Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY CHURCH - PDP - 31-07 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - TRAFFIC STUDYy V m u a N 0 ; > Eii V J ~1 u1 O >' V a) O C 'J v V �ZVI v � � y .r m N y n it .. V C y ^' U - N O � � n 2 C � C a -- � y L �¢ Pedestrian LOS Worksheet Project Location Classification O T F4 67 � t7xn Level afServroe (mireoun ber;.od oepcolectb>x�on ) . Ar�ltYitfiun'1320` A355♦�Oil . �y� _ l..t✓ a •�..�Y+ (Y..J:' :; .. IJC-j"BoKHovD TO �r tD&UTrAL Minimum C. C. C_ C- 1 4,,lzT6l-&AS-r Actual D C D C Proposed . D C T C- rEi c. To . Minimum C C, C. G G 2 FIST ,��VS Actual ao-wBkrtA� Prq)o� A A r3 C Minimal G C C C. 3 V6'r•A (G/C�pr+tM6�tYAt A D A C C To 40�4 D A G IQPA (L TM�A T Minimum L C— C_ C_ C_ 4 ec—sibs4mk Actual li D 'D C Proposed D C l^t�t)Co�tll�rxeD G4� r�� Minimum C_ - C C_ L 5 Actual 13 D j) C ftposed 13 D c Minimum. 6 Actual Proposed Minimum 7 Actual Proposed Minimum 8 Actual Pmposed Minimum 9 Actual Pmposed Minimum 10 Actual 3 � ■ 0 SCALE: 1 "=500' PEDESTRIAN INFLUENCE AREA 3Z N BURLINGTON N No Text 3: Buckingham & Lemay 3: Buckingham & Lemay Short Total Sunday with 0.80 critical gap adjustment 9/14/2007 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4;. 4 Vi T T* Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 15 10. 165 5 5 0 135 495 5 0 530 25 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly flow rate (vph) 18 12 194 6 .6 0 148 544 5 0 582 27 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (f /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 1440 1442 596 1626 1453 547 610 549 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 596 596 843 843 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 844 846 782 610 vCu, unblocked vol 1440 1442 596 1626 1453 547 610 549 tC, single (s) *5.7 *5.2 *5.0 *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 % 92 95 68 95 97 100 85 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 224 235 616. 120 216 537 969 1020 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 224 12 148 549 0 610 Volume Left 18 6 148 0 0 0 Volume Right 194 0 0 5 0 27 cSH 503 154 969 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.44 0.08 0.15 0.32 0.00 0.36 Queue Length 95th (ft) 56 6 13 . 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 17.7 30.3 9.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C D A Approach Delay (s) 17.7 30.3 2.0 0.0 Approach LOS C D Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value Synchro 6 Light Report Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Page 1 :�O 3: Buckingham & Lemay 3: Buckingham & Lemay Short Total PM with 0.80 critical gap adjustment 9/14/2007 EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBF Lane Configurations .T+ ,+ Vi T+ T+ Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 5 5 75 5 5 5 55 995 10 5 645 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.89 0.89 0.89 Hourly flow rate (vph) 6 6 88 6 6 6 59 1059 11 6 725 17 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 1929 1931 733 2008 1934 1064 742 1069 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 744 744 1181 1181 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 1184 1186 827 753 vCu, unblocked vol 1929 1931 733 2008 1934 1064 742 1069 tC, single (s) *5.7 *5.2 *5.0 *5.7 *5.2 *5.0 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 4.7 4.2 4.7 4.2 IF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 97 97 84 96 97 98 93 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 169 191 539 145 186 388 865 652 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 100 18 59 1069 6 742 Volume Left 6 6 59 0 6 0 Volume Right 88 6 0 11 0 17 cSH 436 202 865 1700 652 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.23 0.09 0.07 0.63 0.01 0.44 Queue Length 95th (ft) 22 7 5 0 1 0 Control Delay (s) 15.7 24.5 9.5 0.0 10.6 0.0 Lane LOS C C A B Approach Delay (s) 15.7 24.5 0.5 0.1 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value Synchro 6 Light Report Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Pagel .a 7. 3: Buckingham & Lemay 3: Buckingham & Lemay Short Total AM with 0.80 critical gap adjustment 9/14/2007 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 44 4+ T1+ Vi T+. Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 10 5 35 5 5 0 65 385 5 0 870 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly flow rate (vph) 12 6 41 6 6 0 72 428 6 0 1024 24 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (f /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 1610 1613 1035 1643 1622 .431 1047 433 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1035 1035 575 575 . vC2, stage 2 conf vol 575 578 1068 1047 vCu, unblocked vol 1610 1613 1035 1643 1622 431 1047 433 tC, single (s) *5.7 *5.2 *5.0 *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 4.01 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 94 97 .90 96 97. 100 89 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 210 225 400 166 205 625 665 1126 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SIB 2 Volume Total 59 .12 72 433 0 1047 Volume Left 12 6 72 0 0 0 Volume Right 41 0 0 6 0 24 cSH 318 184 665 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.19 0.06 0.11 0.25 0.00 0.62 Queue Length 95th (ft) 17 5 9 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 18.9 26.0 11.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C D B Approach Delay (s) 18.9 26.0 1.6 0.0 Approach LOS C D Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value Synchro 6 Light Report Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Page 1 Z �. ' 6: Buckingham & Site Access 6: Buckingham &_Site Access Short Total Sunday 9/13/2007 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR ' Lane Configurations f, 4 �► Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume.(veh/h) 25 45 140 25 55 165 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly flow rate (vph) 29 53 165 29 65 194 Pedestrians ' Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage ' Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 82 415 56 vC1, stage 1 conf vol ' vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 82 415 56 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 89 88 81 ' cM capacity (veh/h) 1515 529 1011 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2. Volume Total 82 194 65 194 ' Volume Left 0 165 65 0 Volume Right 53 0 0 194 . cSH 1700 1515 529 1011 Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.11 . 0.12 0.19 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 9 10 18 Control Delay (s) 0.0 6.6 12.7 9.4 Lane LOS A B A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 6.6 10.2 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary ' Average Delay 7.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 25.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 1 15 Synchro 6 Light Report Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Page 1 27 6: Buckingham & Site Access 6: Buckingham & Site Access Short Total PM 8/20/2007 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations T+ ,f Vi if Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 80 5 5 70 5 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly flow rate (vph) 94 6 6 82 6 6 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 100 191 97 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 100 191 97 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 99 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 1493 795 959 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 Volume Total 100 88 6 6 Volume Left 0 6 6 0 Volume Right 6 0 0 6 cSH 1700 1493 795 959 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 1 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.5 9.6 8.8 Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.5 9.2 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.8% ICU Level of Service A. Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Synchro 6 Light Report Page 2 6: Buckingham & Site Access 6: Buckingham & Site Access Short Total AM 8/20/2007 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations T * +T . Sign Control Free ' Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 45 5 10 80 5 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly flow rate (vph) 53 6 12 94 6 6 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 59 174 56 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 59 174 56 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 99 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 1545 810 1011 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 Volume Total 59 106 6 6 Volume Left 0 12 6 0 Volume Right 6 0 0 6 cSH 1700 1545 810 1011 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 1 1 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.9 9.5 8.6 Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.9 9.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 6 Light Report Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Page 2 3: Buckingham.& Lemay 3: Buckingham & Lemay Short Total Sunday 9/13/2007 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR_ SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4r 4 1 1, y, . Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 15 10 165 5 5 0 135 495 5 0 530 25 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 ' 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly flow rate (vph) 18 12 194 6 6 0 148 544 5 0 582 27 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (f /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 1440 1442 596 1626 1453 547 610 549 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 596 596 843 843 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 844 846 782 610 vCu, unblocked vol 1440 1442 596 1626 1453, 547 610 549 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 89 93 61 89 96 100 85 . 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 156 168 503 53 149 537 969 1020 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 224 12 148 549 0 610 Volume Left 18 6 148 0 0 0 Volume Right 194 0 0 5 0 27 cSH 393 78 969 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.57 0.15 0.15 0.32 0.00 0.36 Queue Length 95th (ft) 85 13 13 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 25.6 58.9 9.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS D F A Approach Delay (s) 25.6 58.9 2.0 0.0 Approach LOS. D F Intersection Summary Average Delay. 5.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 6 Light Report Matthew J. Delich , P. E., Page 1 Z4 3: Buckingham & Lemay 3: Buckingham & Lemay Short Total PM 8/20/2007 -♦ ♦- 4 t ,► Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T+ Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 5 5 75 5 5 5 55 995 10 5 645 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.89 0.89 0.89 Hourly flow rate (vph) 6 6 88 .6 6 6 59 1059 11 6 725 17 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 1929 1931 733 2008 1934 1064 742 1069 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 744 744 1181 1181 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 1184 1186 827 753 vCu, unblocked vol 1929 1931 733 2008 1934 1064 742 1069 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 94 - 95 79 93 95 98 93 99 cM capacity(veh/h) 104 122 421 86 119 271 865 652 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 100 18 59 1069 6 742 Volume Left 6 6 59 0 6 0 Volume Right 88 6 0 11 0. 17 cSH 318 126 865 1700 652 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.31 0.14 0.07 0.63 0.01 0.44 Queue Length 95th (ft) 33 12 5 0 1 .0 Control Delay (s) 21.4 38.2 9.5 0.0 10.6 0.0 Lane LOS C E A B Approach Delay (s) 21.4 38.2 0.5 0.1 Approach LOS C E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Synchro 6 Light Report Page 1 3: Buckingham & Lemay 3: Buckingham & Lemay Short Total AM 8/20/2007 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 4 1 ll� 1 A Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 10 5 35 5 5 0 65 385 5 0 870 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly flow rate (vph) 12 6 41 6 6 0 72 428 6 0 1024 24 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 1610 1613 1035 1643 1622 431 1047 433 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1035 1035 575 575 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 575 578 1068 1047 vCu, unblocked vol 1610 1613 1035 1643 1622 431 1047 433 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 92 96 85. 94 96 100 89 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 140 154 281 92 131 625 665 1126 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 59 12 72 433 0 1047 Volume Left 12 6 72 0 0 0 Volume Right 41 0 0 6 0 24 cSH 219 108 665 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.27 0.11 0.11 0.25 0.00 0.62 Queue Length 95th (ft) 26 9 9 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 27.3 42.4 11.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS D E B Approach Delay (s) 27.3 42.4 1.6 0.0 Approach LOS D E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Synchro 6 Light Report Page 1 ZZ APPENDIX E 3: Buckingham & Lemay Short Bkgrd Sunday with 0.80 critical ap adjustment 9/14/2007 �' -► 7 '� �, t �► 1 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations 44 .T* 14 T+ Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ' Volume (veh/h) 5 10 10 5 5 0 5 495 5 0 530 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91, 0.91 0.91 Hourly flow rate (vph) 6 12 12 6 6 0 5 544 5 0 582 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 1149 1151 591 1158 1157 547 599 549 vC1, stage 1 conf vol . 591 591 558 558 ' vC2, stage 2 conf vol 558 560 600 599 vCu, unblocked vol 1149 1151 591 1158 1157 547 599 549 tC, single (s) *5.7 *5.2 *5.0 *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 % 98 96 98 98 98 100 99 100 ' cM capacity (veh/h) 305 312 619 296 310 537 978 1020 . Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 29 ' 12 5 549 0 599 ' Volume Left 6 6 5 0 0 0 Volume Right 12 0 0 5 0 16 cSH 387 303 978 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.04 0.01 0.32 .0.00 0.35 ' Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 3 0 . 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 15.1 17.4 8.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C C A ' Approach Delay (s) 15.1 17.4 0.1 0.0 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary ' Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' * User Entered Value ' Matthew J. Delich , P. E. z0C.. Synchro 6 Light Report Page 1 3: Buckingham & Lemay Short Bkgrd PM with 0.80 critical gap adjustment 9/14/2007 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL S13T SBR ' Lane Configurations 44 +T+ T* Vi 14 . Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade. 0% 0% 0% 0% ' Volume (veh/h) 5 5 70 5 5 5 50 995 10 5 645 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 6.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.89 0.89 0.89 Hourly flow rate (vph) 6 6 82 6 6 6 53 1059 11 6 725 17 Pedestrians ' Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (f /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 1918 1920 733 1991 1923 1064 742 .1069 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 744 744 1170 1170 ' vC2, stage 2 conf vol 1174 1176 821 753 vCu, unblocked vol 1918 1920 733 1991 1923 1064 742 1069 tC, single (s) *5.7 *5.2 *5.0 *5.7 *5.2 *5.0 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 % 97 97 85 96 97 98 94 99 ' cM capacity(veh/h) 171 193 539 149 189 388 865 652 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 . SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total_ 94 18 53 1069 6 742 ' Volume Left 6 6 53 0 6 0. Volume Right 82 6 0 11 0 17 cSH 433 206 865 1700 652 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.22 0.09 0.06 0.63 0.01 0.44 ' Queue Length 95th (ft) 20 7 5 0 1 0 Control Delay (s) 15.6 24.2 9.4 0.0 10.6 0.0 Lane LOS C C A B Approach Delay (s) 15.6 24.2 0.4 0.1 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary ' Average Delay 1.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value ' Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Synchro 6 Light Report Page 1 zoo 3: Buckingham & Lemay Short Bkgrd AM with 0.80 critical gap adjustment 9/14/2007 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +14 . 4 � j, T4 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 10 5 30 5 5 0 55 385 5 0 870 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.85 0,85 0.85 Hourly flow rate (vph) 12 6 35 6 6 0 61 428 6 0 1024 24 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 1588 1591 1035 1615 1600 431 1047 433 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1035 1035 553 553 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 553 556 1062 1047 vCu, unblocked vol 1588 1591 1035 1615 1600 431 1047 433 tC, single (s) *5.7 *5.2 *5.0 *5.7 *5.2 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 4.7 4.2 4.7 4.2 IF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 95 97 91 97 97 100 91 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 214 230. 400 176 212 625 665 1126 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 53 12 61 433 0 1047 Volume Left 12 6 61 0 0 0 Volume Right 35 0 0 6 0 24 cSH 314 192 665 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.17 0.06 0.09 0.25 0.00 0.62 Queue Length 95th (ft) 15 5 8 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 18.8 24.9 11.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C C B Approach Delay (s) 18.8 24.9 1.4 0.0 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value Synchro 6 Light Report Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Page 1 2oA 3: Buckingham & Lemay Short Bkgrd Sunday 12/11/2006 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 444 44� R 14 Vi T4 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 5 10 10 5 5 0 5 495 5 0 530 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly flow rate (vph) 6 12 12 6 6 0 5 544 5 0 582 16 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (f /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 1149 1151 591 1158 1157 547 599 549 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 591 591 558 558 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 558 560 600 599 vCu, unblocked vol 1149 1151 591 1158 1157 547 599 549 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 97 95 98 97 97 100 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 228 237 507 219 235 537 978 1020 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 29 12 5 549 0 599 Volume Left 6 6 5 0 0 0 Volume Right 12 0 0 5 0 16 cSH 298 227 978 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.10 0.05 0.01 0.32 0.00 0.35 Queue Length 95th (ft) 8 4 0 0 0 0 Control Delay Is) 18.4 21.7 8.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C C A Approach Delay (s) 18.4 21.7 0.1 0.0 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Synchro 6 Light Report , Page 1 <n ' 3: Buckingham & Lemay Short Bkgrd PM 12/11/2006 -� --v t 1 d Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4� #14 Vi T* R 14 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ' Volume (veh/h) 5 5 70 5 5 5 50 995 10 5 645 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.89 0.89 0.89 Hourly flow rate (vph) 6 6 82 6 6 6 53 1059 11 6 725 17 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 1918 1920 733 1991 1923 1064 742 1069 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 744 744 1170 1170 ' vC2, stage 2 conf vol 1174 1176 821 753 vCu, unblocked vol 1918 1920 733 1991 1923 1064 742 1069 tC, single (s) 7,1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 ' tC, 2 stage (s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 94 95 80 93 95 98 94 99 ' cM capacity(veh/h) 106 124 421 89 121 271 865 652 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 94 18 53 1069 6 742 Volume Left 6 6 53 0 6 0 ' Volume Right 82 6 0 11 0 17 cSH 315 129 865 1700 652 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.30 0.14 0.06 0.63 0.01 0.44 Queue Length 95th (ft) 31 11 5 0 1 0 Control Delay (s) 21.2 37.2 9.4 0.0 10.6 0.0 Lane LOS C E A B .' Approach Delay (s) 21.2 37.2 0.4 0.1 Approach LOS C E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Synchro 6 Light Report Page 1 3: Buckingham & Lemay Short Bkgrd AM 12/11/2006 t /0' �► d Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4i 4, Vi T+ Vi 1� Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 10 5 30 5 5 0 55 385 5 0 870 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly flow rate (vph) 12 6 35 6 6 0 61 428 6 0 1024 24 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 1588 1591 1035 1615 1600 431. 1047 433 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1035 1035 553 553 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 553 556 1062 1047 vCu, unblocked vol 1588 1591 1035 1615 1600 431 1047 433 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 92 96 87 94 96 100 91 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 143 158 281 102 137 625 665 1126 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 53 12 61 433 0 1047 Volume Left 12 6 61 0 0 0 Volume Right 35 0 0 6 0 24 cSH 216 117 665 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.24 0.10 0.09 0.25 0.00 0.62 Queue Length 95th (ft) 23 8 8 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 27.0 39.3 11.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS D E B Approach Delay (s) 27.0 39.3 1.4 0.0 Approach LOS D E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Synchro 6 Light Report , Page 1 1' APPENDIX D 17 w D 0 I am momm ilim ummorillimHMO um 0 O Co O d 0 Cl 0- 0 o 0 O Lo O a N M O _M Q O O N_ Co O 0 0 0 t- I 0 O ti O O O O Lo M N _ _ (L a u, o m Lo a Q m m w w MINOR STREET APPROACH - VPH � d L L N N Q O O C O E-a)m Ew m Ce m m o a=�C.nLw Q � m3 O t m m� 0om LL 0 , 0 O �' ; m 1 rm- �- m rn QW ago 03 N C W w o m ' J y � o HU °L W= o E W n 3 �� m > 3 O O Lnom � L L Q 0.m Q 2 zm e G Z Y U m 5� L J a Z Q D 0 fQ a. r 0 0 Z 9 F- w 0 APPENDIX C 6 Table 4-3 Fort Collins (City Limits) Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (intersections) Land Use (from structure plan) Other corridors within: Intersection type Commercial Mixed use Low density 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 NIA 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 ZI UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level -of -Service Average Total Delay seclveh A _< 10 B >10and<15 C > 15 and _< 25 D >25 and < 35 E > 35 and < 50 F > 50 13 3: Buckingham & Lemay Recent Sunday with 0.80 critical gap adjustment 9/14/2007 ' Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +T+ +�k 4:k +T+ Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ' Volume (veh/h) 2 6 6 1 3 0 5 396 5 0 421 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 .0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 7 7 1 4 0 5 435 5 0 463 11 ' Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage ' Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 919 920 468 928 923 438 474 441 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 919 920 468 928 923 438 474 441 tC, single (s) *5.7 *5.2 *5.0 *5.7 *5.2 6.2 4.1 4.1 tc, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 98 99 100 99 100 99 100 tcM capacity (veh/h) 358 378 697 348 377 619 1088 1119 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 16 5 446 474 ' Volume Left 2 1 5 0 Volume Right 7 0 5 11 cSH 465 369 1088 1119 Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.00 ' Queue Length 95th (ft) 3 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 13.0 14.9 0.2 0.0 Lane LOS B B A ' Approach Delay (s) 13.0 14.9 0.2 0.0 Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary ' Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 t* User Entered Value ' Synchro 6 Light Report Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Page 1 12C 3: Buckingham & Lemay Recent PM with 0.80 critical gap adjustment 9/14/2007 ' 41 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations .T+ 4, 43, #14 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ' Volume (veh/h) 1 2 66 2 1 2 34 798 8 1 509 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.89 0.89 0.89 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 2 78 2 1 2 36 849 9 1 .572 9 Pedestrians ' Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage ' Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1507 1508 576 1583 1509 853 581 857 vC1, stage 1 conf vol ' vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1507 1508 576 1583 1509 853 581 857 tC, single (s) *5.7 *5.2 *5.0 *5.7 *5.2 *5.0 4.1 4.1 ' tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 99 88 98 99 100 96 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 173 202 628 138 . 202 479 993 783 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 81 6 894 582 ' Volume Left 1 2 36 1 Volume Right 78 2 9 9 cSH 571 212 993 783 Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.03 0.04 0.00 ' Queue Length 95th (ft) 12 2 3 0 Control Delay (s) 12.3 22.5 1.0 0.0 Lane LOS B C A A Approach Delay (s) 12.3 22.5 1.0 0.0 Approach LOS B C Intersection Summary ' Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value !' Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Synchro 6 Light Report Page 1 3: Buckingham & Lemay Recent AM with 0.80 critical gap adjustment 9/14/2007 ' Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations 4� Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ' Volume (veh/h) 8, 2 25 3 0 0 38 309 2 0 677 19 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 2 29 4 0 0 42 343 2 0 796 22 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage ' Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1237 1238 808 1267 1248 344 819 346 vC1, stage 1 conf vol t vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1237 1238 808 1267 1248 344 819 346 tC, single (s) *5.7 *5.2 *5.0 *5.7 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 ' tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 96 99 94 98 100 100 95 100 ' cM capacity (veh/h) 239 262 501 215 164 698 810 1213 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 41 4 388 819 ' Volume Left 9 4 42 0 Volume Right 29 0 2 22 cSH 385 215 810 1213 Volume to Capacity 0.11 0.02 0.05 0.00 ' Queue Length 95th (ft) 9 1 4 0 Control Delay (s) 15.5 22.0 1.6 0.0 Lane LOS C C A ' Approach Delay (s) 15.5 22.0 1.6 0.0 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 ' User Entered Value ' Matthew J. Delich , P. E. iZ A Synchro 6 Light Report Page 1 3: Buckingham & Lemay Recent Sunday 12/7/2006 t �� �♦- �� t a 4 r Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4� 4� #14 444 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 2 6 6 1 3 0 5 396 • 5 0 421 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 7 7 1 4 0 5 435 5 0 463 11 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 919 920 468 928 923 438 474 441 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 919 920 468 928 923 438 474 441 IC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 IC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 97 99 100 99 100 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 248 270 595 240 269 619 1088 1119 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 16 5 446 474 Volume Left 2 1 5 0 Volume Right 7 0 5 11 cSH 347 261 1088 1119 Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 15.9 19.1 0.2 0.0 Lane LOS C C A Approach Delay (s) 15.9 19.1 0.2 0.0 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Synchro 6 Light Report ' Page 1 /Z. 3: Buckingham & Lemay Recent PM 12/7/2006 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations 44 44 4� 44 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 1- 2 66 2 1 2 34 798 8 1 509 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.89 0.89 0.89 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 2 78 2 1 2 36 849 9 1 572 9 Pedestrians ' Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1507 1508 576 1583 1509 853 581 857 vC1, stage 1 conf vol ' vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1507 1508 576 1583 1509 853 581 857 IC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 ' tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 98 85 97 99 99 96 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 95 116 517 71 116 359 993 783 ' Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 81 6 894 582 Volume Left 1 2 36 1 ' Volume Right 78 2 9 9 cSH 444 118 993 783 Volume to Capacity 0.18 0.05 0.04 0.00 ' Queue Length 95th (ft) 17 4 3 0 Control Delay (s) 14.9 37.0 1.0 0.0 Lane LOS B E A A Approach Delay (s) 14.9 37.0 1.0 0.0 Approach LOS B E Intersection Summary ' Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Synchro 6 Light Report Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Page 1 it 3: Buckingham & Lemay Recent AM 12/7/2006 41 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 440 4� 4�- Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 8 2 25 3 0 0 38 309 2 0 677 19 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 2 29 4 0 0 42 343 2 0 796 22 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1237 1238 808 1267 1248 344 819 346 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1237 1238 808 1267 1248 344 819 346 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 94 99 92 97 100 100 95 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 147 167 381 128 164 698 810 1213 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 41 4 388 819 Volume Left 9 4 42 0 Volume Right 29 0 2 22 cSH 265 128 810 1213 Volume to Capacity 0.16 0.03 0.05 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 14 2 4 0 Control Delay (s) 21.1 34.0 1.6 0.0 Lane LOS C D A Approach Delay (s) 21.1 34.0 1.6 0.0 Approach LOS C D Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Synchro 6 Light Report Page 1 /D APPENDIX B LU Cc 0 cc = LL. CM U) LU > Q L: W o ILU co M,= LLJ ow 2 C-4 :)- z d i Lu 0 > m Co 42. 0 > 0 to LL. 0 fA2CCD 0 LU -3 al :3 (D > LU C4 CO) Ln Li co 9 ip O a) E cc N O CNI' CDO C) c> CD C> CD O C CD Co. C) C)CV E ISO. Cl) nc ca IN W CD O C) CN Cj C%j LU C) CIA C=o O W C> CN cm (D to m im ca CD Nco S co 0 w J C> C> CD C> c) CD E C> ca P C) C) CD. M co Z _j CD, m CN CD C> C> 0 c U30 R In co -W I r,: � C3, co I � a! CD C:o I C30 I C3, I C> I C* I czo I to I = I q 4 -At 3 1 IC03,1 'too I 'wo) � = L--] 1-1 0 75 0 (L) E LLI = m cc ic —j C .) LL. IM LU LU L) L: a ,.- R M� 9 � : 902 < Z3 = 06 > m o Wu 'o, two LL. 0 < W=ds 0 Z LU LU CD > c LU C JC c cm CD C? Lm to 11 11 ir co Aco gn 01 -5 m c S P� O C-1: 77, O C> O O C> C> cp ;o is Co C, C> <D C> C) rn (D C> CIJ C) 04 E m co CD C) C) LU CD, LO C> --r a* cm O r� Go 0 t co I, Cb Lr) C* :E C%I M CM 04 CNI 0 m Al t-- LO m --:r --:r 04 m m to 0 .0 a ca RA .. . . . . .. am Fool W C) C> N C) CD C14 r - co 00 f.0 -�t Fj u) Tnr " !0- r-- co f-- r� , r�� 1 0-2 to C%J 1 E 0 E C in C3, 40 W� C2, CD I I C2 M - ji Coln MCo UI* 14* I w cs Itli, I R I,=a! I tell 1 I V 1 IC04,11 V, I VI, I ICTI"Ic> C> C> C> 0': 0011 , C> C> muumuu R, M. MI MI MI m E-3 o o o o K%L c"Mcfl to C.13� 00 C:� %I � m m c"a C* m cn " I " I cn Cno CD c> cn. I CD, I CD o. Icolmls � C4 rn CD, m co CD Cq 0 FQL M-co Ul) C1 I I � co aloollc"j 1216 R �2t� JtsTv-tFiUTioOU Poo" `7"n CCU lee, w 'i�ocgwc"" I�tE�u P, M ju r N •u PoF�X.t A-ri AJ �U� 1 Q,Z��lIA 5 /�7 i, 1 (A Au Aof 1) LJ 1 'Y V Trip Generation Code use Size AVVDTE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Rase Trips mate In Rye Out Rate In Race Out litaUl�Gb� Z4.SK5 F Q.(( 2Z3 ,v L2O p.39 to m 43 8 0.34- 0.32 U Se/lYs b,5 2 0-33 1$Z 0.39 Zl � 0 LAIC / PA &; IN 3 Chapter 4 — Ariachments Attachment A Transportation Impact Study Base Assumptions Project Information Project Name Mo()krAt,u VI&IO O-MMUutr Couecf ProjectLocation SW QVAWRArui CP LomAY rJUe TIS Assumptions Type of Study Full: �VO Intermediate: 0 K,9,,up Study Area Boundaries North: $vej:�i,UG K Atit. South:4ac.Gss East: I -&MA V west: AccG-5,5 Study Years Short Range: Z 00 9 LM9 Range. $ i{ ti Future Traffic Growth Rate Q e, o Study Intersections 1. All access drives 5. 2. LSA4A Svc 144 6. 3. 7. 4. 8. Time Period for Study AM: 7:00-9:00 1 PM: 4:00-6:00 SatNeon: Trip Generation RatesP&P- ( Y y(� A r-rAcawl Trip Adjustment Factors Passby: VIA Captive Captive k// Overall Trip Disftb on SEE ATTACHED SKETCH Mode Split Assumptions WA Committed Roadway Improvements erry cvtbtd Other Traffic Studies L,aeot-U ,G(.ycasp- Areas Requiring Special Study /� 7 Vic, Date: A1QyC—,vt S&E 16710 2 oo & Traffic Engineer b (- I C v S O C (A-7-679 Local Entity Engineer. LWftW COMW Urban Area Street Standards— R"eaW wW Rimed Odobw 1. 2M Adopted by Lmtww County. City of Loveland. My of Fort COFM Page 4-35 APPENDIX A ' IV. CONCLUSIONS ' This study assessed the impacts of the Mountain View Community Church 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 the Mountain View Community Church is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. At full development, the ' Mountain. View Community Church will generate approximately 210 weekday daily trip ends, 17 weekday morning peak hour trip ends, and 15 weekday afternoon peak hour trip ends. The Mountain View ' Community Church will generate approximately 860 Sunday daily trip ends and 403 Sunday morning peak hour trip ends. ' - Current operation at the Lemay/Buckingham intersection is acceptable. In the short range (2009) future, given. development of the Mountain View Community Church and an increase in background traffic, the Lemay/Buckingham intersection will operate acceptably during the weekday peak hours. During the Sunday peak hour, the westbound left -turning vehicles will experience delays commensurate with level of service F. However,.based upon recent research, this intersection will operate acceptably. Bicycle and transit_ level of service will be acceptable. Acceptable level of service for all pedestrian factors cannot be achieved. PIN TABLE 3 Short Range (2009) Background Peak Hour Operation .Intersection X 7 F,,i 3,Ott Le Lemay/Buckingharn (stop sign) EB LT/T/RT D (C) C (C) C (C) WB LT/T/RT E (C) E (C) C (C) NB LT B A A SB LT A B A LOS with 0.80 adjustment to the critical gap TABLE 4 Short Range (2009) Total Peak Hour Operation g -,q EB LT/T/RT D (C) C (C) D (C) WB LT/TIRT E (D) E (C) F (D) Lemay/Buckingham (stop sign) NB LT B A A SB LT A B A NB LT A A B Buckingham/Site Access NB RT A A A (stop sign) NB APPROACH A A B WB LT/T A A A LOS with 0.80 adjustment to the critical gap 15 Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 5, the Lemay/Buckingham intersection operates in the short range (2009) background traffic condition as indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix D. The Lemay/Buckingham intersection will operate acceptably during the weekday peak hours and the Sunday peak hour. Table 3 also shows the level of service for the minor street leg with a 0.80 adjustment to the critical gap. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 7, the key intersections operate in the short range (2009),total traffic condition as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix E. The Lemay/Buckingham intersection will operate acceptably during the weekday peak hours. During the Sunday 'peak hour, the westbound left -turning vehicles will experience delays commensurate with level of service F. As shown in Table 4, with a 0.80 adjustment to the critical gap, the Lemay/Buckingham intersection will operate acceptably. Pedestrian Level of Service Appendix F contains a map of the pedestrian influence area that is within 1320 feet of the Mountain View Community Church. There will be five pedestrian destinations within 1320 feet of the Mountain View Community Church. These are: 1) the residential neighborhood northeast of the site, 2) the commercial areas to the west of the site, 3) the commercial uses to the south of the site, 4) the residential area to the southeast of the site, and 5) the Lincoln Mixed -use Development. This site is in an area type termed "other." The minimum level of service for "other" is C for all categories. Acceptable pedestrian level of service cannot be achieved for all pedestrian factors. However, it is unlikely that the Mountain View Community Church will produce many pedestrian trips. The Pedestrian LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix F. Bicycle Level of Service Based upon Fort Collins bicycle LOS criteria, there are no bicycle destinations within 1320 feet of the Mountain View Community Church. This site will achieve bicycle level of service A connectivity which exceeds the base city-wide minimum. Both Lemay Avenue and Buckingham Street are considered to be streets with bike lanes. Transit Level of Service Currently, there is no transit service on the adjacent streets. Route 8 has service on Vine Drive, to the north, and Route 14 has service on Lincoln Avenue, to the south. 14 N U) to Q N co -40 - Denotes Lane SHORT RANGE (2009) GEOMETRY Figure 8 13 L LO (0 0 1^ '� 80170 IN °I° o 10/5 J + Buckingham 45/80 —� 10/5 5/5 � o 5/5 —� LO 35/75 c� Q W WEEKDAY >. (0 E N J 0/5 5/5 5/5 �n Un o LOrn n °� in ED co V) N --w*— AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles A& T N >_ N�—o _ 25 (IN Ln o 5 04-140 J � � —5 Buckingham 25 / ` 1 15 1 45 r 10 165 v �— 10:30-11:30am Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles SUNDAY SHORT RANGE (2009) TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 7 12 N J O 7/6 ' NOM 'Buckingham 2/2 0/0 cq ui NOM cv co 6/5 U ' AM/PM D Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles WEEKDAY T N ' E J 139 1 f- NOM Buckingham 46 11 NOM . 153 10:30-11:30am Rounded to Nearest ' U) 5 Vehicles ' SUNDAY SITE GENERATED 1 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 6 Buckingham Buckingham T f9 E N J LO LO 0 0 \, 0/5 Cq co o f_ 5/5 5/5 10/5 t 5/5 — o LO o 30/70 L rn LO uo c M WEEKDAY 0i'�tr 1 10 � v SUNDAY SHORT RANGE (2009) BACKGROUND PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC �— AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles f 10:30-11:30am Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles A& N N Figure 5 10 Background Traffic Projections Figure 5 shows the short range (2009) background traffic projections. Background traffic projections for the future horizon year were obtained by reviewing the NFRRTP, reviewing traffic studies for other developments, and reviewing historic.count data for this area of Fort Collins. The Lincoln Mixed -use Development traffic was included in the background traffic forecasts. Trip Assignment/Total Traffic Projections 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 short range (2009) site generated peak hour traffic assignment of the Mountain View Community Church. Figure 7 shows the short range (2009) total (site plus background) peak hour traffic at the key intersections with the development of the Mountain View Community Church. .Signal Warrants ' As a matter of policy, traffic signals are not installed at any location until such time that signal installation warrants are met according to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. It is ' unlikely that peak hour signalwarrants will be met at the Lemay/Buckingham stop sign controlled intersection. Peak hour signal warrant analyses are provided in Appendix C. Geometry Figure 8 shows a schematic of the short range (2009) geometry. Northbound and southbound left -turn lanes are required based upon the short range (2009) background peak hour traffic and the fact that Lemay Avenue is classified as an arterial street. As mentioned earlier, the centerline of the east leg of Buckingham Street is somewhat (18'-201) north of the centerline of the west leg of Buckingham Street. An offset, such as this, primarily presents a concern for the east/west through traffic crossing Lemay Avenue. However, the current traffic making this maneuver is small and it is not likely that the movement would increase significantly. The offset is such that the major street (Lemay Avenue) left turns will not conflict with each other. The left - turn lanes on Lemay Avenue will allow north/south through vehicles to bypass left -turning vehicles. While the offset is not ideal, it is not likely to present operational or safety issues. Operation Analysis Operation analyses were performed at the key intersections. The, operations analyses were conducted for the short range analysis, reflecting a year 2009 condition. 7 Bucki TRIP DISTRIBUTION T (0 r N Figure 4 8 T I I I I ILLt SITE PLAN. IT, v Figure 3 III.. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Mountain View Community Church is located in the southwest quadrant of the Lemay/Buckingham intersection. Figure 3 shows a site plan of the Mountain View Community Church. The site.plan provided by the planning consultant shows the general layout of the site. A. right-in/right-out along Lemay Avenue is proposed with this site. However, initially this access would not be built. The Mountain View Community Church will have a full -movement access along Buckingham ' Street. The short range analysis (year 2009) includes development of only the Mountain View Community Church and an appropriate increase in background traffic due to normal growth and other known potential ' developments in the area. Since this is an intermediate level transportation impact study, along range analysis is not required. 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, 7"' Edition, ITE, was used to estimate trips that would be generated by the Mountain View Community Church. Table shows the expected trip generation on a daily and peak hour basis. TABLE 2 Trip Generation Code Use. Size . AWDTE" ' . `: AM Peak Hour ` PM Peak Hour :Trips .. Rate �� Rate . ,Out - .. :.Rate '- "in Rate Out' 560 Church 23.192 KSF210 P9.1 0.39 9 0.33 8 0.34 8 032 7 Code Use gt.TE Sunday.Peak Hour': Rate : - Ups . nps . Rate . In' . •.' Rate .. .; , Otrf , ; 560 Church 560 Seats 1.53 860 0.33 185 0.39 218 Trip Distribution Trip distribution for the Mountain View Community Church was estimated using membership information provided the church. 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. 6 Existing Operation The Lemay/Buckingham intersection was evaluated using techniques provided in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. Using the peak hour traffic shown in Figure 2, the weekday and Sunday peak hour operation is shown in.Table 1. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix B. The key intersections operate acceptably during both the weekday and Sunday peak hours. At unsignalized intersections, acceptable operation is considered to be at level of service E for any approach leg for an arterial/collector or arterial/local intersection. A description of level, of service for 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 B. Recent research has indicated that the calculated delay does not replicate the observed delay at two-way stop sign controlled intersections. It has been found that a 0.70-0.80 adjustment to the minor street critical gap better reflects the observed delay. The level • of service with this adjustment was also applied to the analysis of the Lemay/Buckingham intersection with the existing traffic and is shown in Table 1. Pedestrian Facilities Pedestrian facilities in this area are sporadic. Sidewalks exist adjacent to some developed properties. There is also a sidewalk along the west side of Lemay Avenue, .north of Buckingham Street. Sidewalks will be incorporated within and adjacent to this development. Bicycle Facilities Bicycle lanes exist on Lemay Avenue and Buckingham Street. Transit Facilities Currently, Transfort does not serve this area of Fort Collins. The nearest route (8) has a stop approximately 1500 feet to the north, near the Vine/Lemay intersection. TABLE 1 Current Peak Hour Operation Intersection, Movement Level of Service ' , :. AM PM. - Sunday Lemay/Buckingham (stop sign) EB LTIf/RT C (C) B (B) C (B) WB LT/T/RT D (C) E (C) C (B) NB LT/T/RT A A A SB LT/T/RT A A A (-) LOS with 0.80 adjustment to the critical gap 5 Buckingham Buckingham %. M E N J O O O � � 0/2 co o — 0/, 3/2 8/1 t 2/2 v Co ao 25/66 Co °�' N Cl) O Cl M 0,0/:111:I 2-��fr 6 —' Ln co Lo 6 � r°'i SUNDAY —m*— AM/PM ---w — 10:30-11:30am. 4 N RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 2 4 SITE LOCATION N BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAI Buckingham Mountain I I I View ca Community E Church Lincoln Mulberry SCALE: 1 "=1000' Figure 1 3 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location .of the Mountain 'View Community Church is shown in Figure 1. It is important that. a thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented. . 1 Land Use 1 Land uses in the , area are primarily residential or commercial/industrial. There are residential uses to the east of the site. There are commercial uses south and west of the site. The center of Fort Collins lies to the southwest of the proposed Mountain View 1 Community Church. Land adjacent to the site is flat (<2% grade) from a traffic operations perspective. Roads The primary streets near the Mountain View Community Church site are Lemay Avenue and Buckingham Street. Condition sketches of the Lemay/Buckingham intersection is shown in Appendix A. The west leg of Buckingham Street does not line up with the east leg. The centerline 1 of the east leg approximately lines up with the 'north edge of the west leg of Buckingham Street. 1 Lemay Avenue is adjacent to the east side of the Mountain View Community Church site. It is a north -south street designated as a four - lane arterial street on the Fort .Collins Master -Street Plan, on its future alignment to the east of the residential neighborhood east of ' Lemay Avenue. The segment at the Lemay/Buckingham intersection. is designated as a local street. It is not known when Lemay Avenue will be realigned. It is not likely to occur before the short range future year (2009). Given the existing trafficvolumes, this isegment of Lemay Avenue was considered to be a two-lane arterial street for this TIS. Currently, it has a two-lane cross section with no auxiliary lanes at ' the Lemay/Buckingham intersection. The existing speed limit in this area is 35 mph. 1 Buckingham Street is an east -west street designated as a collector street. on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, Buckingham Street has a two-lane section. The Lemay/Buckingham intersection has 1 stop sign control on Buckingham Street. The existing speed limit in this area is 30 mph. 1 Existing Traffic Recent weekday and Sunday peak hour traffic counts at the 1 Lemay/Buckingham intersection are shown in Figure 2. The traffic data for the Lemay/Buckingham intersection was collected in November/December 2006. Raw traffic counts are provided in Appendix A. i 2 1 I. INTRODUCTION ' This intermediate transportation impact study (TIS) addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near a proposed Mountain View Community Church. The proposed Mountain View Community ' Church is located in the southwest quadrant of the Lemay/Buckingham intersection in Fort Collins, Colorado. During the course- of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project developer, project engineer, and the City of Fort Collins staff. This study 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).. A Base Assumptions Form and related information are provided in Appendix A. The study involved the following steps: ' - Collect physical, traffic, and development data; Perform trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment; t _ 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 ............................................ 7 4. Trip Distribution ...................................... 8 5. Short. Range (2009) Background Peak Hour Traffic ...... 10 6. Short Range (2009) Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic .. 11 7. Short Range (2009) Total Peak Hour Traffic ........... 12 8. Short Range (2009) Geometry .......................... 13 APPENDIX A Base Assumptions Form/Condition Sketches/Peak Hour Traffic Counts B Current Peak Hour Operation/Level of Service Descriptions C Signal Warrants D Short Range Background Traffic Operation E Short Range Total Traffic Operation F Pedestrian/Transit Level of Service Worksheets TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Introduction ......................................... 1 II. Existing Conditions ................................... 2 Land Use .... 2 Reads................................................ 2 Existing Traffic ....................... a............. 2 Existing Operation .................................... $' Pedestrian Facilities ................................. 5 Bicycle Facilities.................I.................. 5 Transit Facilities ................................... 5 III. Proposed Development ................................. 6 Trip Generation ...................................... 6 Trip Distribution .................................... 6 Background Traffic Projections ....................... 9 Trip Assignment/Total Traffic Projections ............ 9 Signal Warrants ............ .......... ............ 9 Geometry ............................................. 9 Operation Analysis ................................... 9 Pedestrian Level of Service 14 Bicycle Level of Service .............................14 Transit Level of Service ............................. 14 IV. Conclusions ........................................... 16 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Current Peak Hour Operation 5 2. Trip Generation ...................................... 6 3. Short Range (200.9) Background Peak Hour Operation .... 15 4. Short Range (2009) Total Peak Hour Operation ......... 15 MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY CHURCH TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SEPTEMBER 2007 Prepared for. - Mountain View Community Church 201 Whedbee Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 Prepared by: DELICH ASSOCIATES 2272 Glen Haven Drive Loveland, CO 80538 Phone: 970-669-2061 FAX 970-669-5034 PPpO REC'�Sl U 8 �T' _• o