HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW - 20-87A - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - APPLICATIONu t(a$
�, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
F , PLANNING DIVISION APPLICATION FORM
Project Name: �j�� s �� 1`i l -' Ju 16L ' 67N
Project Number: -70Ik.
Project Location or Street Address: :50)�sG�F Jr
Today's Date: 5
0
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Owners Name: Eo�i,D pz _
Address
Telephone
•
Land Use Information:
Gross Acreage/Sq. Footage:
Existing Zoning: r" L
Proposed Use: Sc— (-fUd L
Total Number of Dwelling Units: l;j�cs
Total Commercial Floor Area:
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
Applicants Name: t%E K- Contact Person: car' Nozer,
Address: l� �%'� I�W�1 i11 C -�)uJ (i dUZ T 1, Y� `vC� �GIIt;� �c D �)LLN�J
Address:
d �
Telephone:] 3 �t c5 Telephone:T-I j
TYPE OF REQUEST:
Please indicate type of application submitted by checking the box preceding appropriate request(s). Combined requests, except for Final
PUD and Final Subdivision, require the combined individual fees. No application will be processed until all required information is provided.
Additional handouts are available explaining information requirements for each of the following review processes.
5/1985
'Please make check payable to Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. (OVER)
PUD ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGE
Description of the change and reason(s) for the request:
Planning Division:
Action:
Date: By:
Building Inspection:
Action:
Date:
By:
Engineering:
Action:
Date:
By:
CERTIFICATION
I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that
in filing the applicatiop I am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owners of the property without whose consent the requested
action cannot lawfully Ipg accomplished.
Name:
1
Address:
� 1 c)u) 7Z-+cj,) -s �, Sump
Telephoner J����
ITEM POUDRE R-1 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
1990
NUMBER 20-87a
•
T:JINC
Engineering Consultants
2900 South College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
303/226.4955
February 5, 1988
Ms. Susan Hayes
City of Fort Collins
Storm Drainage Dept.
P.O. Box 570
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522
RE: PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT FOR THE 1990 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
Dear Susan:
The purpose of this letter report is to supplement the Final
Drainage Report for Poudre School District R-1 Elementary School
dated April 1987 by Engineering Professionals Inc. (EPI). The
criteria used to develop the proposed approach to drainage was
developed from this report. Discussions were also held with the
City Storm Drainage Department staff in order to develop an ap-
proach which would address all pertinent concerns.
The Junior High site is located just south of the elementary
school covered in the forementioned EPI report. It should be
pointed out that the drainage analysis done in the EPI Report in-
cluded the 1990 Junior High School site. The drainage approach
proposed in this letter report conforms to the previous analysis.
The final drainage plan from the EPI Report should be used as a
reference with this report. The only difference which should be
noted is that the configuration of the Junior High Building &
Parking Areas have changed. These changes have not, however, ef-
fected the analysis or routing of drainage flows.
The basic proposed approach to drainage can be divided into three
components. First, most of the onsite drainage will flow un-
detained on the surface through grass swales and over pavement to
the existing 42 inch concrete culverts under Seneca Drive just
north of its intersection with Regency Drive. Onsite flows from
the roof and some areas north of the Junior High will be col-
lected in the site pipe system which will outfall just west of
the forementioned 42 inch culverts. All onsite drainage will
flow undetained to the regional pond located east of Regency
Drive, south of Wakerobin Lane and west of the Pleasant Valley
Other Offices: Vail, Colorado 3031476-6340 • Colorado Springs, Colorado 303/574-3504
and Lake Canal.
The second and third components to the proposed drainage approach
involve offsite flows. Offsite flows from Basin 79 will enter
this site just north of the Junior High Building. Here the flows
will be channeled into the forementioned storm drain pipe system.
This system has been sized to handle 100 year historic flows from
Basin 79 in accordance to the EPI report. Drainage flows exceed-
ing 100 year historic volumes will be diverted northward to the
major drainage channel which is to run along the north side of
Seneca Drive. The final component of the proposed drainage ap-
proach involves the offsite flows from Basin 80.
Detention for Basins 79, 80 and 85 will be facilitated in the
regional detention pond mentioned above. The offsite 100 year
developed flows from Basin 79 and 80 must therefore be routed
through the Junior High site. This will be facilitated by a
drainage swale and culvert system running along the north or west
side of Seneca Drive. The existing 42 inch culverts under Seneca
Drive were sized to handle 10-year developed flows from these
basins with the remaining flows contained in the Regency Drive
cross-section. In discussion with City Storm Drainage Department
staff it was decided this approach could also be used for the
short section of Seneca Drive between Regency Drive and Craig
Drive as long as no 100-year flows would not backwater into Craig
Drive. Accordingly the swale and culverts along Seneca Drive are
sized to handle these flows with some overflow into the street
during a large storm event. The following table summarizes the
relationship between culvert capacities and overflow into Seneca
Drive.
100 Year
Culvert Overflow Street
Capacity To Street Capacity
2-36 Inch RCP Culverts 136 154 318
2-42 Inch RCP Culverts 176 114 318
It should be pointed out that both culvert options are being con-
sidered at this time. With either option the street cross-
section provides more than enough capacity.
I trust this letter report and accompanying calculations clarify
our design approach.
Sincerely,
RBD, Inc.
Stan A. Myers, P.E.
cc: 067-004A
•
ERINC
Engineering Consultants
/00 YcAc� �r�T
,OA�I,'U SO
8A5 /N 7
D-rc,
D- 7
CLIENT
PROJECT_ -_----_-CALCULATIONS FOR
MADE BY VA!! DATE _ CHECKED 8Y DATE
JOB NO.0%1/ -0C>'3
SHEET OF
D -8 42 :5
-'7,t/1__S TOTAL
T
i
•
Mt:INC
Engineering Consultants
CLIENT L V N K-
PROJECTQ ••i /-�zy.� CALCULATIONS FOR
MADE BY DATE !ZAhf CHECKED BY DATE
JOB NO. A I - o0�
SHEET OF
G�vG 1"1 .,, h /
d- S+>to .,,;// Carry e4. (/JG AAA) w� .S lea a
",w c.,,/ G8 car Pa C/3G AA!) w/ ..f Aedw
App.nY"6- 4/y ago-a9a cc<,,"// e cc.�//'P a-� .t'—S�e Ass►
!�• �� AwO Y.y "Q G /0 YL40 0V*A 4avJ
iN,�l 6e —290 — i7G = !/y c74-S
36'' Acid 41 ovuPo-j ,-// 4e
a3f f
T --
0 5/ .o5� �Ro
o.yC
,q/- S` Q, 90 � S �z� U, 0
A a (0,Y6 x�31 10,/3 x 63x1,c� tG,YS-Ac8,'
�t o,os x `
io,to >- 0,g f- d.a -t-3o.G t a,o� 3,�= Y%y G 3 _
7-2L, = 78
/Z 13 = 0,7-3
7e
o ` `�� ` x 0• 73 x 0, Or x Y9..S 1/33S6 S I/a,
3/$ JS -gyp S G---
/ice t a,g rs,a r o.a8x G8 +
o.b-3.2 9G• 9 .SJC-
/mow = 7s..G 2= 0.99 9213= o• 7-
2 x 36,9 x o,o9S o
o,oiV
0
0
1988 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
AND
1990 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
SITE ACCESS STUDY
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
NOVEMBER 1986
Prepared for:
Poudre School District R-1
2407 LaPorte Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
Prepared by:
MATTHEW J. DELlCH, P.E.
3413 Banyan Avenue
Loveland, Colorado 80538
Phone 303-669-2061
EXECUTIVE SUMMAR'r
The 1'=88 Elementary School and 1??0 Junior High School,
located west of 'Shields Street and south of Hor_•etooth Road
in Fort Collins, Colorado, is proposed to be an i nst i to t i ona.l
development. This study involved the =.teps of tr• i p
generation, distribution and assignment; traffic projection;
capacity analysis; traffic signal warrant analysis; traffic
'signal progression analysis; and accident analysis as _.et
forth in the C:i ty' =. Traffic Impact Study Guidelines.
Thi=.
sites on
study assessed the impacts of two proposed school
the existing street =.y=.tem in both 1'-?0 and 2006.
However,
it should
be pointed out that the long range
analyses
assumed
that other nearby development_ would also be
in place
in the
general vicinity of the proposed schools. it
is folly
to look:
at a single development without considering
the interaction
of other land uses in the area.
As a.
result
of this analysis, the following is
concluded:
1
- The development of the 1288 Elementary School and
1 =FO junior High School as proposed is feasible from
traffic engineering standpoint with specific improvements in
the area. Full development_ of the school sites as proposed
wi 1 l generate approximately 1600 vehicle trips per day for
the 180 day school year (September - May).
- Current operation of the Hor _•e tooth/Sh i e 1 ds
intersection is in the level of service A category during
bath peak hours with signal control. The four way stop sign
controlled intersection of Harmon::/Shields oper•.a.tes at level
of service D. However, this can be improved with the
addition of both approach and exit lanes. This level of
service D operation is unacceptable according to the City's.
own evaluation cr i ter i a.. Traffic signals may be warranted
now. Signals would improve operation to acceptable levels.
Operation can also be improved to acceptable levels b
improving this intersection to either a. 2X4 or tel:`<.4 stop sign
controlled intersection. It is recommended that one of these
alternatives be pursued by the City immediately to bring
operations to acceptable 1 evel s.
- Access from the three principal arterials,
Hor se tooth , Shields, and Harmony wa.s evaluated in the short
range future. It is recommended that. access to the school
=.ites be from Shields street via. either Troutman Parkway or
I,..I.a,k.erobin Lane. Access from Hor•setooth Road via. Seneca.
Street or Harmony Road via Regency and :Seneca, Streets are the
least acceptable access solutions considering street
construction, anticipated school service area, and ease of
access.
1 0 6
t
— Development of the schools in the _.hart range future
canbe handled can the street system with some improvement_.
These include provision of access to the school =.i sites from
Shields
=�h i e 1 ds Street. This access can be accomplished via. either
Troutman Parkway or Waker•obin Lane. Both route_ have
advantages and disadvantages. From a. traffic operational
viewpoint, both accesses operate similarly. A signal is
1 i ke l y to be warranted at the HarmonX/Sh i e l de• intersection by
1??0 or before based upon background traffic (other than site
'
<school) tra.ff i c? . All signalized intersections wi l 1 operate
acceptably in the short range future.
- With full development of the school sites in the long
range future, signals wi l l be warranted at the Shields....'
Troutman and Horse tooth/Seneca. intersections. This assumes
full development of the Section in which the school sites are
contained. These streets .are classified as collectors.
— All the signalized intersections analyzed operate
acceptably in the peak hour_ in the long range future with
the four lane cro_.=. section on Hor=•etooth, Shields, and
Harmony.
t—
Parking was surveyed at an existing Fort Col l i ns.
junior high drool of comparable size. At the ev i _.t i ng
school, 85 spaces appeared to adequate. Approximately-85
spaces should be provided at the proposed .junior high school
unless additional data indica.tes a. significant difference.
'
- With good design of the aforementioned geometric
improvements to the va.rious intersection_., the accident rate
should be at acceptable levels for urban conditions.
t
I
0 •
t
r�
r-,
I
I . It1TR D ICTI Or -..I
This tra.ff i c impact study-- addr•es=_•e _. the c•a.pac i ty, ,
4eome tr i c , and control requ i rements at and near- a. propo=_•ed
elementary =_.chool and junior high school development 1 ,_,ca.ted
we _.t of Sh i e 1 dS. '_ tree t , be t!,,ieerl Hor=_.e tooth and Harmony Roads.
i n Fart Co 1 i rl=_., C:c,l or••a.do. The 1 oca.t i on of the pr•opossed
development is =•ho+::+n in Fi,aure 1.
E!ur i rlg the course of thi-s anal y= i •_ , numerous. contact -
Vie r e made +.,:+ith the project engineer•ing.:'pla.nning con _•uIt.a.nt_.,
Poudre „=hoo1 E!i s t r i ct '3ta.ff , and Ci t>1 Tr••a.ff i c Enoi neer• i ng
Dep.a.r amen t . The study, conforms to the format set forth b--,
the Transportation Service=. Unit of the City of Fort C:ol l in=..
The study involved the fol 1 ot:,ii n,] steps-
- Collect ph:y_-i cal , traffic, a.nd de;..,el opment data.
- Perform trip generation, trip, di=.tr•ibution, a.nd trip
a.=_. i gnmen t .
- Project traffic gr•,_,+::+th.
- Determine peak hour traffic t,c,l ume_ .
- Conduct ca.pa.c i t;. and operational level of service
•a.na.l y _•e•_ on key inter _ec*ion=_•.
- Ana.l ze =•igna.l +::+ar-r•a.nt=• and signal progression.
- Accident a.na.lysis.
I I. E X I ST I N G C CIP•d D I T I OP-d'=;
The i to of the Elementary School .and 1 = -'il Junior
High=ctlool a._• hc,+:.!n in Figure 1 , i = in a. mi :>'ed-use area.
To the northt:,le=.t, i t i = bounded by-- -an ex i _.t i ng =_•i n a I e fa.mi l y
5ubdi v i i on knovin a. Imper i -a.l E t.a.te=•. There is 1 a.rcie lot
re_.ident ia.l u_.es north of the school -ites. To the I;,IeQ.t,
=ou th , and e.a._.t , i t i s bounded by 1 •a.nd +:�:+h i ch i s. e i t h e r vac.a.n t
*r i n agr 1 cu 1 tura.l use . There are scat tered r•e=_.i den,_e= i n
this a.rea.. To the east , Bkcross Shields Street, is. a. single
fa.mil:y residential =.ubdivi=.ion. The square mile in +.,:Ihich the
school sites. are contained is. a. developing area. of Fort
C:ol l in=. and is e-,;pected to change in character over the next
fe+r,+ ea.r=•. The topography in the -area i=_. es entia.l 1 f1-at
.
The major intersection+_. in the a.r•ea. are 'shield_;'
Hor _•e tooth and Shields./ .Ha.r•mon:: a. half mile nor the.a. +. and
southeast of this Site, r•a•_.pectivel . Harmon :y, Hor-se tooth
and Shields are cla - ified as arterial with the f, llok.!ina
,4eome tr i c=• in this a.r•e•a:
- H arm ,n yRoad - two 1 an e s. t,.je s t of Sh i e 1 ds, an d tt.,-jo-f ou r
1 a.nes ea=.t of Shields
- Hor _.e tooth Road - four - 1 a.ne•__• e.a._.t of Sh i e 1 ds an t!---,o
1a.ne=• vre'_•t of Shield 4,:+ith some p r ov i s ion fc,r
a.ux i 1 i ary turn 1 a.ne=•
1
0
0
j
'0
Parev- Li
❑
El 00=00
EJE]EIn
M
Golf I
Course
c:Ic:
EJEE
Sewage
Disposal
I -
jLJLJCI
U0
REMBM4954
EIEJ
1:10
1510
UUL
r
TE
UNIVER
JL-j
-j11E:10L--JL--j
E3
L
71jT
LIU
E :IFIF
F
heat
in
Z/
E '3 4
aveaverG, r
Pit 7Drive
'Theater
n L::
I.Aft'r-4
Z
VDrakes
%
`Fri ILI
w
19 N,
27
------------
Grav
Pits
I
Omega
. . . ................
5
/549
Dry cf,
Lake
"Gravel
JAL#1
V,
4 91)5.,l
31
Pit
s �0
Mc Clellands
II
Harmony
y J I
'.
a=-
l
TES
SIC OOL
S
Cem
5040
CO
15245000
4916
� I SITE LOCATION FIGURE 1
Shields Street - ti,.jo lanes. one lane in each
direct.ionj tjith au x iIiarY turn lane s, a.t =_same
1 locations. There is some widening for one half mi 1 e
north of Ha.rmonx Road.
' The :sh i el d=S:'Hor =.e tooth i n ter•=_sect i on was recen t l =-i final i zed.
Other streets in the area have =.top sign control. Speed
l imi t_. on the arterial streets are 45-50 mph.
E:i=ting Traffic
' C}a.i l.. traffic flov.i is =_.hoi,.in in Fi,4ur•e 2. The=.e t. olumes
are directional , machine -counted approach volumes. conducted
by the Colorado Department of Hight,)ay-s in September 198:3 and
' by the City of Fort Col 1 i n _. i n September 1'.='86.
In addition to the dai l y count data., peak hour turning
movements UJer•e obtained at Sh i el d_.;,.Hor-_.etooth in August
and atShields./Harmony in huciu=.t 1`7'85. Based upon h i stor. i s
count information, =summer• counts are generally 15 percent
1 ess than vj i n ter counts due to school (part i cu l a.r l -Y GSLO not
' being in session. Therefore, for analysis purposes, it i.
pprc Apr• i a.te that the Shields./Harmony be f.a.c toned by
a.
1.15. The 1='85 counts vjere further factored by 1.03 to
1 reflect 1'+r,6 conditions. These facto t'= .re shok...Yn in
factored counts
Fi gure ?. W 1 rave traffic count data is provided in Appendix
H.
E::i=.ting Operation
Using the traffic: volumes. shov!n in Figure = and the
e;: i _.t i ng geome tr. i cs , the s i gn-a.l i zed intersection of Shields
and Hor••ae toc nth operates at level of _.er-.,,ice H in both peaty:
hours. The Sh i el d=_.::`Tr•outma.n intersection operates acceptably
t,:! i th stop =. i can control and the existing geometric=_• . The
8h i e l ds.,,Harmony intersection operates unacceptably far all
movements t.-!i th 4-way stop _sign control . In the morning and
a.f ter -noon peak: hours, i t i = at 1 eve 1 of sere:! ice D < cr i t i c.a.l
.um of all 1 ecis is. 1231 in the morning and 1017 in the
afternoon). Appendix B describes level of service for
' uns i ��na.l i zed and signalized inter -Sect ions -as def i ned i n the
115'C,5 Hi 4h4-da> 0a.pac i ty 11anua.1 . C:a.l cut a.t i on form=_ are provided
in Hppendi x C. By definition of the Ci t;r of Fort Co 1 ins,
' a.ccep t.a.b1 e c,per• at i on i = l e v e l of s ery i ce i_ or above . Opera-
t i on a.t the si grla.l i zed i nter.._.ec t i can i s cons dered to be
a.ccepta.bl e i n most urban =.i tua.t i ons. Operation at the
Shields.'Ha.rmony intersection can be improved !!ith 4-UJ.y.y _top
control by adding addi t. i on.a.l 1 anes on e i ther H.armon.y or.
Shields or- both. The additional lanes k:'.ioul d need to be bath
.approach 1 anes and ex i t 1 a.nes. Th i =_• !:tou l d make it either .a t
lane b:ti 4 lane, or 4 lane by 4 lane intersection. Record i nci
to signal wa.rra.nts presented in Appendi-x D, signals may be
r
0
0
Ln
C.R. No. 38E
0
9
2-9 HORSETOOTH
4S4 8
O
6'
J
J_
r
H
LL
Q
H
HARMONY 3-a* �25�
It
Q
N
RECENT DAILY TRAFFIC COUNTS
FIGURE 2
r�-
r O�
�-94/Ia5
�---I01/250
HORSETOOTH
340/Z32—�
I
i7/Z3Co
r
Lf)
TV
�Q
40/ 30
15/ 10
0 4 TROUTMAN
J I
W O
_
co �\
o
IP
co
ro
c�
�r
HARMONY
—� Ln
cn 9
5co
AM/PM
Q
N
1986 PEAK HOUR COUNTS FIGURE 3
11
1
11
11
warranted when considering current traffic volumes.. However,
the geometric improvements described above wi l l improve
operation sufficiently until final geometrics can be con-
structed in this intersection =.o that temporary F ry __ i n n .a. l i p .a, t i o n
is not necessary.
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPHENT
The 1988 Elementary School and 1:='=ii Junior High School
is a. proposed institutional development west of Shields
Street and a. half mile south of Hor e toc ith Road. A schematic
of the site plan showing the location and 1 i kel access
point•_. is provided in Figure 4. The elementary school is
scheduled to i be occupied by 1 ?88 and the .junior high school
is scheduled to be occupied by 1? 0. As stated earlier, the
land surrounding these sites is developing and, i
�, as such, many
of the streets are not completed. Access from the arterial
street system will be evaluated based upon operation and ease
of access based upon the proposed service areas of these
schools. Traffic signal warrants will be examined as a.
matter of course. Geometric requirements of on —site streets.
wi l l also be addressed.
In order to comprehensively assess the impacts to the
various streets and the key intersections, it is necessary to
include traffic from uses which are l i ke l y to exist in the
area. This would include the land primarily within this
Section surrounding these school sites. As stated earlier,
this land is currently in fairly low intensity uses. Since
no land use change proposals have been put forward for this
land to date, it was assumed to remain in the existing use
for the short range (3-5 Years) analysis. However, for the
long range (year 200 ) , it was assumed that these properties.
would be developed as indicated i ca.ted on the Fo • t Collins r �11 in•=. Zoning
Map.
Trip Generation
Trip generation is important in considering the impact
of a. development such as this upon the existing street
stem. H compilation of trip generation information was
prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in
1?76, updated in 1?83, and was used to project trips that
t,joul d be generated by the proposed elementary drool use at
this site, as well as, the adjacent developments.. The :junior
high school use is not addressed in the Trip Generation
Ha.nual . Therefore, traffic observations and counts were
performed on October 28, 1986 at Boltz Junior High School in
Fort Collins. Boltz J.H.S. ha.=_. 90=' students which is.
comparable to the expected 900 students at the proposed
junior high school. hl.a.nua.l traffic counts were performed
from , : 15 AN to 8: 15 AH (morning peak hour of the school) and
11
Q
N
HORSETOOTH
i
i
i
i
a�
V�
w
Z : V)
w a
w
ELEMENTARY CA
SCHOOL 1988
` • - , _ _ TROUTMAN
JUNIOR HIGH
SCHOOL 1990
do
>-
�v
�z
w
c7
ui
m HARMONY
LEGEND
'- EXISTING STREETS
• • - •• PROPOSED STREETS
SITE PLAN SCHEMATIC FIGURE 4
1
from 2: 15 P-1 to •?: 15 Phl � of ter•noon peak: hour of the _shoo, :? .
Botha automobiles and school buses were counted. From these
count_., factor_ t,aere developed to proiect trips that t,,iould be
generated by the proposed .junior high schorl use. Table 1
_.hot,,i_. the expected trip generation for the school sites. on .a.
da.i 1 >. and pe•a.k hour ba.si s.. The anal y se_. assumed no publ i c
transit or r• i desha.r• i ng for the school generated trips except
for school buses l•.dh i ch are ref l ec ted i n the tr i p gener•.at i on
factors.. As the residential area around the school sites
f i l l s. i n, the number of vial k. tr i ps_. t..,i i l l 1 i b::e 1 >, i ncreas_.e .
At a. t- p i cal e l omen tar•y or, :j un i or h i gh school , the
morning peak hour of the aenera.tor corresponds, to the peak:
hour of the street. Hot,:jever• , in the afternoon, the peak hour
of the generator is not usually the peak: hour of the _.tr•eet ,
For anal:,:si =. purposes , the peak: hours. used �-)ere 7:15 A42I to
8:15 AF-1 and 2:15 P11 to 2:15 Pt-1. Ample daily traffic counts
e,.- i s.t_ to determine v. hat percent c,f the daily tr•.a.ff i c occur=.
.at any hour of the day. In addition, recent daily traffic
count=. at ke;:- intersections t,,jer•e used to determine the
back:ground traffic in mid -afternoon on .a. t> p i cal it
is also noted that the school trips t, c �u l d occur only during a.
1 ^Q day school year. Typ i cal 1 y, this is. from September to
t1ay i.:ii th somespill overtothe last �:,teek in August and the
first trieeb:: in _Tune .
Trip Distribution and Assignment
'
The di rec t i ona.l di str i bu t i on of generated tr- i ps. from the
school si test.:.�a.s determ i ned based upon the a.nt i c i pa,ted school
_.ery i ce are as de scr• i bed b;., Poudre School Di _.tr, i c t Staff -and
the area road system.
In the short range future �1-' O), the elementray school
=er v i ce .area. i s assumed to be a.__ __•hoi.,an in Figure 5. F-10st
1
� e=.t imated at •>80':) chi 1 dren a.t tendi ng this e l ementa.r.:. school
v.li 1 1 come from the north (Wagon Wheel, PosSbor-ough, and
Imper• i a.l Est..a.te=.) . In the l ong range future (2006) , thte
elementary school s•er v i re .area i s. assumed to be as s.hovyn in
Figure 6. The major difference being elimination of the a.re.a.
West of Taft Hill Road. Hot,aever, i t is important to note
that the Section in t:,,h i ch the school is located v: ill 1 i ke 1 :,:
have a. significant residential population, possibly filled
i:jith residential uses. At this time, si
gnificant ignificant portion
of the students attending this school k:,,ii l l st.i l l came from
the north. Hov.jever• , this is 1 i ke 1 v to decrease to 30-35
percent.. The remainder C,_5-0 percent) +.,1i11 consist of
chi ldr•en I iving in this_. Section, vii thin 1:`2 mi le of the
school . Th i •_ is general 1-Y. considered to be t;,O thin walking
di stance .
The ,iun i or- h i gh _drool i s. assumed to have the sameservice a.rea in bath the short and Iona range futures. Th i s.
0
0
Land Use
Elementary School
540 students
Junior High School
i00 students
Total
Table !
Trip Generation
Da|ix
Trips
551
108?
1640
A.M. Peak
Trips Trips
in out
P.H. Peak
Trips Trips
in out
117 2O 68 ?0
176 117 85 128
ASSUMED SHORT RANGE
' ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SERVICE AREA FIGURE 5
• 0
1
' ASSUMED LONG RANGE
i ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SERVICE AREA FIGURE 6
1
assumed service area is shown in Figure 7. Wh i 1 e the service
a.r•ea. is not anticipated to change over time, the tr• i p distri-
bution will, since the south portion of the service a,
rea i
not as developed as the north portion. r - r I _n. '= Hresidential
development occurs to the south, travel to/from the junior
high school wj l l change. Given the above service areas for
each school and the anticipated residential growth wi th i n
those service areas, the trip distributions used are shown in
Figure S.
Trip assignment is how the generated and distributed
trips are expected to be loaded on the street system. The
assigned trips are the resultant of the trip distribution
process. Figure 9 shoi,.ls the peak hour tr• i p assignment with
background traffic reflecting the short range future Q =':=0)
conditions. While this assignment does have =. _Y,ea.r
associated with i t , the year is only used to derive
background traffic, which can change the overall volumes.
However, the assignment of site generated traffic will remain
constant.
Traffic Projection=.
Traffic volumes are projected for various streets wi th i n
the City c if Fort Collins. utilizing a. tool known as the
gravity model which con_.iders future land use, population,
and employment locations. For. 20 year projectican=. (year
2006), this gravity model output is the usual source for
projections used in traffic impact studies. However, the
last Traffic Flaw Map provides pr•o:iections for the year 2000.
Therefore, an estimation was made of traffic in this a.r'ea by
the year 2006 using the latest Traffic Flow Map and the
knowledge of what has been occurring and what is expected to
occur in this area. of Fort Collins. Figure 10 shcn;.1s the
expected average daily traffic (ADT) for bath Hor_.etooth,
Taft Hill, Harmony, and Shields near this site in the :}ear
1 F?O . Figure It shows the expected average ..g_ P daily traffic d_.i 1 r'i in
the game area in the year 2006. Figure 12 shows the peak
hour traffic for the streets in this a.r•ea in the year 2006
with full development of bath =.chard sites and full
development of the Section as might be expected according to
the For t Gal 1 i n=_. Zon i ng Map .
Signal Warrants
As a matter of policy of the City of Fort Col l i n=-,
traffic signals are not j n=.t.a.l 1 ed at any location unless.
wa.rra.nts are met according to the "Manual can Uniform Traffic
Control Devices." However-, it is possible to determine
whether traffic signal warrantswill be met based upon
estimated ADT and utilizing a. chart shown in Appendix D or
the peak hour signal warrants also provided in Appendix D.
5
ASSUMED JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
SERVICE AREA FIGURE 7
41
•
HORSETOOTH
TROUTMAN
HARMONY
-3,,+
�114/Z01
113/314
so -79
381/Z(o0.
40/ 34 --,`
0
N
0
ro
_I
W
Ln
rLn
=
N
� r
\� 45/34
t— Zq/ I to
1-7/11
1/7 �`
N L _
0
�S
-7 b/ I O Z
-74/ 153
1
Ito/11--7
Z-7Z/148—�
35/
� It 9
co 6`
cn
AM/PM
Q
N
1990 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FIGURE 9
• o
0
4!2Y
ID�000_- 9
14�
N
HORSETOOTH
a
�
O
0
o
J
W
_
_
co
SITE TROUTMAN
0
0
0
5,500
:900
HARMONY 0
0
0
0
1990 DAILY TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
FIGURE 10
0
0
S
Q
IZ DOO I`I OOD
ZI 000
HORSETOOTH
N
Q O
00
O O WFc
J
W
J
OO W z
N
J
N 4,000-
3,000-
O
=
5,000
4, 000
o
U.
SITE TROUTMAN
0
�0 0 00
O�
10,000
15, 000
HARMONY
0
0
2006 DAILY TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS FIGURE 11
Goo
3
��
,0O
2D/ZO
ZO/ Z0
�lJ
20/ZO
f
(000/500 —�
ZO/ZD
O 0O O
p00
U
W
Z
W
N
TROUTMAN
HARMONY
AM/PM
N
o �n
ado
ISO/ Z45
I
3S0/4� S
I40/ I40
1j
/—
Ito/-7s
HORSETOOTH
500/410 —+-
(oo/
,n p
9d\-
00
00
s-
N
O
0
J
W
O-3,0
_
N
09
Lr�
too/ 50
) �
�— 40/ Z O
2,01 Zo
Ito/ 130 -�
s o/ so —�
I
I
ZO/ZO \
GOO O
(O
O
9
to
Ln
t11 cn
ti)
Oto0/
150
Z ZO/ -70
1-7 0/ ZZO
LO
30/ 35 —�
Z7 5 /
85 65
Ln O
Ln
2006 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 12
1
L
Utilizing th i ._ append i .x and the volumes shot: -:in in F i caures ='
.and 10, signals vii l l not l i kel y, be viarra.nted at any of the
possible a.cces.s. locations to the school sites in the short
range future. It is I ik:e1y that s.ianaI s t.-jou1d be t�ia.rra.nted
at the Shields,/Harmony- inter -section. Based upon volumes.
shown in Figures 11 and 12, signals are likely to be
tr.!arra.n ted at the ^hie 1 ds.: "Trou tma.n and Hor se tooth,/Seneca.
intersections in the long range future. These (;%ia.rra.n ts. are
1 i kel y to be met due to background traffic rather than school
related traffic since Troutman and Seneca are collector level
streets.
Signal Progression
Signal progression t•1a.=• evaluated prior to intersection
operational analysis to determine t!.�he then the sionals would
fit into progression schemes. In addition. the progression
=_•theme could be used in eva.l u•?.t i ng operation on a. stop sign
controlled street with the major street having platoon f l c vi .
This analysis. technique is described in the I �.5 Hi ght,;ay
Capacity Manual.
The technique used in the signal progression a.na.l ;r's.i
t,,ias• a. computer program called Signal Progres-si on Analysis.
SF'F,h-J? prepared by the University of Florida Transportation
Research Center.. Its main functions include:
- Interact i ve entry of arter, i al system data..
- Display a. time location diagram i.,:ihich provides
graphical representation of the qua.l i ty of aster i a.l
progression.
- Printing of a. time -space diagram to show the qua.l i ty,
of progression.
- Optimization of signal offsets. for arterial pro-
gress i on .
The program inputs. are:
- Intersect ion location
- Cy-c 1 e 1 ength
- F' h a. s. i n g
- Offs.et=_.
- Speed
' rant' or all of these inputs can be changed i tera.t i'.;el y in
achieving the optimal progre=.=_•ion .
Shields. Street data for. existing and anticipated signals
' to the north v)ere used in evil ua.t i ncA progression along
Shields. The evaluation i:,,ias made vl i th a. sign -al at Richmond
based upon the 1.0i 1 l i a.msburg F'UD Site Access. Study. The
' signal progression on Shields 'street was analyzed based upon
the fol 1 owi ng cr i ter i a:
,4
- Cycle length of 80-120 seconds.
- Posted speed of 35 mph.
- Mainline ('shields) G/C Ratio
Drake G/C = 0.30
Swallow G/C = 0,60
Richmond G/C = 0.70
Hor=.etooth G/C = 0,30
Troutman G/C: = 0.60
Harmony G/C = 0.40
- Green time on the cross street is greater than the
pedestrian crossing time of the mainline at 4 feet
per second.
- Achieve the
largest
bandwidth possible along Shields.
A number of cycle
lengths
were examined. A cycle length
of 100-seconds and a.
travel
speed of 35 mph, were selected a. .
the best to meet the
above
cr i ter i a.. Figure 13 shows the
progression analysis
for Shield=.
'street with Richmond
_. i gn.a.l i zed. A bandwidth
of
27 seconds is passible in the
northbound direction
and 30
seconds in the sou thbound
direction.
11
1
11
Horse tooth Road data for existing and expected signals
were obtained from the Williamsburg PUD Site Access Study.
dated September 1986. The signal progression on Horse tooth
Road was analyzed zed based upon the following cr i ter i a.:
- Cycle length of 80-120 seconds.
- Posted speed of 35-40 mph.
- Mainline (Horsetooth) G/C: Ratio
College G/C: = 0.28
Mason G/C = 0.70
Meadowlark G/C = 0.60
Shields G/C 0.00
Richmond G/C 0.70
Seneca. G/C: = 0,70
Taft Hill G/C = 0.50
- Green time on the cross street
pedestrian crossing time of the
per second.
is greater than the
mainline at 4 feet
- Achieve the largest bandwidth possible along
Hor =.etooth .
A number of cycle lengths and speeds were examined. A
cycle length of 100 seconds and a. travel speed of 35 and 40
mph were selected as the best to meet the above criteria.
Figure 14 shcows the progression analysis for Hor _.etooth Road.
A bandwidth of 15 seconds is possible in each direction.
'
The above progression
a.n.a.ly_.es are
presented to show
that signals can fit along
Shields and
Hor _.e tooth, and to
provide data for the platoon analysis.
Design progression
analysis must be conducted
on a. regular
basis reflecting
'
change in land use, _.peed,
and other variables.
TIATT14EW- J- DELI Cf
ARTERIAL PROGRESSION DEGIGN
• RUN2
ROUTE: SHIELDS
INTERSECTIONS: 6 CYCLE LENGTH: 100 SYSTEM OFFSET: 0
BANDIJIDTH LEFT: 30 SEC. RIGHT: 27 Soe. PERFORMANCE INDEX: 32
EFFICIENCY: 287 ATTAINABILITY: 101 INTERFERENCE: 20
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
N0. .........TIME -LOCATION DIAGRAM.......... DISTANCE SPEED
RIGHTSOUND ... READ DOtJN LEFT RIGHT LEFT RIGHT
I XXXXXxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 2110 0 35 35
2 xxxxxxxX XXXXXXXX 3170 2110 35 35
3 xxxxxxxXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 510 3170 35 35
4 XXXXXxxXxxxx 2370 510 35 35
5 X XXXXXXY.Y.XXXXXXX 2380 2370 35 35
6 XXXXXXXXX XxxxxxxXxxXxXxXxxxx 0 2380 35 35
NO. OFFSET .........TIME -LOCATION DIAGRAM.......... PHASE LENGTHS
LEFTBOUND ... READ UP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 20 XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 40 60
2 60 XXXXXXXXXXXXXxXX 60 40
3 27 xxxxxxxxXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 30 70
4 5 Xxxxx XXXXXXX 70 30
5 60 XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX 60 40
6 25 XxxxxxxxXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 30 70
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TIME SPACE DIAGRAM
ROUTE: SHIELDS
COMMENT: P,LA•12
CYCLE LENGTH 100 SECONDSs SCALE CINCH=40% OF CYCLE: 1 LINE= 264 FT
#�##i#si�i'%if k�!N±E�'if if li iF iF s.ii+!if lF i!i Rii lF iFi#Kit 1�lF iF iiR#iFi Mi4 iF;iMiE iF Y. 9E iii iF RiF f. ie iF if if iF lF iE i4i i!ffS siF lE iE 9F Yi6
NA1RM�1.klMx�-- �--xxxx><:xxxxxxxxxx- ., . ., xxxx—�--y�x�xx�xa�x
TR ell TMA W xxxxxxxxxx - xxyxxxxxxx •--_._...- .xxxxx-xxxxx-
o� oGj.
�y c
�c
NORSE'F*i0T41—--xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx . -- xxxxxx�!xxx x xxxx—mot
RI c,*I "&W D -- -- _.— _--Xxxxxxx- -
9 VALE OW Xxxxxxxxxx -- — Xxxxxxxxxx.- xxxxxxxxxx-
D R A K-ixxx xxxxxXXXXXXxxxxxx - XXXXXXxxxxxxxXXXX x
—)(XXXXX —
SHIELDS SIGNAL PROGRESSION
FIGURE 13
RIRJ i
ROUTE, HORSET*
INTERSECTIONSt 7 CYCLE LENOTHt 100 SYSTEM OFFSET, 0
BANDWIDTH LEFT, 15 3ec RIGHTt 15 Sec PERFORMANCE INDEX, 26
EFFICIENCY, 15 7 ATTAINABILITY, 60 INTERFERENCE, 27
------------------------- --------------------------------------------------
NO. .........TIVIE-LOCATION DIAGRAM.......... DISTANCE SPEED
RIGHTSOUND ... READ DOWN LEFT RIGHT LEFT RIGHT
1 xxxx XXXXXXXXXXXxxxxxxxXY.XXXXx 500 0 35 35
2 XXXXXX 1280 500 35 35
3 XXXX xxxxxxxxxxxx 3500 1280 40 35
4 xxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXX.XXXXXXXX 670 3500 40 40
5 XXXXXXXXXxxx 1010 670 40 40
6 xxxxxxxxxxxx 3600 1010 40 40
7 XXXXXXxxx XXxxxxxxxXX 0 3600 40 40
VIC. OFFSET .........TIME -LOCATION DIAGRAM.......... PHASE LENGTHS
LEFTBOUND ... READ UP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 10 xxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 28 72
2 7 XXXXXX 85 15
3 45 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 60 40
4 10 Xxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 30 70
5 0 Xxxxxxxx XXXX 70 30
6 SO xxxxxxxXXXx X 70 30
7 2 X XXXXXXxxxxxxxxxxXxx 50 50
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TIPIE SPACE DIAGRAM
ROUTE, HOP.SETOOTH
COt If IEVIT, RUI I1
CYC LENGTH 100 SECOVIDS1 SCALE (INCH=40% OF CYCLEt 1 LINE= 264 FT
{fRs.RRRRRRYRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRifRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRYRtRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRiRRR
COLLEC 'xx — xxO(Xxxx)(xxxxxxxxxx---..-•-•-• xx.XXXXXXXXXXXXXxxx xYXXYXXxxxxxXXX-
MA12ON '.x - — --- ...... xxxx ....... .... —...xxx-----HX'
MAVOW
ARIF"xxx x ------..-xxXXXYXxx.X......
.... _..... _.. - ....._ xxxxxxxYXx —
Sol£L
�x-------XA0w-xxxxX>0<Xxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx - --- - --•YXXXXXXXXXXXXX'
Rldi.i
. u------
XXXXXXX----. --
_..---- ----- XXXXXXx' xxxxxxx'
;inxxxx�c
xxxxxxx-..._'..._.___.-_-..__.-------- xXy-XXXx----
fi
y
�Y
Q
CO
TAFT H ,Yxxxxr),Xxxi — x) xxxxxxxxxi —\,--.-----Yxxxxxxxxxx-:—.-
SIGNAL PROGRESSION
FIGURE 14
Operat ions Anal ys. i =_.
'
C:a.pac i ty analyses tj•ier•e performed on key intersections to
determine hot,:) each t,,lould operate in 10'?0 t,:ii th ful l
development of both the elementary and junior h i oh schools.
Operat i ons anal :r _.es were al so performed on key i nter=_.ect i on=_.
'
for -Year 2006 tra.ff i c and ful 1 deveI opment of the school
s i tes., as uael 1 as other assumed development in the area.
In the short range future it is like 1 y that the
schools t,,li l l be developed, but it is not likely that the
surrounding resi dent i al -area wi 1 1 be developed. This.
'
assumption is made because no active development proposals
exist for the vacant land t,:1i th i n this c Seh _ io n . Therefore,
the question is raised — how these school sites be
accessed from the arterial road system prior to development
'
of the collector and local street ne tv: ork: t:,t i th i n this.
:_section. Access can be via. Shields Street, Harmony y, Road, r• .a.do
'
Hor. sae tooth Road. Access. from Hor•=_.e tooth Road t,aou 1 d reclu i r•e
th3.t Seneca. Street be constructed from Horsetooth to the
=.chool s i to s.. Th i =_. t,.iou l d i nvol ve over 1/2 mi le of street
construction. This v.iou l d provide a. good route for 80 per -cent
'
of the elementary students and about 25 percent of the junior
high students. Access via. Shields. Street could be •:pia.
Trautman Par•kt:,iax or I,,Iak:er•obin Lane. Either of these streets
t:%ill operate similarly t.,,O th stop sign control at Shields
'
Street in the short range future. Th i =_. t:jou 1 d provide a. clood
route for 40 percent of the elementary students. and -.bout 60
percent of the junior high students. Access via. Harmony Road
'
vioul d provide the least -acceptable route due to i ts
remoteness from the major i ty of the popul .a,t i on i n the short
range service area. From a. numbers viewpoint, i t is
concl tided that the short ra.noe access shoul d be from Sh i el ds.
Street. As development occur=• in the area, other streets.
be constructed k!.th i ch provide addi t i ona.l atcces.s. from
'
all the arterials. around this _ Section.
From an operational paint of viet•,i, it ma.k;e=. 1 i the
difference t:ihet.her the school sites are accessed via. Troutman
'
or Vlakerob in. Bath t,,till operate similarly at. the Shields
Street intersection t,j i th step sign control. This operation
is s.ha:•,in in Figure 15. C:al cu l at i on forms are provided in
Appendix E. As mentioned ea.r 1 i er , the morn i nib peak: hour,
'
analys.is corresponds to the peak: hour of the street, since
the morning peak hour of the generator and the morning peak
hour of the street are i den t i ca.l . Houie-.)er, , the a.f ternoc!n
'
peak; hour analysis cor•r•es.pondsz to .a. mid —afternoon traffic
,:col umes on the street. Bath elementary and Junior high
schools exhibit very l i the traffic activity bett,:ieen 4.30 .a.nd
5:30Ft-1 on a tik,a. 'picaI t::teed;•. Traffic activityrelated to
hool chool 1 1 onl -Y occur dur i ng the 180 da.;.• school •seas .
sc
During the summer•, tr•a.ff i c t,ai 1 1 operate as though the school s
did not exist. Both signalized intersections. (Harmony/
Shields and Horse tooth../Sh i e 1 ds) vi i 1 1 operate acceptably.
I a
ELEM• ARY Q •JUNIOR HIGH
N
1411tWilt►jri':�7
1990
2006
<5 °/ > 5 %
WITH 10
SECT IOh1
<5%
JUNIOR HIGH
15
Z5%
SECT ION
5%
Rio
30%
010
ti
2S%
TRIP DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 8
•
0
�LM
•
1990 PEAK HOUR OPERATION FIGURE 15
• 0
11
1
Left -turn e: i ts from the school access road (Tr•outma.n or
Wak:erob i n) t,j i 1 1 experience some de 1 .a.;.• during the morning peak:
hour. These delays can be confined to a. single left -turn
lane if aux i 1 i .a.r•:.,� lanes are provided. Based upon 1 imi ted
research conducted re 1 at i nq_ left -turn delay to level of
service (reserve ca.p.a.c i ty) at stop sign control led
intersections, the range of expected delay is 5-14 seconds.
per approach vehicle. A br i of documen ta.t i on of that research
is presented in Appendix F. If good progression is
maintained on Shield•_. Street, similar to that indicated in
Figure 13, level of service C is -attain-able for these left
turns. This conclusion is dr•a.vin a s-i ng the platoon flow
anal ys. i s. de cr i bed in the 1'785 H i Ghv.1arti: Capac i ty Manual . The
delay per approach vehicle for level of service C conditions.
i....Jith _.top sign control is projected to be from 5-10 seconds.
For the short range future, tvdo travel lanes, are needed
for the school .a.cces road (Troutman or Wakerobin), except
for the vii den i ng recommended at the Shields Street i nter-
=•ec t i on . It is, hoviever• , the policy of the City of Fort
Col 1 i ns to require a. developer to construct a. fu 1 1 t:.ai dth
street. The hJakerobi n Lane route vjou 1 d require construction
of 1600 feet of primarily local streets vjith approximately
1000 feet of collector (Seneca.). The Troutman Pa.rkt:a.a.y route
viou 1 d require construction of .a.pprox i mate 1,y 2200 feet of
collector ('Troutman a.nd Seneca). The tvio lane portion of
Shields. Street (r•auahl y between Horsetooth a.nd Troutman*) can
handle the anticipated volumes- from an operational vievipoint.
HavJever, , this section of roadvaay has. numerous patches and
should be evaluated for structural integrity given the
current traffic. If it remains a. two lane rural crass
section for 5 or so years, it is recommended that adequate
6 feet) =shoulders be added. The ultimate -solution for
Shields Street is to construct it to its anticipated four
lane cross section.
Each of these alternative access. streets... Wakerobi n
or Troutman, has specific advantages to the School District.
The l4akerob i n Lane -al t.ernat i ve provides a pa- 'ed =_.tree t for.
approximately 0.15 miles. and a completed bridge a,..oer the
Pleasant Valley & Lake Ditch. Hot�,ie er , the bridge is not
paved. (!Ja.kerobin inter•s.ects. v:ii th Shields Street at .a. point.
vihere Sh i e 1 ds. Stree t i s. construe ted to i ts. fu 1 1 curb -to -curb
.arterial tjidth. If t:Ja.k:erobin Lane is e,,tended to the west
along vO th other, a.n t i c i pated street alignments in the area., a.
total of 2600 lineal feet of street must be constructed in
order to serve both school s.i tes.
The Troutman Parkway alternative intersects t,,li th Shields.
Street approximately 0 .3 miles north of t.Jaker•ob i n Lane. At
this. location. Shields Street is constructed to its. fu 1 l
4didth on the east side, but on the vilest it consists of •a
rur.a.l cross. section. Trautman Parkv:iay is completed on the
east side of Shields to the railroad tracks. I t i s. the
9
F
1
t
L
intent of the City of Fort Collins that Troutman Pa.r•kviay v:ii l l
some day have an at -grade rail crossing. In order to gain
.access. to these school site_ via this route, approx imatel *.
2800 lineal feet of street must be constructed. Since in the
short range , most of the students v.i i 1 1 1 i ve north and
northea,_.t of the school _•i tes, the Troutman Parkviay route
�.ai 1 1 decrease the total traveI di stance by a.pprox imate l y 0 . 3
miles. Th i =. wi l l have a. correspond i ng =_•a.v i ngs i n travel t ime
depending upon the speeds involved.
Ca.pac i ty anal y_.es v:tere al =.o conduc ted u t i l i z i ng the year
200" tr•a.ff i c as shov.+n i n F i sure 12. The re _•u 1 is of these
analyses are shot --,in in Figure 16. Backup calculation form
are provided in Appendix G. Th i s. =.na.1 y_.i =• -assumes that
Harmony, Horse tooth , Sh i e 1 d_. and Ta.f t H i 1 1 are con•_.truc ted to
at 1 e.a_.t four lane cro_.=_• sections. The operation of the
Sh i e l ds/Hor•se tooth -and Shields: "Harmony intersections are in
a. the-acceptbl e categories as indicated in Figure 16. It is
expected that the Shields./Troutman and Horset.00th/Seneca
intersections v:i i 1 1 provide the major acces.s routes for trips
or i g i n.at. i ng vi i th'i i n the Section or accessing the school sites.
These intersections are expected to be signalized in the long
range future. These inter —sections. v.jill also operate
acceptably as indicated in Figure 16.
I n the 1 ong range fu ture , al 1 on-•_ i to 1 oca.l _•tree t
should have one travel lane in each direction. Both Troutman
Pa.rkt,lay and Seneca. Street are expected to be collectors and,
as such, should have one travel lane in each direction and a
center left -turn 1 ane . The expected cross. section of the
collectors (Troutman and Seneca".) v.! i l l be as. indicated in
Figure 17 (.from Design Criteria and Standards for Streets,
city of Fart C:ol l i ns.) .
Accident Analysis
The geometric changes at all the analyzed intersections
should reduce the accident rate. The a.ux i 1 i a.ry lanes
discussed above should remove right -turning and left -turning
vehicles from the through traffic stream and thus eliminate
the 1 i kel i hood of rear end accidents.
Park: i ng Anal ysi
The City of Fort Col 1 i ns expressed concern regarding the
provision of adequate parking a.t the school site,
particularly the junior high school. Curing the traffic
counting, parking inventory and parking observations v:ier•e
also conducted at Boltz Junior High School. At Boltz J.H.S. ,
there are 63 on -site parking spaces in front of the building.
There is also a. large unstr i ped parking lot in the rear of
the bu i 1 di ng. On the observation day, there v:lere 51 vehicles
10
• • Q
N
J
1
Ci
1 2006 PEAK HOUR OPERATION FIGURE 16
�I
RECOMMENDED TYPICAL CROSS SECTION
FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT
50`
z
z
H
H
�
u
a
�z
a
u
rz
H
to
�1
W
H
E+ X
H
m
a
4'
6'
1344
12'
13'
6'
5'
4'
68' RIGHT OF WAY
COLLECTOR
(BIKE
LANES, NO PARKING)
INTERSECTION/TURN
LANE
TROUTMAN AND SENECA
CROSS SECTION
FIGURE 17
11
11
11
K
11
1
11
in the front lot and 19 vehicles in the back lot in the
morning shortly after the morning be 1 1 rang. During traffic
counting, three vehicles were observed to have parked and
moved within the counting period. Numerous vehicles pulled
up to the curb to discharge passengers, but did not engage in
an act of parking. Parking is defined as stopping and
exiting the vehicle. Prior to the afternoon traffic count,
56 vehicles were in the front lot and 21 vehicles were in the
rear 1 of . Four vehicles were in parking spaces with drivers
waiting. These are not included in the 56 vehicles in the
front 1 of . There were also 5 vehicles "standing" along the
curb waiting to pick up students. At Boltz _1.H.S. , it
appears that there is an excess of parking spaces. The
highest number of vehicles parked w•a.s. 77. Wh i 1 e one school
observation does not adequately draw firm conclusions, it
-appears that 85 parking spaces (75 plus 10%) should be
adequate at a. .junior high school with an enrollment of TOO.
This estimate should be adjusted if data from other schools
indicates a. significant difference in parking requirements.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This study assessed the impacts of two proposed school
sites on the existing street system in both 1? 0 and 2006.
However, it should be pointed out that the long range
analyses assumed that other nearby developments would also be
in place in the general vicinity of the proposed schools. it
is. +ally to took at a. single development without considering
the interaction of other land uses in the area.
As a. result of this analysis, the following is
concluded:
- The development of the 1 -'88 Elementary School and
1 ="?0 .junior High School as proposed is feasible from .a.
traffic engineering standpoint with specific improvements in
the area. Full development of the school sites as proposed
will generate approximately 1 600 vehicle trips per day for
the 180 day school year r Sep tember - May).
- Current operation of the Hor•s.e tooth/Sh i e 1 ds.
intersection is in the level of service A category during
both peak hours with signal control. The four way stop sign
controlled intersection of Harmony/Shields operates at level
of service D. However, this can be improved with the
addition of both approach and exit lanes. This level of
service D operation is unacceptable according to the City'
own evaluation cr i ter• i .a.. Traffic signals may be warranted
now. Signals would improve operation to acceptable levels.
Operation can also be improved to acceptable levels by
improving this intersection to either a 2X4 or 4X4 stop sign
controlled intersection. It is recommended that one of these
11
J
alternatives be pursued by the City immediately to bring
operations to acceptable levels.
- Access from the three principal arterials,
Horse tooth , Shields, and Harmony was evaluated in the short
range future. It is recommended that a.cces.s to the school
sites be from Shields Street via. either Troutman Parkway or
Wa.kerobi n Lane. Access. from Hors•etooth Road via. Seneca
'street or Harmony Road via Regency and Seneca. Streets are the
least acceptable access solutions considering street
construction, anticipated school service area., and ease of
access.
- Development of the schools in the short range future
can be handled on the street system with some improvements.
These include provision of access to the school sites from
Shields Street. This access can be accomplished via. either
Troutman Parkway or Wakerobin Lane. Both routes have
advantages and disadvantages. From a traffic operational
viewpoint, both accesses operate similarly. H signal is.
1 i ke l y to be warranted at the Harmony/Shields intersection b.:.:
MO or before based upon background traffic (other than site
( school) tra.ff i c) . All signalized intersections wi 1 l operate
acceptably in the short range future.
- With full development of the school sites in the long
range future, sign.a.ls will be warranted at the Shields..`
Troutman and Hor•s.e tooth/Seneca intersections. This a.=.s•umes
fu l 1 development of the Section in which the school sites are
contained. These streets are classified as collectors.
- All the signalized intersections analyzed operate
acceptably in the peak: hours in the long range future with
the four lane crass section on Horse tooth , Shields., and
Harmony.
- Parking was surveyed at an existing Fort Collins
junior high school of comparable size. At the existing
school, 85 spaces appeared to adequate. Approximately 85
spaces should be provided at the proposed .junior high school
unless additional d•a.ta indicates a. significant difference.
- With good design of the aforementioned geometric
improvements to the various intersections, the accident rate
should be at acceptable levels for urban conditions..
1 12