HomeMy WebLinkAboutBELLA VIRA - PDP - 36-05A - REPORTS - TRAFFIC STUDYFUTURE TRANSIT LEVEL OF SERVICE
Travel Time Worksheet
Destmatton
_.
Approximate
Distance
Auto Travel
Time
:Bus Travel
Time
_..
Travel Time
Factor
CSU Campus Transit Center
3.0
14
25
1.79
Foothills Fashion Mall
5.5
20
43
2.15
Fort Collins High School
7.7
25
59
2.36
Downtown Fort Collins
4.0
16
35.
2.19
Total Travel Time
75
1 162
2.16
3of4=LOSB
Multimodal Transportation Level of Service Manual P. 20
LOS Standurds For Development Review - Bicycle
Figure 7. Bicycle LOS Worksheet
level of service - connectivity
mitdnnon actual proposed
base connectivity: C G
Fspecificconnections, to priority sites:
description of applicable
destination area within 1,320'
including address
`SU �QUtu�
destination area
classification
(see text)
Fm7lmimii
City of tort Collins Transportation Master Plan
SCALE: 1 "=1000'
BICYCLE INFLUENCE AREA
a
Pede strian LOS Worksheet
Project Location Classification: c( Co t" e-
w
F
Minimum
Actual
13
A
Proposed
A
r-,
F-2
To
Minimum
Actual
A
A
Proposed
A
A
[J:
Iq
7We i-ro&r
Minimum
Actual
3
—C-4
f
Proposed
/3/c
—4
Minimum
Actual
Proposed
F-5
Minimum
Actual
Proposed
F-6
Minimum
Actual
Proposed
7
Minimum
Actual
Proposed
F-8
Minimum
Actual
Proposed
F -9
Minimum
Actual
Proposed
EKt
Minimum
Actual
Proposed
tAi Soop-r FAAjrr& DUC;r
To
wo 404A)G OV& >t _Aou% part
t0'!
C
IAJ LOW, PAOG6 T'0
Poop
4A�6' OV6 P-I.A Qt -7p- A, La
z
(VERLAND TRAIL O
DEVELOPMENT o
0
sew
SCALE: 1"=1000'
PEDESTRIAN INFLUENCE AREA
44
ET
STREET
N,
APPENDIX H
0
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail
recent shorton bkgd
am
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
I
T*
T
Vi
?
?
$
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Total Lost time (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Frt
1.00
0.96
1.00
0.89
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
1.00
Fit Protected
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)
1770
1780
1770
1664
1770
1863
1583
1770
1858
Fit Permitted
0.63
1.00
0.73
1.00
0.19
1.00
1.00
0.48
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
1181
1780
1365
1664
357
1863
1583
902
1858
Volume (vph)
10
25
10
125
45
110
20
410
110
145
845
15
Peak -hour factor, PHF
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)
11
26
11
132
47
116
21
432
116
153
889
16
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
9
0
0
93
0
0
0
40
0
1
0
Lane Group Flow (vph)
11
28
0
132
70
0
21
432
76
153
904
0
Turn Type
Perm
Perm
Perm
Perm
Perm
Protected Phases
4
8
2
6
Permitted Phases
4
8
2
2
6
Actuated Green, G (s)
9.6
9.6
9.6
9.6
34.4
34.4
34.4
34.4
34.4
Effective Green, g (s)
10.6
10.6
10.6
10.6
35.4
35.4
35.4
35.4
35.4
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.66
0.66
0.66
0.66
0.66
Clearance Time (s)
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Vehicle Extension (s)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
232
349
268
327
234
1221
1038
591
1218
v/s Ratio Prot
0.02
0.04
0.23
'c0.49
v/s Ratio Perm
0.01
c0.10
0.06
0.05
0.17
v/c Ratio
0.05
0.08
0.49
0.21
0.09
0.35
0.07
0.26
0.74
Uniform Delay, d1
17.6
17.7
19.3
18.2
3.4
4.2
3.4.
3.9
6.2
Progression Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Incremental Delay, d2
0.1
0.1
1.4
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.2
2.5
Delay (s)
17.7
17.8
20.7
18.5
3.6
4.3
3.4
4.1
8.7
Level of Service
B
B
C
B
A
A
A
A
A
Approach Delay (s)
17.8
19.5
4.1
8.1
Approach LOS
B
B
A
A
Intersection Summa
HCM Average Control Delay
8.9 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
0.68
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
54.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization
72.3% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min)
15
c Critical Lane Group
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/8/2006
,Page 1
4'.)"
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail
-* 7 `' 't -4\ T �' �► j .�
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
t*
T+
►j
+
r
T+
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Total Lost time (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0'
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Frt
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.87
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
1.00
Fit Protected
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)
1770
1770
1770
1617
1770
1863
1583
1770
1859
Fit Permitted
0.67
1.00
0.72
1.00
0.52
1.00
1.00
0.30
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
1253
1770
1334
1617
966
1863
1583
553
1859
Volume (vph)
15
40
20
45
15
110
5
725
60
55
370
5
Peak -hour factor, PHF
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
. 0.95
0.95
0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)
16
42
21
47
16
116
5
763
63
58
389
5
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
18
0
0
89
0
0
0
19
0
0
0
Lane Group Flow (vph)
16
45
0
47
43
0
5
763
44
58
394
0
Turn Type
Perm
Perm
Perm
Perm
Perm
Protected Phases
4
8
2
6
Permitted Phases
4
8
2
2
6
Actuated Green, G (s)
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.2
40.1
40.1
40.1
40.1
40.1
Effective Green, g (s)
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
41.1
41.1
41.1
41.1
41.1
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.16
. 0.16
0.16
0.16
0.70
0.70
0.70
0'70
0.70
Clearance Time (s)
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Vehicle Extension (s)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
198
279
211
255
681
1313
1116
390
1311
v/s Ratio Prot
0.03
0.03
c0.41
0.21
v/s Ratio Perm
0.01
c0.04
0.01
0.03
0.10
v%c Ratio
0.08
0.16
0.22
0.17
0.01
0.58
0.04
0.15
0.30
Uniform Delay, d1
20.9
21.2
21.4
21.2
2.6
4.3
2.6
2.8
3.2
Progression Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Incremental Delay, d2
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.2
0.1
Delay (s)
21.1
21.5
22.0
21.5
2.6
5.0
2.6
3.0
3.3
Level of Service
C
C
C
C
A
A
A
A
A
Approach Delay (s)
21.4
21.7
4.8
3.3
Approach LOS
C
C
A
A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay
7.2 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
0.52
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
58.3 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization
64.0% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min)
15
c Critical Lane Group
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/8/2006
Page 1
4!.
Queues
recent shorklon kg ota '
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail
am m
*
,
Lane Group EBT
EBR
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT '
Lane Group Flow (vph) 37
11
179
116
21
432
116
153
905
Act Effct Green (s) 12.1
12.1
12.1
12.1
25.1
25.1
25.1
25.1
25.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27
0.27
0.27
0.27
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
v/c Ratio 0.08
0.03
0.47
0.23
0.09
0.22
0.13
0.31
'
0.47
Control Delay 11.5
7.1
16.1
4.5
7.2
6.1
2.1
8.5
7.5
Queue Delay 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay 11.5
7.1
16.1
4.5
7.2
6.1
2.1
8.5
'
7.5
LOS B
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
Approach Delay 10.5
11.5
5.3
7.7
Approach LOS B
B
A
A '
Queue Length 50th (ft) 5
0
27
0
2
22
0
16
55
Queue Length 95th (ft) 24
8
86
27
12
56
18
58
126
Internal Link Dist (ft) 535
419
451
397
Turn Bay Length (ft)
,
Base Capacity(vph) 735
682
616
742
262
2163
1013
557
2159
Starvation Cap Reductn 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 '
Storage Cap Reductn 0
0
.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.05
0.02
0.29
0.16
0.08
0.20
0.11
0.27
0.42
Intersection Summary
'
Cycle Length: 60
Actuated Cycle Length: 45.6
Control Type: Actuated -Uncoordinated
'
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.47
Intersection Signal Delay: 7.6
Intersection
LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.1 %
ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/8/2006 '
Page 1
M
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent shor06Rbkgd
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail S i 6.A)AL ai
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
►j
it
j,
tt
r
►j
0
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Total Lost time (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
Frt
1.00
0.96
1.00
0.89
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
1.00
Flt Protected
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)
1770
1780
1770
1664
1770
3539
1583
1770
3530
Flt Permitted
0.65
1.00
0.73
1.00
0.29
1.00
1.00
0.50
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
1218
1780
1365
1664
532
3539
1583
933
3530
Volume (vph)
10
25
10
125
45
110
20
410
110
145
845
15
Peak -hour factor, PHF
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)
11
26
11
132
47
116
21
432
116
153
. 889
16
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
9
0
0
90
0
0
0
47
0
2
0
Lane Group Flow (vph)
11
28
0
132
73
0
21
432.
69
153
903
0
Turn Type
Perm
Perm
Perm
Perm
Perm
Protected Phases
4
8
2
6
Permitted Phases
4
8
2
2
6
Actuated Green, G (s)
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
24.9
24.9
24.9
24.9
24.9
Effective Green, g (s)
9.8
9.8
9.8
9.8
25.9
25.9
25.9
25.9
25.9
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.59
0.59
0.59
0.59
0.59
Clearance Time (s)
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Vehicle Extension (s)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
273
399
306
373
315
2097
938
553
2092
v/s Ratio Prot
0.02
0.04
0.12
c0.26
v/s Ratio Perm
0.01
c0.10
0.04
0.04
0.16
v/c Ratio
0.04
0.07
0.43
0.20
0.07 .
0.21
0.07
0.28
0.43
Uniform Delay, dl
13.3
13.4
14.6
13.8
3.8
4.1
3.8
4.3
4.9
Progression Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Incremental Delay, d2
0.1
0.1
1.0
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.1
Delay (s)
13.3
13.4
15.5
.14.0
3.9
4.2
3.8
4.6
5.0
Level of Service
B
B
B
B
A
A
A
A
A
Approach Delay (s)
13.4
14.7
4.1
5.0
Approach LOS
B
B
A
A
Intersection Summa
HCM Average Control Delay
6.4 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
0.43
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
43.7 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization
50:8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)
15
c Critical Lane Group
' Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/8/2006
Page 1
31
Queues
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail
recent
Lane Group
EBL
' EBT
WBL
WBT
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)
16
63
47
132
5
763
63
58
394
v/c Ratio .
0.06
0.17
0.17
0.32
0.01
0.35
0.06
0.18
0.18
Control Delay
10.4
8.4
11.5
6.1
4.4
5.0
1.9
6.5
4.2
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
10.4
8.4
11.5
6.1
4.4
5.0
1.9
6.5
4.2
Queue Length 50th (ft)
5
5
3
1
33
0
4
15
--p Queue Length 95th (ft)
d
25
24
31
3
70
10
20
34
Internal Link Dist (ft)
535
419
451
397
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity(vph)
545
781
580
763
660
2454
1117
364
2450
Starvation Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0,
Reduced v/c Ratio
0.03
0.08
0.08
0.17
0.01
0.31
0.06
0.16
0.16
Intersection Summary
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/8/2006 '
Page 1
3g '
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent sho on
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail S ( G u1A L-
--V #e 4 `\
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
1
$
tt
r
0
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Total Lost time (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
Frt
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.87
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
1.00
Fit Protected
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)
1770
1770
1770
1617
1770
3539
1583
1770
3532
Fit Permitted
0.67
1.00
0.72
1.00
0.52
1.00
1.00
0.35
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
1253
1770
1334
1617
968
3539
1583
652
3532
Volume (vph)
15
40
20
45
15
110
5
725
60
55
370
5
Peak -hour factor, PHF
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)
16
42
21
47
16
116
5
763
63
58
389
5
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
17
0
0
85
0
0
0
23
0
1
0
Lane Group Flow (vph)
16
46
0
47
47
0
5
763
40
58
393
0
Turn Type
Penn
Perm
Perm
Perm
Perm
Protected Phases
4
8
2
6
Permitted Phases
4
8
2
2
6
Actuated Green, G (s)
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
30.3
30.3
30.3
30.3
30.3
Effective Green, g (s)
9.7
9.7
9.7
9.7
31.3
31.3
31.3
31.3
31.3
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.64
0.64
0.64
0.64
0.64
Clearance Time (s),
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Vehicle Extension (s)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
248
350
264
320
618
2261
1011
416
2256
v/s Ratio Prot
0.03
0.03
c0.22
0.11
v/s Ratio Perm
0.01
c0.04
0.01
0.03
0.09
v/c Ratio
0.06
0.13
0.18
0.15
0.01
0.34
0.04
0.14
0.17
Uniform Delay, d1
16.0
16.2
16.3
16.2
3.2
4.1
3.3
3.5
3.6
Progression Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Incremental Delay, d2
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.0
Delay (s)
16.1
16.4
16.7
16.4
3.2
4.2
3.3
3.7
3.6
Level of Service
B
B
B
B
A
A
A
A
A
Approach Delay (s)
16.3
16.5
4.1
3.6
Approach LOS
B
B
A
A
Intersection Summa
HCM Average Control Delay
6.0 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
0.30
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
49.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization
45.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)
15
c Critical Lane Group
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/8/2006
Page 1
37
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail e
recent shor a bkgd �
am
� Ir � 4\ t ti j d
Movement EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Right Turn Channelized
Volume (veh/h) 10
25
10
125 45
110
20
410
110
145
845
15
Peak Hour Factor 0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95 0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
Hourly flow rate (vph) 11
26
.11
132 47
116
21
432
116
153
889
16
Approach Volume (veh/h)
47
295
568
1058
Crossing Volume (veh/h)
1174
463
189
200
High Capacity (veh/h)
539
961
1194
1184
High v/c (veh/h)
0.09
0.31
0.48
0.89
Low Capacity (veh/h)
412
779
988
979
Low v/c (veh/h)
0.12
0.38
0.58
1.08.
Intersection Summary
Maximum v/c High
0.89
Maximum v/c Low
1.08
Intersection Capacity Utilization
53.1 %
ICU Level of Service
A
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/2/2006
Page 1
.36
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail
recent
—p.
m
%,r
4--
4\
t/
ti
1
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Right Turn Channelized
Volume (veh/h)
15
40
20
45
15
110
.5
725
60
55
370
5
Peak Hour Factor
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
Hourly flow rate (vph)
16
42
21
47
16
116
5
763
63
58
389
5
Approach Volume (veh/h)
79
179
832
453
Crossing Volume (veh/h)
495
784
116
68
High Capacity (veh/h)
937
742
1265
1313
High v/c (veh/h)
0.08
0.24
0.66
0.34
Low Capacity (veh/h)
758
586
1052
1096
Low v/c (veh/h)
0.10
0.31
0.79
0.41
Intersection Summary
Maximum v/c High
0.66
Maximum v/c Low
0.79
Intersection Capacity Utilization
43.3%
ICU Level of Service
A
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/2/2006
Page 1
1 3s
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent shortqobkgdota
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail am
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBF
Lane Configurations
4
r
4
r
ft
r
Vi
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
0%
Volume (veh/h)
10
25
10
125
45
110
20
410
110
145
845 15
Peak Hour Factor
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95 0.95
Hourly flow rate (vph)
11
26
11
132
47
116
21
432
116
153
889 16
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
Raised
Raised
Median storage veh)
0
0
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
1600
1792
453
1247
1684
216
905
547
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
1203
1203
474
474
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
397
589
774
1211
vCu, unblocked vol
1600
1792
453
1247
1684
216
905
547
tC, single (s)
*6.0
*5.2
6.9
*6.0
*5.2
6.9
4.1
4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
5.0
4.2
5.0
4.2
tF (s)
3.5
4.0
3.3
3.5
4.0
3.3
2.2
2.2
p0 queue free %
92
85
98
37
74
85
97
85
cM capacity (veh/h)
138
174
554
208
185
789
747
1018
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
EB 2
WB 1
WB 2
NB 1
NB 2
NB 3
NB 4
SB 1
SB 2
SB 3
Volume Total
37
11
179
116
21
216
216
116
153
593
312
Volume Left
11
0
132
0
21
0
0
0
153
0
0
Volume Right
0
11
0
116
0
0
0
116
0
0
16
cSH
162
554
201
789
747
1700
1700
1700
1018
1700
1700 ,
Volume to Capacity
0.23
0.02
0.89
0.15
0.03
0.13
0.13
0.07
0.15
0.35
0.18
-+ Queue Length 95th (ft)
i2�i
1
173
13
2
0
0
0
13
0
0
Control Delay (s)
3
11.6
86.2
10.3
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.2
0.0
0.0
Lane LOS
D
B
F
B
A
A
Approach Delay (s)
28.8
56.4
0.4
1.3
Approach LOS
D
F
Intersection Summary
Average Delay
10.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization
53.1%
ICU Level of Service
A
Analysis Period (min)
15
User Entered Value &o% OF )')a-;'AU47r
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/2/2006 '
Page 1
34
' HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
recent short 4jE kgd Qjb
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail
wpm
*
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
'
Lane Configurations
4
?
4
?
tt
r
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
0%
Volume (veh/h)
15
40
20
45
15
110
5
725
60
55
370
5
Peak Hour Factor
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
Hourly flow rate (vph)
16
42
21
47
16
116
5
. 763
63
58
389
• 5
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
Raised
Raised
Median storage veh)
0
0
' Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
1024
1345
197
1126
1284
382
395
826
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
508
508
774
774
'
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
516
837
353
511
vCu, unblocked vol
1024
1345
197
1126
1284
382
395
826
tC, single (s)
*6.0
'5.2
6.9
*6.0
*5.2
6.9
4.1
4.1
'
IC, 2 stage (s)
5.0
4.2
5.0
4.2
tF (s)
3.5
4.0
3.3
3.5
4.0
3.3
2.2
2.2
p0 queue free %
93
83
97
81
94
81
100
93
' cM capacity (veh/h)
243
252
811
256
275
616
1160
800
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
EB 2
WB 1
WB 2
NB 1
NB 2
NB 3
NB 4
SB 1
SB 2
SB 3
Volume Total
58
21
63
116
5
382
382
63
58
260
135
Volume Left
16
0
47
0
5
0
0
0
58
0
0
Volume Right
0
21
0
116
0
0
0
63
0
0
5
cSH
250
811
260
616
1160
1700
1700
1700
800
1700
1700
to Capacity
0.23
0.03
0.24
0.19
0.00
0.22
0.22
0.04
0.07
0.15
0.08
'Volume
-v Queue Length 95th (ft)
2f>
2
23
17
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
Control Delay (s)
23.7
9.6
23.2
12.2
8.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.8
0.0
0.0
Lane LOS
C
A
C
B
A
A
Approach Delay (s)
19.9
16.1
0.1
1.3
Approach LOS
C
C
Intersection Summary
'
Average Delay
3.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization
43.3%
ICU Level of Service
A
Analysis Period (min)
15
1 ' User Entered Value
80%>
pF
'berAm
i
' Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/2/2006
Page 1
33
APPENDIX G
3ON
' HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
recent t�long bkg&�
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail
am n
-A
-ram
.- +--
k.0\
t
�.
j 4/
Movement EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT SBR
'
Right Turn Channelized
Volume (veh/h) 10
25
10
90 45
80
5
505
40
100
585 15
Peak Hour Factor 0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85 0.85
0.85
0.85
0.93
0.93
0.92
0.92 0.85
Hourly flow rate (vph) 12
29
12
106 53
94
6
543
43
109
636 18
Approach Volume (veh/h)
53
253
592
762
Crossing Volume (veh/h)
850
561
150
165
High Capacity (veh/h)
703
889
1232
1217
High v/c (veh/h)
0.08
0.28
0.48
0.63
Low Capacity (veh/h)
553
715
1022
1009
Low v/c (veh/h)
0.10
0.35
0.58
0.76
Intersection Summary
Maximum v/c High
0.63
Maximum v/c Low
0.76
'
Intersection Capacity Utilization
59.0%
ICU Level of Service
R
B
' Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/2/2006
Page 1
1 31
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail
recent s o long
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Right Turn Channelized
Volume (veh/h)
15
40
20
30
15
80
5
505
40
40
255
5
Peak Hour Factor
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
Hourly flow, rate (vph)
18
47
24
35
18
94
6
594
47
47
300
6
Approach Volume (veh/h)
88
147
647
353
Crossing Volume (veh/h)
382
618
112
59
High Capacity (veh/h)
1025
849
1269
1323
High v/c (veh/h),
0.09
0.17
0.51
0.27
Low Capacity (veh/h)
836
680
1056
1105
Low v/c (veh/h)
0.11
0.22
0.61
0.32
Intersection Summary
Maximum v/c High 0.51
Maximum v/c Low 0.61
Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.5% ICU Level of Service A
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/2/2006
Page 1
3O
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
recent among bkgd al
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail
am 4fm:
----s.
--v
f�
.-
t
4\
t
ti
j r
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT SBR
'
Lane Configurations
d
?
4
r
I
T
r
Vi
A
Sign Control
Stop,
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
0%
'
Volume (veh/h)
10
25
10
90
45
80
20
285
75
100
585 15
Peak Hour Factor
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.93
0.93
0.92
0.92 0.85
Hourly flow rate (vph)
12
29
12
106
53
94
24
306
81
109
636 18
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
'
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
Raised
Raised
Median storage veh)
0
0
' Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
1336
1296
645
1233
1224
306
654
387
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
862
862
354
354
'
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
474
434
880
871
vCu, unblocked vol
1336
1296
645
1233
1224
306
654
387
tC, single (s)
*5.7
*5.2
6.2
*5.7
*5.2
6.2
4.1
4.1
'
tC, 2 stage (s)
4.7
4.2
4.7
4.2
tF (s)
3.5 .
4.0
3.3
3.5
4.0
3.3
2.2
2.2
p0 queue free %
94
88
98
53
80
87
97
91
' cM capacity (veh/h)
200
249
472
227
259
733
933
1171
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
EB 2
WB 1
WB 2
NB 1
NB 2
NB 3
SB 1
SB 2
Volume Total
41
12
159
94
24
306
81
109
654
' Volume Left
12
0
106
0
24
0
0
109
0
Volume Right
0
12
0
94
0
0
81
0
18
cSH
232
472
237
.733
933
1700
1700
1171
1700
Volume to Capacity
0. 8
0.02
0.67
0.13
0.03
0.18
0.05
0.09
0.38
Queue Length 95th (ft)
1D
2
106
11
2
0
0
8
0
Control Delay (s)
23.8
12.8
46.4
10.6
9.0
0.0
0.0
8.4
0.0
Lane LOS
C
B
E
B
A
A
'
Approach Delay (s)
21.3
33.1
0.5
1.2
Approach LOS
C
D
Intersection Summary
'
Average Delay
7.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization
59.0%
ICU Level
of Service
B
Analysis Period (min)
15
* User Entered Value
�
rFAU
CT
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/2/2006
Page 1
MIN
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
recentCho ong bkgd
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail
arr ,pm
*
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
4
r
4
r
t
r
1�
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
. Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
0%
Volume (veh/h)
15
40
20
30
15
80
5
505
40
40
255 5
Peak Hour Factor
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85 0.85
Hourly flow rate (vph)
18
47
24
35
18
94
6
594
47
47
300 6
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
Raised
Raised
Median storage veh)
0
0
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
1106
1050
303
1047
1006
594
306
641
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
397
397
606
606
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
709
653
441
400
vCu, unblocked vol
1106
1050
303
1047
1006
594
306
641
tC, single (s)
*5.7
*5.2
6.2
*5.7
*5.2
6.2
4.1
4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
4.7
4.2
4.7
4.2
tF (s)
3.5
4.0
'3.3
3.5
4.0
3.3
2.2
2.2
p0 queue free %
93
85
97
88
95
81
100
95
cM capacity (veh/h)
236
307
737
293
326
505
1255
943
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
EB 2
WB 1
WB 2
NB 1
NB 2
NB 3
SB 1
SB 2
Volume Total
65
24
53
94
6
594
47
47
306
Volume Left
18
0
35
0
6
0
0
47
0
Volume Right
0
24
0
94
0
0
47
0
6
cSH
284
737
303
505
1255
1700
1700
943
1700
Volume to Capacity
0.23
0.03
0.17
0.19
0.00
0.35
0.03
0.05
0.18
Queue Length 95th (ft)
2®
2
16
17
0
0
0
4
0
Control Delay (s)
21.4
10.0
19.4
13.8
7.9
0.0
0.0
9.0
0.0
Lane LOS
C
B
C
B
A
A
Approach Delay (s)
18.4
15.8
0.1
1.2
Approach LOS
C
C
Intersection Summary
Average Delay
3.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization
49.5%
ICU Level of Service
A
Analysis Period (min)
15
* User Entered Value :�roF0 OP '70 FAV4:7
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/2/2006
Page 1
. rA
APPENDIX F
a?
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
recent long 1:5�total
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail
arnQl?
k-
t
�►
1
Movement WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR SBL
SBT
Right Turn Channelized
Volume (veh/h) 90
75
285
80 100
595
Peak Hour Factor 0.85
0.85
0.93
0.93 0.92
0.92
Hourly flow rate (vph) 106
88
306
86 109
647
Approach Volume (veh/h) 194
392
755
Crossing Volume (veh/h) 306
109
106
High Capacity (veh/h) 1089
1272
1275
High v/c (veh/h) 0.18
0.31
0.59
Low Capacity (veh/h) 893
1059
1061
Low v/c (veh/h) 0.22
0.37
0.71
Intersection Summary
Maximum v/c High
0.59
Maximum v/c Low
0.71
Intersection Capacity Utilization
43.0%
ICU Level of Service A
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
6/20/2005 ,
Page 1
A6
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent�long.�total
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail ��pm
%,(- 4 t l
Movement
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR SBL
SBT
Right Turn Channelized
Volume (veh/h)
35
80
510
50 40
260
Peak Hour Factor
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85 0.85
0.85
Hourly flow rate (vph)
41.
94
600
59 47
306
Approach Volume (veh/h)
135
659
353
Crossing Volume (veh/h)
600
47
41
High Capacity (veh/h)
862
1335
1341
High v/c (veh/h)
0.16
0.49
0.26
Low Capacity (veh/h)
691
1116
1121
Low v/c (veh/h)
0.20
0.59
0.31
Intersection Summary
Maximum v/c High
0.49
Maximum v/c Low
0.59
Intersection Capacity Utilization
43.2%
ICU Level of Service A
' Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
6/20/2005
Page 1
as
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail
4' '%- 1 /' �► 1
Movement .
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lane Configurations
I
r
+
r
f
Sign Control
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
Volume (veh/h)
90
75
285
80
100
595
Peak Hour Factor
0.85
0.85
0.93
0.93
0.92
0.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)
106
88
306
86
109
647
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
Raised
Median storage veh)
0
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
1171
306
392
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
306
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
864
vCu, unblocked vol
1171
306
392
tC, single (s)
*5.1
*5.0
4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
4.1
tF (s)
3.5
3.3
2.2
p0 queue free %
65
89
91
cM capacity (veh/h)
307
814
1166
Direction, Lane #
WB 1
WB 2
NB 1
NB 2
SB 1
SB 2
Volume Total
106
88
306
86
109
647
Volume Left
106
0
0
0
109
0
Volume Right
0
88
0
86
0
0
cSH
307
814
1700
1700
1166
1700
Volume to Capacity
0.35
0.11
0.18
0.05
0.09
0.38
Queue Length 95th (ft)
37
9
0
0
8
0
Control Delay (s)
22.8
10.0
0.0
0.0
8.4
0.0
Lane LOS
C
A
A
Approach Delay (s)
17.0
0.0
1.2
Approach LOS
C
Intersection Summary
Average Delay
3.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization
43.0%
ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)
15
* User Entered Value %07, Or 7l 6FAUL'T
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/2/2006 '
Page 1
'k+
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Elizabeth. Street & Overland Trail
recen fio ong k total
Pin
Movement
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lane Configurations
r
+
r
+
Sign Control
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
Volume (veh/h)
35
80
510
50
40
260
Peak Hour Factor
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
Hourly flow rate (vph)
41
94
600
59
47
306
Pedestrians .
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
Raised
Median storage veh)
0
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
-
vC, conflicting volume
1000
600
659
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
600
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
400
vCu, unblocked vol
1000
600
659
tC, single (s)
*5.1
*5.0
4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
4.1
tF (s)
3.5
3.3
2.2
p0 queue free %
89
85
95
cM capacity (veh/h)
367
614
929
Direction, Lane #
WB 1
WB 2
NB 1
NB 2
SB 1
SB 2
Volume Total
41
94
600
59
47
306
Volume Left
41
0
0
0
47
0
Volume Right
0
94
0
59
0
0
cSH
367
614
1700
1700
929
1700
Volume to Capacity
0.11
0.15
0.35
0.03
0.05
0.18
Queue Length 95th (ft)
9
13
0
0
4
0
Control Delay (s)
16.0
11.9
0.0
0.0
9.1
0.0
Lane LOS
C
B
A
Approach Delay (s)
13.2
0.0
1.2
Approach LOS
B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay
1.9
Intersection Capacity Utilization
43.2%
ICU Level
of Service A
Analysis Period (min)
15
* User Entered Value ?Oio 01= 'UGl=AVL--T
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/2/2006
Page 1
a3
APPENDIX
E
0 0
ilmommim
FAFINim
I
O
' (DD U) cM N
S
=S=
a
aaa
�
mmuLi
_
�
aaa
a
w3w
MINOR STREET APPROACH - VPH
a.1
0
0
Cl
0
ti
0
0
co
r
Ia.
o LO
to
0-
o °-
0
v
0
0
co
OCD
as
N >
� 0
N
N
O
O Q
0
O
0
1 .mil
1
•
i
0
0
ti
O
O
9 •
i (D
Q 0-
O - co
cp U) C
a ` f6 O
¢a �Q3
ca U
O 0 > Q
m -:) OO
Low
O �U(!D
Ja �c6�
QW 0
F- a 0
O W Z ( m
O 0
(� c0
W m N O N
W Q 0 7
W D L > O
fII
L =v
>30
Lo O om
C L
CL
cQ Q Qr+
G Z cc
0 0
Lo 0
Y
w/�
M
iYi 13
F
Z
QZ
LL ~
0
N w
LL M
O
Q
M
NW
L.L
r�
V_
LL
II�
�VA sm
#10
0 0 0 0 0
0
CD COA M N
2
=__
a
aaa
0
000
M
1pNIV
aaa
a
mmm
Go
ww�:
MINOR STREET APPROACH = VPH
ao
c..
0
0
0
0
ti
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
v
o
M
Q
o—c
�
NO
CDLL
O
(Q N C
� C6 O
N
cq
Qa �a3
�o=
;
_o
U�
0 u
r-
=
a
co
> to -
CL
L- 0
som
o
CD 0o
0
CD
o
a�'i m
_ c
a
Q W
,
D
o
H�
p C
f6
0)OW
��co
O O
E 2
ca
CD>
W=
�`o°�
ao
�
W
Qom
OD
2
WW
>
� O
O
o
a
U)
n 3 0
=
_ y
O
u2
�2w
a
0o
co
Q
o
Z �°
0
0
lqt
APPENDIX D
Table 4-3
Fort Collins (City Limits)
Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections)
Land Use (from structure plan)
Other corridors within:
Low density
Intersection type
Commercial
Mixed use
mixed use
All other
corridors
districts
residential
areas
Signalized intersections
D
E'
D
D
(overall)
Any Leg
E
E
D
E
Any Movement
E
E
D
E
Stop sign control
N/A
F"
F"
E
(arterial/collector or local —
any approach leg
Stop sign control
NIA
C
C
C
(collector/local—any
approach leg)
mitigating measures required
" considered normal in an urban environment
UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Level-of-Scrvicc
_
Average l olal Delay
%Wvch
_ 113
> 10 and < 15
C
> 15 and < 25
C)
> 25 and < 35
_
I:
>35and<50
1
> 50—
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
17
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysisshort long bkgd total
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail am aTl*)
1 /00. 1
Movement
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lane Configurations
F
f
r
t
Sign Control
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0°%
Volume (veh/h)
83
70
262
73
91
541
Peak Hour Factor
0.85
0.85
0.93
0.93
0.92
0.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)
98
82
282
78
99
588
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type TWLTL
Median storage veh)
0
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
1068
282
360
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
282
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
786
vCu, unblocked vol
1068
282
360
tC, single (s)
*5.1
*5.0
4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
4.1
tF (s)
3.5
3.3
2.2
p0 queue free %
70
90
92
cM capacity(veh/h)
330
833
1198
Direction, Lane #
WB 1
WB 2
NB 1
NB 2
SB 1
SB 2
Volume Total
98
82
282
78
99
588
Volume Left
98
0
0
0
99
0
Volume Right
0
82
0
78
0
0
cSH
330
833
1700
1700
1198
1700
Volume to Capacity
0.30
0.10
0.17
0.05
0.08
0.35
Queue Length 95th (ft)
30
8
0
0
7
0
Control Delay (s)
20.4
9.8
0.0
0.0
8.3
0.0
Lane LOS
C
A
A
Approach Delay (s)
15.6
0.0
1.2
Approach LOS
C
Intersection Summary
Average Delay
2.9
Intersection Capacity Utilization
39.7°%
ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)
15
* User Entered Value ape of DUVAUc yF
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/2/2006
Page 1
/G
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis qece hort long bkgd total
3: Elizabeth Street & Overland Trail Qpm
1 P 4
Lane Configurations
Sign Control
Grade
Volume (veh/h)
Peak Hour Factor
Hourly flow rate (vph)
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol
tC, single (s)
IC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) '
p0 queue free %
cM capacity (veh/h)
BL SBT
Stop
Free
Free
0%
0%
0%
31
71 464
43 36 237
0.85
0.85 0.85
-0.85 0.85 0.85
36
84 546
51 42 279
TWLTL
0
909
546
596
546
364
909
546
596
"5.1
"5.0
4.1
4.1
3.5
3.3
2.2
91
87
96
389
647
980
Direction, Lane #
WB 1
WB 2
NB 1
NB 2
SB 1
SB 2
Volume Total
36
84
546
51
42
279
Volume Left
36
0
0
0
42
0
Volume Right
0
84
0
51
0
0
cSH
389
647
1700
1700
980
1700
Volume to Capacity
0.09
0.13
0.32
0.03
0.04
0.16
Queue Length 95th (ft)
8
11
0
0
3
0
Control Delay (s)
15.2
11.4
0.0)
0.0
8.8
0.0
Lane LOS
C
B
A
Approach Delay (s)
12.6
0.0
1.2
Approach LOS
B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay
1.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization
39.9%
ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)
.
15
User Entered Value 8090 o F 71 EFAVLT
Joseph
Matthew J. Delich , P. E.
2/2/2006
Page 1
/S
APPENDIX C.
/-f
1
1
N
C
_
O
0
C.)0
(�
cc
'
co
N
M
J
-tea
ti
w
W
a
=
Z
C
o
_
F=
'
ce
U
O
o N
>
N�
C
J
=
O m
Li.
C
W
Q
V
Q
>
>
'
O
'
Z
zLU
=
C7
? c
Q
~
A
O L
C
a
N
a
�
0
�
=
d
QAn
_La
m
~
�
G
cu
�
y� L
rn
�C N
11 II
a' co
IWO 1 C4 1 C:o I r.- Icq
NI
3
12
N
J co CO I C) 00
0
C
3
W
J
co
a—
0)
N
H
r
to
ate-
N
c�
w
F
C
N
U'>
m
m
v
J
ao
C
rn
�
C
7
r'
In
�
c+>
aN
r
Z
J
E
I
i= m
A
A
a0
ao
J
t3
I"+IMIMImI
INIII`III
INICIO ININI
INI10 NINI'I
In 1m i &i
r r r
N N N N
� CO
N N
� � cNo cNo
I*I3I�i�l
APPENDIX B
P-3
z-
�GU
So
C>Ajb S— i2&S; c D Gnu r i Al, -r'o -T c S uU r 6f
-ro -rN-&"
or-
�iCYCCC ��S��N�Yroa.)�
.
N
i
AD21
O
a
co
i 1
H
\
1
o I
1
a
'
a
1
\\
lilt
N 1
m
i
o
�1
1
1
i
11
I
11
NI
,�
N I
\
tl
i
43
J
I I
J—
ju Deg
i ro
/
�N
1
! /
wurm go 11
-3✓
I
�
I
N
n
i
Gravity Model Data 20417 ?, C X.0
NORTH
SOUTH
EAST
WEST
Zone
emp.
Zone
emp.
Zone
emp.
Zone
emp.
55
1002
50
10
58 1 /4
269
56
220
51
110
59 3/4
338
57
192
52
128
60 1 /4
147
58 3/4
807
53
530
66
215
59 1 /8
56
54
152
67
600
61
148
59 1 /8
56
68
595
62
135
60 314
442
77 1 /2
375
63
280
73
545
79 3/4
847
64
133
74
561
81 1/2
2431
65
353
75
805
99
281
69
65
76
2520
100
89
71
185
77 1 /2
375
101
222
72
689
78
1197
102
4381
84
760
79
1404
103
528
86
197
80
684
105 1 /2
1164
87
784
81 1 /2
2431
108 1 /2
1250
104
260
82
1316
125
1390
105 1 /2
1165
83
1500
126
22
106
691
115
1375
127
340
107
170
116
739
134
100
108 112
1250
119
2612
135
7559
111
373
129
3080
136 1 /2
850
144
350
130
1154
137
284
145
931
136 1 /2
850
138
790
302
97
140
1730
139
583
141
1346
142
153
Total Emp.
11,293
Total Emp.
26,306
Total Emp.
27,149
Total Emp.
0
Distribution
17.44%
Distribution
40.63%
Distribution
41.93%
Distribution
0.00%
Gravity Model Data 2010
NORTH
SOUTH
EAST
WEST
Zone
emp.
Zone
emp.
Zone
emp.
Zone
emp.
55
563
50
6
58 1 /4
262
56
165
51
58
59 3/4
294
57
156
52
108
60 1/4
119
58 3/4
787
53
320
66
200
59118
49
54
114
67
537
61
97
59118
49
68
490
62
82
60 3/4
359
77 1 /2
233
63
243
73
455
79 3/4
847
64
127
74
279
811/2
1289
65
331
75
519
99
254
69
39
76
1723
100
87
71
137
77 1 /2
234
101
198
72
498
78
1101
102
4170
84
529
79
283
103
425
86
163
80
505
1051/2
1081
87
778
81 1 /2
1290
108 1 /2
867
104
206
82
987
125
1251
105 1 /2
1080
83
1204
126
12
106
389
115
1049
127
200
107
113
116
545
134
44
1081/2
867
119
1863
135
6844
111
176
129
3088
136 1 /2
808
144
176
130
1097
137
252
145
537
136 1 /2
809
138
575
302
97
140
1557
139
563
141
1311
142
143
Total Emp.
8,385
Total Emp.
19,602
Total Emp.
23,356
Total Emp.
0
Distribution
16.33%
Distribution
38.18%
Distribution
45.49%
Distribution
0.00%
--a- AM/PM
TRIMP DISTRIBUTION
Figure 4
TABLE
Trip Generation
�,R
210
Single Family Housing
106 D.U.
9.57
1015
0.19
20
0.56
59
0.64
68
0.37
39
220
Apartments
40 D.U.
6.72
270
0.10
4
0.41
16
0.40
16
0.22
9
TOTAL
1285
24
75
84
48
S
_ � �
o/m��
oil
`e@ mw. !
e-i
®
�#IS WA5Coe
�<
��
�,Tr A
-rgAT w55
AVAiI.4#66 A T
2
�
Tik& rA
}
S ck. IT
N
99
� vai.v To
k�
T*C- 'PL Aoi TA+I
10'e S
I% -(AL)T14 �l �i
t,
V
� ) (
((|
!
��
}0.0�§F■■k
�
�
�
ra
SCALE: 1 "=1000'
SITE LOCATION Figure 1
3
Project Information
Project Name Q F ?
Project Location 1�&
TIS Assumptions
Type of Study
Study Area Boundaries
Study Years
Future Traffic Growth Rate
Study Intersections
4 - Attachments
Attachment A
Transportation impact Study
Base Assumptions
/J
Time Period for Study
Trip Generation Rates
Trip Adjustment Factors
Overall Trip Distribution
.Mode Split Assumptions
Committed Roadway Improvements
Other Traffic Studies
Areas Requiring Special Study
Full: Ye
North: A). [41-JA R
East: -r4 FT �«
Short Range: Zoo4
1. All access drives
3.
4.
rT(r' (AT-r,4eb
Intermediate: 1✓o
South: V1 6-uVA84
West: S(T
Long Range:
4:00-Rb-) I Sat Noon:
//�� Captive
Passby:
�Market:
SEE ATTACHED SKETCH
�v /R
e
CSU b,0CaMTAtd1xte4)Y 4A6
JGiv duos
Date:
Traffic Engineer: v ��
Local Entity Engineer.
(540AY Pu?1,26;7 AS N(230 8'0C0vrdwM&-),r 4A19 7'[S "
Larirrrer C�� Urban
ja�er County,tStandards
City of Repeated and
City of Fort Coffins
Reenacted
act d October 1, 2002 Page 435
FN
APPENDIX A
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This study assessed the impacts of Bella Vira Development on the
short range (2009) street system in the vicinity of the proposed
development. As a result of this analysis, the following is concluded:
- The development of Bella Vira Development is feasible from a'
traffic engineering standpoint. At full development, Bella Vira
Development will generate approximately 720 daily trip ends, 56
morning peak hour trip ends, and 74 afternoon peak hour trip ends.
Currently, the Overland/Elizabeth intersection operates acceptably
with current control and geometry.
Based upon the short range (2009) peak hour traffic forecasts,
signal warrants will not be met at the Overland/Elizabeth
intersection. In the long range (2025) future, a peak hour signal
warrant will be met at the Overland/Elizabeth intersection in the
afternoon peak hour.
- In the short range (2009) background traffic future, the key
intersections will operate acceptably.
- In the short range (2009) future, given full development of Bella
Vira Development and an increase in background traffic, the
Overland/Elizabeth intersection will operate acceptably, with the
westbound left/through movement operating at level of service E in
the afternoon peak hour. The recommended short range (2009)
geometry is shown in Figure 9.
In the long range (2025) future, given full development of Bella
Vira Development and an increase in background traffic, the
Overland/Elizabeth intersection will operate acceptably, except
the westbound approach operating at level of service F with stop
sign control in the afternoon peak hour. The Overland/Elizabeth
intersection will operate acceptably, with signal control. The
long range (2025) geometry is shown in Figure 10.
Acceptable level of service is achieved for pedestrian, bicycle,
and transit modes based upon the measures in the multi -modal
transportation guidelines, except for the pedestrian street
crossing criteria for Overland Trail. Level of service B cannot
be achieved or mitigated with regard to that street, unless a
raised median is installed when it is widened as a Fort Collins
capital improvement project.
23
' Pedestrian Level of Service
' Appendix H shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of
the Bella Vira Development. Three potential pedestrian destinations
within 1320 feet were identified: 1) institutional uses (CSU Equine
' Center) to the north, 2) residential uses to the south, 3) residential
uses to the east of the site. Pedestrian circulation within the study
area is good. The west side of Overland Trail north of the site does
not have sidewalks. It is not known when sidewalks will be built in
' this area. The Bella Vira Development is located within an area
termed as a transit corridor which sets the level of service threshold
at LOS B for all measured categories, except visual interest and
' amenities, which is C. Appendix H contains a Pedestrian LOS
Worksheet. In the short range future, the street crossing level of
service is B, since the raised median is not required in crossing four
' lanes of traffic (<50'). In the long range future, the street
crossing level of service will be at C, unless a raised pedestrian
refuge is installed in Overland Trail. Widening of Overland Trail
will likely be a capital improvement project by the City of Fort
Collins if it is deemed to be necessary.
Bicycle Level of Service
Appendix H shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of
Bella Vira Development. The only bicycle priority destination is the
CSU Equine Center. Based upon Fort Collins bicycle LOS criteria, the
minimum level of service threshold for bicycles is LOS C. There are
' bicycle facilities along most streets. The Bella Vira Development
will be connected to the bike lanes on Overland Trail and West
Elizabeth Street, which exceeds the LOS C criteria.
Transit Level of Service
' Currently, this area is served by transit routes 2, 3, and 64
(when CSU is in session). The Bella Vira Development is located in an
area defined as a "low density mixed use residential." In the future,
' transit service will be improved as depicted on the Fort Collins
Transit System Plan. Appendix H contains a future transit level of
service worksheet. As indicated, the future level of service will be
' in the B category.
22
iRoundabout Analysis
' A resolution of the Fort Collins City Council requires a
roundabout analysis at arterial/arterial and arterial/collector
intersections. A roundabout analysis was requested at the
' Overland/Elizabeth intersection and is addressed in this section of the
TIS. Tables 3, 4 and 5 show the volume/capacity (v/c) ratios with
roundabout control at the subject intersection for the respective short
range (2009) and long range (2025) futures. The Overland/Elizabeth
intersection was analyzed as a single -lane roundabout in the short range
(2009) and long range (2025) using the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual.
This technique does not calculate level of service or delay to the
traffic entering the roundabout. Instead, it provides a v/c ratio for
each entering leg. The capacity is expressed as an upper and lower
bound. The calculation forms are provided in the respective appendices.
' Convention would indicate that level of service A is associated with a
v/c ratio <-0.60. Correspondingly, the following associations are also
reasonable: level of service B - v/c=0.61-0.70; level of service C -
v/c=0.71-0.80; level of service D - v/c=0.81-0.90; level of service E -
v/c=0.91-1.00; and level of service F - v/c>1.00. The capacity of a
roundabout can be increased by providing right -turn bypass lanes when
the right -turning volume is sufficiently high to warrant this treatment.
' The capacity can also be improved by increasing the number of lanes on
the approaches and on the circulating roadway. However, increasing the
number of lanes does not cause a doubling of the capacity. It is
' assumed that the level of service for an approach leg (LOS D in a low
density mixed use residential area) at a signalized intersection is also
acceptable for the approach leg for a roundabout. The roundabout
analyses indicate that a single -lane roundabout would provide acceptable
operation in the short range (2009). In the long range a dual lane
roundabout may be needed with the proposed 4-lane cross section of
' Overland Trail. The HCM does not analyze dual lane roundabouts, but
based on the single lane roundabout analysis in appears that it would
operate acceptably.
' Since the entering vehicles on all legs of a roundabout are
typically not stopped, the vehicle emissions at a roundabout are less
than that at a stop sign controlled or a signal controlled intersection.
' This is especially true during the non -peak hours. Accidents at
roundabout intersection are less severe than those at conventional
intersections. If a roundabout is built at this intersection,
' additional right-of-way may be required at all four quadrants of the
intersection depending upon the ultimate design. A detailed cost
estimate is beyond the scope of a transportation impact study. This is
more appropriately provided by the roundabout design engineer. It is
premature to provide a design and cost estimate unless the City of Fort
Collins desires roundabout control at this intersection. It is likely
that the annual maintenance costs of a roundabout will be less than that
of a signalized intersection.
21
' Queue Analysis
City staff requested a queuing analysis for the west leg of West
Elizabeth Street. There are two driveways that access the townhome
portion of this development. The generated traffic will be split
' between the two driveways. It is likely that the traffic will be evenly
split or perhaps, slightly favoring the east access, since it is the one
that is closest to Overland Trail. Even if all traffic uses the east
access, that driveway would not be considered to be a high volume
driveway. It is recommended that the west leg of West Elizabeth Street
be classified as a local street. The forecasted traffic on West
Elizabeth Street, just west of Overland Trail, will be just over 1000
' vehicles per day. However, just west of the townhome driveways' the
volume will decrease to under 1000 vehicles per day, which is the
threshold for a residential local street. Since the recommended
' geometry will easily accommodate the volumes that are slightly higher
than the local street threshold, there is no reason to change the
classification of the west leg of West Elizabeth Street for just a short
' segment. Changing the classification of the street at the driveway
location is not good engineering or transportation planning practice.
' As a local street, the distance between driveways and street
intersections is 50 feet, minimum, on -centers, according to Table 7-3 in
LCUASS. However, good engineering practice would indicate that the east
driveway to the townhome portion be much further to the west, beyond the
area where the eastbound turn lanes are striped. The queuing analysis
would determine the length of the eastbound lanes on the west leg of
West Elizabeth Street approaching Overland Trail. The LOS analysis
calculates the 95th percentile queue as shown in Appendices F and G. In
the short and long range futures, with stop sign control, the 95th
percentile queue for the eastbound approach is less than 25 feet in
either peak hour. With signalization, the eastbound queue is 25 feet.
Convention would indicate that the minimum length of the left-
turn/through lane should be 50 feet. The queuing analysis indicates
that the forecasted left -turn queue would not exceed 50 feet. Beyond
' the end of the eastbound lanes, there should be a transition back to the
two lane local street cross section. The site plan indicates that the
east driveway to the townhome portion is 200 feet west of Overland
' Trail, on -centers. The distance from the centerline of Overland Trail
to the stop bar on the west leg of West Elizabeth Street is 60 feet.
Therefore, the distance from the stop bar to the east driveway to the
townhome portion is 140 feet. The area between the stop bar and the
east driveway to the townhome portion should be three lanes wide. The
eastbound left-turn/through lane will not extend past the east driveway.
The additional width at the east driveway could provide an area for a
westbound left -turning vehicle to the east driveway. The transition to
the two lane local street cross section should occur in the segment
between the two driveways to the townhome portion. Details regarding
t this design should occur as the Bella Vira Development goes through the
development review process.
20
Stop Signal
Sign
1 1
f f
Signal Stop
Sign
c
ca
L
O F-
LONG RANGE GEOMETRY
West Elizabeth
Street
10 - Denotes Lane
19
N
Figure 10
SHORT RANGE GEOMETRY
West Elizabeth
Street
do - Denotes Lane
A&
N
Figure 9
18
TABLE 5
Long Range (2025) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection
Movement
Level of Service
AM
PM
Overland/Elizabeth
(stop sign)
EB LT/T
C
D
EB RT
A
B
EB APPROACH
C
D
WB LT/T
C
F
WB RT
B
B
WB APPROACH
C
F
NB LT
A
A
SB LT
A
A
Overland/Elizabeth
(roundabout)
v c RiitiO (upper
mubwer bound) ._".
EB
0.08/0.10
0.09/0.12
WB
0.24/0.31
0.31/0.38
NB
0.66/0.79
0.48/0.58
SB
0.3410.41
0.89/1.08
Overland/Elizabeth
(signal)
EB LT
B
B
EB T/RT
B
B
EB APPROACH
B
B
WB LT
B
B
WB T/RT
B
B
WB APPROACH
B
B
NB LT
A
A
NB T
A
A
NB RT
A
A
NB APPROACH
A
A
SB LT
A
A
SB T/RT
A
A
SB APPROACH
A
A
OVERALL
A
A
17
TABLE 3
Short Range (2009) Background Peak Hour Operation
Intersection.
movement
Level of Service
'AM
PM
Overland/Elizabeth
(stop sign)
WB LT
C
C
WB RT
B
A
WB APPROACH
B
C
SB LT
A
A
Overland/Elizabeth
(roundabout)
vic..Ratio wppeib'oundflower- bound):.,
WB
0.16/0.20
0.18/0.22
N8
0.49/0.59
0.31/0.37
SB
0.26/0.31
0.59/031
TABLE 4
Short Range (2009) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection
la
7:
ovement
f 3
eve,oll ervfce
AM
Overland/Elizabeth
(stop sign)
EB LT/T
C
C
EB RT
B
B
EB APPROACH
C
C
WB LT/T
C
E
WB RT
13
e
WB APPROACH
C
D
NB LT
A
A
SB LT
A
A
Overland/Elizabeth
(roundabout)
v/c Ratio (upper
bqundqower bound).:
EB
0.09/0.11
0.08/0.10
WB
0.17/0.22
0.28/0.34
NB
0.51/0.61
0.48/0.58
SB
0.27/0.32
0.63/0.76
16
Operation Analysis and Geometry
Operation analyses were performed at the Overland/Elizabeth
intersection. The operations analyses were conducted for the short
range and long range analysis futures, reflecting a year 2009 and 2025
condition, respectively.
Using the short range (2009) background traffic volumes shown in
Figure 5, the Overland/Elizabeth intersection operates as indicated in
Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in
Appendix E. The Overland/Elizabeth intersection will operate
acceptably, with stop sign control on West Elizabeth Street.
Using the short range (2009) total traffic volumes shown in
Figure 7, the Overland/Elizabeth intersection operates as indicated in
Table 4. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix
F. The Overland/Elizabeth intersection will operate acceptably, with
the westbound left-turn/through movement operating at level of service E
in the afternoon peak hour. The geometry that was evaluated with stop
sign control has the minor street (West Elizabeth Street) through and
lefts in the same lane and right turns in a separate lane. This is the
preferred striping, since the minor street through movements and left -
turn movements seek the same gaps (from both directions on Overland
Trail) in traffic. The minor street right turns only seek a gap from
the left and do not experience the delays associated with the throughs
and lefts. This is acceptable at stop sign controlled arterial/arterial
intersections during the peak hours.
Using the long range (2025) total traffic volumes shown in Figure
8, the Overland/Elizabeth intersection operates as indicated in Table
5. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix G. In
the long range (2025) future the Overland/Elizabeth intersection was
analyzed with stop sign, signal, and roundabout control. The
Overland/Elizabeth intersection will operate acceptably, except for the
westbound approach operating at level of service F with stop sign
control in the afternoon peak hour. This analysis assumes that by the
long range future year of 2025, Overland Trail will have two through
lanes in each direction. However, the 2025 forecasted volumes on
Overland Trail indicate that the four lane cross section may not be
needed. With the two lane cross section the delays to the minor street
legs will be less. The Overland/Elizabeth intersection will operate
acceptably, with signal control, however a traffic signal may not be
warranted.
The short range (2009) geometry, with stop sign control, is shown
in Figure 9. As a signalized intersection it is recommended that the
eastbound and westbound have a dedicated left -turn lane and a combined
through/right-turn lane. This is the standard configuration at
signalized intersections. The long range (2025) geometry, with both
stop sign control and signal control, is shown in Figure 10. As
reflected in the City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan, two through
lanes are shown on Overland Trail.
15
LO
00�
to — 110/110
LO "' LO 15/45
f 1 45/125
West Elizabeth
15/10 / ro" Street
40/25 CD C� o
20/10 ULO v
N CEO
ti
-a*-- AM/PM
Rounded to Nearest
5 Vehicles
LONG RANGE (2025) TOTAL
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 8
14
N
to
LOo
a 80/80
to c*4 � 15/45
30/80
West Elizabeth
15/10 1 Street
40/25 —•— o LO U')
20/10 Lo N Co
o v
LO
+ AM/PM
Rounded to Nearest
5 Vehicles
SHORT RANGE (2009) TOTAL
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 7
13
A&
N
West Elizabeth
Street
co
L
CU
O t-
---o— AM/PM
SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 6
' 12
O I—
LO
rn O
to O
co
It
80/75
1 � � 35/90
Ln O
00 00
N O
O to
to
WITHOUT WEST LEG
OF W. ELIZABETH STREET
to
t` O
CD80/80
N `r �. 10/25
30/80
10/5
20/15 —► I I
NOM. Z to
O
LO
WITH WEST LEG
OF W. ELIZABETH STREET
SHORT RANGE (2009) BACKGROUND
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
41
N
West Elizabeth
Street_
� AM/PM
Rounded to Nearest
5 Vehicles
West Elizabeth
Street
Figure 5
11
c
m
L _
0 F-
TRIP DISTRIBUTION
N
West Elizabeth
Street
Figure 4
10
Trip Distribution
' Trip distribution for the Bella Vira Development was estimated
using gravity model analysis, knowledge of the existing and planned
street system, development trends, and engineering judgment. Figure 4
' shows the trip distribution used for the peak hour traffic assignment.
The trip distribution analysis was discussed and agreed to in the
scoping meeting and is contained in Appendix A.
' Background Traffic Projections
' Figure 5 shows the short range (2009) background traffic
projections. Background traffic projections for the short range
future horizon were obtained by reviewing the NFRRTP and recent
' traffic studies in the area and factoring the traffic volumes by 2.3%
per year compounded annually. Traffic from a proposed Regional
Biocontainment Laboratory northwest of this development was included in
the background traffic forecasts. It is assumed that the west leg of
West Elizabeth Street will have some "cut through" traffic from the
Ponds Development. This adjustment is also shown in Figure 5.
Trip Assignment
Trip assignment is how the generated and distributed trips are
expected to be loaded on the street system. The assigned trips are the
resultant of the trip distribution process. Figure 6 shows the site
generated peak hour traffic assignment. Figures 7 and 8 show the
respective total (site plus background) short range (2009) and long
range (2025) peak hour traffic at the Overland/Elizabeth intersection.
Signal Warrants
As a matter of policy, traffic signals are not installed at any
location unless warrants are met according to the Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices. Based upon the short range (2009) peak hour
traffic forecasts, peak hour signal warrants will not be met at the
Overland/Elizabeth intersection. In the long range (2025) future, a
peak hour signal warrant will be met at the Overland/Elizabeth
intersection in the afternoon peak hour. Signal warrant analyses are
provided in Appendix D. Signals would not, be installed based upon
meeting one peak hour warrant. As traffic increases in the area, a
comprehensive signal warrant analysis should be conducted periodically.
The need for a future signal will be determined by the City of Fort
Collins.
0
SITE PLAN
Figure 3
8
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The Bella Vira Development is a proposed residential development,
located in the southwest quadrant of the Overland/Elizabeth intersection
in Fort Collins. Figure 3 shows a site plan of the Bella Vira
Development. The short range analysis (Year 2009) includes development
of the Bella Vira Development and an appropriate increase in background
traffic. The long range future was assumed to be the year 2025. The
site plan shows one main public access to the Bella Vira Development via
the future extension of West Elizabeth Street. Two other streets will
provide connections to the Ponds Development to the south.
Trip Generation
Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a
development such as this upon the existing and proposed street system.
Trip generation information contained in Trip Generation, 7th Edition,
ITE was used to estimate trips that would be generated by the
proposed/expected uses at this site. A trip is defined as a one-way
vehicle movement from origin to destination. The Bella Vira
Development proposes to have 60 Single Family dwelling units and 25
townhomes. Table 2 shows the expected trip generation on a daily and
peak hour basis. The trip generation of the Bella Vira Development
resulted in 720 daily trip ends, 56 morning peak hour trip ends, and
74 afternoon peak hour trip ends.
TABLE 2
Trip Generation
Code Use. Size, AWD7 E ` 'AM Peak Hour . ; A Peak. Hour
> t Rate Tnps . Rate In Rate Out Rate: In. Y Rate , Out;
210 Single Family Housing 60 D.U. 9.57 1 570 1 0.19 11 T0.5J 34 0.64 39 0.37 1 22
220 1 Townhomes 1 25 D.U. 1 5.86 1 150 10.07 1 2 10.37 1 9 10.35 1 9 10.17 1 4
TOTAL I 720 I I 13 I I 43 I I 48 I I 26
7
Pedestrian Facilities
Sidewalks exist along both West Elizabeth Street and Overland Trail,
except for segments along Overland Trail (west side) adjacent to this site
and the CSU Equine center. The nearest pedestrian crosswalk is at the
Overland/Prospect intersection. This site is within 1320 feet of: existing
residential areas, and institutional uses.
Bicycle Facilities
There are bicycle facilities along West Elizabeth Street and
Overland Trail.
Transit Facilities
This area is served (within 1320 feet) by transit routes 2, 3,
and 64 (when CSU is in session).
rg
' Existing Operation
The key intersections were evaluated using techniques provided in
the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. Using the peak hour traffic shown in
Figure 2, the peak hour operation is shown in Table 1. Calculation
forms are provided in Appendix C. A description of level of service for
signalized and unsignalized intersections from the 2000 Highway Capacity
Manual and a table showing the Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards
' (intersections) are also provided in Appendix C. The Overland/Elizabeth
intersection operates acceptably during both the morning and afternoon
peak hours. The Bella Vira Development site is in an area termed low
density mixed use residential area. At unsignalized arterial/collector
' or arterial/local intersections, in low density mixed use residential
areas, acceptable operation is level of service F. In such areas, it is
expected that there would be delays to the minor street movements during
the peak hours. This is considered to be normal in urban areas. The
Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards do not address unsignalized
arterial/arterial intersections. City staff has determined that level
I of service E for any movement would be acceptable at arterial/arterial
intersections.
In recent research, it was found that the intersection analysis
software (HCS and Synchro) did not reasonably predict the observed
delay at two-way stop sign controlled intersections. In an effort to
be as accurate as possible, the analysis technique was calibrated by
' modifying the critical gaps to match the observed delay for the minor
street movements. This research found that reducing the critical gap
by 20 to 30 percent results in a more accurate delay calculation. In
' a meeting with the City of Fort Collins Traffic Engineer, it was
agreed the reducing the critical gap by 20 percent could be applied to
the Overland Trail/Elizabeth intersection.
TABLE 1
Current Peak Hour Operation
.Intersection " Movement Level of Sernce
AM PM
WB LT C C
Overland/Elizabeth WB RT B B
(stop sign) WB APPROACH B C
SB LT A A
5
0
N M 71/70
31/83
no
N m
co ti
N M
v
v
--w- AM/PM
RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
4
A&
N
West Elizabeth
Street
Figure 2
' SCALE: 1 "=1000'
SITE LOCATION
3
Figure 1
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The location of the Bella Vira Development is shown in Figure 1.
It is important that a thorough understanding of the existing conditions
be presented.
Land Use
Land uses in the area are residential, industrial, and
institutional. There are residential uses to the west, east and south
of this site. There is an industrial (CDC) use to the northwest of this
site. There is an institutional (CSU Equine Center) use to the north of
this site. The center of Fort Collins lies to the east of the Bella
Vira Development.
Streets
The primary streets near the Bella Vira Development site are
Overland Trail and West Elizabeth Street. Overland Trail is adjacent
to (east of) the Bella Vira Development site. It is a north -south
street designated as a four -lane arterial street on the Fort Collins
Master Street Plan. Currently, it has a two-lane general cross
section with a center turn lane. The Overland/Elizabeth intersection
has stop sign control on Elizabeth Street. At the Overland/Elizabeth
intersection, Overland Trail has a southbound left -turn lane, one
through lane in each direction, and a northbound right -turn lane. The
posted speed on this section of Overland Trail is 40 mph.
West Elizabeth Street (future extension) is north of the Bella
Vira Development site. East of Overland Trail, it is an east -west
street designated as a two-lane arterial street on the Fort Collins
Master Street Plan. Currently, it has a two-lane general cross
section with a center turn lane. West Elizabeth Street terminates at
Overland Trail. At the Overland/Elizabeth intersection, West
Elizabeth Street has an eastbound left -turn and right -turn lane. The
posted speed on this section of West Elizabeth Street is 30 mph.
Existing Traffic
Recent peak hour traffic volumes at
intersection are shown in Figure 2.
Overland/Elizabeth intersection were obtained
count data is provided in Appendix B.
the Overland/Elizabeth
Traffic counts at the
in February 2005. Raw
2
' I. INTRODUCTION
' This transportation impact study (TIS) addresses the capacity,
geometric, and control requirements at and near the proposed Bella Vira
Development. The Bella Vira Development site is located west of
Overland Trail and across from West Elizabeth Street in Fort Collins,
Colorado. This TIS is a revision, which addresses staff comments
regarding adequate public facilities (APF) issues at the Overland
' Trail/West Elizabeth intersection and queuing on the west leg of West
Elizabeth Street.
' During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made
with the project developer (OFP Development Co.), the project engineer
(Jim Sell Design), the Fort Collins Traffic Engineering Staff, and the
' Fort Collins Transportation Planning Staff. The Transportation Impact
Study Base Assumptions form is provided in Appendix A. This full
transportation impact study generally conforms to the format set forth
' in the Fort Collins transportation impact study guidelines as contained
in the "Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards" (LCUASS). The study
involved the following steps:
- Collect physical, traffic, and development data;
- Perform trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment;
- Determine peak hour traffic volumes;
- Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses on key
intersections;
- Analyze signal warrants;
- Conduct level of service evaluation of pedestrian, bicycle, and
transit modes of transportation.
1
LIST OF FIGURES
' Figure
Page
' 1.
Site
Location ........................................
3
2.
Recent Peak Hour Traffic .............................
4
' 3.
Site
Plan ............................................
8
4.
Trip
Distribution
....................................
10
S.
Short
Range (2009)
Background Peak Hour Traffic ......
11
6.
Site
Generated Peak Hour Traffic .....................
12
7.
Short
Range (2009)
Total Peak Hour Traffic ...........
13
8.
Long
Range (2025)
Total Peak Hour Traffic ............
14
. 9.
Short
Range (2009)
Geometry ..........................
18
'
10.
Long
Range (2025)
Geometry ...........................
19
APPENDIX
A Base Assumptions Form
B Recent Peak Hour Traffic
C Existing Peak Hour Operation/Level of Service Descriptions/Fort
Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards
D Signal Warrants
E Short Range Background Peak Hour Operation
F Short Range Total Peak Hour Operation
G Long Range Total Peak Hour Operation
H Pedestrian/Bicycle/Transit Level of Service Worksheets
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. Introduction ......................................... 1
II. Existing Conditions .................................. 2
LandUse ............................................. 2
Streets.............................................. 2
Existing Traffic ..................................... 2
Existing Operation ................................... 5
Pedestrian Facilities ................................ 6
Bicycle Facilities ................................... 6
Transit Facilities ................................... 6
III. Proposed Development ................................. 7
Trip Generation ...................................... 7
Trip Distribution .................................... 9
Background Traffic Projections ....................... 9
Trip Assignment ...................................... 9
Signal Warrants ...................................... 9
Operation Analysis and Geometry ...................... 15
Roundabout Analysis .................................. 15
Pedestrian Level of Service .......................... 20
Bicycle Level of Service ............................. 21
Transit Level of Service ............................. 21
IV. Conclusions .......................................... 22
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1.
Current Peak Hour
Operation ..........................
5
2.
Trip Generation ......................................
7
3.
Short Range (2009)
Background Peak Hour Operation ....
16
4.
Short Range (2009)
Total Peak Hour Operation .........
16
5.
Long Range (2025)
Total Peak Hour Operation ..........
17
BELLA VIRA DEVELOPMENT
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
APRIL 2006
Prepared for:
John Minatta
OFP Development Co.
2037 Lexington Court
Fort Collins, CO 80526
Prepared by:
DELICH ASSOCIATES
2272 Glen Haven Drive
Loveland, CO 80538
Phone: 970-669-2061
FAX: 970-669-5034
PP�p REC,�S,T
Qom. �tiW J, Fh
t5� ago ,