HomeMy WebLinkAboutASPEN HEIGHTS STUDENT HOUSING - PDP - PDP110018 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - TRAFFIC STUDYDELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 1
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................................................................................... 2
Land Use......................................................................................................................... 2
Streets............................................................................................................................. 2
Existing Traffic................................................................................................................. 6
Existing Operation........................................................................................................... 6
Pederstrian Facilities..................................................................................................... 10
Bicycle Facilities............................................................................................................ 10
Transit Facilities ............................................................................................................ 10
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT............................................................................... 11
Trip Generation ............................................................................................................. 11
Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................. 13
Background Traffic Projections ..................................................................................... 13
Trip Assignment ............................................................................................................ 13
Signal Warrants............................................................................................................. 22
Operation Analysis ........................................................................................................ 22
Geometry ...................................................................................................................... 32
Pedestrian Level of Service........................................................................................... 32
Bicycle Level of Service ................................................................................................ 35
Transit Level of Service................................................................................................. 35
IV. CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................... 36
LIST OF TABLES
1. Current Peak Hour Operation.................................................................................... 9
2. Trip Generation ....................................................................................................... 11
3. Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Operation .......................................... 23
4. Long Range (2030) Background Peak Hour Operation........................................... 25
5. Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Operation ..................................................... 27
6. Long Range (2030) Total Peak Hour Operation...................................................... 29
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Site Location ............................................................................................................. 3
2. Existing Geometry..................................................................................................... 4
3. Recent Peak Hour Traffic .......................................................................................... 7
4. Balanced Recent Peak Hour Traffic .......................................................................... 8
5. Site Plan.................................................................................................................. 12
6. Trip Distribution ....................................................................................................... 14
7. Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Traffic................................................ 15
8. Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Traffic with Redwood Connection ..... 16
9. Long Range (2030) Background Peak Hour Traffic................................................. 17
10. Short Range (2016) Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic........................................... 18
11. Long Range (2030) Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic............................................ 19
12. Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Traffic ........................................................... 20
13. Long Range (2030) Total Peak Hour Traffic............................................................ 21
14. Short Range (2016) Geometry ................................................................................ 33
15. Long Range (2030) Geometry................................................................................. 34
APPENDICES
A. Base Assumptions Form
B. Peak Hour Traffic Counts
C. Current Peak Hour Operation/Level of Service Descriptions/Fort Collins Motor
Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections)
D. Signal Warrants
E. Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Operation
F. Long Range (2030) Background Peak Hour Operation
G. Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Operation
H. Long Range (2030) Total Peak Hour Operation
I. Pedestrian/Bicycle Level of Service Worksheets
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 1
I. INTRODUCTION
This transportation impact study (TIS) addresses the capacity, geometric, and
control requirements at and near the proposed Aspen Heights development. The
proposed Aspen Heights site is located in the southwest quadrant of the Conifer/Redwood
intersection in Fort Collins, Colorado. Aspen Heights is a residential development that is
geared toward college students.
During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the owner
(Aspen Heights), the project engineer (Owen Consulting Group), the project planning
consultant (The Frederickson Group), Fort Collins Traffic Engineering, and Fort Collins
Transportation Planning. The Transportation Impact Study Base Assumptions form and
related documents are provided in Appendix A. This study generally conforms to the
format set forth in the Fort Collins TIS Guidelines in the “Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards” (LCUASS). Due to the trip generation, this is a full transportation impact study.
The study involved the following steps:
- Collect physical, traffic, and development data;
- Perform trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment;
- Determine peak hour traffic volumes;
- Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses on key intersections;
- Analyze signal warrants;
- Conduct level of service evaluation of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes of
transportation
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 2
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The location of the Aspen Heights development is shown in Figure 1. It is
important that a thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented.
Land Use
Land uses in the area are primarily residential and commercial. There are
residential uses to the south, east, and northeast of the site. There are commercial
uses to the north and west of the site. The proposed Aspen Heights site is currently
vacant. The center of Fort Collins lies to the south of the proposed Aspen Heights.
Streets
The primary streets near the Aspen Heights site are North College Avenue,
Hickory Street, Conifer Street, Redwood Street, Vine Drive, Blue Spruce Drive, and
Linden Street. Figure 2 shows a schematic of the existing geometry at the key
intersections. North College Avenue is to the west of the proposed Aspen Heights site.
It is a north-south street classified as a four-lane arterial on the Fort Collins Master
Street Plan. Currently, North College Avenue has a four-lane cross section in this area.
At the N. College/Hickory intersection, North College Avenue has a northbound left-turn
lane and two through lanes in each direction. At the N. College/Conifer intersection,
North College Avenue has a southbound left-turn lane and two through lanes in each
direction, and a northbound right-turn lane. At the N. College/Vine intersection, North
College Avenue has a southbound left-turn lane, two through lanes in each direction,
and a northbound right-turn lane. The N. College/Conifer, N. College/Hickory, and N.
College/Vine intersections have signal control. The posted speed limit in this area of
North College Avenue is 40 mph, north of Woodlawn Drive, and 35 mph, south of
Woodlawn Drive.
Hickory Street is to the northwest of the proposed Aspen Heights site. It is an
east-west street classified as a two-lane collector according to the Fort Collins Master
Street plan. Hickory Street only has a west leg at the N. College/Hickory intersection.
Currently, Hickory Street has a two-lane cross section. At the N. College/Hickory
intersection, Hickory Street has eastbound left-turn and right-turn lanes. The existing
speed limit in this area of Hickory Street is 25 mph.
Conifer Street is to the north of (adjacent to) the proposed Aspen Heights site. It
is an east-west street classified as a two-lane collector according to the Fort Collins
Master Street plan. Conifer Street only has an east leg at the N. College/Conifer
intersection. Currently, Conifer Street has a two-lane cross section with parking on both
sides of the street. At the N. College/Conifer intersection, Conifer Street has westbound
dual left-turn lanes and a westbound right-turn lane. At the Conifer/Blue Spruce
Vine
College
Conifer
Hickory
Redwood
Jerome
Blue Spruce
Future Vine
Woodlawn
SCALE: 1"=1000'
SITE LOCATION Figure 1
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 3
Conifer Street
EXISTING GEOMETRY Figure 2
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 4
Vine Drive
College Avenue
Blue Spruce Drive
Redwood Street
Linden
Street
Redwood Street
- Denotes Lane
Hickory
Street
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 5
intersection, Conifer Street has all movements combined into a single lane. At the
Conifer/Redwood intersection, Conifer Street has all movements combined into a single
lane. The Conifer/Blue Spruce and Conifer/Redwood intersections are stop sign
controlled on Blue Spruce Drive and Redwood Street, respectively. The existing speed
limit in this area of Conifer Street is 30 mph.
Vine Drive is south of the proposed Aspen Heights site. It is an east-west street
classified as a two-lane arterial street according to the Fort Collins Master Street Plan.
Vine Drive only has an east leg at the N. College/Vine intersection. Currently, Vine
Drive has a two-lane cross section. At the N. College/Vine intersection, Vine Drive has
separate westbound left-turn and right-turn lanes. At the Vine/Redwood-Linden
intersection, Vine Drive has all movements combined into the single lane. The
Vine/Redwood-Linden intersection is stop sign controlled on Redwood Street and
Linden Street. The posted speed limit in this area of Vine Drive is 35 mph.
Redwood Street is east of (adjacent to) the proposed Aspen Heights site. It is a
north-south street designated as a two-lane collector street according to the Fort Collins
Master Street Plan. Currently, Redwood Street has a two-lane cross section with
parking on both sides of the street. Redwood Street has a gap between Cajetan Street
and to a point approximately 575 feet south of Lupine Drive. At the Conifer/Redwood
intersection, Redwood Street has all movements combined into a single lane. At the
Vine/Redwood-Linden intersection, Redwood Street has all movements combined into a
single lane. The posted speed limit of Redwood Street is 30 mph from Vine Drive to
Cajetan Street; 25 mph north of Conifer Street; and there is no posted limit, south of
Conifer Street.
Linden Street is south of the proposed Aspen Heights site. It is a north-south
street designated as a two-lane collector street according to the Fort Collins Master
Street Plan. Currently, Linden Street has a two-lane cross section with parking on both
sides of the street. Linden Street is the south leg of the Vine/Redwood-Linden
intersection. At the Vine/Redwood-Linden intersection, Linden Street has all
movements combined into a single lane. The posted speed limit in this area of Linden
Street is 25 mph.
Blue Spruce Drive is north of the proposed Aspen Heights site. It is a north-
south street classified as a local street on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan.
Currently, Blue Spruce Drive has a two-lane cross section with parking on both sides of
the street. Blue Spruce Drive only has a north leg at the Conifer/Blue Spruce
intersection. At the Conifer/Blue Spruce intersection, Blue Spruce Drive has all
movements combined into a single lane. The posted speed limit in this area of Blue
Spruce Drive is 25 mph.
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 6
Existing Traffic
Recent morning and afternoon peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3.
The traffic counts at the N. College/Hickory, N. College/Conifer were obtained in April
2011 by the City of Fort Collins. The traffic counts at the N. College/Vine intersection
were obtained in May 2011 by the City of Fort Collins. The traffic counts at the
Conifer/Blue Spruce and Conifer/Redwood intersections were obtained in October
2011. Due to construction on Linden Street, recent traffic counts at the Vine/Redwood-
Linden intersection were not obtained. The latest traffic counts at the Vine/Redwood-
Linden intersection are from February 2008. Raw traffic count data are provided in
Appendix B. Since the count at the Vine/Redwood-Linden intersection is more than a
year old, the Year 2010 Total Traffic projection in the “Rocky Mountain Innovation
Initiative TIS,“ dated July 2009 was used as the recent traffic with some adjustment to
the north leg based on the current number of homes built in the existing development.
Since the counts were done on different days, the counts were adjusted/balanced
between the Conifer/Blue Spruce and Conifer/Redwood intersections. The
adjusted/balanced recent peak hour traffic is shown in Figure 4.
Existing Operation
The N. College/Hickory, N. College/Conifer, N. College/Vine, Conifer/Blue
Spruce, Conifer/Redwood, and Vine/Redwood-Linden intersections were evaluated
using techniques provided in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. Using the morning
and afternoon peak hour traffic shown in Figure 4, the peak hour operation is shown in
Table 1. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix C. The key intersections are
currently operating acceptably with existing control and geometry in the morning and
afternoon peak hours. A description of level of service for signalized and unsignalized
intersections from the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual and a table showing the Fort
Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections) are also provided in Appendix C.
This site is in an area termed “commercial corridor.” In areas termed “commercial
corridors,” acceptable overall operation at signalized intersections during the peak hours
is defined as level of service D or better. At signalized intersections, acceptable
operation of any leg and any movement is level of service E. At stop sign controlled
intersections, acceptable level of service is listed as “not applicable” (N/A). In past
transportation impact studies, “not applicable” has been interpreted as level of service
E. In urban and urbanizing corridors, delays commensurate with level of service E and
F are typical for minor street left-turns at stop sign controlled intersections along arterial
streets during the peak hours. These delays are generally accepted by the traveling
public.
Conifer Street
AM/PM
RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 3
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 7
847/796
29/35
493/978
98/95
30/77
106/182
840/839
127/175
542/936
76/153
89/153
114/107
Vine Drive
College Avenue
Blue Spruce Drive
Redwood Street
Linden
Street
Redwood Street 7/1
2/2
4/4
16/5
0/3
14/8
5/14
68/205
2/6
8/0
192/145
1/5
42/107
37/107
106/52
106/97
67/33
32/113
61/77
466/989
34/55
810/755
38/50
67/79
10/44
2/5
16/64
4/1
4/3
2/1
1/0
156/207
28/30
0/8
171/175
Conifer Street
AM/PM
BALANCED RECENT
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 4
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 8
847/796
29/35
493/978
98/95
30/77
106/182
840/839
127/175
542/936
76/153
89/153
114/107
Vine Drive
College Avenue
Blue Spruce Drive
Redwood Street
Linden
Street
Redwood Street 7/1
2/2
4/4
16/5
0/3
14/8
5/14
65/203
2/6
8/0
191/144
1/5
42/107
39/108
107/52
107/98
67/33
33/115
61/77
466/989
34/55
810/755
38/50
67/79
41/49
2/5
20/70
4/1
4/3
2/1
1/0
161/218
33/49
0/8
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 9
TABLE 1
Current Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT C C
EB RT C C
EB APPROACH C C
NB LT A A
NB T A A
NB APPROACH A A
SB T/RT A A
N. College/Hickory
(signal)
OVERALL A A
WB LT C C
WB RT C C
WB APPROACH C C
NB T A A
NB RT A A
NB APPROACH A A
SB LT A A
SB T A A
SB APPROACH A A
N. College/Conifer
(signal)
OVERALL A A
WB LT C D
WB RT C C
WB APPROACH C C
NB T A A
NB RT A A
NB APPROACH A A
SB LT A A
SB T A A
SB APPROACH A A
N. College/Vine
(signal)
OVERALL A A
Conifer/Blue Spruce EB LT/T A A
(stop sign) SB LT/RT B B
EB LT/T/RT A A
WB LT/T/RT A A
NB LT/T/RT B B
Conifer/Redwood
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B B
EB LT/T/RT A A
WB LT/T/RT A A
NB LT/T/RT B B
Vine/Redwood-Linden
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B B
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 10
Pedestrian Facilities
There are sidewalks along Redwood Street, south of Cajetan Drive and north of
Conifer Drive. There is a sidewalk along the east side of Redwood Street, south of
Conifer Drive. There is a pedestrian/bicycle trail through the gap in Redwood Street.
Sidewalks along North College Avenue are sporadic. There are no sidewalks along
either side of Vine Drive and Conifer Drive. It is expected that as properties in this area
are developed or redeveloped, sidewalks will be installed as part of the street/property
infrastructure.
Bicycle Facilities
Bicycle lanes exist along Vine Drive, Redwood Drive, Conifer Drive, and Blue
Spruce Drive, within the study area. There is a pedestrian/bicycle trail through the gap
in Redwood Street. On North College Avenue, bicycles utilize the shoulders.
Transit Facilities
Currently, this area of Fort Collins is served by Transfort Routes 8 and 81. There
are bus stops near the Conifer/Blue Spruce, Conifer/Redwood, and Vine/Redwood
intersections. There are also bus stops along North College Avenue.
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 11
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The Aspen Heights is a residential development with 190 units with a total of 716
bedrooms. Aspen Heights is a unique student housing concept placing residents in a
house, not an apartment. It creates a secure, all-student neighborhood, with on-site
amenities. Figure 5 shows a site plan of the Aspen Heights. The short range analysis
(Year 2016) includes full development of the Aspen Heights and an appropriate
increase in background traffic due to normal growth and other potential developments in
the area. This development will build the connection of Redwood Street and the future
realigned Vine Drive from the west site access (across from future Blondel Street) to
Redwood Street. The connection of future Blondel Street to the future realigned Vine
Drive is expected to be completed in the short range future. However, it was assumed
that the use of Blondel Street would be nominal in the short range future due to
convenient existing direct assess to Jerome Street and Redwood Street for the Old
Town North development. The long range analysis year is considered to be 2030 and
reflects the future realigned Vine Drive from North College Avenue to the existing Vine
Drive to the east. The site plan shows that there will be three accesses to the site: 1)
one to Conifer Street; 2) one to Redwood Street; and 3) one to the future realigned Vine
Drive.
Trip Generation
Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this
upon the existing and proposed street system. Even though many of the pads will be
houses, it is expected that they will have a trip generation similar to apartments since they
are geared toward student housing. Trip generation for Apartment (Code 220) with
persons (beds) as the trip generation variable in Trip Generation, 8th Edition, ITE was used
to estimate the trips that would be generated by the proposed Aspen Heights. A trip is
defined as a one-way vehicle movement from origin to destination. The calculated trip
generation is 2420 daily trip ends; 201 morning peak hour trip ends; and 286 afternoon
peak hour trip ends. It is assumed and agreed to in the scoping meeting that 10 percent of
the residents will use alternative modes. In all likelihood it will be greater than 10 percent.
Alternative modes include bike and Transfort. The adjusted trip generation of the Aspen
Heights development resulted in 2180 daily trip ends, 181 morning peak hour trip ends,
and 257 afternoon peak hour trip ends. Table 2 shows the expected trip generation on a
daily and peak hour basis.
TABLE 2
Trip Generation
Code Use Size AWDTE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Trips Rate In Rate Out Rate In Rate Out
220 Apartments 716 Persons EQ. 2420 0.06 43 0.22 158 0.26 186 0.14 100
Less 10% Alternative Modes 240 4 16 19 10
Total 2180 39 142 167 90
SCALE 1"=200'
SITE PLAN Figure 5
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 12
DETENTION POND
REC. NO. 20100038640
VINE DRIVE
Future Vine Drive
Redwood Street
Blondel Street Blue Spruce Drive
Conifer Street
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 13
Trip Distribution
Trip distribution for the Aspen Heights was based on existing/future travel
patterns, land uses in the area, consideration of trip attractions/productions in the area,
and engineering judgment. Figure 6 shows the trip distribution for the short range
(2016) and long range (2030) analysis futures. The trip distribution was agreed to by
City of Fort Collins staff in the scoping meeting.
Background Traffic Projections
Figure 7 shows the short range (2016) background peak hour traffic projections.
These forecasts assume that the current street network exists in this area. Background
traffic projections for the short range were obtained by reviewing the North Front Range
Regional Transportation Plan, CDOT growth factors, U.S.287/S.H.14 Access
Management Report, and various traffic studies prepared for this area of Fort Collins.
The other traffic studies in this area are the Jax Mercantile Expansion, CSU Engines &
Energy Conversion Lab Expansion, Union Place, and Rocky Mountain Innovation
Initiative. The CDOT/North College Improvement Plan has a growth factor for this area
of North College Avenue of 1.7 percent per year. Based upon these sources, it was
determined that the traffic volumes would increase by approximately 1.7 percent per
year. The unbuilt portion of Old Town North was added to the short and long range
volumes.
Figure 8 shows the short range background peak hour traffic with the connection
of Redwood Street between Cajetan Street and Lupine Drive. This graphic reflects a
reassignment of selected movements that would likely use Redwood Street due to
closing the existing gap in the street network.
Figure 9 shows the long range (2030) background peak hour traffic projections.
This reflects completion of the future Vine Drive, as shown in the Fort Collins Master
Street Plan. However, the Fort Collins Master Street Plan shows Vine Drive as a four-
lane arterial street. The traffic forecasts shown in Figure 9 do not indicate the need for
a four-lane arterial street by the year 2030. The four-lane arterial street is due to the
potential interchange with I-25 at Vine Drive or other significant development east of I-
25. In discussions with various Fort Collins staff, this interchange is not likely to occur
by the year 2030, if at all. Significant development, east of I-25, is not likely to occur by
2030.
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 10 and 11 show the respective short range (2016) and long range
(2030) site generated peak hour traffic assignment. Figures 12 and 13 show the
respective short range (2016) and long range (2030) total (site plus background) peak
hour traffic assignment.
Conifer Street
TRIP DISTRIBUTION Figure 6
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 14
Vine Drive
Future Vine
Drive
College Avenue
Blue Spruce Drive
Lemay Avenue
Redwood Street
Linden
Street
Redwood Street
SITE
10%
70% 10% 10%
NOM
Hickory
Street
Conifer Street
AM/PM
SHORT RANGE (2016) BACKGROUND
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 7
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 15
963/906
32/38
552/1111
107/103
33/84
115/198
970/965
144/204
612/1071
105/241
108/175
189/159
Vine Drive
College Avenue
Blue Spruce Drive
Redwood Street
Linden
Street
Redwood Street 9/1
2/2
4/4
17/6
0/3
15/9
6/15
72/225
2/6
9/0
210/159
1/6
46/118
43/119
118/58
118/108
74/37
37/127
66/84
519/1111
37/60
922/858
41/54
73/86
46/59
4/10
22/77
42/26
9/6
7/4
13/43
182/244
41/57
2/14
Conifer Street
AM/PM
SHORT RANGE (2016) BACKGROUND
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC WITH REDWOOD
STREET CONNECTION Figure 8
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 16
963/906
32/38
552/1111
96/88
33/84
96/182
951/949
144/204
601/1056
116/256
108/175
207/175
Vine Drive
College Avenue
Blue Spruce Drive
Redwood Street
Linden
Street Redwood Street
40/19
9/9
2/2
9/3
14/10
9/5
3/8
61/195
17/44
5/0
180/144
1/3
41/106
48/131
125/62
104/104
67/33
33/116
66/84
519/1111
37/60
922/858
41/54
73/86
46/59
11/13
22/77
60/42
13/13
23/33
24/58
182/244
41/57
Conifer Street
LONG RANGE (2030) BACKGROUND
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 9
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 17
1220/1150
40/50
700/1405
135/130
40/105
145/250
1395/1470
20/10
860/1610
50/55
10/20
55/60
Vine Drive
Blue Spruce Drive
Redwood Street
Linden
Street
Redwood
Street
85/105
655/1405
45/75
1170/1090
50/70
90/110
40/70
15/15
30/95
20/35
25/10
15/30
25/15
230/310
45/55
30/15
255/270
90/55
AM/PM
Rounded to Nearest
5 Vehicles
50/25
15/10
10/5
10/5
25/15
10/5
5/10
75/245
20/55
5/5
230/180
10/10
50/135
SHORT RANGE (2016) SITE
GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 10
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 18
4/17
74/47
14/9
13/7
20/87
4/14
4/14
0/2
1/1
13/7
3/7
7/30
6/4
25/16
0/2
1/1
25/16
7/30
20/87
74/47
Vine Drive
College Avenue
Blue Spruce Drive
Lemay Avenue
Redwood Street
Linden
Street
AM/PM
Conifer
Street
7/8
3/1
0/1
1/4
1/1
1/1
5/8
0/2
28/18
2/2
6/4
0/2
0/3
1/3
9/34
3/2
3/2
1/7
19/77
1/4
2/10
4/2
9/5
65/42
LONG RANGE (2030) SITE
GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 11
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 19
4/17
14/9
4/14
0/2
1/1
13/7
4/3
25/16
0/2
1/1
99/63
27/117
Vine Drive
College Avenue
Blue Spruce Drive
Lemay Avenue
Redwood Street
Linden
Street
AM/PM
Conifer
Street
7/8
3/1
0/1
1/4
1/1
1/1
5/8
0/2
26/17
2/2
6/4
1/2
2/5
1/3
8/32
3/2
3/2
1/7
19/77
1/4
2/10
4/2
9/5
65/42
Redwood
Street
SITE
28/16
6/4
2/8
48/32
7/31
Conifer Street
AM/PM
SHORT RANGE (2016) TOTAL
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 12
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 20
963/906
35/45
552/1111
103/118
39/88
121/198
976/965
144/204
608/1086
136/343
108/175
281/222
Vine Drive
College Avenue
Blue Spruce Drive
Redwood Street
Linden
Street
Redwood
Street
47/27
12/10
2/2
9/4
15/14
9/5
4/9
62/196
22/52
5/0
180/146
1/3
66/84
525/1115
37/60
925/865
41/54
73/86
46/59
15/30
22/77
134/89
27/22
36/40
44/145
182/244
41/57
33/43
201/213
72/44
28/18
2/2
Conifer Street
LONG RANGE (2030) TOTAL
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 13
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 21
1220/1155
45/55
705/1405
140/160
45/110
170/265
1495/1535
20/10
885/1725
50/55
10/20
55/60
Vine Drive
Blue Spruce Drive
Redwood Street
Linden
Street
Redwood
Street
85/105
665/1410
45/75
1175/1100
50/70
90/110
40/75
20/30
30/95
70/65
35/15
25/35
40/75
235/315
50/60
35/25
255/275
90/55
AM/PM
Rounded to Nearest
5 Vehicles
55/35
20/10
10/5
10/5
30/20
10/5
5/10
75/245
25/65
5/5
230/185
10/10
30/15
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 22
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. For the roads in the
vicinity of the Aspen Heights development, four hour and/or eight hour signal warrants are
applicable. These warrants require much data and are applied when the traffic is actually
on the area road system. It is acknowledged that peak hour signal warrants should not be
applied, but since the peak hour forecasts are readily available in a traffic impact study, it
is reasonable to use them to get an idea whether other signal warrants may be met. If
peak hour signal warrants will not be met at a given intersection, it is reasonable to
conclude that it is not likely that other signal warrants would be met. If peak hour signal
warrants are met, it merely indicates that further evaluation should occur in the future as
the development occurs. However, a judgment can be made that some intersections will
likely meet other signal warrants.
Using the short range (2016) total peak hour traffic (Figure 12), the peak hour
signal warrant will not be met in the morning and afternoon peak hours at any of the key
unsignalized intersections.
Using the long range (2030) total peak hour traffic (Figure 13), the peak hour signal
warrant will likely be met in the morning and afternoon peak hours at the N. College/Future
Vine intersection. Based on the peak hour signal warrant, it is likely that other volume
based signal warrants would be met at the N. College/Future Vine intersection. Therefore,
the N. College/Future Vine intersection was analyzed with signal control in the long range
(2030) future. It is not likely that any of the other key unsignalized intersections will meet
the peak hour signal warrant. The peak hour signal warrant analyses are provided in
Appendix D. The “U.S. 287/S.H. 14 Access Management Report” indicates that the N.
College/Future Vine intersection will be signalized in the future, when warranted.
Operation Analysis
Capacity analyses were performed at the N. College/Hickory, N. College/Conifer,
N. College/Vine, N. College/Future Vine, Conifer/Blue Spruce-Site Access,
Conifer/Redwood, Vine/Redwood-Linden, Redwood/Lupine-Site Access, and
Redwood/Future Vine intersections. The operations analyses were conducted for the
short range and long range futures, reflecting year 2016 and 2030 conditions, respectively.
By City Council Resolution, the City requires a roundabout analysis at appropriate
intersections. This analysis was applied at the future Vine/Redwood intersection using the
long range total peak hour traffic.
Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 7, the N. College/Hickory, N.
College/Conifer, N. College/Vine, Conifer/Blue Spruce, Conifer/Redwood and
Vine/Redwood-Linden intersections operate in the short range (2016) background traffic
future as indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in
Appendix E. The key intersections will operate acceptably with the existing control and
geometry.
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 23
TABLE 3
Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT C C
EB RT C C
EB APPROACH C C
NB LT A A
NB T A A
NB APPROACH A A
SB T/RT A A
N. College/Hickory
(signal)
OVERALL A A
WB LT C C
WB RT C C
WB APPROACH C C
NB T A A
NB RT A A
NB APPROACH A A
SB LT A A
SB T A A
SB APPROACH A A
N. College/Conifer
(signal)
OVERALL A A
WB LT D D
WB RT C C
WB APPROACH C D
NB T B B
NB RT A A
NB APPROACH A B
SB LT A A
SB T A A
SB APPROACH A A
N. College/Vine
(signal)
OVERALL B B
Conifer/Blue Spruce EB LT/T A A
(stop sign) SB LT/RT B B
EB LT/T/RT A A
WB LT/T/RT A A
NB LT/T/RT B B
Conifer/Redwood
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B B
EB LT/T/RT A A
WB LT/T/RT A A
NB LT/T/RT C C
Vine/Redwood-Linden
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B B
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 24
Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 9, the N. College/Hickory, N.
College/Conifer, N. College/Vine, N. College/Future Vine, Conifer/Blue Spruce,
Conifer/Redwood, and Vine/Redwood-Linden intersections operate in the long range
(2030) background traffic future as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms for these
analyses are provided in Appendix F. The key intersections will operate acceptably. In
the long range (2030), it was requested that the N. College/Hickory and N. College/Conifer
intersections be analyzed as a realigned intersection, N. College/Hickory-Conifer. A figure
showing the realigned N. College/Hickory-Conifer intersection peak hour volumes and
calculation forms are also provided in Appendix F. The N. College/Hickory-Conifer
intersection will operate acceptably.
Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 12, the N. College/Hickory, N.
College/Conifer, N. College/Vine, Conifer/Blue Spruce-Site Access, Conifer/Redwood,
Vine/Redwood-Linden, Redwood/Lupine-Site Access, and Redwood/Future Vine
intersections operate in the short range (2016) total traffic future as indicated in Table 5.
Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix G. The key intersections
will operate acceptably with the existing control. The Vine/Redwood-Linden intersection
calculated delay for the afternoon peak hour northbound approach was commensurate
with level of service F (67.4 seconds). This is considered to be normal during the peak
hours at stop sign controlled intersections along arterial streets. This is higher than the
interpreted level of service E for “not applicable,” by 17.4 seconds. Since Future Vine
Drive will remove much of the traffic from this intersection, it is recommended that F at the
Vine/Redwood-Linden intersection be accepted in the short range future. This will be a
temporary condition.
Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 13, the N. College/Hickory, N.
College/Conifer, N. College/Hickory-Conifer, N. College/Vine, N. College/Future Vine,
Conifer/Blue Spruce-Site Access, Conifer/Redwood, Vine/Redwood-Linden,
Redwood/Lupine-Site Access, and Redwood/Future Vine intersections operate in the
long range (2030) total traffic future as indicated in Table 6. Calculation forms for these
analyses are provided in Appendix H. The key intersections will operate acceptably. A
roundabout was also analyzed at the Future Vine/Redwood intersection. A roundabout
will operate acceptably. While the roundabout will operate acceptably, this type of control
may not be appropriate at the Future Vine/Redwood intersection. The approach volumes
on Future Vine are 2-4 times higher than the approach volumes on Redwood Street.
Roundabout control will cause significant delay to arterial street volumes on Future Vine
Drive. Since the level of service E operation with stop sign control only occurs on one leg
of Redwood Street during one peak hour, it is recommended that a roundabout not be
considered at this intersection.
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 25
TABLE 4
Long Range (2030) Background Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT C C
EB RT C C
EB APPROACH C C
NB LT A A
NB T A A
NB APPROACH A A
SB T/RT A A
N. College/Hickory
(signal)
OVERALL A A
WB LT C D
WB RT C C
WB APPROACH C D
NB T/RT A A
SB LT A A
SB T A A
SB APPROACH A A
N. College/Conifer
(signal)
OVERALL A A
EB LT C D
EB T/RT C D
EB APPROACH C D
WB LT C C
WB T/RT C C
WB APPROACH C C
NB LT B B
NB T B B
NB RT B B
NB APPROACH B B
SB LT A B
SB T C B
SB RT B B
SB APPROACH B B
N. College/Hickory-Conifer
(signal)
OVERALL B C
Continued on next page
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 26
Continued from previous page
TABLE 4
Long Range (2030) Background Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT C D
EB T/RT D D
EB APPROACH C D
WB LT D D
WB T/RT C D
WB APPROACH C D
NB LT A A
NB T B C
NB RT C B
NB APPROACH B C
SB LT A C
SB T B B
SB RT A A
SB APPROACH A B
N. College/Future Vine
(signal)
OVERALL B C
WB LT D D
WB RT C C
WB APPROACH D D
NB T A A
NB RT A A
NB APPROACH A A
SB LT A A
SB T A A
SB APPROACH A A
N. College/Vine
(signal)
OVERALL A A
Conifer/Blue Spruce EB LT/T A A
(stop sign) SB LT/RT B B
EB LT/T/RT A A
WB LT/T/RT A A
NB LT/T/RT B B
Conifer/Redwood
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B B
EB LT/T/RT B B
WB LT/T/RT B B
NB LT/T/RT A A
Vine/Redwood-Linden
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT A A
EB LT A A
WB LT A A
NB LT/T/RT C C
Future Vine/Redwood
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT C C
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 27
TABLE 5
Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT C C
EB RT C C
EB APPROACH C C
NB LT A A
NB T A A
NB APPROACH A A
SB T/RT A A
N. College/Hickory
(signal)
OVERALL A A
WB LT C C
WB RT C C
WB APPROACH C C
NB T/RT A A
SB LT A A
SB T A A
SB APPROACH A A
N. College/Conifer
(signal)
OVERALL A A
WB LT D E
WB RT C C
WB APPROACH D D
NB T B B
NB RT A A
NB APPROACH B B
SB LT A B
SB T B A
SB APPROACH A A
N. College/Vine
(signal)
OVERALL B B
Continued on next page
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 28
Continued from previous page
TABLE 5
Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT/T/RT A A
WB LT/T/RT A A
NB LT/T/RT B B
Conifer/Blue Spruce-Site Access
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B B
EB LT/T/RT A A
WB LT/T/RT A A
NB LT/T/RT B B
Conifer/Redwood
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B B
EB LT/T/RT A A
WB LT/T/RT A A
NB LT/T/RT D F
Vine/Redwood-Linden
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT C E
EB LT/T/RT A A
WB LT/T/RT A A
NB LT/T/RT A A
Redwood/Lupine
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT A A
Future Vine/Redwood EB LT/RT A A
(stop sign) NB LT/T A A
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 29
TABLE 6
Long Range (2030) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT C D
EB RT C C
EB APPROACH C D
NB LT A A
NB T A A
NB APPROACH A A
SB T/RT A A
N. College/Hickory
(signal)
OVERALL A A
WB LT C D
WB RT C C
WB APPROACH C D
NB T/RT A A
SB LT A A
SB T A A
SB APPROACH A A
N. College/Conifer
(signal)
OVERALL A A
EB LT/T C D
EB RT C D
EB APPROACH C D
WB LT/T C C
WB RT c C
WB APPROACH C C
NB LT B B
NB T B C
NB RT B B
NB APPROACH B B
SB LT A B
SB T C B
SB RT B B
SB APPROACH C B
N. College/Hickory-Conifer
(signal)
OVERALL B C
Continued on next page
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 30
Continued from previous page
TABLE 6
Long Range (2030) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT C D
EB T/RT C D
EB APPROACH C D
WB LT D D
WB T/RT C D
WB APPROACH C D
NB LT B A
NB T B C
NB RT D B
NB APPROACH C C
SB LT A C
SB T B A
SB RT A A
SB APPROACH B B
N. College/Future Vine
(signal)
OVERALL B C
WB LT D D
WB RT C C
WB APPROACH D D
NB T A A
NB RT A A
NB APPROACH A A
SB LT A B
SB T A A
SB APPROACH A A
N. College/Vine
(signal)
OVERALL A A
Continued on next page
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 31
Continued from previous page
TABLE 6
Long Range (2030) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT/T/RT A A
WB LT/T/RT A A
NB LT/T/RT B B
Conifer/Blue Spruce
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B C
EB LT/T/RT A A
WB LT/T/RT A A
NB LT/T/RT B B
Conifer/Redwood
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B B
EB LT/T/RT B B
WB LT/T/RT B B
NB LT/T/RT A A
Vine/Redwood-Linden
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT A A
EB LT A A
WB LT A A
NB LT/T/RT C E
Future Vine/Redwood
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT C D
(v/c ratio lower/upper bound)
EB LT 0.28/0.34 0.37/0.45
WB LT 0.31/0.38 0.31/0.38
NB LT/T/RT 0.09/0.11 0.22/0.27
Future Vine/Redwood
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT 0.14/0.17 0.12/0.15
EB LT/T/RT A A
WB LT/T/RT A B
NB LT/T/RT A A
Redwood/Lupine-Site Access
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT A A
EB LT A A
WB LT A A
NB LT/T/RT C C
Future Vine/Blondel-Site Access
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B B
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 32
Geometry
Figure 14 shows a schematic of the short range (2016) geometry. This is the
existing geometry at the N. College/Vine, Conifer/Blue Spruce-Site Access,
Conifer/Redwood, and Vine/Redwood-Linden intersections. The N. College/Hickory and
N. College/Conifer intersections are assumed to have side by side left-turns per the North
College Improvement plan.
Figure 15 shows a schematic of the long range (2030) geometry. It was assumed
that the future Vine Drive will have a two-lane cross section with a center turn lane since
the volumes do not support a four-lane cross section given the 2030 forecasts in this TIS.
It is acknowledged that the Fort Collins Master Street Plan shows Future Vine Drive to be
a 4-lane arterial street. Daily traffic forecasts from Fort Collins Transportation Planning
indicate a daily volume of 17,000, between North College Avenue and Redwood Street;
and a daily volume of 24,000, east of Redwood Street. These forecasts were developed
with an interchange at I-25/Vine Drive. As mentioned earlier, this interchange may not be
built or it may occur after 2030. It is recommended that the right-of-way for Future Vine
Drive be dedicated, however, an interim 2-lane arterial cross section be developed that will
accommodate the forecasted traffic plus a 1.3-1.5 times volume contingency. An
eastbound right-turn lane at the Future Vine/Redwood intersection is required in the long
range future.
The geometry on North College Avenue at the N. College/Hickory-Conifer
intersection as a realigned intersection was assumed to have northbound and southbound
left-turn lanes, two through lanes in each direction, and northbound and southbound right-
turn lanes. The geometry on Hickory Street and Conifer Street was assumed to be an
eastbound and westbound left-turn lane and an eastbound and westbound through/right-
turn lane.
Pedestrian Level of Service
Appendix I shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Aspen Heights
development. There are four pedestrian destinations within 1320 feet of the Aspen
Heights development. These are: 1) the residential area to the south; 2) the commercial
area to the west; 3) the residential area to the northeast; and 4) the
commercial/residential area to the north. The Aspen Heights site is located within an
area termed as “commercial corridor,” which sets the level of service threshold at LOS B
for all measured categories. Pedestrian level of service B is not achieved for all
pedestrian destinations with regard to continuity. The Pedestrian LOS Worksheet is
provided in Appendix I. There are properties that are within the pedestrian influence
area that do not have sidewalks. The practical limits of pedestrian improvements would
be on the Aspen Heights site itself.
Conifer Street
SHORT RANGE (2016) GEOMETRY Figure 14
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 33
Vine Drive
College Avenue
Blue Spruce Drive
Redwood Street
Linden
Street
- Denotes Lane
Conifer Street
LONG RANGE (2030) GEOMETRY Figure 15
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
Page 34
Vine Drive
College Avenue
Blue Spruce Drive
Redwood Street
Linden
Street
- Denotes Lane
Future Vine Drive
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 35
Bicycle Level of Service
Appendix I shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Aspen Heights
development. There is one bicycle destination within 1320 feet of the Aspen Heights
development. This is the commercial area to the west. The Bicycle LOS Worksheet is
provided in Appendix I. The minimum level of service for this site is C. This site is
connected to bike lanes on Redwood Street and Conifer Street. Therefore, it is
concluded that level of service A can be achieved.
Transit Level of Service
This area of Fort Collins is served by Transfort Routes 8 and 81. There are bus
stops near the Conifer/Blue Spruce, Conifer/Redwood, and Vine/Redwood
intersections. There are also bus stops along North College Avenue.
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 36
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This study assessed the impacts of the Aspen Heights on the street system in the
vicinity of the proposed development in the short range (2016) and long range (2030)
futures. As a result of this analysis, the following is concluded:
- The development of the Aspen Heights is feasible from a traffic engineering
standpoint. At full development, the Aspen Heights will generate approximately
2180 daily trip ends, 181 morning peak hour trip ends, and 257 afternoon peak
hour trip ends.
- Current operation at the N. College/Hickory, N. College/Conifer, N. College/Vine,
Conifer/Blue Spruce, Conifer/Redwood, and Vine/Redwood-Linden intersections
is acceptable.
- The Conifer/Blue Spruce, Conifer/Redwood, and Vine/Redwood-Linden
intersections are currently unsignalized. It is not likely that volume based signal
warrants would be met at the Conifer/Blue Spruce, Conifer/Redwood,
Vine/Redwood-Linden intersections. Using the long range (2030) total peak hour
traffic forecasts, the peak hour signal warrant will likely be met in the morning and
afternoon peak hours at the N. College/Future Vine intersection. Based on the
peak hour signal warrant, it is likely that other volume based signal warrants would
be met at this intersection in the long range (2030) future. The “U.S. 287/S.H. 14
Access Management Report” indicates that the N. College/Future Vine intersection
will be signalized in the future, when warranted.
- In the short range (2016) future, given development of the Aspen Heights and an
increase in background traffic, the N. College/Hickory, N. College/Conifer, N.
College/Vine, Conifer/Blue Spruce-Site Access, Conifer/Redwood,
Vine/Redwood-Linden, Redwood/Lupine-Site Access, and Redwood/Future Vine
intersections will operate acceptably with existing control and geometry. At the
Vine/Redwood-Linden intersection, the calculated delay for the afternoon peak hour
northbound approach will experience delays that are commensurate with level of
service F (67.4 seconds). This is considered to be normal during the peak hours at
stop sign controlled intersections along arterial streets. This is higher than the
interpreted level of service E for “not applicable,” by 17.4 seconds. Since Future
Vine Drive will take much of the traffic off of this intersection, it is recommended that
F at the Vine/Redwood-Linden intersection be accepted in the short range future.
This will be a temporary condition.
- In the long range (2030) future, given development of the Aspen Heights and an
increase in background traffic, the N. College/Hickory, N. College/Conifer, N.
College/Hickory-Conifer, N. College/Future Vine, N.. College/Vine, Conifer/Blue
Spruce-Site Access, Conifer/Redwood, Vine/Redwood-Linden, Redwood/Lupine-
Site Access, and Redwood/Future Vine intersections will operate acceptably. A
roundabout will operate acceptably at the Future Vine/Redwood intersection,
however this form of traffic control is not recommended.
DELICH Aspen Heights TIS, November 2011
ASSOCIATES Page 37
- The short range (2016) geometry is shown in Figure 14. The long range (2030)
geometry is shown in Figure 15.
- Acceptable level of service is achieved for bicycle and transit modes based upon
the measures in the multi-modal transportation guidelines and future improvements
to the street system in the area. Pedestrian level of service B is not achieved for
all pedestrian destinations with regard to continuity. The practical limits of
pedestrian improvements would be on the Aspen Heights site itself.
70/185
15/45
15/10
155/120
15/10
10/15
20/25
15/25
10/15
25/20
45/25
30/20
705/1470
160/255
5/5
1210/1305
165/255
25/20
5/5
10/10
130/200
5/5
295/225
College Avenue
20/75
65/40
5/10
5/10
55/70
5/10
10/5
NOM
65/40
10/5
NOM
10/5
25/15
5/5
5/5
50/135
0/5
60/170
85/40
40/150
10/30
165/85
135/135
0/5
30/20
NOM
10/5
30/15
NOM
5/5
10/30
305/435
10/30
5/10
360/395
5/10
6/4
41/106
0/2
48/134
67/33
34/119
9/34
128/64
107/106
1/7
19/77
45/30
1/7
2/10
34/51
2/8
9/5
0/0
65/42
7/4
0/0
8/3
8/37
65/114
0/0
107/96
0/0
32/19
Hickory
Street
Future
Vine Drive
14/58
25/16
1/2
7/30
20/87
2/1
74/47
48/32
11/7
10/5
New Vine
Drive
14/58
3/2
3/2
3/7
6/4
0/2
0/3
2/1
7/30
1/4
3/13
3/10
1/4
Hickory
Street
Future
Vine Drive
8/37
20/81
69/44
32/19
Redwood
Street
SITE
3/7
6/4
Hickory
Street
Future
Vine Drive
60/165
160/80
130/130
85/40
40/145
50/70
5/10
65/35
5/10
10/5
10/5
30/15
65/170
15/45
15/10
140/110
15/10
10/15
20/25
15/25
10/15
25/20
45/25
30/20
700/1440
140/170
5/5
1185/1290
165/250
25/20
5/5
10/10
125/200
5/5
220/180
College Avenue
290/375
10/30
310/365
5/10
30/20
10/5
29/29
201/213
72/44
30/49
2/8
44/26
1/7
7/4
8/3
Hickory
Street
201/213
72/44
Hickory
Street
181/188
65/40
Hickory
Street
61/37
Hickory
Street