HomeMy WebLinkAboutFRONT RANGE REZONING & STRUCTURE PLAN AMEND. - 3-00 - CORRESPONDENCE - TRAFFIC STUDYSteve Olt Sc Is Page 2
deceleration lanes— this can most likely be resolved as this project moves through the site design and
engineering phases. Also, Tess should be consulted regarding the intersection issues at Trilby and at Skyway.
In order to create the 3/4 movement on South College, a median will need to be installed. Design of this median and
the associated issues will need to be determined as this project moves through future phases of the development
review process.
If it is determined that the northern most RIRO is not necessary for vehicular access to the site, then it could be
replaced with a pedestrian/bicycle connection to serve the neighborhood.
Regarding the Ped LOS, the TIS needs to address the street crossing of South College at Skyway and at Trilby in
order to provide connectivity from the site to the commercial uses and the existing Foxtrot transit service. A
pedestrian LOS worksheet should also be provided.
The Bicycle LOS needs to indicate that bikelanes would be required on South College. Currently the 12' shoulder
serves as the bikeway through this corridor but with their other roadway improvements using this shoulder area,
a dedicated bikelane will need to be provided. A bicycle LOS worksheet should also be provided.
Please let me know if you have any questions or need further clarification about these concerns. Eric and I would
be available to meet with the your staff as well as the project applicant and their traffic engineer to review our
comments.
CC: Steve Olt
Eric Bracke
Ward Stanford
Dave Stringer
Steve Olt - sctis Page
DATE: August 3, 2001
TO: Cameron Gloss, Current Planning Director
FROM: Kathleen Reavis, Senior Transportation Planner
RE: Front Range Project — South College
Here are the comments on the Transportation Impact Study (TIS) for the Front Range project on South College. We
realize that this project is just at the rezoning request stage but we would like to offer these questions and concerns
on the TIS at this time in order to help clarify issues as this project moves forward.
Eric Bracke's comments are as follows:
I agree with a minimum of 600' spacing between the access road and 287. A future signal at this location is
questionable.
I have concerns that the sight distance may be a problem at this location and they will more than likely need to
chase the grade west to obtain appropriate sight distance.
3. Three access drives on 287 seems a bit excessive. The residential section of the property would be better served
via access from Saturn.
4. The 3/4 movement should be moved further north.
5. I have concerns that the access drives will not meet SHAC criteria. When I get a scaled drawing of the
development, we can determine more.
6. Access to the site should include a joint access with the swimming pool folks.
7. A north/south access road (public street) between Trilby and Saturn is critical for recirculation and should not be
negotiable.
8. The Trilby/287 intersection (west leg in particular) will need considerable improvements to bring it up to city
standards. This will be required with the access to Trilby.
My additional comments regarding the South College Access Plan and bicycle/pedestrian issues:
The intersection analysis at Skyway does not take into consideration the existing conditions such as the lack of
dedicated left turn lanes westbound and eastbound on Skyway nor does it factor in the existing frontage road
connections to Skyway on both the west and east sides of US287. By not factoring in these conditions, the LOS
projections and geometry requirements do not seem to be accurate for the short term and the long term. I'm
particularly concerned because the TIS indicates that no improvements would be necessary in the short-term to
accommodate this development (even though full build out is intended to occur within the short term). The
proposed Access plan South College/US 287 includes a lot of information regarding the intersection of
Skyway/US 287 and the adjacent frontage roads and this needs to be included in the TIS analysis.
The number and type of access points shown in the TIS are consistent with the proposed South College/US 287
Access Management Plan. However, given the traffic volumes projected by this development, the applicant
should talk with Tess !ones at CDOT to determine if the SHAC criteria can be achieved for the acceleration and