HomeMy WebLinkAboutSHENANDOAH PUD - PRELIMINARY - 47-95 - CORRESPONDENCE - TRAFFIC STUDYFEB-12-1996 12:35 MATTHEW DELICH PE
3WG695034 P.02
Pertaining to her last comment (4.) regarding increasing
the traffic on Shields Street, I explained that Shenandoah was
primarily accessing US287, not Shields. Development generated
traffic on Shields Street is expected to be low. The current
plan indicates that CR32 will not be connected from US287 to
Shields Street. This is a variance from the Fort Collins
Master Street Plan.
Please call if you have questions regarding this
memorandum.
TOTAL P.02
FEB-12-1996 12:35
MATTHEW DELICH PE
3036695034 P.01
u.i
o<..
cad
x
r
Ks
2zi - (, 37$
MEMORANDUM --
G
0
TO: Jim MCCory, Colorado Land Source
Lucia Liley, March & Myatt
Frank Vaught, Vaught*Frye Architects
e Elaine Spencer, Larimer County Engineering
Steve Olt, Fort Collins Planning Department
Eric Bracke, Fort Collins Traffic Engineer
FROM: Matt Delich��
DATE: February 12, 1996
SUBJECT: Larimer County Engineering Department letter on
Shenandoah ODP
(File: 9582MEM3)
This memorandum documents my conversation with Elaine
Spencer, Direct of Engineering, Larimer County, regarding her
letter dated January 3, 1996, pertaining to the Shenandoah
ODP.
Elaine's primary concern was the issue of the Victoria
Estates residents regarding existing and potential cut through
traffic on Victoria Drive. The citizens were c6ncerned that
lining up the Shenandoah access and signalization of this
intersection would increase this type of traffic. In her
letter, she stated that she did not support signalization, but
did support lining up streets on both sides of US287. I
explained that a signal at the half mile was not reasonable
c, due to Benson Lake and that signalization of the
US287/Victoria intersection was not new to this ODP, but had
W been in the 1994 Ridgewood Hills ODP, as well as the Del Webb
plan in the early 1980's. Elaine agreed that Victoria Drive
w (through Victoria Estates) would not be the route of
preference once signals go in at the US287/CR32 and US287/
r5 Victoria intersections. The easier and faster route will be
through signalized intersections.
x
aHer comment (3.) of not being in favor of the right -in/
right -out to Parcel B-6 (really B-7 in new plan) stems from
a limiting direct access to state highways. !I explained that
z the location was approximately 800 feet south of Victoria
F Drive and Boo feet north of CR32, and that it would operate
acceptably. I also told her that the right-in/right-out to
Parcel B-7 would remove traffic from other intersections,
thereby improving the operation at those intersections. If
F this access were to be allowed, it 1would require a
with/without analysis.
I
I
i