HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 07/07/2015 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 077, 2015, ADOPTINGAgenda Item 12
Item # 12 Page 1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 7, 2015
City Council
STAFF
Emma Belmont, Transit Planner
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 077, 2015, Adopting New Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to update Transfort’s Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines. The update
integrates Americans with Disability Act (ADA) requirements and provides guidance for the distribution of
passenger amenities at bus stops.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The current Transit Design Standards and Guidelines have been in place since 2001 and are implemented
through City Land Use Code Section 3.6.5 – Transit Facilities Standards. The design standards update was
prompted by out-of-date ADA accessibility standards and is intended to provide further clarification for how bus
stop amenities are distributed throughout the transit system. In addition, this update renames the document to
“Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines” in order to clarify the emphasis on stops and not other facilities in
the transit system.
The update of the Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines (Standards) prescribes four bus stop types,
Type I – Type IV, representing the amount of passenger amenities recommended at each stop. These
amenities range from stops with passenger amenities limited to a bus stop sign and ADA accessibility only to
enhanced bus stops with amenities similar to MAX stations. At a minimum, the Standards require that any
altered or newly constructed stop meet ADA accessibility requirements, to the maximum extent feasible.
The Standards provide a methodology for distribution of stop types and passenger amenities based on:
existing and projected transit ridership;
proximity to senior, youth, low-income and disabled population densities, such as housing, schools,
employment centers and/or social service agencies;
land use densities and location within a City defined Activity Center or Enhanced Travel Corridor;
and/or
locations with high exposure to the elements.
Application of this methodology typically results in either a Type II or Type III stop. Type II and Type III stop
types include a bench or shelter, plus basic accessibility, a bus stop sign, bike rack(s) and trash and recycling
facilities. Type I stops, which include basic accessibility and a sign only, would be limited to locations with low
population densities and low ridership potential. Similarly, Type IV stops, which include the highest level of
passenger amenities such as a custom shelter, bench, bike racks, trash and recycling facilities and enhanced
passenger communication tools, would only be used on enhanced transit routes such as Enhanced Travel
Corridors as prescribed by the Transportation Master Plan.
Agenda Item 12
Item # 12 Page 2
Using existing and projected resources Transfort estimates that 20 bus stops will be improved a year to comply
with these new standards. The process for prioritization of bus stop improvements is derived from the
methodology for the distribution of amenities in the bullet points listed above. Stops will be upgraded via three
techniques: 1) Transfort initiated improvements, 2) City Capital/Maintenance Project initiated improvements
and 3) development and/or redevelopment initiated improvements. The financial implications of this goal are
described more thoroughly in the City Financial Impacts section of the AIS.
CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS
No additional funding beyond existing resources is being sought at this time. Currently, the primary funding for
these improvements originates from the City of Fort Collins’ citizen-approved 10-year ¼ cent sales tax for
Capital Projects, which provides an average of $100,000/year dedicated to bus stop improvements. The
average cost to upgrade and improve a bus stop to the requirements outlined in these Standards is $10,000.
This estimate assumes the current average cost to install the ADA accessible landing surface large enough to
accommodate a full bus stop shelter and a connection to neighborhood sidewalks. The passenger amenities
(shelter, bench, bike racks, trash/recycling receptacle, etc.) are not included in this cost estimate as they are
provided through Transfort’s advertising contractor, or are to be provided by a development/redevelopment
project as prescribed by Land Use Code (LUC) section 3.6.5.
The $100,000/year may be used as leverage for grants to upgrade additional stops beyond what the funding
alone could improve. Finally, development/redevelopment projects and City Capital Projects will upgrade
additional stops throughout the community.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines Update were presented to the following boards and
commissions:
Commission on Disability, April 23, 2015
Planning and Zoning Board Work Session, May 8, 2015
Senior Advisory Board, May 13, 2015
Transportation Board, May 20, 2015
All boards and commissions viewed the update as favorable. Minutes and letters of support are provided as
attachments.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
A citizen advisory group was formed to guide the development of the Bus Stop Design Standards and
Guidance Update. This group was comprised of local transit riders, cycling advocates, safety specialists,
urban designers, CSU students, media professionals and other interested parties. The group met five times
during the development of the Standards. In addition, the Standards were presented at the following public
meetings:
Transfort Open House, April 16, 2015
Commission on Disability, April 23, 2015
Planning, Development, and Transportation Open House, May 6, 2015
Senior Advisory Board, May 13, 2015
Transportation Board, May 20, 2015
Agenda Item 12
Item # 12 Page 3
ATTACHMENTS
1. Commission on Disability minutes, April 23, 2015 (draft) (PDF)
2. Senior Advisory Board minutes (draft), May 13 2015 (PDF)
3. Transportation Board Letter of Support (PDF)
4. Sustainability Analysis Summary and Tool (PDF)
ATTACHMENT 1
Attachment 4
faces such as: overcrowded buses, high number of bike crashes, and sidewalks do
not meet standards for comfortable walking as well as poor accessibility. Today is
an introduction to study and get feedback on what is going well and help to
understand what the corridor project is. Will be having a number of follow ups
throughout the project through next summer.
B. Transfort- Emma Belmont- Transit Planner
Power point sent through email via Katie Stieber. Improvements happen through
development, advertising contractors, Transfort, and city capital projects. Five
different types of in-street stops. Improve on accessibility at bus stops utilizing
the four different styles of stop types: sign stop, bench stop, shelter stop, and
station stop. Upgrades will happen ~20 per year depending on funding. City has
over 500 stops currently. Need comment to City Council by June 2 for support or
critique for approval of bus stop design standards.
V. New Business
A. Education
No news at this time
B. Outreach
a. Update on Bridging the Gap
Angela Condit reporting: lock in the Hilton for every year, Loveland
handling finances works wonderfully, reviewed budget from last year and
set up budget for this year, focus right now on getting a topic/speaker.
Event September 23rd at the Fort Collins Hilton, more information
regarding cost and registration coming soon.
b.Update on Summit on Aging
Katie Stieber, Diane Smith, Joann Thomas, and Patricia Housley attended.
Informative, networking, full of energy, but a little too long of a day
(enough material for 2 days’ worth of meetings). All presentations are
available on Foundation on Aging website and meeting was also recorded
for a Channel 14 presentation. Patricia Housley will continue to be the
liaison for the Partnership for Age Friendly Communities.
C. Advocacy
a. Response to Transfort presentation
West Elizabeth presentation will continue to present as they go through
their process.
Bus stop standard presentation: upgrades look excellent and prioritization
is in match with the boards views. Suggest reviews of the stops more
often. Joann Thomas will be writing a letter of support to submit to City
Council prior to the deadline date.
b.Housing issue including livability and affordability suggested writing a
memo as a board representing seniors listing items we are interested in
Senior Advisory Board
May 13, 2015 ATTACHMENT 2
Olga Duvall, Chair
Eric Shenk, Vice Chair
Transportation Board
D DKZEhD
d ͗ :ƵŶĞϭ͕ϮϬϭϱ
dK͗ DĂLJŽƌĂŶĚŝƚLJŽƵŶĐŝůŵĞŵďĞƌƐ
&ZKD͗ KůŐĂƵǀĂůů͕dƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶŽĂƌĚŚĂŝƌ͕ŽŶďĞŚĂůĨŽĨƚŚĞdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶŽĂƌĚ
Z ͗ dƌĂŶƐĨŽƌƚƵƐ^ƚŽƉĞƐŝŐŶ^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĂŶĚ'ƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞƐ
ƚŝƚƐDĂLJϮϬ
ƚŚ
ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ͕ƚŚĞdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶŽĂƌĚƌĞǀŝĞǁĞĚƚŚĞŶĞǁdƌĂŶƐĨŽƌƚďƵƐƐƚŽƉĚĞƐŝŐŶ
ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĂŶĚŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞƐĂƐƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĞĚďLJ ŵŵĂĞůŵŽŶƚ͘/ŶƚŚĞƉĂƐƚ͕ƚŚĞŽĂƌĚŚĂƐĞdžƉƌĞƐƐĞĚ
ŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚŝŶƚŚĞƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŽĨďƵƐƐƚŽƉƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚ͕ŝŶƐƚĂůůĂƚŝŽŶ͕ŵĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞĂŶĚƵƉŐƌĂĚĞƐ͘dŚĞ
ŽĂƌĚŐĂǀĞƐƉĞĐŝĂůĂƚƚĞŶƚŝŽŶƚŽƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐŽĨŚŽǁĨƵƚƵƌĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚͬƌĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŵĂLJ
ŝŶĨůƵĞŶĐĞƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŶĨƌĂƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕ĂŶĚĂďŽƵƚŝƚLJƉůĂŶƐƚŽƵƉŐƌĂĚĞĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐďƵƐƐƚŽƉƐ͘
dŚĞŽĂƌĚƵŶĂŶŝŵŽƵƐůLJĞdžƉƌĞƐƐĞĚƐƵƉƉŽƌƚĨŽƌŶĞǁdƌĂŶƐĨŽƌƚďƵƐƐƚŽƉĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĂŶĚ
ŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞƐĂƐƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĞĚ͘
ZĞƐƉĞĐƚĨƵůůLJƐƵďŵŝƚƚĞĚ͕
KůŐĂƵǀĂůů͕dƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶŽĂƌĚŚĂŝƌ
$$%BSJO"UUFCFSSZ
$JUZ.BOBHFS
ATTACHMENT 3
SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
DATE: 6/24/2015
SUBJECT: Sustainability Assessment (SA) Summary for Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines
Key issues identified:
Enhances community accessibility for all residents across income and ability
Improves safety at bus stops
Encourages alternative transportation use, which helps reduce mobile sources of air pollution
o Supporting goals of the Climate Action Plan
Supports goals of Nature in the City
Increased transit usage expands the capacity of the City’s transportation network without
widening roadways
o Increases the feasibility of higher density development patterns
o Reduces the need for parking
Improves access to employment for all income groups and abilities
A dedicated funding source is identified (BOB 2.0)
Suggested mitigation actions:
• None identified
Economic
+2.8
Social +2.0 Environmental
+1
Rating Average
1.9
-4.0
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
Sustainability Rating
Rating without mitigation Rating with mitigation
Rating Legend
3 Very positive
2 Moderately positive
1 Slightly positive
0 Not relevant or neutral
-1 Slightly negative
-2 Moderately negative,
impact likely
-3 Very negative, impact
expected
ATTACHMENT 4
*The Fort Collins SAT was developed by modifying the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Analysis Tool developed by Eugene, Oregon, July 2009. 1
City of Fort Collins SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL (SAT)
(November 2014)
Creating a sustainable community
Plan Fort Collins is an expression of the community’s resolve to act sustainably: to systemically, creatively, and thoughtfully utilize environmental,
human, and economic resources to meet our present needs and those of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we
depend.
How to use the tool
The Sustainability Assessment Tool (SAT) is designed to inform a deeper understanding of how policy and program choices affect the social
equity, environmental health and economic health of the community. The City of Fort Collins has developed a Sustainability Assessment
Framework that describes the purpose, objectives, and guidelines to assist City Program/Project Managers to determine:
• The process for cross-department collaboration in using the SAT
• Timing for applying a SAT
• When to apply a SAT
• How to document the results of the SAT and present at City Council Work Sessions and Regular Council Meetings
Further detailed guidance is available at: http://citynet.fcgov.com/sustainability/sustainabilityassessments.php
The SAT does not dictate a particular course of action; rather, the analysis provides policy makers and staff with a greater awareness of some
of the trade-offs, benefits and consequences associated with a proposal, leading to more mindful decision-making.
Brief description of proposal
Please provide a brief description of your proposal – 100 words or less
The purpose of this item is to update Transfort’s Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines. The update integrates Americans with Disability Act (ADA)
requirements and provides guidance for the distribution of passenger amenities at bus stops.
Staff lead(s):
Please note staff name, position/division and phone number
Emma Belmont, Transit Planner/Transfort, 970-224-6197
2
Social Equity
Described: Placing priority upon protecting, respecting, and fulfilling the full range of universal human rights, including those pertaining to civil,
political, social, economic, and cultural concerns. Providing adequate access to employment, food, housing, clothing, recreational opportunities, a
safe and healthy environment and social services. Eliminating systemic barriers to equitable treatment and inclusion, and accommodating the
differences among people. Emphasizing justice, impartiality, and equal opportunity for all.
Goal/Outcome: It is our priority to support an equitable and adequate social system that ensures access to employment, food, housing, clothing,
education, recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy environment and social services. Additionally, we support equal access to services and
seek to avoid negative impact for all people regardless of age, economic status, ability, immigration or citizenship status, race/ethnicity, gender,
relationship status, religion, or sexual orientation. Equal opportunities for all people are sought. A community in which basic human rights are
addressed, basic human needs are met, and all people have access to tools and resources to develop their capacity. This tool will help identify how
the proposal affects community members and if there is a difference in how the decisions affect one or more social groups. Areas of consideration in
creating a vibrant socially equitable Fort Collins are: basic needs, inclusion, community safety, culture, neighborhoods, and advancing social equity.
Analysis Prompts
• The prompts below are examples of the issues that need to be addressed.
They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any
one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a
proposal - please include them in the analysis.
Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan?
Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of
expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal?
Proposal Description
The purpose of this item is to update Transfort’s Bus Stop Design Standards and
Guidelines. The update integrates Americans with Disability Act (ADA)
requirements and provides guidance for the distribution of passenger amenities
at bus stops.
1. Meeting Basic Human Needs
• How does the proposal impact access to food, shelter,
employment, health care, educational and recreational
opportunities, a safe and healthy living environment or
social services?
• Does this proposal affect the physical or mental health of
individuals, or the status of public health in our community?
• How does this proposal contribute to helping people achieve
and maintain an adequate standard of living, including housing,
or food affordability, employment opportunities, healthy families,
or other resiliency factors?
Analysis/Discussion
Improves community accessibility, including access to:
o Housing
o Jobs
o Goods and services
o Recreation and educational opportunities
o Healthcare facilities
o Social service providers
Provides independence for residents that do not drive
Improved amenities will make transit more attractive and comfortable
Improves safety at bus stops, particularly for disabled populations and
other vulnerable populations
2. Addressing Inequities and being Inclusive
• Are there any inequities to specific population subsets in this
proposal? If so, how will they be addressed?
• Does this proposal meet the standards of the Americans with
Disabilities Act?
• How does this proposal support the participation, growth
Improves equitable transportation options across all socioeconomic
groups
Improves the ADA accessibility of bus stops, improving community
access for youth, seniors and low-income and individuals with
disabilities
3
and healthy development of our youth? Does it include
Developmental Assets?
• If the proposal affects a vulnerable section of our community (i.e.
youth, persons with disabilities, etc.)
3. Ensuring Community Safety
• How does this proposal address the specific safety and
personal security needs of groups within the community,
including women, people with disabilities, seniors, minorities,
religious groups, children, immigrants, workers and others?
Improves the safety at bus stops, including:
o Accessible landing surface
o Connections to adjacent neighborhood sidewalks
o Greater separation from road traffic
4. Culture
• Is this proposal culturally appropriate and how does it affirm
or deny the cultures of diverse communities?
• How does this proposal create opportunities for artistic and
cultural expression?
Sends message of being welcoming community
Provides opportunity to engage with diverse fellow citizens and visitors
Distributes bus stop amenities in a more equitable way throughout the
community
5. Addressing the Needs of Neighborhoods
• How does this proposal impact specific Fort Collins
neighborhoods?
• How are community members, stakeholders and interested
parties provided with opportunities for meaningful participation
in the decision making process of this proposal?
• How does this proposal enhance neighborhoods and
stakeholders’ sense of commitment and stewardship to our
community?
Improves accessibility of Fort Collins neighborhoods
Improves access to transportation options to participate in the
community decision making processes (e.g. City Council Meetings, etc.)
Including system maps at stops would help users
Demonstrates responsiveness to community needs and safety of
individuals
6. Building Capacity to Advance Social Equity
• What plans have been made to communicate about and
share the activities and impacts of this proposal within the
City organization and/or the community?
• How does this proposal strengthen collaboration and
cooperation between the City organization and community
members?
Social Equity Summary
Improves underserved populations accessibility throughout the community, specifically: youth, senior, disabled and low-income populations.
Key issues:
Enhances Community Accessibility and Improves Safety at Bus Stops
4
Potential mitigation strategies:
n/a
Overall, the effect of this proposal on social equity would be:
Please reach a consensus or take a group average on the rating, enter an “x” in one of
the following boxes and indicate the overall rating.
Rating represents group consensus Yes
Rating represents group average + 2.8
+3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3
Very
positive
Moderately
positive
Slightly
positive
Not
relevant
or neutral
Slightly
negative
Moderately
negative,
impact
likely
Very
negative,
impact
expected
X X X X X
Environmental Health
Described: Healthy, resilient ecosystems, clean air, water, and land. Decreased pollution and waste, lower carbon emissions that contribute to
climate change, lower fossil fuel use, decreased or no toxic product use. Prevent pollution, reduce use, promote reuse, and recycle natural
resources.
Goal/Outcome: Protect, preserve, and restore the natural environment to ensure long-term maintenance of ecosystem functions necessary for
support of future generations of all species. Avoid or eliminate adverse environmental impacts of all activities, continually review all activities to identify
and implement strategies to prevent pollution; reduce energy consumption and increase energy efficiency; conserve water; reduce consumption and
waste of natural resources; reuse, recycle and purchase recycled content products; reduce reliance on non-renewable resources.
Analysis Prompts
• The prompts below are examples of issues that need to be addressed.
They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for
any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent
to a proposal – please include them in the analysis.
• Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action
plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level
of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal?
1. Environmental Impact
• Does this proposal affect ecosystem functions or
processes related to land, water, air, or plant or
animal communities?
• Will this proposal generate data or knowledge related to the
use of resources?
• Will this proposal promote or support education in
prevention of pollution, and effective practices for
reducing, reusing, and recycling of natural resources?
• Does this proposal require or promote the continuous
improvement of the environmental performance of the City
organization or community?
• Will this proposal affect the visual/landscape or aesthetic
Analysis/Discussion
Improved bus stop passenger amenities encourage alternative
5
elements of the community?
2. Climate Change
• Does this proposal directly generate or require the
generation of greenhouse gases (such as through
electricity consumption or transportation)?
• How does this proposal align with the carbon reduction goals for
2020 goal adopted by the City Council?
• Will this proposal, or ongoing operations result in an
increase or decrease in greenhouse gas emissions?
• How does this proposal affect the community’s efforts to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions or otherwise mitigate adverse climate
change activities?
Encourages reduction in Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) trips, thus
potentially helping to reduce carbon emissions in line with the City’s
2020 goal for reduced carbon emissions
Temporary and minor GHG emissions from diesel engines and use of
cement during construction activities
3. Protect, Preserve, Restore
• Does this proposal result in the development or modification
of land resources or ecosystem functions?
• Does this proposal align itself with policies and procedures
related to the preservation or restoration of natural habitat,
greenways, protected wetlands, migratory pathways, or the
urban growth boundary
• How does this proposal serve to protect, preserve, or restore
important ecological functions or processes?
Increased transit usage expands the capacity of the City’s
transportation network, thus potentially limiting the need for widening
of roadways in the longer-term
Improved transit facilities increase the feasibility of higher density
development patterns, which are less resources intensive
4. Pollution Prevention
• Does this proposal generate, or cause to be generated,
waste products that can contaminate the environment?
• Does this proposal require or promote pollution prevention
through choice of materials, chemicals, operational practices
and/or engineering controls?
• Does this proposal require or promote prevention of
pollution from toxic substances or other pollutants
regulated by the state or federal government?
• Will this proposal create significant amounts of waste or
pollution?
Encouraging transit usage has the potential to help reduce SOV trips,
thus promoting pollution prevention
5. Rethink, Replace, Reduce, Reuse, Recirculate/Recycle
• Does this proposal prioritize the rethinking of the materials or
goods needed, reduction of resource or materials use, reuse of
current natural resources or materials or energy products, or
Has the potential to help decrease parking needs throughout the
community
6
result in byproducts that are recyclable or can be re-circulated?
6. Emphasize Local
• Does this proposal emphasize use of local materials,
vendors, and or services to reduce resources and
environmental impact of producing and transporting
proposed goods and materials?
• Will the proposal cause adverse environmental effects
somewhere other than the place where the action will take
place?
Environmental Health Summary
Improving bus stop amenities encourage alternative transportation use, which has the potential to help reduce carbon emissions and other
pollutants and increase the capacity of the City’s transportation network without expanding roadway widths.
Key issues:
None Identified
Potential mitigation strategies:
N/A
Overall, the effect of this proposal on environmental health would be:
Please reach a consensus or take a group average on the rating, enter an “x” in one of
the following boxes and indicate the overall rating.
Rating represents group consensus Yes
Rating represents group average + 2.0
+3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3
Very
positive
Moderately
positive
Slightly
positive
Not
relevant
or neutral
Slightly
negative
Moderately
negative,
impact
likely
Very
negative,
impact
expected
X X X X X
Economic Health
Described: Support of healthy local economy with new jobs, businesses, and economic opportunities; focus on development of a diverse economy,
enhanced sustainable practices for existing businesses, green and clean technology jobs, creation or retention of family waged jobs.
Goal/Outcome: A stable, diverse and equitable economy; support of business development opportunities.
Analysis Prompts
• The prompts below are examples of the issues that need to be addressed.
They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any
one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a
proposal - please include them in the analysis
• Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has
advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or
may be significantly affected by this proposal?
7
1. Infrastructure and Government
• How will this proposal benefit the local economy?
• If this proposal is an investment in infrastructure is it designed
and will it be managed to optimize the use of resources
including operating in a fossil fuel constrained society?
• Can the proposal be funded partially or fully by grants, user
fees or charges, staged development, or partnering with
another agency?
• How will the proposal impact business growth or operations
(ability to complete desired project or remain in operation), such
as access to needed permits, infrastructure and capital?
Analysis/Discussion
Financial investment in bus stop accessibility improvements and
passenger amenities are minimal compared to other transportation
infrastructure improvements
Dedicated funding for these improvements exists through a Citizen
Approved tax (BOB 2.0)
2. Employment and Training
• What are the impacts of this proposal on job creation
within Larimer County?
• Are apprenticeships, volunteer or intern opportunities
available?
• How will this proposal enhance the skills of the local workforce?
The accessibility improvements recommended will assist with access to
jobs throughout the community for residents of all income and abilities
Supports employment opportunities for nontraditional employees
3. Diversified and Innovative Economy
• How does this proposal support innovative or
entrepreneurial activity?
• Will “clean technology” or “green” jobs be created in this
proposal?
• How will the proposal impact start-up or existing businesses or
development projects?
Access to high-quality transit has been shown to attract young, creative
and entrepreneurial professionals, particularly of the Millennial
generation
4. Support or Develop Sustainable Businesses
• What percentage of this proposal budget relies on local services
or products? Identify purchases from Larimer County and the
State of Colorado.
• Will this proposal enhance the tools available to businesses
to incorporate more sustainable practices in operations and
products?
• Are there opportunities to profile sustainable and socially
responsible leadership of local businesses or educate
businesses on triple bottom line practices?
May allow businesses to provide less parking
Supports employee access to jobs
Businesses could become more motivated to provide transit passes to
employees as services and amenities throughout the community are
improved
5. Relevance to Local Economic Development Strategy
8
Economic Prosperity Summary
Existing funding is dedicated for the bus stop accessibility and passenger amenity improvements recommended and transportation improvements
such as these improve access to employment throughout the community.
Key issues:
None identified
Potential mitigation strategies:
N/A
Overall, the effect of this proposal on economic prosperity will be:
Please reach a consensus or take a group average on the rating, enter an “x” in one of
the following boxes and indicate the overall rating.
Rating represents group consensus Yes
Rating represents group average + 1.0
+3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3
Very
positive
Moderately
positive
Slightly
positive
Not
relevant
or neutral
Slightly
negative
Moderately
negative,
impact
likely
Very
negative,
impact
expected
X X X X
X
- 1 -
ORDINANCE NO. 077, 2015
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ADOPTING NEW BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
WHEREAS, in 2001, the City established the current “Transit Design Standards and
Guidelines” which have been implemented through Section 3.6.5 of the Land Use Code; and
WHEREAS, these Transit Design Standards and Guidelines contain out-of-date ADA
accessibility provisions and need further clarification for how bus stop amenities are distributed
throughout the system; and
WHEREAS, City staff has prepared new “Bus Top Design Standards and Guidelines” to
replace the existing “Transit Design Standards and Guidelines” which new standards and
guidelines accomplish the goal of updating the ADA requirements and providing guidance for
distribution of passenger amenities at bus stops and sets a goal for improving an average of 20
bus stops per year; and
WHEREAS, following substantial public outreach, and upon the favorable
recommendation of the Senior Advisory Board, the Commission on Disability, the Planning and
Zoning Board, and the Transportation Board, the City Council has determined that the “Bus Stop
Design Standards and Guidelines” attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein are in
the best interests of the City and should be adopted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines attached hereto as
Exhibit “A” are hereby adopted for implementation as set forth in Section 3.6.5 of the Land Use
Code.
Section 2. That the “Transit Design Standards and Guidelines” are hereby repealed.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 7th day of
July, A.D. 2015, and to be presented for final passage on the 21st day of July, A.D. 2015.
__________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
City Clerk
- 2 -
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 21st day of July, A.D. 2015.
__________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
City Clerk
BUS STOP DESIGN
STANDARDS &
GUIDELINES
July 21, 2015
EXHIBIT A
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
Technical Advisory Committee
Noah Al Hadidi, CSU Student
Sarah Allmon, Barrier Busters Public Transportation Advisory Group (PTAG)
Vivian Armendariz, Citizen
Michael Devereaux, PTAG, Commission on Disability
Kathryn Grimes, Bike Advisory Commission
Jamie Rideoutt, Lamar Advertising Company
Ed Roberts, Transportation Board (past member)
Carol Thomas, Transfort Safety, Security and Training Manager
Project Management Team
Emma Belmont, Transfort — Transit Planner
Steve Gilchrist, Traffic — Traffic Engineer
Aaron Iverson, FC Moves — Senior Transportation Planner
Tim Kemp, Engineering — Civil Engineer III
Tom Knostman, Streets — Pavement Engineer
Kathleen Walker, Transfort — Operations Manager
Graphics and Formatting
Slate Communications
BHA Design Incorporated
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
CONTENTS
1. OVERVIEW
1.1 PURPOSE
1.2 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE
STANDARDS AND GUIDANCE
1.3 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER
STANDARDS GUIDANCE
2. THE BIG PICTURE
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 TRANSIT SYSTEM OVERVIEW
2.3 BUS STOP INSTALLATION AND
UPGRADE — HOW DOES IT HAPPEN?
2.4 OBSTACLES TO IMPROVING
TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE
2.5 BUS STOP MAINTENANCE
AND ADVERTISING
3. STREET-SIDE
CHARACTERISTICS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 STOP SPACING
3.3 STOP LOCATING
3.4 IN-STREET DESIGN
3.5 TECHNICAL DETAILS
4. CURB-SIDE
CHARACTERISTICS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 UNIVERSAL DESIGN AND
ADA ACCESSIBILITY
4.3 BUS STOP TYPES
4.4 AMENITIES
4.5 BUS STOP TYPE DETERMINATION
5. NEXT STEPS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 TRANSFORT BUS STOP
IMPROVEMENT PLAN
5.3 RECOMMENDED FUTURE ACTIONS
6. APPENDIX
6.1 BUS STOP DEVELOPMENT FORM
6.2 LAND USE CODE SECTION 3.6.5
6.3 TECHNICAL DESIGNS (As Incorporated into
Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards)
6.4 CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
LETTER OF SUPPORT
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 1
1. OVERVIEW
1.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of the Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines document is to assist City staff,
developers, local partners and private property owners in locating and designing bus stops and
their associated passenger amenities within the City of Fort Collins as well as the greater Transfort
service area. The document consists of five chapters:
• Overview — discusses how to use the standards and guidance
• The Big Picture — discusses the transit network as it currently exists and the envisioned
future of transit service in Fort Collins
• Street-side Characteristics — discusses the factors associated with the roadway that
influence bus operations
• Curb-side Characteristics — discusses the factors associated with the comfort, safety and
convenience of patrons at bus stops
• Next Steps — discusses Transfort’s approach to pursue capital improvements and outlines
related action items related to bus stop accessibility
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 2
1.2 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE
STANDARDS AND GUIDANCE
This guidance document was created with the assistance of a Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC),
created by Transfort, comprised of local transit riders, cycling advocates, safety specialists, urban
designers, students, media professionals, Transfort staff and other interested parties. The CAC
members included individuals with a wide range of abilities and experiences with the transit network.
A project management team (PMT) of City staff also assisted in the development of this document.
This group focused on the technical components and safety considerations as they relate to bus
stops. The following City departments were represented in the PMT: Engineering, FC Moves,
Planning, Streets, Traffic, and Transfort.
In addition, Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 19 – Guidelines for the Location
and Design of Bus Stops, as well as various other transit agency bus stop design documents,
provided best practices and general guidance in the development of the standards and guidance
outlined in this document.
1.3 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER
STANDARDS AND GUIDANCE
There are various tools that work in tandem with this standards and guidance document. Within the
Transfort department, other important guidance tools that may provide guidance on facilities and
services include: Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (TSOP), Transfort Operating Manual (TOM),
and Transfort Service Standards. Additional documents that govern site development include:
Fort Collins Land Use Code (LUC) and Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS). If
conflicts arise between these documents, the more specific and/or stringent standard will apply.
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 3
2. THE BIG PICTURE
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Bus stops are a critical part of the transit system as they serve as the first point of contact between
the customer and the service. In addition, bus stop placement throughout the community acts
to promote alternative modes of transportation to the traveling public. The spacing, location and
design all affect the operation of the transit system and, in turn, the transit patron’s satisfaction.
The standards and guidance in this document are intended to guide the design of transit stops that
complement their immediate surroundings, meet the transit patron’s comfort and safety needs,
and support an efficient transit network.
The placement of transit stops is guided by safety considerations, community context, patron’s
origins and destinations, opportunity, and Transfort’s strategic planning efforts. The TSOP is
Transfort’s long range planning tool; however, it is possible that community growth and change will
occur in ways not anticipated by the TSOP, and therefore routes and bus stops may be different from
those envisioned in the TSOP. The TSOP proposed long range routes are depicted in Figure 2 below.
2.2 TRANSIT SYSTEM OVERVIEW
The City of Fort Collins operates its own transit system, which is branded as Transfort. Transfort
operates fixed route transportation within the City of Fort Collins and in parts of unincorporated
Larimer County. Complementary paratransit service is contracted to and operated by Veolia
Transportation. A regional express route, known as FLEX, is provided through a partnership
between Fort Collins, Loveland, Berthoud, Longmont and Boulder County. Transfort bus stops
are located within Fort Collins city limits as well as in unincorporated Larimer County, the City of
Loveland, the Town of Berthoud, Boulder County and the City of Longmont.
Transfort’s route map (August 2015) is provided below in Figure 1. Following Figure 1 is a map
of the long range vision for transit service in and surrounding Fort Collins, Figure 2. This map
illustrates the TSOP vision for a full transition into a productivity-based grid system. It incorporates
the Phase 3 planned routes, along with additional recommendations from other adopted plans
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 4
and new routes that have been added since the TSOP’s adoption. The purpose of this map is to
indicate where new bus stops will be located as development occurs throughout the city.
VINE DR.
MULBERRY ST.
PROSPECT RD.
DRAKE RD.
HORSETOOTH RD.
HARMONY RD.
OVERLAND TRAIL
TAFT HILL RD.
LEMAY AVE.
TIMBERLINE RD.
I-25
SHIELDS ST.
COLLEGE AVE.
LAPORTE AVE.
ELIZABETH ST.
6 19
91
33
18
16
14
12
10
9
92
81
7
5
32
31
DTC
CTC
STC
8
2
Figure 1 — Transfort All Routes Map (Effective August 2015)
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 5
Figure 2 — Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Phase 3 Routes and Proposed Changes
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 6
2.3 BUS STOP INSTALLATION AND
UPGRADE — HOW DOES IT HAPPEN?
There are just over 500 existing bus stops in the Transfort system; of these, some meet the
standards outlined in this document and some do not. In addition to existing bus stops that
Transfort currently serves, the TSOP sets forth a plan for expanded service which will require new
transit facilities throughout Transfort’s service area.
There are a variety of ways transit facilities are installed and upgraded throughout the Transfort
system, and they are described below:
• Transfort’s Capital Improvement Plan — The Improvement Plan, which is based on
location specific criteria, identified in the Bus Stop Development Form (Appendix 1) and
Section 4.5, prioritizes bus stop improvements in the Transfort Service Area. Transfort
anticipates an annual budget of $100,000, based on dedicated tax revenue (Building on
Basics), for bus stop improvements. It is estimated that this amount will fund approximately
7–10 bus stops annually. Transfort also pursues grants to fund additional improvements.
Improvements are generally implemented according to the Improvement Plan, but obstacles
do arise as described in Section 2.4.
• Transfort’s Service Agreement for Bus Stops — Transfort contracts with an advertising
company for the installation, provision of passenger amenities and maintenance of Transfort’s
bus stops. This agreement permits Transfort to request solid surface upgrades to bus stops
that are located within public right-of-way (ROW) and installation of passenger amenities
at bus stops in Transfort’s service area. In a typical year, this agreement provides for the
upgrade of approximately 10 bus stops.
• Development and/or Redevelopment — As properties develop and redevelop within city
limits the City’s Land Use Code (LUC) requires that the development accommodate both
the existing and planned transit network (LUC Section 3.6.5 text included in Appendix 2).
This requires developers to provide the necessary transit infrastructure and passenger
amenities, if applicable, on or adjacent to their property. Developer responsibilities may
include: dedicating additional public ROW; dedicating a Transit Easement; installation of a
bus stop solid surface; installation of a bus pullout; and installation of or payment in lieu for
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 7
the applicable bus stop passenger amenities, all in accordance with the standards set forth
in this document.
Transfort does not have control over which stops are improved via this method. Bus stop
improvements may not be in accordance with the Improvement Plan Priorities set forth
in this document.
• City Capital Improvement and Street Maintenance Projects — Every year the
City’s Engineering and Streets Departments implement capital improvements and street
maintenance. These departments manage infrastructure improvements and work with
Transfort to help upgrade bus stops, as needed in the area of the project’s impact. Since
stops improved through this method are opportunistic, improvements may not reflect the
same priorities as listed in the Improvement Plan.
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 8
2.4 OBSTACLES TO IMPROVING
TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE
Many obstacles exist outside of Transfort’s control, which makes providing quality transit facilities
challenging at times. Obstacles to improving bus stops include: available space (including public
ROW) for stop infrastructure (solid surface and passenger amenities); accessible neighborhood
sidewalks connecting to stops; accessible street crossings; and temporary obstacles such as those
due to weather events like snow, rain or hail. Transfort actively works with other City departments
to make improvements to the sidewalk network and to add accessible bus stops in conjunction
with City construction activities. However, it will take many years for all stops to be improved
because infrastructure deficiencies are widespread. Images 1, 2 and 3 below demonstrate some
of the obstacles that limit transit facility improvements.
Image 1 Image 2
Laporte and Overland Eastbound (EB)
Obstacles: • Limited public ROW
• No sidewalks
Shields and Swallow Northbound (NB)
Obstacles: • Limited public ROW
Image 3
Harmony and Corbett (EB)
Obstacles: • Covered section of ditch runs between sidewalk and edge of street
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 9
2.5 BUS STOP MAINTENANCE
AND ADVERTISING
Transfort, like many transit agencies across the nation, utilizes advertising revenue to provide
both maintenance of and passenger amenities at bus stops. Transfort contracts this service with
an advertising contractor, allowing them to advertise at Transfort bus stops. In return, Transfort
benefits from a portion of the advertising revenue, as well as the contractor’s maintenance of bus
stops (including snow removal) and the contractor’s provision of passenger amenities and solid
surface installation at locations within public ROW. However, advertising is not permitted at all
bus stops within Transfort’s network. In single family residential areas, for example, advertising
is limited to side-yards. In addition, certain areas may not be appropriate for advertising, such as
historically significant sites. In such cases, Transfort has a limited number of non-advertising bus
stop benches and shelters that can be used if advertising is deemed to be incompatible with the
character of the area.
Images 4–7 below are examples of advertising at Transfort bus stops.
Image 4
Harmony and Timberline (EB)
Image 5
Image 6 Image 7
Harmony and Larkbunting (WB)
Rock Creek at Fossil Ridge High School (EB) Taft Hill and Drake (NB)
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 10
3. STREET-SIDE CHARACTERISTICS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This section discusses preferred and alternative street-side or in-street stop designs. Street-side
characteristics refer to features associated with the roadway that influence transit operations.
These features include elements such as: traffic speeds, street design, intersection design and
the location of acceleration/deceleration lanes. Street-side features influence the location of and
in-street design of bus stops. It is important to note that since stop designs were developed
based on standard roadway characteristics, the on-site context may call for locations or designs
that are tailored to that context. Ultimately, Transfort staff, with the input from the City’s Traffic,
Engineering and FC Moves Departments, will make the final decision on the location and design
that is appropriate for a given situation.
Image 8
Street-side
Characteristics
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 11
3.2 STOP SPACING
Stop spacing refers to the distance between stops along a bus route. Stop spacing takes into
consideration the trade-offs between vehicle travel times and walking distances to bus stops.
While more frequently placed bus stops reduce walking distances, it also slows down bus service.
In contrast, longer distances between stops increases vehicle speed but may result in customers
having to walk longer distances to get to bus stops. This is described in TCRP’s Report 19 as trade-
offs between operating efficiencies and customer accessibility, as follows:
Table 1 — Trade-offs of Stop Spacing
TCRP Report 19 also describes the industry standards for bus stop spacing typically being
subdivided by land use types/densities or locating stops near major trip generators. This suggests
using closer spaced stops in more densely populated areas, such as the central business core,
and increasing space between stops when approaching more suburban and rural areas of the
community. In addition Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) type routes generally suggest an increased
distance between stops to decrease travel times. Table 2 below describes typical ranges for the
different land use environments.
Transfort uses these ranges as references, but in general the main considerations for bus stop
locating and spacing are safety, such as reducing bus and vehicle conflicts, and major trip
generators, such as, community activity centers and concentrations of residences and businesses.
Where feasible, stops shall be located approximately ¼ mile apart. In locations where stop spacing
is more then ⅓ mile apart, a midpoint stop may be considered if adjacent land uses warrant such
additional stop placement.
Close stops
(every block or
⅛ mile – ¼ mile spacing)
Further distance between stops
(Beyond ¼ mile spacing)
•Short walking distances
•More frequent stops, creating longer travel time
•Longer walking distances
•Less frequent stops, creating shorter travel time
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 12
Table 2 — Recommended Bus Stop Spacing
3.3 STOP LOCATING
There are three location options for bus stops: near-side, far-side and mid-block, as shown in
Figure 3 below. Far-side stops are, in general, Transfort’s preferred stop location because they
are shown to be the safest for passengers exiting the bus and minimize conflicts with other
vehicles. However, a mid-block or near-side stop may be more appropriate in some situations.
Many factors influence the location of stops, such as site specific safety considerations, traffic
patterns, intersection geometry, passenger origins and destinations, pedestrian accessibility, route
design and available space. Transfort staff determine which stop location is most appropriate for
each individual situation, and Table 3 may be used to help make a decision based on the trade-
offs of each possible location.
Environment Route Type Spacing Range
Urban Area (within a City
Plan Activity Center, see
Figure 20 in Section 4.5)
Local Route ⅛ – ¼ Mile
Express or Bus Rapid Transit Route ½ – 1 Mile or As Needed
Suburban Area Local Route ¼ – ½ Mile
Express or Bus Rapid Transit Route 1 Mile or As Needed
Rural Area Local Route As Needed
Express or Bus Rapid Transit Route As Needed
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 13
Figure 3 — Near-Side, Far-Side and Mid-Block Stops Locations
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 14
STOP LOCATION ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
NEAR-SIDE STOP
Use if:
• Destinations are
focused at the
near-side corner
• Route pattern calls for
near-side location
• Available space is
limited on far-side
• Allows passengers to access buses
close to the crosswalk
• Eliminates the potential for double
stopping — passenger loading can
occur when bus is stopped at
the signal
• Increases conflict with
right-turning vehicles
• May result in stopping buses
obscuring curbside traffic control
devices and crossing pedestrians
• May block the through traffic lanes
during peak hours
• May cause sight distance
problems for pedestrians
and motorists
• May increase rear-end accidents if
drivers aren’t anticipating the bus
stopping before the intersection
• Vehicles may attempt to turn in
front of a stopped bus that is
beginning to pull away
FAR-SIDE STOP
Use if:
• Destinations are on
both sides of street
or on the far side of
the intersection
• Minimizes conflicts between right-
turning vehicles and buses
• Allows for additional right-turn
capacity (because bus is not
stopping in the right turn lane)
• Minimizes sight distance
difficulties on approach
to intersections
• Encourages pedestrians to cross
behind the bus
• Bus can merge into traffic more
easily, taking advantage of gaps
• Stopped buses may block
intersections during
congested periods
• May cause a bus to stop twice in
short order: once at a red light
and once at the bus stop
• May increase rear-end accidents if
drivers do not anticipate the bus
stopping after the intersection
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 15
3.4 IN-STREET DESIGN
The In-Street Design refers to the location that the bus stops in the street to approach the bus
stop, such as in a bus pullout, travel lane, bike lane or on a road shoulder. Determining what
design is appropriate depends on safety considerations, street design, available space, ridership
and other factors. Most of Transfort’s buses stop in bike or travel lanes, but bus pullouts may be
used in areas where there is high ridership, a large number of route transfers or where traffic is
considered to be high volume. Queue jumps refer to an intersection design that allows the bus
to move ahead of queueing traffic to progress through high congestion intersections quicker.
Queue jumps and bus pullouts typically originate from recommendations of a corridor, sub-area or
service-related planning effort (e.g. Harmony Road Enhanced Travel Corridor Alternatives Analysis,
Lincoln Corridor Plan, or West Central Area Plan). In addition, a bus pullout may be required when
multiple routes transfer at the location. Foothills Mall provides an example of such a situation.
In-Street Design alternatives are illustrated below in Figures 4 and 5. Bus pullouts, shall be designed
to the detail shown in LCUASS drawing 711. The flow chart in Figure 6 helps to determine what
In-Street Design is appropriate, and the trade-off of each design is described in Table 4.
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 16
Figure 4 — In-Street Bus Stop Design Alternatives
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 17
Figure 5 — Bus Stop Zone Dimensions (where on-street parking is present)
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 18
Figure 6 — In-Street Design Recommendations
Is a design
recommended as part
of an adopted plan?
YES
Use design
identified
in the Plan
NO
Is the stop a
transfer location?
YES
What volume
of transfers are
anticipated?
NO
Is there on-street
parking?
YES NO
A Bulbout stop
is most likely
appropriate
A Curbside stop
is appropriate
HIGH VOLUME
(BRT connections or
more than 3 routes
serve the stop)
LOW VOLUME
(2-3 low frequency routes)
How many travel lanes are
on the adjacent road?
A Bus Pullout or
Open Bus Bay is
appropriate
1 in each
direction
A Bus Pullout or
Open Bus Bay is
appropriate
2 or more in
each direction
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 19
STOP LOCATION ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
CURBSIDE STOP
(Typical)
• Provides easy approach for bus
drivers and results in minimal
delay to the bus
• Simple design and inexpensive
to install
• Easy to relocate
• Can cause traffic delays since bus
stops in the travel lane
• May cause drivers to make unsafe
passing maneuvers
BUS PULLOUT
(Route transfer stop
and/or on roads with
two travel lanes)
• Bus is out of travel lane,
minimizing delay to traffic
• Passengers board/alight out
of traffic
• Re-entry into congested traffic can
be difficult and cause delays
• Expensive to install, making
relocation difficult/expensive
OPEN BUS BAY • Allows the bus to decelerate
in the intersection
• See Bus Pullout advantages
• See Bus Pullout disadvantages
QUEUE JUMP • Allows bus to bypass
queued traffic
• See Bus Pullout advantages
• May delay right turning vehicles
• See Bus Pullout disadvantages
BULBOUT/NUB
(For locations with
on-street parking)
• Removes fewer parking spaces
than others
• Decreases walking distances to
bus stops for pedestrians
• Provides additional sidewalk area
for passengers
• Results in minimal delay for buses
• Costs more to install compared to
curbside stops
• See Curbside Stop disadvantages
Table 4 — Recommended Bus Stop In-Street Design
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 20
4. CURB-SIDE CHARACTERISTICS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
This section describes criteria that all bus stops shall meet, provides preferred layout of passenger
amenities at stops and recommends how amenities should be distributed throughout the Transfort
service area. Curbside characteristics refer to features associated with the comfort, safety and
convenience of customers at bus stops outside of the roadway. These features include factors like
sidewalk width, connections to adjacent land uses, and bus stop passenger amenities such as
shelters, benches, bike racks, trash and recycling receptacles and lighting. Newly constructed or
altered bus stops shall meet the standards in this section to the maximum extent feasible.
Image 9
Curb-side
Characteristics
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 21
4.2 UNIVERSAL DESIGN AND
ADA ACCESSIBILITY
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 regulated enforceable accessibility standards for
new construction and alterations to places of public accommodation, which include bus stops.
The 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design, the most recent guidance, outlines the following
four basic principles to accomplishing ADA accessibility at bus stops, as it applies to all newly
constructed or altered Transfort bus stops.
1) Surface — the bus stop boarding and alighting area shall have a firm, stable surface;
2) Dimensions — the bus stop boarding and alighting area shall provide a clear length of 8'
minimum, measured from the curb, and a clear width of 5' minimum, measured parallel to
the roadway.
Figure 6 — ADA Dimensions of Bus Boarding and Alighting Area
3) Connection — the bus stop boarding and alighting area shall be connected to streets, sidewalks,
or pedestrian paths by an accessible route, of at least 4' wide.
4) Slope — the slope of the bus stop boarding and alighting area shall be the same as the roadway
to the maximum extent practical, and not steeper than 1:48, a 2% grade.
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 22
If a bus stop has a shelter, there shall be a minimum clear floor space of 30" wide by 48" deep inside
the shelter and an accessible path leading from the shelter to the boarding and alighting area.
Figure 7 — ADA Interior Bus Shelter Space
4.3 BUS STOP TYPES
Transfort has four typical stop types tailored to the context of each stop area. Higher ridership
areas or areas with high concentrations of youth, senior, disabled or low-income populations are
recommended to have a higher level of patron amenities such as a shelter, bench, bike rack,
trash receptacle and lighting. Lower ridership areas may have fewer amenities. The Bus Stop
Development Form (Appendix 1) will assist in determining what stop type is appropriate. The stop
types are described below:
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 23
Figure 8
Type I Standard (Detached sidewalk)
Figure 9
Type I Constrained (Attached sidewalk)
Images 10 and 11 — Existing Type I Standard Stop Examples:
Shields and Rolland Moore Park SB Bus Stop Harmony and Taft Hill EB Bus Stop
• Type I – Sign Stop — A bus stop with a bus stop sign and basic ADA accessible landing
surface are the primary features of this stop type, meaning there is no bench or shelter. This
is the most basic stop type and is appropriate for low land-use density and low ridership areas.
Figures 8 and 9 and images 10 and 11 show standard and constrained options for this type of
stop, depending on the available right-of-way and sidewalk design.
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 24
Figure 10
Type II Standard (Detached sidewalk)
Figure 11
Type II Constrained (Attached sidewalk)
Images 12 and 13 — Existing Type II Standard and Constrained Examples
(to comply with above design, these stops need the addition of a bike rack and trash receptacle)
Shields and Centre Avenue NB Bus Stop Lincoln Avenue and Buckingham Park WB
Bus Stop
• Type II – Bench Stop — This describes a bus stop with a stand-alone bench as the primary
feature, and which does not include a shelter. The stop should also have a bus stop sign, bike
rack and trash receptacle. The most appropriate use of Bench Stops is areas with low to mid
ridership potential. Figures 10 and 11 and images 12 and 13 show standard and constrained
options for Type II – Bench Stops.
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 25
• Type III – Shelter Stop — This describes a bus stop with a shelter as the primary feature.
This stop type should also include a bus stop sign, at least one bench, a trash receptacle, one
or more bike racks, interior lighting and advertising panels. A Shelter Stop should be used in
areas with medium to high ridership potential, high concentrations of elderly, youth, disabled
and low-income populations and in areas with high exposure to the elements.
• There are four alternative designs for Type III stops. The alternative chosen depends on the
sidewalk design, public right-of-way and existing structures that may render the standard
design impractical. Transfort staff will assist in determining which design is appropriate
for each individual situation. Figures 12–19 and images 14–17 show examples of Type
III Shelter Stop configurations. The existing stop images aren’t necessarily compliant
with the organization/siting recommendations for passenger amenities in this section,
for the appropriate organization/siting of passenger amenities, see the “amenity detail”
following each Type III configuration.
Figure 12
Type III Standard (Detached sidewalk)
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 26
Figure 13
Type III Standard (Detached sidewalk) — Amenity Detail
Figure 14
Type III Constrained (Detached sidewalk)
Figure 15
Type III Constrained (Detached sidewalk) — Amenity Detail
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 27
Figure 16
Type III Constrained (Attached sidewalk)
Figure 17
Type III Constrained (Attached sidewalk) — Amenity detail
Figure 18
Type III Wide Parkway (Detached sidewalk)
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 28
Figure 19
Type III Wide Parkway (Detached sidewalk bus stop) — Amenity detail
Image 14 and 15 Existing Type III Examples
* These do not meet the siting/organization of passenger amenity recommendations detailed in this section.
Over time stops will be upgraded to meet revised standards, see Section 5.2 for more information.
Images 16 and 17 — New Shelter Examples
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 29
• Type IV – Station Stop — This describes a bus stop that has enhanced passenger amenities
such as a ticket vending machine, real time next bus LED and/or digital signage, a unique shelter
structure, as well as the standard passenger amenities provided at Type III stops. Elements
required at a Station Stop include those identified in Image 18 and Section 4.4 below. MAX
Stations are currently the only Station Stops in Transfort’s system. Stations should be used
on specialty routes, most often in Enhanced Travel Corridors as defined in the Transportation
Master Plan as “uniquely designed corridors that are planned to incorporate high frequency
transit, bicycling and walking as part of the corridor.”
Image 18 — Example Station Stop
Image 19 — Troutman Station (Concept) Image 20 — Troutman Station (Built)
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 30
4.4 PASSENGER AMENITIES
Passenger amenities are a significant element in attracting people to use public transportation.
Shelters are the most preferred passenger amenity because they offer the best protection from
the elements. Other important amenities include: benches; customer information such as transit
maps; real-time bus arrival information and directional signage; lighting; bike racks; and trash and
recycling facilities. All passenger amenities should be located within public right-of-way or within
a dedicated transit easement. The Bus Stop Passenger Amenities required, based on Stop Type
described in Section 4.3, are provided in Table 5. In addition, see the Bus Stop Development Form
in Appendix 1 for determining stop type.
• Bus Stop Sign — All active bus stops (except Type IV Station Stops) are required to have a
Transfort bus stop sign. Signage includes a round bus stop sign and a routes served sign.
Transfort will arrange for the installation of the signage at the time service is initiated at a stop.
• Solid Surface and full ADA Accessibility — All newly constructed or altered bus stops shall
have a solid surface at least as large as the minimum size described in the Stop Types in
Section 4.3 and comply with the four dimensions of accessibility described in Section 4.2.
Newly implemented routes offer an exception to this rule, as sometimes stop locations need
to be monitored to ensure they are in the best location prior to making the full investment
upgrading the stop infrastructure. Final stop locations are generally finalized within two years.
• Bench – All new benches shall be selected from the options described in this section and
shall be powder coated in either RAL 7047 (for benches in shelters) or RAL 7039 (for
stand-alone benches), refer to the Shelter Paint Colors on page 31. Images 21-23 depict the
acceptable options.
Image 21 Image 22 Image 23
6' Stand-alone ad bench
REF RFB-14 4793-121
5–7' In-shelter non-ad bench
REF SFB-02 14001-121
5' In-shelter non-ad bench
REF SFB-08 12096-121
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 31
• Shelter — All new shelters (not including Type IV Stations) shall be selected from the options
described in this section and be powder coated in RAL 7047 and RAL 6017 as depicted in
the examples below. Walls shall be either perforated metal or custom glass with the official
Transfort branded banner and routes served information as shown in images 24–27. A
double-sided advertising panel is the standard requirement. The non-ad shelter option is
only available upon Transfort’s approval. In addition, shelters are preferred to incorporate
solar panels for lighting or shall be directly wired for electric service.
Image 24 Image 25
14' Standard Non-advertising shelter
(Use must be approved by Transfort)
REF SIGNA-TFP14
15' Standard advertising shelter
REF SIGA-TFP15 25340-00
Image 26 Image 27
18' Upgraded ad shelter with V-ad Panels
REF SIGA-TFV 24343
15' Upgraded ad shelter with glass walls
REF SIGA-TFG15 25341-00
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 32
RAL Paint Colors
SHELTER PAINT COLORS
GREEN: #RAL 6017 SILVER: #RAL 7047
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 33
• Bike Racks — Bike racks are recommended at all bus stops and specifically required at
all type II–IV stops. The preferred bike rack style is a simple hitching post or inverted U, as
shown below, and should be powder coated in RAL 7047, RAL 7039 or RAL 6017.
Image 28 (2 bike) Image 29 (2 bike)Image 30 (4 or 5 bike)
REF SFM-05 25390-121 REF SFM-06 25391-121 REF SFM-10 25392-121
• Trash and Recycling Receptacles — Trash and recycling receptacles are required at all
Type III and IV stops and are an option at Type I and II stops. Lower ridership stops may
utilize a pole mounted trash receptacle, and higher ridership stops (projected over 25 daily
boardings) shall provide a stand-alone trash receptacle from the options below, and should
be powder coated in RAL 7047 or RAL 7039.
Image 31 Image 32
Pole Mounted
REF SFTR-10 25393-121 25394-121
32 Gallon Steel Strap
REF SFTR-11 25395-121 25396-121
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 34
• Lighting — Solar lighting panels are included on the roof of the approved shelter options
described previously. Type I and II stops typically do not have their own lighting, and instead
utilize nearby street lights and lighting from neighboring businesses. Pole mounted lighting
may be an option for stops with limited nearby lighting.
• Transit System Map — Transfort installs transit system maps at high ridership Type III
stops (over 50 daily boardings). System maps are only installed at Type III stops because
the shelter provides a mounting location for the map display case.
• Transit Route Map/Schedules(s) — Transfort typically installs individual route maps at
high ridership Type III stops (over 50 daily boardings). Route maps are only installed at Type
III stops because the shelter provides a mounting location for the map display case.
• Ticket Vending Machine (TVM) — Ticket vending machines are included at MAX stations
and in the example Type IV Station Stop design, as shown in Images 18–20. However, while
TVMs remain a recommended element, the need for TVMs may be reduced as Transfort
moves towards mobile ticket purchase options.
• Digital Signage — Digital signage is recommended at all Type IV Station Stops and may be
installed by Transfort at high use and/or transfer bus stops. Digital signs, which are LED
panels and/or LCD screens, typically display real-time bus arrival information, rider alerts,
and other critical passenger information.
• Ground Mounted Tactile — Type IV Station Stops are recommended to include ground
mounted tactile surfaces adjacent to boarding and alighting areas.
• Paper Schedules — Paper schedules are typically provided just at transit centers, but
could be considered for high ridership stops as needed. This information would be provided
by Transfort.
• Security Cameras and Emergency Call Box — Security cameras and emergency call
boxes are recommended to be provided at Type IV Station Stops.
• Wind Screen — Wind screens are integrated into the standard shelter designs, but depending
on the orientation of the shelter, the standard wind screens may not be adequate for the
specific location. If wind is deemed to be an issue at a particular stop, a custom wind panel
should be considered in addition to or in lieu of the standard shelter wind panel.
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 35
• Secure Bike Parking — Secure bike parking is an optional element at any stop, but should
be considered at high use stops, especially transit centers and/or park-n-rides.
• Braille Signage — Braille signage is not a standard element at bus stops, but has been
recommended to be evaluated further following the completion of this document. Section
5.3 discusses next steps related to Braille Signage.
• Wayfinding Signage — Wayfinding signage is optional at all bus stops but is recommended
at Type IV Station stops.
Bus Stop Amenities Type I Type II Type III Type IV
Bus Stop Sign
Solid Surface
5' x 8' Landing Pad
4' Path Connection to adjacent sidewalks
Minimal Slope
Bench
Shelter
Custom Shelter
Bike Rack(s)
(At least 1 rack recommended at all stops
[except Type I], additional racks may be
required based on projected ridership)
Trash and Recycling Facilities
Lighting
Transit System Map
Route Map/Schedule(s)
Ticket Vending Machine (TVM)
Digital Signage
Ground Mounted Tactile
Paper Schedules
Security Cameras and Emergency Call-box
Wind Screen
Secure Bike Parking
Braille Signage
Wayfinding Signage
Legend:
Required Amenity
Recommended Amenity
Optional Amenity
Table 5 — Bus Stop Amenities
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 36
4.5 BUS STOP TYPE DETERMINATION
The selection of the appropriate stop type should consider both qualitative and quantitative
measures, such as:
• ridership potential and/or existing ridership,
• neighboring land uses, including concentrations of youth, seniors, disabled, and low-income
populations (e.g. schools, housing or social service agencies)
• proximity to defined activity centers (as part of City Plan), and
• exposure to the elements.
As new stops are developed, the following criteria should be used to determine the appropriate stop
type. Please refer to the Bus Stop Development Form in Appendix 1 for a site specific evaluation form.
Higher priority for upgrades should be given to bus stops with mid-high ridership (above 50
boardings per day), demographic considerations such as youth, senior, disabled and low-income
population concentrations within ¼ mile of the stop, and stops with high exposure to the elements.
Criterion Type I – Sign Type II – Bench Type III – Shelter Type IV – Station
Ridership Potential
(existing or projected)
Low Ridership
(<25 daily
boardings)
Low–Med
Ridership
(25–50 daily
boardings)
Med–High
Ridership
(>50 daily
boardings)
Very High
Ridership
(250+ daily
boardings)
Land Use Density
(Refer to Zoning Map)
RUL, UE, RF,
RL, or POL
NCL, NCB,
LMN, RC, RDR,
NC, CL, E, I
NCM, MMN,
HMN, D, CC,
CCN, CCR, CG,
CS, HC
Youth, Seniors or Disabled
Populations Concentrations
Within a ⅛ mile
of population
concentrations
Located in an Activity
Center (City Plan— Targeted
Infill and Redevelopment Area
map, see Figure 20 below)
Recommended
Located in an Enhanced
Travel Corridor
Recommended
High Exposure
to the Elements
Recommended
Table 6 — Bus Stop Type Criteria
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 37
Figure 20 — Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Map, City Plan, 2010
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 38
As noted previously, Transfort serves just over 500 bus stops; some of which meet the design and
amenity distribution standards outlined in Sections 3 and 4. This section is intended to describe
Transfort’s plan to bring bus stops into compliance with these standards as well as the City’s
Americans with Disabilities Act Transition Plan as adopted in 1992.
The Transition Plan set forth a five year approach to achieving full compliance with the Americans
with Disabilities Act standards. At that time, Transfort had a much smaller service area and
anticipated that full compliance could be achieved through a $17,000 investment in bus stop solid
surface improvements. The plan presumed that once existing stops were brought into compliance,
future stops would be developed in accordance with the ADA standards. However, that was not the
case and many of Transfort’s current stops are not compliant with ADA standards.
In 2013, a full inventory of bus stops was completed. This identified that only 32% of Transfort’s
stops met the ADA standards described in Section 4.2. Since 2013’s inventory, service has been
eliminated in some areas (College Avenue and Timberline Road) and new service has been added
to other areas (Mason Corridor, North Timberline Road, West Vine Drive, East Drake Road and
East Horsetooth Road). In addition, as of spring 2015, approximately 50 stops had been upgraded
to meet ADA standards. Transfort managed projects upgrading 27 stops, including 18 MAX
stations and nine stops throughout the community; private development upgraded upwards of
seven stops; and Transfort’s advertising contractor upgraded 16 stops. Based on this information
Transfort estimates that now approximately 35% of bus stops meet ADA accessibility requirements.
Inventorying of bus stops is ongoing and Transfort will have a more accurate understanding of ADA
compliance by the end of 2015.
Based on the previous estimate, approximately 330 bus stops in Transfort’s service area are not
in compliance with ADA standards. Many of these are located in areas with limited neighborhood
sidewalks. In addition to the cost of any necessary connecting sidewalks, bus stop improvements
can range between $2,500 to $30,000 depending on the available public ROW and other site
specific characteristics (an average is estimated at $10,000 for each stop). Stops on the low
5. NEXT STEPS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 39
end are generally within public ROW and have level grading to build on. Stops on the higher end
are in areas that often require negotiations with private property owners before any accessible
infrastructure can be installed and where drainage or grading challenges are present. The obstacles
to upgrading bus stops is described more thoroughly in Section 2.4.
This information leads Transfort to estimate that full compliance with ADA standards would cost
between $3,000,000 and $5,000,000 (in 2015 dollars). Transfort’s Bus Stop Improvement Plan, in
Section 5.2, describes Transfort’s phased approach to achieving (at a minimum) ADA accessibility
at all bus stops as well as compliance with the bus stop type and amenity distribution standards in
this document.
Section 2.3 — “Bus Stop Installation and Upgrade — How does it happen?” explains the four
primary ways that bus stops are upgraded:
• Transfort Bus Stop Improvement Plan
• Transfort’s Advertising Contractor
• Development and/or Redevelopment
• City Capital Projects and Street Maintenance Program
This section focuses on stops improved through the Transfort Bus Stop Improvement Plan and by
Transfort’s advertising contractor. Transfort’s Bus Stop Improvement Plan is not all inclusive of
every Transfort stop, since two other improvement methods, Development/Redevelopment and
City Capital Projects – Street Maintenance Projects, will also result in upgraded stops throughout
the community.
5.2 TRANSFORT BUS STOP
IMPROVEMENT PLAN
This April, City of Fort Collins residents approved a 10-year 0.25% sales tax for Capital Projects. In
addition to other City Capital Projects, this tax includes a dedication of an average of $100,000 a year
to bus stop improvements in the Transfort service area. It is anticipated that this will fund an average
of 10 stops a year over the next 10 years for a total of 100 stops (between 2016 and 2026). This
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 40
funding can also serve as local as leverage for grants for additional stop improvements. In addition,
Transfort can work with their advertising contractor to upgrade additional stops within public ROW.
Based on this identified funding source and Transfort’s working relationship with their advertising
contractor, Transfort projects an average of 15–20 stops be improved to meet the new design standards
each year based on the priorities described in Section 4.5. To reiterate, priority for bus stop upgrades
are given to areas that do not meet ADA requirements and meet the following criteria:
• Mid-high ridership (above 50 boardings per day),
• Demographic considerations such as youth, senior, disabled and low-income population
concentrations within ¼ mile of the stop
• Stops with high exposure to the elements
5.3 RECOMMENDED FUTURE ACTIONS
• Grant Funding — The City should pursue grant funding to leverage the limited local funding
to accelerate the Transfort Bus Stop Improvement Plan.
• Snow Removal on Adjacent Sidewalks — The inconsistent removal of snow surrounding
bus stops was a point of concern for the Citizen Advisory Committee that helped guide the
development of this document. Transfort would not be the appropriate leader to initiating
this discussion, but the City’s Street Maintenance and Code Enforcement Departments will
be made aware of the concerns expressed.
• Braille Signage — Braille signage was identified as an element of interest by the Citizen
Advisory Committee that guided the development of this document. Following the adoption
of this document, Transfort will establish a group of interested transit users to help determine
how Braille signage could be implemented and what the Braille signage should say.
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 41
6. APPENDIX
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 42
6.1 BUS STOP DEVELOPMENT FORM
Is a design
recommended as part
of an adopted plan?
YES
Use design
identified
in the Plan
NO
Is the stop a
transfer location?
YES
What volume
of transfers are
anticipated?
NO
Is there on-street
parking?
YES NO
A Bulbout stop
is most likely
appropriate
A Curbside stop
is appropriate
HIGH VOLUME
(BRT connections or
more than 3 routes
serve the stop)
LOW VOLUME
(2-3 low frequency routes)
How many travel lanes are
on the adjacent road?
A Bus Pullout or
Open Bus Bay is
appropriate
1 in each
direction
A Bus Pullout or
Open Bus Bay is
appropriate
2 or more in
each direction
Transfort Bus Stop Checklist
To be filled out by Transfort Staff
Location (cross streets): __________________________________________________
Block Location: ¨ Near-side ¨ Far-side ¨ Mid-block
Service: ¨ On Existing Transit Route ¨ Future Transit Route
Street-Side Design Considerations:
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 43
Curb-side Design Considerations:
Projected Ridership (boardings)
Low Ridership (<25 daily boardings) – 0 points
Moderate Ridership (25–50 daily boardings) – 2 points
High Ridership (>50 daily boardings) – 5 points
Very High Ridership (200+ daily boardings) – 10 points
Land Use Density (Zoning)
Low Density (RUL, UE, RF, RL, POL or County) – 0 points
Medium Density (NCL, NCB, LMN, RC, RDR, NC, CL, E, I) – 2 points
Higher Density (NCM, MMN, HMN, D, CC, CCN, CCR, CG, CS, HC) – 5 points
Youth, Senior, Disabled or Low-income Population Concentrations
(includes schools, dedicated housing, and social service entities)
Within a ¼ mile of population concentrations – 2 points
Within a ⅛ mile of population concentrations – 5 points
Activity Center
Within a designated Activity Center or on CSU’s campus – 2 points
Enhanced Transportation Corridor (ETC)
Located along an ETC – 2 points
Designated as Station in an ETC plan – 15 points
High Exposure to Elements
In areas with exposure to wind, rain, high traffic speed, etc. – 5 points
TOTAL
Scoring
Type I Stop — Basic accessibility required
Type II Stop — Basic accessibility and bench required
Type III
Type III – Basic accessibility, standard shelter, trash and 1 bike rack (2 bikes)
Type III – Basic accessibility, standard shelter, trash and 2 bike racks (4 bikes)
Optional Type IV (upon consideration by transit provider)
Score Range
0 – 1
2 – 4
5 – 10
11 – 15
>15
In-street and Curb-side Design
Recommended In-Street Design: ¨ Curb-side Stop ¨ Bulbout Stop
¨ Bus Pullout Stop ¨ Open Bay Stop ¨ Queue Jump Stop
Recommended Curb-side Stop Type: ¨ Type I (Sign Stop) ¨ Type II (Bench Stop)
¨ Type III (Shelter Stop) ¨ Type III (Shelter Stop – 2 bike racks) ¨ Type IV (Station Stop)
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 44
6.2 LAND USE CODE SECTION 3.6.5
3.6.5 Bus Stop Design Standards (update in progress)
(A) Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to ensure that new development adequately
accommodates existing and planned transit service by integrating facilities designed and located
appropriately for transit into the development plan.
(B) General Standard. All development located on an existing or planned transit route shall install
a transit stop and other associated facilities on an easement dedicated to the City or within public
right-of-way as prescribed by the City of Fort Collins Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines
in effect at the time of installation, unless the Director of Community Services determines that
adequate transit facilities consistent with the Transit Design Standards already exist to serve the
needs of the development. All development located on existing transit routes will accommodate
the transit facilities by providing the same at the time of construction. All development located on
planned routes will accommodate said facilities by including the same in the development plan
and escrowing funds in order to enable the city or its agents to construct the transit facilities at the
time transit service is provided to the development. All facilities installed shall, upon acceptance
by the City, become the property of the City and shall be maintained by the City or its agent.
(C) Location of Existing and Planned Transit Routes. For the purposes of application of this
standard, the location of existing transit routes shall be defined by the Transfort Route Map in
effect at the time the application is approved. The location of planned transit routes shall be
defined according to the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan, as amended.
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 45
6.3 TECHNICAL DESIGNS (As Incorporated into
Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards)
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 46
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 47
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 48
6.4 CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
LETTER OF SUPPORT
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 49
MID-BLOCK STOP
Use if:
• Block size is large
and/or destinations
are focused
mid-block
• Route pattern calls
for mid-block stop
• Minimizes sight distance
difficulties at intersections
• Removes the influence of
traffic congestion occurring at
intersections
• Encourages passengers to cross
mid-block (jaywalk)
• Increases walking distance for
patrons to cross at intersections
Table 3 — Recommended Bus Stop Location
transportation use
o Higher use of alternative transportation helps reduce mobile
sources of air pollution
Improves accessibility to nature, supporting the goals of Nature in the
City