HomeMy WebLinkAboutA003 - Council Action form dated November 26, 1991 ITEM #:
DATE: 11/26/91
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT:
Resolution Approving a Request for Approval of the (revised) Conceptual
Development Plan for Valley East Subdivision, Which is Located West of
Delaware Avenue, East of Spring Valley Subdivision, South of Ontario
Street, and North of Dover Drive.
ACTION FORM SUMMARY: This is a request to approve a 70 lot subdivision
west of Delaware Avenue, east of Spring Valley Subdivision, south of
Ontario Street and north of Dover Drive. This revised CDP, which was
previously recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning
Commission, includes a combination of the recently approved CDP for
Valley East Subdivision and the land which was a part of the CDP/PUD for
Wyndham Heights. The proposed development will consist of 52
single-family lots, 12 two-family lots, and six (6) lots which will be
developed under the R2-PUD zoning district regulations with
approximately 104 multiple-family type units.
The Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommends approval of this
request with the stipulations stated in this report.
BACKGROUND:
The developer is requesting approval of a Conceptual Development Plan
(CDP) for a 70 lot subdivision, which is located west of Delaware Avenue,
east of Spring Valley Subdivision, south of Ontario Street and generally
north of Dover Drive. The Planning and Zoning Commission previously
recommended that this CDP be approved with the stipulations that a traffic
study be completed prior to City Council action. Subsequently the
developer withdrew this CDP from consideration in order to reactivate the
original approved Valley East CDP so that the developers could immediately
proceed with an Administrative Plat. Now the developers are reactivating
this more inclusive CDP for Valley East in order to proceed with the
revised PUD for Wyndham Heights.
The proposed subdivision contains a total of 29.03 acres. The average lot
size for the single-family lots is 9225 square feet, and for the two-family
lots it is 8938.5 square feet. The R2-PUD lots range in size from 27,836
square feet to 84,046 square feet. The proposed lot sizes are consistent
with existing and proposed R1-6 zoning and the existing R-2 zoning. The
proposed R2-PUD lots will enable a density of up to 12.4 units per acre,
however, the developers are planning a gross density of 11.72 units per
acre.
2
This proposed CDP combines the 54 lots in the approved CDP for Valley
East Subdivision with the land to the north, known as Wyndham Heights
CDP/PUD. The developers have combined these two projects under one
revised CDP because of the requirements in State platting law, and the
requirements of Chapter 23, Section 23.10(2)(a) of the Municipal Code
which says a plat must contain all contiguous land of the owner. Lots 65
through 70 are zoned R2-PUD. A revised PUD plan is on the City Council
agenda for approval. A request has been submitted for parts of Lots 41
and 47, Lots 42 through 46, and Lots 57 and 58 to be rezoned from
R2-PUD to R1-6. This rezoning area was a part of the approved plan for
the Wyndham Heights CDP/PUD.
No changes have been made from the original Valley East CDP for the lot
layout south of Utah Drive. The cul-de-sac for Vermont Circle north of
Utah Drive has been extended north to serve an additional five single-fam-
ily lots, which are on land that was formerly a part of Wyndham Heights.
This new CDP extends Florida Avenue south from Ontario Street to Utah
Drive. The north end of New Hampshire Circle, which was a cul-de-sac in
the original Valley East CDP, has been incorporated into Florida Avenue.
The site currently includes one single-family dwelling, located on proposed
lot 26. The remainder of the site is vacant. The site is generally rolling
with a significant topography change between proposed Lots 29 and 30.
The northern half of the site drains to the north and the south half of the
site drains to the south. The site contains some mature trees which are
generally volunteer vegetation along fence rows and former property lines,
and in an area of steep topography in the southwest part of the site.
ANALYSIS
Land Use Policy Plan. The Land Use Policy Plan designates the property
as suitable for medium density development on the north half of the site
and along the west side of Delaware Avenue. The remainder of the site is
designated as suitable for low-density residential development. A medium
density designation allows between 10 and 22 units per acre while a
low-density designation contemplates between one(l) and nine (9) units per
acre.
Zoning History. This property currently has three zoning designations:
R2-PUD, R-2, and R1-6. The R2-PUD designation had been placed on
that portion of the site north of parts of Lots 41 and 47, and Lot 56 in
October of 1990 as part of the approval of the Wyndham Heights PUD.
Previously this portion of the site was zoned P-C and R-2. Prior to 1970
all of the site north of Lots 41, 47 and 56 was zoned R-2 (low-density
residential). The developers have filed a petition to rezone part of Lots
41 and 47, Lots 42 through 46, Lot 57 and Lot 58 from R2-PUD to R1-6.
In September of 1991 the remainder of the CDP, except Lots 1 through 10
and Lot 25 and 26 was rezoned from P-C and R-2 to R1-6. Lots 1 through
10 and Lot 25 and 26 remained zoned R-2. The R-2 designation dates
back to 1965 and the P-C designation and its predecessor, C-5, dates back
to 1970.
3
Utilities. The utilities available to serve this site are adequate for the
property's needs.
Water:
Existing:
14-inch main in Ontario Street
16-inch main in Delaware Avenue
6-inch main in Utah Drive in Spring Valley Subdivision
Proposed:
8-inch main in Utah Drive in Valley East Subdivision
8-inch main in Vermont Circle
8-inch main in Florida Avenue
Sanitary Sewer
Existing:
10-inch main in Ontario Street
8-inch mains in Delaware Avenue
8-inch main in Spring Valley Subdivision adjacent to
Lot 32 of Valley East Subdivision
Proposed:
8-inch main in Vermont Circle extended through Lot 32
8-inch main in Utah Drive
8-inch mains in Florida Avenue
Storm Sewer. A storm water management plan has been developed
for this site. The plan includes drainage of the north half of the
site to intakes in two detention areas and then to the storm sewer in
Ontario Street. Drainage of the east central portion of the site is
into another detention area and then into the storm sewer in Dela-
ware Avenue.
The south half of the site drains to the south and southwest through
a series of intakes.
Electric. There is adequate capacity to serve this site. Overhead
electric power lines along the west side of Delaware Avenue will
prevent street trees from being planted within the right of way.
Streets and Vehicular and Pedestrian Access. The east side of the
proposed subdivision abuts Delaware Avenue. This street will
provide access to Lots 1-9 and Lots 25 and 26 within the subdivi-
sion. Utah .Drive will be extended east from Spring Valley Subdivi-
sion to Delaware Avenue. This extension will provide a secondary
means of access for Spring Valley, which currently has only one way
in and out via Idaho Avenue to Ontario Street. Utah Drive must be
extended from Spring Valley to Delaware Avenue as part of the first
phase of this subdivision in order to provide the necessary secon-
dary means of access for Spring Valley. Access to all interior lots
will be from Vermont Circle, Utah Drive and Florida Avenue.
Florida extends south from Ontario Avenue to Utah Drive, and direct
4
access for the six lots in the proposed revised PUD will be to
Florida Avenue.
The traffic report study that was done for Wyndham Heights is still
valid for the project. The traffic study concluded that a 60 foot left
turn lane is needed from Ontario Street into the development. This
lane would provide adequate space for three cars to wait to complete
the turn into the site. A developer's agreement that was previously
worked out, regarding the improvements needed on Ontario Street,
will need to be reworked to reflect the changes in the location of the
traffic directional features on Ontario Street.
In addition, the City Traffic Engineer has completed a traffic study
to evaluate the impact of the Valley East Subdivision on area streets.
This report also evaluated the extension of Utah Drive from Idaho
Avenue to Delaware Avenue (see attached Traffic Study). This
study found that the additional traffic from this development will not
reduce the Level of Service (LOS) below LOS A at the Delaware
Avenue/North Dakota Avenue intersection, or at the Delaware
Avenue/Ontario Street intersection.
The following recommendations have been made in the City's traffic
study to improve traffic operations. On Delaware, parking restric-
tions should be designated to reduce conflicts, and to improve traffic
flow. Currently there are parking restrictions on one-side of
Delaware from Ontario to Dover Drive. However, no restrictions
exist legally from Dover to North Dakota. Staff will recommend that
restrictions be extended on the west and south sides of Delaware
along this street section. Also, due to the sharp roadway curva-
ture, parking restrictions will be recommended on the east and north
sides long this curve section.
Stop controls will also be recommended on Utah and Florida Avenue
in the Valley East Subdivision. Due to the larger volumes on Utah
Drive entering Delaware, stop signs should be placed on Utah Drive
to reduce potential conflicts. Also, this control would be necessary
to aid pedestrians/school children crossing Utah Drive to traverse to
Ontario (Sawyer School). Stop signs also are recommended on
Florida Avenue at the Ontario and Utah intersections. These are
also needed to reduce potential conflicts, since traffic volumes are
expected to be heavier at these intersections.
Parking restrictions are also recommended on the south side of
Ontario from Delaware to North Dakota. By restricting parking
along this section, a right turn lane can be added that will reduce
motorist delays at the intersection. Also, parking restrictions are
planned on Florida and Utah to improve traffic flow and reduce
conflicts. Since Lot 31 is a flag lot, and the developable area is
more than 150 feet from Vermont Circle, a 20 foot wide drive will be
required into the site with a permanent turn around for fire truck
equipment in order to meet fire code access requirements.
5
Parking will be restricted to one side of the street in this develop-
ment since the 27 foot street width for Vermont Circle and the 31
foot width for Florida Avenue and Utah Drive do not provide enough
pavement width to allow for more than one side parking.
Cy-Ride will not enter the site, however service will be available at
North Dakota and Ross Road, at North Dakota and Phoenix Avenue
and a stop will be placed on Ontario Street adjacent to Lot 68.
No bicycle paths are planned through the site or adjacent to the
site. It is expected that bicycles will use the surface streets.
Sidewalks will be provided along both sides of all streets within the
development as well as along Delaware Avenue and Ontario Street.
P g
STAFF COMMENTS:
The following stipulations need to be placed on the Conceptual Development
Plan in order to assure development is consistent with the requirements of
the subdivision ordinance and the premises upon, which the Conceptual
Development Plan was predicated.
1. That Utah Drive be completed between Spring Valley and Delaware
Avenue as part of the first phase of the Valley East Subdivision.
2. That a 20 foot wide drive/fire lane and fire equipment turn around
be installed on Lot 31 prior to any development of that lot.
3. That the 60-foot left turn lane, as recommended by the traffic study
be installed at the developer's expense and that a developer's
agreement with regard to this improvement and any other necessary
improvements on Ontario Street be approved as part of the approval
of the Administrative plat for first phase of this development.
4. That parking be restricted to one side of the street for all interior
streets in this development by ordinance at the time of final plat
approval.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The CityCouncil can approve of the Conceptual Development Plan
PP
(CDP) for Valley East with the stipulations listed above.
2. The City Council can deny approval of the Conceptual Development
Plan (CDP) for Valley East Subdivision.
3. The City Council can table this request for additional information
from the developer or the staff.
6
DEPARTMENT'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
It is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt
Alternative #1. This will approve of the Conceptual Development Plan
(CDP) for Valley East with the stipulations recommended by staff and the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
Attachment
y\bpo\caf\valley.n26
I
cv
cn
VALLEY 3A2T 20a
• W o <z .
'VOTSSa cc
• s. � c•SI a" PROPOSta SVFaOVWAWT/ IR"/S COaSTIOCTaa IN aoCORaVCs KTa r'-" LU f,
CSTT OF alas STalliaaa Nscirl"SOss tot US;CONSUMS011 or MLSC
•WADV IOCRs.
21 GAS. TSLssSOVs. namic an Cai 6:d#�" •:
Ls T.T. O8 INOWOtSOw LSVIS Ssszo St
LoeastY r:aAl Tas wake arsL:sT WtMARt stow. aasaSLm asuoll or
Tuts FUZUTSas an"is ta0vsaaa IT us Isatsc:sys UFSLSTT COWAUT.� /�—�- A w
SI alttaT Taws SsaLL It LOUTta aT Tat TAIL saCI LOT Ss ICSLT up*#. r
STaaaT Tilts SMALL it LOCATts Ss TUB IISOOW OF TIN Oak 8 Faaasao Alta /AS7>r.V7.LiV/tltOv r
amsix"a WALK"a TVs Cults ON taCs aus of"a Inn"AT so ►OOT % LI go N
VaaSVOs ZrmvALS. TARS Sa"as a t/s AIOs CQSFR AT TR Tin Of ]VV� Q��s't \ +
#LANTZ". OIS.T A►FIOM TAUBTSS/VSLL as tLaVTm• + 77'
All YOYI FOOT Kai F.C.C. VALas SILLL R CONVaMCM "ON TR taOVTata
Ot saCa LOT. /
a) OYSaSTOIT Tatts laaLL it ttOtiaSTia aLgN Tss ret!ISOtl-O/-VAT OF /
isLavaas ays A
�t�re's•at� � \ / /�
T %
'r ie
ISO.• l000ll
I: r �-
. ■
00
WA 10
47
1 � l 53 / /7
`� / Ali' AASWI .I
/1EIr�" x
of
w , r
35
I• Y R ` ~ l 1• I
" lp! A
f � ,
MAKoL aav�/.aerJwv �• � , / ' 123E I{ '
MMYIALs®ettsK/ Aq' t , � fiKtss NfLK4MF' ,1 ,
/ 'via IP . /
ol
ow
az
• � / ����•. urawrxw/#IWA/S/
;�,� -' ' sue-�•:�...�.�.. .
AV?W I rV^41.10,Z/f!F-r ,%-s
torte• Ji FTrv�a f f sannev r*.—.c�-r
^✓A&W- 16s ter
,
I Mawr eannrr TMIIT I"Avg sumvgm FYII ANY s'IIVAsao am s1.ANl TMAT OAN a •,,,,. .
SIIIIVivS ANY PANS Alt YOIISIaOT TOTMS KR W Yv AND A T.'�
YYl v llaOIOTSSSY OIVIL W OwtV■ANY LAIN OYRV11V0 I IN Or 'lp � vi I•!
JVLYA%Of*Wr.S.L.LMM i ills . /NM4\
YA'�_•=o' ,l:► ..• �.sac/wli�v.�.cy `c.�r of /Sf�
Poo .yuvzi /•VAL44A ■Iil01TSONt v�lual�� V�4LLEY Ei19r
-far =t sr do
AA•l"o eVWA rOOAO .eHCCr 2 a-L
-------------
_
.. .. .. .. �'�• i 4Lti,J`/f C. . ���yt •:♦ t? S' 'F y.�/.1 i r1 iF
j ° ,t4 ✓+.1;•3 •, � •• - ' ,i ,�'�1 i' {«fir,� 4 �;
r� �1/•/�//•/�{��� /•//./�� •//�/(��//�/(}��p�-�/\,{1//y
+ "a•, ' V YYLif/'.-•Jai Y ri"�a•ii'a.tJ r-a ''.r �i�l
\� 1 �•:a ' 'i r� i f$V��i
� is , so i l.. '• ! r" .j�f
* /�f �` �\ �' a•Is , .r I �� I ' I r .. ts, w JYrr
68 67;
It
Q I• ./ /.- 1 i.wV..N' �1 � ',t, / IN P ni •�C+}•I .'
T fY 7 y
Oy f I. I, 66 f �j ':_..�___..r...•�.:.'`J��._:..._ .. _ ..i.�s..Sif'a,L.{;s,a
l��•;•' ! Nr•.♦va•v �/«"^"r.rt..r � •�'T4-idi�w�...—.\� � .. . . `•i
All
tat+
+ r
r::��
l
.. ` , / �. \ M1\ ` ,' / / •:S` Z ,tt ti.�r t .. « �' T r~77; I i;r7.t+i7.r
,... � I � /� �,. �� ` 'an au r.•,•r,rawrw,aaa r•Mrnr r,ear•Ilae,M 'Al
? YYSTT;p y.
. '. 1•F >Y. .► _....• +NNWN.NrIr„rN11NIr/,•I rr WMnr Y 11Mr .✓`
' �- 1( a,-. - t .a •� ( I.. /.: r.. �`� •+ ..1 iri,ow':•I:'w'wrw w unNw rN,rN•'NwNNN.Nr"iw'w v i i _�yylti
., • I ff�^• rr1,,Nainr,W,r„IN,r N rr r.n•Nw ro„n W,N, .
•/ I.• i / •i� • 1) ,NM NM,1,4 r YNN,M TM 1,r YO NI'N rM M.•.-.. rl'f'7 �4, i •�'�"
, •'• ••• •'' .• •. 7l �/ • : J• ,NYr O,N,YLL r,r,N,,y NMY Y•r YY,,YYN L,�y r�141 r►.1 SI( �1 ,
!j.• ++!� �. , ... � �.,.r 56 J �' �' , v �o..�,:..w,N�i,N,Na Lr eY~.W Y O q/Y I•�I { 1
� \` i"I .� '�f' i• want.vy.,.wr.r,w,r.aar w,Nr�„ .j: •L4
� I C 1• w.M N,i wa�a•MiNlr r•Y:N irww.Y�•/�.w11a_r1'�y��`..
I.,.w'� ~ I ,� V y I• ,'`W,�• I \ 1' ' �'�j �1. ,11 ,b,r� ..' rrwrwa•r""'i^ .s'T..+•oA •?s•dGi IS�•�e`vysi
t } �I ;� �j}.a...---.�a+++ aN"1�r"Y�,n,s,wj�a�lliG. � N
� :�► �+�' � .i�L+,yili'"'wM`S W��•k"ii:..+.`. Mf �
I ! T.
;'• / .>:T '. •• / / Awaa:w�/•rYy 1III
1.I / I ` �,))11 ;r,t A,hi Ylr•Ma►N I ��
fo it
52
I I
r r..rM„yaa�.�r— '/.. I 1 "� •t.IAAt.•.IrALs:�� ,, t .4�1
� � _r_• I ^_ � t; �,,�� ,.r�y. �::•• ^.' "Ar�rxJ+�;t`Y .a:K�*' ,r•� '.
�''' ._N r ,„•«.,.�M I•Iw.�•1 N«w�y,•aN•.M«•tl.N�L�MY:.vj1-l� j''.1 r
�,a �. ••�3'••'• 1' yyN N M.,..'11Nr..:N Y.M I«•'.•.W a.•n a1WN. ,1a.M
.. C .• •, l-,N..wNi1«�i,.W;rwN•. q wwW r N W N,•1�.T•.:y>;• V»'�{ -r nr a Fi
•T.•:,r.N«,W NaN Nw.I+.r NN N' ♦✓
i .,NIyNW MI M.•"Y•MN•,Ypi1rN.N�w�,Y•1•,�H Y�44~�4'N�[�J .`?• j
Z --I _ f ..a/ K r 1Pj,•,r. '«N W WN W.b•t.w N.rf,•«•1 �YZ•^ y
ar. ( ✓ N •�R:—�. r'� .J•�r.r, _ - •.Y. v-
Lrol,.....N....N_r•NN...N.•..:..' 4•, ay' {'' V
0 r" 361 N F ,w. W.w w N .wuN N a« +•' .y t7 • _ rwNr,rN'N Nw,w. un'a�N T«:..Na.:::'�.'t'"'' •^!t
i I( .J .I'.. .u•,N, ii w....N it�f H i.� -
'\ / it 1 1 �N M'Y 61�'NI.N.....�'N�•,«"y«•-M'N I.N.N W.wN•ur•Iv�hY v
r.�•W N.,Nr•r•..i?nA
S. �I I /' I 7' .�•. 1 Y W 4wr,My Y.,,.NNW,It,N N• M•N.N«••i.. F� '
_ / J1 �,I-u•1 N•y w a«r w N w YwiW v.�_W,«.NNY�:�tF�v�!tf(��',/ N rN N.u«,•+Nw.,r u,.r N••I.1,r« •r•N,v. �it4l� ` ' S •V.. I N � ` I *- t N NINI'1WNyN./.«I.WM•MNAN p�'�,NN'�,.'•�h41•Nn•�1«i,�'r.� � •,f .� '
•lY1 IN. Y.I.w1«N w N Lt y N NM,vW/•N Nr, ,;)/'('�i
` 3f I , • .�� N W .1•.,;...,:,�NN«N M�'��MNi..~1I i Y�'1"• y A ), i
- J'� _ - i 4T" _ / fr ar. � {, ,�•�•..,'�.,.W...w wuYr"' .'!,.w...�:6i,s i V��.3.� t
r'rw• I%. .t k ^iiiN...«YINw,N•.r...NNr Nw.N.. �" "t4f i! .
.. • �' f' N MM. ,•Wi•M W WYYr y N"�i„YN«,1N,NI•MI 1 ='
i r� �.Iw wti Iw«�•ur NNNW1ji«a«..u 1.i,Nei'i:i•N...u..f« R•l' r}p a
,:_. ra ,. �¢ 'I .. e.•w.r A «"YI Iw,«�N..W Y 11,N WN•W MYw•N�M�,M ��, x�
j 1� 1s1, • Wlw t+N•1 Y•w1 NNIN.N«W«..N••N,•N,•a >•tl' \ ?.'r
I- y a.N•ar• N«w N NN 1iG �j 6
f -�..-. .. ...,, \. ^ " J\ t •t!, t V 1 itt �s'Tr�.is uK..'u�.`i.rw••wti:,w w WN�i1«�N.w I � !
-}- .\j}{', 1 � IN4YR I IN« ,.N,�•\,.I NNNI•W. q..w Y IN.N,w•N W%)
r ..._. ' �:I / s •~" � i' � ( ra•.I,r `, WwM..rN�W«,u1 ww•i1..�'Ui,«N.r..�,u:YpiNia�'••j,,.,4
l�• 2 t J - - 'frf..• W�..�y�•y,N•«N'MNIV..NNr N/N Iw•1 Nr• r ii r7
� ' ix.� ! J y�I{/.I N / i •f♦ '•�iN,X^I�«I�www,w,,.':, N�«,:'Niw.wy �'al+'f
I � _ " i '.� / F �/ •.` ("Y ' •.��•a IN«. YUNY NN. N.N W:�NYYk .� YI 'I /,/ i wy N Y Nwai rN•1«w:r,�NyWwM.•V,•••.«N r.r�rj'i� r�' � I y • •''� "� / / ' � ..I .'rr.l•Nq MIw W'�wNN'w�r Ni'i o`oN.:,�i.~•v l:)s!,'� '.;\':.'.ti.:+�,i':�"I�
i�i'' i ./,!�� ' �i i' / V,,�r:�r.N..•v.r..w r ,^l,MrN! 1•�Y�: '2. S '" i
� I /ui NMNIN:.,}.�{',. '• ,� N NH»NN N: •:\ . ;
i{t: l /Y'N/I'r.Nw•v "p � i� ••b' / \ 'i1/6,r{w{i,}•'�J'�•nL.k1' 1• �1i•,S/�•`fPi .,a 4 1 1•r"y
t�.i�Vj !7 NW.p•.s a."�v�. �.r r ` •{" + \�'•J"•>,i`' t•v+ ,�i J�
,Iih N ��� �.N N../My Zrr•�h N71i
{t' _ / �'�4'•�irTl• ,•.yc.K i••• ' 'r""•' "�"'rr • y f� �Y•rr�, Y,t
� r.1..• a,..r ii•Je' �'> �" .. 'T \ � w 1� LN«,q:'i,,.N r.�...:i..f� ' j�.•i'w+ � Y _�
.' t�N. •�..+�:>� � +�/ lrY�nrt J,lylyC•J !,
n r 0 I � ,I' r'' 'v.{" v3'\s.�J��"1•µ• :a,�Ku A�+ '�a.'k�'t".c'�lfirrr4 \ ){J
Y i, { i �_���Fµ f"��� ��. � Ww - _.- � •I• 1 ��'1�_.. �' .1.,.:.'.�•.'..'� Sr ii J • ,r w'F,a
At�p ,� ' 1 ,��^x','P.F � � � ,? j' '.•su �1•I.tr i.Al f 'yAr� r/P `''� ,
2'r •p, /. ..Ios ai rsxiif ,y I l_ f +j'i
' � I r / ' ��? � r Y / f .� t..•. .a«o,rrww 1�:�~ .. - � t,
law
10
L ! /, � •ar•rw ta"rN4 '!t�• r w r. � ',!(►t,MY ,f 1 I,i. {''t e
} iJ' Rti Y, f d ,.:y„ 1 aA• ++.S1L7ic .ir.: �:�t �' �+.i... .. _. ..... .. ......«tr...Y �'} :_y':W' .r; 't. 7. "!,t" ..jn•i t f
r . ' I warty. !
BTIUTT STMBOIS ,.:.,,w'"":,'` a,;.,�,•,,,•,« :.Nw I �. !t�
rm a... �.� wa.rrwraN•a.rawrrurlwwa. ..aN, ^y ` / v
Y.Nwr �.T NI N a.,lar.11a,► • � �,y1. �r� I '.
•Y .waver � r i :': ,�,; � .. V%yai.efHi.A.n J"K -i! ''72��t`�t�r'
s .71 • • MN• •- r I, Na.•
it --_... .._•.r�...r._.—.�L..�. _.n._ .-�._...L-r .._.._.. .r.....__.. .....r�.._�.w�-^J�... « 4. -0' A. _ 1.._ L N:• �..A�• l .M.a t': Q. -
Valley East Traffic Report
On October 2, the Planning and Zoning Commission requested from Staff a
traffic report assessing the impact of future traffic from the Valley East
Subdivision on area streets. In this report, staff has discussed the current
traffic conditions, the projected traffic volumes, and the impact of increased
traffic on area streets. This report also includes an analysis on the affects
of extending Utah Drive from Idaho to Delaware Avenue.
The conclusion drawn from this analysis is that the extension of Utah Avenue
would serve as a considerable benefit for the residents in the Spring Valley,
and the future residents in the Valley East Subdivision, while there would be
little detriment caused by increased traffic on Delaware Avenue. By extend-
ing Utah Drive, some traffic will be shifted from Idaho and Ontario, and will
traverse Delaware to access North Dakota. This route to North Dakota will
be significantly shorter for 50% of the residents in these subdivisions. This
alternate route' will cause significantly less traffic on Idaho Avenue, and will
result in less travel delays, improved response time for emergency vehicles,
and increase motorists safety.
Traffic projections show that 36& of the motorists trips (866 vehicles/day)
from the Valley East and Spring Valley subdivisions will be oh~Utah Drive and
Delaware _Ave__nuu._ By constructing Utah Drive, these motorists will reduce
their overall travel distance by one-half mile, and improve their travel time
by one to two minutes. This would be especially significant for emergency
fire and ambulance service, since this reduction in response time could be
critical in some situations. This alternate route will . also improve traffic
safety, since a large number... of motorists will travel half the distance and
through half the number of intersections to traverse onto North Dakota.
Traffic volumes will increase on Delaware Avenue, south of Utah Avenue,
however it will not critically impact the roadway service levels. Currently
there are approximately 1160 vehicles per day (vpd) on Delaware, west of
North Dakota. With the development of Valley East and the extension of Utah
Drive, the volumes will increase to approximately 2012 vpd. This is nearly a
73% increase, however, the roadway capacity for a Level of Service C is
10,000 vpd. In addition, the North Dakota/Delaware intersection will remain
at a Level of Service A. The Level of Service factors are based on motorist
• delays and the traffic volumes. The factors range from LOS A (light traffic,
no delays) to LOS D (heavy traffic, excessive delays). The City has adopted
a LOS C as the minimum acceptable level of traffic operations to be used for
roadway design purposes.
Valley East - 1 -
I
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Traffic counts show that there are no critical traffic volumes on streets in the
area, however, the volumes on Ontario, east of North Dakota are reaching
threshold LOS D volumes. (In the event these volumes reach 9,000 to 10,000
vpd on Ontario, traffic lanes should be added by removing existing on-street
parking to improve traffic flow.) Higher traffic volumes are shown on
Delaware Avenue, and should be expected since drive access is restricted on
Dakota Avenue. Due to this situation, Delaware should be classified as a
collector street (collector streets function to connect local streets to the
arterial street system). Shown on the next page are the existing traffic
volumes on area streets.
An approximate guide that can be used for classifying average daily traffic
volumes on roadways is shown below. It should be noted that LOS C thresh-
olds for two-lane roadways is approximately 10,000 vpd, while thresholds for
four-lane roadways is 22,000 vpd.
Street Classification Traffic Volumes
Local Streets 0 - 2,000 vpd
Collector Streets 2,000 - 5,000 vpd
Arterial Streets 5,000 - 35,000 vpd
Expressways 35,000 - 50,000 vpd
Valley East - 2 -
Valley East Subdivision
Existing Traffic Volumes
(Daily Weekday Volumes)
m
m
C C
` P T 1 2800
1 04 0o c 8 o C
0
Ontario Avenue 1 0 _ 1 0 0
: :: :: 5 0
... ::: :
Es N Ross Road
g p >
b . : �{
..'4i• R[
Ov
v
Ross Road
:: ::':::i•: . cd
Q
O
Z
f
$Kest
Phi
° 4570
0
r
Location of Site r
na s o
Valley East - 3 -
TRAFFIC IMPACT BY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Traffic projections show that the moderate traffic volumes will be shifted from
Idaho and Ontario to Delaware, due to the extension of Utah Drive. This
alternate route will significantly improve traffic delays and trip lengths for
many motorists in the Spring Valley and Valley East subdivisions. Traffic
volumes will increase on Delaware, south of Utah Drive, however, it will not
critically impact the roadway conditions with volumes remaining in acceptable
levels. The projected traffic volumes are shown in the diagram below.
Projected Traffic Volumes
(Daily Weekday Volumes)
2810(+,0)
Y E M_� III vell
Ontario Avenue r- U)
8� 2 (+160)
- 1 0
:�: : :
32
ao.. i°ri0W n, '{^.': �: gip
cis
. L
: . .: ...::......` �
o
J z
I —�-
:'............:....�.....:...
..:: N
N
Location of Site C5 7 4(+974)
court(+730)-Volum.k=am/Daaaau
7500 -Projected Traffic Volume
Valley East - 4 -
Projections of area development were based on subdivision plans for multi-unit
and single family units in the Valley East Subdivision. The number of units
in each area in the Spring Valley and Valley East Subdivisions are shown
below. The subdivisions are divided into sections for the purpose of distri-
bution traffic from each area to adjacent streets.
Area Units & Trip Generation
10 i' C
< < d
Ontario Avenue
fry. ,t..
Familyits :Tr..:.-
482 Tri /D
7 Single
amity Un s Ross Road
::.: -:..;: :-
g :: : : roilyvolts
32
Ross Road 46 Trips, a
46 Ingle - `:.-=:;
mi(y Uni ::_: : :. :fin. �: ..
• • • :.:.::a:::::i:.....�ns:
15 Tri /D :::.:::.......
CD
... . a: : ::....... >
0
CO
Location of Site .�
C&Olurt
0
z
Valley East - 5 -
The projected traffic volumes were determined by applying standard genera-
tion rates established by the Institute of Traffic Engineer's (ITE) Traffic
Generation guide. Projected trips generated from the Valley East Subdivision
were determined by using the "trips per apartment unit" (6.1) and "trips per
single family detached home" (10.1), since the maximum number of units has
been determined. Since the Spring Valley Subdivision is nearly developed,
the existing traffic volumes were used.
Traffic projections made by this manual are based on numerous studies that
reflect statistical correlation. The correlation of .932 means that 93.2% of the
rate variation has been explained by the linear regression model. The
"average number of trips per unit" rate was used in this determination since
there is no indication that the apartment units will generate either typically
higher or lower traffic flows.
The ITE trip generations table is shown below.
Weekday Vehicle Trip Generation for Residential Areas
Dwelling Type Avg. Range Regression Equation
Trips perDwe&V Unit(OU)
Single Family Detached Homes 10.1 4.3 21.9 2.6+0.94 G (DU) (W..959)
Apartments 6.1 0S-11.8 51.0+5.92DU (R2-.932)
Residential Condominiums 5.9 0.6-11.8 2.6+0.84 L. (OU) (W_*.820)
Occupied Mobile Homes 4.8 2.3-10.4 No equation available
Taps per Person(P)
Single Family Detached Homes 25 12-52 -44.0+255P
Apartments 2.8 12-5.8 252.0+2.43P (R2-.952)
Residential Condominiums 2.5 1.1-6.7 310.0+1.74P (R2-.925)
Mobile Homes 2.4 1.27. 3.6 0.99+0.98 L, (P) (R2..858)
Trips per Vehicle Owned(VO)
Single Family Detached Homes 6.5 1.0-9.4 1.88+0.99 L. (VO)(R2-.946)
Apartments 5.1 2.9-6.6 -148.0+5.48VO (R26.927)
Residential Condominiums 3.3 1.9-7.3 309.0+2.30VO (R2=.915)
Mobile Homes 3.4 1.9-4.8 0.92+1.06 L. (VO)(R2-.926)
Source:kisdww of Transportation Engineers.1987.
Valley East - 6 -
The projected traffic volumes from these subdivisions were distributed to
streets according to route destination and the proximity of the location to
adjacent routes. Trips were evenly split to Ontario (west of Dakota) and to
Dakota (south of Ontario), although the approximate split was 64% (Ontario)
and 340 (Dakota) from this area. By projecting more traffic on Delaware, a
worse case scenario was used in this determination for assessing the impact
on this roadway.
Shown below are the percentages and volumes of trips distributed to the area
streets.
Projected Traffic Generation
8 %) 7( %)
Ont io AV! ue % 792 14 sss
2 '9.
:. ,?Y ....................
:•:ri• I.
151
AS Tri
..�.
87(1
::.
515 gss/Day 25 50% ::: '•`': :. . .`• ....:;`'::: 9(9�) Q .
:: ::::::::7.7: lie........:::::..:7.
Z
34(4%)
Location of Site 818(96%)
Valley East - 7 -
Staff analyzed the existing and future level of service for the Dela-
ware/Dakota intersection using the projected traffic volumes. Currently the
Level of Service (LOS) for all approaches during the peak traffic period is
LOS A. With the projected traffic volume increases, the LOS for the
intersection and the approaches will remain at LOS A. This is due to the
high percentage of right turning movements from the Delaware approach, and
the moderate traffic volumes on Dakota Avenue. Shown below are the exist-
ing projected levels of service and traffic volumes for the peak traffic hour.
Delawam/Dakota Avenue Delaware/Dakota Avenue
Existing Level Of Service Factors Projected Level Of Service Faaors
rcafkwmekvft% c NAH—Ti.dieva�
190 m Jc10 P/S 190 m Sc70 P►t
t/) rZ
42S A 4:i9 w
y
i
Dehvxre Avenue 51 420 Dehware Avenue 92 420
LOS A S1� �4 �all LOS A �� rzs 411 .
so
52
a <
Valley East - 8 -
EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Included in this study is an analysis of street widths, and traffic/parking
controls on affected streets. According to this inventory, Delaware has a
street width of 311, which is adequate for two traffic lanes and one-side
parking if parking is removed on one side (parking is removed on the west
portion for almost the entire length of Delaware). Also shown in the diagram
is the left turn bay on Ontario at the Florida intersection that will be con-
structed. Shown below in the diagram are existing parking/traffic controls,
and street widths in the area.
Street Conditions
a
I�
e
o
c
E
e
Ontario Avenue • •
...... ..
:::`::: —
:.::.� 40
..........
E < t; :`. _:..... . ............. o Ross Road
g g €
s ;:y
:.�;::.::....... a:;.....: CD
::;:;;:::: Q00
Ross Road >:::t;::;•::• ol
.............::. ...................... ...
O
st
lo
Street
..... .....
o Z
Location of Site
eiUna
urt
• Stop Sign
C71� Parking Restriction
Valley East - 9 -
Traffic accident records indicate that there are a relatively low number of
accidents occurring in this area. There has been four and three accidents at
the Dakota/Ontario and Dakota/Delaware intersections, respectively, in the
past five years. This rate per year is relatively low based on the entering
traffic volumes, with no injuries occurring in these accidents. The major
contributing factor in these accidents is snow/ice and wet roadway conditions.
Of the five accidents on Delaware, three occurred on snow/ice covered street
surfaces. The number of accidents at intersection and mid-block locations are
shown below.
Traffic Accident History
(1986 -.1990)
Elif e
Ontario Avenue
_ .�.. ........... �
:.:::••A. ..........
CD
c.::: :;;:;:;::::; :.........:
P :. ..:::.:::•;:: ,.::::.:::•
': ....
(�
...............................
.......::;:::a::•:r::::;:;;:,: O
Location of Site
O - No. Accidents
Valley East - 10 -
RECOMMENDATIONS
In order to improve traffic operations, traffic and parking controls should be
implemented on Delaware, Ontario, Utah, and Florida. On Delaware, parking
restrictions should be designated to reduce conflicts, and to improve traffic
flow. Currently there are parking restrictions on one-side of Delaware from
Ontario to Dover Drive. However, no restrictions exist legally from Dover to
North Dakota. Staff will recommend that restrictions be extended on the west
and south sides of Delaware along this street section. Also, due to the sharp
roadway curvature, parking restrictions will be recommended on the east and
north sides along this curve section.
Stop controls will also be recommended on Utah and Florida Avenue in the
Valley East Subdivision. Due to the larger volumes on Utah Drive entering
Delaware, stop signs should be placed on Utah Drive to reduce potential
conflicts. Also, this control would be necessary to aid pedestrians/school
children crossing Utah Drive to traverse to Ontario (Sawyer School). Stop
signs also are recommended on Florida Avenue .at the Ontario and Utah
intersections. These are also needed to reduce potential conflicts, since
traffic volumes are expected to be heavier at these intersections.
Parking restrictions are also recommended on the south side of Ontario from
Delaware to North Dakota. By restricting parking along this section, a right
turn lane can be added that will reduce motorist delays at the intersection.
Also, parking restrictions are planned on Florida and Utah to improve traffic
flow and reduce conflicts. Shown on the next page are the proposed traffic
and parking controls recommended for this area
Respectfully ubmitted,
Scott
Traffic Engineer
October 29, 1991
Valley East
Valley East Subdivision
Proposed Traffic/Parking Controls
that will be recommended to Council
a
z
• Proposed Stop Sign Placements
.�■� Proposed Parking Restrictions
Ontario Avenue • •
:::�
o ::�:. .. :;: <
:;`:;- Ross Road
a�
: . CD 00
Ross Road > :.- Q00
0
'r W
0
.� ,x
• o
Da-4VorWe Z
Location of Site Chelsea
Court
• Stop Sign
® Parking Restriction
Valley East - 12 -