Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 13, 2014October 13, 2014 PEC Record TOWN OF VAIL ` PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION October 13, 2014 at 1:00pm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT Henry Pratt Luke Cartin John Rediker Pam Hopkins Michael Kurz Dick Cleveland Site Visit: None MEMBERS ABSENT Webb Martin 120 minutes A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan, to establish a comprehensive redevelopment plan for the Vail Valley Medical Center, Lot 10 (Town of Vail parking lot), and US Bank Building, located at 181 and 281 West Meadow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road West/ Lots E, F, and 10 Vail Village Filing 2, and Lot D-2, A Resubdivision of Lot D Vail Village Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140011) Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Braun and Associates Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Tabled to October 27, 2014 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Rediker VOTE: 5-0-1 (Cleveland recused) Commissioner Cleveland recused himself due to his involvement with the hospital. Warren Campbell gave a presentation covering the staff memorandum. Campbell outlined the plan for the hearing and the item of loading and delivery and traffic was the first item presented for discussion. Charlie Crevling, Chief Financial Officer, introduced himself and thanked the town staff, community and PEC for their work on this master plan. He added that the VVMC is taking the process seriously which is exhibited by the resources they have brought on board to address the various topics included within the master plan. Tom Braun, representing the applicant, began with a follow up to the earlier work session with answers to some of the questions posed. These included questions concerning ambulance traffic counts, enforceability of provisions, inclusion of the US Bank parcel and the west lot in the master plan, and the possibility of loading and delivery off of the frontage road. Russ Sedmak, architect for the VVMC, embellished on the topic of access to the site from the frontage road and access from West Meadow Drive. Russ walked through how the access from the frontage road is proposed to work including internal motor vehicle turning movements. Russ outlined the challenges posed with development sequencing, existing private covenants and the desired elevation of the main hospital floor. Skip Hudson, traffic consultant for the VVMC, outlined his findings based on actual traffic counts. He stated that they had performed the traffic counts in the past week. Page 1 Commissioner Hopkins questioned if seasonality affected traffic counts as the previous week would have been a slower time potentially in town. Charlie Crevling described how loading and delivery would only be a few trips greater during the busier winter season as more medical supplies were needed daily. Hudson continued presenting his data including peak hour activities and what percent of traffic loading and delivery account for on West Meadow Drive. The analysis showed that the VVMC loading and delivery would be approximately 9% of the traffic on West Meadow Drive after the hospital user groups were relocated to the South Frontage Road. Commissioner Pratt requested clarification on the traffic counts shown in the slide. Hudson walked the Commission through the numbers. He explained that the table did not include any traffic trips for VVMC except the remaining loading and delivery. Commissioner Hopkins asked if doctors would be using West Meadow Drive for access. Hudson explained that doctors, employees, patients, visitors, and ambulances would use the South Frontage Road for access. Commissioner Cartin asked about time frames that loading and delivery vehicles took to offload materials. . Hudson provided some greater detail in the functioning of the loading and delivery facility currently. Braun returned to discuss how the proposed loading and delivery would function in comparison to existing conditions and reiterated the proposed reduction in overall traffic. Braun stressed the relocation of the front door. Braun walked through how vehicles of different sizes would use the proposed facility. Proposed landscape treatments were presented. Commissioner Kurz interjected stated his belief that a management plan would be needed for the loading and delivery facility. He highlighted the need to maintain site distance triangles so loading and delivery vehicles could clearly see the various user groups and vehicles on West Meadow Drive. Braun discussed access to the site by large vehicles that would not use the interior facility. Vehicles larger than a SU30 would be utilizing the west parking lot. Braun showed several site plans showing turning movements of the larger vehicles in the parking lot. Hopkins inquired about pedestrian access from West Meadow Drive to the South Frontage Road. Braun explained the anticipated indoor and outdoor circulation for pedestrians. Kurz commented on public art and the recognition of limited space along West Meadow Drive as contemplated in the Streetscape Master Plan. Campbell explained that the installation of public art would be contemplated to occur along the length of the WMC West Meadow Drive Frontage not necessarily in the proximity of the loading and delivery facility. Page 2 Jim Lamont, Vail Village HOA, asked about VVMC's down valley facility and its potential for expanded transfer use for larger vehicles. Off site transfer may be a viable solution. He spoke to the improvements made to the loading and delivery operation of the VVMC since the last hearing when he provided numerous photos of existing conditions. He felt that the improvements made in under two weeks shows that management and oversight of the operations can result in positive improvements. Jim questioned the lack of independent validation of traffic counts and analysis. Requested verification of West Meadow Drive traffic numbers. Spoke to a need to trust but verify collected data. He described the increasing use of West Meadow Drive for recreational users. Spoke to enforcement of management plans and necessary trip points that require action. Spoke to his recent observations and solutions that move truck operation onto VVMC property and the west lot as opposed to the proposed indoor loading facility. Suggested an enclosed facility on the west parking lot may be more appropriate. Feels master plan only speaks to a snapshot in time as opposed to a fluid, evolving situation. Spoke to covenants on the property and the ability to renegotiate them. There should be options in the master plan which anticipate the possible renegotiation of covenants on the property. Richard Leibhaber, resident/property owner, spoke to the need to take all homeowners' concerns into account. Gwen Scalpello asked for details regarding the traffic counts. Braun and Hudson spoke to the methodology used for generating traffic counts. Tom mentioned that an off site loading facility is still under consideration. Commissioner Pratt stated that the master plan is not adopting a specific plan but is detailing a utopian idea for what should occur on the site in the future as a guide for the review of specific development plans. Commissioner Rediker stated the applicant has done a good job analyzing the loading and delivery issue and the residential owners have some valid concerns. John spoke to Kurz's comment about landscaping and negative impacts to site triangle visibility. John stated loading and delivery off of West Meadow Drive was appropriate. Commissioner Kurz stated this process was touching upon the actual design of the site and that a broader viewpoint is needed. He suggested the master plan include language speaking to the goal of minimizing traffic on West meadow Drive with every possible opportunity. Commissioner Hopkins suggested that any future management plan for loading and delivery include periodic reviews. She asked for more detail on the pedestrian circulation on site. Commissioner Cartin asked for the reasoning behind the location of the oxygen tank. Luke asked for a broader view within the master plan in regards to the possibility of other loading and delivery solutions in the future. Commissioner Pratt agreed that the master plan should remain goal oriented. Henry expressed trepidation with incorporating a management plan that gets forgotten about. He suggested looking for design solutions to address concerns and eliminate them from arising. Commissioner Rediker felt the goals of loading and delivery need to be practical and feasible, and not prohibitive to the function of the hospital. Page 3 Kurz thought a traffic management plan for Meadow Drive is needed, or something to that effect, so that all modes of transportation are given proper consideration. Cartin asked for clarification on Jim Lamont's vision for a loading facility. Lamont spoke to various types of facilities with which he is familiar. He suggested that anytime deliveries could arrive in smaller trucks that could use the South Frontage road entrance it would result in fewer trucks on West Meadow Drive. Warren Campbell then briefly presented Staff's position on traffic and circulation. Staff would like to know the PEC's preference in regards to the South Frontage Road improvements. Hudson then presented the hospital's concerns about the proposed options for improvements to the South Frontage Road. He felt it was premature to choose a preferred option. Braun discussed the pros and cons of the various options under consideration for the South Frontage Road improvements. Commissioner Kurz asked if the Evergreen can locate its entrance to the west. Tom Braun said all options are still on the table and would need to be evaluated during the review of its development plan. Commissioner Pratt asked if it was premature to review this. Warren Campbell stated no — that given the amount of time to complete the master plan November 24, it needs to be looked at now. Commissioner Cartin asked for staff to speak to the need for a round -about and the challenges associated with the non -round -about options. Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, spoke to the need to restrict/eliminate left turn movements. The roundabout was being designed to accommodate the future anticipated growth in traffic on the frontage road. With properties being limited to right -in right -out movements a roundabout was need to allow for vehicles to turn around and head in the direction desired. Lamont, Vail Village HOA, stated that after looking at all the frontage road options, the roundabout option took the most pressure off the Main Vail roundabout and provided the best option for the WMC to have complete access off the South Frontage Road. He then discussed the need to consider the movement of people from site to site within the study area. There are some strategic opportunities to bolster the civic amenities in the area and to ignore that would be a mistake. The redeveloped Evergreen and municipal sites will increase traffic generation. Pedestrian connectivity must be given equal footing as vehicular connectivity. He suggested it would be appropriate for either a tunnel or elevated walkway from the proposed municipal parking structure south across the frontage road for pedestrians. We have tipped from a rural town to a urban town (which is not a bad thing). A pedestrian crossing needs to be included in this conversation. Commissioner Hopkins agreed with Jim. Commissioner Cartin asked that the traffic solution be a coordinated effort between all three adjacent properties. Page 4 Commissioner Kurz agreed with Hopkins and Lamont regarding the need to give some attention to the pedestrian. Commissioner Pratt felt the traffic solution needs to address all three properties. He also agreed a tunnel or some other solution should be explored for pedestrians. Hudson stated that pedestrians are being considered in the design. George Ruther stated that all traffic studies and resulting design solutions will be included in additional planning documents, such as the Town of Vail Transportation Master Plan. Jim Lamont mentioned is would be wise for the master plan to speak to the decision making process as to why a particular option is preferred. Warren Campbell introduced the subject of parking and different methodologies for determining parking requirements. Warren highlighted that the GU zone district does allow the PEC to determine the actual parking demand. Braun stated that the goal, to be included in the master plan, is to address any deficit and to provide all needed parking on site. Braun discussed the methodology used, known as Method #2. Spoke to decompression as opposed to additional employee generation. Hopkins questioned how shift changes effect parking requirement. Braun acknowledged the question and spoke to ongoing discussions and proposed inclusions in the CUP process. Lamont spoke to the complexities of the medical center, ongoing rehabilitation operations (contractors, etc.), and the need to recognize the need for these workers who are not actually employees of the medical center to have access to parking. Spoke to setting aside spaces for these users. The commission spoke in general support of the methodology contained in Method 2 for parking need determination. Commissioner Pratt requested an option for valet parking be included in the master plan. Pratt suggested contractor parking may be accommodated in the interior loading and delivery area. Questioned counting US Bank building parking but not the demand. Braun clarified that both the demand and supply were considered in the case of the US Bank building. Campbell introduced the subject of building bulk, mass and scale. Spoke to the GU zone district and looking to neighboring properties for context. Spoke to one level of concern at the master plan level, that being the southeast corner of the building near the proposed loading and delivery area. Spoke to setbacks and anticipated bulk and mass. Braun spoke to building levels and context including allowable heights of neighboring buildings under zoning. Sedmak spoke in general to the building mass and scale and that the massing models do not illustrate the fenestration that will be proposed at the CUP level. Spoke to roof elements, Page 5 transparency, screening of mechanicals, streetscape and other similar items that will be worked through and shown at the CUP level. Lamont feels that the design issues will be more evident at the development review stage. Spoke to the success of the passageway along the west side of the Four Seasons property and the need for a north/south pedestrian walkway on the east side of hospital site. It could serve dual purpose for pedestrian circulation and a landscaping buffer between adjacent properties. Commissioner Hopkins spoke the need to soften facades. Supports the pedestrian way along the east property. Commissioner Kurz supports setbacks because of the anticipated bulk and mass. He highlighted the need to give attention to the southeast corner and its articulation. Brought up the idea of areas of respite in nature for patrons and visitors of the campus. Specifically the potential for Middle Creek. Commissioner Pratt questioned setbacks along the south property line because of the lack of shadows created on the street. Strongly supports the north -south pedestrian connection along the east property line. Would like to see inclusion of language in the master plan about setbacks in this area and avoidance of institutional architecture. Campbell introduced the topic of employee housing and the language that is proposed in the master plan mirroring the language in the Vail Town Code. Braun spoke in general to this topic and what would be addressed at the CUP level. Mentioned existing VVMC employee housing and the desire to mitigate offsite for future employee generation because of limitations and conflicts on site. Commissioner Rediker supports the applicant's proposal that on site is not appropriate. Commissioner Kurz concurred with Rediker. Commissioners Hopkins and Cartin also support off site and the use of all on site space for hospital related activities. Commissioner Pratt also agrees. Campbell introduced the topic of Middle Creek and the need for significant improvement on how the site relates to the creek. Mentioned need for a heightened awareness regarding the environmental effects. Braun spoke to additional language proposed for the master plan and what would be seen at a future hearing with the adoption of the final master plan. Commissioner Cartin spoke to the need for the Town to look at their side of the creek as well. Comprehensive approach needed. Commissioner Hopkins agrees with making the creek an amenity. Commissioner Rediker supports the additional language proposed by Braun and recommended the inclusion of language concerning riparian plantings. Commissioner Kurz agrees. Page 6 Commissioner Pratt encouraged the inclusion of additional language concerning amenities. Spoke to the need for greater attention in general to the Town's north/south creeks. Jim Lamont spoke to the compressor noise at the southwest corner of the property and the need to address that in Phase 1. Jim mentioned the need to step up the approach to urban runoff and its treatment. Need to differentiate between different types of runoff. Spoke to mechanical treatment as opposed to retention/detention. Encourages a proactive approach. He concluded by suggesting the potential for a wildlife corridor along Middle Creek and the potential to remove the grates from the culverts to allow for animal movement. Campbell reviewed the applications and processes moving forward including revisions to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, Town of Vail Transportation Master Plan, Town of Vail land Use Master Plan, etc. Braun wrapped up and thanked the Commission for their time. Page 7 Vai I Valley Medical Center Extraordinary People. Extraordinary Care. Extraordinary Facilities. Presentation of Facilities Master Plan Vail Planning and Environmental Commission October 13, 2014 AoWB LI 0-'] NTI - 1�...design LANDVlA ANG&C4hcWJNITYDFVILOF'IKNI :r y,. yryJ . J� Today's Agenda 04 1. Introductions 2. Response to Questions from 9/22 3. Follow-up -Meadow Drive/Loading and Service 4. Overall Traffic and Circulation 5. Parking 6. Building Massing/Architecture 7. Employee Housing 8. Middle Creek Follow-up Questions from 9122 How can loading provisions be enforced? How many ambulance trips? Is this a complete master plan — re: West Lot and US bank building? Feasibility of ramp (for deliveries) from South Frontage Road Follow-up Questions from 9122 'iv �'t' A - 7 Rth Pc tenti al Future Expansion Areas �lM4tj �J c EdWft j b 9: Follow-up Questions from 9122 iII SFAVICE�•• ^ - YA'A-+J L y, e •i\ 'i. / MATEFI:-. /Y MGT. .' T65 :1`�• S:1 ti' a .i Follow-up Questions from 9122 WEST WING RENOVATION WEST WING NEW CONSTRUCTION i EAST WING NEW CONSTRUCTION EAST WING RENOVATION CENTRAL WING RENOVATION FUTURE CONSIDERATION r� to F f' i iii•6lb&J NEW —yr, PARKING --- - �- _.._-- -GARAGE , _ --- ----------------------- !S DMT. 'AMRUMI.AMCE -- LARAGETDBE ilEMOLISHE➢ - WEST WING EXPANSIGN 2,680 SF - W MC SURGERY (E) 6.100 SF ROOF(Lj NEN PDRLN: VYSD CORRIDOR "PANSroN MSF YS SiIRGERYRY 16,260 SF p — --i (EXPANDED) I I w3ac +mss ` HEERY +• \ENTNRY .�` MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL I:4FT PARK, -G 6llILDING - - r - SII NAIL 1 IE71 — N O I Loearle, SISIIIE NEY TIFF TN1�EHf 1 I T. (E CMN �* 3A903F HCPARAING(S) ECMM cmm ENSRAW IwArchal it VEST IE) _ BA Ca Y C. I 300 SF WALKWAY �-._ 4-_.._.__._ _.—.•i F 2x1351 S A00 SF VSD 4,5309 -f SINAL MUS CONDOS � Fxea� lox � � PEDESTRIAN ❑ ❑ 91D11 ROOF BELOW DDxxECdON ❑ .1 i roFaaNTAGE NOVATION -- -- .SUO EF _ _.-._._._ -- - - - _ _.._... ..---.._. i CDMNEOM N TDW€ST \\ 7 MEADOW DRIVE \ENTNRY .�` MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL I:4FT PARK, -G 6llILDING - - r - SII NAIL 1 IE71 — N O I Loearle, SISIIIE NEY TIFF TN1�EHf 1 I T. (E CMN �* 3A903F HCPARAING(S) ECMM cmm ENSRAW IwArchal it VEST IE) _ BA Ca Y C. I 300 SF WALKWAY �-._ 4-_.._.__._ _.—.•i F 2x1351 S A00 SF VSD 4,5309 -f SINAL MUS CONDOS � Fxea� lox � � PEDESTRIAN ❑ ❑ 91D11 ROOF BELOW DDxxECdON ❑ .1 i roFaaNTAGE NOVATION -- -- .SUO EF _ _.-._._._ -- - - - _ _.._... ..---.._. Follow-up Questions from 9122 WEST WING RENOVATION _ WEST WING NEW CONSTRUCTION ®design EAST WING NEW CONSTRUCTION EAST WING RENOVATION CENTRAL WING RENOVATION FUTURE CONSIDERATION lom ?a MIA ------------------ ;rr i i iii 'r- NEWI PEDESTRIANCO 14 PARKING 10 - _ _.wear _._._._._.-._ _ -'_ _ {GARAGE � Mennmxo i e I --- — MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL % /✓ %f✓ ,f / (l. -- �f' �f i / TR '*'T - PLf1iNlNG-BLILdING _ -_-- r EXISTING OWCETOM LVAVE i I r. . ESi t' WEST WING- C Dear F 'F EXPANSION p��f suiTelrl T.{e� cMM ,� ' 2,680 SF — CMM S, W SF WNN I VVMC NEw ruBc vasa _ SURGERY(E) coNS. �SPss `D"'' OPEN 6ELp1�Md Nd V i 6,100S F YENT.IEI r -? __ 3.150 SF -- ■YSI��Id965F S E07SF wMAN'ST .- _ -- TSYSF WAJT SURGERY aovmm 16,260 SF , i (EXPANDED) IXPAN54X �520.5F SWLHVSCONDM PSP RECOVERYCENTE VVSc 1COX8fR1101O1 SBSBESY EIS'AMSAN NEll4➢a.� ROOF I W34 Y,300 SF w 1,N4FSP PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIBN ❑ BELOW OFEONTAOE R ;3S4S 800.4 f Ery _. _. _.l ; SUR 0,jelp-)VAIIQN _-._._._ _._._._._-...__- r.._. _ 4m M� FRONTAGE ROAD EL - ' ' 8t71-� • - -OWN 'ATI -LEVEL 1 ELEVATION: 8147 Opp, 24 LA �- = - - , ■ ■ Al 0 1 f,} r a;; rNow /. A. loom _' sow v mom 400 ft. TRUCK �' 4S elm man was aim mom won mom ~ 10 ft. RAMP MHT. - i-)rivp/i_i Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service VVMC Delivery / Service Vehicles D,AIL Y Based on traffic counts conducted September 29 thru October 3, 2094 # of Delive l Service Vehicles # of Delivery 1 Service Vehicle Trips Vehicle on West Meadow Drive - - Size Average Highest Day Average Highest Day Monda -Freda(Monday) (Monday -Friday) (Monday) Passenger 11 13 22 26 Vehicle SU -30 16 14 20 28 or smaller WB -40 2 1 4 2 Total 23 28 46 56 Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service VVMC Delivery / Service Vehicles PEAK HOUR Based on traffic counts conducted September 29 thru October 3. 2014 Notes: 1. The AM and PM peak hours are based on the peak hours at the Vail Road and West Meadow Drive intersection; the highest hour for Delivery 1 Service vehicles to/from the VVMC ("VVMC Peak Hour") generally occurs from 10 am to 11 am. # of Delivery 1 Service Vehicle Trips on West Meadow Drive - .- AM Peak Hour (Adjacent Roadways) 7:30 — 8:3Q am VVMC Peak Hour' (10 -00 —11:QQ am) PM Peak Hour (Adjacent Roadways} 4:00 —5-00 m Trips IN 4 8 3 Trips CUT 4 7 4 Total 8 15 7 Notes: 1. The AM and PM peak hours are based on the peak hours at the Vail Road and West Meadow Drive intersection; the highest hour for Delivery 1 Service vehicles to/from the VVMC ("VVMC Peak Hour") generally occurs from 10 am to 11 am. Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service Compare VVMC Traffic Volumes on West Meadow Drive After VVMC Master Plan Construction Completed (Votes: 1. Bus numbers estimated based on frequency/headway information provided by Vail Transit. 2. Based on Monday, which has the highest number of Daily Deliveries 3. No traffic volume growth was assumed for the background traffic volume on West Meadow Drive because the area is built -out. 4. Represents the existing and future volume of VVMC Delivery 1 Service vehicles Peak Hour Traffic Volume Daily Traffic (vehicles per hour) Volume Traffic Volume Source [Based on traffic count data collected on Tuesda , February 4, 2014 - Peak Winter Season (vehicles per day) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour (Ba sed on frdata colleccted tedo count on (7:30 am — 8:30 am) (4:00 pm — 5:00 pm) Thursday, October 3, 2014] Passenger 33 81 394 Vehicles Existing Background Buses 14' 20' 1801 Traffic 3 Total 47 101 574 VVMC Traffic 4 8 7 56 Z (Delivery /Service Vehicles only) Future Total 55 108 630 (Background + VVMC Future VVMC Traffic 15% 7% 9% as % of Total (Votes: 1. Bus numbers estimated based on frequency/headway information provided by Vail Transit. 2. Based on Monday, which has the highest number of Daily Deliveries 3. No traffic volume growth was assumed for the background traffic volume on West Meadow Drive because the area is built -out. 4. Represents the existing and future volume of VVMC Delivery 1 Service vehicles Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service DELIVERY AND CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE INFO Date Arrival Time Departure Time Time On Site Cornpany/Vendor Vehicle Type/Size What's being delivered? Photo Taken 7 29 -Sep 06:30 06:45 15 Min Reyhal GMC Savanna 2500 Electrical Supplies 1 29 -Sep 1 07;15 07:20 5Min Galleria Freight Liner Single Axel Oncore 2 29 -Sep 07:20 08:05 45 Min Meadow Gold Freight Liner Semi Milk 3 29 -Sep 07:45 07:52 7 Min Pristine Landscape Chevy 2504 Pickup Watering Flowers d 29 -Sep 08:10 08:50 40 Min Sundance GMC 4500 Salt for Hospital 5 29 -Sep 08:S1 09:00 9 Min Reyhal GMC Savanna 2500 Electrical Supplies 1 29 -Sep 08:51 08:52 1 Min VVMC Courier Dodge Ram Supplies 6 29 -Sep 09:28 04:30 2Min Reyhal GMC Savanna 2500 Electrical Supplies 1 29 -Sep 10:00 10:03 3 Min Game Ready Toyota Tacoma Surgery Supplies 7 29 -Sep 10:07 10;24 17 Min Staples On Track GMC Box Van Office Supplies Room 800 8 29 -Sep 10:16 10:20 4 Min Vail Florey Wagon Duel Axle Peterbuilt Garbage 9 29 -Sep 10:20 11:02 42 Min Alpine Vending Box Truck Single Axle Vending Machines 10 29 -Sep 10:33 10:44 11 Min Fed EX duel Axle Box Vara Misc Boxes - Shipping/Rec 11 29 -Sep 10:35 11:12 37 Min Alsco Duel Axle Box Van Linen Kitchen 12 29 -Sep 10:40 10:42 2 min Makasan GMC 2500 Van Pharmaceutical 13 29 -Sep 10:55 11:02 7 Min DMI Ford F350 Pickup D -Mark 14 29 -Sep 11:12 12:05 53 Min UPS Single Axle Bax Van Misc Boxes - Shipping/Rec 15 29 -Sep 11:46 11:55 9 Min Retrever Fright Services 5ingle Axel Bax Freightliner Ryder Pick up From Lab Dept 16 Monday, September 29 to Friday, October 3, 2014 A VVMC staff person observed and recorded details (arrival & departure time, vendor name, vehicle size,) for each Delivery I Service vehicle at the loading dock for a 12 -hour period (6 am to 6 pm) each of the five days, Iirivpll_i I CD 114 IIPNceu Au � J L:l Jim, i�al I-)rivpll_i 7 y r Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service 3 Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service IP„ A .tea a 1 �•� I TOV Buses (240 daily trips ► .� Ai AM I Background Traffic (294 daily trips) VVllr°IC Loading W -it trips) :'. (58 daily t ps) VVMC 1 West Lo r p _ (1400 daily trips) Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service THIS IS WHAT WE WILL HAVE with creating front door at frontage road • EJB � y � �-��i_.-i_f_ __jam. ' VMC Main Entry 400 claily trips) AAkAk rr r i r If _ ^ .4raX TOV Buses (240 daily trips) --AOL- Bae roun - ' Traffic (294 daily trips) VVMC Loading (58 dally trips); r Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service 1_ A1901,: Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service VVIVIC Traffic Proposal Moving Off West Meadow Drive Service/Delivery vehicles 1,400 trips (96%) X58 trips Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service CL CEA SUL UOUK _NEN $TAIK r aLlym SERVICE ENCLOSURE LANDSCAPING TO DEFINE DRIVEWAY WX i 4WAY RAISED CURB LANDSCAPE AREAS TO BUFFER PEDESTRIANS. DEFINE SPACES Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service 31.37 3g2-0.33 Heil Recycle 2000 M1et Vuth BW Trade : 8.04 Lock to Lack Tku : 8.0 St—mg Mgle : 31.3 r 7 LA 34.31 3 20.33 Heil Recycle 2000 feet WWW. : SAG Track SA4 Lockto Lack Tme : 8.0 Steering Angle : 31.3 �ll �I Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service J 33.62 Q 0 3.502217 ACCUr0te 3Ck Roll—Off feet Nldtlh ; &17 Tngek : 8.02 Lack to Lack Tme 8.0 Staering Angle ; 32.7 Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service PL AHU MAIN LOBBY 0 sa.ao EMERGENCY — CENTRALPLANT WESTmpm MEADOW 4st-30 ee< PARKING L.1 DRIVE e,ca An4 l.gckKco lock Tlne 6,6 3L.B PARKING L.2 0 Steering gle i Mrs PARKING, L-3 0 ELEV 8174'- 8"_ ELEV8161'-4" ELEV8147'-4" SERVICE ENCLOSURE SECTION 10.1.2014 1116"= 1'--0" Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service MOKOW I MASTE aUARY SERVICE ENCLOSURE RECYCLE m DmJV HOLD D7 LANDSCAPING TO DEFINE DRIVEWAY 201-011 ROLIAWAY LANDSCAPE PLAN 10.3.2014 118"= 1'-0" 51DEWALK LANDSCAPE AREAS TO BUFFER PEDESTRIANS, DEFINE SPACES Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service I T MOVEMENTS- WB -40, DRAWING 2 OF 2 NOT TO SCALE 3 OCTOBER 2014 HEERY,'PARSONS BRIMCKFRHQFF Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service IN T. 1 .1-14- A -I -0-14-UL Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service VVMC Master Plan- Delivery and Service • Loading docks and loading activity shall be located inside the building • The number of loading bays within the facility should range from between 3-4 and accommodate turning movements (within the facility) for SU -30 sized trucks • Trash and recycling facilities shall be located inside the building • Streetscape/landscape adjacent the loading facility should be designed to define distinct spaces (for pedestrians and for trucks) and to discourage parking on West Meadow Drive • Role of West Lot • Aesthetic considerations • Management and Operations Plan IA Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service "Design and manage loading and service facilities to meet the needs of VVMC while at the same time minimize potentially adverse impacts on the surrounding neighborhood and on West Meadow Drive". VVMC ily trips) A& TOV Buses (240 daily trips) -� 'Background -" Traffic (294 daily trips) s` '7W - VVMC Loading (58 daily trips) VVMC Traffic Proposal Moving Off West Meadow Drive Service/Delivery vehicles 1,400 trips--_ (96%) \-58 trips (4%) Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service Is Meadow Drive/Delivery and Service appropriately addressed at Master Plan level? If nest — • What additional information is needed? • Are changes to Master Plan necessary? • Are additional "expectations" needed in the Master Plan to better clarify CUP review process? Traffic and Circulation Vail Valley Medical Center Traffic Impact Study Turnkey Consulting LLC South Frontage Road Access Improvement Study Town of Vail/VVMC/Evergreen Collaboration Traffic and Circulation Proposed Roundabout Existing 1-70 South South lint #r1 VVmC Roundabout (Genera[ location based Access Frontage Rd r on FHU study area) at Main Vi [Int #21 Interchange AL �. Evergreen Lodge ' _- '# �s TOV ilk VVM Vail Rd Existing VVMC tg Main Access {ro be relocated to int #2J W Meadow i3r Ar Vail Road and Meadow Dr [In t #31 Traffic and Circulation Traffic Analysis Conditions 0 Year 2015 —West End (During Construction) • Year 2016 —West End (Construction Completed) • Year 2017 —East End (During Construction) • Year 2018 —East End (Construction Completed) • Year 2035 —Build -out (20 -year horizon) Definitions: West End Improvements include approximately 40,000 SF of medical space on and around the existing West Wing of the VVIVIC. East End Improvements include approximately 25,000 SF of net new medical space and an expanded parking structure at the east end of the Campus. Traffic and Circulation Proposed Roundabout Analysis Results Year2018 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Roundabout 95 t %%Approach 95 t LOS -Delay Queue LOS -Delay Queue (sec) ft (sec) ft West Leg A — 5 20 A — 9 70 (Frontage Road) East Leg A - 6 50 A - 6 50 (Frontage Road South Leg A - 5 20 A - 9 20 (Evergreen Lodge Access) North Leg A - 0 20 A - C 20 (TO V Service Access) Overall Roundabout A - 5 50 (max) A - 7 70 (marc) all vehicles Traffic and Circulation Future Frontage Road Roundabout Year 2435 - Area Buildmout Scenario Sidra software was used to assess the operational aspects of a roundabout via calculating Level of Service (LOS). The analysis first assessed whether any form of a one -lane roundabout might suffices it won't. A full N,o-lane roundabout is needed given the traffic numbers in Table 1. This was found to be the case for all the alternatives analyzed, two lanes are needed and -vould be sufficient even for those in which U -turning traffic .vould add demand. Further, t,.,.,a_lanes will be required along the Frontage Roars approaches into the roundabout to achieve at least a LOS under ideal conditions (actually. LOS B is achieved in every case). The one nuance revealed by the roundabout analysis pertains to the traffic queues that could form upon entering the roundabout. Specifically, the VVB Frontage load approach :Vas found to potentially queue back past the parking structure entrance in Alternative 1 (more -so in Alternative 1a). This suggests that drive.vay access points onto the Frontage Road ithat do not directly connect into the roundabout should be located at least 125 feet from the roundabout along its entry leg. Traffic and Circulation VVMC/TOV Access on Frontage Road Analysis Results Year 2035 VVMC and TOV Accesses are RIRO (in conjunction with the Proposed Roundabout) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Las — 95th % LOS — 95th % Direction Movement Delay Queue Delay Queue sec ft sec ft Northbound Right -turn A — 3 45 A — 8 95 vvMc Access Southbound Right -turn A — 4 35 A — 5 50 To v Access Traffic and Circulation Vail Road and Meadow Drive Analysis Results Year 2017 - During East End Construction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 5th %5th %Approach LOS —Delay LOS —Delay (sec) Queue (sec) Queue ft ft Eastbound A — 7 50 B — 10 95 West Meadow Drive Westbound A— 10 55 A— 9 65 East Meadow Drive Northbound A — 8 55 B — 12 90 Vail Road Southbound A — 10 115 B — 11 100 Vail Road Overall Intersection A — 9 115 (max) B -11 100 (max) all vehicles Traffic and Circulation Proposed Roundabout on Frontage Road • Not necessary upon VVIVIC master plan implementation in year 2018 if Evergreen Project does not develop at same time. Will be necessary in 2018 if Evergreen project also redevelops by 2018 • Per FHU build out analysis for all three projects (year 2035), a 2 -lane roundabout would provide acceptable traffic operations (LOS B) VVMC & Muni Site Access on Frontage Road VVMC "First and Alone" Scenario • Reconstruct the VVMC Access and median of Frontage Road to a right-in/right-out configuration (left turns prohibited). Also add an eastbound right turn deceleration lane. • Create a short median opening to allow for inbound left -turning emergency vehicle access directly to VVMC. • At the same time, reconstruct the Municipal Access and median of Frontage Road to a 3/4 configuration (left turns out allowed but left turns in prohibited). Also add an outbound left turn acceleration lane in the median. • The "First and Alone" alternative will provide acceptable traffic operations at both the VVMC and Municipal Access thru the year 2035. Area Build -Out Scenario • Reconstruct the median near access points to remove the left turn accel lane for Municipal access. • Done in conjunction with Frontage Road roundabout construction. • This would convert the Municipal Access to a right-in/right-out configuration (left turns prohibited). Traffic and Circulation Vail Road and Meadow Drive Intersection • The VVMC trips at this intersection will increase during the East End construction due to the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building being accesses via West Meadow Drive. ■ The increase in traffic at this intersection will only be 11% (AM) and 8% (PM) • There will not be a noticeable change in the LOS, delay, or queuing at this intersection. No changes are recommended at this intersection. I "I #,IW. "'*'%I Frrmttag{ Road Access Study Traffic and Circulation RM 4m Vail, Colorade cxmn. rico ,� f Frottage Road Access Study Vali, cdomado [�uYabc1.2031 two Traffic and Circulation WSW 40 rWaft a + .d' w N. a• "x Cut PIP 1 t Traffic and Circulation r r . RI JRO RI/190 .! .`� 3f I r r � r nPTInKI 1 Q 40 e0 325 Stall k .� Parking Structure r i Traffic and Circulation M roftWOUIM _r r• 325 Stull Parking Structure 0 $Q so 3/4 � �� � z . � _P y � i �,•►' � c •� ter: _ �, _ ++ '" � - r s' � � , � �, Traffic and Circulation - - OPTION 3 RI{RO RI/Ra ` t �- N ° ' 325 Stall , A- 11NP,� ` Parkirwg Structure �. RI/Ra RIIRo f ^- Traffic and Circulation ` OPTION 3a i a 40 so 8CJ`L8 T SSD' RI/RO 325 Stall lot ) �. Parking Structure RI/RO RI/RO F: OF �• i s Traffic and Circulation L 7- -�;,�,'i�reiirninary Draft Concept Subject to Change so mo SCALE TIM 4L L 7- -�;,�,'i�reiirninary Draft Concept Subject to Change Traffic and Circulation b Ki f Traffic and Circulation rt r L _ k ► R � _ l - 'Yah i •. •� .� -. 27 f IPA+. fl F I r F Road _ Traffic and Circulation -------------- vvmC Frontage Road Ac ss Study • j -- Vail, Colorado �, I 1 zn.,tt �ip 1 Traffic and Circulation '-14 Traffic and Circulation Is traffic and circulation appropriately addressed at Master Plan level? If not — • What additional information is needed? • Are changes to Master Plan necessary? • Are additional "expectations" needed in the Master Plan to better clarify CUP review process? Parking VVMC's goal for Parking Parking requirements for hospitals and medical facilities Town's parking formula • Based on SF • Today would require 697 spaces "Employee based" formula • Based on number of employees, exam rooms and patient beds • Today would require 645 spaces Parking Existing Parking Situation • 407 on-site spaces • 92 "alternative" spaces • 173 off-site leased spaces • 672 total spaces Range of spaces - 645/672/697 Why the "employee based" formula? Parking Master Plan Parking Solution Need for 50-60 additional spaces All parking to be on-site Total parking req. estimated at 730-740 spaces Parking provide via: • "Alternative spaces" • US Bank Building • West lot surface spaces • New structure at East Wing L -- IW Pi LF�•E_ 63 ELE161ia..4j� 1 Lk:'b16f..11'�3 __ .L__ 1• LCA LP: I 1 E:EIM' 4.93'!l -1- 33 FEF 6c�'94' _ =j ¢avalzc 33 �d av 1 AE'r.t1.m VVhAC EAST WING PARKING STRUCTURE: 14S SECIIPY LDMNS VVEST 11-38'-W ARY 28.2014 Parking Is parking appropriately addressed at Master Plan level? If not — • What additional information is needed? • Are changes to Master Plan necessary? • Are additional "expectations" needed in the Master Plan to better clarify CUP review process? Building Massing/Architecture VVMC - MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT Il _ r P yip ! r A, - A* * � H a - 4104 ORTHQFiC FE IN VISITOR STAT AMIdNZ;! : PARKING MEDI AL { ROFESSIONA BUILDING ESTWING: CENTRAL 3 ST IES ORTHOPEDIC/ WING: INPATIENT EXISTING EAST WING: EMERGENCY/ 4 STORIES 2/3 STORIES IMAGING 3 STORIES ',� M ' Building Mass i ng/Arch itectu re VVMC Master Plan Building Massing Yell, Colorado .AWV;lUN dpiiAW Building Mass i ng/Arch itectu re �A ,.rel, Building Mass i ng/Arch itectu re Is building massing appropriately addressed at Master Plan level? If nest — • What additional information is needed? • Are changes to Master Plan necessary? • Are additional "expectations" needed in the Master Plan to better clarify CUP review process? Employee Housing " employee housing impacts need only be mitigated for a redevelopment that results in a greater number of employees generated from an increase in net floor area" • VVMC existing employee housing program • Estimate of new employees from master plan expansion • Estimate of employee housing requirement • Off-site mitigation Employee Housing Is employee housing appropriately addressed at Master Plan level? If not — • What additional information is needed? • Are changes to Master Plan necessary? • Are additional "expectations" needed in the Master Plan to better clarify CUP review process? i �a'X�':.- I .t. 1�4 3 � 1 � '`t � �.' i 'ir �' � r < �_ � h� 4 � ,w� _ _- �� �. _ .�J���� � �YL ��j�- I. r. ��� ^� ,� ,�r: , .,.� `. '`?,5, - -_ _"^ 'rte ,. ? � + � a �! : '' +� t} �k viii .d � _ r h, - _ -�.. �� - ... '� - �. __-^_ - a ��- •.. .- 't. _ � __ _ .. - _.r-� � _ _ � � �_ ... .� �® - � - , .' �^ �` . _ � ,:.1 ' y w`�ty ` - _ , = _ tel, 4 �'T +F �' i Middle Creek "VVMC will evaluate potential improvements to the relationship of the parking lot to the creek corridor" Expand language in Master to Plan to identify specific measures that may include: • Increased landscape buffer between parking area and creek • Direct parking lot drainage away from creek • Installation of oil/sand separators or other means to improve quality of water that leaves site • Snow storage/management • Outdoor spaces along creek Middle Creek Is Middle Creek appropriately addressed at Master Plan level? If not — • What additional information is needed? • Are changes to Master Plan necessary? • Are additional "expectations" needed in the Master Plan to better clarify CUP review process? Next Steps Summary of where we stand on today's discussion Oct. 27th meeting - helipad End of Presentation Follow-up Questions from 9/22 LoT 2, ULc)CK 1, vi U* are W4 o ,CvD*s*frs. LoDaE AT VAIL LMI & 7HL WALL IN". *C-) 4EST MEAMW DRIVE ISOM5AWAMLA FLODWLATE. BUILDING 1976 BUILDING 1967 BUILDING!,:; RY I -STORY 215TM it Sr I 'SAAAL HtS ICC KOS) ,50' R.O.W,) 0) TOWN OF VAIL ` Memorandum TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: October 13, 2014 SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan, to establish a comprehensive redevelopment plan for the Vail Valley Medical Center, Lot 10 (Town of Vail parking lot), and US Bank Building, located at 181 and 281 West Meadow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road West/ Lots E, F, and 10 Vail Village Filing 2, and Lot D-2, A Resubdivision of Lot D Vail Village Filing 2, and setting forth details it regard thereto. (PEC140011) Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Braun and Associates Planner: Warren Campbell DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant, Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC), represented by Braun and Associates, is requesting a public hearing with the Planning and Environmental Commission to continue the review of the proposed Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan (VVMC MP), dated August, 2014 (Attachment A). The public hearing will include: • responses by the VVMC to questions raised at the September 22nd hearing where loading and delivery was discussed, • a discussion of traffic and circulation, parking, bulk and mass, employee housing and Middle Creek, • opportunity for public participation, and • a schedule of next steps. As this public hearing will limit the scope of discussion to the topics listed above, which are elements proposed VVMC MP, staff has not prepared a recommendation for any action by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Town staff will provide a recommendation at the November 24, 2014 public hearing. II. DISCUSSION ITEMS The end result of the master planning process is to create a facilities master plan for the VVMC campus. As such, the plan will be used primarily by VVMC to help guide and direct future decisions for development on the VVMC campus. While many aspects and elements of the plan have little, or no relevance, on the Town of Vail or the immediate neighborhood (i.e., interior layout of the buildings, sequencing of construction, size of the emergency generator, etc.), there are many other aspects or elements of the plan which will. For example, elements such as parking; pedestrian circulation; loading and delivery; bulk, mass and scale; vehicular access, etc. For that reason, it is imperative that input from the community and other potentially impacted parties is taken throughout the master planning process. These design solutions and options for the implementation of these elements will become part of the master plan. Once incorporated into the Vail Land Use Plan, the master plan will be used as a benchmark for evaluating development plan proposals provided as part of a conditional use permit application. Further, portions of the master plan should be created with the expressed intent and goal of its inclusion in the Vail's Comprehensive Plan. Through its inclusion in Vail's Comprehensive Plan, the master plan becomes pertinent and relevant to future development review processes and actions by the Town. In order to achieve this goal, the Vail Land Use Plan should be amended to include those aspects or elements of the master facilities plan which bear relevance on the Town of Vail and the immediate neighborhood. Loading and Delivery Proposed VVMC MP Text The applicant is proposing to replace the language include in the initial draft of the VVMC MP (Attachment A) with the following language. The following language is in response to the discussion on September 22nd The language addressing Loading and Service in the VVMC MP is as follows: Existing Conditions VVMC has a wide variety of delivery and service needs that are essential to the operation of its facility and vital to providing quality patient care. Examples of products regularly delivered to VVMC include linens and laundry, food supplies, equipment, and medical and surgical supplies. Deliveries to VVMC occur three different ways: 1. Most deliveries are made by vendors who deliver directly to the Vail campus. 2. VVMC also has a down -valley facility in Gypsum where medical and surgical supplies are warehoused and delivered daily to the Vail campus by VVMC vans on an "as needed" basis. 3. Finally, a third party contractor makes daily deliveries of medical and surgical supplies from a warehouse in Denver. Town of Vail Page 2 On average, 24 service and delivery vehicles serve VVMC each day (resulting in 48 total trips on West Meadow Drive). These 24 trips include vendor vehicles, VVMC courier vans and VVMC service vehicles (vans). On the "peak day" (Mondays) on average 29 service and delivery vehicles serve VVMC. The majority of vendor deliveries are made in mid-sized trucks (SU -30) or smaller. Typically only four deliveries are made by larger trucks (articulated vehicles or WB -40 trucks) each week. On rare occasions, larger semi -truck service VVMC. Examples of these include the delivery of new beds (that may occur once each year) and the periodic need for a temporary generator to service the hospital. VVMC's existing delivery is handled in a small, open air area at the southeast corner of the campus immediately adjacent to West Meadow Drive. The loading area is large enough to accommodate two mid-sized trucks and also includes a trash/dumpster area. Portions of the loading area are screened by fencing. Currently there is no delineation between the loading area and the adjoining sidewalk, nor is there a clear demarcation between the road, the sidewalk and the loading area. These conditions make it difficult to manage where trucks stage while making deliveries. The limited size of the area requires trucks to back onto West Meadow Drive, creating safety concerns along this heavily travelled pedestrian roadway. The goal for delivery and service functions at VVMC is to: Design and manage loading and delivery facilities and functions to meet the needs of VVMC while at the same time minimizing potentially adverse impacts on the surrounding residential neighborhood and on West Meadow Drive. Alternative Approaches to Delivery and Service One of the main goals of the Master Plan for VVMC is to establish a new "front door" at South Frontage Road and in doing so remove as much traffic as possible from West Meadow Drive. VVMC generates a variety of different types of vehicular trips — delivery trucks, service vehicles, patients, guests, employees, vendors and emergency vehicles. Each group of users has their own unique design considerations for how they are accommodated. While expansion plans will establish a new front door at the South Frontage Road, due to limited site area and road frontage, not all vehicle trips generated by VVMC can be accommodated at this location. This raises the question of which VVMC vehicle trips should be shifted to the new front door and which trips should remain on West Meadow Drive. The best possible long term solution for Meadow Drive should be to eliminate as much traffic from this road as possible. In order to do so delivery and service vehicles should continue to use West Meadow Drive to access VVMC and all other traffic should access VVMC via the new front door. This solution will remove the vast majority of VVMC vehicle trips from Meadow Drive and, in doing Town of Vail Page 3 so, dramatically reduce the amount of traffic on this road. This reduction in vehicular traffic, coupled with a well -design and properly managed loading facility will balance the operational needs of VVMC while providing a major community benefit to West Meadow Drive. Performance Standards The following design and management parameters address safety, aesthetics, noise, odor, congestions and other considerations to a loading facility on West Meadow Drive. Each of these parameters shall be addressed by detailed plans submitted as a part of the Conditional Use Permit application. The design and management of a loading facility that conforms to these parameters, as determined by the PEC, will ensure the compatibility of the loading facility with the surrounding residential neighborhood and with the pedestrian nature of West Meadow Drive. Site and Loadinq Facility Design Parameters • Loading docks and loading activity shall be located inside the building. • The number of loading bays within the facility should range from between 3-4 and accommodate turning movements (within the facility) for SU -30 sized trucks. • Trash and recycling shall be located inside the building. • Streetscape and landscape improvements adjacent to the loading facility should be designed to define distinct spaces for pedestrians and for trucks, and should discourage truck parking on West Meadow Drive. The West Lot Design Parameters • Provisions to accommodate oxygen truck deliveries. • Provide space suitable to accommodate the occasional delivery from a WB -40 truck. • Provide parking for VVMC service vehicles (to be accessed from the South Frontage Road). Aesthetics • Exterior materials and architectural treatments should be consistent with those on rest of building. • Venting shall be brought through building to rooftop exhaust. • Exterior lighting shall conform to TOV lighting ordiancne and include timer - controlled night time cut-offs. Loading Facility Management Plan • Outline the role/responsibility of the Loading Dock Manger. • Establish protocol for how the facility will be managed (hours of operation, coordinating times of deliveries, managing the size of trucks that deliver to the VVMC, accommodating periodic deliveries by larger trucks, servicing the US Bank Building, etc.) Town of Vail Page 4 Establish "rules of the facility", i.e no backing onto West meadow Drive, no parking on West Meadow Drive (provisions made a part of CUP approval and enforceable by TOV) Staff Response: Staff has reviewed the proposed VVMC MP text regarding loading and service and has the following comments and questions for consideration by the VVMC and the Planning and Environmental Commission. The proposed VVMC MP loading and delivery language more clearly articulates the problem and possible solutions than the previously language. o Staff recommends that the language be amended to highlight that the existing facility is undersized/inadequate and there are times when the number of deliveries exceed the capacity of the facility. Within the body of the proposed loading and delivery text there are two goals of the MP detailed. o The goal for loading and delivery and establishment of a new "front door" Staff will be looking for goals/objectives and action items to be not only contained within the body of the text for each topical area but in a stand alone section/chapter of the VVMC MP, such as an executive summary. • The proposed VVMC MP loading and delivery language shall include a reference to Chapter 12-10, Off Street Parking and Loading, and Section 12- 9C-5, Development Standards, Vail Town Code, as regulations to be adhered to during the review of future conditional use applications. • Staff recommends renaming the title Site and Loading Facility Design Parameters to Enclosed Loading Facility Design Parameters which would more clearly distinguish the elements within this section from the elements of loading and delivery proposed to occur on the west parking lot. • The VVMC MP text under the heading of Loading Facility Management Plan shall include a statement requiring the need to review and approve a Loading facility Management Plan in conjunction with the conditional use permit application. • Staff recommends the VVMC MP loading and delivery language incorporates language similar to that found in the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan to address loading and delivery as follows: o Loading and delivery facilities should be located deep enough into the property that the estimated peak volume of service vehicles does not back up into or block the access road or pedestrian areas. o Service drives and loading docks must be screened with landscaping, fencing, retaining walls or other appropriate design techniques. Town of Vail Page 5 o All reasonable measures shall be taken to prevent noise and exhaust impacts on adjacent properties. o In no case shall a property utilize the public roadway or pedestrian area to stage service and delivery vehicles. The TurnKey Consulting memorandum dated September 30, 2014, has been updated to address staff's previous comments with one exception. That exception being the use of actual trip counts versus ITE trip counts. (Attachment B) o After further discussion with the authors and obtaining a greater understanding of the intent of Table 2 to provide a basis by which to gauge the percentage of loading, delivery, and service traffic on West Meadow Drive, staff agrees ITE counts are appropriate. o Attached to the memorandum is the analysis performed to determine the loading and delivery trips to the VVMC. ■ It should be noted that the table entitled VVMC Delivery Vehicles - DAILY identifies one (1) vehicle per day on Tuesdays through Fridays as being larger than the designed loading facility. o The loading facility which has been provided in concept form with turning radii showing movement can occur within the facility is anticipated to accommodate vehicles up to a SU -30, an unarticulated delivery. The TurnKey Consulting memorandum includes analysis tables indicating that four (4) days a week a vehicle larger that a SU - 30 makes deliveries. The proposed VVMC MP loading and delivery text identifies these deliveries will occur on the west parking lot. Staff recommends that at the condition use application review of the development plan that the potential for design the loading facility to accommodate larger vehicles, up to a single WB -50 bay be explored. o The VVMC MP text should include several elements of the data found in the TurnKey Consultiing memorandum regarding the overall traffic on West Meadow Drive and the reduction to approximately 10% of VVMC loading and delivery traffic after other user groups are relocated to the new "front door". Understanding the limitations included within the scope of this VVMC MP with regard to the US Bank building, staff would recommend identifying in the VVMC MP that additional solutions to removing loading and delivery from West Meadow Drive should be explored in the event the US Bank building is redeveloped in the future. With regard to the streetscape design in front of the loading and delivery facility and the entirety of the VVMC West Meadow Drive frontage the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan Addendum needs to be cited in the VVMC MP text as a review document to be evaluated in the conditional use application process for the development plan. Staff has attached those portion of this Master Plan for review (Attachment C). o This document speaks to the need for public art to be incorporated along the pedestrian walkway. Town of Vail Page 6 Staff has reviewed the proposed language addressing the current loading and delivery problem, possible design solutions, reports, example turning movement plans for the anticipated loading facility, and arguments for West Meadow Drive remaining the access for loading and delivery to the VVMC. Staff's conclusion is that while the ideal solution would be to eliminate all VVMC traffic from West Meadow Drive it is not practical and an approach which results in removing the greatest generators of traffic (ie. patients, employees, emergency vehicles) and is more appropriate. The proposal to relocate all traffic generation sources for the VVMC off of West Meadow Drive results in significant improvements to the number of trips on the street. However, it will be imperative during the conditional use application process for the review of the development plan to scrutinize the design and operation of the facility to address safety of pedestrians and bicyclists, aesthetics, noise, odors, size of vehicles, control of access points for west parking lot, etc. The Planning and Environmental Commission needs to answer the following question in order to provide final direction on this topic to VVMC: Should loading and delivery access be prohibited from West Meadow Drive entirely or are there circumstances or conditions whereby loading and delivery could be permissible on West Meadow Drive? Parking Proposed VVMC MP Text Attached to this memorandum is the VVMC MP Parking Analysis dated May 13, 2014 (Attachment D). This document includes analysis beyond what will be included in the VVMC MP including floor plans, however it is provided in conjunction with the proposed language to lend creditability to the methods examined by the VVMC in order to best identify the actual parking demand. While Chapter 12-10, Off Street Parking and Loading, Vail Town Code, prescribes a parking requirement for hospitals and medical offices the General Use District includes provisions for the Planning and Environmental Commission to evaluate parking in conjunction with the conditional use application for the development plan. In summary, the provided parking analysis reviews two "Methods" for calculating the parking demand of the VVMC. Method 1 utilizes the parking requirements as found in the Town Code which are based upon square footages of various uses. Method 2 is a needs based approach which examines the use of the various facilities and the number of employees anticipated. VVMC suggests that Method 2 is more appropriate as it is more accurate in determining the actual parking need for the campus. Staff Response: Staff has reviewed the proposed VVMC MP text regarding parking calculation methods and has the following comments and questions for consideration by the VVMC and the Planning and Environmental Commission. Town of Vail Page 7 The proposed language shall address more clearly the problem existing on the VVMC site with regarding to the parking deficit. o Discuss the existing shortage more directly. The language does discuss how the shortage is address through off site agreements, bus passes, and carpool vans, however, it does not clearly quantify the deficit. The VVMC MP proposed text performs an analysis on the anticipated parking demand using two methods compared to an actual parking demand analysis based upon current knowledge of the parking demand. o Method 1 utilizes the parking generation tables found in the Town Code. This analysis results in an anticipated parking need of approximately 687 spaces. o Method 2 utilizes a needs based approach examining each user group of the various functions of the facility. This analysis results in an anticipated parking need of approximately 645 spaces. o The results of these two methods of analysis were then compared to an analysis of the current parking need which was determined to be 669 spaces. As stated in the VVMC MP proposed text the results of these methods of analysis resulted in a clustering of results from 645 to 687 parking spaces lending a level of reliability to any of the methods resulting in a scenario where anticipated parking will match the need. o In conjunction with the review of the conditional use permit application to establish the development plan for the VVMC the Planning and Environmental Commission will be tasked with determining the appropriate parking requirement for the VVMC campus. ■ Within the General Use district the Planning and Environmental Commission will prescribe the parking development standard in conjunction with the review of the criteria for the conditional use permit. Staff believes there is merit to the analysis described in Method 2 and that it can be utilized to perform the parking demand for the site. The Planning and Environmental Commission needs to answer the following question in order to provide final direction on this topic to VVMC: Does the Planning and Environmental Commission agree with the analysis of the actual parking demand for the VVMC site as elaborated in the description of Method 2 as the methodology to be utilized during the review of the conditional use application for the VVMC development plan? Traffic and Circulation Attached to this memorandum is the VVMC MP Traffic Impact Study Executive Summary dated September 30, 2014 (Attachment E). The study suggests that to Town of Vail Page 8 accommodate increased traffic demand and changes in the traffic patterns significant traffic improvements will need to be made to the South Frontage Road. The anticipated traffic impacts to the South Frontage Road coupled with Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) requirements for traffic control will result in the access points for the VVMC, Evergreen Lodge, and Municipal Site becoming right -in and right -out only. A raised median similar to those implemented along the frontage of the Four Seasons will likely be required. As a result of the incorporation of raised medians there will be a need to implement a roadway design which includes a method by which vehicles can return to a east bound direction when leaving the Municipal Site, or desiring to visit the Evergreen Lodge or VVMC sites. Recognizing that the necessary traffic improvements to be implemented would affect multiple sites, representatives from the VVMC, Evergreen Lodge, and Municipal Site have participated in exercises and studies to determine possible solutions. Page 16 of the attached VVMC MP (Attachment A) includes a summary of the process undertaken by the concerned parties and the conclusion that a roundabout is likely traffic improvement to be utilized. A copy of the anticipated option for the roundabout is attached for review (Attachment F). Staff Response: Staff has reviewed the proposed VVMC MP text regarding traffic and has the following comments and questions for consideration by the VVMC and the Planning and Environmental Commission. The Town Engineer has reviewed the submitted Traffic Study and the Executive Summary both dated September 30, 2014. o In a memorandum dated October 8, 2014, the Town Engineer identified several aspects for confirmation/clarification and discussion. The memo is included as an attachment (Attachment G). As mentioned in the VVMC MP text regarding traffic the Town of Vail Transportation Master Plan will need to be amended to include the solution to address traffic on the South Frontage Road for the VVMC, Evergreen Lodge, and Municipal Site. The Town Engineer has prepared a memorandum commenting on plans provided by the applicant showing access to the VVMC which does not include the use of the southern spur of the proposed roundabout solution. o The Town believes that is imperative to have the VVMC, Evergreen Lodge, and Municipal Site all utilize the spurs off of the proposed roundabout solution in order to achieve compliance with CDOT regulations and local planning efforts to consolidate access points as contained within the Town of Vail Transportation Master Plan. A copy of this memorandum is attached for review (Attachment H). ■ There are challenges in the implementation of a roundabout in conjunction with the unknown redevelopment time frames of the three properties. Town of Vail Page 9 The proposed VVMC MP text regarding traffic shall include statements speaking to the need to utilize the anticipated roundabout traffic improvement south spur for access. The text of the proposed VVMC MP shall be amended to include discussion of the pedestrian circulation and bus transit occurring around the site and the need for circulation through the site. o Include text and imagery in the VVMC MP which depicts and speak to existing pedestrian circulation and future pedestrian circulation and bus stop locations. ■ Existing conditional along West Meadow Drive. ■ New condition along south side of South Frontage Road. ■ Need for a north south connection through site with appropriate easements. The Planning and Environmental Commission needs to answer the following question in order to provide final direction on this topic to VVMC: Does the Planning and Environmental Commission agree with the need for the VVMC site to utilize the possible roundabout improvement to take access to their site during the review of the conditional use application for the VVMC development plan? Bulk, Mass, Architecture Proposed VVMC MP Text Pages 9 and 10 of the attached VVMC MP (Attachment A) includes a summary of the anticipated sequence and expansion plans for the VVMC Campus. The text and associated imagery describe the addition of a approximately 69,000 square feet (not including parking garage). This square footage will be obtained with the addition of a new fourth floor on the west wing and the construction of a new east wing in the location of the original hospital structure. Staff Response: Staff has reviewed the proposed VVMC MP text regarding bulk, mass, and architecture and has the following comments and questions for consideration by the VVMC and the Planning and Environmental Commission. Within the General Use District the Planning and Environmental Commission will determine the appropriate setbacks and height through a review of the conditional use permit application for the development plan. o The neighboring properties' existing and potential development will be considered in making a determination in VVMC development plan setbacks and height. o Surrounding properties have a variety of different zoning regulations applied to them. Town of Vail Page 10 ■ The Evergreen Lodge is zoned Lionshead Mixed Use 1 requiring 10 foot setbacks and permitted heights with a maximum of 82.5 feet and 71 feet average. ■ The Skaal Hus, Aplhorn, and Scorpio are zoned High Density Multiple Family requiring 20 foot setbacks and permitted heights of 48 feet for sloping roofs. ■ The US Bank building has an underlying zoning of Commercial Service Center with Special Development District No. 23 overlay. The underlying zoning requires 20 foot setback and permits a height of 38 feet for sloping roofs. The SDD allowed for an increase in the allowable height. It is unclear from the imagery provided in the VVMC MP document what the anticipated or appropriate setbacks would be. While a master plan is not the location to include specifics on the setbacks, the general 2D massing exhibits appear to have minimal setback from the South Frontage Road and the southeast corner of the site. o The southeast corner is the portion of the site in closest proximity to residential development. This location, more than any other on the site, needs to be thought out to a greater degree at the master plan stage. The proposed VVMC MP text and imager depict a scenario where the majority of the bulk and mass occur on the south portion of the site. o Can bulk and mass be shifter away from West Meadow Drive? ■ Would result in strengthening the pedestrian character of the street. ■ Can/should bulk and mass step down as it approaches West Meadow Drive and adjacent properties? o Can/should there be required articulation in the facades to reduce bulk and mass? The proposed VVMC MP shall include 3D bulk and mass models as were included in previous power point presentations at the public hearings. The Planning and Environmental Commission needs to answer the following question in order to provide final direction on this topic to VVMC: Does the Planning and Environmental Commission agree with the anticipated bulk and mass, its location, and the relationships between neighboring properties? Middle Creek Proposed VVMC MP Text Page 13 of the attached VVMC MP (Attachment A) includes a statement about the portion of Middle Creek which is adjacent to the west end of the site. The text suggests potential improvements should be evaluated for Middle Creek. One example provided is the introduction of practices to improve the run-off water quality. Town of Vail Page 11 Staff Response: Staff has reviewed the proposed VVMC MP text regarding Middle Creek and has the following comments and questions for consideration by the VVMC and the Planning and Environmental Commission • This element of the VVMC MP text needs to be enhanced to address multiple aspects. o Staff has included the portion of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan recommendations for the portion of Middle Creek adjacent to the Evergreen Lodge in the Applicable documents section of this memorandum. ■ The description of improvements to Middle Creek in association with the VVMC Campus redevelopment shall mirror the statements contained for that portion of the creek adjacent to the Evergreen Lodge. • Gore Creek has recently been listed as an impaired stream by the State of Colorado. Multiple efforts are underway to address the health of Gore Creek and its tributaries. It is imperative that development in town, especially those adjacent to the creek address elements such as: o Run-off water quality. ■ Sand oil seperators ■ Gutters and inlets ■ Snow storage practices and eventual deposition of materials used to both melt and provide traction o Incorporation of riparian vegetation to act as a filter and stream bank stabilization. • In addition to steam health, the possibility of Middle Creek becoming an amenity for the VVMC Campus and community should be explored. o Table and benches o Aesthetically pleasing vegetation o Public art The Planning and Environmental Commission needs to answer the following question in order to provide final direction on this topic to VVMC: Does the Planning and Environmental Commission agree with the need to include a text detailing efforts to be undertaken to not only improve the stream health of Middle Creek, but also turn it in to an amenity to the VVMC Campus as a part of the conditional use permit review of the development plan? Employee Housing Page 21 of the attached VVMC MP (Attachment A) speaks to the employee mitigation requirements of the Town Code. Pursuant to Chapter 12-23, Commercial Linkage, Vail Town Code, only the incremental increase in the number of employees generated by Town of Vail Page 12 the expansion of the facility will be assessed the 20% mitigation rate. VVMC estimates the incremental increase to be approximately 60 employees which would require appropriate mitigation for 12 employees (20%). The VVMC MP language accurately reflects the process by which "competent evidence" must be provided when a specific land use, hospital in this instance, is listed as having a specific mitigation rate. The VVMC begins to lay the framework for providing all required employee housing off-site, including the 50% required on-site, as may be permitted pursuant to the Commercial Linkage Chapter. Staff Response: Staff has reviewed the proposed VVMC MP text regarding employee housing and has the following comments and questions for consideration by the VVMC and the Planning and Environmental Commission. The VVMC MP text accurately states that there are several processes which would need to occur in conjunction with the conditional use permit review of the development plan with regard to the provision of employee housing. o Hospitals are not included in the Employee Generation Rates table and therefore would need to provide "competent evidence" to establish the correct generation employee generation rate. ■ The Planning and Environmental Commission would evaluate the "competent evidence" in order to determine the employee generation rate. o In order to provide all the required employee housing the Planning and Environmental Commission would need to make a finding as found within Section 12-23-6, Methods of Mitigation, Vail Town Code, in order to determine that on-site mitigation is not appropriate. ■ Implementation of the on-site unit mitigation method would be contrary to the intent and purpose of the applicable zone district. ■ Implementation of the on-site unit mitigation method would be contrary to the goals of the applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan and the town's development objectives. ■ Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions apply to the site that prevents the implementation of the on- site unit mitigation method. ■ The method of mitigation proposed better achieves the intent and purpose of this chapter and general and specific purposes of this title than the on-site mitigation unit method. The Planning and Environmental Commission needs to answer the following question in order to provide final direction on this topic to VVMC: Does the Planning and Environmental Commission agree with the concept that employee housing on-site may be incompatible with the functions occurring on-site, which would be thoroughly reviewed for compliance with Town of Vail Page 13 the Chapter 12-23, Commercial Linkage, Vail Town Code, in conjunction with the review of the conditional use permit review of the development plan? Procedural Considerations Pages 21 through 23 highlights of the attached VVMC MP (Attachment A) speaks to the additional tasks that would need to be completed in conjunction with the redevelopment of the VVMC Campus. Staff Response: Staff has reviewed the proposed VVMC MP text regarding future procedural considerations and has the following comments and questions for consideration by the VVMC and the Planning and Environmental Commission Should the VVMC MP be adopted there are multiple additional steps which would need to occur to achieve the implementation of the plan. These items include but may not be limited to: o Amendments to the Town of Vail Transportation Plan ■ Prior to the submittal of a conditional use permit o Amendments to the Town of Vail Lland Use Plan ■ Prior to the submittal of a conditional use permit o Determine the future of Lot 10 through conversation with Vail Town Council ■ Prior to the submittal of a conditional use permit o Minor Subdivision application to dissolve appropriate lot lines ■ Encompass portion of former Evergreen Lodge parcel ■ Prior to or in conjunction wit the conditional use permit application o Zone District Boundary application to rezone appropriate parcels to General Use district ■ Former Evergreen Lodge parcel ■ Prior to or in conjunction wit the conditional use permit application o Applications to CDOT for South Frontage Road traffic improvements ■ Prior to and in conjunction wit the conditional use permit application The Planning and Environmental Commission needs to answer the following question in order to provide final direction on this topic to VVMC: Does the Planning and Environmental Commission foresee any additional procedural considerations to be addressed? Town of Vail Page 14 III. BACKGROUND The idea for a facilities master plan for the VVMC campus rose out of the municipal site redevelopment project. During discussions regarding the municipal site project, a number of land planning opportunities and facility improvement needs were identified. While the municipal site redevelopment project is no longer being actively pursued by the VVMC and the Town of Vail, the need for certain facility improvements on the VVMC campus remains and opportunities for better land planning still exists. Through previous communications with the Town, VVMC has been given conceptual approval to explore master planning options and ideas which may include the use of certain town owned land. More specifically, that land includes the town's municipal site located at 75 South Frontage Road and 281 West Meadow Drive, library parking lot (Lot 10, Vail Village Filing 2). No final decisions on that matter, however, have been reached. On April 8, 2013, the Planning and Environmental Commission the applicant presented conceptual ideas for the creation of the master plan and received input from the Commission on the types of issues which needed to be addressed by the Plan. To that end, a significant amount of time and thought has gone into addressing on-site and off- site traffic circulation, determining the parking need, options for addressing the parking need (both on-site and off-site), loading and delivery options, and construction sequencing. Additionally, further investigation has gone into the potential use of the municipal site and/or Lot 10 to help address the physical and spatial needs of the Vail Valley Medical Center. On May 12, 2014, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing to address, the planning process, background work that has been completed to date, planning considerations, the format of the master plan document, opportunities for public participation, and a schedule of next steps. In August of 2014, the Vail Town Council and the VVMC decided to exclude the town's municipal site in the VVMC MP as a potential site for parking to meet the requirements of the medical campus. On September 8, 2014, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing where an introduction to the proposed VVMC MP was presented. The Commission recommended that the project move forward with a clear agenda of topics to be covered at each hearing. This would allow the public to decide in advanced to attend to participate in those elements of the VVMC MP which most interested them. On September 22, 2014, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing where the topic of loading and delivery was presented and discussed. The discussion involved gaining a better understanding of the loading and delivery operations and needs, clarification of the user groups proposed to be relocated to the new "front door". No conclusion on the appropriateness of loading and delivery access remaining off of West Meadow Drive was reached. Town of Vail Page 15 IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS The following planning documents are applicable to the review of this application: ZONING CODE General Use District 12-9C-1: PURPOSE: The general use district is intended to provide sites for public and quasi -public uses which, because of their special characteristics, cannot be appropriately regulated by the development standards prescribed for other zoning districts, and for which development standards especially prescribed for each particular development proposal or project are necessary to achieve the purposes prescribed in section 12-1-2 of this title and to provide for the public welfare. The general use district is intended to ensure that public buildings and grounds and certain types of quasi -public uses permitted in the district are appropriately located and designed to meet the needs of residents and visitors to Vail, to harmonize with surrounding uses, and, in the case of buildings and other structures, to ensure adequate light, air, open spaces, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of uses. VAIL LAND USE PLAN The Vail Land Use Plan contains multiple goal statements placed into six different categories. Staff believes the following goal statements are applicable to the effort to master plan the VVMC campus. 1. General Growth /Development 1.1. Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.2. The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural resources should be protected as the Town grows. 1.3. The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 6. Community Services 6.1. Services should keep pace with increased growth. Town of Vail Page 16 6.2. The Town of Vail should play a role in future development through balancing growth with services. 6.3. Services should be adjusted to keep pace with the needs of peak periods. The Land Use Plan designates the desired Land Use Category of all properties in the Town. The VVMC is comprised of several properties with differing land use designations. Resort Accommodations and Service (US Bank Building) This area includes activities aimed at accommodating the overnight and short- term visitor to the area. Primary uses include hotels, lodges, service stations, and parking structures (with densities up to 25 dwelling units or 50 accommodation units per buildable acre). Transition (VVMC Campus) The transition designation applies to the area between Lionshead and the Vail Village. The activities and site design of this area is aimed at encouraging pedestrian flow through the area and strengthening the connection between the two commercial cores. Appropriate activities include hotels, lodging and other tourist oriented residential units, ancillary retail and restaurant uses, museums, areas of public art, nature exhibits, gardens, pedestrian plazas, and other types of civic and culturally oriented uses, and the adjacent properties to the north. This designation would include the right-of-way of West Meadow Drive and the adjacent properties to the north. LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMNT MASTER PLAN The following is the language contained within the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan regarding the Middle Creek Stream Tract adjacent to the Evergreen Lodge development site. 5.19.4 Impacts on Middle Creek Stream Tract The Middle Creek Stream Tract lies to the west of the Evergreen Lodge. The Tract is owned by the Town of Vail. The tract is heavily vegetated with several substantial deciduous trees and a significant lower layer of underbrush. Although the site borders the Middle Creek Stream Tract, there is no significant amount of quality vegetation on the site, and the parcel lies out of the 100 -year flood plain. As currently configured, opportunities exist to better recognize the benefits of creekside development. While the natural riparian corridor of Middle Creek needs to remain protected and preserved, the physical and visual relationships and references between adjacent development and the stream tract should be strengthened. An opportunity exists to create a significant connection between the Evergreen Lodge and Middle Creek. Any use of Middle Creek for aesthetic or recreational purposes, however, should be subordinate to the preservation of the natural riparian corridor and its inherent natural character. The Middle Creek Stream Tract may provide an opportunity for the construction of a recreational path connecting the South Frontage Road to the existing pedestrian paths at the Dobson Ice Arena. Town of Vail Page 17 V. NEXT STEPS At the hearing on October 27th will cover any reaming topics not completely addressed in previous hearing and will include the helipad topic for discussion. Are there any additional materials the Commission anticipates at this time in order evaluate future discussion items encompassed by the VVMC MP? The Planning and Environmental Commission is asked to table this public hearing to the October 27, 2014. VI. ATTACHMENTS A. Proposed VVMC MP dated August 2014 B. TurnKey Consulting memorandum addressing Delivery and Service Vehicles on West Meadow Drive dated September 30, 2014. C. Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan Addendum for West Meadow Drive D. VVMC parking Anlaysis dated October 9, 2014 E. VVMC Traffic Impact Study Executive Summary and Full Report F. Anticipated South Frontage Road roundabout. G. Memorandum from the Town Engineer dated October 8, 2014 H. Memorandum from the Town Engineer dated September 26, 2014 I. Correspondence from neighbors Town of Vail Page 18 Vail V FACILITIES MASTER PLAN AN ELEMENT OF THE VAIL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AUGUST, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1Introduction 1 APPENDIX: Traffic Impact Study 2 Background on VVMC 3 3 Master Planning Process and Master Plan Goals 6 4 Overview of Expansion Plans and Design Considerations 9 5 Traffic 14 6 Parking 17 7 Helipad 19 8 Other Considerations 21 TEAM: TurnKey Owners: Vail Valley Medical Center Vail Vallev Medical Center Architect: Heery International Planning Consultants: Braun Associates, Inc. Traffic: Turnkey Consultanting, LLC August, 2014 VVMC Facilities Master Plan 1. INTRODUCTION Since its establishment in 1965, Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) has grown into one of the world's most advanced mountain hospitals, providing Olympic -quality sports medicine, leading evidence -based research, modern cancer care and extensive cardiology capabilities. While medical care and services are outstanding, the hospital's infrastructure is due for modernization. VVMC is at an age and condition where it must be modernized to meet the challenges of modern medicine and to ensure the facility provides medical staff with the resources necessary to offer the utmost in quality health care. The Vail Valley Medical Center Facilities Master Plan (the Master Plan) establishes a vision for how VVMC will respond to these challenges and in doing so addresses a multitude of operational, clinical, and technical requirements which are not being met by the existing facility. In addition, an equally important element of the Master Plan is how it addresses important neighborhood and community goals. Lionshead Master Plan Study Area The Master Plan provides a general direction and framework for how the VVMC will expand in the future. It has been prepared with extensive input from VVMC staff, neighbors, the community at large, and Town of Vail staff. Bordered on the west by the Lionshead Master Redevelopment Plan and on the east by the Vail Village Master Plan, the VVMC Master Plan will provide direction for a key community -oriented property located mid -way between Vail's two villages. Information provided in the Master Plan regarding future expansion plans is general in nature. Far more detail on the design, operation and management of future expansions will be provided during subsequent steps in the Town's review process, specifically the review of Conditional Use applications. Information provided herein is intended to demonstrate how future expansions will integrate with existing VVMC functions and the surrounding neighborhood and how, at a general level they will conform with applicable Town development standards. The 0r The VVMC Master Plan area is strategically located between the Lionshead and Vail Village Master Plan areas. VVMC Master Plan Study Area Vail Streetseape Master Plan Study Area Vail Village Master Plan Study Area s August, 2014 111 VVMC Facilities Master Plan 1. INTRODUCTION underlying goals of this Master Plan are to establish expectations for the expansion of VVMC and to establish a basis for the Town's review of future development proposals. The Master Plan has been prepared with a focus on addressing both internal and external goals or "drivers". Internal goals generally address the viability and sustainability of VVMC, VVMC's goal of providing quality health care to the community and the specific operational and clinical requirements of the campus. External goals generally address how VVMC responds to broader neighborhood and community considerations. It is often the case that internal and external goals overlap. These are discussed in greater detail in Section 3 of this plan. The Master Plan will be used by the Town's Planning and Environmental Commission, Design Review Board and Town Council as their primary tool in reviewing future expansion plans at VVMC. The Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan has been adopted as an element of the Town's Comprehensive Plan by Resolution No. XX, 2014, following recommendation from the Vail Planning and Environmental Commission. The area covered by this Master Plan is depicted on the following diagram. Q) Vail Valley Medical Center Facilities Master Plan Study Area. August, 2014 121 VVMC Facilities Master Plan Z. BACKGROUND ON VVMC EVOLUTION OF THE VVMC VVMC began as a clinic in 1965 to support a then fledgling ski resort and since that time has grown at a level commensurate with Vail and surrounding communities. Today, VVMC is comprised of several health care campuses located throughout Eagle County and provides health care services to both residents and visitors of the Rocky Mountain region of Colorado. VVMC's main hospital campus, located in the Town of Vail, provides an essential service to the Vail community, the surrounding region and destination patients from around the world. The building that housed the original Vail Clinic still exists at the southeast corner of the campus and is one of the various wings of the hospital that no longer meets contemporary health care requirements. Since the original clinic was constructed the following expansions have occurred: • A 1971 addition to house support services • A 1978 addition that houses the current Emergency and Imaging Departments • The 1987 West Wing, which was subsequently expanded in 1990, and accommodates the Patient Care Unit Intensive Care Unit, and the main VVMC Surgery Department • A 2001 two-story addition to the central wing of the hospital, which included a replacement of the Women & Children's Center, and construction of Vail Valley Surgical Center (VVSC), and The Steadman Philippon Research Institute (SPRI) • In 2005, VVMC acquired the US Bank Building and since that time has been converting it to a medical office and administrative support facility for VVMC EXISTING BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES VVMC is an aging facility. Other than the Women & Children's Center and Vail Valley Surgery Center (13 -years old), all other buildings within the campus are at least 24 years old, with some areas nearly 45 years old. There are many implications from the condition of these older buildings: The buildings' basic mechanical and electrical systems are nearing the end of their useful life, requiring higher levels of maintenance and uncertainty in service. In many areas of the hospital existing spaces no longer support the most efficient and appropriate setting for patient care. This is largely a result of the evolution in healthcare from a traditional inpatient type of delivery, to more outpatient procedures. This evolution has created the need for different types of medical facilities that are difficult to achieve in older buildings. Over time, new services and facilities have been added wherever the hospital can find space, sometimes causing disjointed functional relationships, between types of services and patient's access to them. Higher levels of care require additional staff, medical equipment, and supplies. All of these factors have created extremely cramped conditions throughout the hospital. Over the past ten years VVMC has undertaken a series of studies to determine the best long-term use and configuration of its Vail campus. Although one of the earlier studies had suggested that VVMC consider relocating most of its acute care functions to a new site in Eagle County, the VVMC Board of Directors has concluded that the main hospital must remain in Vail. The Vail Town Council has also strongly stated their support for VVMC to August, 2014 131 VVMC Facilities Master Plan 2. BACKGROUND ON THE VVMC remain in Vail. This Master Plan was, in part, initiated to address sweeping changes in the healthcare industry, but also to ensure that VVMC remain in Vail, with a sustainable strategy to meet the long-term needs of the community. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS AND SURROUNDING USES The VVMC is located on three parcels of land that total 4.57 acres The site is bordered on the north by the South Frontage Road and on the south by West Meadow Drive. The VVMC is located in the center of a transitional area between Vail Village and Lionshead. Land uses surrounding the VVMC are depicted on the diagram below. VVMC Master Ilan L.w�irp LaN L'u � f Existing Land Uses surrounding VVMC. Vehicular access to VVMC is provided by South Frontage Road and West Meadow Drive. South Frontage Road provides access to an employee parking structure located at the east end of the campus and the US Bank building. West Meadow Drive provides access to patient and guest parking at the west end of the campus and to loading/service facilities located at the southeast corner of the campus. Regional bus service is provided along South Frontage Road and Town of Vail bus service is provided along West Meadow Drive. West Meadow Drive also provides an important pedestrian connection to Vail Village and Lionshead. A portion of the VVMC's surface parking lot at the southwest corner of the campus is actually located on adjoining Lot 10, which is owned by the Town of Vail. Via separate agreement, the Town utilizes parking spaces on Lot 10 (for use by the Vail Library), which are accessed via the VVMC entry drive. The property's zoning and covenant restrictions are discussed in Section 8 of the Master Plan. Existing site conditions are depicted on the following page. August, 2014 141 VVMC Facilities Master Plan LAND USE DESIGNATIONS �liigt+ Uernuy irsadk�ai - n—Ite.onM [d'eLia.f me cat Mr,ro>�mi-Public 1110 W -P VVMC Master Ilan L.w�irp LaN L'u � f Existing Land Uses surrounding VVMC. Vehicular access to VVMC is provided by South Frontage Road and West Meadow Drive. South Frontage Road provides access to an employee parking structure located at the east end of the campus and the US Bank building. West Meadow Drive provides access to patient and guest parking at the west end of the campus and to loading/service facilities located at the southeast corner of the campus. Regional bus service is provided along South Frontage Road and Town of Vail bus service is provided along West Meadow Drive. West Meadow Drive also provides an important pedestrian connection to Vail Village and Lionshead. A portion of the VVMC's surface parking lot at the southwest corner of the campus is actually located on adjoining Lot 10, which is owned by the Town of Vail. Via separate agreement, the Town utilizes parking spaces on Lot 10 (for use by the Vail Library), which are accessed via the VVMC entry drive. The property's zoning and covenant restrictions are discussed in Section 8 of the Master Plan. Existing site conditions are depicted on the following page. August, 2014 141 VVMC Facilities Master Plan lk 1 2. BACKGROUND ON THE VVMC ` I -.�V I S I TO -R VVMC -EXISTING CONDITIONS ♦ r�-, ''�; '► �' �� �`•,� � tom- - tr 4t - 4 r♦ T �. ■iss1 * i ti I •N R DA( lip- is �P6440 q8 1j, STAFF - �`""-- �•..,a#' PARKING ti USB q LOT N BUILDING ►` VVMC BU SJVEHICL-ka �� i ►'- TRAFFIC '� • ♦ •~'`-�''-,� fes' s.i LOADING/SERVICE • ACCESS t 4� PATIENTACCESS■■#�f°■ ■#■■■■■ r a#■ _' �: MBULANCE ACCESS ■ ■ ■ ■ rr ■ 1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ �1■�■ ■ ■ ■ b, i August, 2014 5 VVMC Facilities Master Plan 3. MASTER PLANNING PROCESS AND MASTER PLAN GOALS THE MASTER PLAN PROCESS VVMC spent nearly two years developing a Master Facility Plan for the Vail campus. This process involved extensive collabo- ration with their consulting team, staff, the VVMC Advisory Committee, the Executive Team and Board members. The Vail community and Town of Vail staff were also involved in this planning process. Master planning for a medical center is unique to other land development master planning processes. A master planning effort for a hotel or commercial development may typically involve defining the potential "building envelope" of a site and then working to "fill the envelope" with buildings. Master plan- ning for Vail's hospital was based on a strategic, "inside -out" approach, rather than "outside -in." This is defined as a method for determining the real operational needs of the hospital, and then responding to those needs with the physical plan. An underlying theme for the expansion plans envisioned for the VVMC is the "decompression" of spaces —to provide larger or more efficient spaces for medical services that are designed specifically to improve healthcare services (as opposed to in- creasing capacities of such spaces). Another major influence in the master planning process that is unique to medical centers, and specifically to VVMC is sequencing of construction. It is essential that construction can be sequenced without disrupting on-going patient care. For example, because the western -most portions of the campus include the most serviceable buildings, these areas will be expanded in initial construction and the older buildings on the east side of the campus will be addressed after west wing improvements are completed. The Master Plan process was organized and executed in five major stages: 1. Project initiation, confirm goals, drivers, and Lean Process improvement 2. Analysis of existing facilities, site issues, and operations 3. Develop Master Plan level space requirements/ projections 4. Develop conceptual Master Plan alternatives 5. Finalize the Master Plan solution and define a road map for the future Mauer Planning Process Activity 1 Activity 2 Activity 3 Activity 4 Activity 5 Faubbes Inventory Master Plan Sim r,enfirm GaysT3nVers+ a ul Evaluation Pro ctlons•+ IEAN PrurNs9 tnrprcvrrnenl Moo August, 2014 161 VVMC Facilities Master Plan 3. MASTER PLANNING PROCESS AND MASTER PLAN GOALS MASTER PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES A key step in of Stage 1 was identifying the major goals and ob- jectives for the project. This was accomplished through collab- orative work sessions with the entire planning team. The goals and objectives addressed internal, external, operational and economic considerations, and were prioritized and categorized in the following areas: 1. Site Planning Major changes to the layout and design of VVMC, including, but not limited to, a new main entrance, and a new Emergency Department, improving loading facilities, expanding parking and considering the helipad location are addressed in this category. 2. Functional/Organizational These goals and objectives primarily addressed internal considerations and identified a number of improvements to the organization and overall efficiency of the campus. Master Planning This category of goals and objectives ensured the Master Plan includes flexibility to respond to future conditions and implementation strategies. 4. Economic Sustainability, operational costs, long-term maintenance and energy costs and implementation strategies were some of the internal goals and objectives addressed in this category. Each of these four categories includes five or more goal state- ments. At the conclusion of this process the following ten goals were identified as the primary goals and objectives of the Master Plan to be addressed in future expansion plans. • Relocate the main entrance to VVMC to South Frontage Road • Modify service vehicle access to a concealed loading zone • Relocate Emergency Department and ambulance traffic to South Frontage Road • Locate Helipad with direct connection to Emergency Department, and with sensitivity to neighbors • Provide adequate and convenient parking for patients, visitors and staff • Improve operational efficiencies through proper sizing and adjacencies • Accommodate patients in the most appropriate setting (and w/privacy) • Optimize access and way -finding for patients and visitors • Create a flexible framework to accommodate future unforeseen changes • Accommodate appropriate medical office space on campus While most of the goals and objectives identified above are internal to how VVMC operates, a number of critical external considerations were also identified during the master planning process. Many of these same external considerations were identi- fied by Town of Vail staff as "issues or considerations" to be ad- dressed during the master planning process. August, 2014 171 VVMC Facilities Master Plan IL I I MASTER PLANNING PROCESS AND MASTER PLAN GOALS ` I Town staff identified the following 13 issues to be addressed in the VVMC Master Plan. These issues include: 1. Helipad/emergency air service to the hospital site. 2. On-site loading and delivery facilities 3. Ambulance access to and from the site. 4. Vehicle access that uses South Frontage Road for primary access. 5. Minimize vehicle trips on West Meadow Drive 6. North/south pedestrian circulation through the site. 7. Middle Creek riparian corridor. 8. Provide on-site parking in full compliance with the parking requirements. 9. Define appropriate location for vehicle access off of the South Frontage Road. 10. Potential for VVMC use of Lot 10 and/or the Town's municipal center site. 11. Zoning considerations. 12. Identify future growth and expansion opportunities to ensure the community, long-term health care needs are met. 13. Screening of mechanical equipment. The VVMC's goals and objectives directly align with most of the topics raised by Town staff. The manner in which future VVMC improvements implement the Master Plan's goals and objectives and address the issues raised by the Town is described in the following sections of the plan. August, 2014 1 8 1 VVMC Facilities Master Plan 4. OVERVIEW OF EXPANSION PLANS AND DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Thifsection of the Master Plan provides an overview of: Building expansions planned for the VVMC The main "influences" in the overall site planning of the project Architectural design and planning considerations relative to key elements of expansion plans Expansion Plans and Improvements VVMC currently has approximately 201,000sf of gross floor area (exclusive of parking garages). Expansion plans will increase square footage by a third, bringing the total square footage of the campus to approximately 270,000sf. Expansions will occur in two primary areas — additions to the West Wing and construction of an entirely new East Wing. West Wing Expansion The focal point of a +/-35,000 sf expansion planned for the West Wing is the addition of a new fourth floor. This new floor will pro- vide space for The Steadman Philippon Research Institute and The Steadman Clinic. Smaller multi-level expansions are also planned at the south and west sides of the West Wing. Interior spaces throughout the West Wing will be re -organized and provide in- creased space for surgery suites, Howard Head Sports Medicine, a Cardiac Catheterization Lab and other uses. New East Wing The East Wing of the hospital will be demolished and replaced with a building that adds approximately 35,000sf of net new square footage. Underlying this new building will be a multi-level parking structure which will be accessible from South Frontage Road and will provide the majority of all on-site parking. The south half of the new East Wing will include three levels. The lowest level (ground level at West Meadow Drive) will include an enclosed loading/delivery facility and a central utility plant. The second level will be devoted to new Emergency and Imaging'Ve- partments. The upper level will accommodate the main hospital entry, admissions and other hospital functions. The general location of these two areas is depicted on the Build- ing Massing diagram on the following page. Main "Influences" in Site Planning of Future Expansions A number of factors influenced the overall site planning of future expansions to VVMC. Examples of these are the specific program- matic elements of the expansion plans, the internal relationships of new and expanded uses to other uses within the campus, and how the project can be constructed while maintaining hospital op- erations. Aside from these considerations, the single most impor- tant influence in the overall design of Master Plan improvements is moving VVMC's "front door" to South Frontage Road. Bringing vehicular access to this location became a driver for the following design decisions: • The main entrance to the hospital needs to be proximate to where patients and guest arrive at the campus. Vehicle access off of South Frontage Road necessitates re -locating the main entrance (and functions such as admissions) to the East Wing. • Moving ambulance arrival to the new South Frontage Road access is proposed to address a major community goal of removing emergency vehicles from West Meadow Drive. This, in turn, necessitates a new Emergency Department is within the East Wing. • A new Emergency Department demands the need for a new imaging department in the East Wing. • Given the scope of new hospital functions that will be located within the East Wing, the east end of the campus became the logical location for additional structured parking. August, 2014 191VVMC Facilities Master Plan lk I 4.0VERVIEW OF EXPANSION PLANS AND DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ` 11 While other factors were considered in the overall site planning of future expansion plans, the location of the new VVMC entry was a major influence in the design of the new campus. Specific Architectural Design and Planning Considerations The following outlines planning and design considerations relative to specific elements of the Master Plan Building Massing A number of factors influenced the building massing of proposed expansions to VVMC, including the structural capacity of exist- ing buildings to handle additions, internal spatial relationships of hospital uses, relationships to surrounding buildings in the neighborhood and conformity with applicable Town development standards. A number of covenant restrictions established by a 1989 land use agreement with the Evergreen Lodge also directly influence the design process. The building massing diagram provides a general indication of the building footprint and massing of expansions envisioned by the Master Plan. As demonstrated by the neighborhood massing diagram, the massing of VVMC is very consistent with building heights in the immediate vicinity of the hospital. INN 1 11 1 r ` -------------- Stea a Y _ �Y ORTHOPEDIC PA*NG F PARKING �.� STAFF PA ENTRALWING:XISTING STORIES ,Y H VISITOR — PARKING ` MEDI AL ROFESSIONA BUILDING i 3 ST IES 1 EASTWING: EMERGENCY/ a `.— IMAGING 3STORIES I r AW& - 6-8 levels- �.: a, 41 -}Z.� 4 3 1 is 1 5-6 �f' -_-- t` 'Levels Level 4 levels I Levels 2 -_-- levels levels 2-3 ve a J _ VVMC'MW Pfau- The drawings above depict existing building heights surrounding VVMC and building massing of future hospital expansion August, 2014 1101VVMC Facilities Master Plan lk I 4.0VERVIEW OF EXPANSION PLANS AND DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ` 11 Meadow Drive The VVMC shares an important "public edge" with West Meadow Drive. The relocation of VVMC's main entry to the South Frontage Road will provide a major benefit to West Meadow Drive and the pedestrian/biking experience along this corridor. Other considerations to be addressed in the design of building expan- sions that will enhance the campus' relationship to West Meadow Drive may include: • Providing off -sets in building facades in order to avoid long, continuous wall planes • Providing variation of building heights T • Maintaining existing landscaping and where appropriate enhancing landscaping between the building and the street • Introducing outdoor spaces (such as dining decks) in order to create interest and activity along the street • Maintaining the existing West Meadow Drive sidewalk and where appropriate enhance this corridor These and other detailed design considerations will be addressed during subsequent steps in the review process. August, 2014 1111 VVMC Facilities Master Plan r Varied roof heights and building offsets Enclosed fj along Meadow Drive Loading/Service Facililty P-tential ou or — _ Cllnl]I patio 4 New pedestrian Landscap _� — coiu-tection to screening L — - - frontage road New pedestrian Landscape access to hospital screening at existing bus step V'VM eadow Dive 1 Streetscap Diagram August, 2014 1111 VVMC Facilities Master Plan 4. OVERVIEW OF EXPANSION PLANS AND DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Architecture The implementation of the Master Plan provides a significant op- portunity for improvement and modernization to the architecture of the campus. The present building is a conglomeration of older buildings on the east and west ends of the campus, with a modern addition in the central portion. Expansion of the West Wing will include resurfacing of the 1980 fagade, primarily by covering the older buildings with new additions on the south and west ends. The materials and forms anticipated for this expan- sion will be consistent with those used in the 2001 Central Wing addition, including natural stone and complimentary metal panel detailing. Window frames will be consistent with these materials and the amount of glazing will be balanced with the need for privacy. For example, on the new 4th level addition housing The Steadman Clinic, the use of more extensive glazing will be explored to take advantage of natural light and views, and to create a lighter, more recessed appearance at the very top of the building. The new East Wing will be articulated in a similar fashion, utilizing a stepped massing, from bottom to top. The use of varying materials will allow for further reduction of the visual massing of the building. Mechanical Systems One of the major goals of the VVMC Master Plan is to replace its aging utility components with a new Central Utility Plant, or CUP. The new CUP will be built as part of the East Wing, and will be located on the ground level, behind the service enclosure and away from West Meadow Drive. This area will house the hospitals heavy equipment including boilers, compressors, and emergency generators. Once this sequence of construction is complete, the existing mechanical yard located at the southwest corner of the campus along Meadow Driver, will be removed. In addition to the CUP, new air -handling units and air-cooled chill- ers will be located on the roof of the buildings. This equipment will be screened in a fashion which is consistent with the mechanical screen located above the 2001 VVSC Addition, whereby only the metal roofing form is visible from the sides of the buildings. Mechanical noises generated from this equipment will be largely contained and reflected above these enclosures, as opposed to directly across the roof. Loading and Service Relocating loading and delivery facilities off of West Meadow Drive has been suggested by community members. Moving these facilities to the new South Frontage Road access was studied but deemed infeasible. This is due primarily to grade changes; limited road frontage; and the space necessary to provide vehicular access for guests and patients, patient drop-off and ambulance access. The new loading facility is proposed to remain on West Meadow Drive. However, with the redevelopment of the East Wing the loading facility will be entirely enclosed and sized such that vehicles can complete turning movements within the structure. Noise, odor and visual impacts of loading and delivery functions will be mitigat- ed with this new enclosed facility, enhancing VVMC's compatibility with adjacent residential uses. Pedestrian Circulation The primary pedestrian access to and from VVMC is West Meadow Drive. This shared vehicle/bike/pedestrian corridor is heavily used and provides a key link between Vail Village and Lionshead. Relocating the main entrance to South Frontage Road will greatly August, 2014 1121 VVMC Facilities Master Plan lk I 4.0VERVIEW OF EXPANSION PLANS AND DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ` 11 improve the safety and aesthetics of the road by significantly reducing traffic, providing a significant benefit to those who use this corridor, to neighboring residential uses and to the entire community. A dedicated pedestrian entry to the new Emergency Department will be provided along West Meadow Drive. This entry is located proximate to the west -bound in -town bus stop. A north/south pedestrian corridor will be constructed at the east end of the campus, providing a new connection between the South Frontage Road and West Meadow Drive. Middle Creek The VVMC's existing surface parking lot at the west end of the campus is located adjacent to Middle Creek and the adjoining riparian corridor. While no major changes are contemplated to this portion of the site, VVMC will evaluate potential improve- ments to the relation of the parking lot to the creek corridor. Potential steps could include the introduction of best management practices to improve the quality of water that runs off of the existing surface parking lot. August, 2014 1131 VVMC Facilities Master Plan J. TRAFFIC One of the key elements of this Master Plan is to establish South Frontage Road as the primary access to the VVMC. Through their internal master planning process the VVMC team defined this as a major goal. Establishing VVMC's "front door" at the South Frontage Road has been a long-standing goal of the Town of Vail. The reason for this is quite simple — Meadow Drive is a heavily used pedestrian corridor and reducing the number of cars on this road will greatly improve the aesthetics of this pedestrian corridor. MEADOW DRIVE Re -locating VVMC's main access to South Frontage Road will significantly improve conditions on West Meadow Drive. The following demonstrates how this new access will shift traffic patterns and greatly reduce VVMC-generated traffic on West Meadow Drive: WEST MEADOW DRIVE Existing Users Post -Master Plan Users 116 Patient/Guest Spaces 5 Service Vehicles Emergency Vehicles Loading/Delivery Vehicles Loading/Delivery Vehicles Of particular significance are the 116 parking spaces in the West Lot. 106 of these spaces have historically been used by patients and guests to VVMC. Given how they are used, these spaces "turnover" 6-8 times during a typical day, creating significant trips on West Meadow Drive. These trips will shift to South Frontage Road upon reconstruction of the East Wing. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY A Traffic Impact Study has been completed by TurnKey Consult- ing LLC. This study evaluates the traffic impacts of new develop- ment and other changes contemplated by this Master Plan. An executive summary of the study is found in the appendix of this Plan. The diagram on the following page depicts the vehicular and pedestrian circulation patterns for VVMC. Assumptions on potential South Frontage Road improvements, VVMC expansion plans and other traffic -related operational changes at VVMC that were considered in the traffic study includ- ed the following: • A round -about (designed to facilitate site access to the VVMC, the Evergreen Lodge, the Town Hall site and pass- through traffic), on South Frontage Road • Vehicular access off South Frontage Road to VVMC will be right-in/right-out only • Emergency vehicles will access VVMC via the new main access off of South Frontage Road, including westbound left turn into the VVMC • Patient and guest access to the West Surface Parking lot will be provided via VVMC's new main access off of the South Frontage Road • Access to the new East Parking Structure and the West Surface Lot will be provided via the new main access off of South Frontage Road • During the construction of the East Wing, 69 parking spaces in the US Bank Building will be temporarily accessed via West Meadow Drive August, 2014 1141 VVMC Facilities Master Plan —'�P�lemti Rou�dabouf�� Faasting Pedestrian Corridor - -- - 5. TRAFFIC PT VVMC Master Plan Conceptual Circulation Plan A� The performance of the South Frontage Road roundabout, the Frontage Road/VVMC access point and the Vail Road/Meadow Drive intersection were evaluated. Based on analysis by TurnKey Consulting Inc. and Felsberg Holt Ulevig, each of these intersec- tions performed at a level well above minimum Town standards for both level of service and delay. structured and "V -d" -wk par Amisu3ance access W1 right out only �t Major Pedestrian Corridor Sectdary Pe esfrf An updated traffic study for VVMC will be completed in the future and submitted at subsequent stages of the development review process. CONCEPTUAL ROUNDABOUT LOCATION STUDY The Town of Vail has taken the lead on a conceptual design study of future road and access improvements to South Frontage Road. August, 2014 1 151 VVMC Facilities Master Plan J. TRAFFIC The'participants in this process include the Town, representatives The roundabout solution is based on the assumption that all ' from the Evergreen Lodge and VVMC. Each of these organiza- three properties will re -develop and is also dependent upon the tions is contemplating development of their property and the participation of all three property owners. In addition, topogra- primary goal of this effort is to collaboratively define a plan for phy and site conditions along South Frontage Road could present access improvements along South Frontage Road. The TOV has design and construction and the sequencing of when the round - retained Felsburg Holt and Ullevig (FHU) to provide technical sup- about is constructed relative to when each of the three parcels port for this effort. re -develop is also a consideration. For these reasons VVMC has evaluated South Frontage Road improvements that would be It is anticipated that South Frontage Road improvements will necessary if only VVMC were to re -develop. The findings of this likely include a roundabout in order to provide optimal access to analysis will be provided in an addendum to the VVMC Master each of the three properties. The focal point of this conceptual Plan Traffic Impact Study. study has been to evaluate alternative roundabout locations and to define the preferred location for a roundabout. While much progress has been made on this conceptual design study, the process is not yet complete. The preferred location for the roundabout will likely be near the shared property line between VVMC and the Evergreen Lodge. FHU and project participants are evaluating several different site access configura- tions for a roundabout at this location. The VVMC Traffic Study could not analyze the proposed round- about location because the preferred access configuration has not yet been defined. Therefore, this traffic study refers to and relies upon the FHU work completed to date (and documented in an 8/1/14 FHU memo), for the roundabout operational analysis. The FHU memo indicates the proposed roundabout would oper- ate at LOS B or better, even when using conservative background traffic and site trip generation estimates. It is expected that the preferred roundabout location and access configurations will be determined sometime during the VVMC Master Plan approval process, at which time the VVMC Traffic Study will be updated. August, 2014 1161 VVMC Facilities Master Plan 6. PARKING On-site parking at VVMC has for many years been widely ac- knowledged to be inadequate. Providing sufficient on-site park- ing is one of the primary goals of this master planning effort. The following section addresses three related topics - method- ologies for determining parking requirements, existing parking conditions, and the parking demands expected from expansion of VVMC. More detailed information on each of these topics will be provided in subsequent development applications. METHODOLOGIES FOR DETERMINING PARKING REQUIREMENTS Zoning code formulas used to determine parking requirements for land uses such as office, retail, etc. are fairly consistent and are almost always based on square footage. Hospitals and medical centers present a unique land use and formulas used to determine parking requirements vary widely. Gross square footage, net square footage, number of employees, number of doctors, number of patient beds and number of patient exam rooms (or some combination of the above), are examples of the different "measures" used to determine parking requirements for medical centers. The Town's methodology for determining the medical center's parking requirement is based primarily on square footage, but involves three related considerations: Hospitals 1 space per patient bed 1 space/150sf net floor area Medical offices 1 space per 200 sf net floor area While in concept a square footage based formula can provide a relative indication of a facility's parking demand, the use of square footage is arbitrary in that all square footage within a medical center is treated uniformly (with respect to its intensity of use, hence parking demand). Basing parking requirements on the number of employees, an approach used by many codes, may be a more accurate measure for determining a facility's parking demand. The following formula is suggested as an alter- native to the Town's formula: 1 space per patient bed 1 space per exam room 1 space per day shift employee Both of these methodologies have their strengths and weak- nesses and as demonstrated below, both formulas provide similar parking numbers when applied to the existing campus. More importantly, both formulas provide a parking number that is very close to current parking conditions at VVMC. As further explained below, the employee -based formula is the most appro- priate and accurate formula for determining the VVMC parking demand. EXISTING PARKING CONDITIONS Applying the Town parking formula to the existing facilities at the VVMC results in 870 spaces and after application of a 20% multi- use credit the parking requirement is 697 spaces. Applying the employee -based formula to the existing campus results in 782 spaces and after application of a 17.5% multi -use credit the parking requirement is 645 spaces. August, 2014 1171 VVMC Facilities Master Plan 6. PARKING While the parking requirement numbers above are very similar, functional spaces for staff to provide better care to patients. they are based on formulas and may not reflect actual park- There are plans for improvements such as additional medical ing conditions, or VVMC's existing parking demand. The table space and exam rooms that will generate more employees and below summarizes actual parking conditions: increased patient activity, resulting in increased parking demand. However, there are many improvements such as the re -designed 407 On-site spaces (located in West Lot, East Structure, US Bank Building) 60 Employee -issued ECO bus passes 32 Average number of employees who utilize VVMC shuttles 120 TOV/Lionshead parking and season parking passes purchased (2013/14 ski season) 53 Off-site leased spaces 672 Total spaces VVMC provides patient, guest and employee parking with a combination of on-site parking, off-site/leased parking and managed parking (employee bus pass and shuttles). These 672 "actual" spaces fall mid -way between two zoning calculations, in essence validating the accuracy of the two parking formulas. This information can also be used to define the existing park- ing deficit at VVMC. Assuming 672 is VVMC's required parking, there are currently 499 "code conformant" parking spaces (407 on-site spaces and 92 "managed" spaces), and as such the exist- ing parking deficit is approximately 173 spaces. PARKING REQUIREMENTS OF MASTER PLAN AND EXPANSION The increased parking demand from expansions contemplated by the Master Plan is expected to be relatively low. This is because building expansions are primarily intended to "decom- press" existing hospital facilities; and to provide larger, more Emergency Department that will not increase capacity or em- ployees, hence not increasing parking demand. Assuming the use of the employee -based parking formula, the increased park- ing demand from the Master Plan expansion is anticipated to be approximately 50-60 additional spaces, or approximately 730-740 total spaces. Upon completion of the Master Plan expansion all required parking will be provided by on-site parking spaces and managed parking solutions (i.e. employee shuttle and bus pass programs). On-site parking will be provided in the existing West Lot, new surface spaces will be created when the ambulance building is removed, and a new parking structure will be located at the east end of the site. Actual on-site parking spaces are expected to be between 650-700 spaces. As has been done in the past, managed programs (bus passes and employee shuttle vans) will be used to satistfy VVMC's parking requirement. During the construction of the new East Wing parking structure interim off-site parking will be needed for approximately two years. Details on how this will be addressed as well as additional information on the number of required parking spaces, the manner in which new parking will be provided and parking man- agement plans will be provided with subsequent development applications. August, 2014 1181 VVMC Facilities Master Plan % HELIPAD EXISTING HELIPAD The existing helipad that serves VVMC is located north of the South Frontage Road and immediately west of the Vail Town Hall. This helipad has been used by VVMC for the past 30 years. A helipad is an essential element of a medical facility such as VVMC On average approximately 70 helicopter transports occur each year. The majority of these are scheduled transports of patients from VVMC to other healthcare facilities. While the existing helipad has served its purpose in supporting emergency air transport, there are shortcomings with the current helipad. The fundamental limitation of the existing helipad is that it requires the transfer of the patients from VVMC to the helicopter via an ambulance. The most significant implication of this is increased time required to transfer the patient. In addition, the transfer monopolizes the use of an ambulance and also necessitates the temporary closure of South Frontage Road. Each of these factors would be resolved with a helipad located within the VVMC campus. HELIPAD SITE SELECTION A number of potential on-site helipad locations were evaluated with the assistance of Cayce Batterson of CLB Enterprises. These alternatives included rooftop locations and an elevated helipad at the northernmost portion of the campus. Criteria used to evaluate these alternatives included safety, functionality, proximity to the Emergency Department and other considerations. Rooftop locations at the west (on the roof of the new fourth floor proposed at the West Wing) and southeast portions of the campus (on the roof of the new East Wing) were considered. While these locations conformed to applicable elements of the FAA Advisory Circular and provided good access to the Emergency Department, each necessitated flight paths that brought the helicopter over existing residential land uses. Because of residential concerns with the overflight of helicopters and the associated noise impacts, these rooftop alternatives are currently not being pursued. August, 2014 1191 VVMC Facilities Master Plan % HELIPAD The proposed helipad involves an elevated pad located at the northernmost corner of the campus along South Frontage Road. This location allows for direct access to the adjacent (re- located) Emergency Department without use of an ambulance. As depicted on the diagram on the previous page, this location allows for a flight path over the 1-70 corridor, similar to the flight path used with the existing helipad. IMPLICATIONS ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES Adjacent buildings and land uses are considerations in evaluating the feasibility, function and safety of a helipad. Horizontal and vertical distances between the helipad and adjacent buildings are one of the key factors in this evaluation. Based on existing land uses and buildings on adjacent properties, the proposed helipad site presents a workable solution and adjacent land uses would have no constraints on helipad operations. Consideration has also been given to potential implications resulting from conditions changing on adjoining properties. Concerns would arise if the Evergreen Lodge were to re -develop with buildings at the maximum allowable building height (82.5') at the easternmost portion of their site. Potential impacts could be addressed in two ways — establishing maximum building height limitations on the eastern end of the Evergreen property or by varying the height to which the helipad is elevated (the degree to which the helipad is elevated directly influences the horizontal and vertical separation needed between the helipad and adjacent buildings). VVMC is currently in discussions regarding the helipad with representatives from the Evergreen Lodge. Proposed helipad location August, 2014 1201VVMC Facilities Master Plan S. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS The following section addresses zoning/development review considerations and other topics relative to expansion plans envisioned by the Master Plan. Many of these topics will be addressed in greater detail during the review of subsequent development applications. EMPLOYEE HOUSING Chapter 23 - Commercial Linkage of the Town's zoning regula- tions stipulates that "commercial development or redevelop- ment shall mitigate its impact on employee housing by provid- ing Employee Housing Units (EHU's) for twenty percent (20%) of the employees generated." Further, that "employee hous- ing impacts need only be mitigated for a redevelopment that results in a greater number of employees generated from an increase in net floor area." As such VVMC's requirement is to provide housing for 20% of the new employees resulting from the proposed expansion. Chapter 23 provides a table of employee generation rates for a variety of different land uses. Hospitals and medical facilities are not included in this table. In accordance with the ordinance, in such cases it is incumbent on the applicant to pro- vide documentation of employee generation anticipated from the project. The VVMC and other entities that operate within the campus (i.e. Colorado Mountain Medical, The Steadman Clinic, etc.) in- clude a total of approximately 550 employees. It is anticipated that as the Master Plan expansion is implemented employees will increase to approximately 610, an increase of 60 employ- ees. Based on the 20% requirement, housing for 12 employees will be provided. This housing may be in the form of dormitory; studio; or 1, 2 or 3 bedroom units. Chapter 23 stipulates that 50% of required employee housing be located "on-site". Due to the incompatibility of housing and hospital uses, all required employee housing will be provided off-site (as may be permitted by Chapter 23). Detailed information on employee generation, the exception to the on-site requirement, and an employee housing plan will be provided in subsequent development applications. COVENANT RESTRICTIONS Portions of the VVMC campus are encumbered by restrictive cov- enants that address the use of the property and establish limita- tions on building location, building height and other site develop- ment considerations. Covenants established by Vail Associates, Inc. when the property was originally conveyed to VVMC limit the use of the land to "hospitals and medical facili- ties". In 1989 a number of restrictions on the design and devel- opment of VVMC property were established by covenants for the benefit of the Evergreen Lodge. Improvements contemplated by this Master Plan are designed to conform with all applicable elements of these covenant restric- tions. ZONING Existing zoning of the VVMC campus includes three different zone districts. The majority of the campus is zoned General Use (GU), the US Bank Building site is zoned Special Development District (SSD #23), and a portion of land along South Frontage Road August, 2014 1211 VVMC Facilities Master Plan S. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS (recently purchased from the Evergreen Lodge) is zoned Lions - head Mixed Use —1. The diagram on the following page depicts the location of existing zone districts. The following summarizes the existing zoning of these three areas relative to the proposed master plan. ^�I I J � 1 '-Lionshead Mixed Usel -- - --------1 C) VVMC - Existing Zoning 1 I Fd /1111 GENERAL USE ZONING The majority of the campus is zoned GU. The purpose of the GU district is intended for use on sites with public and quasi -public uses and this zone district has been the primary tool for review- ing the development of VVMC for many decades. "Healthcare facilities" are a Conditional Use in the GU District. There are no changes proposed to this zoning. LIONSHEAD MIXED USE -1 ZONING This small portion of the VVMC campus was zoned LHMU-1 when acquired from the Evergreen Lodge. The LHMU-1 district does not allow for medical facilities, medical offices or clinics. For this reason the re -zoning of this portion of the campus to GU will be proposed as an element of future development applications. SDD ZONING The VVMC purchased the US Bank Building in 2005. At that time, the property was used as a professional office building and was zoned SDD #23. Since that time, VVMC has converted many office uses within the building to medical uses or office uses directly related to the VVMC. These medical uses are permissible by SDD #23. While the majority of the building has evolved into a medical of- fice building, the bank use is expected to remain for the foresee- able future. VVMC's ultimate plan is for all uses within the build- ing to be medical -oriented and it is anticipated that this will occur once the bank vacates the building. At that time it is expected that the property will be re -zoned to the GU district. There are two reasons for not re -zoning this portion of VVMC to GU at this time. The existing bank building is physically separate from the rest of the buildings on the VVMC campus and as such there are no real regulatory complications from having two different zone districts in place on the VVMC campus. More im- portantly, the "banks and financial institutions" are not permitted in the GU district. Re -zoning the property to GU would make the existing bank a non -conforming use and this could create future unintended or unforeseen consequences. August, 2014 122-1 VVMC Facilities Master Plan 8. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS VAIL LAND USE PLAN The Vail Land Use Plan includes references to VVMC. It is US Bank Building intended that this Master Plan supersede all reference to VVMC Since it was purchased by VVMC in 2005, this building has found in the Vail Land Use plan. TOV LANDS The adjacency of Lot 10 to the west side of the VVMC campus presents a meaningful opportunity for the long-term growth of the hospital. While small in size, Lot 10 could nonetheless be a key fac- tor in providing future hospital improvements at the west end of the campus. VVMC remains interested in working with the Town regarding the future acquisition of this parcel. Doing so could facilitate the VVMC's ability to pursue expansion plans on the West Lot at some point in the future. Future Expansion Potential at VVMC Expansions and improvements outlined in this Master Plan are planned to meet the needs of VVMC for many years. In doing so these improvements will provide facilities that will allow the VVMC to serve the community with state-of-the-art, high quality healthcare. It is difficult to speculate on expansions or improvements beyond those envisioned by this Master Plan. That said, as medical services and technology evolve over the next few decades, it is reasonable to assume that over time additional changes to the VVMC will be nec- essary. VVMC would have two options available for future expan- sion and improvements to the campus: evolved into a near -exclusively medical office building. As a part of the changes to the main hospital campus outlined by this Mas- ter Plan, the US Bank Building will be used to accommodate some uses that are currently located on the main campus. Overtime, it may be possible to demolish this building and redevelop it with more direct, physical integration with the main campus. This would represent one alternative for how VVMC could address future long-term needs. West Lot The West Lot is a location that could accommodate a new build- ing at some point in the future. This would likely necessitate below -grade structured parking. Access to this building (and parking) would be possible via South Frontage Road and the new main entry to VVMC. No specific work has been done on future improvements beyond those outlined in this Master Plan. This Master Plan does howev- er, provided VVMC with options for how future unforeseen needs could be provided for on campus. August, 2014 1231 VVMC Facilities Master Plan f__ -- TumKey (0J1 `1,_ � co g, LLC MEMORANDUM 2533 West Pinyon Ave Grand Junction, CO 81505 970-985-4001 TO: Dan Feeney, PE, Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) FROM: Skip Hudson, PE DATE: September 30, 2014 RE: Delivery and Service Vehicles on West Meadow Drive This memo was originally submitted to the Town of Vail (TOV) on September 16. This version of the memo has been revised to reflect all comments (except one) from the TOV Community Development Department dated September 22. The fourth comment about using actual traffic counts instead of ITE trip generation was not updated in this memo. This memo addresses the delivery and service vehicle traffic on West Meadow Drive. The information in the Table 1 is based on the current delivery vehicle information provided by the VVMC Facilities group, and your email regarding the VVMC service vehicles. Table 1 shows the existing VVMC traffic volumes on West Meadow Drive. It is anticipated that these numbers will not change significantly after the Master Plan construction is completed. Even though the VVMC will be larger in size, employee more people, and serve more patrons and guests, it is anticipated that the same number of delivery trucks will visit VVMC — they will just deliver or pick-up more stuff each trip. Table 1 — VVMC Delivery and Service Trips on West Meadow Drive Vehicle Type Peak Hour Traffic Volume 1,2 (vehicles per hour) Daily Traffic Volume (vehicles per day) (Based on Monday, which has the highest number of Daily Deliveries] AM Peak Hour (7:30 am - 8:30 am) VVMC Peak Hour (10:00 am - 11:00 am) PM Peak Hour (4:00 pm - 5:00 pm) Delivery 6 10 8 503 Service 4 2 2 2 8 Total 8 12 10 58 Notes: 1. The Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes represent the total number of trips IN and trips OUT; for example, the Total Daily Traffic Volume of 58 for Delivery and Service Vehicles represents 29 vehicles that make 29 trips IN plus 29 trips OUT for a total of 58 daily trips. 2. The AM and PM peak hours are based on the peak hours at the Vail Road and West Meadow Drive intersection; the highest hour for delivery and service vehicles to/from the VVMC ("VVMC Peak Hour") occurs from 10 am to 11 am. 3. 6 of the 50 trips are made by semi -trucks with trailers [one WB -50 and two WB -40s]; the rest of the trips are made by single -unit trucks [SU -30 or smaller]. 4. The service vehicles are pick-up trucks or large vans [SU -30 or smaller]. Page 1 of 2 Table 2 compares the background (non-VVMC) traffic on West Meadow Drive to the VVMC delivery and service vehicles that will be on West Meadow Drive after the VVMC Master Plan construction is completed. The VVMC main entrance will be relocated to the 170 South Frontage Road so the only VVMC traffic on West Meadow Drive will be delivery and service vehicles. Table 2 — Compare VVMC Traffic Volumes on West Meadow Drive Traffic Volume Source Peak Hour Traffic Volume (vehicles per hour) Daily Traffic Volume (vehicles per day) AM Peak HourPM (7:30 am — 8:30 am) Peak Hour (4:00 pm — 5:00 pm) Passenger Vehicles 33 81 294' Background Traffic Buses 142 202 2402 Total 47 101 536 VVMC Traffic (Delivery and Service Vehicles only) g -F 10 58 3 Total (Background + VVMC) 55 111 594 VVMC as % of Total 15% 9% 10% Notes: 1. The daily traffic volume on West Meadow Drive is not known; the 294 vehicles per day was estimated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual (ITE Land Use 260 Recreational Homes; there are 93 residential units that access West Meadow Drive). 2. Bus numbers estimated based on frequency/headway information provided by Vail Transit. 3. Based on Monday, which has the highest number of Daily Deliveries Page 2 of 2 VVMC Delivery Vehicles - DAILY Notes: 1. Delivery vehicles are SU -30 (or smaller), unless otherwise noted after the name of the delivery company Regular Deliveries' Non -Regular Deliveries' These deliveries occur on specific dates as listed below These deliveries only occur "as needed" 0 U Day N c E7 2 W 0 Y N C F LO C N >_ O N 01 mmW C m CO >m > L71 i 07 3 > > y o p a _o m 2 o Daily N rn N— N Daily Number of DAILY m o _ o T c ij U ° o N Q 3 c 0 C N > C u v Vehicle m C .9 a Vehicle Dail Totals Y Delivery Vehicle Trips on m L = Y o m w :N @ °o c E m m .Q Totals F m .Q v Totals (Regular plus West Meadow Drive 2 Q >, w m 'm y U) d m o- a@i p a a� i'p o (Regular o W (Non -Regular No (One Delivery Vehicle = 2 Trips) a- U) U) O LL (7 > U) Q 2 ami LL 2 a- a"i 01 Q � Q � 2 Deliveries U) 2 2 0 U) 2 Deliveries Deliveries) (1 Trip IN, 1 Trip OUT] Monda 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 5 22 These 6 deliveries only occur "as needed'; it was assumed that no more than 3 of these would occur on any given day Assume that no more than 3 will occur on any given day 25 50 Tuesda 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 5 17 20 40 Wednesda 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 5 17 20 40 Thursda 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 5 20 23 46 Friday1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 5 20 23 46 Total 96 6 102 204 Average 19.2 1.2 20 40 Highest Day (Monday)l 22 3 25 50 Notes: 1. Delivery vehicles are SU -30 (or smaller), unless otherwise noted after the name of the delivery company O � Vendor Deliveries (Information Provided by VVMC Facilities Group): Monday: PHS - Panel Van - 2 a.m. Stericycle - Panel Van - 5 a.m. Freshpoint - Panel Van - between 4am — 7am G&K - Panel Van - 6 a.m. Vail Honey Wagon - Garbage Truck - 7 a.m. Alsco -Panel Van - between Sam — 11 am Stryker - Panel Van - between 7am — 9am USPS - Postal Van - 9 a.m. FedEx - Panel Van - 10am and 4pm UPS - Panel Van - 10am and 4pm Meadow Gold Bakery - Panel Van - between 10am — 2pm Robinson Dairy - Panel Van - between 10am — 2pm Alpine Vending - Panel Van - between 10am — 1 pm Western Slope Water -Panel Van - between 9am — 12pm Materials Management - Panel Van - 1 P.M. Hospital Couriers - Passenger Van - 8:20am, 10:20am, 12:20pm, 2:20pm, 4:20pm Hospital Shuttles - Passenger Van - 7:00 AM, 8:00 AM, 9:00 AM, 10:00 AM, 11:30 AM, 12:30 PM, 1:35 PM, 2:35 PM, 3:35 PM, 4:35 PM, 5:35 PM, 7:30 PM, 8:30 PM (approximates per schedule) Tuesday: PHS - Panel Van - 2 a.m. Sysco - Panel Van - between 4am — 9am G&K - Panel Van - 6 a.m. Stryker - Panel Van - between 7am — 9am USPS - Postal Van - 9 a.m. FedEx - Panel Van - 10am and 4pm UPS - Panel Van - 10am and 4pm Alpine Aire - Panel Van - No set time Materials Management - Panel Van - -i p.m. �1� Hospital Couriers - Passenger Van - 8:20am, 10:20am, 12:20pm, 2:20pm, 4:20pm Hospital Shuttles - Passenger Van - 7:00 AM, 8:00 AM, 9:00 AM, 10:00 AM, 11:30 AM, 12:30 PM, 1:35 PM, 2:35 PM, 3:35 PM, 4:35 PM, 5:35 PM, 7:30 PM, 8:30 PM (approximates per schedule) Wednesda PHS - Panel Van - 2 a.m. Freshpoint - Panel Van - between 4am — 7am G&K - Panel Van - 6 a.m. Vail Honey Wagon - Garbage Truck - 7 a.m. Stryker - Panel Van - between 7am — 9am USPS - Postal Van - 9 a.m. FedEx - Panel Van - 10am and 4pm UPS - Panel Van - 10am and 4pm Pepsi - Semi Trailer - between 10am — 12pm Materials Management - Panel Van - 1 P.M. Hospital Couriers - Passenger Van - 8:20am, 10:20am, 12:20pm, 2:20pm, 4:20pm Hospital Shuttles - Passenger Van - 7:00 AM, 8:00 AM, 9:00 AM, 10:00 AM, 11:30 AM, 12:30 PM, 1:35 PM, 2:35 PM, 3:35 PM, 4:35 PM, 5:35 PM, 7:30 PM, 8:30 PM (approximates per schedule) Thursday: PHS - Panel Van - 2 a.m. Sysco - Panel Van - between 4am — 9am Stericycle — Panel Van - 5 a.m. Dietary Towel Delivery - Panel Van - 6am G&K - Panel Van - 6 a.m. Vail Honey Wagon - Garbage Truck - 7 a.m. Stryker - Panel Van - between 7am — 9am Alsco -Panel Van - between 8am — 11 am Western Slope Water -Panel Van - between 9am — 12pm USPS -Postal Van - 9 a.m. FedEx - Panel Van - 10am and 4pm �2� UPS - Panel Van - 10am and 4pm Materials Management - Panel Van - 1 P.M. Hospital Couriers - Passenger Van - 8:20am, 10:20am, 12:20pm, 2:20pm, 4:20pm Hospital Shuttles - Passenger Van - 7:00 AM, 8:00 AM, 9:00 AM, 10:00 AM, 11:30 AM, 12:30 PM, 1:35 PM, 2:35 PM, 3:35 PM, 4:35 PM, 5:35 PM, 7:30 PM, 8:30 PM (approximates per schedule) Friday: PHS - Panel Van - 2 a.m. Freshpoint - Panel Van - between 4am — 7am G&K — Panel Van - 6 a.m. Vail Honey Wagon — Garbage Truck - 7 a.m. Stryker - Panel Van - between 7am — 9am Coke - Semi Trailer - between 8a -10a Recall Document Destruction - Panel Van - between 8am-12pm USPS — Postal Van - 9 a.m. FedEx — Panel Van - 10am and 4pm UPS — Panel Van - 10am and 4pm Meadow Gold Bakery - Panel Van - between 10am — 2pm Robinson Dairy - Panel Van - between 10am — 2pm Materials Management - Panel Van - 1 P.M. Hospital Couriers - Passenger Van - 8:20am, 10:20am, 12:20pm, 2:20pm, 4:20pm Hospital Shuttles - Passenger Van - 7:00 AM, 8:00 AM, 9:00 AM, 10:00 AM, 11:30 AM, 12:30 PM, 1:35 PM, 2:35 PM, 3:35 PM, 4:35 PM, 5:35 PM, 7:30 PM, 8:30 PM (approximates per schedule) No Set Schedule (as needed): Steam Master - Panel Van - After 6pm US Welding - Semi Trailer - before 6am, day of the week varies and depends on needs Hospira - Panel Van - before 6am, day of the week varies and depends on needs GE Medical - Panel Van - here at least once a week and between 8am — 2pm Steris - Panel Van - here at least once a week and between 8am — 2pm HSS (Sterilizer Division) - passenger cars - here one day a week, and between hours of 8am — 2pm �3� J ;E F-! Y SOIL - LINEN - SERVICE OILLINEN- SERVICE ENCLOSURE 10.3.2014 1/8 If= 1 1.011 PEDESTRIANS, DEFINE SPACES mm im ]/EXISTINGAMBUIIICE MCP^-PyINGf81 GARAGE T08 I'HrD E EN LANDSCAPE PLAN 10.3.2014 1/8 )) = 1 1. 0)3 SURE LANDSCAPE AREAS TO BUFFER PEDESTRIANS, DEFINE SPACES --=r s, 06 wafft TOWN OF VAIL STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN ADDENDUM • Nest Meadow Drive • East Meadow Drive Vail Road to Willow Bridge Road • East Meadow Drive Willow 'Bridge Rd. to Vail Valley Dr. • Village Core November 4, 2003 Preparrd by: Town of Vail, Qtak Inc., Wenk Associates WEST MEADOW DRIVE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT Completed Components Improvements Plan View The Streetscape Master Plan describes West Meadow Drive as an opportunity for transforming asphalt street character into a safe "pedestrian street" that embodies an "exciting pedestrian experience" and encourages pedestrian traffic between Vail Village and Lionshead. This addendum proposes achieving the desired effect through integration of public art into the streetscape as an "artwalk" experience. It recommends a primary pedestrian walkway 15 to 20 feet wide on the north side of the street, and a secondary six foot walkway on the other. Pedestrian needs have been given strong emphasis in the design. Artists were selected by AIPP to work as part of the design team. The design team identified opportunities for public artwork which are integrated into the overall streetscape design concept. • Pavement features • Seating • Transit stops • Walls • Sculptural elements Additional art opportunities should be identified and implemented with ficial design development of public and private projects. Mayor's Park, a component of this sub -area, was constructed as a public pocket park on the old Ski Museum site at the intersection of West Meadow Drive and Vail Road. The drawings on the following pages provide a plan view of the West Meadow Drive design development. TOWN OF VAIL STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN ADDENDUM West Meadow Drive, East Meadow Drive, & Village Core Page 15 II II I I VAIL VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER F ra w 1 r.,e,rAG.m Di -$I h�CJ ,44.4,xv laf it la,y. Wady CamtA.I.0 w in m a ago 4Pru ro me HOWIml. the 12' pat>"do, r OLW,@ Iro ours+ side Of -,W MeodPv D,*_ a IV fmilly Owen NC. 'r—uftl $dpenlata rarkryrq a+rR}d,a5ein �eWdca ria 7w,rro 9lemere. ` �enr�9s .14 P vrettpone,rl Irare7t 5leel�n as title aaAM,nd as apps"uniliei. VAIL VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER JI I;ti+ Iff F Y.. t 1:J n7iil (. f dr ART ELEMEI NI h rlow.,a- 1 x $Meericape Jr, shn0le thepnm y mt e—, eww sane -W, ," pow, Intsl wpaPre �1 • >E saw ~. WEST MEADOW DRIVE TURN -AROUND _ .IoW P a ln_occeSa011y IP Dabsan Ale -i, Vol Wary and ahs larnuad fPath wHh a I2 -M wide pe le}Ilanadewck w9ti Ixyier} Fps lwe, 5earn4. Gn6 �'M1+�FI. µ t:a Cram M1d Mi as orle ery PI IS,e "Iloafne" pk+!u arlcmtepo. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES n,x!W caner:"' VAI imp+ave peamhpn access ru t�uuIl s116. 0' W.,I rl anywkn,iy oen.dar,r;s rors un liu so..ln :tae of well ueaaarC Ivo. sneergms a,e wxea lamer open ra+naVnVie IDhr Pal�ipan ra+efilbnit. il,e sree, v,. hove re}. arainppe to em*oe aayl aowm,s Figure 2: West Meadow Drive Plan View - West Section TOWN OF VAIL STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN ADDENDUM West Meadow Drive, East Meadow Drive, & Village Core Page 16 f RT ELEMENTS a Irsey wW sr o,Vh W me Wen meadpw pr we �.e71:Ppeam srmpkr axn.+sp. wo—Erin 1.'w wlkk*, pfs y an eNnleah doN Wasp Meadow 01 lck— s¢rperuxie "11P.rine" Paves d IM sdeY Y.nde sic" ro..s tna+ repva•e pe-%4kion N-, a + n� � w SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES h sa-I�al cwrG W .g 1hci rtil4nxuo.s: Pnd.eGeu accCSf a rreralr ray.ce WOO Ilse arrpr DN", v re elig is we Pn .ne W41e yW a: Wast dteadow plre. ikeetrgng we spaced 1Pr apart 1. -6— 6g.pDLfi- wrd kMnK.. I" 1n wu wove new &0VQQ+D0*kmi ame r.wr prasoiesns. Ce FOUR SEASONS REDEVELOPMENT e �s 4b AIL FIRE STATION 'i 1 VAIL ROAD INTERSECTION irwr ienecawl d Wart M-0Dr wslreeticnpe rade V. Rwtl"—I--- irwoen4 sa dnlld 4 me pedeie an e>gryiriC * 01 M1MP/01'1 pork wrae W0.,j'.q the 7¢c¢'i' Y err-ge-y -Hhl .cedar. W mere sr sio,. A wk* po— aenw& Woww wwp ,j frCC4TS 19 em, Meaaa. Dfi- Figure 3: West Meadow Drive Plan View - .East Section TOWN OF VAIL STREEi'SCAPE MASTER PLAN ADDENDUM West Meadow Drive, East Meadow Drive, & Village Cote Page 17 I I Master Plan Design Changes Taab1c 4: West Meadow Drive Master Plan While the objectives of the Master Plan have been sustained in Design, the manner in which they are achieved has changed. The areas that deviate from the Master Plan's directives are as follows: 'T. Provide a primary 10-12 foot walkway on the north side of the street with a priority raised cross -walk near the Holiday Inn (currently Chateau Vail), routing pedestrians to the south side of the street. The primary pedestrian walkway returns to the north side near the Vail Valley Medical Center. The primary purpose is to route pedestrians away from the head -in parking located at the L Alphorn and Skaal Haus. street oruy. increase the overan piarrorm rrom l,c reet to 20 feet, divided among landscape, pedestrian movement areas, seating points and art opportunities. Vary the space dedicated to these functions depending on the interface with various land uses along the street. Install a safety "rumble strip" between the dedicated pedestrian area and head -in parking in front of Alphorn and Skaal Haus to draw pedestrians away from the back end of parked vehicles. This provides a "safe zone" and better sight distance for drivers backing out. (Figure 4) Parking Skaal Haws Rumble Strip Walkway a!phorn Figure 4: West Meadow Drive, Rumble Strip at Alphorn and Skaal Haus parking TOWN of VAIL STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN ADDENDUM West Meadow Drive, East Meadow Drive, & Village Core Page 18 2. Provide a five foot walkway on the opposite side of the street. 3. Maintain a street width of 26 feet curb to curb. Provide a six foot walkway in accordance with the Town standards. To provide more pedestrian and landscape area, design a street width of 24 feet, curb to curb. (Figure 5) 4. Provide a "neighborhood entry" feature in the form of a small landscape median immediately west of the Fire Station Figure 5: West Meadow Drive, Cross section This element was studied at the proposed location and a location east of the Fire Station. Both locations conflicted with turning movements associated with the Fire Station and intersection. This element has been excluded form the Master Plan at this time. TOWN OF VAIL STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN ADDENDUM gr West Meadow Drive, East Meadow Drive, & Village Core Page 19 5. Develop a pocket park with public restrooms on the northwest corner of West Meadow Drive and Vail Road (the location formerly occupied by the Ski Museum). 6. The pedestrian walkway reverts to a shared use platform, allowing vehicles and transit service from the west end of the hospital to the library and Dobson Arena. Mayor's Park did not incorporate public restrooms. There is insufficient space to incorporate a public restroom as a feature of West Meadow Drive. Additional locations for public restrooms are discussed in the "Guidelines" section of this document. The separated pedestrian walkway continues past the hospital, beyond the point where the transit service gate crosses Meadow Drive to the south, and connects to the Gore Valley Trail. The Gore Valley Trail is rerouted to connect to the sidewalk rather than directly to the street. The trail that runs south from the Evergreen Hotel is rerouted by the Dobson Arena across to the east side of Middle Creek where it intersects with the Meadow Drive pedestrian walkway. From this point west, the pedestrian walkway becomes shared use with the transit service to the library. (Figure 6) Figure 6: West Meadow Drive, Library Area TOWN OF VAIL STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN ADDENDUM West Meadow Drive, East Meadow Drive, & Village Core Transit Separaletl Vail Valley Medical Page 20 I I Additions to the Streetscage Master Plan Vail Valley Medical Center New opportunities for pedestrian and other streetscape character enhancements were discovered during the design dialogue process. The Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) was in the process of acquiring "Town approval for facility expansion when the Meadow Drive public process began. VVMC management and consultants participated in the streetscape design dialogue and subsequent public meetings. VVMC was supportive of the concepts developed and agreed to allow the pedestrian space along the north side of the street to encroach in a seamless manner onto their south frontage property. This provides an opportunity for a pedestrian pause space along West Meadow Drive, accentuating the pedestrian experience. It also provides an opportunity for integrating public art in the form of benches, paving accents, transit stop, and a wall mural, as illustrated in the plan view in Figure 7 below. TOWN OF VAIL. STR.EE i'SCAPE MASTER PLAN ADDENDUM West Meadow Drive, East Meadow Drive, & Village Core VAIL VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER 1�a�rr • U�t�e- �- �� j.0W Figure 7: West Meadow Drive, Vail Valley Medical Center Page 21 II II I! M f�if.aa Pf Pt, PrrfnrnT.r Mw4L iww 3 — li+f PP fPa rN 14 H. a Figure 8: West Meadow Drive - Vail Valley Medical Center - Mural Wall and Planter Bench The area between Dobson Arena and Vail Valley Medical Center, where Middle Creek flows toward Core Creek is stream corridor dedicated to and owned by the Town of Vail. The parking lot that serves both Vail Valley Medical and the Town is located on the East side of Middle Creek. At present, this area serves as a connecting point to Lionshead, the Library, Gore Valley Trail and north past Dobson Arena. However, it is not clearly marked. Preliminary plans for the Medical Center and Evergreen Lodge expansions suggest removing existing parking and eliminating vehicular access from Meadow Drive. These plans provide a great opportunity to transition the west end of the artwalk from an urban street experience into an open park setting. The Library, Dobson Arena, and VVMC can be unified by the common open space created by the removal of the parking area. To enhance the park -like setting, stream access should be provided, along with natural form gardens, seating areas, and environmental interpretation/ education opportunities. TOWN OF VAiL STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAT'+! ADDENDUM West Meadow Drive, East Meadow Drive, & Village Core Page 22 The pedestrian path bordering the west bank of Middle Creek is rerouted to the east bank as a part of the recent Dobson Arena improvements. In final design, this path intersects with the Meadow Drive walkway and extends across Meadow Drive through the open space to the south, where it intersects with the Gore Valley Trail. The route is emphasized as the preferred pedestrian connection to Lionshead.. Appropriate signing would inform and efficiently direct pedestrians to various destinations. Elements of this design include: • Relocating the walk bridge further up the creek to open up more park area, • Re-routing the path from the relocated bridge further to the east, toward the southwest entrance to the VVMC, • Establishing a new trail/road intersection at or near the VVMC entrance, and • Creating an open area park setting and public gathering area at the west terminus of the Meadow Drive artwalk. TOWN OF VAIL STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN ADDENDUM West Meadow Drive, East Meadow drive, & ViHage Core Mage 23 VVMC Master Plan Parking Analysis October 9, 2014 Purpose of Analysis The purpose of this analysis is to address five parking -related elements of the VVMC Master Plan: 1. Calculate parking requirements for the VVMC based on different parking formulas. 2. Inventory VVMC's existing parking resources (both on-site parking spaces and parking management programs) and based on this and the two parking requirement formulas determine the existing parking deficit. 3. Determine the appropriate formula to use for calculating VVMC's parking requirement. 4. Estimate the approximate parking demand that will result from future expansion plans. 5. Define generally how VVMC can address future parking requirements from Master Plan expansions. Existing Parking Requirements Zoning codes utilize a wide variety of methodologies for determining parking requirements. Most of these involve consideration of square footage, number of patient beds, number of exam rooms, number of employees or some combination thereof. The Town of Vail Zoning Code utilizes patient beds and square footage ratios to determine parking for "hospitals". Square footage calculations are used to determine parking requirements for "medical offices". VVMC believes that these formulas are outdated and not the most accurate indicator of future parking needs. Existing improvements at the VVMC were evaluated relative to two different formulas — Method 1 uses the standards outlined in the Town of Vail zoning code and Method 2 is an "employee based" formula. Method 2 is suggested by the VVMC as a more accurate and appropriate formula for determining parking requirements than a square footage based method. Method 2 has been used in the past by VVMC and has been acknowledged by the Town in previous review processes. The merits of Method 2 and the short -comings of the formula prescribed by the Town code are discussed in greater detail below. VVMC Parking Analysis Page 1 Calculations provided below include the main hospital, all lessees within the hospital (i.e. Colorado Mountain Medical, the Steadman Clinic) and all uses within the US Bank Building (with the exception of the US Bank). Method 1— TOV Formula: Hospital - 1 space per patient bed plus 1 space/150 sf net floor area Medical offices - 1 space per 200 sf net floor area Professional offices — 1 space per 250 sf net floor area Professional or Medical offices in US Bank Building — 1 space per 370 sf net floor area Square footages of all applicable uses within the main hospital building the US Bank Building were calculated. Within the main hospital building the 1/150sf ratio was used for all hospital functions (ED, operating rooms, OBGYN, imaging, administration, etc.), the 1/200sf ratio was used for medical offices that operate independent of the hospital (such as the Steadman Clinic and Colorado Mountain Medical), and the ratio of 1/250sf was used for professional offices (defined as office uses that do not directly serve patients). The same approach was taken with the US Bank Building, however this lot is located within the Town's Commercial Core Parking Area and as such a ratio of 1/370sf was used for medical and professional offices. Parking requirements for both buildings were then added together and a multi -use credit (20%) was applied. This approach indicates a total parking requirement of 697 parking spaces. A table summarizing this analysis is found on the next page. Floor plan diagrams defining the square footage of specific uses are found at the end of this report. VVMC Parking Analysis Page 2 VVMC Parking Calculations - Existing Condition 4/17/2014, updated 5/6/14, 5/14/14 Method 1 -Town of Vail Code 1 space per patient bed plus 1 space/150 sf net floor area - hospital 1 space per 200 sf net floor area - medical offices 1 space per 250 sf net floor area - professional offices 2.7/1000SF, or 1 space per 3705F for medical and professional offices in US Bank Building - lot is within Comm Core area Patient Beds Dining Admin SPRI Conference/other Level 1 Pharmacy/Gift Shop Carido/Imagi ng/Sterile/Pharm Lmergency Roam/Imaging/OC Imaging Co Mtn Medical Howard Head Steadman Research Patient Care Admin ICU Lab/Staff/Anes Mtn Surgical Steadman Clinic Level 3 Surgical Suite and Surgery Center Steadman Clinic Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Sub -Total Multi Use Credit Total Parking Requirement 58 1 1 581 I Patient Beds 3,513 1/150 23.4 591 1/150 3.9 7,033 1/250 28,1 1,876 1/150 12.5 139,476 1/370 870.2 1,440 1/150 9.6 10,955 1/150 73.0 12,189 1/150 81.3 710 1/150 4.7 4,216 1/200 21.1 5,136 1/200 25.7 5,474 1/250 21.9 36.7 11,580 1/150 77.2 13,750 1/150 91.7 2,998 1/150 20.0 2,144 1/150 14.3 3,923 1/150 26.2 1,792 1/200 9.0 2,208 1/200 11.0 9,853 1 1/1501 65.7 12,556 1/1501 83.7 6,511 1/2001 32.6 3,822 variesl 10.3 6,587 varies 36.7 8,619 varies 28.7 1448 1/370 3.9 139,476 1/370 870.2 20.00 174.0 696.2 Steadman Clinic HH Sports Medicine sub -total Level 2 Avanti Cardio Vacant Conference HR into Technology sub -total Level 3 Vail Summit VVMC Multi -Spec Steadman office VVMC Dev Office Vacant Steadman Admin sub -total 0 1 0.0 1448 1/370 3.9 2374 1/370 6.4 10.3 1832 1/370 5.0 1012 1/150 6.7 403 1/150 2.7 1054 1/150 7.0 2286 1/1501 15.2 36.7 1795 1/370 2695 1/370 724 1/370 949 1/150 422 1/150 2034 1/370 * =The US Bank Building will be remodeled in the near future. Parking numbers will be re -calculated when final plans are available. 7.31 28.71 VVMC Parking Analysis Page 3 Method 2 — Employee Based Formula: 1 space per patient bed 1 space per exam room 1 space per day shift employee The VVMC has 58 licensed patient beds and 155 exam rooms. An exam room includes any room, station, or other location where a patient is seen by a health care provider. For example, in addition to a traditional exam room, a station for physical therapy is also considered an exam room. An employee census for all VVMC departments and for lessees (such as Colorado Mountain Medical, the Steadman Clinic, etc.) was completed this past winter to determine the typical number of day -shift employees. The parking demands for each of the three considerations were totaled and a multi -use credit (17.5%) was applied. This approach indicates a total parking requirement of 645 spaces. The table summarizing this approach follows and the floor plan diagrams defining patient beds and exam rooms are found at the end of this report. VVMC Parking Analysis Page 4 VVMC Parking Analysis Page 5 VVMC Parking Calculations - Existing Conditions 8-May-14 Method 2 - "Employee-based formula" Formula 1 space per patient bed 1 space per patient exam room 1 space per M-F day-shift employees Existing Parking Requirement Units Spaces Patient Beds 58 58 Patient Exam Rooms 155 155 Employees Dietary 15 15 VMMC 371 371 VV EM Phy 3 3 Rad 1 1 MSA 4 4 Apollo 10 10 CMM 17 17 Steadman Clinic 98 98 VSO 10 10 SPRI 35 35 Ambulance 3 3 Pediatric 2 2 Employee total 569 Sub-total 782 Multi-Use Credit 17.5% reduction 137 Total Required Parking I 645 VVMC Parking Analysis Page 6 Parking Resources and Existing Parking Deficit An inventory of all VVMC existing parking resources was completed. This inventory includes all on-site parking spaces, employees served by parking management programs and off-site parking spaces utilized by hospital staff. On-site Parking The VVMC has a total of 407 parking spaces. These spaces are located on the main west lot, the east parking structure, and at the US Bank Building. A diagram depicting these spaces is found on the following page. Currently the west lot parking is used primarily by guests and patients while the east structure is used by employees. Both employees and patients utilize parking at the US Bank Building. ECO Bus Passes The VVMC has on average over the past few years purchased 60 ECO bus passes for use by employees. Shuttles AO%kt The VVMC operates employee shuttles and based on survey information gathered this past winter on average they were used by 32 employees per week. It is assumed that this usage is consistent throughout the winter. Off -Site Parking The VVMC (and lessees) this past winter purchased 140 parking passes for the Lionshead Parking Structure and an additional 30 spaces Solaris. VVMC's total parking resources include: 407 surface and structured spaces at VVMC and USB Building 32 shuttles 60 bus passes 140 LH Structure parking passes 30 Solaris Parking passes 669 tota I VVMC Parking Analysis Page 7 VVMC Parking Analysis Page 8 Q w = Q U7v ZM CD LLI w LLI 0 LO M Lu M - �� BOO ZW z0 U)iw w Hw 0Z UQ QZ w~ pH UH QW QZ crw UZ J0 Dz Q cU) ofW 0U) f LL LU LL, H W co `-' U) =1 U) p W 2r LU U) ,mow �� �.'` =1 U) (9 YLLJV XW XV 1 - V3� QU) Z`�Z <Z (jJ1 [YL'w m� ma_ me ` ¢d w< Q¢ (n U)U) U)M ma. d cn NC%j _ �r m I �- N CD CJ ©H YF !�z az W W W r U Co �W ;'L �a LLI co C O O ~ CD c > Lu Q VVMC Parking Analysis Page 9 Evaluation of existing parking resources would indicate the current parking need at VVMC to be 669 spaces. The 407 on-site spaces address a significant portion of this need and the 92 employees who utilize shuttles and bus passes essentially equate to 92 parking spaces (these types of programs are permissible in accordance with section 12-10-20 of the Town Code). The 170 off-site spaces do not conform to the standards for off-site parking and have not been reviewed or approved by the town. As such it could be concluded that the current parking deficit is 170 spaces. In apply this same approach to the parking requirement based on the two formulas outlined above, the parking deficit would be 198 spaces for Method 1— the Town of Vail Code and 146 spaces for Method 2 — the employee based approach. It is noteworthy that existing conditions parking and the two parking formulas all result in relatively similar numbers. Suggested Parking Formula for use at VVMC — Method 2 Method 2, the employee -based formula is recommended as the most accurate indicator of parking demand at VVMC. This formula is based on one parking space for each employee during a typical day -shift period, one parking space per patient bed and one parking space per exam room. The formula is effective because it directly targets each of the main users of VVMC — employees who work at the Center and patients who are either staying at the hospital or visiting the Center. The Town's square footage based formula applies a very high ratio of parking (1 space /150 SF for all hospital square footage) when compared to many other zoning codes. In addition, the code requirement as written unnecessarily "over -assesses" parking requirements for specific uses at the hospital. For example: • The Town code requires 1 space per 150SF for the hospital cafeteria. The overwhelming majority of cafeteria patrons are employees and patient visitors, users that are already accounted for by parking requirements imposed on other hospital uses. The parking requirement for the cafeteria is 23 parking spaces. The typical number of cafeteria employees is 15, a difference of 8 spaces more than necessary to "park" this use. While not a large number of spaces, the disparity becomes much greater with the Master Plan expansion. • The definition of "net floor area" only excludes common areas (lobbies, hallways, restrooms) that are common to the entire building. This means roughly 7,700SF of such spaces within Howard Head, the Surgery Center, the Steadman Clinic and other uses cannot be excluded from parking calculations. This nuance of the parking code VVMC Parking Analysis Page 10 unnecessarily adds approximately 40 spaces to the existing parking requirement. This disparity will become much more significant with the Master Plan expansion. • Currently the largest single generator of parking at the VVMC is Patient Care and Intensive Care, the areas of the hospital that includes most patient beds. The code requires one parking space for each bed (44 spaces) and an additional 106 parking space for the 15,894SF of space, a total of 160 spaces. The employee -based formula would require one space for each bed (44 parking spaces) and one space per typical day -shift employees (38 spaces) for a total of 82 spaces. This difference of 78 spaces is significant. • The town code applies a requirement of one space for every 150SF for the gift shop and pharmacy, or 10 spaces. The vast majority of patrons to these uses are patients and guest to the hospital and clinics, users that are accounted for in other parking calculations. The employee -based formula would require 5 spaces, or one for each day - shift employee. The discrepancy described above will be exacerbated with build -out of the Master Plan. This is because one of the main features of the master plan is the "de -compression" of spaces for many of the key uses throughout the hospital. In essence, de -compression is the expansion of spaces or uses to improve patient services and hospital operations while not significantly increasing capacity or intensity of the use. The considerations outlined above demonstrate the flaws of the Town's square footage based parking formula. When applying the employee -based formula to the existing Center, the required parking is very close to the actual parking conditions. This would suggest that the employee -based formula to be a very good indicator of required parking. It is for these reasons that the employee -based formula is recommended for VVMC. Parking Requirements of Master Plan Expansions Estimating the parking requirement for expansions contemplated by the Master Plan have been done using Method 2, the employee -based approach. It should be noted that this estimate is based on "master plan" level information, i.e. conceptual plans for VVMC. Expansion plans will be refined in the future and as such the parking estimate should be considered conceptual in nature. That said, the numbers below are considered a good estimate of future parking need. The two changes that will increase parking demand after completion of the master plan expansion will be from an increase of exam rooms from 155 to 197 and an increase of 49 employees. VVMC Parking Analysis Page 11 The parking demands for each of the three considerations were totaled and a multi -use credit (20%) was applied. This approach indicates a total parking requirement of 699 spaces. The table summarizing this approach is below. VVMC Parking Calculations - MP Buildout 10 -May -14 Method 2 - "Employee -based formula" Formula - 1 space per patient bed_ 1 space per patient exam room 1 space per M -F day -shift employees i Estimated Parkinp, Requirement Patient Beds Units 58 Spaces 58 Patient Exam Rooms 197 197 Employees as of May 2014 Employees Dietary 15 1s VMMC 1 371 371 VV EM Phy 3 3 Rad 1 1 MSA 4 4 Apollo 10 10 CMM 17 17 Steadman Clinic 98 98 VSO 10 10 5PRI 35 35 Ambulance 3 3 Pediatric 2 2 Estimate of new employees after MP buildout Employee total -- - 491 618j 49 618.0 873.0 Sub -total Multi -Use Credit 20% reduction 174.6 Total Required Parking 698.4 VVMC Parking Analysis Page 12 Conceptual Plan for how VVMC can satisfy parking requirements The following provides a brief summary of how the Master Plan parking demand of 699 spaces can be met. On -Site Parkine Solution/Emolovee Based Formula (699 spaces +/-64 surface parking +/-100 employees who use buses passes and shuttle vans +/-213 new east parking structure +/-197 new west structure +/-70 US Bank Building +/-55 Combination of valet, compact spaces, management programs +/-699 VVMC Parking Analysis Page 13 1 75x!ecutive SummaryOnl The complete Traffic Impact Study is available upon request Prepared For: Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan I-70 South Frontage Road, Just west of the main Vail interchange Vail, Colorado September 30, 2014 2533 West Pinyon Ave TC1rnKe Grand Junction, CO 81505 970-985-4001 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS 1 Executive Summary 1.1 Introduction This report documents the traffic impact study (TIS) for the proposed Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan (Project) in the Town of Vail (TOV), Colorado. The VVMC is located on the south side of the 1-70 South Frontage Road (Frontage Road) about 750 feet west of the main Vail interchange. The VVMC also has access to West Meadow Drive. See Figure 1 for the Project Vicinity Map. All land use details listed in this TIS are based on the VVMC Master Plan effort, and will be updated as the Project concept is refined. Another key assumption is a future roundabout on the Frontage Road, which would provide optimal access to each of the three adjacent properties when this area builds out. The TOV has recently been working with adjacent property owners to evaluate alternative roundabout locations and to define the preferred location for this roundabout. This TIS assumed a roundabout configuration, but the roundabout solution is dependent upon the participation of all three property owners, and is based on the assumption that each of the properties will be redeveloped at the same time. Since the timing of these projects may not occur simultaneously, VVMC evaluated Frontage Road improvements that would be necessary if VVMC were to redevelop "First and Alone". The "First and Alone" evaluation was done to find a workable VVMC access solution that could occur within the existing right of way. The ultimate roundabout configuration would require additional highway right of way for implementation. In addition, CDOT understands that over -designed roundabouts can create operational issues, which is another reason that VVMC evaluated access options that do not include a roundabout. This TIS will be updated as necessary and resubmitted for the TOV Condition Use Permit (CUP) and Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) access permit processes. 1.2 Study Area The Study Area includes the intersections listed below, which are shown in Figure 1. Figure 2 shows the lane geometry and traffic control. Intarcarfinnc #1 Frontage Road and Evergreen Access (South Leg) (Proposed intersection west of VVMC Access — assumed to be a roundabout) #2 Frontage Road and VVMC Access (South Leg) / TOV Access (North Leg) #3 Vail Road and Meadow Drive TurnKe Page 1 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS The Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection was added to the Study Area because the VVMC trips at this intersection will increase during the East End construction. The increase in VVMC trips at this intersection will occur because the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building will be accessed via West Meadow Drive instead of the Frontage Road. The south roundabout at the Main Vail Interchange was not included in the Study Area. The 2025 Vail Transportation Plan (Vail TMP) concluded that there is a limited amount of realistic capacity improvements that could be constructed at this interchange, and discussed other system -wide improvements that would help alleviate congestion at the Main Vail Interchange. 1.3 Traffic Analysis Periods and Years The traffic analysis was conducted for the periods and conditions listed below. The traffic volumes used in the analysis are based on traffic data from the peak summer and winter seasons. In addition, traffic volumes from the Vail TMP were used for the Frontage Road. Periods • Weekday AM Peak Hour • Weekday PM Peak Hour Conditions • Year 2015 — West End (During Construction) • Year 2016 — West End (Construction Completed) • Year 2017 — East End (During Construction) • Year 2018 — East End (Construction Completed) • Year 2035 — Build -out (20 -year horizon) Definitions: West End improvements include approximately 40,000 SF of medical space on and around the existing West Wing of the VVMC. East End improvements include approximately 25,000 SF of net new medical space and an expanded parking structure at the east end of the Campus. 1.4 Background Traffic Assumptions Related to Adjacent Development The future traffic volumes used in this study assume the following: • VVMC build out • Evergreen Site redevelopment, per previous traffic study for this site • No changes to the Town of Vail municipal site 1.5 Existing and Proposed Project Uses Table 1 shows the existing and proposed Project uses for each condition. Table 2 shows the number of employee and guest/patron parking spaces for each condition. TurnKe Page 2 consulting, i_ WMC Master Plan TIS Table 1- Existing and Proposed Project Uses Condition Year Gross Bldg Full-time Employees Patient Exam Rooms Condition Year Area SF FTE Beds # Parking Spaces Existing 2014 202,000 569 58 155 West End 2015 202,000 569 58 160 (During Const 9 107 116 245 46 West End 2016 242,000 590 58 190 Const Com leted 57 66 195 96 291 East End 2017 242,000 590 58 190 (During Const East End 2018 268,000 610 58 197 Const Completed) 245 46 291 254 153 Build -out Prior to 300,000 1 700 58 2601 2035 East End 2017 32' 153' 185' 02 Overall Increase 49% 23% 0% 68% (Existing to Build -out Notes: SF — square footage 1. The SF and exam rooms shown for the Build -out Condition are speculative in nature. Estimates are provided for long-range traffic planning purposes only Table 2 - Existing and Proposed Parking Spaces Note: the number of parking spaces were estimated based on schematic designs for the Master Plan effort; the final parking numbers are subject to change as more detailed design work is completed. # Parking Spaces Accessed via Total Condition Year West Meadow Drive Frontage Road # Parking Spaces Emp P / G Total I Emp P / G Total Emp P / G Total Existing 2014 9 107 116 245 46 291 254 153 407 West End 2015 9 57 66 195 96 291 204 153 357 (During Const West End 2016 9 107 116 245 46 291 254 153 407 Const Com leted East End 2017 32' 153' 185' 02 0 0 32 153 185 (During Const t End 2018 53 0 5 404 210 614 409 210 619 CoEa ted (nstBuild-out Prior to 53 0 5 435 260 695 440 260 700 2035 Overall Increase 73% 70% 72% (Existing to Build -out Notes: Emp — Employee, P / G — Patron / Guest 1. Includes 69 parking spaces (46 = P / G, 23 = Emp) at the US Bank Building that will be accessed from West Meadow Drive instead of the Frontage Road. 2. During the East End Construction, the VVMC will "replace" 245 parking spaces by leasing parking spaces at nearby parking structures, and/or increasing transit and shuttle use by employees. 3. These 5 parking spaces are for service vehicles CTurnKe Page 3 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS It Not To Scale Proposed Intersection #1 Existing I-70 South South [assumed VVMC Frontage Rd Roundabout roundabout] Access� at Main Vail (General location base1r ° [Int #2] on FHU study area)d Interchange Existing VVMC Main Access (to be relocated to Int #2) Evergreen Lodge .A VVMC 1-70 -- Vail Rd W Meadow Dr AM �. Vail Road and Meadow Dr Pint #31 Vail Valley Medical Center (WMC) Master Plan Vicinity Map Figure 1 TurnKe Page 4 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS 1 2 Not To Scale Exact location and �}+► geometry of the �s Proposed Intersection not know at this point; ~ yellow shape represents the area studied by FHU : TOV West Access Evergreen Main Vail Lodge TOV Main Interchange Access Access 2 1-70S Fro ntage Rd VVMC v 3 W4 fea = dow T � e E Meadow Drive F 3 Ped / Transit only Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan Figure Existing Lane Geometry and Traffic Control 2 �TurnPage 5 Consulti�nga,LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS 1.6 Summary of Traffic Analysis Results The following sections summarize the traffic analysis results at the three Study Area intersections. 1.6.1 Intersection #1 on Frontage Road - Assumed Roundabout The TOV has taken the lead on the preliminary design of the Proposed Roundabout on the Frontage Road. The participants in this process include all adjacent property owners because the roundabout would require additional right of way from these properties. VVMC, TOV, and the Evergreen Lodge have been meeting for a couple months to evaluate various roundabout location and configuration options. The TOV has retained Felsburg Holt and Ullevig (FHU) to provide technical support to the effort, and they produced a memorandum to the TOV on 8/1/14. The FHU memo summarized the results of the alternatives analysis for the roundabout, which was based on build out conditions of all three properties in the year 2035. The most recent team meeting was held on 8/5/14 where the participants agreed that the roundabout would be likely be located near the shared property line between the VVMC and Evergreen properties. FHU is currently looking at several different access configurations for the roundabout at this location. This VVMC TIS could not analyze the proposed roundabout because the preferred configuration is not known yet. Therefore, this TIS refers to and relies upon the FHU memo for the roundabout operational analysis in the build out condition. The FHU memo indicates that the proposed roundabout would operate at LOS B or better, even when using conservative background traffic and site trip generation estimates. It is anticipated that the preferred roundabout location and configuration will be identified sometime during the VVMC Master Plan approval process, so this TIS will be updated accordingly. VVMC has identified the Frontage Road improvements that would be necessary if VVMC were to redevelop "First and Alone". The "First and Alone" evaluation was done to find a workable VVMC access solution that could occur within the existing right of way. The ultimate roundabout configuration would require additional highway right of way for implementation. In addition, CDOT understands that over -designed roundabouts can create operational issues, which is another reason that VVMC evaluated the "First and Alone" access options that do not include a roundabout. The Proposed Roundabout on the Frontage Road was analyzed for the completion of of the VVMC Master Plan, which is anticipated to be year 2018. Table 3 shows the level of service (LOS), delay, and queuing results of the roundabout analysis based on the HCM 2010 Roundabout Methodology. TurnKe Page 6 J Consulting, LLc VVMC Master Plan TIS Table 3 — Int #1 - Assumed Roundabout Analysis Results [Year 2018] Roundabout AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS —Delay 95th % Queue Approach LOS — Delay (sec) (ft) (sec) (ft) West Leg A-5 20 A — 9 70 (Frontage Road Southbound East Leg A-6 50 A — 6 50 (Frontage Road and Right -Turn South Leg A-6 20 A — 9 20 (Evergreen Lodge Access 105 (VVMC Access, North Leg A-6 20 A — 6 20 TOV Service Access (Evergreen Lodge Overall Roundabout A-6 50 (max) A - 7 70 (max) all vehicles Table 3 shows that the Proposed Roundabout will operate at LOS A with minimal queuing in year 2018, the anticipated opening year of the WMC Master Plan. Refer to the FHU memo in the Appendix for the year 2035 Build -out analysis results. 1.6.2 VVMC Access I TOV Access on Frontage Road [Intersection #2] The year 2018 East End (Construction Completed) analysis showed that the existing roadway configuration at the VVMC Access will probably create grid -lock on the Frontage Road and Main Vail interchange. If the proposed roundabout is not constructed prior to year 2018, the "First and Alone" alternative should be constructed prior to (or coincide with) the completion of the VVMC Master Plan construction in year 2018. Table 4 shows that the "First and Alone" alternative will provide acceptable traffic operations at the VVMC Access and TOV Access thru the year 2035. In addition, an eastbound right -turn deceleration lane should be constructed at the VVMC Access on the Frontage Road. Table 4 - VVMC Access: "First and Alone" Alternative [Year 2035] VVMC Access is RIRO: TOV Access is % (Left -turn IN prohibited) �TurnPage 7 Consulti�nga,LLC AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Direction Movement LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS — Delay 95th % Queue sec ft sec ft Southbound Shared Left- C — 16 30 C — 19 50 TOV Access and Right -Turn Northbound Right -turn A-4 55 A — 10 105 (VVMC Access, Westbound (Evergreen Lodge U-turn A-5 95 B — 13 120 Access �TurnPage 7 Consulti�nga,LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS Table 5 shows that the RIRO configuration at the VVMC and TOV Accesses on the Frontage Road will operate at LOS A in the Year 2035 Build -out Condition. Table 5 — WMC/TOV Access on Frontage Road Analysis Results [Year 2035] VVMC and TO Accesses are RIRO (in coniunction with the Proaosed Roundabout) 1.6.3 Vail Road and Meadow Drive [Intersection #3] The existing main access to the VVMC is on West Meadow Drive. In order to get to the VVMC main access, drivers pass thru the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection, which is a small four-way stop intersection with a high number of pedestrians and local buses. The VVMC Master Plan proposes to relocate the main access to the Frontage Road, but the new main access on the Frontage Road will not be open until year 2018. In addition, when the East End is being constructed in year 2017, it will be necessary to access the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building via West Meadow Drive. This means that the VVMC traffic on West Meadow Drive will increase over the existing condition when the East End is under construction. The existing roadway configuration was analyzed for the year 2017 East End (During Construction) scenario. Table 6 shows what can be expected at the this intersection when the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building are access via West Meadow Drive during the construction of the East End parking structure. Table 6 — Vail Road and Meadow Drive Analysis Results [Year 2017] AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Direction Movement LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS — Delay 95th % Queue (ft) (sec) sec ft sec ft B — 10 95 West Meadow Drive Northbound Right -turn A — 3 45 A-8 95 Accessouthbound Northbound SVVMC Right -turn A-4 35 A-5 50 TOV Access Southbound A — 10 —7 115 1.6.3 Vail Road and Meadow Drive [Intersection #3] The existing main access to the VVMC is on West Meadow Drive. In order to get to the VVMC main access, drivers pass thru the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection, which is a small four-way stop intersection with a high number of pedestrians and local buses. The VVMC Master Plan proposes to relocate the main access to the Frontage Road, but the new main access on the Frontage Road will not be open until year 2018. In addition, when the East End is being constructed in year 2017, it will be necessary to access the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building via West Meadow Drive. This means that the VVMC traffic on West Meadow Drive will increase over the existing condition when the East End is under construction. The existing roadway configuration was analyzed for the year 2017 East End (During Construction) scenario. Table 6 shows what can be expected at the this intersection when the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building are access via West Meadow Drive during the construction of the East End parking structure. Table 6 — Vail Road and Meadow Drive Analysis Results [Year 2017] TurnKe Page 8 Consulting, LLC AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Approach LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS —Delay 95th % Queue (sec) (ft) (sec) (ft) Eastbound A — 7 50 B — 10 95 West Meadow Drive Westbound A — 10 55 A — 9 65 East Meadow Drive Northbound A — 8 55 B — 12 90 Vail Road Southbound A — 10 —7 115 B — 11 T 100 Vail Road) Overall Intersection A — 9 115 (max) B — 11 100 (max) all vehicles TurnKe Page 8 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS Table 6 shows that there will not be a noticeable change in the LOS, delay, or queuing at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection during the construction of the East End when the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building will be accessed via West Meadow Drive. The 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building represents a 60% increase in VVMC parking spaces accessed via West Meadow Drive (116 existing vs 185 during East End Construction). However, the traffic data obtained in February 2014 showed that the peak hour trips to/from the US Bank Building were 36 vph (AM) and 43 (PM). Based on the existing peak hour traffic volumes at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection (AM = 316 vph, PM = 518 vph), the increase in VVMC trips on West Meadow Drive to/from the US Bank Building during the East End Constructions is only 11 % (AM) and 8% (PM). VVMC Trips on West Meadow Drive after the VVMC Master Plan is Completed After the VVMC Master Plan is completed in year 2018, the VVMC traffic volume on West Meadow Drive will go from about 1,000-1,400 vehicles per day (1,000 = summer season, 1,400 = winter season) to 58 vehicles per day (service and delivery vehicles only). The 58 vehicles per day on West Meadow Drive is 29 services and delivery vehicles that make 29 trips IN and 29 trips OUT for a total of 58 daily trips. The existing peak hour VVMC traffic at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection represents 21% (AM) and 29% (PM). After completion of the VVMC Master Plan in year 2018, the peak hour traffic volume at this intersection will decrease by those same percentages. 1.7 Conclusions and Recommendations The following conclusions and recommendations are based on the Project trip generation and traffic analysis. 1.7.1 Proposed Roundabout on Frontage Road [Intersection #1] The TOV has taken the lead on the preliminary design of the Proposed Roundabout on the Frontage Road. The participants in this process include all adjacent property owners because the roundabout would require additional right of way from these properties. VVMC, TOV, and the Evergreen Lodge have been meeting for a couple months to evaluate various roundabout location and configuration options. The TOV has retained Felsburg Holt and Ullevig (FHU) to provide technical support to the effort, and they produced a memorandum to the TOV on 8/1/14. The FHU memo summarized the results of the alternatives analysis for the roundabout, which was based on build out conditions on all three properties in the year 2035. The most recent team meeting was held on 8/5/14 where the participants agreed that the roundabout would be likely be located near the shared property line between the VVMC and Evergreen properties. FHU is currently looking at several different access configurations for the roundabout at this location. This VVMC TIS could not analyze the proposed roundabout because the preferred configuration is not known yet. Therefore, this TIS refers to and relies upon the FHU memo for the roundabout operational analysis in the build out condition. The FHU memo indicates that the CTurmnKe Page 9 onsulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS proposed roundabout would operate at LOS B or better, even when using conservative background traffic and site trip generation estimates. It is anticipated that the preferred roundabout location and configuration will be identified sometime during the VVMC Master Plan approval process, so this TIS will be updated accordingly. VVMC has identified the Frontage Road improvements that would be necessary if VVMC were to redevelop "First and Alone". The "First and Alone" evaluation was done to find a workable VVMC access solution that could occur within the existing right of way. The ultimate roundabout configuration would require additional highway right of way for implementation. In addition, CDOT understands that over -designed roundabouts can create operational issues, which is another reason that VVMC evaluated the "First and Alone" access options that do not include a roundabout. 1.7.2 VVMC Access on Frontage Road [Intersection #2] The year 2018 East End (Construction Completed) analysis showed that the existing roadway configuration at the VVMC Access will probably create grid -lock on the Frontage Road and Main Vail interchange. If the proposed roundabout is not constructed prior to year 2018, the "First and Alone" alternative should be constructed prior to (or coincide with) the completion of the WMC Master Plan construction in year 2018. The "First and Alone" alternative will provide acceptable traffic operations at the VVMC Access (RIRO) and TOV Access (3/4 movement) thru the year 2035. In addition, an eastbound right -turn deceleration lane should be constructed at the VVMC Access on the Frontage Road. 1.7.3 Vail Road and Meadow Drive [Intersection #3] The VVMC trips at this intersection will increase during the East End construction due to the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building being accesses via West Meadow Drive. However, the increase in traffic at this intersection will only be 11 % (AM) and 8% (PM), and there will not be a noticeable change in the LOS, delay, or queuing at this intersection. No changes are recommended at this intersection. TurnKe Page 10 Consulting, LLC Traffic Impact Study Prepared For: Vail Valley Medical Center Muster Plan 1-70 South Frontage Road, just west of the main Vail interchange Vail, Colorado {r September 30, 2014 2533 West Pinyon Ave -,TC1P17G Grand Junction, CO 81505 970-985-4001 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS Table of Contents TABLEOF CONTENTS.......................................................................................................... 1 LISTOF FIGURES................................................................................................................. 2 LISTOF TABLES................................................................................................................... 2 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................. 3 1.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 STUDY AREA.............................................................................................................................................................. 3 1.3 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS PERIODS AND YEARS...................................................................................................................4 1.4 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC ASSUMPTIONS RELATED TO ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT .......................................................4 1.5 EXISTING AND PROPOSED PROJECT USES...................................................................................................................4 1.6 SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC ANALYSIS RESULTS............................................................................................................... 8 1.7 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................... 11 2 EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNT DATA.............................................................................. 13 2.1 VVMC ACCESSES....................................................................................................................................................13 2.2 OTHER TRAFFIC COUNT LOCATIONS........................................................................................................................ 13 2.3 PEAK HOUR DETERMINATION: VVMC TRAFFIC VS FRONTAGE ROAD TRAFFIC....................................................... 15 2.4 VVMC WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR VS WEEKEND PEAK HOUR...................................................................................... 16 3 PROJECT TRIPS.......................................................................................................... 16 3.1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION..................................................................................................................................... 16 3.2 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION................................................................................................................................... 18 4 EXISTING AND FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES........................................................... 26 4.1 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES...........................................................................................................................26 4.2 TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES (BACKGROUND + PROJECT)...........................................................................................29 5 TURN LANE WARRANTS AT VVMC ACCESS TO FRONTAGE ROAD ...................... 35 6 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS............................................................................. 35 6.1 PROPOSED ROUNDABOUT ON FRONTAGE ROAD [INTERSECTION#1]........................................................................35 6.2 VVMC ACCESS / TOV ACCESS ON FRONTAGE ROAD [INTERSECTION#2]...............................................................38 6.3 VAIL ROAD AND MEADOW DRIVE [INTERSECTION#3].............................................................................................40 7 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................ 42 7.1 PROPOSED ROUNDABOUT ON FRONTAGE ROAD [INTERSECTION#1]........................................................................42 7.2 VVMC ACCESS / TOV ACCESS ON FRONTAGE ROAD [INTERSECTION#2]...............................................................43 7.3 VAIL ROAD AND MEADOW DRIVE [INTERSECTION#3].............................................................................................43 APPENDIX Turnfie Page 1 0 consulting. LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS List of Figures Figure1 — Vicinity Map........................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2 — Existing Lane Geometry and Traffic Control.......................................................... 7 Figure 3 — Year 2014 Peak Hour Traffic Count Volumes ...................................................... 14 Figure 4 — Project Trip Distribution (AM Peak Hour)............................................................. 19 Figure 5 — Project Trip Distribution (PM Peak Hour)............................................................. 20 Figure 6 — Project Trip Assignment (West End — During Construction) ................................ 21 Figure 7 — Project Trip Assignment (West End — Construction Completed) .......................... 22 Figure 8 — Project Trip Assignment (East End — During Construction) ................................. 23 Figure 9 — Project Trip Assignment (East End — Construction Completed) ........................... 24 Figure 10 — Project Trip Assignment (Build-out)................................................................... 25 Figure 11 — Adjusted Year 2014 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ................................................ 27 Figure 12 — Year 2015 Total Traffic Volumes (West End — During Construction) ................. 30 Figure 13 — Year 2016 Total Traffic Volumes (West End — Construction Completed) .......... 31 Figure 14 — Year 2017 Total Traffic Volumes (East End — During Construction) .................. 32 Figure 15 — Year 2018 Total Traffic Volumes (East End — Construction Completed) ........... 33 Figure 16 — Year 2035 Total Traffic Volumes (Build -out) ...................................................... 34 List of Tables Table 1 — Existing and Proposed Project Uses....................................................................... 5 Table 2 — Existing and Proposed Parking Spaces.................................................................. 5 Table 3 — Proposed Roundabout Analysis Results [Year 2018] ............................................. 9 Table 4 — VVMC Access: "First and Alone" Alternative [Year 20351 ....................................... 9 Table 5 — VVMC/TOV Access on Frontage Road Analysis Results [Year 20351 .................. 10 Table 6 — Vail Road and Meadow Drive Analysis Results [Year 2017] ................................. 10 Table 7 — Summary of Traffic Counts at VVMC Accesses .................................................... 13 Table 8 — Peak Hour Comparison......................................................................................... 15 Table 9 — Year 2014 Winter Traffic Count at VVMC Accesses by Group ............................. 16 Table 10 — VVMC Trip Generation Summary....................................................................... 18 Table 11 — VVMC Trip Distribution Summary .................................................... ................... 18 Table 12 — Compare Frontage Road Traffic Volumes.......................................................... 26 Table 13 — Turn Lane Warrants at VVMC Access to Frontage Rd ....................................... 35 Table 14 — Roundabout Analysis Results [Year 2018].......................................................... 37 Table 15 — Roundabout Analysis: Compare Various Methodologies .................................... 37 Table 16 — VVMC Access on Frontage Road Analysis Results [Year 2014] ......................... 38 Table 17 — VVMC Access on Frontage Road Analysis Results [Year 2018] ......................... 39 Table 18 — VVMC Access: "First and Alone" Alternative [Year 2035] ................................... 40 Table 19 — VVMC Access on Frontage Road Analysis Results [Year 2035] ......................... 40 Table 20 — Vail Road and Meadow Drive Analysis Results [Year 2014] ............................... 41 Table 21 — Vail Road and Meadow Drive Analysis Results [Year 2017] ............................... 42 �TurnPage 2 Consulti�nga,UC VVMC Master Plan TIS 1 Executive Summary 1.1 Introduction This report documents the traffic impact study (TIS) for the proposed Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan (Project) in the Town of Vail (TOV), Colorado. The VVMC is located on the south side of the 1-70 South Frontage Road (Frontage Road) about 750 feet west of the main Vail interchange. The VVMC also has access to West Meadow Drive. See Figure 1 for the Project Vicinity Map. All land use details listed in this TIS are based on the VVMC Master Plan effort, and will be updated as the Project concept is refined. Another key assumption is a future roundabout on the Frontage Road, which would provide optimal access to each of the three adjacent properties when this area builds out. The TOV has recently been working with adjacent property owners to evaluate alternative roundabout locations and to define the preferred location for this roundabout. This TIS assumed a roundabout configuration, but the roundabout solution is dependent upon the participation of all three property owners, and is based on the assumption that each of the properties will be redeveloped at the same time. Since the timing of these projects may not occur simultaneously, VVMC evaluated Frontage Road improvements that would be necessary if VVMC were to redevelop "First and Alone". The "First and Alone" evaluation was done to find a workable VVMC access solution that could occur within the existing right of way. The ultimate roundabout configuration would require additional highway right of way for implementation. In addition, CDOT understands that over -designed roundabouts can create operational issues, which is another reason that VVMC evaluated access options that do not include a roundabout. This TIS will be updated as necessary and resubmitted for the TOV Condition Use Permit (CUP) and Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) access permit processes. 1.2 Study Area The Study Area includes the intersections listed below, which are shown in Figure 1. Figure 2 shows the lane geometry and traffic control. Intarcarfinnc #1 Frontage Road and Evergreen Access (South Leg) (Proposed Roundabout west of VVMC Access) #2 Frontage Road and VVMC Access (South Leg) / TOV Access (North Leg) #3 Vail Road and Meadow Drive TurnKe Page 3 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS The Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection was added to the Study Area because the VVMC trips at this intersection will increase during the East End construction. The increase in VVMC trips at this intersection will occur because the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building will be accessed via West Meadow Drive instead of the Frontage Road. The south roundabout at the Main Vail Interchange was not included in the Study Area. The 2025 Vail Transportation Plan (Vail TMP) concluded that there is a limited amount of realistic capacity improvements that could be constructed at this interchange, and discussed other system -wide improvements that would help alleviate congestion at the Main Vail Interchange. 1.3 Traffic Analysis Periods and Years The traffic analysis was conducted for the periods and conditions listed below. The traffic volumes used in the analysis are based on traffic data from the peak summer and winter seasons. In addition, traffic volumes from the Vail TMP were used for the Frontage Road. Periods • Weekday AM Peak Hour • Weekday PM Peak Hour Conditions • Year 2015 — West End (During Construction) • Year 2016 — West End (Construction Completed) • Year 2017 — East End (During Construction) • Year 2018 — East End (Construction Completed) • Year 2035 — Build -out (20 -year horizon) Definitions: West End improvements include approximately 40,000 SF of medical space on and around the existing West Wing of the VVMC. East End improvements include approximately 25,000 SF of net new medical space and an expanded parking structure at the east end of the Campus. 1.4 Background Traffic Assumptions Related to Adjacent Development The future traffic volumes used in this study assume the following: • VVMC build out • Evergreen Site redevelopment, per previous traffic study for this site • No changes to the TOV municipal site 1.5 Existing and Proposed Project Uses Table 1 shows the existing and proposed Project uses for each condition. Table 2 shows the number of employee and guest/patron parking spaces for each condition. � TurnKe Page 4 consulting, i_ WMC Master Plan TIS Table 1- Existing and Proposed Project Uses Condition Year Gross Bldg Full-time Employees Patient Exam Rooms Condition Year Area SF FTE Beds # Parking Spaces Existing 2014 202,000 569 58 155 West End 2015 202,000 569 58 160 (During Const 9 107 116 245 46 West End 2016 242,000 590 58 190 Const Com leted 57 66 195 96 291 East End 2017 242,000 590 58 190 (During Const East End 2018 268,000 610 58 197 Const Completed) 245 46 291 254 153 Build -out Prior to 300,000 1 700 58 2601 2035 East End 2017 32' 153' 185' 02 Overall Increase 49% 23% 0% 68% (Existing to Build -out Notes: SF — square footage 1. The SF and exam rooms shown for the Build -out Condition are speculative in nature. Estimates are provided for long-range traffic planning purposes only Table 2 - Existing and Proposed Parking Spaces Note: the number of parking spaces were estimated based on schematic designs for the Master Plan effort; the final parking numbers are subject to change as more detailed design work is completed. # Parking Spaces Accessed via Total Condition Year West Meadow Drive Frontage Road # Parking Spaces Emp P / G Total I Emp P / G Total Emp P / G Total Existing 2014 9 107 116 245 46 291 254 153 407 West End 2015 9 57 66 195 96 291 204 153 357 (During Const West End 2016 9 107 116 245 46 291 254 153 407 Const Com leted East End 2017 32' 153' 185' 02 0 0 32 153 185 (During Const t End 2018 53 0 5 404 210 614 409 210 619 CoEa ted (nstBuild-out Prior to 53 0 5 435 260 695 440 260 700 2035 Overall Increase 73% 70% 72% (Existing to Build -out Notes: Emp — Employee, P / G — Patron / Guest 1. Includes 69 parking spaces (46 = P / G, 23 = Emp) at the US Bank Building that will be accessed from West Meadow Drive instead of the Frontage Road. 2. During the East End Construction the WMC will "replace" 245 parking spaces by leasing parking spaces at nearby parking structures, and/or increasing transit and shuttle use by employees. 3. These 5 parking spaces are for service vehicles TurmnKe Page 5 0 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS It Not To Scale Proposed Roundabout Existing I-70 South South [Int #1] VVMC Fronta a Rd Roundabout (General location based Access g on FHU study area) [Inf #2] y 'a at Main Vail Interchange %_ Existing VVMC Main Access (to be relocated to Int #2) Evergreen Lodge .A VVMC NAM�Y �zJ 1-70 -- Vail Rd W Meadow Dr Vail Road and Meadow Dr Pint #31 Vail Valley Medical Center (WMC) Master Plan Vicinity Map Figure 1 TurnKe Page 6 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS 1 2 Not To Scale Exact location and �}+► geometry of the �s Proposed Roundabout ~ not know at this point; yellow shape represents the area studied by FHU : TOV West Access Evergreen Main Vail Lodge TOV Main Interchange Access Access 2 1-70S Fro ntage Rd VVMC v 3 W4 fea = dow T � e E Meadow Drive F 3 Ped / Transit only Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan Figure Existing Lane Geometry and Traffic Control 2 �TurnPage 7 Consulti�nga,UC VVMC Master Plan TIS 1.6 Summary of Traffic Analysis Results The following sections summarize the traffic analysis results at the three Study Area intersections. 1.6.1 Proposed Roundabout on Frontage Road [Intersection #1] The TOV has taken the lead on the preliminary design of the Proposed Roundabout on the Frontage Road. The participants in this process include all adjacent property owners because the roundabout would require additional right of way from these properties. VVMC, TOV, and the Evergreen Lodge have been meeting for a couple months to evaluate various roundabout location and configuration options. The TOV has retained Felsburg Holt and Ullevig (FHU) to provide technical support to the effort, and they produced a memorandum to the TOV on 8/1/14. The FHU memo summarized the results of the alternatives analysis for the roundabout, which was based on build out conditions of all three properties in the year 2035. The most recent team meeting was held on 8/5/14 where the participants agreed that the roundabout would be likely be located near the shared property line between the VVMC and Evergreen properties. FHU is currently looking at several different access configurations for the roundabout at this location. This VVMC TIS could not analyze the proposed roundabout because the preferred configuration is not known yet. Therefore, this TIS refers to and relies upon the FHU memo for the roundabout operational analysis in the build out condition. The FHU memo indicates that the proposed roundabout would operate at LOS B or better, even when using conservative background traffic and site trip generation estimates. It is anticipated that the preferred roundabout location and configuration will be identified sometime during the VVMC Master Plan approval process, so this TIS will be updated accordingly. VVMC has identified the Frontage Road improvements that would be necessary if VVMC were to redevelop "First and Alone". The "First and Alone" evaluation was done to find a workable VVMC access solution that could occur within the existing right of way. The ultimate roundabout configuration would require additional highway right of way for implementation. In addition, CDOT understands that over -designed roundabouts can create operational issues, which is another reason that VVMC evaluated the "First and Alone" access options that do not include a roundabout. The Proposed Roundabout on the Frontage Road was analyzed for the completion of of the VVMC Master Plan, which is anticipated to be year 2018. Table 3 shows the level of service (LOS), delay, and queuing results of the roundabout analysis based on the HCM 2010 Roundabout Methodology. TurnKe Page 8 J Consulting, LLc VVMC Master Plan TIS Table 3 - Proposed Roundabout Analysis Results [Year 2018] Roundabout AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS —Delay 95th % Queue Approach LOS — Delay (sec) (ft) (sec) (ft) West Leg A-5 20 A — 9 70 (Frontage Road Southbound East Leg A-6 50 A — 6 50 (Frontage Road and Right -Turn South Leg A-6 20 A — 9 20 (Evergreen Lodge Access 105 (VVMC Access, North Leg A-6 20 A — 6 20 TOV Service Access (Evergreen Lodge Overall Roundabout A-6 50 (max) A - 7 70 (max) all vehicles Table 3 shows that the Proposed Roundabout will operate at LOS A with minimal queuing in year 2018, the anticipated opening year of the WMC Master Plan. Refer to the FHU memo in the Appendix for the year 2035 Build -out analysis results. 1.6.2 VVMC Access I TOV Access on Frontage Road [Intersection #2] The year 2018 East End (Construction Completed) analysis showed that the existing roadway configuration at the VVMC Access will probably create grid -lock on the Frontage Road and Main Vail interchange. If the proposed roundabout is not constructed prior to year 2018, the "First and Alone" alternative should be constructed prior to (or coincide with) the completion of the VVMC Master Plan construction in year 2018. Table 4 shows that the "First and Alone" alternative will provide acceptable traffic operations at the VVMC Access and TOV Access thru the year 2035. In addition, an eastbound right -turn deceleration lane should be constructed at the VVMC Access on the Frontage Road. Table 4 - VVMC Access: "First and Alone" Alternative [Year 2035] VVMC Access is RIRO: TOV Access is % (Left -turn IN prohibited) �TurnPage 9 Consulti�nga,LLC AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Direction Movement LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS — Delay 95th % Queue sec ft sec ft Southbound Shared Left- C — 16 30 C — 19 50 TOV Access and Right -Turn Northbound Right -turn A-4 55 A — 10 105 (VVMC Access, Westbound (Evergreen Lodge U-turn A-5 95 B — 13 120 Access �TurnPage 9 Consulti�nga,LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS Table 5 shows that the RIRO configuration at the VVMC and TOV Accesses on the Frontage Road will operate at LOS A in the Year 2035 Build -out Condition. Table 5 — WMC/TOV Access on Frontage Road Analysis Results [Year 2035] VVMC and TO Accesses are RIRO (in coniunction with the Proaosed Roundabout) 1.6.3 Vail Road and Meadow Drive [Intersection #3] The existing main access to the VVMC is on West Meadow Drive. In order to get to the VVMC main access, drivers pass thru the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection, which is a small four-way stop intersection with a high number of pedestrians and local buses. The VVMC Master Plan proposes to relocate the main access to the Frontage Road, but the new main access on the Frontage Road will not be open until year 2018. In addition, when the East End is being constructed in year 2017, it will be necessary to access the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building via West Meadow Drive. This means that the VVMC traffic on West Meadow Drive will increase over the existing condition when the East End is under construction. The existing roadway configuration was analyzed for the year 2017 East End (During Construction) scenario. Table 6 shows what can be expected at the this intersection when the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building are access via West Meadow Drive during the construction of the East End parking structure. Table 6 — Vail Road and Meadow Drive Analysis Results [Year 2017] AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Direction Movement LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS — Delay 95th % Queue (ft) (sec) sec ft sec ft B — 10 95 West Meadow Drive Northbound Right -turn A — 3 45 A-8 95 Accessouthbound Northbound SVVMC Right -turn A-4 35 A-5 50 TOV Access Southbound A — 10 —7 115 1.6.3 Vail Road and Meadow Drive [Intersection #3] The existing main access to the VVMC is on West Meadow Drive. In order to get to the VVMC main access, drivers pass thru the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection, which is a small four-way stop intersection with a high number of pedestrians and local buses. The VVMC Master Plan proposes to relocate the main access to the Frontage Road, but the new main access on the Frontage Road will not be open until year 2018. In addition, when the East End is being constructed in year 2017, it will be necessary to access the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building via West Meadow Drive. This means that the VVMC traffic on West Meadow Drive will increase over the existing condition when the East End is under construction. The existing roadway configuration was analyzed for the year 2017 East End (During Construction) scenario. Table 6 shows what can be expected at the this intersection when the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building are access via West Meadow Drive during the construction of the East End parking structure. Table 6 — Vail Road and Meadow Drive Analysis Results [Year 2017] TurnKe Page 10 Consulting, LLC AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Approach LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS —Delay 95th % Queue (sec) (ft) (sec) (ft) Eastbound A — 7 50 B — 10 95 West Meadow Drive Westbound A — 10 55 A — 9 65 East Meadow Drive Northbound A — 8 55 B — 12 90 Vail Road Southbound A — 10 —7 115 B — 11 T 100 Vail Road) Overall Intersection A — 9 115 (max) B — 11 100 (max) all vehicles TurnKe Page 10 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS Table 6 shows that there will not be a noticeable change in the LOS, delay, or queuing at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection during the construction of the East End when the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building will be accessed via West Meadow Drive. The 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building represents a 60% increase in VVMC parking spaces accessed via West Meadow Drive (116 existing vs 185 during East End Construction). However, the traffic data obtained in February 2014 showed that the peak hour trips to/from the US Bank Building were 36 vph (AM) and 43 (PM). Based on the existing peak hour traffic volumes at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection (AM = 316 vph, PM = 518 vph), the increase in VVMC trips on West Meadow Drive to/from the US Bank Building during the East End Constructions is only 11 % (AM) and 8% (PM). VVMC Trips on West Meadow Drive after the VVMC Master Plan is Completed After the VVMC Master Plan is completed in year 2018, the VVMC traffic volume on West Meadow Drive will go from about 1,000-1,400 vehicles per day (1,000 = summer season, 1,400 = winter season) to 58 vehicles per day (service and delivery vehicles only). The 58 vehicles per day on West Meadow Drive is 29 services and delivery vehicles that make 29 trips IN and 29 trips OUT for a total of 58 daily trips. The existing peak hour VVMC traffic at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection represents 21% (AM) and 29% (PM). After completion of the VVMC Master Plan in year 2018, the peak hour traffic volume at this intersection will decrease by those same percentages. 1.7 Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations The following conclusions and recommendations are based on the Project trip generation and traffic analysis. 1.7.1 Proposed Roundabout on Frontage Road [Intersection #1] The TOV has taken the lead on the preliminary design of the Proposed Roundabout on the Frontage Road. The participants in this process include all adjacent property owners because the roundabout would require additional right of way from these properties. VVMC, TOV, and the Evergreen Lodge have been meeting for a couple months to evaluate various roundabout location and configuration options. The TOV has retained Felsburg Holt and Ullevig (FHU) to provide technical support to the effort, and they produced a memorandum to the TOV on 8/1/14. The FHU memo summarized the results of the alternatives analysis for the roundabout, which was based on build out conditions on all three properties in the year 2035. The most recent team meeting was held on 8/5/14 where the participants agreed that the roundabout would be likely be located near the shared property line between the VVMC and Evergreen properties. FHU is currently looking at several different access configurations for the roundabout at this location. This VVMC TIS could not analyze the proposed roundabout because the preferred configuration is not known yet. Therefore, this TIS refers to and relies upon the FHU memo for the roundabout operational analysis in the build out condition. The FHU memo indicates that the CTurnKe Page 11 onsulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS proposed roundabout would operate at LOS B or better, even when using conservative background traffic and site trip generation estimates. It is anticipated that the preferred roundabout location and configuration will be identified sometime during the VVMC Master Plan approval process, so this TIS will be updated accordingly. VVMC has identified the Frontage Road improvements that would be necessary if VVMC were to redevelop "First and Alone". The "First and Alone" evaluation was done to find a workable VVMC access solution that could occur within the existing right of way. The ultimate roundabout configuration would require additional highway right of way for implementation. In addition, CDOT understands that over -designed roundabouts can create operational issues, which is another reason that VVMC evaluated the "First and Alone" access options that do not include a roundabout. 1.7.2 VVMC Access on Frontage Road [Intersection #2] The year 2018 East End (Construction Completed) analysis showed that the existing roadway configuration at the VVMC Access will probably create grid -lock on the Frontage Road and Main Vail interchange. If the proposed roundabout is not constructed prior to year 2018, the "First and Alone" alternative should be constructed prior to (or coincide with) the completion of the WMC Master Plan construction in year 2018. The "First and Alone" alternative will provide acceptable traffic operations at the VVMC Access (RIRO) and TOV Access (3/4 movement) thru the year 2035. In addition, an eastbound right -turn deceleration lane should be constructed at the VVMC Access on the Frontage Road. 1.7.3 Vail Road and Meadow Drive [Intersection #3] The VVMC trips at this intersection will increase during the East End construction due to the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building being accesses via West Meadow Drive. However, the increase in traffic at this intersection will only be 11 % (AM) and 8% (PM), and there will not be a noticeable change in the LOS, delay, or queuing at this intersection. No changes are recommended at this intersection. TurnKe Page 12 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS 2 Existing Traffic Count Data 2.1 VVMC Accesses Traffic counts were conducted at the VVMC Accesses on the dates and times listed in Table 7. Table 7 also shows a comparison of the summer and winter traffic counts. Table 7 — Summary of Traffic Counts at VVMC Accesses Notes: vph — vehicles per hour 1. The peak hour data shown is for highest peak hours of the two days that were counted Table 7 shows that the winter season peak hour traffic volumes were higher than the summer season. Therefore, the traffic data collected on February 4, 2014 was used for this TIS. 2.2 Other Traffic Count Locations In addition to counting the traffic IN and OUT at the VVMC Accesses, the movements and intersection listed below were also counted. Figure 3 shows the existing year 2014 peak hour traffic volumes at these locations. The Appendix contains the peak hour traffic count data at all locations. • Frontage Road thru movements at the VVMC Access • Traffic IN and OUT at the TOV Access • Vail Road and Meadows Drive intersection TurnKe Page 13 Consulting, LLC AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Season Traffic Volumes Traffic Volumes Date Time vpn Time vph IN OUT Total IN OUT Total Summer' Wednesday, August 21, 2013 6:30-7:30 am 1 160 29 189 4:00-5:00 pm 62 94 156 Thursday, August 22, 2013 Winter 6:45-7:45 am 167 36 203 3:30-4:30 pm 108 109 217 Tuesday, February 4, 2014 % Difference 7% 289/lo (Summer is % lower than Winter) Notes: vph — vehicles per hour 1. The peak hour data shown is for highest peak hours of the two days that were counted Table 7 shows that the winter season peak hour traffic volumes were higher than the summer season. Therefore, the traffic data collected on February 4, 2014 was used for this TIS. 2.2 Other Traffic Count Locations In addition to counting the traffic IN and OUT at the VVMC Accesses, the movements and intersection listed below were also counted. Figure 3 shows the existing year 2014 peak hour traffic volumes at these locations. The Appendix contains the peak hour traffic count data at all locations. • Frontage Road thru movements at the VVMC Access • Traffic IN and OUT at the TOV Access • Vail Road and Meadows Drive intersection TurnKe Page 13 Consulting, LLC WMC Master Plan TIS ii Not To Scale Legend X_ = AM Peak Hour Volume Y = PM Peak Hour Volume Evergreen Lodge Access �—\ 1TOV West Access WMC ' 20 76 4 44 t71 11 18 16 ~ 15 This intersection was counted to determine the overall trips to/from VVMC, but was not included in the intersection analysis. TOV Main Access 2 1I-70 South Frontage Rd Mead --77s OH, 143 65 1103 0 28 88� + L 4 0 7 10 10 0 18 9 2 01ira 4 60 2 151 2 3 5\ 5j 13 39 2 1 L 193 .- 359 1117; 84 9 31826 2 29/ Vail Valley Medical Center (WMC) Master Plan Year 2014 Peak Hour Traffic Count Volumes Main Vail �o 0 265 274 E Meadow Drive 3 pad /Transit only Figure 3 T#.lrmnKe Page 14 0 consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS 2.3 Peak Hour Determination: VVMC Traffic vs Frontage Road Traffic The AM and PM peak hours for the VVMC traffic and the Frontage Road thru traffic were calculated separately to see if had the same peak hour. Table 8 shows a comparison of the peak hours. The Appendix contains more detailed peak hour calculations. Table 8 — Peak Hour Comparison Time Peak Period Traffic Volumes vehicles per hour (vph) VVMC Traffic 1-70 South Frontage Road (All Accesses) (At VVMC Access) IN OUT Total WB Thru EB Thru Total AM Peak Period 6:30-7:30 am 149 28 177 117 72 189 6:45-7:45 am 167 36 203 136 79 215 7:00-8:00 am 154 36 190 180 110 290 7:15-8:15 am 150 42 192 235 151 386 7:30-8:30 am140 42 182265 193 458 PM Peak Period 3:00-4:00 pm 98 84 182 249 315 564 3:15-4:15 pm 102 1 1 • 97 199 270 278 340 350 610 628 3:45-4:45 pm 94 11 11 • 86 115 121 209 207 278 351 629 4:15-5:15 pm 79 123 202 279 341 620 4:30-5:30 pm 65 127 192 267 320 587 4:45-5:45 pm 63 143 206 246 294 540 5:00-6:00 pm 66 143 209 223 272 495 Table 8 shows that the peak hours for the VVMC traffic and Frontage Road traffic are different. Below are observations about each peak period. AM Peak Hour The VVMC and Frontage Road peak hours only overlap by 15 minutes. VVMC traffic during the Frontage Road peak hour is 10% lower than during the VVMC peak hour (203 vph vs 182 vph). Frontage Road traffic during the VVMC peak hour is 53% lower than during the Frontage Road peak hour (458 vph vs 215 vph). Because the Frontage Road traffic is so much lower during the VVMC peak hour (458 vph vs 215 vph), the traffic volumes during the Frontage Road peak hour were used for the AM peak hour. TurnKe Page 15 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS PM Peak Hour The VVMC and Frontage Road peak hours overlap by 30 minutes. VVMC traffic during the Frontage Road peak hour is 5% lower than during the VVMC peak hour (217 vph vs 207 vph). Frontage Road traffic during the VVMC peak hour is 0.8% lower than during the Frontage Road peak hour (633 vph vs 628 vph). Because the Frontage Road peak hour is essentially the same during the VVMC peak hour (633 vph vs 628 vph), the traffic volumes during the VVMC peak hour were used for the PM peak hour. 2.4 VVMC Weekday Peak Hour vs Weekend Peak Hour The traffic volumes discussed in Sections 2.1-2.3 were collected during the weekday AM and PM peak hours. The weekday represents the peak for the VVMC because the VVMC operates at full capacity with all clinics open on weekdays. On the weekend, the VVMC has significantly less trips because the clinics are closed and VVMC operates with reduced and staff and doctors. 3 Project Trips 3.1 Project Trip Generation The Project trip generation is based on the existing winter season traffic counts at the VVMC Accesses and the existing and future VVMC land use and parking spaces. Table 9 summarizes the existing traffic counts at the VVMC Accesses by group — employees and guests / patrons. Table 9 - Year 2014 Winter Traffic Count at WMC Accesses by Group Peak Hour Main Access (w Meadow Dr) Service Access (w Meadow Dr) Employee Access Frontage Road US Bank Bldg Access Fronta e Road Total IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT Guest / Patron Trips AM 44 20 --- --- --- --- 5 0 49 20 PM 71 76 --- --- --- --- 5 2 76 78 Employee Trips AM --- --- 1 1 61 19 29 2 91 22 PM --- --- 2 2 5 18 25 11 32 31 The steps listed below were used to calculate the VVMC trip generation for each condition. The trip generation for Guests / Patrons and Employees were calculated separately, and then combined at the last step. The Appendix contains the detailed trip generation calculations. Guest / Patron Trip Generation Calculations Step #1 Calculated the percent change in Patient Beds, Exam Rooms, and Guest / Patron Parking Spaces from one condition to the next. O TurnKey Page 16 Gansulting. i_t VVMC Master Plan TIS The Patient Beds did not change for any condition so it was disregarded. Due to the limited Parking Spaces at the VVMC, the trip generation is more dependent upon the availability of Parking Spaces than the increase in Exam Rooms. Therefore, the percent change in trip generation for each condition was directly correlated to the percent change in Guest / Patron Parking Spaces. Step #2 Increased the trips to/from the VVMC by the percent change in Parking Spaces from Step #1. Step #3 Allocated the trips to/from the VVMC for each condition based on the percent of parking spaces accessed via West Meadows Drive or Frontage Road. Employee Trip Generation Calculations Step #1 Calculated the percent change in FTE's and Employee Parking Spaces from one condition to the next. Due to the limited Employee Parking Spaces at the VVMC (some employees have to park off-site now), the Employee trip generation is dependent upon the availability of Employee Parking Spaces, and not the increase in FTE's. Therefore, the percent change in trip generation for each condition was directly correlated to the percent change in Employee Parking Spaces. Step #2 Increased/decreased the trips to/from the VVMC by the percent change in Parking Spaces from Step #1. Step #3 Allocated the trips to/from the VVMC for each condition based on the percent of parking spaces accessed via West Meadows Drive or Frontage Road Combine Guest / Patron and Employee Trips Step #4 The number of Patron / Guest and Employee trips were combined to get the total trips to/from the VVMC on West Meadow Drive, and Frontage Road for each condition. Table 10 shows a summary of the VVMC trip generation. The "Trip Generation Calculations" table in the Appendix shows the detailed trip generation calculations. TurnKe Page 17 consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS Table 10 — VVMC Trip Generation Summary 3.2 Project Trip Distribution The Project Trip Distribution was based on the existing traffic counts at 1) the VVMC Access on the Frontage Road, and 2) Vail Road and Meadows Drive intersection. Table 11 shows the trip distribution percentages at these two locations. The Project Trip Distribution is the same in all conditions. Table 11 - VVMC Trip Distribution Summary Trip Distribution for VVMC Trips VVMC Peak Hour Trips (vph) West Meadow DriveFrontage West Meadow Drive Road Condition Year AM Pk Hr PM Pk HrEAMPk Hr PM PkHr To the East I (NB RT) To the West (NB LT) From the North (SB RT) From the South (NB LT) IN Out Tot IN Out Totut 85% 15% I Tot IN Out Tot Existing 2014 45 21 66 73 78 151 95 21 116 35 31 66 West End 2015 21 8 29 29 30 59 101 30 131 73 73 146 (During Const) West End 2016 37 15 52 54 56 110 103 27 130 54 53 107 (Const Completed) East End 2017 60 23 83 80 82 162 0 0 0 0 0 0 (During Const) East End 2018 2 0 2 1 1 2 212 62 274 155 156 311 (Const Completed) Build -out Prior to 2 0 2 1 1 2 239 72 311 183 186 369 2035 3.2 Project Trip Distribution The Project Trip Distribution was based on the existing traffic counts at 1) the VVMC Access on the Frontage Road, and 2) Vail Road and Meadows Drive intersection. Table 11 shows the trip distribution percentages at these two locations. The Project Trip Distribution is the same in all conditions. Table 11 - VVMC Trip Distribution Summary Figures 4 (AM Peak) and 5 (PM Peak Hour) show the Project Trip Distribution. Figures 6 thru 10 show the Project Trip Assignment. CTurnKe Page 18 onsuiting, LLC Trip Distribution for VVMC Trips Fronta a Road West Meadow Drive Peak Hour Inbound Trips Outbound Trips Inbound Trips Outbound Trips From the East (WB LT) From the West (EB RT) To the East I (NB RT) To the West (NB LT) From the North (SB RT) From the South (NB LT) To the North (EB LT) To the South (EB RT) AM 90% 10% 85% 15% 100% 0% 90% 10% PM 75% 25% 95% 5% 95% 5% 95% 5% Figures 4 (AM Peak) and 5 (PM Peak Hour) show the Project Trip Distribution. Figures 6 thru 10 show the Project Trip Assignment. CTurnKe Page 18 onsuiting, LLC WMC Master Plan TIS Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan I Figure Project Trip Distribution — AM Peak Hour (Same for all Conditions) I 4 -"ff f]" i►� Page 19 _ consultrng, LLC WMC Master Plan TIS Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan I Figure Project Trip Distribution — PM Peak Hour (Same for all Conditions) I 5 CTurmn �e Page 20 consulting, LLC WMC Master Plan TIS Vail Valley Medical Center (WMC) Master Plan I Figure Project Trip Assignment (West End — During Construction) I 6 CTurmn �e Page 21 consulting, LLC WMC Master Plan TIS Vail Valley Medical Center (WMC) Master Plan I Figure Project Trip Assignment (West End — Construction Completed) I 7 C�+�ll"f1' i Page 22 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS Vail Valley Medical Center (WMC) Master Plan I Figure Project Trip Assignment (East End - During Construction) 1 8 CTumKev -,J Page 23 Consulting, LLC WMC Master Plan TIS Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan I Figure Project Trip Assignment (East End — Construction Completed) I 9 CTurmn �e Page 24 consulting, LLC WMC Master Plan TIS Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan I Figure Project Trip Assignment (Build -out) I 10 C�+�ll"f1' i Page 25 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS 4 Existing and Future Traffic Volumes The following sections describe the existing, future background, and total traffic volumes. The Appendix contains tables that show the traffic volumes at the Study Area intersections. 4.1 Background Traffic Volumes 4.1.1 Frontage Road Traffic Volumes 4.1.1.1 Existing Year 2014 The existing year 2014 Frontage Road traffic volumes are based on the traffic counts conducted in February 2014. The Frontage Road traffic volumes from the February 2014 traffic count were compared to the traffic volumes from 1) the 2009 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update (Vail TMP), 2) the Vail MOB TIS prepared in November 2012 by Turn Key Consulting, and 3) the MOB and Municipal Center Roundabout Analysis memo prepared in October 2012 by FHU. Table 12 shows the traffic volume comparison. Table 12 - Compare Frontage Road Traffic Volumes Peak Hour Direction Year 2006 (Vail TMP) Year 2014 (Calculated) Note 1 Year 2014 (traffic count in Feb 2014 Year 2025 (Vail TMP) Year 2032 (TOV Info) AM EB 395 475 193 Not included in Vail TMP 605 WB 585 704 265 880 Total 980 1,178 458 1,485 EB 815 980 359 1,202 1,160 PM WB 600 722 274 992 985 Total 1,415 1,701 633 2,194 2,145 Notes: 1. The year 2014 Frontage Road traffic volumes were calculated using a straight-line growth between the years 2006 and 2025 traffic volumes in the Vail TMP. The annual growth rate (AGR) between years 2006 and 2025 traffic volumes in the Vail TMP was 2.34% per year. Table 12 shows that the year 2014 traffic counts are 62% lower than the year 2014 traffic volumes calculated using the years 2006 and 2035 traffic volumes from the Vail TMP. In addition, the 2014 traffic counts are 54% lower than the year 2006 traffic volumes from the Vail TMP. Because of the significant difference between traffic volume sources, the Frontage Road traffic volumes based on the Vail TMP were used so that this TIS is consistent with the Vail TMP. The traffic volumes in the Vail TMP are based on traffic data "collected over a variety of times including the Christmas holiday, Martin Luther King weekend, Presidents Day weekend, and Spring Break times in 2005 and 2006." (Page 4 of the Vail TMP). Figure 11 shows the adjusted year 2014 traffic volumes. CTurnKe Page 26 onsulting, LLC WMC Master Plan TIS 1 2 It <423 1 3 5 Not To Scale 2 1 2 5 I I I 1339Legend 2 2Irl I`� 5 662 475 704 X = AM Peak Hour Volume 652 980 722 Y = PM Peak Hour Volume 47 11 84 75 9 26I 64 3 18 69 2 29 ;adow Drive I / Transit Only Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan I Figure Adjusted Year 2014 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 1 11 C�+�ll"f1' i Page 27 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS 4.1.1.2 Future Years 2015 to 2018 The 2.34% AGR (refer to Note 1 of Table 12) was applied to the year 2014 traffic volumes from the Vail MOB TIS to calculate the Frontage Road traffic volumes in years 2015-2018 and 2035. 4.1.1.3 Future Year 2035 FHU, who prepared the Vail TMP, stated in an email to the TOV that a 0.5% AGR could be used to forecast traffic growth from year 2025 to year 2034. The 0.5% AGR was applied to the year 2025 Frontage Road traffic volumes in the Vail TMP to estimate year 2035 Frontage Road traffic volumes. The Appendix contains the email from FHU to the TOV. The 0.5% AGR from 2025 to 2034 has been recommended by FHU and the TOV since the Vail TMP is based on the assumption that Vail will reach build -out by 2025. It has been recommended that after build -out only this modest growth rate be applied. It also should be noted that with the recent economic downturn and slowing of development in Vail, it is unlikely Vail will see build out in 2025 and potentially it will extend beyond 2034. Thus it is likely that the total traffic growth projected for this study is very conservative. 4.1.2 TOV Traffic Volumes (Main Access) 4.1.2.1 Existing Year 2014 The traffic volumes to/from the main access to TOV Municipal Building (TOV Main Access) on the Frontage Road were counted during the February 2014 traffic counts. These traffic volumes were used without any modifications. 4.1.2.2 Future Years 2015 to 2018, 2035 The year 2014 traffic volumes to/from the TOV were assumed to stay the same in all future year scenarios. There have been several proposed projects on the north side of the Frontage Road (including a parking structure for the VVMC) that would significantly increase the traffic volume at the TOV Access. At this point the traffic volumes at the TOV Access do not include any future development on the TOV property. 4.1.3 Vail Road and Meadow Drive Traffic Volumes 4.1.3.1 Existing Year 2014 The traffic volumes at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection were counted during the February 2014 traffic counts. This intersection was not included in the Vail TMP so it was not possible to see how the February 2014 traffic counts compared to the Holiday traffic counts in the Vail TMP. Therefore, these traffic volumes were used without any modifications for year 2014. TurnKe Page 28 consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS 4.1.3.2 Future Years 2015 to 2018. 2035 The background traffic volumes (all movements except those to/from West Meadow Drive) at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection were increase by 0.5% AGR to years 2015 thru 2018 and 2035. The 0.5% AGR is based on the area served by this intersection is already developed, but traffic will still probably see modest growth over time as noted by FHU in the email to the TOV referenced in Section 4.1.1.3. 4.1.4 Evergreen Lodge Traffic Volumes 4.1.4.1 Existina Year 2014 The Evergreen Lodge is located on the south side of the Frontage Road immediately west of the VVMC. If the Proposed Roundabout is constructed on the Frontage Road west of the VVMC / TOV Access, the south leg of the Proposed Roundabout could be the Evergreen Lodge access. Because of this, the traffic volumes to/from the Evergreen Lodge were estimated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual. Fox Higgins prepared a traffic study in year 2008 for the proposed redevelopment of the Evergreen Lodge. The Fox Higgins traffic study was based on the Evergreen Lodge expanding from 128 units (128 hotel rooms) to 230 units (139 hotel rooms and 91 condos). Even though the redevelopment has not occurred yet, the year 2014 traffic volumes at the Evergreen Lodge were based on the proposed redevelopment from the Fox Higgins traffic study. The trips to/from the Evergreen Lodge were distributed using the same trip distribution percentages calculated at the VVMC Frontage Road access. The Appendix contains select pages from the Fox Higgins traffic study, and the Evergreen Lodge trip generation and distribution calculations. 4.1.4.2 Future Years 2015 to 2018, 2035 The year 2014 traffic volumes to/from the Evergreen Lodge were assumed to stay the same in all future year scenarios. 4.2 Total Traffic Volumes (Background + Project) Total traffic volumes are the sum of project traffic and background traffic. The Appendix contains tables that show the total traffic volumes at the Study Area intersections. Figures 12 thru 16 show the total traffic volumes. TurnKe Page 29 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS 1 2 See Note Below <433 3 51Not To Scale 2 2 5� I '�13;39Legend + 2 1`x` 5 680 486 720Y = PM Peak Hour VolumeX = AM Peak Hour Volume 47 671 1003 18 91` 7391 75 118 5 26; 55� 64 69 4 69 3 144 41 104 0 16 474 0 78� L 4 2---� �— o 0 02 1 60 2 152 NOTE Both of these movements will have to make a U-turn at the Proposed Roundabout west of the VVMC Access when the VVMC and TOV Accesses are converted to RIRO. Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan Year 2015 Total Traffic Volumes (West End - During Construction) ;adow Drive / Trenslt only Figure G PA CTurmn �e Page 30 consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS It Not To Scale Legend 444 X = AM Peak Hour Volume 971 Y = PM Peak Hour Volume 3 144 57 104 0 23 704 0 102 t 4 3� 0 80 02 3 153 1 2 1 1 1� L 2 12� 47 25 I75 16 I rL 4 69 2 See Note Below <497 5 13 39696 5737687 756 93I 4; I 23 50 NOTE Both of these movements will have to make a U-turn at the Proposed Roundabout west of the VVMC Access when the VVMC and TOV Accesses are converted to RIRO. Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan Year 2016 Total Traffic Volumes (West End — Construction Completed) ;adow Drive I /Transit Only Figure 13 CTurmnKe Page 31 consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS Not To Scale Legend X = AM Peak Hour Volume Y = PM Peak Hour Volume 1 1 2 1 2 446 1� 709 981 702 12� 47 25 1 I I r 75 16 64 4 69 2 See Note Below 3 5 2 5� �"l3 39 509 2� 5 754 1050 774 ----\�1 r:: VVMC Access 0 I" ?O TOV West Access Evergreen Main Vail Lodge TOV Main Interchange Access Access 2 1-7p South Frontage Rd VVMC '0 0 0 3 wM �adOW 145 80 105 0 �/�v� (� 1 30 8 95� � � 4 4 E Meadow Drive L 7 10 10 ~ 18 NOTE 3 Ped / Transit Only s� 0 This movement will have to make a U- turn at the Proposed Roundabout west 0 0 of the VVMC Access when the TOV a 61 2 153 Access is converted to RIRO. Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan Figure 14 Year 2017 Total Traffic Volumes (East End — During Construction) �Lll"f1r� Page 32 �Gonsuiting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS Not To Scale Legend X = AM Peak Hour Volume Y = PM Peak Hour Volume 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 479 1� 2 736 1045 728 X2512� 47 t I 75 16'1 I 64 4 69 2 See Note Below 3 5 2 5� I 13 39 5 521 2� 772 1075 792 211191, 39 39 � 1 � 53 X116; 9 I , 8 148 I" ?O TOV West Access Evergreen Main Vail Lodge TOV Main Interchange Access Access 2 1- 7p South Frontage Rd VVMC '0 0 0 3 �IiM �adOW 146 22 105 0 �/�v (� 204 0 9 L 51� 4 E Meadow Drive t 7 � 10 3 Ped / Transit Only 10 18 � NOTE 1� 0 Both of these movements will have 5 2 to make a U-turn at the Proposed 0 0 Roundabout west of the VVMC 61 2 Access when the VVMC and TOV 154 Accesses are converted to RIRO. Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan Figure 15 Year 2018 Total Traffic Volumes (East End - Construction Completed) C+�ll"flr� Page 33 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS It Not To Scale Legend 1 1 \ � 2 1 1 + ,� 2 606 920 644 X = AM Peak Hour Volume 1263 985 1263 Y = PM Peak Hour Volume 12 47 3 1'�\ 59 24 114 0 1 224 0 55� L 4 1 0 6 �1r0 2 67 2 168 25 0 1 64 75 \16 I 4 69 / NOTE Both of these movements will have to make a U-turn at the Proposed Roundabout west of the VVMC Access when the VVMC and TOV Accesses are converted to RIRO. Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) Master Plan Year 2035 Total Traffic Volumes (Build -out) ;� See Note Below 4 7 , 3 10�I�22 54 11 25� 60 953 1043 24� 215; 46 1; 1 37 \11 I 61 9 177 ;adow Drive I / Transit Only Figure 16 CTurmn ie Page 34 consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS 5 Turn Lane Warrants at VVMC Access to Frontage Road The need for turn lanes on the Frontage Road at the VVMC Access is based on the requirements in the Colorado State Highway Access Code (SHAC). Table 13 shows the required turn lanes per the SHAC. Table 13 — Turn Lane Warrants at WMC Access to Frontage Rd Table 13 shows that an eastbound right -turn deceleration lane (EB RT Decel Lane) will be required at the VVMC Access to the Frontage Road. The EB RT Decel Lane was included in the roadway configuration for the traffic analysis discussed in the next section. 6 Traffic Operations Analysis The traffic operations was analyzed at the three Study Area intersections. The following sections describe the analysis and results for each Study Area intersection. 6.1 Proposed Roundabout on Frontage Road [Intersection #1] The Proposed Roundabout on the Frontage Road west of the VVMC Access was analyzed using the FHWA Roundabout Methodology, which utilizes the methods and calculations in the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 (HCM 2010). In addition to the HCM 2010 Roundabout Methodology, the SIDRA Roundabout Methodology was used to validate the results of HCM 2010 Roundabout analysis and provide a range of analysis results. SIDRA is a computer software program that can analyze Roundabouts using TurnKe Page 35 O consulting, LLc Total 2035 Volume (vph) CDOT Turn Lane Warrants Lane Turn Lane (Based on higher F -R Access Classification Warranted? traffic volume of AM Speed Limit = 25 mph or PM peak hour) Right -IN Right -OUT (RIRO) Access (Left -turn IN and Out Prohibited) WB Left -turn Deceleration Lane Movement will be Prohibited inbound Traffic will make a U-turn at the Proposed Roundabout west of the VVMC Access EB Right -Turn Deceleration Lane Right -Turn IN More than 50 vph YES inbound DHV = 239 NB -WB Left -Turn Acceleration Lane Movement will be Prohibited outbound Traffic will make a U-turn at the Existing Roundabout at the Main Vail Interchange NB -EB Right -Turn Acceleration Lane Right -Turn OUT Not required on multi -lane No (outbound) DHV = 186 highways of this category Table 13 shows that an eastbound right -turn deceleration lane (EB RT Decel Lane) will be required at the VVMC Access to the Frontage Road. The EB RT Decel Lane was included in the roadway configuration for the traffic analysis discussed in the next section. 6 Traffic Operations Analysis The traffic operations was analyzed at the three Study Area intersections. The following sections describe the analysis and results for each Study Area intersection. 6.1 Proposed Roundabout on Frontage Road [Intersection #1] The Proposed Roundabout on the Frontage Road west of the VVMC Access was analyzed using the FHWA Roundabout Methodology, which utilizes the methods and calculations in the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 (HCM 2010). In addition to the HCM 2010 Roundabout Methodology, the SIDRA Roundabout Methodology was used to validate the results of HCM 2010 Roundabout analysis and provide a range of analysis results. SIDRA is a computer software program that can analyze Roundabouts using TurnKe Page 35 O consulting, LLc VVMC Master Plan TIS either 1) the HCM 2010 Roundabout Methodology, or 2) the SIDRA Methodology. The Roundabout analysis was conducted twice for each Methodology, once with the "Default" factors and parameters, and a second time with factors and parameters approved by CDOT and FHWA as part of the System Level Study for the Wolcott traffic study, including: • Critical Gap = 4.05 seconds • Follow Up Headway = 2.50 seconds Proposed Roundabout Location and Confi_guration The TOV has taken the lead on the preliminary design of the Proposed Roundabout on the Frontage Road. The participants in this process include all adjacent property owners because the roundabout would require additional right of way from these properties. VVMC, TOV, and the Evergreen Lodge have been meeting for a couple months to evaluate various roundabout location and configuration options. The TOV has retained Felsburg Holt and Ullevig (FHU) to provide technical support to the effort, and they produced a memorandum to the TOV on 8/1/14. The FHU memo summarized the results of the alternatives analysis for the roundabout, which was based on build out conditions on all three properties in the year 2035. The most recent team meeting was held on 8/5/14 where the participants agreed that the roundabout would be likely be located near the shared property line between the VVMC and Evergreen properties. FHU is currently looking at several different access configurations for the roundabout at this location. This VVMC TIS could not analyze the proposed roundabout because the preferred configuration is not known yet. Therefore, this TIS refers to and relies upon the FHU memo for the roundabout operational analysis in the build out condition. The FHU memo indicates that the proposed roundabout would operate at LOS B or better, even when using conservative background traffic and site trip generation estimates. It is anticipated that the preferred roundabout location and configuration will be identified sometime during the VVMC Master Plan approval process, so this TIS will be updated accordingly. The following sections describe the Interim and Build -out conditions, and Roundabout analysis results. 6.1.1 Interim Condition [Year 2018 — Completion of the VVMC Reconstruction] The Proposed Roundabout on the Frontage Road was analyzed for the completion of the VVMC Master Plan, which is anticipated to be year 2018. Table 14 shows the LOS, delay, and queuing results of the roundabout analysis based on the HCM 2010 Roundabout Methodology. Table 15 compares the results from the HCM 2010 and SIDRA Roundabout analyses methodologies. The Appendix contains the Roundabout analysis output. TurnKe Page 36 Consulting, LLC WMC Master Plan TIS Table 14 - Roundabout Analysis Results [Year 2018] Roundabout Approach AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LO S — Delay (sec) 95th % Queue (ft) LOS — Delay (sec) 95th % Queue (ft) (FHWA-Approved (Default Factors (Default Factors Approach pP Factors & Parameters West Leg (Frontage Road A-5 20 A-9 70 East Leg (Frontage Road A-6 50 A-6 50 South Leg (Evergreen Lodge Access A-6 20 A-9 20 North Leg TOV Service Access A-6 20 A-6 20 A-7 A-2 (Frontage Road Overall Roundabout all vehicles A-6 50 (max) A-7 70 (max) Table 15 - Roundabout Analysis: Compare Various Methodologies TurmnKe Page 37 0 consulting, LLC HCM 2010 SIDRA HCM 2010 SIDRA Roundabout (FHWA-Approved (FHWA-Approved (Default Factors (Default Factors Approach pP Factors & Parameters Factors & Parameters & Parameters) & Parameters) LOS — Dela sec Year / Peak West Leg A-5 A-2 B-11 A-2 (Frontage Road East Leg A-6 A-2 A-7 A-2 (Frontage Road South Leg A-6 A-6 B— 10 A-6 (Evergreen Lodge Access North Leg A-6 A-7 B-10 A-7 TOV Service Access Overall Roundabout A-6 A-2 A-9 A-2 Lail vehicles Year 1 AM Peak Hour Leg A-9 A-2 C-22 A-2 (Frontage Road East Leg A-6 A-2 A-6 A-2 Frontage Road South Leg A— 9 A-7 C— 18 A-7 (Evergreen Lodge Access North Leg A-6 A-7 A-10 A-7 TOV Service Access Overall Roundabout A-7 A-2 B-15 A-2 all vehicles TurmnKe Page 37 0 consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS 6.1.2 Build -out Condition [Year 2035] Refer to the FHU memo for the year 2035 Build -out analysis. 6.2 VVMC Access / TOV Access on Frontage Road [Intersection #2] The VVMC Access on the Frontage Road was analyzed using Synchro and SimTraffic software, which is based on the HCM 2010. The analysis included the TOV Site Access as the north leg of the intersection. The following sections describe the Existing, Interim, and Build -out conditions analysis results. 6.2.1 Existing Condition [Year 2014] This analysis is based on the existing roadway configuration at the VVMC Access. Table 16 shows the analysis results for the Year 2014 Existing Condition. The Appendix contains the Synchro and SimTraffic analysis output. Table 16 - VVMC Access on Frontage Road Analysis Results [Year 2014] 6.2.2 East End (Construction Completed) [Year 2018] VVMC has been working from the assumption that a roundabout would be constructed on the Frontage Road west of the VVMC access. That assumption is based on the premise that adjacent properties will redevelop and provide the right-of-way necessary to construct the proposed roundabout on the Frontage Road. If the adjacent properties do not redevelop such that the proposed roundabout can not be constructed prior to the completion of the VVMC Master Plan, the VVMC needs an access option that would work in the interim condition prior to the construction of the proposed roundabout. VVMC has identified the Frontage Road improvements that would be necessary if VVMC were to redevelop "First and Alone". The "First and Alone" evaluation was done to find a workable VVMC access solution that could occur within the existing right of way. The following sections describe the possible scenarios that could occur in year 2018 at the completion of the VVMC Master Plan. TurnKe Page 38 J Consulting, LLc AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Direction Movement LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS — Delay 95th % Queue sec ft sec ft Eastbound Left -turn A-6 20 A-5 20 (Fronta e Road Westbound Left -turn A — 3 50 A-9 40 Frontage Road Northbound Left -turn D — 31 40 E — 46 50 Right -turn A-3 A-5 (VVMC Access) Southbound Left -turn C— 18 20 C-23 35 Right -turn B— 12 A-8 (TOVAccess) 6.2.2 East End (Construction Completed) [Year 2018] VVMC has been working from the assumption that a roundabout would be constructed on the Frontage Road west of the VVMC access. That assumption is based on the premise that adjacent properties will redevelop and provide the right-of-way necessary to construct the proposed roundabout on the Frontage Road. If the adjacent properties do not redevelop such that the proposed roundabout can not be constructed prior to the completion of the VVMC Master Plan, the VVMC needs an access option that would work in the interim condition prior to the construction of the proposed roundabout. VVMC has identified the Frontage Road improvements that would be necessary if VVMC were to redevelop "First and Alone". The "First and Alone" evaluation was done to find a workable VVMC access solution that could occur within the existing right of way. The following sections describe the possible scenarios that could occur in year 2018 at the completion of the VVMC Master Plan. TurnKe Page 38 J Consulting, LLc VVMC Master Plan TIS 6.2.2.1 Existing Roadway Configuration on the Frontage Road The VVMC Access on the Frontage Road was analyzed for the year 2018 East End (Construction Completed) scenario using the existing roadway configuration. Table 17 shows what can be expected at the VVMC Access if Frontage Road improvements (proposed roundabout or "First and Alone" alternative) are not constructed prior to the completion of the East End of the VVMC Campus. The Appendix contains the Synchro and SimTraffic analysis output. Table 17 — VVMC Access on Frontage Road Analysis Results [Year 2018] Existing Roadwav Configuration 6.2.2.2 "First and Alone" Alternative As stated in the introduction to Section 6.2.2, VVMC has identified the Frontage Road improvements that would be necessary if VVMC were to redevelop "First and Alone". These improvements are listed below. The Appendix contains a sketch of the "First and Alone" alternative. The "First and Alone" alternative was analyzed using year 2035 traffic volumes to see how it would operate beyond the completion of the VVMC Master Plan in year 2018. Table 18 shows the results of the "First and Alone" alternative analysis. The Appendix contains the Synchro and SimTraffic analysis output. "First and Alone" Alternative Improvements on the Frontage Road • Construct a raised median on the Frontage Road that: o Converts the VVMC Access to RIRO, with a break in the raised median so that emergency vehicles can make a left -turn into VVMC. o Converts the TOV Access to 3/4 with a left -turn acceleration lane for outbound left -turns; the left -turn IN will be prohibited. • Construct an eastbound right -turn deceleration lane at the VVMC Access (per requirements in the Colorado State Highway Access Code — see Table 13) • Construct a bulb -out at the Evergreen Lodge Main Access that would accommodate westbound to eastbound U-turns. TurnKe Page 39 Consulting, LLC AM Peak HourPeak Hour mm LOS —Delay 95 th % Queue LOS — Delay 95' % Queue I (sec) (ft) (sec) (ft) 1 Due to the high volume of EB thru traffic (1,075 vph), there will be very 1 Westbound 1 few gaps for WB left -turns (116 vph) into the VVMC, in (Frontage Road) 1 which will result the WB left -turns blocking the WB thru traffic on the Frontage Road. Northbound F — 57 (VVMC Access) • 1 The WB thru queue will probably Southbound extend back to the Roundabout at 1 the Main Vail interchange and cause `grid -lock" in that Roundabout. • • 6.2.2.2 "First and Alone" Alternative As stated in the introduction to Section 6.2.2, VVMC has identified the Frontage Road improvements that would be necessary if VVMC were to redevelop "First and Alone". These improvements are listed below. The Appendix contains a sketch of the "First and Alone" alternative. The "First and Alone" alternative was analyzed using year 2035 traffic volumes to see how it would operate beyond the completion of the VVMC Master Plan in year 2018. Table 18 shows the results of the "First and Alone" alternative analysis. The Appendix contains the Synchro and SimTraffic analysis output. "First and Alone" Alternative Improvements on the Frontage Road • Construct a raised median on the Frontage Road that: o Converts the VVMC Access to RIRO, with a break in the raised median so that emergency vehicles can make a left -turn into VVMC. o Converts the TOV Access to 3/4 with a left -turn acceleration lane for outbound left -turns; the left -turn IN will be prohibited. • Construct an eastbound right -turn deceleration lane at the VVMC Access (per requirements in the Colorado State Highway Access Code — see Table 13) • Construct a bulb -out at the Evergreen Lodge Main Access that would accommodate westbound to eastbound U-turns. TurnKe Page 39 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS Table 18 - VVMC Access: "First and Alone" Alternative [Year 2035] VVMC Access is RIRO. TOV Access is % (Left -turn IN prohibited) 6.2.3 Build -out Condition [Year 2035] The year 2035 Build -out Condition includes proposed roundabout on the Frontage Road. Table 19 shows the analysis results for the Year 2035 Build -out Condition. The Appendix contains the Synchro and SimTraffic analysis output. Table 19 - VVMC Access on Frontage Road Analysis Results [Year 2035] VVMC and TO Accesses are RIRO (in coniunction with the Proposed Roundabout) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Direction Movement LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS — Delay 95th % Queue (sec) (ft) (sec) (ft) Southbound Shared Left- C — 16 30 C — 19 50 TOVAccess and Right -Turn Northbound Right -turn A-4 55 A — 10 105 VVMC Access Westbound (Evergreen Lodge U-turn A-5 95 B — 13 120 Access 6.2.3 Build -out Condition [Year 2035] The year 2035 Build -out Condition includes proposed roundabout on the Frontage Road. Table 19 shows the analysis results for the Year 2035 Build -out Condition. The Appendix contains the Synchro and SimTraffic analysis output. Table 19 - VVMC Access on Frontage Road Analysis Results [Year 2035] VVMC and TO Accesses are RIRO (in coniunction with the Proposed Roundabout) 6.3 Vail Road and Meadow Drive [Intersection #3] The existing main access to the VVMC is on West Meadow Drive. In order to get to the VVMC main access, drivers pass thru the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection, which is a small four-way stop intersection with a high number of pedestrians and local buses. The VVMC Master Plan proposes to relocate the main access to the Frontage Road, but the new main access on the Frontage Road will not be open until year 2018. In addition, when the East End is being constructed in year 2017, it will be necessary to access the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building via West Meadow Drive. This means that the VVMC traffic on West Meadow Drive will increase over the existing condition when the East End is under construction. The 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building represents a 60% increase in VVMC parking spaces accessed via West Meadow Drive (116 existing vs 185 during East End CTurnKe Page 40 onsulting, LLC AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Direction Movement LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS — Delay 95th % Queue (sec) (ft) (sec) (ft) Northbound Right -turn A — 3 45 A-8 95 (VVMC Access) Southbound Right -turn A-4 35 A-5 50 TOV Access) 6.3 Vail Road and Meadow Drive [Intersection #3] The existing main access to the VVMC is on West Meadow Drive. In order to get to the VVMC main access, drivers pass thru the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection, which is a small four-way stop intersection with a high number of pedestrians and local buses. The VVMC Master Plan proposes to relocate the main access to the Frontage Road, but the new main access on the Frontage Road will not be open until year 2018. In addition, when the East End is being constructed in year 2017, it will be necessary to access the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building via West Meadow Drive. This means that the VVMC traffic on West Meadow Drive will increase over the existing condition when the East End is under construction. The 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building represents a 60% increase in VVMC parking spaces accessed via West Meadow Drive (116 existing vs 185 during East End CTurnKe Page 40 onsulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS Construction). However, the traffic data obtained in February 2014 showed that the peak hour trips to/from the US Bank Building were 36 vph (AM) and 43 (PM). Based on the existing peak hour traffic volumes at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection (AM = 316 vph, PM =518 vph), the increase in VVMC trips on West Meadow Drive to/from the US Bank Building is only 11 % (AM) and 8% (PM). The Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection was analyzed using Synchro and SimTraffic software, which is based on the HCM 2010, to compare the existing Condition to the East End (During Construction) to show the impact of using West Meadow Drive to access the US Bank Building parking. After the East End parking structure is completed, the VVMC main access will be on the Frontage Road. Except for service vehicles, all VVMC trips will use the new VVMC main access on the Frontage Road. The following sections describe the Existing, Interim, and Build -out conditions analysis results. 6.3.1 Existing Condition [Year 2014] This analysis is based on the existing roadway configuration at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection. Table 20 shows the analysis results for the Year 2014 Existing Condition. The Appendix contains the Synchro and SimTraffic analysis output. Table 20 — Vail Road and Meadow Drive Analysis Results [Year 2014] 6.3.2 East End (During Construction) [Year 2017] The existing roadway configuration was analyzed for the year 2017 East End (During Construction) scenario. Table 21 shows what can be expected at the this intersection when the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building are access via West Meadow TurnKe Page 41 Consulting, LLC AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Approach LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS —Delay 95th % Queue (sec) (ft) (sec) (ft) Eastbound A — 7 55 B — 11 100 West Meadow Drive Westbound A-9 50 B — 10 70 East Meadow Drive Northbound A — 8 55 B — 12 100 Vail Road Southbound A — 9 95 B — 10 95 (Vail Road) Overall Intersection A — 9 95 (max) B — 11 100 (max) all vehicles 6.3.2 East End (During Construction) [Year 2017] The existing roadway configuration was analyzed for the year 2017 East End (During Construction) scenario. Table 21 shows what can be expected at the this intersection when the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building are access via West Meadow TurnKe Page 41 Consulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS Drive during the construction of the East End parking structure. The Appendix contains the Synchro and SimTraffic analysis output. Table 21— Vail Road and Meadow Drive Analysis Results [Year 2017] Table 21 shows that there will not be a noticeable change in the LOS, delay, or queuing at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection during the construction of the East End parking structure when the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building will be accessed via West Meadow Drive. 6.3.3 Build -out Condition [Year 2035] After the VVMC Master Plan is completed in year 2018, the VVMC traffic volume on West Meadow Drive will go from about 1,000 vehicles per day (based on August 2013 traffic count) to less than 20 trips per day (service vehicles only). The existing peak hour VVMC traffic at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection represents 21% (AM) and 29% (PM). After completion of the VVMC Master Plan in year 2018, the peak hour traffic volume at this intersection will decrease by those same percentages. Therefore, the year 2035 Build -out Condition was not analyzed at this intersection. 7 Conclusion and Recommendations The following conclusions and recommendations are based on the Project trip generation and traffic analysis. 7.1 Proposed Roundabout on Frontage Road [Intersection #1] The TOV has taken the lead on the preliminary design of the Proposed Roundabout on the Frontage Road. The participants in this process include all adjacent property owners because the roundabout would require additional right of way from these properties. VVMC, TOV, and the Evergreen Lodge have been meeting for a couple months to evaluate various roundabout location and configuration options. The TOV has retained Felsburg Holt and Ullevig (FHU) to provide technical support to the effort, and they produced a memorandum to the TOV on 8/1/14. The FHU memo summarized CTurnKe Page 42 onsulting, LLC AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Approach LOS — Delay 95th % Queue LOS —Delay 95th % Queue (sec) (ft) (sec) (ft) Eastbound A — 7 50 B — 10 95 West Meadow Drive Westbound A — 10 55 A — 9 65 East Meadow Drive Northbound A-8 55 B — 12 90 Vail Road Southbound A — 10 115 B — 11 100 Vail Road Overall Intersection A-9 115 (max) B — 11 100 (max) all vehicles Table 21 shows that there will not be a noticeable change in the LOS, delay, or queuing at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection during the construction of the East End parking structure when the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building will be accessed via West Meadow Drive. 6.3.3 Build -out Condition [Year 2035] After the VVMC Master Plan is completed in year 2018, the VVMC traffic volume on West Meadow Drive will go from about 1,000 vehicles per day (based on August 2013 traffic count) to less than 20 trips per day (service vehicles only). The existing peak hour VVMC traffic at the Vail Road and Meadow Drive intersection represents 21% (AM) and 29% (PM). After completion of the VVMC Master Plan in year 2018, the peak hour traffic volume at this intersection will decrease by those same percentages. Therefore, the year 2035 Build -out Condition was not analyzed at this intersection. 7 Conclusion and Recommendations The following conclusions and recommendations are based on the Project trip generation and traffic analysis. 7.1 Proposed Roundabout on Frontage Road [Intersection #1] The TOV has taken the lead on the preliminary design of the Proposed Roundabout on the Frontage Road. The participants in this process include all adjacent property owners because the roundabout would require additional right of way from these properties. VVMC, TOV, and the Evergreen Lodge have been meeting for a couple months to evaluate various roundabout location and configuration options. The TOV has retained Felsburg Holt and Ullevig (FHU) to provide technical support to the effort, and they produced a memorandum to the TOV on 8/1/14. The FHU memo summarized CTurnKe Page 42 onsulting, LLC VVMC Master Plan TIS the results of the alternatives analysis for the roundabout, which was based on build out conditions on all three properties in the year 2035. The most recent team meeting was held on 8/5/14 where the participants agreed that the roundabout would be likely be located near the shared property line between the VVMC and Evergreen properties. FHU is currently looking at several different access configurations for the roundabout at this location. This VVMC TIS could not analyze the proposed roundabout because the preferred configuration is not known yet. Therefore, this TIS refers to and relies upon the FHU memo for the roundabout operational analysis in the build out condition. The FHU memo indicates that the proposed roundabout would operate at LOS B or better, even when using conservative background traffic and site trip generation estimates. It is anticipated that the preferred roundabout location and configuration will be identified sometime during the VVMC Master Plan approval process, so this TIS will be updated accordingly. VVMC has identified the Frontage Road improvements that would be necessary if VVMC were to redevelop "First and Alone". The "First and Alone" evaluation was done to find a workable VVMC access solution that could occur within the existing right of way. The ultimate roundabout configuration would require additional highway right of way for implementation. In addition, CDOT understands that over -designed roundabouts can create operational issues, which is another reason that VVMC evaluated the "First and Alone" access options that do not include a roundabout. 7.2 VVMC Access / TOV Access on Frontage Road [Intersection #2] The year 2018 East End (Construction Completed) analysis showed that the existing roadway configuration at the VVMC Access will probably create grid -lock on the Frontage Road and Main Vail interchange. If the proposed roundabout is not constructed prior to year 2018, the "First and Alone" alternative should be constructed prior to (or coincide with) the completion of the WMC Master Plan construction in year 2018. The "First and Alone" alternative will provide acceptable traffic operations at the VVMC Access (RIRO) and TOV Access (3/4 movement) thru the year 2035. In addition, an eastbound right -turn deceleration lane should be constructed at the VVMC Access on the Frontage Road. 7.3 Vail Road and Meadow Drive [Intersection #3] The VVMC trips at this intersection will increase during the East End construction due to the 69 parking spaces at the US Bank Building being accesses via West Meadow Drive. However, the increase in traffic at this intersection will only be 11 % (AM) and 8% (PM), and there will not be a noticeable change in the LOS, delay, or queuing at this intersection. No changes are recommended at this intersection. TurnKe Page 43 J Consulting, LLc VVMC Master Plan TIS Appendix • Methodology submitted to TOV and CDOT • Traffic Count Data o Winter Season Traffic Counts — February 4, 2014 o Summer Season Traffic Counts — August 21-22, 2013 • Peak Hour Calculations • Project Trip Generation Calculations • Project Trip Distribution Calculations • FHU Email to TOV Regarding Traffic Forecasts • Evergreen Lodge o Select pages from the Fox Higgins traffic study prepared in year 2008 o Trip Generation and Distribution Calculations • Traffic Volumes at Study Area Intersections • Proposed Roundabout Analysis Output [Intersection #1] • Frontage Road and VVMC Access Analysis Output [Intersection #2] o "First and Alone" Alternative Sketch • Vail Road and Meadow Drive Analysis Output [Intersection #3] • FHU Memo regarding Proposed Roundabout, dated August 1, 2014 TurnKe Page 44 Consulting, LLC Traffic Volume Development — VVMC Master Plan TIS Methodology submitted to TOV and CDOT Tu rn they Consulting, LLC superior Yrojecl Leadership Mark Bunnell From: Tom Kassmel <TKassmel@vailgov.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 2:38 PM To: 'Harbert - CDOT, Kent'; Mark Bunnell Cc: Daniel Roussin; Daniel Feeney; Skip Hudson Subject: RE: Vail Valley Medical Center - Study Area & Traffic Data Methodology Mark, See my response below in bold. • Study area will only include the potential VVMC Main Access (south leg) and TOV municipal building access (north leg) to the 1-70 South Frontage Road. I agree the roundabout does not necessarily be analyzed, however we will have to understand the impacts of a new intersection on the multiple adjacent intersections as Kent suggests. • Collecting traffic counts for two weekday AM & PM peak hour periods will be sufficient to calculate the existing trip generation. I would guess that Summer mid week traffic patterns are significantly lower from winter. would suggest that a winter count be done as well, during a busier time period. The Town of Vail did winter counts along the Frontage Road this past winter that can be used as a comparison. • Existing and future background traffic volumes for the 1-70 South Frontage Road will be based on the Vail MOB traffic study, the Vail TMP, and follow-up work by FHU. Ok From: Harbert - CDOT, Kent [mailto:kent.harbert@state.co.us] Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 4:21 PM To: Mark Bunnell Cc: Daniel Roussin; Tom Kassmel; Daniel Feeney; Skip Hudson Subject: Re: Vail Valley Medical Center - Study Area & Traffic Data Methodology Mark, I am not familiar with the previous study, but based on what you say about it I am okay with not analyzing the roundabout at the interchange. However, I do see that there a half dozen or so access onto the frontage road in proximity to this project that will need to be addressed at some point in the process. Thanks, Xent T. Kent Harbert, PE Access Engineer CDOT Region 3, Traffic and Safety Residency 222 South 6t" Street, Room 100 Grand Junction, CO 81501-3794 Phone: 970-683-6279 Cell: 970-812-6768 Fax: 970-683-6290 kent.harbert(g,state.coms On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Mark Bunnell <markbkturnke, ll�> wrote: Dan, Kent, and Tom, I am in the very early stages of a traffic study related to a potential master plan for the Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) and want to get confirmation on the study area and traffic data. Typically, I would submit a full methodology (study area, traffic data, land use, trip generation & distribution, analysis periods & methods, etc), but at this point we just want to get the traffic counted before the summer season ends. I will submit a full methodology at a later date, assuming the master plan effort moves forward. Please review the details below and provide comments. Prosect The VVMC is looking at doing a master plan for their Vail campus, but the work is very preliminary and the possible concepts described in this email have not been finalized. The possible redevelopment of the VVMC could change the layout such that the VVMC Main Access would be on the 1-70 South Frontage Road, instead of on West Meadow Dr as it is today. There would possibly be a service access on West Meadow Drive that would not be used by patrons or employees so the future VVMC traffic on West Meadow Drive would be lower than existing. Study Area The study area will only include one intersection — the potential VVMC Main Access to the 1-70 South Frontage Road (see aerial image below). The TOV municipal building would be the north leg of the potential VVMC Main Access. We considered including the south roundabout at the Vail interchange in the study area, but did not include it for the following reasons: • The TOV completed an extensive evaluation of alternatives at the Main Vail Interchange Roundabouts as part of the 2025 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update (Vail TMP). The Vail TMP concluded that there is a limited amount of realistic capacity improvements that could be constructed at the interchange, and concluded that other system -wide improvements would be needed to provide an acceptable level of service (LOS) at the interchange. • The Vail TMP discusses how reconfiguring the VVMC so that its main access is on the 1-70 South Frontage Road would improve the south roundabout. On page 37 of the Vail TMP it states: Another consideration listed in Table 6. but not specifically quantified, is the modification of the Hospital's access. The Vail Valley Medical Center is cuinentIly served by Meadow Drive via Mail Road. As such, nearly all of its traffic impacts the south roundabout intersection along the Vail Road (south) leg, The Center is in the planning process to retonrigure its far lky such thal it alight have art access directly onto the Frontage Road arrest of the Wit, across from the Municipal Center. This would -shift" some of this facility's traffic (0 of tha south round*>out and off of the south roadway -leg" which is projected to operate at a poor LOS_ This scheme requires coordination with the other nearby uses' acoess points, but it could offer a small dose of traffic relief to the heavily -used south roundabout TurnKey Consulting prepared a traffic study for the Vail Medical Office Building (Vail MOB) in 2012. The traffic study was completed, but not submitted because the Vail MOB project did not continue. The Vail MOB consisted of constructing a medical office building and parking garage on the north side of the 1-70 South Frontage Road adjacent to the TOV municipal building. The Vail MOB / TOV municipal building access (north leg) would have lined up with the potential access to the VVMC main access (south leg). As part of the Vail MOB traffic study, CDOT and the TOV reviewed and approved a methodology that stated that the study area would only include the access to the Vail MOB, and not include the south roundabout at the Vail Interchange for the first reason listed above. Traffic Volume Data TurnKey Consulting plans to calculate the trip generation for the VVMC master plan based on the existing trips to/from the VVMC campus. In order to do that, we plan to conduct traffic counts at the three existing accesses to the VVMC campus for the durations listed below. The trip generation based on the summer season will be factored to the peak season (winter). • AM & PM peak periods (two hours each) • Two Weekdays (Tues & Wed OR Wed & Thur) The existing and future background traffic volumes on the 1-70 South Frontage Road will come from previous studies [Vail MOB traffic study prepared by TurnKey Consulting, Vail TMP, and follow-up work by Felsburg Holt & Ullevig (FHU) on a potential roundabout at the VVMC / MOB access (see attached memo)]. The previous studies are based on the peak season (winter) so we do not plan on counting the traffic on the 1-70 South Frontage Road. Summary At this point I am looking for confirmation on the following: • Study area will only include the potential VVMC Main Access (south leg) and TOV municipal building access (north leg) to the 1-70 South Frontage Road • Collecting traffic counts for two weekday AM & PM peak hour periods will be sufficient to calculate the existing trip generation • Existing and future background traffic volumes for the 1-70 South Frontage Road will be based on the Vail MOB traffic study, the Vail TMP, and follow-up work by FHU. Please call or email if you have questions. Thanks, Mark Bunnell, P.E. TurnKey Consulting, LLC M: 970-640-2677 O: 970-985-4001 markb(ab-turnkeyllc.net 2478 Patterson Road, Suite 18 Grand Junction, CO 81505 Networks Unlimited FilterIT identified this as CLEAN. Give feedback: This is SPAM • More VVMC Master Plan TIS Traffic Count Data • Winter Season Traffic Counts — February 4, 2014 • Summer Season Traffic Counts — August 21-22, 2013 TurnKey Consulting, LLC superior Prnjeol leadership Count Type Cars Trucks Cars & Trucks Peds WMC Master Plan TIS Traffic Counts Collected on Tuesday, February 4, 2014 Main Entrance & W Meadows Drive I I WMC Employee Entrance and Frontage Rd Main Entrance & W Meadows Drive WMC Employee Entrance and Frontage Rd Count WMC Main Ect.— W Meadows Dr W Meadows Dr Municipal Bldg Frontage Road WMC Employee Ent Frontage Road Traffic tolfrom Alley A4j to Bank Bltlg Type Time 300 PM 3:15 PM 3'30 PM 3:45 PM 4:00 PM 4:15 PM Cars 4:30 PM 445 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM Total Peak Hour 3:00 PM 3'15 PM 3:30 PM 3 45 PM 4:00 PM 4 15 PM Trucks 4:30 PM 445 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM Total Peak Hour 3:00 PM 3:15 PM 3:30 PM 3:45 PM 4:00 PM 4:15 PM Cars & 4:30 PM Trucks 4:45 PM 5:00 PM t 3:00 PM 3:15 PM 3:30 PM 3:45PM 4:00 PM 4:15 PM Peds 430 PM 4:45 PM 500 PM 515 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM Total Peak Hour ®®®® ® ®® ®® ® ® ®® ®® ®® ® rr m MOM 1=123 -11110MI-M rrm ����������©� rrmlliNllmllMERE �©�©� ©E EmIIIIIIIIIIIIII ME Mm MOMI IM ME mm MIMI rr m E�� :rrm ®NIM Mm ®' - ����M�����M� EM©MIE©IM®SIE ���� IMIIIIE©� ®� �������®��� mm mm © ©E r r m �' ��' �©��®�©I♦ ®m MEME®EMERE� �m ENIMEMINSWIMMINIM ���i M© rr m rrm®��©�®������ ������������ ���� �® �� �m MWIMMEIMMIMIMMIMM mm �© Im mm E IIIIIIBI� M' IM' IM' E' MIM' M' IM' IM' E' M' Main Entrance & W Meadows Drive WMC Employee Entrance and Frontage Rd Count WMC Main Ect.— W Meadows Dr W Meadows Dr Municipal Bldg Frontage Road WMC Employee Ent Frontage Road Traffic tolfrom Alley A4j to Bank Bltlg Type Time 300 PM 3:15 PM 3'30 PM 3:45 PM 4:00 PM 4:15 PM Cars 4:30 PM 445 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM Total Peak Hour 3:00 PM 3'15 PM 3:30 PM 3 45 PM 4:00 PM 4 15 PM Trucks 4:30 PM 445 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM Total Peak Hour 3:00 PM 3:15 PM 3:30 PM 3:45 PM 4:00 PM 4:15 PM Cars & 4:30 PM Trucks 4:45 PM 5:00 PM t 3:00 PM 3:15 PM 3:30 PM 3:45PM 4:00 PM 4:15 PM Peds 430 PM 4:45 PM 500 PM 515 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM Total Peak Hour Page 1 of 2 MOM 1=123 -11110MI-M mm EmIIIIIIIIIIIIII ME Mm mm rrm®��©�®������ ���� �® mm Im mm IIIIIIBI� rrm mm ME mum ©E ME EM Page 1 of 2 WMC Master Plan TIS Traffic Counts Collected on Tuesday, February 4, 2014 Page 2 of 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Traffic Counts Collected on Wednesday and Thursday, August 21-22, 2013 Date/Time 08/21/2013 06:30 - 06:44 08/21/2013 06:45 - 06:59 08/21/2013 07:00 - 07:14 08/21/2013 07:15 - 07:29 08/21/2013 07:30 - 07:44 08/21/2013 07:45 - 07:59 08/21/2013 08:00 - 08:14 08/21/2013 08:15 - 08:29 Peak Hour 08/21/2013 15:00 - 15:14 08/21/2013 15:15 - 15:29 08/21/2013 15:30 - 15:44 08/21/2013 15:45 - 15:59 08/21/2013 16:00 - 16:14 08/21/2013 16:15 - 16:29 08/21/2013 16:30 - 16:44 08/21/2013 16:45 - 16:59 Peak Hour 08/22/2013 06:30 - 06:44 08/22/2013 06:45 - 06:59 08/22/2013 07:00 - 07:14 08/22/2013 07:15 - 07:29 08/22/2013 07:30 - 07:44 08/22/2013 07:45 - 07:59 08/22/2013 08:00 - 08:14 08/22/2013 08:15 - 08:29 Peak Hour 08/22/2013 15:00 - 15:14 08/22/2013 15:15 - 15:29 08/22/2013 15:30 - 15:44 08/22/2013 15:45 - 15:59 08/22/2013 16:00 - 16:14 08/22/2013 16:15 - 16:29 08/22/2013 16:30 - 16:44 08/22/2013 16:45 - 16:59 Peak Hour Guest Access (W Meadow Dr) Service Access (W Meadow Dr) Employee Access (Frontage Road) SB (OUT) I NB (IN) SB (OUT) I NB (IN) NB (OUT) FSB (IN) 0000©� 0®000 ©©000® ®000© ©©000® ©000©® 000©� 00000® 0©00®0 00000 00000 ©©000 ®000© 0©000© ®000®0 ®®0000 �000�0 0©00®0 00000 ©000©® ©©000 00000® 0©0000 0000® ©000®® 0�000� 00000 000000 0000®0 00000© 00000 Total VVMC Trips OUT I IN 3 20 1 60 13 38 9 24 7 22 8 32 2 29 6 19 30 144 23 12 15 19 18 16 19 6 26 15 20 22 29 17 19 8 94 62 4 34 5 61 7 31 13 34 7 12 9 37 17 33 10 22 29 160 13 21 16 13 23 12 24 14 16 8 11 18 21 18 29 21 77 65 AM Peak Hour (Max) 12 21 0 0 17 139 29 160 PM Peak Hour Max 44 30 2 0 48 32 1 94 62 Page 1 of 1 WMC Master Plan TIS Peak Hour Calculations Turn Key Consulting, LLC superior Yrojecl Leadership VVMC Trips 15 -Min Periods 21 Time IN OUT Total 6:30-6:45 am 27 5 32 6:45-7:00 am 50 8 58 7:00-7:15 am 33 7 40 7:15-7:30 am 39 8 47 7:30-7:45 am 45 13 58 7:45-8:00 am 37 8 45 8:00-8:15 am 29 13 42 8:15-8:30 am 29 8 37 Total 2901 70 360 3:00-3:15 pm 21 17 38 3:15-3:30 pm 19 14 33 3:30-3:45 pm 32 24 56 3:45-4:00 pm 26 29 55 4:00-4:15 pm 25 30 55 4:15-4:30 pm 25 26 51 4:30-4:45 pm 18 30 48 4:45-5:00 pm 18 35 53 5:00-5:15 pm 18 32 50 5:15-5:30 pm 1 111 301 41 5:30-5:45 pm 161 46 62 5:45-6:00 pm 211 351 56 Total 2501 3481 598 VVMC Master Plan TIS Peak Hour Comparison - VVMC Traffic vs Frontage Road Traffic Peak Hour 52 Time Time I IN JOUTITotal 98 84 182 3:15-4:15 prn 102 97 6:30-7:30 am 149 28 177 6:45-7:45 am 167 36 203 7:00-8:00 am 154 36 190 7:15-8:15 am 150 42 192 7:30-8:30 am 140 42 182 192 4:45-5:45 pm 63 143 1-70 South Frontage Road Traffic (at VVMC Access) 15 -Min Periods 52 Time IN 3:00-4:00 pm 98 84 182 3:15-4:15 prn 102 97 199 3:30-4:30 pm 108 109 217 3:45-4:45 prn 94 115 209 4:00-5:00 pm 86 121 207 4:15-5:15 prn 79 123 202 4:30-5:30 pm 65 127 192 4:45-5:45 pm 63 143 206 5:00-6:00 pm 66 1431 209 265 647 64 108 1-70 South Frontage Road Traffic (at VVMC Access) 15 -Min Periods 52 Time IN OUT Total 6:30-6:45 am 23 13 36 6:45-7:00 am 33 16 49 7:00-7:15 am 24 24 48 7:15-7:30 am 37 19 56 7:30-7:45 am 42 20 62 7:45-8:00 am 77 47 124 8:00-8:15 am 79 65 144 8:15-8:30 am 671 61 128 Total 3821 265 647 3:00-3:15 pm 52 63 115 3:15-3:30 pm 66 82 148 3:30-3:45 pm 65 89 154 3:45-4:00 pm 66 81 147 4:00-4:15 pm 73 88 161 4:15-4:30 pm 74 92 166 4:30-4:45 pm 65 90 155 4:45-5:00 pm 62 89 151 5:00-5:15 pm 78 70 148 5:15-5:30 pm 621 71 133 5:30-5:45 pm 44 64 108 5:45-6:00 pm 39 67 106 Total 746 946 1692 Page 1 of 1 Peak Hour Time WB Thru EB Thru Total 564 3:15-4:15 pm 270 340 6:30-7:30 am 117 72 189 6:45-7:45 am 136 79 215 7:00-8:00 am 180 110 290 7:15-8:15 am 235 151 386 7:30-8:30 am 265 193 458 587 4:45-5:45 pm 2461 2941 3:00-4:00 pm 249 315 564 3:15-4:15 pm 270 340 610 3:30-4:30 pm 278 350 628 3:45-4:45 prn 278 351 629 4:00-5:00 pm 274 359 633 4:15-5:15 prn 279 341 620 4:30-5:30 pm 2671 320 587 4:45-5:45 pm 2461 2941 540 5:00-6:00 pm 2231 2721 495 VVMC Master Plan TIS Project Trip Generation Calculations TurnKey Consulting, LLC superior Projeol leadership Condition Existing West End (Du _q Const West End Const Com leted East End Durin Const East End Const Com feted Build -out WMC Master Plan TIS Trip Generation Calculations Patron / Guest Medical Accomodations Parking Trips to/from WMC (vph) Parking Spaces Trips on W Meadow Dr (vph) Trips on Frontage Road (vph) Spaces Change Patient Beds Exam Rooms (based on AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr W Meadow or 1-70S FR AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr Med Acc and/or # Change Parking Spaces) # Change # Change E(fs°l�g) IN OUT IN OUT # % of # % of IN OUT Total IN OUT Total IN OUT Total IN OUT Total (from (from Spaces Total Spaces Total Existin Existin Condition wu-time parking Employees Spaces FTE o'oo Chane Chane # (f m # (f nm Existin Existin 569 0.0% 204[1907%.. 3.7% 2540.% 590 3.7% 32 -87.4% 610 7.2% 409 61.0% _ % 440 73.2 % HEI Employees 153 --- Trips to/from VV (vph) 49 20 76 78 107 69.9% 46 30.1 % 44 20 1 64 71 76 147 1 5 1 0 5 1 5 2 7 58 0.0% 160 3.2% 153 0.0% 0.0% 49 20 76 78 57 37.3% 96 62.7% 18 7 25 28 29 57 31 13 44 48 49 97 58 0.0% 190 22.6% 153 0.0% 0.0% 49 20 76 78 107 69.9% 46 30.1% 34 14 48 53 55 108 15 6 21 23 23 46 58 0.0% 190 22.6% 153 0.0% 0.0% 49 20 76 78 153 100.0% 0 0.0% 49 20 69 76 78 154 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 0.0% 197 27.1% 210 37.3% 37.3% 67 27 104 107 0 0.0% 210 100.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 27 94 104 107 211 60 67.7 % HEI % Kin] 83 34 129 133 0 0.0% 260 100.0 % 0 0 0 0 O= 83 34 117 129 HE Step #1 Step #2 Step #3 Condition wu-time parking Employees Spaces FTE o'oo Chane Chane # (f m # (f nm Existin Existin 569 0.0% 204[1907%.. 3.7% 2540.% 590 3.7% 32 -87.4% 610 7.2% 409 61.0% _ % 440 73.2 % HEI Employees Trips on Frontage Road (vph) Trips to/from VV (vph) Parking Spaces Trips on W Meadow Dr (vph) Trips on Frontage Road (vph) WMC Campus % Change (based on Parking Spaces) AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr W Meadow Dr -70 S FR AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr IN OUT IN 1 OUT I OUTI Total I IN I OUT I Total IN OUT Total IN OUT Total 91 22 32 31 9 3.5% 245 96.5% 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2= 90 21 111 30 29 59 West End Durin ConstWest End590 Const Com feted East End Durin Const East End Const Com feted -19.7% 0.0% -87.4% 61.0% 73.2 % 73 18 26 25 91 22 32 31 11 3 4 4 147 35 52 50 158 38 55 54 9 4.4% 195 95.6% 9 3.5% 245 96.5% 32 100.0% 0 0.0% 5 1.2% 404 98.8% .1% 435 98.9 % 5 =-/.4 3 1 4 1 1 2 3 1 4 1 1 2 11 3 14 4 4 8 2 0 2 1 1 2 _ 2 0 2 1 17 2 70 17 87 25 24 49 88 21 109 31 30 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 145 35 180 51 49 100 _ 156 38 194 54 53 107 Build -out Condition Year TOTAL WMC TRIPS Trips on W Meadow Dr (vph) Trips on Frontage Road (vph) WMC Cam us AM Pk HrPM Pk Hr AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr IN OUT Total IN OUT Total I IN I OUT I Total I IN I OUT I Total Existing 2014 45 21 1 66 1731 1 95 1 21 1 116 1 35 31 66 West End Durin Const 2015 21 8 29 29 30 59 101 30 131 73 73 146 West End Const Com fete 2016 37 15 52 54 56 110 103 27 130 54 53 107 East End(During Const 2017 60 23 1 83 1801 82 162 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 10 0 0 East End Const Completed 2018 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1212162 1 274 155 156 311 Build -out Prior to 2035 2 0 2 1 1 1 2 239 72 311 183186 369 Page 1 of 1 WMC Master Plan TIS Project Trip Distribution Calculations Turn Key Consulting, LLC superior Yrojecl Leadership VVMC Master Plan TIS Trip Distribution Calculations VVMC Employee / Bank Bldg Entrance and Frontage Rd Municipal Bldg Frontage Road VVMC Employee Ent Frontage Road Peak Hour From North From East From South From West Total Left Thru I Right Left I Thru Ri ht Left I Thru I Right Left I Thru I Ri ht 7:30-8:30 am 623 3:30-4:30 pml 719 Peak Hour # Trips AM Dist. % USE # Trips PM Dist. % USE Trip Distribution Percentages - Frontage Road (Based on Vehicles IN and OUT at VVMC access on Frontage Road) Inbound Outbound From the East (WB LT) From the West (EB RT) To the East (NB RT) To the West (NB LT) 26 Vail Road and Meadows Drive Vail Rd W Meadows Dr Vail Rd W Meadows Dr Peak Hour From North From East From South From West Left Thru Right Left Thru Ri ht Left Thru Ri ht Left Thru Right 7:30-8:30 am 0 143 65 0 10 0 0 60 0 28 7 F 9 29 2 74.3% 25.7% 93.5% 6.5% 75% 25% 95% 5% 3:30-4:30 pm 4 103 88 2 18 4 4 151 2 123 10 PM Dist. USE Trip Distribution Percentages -Vail Road (Based on Vehicles IN and OUT at Meadow Drive and Vail Road Intersection) Peak Hour # Trips AM Dist. USE #Trips Inbound Outbound From the North (SB RT) From the South (NB LT) To the North (EB LT) To the South (EB RT) 88 4 123 9 95.7% 4.3% 93.2% 6.8% 95% 5% 95% 5% Page 1 of 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS FHU Email to TOV Regarding Traffic Forecasts TurnKey Consulting, LLC superior Prnjeol leadership Page 1 of 2 Skip Hudson From: Tom Kassmel [TKassmel@vailgov.com] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 8:23 AM To: Skip Hudson; Michael O'Connor (michael@triumphdev.com) Cc: Greg Hall Subject: FW: VOlumes I asked FHU to weigh in on the growth rate after 2025. See below. From: Chris.Fasching[mailto: Chris. Fasching@FHUENG.COM] Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2012 3:01 PM To: Tom Kassmel Subject: RE: VOlumes Tom, We used 0.5% per year growth in the stud hich is pretty darn flat. I think you could safely apply this rate out to 2034. Thanks. Chris Fasching, PE, PTOE Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 S. Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO 80111 303-721-1440 Fax - 303-721-0832 From: Tom Kassmel rmailto:TKassmel@vailgov.coml Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 1:58 PM To: Chris.Fasching Subject: VOlumes Chris Would you be able to weigh in on the appropriate growth rate for post 2025. So Turnkey (Skip) can extrapolate to 2034. We all agree it should be relatively flat compared to the growth we project until 2025, your thoughts? Tom Kassmel Town Engineer Public Works Department rowN of vs 970.479.2235 vailgov.com twitter.com/vailgov V�- 8/14/2012 WMC Master Plan TIS Evergreen Lodge Select pages from the Fox Higgins traffic study prepared in year 2008 Trip Generation and Distribution Calculations Turn Key Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership IN IN V, a A T R AN S P❑ R T AT I❑ N G R UP October 3, 2008 Mr. Adam Williams ARC Integrated Program Management, Inc. 179038 th Street, Unit 105 Boulder, CO 80301 RE: Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Williams: Fox Higgins has completed a traffic impact analysis for the proposed Fairmont Vail project located on the south side of the S. Frontage Road roughly 850 feet west of the main Vail roundabout. This analysis has been completed following "Level Three" traffic assessment requirements per Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Region 3. Per CDOT requirements, this analysis evaluates potential traffic impacts along the S. Frontage Road with respect to operational considerations and auxiliary lane needs for the short-term build -out and long-term (20 -year) scenarios. Since the project and adjacent roadways are anticipated to generate the highest traffic volumes during the peak winter season, this study analyzes the peak winter scenario for the highest of the AM, PM and Saturday peak hour volumes. This memorandum summarizes our analysis and findings. Project Description The Fairmont Vail project is proposing to redevelop the existing Evergreen Lodge hotel with similar uses to include hotel rooms, on-site restaurant and meeting facilities, fractional -ownership units, and residential condominium units. The project site is located along the S. Frontage Rd. just west of mile marker 176. A vicinity map is provided on Figure 1. Nearby accesses and intersections include the main Vail roundabout (Vail Road and 1-70 interchange) located roughly 850 feet east of the east site access, the existing Lionshead parking structure access located roughly 650 feet west of the west site access, and driveways for adjacent uses to the east. Two access driveways along the S. Frontage Road currently serve the site. These accesses are not shared or used by any other properties. The project proposes to relocate the easternmost access roughly 45 feet to the west of the current location, with the east access to serve only service vehicles with redevelopment. The existing westernmost access will serve as the main site access. This access location may need to be adjusted slightly to accommodate grades, though is shown in roughly the existing access location based on the current site plan. The site plan depicting the existing and proposed access points is shown on Figure 2. P.O. Box 1 9768, BOULDER, COLORADO 811308-2768 PRONE: 303-652-3571 0 FAx: 3133-772-2329 OR 303-652-6574 FH#08042 Fairmont Vail 10-03-08 Traffic Impact Analysis WHIG13INS Table 2. Trip Generation Estimate - No Reductions Table 3. Trip Generation Estimate with Non -Auto Use Reduction Non -Auto Average Weekday Average Saturday Weekday Weekday Saturday ITEUse Use Daily Trips Daily Trips AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Reduction Code Land Use Size Unit (a) Rate Total In Out Rate Total In Out Rate Total In Out Rate Total In Out Rate Total In Out Existing Land Use (Evergreen Lodge) 310 Hotel 128 Occupied 0% 8.92 1142 571 571 10.50 1344 672 672 0.67 86 50 36 0.70 90 44 46 0.87 111 54 57 40 Rooms Rooms Totals: 1142 571 571 400 1344 672 672 471 86 50 36 35 90 44 46 111 54 57 Proposed Site Land Uses (Fairmont Vail): 310 Hotel 128 Occupied 0% 8.92 1142 571 571 10.50 1344 672 672 0.67 86 50 36 0.70 90 44 46 0.87 111 54 57 78 38 40 Rooms Rooms 310 Hotel (Fractional Ownership) 11 Occupied 0% 8.92 98 49 49 10.50 116 58 58 0.67 7 4 3 0.70 8 4 4 0.87 10 5 5 7 4 3 Rooms Rooms 230 Residential Condominium/Townhouse 91 Dwelling 0% 5.86 533 267 266 5.67 516 258 258 0.44 40 7 33 0.52 47 31 16 0.47 43 29 14 30 20 10 Units Units Totals: 1 1 17731 8871 8861 1 12411 1 1976 988 988 1 13831 133 61 72 93 145 79 661 101 1 164 88 76 1 115 62 53 Net Added Trip Totals (Proposed less Existing): I I 631 316 315 632 316 316 47 11 36 55 35 20 53 34 19 Table 3. Trip Generation Estimate with Non -Auto Use Reduction (a) Accounts for pedestrian, transit, and other non -auto trips made to/from the site within the downtown Vail core area; 30% reduction assumed per the Vail Transportation Master Plan Update (Draft, June 2008). 08042 trip genAs - Trip Generation Non -Auto Average Weekday Average Saturday Weekday Weekday Saturday ITE Use Daily Trips Daily Trips AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Reduction Code Land Use Size Unit (a) Rate Total In Out Rate Total In Out Rate Total In Out Rate Total In Out Rate Total In Out Existing Land Use (Evergreen Lodge) 310 Hotel 128 Occupied 30% 8.92 799 400 399 10.50 941 471 470 0.67 60 35 25 0.70 63 31 32 0.87 78 38 40 Rooms Totals: 799 400 3991 941 471 4701 60 35 251 8 38 40 Proposed Site Land Uses (Fairmont Vail): 310 Hotel 128 Occupied 30% 8.92 799 400 399 10.50 941 471 470 0.67 60 35 25 0.70 63 31 32 0.87 78 38 40 Rooms 310 Hotel (Fractional Ownership) 11 Occupied 30% 8.92 69 35 34 10.50 81 41 40 0.67 5 3 2 0.70 5 3 2 0.87 7 4 3 Rooms 230 Residential Condominium/Townhouse 91 Dwelling 30% 5.86 373 187 186 5.67 361 181 180 0.44 28 5 23 0.52 33 22 11 0.47 30 20 10 Units Totals: 1 1 12411 6221 6191 1 13831 6931 6901 93 43 50 101 56 451 1 115 62 53 Net Added Trip Totals (Proposed less Existing): 442 222 2201 442 222 2201 33 8 251 38 25 131 37 24 13 (a) Accounts for pedestrian, transit, and other non -auto trips made to/from the site within the downtown Vail core area; 30% reduction assumed per the Vail Transportation Master Plan Update (Draft, June 2008). 08042 trip genAs - Trip Generation Land Use Size Units 230 - Residential Condo/Townhouse 91 1 Dwelling Units 310 - Hotel 139 Occu ied Rooms Total Trips IN & OUT WMC Master Plan TIS Evergreen Lodge Trip Generation and Distribution Weekday AM Peak Hour Peak Hour of Adj Street Traffic (7-9 am) Rate /Equation # Trips % IN %OUT Trips # Rate I Eq Total IN OUT AM Peak Hour of Generator Rate / Equation # Trips % IN %OUT # Trips Rate I Eq Total IN OUT MAX # Trips Total I IN I OUT 0.44 / Ln(T) - 0.80 Ln(X) + 0.26 40 48 171 1 831/, 48 8 40 0.44 / Ln(T) = 0.82 Ln X) + 0.15 40 47 19% 81 % 47 9 38 49 9 40 0.67 / T = 0.78 X + -29.80 93 79 58 % 42 % 79 46 33 0.64 / Ln T = 0.91 Ln X + 0.011 891 90 55 % 45% 1 90 501 401 1 901 501 40 1261 541 721 1 1 137 591 78 139 59 80 Land Use Size Units Trip Distribution Percentages from VVMC Access; Weekday PM Peak Hour Assume that the two Evergreen Accesses will be consolidated to Peak Hour of Adj Street Traffic (4-6 pm) # Trips Rate /Equation % IN %OUT Rate Eq 0.52 / Ln T = 0.82 Ln X + 0.32 47 56 67% 33% 0.70 / 97 -NA- 49 % 51 % 1 Total 56 97 1 1531 PM Peak # Trips Rate /Equation IN OUT 37 19 0.52 / T = 0.34 X + 48 49 0.74 / Ln(T) - 0.94 Ln(X) + 851 68 Hour of Generator # Trips % IN %OUT Rate Eq 35.87 47 67 64% 36% -0.03 103 100 57 % 43% # Trips Total IN 67 43 100 57 167 100 MAX # Trips OUT Total IN OUT 24 67 43 24 43 106 57 49 67 173 100 73 230 -Residential Condo/Townhouse 1 91 Dwellin Units 310 -Hotel 139 Occu ied Rooms Inbound Total Trips IN & OUTI EUsed Trip Distribution Trip Distribution Percentages from VVMC Access; Assume that the two Evergreen Accesses will be consolidated to one Total Trips AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour (Weekday MAX) --- 1 59 1 80 1 -- 1001 73 Direction Dist % IN OUT I Dist % IN OUT Inbound EB RT 10% 6 --- 25% 25 WB LT 90% 53 75% 75 Outbound NB LT 15% 12 5% 4 NB RT 85% 68 95% 69 Page 1 of 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Traffic Volumes at Study Area Intersections TurnKey Consulting, LLC superior Prnjeol leadership VVMC Master Plan TIS Background, Project, and Total Traffic Volumes Page 1 of 3 1 South Frontage Road and Potential Roundaboutof VVIVIC Access Access AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Traffic Source Configuration West End Trips NEE M�MM�M�wmmmmm� West End Trips Evergreen (S) East End Trips East End Evergreen (S) Trips Trips Page 1 of 3 VVMC Master Plan TIS Background, Project, and Total Traffic Volumes Page 2 of 3 1-70 South Frontage Road and VVMC / TOV Access AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Phase Year Traffic Source VVMC Trips Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound VVMC Trips Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound (Frontage Road) (Frontage Road) (VVMC Access) (TOV Access) Total (Frontage Road) (Frontage Road) (VVMC Access) (TOV Access) Total IN OUT LT Thru RT LT Thru RT LT Thru RT LT Thru RT IN OUT LT Thru RT LT Thru RT LT Thru RT LT Thru RT Existing2014 Traffic Count 2 193 11 84 265 39 3 0 18 5 0 3 623 2 359 9 26 274 5 2 0 29 13 0 5 724 Frontage Road 475 704 1,179 980 722 1,702 Existing TOV Access TOV 2 39 5 3 49 2 5 13 5 25 (Adjusted) 2014 VVMC Access 95 21 11 84 3 18 116 35 31 9 26 2 29 66 TOTAL 2 475 11 84 704 39 3 0 18 5 0 3 1,344 2 980 9 26 722 5 2 0 29 13 0 5 1,793 WMC Trips IN 10% 90% 25% 75% VVMC Trip Site Trips OUT 15% 85% 5% 95% Distribution TOV Tris IN 10% 0% 90%1 25% 75% Site TripsOUT85% 15% 95% 5% Frontage Road 486 720 1,206 1,003 739 1,742 TOV Access TOV 2 39 5 3 49 2 5 13 5 25 West End 2015 VVMC Access 101 30 10 91 5 26 132 73 73 18 55 4 69 146 (During Const) TOV Access WMC --- --- --- --- --- --- 0 --- --- --- --- --- -- 0 TOTAL 2 486 10 91 720 39 5 0 26 5 0 3 1,387 2 1,003 18 55 739 5 4 0 69 13 0 5 1,913 Frontage Road 497 737 1,234 1,026 756 1,782 TOV Access TOV 2 39 5 3 49 2 5 13 5 25 West End 2016 VVMC Access 103 27 4 23 130 54 53 14 41t7745 3 50 108 (Const Completed) TOV Access MC --- --- ------ --- --- 0 --- --- --- --- 0 TOTAL 2 737 39 4 0 23 5 0 3 1,413 2 1,026 14 41 3 0 0 5 1,915Fronta a Road t10 754 1,263 1,050 1,824East End TOV Access TOV 239 5 3 49 2 t501 5 25(During 2017 WMC Access 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0TOV Const) Access WMC ------ --- --- 0 --- --- --- 0TOTAL 2 754 39 0 0 0 5 0 3 1,312 2 1,050 0 0 0 0 0 5 1,849 Frontage Road 521 772 1,293 1,075 792 1,867 East End TOV Access TOV 2 39 5 3 49 2 5 13 5 25 2018 VVMC Access 212 62 21 191 9 53 274 155 156 39 116 8 148 311 (Const Completed) TOV Access VVMC --- --- --- --- 0 --- --- --- --- --- --- 0 TOTAL 2 521 21 191 772 39 9 0 53 5 0 3 1,616 2 1,075 39 116 792 5 8 0 148 13 0 5 2,203 Frontage Road 644 953 1,597 1,263 1,043 2,306 TOV Access TOV 3 54 7 4 68 25 60 22 10 117 Build -out 2035 VVMC Access 239 72 24 215 11 61 311 183 186 46 137 9 177 369 (Prior to 2035) TOV Access MC --- ------ --- --- --- 0 --- --- --- --- --- --- 0 TOTAL 3 644 24 215 953 54 11 0 61 7 0 4 1,976 25 1,263 46 137 1,043 60 9 0 177 22 1 0 10 2,792 Page 2 of 3 VVMC Master Plan TIS Background, Project, and Total Traffic Volumes Phase Year Vail Road and Meadow Drive AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Traffic Source WMC Trips Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound VVMC Trips Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound (Meadow Dr) (Meadow Dr) (Vail Rd) (Vail Rd) Total (Meadow Dr) (Meadow Dr) (Vail Rd) (Vail Rd) IN OUT LT Thru RT LT Thru RT LT Thru RT LT Thru RT IN OUT LT Thru RT LT Thru RT LT Thru RT LT Thru RT Total Existing 2014 All Traffic Background minus VVMC 28 9 7 7 3 1 0 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 60 60 0 0 0 0 143 143 65 20 316 250 123 49 10 10 9 5 2 2 18 18 4 4 4 0 151 151 2 2 4 4 103 88 518 103 19 367 WMC Tris 45 21 19 2 0 45 66 73 78 74 4 4 69 151 TOTAL 28 7 3 0 10 0 0 60 0 0 143 65 316 123 10 9 2 18 4 4 151 2 4 103 88 518 WMC Trip Distribution Trips IN Trips OUT o 90% 0 10% 10% 1007 o 95% 0 5 /o 5% 95% West End Background 9 7 1 0 10 0 0 60 0 0 144 20 251 49 10 52 18 4 0 152 2 4 104 19 369 2015 VVMC Tris 21 8 7 1 0 21 29 29 30 29 2 1 28 60 (During Const) TOTAL 16 7 2 0 10 0 0 60 0 0 144 41 280 78 10 7 2 18 4 1 152 2 4 104 47 429 West End Back round 9 7 1 0 10 0 0 61 0 0 144 20 252 49 10 5 2 18 4 0 153 2 4 104 19 370 (Const 2016 WMC Tris 37 15 14 2 0 37 53 54 56 53 3 3 51 110 Completed) TOTAL 23 7 3 0 10 0 0 61 0 0 144 57 305 102 10 8 2 18 4 3 153 2 4 104 70 480 East End Background 9 7 1 0 10 0 0 61 0 0 145 20 253 50 10 5 2 18 4 0 153 2 4 105 19 372 2017 VVMC Tris 60 23 21 2 0 60 83 80 82 78 4 4 76 162 (During Const) TOTAL 30 7 3 0 10 0 0 61 0 0 145 80 336 128 10 9 2 18 4 4 153 2 4 105 95 534 East End Background 9 7 1 0 10 0 0 61 0 0 146 20 254 50 10 5 2 18 4 0 154 2 4 105 19 373 (Const 2018 WMC Tris 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 2 Completed) TOTAL 9 7 1 0 10 0 0 61 0 0 146 22 256 51 10 5 2 18 4 0 154 2 4 105 20 375 Background 10 8 1 0 11 0 0 67 0 0 159 22 278 54 11 6 2 20 4 0 168 2 4 114 21 406 Build -out 2035 VVMC Tris 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 1 M 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 (Prior to 2035) TOTAL 10 8 1 1 1 0 1 11 1 0 1 0 67 0 0 159 24 280 55 1 11 1 6 2 1 20 4 0 168 2 4 114 22 408 Page 3 of 3 VVMC Master Plan TIS Proposed Roundabout Analysis Output [Intersection #1] • Year 2018 AM Peak Hour • Year 2018 PM Peak Hour TurnKey Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2018 AM Peak Hour • HCM 2010— FHWA-Approved Factors and Parameters • SIDRA — FHWA-Approved Factors and Parameters • HCM 2010 — Default Factors and Parameters • SIDRA — Default Factors and Parameters TurnKey Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership LEVEL OF SERVICE Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Helipad New Site Roundabout All Movement Classes South East North West Intersection LOS A A A A A I N 1 I I MOVEMENT SUMMARY V Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Helipad New Site Roundabout South: Evergreen Access 3 L2 17 3.0 0.114 5.8 LOS A 0.4 9.6 0.53 0.51 8 T1 1 3.0 0.114 5.8 LOS A 0.4 9.6 0.53 0.51 18 R2 70 3.0 0.114 5.8 LOS A 0.4 9.6 0.53 0.51 Approach 88 3.0 0.114 5.8 LOS A 0.4 9.6 0.53 0.51 East: 170 S FR 1 u U 213 3.0 0.387 6.2 LOS A 2.0 50.9 0.11 0.03 1 L2 51 3.0 0.387 6.2 LOS A 2.0 50.9 0.11 0.03 6 T1 800 3.0 0.387 6.2 LOS A 2.0 50.9 0.11 0.03 16 R2 1 3.0 0.387 6.2 LOS A 2.0 50.9 0.11 0.03 Approach 1065 3.0 0.387 6.2 LOS A 2.0 50.9 0.11 0.03 North: TOV Service Access 7 L2 1 3.0 0.006 6.2 LOS A 0.0 0.4 0.58 0.47 4 T1 1 3.0 0.006 6.2 LOS A 0.0 0.4 0.58 0.47 14 R2 1 3.0 0.006 6.2 LOS A 0.0 0.4 0.58 0.47 Approach 3 3.0 0.006 6.2 LOS A 0.0 0.4 0.58 0.47 West: 170 S FR 5 L2 1 3.0 0.237 5.4 LOS A 0.9 23.8 0.37 0.27 2 T1 521 3.0 0.237 5.4 LOS A 0.9 23.8 0.37 0.27 12 R2 13 3.0 0.237 5.4 LOS A 0.9 23.8 0.37 0.27 Approach 535 3.0 0.237 5.4 LOS A 0.9 23.8 0.37 0.27 All Vehicles 1691 3.0 0.387 5.9 LOS A 2.0 50.9 0.21 0.13 Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 2010). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 2010). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 2010. HCM Delay Formula option is used. Control Delay does not include Geometric Delay since Exclude Geometric Delay option applies. Gap -Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. 24.0 3.7 22.2 22.3 24.5 13.7 24.0 13.1 23.6 23.7 4.1 22.0 16.5 13.2 24.5 13.2 24.2 04971/ Processed: Thursday, July 31, 2014 6:17:50 PM Copyright © 2000-2014 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd I L SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.0.22.4722 www.sidrasolutions.com I L� RA Project: D:\Project Files(P)\Active Projects\VVMC\Traffic Analysis\170 S FR Roundy_2018-AM_HCM Wolcott.sip6 INTERSECTION 6 8000745, TURNKEY CONSULTING LLC, PLUS / 1 PC LEVEL OF SERVICE Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Heli New Site Roundabout All Movement Classes South East North West Intersection LOS B A B B A se-v-ce A-ess EywWwm Accros MOVEMENT SUMMARY V Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Helipad New Site Roundabout South: Evergreen Access 3 L2 17 3.0 0.182 10.0 LOS B 0.5 12.2 0.52 0.52 8 T1 1 3.0 0.182 10.0 LOS B 0.5 12.2 0.52 0.52 18 R2 70 3.0 0.182 10.0 LOS B 0.5 12.2 0.52 0.52 Approach 88 3.0 0.182 10.0 LOS B 0.5 12.2 0.52 0.52 East: 170 S FR 1 u U 213 3.0 0.437 7.4 LOS A 2.4 62.6 0.12 0.04 1 L2 51 3.0 0.437 7.4 LOS A 2.4 62.6 0.12 0.04 6 T1 800 3.0 0.437 7.4 LOS A 2.4 62.6 0.12 0.04 16 R2 1 3.0 0.437 7.4 LOS A 2.4 62.6 0.12 0.04 Approach 1065 3.0 0.437 7.4 LOS A 2.4 62.6 0.12 0.04 North: TOV Service Access 7 L2 1 3.0 0.009 10.2 LOS B 0.0 0.6 0.61 0.58 4 T1 1 3.0 0.009 10.2 LOS B 0.0 0.6 0.61 0.58 14 R2 1 3.0 0.009 10.2 LOS B 0.0 0.6 0.61 0.58 Approach 3 3.0 0.009 10.2 LOS B 0.0 0.6 0.61 0.58 West: 170 S FR 5 L2 1 3.0 0.406 11.2 LOS B 1.8 46.4 0.53 0.48 2 T1 521 3.0 0.406 11.2 LOS B 1.8 46.4 0.53 0.48 12 R2 13 3.0 0.406 11.2 LOS B 1.8 46.4 0.53 0.48 Approach 535 3.0 0.406 11.2 LOS B 1.8 46.4 0.53 0.48 All Vehicles 1691 3.0 0.437 8.7 LOS A 2.4 62.6 0.27 0.20 Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 2010). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 2010). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 2010. HCM Delay Formula option is used. Control Delay does not include Geometric Delay since Exclude Geometric Delay option applies. Gap -Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. 22.2 3.4 20.7 20.7 24.2 13.6 23.7 12.9 23.3 22.0 3.9 20.6 15.4 12.4 23.0 12.4 22.7 0911 Processed: Friday, August 01, 2014 8:14:01 AM Copyright © 2000-2014 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd I L SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.0.22.4722 www.sidrasolutions.com I L� RA Project: D:\Project Files(P)\Active Projects\VVMC\Traffic Analysis\170 S FR Roundy_2018-AM_HCM Default.sip6 INTERSECTION 6 8000745, TURNKEY CONSULTING LLC, PLUS / 1 PC LEVEL OF SERVICE Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Helipad New Site Roundabout All Movement Classes South East North West Intersection LOS A A A A A I N 1 I I MOVEMENT SUMMARY V Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Helipad New Site Roundabout South: Evergreen Access 3 L2 17 3.0 0.154 8.7 LOS A 0.6 15.5 0.60 8 T1 1 3.0 0.154 4.3 LOS A 0.6 15.5 0.60 18 R2 70 3.0 0.154 4.8 LOS A 0.6 15.5 0.60 Approach 88 3.0 0.154 5.6 LOS A 0.6 15.5 0.60 East: 170 S FR 1 u U 213 3.0 0.394 7.0 LOS A 3.2 81.0 0.16 1 L2 51 3.0 0.394 5.5 LOS A 3.2 81.0 0.16 6 T1 800 3.0 0.394 0.6 LOS A 3.2 81.3 0.16 16 R2 1 3.0 0.394 1.5 LOS A 3.2 81.3 0.16 Approach 1065 3.0 0.394 2.1 LOS A 3.2 81.3 0.16 North: TOV Service Access 7 L2 1 3.0 0.006 9.3 LOS A 0.0 0.6 0.59 4 T1 1 3.0 0.006 4.9 LOS A 0.0 0.6 0.59 14 R2 1 3.0 0.006 5.3 LOS A 0.0 0.6 0.59 Approach 3 3.0 0.006 6.5 LOS A 0.0 0.6 0.59 West: 170 S FR 5 L2 1 3.0 0.247 7.0 LOS A 1.4 36.0 0.48 2 T1 521 3.0 0.247 2.1 LOS A 1.4 36.4 0.48 12 R2 13 3.0 0.247 2.9 LOS A 1.4 36.4 0.47 Approach 535 3.0 0.247 2.1 LOS A 1.4 36.4 0.48 All Vehicles 1691 3.0 0.394 2.3 LOS A 3.2 81.3 0.29 Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 2010). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 2010). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard. SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay. Gap -Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akgelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. 0.71 24.9 0.71 3.8 0.71 23.0 0.71 23.1 0.37 26.0 0.37 14.6 0.18 25.4 0.09 13.8 0.23 25.0 0.59 24.5 0.59 4.3 0.59 22.7 0.59 17.0 0.31 13.5 0.30 25.1 0.30 13.5 0.30 24.8 0.28 24.8 Processed: Thursday, July 31, 2014 6:21:59 PM Copyright © 2000-2014 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd SIDRA SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.0.22.4722 www.sidrasolutions.com I L� Project: D:\Project Files(P)\Active Projects\VVMC\Traffic Analysis\170 S FR Roundy_2018-AM_SIDRA Default.sip6 INTERSECTION 6 8000745, TURNKEY CONSULTING LLC, PLUS / 1 PC VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2018 PM Peak Hour • HCM 2010— FHWA-Approved Factors and Parameters • SIDRA — FHWA-Approved Factors and Parameters • HCM 2010 — Default Factors and Parameters • SIDRA — Default Factors and Parameters TurnKey Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership LEVEL OF SERVICE V Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Heli New Site Roundabout All Movement Classes South East North West Intersection LOS A A A A A 1N h MOVEMENT SUMMARY V Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Helipad New Site Roundabout South: Evergreen Access 3 L2 4 3.0 0.160 9.3 LOS A 0.5 12.9 0.68 0.68 8 T1 1 3.0 0.160 9.3 LOS A 0.5 12.9 0.68 0.68 18 R2 75 3.0 0.160 9.3 LOS A 0.5 12.9 0.68 0.68 Approach 80 3.0 0.160 9.3 LOS A 0.5 12.9 0.68 0.68 East: 170 S FR 1 u U 140 3.0 0.365 5.9 LOS A 1.8 46.8 0.05 0.01 1 L2 82 3.0 0.365 5.9 LOS A 1.8 46.8 0.05 0.01 6 T1 791 3.0 0.365 5.9 LOS A 1.8 46.8 0.05 0.01 16 R2 2 3.0 0.365 5.9 LOS A 1.8 46.8 0.05 0.01 Approach 1015 3.0 0.365 5.9 LOS A 1.8 46.8 0.05 0.01 North: TOV Service Access 7 L2 2 3.0 0.007 5.9 LOS A 0.0 0.5 0.56 0.46 4 T1 1 3.0 0.007 5.9 LOS A 0.0 0.5 0.56 0.46 14 R2 1 3.0 0.007 5.9 LOS A 0.0 0.5 0.56 0.46 Approach 4 3.0 0.007 5.9 LOS A 0.0 0.5 0.56 0.46 West: 170 S FR 5 L2 1 3.0 0.499 8.6 LOS A 2.7 68.7 0.46 0.35 2 T1 1136 3.0 0.499 8.6 LOS A 2.7 68.7 0.46 0.35 12 R2 27 3.0 0.499 8.6 LOS A 2.7 68.7 0.46 0.35 Approach 1164 3.0 0.499 8.6 LOS A 2.7 68.7 0.46 0.35 All Vehicles 2264 3.0 0.499 7.4 LOS A 2.7 68.7 0.29 0.21 Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 2010). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 2010). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 2010. HCM Delay Formula option is used. Control Delay does not include Geometric Delay since Exclude Geometric Delay option applies. Gap -Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. 22.7 3.2 21.1 20.9 24.7 13.8 24.1 13.1 23.3 23.5 4.3 21.9 18.2 12.7 23.6 12.8 23.4 23.3 Processed: Thursday, July 31, 2014 6:31:04 PM Copyright © 2000-2014 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd I L SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.0.22.4722 www.sidrasolutions.com I L� RA Project: D:\Project Files(P)\Active Projects\VVMC\Traffic Analysis\170 S FR Roundy_2018-PM_HCM Wolcott.sip6 INTERSECTION 6 8000745, TURNKEY CONSULTING LLC, PLUS / 1 PC LEVEL OF SERVICE V Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Heli New Site Roundabout All Movement Classes South East North West Intersection LOS A A A A A 1N —01 l MOVEMENT SUMMARY V Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Helipad New Site Roundabout South: Evergreen Access 3 L2 4 3.0 0.204 11.1 LOS B 0.8 21.0 0.73 8 T1 1 3.0 0.204 6.8 LOS A 0.8 21.0 0.73 18 R2 75 3.0 0.204 7.2 LOS A 0.8 21.0 0.73 Approach 80 3.0 0.204 7.4 LOS A 0.8 21.0 0.73 East: 170 S FR 1 u U 140 3.0 0.370 6.9 LOS A 2.9 75.4 0.08 1 L2 82 3.0 0.370 5.4 LOS A 2.9 75.4 0.08 6 T1 791 3.0 0.370 0.5 LOS A 3.0 75.6 0.08 16 R2 2 3.0 0.370 1.4 LOS A 3.0 75.6 0.08 Approach 1015 3.0 0.370 1.8 LOS A 3.0 75.6 0.08 North: TOV Service Access 7 L2 2 3.0 0.008 9.0 LOS A 0.0 0.7 0.57 4 T1 1 3.0 0.008 4.7 LOS A 0.0 0.7 0.57 14 R2 1 3.0 0.008 5.1 LOS A 0.0 0.7 0.57 Approach 4 3.0 0.008 7.0 LOS A 0.0 0.7 0.57 West: 170 S FR 5 L2 1 3.0 0.517 7.3 LOS A 3.8 97.3 0.57 2 T1 1136 3.0 0.517 2.4 LOS A 3.8 98.2 0.57 12 R2 27 3.0 0.517 3.2 LOS A 3.8 98.2 0.56 Approach 1164 3.0 0.517 2.4 LOS A 3.8 98.2 0.56 All Vehicles 2264 3.0 0.517 2.3 LOS A 3.8 98.2 0.35 Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 2010). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 2010). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard. SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay. Gap -Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akgelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. 0.79 24.0 0.79 3.4 0.79 22.2 0.79 22.1 0.33 26.2 0.33 14.6 0.17 25.5 0.08 13.9 0.20 24.7 0.62 24.3 0.62 4.5 0.62 22.5 0.62 18.7 0.35 13.4 0.35 24.9 0.34 13.5 0.35 24.6 Processed: Thursday, July 31, 2014 6:33:07 PM Copyright © 2000-2014 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.0.22.4722 www.sidrasolutions.com SIDRA Project: D:\Project Files(P)\Active Projects\VVMC\Traffic Analysis\170 S FR Roundy_2018-AM_SIDRA Default.sip6 INTERSECTION 6 8000745, TURNKEY CONSULTING LLC, PLUS / 1 PC LEVEL OF SERVICE V Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Heli New Site Roundabout All Movement Classes South East North West Intersection LOS C A A C B 1 I I MOVEMENT SUMMARY V Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Helipad New Site Roundabout South: Evergreen Access 3 L2 4 3.0 0.266 17.5 LOS C 0.7 18.1 0.73 0.76 8 T1 1 3.0 0.266 17.5 LOS C 0.7 18.1 0.73 0.76 18 R2 75 3.0 0.266 17.5 LOS C 0.7 18.1 0.73 0.76 Approach 80 3.0 0.266 17.5 LOS C 0.7 18.1 0.73 0.76 East: 170 S FR 1 u U 140 3.0 0.380 6.2 LOS A 2.0 50.3 0.06 0.01 1 L2 82 3.0 0.380 6.2 LOS A 2.0 50.3 0.06 0.01 6 T1 791 3.0 0.380 6.2 LOS A 2.0 50.3 0.06 0.01 16 R2 2 3.0 0.380 6.2 LOS A 2.0 50.3 0.06 0.01 Approach 1015 3.0 0.380 6.2 LOS A 2.0 50.3 0.06 0.01 North: TOV Service Access 7 L2 2 3.0 0.011 9.7 LOS A 0.0 0.7 0.59 0.57 4 T1 1 3.0 0.011 9.7 LOS A 0.0 0.7 0.59 0.57 14 R2 1 3.0 0.011 9.7 LOS A 0.0 0.7 0.59 0.57 Approach 4 3.0 0.011 9.7 LOS A 0.0 0.7 0.59 0.57 West: 170 S FR 5 L2 1 3.0 0.765 22.2 LOS C 7.8 200.1 0.78 0.82 2 T1 1136 3.0 0.765 22.2 LOS C 7.8 200.1 0.78 0.82 12 R2 27 3.0 0.765 22.2 LOS C 7.8 200.1 0.78 0.82 Approach 1164 3.0 0.765 22.2 LOS C 7.8 200.1 0.78 0.82 All Vehicles 2264 3.0 0.765 14.8 LOS B 7.8 200.1 0.46 0.46 Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 2010). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 2010). Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 2010. HCM Delay Formula option is used. Control Delay does not include Geometric Delay since Exclude Geometric Delay option applies. Gap -Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1. HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. 19.6 2.8 18.4 18.3 24.6 13.7 24.0 13.1 23.3 22.0 4.1 20.6 17.0 11.2 20.7 11.2 20.5 ►,y9. Processed: Friday, August 01, 2014 8:11:26 AM Copyright © 2000-2014 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd I L SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.0.22.4722 www.sidrasolutions.com I L� RA Project: D:\Project Files(P)\Active Projects\VVMC\Traffic Analysis\170 S FR Roundy_2018-PM_HCM Default.sip6 INTERSECTION 6 8000745, TURNKEY CONSULTING LLC, PLUS / 1 PC LEVEL OF SERVICE V Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Heli New Site Roundabout All Movement Classes South East North West Intersection LOS A A A A A 1N h MOVEMENT SUMMARY V Site: 170 S FR Roundabout at Heli New Site Roundabout South: Evergreen Access 3 L2 4 3.0 0.204 11.1 LOS B 0.8 21.0 0.73 8 T1 1 3.0 0.204 6.8 LOS A 0.8 21.0 0.73 18 R2 75 3.0 0.204 7.2 LOS A 0.8 21.0 0.73 Approach 80 3.0 0.204 7.4 LOS A 0.8 21.0 0.73 East: 170 S FR 1 u U 140 3.0 0.370 6.9 LOS A 2.9 75.4 0.08 1 L2 82 3.0 0.370 5.4 LOS A 2.9 75.4 0.08 6 T1 791 3.0 0.370 0.5 LOS A 3.0 75.6 0.08 16 R2 2 3.0 0.370 1.4 LOS A 3.0 75.6 0.08 Approach 1015 3.0 0.370 1.8 LOS A 3.0 75.6 0.08 North: TOV Service Access 7 L2 2 3.0 0.008 9.0 LOS A 0.0 0.7 0.57 4 T1 1 3.0 0.008 4.7 LOS A 0.0 0.7 0.57 14 R2 1 3.0 0.008 5.1 LOS A 0.0 0.7 0.57 Approach 4 3.0 0.008 7.0 LOS A 0.0 0.7 0.57 West: 170 S FR 5 L2 1 3.0 0.517 7.3 LOS A 3.8 97.3 0.57 2 T1 1136 3.0 0.517 2.4 LOS A 3.8 98.2 0.57 12 R2 27 3.0 0.517 3.2 LOS A 3.8 98.2 0.56 Approach 1164 3.0 0.517 2.4 LOS A 3.8 98.2 0.56 All Vehicles 2264 3.0 0.517 2.3 LOS A 3.8 98.2 0.35 Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 2010). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 2010). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard. SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay. Gap -Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akgelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. 0.79 24.0 0.79 3.4 0.79 22.2 0.79 22.1 0.33 26.2 0.33 14.6 0.17 25.5 0.08 13.9 0.20 24.7 0.62 24.3 0.62 4.5 0.62 22.5 0.62 18.7 0.35 13.4 0.35 24.9 0.34 13.5 0.35 24.6 Processed: Thursday, July 31, 2014 6:33:07 PM Copyright © 2000-2014 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.0.22.4722 www.sidrasolutions.com SIDRA Project: D:\Project Files(P)\Active Projects\VVMC\Traffic Analysis\170 S FR Roundy_2018-AM_SIDRA Default.sip6 INTERSECTION 6 8000745, TURNKEY CONSULTING LLC, PLUS / 1 PC VVMC Master Plan TIS Frontage Road and VVMC Access / TOV Access [Intersection #2] • Year 2014 — Existing Condition • Year 2018 — East End (Construction Completed) o Existing Conditions o "First and Alone" Alternative ■ Sketch ■ Analysis Output • Year 2035 — Build -out Condition NOTE: The VVMC Access and TOV Access are offset by approximately 100 -feet. Because of the offset, they were modeled as two Tee -intersections to account for the impact of the offset. In the Synchro and Sim Traffic analysis output, the VVMC Access is listed as Intersection #2, and the TOV Access is Intersection #20. Turn Key Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2014 - Existing Condition • AM Peak Hour • PM Peak Hour TurnKey Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2014 - Existing Condtion 2: VVMC Access & 170 South FR Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 AM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 --I- 4--- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t Volume (vph) 477 11 84 707 3 18 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 16 12 12 12 Storage Length (ft) 180 25 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Satd. Flow (prot) 1853 0 2006 1863 1635 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.993 Satd. Flow (perm) 1853 0 2006 1863 1635 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 Link Distance (ft) 500 100 200 Travel Time (s) 13.6 2.7 9.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.60 0.60 0.92 0.60 0.60 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 536 0 140 768 35 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 AM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2014 - Existing Condtion 20:170 South FR & TOV Access Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt t r Volume (vph) 2 493 788 39 5 3 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 16 12 12 12 12 12 Storage Length (ft) 25 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Satd. Flow (prot) 2006 3539 1863 1583 1713 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.970 Satd. Flow (perm) 2006 3539 1863 1583 1713 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 Link Distance (ft) 100 500 198 Travel Time (s) 2.7 13.6 9.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.60 0.92 0.92 0.60 0.60 0.60 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 3 536 857 65 13 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 AM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2014 - Existing Condtion SimTraffic Performance Report 8/2/2014 2: VVMC Access & 170 South FR Performance by movement Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 0.5 0.4 3.3 0.3 31.0 3.2 20: 170 South FR & TOV Access Performance by movement 0.2 0.6 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 6.1 0.1 Total Network Performance 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.2 17.6 11.5 0.3 0.9 Denied Del/Veh (s) Total Del/Veh (s) 0.4 2.0 AM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Queuing and Blocking Report Year 2014 - Existing Condtion 8/2/2014 Intersection: 2: VVMC Access & 170 South FR Movement EB WB WB NB Directions Served TR L T LR Maximum Queue (ft) 11 47 64 32 Average Queue (ft) 0 23 4 14 95th Queue (ft) 6 48 30 37 Link Distance (ft) 466 54 148 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 25 Storage Blk Time (%) 4 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 30 0 Intersection: 20: 170 South FR & TOV Access Movement EB WB SB Directions Served L T LR Maximum Queue (ft) 12 103 27 Average Queue (ft) 1 6 5 95th Queue (ft) 10 59 22 Link Distance (ft) 467 149 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 25 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 31 AM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2014 - Existing Condtion 2: VVMC Access & 170 South FR Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 PM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 --I- 4--- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t Volume (vph) 982 9 26 727 2 29 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 16 12 12 12 Storage Length (ft) 180 25 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Satd. Flow (prot) 1859 0 2006 1863 1623 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.997 Satd. Flow (perm) 1859 0 2006 1863 1623 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 Link Distance (ft) 500 100 200 Travel Time (s) 13.6 2.7 9.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.50 0.50 0.92 0.50 0.50 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 1085 0 52 790 62 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 PM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2014 - Existing Condtion 20:170 South FR & TOV Access Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt t r Volume (vph) 2 1009 748 5 13 5 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 16 12 12 12 12 12 Storage Length (ft) 25 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Satd. Flow (prot) 2006 3539 1863 1583 1729 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.965 Satd. Flow (perm) 2006 3539 1863 1583 1729 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 Link Distance (ft) 100 500 198 Travel Time (s) 2.7 13.6 9.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.50 0.92 0.92 0.50 0.50 0.50 Growth Factor 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 2 1097 813 10 36 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min)15 PM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2014 - Existing Condtion SimTraffic Performance Report 8/2/2014 2: VVMC Access & 170 South FR Performance by movement Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 1.1 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 1.0 0.8 9.3 0.2 46.2 4.5 20: 170 South FR & TOV Access Performance by movement 0.6 0.9 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 0.2 Total Network Performance 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.0 0.0 23.0 8.2 0.2 0.7 Denied Del/Veh (s) Total Del/Veh (s) 0.8 2.3 PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Queuing and Blocking Report Year 2014 - Existing Condtion 8/2/2014 Intersection: 2: VVMC Access & 170 South FR Movement EB WB WB NB Directions Served TR L T LR Maximum Queue (ft) 4 38 40 59 Average Queue (ft) 0 15 2 20 95th Queue (ft) 3 41 22 48 Link Distance (ft) 466 54 148 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 25 Storage Blk Time (%) 5 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 38 0 Intersection: 20: 170 South FR & TOV Access Movement EB WB SB Directions Served L T LR Maximum Queue (ft) 9 75 48 Average Queue (ft) 0 3 12 95th Queue (ft) 5 51 35 Link Distance (ft) 467 149 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 25 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 39 PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 WMC Master Plan TIS Year 2018 - East End (Construction Completed) Existing Conditions • AM Peak Hour • PM Peak Hour Turn Key Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2018 - East End (Const Completed) 2: VVMC Access & 170 South FR Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 AM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 --I- 4--- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t Volume (vph) 523 21 191 775 9 53 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 16 12 12 12 Storage Length (ft) 180 25 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Satd. Flow (prot) 1852 0 2006 1863 1637 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.993 Satd. Flow (perm) 1852 0 2006 1863 1637 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 Link Distance (ft) 500 100 200 Travel Time (s) 13.6 2.7 9.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.75 0.75 0.92 0.75 0.75 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 596 0 255 842 83 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 AM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2018 - East End (Const Completed) 20:170 South FR & TOV Access Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt t r Volume (vph) 2 574 963 39 5 3 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 16 12 12 12 12 12 Storage Length (ft) 25 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Satd. Flow (prot) 2006 3539 1863 1583 1717 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.969 Satd. Flow (perm) 2006 3539 1863 1583 1717 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 Link Distance (ft) 100 500 198 Travel Time (s) 2.7 13.6 9.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.92 0.92 0.75 0.75 0.75 Growth Factor 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 1 624 1047 52 11 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min)15 AM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2018 - East End (Const Completed) SimTraffic Performance Report 8/2/2014 2: VVMC Access & 170 South FR Performance by movement Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 0.7 0.4 4.4 0.6 56.6 10.4 20: 170 South FR & TOV Access Performance by movement 0.2 1.8 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s) 0.2 2.8 0.4 18.2 15.7 Total Network Performance 0.3 1.9 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.5 Total Del/Veh (s) 4.1 AM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Queuing and Blocking Report Year 2018 - East End (Const Completed) 8/2/2014 Intersection: 2: VVMC Access & 170 South FR Movement EB WB WB NB Directions Served TR L T LR Maximum Queue (ft) 19 51 80 115 Average Queue (ft) 1 34 23 35 95th Queue (ft) 9 49 75 79 Link Distance (ft) 466 0 54 148 Upstream Blk Time (%) 2 2 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 25 0 15 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 0 25 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 13 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 104 1 Intersection: 20: 170 South FR & TOV Access Movement EB WB WB SB Directions Served L T R LR Maximum Queue (ft) 9 261 48 27 Average Queue (ft) 0 28 2 5 95th Queue (ft) 5 134 47 22 Link Distance (ft) 467 467 149 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 25 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 121 AM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2018 - East End (Const Completed) 2: VVMC Access & 170 South FR Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 PM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 --I- 4--- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t r Volume (vph) 1077 39 116 797 8 148 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 16 12 12 12 Storage Length (ft) 180 25 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Satd. Flow (prot) 1852 0 2006 1863 1770 1583 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1852 0 2006 1863 1770 1583 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 Link Distance (ft) 500 100 200 Travel Time (s) 13.6 2.7 9.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.75 0.75 0.92 0.75 0.75 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 1223 0 155 866 11 197 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 PM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2018 - East End (Const Completed) 20:170 South FR & TOV Access Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt t r Volume (vph) 2 1223 908 5 5 3 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 16 12 12 12 12 12 Storage Length (ft) 25 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Satd. Flow (prot) 2006 3539 1863 1583 1717 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.969 Satd. Flow (perm) 2006 3539 1863 1583 1717 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 Link Distance (ft) 100 500 198 Travel Time (s) 2.7 13.6 9.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.92 0.92 0.75 0.75 0.75 Growth Factor 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 1 1329 987 7 11 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min)15 PM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS SimTraffic Performance Report Year 2018 - East End (Const Completed) 8/2/2014 2: VVMC Access & 170 South FR Performance by movement Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 679.2 705.7 2.7 3.7 524.5 307.6 474.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 69.5 71.6 81.1 1.2 850.2 43.5 50.0 20: 170 South FR & TOV Access Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 691.5 729.8 0.1 0.1 402.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 0.3 110.8 0.4 280.8 632.0 48.0 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s) 657.8 Total Del/Veh (s) 94.6 PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Queuing and Blocking Report Year 2018 - East End (Const Completed) 8/2/2014 Intersection: 2: VVMC Access & 170 South FR Movement EB WB WB NB NB Directions Served TR L T L R Maximum Queue (ft) 354 37 57 92 120 Average Queue (ft) 242 27 43 37 69 95th Queue (ft) 618 42 59 107 146 Link Distance (ft) 466 42 149 149 Upstream Blk Time (%) 49 17 54 6 22 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 495 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 0 25 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 67 54 Queuing Penalty (veh) 534 63 Intersection: 20: 170 South FR & TOV Access Movement EB EB WB WB SB Directions Served L T T R LR Maximum Queue (ft) 6 4 485 479 74 Average Queue (ft) 0 0 296 241 19 95th Queue (ft) 4 4 637 628 73 Link Distance (ft) 42 467 467 149 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 53 48 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 25 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1093 PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2018 - East End (Construction Completed) "First and Alone" Alternative • Sketch • AM Peak Hour • PM Peak Hour TurnKey Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership .Sa glrk ToU- i'ifw r .PH is y VA e A a df,,I o f r vvzv AW -10 /-, i9.4T at-' T a��f` I�VQ /r It vy o%Q a s.Q lV e J7 K r c --r1 Q.,- �Lf- %Grh rr~viraT~tfee pre cji T4 V o'a �• � 0�f � q� y � *fJriJ1t•I � �w J tfekle I -e EQ a�7'y! 7-0 �J f e t e rf al�i�i v r�ai aria f r a��f` I�VQ /r It vy o%Q a s.Q lV e J7 K r c --r1 Q.,- �Lf- %Grh rr~viraT~tfee pre cji VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2035 - Build -out [No Roundabout] 9/30/2014 Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 AM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 --I- q 4--- Lane Group EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tt I tt y Volume (vph) 607 0 215 47 921 16 64 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 200 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.891 Flt Protected 0.950 0.990 Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 0 0 1805 3539 1643 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.990 Satd. Flow (perm) 3539 0 0 1805 3539 1643 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 Link Distance (ft) 200 300 200 Travel Time (s) 5.5 8.2 9.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 0% 0% 2% 2% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 660 0 234 51 1001 17 70 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 660 0 0 285 1001 87 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 AM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2035 - Build -out [No Roundabout] 9/30/2014 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r t r Volume (vph) 0 647 239 0 1179 57 0 0 72 7 0 4 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 180 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.993 0.865 0.955 Flt Protected 0.968 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3539 1583 0 3514 0 0 0 1611 0 1722 0 Flt Permitted 0.968 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3539 1583 0 3514 0 0 0 1611 0 1722 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 15 Link Distance (ft) 300 380 200 200 Travel Time (s) 8.2 10.4 9.1 9.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 703 260 0 1282 62 0 0 78 8 0 4 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 703 260 0 1344 0 0 0 78 0 12 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min)15 AM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2035 - Build -out [No Roundabout] SimTraffic Performance Report 8/18/2014 1: Evergreen Access & 170 South FR Performance by movement Movement EBT WBU WBL WBT NBL NBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 0.3 4.9 5.3 0.3 45.8 16.4 2: TOV Site & 170 South FR Performance by movement 0.0 1.9 Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBL SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.6 0.4 0.3 3.5 16.4 Total Network Performance 0.0 0.0 4.7 0.5 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s) 2.8 AM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Queuing and Blocking Report Year 2035 - Build -out [No Roundabout] 8/18/2014 Intersection: 1: Evergreen Access & 170 South FR Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) EB EB WB NB T T UL LR 5 3 116 126 0 0 54 48 4 3 93 95 168 168 125 1 0 200 Intersection: 2: TOV Site & 170 South FR Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) B203 NB SB T R LTR 11 70 34 0 29 9 7 55 31 92 114 126 Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 AM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2035 - Build -out [No Roundabout] 9/30/2014 Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 PM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 --I- q 4--- Lane Group EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tt I tt y Volume (vph) 1265 0 137 75 987 4 69 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 200 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.872 Flt Protected 0.950 0.997 Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 0 0 1805 3539 1619 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.997 Satd. Flow (perm) 3539 0 0 1805 3539 1619 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 Link Distance (ft) 200 300 200 Travel Time (s) 5.5 8.2 9.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 0% 0% 2% 2% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 1375 0 149 82 1073 4 75 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 1375 0 0 231 1073 79 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 PM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2035 - Build -out [No Roundabout] 9/30/2014 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r t r Volume (vph) 0 1288 183 0 1189 85 0 0 186 22 0 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 180 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.990 0.865 0.958 Flt Protected 0.967 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3539 1583 0 3504 0 0 0 1611 0 1726 0 Flt Permitted 0.967 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3539 1583 0 3504 0 0 0 1611 0 1726 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 15 Link Distance (ft) 300 380 200 200 Travel Time (s) 8.2 10.4 9.1 9.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1400 199 0 1292 92 0 0 202 24 0 11 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1400 199 0 1384 0 0 0 202 0 35 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min)15 PM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2035 - Build -out [No Roundabout] SimTraffic Performance Report 8/18/2014 1: Evergreen Access & 170 South FR Performance by movement Movement EBT WBU WBL WBT NBL NBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 0.4 13.3 14.7 0.3 139.6 34.6 2: TOV Site & 170 South FR Performance by movement 0.1 2.6 Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBL SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s) 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.4 9.1 19.4 Total Network Performance 0.0 0.0 6.3 1.1 Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 4.1 PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Queuing and Blocking Report Year 2035 - Build -out [No Roundabout] 8/18/2014 Intersection: 1: Evergreen Access & 170 South FR Movement EB EB WB NB B105 Directions Served T T UL LR T Maximum Queue (ft) 8 11 139 153 26 Average Queue (ft) 0 1 71 55 2 95th Queue (ft) 5 7 122 125 24 Link Distance (ft) 168 168 125 72 Upstream Blk Time (%) 5 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: TOV Site & 170 South FR Movement B203 B203 NB SB Directions Served T T R LTR Maximum Queue (ft) 16 18 127 61 Average Queue (ft) 1 1 59 21 95th Queue (ft) 8 8 103 51 Link Distance (ft) 92 92 114 126 Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2035 — Build -out Condition • AM Peak Hour • PM Peak Hour TurnKey Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2035 - Build -out 7/31/2014 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r t r r Volume (vph) 0 654 239 0 1179 57 0 0 72 0 0 11 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 180 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3539 1583 0 3514 0 0 0 1611 0 0 1611 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3539 1583 0 3514 0 0 0 1611 0 0 1611 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 15 Link Distance (ft) 500 500 200 200 Travel Time (s) 13.6 13.6 9.1 9.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 711 260 0 1344 0 0 0 78 0 0 12 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min)15 AM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2035 - Build -out SimTraffic Performance Report 7/31/2014 2: VVMC Access/TOV Site & 170 South FR Performance by movement Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3 2.8 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.5 Total Del/Veh (s) 0.3 0.9 0.5 0.4 2.9 4.4 0.6 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.5 Total Del/Veh (s) 1.0 AM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2035 - Build -out Intersection: 2: VVMC Access/TOV Site & 170 South FR Movement NB SB Directions Served R R Maximum Queue (ft) 55 33 Average Queue (ft) 23 10 95th Queue (ft) 44 34 Link Distance (ft) 146 160 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 Queuing and Blocking Report 7/31/2014 AM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2035 - Build -out 7/31/2014 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r t r r Volume (vph) 0 1310 183 0 1189 85 0 0 186 0 0 32 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 180 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3539 1583 0 3504 0 0 0 1611 0 0 1611 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3539 1583 0 3504 0 0 0 1611 0 0 1611 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 15 15 Link Distance (ft) 500 500 200 200 Travel Time (s) 13.6 13.6 9.1 9.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1424 199 0 1384 0 0 0 202 0 0 35 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min)15 PM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2035 - Build -out SimTraffic Performance Report 7/31/2014 2: VVMC Access/TOV Site & 170 South FR Performance by movement Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 2.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.4 Total DelNeh (s) 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.6 8.2 4.7 1.1 Total Network Performance Denied DelNeh (s) 0.4 Total DelNeh (s) 1.7 PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2035 - Build -out Intersection: 2: VVMC Access/TOV Site & 170 South FR Movement WB NB SB Directions Served TR R R Maximum Queue (ft) 4 124 48 Average Queue (ft) 0 51 22 95th Queue (ft) 4 95 49 Link Distance (ft) 472 146 160 Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 Queuing and Blocking Report 7/31/2014 PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Vail Road and Meadow Drive [Intersection #3] Year 2014 — Existing Condition Year 2017 — East End (During Construction) TurnKey Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2014 - Existing Condition • AM Peak Hour • PM Peak Hour TurnKey Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2014 - Existing 7/31/2014 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 28 7 3 1 10 1 1 60 1 1 143 65 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1071 0 0 810 0 0 1162 0 0 1116 0 Flt Permitted 0.965 0.996 0.999 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1071 0 0 810 0 0 1162 0 0 1116 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 408 515 490 450 Travel Time (s) 11.1 14.0 13.4 12.3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 7% 7% 7% 46% 46% 46% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 41 0 0 13 0 0 67 0 0 227 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 AM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS SimTraffic Performance Report Year 2014 - Existing 7/31/2014 3: Vail Rd & Meadow Dr Performance by approach Approach EB WB NB SB All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 6.5 9.3 7.9 9.0 8.5 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 9.8 AM Peak Hour SirnTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Queuing and Blocking Report Year 2014 - Existing 7/31/2014 Intersection: 3: Vail Rd & Meadow Dr Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) EB WB NB SB LTR LTR LTR LTR 65 68 67 122 24 14 33 55 53 50 56 93 384 491 466 426 Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 AM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2014 - Existing 7/31/2014 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 123 10 9 2 18 4 4 151 2 4 103 88 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1066 0 0 801 0 0 1162 0 0 1093 0 Flt Permitted 0.959 0.996 0.999 0.999 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1066 0 0 801 0 0 1162 0 0 1093 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 408 515 490 450 Travel Time (s) 11.1 14.0 13.4 12.3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 7% 7% 7% 46% 46% 46% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 155 0 0 26 0 0 170 0 0 212 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 PM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS SimTraffic Performance Report Year 2014 - Existing 7/31/2014 3: Vail Rd & Meadow Dr Performance by approach Approach EB WB NB SB All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 10.5 10.2 12.0 10.4 10.9 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3 Total Del/Veh (s) 12.1 PM Peak Hour SirnTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Queuing and Blocking Report Year 2014 - Existing 7/31/2014 Intersection: 3: Vail Rd & Meadow Dr Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) EB WB NB SB LTR LTR LTR LTR 136 79 131 131 54 26 55 56 99 70 100 96 384 491 466 426 Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Year 2017 - East End (During Construction) • AM Peak Hour • PM Peak Hour TurnKey Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2017 - East End (During Const) 7/31/2014 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 30 7 3 1 10 1 1 61 1 1 145 80 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1071 0 0 810 0 0 1162 0 0 1109 0 Flt Permitted 0.964 0.996 0.999 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1071 0 0 810 0 0 1162 0 0 1109 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 408 515 490 450 Travel Time (s) 11.1 14.0 13.4 12.3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 7% 7% 7% 46% 46% 46% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 44 0 0 13 0 0 68 0 0 246 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 AM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS SimTraffic Performance Report Year 2017 - East End (During Const) 7/31/2014 3: Vail Rd & Meadow Dr Performance by approach Approach EB WB NB SB All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 6.9 9.5 7.8 9.9 9.2 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 9.8 AM Peak Hour SirnTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Queuing and Blocking Report Year 2017 - East End (During Const) 7/31/2014 Intersection: 3: Vail Rd & Meadow Dr Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summ EB WB NB SB LTR LTR LTR LTR 38 48 43 96 23 18 35 63 50 56 54 114 384 491 466 426 Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 AM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS Lanes, Volumes, Timings Year 2017 - East End (During Const) 7/31/2014 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 128 10 9 2 18 4 4 153 2 4 105 95 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1066 0 0 801 0 0 1162 0 0 1091 0 Flt Permitted 0.958 0.996 0.999 0.999 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1066 0 0 801 0 0 1162 0 0 1091 0 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 408 515 490 450 Travel Time (s) 11.1 14.0 13.4 12.3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 7% 7% 7% 46% 46% 46% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 160 0 0 26 0 0 172 0 0 221 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 PM Peak Hour Synchro 8 Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS SimTraffic Performance Report Year 2017 - East End (During Const) 7/31/2014 3: Vail Rd & Meadow Dr Performance by approach Approach EB WB NB SB All Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 10.4 9.2 11.5 10.6 10.7 Total Network Performance Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.4 Total Del/Veh (s) 12.0 PM Peak Hour SirnTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 1 VVMC Master Plan TIS Queuing and Blocking Report Year 2017 - East End (During Const) 7/31/2014 Intersection: 3: Vail Rd & Meadow Dr Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) EB WB NB SB LTR LTR LTR LTR 116 81 114 129 54 24 53 59 94 66 89 101 384 491 466 426 Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 PM Peak Hour SimTraffic Report Mark Bunnell, PE, PTOE Page 2 VVMC Master Plan TIS FHU Memo Regarding Proposed Roundabout TurnKey Consulting, LLC Superior Nofeol Leadership FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG f' connecting and enhancing cammunities August 1, 2014 MEMORANDUM TO: Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, Town of Vail FROM: Chris Fasching SUBJECT: Evergreen, VVMC, Municipal Center Roundabout FHU Reference 14-236 Introduction Various redevelopments are being considered along both sides of the South Frontage Road west of the Main Vail roundabout. One area includes the Municipal Center in which the existing eastern Municipal Center building would remain, but the western building would be replaced with a parking structure. Across the South Frontage Road, Evergreen and the Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) are contemplating redevelopment as well. This memorandum specifically explores the nuances of various access schemes with respect to a roundabout intersection serving these uses. It is already anticipated that the roundabout would need to two lanes to function (and this analysis confirms that notion). Traffic Projections Peak hour traffic projections used in the analysis were developed from the long term projections from the latest travel demand model runs which were made in support of planning and design for the 1-70 underpass project near Simba Run. Further, available peak hour trip generation estimates associated with a potential Evergreen redevelopment and of a VVMC expansion have been accounted. The parking structure was assumed to contain 325 spaces in which one-half would be associated with a directional peak hour trip (inbound in the morning and outbound in the evening). Table 1 shows the various trip -making components and their assumed peak hour trip generation. These serve as the basis for analysis in assessing varying access scenarios. The VVMC has the potential of generating the greatest amount of traffic of the three uses, although the impact could end up being less than that shown. It should be noted that the estimates shown in Table 1 are rough at this point as the character and scale of each redevelopment is still evolving. 6300 South Syracuse Way, wire 600 Centennial, CO 80111 tel 303.721.1440 fax 303. i? 1.0832 www.fl-werig.com infcaWmeng.coin August 1, 2014 Memo to Tom Kassmel Page 2 Table 1 Peak Hour Traffic Components and Trip Estimates** * AM (PM) Peak hour in vehicles per hour. **Through traffic along the Frontage Road used in this was based on latest travel demand model run in support of 1-70 Underpass project. Access Alternatives A design charette, held July 16, 2014 in Vail, resulted in three fundamental alternatives to be analyzed; each has a sub -option as well. The primary alternatives locate the roundabout in a slightly different location along the Frontage Road, and the sub -options pertain to adjustments in access locations. The exception is Alternative 3a in which parcel access is the same as Alternative 3, but the roundabout is replaced with a U-turn bulb -out instead. Each alternative has been conceptually laid out and shown at the end of this memo. One of the constraints in locating the roundabout is to ensure it does not cross the 1-70 barrier line. Traffic Operations Sidra software was used to assess the operational aspects of a roundabout via calculating Level of Service (LOS). The analysis first assessed whether any form of a one -lane roundabout might suffice; it won't. A full two-lane roundabout is needed given the traffic numbers in Table 1. This was found to be the case for all the alternatives analyzed; two lanes are needed and would be sufficient even for those in which U -turning traffic would add demand. Further, two -lanes will be required along the Frontage Road approaches into the roundabout to achieve at least a LOS C under ideal conditions (actually, LOS B is achieved in every case). The one nuance revealed by the roundabout analysis pertains to the traffic queues that could form upon entering the roundabout. Specifically, the WB Frontage Road approach was found to potentially queue back past the parking structure entrance in Alternative 1 (more -so in Alternative 1a). This suggests that driveway access points onto the Frontage Road (that do not directly connect into the roundabout) should be located at least 125 feet from the roundabout along its entry leg. A sub -option in several of the alternatives pertains to the provision of a left -in to the VVMC. The analysis suggests that this left in movement could operate at LOS B with queues that could be accommodated in a 100 -foot lane. All the alternatives would allow flexibility in the event that this left -in movement exceeds the projection; the downstream roundabout would have excess capacity to accommodate it in the form of a U-turn. Comparisons Table 2 shows a matrix that simply highlights nuances and a few differences between the alternatives. Inbound* Outbound* Component From West From East TO West TO East VVMC 24 (50) 217 (150) 11 (10) 64 (192) Evergreen Lodge 12 (25) 47 (75) 16 (4) 64 (69) Parking Structure 1 40 (15) 125 (40) 1 10 (40) 25 (125) * AM (PM) Peak hour in vehicles per hour. **Through traffic along the Frontage Road used in this was based on latest travel demand model run in support of 1-70 Underpass project. Access Alternatives A design charette, held July 16, 2014 in Vail, resulted in three fundamental alternatives to be analyzed; each has a sub -option as well. The primary alternatives locate the roundabout in a slightly different location along the Frontage Road, and the sub -options pertain to adjustments in access locations. The exception is Alternative 3a in which parcel access is the same as Alternative 3, but the roundabout is replaced with a U-turn bulb -out instead. Each alternative has been conceptually laid out and shown at the end of this memo. One of the constraints in locating the roundabout is to ensure it does not cross the 1-70 barrier line. Traffic Operations Sidra software was used to assess the operational aspects of a roundabout via calculating Level of Service (LOS). The analysis first assessed whether any form of a one -lane roundabout might suffice; it won't. A full two-lane roundabout is needed given the traffic numbers in Table 1. This was found to be the case for all the alternatives analyzed; two lanes are needed and would be sufficient even for those in which U -turning traffic would add demand. Further, two -lanes will be required along the Frontage Road approaches into the roundabout to achieve at least a LOS C under ideal conditions (actually, LOS B is achieved in every case). The one nuance revealed by the roundabout analysis pertains to the traffic queues that could form upon entering the roundabout. Specifically, the WB Frontage Road approach was found to potentially queue back past the parking structure entrance in Alternative 1 (more -so in Alternative 1a). This suggests that driveway access points onto the Frontage Road (that do not directly connect into the roundabout) should be located at least 125 feet from the roundabout along its entry leg. A sub -option in several of the alternatives pertains to the provision of a left -in to the VVMC. The analysis suggests that this left in movement could operate at LOS B with queues that could be accommodated in a 100 -foot lane. All the alternatives would allow flexibility in the event that this left -in movement exceeds the projection; the downstream roundabout would have excess capacity to accommodate it in the form of a U-turn. Comparisons Table 2 shows a matrix that simply highlights nuances and a few differences between the alternatives. August 1, 2014 Memo to Tom Kassmel Page 3 Table 2 Roundabout Conceptual Design Options Matrix Alt. Description Notes Roundabout is located at the Roundabout will function at LOS B given ideal west end of the municipal center conditions. The parking structure would not be easily accessed and would provide access into from the west. 1 Evergreen. The parking Right-in/right out driveway from Parking Structure onto structure would be accessed via Frontage Road may be too close to the roundabout. a right-in/right-out. The VVMC Retaining wall likely needed along south and west sides would be provided a % access. of roundabout. Roundabout would serve more traffic than Alt. 1, but still operate at LOS B given ideal conditions. The parking structure would not be easily accessed from the west. Roundabout is located in same EB approaching traffic into roundabout would stack past location as described above. to the Parking Structure right-in/right-out; this is more 1 a The VVMC would be served via critical in 1 a than in 1. a right-in/right out only, other Emergency vehicles entering from the east would have than emergency traffic which a clear turn lane. could turn left into the facility. Retaining wall likely needed along south and west sides of roundabout. Possible driver expectancy issues in forcing lefts through roundabout; significant advance signage needed. Roundabout is shifted to the east (in the vortex are related to Roundabout will function at LOS B given ideal new helipad site), located conditions. 2 roughly mid -point of the Evergreen frontage. The Smooth parking structure entry operations would be parking structure would access required to preclude queuing into roundabout. directly into roundabout, and VVMC would be served via a 3/ access. Roundabout is located in the Roundabout LOS would be A given ideal conditions. same location as described Patterns through the roundabout would be simpler 2a above. The right -in to the compared to 2 (no longer accommodating an EB left parking structures is shifted to nor a WB right). the east out of the roundabout. The parking structure will not be easily accessed from the west. August 1, 2014 Memo to Tom Kassmel Page 4 Summary A two-lane roundabout will function at LOS B in ideal conditions for any of the alternatives considered. Sensitivity to access placement is needed for some alternatives such that driveways are not too close to the entry legs of the roundabout and end up being blocked at peak times. Property owners should evaluate the constraints and opportunities with respect to their needs of redevelopment towards developing a balanced solution. This memo provides additional fodder in support of additional consideration and discussion. Roundabout would function at a LOS B in ideal conditions. Roundabout is located to the May defy driver expectation given that there would not west up against Middle Creek be any kind of cross street connecting to roundabout. and is used to serve WB to EB The parking structure will not be easily accessed from u -turns (which includes left -in the west. Roundabout could also be used for EB to WB U-turns, 3 traffic for Evergreen, left -in traffic perhaps those exiting the Lionshead parking structure for VVMC, and left -out traffic desiring travel west; a right turn followed by a U-turn from parking structure). No may be easier than a left turn at peak times. direct access would be provided This option could incorporate an emergency left -in lane via the roundabout. for VVMC and/or a left -in lane to Evergreen. Retaining wall needed along south side of roundabout. Potential headwall/wing-wall work pertaining to Middle Creek. The U-turn traffic will operate at LOS C in ideal conditions, but this approach lane could see 250 -foot queues during the PM peak hour (reduced to 150 feet Roundabout is replaced with a +/- if a left -in is allowed at VVMC). This could be formal U-turn "bulb -out" area, challenging for parking structure traffic exiting that 3a which would be located in facility and needing to complete several lane changes approximately the same location in a relative short distance. as the roundabout in Alternative This option could incorporate an emergency left -in lane 3. for VVMC and/or a left -in lane to Evergreen. Retaining wall needed on south side of roundabout. Potential headwall/wing-wall work pertaining to Middle Creek. Summary A two-lane roundabout will function at LOS B in ideal conditions for any of the alternatives considered. Sensitivity to access placement is needed for some alternatives such that driveways are not too close to the entry legs of the roundabout and end up being blocked at peak times. Property owners should evaluate the constraints and opportunities with respect to their needs of redevelopment towards developing a balanced solution. This memo provides additional fodder in support of additional consideration and discussion. OPTION 1 1��\I iv vi, � ur v■ ME WE ME SIMMONS ■n m v■ ur nu. .uv i. wu■umuoWEMI• �uu. .iSEEMS - ..■ noun ,■uv- •uuuu► ME n� vuu■� v �uu■■► i vuu► ■■■■■■ numumNoun MMMMM_ .■. vu■� �uu■. vu■■. quo■. vu l • u■■■ ► .u■■■. �. ■WOMEN n■■■■. v■■■■. ■■■■■. vu■■. v■■o► .o MEMO► _ nuu. vuu on on i, vuo. WA 6-1 • sir �u■u■. r .• � � � • vou► vuu►. � •uuo• ■■._ v000. . a -v■oou■._-- -vuuouuo.-- -•■u■u■uu■uuu . -•■uuuuuu iii■u.-- --vuuu■ ouuuou..-- 1 M •� ,r M - ;' ICS OPTION 2 , LN 325 Stall-� Parking Structure : vpIp 4 op 71t - alb' pal .� OPTION 2a 0 40 80 SCALE: T-80' 325 Stall - Parking Structure Rl IF IF -moi pal .� 1 ............ ............. ... ... ..MEN � m IN�MEMNON NONE MEN -NOON■■■.. NOMEN ■■. :• -NOON■■.. -NOON■■.. NOON■■.. .NOON■. NOON■■. NOON■■. NOON■.. NOON■. .NOON■. •NOON■. .NOON■, .NOON. NOON■. .NOON. .NOON. .NOON. .NOON. .NOON, NOON. NOON■ .NOON. .NOON. NOON. .NOON. .NOON. was NOON. .■■■.. .NOON. NOON■. NOON■. .NOON. NOON■. . ■:.. r •NONE■, .NONE. .NOON. ,NOON■. � •uuu ,u■u. N.i�iii► i�■ouse MESON t vuu► uuo. � �uuu. - • vu■u.. vuu■■. -uuu■_ mossm .■.u■■■� v■■.■u._ ON •vuuu._ - v.uuo._ .uuoo._ vMEMMEo._ v■umouu■._ .uuuu.._ _ �.u■u■uu._ wassum M -" -vuuuuu.__ vuuu■uu.-_ - wuuuouu.'- • .u■uuuuu■---_ --vuoououuo.-- ' wuuuuuuuu■ --vuuu■uu■ iiia..__ vuuo■ uuou■■■..-_. uuouuuuuu..__ -- .00uuouuuuu.-_. } I R m \ RI/RO OPTION 3a Alk lc� 325 Stall ` Parking Structure I f v W.1911/190 ' -• mass::... - numom summummom wassummous mumm googol MUNMEN s � n r' r- - ` \ 1 \ RI/RO OPTION 3a Alk lc� 325 Stall ` Parking Structure I f v W.1911/190 ' -• mass::... - numom summummom wassummous mumm googol MUNMEN s � n r' r- - NONCOM Y 11 ! ^ !SSSS\�_ s\■\■■No ■■\\ !�1• \—\02!■ ERIC.■■■■\� � \M■■■■\� SSSS■. South Frontage Road Traffic Improvements it W4` r 1 i7 1 ' _ ���� � '\SSSS■► -o �iiiiiir\ •' r ' - - - 1 MOW nommol '■■■■■� /' 1� ,SSSS■, `■ �� • � / I IIS. - r' ■id7Ui■■►. �n2 vy AOMORI NEED ISI � 'W I■tri.ME '■��--�'■■■■\ ■ • 4 w 11 1 k LN son ME %NNS -1 !■■i a■I SSSS.__ .■■fir■■\ ` r, ■► r ---- Ari■■■■■► ■■L�■m■■■■■�� /■■■�� RISE■■■,. =_i 0 .,� �� y • • r •• . "`v9� s � ~ � + � � � \`' \EES r' ••■i�� ��� � �?�, � r�, � �' ��� 1 ., \\■■E► a `r �/', //.; it `� � � '`1* ` � � �� ��� ~��-� ��—���.�•�-`iY� ',� ILII! © '� p` ■ ���\` � �� t� � � �� �,_ t '� � I " � � •' � -- - -i• —aa� �"-''• 1■ tom—_ ��u♦� —���/� s Ir � �,�■r� SSRI_- _ � �.,. --- � �� ' — _ ;I ► " `'�� i rel �-RI■�� �■■■■■�■■.__ '� � - — .. - N � SSSS■■ESE■■■■._-- "'- _�\■■■■■■■FIS■■■!.-_ m. ON IMMMMMM MOEN Wit / MRI ■■■SII■■■E■■■■\il■.€= :.,---'�.■■��■� SSSS■■■\■ - RM, SCORPIO CONDOMINIUMS lull -' V AM 0 tj - f I n . r . AL �� .� ■ ■ TOWN OF To: VVMC From Date Public Works Department October 8, 2014 Subject: VVMC Traffic & Loading Delivery Comments Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan - Traffic Impact Study Memorandum After review of the Traffic Volume Development report for the Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan dated September 30, 2014; we offer the following notes and comments for confirmation/clarification and discussion; • The trip generation is based on # of parking spaces and existing count data; not based on ITE use categories. How does this generation number compare with ITE trip generation? • It should be noted that the -50+% discrepancy in volumes between VVMC counted traffic and the VTMP counted volumes for existing traffic can easily be explained since the VVMC traffic counts were done midweek and the Frontage Road sees significantly more volume on the weekends with skier traffic. • With a right turn in volume of 239, the right turn required decel lane may be +/- 240'; how will this be accommodated in the Roundabout or in the "First In and Alone" scenarios. • The First In and Alone scenario seems potentially problematic; o the left -in only for emergency vehicles will be difficult to control, o the U-turn movement for 200+ vehicles at peak hour will be difficult to enforce/manage, o the U-turn will be difficult to design and sign within the ROW, where is this U-turn proposed to be located? Both the Roundabout and First In and Alone scenarios need to be vetted more in design to understand if they are feasible and approvable. It will also be important to get CDOT's input on whether these solutions will be approvable in CDOTs ROW. If it is determined neither are feasible or approvable what it the next option? On-site circulation will be critical for this amount of traffic entering off the Frontage Road. This should be vetted in more detail. II. Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan — Loading & Delivery Study • The loading and delivery table provided shows that a WB -40 size vehicle comes at least once a day Tuesday thru Friday. It also indicates that the Pepsi/Coke trucks are WB -40, the ones we see in Vail are generally classified as WB -50. This should be taken into consideration when designing a loading & delivery facility. • The table also indicates that the non -regular deliveries or as needed deliveries occur 3x in a given day. This seems very regular, and should be included as such. • Based on the number of deliveries that come to the VVMC, the loading and delivery facility should be able to handle at least the peak number of SU trucks in one hour (6), plus be able to accommodate at least one WB -50. This would accommodate the existing uses. Further discussions should be had as to what may happen in the future. Additional capacity should be considered. The proposal to use the west parking lot for daily WB -40 deliveries is not recommended as this will block necessary parking spaces that need to operate and turn over during the day. • The design of the facility should accommodate a 2' buffer on each side of the trucks for all turning movements, and take into account the blind turn of large articulating vehicles. • It should be also shown how other in -frequent oversize vehicles will be accommodated on site in the West Lot (i.e. WB -67), since no deliveries will be aloud on West Meadow Drive or within the Right of Way. Town of Vail Page 2 TOWN OF Memorandum To: VVMC From: Public Works Department Date: 9/26/14 Subject: VVMC Preferred Frontage Road Access Review Comments In general we do not support this Frontage Road access configuration; by not consolidating/eliminating access points it does not achieve the local planning efforts as indicated in the Vail Transportation Master Plan Access Management Plan that states the accesses in this area should be consolidated. The ability to use the roundabout as an access seems to be a missed opportunity if not used. Additional alternatives need to be thoroughly vetted. See attached sketch ideas, these plus others need to be looked at by the VVMC team and reviewed by the Town. Other more specific concerns and potential challenges of the proposed Frontage Road access are as follows; Eastern US Bank Access 1. The eastern US bank access will not physically function as a two way access. It only accommodates an entering turning radius of 15' and a two lane drive lane width of 20'. The drive lane is also partially in the CDOT ROW. 2. The Eastern US Bank Access may cause (maintain) a hardship to the neighboring property (Scorpio), if the Scorpio ever needed to take access off the S. Frontage Road. See section 3.13 of SHAC. 3. The spacing between the two access points is -85'. It is required to be 150' on a posted 25 mph hour road. (4.4 SHAC) 4. Entering sight distance is required to be 375' for commercial/office uses on a 25 mph 4 lane road. This may be difficult since 375' is the far side of the roundabout. (4.3 SHAC) 5. The proposed 5 parking spaces will not work. They are completely in the ROW and a 6' walk separated from the back of curb by 10' or more is desired. (4.3 SHAC) 6. Per SHAC access are to be perpendicular (sometimes allowed at 60-90 degrees) for a minimum distance of 40'. This access is -15'. VVMC Proaosed Access 1. The spacing between the two proposed access points and the roundabout is —85'. It is required to be 150' on a posted 25 mph hour road. (4.4 SHAC). The Sebastian loading delivery access is about 120' from roundabout and we have issues with it, and it has minimal traffic volume. This preferred VVMC access would have much more volume. 150' may be even too tight of spacing. 2. Entering sight distance is required to be 375' for commercial/office uses on a 25 mph 4 lane road. This may be difficult since 375' is well beyond the far side of the roundabout. (4.3 SHAC) 3. Per SHAC 4.9 access are to be perpendicular (sometimes allowed at 60-90 degrees) for a minimum distance of 40'. This access is —35'. 4. Since the peak right turn movement into the access is greater than 50, a right turn lane is required. This may be accommodated by the anticipated two lanes in the eastbound direction (one a thru lane, one an auxiliary lane). Per SHAC code (4.8) right turn lanes are required to include storage length and taper length, for this project the approximate required storage length 100'+,plus the taper length (90') would be about 190'+ from Roundabout. There is not room for this length. Roundabout Access 1. It seems not using this option would be a missed opportunity for this project. The restrictions discussed in the VVMC Site Access Alternative Evaluation seem predicated on the position that the proposed VVMC expansion has already been designed, and that the US Bank building can not be modified since there is a 10 year lease in place. 2. In response to some of the constraints mentioned in the evaluation for the roundabout access, we would like to discuss these items in more detail; a. The necessary 100-125' queuing could occur on-site, onto/into the parking structure or a redesigned port-cochere entry as anticipated in the VVMC preferred access point. b. The joint access could possibly be an entry only, with separate exit points c. The existing parking garage is being demolished which should provide flexibility in its future design. d. Emergency vehicles are mixed in the preferred design so how is mixing in the roundabout design different. We need to more thoroughly review the need for separate access. e. US Bank lease constraints should be discussed but the project may not be best served to drive the design of the future 100 year life of the VVMC. f. The wayfinding difficulty to sign the entrance from the roundabout would seem to be much easier than wayfinding guests to use the roundabout as a U-turn. g. Recognizing the difficulty of the timing, the Evergreen seemed open to the potential of a modified access for a couple of years, if necessary. Town of Vail Page 2 Town of Vail Page 3 Warren Campbell From: Curt Trau <curttrau@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 2:12 PM To: George Ruther Subject: VVMC - Information George Thank you for taking the time so review the plans for the Hospital with me. I appreciate all your time and information To Recap Our Concerns: 1) Placement of Heliport and concerns about Safety and Noise associated with the placement and operation of. 2) Traffic on West Meadow Drive and how this will be handled 3) Traffic that might utilize Driveway access Between Skaal Hus and Alpenhorn 4) Noise and Construction issues in future as Hospital begins construction of project........ Please understand the importance of these issues not only to myself but to the other owners of Skaal House II as well. Please put my name and Email on your list for further communications as well as forwarding my info to the Hospital. President Skaal Hus II Homeowner Assoc. Owner of 141 W Meadow Unit A Curt Trau 10144 N Port Washington Road Mequon, WI 53092 262-240-1250 curttrau(D_yahoo.com