The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSPRADLEY BARR AUTO DEALERSHIP PDP FDP - 64 93E - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - TRAFFIC STUDYM = = = i HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4d 07-14-1997 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation ---------- ------------------- ------ Streets: (E-W) fairway (N-S) college Analyst: Matt File Name: Area Type: Other 7-14-97 am pm Comment: long Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R ; L T R ; L T R I L T R ---- --------;---- ---- ----;-- --- ----I---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 < 1 3 < 1 3 < Volumes - 85 20 30; 40 20 100: 50 1770 100I 100 1360 120 PHF or PK15I0.90 0.90 G.90;0.90 0.90 0.90I0.90 0.95 0.90:0.90 0.95 0.90 Lane W (ft)I12.0 12.0 12.0;12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 I12.0 12.0 Grade 0 0 0 0 % Heavy Veh; 1 1 1; 1 1 11 1 2 1; 1 2 1 Parking I(Y/N) N I(Y/N) N ;(Y/N) N I('Y/N) N Bus Stops 0; 0; 0; 0 Con. Peds 01 01 OI 0 Ped Button I(Y/N) Y 23.5 sI(Y/N) Y 23.5 sI(Y/N) Y 11.5 s;(Y/N) Y 14.5 Arr Type 1 3 31 1 1 RTOR Vols OI 0; 0; 0 Lost Time ;3.00 3.00 3.00; 3.00 3.00 3.00;3.00 3.00 3.00;3.00 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 Pads * Peds W8 Left * 1:SB Left Thru c Thru Right * I Right Peds * Peds ` NB Right 'EB Right SB Right ;WB Right Green 24.OA (Green 8.OA 54.OP Yellow/AR 5.0 ;Yellow/AR 4.0 5.0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 _______________________________________________________________________ intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio _____ Delay _____ LOS ___ Delay _____ LOS --- EB _____ L ____ 281 _______ 1079 _____ 0.335 0.260 " .9 C 22.3 C T 489 1881 0.045 0.260 21.1 C R 416 1599 0.079 0.260 21.2 C W8 L 432 1661 0.102 0.260 21.4 C 22.4 C TR 428 1646 0.311 0.260 22.8 C NB L 249 1787 0.225 0.680 15.0 B 12.7 5 TR 3103 5541 0.700 0.560 12.6 8 58 L 236 1787 0.470 0.660 24.6 C 11.7 8 TR 3090 5517 0.557 0.560 10.9 B intersection Delay = 13.0 sec/veh Intersection LOS = 6 Lost ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Time/Cycle, L = 9.0 sec Critical v/c(x) = 0.595 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4d 07-14-1997 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation --------- --------------------------- Streets: (E-W) fairway (N-S) collage Analyst: Matt File Name: Area Type: Other 7-14-97 am pm Comment: long Eastbound I Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R ; L T R ' L T R L T R I---- --------'--- ---- ----'---- ---- ----I---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 11 1 1 I 1 1 ` 1 3< 11 3 ` Volumes ; 190 30 601 100 30150; 50 2030 75: 100 2270125 PHF or PK15;0.95 0.90 0.9010.90 0.90 0.9010.90 0.95 0.9010.90 0.95 0.90 Lane W (ft)112.0 12.0 12.0;12.0 12.0 I12.0 12.0 :12.0 12.0 Grade 0 0 0 0 % Heavy Veh; 1 1 1I 1 1 1; 1 2 11 1 2 1 Parking I(Y/N) N ;('Y/N) N :(YIN) N ;(Y/N) N Bus Stops 0; 01 0; 0 Con. Peds 01 0; 0; 0 Ped Button I(Y/N) Y 23.5 sI(Y/N) Y 23.5 sI(Y/N) Y 11.5 sj(Y/N) Y 14.5 Arr Type 1 3 3; 1 3 1 1 3 ; 1 3 RTOR Vols OI 0; GI 0 Lost Time 13.00 3.00 3.00;3.00 3.00 3.00:3.00 3.00 3.00I3.00 3.00 3.00 Prop. Share) ; Prop. Prot.; , _____________________________________________________________________ Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4; 5 6 7 8 EB Left ' INB Left * `F Thru * Thru Right * I Right ,r Peds * Peds WB Left .x ISB Left ` Thru" I Thru ' Right * ; Right Peds * Peds NB Right :EB Right SB Right ;WB Right Green 24.OA ;Green B.OA 54.OP Yellow/AR 5.0 ;Yellow/AR 4.0 5.0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: 41 45 46 _______________________________________________________________________ Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS ----- - ------- ----- ----- ----- --- ----- --- EB L 206 794 0.969 0.260 54.6 E 43.6 E T 469 1881, 0.067 0.260 21.2 C R 416 1599 0.161 0.260 21.7 C WB L 417 1603 0.266 0.260 22.4 C 23.6 C TR 426 1646 0.467 0.260 24.3 C NB L 236 1787 0.237 0.680 31.9 0 14.5 B TR 3112 5557 0.785 0.560 14.1 B SB L 236 1787 0.470 0.680 28.9 D 13.0 C TR 3104 5542 0.896 0.560 17.6 C Intersection Delay = 18.1 sec/veh Intersection LOS = C Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9.0 sec Critical vic(x) = O.896 -- -- -- ------- - -- ---------------- - ----- ----- - - -- - ----- ---- -- HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d Page Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 ------------------------------- ------------_____=--------- Streets: (N-S) college (E-W) mason/palmer Major Street Direction.... NS Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Analyst ................... mJd Date of Analysis.......... 7/14/97 Other Information ......... am Pm 1997 short l Two-way Stop -controlled Intersectionong ------------- ------------- --- Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound L T R L T R L T R L T R --- ---- ----'---- ---- ----'---- ---- --- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 3 0 0 3 < 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Stop/Yield ! N! N Volumes 65 922 964 135: 85 PHF .9 .95 .95 .9; .9; Grade 0 0 0 MC's (%) i SU/RV's (%)'I CV's (%) i' PCE's I1.10 1.1O: ----------------- ------------------------- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) __________________________________________________________________ Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 413 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 855 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 855 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.88 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 2: LT from Major Street-------------SB NB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1165 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 406 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 406 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.81 -------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) ---- (sec/veh) ------ ----- ------- --------------4.8 EB R 103 855 4.8 0.4 A NB L 79 406 11.0 0.8 C 0.7 Intersection Delay = 0.5 sec/veh 0 i== M M M m m M r M=== m m m HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville. FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 ----------------------- Streets: (N-S) college (E-W) mason/palmer Major Street Direction.... NS Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Analyst.. ----- :''* ........ mjd Date of Ana iysis.......... 7/14/97 Other Information........ am pm 1997 short long Two-way Stop -controlled Intersection Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ----'---- ---- ----I---- --------1---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 3 0 0 3 < 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Stop/Yiald N; N Volumes 40 766 624 85; 20; PHF .9 .95 .95 .9; .9 Grade 0 0 0 MC's (%) I SU/RV's (%); CV's (%) PCE's ;1.10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) __________________________________________________________________ Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB E8 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 266 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1015 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1015 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.98 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 2: LT from Major Street_---_-___-SB NB -------------------------- ------------ Conflicting Flows: (vph) 751 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 678 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 678 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.93 -------------------------------------------------------- intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) _-___ (sec/veh) ________ ______ ______ ______ _______ _______-______ 3.6 EB R 24 1015 3.6 0.0 A NB L 48 678 5.7 0.1 B 0.3 Intersection Delay = 0.2 sec/veh APPENDIX F r r� r r � r � r r r r � r�■� � �r �r �r � � HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d Page Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2063 Ph: (904) 392-0378 ------------------------------------- Streets: (N-S) college (E-W) mason palmer Major Street Direction.... NS Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Aria l yst................... mjd 2 STC Date of Analysis.......... 7/14/97 Other Information ......... am pm 1997 short long Two-way Stop -controlled Intersection Northbound I Southbound Eastbound Westbound L T R L T R L T R 1 L T R No. Lanes 1 2 0 ; 0 2 1 ; 1 0 1 0 0 0 Stop/Yield I N; N1 Volumes 20 840 1 792 50: 70 30; PHF 1 .9 .9 .9 .9; .9 .9 Grade 0 0 0 MC's (%) SU/RV's (%)I CV's PCE's ;1.10 ;1.10 1.10 ----------- ____________________________________________________________ Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) --- ---------------------------------------------------------- Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor- Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road *5.50 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road v5.50 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 440 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 829 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 829 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.96 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 2 LT from Major Street-__SB__ _______ NB __- ______________________________________ Conflicting Flows: (vph) 936 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 539 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 539 Prob. of Queue -Free State: -___ ___ _-__ 0_96 __________________________ Step 4: LT from Minor Street WS EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1863 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 146 Major LT, Minor TH impedance Factor: 0.96 Adjusted impedance Factor: 0.96 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.96 Movement Capacity: (pcph) ------------------------------------------------------- 141 intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LDS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) ------- (sec/veh) ----- --------- -------- ------ ------ ------------- EB L 86 141 63.4 4.0 F 45.7 EB R 36 829 4.5 0.0 A NB L 24 539 7.0 0.0 8 0.2 Intersection Delay = 2.6 sec/veh i HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d Page Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) college (E-W) mason/palmer Major Street Direction.... NS Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Analyst ................... mjd Z S 7C' Date of Analysis......... 7/14/97 Other Information....._.. am pm 1997 short long Two-way Stop -controlled in errection Northbound Southbound I Eastbound i Westbound L T R L T - R ; L T R L T R ,____ ____ _--_____ ____-_______ ____ __-_---- --__ ___- No. Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 1 ; 1 0 1 0 0 .0 Stop/yield N; N Volumes 25 708 489 601 225 15 PHF .9 .9 .9 .91 .9 .9i Grade 0 0 0 MC's (%) SU/RV's (%}; CV's (%) PCE's :1.10 _______________________________________________________________________ Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Maneuver Gap (tg) ------- Left Turn Major Road 5.50 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 Through Traffic Minor Road `5.50 Left Turn Minor Road r5.50 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 272 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1008 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1008 Prob. of Queue -Free State:----- --- ---------0_98 -------------------------- Step 2: LT from Major Street---- NB _____________ ____________________________ ___-----56 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 610 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 807 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 807 Prob. of Queue -Free State:- -------0_96 -------- ---------'------ --------------- Step 4: LT from Minor StreetWB----- ---EB -------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1392 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 244 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.96 Adjusted impedance Factor: 0.96 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.96 Movement Capacity: (pcph) ________________________________________________________ 235 ' Intersection Performance Summary Follow-up Avg. 95% Time (tf) Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach ---------- Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay 2.10 Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) 2.60 ________ ______ ______ ______ _______ _______ _____ _________ 3.30 EB L 31 235 17.6 0.5 C 3.40 12.4 EB R 19 1008 3.6 0.0 A NB L 31 807 4.6 0.0 A 0.2 Intersection Delay = 0.5 sec/veh APPENDIX E RUN? ROUTES COLLEGE 0 INIEROECII0401 It YCLE LEJMOINI 115 SYStEM OFFSEIi eANDWIDTH LEFTS 48'.;CS; RIOHfS 48 rer PERFORMANCE INDEXS 60 EFFICIENCYS 41eo ATTAINABILITYs 102 INTERFERENCES 14 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO. .......... DIAGRAM.......... DISTANCE SPEED RIOWSOWD ... READ DON LEFT RIGHT LEFT RIGHT I XX 700 0 40 40 2 730 700 40 40 3 490 730 40 40 +0 114 S} 4 290 490 40 40 S 1490 290 40 40 { 1730 1490 40 40 7 070 1730 40 40 0 1360 070 40 40 9 )OOOOOOOOOOO( 1940 1360 40 40 10 700 1940 40 40 at 0 700 40 40 NO. OFFSET .........TIME -LOCATION DIAGRAM.......... PHASE LENGTHS h LEFTBOUND ... READ UP •/ 2 3 4 3 6 7 0 1 3 2 0 X �9 36 too /�fly1+, - '. Rt•. 3 0 4 0 too too 3 0 { 47 X}DOOOOOOOOOOOOOI 1/1 o �7t ua.-.. ---- 40 n^ a 7 0. B 0 SC°,w/ 0 �.. 1p0 <G �" �_ - 9 92 X)O000000000( - (9 30 l0 0 ,.1� ! D at 30 ---__------'-' ---- a t1 LYE.. 43M--__M_ ------------------'-------''-_-_ - ----'- TIME SPACE DIAGRAM ROUTEt QoLLEOE COSIMENTI RW9 CYCLE LENGTH 110 SECONDSI SCALE (INCH-40% OF CYCLES I LINE- 263 FT rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr�rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Harmony Road t Mason Street 2 S. R R.E.A. s . v: S. R Fossil Creek Nursery 4 Fairway Lane 3 Fossil Creek Parkway 6 Buono 7 Smokey 9 Skyway 9 n Tr11by ) ........................rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrlrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr■rrrlrrrrrr I APPENDIX D u Level of Service for Signalized Intersections Level of service for signalized intersections is defined in terns of delay, which is a measure of driver discomfort and frustration, fuel consumption, and lost travel time. Specifically, level -of - service (LOS) criteria are stated in terns of file average stopped delay per vehicle for a 15-min analysis period. The criteria are given in Table 9-1. Delay may be measured in the Geld or estimated using procedures presented later in this chapter. Delay is a complex measure and is dependent upon a number of variables, including the quality of progression, the cycle length, t11e green ratio, and the v/c ratio for the lane group in question. LOS A describes operations with very low delay, up to 5 sec per vehicle. This level of service occurs when progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles, arrive during (lie green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. LOS B describes operations with delay greater than 5 and up to 15 sec per vehicle. This level generally occurs with good progres- sion, short cycle lengths, or both. More vehicles stop than with LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. LOS C describes operations with delay greater than 15 and up to 25 sec per vehicle. These higher delays may result from fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping Is significant at this level, though many still pass through the intersection without stopping. LOS D describes operations with delay greater than 25 and up to 40 sec per vehicle. At level D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. LOS E describes operations with delay greater than 40 and up to 60 sec per vehicle. This level is considered by many agencies to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. LOS F describes operations with delay in excess of 60 sec per vehicle. This level, considered to be unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with oversaturation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. It may also occur at high v/c ratios below 1.0 with many individual cycle failures. poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing causes to such delay levels. TABLE 9-1. LEVEL -OF -SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE STOPPED DELAY PER VEHICLE (SEC) A 55.0 B >5.0 and 5 15.0 C > 15.0 and 5 25.0 D >25.0 and 5 40.0 E >40.0 and 5 60.0 F >60.0 UNSIQNALIZEU INTERSECTIONS I I►Itrrsection7otnlDelay = (Vehicle 7otalDelay x Volume) _ ,Volume A Level -of --Service (Intersection) _ Level -of -Service Average Total Delay, sec/velt A <_5 b >5and <_10 C > 10and <_20 D >20and <_30 $ > 30 and <_ 45 r > 45 M F APPENDIX C I 11, M" M M M w w. m! M= W M M W M INi m m HCS: Unsionalized Intersections Release 2.ld Page Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hail Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-03378 ------------------------------------- Streets: (N-S) college (E-W) fairway Major Street Direction.... NS Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) S rep Analyst ................... mjd Date of Analysis.......... 7/14/9-1 Other Information...... ..am A 1997 short long Two-way Stop -controlled Intersection Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound i L T R 1 L T R L T R L T R ---- ----'--- --- ----I---- ---- -- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 > 1 1 Stop/Yield ; N; N; ; Volumes 4 799 7; 19 760 121 20 1 9; 15 1 26 PHF .9 .9 .9; .9 .9 .9i .9 .9 .9; .9 .9 .9 Grade 0 0 0 ; 0 MC's (%) i SU/RV`s (%); , CV's- (%) PCE's ;1.10 ;1.10 :1.10 1.10 1.10�:1.10 1.10 1.10 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) __________________________________________________________________ Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor- Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road '95.50 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road "5.50 3.40 HCS: Unsionalized Intersections Release 2.1d Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 444 422 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 825 346 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 825 846 Prob. of Oueue-Free State: 0.96 0.99 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 2: LT from Major Street S5 NB ________________________________________________________ Conflicting Flows: (vph) 896 857 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 566 594 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 566 594 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.96 0.99 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 3: TH from Minor Street W8 EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1770 1765 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 164 i65 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.95 0.95 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 156 157 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.99 0.99 ------------------------------ ----------------=------ Step 4: LT from Minor Street W6 EB ------------------------------------------------------ Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1757 i764 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 166 165 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: - 0.95 0.95 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.96 0.96 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.95 0.92 Movement Capacity: (pcph) -------------------------------------------------------- 157 152 intersection Performance Summary Avg. 9 5 % Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (van) _______ _____ (secjveh) --------- ________ ______ ______ ______ ES L 24 152 _______ 28.1 0.6 D EB T 1 157 23.1 0.0 D 20.8 E6 R ii 846 4.3 0.0 A WB L 19 157 > 157 26.3 0.4 D WB T 1 156 ? 12.8 W8 R 32 625 4.5 0.0 A NB L 4 594 6.1 0.0 8 0.0 36 L 23 566 6.6 0.0 6 0.2 intersection Delay = 0.8 sec/veh HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d Page 1 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Center For- Microcomputers in Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets (N-S) college_-_---- (E-W) fair -way Major Street Direction.... NS Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) S r cP Analyst ................... mjd 2 Date of Analysis.......... 7/14/97 Other Information........ pm 1997 short long am Two-way Stop -controlled Intersection Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound L T R L T R L T P L T R I- ---- ---- --- --- ---- ---- No_ Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 ; 0 > 1 1 Stop/Yield N! N! Volumes I 3 682 26: 25 461 8; 6 1 4� 1 1 13 PHF .9 .9 .9 .9 .9 .9; .9 .9 .9I .9 .9 .9 Grade ; 0 0 0 0 MC's (%) Cv's (%) PCE's ;1.iG 1.10 '1.10 1.10 1.10;1.10 1.10 1.10 _______________________________________________________________________ Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) __________________________________________________________________ Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 1.60 Through Traffic. Minor Road 95.50 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road -5.50 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.ld Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection ------- --------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 379 256 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 890 1027 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 890 1027 Prob. of Queue -Free State:_----_ -981_00 -------- __________________ Step 2: LT from Major Street-__-_- -----0_ _-___-- SBNB ____________________________ Conflicting Flows: (vph) -_-__- _-__-__-__- 787 521 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 648 900 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 648 900 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.95 1.00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 3: TH from Minor Street WS EB ________________________________________________________ Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1310 1330 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 269 263 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to impeding Movements 0.95 0.95 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 255 250 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 1.00 1.00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4: LT from Minor Street WB EB ________________________________________________________ Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1302 1307 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 268 266 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.95 0.95 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.96 0.96 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.95 0.94 Movement. Capacity: (pcph) ------------------------------------------- 256 ---------- 251 intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) ______ (veh) ______________ _____ (sec/veh) --------- ________ ______ ______ EB L 8 251 14.8 0.0 C EB T 1 250 14.5 0.0 C 10.7 EB R 4 1027 3.5 0.0 A WB L 1 256 > 255 14.2 0.0 C WB 1 1 255 > �.5 W8 R 15 890 4.1 0.0 A NB L I900 a.0 G.0 A 0.G SB L 31 648 5.8 0.0 B 0.3 Intersection Delay = 0.3 sec/ven � +� .,� � r �s r�■s r� � �r r � ire � � � r�r r r HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release-2_1d _Page 1 HCS: Unsipnalized Intersections Release 2.1d Center For Microcomputers In Transportation ----�------------- University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Worksheet for TWSC intersection Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 ---------------------------------------- -------- Ph: (904) 392-0378 Step 1: RT from Minor Street ________________-___________-_------________________--_- W6 EB Streets: (N-S) college (E-W) mason/palmer Conflicting Flows: (vph) 431 414 Major Street Direction.... NS Potential Capacity: (pcph) 837 854 Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) 5-r _ Movement Capacity: (pcph) 837 854 Analyst ........... ....... . 2 is P Prob. of Oueue-Free State: 0.75 0.92 7/1 Date of Analysis.......... 7/14/97 ________________________________________________________ Other Information......... am pm 1997 short long Step 2: LT from Major Street SB N6 Two-way Stop -controlled intersection ---------------------------------------- `-------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 863 937 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Potential Capacity: (pcph) 590 538 L T R; L T R L T R; L T R Movement Capacity: (pcph) 590 538 �---- ------------ --------;---- ------------ ---- ---- Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.96 0.81 No. Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1; 0 , 1 1; 0 > 1 1 _-__ ___---_-_-_ _________________________ Stop 'Yield N; N; Step 3: TH from Minor Street W8 EB Volumes 84 776 1; 21 745 98; 1 2 55; 1 1 169 -------------------------------------------------------- PHF .9 .9 .9; .9 .9 .9; .9 .9 .9; .9 .9 .9 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1915 1807 Grade ; 0 0 0 0 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 141 158 MC's (%) Capacity Adjustment Factor SU/RV's (%); ; due to impeding Movements 0.78 0.78 CV's (%) Movement Capacity: (pcph) 109 123 PCE's 11.10 ;1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10;1.10 1.10 1.10 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.99 0.98 _______________________________________________________________________ _----------------_-_-___-____-_-_---------------_------- Step 4: LT from Minor Street W6 EB ----------- -- --------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1808 1662 Adjustment Factors Potential Capacity: (pcph) 157 148 Major LT, Minor TH Vehicle Critical Follow-up Impedance Factor: 0.76 0.77 Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.82 0.82 ___________________________________________________--------------- Capacity Adjustment Factor Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 due to impeding Movements 0.75 0.62 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 118 92 Through Traffic Minor Road x5.50 3.30 -------------------------------------------------------- Left Turn Minor Road -5.50 3.40 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LDS Delay Movement ________ (pcph.) ______ (pcph) ______ (pcph)(sec/veh) ______ _______ (veh) _______ _____ (sec/veh) _________ EB L 1 92 > 111 33.3 0.0 E EB T 2 123 > 6.1 EB R 67 854 4.6 0.2 A W6 L 1 116 > 113 32.4 0.0 E WB T 1 109 > 6.0 WB p 207 837 5.7 1.1 8 N8 L 102 538 8.3 0.8 B 0.8 SB L 25 590 6.4 0.0 6 0.2 Intersection Delay = 1.1 ser_;veh Pape 2 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1d Page Center For, Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------- --------- Streets: (N-S) college (E-W) mason/palmer Major Street Direction._.. NS Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) S 7 GP Analyst_ ................ mjd Z Date of Analysis.......... 7/14/97 Other Information........ am pm 199i short long Two-way Stop -controlled In ersecti on Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound ' L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 1 2 1 i 2 1 0> 1 1 0 > 1 1 Stop/Yield N; N Volumes 55 658 6; 53 672 2?' 1 1 128; 1 19 PHF .9 .9 .9; .9 .9; .9 .9 .9 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC's (%) i SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's ;1.10 I1.10 :1.10 1.10 1.10'1.10 1.10 1.10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver cap (tg) Time (tf) __________________________________________________________________ Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.30 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road -5.50 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road *5.50 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized intersections Release 2.1d Worksheet for TWSC Intersection ------------------------- _______________________________ Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 366 374 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 903 895 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 903 895 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.97 0.83 LT from MajorStreet Step_-__ _ NB - - ________________________ Conflicting Flows: (vph) 736 777 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 688 656 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 688 655 Prop. of Queue -Free State: 0.91 0.90 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 3: TH from Minor Street WB EB ________________________________________________________ Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1626 i605 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 191 i96 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.81 0.81 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 155 159 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.99 0.99 ---------------------------------------------------- Step 4: LT from Minor Street WB ES - ---------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1598 1614 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 196 193 Major LT, Minor TH impedance Factor: 0.81 0.60 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.85 0.85 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.70 0.83 Movement Capacity: (pcph) ________________________________________________________ i38 160 intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pr_ph)(sec/veh) ______ (veh) __ ______ (sec/veh) _____ --------- ________ ______ ______ EB L 1 160 > 159 22.9 0.0 0 EB T 1 159 > 5.1 EB R 156 895 4.9 0.7 A WB L 1 138 > 149 24.7 0.0 D WB T 2 155 > 6.9 WS R 23 903 4.1 0.0 A NB L 67 656 6.1 0.3 B 0.5 36 L 65 688 5.6 0. B. D.4 intersection Delav = 0.9 secjveh Page 2 I 11, I APPENDIX B L 11 a I MATTHEW J. DELICH , P.E. 2272 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE LOVELAND, CO 80538 //T,�ABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS Ott,amr S U E l E G Date /4 9 Day a�.pA Y city Foe -r CO /- L l A-%� R = Ripm turn f S = niom L =ett Ium INTERSECTION OF Cot L e G E A V G AIUt,; AND PALH6�— MASOAI L eoLL6rl= TIME trom NORTH BEGINS R I S I L Total COLLG6F from SOUTH TOTAL R S I L I Total Soufn PALr1,rG� A4ASAA) TEntri OTAL TOTAL Wm ALL from EAST horn WEST I R I S I L I Total II R I S I L I Totai 73o II/o 1 lqql 13 /63 11 o isl 191 bo1 z3 I a o I o z. 11,251 o 1 01 as II 27 I 50 745-1y 1.7e8 13 aa511 3 35 11?1395100 11.21 0 l0 1 jIq?0 1 014q 11 51 1 65 goo 11 7 1 170 201 197 11/ a31 1,201 25J-114 4 7 II 7 I 1 1 0 I g, 11 aol 0 1 0 1 ab 11 34 IIq SIS II/o 1 ISDI J1 /67 11 a 1 ado 91 -1o1 7 1 8 1 1 1 1 1 /o IIa81 0 1 1 1 a 1 3 I II I I II I 1 II I I I I I I I N II 730-8Z!12 714 7 z s317sz1 1a 11071,155111s79 1,707 11 /ql z I 1 1 az 111281 0 1 / 1 /.29 11 /5'1 11,204.0 I I I I I I I I N I I I I II I I II II II I I I I I 1 II I I I II I I I I II II I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I II II II I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I II II I I I i I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I N I I I I I I I I I II I I N I I I I I I I II 430 11Z41295 1 51324-I0 1 z & I 119 1 ?_ 2 (o 16 10 11431 0 101 451119 7-1 0 1 21 1 I 4 445 11413a1 713GZ10 3351 1I35Z1714- 11371 0 10 1 39 11 9 1 0 1 I 1 12 I 49 II 63 500 2(n1z99 4 32 I I 5(6012l013g3 N712 1371 0 10 1 3-71 1 O 10 1 19 S 7;s 615 11341 306 51345 0 13351zz136717 02 115a1 I I I 5Z 81 O O I 8 II 60 11762- I I I I I I N I I I I I II 4-74-5JI8I1241 Z11131oO N 1031841137617136 11o91 1 11 17 I 6'51 2 I I 1 5-8 Z2-9 112967 MATTHEW J. DELICH , P.E. 2272 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE LOVELAND, CO 80538 TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS ottaervar 15TE✓E_ Date '/1141Day MoaMArl City FORT' COa L/ Ll R = RIQht tarit COLLEGt /}UFUUE FArewAY S=Stniom INTERSECTION OF AND L a Lett turn BTIE EGINSS CtoLLF'eE E OTACoat-EG/ from SOUTH North R S I L I TOW Soutn P/1/CWA FA IecJg TOTAL�I TOTAL ALL tram NORTH tram EAST1 11 from WEST R I S I L I Toni I I R I S I L I Tow II R I S I L I Total 30 Ilsl I (0I 13- I I I N 11 1 0 7q TII/I ISI Is 101 1 11 9lolo1 0131 3 1 4 II 4a Ilal al 11/ lal 1 II31 0 s II II o 1/1 2- 1 s II 7l' II of G I II 51 1 0 1 1 II &1 1 o 1 o I II o I o 1 o I p II q 11 II I I I 1 1 1 N 11 1 1 I 11 1 1 1 II II 30 31 II/31 0 1 1 14 II t11 1 to I /0 11 ay 11 I I I I I I I 1 II I I I II II I I I I I N II I I I II I I i I II I I I I I I 1 11 I I I I I I II II It i I I I I N I I II I I II II I I I I I I p I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I t I I I II I I II I I I I I I I I II </30 1 31 1 S1 5 111 1 I I 131 11 4yS I I I/ to N I l o I II3 1 0 10 S I /H 11 meal 3 10 Izl N I I oI I�IaI IN II 5 1 sys ISI 3 1 1 1 sl o Iz. I d o l I S II /S II I I I 1 I I I I I I II f3o53 /zI /9I ? `lI11a41 0 1131 41 119I ao a9 11 70 0 APPENDIX A Il k 11 is 1. ' ends daily. The future development to the south is expected to generate 2850 trip ends daily. - Based upon current traffic volumes and existing geometry/ control, the College/Fairway and College/Mason/Palmer intersections operate acceptably, except for minor street left turns/throughs at L one intersection in the afternoon peak hour. These movements operate at level of service E. This type of operation is typical at stop sign controlled intersections along arterial streets. - By 1998, given development of the proposed Spradley-Barr site, the College/Access intersection will operate similarly as it does today. A traffic signal may be warranted at the College/ Fairway intersection as delays and traffic volumes increase. The City should monitor traffic to determine when signal warrants are met. This signal can fit into signal progression schemes along ,South College Avenue and is identified in the "South College Avenue Access Control Plan." - By 2015, with the projected traffic volumes, South College Avenue will operate acceptably with a functional seven lane cross section. The signalized College/Fairway intersection will operate acceptably. As a limited turn intersection, the site access will operate acceptably. u 1 11 7 I 11 ' Control Plan (SCAACP). In the short range future, this access is intended to be a full movement intersection. The SCAACP calls for this intersection to be a right-in/right-out/left-in intersection. As indicated above, this intersection will not operate differently than other stop sign controlled intersections along arterial streets. Given the difficulty in restricting the left -turn egress, L it is appropriate that this intersection function as a full movement intersection until such time that a center median is constructed in this area, This is consistent with recommendations contained in the SCAACP. In the short range future, a southbound right -turn deceleration lane and a northbound left -turn deceleration/storage lane are required. The southbound deceleration lane should be 315 feet long, given the proposed 30 foot curb radius at the proposed access. The taper should be at a 15:1 ratio. Since there is a continuous shoulder lane on South College Avenue south of Mason Street, it is appropriate that this deceleration lane be a continuous lane between Mason Street and this access. This is consistent with numerous other accesses along South College Avenue. The northbound left -turn lane should be 335 feet (deceleration plus storage). Since there is already a painted two-way left -turn lane on South College Avenue, this left -turn lane can be accommodated in this area. This length will not impact the southbound left -turn lane at Fairway Lane. In the long range future, it is expected that South College Avenue will have three through lanes in each direction. With this cross section, the SHAC does not require right -turn deceleration lanes unless this is considered to be a high volume access or specific geometric safety problem exists. The forecasted DHV turning movement is 110 vehicles. This is an average of one vehicle every 33 seconds. This is not considered to be a high volume. The access will be 36 feet wide. Since the left -turn egress has been eliminated, the entering lane (westbound) can be oversized to accommodate a higher speed turn. No geometric safety problems are anticipated. V. CONCLUSIONS This study assessed the traffic impacts of the development of Spradley-Barr and other uses on the short range (1998) and long range (2015) street system in the vicinity of the proposed development. As a result of this analysis, the following is concluded: - The completion of the Spradley-Barr site and neighboring land uses is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. The Spradley-Barr site is expected to generate approximately 2930 trip 6 TABLE 3 Short Range Peak Hour Intersection Operation With Spradley-Barr Only Intersection College/Access (stop sign) EB LT EB RT NB LT Overall TABLE 4 Level of Service AM PM C F A A A B A A Long Range Peak Hour Intersection Operation Level of Service Intersection AM PM College/Access (stop sign) EB RT A A NB LT B C Overall A A College/Fairway (signal) B C .I Signal Progression Signal progression was not evaluated since the only signal that is expected is at the College/Fairway intersection. Appendix D contains a copy of the signal progression from the "South College Avenue Access Control Study." This analysis indicates that a signal at this intersection will not negatively impact the progression along College Avenue. Operation Analysis Capacity analyses were performed on the College/Access intersection, which serves the Spradley-Barr site for both the short range (1998) and long range (2015) traffic conditions. The short range analysis considered this to be a full movement intersection. In the long range future, this access was assumed to be right-in/right-out/left-in as shown in the "South College Avenue Access Control Plan." Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 6, the College/ Access intersection operates in the short range future, with the Spradley-Barr site only, as indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix E. With existing stop sign control, the left -turn exits from the site to College during the peak hours operate at level of service F in the afternoon peak hour. This is normal at stop sign controlled intersections along arterial streets. Overall, this intersection will operate acceptably. Gaps in the traffic will be caused by the queuing effect of traffic signals to the north and south. These gaps are not considered in the analysis procedure, but tend to improve the intersection operation. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 7, the College/ Access and College/Fairway intersections operate in the long range future as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix F. In order to achieve acceptable operation during the afternoon peak hour, College Avenue should have a functional seven lane cross section. As a right-in/right-out/left-in access, the site intersection will operate acceptably. The signalized operations analysis indicates that the minor street green time is less than the 34 seconds shown on the progression diagram in Appendix D. This indicates that this signal will not cause a negative impact on signal progression on this segment of College Avenue. State Highway Access Code/South College Avenue Access Control Plan This access falls under the criteria contained in the State Highway Access Code (SHAC) and the South College Avenue Access 5 N r��rr�rrr�rr�ir�r� ` a0 20/85 LOLO �c o \n o� Ln rn 0 r, NCO \o \ �100/150 N n O �— 20 30 / r--40/100 FAIRWAY ) } I 85/190 --#f 20/30 - o o to 30/60- 4 i! 'tl vVi\o o -- n n AM / PM Rounded to the Nearest 5 Vehicles. LONG RANGE TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 7 I �r77CN ��rrr�rr�rr��r Site r LOm 25/70 -1 15/30 SHORT RANGE TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC I N AM / PM Rounded to the Nearest 5 Vehicles. Figure 6 L $It@ u �i i�� 25/66 --'4f 11 /29 ---) W a W J J O U D, Lo m) 11 /29 —� m N 25/66 W a W J J O U YA 4- N rn L N FAIRWAY SHORT RANGE AM / PM LONG RANGE SPRADLEY-BARR SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 4 N 9/55 - W C7 W J J O U E6 15/84 FAIRWAY N4 LONG RANGE AM / PM PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 5 Trip Distribution Directional distributions were determined for the Spradley- Barr site. This distribution considered trip attractions and productions in the Fort Collins area, and existing travel patterns in the area. The trip distribution used in subsequent analyses was 70% to/from the north and 30% to/from the south. Trip Assignment Trip assignment is how the generated and distributed trips are expected to be loaded on the street system. The assigned trips are the resultant of the trip distribution process. Figures 4 and 5 show the assignment of the generated trips from the Spradley-Barr site and from the property to the south considered in this study. Figure 6 shows the morning and afternoon weekday peak hour traffic from only the Spradley-Barr site plus background traffic in the short range future (1998). Background traffic on College Avenue for 1998 was determined by factoring the 1997 traffic by 1.7 percent per year. This factor was determined based upon historic traffic growth and information contained in the "North Front Range Regional Transportation Plan," October 1994. Figure 7 shows the morning and afternoon weekday peak hour traffic from the Spradley- Barr site and the future development to the south in the long range future (2015). Background traffic for the year 2015 was determined using other traffic studies for projects in this area, the "North Front Range Regional Transportation Plan," and the "South College Avenue Access Control Study." The site access and the College/ Fairway intersection will not be the only accesses to this area. The forecasts shown in Figure 7 give a reasonable representation of nearby development. When actual development proposals are put forth for other properties, additional traffic studies should be performed. IV. TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND ANALYSIS Signal Warrants As a matter of policy, traffic signals are not installed at any location unless warrants are met according to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The "South College Avenue Access Control Plan" indicates that the College/Fairway intersection is a potential signalized intersection. In the short range forecast, the College/Fairway intersection is not shown, since it is not known whether the Fossil Boulevard connection will be made. However, based upon the cited traffic study, it is likely that one or more signal warrants will be met at this intersection. The City should monitor this intersection to determine whether any warrants are met. The long range analysis assumed signal control. 4 44Z NO SCALE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD SITE PLAN Figure 3 TABLE 1 1997 Peak Hour Intersection Operation Level of Service Intersection AM PM College/Mason/Palmer (stop sign) EB LT/T D E EB RT A A WB LT/T D E WB RT A B NB LT B B SB LT B B Overall A A College/Fairway (stop sign) EB LT C D EB T C D EB RT A A WB LT/T C D WB RT A A NB LT A B SB LT B B Overall A A TABLE 2 Trip Generation Daily A.M. Peak P.M. Peak Land Use Trips Trips Trips Trips Trips in out in out Spradley-Barr - 61.14 KSF 2930 84 36 65 95 (Rate) (47.91) (1.38) (0.59) (1.07) (1.55) Future Building to the south - 70.0 KSF 2850 41 24 139 139 (Rate) (40.67) (0.58) (0.34) (1.99) (1.99) TOTAL 5780 125 60 204 234 Existing Operation Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 2 and the existing stop sign control, the College/Palmer/Mason and College/Fairway intersections operate as indicated in Table 1. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix B. Appendix C describes level of service for unsignalized and signalized intersections as provided in the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual. The College/Palmer/Mason intersection was analyzed as a full movement intersection, even though it has restricted movements. During traffic counting, some illegal turns were observed. Minor street left turns/throughs operate at level of service E during the afternoon peak hour. Acceptable level of service is defined as level of service D or better. During the traffic counting, it was noted that many vehicles made these left turns/throughs in a two step maneuver, utilizing the wide median on College Avenue as a refuge area. There were a few vehicles that waited more than a minute for an acceptable gap in the South College Avenue traffic. However, there were also some periods when more than one vehicle could exit due to the gaps created by the queuing effect of the signals on College Avenue. The level of service shown in Table 1 is typical for minor street left turns/throughs to arterial streets. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Spradley-Barr is an automobile dealership proposed to be relocated to the former REA property, west of South College Avenue in Fort Collins. Figure 3 shows a schematic of the site plan of Spradley-Barr and some adjacent properties. The site plan shows the Spradley-Barr building at 61,000+ square feet. Land on the south side of the access driveway was the site of the Fossil Creek Nursery. It is expected that this area would eventually have some types of commercial use. It is expected that the access driveway would connect to Fossil Boulevard. The location and alignment should be determined when the property to the south is redeveloped. Trip Generation Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this upon the existing and proposed street system. A compilation of trip generation information was prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers and is presented in Trip Generation, 5th Edition. This document was used to project trips that would be generated by the proposed uses at this site. Table 2 shows the expected trip generation on a weekday and a weekday peak hour basis. The land to the south was assumed to be commercial/retail. Land uses to the south were only considered in the long range analysis. N N � \CV '9s►0\N .0 19/169 04 9rl f 2 1 %1/1r PALMER 128%5 —� � � aO Ln \ to rn Site I w c7 W J J O U W AM / PM [CALCULATED] N <o — 13/26 m `.N � o 0 r--1/15 FAIRWAY 6/20 0/O� 4/9� \N "'�to N co r7 u 1, RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 2 Roads The primary streets near the Spradley-Barr are College Avenue and Palmer Drive/Mason Street. College Avenue (U.S. 287) is adjacent to the site on the east. It is a north -south street designated as a major arterial on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Its existing cross section in this area has two 12 foot lanes in each direction. There are designated left -turn lanes at appropriate locations or two way continuous left -turn lanes. There is a shoulder area between the right through lane and the curb and gutter that serves as a right -turn auxiliary lane at various access points. The posted speed limit is.40 mph on College Avenue in this area. Sight distance is generally not a problem. Currently, intersections along South College Avenue are signalized at Harmony Road to the north and Fossil Creek Parkway to the south. According to the "South College Avenue Access Control Plan," a signal is expected at Fairway Lane in the future. Palmer Drive provides access from College Avenue (to the east) to the commercial uses along South College Avenue (via a frontage road) and the residential area known as Fairway Estates. Mason Street serves the Arbor Plaza Shopping Center. West of College Avenue, Mason Street curves north, intersecting with Harmony Road at a signalized intersection. The "South College Access Control Plan" indicates that the College/Palmer/Mason intersection should have restricted turning movements. Fossil Boulevard is a two lane street located approximately 700 feet west of South College Avenue. It is a north -south street that is only 400-500 feet long. It currently exists for a short distance near Fairway Lane to the south. Fossil Boulevard will serve as a recirculation street for this area of South College Avenue. It is intended to function similarly to the way Mason Street does to the north of Harmony Road. It will serve properties to the north and to the south. It is expected that Fossil Boulevard will connect to the College/Fossil Creek Parkway intersection, also. The future alignment and other details concerning Fossil Boulevard are beyond the scope of this study. Existing Traffic Weekday morning and afternoon peak hour traffic data was obtained in July 1997 at the College/Palmer/Mason amd College/ Fairway intersections. The peak hour turning movements are shown in Figure 2. All raw traffic data is presented in Appendix A. Since the actual site has construction traffic utilizing the access, these intersections were deemed to be the most appropriate ones to count. 2 6 N BARR PORTNER RES jib i" = 2000' SITE LOCATION Figure 1 d �I I. INTRODUCTION This traffic impact study addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near the proposed relocation of the Spradley-Barr Automobile Dealership known hereinafter as Spradley- Barr. It is proposed to be located south of Harmony Road and west of South College Avenue in Fort Collins, Colorado. The site is currently in unincorporated Larimer County. During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project planning consultant (Cityscape Urban Design), the project engineering consultant (Sear -Brown Group), the Larimer County Planning Department, the Larimer County Engineering Department, and CDOT. This study conforms with typical traffic 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. - Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses on key intersections. - Analyze signal warrants. - Analyze signal progression. The "George T. Sanders Store PUD Site Access Study," July 1995, was reviewed as part of this analysis. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location of the Spradley-Barr site is shown in Figure 1. Since the impact in the short range, as well as, the long range is of concern, it is important that a thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented. Land Use In the recent past, the City of Fort Collins has tended to grow predominantly to the south. Development along South College Avenue is expected to continue. This is evidenced by a number of retail developments (e.g. Harmony Towne Center) and residential developments (e.g. Huntington Hills and Ridgewood Hills). The center of Fort Collins lies to the north of the Spradley-Barr site. The adjacent land uses near the Spradley-Barr site are as follows: 1) to the west is the Burlington Northern Railroad track; 2) to the north is the Arbor Plaza Shopping Center; 3) to the east are commercial uses along College Avenue; and 4) to the south is vacant land, formerly the Fossil Creek Nursery. 1 SPRADLEY-BARR AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP SITE ACCESS STUDY LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO JULY 1997 0 Prepared for: Spradley-Barr 2849 South College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80525 Prepared by: MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E. 2272 Glen Haven Drive Loveland, CO 60538 Phone: 970-669-2061 FAX: 970-669-5034