Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutACE HARDWARE @ RAINTREE VILLAGE - PDP - 22-98 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - TRAFFIC STUDYMultimodal Transportation Level of Service Manual p. 20 LOS Standards for Development Review - Bicycle Figure 7. Bicycle LOS Worksheet level of service - connectivity nasrun actual proposed base connectivity: C Q A specific connections to priority sites: description of applicable destination area within 1,320' including address e0f-LaAJ-b Mover se>Jto2. CE�� Pik tvr,FEr: sH-C,PPto-) 6� C Tt=� eW TW IZo P- A� Dt/�V� GcgAbLvC• Y t destination area classification (see text) 2C P-c-tTt uaJ ?L,-CecFAT(OOJ Cdaeateject A L C'pt.�MFsle � f Q L imININI City of Port Collins Transportation Master Plan City of Port Collins Transportation Master Plan I SWIMS on vim ! M- no aw"a Me <1!° Im '8W :s- =1 MS'}- i MI Multimodal Transportation Level of Service Manual P. Is LOS Standards for Development Review - Pedestrian Figure 6. Pedestrian LOS Worksheet project location classification: A CT t W'r tJ `uo `C (enter as many as apply) IE r la description of applicable destination area within 1,320' including address C4f-,V-rQG- r0 Az,va'Je.�7 T�c(40006 Y destination area destination area level of service (minimum based on project location classification) classification (see text) Airs,Mss :a.�ewio• a � �iwal imeraifi ..0 City amad6ft n- W"A,16 •fAC nminaan Fj Q B a V t7F l�.L`!' actual y(j Q A Prom 4 A .4 r-actual I PNP'� mninnan actual proposed tttnimian actual proposed ��^ City of Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan NIultimodal Transportation Level of Service Manual p. 18 LOS Standards for Development Review - Pedestrian Figure 6. Pedestrian LOS Worksheet project location classification: A CTIy •'r V CE/`i T& )e (enter as many as apply) 1-11 description of applicable destination area within 1,320' including address �!OLLAAJD I�lao�E S€Moe �e�urEe_ Sf-ko?PIuG CEdJT6 f2— destination area level of service (minimum based on project location classification) classification (see text) ar.an... �a�o om , .;y.y �. ��s ..aery P�CKE�4TftvJ nfainuan B � �13 Ale@A actual A A A Q M-A A A JA /'LF.U'tAC meittnvn 8 8 B t2 B Q(f?EA actual A A A Proposed A I I A I A A 5 ITUTrod muvmvn C G,arro1J BQ actual proposed I A nn mvmuvn l„t;NA IAGR � 1 A L /QR�s^i achial proposed 23 U CI ml©l tttttttttttf • � tttttttttl• � ttt4t4tttttttttl• � tttttttt� City of Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan 1 w0 i e It Golf C. ;. 0 wale. CI SI el re ¢ ( w lord Ave e . i E air. St. Pe_=ra` ! n ba m w aMa wollac SI. a <' .e v, E - - n n u • > \ \ • \ Cif perl a : p 'lE� V . E Mo R. St. I d 'd W MVlbeirr SI -� \ - N. er CI' 1! S.° l • .i .ri n W '+ E Mulb... SI. xe�Or C nh.ia. _ vi M rO. h h h . ° '^ W i N • Cre.lmo•e� nE we'..rCI M rll. SI.aeraTmur CI Ar w A.SI a e� 8 I - -in 'n`nle OrdioldN 4lfnmr0. ( BIoa % "Boysn.A " e •' 3 W Laurel 51 E�ew E. L..i.I St.'WPL Om "' _.._ North - ., Old o EE Plum SI. �.__ Plum Sl0'E17 CI a Isoto . Or Locu.t St. W. Eluab.ln St. nle. 8 /'` E. Eliaab.lh St f•. • i i E �+ CILr[sdale v Umv°nir 3 a Gorli.ld e c u 1Ct ' • 3 SourA . sf ' °. pPPI. . m . _ ° Wnt.ord Dr Or c a nAr I o i u Cl ... is.+•• • e e E Or. . n • h ,� LoYe .00d Dr^ - • w I c " Q m n j °^• .I __ N C m w PilYin SI Dr 1 ¢. E.3 RIh10 itSI.H Soranmtll o S nn ..._..a .... -..... e _ w Lota °o d ' o I core m Jamu a I C Buche • 11 Cl c a fair' ir St I E .Late A. St. q i� m W.L M I �m` w L.te Sl , Srm St 91er'n I "' Cat. U e ' a CI in PCW aaCI v1 _ So ° I Balsam Pinto ect . q ze ., t o )✓ -. _ n Ju nl e I - P J vl u p e r D free l Lon R. A. 1 j S He I Nan e Nlln,).{ v ln. 1 Q Birt Pl, MY CI = '; Dr... _ n ( P Por4 r SI a. _ Y• w. � � Po• tno re. preen noen_. � ..� `.. SI a Sneel Dr. w. 9 ` p N wr, � G � �' al ar o 4veV ppp W. Al 1., P L 4� _ • . :r .. r e te' °•on e [ a. _I ,, Etlgrw[a .vtYF�p. 5nng , Cre[t �' �-�... o:P E i Slua I 3 V St .CI v o''D w S..oN sl, P O iJ CI �oearGt n ./' E C N , , i ,t Freed. ) n ' CeP6 IJonmon 'S n 6Y� .:: Ae Co.J'nn' c_CC' i / ..� �L` .. mCheOSTwM •.u-.• rd. 1 -��.-, 21 :N Arinur.� a I/. 'W. CI ......God CI Dr ¢ Arlin rt^a D�ilmauln v. p 2_ Cir. el Is • ` �s��'hiOPew �' ° j c.w . b e ' tea' Ln. r Or. Cl C.'Pnn.. I 1 i Yale o orn 11 ave ° -dumd. • i =I Y". wa N camlraN _ n Coccrtl u u 1 Ct. °° 4 I �I ~ Guean, p. re I' i Q I'ri a n[.lan o m 11a All Prinn nn Hd -J Ba for 11. cu E Tr F illDr. Ad. ( a _ Cl Ci Cl1 i wrl[el O Or . o.. f .nOx i E 4 SIF e--• a.. O Ir e Dr, w 7), L o pen St j n CL .Y u a e Fli ....IQ m Sla a RI i H lino Di S! jMl/U �• EV.- Ar /a pa I IWvard y Ale.elct Cl. 6 ""1'. nlair _ � O �T ue1°y ¢ I P� ♦°�` I a HE Iota ; V V .d u If we- W. swallow Rd, . ¢ _ . S ✓i —a Pe ou' 6 N�Vp N..+ - Driv. �Iba 51 a E Su - F Ct. ° I'= ben 4 I Siou. BM, 1 c •o.ra. I t o. 2 '. •� (\ :are A d{ ero : - a '£fn °.n o^° in Ct. k I iE ol, PYwY. IirY.� a °i .a.. s ; 5`"`�\w'•:'a, Q • I °� c,.ei el. I Q = i Doer c. 1 A° y e,enlina t, a Oa xem. Fri., ••1° Bl ueblra I to E e ' u P I x..[aim C• .. LnC c n C: °• -EI. P. may.. ,3 h �y/sue _ . V M.n'nu C h p I ° " Bolu Dr .on 61' e ` ^ Kiel CI. • 1 col eIJ .q nn.maa Lt p' D• /: yPp1 M. •` Sir IA+nsli.l pr € E m • y— P.. P.1 n . i fy K W Manr°. A•. [K.r n 1 r. o• 61 al ` W. Nos atoor Kings Iono Or O f..e t\ d E V Frhw AveI \ u i So r4p'o xl Lsoin bj4w� Imf 9 CJ Brook Or u. '� Os s ^ Bonilo Ave W ' ° p cr9 "i St brs wow .I I I r.oe YhtlfMd Give 8 w AI' I C lhoord a«.men Or westfie Or d t .4 wxn fj ° Q ,i ` Marda LY a a 6 I n°eAgE Q \'C•E. O WA99[N 1 _tom' 9 "RR 1 0 •e �-..� 3 � � f+aol PYv�s CI. lire I I .. � inbn Re A nw 6t n Fs. LL Y -'n 1.: ➢'-S �F - :.mo-r � Iroul n P°o nwA f wniuw` e..ku n R t 4 aa� L"Uc;\ "' a9": 1 8e .. -_ .. ,\'. C. / v�lb.ai u_. .. _ 1 1 1 I 11 i 1 u 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1� APPENDIX E 1 HCS: Unsignalized intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) shields (E-W) evenstar Major Street Direction.... NS Length of Time Analyzed... 15 (min) Analyst ................... mid Date of Analysis.......... 7/19/98 Other Information ......... am ® 1998 shor bkgrd total Two-way Stop -controlled Intersection c = Northbound Southbound Eastbound L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 0 2 < 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MCI ($) SU/RV's ($) CV's ($) PCE's ------------ 1077 20 .95 .95 0 ---------------. Adjustment Factors Westbound = L T R ---- ---- 0 0 0 --------------- Vehicle Critical Follow=up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 0 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1385 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1385 Prob. of Queue -Free State: -------------------------------------------------------- 1.00 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) — — — — ------ ----- ---- ------ ----- -------- 2.6 EB R 6 1385 2.6 0.0 A Intersection Delay = 0.0 sec/veh HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) shields: (E-W) evenstar Major Street Direction.... NS Length of Time Analyzed... 15 (min) Analyst .................... mjd Date of Analysis.......... 7/19/98 Other Information ........ (-am)pm 1998 shot bkgrd rota Two-way Stop -controlled IntLfrsection Northbound Southbound Eastbound = Westbound = L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 2 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 693 10 5 PHF .95 .95 .95 Grade 0 0 MC's (%) SU/RV's W CV's (t) PCE's 1 1.101 - ----------------------------- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street -------------------------------- ---------------------- WB BB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 0 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1385 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1385 Prob. of Queue -Free State: -------------------------------------------------------- 1.00 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) ---- --- -------- ------ ------ ------ ------- ------- — --- 2.6 EB R 6 1385 2.6 0.0 A Intersection Delay = 0.0 sec/veh M HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) senior/shopping ctr (E-W) raintree Major Street Direction.... EW Length of Time Analyzed... 15 (min) Analyst ................... mjd Date of Analysis.......... 7/19/98 Other Information ......... am�1998 short bkgrd total Two-way Stop -controlled Intersection Eastboundc Westbound Northbound Southbound I L T R =I L T R I L T R I L T R No. Lanes 1 1 1 < 0 1 1 < 0 ) 1 1 < 0 ) 1 1 < 0 Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MCI (t) SU/RV's M CV's W PCEIs NJ N 15 50 20 135 115 50 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 0 0 1.10 11.10 ------------------- 25 1 140 .95 .95 .95 0 1.10 1.10 1.10 - Adjustment Factors 45 1 15 .95 .95 .95 0 1.10 1.10 1.10 ------ Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 64 148 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1285 1165 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1285 1165 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.87 0.98 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 74 174 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 15s1 1416 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1581 1416 Prob. of Queue -Free State_ 0_- -90 0_99 _ ------------------' - Step 3: TH from Minor Street _ NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 396 380 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 676 689 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.89 0.89 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 602 613 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 1.00 1.00 ------------------------------------------------------- Step 4: IT from Minor Street _ NB - - SB -----------------------' Conflicting Flows: (vph) 378 443 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 640 587 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.89 0.89 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.91 0.91 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.90 0.80 Movement Capacity: (pcph) ---------------------------------------------------- 576 469 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) ------- (sec/veh) ----- --------- -------- ------ ------ ------ NB L 29 576 ------- 6.6 0.0 B NB T 1 602 > 3.7 NB R 162 1285 > 1276 3.2 0.4 A SB L 52 469 8.6 0.3 B SB T 1 613 > 7.2 SB R 18 1165 > 1112 3.3 0.0 A EB L 18 1416 2.6 0.0 A 0.5 WB L 156 1581 2.5 0.3 A 1.1 Intersection Delay = 2.4 sec/veh HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCAMST.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation. University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets (N-S) senior/shopping ctr (E-W) raintree = Major Street Direction.... EW Length of Time Analyzed... 15 (min) Analyst ................... mjd. Date of Analysis.......... 7/19/98 Other Information........ Crt pm 1998 hurt bkgrd total Two -way -Stop controlled Intersection - L Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 1 < 0 1 1 < 0 1 1 < 0 1 1 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 10 100 15 70 30 35 15 1 115 25 1 5 PHF .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 Grade MCI (%) SU/RV`s (t) CVIs (a) PCEIs 0 11.10 11.10 -------------------- 0 0 0 11.10 1.10 1.1011.10 1.10 1.10 ----------------------------------- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCAMST.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 113 50 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1214 1306 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1214 1306 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.89 1.00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 2: IT from Major -------------WB --------------- EB -Street -------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 121 69 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1501 1589 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1501 1589 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.95 0.99 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 3: TH from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 267 256 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 790 801 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.94 0.94 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 742 752 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 1.00 1.00 ------------------------------------------------------- Step 4: IT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 252 310 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 757 700 Major IT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.94 0.94 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.95 0.95 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.95 0.85 Movement Capacity: (pcph) ----------------------------------------------------- 718 594 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) ---- --------- -------- ------ ------ ------ NB L is 718 ------- 5.1 ------- 0.0 B NB T 1 742 > 3.6 NB R 133 1214 > 1208 3.4 0.3 A SB L 29 594 6.4 0.0 B SB T 1 752 > 5.7 SB R 6 1306 > 1182 3.1 0.0 A EB L 12 1589 2.3 0.0 A 0.2 WB L 81 1501 2.5 0.0 A 1.3 Intersection Delay = 2.0 sec/veh HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4f 07-19-1998 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets (E W) raintree/centre (N-S) shields Analyst: Matt File Na RCLAMST.HC9 Area Type: Other.- 7-19-9pm Comment: 1998 shor bkgrd total Eastbound westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 < 0 1 2 < 0 Volumes 165 35 40 60 20 105 30 1150 140 175 905 80 Lane W (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 0 Lost Time 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left Thru * Thru Right * Right Peds * Peds WB Left * SB Left Thru * Thru Right Right ` Peds * Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right Green 16.OA Green 9.OA 61.OP Yellow/AR 5.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 5.0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat V/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS ----- --- ------- ----- ----- ----- --- ----- --- EB L 330 1650 0.527 0.200 24.4 C 22.6 C T 335 1863 0.110 0.180 22.2 C R 491 1583 0.086 0.310 15.8 C WB L 313 1567 0.201 0.200 21.6 C 18.8 C T 335 1863 0.063 0.180 22.0 C R 491 1583 0.226 0.310 16.6 C NB L 326 1770 0.098 0.780 2.6 A 7.5 B TR 2309 3665 0.618 0.630 7.6 B SB L 307 1770 0.599 0.780 13.5 B 7.4 B TR 2319 3680 0.470 0.630 6.4 B Intersection Delay = 9.4 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 5.0 sec Critical v/c(x) = 0.630 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY version 2.4f 07-19-1998 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets (E-W) raintree/centre =(N-S) shields =_ Analyst: Matt File Name: RCC®ST.HC9 Area Type: Other 7-19-98/km Comment: 1998 short bkgrd tota Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 < 0 1 2 < 0 Volumes 150 .40 40 160 55 335 50 1120 95 230 1375 195 Lane W (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 0 Lost Time 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left Thru * Thru Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left • SB Left Thru * Thru Right * Right Peds * Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right Green 16.OA Green ll.OA 59.OP _ Yellow/AR 5.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 5.0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat V/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS ----- --- ------- ----- ----- ----- --- ----- --- EB L 294 1470 0.538 0.200 24.7 C 22.6 C T 335 1863 0.125 0.180 22.2 C R 523 1583 0.080 0.330 14.9 B WB L 309 1543 0.545 0.200 24.7 C 22.3 C T 335 1863 0.173 0.180 22.4 C R 523 1583 0.676 0.330 21.1 C NB L 322 1770 0.165 0.780 6.9 B 8.0 B TR 2246 3682 0.598 0.610 8.1 B SB L 341 1770 0.710 0.780 19.1 C 11.7 B TR 2230 3656 0.778 0.610 10.6 B Intersection Delay = 12.5 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 5.O sec Critical v/c(x) = 0.758 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- I 1 J i 1 1 n 1 1 i 1 II II 11 APPENDIX D = = = = = M HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) shields (E-W) evenstar Major Street Direction.... NS Length of Time Analyzed... 15 (min) Analyst ................... mjd Date of Analysis.......... 7/19/98 Other Information......... am ®1998 short bkgrd total Two-way Stop -controlled Intersection Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 2 < 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 1074 6 2 PHF .95 .95 .95 Grade 0 0 MCI (%) SU/RV's ($) CVIs W PCEIs ------------ 1.10 --------------. Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) --------------------------------- -------------------------------- Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB BB ------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 0 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1385 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1385 Prob. of Queue -Free State: -------------------------------------------------------- 1.00 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ -------------------- ----------2.6 EB R 2 1385 2.6 0.0 A Intersection Delay = 0.0-sec/veh r M = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets (N-S) shields = c (B-W) evenstar = Major Street Direction.... NS Length of Time Analyzed... 15 (min) Analyst ................... mjd Date of Analysis.......... 7/19/98 Other Information........ am pm 1998 shor bkgrd total Two-way Stop -controlled Intersection =c=========I LNorthboundd=- LSouthboundR= I LBastboundR==I=LWestboundR - No. Lanes 0 2 < 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 692 1 4 PH F .95 .95 .95 Grade 0 0 MCI (t) SU/RVIs ($) CVIs (t) PCsIs Adjustment Factors 1.101 ------------------------ Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection ------------------------------------------------------ Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB BB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 0 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1385 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1385 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 1.00 -------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ----- ------ ------- ----- -------2.6 - RB R 4 1385 2.6 0.0 A Intersection Delay = 0.0 sec/veh M = M = = M = = = = ! = = M = M M HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.if RSSCPMSB.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets (N-S) senior/shopping ctr (E-W) raintree Major Street Direction.... EW Length of Time Analyzed... 15 (min) Analyst ................... mjd Date of Analysis.......... 7/19 98 Other Information ......... am m 1998 short kgr total Two-way -Stop-controlled -Intersection -- - ---- ----- ------------ = Eastbound westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 1 < 0 1 1 < 0 1 1 < 0 1 1 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 6 48 17 135 113 30 25 1 140 16 1 4 PHF .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 -.95 .95 .95 .95 .95 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) SU/RV's (8) - CV's 3) PCE's 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMSB.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 60 135 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1291 1183 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1291 1183 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.87 1.00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 69 151 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1589 1453 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1589 1453 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.90 1.00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 3: TH from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 359 352 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 707 713 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.90 0.90 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 635 640 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 1.00 1.00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB ------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 346 417 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 668 607 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.90 0.90 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.92 0.92 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.92 0.80 Movement Capacity: (pcph) -------------------------------------------------------- 613 489 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ NB L 29 613 ------- 6.2 ------- 0.0 ----- --------- B NB T 1 635 > 3.7 NB R 162 1291 > 1283 3.2 0.4 A SB L 19 489 7.7 0.0 B SB T 1 640 > 6.7 SB R 4 1183 > 1011 3.6 0.0 A EB L 7 1453 2.5 0.0 A 0.2 WB L 156 1589 2.5 0.3 A 1.2 Intersection Delay = 2.1 sec/veh M r M r r M r HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCAMSB.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets (N-S) senior/shopping ctr (E-W) raintree Major Street Direction.... SW Length of Time Analyzed... 15 (min) Analyst ................... mjd Date of Analysis.......... 7/19/98 Other Information........ am pm 1998 shor bkgrd total Two-way Stop -controlled Int rsection LEastboundR I LWestboundR I LNorthboundd I LSouthboundd = NO. Lanes 1 1 1 < 0 1 1 1 < 0 1 1 1 < 0 1 1 1 < 0 Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC.s ($) SU/RV's (t) CVIs (t) PCEIs N 2 99 13 95 .95 .95 0 1.10 ---------------- N 68 26 25 .95 .95 .95 0 11 1 112 .95 .95 .95 0 1.10 1.10 1.10 ---------------. Adjustment Factors 14 1 1 .95 .95 .95 0 1.10 1.10 1.10 -------------- Vehicle Critical Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 �r �■ � r r r r r�� HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCAMSB.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection ------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 111 40 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1216 1321 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1216 1321 Prob. of queue -Free State: 0.89 1.00 Step 2: IT from Major Street WB-----------EB - ------------------------------ ---------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 118 53 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1506 1617 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1506 1617 Prob. of queue -Free State: 0.95 1.00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 3: TH from Minor Street NB SB ------------------------ ---------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 238 232 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 818 824 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.95 0.95 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 774 780 Prob. of queue -Free State: 1.00 1.00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 226 284 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 783 725 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.95 0.95 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.96 0.96 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.96 0.86 Movement Capacity: (pcph) ------------------------------------------------------- 750 620 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) ----- --------- -------- ------ ------ ------ NB L 13 750 ----- - 4.9 ------- 0.0 A NB T 1 774 > 3.5 NB R 130 1216 > 1211 3.3 0.3 A SB L 17 620 6.0 0.0 B SB T 1 780 > 5.7 SB R 1 1321 > 981 3.7 0.0 A EB L 2 1617 2.2 0.0 A 0.0 WB L 79 1506 2.5 0.0 A 1.4 Intersection Delay = 1.9 sec/veh M M M M = M = M M = = M r a HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY version 2.4f 07-19-1998 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets (E-W) raintree/centre (N-S) shields = _ Analyst: Matt File Na CLAMSB.HC9 Area Type: Othe 7-19-98� pm Comment: 1998 (shor bkgrd total --------- _ - Eastbound westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 < 0 1 2 < 0 Volumes 158 31 36 60 17 103 25 1150 140 175 905 77 Lane W (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 0 Lost Time 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left Thru * Thru Right * Right Peds * Peds WB Left * SB Left Thru * Thru Right * Right Peds * Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right + Green 15.OA Green 9.OA 62.OP Yellow/AR 5.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 5.0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS ----- ---- ------- ----- --- - ----- --- ----- --- BB L 317 1667 0.524 0.190 24.8 C 23.1 C T 317 1863 0.104 0.170 22.7 C R 475 1583 0.080 0.300 16.2 C WB L 302 1587 0.209 0.190 22.1 C 19.2 C T 317 1863 0.057 0.170 22.5 C R 475 1583 0.227 0.300 17.0 C NB L 329 1770 0.079 0.790 2.3 A 7.1 B TR 2346 3665 0.608 0.640 7.2 B SB L 311 1770 0.592 0.790 12.9 B 7.0 B TR 2356 3682 0.461 0.640 6.0 B Intersection Delay = 9.0 sec/veh Intersection LOS B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 5.0 sec Critical v/c(x) = 0.624 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4f 07-19-1998 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets (E W) raintree/centre (N-S) shields = Analyst: Matt File Name: RCLPMSB.HC9 Area Type: Othe 7-19-98 ►m Comment: -1998- short= bkgrd--total=====____________________________ _ =Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound== L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 < 0 1 2 < 0 Volumes 138 35 51 160 50 332 36 1120 95 230 1370 192 Lane W (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 0 Lost Time 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 ------------------ --------------------------------------------------- Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left • NB Left Thru • Thru Right * Right Peds • Peds WB Left * SB Left Thru * Thru Right * Right Peds * Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right Green 16.OA Green 11.OA 59.OP Yellow/AR 5.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 5.0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS ----- ---- ------- ----- ----- ----- --- ----- --- EB L 298 1492 0.486 0.200 23.9 C 21.6 C T 335 1863 0.110 0.180 22.2 C R 523 1583 0.103 0.330 15.0 B WB L 313 1567 0.536 0.200 24.6 C 22.1 C T 335 1863 0.158 0.180 22.4 C R 523 1583 0.668 0.330 20.9 C NB L 322 1770 0.118 0.780 6.5 B 8.0 B TR 2246 3682 0.598 0.610 8.1 B SB L 341 1770 0.710 0.780 19.1 C 11.6 B TR 2231 3657 0.774 0.610 10.5 B Intersection Delay = 12.4 sec/veh Intersection LOS B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 5.0 sec Critical v/c(x) = 0.754 --------------------------------------------------------------------- I 1 I I 1 I APPENDIX C [_1 1 1 1 i I 1 I 1 Level of Service for Signalized Intersections Level of service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of delay, which is a measure of driver discomfort and frustration, fuel consumption, and lost travel time. Specifically, level -of - service (LOS) criteria are stated in tenns of the average stopped delay per vehicle for a 15-min analysis period. The criteria are given in Table 9-1. Delay may be measured in the field or estimated using procedures presented later in this chapter. Delay is a complex measure and is dependent upon a number of variables, including the quality of progression, the cycle length, the green ratio, and the v/c ratio for the lane group in question. LOS A describes operations with very low delay, up to 5 sec per vehicle. This level of service occurs when progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. LOS B describes operations with delay greater than 5 and up to 15 sec per vehicle. This level generally occurs with good progres- sion, short cycle lengths, or both. More vehicles stop than with LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. LOS C describes operations with delay greater than 15 and up to 25 sec per vehicle. These higher delays may result from fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant al this level, though many still pass through the intersection without slopping. LOS D describes operations with delay greater than 25 and up to 40 sec per vehicle. At level D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not slopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. LOS E describes operations with delay greater than 40 and up to 60 sec per vehicle. This level is considered by many agencies to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high I* ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. LOS F describes operations with delay in excess of 60 sec per vehicle. This level, considered to be unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with oversaturation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. It may also occur at high I* ratios below 1.0 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing causes to such delay levels. TABLE 9-1. LEVEL -OF -SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE STOPPED DELAY PER VEHICLE (SEC) A 55.0 B >5.0 and 5 15.0 C > 15.0 and S 25.0 D >25.0 and 5 40.0 E >40.0 and 5 60.0 F >60.0 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS ' Intersectio►iTotal Delay = (Vehicle Total Delay x Volume) _ ,Volume Level -of -Service (Intersection) _ Level -of -Service Average Total Delay, sec/veh A <_5 B >5and <10 C > 10 and <_ 20 D > 20 and 5 30 E >30and <_45 F > 45 � = ,M M HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets (N-S)cshields L c (E-W) evenstar Major Street Direction.... NS Length of Time Analyzed... 15 (min) Analyst ................... mjd Date of Analysis.......... 7/19/9 Other Information ......... am m 1998 short bkgrd total Two-way Stop -controlled Intersect n LNorthboundd IcLSouthboundR IcLBastboundR--I LWestboundR - No. Lanes 1 0 2 < 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MCI (t) SU/RVIs M CVIs (&) PCE's ------------ 1055 6 .95 .95 0 --------------- 2 .95 0 1 1.10 ----------------------------- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 - 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) --- 0 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1385 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1385 Prob. of Queue -Free State: -------------------------------------------------------- 1.00 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- -- — ---- --- 2.6 EB R 2 1385 2.6 0.0 A Intersection Delay - 0.0 sec/veh r M M Is m m �= r M W I= r M M= ems. M HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) shields (E-W) evenstar Major Street Direction.... NS Length of Time Analyzed... 15 (min) Analyst ................... mjd Date of Analysis.......... 7/19/9 Other Information........ am pm 1998 short bkgrd total Two-way Stop -controlled In rsect n c c Northbound I Southbound I Eastbound I Westbound L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 0 2 < 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 620 1 4 PHF .95 .95 .95 Grade 0 0 MC's ($) SU/RV's (�) CV's (6) PCE's ------------ 1 1.101 -------------------------------------------- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPMST.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 0 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1385 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1385 Prob. of Queue -Free State: -------------------------------------------------------- 1.00 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) ------- ------- (sec/veh) -------------- -------- ------ ------ ------ 2.6 8B R 4 1385 2.6 0.0 A Intersection Delay = 0.0 sec/veh HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPM98.HC0 Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) senior/shopping ctr (E-W) raintree Major Street Direction.... EW Length of Time Analyzed... 15 (min) Analyst ................... mjd Date of Analysis.......... 7/19/9 Other Information......... am pm 998 short bkgrd total Two-way Stop -controlled Intersecti n LEastboundR I LWestboundR I LNorthboundd ( LSouthboundRcc No. Lanes 11 1 < 0 1 1 1 < 0 1 1 1 < 0 1 1 1 < 0 Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MCI (%) SU/RV's (t) CV's (%) PCE's N 5 31 16 .95 .95 .95 0 N 125 85 28 .95 .95 .95 0 23 2 130 .95 .95 .95 0 1.10 1.10 1.10 --------------- Adjustment Factors 15 1 3 .95 .95 .95 0 1.10 1.10 1.10 -------------- Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCPM98.HC0 Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 42 104 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1318 1226 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1318 1226 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.89 1.00 Step 2: LTfromMajorStreet WB EB -- - - ------------------------ Conflicting Flows: (vph) 50 118 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1623 1506 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1623 1506 Prob. of Queue -Free State: -------------------------------------------------------- 0.91 1.00 Step 3: TH from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 296 290 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 763 768 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.91 0.91 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 692 697 Prob, of Queue -Free State: 1.00 1.00 ----------------------------------------------------- Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 284 352 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 725 662 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.91 0.90 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.93 0.93 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.93 0.82 Movement Capacity: (pcph) ------------------------------------------------------- 671 543 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95t Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ NB L 26 671 ------- 5.6 ------- 0.0 ----- --------- B NB T 2 692 > 3.5 NB R 151 1318 > 1303 3.1 0.4 A SB L 18 543 6.9 0.0 B SB T 1 697 > 6.2 SB R 3 1226 > 1030 3.5 0.0 A EB L 6 1506 2.4 0.0 A 0.2 WB L 145 1623 2.4 0.2 A 1.3 Intersection Delay = 2.1 sec/veh M= =. $M M r w M W r w�= IMM M M M M HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCAM98.HC0 Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets (N-S) senior/shopping ctr (E-W) raintree Major Street Direction.... EW Length of Time Analyzed... 15 (min) Analyst ................... mjd Date of Analysis.......... 19/9 Other Information........ am m 199 short bkgrd total Two-way Stop -controlled In rsec ton LEastboundR I LWestboundR I LNorthboundd I LSouthboundd - No. Lanes 11 1 < 0 1 1 1 < 0 1 1 1 < 0 1 1 1 < 0 Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC -s ($) SU/RV's ($) CVIs (t) PCEIa N 1 80 12 95 .95 .95 0 1.10 --------------- N 63 23 23 95 .95 .95 0 1.10 ---------------- 10 1 104 .95 .95 .95 0 1.10 1.10 1.10 --------------. Adjustment Factors 13 1 1 .95 .95 .95 0 1.10 1.10 1.10 '-------------- Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1f RSSCAM98.HC0 Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 90 36 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1247 1328 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1247 1328 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.90 1.00 ------------------------- Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB ' -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 97 48 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1541 1626 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1541 1626 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.95 1.00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 3: TH from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 206 200 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 851 857 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.95 0.95 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 810 816 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 1.00 1.00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB ------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 194 248 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 817 761 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.95 0.95 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.96 0.96 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.96 0.87 Movement Capacity: (pcph) ----------- ------------------------------------------ 786 662 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95$ Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ NB L 12 786 ------- 4.7 ------- 0.0 ----- --------- A NB T 1 810 > 3.3 NB R 120 1247 > 1241 3.2 0.3 A SB L 15 662 5.6 0.0 B SB T 1 816 > 5.3 SB R 1 1328 > 1011 3.6 0.0 A BB L 1 1626 2.2 0.0 A 0.0 WB L 73 1541 2.5 0.0 A 1.4 Intersection Delay = 1.9 sec/veh HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4f 07-19-1998 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets (E-W) raintree/Centre =(N S) shields Analyst: Matt File Na RCLAM98.HC9 Area Type,; --Other 7-19-M8 pm Comment: 1998 short bkgrd total Eastbound westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T ---- ---- R No. Lanes ---- ---- ---- 1 1 1 ---- ---- ---- 1 1 1 ---- ---- ---- 1 2 < 0 ---- 1 2 < 0 Volumes 139 24 34 8 14 71 25 1009 73 105 863 70 Lane W (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 0 Lost Time 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left Thru * Thru Right - * Right Peds * Peds WE Left * - SB Left Thru * Thru ` Right * Right Peds * Peds ` NB Right EB Right SB Right WE Right Green 14.OA Green 9.OA 63.OP Yellow/AR 5.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 5.0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: MVmtS Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS --- ----- EB L ----------- ----- 303 1684 0.482 ----- ----- 0.180 24.7 --- ----- C 24.3 C T 298 1863 0.084 0.160 23.1 C R 253 1583 0.142 0.160 23.3 C WE L 293 1629 0.027 0.180 21.8 C 23.8 C T 298 1863 0.050 0.160 23.0 C R 253 1583 0.296 0.160 24.1 C NB L 335 1770 0.078 0.800 2.0 A 5.9 B TR 2397 3688 0.499 0.650 6.0 B SB L 327 1770 0.339 0.800 3.5 A 5.4 B TR 2394 3683 0.431 0.650 5.6 B Intersection Delay = 7.8 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 5.0 sec Critical v/c(x) = -------------------------------------------------------------------- 0.499 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4f 07-19-1998 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets (E-W) raintree/centre (N-S)=shields Analyst: Matt File Name: RCLPM98.HC9 Area Type: her 7-19-98 mm pm Comment: 998 short bkgrd total Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T ---- ---- ---- R No. Lanes ---- ---- ---- 1 1 1 -- - ---- ---- 1 1 1 ---- --- ---- 1 2 < 0 1 2 < 0 Volumes 125 '24 27 45 38 210 30 1183 46 107 1484 170 Lane W (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 0 Lost Time 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 -------------- ------------------------------------------------------ Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * ` Thru * Thru Right * Right Peds * Peds WB Left * SB Left Thru * Thru Right * Right r Peds * Peds * NB Right EB Right SB Right WE Right Green 16.OA Green 9.OA 61.OP Yellow/AR 5.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 5.0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS --- ----- EB L ----------- ----- 310 1552 0.425 ----- ----- --- ----- 0.200 23.2 C 22.9 C T 335 1863 0.075 0.180 22.0 C R 285 1583 0.098 0.180 22.1 C WE L 326 1629 0.144 0.200 21.3 C 30.4 D T 335 1863 0.119 0.180 22.2 C R 285 1583 0.775 0.180 33.8 D NB L 287 1770 0.111 0.780 6.9 B 7.3 B TR 2334 3705 0.582 0.630 7.3 B SB L 311 1770 0.363 0.780 5.2 B 9.9 B TR 2311 3668 0.791 0.630 10.2 B Intersection Delay = 11.2 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 7.0 sec Critical v/c(x) = 0.755 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 I I 1 1 I I F 11 1 I I r APPENDIX B r M WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII m III M; M m m= i am is III m � MATTHEW J. DELICH , P.E. 2272 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE LOVELAND, CO 80538 TABULAR SUMMARY Or `VEHICLE COUNTS Dow 0 ° (J e 17 P� Date ] J(, r3 , mr Day ✓ ! c1�^t City Crj f I ; , S R = Right turn S = stmight INTERSECTION OF S� 1� s i AND �UP STOV L=.Letttum TIME BEGINS 5�t;c��s S11 e��s North South ty?„5��✓ TOTAL � weal T� trom NORTH tram SOUTH I from EAST I from WEST R I S I L I Total II R S I L I Total I R I S I L I Total I) R I S I L I Total 30 lol( i I Ilc I I i N II I I I lol Ir 0II II 1-2..V3 III I II I 1 1D 1 N II I I I IID \ II I J I II g:'o II I 1 1 1 I l :IDI li II I I I II 3( 1 1 1 1 3 II II 1101 11 II/ I I/I a II I I I Ilt I I l r I I� I II I I II I I i f! II ► I I i I I I II Ii. 1�3u-8�3v11 I I II t I l l II II I I I II y l I I II II I I I I I li I I I u It I I I I I I I I li I II I i I I I I I B II I I I I I I I I II i,V'30 Ill 1 I I III to I II II I I I I Ir I I/ II II lyvs Ilal I I II\I I01 li II I I I II/I I/I� I II IS 00 III I I II )I\ 10 I li II I I I IDI I I II Is, I 7717 1 11f1 101 ii II I I I I o I I r II li II I I I II l l i I II li I I I I I I I Il Is�o�3cII I I ( II) IDI II II 1 1 I II I i l l 1 I► I I I I II i I II II I I I I I i ( I II I I I I I I I II II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II m m m m m m MATTHEW J. DELICH , P.E. 2272 GLEN HAVEN DRIVE LOVELAND, CO 80538 /'..(Ij Otur." / ' � " INTERSECTION OF TABULAR SUMMARY Or VEHICLE. life ✓ Dace J 9? I� gy0ar .. � r-4 AND COUNTS C� 1, 4,_� R = Ripht turn s = straipttt L = Lett turn TIME BEGINS 11 t IIr I from NRTH O n J� u3aH TOTAL North South -JJ II✓Pe I fEAST rom l�C¢tl1✓ oQ. TOTAL west TOTAL ALL I fivm SOUTH from WESTWEST�t R I S I L Total II R I S I L I Total II R( S I L I Total II R I S I L I Total 17r3o l o 0 1 3 1 a9 II .5 i S l q 1,7 S �; ys 1 0 1 0 17 1 IDS 1 0 1 1 1 a ro 11 33 11 17 1.2 II V l .3.2 1 l l 317 �-;®D Il o l a I I 1 11 8 1 0 Is 1a1 11 a -a 115 1 7 IF la.! 111 11-7 10 1 19' 11 L II (,1 Iq1/ 10 13 12 I!/SI D 1 3 1 i II.1 15' 1 S II lass II 3 I /S 1 0 119 II vr II (07 II I I I U I I I U I I I I II I I I II II I! r2I /y Il7/I o IID I y II10K 11,413(aa I5-31q9' II/aI7 kI1 Iql II/,P9 11797 1 I I I h I I I II I I I I I I 1 I II li II I I I II I I I II II I I I II i I I II U ,30 I I G I I I' , i 0 3a it as II'7 .I 00 IC',� I 3 U 9 y"1 IIDID IBIS 1011/ IS- 133 1139 11?I01//1 D IIy u7 S-OD II 1 I o IS1 (0 Its 5p 10 19 1 11 sy Is le 1?1 -7 11/ 1 s I.SI 11 II �?z I5; I j- II 1 I D 13 1 II3/ 1 / IS 12 7 11 11 it 1- �' Inc-. 1 Y I� I I c 116 11 v II ,a,� I I I I II I i I II II I I I II I i II II y0t,j;�� 1 /sd II 1 1 Ra Ip� '11/ 1 1 s 1 I I I I II 1 I I II I I I I I I I i II II I I I I I I I it I I I I I I I I I II I I I i I I I I I 11 I I I II I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I II City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations PAGE: 1 its Code : 00000126 FILE: 126-5-98 -S Street: SHIELDS W Street: RAINTREE Movements by; Primary DATE: 5/07/98 nether : PARTLY CLOUDY ----------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------ PEAK PERIOD ANALYSIS FOR THE PERIOD: 4:20 PM - 5:30 PA DIRECTION START PEAK HR ........... VOLUMES ........... ...... PERCENTS ....... FROM PEAK HOUR FACTOR PEDS Right Thru ---------- left Total PEGS Right Thru Left --------- ----- ----------- North 4:30 PH --------- 0.89 ------- 11 170 1484 101 1161 - 10 84 6 East 4:30 PM 0.84 4 210 38 45 293 - 12 13 15 ' South 4.30 PH 0.92 1 46 1183 30 1259 4 94 2 West 4:30 PH 0.90 0 21 24 125 176 - 15 14 I1 rEntire Intersection North 4:30 PM 0.89 11 110 1484 101 1161 10 84 6 ' East 0.84 4 210 38 45 293 12 13 15 South 0.92 1 46 1183 30 125S 4 94 2 West 0.90 0 21 24 125 116 - 15 14 It ' SHIELDS ;...; N ' _ i S ............ ' .... ' [PEDS ] 17 ; 170 :1484 ; 107 ;. .; 4 [PEDS ] ------------------* *------------------ r ....:....... -- 1 761 - -- � -- 210 . ......... ... 238 ------------------ ... RAINTREE 293 38 --------------- ' ------------------ --- 125 -- �— 45 r------------------ --------------- RAINTREE ... 24 176 -------- ... .................. ------------------ 177 .......... 27 1259 [PEDS ] O 1.......... .� 30 111183 46 ; ' 7 [PEDS ] r ' 1556 .: .............. ;...; SHIELDS City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations to Code : 00000126 S Street: SHIELDS 1 Street: RAINTREE ' ether : PARTLY CLOUDY -------------------------------------- Movements by: Primary --------------------- PEAK PERIOD ANALYSIS FOR THE PERIOD: 1:30 AM - 08:30 AM ' DIRECTION START PEAK HR ........... VOLUMES ........... ...... PERCENTS ....... FROM PEAK HOUR FACTOR PEDS Right Thru Left Total PEOS Right Thru Left ------------------------------------------------------------------- North 1:30 AM 0.14 8 TO 863 105 --------------------------- 1038 - 1 83 10 East 1:30 AM 0.86 4 11 14 8 93 - 16 15 9 ' South Nest 7:30 AM 7:30 AM 0.90 0.86 1 13 3 34 009 24 25 139 1107 _ 191 1 11 91 12 2 11 Entire Intersection North 1:30 AM 0.14 8 10 863 105 1038 - 1 83 10 East 0.86 4 11 14 8 93 - 16 15 9 South 0.90 1 73 1009 25 1107 - 1 91 2 Nest 0.66 3 34 24 139 191 11 12 11 i ' [PEDS ------—]---8— * .................. ................: 1 .... 109. .................. ... RAINTREE ------------------ PAGE: 1 FILE: 125-5-98 DATE: 5/01/98 SHIELDS ;...; N ------- ' ' W—+—E S 1219 ...� 70 ; 863 ; 105 :............: 4 [PEDS ] *------------------ -- 1038 ---� -- 71 ' ------------------ 93 14 ' ------------------ :._ g ------------------ RAINTREE ... .................. 202 .......... --- 1107 — — — — ............ ..... *------------------ 25 :1009 ; 73 ; 7 [PEDS ] i i 1 1 1 1 1 [ �1 1 AMIENDIX A 1 1 i I I 11 I 1 1 VII. CONCLUSIONS This study assessed the potential impacts of the Ace Hardware site in Fort Collins, Colorado. As a result of the analysis, the following conclusions were drawn: - The potential impacts of the proposed project were evaluated at the following intersections: Shields/Raintree/Centre, Raintree/Senior Center/Shopping Center, and Shields/Evenstar. - The traffic impact analyses were performed for existing conditions and future Year 2003. Future background traffic conditions without the project and the total traffic conditions with completion of the proposed project, were evaluated. - Under existing conditions, each of the study intersections is currently operating at an acceptable level of service. - For Year 2003 background and total traffic conditions, the study intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service. The required geometry in the short range future is shown in Figure 9. - Pedestrian access to and from the proposed Ace Hardware site is/will be direct and continuous. Pedestrian level of service will be acceptable. Bicycle level of service will be acceptable. It is anticipated that the transit level of service will be acceptable in the future. 19 [1 1 1 I 1 that Shields Street will be a high frequency transit corridor. Future transit level of service will be acceptable. 18 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 :y b� m N arvn9n1 Legend: — w - Lane RECOMMENDED APPROACH GEOMETRY Figure 9 i, Table 3 Short Range Background Peak Hour Traffic Operation Level of Service Intersection am Pm Shields/Raintree/Centre (signal) B B Raintree/Senior Center/Shopping Center (stop sign) NB LT A B NB T/RT A A SB LT B B SB T/RT A A EB LT A A WB LT A A OVERALL A A Shields/Evenstar (stop sign) EB RT A A Table 4 Short Range Total Peak Hour Traffic Operation Level of Service Intersection AU Pm Shields/Raintree/Centre (signal) B B Raintree/Senior Center/Shopping Center (stop sign) NB LT NB T/RT SB LT SB T/RT EB LT WB LT OVERALL Shields/Evenstar (stop sign) EB RT 16 A B A A B B A A A A A A A A A A VI. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ' The previous two chapters described the development of future traffic forecasts both with and without the proposed project. Intersection capacity analyses are conducted in this chapter for both scenarios to assess the potential impact of the proposed project -generated traffic on the local street system. Other transportation modes are also addressed in this chapter. ' Traffic Analysis - Year 2003 The peak hour background and total traffic volumes for Year 2003, ' illustrated on Figures 7 and 8, respectively, were analyzed to determine the intersection delay and corresponding level of service. Tables 3 and 4 summarize the results for the respective short range Year 2003 background ' and total traffic conditions. The level of service worksheets for Year 2003 background and total traffic conditions are provided in Appendix C and D, respectively. As indicated in Tables 3 and 4, the traffic movements at each of the study intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable level of service under future traffic conditions for Year 2003. The short range intersection geometry is depicted on Figure 9. Pedestrian Level of Service The study area for pedestrians is, by definition, those destinations ' which are within 1320 feet of the site. The potential destinations are shown on the graphic in Appendix E. The site itself falls into the "Activity Center" category. As mentioned earlier, the site is connected to all of the potential destinations by existing sidewalks, although some of those sidewalks do not meet current City Standards since they were built under previous City Standards. ' The Pedestrian LOS Worksheets are provided in Appendix E. The minimum level of service for activity center is B for all measured categories. This level of service will be satisfied for all categories either currently or in the future. This area has/will have a good ' pedestrian system. ' Bicycle Level of Service This site is directly connected to the on -street bike lanes on Shields Street and Raintree Drive. Therefore, the base connectivity is at ' level of service A as shown on Appendix E. The site is in an existing commercial area. ' Transit Level of Service There is transit service along Shields Street with a stop at the ' Senior Center, which is adjacent to the site. The current route (Route 7) is within 1320 feet of. the site. The 2015 Transit System map indicates 15 1 1 1 1 1 o � N W) VENSTAR ) 1 5/5 Site N Senior Center r, o Cn M NJ -55I50 0 0 ^ 105 335 s 50i115 001a) .f-20/55 `r fo r 10��35 1 %- 60/160 Shopping Center SHORT RANGE TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 165/150 --4' } r 35/40 � o n 40/40 - C) o u7 0 AM/PM Rounded to the Nearest 5 Vehicles. . CENTRE Figure 8 14 V. FUTURE TOTAL TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS The future total traffic projections reflect future traffic conditions with the traffic from the proposed Ace Hardware site. The future total traffic projections were developed for the Year 2003. ' Total Traffic Year 2003 ' The total traffic for Year 2003 was developed by adding traffic from the proposed project to the background traffic for Year 2003. The resulting short range peak hour total traffic projections for Year 2003 are shown on Figure B. I I I 1 I I I� 13 g � N 1 1 0 � Y7 \LoII o I EVENSTAR 4/2 AM/PM / r ` 0 W Site ) 1 Senior CD cl) Center — M_ M N ZOl \\ �� 25130 a LO 03/332 2bbo5 + —17 50 60/160 ��o CENTRE 158/138 --/ } 31"/35 --r Z 36/31\4\ o Ln � Shopping Center SHORT RANGE BACKGROUND PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 7 12 I IIV. FUTURE BACKGROUND TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS In order to properly evaluate the potential impact of the proposed Ace Hardware site on the local traffic conditions, future traffic volumes were first estimated for the study area without the project. These future forecasts reflect the growth that is expected from overall development in ' this area of the City of Fort Collins. ' Background Traffic Year 2003 The growth reflected in Year 2003 Background Traffic is based on area wide growth and development. Based upon historical traffic growth and ' information from the North Front Range Regional Transportation Plan, October 1994 and the cited traffic studies, the background traffic was determined. The short range peak hour background traffic for Year 2003 is depicted on Figure 7. 1 i 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 I L N Oil Site RAINTREE oho o I uo N 10 m► TRIP DISTRIBUTION Figure 5 N L.enrer SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 6 10 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Land Use Ace Hardware - 12.6 KSF (Rate) Sit -Down Rest. - 2.0 KSF (Rate) TOTAL Table 2 Trip Generation Daily A.M. Peak Trips Trips Trips in out 650 10 4 (51.29) (0.76) (0.32) 260 10 9 (130.34) (4.82) (4.45) 910 20 13 9 P.M. Peak Trips Trips in out 27 29 (2.12) (2.30) 13 9 (6.52) (4.34) I i 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f 1 1 1 1 1 1 SITE PLAN H Lu W m H N 0 W_ 2 N 4 N NO SCALE CENTRE AVENUE Figure 4 r I 1 I r I 1 I III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Ace Hardware site is proposed to have retail and restaurant uses. The project site, depicted on Figure 4, is located west of Shields Street between Raintree Drive and Evenstar Court. Trip Generation Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this upon the existing and proposed street system. A compilation of trip generation information, prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (Trip Generation. 6th Edition) was used to estimate trip generation. Table 2 shows the trip generation of the proposed project. Land use code 816 (Hardware/Paint Store) and 832 (High Turnover Restaurant) were used. Trip Distribution The directional distribution of the generated trips was determined for the Ace Hardware site. The distribution was determined based upon a gravity model process, in addition to analysis of the existing traffic patterns in the area and the type of use proposed at the site. The trip distribution is provided on Figure 5. Trip Assignment Trip assignment is how the generated and expected to be loaded on the street system. The resultant of the trip distribution process. Figure site generated traffic for the proposed project. 7 distributed trips are assigned trips are the 6 shows the peak hour I ' Highway Capacity Manual. Operation at the key intersections is acceptable. Acceptable level of service is defined as level of service D or better. Pedestrian Facilities Currently, there are pedestrian facilities adjacent to the project site and adjacent to both key streets near the project site. Some of these sidewalks were built under former City Street Standards and, therefore, do not have the parkway between the street and the sidewalk. There are handicap ramps at all intersections. Bicycle Facilities t. There are bike lanes striped along Raintree Drive. Shields Street has on -street bike lanes. Transit Facilities Transfort currently serves this area with Route 7. There is a transit stop at the Senior Center. During the school year, Route 7 has 30 minute service. I ri 6 1 Table 1 Current Peak Hour Operation Level of Service Intersection Noon PM Shields/Raintree/Centre (signal) B B Raintree/Senior Center/Shopping Center (stop sign) NB LT A B NB T/RT A A SB LT B B SB T/RT A A EB LT A A WB LT A A OVERALL A A Shields/Evenstar (stop sign) EB RT A A 5 1 Senior Center z�lza `r � 53rg5 0 os Shopping Center 4/2 ono �-71/210 Ir 00 f 114/38 8/45 139/125 � 24/24 o 34/27 Nan 0 0 AM/PM 4 N RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 2 , A& ;o N Senior Center � 2312a 23�a5 �63o-5 �o Shopping Center 4/2 C�� �� o 71/210naOo " —14/38 r— 8/45 139/125 24/24 34/27 —� L °^ M O O AM/PM RECENT ADJUSTED PEAK HOUR- TRAFFIC Figure 3 4 9 I ware I i I 11 1. t SITE LOCATION 1 "=1500' N Figure 1 s L 1 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location of the proposed Ace Hardware site is shown on Figure 1. It is important that a thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented. Land Use Land uses in the area are commercial and residential. The topography surrounding the site is essentially flat from a traffic operations perspective. Shields Street decreases in grade from south to north from Raintree Drive to Rolland Moore Park. The center of Fort Collins is located northeast of this site. Roads The primary streets, which will serve the proposed project in the study area, are Shields Street and Raintree Drive. The intersection of Shields/Raintree/Centre is signal controlled. Evenstar Court has a right- in/right-out intersection with Shields Street to the north of the site. The site will take access through the Fort Collins Senior Center from Raintree Drive. This access is stop sign controlled. Shields Street is a north/south arterial street. Within the study area, Shields Street accommodates five travel lanes: two through lanes in each direction and a center left -turn lane. Recent daily traffic on Shields Street is approximately 37,000 near Prospect Road and 28,000 near Horsetooth Road. Raintree Drive is a local street that primarily serves the residential and commercial uses north and south of Raintree Drive. The east leg of Raintree Drive is called Centre Avenue, which is classified as ' a collector street. Raintree Drive also intersects with Drake Road on the west side of the Raintree Shopping Center. Evenstar Court currently serves a few residential units west of Shields Street. tExisting Motor Vehicle Traffic Peak hour traffic counts at the key intersections are shown on Figure 2. Raw count data is provided in Appendix A. Since some of these counts were obtained during the summer, they were adjusted and balanced to reflect a school time condition. The resulting traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. Existing Motor Vehicle Operation Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 3 and the existing control, the key intersections operate as indicated in Table 1. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix B. Appendix B also describes level of service for unsignalized intersections as provided in the 1994 II. INTRODUCTION This transportation impact study addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near the proposed Ace Hardware site, located north of Raintree Drive and west of Shields Street. This transportation analysis addresses potential vehicular impacts upon the street system, the pedestrian network surrounding the study area, the bicycle system, and the availability of transit facilities. Traffic projections will be prepared for future Year 2003. The scope of this study was discussed with City staff. 11 I I 11 During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project architect/planner (Greg D. Fisher) and City staff. This study generally conforms to the format set forth in the Fort Collins Transportation 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 and daily traffic volumes; - Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses for all pertinent modes of transportation. This report is prepared for the following purposes: - Evaluate the existing conditions; - Estimate the trip generation by the proposed/assumed developments; - Determine the trip distribution of site generated traffic; - Evaluate level of service; - Determine the geometrics at key intersections; - Determine the impacts of site generated traffic at key intersections; - Determine pedestrian, bicycle, and transit levels of service. Information used in this report was obtained from the City of Fort Collins, the planning and engineering consultants, the developer, research sources (ITE, TRB, etc.), and field reconnaissance. The "Transportation Impact Study - The Preserve Apartments, Phase II," July 14, 1998, and the "Market Centre PUD Site Access Study," December 1996 were also reviewed as part of this analysis. LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Site Location ........................................ Page 3 2. Recent Peak Hour Traffic ............................. 4 3. Recent Adjusted/Balanced Peak Hour Traffic ........... 4 4. Site Plan ............................................ 8 5. Trip Distribution .................................... 10 6. Site Generated Traffic ............................... 10 7. Short Range Background Peak Hour Traffic ............. 12 8. Short Range Total Peak Hour Traffic .................. 14 9. Short Range/Long Range Geometry ...................... 17 APPENDIX A Recent Peak Hour Traffic B Current Peak Hour Operation/Description of Level of Service C Year 2003 Background Traffic Analyses D Year 2003 Total Traffic Analyses E Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Level of Service 11 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Psis I. Introduction ......................................... 1 II. Existing Conditions .................................. 2 LandUse ............................................. 2 Roads................................................ 2 Existing Motor Vehicle Traffic ....................... 2 Existing Motor Vehicle Operation ..................... 2 Pedestrian Facilities ................................ 6 Bicycle Facilities ................................... 6 Transit Facilities ................................... 6 III. Proposed Development ................................. 7 Trip Generation ...................................... 7 Trip Distribution .................................... 7 Trip Assignment ...................................... 7 IV. Future Background Traffic Projections ................ 11 Background Traffic Year 2003 ......................... 11 V. Future Total Traffic Projections ..................... 13 Total Traffic Year 2003 .............................. 13 VI. Traffic Impact Analysis .............................. 15 Traffic Analysis Year 2003 ........................... 15 Pedestrian Level of Service .......................... 15 Bicycle Level of Service ............................. 15 Transit Level of Service ............................. 15 VII. Conclusions .......................................... 19 LIST OF TABLES Table Paae 1. Current Peak Hour Operation .......................... 5 2. Trip Generation ...................................... 9 3. Short Range Background Peak Hour Traffic Operation ... 16 9. Short Range Total Peak Hour Traffic Operation ........ 16 I ACE HARDWARE SITE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY FORT COLLINS, COLORADO AUGUST 1998 Prepared for: Greg D. Fisher, Architect 3115 Clyde Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 Prepared by: MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E. 2272 Glen Haven Drive Loveland, CO 80538 Phone: 970-669-2061 FAX: 970-669-5034