HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOSTON CHICKEN PUD MAJOR AMENDMENT - 79 93B - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSAPPENDIX H
Elms
to ashes
Need for new trees
stems from damage
By SUSAN BECKER
The Coloradoan
The buzzing of chain saws.
could be heard at the intersection
of South Lemay and Pennock
Place on Tuesday as two 60-year-
old Siberian elm trees were dis-
membered.
The two trees, measuring 38
and 58 inches in diameter, had to
be removed after sustaining se-
vere root damage during the con-
struction of the new Boston
Chicken on the east side of the in-
tersection.
"It was a preventable incident,"
said senior city planner Ted Shep-
ard.
The damage, caused by a
trenching machine used in exca-
vating, weakened the trees' root
systems to the point that leaving
the trees was deemed unsafe.
Shepard said a good gust of wind
could have toppled the trees in six
to 18 months.
"We decided it was better to
solve the problem now than cover
them up with dirt and deal with it
later," Shepard said.
Boston Chicken will compen-
sate the city for the loss in two
ways. The Siberian elms will be
replaced with two green ash trees
of approximately 4 inches in di-
ameter.
Boston Chicken also will fi-
nance the planting of more than
40 new trees in the immediate
area, as well as other commercial
corridors in Fort Collins, includ-
ing South College Avenue.
The additional trees will be
hearty species of burr oak, honey
locust, linden and hackberry.
They were chosen for their me-
dium- to fast -growth rate, adapt-
ability to the climate and lack of
low branches, thorns and fruit.
STATE
REGION
Michael Madrid/The Coloradcan
GOING OUT ON A LIMB: Joe Hand of Jordan's Tree Service pushes
the top of a tree over while removing two trees from the entrance of
Boston Chicken at Lemay Avenue and Pennock Place.
v
T,e /i �J l
CCU
F
!'EAR �oA(> �. /t •-. rUF'_ - � 1. [)
T`AVC-L
r_ �i-4
F C (4- - 2
GRu-c2
PEA✓ L 0 A D F'Ar_-r0R. - S (. Z
LO S 0
Multimodal Transportation Level of Service Manual
LOS Standards for Development Review - Bicycle
Figure 7. Bicycle LOS Worksheet
level of service - connectivity
nm>innan ;dual proposed
base connectivity: C B p
specific connections to priority sites:
description of applicable
destination area within 1,320'
including address
A, Ek7— i
S go PPrAvG C En/rc 2
destination area
classification
(see text)
Co,r,�,vwsry
CGM�ufRcS�IL
C 1 Al
p. 20
City of Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan
Multimodal Transportation Level of Service Manual P. 18
LOS Standards for Development Review - Pedestrian
Figure 6. Pedestrian LOS Worksheet
project location classification: A c T1 v_ -Ty (enter as many as apply)
FLI
Ifl
is
is
description of applicable
destination area within 1,320'
including address
A` e </z�SoAl
?6J 1? 6 VA t_t_tw
destination area
level of service (minimum based on project location classification)
classification
(see text)
9,.tness
suit--Y
F
aoo-s M-s
swl
r sthF-,YP
e/n�ities
mninnnn
/i
%8
8
actual
A
A
B
B
B
proposed
A
A
B
Q
B
mvimten
�'�
acntal
A
A
A
prupused
Q
A
A
A
mnmman
actual
prnpused
mninnnn
xtual
prupused
�� City of Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan
HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4d 10-23-1997
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
Streets: 1E-W) riverside (N-5) Tema•
Analyst: Matt File Name:
Area Type: Other 10-23-97 am pm
ng Comment: short lobY.grd "total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound 1 Southbound
L T R : L T R : L T R : L T R
-__ ____ ____ _ __-_ ____---- ____ ----
No. Lanes : 1 2 1 : 1 2 < : 1 2 1 : 1 2
Volumes 55 485 265: 50 350 150: 365 630 601 230 665 15
PHF or Pii15!0.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.95-:0.95 0.95 0.95
Lane W (ft):12.0 12.0 12.0:12.0 12.0 :12.0 12.0 12.0:12.0 12.0
Grade 0 0 0 0
% Heavy Veh: 2 2 2: 2 2 2: 2 2 2: 2 2 2
Parking :(Y/tl) N :(Y/N) N !(YIN) N :(YIN) N
Bus Stops 0: 0: 0: 0
Con. Peas 0: 0! 0: 0
Ped Button :(Y/N) N :(Y/N) N :(Y/N) N :(Y/N) N
Art Type t 3 3 3: 3 3 3 3 3: 3 3
RTOR Vols 0: 0: 0: 0
Lost Time :1.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.0011.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.00
Prop. Share:
Prop. Prot.:
_______________________________________________________________________
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4: 5 6 7 8
EB Left :NB Left
Thru Thru '
Right Right "
Peds Peds
WB Left :SB Left
Thru Thru
Right i Right
Peds Peds
NB Right :EB Right
SB Right :WB Right
Green S.OP 16.OP :Green S.OP 7.OP 45.OP
Yellow/AR 5.0 5.0 :Yellow/AR 5.0 0.0 6.0
Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: $1 a2 #5 =6 =.
_______________________________________________________________________
lnterser_tion Performance Summary
'_ane Group: Adi Sat V/c g/C Approach:
Mvmcs Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS
_____ ____ _______ _____ _____ _____ ___ _____ ___
EB L 234 1770 0.248 0.310 19.7 c 27.4 D
T 708 3125 0.759 0.190 32.4 D
R 570 1583 0.490 0.360 19.4 C
WB L 234 1770 0.226 n.310 19.5 C 33.6 D
TR 676 3558 0.817 0.190 34.9 D
NB L 413 1'70 0.930 0.6"71) 35.3 D 16.3 1:
T 2049 _ 0.340 0.550 9.5 B
R 871 1583 0.077. 0.550 9.0 B
0.691 0.600 il.4 B 12.6 3
T:. 17P,2 fis .!.422 0.4Ac 13. C�
1_n-er5e.-t:U❑ Delay = 21.5 .=.Pc/'veh lntPrsectian _uS =
Lost .ime/i;_cle, L, = 3.., sec cri`_icai v/c(x) = 0.783
HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4d 10-23-1997
:e n*er For Microcomputers In Transpor`_at ion
Streets: (E-W) riverside (N-S) iemay
Analyst: Matt File Name:
Area Type: Other 10-23-97 ampm
'
Comment: short long okgrd total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound t Southbound
L T R : L T R : L T R 1 L T R
--- ---- ---- ---- ---- --- • --- --- ---- ---- --- --
30. Lanes : 1 2 1 : 1 2 : 1 2 1 1
Volumes 195 375 4501 120 400 215: 415 860 55: 130 715 10
PHF or PR15:0.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.9510.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.95
Lane W (ft):12.0 12.0 12.0:12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0:12.0 12.0
Grade : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0
% Heavy Veh: 2 2 2: 2 2 21 2 2 2: 2 2 2
Parking :(Y/N) N (YIN) N !,,YIN) N (Y/N) N
Bus Stops t 0: 0: 0: 0
Con. 'reds 01 0: 0: 0
Ped Button :(YIN) N :(YIN) N :(Y/17) N :(Y/Nj N
Arr hype 3 3: 3 3 3 3 3: 3
RTOR Vols 0: 01 0: 0
Lost Time 11.00 3.00 3.0011.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.0011.00 3.00 3.00
Prop. Share:
Prop. Prot.;
_______________________________________________________________________
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4: 5 6 7 3
EB Left :NB Left
Thru Thru '
Right Plant
Peds Peds
WB Left :SB Left `
Thru Thru
Right Right `
Peds Peds
NB Right :EB Right
SB Right :WB Right
Green 7.Or 2.0P 25.0P :Green 6.OP 14.OP 34.OP
Yellow/AR 5.0 0.0 6.0 :Yellow/AR 5.0 0.0 6.0
cycle Length: i10 secs Phase combination order: =1 42 Q3 #5 a6 =7
_______________________________________________________________________
intersection Performance Summary
Lane Group: Ad! Sat Vic giC Approach:
tivmts Cap ,low Ratio Ratio Deiay LOS Delay LOS
____ _______ _____ _____ _____ ___ _____ ___
EB L '77 1770 0.740 0.400 25.7 D 21.2 C
t 1016 3725 0.409 0.273 5.0
R '92 1503 0.599 0.500 i.5.9
WB L 336 177C 0.375 0.382 18.3 C 29.3 D
TR 399 3530 0.756 0.255 31.3 D
NB L 454 1770 0.963 0.582 48.5 E 26.0 D
T 1727 3725 0.550 0.464 16.4 C
R 734 1583 0.0-19 0.464 B
SB ., 236 i770 :.561 .455 16.13 C _
TR 1250 -717 0.--41 0.336 24.3 _
Intersection I-elav = 24.e sec:'veh Intersection Lu5 =
Lost Time cvole. L = 5.0 sec criti.-al v/c(:<! = 0,839
fii;i•1; _iCNAL I L'_U INIF:;'.F-.T Intl 51 11 Mh'ARY 'viers ion ,..4d i71-1-1 1::;'
center For Mirrocornput•3rs Ln Tr-ar,sPor t:at,rn
fit- .Jj :e_'nn,:•,: t: ;Ai._:.j -rmay
ys L: JMP Fi l:_. N,..,,;
Type. Other 10- 1 -:17 ,aQi hIn
We=i hnt'nr_i _ N,_r'hhi)%und ,l, hh, ,-1:.
L i L T R L T R'. 1. T
V IIJmeS 35 5 r'Ui 15 5 15: 160 lit J'J
PHF ::r %'\i'.''0.'15 0.95 5; 0.95 0.35 0.9 0.95 1).?5 0.05!0. 0. _.95
_ a n e 'W i t i _. ') .. Q i L. ll ! 1_ iJ i 7- V
ed-z 0 li 0
e Heavy Veh; _ _ 2
>r b:ina �YjN) N fY/NY/N) N /Y/ia i iv
cj is ill 1-t :N) N il'i/tJi h' �rl iNJ N 'r`r'. N, N
i s _.t T:.ne 1 00 3-.00 .ti0; i JO 3.00 3.00; 1 .00 ,;.00 :5.00i i .G0 3.00 ;.:)0 Prof. Prot ! 45�
__ _ _ ___________________ __
3 ignai C,perations
Phase '--� ,h i rlai. ion 1 c 3 4 i 5 r 7
EE. L=tt " !NB Lett ".
Tl-,r,, I hr-IJ
R iciht Pinht `
I''eds Peds `
WE. I_ -rt " 3 LefL
T h,`u •. Thu '
Right " Right "
Peds - Pecs '-
N6 ight '�C. inil t
Right
c'l -Ten :i0.0A i0r-een 14.0A a9-,i'r
.�il�W:AR 6.0 f?11:;WiAk 5.0 6 a
Cycle =nc i'.h: 100 sacs 1%hnse omn inst i oo r,rder: 41 45 46
_________________________
. ntar -e,'t 4 o n =r fc rman.:a :urnmar'y
�=ne lir our..: Adj _.at v;c ;C
nvmts Cnp Fipw .otie k3 1.3
C
1110 i i 1i. 1 :) II
H I,M1 _-,)IfJ AI_( L II L' IN Ti-_i•--F T1'1N Ij1 iMMA.KV Ver; i,Jn ?.Ad Ij-
Center- F� Mir_i cc n:nou tern in TransPor tat i on
+ree+_. 1'E-.W1 fend r,,_i (tJ-S) Le,na„
An.y iy:,{: ,I I�III File N•=ma:
Area Type it i:he,- _ Ii1-20-97 am ,v
_______
}i Found ,:dJod
i L ! L is I L T f< L T R
_.--we=
Volumes 101) i0 '- i0 65: 0 1055 50; 60 1310 30
PHF ,Pk15;0. --,5 0.95 0'9°.;n-35 0-15 0. 95I 0. 95 0.95 0.95; 0. 95 0.95 0.95
LaneW ,Ftil1 i; .iJ i_'.C, 1-.6 i? 0 1i,,7 �10 12.. IZ_,l I'.0 i:j
I,i-aos V ll U U
Pri: ing O/N) N Y/NY/Nj tJ
Eus Stops
-
i'.-n. Pads Gi 0; 01 p
PNd Ni N
Ar'r i ype
TUn Vo 1:; .. 0i 0I L7
I_o5t. Time ;1.00 3.00 3.00 1ri0 3.00 3.Ii0; i.00 3.Oli '.. 00; 1.00 3.00 ',.00
Prop. Share:F i
Prop. Prct.: 1
----- ----- --------------------- _____
.ianai 11Parations
Phase Combination 1 ?_ S 4 5 6 7 a
FE Left HE. Lett -�
nru " j Inru K
F. ighrf: Riaht t
CIS
Peds
WE. Lett ;SS Left = "
T i,ru Thru '
Ri aht • Right x
F, ds " Peds
NF. h'i nh 1, !GE, Right "
',c Right ;WB 12iah1:
Ijreen 22.iiA Green i6.0A 55. GP
rel iota/At? 6.0 ;fe 1lowi AR 5A 6.0
:. i_,og.h: !10 Ph.:__ c-mh ination order: 41 #..5 47
.__ _ __ _ ir: ispr-q_ i.Jn ic;-fnrmance Summar-Y
-aslle ..roue: ar:j v;.: qiC ap IDir,.;::n:
riv nn__l.ao nati., Ratio
---
L 6 0.d5
1-36ll l/c6 'J.Tii
0. 533 I).41.3 1p- I c
WE; i- a 19 . 07 _ . i.; :i u %,15 1 . 0
52l[ C'
HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4d 10-23-1997
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
Streets: (E-W) elizabeth (N-S) lema
Analyst: Matt File Name,
Area Type: Other 10-23-97 am pm
Comment: long bkgrd Ctal
Eastbound 1 Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R ; L T R L T R L T R
No. Lanes 1 1 1 < ; 1 1 < : 1 2 < 1 2 c
Volumes 95 135 801 35 80 45: 123 1055 135: 90 795 90
PHF or PR15;0.95 0.95 0.9510.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.9510.95 0.95 0.95
Lane W (ft)112.0 12.0 :12.0 12.0 :12.0 12.0 :12.0 12.0
Grade ; 0 ; 0 ; 0 0
% Heavy Veh; 2 2 2; 2 2 21 2 2 21 2 2 2
Parking ;(Y/N) N ;(YIN) N ;(YIN) N :(YIN) N
Bus Stops 01 01 0: 0
Con. Peds 0; 0; 0; 0
Ped Button :(Y/N) N ;(YIN) tI :(YIN) N - :(YIN) N
Arr Type i 3 3 ; 3 3 : 3 3 1 3 3
RTOR Vols 01 01 01 0
Lost Time :1.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.00
Prop. Share:
Prop. Prot.: ,
---- -----------------------------------------------
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
EB Left * ;NB Left "
Thru Thru
Right f Right
Peds Peds
WB Left ;SB Left "
Thru Thru
Right " Right
Peds Peas
NB Right ;EB Right
SB Right :WB Right
Green 6.OP 20.OP Green 8.OP 44.OP
Yellow/AR 5.0 6.0 :YeIIOW/AR 5.0 6.0
Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #2 #5 #6
- ------ -- - - -- ---------------------------------------
Intersection Performance Summary
Lane Group: Adj Sat VIC g/C Approach:
Mvmts Can Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS
_____ ____ _______ _____ _____ _____ ___ _____ ---
EB L 418 1770 0.239 0.360 16.7 C 24.0 C
TR 405 1759 0.559 0.230 27.2 D
WB L 317 1770 0.117 0.360 16.4 C 22.7 C
TR 405 1762 0.323 0.230 24.5 C
NB L 287 1770 0.460 0.620 10.0 B 17.4 C
TR 1721 3662 0.765 0.470 18.1 C
SB L 287 1770 0.331 0.620 10.8 B 14.5 B
TR 1724 3669 0.568 0.470 14.9 B
Intersection Delay = 17.4 sec/veh Intersection LOO = C
Lost Time/Cycle, L = 8.0 sec riticai v/cix) = 0.673 _
------------- --- -- --------------------------------------
HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4d 10-23-1997
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
Streets: (E-W) eiizabeth N-S Tema
Analyst: Matt File Name:
Area Type: Other 10-23-97 am pm
Comment: on bkgrd .� +a+
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
; L T R : L T R L T R ; L T R
No. Lanes 1 1 <. : 1 1 ; 1 2< : 1 2
Volumes 195 90 90; 190 130 1501 100 1110 75: 105 1470 150
PHF or PA15;0.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.95;0.95 0.95 0.95;0.95 0.95 0.95
Lane W (ft):12.0 12.0 :12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
Grade 0 0 0 0
% Heavy Vehl 2 2 2: 2 2 21 2 2 21 2 2 2
Parking :(Y/N) N ;(Y/N) N :(Y/N) N :(Y/N) N
Bus Stops 01 0: 0; 0
Con. Peds 01 01 01 0
Ped Button ;(Y/N) N :(YIN) N :(YIN) N ;(Y/N) N
Arr Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
RTOR Vols 0; 0; 0; 0
Lost Time :1.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.0011.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.00
Prop. Share;
Proo. Prot.; ,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sianal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4; 5 6 7 8
EB Left ;NB Left "
Thru Thru
Right i Right
Peds Peds
WB Left ;SB Left "
Thru Thru ^
Right Right
Peds Peds
NB Right :EB Right
SB Fight ;WB Right
Green 6.OA 25.OA ;Green 6.OA 51.OP
Yellow/AR 5.0 6.0 ;Yellow/AR 5.0 6.0
Cycle Length: 110 secs Phase combination order: #1 #2 #5 #6
-------------------------- ----------------
Intersection Performance Summary
Lane Group: Ad! Sat VIC g/C Approach:
Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS
_____ ___________ _____ _____ _____ ___ _____ ---
EB L 262 1770 0.782 0.373 26.5 D 24.6 C
TR 439 1'23 0.433 0.255 22.6 C
WB L 366 1770. 0.546 0.373 17.4 C 23.0 C
TR 436 1713 0.677 0.255 26.7 D
NB L 229 1770 0.459 0.609 15.6 C 15.3 C
TR 1811 3690 0.723 0.491 15.3 C
SB L 229 1770 0.485 0.609 11.9 B 31.5 D
TR 1804 36-14 0.992 0.491 32.7 D
inter_sec-ion Delay = 24.4 sec/veh Intersecticn LOS = _
Lost Time;Cycie, L = =so Critical v/c(,:;) = 0.8.77
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
APPENDIX G
HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4d 10-23-1997
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
Streets: (E-W) riverside (N-S) lemay
Analyst: Matt File Name:
Area Type: Other 10-23-97 am pm
Comment: short lon bkgrd total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound 1 Southbound
L T R: L T R : L T R : L T R
____ ____ ---- ;---- __-_ ____ ----
No. Lanes : 1 2 1 1 2 < : 1 2 1 : 1 2 <
Volumes 55 485 260: 45 350 150: 360 625 55: 230 660 15
PHF or PK15:0.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.9510.95 0.95 0.9510.95 0.95 0.95
Lane W (ft):12.0 12.0 12.0:12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0:12.0 12.0
Grade 0 i 0 0 t 0
% Heavy Veh: 2 2 2: 2 2 2: 2 2 2: 2 2 2
Parking :(Y/N) N :(YIN) N :(YIN) N :(YIN) N
Bus Stops 0: 0; 0: 0
Con. Peds i 0: 0: 0: 0
Ped Button :(Y/N) N l(YIN) N :(Y/N) N :(Y/N) N
Arr Type i 3 3 3: 3 3 3 3 3: 3 3
RTOR Vols 0: 0: 0: 0
Lost Time :1.00 3.00 3.0011.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.0011.00 3.00 3.00
Prop. Share:
Prop. Prot.:
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4: 5 6 7 8
EB Left ^ :NB Left
Thru i Thru '
Right Right `
Peds Peds
WB Left ` :SB Left
Thru Thru
Right i Right `
Peds Peds
NB Right :EB Right '
SB Right :WB Right
Green 5.OP 16.OP :Green 5.OP 7.OP 45.OP
Yellow/AR 5.0 6.0 Yellow/AR 5.0 0.0 6.0
Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #2 #5 #6 #7
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Intersection Performance Summary
Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach:
Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS
_____ ____ _______ _____ _____ _____ ___ _____ ---
EB L 234 1770 0.248 0.310 19.7 C 27.5 D
T 708 3725 0.759 0.190 32.4 D
R 570 1563 0.481 0.360 19.3 C
WB L 234 1770 0.201 0.310 19.5 C 33.7 D
TR 676 3558 0.817 0.190 34.9 D
NB L 415 1770 0.913 0.670 33.0 D 17.3 C
T 2049 3725 0.337 0.550 9.5 B
R 871 1583 0.067 0.550 8.0 B
SB L 3.53 1770 0.686 0.600 11.2 B 12.5 B
TR 1782 3713 0.419 0.480 13.0 B
Intersection Delay = 21.2 sec/veh Intersection LOS = C
Lost Time/Cycle, L = 5.0 sec Critical v/cix) = 0.758
HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4d 10-23-1997
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
Streets: (E-W) riverside (N-S) lemay
Analyst: Matt File Name:
Area Type: Othe 10-23-97 am pm
Comment: short longo bkard total
Eastbound 1 Westbound Northbound 1 Southbound
L T R : L T R : L T R : L T R
---- ---- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
No. Lanes : 1 2 1 : 1 2 < : 1 2 1 1 2
Volumes : 195 375 430: 105 400 215: 395 845 40: 130 700` 10
PHF or PK15:0.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.95
Lane W (ft):12.0 12.0 12.0:12.0 12.0 :12.0 12.0 12.0:12.0 12.0
Grade : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0
% Heavy Veh: 2 2 2: 2 2 2: 2 2 2: 2 2 2
Parking :(Y/N) N :(Y/N) N :(YIN) N :(Y/N) 11
Bus Stops 0: 0: 0: 0
Con. Peds 0: 0: 0: 0
Ped Button :(YIN) N :(Y/N) N :(Y/N) N :(Y/N) N
Arr Type 3 3 3: 3 3 3 3 3: 3 3
RTOR Vols O: 0: O: 0
Lost Time :1.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.00
Prop. Share:
Prop. Prot.:
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 3 4: 5 6 7 8
EB Left :NB Left
Thru Thru `
Right Right '
Peds Peds
WB Left :SB Left "
Thru i Thru
Right Right
Peds Peds
NB Right :EB Right
SB Right :WB Right
green 7.OP 2.OP 25.OP :Green 6.OP 13.OP 35.OP
Yellow/AR 5.0 0.0 6.0 :Yellow/AR 5.0 0.0 6.0
Cycle Length: 110 secs Phase combination order: #1 #2 #3 #5 #6 #7
_______________________________________________________________________
Intersection Performance Summary
Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach:
Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS
----- ---- ------- ----- ----- ----- --- ----- ---
EB L 277 1770 0.740 0.400 25.7 D 21.4 C
T 1016 3725 0.409 0.273 25.0 C
R 777 1583 0.583 0.491 16.0 C
WB L 336 1770 0.330 0.382 18.0 C 29.5 D
TR 899 3530 0.756 0.255 31.3 D
NB L 438 1770 0.950 0.582 46.5 E 25.2 D
T 1727 3725 0.540 0.464 16.3 C
R '34 1583 0.057 0.464 12.4 B
SB 239 ',70 0.573 0.464 16.2 C i2.3 C
TR 1284 3717 0.611 0.345 23.3 C
intersection Delay = 24.4 sec/veh intersection LOS = C
Lost Time/Cyrle, L = 5.0 =_ec Critical v/c(x) = 0.807
___________________________________________-___-_______-___----__--____
i 110A._i ZED iNTi.P',ECT
ION UhmARr
jogs inn 1.4d
ui-?1-i c.•
Cent r Foy
ni i,_rocompu ter
in T arlsr
St-.ee ts: (E-W) Pennock-
--------------------
N-. Lema`J
Ong iS.g}. .)M0
Fi
i .. ♦
'., ,?•'+'ll�'" L:O ,.'i c r,,und .c•ta i
• Y_
,y rf llll(j
FC 1'
W__1',,:IIfIO
YJ. rthh Jlli iil
flf
7,095 u.n'O.aS!35
t'•rr
u95
0.95:0-`15 it � 0.45
1
L'W 1.ft.V o
e
113 1t.0 i2.0
�12.0 i:2.p
�12.0 12 j i
3de _
0
7
V
av}' 'Joni C ..
!i C
iny (Y j Nj N
(YIN) N
('r jrJ) fJ
�(YjNi N
oV. _lops
0;
0!
0;
0
Pet, Butt,>n 1, T',Nl N
IN N
�('ri N) rJ
;i'i ildl iJ
>rr Tye,-
st iimE i-OO -.00
-I]O;l-0O .: .Oo
_.00;'i-JO .,.00 _.00p
i.G0 _.1)0 :.6CI
;p :.hare
•'-
45i
_.______________._-_..-_______-____________________________._-__-_
Signal Gper,ations
i•i'eae +nd3'ina t'ion
4
.-
i
13
EE• L.fi: °
Na Left:
"
'Th r1.1
1111-u
Right°
Fight
F_j_ `
Fads
'.
'WE. Left
SE\ 1_ert *-
Th:.,,
Thru
r
Right `-
Right
'
Feds `"
Feds
'
EB Right
_:r. Fi<lht
,WB Right
. -.en ?_I)-OA.
I'3r een in -i)A
49.Of'
Yi-1 lowiAF+ 6.O
�Y'r.1 l ow; AR 5.']
0
pile Leny the 100 secs
Phase Combination
order : It Ho
Ali
. ---- --- ----------------------
In tame,:
_--------- ---
tlan ler r,;rman•-e
--------------------------
_i+.unnl.3ry
_.
1'• ♦ .r": `.ap
I' i\,w F,. 31,'l li
:.: 1t,n i)e 1.3V
Lil I�'i� y
T 42f1
1;j r_i4 0.0i[
'.�1.lr)
1'•1i "I lJl I
pi ll _
C I"..
.
no =
E.
Ij..
i1t,M: _]il!N t\Li(. i. T' jW ir'i:_ia.i i'_'N '.+ijfAMAfti
V:er91,:n _.Ad
_ :.1'
C erltef'
`. Milr-ocl-,mputers
in Transoortation
3treat=.: 1E-W, Pnno,4,
Lemav
Analyst: JMCI
File Name
Area Type: Other'
lil-_v-97 am.?In
Ccmn:ent: I'd a7 .iu�rt
io+,.:: bT ald to Lai
Inld WCG th,.lrl♦:I
n - tnn•-••IJfI'-
.IJn(1
.
____ ____l
_ ____ ____ ____
----
..__- ____
No I_z•nes
____l____
t 1 1
1 -
VoiunlNs ii70
7 35; 5 5
10;
PHF ol• P'K 15 0.95 0.95
17.95;O s5 0.93 O.a5I0-
5 0
I_sne W rit1; 1^.0 1%.0
1% 01- 0 1,_.0
i5.0 1=.0IZ^0
f'rade
U 0
iJ
F'ar-L,.ing (YjN)
N ;1Y/N) N
(Yi"N1 N
i+us Stops
0;
0! Oi
0
Con. Feds
1,
0; 0;
O
P<d c.utton Ir(1N)
N 1(YIN) N
f/Ni N
Arr Tvpe
RTOR Vole
lost Time !i.00 i.00
3.Oli; i.00 3- OO 3.00;
1.00 3AG 3. out: :: ...:
:.'i']
Pr-,:'R. _hare
F'rep. Frot.
47;
__._____________________________________.____________________________-___
`3i grlal Operations
rh.lse Combination
1 _ - 4
'
3
EE Left
a
;NB Left
Thru
Thru '
right
Right '
F'._'•d5
't
P. ds
W6 Lett
"
:E• Left
T hr I.,
'
ThrU '
Right
`
Right '
Reds
Reds
N6 Right
;EB Ri I h t
SB Ri91'It
Wi Right
1?reen 22.oA
;Green 16.0A 55 '`-
Ye110wjAR 6
u
;Yeliowj AR 5.0 11:
'c le Length: 1io
'Ph,=se •_enlbirlation
order: 41 45 46
_-.___..___-________._-
________________________________--
.tion Ferrormance
Summa,
j : 3•.
M,ff, h^. fag
-_+�l Ra t'i ..
R3ti:; fr c. I%may L'J _• r-
L'."'
E5 L____. _di
i673 V __�
it NJ '�i -
Wr,: 4.8
i 7-t O.O i,'.
O. 245 ;lij
_ li
Tk $rj
i6, i i;.l]t7
0.22i 21.4
HCN: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4d 10-23-1997
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
Streets: (E-W) elizabeth (N-S) lemay
Analyst: Matt File Name:
Area Type they 10-23-9 am pm
Comment: lon bkgrd total
Eastbound Westbound 1 Northbound Southbound
L T • R L T R L T R , L T R
---- ---- --- --- ---- --- ---- ---- --- ---- ---- ----
No. Lanes 1 1 < 1 1 < ; 1 2 < ! 1 2 <
Volumes 1 90 135 80: 35 80 451 125 1050 135: 85 790 85
PHF or PK15;0.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.95
Lane W (ft):12.0 12.0 :12.0 12.0 :12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
Grade i O 0 0 0
% Heavy Veh! 2 2 21 2 2 21 2 2 2; 2 2 2
Parking 1(YIN) N 1(Y/N) N :(YIN) N 1(Y/N) N
Bus Stops i 0! 0! 0; 0
Con. Peds 0! 0; 0; 0
Ped Button !(Y/N) N :(YIN) N !(Y/N) N !(Y/N) N
Arr Type 3 3 ; 3 3 3 3 3 3
RTOR Vols 0! 0! 0! 0
Lost Time :1.00 3.00 3.0011.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.0011.00 3.00 3.00
Prop. Share!
Prop. Prot.!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4! 5 6 7 8
EB Left 1NB Left '
Thru Thru '
Right i Right "
Peds i Peds
WB Left 1SB Left '
Thru " Thru `
Right Right
Peds i Peds
NB Right IEB Right
SB Right !WB Right
Green 6.OP 20.OP !Green B.OP 44.OP
Yellow/AR 5.0 6.0 ;Yellow/AR 5.0 6.0
Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #2 #5 #6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Intersection Performance Summary
Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach:
Nvmts -Cap --Flow- Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS
EB L 416 1770 0.227 0.360 16.6 C 24.1 C
TR 405 1759 0.559 0.230 27.2 D
WB L 317 1770 0.117 0.360 16.4 C 22.7 C
TR 405 1762 0.323 0.230 24.5 C
NB L 287 1770 0.460 0.620 9.9 0 17.3 C
TR 1721 3662 0.761 0.470 18.0 C
SB L 287 1770 0.310 0.620 10.5 B 14.5 B
TR 1725 3671 0.560 0.470 14.8 B
Intersection Delay = 17.3 sec/veh Intersection LOS = C
Lost Time/Cycle, L = 8.0 sec Critical v/c(x) = 0.668
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4d 10-23-1997
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
Streets: (E-W) elizabeth (N-S) lemay
Analyst: Matt File Name:
Area Type: theme. 10-23-97 am pm
Comment: long bkgrd total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound 1 Southbound
! L T R ; L T R 1 L T R ; L T R
--- ---- --- --- ---- -------- ------------ ---- ----
No. Lanes ; 1 1< ! 1 1< ! 1 2 ` ; 1 2<
Volumes 1 175 90 90: 190 130 150; 100 1085751 80 1445 130
PHF or PK15l0.95 0.95 0.9510.95 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.9510.95 0.95 0.95
Lane W (ft)l12.0 12.0 :12.0 12.0 :12.0 12.0 :12.0 12.0
Grade ; 0 ! 0 ; 0 ; 0
% Heavy Veh; 2 2 2; 2 2 2! 2 2 2! 2 2 2
Parking !(YIN) N !(YIN) N ;(Y/N) N :(YIN) N
Bus Stops 0; 0! 0! 0
Con. Peds 0; 0! 0! 0
Ped Button !(Y/N) N :(YIN) N ;(Y/N) N :(YIN) N
Arr Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 i 3 3
RTOR Vols 0! 0! 0! 0
Lost Time :1.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.00:1.00 3.00 3.0011.00 3.00 3.00
Prop. Share;
Prop. Prot.;
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4! 5 6 7 8
EB Left ;NB Left
Thru Thru "
Right Right "
Peds Peds
WB Left !SB Left "
Thru ' Thru
Right i Right "
Peds Peds
NB Right !EB Right
SB Right ;WB Right
Green 6.OA 25.OA !Green 6.OA 51.OP
Yellow/AR 5.0 6.0 ;Yellow/AR 5.0 6.0
Cycle Length: 110 secs Phase combination order: #1 #2 #5 #6
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Intersection Performance Summary
Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach:
Mvmts Cao Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS
----- ---- ------- ----- ----- ----- --- ----- ---
EB L 262 1770 0.702 0.373 22.2 C 22.4 C
TR 439 1723 0.433 0.255 22.6 C
WB L 366 1770 0.546 0.373 17.4 C 23.0 C
TR 436 1713 0.677 0.255 26.7 D
NB L 229 1770 0.459 0.609 15.4 C 15.1 C
TR 1811 3689 0.708 0.491 15.0 B
SB L 229 1770 0.367 0.609 10.1 B 26.8 D
TR 1806 3679 0.964 0.491 27.6 D
Intersection Delay = 22.0 sec/veh Intersection LOS = C
Los`_ Time/Cycie, L = 8.0 sec Critical v/c(:<) = 0.858
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
APPENDIX F
'j4^I_160AL l t.Cl INT 't'
,iif-rJ r, l- 41;'wI
Vat-5ion
Gentar For hlicrocon,Duters
in 11'anoP X-i:a Ei
On
tJ =�t5: It'-W'1
F'ennori-
(N-5) _,
1
-'ea 'iype: Tither
i0-irl-� (Pm
C.)mnrent: 1997
;ii or- ona
bknrd
astowind
wastbound
•b..-Abound
s;uthb.n...__
i_
P i_ T
R E. 1 n
I
n
I____
Nn 1_:..
_-_-
1 1
____I_.___ ____
1 1 1
____,---- ____ ____
1 1 -.
1
1 -
VolumYs
::o 5
.551 5 5
10i 110 S65
Ic
10 765
:30
PHF <r PK15j0.90
0,90
0.90i0.90 0,90
0,905 ,90 iJ.90 0.
905,
90 0,90 0,90
r_,-,re tJ rf+.); I%
0 i;:.0
12.0;12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0
111.0
17 u 12
0
Grade
0
0
0
0
% Heavy Veh;
2 Z
21 2 2
21 '_ 2
2 i_
Parking (YiN)
N
;(YIN) N
(i/N) N
;1'f/N)
N
Sus 4tnps
0
F
0;
U
Con. Peds
0;
0;
0:
0
Pad Sutton (YIN)
N
(YIN) N
1e/N) N
/'r;'NJ
N
Arr Type
3
31 3 _
3 .:
3 1:i
RTOR Vols
0;
0;
0'
0
Lost Time i.00
3.00
3.00; 1.00 3.00
.00; 1.00 3.00 3.
00; 1.00
3.00
"00
✓r-oo. Sharer
Prop. Prot.
_________.______________________________________________________________
Signal Operations
Fhase Combination
1
- 3 4
5
S
i
3
ES Left
*
;NE Left *
'
T hrij
`
Thr-r.r
Right
I,ia_hr
Ped'::
"
Peds
WE Left
ISE Left «
Thru
*
Thru
'*
Piaht
"
tight
Pads
Pads
WE P.innt
;En Right
9E "P;ght
;WE• night
Green
20. VA
!Green Q,9A
r.0%
ei low;AR
r5.0
;fellow,'AR 5.0
6.0
_!_ i_cngth:
__.-____________________________________________________________________
i0C• sacs
Phase combination
order- al U5
Up
inr.ersertion
r=._-r-f pr
mince Suffana:-.,,
A.oj
qi-
sir.
Aoc• :df,h:
•wmts
sap
F;,i Ratio
R:. ii. Da l z: y,
EE L
413
472 0.072
__` o 15.5
_"-
1,-a_-
--_
4%o
i:j63 13A14
0 1) 19.E
t:
36
1553 0.166
0.250 19.9
'A'.
A9.4
1717 1J 14
0, no 11 2
t".
In I
t.
1144
0.:'30 19,
_
_
17 P, rl
0 '-rO 4 U
A
..T:
11,-nAL I LEL, I N I -i_;,, t'.'N UMM-;:f i_rs irn ..ad itl-'0-19':1%
Center- For Mi._r'r_._owputerIn transportation
Scree t'a: (c-.-Wi rennr.._t (N-j) Lemay
Hna1•;st.: MD =i:? hums:
Area Typa: Other 10-20-97 am
.lr[ 1.:n,] bit 7rd �[
_ _Cli,.i
, uid as -t r' n- OW rribound_____ r t ri !end
T L i R T R
j•u?- _ i_a"or I i I I sees.
Ve fumes 35 ` ._Sri: so 5 S: &A 370 ZY to ii05 45
PHF or PK 1510.90 0.5G 0.90 0.30 ir-90 0, 0 0._0 0.96 U.90i0.90 5.90 0.:�
Lane W r ft) it A i2 J I..a r '.0 ...I _. i I F .tI i2.0 I-. :) 1.0
Grei::= 0 J0 0
h'ar :ing ;lf/N1 N 1 00) N 1tYIN) N ;r_iiN1 N
nits Stop ')r 0' 0i V
Con. Pens 0; 0: 0;
Ped hu 1: ton ('i:N) N (fiN) N ('riN1 N r'ij N) N
Arr Tyne .; - 3
RTOR Vuls 0; 0;
Lost Time 11.00 3.00 5.00; 1.rJ0 3.00 3.0gf 1.0v 3.00 3.00; 1.00 3.OrJ 3.00
Prop. Sha,
Prop. Prot.
________________.__-___-_____________-_________________-______-__-
-- - Signal Ooer-ati•.ns
Phase Combination 1 _ 3 4 5 0' - 3
EE• Left :NB Laft
Thru • Thru
Right Right _r
Pads .r. Peds
WE Left ;SE. Left '*
Thru ' Thru
Right * Right
Pods * ;'-ads
No Right :ES Right s
06 Right WE Right
fe1 i,>wiAP 5.0 `. f_1 tow/AP =.i) 6-0
I yr ig Larry the 111 secs M,.: _<m-, ina t9.-in z roar. 41 45 46
___________________
gr 3k-_tips _riot".an.]�
L;rn•- rr r':.Up: '.rt. _ 3/1_ Approach:
rl•nni:G Cep I^ro. Re( , '.a t',? r�•%'By LV� Do)ay LOS
R -.45 IGn4 rl uSj 0.4i0 1�.: I,
WG L 395 172 70.031 ).2£.' 2 1 A 0 22A C
7 i
___ ?. �.
i, 19' '•1L IJ :11 iZY it IN It •F} lf'N ' i IMMAI.r '/ _ In : ...- I .' .
Center For M1_iocDalout_"3 Ki ir.usr: t._1t.icn
-- -ts. iE-Wj Elizabeth Lem,y
.lHO ='le Name:
. rmrepnl ;101-`a)i rp r-d
sees sees __
i_ ih�w .. W=.o CU;: �f." h.., rnip.,•V n7 _ t i:h �... .. .
L T r; L i :. L I .. -.
____ sees ____i sees __.__ -___; sees sees ___._____ _- __ sees
rio LanasI
•1,.1,It- 80 110 65 30 65 461 105 170 110 70 6 A 5
P'HP or -K 15;0.90 0.90 0.90;0.90 0.90 0,900,90 0,40 0.701,50 0.90 0.90
Lane W lfti; 1, .0 i'Z. i2.0 11.0 i:; .0 i:.0 i_., 11
ado i 0 _
Far-t'.'ing 1'I/N1 N r,YjN) N l{jNr N 1i'Y.NI N
Con. Pods 0: 0; 0 O
-ad itutton CI N.) N ;('r INl N i'/:';J7 N lf; Ni PI
At-.- Type 1 _ _ 3 3 3 1 _
R-1 I;R Vo l's 0 0 0 i 0
ir_t Time I10 >-00 _.00:I ri0 J.00 j.iiu 1 00 _00 .I10i 1.000 u'i uu
Prcp. Chars
Pr.:p. Prot., 4 r
---------------------------------------------------------------
ignai Opert.i i ons
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 .3
EB Left * ',NB Left
ihru x ihr,j r
Right * Right
Pens ` reds
WB Left ` Left '
hrl.t ihru
R i'._rhIt R'lilht
re Nos
NF Right 1 En Right
--'R Right IRiF: R,ght
Growl 22. OA -. w-, 4 . 1]A 44. OF
IoW%AR +].'j eli,-.w/illy
-ia __no the IaJ v J_, Pha s' ::::mll i na 11 -i. rd'er-: 0i it lip
in}= oct;on ✓•?rfGr'mAr:f:% ;�i, nlmar•:
. mLa sap PaCln ..-. lie:=� L"... I'e 1.-,y
iP 441) 1759 'i 41 17. J0 _i7.9 ..
WE. i95 __. __I0i6 0_ _J 1n.I _ _
N5 I_ 505 ii70 0. 294 0 210 1 2 A Ili.l -
r1r�i671 J oq0 2.5_. Ii._------------
7
it}d 11 �1J A.t.l r''ll IiJ iir.r i 011 ;'.iMMi�Ri
V.r--Lin i.dd
lij-ij I+
Center °r-+-
Mi.--rocomputais
in iranspertat ion
E1i_ehet.h
(N-'=.5 I_ -may
i.n5 i yett: JMII
File Name:
r'en lyp'-: i-t.h.-r
t. 19':l1
r. long
nt. t.:
IU- 0-97 an, D,
C:mm r
gh;rr
and
W.-_'r,,,urrv_
Nor thbuund
.
L i
1: i_ T
1____ ____
n I_ T ..
____ ____
l i
____ ---- ----
i•
No, Lanes
---- ____
i 1
---- ____
1
____
i ..
1 '
10 lumes
i95 75
-- 155 105
125i Ju 505
01 65 C05
120
FHr '>r FK IS
0.90 0.90
17.9r010.90 0.90 0.40;0.90
0.90 0.
90; 0. 90 0.90 0.90
Lang W !ftJil[.0
12.0
1i.1] 12.0
i2.0 12.0
12.0 is .0
lade
0
0
Healy Voh;
[
2 1 _
21 _ _
_ 1 _
V na ;lr/Ni
N
;�f;N7 N
;(YIN7 N
;iFIN N
Bus Steps
r7;
0;
0;
�)
Con_ Peds
0;
0I
0;
0
pert 61.1 ttort
('f JN; N
IN) N
(/N) N
if,(/N) N
Arr, Type
3 3
3 _
3 3
_. 3
RTOR Vols
0;
q
Lost Time
1.00 3.00
3 00;COO 3.00 3.00;1-00
3.00 3.0011.00.:3.O0
3.1]0
Prop, Share;
Prop. Prot.;
4ri
r
1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Signal Operations
Phase C; mbinaticn
1
2 3 4
5
6 .'
8
EB Left
'
;NB Left
ihru
Tnru
*
Right.
*
-
Right
Pons
reds
WE. Left -
e
:SB Left .*
e
ihrl.l
'
ihru
Right
*
Right
r
Pods
Pods
NB Right
1EE. Right
_h Right
)Wr3. Right
Gr:?n
34, OA
Areen B.OA
SIM
rw tow, AR
5.0
iYe 1lov,/AR 5.0
6.113
1-. .:.-7 r p•Inn the
I iri se•-3
Phase-,,mbinatlon
:_,der: 41 45
it6
----------------------------------------------------------
t
-_rfor-manre
Summary
sees
Lang _-OUC:
'id
Sat vi`
gjC
Approach:
Mvn,i-s
I.ag
1-J'N Ra i.:
Pati." ire laV
LOS Ile)av
L_i_
LL sees._
21
601i 7 jri9
O •55 34A
0 Z6
_I'_
iVk
500
Il J 13 5 Z5
06 1?.a
WE 1
30
921 0. 52i
0. 35 19.4
C 19-0
f
rR
F?j
17ii O. d45
0. ?,p i-i
1.
NB I_
261
1770 0 3a 1
1.6;._ Ii 9
B 13.6
B
an Merseo-
nLob-
..
F1CN: Slr rJal_J ZED 1NiFRSEi,Th]N �tIMMARI
'V,-:i.n <.'I
In TransD •r i;Jt l
on
5treats: (E-W) Riverside
(N-S' I_•_ma
Analyst: JMF,
File Name:
Ar p iyr Cher
10-17-97 em pm
1 gfLtl� 41r
1 + Ilg I, Lcef CI tnta I
E"Stho,"a
Wes tbCn-rnrj
Northbound
tirnJ t: hrh S,-Ind
____
L T
_-__
R
I
________ -___
.____---- =
,
v ,r',e _. 42
356 147! 53 258
115! 2 476
41 174504
10
PHF or 1k150,90
0.90 0.9G;0.90 0.90
0.90!0-90 0.90 0.90!0.90
0 O.aO
Lane W (ftl!12.0
12.0 12.0;12.0 12.G
12.0 12.0 i 2
- 0 12.0 12-0
'ir'ade
0 0
0
0
% Heavy v,1h
Parking !('Y/Nj
N !(Y/N! N
;('f N) N
(Y/N1 N
Bus Stops
0;
01
fi;
0
Con- Peds
0I
0;
0;
0
Ped Button i(YIN )
N ;;ffN1 N
;(YIN i N
i'i 'N) N
Art- T yp . I 3
' ! 3 3
! 3
'
RTCJR 'Vols
0!
0;
1) -
0
Lost Time ;1.00
;.00 3.00�I.00 3.00
'-•.00; 1 - 0 0 "3. p0 ?.,00;
1.00
Prop. Share;
Prop. Prot.;
________________________________________________________-_-________-___
Signal Operations
Phase �:ombination
1 2 3 a!
5
- 7
E
EB Left
"
;NB Left «
11«
Thru
*
Thru
Riri-,i-
*
Right
* «
Peds
*
Peds
w «
Wl: L_tt
a s
TSB L_afI.
Thru
'
'Thru
Riaht
Right
F'aH,
*
Peds
«
NE: Right
REF' Right
.
SB R-inht
!WB Right
r>r-=en S.,j
F' 14-OP
'Green -.OP
7 r -- 47.0f
Yeiiow/,1R 5
ri 6.0
;Y11 low/AP 5-0
G -I]6.rr
,•-le i-ength: i,00
_.__________________
sar:3 rhmse-rmbination
-----------------------------------------------
order41 it'2
45 06 :17
Intersection Per'f0rmano2
Dummar'y
Lane 5roup:
Ad.l Sat v/r
g/C
Aj,proacI,
Mvmts Cap
ri;.w Yhr�o
Rai-i Delay
L0ley i_IJi
-?_t
ri O %]1
Li '.'.-.0 0_,
R 259=J3
'].eta
ri. I70 4I
E
we. 23a
1? r, ],I°;
0.291) G.i
u
rj.'o�
0. 170 �...
rr
Ni_ _ l015
i 77ri fi .545
0.59ir b..
1
,' :iif
'l •...
li _,j 111 I I .1
1ICM: -I.:L[' IN It:. _.ti._10'r,
V.-
. ✓nter
r,:7 In iransL,• r vati,
n
Streets: tE-W) Riversid-
Anal"t. IMF
Fii� Name.
r';,a lyp•" r.. l.r_ t'
1G'-17-i7 .-, 1151
,•)rrlment. I '9 ,,n Crt
lc�na ht'grr- tot•,1
il-*, "i wC5 'I-ol,n
P,•, tr ,l `L n,
.. •1r 11.
i_
__
No, tones
___ --------- ____
V o1ume's 147
165 :j '0 :.04
1 o 2 299 543.
_0;
9a 5:. •
PHF or Pt,19 0.10
0.90 G.90!0.M 0-90
0 9G!0.90 O.SO u-yn,ri.90
0 ':1ri
0-30
Lane W rfti; 16i.0
12.0 1;_.0!12.G 12.i,
i-=-0 t:-0 I'-G;
t2'0
1:_-6
�r'adz= i
U ,j
ij
O
-% Heavy Veh!
_ _ 2
�;('f/N)
21
Parking (YIN)
N N
iY/Nj N
r'YiNj
N
bus Stops
0;
iron
ad Button !(Y/N)
N (Y/w) N
('YjNJ N
rriiJJ
N
Arr Type 11
3 31 3 -•
3
RTOR Vols
01
0;
0;
G
Lost Time I.00
3.GO 3.00; 1.00 3.00
3.00;1.00 3,00 3.00;
1.a0
'.00 :i
.00
Prep_ =hare!
Prop. Prot-�
_______________________________________________________________________
Signal Operations
Phase Combination
1 a
r
5
5
7
E
EB Left
« *
;NB Left
*
«
Thru
'* •
Thru
*
«
P.ight
«
Right-
Peds
WB Left
« *
313 Left *
«
Thru
*
Thru
«
Right
'
Right
Fedc
*
Fa_ds
«
NR Riaht
IEB Riaht
318 Right
WB Right
ilreen a.OP
7-GP .iIP
;Green 5-OP
a.OF'
69. GP
fellcw,'AR 5-0
0.0 :,-O
!Ye110w/AR 5.0
0.0
6.0
Cyc ie,Lang the i10
_.-___________________________._
secs F'i]ascombination
_____________________
order: p1 41
#R It5
46 B?
i nter s ec. t. inn -ri or
___________________
ma Summary
I --,ne 6rpup:
Ar' i Sat v .,
.-,i
rlppr OaCtl:
=low Pa t.io
Pa It Delay
L,-,,,
De Iav
L'JS
EFi L. BIG
liiij u. ➢r
ri.4.A
c
_+,a
(I
R 432
155.'_. Ij. 4,3
O
i,
WB a4
C,. Sri
u.. 91 I` a
_
25.7
p
iTt n99
i5�•I -.iij :i
G.%55 ZS.
O
...
k: 1
'r 14 rl
l 4l
-.`_t I,- :. Vi'I:' .-
- -- ., It
rf 1f,
�,)
r.;q:Cq
- - Va i :.., L A,
ell m I c 0/' " )MID, Ter; 1r, 7'a'ooi
Short Iona bkard t,tal
3 - r j West. -:Duna
Q,j
CJ 1 i
t HeAvy ,ell
-�iI, "a, N j rj . ;� T/ r, t pj T }/N
t
0
J e--J t tOn TIN N f .,j j t., N l ri r N
Orr Type
T ;,e
_.-pp 0 j rjo ..Du .1 C, i on 13 ri 6 Ii i 0:1 0 u u. C)
pr-oc hj r
roc. Fr,,t
- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- - - - ---- - - - -
sial,a) ljreratl
haSe. Clowbiration 1 - 4
F E, Lar I I
N6 Left
hru
Thru
4 i a i, +
p =Cks
W& Left , -6 -1 Left
Thru Thru
Right Richt
rj
lip. Riahf
i qht
jj III
cj A ij
-
Y,
-- - - - - - - - -'_I_ - - - -- -- - - - - - - - -- - - -- -- -- --- - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - -- -
t
M, ..-ar c -1 j byr 1 0
7
,hu
la
J
F.
Jj- nay
S Iml-
vo lumes
PHF 0 Fj 9u 0
vj I;r an
Lattt- �4
I' He", Veh
k i I'IC ('iNj ('TNIN
ry
us
e,N i 11 N
0
ri Li rj C. op;
0 cj
Prop 911are
Pr -OD Pt-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
.- pigna's
Phase :omh in,arion i
F6 Left + .5 7 3
;N8 Left I
rhrit
WE Lef F. reds
rho , i
R i yjm A i ah
lip.
E& Richr
t "Ic - ✓tight
T
r
y f-h 1 1 -.-1
-- - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- -- - - - --- - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - -- -- -- - - -- - - - - - - - -- -
rJ
2 .
C, 6
ric,
5 5 5
2
. rri CNJu L 1 Lr1ni__..
^I ,
.�� .Ci!7t',:
.
.. ...._ ...
Cant-r `or
Mi.- roc ._.n¢.utars
i�-'dr tl izahath
.; y .I
OmFnt 1 r]111
I-c r-.i ,�ltAl
FJr ilH l:� ,. ll. ._,Ji��_
•__ .'l a7'}:Jllnr.i
J ;lunlvc ri3 I00
60l 53 ':a 30
Iri i bP, arj}
oh
fJ '00 i.4i J
>1 J 9rj fJ YJ
Q '1
,ne }I !i ti
I
iirdG� iJ
Il Ij
!J
avy Veh�
L'ri/Fi1
>hrl. in4 rTiril N
iij rJi N N
�r,tYri1 ri
Jlli .. :P.=
li
1. Jn. .: LiS
IJ V
r1
ll
rr-,- iHltr tnn ;r'I/Nl iJ
i'i 1fJi tJ (1 ;'N1 N
t'r;^, H,
ri1rJR:nl�
'1� rj ;
fl i
!r.5t i1m- -rJ :J .'JV
_.rllJ - .. IJUi i.U'J •..p0
_
-
-Jpi
Ij
_
•:-pG. _.hard
------------------------
-----------
rhas'= ,,?mb inat:ion 1
._ - y
(
t7 L4ft •
rJ LefF r.
'r.
.�
ihrU r
Fi4hF
Til r-U
is i g h t
IS
Wti Left`
"E Left r
i i,;-IJ '
ThnJ
r
'i mF
it'i UI'rt
t
-i t.5 r
✓- :=
AR
t1., :
-
_._ _ _- -_
... tc:
_.._,.-_ _
r _..:_[. '.. Il i•r t.`:'mrr;:_._ _'.Llnl'rltlr'V
___-___-.. ..___.._.
_
_.n:-
M,nni . aG
F i._w .,.t*. i i - Uc.in':
r
-
it nap
_ L
H.,r :41141.':i i rJ ft{;i;rr.j t'.-:o-lch.;f.`r --r Cen tEr � �, tqi: ,'.J,. Z,mPUf.ci'_ in is arlgPvr'ilc i.,nn
1:h ,N-=.: I_�mP�•
r iii am :m
inn }f�. - r.:l _ I.;: of r. C •f.i
ln' G 1-1 A
I ; ]1• l: 1J 'i3
PIF IKJj p rl r, -J J <liin J J ;Ij v +i 0_J;O._ri
Heavy Vr'h
in r%Ni N
-9:rj rd
'r.d _-.n-I H(Y!"iJ1 iJ rr: rJi N rv,�FJI N !i:'tJt N
ij
eH
rrr
arr Typp
Lost Hine ;i.fJ iJ _.up -.pUii iJ1) -.pp ,'1O (r - V
-
Pr op _hare�
- JJ _.'jll
yr^P. Fr-ot.;
___.____
Z. i!nai UP er-.y t'i on .
Fh:es, is H>nlb ind t inn I
fA Lef+ a 0
:NB Left " <
ihru " ihru .a
F'igh" a Riaht
coWIR
Thru -
irru r'
a H �riG
10 0A 5J. JY
C. IdJ 17-, ; h,.- .•no i.rt i.rl _rder: NI 45 i:fj
_._..__..-_..___________________________________________.__.._______
L.;•ne -,. rJP' r �a t:r ,1.^ Ilpr'J.1,-pi
19�mtF ' -
�:9 tl C: ctrp lBldy Li;ti ire rav _.._
j-
APPENDIX B
Oct-08-97 01:22P
site CON : 00000011
A-S $trial: legal Ave.
1-1 Street: Riverside Or.
"ether : Mimicry
City OI Fort Collins traffic Durations
Nnetgants Ay: PrlNry
970-484-9508
PAGE: I
FILE: 11-2-95
DATE: 210619E
----------------
PEAS FERIOO ANALYSIS FOR THE PERIOD: 1:30 M - C30 0
OIRECIION
START
PEAK MR
........... VOLUMES ........... ......
PERCENTS .......
FIX
PEAS NOW
FACTOR
Pods Right Ihrd left Total 'tens Right Thru left
Am lh
1:30 AN
0.61
0 10 523 ITS ;OR
1 14 25
East
1:10 AA
0.61
1 its Fall It sit -
26 61 6
IOuth
1:30 All
0.11
I 42 al 161 all -
S 60 35
lest
1:10 All
0.11
1 this 310 42 Sit -
13 t0 1
Entire Interse:tivn
hot to
1:30 AR
0.61
0 10 523 115 Ica
1 II 25
Ent
0.61
t 115 219 JI 411 -
ie ga a
South
0.11
1 42 411 262 all -
5 go 3S
"al
0.11
1 111 310 e1 pi -
31 60 1
Loosely Ave.
N
------ ...
W. +-E
..........
S
............
[Pods J 0
10
523 ; 175 ............: 1 [Pods ]
..........
..
---
108 --- --
116
..........
581
....Riverside Dr.
419
269
---------------
42
—
--
----. -----------
34
370
617
River:lidel Dr. ...
-----
- —______—_____
. 587 ..........
205
--
--- Bt5 ---
..................
------------'
(Pods ] 3 :............
.------
282 491 42 i
-----------
1 Weds ]
762 ..
i
Lemley Ave.
P_08 Oct-08-97 01:23P
City Of Fort Collins Traffic OOtritions
970-484-9608
Site Cods . 00000011
A-S Street: Lazy Ave.
E-1 Street. Riverside Or.
lather : "rtlDrl
Movements by! Primly
PEAK PERIOD ARALISIS
FOR THE PERIOD: 4:30 PR - S:30 No
DIRECTION
START
PEAK RR
........... VOLUMES ...........
......
FEACEAIS .......
FROM
_.
PEAK HOW
FACTOR
—-------
Peas Riot Thin left
_--- -_____.__—___..__—___..______.__
Total Pal
Hight
fAru Left
North
4:30 PA
OX
2 Is R6 IN
903 -
2
9 It
East
4:10 PR
0.63
1 ISS 272 92
521
29
1$ It
South
4:30 PA
0.51
2 26 111 251
IN
3
66 31
till
4:39 FA
0.62
0 335 213 In
119 -
65
3S 19
Entirt Intersection
North
1:10 PA
0.93
2 II fit$ III
601 -
2
a 14
its(
0.53
1 ISS 291 82
529 -
19
55 IS
South
0.31
2 t6 561 251
$tl .
1
65 31
lest
0.62
0 ITS ill tar
Ill -
45
36 19
Lerney Ave. ; ... ;
N
------
W -+-E
..........
..........
S
957 ..
[Pods ] 2
14
878 ill ;............
8
I+'oafs ]
..................
..................
---
803
--
155
..........
567
—
... Riverside Dr.
529
292
'
141
--
-_
82
PAGE: I
FILE: 11-1-91
DAIS: 2101195
273 749 Riverside Dr. ...
..................
335 -- 410 ..........
(Pods 1 0 201 561 2G 2 (Pods ]
logs .. ;
...........;
Ltelney Ave.
P.10
Oct-08-97 Olt22P
Site Code : 0000011111
end Street: Lilly Ave. -
H $trial: pmanaca
970-484-9508
City Of Fort Collins traffic Operations
PAGE: I
Fit[: 91.2-96
Settler : Mullen
elevation Is by! Primary
DATE: 2101114
PEAK PERIOD ANALYSIS
FOR THE PERI00: 1:30 AR - 8:30 AN
OIRECTION START
PEAR NR
........... VOLUMES ........... ......
PERCUIS .......
FROM PEAK M
------- --""-"'-----
FACTOR
_--- --""-'—..__-""""-'__--_________--_.__-""
Fed$ Right Toro left Total Pods
Right Ihru Left
North 7:30 AN
0.90
0 11 131 3 151 -
2 91 0
Ent 1:30 AM
0.50
0 1 0 1 2 -
50 0 50
South 1:30 AM
0.63
O 2 838 86 926
0 90 9
test 1:30 AN
0.11
0 38 0 14 52
13 0 21
Entire lotermaction
North 1:30 AN
0.30
0 11 ITS 3 161
2 91 0
East
0.50
0 1 0 1 2 -
AN 0 50
South
0.13
0 2 838 86 926 -
0 99 9
test
0.51
0 31 0 It 52 -
13 0 21
,
,
I-erhay Ave. ; , , , ;
N
- - - - - - - — - ... ;
VY-f-E
'
I
..........
S
.. .. '
853 .. '
[Peds ] 0
----- '----------•
19
739 3 ............:
O [Pods J
..................
..................
—
,
761 --- =-
1
I......... 105
..................
_"---_'------
... Pennock
2
O
14
0
52
------------------
Permock ...
'
...........
5 ..........
38
--
--- 928 ---'
,
- [Pards 0 J 0 :............:
88 ; 836 2 ; 0 [Peas ]
778
..........
i............:
..
i
i r
- Lemay Ave.
P.05 Oct-08-97 01_22P
970-484-9508
City Of Fort Collins Traffic Operations
Site Code : 0000oot,
PtGE: I
H-S Street: Lilly Ave.
fILE: 91-2-91
f•V Street: period
leather : eare/Orl
movements 0y: Primary
DATE: 210N91
PEAK
PERIOD ANALYSIS FOR THE PERIOD: 4:30 PR - 5:30 UM
DIRECTION START
PEAR UM ........... VOLUMES ........... ......
PERCENTS .......
FROM PENN NOW
'--"—------- -"'-------------
FACTOR Peds Right Thru Lift Total Peas
—---------------- .............
Right Toro W1
North 4:30 PM
..._
0.91 0 24 1051 1 IOU -
_—__"-'-'
2 17 1
East 4:10 PM
0.61 0 12 1 10 25 -
48 12 40
South 4;30 PA
0.95 0 6 no 191 995 -
I 10 29
Vast 4:50 PIT
0.11 0 115 2 65 262 -
14 1 25
'
Entire InlerSWIM
North 4:30 PIT
9.94 0 24 I051 1 1088
2 91 1
Emal
0.0 0 12 3 to 25 .
48 12 t0
South
0.95 0 1 511 291 995 -
1 10 29
list
0.91 0 195 2 65 252
14 1 25
Lemay Ave.
N
-------
W-a-E
..........
S
..........
775 ...
[Peds ] 0 24 ;1057 1 :............: 0 (Peds ]
..................
..... ...... ..
,
-- 1088 --- --
12
.......... 318
'
... Pennock
25
3
65
--
10
2
262
Pennock ...
-----'-_'------
'
...... ...........
..........
195
__ ___ 995 ____
....15•
......... ..
(Peds 1 O
; ............ 291 698 e
0 EPeds ]
1262 ..
.......... ,
.......... i
. LeMy Ave.
P.07
Oct-06-97 O1:21P
Site Co0l : 00000010
0-5 Street: IMP Ave.
E-9 Street: Eliuheth St.
k4ther :llrelOry
970-484-9508 P.O2
City of Fort Collins traffic mraticns
WE: I
FILE: 10.1-59
Ibreahts by: Prisary DATE: 2101/15
PEA PERIOD UALYSIS FOR THE PERIOD: I:30 M - 1:30 M
OIRECIIOA SIMI
PEAR RR ........... 90UOIES ........... ......
P[RCERTS .......
FAX PEM as
.... _... ..........................
FACTOR Pods Right IArs left Intel Pens
_.________._._....._.__________..___.____._____
Right Thin tell
North FAQ M
0.91 2 65 619 is ISO .
9 13 9
East FAD All
0.82 1 A Ss 21 Its -
28 49 23
South 1:30 M
O.s2 2 l0t s03 94 996 -
t0 s0 1
lest 1:30 M
0.14 2 60 101 68 229 -
26 44 10
Entire Intersection
North 1:30 AN
0.91 2 66 619 65 ISO -
1 93 9
East
O.92 1 33 511 21 1S7 -
21 41 21
SOath
ON 2 101 803 91 Ila -
10 80 1
West
0.14 2 00 101 69 221 -
2s 11 10
i Lemay Ave. ,
N
�............�
S
.. 904 ...�
(Pads ] 2 i 66 i 619 65 ............
1 (Pods ]
..................
- - - 750 -=-- —
33
.......... 218
..................
;
_--------'---
... Elizabeth St.
118
50
68
-- —
21
101
229
Elizabeth St.
'
...........
267 1.........
60
-- --- 998 ----
....
------------• •------------- ---
(Peeds j 2
............94 803 101
(Pads ]
706 „
...........i r
..........
.......,
Lemay Ave.
Oct-08-97 O1:211'
Site Coda : OODOOD10
A-$ Street: Lilly Are.
E-Y Street: Eliabela St.
hather : Werl/Dry
City of tort Collins Traffic owiti n5
Increments by: Prihry
PEM PERIOD ANALYSIS FOR IR[ PERIOD: 4:10 PR - 5:10 PA
970-484-9508
PAGE: I
FILE: 10-2-11
DATE: 2/01/90
DIRECTION START
PEAK RR
........... 1'OIURFS ........... ......
PERCERIS .......
FIRM PEAK HU
... _.......... .........
FACTOR
—_...—____.___.-----
Po0s Right Thru tell Total Pets
Right 9hrn tilt
firth 1:30 PR
0.12
_----------
2 15 1035 52 Ilia -
_________.._-__
s $e 5
East 4:10 91
0.10
A l0g 92 01 338 .
12 21 At
South 4:30 PA
9.32
0 52 111 IF 904 -
6 66 a
lest 4:30111
0.69
3 63 16 124 253 .
2S 25 19
Entire Intersection
North 1:30 PR
0.92
2 15 Ip15 Si 1238 .
5 IS 5
test
0.10
A ]ON 12 IM 338 -
32 9I 41
South
0.92
0 52 IN] 11 "A -
6 65 s
lost
0.69
3 63 00 ILA 253 -
25 26 19
Le1Ray Ave.
N
---- ,..
M-r-E
...
. 1013
(Peds 1 2
96 :1085
; 57 :............:
4 (Pads 1
............
........... ..
,
—
1238 ---1 —
108
259
... Elizabeth St.
338
92
124
—
_
t30
66
253
Elizabeth St.
'
.............
175 ..........
63
--
—_904
Petls 3'
..................
.. 52 ; 0 (Pods ]-• --
. 1285 ..
• Lemay Ave.
P.O4
11
MATTHEW J. DELICH , P.E.
2272 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE
LOVELAND, CO 80538
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS
Observer So Date /O / Day l'1ON l)/l'/ City %-orT C o L L �:!V S
INTERSECTION OF L F<<1/d •� AND o�5 C A
R = Right turn
S = Straight
L = Lett turn
TIME
BEGINS
Lir�.flj!
( �l�rs1/
TOTAL
North
I $ "•
rr.""Cc E
�Frck
"Al
TOTAL
East
West
TOTAL
ALL
I from NORTH
II from SOUTH
I tram EAST
trom WEST
R I S I L I Total
R I. S I L I Total
I R
I S I L I Tots) II R I S
I L I Total
730 II
y IIS71
0
1 /6 1 II
G
1/6813/ 1199 II
s60
II , I C (
r 1
0
II
1 0
IS 1 /7 II
/7 11377
Sys II
9 1/4g►
/
I a.01? 11
0
1-1,611
q 7 C
II G 1 0 1
rl I
0 11101
0
1 '/ 1 PY
8 /y llqq
0
.qec II
6 I/i'71
0
1173 110
1/99'IL71 AS 113
7 8
11 1 1
1
0 11
/,<I 0
1.6 1 11
IIy
19
rfS 11
6 I/FS1
0
1/ / 110
I 1? 71k3-k II
_;X,3
1 1 1
J 1
0 II/q
i
Ilyy
II
I
I
I II
I I I II
II I I
I
II
I
I I II
II
o-2:011d51707
/
1733 11
0
19 031/-� i ;v 111657
II 0 1 0 1
0 1
0 IIS
t o
l L1 75
1 75 11173
it
I
I
I II
I I I II
I t I
I
II
I
i I
I II
it
I
I II
I I I II
II I I
I
I
I
I I
I II
II
I
I
I II
I I I II
II I I
I
II
I
I I II
II
II
I
I
I II
I I I II
I I I
I
I
I I
I II
II
I
I
II
I I I it
II I I
i
I
I
I I
II
II.
I
I
I II
I I I II
II I I
I
I
I I II
II
I
i
I II
I I I II
I I I
I
I
I
I I
II
I1�-2 11
1
1o'o161 IV';� 11S/0
11 -), 1 0 1
! 1
3
If
I C
1/1 1 71 11
7`/
ISg
r II /o las,
!
116y 11
1
1195'1 r 1a76 11sy0 II
o I 1 I
o IJlCt
0
13,0 1 F/
1 1?'3 116
a3
for
i/:L1 9710
1'01 11
1/57! Ir!1,23 111 q !
1 1 1 u 1
f I
'1170I_0
Il I c 11
fib' II6�
,/- Ilfol sw
3
1;-7Il6
1-00If�i�s9 115�6
I I I
I
7
1/
1 119s II9�
Ii63y
I
I I
I it
I 1 I II
I I I
I
I
I I
I
II
110a5
5
I/O 7 11
19OC
[)SI 1105 11X/
),7 111
a 1
)-1
/0 11.61
/
7 CI 3 33 11
3q3 11),4470
APPENDIX A
VII. CONCLUSIONS
This study assessed the potential impacts of opening the
Safeway Credit Union near the Lemay/Pennock intersection in Fort
Collins, Colorado. As a result of the analysis, the following
conclusions were drawn:
The potential impacts of the proposed project were
evaluated at the following intersections: Lemay/Elizabeth,
Lemay/Pennock, and Lemay/Riverside.
- The traffic impact analyses were performed for existing
conditions and future Years 2002 and 2015. Future background
traffic conditions without the project and total traffic
conditions, with completion of the proposed project, were
evaluated.
- Under existing conditions, each of the study intersections
are currently operating at an acceptable levels of service.
- For Year 2002 background and total traffic conditions, the
study intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels
of service. An EB RT arrow is recommended at the Lemay/Riverside
intersection.
For Year .2015 future background and total traffic
conditions, the study intersections are projected to operate at
acceptable levels of service. The need for dual northbound left -
turn lanes at the Lemay/Riverside intersection should be re-
evaluated after completion of the Timberline Extension.
- Pedestrian access to and from the proposed Safeway Credit
Union is/will be direct and continuous. Bicycle facilities are
present along Lemay Avenue. The project site will be directly
connected to these facilities. Currently, transit service to the
study area, which is provided by Routes 5 and 9, is operating at
level of service E. It is anticipated that the transit level of
service will be improved to level of service B in the future.
25
future credit union and live in the nearby neighborhoods,
individuals who work at the credit union and are destined to
adjacent commercial facilities such as restaurants and shopping.
The nearby neighborhoods are greater than 1320 feet from the
site, although they do have good pedestrian connections. The
Riverside/Lemay Shopping Center and Poudre Valley Hospital are
destination areas that are applicable for pedestrian level of
service analysis. The Pedestrian LOS Worksheet is provided in
Appendix H. The minimum level of service for activity centers is
B for all measured categories. This level of service will be
satisfied or exceeded.
Bicycle Level of Service
There are bicycle facilities along Lemay Avenue. Local
streets (Pennock Place) do not require striped bike lanes. The
bicycle level of service to/from the proposed credit union to the
adjacent commercial area is acceptable. The Bicycle LOS Worksheet
is provided in Appendix H.
Transit Level of Service
The current transit level of service (Routes 5 and 9) is
determined based upon the following: the 12-13 hours of weekday
service and 60 minute headways. The travel time factor is
estimated at <2 for three destinations and >2 for one destination.
The peak load factor is less than one. Based upon the criteria set
forth by the City of Fort Collins, the project site is located
within an area defined as the "remainder of service area".
Currently the level of service is LOS E, which is not acceptable
for this service area. It is anticipated that this level of
service will be improved in the future with implementation of the
City's Transit Development Plan. An analysis is provided in
Appendix H.
24
n
PENNOCK �i1
FI 17AAFTN
Site
Legend:
- Denotes Lane
LONG RANGE GEOMETRY
23
Figure 12
Table 5
Year 2015 Peak Hour Background Traffic Operation
Level of Service
Intersection AM PM
Lemay/Elizabeth (signal) C C
Lemay/Pennock (signal) B C
Lemay/Riverside (signal) C C
Table 6
Year 2015 Peak Hour Total Traffic Operation
Level of Service
Intersection AM PM
Lemay/Elizabeth (signal) C C
Lemay/Pennock (signal) B C
Lemay/Riverside (signal) C C
22
PENNOCK �i1
N
SitAA
e
Legend:
- Denotes Lane
SHORT RANGE GEOMETRY
21
Figure 11
Table 3
Year 2002 Peak Hour Background Traffic Operation
Level of Service
Intersection AM PM
Lemay/Elizabeth (signal) B C
Lemay/Pennock (signal) B B
Lemay/Riverside (signal) C C
Table 4
Year 2002 Peak Hour Total Traffic Operation
Level of Service
Intersection AM PM
Lemay/Elizabeth (signal) B C
Lemay/Pennock (signal) B B
Lemay/Riverside (signal) C C
20
VI. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
The previous chapter described the development of future
traffic forecasts both with and without the proposed project.
Intersection capacity analyses are conducted in this chapter for
both scenarios to assess the potential impact of the proposed
project -generated traffic on the local street system.
Traffic Analysis - Year 2002
The peak hour background and total traffic volumes for Year
2002, illustrated on Figures 6 and 8, respectively, were analyzed
to determine the intersection delay and corresponding level of
service. Tables 3 and 4 summarize the results for the respective
Year 2002 background and total traffic conditions. The level of
service worksheets for Year 2002 background and total traffic
conditions are provided in Appendix D and E respectively. As
indicated in Tables 3 and 4, the traffic movements at each of the
study intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable level
of service under future traffic conditions for Year 2002. It is
recommended that EB RT arrows be implemented during the NB LT/SB
LT and NB LT/T phases at the Lemay/Pennock intersection. The Year
2002 intersection geometry is depicted on Figure 11.
Traffic Analysis - Year 2015
The Year 2015 peak hour traffic volumes for background and
total traffic conditions (after completion of the proposed
project), were analyzed to determine the intersection delay and
corresponding level of service. Tables 5 and 6 summarize the
results. Appendix F contains worksheets for Year 2015 background
conditions and Appendix G for total traffic conditions. The level
of service analyses shown in Tables 5 and 6 indicate that the study
intersections will continue to operate at acceptable levels of
service. The EB RT arrows continue to be recommended at the
Lemay/Riverside intersection. Long range traffic forecasts
indicate the need for dual northbound left -turn lanes at the
Lemay/Riverside intersection. This need should be re-evaluated
after the Timberline Extension is completed. Diversion of traffic
may occur at the Lemay/Riverside intersection such that dual left -
turn -lanes may not be required. If traffic increases on Elizabeth
Street, separate left -turn phases may be needed in the future. The
Year 2015 intersection geometry is depicted on Figure 12.
Pedestrian Level of Service
The pedestrian activity associated with the proposed project
would be related to the following: individuals who work at the
W
7,00� 0 8,000�
6,000-7,000_
n
Hk
LONG RANGE DAILY
TRAFFIC
18
Figure 10
I
9
F
a
9
o�
� M
~,S0
9
S
�{9��sp
\ p/S
Sp/,?p
I
LO
CD
C
,0
46,
CDo —
Y
c) �c,
M 15/65
rn N �- 5 1
15/55
55
�Slt@/
35/100 f
5/10 — o ,n o
70/335 -,. Lo
0 o�,
0
0
ovuO
Leo
o rn o 45/150
a' ^ Q' �- 80/130
r } � �-- 35/190
95/195 -/ ) f I
135/90 — g o uO
80/90 --,4�, F '�,
N i
O
LONG RANGE TOTAL
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
AM/PM
Rounded to the Nearest
5 Vehicles.
Figure 9
17
N
co
��o
zs
JJO
0S� � � AgS
M
Z
O \ O
MLA
CD
J
N
O
LO
�L M
035
M r f- 15%5
PENNOCK .oj /`— 5/30
/site
30/85--, 4 t , I I
5/5 — O O u7
55/280 o L o
M c0
�00
LO
O
O N
N <,2
O to o 40/125
`O '^ — 65/105
j\ r- 30/155
80/155 --/) } r
110/75 — o Ln o
65/75 � o
CD CD
�r�
m
SHORT RANGE TOTAL
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
AM/PM
Rounded to the Nearest
5 Vehicles.
Figure 8
V. FUTURE TOTAL TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
The future total traffic projections reflect future traffic
conditions with the traffic from the proposed Safeway Credit Union
project. The future total traffic projections were developed for
Years 2002 and 2015.
Total Traffic Year 2002
The total traffic for Year 2002 was developed by adding
traffic from the proposed project to the background traffic for
Year 2002. The resulting peak hour total traffic projections for
Year 2002 are shown on Figure 8.
Total Traffic Year 2015
The total traffic for Year 2015 was developed by adding
traffic from the proposed project to the background traffic for
Year 2015. The resulting peak hour total traffic projections for
Year 2015 are shown on Figure 9. The total daily traffic
projections are provided on Figure 10.
15
I
R
n
N
y
O
O
���
PENNOCK
31/99 1
0/1-y
67/335 --,�
89/171
131/90
78/86
rn I }
rl coo If
Lo -�,rn
PO CN
N
tD <
Lo
0/8
0/3 A
j-- 0/3 1"
Site
goo .�1�
1
Lo o
.- vo
0
t— 43/150
f 76/126
-- 35/188
I-
1� co ^
cli n
0
LONG RANGE BACKGROUND
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
AM/PM
Figure 7
Rid
� 7NO
W N\
N
6/27
PENNOCK sj
N
\
n
� 1 )
N 17
ELIZABETH
3/10 -
AM/PM
Initial Development
Rrb
FRSroF
N
i N I
W io
O \
L �-12 541/6
��
PENNOCK � % L1/49jP��/A
1/5-_
N f�
N N
N tI\O
ELIZABETH 1
6/20
co AM/PM
Full Development
PEAK HOUR SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC
Figure 5
1,
9
A&
N
NO SCALE
TRIP DISTRIBUTION Figure 4
10
0
Table 2
Trip Generation
Daily A.M.
Peak
P.M.
Peak
Land Use Trips Trips
Trips
Trips
Trips
in
out
in
out
Credit Union - 3 KSF 635 15
12
50
54
Credit Union - 6 KSF 1275 30
24
101
109
6
PENNOCK
W
Z
W
Idw
N
D SCALE
SITE PLAN Figure 3
Table 1
Current Peak Hour Operation
Level of Service
Tntersection AM PM
Lemay/Elizabeth (signal) B C
Lemay/Pennock (signal) B B
Lemay/Riverside (signal) C C
T
LO ^ �.�Synthesized
c,
N
N M7
a
CD
cn �
N
Counted co L
" ^ 0/2 t'
PENNOCK,oj �� S/
/—°/2 /Site
24/76
0/1 y � `IN
51 /256 N � O
00
M
Synthesized
o n 33/114
co co to - 58/96
ELIZABETH OJ f- 27/144
68/131--1) } I
100/69 a- co I.
60/66 —� � D
CD
co
AM/PM
N
RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
Figure 2
Existing Motor Vehicle Traffic
Peak hour traffic flow at the key intersections is shown on
Figure 2. The key intersections included in this study are:
Lemay/Pennock, Lemay/Elizabeth, and Lemay/Riverside. The morning
and afternoon peak hour counts were obtained in 1997 at the
Lemay/Pennock intersection. The 1997 counts were used to
synthesize (update) 1996 counts at the Lemay/Riverside and
Lemay/Elizabeth intersections. Raw traffic count data is provided
in Appendix A.
Existing Motor Vehicle Operation
The operation at the key intersections during the peak hours
is provided in Table 1. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix
B. Level of service definition for signalized intersections from
the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual, are provided in Appendix C. As
indicated in Table 1, each of the existing study intersections is
currently operating at an acceptable level of service during the
peak hours. Acceptable operation is defined as level of service
D or better.
Pedestrian Facilities
Currently, there are pedestrian facilities adjacent to the
project site. There are sidewalks present in the study area on all
streets, except for the north side of Riverside Avenue. There are
handicapped ramps at all intersections. The widths of the
sidewalks vary from 4 to 6 feet. The sidewalks are attached to the
roadway.
Bicycle Facilities
There are bicycle lanes on Lemay Avenue, with no parking
allowed on either side of the street. No bicycle lanes currently
exist on Pennock Place.
Transit Facilities
Transfort currently serves the study area with Routes 5 and
9. Route 9 operates on Lemay Avenue adjacent to the site at 60
minute headways for 12 hours/day. Route 5 operates on Lemay and
Elizabeth to the south at 60 minute headways for 13 hours/day.
4
oc
STREET
1 "=1500'
Safeway
SITE LOCATION Figure 1
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The location of the proposed Safeway Credit Union is shown on
Figure 1. It is important that a thorough understanding of the
existing conditions be presented.
Land Use
Land uses in the area are predominantly commercial on all
sides of the site. West of the site is the Riverside/Lemay
Shopping Center. North of the site is a veterinarian office. East
of the site are low intensity commercial uses. South of the site
are two restaurants. The topography within and surrounding the
site is essentially flat. The center of Fort Collins is located
west of the site.
Roads
The primary streets which will serve the proposed project
within the study area are: Pennock Place, Lemay Avenue, Elizabeth
Street, and Riverside Avenue. There are three key intersections.
All three intersections are signalized.
Lemay Avenue is a north/south arterial street which serves
eastern areas of the City of Fort Collins. Within the study area,
Lemay Avenue accommodates five travel lanes, two through lanes in
each direction and a center lane for left -turns. No parking is
allowed on Lemay Avenue. The speed limit is posted at 35 mph.
Pennock Place is a local street which serves the adjacent
businesses. This is a two-lane, east/west street. No parking is
allowed on either side of the street. No speed limit is posted on
this facility.
Riverside Avenue borders the Riverside/Lemay Shopping Center
on the north. It is a diagonal street that is designated as an
arterial on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Riverside Avenue
is a four lane street both east and west of Lemay Avenue. There
are turn lanes at signalized intersections. The posted speed on
Riverside is 35 mph.
Elizabeth Street is an east/west street to the south that is
designated as a collector street. It serves commercial uses east
of Lemay Avenue, and residential and commercial uses west'of Lemay
Avenue.
2
I. INTRODUCTION
This transportation impact study addresses the capacity,
geometric, and control requirements at and near the proposed
Safeway Credit Union, located at the intersection of Lemay Avenue
and Pennock Place in Fort Collins, Colorado. The scope was
discussed with city staff. The transportation analysis will
address potential vehicular impacts upon the roadway system, the
pedestrian network surrounding the study area, the bicycle system,
and the availability of transit facilities. Traffic projections
will be prepared for future Years 2002 and 2015.
During the course of the analysis, contacts were made with the
project architect, the project owner, and City staff. This study
generally conforms to the format set forth in the Fort Collins
Transportation Impact Study Guidelines. 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 and daily traffic volumes;
- Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses for
all pertinent modes of transportation.
This report is prepared for the following purposes:
- Evaluate the existing conditions;
- Estimate the trip generation by the proposed/assumed
developments;
- Determine the trip distribution of site generated traffic;
- Evaluate level of service;
- Determine the geometrics at key intersections;
- Determine the impacts of site generated traffic at key
intersections.
Information used in this report was obtained from the City of
Fort Collins, the planning and engineering consultants, the
developers, research sources (ITE, TRB, etc.), and field
reconnaissance. The following traffic study was reviewed and
considered in preparing this study:
- Boston Chicken Site Access Study, December 1993
1
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Site Location ........................................ 3
2. Recent Peak Hour Traffic ............................. 5
3. Site Plan ............................................ 8
4. Trip Distribution .................................... 10
5. Site Generated Traffic 11
6. Background Traffic Year 2002 ......................... 13
7.
Background Traffic Year
2015 .........................
14
8.
Total
Traffic Year 2002
..............................
16
9.
Total
Traffic Year 2015
..............................
17
10.
Daily
Traffic Volumes ................................
18
11.
Short
Range Intersection
Geometry ....................
21
12. Long Range Intersection Geometry ..................... 23
APPENDIX
A Recent Peak Hour Traffic
B Current Peak Hour Operation
C Description of Level of Service
D Year 2002 Background Traffic Analyses
E Year 2002 Total Traffic Analyses
F Year 2015 Background Traffic Analyses
G Year 2015 Total Traffic Analyses
H Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Level of Service
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I.
Introduction
.........................................
1
II.
Existing Conditions
..............
LandUse ........................
2
Roads ........
2
Existing Motor Vehicle Traffic
2
.......................
Existing Motor Vehicle Operation
4
...
Pedestrian Facilities "
4
.......
Bicycle Facilities
4
.......
Transit Facilities " " " " " " '
4
III.
Proposed Development ..................
Trip Generation
7
.........................
Trip Distribution
7
....................
TripAssignment ......................................
7
7
IV.
Future Background Traffic Projections
................
Background Traffic Year 2002
12
..........
Background Traffic Year 2015
12
.........................
12
V.
Future Total Traffic Projections
.....................
Total Traffic Year 2002
15
..................
Total Traffic Year 2015
15
.......
15
VI.
Traffic Impact Analysis
..................
Traffic Analysis Year 2002
19
.......6......
Traffic Analysis Year 2015
19
...............
Pedestrian Level of Service
19
..........
Bicycle Level of Service
19
..............
Transit Level of Service
24
....6........................
24
VII. Conclusions ..................................... 25
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Current Peak Hour Operation .......................... 6
2. Trip Generation ...................................... 9
3. Year 2002 Peak Hour Background Traffic Operation ..... 20
4.
Year
2002
Peak
Hour
Total Traffic Operation ..........
20
5.
Year
2015
Peak
Hour
Background Traffic Operation .....
22
6. Year 2015 Peak Hour Total Traffic Operation 22
SAFEWAY CREDIT UNION
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
OCTOBER 1997
Prepared for:
Financial Commercial Security
3655 Walnut. Street
Denver, CO 80205
Prepared by:
MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E.
2272 Glen Haven Drive
Loveland, CO 80538
Phone: 970-669-2061
FAX: 970-669-5034
OCT 15 '97 11:00 FROM: 4ACGREGO°""4THEN CONSTRUCTION 303-922-6765 T-166 P 02/02 F-112
FINANCIAL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
3655 WALNUT STREET
DENVER, CO 80205
(303) 295-1066 - FAX: (303) 295-1073
October 15, 1997
Ms. Leanne Harter
City of Fort Collins
281 N. College Avenue
Ft. Collins, Colorado
Re: Re -development of 900 Lemay
Safeway Federal Credit Union
Dear Leanne:
This letter is to address the time line for the future addition to the existing building.
It is our plan to renovate the existing building, construct the new drive -up facility along with the
foundation only for the future expansion and the required site work with temporary landscaping.
We are planning on completing the future expansion within four (4) years based on the
anticipated growth of the credit union. Since the existing service entrance, trash enclosure and
grease trap must be removed for the renovation and drive up facility, it is cost efficient to
construct the foundation for the future addition at the same time this part of the site work is being
completed. The balance of this area will be landscaped consistent with City standards until the
future expansion is completed.
1f you have any questions, please feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
Safeway Rocky Mountain FCU
Planning and Zoning Board
City of Ft. Collins, Colorado
Page two
The credit union provides the convenience of four Denver metro area locations
and one Colorado Springs location to serve our members. The proposed location in Ft.
Collins is intended to be a regional hub for the credit union to provide more convenient
service to our current and potential members in Northern Colorado and Wyoming. The
facility is also intended to serve as a Shared Service Branch for all Colorado Credit
Unions participating in the Credit Union Service Network. The opportunity to extend
services to such a wide range of citizens is the primary concern in asking the Board to
approve Drive -Up facilities at this location. The credit union proposes to the Board the
approval of four drive -up lanes, with one of those lanes designated for a SURCHARGE
FREE ATM. The drive -up lanes could be serviced by two tellers. Each teller would be
capable of completing one vehicle transaction every 80 seconds, or a potential movement
of over 45 vehicles per hour per teller (360 transactions per teller per eight hour work
day). An extremely busy teller day at our other locations typically consists of 300
transactions. In comparison, the drive -up rate for four lanes provides for minimal
stacking and idling time which in turn should minimize pollution from the facility.
In meeting its commitment to further technology, the credit union's telephone
audio response system, HOTLINE, provides service to more than 15,000 phone calls and
55,000 transactions each month. This service has expanded by more than 25% in the last
year. The credit union's PC HOME BANKING service, P.O.E.T., introduced in 1995,
provides service to more than 2,000 phone calls and 25,000 transactions each month.
Internet services, introduced in 1997, is still in its formative stages, and is growing in
acceptability by membership. The response and growth of these products has reduced the
need of our members to make unnecessary trips to the credit union to perform basic
transactions, provided greater access, and saved hundreds of dollars in transportation
costs and unnecessary automobile pollution.
Safeway Rocky Mountain FCU desires the approval of the"Board for the proposed
location in order to meet its commitments to its charter, its members, and its potential
members both today and in the future.
rresiaent
SAFEWAY ROCKY MOUNTAIN FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
3138 South Parker Road, Aurora, CO 80014-3180 - (303) 369-6400 - (800) 748-3800
September 29, 1997
Planning and Zoning Board
City of Ft. Collins, Colorado
Re: Proposal for 900 S. Lemay Ave.
Branch location for Safeway Rocky Mountain FCU
Board Members:
Our decision to pursue a regional location in Ft. Collins is based on the desire to
provide service to our members, the credit union community and the citizens of Ft.
Collins. Safeway Rocky Mountain FCU provides a wide range of services to its
members. These services began with the traditional saving and loan products, and
expanded to the most modern technology services such as PC Home Banking and Internet
Services. It is the commitment of the credit union to offer the most basic and the most
advanced services to its membership, and continue a long tradition of service.
The Safeway Rocky Mountain FCU was founded in 1951 to provide services to
the employees of the Denver Division of Safeway Stores, Inc. Our chartered operating
area is the six state region of Colorado, Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and
New Mexico. The credit union currently serves over 23,000 members with assets over
$110 million. This base of members was built over three and one half decades of
providing traditional financial services. In recent years the demand of our members has
been for more convenient access to their accounts. To accommodate this demand, the
credit union has introduced numerous new technologies and more convenient locations.
N(,HTHEAST OFFICE COLORADO SPRINGS OFFICE DOWNTOWN OFFICE
4800 Dahlia 730 Citadel Drive East, Suite 207-A 365 Federal Office Building
(-.;nnver, CO 80216-3121 (in the Citadel Bank Building) 1961 Stout Street
303) 320-4701 Colorado Springs. CO 80909-5380 Denver, CO 80294-3514
(719)591-5198 (303)892-0196
WEST OFFICE
97 South Sheridan Blvd.
Lakewood, CO 80226-2428
(303)237-4700
SAFEWAY ROCKY MOUNTAIN FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
3138 South Parker Road, Aurora, CO 80014-3180 - (303) 369-6400
September 29, 1997
TO: City of Fort Collins, Colorado
Safeway Rocky Mountain Federal Credit Union was chartered in 1951 to provide financial
services to employees of Safeway Stores Inc. In 1983 we began to expand our field of
membership to include employees of other businesses in the Denver metro area and
Colorado Springs. In addition to the Safeway Denver Division, we currently serve
employees of over 100 employee groups. We are also chartered to serve those people age
55 and over that live within a 25-mile radius of any of our branch locations.
At this time Safeway Rocky Mountain Federal Credit Union has five branch locations.
The main office is located in Aurora with other offices located in Lakewood, downtown
Denver, northeast Denver and Colorado Springs.
Our decision to establish a branch office in Fort Collins is based on our desire to better
serve our members living and working in the northern region of the state. We are also
listening to the requests we often receive from members in this area. By establishing a
SRMFCU regional service center in Fort Collins, we feel we will be better able to provide
quality, personal service to our members located not only in Fort Collins but in Longmont,
Loveland, Greeley, Brighton, Estes Park and Wyoming.
We also hope to provide service to the businesses and residents of Fort Collins and the
surrounding area.
The Board of Directors, management and staff of Safeway Rocky Mountain Federal
Credit Union look forward to joining your community.
Sincerely,.
President
NUNTHEAST OFFICE COLORADO SPRINGS OFFICE DOWNTOWN OFFICE
4800 Dahlia 730 Citadel Drive East. Suite 207-A 365 Federal Office Building
Denver, CO 80216-3121 (in the Citadel Bank Building) 1961 Stout Street
(303) 320-4701 Colorado Springs. CO 80909-5380 Denver. CO 80294.3514
(719)591-5198 (303)892-0196
WEST OFFICE
97 South Sheridan Blvd.
Lakewood, CO 80226.2428
(303)237-4700
Statement of Planning Objectives
900 S. Lemay Avenue
Also Known As the Boston Market Building
Safeway Rocky Mountain Federal Credit Union ( Hereafter referred to as SFCU )
recently entered into a contractual arrangement to purchase the Boston Market ( Hereafter
referred to as BM ) Building located at 900 S. Lemay Avenue. For additional background on the
SFCU and its rationale for pursuing this particular building, please refer to the two attached
letters.
The BM Building is located in an Employment District ( E ). Per Article 4.22 in the Land
Use Code, the proposed project will be a permitted Commercial/Retail Use as a financial
institution with drive-in facilities. The drive-in facility, as shown in the plans, will be secondary in
emphasis and priority to other access and circulation functions on the site. It will also be located
to the rear of the building, will not adversely affect contiguous parcels, and will have little, if any,
impact on pedestrian access to the site. In addition, the design and layout shall:
(a) provide four ( 4 ) drive-thru lanes to minimize stacking even during the busiest
times and more than adequate stacking spaces for automobiles before and after
use of the facility;
(b) provide clear directional signage to ensure smooth traffic flow through the site;
and
(c) provide a walk-up service option as well as drive-in.
In addition, the SFCU believes this proposed project is consistent with the Land Use
Code and City Plan for three primary reasons, which are outlined below.
First, this building constitutes a retrofit and remodel of a current building, rather than
construction of a new building. Economically, it simply makes sense to redevelop an existing
building, rather than develop and build a new building. In addition, it is consistent with a primary
purpose of the Land Use Code, which is to encourage infill and redevelopment in an effort to
reduce urban sprawl and minimize the environmental and infrastructural impact of new
development.
Second, this building is consistent with the Community Vision and Goals 2015 as
outlined on Page 15 of the City Plan. In essence, instead of building a new building in the
southern portion of Fort Collins, the SFCU is retrofitting a vacant building in the northern portion
of Fort Collins for their banking facility. This serves three purposes:
1) Promotes a compact and contiguous growth pattern.
2) Renovates an abandoned, limited use building. In addition, landscape that has been
neglected and is currently dying, will be restored.
3) Places the drive-thru lanes and service windows to the rear of the building so as not
to be seen from the street and detract from the overall appearance of the site and the
building.
Third, this building is located in an Employment District, directly across the street from a
retail shopping center. The building will have an attractive appearance, will complement the
retail center, and will be located on a mass transit route. In addition, the employees and
customers of the SFCU will have convenient access to business services, housing, grocery
shopping, convenience retail, child care, lodging and restaurants.
In summary, this is a quality project that adheres to planning objectives as outlined in the
Fort Collins Comprehensive City Plan and the Land Use Code.
Article 3, General Development Standards
Division 3.2, Site Planning and Design Standards
street or shared parking is not available on land adjacent to
the use, then the maximum parking allowed may be increased
by twenty (20) percent, provided that the amount of parking
lot landscaping is also increased by twenty (20) percent.
Use
Maximum Parking
Restaurants
a. Fast Food
b. Standard
1511000
10/1000
Bars, Taverns, and Nightclubs
10/1000
Commercial Recreational
a. Limited Indoor Recreation
b. Outdoor
c. Bowling Alley
6/1000
.3/person cap.
511000
Theaters
1/3 seats
General Retail
4/1000
Personal Business and Service Shop
4/1000
Shopping Center
511000
Medical Office
4.5/1000
Financial Services
3.5/1000
Grocery Store, Supermarket
6/1000
General Office
3.0/1000
Vehicle Servicing & Maintenance
5.011000
Low Intensity Retail, Repair Service, Workshop and
Custom Small Industry
2.0/1000
Lodging Establishments
1/unit
Health Facilities
a. Hospitals
b. Long Term Care Facilities
1.0/bed
.33/bed
Industrial: Employee Parking
.75/employee
(b) For uses that are not specifically listed in subsections
3.2.2(K)(1) or (2), the number of parking spaces permitted
shall be the number permitted for the most similar use listed.
City of Fort Collins
Land Use Code Article 3, Page 28 Proposed July, 1997 Changes
Article 4, Districts
Division 4.22, Employment District
integrated pattern of streets, outdoor spaces, building styles,
and land uses.
(b) Where an employment or industrial use abuts a residential
area, there shall be no drastic and abrupt change in the scale
and height of buildings.
(c) All commercial/retail and industrial uses, except for off-street
parking and loading shall be conducted or carried out entirely
within completely enclosed buildings or structures.
(2) Building Design.
(a) All buildings shall provide a primary entrance that faces and
opens directly onto the adjacent street sidewalk or a walkway,
plaza, or courtyard that has direct linkage to the street
sidewalk without requiring pedestrians to cross any
intervening driveways or parking lots.
(b) To the extent reasonably feasible, buildings shall be oriented
to face the adjacent street with no intervening front yard
parking. The following exceptions shall be permitted:
Buildings may orient away from the street if the
development provides a campus or park -like
development block with an internal pedestrian
network that functions as an additional alternative to
the street sidewalk by connecting buildings within the
site and directly connecting to common destinations
in the district (such as transit stops, restaurants, child
care facilities, and convenience shopping centers).
Such an internal network shall provide direct
pedestrian access to the street sidewalk(s) or
walkway(s).
2. The streetfront orientation requirement may be met by
facing only a portion of the front facade to the
adjacent street with no intervening front yard parking,
provided that the streetfront facade adjoins a
landscaped yard with a connecting walkway. Such
City of Fort Collins
Land Use Code Article 4, Page 133 Proposed July, 1997 Changes
VELDMAN MORGAN
C O M M E R C I A I
10 October 1997
Leanne A. Harter, AICP
City Planner
Current Planning Department
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
Dear Leanne:
As part of the proposed project, the Safeway Rocky Mountain Federal Credit Union,
( Hereafter referred to as SFCU ), is requesting two modifications to the Land Use Code:
The first modification relates to Article 4 of the Land Use Code ( Section 4.22 (E)(a-b),
which is attached. As this is an existing site with the building entrance separated from the street
sidewalk by an intervening drive and parking area, it would not be feasible to direct the traffic to
the rear of the building as that would create congestion and flow problems with the drive-in
facility that will be located at the rear of the building. This is an issue that is endemic to this site
and is impossible to overcome without complete redesign of the existing site. The access from
the front entrance to the sidewalk can be enhanced, however, to provide for pedestrian ease and
safety. A well -marked pedestrian crosswalk can be installed with signs identifying the cross walk
as a pedestrian crosswalk, similar to those found at school crossings.
The second modification relates to Article 3 of the Land Use Code ( Section 3.2 (ln(2)(a)
which is attached. Again, this is an existing building with 50 parking spaces, 12 of which will be
immediately removed by the installation of the drive4hru facility. In addition, the SFCU is
planning for future expansion, which will eventually result in a 5,240 square foot facility. Taking
into account this future expansion, this site will have a parking requirement not to exceed 18
spaces (3.5 x 5,240 = 18.34). The site, therefore, exceeds the maximum number of parking
spaces by twenty ( 20 ) spaces and is the basis of the modification request. With the heavy
restaurant use in the area ( Schlotzky's and Godfather's ) and the nature of shared parking
between these facilities, the excess parking is not unwarranted, nor likely to be excessive.
Sincerely,
VELDMANQMORGAN COMMERCIAL, INC.
D niel R. Bemth
Broker Associate
760 Whalers Way, Bldg. C, Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Phone 970/223-5555 Fax 970/223-1647
HEAIIOH
t4
NO,
x
DEC-03-97 WED 09:35 AM
P.02
SAFEWAY ROCKY MOUNTAIN FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
3138 South Parker Road, Aurora, CO 80014-3180 - (303) 369.6400 - (800) 748-3800
December 2, 1997
Mr. Roger Buffington
City of Ft. Collins
Ft. Collins, CO.
Re: 900 S. Lemay
Mr. Buffington,
The Safeway Rocky Mountain Federal Credit Union is the potential owner of the above mentioned
property. The Credit Union has submitted plans to the City of Ft. Collins with regards to this property, and
understands the concern raised in your memo of November 23, 1997. Your memo referenced the sanitary
sewer on the property which will be under a portion of the Drive -up facility. The Credit Union
acknowledges and will accept its responsibility for the normal maintenance of the sewer system on its
property.
Thank you for your hard work and concern with regard to 900 S. Lemay.
NORTHEAST OFFICE COLORADO SPRINGS OFFICE DOWNTOWN OFFICE
4800 Dahlia 730 Citadel Drive East, Suite 207-A 365 Federal Office Building
Denver, CO 80216.3121 on the Citadel Bank Building) 1981 Sloul Street
(303) 320-4701 Colorado Springs, CO 80909-5380 Denver, CO 80294-351A
(719) 591-5198 (303) 892-0196
WEST OFFICE
97 South Sheridan Blvd.
Lakewood, CO 80226.2428
(303) 237.4700
VELDMAN MORGAN
C O M M E R C I A L
1 December 1997
Leanne A. Harter, AICP
City Planner
Current Planning Department
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
Subj: Boston Market / Safeway Federal Credit Union
Dear Leanne:
First Leanne, thank you for all your assistance and cooperation in expediting and
simplifying this process. Your patience is appreciated.
Per your discussions with Jerry Melton, the SFCU will agree to a landscape inspection
around the June 1, 1998 timeframe and replace any plants/trees that are dead at that time. In
addition, the sidewalk and crosswalk will be built according to specifications outlined on the site
plan and the 4" English Oak Trees will be planted as outlined on the landscape plan.
Please call me if you have any questions regarding this letter, the attached letter from
the SFCU regarding the sewer line, or the PMT. In addition, we will provide you with a site plan
NLT Monday 12/8/97.
Sincerely,
V DMMA�N�MORGAN COMMERCIAL, INC.
D niel R. Bemth
Broker Associate
760 Whalers Way, Bldg. C, Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Phone 970/223-5555 Fax 970/223-1647
nuiroH
I , / Ik
\\T
]PAS•I CNCIOSVRE CEl4L
lti a �1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.,
�•r..rrr.e (,al I, B Jon Chicken At fe m Md Pemrock P.U.D.. Cite Of Fwt Cebru, Cevnry Of Iwvn[r, yvn Of
y v_. N Cobrodo. awfoinilg I. I5BJ oma, w W ASS pwn Iael, mwe w teem. T.
.���_•� NOTES.,
••�^-� 1. AM ageala cad f-neap Tampa ri [wlwm e& ary o1 trot ce6mm stanad. dl.
^� 1 AM degnfiw for IV. ail. NI 6e baTb it acwcbw.s r/N a, W rM R'Me
Stpawda.
J MY wfl OI on eRen'w Wigiry wM rAb b[olq ri(Nn I50 feel o/ vn [Rem /w /in
o d emegancy puipmenf.
A. Abeimum Wigin9 Might rill b Miff feetIiitim Ilow-
�""`"` 5 Prvgrty is erred E - Empb)m t..
—_o— 6 e an. —.1 fmnhf the
Ci y �n code. Sign pe—ib we Ipuvmd to,M grvge
rpp y 61iGnp Rpwlms,
I. Mo wt elwge eAb porNp Inkla f ft!r e[mvN MOMrqr.
6. Iroah pck-up rY b pmuiled fe omo fmN arem idicofW p pbn.
p. Relw fo vhxy pvn forro tO of veFevc
/0 All mp npnkpl Herons KKOtetean eM mpI riM De mlwned /ra/n ri.e Iiwn Met Wjo[ent
net,
II. hb OSNpnvfe! mofor[Mcls pvhin9 is prmided. Wfwcyc✓ea mq um alvrvbrd pMirq
p [e
12 E�iafip FpMirg to M used va mlwrn m Motpen.
li FufuAWWup eapanekn nloef b o mnvnrm a J feet /iron Me, e—M,, fmnsf—
IA. Eiiafup POW m[k is to be, nAoOotad and grm tM efbed fo Met g—f.
IS Me m "o, se— awriCe to as emvfuq Wdy . b mvA'. q Me orrnr.
16. Rxnow gmeaes trap wull aM racm—t A' sank& too.
LAND USE TABLE ttEr so rz ACIIES GRoss so rT
mTI S AY CFEWr. SQASS 1. 1313 61.113
tGl1 elf Sp Fr. iN[I Ge=w.. 1.. ;G`VSS
EXIST. BUIL&W wAG
NNflE EN PANS/ON 1960 10 Si 1.1.50 5 AJS
SMMET&O 2515SJ 50.1i WPm .H.III
CPER SPACE 19,562 M.." 14,565
_rAr �e Mr. WAS5 IMS 611I3 IWS
PAM"W CAGE REWIRED SPACES PRGNIXD
9 enMd !6
i M .p 2
i
I �
I
I
I
L—
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CER77FICA77ON:
e� 6y Me Atom&o ignd Zo k Be eMd.1 Woy a. Coe—, Catelade ema_mY
SECREMMYW PIAN'MG AND 20m'xG awn,
OWNER'S CERTIFICATION:
We the uMengned do hee y —tiff, eat we are Me ke/w omen of red popar(y emcnDed on mis
mite pbn and do 1,., certify mvl ee a[[wl fa cenditrone . na(-Uw r sat lm h m eakl ail.
Aron.
W AY MX, Y TAW fFgERLL CR(Wr
BY
State o/ } S.S
t' o/
ThOlaregoirp dedcdlion s odrroeledped M/dn me fMiday o/ A0,
19
19— DY I
C?Y C(£Rrr
VICINITY MAP scelc - ,mm
✓
�Ome
;
G I
g
I
I
G
4+e rr
,
� J}}}
LYIf
M
1
`Zip
•
.
a.ev
w[
RIVERSIDE SHOPPING CENTER
PENNOCK PLACE =1—=
ExiSiING PRZ< rv�
C.
LEGAL 0E4C0PRON
_
•�
nlxa4na mumenMnorn...,11/aas.om,le.iw+•Y�p]NbM.
.J I
livy)eM We,l ofM51T FM.. NCa
Nc,Ccme.l4 HCtt.F
vpryNNp 1M WM M W ,W NeMm'e,i l/C m IaYp N W M' E oN MII•
d wuE'V cmMrw� Iweln �ela1N4 Mwalo.4 vmltiW wlli• M
4N•ee,•PI
..W IIw: IroI
Ilxa$fWcNwWnSeC
Mwf�WMICwN
'EWWwx'Maf Bp.qO
_
WWy'nfMaJ]IIo4P7oI`ni
nNI'.ESWl1
NWM'EWNN: GSM 11wEMIOIL
�•�L�
7 W iV5_]Il lwl: Mince S Bi IS' W t51 CB Iwl ro M1w
IwUIMrceS01 15
��Nn
wfNae4of.+w
NOTE
FOURTH FILING
RIVERSIDE SUBDIVISION ,
VICINITY MAP
p �.. .Q.mv,..
�ww�m, mm.amu<mn.mns..aroa�ann
' .vom.ovws.eew...�m.a.
�. � idPo®mart!laM�11.
____r
�v.
EUSJNw
DOC1ORs Orrici
•� ueRCN e, lua.
FINAL SITE PLAN
(—D rws PrvERsmE P.u.a _ —I_
BOSTON
A I Imo-
T �
I! gill
ATTORNEY'S CERTIFICATION
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
CERTIFICATION — TW
OWNERS CERTIFICATION
CHICTz-vNIX-r-.d
AT LEMAY &
PENNOCK PUD
GROUP
60 ems
LL
Lu
won
POUDRE VALLEY HOSPITAL
VICINITY MAP 10/20/97
#79-93B Boston Chicken P.U.D.
Type II (LUC) Major Amendment
1"= 300'
I
D
.,EC 17 RECI
Godfather's
Pizza®
V
December 11, 1997
G.F. FOUR INVESTMENTS, INC.
P.O. Box 640 • Boone, Iowa 50036 • (515) 432-5907
Leanne Harter
City Planner
281 North College Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
Re: Amendment 479-93B
Dear Ms. Harter:
Thank you for informing us as to the possible amendment to the
property owned by Boston Market.
We have no problem with this piece of property being converted
to a Safeway Credit Union. We would welcome them as neighbors.
Sincerely,
ack Gano
JG/jf
C-17-97 WED 03:20 PM
P,02
SAFEWAY ROCKY MOUNTAIN FEDERAL CREOFF UNION
3135 South Pae ar Road, Aurora, to 600/e•31m - (3m) 369-6400 - (800) 7/83Boo
MEMORANDIZIM
December 17, IM
TO; Ft Collins Staff
Ft. Collins Planning and Zoning Board
FROM: Denise Nall OP
Executive Vtoe Pre6ldeat
SUBJECT: Safeway Rocliy MountainFC11
Tb&Qk you fort the opportunity to respond to further rgl OOns wn=*ing our plUMAg and aOnOg request-
M Collins was chosen as the sloe for our rwrthem megitonal facility, bated on its location in nocthem
Colorado and its accessibility to maltem Wyoming.
Safeway Stores Inc., ow pmmaty membwsNp groups mmngbs and opera" 16 Mores m this region, with
approximately 1500 auployeea.
Based on our studies of our current and "ittial membership, it is anticipated our business will occur
along the following guidelirm:
10 %Southem Wyoming
7S %FL CollbuVLoveland
10 %NoRheastemn colwraao
to %Northweatem Colorado
We hope thts addition of this information, will expedite the approval of our planning and zoning request.
T OFFICE COLMADO SVRM S OFFICE DOWNTOWN OFF" WEST OFF"
730 C 0dV4 Sag, aura 207•A 365 too" otlior suit" 97 SOWh.SherkJen ebd,
W219-3121 M aW Cladel am* &+uduq) 1"11 stout aw" Lakewood, eo aeeze UM
rot Colorado Springs. CO aoWg-"m oernec Co Gom—U1A (303) 237-474Q
(719) 691-6190 (3W) 892-01"
DEC-17-1997 10:19 MATTHEW DELICH PE 3036695034 P.03
between those forecasted at the short range and long range
futures. It was demonstrated that acceptable operation would
occur at the key intersections at both the short range future
and the long range future. Therefore, it can reasonably be
deduced that operation will be acceptable at the mid range
future.
Based upon data contained in Trip Generation, 5th
Edition, ITE, the Boston Market Restaurant would generate the
following traffic:
Daily - 1520 trip ends
AM peak - closed
Noon peak - 144 trip ends
PM peak - 176 trip ends
Using the same reference document, the Safeway Credit Union
would generate the following traffic:
At 3,000 Square Feet
Daily - 635 trip ends
AM peak - 27 trip ends
Noon peak - 104 trip ends
PM peak - 104 trip ends
At 6,000 Square Feet
Daily - 1275 trip ends
AM peak - 54 trip ends
Noon peak - 208 trip ends
PM peak - 210 trip ends
Except for the morning peak hour when the Boston Market
restaurant was closed, the trip generation (at full build -out
of the Safeway Credit Union) is very similar to that of the
Boston Market. The small differences will have a negligible
effect on the operation at the key intersections.
The traffic operations analyses from the two
transportation impact studies were compared. In both the
short range and long range futures, the key intersections
operated acceptably and at the same levels of service for both
the Boston Market use and the Safeway Credit Union use.
TOTAL P.03
DEC-17-1997 10:18 MATTHEW DELICH PE
3036695034 P.02
W
W!
o:
A
,Fj TO: Denise Hall,
d)
Jim Gregory,
m
Fort Collins
Fort Collins
o�
FROM: Matt Delich
LL
Safeway Credit Union
Financial Commercial
Staff
DEC 17 REn
Security
Planning & Zoning Board
DATE: December 17, 1997
SUBJECT: Safeway Credit Union - Additional requested traffic
to information (File: 9772MEM1)
40
M
c°Do At the P & 2 Board lunch meeting on December 12, 1997,
o a few traffic related issues were raised. These were relayed
0 to me by the project planner on December 15, 1997. I also had
W a phone conversation on December 15, 1997, with Jerry
Gavaldon, Board Member, regarding the issues. Addressing some
n of the issues would require an entire new traffic study.
There was not enough time to do this by the December 18, 1997,
P & Z Board Meeting. Mr. Gavaldon agreed that extrapolations
and comparisons would likely satisfy his concerns. It should
be pointed out that the transportation impact study submitted
for the Safeway Credit Union was done in accordance with the
Fort Collins guidelines and I received no written comments
from staff regarding it. Analyses done for this memorandum
are not required in the Fort Collins Traffic Study Guidelines.
This memorandum addresses the following concerns:
- Lunch time level of service;
- Short range, mid range, and long range level of service;
- Trip generation comparison between the Boston Market and
the Safeway Credit Union;
- operations analysis comparison at key intersections
W between the Boston Market use and the Safeway Credit
a Union use.
a
x
W The lunch time level of service was neither requested nor
analyzed in the Safeway Credit Union Transportation Impact
Study (TIS). historic count information along Lemay Avenue
at the key intersections indicates that the afternoon peak
hour traffic counts are 10-15 percent higher than the lunch
time (noon) peak hour. It was demonstrated in the TIS that
acceptable operation would occur during the afternoon peak
hour. Therefore, it can reasonably be deduced that operation
o will be acceptable during the noon peak hour.
M
F operations analyses were conducted for the short range
(year 2002) and long range (year 2015) futures. A mid range
future (year 2005) would fall between the two analyzed future
years. Traffic volumes at a mid range future would fall
Commui, y Planning and Environmental vices
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Planning and Zoning Boar
FROM: Leanne A. Harter, City Planne�_4a
RE: Additional information regarding the Partial Abandonment of
Huntington Hills Parcel A and the Boston Chicken Major
Amendment
DATE: December 17, 1997
Attached is additional information requested by members of the Planning and
Zoning Board at the Friday worksession. Included is information regarding the
abandonment of the Huntington Hills ODP as well as requested information for
the Boston Chicken Major Amendment.
For the Huntington Hills ODP, the following is attached:
• Letter dated December 5, 1997, requesting the partial abandonment.
• Letter dated December 17, 1997, responding to comments and questions
raised at worksession.
• Memo from Tom Shoemaker regarding possible City acquisition of Parcel J.
• Letter from the legal representative for Parcel J outlining development
options.
Regarding the Boston Chicken Major Amendment, the following is attached:
• Memo from Matt Delich addressing transportation related concerns.
• Memo from Safeway Credit Union with demographic information.
• Letter from the owners of Godfather's Pizza.
The applicants are preparing 3-D drawings that will be distributed prior to the
hearing, and I will provide a detailed drawing of the circulation patterns for all
three sites.
If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 221-6641.
281 North College Avenue • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020
Boston Chicken PUD - Major Amendment, #79-93B
December 18, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 11
F. The Boston Chicken PUD Major Amendment complies with Section 3.2.2(H)
Drive-in Facilities of the Land Use Code.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested modification to Section 4.22(E)(a-b) and
Section 3.2.2(K)(2)(a) of the Land Use Code and approval of the Boston Chicken PUD
Major Amendment #79-93B with the following condition:
By June 1, 1998, a landscape inspection will be completed by the Zoning
Department of the City of Fort Collins to determine what, if any, vegetation/trees
are not living and those determined to be dead or at least 70% dead must be
replaced in accordance with the approved landscape plan approved as part of
the proposal for the Major Amendment.
Boston Chicken PUD - Major Amendment, #79-93B
December 18, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 10
which complies with the standard. The purpose of the standard is to create an
environment that promotes pedestrian circulation and connections. The enhanced
pedestrian connection from the main entrance to the sidewalk along Lemay will serve to
better connect and define pedestrian circulation routes. In addition, as an existing
condition, the relocation of the drive aisle to the rear of the facility, would impact upon
the circulation and access to Schlotsky's and Godfather. Thus, in order to comply with
the standard, the site must be redesigned and would ultimately impact upon adjacent
businesses with shared access with this site.
The proposal complies with all other applicable standards of the district standards in
Article 4.
5. Findings of Fact/Conclusion:
A. The Boston Chicken PUD Major Amendment is a permitted use in the E-
Employment District, subject to administrative review, however, the applicant has
requested modifications to Section 4.22(E)(a-b) and Section 3.2.2(K)(2)(a) of the
Land Use Code and the Planning and Zoning Board is empowered to grant
modifications pursuant to Section 2.7.1 of the Land Use Code.
B. The request for modifications to Section 4.22(E)(a-b) and Section 3.2.2(K)(2)(a)
of the Land Use Code are warranted as the granting of the modifications would
neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of
the Land Use Code. It has been demonstrated that the plan as submitted
advances the purposes of the standards for which the modifications are
requested equally well or better than a plan which complies with the standard for
which a modification is requested, and, the strict application of both standards
would require redesign of the site and adjacent sites, thus, rending the project
practically infeasible.
C. The Boston Chicken PUD Major Amendment complies with all applicable
standards as put forth in the Land Use Code, excluding Section 4.22(E)(a-b) and
Section 3.2(K)(2)(a) for which the applicant has requested modifications.
D. The Boston Chicken PUD Major Amendment is compatible with the surrounding
land uses.
E. The Boston Chicken PUD Major Amendment will result in the redevelopment of
an existing vacant building and site improvements, including additional
landscaping and enhanced pedestrian connections, will be completed as part of
the proposal.
Boston Chicken PUD - Major Amendment, #79-93B
December 18, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 9
1. Buildings may orient away from the street if the development provides
a campus or park -like development block with an internal pedestrian
network that functions as an additional altemative to the street
sidewalk by connecting buildings within the site and directly connecting
to common destination in the district (such as transit stops,
restaurants, child care facilities and convenience shopping centers).
Such an internal network shall provide direct pedestrian access to the
street sidewalk(s) or walkway(s).
2. The streetfront orientation requirement may be met by facing only a
portion of the front facade to the adjacent street with no intervening
front yard parking, provided that the streetfront facade adjoins a
landscaped yard with a connecting walkway. Such building face shall
not consist of a blank wall. In no case shall the streetfront facade be
less than thirty (30) percent of the building frontage.
The applicant stated the following in the request to modify this standard:
"As this is an existing site with the building entrance separated from the street
sidewalk by an intervening drive and parking area, it would not be feasible to
direct the traffic to the rear of the building as that would create congestion and
flow problems with the drive-in facility that will be located at the rear of the
building. This is an issue that is endemic to this site and is impossible to
overcome without complete redesign of the existing site. The access from the
front entrance to the sidewalk can be enhanced, however, to provide for
pedestrian ease and safety. A well -marked pedestrian crosswalk can be
installed with signs identifying the crosswalk as a pedestrian crosswalk, similar to
those found at school crossings."
In the review of this project, it was demonstrated that Schlotsky's Deli (located to the
south of the proposal) uses the existing drive way in front as well. Therefore,
eliminating the drive could ultimately impact that business. In addition, the location of
the drive-thrus at the rear of the building complies with the Land Use Code, and
relocating the driveway from the front to the rear would severely affect the circulation of
vehicles using the drive thru. In response to Staffs concerns, the developer has
enhanced the crosswalk connecting the front entrance with the sidewalk along Lemay.
Rather than a striped crosswalk, it will be a raised, patterned concrete crosswalk to
clearly identify the pedestrian connection.
The criteria for granting a modification to this standard is based upon the plan, as
submitted, advances the purposes of the standard equally well or better than a plan
Boston Chicken PUD - Major Amendment, #79-93B
December 18, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 8
Division 3.5 Building Standards
Building and Project Compatibility standards (Section 3.5.1)
Building materials. The future expansion is proposed to be designed to
match the existing building design and materials, and complies with the
standard that requires that building materials shall either be similar to the
materials already being used in the neighborhood, or, dissimilar materials
are being proposed, other characteristics such as scale and proportions,
form, architectural detailing, color and texture, shall be utilized to ensure
that enough similarity exists for the building to be compatible, despite the
differences in materials. [Section 3.5.1(F)(1)]
4. Article 4-District Standards
Financial institutions are a Type 1 permitted use in the E-Employment zoning district,
subject to administrative review, but as a request for modification of standards is
included in the proposal, the project is subject to review by the Planning and Zoning
Board. This proposal complies with the purpose of the Employment District, which is
"intended to provide locations for a variety of workplaces including light industrial uses,
research and development activities, offices and institutions. This District is also
intended to accommodate secondary uses that complement or support the primary
uses, such as hotels, restaurants, convenience shopping, child care and housing."
[Section 4.22(A) of the Land Use Code] In addition, the building is currently vacant and
neglected to an extent, and, therefore, the redevelopment of the property into the credit
union use will eliminate the vacant building and will result in some improvements to the
area.
Modification of Standards
The applicant has requested a modification to the district standard, Section
4.22(E)(2)(a-b) Building Design which states:
(A) All buildings shall provide a primary entrance that faces and opens directly onto
the adjacent street sidewalk or a walkway, plaza or courtyard that has direct
linkage to the street sidewalk without requiring pedestrians to cross any
intervening driveways or parking lots.
(B) To the extent reasonably feasible, buildings shall be oriented to face the
adjacent street with no intervening front yard parking. The following exceptions
shall be permitted.,
Boston Chicken PUD - Major Amendment, #79-93B
December 18, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 7
crossing shall emphasize and place priority on pedestrian access and
safety. The pedestrian crossings must be well -marked using pavement
treatments, signs, striping, signals, lighting, traffic calming techniques,
median refuge areas, and landscaping. [Section 3.2.2(5)(b)] The site plan
indicates that the pedestrian crossing from the main entrance to the
sidewalk along South Lemay will be raised concrete and the connection
from the northwest of the building across the drive aisle is to be striped in
accordance with the Land Use Code to ensure a safe
pedestrian/automobile interface.
Drive-in Facilities. The Land Use Code defines criteria directly related to
drive-in facilities. Section 3.2.2(H) of the Land Use Code states that,
Any drive-in facilities, if permitted by the zone district regulations set forth
in Article 4, shall be secondary in emphasis and priority to any other
access and circulation functions. Such facilities shall be located in side or
rear locations that do not interrupt direct pedestrian access along
connecting pedestrian frontage. The design and layout of drive-in
facilities for restaurants, banks, or other uses shall.
(1) avoid potential pedestrian/vehicle conflicts,
(2) provide adequate stacking spaces for automobiles before and after
use of the facility,
(3) provide adequate directional signage to ensure a free -flow through
the facility; and
(4) provide a walk-up service option as well as drive-in.
The proposal complies with the Land Use Code requirements regarding
drive-in facilities in the following: pedestrian crossings will be clearly
marked to help reduce pedestrian/vehicle conflicts; adequate stacking
spaces for vehicles both entering and exiting the drive-thru lanes will be
provided; signage will be provided to clearly define drive-thru lanes for the
Safeway Credit Union as well as the Schlotsky's to the south; and a walk-
up ATM will be provided at the entrance to the building, accessible on a
24 hour basis.
Boston Chicken PUD - Major Amendment, #79-936
December 18, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 6
to Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping [Section 3.2.1(E)(4)(b)] and Parking
Lot Interior Landscaping [Section 3.2.1(E)(5)]. Existing landscape
materials will be enhanced to provide additional screening of the parking
along Lemay Avenue, and an existing fence along the east property line
will remain and screen the parking from the east. As part of the future
expansion, some existing landscaping will be removed and relocated on
site. Furthermore, additional plantings have been required on the site,
including two 4" caliper canopy shade trees (English Oak species as
recommended by the City Forester) at the entrance off of South Lemay.
Additional canopy trees and plantings have been required on the site,
including a tree in the landscaped area at the southwest corner of the
building, and ornamental trees along the north of the building.
Screening. The proposal complies with the standard relating to the
screening of low visual interest or visually intrusive site elements (such as
trash collection, open storage, service areas, loading docks, and blank
walls) from off -site view. [Section 3.2.1(E)(6)] The trash collection area
will be screened by a six (6) foot cedar fence, with additional landscaping
surrounding the fence.
Access, Circulation and Parking standards (Section 3.2.2)
Bicycle parking. Bicycle parking is provided on site that meets or
exceeds the required number of bicycle parking spaces as well as the
location. An existing bicycle rack will be relocated to the south of the
main entrance and will be placed and designed in accordance with the
standards.
Directness and continuity of walkways. The proposal satisfies the
standard that walkways shall be grade separated from the parking lot, with
a paved surface not less than 6' in width. [Section 3.2.2(C)(5)(a)] The
walkway provided will be 6= in width and is separated from the parking
with a grade separation. The walkway connecting the main entrance of
the use to the sidewalk along South Lemay will be raised concrete and
clearly defined as a pedestrian crossing. Staff has requested that the
applicant provide a pedestrian connection to the east to the existing uses,
and that the connection be marked with striping to define it as a
pedestrian crossing.
Street crossings. The standard states that where a pedestrian would be
required to cross drive aisles or internal roadways, the pedestrian
Boston Chicken PUD - Major Amendment, #79-93B
December 18, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 5
developments wherein shared parking is not an option, to increase the number
of parking spaces. In the case of the Boston Chicken PUD Major Amendment,
the proposal does share parking with the Schlotsky's to the north, and the
Schlotsky's, in turn, shares with Godfather's Pizza further north. Therefore, the
strict application of the standard (which would require the removal of parking
spaces) could ultimately impact the parking capacity of adjacent properties. The
Land Use Code encourages shared parking facilities, and therefore, the proposal
meets this intent of the Land Use Code. Thus, the granting of a modification to
the standard would not be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent
and purposes of the Land Use Code.
Currently, the existing building is vacant, and to an extent, somewhat neglected.
As City Plan and the Land Use Code encourage the redevelopment of
underutilized properties, the change of use from a vacant building to a credit
union meets this goal. One of the criteria that must be demonstrated in the
consideration of a modification to the standard is whether the strict application of
the standard would render the project practically infeasible. The removal of the
parking spaces would be costly, and, furthermore, would impact the entire
parking design from the Godfather's Pizza to the credit union. Furthermore, the
proposal complies with the intent of Policy CD-2.1 Existing Strip Commercial
Corridor Developments (City Plan Principle and Policies) which states:
"The City will encourage and support the gradual evolution of existing, auto -
dominated strip commercial areas to compact, multi -modal -oriented, mixed -use
places with enhanced walking connections between destinations."
General Development Standards
The project complies with the remaining applicable standards from Article 3 of the Land
Use Code, including the following:
Division 3.2 Site Planning and Design Standards
Landscaping and Tree Protection Standards (Section 3.2.1)
Street trees. Street tree planting is in accordance with the Design and
Construction Criteria, Standards and Specifications for Streets, Sidewalks,
Alleys, and Other Public Ways.
Parking lot landscaping --perimeter and interior. Parking lot
landscaping is in accordance with the standards, including those related
Boston Chicken PUD - Major Amendment, #79-93B
December 18, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 4
A. that the plan as submitted will advance or protect the public interests and
purposes of the standard for which the modification is requested equally well or
better than would a plan which complies with the standard for which a
modification is requested; or
B. that the granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard
would result in a substantial benefit to the city by reason of the fact that the
proposed project would substantially address an important community need
specifically and expressly defined and described in the city's Comprehensive
plan, adopted policy, ordinance or resolution (such as, by was of example only,
affordable housing or historic preservation) or would substantially alleviate an
existing, defined and described problem of city-wide concern (such as, by way of
example only, traffic congestion or urban blight), and the strict application of such
a standard would render the project practically infeasible.
As part of the initial submittal of this proposal, the applicant requested a modification to
Section 3.2.2(K)(2)(a) Nonresidential Parking Requirements.
Section 3.2.2(K)(2)(a) Nonresidential Parking Requirements of the Land Use Code
requires that nonresidential uses are limited to a maximum number of parking spaces.
For financial services, the maximum number of parking spaces is 3.5/1000 square feet.
Therefore, the number of parking spaces allowed for the proposed use per the Land
Use Code requirements would be 18 spaces. The number of existing parking spaces
for the existing use is 50, twelve (12) of which are proposed to be removed. The
applicant is requesting a modification to this standard based on the following:
"...this is an existing building with 50 parking spaces, 12 of which will be
immediately removed by the installation of the drive4hru facility. In addition, the
SFCU is planning for future expansion, which will eventually result in a 5,240
square foot facility. Taking into account this future expansion, this site will have
a parking requirement not to exceed 18 spaces (3.5 x 5,240 = 18.34). The site,
therefore, exceeds the maximum number of parking spaces by twenty (20)
spaces and is the basis of the modification request. With the heavy restaurant
use in the area (Schlotzky's and Godfather's) and the nature of shared parking
between these facilities, the excess parking is not unwarranted, nor likely to be
excessive."
In the determination of a modification request, the Board must consider how the
proposal meets the criteria listed previously. The purpose of the standard is to
limit the number of parking spaces that each individual development requests
and, if approved, develops. Furthermore, the Land Use Code allows those
Boston Chicken PUD - Major Amendment, #79-93B
December 18, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 3
approved under the laws of the city for the development of land prior to the
adoption of this Land Use Code shall be reviewed and processed as required for
the land use or uses proposed for the amendment as set forth in Article 4 (i.e.,
Type 1 review or Type 2 review). Major amendments to project development
plans or final plans approved under this Land Use Code shall be reviewed and
processed in the same manner as required for the original development plan for
which amendment is sought. Any major amendments to an approved project
development plan or site specific development plan shall be recorded as
amendments in accordance with the procedures established for the filing and
recording of such initially approved plan. Any partial or total abandonment of a
project development plan or final plan approved under this Land Use Code, or of
any plan approved under the laws of the city for the development of land prior to
the adoption of this Land Use Code, shall be deemed to be a major
amendment."
It was determined that the addition of four drive-thru lanes and conversion of a
restaurant to a financial office use constituted a change in character of the approved
Boston Chicken PUD, and thus, the determination that the proposal be processed and
reviewed as a major amendment. The process of the major amendment requires the
applicant to submit a project development plan which complies with the standards
defined in the Land Use Code (or modifications of the standards may be requested).
The Boston Chicken PUD was approved on March 28, 1994 to allow for a restaurant
use (including both Boston Chicken and Schlotsky's). The requested major amendment
must be processed in accordance with the Land Use Code, rather than the Land
Development Guidance System (the regulatory mechanism under which approval for
the Boston Chicken PUD was granted.)
2. Article 3--General Development Standards
The Boston Chicken PUD Major Amendment (Safeway Credit Union) proposal meets all
applicable standards in Article 3, General Development Standards, of the Land Use
Code, excluding Section 3.2.2(K)(2)(a) Nonresidential Parking Requirements for which
a modification has been requested.
Modification of Standards
In the consideration of requests for modifications, the Planning and Zoning Board must
determine and find that the granting of the modification would neither be detrimental to
the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of the Land Use Code. The
applicant must demonstrate either:
Boston Chicken PUD - Major Amendment, #79-93B
December 18, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 2
Offices, financial services, and clinics are a permitted use in the E-Employment district,
subject to administrative review. However, the proposal requests modifications to
Section 4.22(E)(2)(a-b) Building Design of Article 4, District Standards, and Section
3.2.2(K)(2)(a) Nonresidential Parking Requirements of Article 3, General Development
Standards, and, therefore, this project is subject to review by the Planning and Zoning
Board.
The proposal includes a future expansion to be completed within four (4) years based
on anticipated growth of the credit union. In addition, four (4) drive-thru lanes are
proposed to the rear of the building, with a drive -up ATM included in these lanes, and a
walk-up ATM to be provided near the main entrance to the facility.
This proposal complies with the purpose of the Employment District, which is "intended
to provide locations for a variety of workplaces including light industrial uses, research
and development activities, offices and institutions. This District is also intended to
accommodate secondary uses that complement or support the primary uses, such as
hotels, restaurants, convenience shopping, child care and housing." [Section 4.22(A)
of the Land Use Code] In addition, the building is currently vacant, and, therefore, the
redevelopment of the property into the credit union use will eliminate the vacant building
and will result in some improvements to the area.
COMMENTS:
1. Background:
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: E-Existing veterinary facility (Lemay Animal Hospital) and commercial uses
S: E-Schlotsky's Deli and Godfather's Pizza
W: NC-Albertson's (Riverside and Lemay Shopping Center)
E: E-Medical offices and Vineyard Church
2. Major Amendments
This proposal was processed as a Major Amendment under the Land Use Code.
Section 2.2.10(B) Major Amendments of the Land Use Code states:
"Amendments to any approved development plan or site specific development
plan that are not determined by the Director to be minor amendments under the
criteria set forth in subsection (A) above, shall be deemed major amendments.
Major amendments to development plans or site specific development plans
ITEM NO. 5
MEETING DATE12/18/97
STAFF Leanne Harter
Citv of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
S PaECTL\E1 BRT
osto Chicken PUD Major Amendment #79-93B
APPLICANT: Veldman Morgan Commercial, Inc.
Daniel R. Bernth
760 Whalers Way, C-200
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
OWNER: Boston Chicken, Inc.
14103 Denver West Parkway #4086
Golden, Colorado 80401-4086
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for Major Amendment to allow for a change of use of the existing
Boston Chicken restaurant (vacant) on South Lemay Avenue to a Safeway Credit
Union. The existing building is 3,000 square feet, and the proposal includes a 2,240
square foot addition (to be constructed at a future date). In addition, the applicant
proposes the placement of four (4) drive-thru lanes (one being a drive -up ATM) to be
located to the rear of the building. The property is zoned E-Employment District, and
the use is Type 1 permitted use, however, the project is requesting modifications to the
standards of the Land Use Code, necessitating a decision by the Planning and Zoning
Board.
RECOMMENDATION: Approval with modifications and condition.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This request for Major Amendment was processed in accordance with Section
2.2.10(B) of the Land Use Code (LUC) Major Amendments, and complies with
applicable requirements of the Land Use Code, specifically the standards located in
Division 3.2 Site Planning and Design Standards and Division 3.5 Building Standards
located in Article 3, General Development Standards, (excluding those standards for
which modifications are requested) and the applicable district standards located in
Article 4, District Standards of the Land Use Code (Division 4.22 Employment
District.)
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (970) 221-6750
PLANNING DEPARTMENT