HomeMy WebLinkAbout87-50A AMENDMENT 4 OF 6I
I
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGeNGY' GEQI2GE pEU(fM> IIANi Govorno
DEPARTMENT J.''Cann
Rn
�.
pISTRICT
pO, 80X;,911, MARYSVILLE, 95901 MAY, 10 1989
�
TDD Phone`(516) 7'41.-4463
tJroyille, C:alifornir�.
Telephone (916 741-4498
May ,5
19,89
03-Eut-162
03
P.Mi 22 C0
`
Oak "Terrace
..Ranch
SCH'89032811
Mr. Dave ;Rironimus
nutte County
Planning ''Depa'rtment
7 County Center Drive'
Orov. lle, CA 95965
Dear Mr. Hirohimus<:
Caltrans; District 3, has. reviewed the .final traffic impact
analysis, dated February 22, 1989{ for the Oak Terrace'; Ranch
Subdivision,.
The study "addresses a development `scenario that could 'generate:
abol.�t 3,300 trip ends, with 5,000 square feet of office space, ,
The environmental evaluation describes a wors case scenario 0j
:10, 860, trip ends with 36,000 square feet of commercial space
Our comments are based on 3,,300 trip ends. The traffic study and
the general plan. amendment 'should be consistent.
Although the, study regiire,s' revisions in order to accurately
assess the traffic" impacts,` the°'range, of alternative. highway
mitigation measures are adequate. Alternate 'D appears to
mitigate the significant impacts of, the 3.,300;'trip scenario. All
alternatives should �nclude:clo"sure of, the Ynobile home park
entrance just eastof S,addl;e privet A road should be ''required
through the-subdivision which could be extended with an
overcrossing to River View Drive at a future date,. Sheet lights
would, also ,be '`required ,at Apica ,Avenue, ;
d
The County's inal.,negative eclaration should incorpoxa.,t the
above concerns: Zf you have any clues tionsj.please, contact;
Jeahnie Baker;.. telephone ' (,916) 7:41-449.8'.
Sincerely,
Tian J: Smith; Chief
Environmental ';Branch B
Y.
T
G
GES DEU
STJITC� O, C.AIIFOf;NIA—BUSINESSr TRA{V5PORTATfON ANQ HOUSING gGENGY __. __ ,- ; ,; KMEIIAN, :Gavemor _
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIO�1
''''"
�� ���
YSVIIIE 95901
;BOX 9f,lr NLAk ,
:�3rovil�;� ���liforr�la ,
(916); 741-4362 �tt
January 27, 1989
-
�;?;.A 03 -But -162
PM 22.0
.��...� Uak Terrace Ranch
ter. Kenneth C LenWdt, R:E.
u DA. En neerina
220 Gravid Avenue
Orov 111e, CA 95965 -
Dear Mr. Ldhhardt:
We have reviewed the amended Traffic `Impact Analysis. Report for; -the proposed
Oak Terrace Ranch subdivision, dated December 9 1988: Although' this study
�still� regu res reVlsions iii order to 'accurately assess.the traffic impacts of
this proposal , tfie range of a1 terhati ve hi'ghway mi ti ga.ti on` measures that are
"
presented seems to be adequate. Of these,,Alternate D appears t;o be the
minimum `mprovement.levol that Caltrans would consider acceptable. .All
alter►�atives should in the closure af`the existing mobile home park
entrance.just.east of5add;l,e Drive and should,provide.;a road through the
subdivision that could We' nded Vith,an overcrossing to�R�ver;Vie�r�Drive
at so''me time in the. future. Streets lights would also be, required at, the ,
p7ca' Avenue yhtersection.
"�
The rest of this; letter will discuss paris'of tills study -that 'should be
revised. ,
,
Exhibit B
It shout& be pointed out that ,t' figure does not, accurately reflect;,tne
teaffn c' volumes on Hi gWl' "' I Froin Hi ghWay, 70 to Canyon Drive' for. 1985.
,
Actua`1 founts made in 1985�were as much as '30 lower. The ;source of ,this
fi9pre should be�;t, Wn.-
bat C
it
�n d' r the. vola esi' lotted should a ree,with
This figure sho'uad. bei elim,� ate o m p 9,
,,,
those` on 11 page 8,
a'
Y
b
n•^ Jl�A r * # v _ _ � ^t J rf ci y�,::. .:+� Ye{I t" 1 ;t��' 4 , .r % r � f 1 ••
7
.�i �,(�.�f{' !�i �..ra�l,. ',�,'-0u7 s r+Y'F ..7 �+SY��Y.r: ,^�'�, I'�''h'n^�+tr�'sy'yr, r�i4. ,'^; s+•4 • y�lwwYi r; +%1�^,tw "^,. lt' w wr } .( .n.:llY Y 1 Y. 1
jL+7sc � � yi,l ��N.7'v � Y �,n,g �� a tt,a t' atr, 7; rwY. .•�i
�C 1.
r
i
I
1 4Y
I
,
o z
b . • 1 �4Pr P +�'
d. t
P
< 4
I°
J Yj,
yt w
at.
yK l
t �4,
J YY Y)YfT { I.i�
Gl v
,
f(�
i
't r
r
1 ,
r
ea t< t
I
a
�i
t.
u
$j41 �'d(SmaR>>'A�"pT p'Y1911�if a�iyw.d"'+}.
• � a � c''rfL 341
tn�+Y�'�rtg°°�pa�/�e�a;�Y�Mp �i+»'q{R�a�^Mt
A
Y
c} I
,.S
ti.
Cyw..•Y"'ry'S' .".' ��I�' !ifti �'e°yk . tri � t .r '�•� .ra'
YY i Y' r
ri l
1'Y
1
y
TABLE OF CONTENTS
'SUNLYIARY - -
-ALTERNATIVE
,
RECOMMENDED _
-- - -
OENERAL BACKGROUND _ --
1A
_
DESCRIPTION -- - - "-"'-
2
o;1VE HIGHWAY -- -- - -- --.- _ _
EXISTINO TRAFFIC MOVEMENTS - -- --r
-
4
PRESENT LEVEL, OF SERVICE.-----=�
PROJECTED PROJECT TRAFFIC GENERAT ION`S
-
COMBINED PEAK HOUA- TRAFFIC VOJ�UMES
ALTERNATIVE _
1 Z
_
��B" ALTERNATIVE - -- _ -- - ""``-
13
ALTERNATIVE - _ --- -- - _ --
ALTERNATLVE --
14
15:`
�'D" -- - - - _.. __
'E'r A. LTE
RECOMMENDATIONS -- -----
----- - -- -- -
17
EXHIBITS
A- ESTIMATED TRAFFIC VOLUME,
B- TRAi?FYC VOL UMES &, SERVICE LEVEL'S 'STATE HIGHWAYS
D - SADDLE; DRIVE CA;PAC 1 TY CALCULATION` FORM
E -MOBILE HOME DRIVEWAY CAPACITY CALCULATION FORNI
F' - THE OAKS CAPACITY CALCULATION'
FORM
G - TRAFF IC� ANALYSTS
H - PEAK HQUA 1905 WITH OVER CROSSI
I - PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC DIRECTION W/BRIDGE
A YERY I EWAN D ARICA 'WAY CAFAC S TY CALCULATION FORM
K - AT 'It B n
L - PEAK HOUR TR' F
A F,IC DI,REC.TION W.%SIGNAL AT AP1CA AVENUE
M - TRAFFIC ANALYSIS "
N - PEAK HOUR 1995 WITHOUT OVER CROSSING
O OLIVE HIGHWAY AND SADDLE DRIVE'CAPACITY
CALCULA'TIQN,° FORK!
P - AI,TERNAZ" I VE n Dir '
Q - PEAK HOUR TRAFF I,C D I RECT I'ON -ALTERNATIVE r+ D ►�
ft - PEAK
HOUR 19;9 5 -. ALTERNATIVE,,, (r D rr
S - OLIVE HIGHWAY ANb AP1CA AVENUE CAPACITY
CALCULATION FORM
-T- OL I VE H_1 GHWAY AND SADDLEDR I YE CAP�CIT
CALCULAT,I ON...,. FOR1Vf
U ALTERNATIVE ' �� E �r
r
V - FEAK HOUR 19; 9 5 SIGNAL ;A"I' SADDLE D RIVE
' W -� PEAK HOUR
1 9,95 ALTS ii
RNATI E ;Ery
V
OT I've HAthway from
State' Route 70 to, aind
i nc.l ud=3 ng,
the'
S,faEe:recr°e'atio;nal
areas not ah�oye:_
CRITERIA FOR T.EVEL'OF SERVICE DESIGNATION
A
g
al
I. ARTERZAL.STREETS_= Vol=ie/Capacity-_Ratio (V/C)"Basis
Description: Relatively
Stable,hlow
Stable Flow
Nearittg
Ugsitabie
s. free Flow
51ight Delay
Acceptable Delay,
Unstable Flow
Flow
e/Capacity ,.
0`..9U
1.0
ICHWAYS _ �
,
Description: Vree Flow.
Stable k
Stable Flow
Approaching
Unstable
(uPPer teped) ,
unstable Flog;
Flog
A) OaeratinikSpeed 1{asi®
Specd', mph; > 60
> 5Q`4Q
35
r
30
b). noluaie/Cepacitiv Sase
Volurie/capacity g� 0.20 ' `
5`
r
j
r:
Fj
_ 6_
SUMIMARY .OF A M. PEAR. HOUR'L.11 .O.S.
BY INTERSECTION'LEG, EG TN' YEARS 1995 AND20,05
Alt. "A" Alt, "8"AltC" Alt. "p"�
Alt,
Bridge at Signal Na ...ft Left at
Agi. at Apica
Left
Turns,
Turns`at Apica
at -API c a-&
Inter"sect.on Apipa
Si gnat a
Saddle' Drive
Yr. Y'r:.Yr. Yr.` Yry�r
: .
1995 12.005 199a 2O05 1995 2005 1995 2Q:.05
Yr.Yr
199-5`
2005
Apica/Olive
Apica ��
a. : A A,, C"lD A EE
b. Heritage A A
F
, A A, A A A
A
A
Saddle/01 i� V e
a, Saddle C C/D C CfD F F E
b. Olive (Ltj C C/D C C/,DA B A A:'
C
C
KelIy Ridge Road
a. Kelly Ridge Rd.. C C/D' C C/a C/I7• , . C. C !D .
b. Olive (Lt) C'° C/b C CSD
C
C/D
�D C C D
C : Wyandrutte Miners
B/C
C
Ranch Road CLt) C C/D C OBD C CID C G%D BSC'
C
The L.Q.S. shorn .`tar the signai3.zecl intersection ;,bbve
reflects
the analysis.f.or that leg instead of analyain;g the
overall traffic operation fo°r "that" inte:rs,ectign.
Below is the projected trip , di:stzibu,t1160 per'centa-t� o€
leaving from .this; proposed development. for the
da.fferent alternatives. The traffic"
generated; by'' the
df,fere�t And ii'se was taken frgm the ; "t'ri;p Generaty�gn"`,
nth Edition, Institute of Tzansportatia'nngineers�
Washington, D.C. The tr.i ,, y
p generated tYes different'
,by land
uses for °this development.Ar11e shown on Exhibit "I" for
A7 it 12 "A";
°
ati.ve Exh�.bit L f"or Alternative
.. Eor ATtorative andXhibi.t ""�!� fbr
y I.,Altern:ative
I
�I
-s2-I
I
Altern'at:ive
Heri"°,tage
Olive
Hgh�t�4y.
ey, �
Ap,ica
SaddleDrive
A:lt'ernati,v
Olive
Highway
p._
72$
23`% 59
Saddle' Drive
Alierrkativ'I--
"D
O11.ve
Highway
551 I
Apica
Saddla,Drive
Alt�rriative
"'E"
Clive.
Highway
10
85* 5
PIC
�add'le Dr°ive
I
A
I
I
-
ALTERNATIVE•'
Install Fu11 Traffic Actuated Signal at Apica.
Intersection.,
1. Physical improvemen s rlequired•
ia;,
Construct intersection improvement substantially
as per the ;modified March1982 design,-with
deceleration line for east bound t;affc turning
Onto Apca Avenue.
b. Provide demand ac tuated signals wi,ith appropriate
we°st bound traffic warning devices.
c. Provide a slow acceleration lane from the signal
to'the crest of "hill, east bound on Olive Highway
(truck :lane')
'E'stimatre0 'cost' - - - - - - - $200,:000
3i Approval confidence .rat.ing
4. Major benefits: This alternati�e'is the classical`
solutcri to a traffic plcoblem easily understood
by the decision makers.
5. Magor,ob�ect�on: High speed traffic from east-
coming upon, the signal Budde lv and at times
d;iredtly.i;nto the setting sung truck traffic
starting problems upgrade to they'east, high
maintenance cost. Cal T'rar�s,resists' the
installation of a sig:.al in the middle of an
open stretch of highway Mie to high speed rear
end accidents. 'The sun angle and`basc Olive;
Highway geometrics,will compound this
h'istorical occurrence. 'steep west approach
grade and_Ste<distance are additional concern,. ..
6: ,General; 'Therenegative £ac,"tor,,s that.resul;t
from injury acciAents at Saddle .Drive: The traffic.
a;t 86cdd1e °Drive- vil zncrease, but the majority
W, go to Apica AAv enue�� and a signal Will not 'be
warranted t-
7
i
r
I
1 _
n I
t
1
a
1
I I