The URL can be used to link to this page

Woodland Crossing CC presentation_171009 backup [Compatibility Mode] Woodland Crossing Development Woodburn , Oregon City Council Hearing October 91 2017 Introductions • Land Use Attorney — Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt — Garrett Stephenson • Developer — MWI, LLC — Steve Master • Design Team — Mackenzie — Brian Varricchione, land use planner — Dick Spies, architect — Jennifer Danziger, transportation engineer Site Context lJrbarb Grov�rlth boundary I I IN t µ QIP-219 Project Overview • 300 multi-family units west of wetlands, accessible from extensions of Arney Lane and Steven Street — Designed to meet City's minimum density of 12.8 units per acre in the RM zone • 127-space RV storage facility on Sprague Lane, east of Senecal Creek East Tributary wetlands ( no buildings proposed ) Site Plan NE NE ,��'3,1,��" . nu yrlr rr rirn rmrurio ,y v111011, f Res ect a n d ' ma ntain existing mek, wetlands, /'and floodplain rm�f` f I • Create street connection b requested re � a v City , ,f u Maintain view corridors to j„!f wetlands Provide site amenities for ,M residents Typical B / r, ✓ ; r ,...Y µ, ll/dol, VIII n ,air f�(�wM 1 Transportation Impact ATIA 1; I i liar, II ll 111 i i � 1 i i i �1 /r I � aao Transportation Impact Analysis • Contact City of � . Woodburn, ODOT, and . . � Marion County • - • Determine study area • Select analysis time periods Study Area ro G i f � r J 1 w 1 W Q Transportation Impact A e Collect existing traffic volumes (2016) '. rppw mro�m�o Project background traffic m rppw volumes (2018) e Estimate traffic volumes with project traffic (2018) uw ��n utiHn 2018 Background Traffic ro i r v / r. y i v � J III�Illuuuu i i i� �ul�u Pii VIIII Q °4 � ��dili � i wW v a fav, mm ri" '�,�� 91 ✓°� u f / arra, 1 � CJI r � s Project-Ge ne rated Traffic • ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9t" Edition — Industry standard for traffic studies — A trip is a one-way movement, either entering or exiting the site 1 11111111116111111111 11,1111 1111111111111�11 111111111111 Apartments Apartments 220 300 units 30 121 151 1.19 64 183 1,942 RVStorage, MIN-Warehouse 151 127 omits 2 1 3 1 2 3! TOTAL 32 122 1 154 1.24 1 66, 186 1,9 '4 • Comparison to maximum allowed under zoning — 300 apartment units proposed vs. 374 units allowed — 1,974 daily trips vs. 2,422 daily trips — Proposal is 80% of what is allowed Transportation Impact Analysis • Model transportation facilities and traffic control • Evaluate traffic demand vs. intersection capacity �I • Examine delays and queuing Transportation Impact Analysis • Compare with Agency standards • Identify deficiencies if they are expected • Recommend improvements Access Routes for Apartments • Development must have two non-overlapping public street access routes • Only feasible f,J options were selected W • Site will meet City and State I operational criteria under best- and worst- case scenarios for traffic volumes ° Transportation Recommendations — Woodland/Robin Intersection • Add signage on Robin Avenue westbound to indicate that left turns can be made from both lanes and that both lanes provide access to I-5 similar to the following: v ONLY Transportation Recommendations — Woodland/Robin Intersection • Remove the existing right-turn-only arrow in the right lane of westbound Robin Avenue. • Replace the "3 WAY" supplemental plaque on the stop signs with "ALL WAY" supplemental plaques. • Remove or trim existing vegetation etation � on the southern tip of the � Woodland Avenue median north o . of Robin Avenue to improve sightlines. ''%% • Relocate the southbound stop bar ' pavement marking on Woodland � Avenue north of Robin Avenue to improve sightlines. Transportation Recommendations — Woodland/Robin Intersection • Install a flashing LED stop sign for westbound Robin Avenue (similar to right). • Install a flashing LED stop ahead sign for westbound Robin Avenue. r • Add signage on Woodland Avenue to provide direction to 1-5. • Modify pavement marking arrows in Woodland Avenue near Myrtle Street to better explain allowable turn i movements. ' ' " Transportation Recommendations — Arney Lane/Stevens Street Extensions • Design Arney Lane/Steven Street extensions to encourage slower travel speeds to make the roads less desirable for traffic from the outlet center • Current plans include elements to slow traffic: — On-street parking — All-way stop control at Steven/Arney/Site Access — Roadway curvature designed for 25 mph — Street trees Conclusion • Proposed development is appropriate for the site context and is consistent with the City's long-term vision spelled out in the Comprehensive Plan • Project meets approval standards as outlined in the staff report • City and ODOT staff have concurred with traffic analysis • Applicant respectfully requests the City Council's approval Proposed Access Points Proposed access points �,, l�rbar� �rt�with �auna�aryr C74�,'fj�sr Arney Rd iDIR-2�19� Planning Commission's Preferred Access Points lJrban Grovwrlth Boundary Arney Ln t e Commission's preferred access points Pak � /�� 'UhNoodburn�Pr��emwum �urlm hram � `�' r✓ Clutlets I, �r Sh�st > � Amey Rd Q 01�-2"19� Analysis Time Periods • Consistent and frequent — Same time of day — Many days of the year • Correspond with peak site activity — Morning and evening commute times for housing — Afternoon/evening for storage • Selected time periods — AM peak hour (generally between 7 :00 and 9 :00 AM) — PM peak hour (generally between 4:00 and 6:00 PM) Existing Traffic Counts • Data collection — Thursday, November 17, 2016 — Morning (7 :00 to 9 :00 AM ) — Evening (4:00 to 6 :00 PM ) • Peak hours — 7 :00 to 8:00 AM — 4:45 to 5 :45 PM • Seasonal adjustment for state highways 2018 Post- Development Traffic • Site-generated traffic added to network • Site traffic added to pre-development condition Follow- UpAnalysis • Additional data collected at the Woodland Avenue/Robin Avenue intersection September 9-13, 2017 • Traffic signal warrants were evaluated following industry guidelines* with the following observations : — No signal warrants are met under existing conditions on either an average weekday or a weekend day — No signal warrants are met for an average weekday for any conditions (existing, pre-development, or post-development) — Warrants are met on both weekend days under both pre-development and post-development conditions * Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Follow- UpAnalysis Conclusions • Industry guidance suggests that "since vehicular delay and frequency of some types of crashes are greater under traffic signal control than under STOP sign control, consideration should be given to providing alternatives to traffic control signals even if one or more of the signal warrants has been satisfied ." • Therefore, a traffic signal is not recommended because warrants are only met on weekends, not on weekdays. — Traffic signal could add delay for drivers on weekdays & off-peak times — Traffic signal would incur additional maintenance costs • Instead, actions should be pursued that can improve the safety and operations of the all-way stop controlled intersection