HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 5.F 10/18/2004CITYOF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
OCT 1 2004
AGENDA BILL
enda, Title: Discussion and Possible Action Regarding a Modification 1VIeeting Date: October 18, 2004
Flo the Design and Construction of a `Proposed Raised Concrete - Median on
North McDowell Boulevard from Redwood Way to the southern. boundary,
of the, Redwood Gateway Shopping Center'( Moore /Spaulding/Bates) ' _Meeting Time Z 3:00 PM
❑ 7:00 PM '
r
Category (check one) � Consent,Calendar ❑° Public.Hearng ' Z New Business
Unfinished Business F Presentation
Department
Director
Contact Person I
Phone Number '778 -4301
Community Development
Mike Moor
Mike Moore
Curt Bates
Cost of Proposal N/A -
1 Account Number
Amount Budgeted
' Name.of,Fund:
Attachmonts'fo Agenda Packet Item
1) Location Map
2) Excerpt from September 23 2003 Staff Report to the Planning - Commission for Redwood Gateway
3) Excerpt from September 23, 2003 Planning Commission Minutes
4) Excerprfrom October 27, 2003 Staff Report, to the City Council_for.Redwood Gateway
5) Excerpt October 27, 2003 City; 'CoLcil approving Redwood.Gateway
6) October 20, 2003 Letter to.George''`White.from W -Trans
7) July 21, 2003 Letter to George Wh ite rom W=Trans ,
Summary Statement
Business: owners ac ross North McDowell,, 'from the Redwood. Gatewa'y`?Shopping Center are objecting to a median
that has now been installed temporarily, .but will be a permanent, concrete median later this month. The concrete
median is a traffic mitigation measure< approved by City: Council as part. the certification of the Redwood
Technology environmental im re ort an
p p d the Redwood Gatewayproject. The original mitigation' measure called
for a continuous concrete median /Old Redwood,Highway intersection to the southern
IF
'Gateway ( N oi - th,,McDowell
rY of the Redwood Center
boundary with a break at the intersection of..North McDowell and Redwood Way,
the main entrance to Redwood Gateway). The median was a response 'to identified traffic safety concerns resulting
from the anticipated increase. m traffic and' turnm movements into out' of the existing and proposed driveway
g s
byway of the existing, two -way left -turn lane. The City Council approved' the'Redwood Gateway project on October
272003', with "a condition of approval that; provided two breaks in the median -- a southbound, left -turn pocket for
Motel 6 and ai northboundaeftAurn; ockef serving the shopping center.
Recommended, City_Couincil .Action /Sukgested Motion
There are three options for Council consideration and .'action:
1) Leave the median'conf guration'as approved with the turn pockets for Motel 6 and the Redwood Gateway.
Center.,
2) Require the construction of an unbroken median as originally recommended' in the project-EIR.
3) Construct no median and provide a .continuous. double left turn lane . ,Redwood Way to the end of the
Kohl's property.
Reviewed by Finance Director:
Reviewed by City Attorney
Date:
Approved. by City Manager
Date:
Date: °
Today's Date
Revision, #i and Date Revised:
File Code:
October 12, 20'04
CITY OF P ETALUMA, CA
LIFORNIA
AGENDA REPORT '
FOR
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A MODIFICATION TO THE DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF ATROPOSED RAISED CONCRETE MEDIAN ONAORTH1VICDOWELL
BOULEVARD FROM REDWOOD WAY "TO -THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE REDWOOD
GATEWAY SHOPPING CENTER (MOORE /SPAULDING /BATES)
1. - EACUTIVE'SUMMARY.
Business owners across North McDowell from: the Redwood. Gateway Shopping Center are objecting to a
median that has now been installed, 'temporarily, but will a;perrrianent, :concrete median later this month. The
concrete median is a traffic mitigation measure :approved by' the City Council as part of the certification of the
Redwood Technology environmental impact report and'the Redwood Gateway project. The original mitigation
measure called for a continuous concrete median from the: North McDowell /Old Redwood Highway
intersection to the - southern boundary,.of the, Redwood ,Gateway Center (With a break at the intersection of North
McDowell and Redwood Way,, the . m ain ,entrance 'to. Redwood_ Gateway); The median was a response to
identified traffic safety concerns resulting , from; thet anticipated increase in traffic and turning movements into
and out of the existing and proposed driveways by way of the existing two =way left turn lane. The City Council
approved the Redwood Gateway project on October 27, 2003, with a condition of approval that two
breaks in the median — a southbound left= turmpocket for Motel 6 and a northbound left -turn pocket serving the
shopping center.
0 ' BACKGROUND :
The attached minutes excerpts from the Planning .Commission and City Council meetings on September 23,
2003 and October 27, 2003, respectively, provide some background on the median. issue. Also attached are
copies of two reports from W -Trans regarding the median 'issue::, The :first report;, dated July 21, 2003, and
prepared at the request of Robertson Properties the developer of'Redwood Gateway, proposed an alternative
median configuration that maintained po'rtioris of the .continuous, two -way Left -turn lane to serve the adjacent
businesses. That alternative was not acceptable to the Planning Commission based on concerns about traffic
safety raised by then City Traffic Engineer Mike Hass. The second :report, dated October 20, 2003, was
prepared in response to the median issues raised by the Planning Commission at its meeting of September 23
and presented to the City Council for'its consideration of the Redwood ,Gateway project on October 27.
3. ALTERNATIVES
Staff has identified three options for Council consideration and action:
® Construct'.'the� .:median, as originally approved,by -City Council and shown on the public improvement
plans,.
® Construct the median as required by the EIR mitigation. Th's option would require a continuous median
with fib, ,left turn lanes. Because this does not favor any particular business or property, everyone would
• be treated equally in terms of access. It is also consistent with the original EIR'mitigation. South.bound
traffic on McDowell Blvd. from Q_ld Redwood
'Hwy. would have to make a U-turn near Scott Street in
order to access the four properties across froin Kohl's or turn on Scott _Street and return to McDowell by
way of Ross Street. Although thi 's':' may 'be inconvenient gat first; the number of people making this
movement may not be significant. Vehicles leaving these same properties, wanting to proceed south on
1VIeDowe11, merely have to drive to.,the new signal at Redwood Way and make a U -turn.
e Construct no median and provide a continuous double left turn lane from Redwood Way to the end of
the Kohl's property. This option was proposed "Fby W -trans in their report of July 2f, 2003; however it
contradicts the original EIR mitigation. This option obviously allows for more left turn movements and,
therefore, more traffic conflicts (safety '-issues). This option would have to be fully documented
approved by City Council because it would also contradict the adopted condition of approval. We wo"
also recommend another analysis and recomrmridation from a traffic engineer to address the "traPic
safety issue.
4. FINANCIAL:IMPA'CTS
If the approved configuration of the median is .changed'to either an unbroken median or the continuous double
added costs to modify the plans and construct whatever is approved. Robertson
Prope e there
s thedevel p of the Redwood Gateway Center, has been. responsible for` the construction of the
improvements to -date (except for the paving work on North. McDowell that was part of the City's street .
improvement program). The Council will have to determine whether Robert son should be responsible for any
changes to the existing plans; or whether the City should bear those costs.
S: CONCLUSION
Essentially, this is a traffic :;safety issue and the. City Council needs to evaluate the competing ,demands for
unobstructed access in light of the potential for ;an increase , in the number of traffic accidents in this area: The
Redwood Technology. EIR and - subsequent comments from the City's former Traffic Engineer identified
potential traffic safety issues that - would likely result in this area with a continuous double left-turn lane.
Additionally, Community Development erngineermg staff does not support-the the striped, double left turn lane
concept because of the ,collision.hisiory aind that additional :traffic'generated from, the. Redwood Gateway center
creates the potential for , additional future accidents It 'i's likely that even if the Council chose this option ,no
that at some point in the future the City would find itself in the position of having, to retrofit the turn lane IT
traffic accidents (as was the case at the Orchard Supply Shopping Center to, the north of Redwoo
Gateway)
6. RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends, that the City Council require an unbroken median. as originally recommended in the
Redwood ;Technology EIR and as recommended by ;the,.Pla ring Commission to the City Council:. We - believe
that-'this not only effectively addresses the potential traffic safety issues in this area, but also results ill the most
equitable treatment-of the, concerns about access.
Location
Map
City of Petaluma
California
❑ parcels_NADS3
Air Photo
A GIS Division
z
asaama�
loess mgps «� new«e[emDleO end dlgt¢adwe Nernmlc mama wYxnp
mmry nts u K mr.naeo io a rc«esenuEV. o� Mten DMslcd.
mea e... ai«ame�airiul o: nee eril'ee mou�sauu�mmi
does n «mD ayemtee nMDer edeWNe cepMSYy Ma erelkpAry DI
d [ TDe Ory d DelNUme assumes n rY{smu tllpy regeroing ma eccurery
malm«mmmn reIXreesmed n«.n br kgN xenon. noreseDm�aN
el con u m r«erty Was DUryose lorsMeA Te meD was n«lrcendtl.
Powered By GeoSmart.net
�ttG/?r►�en/
1 contained in the attached rnemo dated August 10, 2003 ,(Attachment E). ,In addition, a
2 condition of approval would require improved, pedestrian .connections and bicycle facilities in
3. accordance with recommendations contained in,Apperidix , A „'of the'Bicycle Plan.
4,
5 ' Access Restrictions ion North McDowell'.Boulevard
6 The traffic analysis ricluded:in the�certified Redwood` Technology Center EIR assessed proposed
7 secondary access points into .the project site along North McDowell Boulevard. The EIR
8 analysis concluded. that given the! number of left turn movements expected at the secondary
9 access y y with throe h traffic on o gaps make eurns,
10 which , ma cause safet confli is ' ,drivers ma acce pt shorter s t k left t
p
our, g North McDowell Boulevard. The
1.1 certified g IR includes' a mitigation nieasure (.Mitigation Measure CIR =5), which recommends the
12 followin
13
14 "The secondary access points to the project on North McDowell Boulevard should be
15 limited to right turns in and out in and out through ; on -site channelization and the
16 installation of a raised median island on North'McDowell Boulevard.”
17
18 The Preliminary Site Plan submifted'wi'th "Amendment application shown two separate
19 medians near proposed driveways on: North McDowell Boulevard rather than a continuous
20 median that would prohibit inbound and outbound left turns from all three proposed secondary
p oints. 21 access
T h e
p h h stallati on of a continuous media along this
22 section of North r
,Bou1 yard s isnotreco
mmended because of the adverse access
3: conditions that would result :for existing businesses on the east side of the street. The W -Trans
report outlines a potential configuration for access restrictions along the project frontage that
25 would retain the existing two -way left turn lane rather than install a continuous median.
26
27 The City Traffic Engineer, Michael Hass, has reviewed the configuration suggested in the W-
29 median on this;section of North McDowell Boulevard. � Mr. Hass will be available to answ
ed
28 Trans rep and reflected on the
p lan, , and recommends a continuous rat
w
re irninar site
30 questions regarding the median proposal at the Plammn
g Commission hearing.
31
32 Hydrology - Local. and On -Site flooding. The proposed project would increase the amount of
33 impervious surface through the construction. of `buildings, parking and other hardscape features
34 such as walkways, .curbif g, etc. The increase ,in imp'erviou's surface 'would decrease. the rate of
36 gr oundwater
cha il In addition, nfil't�ould ncreas fall; which" would decrease the rate of
tom
g e, both the rate and volume of stormwater
37 which runs off the site, which would contribute to = flooding.
38
To estimate the
resultn o n local flooding, estimates of the peak runoff rate and volume were
40
gi elevations were determined: As with the traffic analysis, the EIR
42 with im p acts ex ected fiom:the adjacent Redwood Technology visioned on the project site along
41 h drolo analysis! assessed., chn&nt
p merit en
J gy Center development. The results
43 of the hydrology analysis indicate that during a 100- e' ar flood the water .surface upstream of at
g Y � p ,
44 and downstream 'of the site would, on average, remain unchanged.' This is largely due to
mitigation .for flood control being. built into the site design of both the Redwood Technology
Center and Redwood Gateway, projects. Along Redwood Way,. the 100 -year flood level could
Page 5
Planning Commission Minutes - September 23, 2003
1
Traffic circulation /median :.
..�'
2
3
Commissioner Dargie - Read Mitigation Measure -1, which proposes a median from
4
Old Redwood Highway to Redwood Way. Would the'median be going from Redwood
5
Way to Scott . Road?
6
7
George White: Mediai 'is proposed to end at the properEy., line..
8
9
Chair Barrett: Would .it be the same median as what is presently at Old Redwood
10
Highway to Redwood Way.
11
12
George White: This has not been determined yet'.
13
14
Commissioner von Raesfeld. ham in agreement wifh the City's Traffic Engineer.
15
16
Council Member Healy: Signal at Redwood - Way will be ' a traffic calming measure.
17
Would like to see if there are opportunities for left hand'-�tums into the business, but not
18
out.
19
20
Steve Weinberger: Showed the median. as proposed by W- Trans.
21
22
Commissioner Rose: The traffic conditions will he :exacerbated by the shopping center. I
23
24
am an advocate for a median to control the left turns out of business — would be a right
turn only resulting in u- turns.
25
26
Chair.Barrett: Think it is , a safety issue — would not want to allow left hand turns in or
27
out of the site.
28
29
Commissioners von Raesfeld and McAllister support the Traffic Engineer.
30
.
31
Council Member Healy:` Would like turns into but not out of the busines's.on McDowell.
32
33
Commissioner McAllister: Do we vneed to address the improvements .and when they will
34
happen?
35'
7
l ikely e Kohl's center will happen before Red w ood Technology
3
e so the med wil in
lhgo from Redwood Way to the southern end of the property.
38
Some improvements have to be`tied to particular•projects.
39
40
Commissioner McAllister: Addressed the mitigation, measure that states a right hand turn
41
'lane will be in on North McDowell at Redwood Way.
42
43
The commission agreed to an unbroken median as proposed by the City's Traffic
44
Engineer, however, the 'commission I ncouraged the applicant and their traffic engineer to .
45
46
explore safe'meth'ods for'.left turns in only prior to the item going to City'Counc 1.
47
Stubb Road:
4
Septe n Review
Plan
missio
On" ept mber' 23, 2003, the Planning Commission conducted a ,public hearing on the project (please see
Planning Commission Staff Report and minutes .Attachments 2 and 3). The Commission received comments
p e timing for completing traffic
g concerns and th
f rom two; members of the public related to floodin c
_. g
r ents. In addition, the Planning Commission discussed the .following issues:
rovem
® Median ro osal along North McDowell Boulevard
p p g
The Planning Commission recommended a continuous median as recommended by the City's Traffic Engineer.
However, the Commission encouraged `the applicant and their traffic consultant to explore safe methods for left
turns into the project site (no left turns out of the Center).
m Improvements to Stubb Road intersection
The Planning Commission recommended' that the applicant, for Redwood Gateway and the applicant for the
adjacent Redwood Technology Center work with staff and SPARC to better define improvements to Stubb
Road at its intersection with
�' the project site.
® Parking Requirement /Parking Reserve
The Planning Commission agreed that a parkin ra of five ( ) spaces per 1000 gross square feet should be
applied to Kohl's tenant space and" the city star
dard of 3.3 spaces
per, per .1`000: gross square feet should apply to the
other commercial space' on the site."
® Detention Areas
'e amenity, parking landscape reserve eve
* : the detention area as a landsca w Committee's recommendation to
Planning Commission agreed with the Site Plan and Architectural'R
p y, p g p and/or pervious paving.
The Planning Commission also made the following specific recommendations:
Parking ratio of 5 11,000 square feet;'of retail for Kohl's and'3' /1000 square. feet of retail for the rest of the
Center.
■ Detention areas need to be upgraded as a- landscape amenity to look more like a park and will go to
SPARC for approval.
■ Support staff's recommendation f6filie under grounding of distribution wires.
■ Support the City Traffic Engineer's recommendation for a continuous,me'dian on the North McDowell
frontage.
■ Want to reword Condition 14 to state coordination between Redwood Technology and Redwood
Gateway for overall landscape master plan and pedestrian connections for SPARC review.
■ Modify the "built to envelope for. Pad A so that the entrance to the site from Redwood Way and North
McDowell Boulevard is provided regardless of the building :configuration.
■ Stubb Road recomriiendation (pg. 5, line 16 -17).
■ Improve pedestrian connections from Redwood Technology site by increasing landscape buffer.
The Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the project be approved by the City Council with
the following conditions. The Planning Commission recommendations are .reflected 'in the conditions of
a proval contained in the attached draft resolution approving the PCD Amendment and Modified General
elopment Plan.
3. ALTERNATIVES
L . a. The City Council may approve the proposed project with modifications to the conditions of approval
and /or to the conditions previously modified�by-the Planning Commission; or
Atichn+rn4 5'
October 27, 2003 Vol. 39, Page 221
.•
1
.
2
AYES: Harriss, Canevaro, Healy, O'Brien, Mayor Glass
3
and Tbrliatt
4
NOES: Moynihan
5
6
10. Introduction (First Reading), of . Ordinance 2166 N.C.S.
7
Amending 'Sections 20.34.090 and 20.34.100 of the Petaluma
8
Municipal Code Regarding the, Amount of Park Land and
9
Park Fees Required.
10
11
MOTION to introduce the Ordinance.
12
13
AYES: Caneuaro, Healy, Mayor Glass and Torliatt
14
NOES :, Harris,.'O'Brienand Moynihan
15
16 B.
Redwood, Gateway Retail Center: Discussion and Possible Action
17
Regarding; a Recommendation, from the Planning Commission to
18
adopt:
19
20
1. Resolution 2003 -214 N.C.S. Adopting a Statement of
21
Overriding Considerations and Approving Mitigation
22
Monitoring Program; and,
23
24
2. Resolution 2003 215' 'N.C.S. Approving a PCD Amendment
25
and Modified General Development Plan for the" Redwood
26
Gateway Retail Center;" a 166;713 'square foot' retail center
27
on : a 16.2 -acre site located at 1363 North McDowell
28
Boulevard at Redwood Way; APN 007- 411 -20 & 21. File 03-
29
ZOA -0271. (Mo'ore /Allsep)
30
31
Jayni Allsep, Contra cf.Planner, gave the staff report and indicated
32
-the Planning .Commissio.n and staff recommends the City Council
33
adopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations, approve the
34
Mitigation Monitoring Prograrn, and approve the PCD Amendment
35
and. Modified General 'Development Plan for the Redwood
36
Gateway Retail Center.
37
38
In response to Council's question, the City Manager clarified staff is
39
in favor of the median being broken.
40
41
Tamara Thompson, Robertson Properties Group, addressed the City
42
Council asked that the following conditions be amended to reflect:
43
44
p A median cut providing for an inbound left turn pocket.
45
46
To remove the requirement to underground overhead power
47
lines; as the upper lines need to remain. The lower lines could
48
be under - grounded, but they would propose leav ing them as is.
Vol. 39, Page 222 October 27, 2003
•
• That the parking ratio, be amended, to allow for 800 parking,
stalls
•
That the requirement for showers be on a "tenant" as- needed
basis rather than a square footage °basis.
•- That the impact fees be amended for their - project, as they will
create a hardship for this project to move forward.
Mayor Glass opened the public hearing:
Patricia Tuttle Brown,, Petaluma,. addressed the City Council in
support of the square footage requirement regarding showers be
left in. She also indicated parking spaces should be kept at the
current level and urged the Council to continue to hold to the
propose6conditions. .
Rick Farmer, Petaluma stated his opposition to both of the
resolutions. He commented this is part of, incremental "dumb
growth" rather than "smart growth" policy: He concluded by
stating, allowing these to go 1forward would be bad public; policy.
Geoff Cartwright, Petaluma, addressed, the_City Council and gave
a development- history of the proposed site, acknowledging the
flood issues in that area.
Hearing bo further requests to speak, Mayor Glass closed the public
.hearing.
Council Member Torlidtt. commented on issues and concerns
expressed regarding the square footage ratio for the installation of
showers as it relates :to the single .tenant vs. multi- tenant aspects of
the development plan: Discussion ensued regarding the square
footage of the Kohl's footprint as well as the amount of water the
project is expected to use. She requested staff amend the PCD
guidelines to not allow .for a single use in that project to be in
excess of 98,000 square feet.
Council Member Torliaft also asked that the Planning Commission's
recommendation to have staff look at some "pervious surfaces and
work with the applicant through the design review process be
added the conditions of approval.
Discussion ensued regarding the median alternatives and it was
noted the City -does have the ability to close the turn lane in the
future, if warranted.
October 27, 2003 Vol. 39, Page 223
u
1
Council Member Torliatt' also.,pointed out that the "urban limit line"
2
referred to should be changed to "urban growth boundary."
3
.
4
With regard to the specific requests by the applicant, the majority
5
of Council agreed to-
6
7
1 . median cut to left -turn only;
8
2. go with the staff 'recommendation regarding under- grounding
9
of overhead power distribution lines, recognizing the high
10
voltage lines cannot be placed underground; (It was noted
11
Council Member Moynihan was not supportive of having them.
12
underground the distribution lines that are on the some poles as
13
the high voltage lines.)
14
3.. supporting staff'a recommendat ion. as it relates to the parking
15
ratio, 1 per 300 square feet or 3.3;per 1;000 square feet. (It was
16
noted that Council Member- Moynihan supported the
17
applicant's request.)
18
4. support the ratio,,as provided for in the Bike Plan,. to remain as a
19
requirement. It was noted that a, gross floor area of 50;000 sq. ft.
20
and up requires 4 showers. (VlceMayor O'Brien indicated he
'
21
would be willing to exempt Shop A and Pad A from the shower
22
requirement.)
23
6. require the 'developer to pay whatever impact fees are in
•
24
25
place at the time they file for permits.
26
Council Member Torlialt recommended in Attachment 6, under the
27
Conditionsl of Approval for - # 5, which talks about a separate water
28
meter being provided for landscape Irrigation systems or as
29
r equired by staff; ahe would. like to add if tertiary water becomes
30
available to this project that they would be required to hook up at
31
staff's direction. The Council supported that recommendation.
32
33
Mayor Glass confirmed the Council's consensus and direction for
34
capping :the Kohl's. building size to 98,000 quare feet.
35
36
Vice Mayor O'Brien commented that he would like to see that
37
when they pay their fair' share of the contribution for the portion of
38
the, Old Redwood Highway over - crossing that ' it goes into the
39
specified CIP account that has already been set up for that
40
project.
4.1
42
MOTION to adopt the Resolutions to include the recommended
43
changes by the City Council.
.44
45
M/S Torliatt and O'Brien. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
46
47
48
u i �
44-f-^44 n,,
As requested by the Planning Commission' at the'Septem6er 23,.'20.03, bearing regarding the Redwood
Gateway project, Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc (W- Trans) has,completed additional analysis
of the potential configuration of,:ralsed, ri edian's'along the project frontage of North McDowell Boulevard.
Mr. Mike Hass, the former City Traffic Engineer, expressed concerri'over a conceptual median configuration
shown and described in our last etter
_ to you'dated,Juay 21,.`.2003: We ' Nave completed additional analysis
of the roadway segment based on
discussions at the Planning Commission and with Mr. Hass, and have
developed a revised conceptual scheme shown on the enclosed, Figure 1. At the request of Robertson
10 Properties Group we have also evaluated the configuration of Redwood Way'within the development on
an interim basis before occupation of'th'e adjacent Basin Street properties.
North McDowell Boulevard'Plediahs -
Background
W - T rans prepared the circulatio
recommendation that, ecta' o nology Center- EIR, which included the
The secondary
access points to the pr je t',on North, McDowell Boulevard should
p p
be limited to right turns in and out through on -site channelintion sand the installation of a raised median
island on North McDowell Boulevard." 'The Redwood Gateway .site plan has subsequently been updated
since completion of the-EIR- in May 2002, The site plan used in our evaluation is dated September 9, 2003.
Primary access to Redwood Gateway would be provided at Redwood Drive, which would ;be signalized.
nda
Way s gl ul
Three se condary d als �be constructed: one approximately 200 feet south of ;Redwood
, drivewa y
Wa , one close to the existin 'drivewa s near the front of the existing'Theater building (and the future
"Major C' ), and one currently- existing driveway at the southern boundary of the site. These three
driveways are referred to as Driveways I through 3 respectively. The driveway locations are shown
graphically on the enclosed Figure L.
Collision History
A prima concern of the former City Traffic Engineer was the collision history along this segment North
McDowell Boulevard. WY-Trans obtained and reviewed collision records for the segment between
w -t ra n s
October 20, 2003
Mr. George White
Whitlock &Weinberger
Transportadon, Inc.
Planning Manager
City of Petaluma
509 seventh street
Suite 101
I I English Street
Santa Rosa CA 95401
Petaluma, CA 94M
voice 707.542.9500
fax 707.542.9590
Redwood Gateway Nledi'an' and Access Eyahuation
web www.w,trans.com
Dear Mr. White;
As requested by the Planning Commission' at the'Septem6er 23,.'20.03, bearing regarding the Redwood
Gateway project, Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc (W- Trans) has,completed additional analysis
of the potential configuration of,:ralsed, ri edian's'along the project frontage of North McDowell Boulevard.
Mr. Mike Hass, the former City Traffic Engineer, expressed concerri'over a conceptual median configuration
shown and described in our last etter
_ to you'dated,Juay 21,.`.2003: We ' Nave completed additional analysis
of the roadway segment based on
discussions at the Planning Commission and with Mr. Hass, and have
developed a revised conceptual scheme shown on the enclosed, Figure 1. At the request of Robertson
10 Properties Group we have also evaluated the configuration of Redwood Way'within the development on
an interim basis before occupation of'th'e adjacent Basin Street properties.
North McDowell Boulevard'Plediahs -
Background
W - T rans prepared the circulatio
recommendation that, ecta' o nology Center- EIR, which included the
The secondary
access points to the pr je t',on North, McDowell Boulevard should
p p
be limited to right turns in and out through on -site channelintion sand the installation of a raised median
island on North McDowell Boulevard." 'The Redwood Gateway .site plan has subsequently been updated
since completion of the-EIR- in May 2002, The site plan used in our evaluation is dated September 9, 2003.
Primary access to Redwood Gateway would be provided at Redwood Drive, which would ;be signalized.
nda
Way s gl ul
Three se condary d als �be constructed: one approximately 200 feet south of ;Redwood
, drivewa y
Wa , one close to the existin 'drivewa s near the front of the existing'Theater building (and the future
"Major C' ), and one currently- existing driveway at the southern boundary of the site. These three
driveways are referred to as Driveways I through 3 respectively. The driveway locations are shown
graphically on the enclosed Figure L.
Collision History
A prima concern of the former City Traffic Engineer was the collision history along this segment North
McDowell Boulevard. WY-Trans obtained and reviewed collision records for the segment between
Mr. George White Page 2 October 20, 2003 •.
Redwood Way and Scott Street during the 4 -year period between January 1999 and December 2002. A
total of '.21 ,collisions were reported along the segment. Upon of the collision records, it was
determined' that 14 of the 23 incidents occurred at the Redwood Way intersection. The frequency of
collisions at this location should dramatically decrease upon installation.of the planned !traffic signal.
Nine collisions occurred on the segment at locations oth&r than the,Redwood' Way. Thais tr,,anslates'to an
approximate collision rate of 2.35 collisions per million vehicles per year on this segment of! North
McDowell Boulevard, which is within the range expected fora five -lane, urban, arterial street:, Of`the nine
incidents, three ; " involved vehicles turning left out of driveways onto North McDowell Boulevard, two
involved vehicles turning left from North McDowell Boulevard into driveways, and the remaining, four
'involved other types of collisions (vehicles hitting objects, running off the road, rear-ends)." A diagram
showing the collision locations and types is enclosed.
Necessary Access. Restrictions
As in the EIR;it was determined that, even with existing volumes on: North McDowell B °oulevard, delays for
outbound left.turns can be. lengthy. Given the trafficvolumes anticipated at Driveways ;l and 2: it would be
undesi'rablefrom a safety perspective to allow outbound left turnsto occur at these, locations. Outbound
turns at these two driveways should therefore be restricted to right turns. Traffic volumes at Driveway
3, the southernmost driveway which accesses loading dock areas; would remain relatively low and would
be used predominantly by employees. No collisions have been reported at this or similar low- volume
g g g operation of the formertheater. The existing two -way left turn
locations on'the.se merit,, ncludin Burin o
lane on. North McDowell Boulevard would adequately accommodate the few movements into and out of
Driveway 3' as well as adjacent properties to the south and east.
Drivers, making, left turns from a, street, such as North. McDowell Boulevard onto minor streets or .
driveways must contend primarily with one movement— the opposing direction of traffic on the street.
This is in contrast.to leftxui ns made from driveways onto a major. street, where drivers must contend with
two directions of °traffic. This situation is evident in Level of Service, calculations for North McDowell
Boulevard, which indicate LOS F conditions for outbound. left turn movements but :LOS C or better
conditions foi- inbound left turn movements. 'The ease of making inbound, left turns from North McDowell
Boulevard will`be further assisted by'a new signal at'Redwood Way, which will creategaps in through traffic.
The conceptual median configuration shown in Figure 'I would prohibit outbound left turn,movements.along
the North McDowell Boulevard segment but allow inbound left turns at two locations. The first is
in the;southbo.und direction at.the southern Motel 6 driveway. The second' is in the northbound direction
at Redwood Gateway near''Major'C." Each location is projected to operate; acceptably atLos C`or better
under Future Conditions, and would also be expected to perform acceptably from a safety perspective:
•
Page 3
Configuration of Medians
There are "several methods of
, allowing inbound left
i
turns while prohibiting: outbound left turns.: ..One
example near Redwood Gateway 'is on southbound
Old . Redwood Highway at `the Orchard Supply
Hardware shopping center near North McDowell,
Boulevard. At this location theilandscaped median :on
Old Redwood Highway is angledto allow the!inbound
movement but provide a visual barrier to drivers
exiting the, shopping center driveway. During the 4-
year period between 1999 and 2002, two collisions
were reported at this location. ' One involved a rear-
end collision on Old Redwood Highway (not , ,
associated with left turn movements). and the other
involved a vehicle .making a U-turn from 'the Old
Redwood Highway left turn pocket. -
October 20, 2003
w t
W
x �
Inbound left turn pocket (with prohibited left turns
out) on Old R'ed'wood Highway
Following is a bulleted, Jist of the °potential median
configuration's. key design elements:
• Medians would be constructed .on North, McDowell Boulevard between Redwood Way and just north
of. the southern project boundary. All outbound 'deft turn movements would be prohibited from
driveways on both sides of North; McDowell Boulevard.
• Two median breaks serving.inbound left`turns would be'provided along the segment. The first would
be serve southbound left turns into the southern' Motel 6 driveway; .and the, second would, serve
northbound left turns into R'edwoo.d Gateway near "Major C."
• The median would terminate approxirriately 400 feet north. of Scott,5treet and transition into the
existing two-way left -turn lane. Full access,to the rear loading;dock area of Redwood Gateway and
g Y
adjacent parcels, to. the south and east,along North M.c Dowell 'Boulevard would be maintained.
•
. two existing properties on the east side of North McDowell Boulevard that would become
restricted to ri "ht tu rns
access b ' constr p "bly gain inbound left turn
g new, o a n completion of the median could feast
out:u on
ns m and
y ucting y co nn ections, to adjacent `parcelS. Any such connections would
require coordina
q ' tion; between the two property owners and with the City.
Anoth common of allowing: inbound but not outbound movements has - been .successfully used
locally in Santa Rosa at ao hopping center. on Marlow Road, just south of Piner Road. Traffic volumes on
this segment of Marlow Road are-very similar to those :ron North McDowell Boulevard. The median
channelizatiopeann g as a pearl
n uses inuous median to drivers that are offset by a lane width, allowing
street but a p for left turns off the main
rivers on the side street. It is particularly difficult
for side - street drivers to cheat the left turn :prohibition using this configuration. There were no reported
collisions this location between 1999 and 2002. Additional photos of this .location are enclosed for
7!t.
..
w t
W
x �
Inbound left turn pocket (with prohibited left turns
out) on Old R'ed'wood Highway
Following is a bulleted, Jist of the °potential median
configuration's. key design elements:
• Medians would be constructed .on North, McDowell Boulevard between Redwood Way and just north
of. the southern project boundary. All outbound 'deft turn movements would be prohibited from
driveways on both sides of North; McDowell Boulevard.
• Two median breaks serving.inbound left`turns would be'provided along the segment. The first would
be serve southbound left turns into the southern' Motel 6 driveway; .and the, second would, serve
northbound left turns into R'edwoo.d Gateway near "Major C."
• The median would terminate approxirriately 400 feet north. of Scott,5treet and transition into the
existing two-way left -turn lane. Full access,to the rear loading;dock area of Redwood Gateway and
g Y
adjacent parcels, to. the south and east,along North M.c Dowell 'Boulevard would be maintained.
•
. two existing properties on the east side of North McDowell Boulevard that would become
restricted to ri "ht tu rns
access b ' constr p "bly gain inbound left turn
g new, o a n completion of the median could feast
out:u on
ns m and
y ucting y co nn ections, to adjacent `parcelS. Any such connections would
require coordina
q ' tion; between the two property owners and with the City.
Anoth common of allowing: inbound but not outbound movements has - been .successfully used
locally in Santa Rosa at ao hopping center. on Marlow Road, just south of Piner Road. Traffic volumes on
this segment of Marlow Road are-very similar to those :ron North McDowell Boulevard. The median
channelizatiopeann g as a pearl
n uses inuous median to drivers that are offset by a lane width, allowing
street but a p for left turns off the main
rivers on the side street. It is particularly difficult
for side - street drivers to cheat the left turn :prohibition using this configuration. There were no reported
collisions this location between 1999 and 2002. Additional photos of this .location are enclosed for
Mr. George White'
reference.
Page 4
Installation of a continuous, unbroken median along
the project frontage would eliminate the potential for
all outbound and inbound.left.turn movements. While,
it is desirable to eliminate the possibility of outbound
left turns, itdoes riot.appear °:necessary to eliminate, all
inbound, left turns.
October 20, 2003
The .provision for Isouthbou , left turns: into the --�
thists art M 6 lot, ented destination at ractinl'e in that drivers, bound left turn pock s
y using �_
g
on Marlow Road in Santa Rosa set .med►an ,islands
unfamiliar with the area. These drivers, who would be
predominantly oriented toward Old Redwood _
Highway'and the U: S. 1.01 interchange, would need to drive :further down McDowell'. Boulevard and. make
a u -turn at Scott Street or isome. other location along ":the corridor if left turn's were prohibited. The
displacement of left turns at the motel to u -turns further down_'the street: may not result in a. net. benefit
from'a safety standpoint. The provision of a northbound left turn'lane'iino Redwood Gateway'is desirable
in thatft would,allow, the new signal at Redwood 'Way to operate more- efficiently, and with shorter queues
on the northbound 'left. turn movement. The channelized left turn movement would alsa be expected to"
operate very' effectively, since the new signal at Redwood Way would create frequent'gaps.in southbound
traffic.
Left Turn Access into Other Properties
The two pareels;.on the east side of North McDowell Boulevard located south of,Motel 6 and directly
across from the former Pacific Theaters would.have no inbound.l'eft turn access with`the potential median
Configuration. Inadequate space for left,turn pockets exists at two driveways. One potentia,bption
to provide inbound 'left "turn access would..be -for the northern parcel (.which contains business park type
uses) to coordinate with .;Motel 6 in order to establish a driveway between the parcels. Similarly,, "the
Yard-birds administrative offices property could coordinate with the neigh boring,parcel to the southand
establish a. link: to their front parking lot. Each of these options would require'fulF coordination of the
affected businesses and would require review by the City. The Redwood Gateway project does not
propose to construct these connections between parcels.
Evaluation, of Partial Redwood Way Extension
.The Redwood Gateway project, is anticipated to be occupied prior to the two adjacent Basin Street
Way through the entire site is. contingent upon rece t of a permit from the Army of Redwood
Pro erties parcels that form, the remainder of the Redwood Technology Center. Extension
8 P P p y Corps of Engineers.
Robertson Properties Group, developers of the Redwood 'Gateway project, are, requesting, that their
project construct only the first segment of Redwood Way.between North McDowell Boulevard and the
first project driveway(approximately 200 feet) to serve the shopping center on an' interim basis. The traffic,
signal At Redwood Way would be:completed prior to occupation of either project.
•
•
Mr. George White Page S October 20, 2003
The ability to construct all partial segment of Redwood, , ay. an interim basis relies largely on. the
performance of the new traffic signal at North,McDowell goulevand. Adequate vehicle storage space needs
to be provided on Redwood Way; without adversely impacting onsite circulation within the project.
Projections indicate that ,queues for the eastbound left, turn movement at North McDowell Boulevard/
Redwood Way could, extend up, to 400 -feet during peak periods. With the proposed extension of
Redwood Way only to the.first driveway; this`would, result in,queuing 2'30 feet.i.nto the Redwood Gateway
site past the fast food pad. It is therefore recommended' that completion and occupation of a fast food
resta arcel� tRcudWO Way`is fully constructed. Similarly
office ,.neither of the adjacent Basin Street
p should be occupied prior to completion and full extension of the street.
The operation of the North McDowell Boulevard /Redwood
t. , Way intersection could also be modified to
improve onsite queuing conditions Th'e Redwood Gateway si_mplans currently show the intersection as
including aleft turn lane and shared'through- right.turn'lane on the new eastbound Redwood Way approach.
Though the intersection would be expected to operate acce I tab'ly,at LOS C, it is recommended that this
lane configuration be modified to"instead provide a left turn lane and shared left- through -right lane. This
would reduce peak queue lengths to" .300 feet and more efficiently serve project traffic: The existing
westbound approach of Redwood Way could also be restriped; under this scenario to provide more
efficient o peration, o including, ' r'
on Redwood Wa s n oeder to agcoeft lame: The intersection signal phasing
oulcl need to be Itased f s lit, y mmodate these modifications: It should
o
be noted that the provision
p phasing at locations with. heavy pedestrian crossing,activity,tan lead to
reductions in intersection efficiency (worse LOS), however, this location would be expected to continue
0 operating at LOS C orbetter even with several hundred pedestrian'crossings per hour.
The extension of Redwood Wa y onl y to the first project driveway would be expected to perform
� P
adequately under interim conditions with the restrictions indicated.
Summary
Th e potential median configuration on "North McDowell Boulevard shown in Figure I would alleviate the
safety concerns associated with "outbound'left turn movements,
'while still providing for inbound left turn
access at two key locations. The configuration isexpected to:operate.acceptablyboth from Level of Service
(LOS) and safety perspectives. Similar installations are being used .successfully in Santa Rosa on major
arterial corridors..
The develo ers of " Gateway are requesting that Redwood Way be extended. only. to the first
project driveway o R an i 'ante rim, basis pending receipt of Army Corps of Engineers permits. This interim
p edwoo d
roadway extension would work acceptably if'two conditions are. met. First, the fast food pad ( "Pad A ")
should not be occupied as lon&as Redwood Way is incomplete: Second, the proposed lane.striping at the
North McDowell Boulevard /Redwood Way intersection ,should be modified to include a.left turn lane and
shared left - through - .right, turn lane on the eastbound approach exiting the site. This change would also
require modification. of the .proposed signal to include split - phasing on the eastbound and westbound
approaches. Additional efficiency could be achieved bystriping the existing westbound Redwood Way
approach with a right turn lane and shared through -left turn 'lane: .
Mr. George White Page 6 October 20 „2003 •
We hope this Information is usefu to Staff and the City Council in reviewing the Redwood .Gateway
development application. Please feel free. to contact us if you' need anything further.
Sincerely;.
achary Matl'ey, AICP
Project Planner
JZM /sjw /PET076.L3.wpd
Enclosures
C. Tamara Thompson, Robertson Properties
Andrew f unius, .Re,uben & Alter
LEGEND
AD Driveway
s .
Median d(Chan
or Illustrativ"e, PurposmOhl,y
to SQle
Redwood "Giteway
City of Petaluma
V t
C =j
rf�
J.j
Figure I
Conceptual eptual Access Configuration
PET11178A 111'03
W-tran
0
Collision Involving left turn from side street
. Collision IhV61ving, left turn from North McDowell
Other of collision
Collisions at intersection
I " — 200'
Redwood Gateway Collision Evaluation North McDo -
City of Piataturna. well Boulevard Collisions 1999-2002
Redwood WaY toy Scott Str
E0
AMER
View of from Opposing Traffic Dire.ction.(Southbound Marlow Road)
Inbound Left Turn Pocket. - View from Sidewalk
View from Shopping Center Driveway Exit
'_ I 41-nWl
1
0 ..
. July 2'I; 2003
Mr. George White
Planning Manager
City of Petaluma
I I English Street
Petaluma, CA 94952
Redwood Gateway Project. "Focused Traffic 'Evaluati'on,
Dear Mr. White;
w -t ra n s
Whitlock & Weinberger
Transportation, Inc.
509 Seventh Street
Suite 101
Santa Rosa, CA 95401
voice 707.542.9500
fax 707.542.9590
web www.w- trans.com
As requested by Robertson Properties Group Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. (W- Trans) has
completed a focused traffic eyaluauon_ relative to the proposed Redwood Gateway project in Petaluma.
The 20,02. The Redwood Gateway site
Environmental Imp act Re Des n Comnn' hk I & Environment, M In the Redwood Technology Center Final
(ered to as Parcel C ''
p p g re r y ay,
pro ject , Is
plan, dated May 28, 2003, °and referred to "herein as the "R"evlsed''Proleet,'' reflects a change in uses from
what was assumed in the EIR. Following is a, comparison . of theitrip.generation reflected in the EIR and that
for the Revised Project. The need for, and configuration of, access °restrictions at project driveways along
-North McDowell Boulevard was also evaluated.
Trip Generation Comparison
For, purposes estimating. the .number of new trips that the, Revised Project would be expected to
generate, Trip Generation, 6' Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997, was used. This standard
reference is used by jurisdictions .throughout. the country,, and is. based on actual tripi generation studies
performed at numerous locations in areas of various populations. The Trip Generation Handbook: An ITE 411
Recommended Practice, Institute of Transportation Engineers, `2001 used to determine the percentage
of pass -by trips. Pass -by trips are not considered "new`," but are instead comprised of drivers who are
already driving on the adjacent street and choose to make an interim stop.
The "Shopping Center land use (ITE. #820) in Trip Generation was determined to best represent the retail
com the�RevlseclProject.
p d, use<indudes multi
- tenant developments that consist of'various
Thi'slan
types of retail uses including apparel -based stores such as Kohl's. Trip generation rates for the "Fast Food.
with Drive =Thru "land use (ITE #834)'were used to determine the ";projected_ trips created by the fast food
pad on the northeast corner of the site. It should be noted that the. former site plan for'Redwood
Gateway, referred to as "Parcel C" in the Redwood Technology,Center EIR, designated a larger single tenant
anchor with a garden center. As a.result, the trip generation projections contained within the EIR utilized
the "Free- Standing'Discouiis Store ",land use (ITE #8'1'5) in,addition to the " Fast.Food with Drive- Thru" and
"Shopping Center uses., THP. generation estimates for both, the Revised Project and the EIR include a
deduction oft"rips for the'former:theater use at the site since the traffic analysis employed in the EIR was
based on traffic volumes obtained .while the theater was still in operation.
A comparison between the' "Revised Project's anticipated trip generation and that assumed for `the Redwood
• Technology Center EIR is provided' in Table 1.
Mr. George White'
Land :Use Units
Page 2
Table 'I
Trip 17eneration. Co
July 21, 2003
Daily A.M.Peak H — 0ur P.M. Peak Hour
Rate . Trips I Rate Trips in Out Rate, Trips - In Out
Revise.d PrbjiEkt
Shopping Center I
160.83
57.53 9,2
L32
212
129
83
5. 859
412
4:47
Pass-by Trips -40%.
402
701
201
-85
-52
-33
-344
-165
-179
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . ....... . .
Fast Food with Drive -thru
. . . . . . . . . .
'4
. . . . .
4
4 * 9 , , * 8 - 62 * 3'3I - 1 * 9 *,**, I ,* 1 , 4" .,-
Pass-by Trips -16%
; ............... I
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3 156
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
81'
. . . . . . . . . . . .
75
I
Pass-by Trips -48 %'
-15
4,00
-5.
-112
-57
-55
-75'
-39'
-36
.............................................................
Removed Theater Trips
.........
8 screen
...........
59.84 .479
........ V.o .......................................
0.06 .
0
o
o
: .........
1 34 -t
- 3-9
-68
..........
J!
TOTAL PROJ TRI PS' 6,276 248 139 109] 457 121 .136
EIR Assumptions:
Free - Standing Discount
94.92 ksi
56:63
5,375
0.9 9
94
62
32
4.24
402
201
201
Store
Pass-by Trips -16%
; ............... I
_86
-15
_10
-5.
-64
J1
' -32
......... I .............. ....................................
Garden Center
20.41 k.sI
...............................
36.08
736
...........
1.31
.... ...............................
27
17
10
......................
* 3.86
.
- 78
r .......................
38
40
Pass-by Trips -16%
1'8*
-4
-2
-2
-12,
-6t
-6
................... ..... ...............................................
Fast Food with Drive-Thru
1.55: ksf
....
49 6'.' 1
1,464
................
147
:� ..................
75
72
: .............
33.48
; ............
99
. ....................
5I.
48
Pass-by Trips -48%
-703
.
-36
-35
47
-24
-23
......................... ...................................
High-Turnover Sit-Down
.........
7.50 ksf
.... ...................
130.34
978
..............................
9.27
70
.................
36
64
.....................
10.
`41'
. . .. ...........
4
'32,
Restaurant
Pass-by Trips -43%
-420
-30
46
-14
-35
-21
-14
....................................... ; ......................
Shopping Center
.
3415 ksf
..............................
6211
2,131
.......... .....................................
1.44
49 ,
30
19
................
5.76' '
.............................
101
-
95
1'02,
Pass-by Trips -40%
-852
-20
-12
-:8
-79
-38
-44
......................... o .............. ..........
Removed Theater Trips
�8 s c r een
creen
...........
59.84,
.................................................
'-479
0.00
0
...........
0
0
.. ; .............
17.38
I ........
-139
..............
_-68
-71'.
TOTAL EIR TRIPS 7,252 247 144 103 48 245 136
Difference between Revised 476 1 .5 6 -.24, -24 0:
I
Project and EEIR Trip
Generation
Notes: ksf = thousand square feet
Shopping Center trip generation rates vary based on total combined size of retail uses
•
•
•
Mr. George White Page 3 July 21, 2003
As shown in Table -I ,, the Revised Project would,be :expected to generate approximately 6,276 new vehicle
trips per day. Of these, �248.,are expected to occur during the a.m. peak hour (139 in and 109' out) and 457
are expected during the p.m. peak hour (221 in and 236 out)., In comparison, the Projection in the Redwood
Technology Center EIR was 7,252 t rips'per dayfor Parcel C, withi247 ofthese occurring during the a.m. peak
hour and 481 occurring during the `p.m. peak hour.
Based on this comparison of trip generation projections, `the Revised Project is-anticipated to create fewer
vehicle trips per day than what was assumed for Parcel' C in the, EIR..
The estimated trip generation during
the a.m. peak hour is one 'vehicle trip higher than'what wat:Osume',d in the EIR, an amount'which would
be immeasurable in terms of the,traffic analysis. During the mores ritical p.m. peak hour the average trip
generation would be 24 trips fewer than what was assumed for the : EIR.
The Levels of Service projected, in the Redwood Technology Center EIR include development of Parcel C
(Redwood Gateway) as well as Parcels A and B, which will, be developed, with office uses by Basin Street
Properties. Because the Revised
p Projects tripgeneration would reiimaini equivalent to or slightly lower than
what was assumed for Parcel C in .the' EI,R, the;L evel of analysis included in the EIR remains valid for
estimating impacts associated, with the Revised Project Levels `of Service with the Revised Project in
combination with Parcels A and B would likely be equivalent to or nominally better than what was
projected in the EIR.
Access Restrictions on North M'cDowell Boulevard'
The Redwood Technology enter EIR included. the following recommendations. gy g "The secondary access
points to the project on North. McDowell Boulevard should be limited to right .turns in and out through
on -site channelization and the installation of a raised median island on North McDowell Boulevard." The
types and locations of such access restrictions were ev'aluated based on the May 2003 Revised Project site
plan.
Primary access would 'be provided at 'Redwood :Drive; which. would .be; signalized. Three secondary
driveways.would also be constructe& one approximately °200 feet,south of Redwood Way, one close to
the existing driveways faear °the front of the existing Theater building (and the future "Major C "), and one
currently - existing driveway at the :southern boundary of the site. These three driveways are referred to
as Driveways ,l through 3,. respectively. The driveway locations are shown graphically on the enclosed
figure.
The potential for .outbound' left- turns to take place from secondary project driveways onto North
McDowell' Boulevard was ^fist - evaluated. As in the EIR it was determined that, even with existing volumes
on North McDowell Boulevard, ,delays for outbound left turns could be significant. Given the traffic
volumes anticipated at Driveways' .w
I 2 it ould' be undesirable from , a safety perspective to allow
outbound left turns,to occur at locations. Outbound turns at-these two driveways should therefore
be restricted to right turns: Trafficvolurhm s at Driveway 3, the southernmost driveway which accesses the
rear of the buildings, would remain relatively low because of the small amount of parking it serves that
would likely be used predominantly by employees. Few customers of the shopping center would be
•
expected to exit from Drivewa y 3 g because of t he circuitous path required to reach it from the main parking
lot. For these reasons the existin two -wa y left turn lane on North , McD.owell Boulevard would adequately
Mr. George`White Page 4 July 21, 20,0
accommodate the few movements into and out of Driveway 3..
The potential for ;inbound .left turns from North McDowell Boulevard into .Redwood Gateway was
subse 9 ueritly evaluated. At Driveway I, provision. of inbound left turns would interfere. with the left turn
channeli'tation needed at the future Redwood. Drive intersection and is not recommended. At Driveway
2, the central driveway nearest: "Major C," inbound left .turns are feasible- but would require special
attention to channelizatiop.' The northbound left turn incvernent from North :McDowe Boulevard into
Redwood Gateway would 'be expected to operate acceptably °at LOS B or better*under existing and future
conditions at this location. Inboundi'eft'turns at Driveway 3 would operate acceptably with 'the existing
two -way left turn. lane.
Potential Configuration of Access Restrictions
As indicatedin the EIR, access restrictions achieved through, channelization and medians will be required.
on the segment of'North McDowell Boulevard .along the Redwood Gateway pro)ect: It is recommended
that 'Driveway I; -'be restricted: to right turns .in. and right turns out, Driveway 2 restricted to ;prohibit
outbound leftturns, and Driveway 3 maintained in its current configuration with no access, restrictions.
The installation ,of a continuous median along North McDowell Boulevard is not recommended because
of the °adverse access conditions that would result -for existing businesses on the east side of the sheet.
The existing two -way left turn lane or left-turn pockets should be maintained where possible to serve at
least one driveway of each of these parcels.
A potential configuration for access restrictions along'North McDowell Boulevard isshown•on the,enclosed
figure. The scheme, would ihclude installation of a raised , median at two locations. The` first would be
approximately.250`feet long,between. Redwood Way and-just south of Driveway ;l for Redwood Gateway:
The median would channelize the; Redwood Way left turn pocket for northbound 'North McDowell
Boulevard traffic, as well at. a short left turn pocket provided for an: existing business onthe, east side of the
street. The second median would be approximately 140 feet long, extending south,from Driveway`2. This
median would' also channelizedeft turn movements at another existing business on the east side of North
McDowell Boulevard.
Channelization would be - required at Driveway 2 to ensure that drivers do not turn left out'of Redwood
Gateway onto North Mc.Dowell Boulevard..O,ne way to _achieve this would be to configure the driveway
exit with curbs ;so ;that drivers are forced to the right, making it very difficult for drivers to . vi'olate the left
turn prohibition. The - presence; of the, recommended median on North McDowell Boule_ vard at this.
driveway would also reinforce'the left turn prohibition.
The potential configuration described above would: maintain the existing two -way left -turn lane on North
McDowell Boulevard for much of the project frontage. Each of the four currently- deyelo,ped, parcels alo_ ng
the! east side of the street would retain full access onto North :McDowell Boulevard at one or more
:
driveways.
r
r
• Mr. :George White Page 5 July 2I, 2003
Summary
The Revised Project is expected'to generate 976 few,erldajlywehicle trips than what was assumed for the
Redwood Technology Center EIR. Peak,hour trip generation would be equivalent to or slightly less than what
was assumed in the .EIR, and therefore, the traffic analysis performed 'for the EIR would remain, valid.
Project access along North McDowell Boulevard. would need to be restricted as indicated in the EIR. A
,potential access management scheme that would serve the needs of the corridor as well as adjacent
properties is.shown in the enclosed figure.. The 'scheme, entails the use of two separate medians near
project driveways on North Mcbowell'Boulevard,as „well as a charinelize'd outbound rightturn lane at one
of the project driveways. Northbound left turns into the - project could occur at the driveway nearest
"Major C” using this, type of access management scheme.
We trust this information adequately addresses the. trip generation land accem conditions associated with
the Revised Project plan for Redwood Gateway. Please,feel free to contact me ifyou need anything further.
Sincerel
achary Matley, AICP
Project Planner
JZM /sjw /PET078.L2.wpd
Enclosure
c Tamara Thompson, Robertson. Properties
Andrew Junius, Reuben &.After
•
w -tra ns:
•
SHOP A
MAJOR = 1�
MAJOR'
B;
11 1 �1�!1 - 1.1 Ln n
d R
MAJOR
A
LEGEND
Q# ! Di veway �r
Madisma Channellzaton
For'Illustrative'Pur'poses Only he to k.k
Redwood Gateway Figure
City of .Petaluma
Conceptual.Access; Configuration
PETO78al 7103
C)
z ~ 4+
n� •
F a ��
1
r _ @ 'f8,. } - *
RED:V1/OO,gTEV1/AY
} ..
z„
PROJECT` ,BITE
{
i _
CITY ❑F PETALUMA
�' %
CALIFORNIA.
a.�.�
s
Legend
Parcel Boundaries
�~>
Building Outlines
-
A, ,
a
�
e
♦ I
Pti
L
<LO
l
4
AV
\ 1
I
7 p 1 0
h 0i �r��
Leo 270 ;360 '!
D
—{
'S j
T 41
°
D
. ,o y
CVO
,L
.,,, ....
-- -- -- ° - -.
C)
z ~ 4+
n� •
F a ��
1
h Chris Moore
t
(262)
Fax: (262) 703 -7105
1 chris.moore (d- )kohis.com
.October 14, 2004
Mr. Curt Bates
Associate Civil Engineer
Community Development;,Department,
11 English Street
Petaluma CA.94952.
RE: North McDowell Median 0
Kohl's Department'Store
Petaluma CA
Dear Mr. Bates:
K ha Octobe r 13 i 2004 p e. Hato the Kohl
unity Development
'
Director regarding thehm ,,R
dean "opening leftrtucn ,4 Mis {eMoore, Gornm
g (. ) from North McDowell Blvd. It is
my understanding that you have ,discussed the issue with Bob'Doren, Kohl's Site Development Manager
and Vasilis Papadato.s, Kohl's. Architect regardinb1he issue.
ublic notic
As we understand the situation, es were sen tong property;owners in advance of the
issues
re
r
pubic hearing on this and othe to evelopmen't Frorm our information, no objectioris
favorab
a d to the d
were. raised at that'time which resulted in , a , edian opening. This median
e outcome. �to a ow t e m
opening is paramount to the success of our development in Petaluma.
Kohl's sympathizes with the complainants,but must Iinsist that the City Council reaffirm its earlier decision
to allow the median opening.
Sincerely,
Christopher J. Moore
Director of Real Estate,, Western _Region
Kohl's Department Stores, Inc.
cc Bob. Doren
.Alan Salle
Greg Bartel
Tamara Thompson'
ECEIV�- .
OCT 15 2004 .
f ,'OMMUNIlY LbLLUr,MUNJ uk RH �Nzl
:CORPORATE OFFICES ® N56 e(262) 703 - 7,0
W17000RICiGEWOOD DRIVE ®;MENUMONEE FALLS, WISCONSIN 53051 00`
,.