Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/05/2025 - Planning and Zoning Commission - AGENDA - Special Meeting (2)PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL HEARING 02/05/2025 Agenda Participation for this Planning & Zoning Commission Regular Meeting will be in person at Council Chambers, City Hall, 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80521. You may also join online via Zoom, using this link: https://fcgov.zoom.us/j/95901729936 Online Public Participation: The meeting will be available to join beginning at 5:45pm, February 5, 2025. Participants should try to sign in prior to the 6:00 pm meeting start time, if possible. For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. Staff will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Board or Commission and watch the meeting through that site. To participate: •Use a laptop, computer, or internet-enabled smartphone. (Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio). •You need to have access to the internet. •Keep yourself on muted status. •Documents to Share: If residents wish to share a document or presentation, City Staff needs to receive those materials via email by 24 hours before the meeting. Please email any documents to mmatsunaka@fcgov.com. •Individuals uncomfortable or unable to access the Zoom platform or unable to participate by phone are encouraged to participate by emailing general public comments you may have to devreviewcomments@fcgov.com . Staff will ensure the Commission receives your comments. If you have specific comments on any of the discussion items scheduled, please make that clear in the subject line of the email and send 24 hours prior to the meeting. Appeals: Appeals of decisions of this Commission must be filed with the City Clerk no more than 14 days following the hearing. You must have participated in the hearing via written or oral comments, and the issue on appeal must be included in the record of the hearing. www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/appeals.php Upon request, the City of Fort Collins will provide language access services for individuals who have limited English proficiency, or auxiliary aids and services for individuals with disabilities, to access City services, programs and activities. Contact 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Colorado) for assistance. Please provide 48 hours advance notice when possible. que no dominan el idioma inglés, o ayudas y servicios auxiliares para personas con discapacidad, para que puedan acceder a los servicios, programas y actividades de la Ciudad. Para asistencia, llame al 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Marque 711 para Relay Colorado). Por favor proporcione 48 horas de aviso previo cuando sea posible. Council Chambers, 300 Laporte Avenue Zoom – See Link Below Packet Pg. 1 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL HEARING • CALL TO ORDER • ROLL CALL • AGENDA REVIEW • PUBLIC PARTICIPATION • DISCUSSION 1. PROSPECT PLAZA REDEVELOPMENT, SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW SPA240003 DESCRIPTION: This is a request to rezone 1185 and 1201 Westward Drive to remain in the This is a request for a Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) to develop a 5-story student oriented apartment building. The plan proposes the demolition of 11 3-story apartment buildings and a multitenant commercial building. The new building is proposing to provide 696 rentable bedrooms and 418 parking spaces. The SPAR process allows the Planning and Zoning Commission to provide a decision within 60 days of submittal of a Development Application. Arlo Schumann, City Planner PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT/ REPRESENTATIVE: • OTHER BUSINESS • ADJOURNMENT Julie Stackhouse, Chair City Council Chambers - City Hall West Adam Sass, Vice Chair 300 Laporte Avenue Russell Connelly Fort Collins, Colorado David Katz Shirley Peel Virtual (Zoom or Telephone) Ted Shepard Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 on Connexion & York Channels 14 & 881 on Comcast Packet Pg. 2 Development Review Staff Report Agenda Item 1 Planning Services Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 p. 970-416-4311 f. 970.224.6134 www.fcgov.com Planning and Zoning Commission Hearing: February 5, 2025 Prospect Plaza Redevelopment, Site Plan Advisory Review SPA240003 Summary of Request This is a request for a Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) to develop a 5-story student oriented apartment building. The plan proposes the demolition of 11 3-story apartment buildings and a multitenant commercial building. The new building is proposing to provide 696 rentable bedrooms and 418 parking spaces. The SPAR process allows the Planning and Zoning Commission to provide a decision within 60 days of submittal of a Development Application. Zoning Map Next Steps If approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the applicant will be eligible to submit for Final Development Plan (FDP). Site Location 304 W Prospect Road Zoning High-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (HMN) Property Owner The Board of Governors of The Colorado State University System Campus Delivery 6009 Fort Collins, CO 80523 Applicant/Representative CSU STRATA 2537 Research Blvd Fort Collins, CO 80526 Staff Arlo Schumann, City Planner p. (970) 221-6599 aschumann@fcgov.com Contents 1. Project Introduction ....................................... 2 2. Public Outreach ............................................ 3 3. Procedural Requirements – Land Use Code Article 2 ......................................................... 4 4. Staff Evaluation ............................................ 5 5. Staff Conclusions and Recommendation ..... 8 6. Attachments .................................................. 8 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the P&Z Commission approve the project with one recommended condition of approval. Site Packet Pg. 3 P&Z Agenda Item #1 SPA240003 | Prospect Plaza Redevelopment SPAR Wednesday, February 5, 2025 | Page 2 of 8 Back to Top 1. Project Introduction A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION & STAFF REVIEW OVERVIEW The Prospect Plaza redevelopment team is proposing to build a new student oriented apartment building at 304 W Prospect Rd. The site currently provides student housing in 11 3-story brick apartment buildings. The site also contains a multi-tenant commercial building. Additionally, the HORN bus route utilizes a portion of the site as a stop and turnaround. The current site does not meet current land use code standards for landscaping, parking lot layout, building layout or street scape standards. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing structures and parking lot and build a new 5-story student apartment building. The project will be rent by the bedroom with a total of 696 bedrooms in 259 units. Plans include studio, 1, 2, 3, and 4 bedroom units. Parking is provided by 49 surface parking stalls and 369 stalls in a structured garage that is integrated into the building. The plan includes a retail space for a coffee shop adjacent to a new enhanced transit stop. The applicant's narrative, with additional detail, is attached. The City's review is governed by State statutes. The criteria for review are more general than the City's Land Use Code standards, necessitating a degree of interpretation. Staff's review of the proposed development aligns with established practice, which does not evaluate compliance with Land Use Code standards per se. Instead, plans are evaluated based on the specific requirements outlined below. 1. State Requirements for City Review Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended (C.R.S.), govern the City’s review of improvements to parcels owned or operated by public entities. These supersede the City’s typical processes for development plan review. • Section 31-23-209, C.R.S. generally governs all public facilities with the following pertinent provision: o “no public building shall be constructed or authorized in a city until the location, character, and extent thereof has been submitted for approval by the commission [the Planning and Zoning Commission].” o The failure of the commission to act within sixty days from and after the date of official submission to it shall be deemed approval. o In case of disapproval, the commission shall communicate its reasons to the municipality's governing body, which has the power to overrule such disapproval by a recorded vote of not less than two-thirds of its entire membership. Verbatim excerpts from the statutes are attached. 2. Land Use Code Requirements The Land Use Code incorporates the statutory requirements above into Sections 6.2.3(F) and 6.11.2(Q) under the Site Plan Advisory Review Procedures (“SPAR”). Following are pertinent excerpts for convenient reference: “6.2.3(F)(1) Site Plan Advisory Review. The Site Plan Advisory Review process requires the submittal and approval of a site development plan that describes the location, character, and extent of improvements to parcels owned or operated by public entities. In addition, with respect to public and charter schools, the review also has as its purpose, as far as is feasible, that the proposed school facility conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan.” Packet Pg. 4 P&Z Agenda Item #1 SPA240003 | Prospect Plaza Redevelopment SPAR Wednesday, February 5, 2025 | Page 3 of 8 Back to Top “6.11.2 Site Plan Advisory Review Procedures (Q) Standards: [LUC standards are] Not applicable, and in substitution thereof, an application for a Site Plan Advisory Review shall comply with the following criteria: 1) The site location for the proposed use shall be consistent with the land use designation described by the City Structure Plan Map, which is an element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2) The site development plan shall conform to architectural, landscape and other design standards and guidelines adopted by the applicant's governing body. Absent adopted design standards and guidelines, the design character of the site development plan shall be consistent with the stated purpose of the respective land use designation as set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan. 3) The site development plan shall identify the level of functional and visual impacts to public rights-of-way, facilities and abutting private land caused by the development, including, but not limited to, streets, sidewalks, utilities, lighting, screening and noise, and shall mitigate such impacts to the extent reasonably feasible. B. SITE CHARACTERISTICS 1. Current Conditions The site is approximately 4.5-acres and contains 11 existing 3-story residential buildings and a multi-tenant commercial building. The NW corner of the site is currently used as a transit stop and but turnaround for the HORN bus route. The residential buildings provide student housing with a bed count of 294. The commercial building contains leasing offices for the current apartments as well as a restaurant, laundry mat, and variety of personal service shops. 2. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use North South East West Zoning Colorado State University Employment (E) Colorado State University Colorado State University Land Use CSU Campus Hilton Fort Collins US Forest Service - Rocky Mountain Research Station Lake St Parking Garage 2. Public Outreach A. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING A neighborhood meeting was held on January 8, 2025 at 281 N College Ave. Attendance included 4 in person and 2 virtual members of the public plus several members of the applicant team. Several members of the public shared questions and comments regarding traffic impacts, pedestrian safety, affordability of units, and displacement of current residents. Meeting notes are attached. B. PUBLIC COMMENT No other public comment has been received. Any communication received between the public notice and the hearing will be provided to the Commission for the hearing. Packet Pg. 5 P&Z Agenda Item #1 SPA240003 | Prospect Plaza Redevelopment SPAR Wednesday, February 5, 2025 | Page 4 of 8 Back to Top 3. Procedural Requirements – Land Use Code Article 2 A. SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW PROCEDURAL OVERVIEW 1. Conceptual Review A conceptual review meeting was held on December 19, 2024. 2. Neighborhood Meeting Held on January 8, 2025 and satisfies the applicable requirement of Section 6.11.2 – Site Plan Advisory Review Procedures. 3. Submittal The project development plans were deemed complete on December 10, 2024, and subsequently routed to all reviewing departments. Notice (Posted, Written and Published) Posted notice: December 24, 2024, Sign #814 Written notice: December 24, 2024, 33 letters sent. Hearing notification area (blue shading) 1000’ Radius SITE Prospect Road Packet Pg. 6 P&Z Agenda Item #1 SPA240003 | Prospect Plaza Redevelopment SPAR Wednesday, February 5, 2025 | Page 5 of 8 Back to Top 4. Staff Evaluation A. LOCATION Standard 1 – Location. The site location for the proposed use shall be consistent with the land use designation described by the City Structure Plan Map, which is an element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. City Plan designates this site as “Urban Mixed Use” land use place type which is currently zoned High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (HMN). Urban Mixed-Use calls for high-density residential as a principal land use. Key Characteristics/Considerations of Urban Mixed-Use Areas » Vibrant mixed-use districts that provide live-work opportunities, as well as a range of supporting services and amenities along high-frequency transit routes. » Some existing Urban Mixed-Use Districts may include pockets of lower-intensity, auto-oriented uses; however, these areas should be encouraged to transition to a vertical mix of high-density development through infill/ redevelopment, particularly near BRT stations. » Supported by pedestrian and bicycle linkages to surrounding neighborhoods and BRT or high-frequency bus service. High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (HMN) PURPOSE: The High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District is intended to be a setting for higher density multi-unit housing and group quarter residential uses (dormitories, fraternities, sororities, etc.) closely associated with, and in close proximity to, the Colorado State University Main Campus, provided that such areas have been given this designation in accordance with an adopted subarea plan. Multistory buildings (greater than one [1] story and up to five [5] stories) are encouraged in order to promote efficient utilization of the land and the use of alternative modes of travel. West Central Area Plan The areas within the subarea plan zoned HMN represent an edge condition intended to provide a transition between campus and the neighborhoods south of Prospect. The areas zoned HMN are expected to build out in accordance with the existing zoning. Existing Zoning Map Structure Plan Map CG HMN E Urban Mixed Use District Packet Pg. 7 P&Z Agenda Item #1 SPA240003 | Prospect Plaza Redevelopment SPAR Wednesday, February 5, 2025 | Page 6 of 8 Back to Top B. CHARACTER Standard 2 – Character. The site development plan shall conform to architectural, landscape and other design standards and guidelines adopted by the applicant's governing body. Absent adopted design standards and guidelines, the design character of the site development plan shall be consistent with the stated purpose of the respective land use designation as set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Key Characteristics/Considerations of Urban Mixed-Use Areas » Vibrant mixed-use districts that provide live-work opportunities, as well as a range of supporting services and amenities along high-frequency transit routes. » Some existing Urban Mixed-Use Districts may include pockets of lower-intensity, auto-oriented uses; however, these areas should be encouraged to transition to a vertical mix of high-density development through infill/ redevelopment, particularly near BRT stations. » Supported by pedestrian and bicycle linkages to surrounding neighborhoods and BRT or high-frequency bus service. Staff evaluated several character related factors related to the stated key characteristics of the Urban Mixed-Use district. Building Placement. A fundamental concept in the City’s planning and development system is that buildings must be placed in direct relation to street sidewalks, with no intervening vehicle use areas. Multiple purposes behind this concept involve community character, with an emphasis on streets as attractive public space; walkable neighborhoods and districts; and visual interest and pedestrian comfort generally. Parking lots and drives are to be fitted into development sites behind or beside buildings where they don’t impact the visual and pedestrian environment of the city to the same degree. The proposed building fronts on both Lake and Prospect streets. The building placement encourages activity along these frontages as well as along the dedicated pedestrian path running North-South along the east edge of the property. Vehicle access and parking is limited to a area between the building and the existing multistory parking garage to the west. Architecture and Landscaping The proposed apartment building meets this requirement by conforming to the architectural, landscape and other design standards established by the Colorado State University Aesthetic Guideline and CSU Facilities Construction Standards Manual. Staff provided comments recommending additional study and detail of the south façade in particular the building access points on that end of the building to be more human scaled and pedestrian friendly. The applicant has provided revised plans that satisfy the recommendations staff provided. The building’s perimeter and interior are adequately landscaped. Perimeter landscaping is enhanced, serving to soften views of the parking and provide a visual buffer to enhance privacy for the existing residences to the east and west. CSU Facilities staff is also coordinating with City staff to comply with City drainage requirements. Packet Pg. 8 P&Z Agenda Item #1 SPA240003 | Prospect Plaza Redevelopment SPAR Wednesday, February 5, 2025 | Page 7 of 8 Back to Top C. EXTENT Standard 3 – Extent. The site development plan shall identify the level of functional and visual impacts to public rights-of-way, facilities and abutting private land caused by the development, including, but not limited to, streets, sidewalks, utilities, lighting, screening and noise, and shall mitigate such impacts to the extent reasonably feasible. In terms of overall project size the extent of the proposed building is similar in scale to neighboring parking garage structure and other multi-unit housing developments nearby within the H-M-N corridor. Transportation The development plan submittal includes a Traffic Impact Study (TIS), which includes a review of anticipated vehicles to/from the site; reviews operations for level of service; and provides recommendations. Pertinent aspects of staff’s review of the TIS include: • The project is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. • The applicant will need to obtain access, and excavation permits for work in the public right-of-way. That will require a final set of plans post hearing. • The applicant has requested a variance to the access spacing requirements for the drive access along Prospect Rd. The request has been approved by Engineering with the stipulation that the access shall be a right-in right-out configuration. The current plans show this access as right-in right-out. • The Prospect access drive aisle does not meet the LCUASS standards for parking setback. Staff is recommending a condition of approval to revise the drive aisle to meet the setback standards. Staff recommend that the Commission include a condition of approval that the plans will be updated to remove the three parking spaces closest to Prospect Road to achieve a parking setback of 75 feet from the Packet Pg. 9 P&Z Agenda Item #1 SPA240003 | Prospect Plaza Redevelopment SPAR Wednesday, February 5, 2025 | Page 8 of 8 Back to Top north flowline of Prospect Road, in accordance with Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Figure 19- 6. Lighting A photometric plan was not provided as part of the application. Staff has recommended to the applicant that in addition to meeting the lighting standards outlined in Colorado State University Facilities Planning, Design and Construction Standards that the plans specify a maximum lighting color temperature of 3000k in alignment with the City’s lighting standards. In response to staffs comments the applicant has indicated they intend to meet color temp standards. 5. Staff Conclusions and Recommendation In evaluating the proposed Prospect Plaza Redevelopment Site Plan Advisory Review SPA240003, staff makes the following findings of fact: • The Prospect Plaza Redevelopment SPAR is subject to evaluation by the Planning and Zoning Board, pursuant to State Statute Section 31-23-209, C.R.S. and Fort Collins Land Use Code Section 6.2.3(F). • The location of the Prospect Plaza Redevelopment is consistent with the policies in City Plan and the West Central Area Plan, which are part of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. • The character of the Prospect Plaza Redevelopment conforms to the landscape and other design standards and guidelines adopted by CSU. • The extent of the proposed Prospect Plaza Redevelopment is integrated into the surrounding context though the use of onsite and perimeter landscaping, accommodation of existing transit routes and utilities, public sidewalk improvements and access control to mitigate traffic operations. In evaluating the request for, #SPA240003, Staff recommend that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the development plan with the following condition: The plans will be updated to remove the three parking spaces closest to Prospect Road to achieve a parking setback of 75 feet from the north flowline of Prospect Road, in accordance with Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Figure 19-6. 6. Attachments 1. Applicant Narrative 2. Project Plans 3. Traffic Study 4. Drainage Summary 5. Comment Letter (with applicant responses) 6. Neighborhood Meeting Notes 7. Excerpts from Colorado Revised Statues Pertinent to the Proposal 8. Variance Request Access Spacing Packet Pg. 10 Project Narrative Project Title: Prospect Plaza Redevelopment Past Meeting Dates: 02/23/24 - Prospect Plaza Drainage meeting with the City of Fort Collins (Stephen Agenbroad, Claudia Quezada, and Ted Bender) 11/06/24 - Introductory meeting was held with Poudre Fire Authority to discuss fire department access (Katie Quintana) Owner: The Board of Governors of the Colorado State University System General Information: The project site, located between Lake Street and Prospect Road, and one block east of Center Street, is roughly 4.5 acres. A collection of eleven 3-story buildings, as well as a small multi-tenant retail building currently exist on the site and are at the end of their serviceable life. The project intends to replace these existing buildings to make way for redevelopment as an off-campus student housing while enhancing the site’s strong location directly adjacent to CSU’s campus and providing much -needed off-campus housing for CSU’s growing student population. The project is currently planned as a 5-story apartment building at its tallest point along Lake Street, with the southern portion of the building limited to 4 -stories. The project is currently planned to accommodate approximately 700 bedrooms and 420 Parking spaces (52 surface stalls, and 368 in structured parking). The zoning for the site is HMN. As the project site is owned by Colorado State University Board of Governors, the project is being submitted under the Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) process. Written Narrative: Site Design - Site Layout and Vehicles All existing structures and features on the site will be demolished. This includes all existing buildings, parking areas, and the bus drop off loop. The proposed site will include a residential building that includes a parking garage and exterior courtyard areas. The north portion of the building will have columns so that the building is raised to the second floor. This design was created to accommodate student outdoor amenities and floodplain volume (discussed further below). There is also green space in t he north portion of the site and in the courtyard areas. The design team is working with both Transfort, CSU Parking and Transportation Services to remove and reconfigure the bus drop-off. Instead of a loop, the proposed configuration is an eastbound pull off lane to be constructed on Lake Street as shown on the Site Plan. To the south of the lane, a bus waiting area with a building overhang and amenities for students is proposed. The existing site has five points for vehicular traffic; three from Prospect Road and two from Lake Street. In the proposed condition, this will be reduced to two access points from each of the public streets. The western access points will be the primary vehicular access, and the eastern access points will be for emergency access only. The western private driveway (located between the proposed building and the Lake Street parking garage) will accommodate the existing Arthur Ditch underground culvert and will have off-street parking stalls (similar to the existing condition). The eastern driveway will primarily function as a pedestrian and bike corridor but will also be designed to accommodate emergency vehicles as an ae rial fire-apparatus access road. Site safety for pedestrians and bike traffic is being considered and addressed. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 11 The development team hired Delich Associates in April of 2024 to perform a transportation impact study (TIS). The data was obtained while school was in session at peak hours of traffic. As stated in Exhibit A; the attached TIS, the study conforms to the format set forth in the Fort Collins transportation impact study guidelines contained in the “Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards” (LCUASS). After review, the level of service is still within acceptable limits based on the proposed development’s attri butes. Site Design - Floodplain and Stormwater Drainage The existing site has a floodplain that is mapped by CSU’s PCSWMM floodplain model. Flooding is deepest in Lake Street and extends south into the site. For the proposed condition, assessing floodplain impacts is critical to ensure that the redevelopment does not increase flooding risks to the site and the surrounding areas. To accommodate the proposed development, the floodplain boundary within the site will be adjusted while maintaining the existing flood volume on-site. The proposed development will accommodate this floodplain volume within open space in the north portion of the site and within the proposed driveways on the west and east sides of the building. Additionally, the northwest portion of the building will not have a ground level and will instead be elevated on structural columns. The finished floor elevation of the residential portion of the proposed building will be set at least 2 feet above the base flood elevation (BFE), and the commercial portion will be set at least 1 foot above the BFE. An update to CSU’s floodplain model will be completed to ensure the BFE used for design is accurate. Proposed floodplain limits are shown on the Floodplain Plan sheet. Because the overall imperviousness of the proposed development will be less than that of the existing site, traditional stormwater detention is not required. Water quality for the site will be treated using Low Impact Design (LID) techniques. Rain gardens and underground infiltration systems are being vetted for use in various areas of the site as shown on the Grading Plan sheet. These systems will treat at least 75% of the site’s impervious area in accordance with CSU and City of Fort Collins stormwater design criteria. Coordination with the Arthur Ditch Irrigation Company will occur to ensure that changes to drainage and all impacts to the enclosed ditch on the west side of the site are permitted and adhere to engineering best practices. During construction temporary erosion control measures will be installed to meet the state standards for erosion and sedimentation controls. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention (SWMP) manual will be created and used by the contractor. The contractor will obtain a State of Colorado CDPHE permit for temporary stormwater. Utilities As shown on the Utility Plan sheets, there are existing utility mains adjacent to the site. These include City of Fort Collins water, City of Fort Collins sanitary, City of Fort Collins electrical, Xcel Energy natural gas, and CSU communications. New fire hydrants are proposed at three corners of the site (the southeast corner has an existing hydrant) to provide fire protection for the proposed building and domestic water and fire services are proposed to tie directly to the main in Lake Street. The sanitary sewer service is proposed to connect from the north and south sides of the building to the existing sewer mains in Prospect Road and Lake Street. Natural gas and communications services will be connected to the mains that run along the south side of Lake Street. It is likely that three transformers will be required to power the building. These are proposed along the east side of the building and will connect to the existing electrical vault at the southwest corner of Prospect Road and Bay Road. These proposed utility connections are all shown on the Utility Plan sheets. Pedestrian Flow and Landscape Design Concrete paths and plazas lead users into and out of the building with crusher fines “nodes” or spaces that provide informal seating and gathering spaces as well as bicycle parking. The smaller nodes have landscape ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 12 beds as a backdrop which allow for separation between spaces and the larger ones are more open and have the ability to accommodate larger groups. The interior courtyard area is designed to be an amenity area with several uses. On both the north and south end, there are seating nodes with fire pits and festoon lighting that can also be used as a study area during the day. In between two of the nodes is a lawn area intended for group fitness or passive use. The two small courtyards on the south side of the building are accessible from interior lounge areas and are meant to be a study space; an ornamental fence will be provided in these spaces for security. The east side of the building is planned for fire access as well as a strong pedestrian connection from north to south. The design team understands the space requirements for Fire access but intends to create a connection that feels appropriate at the pedestrian scale that will (at the minimum) include design elements such as pedestrian scale lighting and landscape. The west side of the building includes the parking structure for this housing project and will face the existing parking structure. This space is seen as an opportunity for festoon lighting and landscape to soften the large expanse of building and bring the scale down to the pedestrian level. Landscape areas on the north side of the building are designed to accommodate the floodplain as well as the elevated second story of the building. A lawn is provided for relaxation, passive recreation, and includes boulder and step seating. Planting beds are laid out to provide buffer between building windows and public spaces, frame pathways into the building, and will also include rain gardens to support LID requirements. To the extent possible, plant material will be low water-use and all material be appropriate for the site and region. For the most part, the existing trees on the site are in fair to poor condition and all will be removed and mitigated with proposed trees. The proposed landscape in the interior and south courtyard areas consists primarily of foundation planting that will provide a buffer between resident windows and the user spaces outside. The design and layering of plant material will consider security (clear lines of sight), sun exposure and aesthetics for the outdoor gathering spaces. Architectural Design The project is governed by CSU’s design guidelines, and the project has completed, and received approval of concept level review from CSU’s Design Review Committee. The proposed student housing concept has been carefully crafted to respond to its neighboring site context . The project team has worked closely with CSU STRATA, CSU’s campus architect, design review committee, and Housing and Dining Services, to identify an appropriate architectural Character for the project. As the project is not intended to serve as a Residence Hall for freshmen students and will be managed by CSU STRATA, the decision has been made to incorporate subtle nods to the architecture of the campus, while differentiating materiality to allow the project to stand apart visually from projects managed by Housing and Dining Services. With campus situated to the north, the building responds by opening up the first level of the proposed structure along the more pedestrian-friendly Lake Street frontage. This act of porosity and transparency welcomes pedestrians, cyclists, and visitors into a semi-public courtyard space that presents itself as the front porch of the development, but also serves as a critical flood control element to hold water during heavy rain events. Furthermore, the building above will act as a covered waiting area for t he bus stop along Lake Street. The south-facing elevation of the proposed structure along the Prospect Road frontage was not treated as a large mass in-line with the Lake Street Garage, but instead sets the urban edge with more porosity and opportunities for landscaping in mind. In an effort to provide visual interest and a comfortable building scale along Prospect Road, two semi-recessed forecourts allow for a break in the massing . To further address ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 13 pedestrian scale along Prospect Road, the project team has made the decision to reduce the building height in this area from five stories down to four. Architectural detailing and materiality have also been considered relative to human scale along this frontage, including limiting the height of stone elements via a change in materiality, covered entries at the street level, and landscape features to provide transition between the building and the streetscape. The south-facing courtyards allow for the building’s corners to be opened up with large amounts of transparency to showcase common lounge spaces that act as “lighted candles” to signal a sense of arrival to the southern edge of CSU’s Campus. These “lighted candle” elements that are repeated at many of the building corners are a key element throughout CSU’s campus, offering a sense of belonging, safety and warmth when they are internally lit in the evening hours that help showcase the activity inside of the building. The roof line intentionally helps break up the scale and gives a subtle nod back to a residential aesthetic that is more commonly characterized by pitched roofs. Toward the middle of the roof there is a flat area beyond the pitched roofs that will be filled with condensing units, therefore this varying roof line is also performative in that it becomes a screen to block the view of these units from both directions along Prospect Road and Lake Street. Sincerely, Fred Haberecht, RLA, LEED AP Urban Ecology Studio 970 317 7027 urbanecologystudio@gmail.com ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 14 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 15 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 16 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 17 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 18 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 19 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 20 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 21 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 22 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 23 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 24 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 25 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 26 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 27 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 28 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 29 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 30 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 31 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 32 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 33 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 34 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 35 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 36 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 37 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 38 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 39 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 40 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................................................................................... 2 Land Use ......................................................................................................................... 2 Roads .............................................................................................................................. 2 Existing Traffic ................................................................................................................. 5 Existing Operation ........................................................................................................... 5 Pedestrians Facilities .................................................................................................... 10 Bicycle Facilities ............................................................................................................ 10 Transit Facilities ............................................................................................................ 10 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................... 11 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................. 11 Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................. 11 Background Traffic Projections ..................................................................................... 14 Trip Assignment ............................................................................................................ 14 Signal Warrants ............................................................................................................. 14 Operation Analysis ........................................................................................................ 14 Geometry ...................................................................................................................... 24 Pedestrian Level of Service ........................................................................................... 31 Bicycle Level of Service ................................................................................................ 32 Transit Level of Service ................................................................................................. 32 IV. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. 33 LIST OF TABLES 1. Current Peak Hour Operation .................................................................................... 9 2. Trip Generation ....................................................................................................... 11 3. Short Range (2029) Background Peak Hour Operation .......................................... 23 4. Long Range (2045) Background Peak Hour Operation ........................................... 25 5. Short Range (2029) Total Peak Hour Operation with RT Access at Prospect Road ........................................................................... 26 6. Short Range (2029) Total Peak Hour Operation with Full Access at Prospect Road .......................................................................... 27 7. Long Range (2045) Total Peak Hour Operation with RT Access at Prospect Road ........................................................................... 28 8. Long Range (2045) Total Peak Hour Operation with Full Access at Prospect Road .......................................................................... 29 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 41 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES LIST OF FIGURES 1. Site Location ............................................................................................................. 3 2. Existing Intersection Geometry.................................................................................. 4 3. Recent Peak Hour Traffic .......................................................................................... 6 4. Recent Bicycle Volumes ............................................................................................ 7 5. Recent Pedestrian Volumes ...................................................................................... 8 6. Site Plan .................................................................................................................. 12 7. Trip Distribution ....................................................................................................... 13 8. Short Range (2029) Background Peak Hour Traffic ................................................ 15 9. Long Range (2045) Background Peak Hour Traffic................................................. 16 10. Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic with RT Access at Prospect ............................... 17 11. Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic with Full Access at Prospect .............................. 18 12. Short Range (2029) Total Peak Hour Traffic with RT Access at Prospect .............. 19 13. Short Range (2029) Total Peak Hour Traffic with Full Access at Prospect ............. 20 14. Long Range (2045) Total Peak Hour Traffic with RT Access at Prospect ............... 21 15. Long Range (2045) Total Peak Hour Traffic with Full Access at Prospect .............. 22 16. Short Range (2029) and Long Range (2045) Geometry ......................................... 30 APPENDICES A. Base Assumptions form and related information B. Recent Peak Hour Traffic C. Current Peak Hour Operation/Level of Service Descriptions/Fort Collins LOS Standards D. Short Range (2029) Background Peak Hour Operation E. Long Range (2045) Background Peak Hour Operation F. Short Range (2029) Total Peak Hour Operation with RT Access at Prospect G. Short Range (2029) Total Peak Hour Operation with Full Access at Prospect H. Long Range (2045) Total Peak Hour Operation with RT Access at Prospect I. Long Range (2045) Total Peak Hour Operation with Full Access at Prospect J. Pedestrian/Bicycle Level of Service ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 42 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 1 I. INTRODUCTION This transportation impact study (TIS) addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near the proposed Prospect Plaza Student Housing. The proposed Prospect Plaza Student Housing site is located south of (adjacent to) Lake Street and east of Centre Avenue in Fort Collins, Colorado. During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project planning consultant (Tetrad Real Estate, LLC) and the Fort Collins Traffic Engineering staff. This study generally conforms to the format set forth in the Fort Collins transportation impact study guidelines contained in the “Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards” (LCUASS). The base assumptions packet is provided in Appendix A. The study involved the following steps: • Collect physical, traffic, and development data; • Perform trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment; • Determine peak hour traffic volumes; • Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses on key intersections; • Analyze signal warrants; • Conduct level of service evaluation of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes of transportation. This TIS is a revision of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing Transportation Impact Study, dated May 2024. It reflects a change in the number of beds, the City comments in the letter dated December 19, 2024, and a conversation with Steve Gilchrist, Fort Collins Traffic Operations on December 27, 2024. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 43 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 2 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site is shown in Figure 1. It is important that a thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented. Land Use Land uses in the area are primarily institutional (CSU) or residential. Land adjacent to the site is flat (<2% grade) from a traffic operations perspective. This site is near the center of Fort Collins. Colorado State University and the Fort Collins CBD are north of the proposed Prospect Plaza Student Housing site. This site is adjacent to the CSU Campus. Roads The primary streets near the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site are Prospect Road, Centre Avenue, and Lake Street. Figure 2 shows a schematic of the existing geometry at the Prospect/Centre and Centre/Lake intersections. Prospect Road is to the south of (adjacent to) the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site. It is classified as a four-lane arterial street on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, Prospect Road has a four-lane cross section in this area. At the Prospect/Centre intersection, Prospect Road has eastbound and westbound left-turn lanes and two through lanes in each direction. According to LCUASS, eastbound and westbound right-turn lanes are required with the existing traffic volumes at the Prospect/ Centre intersection. Typically, with constrained conditions, when turn lanes are shown to be required based on volumes, they are not built unless the operation at the subject intersection is determined to be unacceptable. The Prospect/Centre intersection has signal control. The posted speed limit in this area of Prospect Road is 35 mph. Centre Avenue is to the west of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site. In this area, it is a north-south street designated as a collector street on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. It would be classified as a major collector street (without parking). Currently, it has a two-lane cross section with no center median lane north of Prospect Road. South of Prospect Road, Centre Avenue has a two-lane cross section with a center median lane. At the Prospect/Centre intersection, Centre Avenue has northbound and southbound left- turn lanes, one through lane in each direction, and northbound and southbound right-turn lanes. At the Centre/Lake intersection, Centre Avenue has all northbound movements combined into a single lane. The Centre/Lake intersection has stop sign control on all legs. The posted speed limit in this area of Centre Avenue is 35 mph, south of Prospect Road. There is no posted speed limit on Centre Avenue between Prospect Road and Lake Street. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 44 Spring Creek Trail Prospect Lake Sh i e l d s Ce n t r e Co l l e g e Prospect Plaza Student Housing SCALE: 1"=1000' SITE LOCATION Figure 1 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 3 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 45 EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRY Figure 2 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 4 Prospect Lake Ce n t r e STOP ST O P ST O P - Denotes Lane _ Two-way Continuous Left-turn Lane 75' Striped Lane plus 75' Transition 75' Striped Lane plus 75' Transition 12 0 ' F u l l - W i d t h L a n e pl u s 1 8 0 ' B a y T a p e r 12 0 ' F u l l - W i d t h L a n e pl u s 1 8 0 ' B a y T a p e r 12 5 ' F u l l - W i d t h L a n e pl u s 2 0 0 ' B a y T a p e r 12 5 ' F u l l - W i d t h L a n e pl u s 2 0 0 ' B a y T a p e r ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 46 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 5 Lake Street is an east-west street designated as a collector street on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. It would be classified as a major collector street (without parking). Currently, Lake Street has a two-lane cross section with no center median lane. At the Centre/Lake intersection, Lake Street has all eastbound and westbound movements combined into single lanes. The posted speed limit in this area of Lake Street is 25 mph. Existing Traffic Figure 3 shows the recent morning and afternoon peak hour traffic counts at the Prospect/Centre and Centre/Lake intersections. Recent count data at the Prospect/ Centre and Centre/Lake intersections was obtained in April 2024. Raw count data is provided in Appendix B. Figures 4 and 5 respectively show the recent bicycle and pedestrian volumes at the Prospect/Centre and Centre/Lake intersections. Existing Operation The Prospect/Centre and Centre/Lake intersections were evaluated using techniques provided in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition. Using the peak hour traffic shown in Figure 3, the peak hour operation is shown in Table 1. The Prospect/ Centre and Centre/Lake intersections meet the City of Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standard during the morning and afternoon peak hours with existing control, geometry, and signal timing. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix C. A description of level of service for signalized and unsignalized intersections from the Highway Capacity Manual, 7th Edition and a table showing the Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections) are also provided in Appendix C. The Prospect Plaza Student Housing is in an area termed “mixed-use district.” In areas termed “mixed-use districts,” acceptable operation at signalized intersections during the peak hours is defined as level of service E or better for the overall intersection, and level of service E or better for any leg or movement. At arterial/arterial and collector/collector stop sign controlled intersections, acceptable operation is considered to be at level of service E, overall and level of service F, for any approach leg. At arterial/collector, arterial/local, collector/local, and local/local stop sign controlled intersections, acceptable operation is considered to be at level of service D, overall and level of service F, for any approach leg. It is important to note that the bicycle and pedestrian volumes were used in the operational analysis of the Prospect/ Centre and Centre/Lake intersections. However, the bicycle and pedestrian inputs had very little impact to the calculated operation of the intersections. During the peak hour traffic counts, the operation at the Centre/Lake intersection was specifically observed. This was done since there is a high number of pedestrians/ bicycles crossing Lake Street in the north/south direction. The following is a summary of the observations: 1) the pedestrians/bicycles seemed to cross in waves with gaps between the crossing waves; 2) the cars yielded to the waves of pedestrians/bicycles; ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 47 AM/PM RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 3 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 6 48 / 6 4 13 2 / 6 7 22 9 / 3 2 2 63/31 813/984 59/65 212/263 586/1120 83/3414 / 5 2 41 / 1 2 1 19 / 6 6 29/46 127/166 29/90 122/204 40 / 5 6 89 / 5 4 Prospect Lake Ce n t r e ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 48 AM/PM RECENT BICYCLE VOLUMES Figure 4 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 7 0/ 0 1/ 3 0/ 0 0/0 0/3 0/0 1/0 0/1 0/00/ 0 0/ 5 0/ 1 Prospect Lake Ce n t r e 1/ 2 71 / 2 6 8/ 1 5/1 6/11 3/6 0/5 5/8 9/00/ 0 15 / 5 8 0/ 0 CS U P e d & Bi k e M a l l ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 49 AM/PM RECENT PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES Figure 5 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 8 Prospect Lake Ce n t r e CS U P e d & Bi k e M a l l 21/38 16 8 / 1 7 9 32 0 / 3 0 1 12 / 1 6 9/ 8 0/5 3/12 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 50 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 9 TABLE 1 Current Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Prospect/Centre (signal) Centre/Lake (all-way stop sign) ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 51 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 10 3) the cars proceeded in the gaps between the pedestrian/bicycle waves; 4) the cars were not significantly delayed; 5) there were not long queues of cars on any of the approaches (2-3 cars); and 6) there did not appear to be frustration on the part of drivers (cars) or pedestrians/bicyclists. In general, the operation of all modes seemed to be very smooth. Pedestrian Facilities There are sidewalks along Prospect Road, Centre Avenue, and Lake Street. There are painted crosswalks on all legs of the Prospect/Centre and Centre/Lake intersections. Bicycle Facilities Bicycle lanes exist on Centre Avenue and Lake Street. Prospect Road has no bicycle lanes. Transit Facilities The nearest Transfort routes are Routes 2, 7, Around the Horn, and the MAX. The nearest bus stops are along Prospect Road, Whitcomb Street, Lake Street, and the Prospect Station for the MAX Route. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 52 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 11 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Prospect Plaza Student Housing development is a student residential development with 785 beds (311 apartment dwelling units). Figure 6 shows a site plan of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing development. The Prospect Plaza Student Housing development will replace the existing Prospect Plaza Apartments. The site plan shows one access to/from Lake Street and one access to/from Prospect Road. The access to/from Prospect Road will be analyzed as full-movement (Full Access) and restricted to right-in/right-out (RT Access). The short range analysis (Year 2029) includes development of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site and an appropriate increase in background traffic, due to normal growth, and other approved developments in the area. The long range analysis (Year 2045) includes background traffic due to normal growth and in general accordance with the Fort Collins Structure Plan. Trip Generation Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this upon the existing and proposed street system. A compilation of trip generation information contained in Trip Generation, 11th Edition, ITE is used to estimate trips that would be generated by the proposed/expected use at a site. Off-Campus Student Apartment - Low- Rise (Code 226) was used as the land use. Table 2 shows the daily and peak hour trip generation for the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site. It is assumed that alternative modes (pedestrian, bicycle, and transit) have been considered in the ITE rates for student apartments. The trip generation of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing development resulted in 2,018 daily trip ends, 55 morning peak hour trip ends, and 165 afternoon peak hour trip ends. The existing Prospect Plaza Apartments (294 beds) generates 756 daily trip ends, 21 morning peak hour trip ends, and 62 afternoon peak hour trip ends. The difference in trip generation between the existing Prospect Plaza Apartments and the Prospect Plaza Student Housing development is 1,262 daily trip ends, 34 morning peak hour trip ends, and 103 afternoon peak hour trip ends TABLE 2 Trip Generation Code Use Size Rate Trips Rate In Rate Out Rate In Rate Out 226 Apartment (Mid-Rise) Beds 2.57 2018 46% 25 54% 30 47% 78 53% 87 Trip Distribution Directional distribution of the generated trips was determined for the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site. Figure 7 shows the vehicle trip distribution used for the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site. The trip distribution was agreed to by City of Fort Collins staff in the scoping discussions. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 53 SCALE: 1"=100' SITE PLAN Figure 6 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 12 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 54 Prospect Lake Ce n t r e Co l l e g e 15% 15% 15% 20 % 20 % 15 % SCALE: 1"=500' TRIP DISTRIBUTION Figure 7 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 13 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 55 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 14 Background Traffic Projections Figures 8 and 9 show the short range (2029) and long range (2045) background peak hour traffic projections at the key intersections. Traffic at the key intersections was increased at a rate of one percent per year for the short range (2029) and long range (2045) background traffic forecasts. The peak hour trip generation for the existing Prospect Plaza Apartments was calculated, assigned, and subtracted from the background traffic. Trip Assignment/Total Traffic Trip assignment is how the generated and distributed trips are expected to be loaded on the street system. The assigned trips are the resultant of the trip distribution process. Using the trip distribution shown in Figure 7, Figures 10 and 11 respectively show the assignment of the site generated peak hour vehicle traffic with the RT Access and Full Access at Prospect Road. The site generated vehicle traffic was combined with the background traffic to determine the total forecasted vehicle traffic at the key intersections. Figures 12 and 13 respectively show the short range (2029) total peak hour vehicle traffic at the key intersections with the RT Access and Full Access at Prospect Road. Figures 14 and 15 respectively show the long range (2045) total peak hour vehicle traffic at the key intersections with the RT Access and Full Access at Prospect Road. Signal Warrants As a matter of policy, traffic signals are not installed at any location unless warrants are met according to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The following signal warrants were evaluated at the Centre/Lake intersection: Warrant 3, Peak Hour and Warrant 4, Pedestrian Volume. These signal warrants will not be met. As noted based upon observations and subsequent operational analyses, this intersection will meet the Fort Collins Level of Service Standards with all-way stop sign control. Operation Analysis Operation analyses were performed at the Prospect/Centre, Prospect/RT and Full Access, Centre/Lake, and Lake/Site Access intersections. The operation analyses were conducted for the short range future, reflecting a year 2029 condition and for the long range future, reflecting a year 2045 condition. As mentioned earlier, the Prospect/Centre intersection was analyzed using the existing City signal timing. Using the short range (2029) background peak hour traffic volumes, the Prospect/Centre and Centre/Lake intersections operate as indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix D. The Prospect/Centre and Centre/Lake intersections will meet the City of Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standard. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 56 AM/PM SHORT RANGE (2029) BACKGROUND PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 8 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 15 50 / 6 7 13 8 / 6 6 24 1 / 3 3 8 64/28 854/1034 62/68 223/276 616/1177 87/3613 / 5 0 42 / 1 2 2 18 / 6 4 30/48 131/170 25/80 126/211 42 / 5 9 91 / 4 8 Prospect Lake Ce n t r e ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 57 AM/PM LONG RANGE (2045) BACKGROUND PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 9 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 16 59 / 7 9 16 2 / 7 9 28 2 / 3 9 7 76/33 1002/1213 73/80 261/324 722/1380 102/4215 / 5 9 50 / 1 4 4 21 / 7 6 36/57 155/201 31/96 148/246 49 / 6 9 10 7 / 5 8 Prospect Lake Ce n t r e ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 58 AM/PM SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC WITH RT ACCESS AT PROSPECT Figure 10 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 17 3/ 1 1 4/12 2/5 3/88/ 2 2 2/ 8 2/ 5 8/22 6/20 5/ 1 3 Prospect RT A c c e s s 4/12 12/35 5/13 7/ 2 3 11/35 8/23 17 / 4 8 8/ 2 6 Lake Si t e A c c e s s Ce n t r e ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 59 AM/PM SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC WITH FULL ACCESS AT PROSPECT Figure 11 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 18 2/ 7 2/5 3/83/ 9 2/ 8 2/ 5 Prospect RT A c c e s s 4/12 7/22 5/13 4/ 1 2 8/24 8/23 12 / 3 5 8/ 2 6 Lake Si t e A c c e s s Ce n t r e 3/11 3/9 1/1 5/ 1 3 5/ 1 3 1/ 4 2/5 2/7 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 60 SHORT RANGE (2029) TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC WITH RT ACCESS AT PROSPECT Figure 12 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 19 50 / 6 7 14 1 / 7 7 24 1 / 3 3 8 68/40 854/1034 62/68 225/281 619/1185 87/3621 / 7 2 44 / 1 3 0 20 / 6 9 30/48 135/182 37/115 131/224 42 / 5 9 98 / 7 1 926/1489 1116/1444 6/20 5/ 1 3 11/35 222/218 8/23 151/291 17 / 4 8 8/ 2 6 AM/PM Prospect RT A c c e s s Lake Si t e A c c e s s Ce n t r e ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 61 SHORT RANGE (2029) TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC WITH FULL ACCESS AT PROSPECT Figure 13 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 20 50 / 6 7 14 0 / 7 3 24 2 / 3 4 2 66/33 856/1041 62/68 225/281 619/1185 87/3616 / 5 9 44 / 1 3 0 20 / 6 9 30/48 135/182 32/102 131/224 42 / 5 9 95 / 6 0 8/24 222/218 8/23 151/291 12 / 3 5 8/ 2 6 AM/PM Prospect Fu l l A c c e s s Lake Si t e A c c e s s Ce n t r e 926/1489 3/11 1111/1431 6/20 5/ 1 3 5/ 1 3 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 62 LONG RANGE (2045) TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC WITH RT ACCESS AT PROSPECT Figure 14 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 21 59 / 7 9 16 5 / 9 0 28 2 / 3 9 7 80/45 1002/1213 73/80 263/329 725/1388 102/4223 / 8 1 52 / 1 5 2 23 / 8 1 36/57 159/213 43/131 153/259 49 / 6 9 11 4 / 8 1 1085/1746 1307/1691 6/20 5/ 1 3 11/35 262/259 8/23 179/342 17 / 4 8 8/ 2 6 AM/PM Prospect RT A c c e s s Lake Si t e A c c e s s Ce n t r e ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 63 LONG RANGE (2045) TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC WITH FULL ACCESS AT PROSPECT Figure 15 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 22 59 / 7 9 16 4 / 8 6 28 3 / 4 0 1 78/38 1004/1220 73/80 263/329 725/1388 102/4218 / 6 8 52 / 1 5 2 23 / 8 1 36/57 159/213 38/118 153/259 49 / 6 9 11 1 / 7 0 8/24 262/259 8/23 179/342 12 / 3 5 8/ 2 6 AM/PM Prospect Fu l l A c c e s s Lake Si t e A c c e s s Ce n t r e 1085/1746 3/11 1302/1678 6/20 5/ 1 3 5/ 1 3 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 64 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 23 TABLE 3 Short Range (2029) Background Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Prospect/Centre (signal) Centre/Lake (all-way stop sign) ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 65 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 24 Using the long range (2045) background peak hour traffic volumes, the Prospect/ Centre and Centre/Lake intersections operate as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix E. The Prospect/Centre and Centre/Lake intersections will meet the City of Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standard. Using the short range (2029) total peak hour traffic volumes with the RT Access at Prospect Road, the Prospect/Centre, Prospect/RT Access, Centre/Lake, and Lake/Site Access intersections operate as indicated in Table 5. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix F. The key intersections will meet the City of Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standard. Using the short range (2029) total peak hour traffic volumes with the Full Access at Prospect Road, the Prospect/Centre, Prospect/Full Access, Centre/Lake, and Lake/Site Access intersections operate as indicated in Table 6. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix G. The key intersections will meet the City of Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standard. The southbound left-turn/right-turn movements at the Prospect/Full Access intersection will experience delays commensurate with LOS E and F during the peak hours. Using the long range (2045) total peak hour traffic volumes with the RT Access at Prospect Road, the Prospect/Centre, Prospect/RT Access, Centre/Lake, and Lake/Site Access intersections operate as indicated in Table 7. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix H. The key intersections will meet the City of Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standard. Using the long range (2045) total peak hour traffic volumes with the Full Access at Prospect Road, the Prospect/Centre, Prospect/Full Access, Centre/Lake, and Lake/Site Access intersections operate as indicated in Table 8. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix I. The key intersections will meet the City of Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standard. The southbound left-turn/right-turn movements at the Prospect/Full Access intersection will experience delays commensurate with LOS F during the peak hours. Geometry The geometry was evaluated using the long range (2045) peak hour traffic forecasts. The long range (2045) geometry is shown in Figure 16. The geometry at the Prospect/Centre and Centre/Lake intersections is the existing geometry. As mentioned earlier, according to LCUASS, eastbound and westbound right-turn lanes at the Prospect/Centre intersection are required with the existing traffic volumes. Typically at constrained locations, when turn lanes are shown to be required based on volumes, they are not built unless the operation at the subject intersection is determined to be unacceptable. The operation at the Prospect/Centre intersection meets the Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards without the eastbound and westbound right-turn lanes. The westbound left-turn lane on Prospect Road approaching Centre Avenue is currently ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 66 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 25 TABLE 4 Long Range (2045) Background Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Prospect/Centre (signal) Centre/Lake (all-way stop sign) ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 67 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 26 TABLE 5 Short Range (2029) Total Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Prospect/Centre (signal) SB RT B C Centre/Lake (all-way stop sign) Lake/Site Access (stop sign) ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 68 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 27 TABLE 6 Short Range (2029) Total Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Prospect/Centre (signal) Prospect/RT Access (full movement) Centre/Lake (all-way stop sign) Lake/Site Access (stop sign) ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 69 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 28 TABLE 7 Long Range (2045) Total Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Prospect/Centre (signal) SB RT B C Centre/Lake (all-way stop sign) Lake/Site Access (stop sign) ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 70 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 29 TABLE 8 Long Range (2045) Total Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Prospect/Centre (signal) Prospect/RT Access (full movement) Centre/Lake (all-way stop sign) Lake/Site Access (stop sign) ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 71 LONG RANGE (2045) GEOMETRY Figure 16 DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 Page 30 Lake Si t e A c c e s s - Denotes Lane _ Two-way Continuous Left-turn Lane STOP Ce n t r e STOP ST O P ST O P Prospect RT A c c e s s STOP ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 72 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 31 75 feet in length with a transition (no stripe) area of 75 feet. This lane becomes a two- way left-turn lane east of the westbound left-turn lane. The two-way left-turn lane currently serves the existing two accesses for Prospect Plaza, as well as an existing access for the Forestry Services building east of Prospect Plaza and Bay Road on the south side of Prospect Road. The distance from the westbound left-turn lane stop bar to the centerline of the proposed Full Site Access driveway on Prospect Road is approximately 235 feet. This westbound left-turn lane does not/will not meet LCUASS standards (Figure 8-2). Using the long range (2045) total peak hour traffic, this westbound left-turn lane should be approximately 550 feet in length. The 95th percentile queue length for this westbound left-turn lane is 377 feet. Given the proposed location of the Full Access, vehicles in the westbound left-turn lane approaching Centre Avenue will queue back and not allow for eastbound left-turning vehicles to enter the Full Access driveway. Since the westbound left-turn queue will extend past the proposed Site Access driveway, it is recommended that it should provide for right-in/right-out movements. According to the “West Central Area Plan” (adopted March 17, 2015), the right-of- way of Lake Street will be widened to 75 feet from the existing 60 foot right-of-way. The additional right-of-way will be on the north side of West Lake Street. A “planted buffer” will shield the bike lanes and sidewalks from the roadway. This project will install the sidewalk along its frontage. The new cross section of West Lake Street will be constructed by CSU. It is assumed that the unique function and design of Lake Street will not include any auxiliary turn lanes at driveways along it. Pedestrian Level of Service Appendix J shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site. The Prospect Plaza Student Housing site is located within an area termed as “pedestrian district,” which sets the level of service threshold at LOS A for all measured factors, except for Street Crossing which is LOS B. There are five destination areas within 1320 feet of the proposed Prospect Plaza Student Housing site: 1) the CSU Campus, 2) the CSU student housing to the west of the site, 3) the CSU student housing to the southwest of the site, 4) the commercial uses to the south of the site, and 5) the commercial uses to the southeast of the site. There are sidewalks along all streets in the area of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site. Sidewalks will be built throughout and adjacent to the development that will connect to existing nearby sidewalks along Prospect Road, Centre Avenue, and Lake Street. • Directness – The distance ratio to all pedestrian destinations is less than 1.2 (LOS A). • Continuity – The continuity to all pedestrian destinations will be acceptable at LOS B, since there are existing sidewalks adjacent to all the destination areas. • Street Crossings – The street crossings will be acceptable at LOS B all destination areas. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 73 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 32 • Visual Interest and Amenity – The visual interest and amenity will be acceptable at LOS A for all destination areas since this area around the CSU Campus is an enhanced pedestrian area. • Security – The security is acceptable at LOS A for all destination areas since this area around the CSU Campus is an enhanced pedestrian area. Bicycle Level of Service Based upon Fort Collins bicycle LOS criteria, there is one destination area (CSU) within 1320 feet of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing. The bicycle level of service is acceptable. The bicycle LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix J. There will be bicycle storage facilities on site. Transit Level of Service The nearest Transfort Routes are Routes 2, 7, 19, and 32 at the Prospect/Centre intersection and Around the Horn at the Prospect/Centre intersection. According to the “West Central Area Plan,” there will be transit stops on Lake Street and Prospect Road in the future. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 74 DELICH Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, January 2025 ASSOCIATES Page 33 IV. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS This study assessed the impacts of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing development on the short range (2029) and long range (2045) street system in the vicinity of the proposed development. As a result of this analysis, the following is concluded: • The development of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. At full development, the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site will generate approximately 2,018 daily trip ends, 55 morning peak hour trip ends, and 165 afternoon peak hour vehicle trip ends. • Current operation at the Prospect/Centre and Centre/Lake intersections meets the City of Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standard. • The following signal warrants were evaluated at the Centre/Lake intersection: Warrant 3, Peak Hour and Warrant 4, Pedestrian Volume. These signal warrants will not be met. As noted based upon observations and subsequent operational analyses, this intersection does and will meet the Fort Collins Level of Service Standards with all-way stop sign control. • In the short range (2029) future, given development of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site and an increase in background traffic, the key intersections will meet the City of Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standard with existing/recommended control, geometry, and existing signal timing. • In the long range (2045) future, given development of the Prospect Plaza Student Housing site and an increase in background traffic, the key intersections will meet the City of Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standard with existing/recommended control, geometry, and existing signal timing. • The geometry at the key intersections is shown in Figure 16. Given the proposed location of the proposed Site Access driveway at Prospect Road, vehicles in the westbound left-turn lane approaching Centre Avenue will queue back beyond this access driveway and not allow for eastbound left-turning vehicles to enter the Site Access driveway. It is recommended that this Site Access driveway should provide for right-in/right-out movements. The new cross section of Lake Street will be in accordance with the “West Central Area Plan.” • Acceptable level of service is achieved for pedestrians and bicycles based upon the measures in the multi-modal transportation guidelines. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 75 APPENDIX A ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 76 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 77 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 78 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 79 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 80 APPENDIX B ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 81 DELICH ASSOCIATES 2272 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE LOVELAND, CO 80538 Phone: (970) 669-2061 TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS Day: Thursday Jurisdiction: Fort Collins R = right turn Intersection: Centre/Lake S = straight L = left turn Time Northbound: Centre Southbound: Total Eastbound: Lake Westbound: Lake Total Total Begins L S R Total L S R Total north/south L S R Total L S R Total east/west All 7:00 2 15 17 0 8 4 12 11 12 23 35 52 7:15 3 16 19 0 26 3 29 6 13 19 48 67 7:30 7 27 34 0 39 8 47 16 24 40 87 121 7:45 5 25 30 0 46 7 53 13 24 37 90 120 # 8:00 6 20 26 0 22 8 30 3 21 24 54 80 # 8:15 6 21 27 0 26 7 33 5 21 26 59 86 # 8:30 9 27 36 0 46 10 56 9 29 38 94 130 # 8:45 19 21 40 0 33 4 37 12 51 63 100 140 # 8:00-9:00 40 0 89 129 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.53 n/a 0.82 0.81 n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.81 n/a 0.69 0.73 0.7 0.6 0.6 n/a 0.6 0.77 0.78 4:00 9 14 23 0 31 17 48 15 52 67 115 138 4:15 13 16 29 0 33 5 38 19 55 74 112 141 4:30 18 13 31 0 32 13 45 18 50 68 113 144 4:45 12 10 22 0 49 20 69 25 50 75 144 166 # 5:00 13 15 28 0 52 8 60 28 49 77 137 165 # 5:15 3 10 13 0 29 12 41 27 46 73 114 127 # 5:30 18 9 27 0 28 4 32 10 47 57 89 116 # 5:45 10 3 13 0 24 5 29 12 44 56 85 98 # 4:15-5:15 56 0 54 110 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.78 n/a 0.84 0.89 n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.89 n/a 0.8 0.58 0.77 0.8 0.93 n/a 0.95 0.88 0.93 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 82 DELICH ASSOCIATES 2272 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE LOVELAND, CO 80538 Phone: (970) 669-2061 TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS Day: Wednesday Jurisdiction: Fort Collins R = right turn Intersection: Prospect/Centre S = straight L = left turn Time Northbound: Centre Southbound: Centre Total Eastbound: Prospect Westbound: Prospect Total Total Begins L S R Total L S R Total north/south L S R Total L S R Total east/west All 7:00 1 10 28 39 0 5 3 8 8 123 5 136 36 52 2 90 226 273 7:15 1 16 23 40 0 6 5 11 7 148 14 169 31 67 8 106 275 326 7:30 7 23 55 85 1 4 3 8 9 211 13 233 41 116 13 170 403 496 7:45 3 32 69 104 3 15 5 23 16 222 17 255 78 147 18 243 498 625 # 8:00 10 28 65 103 1 7 3 11 6 174 16 196 56 142 16 214 410 524 # 8:15 10 26 46 82 3 12 3 18 11 198 10 219 43 121 17 181 400 500 # 8:30 12 31 56 99 3 11 5 19 23 213 12 248 55 158 32 245 493 611 # 8:45 16 47 62 125 7 11 8 26 23 228 21 272 58 165 18 241 513 664 # 8:00-9:00 48 132 229 409 14 41 19 74 PHF 0.75 0.7 0.88 0.82 0.5 0.85 0.59 0.71 0.8 0.68 0.89 0.7 0.86 0.91 0.89 0.65 0.9 0.88 0.87 4:00 23 15 86 124 15 34 27 76 8 213 16 237 68 257 8 333 570 770 4:15 18 21 91 130 14 28 17 59 6 225 17 248 48 267 3 318 566 755 4:30 22 14 84 120 10 23 16 49 5 238 16 259 66 267 15 348 607 776 4:45 10 17 80 107 17 30 16 63 16 273 15 304 65 284 8 357 661 831 # 5:00 14 15 67 96 11 40 17 68 4 248 17 269 84 302 8 394 663 827 # 5:15 14 11 63 88 10 24 16 50 3 216 13 232 57 289 4 350 582 720 # 5:30 20 15 50 85 12 22 16 50 4 231 11 246 47 288 6 341 587 722 # 5:45 9 9 55 73 6 8 7 21 3 224 8 235 37 213 5 255 490 584 # 4:15-5:15 64 67 322 453 52 121 66 239 PHF 0.73 0.8 0.88 0.87 0.76 0.76 0.97 0.88 0.92 0.48 0.9 0.96 0.89 0.78 0.93 0.57 0.9 0.94 0.96 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 83 APPENDIX C ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 84 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Recent AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report recent am.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 63 813 59 212 586 83 48 132 229 14 41 19 Future Volume (veh/h) 63 813 59 212 586 83 48 132 229 14 41 19 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.75 0.71 0.84 0.71 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 72 934 63 244 674 87 55 152 64 16 47 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 542 2123 143 475 2092 270 219 322 195 163 322 195 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.63 0.63 0.08 0.66 0.66 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3371 227 1781 3154 407 1020 1870 1133 982 1870 1133 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 72 492 505 244 379 382 55 152 64 16 47 5 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1821 1781 1777 1783 1020 1870 1133 982 1870 1133 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 15.6 15.6 4.9 10.1 10.1 5.3 8.1 5.5 1.6 2.3 0.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 15.6 15.6 4.9 10.1 10.1 7.7 8.1 5.5 9.7 2.3 0.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 542 1119 1147 475 1179 1183 219 322 195 163 322 195 V/C Ratio(X) 0.13 0.44 0.44 0.51 0.32 0.32 0.25 0.47 0.33 0.10 0.15 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 581 1119 1147 568 1179 1183 317 502 304 257 502 304 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.4 10.4 10.4 7.4 7.9 7.9 41.9 41.0 39.9 45.4 38.6 37.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.3 1.2 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.6 1.1 1.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 6.0 6.1 1.6 3.7 3.7 1.4 3.8 1.6 0.4 1.1 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 6.5 11.7 11.7 8.2 8.6 8.6 42.5 42.1 40.9 45.6 38.8 37.9 LnGrp LOS A B B A A A D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1069 1005 271 68 Approach Delay, s/veh 11.3 8.5 41.9 40.4 Approach LOS B A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.5 12.3 74.3 23.5 8.6 78.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.5 13.0 52.0 28.5 6.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.7 6.9 17.6 10.1 3.5 12.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.4 3.7 0.9 0.0 2.7 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 14.4 HCM 7th LOS B ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 85 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Recent AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report recent am.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 34 18 58 34 11 65 Maximum Split (%) 30.9% 16.4% 52.7% 30.9% 10.0% 59.1% Minimum Split (s)23.5 11 26 24.5 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)79 3 21 79 3 14 End Time (s)3 21 79 3 14 79 Yield/Force Off (s) 107.5 16 73 107.5 9 73 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 96.5 16 60 96.5 9 62 Local Start Time (s)6 40 58 6 40 51 Local Yield (s)34.5 53 0 34.5 46 0 Local Yield 170(s)23.5 53 97 23.5 46 99 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 110 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 65 Offset: 73 (66%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 86 Queues Recent AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report recent am.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 72 1002 244 769 55 152 263 16 47 22 v/c Ratio 0.15 0.50 0.58 0.36 0.26 0.52 0.74 0.14 0.16 0.06 Control Delay (s/veh) 5.6 14.8 10.3 9.9 40.5 47.1 22.5 38.6 37.9 0.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 5.6 14.8 10.3 9.9 40.5 47.1 22.5 38.6 37.9 0.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 11 197 43 122 34 98 31 10 29 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 30 320 90 194 63 142 105 27 54 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 512 584 555 529 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 497 1986 454 2153 354 482 450 192 482 503 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.14 0.50 0.54 0.36 0.16 0.32 0.58 0.08 0.10 0.04 Intersection Summary ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 87 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Recent PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report recent pm.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 31 984 59 263 1120 34 64 67 322 52 121 66 Future Volume (veh/h) 31 984 59 263 1120 34 64 67 322 52 121 66 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.88 0.80 0.85 0.80 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 32 1025 58 274 1167 34 67 70 41 54 126 11 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 370 2225 126 460 2465 72 167 296 202 197 296 202 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.65 0.65 0.08 0.70 0.70 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3412 193 1781 3525 103 1096 1870 1275 1093 1870 1275 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 32 534 549 274 588 613 67 70 41 54 126 11 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1828 1781 1777 1851 1096 1870 1275 1093 1870 1275 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 17.9 17.9 5.5 17.9 17.9 7.1 3.9 3.4 5.5 7.3 0.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 17.9 17.9 5.5 17.9 17.9 14.3 3.9 3.4 9.4 7.3 0.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 370 1158 1192 460 1242 1294 167 296 202 197 296 202 V/C Ratio(X) 0.09 0.46 0.46 0.60 0.47 0.47 0.40 0.24 0.20 0.27 0.43 0.05 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 420 1158 1192 678 1242 1294 318 553 377 348 553 377 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.8 10.4 10.4 8.1 8.1 8.1 52.1 44.2 43.9 48.3 45.6 42.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.6 0.4 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 6.9 7.1 1.9 6.5 6.8 2.0 1.8 1.1 1.5 3.5 0.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 6.9 11.7 11.7 9.3 9.4 9.4 53.6 44.6 44.4 49.0 46.6 43.0 LnGrp LOS A B B A A A D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1115 1475 178 191 Approach Delay, s/veh 11.6 9.4 48.0 47.1 Approach LOS B A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.5 13.3 83.2 23.5 7.6 88.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 34.5 23.0 46.0 34.5 6.0 63.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.4 7.5 19.9 16.3 2.7 19.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 0.8 4.1 0.6 0.0 4.9 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 14.9 HCM 7th LOS B ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 88 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Recent PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report recent pm.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 40 28 52 40 11 69 Maximum Split (%) 33.3% 23.3% 43.3% 33.3% 9.2% 57.5% Minimum Split (s) 23.5 11 26 24 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)16 56 84 16 56 67 End Time (s)56 84 16 56 67 16 Yield/Force Off (s)50.5 79 10 50.5 62 10 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 39.5 79 117 39.5 62 119 Local Start Time (s)6 46 74 6 46 57 Local Yield (s)40.5 69 0 40.5 52 0 Local Yield 170(s)29.5 69 107 29.5 52 109 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 120 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 65 Offset: 10 (8%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 89 Queues Recent PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report recent pm.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 32 1086 274 1202 67 70 335 54 126 69 v/c Ratio 0.10 0.57 0.58 0.51 0.48 0.27 0.73 0.37 0.49 0.22 Control Delay (s/veh) 6.5 19.3 11.1 9.9 57.0 46.5 15.3 51.5 52.8 2.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 6.5 19.3 11.1 9.9 57.0 46.5 15.3 51.5 52.8 2.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 5 273 49 231 47 48 5 38 89 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 15 441 127 343 90 87 97 74 142 8 Internal Link Dist (ft) 674 585 555 522 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 338 1903 527 2371 293 532 599 307 532 530 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.09 0.57 0.52 0.51 0.23 0.13 0.56 0.18 0.24 0.13 Intersection Summary ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 90 HCM 7th AWSC Recent AM 1: Center & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report recent am.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.6 Intersection LOS A Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 127 29 29 122 40 89 Future Vol, veh/h 127 29 29 122 40 89 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 149 34 34 144 47 105 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 8.6 8.8 8.4 HCM LOS A A A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %31% 0% 19% Vol Thru, %0% 81% 81% Vol Right, %69% 19% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 129 156 151 LT Vol 40 0 29 Through Vol 0 127 122 RT Vol 89 29 0 Lane Flow Rate 152 184 178 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.185 0.223 0.223 Departure Headway (Hd)4.392 4.367 4.518 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 818 822 796 Service Time 2.417 2.39 2.541 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.186 0.224 0.224 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 8.4 8.6 8.8 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 0.9 0.9 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 91 HCM 7th AWSC Recent PM 1: Center & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report recent pm.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.8 Intersection LOS A Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 166 46 90 204 56 54 Future Vol, veh/h 166 46 90 204 56 54 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 178 49 97 219 60 58 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.2 10.6 9 HCM LOS A B A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %51% 0% 31% Vol Thru, %0% 78% 69% Vol Right, %49% 22% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 110 212 294 LT Vol 56 0 90 Through Vol 0 166 204 RT Vol 54 46 0 Lane Flow Rate 118 228 316 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.163 0.282 0.399 Departure Headway (Hd)4.948 4.451 4.54 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 723 807 793 Service Time 2.993 2.484 2.572 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.163 0.283 0.398 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9 9.2 10.6 HCM Lane LOS A A B HCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 1.2 1.9 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 92 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level-of-Service Average Total Delay sec/veh A < 10 B > 10 and < 15 C > 15 and < 25 D > 25 and < 35 E > 35 and < 50 F > 50 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level-of-Service Average Total Delay sec/veh A < 10 B > 10 and < 20 C > 20 and < 35 D > 35 and < 55 E > 55 and < 80 F > 80 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 93 Table 4-2 Fort Collins (GMA and City Limits) Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections) Overall Any Approach Leg Any Movement Signalized D1 E E2 Unsignalized E3 F4 Arterial/Arterial Collector/Collector Unsignalized 4 Arterial/Collector Arterial/Local Collector/Local Local/Local 1 In mixed use district including downtown as defined by structure plan, overall LOS E is acceptable 2 Applicable with at least 5% of total entering volume 3 Use weighed average to identify overall delay 4 Mitigation may be required 5 Apply unsignalized delay value thresholds to determine LOS ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 94 APPENDIX D ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 95 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Short Bkgrd AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report sb am.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 64 854 62 223 616 87 50 138 241 13 42 18 Future Volume (veh/h) 64 854 62 223 616 87 50 138 241 13 42 18 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.75 0.71 0.85 0.71 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 74 982 66 256 708 92 57 159 82 15 48 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 523 2115 142 459 2090 271 219 322 195 158 322 195 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.63 0.63 0.08 0.66 0.66 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3372 227 1781 3151 409 1020 1870 1133 969 1870 1133 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 74 517 531 256 399 401 57 159 82 15 48 4 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1822 1781 1777 1783 1020 1870 1133 969 1870 1133 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.6 16.8 16.8 5.1 10.7 10.7 5.5 8.5 7.1 1.6 2.4 0.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.6 16.8 16.8 5.1 10.7 10.7 7.9 8.5 7.1 10.0 2.4 0.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 523 1115 1143 459 1178 1182 219 322 195 158 322 195 V/C Ratio(X) 0.14 0.46 0.46 0.56 0.34 0.34 0.26 0.49 0.42 0.09 0.15 0.02 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 563 1115 1143 547 1178 1182 317 502 304 251 502 304 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.5 10.8 10.8 8.0 8.0 8.0 42.0 41.2 40.6 45.7 38.7 37.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.4 1.4 1.1 0.8 0.8 0.6 1.2 1.4 0.3 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 6.5 6.6 1.7 4.0 4.0 1.4 4.0 2.0 0.4 1.1 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 6.6 12.2 12.1 9.1 8.8 8.8 42.7 42.3 42.0 46.0 38.9 37.8 LnGrp LOS A B B A A A D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1122 1056 298 67 Approach Delay, s/veh 11.8 8.9 42.3 40.4 Approach LOS B A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.5 12.5 74.0 23.5 8.6 78.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.5 13.0 52.0 28.5 6.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.0 7.1 18.8 10.5 3.6 12.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.4 4.0 1.1 0.0 2.9 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 14.9 HCM 7th LOS B ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 96 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Short Bkgrd AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report sb am.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 34 18 58 34 11 65 Maximum Split (%) 30.9% 16.4% 52.7% 30.9% 10.0% 59.1% Minimum Split (s)23.5 11 26 24.5 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)79 3 21 79 3 14 End Time (s)3 21 79 3 14 79 Yield/Force Off (s) 107.5 16 73 107.5 9 73 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 96.5 16 60 96.5 9 62 Local Start Time (s)6 40 58 6 40 51 Local Yield (s)34.5 53 0 34.5 46 0 Local Yield 170(s)23.5 53 97 23.5 46 99 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 110 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 65 Offset: 73 (66%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 97 Queues Short Bkgrd AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report sb am.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 74 1053 256 808 57 159 277 15 48 21 v/c Ratio 0.16 0.54 0.63 0.38 0.25 0.52 0.78 0.12 0.16 0.06 Control Delay (s/veh) 6.2 16.4 13.3 10.5 39.3 45.9 26.9 36.8 36.7 0.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 6.2 16.4 13.3 10.5 39.3 45.9 26.9 36.8 36.7 0.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 12 224 45 130 35 103 45 9 29 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 33 342 106 206 63 145 124 24 54 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 512 584 555 529 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 469 1934 429 2135 354 482 444 190 482 503 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.16 0.54 0.60 0.38 0.16 0.33 0.62 0.08 0.10 0.04 Intersection Summary ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 98 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Short Bkgrd PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report sb pm.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 28 1034 68 276 1177 36 67 66 338 50 122 64 Future Volume (veh/h) 28 1034 68 276 1177 36 67 66 338 50 122 64 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.88 0.80 0.86 0.80 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 29 1077 68 288 1226 37 70 69 66 52 127 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 349 2197 139 442 2466 74 166 296 202 195 296 202 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.65 0.65 0.08 0.70 0.70 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3387 214 1781 3521 106 1098 1870 1275 1076 1870 1275 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 29 565 580 288 618 645 70 69 66 52 127 9 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1824 1781 1777 1850 1098 1870 1275 1076 1870 1275 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.6 19.6 19.7 5.9 19.2 19.2 7.4 3.9 5.5 5.3 7.4 0.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.6 19.6 19.7 5.9 19.2 19.2 14.7 3.9 5.5 9.2 7.4 0.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 349 1153 1183 442 1244 1296 166 296 202 195 296 202 V/C Ratio(X) 0.08 0.49 0.49 0.65 0.50 0.50 0.42 0.23 0.33 0.27 0.43 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 401 1153 1183 654 1244 1296 317 553 377 344 553 377 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 7.1 10.9 10.9 9.3 8.3 8.3 52.3 44.1 44.8 48.2 45.6 42.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.7 0.4 0.9 0.7 1.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 7.6 7.8 2.2 7.0 7.3 2.1 1.8 1.8 1.5 3.5 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 7.2 12.4 12.3 11.0 9.7 9.6 54.0 44.5 45.8 48.9 46.6 42.9 LnGrp LOS A B B B A A D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1174 1551 205 188 Approach Delay, s/veh 12.2 9.9 48.2 47.1 Approach LOS B A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.5 13.7 82.8 23.5 7.5 89.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 34.5 23.0 46.0 34.5 6.0 63.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.2 7.9 21.7 16.7 2.6 21.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 0.8 4.4 0.7 0.0 5.3 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 15.5 HCM 7th LOS B ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 99 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Short Bkgrd PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report sb pm.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 40 28 52 40 11 69 Maximum Split (%) 33.3% 23.3% 43.3% 33.3% 9.2% 57.5% Minimum Split (s) 23.5 11 26 24 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)16 56 84 16 56 67 End Time (s)56 84 16 56 67 16 Yield/Force Off (s)50.5 79 10 50.5 62 10 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 39.5 79 117 39.5 62 119 Local Start Time (s)6 46 74 6 46 57 Local Yield (s)40.5 69 0 40.5 52 0 Local Yield 170(s)29.5 69 107 29.5 52 109 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 120 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 70 Offset: 10 (8%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 100 Queues Short Bkgrd PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report sb pm.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 29 1148 288 1264 70 69 352 52 127 67 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.63 0.62 0.54 0.48 0.26 0.77 0.34 0.48 0.21 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.4 22.6 15.8 10.8 55.8 45.3 18.4 49.4 51.4 2.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 7.4 22.6 15.8 10.8 55.8 45.3 18.4 49.4 51.4 2.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 4 311 61 250 50 47 19 36 90 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 15 522 171 398 90 84 118 70 139 5 Internal Link Dist (ft) 674 585 555 522 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 315 1823 506 2353 294 532 596 308 532 530 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.09 0.63 0.57 0.54 0.24 0.13 0.59 0.17 0.24 0.13 Intersection Summary ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 101 HCM 7th AWSC Short Bkgrd AM 1: Center & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report sb am.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.7 Intersection LOS A Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 131 30 25 126 42 91 Future Vol, veh/h 131 30 25 126 42 91 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 154 35 29 148 49 107 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 8.7 8.9 8.5 HCM LOS A A A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %32% 0% 17% Vol Thru, %0% 81% 83% Vol Right, %68% 19% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 133 161 151 LT Vol 42 0 25 Through Vol 0 131 126 RT Vol 91 30 0 Lane Flow Rate 156 189 178 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.192 0.23 0.224 Departure Headway (Hd)4.411 4.38 4.531 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 814 820 792 Service Time 2.436 2.405 2.556 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.192 0.23 0.225 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 8.5 8.7 8.9 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 0.9 0.9 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 102 HCM 7th AWSC Short Bkgrd PM 1: Center & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report sb pm.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.8 Intersection LOS A Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 170 48 80 211 59 48 Future Vol, veh/h 170 48 80 211 59 48 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 183 52 86 227 63 52 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.3 10.5 9 HCM LOS A B A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %55% 0% 27% Vol Thru, %0% 78% 73% Vol Right, %45% 22% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 107 218 291 LT Vol 59 0 80 Through Vol 0 170 211 RT Vol 48 48 0 Lane Flow Rate 115 234 313 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.159 0.289 0.394 Departure Headway (Hd)4.983 4.438 4.533 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 718 809 795 Service Time 3.03 2.469 2.563 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.16 0.289 0.394 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9 9.3 10.5 HCM Lane LOS A A B HCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 1.2 1.9 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 103 APPENDIX E ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 104 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Long Bkgrd AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report lb am.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 76 1002 73 261 722 102 59 162 282 15 50 21 Future Volume (veh/h) 76 1002 73 261 722 102 59 162 282 15 50 21 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.76 0.72 0.88 0.72 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 84 1113 77 290 802 104 66 180 145 17 56 6 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 477 2084 144 420 2086 270 216 323 196 144 323 196 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.62 0.62 0.09 0.66 0.66 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3365 233 1781 3151 409 1020 1870 1134 923 1870 1134 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 84 587 603 290 452 454 66 180 145 17 56 6 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1820 1781 1777 1783 1020 1870 1134 923 1870 1134 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.8 20.7 20.7 5.9 12.7 12.7 6.5 9.7 13.3 1.9 2.8 0.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.8 20.7 20.7 5.9 12.7 12.7 9.3 9.7 13.3 11.6 2.8 0.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 477 1101 1128 420 1176 1180 216 323 196 144 323 196 V/C Ratio(X) 0.18 0.53 0.53 0.69 0.38 0.38 0.31 0.56 0.74 0.12 0.17 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 515 1101 1128 495 1176 1180 313 502 304 232 502 304 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.9 11.9 11.9 11.2 8.4 8.4 42.8 41.7 43.2 47.0 38.8 37.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 1.9 1.8 3.3 1.0 0.9 0.8 1.5 5.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 8.0 8.2 2.8 4.7 4.7 1.7 4.6 4.0 0.5 1.3 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 7.1 13.7 13.7 14.4 9.4 9.4 43.6 43.2 48.6 47.3 39.1 37.9 LnGrp LOS A B B B A A D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1274 1196 391 79 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.3 10.6 45.2 40.8 Approach LOS B B D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.5 13.4 73.1 23.5 8.7 77.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.5 13.0 52.0 28.5 6.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.6 7.9 22.7 15.3 3.8 14.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.4 4.7 1.3 0.0 3.4 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 17.2 HCM 7th LOS B ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 105 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Long Bkgrd AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report lb am.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 34 18 58 34 11 65 Maximum Split (%) 30.9% 16.4% 52.7% 30.9% 10.0% 59.1% Minimum Split (s)23.5 11 26 24.5 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)79 3 21 79 3 14 End Time (s)3 21 79 3 14 79 Yield/Force Off (s) 107.5 16 73 107.5 9 73 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 96.5 16 60 96.5 9 62 Local Start Time (s)6 40 58 6 40 51 Local Yield (s)34.5 53 0 34.5 46 0 Local Yield 170(s)23.5 53 97 23.5 46 99 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 110 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 75 Offset: 73 (66%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 106 Queues Long Bkgrd AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report lb am.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 84 1194 290 915 66 180 313 17 56 23 v/c Ratio 0.21 0.68 0.76 0.44 0.26 0.52 0.86 0.13 0.16 0.06 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.7 22.5 29.1 12.6 37.4 43.5 39.5 34.9 34.7 0.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 7.7 22.5 29.1 12.6 37.4 43.5 39.5 34.9 34.7 0.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 15 341 86 170 40 114 90 10 33 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 37 435 #255 255 74 168 #197 28 62 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 512 584 555 529 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 407 1750 383 2058 351 482 430 185 482 503 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.68 0.76 0.44 0.19 0.37 0.73 0.09 0.12 0.05 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 107 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Long Bkgrd PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report lb pm.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 33 1213 80 324 1380 42 79 79 397 59 144 76 Future Volume (veh/h) 33 1213 80 324 1380 42 79 79 397 59 144 76 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.91 0.83 0.89 0.83 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 34 1264 80 338 1438 43 82 82 145 61 150 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 278 2079 131 388 2394 71 177 331 231 204 331 231 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.61 0.61 0.10 0.68 0.68 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3387 214 1781 3522 105 1112 1870 1308 1031 1870 1308 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 34 662 682 338 724 757 82 82 145 61 150 10 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1824 1781 1777 1850 1112 1870 1308 1031 1870 1308 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.8 27.5 27.7 7.7 26.5 26.6 8.6 4.5 12.3 6.5 8.6 0.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.8 27.5 27.7 7.7 26.5 26.6 17.2 4.5 12.3 11.0 8.6 0.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 278 1091 1120 388 1208 1258 177 331 231 204 331 231 V/C Ratio(X) 0.12 0.61 0.61 0.87 0.60 0.60 0.46 0.25 0.63 0.30 0.45 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 327 1091 1120 572 1208 1258 309 553 387 326 553 387 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.3 14.3 14.3 18.8 10.4 10.4 51.9 42.5 45.7 47.3 44.2 41.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 2.5 2.5 9.6 2.2 2.1 1.9 0.4 2.8 0.8 1.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 11.1 11.4 7.1 10.0 10.4 2.5 2.1 4.1 1.7 4.1 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 9.5 16.8 16.8 28.4 12.6 12.6 53.8 42.9 48.5 48.1 45.2 41.0 LnGrp LOS A B B C B B D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1378 1819 309 221 Approach Delay, s/veh 16.6 15.5 48.4 45.8 Approach LOS B B D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 25.7 15.6 78.7 25.7 7.7 86.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 34.5 23.0 46.0 34.5 6.0 63.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.0 9.7 29.7 19.2 2.8 28.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 0.9 4.9 1.1 0.0 6.8 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 20.4 HCM 7th LOS C ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 108 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Long Bkgrd PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report lb pm.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 40 28 52 40 11 69 Maximum Split (%) 33.3% 23.3% 43.3% 33.3% 9.2% 57.5% Minimum Split (s) 23.5 11 26 24 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)16 56 84 16 56 67 End Time (s)56 84 16 56 67 16 Yield/Force Off (s)50.5 79 10 50.5 62 10 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 39.5 79 117 39.5 62 119 Local Start Time (s)6 46 74 6 46 57 Local Yield (s)40.5 69 0 40.5 52 0 Local Yield 170(s)29.5 69 107 29.5 52 109 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 120 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 90 Offset: 10 (8%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 109 Queues Long Bkgrd PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report lb pm.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 34 1347 338 1482 82 82 414 61 150 79 v/c Ratio 0.14 0.81 0.81 0.66 0.49 0.26 0.86 0.34 0.47 0.22 Control Delay (s/veh) 10.0 32.2 43.5 15.6 51.6 41.4 29.7 44.8 47.1 3.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 10.0 32.2 43.5 15.6 51.6 41.4 29.7 44.8 47.1 3.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 5 444 173 329 59 57 78 43 108 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 22 #738 #362 601 96 88 190 73 147 14 Internal Link Dist (ft) 674 585 555 522 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 242 1656 435 2262 280 532 590 302 532 530 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.14 0.81 0.78 0.66 0.29 0.15 0.70 0.20 0.28 0.15 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 110 HCM 7th AWSC Long Bkgrd AM 1: Center & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report lb am.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.2 Intersection LOS A Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 155 36 31 148 49 107 Future Vol, veh/h 155 36 31 148 49 107 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 182 42 36 174 58 126 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.3 9.4 9 HCM LOS A A A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %31% 0% 17% Vol Thru, %0% 81% 83% Vol Right, %69% 19% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 156 191 179 LT Vol 49 0 31 Through Vol 0 155 148 RT Vol 107 36 0 Lane Flow Rate 184 225 211 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.233 0.281 0.272 Departure Headway (Hd)4.572 4.497 4.652 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 784 798 771 Service Time 2.61 2.533 2.691 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.235 0.282 0.274 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9 9.3 9.4 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th-tile Q 0.9 1.2 1.1 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 111 HCM 7th AWSC Long Bkgrd PM 1: Center & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 12/31/2024 Synchro 12 Light Report lb pm.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 10.9 Intersection LOS B Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 201 57 96 246 69 58 Future Vol, veh/h 201 57 96 246 69 58 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 216 61 103 265 74 62 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 10.1 11.9 9.6 HCM LOS B B A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %54% 0% 28% Vol Thru, %0% 78% 72% Vol Right, %46% 22% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 127 258 342 LT Vol 69 0 96 Through Vol 0 201 246 RT Vol 58 57 0 Lane Flow Rate 137 277 368 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.197 0.353 0.476 Departure Headway (Hd)5.202 4.575 4.656 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 686 782 772 Service Time 3.271 2.625 2.703 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.2 0.354 0.477 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.6 10.1 11.9 HCM Lane LOS A B B HCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 1.6 2.6 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 112 APPENDIX F ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 113 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Short Total AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st am.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 68 854 62 225 619 87 50 141 241 21 44 20 Future Volume (veh/h) 68 854 62 225 619 87 50 141 241 21 44 20 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.76 0.71 0.85 0.71 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 78 982 66 259 711 92 57 162 82 24 51 6 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 522 2113 142 459 2089 270 218 323 195 156 323 195 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.63 0.63 0.08 0.66 0.66 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3372 227 1781 3153 408 1020 1870 1133 968 1870 1133 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 78 517 531 259 400 403 57 162 82 24 51 6 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1822 1781 1777 1783 1020 1870 1133 968 1870 1133 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 16.9 16.9 5.2 10.8 10.8 5.5 8.6 7.1 2.5 2.6 0.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 16.9 16.9 5.2 10.8 10.8 8.1 8.6 7.1 11.2 2.6 0.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 522 1113 1142 459 1177 1182 218 323 195 156 323 195 V/C Ratio(X) 0.15 0.46 0.46 0.56 0.34 0.34 0.26 0.50 0.42 0.15 0.16 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 561 1113 1142 547 1177 1182 315 502 304 249 502 304 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.6 10.8 10.8 8.1 8.1 8.1 42.2 41.2 40.6 46.3 38.7 37.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.4 1.4 1.1 0.8 0.8 0.6 1.2 1.4 0.4 0.2 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 6.5 6.6 1.8 4.0 4.0 1.4 4.0 2.0 0.6 1.2 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 6.7 12.2 12.2 9.1 8.9 8.9 42.8 42.4 42.0 46.7 38.9 37.9 LnGrp LOS A B B A A A D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1126 1062 301 81 Approach Delay, s/veh 11.8 8.9 42.4 41.2 Approach LOS B A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.5 12.6 73.9 23.5 8.6 77.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.5 13.0 52.0 28.5 6.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.2 7.2 18.9 10.6 3.7 12.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.4 4.0 1.1 0.0 2.9 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 15.1 HCM 7th LOS B ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 114 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Short Total AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st am.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 34 18 58 34 11 65 Maximum Split (%) 30.9% 16.4% 52.7% 30.9% 10.0% 59.1% Minimum Split (s)23.5 11 26 24.5 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)79 3 21 79 3 14 End Time (s)3 21 79 3 14 79 Yield/Force Off (s) 107.5 16 73 107.5 9 73 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 96.5 16 60 96.5 9 62 Local Start Time (s)6 40 58 6 40 51 Local Yield (s)34.5 53 0 34.5 46 0 Local Yield 170(s)23.5 53 97 23.5 46 99 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 110 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 65 Offset: 73 (66%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 115 Queues Short Total AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st am.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 78 1053 259 811 57 162 277 24 51 23 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.55 0.64 0.38 0.25 0.53 0.77 0.20 0.17 0.06 Control Delay (s/veh) 6.3 16.5 13.6 10.5 39.3 46.1 26.8 39.5 36.9 0.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 6.3 16.5 13.6 10.5 39.3 46.1 26.8 39.5 36.9 0.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 12 226 46 131 35 105 45 15 31 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 34 342 109 207 63 147 124 35 56 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 512 221 555 529 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 468 1928 430 2133 353 482 444 188 482 503 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.17 0.55 0.60 0.38 0.16 0.34 0.62 0.13 0.11 0.05 Intersection Summary ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 116 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Short Total PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st pm.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 40 1034 68 281 1185 36 67 77 338 72 130 69 Future Volume (veh/h) 40 1034 68 281 1185 36 67 77 338 72 130 69 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.88 0.80 0.86 0.80 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 42 1077 68 293 1234 37 70 80 66 75 135 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 351 2193 138 443 2450 73 162 296 202 189 296 202 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.65 0.65 0.08 0.70 0.70 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3387 214 1781 3521 106 1096 1870 1276 1072 1870 1276 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 42 565 580 293 622 649 70 80 66 75 135 7 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1824 1781 1777 1850 1096 1870 1276 1072 1870 1276 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.9 19.7 19.7 6.0 19.7 19.7 7.4 4.5 5.5 7.9 7.9 0.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.9 19.7 19.7 6.0 19.7 19.7 15.3 4.5 5.5 12.5 7.9 0.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 351 1150 1181 443 1236 1287 162 296 202 189 296 202 V/C Ratio(X) 0.12 0.49 0.49 0.66 0.50 0.50 0.43 0.27 0.33 0.40 0.46 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 395 1150 1181 653 1236 1287 313 553 377 337 553 377 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 7.2 10.9 10.9 9.5 8.5 8.6 52.7 44.4 44.8 49.9 45.8 42.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.8 0.5 0.9 1.3 1.1 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 7.6 7.8 2.3 7.2 7.6 2.1 2.1 1.8 2.2 3.8 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 7.3 12.4 12.4 11.2 10.0 10.0 54.6 44.9 45.8 51.2 46.9 42.8 LnGrp LOS A B B B B A D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1187 1564 216 217 Approach Delay, s/veh 12.2 10.2 48.3 48.3 Approach LOS B B D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.5 13.8 82.7 23.5 8.0 88.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 34.5 23.0 46.0 34.5 6.0 63.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 14.5 8.0 21.7 17.3 2.9 21.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 0.8 4.4 0.7 0.0 5.3 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 16.1 HCM 7th LOS B ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 117 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Short Total PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st pm.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 40 28 52 40 11 69 Maximum Split (%) 33.3% 23.3% 43.3% 33.3% 9.2% 57.5% Minimum Split (s) 23.5 11 26 24 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)16 56 84 16 56 67 End Time (s)56 84 16 56 67 16 Yield/Force Off (s)50.5 79 10 50.5 62 10 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 39.5 79 117 39.5 62 119 Local Start Time (s)6 46 74 6 46 57 Local Yield (s)40.5 69 0 40.5 52 0 Local Yield 170(s)29.5 69 107 29.5 52 109 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 120 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 70 Offset: 10 (8%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 118 Queues Short Total PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st pm.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 1148 293 1272 70 80 352 75 135 72 v/c Ratio 0.14 0.64 0.63 0.56 0.49 0.30 0.77 0.50 0.51 0.22 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.8 23.1 16.6 11.9 56.8 46.2 18.3 56.3 52.2 3.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 7.8 23.1 16.6 11.9 56.8 46.2 18.3 56.3 52.2 3.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 6 314 67 254 50 55 19 53 96 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 20 #528 177 407 91 94 118 95 147 9 Internal Link Dist (ft) 674 171 555 522 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 311 1806 506 2286 283 532 596 302 532 530 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.14 0.64 0.58 0.56 0.25 0.15 0.59 0.25 0.25 0.14 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 119 HCM 7th TWSC Short Total AM 9: Prospect & RT Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st am.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 1116 926 6 0 5 Future Vol, veh/h 0 1116 926 6 0 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length -- - - - 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 1313 1089 7 0 6 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All - 0 - 0 - 548 Stage 1 -- - - - - Stage 2 -- - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 - - - 0 480 Stage 1 0 - - - 0 - Stage 2 0 - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver -- - - - 480 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -- - - - - Stage 1 -- - - - - Stage 2 -- - - - - Approach EB WB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0 12.59 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)- - - 480 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.012 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)- - - 12.6 HCM Lane LOS - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 120 HCM 7th TWSC Short Total PM 9: Prospect & RT Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st pm.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 1444 1489 20 0 13 Future Vol, veh/h 0 1444 1489 20 0 13 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length -- - - - 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 1553 1601 22 0 14 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All - 0 - 0 - 811 Stage 1 -- - - - - Stage 2 -- - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 - - - 0 322 Stage 1 0 - - - 0 - Stage 2 0 - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver -- - - - 322 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -- - - - - Stage 1 -- - - - - Stage 2 -- - - - - Approach EB WB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0 16.67 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)- - - 322 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.043 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)- - - 16.7 HCM Lane LOS - - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.1 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 121 HCM 7th AWSC Short Total AM 1: Center & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st am.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.9 Intersection LOS A Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 135 30 37 131 42 98 Future Vol, veh/h 135 30 37 131 42 98 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 159 35 44 154 49 115 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 8.9 9.1 8.6 HCM LOS A A A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %30% 0% 22% Vol Thru, %0% 82% 78% Vol Right, %70% 18% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 140 165 168 LT Vol 42 0 37 Through Vol 0 135 131 RT Vol 98 30 0 Lane Flow Rate 165 194 198 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.204 0.239 0.251 Departure Headway (Hd)4.457 4.429 4.572 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 805 811 785 Service Time 2.488 2.458 2.601 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.205 0.239 0.252 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 8.6 8.9 9.1 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th-tile Q 0.8 0.9 1 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 122 HCM 7th AWSC Short Total PM 1: Center & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st pm.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 10.6 Intersection LOS B Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 182 48 115 224 59 71 Future Vol, veh/h 182 48 115 224 59 71 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 196 52 124 241 63 76 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.7 11.7 9.4 HCM LOS A B A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %45% 0% 34% Vol Thru, %0% 79% 66% Vol Right, %55% 21% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 130 230 339 LT Vol 59 0 115 Through Vol 0 182 224 RT Vol 71 48 0 Lane Flow Rate 140 247 365 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.197 0.315 0.469 Departure Headway (Hd)5.064 4.579 4.635 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 705 782 776 Service Time 3.125 2.626 2.68 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.199 0.316 0.47 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.4 9.7 11.7 HCM Lane LOS A A B HCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 1.4 2.5 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 123 HCM 7th TWSC Short Total AM 5: Site Access & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st am.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.8 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 222 11 8 151 17 8 Future Vol, veh/h 222 11 8 151 17 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 261 13 9 178 20 9 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 274 0 464 268 Stage 1 - - - - 268 - Stage 2 - - - - 196 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1289 - 556 771 Stage 1 - - - - 777 - Stage 2 - - - - 837 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1289 - 552 771 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 552 - Stage 1 - - - - 777 - Stage 2 - - - - 830 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.39 11.23 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)607 - - 91 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.048 - - 0.007 - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)11.2 - - 7.8 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 - ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 124 HCM 7th TWSC Short Total PM 5: Site Access & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st pm.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 218 35 23 291 48 26 Future Vol, veh/h 218 35 23 291 48 26 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 242 39 26 323 53 29 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 281 0 636 262 Stage 1 - - - - 262 - Stage 2 - - - - 374 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1281 - 442 777 Stage 1 - - - - 782 - Stage 2 - - - - 695 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1281 - 431 777 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 431 - Stage 1 - - - - 782 - Stage 2 - - - - 678 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.58 13.39 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)511 - - 132 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.161 - - 0.02 - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)13.4 - - 7.9 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 - - 0.1 - ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 125 APPENDIX G ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 126 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Short Total AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st am full.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 66 856 62 225 619 87 50 140 242 16 44 20 Future Volume (veh/h) 66 856 62 225 619 87 50 140 242 16 44 20 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.76 0.71 0.85 0.71 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 76 984 66 259 711 92 57 161 83 18 51 6 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 522 2114 142 459 2090 270 218 323 195 157 323 195 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.63 0.63 0.08 0.66 0.66 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3372 226 1781 3153 408 1020 1870 1133 968 1870 1133 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 76 518 532 259 400 403 57 161 83 18 51 6 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1822 1781 1777 1783 1020 1870 1133 968 1870 1133 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.6 16.9 16.9 5.2 10.8 10.8 5.5 8.6 7.2 1.9 2.6 0.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.6 16.9 16.9 5.2 10.8 10.8 8.1 8.6 7.2 10.5 2.6 0.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 522 1114 1142 459 1178 1182 218 323 195 157 323 195 V/C Ratio(X) 0.15 0.47 0.47 0.56 0.34 0.34 0.26 0.50 0.42 0.11 0.16 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 561 1114 1142 546 1178 1182 315 502 304 250 502 304 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.5 10.8 10.8 8.1 8.1 8.1 42.2 41.2 40.6 46.0 38.7 37.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.4 1.4 1.1 0.8 0.8 0.6 1.2 1.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 6.5 6.7 1.8 4.0 4.0 1.4 4.0 2.1 0.5 1.2 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 6.7 12.2 12.2 9.2 8.9 8.9 42.8 42.4 42.1 46.3 38.9 37.9 LnGrp LOS A B B A A A D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1126 1062 301 75 Approach Delay, s/veh 11.8 8.9 42.4 40.6 Approach LOS B A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.5 12.6 73.9 23.5 8.6 77.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.5 13.0 52.0 28.5 6.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.5 7.2 18.9 10.6 3.6 12.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.4 4.0 1.1 0.0 2.9 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 15.1 HCM 7th LOS B ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 127 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Short Total AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st am full.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 34 18 58 34 11 65 Maximum Split (%) 30.9% 16.4% 52.7% 30.9% 10.0% 59.1% Minimum Split (s)23.5 11 26 24.5 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)79 3 21 79 3 14 End Time (s)3 21 79 3 14 79 Yield/Force Off (s) 107.5 16 73 107.5 9 73 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 96.5 16 60 96.5 9 62 Local Start Time (s)6 40 58 6 40 51 Local Yield (s)34.5 53 0 34.5 46 0 Local Yield 170(s)23.5 53 97 23.5 46 99 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 110 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 65 Offset: 73 (66%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 128 Queues Short Total AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st am full.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 76 1055 259 811 57 161 278 18 51 23 v/c Ratio 0.16 0.55 0.63 0.38 0.25 0.52 0.78 0.15 0.17 0.06 Control Delay (s/veh) 6.3 16.6 13.6 10.5 39.3 46.0 27.3 37.7 36.9 0.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 6.3 16.6 13.6 10.5 39.3 46.0 27.3 37.7 36.9 0.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 12 227 46 131 35 104 47 11 31 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 33 343 109 207 63 146 124 28 56 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 512 221 555 529 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 468 1926 429 2134 353 482 443 189 482 503 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.16 0.55 0.60 0.38 0.16 0.33 0.63 0.10 0.11 0.05 Intersection Summary ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 129 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Short Total PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st pm full.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 33 1041 68 281 1185 36 67 73 342 59 130 69 Future Volume (veh/h) 33 1041 68 281 1185 36 67 73 342 59 130 69 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.88 0.80 0.86 0.80 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 34 1084 68 293 1234 37 70 76 70 61 135 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 348 2194 138 441 2459 74 162 296 202 191 296 202 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.65 0.65 0.08 0.70 0.70 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3389 212 1781 3522 106 1096 1870 1276 1070 1870 1276 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 34 568 584 293 622 649 70 76 70 61 135 7 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1824 1781 1777 1850 1096 1870 1276 1070 1870 1276 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.8 19.9 19.9 6.0 19.5 19.6 7.4 4.3 5.9 6.4 7.9 0.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.8 19.9 19.9 6.0 19.5 19.6 15.3 4.3 5.9 10.6 7.9 0.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 348 1150 1181 441 1241 1292 162 296 202 191 296 202 V/C Ratio(X) 0.10 0.49 0.49 0.66 0.50 0.50 0.43 0.26 0.35 0.32 0.46 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 397 1150 1181 651 1241 1292 313 553 377 338 553 377 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 7.1 11.0 11.0 9.7 8.4 8.4 52.7 44.3 45.0 49.0 45.8 42.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.8 0.5 1.0 0.9 1.1 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 7.7 7.9 2.4 7.2 7.5 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.8 3.8 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 7.3 12.5 12.5 11.4 9.9 9.8 54.6 44.8 46.0 49.9 46.9 42.8 LnGrp LOS A B B B A A D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1186 1564 216 203 Approach Delay, s/veh 12.3 10.1 48.3 47.7 Approach LOS B B D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.5 13.8 82.7 23.5 7.7 88.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 34.5 23.0 46.0 34.5 6.0 63.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.6 8.0 21.9 17.3 2.8 21.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 0.8 4.4 0.7 0.0 5.3 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 16.0 HCM 7th LOS B ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 130 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Short Total PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st pm full.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 40 28 52 40 11 69 Maximum Split (%) 33.3% 23.3% 43.3% 33.3% 9.2% 57.5% Minimum Split (s) 23.5 11 26 24 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)16 56 84 16 56 67 End Time (s)56 84 16 56 67 16 Yield/Force Off (s)50.5 79 10 50.5 62 10 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 39.5 79 117 39.5 62 119 Local Start Time (s)6 46 74 6 46 57 Local Yield (s)40.5 69 0 40.5 52 0 Local Yield 170(s)29.5 69 107 29.5 52 109 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 120 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 70 Offset: 10 (8%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 131 Queues Short Total PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st pm full.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 34 1155 293 1272 70 76 356 61 135 72 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.64 0.63 0.54 0.49 0.28 0.77 0.39 0.50 0.22 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.7 23.4 16.9 11.1 56.3 45.6 19.0 51.2 51.8 2.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 7.7 23.4 16.9 11.1 56.3 45.6 19.0 51.2 51.8 2.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 5 317 69 253 50 52 22 43 96 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 18 #570 180 411 90 90 122 79 146 9 Internal Link Dist (ft) 674 171 555 522 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 311 1802 504 2345 283 532 595 307 532 530 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.11 0.64 0.58 0.54 0.25 0.14 0.60 0.20 0.25 0.14 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 132 HCM 7th TWSC Short Total AM 9: Prospect & Full Access Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st am full.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.2 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 1111 926 6 5 5 Future Vol, veh/h 3 1111 926 6 5 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 150 - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 4 1307 1089 7 6 6 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 1096 0 - 0 1754 548 Stage 1 - - - - 1093 - Stage 2 - - - - 661 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - - 6.84 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.84 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.84 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - - 3.52 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 632 - - - 76 480 Stage 1 - - - - 283 - Stage 2 - - - - 475 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 632 - - - 76 480 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 76 - Stage 1 - - - - 281 - Stage 2 - - - - 475 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0.03 0 35.12 HCM LOS E Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)632 - - - 131 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.006 - - - 0.09 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)10.7 - - - 35.1 HCM Lane LOS B - - - E HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.3 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 133 HCM 7th TWSC Short Total PM 9: Prospect & Full Access Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st pm full.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 11 1431 1489 20 13 13 Future Vol, veh/h 11 1431 1489 20 13 13 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 150 - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 12 1539 1601 22 14 14 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 1623 0 - 0 2405 811 Stage 1 - - - - 1612 - Stage 2 - - - - 793 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - - 6.84 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.84 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.84 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - - 3.52 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 397 - - - 28 322 Stage 1 - - - - 149 - Stage 2 - - - - 406 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 397 - - - 27 322 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 27 - Stage 1 - - - - 144 - Stage 2 - - - - 406 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0.11 0 147.97 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)397 - - - 49 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.03 - - - 0.566 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)14.3 - - - 148 HCM Lane LOS B - - - F HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 2.2 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 134 HCM 7th AWSC Short Total AM 1: Center & Lake Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st am full.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.8 Intersection LOS A Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 135 30 32 131 42 95 Future Vol, veh/h 135 30 32 131 42 95 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 159 35 38 154 49 112 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 8.8 9.1 8.6 HCM LOS A A A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %31% 0% 20% Vol Thru, %0% 82% 80% Vol Right, %69% 18% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 137 165 163 LT Vol 42 0 32 Through Vol 0 135 131 RT Vol 95 30 0 Lane Flow Rate 161 194 192 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.199 0.238 0.243 Departure Headway (Hd)4.448 4.412 4.556 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 806 813 788 Service Time 2.477 2.44 2.585 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.2 0.239 0.244 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 8.6 8.8 9.1 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 0.9 1 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 135 HCM 7th AWSC Short Total PM 1: Center & Lake Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st pm full.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 10.4 Intersection LOS B Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 182 48 102 224 59 60 Future Vol, veh/h 182 48 102 224 59 60 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 196 52 110 241 63 65 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.6 11.3 9.2 HCM LOS A B A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %50% 0% 31% Vol Thru, %0% 79% 69% Vol Right, %50% 21% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 119 230 326 LT Vol 59 0 102 Through Vol 0 182 224 RT Vol 60 48 0 Lane Flow Rate 128 247 351 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.18 0.311 0.448 Departure Headway (Hd)5.06 4.528 4.596 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 705 791 782 Service Time 3.116 2.57 2.635 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.182 0.312 0.449 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.2 9.6 11.3 HCM Lane LOS A A B HCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 1.3 2.3 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 136 HCM 7th TWSC Short Total AM 5: Site Access & Lake Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st am full.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.7 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 222 8 8 151 12 8 Future Vol, veh/h 222 8 8 151 12 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 261 9 9 178 14 9 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 271 0 462 266 Stage 1 - - - - 266 - Stage 2 - - - - 196 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1293 - 558 773 Stage 1 - - - - 779 - Stage 2 - - - - 837 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1293 - 553 773 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 553 - Stage 1 - - - - 779 - Stage 2 - - - - 830 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.39 10.99 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)624 - - 91 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.038 - - 0.007 - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)11 - - 7.8 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 137 HCM 7th TWSC Short Total PM 5: Site Access & Lake Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report st pm full.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 218 24 23 291 35 26 Future Vol, veh/h 218 24 23 291 35 26 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 242 27 26 323 39 29 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 269 0 630 256 Stage 1 - - - - 256 - Stage 2 - - - - 374 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1295 - 446 783 Stage 1 - - - - 787 - Stage 2 - - - - 695 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1295 - 435 783 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 435 - Stage 1 - - - - 787 - Stage 2 - - - - 679 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.57 12.68 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)537 - - 132 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.126 - - 0.02 - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)12.7 - - 7.8 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 0.1 - ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 138 APPENDIX H ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 139 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Long Total AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt am.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 80 1002 73 263 725 102 59 165 282 23 52 23 Future Volume (veh/h) 80 1002 73 263 725 102 59 165 282 23 52 23 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.76 0.72 0.88 0.72 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 89 1113 77 292 806 104 66 183 145 26 58 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 476 2083 144 420 2086 269 214 323 196 142 323 196 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.62 0.62 0.09 0.66 0.66 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3365 233 1781 3153 407 1019 1870 1134 922 1870 1134 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 89 587 603 292 454 456 66 183 145 26 58 9 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1820 1781 1777 1783 1019 1870 1134 922 1870 1134 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.0 20.7 20.7 6.0 12.8 12.8 6.5 9.9 13.3 2.9 2.9 0.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.0 20.7 20.7 6.0 12.8 12.8 9.4 9.9 13.3 12.8 2.9 0.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 476 1100 1127 420 1175 1180 214 323 196 142 323 196 V/C Ratio(X) 0.19 0.53 0.53 0.69 0.39 0.39 0.31 0.57 0.74 0.18 0.18 0.05 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 513 1100 1127 495 1175 1180 312 502 304 230 502 304 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 7.0 11.9 11.9 11.2 8.5 8.5 42.9 41.7 43.2 47.6 38.9 37.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 1.9 1.8 3.4 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.6 5.4 0.6 0.3 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 8.1 8.3 2.9 4.7 4.7 1.7 4.6 4.0 0.7 1.4 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 7.1 13.8 13.8 14.6 9.4 9.4 43.7 43.3 48.6 48.2 39.1 38.0 LnGrp LOS A B B B A A D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1279 1202 394 93 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.3 10.7 45.3 41.6 Approach LOS B B D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.5 13.4 73.1 23.5 8.7 77.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.5 13.0 52.0 28.5 6.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 14.8 8.0 22.7 15.3 4.0 14.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.4 4.7 1.4 0.0 3.4 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 17.4 HCM 7th LOS B ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 140 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Long Total AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt am.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 34 18 58 34 11 65 Maximum Split (%) 30.9% 16.4% 52.7% 30.9% 10.0% 59.1% Minimum Split (s)23.5 11 26 24.5 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)79 3 21 79 3 14 End Time (s)3 21 79 3 14 79 Yield/Force Off (s) 107.5 16 73 107.5 9 73 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 96.5 16 60 96.5 9 62 Local Start Time (s)6 40 58 6 40 51 Local Yield (s)34.5 53 0 34.5 46 0 Local Yield 170(s)23.5 53 97 23.5 46 99 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 110 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 75 Offset: 73 (66%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 141 Queues Long Total AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt am.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 89 1194 292 919 66 183 313 26 58 26 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.68 0.76 0.45 0.26 0.52 0.86 0.20 0.17 0.07 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.8 22.6 29.2 12.6 37.4 43.7 39.5 37.2 34.8 0.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 7.8 22.6 29.2 12.6 37.4 43.7 39.5 37.2 34.8 0.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 16 343 87 172 40 116 90 15 34 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 39 435 #260 256 74 171 #197 39 65 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 512 221 555 529 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 406 1745 385 2058 351 482 430 182 482 503 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.22 0.68 0.76 0.45 0.19 0.38 0.73 0.14 0.12 0.05 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 142 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Long Total PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt pm.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 45 1213 80 329 1388 42 79 90 397 81 152 81 Future Volume (veh/h) 45 1213 80 329 1388 42 79 90 397 81 152 81 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.91 0.83 0.90 0.83 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 47 1264 80 343 1446 43 82 94 145 84 158 13 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 278 2051 130 390 2367 70 177 338 238 202 338 238 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.61 0.61 0.10 0.67 0.67 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3387 214 1781 3523 105 1110 1870 1314 1029 1870 1314 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 47 662 682 343 728 761 82 94 145 84 158 13 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1824 1781 1777 1850 1110 1870 1314 1029 1870 1314 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 28.1 28.3 8.2 27.4 27.5 8.6 5.2 12.2 9.2 9.1 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 28.1 28.3 8.2 27.4 27.5 17.6 5.2 12.2 14.4 9.1 1.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 278 1076 1104 390 1194 1243 177 338 238 202 338 238 V/C Ratio(X) 0.17 0.62 0.62 0.88 0.61 0.61 0.46 0.28 0.61 0.42 0.47 0.05 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 320 1076 1104 567 1194 1243 304 553 389 320 553 389 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.8 14.9 14.9 19.6 11.0 11.0 51.8 42.4 45.2 48.6 44.0 40.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 2.6 2.6 10.7 2.3 2.3 1.9 0.4 2.5 1.4 1.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 11.4 11.7 7.2 10.4 10.9 2.5 2.4 4.1 2.5 4.3 0.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 10.1 17.5 17.5 30.3 13.3 13.2 53.7 42.8 47.8 50.0 45.0 40.7 LnGrp LOS B B B C B B D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1391 1832 321 255 Approach Delay, s/veh 17.3 16.4 47.8 46.4 Approach LOS B B D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 26.2 16.1 77.7 26.2 8.2 85.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 34.5 23.0 46.0 34.5 6.0 63.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 16.4 10.2 30.3 19.6 3.2 29.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 0.9 4.9 1.1 0.0 6.8 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 21.4 HCM 7th LOS C ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 143 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Long Total PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt pm.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 40 28 52 40 11 69 Maximum Split (%) 33.3% 23.3% 43.3% 33.3% 9.2% 57.5% Minimum Split (s) 23.5 11 26 24 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)16 56 84 16 56 67 End Time (s)56 84 16 56 67 16 Yield/Force Off (s)50.5 79 10 50.5 62 10 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 39.5 79 117 39.5 62 119 Local Start Time (s)6 46 74 6 46 57 Local Yield (s)40.5 69 0 40.5 52 0 Local Yield 170(s)29.5 69 107 29.5 52 109 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 120 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 90 Offset: 10 (8%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 144 Queues Long Total PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt pm.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 47 1347 343 1490 82 94 414 84 158 84 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.82 0.81 0.68 0.50 0.29 0.86 0.48 0.49 0.23 Control Delay (s/veh) 11.0 33.1 44.9 17.0 52.0 42.0 29.1 50.4 47.3 3.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 11.0 33.1 44.9 17.0 52.0 42.0 29.1 50.4 47.3 3.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 7 449 179 336 59 65 78 61 114 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 27 #738 #374 607 96 98 190 97 154 18 Internal Link Dist (ft) 674 171 555 522 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 235 1635 435 2190 271 532 590 290 532 530 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.82 0.79 0.68 0.30 0.18 0.70 0.29 0.30 0.16 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 145 HCM 7th TWSC Long Total AM 9: Prospect & RT Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt am.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 1307 1085 6 0 5 Future Vol, veh/h 0 1307 1085 6 0 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length -- - - - 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 1538 1276 7 0 6 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All - 0 - 0 - 642 Stage 1 -- - - - - Stage 2 -- - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 - - - 0 417 Stage 1 0 - - - 0 - Stage 2 0 - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver -- - - - 417 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -- - - - - Stage 1 -- - - - - Stage 2 -- - - - - Approach EB WB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0 13.76 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)- - - 417 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.014 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)- - - 13.8 HCM Lane LOS - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 146 HCM 7th TWSC Long Total PM 9: Prospect & RT Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt pm.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 1691 1746 20 0 13 Future Vol, veh/h 0 1691 1746 20 0 13 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length -- - - - 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 1818 1877 22 0 14 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All - 0 - 0 - 949 Stage 1 -- - - - - Stage 2 -- - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 - - - 0 261 Stage 1 0 - - - 0 - Stage 2 0 - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver -- - - - 261 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -- - - - - Stage 1 -- - - - - Stage 2 -- - - - - Approach EB WB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0 19.57 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)- - - 261 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.054 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)- - - 19.6 HCM Lane LOS - - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.2 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 147 HCM 7th AWSC Long Total AM 1: Center & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt am.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.5 Intersection LOS A Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 159 36 43 153 49 114 Future Vol, veh/h 159 36 43 153 49 114 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 187 42 51 180 58 134 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.5 9.8 9.2 HCM LOS A A A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %30% 0% 22% Vol Thru, %0% 82% 78% Vol Right, %70% 18% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 163 195 196 LT Vol 49 0 43 Through Vol 0 159 153 RT Vol 114 36 0 Lane Flow Rate 192 229 231 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.246 0.29 0.301 Departure Headway (Hd)4.621 4.546 4.692 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 775 787 763 Service Time 2.666 2.59 2.735 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.248 0.291 0.303 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.2 9.5 9.8 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th-tile Q 1 1.2 1.3 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 148 HCM 7th AWSC Long Total PM 1: Center & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt pm.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 12 Intersection LOS B Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 213 57 131 259 69 81 Future Vol, veh/h 213 57 131 259 69 81 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 229 61 141 278 74 87 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 10.7 13.7 10 HCM LOS B B A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %46% 0% 34% Vol Thru, %0% 79% 66% Vol Right, %54% 21% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 150 270 390 LT Vol 69 0 131 Through Vol 0 213 259 RT Vol 81 57 0 Lane Flow Rate 161 290 419 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.237 0.381 0.555 Departure Headway (Hd)5.295 4.723 4.762 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 671 755 751 Service Time 3.383 2.792 2.825 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.24 0.384 0.558 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 10 10.7 13.7 HCM Lane LOS A B B HCM 95th-tile Q 0.9 1.8 3.5 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 149 HCM 7th TWSC Long Total AM 5: Site Access & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt am.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.7 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 262 11 8 179 17 8 Future Vol, veh/h 262 11 8 179 17 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 308 13 9 211 20 9 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 321 0 544 315 Stage 1 - - - - 315 - Stage 2 - - - - 229 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1239 - 500 726 Stage 1 - - - - 740 - Stage 2 - - - - 809 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1239 - 496 726 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 496 - Stage 1 - - - - 740 - Stage 2 - - - - 802 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.34 11.89 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)552 - - 77 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.053 - - 0.008 - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)11.9 - - 7.9 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 - ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 150 HCM 7th TWSC Long Total PM 5: Site Access & Lake Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt pm.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 259 35 23 342 48 26 Future Vol, veh/h 259 35 23 342 48 26 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 288 39 26 380 53 29 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 327 0 738 307 Stage 1 - - - - 307 - Stage 2 - - - - 431 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1233 - 385 733 Stage 1 - - - - 746 - Stage 2 - - - - 655 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1233 - 375 733 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 375 - Stage 1 - - - - 746 - Stage 2 - - - - 638 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.5 14.71 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)453 - - 113 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.182 - - 0.021 - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)14.7 - - 8 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.7 - - 0.1 - ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 151 APPENDIX I ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 152 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Long Total AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt am full.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 78 1004 73 263 725 102 59 164 283 18 52 23 Future Volume (veh/h) 78 1004 73 263 725 102 59 164 283 18 52 23 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.76 0.72 0.88 0.72 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 87 1116 77 292 806 104 66 182 146 20 58 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 476 2083 144 420 2087 269 214 323 196 142 323 196 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.62 0.62 0.09 0.66 0.66 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3365 232 1781 3153 407 1019 1870 1134 922 1870 1134 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 87 589 604 292 454 456 66 182 146 20 58 9 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1820 1781 1777 1783 1019 1870 1134 922 1870 1134 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.9 20.8 20.8 6.0 12.8 12.8 6.5 9.8 13.5 2.2 2.9 0.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.9 20.8 20.8 6.0 12.8 12.8 9.4 9.8 13.5 12.0 2.9 0.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 476 1100 1127 420 1176 1180 214 323 196 142 323 196 V/C Ratio(X) 0.18 0.54 0.54 0.70 0.39 0.39 0.31 0.56 0.75 0.14 0.18 0.05 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 513 1100 1127 494 1176 1180 312 502 304 230 502 304 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 7.0 11.9 11.9 11.3 8.5 8.5 42.9 41.7 43.2 47.2 38.9 37.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 1.9 1.8 3.4 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.5 5.6 0.4 0.3 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 8.1 8.3 2.9 4.7 4.7 1.7 4.6 4.0 0.5 1.4 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 7.1 13.8 13.8 14.8 9.4 9.4 43.7 43.2 48.8 47.7 39.1 38.0 LnGrp LOS A B B B A A D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1280 1202 394 87 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.3 10.7 45.4 41.0 Approach LOS B B D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.5 13.4 73.1 23.5 8.7 77.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.5 13.0 52.0 28.5 6.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 14.0 8.0 22.8 15.5 3.9 14.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.4 4.8 1.4 0.0 3.4 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 17.3 HCM 7th LOS B ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 153 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Long Total AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt am full.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 34 18 58 34 11 65 Maximum Split (%) 30.9% 16.4% 52.7% 30.9% 10.0% 59.1% Minimum Split (s)23.5 11 26 24.5 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)79 3 21 79 3 14 End Time (s)3 21 79 3 14 79 Yield/Force Off (s) 107.5 16 73 107.5 9 73 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 96.5 16 60 96.5 9 62 Local Start Time (s)6 40 58 6 40 51 Local Yield (s)34.5 53 0 34.5 46 0 Local Yield 170(s)23.5 53 97 23.5 46 99 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 110 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 75 Offset: 73 (66%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 154 Queues Long Total AM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt am full.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 87 1197 292 919 66 182 314 20 58 26 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.69 0.76 0.45 0.26 0.52 0.87 0.15 0.17 0.06 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.9 22.8 29.7 12.7 37.2 43.4 39.9 35.5 34.7 0.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 7.9 22.8 29.7 12.7 37.2 43.4 39.9 35.5 34.7 0.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 16 346 89 173 39 115 92 12 34 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 39 437 #262 256 74 170 #203 32 65 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 512 221 555 529 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 404 1739 383 2055 351 482 429 184 482 503 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.22 0.69 0.76 0.45 0.19 0.38 0.73 0.11 0.12 0.05 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 155 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Long Total PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt pm full.syn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 38 1220 80 329 1388 42 79 86 401 68 152 81 Future Volume (veh/h) 38 1220 80 329 1388 42 79 86 401 68 152 81 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.91 0.83 0.90 0.83 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1796 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 40 1271 80 343 1446 43 82 90 149 71 158 13 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 276 2046 129 390 2373 70 177 339 238 204 339 238 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.60 0.60 0.10 0.67 0.67 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3388 213 1781 3523 105 1110 1870 1314 1028 1870 1314 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 40 665 686 343 728 761 82 90 149 71 158 13 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1824 1781 1777 1850 1110 1870 1314 1028 1870 1314 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.0 28.4 28.6 8.4 27.2 27.3 8.6 5.0 12.6 7.7 9.1 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.0 28.4 28.6 8.4 27.2 27.3 17.6 5.0 12.6 12.6 9.1 1.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 276 1073 1102 390 1197 1246 177 339 238 204 339 238 V/C Ratio(X) 0.14 0.62 0.62 0.88 0.61 0.61 0.46 0.27 0.63 0.35 0.47 0.05 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 322 1073 1102 564 1197 1246 304 553 389 322 553 389 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.8 15.0 15.1 20.0 10.8 10.9 51.8 42.3 45.4 47.7 44.0 40.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 2.7 2.7 10.8 2.3 2.2 1.9 0.4 2.7 1.0 1.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 11.5 11.9 7.2 10.4 10.8 2.5 2.3 4.2 2.0 4.3 0.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 10.0 17.7 17.7 30.8 13.1 13.1 53.7 42.7 48.1 48.7 45.0 40.7 LnGrp LOS B B B C B B D D D D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1391 1832 321 242 Approach Delay, s/veh 17.5 16.4 48.0 45.8 Approach LOS B B D D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 26.2 16.3 77.5 26.2 7.9 85.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 34.5 23.0 46.0 34.5 6.0 63.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 14.6 10.4 30.6 19.6 3.0 29.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 0.9 4.9 1.1 0.0 6.8 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 21.4 HCM 7th LOS C ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 156 Timing Report, Sorted By Phase Long Total PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt pm full.syn Phase Number 2 3 4 6 7 8 Movement SBTL WBL EBTL NBTL EBL WBTL Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize Recall Mode None None C-Max None None C-Max Maximum Split (s) 40 28 52 40 11 69 Maximum Split (%) 33.3% 23.3% 43.3% 33.3% 9.2% 57.5% Minimum Split (s) 23.5 11 26 24 11 25 Yellow Time (s) 3 5 4 4 5 4 All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0 2 1.5 0 2 Minimum Initial (s)7 4 10 7 4 10 Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 Time Before Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce (s)0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk Time (s)7 7 7 7 Flash Don't Walk (s)11 13 11 11 Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Start Time (s)16 56 84 16 56 67 End Time (s)56 84 16 56 67 16 Yield/Force Off (s)50.5 79 10 50.5 62 10 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 39.5 79 117 39.5 62 119 Local Start Time (s)6 46 74 6 46 57 Local Yield (s)40.5 69 0 40.5 52 0 Local Yield 170(s)29.5 69 107 29.5 52 109 Intersection Summary Cycle Length 120 Control Type Actuated-Coordinated Natural Cycle 90 Offset: 10 (8%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL, Start of Yellow Splits and Phases: 84: Centre/Center & Prospect ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 157 Queues Long Total PM 84: Centre/Center & Prospect Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt pm full.syn Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 40 1354 343 1490 82 90 418 71 158 84 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.83 0.82 0.68 0.49 0.28 0.87 0.39 0.49 0.23 Control Delay (s/veh) 10.7 33.7 45.8 17.1 51.4 41.4 29.8 46.5 47.0 3.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 10.7 33.7 45.8 17.1 51.4 41.4 29.8 46.5 47.0 3.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 6 458 182 339 59 62 82 50 114 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 24 #745 #377 607 96 94 196 83 154 18 Internal Link Dist (ft) 674 171 555 522 Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 135 135 180 150 Base Capacity (vph) 233 1628 433 2186 272 532 590 294 532 530 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.17 0.83 0.79 0.68 0.30 0.17 0.71 0.24 0.30 0.16 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 158 HCM 7th TWSC Long Total AM 9: Prospect & Full Access Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt am full.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.2 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 1302 1085 6 5 5 Future Vol, veh/h 3 1302 1085 6 5 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 150 - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 4 1532 1276 7 6 6 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 1284 0 - 0 2053 642 Stage 1 - - - - 1280 - Stage 2 - - - - 773 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - - 6.84 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.84 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.84 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - - 3.52 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 536 - - - 48 417 Stage 1 - - - - 225 - Stage 2 - - - - 416 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 536 - - - 48 417 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 48 - Stage 1 - - - - 223 - Stage 2 - - - - 416 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0.03 0 53.68 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)536 - - - 86 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 - - - 0.138 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)11.8 - - - 53.7 HCM Lane LOS B - - - F HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.5 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 159 HCM 7th TWSC Long Total PM 9: Prospect & Full Access Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt pm full.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.2 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 11 1678 1746 20 13 13 Future Vol, veh/h 11 1678 1746 20 13 13 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 150 - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 12 1804 1877 22 14 14 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 1899 0 - 0 2814 949 Stage 1 - - - - 1888 - Stage 2 - - - - 926 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - - 6.84 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.84 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.84 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - - 3.52 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 310 - - - 14 261 Stage 1 - - - - 105 - Stage 2 - - - - 346 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 310 - - - ~ 14 261 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - ~ 14 - Stage 1 - - - - 101 - Stage 2 - - - - 346 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0.11 0 $ 415.57 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)310 - - - 26 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.038 - - - 1.068 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)17.1 - - -$ 415.6 HCM Lane LOS C - - - F HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 3.4 Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 160 HCM 7th AWSC Long Total AM 1: Center & Lake Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt am full.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.4 Intersection LOS A Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 159 36 38 153 49 111 Future Vol, veh/h 159 36 38 153 49 111 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 187 42 45 180 58 131 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.4 9.7 9.1 HCM LOS A A A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %31% 0% 20% Vol Thru, %0% 82% 80% Vol Right, %69% 18% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 160 195 191 LT Vol 49 0 38 Through Vol 0 159 153 RT Vol 111 36 0 Lane Flow Rate 188 229 225 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.241 0.289 0.292 Departure Headway (Hd)4.609 4.531 4.678 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 777 791 766 Service Time 2.653 2.571 2.72 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.242 0.29 0.294 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.1 9.4 9.7 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th-tile Q 0.9 1.2 1.2 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 161 HCM 7th AWSC Long Total PM 1: Center & Lake Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt pm full.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 11.7 Intersection LOS B Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 213 57 118 259 69 70 Future Vol, veh/h 213 57 118 259 69 70 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 229 61 127 278 74 75 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Left NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 10.6 13.1 9.9 HCM LOS B B A Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 Vol Left, %50% 0% 31% Vol Thru, %0% 79% 69% Vol Right, %50% 21% 0% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 139 270 377 LT Vol 69 0 118 Through Vol 0 213 259 RT Vol 70 57 0 Lane Flow Rate 149 290 405 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X)0.219 0.377 0.532 Departure Headway (Hd)5.284 4.669 4.721 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 673 766 758 Service Time 3.367 2.731 2.778 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.221 0.379 0.534 HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.9 10.6 13.1 HCM Lane LOS A B B HCM 95th-tile Q 0.8 1.8 3.2 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 162 HCM 7th TWSC Long Total AM 5: Site Access & Lake Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt am full.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.6 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 262 8 8 179 12 8 Future Vol, veh/h 262 8 8 179 12 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 308 9 9 211 14 9 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 318 0 542 313 Stage 1 - - - - 313 - Stage 2 - - - - 229 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1242 - 501 727 Stage 1 - - - - 741 - Stage 2 - - - - 809 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1242 - 497 727 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 497 - Stage 1 - - - - 741 - Stage 2 - - - - 802 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.34 11.6 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)569 - - 77 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.041 - - 0.008 - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)11.6 - - 7.9 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 - ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 163 HCM 7th TWSC Long Total PM 5: Site Access & Lake Full Access Scenario 1 City of Fort Collins Signal Timing 01/06/2025 Synchro 12 Light Report lt pm full.syn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 259 24 23 342 35 26 Future Vol, veh/h 259 24 23 342 35 26 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 288 27 26 380 39 29 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 314 0 732 301 Stage 1 - - - - 301 - Stage 2 - - - - 431 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1246 - 388 739 Stage 1 - - - - 751 - Stage 2 - - - - 655 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1246 - 378 739 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 378 - Stage 1 - - - - 751 - Stage 2 - - - - 638 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.5 13.78 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)477 - - 113 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.142 - - 0.021 - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)13.8 - - 8 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0.1 - ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 164 APPENDIX J ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 165 Prospect Lake Ce n t r e Co l l e g e SCALE: 1"=500' PEDESTRIAN INFLUENCE AREA DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, April 2024 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 166 Pedestrian LOS Worksheet Project Location Classification: Pedestrian District Description of Applicable Destination Area Within 1320’ Destination Area Classification Directness Continuity Street Crossings Visual Interest & Amenities Security CSU Campus School CSU Student Housing Residential CSU Student Housing Residential Commercial Uses Commercial Commercial Uses Commercial ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 167 Prospect Lake Ce n t r e Co l l e g e SCALE: 1"=500' BICYCLE INFLUENCE AREA DELICH ASSOCIATES Prospect Plaza Student Housing TIS, April 2024 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 168 Bicycle LOS Worksheet Minimum Actual Proposed Base Connectivity: C B B Specific connections to priority sites: Description of Applicable Destination Area Within 1320’ Destination Area Classification CSU Campus School A A ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 169 Page 1 of 3 www.sunnycivil.com January 20, 2025 RE: Prospect Plaza Conceptual Drainage Summary Dear Sir or Madam: The purpose of this letter is to summarize the proposed conceptual drainage patterns for the upcoming Prospect Plaza development. The project site is located at 304 and 318 West Prospect Road in Fort Collins, Colorado 80526. The site is bordered by Prospect Road on the south, Lake Street on the north, and by Colorado State University (CSU) owned properties on the west and east. The proposed development is to be comprised of a multi-story, multi-unit student housing complex. The complex will also include a small commercial area and a multilevel parking garage. Additionally, the existing site has a floodplain that is mapped by CSU’s PCSWMM floodplain model. Flooding is deepest in Lake Street and extends south into the site. In order to accommodate the proposed development, the floodplain boundary within the site will be adjusted while maintaining the existing flood volume on-site. The proposed development will accommodate this floodplain volume within open space in the north portion of the site and within the proposed driveways on the west and east sides of the building. Additionally, the northwest portion of the building will not have a ground level and will instead be elevated on structural columns. The finished floor elevation of the residential portion of the proposed building will be set at least 2 feet above the base flood elevation (BFE), and the commercial portion will be set at least 1 foot above the BFE. An update to CSU’s floodplain model will be completed to ensure the BFE used for design is accurate. A summary of the site’s overall composite imperviousness in the pre-development condition and the post- development condition is detailed below in Table 1. Table 1. Imperviousness Summary Condition Composite Imperviousness (%) Pre-Development 94.8 Post-Development 75.1 Because the overall imperviousness of the proposed development will be less than that of the existing site, traditional stormwater detention is not required. However, the Prospect Plaza development will aim to implement Low-Impact Development (LID) water quality treatment measures via various bioretention areas, otherwise known as rain gardens. These rain gardens, in conjunction with a proposed storm sewer pipe network, will be strategically located and designed throughout the site in order to capture 75% of the stormwater runoff that is to be generated by the impervious areas. Once captured, the rain garden’s engineered media and vegetation facilitate filtration, adsorption, absorption, and biological processes that retain stormwater pollutants and enhance infiltration capabilities. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 170 Page 2 of 3 www.sunnycivil.com There are four (4) rain gardens proposed for the development. A quick description of each rain garden and its respective tributary area is as follows: Rain Garden 1 (RG1) is located in the northwest corner of the property. RG1 will treat stormwater runoff generated within the western roadway and parking stalls. Rain Garden 2 (RG2) is located in the northeast corner of the property. RG2 will treat stormwater runoff generated within portions of the northern courtyard, the central courtyard, and the northern half of the proposed roof area. Rain Garden 3 (RG3) is located in the southwest corner of the property. RG3 will treat stormwater runoff generated within the parking garage, the southwest courtyard, and the southwest portion of the proposed roof area. Rain Garden 4 (RG4) is located in the southeast corner of the property. RG4 will treat stormwater runoff generated within the southeast courtyard and the southeast portion of the proposed roof area. The preliminary delineation of each of these rain gardens’ tributary area is depicted within the Proposed Drainage Basin Map, which is included within this letter. Also included within this letter are the Rational Method and Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) calculations for these aforementioned conceptual drainage basins and rain gardens. These calculations have determined the amount of stormwater runoff that each of the proposed rain gardens will be designed to capture and treat. A summary of these volumes are as follows: Table 2. Rain Garden Summary Rain Garden I.D. Required WQCV (cubic feet) RG1 806.7 RG2 1,440.4 RG3 1,433.1 RG4 210.8 Additional storm sewer infrastructure will be provided within the rain gardens in order to provide a controlled release into the public storm sewer infrastructure. Excluding the central courtyard, runoff generated during the major storm event will be designed to flow overland and directly into the public roadways. The proposed storm sewer infrastructure within the central courtyard will be designed to convey the major storm event. In the extreme case where runoff may exceed the major storm event, emergency overflow paths have been designed for the central courtyard area. These paths will direct stormwater into the eastern emergency access drive without flooding the adjacent buildings. The Proposed Drainage Basin Map also details three (3) additional offsite basins, which represent areas that are not able to be routed to the proposed rain gardens. Instead, each of the offsite basins will direct runoff directly into the public roadways. A quick description of each offsite basin is as follows: ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 171 Page 3 of 3 www.sunnycivil.com Basin OS1 is comprised primarily of the lawn and sidewalk area along Prospect Road. This area is downhill of the southern rain gardens and would require major impacts to the public roadways in order to re-direct stormwater runoff back towards any proposed LID measures. Basin OS2 is comprised primarily of the eastern emergency access path and portions of the northern courtyard. If this area were to be routed to a proposed rain garden, the resulting garden would be much larger and much deeper than what is allowable or functional. However, unlike the western access drive located within Basin RG1, the emergency access does not receive regular vehicular traffic. Therefore, the western drive was considered more of a treatment priority. Additionally, 75% of the proposed impervious area will still be receiving treatment even with Basin OS2 being directed offsite. Basin OS3 is comprised primarily of the pavement area above Arthur’s Ditch, which runs along the site’s western property line. Re-directing stormwater runoff generated within area towards a proposed LID measure would require large re-designs of the ditch itself. A full drainage report will be prepared for the Prospect Plaza development as the approval process progresses. All proposed stormwater infrastructure and facilities for the site will be designed in accordance with the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (December 2018). If you have any questions or need any further information, please contact me at (913) 709-5579 or at mwalter@sunnycivil.com. Thank you, Sunny Civil Megan Walter, PE Project Manager ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 172 5002 5007 50 0 4 5003 500 3 500 3 ST ST ST ST SS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS S S S S F.O. VAULT WV WV D G HYDWV S GAS EL E C ELEC C.O. G C.O. ELEC W S C.O. C C ELEC ELEC ELECD ELEC G F.O.CS ELECELEC GAS PARKING GARAGE FFE = 5008.72 BUS STOP NO THRU TRAFFIC NO PARKING PARKING BY PERMIT ONLY LAKE STREET GARAGE STOP VISITORS PARKING GATE GATE SPEED BUMP #### CP - N:124303.36 E:193249.96 ELEV=5001.47 DESC: ??? E E E E E E E E TCT V TCTV G G G G G G G G G G G G G GWV LL ST STORM STRUCTURE INV(NE) 4998.74 12" PVC STORM INLET RIM = 5007.24 INV(N) 5004.84 10" PVC INV(S) 5004.84 10" PVC STORM INLET RIM = 5000.95 INV(N) 4998.96 10" METAL INV(SW) 4998.36 12" PVC STORM INLET RIM = 5000.80 INV(N) 4998.16 12" METAL INV(S) 4998.16 12" METAL STORM INLET RIM = 5002.00 INV(N) 4999.80 8" PVC STORM INLET RIM = 5007.09 INV(S) 5003.86 10" PVC ARTHUR DITCH MANHOLE RIM = 5003.71 TOP OF CULVERT = 5002.96 BOTTOM OF CULVERT = 4997.41 ARTHUR DITCH MANHOLE RIM = 5002.72 BOTTOM OF CULVERT = 4997.57 STORM INLET RIM = 5007.73 INV(S) = 5005 .52 10" PVC ST ST STORM STRUCTURE INV(W) 4991.28 36" RCP INV(E) 4991.24 36" RCP #### CP - N:123796.39 E:193515.26 ELEV=5005.82 DESC: ??? #### CP - N:123798.01 E:193140.79 ELEV=5007.92 DESC: ??? SA N O' S " SANITARY MANHOLE RIM = 5002.11 INV(W) 4994.89 10" VCP INV(E) 4994.86 10" VCP INV(S) 4996.56 6" VCP (ABANDONED) SANITARY MANHOLE RIM = 5002.72 INV(W) 4994.65 10" VCP INV(E) 4994.61 10" VCP INV(S) 4994.71 8" PVC OLE 5.32 9.97 BLE FOUND ILLEGIBLE 1 INCH DIAMETER ORANGE PLASTIC CAP REBAR SIZE UNKNOWN ED BUMP 6" C O N C R E T E W A L L PRELIMI N A R Y T T T± ± ± ± ± -0.60%-0.25% ± ± ± ± ± ± ± 11/05/2024DATE: EMDRAWN BY: 024-015PROJECT NO: PR O S P E C T P L A Z A RE V I S I O N S # D A T E D E S C R I P T I O N SU N N Y C I V I L SHEET CO N C E P T U A L P L A N S C: \ U s e r s \ M a t t B a r r \ S u n n y C i v i l D r o p b o x \ P r o j e c t s \ 0 2 4 - 0 1 5 P r o s p e c t P l a z a \ 4 0 - D e s i g n \ R e p o r t s \ D r a i n a g e \ C A D \ P B A S N _ 0 2 4 0 1 5 . d w g 1 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 2 : 1 4 P M M a t t B a r r CALL 811 72 HOURS PRIOR TO DIGGING, GRADING, OR EXCAVATING FOR THE MARKING OF UNDERGROUND, MEMBER UTILITIES. SUNNY CIVIL HAS USED THE BEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION TO PLOT UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FIELD VERIFICATION OF UTILITY LOCATIONS AND DEPTHS PRIOR TO COSTRUCTION. PRELIMINARY 1 N PR O P O S E D D R A I N A G E B A S I N M A P ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 173 Project Name:Prospect Plaza Project Number :024-015 Client:0 Basin Name:0 Asphalt, Concrete Rooftop Gravel Lawns, Clayey, <2%C C*Cf (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres)2, 5, 10 100 (%) EX1 Existing Site N/A 3.439 0.920 0.069 0.107 4.534 0.93 1.00 94.76% Asphalt, Concrete Rooftop Gravel Lawns, Clayey, <2%C C*Cf (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres)2, 5, 10 100 (%) 1A Western Drive Aisle RG1 0.538 - - 0.092 0.630 0.84 1.00 85.72% 2A Northern Rooftop Area RG2 - 1.072 - - 1.072 0.95 1.00 90.00% 2B Centeral Courtyard RG2 0.078 - - 0.206 0.284 0.41 0.51 28.92% 2C Northeast Raingarden RG2 - - - 0.096 0.096 0.20 0.25 2.00% 3A Parking Garage RG3 0.629 - - - 0.629 0.95 1.00 100.00% 3B Southwest Rooftop Area RG3 - 0.332 - - 0.332 0.95 1.00 90.00% 3C Southwest Raingarden RG3 - - - 0.081 0.081 0.20 0.25 2.00% 4A Southeast Rooftop Area RG4 - 0.169 - - 0.169 0.95 1.00 90.00% 4B Southeast Raingarden RG4 - - - 0.084 0.084 0.20 0.25 2.00% Asphalt, Concrete Rooftop Gravel Lawns, Clayey, <2%C C*Cf (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres)2, 5, 10 100 (%) RG1 NW RG N/A 0.538 - - 0.092 0.630 0.84 1.00 85.72% RG2 NE RG N/A 0.078 1.072 - 0.302 1.451 0.79 0.99 72.24% RG3 SW RG N/A 0.629 0.332 - 0.081 1.041 0.89 1.00 89.23% RG4 SE RG N/A - 0.169 - 0.084 0.254 0.70 0.88 60.69% OS1 Offsite to South N/A 0.107 - - 0.071 0.178 0.65 0.81 60.88% OS2 Offsite to North N/A 0.557 - - 0.361 0.919 0.66 0.82 61.48% OS3 Arthurs Ditch N/A 0.061 - - - 0.061 0.95 1.00 100.00% TOTAL AREA Basin Description Major Basin Routing Surface Type TOTAL AREA Percent Impervious Runoff Coefficients Runoff Coefficients Percent Impervious Surface Type TOTAL AREA Basin Name Basin Description Major Basin Routing Major Basin RoutingBasin Description RATIONAL METHOD CALCULATIONS: COMPOSITE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT & PERCENT IMPERVIOUS Runoff Coefficients Percent ImperviousBasin Name Basin Name EXISTING BASINS DEVELOPED BASINS MASTER BASINS Surface Type MWB 1/20/2025 Prepared By: Date: ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 174 0.294 in A = 0.630 acres V = 0.0185 ac-ft 806.70 cu. ft RG1 i = a = DRAIN TIME WQCV = 85.72% CITY OF FORT COLLINS (COFC) CALCULATION FOR: WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME (WQCV) 12 hr 0.80 Date: Prepared By: Basin Name: Client: Project Number : Project Name: 0 0 024-015 Prospect Plaza MWB 1/15/2025 MAJOR BASIN RG1 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 175 0.228 in A = 1.451 acres V = 0.0331 ac-ft 1440.40 cu. ft CITY OF FORT COLLINS (COFC) CALCULATION FOR: WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME (WQCV) Project Name:Prospect Plaza Date: 1/15/2025 Project Number :024-015 Prepared By: MWB Client:0 Basin Name:0 MAJOR BASIN RG2 DRAIN TIME 12 hr a = 0.80 i = 72.09% WQCV = RG2 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 176 0.316 in A = 1.041 acres V = 0.0329 ac-ft 1433.07 cu. ft CITY OF FORT COLLINS (COFC) CALCULATION FOR: WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME (WQCV) Project Name:Prospect Plaza Date: 1/15/2025 Project Number :024-015 Prepared By: MWB Client:0 Basin Name:0 MAJOR BASIN RG3 DRAIN TIME 12 hr a = 0.80 i = 89.23% WQCV = RG3 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 177 0.191 in A = 0.254 acres V = 0.0048 ac-ft 210.81 cu. ft CITY OF FORT COLLINS (COFC) CALCULATION FOR: WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME (WQCV) Project Name:Prospect Plaza Date: 1/15/2025 Project Number :024-015 Prepared By: MWB Client:0 Basin Name:0 MAJOR BASIN RG4 DRAIN TIME 12 hr a = 0.80 i = 60.69% WQCV = RG4 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 178 1 Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6689 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com December 20, 2025 Fred Haberecht CSU STRATA 2537 Research Blvd Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80526 Re: Prospect Plaza Redevelopment SPAR Description of project: This is a SPAR request to develop student housing and structured parking at 304 W Prospect Rd. (9714408016, 9714408920, 9714408943). The applicant is proposing a residential building that includes a parking garage and exterior courtyard areas. The design team is working with CSU Parking and Transportation Services to remove and reconfigure the bus drop off. Access is taken from W Prospect Rd to the south. The site is approximately 0.24 mi west of S College Ave. and directly north of W Prospect Rd. The property is located in the High Density Mixed -Use- Neighborhood (HMN) zone district and is subject to a Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR). The conceptual will be next week and the formal application will be routed on Friday. Please see the following summary of comments regarding Prospect Plaza Redevelopment SPAR. The comments offered informally by staff during the Conceptual Review will assist you in preparing the detailed components of the project application. Modifications and additions to these comments may be made at the time of formal review of this project. If you have any questions regarding these comments or the next steps in the review process, please contact your Development Review Coordinator, Brandy Bethurem Harras , bbethuremharras@fcgov.com, or Marissa Pomerleau, mpomerleau@fcgov.com. Comment Summary Development Review Coordinator Contact: Brandy Bethurem Harras bbethuremharras@fcgov.com 970-416-2744 Contact: Marissa Pomerleau mpomerleau@fcgov.com 970-416-8082 1. INFORMATION: We will be your primary point of contact throughout the development review process. If you have any questions, need additional meetings with the project reviewers, or need assistance throughout the process, please let us know and we can assist you and your team. Please include us in all email correspondence with other reviewers and keep us informed of any phone conversations. Thank you! ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 179 2 ALL: Noted, thank you. 2. NOTICE: A Development Review sign has been posted on the property. This sign will be posted through the hearing. A request for the removal of signs will be made by your Development Review Coordinator at the appropriate time. ALL: Noted, thank you. 3. NEIGBORHOOD MEETING: The Neighborhood Meeting for this project has been scheduled for Monday January 6, 2025. To begin at 6pm at the Har Shalom Center for Jewish Living, 725 W Drake Road. ALL: The neighborhood meeting has been completed. 4. FOR HEARING: The proposed development project is subject to a Site Plan Advisory Review. The Planning & Zoning Commission will provide review comments at a public hearing. For the hearing, we will formally notify surrounding property owners within 800 – 1,000 feet (excluding public right of way and publicly owned open space). ALL: Noted, thank you. 5. FOR FINAL PLAN: I will provide a Project Submittal Checklist for your Final Development Plan to assist in your submittal preparation. Please use the checklist in conjunction with the final SPAR comment letter and the Submittal Requirements located at: http://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/applications.php. If you have questions regarding items in the checklist, or the applicability of an item to your project, please reach out to me. SC: Noted, thank you. Based on the review discussion between City staff and the project team on 1/8, the FDP checklist was reviewed, and we believe requirements were agreed to. In an effort to maintain clear communication with City staff, we had submitted a marked -up FDP checklist to Brandy indicating our understanding of FDP submission requirements. On 1/16, Brandy responded to the checklist with comments. 6. SUMBITTALS: As part of your submittal, a response to the comments provided in this letter is required. The final letter is provided to you in Microsoft Word format. Please use this document to insert responses to each comment for your submittal, using a different font color. Provide a detailed response for any comment asking a question or requiring an action. Any comment requesting a response or requiring action by you with a response of noted, acknowledged etc. will be considered not addressed. You will need to provide references to specific project plans, pages, reports, or explanations of why comments have not been addressed [when applicable]. ALL: Noted, thank you. We have provided our responses by noting the responses by discipline. For architectural comments, the responses start with HBA, Holland Basham Architects. For landscape, we included ND for Norris Design. For civil, we included SC for Sunny Civil. For future MEP responses, we will note GWY for Galloway Engineering. For comments that included all disciplines, we had noted our responses stating “ALL”. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 180 3 7. SUMBITTALS: Correct file naming is required as part of a complete submittal. Please follow the Electronic Submittal Requirements and File Naming Standards found here: https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/files/electronic-submittal-requirements-and-file- naming-standards_v1_8-1-19.pdf?1703783275 File names should have the corresponding number, followed by the file type prefix, project information, and round number. For example: 1_SITE PLAN_Project Name_FDP_Rd1. A list of numbers and prefixes for each file can be found at the link above. ALL: Noted, thank you. 8. SUBMITTALS: All plans should be saved as optimized/flattened PDFs to reduce file size and remove layers. Per the Electronic Submittal Requirements AutoCAD SHX attributes need to be removed from the PDF’s. AutoCAD turns drawing text into comments that appear in the PDF plan set, and these must be removed prior to submittal as they can cause issues with the PDF file. The default setting is "1" ("on") in AutoCAD. To change the setting and remove this feature, type "EPDFSHX" (version 2016.1) or “PDFSHX (version 2017 and newer) in the command line and enter "0". Read this article at Autodesk.com for more on this topic: https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/troubleshooting/caas/sfdcarticles/sfdcart Icles/Drawing-text-appears-as-Comments-in-a-PDF-created-by-AutoCAD.html ALL: Noted, thank you. 9. SUBMITTALS: Submittals / Resubmittals are accepted any day of the week, with Wednesday at noon being the cutoff- for routing the same week. When you are preparing to resubmit your plans, please notify me with an expected submittal date with as much advanced notice as possible. ALL: Noted, thank you. 10. FOR FINAL PLAN: Upon initial submittal, your project will be subject to a Completeness Review. Staff has until noon that Friday to determine if the project contains all required checklist items and is sufficient for a round of review. If complete, a formal Letter of Acceptance will be emailed to you and the project would be officially routed with its initial round of review, followed by a formal meeting. Please check with me, your Development Review Coordinator, regarding review timelines. ALL: Noted, thank you. 11. FOR FINAL PLAN: Once your project has been formally reviewed by the City and you have received comments, please resubmit within 180 days, approximately 6 months, to avoid the expiration of your project. ALL: We will be sure to resubmit within 180 days. 12. FOR FINAL PLAN: The request will be subject to the Development Review Fee Schedule: https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/fees.php. I will provide an estimate of the initial fees for a Final Development Plan Application. As noted in the ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 181 4 comments, there could be additional fees required by other departments. The City of Fort Collins fee schedule is subject to change – please confirm these estimates before submitting. Development Review Application Fees will be due at time of the project being submitted for formal review. If you have any questions about fees, please reach out to me. ANY project that requires four or more rounds of review would be subject to an additional fee of $3,000.00. ALL: Noted, thank you. 13. FOR FINAL PLAN: Payments can be made by check, debit/credit card or eCheck. If paying by check, make payable to “City of Fort Collins”. This is accepted at the Development Review Center, 281 N College Ave, Fort Collins, CO 80524, by mail or can be placed in the blue drop box located at the northwest side of the building. Please mark it to the attention of your Development Review Coordinator and reference to the project it is associated with. If paying by debit/credit card or eCheck, please go to fcgov.com/Citizen Access, select Planning/Development Review and search by inputting your project's information*. • Debit/Credit card payments include a convenience fee of 2% + $0.25 added to all payments under $2,500.00, and 2.75% added to all payments over $2,500.00. • ECheck payments include a convenience fee of $0.50 added to all payments *Please advise us as to which payment method will be used. If choosing to pay online, we will provide you with the project information when the fees are available to be paid. ALL: Noted, thank you. Planning Services Contact: Arlo Schumann aschumann@fcgov.com 970-221-6599 1. Staff recommends that the color temperature for all site lighting and exterior building lighting be no greater than 3000k, additionally fixtures should be selected that don't create glare and light trespass off site to better protect the night sky, conserve energy, and reflect lighting best practices. HBA: Noted. The project sees no issue with complying with these requirements and will plan to meet the noted standards. 2. In contrast to the building frontage along Lake, the Prospect frontage does not have a human scaled presence and relationship to the street. The building entrances aren't well defined and have minimal connection to the street. Of the 4 doorways nearest prospect, 3 lead directly into stairwells. Staff would like to see the one entrance connected to the lounge area address the street in a clearly identifiable and intentional way. HBA: The project team feels this feedback is valid as it relates to our original submission, and we have further developed the design of the Prospect Road frontage to address this comment. We acknowledge and value the importance of the Prospect Road frontage in terms of visual impact and pedestrian experience. We have submitted revised building elevations and renderings including a number of modifications, such as: 1. The original proforma for the project had led toward a 5 -story building, with 783 beds as originally submitted. As design has progressed, the decision has been made to reduce the height of the building to 4 stories for the south 2/3 portion of the site and with the north portion along Lake Street primarily remaining at 5 stories. This change better aligns with the desire of CSU STRATA to provide much-needed student housing near campus, while balancing the cost of construction, and associated future cost to residents. Furthermore, we ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 182 5 believe that this change will positively impact the scale of the building along Prospect Road. 2. In addition to the reduction in building height, the design team has further developed architectural detailing along the building frontage facing Prospect Road, including the following: - Better-defining building entries/exits at key locations along Prospect via entry canopies and landscape features. - Reduction in height of stone elements along the building facade to make the building, allowing for changes in materiality that break up the facade. This reduction in stone height is coupled with additional architectural detail within the exterior facade materials including changes to the siding color to provide more contrast between the stone below, siding above, and adding additional trim detailing to create more visual interest within the siding. 3. The area between the surface parking and the Prospect streetscape appears to be blank on the landscape plan. Will there be plantings proposed in that area? This would be an ideal place to provide screening and buffering from the parking and the street and pedestrian path. ND: A planting hatch has been added to this area for screening and buffering. Detailed planting will be added in the Final Plan set. 4. Staff would like to formally request that the applicant extend the 60 day 'shot clock' to allow the project to be heard at the February P&Z hearing. The February hearing is scheduled for the 20th. This would be an extension of about 12 days. ALL: We understand that the meeting will be held on February 5th. Department: Historic Preservation Contact: Jim Bertolini jbertolini@fcgov.com 970-416-4250 1. INFORMATION ONLY – MATERIALS CONSERVATION: This property contains a significant amount of building material, including masonry between the 11 existing buildings (with approximately 192 existing housing units). Staff would recommend some form of construction waste diversion option such as deconstruction to support the City’s waste diversion goals. Staff would also be supportive of a building conservation project to avoid the temporarily loss of nearly 200 existing housing units and landfilling of such a large amount of building material, if of interest. ALL: Noted, thank you. 2. INFORMATION ONLY (SPAR) PRESUBMITTAL- – HISTORIC SURVEY: At conceptual review, the applicant is responsible for working with City staff to determine if any structures on the development site and, when relevant, within 200 feet of the development site, are designated historic resources or are eligible for historic designation [LUC 5.8.1(C)(2)]. Structures subject to this requirement must be at least 50 years old. This process involves ordering historic property surveys if no such documentation has been produced for the property in the last five years. ALL: Noted, thank you. 3. INFORMATION ONLY (SPAR) CODE- REQUIREMENTS FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES ON THE DEVELOPMENT SITE: If any resources on the development site are identified as historic resources through the survey and records review process, the project must include a rehabilitation and adaptive reuse plan for those structures pursuant to Land Use Code Section 5.8.1(E), to the maximum extent feasible, or satisfactorily meet the requirements for a modification of standards following the requirements of Division 6.8 of the land use code. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 183 6 ALL: Noted, thank you. 4. INFORMATION ONLY (SPAR) CODE- REQUIREMENTS FOR WHEN HISTORIC RESOURCES ARE NEAR DEVELOPMENT SITE: If no structures or other features on the development site are historic resources (based on the information provided by the surveyor), Historic Preservation review of your proposed development would be limited to section 5.8.1(F), which provides various standards regarding architectural compatibility with abutting and nearby historic properties within 200 feet. The purpose of the design compatibility standards is not to force derivative architecture, but rather to establish a few points of commonality and create a fundamental harmony between the old and the new. Those requirements are designed to create an appropriate design relationship between new construction and nearby historic resources. They cover building massing and design features and, for larger developments, are applied only to the new construction that is closest to the identified historic structures, i.e. the “historic influence area.” This is illustrated in 5.8.1(C)(2). If an abutting property is a historic resource or there are historic resources on the development site, the design compatibility requirements are t ypically met relative to that property, even if there are other historic resources within the 200 -foot boundary. ALL: Noted, thank you. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Sophie Buckingham sbuckingham@fcgov.com 1. FOR HEARING UPDATED-: Engineering Department staff does not support the proposed full movement- access onto Prospect Road at the western side of the property. This access point will need to be restricted to right-in and -right-out-. If the design team would like to look for a different location for full movement - access onto Prospect Road, please consider a shared access with the property to the east. If you choose to move forward with a right-in -right-out- access in the proposed location, you will need to submit a variance request for a reduction from the minimum 460 spacing. The variance request will need to meet the criteria of LCUASS 1.9.4. To accommodate the review timeline for this variance request, you must submit the formal request at least four weeks in advance of the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing date. Since there is less than four weeks between the date of this comment letter and the January 16 Planning and Zoning hearing, if this project is heard at the January 16 hearing, Engineering and Traffic staff will not have enough time to review the variance request and will therefore recommend denial of the project. If the hearing is scheduled for later in January or February, there will most likely be enough time to review the variance request if you submit it as soon as possible. SC: Thank you, the variance for access spacing has been submitted and accepted as a right -in, right-out access only. 2. FOR HEARING UPDATED-: The new bus stop will need to be designed in accordance with the City's Transfort Bus Stop Design Standards. The bus stop design and location will need approval from Transfort staff before the site plan can be approved. Please contact TPSProjects@fcgov.com with any questions about the bus stop design and location. Your coordination with TransFort must be completed at least two weeks in advance of the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing date to meet the deadline for the staff report. SC: The project team attended a meeting with CSU staff and Transfort representatives on January 9, 2025. The project team presented the proposed design for the bus pull-off area. Transfort staff in attendance indicated that the location and general dimensions of the proposed bus turnout were adequate for the operation of the existing Horn Route and the realignment of Route 2 in the future. They ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 184 7 also indicated the desire to maintain the Horn service close to or adjacent to the construction site during the duration of the Prospect Plaza construction. 3. FOR HEARING UPDATED-: Thank you for proposing a 10-foot detached sidewalk and 8foot tree lawn for Prospect Road. Engineering Department staff would strongly prefer for the sidewalk to be within public right-of-way rather than an access easement. Please note that the typical arterial street also has a 15foot utility easement behind the back of right-of-way. If the design team would like for the sidewalk to be in an access easement that overlaps with a utility easement, this will require a variance request. The variance request will need to meet the criteria of LCUASS 1.9.4. Please note that City staff cannot guarantee that any variance request will be approved. To accommodate the review timeline for this variance request, you must submit the formal request at least five weeks in advance of the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing date. Since there is less than five weeks between the date of this comment letter and the January 16 Planning and Zoning hearing, if this project is heard at the January 16 hearing, Engineering staff will not have enough time to review the variance request and will therefore recommend denial of the project. If the hearing is scheduled for later in January or February, there may be enough time to review the variance request if you submit it as soon as possible. SC: Thank you, a variance has been submitted for the combined easement. 4. FOR HEARING UPDATED: The site plan currently does not comply with - LCUASS Figure 196 for parking setbacks from public -right-of-way-. You will need to remove several of the surface parking spaces closest to Prospect Road and Lake Street so that the site plan is in compliance with required setbacks. This must be updated on the plans at least two weeks in advance of the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing date to meet the deadline for the staff report. SC: 3 parking stalls have been removed to accommodate the 50ft parking setback. 5. FOR FINAL PLAN: This project may be required to contribute to Lake Street bike and pedestrian improvements. The final plans will need to coordinate with the City's proposed capital project for Lake Street. SC: The design team is awaiting information on the Lake Street CIP. We are happy to collaborate with the capital improvement project during our FDP process if information is available. 6. FOR FINAL PLAN: The plans need to identify all of the easements that are proposed to be vacated within the property. If any of these are public easements, you will need to apply for an easement vacation for each public easement. Please note that if there is utility infrastructure within a public easement, then the easement cannot be officially vacated until after the utility infrastructure has been removed from the easement. More information about easement vacation is available at https://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev#cb383096601 -. SC: Noted, thank you. The easements will be vacated per the plat with final plan. 7. FOR FINAL PLAN: Is there an existing easement for the Arthur Ditch across the property? If any new easements are dedicated on top of an existing Arthur Ditch easement, there would need to be a signature from the Arthur Ditch as a party of interest. SC: There is an existing 25-foot strip of property in which the Arthur Ditch is located. If we end up combining this strip with the rest of the property with the plat, an easement will be provided for the ditch. 8. FOR FINAL PLAN: This project will require a Development Agreement as part of the ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 185 8 Final Plan approval. With your FDP submittal, please fill out and provide the Development Agreement Information form. HBA+SC: We are awaiting a response from City Staff clarifying whether the FDP is the mechanism for approval or if there is another requirement between the two parties. Upon feedback from City Staff, we look forward to collaborating towards a decision on the correct mechanism for approval. 9. INFORMATION: This project will require a Development Construction Permit after the final plans are approved, before construction can begin on the property. SC: Noted, thank you. 10. INFORMATION: All public sidewalk, driveways and ramps, existing or proposed, adjacent or within the site, need to meet ADA standards. If they currently do not, they will need to be reconstructed so that they do meet current ADA standards as a part of this project. SC: Noted, thank you. The site will be designed to meet ADA standards. 11. INFORMATION: Any public improvements must be designed and built in accordance with the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS). They are available online at: https://www.larimer.org/urbanareastreetstandards2021 SC: Noted, thank you. The site will utilize LCUASS for design and construction details. 12. INFORMATION: This project is responsible for dedicating any right -of-way- and easements that are necessary or required by the City for this project (i.e. drainage, utility, emergency access). This shall include the standard utility easements that are to be provided behind the right-of-way- (15 feet along an arterial, 8 feet along an alley, and 9 feet along all other street classifications). Information on the dedication process, as well as deed templates for dedication by separate document, can be found at: http://www.fcgov.com/engineering/devrev.php SC: Noted, thank you. Per comment #3, we are proposing a 16ft combined access and utility easement along Prospect, and ROW dedication along Lake St. 13. INFORMATION: All fences, barriers, posts or other encroachments within the public right-of-way are only permitted upon approval of an encroachment permit. -Applications for encroachment permits shall be made to the Engineering Department for review and approval before installation. Encroachment items shall not be shown on the site plan as they may not be approved, need to be modified or moved, or if the permit is revoked then the site/ landscape plan is in non-compliance. SC: Noted, thank you. 14. INFORMATION: The development cannot use the right-ofway- for any Low Impact Development to treat the site’s storm runoff. We can look at the use of some LID methods to treat street flows – the design standards for these are still in development. SC: LID is proposed and will be located outside of the ROW. 15. INFORMATION: Any bike parking that is required for the project cannot be placed within the right-of-way, and if it is placed just behind the -right-of-way-, it needs to be placed so that when bikes are parked, they do not extend into the right -of-way-. SC: All bike parking is proposed outside of the ROW. 16. INFORMATION: In regard to construction of this site, the public right -of-way- shall not be used for staging or storage of materials or equipment associated with the Development, nor shall it be used for parking by any contractors, subcontractors, or other personnel working for or hired by the Developer to construct the Development. The Developer will need to find a location(s) on private property to accommodate any necessary staging and/or parking needs associated with the completion of the Development. Information ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 186 9 on the location(s) of these areas will be required to be provided to the City as a part of the Development Construction Permit application. ALL: Noted, thank you. 17. INFORMATION: There will be an update in 2025 to the City of Fort Collins Streetscape Standards LCUASS- Appendix C. The update will require landscaping in public right-of-way to comply with- Colorado Senate Bill 24-005. Please reach out with any questions about the right-of-way- landscaping requirements. ND: ROW landscape will comply with this update. Department: Traffic Operations Contact: Steve Gilchrist sgilchrist@fcgov.com 970-224-6175 1. FOR FINAL PLAN/RECORDING: The provided Transportation Impact Study does not include the Appendices as referenced. A complete TIS will be required and a final signed and stamped version will be necessary for recording. HBA: A revised TIS was provided to City Staff as requested including all appendices. Additionally, we would like to note that as the project team is proposing to reduce the height of a portion of the building from 5 stories to 4, the traffic engineer has evaluated the impact of the slight reduction in bed count and has provided updates as noted in the paragraph below. The project team is working to update the Traffic Impact Study and can provide the fi nal report for the 695-bed count at Final Plan. “With regard to the alternative 4-story 695 bed proposal, it was stated that this should come in the form of a separate report. The trip generation for the current 5 -story 785 bed proposal is 2,018 daily trip ends, 55 morning peak hour trip ends, and 165 afternoon peak hour trip ends. The trip generation for the alternative 4-story 695 bed proposal is 1,786 daily trip ends, 49 morning peak hour trip ends, and 146 afternoon peak hour trip ends. This is not a large difference in trip generation. Impacts to the key intersections will be slightly less, but not significant. It is likely that the operational level of service at the key intersections will not change. The conclusions of the traffic impact study will not change.” -Michael Delich 2. FOR HEARING: The proposed pull out for the transit stop does nothing to accommodate the westbound stopping of buses at this location. Further coordination will be needed in this regard. A clear understanding of the bike and pedestrian level of service to and from the stop will be needed, and will need to evaluate the impacts of the proposed changes with the transit stop. HBA+SC: The project team met with Transfort on 1/9/2025 to discuss the proposed layout. Transfort staff in attendance indicated that the location and general dimensions of the proposed bus turnout were adequate for the operation of the existing Horn Route and the realignment of Route 2 in the future. They also indicated the desire to maintain the Horn service close to or adjacent to the construction site during the duration of the Prospect Plaza construction. 3. INFORMATION: The City of Fort Collins and CSU are coordinating on a Capital Project to reshape Lake Street with protected bike lane and possibly closing the Lake and Centre intersection to vehicular traffic. This will need further coordination with this project. SC: The project team will continue to work with the City to coordinate with the Lake St CIP. We are happy to collaborate with the capital improvement project during our FDP process if information is available. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 187 10 4. FOR HEARING: The site plan is showing the western Prospect access as a full movement access, but the TIS evaluated this as a right-in/-right-out. -Given the proximity to the signalized intersection that would not meet the spacing standards for an arterial roadway, we may be able to consider this as a right-in/-right-out- within a variance, but I doubt we would be supportive of a variance with a full movement. Further coordination will be needed with our Engineering department. SC: This has been updated on the site plan. Variance has been accepted as right -in, right-out only. 5. FOR HEARING: The detailed site plan and the TIS are inconsistent regarding the number of proposed beds for this site. This needs to be corrected. With this being a redevelopment, the proposed trip generation also doesn't appear to take into account the existing trips generated by the current apartments and commercial buildings. This may need further coordination and correction. HBA: A revised TIS was submitted including the requested updates and clarifications. Department: Erosion Control Contact: Andrew Crecca acrecca@fcgov.com 1. Please confirm whether or not this project is located within the City's MS4 boundaries. If it is the project is subject to the erosion control requirements located in the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM), Chapter 2, Section 6.0. A copy of those requirements can be found at www.fcgov.com/erosion Mapping may need updated if the project is not located within the City's MS4 boundaries. SC: This project is in the process of being changed to be within CSU’s MS4 boundary for temporary erosion control. 2. Based upon this project type, Conceptual Development Reviews (CDRs) & Preliminary Design Reviews (PDRs) alone do not trigger erosion control requirements. Please be aware that future submittals or planned work will be evaluated based upon the submittal requirements of FCSCM and may require Erosion Control Materials including Plans, Reports, Escrow Calculations and Inspection Fees. SC: Erosion control plans and a report will be submitted for review with Final Plan. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Water Utilities WaterUtilitiesEng@fcgov.com (970)224-6191 3. Arthur Ditch, 12-FT wide box culvert: The Arthur Ditch flows north to south across the project site in a 12 -feet wide by 3.5-feet deep rectangular box culvert. There is a 50-foot--wide easement centered on the centerline of the box culvert. No development is allowed within this easement without an encroachment permit from the Arthur Irrigation Company. Please contact Melissa Buick at 970-6867126 or melissabuick@gmail.com for -development requirements within the Arthur Irrigation Company easement. Please contact Colorado 811 to have the box culvert located. https://www.colorado811.org/ HBA: We are coordinating with AIC to obtain approval for construction within the ditch ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 188 11 property and stormwater discharge to the ditch. 4. Master plan and criteria compliance (site specific comment): The stormwater runoff from this site ultimately drains to Spring Creek, but the site is located within the Old Town Basin Master Drainage Plan. Therefore, the design of this site must conform to the drainage basin designs of both the Old Town and Spring Creek Master Drainage Plans as well the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM). The stormwater criteria manual is available on our website here: https://www.fcgov.com/utilitydevelopment SC: Noted, thank you. 5. Documentation requirements (site specific comment): A drainage report and construction plans are required and must be prepared by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Colorado. The drainage report must address the four-step process for -selecting structural BMPs. SC: A full drainage report will be submitted with Final Plan. 6. Stormwater outfall (site specific comment): The stormwater outfall options for this site appear to be existing stormwater infrastructure in W. Lake Street and/or W. Prospect Road. The Arthur Irrigation Company will need to sign off on any additional developed flows entering their ditch. SC: We are coordinating with AIC to obtain approval for construction within the ditch property and stormwater discharge to the ditch. 7. Detention requirements (site specific comment): When improvements are being added to an existing developed site in the Old Town basin, onsite detention is only required if there is an increase in impervious area greater than 5,000 square feet. If it is greater, onsite detention is required with a 2 -year historic release rate for water quantity. SC: The overall imperviousness of the site will decrease by approximately 20% with this proposed development, so no detention is proposed. 8. Water Quality and Low Impact Development requirements (standard comment): All modified impervious areas require stormwater quality treatment. In addition, the City requires the use of Low Impact Development (LID) methods to treat stormwater quality on all new or redeveloping property, including sites required to be brought into compliance with the Land Use Code. There are two (2) categories of LID requirements; the development will need to meet one of the two following options: 1. LID with Permeable Pavers: When using the permeable pavers option, 50% of the new or modified impervious areas must be treated by LID methods. Of the new or modified paved areas, 25% must be pervious. 2. LID without Pavers: 75% of all new or modified impervious areas must be treated by LID methods. This typically consists of a rain garden or bioretention system, but other options are allowed. The remainder of the water quality treatment can be accomplished ‘standard’ or LID water quality methods. Accepted methods are described in the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM), Chapter 7: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/development-forms-gui Delinesregulations/-stormwater-criteria SC: Option 2 for LID is proposed for the site. This will be documented in the drainage report submitted with the Final Plan. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 189 12 9. Imperviousness documentation (standard comment): The existing and proposed impervious areas need to be documented in the drainage report. Drainage requirements and development fees are based on the new impervious area. An exhibit showing the existing and proposed impervious areas with a table summarizing the areas is required with the first project submittal. SC: This will be documented in the drainage report submitted with Final Plan. 10. Inspection and maintenance (standard comment): There will be a final site inspection of the stormwater facilities when the project is complete, and the maintenance is handed over to an HOA or another maintenance organization. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) for on-going maintenance of all onsite drainage facilities will be included as part of the Development Agreement. More information and links can be found at: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/whatwedo/stormwater/stormwaterquality/lowimpactdevelopment SC: Noted, thank you. 11. Fees (standard comment): The 2024 city wide Stormwater development fee (PIF) is $11,834/acre ($0.2717/ sq. ft.) of a new impervious area over 350 square feet. No fee is charged for existing impervious area. This fee is to be paid at the time each building permit is issued. Information on fees can be found at: http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers/plant-investment-develo pmentfees- or contact our Utility Fee and Rate Specialists at (970) 416-4252 or UtilityFees@fcgov.com for questions on fees. SC: Noted, thank you. 12. Offsite Stormwater Flows (standard comment): The development will need to accept and pass any existing offsite flows. SC: Offsite flows are being considered and addressed via the floodplain modeling and on -site drainage calculations and will be documented in the site drainage report submitted with Final Plan. 13. Capital Project Coordination (site specific comment): The Spring Creek Basin Stormwater Masterplan identifies a pipe improvement project adjacent to the project site. Prospect Plaza project will need to provide a drainage easement for this pipe to be constructed in the future. Please coordinate with Claudia Quezada, cquezada@fcgov.com. SC: A 30ft easement has been added along the east side of the property between the duct bank and the proposed building to accommodate the City’s 36” storm pipe. Department: WaterWastewater- Engineering Contact: Water Utilities WaterUtilitiesEng@fcgov.com (970)224-6191 1. Existing Water Infrastructure (site specific comment): There is an existing 8-inch water main in W. Prospect Road with an existing 1-1/2-inch water service to the site. There is also an existing 16 -inch water main in W. Lake Street with an existing 4-inch water service to the site. SC: Connections are proposed to both watermains. 2. Existing Wastewater Infrastructure (site specific comment): There is an existing 10-inch wastewater main in W. Prospect Road with three existing wastewater services to the site. There is also an existing 10 -inch wastewater main in W. Lake Street with an existing wastewater service to the site. SC: Connections are proposed to both sewer mains. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 190 13 3. Service abandonment (standard comment): Any existing water and wastewater services that are not planned to be reused with this project will be required to be abandoned at the main. SC: Abandonment will be detailed with Final Plan. 4. Service sizing (standard comment): The water service and meter for this project site will need to be sized based on the AWWA M22 manual design procedure. A sizing justification letter that includes demand calculations for maximum flows and estimated continuous flows will need to be provided as a part of the final submittal package for this project. SC: Meter calculations will be provided with Final Plan. 5. Water conservation (standard comment): The water conservation standards for landscape and irrigation will apply. Information on these requirements can be found at: https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/watercode ND: Noted, thank you. Landscape and irrigation design will comply with water conservation standards. 6. Separate Irrigation Tap (site specific comment) Since the site is scraping and rebuilding the site irrigation service requirements are triggered under Section 2694. A separate irrigation tap will be required - to service this site unless it can be proven that this site uses less than 30,000 gallons of water for irrigation annually. ND: A separate irrigation tap is being provided, and plans will be submitted as part of the Final plan set. 7. Landscape Plan and Hydrozone Table (standard comment): For final plan, the Landscape Plan will need to include a hydrozone table for outdoor irrigation that is broken out per tap. This is used to document the outdoor water budget and determine water allotment requirements. For more information, please see this webpage: www.fcgov.com/wsrupdate ND: A hydrozone plan water budget will be completed as part of the final plan set to ensure that the project meets water conservation and other applicable requirements. 8. Water and Wastewater Criteria Manual (standard comment): The design of this development must follow City of Fort Collins Utilities Water and Wastewater Design Criteria, Specifications, and Details. These manuals are available on this website: https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/buildersanddevelopers/developmentformsguidelinesregulations/ SC: Sunny Civil is utilizing the City’s design standards for site engineering. 9. Fees (standard comment): New or upgraded water and wastewater services will require development and water supply requirement (WSR) fees, these are paid at building permit. Please contact our Utility Fee and Rate Specialists at (970) 416-4252 or UtilityFees@fcgov.com for more information or questions. Information on fees can also be found at: www.fcgov.com/developmentfees SC: We understand the City staff are working through calculation of credits, and we look forward to coordinating further. 10. One building per service (standard comment): Separate water and wastewater services, connecting to the City main, will be required to service each building. SC: The project team is interested in further discussion the possibility of submetering the commercial space during final plan. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 191 14 11. Utility Separations (standard comment): For your reference, minimum water and wastewater service separations are: > 10-ft min. between water and wastewater services. > 6-ft min. between trees and water or wastewater services. > 4-ft min. between shrubs and water or wastewater services. > 10ft min. between -storm-drain pipes and other utilities. > Service lines of the same type may be joint trenched with 3 -ft of separation Other utilities, such as gas, electric, and communications will also have spacing requirements and will need space on the site. Last, please remember that there may be service lines on the adjacent properties for which clearances also need to be maintained. Please contact Water Utilities Engineering at (970)224 -6191 or WaterUtilitiesEng@fcgov.com to coordinate utility layout. SC: Noted, thank you. 12. Grease Interceptor (Standard Comment) If commercial cooking facilities are proposed these may require a grease interceptor on the wastewater service. To discuss the City’s requirements, please contact Wes Lamarque at (970) 416-2418 or WLAMARQUE@fcgov.com . SC: We will plan to coordinate this at FDP. 13. Wastewater System Capacity (site specific comment): Please prepare and submit a wastewater loading calculation and summary report for your development. The City will need to evaluate the downstream wastewater capacity to confirm if the existing system can support this development. These calculations need to be included with the next submittal but could also be submitted to us in advance. Please contact us to discuss further. SC: Noted, we will submit for the next submittal, which would be Final Plan. Department: Electric Engineering Contact: Daniel Paluzzi dpaluzzi@fcgov.com 1. SITE SPECIFIC: Light and Power has an existing three phase vault on the South side of Prospect and the West side of Bay Rd that has an available spot to feed your project. SC: Noted, thank you. We plan to tie it in at this location. 2. SITE SPECIFIC: There is an existing 10x10 vault located on the NE corner of the property that will most likely need to be adjusted due to grading. It would be nice to know how much fill you have on top of our vault so we can know what modifications are needed. SC: We are proposing to keep this vault within landscape area and maintain the existing elevations for cover of the vault. This will be detailed with the Final Plan. 3. INFORMATION: Please ensure that all Light and Power facilities are located within a utility easement and please show the easements on the utility plan. SC: Easements are shown on the updated site plans for L&P facilities. 4. INFORMATION: Any existing electric infrastructure that needs to be relocated or modified as part of this project will be at the expense of the developer. Please coordinate relocations with Light and Power Engineering. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 192 15 We will need to go in and remove all of the old infrastructure that feeds your current buildings. SC: The project team will continue to coordinate with L&P. 5. FEES: Electric capacity fees, development fees, building site charges and any system modification charges necessary to feed the site will apply to this development. Please contact me to discuss development fees or visit the following website for an estimate of charges and fees related to this project http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-anddevelopers/-plant-investment-development-fees *Please contact me when using the online calculator so that we can ensure that you get the proper estimate for your project as the calculator can be confusing. ALL: Applicant team is working on a C1 line diagram to calculate fees. Will coordinate further during FDP. 6. FEES: Please document the size of the electrical service(s) that feeds the existing property prior to demolition of the building to receive capacity fee credits. ALL: Noted, thank you. 7. INFORMATION: Transformer locations will need to be coordinated with Light & Power. Transformers must be placed within 10 ft of a drivable surface for installation and maintenance purposes. The transformer must also have a front clearance of 10 ft and side/rear clearance of 3 ft minimum. The transformer must have 2 ft clearance from sidewalks and from the front face of the curb face. When located close to a building, please provide required separation from building openings as defined in Figures ESS4 ESS -7 within the Electric Service Standards. Please show all proposed transformer locations on the Utility Plans. SC: We will be sure to have the final transformer locations and clearances reviewed and approved by L&P with Final Plan. 8. INFORMATION: Three phase transformer pad dimensions for 75 -1000KVA are 84 inches by 73 inches and the 1500-2500KVA dimensions are 107 inches by 88 inches. The wider side of the transformer is the front that needs 10’ clearance. SC: We are proposing 2 of the larger size (one of these will be for future) and one of the smaller size. Clearances are shown on the updated site plans. 9. INFORMATION: The service to the building will be considered a commercial service; therefore, the applicant is responsible for installing the secondary service from the transformer, or first point of connection to the meter(s) and will be owned and maintained by the individual unit owner. Single phase transformers are limited to a maximum of 8 runs of secondary, not to exceed a wire size of 350KCMIL. Three phase transformers are limited to a maximum of 12 runs of secondary, not to exceed a wire size of 500KCMIL. ALL: Noted, thank you. 10. INFORMATION: Multi family buildings and duplexes are treated as customer owned services; therefore a C1 form and one line diagram must be filled out and submitted - to Light & Power Engineering for each building. All secondary electric service work is the responsibility of ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 193 16 the developer and their electrical consultant or contractor. A C-1 form can be found here: https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/buildersanddevelopers/developmentformsguidelinesregulations ALL: Noted, thank you. 11. INFORMATION: This project will need to comply with our electric metering standards. Electric meter locations will need to be coordinated with Light and Power Engineering. Residential units will need to be individually metered. Please gang the electric meters on one side of the building, opposite of the gas meters. Reference Section 8 of our Electric Service Standards for electric metering standards. A link has been provided here: https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/ElectricServiceStandards_FIN AL_18November2016_Amendment.pdf ALL: Noted, thank you. 12. INFORMATION: We are experiencing material shortages and long lead times on certain materials and unfortunately this is an industry wide issue. We typically have stock of our transformers, and we work on a firstcome, -firstserve- basis with our inventory stock. I know that this may be a bit unsettling, but we will have to see what is available when this project gains City approval and progresses to construction. I will add that our Standards Engineering group is working hard to secure materials, including transformers, and orders have been placed with our manufacturers to replenish inventory. ALL: Noted, thank you. 13. INFORMATION: You may contact Daniel Paluzzi with project engineering if you have questions. Dpaluzzi@fcgov.com. You may reference Light & Power’s Electric Service Standards at: https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/electricservicestandards.pdf?1645038437 You may reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/buildersanddevelopers ALL: Noted, thank you. Department: Environmental Planning Contact: Clint Anders canders@fcgov.com 1. FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Per Senate Bill 24-005, a local entity shall not install artificial turf as part of a new development project or redevelopment project starting January 2026. Artificial turf can cause negative environmental and health impacts. Consider choosing an alternative to artificial turf in your project. Consider a short fescue lawn or new bermudagrass cultivar to conserve water. Similarly, SB24 bans the use on nonfunctional turf so the sodded areas in the ROW tree lawn will need to change to shrub bed areas or native seed. ND: Noted, thank you. ROW landscape will be revised so that non -functional turf is not a part of the ROW design. Regarding artificial turf, the language above is correct in that local entities cannot install artificial turf. In the bill (Senate Bill 24005), local entity is defined as a: Home Rule or Statutory City, County, City and County, Territorial Charter City or Town; Special District; and Metropolitan District. As this is a CSU student housing (residential) project, and not a local entity, it is our understanding that artificial turf would be allowed, however we will work with CSU counsel to confirm. That said, our team is exploring the use of Tahoma 31 Bermudagrass, however cost and availability are ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 194 17 factors that we are looking into. We will plan to coordinate further during FDP. 2. FOR FINAL APPROVAL: The City of Fort Collins is designated as a bird sanctuary for the refuge of wild birds (Municipal Code Chapter 4, Division 8 Wild- Birds: https://library.municode.com/co/fort_collins/codes/municipal_code? nodeId=CH4ANIN_ARTIIAN_DIV8WIBI) and in order to satisfy the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act requirements, it is prohibited for any person at any time in the City to abuse or injure any wild bird or damage a nest with eggs or injure the young of any such bird. A professional ecologist or wildlife biologist is required to complete the nesting survey linked below 57 days- before conducting tree removal or trimming. If tree removal or trimming is planned, please include the following note on the tree mitigation plan and landscape plan, as appropriate: "NO TREES SHALL BE REMOVED DURING THE SONGBIRD NESTING SEASON (FEBRUARY 1 TO JULY 31) WITHOUT FIRST HAVING A PROFESSIONAL ECOLOGIST OR WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST COMPLETE A NESTING SURVEY 5-7 DAYS BEFORE TREE REMOVAL OR TRIMMING TO IDENTIFY ANY ACTIVE NESTS EXISTING ON THE PROJECT SITE. THE SURVEY SHALL BE SENT TO THE CITY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER. IF ACTIVE NESTS ARE FOUND, THE CITY WILL COORDINATE WITH RELEVANT STATE AND FEDERAL REPRESENTATIVES TO DETERMINE WHETHER ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS ON TREE REMOVAL AND CONSTRUCTION APPLY." The Songbird Nesting Survey document: https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/files/songbirdnestingsurvey.pdf?1689286309 ND: Noted, thank you. This note has been revised in our City of Fort Collins Tree Protection Notes. 3. FOR FINAL APPROVAL: City of Fort Collins Land Use Code [Article 5.10.1 (E)(3)], requires that to the extent reasonably feasible, all plans be designed to incorporate water conservation materials and techniques. This includes use of low -water use- plants and grasses in landscaping or re-landscaping and reducing bluegrass lawns as much as possible. Native plants and Wildlife friendly- (ex: pollinators, butterflies, songbirds) landscaping and maintenance are also encouraged. Please refer to the Fort Collins Vegetation Database at https://www.fcgov.com/vegetation/ and the Natural Areas Department’s Native Plants document for guidance on native plants: http://www.fcgov.com/naturalareas/pdf/nativeplants2013.pdf. These same requirements will also help the design comply with CSU's Campus Planning & Design Philosophy and Aesthetic Guidelines (pages 7,8 and 40). ND: Noted, thank you. To the extent feasible, the design will incorporate water conservation techniques and materials, including the use of native plant species as referenced above. 4. FOR FINAL APPROVAL: To better comply with LUC 5.10.1.(I) and CSU's aesthetic guidelines, consider adding larger container shrubs / live plantings to the raingardens. This will also support increased species diversity and add more textural interest to the design. Early season flowering native shrubs will also provide tremendous benefit to local specialists pollinator species. Consider using the City approved seed mix for the proposed rain gardens. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 195 18 https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/files/2024tipstechniquesestablishnativeseed.pdf1724854534 ND: To the extent feasible, container shrubs / live plantings will be used in the design of the rain gardens. Department: Forestry Contact: Malesa Plumley mplumley@fcgov.com 1. Green mountain sugar maple has not been very successful in Fort Collins. I would recommend using another species such as Shumard oak, chinkapin oak, texas red oak, david elm, accolade elm, sensation boxelder, or northern catalpa. ND: Noted, thank you. These species will be revised for final. 2. Consider adding trees to the courtyard. These areas provide unique microclimates where trees can do very well and provide benefits to what otherwise would be a very urban area. Trees such as Redbud that would otherwise need protection can do very well in courtyards in Fort Collins. ND: Noted, thank you. Trees have been added to the courtyard. The applicant is receptive to adding trees to the east elevation based on coordination with PFA along our aerial apparatus fire access. Department: Park Planning Contact: Missy Nelson mnelson@fcgov.com 1. FOR FINAL APPROVAL: Please add a note to the landscape plan: "The Developer, or its successor(s) in interest, shall be responsible for the ongoing irrigation and maintenance of the landscaping located within the public right -ofway- along the portion of W. Prospect Road that abuts the Property as shown on the Final Development Plan Documents. This obligation may be assigned to a home owners association duly constituted pursuant to Colorado state law, however, should such home owners association be dissolved, the obligation shall become that of the Developer or its successor(s) in interest." ND: This note has been added to the City of Fort Collins General Notes. Department: Fire Authority Contact: Erika Seeling erika.seeling@poudre-fire.org 1. ACCESS Comment: Since the building would be sprinklered, we could increase the required access distance requirement of 150 ft to 300 feet of all exterior portions of the building, which is reflected in this proposal. Buildings over 30 feet would trigger aerial access requirements it appears the proposal- currently addresses these requirements. Roof access and a standpipe will be required for buildings 4-story and beyond. There will need to be a fire hydrant within 100 ft of the standpipe. HBA: Noted, thank you. FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS – IFC 503.1.1 Fire access is required to within 150 feet of all exterior portions of any building, or facility ground floor as measured by an approved route around the perimeter. Any private alley, private road, or private drive serving as a fire lane shall be dedicated as an Emergency Access Easement (EAE) and be designed to standard fire lane specifications. In ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 196 19 addition, aerial apparatus access requirements are triggered for buildings in excess of 30' in height. SC: Noted, thank you. The arerial apparatus access road is designed in accordance with these requirements. FIRE LANE SPECIFICATIONS A fire lane plan shall be submitted for approval prior to installation. In addition to the design criteria already contained in relevant standards and policies, any new fire lane must meet the following general requirements: Fire lanes established- on private property shall be dedicated by plat or separate document as an Emergency Access Easement. -Maintain the required 20-foot minimum unobstructed width & 14 foot minimum overhead clearance. Where road widths exceed 20 feet in width, the full width shall be dedicated unless otherwise approved by the AHJ. Access roads with a hydrant are required- to be 26 feet in width. Additional- fire lane requirements are triggered for buildings greater than 30 feet in height. Refer to Appendix D105 of the International Fire Code. Be designed as a flat, hard, -all weather- driving surface capable of supporting 40 tons. -Dead-end fire access roads- in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround area for fire apparatus. -Dead-end- fire access roads used for aerial access shall be 30 feet in width -The required turning radii of a fire apparatus access road shall be a minimum of 25 feet inside and 50 feet outside. Turning radii shall be detailed on submitted plans. Dedicated fire lanes are required- to connect to the Public Way unless otherwise approved by the AHJ. Fire lane to be identified- by red curb and/or signage, and maintained unobstructed at all times. -Fire lane sign locations or red curbing should be labeled and detailed on final plans. Refer to LCUASS detail #1418 & #1419 for sign type, placement, and spacing. Appropriate directional arrows required on all signs. HBA+SC: Noted, thank you. 2. ACCESS Cont. AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS – IFC Appendix D105 Amendment Buildings over 30' in height trigger additional fire lane requirements in order to accommodate the logistical needs of aerial apparatus (ladder trucks). The intent of the code is to provide for rescue operations and roof access via ladder trucks when ground ladders cannot reach upper floors. Aerial access should therefore be available on at least one entire long side of the building, located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building. Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet, exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof. Dead end access roads shall have a minimum width of 30 ft. Parapet heights greater than 4' in height do not support ladder truck operations. SC: Noted, thank you. The arerial apparatus access road is designed in accordance with these requirements. BUILDINGS FOUR OR MORE STORIES IN HEIGHT ROOF ACCESS: New buildings four or more stories above grade plane, except those with a roof slope greater than four units vertical in 12 units horizontal (33.3 percent slope), shall be provided with a stairway to the roof. Stairway access to the roof shall be in accordance with IFC 1011.12. Such stairways shall be marked at street and floor levels with a sign indicating that the stairway continues to the roof. Where roofs are used for roof gardens or for other purposes, stairways shall be provided as required for such ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 197 20 occupancy classification (IFC 504.3). HBA: Noted, thank you. -FIRE STANDPIPE SYSTEM: Standpipe systems shall be provided in new buildings and structures in accordance with Section 905 of the 2021 International Fire Code. Approved standpipe systems shall be installed throughout buildings where the floor level of the highest story is located more than 30 feet above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access. The standpipe system shall be capable of supplying a minimum of 100 psi to the top habitable floor. An approved fire pump may be required to achieve this minimum pressure. Buildings equipped with standpipes are required to have a hydrant within 100 feet of the Fire Department Connection (IFC Sections 905 and 913). HBA: Noted, thank you. -HYDRANT FOR STANDPIPE SYSTEMS: Buildings equipped with a standpipe system installed in accordance with Section 905 shall have a fire hydrant capable of providing Fire Flow according to IFC B105.2, located within 100 feet of the fire department connections. HBA+SC: Noted, thank you. ACCESS TO BUILDING OPENINGS – IFC 504.1 An approved access walkway leading from fire apparatus access roads to the main egress door of the building shall be provided on this site. The walkway shall be capable of providing access for emergency personnel and equipment. Please provide details on site plan for the access walkway. HBA: Noted, thank you. The project will comply with these requirements and will provide these details in the final plan. MULTIPLE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINTS IFC- D106.2 Multiple family- residential projects having more than 200 dwelling units shall be provided with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads regardless of whether they are equipped with an approved automatic sprinkler system HBA: Noted, the project has provided two separate fire access roads in compliance with this item. REMOTENESS IFC D106.3 Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than onehalf of the length of the maximum - overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. ALL: Noted, the project has provided two separate fire access roads in compliance with this item. 3. Address Comment: The building will need to have addressing on multiple sides of the building, with numerals, plus the street name spelled out for any addressing facing an Emergency Access road with a different street name from the address. See below for additional addressing requirements. HBA: Noted, the project will comply with this requirement. PREMISE IDENTIFICATION: ADDRESS POSTING & WAYFINDING – IFC section 505.1.1 amendment Where possible, the naming of private drives is usually recommended to aid in ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 198 21 wayfinding. New and existing buildings shall be provided with approved address identification. The address identification shall be legible and placed in a position that is visible from the street or road fronting the property. Address identification characters shall contrast with their background. Address numbers shall be arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall not be spelled out. Monument signs may be used in lieu of address numerals on the building as approved by the fire code official. Buildings, either individually or part of a multi- building complex, that have emergency access lanes on sides other than on the addressed street side, shall have the address numbers and street name on each side that fronts the fire lane. ALL: Noted, the project will comply with this requirement. 4. Water Comment: There are three proposed hydrants, one near the NE corner of the lot, one near the NW corner and one near the SW corner. Depending on where the FDC is located, an additional hydrant may be required. HBA+SC: Noted. There is also an existing hydrant at the southeast corner of the site. As FDC location is finalized, the project will plan to comply with this requirement. WATER SUPPLY – Commercial/Multi-family Hydrant spacing and flow must meet minimum requirements based on type of occupancy. A fire hydrant capable of providing Fire Flow according to IFC B105.2 is required within 300 feet of all portions of any commercial building as measured along an approved path of vehicle travel. For the purposes of this code, hydrants on the opposite side of arterial roadways are not considered accessible to the site. An exception to this rule pertains to buildings equipped with a standpipe system which require a hydrant within 100 feet of any Fire Department Connection (FDC). ALL: Three new hydrants are proposed for the site at each corner of the property, and there is an existing hydrant at the fourth corner. A flow test will be performed to confirm the fire flow provided from the existing hydrant. 5. KEY BOXES REQUIRED IFC- 506.1 and Poudre Fire Authority Bureau Policy P-13-8.11 Poudre Fire Authority requires at least one key box ("Knox Box") to be mounted in an approved, exterior location (or locations) on every new or existing building equipped with a required fire sprinkler or fire alarm system. The box shall be positioned 3 to 6 feet above finished floor and within 10 feet of the front door, or closest door to the fire alarm panel. Exception can be made by the PFA if it is more logical to have the box located somewhere else on the structure. Knox Box size, number, and location(s) to be determined at building permit and/or by time of final CO. All new or existing Knox Boxes must contain the following keys as they apply to the building: - Exterior Master - Riser room - Fire panel - Elevator key if equipped with an elevator The number of floors determines the number of sets of keys needed. Each set will be placed on their own key ring. - Single story buildings must have 1 of each key - 2-3 story buildings must have 2 of each key - 4+ story buildings must have 3 of each key ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 199 22 For further details or to determine the size of Knox Box required, contact the Poudre Fire Authority. ALL: Noted, Thank you. AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS AND FIRE CONTAINMENT The proposed building(s) exceeds 5,000 square feet and shall be sprinklered or fire contained. If containment is used, the containment construction shall be reviewed and approved by the Poudre Fire Authority prior to installation. HBA: Noted, Thank you. GROUP R SPRINKLER SYSTEMS New multi-family buildings above 4 stories or with floor levels 30 feet above fire department vehicle access shall be provided with NFPA13 fire suppression systems. New multi-family buildings 4 stories or less or with floor levels 30 feet and below fire department vehicle access shall be provided with minimum NFPA13R fire suppression systems and Attic Protection as amended in 903.3.1.2.3 Exception 1: Buildings that do not contain- more than 6 individual dwelling units and the units are separated from each other with a 1-hour fire barrier will not require the attic protection. Exception 2: Buildings that do not contain- more than 12 individual dwelling units and is divided into no more than 6 individual dwellings (complying with exception1) by a minimum 2hour- fire wall will not require the attic protection. HBA: The project will provide NFPA 13 sprinkler system. FIRE DEPARTMENT HOSE CONNECTION IFC 912.2: Fire Department Connections shall be installed in accordance with - NFPA standards. Fire department connections shall be located on the street side of buildings, fully visible and recognizable from the street or nearest point of fire department vehicle access. The location of the FDC will be reviewed at construction and the sprinkler system permit. An underground fire line permit is required by the Poudre Fire Authority. As per Colorado state law (8 CRR 1507-11), individuals or companies installing underground supply lines from public water supplies to fire sprinkler system risers, standpipes, and other fire protection systems must be registered with the State of Colorado Division of Fire Prevention and Control (DFPC) as a “FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM CONTRACTOR – UNDERGROUND”. Permit applications should include a current business name and registration number. As per DFPC records, currently registered individuals and companies can be found here: https://dfpc.colorado.gov/sites/dfpc/files/2021%20Suppression%20Contractor%20Registrations.pdf Additional information regarding requirements of Colorado state law can be found here: https://dfpc.colorado.gov/firesuppressionsystemcontractors HBA: Noted, the project team will coordinate FDC location with PFA as required. 6. ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS, MODIFICATIONS AND METHODS Where a project conflicts with fire code compliance, the intent of the fire code may be met via alternative materials, modifications, or methods, where approved by the fire code official. As per Sections 104.8, 104.9 and 104.10 of the 2021 International Fire Code (IFC), the fire code official has the authority to review alternatives proposed in accordance with these sections and consider them for approval. An alternative methods request letter and any supporting documentation must be submitted to the Fire Marshal for review and approval, prior to final development plan approval. The letter and ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 200 23 supporting documentation must include language that supports the requirements of the previously mentioned sections. If alternatives are approved by the Fire Marshal, this approval must become a part of the permanent record of the final development plan and must be included in the code analysis of any design construction documents. ALL: Noted, thank you. INFORMATION – CODES AND LOCAL AMENDMENTS Poudre Fire Authority has adopted the 2021 International Fire Code (IFC). Development plans and building plan reviews shall be designed according to the adopted version of the fire code as amended. -Copies of our current local amendments can be found here: https://www.poudrefire.org/-programsservices/-community-safety-services-fire-prevention/fire-codeadopti on- - Free versions of the IFC can be found here: https://codes.iccsafe.org ALL: Noted, thank you. PLAN REVIEW SUBMITTAL When you submit for your building permit though the City of Fort Collins please be advised Poudre Fire Authority is an additional and separate submittal. The link for Poudre Fire Authority’s plan review application can be found at https://www.poudrefire.org/onlineservices/contractorsplanreviewsandpermits/newbuildingplanreviewappl cation-. ALL: Noted. Please be aware that the Authority having Jurisdiction for building permit for this project is CSU. The project plans for an additional and separate submittal to PFA. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County jcounty@fcgov.com 970-221-6588 1. All development plans are required to be on the NAVD88 vertical datum. Please make your consultants aware of this, prior to any surveying and/or design work. Please contact our office if you need up to date Benchmark Statement format and City Vertical Control Network information. SC: NAVD88 is being utilized. 2. If submitting a Subdivision Plat is required for this property/project, the title/name may not begin with addresses in numeral form. Address numbers must be spelled out. Please contact our office with any questions. SC: Noted, thank you. 3. If a Subdivision Plat is required and aliquot corners are shown, current acceptable Monument Records will be required. These are required with Round 1 submittal. SC: Noted, thank you. 4. Closure reports will be required for all Subdivision Plats, Easements, and any other document requiring a legal description & sketch being submitted for review. These are required with Round 1 submittal. SC: Noted, thank you. Department: Building Code Review Contact: Russell Hovland rhovland@fcgov.com 970-416-2341 1. If this project is CSU owned land and building then it not in City Building Services ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 201 24 jurisdiction and they must follow the State permit process. This project is CSU owned land and will follow the State permit process. If not State jurisdiction: Multifamily Construction shall comply with- adopted codes as amended. Current adopted codes are: 2021 International Building Code (IBC) with local amendments 2021 International Existing Building Code (IEBC) with local amendments 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) with local amendments 2021 International Mechanical Code (IMC) with local amendments 2021 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) with local amendments 2021 International Swimming Pool and Spa Code (ISPSC) with local amendments Colorado Plumbing Code (currently on the 2021 IPC) 2023 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado Projects shall comply with the current adopted building codes, local amendments and structural design criteria can be found here: https://www.fcgov.com/building/codes New 2024 building codes will be adopted in 2025. Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A117.1-2017. Snow Live Load: Ground Snow Load 35 PSF. Frost Depth: 30 inches. Wind Loads: Risk Category II (most structures): • 140mph (Ultimate) exposure B or Front Range Gust Map published by The Structural Engineer's Association of Colorado Seismic Design: Category B. Climate Zone: Zone 5 Energy Code: • Multi-family and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2021 IECC residential chapter. • Commercial and Multifamily 4 stories and taller: 2021 IECC commercial chapter -. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: • Electric vehicle charging parking spaces are required per local IBC amendment 3604, which requires 70% of parking spaces provide 3 types of EV charging. • If the building is located within 250ft of a 4 lane road or 1000 ft of an active railway, must provide exterior composite sound transmission of 39 STC min. • R-2 occupancies must provide 10ft to 30ft of fire separation distance (setback) from property line and 20 feet between other buildings or provide fire rated walls and openings per chapter 6 and 7 of the IBC. • All multifamily- buildings must be fire sprinkled. City of Fort Collins amendments to the 2021 International Fire Code limit what areas can avoid fire sprinklers with a NFPA 13R, see local IFC 903 amendment. • Bedroom egress windows required below 4th floor regardless of fire sprinkler -. All egress windows above the 1st floor require minimum sill height of 24”. • If using electric systems to heat or cool the building, ground source heat pump or cold climate heat pump technology is required. • A City licensed commercial general contractor is required to construct any new multi-family structure. • Energy code requires short hot water supply lines by showing plumbing compactness. • For projects located in Metro Districts, there are special additional code requirements ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 202 25 for new buildings. Please contact the plan review team to obtain the requirements for each district. Building Permit Pre-Submittal- Meeting: For new buildings, please schedule a pre-submittal- meeting with Building Services for this project. Pre-Submittal meetings assist- the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the design, that the new projects are on track to complying with all of the adopted City codes and Standards listed above. The proposed project should be in the early to Mid design- stage for this meeting to be effective. Applicants of new projects should email rhovland@fcgov.com to schedule a pre-submittal- meeting. Stock Plans: When the exact same residential building will be built more then once with limited variations, a stock plan design or master plan can be submitted for a single review and then built multiple times with site specific permits. More information can be found in our Stock Plan Guide at fcgov.com/building/res-requirements.php. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 203 Development Review Center 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Prospect Plaza, SPA240003 Neighborhood Meeting Notes January 8, 2025 These notes are a summary of the neighborhood meeting discussion and not a verbatim transcript. Most neighborhood meetings are recorded and posted on the City;s YouTube page: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7cZylpMlgCKqkcNsNCKAEevDf1P6r-Xk Attendees City Staff: Arlo Schumann, City Planner, aschumann@fcgov.com Em Myler, Neighborhood Development Liaison, emyler@fcgov.com Steve Gilchrist, Civil Engineer, Traffic Applicant Team: Fred Haberecht, Urban Ecology Studio Public: In-person - 4 Virtual - 2 Agenda 1.Purpose of the Meeting and Development Review Process – NDL and Planner Neighborhood Development Liaison Em Myler introduced the purpose of the meeting and how it fits into the process for prospective development in the City Notes. The City of Fort Collins knows that development can have a meaningful impact on neighbors who live, work and play nearby. Because of this, when someone wants to build something new in the city, we often require a neighborhood meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to give the public an opportunity to: •Learn about the project •Ask questions about the project •Share their feedback on the project Meeting discussion is intended to be considered by the development team as they decide whether and how to formulate an actual application for submittal to the City for review. The notes and recordings of neighborhood meetings are also provided to the decision maker at the end of the Development Review process. 2.Proposal Overview - Applicant The applicant presented their plans for the proposal. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 204 N e i g h b o r h o o d M e e t i n g N o t e s - P a g e | 2 3. Questions (Q), Responses (R), and Comments (C) - Responses are by the applicant unless otherwise noted Q: Prospect is very narrow. How will vehicles get into this site from Prospect? Will they use the center turn lane? The center turn lane becomes very dangerous already with people turning onto Centre Avenue. A: We’ll add a new roadway on the west side of the project between the new garage and the current Lake Street Garage with parking and the entrance to the new garage. There won’t be direct access from the garage onto Prospect or Lake. The curb cut for that new roadway will be in almost the same place as the current one to access the commercial building on the site. C: I’m mostly concerned about eastbound traffic trying to turn left into the site using the center turn lane. People trying to use the center turn lane on Prospect can’t get their car all the way into it and they block traffic. Adding another place where that happens would be dangerous. A: We’ll be also reducing the number of curb cuts in that area as well. A: (Gilchrist) Our suggestion is to do a right-in, right-out access there, so drivers can’t turn left into the new development going eastbound. We just got their traffic study and we’re evaluating how to mitigate that issue with the center turn lane on Prospect. Q: I live across the street in Aggie Village. There is existing affordable housing in Prospect Plaza right now, will that continue in the new development? A: CSU STRATA has owned this property for a while, and we are committed to making sure the housing there is affordable for students. We’re currently working through what this project will cost but our goal is to keep it as affordable as possible while making the project financially feasible. C: The pedestrian access is fantastic. The best part of this location is that it is easy to get around and you don’t really need a car as a student here. I hope that is the same for the students in this project. From my experience, I don’t think the traffic impact will be as high as usual since it is student housing and very walkable to campus. Q: The Horn bus route stops on this property. Will that service be affected by construction? A: We’re working with Transfort to keep that stop operating. It will probably move, but we know that that stop is very important for students who ride the bus around campus and to the Veterinary Teaching Hospital. Once the project is completed, the stop will be much improved with shelter, digital displays and a café. Q: Do you know where it might move? I take the bus to the Veterinary Teaching Hospital from that stop. A: It will still be somewhere on the same property, so likely less than 200 feet from where it currently is. The public right of way in that area will be rebuilt as well and should improve pedestrian safety and connectivity on Lake Street and Prospect Road. Q: What are the current student residents going to do while this is being constructed? Where will they go? There is no comparable affordable housing in Fort Collins for these students. A: We don’t have an answer right now. We’re trying to help as much as we can but they will need to leave this site. Q: Will students who live in Prospect Plaza right now be eligible for financial assistance finding new housing they can afford such as vouchers? A: We haven’t made a plan for that yet. C: Housing is always a critical issue for students, so please keep that in mind. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 205 N e i g h b o r h o o d M e e t i n g N o t e s - P a g e | 3 Q: A wheelchair-bound student was hit crossing the street nearby last year, how much have you thought about promoting accessibility and safety? A: Accessibility will be greatly improved on Lake Street and Prospect Road. We have a dedicated pedestrian way with accessible features going north and south on this property as well. There is a plan for a different project with CSU and the City to add new crossings along Lake Street and protected bike lanes too. This project will also meet all the Americans with Disabilities Act standards which did not exist when the current buildings were constructed in the 1960s. Safety is our number one priority for students. Q: When will the project be finished? A: Fall of 2027 C: So that’s about 2 and a half years where students will not have affordable housing. Q: How many beds will this development be adding to the market? A: The property currently has about 240 and the new development will be around 700. Q: Is it on campus housing only or off campus housing? A: It is off campus housing owned by CSU STRATA and not considered a CSU on campus housing project Q: Will this function similarly to Rendezvous Trails due to Tetrad's involvement, regarding the affordability? A: No, this is primarily for student housing and Rendezvous Trails is employee housing. The affordability component is different. Q: Can you clarify who owns the property? Is it CSU STRATA? A: No, the property is owned by the CSU Board of Governors and leased to CSU STRATA. The improvements will be owned by CSU STRATA. Due to CSU STRATA’s mission and the type of project it will only be available to students. C: I'd be happy to provide a list of available units at the several communities I oversee along that strip if that would be helpful. May not be exactly comparable to the affordability at Prospect Plaza but happy to provide. Q: Have you considered immediate things you can do to help students who will be displaced by this project such as refunding security deposits and working with ASCSU to find new housing for them? We should try to make sure that the students displaced by this valiant effort to increase affordable housing have the resources they need to find new housing quickly A: (Myler) The City also has a housing department and I am happy to share their contact information. A: CSU Off Campus life is also involved in this project and are there to help students find housing too. Changes to occupancy limits will hopefully also help. Q: What is the anticipated timeline for demolition and substantial completion? A: Demolition will begin in June of 2025 and students will be able to move in for the Fall 2027 semester. 4. Next Steps and Adjourn - NDL ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 206 membership of the commission. The resolution shall refer expressly to the maps and descriptive and other matter intended by the commission to form the whole or part of the plan, and the action taken shall be recorded on the map and plan and descriptive matter by the identifying signature of the chairman or secretary of the commission. An attested copy of the plan or part thereof shall be certified to each governmental body of the territory affected and, after the approval by each body, shall be filed with the county clerk and recorder of each county wherein the territory is located. Source: L. 75: Entire title R&RE, p. 1148, § 1, effective July 1. Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 31-23-108 as it existed prior to 1975. 31-23-209. Legal status of official plan. When the commission has adopted the master plan of the municipality or of one or more major sections or districts thereof, no street, square, park or other public way, ground or open space, public building or structure, or publicly or privately owned public utility shall be constructed or authorized in the municipality or in such planned section and district until the location, character, and extent thereof has been submitted for approval by the commission. In case of disapproval, the commission shall communicate its reasons to the municipality's governing body, which has the power to overrule such disapproval by a recorded vote of not less than two-thirds of its entire membership. If the public way, ground space, building, structure, or utility is one the authorization or financing of which does not, under the law or charter provisions governing the same, fall within the province of the municipal governing body, the submission to the commission shall be by the governmental body having jurisdiction, and the planning commission's disapproval may be overruled by said governmental body by a vote of not less than two-thirds of its membership. The failure of the commission to act within sixty days from and after the date of official submission to it shall be deemed approval. Source: L. 75: Entire title R&RE, p. 1148, § 1, effective July 1. Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 31-23-109 as it existed prior to 1975. 31-23-210. Publicity - travel - information - entry. The commission has power to promote public interest in and understanding of the plan and to that end may publish and distribute copies of the plan or any report and may employ such other means of publicity and education as it may determine. Members of the commission may attend city planning conferences, meetings of city planning institutes, or hearings upon pending municipal planning legislation, and the commission may pay, by resolution, the reasonable traveling expenses incident to such attendance. The commission shall recommend, from time to time, to the appropriate public officials programs for public structures and improvements and for the financing thereof. It shall be part of its duties to consult and advise with public officials and agencies, public utility companies, civic, educational, professional, and other organizations, and with citizens in relation to protecting and carrying out the plan. The commission has the right to accept and use gifts for the exercise of its functions. All public officials shall furnish to the commission, upon request, within a reasonable length of time, such available information as the Colorado Revised Statutes 2023 Uncertified PrintoutPage 261 of 603 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 207 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 208 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 209 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 210 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 211 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 212 Headline Copy Goes Here Arlo Schumann, City Planner Site Plan Advisory Review SPA240003 Prospect Plaza Student Housing February 5, 2025 Headline Copy Goes Here 2 Aerial Map Lake St Prospect RdCe n t r e A v e Co l l e g e A v e 1 2 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 213 Headline Copy Goes Here 3 Headline Copy Goes Here 4 High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (HMN) Urban Mixed Use District Structure Plan Place Type 3 4 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 214 Headline Copy Goes Here 5 Transit-oriented Development Overlay (TOD) West Central Neighborhoods Subarea Plan Headline Copy Goes Here 6 Site Plan Advisory Review • Colorado Revised Statutes - 31.23.209 • City of Fort Collins Land Use Code Division 6.11 Site Plan Advisory Review (City of Fort Collins Specific) •Conceptual Review, December 19 •Neighborhood Meeting, January 8 • Upon receiving complete Development Application Submittal, the City must hear the item within 60-days. •Hearing/Decision deadline February 8 •Round 1 comment review meeting December 8 and will receive final comment letter December 10 • A disapproved Site Plan Advisory Review made under Section 31-23-209, C.R.S., may be overruled by the governing board of the public entity by a vote of not less than two-thirds (⅔) of its entire membership. 5 6 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 215 Headline Copy Goes Here 7 Review Criteria 1. The site location for the proposed use shall be consistent with the land use designation described by the City Structure Plan Map, which is an element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2. The site development plan shall conform to architectural, landscape and other design standards and guidelines adopted by the applicant's governing body. Absent adopted design standards and guidelines, the design character of the site development plan shall be consistent with the stated purpose of the respective land use designation as set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan. 3. The site development plan shall identify the level of functional and visual impacts to public rights-of-way, facilities and abutting private land caused by the development, including, but not limited to, streets, sidewalks, utilities, lighting, screening and noise, and shall mitigate such impacts to the extent reasonably feasible. Headline Copy Goes Here 8 General Information 1. Site is Approximately 4.5 Acres 2. Existing on site is 11 3-story residential buildings and a multi-tenant commercial building. 3. Proposing a 5-story apartment building. 4. 696 bedrooms (rent by the bedroom) 5. Structured and surface parking with 418 parking stalls. a) 49 surface stalls, and 369 in structured parking 6. Primary entrance facing Lake St. 7. Improved transit stop on Lake St. 7 8 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 216 Headline Copy Goes Here 9 Planning Comments 1. Lighting – Recommending 3000k color temp max 2. Suggesting further study of Prospect frontage and adding architectural elements more complimentary of the pedestrian scale. 3. Landscaping at the SW corner of the site. • Traffic Study – Prospect Entrance • Utilities Coordination • Future Lake St capital project • Transit stop Other Depts. Headline Copy Goes Here 10 Parking Setback from Prospect Road • Parking setbacks are determined by street classification and Average Daily Traffic (ADT). • Prospect Road is an Arterial street. • The Prospect Plaza Transportation Impact Study indicates that the ADT for the Prospect Road access is between 100 – 750. • The appropriate setback for this access point is 75 feet. 9 10 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 217 Headline Copy Goes Here 11 Parking Setback from Prospect Road • The plans currently show a 50-foot parking setback. • Increasing the setback to 75 feet will eliminate three of the proposed parking spaces. • The increased setback will provide a greater deceleration distance for vehicles entering the parking lot from Prospect Road, reducing conflicts with vehicles entering or exiting the parking spaces. Headline Copy Goes Here 12 Neighborhood Meeting Comments • Traffic Impacts – Turning on Prospect • Pedestrian Safety • Bus stop along lake status during and after project • Affordability of units for students • Displacement of existing tenants during construction 11 12 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 218 Headline Copy Goes Here 13Floor Plans Headline Copy Goes Here 14 Lake St. Frontage 13 14 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 219 Headline Copy Goes Here 15 Prospect Rd Frontage Headline Copy Goes Here 16Elevations Building Length Approx 492ft 15 16 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 220 Headline Copy Goes Here 17 Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Prospect Plaza Redevelopment SPA240003, with the following condition: The plans will be updated to remove the three parking spaces closest to Prospect Road to achieve a parking setback of 75 feet from the north flowline of Prospect Road, in accordance with Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Figure 19-6 In evaluating the proposed Prospect Plaza Redevelopment Site Plan Advisory Review SPA240003, staff makes the following findings of fact: The Prospect Plaza Redevelopment SPAR is subject to evaluation by the Planning and Zoning Board, pursuant to State Statute Section 31-23-209, C.R.S. and Fort Collins Land Use Code Section 6.2.3(F). The location of the Prospect Plaza Redevelopment is consistent with the policies in City Plan and the West Central Area Plan, which are part of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The character of the Prospect Plaza Redevelopment conforms to the landscape and other design standards and guidelines adopted by CSU. The extent of the proposed Prospect Plaza Redevelopment is integrated into the surrounding context though the use of onsite and perimeter landscaping, accommodation of existing transit routes and utilities, public sidewalk improvements and access control to mitigate traffic operations. 17 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 221 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 222 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 223 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 224 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 225 20' VACATION OF LAKE STREET PER BOOK A PAGE 1 PARKING GARAGE PROPOSED BUILDING FFE: 5008 COURTYARD W LAKE ST 5003 5001 COFFEE KIOSK FFE: 5006 5002 N LEGEND XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 226 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 227 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 228 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 229 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 230 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 231 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 232 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 233 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 234 ITEM 1, APPLICANT PRESENTATION Packet Pg. 235