HomeMy WebLinkAbout1F, Walgreens Concept Review and Transportation Discussion
1F
City Council Worksession
January 20, 2009
Agenda Title:
Walgreen’s Concept Review and Transportation
Discussion
James Lehnhoff
Prepared By:
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
January 20, 2009
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
James Lehnhoff, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Planning Case #: 09-001
Walgreen’s – Arden Plaza PUD Concept Review
ATTACHMENTS:
A – Concept Design Packet from Arden Plaza, LLC
B – B2 Design Standards (Section 1325.05 Subd 8 of the Zoning Code)
C – Traffic Study – Guiding Plan for the B2 District
Requested Action
The concept review process is an opportunity for the City Council to provide comments,
questions, concerns, and suggestions regarding the Walgreen’s – Arden Plaza concept PUD. A
concept review is considered advisory and is nonbinding to the City and applicant (Section
1320.14 Subd 4 of the Zoning Code). No formal action can be taken at a work session. A
formal application will be subject to the full review process, including a public hearing with the
Planning Commission and City Council review.
Walgreen’s – Arden Plaza Concept Proposal
The applicants have submitted a packet of information that includes a description of the potential
project. The packet includes the following information:
The 2007 site layout and building elevation that was withdrawn;
A new 2009 site layout and building elevation; and,
Cross sections of the 2009 layout as viewed from Lexington Avenue and from County
Road E.
The revised 2009 concept includes a 14,400 square foot Walgreen’s store and 5,000 square feet
of retail/restaurant space. The existing “pod” office building has about 46,000 square feet of
City of Arden Hills
City Council Work Session for January 20, 2009
\\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Cases\2009\09-002 - Walgreen - Arden Plaza Concept Review\012009 - CC report - Walgreen's -
Arden Plaza Concept Review.doc
Page 1 of 3
space, which is proposed to be removed. If this project moves forward as shown in the concept,
there would be a net reduction of approximately 26,600 square feet. While it is certainly
possible that there could be future redevelopment on the rest of the site, the current concept plan
does not include any other redevelopment or new development.
If a formal application is submitted, it would include landscaping, lighting, sign, architecture,
utility, and other related plans.
City Review Process and Regulations
To help provide support for the City’s review process, we have retained Gary Hay and Thomas
Dobbs of Hay Dobbs architecture and planning. Mr. Dobbs provided some input on the Guiding
Plan for the B2 District as part of the City’s contract with MFRA. Mr. Hay will be in attendance
at the work session.
B2 Design Standards (Section 1325.05 Subd 8)
On November 24, 2008, the City adopted design standards for the B2 District. This is a new
set of regulations that were not in place during the previous review process. The adopted
design standards do set a high bar for new development and redevelopment in the B2
District. If a formal application is submitted, these regulations are the foundation for the
City’s review.
Since all new development and redevelopment are subject to the Planned Unit Development
(PUD) process, there is room for a negotiation. It is not uncommon for a developer to ask for
leniency in some areas and the City to ask for a higher level of design in other areas. It is
important for a City to prioritize what is important in terms of design and function and
determine how much flexibility should be granted. Conformance and flexibility with the
design standards is subject to City Council determination.
To help facilitate this discussion, a copy of the B2 design standards is included in Attachment
B. The other design standards in Section 1320 and 1320 of the Zoning Code also apply,
which includes additional regulations for parking, landscaping, and screening.
Guiding Plan for the B2 District
Although the Guiding Plan for the B2 District is not formally adopted into the Zoning Code,
the Zoning Code does reference that Plan and it is part of the overall review process. During
the review process, applications will be evaluated based on their conformance with and
advancement of the goals in the Guiding Plan. Copies of the Guiding Plan were distributed
to the City Council in December and can also be downloaded online at www.ci.arden-
hills.mn.us/b2district.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Work Session for January 20, 2009
\\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Cases\2009\09-002 - Walgreen - Arden Plaza Concept Review\012009 - CC report - Walgreen's -
Arden Plaza Concept Review.doc
Page 2 of 3
Transportation Discussion
A transportation consultant, Mike Spack of Spack Consulting, will be attending the work session
to facilitate a discussion on the various traffic studies and transportation questions along County
Road E and Lexington Avenue. Mr. Spack prepared the traffic impact study for the Guiding
Plan for the B2 District as part of the City’s contract with MFRA, which is included in
Attachment B for your reference. We welcome any questions that can be submitted prior to the
meeting so that we can have as much information and answers as possible at the work session.
Please feel free to submit any questions to James prior to the meeting.
Preliminary Review Timeline
If the applicants decide to move forward, they have indicated that they would like to submit a
completed application in time for the March 4, 2009, Planning Commission meeting. The
Planning Commission would hold a public hearing where they could recommend approval,
recommend denial, or table the application to another meeting. If the Planning Commission
makes a recommendation at their March 4 meeting, it would likely come to the City Council on
March 30, 2009.
A concept review does not automatically start the review process for a formal application. The
timeline is subject to change.
Attachments
A – Concept Design Packet from Arden Plaza, LLC
B – B2 Design Standards (Section 1325.05 Subd 8 of the Zoning Code)
C – Traffic Study – Guiding Plan for the B2 District
In order to conserve paper, not all copies of this report include the attachments. The attachments
can be viewed at City Hall or downloaded at www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us.
City of Arden Hills
City Council Work Session for January 20, 2009
\\Ahdocs1\ah\AHdata\Planning\Planning Cases\2009\09-002 - Walgreen - Arden Plaza Concept Review\012009 - CC report - Walgreen's -
Arden Plaza Concept Review.doc
Page 3 of 3
A
Attachment
Concept Design Packet from
Arden Plaza, LLC
January 20, 2009
HOPPING COUNTY ROAD E wALGREENS c
CENTER SIGN MONUMENT SIGN
' F 1
CD
10
— I
PROPOSED BUILDING'A'
RETAIL
A 14,490 S.F.
EXISTING BUILDING I I 1
,2
I
I
i I 1
28 I
1 I ,2 I � w
22
I I p
i
'6 L z
— o
o
z
PROPOSED BUILDING'S" W
RETAIL ' 1
1 I 29 16,230 S.F. '
1 I
I �
so
I ❑ \
I � �
IF1
33 I
I ' I
i
24
I I 1
I � I
1 1 1
1 I
pp I
EXISTING I
RETAIL BUILDING
52,580 S.F.
--I PROPOSED BUILDING"C'
I OFFICE/RETAIL I
-I 14,300 S.F. 'I
� I
L - - - - - - - - - - - — — — — — — — - - - - - �
Option I - 2007 Plan
Scale 1"=80' Total Parking Count : 407
NORTH
PROJECT O C7 D7HHUS
O O Arden Plaza, Arden Hills MN 0
� 0 properties
Ii/f9/o� � COMMISSION ul6zzb-o7olz Welligton
MANAGEMENT, INC.
COUNTY ROAD E WALGREENS
HOPPING MONUMENT SIGN
CENTER SIGN
CITY t�ONUME T
SIGN
TM
GATNERMs
I _ WACE
I I II 15 1 11
I _
IRETAIL WALGREEN5 I
EXISTING I 5,000 14,400 4 t _
RETAIL/ SF '
I
BANK tt l t ,
I
5500 5F I - I
_ I ;
1 `` ( ) ► DRIVE T4R1
I ;liiiilllliiil 11
.
QI
I 23 Z
i I 16 I 0 '
II I I 1 I Z 5 + t
Uj
x
_ I � I I
I
4t
I I
- I4t ,
I
. I
I p7U 28 '
1
?/�
SHOPPING I I CENTER SIGN '
I / I It '
- I
EXISTING
RETAIL • • � I � I � �8 1
I
52,000 5F I I_ �-�-��- ( POND
I. I
I I !
I ,
I '
1 _ I I
' L - -- _ 6 - -. - -- _ -. .. _. ....
Option 2 - Anticipated 2009 Plan
Scale I"=80' Total Parking Count : 485 NORTH
on o 0[R �
PROJECT O O properties
Arden Plaza Arden Hills MN 0
01-14-09 1 COMMISSION 1116226-07012
Well igon
MANAGEMENT, INC.
Z
Z
nc 0 Q
� O
y ` O
-Now-. ,
A
lit
{1�
H�lat
< O
We fV
O
CL
O
Z
a �
M �I
N
L �
N
N
rz Z
N o
rz V)
C
� o
u
w
O L-
a Q
W
', ► >✓ V'
LL Q� Z
on a
o ~ v
uH X \`
Z Q O s .... �■
1 �
Q
}
�r
O
a O
C�
..ter
U
t
■ N
O
Q
O
Z
a�
N
O
N
N
Z
N o
L
l
� %
Z
0
a)
z
00
W� N
m \
L
Y a
\ no W a
O
0
w
_l�
g w
U c - x
a�
Y M
m N .
O .O
W
W � �
O 73 O
O T J U
� 7
e
3 Ln
W
O � r
O
N
N
m i
W LA
LA
r �LLJ o
r " o
� w
o L
\ ao
\ bD 3
\ r .
2
rz 5= n
r
B
Attachment
B2 Design Standards
(Section 1325.05 Subd 8 of the Zoning Code)
January 20, 2009
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
Subd. 8
Additional Design Standards for New Development, Redevelopment, and
Modifications to Existing Sites in the B2 and B3 Districts. (Revised December 17,
2008) Unless preempted by the standards in this section, all other zoning provisions
shall apply:
A.Purpose and Intent. The purpose of these additional design standards
is to promote a high level of architectural, landscaping, and site design in
the business districts of Arden Hills. The City seeks to create a unified,
harmonious, and high-quality environment to foster a distinct, positive,
and successful image for the City. The criteria by which new
development, redevelopment, and site modifications in the Districts shall
be judged are as follows:
1.Consistency with provisions of the comprehensive plan and other
guiding plans as amended from time to time; provisions of the zoning
ordinance and subdivision ordinance; and all other applicable
regulations.
2.Use of appropriate materials, lighting, textures, colors, and
architectural and landscape forms to create a unified, high-quality
design concept for each site that is compatible with adjacent and
neighboring structures and functions.
3.Creation of unified site designs, each with a sense of internal order,
that provide desirable environments for site users and visitors and the
community as a whole and that consider all site elements.
4.Provision of safe and adequate access from public streets to sites
giving ample consideration to the location and number of access
points, the safety and convenience of merging and turning movements,
and traffic management and mitigation.
5.Provision of on-site vehicular, bicycling, and pedestrian circulation
by way of interior drives, parking areas, pathways, and walkways
adequate to handle anticipated needs and to safety buffer pedestrians
and cyclists from motor vehicles. Ample consideration shall be given
to the width of interior drives, internal traffic movement and flow,
separation of pedestrian, cycling, automobile; and delivery traffic, and
the safe, convenient, and practical arrangement of parking spaces.
B.Application. The standards in this Section should apply only to the
building or site elements being developed or altered (i.e. a proposal for
changes to a building would be required to meet only those standards that
pertain to buildings while changes to a parking area would be required to
meet the standards for parking areas but not for buildings). The design
standards shall be applied proportionately to the degree of change
Section 1325 – General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 20 of 53
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
proposed. Upon recommendation from the Planning Commission, the
City Council may waive specific design standards based on the scale of
the project. The City Council shall make the final determination on the
compatibility and consistency with the design standards.
C.Architectural Style and Building Character. Evaluation of the
appearance of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and on
its relationship to its surroundings. Site characteristics to be evaluated for
this purpose include, but are not limited to, building and landscaping
materials, colors, textures, shapes, massing, building components, height,
roof-line, and setback. Monotony of design, both within projects and
between projects and its surrounding, is prohibited. Variation in detail,
form, and arrangement shall provide visual interest. Architectural style
should not be restricted.
D.Building Materials. Buildings shall be constructed of materials that
are enduring, timeless, and well-detailed.
1.At least seventy-five percent (75%) of the exterior building
materials shall be of brick, stone, decorative concrete plank,
transparent glass or any combination thereof.
2.Trim and other accent or decorative features may be metal, wood,
or EIFS. Other high-quality materials that increase the variety and
appeal of buildings may be considered as accents. Metals shall have a
matte finish and neutral or earth tone colors. Metals that are used on
exterior walls shall have visible corner moldings and trim.
3.Undesirable materials shall include simulated brick or stone, vinyl
or aluminum siding, sheet metal, corrugated metal, concrete blocks,
materials that have no pattern or relief when applied to large walls,
brightly colored metal roofing or canopies, and pre-cast tilt-up walls.
Extensive use of mirrored or tinted glass on the first floor and
materials that represent corporate colors or trademarks that are not in
conformance with approved building materials are also undesirable.
E.Building Design. The arrangement, geometry, massing, materials and
colors shall work to create a high quality development that is responsive to
existing buildings, site features, and site design on adjoining sites in the
district.
1.At least fifty percent (50%) of the largest building on each site
shall be constructed at the front setback line.
2.Façade treatment shall be carried around all sides. Architectural
elements such as, but not limited to, windows, shutters, awnings,
doors, masonry exterior veneers, cornice detailing, window casings,
Section 1325 – General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 21 of 53
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
and other architectural details should demonstrate consistency on all
sides of the structure that are reasonably visible to the general public.
Plain flat walls shall not be permitted when viewable from the public
right-of-way or public areas.
3.To avoid long unbroken expanses and to increase visual interest
from the street, buildings of more than 40 feet in width shall be
divided into smaller increments (between 20 and 40 feet) through
articulation of the facades to convey the impression of individually-
constructed small storefronts or, in the case of housing, housing units.
This can be achieved through the combination of the following
techniques:
a.The use of windows and doors;
b.Façade modulation—stepping backward or forward or
extending a portion of the façade;
c.Vertical divisions into storefronts with separate display
windows and entrances;
d.Recesses and projections such as porches, dormers and bays
that create shadows and add visual interest;
e.Variation in the rooflines by using multiple roof and ridge lines
perpendicular to one another, offsetting single roof lines, stepped
roofs;
f.Providing a lighting fixture, trellis, tree, or other landscape
feature with each interval.
4.Awnings or overhangs shall be provided at entryways to provide
shelter from the sun and rain. The awnings shall be opaque so as not
to create a glowing effect with lights under the awnings. Awnings
shall be constructed of durable, protective, and water repellant
material; however, plastic or fiberglass awnings shall not be permitted.
5.Any multi-level building shall distinguish the ground floor level
from the upper floors by use of any or a combination of these
techniques: an intermediate cornice line, difference in building
materials or details, awnings trellis or arcade, special window details,
or brick corbels or quoins. A strong base and top for multi-story
buildings shall be established; middle layers shall be simpler. Detail
shall be an integral part of the architecture rather than a series of
applied elements.
Section 1325 – General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 22 of 53
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
6.Franchise architecture identified with a particular chain shall be
discouraged unless it is architecturally integrated into the district and
conforms to these design standards.
7.Entrances shall have convenient access to the street frontage and to
parking serving the use. For those properties along County Road E,
access to the street frontage shall be given priority where feasible.
F.Commercial Façade Transparency.
1.Fifty percent (50%) of the first level façade that includes the
primary store entrance and/or faces a public street shall be made of
transparent windows and doors that are recessed at least one inch
rather than being flush with the façade. If the building is a one story
design and the first floor elevation exceeds twelve (12) feet, then only
the first twelve (12) feet shall be included in calculating the façade
area.
2.At least twenty percent (20%) of the remaining sides that are
reasonably visible to the public shall be window coverage, half of
which may be simulated windows (i.e. spandrel glass). If additional
transparent glass is used on the remaining sides, the City may consider
a proportional reduction in the transparent window and door
requirement on the primary store entrance and/or public street façades:
3. For buildings with a use or function that does not readily allow
windows (e.g. cooler or freezer areas, mechanical rooms, security
areas, storage areas) the transparent window standards may be reduced
at the discretion of the City Council. However, the architectural
detailing must be provided by the use of upper level windows, which
may include the partial use of simulated windows, or architectural
detailing that provides arches, patterning, recesses, and shadowing that
provide aesthetic interest. Architectural detailing may include such
things as change in materials, change in color and other significant
visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the
size, mass, and scale of the wall.
G.Building Color. Colors shall be harmonious. Building colors shall
consist of muted colors with low reflectance. Recommended colors
include browns, grays, tans, beiges, and dark or muted green, blues, and
reds. Bright or brilliant colors and sharply contrasting colors may be used
for only accent purposes occupying a maximum of five percent (5%) of
building façades.
H.Fences. Fences shall blend into the landscape, be compatible with
other materials used on site, and be made of a material that minimizes
Section 1325 – General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 23 of 53
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
corrosion. Finished and treated wood, brick, stone or wrought iron is
encouraged.
I.Signs.
1.Business signs shall be architecturally compatible with the style,
composition, materials, colors and details of the building and should
be an integral part of the building. Signs shall be incorporated into the
façades of the buildings rather than extending past the roof line and
should not project more than twelve (12) inches beyond the plane of
the façades. Retail business wall signs shall be located in a position
above the front window that is located consistently among stores.
2.All other provisions in Chapter 12, Sign Code, shall apply.
J.Site Furnishings and Seating Areas.
1.Site furnishings shall be provided based on the scale of the project.
The site furnishings may be spread out on the site or clustered to
provide a more formal area. Placing site furnishings near landscaped
areas is encouraged. These areas may be shared by multiple tenants on
a property or adjacent properties and may include tables, chairs,
benches, plantings, and other outdoor amenities such as a plaza. These
areas shall be maintained for year round use. Creativity is highly
encouraged. These spaces shall be connected to the sidewalk system.
2.Benches and decorative plantings shall be provided near the
primary entrance of all buildings on a site.
3.Restaurants shall include a functional outdoor seating area with
tables, chairs, plantings, and access to the restaurant.
r.No outdoor seating shall be permitted in any portion of the
public sidewalks where normal pedestrian traffic flow is
obstructed.
s.The outdoor seating area shall not be used for exterior storage
when the area is not in use. While such area is in operation, all
tables and chairs shall be kept in a clean, sanitary condition.
t.These areas shall be distinguished with decorative fencing
and/or plantings.
u.If alcoholic beverages are served, the establishment shall take
reasonable steps to insure that alcoholic beverages are consumed
only by patrons of the establishment who are of age. All other
provisions related to the license to serve alcohol shall apply.
Section 1325 – General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 24 of 53
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
K.Screening.
1.Trash and recycling equipment, materials, and containers shall be
fully enclosed and integrated into the architecture of the buildings.
2.All mechanical equipment, whether roof-mounted or ground-
mounted should be integrated into the architecture of the building. It
shall be completely screened from the ground-level view of adjacent
properties and public streets. Wood screening shall not be permitted.
3.Truck docks and delivery areas shall face away from the public
street and shall be integrated into the architecture of the building.
L.Landscaping. A generous amount of plant material and landscaping
shall be used on all new development and redevelopment sites. Office
parking areas shall include a generous amount of perimeter and internal
landscaping. Parking structures shall be visually softened with plantings.
A minimum of one tree shall be placed along the right-of-way every forty
(40) feet. The tree shall not interfere with the roadway and shall be on
private property.
M.Parking.
1.Placing parking between the street right-of-way and a building
shall be discouraged.
2.No more than fifty percent (50%) of the parking on a site may be
between buildings or in the side yards.
3.Sufficient parking shall be provided to accommodate the
reasonable hourly peak on a given site. Shared parking is encouraged
to reduce land devoted to parking. Hourly variations among different
types of land use may be considered when estimated parking demands.
4.Plantings shall be used to soften and shade parking lots and
parking structures. Parking and service areas shall be visually
screened from street views with plantings and architectural treatments.
5.Parking lot islands shall be used to distribute large parking fields
into separate “outdoor” rooms that have visual relationship to the
buildings they serve. Parking lot islands shall be planted with trees or
include infiltration basins and plantings. Entry drives shall be defined
by trees and shrubs.
Section 1325 – General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 25 of 53
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
6.A concrete curb shall be provided around the periphery of all
parking lots and access roads, except where the City Engineer
determines that a curb would impede drainage.
7.Parking adjacent to streets should be screened from views with
landscaping, including but not limited to trees, hedges, flowers and
other bushes and/or decorative masonry walls. Berms shall be
discouraged.
8.Parking structures that are visible from off the site shall display an
integration of building materials building form, textures, architectural
motif, and building colors with the principal building. No signs other
than directional signs shall be permitted on parking ramp facades.
N.Traffic Study. A traffic study shall be required for all new
developments, redevelopments, and significant modifications to existing
sites unless waived by the City Council.
O.Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be provided for the safety and
convenience of occupants and visitors.
1.A lighting plan shall be submitted that shows location, type of
illumination and design. A photometric analysis of site and building
shall be submitted for City approval with all new construction or
redevelopment projects.
2.Exterior lighting shall be consistent in type, design, scale, and
color to create unity in the Districts. High-pressure sodium lighting
and other similar types of lighting color may be required by the City to
promote a unified lighting color throughout the Districts. Other
lighting colors may be considered during the City review process.
3.Exterior lighting for parking lots and buildings shall not be
excessive and shall be directed at their intended purposes.
4.Lighting under a gasoline station canopy shall not be directly
visible from the street but shall be recessed into the canopy or
otherwise shielded.
5.Light washing of buildings and accent lighting may be permitted
through the City review process provided that it does not negatively
impact residential areas or traffic safety and is complementary to the
district as a whole.
P.Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation. Pedestrian and bicycle
improvements shall be installed in accordance with the City of Arden Hills
Section 1325 – General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 26 of 53
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
Comprehensive Plan and the local guiding plan and shall be in
conformance with the following:
1.Site design shall facilitate pedestrian connections and mobility
within and between building, sites, and uses by providing clear visual
indicators through door placement, signage, striping, raised pathways,
and integrating landscaping components. Other features or materials
may be considered that enhance and provide a safe pedestrian
experience.
2.A sidewalk shall link the primary entrance of each building on site
with the public sidewalk network. In the event a building is
subdivided into multiple separated tenant spaces, a sidewalk must link
the primary entrance of each separated tenant space with the public
sidewalk network.
3.Bike racks shall be required near a public entrance of all buildings.
4.Internal sidewalk systems shall connect with adjacent planned or
developed public sidewalks or trails.
5.The grades of all walks, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved
areas shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
6.Where there is new building construction or renovation where the
renovation value is thirty percent (30%) or more of the pre-renovation
value of the structure, a minimum six foot concrete sidewalk adjacent
to or in all rights-of-way shall be provided. The location of the
sidewalk shall be prescribed by the Public Works Director. The new
sidewalks shall connect to sidewalks on adjacent properties if they
exist. At the discretion of the City Council, the property owner may,
in lieu of constructing the sidewalk, pay the City an amount equal to
the cost of constructing the sidewalk to satisfy the obligations of this
section. Said payment shall be used by the City to further maintain and
construct the pathway system within the City.
7.When there is more than one building on a site, a sidewalk must
link the primary building entrances of each building to one another.
Q.Drainage/Water Management Plan: A plan must be submitted with
each project or lot development in the Districts. The plan must be
approved by the Rice Creek Watershed District, other agencies as
required, and the engineer assigned by the City. Two or more lots or
projects may coordinate their plans for their mutual benefit.
Section 1325 – General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 27 of 53
City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code
R.Environmental Conservation and Sustainability. The City encourages
the use of green materials and environmentally friendly construction and
site design such as the use of pervious surfaces, green rooftops, energy
efficient materials, LEED standards, and other green building techniques.
Section 1325 – General Regulations
Adopted: November 13, 2006
Page 28 of 53
C
Attachment
Traffic Study –
Guiding Plan for the B2 District
January 20, 2009
PTHE'
TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY
w _
�Pr
Tra I
In -m act Study
Guiding Plan for the B2 District
Arden Hills, MN
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or
under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the
State of Minnesota.
Date: December 5,2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.Introduction and Summary ........................................................ 1
2.Proposed Development ............................................................. 3
3.Analysis of Existing Conditions ............................................... 6
4.Projected Traffic ....................................................................... 12
5.Traffic and Improvement Analysis .......................................... 21
6.Conclusions and Recommendations ..................................... 25
7.Appendix ................................................................................... 25
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1 – Location Map .................................................................................. 4
Figure 2.2 – Concept Plan .................................................................................. 5
Figure 3.1 – Existing Conditions ....................................................................... 9
Figure 3.2 – Existing P.M. Peak Hour Traffic .................................................. 10
Figure 3.3 – Existing Daily Traffic .................................................................... 11
Figure 4.1 – Trip Distribution ........................................................................... 14
Figure 4.2 – P.M. Peak Hour Volumes Due to Development.......................... 15
Figure 4.3 – Daily Volumes Due to Development ........................................... 16
Figure 4.4 – 2030 No-Build P.M. Peak Hour Volumes .................................... 17
Figure 4.5 – 2030 No-Build Daily Volumes ...................................................... 18
Figure 4.6 – 2030 Build P.M. Peak Hour Volumes .......................................... 19
Figure 4.7 – 2030 Build Daily Volumes ............................................................ 20
Figure 5.1 – Recommended Long Range Improvements .............................. 24
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 – Average Annual Daily Traffic Volumes .......................................... 7
Table 3.2 – Existing Level of Service (LOS) ...................................................... 8
Table 4.1 – Development Trip Generation ...................................................... 13
Table 5.1 – 2030 P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service (LOS) ............................... 21
Guiding Plan for the B2 District i Arden Hills, MN
Traffic Impact Study December 2008
1. Introduction and Summary
a. Purpose of Report and Study Objectives
The City of Arden Hills is developing a Guiding Plan for the B2
District. The purpose of this report is to determine if existing
transportation infrastructure can accommodate the redevelopment
contemplated in the Guiding Plan and to recommend changes to the
transportation infrastructure to enhance the redevelopment.
The study objectives are:
i. Determine how the existing County Road E/Hamline Avenue
West Ramp, County Road E/Connelly Avenue, County Road
E/Pine Tree Drive, County Road E/Holiday Inn Site Driveway,
County Road E/Arden Plaza Driveway, County Road
E/Lexington Avenue, and Lexington Avenue/Harriet Avenue
intersections currently operate.
ii. Determine if the above intersections will operate acceptably
after the redevelopment is fully occupied in 2030.
iii. Recommend improvements if needed.
b. Executive Summary
The City of Arden Hills is planning for redevelopment along the
County Road E corridor. The redevelopment is planned to occur on
three different sites along the corridor: (1) the Pot ‘O Gold bingo hall
site will be replaced with 15,000 square feet of offices, (2) the Holiday
Inn hotel will be replaced with 95 apartment units and 120,000
square feet of office, and (3) the 46,000 square feet of offices on the
Arden Plaza site will be replaced with a 14,400 square foot pharmacy
and 5,000 square foot shopping center.
To determine if there will be significant traffic impacts to the County
Road E corridor, the following intersections are analyzed in this
study:
County Road E & Hamline Avenue West Ramp
County Road E & Hamline Avenue East Ramp/Connelly
Avenue
County Road E & Pine Tree Drive
County Road E & Holiday Inn Site Driveway
County Road E & Arden Plaza Driveway
County Road E & Lexington Avenue
Lexington Avenue & Harriet Avenue
Guiding Plan for the B2 District 1 Arden Hills, MN
Traffic Impact Study December 2008
The principal findings of this study are:
i. The roadways and study intersections within the study area
currently operate acceptably at Level of Service (LOS) D or
better and will continue to operate at LOS D or better
through the 2030 Build scenario when the redevelopment
is anticipated to be fully occupied.
ii. The driveways on County Road E for the Holiday Inn site
and the Arden Plaza site will experience significant delay
and queuing in the p.m. peak hour. This is acceptable as
an interim situation because little queuing is anticipated on
County Road E to pose a safety problem. Long term, the
queuing will impact the vitality of the redevelopments and
could lead to safety problems. These driveways should be
realigned midway between Pine Tree Drive and Lexington
Avenue to provide a four legged intersection that could be
controlled with a traffic signal. Left turn lanes and shared
through/right lanes should be provided on the north and
south legs to provide adequate egress.
iii. No improvements are needed to facilitate the Pot ‘O Gold
site redevelopment.
iv. The County Road E corridor has a wide center two way left
turn lane down the middle as well as many driveway
intersections. This leads to a vehicle dominated corridor
that is unfriendly to pedestrians and bicycles. It is
envisioned County Road E will operate as a vibrant, multi-
modal corridor that will attract pedestrians and bicycles.
To provide a safe multi-modal corridor, it is recommended
County Road E should ultimately be reconstructed from
Hamline Avenue to Lexington Avenue to provide a
landscaped median, bike lanes, boulevards, and
sidewalks.
Guiding Plan for the B2 District 2 Arden Hills, MN
Traffic Impact Study December 2008
2. Proposed Development
a. Site Location
The study area is bordered by the railroad tracks on the north,
Hamline Avenue on the West, Harriet Avenue on the south, and
Lexington Avenue on the east. See Figure 2.1 for a location map.
b. Land Use and Intensity
Three redevelopment sites were identified through the planning
process. Although redevelopment may occur outside of these three
areas, this study analyzes the impact of redeveloping the Pot ‘O
Gold, Holiday Inn, and Arden Plaza sites. Through the planning
process, we were directed to analyze the impacts of the following
development:
1. The Pot ‘O Gold bingo hall site will be replaced with 15,000
square feet of office.
2. The Holiday Inn hotel will be replaced with 95 apartment units
and 120,000 square feet of office.
3. The 46,000 square feet of offices on the Arden Plaza site will
be replaced with a 14,400 square foot pharmacy and 5,000
square foot shopping center.
c. Concept Plan
Figure 2.2 shows the location of the redevelopment sites
d. Development Phasing and Timing
This study assumes the development will be fully occupied by the
end of 2030.
Guiding Plan for the B2 District 3 Arden Hills, MN
Traffic Impact Study December 2008
p"Aa—"FFC �S=ue�YCOM PA INY Figure 2.1
Location Maps t
Guiding Plan for the B2 District North
Arden Hills, MN No Scale
Anora �. N O K ,' 3
14 „ q
Vw
$` Champlin 21
2f' ❑
' t, Mir viNs 5
1 6rc* _ ��119D
tD3Pine -
... Blae
T-cs.L3,,e 't! ltl ,.LiRu l}eS 'Bt ._._ 7
- n6 '3D— 13 a Coon Rapids ------s"� -1
, ea rL�'e flsse7r 1De' „pn�9 Lalcep k _
lRA1rte
tt 6car i5 11.._
- x Prla�Hill� 'YIIIIB n_Battett. -
as
52 QBC>� Rar k B
oFritiley Shoreview. n .DeW—ad
D0 - - I[An EtW,kt4'YYVWy�"V1Nag}'• ,"oillarrne
• 9' a�c = - 12 r
tt �
O ak F"xk He1#E
T N 3 3 A- °► Canada .. 19 ' ruse ,pnr,
:a 1D2 81:H a" �Maplevrool t7. 6ayp
o (1 Iy � Roselnlle + rtF t Paul 1.4
akdale -L»k-Ehu
90g� Qo�z+t a>.
t O $ �
73
Woodland y, ia1� fall: I ... ._.
- I + s - i ,`y!!w•_ l3
eephaden tin - I aD l ae - .� - 3� r -_ , 1220 La
T
L k DY
�.- Afton '.
��
£.
Edin$ 1 it�
62 _ks & L'Bli.$ .1 ___.1,♦�.
Ott
tC0 "
56 qD
1d dt� 5 cottage
G ..95 L ♦�
3
77" loorniforgot 7 Grove
♦♦
< tl
I
a aline�a[N�.` ^ll 3ht�ie etrved�r� f. r +I.Fea
Study Area
raen
®aws`P�
{
R�
h n Y� �
.mac' S:L52 ':,- '® .� •:'a�'. '� dit�''''Lt""> ri
r +
' G�at1 a C r' .
3. Analysis of Existing Conditions
a. Physical Characteristics
Each of the three redevelopment sites is being planned at a
conceptual level. The beginning assumption is that they will utilize
the existing access configurations.
The three major roadways within the study area, all designated as
minor arterials, are County Road E (Ramsey County State Aid
Highway 15), Lexington Avenue (Ramsey County State Aid Highway
51), and Hamline Avenue(Minnesota Trunk Highway 51). The rest
of the roadways within the study area are city streets. Existing traffic
control, speed limits, and travel lanes are shown on Figure 3.1 for
each study intersection. No roadway improvements are scheduled
near the site.
Metro Transit routes 225 and 261 travel along County Road E
through the study area and on Lexington Avenue north of the study
area. Route 261 also travels along Lexington Avenue through the
study area. There are no major bus stops within the study area, but
bus service is available during the day time hours.
There are intermittent trails and sidewalks for pedestrians through the
study area. The sidewalks along County Road E are interrupted by
many driveways that serve the local businesses. There are bicyclists
who use the corridor both on street and along the trails/sidewalks.
The County Road E/Hamline Avenue interchange provides a
significant barrier for pedestrians and bicycles who want to move
along the County Road E corridor. The bridge over Hamline Avenue
does not have sidewalks or on street bicycle lanes.
b. Traffic Volumes
In commercial/retail areas, such as the County Road E corridor, the
p.m. peak hour is typically more congested than the a.m. peak
period. For this reason, the analysis in this study focuses on the p.m.
peak hour. Figure 3.2 shows the existing p.m. peak hour turning
movement counts for the study area. The data for the street
intersections was collected in 2008 and the turning movement count
data is contained in fifteen minute intervals in the Appendix. The
turning movement volume data for the County Road E/Arden Plaza
driveway intersection is from the 2007 Traffic and Parking Study for
Proposed Redevelopment of Arden Plaza. No turning movement
volumes are shown for the Holiday Inn site because it is currently
vacant and will be completely redeveloped.
Guiding Plan for the 82 District 6 Arden Hills, MN
Traffic Impact Studv December 2008
S p -a c -k
PAfFI �-UD � �FA.� -- Figure 2.2
Concept Plan t
Guiding Plan for the 132 District North
Arden Hills, MN No Scale
Pot'O Gold Site
- Remove Bingo Hall
-Add 15,000 sq ft of Office
®Holiday Inn Site
• • - Remove Hotel
a •
-Add 95 Apartment Units
-Add 120.000 so ft of Office
0 TV or
{'may
F x! a
a�
tk
♦
Arden Plaza Site •
- Remove Offices
-Add 14,400 sq ft Pharmacy
-Add 5,000 sq ft Shopping Center
c. Level of Service
Los A An intersection capacity analysis was conducted
for the existing intersections per the Highway
- Capacity Manual. Intersections are assigned a
"Level of Service" letter grade for the peak hour
of traffic based on the number of lanes at the
intersection, traffic volumes, and traffic control.
Los C Level of Service A (LOS A) represents light
a: �s-
traffic flow (free flow conditions)while Level of
Service F (LOS F) represents heavy traffic flow
(over capacity conditions). LOS D is considered
acceptable in urban conditions. The pictures on
LOS D=Acceptable the left represent some of the LOS grades (from
1 *� a signal controlled intersection in San Jose, CA).
`.t
The LOS results for the existing study hours are
shown in Table 3.2. These are based on the
existing traffic control and lane configurations as
cos F=Unacceptable existing
in Figure 3.1. The existing turning
r _ movement volumes from Figure 3.2 were used
- � in the LOS calculations. The LOS calculations
were done using SYNCHROT"' software.
source: city of Ramsey County's existing timing plans were
San Jose,CA used in the analyses. The complete LOS
calculations are included in the Appendix.
Table 3.2 — Existing Level of Service (LOS)
Intersection Existing P.M. Peek Hour
Co Rd E & Hamline Ave West Ramp B
Co Rd E & Connell Ave C
Co Rd E & Pine Tree Dr B
Co Rd E & Holiday Inn Site Dvwy A
Co Rd E & Arden Plaza Dvw A
Co Rd E & Lexington Ave D
Lexington Ave & Harriet Ave A
All of the study intersections operate acceptably at LOS D or better in
the existing p.m. weekday peak hour.
d. Data Sources
The sources for the data cited above are:
• Turning movement volumes —Traffic Data Inc. & Wenck
• Daily traffic volumes — Mn/DOT
• Roadway geometries and traffic control — Spack Consulting
• Concept plan — MFRA
Guiding Plan Jor the B2 District 8 Arden Hills, MN
Traffic Impact Study December 2008
Please note the traffic volumes do not balance between the study
intersections because there are driveways and ancillary intersections
between them.
The historic daily traffic volumes for the area roadways are shown in
Table 3.1. This data was furnished by Mn/DOT.
Table 3.1 – Average Annual Daily Traffic Volumes
30,000
25,000
20,000
CR E E of Lexington
CR E W of Lexington
15,000
Lexington N of CR E
Lexington S of CR E
10,000
5,000
0
1986198819901994199619982000200320052007
Year
6,9006,4006,7007,0007,9009,10010,10010,5009,4009,100
CR E E of Lexington
16,00015,30015,70015,50015,80015,80016,30016,00016,00014,700
CR E W of Lexington
15,70014,50017,50017,00020,00019,00024,00023,00022,40022,400
Lexington N of CR E
13,50011,50012,50012,50012,00012,00014,00013,00011,80013,100
Lexington S of CR E
Guiding Plan for the B2 District 7 Arden Hills, MN
Traffic Impact Study December 2008
Ra -c k
,IFFIC STUDY ,F,PANY
Fi ure 3.1
Existing Lanes & Traffic Control
Guiding Plan for the B2 District
Arden Hills, MN
North
No Scale
IT-
_s [. ai
a
o
$ r r r west county r" ; «��L► = <
Ian?y 'id E Road E 1 .. ..
11 Uzi County Road E
u 35 m h F tL
v
-
��
>
�► ' m a o
m rn E y t
X .
t = f0 `'�
ten;:§s Est g ,� + e ,° Harriet Avenue 4
30 mph
J IS ` q '
�c �
�x 43
TIL
a
St
r
P 'q
�FFF,c 5TUCIf MPANY Figure 3.2
Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes t
Guiding Plan for the B2 District North
Arden Hills, MN No Scale
L 57 ILO
v v 4 —619 0 0 0 4--730
J t 4 r 272 4.11 j 4 r 28
*
52../ r 0 j 4-1 t 14
623--O� N 960 —.0. o
L 0 187� 51 -% o a, L 148
0 0 0 4-550 4�749 c`Do N 4—286
4 4 r310 r40 1 4 ra61
0�/* 4-j 1 r* *1 to 389� *1 1 f*
711 0 o 0 857 —► o
52 67 131
d
� C
C � �
West Countv Road E
a 3
c
N
19
i d N m chi ♦�1
5+ ''1tf''
0-
1 �.► o
Q
62..+
riet Avenue a
d
c �
E
R o
x rn
c
X
N
J
Figure 3.3
Existing Daily Traffic Volumes
Guiding Plan for the B2 District
North
Arden Hills, MN
No Scale
West County Road E
10,70016,0009,400
Harriet Avenue
1,450
LEGEND
2006 Average Annual Daily
Traffic Volumes
source: Mn/DOT Traffic Flow Maps
2005 Average Annual Daily
Traffic Volumes
source: Mn/DOT Traffic Flow Maps
4. Projected Traffic
a. Site Traffic Forecasting
A trip generation analysis was performed for the site based on the
th
methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7
Edition. The weekday p.m. peak hour trip generation is for the “one
hour of adjacent street traffic” from 7-9 p.m. The resultant trip
generations are shown in Table 4.1.
The directional orientation of the generated traffic is shown in Figure
4.1. This orientation is based on a weighted distribution of the traffic
volumes currently using the area roadways.
The p.m. peak hour and daily trips generated by the site were
assigned to the area roadways per the trip distributions shown in
Figure 4.1. The traffic volumes added to the study roadways through
this process are shown in Figures 4.2 and Figure 4.3. Figure 4.2
and 4.3 are the traffic added by the development in the p.m. peak
hour and daily conditions respectively.
b. Non-site Traffic Forecasting
As shown in Table 3.1, the daily traffic volumes on County Road E
and Lexington Avenue within the study area have not grown over the
last twenty years. Based on the flat growth in daily traffic volumes
within the study area, it is assumed their will be little growth in traffic
volumes within the study area that is not directly attributed to the
proposed redevelopment sites. Traffic forecasts were developed for
the year 2030 No-Build scenario by rounding the existing volumes to
represent the level of accuracy of the future forecasts. The resulting
2030 No-Build forecasts are shown in Figures 4.4 and 4.5.
c. Total Traffic for 2030
Traffic forecasts were developed for the year 2030 Build scenario by
adding the traffic generated by the proposed development, as shown
in Figures 4.2 and 4.3, to the No-Build volumes shown in Figures 4.4
and 4.5. The resultant 2030 Build traffic forecasts are shown in
Figures 4.6 and 4.7.
Guiding Plan for the B2 District 12 Arden Hills, MN
Traffic Impact Study December 2008
ac k
p
RAFF�C 5TUDY C C,r.,P..:ti Figure 4.1
Trip Distribution
Guiding Plan for the B2 District North
Arden Hills, MN No Scale
T
''SDI
n � r
n
V
O1 50/n
arrlek
O
r�
4
n "
x
w
-
r
X
r w w N
IL
Z z
.�. M O G "�" Onf Z f" Q M M O r n
. M tp r Ca 2to
::
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0
d
y V o 0 o a e N U e o e e o a
Na �
ILa', o w
LU
w 111 `G
Z � N
O
a
zm
U o e a o e U'. o o e o a a
R' LLI O g
IL IL
C
w T
W V
W a a e o e t= w" e e a o e N
U. M t0 M O N M m W L
G 9L c w w
m = >
H rn U
2 o
W o e o e m e m
w CT n �n n o `co n L o O
Z p,
Z Qom' �O N N N N O w w r t0 r N O r O`
w d. w
m O
C N w
3 C �
J F O r O O Of V tD V N n «�i O F O
w m E c
} n = cc m
L6 N V C_ Y C G
Q O m ._
C'I LF W a° m
v 3 m
C c N V
�^ O A 12 '-
Z
a a a a a ¢ w a a a ¢
M U. U. lL LL. LL N LL LL LL LL p 0 � _
a C9 �' C9 C7 C9 (9 3► C9 C9 C� (7 (9 p, O
m v E
Z Z I- V,
p o N o m N }w.Q o N O N o c o u
0..
•O � V �
c C m
L) U i 9
O m
U 3
O Y na L o
N -p m c m a c m m
_ I > w- ° m > m rn
m w U p w 3 0 m w
C V d a E Vol ¢ r
Q i Z E m E m a u Z m r E a OF
Qc Y m CL R C «
d 0 ¢ O a m 0 3 O a 0 E m
U) a
a o Nac vc c iiil LLn
U) co
U N NN 7 ~aO N mR
a a a O a a a
c O c c wOR vm
(.9w o 0 -E v -a aO a
o 6LL Q 0 x = ¢ ¢ a n = x TE
Figure 4.2
PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Due to Development
Guiding Plan for the B2 District
North
Arden Hills, MN
No Scale
0
50
30
3050
0
30140
00300
106030
300
0
070
106040
0060
West County Road E
0
0
0
0
0
0
Harriet Avenue
50
20
20
40
Figure 4.3
Daily Traffic Volumes Due to Development
Guiding Plan for the B2 District
North
Arden Hills, MN
No Scale
West County Road E
2001,000600
Harriet Avenue
0
Figure 4.4
2030 PM Peak Hour No-Build Traffic Volumes
Guiding Plan for the B2 District
North
Arden Hills, M
No Scale
600
700730
27030
24
500
680960
019050150
550750290
3104060
135
0390
710860500
5070130
West County Road E
20
0
10
6
10
0
60
Harriet Avenue
Figure 4.5
2030 Daily No-Build Traffic Volumes
Guiding Plan for the B2 District
North
Arden Hills, MN
No Scale
West County Road E
10,70016,0009,400
Harriet Avenue
1,500
Figure 4.6
2030 PM Peak Hour Build Traffic Volumes
Guiding Plan for the B2 District
North
Arden Hills, MN
No Scale
60
780
730
30080
50
7101,100
080150
190
560810320
34060
40
0460
720920540
5070190
West County Road E
20
0
10
10
0
60
Harriet Avenue
50
790
20
970
Figure 4.7
2030 Daily Build Traffic Volumes
Guiding Plan for the B2 District
North
Arden Hills, MN
No Scale
West County Road E
10,90017,00010,000
Harriet Avenue
1,500
5. Traffic and Improvement Analysis
a. 2030 Level of Service Analysis
The LOS results for the 2030 study hours are shown in Table 5.1.
These are based on the existing traffic control and lane
configurations as shown in Figure 3.1. The forecast turning
movement volumes from Figures 4.4 and 4.6 were used in the LOS
TM
calculations. The LOS calculations were done using SYNCHRO
software. Ramsey County’s existing timing plans were used in the
analyses. The complete LOS calculations are included in the
Appendix.
Table 5.1 – 2030 P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service (LOS)
IntersectionNo-Build Build
Co Rd E & Hamline Ave West Ramp B B
Co Rd E & Connelly Ave C C
Co Rd E & Pine Tree Dr B B
Co Rd E & Holiday Inn Site Dvwy A C
Co Rd E & Arden Plaza Dvwy A B
Co Rd E & Lexington Ave D D
Lexington Ave & Harriet Ave A A
All of the intersections will operate acceptably at LOS Dor better
during the 2030 weekday p.m. peak hour in both the No-Build and
Build scenarios. The Holiday Inn Site driveway and the Arden Plaza
driveway intersections on County Road E will operate acceptably with
little delay and vehicle stacking on County Road E, however vehicles
will experience significant delay trying to turn onto County Road E
during the evening peak period after the sites are redeveloped. The
LOS calculations predict it will take approximately 3 minutes per
vehicle on average to turn from Arden Plaza onto County Road E and
approximately 3½ minutes per vehicle on average to turn from the
Holiday Inn site onto County Road E. Because motorists are queuing
in parking lots instead of on high speed public roadways, this type of
delay can be tolerated in an interim situation but improvements
should be planned to reduce these delays.
Based on calculations from the Transportation Research Board’s
Highway Capacity Manual, roadway segments operate at LOS D if
they carry the following daily volumes:
9,000 vehicles per day - Two Lane Roadways (Harriet
Avenue)
Guiding Plan for the B2 District 21 Arden Hills, MN
Traffic Impact Study December 2008
14,000 vehicles per day - Two Lane Roadways with Turn
Lanes (Pine Tree Drive, Lexington Avenue at Harriet
Avenue, and County Road E west of Hamline Avenue)
27,000 vehicles per day - Four Lane Roadways with Turn
Lanes (Lexington Avenue at County Road E and County
Road E east of Hamline Avenue)
45,000 vehicles per day - Four Lane Expressways (Hamline
Avenue)
Figures 4.5 and 4.7 show the 2030 daily volumes anticipated on the
area roadways. The daily traffic volumes within the study area will
operate at or better than LOS D in both the 2030 No-Build and 2030
Build scenarios.
b. Long Range Improvements
Even though the roadways and intersections will operate within traffic
engineering standards, it will be difficult for vehicles to leave the
Holiday Inn and Arden Plaza sites during the evening rush hour. To
assist the redevelopment efforts, it is recommended the Arden Plaza
and Holiday Inn driveways be realigned midway between Pine Tree
Drive and Lexington Avenue. Left turn lanes and shared
right/through lanes should be built on the new north and south legs of
the intersection to provide adequate egress and the intersection
should be controlled with a traffic signal. The signal should be
installed when the traffic volumes at the intersection meet the criteria
for installing a traffic signal per the Minnesota Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices. These improvements are shown
schematically on Figure 5.1.
When the traffic signal is installed at the new intersection it will
operate at LOS B in the 2030 Build p.m. peak hour. This leaves
capacity to accommodate significantly more redevelopment as long
as the traffic from the redevelopment is focused at the signalized
intersection.
Based on the Guiding Planning efforts, it is envisioned the County
Road E corridor should provide safe mobility for pedestrians and
bicycles as well as vehicles. Several improvements are
recommended to accomplish this goal (see Figure 5.1):
Construct a landscaped median on County Road E from
Hamline Avenue to Lexington Avenue to convert the private
driveways along County Road E into right-in/right-out
accesses.
Driveways should be consolidated whenever feasible to limit
the conflict points along the corridor.
Provide left turn lanes at public street intersections.
Guiding Plan for the B2 District 22 Arden Hills, MN
Traffic Impact Study December 2008
Provide on street bicycle lanes.
Provide sidewalks.
Improve the landscaping to provide a human scale to the
corridor.
Provide eleven foot wide travel lanes which will reinforce the
35 mph speed limit.
Minimize traffic signs within the corridor whenever feasible.
Extend the bicycle and pedestrian facilities through the
County Road E/Hamline Avenue interchange when it is
reconstructed.
The cross section in Figure 5.1 was developed with MFRA to utilize
the existing pavement width and curbs. Using the existing curb and
gutter system will minimize the cost of reconstructing the corridor. It
will also shorten the construction period, lessening the impact on
local businesses.
County Road E is under the jurisdiction of Ramsey County. The City
will need to work collaboratively with the County to gain approval for
these recommended improvements.
Guiding Plan for the B2 District 23 Arden Hills, MN
Traffic Impact Study December 2008
PTHETRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Figure 5.1
Recommended Long Range Improvements
Guiding Plan for the B2 District
Arden Hills, MN
I
3
BfKE DRNE LANC?SCAPE �.tEDtAN ANp - .. .. •;.
SIGEWAi,J� EtOULEVARD DRTVE LEFT- TURN UNE U "tt L2R€VE fai;E
11I mot( BOULEVARD SIDEWALK
, �
72'
+u'
1,.--..___._.,....._....�... 88' ROw__--
t
Reconstruct County Road E from Hamline Avenue to Lexington Avenue to
provide a landscaped median, bike lanes, boulevards, and sidewalks.
r
.f r
a
- Align Holiday Inn Site driveway and Arden Plaza driveway midway
between Pine Tree Drive and Lexington Avenue.
- Control newly formed intersection with a traffic signal.
- Provide left turn lanes on the north and south approaches to the
intersection.
- Promote connecticity throughout parcels to utilize the signalized
intersection.
6. Conclusions and Recommendations
The roadways and study intersections within the study area currently operate
acceptably at Level of Service (LOS) D or better in the weekday p.m. peak hour
and will continue to operate at LOS D or better through the 2030 Build scenario
when the redevelopment is anticipated to be fully occupied. The driveways on
County Road E for the Holiday Inn site and the Arden Plaza site will experience
significant delay and queuing in the p.m. peak hour. This is acceptable as an
interim situation because little queuing is anticipated on County Road E to pose
a safety problem. Long term, the queuing will impact the vitality of the
redevelopments and could lead to safety problems. These driveways should
be realigned midway between Pine Tree Drive and Lexington Avenue to
provide a four legged intersection that could be controlled with a traffic signal.
The County Road E corridor has a wide center two way left turn lane down the
middle as well as many driveway intersections. This leads to a vehicle
dominated corridor that is unfriendly to pedestrians and bicycles. It is
envisioned County Road E will operate as a vibrant, multi-modal corridor that
will attract pedestrians and bicycles. To provide a safe multi-modal corridor, it
is recommended County Road E should ultimately be reconstructed from
Hamline Avenue to Lexington Avenue to provide a landscaped median, bike
lanes, boulevards, and sidewalks.
7. Appendix
a. Traffic counts
b. Capacity analysis calculations
Guiding Plan for the B2 District 25 Arden Hills, MN
Traffic Impact Study December 2008
Appendix A
Traffic Counts
Appendix B
Capacity Analysis
Existing PM Peak HourCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: West County Road E & Hwy 51 SB Ramp
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor1.001.001.001.00
Frt0.991.001.000.89
Flt Protected1.000.951.000.99
Satd. Flow (prot)1845177018631642
Flt Permitted1.000.191.000.99
Satd. Flow (perm)184535718631642
Volume (vph)7115231055047210
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)7735733759851228
RTOR Reduction (vph)20001950
Lane Group Flow (vph)8280337598840
Turn Typepm+pt
Protected Phases2168
Permitted Phases6
Actuated Green, G (s)53.772.271.79.8
Effective Green, g (s)54.272.272.29.8
Actuated g/C Ratio0.600.800.800.11
Clearance Time (s)4.54.04.54.0
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)11115061495179
v/s Ratio Protc0.45c0.100.32c0.05
v/s Ratio Perm0.43
v/c Ratio0.740.670.400.47
Uniform Delay, d112.919.22.637.7
Progression Factor1.000.560.281.00
Incremental Delay, d24.62.60.61.9
Delay (s)17.513.41.339.6
Level of ServiceBBAD
Approach Delay (s)17.55.739.6
Approach LOSBAD
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay15.1HCM Level of ServiceB
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.67
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization83.3%ICU Level of ServiceE
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
TDI
Existing PM Peak HourCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: West County Road E & Connelly Ave
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor1.000.951.001.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.971.001.000.850.930.95
Flt Protected0.951.000.951.001.000.980.98
Satd. Flow (prot)1770341717701863158316941736
Flt Permitted0.371.000.131.001.000.830.78
Satd. Flow (perm)68234172431863158314391373
Volume (vph)526231872726195712128179462842
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)576772032966736213230195503046
RTOR Reduction (vph)0300003004800230
Lane Group Flow (vph)578500296673320309001030
Turn Typepm+ptpm+ptPermPermPerm
Protected Phases521684
Permitted Phases26684
Actuated Green, G (s)33.833.345.345.345.328.528.5
Effective Green, g (s)33.833.845.845.845.829.029.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.380.380.510.510.510.320.32
Clearance Time (s)4.04.54.04.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)2951283382948806464442
v/s Ratio Prot0.01c0.25c0.130.36
v/s Ratio Perm0.07c0.260.02c0.210.08
v/c Ratio0.190.660.770.710.040.670.23
Uniform Delay, d121.223.419.917.011.126.322.3
Progression Factor0.490.571.061.112.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d20.21.88.94.20.17.41.2
Delay (s)10.615.030.023.022.233.723.6
Level of ServiceBBCCCCC
Approach Delay (s)14.725.033.723.6
Approach LOSBCCC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay22.3HCM Level of ServiceC
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.70
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization72.4%ICU Level of ServiceC
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 2
TDI
Existing PM Peak HourCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: West County Road E & Pine Tree Drive
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor0.951.000.951.001.00
Frt0.991.001.001.000.85
Flt Protected1.000.951.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)35011770353917701583
Flt Permitted1.000.201.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3501375353917701583
Volume (vph)8576740749205101
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)9327343814223110
RTOR Reduction (vph)6000078
Lane Group Flow (vph)99904381422332
Turn Typepm+ptPerm
Protected Phases2168
Permitted Phases68
Actuated Green, G (s)44.956.055.526.026.0
Effective Green, g (s)45.456.056.026.026.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.500.620.620.290.29
Clearance Time (s)4.54.04.54.04.0
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)17663362202511457
v/s Ratio Protc0.290.01c0.23c0.13
v/s Ratio Perm0.070.02
v/c Ratio0.570.130.370.440.07
Uniform Delay, d115.514.38.326.023.2
Progression Factor0.711.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d21.10.20.52.70.3
Delay (s)12.114.48.828.723.5
Level of ServiceBBACC
Approach Delay (s)12.19.127.0
Approach LOSBAC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay13.2HCM Level of ServiceB
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.49
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization50.5%ICU Level of ServiceA
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 3
TDI
Existing PM Peak HourCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: West County Road E & Lexington Ave
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor1.000.951.000.951.000.951.000.95
Frt1.000.971.000.951.000.991.000.95
Flt Protected0.951.000.951.000.951.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17703429177033581770349717703357
Flt Permitted0.181.000.391.000.131.000.291.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3343429730335824534975463357
Volume (vph)3894981316128614812364556244669350
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)4235411426631116113470161265727380
RTOR Reduction (vph)020005500500550
Lane Group Flow (vph)4236630664170134757026510520
Turn Typepm+ptpm+ptpm+ptpm+pt
Protected Phases74385216
Permitted Phases4826
Actuated Green, G (s)49.941.222.017.338.138.146.145.1
Effective Green, g (s)50.942.223.018.339.139.146.146.1
Actuated g/C Ratio0.430.360.200.160.330.330.390.39
Clearance Time (s)4.05.04.05.04.05.04.05.0
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)493122918452219411623771315
v/s Ratio Protc0.210.190.010.120.05c0.220.09c0.31
v/s Ratio Permc0.160.060.180.18
v/c Ratio0.860.540.360.800.690.650.700.80
Uniform Delay, d130.130.039.647.932.333.534.831.7
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d213.80.51.28.410.12.85.85.2
Delay (s)43.930.540.856.342.436.340.736.9
Level of ServiceDCDEDDDD
Approach Delay (s)35.654.437.237.6
Approach LOSDDDD
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay39.3HCM Level of ServiceD
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.81
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 117.7Sum of lost time (s)12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization84.0%ICU Level of ServiceE
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 4
TDI
Existing PM Peak HourCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: West County Road E & Arden Plaza Dvwy
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Sign ControlFreeFreeStopStop
Grade0%0%0%0%
Volume (veh/h)09605128730043061000
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)010435530793047066000
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)1
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)900464
pX, platoon unblocked0.940.820.850.850.820.850.850.94
vC, conflicting volume79310981533192954913801957397
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol7228991250171822910701750301
tC, single (s)4.14.17.56.56.97.56.56.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)2.22.23.54.03.33.54.03.3
p0 queue free %100955910090100100100
cM capacity (veh/h)8276161057163412868656
Direction, Lane #EB 1EB 2EB 3WB 1WB 2WB 3NB 1SB 1
Volume Total0696403305292641130
Volume Left0003000470
Volume Right0055000660
cSH170017001700616170017002371700
Volume to Capacity0.000.410.240.050.310.160.460.00
Queue Length 95th (ft)000400560
Control Delay (s)0.00.00.011.20.00.032.50.0
Lane LOSBDA
Approach Delay (s)0.00.432.50.0
Approach LOSDA
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.9
Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.6%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
TDI
Existing PM Peak HourCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Harriet Ave & Lexington Ave
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Sign ControlStopStopFreeFree
Grade0%0%0%0%
Volume (veh/h)5162611940716163480926
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)5167712143778173787928
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume1854185089318951855787908796
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol1854185089318951855787908796
tC, single (s)7.16.56.27.16.56.24.14.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)3.54.03.33.54.03.32.22.2
p0 queue free %8998808398959496
cM capacity (veh/h)49673403966392750826
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NB 1NB 2SB 1SB 2
Volume Total74284379637908
Volume Left57430370
Volume Right6721017028
cSH22711975017008261700
Volume to Capacity0.330.240.060.470.040.53
Queue Length 95th (ft)34225040
Control Delay (s)28.344.410.10.09.60.0
Lane LOSDEBA
Approach Delay (s)28.344.40.50.4
Approach LOSDE
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 2.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.3%ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min)15
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 2
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour No BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: West County Road E & Hwy 51 SB Ramp
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor1.001.001.001.00
Frt0.991.001.000.89
Flt Protected1.000.951.000.99
Satd. Flow (prot)1846177018631644
Flt Permitted1.000.191.000.99
Satd. Flow (perm)184635418631644
Volume (vph)7105031055050210
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)7725433759854228
RTOR Reduction (vph)20001830
Lane Group Flow (vph)8240337598990
Turn Typepm+pt
Protected Phases2168
Permitted Phases6
Actuated Green, G (s)53.271.771.210.3
Effective Green, g (s)53.771.771.710.3
Actuated g/C Ratio0.600.800.800.11
Clearance Time (s)4.54.04.54.0
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)11015021484188
v/s Ratio Protc0.45c0.100.32c0.06
v/s Ratio Perm0.43
v/c Ratio0.750.670.400.52
Uniform Delay, d113.219.52.737.5
Progression Factor1.000.500.271.00
Incremental Delay, d24.72.30.52.6
Delay (s)17.912.01.340.2
Level of ServiceBBAD
Approach Delay (s)17.95.140.2
Approach LOSBAD
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay15.1HCM Level of ServiceB
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.67
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization83.3%ICU Level of ServiceE
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour No BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: West County Road E & Connelly Ave
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor1.000.951.001.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.971.001.000.850.930.96
Flt Protected0.951.000.951.001.000.980.98
Satd. Flow (prot)1770342317701863158316951743
Flt Permitted0.261.000.131.001.000.840.76
Satd. Flow (perm)49034232431863158314411347
Volume (vph)506801902707006012030180503040
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)547392072937616513033196543343
RTOR Reduction (vph)0270003204800200
Lane Group Flow (vph)549190293761330311001100
Turn Typepm+ptpm+ptPermPermPerm
Protected Phases521684
Permitted Phases26684
Actuated Green, G (s)33.933.445.345.345.328.528.5
Effective Green, g (s)33.933.945.845.845.829.029.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.380.380.510.510.510.320.32
Clearance Time (s)4.04.54.04.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)2301289380948806464434
v/s Ratio Prot0.01c0.270.13c0.41
v/s Ratio Perm0.080.260.02c0.220.08
v/c Ratio0.230.710.770.800.040.670.25
Uniform Delay, d125.723.920.118.311.126.422.5
Progression Factor0.500.581.051.091.901.001.00
Incremental Delay, d20.32.28.96.80.17.51.4
Delay (s)13.216.030.026.921.233.923.9
Level of ServiceBBCCCCC
Approach Delay (s)15.927.333.923.9
Approach LOSBCCC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay23.7HCM Level of ServiceC
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.73
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization73.8%ICU Level of ServiceD
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 2
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour No BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: West County Road E & Pine Tree Drive
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor0.951.000.951.001.00
Frt0.991.001.001.000.85
Flt Protected1.000.951.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)34991770353917701583
Flt Permitted1.000.201.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3499371353917701583
Volume (vph)8607040750210100
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)9357643815228109
RTOR Reduction (vph)6000078
Lane Group Flow (vph)100504381522831
Turn Typepm+ptPerm
Protected Phases2168
Permitted Phases68
Actuated Green, G (s)44.956.055.526.026.0
Effective Green, g (s)45.456.056.026.026.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.500.620.620.290.29
Clearance Time (s)4.54.04.54.04.0
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)17653332202511457
v/s Ratio Protc0.290.01c0.23c0.13
v/s Ratio Perm0.070.02
v/c Ratio0.570.130.370.450.07
Uniform Delay, d115.514.48.326.123.2
Progression Factor0.671.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d21.00.20.52.80.3
Delay (s)11.314.58.828.923.5
Level of ServiceBBACC
Approach Delay (s)11.39.127.2
Approach LOSBAC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay12.9HCM Level of ServiceB
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.50
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization51.0%ICU Level of ServiceA
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 3
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour No BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: West County Road E & Lexington Ave
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor1.000.951.000.951.000.951.000.95
Frt1.000.971.000.951.000.991.000.95
Flt Protected0.951.000.951.000.951.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17703430177033581770349517703357
Flt Permitted0.181.000.391.000.131.000.291.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3343430729335824534955323357
Volume (vph)3905001306029015012065060240670350
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)4245431416531516313070765261728380
RTOR Reduction (vph)019005500500550
Lane Group Flow (vph)4246650654230130767026110530
Turn Typepm+ptpm+ptpm+ptpm+pt
Protected Phases74385216
Permitted Phases4826
Actuated Green, G (s)50.041.322.017.338.138.146.145.1
Effective Green, g (s)51.042.323.018.339.139.146.146.1
Actuated g/C Ratio0.430.360.200.160.330.330.390.39
Clearance Time (s)4.05.04.05.04.05.04.05.0
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)494123218452219411603731314
v/s Ratio Protc0.210.190.010.130.05c0.220.09c0.31
v/s Ratio Permc0.160.050.170.18
v/c Ratio0.860.540.350.810.670.660.700.80
Uniform Delay, d130.130.039.648.132.333.735.131.8
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d213.80.51.29.38.83.05.75.2
Delay (s)43.930.540.857.341.136.640.737.0
Level of ServiceDCDEDDDD
Approach Delay (s)35.655.437.337.7
Approach LOSDEDD
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay39.5HCM Level of ServiceD
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.82
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 117.8Sum of lost time (s)12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization84.1%ICU Level of ServiceE
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 4
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour No BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: West County Road E & (Vacant Site)
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Sign ControlFreeFreeStopStop
Grade0%0%0%0%
Volume (veh/h)09605030730040060000
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)010435433793043065000
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)1
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)900464
pX, platoon unblocked0.940.820.850.850.820.850.850.94
vC, conflicting volume79310981533192954913801957397
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol7198971241171022610621742297
tC, single (s)4.14.17.56.56.97.56.56.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)2.22.23.54.03.33.54.03.3
p0 queue free %100955910090100100100
cM capacity (veh/h)8276161077263613069658
Direction, Lane #EB 1EB 2EB 3WB 1WB 2WB 3NB 1SB 1
Volume Total0696402335292641090
Volume Left0003300430
Volume Right0054000650
cSH170017001700616170017002401700
Volume to Capacity0.000.410.240.050.310.160.450.00
Queue Length 95th (ft)000400550
Control Delay (s)0.00.00.011.20.00.031.90.0
Lane LOSBDA
Approach Delay (s)0.00.431.90.0
Approach LOSDA
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.9
Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.5%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour No BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Harriet Ave & Lexington Ave
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Sign ControlStopStopFreeFree
Grade0%0%0%0%
Volume (veh/h)100601002040720203081030
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)110651102243783223388033
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume1853185389718911859793913804
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol1853185389718911859793913804
tC, single (s)7.16.56.27.16.56.24.14.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)3.54.03.33.54.03.32.22.2
p0 queue free %781008173100949496
cM capacity (veh/h)50673394066388746820
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NB 1NB 2SB 1SB 2
Volume Total76334380433913
Volume Left1111430330
Volume Right6522022033
cSH1859974617008201700
Volume to Capacity0.410.330.060.470.040.54
Queue Length 95th (ft)46325030
Control Delay (s)37.558.110.10.09.60.0
Lane LOSEFBA
Approach Delay (s)37.558.10.50.3
Approach LOSEF
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 2.9
Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.8%ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min)15
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 2
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: West County Road E & Hwy 51 SB Ramp
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor1.001.001.001.00
Frt0.991.001.000.89
Flt Protected1.000.951.000.99
Satd. Flow (prot)1847177018631641
Flt Permitted1.000.181.000.99
Satd. Flow (perm)184734018631641
Volume (vph)7205034056050230
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)7835437060954250
RTOR Reduction (vph)20002010
Lane Group Flow (vph)83503706091030
Turn Typepm+pt
Protected Phases2168
Permitted Phases6
Actuated Green, G (s)53.171.671.110.4
Effective Green, g (s)53.671.671.610.4
Actuated g/C Ratio0.600.800.800.12
Clearance Time (s)4.54.04.54.0
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)11004931482190
v/s Ratio Prot0.45c0.120.33c0.06
v/s Ratio Permc0.48
v/c Ratio0.760.750.410.54
Uniform Delay, d113.420.42.837.6
Progression Factor1.000.490.271.00
Incremental Delay, d24.93.90.53.2
Delay (s)18.413.91.340.7
Level of ServiceBBAD
Approach Delay (s)18.46.040.7
Approach LOSBAD
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay15.9HCM Level of ServiceB
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.71
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization86.7%ICU Level of ServiceE
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: West County Road E & Connelly Ave
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor1.000.951.001.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.971.001.000.850.920.95
Flt Protected0.951.000.951.001.000.980.98
Satd. Flow (prot)1770342717701863158316901736
Flt Permitted0.231.000.131.001.000.830.72
Satd. Flow (perm)43634272511863158314251271
Volume (vph)507101903007306012030200603050
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)547722073267936513033217653354
RTOR Reduction (vph)0260003205400220
Lane Group Flow (vph)549530326793330326001300
Turn Typepm+ptpm+ptPermPermPerm
Protected Phases521684
Permitted Phases26684
Actuated Green, G (s)32.932.445.345.345.328.528.5
Effective Green, g (s)32.932.945.845.845.829.029.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.370.370.510.510.510.320.32
Clearance Time (s)4.04.54.04.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)2071253399948806459410
v/s Ratio Prot0.01c0.280.15c0.43
v/s Ratio Perm0.090.270.02c0.230.10
v/c Ratio0.260.760.820.840.040.710.32
Uniform Delay, d127.725.121.518.911.126.823.0
Progression Factor0.520.601.011.101.911.001.00
Incremental Delay, d20.42.811.68.20.19.02.0
Delay (s)14.917.833.429.021.235.825.0
Level of ServiceBBCCCDC
Approach Delay (s)17.629.835.825.0
Approach LOSBCDC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay25.8HCM Level of ServiceC
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.77
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization76.8%ICU Level of ServiceD
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 2
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: West County Road E & Pine Tree Drive
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor0.951.000.951.001.00
Frt0.991.001.001.000.85
Flt Protected1.000.951.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)35021770353917701583
Flt Permitted1.000.181.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3502330353917701583
Volume (vph)9207040810210100
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)10007643880228109
RTOR Reduction (vph)5000078
Lane Group Flow (vph)107104388022831
Turn Typepm+ptPerm
Protected Phases2168
Permitted Phases68
Actuated Green, G (s)44.956.055.526.026.0
Effective Green, g (s)45.456.056.026.026.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.500.620.620.290.29
Clearance Time (s)4.54.04.54.04.0
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)17673112202511457
v/s Ratio Protc0.310.01c0.25c0.13
v/s Ratio Perm0.080.02
v/c Ratio0.610.140.400.450.07
Uniform Delay, d115.915.58.526.123.2
Progression Factor0.651.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d21.10.20.52.80.3
Delay (s)11.315.79.128.923.5
Level of ServiceBBACC
Approach Delay (s)11.39.427.2
Approach LOSBAC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay12.9HCM Level of ServiceB
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.52
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization51.5%ICU Level of ServiceA
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 3
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: West County Road E & Lexington Ave
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor1.000.951.000.951.000.951.000.95
Frt1.000.961.000.951.000.991.000.94
Flt Protected0.951.000.951.000.951.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17703401177033701770349517703341
Flt Permitted0.181.000.351.000.131.000.281.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3273401655337024834955163341
Volume (vph)4605401906032015014065060240670400
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)5005872076534816315270765261728435
RTOR Reduction (vph)029004600500740
Lane Group Flow (vph)5007650654650152767026110890
Turn Typepm+ptpm+ptpm+ptpm+pt
Protected Phases74385216
Permitted Phases4826
Actuated Green, G (s)52.844.022.617.838.038.046.045.0
Effective Green, g (s)53.845.023.618.839.039.046.046.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.450.370.200.160.320.320.380.38
Clearance Time (s)4.05.04.05.04.05.04.05.0
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)516126717252419311283631272
v/s Ratio Protc0.250.220.010.14c0.060.220.10c0.33
v/s Ratio Permc0.180.060.190.18
v/c Ratio0.970.600.380.890.790.680.720.86
Uniform Delay, d134.030.740.650.056.635.537.034.4
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d231.40.81.416.618.83.36.77.5
Delay (s)65.431.542.066.675.438.843.741.9
Level of ServiceECDEEDDD
Approach Delay (s)44.663.844.842.2
Approach LOSDEDD
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay46.5HCM Level of ServiceD
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.90
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.8Sum of lost time (s)12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization91.6%ICU Level of ServiceF
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 4
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: West County Road E & Arden Plaza Driveway
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Volume (veh/h)110080807806090
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)119687878486598
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)1
Median typeNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)900464
pX, platoon unblocked0.810.840.81
vC, conflicting volume12831837641
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol11121595318
tC, single (s)4.16.86.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %83382
cM capacity (veh/h)50468547
Direction, Lane #EB 1EB 2WB 1WB 2WB 3NB 1
Volume Total79748687424424163
Volume Left00870065
Volume Right08700098
cSH1700170050417001700148
Volume to Capacity0.470.290.170.250.251.10
Queue Length 95th (ft)001500221
Control Delay (s)0.00.013.60.00.0164.9
Lane LOSBF
Approach Delay (s)0.01.3164.9
Approach LOSF
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 11.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.7%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Harriet Ave & Lexington Ave
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Sign ControlStopStopFreeFree
Grade0%0%0%0%
Volume (veh/h)100601002040770203088030
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)110651102243837223395733
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume1984198497320221989848989859
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol1984198497320221989848989859
tC, single (s)7.16.56.27.16.56.24.14.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)3.54.03.33.54.03.32.22.2
p0 queue free %731007965100949496
cM capacity (veh/h)40553063155361699782
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NB 1NB 2SB 1SB 2
Volume Total76334385933989
Volume Left1111430330
Volume Right6522022033
cSH1568069917007821700
Volume to Capacity0.490.410.060.510.040.58
Queue Length 95th (ft)58415030
Control Delay (s)48.178.110.50.09.80.0
Lane LOSEFBA
Approach Delay (s)48.178.10.50.3
Approach LOSEF
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 3.4
Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.4%ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min)15
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 2
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour BuildCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7: West County Road E & Holiday Inn Site
MovementEBLEBTWBTWBRSBLSBR
Lane Configurations
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Volume (veh/h)209707905013040
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)2210548595414143
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)630734
pX, platoon unblocked0.990.800.99
vC, conflicting volume9131457457
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol9021285441
tC, single (s)4.16.86.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %97092
cM capacity (veh/h)742122559
Direction, Lane #EB 1EB 2EB 3WB 1WB 2SB 1
Volume Total22527527572341185
Volume Left220000141
Volume Right00005443
cSH7421700170017001700149
Volume to Capacity0.030.310.310.340.201.24
Queue Length 95th (ft)20000271
Control Delay (s)10.00.00.00.00.0210.1
Lane LOSAF
Approach Delay (s)0.20.0210.1
Approach LOSF
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.1%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 3
TDI
2030 PM Peak Hour Build MITIGATEDCounty Road E Master Plan
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7: West County Road E & Holiday Inn Site
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Lane Util. Factor1.000.951.000.951.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.991.000.991.000.871.000.88
Flt Protected0.951.000.951.000.951.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17703499177035081770161217701640
Flt Permitted0.301.000.101.000.721.000.691.00
Satd. Flow (perm)551349919135081345161212791640
Volume (vph)209708080790506010901301040
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Adj. Flow (vph)2210548787859546511981411143
RTOR Reduction (vph)07005006600290
Lane Group Flow (vph)221134087908065430141250
Turn Typepm+ptpm+ptPermPerm
Protected Phases743826
Permitted Phases4826
Actuated Green, G (s)42.441.944.844.829.429.429.429.4
Effective Green, g (s)42.442.445.345.329.429.429.429.4
Actuated g/C Ratio0.470.470.500.500.330.330.330.33
Clearance Time (s)4.04.54.04.54.04.04.04.0
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)30416482051766439527418536
v/s Ratio Prot0.00c0.320.03c0.260.030.02
v/s Ratio Perm0.030.180.05c0.11
v/c Ratio0.070.690.420.510.150.080.340.05
Uniform Delay, d114.218.615.515.021.421.022.920.7
Progression Factor0.380.530.450.481.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d20.11.00.80.20.70.30.50.0
Delay (s)5.511.07.97.422.221.323.420.8
Level of ServiceABAACCCC
Approach Delay (s)10.97.521.622.7
Approach LOSBACC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay11.2HCM Level of ServiceB
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio0.55
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0Sum of lost time (s)12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization57.7%ICU Level of ServiceB
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
9/3/2008Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
TDI