The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT (OLD ELK DISTILLERY - PDP - PDP140016 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - TRAFFIC STUDYBicycle LOS Worksheet ie Leyet U .� . of{SennceGonnectivity 61 M Actual Proposed Base Connectivity: C, B B Specific connections to priority sites: , t)escnpfionrof Applicabl�el)eshnahon= „Area within 1320 .� . M,• rs. .. a7v X a. r ° Des6nnatton g w ,�A,rea y! eclassfication 1ih `� i 'm`..:,m s� 1 Poudre Trail Recreational B B B 2 3 4 �1 Old Elk Distillery > f, AVenue Q s oo ��ncoln m a) 0 Mountain A enue 30_14=lf 4101 BICYCLE INFLUENCE AREA -/i f DELICH ® I=ASSOCIATES Pedestrian LOS Worksheet Project Location Classification: School Walking Area 1t'Yt,YY 1'„f 5 Desch tioh4 off , J��p� Applicable Destination�AreK ` a,WithIn£ClssifVA t :e 4 rDestination r' tn b"F*'} 'N34 'M1`ryA vY4K Level of Serncea(mimmum - M kS m +Y.S^' ;vx- 4 .Y'3 based�on�protect location dass�fication) P"L tl' 1 I !• � a,r Directness continudy t� :" Effings �` Vsua 'Interest& nmenmes �� Searity Commercial/Industrial to the southwest Commercial/ industrial Minimum A A B A A 1 Actual A A A A A Proposed A A A A A Poudre Trail to the northeast Recreational Minimum A A B A A 2 Actual A A A A A Proposed A A A A A Industrial/recreational to the northwest Industrial/ Recreational Minimum A A B A A 3 Actual A D A A A Proposed A D A A A Minimum 4 Actual Proposed Minimum 5 Actual Proposed Minimum 6 Actual Proposed Minimum 7 Actual Proposed Minimum 8 Actual Proposed Minimum 9 Actual Proposed Minimum 10 Actual Proposed 3 � °2� ,tea Old Elk Distillery Q d'��,��f Lincoln Avenue 0 Mountain A enue SCALE: V=500' PEDESTRIAN INFLUENCE AREA —// LDELICH ® (—ASSOCIATES APPENDIX F 50 Lanes and Geometrics 3: Linden & Willow Short Total PM .a *x jr-. f 3 X �0-4 ►� k. Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations 4* 41� 4* 4)- Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fed Bike Factor Frt 0.979 0.985 0.964 0.953 Fit Protected 0.989 0.993 0.992 0.996 Said. Flow (prot) 0 1804 0 0 1822 0 0 1781 0 0 1768 0 Fit Permitted 0.989 0.993 0.992 0.996 Said. Flow (perm) 0 1804 0 0 1822 0 0 1781 0 0 1768 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 694 818 511 674 Travel Time (s) 15.8 18.6 11.6 15.3 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 49 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Linden &Willow Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh Intersection LOS Movement SWU SWL SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 0 18 139 83 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 20 151 90 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 Short Total PM Approach SW Opposing Approach NE Opposing Lanes 1 Conflicting Approach Left NW Conflicting Lanes Left 1 Conflicting Approach Right SE Conflicting Lanes Right 1 HCM Control Delay 12.9 HCM LOS B Lane 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 3 48 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Linden & Willow Short Total PM Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 13.1 Intersection LOS B Movement SEU SEL SET SER NWU NWL NWT NWR NEU NEL NET NER Vol, veh/h 0 52 145 36 0 38 213 32 0 31 105 50 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 57 158 39 0 41 232 35 0 34 114 54 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Approach SE NW NE Opposing Approach NW SE SW Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 12.9 14.2 12 HCM LOS B B B Lane NEW NWLn1 SEW SWLn1 Vol Left, % 17% 13% 22% 7% Vol Thru, % 56% 75% 62% 58% Vol Right, % 27% 11% 15% 35% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 186 283 233 240 LT Vol 105 213 145 139 Through Vol 50 32 36 83 RT Vol 31 38 52 18 Lane Flow Rate 202 308 253 261 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.332 0.488 0.408 0.416 Departure Headway (Hd) 5.915 5.706 5.798 5.738 Convergence, YIN Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 602 628 615 621 Service Time 4.011 3.791 3.887 3.827 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.336 0.49 0.411 0.42 HCM Control Delay 12 14.2 12.9 12.9 HCM Lane LOS B B B B HCM 95th-tile Q 1.4 2.7 2 2 1011/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 47 Lanes and Geometrics 3: Linden & Willow Short Total AM Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations 41+ 4P. 44 4 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.982 0.981 0.968 0.955 At Protected 0.987 0.994 0.992 0.995 Said. Flow (prot) 0 1805 0 0 1816 0 0 1789 0 0 1770 0 Flt Permitted 0.987 0.994 0.992 0.995 Said. Flow (perm) 0 1805 0 0 1816 0 0 1789 0 0 1770 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 694 818 511 674 Travel Time (s) 15.8 18.6 11.6 15.3 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other u 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report ' Page 1 46 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Linden & Willow Short Total AM Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh Intersection LOS Movement SWU SWL SWT SWR Vol, vehm 0 19 100 59 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 21 109 64 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 Approach SW Opposing Approach NE Opposing Lanes 1 Conflicting Approach Left NW Conflicting Lanes Left 1 Conflicting Approach Right SE Conflicting Lanes Right 1 HCM Control Delay 10.1 HCM LOS B Lane ' 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 3 45 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Linden &Willow Short Total AM ' Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 10.3 Intersection LOS B Movement SEU SEL SET SER NWU NWL NWT NWR NEU NEL NET NER Vol, veh/h 0 60 138 30 0 21 121 23 0 22 87 34 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 65 150 33 0 23 132 25 0 24 95 37 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Approach SE NW NE Opposing Approach NW SE SW Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 10.9 10 9.8 HCM LOS B A A Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SEW SWLn1 Vol Left, % 15% 13% 26% 11% Vol Thru, % 61% 73% 61% 56% Vol Right, % 24% 14% 13% 33% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 143 165 228 178 LT Vol 87 121 138 100 Through Vol 34 23 30 59 RT Vol 22 21 60 19 Lane Flow Rate 155 179 248 193 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.227 0.258 0.352 0.276 Departure Headway (Hd) 5.251 5.18 5.11 5.128 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 684 694 704 700 Service Time 3.281 3.21 3.137 3.157 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.227 0.258 0.352 0.276 HCM Control Delay 9.8 10 10.9 10.1 HCM Lane LOS A A B B HCM 95th-tile Q 0.9 1 1.6 1.1 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report t I Page 2 � ' I Lanes and Geometrics Lincoln Plan Geometry 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Total PM Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations r I t t r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 150 0 150 150 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 1863 1863 1583 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 1863 1863 1583 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 818 327 939 Travel Time (s) 18.6 7.4 21.3 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other I 1 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 11 43 HCM 2010 TWSC Lincoln Plan Geometry 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Total PM Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.5 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 157 70 47 274 328 200 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 150 0 150 - - 150 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 171 76 51 298 357 217 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 757 357 357 0 0 Stage 1 357 - - - - Stage 2 400 - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 375 687 1202 Stage 1 708 - - Stage 2 677 - - Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 359 687 1202 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 359 - - Stage 1 708 Stage 2 648 Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 19.8 1.2 0 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NET SELn1 SELn2 SWT SWR Capacity (veh/h) 1202 - 359 687 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 - 0.475 0.111 - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 - 23.8 10.9 - HCM Lane LOS A - C B - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 2.5 0.4 - 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 42 Lanes and Geometrics Lincoln Plan Geometry 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Total AM l k ' Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations Vi If + + r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 150 0 150 150 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 ' Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 1863 1863 1583 At Permitted 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 1863 1863 1583 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 818 327 939 Travel Time (s) 18.6 7.4 21.3 Intersection Summary tArea Type: Other ' 10/112014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 a HCM 2010 TWSC Lincoln Plan Geometry 6: Lincoln &Willow Short Total AM Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.3 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 117 32 27 160 189 100 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 150 0 150 - - 150 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 127 35 29 174 205 109 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 438 205 205 0 0 Stage 1 205 - - - Stage 2 233 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 Critical Hdwy Sig 1 5.42 - - Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.42 - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 576 836 1366 Stage 1 829 - - Stage 2 806 - - Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 564 836 1366 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 564 - - Stage 1 829 Stage 2 789 Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 12.4 1.1 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NET SEW SELn2 SWT SWR Capacity (vehlh) 1366 - 564 836 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.021 - 0.225 0,042 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 - 13.2 9.5 - - HCM Lane LOS A - B A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0.9 0.1 - - 10/112014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report ' Page 2 40 Lanes and Geometrics 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Total PM Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWT : SWR Lane Configurations V 4 T* Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0°A Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 0 ' Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.958 0.949 Flt Protected 0.967 0.993 Satd. Flow (prot) 1726 0 0 1850 1768 0 FIt Permitted 0.967 0.993 Satd. Flow (perm) 1726 0 0 1850 1768 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 818 327 939 Travel Time (s) 18.6 7.4 21.3 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report ' Page 5 39 HCM 2010 TWSC 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Total PM Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.7 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 157 70 47 274 328 200 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None None None Storage Length 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 171 76 51 298 357 217 Major/Minor Minor2 Majort Major2 Conflicting Flow All 865 465 574 0 0 Stage 1 465 - - - Stage 2 400 - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 324 597 999 Stage 1 632 - - Stage 2 677 - - Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 304 597 999 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 304 - Stage 1 632 ; Stage 2 636 Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 34.6 1.3 0 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NET SEW SWT SWR Capacity (veh/h) 999 - 358 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.051 - 0.689 - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.8 0 34.6 - HCM Lane LOS A A D - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - 4.9 - 10/112014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report ' Page 6 38 Lanes and Geometrics ' 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Total AM l k ' Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations V *T 111� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ' Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.971 0.953 Flt Protected 0.962 0.993 Satd. Flow (prot) 1740 0 0 1850 1775 0 At Permitted 0.962 0.993 Satd. Flow (perm) 1740 0 0 1850 1775 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 818 327 939 Travel Time (s) 18.6 7.4 21.3 Intersection Summary ' Area Type: Other ' 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 5 37 HCM 2010 TWSC 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Total AM ' Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.7 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 117 32 27 160 189 100 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None None None Storage Length 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 127 35 29 174 205 109 Major/Minor Minot Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 493 260 314 0 0 Stage 1 260 - - - - Stage 2 233 - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 535 779 1246 Stage 1 783 - - Stage 2 806 - - Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 521 779 1246 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 521 - - Stage 1 783 Stage 2 785 Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 14 1.1 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NET SEW SWT SWR Capacity (veh/h) 1246 561 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.024 0.289 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8 0 14 - - HCM Lane LOS A A B - - HCM 95th %tile C(veh) 0.1 - 1.2 - - 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report ' Page 6 36 APPENDIX E 35 Lanes and Geometrics 3: Linden & Willow Short Background PM 11-* L IWO' >--I Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations *T* 41+ *T+ 4� Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.982 0.986 0.971 0.953 Fit Protected 0.988 0.997 0.993 0.997 Said. Flow (prot) 0 1807 0 0 1831 0 0 1796 0 0 1770 0 Fit Permitted 0.988 0.997 0.993 0.997 Said. Flow (pens) 0 1807 0 0 1831 0 0 1796 0 0 1770 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 694 818 511 674 Travel Time (s) 15.8 18.6 11.6 15.3 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report ' Page 1 34 I. HCM 2010 AWSC I Linden & Willow Short Background PM Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh Intersection LOS Movement SWU SWL SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 0 15 138 82 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 16 150 89 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 ' Approach SW Opposing Approach NE Opposing Lanes 1 Conflicting Approach Left NW Conflicting Lanes Left 1 Conflicting Approach Right SE ' Conflicting Lanes Right 1 HCM Control Delay 11.9 HCM LOS B Lane ' 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 3 1 33 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Linden & Willow Short Background PM Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 11.8 Intersection LOS B Movement SEU SEL SET SER NWU NWL NWT NWR NEU NEL NET NER Vol,veh/h 0 51 132 28 0 17 206 27 0 23 103 34 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 55 143 30 0 18 224 29 0 25 112 37 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Approach SE NW NE Opposing Approach NW SE SW Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 11.7 12.4 10.9 HCM LOS B B B Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 Vol Left, % 14% 7% 24% 6% Vol Thru, % 64% 82% 63% 59% Vol Right, % 21 % 11 % 13% 35% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 160 250 211 235 LT Vol 103 206 132 138 Through Vol 34 27 28 82 RT Vol 23 17 51 15 Lane Flow Rate 174 272 229 255 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of LIN (X) 0.274 0.414 0,355 0.386 Departure Headway (Hd) 5.682 5.484 5.573 5.443 Convergence,Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 630 655 642 659 Service Time 3.745 3.537 3.629 3.499 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.276 0.415 0.357 0.387 HCM Control Delay 10.9 12.4 11.7 11.9 HCM Lane LOS B B B B HCM 95th-tile Q 1.1 2 1.6 1.8 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 32 Lanes and Geometrics ' 3: Linden & Willow Short Background AM ' Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations 4;4 4,� 41� 4* Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor ' Frt 0.984 0.981 0.980 0.955 Flt Protected 0.986 0.995 0.993 0.996 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1807 0 0 1818 0 0 1813 0 0 1772 . 0 Flt Permitted 0.986 0.995 0.993 0.996 ' Satd. Flow (pens) 0 1807 0 0 1818 0 0 1813 0 0 1772 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 694 818 511 674 Travel Time (s) 15.8 18.6 11.6 15.3 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other ' 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 31 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Linden & Willow Short Background AM Intersection Intersection Delay, slveh Intersection LOS Movement SWU SWL SWT SWR Vol, vehlh 0 15 99 58 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 16 108 63 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 Approach SW Opposing Approach NE Opposing Lanes 1 Conflicting Approach Left NW Conflicting Lanes Left 1 Conflicting Approach Right SE Conflicting Lanes Right 1 HCM Control Delay 9.7 HCM LOS A Lane 10/112014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 3 30 HCM 2010 AWSC ' 3: Linden & Willow Short Background AM Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.8 Intersection LOS A ' Movement SEU SEL SET SER NWU NWL NWT NWR NEU NEL NET NER Vol, veh/h 0 60 128 26 0 16 117 22 0 17 87 18 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 ' Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 65 139 28 0 17 127 24 0 18 95 20 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Approach SE NW NE Opposing Approach NW SE SW Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 ' Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW ' Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 10.3 9.6 9.4 HCM LOS B A A Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SEW SWLn1 'Vol Left, % 14% 10% 28% 9% ' Vol Thru, % 71 % 75% 60% 58% Vol Right, % 15% 14% 12% 34% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 122 155 214 172 LT Vol t 87 117 128 99 Through Vol 18 22 26 58 RT Vol 17 16 60 15 Lane Flow Rate 133 168 233 187 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.188 0.232 0.318 0.255 Departure Headway (Hd) 5.1 4.958 4.92 4.905 ' Convergence,Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 695 716 723 724 Service Time 3.192 3.045 3.001 2.989 ' HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.191 0.235 0.322 0.258 HCM Control Delay 9.4 9.6 10.3 9.7 HCM Lane LOS A A B A HCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 0.9 1.4 1 ' 1/1112014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 1 29 Lanes and Geometrics Lincoln Plan Geometry 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Background PM Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations Vi if ►i + + if Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 150 0 150 150 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 1863 1863 1583 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 1863 1863 1583 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 818 327 939 Travel Time (s) 18.6 7.4 21.3 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 ' 28 HCM 2010 TWSC Lincoln Plan Geometry 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Background PM ' Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 146 62 41 274 328 195 Conflicting Pods, Whr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized None None None Storage Length 150 0 150 - - 150 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 0 ' Grade, % 0 _ 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 ' Mvmt Flow 159 67 45 298 357 212 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 744 357 357 0 0 Stage 1 357 - - Stage 2 387 - ' Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218. ' Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 382 687, 1202 Stage 1 708 - - Stage 2 686 - - Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 368 687 1202 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 368 - - Stage 1 708 Stage 2 660 Approach SE NE SW ' HCM Control Delay, s 18.7 1.1 0 HCM LOS C ' Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NET SELn1 SELn2 SWT SWR Capacity (veh1h) 1202 - 368 687 . HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.037 - 0.431 0.098 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 22 10.8 HCM Lane LOS A C B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 2.1 0.3 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 27 Lanes and Geometrics Lincoln Plan Geometry 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Background AM } k Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations ►i if V + ♦ i Ideal Flow (v0hpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 150 0 150 150 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.850 0.850 . At Protected 0.950 .0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 1863 1863 1583 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 Said. Flow (perm) 1710 1583 1770 1863 1863 1583 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 818 327 939 Travel Time (s) 18.6 7.4 21.3 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 26 HCM 2010 TWSC Lincoln Plan Geometry 6: Lincoln &Willow Short Background AM ' Intersection Int Delay, slveh 3.2 ' Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 116 31 21 160 189 94 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized None None None Storage Length 150 0 150 - - 150 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 ' Grade, % 0 0 0 _ Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 ' Mvmt Flow 126 34 23 174 205 102 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 425 205 205 0 0 Stage 1 205 - - - - Stage 2 220 - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 ' Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 586 836 1366 Stage 1 829 - - Stage 2 817 - - Platoon blocked, % ' Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 576 836 1366 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 576 - - Stage 1 829 ' Stage 2 803 Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 12.3 0.9 0 HCM LOS B iMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NET SEW SELn2 SWT SWR Capacity (vehlh) 1366 576 836 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.017 0.219 0.04 - - ' HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 13 9.5 HCM Lane LOS A B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1 0.1 0.8 0.1 - - 10/112014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 041 Lanes and Geometrics 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Background PM Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations V 4 j, Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.960 0.950 Fit Protected 0.966 0.993 Satd. Flow (prot) 1727 0 0 1850 1770 0 Flt Permitted 0.966 0.993 Satd. Flow (perm) 1727 0 0 1850 1770 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 818 327 939 Travel Time (s) 18.6 7.4 21.3 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report ' Page 5 24 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Background PM Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.2 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 146 62 41 274 328 195 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None None None Storage Length 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor q 92 92 92' 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2• 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 159 67 45 298 357 212 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 850 463 568 0 0 Stage 1 463 Stage 2 387 Critical Hdwy 6A2 6.22 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 331 599 _ 1004 Stage 1 634 - Stage 2 686 - ' Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 313 599 1004 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 313 - - Stage 1 634 Stage 2 649 _ Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 29.6 1.1 0 HCM LOS D - Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NET SEW SWT SWR Capacity (veh/h) 1004 - 365 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.044 - 0.619 - ' HCM Control Delay (s) 8.8 0 29.6 HCM Lane LOS A A D HCM 95th %tile C(veh) 0.1 4 - 1 II 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 6 23 Lanes and Geometrics 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Background AM Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations y *T T* Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.971 0.955 Fit Protected 0.962 0.994 Satd. Flow (prot) 1740 0 0 1852 1779 0 Flt Permitted 0.962 0.994 Satd. Flow (pens) 1740 0 0 1852 1779 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 818 327 939 Travel Time (s) 18.6 7.4 21.3 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 5 r-4a ' HCM 2010 TWSC 6: Lincoln & Willow Short Background AM Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.6 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 116 31 21 160 189 94 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized None None None Storage Length 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 ' Mvmt Flow 126 34 23 174 205 102 Major/Minor Minor Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 477 257 308 0 0 Stage 1 257 - - - - Stage 2 220 - - ' Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 ' Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 547 782 1253 Stage 1 786 - - Stage 2 817 - - Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 536 782 1253 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 536 - - Stage 1 786 Stage 2 801 Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 13.7 0.9 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NET SEW SWT SWR Capacity (veh/h) 1253 - 574 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.018 - 0.278 - - ' HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 0 13.7 HCM Lane LOS A A B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 1.1 - - ' 1011/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 6 21 APPENDIX D 20 Table 4-3 Fort Collins (GMA and City Limits) Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections) Land Use (from structure plan) Other corridors within: Mixed use Low density mixed use Al other Intersection type Commercial corridors districts residential areas Signaled 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 (arterial/arterial, arterial/collector, or collector/local—any approach 129) ' mitigating measures required •` considered normal in an urban environment 113 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 1 Level -of -Service Average Total Delay sec/veh A < 10 B >10and<15 c > 15 and < 25 D > 25 and < 35 E >35and <50 F > 50 1114 Lanes and Geometrics 3: Linden & Willow recent PM Ar% Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations 4� 41, cT* 4* Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade(%) 0% 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.980 0.986 0.970 0.954 Flt Protected 0.991 0.997 0.990 0.997 Said. Flow (prot) 0 1809 0 0 1831 0 0 1789 0 0 1T72 0 Fit Permitted 0.991 0.997 0.990 0.997 Said. Flow (perm) 0 1809 0 0 1831 0 0 1789 0 0 1772 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30' Link Distance (ft) 694 818 511 674 Travel Time (s) 15.8 18.6 11.6 15.3 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other 1011/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Linden & Willow Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh Intersection LOS Movement SWU SWL SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 0 11 93 53 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 12 101 58 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 recent PM Approach SW Opposing Approach NE Opposing Lanes 1 Conflicting Approach Left NW Conflicting Lanes Left 1 Conflicting Approach Right SE Conflicting Lanes Right 1 HCM Control Delay 9.5 HCM LOS A Lane 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 3 18 HCM 2010 AWSC ' 3: Linden & Willow recent PM ' Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.7 Intersection LOS A Movement SEU SEL SET SER NWU NWL NWT NWR . NEU NEL NET NER Vol, veh/h 0 32 117 26 0 11 186 22 0 21 57 22 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 35 127 28 0 12 202 24 0 23 62 24 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Approach SE NW NE Opposing Approach NW SE SW Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW ' Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 9.6 10.1 9.1 HCM LOS A B A Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 Vol Left, % 21% 5% 18% 7°/° ' Vol Thru, % 57%* 85% 67% 59% Vol Right: % 22% 10% 15% 34% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 100 219 175 : 157 LT Vol 57 186 117 93 Through Vol 22 22 26 53 RT Vol 21 11 32 11 Lane Flow Rate 109 238 190 171 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Ufil (X) 0.154 10.318 0.257 0.233 Departure Headway (Hd) 5.098 4.811 4.868 4.915 ' Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 696 740 730 724 Service Time 3.185 2.884 2.944 2.993 ' HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.157 0.322 0.26 0.236 HCM Control Delay 9.1 10A 9.6 9.5 HCM Lane LO$` A B A A HCM 95th-tile Q 0.5 1.4 1 0.9 101112014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 17 Lanes and Geometrics 3: Linden & Willow Recent AM ' Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations 4* 4+ #4 4 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 ' Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 ' Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.981 0.981 0.983 0.958 ' Fit Protected 0.990 0.996 0.986 0.995 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1809 0 0 1820 0 0 1805 0. 0 1776 0 Flt Permitted 0.990 0.996 0.986 0.995 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1809 0 0 1820 0 0 1805 0 0 1776 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 694 818 511 674 Travel Time (s) 15.8 18.6 11.6 15.3 ' Intersection Summary Area Type:', Other A ' 1 1 1 101112014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 ' 16 ' HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Linden & Willow Recent AM Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh Intersection LOS Movement SWU SWL SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 0 11 65 34 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 12 71 37 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 Approach SW Opposing Approach NE Opposing Lanes 1 Conflicting Approach Left NW Conflicting Lanes Left 1 Conflicting Approach Right SE Conflicting Lanes Right 1 HCM Control Delay 8.5 HCM LOS A Lane 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 3 15 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Linden & Willow Recent AM Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.6 Intersection LOS A Movement SEU SEL SET SER NWU NWL NWT NWR NEU NEL NET NER Vol,veh/h 0 36 114 24 0 10 104 18 0 16 34 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 39 124 26 0 11 113 20 0 17 37 8 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Approach SE NW NE Opposing Approach NW SE SW Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE Conflicting Lanes Left . 1 . 1 . 1 _ Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 8.9 8.5 8.3 HCM LOS A A A Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 Vol Left, % 28% 8% 21% 10% Vol Thru, % 60% 79% 66% 59% Vol Right, % 12% 14% 14% 31% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 57 132 174 110 LT Vol 34 104 114 65 Through Vol 7 18 24 34 RT Vol 16 10 36 11 Lane Flow Rate 62 143 189 120 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Utii(X) 0.083 0.18 0.236 0.153 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.826 4.514 4.489 4.607 Convergence,YlN Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 741 795 800 777 Service Time 2.864 2.545 2.517 2.641 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.084 0.18 0.236 0.154 HCM Control Delay 8.3 8.5. 8.9 8.5 HCM Lane LOS A A A A HCM 95th-tile Q 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.5 1011/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 , 14 Lanes and Geometrics ' 6: Lincoln & Willow recent PM ,-If I Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations y 4 T+ Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ' Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade (%) 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.965 0.951 Fit Protected 0.964 0.995 Satd. Flow (prot) 1733 0 0 1853 1771 0 Fit Permitted 0.964 0.995 Said. Flow (perm) 1733 0 0 1853 1771 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 818 327 939 Travel Time (s) 18.6 7.4 21.3 Intersection Summary ' Area Type: Other 1 ' 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 5 13 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 6: Lincoln & Willow recent PM ' Intersection ' Int Delay, s/veh 4.4 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 132 46 31 253 303 175 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None None None Storage Length 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 143 50 34 275 329 190 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 766 424 520 0 0 Stage 1 424 - - - Stage 2 342 - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 371 630 1046 Stage 1 660 - - Stage 2 719 - - Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 357 630 1046 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 357 - - Stage 1 660 Stage 2 692 Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 22 0.9 0 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NET SELn1 SWT SWR Capacity (veh/h) 1046 - 402 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.032 - 0.481 - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 0 22 - HCM Lane LOS A A C - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 2.5 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report ' Page 6 12 Lanes and Geometrics ' 6: Lincoln & Willow Recent AM ' Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Lane Configurations y 4 1, Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 Grade(%) 0% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 0 ' Taper Length (ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor ' Frt 0.979 0.957 Fit Protected 0.959 0.996 Satd. Flow (prot) 1749 0 0 1855 1783 0 Fit Permitted 0.959 0.996 ' Satd. Flow (perm) 1749 0 0 1855 1783 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 818 327 939 ' Travel Time (s) 18.6 7.4 21.3 Intersection Summary ' Area Type: Other 1/11/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 5 HCM 2010 TWSC 6: Lincoln & Willow Recent AM ' Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 102 18 13 148 175 81 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None None None Storage Length 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 111 20 14 161 190 88 Major/Minor Minor2 Majort Major2 Conflicting Flow All 423 234 278 0 0 Stage 1 234 - - - Stage 2 189 - - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.42 - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 588 805 1285 Stage 1 805 - - Stage 2 843 - - Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 581 805 1285 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 581 - - Stage 1 805 Stage 2 833 Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 12.6 0.6 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NET SEW SWT SWR Capacity (veh/h) 1285 - 606 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 - 0.215 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 0 12.6 - - HCM Lane LOS A A B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.8 - - 10/1/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 6 , 10 APPENDIX C 9 DELICH ASSOCIATES 2272 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE LOVELAND, CO 80538 Phone: 970 669.2061 TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS Date: 912412014 Observer: Carl Day: Wednesday Jurisdiction: Fort Collins R = righttum Intersection: LindenlWillow S = straight I =6fi five Time Northbound: Willow Southbound: Willow Total Eastbound: Linden Westbound: Linden Total Total L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total Begins northisouth east/west All 7:30 2 6 1 x %9 2 27 7 "=`36 45 10 26 4 �40, 1 34 6 = 41 81126 7:45 6 11 2 19 2 12 10� 243 43 9 44 5 2 27 3 90 133 8:00 1 6 1 T 8 z 4 12 6 -' � 22� � 30 7 29 7 43 4 23 4 L31 74;104= _. = x 8:15 7 11 3 3 14 11 %� 28 49 10 15 8 33= 7:30.8:30 132 306 174 I 51 110 ' 167 ' �36�' 1142l 24 I �10�`�'gjg4 K.18It I PHF 10.57 10.77 10.58 1 0.68 10.69 1 0.6 10.77 1 0.76 0.9 10.65 10.75 1 0.75 0.63 10.76 10.75 0.8 0.89 4:30 5 9 3 11 5 20 12 54 3 27 3 jas33 2 31 2 68 122_ 4:45 2 15 3 __..x 2 29 15 45 66 3 24 936 3 44 6- 53 89 �155x 5:00 8 22 13 43 3 21 19 43 86 13 33 854z 3 53 7 63 117203_7 5:15 6 11 3 Nff20 1 23 7' 31 51 13 33 6 7 5231`% 3 58 7 f66 ` 120 4171 , 4:30-5:30 ' a57 LL' "22I 100 '�11 193'53x1 157 257=32 I'1171261 175 I A 22 =I 219 394651 5� I PHF 10.66 10.65' 0.420.58 0.55 1 0.8 1 0.7 0.85 0.62 10.89 10.72 0.81 0.92 1 0.8 10.79 0.81 1 0.8 DELICH ASSOCIATES 2272 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE LOVELAND,CO 80538 Phone: 970 669.2061 TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS Date: 9/23/2014 Observer: Carl Day: Tuesday Jurisdiction: Fort Collins R = right turn Intersection: LincolnMlilloW S = straight I - Inff h,rn Time Northbound: Southbound: Willow Total Eastbound: Lincoln Westbound: Lincoln Total Total L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total Begins northlsouth eastlwest All 7:30 Or 22 4 26 26 3 22 K 25 28 7 60 — 86_; 7:45 = 0 25 326 28 1 52�. ' 53 40 20 fio 113 _ 8:000. 26 6 ,= 32t 32 4 33 37 52 20 ` m 72 109 _ 141=ems 8:15 s0 29 534� 34 5 41 `'46 55 34 ir89 135 169 4:30 OAT' '7=_ 40 14 54 .�� 54 10 76 �86'x� _z 71 35 10t nr 192 246 Y- 4:450 18 8 26 26 4 46 = 52 60 28 8 140 166" n 5:00 �,r-0� 36 16 `�y52� 52 9 65 ,X�74�� 110 63 �173 _� 247 5:150 38 846 46 8 64 <I''72 `° 62 49 111 183 =�229s APPENDIX B \)cSTII.CC'YIPU1)/K677411, Trig Generation Use Size ' AWdDTE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Hate trips state In Race Out %fate In Rate Out FCode L i F£ T i tiousr t �7tsT�cc�la% �> 5� EQ �•97 [ �& Z4e- uQ O.81 ti A zo Ea 6,11 MIA 4 4 cQ 0.12 A[IA 4- �Q 4.85 nj A z9 gl4 125-rAIL 64.03 230 2.55 9 1. 4 3.41 12 3_41 /Z 3Z'CSTAv�lae J jy� S . 9,39 127.(x 756 NOT OFC(J 5.qi 3i 5.94 Z 3 931 �i C u 714 opt--t.cC KSP 7.q8 74 1.41 t7 0-11 1 6.14 5 L�Cur 14.37 7 /J A T�Atl-Y PEA f2' 5rS �J T.. cJU6,TOTA1- i �v�u 1312. rit)o o .. �¢ S G 9 q 53 77 5 U Site Concept Location 360 Linden Street Fort Collins, CO rGy Zoning CI Dec River Downtown Redevelopment (R-D Ri Stqetscape Improvements by City Site Area +/ 95,500st Setbacks 10' wide easement for Mountain Slates Pf iuf te Cu. 15' wide Union Pacific Railroad Easement Urban cor, iuvr NIUY f(AJ pura(, Building Area seu?a 100,000 Sf N Ilk. Art," FUlufe Development Existing bulldlngOa remain T:Jck Acce5to Lincoln Ave, I■ Is V SiTE ARCWTECTURE Old Elk Distillery I Preliminary Design Review Package 4)1 URG*H DB:GN BRINKMAN NORTHERN Design Nit. NT(940R MiGN i 1, �,N NY N r 1, - F lt� I TI 13 4 oll #4 cp ji r r� 14 7-7 1000 k-.30osic earth tees 500 m TF,-p DisTR150TICN A :a!8Ji=( -,'r --�CiaGitP7tP[:i _�,�_„•`. .._..,..�� Attachment A Transportation impact Study Rasa Assumptions irojcc:Infor maiioF _7 / ✓_,..._,...-vim..-...__i, :7 � ..y T f PrOi'tcz Loc2Lion '�r>S.: t f�!Cl�o-. `�+:}UfiYt`�'. AiJ 1 '") i'- �...rE lbb hl/ �Ll;-L i TIS Assumprons f y c o f S+1u d'. i C;;I}.- !(! Saidi :\re2 n,oundurits R�; t' SuutF:(t1l�z:X,> -Iv i'Ci-'S ry 'tlE:ii: 1�T3�('li: t iftlVv:9? Ruin `•PJo?. t' illr::iSuL'ttOilS „[:3C1 1 ii FF ��!JFI'i il��ti Oil /l l i ; ? / /-4 SLt .� i D tiI'-' j "i iNI odd;. Si 44•.i A` ,.iti ill�iiVnS .liii l�C[? �ZO?.i�lb;tb i!?IL'i H'8il :v: lS 1 //f�l+/ t _ rL �:• li _1'~,,,,! }._:$ ' `7T'j e 11L: �''...� v' �5r.: i�._.. L.+., i =' .—. CZ i r;;Cfl'�t _ r..i' C., !_ { /t !'('!`k I /� ✓ JL. l-:rurer COUr:CY !!roar. Arc. SireM Sta :da:r.'y — 2e;w Jicc Ord Rctn x.W:? Agra t, -,GC, APPENDIX A IV. CONCLUSIONS This study assessed the impacts of the Old Elk Distillery on the street system in the vicinity of the proposed development in the short range (2016) future. As a result of this analysis, the following is concluded: - The development of the Old Elk Distillery is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. At full development, the Old Elk Distillery will generate approximately 1,322 daily trip ends, 63 morning peak hour trip ends, and 132 afternoon peak hour trip ends. - Current operation at the Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections is acceptable. The Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections will not meet peak hour signal warrants and do not meet the signal spacing criteria and will not be signalized. - In the short range (2016) future, given development of Old Elk Distillery and an increase in background traffic, the Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections will operate acceptably with existing control and the existing and future geometry. - The short range (2016) geometry is shown in Figure 9. - Acceptable level of service is achieved for bicycle and transit modes based upon the measures in the multi -modal transportation guidelines. For pedestrians continuity factor could not achieve the desired level of service for a "pedestrian district" for one pedestrian destination. As the area redevelops, this deficiency will be corrected. This area of Fort Collins was built prior to the current LCUASS Document being adopted. DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -7-pr-ASSOCIATES Page 19 There are a number of bus routes (5, 8, 14, and 81) within one block of the Old Elk Distillery site. The Downtown Transit Center (MAX and many additional bus routes) is 3-4 blocks from the Old Elk Distillery site. Bicycle parking facilities will be provided at the Old Elk Distillery site. Pedestrian Level of Service There aretwill be sidewalks to the southwest (to Old Town) and to the northeast (Poudre Trail). Sidewalks will be constructed related to the Feeder Supply Project. Sidewalks will be constructed along Willow Street adjacent to this site. Appendix F shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Old Elk Distillery development. There are three pedestrian destinations within 1320 feet of the Old Elk Distillery development. These are: 1) the commercial/industrial area to the southwest; 2) the Poudre Trail to the northeast; and 3) the industrial/recreational area to the northwest. The Old Elk Distillery site is located within an area termed as "pedestrian district," which sets the level of service threshold at LOS A for all measured categories, except for street crossings which is LOS B. Pedestrian level of service is not achieved for all pedestrian destinations with regard to continuity for one pedestrian destination. The continuity gap is along Willow Street, northwest of Linden Street. As the area redevelops, this deficiency will be corrected. The Pedestrian LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix H. The practical limits of pedestrian improvements would be on the Old Elk Distillery site itself. Bicycle Level of Service Appendix F shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Old Elk Distillery development. There is one bicycle destination within 1320 feet of the Old Elk Distillery development. This is the Poudre Trail to the northeast. The Bicycle LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix H. The minimum level of service for this site is B. This site is connected to bike lanes on Linden Street. Therefore, it is concluded that level of service B can be achieved. Transit Level of Service This area of Fort Collins is served by Transfort Routes 5, 8, 14 and 81. Routes 5 and 14 run along Jefferson Street and have bus stops near the Jefferson/Linden intersection. Routes 8 and 81 run along Willow Street and Linden Street and have bus stops near the Willow/Linden intersection. ---�� LDELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -7,'T --ASSOCIATES Page 18 TABLE 3 Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Operation ��i.��i a�Sr+Y,.�k�i� � .. .A'-�Y"'i�.`�'i.., ..`o-i,%s� � .�C.r `Kl'a'G .'m��' tL�.�'`Yy�ry✓ ,i'h",1,/*..zG .. 5, t n. Lincoln/Willow (Stop Sign)(Existing Geometry) SEB LT/RT B D NEB LT/T A A Lincoln/Willow (Stop Sign) (Lincoln Corridor Plan Geometry) SEB LT B CSEB RT A B SEB APPROACH B C NEB LT A A Willow/Linden (All -Way Stop) SEB LT/T/RT B B NWB LT/T/RT A B NEB LT/T/RT A B SWB LT/T/RT A B TABLE 4 Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Operation i�Y"" �'',., �:jai✓ 3 , i q� z,s;�,l` clan . x ri ,.� .. Lincoln/Willow (Stop Sign)(Existing Geometry) SEB LT/RT B D_ NEB LT/T A A Lincoln/Willow (Stop Sign) (Lincoln Corridor Plan Geometry) SEB LT B CSEB RT A B SEB APPROACH B C NEB LT A A Willow/Linden (All -Way Stop) SEB LT/T/RT B B NWB LT/T/RT A B NEB LT/T/RT A B SWB LT/T/RT B B --�,1�4--DELICH 1 � rASSOCIATES Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 17 SHORT RANGE (2016) GEOMETRY —/fL—DELICH 07, 11; r—ASSOCIATES N f— -Denotes Lane �.— - Lincoln Corridor Plan Geometry Figure 9 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 16 ' Geometry Figure 9 shows a schematic of the short range (2016) geometry. According to the Lincoln Corridor Plan, the LincolniWillow intersection will have separate left -turn and right - turn lanes on Willow Street and Lincoln Avenue will have an eastbound left-tum lane, a through lane in each direction, and a westbound right -turn lane. Since it is not known ' when this will occur, the short range analysis was conducted with the existing geometry and the Lincoln Corridor Plan Geometry. Operation Analysis Capacity analyses were performed at the Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections. The operations analyses were conducted for the short range future, reflecting year 2016 conditions. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 6, the Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections operate in the short range (2016) background condition as indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix D. The key intersections will operate acceptably with both the existing geometry and future geometry. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 8, the Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections operate in the short range (2016) total traffic future as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix E. The key intersections will operate acceptably with both the existing geometry and future geometry. Parking The site plan shows that off-street parking will not be provided for either employees or visitors/customers. However, parking for trucks, related to the shipping/receiving of product and materials, will be provided at the east end of the building. The trucks will enter from Willow Street and exit via an "alley" to Lincoln Avenue. The exiting trucks will make a right turn on Lincoln Avenue to reach the Jefferson-Riverside/Lincoln-Mountain signalized intersection. Employees, who drive personal vehicles to/from work, will park at available on - street spaces or. in public parking lots in the area. There are two City operated parking garages within 3-4 blocks of the Old Elk Distillery site. There are time parking limits along many streets in this area of Fort Collins. It is likely that the two parking garages will be utilized by many employees. Visitors and customers are expected to utilize the available on -street parking in the area, since they will generally not require long term (more than 2 hours) parking. The on - street parking is utilized for other similar land uses in this area of Fort Collins. While the implementation schedule is not known, there are plans to introduce considerable on -street parking on Willow Street in the future. -L—DELICH Old Elk Distill"TIS, October2014 /14-ASSOCIATES Page 15 SHORT RANGE (2016) TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC —//L—DELICH -7 rASSOCIATES N AM/PM Figure 8 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 14 �O 5 SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ---/��-DELICH �. t=ASSOCIATES N AM/PM Figure 7 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 13 SHORT RANGE (2016) BACKGROUND PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC m��/LDELICH 7,1 rASSOCIATES N -aAM/PM Figure 6 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 12 4( TRIP DISTRIBUTION -��I DELICH =7J ["ASSOCIATES N Figure 5 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 11 facilities would not be used on a daily basis. It is expected that parking for the events would occur at available on -street spaces or in the parking garages. Due to the ' infrequency of events at the Old Elk Distillery, rigorous analyses of the key intersections were not conducted at event times. Given the location of this site and nature of the parking in the area, the traffic impacts of an event would be spread over a large area (a ' number of square blocks). Specific impacts to key intersections are difficult to determine and evaluate. Trip Distribution Trip distribution for the Old Elk Distillery development was based 'on existing/future travel patterns, land uses in the area, consideration of trip attractions/productions in the area, and engineering judgment. Figure 5 shows the trip ' distribution for, the short range (2016) analysis future. The trip distribution was agreed to by City of Fort Collins staff in the scoping discussions. ' Background Traffic Projections Figure 6 shows the short range (2016) background traffic projections. Background traffic projections for the short range future horizon were obtained by ' reviewing the North Front Range Regional Transportation Plan and traffic studies prepared for this area of Fort Collins. The other traffic studies in this area are Feeder Supply and Block One. Based upon these sources, it was determined that traffic ' volumes would increase by approximately 4% per year in the short range future. The Feeder Supply and Block One traffic was added to determine the background volumes. 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 Old Elk ' Distillery site. Figure 8 shows the short range (2016) total (site plus background) peak hour traffic assignment. I' Signal Warrants As a matter of policy, traffic signals are not installed at any location unless warrants are met according to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The LincolnM/illow and Willow/Linden stop sign control intersections will not meet peak hour signal warrants and do not meet the signal spacing criteria. Therefore, they will not be signalized. --��LDELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 ' -71; r—ASSOCIATES Page 10 =., L/IDEN STREET SITE PLAN -//4-DELICH �7, ASSOCIATES p Figure 4 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 9 ' III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ' The Old Elk Distillery development consists of a 34,640 square foot distillery, a 5,939 square foot restaurant, an 11,694 square foot corporate office, a 3,593 square foot retail component, and a 14,975 square foot event venue. Figure 4 shows a site ' plan of the Old Elk Distillery. The short range analysis (Year 2016) includes full development of the Old Elk Distillery and an appropriate increase in background traffic due to normal growth and other potential developments in the area. The site plan ' shows that trucks/service vehicles will have an access to Willow Street. Trip Generation Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this ' upon the existing and proposed street system. Light Industrial (Code 110), High -Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant (Code 932), Corporate Office (Code 714), and Specialty Retail ' (814) in Trip Generation, 9th Edition, ITE were used to estimate the trips that would be generated by the proposed Old Elk Distillery development. A trip is defined as a one-way vehicle movement from origin to destination. The calculated trip generation is 1322 daily ' trip ends; 63 morning peak hour trip ends; and 132 afternoon peak hour trip ends. Table 2 shows the expected trip generation on a daily and peak hour basis. TABLE 2 Trip Generation �y�yy� 'it. _ .A.M1 0.81 1 28 0.11 4 0.12 4 110 Light Industrial 34.64 KSF 6.97 242 0.85 29 932 Restaurant 5.939 KSF 127.15 756 5.91 35 3.94 23 714 Corporate Office 11.694 KSF 7.98 94 1.41 17 0.11 1 0.14 2 1.27 15 814 Retail 3.593 KSF 64.03 230 2.59 9 1.22 4 3.41 12 3.41 12 Total 1 1 1322 54 9 53 1 1 79 Not Open Event Venue There is a banquet room and a number of private dining rooms within the Old Elk Distillery building. The largest number of event guests would be 250, however, an event of this size would not be frequent. Events would generally occur on weekends (wedding receptions or similar activity), which would not impact the conventional weekday peak hours of the street. Some events could occur on weekday evenings, which could impact a portion of the afternoon peak hour of the street. The end of this type of event would not impact the peak hour of the street. The private dining rooms have limited seating and would not be used on a regular basis. There are conference rooms on the second floor which are designed to accommodate 136 people. These L-DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 r--ASSOCIATES Page 8 TABLE 1 Current Peak Hour Operation P+:n i X`,�;.iiinr�'s .'�,✓a 'M y�z'� °�%'WCk.: A"W Lincoln/Willow SEB LT/RT B C (Stop Sign) NEB LT/T A A SEB LT/T/RT q A Willow/Linden NWB LT/T/RT q B (All -Way Stop) NEB LT/T/RT q q SWB LT/T/RT q A '--��--DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 ' -71' [—ASSOCIATES Page 7 Existing Operation The LincolnNVillow and Willow/Linden intersections were evaluated using techniques provided in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. Using the morning and afternoon peak hour traffic shown in Figure 3, the peak hour operation is shown in Table 1. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix C. The key intersections are currently operating acceptably with existing control and geometry in the morning and afternoon peak hours. A description of level of service for unsignalized intersections from the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual and a table showing the Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections) are also provided in Appendix C. This site is in an area termed "mixed use district." In areas termed "mixed use district," acceptable overall operation at stop sign controlled intersections, acceptable level of service level of service F for any approach leg at arterial/collector intersection. In urban and urbanizing corridors, delays commensurate with level of service E and F are typical for minor street left -turns at stop sign controlled intersections along arterial streets during the peak hours. These delays are generally accepted by the traveling public. Pedestrian Facilities There are sidewalks along Linden Street and portions of Lincoln Avenue. There is no sidewalk along the Willow Street. The Poudre Trail is to the northeast of the Old Elk Distillery site. Bicycle Facilities Bicycle lanes exist along Lincoln Avenue and Linden Street. The Poudre Trail is to the northeast of the Old Elk Distillery site. Transit Facilities Currently, this area of Fort Collins is served by Transfort Routes 5, 8, 14 and 81. Routes 5 and 14 run along Jefferson Street and have bus stops near the Jefferson/Linden intersection. Routes 8 and 81 run along Willow Street and Linden Street and have bus stops near the Willow/Linden intersection. —DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 1,'rASSOCIATES Page 6 4 N -Denotes Lane RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 3 _e -// 4—DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 1 j-"-ASSOCIATES Page 5 EXISTING GEOMETRY //�DELICH '71 rASSOCIATES N -Denotes Lane Figure 2 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 4 kz �� Old Elk Distillery c SO �Jncoln Avenue m 0 U Mountain AN enue J -ALt: l =ouu SITE LOCATION Figure 1 !--DELI CH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 rASSOCIATES Page 11. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location of the Old Elk Distillery development is shown in Figure 1. It is important that a thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented. Land Use Land uses in the area are primarily industrial and commercial. There are industrial uses to the south, east, and north of the site. There are commercial uses to the south of the site. The proposed Old Elk Distillery site is currently vacant. The center of Fort Collins lies to the south of the proposed Old Elk Distillery development site. Streets The primary streets near the Old Elk Distillery site are Lincoln Avenue, Linden Street, and Willow Street. Figure 2 shows a schematic of the existing geometry at the key intersections. Lincoln Avenue is southeast of the Old Elk Distillery site. It is an east -west street classified as a two-lane arterial on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, Lincoln Avenue has a two-lane cross section. At the LincolniWillow intersection, Lincoln Avenue has all movements combined into a single lane. The Lincoln/Willow intersection has stop sign control on Willow Street. The posted speed limit in this area of Lincoln Avenue is 35 mph. Willow Street is northeast of (adjacent to) the Old Elk Distillery site. It is a northwest -southeast street classified as a two-lane collector on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, Willow Street has a two-lane cross section. At the LincolnM/illow intersection, Willow Street has all movements combined into a single lane. At the Willow/Linden intersection, Willow Street has all movements combined into a single lane. The Willow/Linden intersection has all -way stop sign control. The posted speed limit in this area of Willow Street is 25 mph. Linden Street is northwest of (adjacent to) the Old Elk Distillery site. It is a northeast -southwest street classified as a two-lane collector street on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, Linden Street has a two-lane cross section. At the Willow/Linden intersection, Linden Street has all movements combined into the single lane. The posted speed limit in this area of Linden Street is 25 mph. Existing Traffic Recent morning and afternoon peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. The traffic counts at the Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections were obtained in ' September 2014. Raw traffic count data are provided in Appendix B. J/-t—DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October2014 r-ASSOCIATES Page 2 I. INTRODUCTION This transportation impact study (TIS) addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near the proposed Old Elk Distillery development. The ' proposed Old Elk Distillery site is located in the southeast quadrant of the LindeNWillow intersection in Fort Collins, Colorado. ' During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project developer (Blue Ocean), the project architect (Oz Architecture), the project planning consultant (Ripley Design), and Fort Collins Traffic Engineering. The Transportation ' Impact Study Base Assumptions form and related documents are provided in Appendix A. This study generally conforms to the format set forth in the Fort Collins TIS Guidelines in the "Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards" (LCUASS). Due to the trip generation, this is an intermediate transportation impact study. 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 ' __//11L_DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 ' �� `--ASSOCIATES Page 1 LIST OF FIGURES 1. Site Location............................................................................................................. 3 2. Existing Geometry ..................................................................................................... 4 3. Recent Peak Hour Traffic.......................................................................................... 5 4. Site Plan.................................................................................................................... 9 5. Trip Distribution..................................................................:.................................... 11 6. Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Traffic ................................................ 12 7. Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic........................................................................... 13 8. Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Traffic........................................................... 14 9. Short Range (2016) Geometry ................................................................................ 16 APPENDICES A. Base Assumptions Form B. Peak Hour Traffic Counts C. Current Peak Hour Operation/Level of Service Descriptions/Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections) D. Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Operation E. Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Operation F. Pedestrian/Bicycle Level of Service Worksheets --DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October2014 7., r -ASSOCIATES TABLE OF CONTENTS ' 1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS.......................................................................................... 2 LandUse.........................................................................................................................2 Streets............................................................................................................................. 2 ExistingTraffic................................................................................................................ 2 ExistingOperation........................................................................................................... 6 PederstrianFacilities....................................................................................................... 6 ' Bicycle Facilities.............................................................................................................. 6 TransitFacilities..............................................................................................................6 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT................................................................................ 8 TripGeneration............................................................................................................... 8 EventVenue................................................................................................................... 8 TripDistribution............................................................................................................. 10 Background Traffic Projections..................................................................................... 10 TripAssignment............................................................................................................ 10 SignalWarrants............................................................................................................ 10 Geometry...................................................................................................................... 15 OperationAnalysis........................................................................................................ 15 Parking.......................................................................................................................... 15 Pedestrian Level of Service.......................................................................................... 18 Bicycle Level of Service................................................................................................ 18 TransitLevel of Service................................................................................................. 18 IV. CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................... 19 LIST OF TABLES 1. Current Peak Hour Operation................................................................................... 7 2. Trip Generation......................................................................................................... 8 3. 4. Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Operation .......................................... Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Operation..................................................... 17 17 /-L—DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October2014 1, rASSOCIATES 1 1 1 1 1. RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT (OLD ELK DISTILLERY) TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY FORT COLLINS, COLORADO OCTOBER 2014 Prepared for: Blue Ocean Enterprises, Inc. 401 Mountain Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521 Prepared by: DELICH ASSOCIATES 2272 Glen Haven Drive Loveland, CO 80538 Phone: 970-669-2061 FAX: 970-669-5034 Project # 1470