The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutINTERSTATE LAND - ODP - 49-02A - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - TRAFFIC STUDYN Multimodal Transportation Level of Service Manual LOS Standards for Development Review - Bicyc!e Figure 7. Bicycle LOS Worksheet 1 2 �3 LL level of service - connectivity mhdnnun actual proposed base connectivity: C N/A specific connections to priority sites: description of applicable destination area within 1,320' including address C-mPLcyrw6.vt 7C� T9F A%o erH destination area classification n (see text) WHI496CtAL __m_ !-loll p. 20 City of Fort Collins Transportation N'laster Plan SCALE: 1=2000' BICYCLE INFLUENCE AREA N Multimodal Transportation Level of Service Manual p.18 LOS Standards for Development Review - Pedestrian Figure 6. Pedestrian LOS Worksheet iroject location classification: 6) -rf*eP (enter as many as apply ID L. Iz la description of applicable destination area within 1,320' including address F&-5(DI5 *r(AL To -r'4G WeS-r !�rXEA-C�jG-' To T-46 d /o2Y1!we'sT C-mpGoy 4arvr Tv Tim Ae2T* destination area classification pp u�(see text) eG5 �d$tpbarftAG. Ce..u�u�euAc. 1,V D V STPAL. (3FR! CC;;' level of service (minimum based on project location classification) �Grn'iness ;cu�inul4 gwsin6s inienoi A amer�itl es semi n ntiinnun G C— C C— actual NIA N1* 'V A AJ14 u�R proposed A C A G �+ ®41� EI IMIM, I �Cllt� MMiM10i milinwin actual proposed Citv of Fort Collins Transportation 1'"laster Plan SCALE: 1 °=2000' PEDESTRIAN INFLUENCE AREA 19 APPENDIX C t-7 Table 43 Fort Collins (City Limits) Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections) Land Use (from structure plan) Other corridors within: Mixed use Low density mixed use All other Intersection type Commercial 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 N/A C C C (col le ctor/loGa I —any approach leg) mitigating measures required " considered normal in an urban environment 60 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level -or -'service Average 1'ota1 Delay - ur/vch A 13 --� > 10 and < 15_ C _ > l 5 and < 25 D >2Sand<35 > 35 and < 50 f SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level -of -Service Average Total Delay See�vell — A < 10 —__--- B > 10 and < 20 C > 20 and < 35 U > 35 and 55 E — _< > SS and _ 80 1 > 80 HCS2000: Un5_gnalized Intersections Release 4.,c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Michael Agency/Co.: Matthew J. Delich, P.E. Date Performed: 5/10 02 Analysis Time Period: a pm Intersection: Prospect/E. Frontage Road Jurisdiction: Fort Collins Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: recen long bkgrd total Project ID: 0311 East/West Street: Prospect Road North/South Street: East Frontage Road Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 25 162 36 5 81 2 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.86 0.86 0.86 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 29 190 42 5 94 2, Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 L T R 1 L T R Volume 37 2 4 3 7 31 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 43 2 4 3 8 36 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No No Storage RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config LTR LTR 1 LTR 1 LTR v (vph) 29 5 49 47 C(m) (vph) 1498 1336 543 812 v/c 0.02 0.00 0.09 0.06 95% queue length 0.06 0.01 0.30 0.18 Control Delay 7.5 7.7 12.3 9.7 LOS A A B A Approach Delay 12.3 9.7 Approach LOS B A 1¢ tHCS2000: Uns_ynalized Intersections Release 4__c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY ' Analyst: Michael Agency/Co.: Matthew J. Delich, P.E. Date Performed: 5/10/02 ' Analysis Time Period: am pm Intersection: rospect/E. Frontage Road - Jurisdiction: Fort Collins ' Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: recent long bkgrd total Project ID: 0311 East/West Street: Prospect Road North/South Street: East Frontage Road Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments ' Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4. 5 6 L T- R L T R Volume 35 58 22 1 147 1 Peak -Hour Factor; PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.89 0.89 0.89 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 41 68 25 1 165 1- ' Percent Heavy .,Vehicles 2 2 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 ' Configuration.' LTR LTR Upstream Signal? No No ' Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 i_ 10 11 12 L T R L T R ' Volume' 15 2 3 6 7 15 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 '0.85 0.85 Hqurl ` Flow Rate,. HFR - 17 2 3 7 8 17 Heavy Vehicles 2, 2 2 2 2 2 'Percent Percent Grade ($) 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No No Storage RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 ' Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config LTR LTR I LTR LTR 'v (vph) 32 41 1 22 C(m) (vph) 1412 1501 612 707 v/c 0.03 0.00 0.04 0.05 95% queue length 0.09 0.00 0.11 0.14 Control Delay 7.6 7.4 11.1 10.3 LOS A A B B Approach Delay 11.1 10.3 ■ Approach LOS B B HCS2000: Uns_ynalized Intersections Release 4 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Michael Agency/Co.: Matthew J. Delich, P.E. Date Performed: 5/10/02 Analysis Time Period: am R Intersection: Prospect/I-25 NB Ramp Jurisdiction: Fort Collins Units: U. S. Customary ' Analysis Year: recen long bkgrd total Project ID: 0311 East/West Street: Prospect Road ' North/South Street: I-25 NB Ramp Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments ' Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L. T- R I. .L T: .. R ' 17 Volume 177 168 132 Peak -Hour Factor,- PHF 0.85, 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 208 221 155 19 ' Percent Heavy.Vehicles 2 -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 1 0 ' Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal? No No ' Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 B 9 -'I. 10 11 12 L T R I ;L T R Volume 423 35 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 Hourly -Flow Rate, HFR 470 38 -- Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2. Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Approach Movement Lane Config ' v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/c ' 959 queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service EB WB Northbound Southbound 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 LT I L R I 208 470 38 1403 302 819 0.15 1.56 0.05 0.52 27.43 0.15 8.0 297.1 9.6 A F A 275.6 F lZ HCS2000: Uns_gnalized Intersections Release 4_,'c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Michael Agency/Co.: Matthew J. Delich, P.E. Date Performed: 5/10/02 Analysis Time Period: am"pm Intersection: rospect/I-25 NB Ramp Jurisdiction: Fort Collins Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: ecen long bkgrd total Project ID: 0311 East/West Street: Prospect Road North/South Street: I-25 NB Ramp Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments jor Street: Approach Eastbound Movement, 1 2 3 14 L T: R I L Westbound 5 6 T R Volume 105 96 171 6 Peak -Hour Factor; PHF 0.94 0.94 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate', HFR 111 102 201 7 Percent Heavy,Vehicles 2 -- -- -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 1 0 Configuration IT TR Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 1.. 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume'. 574 19 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 Hourrly- Flow'Rate, •_HFR 659 21' Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 Percent Grade ($) 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R 0 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service ' Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config LT I L R I ' v (vph) ill 659 21 C(m) (vph) 1363 469 953 v/c 0.08 1.41 0.02 queue length 0.27 31.58 0.07 '95% Control Delay 7.9 218.6 8.9 LOS A F A Approach Delay 212.1 Approach LOS F HCS2000: Uns_ynalized Intersections Release 4 .c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Michael Agency/Co.: Matthew J. Delich, P.E. Date Performed: 5/10/02 Analysis Time Period: a pm) Intersection: Prospect/I-25 SB Ramp Jurisdiction: Fort Collins Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: ecent long bkgrd total Project ID: 0311 East/West Street: Prospect Road North/South Street: I-25 SB Ramp i Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L. T. R I L T R Volume 356 739 31 524 Peak -Hour Factor,'.HF 0.85 0.85 0.88 0.88 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR, 418 869 35 595 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR IT Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street-: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R 1 L T R Peak Hour Factor, PHF ,Hourly Flow.. Rate ;-•<:HFR. <, Percent Heavy`Vehicles' " Percent Grade (%) 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/ c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS 9 109 0.85 0.85 10 12.8 2 2 0 No 1 1 L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service EB WB Northbound 1' 4 1 7 8 9 LT Southbound 1 10 11 i L 12 R 35 10 128 539 122 504 0.06 0.08 0.25 0.21 0.26 1.00 12.1 37.1 14.6 B E B 16.2 C 10 HCS2000: Uns_.jnalized Intersections Release 4._c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Michael Agency/Co.: Matthew J. Delich, P.E. Date Performed: 5 0/02 Analysis Time Period: a m Intersection: Prospect/1-25 SB Ramp Jurisdiction: Fort Collins Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: recent long bkgrd total Project ID: 0311 East/West Street: Prospect Road North/South Street: I-25 SB Ramp Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume Peak -Hour Factor,'PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 190 404 26 719 0.90 0.90 .0.87 0.87 211 448 29 826 0 1 LT Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 L T R I L T R 1 0 TR Volume 11 175 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow. Rate, HFR 12 205... . Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R ' Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level of: Service EB WB Northbound Southbound 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 LT I I L R 29 12 205 929 168 372 0.03 0.07 0.55 0.10 0.23 3.19 9.0 28.1 25.9 A D D 26.0 D q HCS2000: Uns-,nalized Intersections Release 4 c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Michael " Agency/Co.: Matthew J. Delich, P.E. Date Performed: 5/10/02 Analysis Time Period: am 0 Intersection: Prospect/W. Frontage Road Jurisdiction: .,Fort Collins Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: recent, long bkgrd total Project ID: 0311 East/West Street: Prospect Road North/South Street: West Frontage Road Intersection Orientation: KW Study period (lrs):' 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 26 1060 3 3 605 25 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.09 0.94, .0.94` 0.94 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 29 1191 3 3 643 26 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2. 7- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 0., 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound -. Soutthbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 4..11 12 L T R I L. T R Volume 4 0 3 32 0 69 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HER 4 0 3 37 0 81 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (W) 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No No Storage RT Channeli2ed? Lanes 0 1 0 0.'1 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR' ' Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level .of.Servic6 EB WB Northbound Southbound 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 1p 11 12 LTR LTR I LTR I LTR 29 3 7 118 921 585 58 123 0 0 12 0 96 0.03 O1 0.10 0.02 0.39 9.0 11.2 75.4 A B F 75.4 F 6.35 137.9 F 137.9 F .. ' HCS2000: Uns._,nalized Intersections Release 4 _c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY ' Analyst e Michael - Agency/Co.: Matthew.-.J. Delich, P.E. Date Performed: S 10/02 ' Analysis Time Period. a pm Intersection: Prospect/W. Frontage Road Jurisdiction: Fort Collins ' Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: recent long bkgrd total Project ID: 0311 East/West Street: Prospect Road ' North/South Street: West Frontage Road Intersection Orientation: EW Study period.(hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments ' Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R ' L T R Volume 46 583 4 0 863 31 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.85_ 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 49 626 4 0 1015 36 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 ' Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal? No No ' Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ' Volume 2 0 3 8 0 38 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 0 3 9 0 44 ' Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No No ' Storage RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 ' Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level .of Service ' Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LTR LTR LTR LTR ' v (vph) 49 0 5 53 C(m) (vph) 662 952 106 173 v/c 0.07 0.00 0.05 0.31 queue length 0.24 0.00 0.15 1.22 '95% Control Delay 10.9 8.8 40.6 34.7 LOS B A E D Delay 40.6 34.7 'Approach Approach LOS E D t APPENDIX B b MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E. 2272 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE LOVELAND, CO $0538 Phone: 970 669.2061 TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS Date: 5-15.03 Observer: Shelley Day: Thursday Jurisdiction: Fort Collins R = right tum Intersedon: ProspedE. Frontage Road S = straight I = laft MM Time Begins Northbound: EFR Southbound: EFR Total northisouth Eastbound: Prosper! Westbound: Prospect Total east/west Total AU L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total 7:00 0 0 0 ';<o" . 0 0 3 3. 3 4 1 10 2 is .. 0 26 0 26 42 45 7:15 4 0 0 '.4 0 1 5 :8 :. 10 6 15 4 -'25: ... 1 28 0 29 54 $4 7:30 1 1 1 3` ., 0 1 7 8 : """. 11 12 10 8 30 1 39 1 41 71 82 7:45 1 1 0 1 ; 2, 1 1 2 4. '. 6 9 13 3 : 25 . 0 40 0 40 65 71 8:00 7 1 2 10 '; 1 4 4 9 19 8 16 4 28 0 53 0 53 81 100 8:15 8 0 0 8 : :, 3 2 9 14 22 13 20 12 .45 , 0 51 0 51 ` 96 118 8:30 3 1 0 4 1 0 4 1 '' 9 9 15 6 :30 1 42 1 44 74 83 845 1 0 1 2 0 1 6 7 :: ' .: 9 7 16 6 29 : 0 33 0 33 62 71 7:4M:,U 1119 1 2 , 3 1 24 1 6 1 7 .119.1 32 1 56 139 164. 25 128 1 1 1186 1 1 188 1 316 J 372 PHF 1 0.8 1 0.57 1 1 0.71 1 1 0.88 4:00 8 1 0 1 2 0 9 20 10 34 4 48 0 24 1 1 25 73 93 4:15 11 1 2 0 "13 0 2 6 8 , :, 21 8 28 7 43 0 20 0 20 63 84 4:30 12 1 2 : 15' 2 1 12 .15. r 30 12 46 9 67 1 24 0 25 92 112 4:45 7 0 1 7, 1:- ; -; 0 0 10 10 18 4 40 11 55. 2 19 0 21 76 94 5 7 1 0 8 1 4 9 14 ,. 22 8 41 6 55 0 22 0 22 77 99 5:15 14 0 1 15 0 2 3 5" 20 1 36 10 47. 2 24 2 28 75 95 5:30 8 2 1 -Ai 2 1 8 11 :.: 22 5 38 8 St . 1 22 1 24 75 97 5:45 5 1 0 8 1 0 7 8 14 4 31 4 39 0 1 18 1 0 18 57 71 4:30.5:30 40 2 1 4 1 46 1 3. :7 J,U 44 90 :25 1163 136 '1 224 S ' 89 1 2 1 96 1 320 410 PHF 1 0.77 0.73 1 0.84 1 0.86 MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E. 2272 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE LOVELAND, CO 80538 Phone: 970 669.2061 TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS Date: 4.10.03 Observer: Harry Day: Thursday Jurisdiction: Fort Collins R = right tum Intersection: ProspectlNEI 1.25 Ramp S = straight L = ien tum Time Begins Northbound: NB Ramp Southbound: Total north/south Eastbound: Prospect Westbound: Prospect Total eastlwest Total All L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total 7;00 130 0 2 �;1320 ,.', 132 18 18 36 :`' 25 2 27 63 195, 7:15 136 0 1 0 137 29 20 5 29 3 '. 32. - 81 218 7:30 162 0 4 66 = = 0 , =: 166 24 23 47- ` , '+ 59 160 107 273 7:45 160 0 9 169 _, : '' 0 ' 169 25 25 ; 50 < = •,` 42 1 43 93 2$2 8:00 111 0 5 t18 0 116 20 21 41 :;,; ;, 40 1 41 82 198.. 8:15 122 0 7 t29 .= 0 ' 129 17 26 ;43' .;- 27 3 30`, 73 202 8:30 116 0 6 122 5;'" . ;Y Q, 122 10 27 37 .' 36 5 41 78 200 8:45 103 0 6 '.'109 0 ,'• < 109 13 2235 25 2 27 , 62 171 7:15-8:15 569 . 0` '19.= 588 : 0 0 :; `:0'`:+ 0 588=0 rli 187 0 1176 _ B ;`. 176 363 951 PHF 0.87 n/a 0.94 1 1 0.73 4:00 89 0 5 ;`94 ^ ,? ; 0 , • __ 94 38 31 69' " .� 30 2 32 101 195 4:15 98 2 3 :103 ; :` 0 103 45 30 7&, 25 4 29 104 207 4:30 101 0 109 34 37 71F ?;°: 40 2 42 113 222 4:45 108 0 5 113 0 113 42 48 :.90 32 1 33 123 236 5:04 104 2 14;,120� 0 120 44 48 92 `;�.,;,� 33 4 37'1 129 249 5:15 106 0 5 `1-11 ..:: _ = 0 111 54 53 :107; ",, 41 6 47' 154 2$5 5;30 120 1 11 '132 '; 0 ., 132 35 36 71:.;;'' 30 6 38 107 239 5:45 113 0 8 '121 =� 0 ..,, 121 32 35 �- 67 = ^; 27 98 219 4:45.5:45438, 3, -35. 47fi4 0 .0_ 0 476 ;175 ` i185 ..0 `. 360 0. , '138 1t: 153 513 989 PHF 0.9 n/a 0,84 0,81 \U MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E. 2172 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE LOVELAND, CO 80538 Phone: 970 669.2061 TABULAR SUMMARY Of VEHICLE COUNTS Date: 4.9.03 Observer: Shelley Day: Wednesday Jurisdiction: Fort Collins R = right turn Intersection: ProspectlSB l•25 Ramp S = straight L=ienwm Time Begins Northbound: Southbound: SS Ramp Total norltUsouth Eastbound: Prospect Westbound: Prospect Total east/west Total All L S R Totai L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total 7:00 ::0 1 35 36 . , :: 3S 35 84 119 '. 4 134 138 257 293 7:15 ,.0 1 38 �39 39 48 90 138., 'J 3 119 121' 2$0 299 7:30 0 `s 0 45"45._�- 45 33 90 123 ,", 10 170- ,180: 303 348 7:45 60 61 54 95 �149 5 201208 355 416 8:00 44 45 45 42 132 174 ` '. 5 210 213 _ 389 434 8:15 0 45 52 94 146 = 11 156 187 313 35$ 8: 35. ` r•;` 35 56 100 158; : =�� 5 158 1$3', 319 354 8:45 1 1. 0 ., '• 2 34 38 , ; ' , 36 47 91 . , . `, i 38 E. = . 7 146 153 291 327 7:45.8 45 `0; 0 ; • ,0 ' 0 ,11 0; '175'! 186 1 186 "0' `204 421, 625 2$ '125 ;0,`' 751 1376 1562 PHF nla 0.76 0.9 0.87 4:00 0 , , . 2 25 ; 'j 27 27 70 77 ;147 •' I° 6 94 100 : ' 247 274 4:15- i0 1 33.,� 34 34 63 85 148':.- 15 100 115 263 297 4:30.0 6 29 35 80 159 . , 238�...;� 6 126 132�,. 371 406 4:45 8 , , ,', 1 23 ' <24, ,, 24 88 235 323 ;'.; ` 8 113 111 444 46$ 5:00 �`0� ,'., 0 24 '�24 > == 24 112 190 , 302''�;`:. 8 122 130- 432 458 5:15 0 : ,'' 2 33 . `; 35 ";`": 35 80 1155 235. i < 8 1145 1 15V 388 423 5:30 0 3 18 2i 21 77 105 ., 182� F 6 117 123 305 326 5:45 2 21 ti :. 23 23 69 119 188 ; �:� 6 122 128, 316 339 4:30.5:30 0;;'" 0 ` ;'!.0 :` 0 9 , 0 :;' •109; 118 118 :0 ` '"T. 139' 1099 30' "S08 0 :> 536 1635 175371 PHF n1a 1 0.84 0.85 0.88 R = right tum S = straight I = lAft him MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E. 2272 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE LOVELAND, CO 80538 Phone: (970) 669-2061 TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS Date: 4.8-03 Observer: Shelley Day: Tuesday Jurisdiction: Fort Collins [—intersection: ProspectM. Frontage Road Time Begins Northbound: WFR —L Southbound: WFR Total northisouth Eastbound: Prospect Westbound: Prospect Total east/west Total All T S7 R. Total L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total 7:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 5 9 9 126 0 136- 0 159 6 165 300 305 7:15 0 0 1 2 0 6 9 14 1 4 122 2 .3', 1 3V 1 171 7 179 317 326 7:30 0 0 0 1 0 5 6 12 145 1 -:- 158 0 204 11 215' 373 379 7:45 1 0 1 -2- 2 0 10 -1Z':'.* 14 7 136 0 143 0 250 7 257 400 414 8:00 0 0 1 3 1 0 10 14 12 138 0 0 283 5 288 438 452 8:15 1 0 1 2 0 13 17 15 147 3 165, 0 215 8 223 388 405 8:30 0 1 0 1 2 0 9 "11 12 12 118 1 8:45 0 7T 0 0 0' I 1 0 11 1 7:30.8:30 [,2r ]:�'O:'-j '3' 5 8:.` 0``;1 38 46 51 1 .46 1566 `4 616 [962 31-1 983 1599 1650 PHF 0.63 0.77 0.93 0.85 1 4:00 0 0 0 - Zo 1 6 0 1 17 23 7 209 0 """2161 0 143 1 3 1 146 362 385 4:15 2 0 0 -`2' 4 9 0 1 20 29 31 5 238 2 '246 ' 0 157 10 167 412 43 4:30 2 0 2 7 0 1 26 37 11 259 0 270 1 154 1 '4 6 6 161 —431 468 4:45 0 0 0 :: -4�� J .1 7 0 11 116 18 5 301 1 i'a 301 1 167 3 17.1 478 496 5:00 0 0 1 9 0 12 -21 270 0 275" 1 174 6 181 456 478 5:15 0 0 9 0 15 1% 2 4 25 �T6 220 F 0 - �", 226 0 167 6 5 5 172 398 423 5:30 0 0 0 --_0 7 0 13 10 20 9 1a3 0 0 143 6 149 341 361 5:45 1 1 0 1 0 5 0 1 11 16 17 7 101 1 1,199 0 1 148 7 155 354 '474 4:15.515 7 jz"32 69--] 101 1 108 ji:26''j1008.j'%3 :j 1097 3--f(IU 115 1 680 1 1777 1885 PHF 0." L_0.77 I 1 0.89 1 0.94 1 APPENDIX A IV. CONCLUSIONS This study assessed the impacts of the Interstate Land ODP on the 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 Interstate Land ODP is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. At full development, the Interstate Land ODP'will generate approximately 10,914 daily trip ends, 857 morning peak hour trip ends, and 1040 afternoon peak hour trip ends. - In the long range (2025) future, given development of the Interstate Land ODP and an increase in background traffic, the area streets will carry volumes that are commensurate with their ' classifications. - Acceptable level of service will be achieved for pedestrian and bicycle modes based upon the measures in the multi -modal transportation guidelines. This area will not be served by Transfort. ' - When specific development plans are submitted for all or a part of the Interstate Land, a detailed transportation impact study will be required. 16 Bicycle Level of Service Appendix B shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Interstate Land ODP. Based upon Fort Collins bicycle LOS criteria, there is one bicycle destination within 1320 feet of the Interstate Land ODP. This is the employment area to the north. A bicycle LOS worksheet is provided in Appendix B. The "actual" level of service for base connectivity is not relevant since the streets do not exist. Transit Level of Service ' This area of Fort Collins is not/will not be served by Transfort service according to the Fort Collins Transit Plan. Therefore, a transit level of service analysis is not required. 15 -�-".- 2640/2995 13.0%/14.2%/13.6% Prospect 305/381 e--------- 0- 2605/2945 11.7%/12.9%/12.3% 0 •- o ; N co N N c C LO 2805/3220 14.5%/15.5%/15.0% W �o e IMPACT OF SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC H 2515/2825 8.2%/9.9%/9.1 % o � m a ci0i� .-we ---------- 0- 2270/2720 1.0%/1.6%11.3% a M O z d O) R1 C O LL LL N W �r 885/1015 2.6%/4.2%/3.4% Site Genera! ted (�M/PM) Total Traffic (AM/PM) % Impact (AM/PM/Average) Figure 7 ' Interstate Land current traffic ' traffic from Prospect/I-25). ODP. Background traffic was developed by factoring the counts by 0.5% per year and adding the site generated the known developments (The Paradigm Property and Development Impact Figure 7 shows the it various street segments in t traffic impact of the Inters will be 12-15 percent. As significant on the few links ODP. The impact to Prospect percent. i ipact of the site generated traffic on he area of the Interstate Land ODP. The -ate Land on Prospect Road, west of I-25, expected, the impact to the WFR will be that are adjacent to the Interstate Land Road, east of I-25, will be less than 5 Internal Street Classification The West Frontage Road is not classified on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. It will carry traffic volumes in the segment that is just north of Prospect Road that will be comparable to that of a two-lane arterial street. The traffic volumes will decrease dramatically just north of the access to the Interstate Land ODP that is west of the WFR. The various accesses to the Interstate Land ODP that intersect with the WFR and Prospect Road will carry volumes that are commensurate with that of a minor collector street. Pedestrian Level of Service Appendix C shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Interstate Land ODP. There will be three pedestrian destinations within 1320 feet of the Interstate Land ODP. These are: 1) the existing residential area to the west, 2) the existing mixed -use area to the northwest of the site, and 3) the existing employment area to the north. This site is in an area type termed "other." Since this is an MTIS and many of the streets will not exist for a number of years, the "actual" level of service for each factor is not relevant. The level of service determination assumes that future residential developments will build their streets and adjacent streets in accordance with Fort Collins Standards. This being the case, pedestrian facilities will exist where they currently do not. This is a reasonable assumption. If this does not occur or is not accepted by the City, then acceptable pedestrian level of service cannot be achieved. The Pedestrian LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix C. The minimum level of service for "other" is C for all categories. With the assumed future pedestrian facilities along future streets, the pedestrian level of service will be acceptable. There are no schools within 1.5 miles of the Interstate Land ODP. It is expected that all students within the residential portion of the Interstate Land ODP will be bused. 13 (• fow m m m m ,n m N m N 1185/ CIA0w "1 1465/1370 1390/1380 1500/1485141800 —; —y 1175/1625 1215/1565 1305/1735 1030/1025 Prospect' R 0 O o LONG RANGE (2025) TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 890/1520 1380/1200 0 0 LL W �In n v N In 485/510 370/505 Ln 1 I N --a*-- AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles a Figure 6 0 N U Q m f� O F—� 1fI V 19/69 �— 981148 31/97 121/124 —+► S m 'I 8114 L �76/168 o W co 0 Of c0 �— O O m O z co 167/193 f 19/69 121/124 67/40 —i► to 1 lien N -f 27/43 m r 29/15 35 —' 6A,� 0 84/96 —m— 136/142 i— 122/185 -r 11/25 62/78 12118 —�► o 2 12118 --t --o— AM/PM � 11/25 mommommoss Prospe SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 11 Figure 5 N / \ 15% 12 20% 20% c 10% 10% - / 1 10% Site v � co W 40% NOM 35% 5% 45% 5% Prospect v m 0 x m rn ti in 3 Office 25% Commercial 30% Residential 30% TRIP DISTRIBUTION Figure 4 TABLE 2 Trip Generation In 310 Hotel 80 rooms 8.23 658 0.34 27 0.22 18 0.32 26 0.29 23 310 Hotel 80 rooms 8.23 658 0.34 27 0.22 18 0.32 26 0.29 23 846 GasIC-store 12 positions 152.84 1834 5.43 65 5.21 63 6.60 79 6.60 79 846 Gas/C-store 8 positions 152.84 1223 5.43 43 5.21 42 6.60 53 6.60 53 820 Retail 13.4 KSF 42.92 575 0.63 8 0.40 5 1.80 24 1.94 26 710 Office 113.9 KSF 11.01 1254 1.37 156 0.19 22 0.25 28 1.24 141 210 Single Family 163 D.U. 9.57 1560 0.19 31 0.56 91 0.65 106 0.36 59_ 220 Apartment 380 D.U. 6.63 2519 0.08 30 0.43 163 0.42 160 0.20 76 230 Townhome 108 D.U. 5.86 633 0.07 8 0.37 40 0.36 39 0.18 19 Total 1 1 10,914 395 462 541 499 SITE PLAN PR ROAD Figure 3 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Interstate Land ODP is a mixed -use development, located west of Interstate 25 and north of Prospect Road in Fort Collins. Figure 3 shows a site plan of the Interstate Land ODP. The development, at the ODP level, will consist of two 80 room hotels, two gas/convenience stores, 13,400 square feet of retail, 113,900 square feet of office, 163 single family dwelling units, 380 apartment dwelling units, and 108 townhome dwelling units. The commercial components are located between I-25 and the WFR. The residential components are located west of the WFR. The site plan shows that the site will be accessed via three site accesses to the WFR, and one access to Prospect Road. Since this is an ODP level transportation impact study, a short range analysis was not required. The long range future was assumed to be the year 2025. The long range analysis (Year 2025) includes development of the Interstate Land ODP and an appropriate increase in background traffic, due to normal growth and other potential developments in the area. 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, 6t" Edition, ITE was used to estimate trips that would be generated by the proposed/expected uses at this site. Table 2 shows the expected trip generation on a daily and peak hour basis. Table 2 does not show trip generation for the small neighborhood park. This land use will generate trips that will not impact the key intersections analyzed in this MTIS. They will primarily be internal or non -vehicular. Trip Distribution Directional distribution of the generated trips was determined for the Interstate Land ODP based upon the location of trip productions for these types of land uses and engineering judgment. Future year data was obtained from the NFRRTP and other traffic studies. Figure 4 shows the trip distribution used for the Interstate Land ODP. 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 5 shows the site generated peak hour traffic assignment with full development of the Interstate Land ODP. Total Traffic Figure 6 shows the total (site plus background) long range (2025) peak hour link volumes on the street system with development of the 7 TABLE 1 Current Peak Hour Operation Prospect/WFR (stop sign) NB LT/T/RT E Fl SB LT/T/RT D F EB LT B A WB LT A B Prospect/SB 1-25 Ramp (stop sign) SB LT D E SB RT D B SB APPROACH D C WB LT A B Prospect/NB 1-25 Ramp (stop sign) NB LT F F NB RT A A NB APPROACH F F EB. LT A A Prospect/EFR (stop sign) NB LTIT/RT B B SB LT/T/RT B A EB LT A A WB LT A A The counts were collected on different days, so the traffic shown in Figure 2 is the average of the traffic between the intersections. Existing Operation ' The key intersections were evaluated using techniques provided in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. Using the volumes shown in Figure 2, the peak hour operation is shown in Table 1. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix B. A description of level of service for signalized and unsignalized intersections from the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual and the Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections) are also provided in Appendix B. The Prospect/SB I-25 Ramp and Prospect/EFR intersections operate acceptably during both the morning and afternoon peak hours. The Prospect/WFR and Prospect/NB I- ' 25 Ramp intersections operate unacceptably during the peak hours. Acceptable operation at signalized intersections during the peak hours is defined as level of service D or better overall. Acceptable ' operation at stop sign controlled intersections during the peak hours is defined as level of service E for any approach leg. Pedestrian Facilities There are no sidewalks in this area of Fort Collins. Bicycle Facilities There are limited bicycle facilities along Prospect Road. There are limited bicycle facilities along the EFR and the WFR. Bicyclists ' generally ride the shoulder of the EFR and WFR. Transit Facilities ' Currently, this area does not have transit service. W m o / 1 46126 583/1060 —•� 4/3 ---y 10 R 0 x m 0 LL 31/25 + 863/605 r— 0/3 O o-71! 26/31 190/356 —+► 404/739 AN 2 m Ln a� R. V524 6/17 - 171/132 105/177 96/18823 h FQ O� Prospect M M JLo f 35/25 58/162 —+► 22/36 f AM/PM 1/2 f- 147/81 ./-1/5 AVERAGED RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 2 FORT COLuns DOWNTOWNaKK N 1 SH14 Mulberry to SG m U 0 �Oly li Ui Prospect ' Interstate Land To CD 1 aG To 1 oy T4 N 1 J i O 1 O 1 SCALE 1"=3000' ' SITE LOCATION Figure 1 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location of the Interstate Land ODP is shown in Figure 1. It is important that a thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented. This area is considered to be in a low density mixed -use residential area. Land Use Land uses in the area are primarily either vacant (agriculture), commercial, or residential. There are various residential uses to the west, north, and east of the site. Land adjacent to the site is flat (<2% grade) from a traffic operations perspective. Commercial uses exist north of the site. There are intermittent vacant parcels of land between more active parcels. Some of these are in agriculture use. The center of Fort Collins lies to the west of the proposed Interstate Land ODP. Roads ' The primary streets near the Interstate Land ODP site are Prospect Road, the West Frontage Road (WFR), the Southbound I-25 Ramp, the Northbound I-25 Ramp, and the East Frontage Road (EFR). ' Prospect Road is to the south of the Interstate Land ODP site. It is an east -west street designated as a four -lane arterial street on the ' Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently in this area, Prospect Road has a two-lane cross section. There are limited bicycle facilities on Prospect Road. The posted speed on Prospect Road, east and west of the t I-25 Interchange, is 45 mph. At the I-25 Interchange, the posted speed on Prospect Road is 35 mph. At the key intersections, Prospect Road has single lane approaches. ' The EFR and WFR are approximately 1000 feet from the respective NB I-25 Ramp and SB I-25 Ramp. The Prospect/EFR and Prospect/WFR intersections have stop sign control on the EFR and WFR. The Frontage ' Roads have single lane approaches. The NB and SB I-25 Ramps intersect Prospect Road and are controlled by stop signs. The ramps have one lane approaches, however there are functional right -turn flares on each ramp. Existing Traffic Recent peak hour counts at the Prospect/WFR, Prospect/SB I-25 ' Ramp, Prospect/NB I-25 Ramp, and Prospect/EFR intersections are shown in Figure 2. Raw traffic count data is provided in Appendix A. The traffic data at the key intersections was collected in April/May 2003. 2 I. INTRODUCTION ' This Master Transportation Impact Study (MTIS) addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near the proposed Interstate Land ODP. The proposed Interstate Land ODP is located north ' of Prospect Road and west of Interstate 25 in Fort Collins, Colorado. During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project planning consultant (Cityscape Urban Design), the project engineer (JR Engineering), 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 scoping discussion was held with the Fort Collins Traffic Engineer. This MTIS would include only a long range analysis, since overall development plan approval is being sought. When specific preliminary development plans are submitted for all or a part of this property, a detailed transportation impact study will be required. 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; - Conduct level of service evaluation of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes of transportation. LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Site Location ........................................ 3 2. Averaged Recent Peak Hour Traffic .................... 4 3. Site Plan ............................................ 8 4. Trip Distribution .................................... 10 5. Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic ..................... 11 6. Long Range (2025) Total Peak Hour Traffic ............ 12 7. Impact of Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic ........... 14 APPENDIX A Recent Peak Hour Traffic Data B Current Peak Hour Operation/Level of Service Descriptions C Pedestrian and Bicycle Level of Service Worksheets TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Introduction ......................................... 1. II. Existing Conditions .................................. 2 LandUse ............................................. 2 Roads................................................ 2 Existing Traffic ..................................... 2 Existing Operation ................................... 5 Pedestrian Facilities ................................ 5 Bicycle Facilities ................................... 5 Transit Facilities ................................... 5 III. Proposed Development ................................. 7 Trip Generation ...................................... 7 Trip Distribution .................................... 7 Trip Assignment ...................................... 7 Total Traffic ........................................ 7 Development Impact ................................... 13 Internal Street Classification ....................... 13 Pedestrian Level of Service .......................... 13 Bicycle Level of Service 15 Transit Level of Service 15 IV. Conclusions .......................................... 16 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Current Peak hour Operation .......................... 6 2. Trip Generation ...................................... 9 INTERSTATE LAND OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN MASTER TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY FORT COLLINS, COLORADO AUGUST 2003 Prepared for: Western Property Advisors 11859 Pecos Street, Suite 300 Westminster, CO 80234 Prepared by: MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E. 2272 Glen Haven Drive Loveland, CO 80538 Phone: 970-669-2061 FAX: 970-669-5034 PPQp REG�S,T 0 o44�W WIT O :Z arses