4.0 TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS

Transcription

1 4.0 TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS This chapter describes the anticipated transportation impacts of the No-Build and LRT Alternative. The evaluation is based upon the anticipated travel demand, transportation capacity, transportation performance measures, and impacts to the road network, parking, and freight delivery. The analysis was developed from 2030 travel demand forecasts for the project corridor using the NCTCOG s regional travel demand model. Where possible, quantitative and qualitative data are presented to show the relative performance measures and impacts of each alternative. 4.1 IMPACTS ON TRANSIT SERVICE AND RIDERSHIP The proposed LRT Alternative would extend service from the existing LRT system in downtown Dallas through northwest Dallas and Irving to a terminus at Belt Line Road in DFW International Airport (See Chapter 2 for a detailed description. A DART bus network with 14 routes and one transfer station with park-and-ride lots currently serves the corridor (see Chapter 3, Existing Conditions. The DART bus service includes local, express, circulator and cross-town routes. These buses operate in mixed traffic on IH 35E and on local arterials. The proposed LRT Alternative would expand fixed guideway transit from downtown Dallas and increase the reliability of transit service in the corridor, particularly for commuters to downtown Dallas Transit Levels of Service Current bus transit service in the project corridor operates in mixed traffic on city streets and on IH 35E, SH 114 and SH 161. The transit service currently carries approximately 1.1 percent of the total travel demand in the corridor. While the bus system would evolve to better accommodate future travel demand patterns in the No-Build Alternative, buses would still operate under unpredictable, mixed traffic conditions on area roadways and highways. The proposed LRT Alternative would provide an exclusive guideway that would provide increased reliability and the potential for travel time savings. When connected to the existing DART LRT system, the proposed LRT Alternative would also provide increased transit mobility to origins and destinations throughout the DART Service Area. As shown by the performance measures in Table 4-1, the DART transit system would experience increased ridership, increased passenger miles, and increased passenger hours with the LRT Alternative compared to the No-Build Alternative. These levels of service measures are commonly used to assess transit system performance. Table 4-1 shows that total system-wide rail ridership would increase by about 12,575 riders per day (an increase of eleven percent and total system-wide transit usage would increase by about 33,670 unlinked trips daily (an increase of over nine percent as compared to the No-Build Alternative. Unlinked trips provide a measure of the number of persons using each route or mode of travel. Table 4-1 also shows that total system-wide transit passenger miles are estimated to increase from 1.77 million in the No-Build Alternative to 1.94 million in the LRT Alternative (an increase of more than nine percent as compared to the No-Build Alternative. Total system-wide passenger hours, on the other hand, would increase only six percent in the LRT Alternative. These trends indicate an increased system-wide efficiency of travel time savings would result from the LRT Alternative because there would be more passengers traveling longer distances with reduced travel times. Geographic Coverage The No-Build Alternative would not expand the geographic coverage of transit service beyond the area traversed by the 14 bus routes currently operating in the project corridor. The level of bus service would increase as the employment and/or population of the corridor increases, particularly with the addition of HOV lanes on SH 114 and IH 35E south of IH 635. However, anticipated Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-1

2 increases in traffic congestion would make the bus transit service with the No-Build Alternative less reliable, regardless of capacity or route expansions. TABLE TRANSIT SYSTEM LEVEL OF SERVICE PERFORMANCE MEASURES (DART SYSTEM-WIDE Daily Alternative Performance Measure No Build 1 LRT Alignment 2 Unlinked Transit Trips 1 Local Bus 221, ,137 2 Express Bus 6,811 4,622 3 Fixed Guideway 139, ,103 4 Total 368, ,862 5 Added Trips 33,674 Rail Ridership 1 Fixed Guideway 112, ,270 2 Added Transit Riders 12,575 Passenger Miles 1 Total 1,775,144 1,938,114 2 Percent Change 9.18% Passenger Hours 1 Total 78,354 83,625 2 Percent Change 6.73% 1 YR25MAR05_NWIRV_OPTA_NOSLC_RDWY, 2030 No Build model run, DART, December YR25MAR05_NWIRV_OPTA_NOSLC_RDWY, 2030 Build model run, DART, December 2005 Source: NCTCOG, DART; December 2005 and March 2006 The LRT Alternative would expand the geographic coverage of fixed guideway transit service from Dallas along Spur 482 into Irving following SH 114 (John W. Carpenter Freeway to the Las Colinas Urban Center, then crossing the President George Bush Turnpike onto Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (DFW Airport property. This would allow continuous, high-speed transit service along an exclusive guideway with 8 transit stations. A feeder bus system would bring transit riders to the LRT stations. The feeder bus service would expand the geographic coverage of the LRT system far beyond the effective range of the No-Build Alternative through the corridor as a whole. Hours and Frequency of Service The LRT Alternative would have a peak-hour headway of 10 minutes and an off-peak (mid-day, evening, and weekend headway of 20 minutes. The LRT vehicles are capable of a maximum operating speed of 65 miles per hour; however, average speeds are much lower. The vehicles would have an average station dwell time of 20 seconds. Table 4-2 shows the preliminary operating plan and station-to-station travel times for the LRT Alternative. Generally, two-vehicle trains would operate most of the day, with three-vehicle trains operating during the peak period, and single-vehicle trains operating during evening hours of low usage. The operating hours for the LRT Alternative would be from about 5:00 AM until 12:30 AM, seven days a week. Peak hour service would be provided Monday through Friday between 6:00 AM and 9:00 AM in the morning, and between 3:00 PM and 6:00 PM in the afternoon. This schedule is the same as that for DART s existing LRT system. The fares would be based on DART's current fare structure for the existing LRT system ($1.25 per one-way trip for light rail riders. Transfers to and from the LRT system from the feeder buses would require a second fare ($1.25 for the bus trip and $1.25 for the light rail trip. LRT riders Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-2

3 transferring to or form an express bus route (i.e., premium service would pay a one-way fare of $2.50. Senior citizens, the mobility impaired, and students would have reduced fares of $ Stations Bachman Station to University of Dallas to Lake Carolyn to North Las Colinas to Carpenter Ranch to North Lake College to Belt Line Road TABLE 4-2 PRELIMINARY OPERATING PLAN FOR THE LRT ALTERNATIVE LRT Alternative Distance from Station to Station (Miles Travel Time between Stations (Minutes TOTAL * * Total Project length is 9.3 miles, including 0.3 miles of tail track extending beyond the Belt Line station platform. Source: DART; January Parking in park-and-ride lots would be free. These fares are similar to the No-Build Alternative bus service fares. A variety of annual passes, monthly passes and day passes would also be offered for trips throughout the DART LRT and Commuter Rail system. Travel Times Ideally, transit alternatives should provide reduced travel times to downtown Dallas when compared to automobile travel (the No-Build Alternative. Due to longer routes and dwell times at each stop and/or station, transit alternatives can take more time to reach their destination than passenger cars, particularly during off-peak hours. However, the benefits of ease of travel, consistent travel time due to an exclusive guideway that is not subject to incidents or accidents, and elimination of the inconvenience and expense of parking in downtown can outweigh the lack of a travel time savings. During peak periods, transit can provide considerable travel time savings, particularly when roadway incidents are present. In addition, the LRT Alternative would provide travel time savings to existing transit riders destined to downtown Dallas from within the project corridor. Table 4-3 shows the difference in average transit travel times from existing transit stops to downtown Dallas for the No-Build Alternative (bus transit and for the LRT Alternative. Depending on the time of day, the LRT Alternative would save up to 67 minutes for transit riders from the Belt Line Station, up to 32 minutes from the North lake College Station, and up to 49 minutes from University of Dallas Station over the No-Build Alternative. Transfers The No-Build and LRT Alternatives would both use the DART bus network to transfer riders to and from the LRT system. With the No-Build Alternative, transit patrons would use the DART bus system to transfer to other bus routes at the North Irving Transit Center. A limited number of transit patrons within the corridor would also use the DART bus system to transfer to the existing LRT system at the current West CBD Transfer Center, which is close to the West End LRT Station. Transit patrons would also be able to use the bus system to access the future Carrollton-Farmers Final Environmental Impact Statement

4 Branch LRT Line at the Bachman Station. The No-Build Alternative would result in 64,700 systemwide transfers from buses to the LRT system daily. TABLE 4-3 TRANSIT TRAVEL TIMES FROM SELECT ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS In-Vehicle Transit Travel Time (minutes To West Transfer Station from: No-Build (Bus (AM /Off-peak /PM LRT Alternative Belt Line Road 95 / 71 / North Lake College 54 / 57 / Carpenter Ranch 26 / 24 / North Las Colinas 22 / 20 / Lake Carolyn 20 / 16 / University of Dallas 43 / 66 / Source: Parsons Transportation Group, DART; December 2005 With the LRT Alternative, many transit riders would use the feeder bus network to transfer to the proposed LRT stations along the project corridor. For the LRT Alternative, there would actually be more transfers than the No-Build Alternative because more riders would be attracted to the system, the feeder bus network would supply a large number of the transit riders to the LRT extension, and several express bus routes to downtown would no longer exist within the corridor. The LRT Alternative would result in 72,850 system-wide transfers from buses to the LRT system daily, an increase of almost 13 percent compared to the No-Build Alternative. The predominant mode of access to the LRT system will vary by each LRT station; however, most of the LRT riders would transfer from the feeder bus service. Approximately 16 percent of LRT riders would transfer to the new rail line from other rail lines, 3 percent would transfer from the Las Colinas Automated People Mover, 24 percent would drive to the LRT stations, 9 percent would access the system by walking, and 48 percent would use local bus service to access the LRT Alternative in Reliability The No-Build Alternative would use the DART bus transit system on the existing corridor roadways under mixed-traffic travel conditions. Therefore, the bus system in the No-Build Alternative would be subjected to similar travel speeds and delays resulting from peak hour congestion on the roadways within the corridor. Many of the major arterials and freeways within the corridor operate at Volume to Capacity ratios meeting or exceeding the upper limit of 0.9, an indication that traffic conditions are unacceptable during the peak hour. As a result, the buses operating in the mixed traffic environment would generally have decreased reliability and increased travel times. The LRT Alternative would operate on an exclusive guideway and would not be subjected to traffic and traffic signal delays on the major thoroughfares within the corridor. The LRT vehicles would have preemption traffic signals at all grade crossings to insure few, if any, delays. Although the LRT may experience longer travel times compared to the No-Build Alternative during optimal traffic conditions, the LRT Alternative would provide transit riders with a more reliable transit service than the No-Build Alternative because it would not be susceptible to the occasional congestion created by traffic incidents. This is also reflected in the increased number of system-wide transit riders after implementation of the LRT Alternative. Comfort and Convenience The No-Build Alternative would provide few enhancements to the existing comfort and convenience of transit service in the corridor. In fact, the No-Build Alternative would be more Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-4

5 susceptible to the inconvenience of lower service reliability due to roadway congestion and incidents. The proposed LRT Alternative would provide enhanced comfort and convenience for transit riders on the DART system as compared to the No-Build Alternative. The LRT system would provide transit service to passengers with conveniently located stations and air-conditioned light rail vehicles. The LRT Alternative would be fully accessible for mobility-impaired patrons and would enhance regional mobility for transit dependent populations much more than the No-Build Alternative. Additionally, the LRT Alternative would operate within an exclusive guideway on continuously welded rail with fewer of the stop-and-go movements associated with conventional bus transit service. Since LRT service would replace the existing Irving express bus routes to downtown Dallas, bus patrons currently utilizing these routes would be required to use the LRT. Compared to the express bus routes, the LRT Alternative would provide improved service reliability to downtown Dallas, increased passenger capacity, a comparable level of comfort, and a lower fare (i.e., a $1.25 one-way LRT fare compared to a $2.50 one-way premium express bus service fare Transit Ridership The transit ridership anticipated for each alternative was estimated in terms of both linked and unlinked passenger trips. The forecast of linked passenger trips includes all travel from the point of origin to the point of final destination as a single trip, regardless of whether or not there was a transfer from one mode to another (e.g., bus to rail. Therefore, the linked trip counts all of the individual segments of travel as one trip. The forecast of unlinked trips counts each segment of a trip on an individual mode as a separate trip, regardless of transfer (e.g., a bus ride and transfer to the rail system to reach a given destination equals two individual trips. Linked trips provide an estimate of the number of people who use the transit system, while unlinked trips provide a measure of the number of people using each route or mode of travel. Thus, for the following analysis of transit patronage, both linked and unlinked passenger trips are used to describe estimated 2030 ridership characteristics for each alternative. Total Transit Riders To determine the total system-wide daily transit ridership for each alternative, the forecast of unlinked transit trips in 2030 was developed using the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG travel demand model. These unlinked transit trips include ridership by mode including local bus, express bus, and LRT. As shown in Table 4-1, the total daily unlinked transit trips range from 368,200 for the No-Build Alternative to 401,900 for the LRT Alternative. Therefore, the LRT Alternative would result in an increased daily ridership of about 33,700 unlinked transit trips system-wide in Rail Ridership by Alternative The forecast of daily ridership for the LRT Alternative includes passengers who would access the passenger rail system at stations from automobiles, walking, and from bus transfers. This estimate was developed using linked trips to count only those riders using the rail system and to prevent double counting. This is done by eliminating the effect of transfers on the total number of system riders to account for the net increase in system ridership. The resulting forecast of 2030 daily linked trips produced by DART s model indicates that the system-wide rail ridership would increase from 112,695 for the No-Build Alternative to 125,270 for the LRT Alternative, as shown in Table 4-1. This indicates that 12,575 more passengers would use the proposed LRT service daily in Special Generator Ridership Special generators, such as large sporting events, do not produce trips on a regular weekday basis throughout the year. For that reason, these types of special generator trips are not addressed in the NCTCOG regional travel demand model. However, understanding the potential for special generator ridership can enhance the accuracy of travel demand forecasts. The proposed LRT Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-5

6 alignment has one potential special events venue along the corridor: the Las Colinas Urban Center, which includes the Irving Convention Center. Station Volumes and Boardings/Alightings The stations proposed for the LRT Alternative were selected due to their proximity to population and employment centers, major existing transportation facilities, and ease of access by bus, car, or walking. Table 4-4 shows the anticipated 2030 daily volumes of transit passengers at each of the stations in the LRT Alternative. As shown in the table, most stations can be categorized as primarily an origin station or a destination station. A few stations serve both functions roughly equally. The two deferred stations (Loop 12 and South Las Colinas are not included in the ridership projection. These stations may be implemented as development warrants. TABLE 4-4 DAILY LRT ALTERNATIVE STATION PASSENGER VOLUMES IN 2030 Station Boardings 1 Alightings 2 Total Total Station Volume Station Riders LRT ALTERNATIVE 4 University of Dallas Lake Carolyn North Las Colinas Carpenter Ranch North Lake College Belt Line Road TOTALS Number of trips to and from station where station is the origin of a one-way or round trip. 2 Number of trips to and from station where station is the destination of a one-way or round trip. Total Boardings and Alightings are not equal because the entire DART LRT system is not represented in this table; many of those who board within this study corridor have destinations outside of the study corridor. 4 YR25MAR05_NWIRV_OPTA_NOSLC_RDWY, 2030 Build model run, DART, Dec Source: Parsons Transportation Group; DART; December 2005 Most stations in the corridor would serve as origin stations for round trips to downtown or other areas within Dallas, but some stations in the corridor would serve as destinations in their own right. Specifically, the University of Dallas, Lake Carolyn, North Las Colinas and Belt Line stations would be major destination stations within the corridor due to the high-density employment in those areas and the high number of patrons and visitors that use those facilities. North Las Colinas is the largest destination station due to the Urban Center. North Las Colinas, North Lake College and Belt Line Stations are the origin stations with Belt Line being the largest origin station because it is at the end of the line. As shown in Table 4-4, the stations anticipated to have the greatest volumes of passengers are Belt Line and North Las Colinas Stations; both having nearly the same volumes. They serve as major origin and destination stations because Belt Line is at the end of the line and North Las Colinas serves employment and residents in the Urban Center. Four of the six stations would have park-and-ride lots and all would have substantial feeder bus service. Major destination stations (University of Dallas and Lake Carolyn would also be served by feeder bus service, but would not have park-and-ride lots. The Belt Line Station (a major origin and destination station would be the northwestern terminus of the LRT Alternative and is expected to draw riders from a broad area of the corridor and beyond via automobile. This station would have the largest park-and-ride lot with approximately 743 spaces. 4.2 HIGHWAY AND ROADWAY IMPACTS The existing highway system in the Irving/DFW LRT corridor includes several freeways, a tollway and a network of arterial and local streets (see Figure 4-1. Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-6

7 N MACARTHUR BLVD Cabell Dr DFW International Airport BELT LINE RD UV114 PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH TPKE ROYAL LN Farmers Branch LUNA RD Legend Major Arterial Minor Arterial Primary Highway Secondary Highway Proposed LRT Line to Irving/DFW Carrollton-Farmers Branch LRT Line VALLEY VIEW LN CARBON RD WALNUT HILL LN JOHN CARPENTER FWY H I DDEN RIDGE DR RIVERSIDE DR Dallas 35E HARRY HINES BLVD WALNUT HILL LN &- 348 ESTERS RD UV 161 NORTHGATE DR WALNUT HILL LN ROCHELLE BLVD CALIFORNIA CROSSING RD NORTHWEST HWY " 12 " 12 WEB CHAPEL RD ROCHELLE RD BELT LINE RD IRVING BLVD STORY RD Irving E AIRPORT FWY MACARTHUR BLVD N O' CONNOR RD BNSF RR JOHN CARPENTER FWY TOM BRANIFF DR UV 183 UV 354 GRAUWYLER RD STOREY LN &- 482 E lm Fork Trinity River</FNT> REGAL ROW 35E DENTON DR UV 354 Source: NCTCOG, 2006 Figure 4-1 NW Corridor LRT Line to Irving/DFW 0 2,000 4,000 8,000 Environmental Impact Statement Feet Major Freeways and Arterials

8 These roads and highways are discussed in Chapter 3, Existing Conditions. In the eastern portion of the corridor, the proposed alignment runs along several highways and arterial roadways, including Spur 482, SH 114, Teleport Boulevard, Las Colinas Boulevard, and Northwest Highway. As the proposed alignment proceeds west of the Las Colinas Urban Center, it no longer follows a particular roadway, but crosses multiple roadways on its way to DFW Airport (such as Hidden Ridge Drive, MacArthur Boulevard, and Walnut Hill Lane. Considering the corridor as a whole, peak period congestion is widespread on the freeways and the major roadways and the length of the peak period has been increasing. As discussed in Chapter 3, Existing Conditions, most of the freeway segments in the study corridor currently operate with unacceptable levels of service on a typical weekday, as well as Belt Line Road on the west end of the corridor, MacArthur Boulevard in the middle, and Harry Hines Boulevard on the east end. In addition, many of the roadways are at their ultimate build-out conditions, so reconstruction cannot mitigate current conditions or handle the growth of traffic that is projected to occur in the future. For example, there is more vacant land to build upon, both in the Las Colinas Urban Center and in the residential areas of the corridor. As a result, there will be more jobs within the corridor as well as residents, translating into more commuter trips into and out of the corridor. The discussion below focuses on the LRT Alternative and anticipated regional impacts, as well as local impacts, including those on road and intersection LOS, transit station access, and pedestrian safety Regional Impacts Regional travel patterns in the corridor were derived from the NCTCOG Travel Demand Model. In 2005, the land uses within the corridor generated 127,521 home-based work (HBW trips daily. This total number of trips includes both productions and attractions to and from sites within and outside the corridor. Of the 114,576 trip productions, 2.5 percent were made to locations within the corridor. This indicates that the majority of the corridor s work force travels to areas outside of the corridor for employment purposes. Another 10,038 HBW trips were attracted to locations within the corridor from areas outside the corridor. These patterns are expected to continue through 2030, but with additional traffic. In 2030, the land uses within the corridor are expected to generate 176,898 HBW trips daily. This total number of trips includes both productions and attractions to and from sites within and outside the corridor. Of the 162,762 trip productions, 2.3 percent will be made to locations within the corridor. This indicates that the majority of the corridor s work force is expected to travel to areas outside of the corridor for employment purposes, a slightly smaller percentage than in Another 10,402 HBW trips will be attracted to locations within the corridor from areas outside the corridor. While there is not a significant difference in the origin and destination of HBW trips between the No-Build and LRT Alternatives, there is a difference in the mode of transportation used to travel between home and work. Of the total number of HBW trips to be generated in the study corridor in 2030, approximately 2.7 percent would use public transit to reach their destinations, and the LRT Alternative would result in about 1,950 more daily riders using public transit compared to the No- Build Alternative. The LRT Alternative is anticipated to have beneficial impacts to the regional transportation system by helping to reduce regional Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT. It is estimated that VMT in the corridor would increase along SH 114 by about 640,000 miles daily from 2005 levels to 2030 levels under the No-Build Alternative. The LRT Alternative would reduce VMT in the corridor by 19,800 miles daily compared to the No-Build Alternative in Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-8

9 4.2.2 Local Impacts The LRT Alternative would help reduce roadway congestion in the corridor. However, some localized areas may experience limited increases in traffic congestion due to the introduction of gates at LRT grade crossings. The gates would create brief interruptions to the flow of traffic to allow for the safe crossing of LRT vehicles. In addition, the construction of park-and-ride lots, LRT train stations, and the traffic they would attract, could have some limited impact on traffic operations near those stations. These impacts are defined in greater detail in the following sections. Impacts on Road/Intersection LOS Impacts on Freeways The LRT Alternative, with its associated park-and-ride lots and feeder bus network, would provide incentive for commuters to use transit and therefore decrease automobile travel on area roadways. Table 4-5 shows the differences in average daily traffic (ADT between the No-Build and the LRT Alternative in 2030 on the corridor freeways. With the LRT Alternative fully operational in 2030, there would be decreases in ADT on several freeway segments, as shown in Table 4-5 and Figure 4-2. On SH 114, traffic is anticipated to decrease by approximately 1,000 vehicles per day on most segments, and decrease by 2,000 vehicles per day at Hidden Ridge Drive. This difference represents a one percent decrease from the No-Build volume. An even larger decrease is seen along the President George Bush Turnpike (SH 161 where traffic is anticipated to decrease by 10,000 vehicles per day (an almost 5 percent decrease. TABLE FREEWAY ADT IN THE NORTHWEST CORRIDOR Average Daily Traffic (ADT Location and Map No. No-Build Alternative LRT Alternative Increase (Decrease Stemmons Freeway (IH 35E 1 Raceway 168, ,000 2,000 2 Northwest Highway (Loop , ,000 2,000 3 Loop 12 Merge 169, ,000 1,000 Loop 12 4 Airport Freeway (SH , ,000 2,000 5 Elm Fork of the Trinity River 194, , Stemmons (IH 35E Merge 189, ,000 0 Spur Stemmons Freeway (IH 35E 72,000 72,000 0 Airport Freeway (SH Loop , ,000 1,000 Carpenter Freeway (SH Tom Braniff Pkwy 178, ,000 (1, Hidden Ridge Drive 183, ,000 (2, Pres. G. Bush Turnpike (SH , , Belt Line Road 234, ,000 (1,000 President George Bush Turnpike 13 Belt Line Road 217, ,000 (10, MacArthur Boulevard 218, ,000 (10,000 * See Figure 4-2. Source: NCTCOG; February 2006 Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-9

10 N MACARTHUR BLVD VALLEY VIEW LN ESTERS RD CARBON RD UV 161 NORTHGATE DR ROCHELLE RD ( " 37 ( 53 " " 54 DFW International Airport ( " 38 " " " BELT LINE RD ( 36 ( 13 ( " 35 " BELT LINE RD Source: Parsons, 2006 " " " 233 ( " 34 " WALNUT HILL LN IRVING BLVD STORY RD UV114 ( " 11 " PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH TPKE ( " WALNUT HILL LN ( " " ( " 33 " " 35 Irving ( " 14 " E AIRPORT FWY JOHN CARPENTER FWY ( " 31 " ( " 29 " MACARTHUR BLVD H ( 27 " " 7 7 ( 28 " 18 " 17 ( " I DDEN RIDGE DR N O' CONNOR RD ( " 25 " " 181 ROYAL LN ( 26 " 8 " 7 BNSF RR ( 19 " 38 " 38 ( ( " 20 " 22 ( " 11 " 13 " " RIVERSIDE DR ( 23 ROCHELLE BLVD " 14 " 15 ( " 24 " &- 348 JOHN CARPENTER FWY Farmers Branch LUNA RD CALIFORNIA CROSSING RD ( 9 " 178 " 177 TOM BRANIFF DR ( 39 Dallas GRAUWYLER RD NORTHWEST HWY " 12 35E STOREY LN UV 354 UV ( ( " " " 9 " 9 Legend ( 11 Location 2030 No-Build ADT Projection (in Thousands " " ( 18 " 53 ( 6 " 54 Proposed LRT Line to Irving/DFW Carrollton-Farmers Branch LRT Line " 194 " " ( 3 " 170 ( " 17 " &- 482 " 169 HARRY HINES BLVD ( " 12 " 16 ( " 37 " 2 37 " ( ( " 7 " " E lm Fork Trinity River</FNT> ( 1 " " REGAL ROW 35E WALNUT HILL LN ( 15 " 68 " 69 DENTON DR WEB CHAPEL RD Figure 4-2 2,000 NW Corridor LRT Line to Irving/DFW Feet Environmental Impact Statement 2030 Average Daily Traffic Projections; No-Build and LRT Alternatives 0 4,000 8,000 " 11 " LRT Alternative ADT Projection (in Thousands Shorecrest

11 The level of service on a roadway is a measure of the relative delay and congestion experienced on that roadway, with level of service A being the best, and F the worst. Levels of service E and F are considered unacceptable. SH 114 currently operates at Level of Service E south of the LRT alignment. Due to the anticipated traffic growth in the area, SH 114 is projected to operate at Level of Service F in 2030 in both the No-Build and LRT Alternatives, regardless of any reductions in traffic due to the implementation of LRT. Impacts on Major Arterials Similar to the freeway system, congestion delays can be expected on many of the arterials in the study corridor by 2030, even with the LRT Alternative in place. Table 4-6 shows the anticipated 2030 ADT on many of the local arterials in the Northwest Corridor for the No-Build and LRT Alternatives. With the LRT Alternative fully operational in 2030, many arterials would experience the same daily traffic levels compared to the No-Build Alternative, and more would experience small increases in ADT. TABLE ARTERIAL ADT IN THE NORTHWEST CORRIDOR Average Daily Traffic (ADT Location and Map No.* No-Build LRT Increase Alternative Alternative (Decrease 15 Northwest Highway at Community 68,000 69,000 1, Harry Hines Blvd. at Northwest Hwy. 37,000 37, Northwest Hwy at Technology Blvd. 42,000 43,000 1, Northwest Hwy at California Crossing 53,000 54,000 1, Northwest Highway at Riverside 38,000 38, Las Colinas Blvd. at O Connor 11,000 11, O Connor at Lake Carolyn Blvd. 11,000 12,000 1, O Connor at Riverside 13,000 13, Riverside south of Northwest Highway 14,000 15,000 1, Riverside north of Northwest Hwy 27,000 27, Colwell Drive at SH ,000 10, Colwell Drive at Las Colinas Blvd. 8,000 7,000 (1, Las Colinas Blvd. at Royal Lane 7,000 7, Hidden Ridge at SH ,000 18,000 1, Hidden Ridge at LRT Alignment 15,000 15, MacArthur Blvd. at Hidden Ridge 35,000 35, Walnut Hill Lane at MacArthur Blvd. 17,000 18,000 1, Walnut Hill Lane at Brangus Drive 36,000 38,000 2, Walnut Hill Lane at Belt Line Road 25,000 27,000 2, Belt Line Road south of SH ,000 42,000 (1, Belt Line Road north of SH ,000 41,000 1, Belt Line Road at SH ,000 54,000 1, Valley View Lane at Belt Line Road 15,000 17,000 2, Tom Braniff Parkway at SH 114 9,000 9,000 0 * See Figure 4-2. Source: NCTCOG; DART; February 2006 Comparing Tables 4-5 and 4-6 and Figure 4-2, the reductions in ADT that would occur on the regional freeway network are greater than those that would occur on the arterial road network in the project corridor. The freeway reductions in ADT are due to the elimination of some of the commuter trips that would have used the freeways, but would now use the expanded transit system. The arterials experience very similar (or slightly higher traffic levels in both alternatives Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-11

12 because any arterial traffic eliminated by the LRT would likely be offset by increased traffic using the arterials to approach new transit station park-and-ride lots. LRT implementation would create some larger localized increases in traffic on some roadways that are not shown in the macroscopic analysis in Table 4-6. This is because some roadways would serve as primary access roads to LRT stations and park-and-ride lots and therefore would carry the station-bound traffic in addition to the commuter traffic already projected for Impacts on Grade Crossings and Intersections The LRT Alternative introduces a new LRT guideway that crosses 56 roadways, one people mover system, and one freight railroad in the corridor. The roadways range in size from two-lane local streets to six-lane major arterials. The main lanes and ramps of the freeways have been assumed to have grade-separated crossings with the LRT Alignment. However, 40 local streets and private driveways could potentially have at-grade crossings with the alignment of the LRT Alternative. Of the 40 potential grade crossings along the LRT Alternative, two will be relocated so that they will not cross the tracks, and six have been designated for closure due to lack of significant traffic volumes or because the transition of the LRT alignment to or from an elevated section at that point would block the crossing. Whether they are public roadways or private driveways, all of the crossings designated for closure are minor crossings and therefore would not impact a significant number of vehicles. In the case of private driveways, each of the affected properties has either a second driveway or alternate access can be provided from another roadway. The remaining 50 crossings along the LRT Alternative would remain open as either at-grade or grade separated crossings. Light rail vehicles would create delays at at-grade crossings because the railroad crossing gates would interrupt traffic flow, particularly during peak traffic periods. In addition, most major crossings have a traffic signal near the LRT crossing of the arterial. If the crossing were to remain at-grade, the nearby traffic signal would require preemption to ensure that all vehicle queues are cleared from the tracks before the arrival of a train. For this reason, a detailed grade separation analysis needs to focus not simply on the gated crossing itself, but on the impact of preempting the nearby traffic signal. DART will continue to work with the City of Irving to assess the transportation impacts of the LRT Alternative on the local street network at the grade crossings and nearby intersections through the preliminary engineering phase. This will include a detailed analysis of 2030 street volumes, intersection capacity, and simulation of grade crossing movements of the proposed LRT system. A preliminary analysis of the major arterials crossing the alignment is presented below. Projected daily traffic volumes at these crossing for 2030 were obtained from the NCTCOG Mobility 2025 Plan (Amended April 2005 as modeled by DART. Existing roadway geometrics in the area of each crossing were inventoried to identify lane configurations, queue storage capacities, and distances between intersections under study. The existing geometrics were assumed to remain in place until 2030, except at locations where improvements are planned. At these locations, the planned improvements were assumed to exist for both the No-Build and LRT Alternative analyses in Each crossing was coded in Synchro (roadway network analysis computer software which was used to replicate the arrival of an LRT vehicle and blockage of the crossing at 10 minute headways in each direction. The rail crossings were assumed to be closed for 45 seconds to include gatewarning time, train clearance time, and time to reopen the gates. The 2030 Level of Service (LOS was determined for the 11 major crossings in the corridor. LOS is a qualitative measure describing the vehicle operating conditions at an intersection or segment of roadway during any given period as shown in Table 4-7. LOS is determined by the volume to capacity ratio (V/C ratio of a street or intersection and corresponding average vehicle delays. LOS A, B, and C generally are considered acceptable, and LOS D often is considered acceptable in more densely populated and traveled Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-12

13 portions of various urban areas. LOS E represents traffic volumes close to the full capacity of a street or intersection and the resulting congestion and slow traffic. LOS F generally represents stop-and-go, near breakdown traffic conditions. TABLE 4-7 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level of Service (LOS Average Total Delay (sec/veh Description A <10 Very low delay; most vehicles do not stop at all. B > 10 and < 20 More vehicles stop than with LOS A, increasing the average delay. C > 20 and < 35 The number of vehicles stopping is significant; however, many still pass through the intersection without stopping. D > 35 and < 55 Congestion is readily apparent with many vehicles stopping and individual cycle failures are noticeable (i.e., not all vehicles waiting in the intersection queue are able to get through the intersection on the first green indication. E > 55 and < 80 Poor progression; long cycle lengths and frequent cycle failures. Unacceptable operations, which include many cycle failures caused F > 80 by arrival flow rates exceeding intersection capacity. Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 To account for all potential design possibilities, 11 major crossings along the LRT Alternative were analyzed using this procedure as if they were grade crossings (regardless of the current design. In this way, a crossing which is grade separated in the current design could be considered for an at-grade crossing if the design were to change. A Level of Service and queue length was calculated for each approach to the crossing (as well as intersection approaches that would be close to a crossing. Poor levels of service and/or queues that fill the distance between a crossing and a nearby intersection were used to make a preliminary determination whether grade separation would be warranted. The results of the grade crossing analysis are shown in Table 4-8. Map No.* Crossing TABLE 4-8 GRADE CROSSINGS ANALYSIS Distance to Peak Hour Peak Hour Nearest Crossing Queue Signalized Level of Length Intersection Service (feet (feet Recommendation 2 Harry Hines Blvd B 1,523 0 Grade Separation 24 Tom Braniff Pkwy A Grade Separation 25 SH 114 WB FR A 292 None At-Grade 29 Teleport Ave A 60 None At-Grade 30 Riverside Blvd A 76 None At-Grade 32 Las Colinas Blvd A 54 None At-Grade 33 California Crossing Rd A At-Grade 35 O Connor Blvd A 142 1,920 At-Grade 36 Street A Minor 1 Minor 1 1,300 2 At-Grade 49 MacArthur Blvd B 1, , Grade Separation 51 Walnut Hill Lane A 264 None At-Grade 1 Traffic volume projections were not available for this future roadway. 2 Assumed traffic signal on future roadway. * See Figures 4-3 and 4-4. Source: Parsons Transportation Group; 2006 Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-13

14 Specifically, the conclusion that a crossing should be grade separated was made due to excessive traffic delay caused by the LRT crossing the roadway or the likelihood that vehicle queues from the crossing would spill back into signalized intersections (or vice versa. Although all of these crossings would experience acceptable levels of service if they were in isolated locations, Table 4-8 shows that the resultant queues from some crossings would interfere with nearby signalized intersections. Based on this preliminary analysis, the crossings requiring grade separation include Harry Hines Boulevard, Tom Braniff Parkway, and MacArthur Boulevard. The remaining crossings would operate adequately as at-grade intersections, though crossing gates would need to be installed at each of them. The preliminary design of the LRT alignment designates additional crossings to be grade separated as well (Colwell Boulevard, Hidden Ridge Drive, etc.. These are due to special considerations or physical constraints placed on the alignment that require an elevated or below grade section, rather than due to traffic conditions. These considerations can include placement of stations or maintaining a mandatory grade separation from a freeway. Road/Intersection Mitigation As shown in Table 4-8, traffic conditions would warrant the LRT tracks being grade separated from the arterial roadways at three crossings within the corridor. In addition, crossings with freeways are always designed for grade separation (IH 35E, Loop 12, SH 114, and SH 161. Table 4-9 lists all of the roadways that cross the LRT alignment and summarizes whether they would be at-grade crossings, grade separated, or closed. This data is shown graphically in Figures 4-3 and 4-4. As stated previously, there are also some other issues to consider at some of the other crossings that cause them to be modified or grade separated, such as station placement or proximity to a necessary grade separation. An example of this is the SH 114 WB Frontage Road, which is recommended for an at-grade crossing in Table 4-8, but is listed in Table 4-9 as being relocated (crossing #25. Of these 58 total crossings along the LRT Alternative: 38 would be grade separated, 12 would be gated, 2 would be relocated, and 6 would be closed. The LRT Alternative will operate within an exclusive right-of-way on a fixed guideway that will, for the most part, not take any roadway right-of-way or require the removal of travel lanes. Anticipated roadway and grade crossing impacts would be minor and localized and would be mitigated using engineering improvements such as grade separation, changing signalization, and other standard traffic engineering strategies. As detailed in the following section, the addition of traffic signals will be required at some entrances to new LRT park-and-ride lots to ensure acceptable operations for traffic entering and exiting the new stations. In addition, the optimization of signal timing will be required in the densely developed areas of the Las Colinas Urban Center and the area surrounding North Lake College. At grade crossings, signal preemption will be required to prevent vehicles from being queued on the tracks when trains arrive, particularly where a parallel street is present (such as Lake Carolyn Parkway. Finally, some roadway improvements will be required such as extra turn lanes and geometric improvements at various intersections to allow buses to turn in and out of the new stations. DART will continue to work with the City of Irving through final design in a detailed traffic analysis which will further refine the mitigation measures outlined above. Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-14

15 TABLE 4-9 LRT ROADWAY CROSSING CONFIGURATIONS LRT Alternative Map No. * Location Roadway Configuration 1 Dallas Jamison Drive Closed 2 Dallas Harry Hines Blvd Grade Separated 3 Dallas EB Spur 482 Grade Separated 4 Dallas Ramp to NW Highway Grade Separated 5 Dallas Spur 482 U-Turn Grade Separated 6 Dallas WB Spur 482 Grade Separated 7 Dallas IH-35E NB Frontage Rd (Future Grade Separated 8 Dallas IH-35E Grade Separated 9 Dallas IH-35E SB Frontage Rd (Future Grade Separated 10 Dallas Justice Way Grade Separated 11 Dallas Driveway Grade Separated 12 Irving Fed Ex Driveway Grade Separated 13 Irving Fed Ex Driveway Grade Separated 14 Irving Century Blvd Grade Separated 15 Irving Century Freight Driveway At-Grade Crossing 16 Irving Driveway Closed 17 Irving Texas Stadium Bridge Closed 18 Irving Future City Street Grade Separated (LRT under 19 Irving Texas Stadium Bridge Closed 20 Irving Loop 12 NB Frontage Rd (Future Grade Separated (LRT under 21 Irving Loop 12 Grade Separated (LRT under 22 Irving Loop 12 SB Frontage Rd (Future Grade Separated (LRT under 23 Irving SH 114 WB Frontage Rd (Future Grade Separated (LRT under 24 Irving Tom Braniff Pkwy Grade Separated (LRT under 25 Irving SH 114 WB Frontage Rd Relocated 26 Irving Cistercian Road Grade Separated 27 Irving SH 114 WB Frontage Rd (Future Grade Separated 28 Irving BNSF Rail Road (Future Grade Separated (LRT under 29 Irving NB Teleport Ave (Reconfigured At-Grade Crossing 30 Irving Riverside Blvd At-Grade Crossing 31 Irving Las Colinas People Mover (APT Grade Separated (LRT under 32 Irving Las Colinas Blvd At-Grade Crossing 33 Irving California Crossing At-Grade Crossing 34 Irving NB Lake Carolyn Pkwy Relocated 35 Irving O Connor Blvd At-Grade Crossing 36 Irving Street A (Future At-Grade Crossing 37 Irving Las Colinas Blvd (Future Grade Separated 38 Irving Ramp from SH 114 to Spur 348 Grade Separated 39 Irving Colwell Blvd Grade Separated 40 Irving SH 114 Exit Ramp (Future Grade Separated 41 Irving SH 114 Ent. Ramp (Future Grade Separated 42 Irving SH 114 Grade Separated 43 Irving Exit Ramp to O Connor Blvd Grade Separated 44 Irving Ent. Ramp from Walnut Hill (Future Grade Separated 45 Irving SH 114 EB Frontage Rd Grade Separated 46 Irving Green Park Drive At-Grade Crossing 47 Irving Carpenter Ranch Road Closed 48 Irving Hidden Ridge Drive At-Grade Crossing 49 Irving MacArthur Blvd Grade Separated 50 Irving Brangus Drive Closed 51 Irving Walnut Hill Lane At-Grade Crossing 52 Irving Hurd Drive At-Grade Crossing 53 Irving SH 161 NB Frontage Rd Grade Separated 54 Irving SH 161 Ent. Ramp Grade Separated 55 Irving SH 161 Grade Separated 56 Irving SH 161 Exit Ramp Grade Separated 57 Irving SH 161 SB Frontage Rd Grade Separated 58 Irving Valley View Lane At-Grade Crossing * See Figures 4-3 and 4-4. Source: Parsons Transportation Group; December 2006 Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-15

16 N O' CONNOR RD NORTHGATE DR Source: Parsons, 2006 " JOHN CARPENTER FWY ( 36 ( 35 " ( ( 34 " ( 33 &- 348 ( 32 ( 30 " " UV114 ROCHELLE BLVD ( 31 " ( 29 ( 28 ( 27 ( 26 Irving E AIRPORT FWY LUNA RD CALIFORNIA CROSSING RD BNSF RR ( 25 ( UV183 TOM BRANIFF DR ( 24 ( 23 NORTHWEST HWY " 12 (21 ( 22 ( ( 20 #* 19 ( #* 18 ( #* ( 13 ( ( 16 ( 15 " 35E Dallas STOREY LN ( 12 " 12 &- 482 Elm Fork Trinity River Joes Creek ( 11 ( 10 ( #* ( ( REGAL ROW Bachman 35E DENTON DR HARRY HINES BLVD WEB CHAPEL RD Figure 4-3 East Section 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 NW Corridor LRT Line to Irving/DFW Feet Environmental Impact Statement LRT Roadway Crossings Configurations ( 10 ( 6 ( ( 7 9 ( 8 ( 5 ( 4 ( 3 Legend " #* ( At-Grade Grade Separated Grade Separated (LRT under Street Closure Street Relocated Proposed LRT Line to Irving/DFW Carrollton-Farmers Branch LRT Line UV354

17 MACARTHUR BLVD N MACARTHUR BLVD BELT LINE RD PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH TPKE ROYAL LN DFW International Airport UV114 LUNA RD VALLEY VIEW LN CARBON RD " ( 58 E47 ( ( ( 53 ( 57 ( 56 " HURD DR WALNUT HILL LN ( 48 ( 52 " #* ( 51 ( 50 ( 49 ( #* " 46 ( 47 HIDDEN RIDGE DR ch Cottonwood Bran LAS COLINAS B L VD ( 45 ( 38 ( 37 Hackberry Creek " RIVERSIDE DR ( 36 ( 35 Dallas &- 348 Luna Rd ESTERS RD UV161 Source: Parsons, 2006 WALNUT HILL LN STORY RD Irving N. M Figure 4-4 N O' CONNOR RD LRT Roadway Crossings Configurations JOHN CARPENTER FWY " ( 34 ( ( 33 ROCHELLE BLVD " ( 31 ( 32 ( 30 West Section 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 NW Corridor LRT Line to Irving/DFW Environmental Impact Statement " " Feet

18 4.2.3 Transit Station Access Most of the initial stations in the LRT Alternative would include park-and-ride facilities. These stations include North Las Colinas, Carpenter Ranch, North Lake College and Belt Line Road Stations. In addition to generating automobile traffic related to park-and-ride facilities, each of the park-and-ride stations would have bus traffic resulting from feeder bus service. Table 4-10 summarizes the amount of parking that would be provided and the proposed number of bus routes and bus bays serving each station. TABLE 4-10 PROPOSED PARKING AND BUS FACILITIES AT LRT STATIONS Station Estimated Parking Spaces Bus Bays Bus Weekday Max. Weekday Routes Buses per Hour University of Dallas Lake Carolyn existing spaces available at North North Las Colinas Irving Transit Center Carpenter Ranch North Lake College Belt Line Source: DART, January 2007 As shown in the table, Belt Line Station would provide the most parking (743 spaces, and the most bus bays. The Belt Line Station would be the northwestern terminus of the line and therefore would attract automobile traffic from a wide area. Conversely, the North Las Colinas Station would be located in a high-density commercial and institutional area where more trips would be attracted by the existing and proposed transit system. Each LRT station would have different impacts on its neighborhood depending on the configuration of the park-and-ride and bus facilities in relationship to the surrounding transportation system. The general layout and traffic impacts of each station are described below. The specific impacts of each station will be determined during preliminary engineering and final design based on a comparison of 2030 intersection operations in the No-Build Alternative with those in the LRT Alternative once the layouts of future roadways and stations are finalized. This effort will be coordinated with the City of Irving. University of Dallas Station The University of Dallas Station would have an at-grade platform located between the westbound SH 114 frontage road and main lanes between Loop 12 and Tom Braniff Parkway. A bus transfer area would be constructed nearby on the north side of the frontage road with driveway access on the westbound SH 114 frontage road as well as Tom Braniff Parkway. The bus transfer area would contain five bus bays to serve the feeder bus system. A pedestrian walkway under the frontage road will connect the platform to the bus transfer area. No park-and-ride facility would be constructed for this station due to the pedestrian nature of the university area. Therefore, this station would have minimal traffic impact on the surrounding roadway network since it would only attract kiss-and-ride and feeder bus traffic. Lake Carolyn Station The Lake Carolyn Station would have an at-grade platform located in the median of Lake Carolyn Parkway south of O Connor Boulevard. Four on-street bus bays would be provided along the street to serve the feeder bus system. Crosswalks will provide pedestrian access to nearby land uses and a pedestrian bridge would provide pedestrian access to the Las Colinas Area Personal Transit (APT station nearby. No park-and-ride facility would be constructed for this station due to Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-18

19 the land use density in the Las Colinas Urban Center. Therefore, this station would have minimal traffic impact on the surrounding roadway network since it would only attract feeder bus traffic. North Las Colinas Station The North Las Colinas Station would have an at-grade platform located along the eastbound side of Spur 348 (Northwest Highway west of O Connor Boulevard. A bus transfer area would be constructed next to the platform that would provide seven bus bays to serve the feeder bus system. Parking would be provided at the existing North Irving Transit Center. The transit center is located west of O Connor Boulevard on the opposite (north side of Spur 348 from the station platform location. It currently contains 715 parking spaces. Pedestrians would have to walk about one quarter mile along a sidewalk that would cross under Spur 348 to connect the North Irving Transit Center parking area to the station platform. This parking lot would retain its bus bays, and feeder buses would also stop at the transit center parking lot after stopping at the platform. Although the North Irving Transit Center exists today, the North Las Colinas Station would attract more traffic to the parking lot than it does today. In addition, some park-and-ride traffic would be attracted to the station area as well as future feeder bus traffic. Therefore, this station would likely have some traffic impact on the surrounding roadway network, which will be determined once plans for the future roadways in this area are finalized. Carpenter Ranch Station The Carpenter Ranch Station would have an at-grade platform located along Meadow Creek Drive west of Green Park Drive. A bus transfer area would be constructed with seven off-street bus bays to serve the feeder bus system. Buses would enter the station area and stop next to the platform before exiting onto Meadow Creek Drive. A park-and-ride parking lot with about 169 parking spaces would be constructed next to the platform and bus transfer area with entrances on Meadow Creek Drive. Carpenter Ranch Road (leading to the vacant ranch property will be closed to make way for the platform. In addition, to facilitate left-turn bays for park-and-ride traffic entering the station, the existing median opening for Carpenter Ranch Road on the south side and a commercial driveway on the north side will be relocated along with the commercial driveway. A detailed traffic impact analysis was conducted for this station to determine what impact the station-related traffic would have on the surrounding roadways in the opening year (2012 and a future horizon year (2030. The background traffic volumes were estimated based on traffic projections provided by NCTCOG, and the park-and-ride and bus traffic attracted to the station was estimated based on ridership projections and bus route plans provided by DART. Planned roadway revisions in the area associated with the station access were also taken into account. Based upon this detailed analysis, the growth in background traffic by the year 2012 will not cause any significant degradation in levels of service at the station area s critical intersections due to the moderate growth in background traffic and available roadway capacity. However, by the year 2030, the projected background traffic growth will require signalization of the Hidden Ridge Drive and Green Park Drive intersection. Background growth will also require that the stop-control approaches at the intersection of Green Park Drive and Meadow Creek Drive be switched to Meadow Creek since there is an imbalance in the north/south versus east/west traffic volumes. With the LRT station in place by 2012, almost all of the study intersections in the station area will continue to operate at the same levels of service during the peak hours as under the baseline conditions. The additional station-related traffic does not result in considerably higher vehicular Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-19

20 delay for all impacted traffic movements and intersections. Similar impacts of station-related traffic can be observed under the projected 2030 conditions. Implementation of the proposed transit oriented developments would increase the traffic demand in the station area and result in some deterioration of levels of service in station area s roadway network, particularly along Green Park Drive. However, close monitoring of the traffic as the developments are implemented can allow for the City of Irving to determine any capacity improvements prior to any major degradation in the levels of service. North Lake College Station The North Lake College Station would have an at-grade platform located north of the college s north parking lot. A bus transfer area would be constructed next to the platform with five bus bays to serve the feeder bus system. A park-and-ride parking lot with about 194 parking spaces would be constructed nearby. In order to accommodate the LRT tracks as well as the North Lake College Station, some roadways in the area would be modified. Brangus Drive would be modified by the construction of the North Lake College Station. It currently connects Walnut Hill Lane to Hidden Ridge Drive, but a segment of it would be closed at the LRT tracks. The remaining northern segment of Brangus Drive would continue to extend from Hidden Ridge Drive to St. Durney Court and would therefore continue to provide access to the residential neighborhood north of the LRT line. The sidewalk currently in place along Brangus Drive, north of the North Lake College property, would be maintained and extended to connect to the station in order to provide pedestrian access to the neighborhood. The remaining southern segment of Brangus Drive would be extended eastward parallel to the LRT tracks as described below. The existing private drive that connects the college s north parking lot to MacArthur Boulevard is proposed to be removed and a new, wider public roadway (a realignment of the southern segment of Brangus Drive would be constructed. This road would be parallel to the LRT tracks, extending from the existing intersection with Walnut Hill Lane to a new intersection with MacArthur Boulevard. Brangus Drive currently carries about 3,800 vehicles per day between Walnut Hill Lane and St. Durney Court. Most of these vehicles would likely travel on the new roadway connection once Brangus Drive is closed north of the LRT line. The new roadway would provide access to the LRT station as well as to the college s parking lot. It would also provide access to the west to Walnut Hill Lane that the college s parking lot does not currently have. However, the proximity of the college s parking lot to the new station may attract some DART patrons to attempt to park there if the DART parking lot is full and monitoring of this potential, once the LRT and station are in operation would be appropriate. A detailed traffic impact analysis was conducted for this station to determine what impact the station-related traffic would have on the surrounding roadways in the opening year (2012 and a future horizon year (2030. The background traffic volumes were estimated based on traffic projections provided by NCTCOG, and the park-and-ride and bus traffic attracted to the station was estimated based on ridership projections and bus route plans provided by DART. Planned roadway revisions in the area associated with the station access were also taken into account. Based on this detailed analysis, it was determined that the growth in background traffic by the year 2012 will not cause any significant degradation in levels of service at the study intersections due to the moderate growth in background traffic and available roadway capacity. However by the year 2030, the projected background traffic growth will result in capacity constraints at MacArthur Boulevard and realigned Brangus. The resultant levels of service are considered not acceptable without further improvements. A southbound right turn lane will be required by this time. In addition, based on the analysis, Brangus Drive will require capacity improvements sometime prior to the year Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-20

21 With the LRT station in place by 2012, all of the study intersections in the station area will continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service during the peak hours. The additional station-related traffic does not result in higher vehicular delay for any traffic movements. Similar impacts of station-related traffic can be observed under the projected 2030 conditions. However by 2030, a second westbound left turn lane will be required at the intersection of Brangus Drive and Walnut Hill Lane not due to poor levels of service but because the queues for this movement may extend beyond the park-and-ride driveway and bus exit driveway which impacts access to and from North Lake College Station. Implementation of the proposed transit oriented developments would further increase the traffic demand in the station area and result in further deterioration of levels of service in the station area s roadway network, particularly along MacArthur Boulevard. Periodic monitoring of traffic conditions and implementation of any needed traffic improvements by the City of Irving is recommended. Belt Line Station The Belt Line Station would provide an at-grade platform located between Valley View Lane and the President George Bush Turnpike (SH 161. A bus transfer area would be constructed next to the platform with driveway access on Valley View Lane. The bus transfer area would provide eight bus bays to serve the feeder bus system. A park-and-ride parking lot would be constructed on the other side of the platform with about 743 parking spaces. The parking lot would have separate driveway access on Valley View Lane. In addition, the parking lot would be constructed with a central roadway that could be connected to any future development that may be constructed southwest of the station. The station would have some impact on the surrounding roadway network due to the park-and-ride and bus traffic attracted to the station. A detailed traffic impact analysis was conducted for this station to determine what impact the station-related traffic would have on the surrounding roadways in the opening year (2012 and a future horizon year (2030. The background traffic volumes were estimated based on traffic projections provided by NCTCOG, and the park-and-ride and bus traffic attracted to the station was estimated based on ridership projections and bus route plans provided by DART. Planned roadway improvements in the area were taken into account, such as the planned widening of Valley View Lane and Gateway Drive to four-lane roadways (according to the City of Irving s Master Thoroughfare Plan. Based upon this detailed analysis, the growth in background traffic will increase congestion on the area roadways by the year 2012 and even more by the year Near the station area, the widening of Valley View Lane to four lanes is necessary to accommodate this growth, and the intersection of Belt Line Road and Valley View Lane would operate at LOS C in 2012 with the widening in place. If no other improvements are made, however, the intersection is expected to degrade to LOS F by The addition of a southbound right-turn bay will improve 2030 conditions to LOS D. The widening of Valley View Lane and the addition of the right-turn bay are needed to mitigate background traffic conditions and are not attributable to the planned station. All of the other intersections in the study area will operate at acceptable levels of service in 2012 except for the intersection of Belt Line Road and SH 114, which will operate at poor levels of service if no improvements are made (regardless of the implementation of the Belt Line Station. By 2030, various improvements will need to be made along the Belt Line Road corridor to accommodate the growth in background traffic and maintain acceptable levels of service. When the station-related traffic is added to the background traffic, the analysis shows small increases in delay on some movements, but all of the intersections in the study area will operate with the same level of service as under the baseline scenario without the station. Therefore, no additional geometric mitigation measures are necessary to accommodate the DART station traffic Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-21

22 other than those already planned as part of the construction of the station (such as turn lanes along Valley View Lane Pedestrian Safety The LRT Alternative would improve safety in the corridor primarily by enhancing pedestrian access. As described above, pedestrian safety to and from the LRT stations and park-and-ride lots would be enhanced by improving markings at existing signalized crosswalks at major intersections, pedestrian bridges at stations with parking facilities located across major roadways, and sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities connecting park-and-ride lots and bus bays to the station platforms. DART will add or improve pedestrian facilities to meet the requirements stated in the DART Build- Out Phase 2 Design Criteria, Volume 1, Revision 3, In accordance with DART policy, fencing will be provided along the right-of-way where the operating speed of the LRT would exceed 45 mph or where special safety considerations are present. Locations of fencing and other safety and security elements are discussed in Section 5.13, Safety and Security Station Area Mitigation Roadway impacts due to new traffic generated at LRT stations are anticipated to be minor and localized. These impacts will be mitigated using standard traffic engineering strategies. These mitigation measures, which will be coordinated with the City of Irving, will be refined throughout the final design stage of project development. Specific mitigation for roadway impacts at each station is described below. University of Dallas Station: Through coordination with TxDOT and the City of Irving, DART will continue to integrate the design of the University of Dallas Station with the design and reconstruction of SH 114. Lake Carolyn Station: DART will coordinate the safe location of on-street bus bays along Lake Carolyn Parkway with the City of Irving. North Las Colinas Station: DART will work with the City of Irving, TxDOT and adjacent property owners to integrate the at-grade station within the future development and street network. Carpenter Ranch Station: DART will work with the City of Irving to ensure a safe design of the rail line as it crosses Green Park Drive near its intersection with Meadow Creek Drive. North Lake College Station: DART will provide a pedestrian link between the station and the Mandalay Place Community and North Lake College. DART will work with the City of Irving in realigning Brangus Drive and creating the new roadway that feeds the station from both Mac Arthur Boulevard and Walnut Hill Lane. Belt Line Station: The station design will accommodate a future grade separation over Belt Line Road. 4.3 IMPACTS ON MOVEMENT OF FREIGHT Freight is transported into, out of, and within the corridor by truck and rail. Contrary to the LRT Line to Farmers Branch and Carrollton, the LRT Line to Irving/DFW would not share the right-of-way of a freight rail line. Therefore, the LRT Alternative will not have a significant impact on the movement of freight by rail Freight Railroads The LRT Alternative does not operate within an existing railroad right-of-way and so will not have an impact on freight railroad operations. Freight service will continue in the same manner as before and the LRT Alternative will be grade separated from the freight tracks where they cross. Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-22

23 4.3.2 Trucking and Deliveries Trucking and delivery movements through the corridor would experience both positive and negative impacts from the construction of the LRT Alternative. The LRT Alternative is also anticipated to help reduce automobile traffic on several major roadways within the corridor, which should benefit truck and delivery traffic. However, some trucking companies and delivery customers that are based within the corridor would be affected by the closure of some local streets and private driveways when the LRT is implemented. Table 4-9 summarized those streets that would be closed. Specifically, some companies would lose some of their direct access to a location through the closure of a local street or a driveway. In most cases this simply means that trucks would have to take an alternate route to reach that location. Overall, the largest impact to trucking and deliveries in the area would be some small added travel time required when certain access points across the tracks are eliminated. All trucking companies (or delivery customers will continue to have access to all locations with the construction of the LRT Alternative Freight Movement Mitigation The LRT crossing of the BNSF railroad will be grade separated. No other specific mitigation will be required. 4.4 IMPACTS ON NON-MOTORIZED CIRCULATION Non-motorized circulation includes pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Pedestrian facilities typically include sidewalks adjacent to area streets, pedestrian crossings, pedestrian signals, and off-street pedestrian trails. Bicycle facilities consist of signed and unsigned bicycle routes on certain streets as well as off-street bicycle routes. The implementation of LRT would have both positive and negative impacts on these methods of non-motorized circulation. The bicycle routes and trail system in the project corridor are shown in Figure Pedestrian Movements Pedestrian circulation facilities in the study area are essentially provided as part of the roadway facility cross-section. While this typically includes sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, and pedestrian signals, there are large sections along the alignment of the LRT Alternative where these pedestrian facilities are not currently provided, especially along highways and frontage roads. There are some existing off-road trails in the project corridor, with plans to interconnect them with future trails. None of these trails cross the alignment. Pedestrian access is a priority in design of DART LRT stations. Stations should be accessible by buses, automobiles and pedestrians alike. Section describes the access, including pedestrian access, for each proposed station Bicycles As described in Chapter 3, Existing Conditions, the City of Dallas has developed a plan for bicycle circulation facilities which encompasses all three corridor cities. The City of Dallas developed the Greater Dallas Bike Plan map in 1992, and updated it most recently in The plan shows two unsigned on-street bike routes that extend from Dallas into Irving. None of these routes cross the alignment. The LRT Alternative would have positive impacts for bicycle circulation as stations will provide bicycle racks and long-term bicycle storage lockers. In addition, cyclists may bring their bicycles onto DART trains at any time of the day (as long as there is room and all DART buses will have bicycle racks installed by mid Final Environmental Impact Statement 4-23

24 CA RP EN TE R Carpenter Ranch R FW Y R L LE EN VA L DD O ST R EY LN 482 & RR BNS F AP E H C Loop 12 (deferred U V 183 G GRAUWYLE R RD 35E NW Corridor LRT Line to Irving/DFW Environmental Impact Statement 0 V U Figure 4-5 Bicycle Routes and Trail System EB Bachman DR D 12 " ON Source: NCTCOG, 2006 TE University of Dallas Proposed LRTIRLine to Irving/DFW V Carrollton-FarmersBLBranch LRT Line VD Y NT DE E AIRPORT FWY Proposed Station EN HW 12 " CA RP WE ST E lm Fo rk Trinity River</FNT> Route Number IN R TH TOM BRANIFF DR NO VD BL 300 Planned Bicycle Routes N N O' CONNOR RD MACARTHUR BLVD STORY RD Existing On-Street Bicycle Routes Existing Off-Street Bicycle Routes LE JO H BELT LINE RD ROCHELLE RD CALIFORNIA CROSSING RD South Las Colinas (deferred NORTHGATE DR Legend EL Lake Carolyn L LN T HIL Irving WALNUT HILL LN LV D ES B 348 H S & C ER Walnut Hill/Denton Dallas O T ES RD WA LNU 35E R Y HIN 7 North Las Colinas HARR H I R RIDG E D R North Lake College U V 290 ED CARBON RD 23 Y S ID FW W N W JO H O Royal Lane 300 R LN W V U U V ROYAL LN WALNUT HILL LN Y VI E R Farmers Branch ER R IV Belt Line Road EO KE AL G B TP LUNA RD BELT LINE RD PR DFW International Airport I ES NT DE GE H US EG Dr R e ll N MACARTHUR BLVD Ca b 2,000 4,000 8,000 Feet