| Date |
Text |
| 2022-12-16 18:08:30 | TRAFFIC COMMENTS |
| | 1) PROVIDE AN UPDATED TRAFFIC STUDY, AS IT IS BASED ON |
| | OLD TRAFFIC COUNTS, ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODOLOGIES. |
| | PLEASE PERFORM A NEW SET OF TRAFFIC COUNTS, AND PROVIDE |
| | A DETAILED ELABORATION ON THE TRIP GENERATION |
| | CALCULATION |
| | 2) INCLUDE THE INTERSECTIONS OF DREHER TRAIL N WITH |
| | SUMMIT AND SOUTHERN BLVD IN THE ANALYSIS |
| | 3) PROVIDE AN UPDATED PARKING STUDY. ACTUAL DATA SHOULD |
| | BE COLLECTED IN ORDER TO CORROBORATE THE THEORETICAL |
| | FORMULAS. TYPICAL DAILY/WEEKEND USAGE AND AT LEAST ONE |
| | SPECIAL EVENT SHOULD BE ACCOUNTED FOR |
| | 4) BOTH THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT AND PARKING DEMAND |
| | STUDY NEED TO CONSIDER THE MULTI-PHASE APPROACH OF THE |
| | PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDE NARRATIVE EXPLAINING |
| | AND ILLUSTRATING TRAFFIC IMPACTS, CIRCULATION, PARKING |
| | AND MITIGATION MEASUREMENTS FOR EACH PHASE |
| | 5) PROVIDE A CRASH ANALYSIS ALONG THE MAIN ACCESS |
| | DRIVEWAYS AND IDENTIFY MITIGATION MEASUREMENTS. THE S4 |
| | DATABASE SHOWED 4 INCIDENTS IN THE PAST 2 YEARS. CITY |
| | WAS ALSO CONTACTED IN 2020 PERTAINING IMPROVEMENTS BY |
| | THE SHARP TURN ALONG N DREHER TRAIL JUST WEST OF THE |
| | SCIENCE CENTER |
| | 6) PROVIDE COUNTY TPS LETTER |
| | 7) DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME OF THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, |
| | TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) MEASURES MAY BE |
| | ENCOURAGED |
| | |
| | SITE COMMENTS |
| | 8) PROVIDE A TRANSPORTATION SPECIFIC SITE PLAN FOR THE |
| | GROUND FLOOR. SHOWCASING TRANSPORTATION RELATED |
| | FEATURES (E.G. ROADWAY WIDTHS, DRIVING AISLES, PARKING |
| | STALLS, SIDEWALK, CURB, GUTTER, DRIVEWAY, GATES, |
| | CROSSWALKS, VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, CORNER & DRIVEWAY |
| | SEPARATION DISTANCES, SLOPES, ETC.) PROPERLY LABELED |
| | AND DIMENSIONED. THE SITE PLAN SHOULD BE NAMED T-1.0 |
| | 9) IN THE T-1.0 SITE PLAN, PLEASE SHOWCASE BASIC CURB |
| | DETAILS (E.G. DRIVEWAY, CURB CUTS, PAVEMENT MARKINGS, |
| | PARKING STALLS, ETC.) ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROADS |
| | SURROUNDING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT |
| | 10) PROVIDE A SIGNAGE AND PAVEMENT MARKING PLAN. |
| | INCLUSIVE OF ALL FEATURES WITHIN THE PROPOSED |
| | DEVELOPMENT AND ALONG ALL ROADS FRONTING THE SITE. SUCH |
| | PLAN IS PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION REVIEW AND SHOULD BE |
| | NAMED ACCORDINGLY (E.G. T-1.1 OR T-2.0) |
| | 11) PROVIDE AUTOTURN ANALYSIS FOR GARBAGE TRUCK AND/OR |
| | SERVICE VEHICLES DRIVING IN AND OUT OF THE PROPOSED |
| | DEVELOPMENT WITH VEHICLE DYNAMIC ENVELOPES AND WHEEL |
| | PATHS CLEARLY DISTINCT AND DEFINED IN DIFFERENT COLORS. |
| | PROVIDE THE ANALYSIS IN A SEPARATE SHEET. SUCH PLAN(S) |
| | CONTAINING THE ANALYSIS ARE PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION |
| | REVIEW AND SHOULD BE NAMED ACCORDINGLY (E.G. T1.2, |
| | T-3.0) |
| | 12) PROVIDE A PARKING TABLE SHOWCASING THE NUMBER OF |
| | REQUIRED AND PROVIDED PARKING SPACES, INCLUSIVE OF ADA |
| | AND BICYCLE ONES |
| | 13) IN THE PAVEMENT, MARKING & SIGN PLAN, PROVIDE A |
| | TABLE SHOWCASING THE NUMBER OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED |
| | ON-STREET PARKING STALLS. PROVIDE THE NUMBER OF METERED |
| | STALLS THAT ARE BEING REMOVED OR RELOCATED, IF ANY |
| | 14) ARE THERE ANY GATES PROPOSED? IF SO, CLEARLY |
| | SHOWCASE THE REQUIRED 20 FEET SETBACK DISTANCE FROM THE |
| | BACK OF THE SIDEWALK |
| | 15) IS VALET SERVICE PROPOSED? IF SO, PROVIDE A |
| | THOROUGH OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS. DETAILS OF THE ANALYSIS |
| | SHOULD BE DISCUSSED DURING THE METHODOLOGY MEETING |
| | 16) ARE THERE ANY BUS STOPS BEING IMPACTED? |
| | 17) IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IMPACTING AN EXISTING |
| | BICYCLE FACILITY? |
| | 18) PROVIDE A CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN. PLEASE |
| | REFER TO CITY CODE 86-246 FOR DETAILS. |
| | |
| | VALERIO ORICCHIO |
| | CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER |
| | 561-494-1092 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| |
Print |
