Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-21-15 PZ Agenda Packet Page 1 of 1 TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA January 21, 2015 WESTLAKE TOWN HALL 3 VILLAGE CIRCLE, 2ND FLOOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS Regular Session 6:00 p.m. Regular Session 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. REVIEW AND APPROVE MINUTES FROM THE MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 5, 2015. 3. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT AMENDS AND REPLACES THE TOWN’S CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 4. ADJOURNMENT CERTIFICATION I certify that the above notice was posted at the Town Hall of the Town of Westlake, 3 Village Circle, Suite 202, Westlake, Texas, 76262, on January 16, 2015, by 5:00 p.m. under the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code. _____________________________________ Kelly Edwards, TRMC, Town Secretary If you plan to attend this public meeting and have a disability that requires special needs, please advise the Town Secretary 48 hours in advance at 817-490-5710 and reasonable accommodations will be made to assist you. Planning and Zoning Item # 1– Call to Order Back up material has not been provided for this item. P&Z Minutes 01/05/15 Page 1 of 3 MINUTES OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING January 5, 2015 PRESENT: Chairman Bill Greenwood, Commissioners Tim Brittan, Liz Garvin, Michelle Lee and Sharon Sanden. ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Town Manager Tom Brymer, Planning and Development Director Eddie Edwards, Town Secretary Kelly Edwards, Public Works Director Jarrod Greenwood, Director of Finance Debbie Piper, Communications & Community Affairs Director Ginger Awtry, and Susan McFarland, Communications Specialist. Regular Session 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Greenwood called the meeting to order at 6:12 p.m. 2. PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF SOLANA REDEVELOPMENT PLANS BY NEW SOLANA OWNERS (EQUITY AKA BLACKSTONE) INCLUDING WAY FINDING, SIGNAGE, LIGHTING, RETAIL, OPEN SPACE RECONFIGURATION, PARKING, AND BUILDING REMODELING. Mr. Brian Blankenship, Cassidy Turley, provided an overview of the item. Mr. Stephen Park, 5G Studio Collaborative, provided a presentation and overview of the proposed redevelopment for the Solana including the Health Club, Kirkwood Boulevard, and Campus Circle developments. Mr. Blankenship stated that they would like to complete an update of the property by the end of the year. P&Z Minutes 01/05/15 Page 2 of 3 Discussion ensued regarding the amendments as presented, reconfiguration of the Village Circle retail parking, additional parking structures for the Campus Circle development, a shading structure, and signage. 3. REVIEW AND APPROVE MINUTES FROM THE MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 8, 2014. MOTION: Commissioner Lee made a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner Garvin seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. 4. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER A ZONING CHANGE FROM R 1 “ESTATE RESIDENTIAL” TO PD-6 “PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WITH TEN LOTS.” THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1480 DOVE ROAD, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS LOT 1, BLOCK 1 OF THE DOVE ADDITION, APPROXIMATELY 10.18 ACRES. Director Edwards provided a presentation and overview of the proposed zoning change including the specific lot sizes of the adjacent subdivisions of Glenwyck Farms and Terra Bella. Developers Todd Handwerk and Paul Rostron, Calais Custom Homes, provided a presentation and overview of their company stating that Calais would be the sole home builder of the development. Discussion ensued regarding Staff recommendations for the proposed development, proposed lot sizes, and R-1 Zoning requirements of 1.0 acre lots. Chairman Greenwood opened the public hearing. BeAnn Arthur, 1755 W. Dove Road, Westlake, spoke against the proposed zoning change due to the lot size, increase of traffic on Dove Road and the new housing development along Dove Road in the City of Southlake. Brent Gabriel, 1625 Trace Bella, Westlake, spoke against the proposed zoning change due to the lot size, concerns that more people were available to attend this meeting, and changes to the development should there be a change in ownership. Michael Clarke, 1310 Casa Bella Court, Westlake, spoke against the proposed zoning change due to the lot size, community gate be distinctive, and stated the he would like the property to stay unchanged. Kevin Maynard, 1624 Fair Oaks Court, Westlake, asked staff to read the letter from resident Charlie Reynolds, stated his concerns regarding the R-1 1.0 acre minimum lot P&Z Minutes 01/05/15 Page 3 of 3 size but believes that there could be another design option that may be considered for this development of 8 lots. Michael Tierney, 1600 Trace Bella Court, Westlake, spoke against the proposed zoning change due to the lot size. Andrew Kuster, 1803 Shady Grove Court, Westlake, spoke in favor of the proposed zoning change stating he believes that the development would be a nice transition between the subdivisions. Chairman Greenwood asked for a motion to close the public hearing. MOTION: Commissioner Sanden made a motion to recommend denial of the zoning change. Commissioner Brittan seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. 5. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 70 SIGNS (SIGNAGE); SECTIONS 70-12, 70-18, AND 70-19 PROVIDING FOR SIGN REGULATIONS WITHIN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS. Director Edwards provided an overview of the propose amendment. MOTION: Commissioner Lee made a motion to recommend approval of the amendment to Chapter 70. Commissioner Garvin seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. 6. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Chairman Greenwood, asked for a motion to adjourn. MOTION: Commissioner Sanden made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. Chairman Greenwood adjourned the meeting at 8:14 p.m. APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON THE 21st DAY OF JANUARY, 2015. ________________________________ ATTEST: William E. Greenwood, Chairman ______________________________ Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary Page 1 of 3 estlake Town Council TYPE OF ACTION Regular Meeting - Action Item Westlake Town Council Meeting Wednesday, January 21, 2015 TOPIC: Conduct a Public Hearing and Consideration of the Comprehensive Plan that Amends and Replaces the Town’s Current Comprehensive Plan. STAFF CONTACT: Tom Brymer, Town Manager Strategic Alignment Vision, Value, Mission Perspective Strategic Theme & Results Outcome Objective Informed & Engaged Citizens / Sense of Community Municipal & Academic Operations High Quality Planning, Design & Development - We are a desirable well planned, high -quality community that is distinguished by exemplary design standards. Encourage Westlake’s Unique Sense of Place Strategic Initiative Comprehensive Plan Project Review Time Line - Start Date: March 2011 Completion Date: February 2015 (estimated) Funding Amount: $350,000 (approx) Status - Funded Source - General Fund EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (INCLUDING APPLICABLE ORGANIZATIONAL HISTORY ) Since November 2013, the Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee (appointed by the Town Council) has been meeting regularly. They have met 1 2 times plus held 3 widely advertised public input workshops for the community. The purpose of this Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee (i.e. the Committee) has been to work with MESA Planning, an urban planning consulting firm retained by the Town Council, to update the Town’s 1992 Comprehensive Plan. On December 8, 2014, the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Town Council held a joint workshop where the Town’s planning consultant, MESA Planning, and the Chair of the Comprehensive Plan Page 2 of 3 Update Steering Committee presented the updated Proposed Comprehensive Plan (the Plan) that would replace the Town’s current Plan originally formulated in 1992. At this December 8th joint workshop, the proposed new Plan’s elements were reviewed. Those Plan elements are: • land use plan • thoroughfare plan • parks & open space plan • trails plan • Town design structure plan • facilities & town hall plan • storm water & water conservation plan • housing plan • economic development plan. It was noted by Committee Chair Johnson at this December 8th joint workshop that the Committee’s recommendation of the thorough fare plan (t-fare) element was not unanimous (Deloitte and Hillwood representatives on the committee dissented with the proposed t-fare plan). It was also noted that Hillwood had presented that evening to the Town Staff and MESA their analysis (conducted by the engineering firm Burns and McDonnell) of the t -fare needs for Hillwood’s Circle T Ranch property in Westlake. It was stated that Hillwood’s t-fare study would be reviewed and analyzed as well as compared to the t-fare plan being recommended by MESA in the Proposed Comprehensive Plan. The Proposed Comprehensive Plan t -fare plan includes a recommendation for an extension of Pearson Lane north of Dove Road as well as extension of Westlake Parkway westward. On January 6, 2015 a complete copy of the Proposed Comprehensive Plan was delivered to the Commission and Town Council perusal in advance of the public hearings. Should this Plan advance from the P&Z, it is planned for the Town Council to hold a public hearing on this Plan on February 23, 2015 and consider it for adoption by ordinance at that time. Both the P&Z’s and the Town Council’s public hearings have been advertised in our newspaper of record (Star Telegram) and the Town’s Westlake Wire email newsletter has been used to inform the public of these public hearings. Ad ditionally, the proposed Plan has been made available via the Town’s website for public review. Finally, on January 9, 2015 the P&Z, Town Council, and Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee were furnished analysis and questions that the Town’s planning consultant produced from their review of Hillwood’s t -fare fare plan study conducted for Hillwood by Burns and McDonnell. This analysis included a comparison of the methodologies used by MESA and Burns and McDonnell to produce the different recommendations they have on this subject. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Commission receive a brief staff presentation, ask questions of the Town’s consultant and/or staff, and then hold the public hearing. Following closing the public hearing, Staff recommends discussion and consideration of recommending this Proposed Comprehensive Plan to the Town Council for adoption. Further, Staff recommends this Plan to the Commission with the t-fare plan as proposed by MESA and a majority of the Comprehensive Pla n Update Committee. Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENTS 1. Proposed Town of Westlake Comprehensive Plan (sent under separate cover 1 6 15). (Link to website – large file) 2. Calendar of Process Used for Formulation of Proposed Comprehensive Plan. 3. Report Commissioned by Hillwood: Burns and McDonnell Traffic Modeling Analysis Dated 12 8 14 for Westlake Circle T Ranch. 4. MESA Planning’s Analysis of 1 8 15 Comparing Their T-Fare Methodology and Analysis to that Contained in the Burns and McDonnell Report. 5. Questions and Comments from MESA re: the Burns and McDonnell Report. Comprehensive Plan Update Key Milestones December 8, 2014 March 28, 2011 Town Manager given directive in Annual Review to implement Comprehensive Planning process March 26, 2012 Draft of Request for Proposal given to Council April 23, 2012 Town Manager directed in Annual Review to continue Comprehensive Planning process October 19, 2012 Conducted survey of Council/P&Z – regarding key policy issues for comprehensive plan Feb. – March, 2013 Request for Proposal Completed by Town Manager March 11, 2013 Request for Proposal Published in Newspapers March 18, 2013 Request for Proposal Bid Meeting April 22, 2013 Deadline for Proposal Submittal May 20-31, 2013 Interview of Consultants and Ranking of Firms August 26, 2013 Resolution Adopted Authorizing Co mprehensive Plan & Mesa Planning September 16, 2013 Authorization for Steering Committee and Created Job Description October 28, 2013 Appointed Steering Committee Members November 19, 2013 Steering Committee Kick-off Meeting - #1 December 11, 2013 Steering Committee Meeting - #2 January 15, 2014 Public Workshop - #1 February 1, 2014 Assessment Report Received from Mesa Planning February 26, 2014 Steering Committee Meeting - #3 March 5, 2014 Public Workshop - #2 April 16, 2014 Steering Committee Meeting - #4 April 30, 2014 Steering Committee Meeting - #5 May 7, 2014 Steering Committee Meeting - #6 May 28, 2014 Public Workshop - #3 June 3, 2014 Steering Committee Meeting - #7 June 18, 2014 Steering Committee Meeting - #8 July 16, 2014 Steering Committee Meeting - #9 July 23, 2014 Steering Committee Meeting - #10 September 10, 2014 Steering Committee Meeting - #11 October 1, 2014 Town Manager given directive in Annual Review to finalize the Comprehensive Planning process October 29, 2014 Steering Committee Meeting - #12 December 8, 2014 Joint Town Council and Planning & Zoning Meeting ROBIN.H.MCCAFFREY AIA.FAICP 11700 PRESTON.RD.STE.660-299 DALLAS.TX.75230 PH + 214.535.7484 rmccaffrey@mesa-planning.com January 8,2015 Mr. Thomas E. Brymer Town Manager Town of Westlake 3 Village Circle, Suite 202 Westlake, TX 76262 Dear Mr. Brymer, Since receiving the Burns and McDonnell Traffic Analysis (prepared at the request of Hillwood) on the evening of December 8, 2014, MESA and our Traffic Sub-consultant (Gresham Smithy and Partners) have spent considerable time examining the thoroughfare plan configuration contained therein and the justifications for that configuration. Our recommendation is that the goals and interests of the Town are best served by the proposed interconnected, Town-wide Thoroughfare System, as shown in the January 2015 Forging Westlake Comprehensive Plan Update. We continue to make this recommendation based on both points of agreement and disagreement with Hillwood’s Burns and McDonnell Report. First, I would like to review the points of agreement MESA has with the Burns and McDonnell Report. They are: 1. Agreement that aggregate non-residential square footage represented by entitlements (i.e. zoning) in place within Westlake is at approximately 25 million square feet. On May 27, 2014; Burns and McDonnell produced an estimate of the total non-residential square footage permitted by planned development and categorical zoning currently in place within the Town of Westlake. This figure was approximately 25 million square feet and closely tracked the permitted non-residential square footage estimated by MESA. 2. Agreement on the magnitude of traffic produced as a result of zoning entitlements in place: On May 27, 2014; Burns and McDonnell produced an estimate of total daily trips generated by 25 million square feet of non-residential zoning entitlement (using the Institute of Traffic Engineers or “ITE” Trip Generation Method) and established that such a magnitude of development would generate 466,000 Average Daily Trips (ADT’s). This figure is significantly greater than the 300,00 average Daily Trip Figure used by MESA for thoroughfare planning purposes, but is comparable as the MESA figure represents a 28% reduction for planning purposes under MESA’s assumption that all zoning entitlement rights may not be used Page 1 of 4 ROBIN.H.MCCAFFREY AIA.FAICP 11700 PRESTON.RD.STE.660-299 DALLAS.TX.75230 PH + 214.535.7484 rmccaffrey@mesa-planning.com However, it is critical to note that on December 8, 2014, Burns and McDonnell revised that number down to 175,000 ADT’s. A subsequent conference call to discuss the matter acknowledged that the revised figure is based on an employment calculation not supported by the published literature (see existing literature in the attached Comments, Questions, and Recommendations for the Browns and McDonnell and Kimberly/Horne Traffic Team). In that conference, Burns and McDonnell illustrated that their second run, using a different employment ratio would significantly raise the traffic count. In addition, the December 8th Burns and McDonnell study is lacking use of the full entitlement rights for PD’s 1 and 2. When using the full entitlement rights’ square footage for Planned Zoning Districts 1 and 2 (PD’s 1 and 2) and an employment ratio supported by current literature; the total Average Daily Trips exceeds the number used by MESA for planning purposes and approaches the earlier number put forth by Burns and McDonnell in May, 2014. 3. Agreement on the extent to which State Highway 114 and various connection points to State Highway 114 are over capacity (at or above LOS F): Maps provided by Burns and McDonnell subsequent to their December 8th Traffic Study (December 15, 2014) show most of State Highway 114 and 6 of the 8 connections to Highway 114 functioning at a Level of Service E and F+. In other words, the Burns and McDonnell study assumes failure from a traffic flow standpoint of these highways and intersections. These levels of service establish that State Highway 114, and key connections to State Highway 114, are at “breakdown” operationally when estimated ADT’s are less than 300,000 trips (the MESA Planning figure). This is the same conclusion reached by MESA with MESA also showing that State Highway 114, today, is 1,000 trips per day over capacity. 4. Agreement that without a Pearson Road connection, Davis Boulevard, Ottinger Road, and Roanoke Road (south of Dove) will function at (and above) capacity with daily trip volumes less than 300,000 vehicle trips. The maps provided by Burns and McDonnell on December 15, 2014 show Levels of Service (LOS) on Davis Boulevard, portions of Ottinger Road, and portions of Roanoke Road (all south of Dove Road) at Levels D,E, and F+ (all exceeding the appropriate LOS for Westlake) with ADT’s less than 300,000 Trips (the MESA Planning figure). In addition, the traffic counts assigned by the Burns and McDonnell model to Ottinger Road, Roanoke Road, and Davis Boulevard are near capacity at trip volumes less than 300,000 ADT’s. Therefore, there is little-to-no capacity in the system as proposed by Burns and McDonnell. Page 2 of 4 ROBIN.H.MCCAFFREY AIA.FAICP 11700 PRESTON.RD.STE.660-299 DALLAS.TX.75230 PH + 214.535.7484 rmccaffrey@mesa-planning.com Conclusion from Points of Agreement: MESA agrees with Burns and McDonnell that zoning entitlements in place will generate Average Daily Trip volumes in excess of 300,000 trips with employment ratios supported by current literature and full consideration of the entitlement potential in PD’s 1 and 2. MESA also agrees that the system as proposed by Burns and McDonnell is comprised of road segments and connections that are functioning at or above capacity (along State Highway 114 and roads south of Dove Road). Therefore, a more connected system is needed which provides the residents of Westlake with more traffic flow choices when local divers encounter the points of congestion as illustrated by Burns and McDonnell. Key to such choices is the extension of Pearson from Dove to Highway 114 and the easterly extension of Dove Road to State Highway 114 (via Solana Boulevard). In addition continuity within the commercial roadway network is impossible if dependent on State Highway 114, making the Westlake Parkway connection between Capital Parkway and State Highway 170 absolutely necessary. Regarding MESA’s point of disagreement with the Burns and McDonnell Report, they are as follows: 1. That E and F+ congestion along, and at points of connection with, State Highway 114 does not require relief routes for local movement within Westlake. This is the primary difference between the MESA analysis and the Burns and McDonnell Analysis. However, MESA continues to assert that any thoroughfare plan which seeks to use State Highway 114 as a primary operational element is unavoidably tied to the operation of State Highway 114. The citizens of Westlake have been clear regarding their desire to see a coherent thoroughfare system for the Town that allows maximum mobility and convenience for local residents. Therefore, a connected Town thoroughfare system which provides alternatives to State Highway 114 (and other points of congestion) is absolutely necessary. 2. The Burns and McDonnell model out-puts are not consistent with current conditions. The attached Comments, Questions, and Recommendations for the Browns and McDonnell and Kimberley/Horne Traffic Team raises several points regarding the inconsistency of model output with current traffic counts and its counter intuitive conclusions regarding desirability pathways. To date these questions have not been answered. Page 3 of 4 ROBIN.H.MCCAFFREY AIA.FAICP 11700 PRESTON.RD.STE.660-299 DALLAS.TX.75230 PH + 214.535.7484 rmccaffrey@mesa-planning.com Conclusion from Points of Disagreement: No additional data has been presented to support changing the proposed interconnected, Town- wide Thoroughfare Plan proposed in the January 2015, Forging Westlake Comprehensive Plan Update. It is also important to recognize that a through fare system is planned for and built to serve development, something that the land owner, in this case Hillwood, has ultimate control over. Should you have further questions about any of the above information or wish to discuss this matter further, please let me know. Sincerely yours, Robin McCaffrey FAICP, AIA Senior Principal, MESA Planning Attachment- Comments, Questions, and Recommendations for the Browns and McDonnell and Kimberley/Horne Traffic Team Page 4 of 4 COMMENTS, QUESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE BURNS and MCDONNELL/ KIMLEY HORN TRAFFIC TEAM The following are Comments, Questions, and Recommendations which reflect the primary issues of difference that MESA/ GSP have with the Burns and McDonnell/ Kimley Horn Traffic Study delivered on December 8 with supporting PDF maps and tables delivered on December 15. 1. Employment Densities: MESA and GSP disagree with the use of 600-800 sf. per employee for service employment and 1200 sf. per employee for retail employment. The following Tables 1 and 2 illustrate more generally accepted industry standards for employment densities: Table 1: Summary of ITE, USDOE, San Diego Association of Governments Corp. headquarters, Suburban = 260 sf./ emp. Specialty Retail Store = 549 sf./ emp. Table 2: Snohomish County Study Given that the general literature states that the 2015 sf. per employee for office use is 195 sf./ emp. MESA and GSP believe that Service Employment should be set at 260 sf./ emp. and Retail Employment should be set at 700 sf./ emp. This will likely precipitate a significant increase in the total trips. Retail 700 sf./ employee 2. Lack of comparability between the two standard methods: MESA and GSP view the inconsistency between the Burns and McDonnell May 27 determination of ADT’s (466,000 ADT, based on the ITE Trip Generation Method) and the December determination of ADT’s (175,000 ADT, based on Trip Demand Model) as an indication that the Trip Demand Model relies upon customized assumptions not supported by the ITE standards. Two different, but accepted, Industry standard models should produce ADT results that are more closely aligned. Therefore, the input assumptions should be reviewed in terms of the inconsistencies which yield such disparate results. 3. Table 1 square footage: MESA and GSP recommends that Table 1 be revised to show a build-out Service square footage for the Fidelity and Solana properties that reflects the entitled square footage number previously identified by Burns and McDonnell in May (6,618,558) or a number more like the square footage estimated by MESA (5,500,000) instead of 1,200,000. Also, MESA/ GSP recommend that Deloitte be included in the service square footage total. 4. Levels of Service at important road segments: The exhibit shown below indicates that numerous road segments will function at failing levels of service (LOS E and F+) at build-out with 175,000 ADT. MESA and GSP recommend that the characterization on page 14 of the Burns and McDonnell Report (which states: “the updated CTR Master Plan networks…provides satisfactory performance when all planned developments are fully built out with 2035 demographics”) be revised to reflect that Levels of Service at D, E, F, or F+ are not satisfactory. Further the extent to which other roadways and intersections move from something less than D to E or higher as a result of the “285,000 ADT stress test”, should also be stated. LOS D,E,F, and F+ MESA and GSP are unclear what the difference between the 2 maps is but, both show considerable dysfunction where road segments connect with the 114 corridor, making dependence of this corridor as a major system element (as suggested in the Burns and McDonnell Report) something that should be reconsidered. The realization of LOS classifications that are “F+”, presents an LOS designation not consistent with current LOS designation typology. LOS F is generally defined as: “Forced or Breakdown Flow: Volumes are exceeding capacity, queues form behind breakdown point.” Therefore, a classification of F+ suggests that it exceeds breakdown. Is there a threshold volume associated with this F+ designation and if so, does it allow the model to load the point of connection beyond F? MESA and GSP recommend that use of F+ should be eliminated from the summary and the model (if it is used therein as a classification). Is the assumption made in May still an assumption used in the December analysis? The May 27th report states: “The volumes of traffic assigned to the State Highway interchanges at connection points may require significant improvements at the interchange to provide acceptable LOS…We do not have sufficient traffic data to assess these needs and the general feasibility of such improvements.” Additionally, much of the proposed network is composed of 6 lane roadway elements. MESA and GSP recommend that the system function as a 4 lane system throughout, which is consistent with the abutting streets. LOS D,E,F, and F+ 5. Adjacent Zoning MESA and GSP recommend that abutting commercial and high density residential zoning in Southlake be included in Table 1 as such area is served by the Westlake system. The attached zoning map illustrates that significant land area served by Solana Boulevard and north of 114 is zoned Retail and higher density residential PD. MESA and GSP believe that such inclusion (which has a land area larger than the retail portions of PD 3), as well as a realistic portrayal of the ADT’s flowing from Solana and Fidelity, will influence the low LOS for road segments serving this intersection, shown on the above maps. 6. Inconsistencies with 2013 area Traffic Counts The following map is from the Southlake Traffic Count Publication (2013 Traffic Count Report). The Dove Road section (east of Davis to 114) is indicated by the numbers 39 and 40. The 2013 traffic count in this location for east and west traffic is 15,750. Note that the 2035 Base Network Map (presented earlier) has this count at 7,700 or 8,050 vehicles less than the 2013 actual count. The same is true for Peytonville with a 2013 count of 5,024 and a 2035 network volume of 1,800. This is an example of differences between 2013 counts and the volumes shown on the 2035 network. MESA and GSP assume that future 2035 volumes would be higher than 2013 counts. Please provide any documentation/ clarification that explains this difference. 7. Counter Intuitive Link and Network Assignments The 2035 Network map segment below illustrates that Ottinger, a 2 lane street south of Dove, will carry 12,800 cars while the neighboring Pearson, a 4 lane street, carries only 2,400. It would seem that Pearson being underutilized as a 4 lane, while Ottinger is at capacity and experiencing LOS F+ at its connection with Keller Smithfield, would be desirable to more trips (especially when the model assigns trips based on travel time). The increased travel time for any portion of Ottinger’s 12,800 vehicles caught in the F+ connection would cause the model to reassign those trips to the underutilized 4 lane which has a straight/ direct connection to 1179. Further, the model projects 2035 volumes on Pearson from 2,400 to 3,700 (depending on the network), which is less than existing counts (4,500 vpd). It is counterintuitive that a 4 lane roadway with excess capacity would experience a decrease in volume while a parallel roadway, a capacity constrained 2-lane street, would experience an increase. The behavior of the model in this and other situations suggest that it is not responding to travel time criteria. MESA and GSP are facing difficulty in determining how the network is programmed to perform given such counterintuitive outcomes. 39 & 40 Peytonville 8. Centroid Connections Several centroids provide direct connection to the SH 114 frontage road and load a significant amount of trips (10,900, 16,000, and 35,000 trips per day) to it. It seems unlikely that such a large amount of development would have direct driveway access to the frontage road, bypassing the local street network entirely. A similar situation occurs with a centroid connector providing direct access to SH 377 (16,200 vpd). MESA and GSP recommend that a Town Thorough system be more actively pursued and connections there-to be more realistically anticipated. Finally, the TAZ west of SH 170 identifies all 32,500 of its daily trips loading directly onto Main Street in Roanoke. Is this representative of the actual property access management scheme envisioned? MESA and GSP recommends that ingress/ egress be considered in the context of creating a thoroughfare plan for the entire Town, not simply moving cars in/ out of a particular PD. Planning and Zoning Item # 4 – Adjournment Back up material has not been provided for this item.