UPTOWN TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

Similar documents
Future Build Alternative Traffic Forecasts and Level of Service Analysis

CHAPTER 2: MODELING METHODOLOGY

City of Berkeley. Guidelines for Development of Traffic Impact Reports

ALBION FLATS DEVELOPMENT EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS

TRAFFIC STUDY GUIDELINES

4.11 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

CHAPTER 2 - TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL DEVELOPMENT

CITY OF CLOVIS Traffic Impact Study Guidelines

3.6 GROUND TRANSPORTATION

Woodburn Interchange Project Transportation Technical Report

VIII. LAND USE ISSUES

TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT

Strasburg Road Extension Rush Meadow Street to New Dundee Road Alternative Route Study Report

Traffic Impact Study Requirements

Traffic Impact Study Guidelines. City of Guelph

CITY OF LA MESA MIXED-USE OVERLAY ZONE PROJECT La Mesa, California August 15, 2007 Revised January 16, 2008

BCEO TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY GUIDELINES

CE 452 Traffic Impact Assessment

Goleta Ramp Metering Study

III. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS F. TRAFFIC

CITY OF MARIANNA MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 936 Marianna, FL (850)

GULF COAST RAIL DISTRICT VISION FOR REGIONAL RAIL

6.0 CONGESTION HOT SPOT PROBLEM AND IMPROVEMENT TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL ANALYSIS

SECTION VII TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES

Letter to Ms. Wallace. March 24, 2014

PORT OF FERNANDINA TRUCK CIRCULATION STUDY

6.1 SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT

1.0 Introduction Traffic Study Overview Study Area Overview of Senate Bill

6.2.2 Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures

Demand Reduction Assumptions Used For Travel Demand Analysis of EIS Alternatives

INTERCHANGE MODIFICATION REPORT

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM #3

CITY OF VALLEJO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT Analysis/Study GUIDELINES

APPENDIX B. Public Works and Development Engineering Services Division Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies

Route 7 Connector Ramp MODIF IE D I N T ER C H A N G E M OD IFICATIO N R E PO RT TRA N S F O R M I : I N S ID E THE BE LTWAY

GUIDE FOR THE PREPARATION OF TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES

Appendix A Transportation Technical Analysis Methodology

TRANSPORTATION IMP ACT MITIGATION FEE (TIMF) NEXUS S TUDY

Appendix F 2008 Travel Demand Modeling

4.1 BACKGROUND ON DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES

Vicinity Map. Interstate 605 (I-605) and State Route 91 (SR-91) in Los Angeles County

Planning Commission Study Session. Presentation

Guidelines for the Submission of a Transportation Study Level 2

I-35/80 Operations Study: Douglas Avenue to NW 86 th Street FOR

4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 11. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 1. TRAFFIC

12 Evaluation of Alternatives

TOWN OF MOORESVILLE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS PROCEDURES MANUAL TOWN OF MOORESVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA

Corpus Christi Metropolitan Transportation Plan Fiscal Year Introduction:

Contents i Contents Page 1 A New Transportation Plan Community Involvement Goals and Objectives... 11

TRANSIT SERVICE GUIDELINES

Traffic Analysis. Appendix I

Prepared By: Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc.

Executive Summary Introduction and Background

Date: May 4, Clare M. Look-Jaeger, P.E. Kevin C. Jaeger Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers Weingart Projects Construction Traffic Analysis

TRANSPORTATION PROJECT REPORT DRAFT CONCEPTUAL ACCESS MODIFICATION PROPOSAL OCTOBER 2002

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

MOBILITY AND ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS

Estimating Work Zone Performance Measures on Signalized Arterial Arterials

LANDSIDE FACILITIES AIRLINE TERMINAL FACILITIES INVENTORY 5.0 INTRODUCTION C H A P T E R 1 CHAPTER 5

Contra Costa Transportation Authority STAFF REPORT February 15, 2017 Page 2 of 3 Background MTC is expected to seek authorization from the State Legis

9. TRAVEL FORECAST MODEL DEVELOPMENT

The TIS is to be signed and sealed by a Florida Registered Professional Engineer.

5.4.1 METHODOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE CRITERIA

APPENDIX Methodology Letter of Understanding (MLOU) and Agency Correspondence

2017 TIGER DISCRETIONARY GRANT APPLICATION

Transportation Impact & Access Study Guidelines

4.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Military Highway Interchange

DIVISION I TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY GUIDELINES ENGINEERING STANDARDS

CHAPTER 5 PARALLEL PARKWAY CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS

Rivers Edge Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Traffic Study

IH 30/IH 35E Reconstruction Project Pegasus Final Technical Memorandum - Evaluation of Conceptual Alternatives Task 7.5

APPENDIX I. Traffic Study

BAYSHORE MULTI-MODAL FACILITY STUDY

City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines

DDI s Can Move More Than Cars. Alex Ariniello. Presentation for the ITE Western District Annual Meeting. July, 2016 in Albuquerque, New Mexico

4.9 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

Dated: January 2015 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY GUIDELINES

DRAFT MEMORANDUM DATE: 10/06/2017

EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES CARRIED FORWARD

FINAL PROJECT PRIORITIZATION PLAN FOR THE NM 599 CORRIDOR

3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC

Operational Analysis of Dulles Toll Road Ramps to Tysons. Board Transportation Committee Meeting September 17, 2013

BOSTON REGION METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION

APPENDIX H: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL VALIDATION AND ANALYSIS

A. INTRODUCTION B. NOISE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

LAS VEGAS STREET RAILROAD CROSSING RR/PUC CONNECTION AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN

Project Prioritization for Urban and Rural Projects TEAM CONFERENCE March 7, 2018

Ms. Jennifer Campos RECON Environmental, Inc Fifth Avenue San Diego, CA LLG Reference:

RE: A Traffic Impact Statement for a Proposed Mixed-use Development at 400 Windmill Road

Chapter 4: Transportation and Circulation

Exhibit J: Other City Correspondence

A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Land Use Intensity Daily Total In Out Total In Out. Shopping Center 236,160 SF

The Folded Interchange: An Unconventional Design for the Reconstruction of Cloverleaf Interchanges

PROJECT STUDY REPORT. Cal Poly Pomona Senior Project

Transit Service Guidelines

City of Los Angeles 2010 Bicycle Plan First Year of the First Five-Year Implementation Strategy & Figueroa Streetscape Project Draft EIR

ACTION REQUESTED Staff recommends forwarding the following comments to Ada County for the above listed application:

Traffic and Parking. Introduction. 3G.2 Environmental Setting. Description of Key Roadways

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS... I APPENDICES... III LIST OF EXHIBITS... V LIST OF TABLES... VII LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS...

Transcription:

UPTOWN TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS This memorandum summarizes the results of the traffic analysis conducted to evaluate the traffic operations of the intersections along Post Oak Boulevard within Uptown Houston in the Year 2018 and Year 2035. The study limits are Richmond Avenue on the south and IH 610 southbound frontage road on the north. The vicinity map of the study area is presented in Figure 1. The study was conducted with an objective of analyzing the traffic operations under Year 2018 and Year 2035 traffic conditions and developing measures to mitigate the impact of the increased traffic along the roadways that would be generated by planned residential and commercial developments in the core area of Uptown Houston. Background Several commercial and residential establishments are proposed to be developed in the Uptown area. By Year 2018, it is anticipated that 12.7 million square feet of office space and 4.8 million square feet of retail space will be developed in Uptown Houston along the Post Oak Boulevard corridor. By Year 2035, 17.8 million square feet of office space and 5.04 million square feet of retail space will be developed. Additionally, 6,100 units of multi-family residential development and over 6,700 hotel rooms will be developed by 2018, and by 2035, 9,425 units of multi-family residential development and around 8,300 hotel rooms will be developed. The future development information is included in Attachment A of this report. Existing Conditions The land use in the study area is a mix of residential and commercial developments. The Post Oak Boulevard corridor from IH 610 on the north to Richmond Avenue on the south constitutes the core area of Uptown Houston. Regional access to the study area is provided by US 59 and IH 610. Westheimer Road, San Felipe Street, and Richmond Avenue are the major thoroughfares providing direct access to the study area.

Figure 1

Traffic Analysis Intersection Level of Service () analyses were performed in accordance with the procedures set forth and recommended by the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Level of Service methodologies for evaluation of signalized and unsignalized intersections. Traffic analysis software Synchro was used to evaluate the operation of the study intersections. The Level of Service criteria for signalized and unsignalized intersections are listed below in Table 1. A is considered as best, free-flow condition and F is considered failing conditions. D is considered acceptable during the peak hours by most agencies. Table 1 Level of Service () Criteria for Intersections Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersections (sec/veh) (sec/veh) A 0-10 0-10 B >10-20 >10-15 C >20-35 >15-25 D >35-55 >25-35 E >55-80 >35-50 F >80 >50 The SYNCHRO network for the Uptown Area has been utilized for conducting traffic analysis. The traffic volume data for the study network was available for the year 2007. Based on the Houston-Galveston Area Council s (H-GAC) traffic demand model networks for years 2009 and 2025, it was determined that the study area will experience an annual growth rate of 0.75%, which was used to project the traffic volumes to Base Year 2011. Based on the comparison of traffic volumes between AM and PM peak hour, it was determined that PM peak hour represents the highest peak hour. Utilizing the projected traffic volumes, the Year 2011 weekday peak hour levels of service for the study intersections were evaluated. The existing PM peak hour levels of service of the analysis intersections are summarized in Table 2 (following page). As presented in Table 2, some of the study intersections would operate at levels of service E or F. Traffic Projection Methodology Based on the H-GAC s travel demand model networks for years 2009, 2025 and 2035, it was determined that the study area will experience an annual growth rate of 0.75%, between 2011 and 2018, and an annual growth rate of 0.5% between 2018 and 2035. At these rates, the study area will experience a growth of 5.25% between 2011 and 2018, and 8.5% between 2018 and 2035.

The proposed development and employment information for Years 2011, 2018 and 2035 was provided by Uptown Houston for the Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) within the Uptown core area. Based on the employment data for Uptown, it has been estimated that the traffic volumes in the study area will increase 15% by Year 2018 and 39% by Year 2035. Table 2 Year 2011 Traffic Conditions and Study Intersections (Sec/Veh) 1 Richmond Ave. at IH 610 NBFR D 50.3 2 Post Oak Blvd. at Richmond Ave. E 61.1 3 Post Oak Blvd. at Fairdale Dr. 1,2 B 12.5 4 Post Oak Blvd. at Hidalgo St. B 18.7 5 Post Oak Blvd. at W. Alabama St. C 26.3 6 Post Oak Blvd. at Westheimer Rd. E 76.7 7 Post Oak Blvd. at Locke Ln. 1,2 A 7.0 8 Post Oak Blvd. at Guilford Ct. 1,2 B 13.7 9 Post Oak Blvd. at Ambassador Way C 22.5 10 Post Oak Blvd. at BLVD Place C 34.4 11 Post Oak Blvd. at San Felipe St. E 67.6 12 Post Oak Blvd. at Westbriar Ln. 1,2 A 7.8 13 Post Oak Blvd. at Four Oaks Pl./Garretson Ln. B 16.7 14 Post Oak Blvd. at Uptown Park Blvd. C 32.0 15 Post Oak Blvd. at IH 610 SBFR F 125.2 16 Post Oak Blvd. at IH 610 NBFR F 144.6 Notes = Level of service 1 Unsignalized intersection in 2011 2 Intersection signalized by 2018 However, based on the employment data from H-GAC for Year 2035, it has been estimated that the traffic volumes in the study area will increase 22% by Year 2035. After reviewing the employment data from Uptown Houston and H-GAC, the background (No-Build) condition traffic volumes for the analysis intersections were developed by increasing the Year 2011 volumes by 15% for Year 2018 and 22% for Year 2035.

Background Traffic Conditions Utilizing the projected traffic data for the study intersections, the Year 2018 and Year 2035 background PM peak hour levels of service for the study intersections were calculated. The background PM peak hour levels of service of the analysis intersections are summarized in Table 3. As presented in Table 3, some of the study intersections would be operating at levels of service E or F under Year 2018 traffic conditions and delays would increase under Year 2035 traffic conditions. Table 3 Year 2018 & 2035 Background Traffic Conditions and - PM Peak Hour Study Intersections LO S Year 2018 Year 2035 (Veh/Sec ) LO S (Veh/Sec ) 1 Richmond Ave. at IH 610 NBFR E 78.4 F 85.9 2 Post Oak Blvd. at Richmond Ave. F 98.5 F 118.1 3 Post Oak Blvd. at Fairdale Dr. 1,2 B 14.7 B 16.5 4 Post Oak Blvd. at Hidalgo St. C 20.3 C 21.4 5 Post Oak Blvd. at W. Alabama St. D 37.8 D 46.9 6 Post Oak Blvd. at Westheimer Rd. F 116.3 F 138.5 7 Post Oak Blvd. at Locke Ln. 1,2 A 7.1 A 8.3 8 Post Oak Blvd. at Guilford Ct. 1,2 B 16.8 B 19.7 9 Post Oak Blvd. at Ambassador Way C 24.3 C 27.1 10 Post Oak Blvd. at BLVD Place D 39.1 D 42.4 11 Post Oak Blvd. at San Felipe St. F 96.3 F 109.2 12 Post Oak Blvd. at Westbriar Ln. 1,2 B 11.1 B 12.4 13 Post Oak Blvd. at Four Oaks Pl./Garretson C 21.0 C 24.3 14 Post Oak Blvd. at Uptown Park Blvd. D 48.4 E 63.9 15 Post Oak Blvd. at IH 610 SBFR F 182.6 F 203.7 16 Post Oak Blvd. at IH 610 NBFR F 189.6 F 216.8 Note s = Level of service Alternative Transportation System Improvements The existing freeways serving the Uptown Houston area are congested. As indicated in the previous section, major intersections in the core Uptown area are operating at unacceptable levels of service. Also, the existing roadway network

will not be able to provide efficient access to the traffic generated by the new developments. In order to meet the transportation needs in Uptown Houston, Uptown Development Authority is considering various alternative transportation system improvements, such as, widening of Post Oak Boulevard, construction of Bellaire Uptown Transit Center with shuttle buses, and implementation of high capacity transit in Uptown Houston. Project (Build) Conditions Uptown Houston, METRO, the City of Houston, and other stakeholders have long recognized the need for high capacity transit within Uptown Houston. Plans for improved transit options in Uptown have been documented by most of the agencies. In addition to proposed transit improvements, the reconstruction of Post Oak Boulevard has been in the City of Houston Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Transit Service along Post Oak Boulevard Traffic analysis was conducted to evaluate the traffic operations along Post Oak Boulevard between Richmond Avenue and IH 610. The transit buses would circulate between Uptown Intermodal Terminal and Northwest Transit Center at five (5) minute headway, which translates to 12 buses entering and exiting the Bellaire Uptown Transit Center every hour. The ridership estimates indicated that the proposed transit service, by Year 2018, is estimated to attract approximately 2,150 riders during the PM peak hour, out of which 1,200 are oriented towards the north and the remaining 950 are oriented towards the south. By 2035, it is estimated that the proposed transit service will attract approximately 3,120 riders during the PM peak hour, out of which 1,570 are oriented towards the north and the remaining 1,550 are oriented towards the south. As a result of the operation of the transit service, there will be a reduction in vehicle trips entering and exiting the Uptown core area. In order to estimate the reduction in vehicle trips, a vehicle occupancy rate of 1.25 passengers per car is assumed. By applying this rate to the number of riders, by 2018 the number of reduced vehicle trips is estimated to be 960 in the northbound direction and 760 in the southbound direction during PM peak hour. By 2035, the number of reduced trips is estimated to be 1,256 in the northbound direction and 1,240 in the southbound direction during PM peak hour. Utilizing future development information provided by Uptown Houston, the origin of transit trips was estimated. It is estimated that the 50% of the transit trips are generated from the Uptown core area between Richmond Avenue and Westheimer Road, 30% generated between Westheimer Road and San Felipe

Street, and the remaining 20% generated from the Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) between San Felipe Street and IH 610 southbound frontage road. Based on the location and size of the developments in each of the TAZs, the vehicle trips were reduced from Year 2018 and Year 2035 traffic turning movements at the appropriate study intersections along Post Oak Boulevard within the Uptown core area. A comparison of Year 2018 and Year 2035 no build conditions and build conditions PM peak hour delays and levels of service of the analysis intersections is presented in Table 4.

Study Intersections Table 4 Comparison of Year 2018 & Year 2035 No Build and Build Conditions and - PM Peak Hour Year 2018 Year 2035 No Build Build % (Veh/Sec) (Veh/Sec) Reduction in No Build Build % (Veh/Sec) (Veh/Sec) Reduction in 1 Richmond Ave. at IH 610 NBFR E 78.4 E 76.4 3% F 85.9 F 84.9 1% 2 Post Oak Blvd. at Richmond Ave. F 98.5 F 90.7 8% F 118.1 F 99.7 16% 3 Post Oak Blvd. at Fairdale Dr. B 14.7 B 12.2 17% B 16.5 B 12.9 22% 4 Post Oak Blvd. at Hidalgo St. C 20.3 B 19.9 2% C 21.4 C 20 7% 5 Post Oak Blvd. at W. Alabama St. D 37.8 C 25.7 32% D 46.9 D 36.1 23% 6 Post Oak Blvd. at Westheimer Rd. F 116.3 F 92.5 20% F 138.5 F 91.4 34% 7 Post Oak Blvd. at Locke Ln. A 7.1 A 7.1 0% A 8.3 A 5.5 34% 8 Post Oak Blvd. at Guilford Ct. B 16.8 B 16.7 1% B 19.7 B 13.2 33% 9 Post Oak Blvd. at Ambassador Way C 24.3 C 21.5 12% C 27.1 C 24.4 10% 10 Post Oak Blvd. at BLVD Place D 39.1 D 35.2 10% D 42.4 D 35.1 17% 11 Post Oak Blvd. at San Felipe St. F 96.3 E 71.1 26% F 109.2 E 62.1 43% 12 Post Oak Blvd. at Westbriar Ln. B 11.1 A 5.2 53% B 12.4 A 5 60% 13 Post Oak Blvd. at Four Oaks Pl. C 21 C 20.8 1% C 24.3 C 22.9 6% 14 Post Oak Blvd. at Uptown Park Blvd. D 48.4 C 30.5 37% E 63.9 C 31.2 51% 15 Post Oak Blvd. at IH 610 SBFR F 182.6 F 141 23% F 203.7 F 106 48% 16 Post Oak Blvd. at IH 610 NBFR F 189.6 F 162.7 14% F 216.8 F 177.4 18% Notes = Level of service

Travel Time Comparison In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the transit service, travel times along the anticipated transit service route between Bellaire Uptown Transit Center and Northwest Transit Center were compared for the no-build and build scenarios and summarized in Table 5. As presented in Table 5, there is a reduction in travel time under the build scenario. Findings Table 5 Travel Time Comparison Segment No Build Bellaire Uptown Transit Center - Richmond Avenue 5 2 PM Build Post Oak Boulevard Richmond Avenue to IH 610 17 12 Post Oak Boulevard to Northwest Transit Center 11 5 Total 33 19 Based on the results of the traffic analysis, the following observations have been made: The implementation of transit service in the study area resulted in the reduction of intersection delays in Year 2018 and Year 2035, when compared to no-build conditions. In the year 2018, the intersections would experience up to 53% reduction in delay following the implementation of transit service. In the Year 2035, the intersections would experience up to 60% reduction in delay following the implementation of transit service. The travel time would reduce by 42% following the implementation of transit service. The results of the analyses conducted for both Year 2018 and 2035 traffic conditions indicate that the implementation of transit service would result in the improved traffic operations at the intersections along Post Oak Boulevard within Uptown Houston.