HomeMy WebLinkAboutAttachmt 4 Parking Study
~
Transportation
Consultants
30th Year
Änni versar
MEMORANDUM
November 22, 2004
From:
Ray Kuzbari
City of Dublin
Via e-mail only:
ray.Kuzbari@ci.dublin.ca.us (7 pages)
Gordon Lum
Project No.: 157-184
To:
Jurisdiction: Dublin
Subject:
Proposed Dublin Gateway Medical Center
The purpose of this memo is to determine the trip generation due to changes in land uses on the northeast
parcel of the Koll Dublin Corporate Center Development and to describe traffic impacts (if any) to the
study intersections and roadways. In addition, the parking and internal circulation are evaluated for this
parcel. The Koll Dublin Corporate Center Development is located on the south side of Dublin Boulevard
between Tassajara Road and Jon Monego Court.
Based on information provided by City staff (as of January 1,2003), the buildout of the northeast parcel
(Koll Dublin Corporate Center Phase 2) has been assumed to be179,850 square feet (s.f.) of office use.
The current proposal (Dublin Gateway Medical Center) is for a three-story Medical Office Building East
(57,700 s.f.) and three-story 62,300 s.f. Lifestyle Wellness Center for Phase I. Phase II will consist of
another three-story Medical Office Building (58,000 square feet) to the west of the Medical Office
Building (MOB) East.
Trip Generation of Koll Center
Based on the office trip generation rates (Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Land Use
Code 710) currently used by City staff and their consultants, Table I summarizes the expected trip
generation for a 179,850 s.f. office building. The building is expected to generate 223 a.m. peak hour
trips and 194 p.m. peak hour trips
925-463-0611 phone
925-463-3690 fax www.tjkm.com
PLEASANTON
SANTA ROSA
5960 Inglewood Drive, Suite 100 Pleasanton, CA 94588-8535
"We create transportation solutions... with the right people"
ATTACHMENT J-\
Ray Kuzbari, January 14,2005, Pg. 2
TABLE I: TRIP GENERATION OF KOLL DUBLIN CORPORATE CENTER PHASE 2
A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Trip In:Out Vehicle Trip Ends Trip In:Out Vehicle Trip Ends
Land Use Size Rate Ratio In Out Total Rate Ratio In Out Total
Office 179.85 ksf 1.66 88:12 262 36 298 1.57 17:83 48 233 281
Source: Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis for the Proposed Dublin Ranch West Development, TJKM, 11/9/04, Appendix C
KSF] ,000 square feet
Trip Generation of Dublin Gateway Medical Center (DGMC)
Given the unique trip generation characteristics of a Medical Office Building (MOB) and associated
Wellness Center, TJKM conducted a people/vehicle generation survey at an existing MOB- Wellness
Center complex located at 1111 East Stanley Boulevard in Livermore on Tuesday, October 26,2004. This
complex is very similar to the proposed DBMC. Based on the Livermore MOB being 65,726 square feet
and the adjacent Wellness Center being 80,366 square feet, Table II presents the results ofthe
people/vehicle generation survey.
TABLE II: 10/26/04 TRIP GENERATION SURVEY IN LIVERMORE
A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Land Trip In:Out Vehicle Trip Ends Trip In:Out Vehicle Trip Ends
Use Size Rate Ratio In Out Total Rate Ratio In Out Total
Medical 65.726 ksf 1.68 77:23 85 26 111 1.80 37:63 44 74 118
Office
Wellness 80.366 ksf 1.54 66:34 82 42 124 2.64 65:35 138 74 212
Center
Total 146.092 ksf 167 68 235 182 148 330
Table III presents the expected trip generation of the proposed DGMC using the rates obtained from the
Livermore survey. The application of the Livermore rates is somewhat conservative because it assumes
that the peak trip generation of the MOB and Wellness Center occurs during the same one-hour period.
In reality, the a.m. peak hour for both the Livermore MOB and Wellness Center was between 8:00 and
9:00. However, the p.m. peak hour for the Livermore MOB was between 4:00-5:00, while the Wellness
Center peaked between 5:00 and 6:00 p.m. Figure 1 illustrates the expected a.m. and p.m. peak hour
trips at the major driveways of the proposed DGMC.
~
~
CD
c
.c
j
C
Ñ
L()
~ ~ (9) Z
1:: '-Ü) ~
~ F(oz) 6
g
c
:2
'3
m
S _
g.¡ ~
~W~
- a.
i -
~
~
o
Cñ
C')
~
CI
c:
:§
.:;
m
III
.~. Q'
g';j~
-J1111
.~ $ if
"C -
GI
~
~
o
Cñ
C')
.p~ eJe!esse.l.
~~g~
sill
tntfc.c
C')~=e:..
...I~
o
Q)
-¡¡;
~ (_ € ciS
_ 0 0
z -
õ
z
(9)L~ r'
Ñ
'"
~
r-
'"
'" I
"
"
Q
,.
"
"
...
~
"
"
'D
'5
0 is
r-
~ +-(~) ~
(Z9U f9J
(9 ~~ ~
¡;:;-
~
~
'"
~
::I
1:)
::I
&š
g
c:
~
III
a.
~
~
~
~
~"è(~)~
.-(9) ~
(
i(
~
)
(£Z) ~£ 3
~
ê:
~
o
;/
~
Q)
...
::I~
C)
LL
'- C/)
2a.
c: ._
( ) ~
ü~
- ..
r5 (.)
.- G>
"0._
III III ~ e
§§ >-D..
~~ co ~
:;:; .~ ~ ;j
£ £ .c...... 0
~~ :J co:I:
g¡ g¡ 0 <.9
Qa.a......c:~
z~~ 0= n:s
~ c:( a. >-.c ...
~~~Gcsä:
...J
CJ
...
o
~
...
'"
,.:.
'"
Ray Kuzbari, January 14,2005, Pg. 3
Figure 1: Peak Hour Project Trips
Ray Kuzbari, January 14,2005, Pg. 4
TABLE III: ApPLICATION OF LIVERMORE RATES TO PROPOSED DUBLIN GA TEW A Y MEDICAL CENTER
A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Land Trip In:Out I Vehicle Trip Ends Trip In:Out Vehicle TriD Ends
Use Size Rate Ratio In Out Total Rate Ratio In Out Total
Medical 115.7 ksf 1.68 77:23 150 45 195 1.80 37:63 77 131 208
Office
We II ness 62.3 ksf 1.54 66:34 63 33 96 2.64 65:35 107 57 164
Center
Total 213 78 291 184 188 372
A comparison between the results in Table I and In indicates that the proposed DGMC is anticipated to
generate approximately 291 a.m. peak hour trips, and 372 p.m. peak hour trips, resulting in approximately
seven (=291-298) fewer a.m. peak hour trips and 91 (=372-281) more p.m. peak hour trips.
The Alameda County Congestion Management Agency has established a guideline that a project must
generate a net increase of 100 peak hour trips before the Metropolitan Transportation System needs to be
studied for significant impacts. Consistent with this guideline, the 91 additional trips in the p.m. peak
hour are expected to be insignificant on the transportation network in the vicinity of the proposed DGMC.
These trips are not expected to further impact the study intersections, roadway segment analysis or
significantly change the results ofthe level of service analysis summarized in the Final Report for Koll
Dublin Corporate Center prepared by TJKM and dated July 28, 1998.
Parking Requirements
To better estimate the expected parking demand of the proposed DMGC, TJKM also conducted a parking
occupancy survey at the Livermore MOB-Wellness Center between 6:30 a.m. and 7:30 p.m. on
Wednesday, November 3, 2004. A total of 499 parking stalls (including 19 stalls for the disabled) were
surveyed on an hourly basis. Table IV summarizes the number of vehicles that were parked. The peak
demand occurred at 10:30 a.m., when 399 of the 499 stalls were occupied. This demand is probably
conservatively high because 48 of the 399 vehicles were parked in an area where most of the parkers were
accessing Valley Care Hospital rather than the adjacent Wellness Center. Nevertheless, a peak demand of
399 vehicles results in a parking ratio of2.73 (=399/146.1 ksf) spaces per 1,000 square feet. To reduce
the amount of driving needed to find an empty parking space, a 15 percent surplus of spaces is
recommended. Apply this amount to the peak parking demand would result in a parking ratio of 3 .14
(=2.73 x 1.15) spaces per 1,000 square feet.
According to the Phase I Site Plan (dated 10/11/04 and shown conceptually on Figure 2), 468 parking
stalls are being proposed for Phase I, resulting in a ratio of 3 .90 (=468/120) spaces per 1,000 square feet
of building floor area. According to the Phase II Site Plan (also dated 10/11/04 and shown conceptually
on Figure 3) a total of 689 parking stalls are being proposed at the DGMC for the two phases resulting in
a parking ratio of 3.87 stalls (=689/178) per 1,000 square feet of building floor area. Based on the results
ofthe Livermore parking occupancy survey, this proposed parking ratio of 3.90 per 1,000 and 3.87 per
1J
.2:
a:I
,5
:!j
::I
C
œ
c
:ë
'3
ø:I
B _
~;¡=
-IVIV
~wz;
.- Q.
i -
:IE
~
¡
C")
~
·PI:! eJe!essel
~~g;:-
sill
U)lic.c
C")~=!!:.
..Ii
~
(
(
~
Q)
ro
,.. :€ ciS
~.~ ::
o
z
...
"
..
Q
:::0
Q
Q
Q"
~
Q
:s
::I
o
I
c:=:::::J
)
~
o
r
~
Q)
...
::IN
C)
ü:
'-
())
-
c
())
Ü
co
ü s:::
"'Ceo
())-
~c..
>'Q)
CO..,
C ~ .-
=())UJ
..c _
::sco-
o (9 Q)
'-cCl)
0= eo
>...c -'=
ð~c..
o
v
o
§
v
"'
~
on
Ray Kuzbari, January 14,2005, Pg. 5
Figure 2: Phase I Site Plan
Ray Kuzbari, January 14,2005, Pg. 6
Figure 3: Phase II Site Plan
1J
>
¡¡:¡
,5
jj
::I
C
(
~
'PI::! eJe!esse.l
~g~
~- II) GI
ot:1
û)tfc.l:.
t')~=e:.
..I~
'"
u
..
e
õ
o
II.
5
o
~
::I
o
I
œ
c
:§
'$
III
S _
~i=
jw~
,- A-
i --
::¡¡
~
~
t')
c
~
.~
::I
1)
2
ü)
œ
c
~
III
A-
œ
c
:§
'S
III
GI
·~N
51)B:
-~Q
mS.l:.
.E A-
i --
:::E
~
o
ü)
t')
(
)
\
(
Q)
ro
(_'€ ciS
_00
z :;
o
Z
o
r
~
~
:JC""')
C)
ü:
'--
(J.)
......
c:::
(J.)
Ü
~ s::
.- CO
"'0_
~Q.
>.(1)
ro~
C:::~CJ)
:.= (J.)
.c...... _
::J ro -
o <.9 (I)
'+- c::: f/)
0:.= CO
>..c J:
......::J'"
GO....
ci
g
'"
;g
,.:.
"'
Ray Kuzbari, January 14,2005, Pg, 7
1,000 should more than adequately meet the expected peak demand of 3 .14 spaces (which includes a 15
percent surplus) per 1,000 square feet.
TABLE IV: LIVERMORE PARKING OCCUPANCY ON 11/3/04
I I Spaces Occupied I
Time (out of 499)
6:30 a.m, 112
7:30 a.m, 133
8:30 a.m, 269
9:30 a.m, 394
10:30 a.m. 399
11 :30 a.m, 337
12:30 p,m. 241
1 :30 p,m. 236
2:30 p,m. 285
3:30 p,m. 270
4:30 p,m. 240
5:30 p,m. 186
6:30 p,m. 211
7:30 p.m. 170
Internal Circulation
As shown on Figure 1, the project parking areas are served by two driveways: the "West Driveway" on
Glynnis Rose Drive and the "South Driveway" just east of the proposed Parking Structure. The following
comments pertain to the full size plans (dated 10/11/04) for both Phases I and II:
. The proposed median at both the West and South Driveways may hinder the ability of trucks to
turn into (and out of) the parking lot. To improve sight distance, the monument signs (proposed
in the median) should be located to the right of outbound drivers at the two Driveways.
. The proposed taper for northbound inbound traffic just north of the South Driveway is too short
(only about 15 feet).
F or Phase II, the proposed taper for southbound outbound traffic just north of the South Driveway is too
short (only about 15 feet). Also for Phase II, the proposed parking structure has an access point on the
east side of the structure. This access point would result in more potential vehicle conflicts at the
proposed offset four-legged intersection just west of the outdoor pool deck (for the WelIness Center).
The project sponsor should consider replacing this access point on the east side of the structure with one
on the south side. An access point on the south side would provide for better circulation since it would be
served directly by the relatively long east-west roadway that provides a connection between Glynnis Rose
Drive and Tassajara Road.