The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBRAZIL 2004 SUBDIVISION - FDP - 23-04A - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - TRAFFIC STUDYPedestrian LOS Worksheet N MY f",NW ,km :Zh &X&61DV4r4AL Eta, WIAL TO t,:oPU&&(AC Minim= F -1 Actual Proposed C C T&,-revvew Minim= A A [2 Actual A oc ftposed CO.UAtatC#AL- Minimum A A F-3 Actual 14 C Nqmed -ro tj Minimum E4 Actual R�-P�—I- .4 A(. 12&-5eDGr".r (A C -ros J�95 j>ej)-rj& Minimum Actual A C- 13 ftpowd A C Minimum F-6 Actual Proposed Minimum F-7 Actual Pwposed Minimum F8- Actual Pmposed Minimum F9 Actual Pmposed Minimum 10 Actual 5,a 3 WA Plum Street m .. � m Q cn ® caa v Z% O West Elizabeth Street v J O O Campus University Avenue West Redevelop ent SCALE: 1 "=50V PEDESTRIAN INFLUENCE AREA 5� O APPENDIX G 66 ' HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent shortdQ?bkgd to 12: Elizabeth Street & Site Access a Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations Vi 0 +T 4 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 40 710 20 20 795 45 10 0 15 25 0 35 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) 42 747 21 21 837 47 11 0 16 26 0 37 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage ' Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) 373 926 pX, platoon unblocked 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 vC, conflicting volume 884 768 1339 1768 384 1376 1755 442 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 884 662 1282 1748 245 1322 1734 442 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 ' tC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 94 98 89 100 98 73 100 93 ' cM capacity (veh/h) 761 849 99 72 696 97 74 563 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 42 498 270 21 558 326 26 63 Volume Left 42 0 0 21 0 0 11 26 Volume Right 0 0 21 0 0 47 16 37 cSH 761 1700 1700 849 1700 1700 204 187 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.29 0.16 0.02 0.33 0.19 0.13 0.34 ' Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 0 0 2 0 0 11 35 Control Delay (s) 10.0 0.0 0.0 9.3 0.0 0.0 25.3 33.8 Lane LOS B A D D ' Approach Delay (s) 0.5 0.2 25.3 33.8 Approach LOS D D Intersection Summary ' Average Delay 1.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.4% ICU Level of Service A ' Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Page 2 1 41 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent short on kgd qjD 9: Elizabeth Street & Site Access ® pm WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations +j ♦T* I tT* + + Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 60 660 20 20 215 25 15 0 20 45 0 20 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) 63 695 21 21 226 26 16 0 21 47 0 21 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 301 998 pX, platoon unblocked 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 vC, conflicting volume 253 716 1008 1126 358 776 1124 126 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 253 556 884 1018 154 624 1015 126 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 98 92 100 97 84 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1310 899 197 195 .769 303 196 900 Direction, Lane # EB 1 . EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 63 463 253 21 151 102 37 68 Volume Left 63 0 0 21 0 0 16 47 Volume Right 0 0 21 0 0 26 21 21 cSH 1310 1700 1700 899 1700 1700 343 380 Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.27 0.15 0.02 0.09 0.06 0.11 0.18 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 0 0 2 0 0 9 16 Control Delay (s) 7.9 0.0 0.0 9.1 0.0 0.0 16.8 16.5 Lane LOS A A C C Approach Delay (s) 0.6 0.7 16.8 16.5 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Joseph 12/23/2005 Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Page 1 ¢? HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent short<tgff d 9: Site Access & City Park Avenue amp -.-v 4,-'- k.4\ t /P..ti 1 r Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 # + 1� d Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 15 0 10 5 0 20 0 310 10 20 190 0 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 0 11 5 0 21 0 326 11 21 200 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 259 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 595 579 200 584 574 332 200 . 337 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 595 579 200 584 574 332. 200 337 IC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 96 100 99 99 100 97 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 399 419 841 412 422 710 ,1372 1222 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 26 26 337 221 Volume Left 16 5 0 21 Volume Right 11 21 11 0 cSH 505 620 1700 1222 Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.04 0.20 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 3 0 1 Control Delay (s) 12.5 11.1 0.0 0.9 Lane LOS B B A Approach Delay (s) 12.5 11.1 0.0 0.9 Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization . 36.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Page 1 ¢7 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent shortQRRO�bkg al 11: Site Access & City Park Avenue am pm --► 7 'r '- 4 . .4\ t �' �► l 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) tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % cM capacity (veh/h) EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 4# 4 1► 4 Stop Stop Free Free 0% 0% 0% 0% 0 0 0 10 0 30 0 135 10 20 120 0 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0. 0 0 11 0 32 0 142 11 21 126 0 None None 347 321 126 316 316 147 126 153 347 321 126 316 316 147 126 153 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 100 100 100 98 100 96 100 99 579 587 924 630 591 900 1460 1428 270 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 0 42 153 147 Volume Left 0 11 0 21 Volume Right 0 32 11 0 cSH 1700 812 1700 1428 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.05 0.09 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 4 0 1 Control Delay (s) 0.0 9.7 0.0 1.2 Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 9.7 0.0 1.2 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 28.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 , Page 2 1a HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent shoefon k ota 6: Elizabeth Street & Shields Street am <0 ' -A --► --V '- t `► 4 -*1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations d r % 1 0 tt r 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 4.0 ' Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1701 1583 1770 1821 1770 3523 1770 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.09 1.00 0.19 1.00 1.00 Said. Flow (perm) 1681 1701 1583 1770 1821 166 3523 345 3539 1583 Volume (vph) 330 35 340 95 60 10 385 1140 35 40 1245 415 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) 347 37 358 100 63 11 405 1200 37 42 1311 437 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 298 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 189 ' Lane Group Flow (vph) 187 197 60 100 69 0 405 1236 0 42 1311 248 Turn Type custom Perm custom pm+pt pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 17.0 17.0 17.0 9.5 9.5 65.3 56.5 43.8 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g (s) 18.0 18.0 18.0 10.5 10.5 66.3 57.5 45.8 41.0 41.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.10 0.10 0.62 0.54 0.43 0.38 0.38 ' Clearance Time (s) 5.0 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 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 283 287 267 174 179 423 1897 212 1359 608 v/s Ratio Prot 0.11 c0.12 c0.06 0.04 c0.19 0.35 0.01 0.37 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.40 0.08 0.16 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.69 0.23 0.57 0.38 0.96 0.65 0.20 0.96 0.41 Uniform Delay, d1 41.5 41.7 38.4 46.0 45.1 33.2 17.5 18.1 32.2 24.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.7 6.7 0.4 4.5 1.4 32.6 1.8 0.5 17.3 2.0 Delay (s) 47.2 48.4- 38.8 50.5 46.5 65.7 19.3 18.6 49.5 26.1 ' Level of Service D D D D D E B B D C Approach Delay (s) 43.5 48.8 30.7 43.1 Approach LOS D D C D ' Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 38.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 ' Actuated Cycle Length (s) 106.8 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 - Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 ' c Critical Lane Group ' Joseph 12/23/2005 Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Page 1 1 4�5 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Elizabeth Street & Shields Street recent shor gapkggg�-W) 'Q4DPm �' -♦� 4__4 t �► 1 r Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r I to 0 tT ? ' 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 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 ' 1.00 Fri: 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 6.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1708 1583 1770 1775 1770 3510 1770 3539 1583 , Fit Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.20 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1708 1583 1770 1775 359 3510 365 3539 1583 Volume (vph) 245 40 325 10 10 5 125 1035 60 10. 935 115 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) 258 42 342 11 11 5 132 1089 63 11 984 121 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 286 0 5 0 0 3 0 0 0 58 Lane Group Flow (vph) 146 154 56 11 .11 0 132 1.149 0 11 984 ' 63 Turn Type custom Perm custom pm+pt pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 6 , Actuated Green, G (s) 12.6 12.6 12.6 2.4 2.4 53.4 47.5 43.6 42.6 42.6 Effective Green, g (s) _ 13.6 13.6 13.6 3.4 3.4 54.5 48.5 45.6 43.6 43.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.04 0.04 0.65 0.58 0.55 0.52 0.52 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 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 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 274 278 258 72 72 351 2039 233 1848 827 v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 00.09 0.01 C0.01 c0.03 c0.33 0.00 0.28 ' v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.21 0.02 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.55 0.22 0.15 0.16 0.38 0.56 0.05 0.53 0.08 Uniform Delay, dl 32.0 32.2 30.3 38.7 38.7 7.5 10.9 9.1 13.2 9.9 ' Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.0 2.4 0.4 1.0 1.0 0.7 1.1 0.1 1.1 0.2 Delay (s) 34.0 34.5 30.7 39.6 39.7 8.2 12.0 9.2 14.3 10.1 Level of Service C C C D D A B A B ' B Approach Delay (s) 32.4 39.7 11.6 13.8 Approach LOS C D B B Intersection Summary , HCM Average Control Delay 17.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 83.5 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 ' Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 , Page 2 44 ' HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent shor6�bkgd 1: Elizabeth Street & City Park Avenue am� Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 0 1 0 1 tP A 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00. 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.93 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3474 1770 3483 1770 1726 1770 1727 Fit Permitted 0.25 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.65 1.00 0.60 1.00 Said. Flow (perm) 462 3474 623 3483 1218 1726 1125 1727 Volume (vph) 65 570 80 75 715 85 110 120 115 85 80 75 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.05 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 68 600 84 79 753 89 116 126 121 89 84 79 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 25 0 0 21 0' 0. 48 0 0 46 0 ' Lane Group Flow (vph) 68 659 0 79 821 0 116 199 0 89 117 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 ' Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 17.2 17.2 17.2 17.2 Effective Green, g (s) 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 18.2 18.2 18.2 18.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Clearance Time (s) 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 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 185" 1391 249 1395 507 719 469 719 ' v/s Ratio Prot 0.19 c0.24 c0.12 0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.15 0.13 0.10 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.47 0.32 0.59 0.23 0.28 0.19 0.16 ' Uniform Delay, di 9.2 9.7 9.0 10.3 8.2 8.4 8.1 8.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 0.3 0.7 0.6 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.5 Delay (s) 10.4 9.9 9.7 10.9 9.3 9.4 9.0 8.5 ' Level of Service B A A B A A A A Approach Delay (s) 10.0 10.8 9.3 8.6 Approach LOS A B A A ' Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 10.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43 ' Actuated Cycle Length (s) 43.7 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 ' c Critical Lane Group ' Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Page 1 43 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent shor1'jgpa0kgd 1: Elizabeth Street & City Park Avenue rpm t -► --v #e '- 4%- 'ti 1 /' �► l d Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Lane Configurations 0 1 0 Vi 1� I A 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.96 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3497 1770 3415 1770 1749 1770 1781 Fit Permitted 0.60 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.70 1.00 0.67 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1115 3497 581 3415 1303 1749 1241 1781 Volume (vph) 65 635 55 35 180 55 35 80 55 50 60 25 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) 68 668 58 37 189 58 37 84 58 53 63 26 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 17 0 0 36 0 0 34 0 0 15 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 68 709 0 37 211 0 37 108 0 53 74 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 15.2 15.2 15.2 15.2 Effective Green, g (s) 14.9 14.9 14.9 14.9 16.2 16.2 16.2 16.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 Clearance Time (s) 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 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 425 1333 221 1301 540 725 514 738 v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.06 c0.06 0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.16 0.53 0.17 0.16 0.07 0.15 0.10 0.10 Uniform Delay, dl 8.0 9.4 8.0 80 6.9 7.1 7.0 7.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.3 Delays) 8.2 9.8 8.4 8.0 7.1 7.6 7.4 7.3 Level of Service A A A A A A A A Approach Delay (s) 9.7 8.1 7.5 7.3 Approach LOS A A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.33 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 39.1 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 - c Critical Lane Group Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Pa ' ge 1 -fa ■ APPENDIX F it HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 12: Elizabeth Street & Site Access -► -�v 'r 4--. k- .4N �' �► l d Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ft TT► 4 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 40 645 20 20 730 45 10 0 15 25 0 35 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly flow rate (vph) 42 672 21 22 793 49 12 0 18 29 0 41 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 373 926 pX, platoon unblocked 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 vC, conflicting volume 842 693 1247 1651 346 1298 1637 421 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 842 628 1210 1634 265 1264 1620 421 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 98 90 100 97 73 100 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 789 905 115 88 699 111 90 581 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 42 448 245 22 529 313 29 71 Volume Left 42 0 0 22 0 0 12 29 Volume Right 0 0 21 0 0 49 18 41 cSH 789 1700 1700 905 1700 1700 231 209 Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.26 0.14 0.02 0.31 0.18 0.13 0.34 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 0 0 2 0 0 11 35 Control Delay (s) 9.8 0.0 0.0 9.1 0.0 0.0 22.8 30.7 Lane LOS A A C D Approach Delay (s) 0.6 0.2 22.8 30.7 Approach LOS C D Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.0 .Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 ' Page 1 GE ' HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recen sho bkg 9: Elizabeth Street & S tTE Ac e<6 6Pn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations 1 0 0 4 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ' Volume (veh/h) 60 605 20 20 200 25 15 0 20 45 0 20 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) 71 712 24 24 235 29 18 0 24 53 0 24 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage ' Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) 301 998 pX, platoon unblocked 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 vC, conflicting volume 265 735 1053 1176 368 818 1174 132 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 265 570 929 1069 155 663 1066 132 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 ' tC, 2 stage (s) .tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 97 90 100 97 81 100 97 ' cM capacity (veh/h) .1296 883 180 179 764 279 180 892 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3. NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 71 475 261 24 157 108 41 76 ' Volume Left 71 0 0 24 0 0 18 53 Volume Right 0 0 24 0 0 29 24 24 cSH 1296 1700 1700 883 1700 1700 319 354 ' Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.28 0.15 0.03 0.09 0.06 0.13 0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 0 0 2 0 0 11 20 Control Delay (s) 7.9 0.0 0.0 9.2 0.0 0.0 17.9 18.0 Lane LOS A A C C ' Approach Delay (s) 0.7 0.8 17.9 18.0 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary ' Average Delay 2.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.7% ICU Level of Service A ' Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Page 1 1 37 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Site Access & City Park Avenue recent Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4* + '# 4 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 15 0 10 5 0 20 0 265 10 20 175 0 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 0 12 6 0 24 0 312 12 24 206 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 259 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 594 576 208 582. 571 318 206 324 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf.vol vCu, unblocked vol 594 576 206 582 571 318 206 324 tC, 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 % 96 100 99 99 100 97 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 397 420 835 412 423 723 1365 1236 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 29 29 324 229 Volume Left 18 6 0 24 Volume Right 12 24 12 0 cSH 503 628 1700 1236 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.05 0.19 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 4 0 1 Control Delay (s) 12.6 11.0 0.0 1.0 Lane LOS B B A Approach Delay (s) 12.6 11.0 0.0 1.0 Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.1 % ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 ' Page 1 39 ' HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recenW�kgd of 11: Site Access & City Park Avenue �pm ' Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations 4 4 1� d Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 10 0 30 0 130 10 20 110 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.85 0.85 0.85 .Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 12 0 35 0 143 11 24 129 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage ' Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None, Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 270 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 360 330 129 325 325 148 129 154 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 360 330 129 325 325 148 129 154 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 % 100 100 100 98 100 96 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 565 579 920 620 583 898 1456 1427 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 0 47 154 153 ' Volume Left 0 12 0 24 Volume Right 0 35 11 0 cSH 1700 808 1700 1427 ' Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.06 0.09 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 5 0 1 Control Delay (s) 0.0 9.7 0.0 1.3 Lane LOS A A A ' Approach Delay (s) 0.0 9.7 0.0 1.3 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary ' Average Delay 1.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 27.7% ICU Level of Service A ' Analysis Period (min) 15 t Joseph. Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Page 1 37 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis bgd)bkgdA-ot,al otal 6: Elizabeth Street & Shields Street aTOM Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations d r % ►) ft 11 ++ ? 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 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1699 1583 1770 1819 1770 3520 1770 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.09 1.00 0.22 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1699 1583 1770 1819 167 3520 414 3539 1583 Volume (vph) 305 30 315 90 55 10 355 925 35 35 1010 380 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 Adj. Flow (vph) 318 31 328 106 65 12 418 1088 41 38 1110 418 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 275 0 6 0 0 2 0 0 0 216 Lane Group Flow (vph) 170 179 53 106 71 0 418 1127 0 38 1110 202 Turn Type custom Perm custom pm+pt pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.3 .16.3 16.3 11.5 11.5 64.6 55.7 43.4 39.5 39.5 Effective Green, g (s) 17.3 17.3 17.3 12.5 12.5 65.6 56.7 45.4 40.5 40.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.12 0.12 0.61 0.53 0.42 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 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 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 271 274 255 206 212 417 1858 237 1335 597 v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.11 c0.06 0.04 c0.20 0.32 0.01 0.31 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 c0.41 0.06 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.65 0.21 0.51 0.33 1.00 0.61 0.16 0.83 0.34 Uniform Delay, d1 42.0 42.2 39.1 44.6 43.6 33.4 17.6 18.4 30.4 23.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.5 5.5 0.4 2.2 0.9 44.7 1.5 0.3 6.2 1.5 Delay (s) 46.5 47.7 39.5 46.8 44.6 78.1 19.1 18.7 36.5 25.4 Level of Service D D D D D E B B D C Approach Delay (s) 43.4 45.8 35.0 33.1 Approach LOS D D D C Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 36.2 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 107.4 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.5% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 ' Page 1 36 ' HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent dho kgd ota 6: Elizabeth Street & Shields Street pm Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r 1 0 r 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 4.0 ' Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Said. Flow (prot) 1681 1706 1583 1770 1770 1770 3506 1770 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1706 1583 1770 1770 415 3506 427 3539 1583 Volume (vph) 230 35 300 10 10 5 115 840 55 10 760 105 ' Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Adj. Flow (vph) 271 41 353 12 12 6 135 988 65 12 894 124 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 294 0 6 0 0 3 0 0 0 60 ' Lane Group Flow (vph) 152 160 59 12 12 0 135 1050 0 12 894 64 Turn Type custom Perm custom pm+pt pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 ' Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 12.9 12.9 12.9 2.4 2.4 53.3 47.4 43.5 42.5 42.5 Effective Green, g (s) 13.9 13.9 13.9 3.4 3.4 54.4 48A 45.5 43.5 43.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.04 0.04 0.65 0.58 0.54 0.52 0.52 ' Clearance Time (s) 5.0 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 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 279 283 263 72 72 381 2027 264 1839 823 ' v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 00.09 0.01 c0.01 c0.03 c0.30 0.00 0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.20 0.02 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.54 0.57 0.22 0.17 0.17 0.35 0.52 0.05 0.49 0.08 ' Uniform Delay, d1 32.0 32.1 30.2 38.8 38.8 7.1 10.6 9.1 12.9 10.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 2.6 0.4 1.1 1.1 0.6 1.0 0.1 0.9 . 0.2 Delay (s) 34.2 34.7 30.7 39.9 39.9 7.7 11.6 9.1 13.8 10.2 Level of Service C C C D D A B A B B Approach Delay (s) 32.4 39.9 11.1 13.4 Approach LOS C D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49 ' Actuated Cycle Length (s) 83.7 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' c Critical Lane Group ' Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Page 2 35 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent QWDbkgdgoo 1: Elizabeth Street & City Park Avenue am4o Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations till. tll� I t# A 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.93 Fit Protected 0.95 . 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3473 1770 3482 1770 1726 1770 1737 Fit Permitted 0.26 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.64 1.00 0.60 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 491 3473 612 3482 1197 1726 1120 1737 Volume (vph) 60 525 75 70 660 80 100 110 105 75 85 70 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Adj. Flow (vph) 69 603 86 76 717 87 118 129 124 88 100 82 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 26 0 0 22 0 0 47 0 0 40 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 69 663 0 76 782 0 118 206 0 88 142 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.7 15.7 15.7 15.7 17.2 17.2 17.2 17.2 Effective Green, g (s) 16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7 18.2 18.2 18.2 18.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Clearance Time (s) 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 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 191. 1352 238 .1355 508 732 475 737 v/s Ratio Prot 0.19 c0.22 I c0.12 0.08 v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.49 0.32 0.58 0.23 0.28 0.19 0.19 Uniform Delay, d1 9.3 9.9 9.1 10.3 7.9 8.1 7.7 7.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 0.3 0.8 0.6 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.6 Delay (s) 10.5 10.2 9.9 10.9 9.0 9.0 8.6 8.3 Level of Service B B A B A A A A Approach Delay (s) 10.2 10.8 9.0 8.4 Approach LOS B B A A Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 10.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 42.9 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 ' Page 1 3q- ' HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recen ho kgd tak 1: Elizabeth Street & City Park Avenue pm ' 'A -. ---v�- t /0- \. 1 .1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations 1 0 1 0 $0 1� 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 ' Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.96 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 ' Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3497 1770 3406 1770 1745 1770 1786 Fit Permitted 0.59 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.69 1.00 0.67 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1102 3497 560 3406 1284 1745 1241 1786 Volume (vph) 60 585 50 35 165 55 35 75 55 45 65 25 ' Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.85 0.85 0.85 Adj. Flow (vph) 71 688 59 41 194 65 38 82 60 53 76 29 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 40 0 0 35 0 0 17 0 ' Lane Group Flow (vph) 71 731 0 41 219 0 38 107 0 53 88 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 ' Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.1 14.1 14.1 14.1 15.2 15.2 15.2 15.2 Effective Green, g (s) 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 16.2 16.2 16.2 16.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.38 .0.38 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 ' Clearance Time (s) 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 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 423 1344 215 1309 529 719 512 736 ' v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 0.06 c0.06 0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.07 0.03 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.54 0.19 0.17 0.07 0.15 0.10 0.12 ' Uniform Delay, d1 8.0 9.4 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.2 7.1 7.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 Delay (s) 8.2 9.9 8.5 8.0 7.3 7.7 7.5 7.5 ' Level of Service A A A A A A A A Approach Delay (s) 9.7 8.1 7.6 7.5 Approach LOS A A A A ' Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.34 ' Actuated Cycle Length (s) 39.3 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.1 % ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' c Critical Lane Group ' Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Page 1 1 33 APPENDIX E W, HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent sho Ion AE13hotal . 6: Elizabeth Street & Shields Street am Ej -A --► ---* 4e '- t 4\ t/D. 1 l 4/ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations A ? I Tt ►j 0 1 tt r 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 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 .0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1701 1583 1770 1821 1770 3523 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.09 1.00 0.18 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1701 1583 1770 1821 166 3523 343 3539 1583 Volume (vph) 320 35 330 95 60 10 375 1140 35 40 1245 405 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) 337 37 347 100 63 11 395 1200 37 42 1311 426 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 289 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 183 Lane Group Flow (vph) 182 192 58 100 69 0 395 1236 0 42 1311 243 Turn Type custom Perm custom pm+pt pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.8 16.8 16.8 9.5 9.5 65.3 56.3 44.0 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g (s) 17.8 17.8 17.8 10.5 10.5 66.3 57.3 46.0 41.0 41.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.10 0.10 0.62 0.54 0.43 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 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 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 281 284 264 174 179 424 1894 215 1361 609 v/s Ratio Prot 0.11 c0.11 c0.06 0.04 c0.19 0.35 0.01 0.37 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.39 0.08 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.68 0.22 0.57 0.38 0.93 0.65 0.20 0.96 0.40 Uniform Delay, d1 41.5 41.7 38.4 45.9 45.0 32.6 17.6 17.9 32.1 23.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.1 6.2 0.4 4.5 1.4 27.2 1.8 0.4 17.1 1.9 Delay (s) 46.5 47.9 38.8 50.5 46.4 59.8 19.3 '- 18.4 49.1 25.8 Level of Service D D D D D E B B D C Approach Delay (s) 43.2 48.7 29.1 42.8 Approach LOS D D C D Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 37.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 106.6 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Page 1 31 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent shorQA4 total 6: Elizabeth Street & Shields Street (5b pm � � ' k � t r' � 1 d Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 4 r ►( 1 0 1 tf r 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 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1681 1708 1583 1770 1775 1770 3510 1770 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0,19 1.00 0.20 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow'(perm) 1681 1708 1583 1770 1775 361 3510 368 3539 1583 Volume (vph) 235 40 310 10 10 5 115 1035 60. 10 935 105 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) 247 42 326 11 11 5 121 1089 63 11 984 111 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 274 0 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 53 Lane Group Flow (vph) 141 148 52 11 11 0 121 1150 0 11 984 58 Turn Type custom Perm custom _ pm+pt pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 12.3 12.3 12.3 2.4 2.4 53.7 47.8 43.9 42.9 42.9 Effective Green, g (s) 13.3 13.3 13.3 3.4 3.4 54.8 48.8 45.9 43.9 43.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.04 0.04 0.66 0.58 0.55 0.53 0.53 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 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 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 268 272 252 72 72 353 2051 236 1861 832 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.09 . 0.01 00.01 c0.03 c0.33 0.00 0.28 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.20 0.02 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.54 0.21 0.15 0.16 0.34 0.56 0.05 0.53 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 32.2 32.3 30.5 38.7 38.7 7.3 10.7 9.0 13.0 9.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 2.2 0.4 1.0 1.0 0.6 1.1 0.1 1.1 0.2 Delay (s) 34.1 34.5 30.9 39.6 39.7 7.9 11.8 9.1 14.1 9.9 Level of Service C C C D D A B A B A Approach Delay (s) 32.5 39.7 11.5 13.6 Approach LOS C D B B Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 16.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 83.5 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 ' Page 2 30 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent sho on otal 1: Elizabeth Street & City Park Avenue ar<�b Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ►j 0 ft T 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.92 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Said. Flow (prot) 1770 3476 1770 3486 1770 1723 1770 1718 Fit Permitted 0.25 1.00 0.34 1.00 0.66 1.00 0.61 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 469 3476 639 3486 1229 1723 1144 1718 Volume (vph) 65 560 75 70 710 80 100 110 110 80 70 75 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) 68 589 79 74 747 84 105 116 116 84 74 79 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 24 0 0 20 0 0 50 .0 0 46 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 68 644 0 74 811 0 105 182 0 84 107 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.2 16.2 16.2 16.2 17.2 17.2 17.2 17.2 Effective Green, g (s) 17.2 17.2 17.2 17.2 18.2 18.2 18.2 18.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Clearance Time (s) 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 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 186 1378 253 1382 515 723 480 720 v/s Ratio Prot 0.19 c0.23 00.11 0.06 v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 0.12 0.09 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.47 0.29 0.59 0.20 0.25 0.17 0.15 Uniform Delay, d1 9.2 9.7 _ 8.9 10.3 8.0 8.2 7.9 7.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.4 Delay (s) 10.5 10.0 9.6 10.9 8.9 9.0 8.7 8.2 Level of Service B A A B. A A A A Approach Delay (s) 10.0 10.8 9.0 8.4 Approach LOS B B A A Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 10.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 43.4 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.1 % ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Page 1 aq HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent shortotal 1: Elizabeth Street & City Park Avenue t pm EBL EBT EBR WBL . WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 '(•j► 1 $10 1 A Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 190.0.111900 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 . 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 , 1.00 0.94. 1.00 0.95 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3499 1770 3418 1770 1746 1770 1771 Fit Permitted 0.61 1.00 0.32 .1.00 0.71 1.00 0.68 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1131 3499 601 3418 1314 1746 1258 1771 Volume (vph) 65 620 50 30 170 50 25 70 50 45 50: 25 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) 68 653 53 32 :: 179 53 26 74 53 47 53 26 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 33 0 0 31 0 0 15 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 68 690. 0 32 199 0 26 96 0 47 64 ` 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Penn Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.3 .13.3 13.3 13.3 15.1 15.1 . 15.1 15:1 Effective Green, g (s) 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3 16.1 16.1 16.1 16.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Clearance Time (s) 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 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 421 1303 224 1273 551 732 527 743 v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.06 c0.06 0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.05 0.02 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.16 0.53 0.14 0.16 0.05 0.13 0.09 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 8.0 9.4 8.0 8.0 6.6 6.9 6.7 6.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.2 Delay (s) 8.2 9.8 8.3 8.1 6.8 7.2 7.1 .6.9 Level of Service A A A A A A A A Approach Delay (s) 9.7 8.1 7.1 7.0 Approach LOS A A A A Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 8.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.32 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 38.4 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Page 1 a� APPENDIX D a7 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recen o k otal 6: Elizabeth Street & Shields Street am, per, EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations d r i 1A I tip I ♦? F 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 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Said. Flow (prot) 1681 1700 1583 1770 1819 1770 3520 1770 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.09 1.00 0,22 1.00 1.00 Said. Flow (perm) 1681 1700 1583 1770 1819 167 3520 416 3539 1583 Volume (vph) 295 30 305 90 55 10 345 925 35 35 1010 370 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 . 0.96 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 Adj. Flow (vph) 307 31 318 106 65 12 406 1088 41 38 1110 407 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 268 0 6 0 0 2 0 0 0 210 Lane Group Flow (vph) 165 173 50 106 71 0 406 1127 0 38 1110 197 Turn Type custom Perm custom pm+pt pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 11.5 11.5 64.6 55.7 43.4 39.5 39.5 Effective Green, g (s) 17.0 17.0 17.0 12.5 12.5 65.6 56.7 45.4 40.5 40.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.12 0.12 0.61 0.53 0.42 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 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 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 267 270 251 207 212 418 1864 238 1338 599 v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.10 c0.06 0.04 c0.19 0.32 0.01 0.31 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 c0.40 0.06 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.64 0.20 0.51 0.33 0.97 0.60 0.16 0.83 0.33 Uniform Delay, dl 42.0 42.2 39.1 44.4 43.5 32.7 17.4 18.3 30.2 23.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.2 5.1 0.4 2.1 0.9 36.4 1.5 0.3 .6.1 1.5 Delay (s) 46.2 47.3 39.5 46.6 44.4 69.1 18.9 18.6 36.2 25.1 Level of Service D D D D D E B B D C Approach Delay (s) 43.3 45.7 32.2 32.9 Approach LOS D D C C Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 34.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 107.1 Sum of lost time (s) • 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 ' Page 1 M ' HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recent 49j&tjFW0 total 6: Elizabeth Street & Shields Street pm Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations 4 r I t+ +T I ?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 4.0 ' Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 ' Said. Flow (prot) 1681 1707 1583 1770 1770 1770 3506 1770 3539 1583 . Flt Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 Said. Flow (perm) 1681 1707 1583 1770 1770 418 3506 428 3539 1583 Volume (vph) 220 35 285 10 10 5 105 840 55 10 760 95 ' Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Adj. Flow (vph) 259 41 335 12 12 6 124 988 65 12 894 112 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 281 0 6 0 0 3 0 0 0 53 ' Lane Group Flow (vph) 146 154 54 12 12 0 124 1050 0 12 894 59 Turn Type custom Perm custom pm+pt pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 ' Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 12.6 12.6 12.6 2.4 2.4 53.4 47.6 43.8 42.8 42.8 Effective Green, g (s) 13.6 13.6 13.6 3.4 3.4 54.6 48.6 45.8 43.8 43.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.04 0.04 0.65 0.58 0.55 0.52 0.52 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 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 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph). 273 278 258 72 72 383 2038 267 1854 829 ' v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 c0.09 0.01 c0.01 c0.03 c0.30 0.00 0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.18 0.02 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.55 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.32 0.52 0.04 0.48 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 32.1 32.2 30.3 38.7 38.7 6.9 10.5 8.9 12.7 9.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.0 2.4 0.4 1.1 1.1 0.5 0.9 0.1 0.9 0.2 Delay (s) 34.1 34.6 30.8 39.8 39.9 7.4 11.4 9.0 13.6 10.0 Level of Service C C C D D A B A B B Approach Delay (s) 32.5 39.8 11.0 13.1 Approach LOS C D B B ' Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 83.6 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' c Critical Lane Group Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Page 2 a:5 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis reen ho k total 1: Elizabeth Street & City Park Avenue arr+ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL Lane Configurations ►j ft 1 0 1 1, 10 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 Lane_ Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt - 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.92 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3476 1770 3484 1770 1723 1770 1718 Fit Permitted 0.27 1.00 0.34 1.00 0.66 1.00 0.61 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 500 3476 631 3484 1223 1723 1140 1718 Volume (vph) 60 515 70 65 655 75 90 100 100 .70. 65 70 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Adj. Flow (vph) 69 592 80 71 712 82 106 118 118 82 76 82 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 24 0 0 21 0 0 49 0. 0 47 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 69 648 0 71 773 0 106 187 0 82 111 0 Tum Type Perm Perm Perm Penn Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.6 15.6 15.6 15.6 17.2 17.2 17.2 17.2 Effective Green, g (s) 16.6 16.6 16.6 16.6 18.2 18.2 18.2 18.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time (s) 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 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 194 1348 245 1351 520 733 485 731 v/s Ratio Prot 0.19 c0.22 c0.11 0.06 v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 0.11 0.09 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.48 0.29 0.57 0.20 0.25 0.17 0.15 Uniform Delay, d1 9.3 9.9 9.0 10.3 7.7 7.9 7.6 7.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.4 Delay (s) 10.4 10.1 9.7 10.9 8.6 8.8 8.4 8.0 Level of Service B B A B A A A A Approach Delay (s) 10.2 10.8 8.7 8.1 Approach LOS B B A A Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 10.0 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 42.8 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c . Critical Lane Group Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 ' Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis recentlEoWiZO total 1: Elizabeth Street & City Park Avenue 0 Pm Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ►j ft 0 j, to 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.93. 1.00 0.95 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Said. Flow (prot) 1770 3500 1770 3409 1770 1741 1770 1764 Fit Permitted 0.60 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.70 1.00 0.68 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1121 3500 584 3409 1311 1741 1260 1164 Volume (vph) 60 570 45 30 155 50 25 65 50 40 45 25 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.85 0.85 0.85 Adj. Flow (vph) 71 671 53 35 182 59 27 71 55 47 53 29 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 37 0 0 32 0 0 17 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 71 709 0 35 204 0 27 94 0 47 65 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 15.2 15.2 15.2 15.2 Effective Green, g (s) 14.9 14.9 14.9 14.9 16.2 16.2 16.2 16.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 Clearance Time (s) 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 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 427 1334 223 1299 543 721 522 731 v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.06 00.05 0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.17 . 0.53 0.16 0.16 0.05 0.13 0.09 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 8.0 9.4 8.0 8.0 6.8 7.1 7.0 7.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.2 Delay (s) 8.2 9.8 8.3 8.0 7.0 7.5 7.3 7.2 Level of Service A A A A A A A A Approach Delay (s) 9.7 8.1 7.4 7.2 Approach LOS A A A A Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 8.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.32 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 39.1 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Joseph Matthew J. Delich , P. E. 12/23/2005 Page 1 A3 G APPENDIX C Table 4- 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 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 0 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS I.cvclr�FScrvicc -- 13 C -- ri— T 1= Average T o al Dclay siWVC11 <10 > 10and_< 15 > 15 and ; 25 >25 and 35 >35and<50 > .50 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level -of -Service -- - •:e'iv'. : •;c, iy sec/vch A- -- B _ > 10 and < 20 >20and _<35 �> > 35 and _< 55 G > 55 and < 80 _ > SO a,o HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis short bkgd total 6: Elizabeth Street & Shields Street am m ' Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 ? Vi T+ +% I tt ? 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 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Said. Flow (prot) 1681 1700 1583 1770 1820 1770 3522 1770 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.24 1.00 1.00 Said. Flow (perm) 1681 1700 1583 1770 1820 210 3522 440 3539 1583 Volume (vph) 288 29 298 86 52 9 338 889 31 35 971 366 ' Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 Adj. Flow (vph) 300 30 310 101 61 11. 398 1046 36 38 .1067 402 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 261 0 6 0 0 2 0 0 .. 0 .209 Lane Group Flow (vph) 161 169 49 101 66 0 398 1080 0 38 :1067 "193 Turn Type ,; custom Perm custom pm+pt pm+pt Perm Protected Phases 4 4. 8 8 5 2 Permitted"Phases "' 4 4 8: 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.5 15.5 15.5 9.5 9.5 65.3 56.5 46.8 43.0 43.0 Effective Green, g (s) 16.5 16.5 . 16.5 10.5 10.5 66:3 57.5 48.81 44.0 44.0 Actuated. g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.10 0.10 0.63 0.55 0,46 0.42 0:42 ' Clearance Time (s) 5.0 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 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 263 266 248 176 181 403 1923 265 1479 661 ' v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 00.10 c0.06 0.04 c0.17 0.31 0.01 0.30 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 c0.45 0.06 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.64. 0.20 0.57 0.36 0.99 0.56 0.14 0.72 0.29 Uniform Delay, d1 41.4 41-6 38.6 45.3 44.3 29.4 15.6 15.6 25.5 20.3 Progression. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 Incremental:Delay, d2 4.2 4.9 0.4 4.5 1.2 41.1 1.2 0.2 3.1 1.1 Delay (s) 45.6 46.5 39.0 49.7 45.5 70.5 16.8 15.9 28.6 21.4 Level of Service D D D D D E B B C C Approach Delay (s) 42.6 48.0 31.3 26.4 Approach LOS D D C C ' Intersection,Summary- HCM Average Control Delay 32.0 HCM Level,of Service,. , :; - `' C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 ' Actuated Cycle Length (s) 105.3 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 ' c Critical Lane Group ' Joseph 12/23/2005 Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Page 2, /9 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis race hort bkgd total 6: West Elizabeth Street & Shields Street a� pm A --a. --V 'r *- k -4\ t ,• 4 -*1 Movement EBL EBT. EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 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 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00. 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Said. Flow (prot) 1681 1707 1583 1770 1770 1770 3506 1770 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1681 1707 1583 1770 1770 443 3506 457 3539 1583 Volume.(vph).: : - 214 34 282, ' 9 % 7 3 103 808 54 8 "" 730 94 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.85. 0.85 0.85 0.85 _0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85' 0.85- 0.85 Adj. Flow (vph) . .... . 252 40 . 332. 11 8.. -4. .121 951 .. 64 9 859 111 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 279 0 4 0 0 3 0 0 0 53 Lane Group,Ftow.(vph) 142 150 53 11 " - 8 0 121 1012 0 9 859 58 Turn Type . custom Perm custom pm+pt pm+pt,. Perm Protected Phases 4 4 8 .8 5 2 1' 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 - 6 6 Actuated.Green, G (s) 12.4 12.4 12.4 2.3 2.3 53.6 47.7 43.8 42.8 42.8 Effective Green; g (s) 13.4 13.4 13.4 3.3- .3.3 54.7 48.7 45.8 43.8 43.8 Actuated WC Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.04 0:04 0.66 0.58 0.55 0.53 0.53 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 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 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 270 274 254 70 70 400 2047 282 1859 831 v/s Ratio Prot: 0.08 c0.09 c0.01 000 c0.03 c0.29 0.00 0.24 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.17 0.02 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.53 '" 0.55 0.21 0.16 0.12 0.30 0.49 0.03 0.46 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 32.1 32.2 30.4 38.7 38.6 6.6 10.1 8.7 12.4 9.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.8 2.2 0.4 1.1 0.7. 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.8 0.2 Delay (s) 33.9 34.4 30.8 39.8 39.4 7.0 11.0 8.8 13.2 9.9 Level of Service C C C D D A B A B A Approach Delay (s) 32.4 39.6 10.6 12.8 Approach LOS C D B B Intersection Summary - HCM'Average Control Delay 16.5 ' HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 83.4 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Joseph 12/23/2005 Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Page 2 IS HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis seen short bkgd total 1: Elizabeth Street & City Park Avenue a - -4\ t ,• �. j .r Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations 1 0 0 1 t+ I A 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 ' Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.93 1.00 .0.92 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 - 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3476 1770 3485 1770 1724 1770 1717 Fit Permitted 0.28 1.00 0.34 1.00 0.66 1.00 0.62 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 513 3476. 642 3485 1232 1724 1146 :1717 Volume (vph) 59 506- 68 64 643 73 90 99 97 70 .61 66 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85' 0.85 0.85 Adj. Flow (vph) 68 582 78 70 699 79 106 116 114 82 72. 78 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 25 0 0 20 0 0 48 0 0 45 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 68 635 0 70 758 0 106 182 0 82 105 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2. 6 8 4 ' Permitted Phases 26 8 4 . Actuated Green, G (s) 15.2 15.2 15.2 15.2 17.2 17.2 17.2 17.2 Effective Green, g (s) 16.2 16.2 16.2 16.2 18.2 18.2 18.2 18.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time (s) 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 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 196 1328 245 1332 529 740 492 737 ' v/s Ratio Prot 0.18 c0.22 c0.11 0.06 v/s Ratio Perm 0.13 0.11 0.09 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.35 0.48 0.29 0.57 0.20 0.25 0.17 0.14 Uniform Delay, d1 9.3 9.9 9.1 10.3 7.6 7.7 7.4 7.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00 Incremental Delay, 412 1.1 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.4 Delay (s) 10.4 . 10.2 9.7 10.9 8.4 8.5 8.2 7.8 Level of Service B.,, B A-;, .. B A, A:;: A A Approach Delay (s) 10.2 10.8 8.5 7.9 Approach LOS B B A A ' Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.9 . HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.40 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 42A Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Joseph 12/23/2005 Matthew J. Delich., P. E. Page 1 1 17 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ilcShort bkgd total 1:.West Elizabeth Street & City Park Avenue pm Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL Lane Configurations I ?A I +A I A To 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.95 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3500 1770 3417 1770 1742 1770 1773 Fit Permitted. 0.61 1.00 0.32 '1.00 0.71 1.00 0.68 1.00 Said. Flow (perm) 1128 3500 596 3417 1316 1742 1269 1773 Volume (vph) 59 560 45 26 154 46 21 61 46 39 45 21 Peak -hour facto, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 0,85 0.85 0.85 Adj. Flow (vph) 69 659 53 31 181 54 23 67 51 46 53 25 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 34 0 0 30 0 0 15 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 69 696 0 31 201 0 23 88 0 46 63 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 15.2 15.2 15.2 15.2 Effective Green, g (s) 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.7 16.2 16.2 16.2 16.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Clearance Time (s) 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 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 426 1323 225 1291 548 725 528 738 v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.06 c0.05 0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.016 0.05 0.02 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.16 0.53 0.14 0.16 0.04 0.12 0.09 0.09 Uniform Delay, dl 8.0 9.4 7.9 8.0 6.7 7.0 6.9 6.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.2 Delay (s) 8.2 9.8 8.2 8.1 6.9 7.3 7.2 7.1 Level of Service A A A A A A A A Approach Delay (s) 9.6 8.1 7.2 7.1 Approach LOS A A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 38.9 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Joseph 12/23/2005 Matthew J. Delich , P. E. Page 1 j-6 No Text LUU:)/uLi,/ l3/mud IU:IJ Am lartrrtk, urntutttulr-> rAA no. JIU LLl OLOL r. UU1 City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations 626 Linden Street. PO Box 580 NortWSouth Street Shields Fort Col ins. CO 80522-0580 File Name : Shields & Elizabeth 2-16-05 EastlWest Street: Elizabeth Turning Movenwit Study Site Code :00000048 Time: PM Start Date : 2/16/2005 ,,=!P1 Number: 46 Page No : 2 77 Elizabeth Shields Elizabeth Sou6rbotrrd Westbound Northbound Eastbound Sett Rg TM Ped Apo. Lft ftig Tttr Pad App. Rig Th LeIPed App, Rig TK Ped App. Time td u S Total M U s Total M u s Total M u 3 Total rear l7YW rlwn V7.JY rM W Vl•I7 raw-rv.q n By 04.30 PM 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 04:30 PM Approach Vdume 368 971 35 16 1388 9 52. 88 50 107 31 689 '338 5 1263 298 29 288 0. 616 Percent 26. 70. ' 2.5 12 a.e 20. 43. 25. 70. 2 5 26_ 0.4 48. 4.7 46 0.0 4 0 4 7 4 4 8 5 a High h% 06:15 PM 05:15 PM 05:15 PM 04:30 PM Volume 98 277 1 2 378 1 18 22 21 62 7 267 100 1 375 71 9 79 0 159 Peak 0.91 0.70 0.84 0.96 Fadur 8 4 2 7 C J 14 [UUS/VU,/I ffiUN IU:IJ AM 1IMH'It, UrhxnitUrb fAA ROAM LLI bZUZ r.UUb City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations 626 Linden Street, PO Box 5W North/South Street Shiebs Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 File Name : Slibelds & ElbW)eth 2-16-05 East/West Street: Elizabeth Turning Movement Study Site Code :0000OD46 Thm: PM StartDate : 211612005 !l) Number 46 Page No : 1 (� GrotuwpsPrinted- Unstilted Shields Elizabeth S11reWs EI"vabcltb Sah hbound Westbound Northbound Easitnind 1:1.0 Sii Thr AM- Ped AM. Rig Thr Ned App. Rip rn Led Ped App. Mt u Lett e Total ht u UM a Total M u Left s Total ht u 8 TotalFac 1.0 1.0 10 1.0I 1A 1.01 1.01.01 1.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 04:30 PM 94 235 0 3 332 4 9 19 8 40 8 186 62 2 268 71 9 79 0 9 789 04.46 PM 77 189 32 4 302 1 7 24 12 44 9 243 93 2 347 82 5 69 0 150 849 Total 171 424 32 7 334 5 16 43 20 84 17 429 155 4 805 163 14 148 0 315 05:OOPM 97 270' 2 7 376 3 18 21 9 51 7 193 83 0 2a3 76 10 82 0 148 858 05:15 PM 98 277 1 .2 378 1 18 22 21 62 7 267 100 1 37S 69 5 78 0 152 967 Grand 365 971 35 16 1388 9 52 88 50 197 31 889 338 5 1263 298 29 288 0 615 3463 Total APPMh �0 26. 70. 25 12 4.8 2B. 43. 25. 25 70. 26 0.4 48- 4.7 46 0.0 4 0 4 7 4 4 8 5 a Total % 10. O 1.0 0.5 40.1 03 1.5 7-5 1 A 5.7 0.9 25. 9.8 0.1 38.5 8-6 0.8 8.3 0.0 17.8 Cl LN 0tt In TOW r-13-881 I JJ7a Jae 671 16 a � 0 3ti PO €� 2 •sm . 612003 S:1SAG FW EUftL-dftd C n T r ftd_ 3wI awl 311 s 120 M,e tp N Tpyl F 0 LUUD/Ut6/WZUf1 IU:13 AEC 1KEirr11. UrZKR11UlW> rAA NO. ylU LLI OLUL r. UUJ City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations 626 Lmden skeet PO Boot 580 NwWSoulh Skeet Shields Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 File Name : Shields K Elizabeth 2-18-05 East"est Slot Elizabeth TUM111v Movelnettt Study Site Code : 00000046 Time; AM Start Date : 2/16/2005 U Number: 4B Page No :2 Shk*k Elizabeth SN" EOrabeln . Southbound I Westbound Mmd Eastbound _ Pog nu l� Pea teR Left Ped Time N ToW ht u s Total ht u s Total ht u s Tohd reeK f W Awn ut;*u AM to Y6: to Am - redo 1 ar, 1 APProaBy 07:30 AM Ch 07:30 AM 07:30 AM 07:30 AM Volume 94 730 8 8 840 3 7 9 '1 20 54 808 103 12 977 282 34 214 3 533 Psroent 11. 86. 1.0 1.0 1& 35. 45 82- 10_ 12 52. 6.4 40 0.8 2 9 0 0 0 7 5 9 2 Hlgh hit 07.45 AM 08:00 AM 07:45 AM • 07:45 AM Volume 30 259 1 3 293 2 4 2 0 8 15 276 17 3 312 104 10 81 2 197 Peak 0.71 0.02 0.78 0.67 Factor 7 5 3 6 W lot Total /a LUU7/11Ct,/ly/MVA lu:lL Hm inmrriu urrmjiura rAd nu. Uiu LLl OLOL r. uuL ° City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations ' 626 Linden Street, PO Box 580 NorowSouth Street Shiebs Fort Collins, CO 80522-OSM File Name : Sh'm&ls & EUmbath 2-18A5 EasiMteat Street' Ef¢abelb Turning Movement study Slle Code : 00000046 Time- AM Start Date : 2/18/2005 U Number. 46 Page No : 1 G�o+Mu Prit+ted- UnSwRed Souetound Shxkft EOzabeth Shy Elimbeth Eastbound Scan• Rio Thr APP• Rig TM W APP Rio TK /We. Rig Thr � Ped APR �- Time td uLeft s Totem ht u s Totat td u s Total M u s To Total Factor fA 1A to 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1. 1.0 1.0 t.0 1.0 1.0 .0 1.0 1.0 0730 AM 16 176 3 5 200 1 0 3 1' S 1 3 93 6 56 1 156 551 07.45 AM 30 259 1 3 293 0 1 3 0 4 18 276 17 3 312 104 10 81 2 197 808 Total 48 435 4 8 493 1 1 6 1 9 465 38 197 18 137 3 353 1387 08.00 At& 25 115 0 0 140 2 4 2 0 8 22 188 34 2 246 39 5 46 0 90 484 08:15 AM 23 180 4 0 207 0 2 1 0 3 10 155 30 4 109 46 13 31 0 90 409 Gravid 94 730 8 8 840 3 7 9 1 2D 54 808 103 12 9T7 282 34 214 3 533 2370 Total AMm,h% t2 1.0 t.0 10 5.0 5.5 87 16 12 52. 9 6.4 4l2 0.8 9 0 0 Total % 4.0 3t- o.3 0.3 35.4 0.1 0.3 0.4 04 0.9 2.3 341. 4.3 0.6 41.2 1 9 1.4 9.0 0.1 22.5 Out H TOW 941 730 T 4 ` 1. n . NoAh a � 7r2A QAON MAM 0 r= lV p O Left T ar 1031 001z cul ,tee In TOb1 I/ 'LUU5/VtU/H/MUN 1U:14 AM 11fA M, UY1S1fMILM M ROAM LZI bLUZ r. Uld City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations 6W t.a1dw street. PO eox 560 N O&JSoulh Street My Park Fort Co8'in8, CO 80522-0580 FNe Name : City Park & E6abeth 3-3"5 1 SflWeet street Elizabeth Turning Nava nerrt Study Site Code : 00000114 urre Phil Start OWe : 3f3COM 1 U Number. 114 Page No :2 Ov Park Swaim" EJ®beth Wesbaad CSY Park Nbr9lboard Efmadeth EEasibOtrrld Time ht u LeftTotal M u Leff 8 TOW la u a Total M u left Pe0 a TOW HCa[ MIN "Um uq:*u rM to W. vp rM - V%WK a W I APP� 04:30 PM 04M PM 04:30 PM Vakrme 66 W 70 7 .2W 73 643 64 2 782 97 99 90 2 288 32. 29. Percent4 34. 9.4 s3 82 8.z a3 33. 34. 31. 0.7 9 3 2 7 4 3 Rob* 04:w PM 05:15 PM 05:15 PM Vokane 12 20 23 6 61 17 176 19 0 211 32 31 39 0 102 Peak 0.83 0.92 0.70 Faclar 6 7 6 G C2 04:30 PM 66 506 59 7 838 10. 79. 92 1.1 3 3 05:15 PM 17 140 24 1 182 0.87 6 to ZUUS/RUN/MUN IU:14 AM IM?It. UrhKAIILM PAX No• y-/U ZZI bzbz r. Uld City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations see Unden Street, PO Bm 580 NwWSoldh Sbeek Cdy Perk Fort ColUns, CO 80522-0580 F;M Name : City Park & FJizabeM 3-31-09 EasMest Sheet. E6zebelh Turning Movement Study Ske Code : 00000114 PM Start Date : 3/30*005 ICU Number. 114 Pape No : 1 CkmamPtiMed- thuhbw Cly Park Soudibound Mebeth Westbound CRY Park Northbound UnIbeM Easdnmd Tioe ft ht TW u LeR Pgd 8 MP• Tadl �9 M TN u lt8 Ped s AAO- Tobd w9 It Thr u Left Pod 8 App. Total Po9 M TM u Ldt S hPP Total Total F 1.0 1. 30 PM 04s45 PM 12 16 20 11 23 15 1 43 17 148 17 1 181 23 24 15 1 63 18 138 11 3 170 457 Total 28 31 38 7 104 40 297 28 1 308 49 42 26 2 119 31 339 25 5 30D 809 O G MAD PM 16 16 15 0 47 16 171 W 1 205 16 26 25 0 67 18 127 10 1 156 475 05.15 PU 22 14 17 0 53 17 175 19 0 211 32 31 39 0 102 17 140 24 1 182 548 Cxalyd TOW 66 61 70 7 2D4 73 043 64 2 782 97 99 90 2 288 86 506 59 7 . 638 1912 AppFch % 32. 29. 34 3"4 9.3 82 2 8.2 0.3 33. 34. 31. 0"7 10- 79. 92 1.1 4 9 3 7 4 3 3 3 TOW% 3.5 32 3.7 OR 10.7 3.8 6 3.3 0.1 40.9 5.1 52 4.7 0.1 15.1 3.5 2 . 3-1 0.4 33.4 i A LUU3/unU/ ty/MUd tU:l4 AM IxPxrtt, urrxrulurtro ree NO. UIU ccl OLOC r. U13 City of Fort Co16ns Traffic Operations 625 Linden Street, PO Box 880 NortltlSouth Street: City Park Fort Collins. CO 805224)580 Re Name : City Pask & Eftabeth 3-31-05 r-.Eastl4yest Street Ekmb� Tuning Movem d Shtdy Slte Code : 00000114 t �me: qM Start Date : W02005 `--YCU Nwn6et': 114 Paige No :2 C ly Perk E h CRY Park Ers<abft Souftound Westherad fftu bound EssWound Stan t TM LeftFM I APP, I Hilg Iry I Left Ped App Rt8 1 Left I APP. Ftig 7M LeftPed TIm6 fit s TOM M u s TOM M u s TOW M u s -W Total s-aa rasa rswn vs..ns s� W wa. �� stiws � rr�a � w � ch 07:30 AM 07:30 AM Vdww 21 45 39 8 113 33 164 26 1 214 Percer6 1& 39. 34. 7'1 15. 72- 12_ 0 5 6 8 5 4 0 1 High hd. 08:15 AM 08M AM Vdwne 7 14 10 2 33 6 50 6 1 63 Peak 0.&S 0.84 Fedor 8 .9 G cN 07:30 AM 07:30 AM 46 61 21 3 131 45 560 59 2 SW 35. 46. 16.. 2.3 84.. 6.9 0.3 8 .6.8 07.45 AM 07:45 AM 16 16 4 0 38 12 198 19 1 230 0.91 0.72 0 4 I c_uwi urIU/ Ia/MVU Iv.11 nm inrvrit, urLEl111tAw rNA 140. 3IU LLI OLUL r. U14 City of Fort Coffins Traffic Operations NortiJSouth SUvet City Pak 1526 Fortrt�nden S CO t.O22-0580 File Name = �e Street City Park 8 t3zabe0t 3 31 05 l/ M Tuming tlroeemertt Study SPoe Code : 00000114 �fCU Number 114 SW Date : 3/3012005 Page No :1 Groups Pm Ied- Lk*htlWd City Park Ef mbeth City Park E-Wbelh SOUO*oLmd Wesmomd NodMand Easfhound Staff R4 Thr Left P80 Pod App. R'B . Thr Ped App. Rg Thr Ped App. InL Time M u S Total M ' u Left a Total ht u Left a Tafal M u a Totet Total F .0 1. 1 1.0 1. L 1, 1 1. 1.0 1. 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1 0720 1 1 3 1 07A8 AM 7 12 12 0 31 9 45 8 0 62 16 16 4 0 36 12 198 19 1 230 359 Toq) 11 25 21 2 59 167 13 0 106 23 33 10 1 67 19 370 39 2 430 662 08 00 AM 3 6 6 4 21 8 50 8 1 63 12 14 2 1 29 13 94 16 0 123 236 MISAM 7 14 10 2 33 11 27 7 0 45 11 14 .9 1 35 13 96 4 0 113 226 Gmrw Total 21 45 39 8 113 33 154 26 1 214 46 61 21 3 131 46 560 69 2 666 1124 Apprch % 1& 39. 34. 71 15. 72. 12. 0'S 35. 46. 16- 23 6.8 84 &9 0.3 8 8 5 4 0 1 1 6 0 1. TOW % 1.9 4.0 3.5 0.7 10.1 22 17 7-3 0.1 19.0 4.1 &4 1.9 0.3 11.7 4.0 4 - 52 0.2 59.3 SY no.4ao 4/s 7 U i 171 91 t a r 9 x. • I iSt aL I I �y':G^vr'xJh •.� V�*. 3 j �t�%- n R� C i I 11 I '7 fel> �•,I �f +� iw•:^.�..f<I T� a.� 1 � s,� i( �q "� a ��.; ua' •Y fi. '',, tr .: .y1=d�dy a •. r nr ��a1� 6 '>I _ er n aT"' l�li � � Y� t a n.. 7 i,� I .' r 1 i 3'fi I ^�+ Y,-•� � �. J � .,� I ' � � G I ril ;� r.. . raw:r x u •I i , j++'Tx / . I! 0.. � i .� r I r A r i n• '•°^`ax r Ur I R _ r ! � 12 `l1 � 'Su'st Fe11. I i y, � � �� I + • �• •1 � 5 I r T • i o i I e � I� �' I n « < �.'.CI� � � i � r n 3 g I "°' ,t K, _ _."r�•r r t±� I yy � f � � +t �_. a � �� 4� � '. R° ✓.. 1, a {{l5�y��'�, r °F ,.�; t �o r-o�i 0. 1 C<.NV- � a . v pi ♦ L..� �f _ r .' nn. I� 4 ..}. e" � fN4yn 4 ".. �� i•� ` t i Y {.q•• f �'I • �� Li� V .2i. i' ':1 \ r 'i 1, 'I� �, ,. Y f 'w'>i }�i � 1+ ✓ 5 47 �, 1' n r lrv".'i� � I 1t�+, y� ..�.J I � ' I. �le ,nr� •°i ti� _'{j�� d;'.rc '��n ql f iL`a a �•, �' ^4 �� Y :+! .YP �^'4� n ;� s�' „�l III I i3 I !ft p S .l I �i> �I 1....,..� �I! S'" Y�-• +'f'" a.f•`�,T 1 �� ' e0tl . Y r I _IJIi�411i11 ^4� } I,.. . �� y1p p � t. s_ � ._ n � a.rr cfw•. ............. rvm ...-;.�.7.a.aaew>P�.�r � � n .....__ „' c � .-w-•-w .. I '.n ,� ,:wu� zr"'7f rw t s r � € �11'i ^ s 'sa,.. ✓ e �'` i,r �I.Yv-s.y.. Y'w -7- !• yy, f —^-,y• r �. C %f.,, a '' i T gp�� H Y i I I J I' r°sr',^,i e r r S d ✓s / i {'a 1'` i 71 n e4 TP� 3 Yim4. b� I a: ey '� �,, �.IX,� ae�3µ(�y,' r� � �,dt^ e� � Rrftwe _k- �•W �� t. I„�f r•� { �� I S `` NI _--' III � r a -KS ir� :..,,' � � °j9 '� , i5M N �• A 1 � I ` 11 � _ .. A f� y�.l s I fY...t� J `�tf ! .. _" 4 y •✓i :r .,,may,:, z t� Y' a 'a" ' r�r I'' i i ' 1 `$ . a �,ly / .Pp ..,^•.r.`rr rim � � . .r.r i h Y, F" I p L;�, � t .: ri � ,+o x 'I � I - ., ,jY�-f++_PNA 4 � l !'t 1 o•cY r "'r '�aK.J I'.flI (�1' RI .,i a y l•.1 "LL :.�. � .M1 � �.�:� � �l�'i4 � ,�f ♦ � i Y � � ' I Li.. �_ r t� yl� £ {7 by r ( a '•� � � ?'. ' �;�'� ,.'"+fit o- I I �' a � � ' � R. n a Inn ' �r } { ' a � � ,,t rn i l I ry i CAMPUS WEST Vb--br::V&:LoPt4-A-i -r 4'40% AL itsJTrip Generation. Code Use gQe AWDTE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Rate Trips Rate In Rae Out Ram In Rate Out ZZp AARTMW 33 R u. (,')Z zsO 4 o.1 U 3 t b.41 1¢ !v 0.4-0 13 s a z Z 3 3z S►T- 'JOw.0 1 rAuPAOJ �1o6 I29.r5- S �o zoo 11Ao s 4 q 2� 1 0 1-1IS s.s3 JZ 6-UP Z? 11 ►q kZ� 1 7 tZ a33 �t W'C,6( 1.Qi Z,tn 13kU 540 Ax . �1 a b'�,� 13 6.Z4 I Z q33 A6L,` Z eor-peE kilo qw 360 VLs' 41 19 45- 18 4.97 1q ►3.52 t-t 7 14 ETA I L io.4 - Qd.32 4b0 180 a.3i� 4- z 0.30 TOTAL 3810 Il5 t20 to g To-rAL 151U 4.1 48. 4Z 33 Asswkep * a. ZS oP FM P&Ae ZAT65�i�E(�5�-�►�Ecr�auAz�IstR�&cJTo� F?-Oq `t"�PLttr¢ Pays 26, � F - �/d'�r��'vC�T,� CMr /Xfl-- *87. �iKSr FLovfe C5r:5TUOb z t RV.,. .wxwo P(CC'Z Schematic Plans Campus West Redevelopment Maxiimo Development Group LLC October 10, 2005 West Elizabeth st. & City Park ave. kenney v associates 11c �Awl �7 R �¢ Wt t RV, ~' jS—F-e+t'_ 2� hi( .. y+4 � '� � � ✓.': �u rtw �3 �i i xl It, ILI 10) ffS i.r ,l _ f Y5 i 4 �{{ rF owl IN y 8 n z .G a:'� �.� ,9F ra +3 13, •.x i >r I�S'.i � i .C.'.�41� b jp c - � t ,4 3 E r°a c q � I �. � ; T� s'�.�Crri --SlA rir� �•, � � .tea 1 is .vI Ep t ri 1-7 Zv. Ir I Iy1 4gA } A �. ri •r'ii i 3 V� r Chapter — Afiachments Attachment A Transportation Impact Study Base Assumptions Project Information Project Name dA&4Pu S k1,15cor 6D9VEL OPA4&kJ-r Project Location SE QUAV>0AWr CP W• &I rA - (2r Y PAIZK TIS Assumptions Type of Study Full: Yes Intermediate: ,V 0 Study Area Boundaries North: &LiZAp6rrA South:,5,r6 4cC&SS EastSr-'G Access West: C r ry A t2K Study Years ShortRange: 2008 L&s Range: 29 ff,,o z S Future Traffic Growth Rate 4,oq t u AC A K PA f rep ''T A RLW Study Intersections 1. All access drives 5- 2 6. 3 ' 7. 4. 8- Time Period for Study AM: 7:00-9:00 M: 4:00-6:00 Sat Noon: Trip Generation Rates 64 7 — A r-rAC4&'D Trip Adjustment Factors Passb3r ?&e t T4;- Captive S0 M tP Market: 5 S� Overall Trip DistributionSEE ATTACHED SKETCH Mode Split Assumptions u$TRuT to L WALK 0 t KE' — >40 Committed Roadway Improvements AJO T A aJ A ?-G OP 4A) V Other Traffic Studies e PoV (POr Areas Requiring Special Study Date: l Z • !C ' f6S— Traffic Engineer. Local Entity Engineer. _ LIC 44 AssoclA Larhrm County Urban Area Sheet S — Wepeafed and Reermcied October 1, MM Adopted by l mmm Couro, My of U aleW. My of Fort Coons Page 4-35 9 APPENDIX A I IV. CONCLUSIONS . This study assessed the impacts of the Campus West Redevelopment on the short range (2008) and long range (2025) street system in the ' vicinity of the proposed development. As a result of this analysis, the following is concluded: - The development of the Campus West Redevelopment is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. At full development, the Campus West Redevelopment will generate approximately 2300 daily vehicle trip ends, 140 morning peak hour vehicle trip ends, and 109 ' afternoon peak hour vehicle trip ends. It is expected that a significant number of trip ends to/from the Campus West Redevelopment will be by walk and bike. ' - Current operation at the key intersections is acceptable with existing controls and geometry. - In the short range (2008) future, given development of the Campus West Redevelopment and an increase in background traffic, the key intersections are shown to operate acceptably. - In the long range (2025) future, given development of the Campus West Redevelopment and an increase in background traffic, the key tintersections are shown to operate acceptably. Short range (2008) and long range (2025) geometry is shown in Figure 10. It is recommended that a TWLTL be considered in this segment of West Elizabeth Street. - Acceptable level of service is achieved for bicycle and transit t modes based upon the measures in the multi -modal transportation guidelines. For pedestrians, not all factors attain the desired level of service for a "pedestrian district." The street-scape of ' this segment of West Elizabeth Street was recently improved by the City. It is not likely that further pedestrian improvements will be made in the foreseeable future. 23 Existing traffic volumes at the West Elizabeth/City Park intersection indicate that the warrant for a right -turn lane is met for the West Elizabeth Street legs in at least one peak hour. No right -turn lanes approaching this intersection currently exist. There are significant constraints to adding these right -turn lanes or the City would have already built them. This small development could not be expected to make these improvements and it may be the desire of the City to not have these right -turn lanes. Pedestrian Level of Service Appendix G shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Campus West Redevelopment. There are five pedestrian destinations within 1320 feet of the Campus West Redevelopment. These are: 1) the commercial and residential areas to the north of the site, 2) the Colorado State University Campus area to the east of the site, 3) the commercial areas to the east of the site, 4) the residential areas to the northwest of the site, and 5) the commercial and residential areas to the west of the site. This site is in an area type termed "pedestrian district." Acceptable pedestrian level of service cannot be achieved for all pedestrian destinations. The Pedestrian LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix G. The minimum level of service for a "pedestrian district" is A for all categories except street crossing, which is B. It is unlikely that improvements will be done to bring this area up to desired pedestrian levels of service, since West Elizabeth Street from City Park Avenue to Elizabeth street was recently improved by the City. ' Bicycle Level of Service Based upon Fort Collins bicycle LOS criteria, the only bicycle ' destinations are the commercial areas along the West Elizabeth Street corridor. This site connects directly to bike lanes on West Elizabeth Street, which achieves level of service B. ' Transit Level of Service This area of Fort Collins will continue to be served by transit service according to the Fort Collins Transit Plan. It will achieve level of service B for public transit. 22 Q L Y in L ^^c ILL t U West --�— Elizabeth —� Street 1 -as - Denotes Lane SHORT RANGE (2008) AND LONG RANGE (2025) GEOMETRY Figure 10 21 TABLE 6 Long Range (2025) Total Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Level of Service AM PM West Elizabeth/City Park (signal) EB LT A B EB T/RT A A EB APPROACH A A WB LT A A WB T/RT A B WB APPROACH A B NB LT A A NB T/RT A A NB APPROACH A A SB LT A A SB T/RT A A SB APPROACH A A OVERALL A B West Elizabeth/Shields (signal) EB LT C D EB LT/T C D EB RT C D EB APPROACH C D WB LT D D WB T/RT D D WB APPROACH D D NB LT A E NB T/RT B B NB APPROACH B C SB LT A B SB T B D SB RT B C SB APPROACH B D OVERALL B D City Park/Site Access (stop sign) EB LT/T/RT A B WB LT/RT A B SB LTfr A A West Elizabeth/Site Access (stop sign) EB LT A B WB LT A A NB LT/T/RT C D SB LT/T/RT C D 20 TABLE 5 Short Range (2008) Total Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Level of Service AM, PM West Elizabeth/City Park (signal) EB LT A B EB T/RT A B EB APPROACH A B WB LT A A WB T/RT A B WB APPROACH A B NB LT A A NB T/RT A A NB APPROACH A A SB LT A A SB T/RT A A SB APPROACH A A OVERALL A B West Elizabeth/Shields (signal) EB LT C D EB LT/T C D EB RT C D EB APPROACH C D WB LT D D WB T/RT D D WB APPROACH D D NB LT A E NB T/RT B B NB APPROACH B D SB LT A B SB T B D SB RT B C SB APPROACH B C OVERALL B D City Park/Site Access (stop sign) EB LTIT/RT A B WB LT/RT A B SB LT/T A A West Elizabeth/Site Access (stop sign) EB LT A A WB LT A A NB LT/T/RT C C SB LT/T/RT C D 19 TABLE 4 Long Range (2025) Background Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Level of Service AM PM . West Elizabeth/City Park (signal) EB LT A B EB T/RT A A EB APPROACH A B WB LT A A WB T/RT A B WB APPROACH A B NB LT A A NB T/RT A A NB APPROACH A A SB LT A A SB T/RT A A SB APPROACH A A OVERALL A B West Elizabeth/Shields (signal) EB LT C D EB LT/T C D EB RT C D EB APPROACH C D WB LT D D WB T/RT D D WB APPROACH D D NB LT A E NB T/RT B B NB APPROACH B C SB LT A B SB T B D SB RT A C SB APPROACH B D OVERALL B D 18 TABLE 3 Short Range (2008) Background Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Level of Service AM PM West Elizabeth/City Park (signal) EB LT A B EB T/RT A B EB APPROACH A B WB LT A A WB T/RT A B WB APPROACH A B NB LT A A NB T/RT A A NB APPROACH A A SB LT A A SB T/RT A A SB APPROACH A A OVERALL A A West Elizabeth/Shields (signal) EB LT C D EB LT/T C D EB RT C D EB APPROACH C D WB LT D D WB T/RT D D WB APPROACH D D NB LT A E NB T/RT B B NB APPROACH. B C SB LT A B SB T B D SB RT B C SB APPROACH B C OVERALL B C 17 Signal Warrants Signal Warrants Elizabeth/City Park signalized. The two spacing requirements. Operation Analysis were not analyzed in this TIS. The West and West Elizabeth/Shields intersections are site access intersections do not meet signal Capacity analyses were performed at the key intersections. The operations analyses were conducted for the short range and long range analysis reflecting a year 2008 and 2025, respectively. Given that the, two major intersections are already signalized, it is not likely that they would be considered for roundabout control. The City Traffic Engineer agreed that roundabout analyses would not be required at these intersections. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 5, the key intersections operate in the short range (2008) background condition as indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix C. All the key intersections will operate acceptably. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 6, the key intersections operate in the long range (2025) background traffic future as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix D. All the key intersections will operate acceptably. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 8, the key intersections operate in the short range (2008) total traffic future as indicated in Table 5. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix E. All the key intersections will operate acceptably. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 9, the key intersections operate in the long range (2025) total traffic future as indicated in Table 6. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix F. All the key intersections will operate acceptably. Geometry Figure 10 shows a schematic of the short range range (2025) geometry. This is the current geometry. Fort Collins, left -turn lanes are required on arterial is already a two-way left -turn lane (TWLTL) striped segment of West Elizabeth Street. It is recommended striping remain. The number of left -turns in and out driveways fit the guideline warrants for application of "Intersection Channelization Design Guide," NCHRP 279. (2008) and long In the City of streets. There median in this that the TWLTL of the various a TWLTL in the 16 > CD Q 2 Y (n m 0 a "a L U tZ W OD Nm a 55/85 + 1801715 35175 65/65 f 635/570 — I I I 0 o u') 55/80 --4 LO 0 to O O �- O O N 30/20 10/5 0/15 --�( f r NOM. O o 0/10 M o M N o O � LO u> v v o 25/45 'r o 5/10 cv z v — 215f795 °' `- 20/20 + 10/60 10/95 /— 60/40 West 245/330 Elizabeth 660f710 40/35 —� Street LO O LO 20/20 , � O o 325/340 •— Z N c°�n° o N co N co O AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles LONG RANGE (2025) TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 9 15 W M C .r > Y in L CA 4_ _a U cn o c � � � � 55/80 `I~ C° v �- 1651660 35/70 � 60/60 1 t r 585/525 o o Ln 50/75 o o to Lr) U) .- o N o N 30/20 10/5 0/15 NOM. —► to o 0/10 N o � � N o 0p UCQ 0 o r ao 0 � 25145 U') � 5/10 B IN z c --a*_ 200/730 20/20 � � � 10/55 10/90 � 60/40 west 230/305 � t r 605/645 -� Elizabeth 35/30 - � U') Street to N 20120 , o p o 300/315 Z N c� Q U) oV to �CD —�— AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles SHORT RANGE (2008) TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 8 14 Q Y N a_ Lm 00 5/3 co �— 8/5 4/3 14/12 --m- � 1 7n� N � 28/20 �—sis Go O � 4/3 17/17 4/3 — 20/17 a`o v to 0 N Q�Sl� TrI West 3etth Street 12/8 1 0/1 0 12/8 o A& N SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 7 13 to o Cc N N C /` 1 65/65 620/560 50/75 > Q) Q Y (n N M Qr _� U) U 50180 �— 170/710 30/70 f r 0 0 0 0 n00 N r� U) West Elizabeth Street • AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles LONG RANGE (2025) BACKGROUND PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC I& N U) LO IT O N 0 to 0V)0 5/10 �-- 10/60 f /—10/95 235/320 1 t 40/35 — to o LO 310/330 , o LO " co N '- co O Figure 6 12 L L Co - 50175 IN IT IT 155/655 30/65 60/60 t 5701515 0 0 0 45/70 Lo o 0 r 0 to O (0 N West Elizabeth Street - w— AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles SHORT RANGE (2008) BACKGROUND PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC N O 1 O O r� uO �c0oo 5/10 0) r,- `- f— 10/55 10/90 220/295 1 f r 35/30 — U) uO U') 285/305 ce) Q O VO OD Figure 5 11 35%/30% H 0 to 0 0 SITE TRIP DISTRIBUTION West Elizabeth Street Residential/Commercial 0 0 0 N N 10%/0% Figure 4 10 TABLE 2 Daily and Peak Hour Trip Generation Code, -Use Size AWDTE- :^, AM Peak Hour :: PM, Peak,Hour Rate Sdpb„ Rate,'.:'. In - Rate ' OuE, . Rate: -In '-Rate 220 Apartment 33 D.U. 6.72 220 0.10 3 0.41 14 0.40 13 0.22 7 935 Sit -Down Restaurant 4.05 KSF 127.15 510 5.99 24 5.53 22 6.66 27 4.26 17 935 Sit -Down Restaurant 2.8 KSF 127.15 360 5.99 17 5.53 15 6.66 19 4.26 12 933 Table 4 Sandwich Shop 1.9 KSF 716 1360 69 t0 20 11 12 21 6.76 13 6.24 12 933 Table 2 Coffee 1.25 KSF 716 900 37.25 47 35.78 45 14.97 19 13.82 17 814 Retail 10.4 KSF 44.32 460 0.38' 4 0.30" 3 1.19 12 1.52 16 BikeMalk Reduction 1 40% 1510 47 48 42 33 Total 2300 68 72 61 48 - u.zn or em eeaK xatesixeverse mrectionai uistrioution ** Derived From Table 4 PM -Regular Fast -Food w/o Drive-Thru (Ratio) 9 West Elizabeth Street A& N SCALE 1 of = 60' SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 3 8 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Campus West Redevelopment is located in the southeast ' quadrant of the West Elizabeth/City Park intersection in Fort Collins. Figure 3 shows a site plan of the Campus West Redevelopment. The short range analysis (year 2008) includes development of the Campus West Redevelopment and an appropriate increase in background traffic ' due to normal growth and other potential developments in the area. The long range analysis year is 2025. Trip Generation ' Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this upon the existing and proposed street system. A compilation of 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. This site being close to -the Colorado State University campus, a reduction (40%) was taken for the trips that are expected to walk or bike to and from this site. Table 2 shows the expected trip generation on a daily and peak hour basis. tTrip Distribution ' Trip distribution for the Campus West Redevelopment was estimated using 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 was discussed and agreed to in the scoping meeting. ' Background Traffic Projections Figures 5 and 6 show the respective short range (2008) and long ' range (2025) background traffic projections. Background traffic projections for the short range future horizon were obtained by reviewing the NFRRTP. ' 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 7 shows the ' site generated peak hour traffic assignment of the Campus West Redevelopment site. Figures 8 and 9 show the respective short range (2008) and long range (2025) total (site plus background) peak hour ' traffic at the key intersections with the development of the Campus West Redevelopment. Since Colorado State University was on Christmas break when this TIS was begun, the peak hour traffic volume on accesses near the Campus West Redevelopment were derived from Trip Generation, 7th Edition, ITE, per the existing land uses. 1 TABLE 1 Current Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Level of Service AM PM West Elizabeth/City Park (signal) EB LT A B EB T/RT A B EB APPROACH A B WB LT A A WB T/RT A B WB APPROACH A B NB LT A A NB T/RT A A NB APPROACH A A SB LT A A SB T/RT A A SB APPROACH A A OVERALL A A West Elizabeth/Shields (signal) EB LT C D EB LT/T C D EB RT C D EB APPROACH C D WB LT D D WB T/RT D D WB APPROACH D D NB LT A E NB T/RT B B NB APPROACH B C SB LT A B SB T B C SB RT A C SB APPROACH B C OVERALL B C Lo M f 1 > Q L Y L (n cc w a v s U �— 46n3 M Lo rn � 154/643 26/64 J 1 � f 59/59 --" 1 � r 560/506 i O rn h 45/68 °' °' m N (O V West Elizabeth Street �1000,01IT147Ji1 N 3/9 +-- 7/52 9/86 214/288 --)� 1 f r 34/29 — ro rn r 282/298 1 ;5 � 0 0 `n W RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 2 5 through/right-turn lane. Shields Street southbound has a left -turn lane, two through lanes and a right -turn lane. The existing speed limit in this area of Shields Street is 30 mph. Existing Traffic Recent peak hour traffic counts at the key existing intersections are shown in Figure 2. The traffic data for the West Elizabeth/City Park and West Elizabeth/Shields intersections was collected in March and February 2005, respectively, by the City of Fort Collins. Raw traffic counts are provided in Appendix A. Existing Operation The counted 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 B. The key intersections operate acceptably overall during both the morning and afternoon peak hours. The Campus West Redevelopment site is in an area termed "commercial corridor." In "commercial corridors," acceptable overall operation at signalized intersections during the peak hours is defined as level of service D or better. At signalized intersections, acceptable operation of any leg and any movement is level of service E. At unsignalized intersections, in commercial corridors, there is no minimum level of service criteria. In such areas, it is expected that there would be substantial delays to the minor street movements during the peak hours. This is considered to be normal in urban areas. 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 B. Pedestrian Facilities Sidewalks exist adjacent to existing developments on all area streets. There are pedestrian crosswalks and ramps at the West Elizabeth/City Park and West Elizabeth/Shields intersections. This site is within 1320 feet of: existing residential areas, commercial/retail uses, and office uses. Bicycle Facilities There are bicycle facilities along West Elizabeth Street and Shields Street. Transit Facilities This area is served (within 1320 feet) by transit routes 2, 3, 6, and 11. 9 Q 3 N c 0 Plum Street a� c Q U) v cu a —y :c U) West Elizabeth Street ---------------------------- Campus West Redevelop SITE LOCATION University Avenue ent Springfield Drive SCALE: 1 "=500' Figure 1 3 ' II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location of the Campus West Redevelopment 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 primarily commercial or residential. There are commercial uses to the north, east, and west of the site. There are residential uses to the north and south of the site. The center of Fort Collins lies to the east of the proposed Campus West ' Redevelopment. Campus West Redevelopment is in a commercial district/corridor. Roads The primary streets near the Campus West Redevelopment site are ' West Elizabeth Street, City Park Avenue, and Shields Street. The following descriptions are based upon a site visit and review of the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. West Elizabeth Street is to the north (adjacent) of the Campus West Redevelopment site. It is classified as a four -lane arterial according to the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, West Elizabeth Street has a four -lane cross section in this area. At the West Elizabeth/City Park intersection, West Elizabeth Street has an ' eastbound and westbound left -turn lane, a through lane in each direction, and a through/right-turn lane in each direction. The West Elizabeth/City Park intersection is signalized. At the West Elizabeth/Shields intersection, West Elizabeth Street eastbound has a left -turn lane, a left-turn/through lane and a right -turn lane. The westbound leg of the West Elizabeth/Shields intersection is the Moby Arena Parking lot. This leg has a westbound left -turn lane and a through/right-turn lane. The West Elizabeth/Shields intersection is signalized. The existing speed limit in this area of West Elizabeth Street is 30 mph. City Park Avenue is to the west (adjacent) of the Campus West Redevelopment site. It is classified as a local street according to the Fort Collins Master Street plan. Currently, City Park Avenue has a two- lane cross section. At the West Elizabeth/City Park intersection, City Park Avenue has a northbound and southbound left -turn lane and a through/right-turn lane in each direction. The existing speed limit in ' this area of City Park Avenue is 25 mph. Shields Street is to the east of the Campus West Redevelopment ' site. It is classified as a four -lane arterial according to the Fort Collins Master Street plan. Currently, Shields Street has a four -lane cross section. At the West Elizabeth/Shields intersection, Shields Street northbound has a left -turn lane, a through lane, and a 2 I. INTRODUCTION This full transportation impact study (TIS) addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near the proposed Campus West Redevelopment. The proposed Campus West Redevelopment is located in the southeast quadrant of the West Elizabeth/City Park intersection in Fort Collins, Colorado. During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project planner (Kenney & Associates), project engineer (Messer Engineering Associates), and the City of Fort Collins staff. This 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). 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; - 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 ............................. 5 3. Site Plan ............................................ 8 4. Trip Distribution .................................... 10 5. Short Range (2008) Background Peak Hour Traffic ...... 11 6. Long Range (2025) Background Peak Hour Traffic ....... 12 7. Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic ..................... 13 8. Short Range (2008) Total Peak Hour Traffic ........... 14 9. Long Range (2025) Total Peak Hour Traffic ............ 15 10. Short Range (2008) and Long Range Geometry ........... 21 APPENDIX A Base Assumptions Form/Peak Hour Traffic Counts B Current Peak Hour Operation/Level of Service Descriptions C Short Range Background Traffic Operation D Long Range Background Traffic Operation E Short Range Total Traffic Operation F Long Range Total Traffic Operation G Pedestrian Level of Service Worksheets TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Introduction ......................................... 1 II. Existing Conditions .................................. 2 LandUse ............................................. 2 Roads................................................ 2 Existing Traffic ..................................... 4 Existing Operation ................................... 4 Pedestrian Facilities ................................ 4 Bicycle Facilities ................................... 4 Transit Facilities ................................... 4 III. Proposed Development ................................. 7 Trip Generation ...................................... 7 Trip Distribution .................................... 7 Background Traffic Projections ....................... 7 Trip Assignment ...................................... 7 Signal Warrants ...................................... 16 Operation Analysis ................................... 16 Geometry............................................. 16 Pedestrian Level of Service .......................... 22 Bicycle Level of Service ............................. 22 Transit Level of Service ............................. 22 IV. Conclusions .......................................... 23 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Current Peak Hour Operation .......................... 6 2. Trip Generation ...................................... 9 3. Short Range (2008) Background Peak Hour Operation .... 17 4. Long Range (2025) Background Peak Hour Operation ..... 18 5. Short Range (2008) Total Peak Hour Operation ......... 19 6. Long Range (2025) Total Peak Hour Operation ......... 20 CAMPUS WEST REDEVELOPMENT TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY FORT COLLINS, COLORADO DECEMBER 2005 Prepared for: Kenney & Associates 209 East 4"' Street Loveland, Co 80537 Prepared by: DELICH ASSOCIATES 2272 Glen Haven Drive Loveland, CO 80538 Phone: 970-669-2061 FAX: 970-669-5034