HomeMy WebLinkAboutFisher Associates Community Corners Review Letter.pdf
September 22, 2016
Mr. Brent Cross
Superintendent of Public Works
Village of Cayuga Heights
836 Hanshaw Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
Development Review – Corners Community Center
Medical Office Building
Dear Mr. Cross:
We have completed our review of the proposed Corners Community Center Medical Office
Building project that is being considered for the area south of Hanshaw Road between
Upland Road and Pleasant Grove Road. The development will consist of a 28,200 square
foot (SF), two-story office building that will replace a 3,600 SF office building and a 1,700 SF
bank. Access will be provided through three existing driveways on Upland Road and single
driveways on Hanshaw Road and Pleasant Grove Road. In addition, the internal vehicular
connection between the existing plaza and the Carriage House Apartments will be closed,
however, a pedestrian connection will remain.
We have the following comments on the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) that was completed by
SRF Associates, dated May 2016, with revisions in August and September 2016.
Traffic Volumes
The traffic volumes presented in the TIS accurately represent the existing conditions of
roadway network. It was noted that in general the peak hours of traffic flow were from 7:45-
8:45 AM and 4:30-5:30 PM, but this was not the case for every single study area intersection,
which is typical. Many of the study area intersections have the peak hour this was identified,
but there are a few intersections where the peak hours are different. Review of Figure 3
revealed that the volumes shown on this map are for the peak hour of each intersection and
not necessarily for the peak hour times of 7:45-8:45 and 4:30-5:30, thereby presenting a
worst case analysis as each intersection was analyzed for its peak hour.
We also reviewed the growth projections and it is our opinion that a more conservative
growth rate should have been used. Review of NYSDOT provided data for North
Triphammer Road and Pleasant Grove Road collected in 2011 and 2014 show growth rates
of 2.3% per year for North Triphammer Road and 1.8% per year for Pleasant Grove Road.
Given the discrepancy of these growth rates with one identified in the TIS (0.25% per year),
a more conservative estimate of 1.0% per year would appear to be more appropriate.
Site Trip Generation and Distribution
We concur with the site trip generation and distribution of site traffic that is presented in
the TIS. However, Figure 7R only shows 54 entering and 15 exiting vehicles during the
AM peak hour and 66 exiting vehicles during the PM peak hour which is different than
what is shown in Table 1 of the TIS. In addition we are unclear how the volumes of
Proposal for Engineering Services
Page 2
September 22, 2016
entering and exiting traffic for existing and proposed volumes were calculated in
paragraph 1 of page 4. We reviewed Figures 3 and 8R and arrived at different entering
and exiting volumes. Finally, we are unclear how that traffic was re-distributed for the
Carriage House Apartments due to the closure of the internal connection between the
Plaza and the apartments. We tried following the tables provided in the appendix,
however the redistribution of the apartment traffic appears to be in error. For example,
during the AM peak hour, there is an additional 9 vehicles turning left out of the Carriage
house entrance, however at the next intersection (Pleasant Grove Entrance) there are 9
less vehicles going through. A more clear explanation of this is necessary.
Capacity Analyses
We are unable to complete a full review of the capacity analyses as there are numerous
worksheets for intersections that are missing. Hanshaw Road/N. Triphammer Road, East
Upland Road/Triphammer Road/Hanshaw Road, Pleasant Grove Road/Hanshaw Road,
and Pleasant Grove Road/Pleasant Grove Entrance all have their results reported, but
there are no capacity analysis worksheets for these intersections to review, like the other
study area intersections. In addition, the questions that we have regarding the traffic
volumes could also impact the results of these analyses. In general, from what has been
presented in the TIS, we offer the following comments:
There are a number of study area intersection movements that either currently
work very poorly or are projected to work even more poorly (LOS F). Additional
traffic due to the proposed development will further exacerbate already poor
operating conditions.
The impact of having poor levels of service for any movement could create a safety
issue as drivers that are forced to wait long periods of time, they become
impatient and may accept smaller gaps in traffic than they normally would
thereby increasing the chances for right angle accidents.
Queueing information needs to be provided for all movements. We have a
concern of how the proximity of the intersections of Pleasant Grove Road with
Hanshaw Road and the Pleasant Grove Entrance are going to work given the poor
levels of service. It is likely Pleasant Grove Road queues at the Hanshaw Road
intersection are going to block the driveway thereby prohibiting traffic from
exiting. It would be preferable to close this driveway completely and create a road
between the proposed medical office building and the fire station that would
connect with the Carriage House driveway.
Shared Parking Analysis
We have reviewed the shared parking analysis and we agree with the methodology that was
used. In the total number of parking spaces that are provided for the existing (285 spaces)
and proposed (298) conditions, does this include the Chemung Canal Bank, because it was
noted that this land use was not included in the analysis. Also, in order to validate the shared
parking model, the developer should have performed parking counts over the course of a
couple of representative days to estimate existing parking usage and compare that
information to what the model predicted for the existing conditions to estimate the
confidence level of the model. The shared use parking model is based on national parking
data and where local information is available, it should be utilized. In addition, this shared
Proposal for Engineering Services
Page 3
September 22, 2016
parking analysis does not take into consideration other people that may be parking within
the plaza that do not have any business there.
Site Plan Review
We have some concerns regarding the proposed site plan. It is good transportation planning
practice to have cross vehicular access between adjacent parcels. This allows trips to occur
without having to go out onto the main roadways. If it is possible, the applicant should keep
the cross vehicular connection between the Carriage House Apartments and the proposed
site. We also recommend removing the first six parking spaces on the south side of the
parking lot adjacent to the East Upland Road South Driveway. The reason for this is that
vehicles backing out of the parking spaces may come into conflict with drivers entering the
driveway as entering drivers may not expect a vehicle backing into the driveway. In
addition, a driver backing out of one of these parking spots may be more concerned with
avoiding drivers entering the driveway and not see vehicles potentially exiting the parking
lot directly behind them.
Finally, as discussed previously, consideration should be given to closing the Pleasant Grove
Driveway closest to Hanshaw Road and have a new roadway run behind the proposed
medical office building (similar to how it is today) and connect up to the parking lot. If this
were completed and the cross connection re-established, then this would allow vehicles to
enter and exit the plaza further away from Hanshaw Road.
If you have any questions or require clarification of these comments, please contact me.
Sincerely,
FISHER ASSOCIATES, P.E., L.S., L.A., D.P.C.
Timothy R. Faulkner, PE
Senior Transportation Manager