HomeMy WebLinkAboutINTERSTATE LAND PUD - PRELIMINARY - 34-88B - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - TRAFFIC STUDYINTERSTATE LAND PUD
SITE ACCESS STUDY
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
NOVEMBER 1995
Prepared for:
G. T. Land Colorado, Inc.
3555 Stanford Road
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Prepared by:
MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E.
3413 Banyan Avenue
Loveland, CO 80538
Phone: 970-669-2061
FAX: 970-669-5034
LN
■
■
I
I
I
I
I
a
■
■
■
M
I. INTRODUCTION
This traffic impact analysis for the Interstate Land PUD,
herein referred to as Interstate Land, addresses the capacity,
geometric, and traffic control requirements related to the proposed
development. Interstate Land is located west of Interstate 25 and
north of Prospect Road in Fort Collins, Colorado. The location of
the Interstate Land PUD is shown in Figure 1.
This study conforms to a typical traffic impact study format.
The study involved the collection of data, a review of previous
developments and studies in the area, trip generation, trip
distribution, trip assignment, and the operation analyses of the
key intersections in the area. The operations analyses were
performed for the existing conditions, the short range
future (2000), and the long range future (2015).
II. EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS
Existing and Proposed Uses
The land for this development is currently undeveloped. The
area is in transition from a rural to urban environment. Figure
2 shows the site plan for Interstate Land. When the north ramps
at Prospect Road were constructed a number of years ago, the
Frontage Road was reconstructed to provide 800-900 feet of
separation between the southbound ramps and Frontage Road
intersections. Figure 2 shows the key intersections analyzed in
this study. The intersections along the Frontage Road are lettered
for easy reference later in this report. In addition to the
intersections shown in Figure 2, the Prospect/Summit View
intersection was also analyzed.
The Interstate Land development is proposed as a mixed -use
development consisting of the following land use elements: office,
retail, hotel, restaurant, and auto related uses. For analysis
purposes, Interstate Land was divided into three phases. It was
assumed that Phases I and II would be built out by the year 2000.
It was assumed that build out would occur prior to the long range
future analysis year of 2015.
South of Prospect Road is the Fort Collins Resource Recovery
Farm. This property was considered for an aquarium use by a
private party. For analysis purposes, the aquarium use was assumed
for the long range future analysis. In order to forecast trip ends
for the aquarium, the zoo land use was used from Trip Generation,
5th Edition. Traffic forecasts from the "Silverberg Property Site
Access Study," January 1991, were used as background traffic for
2
N
UU11 tvufbt: Gidding'—s
j
35 31 'n1 y) 32 t. Z: 7&
U15
7,
It :z
Z)
23
A
1522
47 t'Subst. 4960
3
.
r
U
V
i ICU,
VMR..
r %A1 �5 a ollovv
J_ OL RAD B1, k
itilictioll
Win, 0
I oil Sinnani I i
4 41 Downtown
F d CollinsOLORADO
ollins "'9_0
c
i '� L�OL _0RA
Gravel Pit
Airpark
ct 5
Rosel�w
em
A
c
n
ad s i w e %N, h e,
i p Sal
I ill Ili It f it
15
49
i7
BM4954
CIA
R it
/510
.1—k' '7,
14 8
d%
if W, INTERSTATE LAND
dt
ITY
Hose cc
7111- Gravel Oil w
I IL ------
kPIR03
10-
RDN
n
LI 1500 adio
0
T� I's
!It=,[ I E 1 .07
�Tbeal
L
j
I j 2 21
234
it
Drakes F_ 7 7-111 if
BM4874
It 1 1486
31.
L
o2if
r
26
F
onlega
82
Vt
49
Y
3: Ai 3
99/ 5; 1 32
it 36
NO SCALE
SITE LOCATION Figure
A&
N
NO SCALE
/
l j 1 Lar
d
rnvor=trrIflu AV—•—•—•—•—.--•—•—,—.
SITE PLAN Figure 2
development east of I-25. While this property was never developed,
that study provided a reasonable expectation of future development.
Site Access
Access to the site is proposed from the Frontage Road. No
additional access onto Prospect Road is proposed at this time. The
Frontage Road is a two-lane, north/south road adjacent to I-25.
South of Prospect Road, the Frontage Road terminates. North of
Prospect Road, the speed limit is posted at 45 mph. However,
analysis indicates that the calculated safe speed on the Frontage
Road is 30 mph. For analysis purposes, a speed of 30 mph was
assumed for the Frontage Road. This was confirmed in conversations
with CDOT. The intersection of Prospect Road at the Frontage Road
is stop -controlled for the Frontage Road.
Prospect Road is a two-lane, east/west street with a rural
cross section within the study area. Access to/from I-25 is
provided at Prospect Road. The northbound and southbound I-25
ramps at Prospect Road are stop -controlled for the ramps. Prospect
the
Road has a posted speed limit of 45 mph with the exception of
I-25 interchange area, which is posted at 35 mph.
Existing Land Uses
The land surrounding the site is primarily undeveloped. North
of the site, near Highway 14, are commercial and light industrial
uses. East of I-25 are agricultural and low density residential
uses. South of the site is the City of Fort Collins Resource
low density
Recovery Farm. West of the site are undeveloped and
residential uses.
Existing Traffic
The existing peak hour traffic counts at the key intersections
in the area are shown in Figure 3. Peak hour traffic data was
collected at three of the study intersections in May, 1995. Raw
traffic counts are provided in Appendix A. The peak hour counts
at the Prospect/Summit View intersection were synthesized from a
signal warrant study performed by the City of Fort Collins.
Existing Operation
The existing peak hour operation at the key intersections is
shown in Table 1. Calculation forms for these analyses are
provided in Appendix B. The intersections were analyzed using the
unsignalized intersection techniques from the 1994 Highway Capacity
Manual (1994 HCM). As shown in Table 1, each of the study
I
3 cc
w
W
>
C'3
Q
I—
F-
o
D
o:
cl)
U-
Site
�. _... Lo
�o
ED
��
�- 24/13
°�°
�- 98/47
`� co
-t-
608/522
r - 542 563
I l
I
3 1
/
PROSPECT
75/36 -�
102 75 -�
405 667 376/699 --
c
2/1--�
�-
0
z
P? z
CO)
N
W
a
cc
w
F-
z
-- 477/404
8/22
141/237 \
235/473 -�
9 Nl
tt
V
AM / PM
EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
A&
N
�-6/12
Figure 3
Table 1
Existing Peak Hour Operation
Intersection
Prospect/I-25 NB ramps (stop sign)
NB LT/RT
EB LT
Prospect/I-25 SB ramps (stop sign)
SB LT/RT
WB LT
Prospect/Frontage (stop sign)
NB LT/T/RT
SB LT/T/RT
EB LT
WB LT
Prospect/Summit View (stop sign)
SB LT/RT
EB LT
Level of Service
AM PM
C C
A A
B B
A A
C C
B C
A A
A A
C E
A A
intersections is currently operating at acceptable levels of
service, with the exception of the minor street turns in the
afternoon peak hour at the Prospect/Summit View intersection.
Acceptable operation is defined as level of service (LOS) D or
better.
The signal warrant study at the Prospect/Summit View
intersection indicated that signal warrants were met. If the right
turns and left turns on Summit View were separated, the signal
warrant may not be met. This geometric improvement is often used
to delay the installation of traffic signals. This is especially
relevant since Summit View Drive will have a diminished role as a
street, if Timberline Road is extended north of Prospect Road,
connecting to SH14 (Mulberry Street). The Timberline Road
extension is a Choices 95 Capital Improvement Project. Minor (low
cost) improvements to the Prospect/Summit View intersection should
be considered since the Timberline Road extension may cause the
above signal warrant not to be met.
III. TRIP GENERATION
Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a
development on the existing and proposed street system. Trip
Generation, 5th Edition, ITE was used to forecast trips that would
be generated by the proposed Interstate Land development. A trip
is defined as a one way vehicle movement from origin to
destination. The Regional Transportation Plan for the North Front
Range Area has goals aimed at reducing Single -Occupant Vehicles.
However, for a conservative analysis, no trip reductions were
assumed as part of this traffic study. Trip generation for
Interstate Land is shown in Table 2.
. IV. TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Trip distribution for Interstate Land was based on existing/
future travel patterns, land uses in the area, and consideration
. of trip attractions/productions in the area. The existing roadways
in the area also play a role in developing the trip distribution.
Some uses within Interstate Land are oriented toward I-25.
Therefore, two trip distributions were developed. The trip
distributions are shown in Figure 4.
■
Table 2
Trip Generation
Daily A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Land Use
Trips
Trips
Trips
Trips
Trips
in
out
in
out
PHASE I
Lot 1 - C-store/Gas
1170
44
43
50
50
Lot 2 - Sit -Down Rest.
1330
57
54
54
43
7.5 KSF
Lot 6 - Retail - 8.0 KSF
440
6
4
20
20
Lot 7 - Retail - 7.0 KSF
380
5
3
18
18
Lot 8 - Motorcycle Sales
910
26
11
20
29
19.0 KSF
Lot 13 - Hotel - 120 Rooms
840
38
26
39
34
SUBTOTAL
5070
176
141
201
194
Phase II
Lot 3 - Fast Food Rest.
2360
65
49
64
55
3.0 KSF
Lot 5 - Fast Food Rest.
2360
65
49
64
55
3.0 KSF
Lot 12 - C-store/Gas
1170
44
43
50
50
SUBTOTAL
5890
174
141
178
160
PHASE III
Lot 4 - Sit -Down Rest.
1280
54
52
52
41
7.2 KSF
Lot 9 - Hotel - 120 Rooms
840
38
26
39
34
Lot 10 - Office/Retail
770
35
7
31
52
19.3 KSF
Lot 11 - Office/Retail
740
34
7
28
50
18.6 KSF
SUBTOTAL
3630
161
92
150
177
TOTAL
14590
511
374
529
531
o
N
�e I
O
Site i
20%-25% PROSPECT _0%-5%
N
w
I—
Q
v) r\
aC
w
z
M
LAND USES ORIENTED TO 1-25
C CD
I N N
�e b\
.., - —,
f.Site i
0%-55% 1 PROSPECT
0%-5%
V014
w
Q
F-
N
a Lo
w N
Z a
LAND USES NOT ORIENTED TO 1-25
TRIP DISTRIBUTION Figure 4
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
V. TRAFFIC FORECASTS
Trip Assignment
The trip assignment is how the generated and distributed trips
are expected to be loaded on the roadway network. The site -
generated trip assignments are shown in Figures 5, 6, and 7 for the
respective phases.
Background Traffic
Background traffic was determined for the short and long range
future years. The background traffic for the area streets was
developed using the existing traffic counts performed at the study
intersections. A review of historical traffic count data available
from Larimer County and of traffic projections from the "North
Front Range Regional Transportation Plan" (NFRRTP) was conducted
to determine the annual growth rate. Based upon these sources, it
was determined that traffic is expected to grow at 2.5 percent per
year. This growth rate generally includes traffic that will be
generated in the immediate area.
Total Traffic
The site -generated traffic was combined with the background
traffic to determine the total forecasted traffic for the study
area. Total peak hour traffic for year 2000 is illustrated in
Figure 8. Total peak hour traffic for the year 2015 is illustrated
in Figure 9.
VI. TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS
Signal warrant, geometric, and operational analyses of the key
intersections were conducted using the short range and long range
traffic forecasts shown in Figures 8 and 9.
Signal Warrants
Using the short range peak hour traffic forecasts, it is
expected that traffic signals will be warranted at the Prospect/
Northbound Ramps intersection, the Prospect/Frontage Road
intersection, and the Prospect/Summit View intersection. The
warrant used for the Prospect/Summit View intersection was for a
major street speed of greater than 40 mph. It also assumed that
the Summit View approach would be divided into separate right -turn
��
4
N
N
,,1 O
AM PM 13��
/ 6/ 16
oho
O_
�� �`
O,`
N
�\
W
F-
o
,
W
40;,Al
K
91/87 �
7
rn Q
rn
00
IL
N
N p h\
M � 47
--123/134 PROSPECT
49/61
42/57 52/67 3/4 -
d-
3
y�� m Q
PHASE I SITE GENERATED
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 5
t,
AM / PM
�- 6/6
-100/115
rn
-r
v
to
L
M �
--123/128 PROSPECT
38/39
PHASE II SITE GENERATED
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
uo
N
W
F--
4
H
co
FW-
Z
46/52
A&
N
7
Figure 6
AM/PM
O'
PHASE III SITE GENERATED
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
n
d
Figure 7
W
� AM / PM � ^ � 0
Rounded to the Nearest lo%
5 Vehicles.
10.
O � ��` D
huh
OZ Q� O
N � 40 i
J ai
15/15
--195/205
Lo �Q
�CA
0 0
..I-
LO
O
120/85
725 69
11 Y85
540 850
W)
N
uj
f--
a
Z
00
�- 280/280
J
— 740/580
5/5
A? - 720 610
/
PROSPECT —J �1o/2s
165/140
285/415 17 205/29
370/665 �
0435/795�gp
5/5
Un I i LO
v
7
0/15
-115/110
YEAR 2000
TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 8
� N
■ AM/PM
Rounded to the Nearest
5 Vehicles.
■
Un o
t17 �
/110
`'1135850/910
135 100 -�
750/1005 -
0n o
�o
Y205 -
� 0 .�
I %�
2
`'$
02 0� O
4Q s�T
N /
o h\ /' z g
Lo
*""--15/15 (37 //
/ — 230/245
U)
N
H
F-
Q
H
Z
®
� I
"-%
o Ln
Q
�M
^ N
LO to N
�- 385/380
$\
_J j L
— 835/685
pr-- 75/40
-•- 895/790
PROSPECT —� 210/230
400/555
240/200 + 445/815 -
540/895 0 Ln o
55/30 - -,,, W
,33
N
7
250/370
50/455 -
V270/400
355 /39
YEAR 2015
TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 9
and left -turn lanes, as discussed earlier. If the Timberline Road
extension is completed prior to the year 2000, the Prospect/Summit
View signal may not be warranted.
Using the long range peak hour traffic forecasts, it is
expected that traffic signals will also be warranted at the
Prospect/Southbound Ramps intersection, in addition to those listed
in the previous paragraph. The need for a signal at the
Prospect/Summit View intersection will be a function of the
Timberline Road extension and future development near the Prospect/
Summit View intersection. This should be addressed in traffic
studies for future developments in this area and as part of the
North Front Range Transportation Planning Process.
Geometrics
Using the short range traffic forecasts, the short range
geometry is shown in Figure 10. The southbound right -turn lane and
eastbound right -turn lane at the Prospect/Southbound Ramps
intersection can be accomplished with minor widening and striping.
These lanes will improve the operation at this intersection and
should be provided whether or not the Interstate Land PUD goes
forward. Access C is not shown in the short range geometry or
assignment. This access will serve land uses that are shown in
Phase III. While the access may be constructed with Phases I and
II, it will not likely have much vehicular activity. Based upon
the forecasted traffic volumes, northbound right -turn deceleration
lanes are required at all accesses according to the State Highway
Access Code (SHAC). At the 30 mph design speed, the deceleration
length is 235 feet (185 feet with a 40 foot corner radius). Based
upon Section 4.8.1.e of the SHAC, the deceleration lane length can
include the taper of 90 feet. It is recommended that the right -
turn deceleration lane approaching Access A be a continuous lane
from Prospect Road the this access, due to the high turning
volumes. Southbound left -turn lanes are required at Access A and
a northbound left -turn lane is required at Access D. Based upon
the SHAC criteria, these lanes should be 235 feet long. No storage
is required based upon the forecasted turning volumes. While left -
turn lanes are not required at the other accesses, it is
recommended that the cross section of the Frontage Road have one
travel lane in each direction and a center lane that can be used
as a continuous left -turn lane or a designated left -turn lane. The
center lane can be 14 feet wide. It is the City's desire to have
bike lanes between the travel lanes and the curb/gutter. The
geometry shown at the Prospect/Summit View intersection is
recommended whether or not Interstate Land PUD goes forward.
Figure it shows the long range geometry at the key
intersections. It is expected that Prospect Road will have an
arterial cross section by/before the year 2015. The discussion in
the previous paragraph pertaining to the geometry of the Frontage
5
4h�
� a
0 SHORT RANGE GEOMETRY Figure 10
I
- Denotes Lane
3
w
> L
7
PROSPECT
LONG RANGE GEOMETRY
1
i
�ej
13 (PI
70
?'O
41L
N
Ln
N
co
—
F--
a
w
I—
z
kiV
Figure 11
Road can be applied to the long range geometry. A three lane cross
section is recommended for the Frontage Road. The intersections
shown on the site plan are adequately spaced to allow safe movement
of traffic.
Operation
Table 3 shows the peak hour operation at the key intersections
for the short range traffic conditions. All of the key
intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service.
Calculation forms are provided in Appendix C.
Table 4 shows the peak hour operation at the key intersections
for the long range traffic conditions. Calculation forms are
provided in Appendix D. As indicated, each of the study
intersections is expected to operate at acceptable levels of
service.
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS
This study assessed the transportation impacts associated with
the development of the Interstate Land PUD, located west of I-25
and north of Prospect Road in Fort Collins, Colorado. At the
proposed development level, it is expected to generated 14,590 trip
ends on an average weekday.
The potential impacts of the proposed project were evaluated
at the following intersections: Prospect Road/I-25 Northbound
Ramps, Prospect Road/I-25 Southbound Ramps, Prospect Road/Frontage
Road, Prospect/Summit View, and all accesses to the Frontage Road.
Currently, the key intersections analyzed as part of this study
operate acceptably with their existing control and geometry, except
for minor street turns at the Prospect/Summit View intersection in
the afternoon peak hour.
In the short range future, signals will be warranted at the
Prospect/Northbound Ramps, Prospect/Frontage Road, and Prospect/
Summit View intersections. The short range geometry is shown in
Figure 10. All of the key intersections will operate acceptably.
In the long range future with full development of Interstate
Land and other assumed development, the key intersections will
operate acceptably. With the long range traffic forecasts, it is
expected that the Prospect/Southbound Ramps intersection will
require signalization. The long range geometry is shown in Figure
11.
N.
Table 3
Short Range Traffic Peak
Hour Operation
Level of
Service
Intersection
AM
PM
Prospect/I-25 NB ramps
(signal)
B
B
Prospect/I-25 SB ramps
(stop sign)
SB LT
C
C
SB RT
C
B
WB LT
A
B
Prospect/Frontage Road
(signal)
B
B
Prospect/Summit View (signal)
B
B
Frontage Road/Access A
(stop sign)
WB LT
B
C
WB RT
A
A
SB LT
A
A
Frontage Road/Access B
(stop sign)
WB LT
B
B
WB RT
A
A
SB LT
A
A
Frontage Road/Access D
(stop sign)
EB LT/T/RT
B
B
WB LT/T/RT
A
A
NB LT
A
A
SB LT
A
A
Frontage Road/Access E
(stop sign)
EB LT/RT
A
A
NB LT
A
A
Intersection
Table 4
Long Range Traffic Peak Hour Operation
Level of Service
AM PM
Prospect/I-25 NB ramps
(signal)
C
C
Prospect/I-25 SB ramps
(signal)
C
B
Prospect/Frontage Road
(signal)
B
C
Prospect/Summit View (signal)
B
B
Frontage Road/Access A
(stop sign)
WB LT
C
D
WB RT
A
A
SB LT
A
A
Frontage Road/Access B
(stop sign)
WB LT
B
B
WB RT
A
A
SB LT
A
A
Frontage Road/Access C
(stop sign)
B
WB LT/RT
B
SB LT
A
A
Frontage Road/Access D
(stop sign)
B
EB LT/T/RT
B
A
WB LT/T/RT
A
A
NB LT
A
A
A
SB LT
Frontage Road/Access E
(stop sign)
A
EB LT/RT
A
A
A
NB LT
I I