HomeMy WebLinkAboutTACO BELL RESTAURANT PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PUD - 51-90A - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - TRAFFIC STUDY (2)1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
TACO BELL ENLARGEMENT
SITE ACCESS STUDY
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
DECEMBER 1990
Prepared for:
Taco Caliente, Inca
221 East 29th Street
Loveland, CO 80538
Prepared by:
MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E.
3413 Banyan Avenue
Loveland, CO 80538
Phone: 303-669-2061
as the analysis periods since they represent both the peak hour of
the street and the peak hour of the restaurant. Wi,thee 5t .Choices
7as.A yt :a,
95 imparovemeeht�s at; this,inte`rsectio,n,` level of, service C operation'
is achieved' at`. 'the analyzed peak hours": The Choices 95
improvements are double left -turn lanes and exclusive right -turn
lanes northbound and southbound on College Avenue ^N'o ffiiprov`emenyts
kil _ h^ V .r. a'�Cti, ��•a�'�eT. YfM7Y ',
ar,.e contempla�t4d#1 on;ei'ther le,g ;of 4ProspectFRoadaas�par�t,of .Choices
95:. Further improvement can be achieved by providing a right -turn
arrow for those movements which have right -turn auxiliary lanes
during the non -conflicting left -turn phase. Based upon the current
traffic volumes, a single southbound right -turn lane can achieve
the same level of operation in the noon peak hour and almost the
same level of operation in the afternoon peak hour. The difference
is only 0.2 seconds of delay more with the single southbound left -
turn lane. The single southbound left -turn lane will be evaluated
further using future traffic volumes.
The operation of the accesses to the existing Taco Bell
Restaurant is also shown in Table 1. Right -turn exits from the
College Avenue access operate at levels of service C and B during
the noon and afternoon peak hours, respectively. At the Prospect
access, both the exits and entrances operate acceptably. This
' statement should be qualified based upon observation. There were
very few left -turn entrances and left -turn exits. It was observed
that at times, some vehicles waited to make the desired left -turn
' maneuver, but could not due to the level of the westbound traffic
on Prospect Road. The entering vehicles probably found another way
into the Taco Bell Restaurant or found an alternative destination.
The exiting. vehMic.les finally decided to_,turn right and take another
route to their destination. In both cases, these desired left -
turns were not counted as ultimate left turns. However, they did
create both on -site and off -site congestion that is not reflected
in unsignalized intersection analysis procedure. There were time
periods, particularly during the afternoon peak hour, that vehicle
queues completely blocked the Prospect access to Taco Bell and
extended to Remington Street. These queues cleared when the green
-phase-changed-to-Prospect. It was al -so noted - that--the-westbound-- -
left -turn requirement exceeded the available striped left -turn
lane. During observation, it was noted that there were some
' vehicles who tried to enter the alley from eastbound Prospect Road.
These vehicles created a congestion problem while waiting for a
suitable gap in the westbound traffic.
' III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Taco Bell is proposing to build a larger restaurant with a
drive -up facility. This larger restaurant will occupy the existing
lot at College/Prospect and the lot located to the north. Figure
' 5 shows a schematic of the site plan. One access is proposed on
Prospect Road at the location of the existing access. Two accesses
are proposed to College Avenue. The south access is proposed to
1 3
I
LD
PROSPECT ROAD
Q
N
No Scale
W
.I
- —
Q
i.
SITE PLAN Figure 5
be right-in/right-out, located approximately 100 feet north of
Prospect Road. The north access is proposed to be right -out only
located approximately 220 feet north of Prospect Road. One future
scenario was analyzed for this project, since historic traffic
count information indicates that volumes have decreased over the
past few years in this segment of College Avenue. That has led to
the conclusion that traffic volumes have stabilized at this area
of College Avenue. Any increases in traffic on College Avenue
would be caused by specific land development rather than by an
increase in background traffic. Icr,ea�sie"Ps'r^ i^rit- a�fdfc in>:Jtla.s
ets
Trip Generation
ollege Avenue.
Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a
development such as this upon the existing and proposed street
system. A compilation of trip generation information was prepared
by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in 1976, updated in
1987, and was used to project trips that.would be generated by the
proposed uses at this site. The ITE information was compared to
the driveway counts obtained in October 1990 I,t was found that.
the ITE information underestimat4ed th`'e="actual counts by over 100>>
percent ,dur,ng., the. noons peak hour and' by 86 percent during the'
afternoon peak hour. It was concluded that the existing driveway
counts and the Taco Bell estimated increase of 25 percent would
better reflect the future traffic that would be generated by the
enlarged Taco Bell restaurant. Table 2 shows the expected trip
generation on a daily and peak hour basis from the enlarged Taco
Bell restaurant with a drive -up facility,. AYavehid:le trip is?
--
defined as having either an ori'g'in or dest"inati", at the -site. i
Trip Distribution —
Directional distribution was determined for University Square.
The distribution used a combination of commercial and residential
' uses as the production variable. The distribution was performed
by creating a gravity model. Data used in this analysis was
obtained from the Fort Collins Planning Department. The trip
' distributions are shown in Figure 6.
Several land use generators such as shopping centers, drive-
in (fast food) restaurants, service stations, convenience markets,
and other support services (banks, etc.) capture trips from the
normal traffic passing -by the site. For many of these trips, the
stop at the site is a secondary part of a linked trip such as from
' work to shopping center to home. In all of these cases, the
driveway volumes at the site are higher than the actual amount of
traffic added to the adjacent street system, since some of the site
1 4
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
i
i
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1 TRIP DISTRIBUTION WITH
1 RIGHT -IN / RIGHT -OUT ON PROSPECT
Figure 6
7
I
lI
1
generated traffic was already counted in the adjacent. street
traffic. A '50�, pass4by factor ,was applied to the newly generated
trips for'tl�e Ta°'co Bell res"taurant.
The procedure used to account for both pass -by traffic and
primary destination traffic is as follows:
- Estimate the trip generation rate as is currently done and
determine the total number of trips forecast to occur, based
on the size of the development..
Estimate the percentage of pass -by trips, and split the total
number of trips into two components, one for pass -by trips and
one for new trips.
Estimate the trip distributions for the two individual
components. The distribution of pass -by trips must reflect
the predominant commuting directions on adjacent and nearby
roadway facilities. Most peak period pass -by trips are an
intermediate link in a work trip.
Conduct two separate trip assignments, one for pass -by trips
and one for new trips. The distribution for pass -by trips
will require that trips be subtracted from some intersection
approaches and added back to others. Typically, this will
involve reducing through -roadway volumes and increasing
certain turning movements.
Combine the assigned trips to yield the total link loadings,
and proceed with capacity analysis as normally done.
Two traffic assignments were made. One reflected full turn
access at the Prospect Road driveway and the other reflected a
right-in/right-out access at the Prospect Road driveway. Based
upon analyses of these assignments and following meetings with Taco
Bell, the planning consultant, and city staff, it was concluded',
that right-in./right-out access at the Prospect Road driveway was
the most desirable approach.' The City of Fort Collins also
indicated that they would construct a median on Prospect Road that
would restrict the Taco Bell access and the alley to right-
in/ri_ght=out_access. This median should improve the operation and_
safety along this segment of Prospect Road.
:These pass -by factors were obtained by averaging pass -by
factors from the following sources:
1. Transportation Engineering Design Standards, City of Lakewood,
June 1985.
2. Development and Application of Trip Generation Rates, FHWA/
USDOT, January 1985.
3. "A Methodology for Consideration of Pass -by Trips in Traffic
Impact Analyses for Shopping Centers," Smith, S., ITE Journal,
August 1986, Pg.37.
4. Trip Generation, 4th Edition, ITE, 1987.
5. Transportation and Land Development, Stover/Koepke, ITE, 1988.
5
' Figure 7 shows the noon and the afternoon peak hour
assignments. of the Taco Bell restaurant generated traffic with
background traffic in the area.
Signal Warrants
No signals will be needed at any nearby intersections due to
`J the enlargement of the Taco Bell restaurant.
Signal Progression
' Since no new signals are needed, signal progression analyses
were not conducted. Signal progression was evaluated in the
University Square Site Access Study, December 1989. These analyses
evaluated a signal at Lake Street.
Operations Analysis
Capacity analyses were performed on the College/Prospect and
' driveway intersections adjacent to the Taco Bell.
Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 7 and the base
' condition (Choices 95 improvements), the intersections operate as
indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are
provided in Appendix D.ipec't'ed that'th'�e" .College/Prospect
' ofservice orµ bet't,er�)�"'dauri"ng?"both�"pe k'houras":"T With a single
southbound left -turn lane, the College/Prospect intersection
continues to operate acceptably. With a westbound right -turn lane
added to Prospect between the Taco Bell access and College Avenue,
the operation of this signalized intersection is improved While.
this r'ight`turn,`lane w l'1-be short' (app' 'imately'80 feet), it will
'*..„yo•'"'.&'dt+�x y., a ;.
b'e*lo'�ng enough to, accommodate tYie observed rigti:t .turns..that occur
d"ur-�ingea�ah=-cy�che The allowed- movements at -all of the-d-r-iveway
' accesses will operate acceptably as shown in Table 3.
on -site circulation is good. All parking is confined to the
south part of the site with easy in/out access to both College
Avenue and Prospect Road. The drive-in window is located on the
north side of the building with the storage lanes circling the
building on the east and north. The exit for the drive-in facility
The xM'ew Taco-Bellis a right -turn exit to College Avenue
rM resttairant ivil.l" "not rn"'�`e�gat=ively:` impact the accesse• :tio', or, th�"e^
o era'tion, of the north south �al`ael� ;betwee-n Col`lreg�e Avenue "and3
Remington Stre:e';A
The College/Prospect intersection is currently under design
by the City of Fort Collins, given the Choices 95 improvements.
That design is incorporating a single southbound left -turn lane as
' 6
Q
N
NOON/PM
FUTURE PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 7
Table 3
Future Peak Hour Operation
Intersection
College/Prospect (signal)
With Choices 95 improvements
With Choices 95 improvements,
but single SB LT lane
With Choices 95 improvements,
but single SB LT lane and
WB RT lane
Prospect/Access
SB RT
College/North Access
WB RT
College/South Access
WB RT
Level of Service (Delay)
Noon PM
C (22.9 sec/veh) D (25.2 sec/veh)
C (23.0 sec/veh) D (25.5 sec/veh)
C (22.7 sec/veh) D (25.1 sec/veh)
A A
C B
C B
I
be installed on Prospect from College Avenue through the alley
crossing. This will allow the Prospect access to Taco Bell to be
constructed without a channelization island. Prior to construction
of the Prospect- median, the Prospect access will function as it
does now. When the median is built on Prospect, the ,Prospect
access will become a right-in/right-out driveway.
' Accident Analysis
During traffic counting, it was noted that drivers executing
ingressing left turns at the Prospect Road access often placed
'* themselves in a dangerous situation. They made their intended
movement from the center through lane since there is no left -turn
' lane for this particular maneuver. Accident records were reviewed
for the area near the College/Prospect intersection for 1988, 1989,
and January through April 1990 Collision diagrams are shown in
Appendix E. ITn ']4988 3nd`�1'9,�,, " y ,m ' �'& there were :'39 and 3�8 accidents,
hrespeec'telreportediWntli_iarea�4In th'e, four mo',n�th period of
�.. .
1990,, there ,were sev.en-.a*ccid'ent"s reported. In these two years and
' four months, two were related to access to/from the Taco Bell. One
involved an eastbound vehicle rear -ended while waiting to enter the
Taco Bell driveway and the other involved an exit from the Taco
Bell driveway. The proposed median on Prospect Road will eliminate
the likelihood of these types of accidents occurring. The existing
south access on College Avenue is just north of Prospect Road. The
proximity of this access to the ColleAgee/Prospect i�ntlersection can
' create conflict points. The proposed"sitme planmoves,this access
r >, s ^ Uv y. { y '^" er
10�0feee_t"north o.f Pr�o'spect. This separation^<.wf11 improve the
i ff 9 awe ears( t
saifety at. thet ,C.ollege R Avenue south ,access. With geometric
improvements and "the new access driveway locations, the accident
r-a-te-shoul-d be at a -minimum for a typical urban condit.io.n..
' IV. CONCLUSIONS
This study assessed the traffic impacts of an expansion of the
' Taco Bell restaurant on the adjacent streets. As a result of this
analysis, the following is concluded:
' - The enlargement of the Taco Bell restaurant is feasible
a from traffic engineering standpoint. It is expected that
approximatel 20.00` trig end''s `will, be ene`ra`ted t this" site' on a
. . ,
typica� ,.KYda" .y. Some of these trips will be from the background
traffic already passing by this site.
1
.■ - Using the existing peak hour traffic volumes and geometric
improvements proposed under the Fort Collins Choices 95 Program,
acceptable operation exists at the College/Prospect signalized
intersection. It is recommended that a single southbound left -turn
lane be constructed on College Avenue rather than double left -turn
lanes as shown in the Choices 95 plans.' The existing Taco Bell
accesses to College Avenue operate acceptably. The existing Taco
Bell access to Prospect Road experiences considerable delay and
safety concerns for left -turn ingress and egress.
It is recommended ghat the P=rospect Road` a� cice"ssz''rbe;'
retricted to rig+ht-in,/right ouat. As part of improvements to the
�.� �. ,
' College/Prospect intersection, the City of Fort Collins is
designing a median on the east leg of Prospect Road that will
extend thigh �,thae a„lleyand assure the good operation of the
(<, right-in/right out access on Prospect Road It Mis- recommJende'd thata
we "t�bound righ' Tg' rn�6*lane ` e` buiolt"on ProspectxRoad b�et'ween the'
TacoB:eltl*.access and College Avenue.
.. .. °' 1T..:i:.. �": f V Jiff i :
— m, - t jib •y aYb.. `e' :`. Y y y
With the Choices 95 improvements (sing<le°southbound left
,t°:urn: lane) 'a6nd the r.•ecommended westbound ght turn lane; the
College/Pro`spe"c't' signal`ized intersection w ,11,19�peFZt-es acceptably;
'=with,futuretraffics.,uolumes:; The proposed" driveway accesses will
operate acceptably as proposed.
With the recommended traffic control and geometries, a
' safer situation will exist and the accident rate should be minimal
for an urban condition.
1
1 -
C
7
I
I
I
I
-I-
I
I
I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Taco Bell has proposed to build a larger restaurant on their
existing site, located east of College Avenue and north of Prospect
Road in Fort Collins, Colorado. This traffic impact study involved
the steps of trip generation, trip distribution, trip assignment,
capacity analysis, traffic signal warrant analysis, traffic signal
progression analysis, and accident analysis.
This study assessed the traffic impacts of an expansion of the
Taco Bell restaurant on the adjacent streets. As a result of this
analysis, the following is concluded:
- The enlargement of the Taco Bell restaurant is feasible
from a traffic engineering standpoint It is. expected that
:approximate ly 2 ON tripe-nds 'will `be generat�e'd at this s Ye on a j
typicah.wweekday .. Some of these tr�ip•s w�il1 be ,f,rom��the' bacikI dund j
t-raff4ica1rad+y ^passing bythis! sane
- Using the existing peak hour traffic volumes and geometric
improvements proposed under the Fort Collins Choices 95 Program,
acceptable operation exists at the College/Prospect signalized
.intersection.,
r'ecomm'end+eda�a,singl� 'southSb'0o rdFale;fyt-turn'"'
bane be con truet,ed on_Cal,lxeg� 7 me•nue,_rather than d4olub�ler 13 eft turn
lanes as shown in the Choices 95 plans. The existing Taco Bell
accesses to College Avenue operate acceptably. The existing Taco
Bell sacc(es°s +o =P ospe"ct Ro'ad 'exp`er' erases consideraM1ble:" delay andW
safrety con ernsfor"`left ,tu=rn ngr�ess,and,egress ;.
1L i 15'—'I CC. UIRIIIsip
C I1LL CCl 1.Pla�l7�^',l•�cr(itvt�lr.cc•�^�-nvvur++a.•cic,.c.�lo�c
rests=icted 'to right in/right out% As part of improvements to the
Colle11
ge/Prospect intersection, the City of Fort Collins is
designing a JO 46i.an one "tslieskeasta"legof�'Prosp4ect B d that will
extend through the alley and assure the good operation of� the
- With the Choices 95 improvements (single southbound left -
turn lane) and the recommended westbound right -turn lane, the
College/Prospect signalized intersection will operate acceptably
with future traffic volumes. The proposed driveway accesses will
operate acceptably as proposed.
- With the recommended traffic control and geometrics, a
safer situation will exist and the accident rate should be minimal
for an urban condition.
I
A 1-:p 1=_1•-J D I X I=1
0
!� Weekly Summary for week
of September-
17,
1989 *#x
F'age
'�i£'-�«i,"�!•,f#-#'M.-#-,f'afif#a<?F#jf"tt"iQ-A####�!ie##a!"i�-ir#�tii'#',�1FiF'�#�'##'►�i�-#i��"r##N-'!�r-,fu•',f")f"x'i('#',�'�'ie##',�###"r.?!'####'I�iF
Data -File
M0989i ) i 1 . F'RN
Station
loli,26
Lanes)
.
1
Identification
10
Direction
:
Southbound
City/Town
• FT. COLLINS
County
:
LARIMER
Location
: COLLEGE NORTH of PROSPECT (S °<
N BOUND)'
17 1B 19 20 21
22 23 Wl:day
Daily
Time
Sun Mon Tue Wed
Thu
Fri
Sat Avg.
Avg.
'00
01:
17.6
1Bo ----
158
1-13
02: Oo
139
167
1.33
109:.
03:00
43
62
53
3B'
'04:
C,o
05:oO
31
55
_ 6
44
34
50
24
35
06:00
e7
78
83
59'
07:00
199
226
213
152
Cie :oo
547
575
561
401
09:0o
715
728
722
515
10:00
920
915
91B
655
11:iir,
12: 00
1437
1437
1026
13: 00 1
1444
1535
1490
1064
'14:002
15:00 3
1506
143B
. ._......_..
149B
1464
_.._ . _........
1502
0:.. 1451
1073
1036
16:oO
1664
1497
1581
1129
17: 0i_, '5
1977
1832
1905
1360
18:00(0
1655
1794
1725
1232
19:001
1087
1106
1C,97
783
20:00
834
901
- 86B
620
21:00
7C,CI
839
77(_,
550
22:oQ
800
683
742
530
-�3:00
427
405
416
297
24:01,
208
215
212
__151
Totals
,11
1'Y7
YYy y y i y fY Y1.:3740 Y192G Y54y
-l:T -I-IC lC # # # T. IC T. T."I" 1'."Y. ): �".�.• T•'x:".�:"� P. 'J�' F r. # # # # # T# l: # lC #T. #!! T. # #7C Tv # -!:
YY: YyYy
#TC !i '?•;"M-.�. 'K'k''.' JS T.
y y19y30 y9
-IC'!C #T. # l# # #T #T F T."T:
Y92''
#'�' # �T. T F.
Avg Wl::day
71.2
99.7
15.6
Avg Day
99.6
139.6
21..R
AM Peal:: Hr
12: C)o
1 (:): i
AM Count
1.437
91.E;
FM Peal:: Hr
17:00
17:OC,
PM Count
1977
1B32
1
11
w wr w� w� ew w■ � w� wr �w
xxx Weekly Summary for week of September 17, 1989 xxx Page
Data File -
: M0989011.PRN
Station
. 101026
Lane(s)
2
Identification
: 10
Direction �:
Northbound
City/Town
: FT. COLLINS
County
LARIMER
Location,,.,
: COLLEGE NORTH_ of
PROSPECT
.(S & N-
xxxxxxxxxicx*ititairxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxitxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
17 IB 19
20
21 22
23 Wkday
Daily
Time
Sun Mon Tue
Wed
Thu Fri
Sat Avg.
Avg.
01.00
141 124
.13,.
95
_
02:00
-
59 83
71
51
03: 00
44 46
45�_
:.4:i+C,
_7 44
41
29
57 44 !
51
76
V OD
91 126
1i!9
78
..-..:..
:E5 431
408
291
08:00
1452 1472
1462
1044
09:00
1225 124E
1237
B83
10:00
1044 1111
li
1078
770
11:00
1151
1151
622
12:00
1358
1358
970
13: 001
1449
1589
1519
1085
14:00�
1541
1555
1548
1106
15. 003
1484
1473
1479
1056
16: 004
1378
1468
1423
1016
17:00-
1322
1781
1552
965
18:00I.
1421
1420
1421
1015
19:001
1283
1337
1310
936
20:00
893
997
945
675
21:00
759
760
760
543
:00
60B
6S7
64B
463
_3:00
363
426
395
282
24: 00
242
263
263
ISE
Totals 12743 20420 4729 202U1 14429
xxxxxx.rxxxxxxxxxxwxxx�rxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
% Ave Wkday 63.1 101.1 27..4
% ..vc. Day BE.7 141.5 B
145:: 1472
r„ r_e. k: Hr 14:e. I-
..
PM 1541 ifB9
xxx Weekly Summary for week
ct September 17,
1989 xxx Page
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx�
.
Data File
: M0989012.PRN
Station
: 101006
Lane(s) :
1
" Identification
': 10'"" `"`"""'
Direction :
Northbound""
Citv/Town
FORT COLLINS
County :
LARIMER
Location
COLLEGE AVE SOUTH of PRCSPECT(NO.BOUND)
xxxxxxxxxxxxirxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxwxxxxxxxxx-
17 16 19 20
21 22
23 Wkday
Dai:
Time
SunMon _ Tue Wed
Thu Fri
Sat Avg. -
A•:7,
._._:.
1_7 145
?51
_.
__....
4=
:7 49
46
06:00
106 154
- 130
-.
07:00
464 516
490
�.:
OB:00
1631 1620
1626
1 1 L
09:00
1381 1505
1443
1C::-
10: 00
1266 1255
1261
9C:'
1379
1379
9='
12:00
1603
1603
114'
13:00 4
925
2015
1470
105:
14:00 z
1848
1535
1892
135_
15:00 %
1744
1895
1820
13C,'"
16.004
1698
1892
1795
12Es
17-005
1758
1769
1764
12c.
18:006 -
Ie14
1825
1620
13e"
19:00 1
1557
1773.
1665
11E`
20:00
1250
1267
1259
E9
21:00
1009
1030
1020
22:00
7B3
933
859
til
23:00
426
538
462
34-
24:00
290
350
320
22'
Totals
15102
25434 5447
24483
174E
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-.
/. Avg W1,day
- 61.7
10:;.9 22.2
Avg Day
- 66.4
145.4 7.1.1
AM Peal: Hr
OB:OO 08:00
AM Count
1631 1620
Pp! Peah: Hr
14:00
1 3: 00
P^! Count
1B4E
2015
xxxxxxxxxxwxxxxxxxx.+xxxxxxxxxxxxxx+wxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<>.,
M M M W M
*** Weekly Summary for week of September 17, 1989 *** Page
Data File
: M0989001.PRN
Station
: 101084
1
Lane(s) : 1
Identification
: 30
Direction Westbound
•:
City/Town
: FT. COLLINS
County LARMIER
Location
: PROSPECT EAST of
COLLEGE
(W. £< E. BOUND)
- -
17. 18' 19
20
21 22 23 .
Wkday
Daily
Time -..
.Sun,-. Man - . Tue
Wed
Thu Fri Sat -
Avg.
Avg.
_____
_____ _____
01:00
_____ _____
_____
_____ _____ _____
91 65
_____
7S
56
=2.00
3C 43
38
_-
.71._0
24 23
24
17
!•4:00
18 18
18
13
05: 00
13 13
13
9
06:00
57 44
51
36
07:00
172 151
162
115
08:00
521 530
526
375
09:00
512 529 -
521
372
10:00
424 207
316
225
11:00
460
460
329
12.00
177
630
404
288
13:001
649
663
656
469
14.007,
556
546
552
394
15:003
510
537
524
374
16:004
686
697
692
494
17:005
704
789
747
533
18:006
712
838
775
554
19:001
,:i6C1
649
654
467
20:00
468
461
465
332
21:0n
354
424
369
278
22:00
316
354
335
239
23:00
176
193
185
132
24:00
128
113
121
e6
Totals
609E
921E 1623
870(")
-----
6214
n.: 177 63!: 530 I
PM Hr Ia: f.)Q 1E:Oil
712 c-j
**# Weekly Summary for weer:
of September 17,
1989 R** Page 2
Data File
: M0989001.PRN
Station
: 101084
Lane(s)
2
Identification
: 10
Direction
Eastbound
City/Town
: FT. COLLINS
County
LARMIER
Location
: PROSPECT EAST of
COLLEGE
(W. £< E. BOUND)
17. 18 _ 19
20
21 22
23., Wkday
Daily
Time
Sun Mon Tue
Wed
Thu Fri
Sat Avg.
Avg.
01: 00
61 63
62
44
02:00
37 43
40
29
03:00
15 01
23.
16
04:00
15 20
18
13.
05:00
26 31
29
20
06: 00
114 108
Ill
79
07:00
_
311 320
316
225
08.00
484 533
509
363
09:00
-
552 506
529
378
10:00
431 219
325
232
11:00
473
473
338
12: 00
159
562
361
259
13.001
5e7
658
623
445
14: 00+-
570
586
57B
413
15:00'.
581
599
590
421
16: 00.':
648
670
659
471
17:00`.
74B
731
740
528
18:006
675
742
709
506
19:00"1
591
632
612
437
20: 00
506
493
500
357
21:00
3B6
383
385
275
22: 00
388
328
358
256
23: 00
245
211
228
163
24: 00
_____ _____
_____
112
103
108
77
Totals,
_____
_____
6196
_____ _____ _____
9217 1874
_____
8880
-----
6343
.. F.v_ Wl:day
_T.e
103.e 21.1
.. ., _ -'.
5-.-
145.3 29.5
Count
_5�
562 53-
F'M Peal: Hr
17: OC:
18: 00
F'm COLInt
74E
742
m w m m m m mr MMM
M = M = = M M
*** Weekly Summary for -week of July 16,11989 *** Page
Data File
M0789002.F'RN
Station
.: 101002
Lane s)
1
Identification
10
Direction
:
Southbound
City/Town
FORT COLLINS
County
:
LARIMER
Location
COLLEGE AVE. NORTH of PROSPECT(SO.BOUND)
+**xxxxx*xx*xxxx+i+*xx*x*++*xxxxxx+x%*%**+x*xxxx**x+xxxxx+*x%*x*x**xxxxxxx+*+--_
.
16 17 18
19 20 21
22 Wkday
Dai:.-
Time
Sun Man Tue
Wed Thu Fri
Sat Avg.
Av=
_____ _____
01:00
_____ _____
113
_____ _____ _____ _____
131
_____
122
_
02:00
71
76
74
'..
itir
_•_
34
..
00
25
26
26
•O
a7_
.
_.
..
6:irp
- 94
114
104
.-. iJ0
246
210
08:00
593
593
593
-
09:00
768
717
743
5-.
10:00
1149
973
1061
757
11:00
1466
1425
1446
107.
12:00
1919
399
1159
B<-=
13:00
0 1714
857
61_
14:00
17 1514
766
5?:
15:00
1421 1392
1407
100`_
16:00
1581 1540
1561
111-
17:00
1968 1964
1966
140=
18:00
1767 1718
1743
12?
19:00
979 992
986
70-
20:00
807 871
839
59°
21:00
743 654
699
49"
22:00
640 585
613
43%-
23:00
350 415
383
27-
24:00
203 239
_____
_____ _—-- __—_
221
l!!&
_____ _____
Totals
____
10476 20121
_____
4727
_____
17662
1`261_
Avg Wkday
59.3 113.9
26.8
Avg Day
83.0 159.5
37.5
AM Peak Hr
12:00
11:00
AM Count
1919
1425
PM Peak Hr
17:00 17:00
FM Count
1968 1964
+xxx*xx*%xxxxx+*%%+xxxxx%xxx*x*x%%xxx%%xxxx+*xxx+xxxxxtxxxxx*%%x%xx%xxx*xxxxx�.
xxx Weekly
Summary
for week of July 16, 1989 xxx F'aae
Data File
: M0789006.PRN
Station
: 101006
Lane(s) :
1
Identification
: 30
Direction :
Northbound
City/Town
: FORT COLLINS
County :
LARIMER
Location
: COLLEGE AVE SOUTH
of PROSPECT(NO.BOUND)
xx+xxxx**%*xxxxx*xxxxxxxxxxa*xxxxxxx*%%xxxxxxxxxx%x%*%xxx*xxx*xxxxxxx*xxxxxx--_.
16 17
18
19 20 21
22 Wkday
Da'_;
Time
Sun Mon
Tue
Wed Thu Fri
Sat Avg.
Av_.
01 : 00
142
156
149
1 -`
02: 00
76
84
81
146
144
145
_
OB: 00
1451
1304
1376
S:
09:00
1273
1140
1207
Et
10:00
1183
1114
1149
87
11:00
1337
1303
1320
9=.
12:00
1477
1477
10f'
13:00
1
1780
891
6-•
14:00
176
1759
966
69
15:00
1631
1507
1569
112_
16:00
1531
1436
1484
10b;.
17:00
1553
1569
1561
111
1B:00
1547
1429
1488
10--
19:00
1259
1168
1214
86-
20:00
938
1040
-
989
701
21:00
922
99B
960
6E,
22:00
955
936
896
64:
23:00
482
442
462
33r
24:00
269
268
269
19:
Totals
11164
21997
5844
20241
1445=
Avg Wkday
55.2
108.7
28.9
Avg Day
77.2
152.1
40.4
AM Peak Hr
12:00
0e:00
AM Count
1477
1304
PM Peak Hr
15:00
13:00
PM Count
1631
1760
w**%xxx*xx**xxx*xxxx*xxxxxxxx*xxxxx%x***xxxxxx*x*xxx*xxxx*x*xxxxxxxxx*x**x*xx:..
*** Weekly Summary far week of July 16,11989 *** Page
Data File
: M0789008.PRN
Station
: 101008
Lane(s) ,:
1
Identification
: 10
Direction ':
Westbound
City/Town
: FORT COLLINS
County
LARIMER
Location
: PROSPECT
EAST of
COLLEGE
AVE.(W. BOUND)
16 17
18
19
20 21
22 Wkday
Dai_
Time
Sun Man
_____
Tue
Wed
Thu Fri
Sat Avg.
Ave
_____ _____
01:00
_____
57
_____
66
_____ _____ _____
_____
62
i 12:00
27
41
34
.a:oc;
__•
16
20
o=.00
14
9
_ .O0
19
18
19
-
5/
47
52
07:00
173
172
173
08:00
564
534
549
_-
09:00
479
443
461
_
10: 00
442
430
436
�.
11:00
406
402
404
12:00
390
97
244
13.00
O
418
209
1,
14:00
108
262
195
1S-
15.00
257
227
242
17--
16:00
283
246
265
I-S
17:00
357
329
343
2-:
18:00
469
444
457
�-
19:00
322
377
350
25.
20:00
269
320
295
21C
21:00
287
301
294
_
22:00
249
283
266
19.,
23:00
158
205
182
1_;.
24:00
121
114
118
0
Totals
2880
6177
2275
5666
404-
xx*xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*xx*xxirxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*xxxxxxx*xxw*-
Avg Wkday
50.8
109.0
40.2
Avg Day
71.2
152.6
56.2
AM Peak Hr
08:00
08:00
AM Count
564
534
PM Peak Hr
le:00
Is: 00
PM Count
469
444
i
*x**xxxxxxxx*xxx****YY*xwxxxYxxxx**xxxxxx**xx**Y*Yx*xxx*xxxxxxxxY****xxxxx**"-.
x** Weekly
Summary
for week
of July 16, 1969 x**
Pace
Data File
: M0769004.PRN
Station
: 101004
Lane(s) : 1
Identification
: 10
Direction : Eastbound
City/Town
: FORT COLLINS
County : LARIMER
Location
: PROSPECT
WEST of
COLLEGE
AVE. EAST BOUND
16 17
18
19
20 21 22
Wkday
Dail
Time
Sun Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu Fri Sat
Avg.
Avc
01:00
127
115
121
02: 00
56
71
64
--
03:00
37
31
34
04: 00
21
26
05: Oil
50
48
49
-
.:00
202
195
194
07: 00
541
497
519
-.
08:00
1091
1113
1102
75
09:00
961
883
922
6`.-
10:00
889
769
829
5"-
11:00
863
780
822
52
12.00
946
946
67-
13: 00
O
1125
563
40
14:00
152
859
506
--c-
15:00
632
589
611
4_Tc.
16.00
689
549.
619
44'
17:00
1025
951
998
7C,
I8:00
990
807
899
64'.
19:00
744
640
692
49-
20:00
654
574
614
43'-
21:00
597
614
606
4`
22:00
547
555
551
39-
23:00 -
383
354
369
26.-
24:00
----- ___
170
— _____
174
_____
_____ ___—
_
172
17-
Totals
65B3
13584
4513
____
12613
-----
915=
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*xxxxxxx�xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxwxxxxxxfi*-
% Avg Wkday
51.4
106.0
35.2
Avg Day
71.9
148.4
49.34
AM Peak Hr
06:00
08:00
AM Count
1091
1113
PM Peak Hr
17:00
13:00
PM Count
1025
1125
M M M r M M
ion M M
Site Code : 00000010
N-S Street: COLLEGE AVE.
E-Y Street: PROSPECT RD.
SUNNY i CLOUDY/COLD
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
PAGE: I
FILE: 10-10-89
Movements by: Primary DATE: 10117189
Time .... From North .... .... From East .... .... From South .... ..j. From Nest .... Vehicle PED
Begin PED RT THRU LT PED RT THRU LT PED RT 7HRU LT PED RT THRU LT Total Total
7:30 0 17 110 7 1 36 71 22 0 13 355 58 2 30 105 33 057 3
7:45 0 20 155 10 0 51 90 33 0 14 463 59 0 46 116 51 1108 0
HR TOTAL 0 37 265 17 1 87 161 55 0 27 818 117 �2 76 221 84 1965 3
8:00 AM 0 20 148 11 0 33 63 27 0 21 238 54 0 43 110 43 Bit 0
8:13 0 14 125 19 0 32 70 25 1 21 309 53 0 54 93 38 853 1
DAY TOTAL 0 71 532 47 1 152 294 107 1 69 1365 224 2 173 424 165 3629 4
PEAK PERIOD ANALYSIS FOR THE PERIOD: 7:30 AM - 0200 AM
DIRECTION START PEAK MR ........... VOLUMES ........... ...... PERCENTS .......
FROM PEAK HOUR FACTOR PED Right Thru Left Total PED Right Turn left
North 7:30 AN O.29 0 71 538 47 656 - 11 82 7
East 7:30 AN 0.79 1 152 294 107 S53 - 27 53 19
South 7:3D AN 0.77 1 69 1365 224 1659 - 4 82 14
Nest 7:30 AM 0.89 2 173 424 165 762 - 23 56 22
Entire Intersection
North 7:30 AM 0.89 0 71 538 47 656 - It - 82 7
East 0.79 1 132 294 107 52 - 27 33 19
South 0.77 1 69 1365 224 1659 - 4 82 14
Vest - O.89 2 173 424 165 762 - 23 56 22
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
Site Code : 00000010
PAGE: 1
N-S Street: COLLEGE AVE.
FILE: 10-10-89
E-Y Street: PROSPECT RD.
SUNNY : CLOUDYICOLD
Movements by: Primary
DATE: 10117129
PEAK
PERIOD ANALYSIS FOR THE PERIOD: 7:30 AM - 08:30
AM
DIRECTION
START
PEAK HR
........... VOLUMES ...........
...... PERCENTS
.......
FROM
PEAK HOUR
FACTOR.
PED Right Thru Left Total
PED Right Thru Left
North
7:30 AM
0.89
0 71 538 47 6%
- 11 82
7
East
7:30 AN
0.79
1 152 294 107 553
- 27 53
19
South
7:30 AM
0.77
1 69 1365 224 1650
- 4 B2
14
Nest
7:30 AM
0.89
1 173 424 165 762
- 23 56
22
Entire Intersection
North
7:30 AM
O.99
0 71 539 47 656
- 11 82
7
East
0.79
1 152 294 107 553
- 27 53
19
South
0.77
1 69 1365 224 169
- 4 82
14
vest
0.89
2 In 424 165 762
- 23 56
22
COLLEGE AVE.
N
............
S
.. •• 1682...
EPED
3 O
1 71
1 538 1 47 1............1
1
CPED 3
.. ............
• •.
_—
1
656 --
-- 152
..........
589.
... PROSPECT RD.
553 294
165
--
-- 107
__________________
424
762
_—________________
PROSPECT RD. ...
------------
____________—___
1
__ ...........
540• ..........
173
__
___ 1658 ____ ..................
..................
------------------
SPED
3 2 I............1
224 :1365 I
-___—__--__________
69 1 1
CPED 3
...
818 ...
... 1
COLLEGE AVE.
i
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
Site Code : 00000010 PARE: t
N-S Street: COLLEGE AYE. FILE: 10-10-99
E-N Street: PROSPECT RD. -
SUNNY CLOUDYICDLD Novesents by: Primary DATE: 10117109
Tin .... From North .... .... From East .... .... From South .... .. 1. From Nest .... Vehicle FED
Begin FED AT THRU LT FED RT THRU .LT PED AT THRU LT PEA AT THRU LT Total Total
12:00 PH 2 42 406y 15 0 45 67 43 0 22 299 64 0 103 77 44 1247 2
12:15 5 25 356 26 2 23 55 48 0 29 292 59 0 98 - 61 41 1113 7
1200 6 28. 325 22 0 15 55 46 0 11 313 66 0 52 58 32 1033 6
12:45 2 36 330 32 1 28 74 39 0 53 389 83 0 74 96 40 - 1273 3
HR TOTAL 15 .131 1417 115 3 111 251 175 0 125 1293 272 0 327 292 157 4666 18
DAY TOTAL 15 21 1417 115 Ill 251 17' 0 125 1293 272 0 327 292 157 4666 ..
PEAK PERIODANALYSISFOR THE PERIOD: 12:00 PH - 01:00 PH
DIRECTION START PEAK HR ........... VOLUMES ........... ...... PERCENTS .......
FROM PEAK HOUR FACTOR FED Right Thru Left Total FED Right Thru Left
North 12:00 PH O.B6 15 131 1417 115 1663 - 8 B5 7
East 12:00 PM 0.57 3 Ill 251 175 337 - 21 47 33
South 12:00 PM 0.80 0 125 1293 272 1690 - 7 77 16
Nest 12:00 PH 0.87 0 327 292 157 776 - 42 38 20
Entire. Intersection
North 12:00 PH 0.86 15 131 1417 115 160 - 8 85 7
East 0.27 3 Ill 251 175 537 - 21 47 33
South 0.130 0 125 1293 272 1690 - 7 77 16
Nest 0.87 0 327 292 157 776 - 42 38 20
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
Site Code : 00000010 PAGE: 1
N-S Street: COLLEGE RYE. FILE: 10-10-99
E-N Street: PROSPECT RD. -
SUNNY CLOUDYICOLD Novesents by: Primary DATE: 10/17189
PERK PERIOD ANALYSIS FOR THE PERIOD: 12:00 PH - 01:00 PH
DIRECTION START PEAK HR ........... VOLUMES ........... ...... PERCENTS .......
FROM PEAK HOUR FACTOR FED Right Tire Left Total FED Right Thru Left
North 12:00 PH 0.86 15 131 1417 115 1663 - 0 85 7
East 12:00 PH 0.87 3 Ill 251 175 .5V - 21 47 33
South 12:00 PM 0.20 0 125 1293 272 1690 - 7 77 16
Nest 12:00 PH 0.37 0 = 292 157 776 - 42 38 20
Entire Intersection
North 12:00 PH 0.86 15 l3l 1417 115 1663 - 8 B5 7
East 0.97 3 111 251 175 537 - 21 47 n
South 0.90 0 125 1293 272 1690 - 7 77 16
Nest 0.07 0 327 292 157 n6 - 42 38 20
COLLEGE AVE. N
—_____ --- W-+-E
............ l S
.............
1561 ..
CPED 3 15 1 131 11417 1 1.15 :............1 3 CPED 3
I
.................. ___ 1663 ____
.......... 654 1
... PROSPECT RD. 537 251
157 -- -- 175
__________________ 1 ____---_-_________
292 776 PROSPECT RD. ...
------------
•• 532..........
327 __ ___ 1690 ____ ..................
..................
__________________+ M.________-__-__-___
SPED 3 0 1............1 272 11293 1 125 ; 0 CPED 3
.. 1919 ..
COLLEGE AVE.
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
Site Code : 00000010 PAGE: 1
H-S Street: COLLEGE AVE. FILE: 10-10-89
E-N Street: PROSPECT RD.
SUNNY CLODDY/COLD Movements by: Primary DATE: 10/11/89
Time .... From North .... .... From East .... .... From South .... ... Frog Nest .... Vehicle PED
Begin PED RT THRU LT PED RT THRU LT PED AT THRU LT PED' AT THAD LT Total Total
4:30 0 31 326 44 0 25 99 46 0 22 247 74 0 79 84 34 1171 0
4:45 0 31 471 42 0 22 114 49 0 27 291 48 0 109 99 39 1292 0
HR TOTAL 0 62 607 66 0 47 213 95 0 49 538 122 0 188 183 73 2463 0
5:00 PM 0 42 463 42 0 -19 125 43 0 36 306 70 0 105 83 49 1340 0
. 5:15 2 46 438 27 0 14 131 52 0 27 203 68 0 90 89 48 1313 2
DAY TOTAL no 1708 155 0 79 469 !90 0 112 1127 268 0 383 355 170 5166 _
PEAK PERIOD ANALYSIS FOR THE PERIOD: 0400 PM - 05:30 PM
➢IRECTION START PEAK MR ........... VOLUMES ........... ...... PERCENTS .......
FROM PEAK HOUR FACTOR PED Right Thru Left Total PED Right Thru Left
North 4:30 PM 0.72 2 150 1708 I55 2013 - 7 85 B
East 4:30 PM 0.94 0 79 469 190 738 - 11 64 26
South 4:30 PH 0.90 0 112 1127 268 1507 - 7 75 18
Nest 4:30 PH 0.92 0 383 355 170 90 - 42 39 19
Entire Intersection
North 4:30 PM 0.92 2 150 1709 155 2013 - 7 85 8
East 0.94 0 79 469 1" 738 - 11 64 26
South 0.90 0 112 1127 268 1507 - 7 75 16
Nest 0.92 0 383 335 170 VOB - 42 39 19
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
Site Code : 00000010 PAGE: 1
M-5 Street: COLLEGE AVE. FILE: 10-10-29
E-N Street: PROSPECT RD.
SUNNY CLOUDY/COLD Movements by: Primary DATE: 10/17/89
PEAK PERIOD ANALYSIS FOR THE PERIO➢: 04:I0 PM - 05:30 PM
DIRECTION START PEAK HR ........... VOLUMES ........... ...... PERCENTS .......
FROM PEAK HOUR FACTOR PED Right Thru Left Total PED Right Thru Left
North 4:30 PM 0.92 .2 150 1702 155 2013 - 7 B5 B
East 4:SO PM 0.94 0 79 469 1" 73B - 11 64 26
South 4:30 PM 0.90 0 112 1127 268 1507 - 7 75 18
Nest 4:30 PM 0.92 0 383 3S5 170 908 - 42 39 19
Entire Intersection
North 4:30 PM 0.92 2 150 1709 155 2013 - 7 B5 B
East 0.94 0 79 469 190 739 - 11 64 26
South 0.90 0 112 1127 268 1507 - 7 75 16
Nest 0.92 0 383 30 170 908 - 42 39 19
COLLEGE AVE. 1...1 N
W—+—E
............ I S
............
I I .............I
.. 2376 ..
CPED 3 2 1 150 11708 1 155 1............1 O [PED 3
..................
.................. — — — 2013 — — — — — 79
.......... 887 1
... PROSPECT RD. 738 469
I
170 -- — 190
355 908 PROSPECT RD. ...
__________________ 1 ..................
622 ..........
383 __ — — — 1507 —__ ..................
..................
__________________* e,________—_________
CPED 3 0 1............1 268 :1127 1112 1 O [PED I
.. 2281 ...
............
.. COLLEGE AVE.
#:tv 1-� F" t-= I A u I >< 1--3
I. INTRODUCTION
This site access study addresses the capacity, geometric, and
control requirements at and near the proposed enlargement of the
Taco Bell Restaurant located east of College Avenue and north of
Prospect Road in Fort Collins, Colorado. This study addresses the
traffic impacts at full development of the larger restaurant with
a drive -up facility.
During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made
with the project planning consultant (Architecture One) and the
Fort Collins Traffic Engineering Department. This study conforms
to the format set forth in the Fort Collins Traffic Impact Study
Guidelines. The study involved the following steps:
- Collect physical, traffic and development data.
- Perform trip generation, trip distribution, and trip
assignment.
- Determine peak hour traffic volumes.
- Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses
on key intersections.
- Analyze signal warrants.
- Analyze signal progression.
- Analyze potential changes in accidents and safety
considerations.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The location of the Taco Bell is shown in Figure 1. Since the
traffic in the area has been stable over the past few years, it is
important that a thorough understanding of the existing conditions
be presented.
Land Use
- - - -
The
Taco Bell parcel is bounded
by single family detached
dwelling
units, which have been
converted to commercial office
1
space, across College Avenue to
the west and the north along
College Avenue. Land to the east
(across the alley) is occupied
by single
family detached dwelling
units. Land immediately to the
south (across Prospect Road) is a vacant lot, but further south is
commercial retail and office space along College Avenue. It is
expected that, in the future, the land on the west side of College
' Avenue will redevelop, but will continue as office type uses. The
City anticipates that this land will redevelop as a unit rather
than as individual parcels. The topography in this area is flat
from a traffic operations perspective (<2% grade change).
I
I
1
k
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMMARY REPORT
XXZXZZZZZZXYXXZZZZZYZXXXZZZXXYYXXZXXZtXZZX%XkYX XYYY YYYYXY Y YXXZ.ZYYX K}CZZZZ
I NTERSECTIUN..Pr-os.ecii�cl i ea- �_ � i_
AREA IYPE----- OTHER (-frt-g�^ -7
ANALYST....... � A4 GJ.Fh• I40 P_To2EB
DATE .......... 11/15/89 10t.U"1
T.IME.......... LU 1O fZTi7Q ?..ao
COMMENT.......
VOLUMES=_OME T RI
°- - N� SB _ WE, NB 55
1 _ _ _-..
TH 292 251 1293 1417 : 1 12.0 1i 12.0 T 12.0 1 12.0
RT 327 111 125 131 T 12.0 TR i2.0 T 12.0 T 12.0
RR 140 10 10 10 R 12.0 12.0 TR 12.0 TR 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
__________________________________________________________________________
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
M M Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T
EB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.67 0 N 26.5 3
WB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.87 3 N 26.5 3
NB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.80 0 N 25.5 3
SB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.86 15 N 23.5 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 130.0
PH -I PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EB LT X X NB LT X K
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
PD X PD X
WB LT X X SB LT X X
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
PD X PD X
GPE_EN !3.0 21.ID C.0 _._ GPEE:+ !S.0 o0.0 '_0 __0
YELL ow 5.0 _._ 0.0 il0 YELLOW 5.0 r. i,.0
________________________________CI________.`______________ _______ ___
_EVEL I1� ARV..._
LANE GRP. V/C G,,C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY" APP. LOS
EB L C'. 043 0.32'• 23.0 C 36.4 D
T 0.536 0.185 37.t 0
R 0.7C ,,. 18°. 45.5 E j
•_..1
NB L 1.093 0.631 97.7 F 33!6 D
TR 0.768 0.477 22.4 C
SB L 0.901 0.83' .o e' 21 L
TR 0.781 0.477 22.% C �8
__________________________________________________
_______________________
INTERSECTION: Delay = 29.7 (sec/veh) V/C = 0.7221 LOS D
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMMARY REPORT
ZZYYYXYXZZZZXZZZYZXXXZZZZZZi.ZZXZXXXZZXYZZZZ ZZZY YXXXXYZZZZXZZXZZZZZZZZZf:
INTER>ECTIUN..Prosaec4;colleoe
AREA TYPE..... OTHER X1 STl47 Cc
ANALYST .......3 _ M 1
DATE.......... 11/15/89 IpPn Y9{[, 14-O Tor c3
TIME.......... PM r p (L TOK
COMMENT.......
__________________________________________________________________________
VOLUME_ - GEOMETRY
En WB NB 56 EB WE NB SB
_T 1i0 19C, 26:, 155 L v1 12.0
R1 383 79 112 150 T 12.0 Tit 3.(I i 12.0 1 12.0 ,
RR 140 10 10 10 R 12.0 12.0 TR 12.0 TR 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
_ 12.0 12.0 12.0 12io
__________________________________________________________________________
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
M M Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T
EB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.92 0 N 26.5 3
WB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.94 0 N 26.5 3
NB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 23.5 3
SB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.92 2 N 23.5 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 130.0
PH-1 PH PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EB LT X X NB LT X X
TH X TH Y,
RT X PT X
PD X PO k
WB LT X X SB LT X X
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
PO X PD X
GREEN 12.0 22.0 0.0 0.0GREEN 17.0 58.0 0.0 0.0
. _LOW 5 . 0 _ . 0 U _ _ 0 . C1 YE_LOW _ . 0 c _ 0 - i1 . 0
.
_______________________________________ Ilf�________________--__-_________
_
LEVEL 0- �=f.\
LANE GRP. ViC G/C DELAY 1-0z APP. DELAY APP. LOS
EEE- L 0. 115 0.323 23.5 C 41.5 E
T 0.591 0.192 37.4 U
F: 0.907 0.192 60.3 F
WB 1_ :7.045 0._'23 "'.0
NG L '). 846 0.651 .G.4 1.7
TR 0.617 0.462 20.4 C
SB L 0.395 0.631 9.5 B 27.2 D
________i�`______n9060462__
___________________,________
INTERSECIIUN: Delay = 29.7 (sec/veh) V/C = 0.787 UJS = C
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS -
SUMMARY REPORT
Y ZYYYYYYZY#ZZZZYZ###YZ#####Y#YYYYYYZZ#ZZZ###########Z#######YYYZZZ#YZ##ZZ#
INTERSECTION..prospect/colleae
AREA TYPE..... OTHER 14)1 95-
ANALYSi....... JBS-a-de-
uA1E.......... 11/15/89 e1-9""'
TIME .......... L U add - •-'�^�- 7r EB/w i3 Z-
COMMENT ....... a4t -NVIA, 011 c)S,.v 8S BLT
------------------------------- ------ ------
VOLUMES
GEOMETRY
EB
WS NB
SB
EB
WB
NB
SB
LT 157
175 272
115
L 12.0
L 1?.0 L
12.0
L
12.0
TH 29'_
251 120"_
1417
T 1%.0
T 12.0 L
12.0
L
1'.0
RT
111 125
131
1 Z.A
TR 12.0
1%.G
T
12.0
kki0
10 10
10
k 12.0
12.0 T
12-0
T
1%.0
12.0
12.0 T
12_0
T
12.0
12.0
12.0 R
12.0
R
12.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADJUSTMENT
FACTORS
GRADE
EB 0-00
WB 0.00
NB 0.00
SB 0.00
--------------
PH-1
EB LT X
TH
RT
PD
WB LT K
TH
RT
PD
GREEN 13.0
YELLOW 5.0
--------------
LANE GRP.
E6 L
T
R
W8 L
Tk
NE
k
SB L
T
k
--------------
INTERSECTION:
HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF REDS RED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
(%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T
2.00 N 0 0 0.87 0 N 26.5 3
2.00 N 0 0 0.87 3 N 26.5 3
2.00 N 0 0 0.80 0 N 23.5 3
2.00 N 0 0 0.86 15 N 23.5 3
------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH 130.0
PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
X NB LT X X
X TH K
X RT K
X PD X
X SB LT X X
X TH X
X RT X
X PD K
26.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 10.0 60.0 0.0 0.0
6.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0
------------------------------------------------------------
LEVEL OF SERVICE
V/C C/C DELAY LOS APR. DELAY APP. LOS
•. 043 0.362 20.5 C 31.6 =
0 .443 0.223 32.-4 D
0.764 0.315 35.5 D
0.043 0.362 20.5 C 30.2 D
0.559 0.223 34.8 D
_.647 _ 20
0.160 0.592 9.1 6
0.225 0.592 9.5 B 19..5 C
0.711 0.477 21.1 C
0.157 0.552 9-I
------------------------------------------------
------------
--f------
Delay 22._ (sec/veh) V/C = 0.,11I L0=
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMMARY REPORT- -
iXXzzizzz#ziYiiii#iz##iii##iZXZ#Zz#zz###zi###YYXXXiiXzzXXziiiXiXiii#iiiiii
INTERSECTION..prospect/colleae 2J,7& C4S r.,�f sn,q
AREA TYPE ..... OTHER 2-�.�"'- 'Ug�63 `- ' Y '& D�
Q -) 0 -
ANALYST.......JB p�(17. f.Ed/w/5'7(+.S6
DATE........-.11/15/89 p
TIME .......... PM �O� "'"•.• 4nvu. G E6, "S-, 5 3
COMMENT....... cT 95 w`
VOLUMES
GEOMETRY
EB
WB NB
SB
E8
WB
NB
SB
LT
170
190 256
155 L
12.i•
L 12.C.
L
12.0
L
12.0
TH
355
469 1127
1708 : T
12.0
T 12.0
L
12.0
L
12_0
RT
__.
79 112
150
'.2.0
TR 1%.0
T
12.0
T
12.0
RR:
10
10 10
10 R
i2.0
1-1.0
-
12.0
T
12.0
12.0
12.0
T
12.0
T
12-0
12-0
12.0
R
12.0
R
12.0
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
GRADE HV ADJ"PKG BUSES PHF REDS RED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T
EB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.92 0 N 26.5 3
WB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.94 0 N 26.5 3
NB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 23.5 3
SB 0.00 2-00 N 0 0 0.92 2 N 23.5 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 130.0
PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EB LT X X NB LT X X
TH X TH X
RT Y. RT X
PD X PD X
WB LT X X SB LT X X
TH X TH K
RT X RT X
PD X PO X
GREEN 12.0 29-0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 10.0 58.0 0.0 0.0
YELLOW 5.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEVEL OF SERVICE
LANE GRP, V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS
EB L 0.045 0.377 IQ C 51.0 D
T 0.462 0.246 32.0 0
R 0.791 0.338 35.2 D
WB L 0.045 0.377 10-5 C 31.6 D
TR 0.698 0.246 35.6 D
N L 0.6-0 0.577 1-,. C 18.6 C.
0.55e 0.462 19-5
k 0. 732 0.569 9.9 =
SB L 0.287 0.577 10.7 B 22.9 C
T 0.828 0.462 24.9 C
k 0.177 '. 569 10.2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERSECTIUN: Decay = 24.) (sec/ven) V/C = 0.169 LOS = C
w,/C4s2 -S
Q.a.L.�. Ug�Si3 t 7- {6 fi•a' Sr°'.-
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS S �I t Fg w g
,. SUMMARY .REPORT ...0 j. .-.
I NTERSECT I ON .. prospect/college
AREA TYPE..... OTHER G"r�°""'�y c. r�,,.`
ANALYST....... JE, IGLU �IA1
DATE.......... 11i15/89
TIME.......... LU
COMMENT.......
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUMES GEOMETRY
EB W8 NB SB ES WB NB SB
L7 157 175 11.5 L 12.0 12.0 L 12.0 L 2.0
TH 292 251 %9' 1417 T 12-1 T 1_1.0 1 12.0 1%.0
RT ._ 111 ._= 131 T 12-0
10 16 110 R _ 0 12.r 12.0 T .0
12.0 12.0 T 12.0 R 12.0
12.0 12.0 R 12.0 12.0
------- -----------------------------------------------------------------
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
(%) (%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N . min T
EB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.87 0 N 26.5 3
WB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.87 3 N 26.5 3
NB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.80 0 N 23.5 3
SB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.86 15 N 23.5 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 130.0
PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EB LT X X NB LT X X
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
PO X PD X
WB LT X X SB LT X X
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
PO X PD X
GREEN 13.0 26.0 0-0 0.0 GREEN 10.0 60.0 0.0 0.0
YELLOW 5.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0
------------------------------------------ -------------------------------
-.`:VEL OF SERVIC_
LANE GRr. V/C 3/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS
EE L 0.04-. 0.362 2(1
T r_44_ r,
F: 0.164 0.315 35.5 D
WB L 0.043 0.362 20.5 C 3.0:2 D
TR 0.559 0.223 34.E 0
NB L 9-'a' 0 592 _' 3 C 20.5 C
- .vim 5ii
K O.1b0 0.592
SE L 0.401 0.592 11.5 b 19'7 C
T 0.711 0.477 21.1 C
R 0.157 0.59% 0.1 -
I.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERSECTION: Delay -22.9 (sec/veh) V%C = 0.7111 LuS -
��6ar.�w.-
Ng(:a1_7-4
cue"7. 1b (1/ 6 �.
a
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS . Q)f'" 6;,gA)81 Sg �
SUMMARY REPORT
YY#######YYYYYYY##Y###YYYYYYY######YYYYYYY####Y##Y#YYYYYYYYYYYY YYYYY###
INTERSECTION.. prospect/college
AREA. TYPE..... OTHER --
ANALYS ....... JB 10?Ai
GATE.......... 11/15/89
TIME.......... PM
COMMENT.......
VOLUMES GEOMETRY
EB WB NB SB : EB WB NB SB
LT 170 190 268 155 L 12.0 L i2.0 L 12_.0 L 1%.0
TH 355 469 1127 1708 T 12.0 T12.0 L 11.0 T 12.0
P- 383 79 112 150 T 12.0 TR 12.0 T 12.0 T 12.0
RP, 10 10 10 10 R 12.0 2.0 T 12.0 T 12-0
12.0 12.0 T 12.0 R 12.0
12.0 12.0 R 12.0 12.0
------------------------------------------------------------- ------------
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
(%) (%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T
EB 0.00 2.00 -N 0 0 0.92 0 N 26.5 3
WB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.94 0 N 26.5 3
NB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 23.5 3
SB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.92 2 N 23.5 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 130.0
PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EB LT X X NB LT X K
TH X TH X
RT X RT K
PD X PD X
WB LT X X SB LT X X
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
PD X PD X
GREEN 12.0 29.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 10.0 58.0 0.0 0.0
YELLOW 5.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LEVEL OF SERVICE
LANE GRP. V/C C./C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS
EB L 0.045 9.S77 19-5 C 31.0 0
T 0.462 0.246 32.0 0
R 0.791 0.33E 35-2 D
WB L 0.045 0.377 19.5 C 31.6 D
TR 0.698 0.246 35.6 D
NB L 0.680 0.577 17.9 C 18.6 C
0.55E 0.462 ls�-- L
U.13% 0.569 9. 9 B
Sb L 0.513 0.577 14.5 E, 23.2 C
T 0.828 0.462 24.9 C
R 0.177 0. 569 10.2 E
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERSECTION: Delay = 24,3 (sec/vehl V/C = 0.76'9 LOS = C
1985 HCM: UNS16NALIZED INTERSECTIONS
X##X##XLX##X######XXX#[##_XF###XXz##X############a###X#####X###X#####X
Page-1
CAPACITY AND
LEVEL -OF -SERVICE
Paae-3
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
POTEN-
ACTUAL
_____________________________________________________________________
FLOW- TIAL
MOVEMENT
SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY
.CAPACITY
CAPAC.ITY CAPACITY.
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET..
30
MOVEMENT
v(pcph) c (pcph)
c (pcph)
c (pcph) c = c - v
LOS
p
M
SH R SH
-----
--------
--------------------
---
A.PEA POPUL9T ION ......................
80000
MINOR STREET
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET.........
prospect
SB LEFT
7 141
137
> 137 > 130
> 0
> 374 > 342
>B
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.......
taco bell
RIGHT
24 773
773
> 773 > 748
> A
NAME OF THE ANALYST ..................
mid
MAJOR STREET
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)......
10/23/90
EB LEFT
21 530
530
530 509
A
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED .................
noon am —
OTHER INFORMATION.... full access
2=xt5 rivcc
IDENTIFYING
INFORMATION
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
-------------------------------------------------------------
-------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
NAME OF THE
EAST/WEST STREET......
prospect
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
NAME OF THE
DATE AND TIME
NORTH/SOUTH STREET....
OF THE ANALYSIS.....
taco bell
10/23/90 noon pm
OTHER INFORMATION....
full access
M
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST
CONTROL TYPE SOUTHBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
---------------------------------------------------------------------
,
EE. WE. NB SE.
____ ____ ____ ----
LEFT 17 a -- _
THRU 515 517 -- 0
RIGHT 0 58 -- 20
NUMBER OF LANES
_____________________________________________________________________
i
E WE, NE.
SE.
_______ ______________
LANES [ _ --
-------
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZEO INTERSECTIONS
4...........................*...... *..*----------I----.
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
-----------------------------------------------------
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 30
PEAK HOUR FACTOR .....................
.9
AREA FOPUL4, TON ................... ..
60000
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET.........
prospect
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.......
taco bell
NAME OF THE ANALYST ..................
mJd
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)......
10/23/90
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED .................
pm
OTHER INFORMATION.... full access
f--Xt s-f iAJC�
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
-------------------------------------------------
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST
CONTROL TYPE SOUTHBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
---------------------------- 7 --------------------
EE WE NB SE,
---- ---- ---- ----
LEFT 0 -- 2
THRU 619 729 -- 0
RIGHT 0 26 -- 9
NUMBER OF LANES
E__ WE__
LANES 2 2 -- t
Page-i CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE page-3
——
Z�YX�.FFZY<X -------------------- -------------------------------------------
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED' RESERVE
-------
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS
p M SH k SH
------- -------- --------- ------------ ------------ ---
MINOR STREET
SB LEFT 88 87 > 87 > 85 > E
305 > 292 >C
RIGHT 11 686 686 > 686 > 675 > A
MAJOR STREET
EB LEFT 4 407 407 407 403 A
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
-------------------------------------------------------
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... prospect
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET..... taco bell
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 10/23/90 ; noon( pm
OTHER INFORMATION.... full access � w(g-rvuCa
1985 HCM: UNSIG'N.AL12ED INTERSECTIONS Paae-t
................<«« ....... ................. . ...... <a:
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
---------------------------------------------------`----------------
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET..
40
PEAK HOUR FACTOR .....................
.9
ARE=--. POPULATION ......................
80000
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET.........
i
north taco bell
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.......
college
NAME OF THE ANALYST ..................
mid
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)......
10/23/90
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED .................
noon per —
OTHER INFORMATION.... existing
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
MAJOR, STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
-__---------------------------------------------------------
EP WP. NB SF
LEFT ---( -- 0 0
THRU -- 0 1558 0
RIGHT -- 82 0 0
NUMBER OF LANES
---------------------------------------------------------------------
E.
---Ee-- --_WeNB- -- -----------
LANES -- 2 2 2
CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE
---------------------------------------
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph)
p M
------- -------- ---------
Paae-3
---------------------------
SHARED RESERVE
CAPACITY CAPACITY
c (pcph) c = c - v LOS
SH R SH
---------- ------------ ---
MINOR STREET
WB"_ _ __ ... -. -
RIGHT 100 346 346 346 246 C
MAJOR STREET
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
---------------------------------------------------------------------
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... north taco bell
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... colleoe
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 10/23/90 : noon prt�
OTHER INFORMATION.._. existing
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Paa=-1
Y'YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYSYYYXYYYYYYFYYYYt.YYYYYY...YYYYYYYYXYYYYYYYYYYIYYYYY>.
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
____________________________________________________-
----------------
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 40
PEAK HOUR FACTOR ..................... .9
i
AREA POPULATION ...................... 80000
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... north taco bell
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... college
NAME OF THE ANALYST .................. mid
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 10/23/90
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ................. wseen pm
OTHER INFORMATION.... existing
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
EB WB NE Sb
---- ---- ---- ----
LEFT
THRU -- 0 1362 0
RIGHT -- 26 0 0
NUMBER OF LANES
___________________________________________
EB WB NB
_____________________ _
LANES -- 2 2
CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Page-3
---------------------------------------------------------------------
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcoh) c = c - v LOS
p M SH R SH
________________________ ________________________ ___
MINOk STREET
WE,
RIGHT 32 403 - 403 403 371 B
MAJOR STREET
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... north taco bell
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... college
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 10/23/90
OTHER INFORMATION..._ existing
APPEt--Jb I X C
M M M M M
CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE
The concepts of opacity and level of service are catral to
the analysis of intersstiom as they are for all hypes of (arbor"
In intersctm, snaivm however. the two conepts tie This as
strongly correlated a they tie for other factitty types. In pro-
vioc, chaptm the same anaiyss results yielded a determination
of both the opacity and levd of service of the facility. For
signalized intersections, the two are analysed separately, and
are Fiat simply related to each other. It is critical to wte at the
attract however. that both reporter and level of service must be
fully considered to evaluate the overall operation of a signalized
intersection.
Capacity analysis of i unster n ss results in the campwmm
of vier red= for individoal movements and a composite vier
ratio for the sum of critical movements or lane Poapa .i
the int—!^^^ The vie ratio is the actual or pmjsted rase of
flow ow ace approach or designated group of late during a peak
IS -min interval divided by the capacity, of the approach or
designated group of laces Level of service a bared on the
average stopped delay per vehicle for various movetnem within
the intessectioa While vier $tan delay, there are other param-
eters that moe stmagly affect it such as the quality, of pro
grotto+. length of gram planes. cycle lengths, and others. Thus.
toe espy given vier ratio, a range of delay plus may fault. and
vice -versa. For this anon. both the rapacity and level of set
of the fnteracction must be usefully examined. These two con -
arms are dsamd in dead in the following secndes
capacity of Slgalsed mterwcmma
. Capacity at intasoctioro is deft d for each approach. Inter -
approach capaaty a the maximum rate of flow (for the
mbjct approach) which may pm through the interaction un-
der prevailing ttaft roadway, and sigealiotimr conditions, The
rate of flow s trusts" ammomd or projected for a 15-min
period, and capacity is stated in whacks per horn.
Tmffnc mditaar sal I volume on each approach. the die
tribution of vehicle b7 movement (left. through, right), the
vehicle type docent moe within each newmast. the location of
and use of bus stops within the intersection area. pdstrum
erasing flows and parting moversents within the interaction
Readwor coirditiom include the basic geo ie rim of the in-
tonation, including the number and width of land gsada
and lane -use allocation (including puking fates).
Mgnaliusvw mtdidwr include a full definition of the signal
phaamg. timing, type of control. and an evaluation of signal
Program on each
The capwry of designated late or groups of lane within an
approach may also be evaluated and determined using the pro
adures of this chapter. This may be done to isolate lams serving
a particular movement Of movenents Such u an exclusive right -
or left -turn Wte. lean an designated for separate analysis are
nefirs to as 'lane groom." The ptocdure here n contains
guidelines for when ad how separate lane groups should be
deipatd in an approach
Capacity at signalized intersections is baud on the concept
of saturation flow and saturatioa fine eta Saturnian flow pate
is defined as the maximum ram of flow that cart pass through
a given intersection approach or lane group under prevailing
traffic and roadway Coditions. assuming that We approach or
Line group had 100 percent of real time available as effective
green time Saturation flow rue a given the symbols and a
expressed in wits of vehicles per hour of eRctive groan time
(vphg).
� t� � � ■� � � �Aae� tyrst� sanr�wraa-
Hi AY CAPACITY Mwww►t.. S. }Z.209, TRB/N FZG
WASN4 QC. 1985.
The flaw Prize for i given approach or lane group is defined
a the ratio of the ae:tual flow rate for the approach or lane
troop. Y. to the suvrition flow rate The flow ratio is given the
symbol. (v/s),, for apIprred h or Lane i.
group
The copimn of a grl lane group or approach may be stated
a
— s, X (g/c), (9-1)
whet
C, - egaedy of lane group or approach i in .pier
s, — saturation flow, rate for lane group or apprgrJs
i, in vpbV and
(d/C), —gram lino for lax group or approach L
The ratio of now rare to capacity, v/c. is given the symbol
I in interaction analysis. This new symbol s hm cod in this
chapter to emphasize the strong rdanonshiP of sty m slg-
taliration condsfmn and for wtaotmrcy with the literature.
which also rden to this variable as the "deaze of snoration.'
For a given lane group or approach i;
I, - (v/r), - WAS, X (s/C),l (9-2)
X,, - v,C/s,g. - b/s)✓(s/C),
S, - vier ratio for lane grump or aPI i;
v, — Sexual tier sae for lame group or approach i m
vp4
s, — saturation Bow ran for lane group sir approrh f.
in vphg; and
g, — cifeetive gram time for lane troop i m appsoarh i
in acre
Value of I, once from LOD when the Bow rate eguas ca-
parity to MOO wbm the flow raze is mo.
The capacity of the full mussectioo is not a agm6cam tsomapt
and is not specifically defined betim. Rally do all movements
nts
a an intense rem become sattr std at the same time of day. 1t
is the ability of individual movements to move through the
intersection with some efficiency which is the crud concern.
Another capaciry concept of utility, in the analysis of signal-
h d intersections is. however. the critical vier rtia X, This is
a Pier ratio for the intenseetiom a a whole. considering only the
lane groups or approaches that haw the htghms flow ratio,
v/s for a given signal phase
For example in a two -ph se signal. opposing approaches
move during the same green time Generally, one of these two
approaches will require time gross time than the other (Le, it
will haw a higher flow ratio). This would be the "critical"
approach for the auIjaet signal phase Each signal phase will
haw a critical lane group or approach that determine the green
time requsrnssts fa the phase Where signal ph, overlap,
the Wentihudw of them critical hum groups or approaches a
same I— mmplo, and is discussed in the "Methodology" sco-
tlon of this chapter.
The critical vier ratio for the lateaactian is defined in terms
Of Crum" lane groups or approach¢
where:
x, — L (v/i)r X (C/(C—L)l (9-3)
Z — critical vier ratio for the interxetiom
- the saga . of flow rat= for all ait-
ical lane groups W approaches, i;
C - cycle length. in sea; and .
L - total lest time per cycle; computed a the
s® of"start-up" and change mrnval lost
time minus the portion of the rI I to-
term used by vehicle for each critical
signal place
This equation is usetd in evaluating the overall mteactian
with respect to the Ieometrica and total cycle largely provided.
and is ado todul in 9 signal timings where they are,
not Imown or a1 * 5 1 by local poiici= or oroadura It gives
the vier ratio for a0 critical moveroms. ssss®ng that green
time has been appropriately or proportionally allocated It is
therefore p®ble to have a eritiel vier ratio of lees than LM
and sell have individual mor®ma oven tuned within the
signal Cycle. A aardcal vier ratio Ira than 1.00. bnRYe, doer
indicate that all movemens in the intasscoe ® be accom-
modated within the defused cycle length and phase uaggerse by
proportionally allocating gtemn time. In mssca the total eye&
able green time in the phase ae9aeace is adeguase to handle all
too enams if ptoperiy allocated.
The analysis of capacity in this chapter f, on the com-
puation of samnti as flow rua vier ntim. and capacities for
various approach= or lase groups of the interaction. Prota-
durm for thee computations are, docribed in greats detail in
the -Metbodology" and -Yrocaedurs for Application" .actions
of this chapter.
Level of So im for SWafted Intersections
Level of sts for signalized intersection is defined in terms
of delay. Delay a a mcaare of driver dia rri fort, frustration,
fed comain and bat travel time Smerfiol", level -of -
service criteria are stated in terms of the average stopped delay
per vehicle for a 15-mm &only= period. The criteria are Bross
in Table 9-1.
Delay may be measured in the field or may be atimated
Using psoadum presented later in this chapter. Delay is a
complex moms, sal is dependent w a number of vatiabla
including the quality of progression, the cycle length, the g r m
ratio, ad the vier ratio for the lane group or approach in
Lewi/f-service A dscribn operations with very low delay,
i.e. loss than 3.0 sea per vehicle. Thu comer when proge
is catrendy favorable, and moan whirl= arrive during the green
phase Most vehicles do ram stop in all. Short eyde lengths may
also contribute to low delay.
Levelo%serwee B describes opera dom with delay in the range
of 5.1 to 15.0 Lac per vehicle. This generally occurs with god
progrmion and/or short cycle "110- More vehicla stop than
for LOS A. causing tigher Ierds of average delay .
arorreo osoJar
Paz, Vesrlmi
tavvi m man Isrcl
A 5 3.0
B 3.1 to 15.0
C 13.1 a 23.0
D 23.1 m 40.0
E 40LI to MO
F > 600
Lnelojaer.is Cdescibm opeaiom with delay in the range
of 15.1 to 25.0 Las per vehicle Three higher delays troy vault
from fair pmaenion and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual
cycle failure troy begin to appear in this level. The number of
.chicks stopping is significant at this level, although many still
pass through the intersection without stopping.
Lnelof-i<rrice D describes operations with delay in the range
of 25.1 to 40.0 are per , c. At level D. the influence of
congestion become mote notiocable Longer delays may, result
from some combnation of unfavorable progression. long cycle
lengths. or high vier ratios Many vehicles stop, and the pro-
portion of vehicles am stopping declines. Individual cycle fail -
me are noncable.
Levelof-m, Pare E describes operations with delay i sure
of 40.1 to 60.0 see per •chide. This is considered to be toe limit
of acceptable delay. These high delay plus generally indicate
poor grope Lai at long cycle lengths, and high vier more, In -
dentinal cycle failure are frequent ocvrreeces
LneFolsevvxa'e F dscrfbe operations with delay in exo® of
60.0 Lac per .chide This s mssidesed to be unacceptable or
most drivers This condition often occurs with ovetatmabon,
i.— when arrival flow nun eased the capacity of the intenee-
tion. It may, also cast at high vier ratios below I.W with many
individual cycle failure. Poo prop®oe and long cycle lengths
may ago be major ®riboting cuss to such delay laves
Retamrap Capacity and Leval of Set vim
Became delay is a comply mcamre. is rebuionship to cis -
me" is also compia The levels of service of Table 9.1 have
been established bead on the aeoepubihty, of vatiom delays to
drivers. It is important to atom that this concept is not tested
to capacity in a simple ouee•tootee fashion.
In previous chaptm the hewer bound of LOS E ) rays
been defined to be capacity, Le- the vier ratio is. by fen.
I.00. This it trot the core for the procedure of this chapter. It
is possible. for example. to have delays in the range of LOS F
(unacceptable) while the Pier ratio is below 1.00, perhaps as low
as 0.73-0.85. Very high delays can occur a such Pic ratios
when some combination of the following condition exists: (1)
the cycle length is long. (2) the lane group in question is die
advantaged (has a long red time) by the signal timing, and/or
(3) the signal progression for the mbjeet move ems is poor.
The reverse is also possible a saturatd.appsoach or lane
gawp (i.e. vier ratio - 1.00) pay haw low delays if: (1) the
cycle length is shun. and/or (2) the signal progtmimt is f rror.
able for the subject movernmt Thus, the d®p ation of LOS F
does ass automatically imply that the interaction, approach, or
lane group is overloaded, nor don a level of service in the A
to E range automatically imply that Were is uaurod capacity
available.
The pnpcedms and methods of this chapter tormre the anal-
ysis of both capacity and levelof-service oodition to fully
evaluate the operation of a sgnatimd mtaaaeion. Its imper-
ative that the analyst cup. ze the unique relationship of these
LEVEL OF SEByiCE CNIIENIA
FOR
UNSIONAL12EU 1NIERSECIlUNS
Level-of-sprvite tr-iteria for unsignalized intersec-
tions are stated in very general terms, and are related
to general delay ranges. Analysis for a stop- or-
yipld-controlled irltersectiorl results in solutions for -
tile tapetity of path large on the minor approaches. 'he
level -of -service criteria are then based on the
reserve, or Unused, capacity of the lane in question,
vmpressed in passenger cars per 11ou1- (F'CF'N).
RESERVE CAPACITY LEVEL OF EMIRC'ED DELAY 70
(FCF111) SERVICE MINU11 S1REET 'RAFFIC
-------------------------------------------------------
^!�'r A Little or fit, delay
S Short traffic delays
C Aver age traffic delays
1111►-199 D Long tr of f i c del ays
!J- 91; E Very long traffic delays
*b)hprl demand
volume V:lteeds the capci ty of tile I ane,
p;rtrenle delays Will be encountered With queuing Which
_
mly __t:Ause__5evere_ tontlestltilt affettI1 --- _-.
r g other tl-af-f-i-c—
movemplits in the Intersettioll. 'his tondition usually
Warrants Improvement, to the Intersection.
'r
'
Reference:
Special Report
Iai,yl_��1�+y Cgp.c,l-ly. hlnual-.
209. i1""r1.rInportAtItin Rene arcll t4oard, MAI:Ion-
a1 Research Council. 4lashingten, V.C.
1795.
F
tilt VIP,
lc
North r! d OL DO, ya 131
ji 1 '1, ack 11 41
... itaal;`
A
kIQ ii I
I, v�.
1k
. ` 1 41
.... ...........
wrl own
lqwT[ I'pft (k1.)IIj IT
ITT j "j, n. Graiml Pit
-it k
T•Iffli
A .
Rorehi wn
pa,
{Of ..... . i,� Jcv .1LA .... 11
A
Cern
B14 49�A
I M I CA]
Miii�
.... M. ITT,
4
Wi
k I:J
I I (eve, Pit
4
. I . . Yl
X111
........ ..
A Z"..
zt
AR
Radio
It
70W(r! S
. . ......... ........ .... .. ......
4j
2 2 Ir
.
o Bell Restaurant'46:
U
R
VRML ......
Ali
L...............
L.&A
I. It , sr
. ..... —sh xi. _',AJL� It
A7 -.1,- .41
wa
to:
,r, It'll It
ul IT
Vi.5'
qA;t _4
b� UA (At
. ...........
..........
. ....... ... ............ . ......... . .
5
SITE LOCATION Figure 1
F=�v R a" D I X D
M M = = M
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMMARY REPORT
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx----------- ------xxxxxxxxxxxx
INTERSECTION..prosoect/college I
AREA TYPE ..... OTHER
ANALYST....... mjd
DATE.......... 11/15/89
TIME.......... LU
COMMENT_______w/taco bell far4i rin/rout
VOLUMES GEOMETRY
EB WB NB SB EB Wk NB SB
LT 173 177 272 128 L 12.0 L 12.0 L 12.0 L 12.0
TH 288 256 1329 1406 T 12.0 T 12.0 L 12.0 L 12.0
RT 327 122 125 142 T 12.0 TR 12.0 T 12.0 T 12.0
RR 10 10 10 10 R 12.0 12.0 T 12.0 T 12.0
12.0 12.0 T 12.0 T 12.0
12.0 12.0 R 12.0 R 12.0
---------- - ----------------------- - -------
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
(%) (%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N, min T
EB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.87 0 N 26.5 3
WB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.87 3 N 26.5 3
NB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.80 0 N 23.5 3
SB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.86 15 N 23.5 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 130.0
PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EB LT X X NB LT X X
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
PO X PD X
WB LT X X 56 LT X X
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
PD X PO X
GREEN 13.0 26.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 10.0 60.0 0.0 0.0
YELLOW 5.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0
---------- --------------------------------------------------------------
LEVEL OF SERVICE
LANE GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS
EB L 0.043 0.362 20.5 C 31.4 D
T 0.437 0.223 33.3 D
R 0.764 0.315 35.5 D
WB L 0.043 0.362 20.5 C 30.6 D
TR 0.586 0.223 35.2 D
NB L 0.797 0.592 23.P. C 20. C
T 0.717 0.477 21.2 C
R 0.160 0.592 9.1 b
SB L 0.267 0.592 9.8 B 19.3 C
T 0.705 0.477 21.0 C
R 0.172 0.592 9.2 6
-------------------- - ----------- ----------------
INTERSECTION: D-la= 22.9 (sec/veh) ViC --
y 0.71I4 LOS C
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMMARY REPORT
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
INTERSECTION..prospect/college
AREA TYPE.....
OTHER
ANALYST.......
mjd
DATE..........
11/15/89
TIME ..........
PM
COMMENT .......
w/ taco
bell *t"D
rin/rout
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUMES
GEOMETRY
EB
WB NB
SB
EB
WB
NB SB
LT 184
191 268
166
L
12.0 L
12.0
L
12.0 L
' 12.0
TH 353
471 1202
1846
T
12.0 T
12.0
L
12.0 L
12.0
RT 383
91 112
160
T
12.0 TR
12.0
T
12.0 T
2.0
RR 10
10 10
10
R
12.0
12.0
T
12. T
2.0
12.0
12.0
T
12. T
12.0
12.0
12.0
--------------------------
R
12. R
12.0
GRADE
HV
EB
0.00
2.00
WB
0.00
2.00
NB
0.00
2.00
SB
0.00
2.00
PH-1
EB LT X
TH
RT
PD
WB LT X
TH
RT
PD
GREEN 12.0
YELLOW 5.0
LANE GRP
EB L
R
WB L
TR
NB L
T
R
SB L
T
R
-------------
INTERSECTION
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T
N 0 0 0.92 0 N 26.5 3
N 0 0 0.94 0 N 26.5 3
N 0 0 0.90 0 N 23.5 3
N 0 0 0.92 2 N 23.5 3
'---------------------------------------------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH -130.0
2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
X NB LT X X
X TH X
X RT X
X PD X
X SB LT X X
X TH X
X RT X
X PD X
29.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 10.0 58.0 0.0 0.0
6.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0
----------------------------------------------------------
LEVEL OF SERVICE
V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS
0.045 0.377 19.5 C 30.8 D
0.459 0.246 31.9 D
0.791 0.338 35.2 D
0.045 0.377 19.5 C 32.0 D
0.718 0.246 36.1 D
0.680 0.577 17.9 C 19.1 C
0.595 0.462 20.0 C
0.122 0.569 9.4 B
0.354 0.577 11.4 B 25.5 D
0.895 0.462 27.8 0
0.189 0.569 10.
3 ------ "8B--_--
Delay = 15.2 (sec/veh) V/C = 0.802 LOS = 0
PH -
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMMARY REPORT
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX:XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX2XXXXXX
INTERSECTION..Prospect/college
AREA TYPE..... OTHER
ANALYST....... mid
DATE .......... 11/15/89
TIME.......... LL ___________________________
COMMENT ....... -/taco bell- / ---- rinrout
'----------------
VOLUMES GEOMETRY
EB WB NB SB EB WB I NB SB
LT 173. 177 272 128 L 12.0 L 12.0 L 12.0 L l2.0
TH 288 256 1329 1406 T 12.0 T 12.0 L 12.0 T 12.0
RT 327 122 125 142 T 12.0 TR 12.0 T 12.0 T 12.0
RR 10 10 10 10 R 12.0 12.0 T 12.0 T 12.0
12.0 12.0 T 12.0 R 12.0
12.0 12.0 R 12.0 12.0
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED!. BUT. ARR. TYPE
Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T
EB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.87 0 N 26.5 3
WB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 ,0.87 3 N 26.5 3
NB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.80 0 N 23.5 3
.SB 0.00 2.00 N. 0 0 0.86 15 N 23.5 3 _
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 130.0
I PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EB LT x x NB LT x x
TH X TH x
RT x RT x
PO X PD x
WB LT X x 58 LT X x
TH X TH x
RT x RT x
PD x PD x
GREEN 13.0 26.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 10.0 60.0 0.0 O.0
YELLOW 5.0 5-0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0
---------- --- -------------- -------------------------------------------
LEVEL OF SERVICE
LANE GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS
EB L 0.043 0.362 20.5 C 31.4 D
T 0.437 0.223 33.3 D
R 0.764 0.315 35.5 D
WB L 0.043 0.362 20.5 C 30.6 D
TR 0.586 0.223 35.2 0
NB L 0.797 0.592 23.3 C 20.8 C
-T 0.717 0.477 21.2 C
R 0.160 0.592 9.1 B
SB L 0.478 0.592 12.9 B ti.6 C
T 0.705 0.477 21.0 C
R 0.172 0.592 9.2 B
__________________________________________________________________________
INTERSECTION: Delay = 23.0 (sec/veh) V/C = 0.714 LOS = C
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMMARY REPORT
XXYXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXI.XXXIKXXXXXXXXXXYXXXXXXXIXXXXXXXXXX�XXXXXXiXXXXXXXXX
INTERSECTION..prospect/college
AREA TYPE..... OTHER
ANALYST....... mjd
DATE .......... 11/15/89
TIME.......... PM
COMMENT ....... w/ taco bell t"tfirin/rout
-
-------
VOLUMES - GEOMETRY
ES WB NB SB : EB WB NB SB
LT 184 191 268 166 : L 12.0 L 12.0 L 12.0 L 12.0
TH 353 471 1202 1846 : T 12.0 T 12.0 - L 12.0 T 12.0
RT 383 91 112 160 : T 12.0 TR 12.0 T 12.0 T 12.0
RR 10 10 10 10 : R 12.0 12.0 T 12.0 T 12.0
12.0 12.0 T 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 R 12.0 12.0
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
(%) (%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T
EB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.92 0 N 26.5 3
WB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.94 0 N 26.5 3
NB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 23.5 3
SB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.92 2 N 23.5 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 130.0
PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EB LT X X NB LT x x
TH X TH x
RT x RT x
PO X PD x
WB LT X X SB LT X x
TH x TH x
RT x RT x
PD X PD x
GREEN 12.0 29.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 10.0 58.0 0.0 0.0
YELLOW 5.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0
--------------------------------- _________________________________________
LEVEL OF SERVICE
LANE GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS
EB L 0.045 0.377 19.5 C 30.8 D
T 0.459 0.246 31.9 D
R 0.791 0.338 35.2 D
WB L 0.045 0.377 19.5 C 32.0 D
TR 0.718 0.246 36.1 D
NB L 0.680 0.577 17.9 C 19.1 C
0.595 0.462 20.0 C
R 0.132 0.569 9.9 S
SB L 0.640 0.577 18.7 C 26.0 0
T 0.895 0.462 27.8 D
R 0.189 0.569 10.3 B
--------------------- -
INTERSECTION: Delay = '5.5 (seciveh) V/C = 0.802 LOS = D
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMMARY REPORT
YYY#Z#XYYZZZXZZZZYZZYYZ#YYY#XYZ#ZZYZXXYZZ#ZYZXXZZZZ
INTERSECTION..prospect/college
AREA TYPE ..... OTHER
ANALYST....... mid
DATE .......... 11/15/89
TIME.......... LU
COMMENT....... w/taco bell #!j�g--rin/rout---
--------------------------'-'
VOLUMES - GEOMETRY
EB WB NB SB EB - WB NB SB
LT 173 177 272 128 L 12.0 L 12.0 L 12.0,/ L ' 12.0
TH 288 256 1329 1406 T 72.0 T 12.0 L 12.0 T 12.0
RT 327 122 125 142 T 12.0 T 12.0 T 12.0 T 12.0
RR 10 10 10 10 R 12.0 R 12.0 T 12.0 T 12.0
12.0 12.0 T 12.0 R 12.0
12.0 12.0 R 12.0 12.0
---------------------------------- --- ------------- ---
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
(%) (%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T
EB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.87 0 N 26.5 3
WB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.87 3 N 26.5 3
NB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.80 0 N 23.5 3
SB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.86 15 N 23.5 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS _ CYCLE LENGTH = 130.0
PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EB LT X X NB LT X X
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
PD X PD X
WB LT X X SB LT X X
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
PD X PD X
GREEN 13.0 26.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 10.0 60.0 0.0 0.0
YELLOW 5.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0
LEVEL OF SERVICE
LANE GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS
EB L 0.043 0.362 20.5 C 31.4 D
T 0.437 0.223 33.3 D
R 0.764 0.315 35.5 D
WB L 0.043 0-362 20.5 C 27.4 0
T 0.389 0.223 32.8 D
R 0.271 0.315 25.4 D
NB L 0.797 0.592 23.3 C 20.8 C
T 0.717 0.477 21.2 C
R 0.160 0.592 9.1 B
SB L 0.478 0.592 12.9 B 19.6 C
T 0.705 0.477 21.0 C
R 0.172 C.592 9.2 B
-------------------------- ------------- ------------- - ------ ------
INTERSECTION: Delay = 22.7 (sec/veh) V/C = 0.714 LOS = C
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMMARY REPORT
YXYXYXYYXXYXYXYYXYYYYXXYYYXXYXYYYXXY#XYXYYXYYZYXXYYXYYXYYXXYXXYXXYYXYX#YYX
INTEkSECTION..prospect/college
AREA TYPE ..... OTHER
ANALYST....... mid
DATE.......... 11/15/89
TIME.......... PM
COMMENT....... w/ taco bell 10i rin/rout -------------
-------------
------
VOLUMES GEOMETRY
EB WB NB SB EB WBNB SB
LT 184 191 268 166 L 12.0 L 12.0 L 12.0 L `12.0
2
TH 353 471 1202 1846 T 10 T 12.0 L 12. T 12.0
RT 383 91 112 160 T 12.0 T 12.0 T 12. T 12.0
RR 10 10 10 10 R 12.0 T 12
t2.0 R 12.0 T 12 0 R 12.0
12.0 12.0 R 12. 12.0
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS Y/N min
BUT. ARR. ARR. TYPE
(%) (%) Y/N Nm Nb
EB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.92 0 N 26.5 3
WB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.94 0 N 26.5 3
NB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 23.5 3
SB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.92 2 N 23.5 ------
3----
-
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH 130.0
PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EB LT X X NB LT X X
TH X TH K
RT X RT X
PD X PD X
WB LT X k SB LT X X
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
PD X PO X
GREEN 12.0 29.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 10.0 58.0 0.0 0.0
YELLOW 5.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0
LEVEL OF SERVICE
LANE GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS
EB L 0.045 0.377 19.5 C 30.8 D
T 0.459 0.246 31.9 D
R 0.791 0.338 35.2 D
WB L 0.045 0.377 19.5 C 29.1 D
T 0.600 0.246 33-8 D
R 0.167 0.338 22.9 C
NB L 0.680 0.577 17.9 C 19.1 C
T 0.595 0.462 20.0 C
R 0.132 0.569 9.9 B
SB L 0.640 0.577 18.7 C 26.0 D
T 0.895 0.462 27.8 D
R 0.189 0.569 10.'s B
________________________________________.
INTERSECTION: Delay = 25.1 (sec/veh) V/C = 0.802 LOS = D
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Paae-1
Z YY XYYXXZZZZZYYYXXZZYYYYYYXZ#ZXYZYXZZZXYYXXZ#XX##ZX##ZY#YY#YXZZZ#YXZX
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 40
PEAK
HOUR FACTOR. ....................
.9
AREA
POPULATION ......................
8.0000
NAME
OF THE EAST/WEST
STREET.........
north taco bell
NAME
OF THE NORTH/SOUTH
STREET.......
college
NAME
OF THE ANALYST ..................
mid
DATE
OF THE ANALYSIS
(mm/dd/yy)......
10/23/90
TIME
PERIOD ANALYZED .................
e per
OTHER
INFORMATION....
rin/rout at
prospect
INTERSECTION TYPE AND
-----------------------------------------------------
CONTROL
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
EB W8 NE SE
---- ---- ---- ----
LEFT -- 0 0 0
THRU -- 0 1627 0
RIGHT -- 51 0 0
NUMBER OF LANES
-----------------
EB WS NB SB
------- -------------- ------
LANES -- 2 2 2
CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE
--------------------------------------
Paoe-3
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS
p M SH R SH
------- -------- --------------------- ------------ ---
MINOR STREET
WB
RIGHT 62 328 328 328 265 C
MAJOR STREET
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... north taco bell
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... college
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 10/23/90 ; noo ser
OTHER INFORMATION.... rin/rout at prospect
W = = = = = M M ! = = = M M M
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Paae-1
xxzx:xzzzzzzzzxzzxzzzzzzxxzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzxxzzzzxzzzzzzzxzzzzzzz
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED MAJOR STREET 40
PEAK
HOUR FACTOR .....................
.p
AREA
POPULATION.. ........
: ...........
80000
NAME
OF THE EAST/WEST
STREET.........
north taco bell
NAME
OF THE NORTH/SOUTH
STREET.......
college
NAME
OF THE ANALYST ..................
mid
DATE
OF THE ANALYSIS
(mm/dd/yy)......
10/23/90
TIME
PERIOD ANALYZED .................
wean pm
OTHER
INFORMATION....
rin/rout at
prospect
INTERSECTION TYPE AND
CONTROL
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
MAJOR. STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
EB WB NB SB
---- ---- ---- ----
LEFT -- 0 0 0
THRU -- 0 1474 0
RIGHT -- 18 0 0
NUMBER OF LANES _
-------------------------------------------------I--
EB WB NB SB
-------------- ------- -------
LANES -- 2 2 'L
CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SEkVICE Paae-3
---------------------------------------------------------------------
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL - MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(Pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS
p M SH R SH
------- ----------------------------------------- ---
MINOR STREET
WB -
RIGHT 22 368 368 368 346 B
MAJOR STREET
p Nampo
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
-------------------------------------------------------
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... north taco bell
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... college
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 10/23/90 ;Doan
OTHER INFORMATION.... rin/rout at prospect
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1
Z ZYY###Y###YYY#'F##YYYY##YYYYYYYYYY#YYY#####---- YY#YYYZYYYY##YYYYY
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED. MAJOR STREET.. 40
1
PEAK, HOUR FACTOR ..................... .9
AREA POPULATION ...................... 80000
I
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... south taco bell
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... college
i
NAME OF THE ANALYST .................. mJd
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 10/23/90
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ................. no )n
OTHER INFORMATION.... rin/rout at prospect
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
---------------------------------------------------
-EB- ---- ---- ----
LEFT -- 0 0 0
THRU -- 0 1570 0
RIGHT -- 57 54 0
NUMBER OF LANES
EB WB NB SI
-----------'--------- ----
LANES -- 2 2
CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Paqe-3
---------------------------------------------------------------------
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS
p M SH k SH
------- ----------------- ------------ ------------ ---
MINOR STREET
WB tE--
RIGHT 70 328 328 328 259 C
MAJOR STREET
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... south taco bell
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... college
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 10/23/90 ; noo aie
OTHER INFORMATION.... rin/rout at prospect
t
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Paoe-1
YYYY2YYYYYYYYYY##YYYYYYYYYYY#Y#Y#####Y#############YYYYYYYYYY YYY#YYY#
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
---------------------------------------------------------------------
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 40
PEAK HOUR FACTOR ..................... .9
AREA POPULATION ...................... 80000
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... south taco bell
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... college
NAME OF THE ANALYST .................. mid
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 10/23/90
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ................. r+ceFl pm
OTHER INFORMATION.... rin/rout at prospect
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
---------------------------------------------------- -------------- —
EB WE NB SB
---- --- ---- ----
LEFT -- 0 0 0
THRU -- 0 1455 0
RIGHT -- 19 22 0
NUMBER OF LANES
______________________________________________________
WE NE,
--_EB-- ------- ------- ---SR--
LANES -- 2 2 2
CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE
-----------------------------
Paoe-3
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c -.v LOS
p M SH R SH
--------------- --------- ------------ ------------ ---
MINOR STREET .
WE - -
RIGHT 23 367 367 367 344
MAJOR STREET "
.95
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... south taco bell
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET_... college
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 10/23/90 woaw pm
OTHER INFORMATION.... rin/rout at prospect
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1
XXXXXXXXYIkXXXXXYXYYXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.X XXXXXXXXX XXXiXXXXXXXRXXXXXXYXX
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED. MAJOR STREET.. 30
PEAK HOUR FACTOR .....................
.9
AREA POPULATION.. ....................
80000
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET.........
prospect
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.......
taco bell
NAME OF THE ANALYST ..................
mJd
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)......
10/23/90
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED .................
noon
OTHER INFORMATION.... rin/rout
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST
CONTROL TYPE SOUTHBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
---------------------------------------------------
-----------------
ES WB NB SE
---- ---- ---- ----
LEFT 0 0 -- 0
THRU 539 528 -- 0
RIGHT 0 81 -- 27
NUMBER OF LANES
--------------
EB WE NB SB
----------------------------
LANES 2 2 --
CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE
Page-3
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS
p M SH R SH
-------------- --------- ------------ ------------ ---
MINOR STREET
SB
RIGHT 33 756 756 756 723 f
MAJOR STREET
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
-------------------------------------------------------
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... prospect
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... taco bell
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 10/23/90 noon per+
OTHER INFORMATION.... rin/rout
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS I Paqe-1
###X#####XXX#XXXX#######X##X#XXXXX#XXXX#XXXX#XIFXXXYKXXYXX###X##XXXX#X
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 30
PEAK HOUR FACTOR .....................
.9
AREA POPULATION ......................
80000
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET.........
prospect
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.......
taco bell
NAME OF THE ANALYST. .................
mJd
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dtl/yy)......
10/23/90
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED .................
"oom pm
OTHER INFORMATION.... rin/rout
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
-------------------------------------------------------------
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST
CONTROL TYPE SOUTHBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
EB WB NB SB
---- ---- ---- ----
LEFT 0 Im2pk -- 0
THRU 631 744 -- 0
RIGHT 0 32 -- 9
NUMBER OF LANES
-------------------------------------------------
EB WB NB SB
------- ------- ------- -------
LANES 2 2 -- 2
CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Page-3
---------------------------------------------------------------------
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS
p M SH R SH
------- -------- --------- ------------------------ ---
MINOR STREET
SB
RIGHT 11 677 677 677 666
MAJOR STREET
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... prospect
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... taco bell
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 10/23/90 : aaar pm
OTHER INFORMATION.... rin/rout
Roads
The primary streets near the Taco Bell are shown in Figure 2.
College Avenue (U.S. 287) borders Taco Bell on the west. It is a
north -south street designated as a major arterial on the Fort
Collins Master Street Plan. It has an urban cross section with
three 11 foot lanes in each direction and left -turn lanes at all
public street intersections. There is a raised median on College
Avenue. The posted speed limit is 35 mph in this area of College
Avenue. Sight distance is generally not a problem along College
Avenue. Currently, signalized intersections along this section of
College Avenue are at Pitkin Street, Prospect Road, and Stuart
Street.
Prospect Road borders Taco Bell on the south. It is an east -
west street designated as an arterial on the Fort Collins Master
Street Plan. It has a four lane cross section with auxiliary turn
lanes at some intersections.
I Remington Street is a north -south street that is approximately
400 feet east of College Avenue. It is classified as a collector
street from Mountain Avenue to Prospect Road. Lake Street is an
' east -west local street that is approximately 600 feet north of
Prospect Road. There is a north -south alley between College Avenue
and Remington Street from Lake Street continuing south of Prospect
Road. This alley functions as an alley (accessing garages) for the
dwelling units that front on Remington. However, fora number of
the properties that are north of the Taco Bell, this alley serves
as the only --vehicular access.
Existing Traffic
Daily traffic flow is shown in Figure 3. These are machine
counted volumes conducted by the City of Fort Collins in September
_� 1989. In addition to the daily count data, weekday morning, noon
and-aft-errro-on peak -hour -traffic data was obtained in --October 1989
at the College/Prospect intersection. Driveway counts at the
existing Taco Bell were obtained in October 1990. The peak hour
turning movements are shown in Figure 4. Traffic count data is
provided in Appendix A.
Existing Operation
Using the volumes shown in Figure 4, the peak hour operation
is shown in Table 1. Calculation forms for these analyses are
provided in Appendix B. Appendix C describes level of service for
unsignalized and signalized intersections from the 1985 Highway,
' Capacity Manual. The Cooll'ege/P,rospect signalized interse'etioh
operatesa"cceptably (level of service D or better' in, the noon. `and
afternoon peak hours). Noon and afternoon peak hours were selected
2
APPEND I X E
PNPN NP. 1
10/12/90
USE DATE OF TYP PRIME
NUMBER DAY ACCIDENT TIME COL FACTOR
{ 90-109 WED 01/03/90 1557 05 1101
90-1538 SUN 01/25/90 0130 09 1701
i 90-1621 RON 01/29/90 1825 07
90-1982 NON 02/05/90 1105 07 1101
90-282 SAT 01/06/90 2215 07 01
W-3587 TMO 03/01/90 0230
1 90-4155 TOE 03/13/90 0945 07 0101
INTERSECTION OF COLLEGE S PROSPECT
TARP III
TRAFFIC ACCIDENT REPORT PROGRAM
INTERSECTION ACCIDENT LISTING
i
DIRECTION
TYPE
�
OF TRAVEL BLOCK NO BLK OIR TO
1 F VERB
MVC
MVI
NLSRP
0505 a
0 0 0101
0501
C
1111
0307 a
0 0 0101
0401
C
0505 8
0 0 0101
0909
c
1311
0505 S 8
0 0 0103
0109
C
1111
0101 8
0 0 0101
0109
C
1311
8
00
C
050505 a
0 0 01010 010101
C
3112
1
COLLISION DIAGRAM
COLLEGE & PROSPECT
JAN 90 — APR 90
YV♦
I
ltl
U"
WI
J
J
ON
�oPROSPECT —
}— --- —
I�
I�
I
LEGEND ACCIDENT SUMMARY
--a Irr P00 Head on 0
� Injury Sideswipe 0
Left Turning 2
—>&E Fatality Right Turning 0
Broadside 0
Rear End 4
Other (not plottable) 1
CITY OF FORT COLLINS Total 7
Page NO. 1 INTERSECTION OF COLLEGE 6 PROSPECT
10/12/90
TARP III COLLISION DIAGRAM
TRAFFIC ACCIDENT REPORT PROGRAM
INTERSECTION ACCIDENT LISTING COLLEGE 6 PROSPECT
CASE DATE OF TTP PRIME DIRECTION TYPE - JAN 89 — DEC 89
NUMBER DAY ACCIDENT TIME CDL FACTOR OF TRAVEL BLOCK NO BLK DIR TCO I F VEMS MPC "VI WLSRP
-------- ----------- ---- --- ------.......... ........ ....... ---- - - ..... -'--' '-- -_'--
89-10498 NOW 07/10/89 1131 07 11 0505 8 0 D 0101 01D9 C IIII I G%
89-10882 SUM 07/16/89 1928 07 11 0303 8 0 0 0101 0109 C 1111
89.11018 WED 07/19/B9 0752 08 0717 0303 8 0 0 0101 0301 C 1111
89-1125 WED 01/25/89 2303 28 17 05 8 0 0 01 01 1 1311 W'YW
89.1189 FRI 01/27/89 1156 05 06 0705 8 0 0 0101 0301 C 1111
89.12070 FRI 08/04/89 1541 05 1306 01040707 8 0 0 01030 01030909 C 1111
101
89.12375 TYU OS/D8/B9 1B33 14 13 0507 1 1 0 1101 0401C 1211
W
89.13508 IN 08/24/89 1833 05 06 0105 8 0 0 0101 0301 C 1111 W '
89-13836 TUE OW9/89 1821 07 11 0707 8 0 0 0301 0109 C 1111 VU
89-14559 NON 09/11/89 1033 07 11 0707 8 0 0 0103 0301 C 2112C 2312
89-14602 NOW09/11/89 2049 05 06 0705 8 1 0 0101 030189-15189 TUE 09/19/89 2300 06 04 0705 8 1 0 0101 0301 C 1311
89-15272 WED 09/20/89 1740 05 06 0805 8 2 0 0101 0301 C 111189.15498 SAT 09/23/89 1028 07 10 0707 8 0 0 0101 0101 C T111 _ _ _PROSPECT
89-15688 NON 09/25/89 1533 07 11 0101 8 0 0 0101 0101 C T111
89-15760 TUE 09/26/89 1754 05 04 0507 8 0 0 101 0101 C 011't T'& --- � —�L
89-17029 SUIT 10/15/89 1919 07 1101 0707 8 0 0 0101 0109 C 2212
89-17376 FRI 10/20/89 2156 07 1101 0101 8 0 0 0101 0101 C 1311 • .•
89-17434 SAT 10/21/89 1749 07 1001 0303 8 2 0 0101 0909 ' C IT I T*—�.B• 'IYIVI\
89-17747 WED 10/25/89 1400 07 0111 e3D3 2300 E 8 0 0 0101 0606 3 1111
89-17902 FRI 10/27/89 1355 05 1301 0106 8 0 0 0101 0103 C 1111
89-18947 SUN 11/12/89 0200 8 0 0 C
89-19490 WED 11/22/89 0741 08 1101 0303 8 0 0 0101 0101 C 1111
89-20269 SAY 12/02/89 1430 04 04 _ 03 8 2 0 03 04 8 1111
89-20312 TUE 12/05/89 12M OB 1101 0505 8 0 0 0301 0101 C 1111
89-20598 SAT 12/09/89 1655 07 1701 0101 8 2 0 0101 0109 C 1311
89-2D91 SUN 02/12/89 0120 05 1301 0507 a 0 0 0101 0101 C 2314 y �_
89-21450 TMU 12/21/89 1659 07 0301 0303 8 0 0 0301 0109 C 3315
89-2690 THU 02/23/89 1242 19 11 01 8' 0 0 06 04 1 1111
89-3932 FRI 03/17/89 1248 05 06 0207 8 0 0 0101 0301 C 6111 -
89-4410 SAT 03/25/89 1901 07 11 0505 8 0 0 0101 0404 C 1311 -
89.4896 MON 04/03/B9 1510 04 01 07 100 E 0 0 0 03 01 B 11110
3
89-5099 FRI 04/D7/89 1306 OB 17 0303 8 0 0 0101 0101 C 1111
89-5222 WN 04/10/89 0645 05 13 0103 8 000101 0103 C 1111 ACCIDENT SUMMARY
89-5499 FRI D4/14/89 1555 05 06 0705 8 0 0 0103 D301 C 1111 LEGEND
89.7148 FRI 05/12/89 1454 07 0110 0505 8 0 0 0101 0901 ( C 1111 Head on 1
89-7496 TMU 05/18/89 1738 07 11 OSOSD5 8 0 0 03010 OI0909 C 1111 POO Sideswipe 3
1 Injury D
89-OW ION D6/05/09 1505 08 IT 0707 a 0 0 0101 0301 C 1111 Fatality Left Turning
Right Turning 0
Broadside 2 -
Rear End fl
Other (not plottable) 2
CITY OF FORT COLLINS Total JB
m
FA9e No. 1
10/12/90
USE DATE OF TYP MINE
NUMBER DAY ACCIDENT TINE COL FACTOR
58.10152 SAT 07/09/88 1240 09 04
88-10336 WED 07/13/98 1124 05 06
58.10745 WED 07/20/88 1205 07 11
88-1109 SILT 01/23/88 2120 23 07
88-12762 TUE 03/23/58 1247 07 1101
88-12831 WED 08/24/W 1933 07 1101
BB-1313 WED 01/27/85 1624 07 17
88-1357 TBU 01/28/88 1439 05 06
U-141W FRI 09/16/88 0932 05 04
88-1401 FRI 09/23/88 1100 07 17
88.15536 SAT 10/08/8B 1345 07 10
W-15%1 FRI 10/15/98 1215 05 06
88-16634 WED 10/26/88 1620 07 1011
88-171W SAT 11/05/85 1250 05 04
88-1776 FRI 02/D5/W 1150 05 04
88.19102 FRI 12/09/88 2058 08 03
88-19287 TUE 12/13/85 1435 07
88-2035 WED 02/10/88 1430 07 03
88.2065 WED 02/10/88 1730 07 11
88-2743 WED 02/24/88 1543 08 OBO1
88-3654 FRI 03/11/aS 1500 07 11
BB-3716 SAT 03/12/88 1743 18 17
88-3872 WED 03/16/88 1151 07 10
88-3903 1HU 03/17/88 1022 05 0601
88-458 MW O1/lI/88 1210 07 10
00-4582 THU 03/31/85 0630 10 0103
88-5134 SW 04/10/88 1352 05 06
88-5178 RON 04/11/88 1005
88-52U WED 04/13/55 1330 07 0110
88-5282 WED 04/13/58 1330 07
88-5548 MW 04/18/98 1533 07 10
W-5639 WED 04/20/88 1756 07 10
88-6129 FRI 04/29/88 1638 05 04
88-6408 WED 05/04/88 1612 05 06
a5-69 SAT 01/02/88 1909 09 17
88-7000 SAT 05/%/B8 1130 07 10
89-7058 TUE 05/17/811 12" 05 13
98-8162 PON 06/06/W 2045 07 0101
88.942 TOE 01/19/ae 2124 05 06
INTERSECTION OF COLLEGE AVE a PROSPECT RD
TARP III
TRAFFIC ACCIDENT REPORT PROGRAM
INTERSECTION ACCIDENT LISTING
DIRECTION TYPE
OF TRAVEL BLOCK NO BLN OIR TCD I F YENS NPC
0501
0501
0101
al
0505
Olmi
030303
OB05
0105
OSOI
0101
am
0505
0301
0103
0101
0303
0505
0101
0303
0707
01
0505
0501
0101
0503
0501
0505
0505
0101
0705
050107
0308
0505
0107
0101
070505
8 0 0 0101 0301
8 1 0 0101 0301
8 0 0 0101 0109
8 a 0 01 03
8 0 0 0101 0101
a 0 0 03010 010109
1
a 0 0 01010 a10909
1
8 0 0 0301 0301
8 0 0 0101 0301
8 0 0 0301 0209
a 0 0 0101 0101
a 0 0 0301 0301
8 0 0 0301 0909
8 0 0 0301 QW 1
8 0 0 0301 0101
8 0 0 1501 0101
8 0 0 1401 MISS
8 1 0 0103 0109
a 0 0 0101 0109
8 0 0 0101 0309
a 0 0 0101 0109
8 a 0 01 01
a 0 0 Dial 0101
8 0 D 0101 0301
8 0 0 Dial Dial
8 0 0 Dial 0904
8 2 0 0101 0301
8 00
8 0 0 0301 0901
a 0a
a 1 0 0101 0109
8 0 0 0101 0101
8 0 0 0101 0301
8 1 0 01010 030109
1
8 0 0 1101 1303
8 0 0 0101 0101
8 0 0 0101 0103
a 0 0 0101 0109
e 0 0 01010 030109
1
Nvl nmv
C 1111
C 11I1
C 1111
C 1111
C 1111
C 1111
C 1111
C Fill
C 1315
C 1111
C 1114
C 1114
C 1111
C 1111
1 3114
C 1112
C 1111
C 1112
C 3114
C 1111
C
C 1111
C
C 1111
C 1111
C Fill
C 1111
C 131t
C 1111
C 1I1I
c
C 1315
COLLISION DIAGRAM
COLLEGE AVE 6 PROSPECT RD
JAN 88 — DEC 88
5.
I a
F— lu
w
J
J
O
_T I PROSPECT RD
i
LEGEND
—� POO
�E Injury
>e) �E— Fatality
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ACCIDENT SUMMARY
Head on
0
Sideswipe
i
Left Turning
P
Right Turning
1
Broadside
i
Rear End
D
Other (not plottable)
2
Total
in
PRIMARY STREETS Figure 2
I
I
I
L�
1
I
1989 AVERAGE WEEKDAY TRAFFIC Figure 3
S'
1
1
1
1st/1�o
r 292/355
32�/383
1 1989
1990
a2/zc�
W
EXISTING
O TACO BELL
v 1990 RESTAURANT
'III/,9
a—Z51/469
.I'-- 1-15/190
11/3
NOON/PM
,0",-1990
56/2l0 --
PROSPECT
N
,. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 4
Table 1
Existing Peak Hour Operation
Level of Service (Delay)
I
Intersection
Noon
PM
College/Prospect
(signal)
'
Existing Geometrics
D (29.7 sec/veh)
D (29.7
sec/veh)
With Choices
95 improvements C (22.9 sec/veh)
C (24.1
sec/veh)
With Choices
but single
95 improvements,
SB LT lane C (22.9 sec/veh)
C (24.3
sec/veh)
Prospect/Access
SB RT/LT
B
C
'
EB LT
A
A
College/North
Access
WB RT
C
B
Table 2
Trip Generation
Daily A.M. Peak
P.M.
Peak
Land Use
- Trips Trips - Trips
Tr-ips--Trips—_
in out
in
out
'
Existing Taco
Bell
37
From Counts
1600 108 108
43
'
Taco Bell 25%
Increase 2000 135 135
54
46