HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPRING CREEK CENTER PUD FINAL - 17 90D - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - TRAFFIC STUDY3-�2-1998 2:39PM
f MR—J&-1`!:JU' 15=54
FRC�JMJITYSCAPE 970 226 4196
TTH& MUCH Pe
P. 1
95034 P.03
11
cc
m
w
o
Co
a
0
S1
t�
r,
N
n
7
W
i�
1D0�
e
TO: Eldon Ward, Cityscape Urban Design
Eric Dracke, Port Collins Traffic 84gi.neer
,o Fort Collins Planning Department
o
a PSOIIc Matt Delich 719
U. DATE: Barth 2, 1998
SUBJBCT: Spring Creek Center PVD traffic addendum
(File: 968IM01)
w
CV
This memorandum responds to staff comments pertaining to
co land Vwe inconsistencies between the submitted plan (2/2/98)
^o and the traffic study. The scope of this memorandum was
m discussed with Eric Bracke.
W
9 A 3.000 square foot fast food restaurant was used in the
Q. "Spring Creek Center Site Access Study," Movamber, 1996. The
footprint used on the site plan was that of a XcDonalds
Restaurant with a "playlaad;" The piaylaad is not a. trip
generator for the restaurant. In spite of this, i have used
the 4400 square feet as the size of the last food restaurant
in the trip generation camparisens in this memorandum.
one of the convenience/gas stores (Lot 5) was reduced
from a 12 pump facility to as 9 pamp facility. This will
cause a reduction in trip generation for this lot.
Business Park was used as the general land use for they
remaining buildings. This is appropriate. Triv._Generation-
6th.Edi.tion describes Business Park as a mix of tenants that
o include __offices, retail/wholesale, restaurants, and ..
s recreation. 'The amnxxgv m#x_is_20-30% office/commercial._ gad
+ 70-60$ industrial/varehousia..q:_" It should be noted that the
fast food and convenience/gas store uses were considered
separately and were not Jumped into the business park
z category.
o
It is also noted that Trip Generation. Sth Edition, ITE
eras used as a reference in the cited study. -Table z shows the
trip generation from the study. Table 2 shows the trip
generation using the land uses on the most recent site plan
Fa and using lip Generation. 6th Edition. ITE as the reference
document. A simple comparison indicates that the now site
plan will generate less traffic than that considered in the
site access study. It is concluded that the site access study
adequately addresses the traffic impacts of the Spring Creek
Center.
Post -it' Pax Note 7671
rnwx
Fax •
2-1998 2:4OPM FROM CITYSCAPE 970 22s digs P.2
M'-U-1v* LXSd VTTWW De-ICH PE ���5663503a P.84
Table i
Trip Generation
Daily A.M. Peak P.R. Peak
Land use
Trips
Trips
Trips
Trips
trips
in
out
is
out
Lot 1
Gas/C-store with 8 pumps
1170
44
43
SO
50
Lot 2
Past Food Restaurant -
2130
85
82
57
53
3.0 XSF
Lot 3
Business Park - 6.0 H9P
90
8
1
2
7
Lot 4
Easiness Park - 7.2 KSF
100
10
2
2
8
Lot 5
Business Park - 7.2 BSF
100
10
2
2
8
Lot 6
Gas/C-store with 12 pumps
1750
66
64
74
74
Lot 7
Business Park - 31.2 SSF
450
43
7
10
36
Lot 8
Business Park - 31.2 ISF
450
43
7
10
36
TOTAL
6240
309
208
267
272
a
171
0
3-02-1998 2: "m
SCA2 970 226 di96
FELL DEL104 PE.
9=a P.05
P. 3
Land Luse
Lot 1
Gam/C-store with 8 pumps
Lot.2
Past Food Restaurant -
4.4 OF
Lot 9
Business Park - 9.5 SsF
Lot 4
Business Park - 0.0 XSF
Lot 5
Gas/C-stare with 8 pumps
Lot 6
Business Park - 31.2 XSF
Lot 7
Business Park - 31.2 KSF
TOTAL
In
Table
2
Trip Generation
Daily
A.M.
Peak
P.B.
Peak
Trips
Trips
Trips
Trips
Trips
in
out
in
out
1225
43
42
53
53
2185
lit
107
77
71
120
11
2
3
9
105
10
2
2
8
1,225
43
42
53
53
400
37
7
9
31
400
37
7
4
91
5660
293
309
206
256
TOTAL P.05