently
vacant parcel of land. Each map contains the volumes of trips generated in the peak hours and the
distribution patterns of the trips. Those maps were provided for use in the Buckingham study. All
11
FUTURE CONDITIONS
distribution and assignment patterns were based solely upon that work. The maps are included as
part of the separately bound Technical Appendix.
The following five scenarios were analyzed using the data generated in previous sections of this
report:
Scenario A: Existing Conditions
Scenario B: Development proposed by Buckingham Properties plus existing traffic and
background growth
Scenario C: Development proposed by others on nearby sites plus existing traffic and
background growth
Scenario D: Developments proposed by Buckingham and others plus existing traffic and
background growth
Scenario E: Developments proposed by others plus existing traffic and background growth
and the subject site As Zoned
After computing existing levels of service, the Scenario A volumes were combined with
background growth of 3% per year over 10 years. This corresponds with the year 2009, which is
also the anticipated date of full buildout on the subject site, and becomes the base for each of the
other scenarios.
Each of the four study intersections was analyzed under each of the development scenarios. Table
8 provides the results of these analyses. Figures 3 through 12 illustrate the turning movement
volumes for the AM and PM peak hours of Scenarios A, B, C, D, and E. Figures 13 through 22
illustrate the resulting Levels of Service for each scenario.
12
Table 8
Analysis Results Intersection Levels of Service
OId Meridian Street
W. Main Street
Old Meridian Street
W. Carmel Drive
Pennsylvania Road W.
Carmel Drive
US 31 W. Carmel Drive
A A
C C
A B
F F
F F
F F
A B
F F
F F
B F
F F
F F
F F
B F
F F
F F
E F
B F
F F
Note: For unsignalized intersections, the LOS for each movement is calculated, but no overall
intersection LOS is calculated. The reported intersection LOS at OId Meridian Street and West
Main Street, as shown in Table 8, is the lowest value that was calculated for any one movement.
The Levels of Service for each of the individual movements are shown in Figures 13 through 22.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Highway Capacity Analysis results, as shown in Figures 13 through 22 and summarized in Table 8,
lead to the findings outlined as follows:
Current Traffic with Existing Roadway and Intersection Configurations:
s HCS analyses at Pennsylvania Road and West Carmel Drive estimate acceptable levels
of service for existing conditions. Field observation, however, finds that the
intersection is negatively affected by the congestion at US 31 and West Carmel Drive.
In reality, the intersection of Pennsylvania Road and West Carmel Drive operates
under failing conditions during the PM peak hour.
e Existing peak hour conditions at the intersection of US 31 and West Carmel Drive are
below acceptable levels. The intersection operates at LOS F during the AM and PM
Peak hours.
13
Future Traffic with Existing Roadway and Intersection Configurations:
With background traffic and traffic expected from the proposed Buckingham
development added to existing (Scenario B), the intersection of Old Meridian Street
and West Carmel Drives fails. This failure can be attributed mainly to the southbound
movements, where left turning vehicles and through vehicles share a single lane.
Westbound traffic also suffers unacceptable levels of service without a separate left-
turn lane on this approach.
Under Scenario B, the intersections of West Carmel Drive at US 31 and West Main
Street at Old Meridian Street further deteriorate. The intersection of West Carmel
Drive and Pennsylvania Road remains at acceptable levels; however, it is expected that
field conditions could be worse than this computer output indicates because of the
spillover congestion at US 31 and West Carmel Drive.
o Conditions similar to Scenario B have been determined with existing, background, and
vacant site traffic (Scenario C). In Scenario C, traffic is distributed among different
roadways, based on the locations of the various vacant sites. Therefore, in Scenario C,
the LOS at Old Meridian Street and West Carmel Drive is acceptable in the AM Peak
hour, but the LOS at West Carmel Drive and Pennsylvania Road fails during the PM
peak hour.
e Scenario D is a mixture of Scenarios B and C, including existing and background
traffic, as well as vacant site traffic and traffic expected from the Buckingham
proposed development. Under this scenario, all peak hour analyses show failing
Levels of Service. The only exception to this is that Pennsylvania Road and West
Carmel Drive operates at LOS B during the AM Peak hour.
O Scenario E includes the same development as Scenario D, except that the subject site
is assumed developed as zoned instead of as proposed. The single difference in
intersection LOS between these two scenarios is that Old Meridian Street and West
Carmel Drive is LOS E during the AM peak hour in Scenario E one level better than
in Scenario D. This indicates that capacity problems will exist whether the subject site
is developed as proposed or as zoned, and that mitigation measures will need to be
undertaken under either scenario.
14
Future Traffic with Anticipated Roadway and Intersection Configurations:
INDOT studies have been completed for the US 31 corridor, and recommendations
have been made to upgrade this portion of highway to freeway (grade- separated)
standards. This upgrade would include a grade- separated interchange at US 31 and
West Carmel Drive, designed to improve the LOS to acceptable levels.
Improvements are also being planned for the Old Meridian Street corridor, including
the intersections of Old Meridian Street with West Main Street and West Carmel
Drive. Although the exact configuration of the intersections and characteristics of the
street have not yet been determined, it is expected that improvement plans will enable
the area to accommodate traffic generated by the subject site and other area
development (Scenario D).
Mitigation:
Negligible differences in intersection LOS result from comparing Scenario D (site as
proposed) and Scenario E (site as zoned). The intersection of Old Meridian Street and
West Carmel Drive deteriorates in the AM Peak hour (LOS E as zoned, and LOS F as
proposed), but both levels are unacceptable and would require the same mitigation
measures now being planned by the City of Carmel.
o The developer's impact can also be assessed by comparing Scenarios C and D, where
Scenario D is equal to Scenario C plus proposed development traffic. The single
difference in intersection LOS in this case is that with development traffic added, the
LOS at the intersection of Old Meridian Street and West Carmel Drive drops from C
to F during the AM peak hour. This can be immediately resolved with the installation
of a southbound left turn arrow and a leading southbound signal phase. With these
minor improvements, the intersection will operate at LOS C during the AM peak hour.
(PM conditions remain at LOS F with this improvement). The improvements along
Old Meridian Street that are now being planned by the City are expected to provide
long -term solutions for the intersection.
In addition to the conventional measures used to improve intersection levels of service,
some new methods of control are being considered in this area. As an alternative to
traffic signals, the Old Meridian Task Force recently prepared an area study (February
1999) which identified the intersections of Old Meridian Street with Pennsylvania
15
Road, West Main Street and West Carmel Drive as potential locations for roundabouts.
To complement this study, roundabouts have been considered at the intersections of
Old Meridian Street with West Main Street and West Carmel Drive. The intersection
of Pennsylvania Road and Old Meridian Street was not identified by the City of
Carmel as part of this TIS study area, and was therefore not analyzed for roundabout
operation.
a. HCS analyses show that volumes at Old Meridian Street and West Main
Street would necessitate a two -lane roundabout (two circulating lanes and
two lanes per approach). Although Levels of Service criteria have not yet
been established for roundabouts in the United States, delay calculations
estimate average delays of 12 seconds per vehicle during both peak
periods. An inscribed diameter of approximately 130 feet would be
sufficient to achieve these results.'
b. The intersection of Old Meridian Street and West Carmel Drive has
significantly higher volumes of traffic. During the PM peak hour, there is
a maximum approach volume of 1,460 vehicles per hour (vph) and a
maximum circulating volume of 1,183vph. On a two -lane roundabout (2
circulating lanes and 2 lanes per approach), these volumes correspond to
an average delay per vehicle of more than 50 seconds, indicating the need
for additional circulating and /or approach lanes. Further consideration
should be given to whether a three -lane roundabout would complement the
character of the area. Given the number of lanes and the implied diameter
and right -of -way needed, a roundabout may not be appropriate for this
intersection.
0 Although plans are being made to improve US 31 and the Old Meridian Street
corridor, no specific intersection layouts or roadway characteristics have been
determined. Following is a list of improvements that should be considered by the City
of Carmel in their work with Butler, Fairman, and Seufert in order to mitigate year
2009 projected traffic along the Old Meridian Corridor. These recommendations are
Roundabout analysis conducted using the following sources: (1) Roundabout Design Guidelines, State of
Maryland DOT, State Highway Administration, unknown date, (2) Roundabouts: a design guide, National
Association of Australian Road Authorities, 1986, and (3) Design Criteria for Roundabouts, Mountasser A.
Rahman, 1995 Compendium of Technical Papers, ITE 65`' Annual Meeting
16
based upon improving all intersections to LOS C or better during the peak hours, and
will be necessary whether the subject site is developed as proposed or as zoned:
1. Old Meridian Street should be widened to two (2) lanes in each
direction from West Main Street south through its intersection with
West Carmel Drive. Opposing left turn lanes should be constructed
on Old Meridian Street at major intersections and driveways.
2. At the intersection of Old Meridian Street and West Main Street,
eastbound and westbound left turn lanes and a southbound right turn
lane should be constructed. Additionally, an actuated two -phase
signal should be installed. Under Scenarios D and E, these
improvements will result in LOS B during both the AM and PM peak
hours. The proposed configuration of the intersection is shown in
Figure 23.
3. At the intersection of Old Meridian Street and West Carmel Drive,
westbound right turn and left turn lanes should be added. The
northbound approach should be widened to one right turn lane, two
through lanes, and one left turn lane. The southbound approach
should be widened to one right turn lane, one through lane, and one
left turn lane. Under Scenario D, these improvements will result in
LOS B during the AM peak and LOS C during the PM peak hour.
Figure 23 illustrates the proposed improvements.
4. At the intersection of US 31 and 126th Street /Carmel Drive, traffic
volumes are much higher than is desired for a signalized intersection.
Even with additional left turn lanes, through lanes, and right turn
lanes, acceptable levels of service cannot be efficiently achieved with
a traffic signal control. When US 31 is upgraded to freeway status,
conditions will meet acceptable levels. Currently, the westbound
movement would benefit from double left -turn lanes. This will not
improve the intersection to acceptable levels, but would provide relief
to the intersection and to the adjacent intersection of Pennsylvania
Street and West Carmel Drive. Depending on existing geometry, it
may not be possible to run eastbound and westbound left turn phases
simultaneously with the additional left turn lane. This improvement
will also help provide relief from additional traffic that will be
generated from vacant sites around the area, including the subject site
as proposed or as zoned.
All HCS analysis output is provided in the separately bound Technical Appendix. Roundabout
analysis and future conditions HCS analysis are also included therein.
18