HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-061-07/02/2013-APPROVING THE HARMONY ROAD ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FINAL REPORT RESOLUTION 2013-061
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
APPROVING THE HARMONY ROAD ENHANCED TRAVEL
CORRIDOR ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FINAL REPORT
WHEREAS,for the past 18 months,City staff and City consultants have been engaged in the
process of preparing the Harmony Road Enhanced Travel Corridor (HTC) Alternatives Analysis
Final Report; and
WHEREAS, the HTC Alternatives Analysis Final Report includes an in-depth review of
existing conditions and a comprehensive development of a variety of alternatives which ultimately
resulted in recommendations for improved roadway,bicycle,pedestrian,and transit facilities for the
Harmony Road Corridor; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the HTC Master Plan is to augment and update existing
transportation plans for the Harmony Corridor and to document the transportation, land use,
environmental,economic,and social needs of the Harmony Road Corridor and to determine the most
appropriate configuration for the Harmony Corridor; and
WHEREAS, the 1-ITC Alternatives Analysis includes recommendations for updates to the
HTC Master Plan which supports multiple modes of safe, affordable, easy,and convenient travel to
ensure mobility for people of all ages and abilities; and
WHEREAS,the financial impacts of the HTC Alternatives Analysis will be pursued by City
staff through local, regional, state, and federal funding opportunities in the future; and
WHEREAS, from an environmental impact analysis perspective, the HTC Alternatives
Analysis shows an increase in transit ridership as well as bicycle and pedestrian facilities which are
anticipated to result in a transportation mode shift for the environmental benefit of the Corridor;and
WHEREAS,after significant public outreach and receipt of favorable recommendations from
the Transportation Board, Bicycle Advisory Committee, and the Planning and Zoning Board, with
a mixed recommendation from the Air Quality Advisory Board,the City Council has determined that
the approval of the HTC Alternatives Analysis Final Report is in the best interests of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that the HTC Alternatives Analysis Final Report dated June 14, 2013, attached hereto as
Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein by this reference, is hereby approved.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Port Collins this 2nd
day of July, A.D. 2013.
May r
ATTEST: �y of FoRr
City Clerk v'
V!-ADO '
FINAL DRAFT
'
0 see of
.f I FRONT RANGEy'.
t',lMMUATTV C()llF.(7lip j
� *�4 �AV, MIR CAMPUS I
. 1
now T
.a
- 41 i
E _ - rwR nil
' - - illop
,• it � - t ' ' 1 tr
+� }
. . . L• �_ _"'� , � �
submitted by. in association with :
' FELSBURG b h a
HOLT &
ULLEVIG
June 14, 2013
Harman Road ENHANCED
TRAVEL
CORRIDOR
Alternatives Analysis
FINAL DRAFT
Prepared for:
City of Fort Collins
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Prepared by:
Felsburg Holt & Ullevig
6300 South Syracuse Way, Suite 600
Centennial , CO 80111
303/721- 1440
In association with :
Nelson\Nygaard
BHA Design Incorporated
FHU Reference No . 11- 184-01
June 14, 2013
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
Table of Contents
Page
Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
ExecutiveSummary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
1 . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
CorridorStudy Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
CorridorContext . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Overview of Planning and Outreach Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2 . Purpose and Need . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
PurposeStatement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Problem Statements and Travel Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Goalsand Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3 . Alternatives Development and Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
EvaluationCriteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
NoAction Alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Tier 1 Alternatives Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Tier 1 Evaluation and Screening Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Tier 2 Alternatives Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Tier 2 Evaluation and Screening Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4. Locally Preferred Alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
LPADecision Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
LPADescription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
LPAPerformance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
CostEstimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5 . Implementation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
PhasingOptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Recommended Implementation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
FundingStrategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
List of Figures
Page
Figure1 . Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Figure2 . Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Figure 3 . Existing Daily Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Figure 4 . Transit Boardings and Alightings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Figure 5 . Traffic Forecasts and V/C Ratios ( Existing and 2035 No Action ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Figure 6 . Harmony Corridor Segment Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Figure 7 . 2035 Traffic Forecasts for Tier 2 Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Figure 8 . 2035 PM Peak Hour Traffic Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Figure 9 . 2035 PM Peak Hour Corridor Travel Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Figure 10 . 2035 Average Daily Transit Boardings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Figure 11 . Average Transfers per Transit Trip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Figure 12 . 2035 PM Peak Hour Averages Speeds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Figure 13 . Roadway Widening and Intersection Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Figure 14 . Illustrative Example of LPA : Shields Street to College Avenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Figure 15 . Illustrative Example of LPA : College Avenue to 1 -25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Figure16 . LPA Transit Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Figure 17 . Illustrative of Queue Jump Lanes at Intersection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Figure 18 . Harmony Road Bus Stop and Station Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Figure 19 . Example Intersection with Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Crossing Treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Figure 20 . Pedestrian Grade-Separated Crossing Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Figure 21 . LPA 2035 PM Peak Hour Traffic Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Figure 22 . LPA Typical Mid - Block Cross-Sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
List of Tables
Table1 . Evaluation Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Table2 . Tier 1 Modal Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Table 3 . Summary of Elements Eliminated in Tier 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Table4. Tier 2 Alternatives ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . . . . . . . 27
Table 5 . Summary of Tier 2 Evaluation Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . . 36
Table 6 . Summary Project Costs by Travel Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Table 7 . Potential Sequencing and Costs by Corridor Segment ( Excluding Bus Costs ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Table 8 . Recommended Implementation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
List of Appendices
Appendix A. Existing Conditions
Appendix B . PEL Questionnaire
Appendix C . Public Input
Appendix D . Land Uses and Demographics
Appendix E . Transportation Analysis
Appendix F . Environmental Inventory and Evaluation
Appendix G . Tier 1 and Tier 2 Evaluation Matrices
Appendix H . LPA Conceptual Plans and Cost Estimates
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Altematives Analysis
Acknowledgements
City Council
Karen Weitkunat, Mayor
Bob Overbeck
Lisa Poppaw
Gino Campana
Wade Troxell
Ross Cunniff
Gerry Horak
Transportation Advisory Board
Garry Steen, Chair
Mary Atchinson
Olga Duvall
Sara Frazier
Rita Pat Jordan
Kevin O 'Toole
Eric Shenk
Sid Simonson
Clint Skutchan
Project Management Team
Aaron Iverson, Project Manager, FC Moves Senior Transportation Planner
Amy Lewin , FC Moves Transportation Planner
Emma McArdle, Transfort
Technical Advisory Committee
City of Fort Collins
Megan Bolin, Economic Health
Tim Kemp, Engineering
Craig Foreman , Parks Planning
Bruce Hendee, City Manager' s Office
Aaron Iverson, FC Moves
Amy Lewin , FC Moves
Karen Manci, Natural Areas
Clark Mapes, Planning Services
Emma McArdle, Transfort
Darren Moritz, Streets
Joe Olson , Traffic Operations
Kurt Ravenschlag, Transfort
Glen Schlueter, Utilities
Ted Shepard, Community Development & Neighborhood Services
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 1�1 Alternatives Analysis
Other Agencies
Kristin Kirkpatrick, University of Colorado Health Systems
Suzette Mallette, North Front Range MPO
Larry Squires, Federal Transit Administration
Martina Wilkinson , Larimer County
Town ofTimnath
Consultant Team
Holly Buck, Project Manager, Felsburg Holt & Ullevig
Jenny Young, Deputy Project Manager, Felsburg Holt & Ullevig
Rich Follmer, Felsburg Holt & Ullevig
Geoff Slater, Nelson\Nygaard
Angela Milewski, BHA Design
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
Executive Summary
The City of Fort Collins conducted this study on Harmony Road to establish existing conditions, to identify future
transportation challenges ( using the year 2035 as a planning horizon ), and to create a vision that will serve as a
blueprint for multimodal improvements in the corridor. The study developed a Locally Preferred Alternative
( LPA) for multimodal transportation improvements along the 5 %2 mile corridor and presents a plan for
implementation and funding of those improvements .
Harmony Road Context
Harmony Road is one of six Enhanced Travel Corridors ( ETCs ) in Fort Collins that are " planned to incorporate
high frequency transit, bicycling, and walking as part of the corridor. " The Harmony Road ETC extends from
Shields Street to 1 -25 and includes a variety of cross-sections, land use characteristics, and travel patterns .
. • . . • .vim .....
i � . ..
IV.ry Rwi: •.
cew � ppyy
IbfJ ll+re E ..
m :...........
Harmony Road was named after the agricultural community named " Harmony" established in the area in the
1870s . Remains of the community still exist at the Harmony Road/Timberline Road intersection where the
buildings from the original Harmony Store and the Harmony School still stand .
Today, Harmony Road is an important regional connection ; Harmony road is the first Fort Collins exit traveling
from the south on 1 -25 . Harmony Road is considered one of the best ways into and out of Fort Collins, and with
the limited number of 1 -25 exits, a large amount of regional traffic is funneled to Harmony Road . Harmony Road
is one of the primary commercial corridors in Fort Collins and houses several large employment campuses
including Hewlett Packard , Avago, and Intel . The University of Colorado Health Harmony Campus is also a
prominent land use adjacent to Harmony Road . As a primary commercial corridor serving all of Fort Collins and
also as a regional destination, pressures on Harmony Road are significant . Both local and regional trips and will
continue to grow into the future; the future of Harmony Road corridor is tied to the future of Fort Collins and
the region .
Purpose and Need
The purpose of the project is to implement multimodal transportation improvements that enhance mobility and
safety along the Harmony Road Corridor. Improvements will support local and regional travel needs, land uses,
economic health and environmental stewardship goals .
O
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 111 Altematives Analysis
Improvements are needed to address the following transportation problems :
► The transit routes along Harmony Road are discontinuous
40000
► Traveling by bicycle along Harmony Road is uncomfortable M 2009
/ Pedestrian crossings are typically spaced a half- mile apart 2035
30000
► Traffic congestion is expected to increase due to growth in
population and employment along Harmony Road and the 20000
surrounding area
► The existing cross-section does not accommodate potential 10000
mixed - use transit-oriented development
► Connections between modes to destinations along the U ,
corridor are lacking HOUSEHOLD EMPLOYMENT
► Harmony Road has the two intersections with the highest
Residential growth within the Harmony Road
crash totals in the City study area is expected to increase 42 percent, and
/ Harmony Road is a wide corridor with few dedicated, safe employment is expected to increase 71 percent.
pedestrian crossing points
► Harmony Road does not fully meet Fort Collins' sustainability goals
• . Improve . . The four goals of the project reflect the need to address the
Goal #2: Enhance Accessibility transportation problems and are consistent with the City of Fort
Goal #3 : Improve Safety Collins' vision for the future . These goals are the foundation for
Goal #4: Integrate Sustainability the evaluation criteria used to assess and compare improvement
alternatives .
Planning Process
The Harmony Road ETC Master Plan has been developed in a manner consistent with the Federal Transit
Administration ' s ( FTA' s) Alternatives Analysis (AA) study process . As described in the FTA' s Framework for
Alternatives Analysis, during an AA study process
a
" . . .the priority corridor identified in systems planning is tWM�pD� r `,Nar
p ls studied in detail, focusing on the effects of alternative � ��� pRRID CIO. +;
cfN
solutions to the corridor' s transportation problems . ` Qz � fR1ENOLY « ffA' n
Information on costs, benefits, and impacts of each � � 4 DRIVERSGOQp �" �4�(O�n
alternative is developed to provide a sound technical r L .LJ 0 ;, �d
basis for project decision making ." c C3= �9� ; O -
rN' Q q
op
The planning process was guided by a Project . WN � ' o`o '"` ;avt�4 '=
Management Team ( PMT), which is composed of two
FC Moves transportation planners and a Transfort Wig:
:
transit planner. The PMT and consultant team held ? 3 � Ewca►�E f`�R� = in
monthly or semi - monthly conference calls throughout 0 �'ya+�oQ � a` �-
the planning process to discuss findings and
Zo
• � a �ro�P
preliminary recommendations and to prepare for FcO�G� . ORBAN ha.,
meetings with the larger Technical Advisory C (� E
Committee (TAC, which included individuals from 1.c1 e
� nwa, StiS�
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
various City Departments, FTA, and adjacent jurisdictions ) and public outreach efforts .
A variety of public outreach activities were designed and conducted to solicit input from residents, business
owners, employees, and travelers of the Harmony Road corridor and from the community at large . In addition to
the Harmony Road ETC public meetings, several other outreach mechanisms were successfully used to
disseminate information about the project and to receive input throughout the planning process :
► Virtual public open houses — information from the public meetings was posted on the project website
along with electronic questionnaires which received over 350 responses in total ( between two
questionnaires)
► Presentations to City Boards and City Council
► Booths at City events and other public meetings
► Stakeholder meetings with neighborhood groups, business associations, and major employers
Alternatives Development and Evaluation
The fundamental philosophy in the
screening process was to Broad Range
systematically identify the positive and TIER 1
negative characteristics and tradeoffs SCREENING Fatal Flaw Analysis
among alternatives resulting ultimately
in a Locally Preferred Alternative ( LPA) .
Vision
The alternatives development process TIER 2 Phasing
began with the development of 18 SCREENING Cost
corridor-wide elements including a Triple Bottom Line
broad range of improvements by travel
mode (four roadway, five transit, six
bicycle, and six pedestrian ) that were Public
identified as having potential address REFINEMENT Boards/Commissions
Council
ns
the project needs . City Council
In the Tier 1 evaluation and screening
process, the alternatives were LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
evaluated at a high level for fatal flaws
and their ability to address the Purpose and Need .
Given that no single element would necessarily address all of the project needs as a stand -alone improvement,
the intent of identifying these elements by mode was to combine elements together as part of packaged
alternatives in Tier 2 . The Tier 2 evaluation process involved a detailed and quantitative comparison between
corridor alternatives and against the No Action Alternative . Inter-departmental and agency coordination, as well
as public involvement, played a major role in this process . The TAC was involved in each step of the evaluation
process, as well as during the development and refinement of the LPA.
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
Tier 1 Cross -Sectional Elements
Travel Mode Element
Roadway 2 General Purpose Lanes per direction
3 General Purpose Lanes per direction
w 4 General Purpose Lanes per direction
High Occupancy Vehicle ( HOV) Lanes
Transit Local Bus in Mixed Traffic
0
Enhanced Bus with Transit Priority Treatments
( queue jumps and/or transit signal priority)
Curbside Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT)
Median BRT
Light Rail/Streetcar
Bicycle Bike Lanes ( shoulder)
Buffered Bike Lanes
Bike/Bus Lanes
Shared Use Paths
Cycle Tracks
Back Street Bike Lanes
Pedestrian Curvilinear Detached Sidewalks
Shared Use Paths
Crossing Enhancements at Signalized Intersections
Grade Separated Crossings
Criteria for evaluating alternatives were established to respond directly to the project' s Purpose and Need and
its goals and objectives . The criteria were developed to be appropriate for the evaluation level being conducted
and the alternatives being considered . The responsiveness of each alternative to the criteria determined
whether or not the alternative was reasonable and if it should be advanced for further evaluation . Elements that
best responded to the Purpose and Need and resulted in the best evaluation included :
/ Roadway: 2 General Purpose lanes per direction from Shields Street to College Avenue; 3 General
Purpose lanes per direction from College Avenue to 1 -25, with spot intersection improvements
• Would provide traffic operational benefits without major ROW acquisition
► Enhanced Bus service with queue jumps at congested intersections
• Would provide the best compromise of increasing transit ridership while retaining acceptable
traffic operations
► Bike Lanes from Shields Street to College Avenue; Buffered Bike Lanes from College Avenue to
1 -25
• Would provide the best compromise between ROW and drainage/maintenance impacts and
mode shift potential
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 111 Alternatives Analysis
► Pedestrian : Curvilinear Detached Sidewalks, crossing enhancements at intersections, and grade
separated crossings
• Would continue to provide a separate space for pedestrians along the corridor, and would
improve the safety and level of comfort for pedestrians crossing Harmony Road
Locally Preferred Alternative
The LPA for the Harmony Road ETC, includes a series of multimodal transportation improvements to address the
project Purpose and Need . The LPA includes widening the section of Harmony from College Avenue to
Boardwalk Avenue to six lanes, as well as intersection improvements at selected locations to address future
operational deficiencies .
The transit aspect of the LPA includes Enhanced Bus along Harmony Road between the South Transit Center and
the Harmony Transfer Center. The bus would travel in the general purpose lanes along the extent of the route
except where queue jumps are provided .
The LPA includes enhancements to the existing bicycle lanes including green colored pavement on the bike lanes
for the full length of the corridor, and a striped buffer between the bike lane and the adjacent travel lane from
College Avenue east toward 1 -25 . The meandering sidewalk will be retained on both sides of Harmony Road ,
with completion of the few missing segments . The LPA will also include enhancements to bicycle and pedestrian
crossings ( both at-grade and grade separated crossings) . The LPA includes raised, landscaped medians the entire
length of the corridor .
Illustrative Example of LPA from College Avenue to 1 -25
tiea�eri�c r �tiet�e jtilr�.r
s�deLr1A//C 6tis sfr�fivh
et w4eo76tis• service
a
e —
� " f y
. L
z % -
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \�\ Alternatives Analysis
Roadway Elements
In general, the LPA makes use of the existing roadway infrastructure without major capital
expansion . It includes widening a short segment ( College Avenue to Boardwalk Drive ) to six
lanes to better accommodate future travel demands, which is consistent with the City' s
Transportation Master Plan .
Two widening projects which are anticipated within the planning horizon will affect Harmony
Road . College Avenue is planned for widening to six lanes south of Harmony Road which will require
reconfiguration at the Harmony Road intersection to extend three northbound and southbound lanes through
the intersection . Likewise, the Timberline Road intersection will require similar geometric modifications to allow
six through lanes in the north/south direction . Timberline Road is expected to transition to four lanes south of
the Harmony Road intersection . Although these two widening projects are not a part of the LPA, the intersection
modifications to accommodate these projects are considered part of the LPA.
The LPA also includes intersection Intersection Improvements
improvements at four locations along the ■ Planned
corridor to address future operational Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA)
deficiencies and to enhance safety for Horsetooth Rd /
automobile travel along the corridor. Four
intersections identified for improvements S, e� C
include : P
U �f
/ Harmony Road/Boardwalk Drive Harmon*Rd.
/ Harmony Road/Timberline Road
/ Harmony Road/Ziegler Road
/ Harmony Road/Lady Moon Drive Widen to 6 Lanes — J
In addition to the widening and intersection improvements, the LPA includes urban design elements to provide
consistent aesthesis along the length of the corridor. It includes landscaped medians and curb and gutter
throughout the corridor.
Transit Elements
The LPA includes a new 4 % mile Enhanced Bus route along Harmony Road between the Harmony Transfer
Center and the South Transit Center. The route would begin at the Harmony Transfer Center, north of Harmony
Road and to the west of I -25 . It would travel west along Harmony Road stopping on demand at bus stops and
stations located approximately every % mile along the corridor. At College Avenue the bus would turn south to
access the South Transit Center and connect to the planned MAX service that is currently under construction .
Route H would operate every 20 minutes in the peak period and 30 minutes in the off peak periods .
To the west of College Avenue, Harmony Road would be served by the existing Route 19 connecting the South
Transit Center, Front Range Community College and the CSU Transit Center. Route H would connect with the
Route 17 at Timberline Road and with Route 7 at John F . Kennedy Parkway.
4
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 111 Alternatives Analysis
CSU Downtown Route 19
Transit T nslt ,� „,�
Center C nter - (30 min. headways)
& < fft a = o- Harmony Enhanced Bus
5 . Service
(20 min. peak / 30 min.
: ...
off-peak headways)
S� . . . . . . Optional Interline with
• MAX
g
FORT COLLINS g y
d 4ra , . 3 TIMNATH i
........
Harmony Poao
Tran
17,
The LPA also includes queue jumps at three intersections along Harmony Road :
/ Lemay Avenue
1 Timberline Road
/ Ziegler Road
Buses using the queue jump and right turning vehicles cross the buffered bike lane as they approach the
intersection ; right turning vehicles travel around the right turn channelization island while approaching buses
continue straight . With a green indication buses travel through the intersection concurrently with the other
through travel lanes to a receiving lane on the far side of the intersection and to the bus stop .
9tietie jti��
114S sIZ-?17 14 ekilllce dtis S2 rPVe
p
pop d -
i0O 0 \ v
l \
a
n <
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
Enhanced transit stations
provide a comfortable and
safe respite location for
transit riders to gather while l
anticipating the arrival of the \
next bus . The intent is to
P
provide shelter, seating, bike
parking, waste and recycling �a
collection , and relevant
information regarding the =�
transit system ( e .g . , maps ---/
and time of next bus arrival ) .
Transit stations are located
at key nodes in the transit
system and serve as
gathering places for users . These include locations such as major employers, the hospital, and schools . Stations
will be larger than a typical bus stop and provide more amenities .
Bicycle Elements
The LPA includes enhanced bicycle facilities along the full length of the
Harmony Road corridor. East of College Avenue, a buffered bike lane
will provide a visual separation and greater space between the
motorized travel lane and the bike . The buffered bike lanes will also
provide space for a bicyclist to pass another bicyclist, and generally
appeal to a wider cross-section of bicycle users . _/M
As a part of the LPA
refinement process, the
use of colored pavement
was identified as a desired
treatment for the bike lanes along the full length of Harmony Road
( Shields Street to 1 -25 ) .
Example of a green bike lane in San Francisco
Pcrlcctrian Elements
Harmony Road is identified in the City' s Pedestrian Plan as a Pedestrian Priority Area ( PPA) . The
LPA seeks to enhance the pedestrian experience along the Harmony Road corridor by providing
continuous sidewalk connections along the length of the corridor (Shields Street to 1 -25 ) and
improving the crossing opportunities along the corridor. The LPA includes completion of the
missing sidewalk segments that exist in several locations along the corridor.
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Altematives Analysis
Crossing of Harmony Road has been identified as problematic by the community, and it will become more
difficult as traffic volumes increase in the future . All signalized intersections along the corridor should include at-
grade crossing treatments to enhance the safety and convenience for pedestrians ( and bicyclists ) .
Example Intersection with Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Crossing Treatments
SIDE STREET Signing
TURNING
VEHICLES
Landscaped Pedestrian ActivateaSignal v TO
Median (Leading Interval � I � I Median Refuge
Sidewalk Sidewalk
� III II III
U t
Buffer — — - — — — — — — — — — — — — — Y ~ — — — — — — — — — Buffer_
_ — •-
- � —
Harmon Road
? — �_ Harmon Road '
Buffer --► _ = Buffer
------------------
z n
III II III
Sidewalk Sidewalk
` Landscaped
fit Crosswalks Median
Bike Lane Channelized Bicycle Detection
through Intersection Right Turn lanes on Side Streets
NORTH with Raised Island
NOT TO SCALE
i I
In addition to the at-grade intersection crossing enhancements, six locations for future grade-separated
crossings have been identified and are included in the LPA . These crossings are recommended periodically along
the corridor to connect land uses north and south of Harmony Road, to facilitate access to transit stations, and
to reduce the auto/pedestrian and auto/bicycle conflicts along the corridor.
Pedestrian Grade -Separated Crossing Locations
y
C : 9 2: 8 i
Harmon
2 E ¢ j° c Transfer
J'lhaJ
^s Via Z m Center
c mr o � a
T Harmon Road A11111111161 T
0
High Priority N
Implementation
The improvements needed to realize the LPA likely cannot be constructed at the same time . As such, an
implementation plan has been developed to minimize throw-away costs, expedite high priority improvements,
and advance the capital projects needed to begin enhanced bus service . The City should leverage themselves as
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
well as private development when possible with development projects along the corridor to take full advantage
of other construction activities and magnitudes of scale .
The following table summarizes the recommended implementation plan in Immediate, Short-Term and Long-
Range timeframes . A description of the plan element, the responsible party, and the approximate cost for the
individual elements are included for each of these timeframes .
Recommended Implementation Plan
Locally Preferred Alternative Responsible Part • • • Cost
Element & Description
Immediate • •
LPA Design
• Complete the design of vehicle, pedestrian and
bicycle elements
• Conduct environmental resource inventory; develop Engineering with $ 3 . 50M
mitigation plans for impacted areas Consultant ( 8% of estimated total
• Identify ROW impacts; prepare ROW plans; start Assistance project cost)
ROW acquisition process
• Identify public and private utility conflicts; prepare
modification plans
Finalize the Operating Plan & Determine Vehicle Type Transfort Completed by Transfort
and other Requirements staff
Create aTransit-Oriented Development Overlay District
FC Moves/ Completed by FC Moves
Planning Services & Planning Services staffs
Revise corridor striping to create the bike lane buffer;
install green epoxy paint in bike lanes Engineering $0 . 24M
Construct missing sidewalks and neighborhood
Engineering $0 . 61M
connections
Construct landscaped medians Engineering $ 6 .47M
Construct Mason Trail and Power Trail pedestrian grade-
Engineering $ 5 . 52M
separations
Improvements
Identify and Secure Funding for Vehicle Procurement; Transfort Completed by Transfort
Begin Process to Procure Vehicles Staff
Develop Enhanced Bus Operating Schedules and Begin Transfort Completed by Transfort
Public Information Program Staff
Lemay Avenue
Reconstruct the Lemay Avenue, Timberline Road Intersection : $ 3 . 00M
( including realignment of Harmony Road to the south ), Engineering Timberline Road
and Ziegler Road intersections to include 2035 capacity Intersection : $4. 01M
improvements and Enhanced Bus queue jump lanes Ziegler Road
Intersection : $ 2 . 51M
l Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 1`1 Alternatives Analysis
Locally • Alternative
Responsible ParApproximate C •
Description
Construct the Bus Stations and Bus Stops Engineering $4 . 02M
Finalize and Implement the Marketing Plan for the Transfort with Completed by Transfort
Enhanced Bus Service Consultant Staff
Assistance
Purchase necessary buses Transfort $ 2 . 51M
Begin Enhanced Bus Service
Improvements
Construct remaining roadway cross-sectional elements
sequentially in a west to east manner . Major design
elements would include :
• Roadway widening or narrower to match the
LPA cross-sections ( including irrigation ditch
enclosures where needed ) Engineering $ 9 . 47M
• Intersection capacity improvements including
channelizing islands
• Traffic signal modifications
• Drainage modifications or new systems
• Utility modifications
Construct remaining pedestrian grade-separations at :
• Between Boardwalk Drive and Lemay Avenue
• Adjacent University of Colorado Health
Engineering $ 11 . 04M
Harmony Campus
• Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet
• Harmony Transfer Center
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
1 . Introduction
Harmony Road is one of the six Enhanced
Travel Corridors ( ETCs ) identified in the Fort
Collins Transportation Master Plan ( 2011 ) .
ETCs are defined as " uniquely designed
corridors that are planned to incorporate high
frequency transit, bicycling, and walking as Drive
part of the corridor . " Harmony Road crosses
two other ETCs : Mason and Timberline
Road/ Power Trail . Construction of the Mason Eu7 s
-411
Corridor Bus Rapid Transit ( MAX) line is d ftVectRoad
underway and will bring high frequency transit z
service across Harmony Road, with the BRT
line terminating at the South Transit Center, g
just south of Harmony Road . Building on the 2
momentum of the Mason Corridor, the City
has identified Harmony Road as the next ETC
for multimodal improvements .
Harmony Road is also identified by the North —
Front Range Metropolitan Planning
Organization ( NFRMPO) as a Regionally
Significant Corridor ( RSC) which is defined in
the NFR 2035 Regional Transportation Plan NORTH
Update as "An important link in a multimodal ,
regional network comprised of existing or new Harmony Road is one of six Enhanced Travel Corridors in Fort Collins.
transportation corridors that connect
communities and/or activity centers by facilitating the timely and safe movement of people, goods, information,
and services ." Harmony Road' s designations as an ETC and RSC establish the importance of the corridor for both
local and regional travel .
This Harmony Road ETC Master Plan was conducted by the City of Fort Collins to create a vision that will serve as
a blueprint for future multimodal transportation improvements along the corridor. This report presents the
results of the Alternatives Analysis (AA) study which was conducted to assess existing conditions, identify future
challenges ( using the year 2035 planning horizon ), and identify a Locally Preferred Alternative ( LPA) for
implementation .
Corridor Study Area
The Harmony Road ETC extends from Shields Street to 1 -25; and the study area for the Harmony Road ETC
Alternatives Analysis includes a one mile buffer around this segment ( see Figure 1 ) . Harmony Road ' s cross-
section and character vary and three distinct segments have been identified for the purpose of alternatives
development and evaluation . These segments are described below.
4
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 111 Alternatives Analysis
Figure 1 , Study Area
• x n" m a: � a
c E J a N
: .. . . .. . Hb tooth RWd _
Horsetoofh Road
Q 3£
• ' • ' '��s
T
d t't
in
R
p
y O2Y Ory40 O Harmony
ansfer
Foal halesNe g eater
c
> o E
Ra ony Road
Harmony Road`+.
3
South - cc , ;
:Transit .0
: Center gdlmet a' �V i• m •..t
0� O
r
$ Rook C eek Onve
Kcc
arda c
Y
U
e � � A Kechter R
. . . . —
c
: . :' 287 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .
4
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 111 Altematives Analysis
West Segment (Shields Street to College
Avenue) _ r.
The westernmost segment of the corridor has four through i V
1
lanes with a painted median . The primary adjoining land
use is residential , with houses backing to Harmony Road .
Front Range Community College is located in the southeast
quadrant of Harmony Road and Shields Street . The Mason
Corridor ( including impending MAX BRT service and the
existing Mason Trail ) cross this segment of Harmony Road,
as does the BNSF Railroad . The planned South Transit
Center is located approximately one-third mile south of
Harmony Road adjacent to the Mason Corridor. _
Central Segment (College Avenue to Ziegler Road) West Segment
While the entire central segment of the corridor is planned
for six lanes, only the segment between Boardwalk Drive
and Ziegler Road is currently six lanes with a raised median .
"i
Widening for the remaining section ( College Avenue to
Boardwalk Drive ) is unfunded, however.
The urban design character of the central segment generally
follows the recommendations from the Harmony Corridor
Plan with large landscaped setbacks and informal tree
plantings . Some areas along this segment have redeveloped
into new activity centers that front the corridor, such as
near the Snow Mesa Drive intersection . Newer urban design
Central Segment infrastructure improvements have been completed at the
College Avenue/Harmony Road intersection . Land uses along
the central segment are typically suburban -style commercial development with some residential neighborhoods
backing to Harmony Road . The University of Colorado Health Harmony Campus is a prominent land use on the
south side of Harmony Road, east of Timberline Road . This segment includes the UPRR crossing and a future
Power Trail crossing just west of Timberline Road .
East Segment (Ziegler Road to 1=25)
The eastern segment of the corridor has six travel lanes with
a depressed grassy median, providing a more rural feel . Most
of the land along this stretch is undeveloped farmlands or
natural areas . However, three large employment campuses
( Hewlett Packard , Avago, and Intel ) are located near the
intersection of Harmony Road and Ziegler Road . This segment
has the highest potential for household and employment
growth .
East Segment
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
Corridor Context
Corridor History
Harmony Road owes its name to the agricultural community
named " Harmony" established in the 1870s . The community
of Harmony was centered on what is now the intersection of ,
Harmony Road and Timberline Road . Remains of the
community can still be seen at the intersection where the
buildings from the original Harmony Store and the Harmony
School still stand . To the west of Timberline Road is the
Harmony Cemetery. Harmony was a farming community with
crops such as grasses, wheat, corn, barley, oats, and timothy .
The Harmony School on the northeast corner of
Harmony Road remained a rural Harmony Road and Timberline Road is a designated Fort
agricultural road until the late 1950s and Collins Landmark. The original school house was built in
early 1960s with the construction of 1 -25 . 1878 and the larger masonry school building was built in
By 1965, 1 -25 connected New Mexico and 1931 .
68 Wyoming through Colorado from
1659 Walsenburg to Wellington . In about 1968 Harmony Road became a state highway
connecting 1 -25 to US Harmony
287 ( College Avenue ) and was designated Farm Becomes Corridor Plan
as State Highway 68 ( SH 68 ) . Road State Hwy Harmony Subsequently, the Colorado Department transferred to City
• C
of Transportation ( CDOT) developed
Harmony Road into a divided highway
with a wide grass median/swale that also
acted as a drainage feature from US 287
to just west of 1 - 25 . The width of theBuilds
roadway and rights-of-way set the tone Boardwalk
for a higher speed, limited access Harmony
roadway; a big difference from any other Bicycle Plan
arterial street in the City. In 2005 CDOT
returned all of SH 68 to the City of Fort Collins .
Regional and Citywide Importance
Harmony Road is an important regional connection . Traveling from the south on 1 - 25, Harmony Road is the first
Fort Collins exit; the next Fort Collins exit is Prospect Road three miles to the north . The nearest exit to the south
is State Highway 392 (the Windsor exit) which is also three miles away. Harmony Road as a six lane arterial is
considered one of the best ways into and out of Fort Collins, and with the limited number of 1 -25 exits, a large
amount of regional traffic is funneled to Harmony Road . Harmony Road also connects to the Town of Timnath ,
immediately to the east of 1 -25 . Timnath is a small but rapidly growing community with land use plans that add
an extensive number of new households . Timnath has also seen major employment develop along Harmony
Road with a large Super Walmart located just to the east of the 1 -25 and Harmony interchange .
Harmony Road and College Avenue are the primary commercial corridors for Fort Collins . As a primary
commercial corridor serving all of Fort Collins and also as a regional destination, pressures on Harmony Road are
significant . It also serves both local and regional trips and will continue to grow into the future; the future of
Harmony Corridor is tied to the future of Fort Collins and the region .
0
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
A variety of plans have been completed by the City of Fort Collins and other agencies that address
transportation, access, and other issues along Harmony Road . Appendix A lists these plans and provides a brief
description of their relevance to the Harmony Road corridor. A description of the near term projects that will
affect the Harmony Road corridor are also included in Appendix A.
Overview of Planning and Outreach Process
The Harmony Road ETC Master Plan has been developed in a manner
The following NEPA process principles consistent with the Federal Transit Administration' s ( FTA' s )
were followed for this study: Alternatives Analysis (AA) study process . As described in the FTA' s
Preparation of a purpose and Framework for Alternatives Analysis, during an AA study process
need statement " . . .the priority corridor identified in systems planning is studied in
Evaluation of alternatives and detail, focusing on the effects of alternative solutions to the
identification of a Locally Preferred Alternative
corridor' s transportation problems . Information on costs, benefits,
Identification of potential and impacts of each alternative is developed to provide a sound
environmental impacts and technical basis for project decision making . " The AA study process, as
conceptual mitigation well as the Federal Highway Administration' s ( FHWA' s ) Planning and
strategies Environmental Linkages ( PEL) process can be considered precursors
Public involvement to the environmental review process required by the National
Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA) . The PEL process is intended to
improve and streamline the environmental process for
transportation projects by conducting corridor planning activities prior to the start of the NEPA process .
Although this ETC Master Plan is not considered a PEL, several NEPA process principles were followed and the
FHWA PEL questionnaire was completed and is included in Appendix B .
The TAC included representatives from the
As shown on Figure 2, the Harmony Road ETC planning process following City departments:
began in January 2012 and took approximately 18 months to MovesFC
complete . The process diagram below shows the key tasks, Transf
rt
milestones, and meetings . Advance Planning
Coordination with several City departments and neighboring Community Development
agencies as well as input from the public was important Neighborhood
Services
throughout the planning process . Engineering
Streets
The planning process was guided by a Project Management Team Traffic Operations
( PMT), which is composed of two FC Moves transportation Utilities
planners and a Transfort transit planner. The PMT and consultant City Manager's Office
team held monthly or semi - monthly conference calls throughout
the planning process to discuss findings and preliminary EconomicNatural Areas
recommendations and to prepare for meetings with the larger
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and public outreach efforts . And the following
North • ' •
Coordination with other Fort Collins staff and with neighboring Town of
agencies largely occurred through the TAC. The TAC met six times Larimer County
from March 2012 through the conclusion of the study to provide FederalAdministration
input about the analysis of technical data for the City' s decision University of Colorado Health Systems
making purposes .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
Figure 2 , Planning Process
2012 2013
DEC ]AN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
TASK 1 Project Management and Public Involvement
Previous 11 ,p�y Fo(used Public
Work !1 !2
TASK 21 Corridor Understanding TASK41 Master Plan Development
Tier I Alternatives Tier 2 Alternatives Locally Preferred TASK 61 Plan Adoption / Report
Development and Screening Development and Evaluation Alternative (LPA)
TASK 31 Corridor Vision TASK 51 Implementation Plan
I Final ETC
Corridor Purpose Master Plan
Understanding and Need PROTECT
Report Statement COMPLETE
I i
O
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
A variety of public outreach
activities were designed and Harmony Road31M
conducted for the study to \ Alternatives Analysis
solicit input from residents,
business owners, employees, You are invited to tell us what you think!
and travelers of the Harmony the Gfyof Fort (ollins6 doing aton'idorAdyiorHarmony Road, and we would fikeyourinput Neosevis4the
Road corridor and from the project website and complete the online survey.
community at large . Two Ihe Harm cilRoadlinhanolravel (addor(UQmasterplanOil ProjectWebsite: fcgovxom/harmony
augment and update transportati on plans for the Harmony
public meetings were held for -orridor. (f(masterplansmeintendedtodocmentthe
the project : 7 — - - A
rmsportation, land use, environmental, ecor micandsocial • �
needs of key corridors and determine themoslappropriate = V �ti - VOW
► The focus of the May orridaconhquraion. �� l
for more information,
3, 2012 public meeting contact ;,arnnls?rwn E
'*nicrTransporlaUaopynner • -
was to present ~'
n nsm ti<Ycgnv can
existing conditions, _
future growth +
projections, and __-
transportation needs,
and to receive public
input and feedback on current traveling conditions and on ideas for improvements
► The results of the Tier 1 Alternatives Development and Evaluation ( as described in Chapter 3 ) were
presented at the September 13, 2012 public meeting, along with recommendations for alternatives to
be moved forward for further evaluation in Tier 2 . Attendees provided input on the initial screening
recommendations
. ►;gtit 6'M�DDC c
In addition to the Harmony Road ETC public meetings, several y :;
other outreach mechanisms were successfully used to /LSD Zrtrtrttetr a r%
ry
disseminate information about the project and to receive input �jJJVL9S coup � � v
` j , H
throughout the planning process : v ' t �l ��
► Virtual public open houses — information from the 3i 0$, y "r r-ry
' � �`
G 8 z . aca �0'. .
public meetings was posted on the project website r`o� WN �� � aV �`
along with electronic questionnaires which received ° ` Q = ` yam
over 350 responses in total ( between two
questionnaires ) yv�► , � _. �''�
Eia
► Presentations to City Boards and City Council
► Booths at City events and other public meetingsCoa
► Stakeholder meetings with neighborhood groups,
business associations, and major employers Oa �Sti
► Others (Aaron )
This "Word Cloud" shows the words that were most
frequently included in public comments. Words that
A more detailed description of public outreach efforts and occurred more frequently are given greater prominence.
public input is included in Appendix C .
O
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
2 . Purpose and Need
A critical part of the Alternatives Analysis process is the development of a Purpose and Need statement and
articulation of goals and objectives of the project . The Purpose and Need statement is a key factor in
determining the range of promising alternatives and to guide the development of criteria for evaluating the
alternatives . This chapter documents the project Purpose and Need , transportation problem statements, goals,
and project objectives which were developed during a workshop with the TAC and were refined based on input
from the public .
Purpose Statement
The purpose of the project is to implement multimodal transportation
improvements that enhance mobility and safety along the Harmony No vehicle waits longer
than one
Road Corridor. Improvements will support local and regional travel signal indication .
needs, land uses, economic health and environmental stewardship
goals .
Problem Statements and Travel Needs B On rare occasions vehicle
The following sections summarize the identified transportation wait through more than r . ,
problems followed by the existing and future travel needs by travel one signal indication .
elm
mode : roadway, transit, bicycle and pedestrian . A detailed description
and analysis of the existing conditions is included in Appendix A, the
land use and demographic profile is included in Appendix D, and the
transportation analysis is included in Appendix E . Intermittently vehicles wait le
through more than one J
signal indication . _
Roadway occasionally backups
may develop, traffic flow
Statements : W still stable and acceptable .
Problem
Travel demand • traffic congestion • Delays at intersections may become
extensive. but enough cycles with
the corridor is expected • increase • - to �� • lower demand occur to permit
growthpopulation an • employment al • periodic clearance,
preventing excessive
Harmony Road and backups. L05 D has
will result in additional pressure on - transportation historically been regarded
as a desirable design objective ininfrastructure -(
urban areas.
Harmony Road has the two intersections with the highest
crash totals in the City J TE
Very long queues may
create .r , ) , )
Harmony Road is one of the primary gateways into the City of Fort lengthydelays
Collins . Harmony Road travels east/west through southern Fort Collins
from Horsetooth Reservoir to 1 -25, through the Town of Timnath, and
into Weld County. Within the project limits of the Harmony Road ETC T
( Shields Street to 1 -25 ), the City' s Master Street Plan identifies Harmony Backups from locations �e
Road as a six- lane major arterial between College Avenue ( US 287 ) and downstream restrict or prevent m , „ ,� , is is seen „ ,- - ,
of approach
-�
I -25, and as a four- lane arterial to the west of College Avenue . vehicle,.; out
utnfappromach
creating "gridlock" condition
Traffic operations Level of Service (LOS
Categories)
0
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Altematives Analysis
Existing Traffic Operations
The existing daily traffic volumes along Harmony Road ( shown on Figure 3 ) range from approximately 19, 400
vehicles per day (vpd ) on the west end of the corridor near Starflower Drive to 45, 800 vpd just west of
Timberline Road . Traffic volumes near 1 - 25 are approximately 37, 100 vpd . The majority of the signalized
intersections along the corridor operate at LOS D or better during the PM Peak hour. The only exceptions are the
intersections with South College Avenue and Timberline Road, which currently operate at LOS E during the PM
peak hour .
Figure 3 . Existing Daily Traffic Volumes
cc a 11
a 19 , 400 Q �,
n o c tea% N
� o 704
�5 27 , 800 33 , 600 37 900 42 205 800 38 , 800 36 , 500 379100
Harmony Rd. 399800 N a
o �
sari E m OrZ m
0 N
°) ZiU
Crash History
The top two intersections with the highest crash totals in the City ( 2007 — 2010) are the Harmony Road
intersections at Timberline Road and at Lemay Avenue . Based on a review of the top 50 intersections for overall
crash totals, there are seven intersections along Harmony Road that fall within the top 50 .
Crash data were collected for the five-year period from January 2007 through December 2011 . During that time,
there were a total of 1, 679 reported crashes at the intersections along Harmony Road and 122 mid - block
crashes between Shields Street and Lady Moon Drive . There were three fatal crashes along the corridor during
the five-year study period . Two were front to side crashes; one occurred at Lady Moon Drive and the other at
Snow Mesa Drive . The other fatal crash occurred at Stover Street and involved a pedestrian .
Overall , the proportion of injury / fatal crashes along Harmony Road (compared to property damage only
crashes ) is generally better than expected when compared to similar arterial facilities . On most four or six lane
arterials, the injury / fatal percent of total is 30 percent on average . There are two intersections ( Snow Mesa
Drive and Crest Road ) and one segment ( McMurry Avenue to Timberline Road ) above that threshold . The
frequency of rear-end crashes is higher than normal throughout the corridor as a result of congestion .
The frequency of bicycle related crashes is higher than normal at the Shields Street intersection . However,
overall , the corridor has a very low occurrence of pedestrian crashes (0 . 3%) and bike crashes ( 1 . 2 % ), which is
likely in part because of the relatively lower number of bicycle and pedestrian users on the corridor. These totals
are both better than expected for a four or six lane arterial which typically have bike and pedestrian crash
proportions around 1 . 5 percent .
Land Use and Travel Demand Growth
Between 2009 and 2035, the Harmony Road study area (which includes a one- mile buffer around the corridor) is
expected to see a 42 percent increase in households and a 71 percent increase in employment. These growth
rates are generally in line with the remainder of Fort Collins . The highest concentration of household growth is
expected to occur in the eastern section of the corridor, in the currently undeveloped land south of Harmony
0
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 111 Altematives Analysis
Road between Ziegler Road and Strauss Cabin Road . Notable 40000
household growth is also expected in the northwest 2009
quadrant of Harmony Road and Ziegler Road and just west of 2035
the Harmony Road ETC, between Shields Street and Taft Hill 30000
Road . High concentrations of employment growth are also
expected in the eastern section of the corridor in the 20000
undeveloped land south of Harmony Road , as well as in the
vicinity of College Avenue .
10000
The western portion of the corridor ( Shields Street to College
Avenue ) is projected to experience an approximate 10, 000 044 1[ _J
vehicle per day (vpd ) increase in traffic, with 2035 forecasts HOUSEHOLD EMPLOYMENT
in the 30, 000 to 35, 000 vpd range . Forecasts in the central
portion of the corridor ( College Avenue to Ziegler Road ) are Residential growth within the Harmony Road study area is
in the range of 39, 000 to 54, 000 vehicles per day (vpd ) expected to increase 42 percent, and employment is
through most of the segment . The eastern segment of the expected to increase 71 percent.
corridor (Ziegler Road to 1 -25 ) is expected to have the greatest increase in travel demand with forecasts ranging
from 55, 000 to 63, 000 vpd ( approximately 50 percent higher than existing) .
In 2035, nearly the entire corridor is projected to be congested, even with the recent completion of the six- lane
widening project between Boardwalk Drive and Timberline Road . Most of the study area intersections are
projected to operate at LOS E or F during the PM peak hour in 2035 if no additional improvements are made .
Transit
Problem
The transit routes along Harmony Road are discontinuous, making transit travel along
ME
Harmony Road and to key activity centers throughout Fort Collins inefficient and
inconvenient
The existing Harmony Road cross-section does not accommodate potential mixed - use
and transit-oriented development
Today' s transportation network does not provide sufficient connections between modes ( e . g. , transit to
pedestrian ) nor between each mode and the destinations along the corridor ( e .g., pedestrian
• - • • commercial
Today' s transportation network does not fully meet Fort Collins' sustainability goals
Existing Service and Ridership
Transfort currently has three routes that provide service
along Harmony Road : Routes 1, 16 and 17 . Routes 1 and 17
are primarily north/south oriented except for the portion of
the route serving the Harmony Road area . Route 16 generally
runs east/west between the Mall Transfer Point ( MTP ) and
Fossil Ridge High School, southeast of Harmony and Ziegler
Roads . Route 19 and the regional route FLEX provide _
north/south connections from the corridor but no service
along the corridor. Existing weekday ridership on Harmony
Road is served primarily by Route 16 which serves
A typical Transfort bus stop along Harmony Road
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 111 Altematives Analysis
approximately 260 riders per day. In addition , Routes 1, 17, and 19 provide north -south service through Fort
Collins with service to destinations on Harmony Road . As illustrated on Figure 4, there is currently no bus to the
Harmony Transfer Center, and traveling the length of the Harmony Road ETC would require transferring .
As can be seen on Figure 4, the highest concentration of transit boardings/alightings in the corridor is in
the vicinity of Harmony Road/Shields Street at the Front Range Community College . Other stops with
relatively high numbers of boardings/alightings include the stops east of Timberline Road, near John F .
Kennedy Parkway, and in the vicinity of Ziegler Road near the major employment centers ( Hewlett Packard
and Intel Corporation ) .
Future Ridership
Based on the fiscally-committed transit system included in the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan
( including MAX, general realignment of the transit system around the South Transit Center, and route
extensions around the University of Colorado Health Harmony Campus ), it is forecast that approximately
650 riders per day would board along the Harmony Road corridor in 2035 . These findings suggest a 250
percent increase in transit ridership over existing conditions .
Challenges for Transit Service
The design of much of Harmony Road makes providing safe, convenient and efficient transit service difficult for
Transfort and less appealing for users and potential users . These challenges include physical impediments such
as :
► Drainage ditches located directly adjacent to the roadway along much of the corridor
► Long distances between signalized "� s
intersections SPEED '
LIMIT ' _ ' -
► Wide right-of-way to cross (six travel lanes 4 $
with deceleration/acceleration lanes and bike
lanes in most locations )
a
► Lack of sidewalk connections in some
locations �-
1I Y
► Lack of convenient sidewalk connections to
amenities along the corridor ( 80' setbacks ) =Y �`
► Lack of curb and gutter infrastructure along
most of the corridor
These physical barriers limit where transit stops are ; L
located throughout the corridor and can discourage
Concrete-lined drainage ditch creates a barrier for transit rides.
potential riders from trying transit service .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan o Alternatives Analysis
Figure 4 , Transit Boardings and Alightings
To (SU To Downtown To Prospect Road
Transit Center Transit Center
y cc} J To Foothills Mall ¢' 1`\
= D� h,Q imnsferpoint
C U
. . . .. . . . .HarsetooM Road If Horsetwth Roan
Y i •.a`
! C Rlniui Ld. •i. •eZ99• .. . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . N - [ Bo . . ....
m �}
0 b�,On4a _ i % . . ... .... . . :44 . . .
5 2 3 co 56 N+ a� w� 9 1 1 5 1 0 21 0 41 29 ♦ ; :r
Han any Road 9 • • = • • • HarmanY Road• U
• • -- •'••.. •:••• Harmony Road"' ..
0 13 =13 02 3 2
: South S°
i Transi
�1me a' f r
:Center ac
m
3 Rack
� Dr.
ee
T Q: . . .. ... .. . .. . ...•
O�
. . . . . . . . . . .
. .. . .
2 �.•, f U
. • Kechtar RG@tl" . . . ..•
287 ¢ . . . .
C ::., . .
To Loveland, Berthoud
and Longmont
LEGEND
Relative Number of Daily Weekday - Fort Collins City Boundary
Boardings and Alightings on Routes .............. . Timnath City Boundary
1 , 16, and 17
® Route Designation Parks
Planned Roads
NORTH I SOURCES Transfod 2012 February 2012 Ridership Survey
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
Bicycle
Problem
Traveling by bicycle along Harmony Road is uncomfortable because Harmony is a high-
• - • - - • corridor
10
Today' s transportation network does not fully meet Fort Collins' sustainability goals A
mod
Fort Collins has an extensive bicycle network composed
of on-street bike lanes, designated bike routes, and
multi- use trails . Harmony Road has six- to ten -foot bike
lanes on both sides of the street from 1 - 25 through the
Shields Street intersection .
AFr The full length of the Bicycle segment Level of
- Harmony Road ETC ( LOS) represents a
currently provides a measure of how
bicycle level of service of A comfortable a bicyclists
or B, and this LOS is within a variety of skill
expected to remain even levels would be when
with the increased traffic using the facility. Bicycle
intersection •
volumes associated with represents the perceived
the 2035 No Action scenario . Bicycle intersection LOS for movements along hazard of the shared
Harmony Road ( in the east-west direction ) are LOS A or B, with the exception of roadway
the crossing of College Avenue, which is LOS C . Bicycle intersection LOS for through the intersection .
movements crossing Harmony Road ( in the north -south direction ) range from A
to C. except at the College Avenue intersection where the bicycle LOS is D .
Although bike lanes are provided along the entire length of the study corridor, and the bicycle levels of service
are good, bicycle counts indicate low levels of biking activity in the corridor . The low bicycle counts may be an
indication that the perceived safety of bicycling along Harmony Road is not consistent with the calculated LOS .
There is a need to encourage bicycle travel along the corridor to provide a more balanced multimodal corridor.
Pedestrian
Problem
HarmonyHarmony Road traffic signals (and pedestrian crossings ) are typically spaced at half- mill..A
intervals which require long, sometimes out-of-direction travel for pedestrians crossing
• • . •
Today' s transportation network does not provide sufficient connections between
modes nor between each mode and the destinations along the corridor
Harmony Road is a wide corridor with few dedicated, safe pedestrian crossing points
Today' s transportation network does not fully meet Fort Collins' sustainability goals
Sidewalks along Harmony Road have been built as development has occurred . In general , the sidewalks conform
to the urban design character recommended in the Harmony Corridor Plan : wide setbacks with naturalistic
berming, and a meandering eight-foot sidewalk . Sidewalks currently exist along the vast majority of the corridor,
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 111 Altematives Analysis
and all but a few sections of the sidewalk are detached from the roadway. There are, however, a few sections of
the corridor that lack sidewalks, most notably between Ziegler Road and Strauss Cabin Road . Pedestrian counts
indicate low levels of walking activity in the corridor, despite the presence of sidewalks along the majority of the
corridor.
The existing pedestrian segment levels of
Pedestrian segment LOS can be service along Harmony Road range fromquantified to reflect the
comfort experienced by
A to F; LOS A, B, or C is typically observed
pedestrians. Pedestrian where the sidewalk is substantially
intersections is based on the separated from the vehicular traffic, ,
delay incurred by pedestrians providing a more comfortable � .. �
the pedestrians' exposure to environment for pedestrians . LOS D is li
and interaction with turning observed where the sidewalk is attached
i
to the roadway, and LOS E or F is
observed where the sidewalk is missing .All crossings of Harmony Road are currently at LOS C or D, while the
pedestrian LOS for crossing the side streets ranges from A to D . With the -
increased traffic volumes associated with the 2035 No Action scenario, the
pedestrian segment levels of service are generally expected to degrade by
one LOS ( e . g. , from LOS E to LOS F ) .
Wide meandering sidewalks exist
In many ways Harmony Road provides a sheltered , pleasant walking along much of Harmony Road.
experience because of the naturalistic berming, abundant landscaping and
wide setbacks . However, the corridor also requires pedestrians to walk long distances out of their way and
across a large, busy road in the process . In addition,
connections to corridor land uses are not ideal .
Challenges for Pedestrians
Even with sidewalks provided throughout most of the �a
corridor, pedestrian connections are often inconvenient, -z
� 4 LLL
inaccessible and even lack safety considerations for
pedestrian users . Some of the challenges pedestrians face
throughout the corridor include :
► Indirect pedestrian connections to destinations ( e .g .,
connections ending at the back of buildings and lack
of desirable visual connection between the corridor
and the surrounding land uses ) This photo illustrates large setback adjacent to Harmony
Road and an example of a concrete lined ditch that
► Limited and long distances between signalized street separates the roadwayfrom the corridor land uses.
crossings, encouraging jay-walking across Harmony
Road
► Large 80' setback from Harmony Road and adjacent uses
► Large Harmony Road right-of-way for pedestrians to cross comfortably
► Drainage ditches located between the detached sidewalks and street, limiting the available location of
bus stops
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Altematives Analysis
Goals and Objectives
The project goals listed below reflect the need to address four transportation problem areas ( multimodal
mobility, accessibility, safety, and sustainability) and are consistent with the City of Fort Collins' vision for the
future . The objectives provide guidance for attaining each goal and reflect the expected results to be achieved
during the planning horizon of the project . The goals and objectives are the foundation for the evaluation
criteria .
Goal # 1 : Improve Multimodal Mobility
Objectives:
► Provide comfortable and convenient multimodal travel options that include auto, transit, walking and
bicycling
► Provide a transportation system that supports existing and planned land uses, including future mixed -
use and transit-oriented development
► Provide multimodal connections to the City' s system of Enhanced Travel Corridors and Regionally
Significant Corridors
► Help accommodate future travel demand by increasing bicycle, pedestrian and public transportation ' s
share of trips
Goal #2: Enhance Accessibility
Objectives:
► Improve connectivity among various travel modes along and across the corridor
► Enhance transit, pedestrian and bicycle connections to existing and future land uses
► Provide a multimodal system that is accessible to all abilities and a broad demographic
Goal #3: Improve Safety
Objectives:
► Improve multimodal travel safety along and across the corridor
► Increase opportunities for pedestrians to safely cross Harmony Road
Goal #4: Integrate Sustainability
Objectives:
► Increase the use of environmentally friendly transportation options
► Implement affordable and cost-effective transportation solutions
/ Implement a solution that complements the larger transportation system
► Provide a system that supports planned land uses and economic vitality
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
3 . Alternatives Development and Evaluation
The development and evaluation of
alternative improvements consisted of a Broad Range
two-tier process that began with a TIER 1 Fatal Flaw Analysis
broad range of potentially promising SCREENING
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
cross-sectional elements for each
corridor travel mode ( roadway, transit, L Most Promising
bicycle, and pedestrian ) . The Vision
fundamental philosophy in the TIER 2 Phasing
screening process was to systematically SCREENING Cost
identify the positive and negative Triple Bottom Line
characteristics and tradeoffs among
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ■ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
alternatives resulting ultimately in a
Locally Preferred Alternative ( LPA) . Public
REFINEMENT Boards/Commissions
In the Tier 1 evaluation and screening City Council
process, the alternatives were evaluated
at a high level for fatal flaws and their
ability to address the Purpose and Need . LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
The cross-sectional elements were
combined to develop Tier 2 corridor alternatives . The Tier 2 evaluation process involved a detailed and
quantitative comparison between corridor alternatives and against the No Action Alternative based on the
forecasted conditions in 2035 . Inter-departmental and agency coordination , as well as public involvement,
played a major role in this process . The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was involved in each step of the
evaluation process, as well as during the development and refinement of the LPA. This chapter summarizes the
evaluation processes and the key findings of the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluation . More detailed information
pertaining to the evaluation process is provided in the appendices, as noted below :
► Appendix C summarizes the public input received throughout the study
► Appendix D provides more detailed transportation analysis completed in support of the alternatives
development and evaluation process
► Appendix F describes the environmental resources inventory and evaluation
► Appendix G documents the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluation results in a matrix format
Evaluation Criteria
Criteria for developing and evaluating alternatives were established to respond directly to the project' s Purpose
and Need and its goals and objectives . The evaluation criteria used in the Tier 1 and Tier 2 screening are shown
in Table 1 . The criteria were developed to be appropriate for the evaluation level being conducted and the
alternatives being considered . The criteria and corresponding measures used in Tier 1 were primarily qualitative
in nature . The Tier 2 evaluation criteria were focused on those measures that could best be used to differentiate
the corridor alternatives and facilitate the selection of the LPA. The responsiveness of each alternative to the
criteria determined whether or not the alternative was reasonable and if it should be advanced for further
evaluation .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
Table 1 , Evaluation Criteria
Objectives
Develop improvements that reflect Level of support received through public 777
✓
stakeholder desires. outreach process
MobilityGoal #1 : Improve Multimodal
Auto comfort and convenience ✓
Provide comfortable and convenient
multimodal travel options that include Traffic operations ✓
auto, transit, walking and bicycling.
Transit comfort and convenience ✓
Provide a transportation system that
supports existing and planned land Transit ridership ✓
uses, including future mixed-use and
transit-oriented development. Pedestrian comfort and convenience ✓ ✓
Help accommodate future travel Bicycling comfort and convenience ✓ ✓
demand by increasing bicycle,
pedestrian and public transportation 's Balance multimodal needs ✓
share of trips.
Support future TOD and mixed use ✓
Provide multimodal connections to the Multimodal connections to transit centers/ETCs ✓
City's system of Enhanced Travel
Corridors and Regionally Significant
Auto access to I -25
Corridors. ✓
Goal #2 : Enhance Accessibility
Improve connectivity among various
travel modes along and across the Ease of bicycle/pedestrian crossing ✓
corridor.
Enhance transit, pedestrian and bicycle
connections to existing and future land Quality of transit service ✓
uses.
Provide a multimodal system that is Accommodate a variety of bicycle and
accessible to all abilities and a broad ✓
pedestrian user types and abilities
demographic.
. .
l #3 : Improve Safety
Improve multimodal travel safety along Improve safety at high crash locations ✓
and across the corridor.
Potential crash reduction benefits ( based on ✓
Increase opportunities for pedestrians crash modification factors )
to safely cross Harmony Road. Buffer between vehicular traffic and bicyclists ✓
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
Objectives
Bicycle and pedestrian safety ✓
Goal #4: Integrate Sustainability
Potential ROW impacts ✓ ✓
Increase the use of environmentally Potential environmental resources impacts ✓ ✓
friendly transportation options.
Drainage/impervious surface area ✓ ✓
Mode shift potential ✓
Implement affordable and cost-effective Consistent with potential demand ✓
transportation solutions. Cost ✓
Implement a solution that complements Conformance with Transportation Master Plan ✓
the larger transportation system . (TMP )
Provide a system that supports planned
Consistent with land use plans/zoning
land uses and economic vitality. ✓
No Action Alternative
The 2035 No Action transportation network includes those improvement projects which are expected to be
funded by 2035 . These transportation projects would be built regardless of any other improvements that are
identified as part of the Harmony Road Alternatives Analysis . The No Action Alternative does not address the
purpose and need but has been carried through the analysis for comparison .
Roadway
Planned Roadway Projects
Along Harmony Road, the No Action roadway network includes the recently completed
widening project (Timberline Road to Boardwalk Drive ) . The No Action alternative also includes
three widening projects in close proximity to the Harmony Road ETC :
/ The Town of Timnath ' s Harmony Road widening project (four lane widening from CR 3 to CR 5 )
/ College Avenue widening to six lanes from Harmony Road to Carpenter Road
/ Timberline Road widening to six lanes from Vine Drive to Harmony Road
Travel Demand Forecasts
The analysis of future travel demands along the Harmony Road is based on the NFRMPO' s 2035 travel demand
model, as modified by the City of Fort Collins for the development of the 2011 Transportation Master Plan to
represent the City' s 2035 Fiscally Constrained transportation network. The household and employment
forecasts described in Appendix D were used as input in the travel demand model .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
A comparison of the existing and future ( 2035 No Action ) daily traffic forecasts is presented on Figure 5 . The
western portion of the corridor (Shields Street to College Avenue ) is projected to experience an approximate
5, 000 to 10, 000 vehicle per day (vpd ) increase in traffic, with 2035 forecasts in the 30, 000 to 35, 000 vpd range .
Forecasts in the central portion of the corridor ( College Avenue to Ziegler Road ) are in the range of 35, 000 to
54, 000 vehicles per day (vpd ) through most of the segment . The eastern segment of the corridor (Ziegler Road
to 1 -25 ) is expected to have the greatest increase in travel demand with forecasts ranging from 55, 000 to 63, 000
vpd ( approximately 50 percent higher than existing) .
Volume to capacity (v/c ) ratios compare the capacity of a street to the volume of traffic that it carries or is
projected to carry in the future . A planning level capacity of 8, 000 vehicles per day per lane was used to
estimate and compare the level of congestion today and in the future . Figure 5 shows those segments of the
corridor that are uncongested (v/c ratio less than 0 . 75 ), congesting (v/c ratio between 0 . 75 and 1 . 0 ), and
congested (v/c ratio greater than 1 . 0) today and in the future . Based on this planning level analysis, congestion is
currently experienced between College Avenue and Timberline Road, with most of the remainder of the corridor
"congesting . " In 2035, nearly the entire corridor is projected to be congested in the No Action scenario, even
with the recently completed six- lane widening project between Boardwalk Drive and Timberline Road .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
Figure 5 , Traffic Forecasts and V/C Ratios ( Existing and 2035 No Action)
EXISTING ( Based on 2010 / 2011 Traffic Counts )
m
c
m Y Bo E N . . � . . . ..
i
LL mppp l . ... .. . ..
in
a 3e,3oo . . . . . . . . . . . . ya
- - 33,600 37. 90042 . 200 m 4500
rwmay 35.500 399800 r
Harmon Roatl'' .
• • 24,500 7
' WHO8 37 , 100
' . . .
19 ,400 Ewen oc 41 , 00
Trans i
Cert
i• Rock C k Dim
4 L 6 LANES
LEGEND
XX , XXX Daily Traffic Volumes Volumes
Uncongested (v/c <0.75) 30,000- 40,000- >50 000
<30,000 40,000 50,000
Congesting (0.75>_ v/c >1 .0)
Congested (v/c >_ 1 .0) NORTH
2035 NO ACTION
$
`2871J a Yam
2 c . . ° .'!.yS.� .. . . .:
B
y Om : : . . .
. .. . . .. . . .. : `O . . . . . . . . . . .LZ
i.V . ..
489900
0 53, 600 � 53 00
32,800 39,100 53 300 55, 100 63, 300
. . Ha ony Rcatl. . . . . . . . . . h
•i•• Harmony Road ''.,
299900 40A 51 ,000 , o 56 , 800
28 , 900 �"
T'dn5i, ' p I
Rock C k Onve
4 LANES k *LAMES-7
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 111 Altematives Analysis
Transit
0
Planned Transit Projects
The No Action transit network includes the transit operational improvements recommended in
the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (August 2009 ) . Key aspects of this plan include the
construction of the Mason Corridor Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT), construction of a new South Transit
Center southwest of Harmony Road and College Avenue, and general realignment of the transit
system around this new transit center that is designed to provide better service to areas of demand in 2035 .
Along Harmony Road , it includes route extensions around the University of Colorado Health Harmony Campus .
Additionally, the No Action Alternative includes the capital cost associated with the recommendations in the
North 1 -25 EIS Record of Decision, which includes Express Bus service along 1 -25 connecting Fort Collins to other
Front Range destinations, including Loveland and Denver .
The Mason Corridor is currently under construction .
The corridor includes MAX BRT service and improvedu
non - motorized facilities and is scheduled to be
completed in 2014. The new BRT service will run
north/south adjacent to Mason Street and the BNSF 11it ` r
Railroad, both of which parallel College Avenue . It will
provide a connection between the Downtown Transit
Center and the new South Transit Center ( STC), which _
is located to the south of the Mason Street and ~`
Harmony Road intersection . This bus service, when MAX BRT service is scheduled to commence in May2014.
combined with the shared - use trail along Mason
Street, will improve access to the corridor. MAX will link major destinations and activity centers along the
corridor including Downtown commercial , Colorado State University, Foothills Mall, and South College retail
areas . It is expected to operate nearly twice as fast as auto travel along College Avenue and provide high
frequency service every 10 minutes .
Transit Ridership Forecasts
Based on transit system changes included in the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan, transit ridership forecasts
for the 2035 No Action have been developed . In 2012, there were approximately 260 boardings per day along
the Harmony Road corridor on Route 16 . It is forecast that approximately 650 riders per day would board along
the Harmony Road corridor in the 2035 No Action scenario, a 250 percent increase in transit ridership over
existing conditions .
Bicycle and Pedestrian
As described in Chapter 2, the bicycle and pedestrian segment LOS are impacted
by the level of traffic on the adjacent roadway. The forecasted increase in traffic
all
volumes in 2035 would result in some reduction in pedestrian LOS along the
corridor. In general, the pedestrian LOS would be reduced by one level of service
( e . g. , from LOS C to LOS D ) in the 2035 No Action scenario in comparison to the
current LOS ( as documented in Appendix A) . Where new sidewalk was recently constructed between Timberline
Road and the UP Railroad with the widening project, the future pedestrian LOS will improve to D ( currently LOS
F ) . The bicycle LOS methodology application along Harmony Road is less sensitive to increases in traffic volumes .
The 2035 No Action bicycle LOS are expected to remain in line with current conditions ( LOS A and B ) . However,
the existing low mode split for bicyclists and pedestrians ( compared to other corridors in Fort Collins ) would
likely be further decrease in the future if no improvements were made to the corridor.
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
Tier 1 Alternatives Development
The alternatives development process began with the development of 18 corridor-wide elements . As shown in
Table 2, these elements included a broad range of improvements by travel mode ( roadway, transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian ) that were identified to potentially address the project needs . Given that no single element would
address all of the project needs as a stand -alone improvement, the intent of identifying these Tier 1 elements by
mode was to combine elements together as part of packaged alternatives .
Table 2 , Tier 1 Modal Elements
Travel Mode Element
Roadway 2 General Purpose Lanes per direction
3 General Purpose Lanes per direction
4 General Purpose Lanes per direction
High Occupancy Vehicle ( HOV) Lanes
Transit Local Bus in Mixed Traffic
Enhanced Bus with Transit Priority Treatments
( queue jumps and/or transit signal priority)
Curbside Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT)
Median BRT
Light Rail/Streetcar
Bicycle Bike Lanes ( shoulder)
Buffered Bike Lanes
Bike/Bus Lanes
Shared Use Paths
Cycle Tracks
Back Street Bike Lanes
Pedestrian Curvilinear Detached Sidewalks
Shared Use Paths
Crossing Enhancements at Signalized Intersections
Grade Separated Crossings
Tier 1 Evaluation and Screening Results
In the Tier 1 evaluation, these elements were first assessed independently on their ability to meet the Tier 1
evaluation criteria , as set forth in Table 1 . The evaluation was qualitative in nature, using measures of " Poor,"
" Fair," "Good, " and " Best ." Those alternative elements that were deemed to meet the project Purpose and
Need were advanced to a secondary evaluation within Tier 1 in which the modal elements were combined to
develop conceptual cross-section alternatives .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
The cross-section alternatives were then evaluated for each of three corridor segments using the Tier 1
evaluation criteria . The three corridor segments ( as shown on Figure 6) were identified based on their unique
travel characteristics, adjacent land uses and corridor constraints ( such as right of way) . Evaluating the cross-
section alternatives separately by segment facilitated advancing only those elements and cross-sections that are
most appropriate and beneficial in each of the three segments . Table 3 summarizes the modal elements
eliminated through the Tier 1 evaluation and screening process . While most of the elements listed were
eliminated for all three segments of the corridor, there are two notable exceptions . Widening to six lanes was
eliminated only in the west segment (Shields Street to College Avenue ), and bike lanes ( as an element of a build
alternative ) were eliminated only in the central and east segments ( College Avenue to 1 - 25 ) . The bike lanes have
been retained as part of the No Action Alternative for comparison purposes .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 0 Alternatives Analysis
Figure 6 . Harmony Corridor Segment Characteristics
WEST SEGMENT CENTRAL SEGMENT EAST SEGMENT
Shields St. to College Ave. : College Ave. to Ziegler Rd. Ziegler Rd. to 1-25
• 4 lanes • 6 lanes (planned) • 6 lanes
• Bike lanes - 4lanes currently, College to Boardwalk • Bike lanes
• Detached sidewalks - 6lanes currently, Boardwalk to Ziegler • Attached / detached sidewalks
• • Painted median • Bike lanes (some missing sections) :
• • Primarily residential, • Attached / detached sidewalks (a few missing sections) : • Depressed median, rural feel :
backing Harmony : • Raised median : • Most undeveloped, natural area, plus campus- :
• ROW approximately 120'-140' • Suburban-style commercial development, some residential backing Harmony style development
• Current traffic: : • ROW varies widely from 130'-250' • ROW relatively unconstrained
19,000-28,000 vpd • Current traffic: 36,000-40,000 vpd
• Current traffic: 30,000-46,000 vpd
• 2035 No Action forecasts: . 2035 No Action forecasts: 39,000-54,000 vpd • 2035 No Action forecasts: 55,000-63,000 vpd
• 30,000-35,000 vpd • . • Posted speeds: 45-55mph
• • Posted speeds: 35-40mph • • Posted speeds: 45-50mph
'IN
Horsetooth Road
Horsetoolb Road •
287
a a-
�c • �ZS
t� • ?P
+ c
v> i Y �o -
• N LL
5
Fo vJhaleg YJa w h
c a
m
m a•'
Ha n Roatl m Q ) Harmony Road U -1 Harmony Road
me,
01
U
L
3 Rock C k Drive
- d Dr
.
T
v � ¢
Kechter Road
o w E
� U � 1�1�
287 N
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan o Alternatives Analysis
Table 3 . Summary of Elements Eliminated in Tier 1
ExampleTravel Segment(s) in which
Mode Element • for •
Eliminated
Considerable ROW impacts; would make Harmony more difficult to
Roadway/ Major Widening Y _Transit ( 6lanes ) West cross; therefore, less accommodating of bicycle and pedestrian
modes
Roadway/ Major Widening
Considerable ROW impacts; would make Harmony more difficult to
Transit (8 Lanes )
West, Central , East cross; therefore, less accommodating of bicycle and pedestrian
modes
Transit Light Rail West, Central , East Prohibitive cost; inconsistent with potential demands; limited
operational and implementation flexibility
Transit Streetcar West, Central , East Prohibitive cost; inconsistent with potential demands; limited
operational and implementation flexibility
AWL
Higher cost compared to other alternatives; would limit
Transit Median BRT West, Central , East opportunities for landscaping in median which is highly desired by
the community
Env
Transit Bus only Lane _ ..E � ; West, Central , East Would be detrimental to traffic operations
Transit/ Shared Bus/ Would not address the need to separate the bicyclists from
Bicycle Bike Lane 81KE. ONLY West, Central , East vehicular travel lanes
Does not address the need to provide comfortable and convenient
Bicycle Bike Lane Central , East multimodal travel options because of high speeds and traffic
volumes ( retained in No Action only)
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
Tier 2 Alternatives Development
The results of the Tier 1 evaluation process were presented to and discussed with the TAC, corridor stakeholder
groups, and the public . After considering and reflecting upon the input received during this outreach effort, the
Project Management Team discussed how to efficiently and effectively package the remaining cross-section
alternatives for the more detailed analysis required in Tier 2 . The Tier 2 Alternatives include improvements for
all travel modes; however, because the transit elements are the key differentiators between the alternatives,
the Tier 2 Alternatives are titled based on the transit service, as shown in Table 4 .
As described previously, the No Action Alternative includes only those improvements that are fiscally
constrained . Along Harmony Road, the No Action improvements include fiscally-committed transit service
modifications and widening of College Avenue and Timberline Road through their intersections with Harmony
Road .
The Transportation System Management (TSM ) Alternative consists of lower-cost alternatives that would still
produce meaningful operational improvements . The local bus service along Harmony Road would be expanded
to provide continuous service along the full length of the corridor. The TSM Alternative includes widening the
section of Harmony Road between College Avenue and Boardwalk Drive to six lanes . To address the operational
deficiencies in the No Action Alternative, four intersections along the corridor have been identified for capacity
improvements :
► Harmony Road/Boardwalk Drive
/ Harmony Road/Timberline Road
► Harmony Road/Ziegler Road
/ Harmony Road/Lady Moon Drive
For the purpose of the Tier 2 evaluation , specific intersection improvements (turn lane additions and
channelization ) were identified to provide a minimum 2035 PM peak hour level of service ( LOS) of E . These
intersection improvements, as well as the widening of Harmony Road ( College to Boardwalk), were applied to all
build alternatives for consistency.
The Enhanced Bus Alternative would provide high -quality, high Queue Jump Lane
-
frequency bus service operating in mixed -traffic with queue
jumps at select intersections . A queue jump is a special priority
lane at an intersection approach that allows transit vehicles to
bypass queued vehicles . A new Harmony Enhanced Bus route
would be developed that would operate from Harmony Transfer
Center ( HTC ) to Front Range Community College ( FRCC) .
There are two alternatives that would provide high -quality, high -
frequency Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT) service . The BRT service would
be provided in a curbside lane that is dedicated for use by buses
and High Occupancy Vehicles ( HOV) . In these alternatives, the BRT/ HOV lane would use the existing outside lane
in both travel directions . Therefore, Single Occupancy Vehicles ( SOV) would be limited to using of the inside lane
in each direction between Shields Street and College Avenue and the two inside lanes in each direction between
College Avenue and 1 -25 . There are two variations of transit service for this alternative . The End-to- End
BRT/HOV Alternative includes BRT service along the full length of the Harmony Corridor, and for trips to/from
downtown, passengers would transfer to MAX. The Interlined BRT/HOV Alternative involves interlining the
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
Harmony Road BRT service with MAX; resulting in a one-seat ride from any station along Harmony Road to the
Downtown Transit Center.
The bicycle and pedestrian elements that were retained from the Tier 1 screening could be paired with any of
the four Tier 2 build alternatives . Therefore, the bicycle and pedestrian options ( as listed in Table 4) were
evaluated independently .
Table 4, Tier 2 Alternatives '
Roadway Transit Transit Bicycle and
Alternative infrastructure infrastructure Service Pedestrian
on Harmony on Harmony Accommodation
No Action Existing Existing Committed FY14 Transfort Existing
service modifications
Widen Harmony Expanded Local Bus service
Transportation ( Boardwalk to ( Phase 1 of Transfort
System College ) to 6 Existing Strategic Operating Plan )
Management Front Range Community z
(TSM ) Lanes; intersection College ( FRCC ) to Harmony Options
improvements / Bike lanes +
Transfer Center ( HTC) detached
sidewalks ( West
Queue jumps only)
Enhanced Bus Some as TSM at major Enhanced bus service ( FRCC Segment y)
intersections
to HTC); increased frequency ► Buffered bike
lanes + detached
Outside lanes sidewalks
End-to-End for bus/HOV BRT service ( FRCC to HTC) ; / Cycle tracks +
BRT/HOV Same as TSM ( one in each increased frequency detached
direction ) sidewalks
►Outside lanes Shared use paths
Interlined for bus/HOV BRT service interlined with
BRT/HOV Same as TSM ( one in each MAX; increased frequency
direction )
1 All alternatives include : MAX BRT, College widening to 6 lanes south of Harmony, Timberline widening to 6 lanes north
of Harmony ( including through the Harmony Road intersection ) .
z Back street bike lanes, pedestrian intersection crossing improvements, and grade separated pedestrian crossings were
deemed to be needed and appropriate for all build alternatives; definition of these improvements was deferred to the
LPA refinement process .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
Tier 2 Evaluation and Screening Results
In the Tier 2 evaluation process, the alternatives were evaluated against the evaluation criteria that were
developed based on the goals and objectives and Purpose and Need as previously summarized in Table 1 . The
Tier 2 evaluation criteria include a combination of qualitative and quantitative evaluation criteria . While some of
the Tier 1 evaluation criteria were used again in Tier 2, the Tier 2 evaluation considered the criteria in more
detail than the Tier 1 screening .
The NFRMPO' s 2035 travel demand model , as modified by the City of Fort Collins for the development of the
2011 Transportation Master Plan to represent the City' s 2035 Fiscally Constrained transportation network, was
used to estimate and compare travel demand and travel patterns for automobile and transit modes . The
following sections summarize the key findings from the Tier 2 evaluation by travel mode . More detail about the
transportation analysis is included in Appendix E, and the Tier 2 evaluation matrix is included in Appendix G .
Roadway
Traffic Forecasts
_ The forecasted 2035 daily traffic volumes for each of the Tier 2 alternatives are shown on Figure
F — ■ 7 in comparison to the existing traffic volumes . The TSM , Enhanced Bus, and BRT/HOV
Alternatives are expected to carry higher traffic volumes than the No Action Alternative
between College Avenue and McMurry Avenue as a result of the increased capacity ( six- lane
widening from College to Boardwalk) . The traffic forecasts on the remainder of the corridor are expected to
remain approximately consistent with the 2035 No Action forecasts .
Traffic Operations
The outputs from the NFRMPO travel demand model were used to develop 2035 PM peak hour intersection
turning movements which were then analyzed in Synchro to compare the intersection operations for the Tier 2
alternatives as summarized in Figure 8 .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 1\� Alternatives Analysis
Figure 7 . 2035 Traffic Forecasts for Tier 2 Alternatives
EXISTING
cc 11
19 , 400 0, �, qu
?04 i> 27 , 800 33 , 600 37 900 42 25 800 389800 369500 379100
Harmony Rd. 39 , 800 j
zar, mCU
0 m
° U
2035 NO ACTION
C e cc !�
a 289900 Q v
o d,� � N
'o E
329800 U 39 , 100 51 000 53 600 Q53 200~ 489900 555100 569800
7 Harmony Rd. 63 300
�xnQ E ti
z( e7, � m Z
U
Widen to 6 Lanes Widen to 6 Lanes
2035 TSM , ENHANCED BUS , BRT/HOV
Widen to 6 Lanes Cr ¢ 11
28 , 900 0 Q) EBRight
r rn �k Turn Lane
U o" aid n N
'o E
32 , 800 U 47 , 200 55 , 600 55 , 00704053 200 ~ 489900 55 , 100 569800
armony 63 , 300
co -Q
U
Widen to 6 Lanes Widen to 6 Lanes Channelized EB & NB Right Turn Lanes
Dual Protected SB to WB Channelized WB to NB Free Right
NB & SB Lett Turns Free Right
2035 Carpool Share of Total Vehicle Trips = 23 %
NORTH
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 111 Altematives Analysis
Figure 8 , 2035 PM Peak Hour Traffic Operations
9 In the No Action Alternative, four
g intersections along Harmony Road would
operate at LOS E, and one intersection
0
Intersections
(Ziegler Road ) would operation at LOS F . The
e operatingat: roadway improvements (widening and
s ■ MSUorBetter intersection improvements ) associated with
0 4 DOSE the TSM Alternative and Enhanced Bus
• LOS F Alternative would result in most
E 3 -
z 2 intersections operating at LOS D or better,
and two intersections ( College Avenue and
1
Timberline Road ) operating at LOS E . The
No Action TSM EnhanoPdBus BRT/HOV BRT/HOV Alternatives ( both End-to- End and
Interlined ) would result in some degradation
of intersection operations because SOVs
(which are estimated to make up 77 percent of the traffic ) would be restricted from using the curbside travel
lanes . The intersection of Harmony Road and College Avenue would be most heavily affected by this
configuration , with PM peak hour operations at LOS F .
Corridor Travel Times
A comparison of corridor travel times for SOV and HOV travel along Harmony Road is provided in Figure 9 . The
TSM and Enhanced Bus Alternatives would result in a 13 percent reduction in travel time (two minutes)
compared to the No Action Alternative . The two BRT/HOV Alternatives would result in a 28 percent reduction in
travel time for HOVs (four minutes), but a 20 percent increase in travel time (three minutes ) for SOVs compared
to the No Action Alternative .
Figure 9 , 2035 PM Peak Hour Corridor Travel Times
Summary of Findings 20
Key findings related to the traffic operations • SOV • HO1
include :
15
► Intersection improvements are needed at
several locations to accommodate future
demand 10
► Using the outside lanes for BRT/HOV
through the College intersection would
cause considerable operational problems 5
/ BRT/ HOV alternatives would provide a
travel time savings of as much as seven 0
minutes for carpoolers NoActiao TSM Enhanced Bus End to End Interlined
BRT/HOV BRT/HOV
► Travel time for SOVs would increase 20
percent in the BRT/HOV alternatives
► Queue jumps in the Enhanced Bus Alternative could be most beneficial at about 3 -5 locations where
congestion and queue lengths are expected to be the longest
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 111 Altematives Analysis
Transit
a
Evaluation of the transit service performance for the Tier 2 alternatives was also completed
using the NFRMPO regional travel demand model ( more detailed analysis results are included in
Appendix E ) . The No Action and TSM Alternatives assume 60 minute peak and off- peak
headways; the Enhanced Bus and BRT/HOV Alternatives assume 20 minute headways during
the peak periods and 30 minute headways during the off- peak periods . Figure 10 shows the
2035 average weekday ridership along the Harmony corridor and on MAX . MAX ridership is critical to effectively
compare the Interlined BRT/HOV Alternative with the other Tier 2 alternatives .
Figure 10 , 2035 Average Daily Transit Boardings
10000 As shown , the TSM Alternative would result
9000 in a modest 15 percent increase in ridership
B000 - on Harmony compared to the No Action
7000 Alternative . The Enhanced Bus Alternative
fi" would result in a more than tripling of the
5" No Action ridership, and the End -to- End
a000
3000 BRT/HOV would result in a nearly
z000 quadrupling of the No Action ridership . The
loon ridership for the Interlined BRT/ HOV
o 1 T T Alternative includes those riders on
No Action TSM Enhanced Bus Endo-End Interlined Harmony and MAX as is approximately five
BRT/HOV BRT/HOV
percent less in total than the End -to- End
I Harmony Boardings ■ Mason Boardings
BRT/HOV ridership . However, this decrease
in overall ridership must be assessed in
combination with the number of transfers being made; by providing a one-seat ride from any Harmony Road
station to downtown via the Interline BRT service, the total number of boardings decreases, but the average
number of transfers per trip is decreased substantially, as shown in Figure 11 . A lower average number of
transfers per trips is representative of a more convenient transit system .
Figure 11 , Average Transfers per Transit Trip
Summary of Findings
0.35
► Increasing frequency results in
largest increase in boardings 0.30
► Interlined service MAX to 0.25
Harmony east reduces transfers
0.20
and increases ridership
► Interlined service to the west 0.15
competes with Route 19 0.10
/ Capital associated with HOV
0.05
conversion would be relatively low
► BRT demand requires articulated °'0°
No Action TSM Enhanced Bus End-to-End Interlined
fleet BRT/HOV BRT/HOV
► BRT shelters and fleet are very
costly
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
Travel Speeds by Mode
In order to provide a direct comparison of the roadway and transit components of the Tier 2 Alternatives, the
average corridor travel speeds were evaluated by travel mode . The average travel speeds account for
intersection delays for all travel modes and dwell times to board and alight for transit. As shown in Figure 12,
corridor travel speeds ( average per person ) for SOVs are the highest in the TSM and Enhanced Bus Alternatives;
speeds decrease in the BRT/HOV Alternatives ( primarily as a result of delays at the College Avenue intersection ) .
Corridor travel speeds for HOVs are the highest in the BRT/ HOV Alternative because they have exclusive use of
the outside lanes ( with transit) . Corridor travel speeds for transit are highest in the Enhanced Bus and BRT/ HOV
Alternatives . The average corridor travel speeds ( average for all people in the corridor, regardless of mode ) are
highest in the TSM and Enhanced Bus Alternatives, followed by the BRT/HOV Alternatives .
Figure 12 , 2035 PM Peak Hour Averages Speeds
35
30
25
20 woo SOV
f HOV
15
Transit
10 =mOmmAverage
5
0 r T
No Action TSM Enhanced Bus BRT/HOV
Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternatives
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
Bicycle and Pedestrian
As shown in Table 4, the Tier 2 bicycle and pedestrian options could be paired
with any of the Tier 2 build alternatives (TSM, Enhanced Bus, End-to- End
�.% BRT/HOV or Interlined BRT/HOV) . The bicycle and pedestrian options are
described below along with the primary factors that were considered in the Tier
2 evaluation .
Bike Lanes + Detached Sidewalks
This alternative represents the existing conditions for much
of the Harmony Road corridor . However, this option would
` involve completing the missing sidewalk segments that exist
in several locations along the corridor. As described in the
"0e Tier 1 evaluation , bike lanes as an element of a build
alternative were eliminated for the Central and East
segments because of the perceived safety issue
demonstrated by relatively low utilization . Bike lanes in the
Central and East segments do not afford comfortable and
convenient multimodal travel options because of high
speeds and traffic volumes . This option has been retained
for the West segment, and the primary advantages and
disadvantages are described below.
Advantages
/ Provides a separate space for bicyclists and pedestrians; more accommodating of different abilities than
a shared use path
/ Minimal cost to complete missing sidewalk segments
Disadvantages
/ Less confident bicyclists may not be comfortable riding in close proximity to a travel lane
Buffered Bike Lanes + Detached Sidewalks
Buffered bike lanes provide greater space between motor vehicles
and bicyclists, provide space for bicyclists to pass another bicyclist, '
and appeal to a wider cross-section of bicycle users . This option
includes completion of the missing sidewalk segments that exist in '
several locations along the corridor. The primary advantages and
disadvantages are described below.
Advantages
/ Would improve bicycle accommodation by enhancing `
drivers' visibility and awareness of bicyclists
/ Provides a separate space for bicyclists and pedestrians; 17
more accommodating of different abilities than a shared
use path or bike lanes
/ Heightened driver awareness of bicyclists and presence of buffer may provide improved comfort for
bicyclists ( improved bicycle LOS)
► Relatively low cost improvement to complete missing sidewalk segments and add buffer striping
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
/ Can be accommodated on existing infrastructure in Central and East segments
Disadvantages
/ Would require widening ( and higher cost) on East segment
► Would not provide a physical separation between bicyclists and motor vehicles
Cycle Tracks + Detached Sidewalks
A cycle track is an exclusive bike facility that is physically separated _
from motorized traffic typically by a raised median or bollards .
Although cycle tracks can be one-way or two-way, for Harmony
Road, the cycle track option that was deemed to be most = -
appropriate is one-way cycle tracks on both sides of the street . A ( ��
cycle track is distinct from the sidewalk; this option includes
completion of the missing sidewalk segments that exist in several
locations along the corridor. The primary advantages and
disadvantages are described below.
Advantages
/ Would improve bicycle accommodation by enhancing drivers' visibility and awareness of bicyclists and
providing a physical separation between auto travel lanes and bicyclists
/ Provides a separate space for bicyclists and pedestrians; most accommodating of different abilities
compared to other options
► Heightened driver awareness of bicyclists and physical separation from travel lanes provides improved
comfort for bicyclists ( improved bicycle LOS )
/ A recent study' shows increased bicycling activity and lower risk of injury with implementation of cycle
tracks
Disadvantages
/ Raised buffer would introduce drainage and maintenance complexities
► Highest cost compared to other bicycle/pedestrian options; including completion of missing sidewalk
segments and construction of raised median barrier between travel lane and cycle track
Shared Use Paths -
A shared use path is a bikeway physically '
separated from motorized traffic by an
open space or barrier and can be either
within the roadway right-of-way or within
an independent right-of-way. Shared use s
paths may also be used by pedestrians,
skaters, wheelchair users, joggers and
h
other non - motorized users . This option
would include a two-way shared use path
on each side of Harmony Road ( shared
use paths are also referred to as sidepaths
1 "Risk of Injury for Bicycling on Cycle Tracks Versus in the Street," Injury Prevention, February 2011, Harvard School of
Public Health Researcher Anne Lusk.
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
when adjacent to a roadway) and would replace the existing meandering detached sidewalk with a more direct
and wider ( minimum 10 feet) shared use path . The primary advantages and disadvantages are described below.
Advantages
/ Would provide a physical separation between bicyclists and motor vehicles
Disadvantages
/ Eliminates on -street bicycling accommodation which is preferred by many advanced and non -
recreational bicyclists
► Bicyclists and pedestrians of all types and abilities would be forced to use this single facility
/ Would introduce safety concerns associated with operational conflicts between two-way sidepath and
automobiles at intersections/access points; bicyclists riding on two-way sidepaths incur much greater
risk of collision than those traveling with traffic2
/ The use of shared use paths adjacent to a roadway such as Harmony Road is not consistent with
guidelines in the AASHTO Bike Guide, 3 which states the following :
• " Provision of a pathway adjacent to the roadway [sidepath ] is not a substitute for the provision
of on- road accommodation such as a paved shoulders or bike lanes . . ."
• " Best use of sidepath is adjacent to roadways with no or very few intersections or driveways"
Summary of Tier 2 Evaluation
Overall , the Tier 2 evaluation identified the Enhanced Bus, detached sidewalks, bike lanes west of College
Avenue, and buffered bike lanes east of College Avenue as the elements of the Locally Preferred Alternative
( LPA) . Table 5 summarizes the Tier 2 evaluation results .
While the Enhanced Bus Alternative was identified as the strongest alternative for only four of the ten applicable
evaluation criteria, the criteria that largely influenced the selection of the LPA were public and agency support
and balance of multimodal needs . The Enhanced Bus Alternative provides the best compromise of increasing
transit ridership while retaining acceptable traffic operations .
Likewise, the Buffered Bike Lane + Detached Sidewalk is the strongest bicycle/pedestrian option for the LPA
because it provides the best compromise between ROW impacts/costs/drainage and maintenance (where the
bike lane + detached sidewalk was identified as the strongest candidate ) and mode shift potential/
accommodation of a variety of users (where the cycle track + detached sidewalk was identified as the strongest
candidate ) .
z "Risk Factors for Bicycle- Motor Vehicle Collisions at Intersections," ITE Journal, September 1994 .
3 Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 2012, Fourth Edition, American Association of State Highway
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 1\1 Alternatives Analysis
Table 5. Summary of Tier 2 Evaluation Results
EvaluationStrongest Strongest
Roadway/Transit
Alternative Option
Public and agency support Enhanced Bus Cycle Track + Detached Sidewalk
Traffic operations TSM or Enhanced Bus N/A
Transit ridership Interlined BRT/HOV N/A
Pedestrian comfort and convenience N/A Buffered Bike Lane + Detached Sidewalk
Bicycling comfort and convenience N/A Cycle Track + Detached Sidewalk
Balance of multimodal needs Enhanced Bus Buffered Bike Lane + Detached Sidewalk
Quality of transit service Interlined BRT/HOV N/A
Accommodate a variety of bicycle and
pedestrian user types and abilities N/A Cycle Track + Detached Sidewalk
Enhanced Bus or
Potential crash reduction benefits TSM , BRT/HOV N/A
Bicycle and pedestrian safety N/A Cycle Track + Detached Sidewalk
Potential ROW impacts TSM Bike Lane + Detached Sidewalk
Drainage/impervious surface area TSM Bike Lane + Detached Sidewalk
Mode shift potential BRT/HOV Cycle Track + Detached Sidewalk
Cost TSM Bike Lane + Detached Sidewalk
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
4 . Locally Preferred Alternative
This chapter describes the Locally Preferred Alternative ( LPA) resulting from the extensive alternatives
development and evaluation process conducted in this study. The conceptual engineering plans for the LPA are
included in Appendix H .
LPA Decision Process
The process of selecting the Locally Preferred Alternative for the Harmony Road ETC included the following
steps :
► Performing a two-tiered alternatives development and evaluation process
► Soliciting input from the public, stakeholders, and City staff
► Presenting the Tier 2 evaluation and public input to the TAC on December 19, 2012, at which time the
TAC requested follow-up information related to the feasibility of infrastructure improvements identified
in the build alternatives and a direct comparison of corridor travel times by mode between Tier 2
alternatives
► Presenting the requested follow- up information to a sub-group of the TAC
► Making a preliminary recommendation for the LPA based on the strongest Tier 2 roadway/transit
alternative and bicycle/pedestrian option as described in Chapter 3 . Consideration was given to the
technical analysis ( including the follow- up information ), public input, and input from the Project
Management Team
► Refining the LPA based on input from the TAC; the refined LPA was presented to and supported by the
TAC on February 27, 2013
► Presenting the project and recommended LPA at a series of City board meetings and public meetings
• Transportation Board — July 18, 2012; March 20, 2013; June 19, 2013 .The Transportation Board
acted on the Final Report at their June 191h, 2013 meeting . [ Meeting results to be added ]
• Bicycle Advisory Committee — July 9, 2012 ; May 6, 2013 . The BAC generally supported the
recommendations of the LPA. They viewed the buffered bike lanes as an improvement over the
existing bike lanes .
• Planning and Zoning Board — May 10, 2013 . The Planning and Zoning Board generally supported
the recommendations of the LPA.
• Air Quality Advisory Board — May 20, 2013 . The Air Quality Advisory Board had numerous
questions about the impact of the project on air quality. On one hand the Board felt improving
traffic flow had the most potential to improve mobile emissions, while there was also a strong
advocacy for increasing mode shift to transit, bicycling and walking to reduce vehicle miles
traveled . The Board agreed to provide a brief, bulleted document with ideas regarding air
quality issues in this project .
► The City Council . . . [when they have taken an action in support of the LPA, include date of adoption and
description of action ]
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
LPA Description
The LPA for the Harmony Road ETC, includes a series of multimodal transportation improvements to address the
project Purpose and Need . The LPA includes widening the section of Harmony from College Avenue to
Boardwalk Avenue to six lanes, as well as intersection improvements at selected locations to address future
operational deficiencies .
The transit aspect of the LPA includes Enhanced Bus along Harmony Road between the South Transit Center and
the Harmony Transfer Center. The bus would travel in the general purpose lanes along the extent of the route
except where queue jumps are provided .
The LPA includes enhancements to the existing bicycle lanes including green colored pavement on the bike lanes
for the full length of the corridor, and a striped buffer between the bike lane and the adjacent travel lane from
College Avenue east toward 1 -25 . The meandering sidewalk will be retained on both sides of Harmony Road ,
with completion of the few missing segments . The LPA will also include enhancements to bicycle and pedestrian
crossings ( both at-grade and grade separated crossings ) . The LPA includes raised, landscaped medians the entire
length of the corridor.
Roadway Elements
In general, the LPA makes use of the existing roadway infrastructure without major capital
expansion . As shown on Figure 13, the LPA does include widening a short segment ( College
Avenue to Boardwalk Drive ) to six lanes to better accommodate future travel demands, which
is consistent with the City' s Transportation Master Plan .
Two widening projects which are anticipated within the planning horizon will affect Harmony
Road . College Avenue is planned for widening to six lanes south of Harmony Road which will require
reconfiguration at the Harmony Road intersection to extend three northbound and southbound lanes through
the intersection . Likewise, the Timberline Road intersection will require similar geometric modifications to allow
six through lanes in the north/south direction . Timberline Road is expected to transition to four lanes south of
the Harmony Road intersection . Although these two widening projects are not a part of the LPA, the intersection
modifications to accommodate these projects are considered part of the LPA.
The LPA also includes intersection improvements at four locations along the corridor to address future
operational deficiencies and to enhance safety for automobile travel along the corridor . As shown on Figure 13,
the four intersections identified for improvements include :
► Harmony Road/Boardwalk Drive
/ Harmony Road/Timberline Road
► Harmony Road/Ziegler Road
/ Harmony Road/Lady Moon Drive
For the purpose of this planning study, geometric improvements were identified to address the operational
deficiencies ( as noted previously on Figure 7 ) . However, other types of intersection improvements may be
considered and analyzed in the design phase — roundabouts, continuous flow intersections ( CPIs ), and Michigan
left turns, for example . This study did not include an exhaustive evaluation of intersection improvements .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Altematives Analysis
Figure 13 , Roadway Widening and Intersection Improvements
Intersection Improvements In addition to the widening and intersection
■ Planned improvements described above, the LPA
■ Locally Preferred Nternative (LPA) includes urban design elements to provide
Horsetooth Rd. consistent aesthesis along the length of the
corridor. As illustrated in Figures 14 and 15,
aa� a the LPA includes landscaped medians and
d� curb and gutter throughout the corridor. The
H&rnwv Rd. typical streetscape and median landscape
should emphasize mixed plantings of
:tx i perennials, grasses, shrubs, and tree
Widen to 6 Lanes groupings, with a loosely patterned mulch
surface . The landscape design should reflect
Fort Collins' western regional character with regionally-specific plants suited to the particular microclimate and
environmental conditions of the location . Typical features include native boulder groupings, varied cobble mulch
areas and urban elements such as street lights and decorative railings . Low impact water quality measures may
be incorporated into the design as conditions warrant .
Figure 14. Illustrative Example of LPA : Shields Street to College Avenue
XAC ih
lnixe�fre o;efac Xi;Owa1C) BGc
C4 0 WO
F10000 Q� L 17� �1
D017 L
p � � � •� •� mow. / \ `
AIG
O � n
it, �.
, yn—
.� Ill 111. •� , • I '
ft& ��'
• Mull • I UNT-4 •
^
�� - I ? _
l ,
s •
NO ���� • I
r
wv
TV IF
TV
.i
.� •
• • - • - - - - IF - - • • - • • - • • • / I ' • I / • / I
40
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
The locations of the visible concrete- lined ditches are :
► College Avenue to Boardwalk Drive : Sporadically along the south side of Harmony Road
► Timberline Road to Ziegler Road : Along the south side of Harmony Road ; the ditch proceeds southward
along the east side of Ziegler Road at this point, but continues along Harmony Road as a piped system
then as an open, unlined channel
/ Ziegler Road to Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet : Along the north side of Harmony Road
Coordination with the existing irrigation ditch companies should occur as soon as possible during the preliminary
design process to understand their concerns and their design requirements .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
Transit Elements
LPA transit elements include enhanced bus service, bus stations and stops, and queue jumps at select locations .
a
Enhanced Bus Service
The LPA includes a new 4 %2 mile Enhanced Bus route along Harmony Road between the
Harmony Transfer Center and the South Transit Center . Figure 16 illustrates the proposed
Harmony Enhanced Bus route referred to as Route H . The route would begin at the Harmony
Transfer Center, north of Harmony Road and to the west of 1 -25 . It would travel west along
Harmony Road stopping on demand at bus stops and stations located approximately every % mile along the
corridor . At College Avenue the bus would turn south to access the South Transit Center and connect to the
planned MAX service that is currently under construction .
To the west of College Avenue, Harmony Road would be served by the existing Route 19 connecting the South
Transit Center, Front Range Community College and the CSU Transit Center. Route H would also connect with
the Route 17 at Timberline Road and with Route 7 at John F . Kennedy Parkway .
Route H would operate every 20 minutes in the peak period and 30 minutes in the off peak periods . In 2035, it is
estimated that the Express Bus along Harmony Road would serve approximately 2, 000 boardings daily
depending on the route service pattern . Interlining the Harmony Road service with MAX would result in higher
ridership compared to the end -to-end stand -alone service . This is the result of providing a single seat ride
between Harmony Road and downtown Fort Collins which results in shorter travel time and no transfers .
The service would require three buses plus a spare if the buses are branded for service specifically along the
Harmony Road Corridor . Buses would be low floor and articulated to accommodate demand and could
seamlessly integrate with MAX service . Stops would be provided approximately every % mile . Drivers would stop
when a passenger is waiting to board at any of the stops along the route or when a riding passenger has
provided indication that they will be alighting at the approaching stop .
Annually the Route H service would run approximately 10, 500 service hours assuming end-to-end service . Based
on Transfort ' s current hourly cost per service hour of $93, the annual operating and maintenance costs would be
approximately $990, 000 ( 2012 dollars) . A Route H service pattern interlined with MAX would require a similar
number of additional service hours .
Figure 16 , LPA Transit Routes
Route 19
CSu Downtown (30 min. headways)
Transit Transit ,u,-_ -, Harmony Enhanced Bus
Center Center ^ ; Service
r * (20 min. peak / 30 min.
a, , moo off-peak headways)
is seem • • • optional Interline with
< y(� MAX
0f WumnlJe •.h'wpy ...., i
I: x .....
FORTGOLLINS '. ' "
8O': ' •'•........ .. . . . `a i ?� TIMNATH i
G a �., E
IFAll
MTN re
` iloll
- Ow IrNO Poo,
; ! >
Ilia
MOM
+' y W':1►1� Ate' o
1 .:
J'� _ � `� _ � mow` ► � � �
• • • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
43
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
/ At the three intersections with queue jumps ( Lemay Avenue, Timberline Road , and Zieger Road ), the
queue jump receiving lane will provide a dedicated space for buses at the station ; after stopping at the
station, the buses will be required to enter back into the travel lane
► A bus pull -out is recommended at the station near Mason Street to provide buses with a waiting area to
facilitate timed transfers with MAX
The Harmony Transfer Center
would be the end -of- line
station and park-and - ride C
facility for Route H . As such it
would be upgraded to
accommodate 60 foot
articulated buses and provide a
driver bathroom . In addition , c �
the number of parking spaces is ---
expected to be increased to 350
as part of the North I -25 EIS
project .
The stop/station experience is
an important part of the rider experience . The integration of high
quality materials, modern messaging systems, and improved Harmony station Concept
functionality will serve to improve the image of and increase the
demand for the transit system . Enhanced transit stations support cultural exchange and community building by
providing comfort and safety in the public
realm .
i
. i ,
Harmony Local Stop Concept
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan o Alternatives Analysis
Figure 18 . Harmony Road Bus Stop and Station Locations
CSU Downtown
Transit Transit
I IN
Center Center 1P
0. . HO W.0.0. h Road * — Hmerooth Road
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . : Y m
ate= FORTCOLLINS " A " '
TIMNATHTr2l 0 nr ;
,Nnal"Vda g C< } W ''' ..
c E
E "•l t
. . . . . . . Her Road .•.• •• Hw/ yRoatl "%
F O r
w oc 1
Trans)
conler
LEGEND aa-A °r t t
O Harmony Bus Station
Harmony Local Bus Stop
Bus Route 19
Bus Route H _
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Optional Interline with MAX NORTH
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
Bicycle Elements
Fort Collins was recently designated a Platinum - level
Bicycle Friendly Community by the League of American
Bicyclists . In recognition of the importance of bicycle
travel in Fort Collins, the LPA includes enhanced
bicycle facilities along the full length of the Harmony
Road corridor . East of College Avenue, a buffered bike
lane will provide a visual separation and greater space between the
motorized travel lane and the bike . The buffered bike lanes will also
provide space for a bicyclist to pass another bicyclist, and generally
appeal to a wider cross-section of bicycle users . Buffered bike lanes are
depicted in Figure 15 for the section of Harmony Road between Example of a buffered bike lane in Seattle
College Avenue and 1 -25 . A buffer width of three feet and a bike lane
width of five is recommended, which exceeds minimum standards in the National Association of City
Transportation Officials ( NACTO ) Urban Bikeway Design Guide and could fit within the existing roadway
infrastructure on Harmony Road .
As a part of the LPA refinement process, the use of colored
,R pavement was identified as a desired treatment for the bike lanes
' along the full length of Harmony Road (Shields Street to 1 - 25 ) .
Colored bike lanes help to increase the visibility of the facility,
identify potential areas of conflict, and reinforce priority to
s
bicyclists . Motorists are expected to yield right of way to bicyclists in
the bike lane . Studies have shown that colored bike lanes,
particularly in conflict areas near intersections, result in increases in
motorist yielding behavior.4 Green colored pavement on Harmony
bike lanes are illustrated on Figures 14 and 15 .
Example of a green bike lane in San Francisco While the enhanced bicycle facilities along Harmony Road are
expected to encourage bicycling as a mode of travel along the
corridor, some bicyclists will not be comfortable riding on -street with the levels of traffic volume and motor
vehicle speeds on Harmony Road . To Er ` j i
accommodate these less-confident bicyclists, a L
network of bike facilities including back street
bike lanes (that is, off the major arterial roads )
is needed . A relatively well -established
network of bike facilities ( primarily bike lanes )
exists within approximately a half- mile of
Harmony Road . Bike lanes exist along a route a I A.
half- mile south of Harmony from west of
Lemay Avenue to Lady Moon ( approximately
three miles ) along Boardwalk Drive, Keenland
Drive, Battle Creek Drive, Stetson Creek Drive, An excerpt from the Fort Collins Bike Plan (2008) showing the Planned
Bikeway Network in the Harmony Road ETC study area.
4 "Evaluation of Blue Bike- Lane Treatment in Portland, Oregon," Transportation Research Record 1705, 107- 115, 2008 .
"Effects of Colored Lane Markings on Bicyclist and Motorist Behavior at Conflict Areas," Center for Transportation
Research, City of Austin, 2010 .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
and Rock Creek Drive . To bolster the use of these back street bike lanes, the following actions are
recommended :
► Complete the missing connection across the UPRR (west of Timberline Road ) with a tie-in to the future
Power Trail
► Provide signing and mapping to alert bicyclists of the option to use the back street bike network instead
of Harmony Road
► Consider the extension of an east-west bike route from Lemay to College, with a connection to the
South Transit Center
Pedestrian Elements
Harmony Road is identified in the City' s Pedestrian Plan as a �
Pedestrian Priority Area ( PPA) . The LPA seeks to enhance the K{Y x « ,
pedestrian experience along the Harmony Road corridor b
providing continuous sidewalk connections along the length �r •
of the corridor ( Shields Street to 1 -25 ) and improving the
crossing opportunities along the corridor. The LPA includes completion of the • `
`IF
missing sidewalk segments that exist in several locations along the corridor.
Crossing of Harmony Road has been identified as problematic by the =,jam
community, and it will become more difficult as traffic volumes increase in the � -
future . All signalized intersections along the corridor should include at-grade _
crossing treatments to enhance the safety and convenience for pedestrians
( and bicyclists) . As shown schematically on Figure 19, these treatments could -
include :
► Pedestrian crosswalks
The characteristic wide meandering
/ Use of TURNING VEHICLES YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS signs ( Manual on sidewalk along Harmony Road
Uniform Traffic Control Devices [ MUTCD] R10- 15 ) to remind right-on -
green and permissive left-turn movements of their obligation to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk
► Pedestrian activated signals (with the option of a leading pedestrian interval )
► Channelized right turn lanes with raised islands f
to allow pedestrians to cross the right turning
traffic independently of the rest of the
intersection ; the design should encourage low _
vehicle turning speeds and should provide
unobstructed sight lines between pedestrians
and motorists
► Proper bike lane striping to avoid the right lane
conflict with right turning vehicles
► Bicycle detection ( particularly on the side street
approaches ) and automatically adjusted signal
timing to allow enough time for bikes to cross Lo a
Harmony Road within the green time
Example of enhanced pedestrian crossing treatments at the
Harmony Road/Corbett Drive intersection
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan \� Alternatives Analysis
Figure 19 , Example Intersection with Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Crossing Treatments
SIDE STREET Signing
TURNING
I VEHICLES
Landscaped PLInterval
I
v TO
Median II4 ISidewalkor I Sidewalk
� II II III
U t
Buffer _ _ � — — — — — — — — — — _ Buffer_
Hammy Road
y �= Harmony Road +� �
y
Buffer _ Buffer
r�
r Pr
III 1 III
XY
Sidewalk Sidewalk
I I Landscaped
t I t Crosswalks Median
Bike Lane Channelized I Bicycle Detection
through Intersection Right Turn Lanes I on Side Streets
NORTH with Raised Island
,NOT TO SCALE
I
In addition to the at-grade intersection crossing enhancements, six locations for future grade-separated
crossings have been identified and are included in the LPA . As shown in Figure 20, these crossings are
recommended periodically along the corridor to connect land uses north and south of Harmony Road, to
facilitate access to transit stations, and to reduce the auto/pedestrian and auto/bicycle conflicts along the
corridor . Two grade-separated crossing locations have been identified as the high priority :
/ Mason Trail ( near the BNSF railroad )
1 Power Trail ( near the UP railroad )
These two trails serve regional functions for bicycle and pedestrian travel, and also coincide with future
Harmony Road stations .
Figure 20 , Pedestrian Grade -Separated Crossing Locations
€ a
a 2 a Harmony
Transfer
cc
Center
y Harmon Road l 3
$[ z 8
. U
High Priority
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
LPA Performance
Traffic Operations
Provision of the roadway and intersection improvements in the LPA will result in improved intersection levels of
service ( LOS ) in the future . Most of the major signalized intersections along Harmony Road are expected to
operate at LOS D or better during the PM peak hour ( refer to Figure 21 ) . Two intersections ( Harmony
Road/College Avenue and Harmony Road/Timberline Road ) are projected to operate at LOS E during the PM
peak hour . The LPA is estimated to result in an average corridor travel time (from Shields Street to 1 -25 or vice-
versa ) of approximately 12 % minutes during the PM peak hour in 2035, which equates to an average speed of
27 mph ( including stops at the signalized intersections ) .
Figure 21 , LPA 2035 PM Peak Hour Traffic Operations
ro
m m
i� O Harmony
v otl' m? � ' Q �.Jryalers > > _ y Transfer
vJa
.� Center
t F ° E
Harmony Roam D
E ° D " D C $
C = D D m
mN
l
Transit Operations
Weekday Boardings
Enhanced Bus service along the corridor would see approximately
1, 800 boardings daily, substantially higher ridership than the 2000
service that exists along the corridor today . Service interlined with 1500 ' "
MAX would result in somewhat higher ridership than the end-to- z
end service pattern . a 1000
0
Bicycle and Pedestrian O0 500 o ' '
The enhanced bicycle accommodation in the LPA is expected to EXISTING 2035 with LPA
improve bicyclists' experience and encourage bicycling as a mode
of travel along Harmony Road . The buffered bike lanes will
improve bicycling comfort; green bike lanes are expected to increase drivers' awareness of bicyclists along the
corridor and increase motorists' yielding to bicyclists in conflict areas .
The wide meandering sidewalk that exists along much of Harmony Road provides a pleasant walking experience
for pedestrians; completion of the missing sidewalk segments will further enhance the pedestrian experience
and encourage walking as a mode of travel along Harmony Road . At-grade intersection crossing enhancements
will enhance the safety and convenience for pedestrians crossing Harmony Road , and the provision of grade-
separated crossings approximately every 1 - 1 % miles will reduce the auto/pedestrian and auto/bicycle conflicts
across the corridor.
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
Environmental
Environmental Resources
A cursory- level environmental inventory of existing conditions and a preliminary assessment of the project
impacts was conducted for the for the Harmony Road ETC study area . The level of analysis performed for this
project is commensurate with the requirements of the Federal Transit Administration ( FTA) for Alternatives
Analysis .
The purpose of conducting the environmental inventory and evaluation was to develop an understanding of the
existing physical opportunities and constraints of the corridor related to environmental resources . This
information was used to inform the alternatives screening process and help determine which alternatives had
physical limitations that could either eliminate an alternative from consideration or have an impact on an
alternative' s cost and/or public acceptance due to resource conflicts . The full environmental inventory and
evaluation is included in Appendix F .
The methods used to conduct the environmental inventory included a desktop review of existing information,
including existing geographic information system ( GIS) data and available information from relevant agencies
( e .g ., City of Fort Collins, US Fish and Wildlife Service ) . A field visit was not performed as part of the preliminary
environmental inventory . Mapping of the existing conditions within the study area is included in Appendix F .
A preliminary environmental evaluation of the potential project impacts was performed using the conceptual
design of the Locally Preferred Alternative ( LPA) for several " priority" resources that were identified in the study
area . " Priority" resources are defined as the resources that could require avoidance or minimization of impacts
during design and/or resources that typically have lengthy environmental clearance process .
The following resources were identified as " priority" resources within the corridor :
1 Noise
/ Air Quality
1 Historic Resources
/ Park, Trail , and Open Space Resources/Section 4 (f) Resources
/ Hazardous Materials
/ Wetlands/Other Waters of the US
A preliminary evaluation of priority resources revealed the following findings for each resource .
Noise sensitive receptors include exterior areas of frequent human use that can be disturbed by vehicle noise,
such as residential neighborhoods ( FTA Category 2 ), and schools, parks or churches ( FTA Category 3 ) . Preliminary
review of the project corridor identified ten areas (Appendix F ) with noise sensitive receptors adjacent to
Harmony Road . Harmony Road is already a major arterial corridor and generates substantial traffic noise . The
traffic expected to be added and/or changed by the LPA will be relatively minor and is not likely to have a major
effect on the corridor noise environment . For example, doubling the number of cars would increase noise levels
by three decibels, which would be barely noticeable to most people . However, a detailed noise analysis will be
completed during the NEPA study to identify specific noise impacts and identify minimization , avoidance or
abatement measures to reduce noise impacts .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
Air Quality
The Fort Collins metropolitan area has a couple of air quality challenges : the area is classified by the
Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) as an attainment/maintenance area for carbon monoxide, and is also
within the Denver regional non -attainment area for ozone . Automobiles are major sources of these air pollutant
emissions . Increasing the volumes of vehicles or miles traveled can increase emissions of carbon monoxide and
ozone precursors, but improved vehicular progression ( reduced delay) through congested areas can reduce or
offset those increases . Improvement projects in nonattainment and maintenance areas, such as the Preferred
Alternative, must be examined for air quality impacts under EPA' s Transportation Conformity Rule, which is
done as part of the regional transportation planning process . Projects that reduce delays at intersections or
improve vehicle speeds often have a side benefit of also reducing tailpipe emissions . The LPA is expected to
increase total miles of travel in the corridor by approximately 5 percent over No Action, but to the positive,
corridor crossing time would decrease by approximately 13 percent and average corridor vehicle speeds would
increase by approximately 17 percent . These improvements should reduce tailpipe emissions on the whole .
During subsequent NEPA study of this project, the proposed improvements will be evaluated through the
regional conformity process and travel demand modeling. Local air quality may need to be evaluated through a
" hot-spot" analysis . Through these analyses, it must be demonstrated that the air quality requirements can be
achieved prior to implementation of the LPA.
Historic Resources
Seven properties have been identified along the corridor that are designated historic resources or potentially
eligible for historic designation under the Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act ( NHPA) . Section
106 requires federal agencies to consider the effects of their undertakings upon significant National Register of
Historic Places listed or eligible historic properties . These resources include the cemetery located in the
southeast corner of Harmony Road/McMurry Avenue, Harmony Store, Harmony School, Preston Farm, Harmony
House, a farmstead, and the Fairway Estates .
Based on the preliminary evaluation , the Harmony Store could be impacted by the conceptual design of the LPA.
Avoidance of historic and potentially- historic properties was considered throughout all stages of the conceptual
design process . For instance, based on the knowledge that the Harmony School is designated as a Fort Collins
Landmark, the conceptual design of the LPA was modified to realign Harmony Road south of its current
alignment to avoid impacting this property .
Based on the assumption that the funding source for any future corridor project would be federal- based , any
future NEPA process would require compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA, which requires federal agencies to
consider the effects of their undertakings upon significant NRHP- listed or eligible historic properties . It is
recommended that avoidance and minimization of impacts to historic or potentially historic properties continue
to be considered during preliminary and final design of the Preferred Alternative .
Park and Recreation Resources/Section 4 (f) and 6 (f) Resources
Four park and recreation resources were identified within the study area . These include the Hidden Cattails
Natural Area , Mason Trail, Power Trail Bike Trail, and Arapaho Bend Natural Area . Properties within the project
area that are publicly-owned are afforded protection under Section 4 (f) as defined in 23 Code of Federal
Regulations 774. A Section 4 (f) resource is a property that functions or is designated as a significant publicly-
owned park, recreation area, wildlife or waterfowl refuge, or historic site .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
Based on the preliminary evaluation , the Mason Trail and Power Trail Bike Trail could be impacted based on the
conceptual design of the LPA . These two trail resources would potentially require realignment in conjunction
with the project roadway improvements . Any future NEPA process will require field verification of all of the park
and recreational resource locations and boundaries . Also, a Section 4(f) evaluation would be required for any
publically-owned resources impacted by implementation of the project.
Hazardous Materials
Nine sites with potential or known hazardous materials issues ( e . g. , leaking underground storage tanks, leaking
aboveground storage tanks, drycleaner facilities ) were identified within the study area . Based on the cursory
evaluation, two of the nine sites with potential hazardous materials issues may be directly impacted based on
the conceptual design of the LPA. Any future NEPA process would typically require a formal hazardous materials
assessment, including a site verification, to identify any hazardous materials issues within the study area .
Wetlands/Other Waters of the US
Wetland resources are protected under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act ( CWA) and Executive Order 11990
Protection of Wetlands . Two areas with wetlands ( i . e . , wetlands associated with Hidden Cattails Natural Area
and wetlands associated with Power Trail Bike Trail ) were identified based on a review of available geographic
information systems ( GIS ) mapping data . Based on the preliminary evaluation , the wetlands located west of the
Power Trail Bike Trail could be impacted by the conceptual design of the LPA .
Any future NEPA process would typically require a formal wetland delineation to verify the accuracy of the
wetland resources identified through the GIS mapping data, and any additional wetlands associated with
roadside ditches and/or streams that could be present and affected by the implementation of the project .
Avoidance and minimization of impacts to wetlands will continue to be considered during preliminary and final
design of the LPA.
Mitigation — Avoidance/Minimization
As for any project of this type, how project impacts will be mitigated is a crucial design element . In regards to
the roadway features of the LPA, there are two specific design elements included in the plan to reduce
environmental impacts :
/ To limit any potential widening impacts along Harmony Road between Shields Street and College
Avenue, the proposed cross-sectional elements of this segment were developed such that the curb &
gutter along the existing outside edges of the roadway could remain in their current location . The cross-
sectional elements include 11' wide eastbound and westbound vehicle travel lanes, a 14' raised median,
and 6' bike lanes . At intersections, a 10' left turn lane can be provided within the median such that a
resultant 4' wide space can still provide some pedestrian refuge .
► The Harmony School in the northeast corner of the Timberline Road intersection has played a significant
role in the history of the area and it is designated as a Fort Collins Landmark . As such, an attempt was
made to design the Harmony Road improvements such that these improvements would be outside of
the Harmony School ROW .
As noted previously, the Timberline Road intersection is one of the intersections that will include a future bus
queue jump lane on both the north and south sides of the street . As such, the roadway cross-section at this
intersection is wider than the typical cross-section, thereby requiring more space than some locations .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
To mitigate ROW impacts, Harmony Road has been realigned towards the south as it proceeds through the
Timberline Road intersection . As can be imagined, there is a limit to how much realignment can occur without
starting to impact properties on the south side of Harmony Road . The realignment has been designed to
balance the roadway between existing buildings .
Additionally, some cross-sectional dimensions have been modified to limit these impacts . Eastbound and
westbound travel lanes have been reduced to an 11' width, with the eastbound and westbound left turn lanes
being reduced to 10' .
During the preliminary design process, ROW data that is more detailed than what was used for this project
should be obtained and verified so that the realignment of Harmony Road can be minimized to the extent
possible to limit impacts to adjoining property owners and to still provide a roadway cross-section that meets
the needs of the traveling public .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
Cost Estimates
The typical cross-sections for two primary segments of the Harmony Road corridor are represented on Figure
22 . These typical cross-sections represent the basic intent of each segment of the project corridor, recognizing
that minor modifications may need to be made during the preliminary design phase for special circumstances .
Figure 22 , LPA Typical Mid -Block Cross-Sections
70'
5' 1 10' 6' 11 ' 11 ' 14' 11 ' 11 ' 6' 10' 5'
Min, Bike LanscapedMedian Bike Min,
SW Lane t Lane SW
West of College Avenue
116'
8' Varies 5 ' 12' 12' 1 12 ' 28' 12 ' 12 ' 1 12' 5' Varies 8'
SW Treelawn Bike Landscaped Median Bike Treelawn SW
Lane ■ ■ ■ 1 1 ` Lane
East of College Avenue
These typical cross-sections were used to develop the conceptual roadway design plans shown in Appendix H .
Project costs were estimated by quantifying major roadway design elements such as curb & gutter, asphalt,
material removals, traffic signalization, landscaping, etc . Additional items that affect project costs, but that
cannot be quantified at this time are added to the estimates on a percentage of construction cost basis . Detailed
project cost estimates for eight project segments are included in Appendix H . The eight estimates are
summarized in the following eight segments :
1 . Shields Street to the east side of College Avenue
2 . East side of College Avenue to the west side of Lemay Avenue
3 . Lemay Avenue intersection ( queue jump location )
4 . East side of Lemay Avenue to the west side of Timberline Road
5 . Timberline Road intersection ( queue jump location )
6 . East side of Timberline Road to west side of Ziegler Road
7 . Ziegler Road intersection ( queue jump location )
8 . East side of Ziegler Road to 1 -25
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
There is a benefit to the City' s planning process to summarize project costs in a different manner, however. For
example, the City may choose to install certain project elements over several segments, but without completing
all design elements in that segment. As such, project costs are summarized below in the four main travel mode
categories : 1 ) roadway, 2 ) bike, 3 ) pedestrian, and 4) transit. The information in Table 6 summarizes these costs
for the entire project corridor ( rounded for planning purposes ) .
Table 6 . Summary Project Costs by Travel Mode
ost Estimate Elementsm OPApproximate Quantity Approximate Cor Aml�
Roadway
Construction Elements ( Minus Queue Jump Intersections)
- Removals Several Items & Unit Types $ 831000
- Earthwork 35,345 Cubic Yards $ 4951000
- Asphalt 10, 610 Tons $ 11198, 000
- Curb & Gutter 65,200 Lineal Feet $ 777, 000
- Drainage Percent Estimate $ 631, 000
- Utilities Percent Estimate $ 405, 000
- Signing & Striping Percent Estimate $ 292, 000
- Traffic Signalization Varies by Intersection $ 686, 000
- Lighting Percent Estimate $ 5841000
- Construction Traffic Control Percent Estimate $ 11460, 000
Landscaped Medians 514,250 Square Feet $ 41688,000
Right-of-Way 10,000 Square Feet $ 254,000
Subtotal = $ 11,55%000
Mobilization & Contingencies (32%) Percent Estimate $ 31696,960
Design & Construction Engineering ( 14%) Percent Estimate $ 11617,420
Travel Mode Cost Estimate = $ 16,867,380
Transit
Queue Jump Intersections ( Lemay, Timberline & Ziegler) Numerous Items $ 7, 5201000
Stations & Stops 17 Stations; 18 Stops $ 21910,000
Buses 3 $ 21505,000
Subtotal = $ 12,935,000
Mobilization & Contingencies (32%) Percent Estimate ( Not on Buses) $ 31337,600
Design & Construction Engineering ( 14%) Percent Estimate ( Not on Buses) $ 11460,200
Travel Mode Cost Estimate = $ 17,732,800
Buffered Bike Lane 4 Miles $ 80,000
Bike Lane w/o Buffer 6 Miles $ 90,000
Subtotal = $ 170,000
Mobilization & Contingencies (32%) Percent Estimate $ 54,400
Design & Construction Engineering ( 14%) Percent Estimate $ 23,800
Travel Mode Cost Estimate = $ 248,200
Pedestrian
Missing Sidewalk 13,650 Square Yard $ 444,000
Grade Separations 6 Each $ 12,000,000
Subtotal = $ 12,444,000
Mobilization & Contingencies (32%) Percent Estimate $ 31982,080
Design & Construction Engineering ( 14%) Percent Estimate $ 11742, 160
Travel Mode Cost Estimate = $ 18,168,240
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST = $ 53,0161620
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
5 . Implementation Plan
Implementation of the Locally Preferred Alternative ( LPA) can take several forms relative to the sequence of
construction of the physical infrastructure and the introduction of the operational aspects of the Enhanced Bus
service . Since it is not likely that the City can construct the entire LPA at one time, a phased implementation
approach is recommended . The implementation plan is influenced by the needs of the bus service, lead time for
vehicle purchases, and by the construction of roadway facilities to support the Enhanced Bus service .
Phasing Options
Three phasing options could be used to construct the physical elements of the LPA when considering the overall
length of the project corridor, the differing roadway characteristics along the corridor, and the proposed cross-
sectional elements of the LPA. These methods include a Segment- by-Segment Approach , a Congested Areas
Approach, and a Sequential Corridor Element Approach . The three phasing options are described below .
Option 1 : Segment-by-Segment Approach
The cross-sectional elements of the LPA can be constructed in a segment- by-segment, linear fashion . The City
could chose to construct the LPA in this way to build upon the relatively recent roadway construction ( and on
upcoming construction ) along Harmony Road that could construct the median , bike lane buffers, transit stations,
etc . in pre-determined, one- mile ( +/-) segments, potentially between major intersections . This approach has two
basic advantages :
► All of the construction within a bounded segment can be completed at the same time, thereby limiting
construction interruptions and overall construction time for the traveling public ( " Is construction ever
going to be finished ?" factor)
► If constructed in a west to east manner, construction can be completed in the more densely populated
areas first, followed by those segments that are more rural in nature regardless of the level of
congestion that may exist in any one segment
Main Disadvantage : Beginning of the Enhanced Bus service relies on completion of construction in all corridor
segments .
Potential Sequence Options if this Approach is Pursued
Option 1a: West to East Sequence — This option would construct the LPA beginning at Shields Street and
proceed towards 1 -25 . Beginning construction of the LPA in the segment from Shields Street to College Avenue
has two benefits :
1 ) This segment has the least amount of new infrastructure required of any segment . As such, it would be
the least expensive segment to construct ( estimated as $4 . 8 million ) .
2 ) Construction issues related to the installation of the green , epoxy pavement marking for the bike lanes
could be evaluated on the most western segment initially and the selection of this method for
highlighting the bike lanes could be confirmed for the remainder of the corridor.
Construction of the remaining segments from College Avenue to Lemay, Lemay to Timberline, etc . can progress
in approximate one- mile segments to address the LPA improvements in the more densely- populated areas of
Fort Collins first.
Of note, while these segments are identified between major intersecting streets, construction should include
each of the major intersections in any one segment so that the entire intersection is constructed at one time .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
Option 1b : Least Expensive to Most Expensive Sequence — Under this option the City would begin with the least
expensive segment (Shields Street to College Avenue again ) and progress to the more expensive segments so
that lessons learned during the construction process can be of value to the next segment . If this option is used,
the progression of constructed segments would be :
Table 7 , Potential Sequencing and Costs by Corridor Segment ( Excluding Bus Costs )
Sequence • • • r Segment Approximate c •
1 Shields Street to College Avenue $4. 83
2 Timberline Road to Ziegler Road ' $ 8 . 61M
3 College Avenue to Lemay Avenue $ 10 . 10M
4 Lemay Avenue to Timberline Road ' $ 11 . 15M
5 Ziegler Road to 1 -25 $ 14 . 94M
i
As noted in the LPA description, the Harmony Road/Timberline Road intersection is proposed to be realigned to the south
to avoid the historic Harmony School . As such, construction at this intersection is likely the most expensive roadway
component of the project. Sequence 2 and 4 could be interchangeable depending upon which segment the intersection
reconstruction is coupled with.
Option 2: Congested Areas Approach
Corridor congestion is typically confined to, or influenced by, the operation of intersections . Traffic signals, for
example, require vehicles for any one movement to stop so that another movement can have the opportunity to
proceed through the intersection . This type of intersection traffic control inherently causes congestion and long
vehicle queues during the peak travel times .
This approach would "fix" problem intersections first by constructing the 2035 LPA improvements so as to
provide an optimal operating experience as quickly as possible . This approach would also be the opportunity to
install the Enhanced Bus queue jump lanes, lanes that require additional roadway width at three critical
intersections along Harmony Road : 1 ) Lemay Avenue, 2 ) Timberline Avenue, and 3 ) Ziegler Road .
Once construction is completed at the most congested locations, other improvements that are required
between intersections could proceed . These enhancements would include all of the physical cross-sectional
roadway needs and the operational components of the Enhanced Bus System .
Main Disadvantage : LPA construction is completed in a disjointed fashion .
Potential Sequence if this Approach is Pursued
1 Reconstruct Queue Jump Intersections — Complete the reconstruction of the Lemay Avenue, Timberline
Road ( including realignment of Harmony Road to the south ), and Ziegler Road intersections to include
2035 capacity improvements and the Enhanced Bus queue jump lanes as a necessary improvement for
good Enhanced Bus service
1 Construct Bus Stations and Bus Stops — Construct all of the proposed bus stations and stops . Construct
ancillary improvements to provide good access to/from the stations and stops, i . e . , complete the LPA
sidewalk connections where necessary and construct the pedestrian grade-separations
1 Begin Enhanced Bus Operation — Procure new/spare vehicles during construction completion of the bus
stations and stops and begin operation of Enhanced Bus service
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
1 Improve Roadway Segments and Other Intersections — Complete the LPA improvements along corridor
segments based on projected 2035 daily traffic volumes . Improvements would include all cross-sectional
elements such as roadway widening, medians, drainage facilities, bike lanes, channelizing islands, utility
modifications, etc . :
• Ziegler Road to 1 -25
• Lemay Avenue to Timberline Road
• Timberline Road to Ziegler Road
• College Avenue to Lemay Avenue
• Shields Street to College Avenue
1 Apply green, epoxy pavement markings - installation of the green, epoxy pavement marking in the bike
lanes would need to wait until at least several continuous segments have been constructed to reduce
consistency confusion .
Option 3: Corridor Element Approach
A corridor element approach to implementing the LPA would construct certain corridor elements in a layered
way so that the Enhanced Bus service could be implemented as quickly as possible while also providing
amenities for other modal users before fully completing all of the roadway cross-sectional elements .
For example, the likely first step would be to construct the bus queue jump areas at the Lemay Avenue,
Timberline Road ( including realignment of Harmony Road to the south ), and Ziegler Road intersections, followed
by construction of all of the bus stations . These two improvements would allow the Enhanced Bus service to
begin without requiring the installation of medians, the buffered bike lanes, or other roadway elements .
The benefit to this approach is that the Enhanced Bus system can become operational more quickly than other
approaches since the Enhanced Bus system still uses typical general purpose lanes along Harmony Road .
Main Disadvantage : This approach would construct sequential elements over time throughout the entire
corridor — motorists would be continually impacted by construction activities throughout the entire 5- mile
project corridor, potentially over numerous years .
Potential Sequence if this Approach is Pursued
1 Reconstruct Queue Jump Intersections — Complete the reconstruction of the Lemay Avenue, Timberline
Road ( including the realignment of Harmony Road ) , and Ziegler Road intersections to include 2035
capacity improvements and the Enhanced Bus queue jump lanes as a necessary improvement for good
Enhanced Bus service
1 Construct Bus Stations and Bus Stops — Construct all of the proposed bus stations and stops . Construct
ancillary improvements to provide good access to/from the stations and stops, i . e . , complete the LPA
sidewalk connections where necessary and construct the pedestrian grade-separations
1 Begin Enhanced Bus Operation — Procure new/spare vehicles during construction completion of the bus
stations and stops and begin operation of Enhanced Bus service
1 Complete Cross-Sectional Elements — Construct the remaining roadway cross-sectional elements such as
any roadway widening, medians, drainage facilities, bike lanes, channelizing islands, utility
modifications, etc . ; include side street improvements
1 Install green, epoxy pavement marking — Apply green epoxy in bike lanes as a last construction item for
consistency purposes
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
Implementation Considerations
Each of the phasing options described above are influenced by other factors that are described in the following
sections .
LPA Design
It is recommended that the City design the entire corridor to ensure that each phase fits appropriately within
the context of the entire project . This will help to minimize or ideally avoid reconstruction in later phases . While
completing design for the entire corridor will require a reasonably sized budget outlay at the beginning, it will
pay benefits throughout the life of the LPA construction by having a designed roadway for the ultimate LPA
system . The initial design efforts could also include an initial phase or two that could be part of the first
construction bidding package ( s ) . Considerations when completing design are described below .
ROW Impacts
One of the benefits of completing the design of the entire LPA first ( rather than designing in segments) is that
all of the ROW impacts can be verified at the start of the project . The ROW acquisition process can then begin
early in the project and help the project move forward in a timelier manner including preservation of ROW on
properties that are currently undeveloped .
Identifying ROW acquisitions during the initial design does not mean that all of the ROW would need to be
purchased at the same time, however. Properties could still be purchased when needed .
Environmental Inventory and Mitigation
Another benefit to completing the design of the entire corridor at one time is that environmental resources can
be inventoried and impacts identified . Impacted areas can be further analyzed during the design process to
minimize, avoid, and mitigate impacts as feasible . If federal funding is obtained for any part of the corridor at
any time, there would be benefits to having all of the environmental resources inventoried , and impacts and
mitigation understood so that the construction process can move forward smoothly regardless of the phasing or
timing of the improvements . If the project phases begin to stretch over quite a few years, it is likely that only an
update to the environmental documentation would be required . Once again, there should be benefits to the City
in conducting these investigations up front and on a larger scale than in a piecemeal fashion for any number of
project phases .
Utility Impacts
Completing the design of the entire LPA would enable the City to identify all utility impacts associated with the
LPA. Since some utilities are very longitudinal in nature and are not confined to any one segment of the corridor,
having a plan in place to modify or relocate utilities where necessary will provide long- range benefits to the
project related to timing, coordination and cost implications . Discussions with irrigation companies related to
realignment or enclosure of existing ditches can begin early in the project to help reduce delays .
Enhanced Bus Implementation
The implementation of Enhanced Bus service along Harmony Road will require several steps beyond the
construction of the physical roadway elements :
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
Finalize the Operating Plan and Vehicle Type
Transfort has not yet determined whether Harmony Road service will be operated as an extension of MAX BRT
service or as a separate route and , if it will operate as a separate route, whether it would have a unique identity .
Whether service is operated as an extension of the MAX BRT service or as a separate route, three new buses will
be required . Additionally, a spare bus will be required unless Transfort' s existing spare ratio is sufficient to cover
the needs of Harmony Road service . The decision on whether or not to brand the Harmony Road service
uniquely could have an impact on the type of vehicle that is used and, as a result, this decision will need to be
made before the procurement of new vehicles can begin .
Procure Vehicles
Vehicle acquisition can take up to 24 months for regular transit buses, and sometimes longer for more
specialized BRT vehicles . However, the acquisition timeline can possibly be shortened if Transfort can piggy- back
onto an existing order — either one of its own (of MAX BRT vehicles for example ), or that of another transit
provider . Because of the time required, vehicle procurement activities should start as quickly as possible after
the operating plan and vehicle type have been determined and funding commitments have been secured .
Develop Schedules and Broadcast Public Information
Transfort will need to develop public timetables as well as driver and vehicle schedules . This could be done
concurrently with Transfort' s regular service change process, with service most likely implemented as part of a
regular schedule change . Public information (schedule brochures, and updated system map, etc . ) will also need
to be updated .
Develop and Implement Marketing Plan for the New Service
In the months leading up to implementation, Transfort will also need to develop a marketing plan for the new
service — one that can begin with basic information once funding has been secured, followed by a buildup to
higher levels of information as the implementation date draws nearer .
Transit-Oriented Development Overlay District Creation
The City may consider the development of an overlay district for the Harmony Road corridor to facilitate the
types of development and redevelopment that will both benefit and drive the success of the Enhanced Bus
system .
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan Alternatives Analysis
Recommended Implementation Plan
The preceding sections outlined several project implementation approaches as well as considerations that
influence the overall procedure, design , procurement, and construction sequence to construct and operate the
recommended LPA
This section synthesizes the information in the preceding sections into a recommended implementation plan .
More detail on the implementation plan is included in Table 8, but in general, the overarching approach can be
summarized as a division of the LPA into Immediate, Short-Term, and Long- Range projects, a division that
recognizes the most important desires of the community, and one that strives to limit throw-away project costs .
The improvements needed to realize the LPA likely cannot be constructed at the same time . As such, an
implementation plan has been developed to minimize throw-away costs, expedite high priority improvements,
and advance the capital projects needed to begin Enhanced Bus service . The City should work with private
development when possible to preserve ROW, construct missing sidewalks, install bus shelters and amenities,
etc . , that are adjacent to the development .
The following table summarizes the recommended implementation plan (which generally follows Options 1 & 3,
i . e ., partially layered, partially sequential ) in Immediate, Short-Term and Long- Range timeframes . A description
of the plan element, the responsible party, and the approximate cost for the individual elements are included
for each of these timeframes .
Table 8 , Recommended Implementation Plan
Locally Preferred Alternative Responsible Party Approximate Cost
Description
Immediate
LPA Design
• Complete the design of vehicle, pedestrian and
bicycle elements Engineering and
• Conduct environmental resource inventory; develop $ 3 . 50M
Transfort with
mitigation plans for impacted areas Consultant ( 8% of estimated total
• Identify ROW impacts; prepare ROW plans; start Assistance project cost)
ROW acquisition process
• Identify public and private utility conflicts; prepare
modification plans
Finalize the Operating Plan & Determine Vehicle Type Transfort Completed by Transfort
and other Requirements staff
Create a Transit-Oriented Development Overlay District FC Moves/ Completed by FC Moves
Planning Services & Planning Services staffs
Revise corridor striping to create the bike lane buffer;
install green epoxy paint in bike lanes Engineering $0 . 24M
Construct missing sidewalks and neighborhood
Engineering $0 . 61M
connections
l Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 1`1 Alternatives Analysis
Locally Preferred Alternative Responsible ParApproximate C •
Element & Description
Construct landscaped medians Engineering $ 6 .47M
Construct Mason Trail and Power Trail pedestrian grade-
Engineering $ 5 . 52M
separations
Improvements
Identify and Secure Funding for Vehicle Procurement; Transfort Completed by Transfort
Begin Process to Procure Vehicles Staff
Develop Enhanced Bus Operating Schedules and Begin Transfort Completed by Transfort
Public Information Program Staff
Lemay Avenue
Reconstruct the Lemay Avenue, Timberline Road Intersection : $ 3 . 00M
( including realignment of Harmony Road to the south ), Engineering Timberline Road
and Ziegler Road intersections to include 2035 capacity Intersection : $4. 01M
improvements and Enhanced Bus queue jump lanes Ziegler Road
Intersection : $ 2 . 51M
Construct the Bus Stations and Bus Stops Engineering $4 . 02M
Finalize and Implement the Marketing Plan for the Transfort with Completed by Transfort
Enhanced Bus Service Consultant Staff
Assistance
Purchase necessary buses Transfort $ 2 . 51M
Begin Enhanced Bus Service
Long-Range Improvements
Construct remaining roadway cross-sectional elements
sequentially in a west to east manner. Major design
elements would include :
• Roadway widening or narrower to match the
LPA cross-sections ( including irrigation ditch
enclosures where needed ) Engineering $9 .47M
• Intersection capacity improvements including
channelizing islands
• Traffic signal modifications
• Drainage modifications or new systems
• Utility modifications
Construct remaining pedestrian grade-separations at :
• Between Boardwalk Drive and Lemay Avenue
• Adjacent University of Colorado Health Engineering $ 11 . 04M
Harmony Campus
• Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet
• Harmony Transfer Center
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
Funding Strategies
Funds for multimodal projects such as the Harmony Road ETC can be provided through a variety of sources
which typically consist of a combination of federal , state, and local public funds, and sometimes non -
governmental funds . The following sections describe funding sources that could potentially be used to fund
Harmony Road infrastructure improvements and Enhanced Bus service .
Federal Funding
With Harmony Road designated as a Regionally Significant Corridor ( RSC) by the NFRMPO, projects along the
corridor are potentially eligible to receive federal funding through the MPO .
Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Funds (CMAQ)
The CMAQ program, which is jointly administered by the Federal Highway Administration ( FHWA) and the
Federal Transit Administration ( FTA), provides funding to State DOTS, MPOs, and transit agencies to invest in
projects that reduce air pollution in areas that do not meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
( nonattainment areas ), which includes Fort Collins . CMAQ funds can be used for a wide variety of transit uses,
including programs to improve public transit, High Occupancy Vehicle ( HOV) facilities, Employee Trip Reduction
( ETR) programs, traffic—flow improvements that reduce emissions, bicycle/pedestrian facilities, park-and - ride
facilities, and programs to restrict vehicle use in areas of emission concentration . CMAQ funds can be used for
up to 88 . 5% of capital costs . In the Fort Collins area , CMAQ funds are allocated by NFRMPO, and projects
prioritized based on the reductions in ozone that they would produce . For FY 2012 to 2015, NFRMPO has
programmed a total of $ 8 . 4 million in CMAQ funding .
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
FHWA' s Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP ) provides funding for programs and projects defined as
transportation alternatives, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities, infrastructure projects to improve non -
driving access to public transportation, environmental mitigation , recreational trails, and safe routes to school
projects . TAP was authorized under MAP-21; its predecessor was the Transportation Enhancements program .
FHWA Transportation Mobility Program Funds
The Federal Highway Administration ' s Transportation Mobility Program (TMP ), which replaced the former
Surface Transportation Program (STP ), is a "flexible funding" source that allows states to shift up to 20% of its
TMP funds to other uses, including the FTA funding programs described above . In Colorado, CDOT, which
administers state highway spending, determines the amount of funds to be "flexed" to other uses .
FTA Funds
Since the passage of MAP- 21, the major sources of urban federal transit funding for bus services are : 5
/ FTA Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Grants
/ FTA Section 5309 New Starts Program
/ Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Funds ( CMAQ)
/ FHWA Transportation Mobility Program (TMP )
5 One key element of these new programs is that there is not an equivalent to the former FTA Section 5309 Buses and
Bus-Related Equipment and Facilities program through which Congress historically earmarked funds for a variety of
projects including Enhanced Bus services .
l Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 1`1 Alternatives Analysis
FTA Section 5307 Lrpan Area Formula Funds
FTA Section 5307 provides funding for transit capital and Very Small Starts Eligibility Requirements :
transportation- related planning, and for smaller transit systems Transit Stations
such as Transfort, operating assistance . In urbanized areas with nal '
n (for
populations of 200, 000 or more, which includes the Fort
Collins/ Loveland urbanized area, these funds are apportioned by aBoarding
Vehicles
formula based on a number of population and service- based Special Branding
of Service
factors . Frequent Service - 10 min • - -
min off . - .
Transfort currently receives 5307 funds, and will continue to Service offered at - per
receive them with or without Harmony Road Enhanced Bus day
service . 6 Thus, while FTA Section 5307 funds could be used to Existing corridor . - . exceeding
develop Harmony Road service, they would not represent a new • -
source of funding . Less than $50 million total cost
Less than $3 million per
Section 5309 New Starts Funds (excluding vehicles)
The FTA Section 5309 New Starts Program includes "Small Starts" Small Starts Eligibility Requirements:
and "Very Small Starts" components that can be used to fund Substantial Transit Stations
smaller scale BRT and Enhanced Bus projects ( Small Starts funding _ _
mption (for
is the largest source of funding for MAX service ) . However, there ;Signal.
are a number of eligibility requirements for each program , as listed LevelLow Floor /
to the right . Harmony Road Enhanced Bus service would fail to Special Branding of Service
meet the eligibility requirement in a number of respects ( minimum
ridership, minimum service frequencies, unique branding, and/or min off peak
transit signal priority), and , thus, would not be eligible for funding
under either of these programs . Service offered atleasthours
. .
State Funding
Currently, the only source of state transit funding is the " Funding Advancement for Surface Transportation and
Economic Recovery ( FASTER ) program . This program provides funding for transportation projects through
vehicle registration fees, with a portion is set aside for transit purposes :
► A Local share for " local transit grants"
► A Statewide share to be used "for the planning, designing, engineering, acquisition, installation,
construction, repair, reconstruction , maintenance, operation, or administration of transit- related
projects, including, but not limited to, designated bicycle or pedestrian lanes of highway and
infrastructure needed to integrate different transportation modes within a multimodal transportation
system, that enhance the safety of state highways for transit users"
These funds can be used for any items defined as capital expenses by the FTA, which would include all capital
elements of Harmony Road Enhanced Bus service, and can fund up to 80% of a project' s total cost . For FY 2014
and 2015, CDOT anticipates being able to offer $ 5 million for local transit projects and approximately $ 9 million
for statewide and interregional projects .
6 Since these funds are allocated based on a formula that includes the amount of service provided, the development of
new service would result in an increase in FTA Section 5307 funds . However, the increase would be relatively small and
would represent the proportional increase in Transfort service versus the rest of the country.
Harmony Road
FINAL DRAFT ETC Master Plan 11� Alternatives Analysis
Senate Bill 48 may provide another funding opportunity. This bill, which was signed into law in April 2013,
enables cities and counties to flex Highway Users Tax Fund ( HUTF) dollars to transit, multi - modal , bicycle and
pedestrian projects . The HUTF is funded through revenues raised from statewide gas tax, vehicle registration
fees, license fees and user fees . Historically these funds have been restricted to highway projects . With the
passage of the FASTER legislation in 2009, CDOT was authorized to expend HUTF revenues on transit and other
multi- modal investments . This bill amends the original HUTF language to provide cities and counties the same
flexibility to spend HUTF dollars on transit and other multi - modal projects .
Local Sources
Throughout Colorado, local funds provide the major source of funding for capital infrastructure as well as transit
operations . This is the case in Fort Collins, where the City provides approximately 70% of Transfort' s operating
expenses, and will provide over $7 million in local funding toward the capital costs of MAX service . In a similar
manner, and unless new sources of funds are developed, it is likely that the City would need to provide most of
the funding for operations, plus a local contribution to capital costs .
New Sources
As part of the development of its Strategic Operating Plan, Transfort identified a number of potential new
funding sources, which included :
/ A 0 . 1 to 0 . 25% dedicated sales tax
► An $8 Transit Utility Fee that would be assessed on all utility accounts
► A new ( higher) negotiated fee with Associated Students of Colorado State University (ASCSU ) and
potentially with other partners
► A special assessment district in which a per household or square foot charge would be assessed on
properties within a special improvement district "identified as receiving a direct and unique " benefit"
from a public project," which would most likely include MAX BRT, but could also include Harmony Road
To date, the City has not moved forward on any of these proposals . However, if it were to do so, the additional
revenues that would be generated could potential funds, at least in part, for both operating and capital costs for
Harmony Road Enhanced Bus service .
Summary
As with most transportation improvement projects, it is likely that Harmony Road infrastructure improvements
and Enhanced Bus service would need to be funded through a number of different sources . The most likely of
these would be :
► Federal
• Congestion Management and Air Quality ( CMAQ) funds
• Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP ) funds
• Transportation Mobility Program (TMP ) funds
/ State
• FASTERfunds
• HUTF funds
/ Local
• Additional City General Funds
■
FELSBURG
HOLT &
ULLEVIG
connecting and enhancing communities
6300 South Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial , CO 80111 1 tel 303 . 721 . 1440 1 fax 303 . 721 . 0832
www. fhueng . com