HomeMy WebLinkAbout077 - 07/21/2015 - ADOPTING NEW BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 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WHEREAS, these Transit Design Standards and Guidelines contain out-of-date ADA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 That the "Transit Design Standards and Guidelines" are hereby repealed.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.
QOpT C044��
Mayor —�
ATTEST:
°., •:oo
�v\COl
City Clerk
- 1 -
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 21 st day of July, A.D. 2015.
�Mayor
ATTEST:
�yOf FORTC,
V�'• • .;r
x
Chief Deputy City Clerk
„ADO
- 2 -
EXHIBIT A
........................................................................................................................................................................................�
BUS S DESIGN
STANDARDS &
oil
GUIDELINES
�1 N COLLEGE-Y
July 21 , 2015 � I
t - s CGO ALL ,
\
4
� ri
■
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
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................�
1 . OVERVIEW 4. CURB - SIDE
1 . 1 PURPOSE CHARACTERISTICS
1 . 2 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE 4. 1 INTRODUCTION
STANDARDS AND GUIDANCE 4. 2 UNIVERSAL DESIGN AND
1 . 3 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER ADA ACCESSIBILITY
STANDARDS GUIDANCE 4 . 3 BUS STOP TYPES
4 . 4 AMENITIES
Z. THL BIG PICTURE
4 . 5 BUS STOP TYPE DETERMINATION
2 . 1 INTRODUCTION
2 . 2 TRANSIT SYSTEM OVERVIEW 5. NEXT STEPS
2 . 3 BUS STOP INSTALLATION AND 5 . 1 INTRODUCTION
UPGRADE — HOW DOES IT HAPPEN ?
2 . 4 OBSTACLES TO IMPROVING 5 . 2 TRANSFORT BUS STOP
TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PLAN
2 . 5 BUS STOP MAINTENANCE 5 . 3 RECOMMENDED FUTURE ACTIONS
AND ADVERTISING
6 . APPENDIX
3 . STREET- SIDE 6 . 1 BUS STOP DEVELOPMENT FORM
CHARACTERISTICS
6 . 2 LAND USE CODE SECTION 3 . 6 . 5
3 . 1 INTRODUCTION
6 . 3 TECHNICAL DESIGNS (As Incorporated into
3 . 2 STOP SPACING Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards )
3 . 3 STOP LOCATING 6 . 4 CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
LETTER OF SUPPORT
3 . 4 IN-STREET DESIGN
3 . 5 TECHNICAL DETAILS
................................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ........... ... ... ... ........... ... ... ... ........... ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
■
0.V... ... ... ... ... ............................. ... ... ... ... ............................. ... ... ... ............................. ... ... ... ... ............................. ... ... ... ... ........................
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 1
102 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 2
. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .i. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... .�
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 3
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.
Figure 1 — Transfort All Routes Map ( Effective August 2015 )
N
VINE DR.
DTC
i
MULBERRY ST
CTC
PROSPL., i r.b.
DRAKE RD.
HORSETOOTH RD.
r
STC
................................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 4
Figure 2 — Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Phase 3 Routes and Proposed Changes
w
z
0
w
U
VINE
p ■ ■
Vow
■ ,
a DTC
,� at
MULBERRY ■
■ W
■ .. 1 Z
CTC
m
�" • ~ PROSPECT
SEES! aa - DRAKE
■
9
HORSETOOTH
Harmony
■
Transfer
■
Center
WESISMIN NEWS 0 IS main a 007MME 1ES;M! EEMESwwNwq
MAP LEGEND STC
Strategic Plan Phase 3 Routes
■ Updates Since Tranfort Stratigic
Opereating Plan Adoption
TRILBY
TRANSFORT
................................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 5
203 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 6
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 7
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
ALL ,
ddd
r 1
-
a
r _
Laporte and Overland Eastbound ( EB ) Shields and Swallow Northbound ( NB )
Obstacles : • Limited public ROW Obstacles : Limited public ROW
• No sidewalks
Image 3
JiT" law
• i
_ a
J
Harmony and Corbett ( EB )
Obstacles : • Covered section of ditch runs between sidewalk and edge of street
....... ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 8
205 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 Image 5
I
u
Harmony and Timberline ( EB ) Harmony and Larkbunting ( WB )
Image 6 Image 7
or
t _ s
ma's;-� -
t w
Rock Creek at Fossil Ridge High School ( EB ) Taft Hill and Drake ( NB )
.. .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 9
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
41
Street- side
Characteristics
AM
we
1, J
G — I
o ' C60
1
G � �
_ S
l
L
.. ............................................................................................................... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........... ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 10
302 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
( evese ry stops
• Short walking distances
• More frequent stops , creating longer travel time
p , •
distanceFurther between stops Longer walking distances
( Beyond - p , • Less frequent stops , creating shorter travel time
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 1/4 mile apart . In locations where stop spacing
is more then 1/3 mile apart , a midpoint stop may be considered if adjacent land uses warrant such
additional stop placement .
.. .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 11
Table 2 — Recommended Bus Stop Spacing
Environment Spacing Range
Urban Area (within a City Local Route 1/8 - 1/4 Mile
Plan Activity Center,
Figure 20 in Section 4 . 5 ) Express or Bus Rapid Transit Route 1/2 - 1 Mile or As Needed
Suburban Area Local Route 1/4 - 1/2 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
303 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 .
................................................................................................................. ... ...... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 12
Figure 3 — Near-Side , Far-Side and Mid- Block Stops Locations
Near- Side Bus Stop
Bus Stops before entering the intersection
Far- Side Bus Stop
Bus Stops after going through the intersection
Bus �
Mid - Block Bus Stop
Bus Stops in the middle of a block
................................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 13
Table 3 — Recommended Bus Stop Location
STOP LOCATION ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
• ■ • Allows passengers to access buses Increases conflict with
Use if: close to the crosswalk right-turning vehicles
Destinations Eliminates the potential for double May result in stopping buses
focused at stopping — passenger loading can obscuring curbside traffic control
near-si ' • corner 4w occur when bus is stopped at devices and crossing pedestrians
• Route pattern calls forthe signal May block the through traffic lanes
near-side location
during peak hours
Available• ' ' May cause sight distance
limited on ' • 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
• Minimizes conflicts between right- • Stopped buses may block
Use if: turning vehicles and buses intersections during
Destinations ' • Allows for additional right-turn congested periods
" th sidesofstreetcapacity ( because bus is not • May cause a bus to stop twice in
or on ' • of stopping in the right turn lane ) short order : once at a red light
the intersection Minimizes sight distance and once at the bus stop
difficulties on approach May increase rear-end accidents if
to intersections drivers do not anticipate the bus
• Encourages pedestrians to cross stopping after the intersection
behind the bus
• Bus can merge into traffic more
easily, taking advantage of gaps
MID-BLOCK • • Minimizes sight distance Encourages passengers to cross
Use if: Ad difficulties at intersections mid-block (jaywalk)
Blocklarge Removes the influence of Increases walking distance for
and / or destinations traffic occurring congestion
g g at patrons to cross at intersections
' • focused intersections
mid-block
Route pattern
for • • • • •
................................................................................................................. ... ...... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 14
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 15
Figure 4 — In-Street Bus Stop Design Alternatives
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bus
Curbside Stop ( bus stops in travel lane)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
i Bus
Bus Pullout/ Bus Bay FF
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bus
Open Bus Bay ( bus stops in a merge lane)
—
— - — - - - - - — — — - - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -
BUS ONLYthrough lane Bus
Queue Jump Bus Bay '
111110/00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-� Bus
F0 Parking 0 I 0
BUlbout or Nub ( bus stops in travel lane)
.......... ... ... ... .............. ... ... ........... ... ... .............. ... ... ... .............. ... ... .............. ... ................. ... ................. ... ................. ... ................. ... ................. ... ................. ... ................
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 16
Figure 5 — Bus Stop Zone Dimensions (where on-street parking is present)
111111
, 100' Minimum No Parking Zone , 90' Minimum No Parking Zone
Bus X Bus
50' Minimu
'5 0' Milli
M i i
Near-Side Stop ' " "
Turning
Radii X Far- Side Stop
tLo
0
ri
Far- Side Stop v a
After Turn z E
Legend E 2
MIParking Zone
o Q
L o
X 5 ' from edge of cross walk or end of Q1 Mid - Block Stop
turning radius m
Notes : E
1 ) Sized for 40' buses, add 20' to all designs for E
articulated buses = .2N
2 ) Increase bus stop zone by 50' for every = o
additional 40' bus expected to serve stop
simultaneously o 0
3 ) Bus Stops shall comply with LCUASS detail 7- Z
16 Sight Distance at Intersections
.. .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 17
Figure 6 — In-Street Design Recommendations
Is a design
recommended as part
of an adopted plan?
YES 1
Use design Is the stop a
identified transfer location?
in the Plan
YES 1
anticipated?What volume Is there on-street
of transfers are parking2
VOLUMEHIGH 1VOLUME
C ' frequency
more than 3 routes How many travel lanes are
serve the
op adjacentroad?
A Bus Pullout or 1 in each 2 or more in A Bulbout stop A Curbside stop
Open Bus Bay is is most likely
d � - . � � is appropriate
appropriate appropriate
ON
A Bus Pullout or
Open Bus Bay is
appropriate
................................................................................................................. ... ...... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 18
Table 4 — Recommended Bus Stop In-Street Design
STO ■
LOCATION ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
• : ' • Provides easy approach for bus • Can cause traffic delays since bus
(Typical ) drivers and results in minimal stops in the travel lane
delay to the bus May cause drivers to make unsafe
• Simple design and inexpensive passing maneuvers
to install
• Easy to relocate
BUS PULLOUT Bus is out of travel lane , Re-entry into congested traffic can
( Routeop minimizing delay to traffic be difficult and cause delays
and/ or on ' ' ' ith Passengers board/ alight out Expensive to install , making
' of traffic relocation difficult/ expensive
OPEN BUS BAY Allows the bus to decelerate • See Bus Pullout disadvantages
in the intersection
• See Bus Pullout advantages
QUEUE JUMP Allows bus to bypass May delay right turning vehicles
queued traffic • See Bus Pullout disadvantages
• See Bus Pullout advantages
: Removes fewer parking spaces Costs more to install compared to
oc . tions with than others curbside stops
on-street parking) Decreases walking distances to See Curbside Stop disadvantages
bus stops for pedestrians
• Provides additional sidewalk area
for passengers
• Results in minimal delay for buses
.. .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 19
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
` r
�rt
- - _ _ . .
e - `
................................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 20
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
60 min fit
1525
I I
I I
I I �
I I toA
curb or vehicle
I I
I I roadway edge
n
�LJ
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 21
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
r —J� ii
r bus
bearding shelter
and ! � -- - - - - - -
alighting —
I area I I curb or vehicle roadway
I I accessible route
I edge
403 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 22
• 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 .
Figure 8 Figure 9
Type I Standard ( Detached sidewalk) Type I Constrained (Attached sidewalk)
If pad extends behind
ROW line Sign, ROW a transit ease-
optional ment is needed
trash on ROW Ilse
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -r -� -� - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - poll ' �
5' wide x _ _
Sign, Sidewalk — 4' Min - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - s' widex _ _ _ _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
optional I B' deep I B' deep
trash on ADA pad I ADA pad
No permitted '* No permitted
Poll obstructions Grass Parkway obstructions I
Sidewalk — 4' Min
Street Street
Images 10 and 11 — Existing Type I Standard Stop Examples :
BIKE IAXti" J-
e
Shields and Rolland Moore Park SB Bus Stop Harmony and Taft Hill EB Bus Stop
.......... ... ... ... .............. ... ... ........... ... ... .............. ... ... ... .............. ... ... ........... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 23
• 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 .
Figure 10 Figure 11
Type II Standard ( Detached sidewalk) Type II Constrained (Attached sidewalk)
3'x6' - Hitching Trash 3'x6' - Hitching ROW line—a transit
ROW line Post Bike Rack
Post Bike Rack easement is needed
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - for pad behind ROW
- - - - - - - - Sign,
optional — I-- --- -- --- ----- --
trash I I Bench
5' wide x 5' wide x i
o _
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - i- ex
8'deep �t Bench 8' deep
Sign, p I ( ADA ad
ADA ad - - - - - - - - - - -- - - ---- p
optional * No permitted ' I "1d perrnittei
trash • obstructions bstmctons I
I � �
Street 15' wide x 6' - 12' deep (6' min) Street 15' wide x 6' - 12 ' deep (6' min)
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 )
1� 'Mid � L� T ` � ,� • � - � 1 � . . � __ —
-• "� SONIC
. �
kk
Shields and Centre Avenue NB Bus Stop Lincoln Avenue and Buckingham Park WB
Bus Stop
................................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 24
• 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)
ROW line, if Bus Stop Pad is out-
side of ROW then entire stop
8' deep x 30' wide concrete pad (6" concrete depth)
shall be within a Transit Easement
5'-7' sidewalk
6'-10'
parkway 5' wide
sidewalk
Street
.......... ... ... ... .............. ... ... ........... ... ... .............. ... ... ... .............. ... ... ........... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 25
Figure 13
Type III Standard ( Detached sidewalk) — Amenity Detail
,
' 18' x 5' • Shelter 6'x6' for 2
10
I hitching post
' Includes 2 or 3 Ad panels, 1 bench, Route Map ' i racks I ROW line
Trash
4 Bike Spaces
5'-7' sidewalk
5' wide x '
' 8'deep
Sign, ADA pad
optional '* No permitted '
trash obstructions '
1 � �
Figure 14
Type III Constrained ( Detached sidewalk)
*When existing structures, setback requirements, utilities or other features
ROW line
prohibit stop being located behind the sidewalk
5'-7' sidewalk Passenger Amenity Footprint
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6'-10' 6'-10' deep x 30' at curbside (6" concrete depth) in
:RS' m
parkway
* Maintain a 5' distance from amenity footprint to concrete edge
Street
Figure 15
Type III Constrained ( Detached sidewalk) — Amenity Detail
*When existing structures, setback requirements, utilities or other features
ROW line
prohibit stop being located behind the sidewalk
' 6'x6' for2 1
Trash 18' x 5' • Shelter �I I
5'-7' sidewalk � O I hitching post
I racks
I Includes 2 or 3 Ad panels, 1 bench, Route Map i I
5' wide x I aaaa aaaa aaaiI q Bike Spaces I
I8'deep ` — — — — 5' min
6' 10' ADA pad I
parkway Sign UNo pet matted
Q � obstructions I
Street
................................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 26
Figure 16
Type III Constrained (Attached sidewalk)
* In locations where attached sidewalk already exist ROW line, if Bus Stop
Pad is outside of ROW,
then entire stop shall
be within a Transit
12 ' deep x 30' wide (6" concrete depth) Easement
4' minimum sidewalk
Street
Figure 17
Type III Constrained (Attached sidewalk) — Amenity detail
* In locations where attached sidewalk already exist
�i
118' x 5' - Shelter S'x6' for2
I
Sign II bike racks
'Him
• MEMO Includes 2 or 3 Ad panels, 1 bench, Route Map Sign
4 Bike Spaces
ii
5 wide x
- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - � - ' - I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - � _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
iI 8deep
ADA pad
[ No permitbed
4' minimum sidewalk obstructions
I
Street
Figure 18
Type III Wide Parkway ( Detached sidewalk)
NEEN
*To be used in areas with widerthan typical parkways such as E . Harmony Road
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
8' sidewalk
Larger than 10' deep ( minimum) x 32' wide concrete pad
10' parkway (6" concrete depth)
Street
....... ... ... ... ................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 27
Figure 19
Type III Wide Parkway ( Detached sidewalk bus stop ) — Amenity detail
- - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . - - - . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
8' sidewalk
Trash
Larger than O 118' x 5' - Shelter I 6'x6' fort
.� II bike racks I
10' parkway ' w 1 ' Includes 2 or3Ad panels, 1 bench, Route Map I 58'deep
x I _ — — — — q Bike Spaces
r
I ADA pad
Sign ' No permitted I
• obstructions I
Street
Image 14 and 15 Existing Type III Examples
IN
IN P
LAW
r
17•�y- I -
*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
AN
................................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 28
• Type IV — Station Stop — This describes a bus stop that has enhanced passenger amenities
such as a ticketvending 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
Type IV Station Example
ELECTRONIC NEXT BUS SIGN
BUS TIMES/ROUTE MAP
ENHANCED SIGN
_ I
WIND SCREEN, TYP J
ENHANCED PAVING j•
ADA SPACE
TACTILE WARNING STRIP, TYP
BICYCLE RACKS, BEHIND
TICKET VENDING MACHINE
LOCATION SIGNAGE
TRASH/RECYCLING RECEPTACLE
Image 19 — Troutman Station ( Concept) Image 20 — Troutman Station ( Built)
� Q -
� f
l -
................................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 29
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
Ir• Ff� f
J
6 ' Stand-alone ad bench 5 - 7 ' In-shelter non-ad bench 5 ' In-shelter non-ad bench
REF RFB- 14 4793- 121 REF SFB-02 14001 - 121 REF SFB-08 12096- 121
. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 30
• 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
I � A _
..alas, A
15 ' Standard advertising shelter 14' Standard Non-advertising shelter
REF SIGA-TFP15 25340-00 ( Use must be approved by Transfort)
REF SIGNA-TFP14
Image 26 Image 27
yd
15 ' Upgraded ad shelter with glass walls 18 ' Upgraded ad shelter with V-ad Panels
REF SIGA-TFG15 25341 -00 REF SIGA-TFV 24343
................................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 31
SHELTER PAINT COLORS
RAL Paint Colors
GREEN : #RAL 6017 #RAL 7047
FT[
;Pp ww
lid
'�`►L TAN rU " " ' ' '
•+i, li
R-.
m
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS1 GUIDELINES
• 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, RAIL 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 RAIL 7047 or RAL 7039 .
Image 31 Image 32
K I A .
-A! .}oil
•� � " . _• '' :Y:` �• d J � ^' ��� �f=fir . ��.�.
ECYCL y
Pole Mounted 32 Gallon Steel Strap
REF SFTR- 10 25393- 121 25394- 121 REF SFTR- 11 25395- 121 25396- 121
.............................. ... ....................... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ................. ... .............. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ........... ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 33
• 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 34
• 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 .
Table 5 — Bus Stop Amenities
Bus Stop Amenities
Bus Stop Sign
Solid Surface
i Landing Pad
4' Path Connection to adjacent sidewalks
owe
Custom Shelter
■
ike Rack ( s )
(At least 1 rack recommended at all stops
[except Type 1 ] , additional racks may be
required based on projected ridership) MEIN
Trash • I Recycling
Transit • I ■
Route Map/ Schedule ( s )Ticket Vending Machine (TVM )
Digital Si . a . .
Ground I ' I Tactile
Paper Schedules
Security Cameras and Emergency Call-box
Secure I ■
■
■
Braille Signage F
Wayfinding • • • -
Legend :
Required Amenity
Recommended Amenity
Optional Amenity
.. .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . ..... ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 35
485 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 . gl 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 1/4 mile of the stop , and stops with high exposure to the elements .
Table 6 — Bus Stop Type Criteria
Criterion Type I — Sign Type 11 — Bench Type III — Shelter Type IV — Station
Ridership Potential Low Ridership Low— Med Med — High Very High
( existing or projected ) (< 25 daily Ridership Ridership Ridership
boardings ) ( 25- 50 daily ( > 50 daily ( 250 + daily
boardings ) boardings ) boardings )
Land Use Density RUL, UE , RF, NCL, NCB , NCM , MMN ,
( Refer to Zoning Map) RL, or POL LMN , RC , RDR , HMN , D, CC ,
NC , CL, E, I CCN , CCR, CG ,
CS , HC
Seniorsor • Within a 1/smile
Populations Concentrations of population
concentrations
TargetedLocated in an Activity
Center ( City Plan—
Recommended
Infill • Redevelopment
. • see Figure 20 b •
Located in an Enhanced Recommended
Travel Corridor rr
- h Exposure Recommended
to the Elements
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 36
Figure 20 — Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Map , City Plan , 2010
Fortcollins Targeted Infill and Redevelopment Areas „ , FortCollins
�; nr:.11Jb
r
Caimlry.G.lub
�/ ' t hlountain Vista rt�
—1NillOf7
'.'Jr
rd
� l
—hlult\ L�♦♦ l
J
r—•� Prospect
w E
N U E
IJ I� H
t —Drtike_
o I
li� rs!:I�u ib
{
6j `1
i I''�a9n1Fr ` CI
Targeted Redevelopment Areas Targeted Activity Center _ r
NO NAME Other Activity Center
t Esgkkiibeffy Corridor 2 MSdbwn Comda Growth Management Area
3 Canpis West } City Limits
4 North C -L'r
5 Downtom — Enhanced Travel Corridor
6 CSU
Transit Oriented Development Overlay
r.rrasrr..r.�rwrrr�rr4rrrcrrwwr..aN rwrrw.e. .wab�r/rw�rr
.r.r w•ew�r� w�. ��wrrr�. r_.. .�+ww. r.rra r�.w.r�.rr.gr.:w. �r. �. .
.+�rr .r..�•.r.r�r.r.r.� Norab�ca�rrr.rf�+orrv.n r.trrMur�wd.w.wnr? r .r
nMav� ra w.cur..wroa r.rwsr.wm r`wsR�rc wu rr natnu rH wgwgar/ �...r rti.r
.rr rwr•� .r .�wrw awrwnrrrrrrwrrrwrrwwrrrwyr.rr w[wrr.r
rr..+r r.r r .r.�rw rrr.r rr ..rr. rrwr r...�w...rw.rr rrrr...�rr r
+r.w.r�r.rw..�.r..�rr.r r.wrr rw A rr�.w rr r rr.1 rwwwr/r:wr .w .rrrr. w�.r.
w rrrr.w.r•.r.rrwrrsr.wrr..rw wr�..r N� 4noi Ol :0 ' 1
................................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 37
■
. . .. ......... ... ... ... ................................ ... .. . . . . ... .......................... ... ... ... ... ..................................................................................................................... ... ........................
5 . 1 INTRODUCTION
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
. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ........ . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 38
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 39
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 1/4 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 40
■
... ............................. ... ... ................................ ... ... ................................ ... ... ... ................................ ... ... ... ................................ ... ... ................................... ... ... ...............
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
................................................................................................................. ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 41
601 BUS STOP DEVELOPMENT FORM
Transfort Bus Stop Checklist TRANSFORT
To be filled out by Transfort Staff
F�t` C�i
Location ( cross streets ) :
Block Location : ❑ Near-side ❑ Far-side ❑ Mid-block
Service : ❑ On Existing Transit Route ❑ Future Transit Route
Street-Side Design Considerations .
Is a design
recommended as part
of an adopted plan?
YES NO
Use design Is the stop a
identified transfer location?
in the Plan
YES NO
Whatv• lume Is there on-street
of
anticipated?
HIGH VOLUME LOW VOLUME
connections or • • • routes)
more • How many travel lanes are
serve the stop) on the adjacent road?
OM
A Bus Pullout or 1 in each 2 or more in A Bulbout stop A Curbside stop
Open Bus Bay is is most likely
• - • • • is appropriate
appropriate appropriate
A Bus Pullout or
Open Bus Bay is
appropriate
................................................................................................................. ... ...... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 42
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 , 1 ) - 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 'A mile of population concentrations - 2 points
Within a 1/8 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 Score Range
Type I Stop - Basic accessibility required 0 - 1
Type 11 Stop - Basic accessibility and bench required 2 - 4
Type I I I
Type III - Basic accessibility, standard shelter, trash and 1 bike rack ( 2 bikes ) 5 - 10
Type III - Basic accessibility, standard shelter, trash and 2 bike racks ( 4 bikes) 11 - 15
Optional Type IV ( upon consideration by transit provider) > 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 43
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 44
683 TECHNICAL DESIGNS ( As Incorporated into
Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards )
Taper in accordance Contraction Joint Q 'Joint Li Lo
with the Table below. Jo ns Panels att Typical 10'
i
BOW Lo' 10' 0 L.I.
TyD)
j
15' R 16' R
C] �C7 �
CID
2 �
BOC� — T8" Thick Curb
O
C � � Exi ting 2'-0" Gutter Q
Min.
Cq *The Local Entity Transit Existing Sitlewalk
Authority shall specify
Provide Curved Connections this length.
R-15'
12' Pre-formetl Sealed BUS BAY 1/2' Pre-formetl Sealed
O a Expansion Joint Material Expansion Joint Materal
9 ryy 1¢ E.oarwlon •oint Merenol@sl¢ep
`ti Abe eo MCI IN it wE 11 �S, �2 0
G� 0 11'-0' 2'-tl' rL T—C. —
T To
O L� Flow Line 1Lan }
'z owlatn d E
Y�y
10 min
V 2" 10 0
y C � 2'-0' Mln. Do nWiswnehucl
In
p SECTION A-A IN-STREET CONCRETE BUS PAD - ATTACHED
z 9d
O z N 12-Dowi Joint Mefenel (lypI
\ d BUS BAY TRANSITION LENGTHS DurachodEoIWWk
o - -
(witllM1veGeble) I5, p p.
\ SPEED LIMIT LEAD IN LENGTH (Li) (FT ) LEAD OUT LENGTH (Lo) (FT.) L To
T Di
<35 60 60 120 }
40 100 70 whin c E
45 150 30 ji
lo,o.
o-a•
d 50 200 90 2'-0' Mln. Po not wntti
y 55 250 100 COnIXN¢ in wM1¢¢I p¢m.
~ IN-STREET CONCRETE BUS PAD - DETACHED
NOTE.
C�] 1 . Length of bus pad varies as directed by the Local Entity.
litti 2. Au pads shall be a minimum of 10" thick concrete. BUS STOP
3. On prepared a compacted base.
J0 C
Lam] C I� Row LINE
3 EE)
C/D -
y
„IDFWA-K
aaz
y
e7 -<
I..p { MINIMUM 5 WIDE X B'
PARKWAY DEER CONCRETE RAo..
[� MAY INCLUDE SIDEWALK
� � V (6 CONCRETE DEPTH)
O
C7 Z r.G' STREET
a TYPE I STANDARD-BUS STOP
o n
z �a
0
a
y L' MINIMUM S'WIDE XS'
LSJ I—� YINCLU ESIDEE PAD,
MAYINCLUOE SIOEWALN
o O Bus PABI$ RP
Iyy I6 CONGER CF➢MI 1 OF HOW.
THEN
ENTIRE
STOP
SHALL BE WITHIN TRANSSIT
�i /V� 5MIN. EASEMENT
BOWLINE
O 8 MIN
4 MIN. fIIIII
sloEwnuc
STREET
a TYPE I CONSTRAINED-BUS STOP
~ ' IN LOCATIONS WHERE ATTACHED SIDEWALK ALREADY EXIST
y z
c�
............. ... ... ........... ... ... ... .......................................................................... ... ................. ... .............. ... ... ... .............. ... ................. ... ...... .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ..
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 45
cn
H
ROW LINE
Htd
1
yzx
SIDEWALK
tz
cmi
H
6'-ltl @ -ltl
DO PARKWAY CONCRETE PAD
BOC 16 cONGv[Te Dmml
tz
STREET
a y TYPE II STANDARD-DETACHED SIDEWALK BUS STOP
� y C
z yo
y C CPO
O Z ANY BUS STOP PAD OUTSIDE
OF ROW SHALL BE LOCATED
v " WITHIN A TMNSR EASEMENT
O z 6, ROW LINE
O CONCRETE PAD
Q N'CONO6ETEDEcrM
h" 1
-12
0 r
O' MIN
SIDEWALK
STREET
TYPE II CONSTRAINED-ATTACHED SIDEWALK BUS STOP
z * IN LOCATIONS WHERE ATTACHED SIDEWALK ALREADY EXIST
U3
I� so' O BUS STOP PAD IS IRE STOP
B, OF ROW, THEN ENTIRE STOP
SHALL BE WITHIN ATRANSR
IH ROW LINE 6CONCRETE
CC'L T PADDEPTH
EASEMENT
� 6 �YDH�Eo�
a �o
x
e7 �y (El
� z e-TBIDEwaLK
C7 I-C 1
C/ t 1
C~• 1
` SIDEWALK J
e'It.I PARKWAY
O � BOA
STREET
y C TYPE III STANDARD-DETACHED SIDEWALK BUS STOP
z yo
ROW LINE
o z } - - - - - - - - .
yz 1yt�
)EWALK PASSENGER AMENITY FOOTPRINT
\ O
0
Hr 1 F� 26' CYPI
- 5' MIN. CLEAR CONCRETE AT 5' MIN. CLEAR ~
6 10 16'aorvevEiELeEim
PARKWAY �� 6'- 10'
B'
eoo AT cuRBSIDE
'SI IOULDERS SI IALL MAINTAIN A 5' DISTANCE FROM AMENITY FOOTPRINT
� STREETTYPE III CONSTRAINED-DETACHED SIDEWALK BUS STOP
� ' WHEN EXISTING STRUCTURES, SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, UTILITIES
OR OTHER FEATURES PROHIBIT STOP BEING LOCATED BEHIND THE SIDEWALK
.................................................................................................................................. ... ... ... .............. ... ................. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .................................
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 46
D0
Did
l./ CONCRETE PAD
PB WCRII7EDDFHl
IF RCS STOP PAD IS OUTSIDE
12 OF ROW, THEN ENTIRE STOP
7i o SHALL BE WITHIN A TRANSIT
z ROW LINE � — � 30' � EASEMENT
tz
cmi I
4' MIN
SIDEWALK
tz O Boo
It
a STREET TYPE III CONSTRAINED-ATTACHED SIDEWALK BUS STOP
H d " IN LOCATIONS WHERE ATTACHED SIDEWALK ALREADY EXIST
O C/1
ROW LINE
y C �
z
o SDEWAL,
z d
a
o C
0
O ~ LARGE 1 THAN
19 PARKWAY
STREET
C7 z TYPE III WIDE PARKWAY- DETACHED SIDEWALK BUS STOP
'TO BE USED IN AREAS WITH WIDER THAN TYPICAL PARKWAYS SUCH AS E. HARMONY ROAD
................................................................................................................. ... ...... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .................................
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 47
6 . 4 CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
LETTER OF SUPPORT
Date : May 20, 2015
To : Fort Collins Transfort
From : Fort Collins Transit Design Standards Citizen Advisory Committee
Re: Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines Draft
To Whom It May Concern ,
Following The Transit Design Standards Citizen Advisory Committee meeting on Monday, April 13 , 2015
and after much discussion, we wish to convey our support and endorsement of the Bus Stop Design Standards
and Guidelines. The Guidelines include the following:
Bus Stop Design Standards and Guidelines Higlilights
Accessibility Enhancements - Updates the Accessibility Requirements of bus stops to be in compliance with
ADA standards
Bus Stop Amenity Distribution - Enhances bus stop passenger amenity provision throughout the Transfort
Service Area
Capital Improvement Plan - Sets a goal of bringing approximately 20 bus stops into compliance with these
standards each year
Next Steps — Identifies the next steps to pursue Braille signage at bus stops and recommends further evaluation
of how snow removal is enforced throughout the City
The Fort Collins Transit Design Standards Citizen Advisory Committee believes it is appropriate and highly
important to include the Bits Stop Design Standards and Guidelines in Transfort ' s plans for all bus stop plans .
We are particularly sensitive to ADA requirements therefore, we encourage Transfort to seriously consider and
include all such regulations in any bus stop designs. Bus stop accessibility and safety is of serious concern in the
growing Fort Collins community and should be guaranteed to all citizens . Bus stops are a key link in the
journey of a bus rider. For people with disabilities, inaccessible bus stops often represent the weak link in the
system and can effectively prevent the use of fixed-route bus service. Physical , cognitive, and psychological
barriers associated with bus stops can severely hamper bus ridership by the disability community, thus limiting
their mobility and potentially leading to increased paratransit costs. As such, Transfort is encouraged by this
committee to advocate for accessibility improvements and barrier removal in all bus stop designs. Thank you for
your consideration of this written endorsement .
Sincerely,
The Fort Collins Transit Design Standards Citizen Advisory Committee Members
Fort Collins, Colorado
05/20/2015
.. .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 48
Citizen Advisory Committee Member Signatures :
��777 pp
Sarah Allmon Date Noah Al Hadidi Date
11 lrcY�Qe� .peVereQuX
Vivian Armendariz Date Michael Devereaux Date
� - - - -
1 VMtlbd N I
'YA )s A A ^4 /
11 .�(LL� I OS/7f/t015 I
a ao15
Kat yn Gri es Date Jamie Rideoutt Date
Ed Roberts Date Carol Thomas Date
.. .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... .............. ... .............. ... ... ... ... ........ ... ... ... ... ........ ... .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .
TRANSFORT BUS STOP DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 49