HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARMONY TECHNOLOGY PARK SECOND - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE -w
cn
Liz
o ,:I -
CO
O
L9
o CY)
o aCr
O o
o
U rn
XQ
o
z
a
w
O
J
w
Cr
r)
z
w
a
z
w
0
N
r-
N
CV
W
a
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Les Kaplan,
City of Fort
Tess Jones,
Matt Delich
MEMORANDUM
Imago Enterprises, Inc.
Collins
CDOT
September 13, 2004
W3ye
Harmony/Cambridge intersection signal analysis
File: 0469ME01)
i This memorandum addresses signal warrants at the Harmony/
0
N Cambridge -HP East intersection under a given level of development o
M the Willowbrook and Chateau developments. The location of the
c.p Harmony/Cambridge-HP East intersection and surro.anding area is shown in
o Figure 1. It was assumed that approximately two-thirds of the
rn Willowbrook development and all of the Chateau development would be
Li built and occupied by/before the short range (2007) future. The
o purpose of this analysis is to determine whether signal warrants
a would likely be met at the Harmony/Cambridge-HP East intersection.
Figure 2 shows recent peak hour traffic at the Harmony/HP West
and Harmony/Cambridge-HP East intersections. Raw traffic counts are
provided in Appendix A. The Harmony/Cambridge-HP East intersection
was evaluated using techniques provided in the 2000 Highway Capacity
Manual. Using the peak hour traffic shown in Figure 2, the peak hour
operation at the Harmony/Cambridge-HP East intersection is shown in
Table 1. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix B. A description
of level of service for unsignalized and signalized intersections from
the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual and a table showing the Fort Collins
Motor vehicle LOS Standards ;Intersections; are also provided in
Appendix B. The Harmony/Cambridge-HP East intersection operates
unacceptably during the afternoon peak hour. The Harmony/Cambridge-HP
East intersection is in an area termed -mixed-use districts." In
mixed -use ditricts, acceptable o' ration at i nc? gnalll 7.e— intersections z
is considered to be at level of service F for any approach leg for a E
arterial/collector-local intersection. At signalized intersections, w
z
acceptable operation is considered to be at level of service E for the overall
intersection, as well as for any approach leg or movement for Z
an arterial/collector-local intersection. wZ
0
Appendix C contains the peak hour warrant analysis sheet for a Fmajor
street (Harmony Road) where the posted speed is greater than 40 o
mph. From this exercise, it car. be concluded that the peal: hour N
signal warrant would be met in the afternoon peak hour using the Z
current traffic volumes on the HP East leg of the intersection. It
is important to note that the -Harmony Corridor Plan" and the "
Harmony Road Access Control Plan" indicate that the Harmony/ LLCambridge -
HP East intersection. is a potential signalized a
intersection. This intersection is located approximately 0.5 miles east
of the Harmony/Ziegler signalized intersection. Therefore, it meets
the spacing criteria of both the City of Fort Collins and CDOT.
pi
However, a signal is also proposed at the Harmony/Technology Parkway
intersection (future). The Harmony/Technology Parkway intersection is
approximately 0.25 miles east of the Harmony/Ziegler intersection. The
Harmony/Technology Parkway intersection does not meet signal spacing
requirements. The Harmony/Technology Parkway signal was approved a number
of years ago, when the Harmony Technology Park was proposed for
development. However, since the development has not materialized, it has
been suggested that the Harmony/Cambridge-HP East signal be the next signal
in this corridor_ Since this intersection is at 0.5 mile spacing, CDOT has
waived the need for a signal progression analysis. It is assumed that
signal progression was conducted in the "Harmony Road Access Control Plan."
Figure 3 shows the future (2007) street system with the construction of
the various developments in the area. Along with serving the Willowbrook
and Chateau residential developments, the Harmony/Cambridge-HP East
intersection will also provide a direct access to Fossil Ridge High School,
located in the northeast quadrant of the Ziegler/Kechter intersection.
This school was opened in Fall 2004. In addition to these specific
developments, the Fort Collins Master Street Plan shows Cambridge Drive
directly connecting to Trilby Road through various developments to the
south. This street is designated as a collector street.
Typically, traffic signals are not installed at any intersection
unless one or more signal warrants are met according to the Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). A warrant analysis involves
obtaining traffic count information at a given intersection in accordance
with procedures in the MUTCD. However, the south leg (Cambridge Drive)
terminates approximately 1700 feet south of the subject intersection.
Therefore, the following analysis relies on traffic forecasts.
Specifically, this analysis utilizes peak hour traffic, since that is the
most predictable. This exercise involved conducting trip generation, trip
distribution, and trip assignment for the Willowbrook, Chateau, and Fossil
Ridge High School developments. Along with the peak hour traffic from
these developments, a portion of the left -turning traffic out of the HP
West Access would likely use the HP East Access when the subject
intersection is signalized.
Figure 4 shows the forecasted peak hour traffic at the Harmony/HP
West and Harmony/Cambridge-HP East intersections at a short range future
year (approximately 2007). Appendix D contains the peak hour warrant
analysis sheet for a major street (Harmony Road) where the posted speed is
greater than 40 mph. From this exercise, it can be concluded that the peak
hour signal warrant would be met in both the morning and afternoon peak
hours_ It is important to note that since there are/will be separate
northbound and southbound right -turn lanes, only the left -turn volume was
used in the signal warrant analysis. It is likely that the Harmony/
Cambridge -HP East intersection would also meet the Four Hour Warrant
criteria from MUTCD, since the proposed uses generate significant traffic
during the course of the day, not just at the peak hours. The short range
2007) peak hour operation at the Harmony/Cambridge-HP East intersection is
shown in Table 2. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix E. The
Harmony/Cambridge-HP East intersection will operate acceptably during both
the morning and afternoon peak hours with signalization.
The peak hour signal warrant will be met when the minor street left
turns exceed 75 vehicles per hour. This warrant is met for the southbound
left turns exiting Hewlett-Packard in the afternoon peak hour. The various
developments that were included in these analyses do have connections to
Ziegler Road. The Harmony/Ziegler intersection is a signalized
intersection. However, as homes continue to be built and traffic related
to Fossil Ridge High School grows, delays at the Harmony/Ziegler
intersection will increase. It is difficult to say with certainty when the
Cambridge Drive leg of the subject intersection will meet warrants.
However, it is reasonable to assume that when Cambridge Drive is connected
to the developments to the south, the 75 left -turning vehicles per hour
would be met on the south leg. The key element to meeting the signal
warrant is connecting Cambridge Drive to the developments to the south.
It is my understanding, based upon the correspondence provided in
Appendix F, that the City of Fort Collins will be responsible for the
design and construction of the traffic signal at the subject intersection.
However, a number of developments (Imago Enterprises, Hewlett-Packard,
Chateau Custom Homes, and Village Homes) will be responsible for the design
and construction of the Cambridge Avenue street surface improvements.
Do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or desire
additional analyses.
N
e
c.
ti
O.
9O
C) C)
Hewlett
Packard
w
Harmony m
ca
v
L]
U
a
N
1
Ketcher
SCALE 1"=3000'
SITE LOCATION Figure 1
00
D M
127/45
1237/ 1566
88/11
1298/1566
150/12
1088/1641
2/1
AM/PM
cn
En
U
Q
N
cc
W
D_
2
o
E
CIS
A,
A&
188/11
1378/1429
0/1
t r
CV O O
O —
Harmony
RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 2
a
TABLE 1
Current Peak Hour Operation
kev l trf' -
NB LT/RT E F
SB LT E F
Harmony/Cambridge-HP East SB RT C D
stop sign) SB APPROACH D F
EB LT D B
WB LT B C
N
O
O O
Hewlett
Packard
CD m
w
Harmony
Chateau
2 U
N E
cc
U
i
Rock Creek
Fossil
Ridge H.S.
Willo brook
Ketcher
t,
c,
c
JLr1LG i -Z-U
SITE LOCATION Figure 3
cn
0)
mUU
Q
w
1
i
L0
d" LO
C'7
L0 L0
i
130/45 -
1425/1755
90/10
No— 1485/1630
D U')
co 0
N
O
Z
o
150/ 15
1150/1685
130/90
L
P
co
V
w-- AM/PM
Rounded to Nearest
5 Vehicies
SHORT RANGE (2007) PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
0
0
190/10
1465/ 1515
95/75
t r
2E O
0 ~
z `f'
rn
Harmony
Figure 4
TABLE 2
Short Range (2007) Peak Hour Operation
En%rstie n, A IIgiBt
Lev+e1#
P Yf
Harmony/Cambridge-HP East
stop sign)
EB LT D B
EB T B C
EB RT A B
EB APPROACH B C
WB LT A C
WB T B C
WB RT A B
WB APPROACH B C
NB LT1T D D
NB RT C C
NB APPROACH C D
SB LT/T C E
SB RT C C
SB APPROACH C D
OVERALL B C
APPENDIX A
W W
S O N
O
J W O to
W > U
cl O
Z Q m
WJ J
CM
S (7 > c
ti O
Q N J d
Cl)
m
rB
0 75
U
W
Y
J
o
u-
rn
ca
U L
W
O
LLJ O tyt
O
LL— O c E
O i ca
O_±+
CJ
CD
W
Q)
t+
O O
N C
J
M a)
Q L
E
LT
L C6
0 w
C Z5
ry U)
N co a O0 _ Q
F
e-
co Nr, to
M
to
N
co N 4m 1`
tpN
E
t M
co
M
m
2
m Co V
C70
N
co OO O NCD
V C7 7
d
J O O O O
c
EE
4
M N
co
R o ov
c3
N N
tlf 07 N N
R
W
J M V Cl)
3
prn
F
t Lo M
O
C
cam+/
ui
0 Cl) co an CM
N V CV OO
3
0 c O O O O
t
51
N J C 4
a)
mII
F
c E
tv
U
o O o
c
0
0 cn o 0 o O
0
O O
E
CD
0 C
E
1-
11 ca
O
h h
p
OO OO
J
0o ao m co
tD t0 M M
h ti CO ti
M
co
coco
co M o
o in us
o
m co C N
co 00 O I—
Ln
coCD
Oo
O O O
T T O O
O o 0 0
0 o O O
o 0
M O
W W
coa ()
S 0 O N
U Z c
to
W > QU
C
z a
w J
S U >
r N
t
J
Cl)
Z
0
U
W
J
U
W
U-
0
Cl)
Q
J
MJ
W
F-
N
75
U
w R
Q
Co
r— CM co
Q Oa7 Q1m I
c®
r
cc
Si
co Ln O t—
o 2
F mn
a)
r—
M
CD
c9'
tO
Vr
t0
ccd
O M M M
tp
S
N N ON
C7
C cop
0
N
J
E F
O
M M
S
C
3
N c c4i m COOa
to J h N N
RW
J N M ppppcli
n C*)
3
p
N
M N M e-
OC
j O C) N m
yi
d
N CVQ
C7
to
Ly.+ 7
pO O O O
C7On A
L
O
Z J
to
d C
E
II
OCl)Vyn
ti
pO
O
1A
r
co
J
r-.
M
co
cMU'i-
co
r` CV
0),
U'$
O
CO
00
ti
ti
M
4
co
u
W)
N
U')
r--
7 N N
pNp Vqq CO N
V). M a't M
LO
O
to
N
r— Mu
r- tl1
M t-q- V C7
O O O O
M O
APPENDIX B
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1d
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: Michael
Agency/Co.: Matthew J. Delich, P.E.
Date Performed: 9 10/2004
Analysis Time Period: am pm
Intersection: armony/Cambridge-HP East
Jurisdiction: Fort Collins
Units: U_ S. Customar
Analysis Year: e recent
Project ID: 0469me01
East/West Street: Harmony Road
North/South Street: Cambridge Drive -HP East
Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs):
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street: Approach Eastbound `Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5
L T R I L T i
0.25
Volume 150 1088 2 0 1378 188
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.85 0.85 0.85
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 161 1169 2 0 1621 221
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 0
Median Type/Storage TWLTL 3
RT Channelized? No
Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 1
Configuration L T TR L T R
Upstream Signal? No No
Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12
L T R I L T R
Volume 1 1 8 8
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 1 9 9
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 2
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage No
Lanes 0 0 1 1
Configuration LR L R
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service_
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12
Lane Config L L 1 LR I L R
v (vph) 161 0 2 9 9
C(m) (vph) 326 604 ill 91 323
v/c 0.49 0.00 0.02 0.10 0.03
951115 queue length 2.60 0.00 0.05 0.32 0.09
Control Delay 26.4 11.0 38.0 48.9 16.5
LOS D B E E C
Approach Delay 38.0 32.7
Approach LOS E D
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1d
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: Michael
Agency/Co.: Matthew J_ Delich, P.E.
Date Performed: 9/10 2004
Analysis Time Period: am pm
Intersection: Harmony/Cambridge-HP East
Jurisdiction: Fort Collins
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: ecent
Project ID: 0469me01
East/West Street: Harmony Road
North/South Street: Cambridge Drive -HP East
Intersection Orientation: EW Study period hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6
L T R I L T R
Volume 12 1641 1 1 1429 11
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.97 0.97 0.97
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 13 1823 1 1 1473 11
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- 0
Median Type/Storage TWLTL 3
RT Channelized? No
Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 1
Configuration L T TR L T R
Upstream Signal? No No
Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R I L T R
Volume 2 0 149 159
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 0 175 187
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 2
Percent Grade M 0 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage No
Lanes 0 0 1 1
Configuration LR L R
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12
Lane Config L L I LR I L R
v (vph) 13 1 2 175 187
C(m) (vph) 449 340 71 122 361
v/c 0.03 0.00 0.03 1.43 0.52
95o queue length 0.09 0.01 0.09 12.06 2.85
Control Delay 13.3 15.6 57.2 301.4 25.2
LOS B C F F D
Approach Delay 57.2 158.7
Approach LOS F F
IF
t7NSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Level -of -Servicef-Service
A _.
13
I
Average "Total Delay
kWveli
10 and < 15 --
15 and < 25
25arid --- 35 35 .
nd < 50 SIGNALIZED
INTERSECTIONS Level -
of -Service Average Total Delay sec/
vch IU
and -: 20 20
and < 35 35
and < 55 - B --
c
r
55 and - 80 I
Table 4-3
Fort Collins (City Limits)
Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections)
Land Use (from structure plan)
Other corridors within:
Intersection type Commercial Mixed use
Low density
mixed use All other
corridors districts residential areas
Signalized intersections D E' D D
overall)
Any Leg E E D E
Any Movement E E D E
Stop sign control N/A F" F" E
arterial/collector or local —
any approach leq)
Stop sign control N/A C C C
collector/local—any
approach leg)
mitigating measures required
considered normal in an urban environment
APPENDIX C
V
W
cc
AC
C)
7
a
z
0
1
Q
E
0
v
0
W
m
d
O
z
C)
Q
J
0
a
0
0
0
C
w
Q
W
J
z
CO
V
W
z
W
z J
z
J oZS z
W -- C!)
m W
O Z
I
0 Cc
s
N O
06 qi1) c
w O F
z
N
W
O
I
O
N
i
s
i
r
Hdn - H0VOHddd E3vgn lOn HOIH
iDDUiS UONIl
0
d
N
T
I
I•
I•
I
O
O
0
c
I•
1wil
m
NI: 3096,/PH
AM: 2gO(o Pl4
I z
o
W v °'
o cUSoro
o cu o
a
a).=
CL a- Eta— 2Q cv v
r af=-
o
a >
L
mo
T cLL
O
W
D Lij o
i
z
WQ+ W a >
f" t
C)
O a'
o cz
Q Z
2
APPENDIX D
a
V
rn
W
H
O
0
0
W.
0
r—
w
a
CO
cc
CD
O
Q
J
0
0
C
C
T
F—
co
co
W
rJ
Z
O
C
1
i
I
Z i
w
Z
w
Q
z -
Jl
g xs
T
w
z
W C/) g
O
w
O
w
N O i
Od K
W O
zz ti 1
CV E
Wcc
O
Cc
O
N
I
i
r
0 0 1 (:) i
O
Hdn - HOVOdddV M-IHJIH 1DDH1S
H NIW 1
0
O
N
T
g
T
I
0
O
r-
O
O
u
O
0
M
pM ;
3390 vPN A
M : 3I 80YPH U)
Lli
Occ _
CL _
Q >
cr
O
Co
L.
L T—
o
W Q
0- OW
U_
W
W W >
v )
cc
O
Q
N
L
W
O
C
1;a)aj E _
a) n
C L
w O m --
a • '
3 ctS
a
a Lr)
ro r` N
ou ,^ U)
V! U
N O
cO
ct3 C U
N E o
nE`
O U)
o a o
E a
o O
p
0O r
QCL
L o
ca z
41
1
APPENDIX E
0 HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.le
Analyst: Michael Inter.: Harmony/Cambridge-HP East
Agency: Matthew J. Delich, P.E. Area Type: All other areas
Date: 9/10/2004 Jurisd: Fort Collins
Period: 4:10469m Year recen shor total
Project
E/W St: Harmony Road N/S St: Cambridge Drive -HP East
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound 1 Westbound I Northbound I Southbound
I L T R I L T R 1 L T R 1 L T R
No. Lanes 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1
LGConfig I L T R I L T R I LT R I LT R
Volume 1150 1150 130 195 1465 190 1100 0 95 110 0 10
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0
RTOR Vol 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
EB Left A P I NB Left A
Thru P 1 Thru A
Right P I Right A
Peds X I Peds X
WB Left A P I SB Left A
Thru P I Thru A
Right P I Right A
Peds X i Peds
NB Right A I EB Right
SB Right A 1 WB Right
Green 6.0 60.0 20.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0 3.0
All Red 1.0 2.0 2.0
Appr/ Lane
Lane Group
Grp Capacity
Cycle Length: 100.0
Intersection Performance Summary
Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Flow Rate _
s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 198 1770 0.81 0.71 47.7 D
T 2128 3547 0.58 0.60 13.5 B 16.6 B
R 950 1583 0.15 0.60 9.1 A
Westbound
L 299 1770 0.37 0.71 8.8 A
T 2128 3547 0.81 0.60 19.0 B 17.5 B
R 950 1583 0.24 0.60 9.9 A
Northbound
LT 267 1337 0.44 0.20 36.3 D 31.2 C
R 491 1583 0.23 0.31 25.9 C
Southbound
LT 295 1475 0.04 0.20 32.3 C 28.2 C
R 491 1583 0.02 0.31 24.0 C
Intersection Delay 18.0 sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
secs
1 4'
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1e
Analyst: Michael Inter.: Harmony/Cambridge-HP East
Agency: Matthew J. Delich, P.E. Area Type: All other areas
Date: 9/1 2004 Jurisd: Fort Collins
Period: am Year recent or tot
Project ID: 0469
E/W St: Harmony Road N/S St: Cambridge Drive -HP East
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound
L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R
I ! I I
No. Lanes ! 1 2 1 ! 1 2 1 1 0 1 1 ! 0 1 1
LGConfig I L T R I L T R I LT R I LT R
Volume 115 1685 90 175 1515 10 1115 0 70 1205 0 160
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0
RTOR Vol 1 0 1 0 1 0 I 0
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
EB Left A P 1 NB Left A
Thru P ( Thru A
Right P I Right A
Peds X I Peds X
WB Left A P I SB Left A
Thru P I Thru A
Right P 1 Right A
Peds X I Peds
NB Right A I EB Right
SB Right A 1 WB Right
Green 6.0 55.0 25.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0 3.0
All Red 1.0 2.0 2.0
Appr/ Lane
Lane Group
Grp Capacity
Cycle Length: 100.0
Intersection Performance Summary
Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Flow Rate
s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 198 1770 0.09 0.66 13.5 B
T 1951 3547 0.96 0.55 34.3 C 32.9 C
R 871 1583 0.11 0.55 11.1 B
Westbound
L 198 1770 0.39 0.66 22.8 C
T 1951 3547 0.80 0.55 21.7 C 21.6 C
R 871 1583 0.01 0.55 10.2 B
Northbound
LT 194 774 0.70 0.25 44.4 D 35.8 D
R 570 1583 0.14 0.36 21.7 C
Southbound
LT 281 1123 0.86 0.25 58.1 E 43.0 D
R 570 1583 0.33 0.36 23.6 C
Intersection Delay 29.7 sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C
secs
APPENDIX F
7-11-1997 0=AAAM FROM P_I
Imago Enterprises, Inc.
140 Palmer Drive • Fort Collins • Colorado 80525
Phone: (970) 226-6819 Fax: (970) 207-9256 Email: lesterkaplan@comcast.net
May 13, 2004
Cam McNair, City Engineer
Engineering Department
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Re: Cambridge Avenue Improvement
Cam:
In the course of reviewing my file on the Harmony Technology Park O.D.P., 1 found the
attached April 24, 2001 memo to me from Gary Diede, former Director of Transportation
Operations for the City of Fort Collins, confirming that the "city of Fort Collins will be
responsible for paying for the cost of design and installation of a new traffic signal light
at the intersection of Cambridge Drive and Harmony Road".
As we have been discussing, the developers on Observatory Village, Morningside Village
an Imago Enterprises, Inc. are considering undertaking the improvement of Cambridge
Avenue between Harmony Road and Rock Creek Drive. Our knowing that the signal is a
city expense, as we had believed it would be, is critical to our decision to proceed, and we
are relying upon Mr. Diede's assertion. Who would be the appropriate city staff for our
engineers to meet with to discuss revising the existing construction drawings to a stand
alone project and pursing A -line approval from CDOT?
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Lester M. Kaplan
cc. Tom Iskiyan, Chateau Custom Homes
Peter Benson, Village Homes
Mike Brake, J.R. Engineering
7-11-1997 O:ddAM FROM Y_ L
1 14:- Y
From. Gwy Diede'- GDiEDF. g*gov_ com
To: Lener-ki plan - Lestef.kQjpl tl a. wOx ejM
CC: - CMCNAIR a fcaov com
D TRINGERiw3fc tam
com
Subject: Cambridge Drive Signal
Date. April24, 2001
April 24.2001
Dcar Mr. Kaplan.
Per our telephone conversation this morning, I want to coz rm that the
city of Fort Collins will be responsible for paying for the cost of design
and instalmon ofa nrw traffic signal light at the intersectiou of
Cambrdgo Drive and Harmony Road: This work will require the Colorado
Department of Transportation's approval and will be done at a future dato
to be dotcrmincd by the City of Fort CoUins.
sincerely.
Gary R. Dicdc
Director of Transportation Operations
City of Fort Collins
fide://C:1i'rouam Files\FncorMas3\MaillllserI\mva'R')7S tit.,,
11-1997 O:a5AN1 FROM P. 3
it as.- i vi -r
Lester Kaplan
From: "Cam McNair' <CMCNAIRQfcgov.com>
To: <iesterkaplan st.net>
Cc: "Cameron Gloss' <cgbss@1cgov.con -; -Don Bachman' <DBachman@tcgov_com>; "Dave
Stringer' <DSTRINGER@flcgov.com>; 'Eric Brack®" <ebracke@fcgov.com>; 'Matt Baku'
MBAKER@fcgov_corrv;'Mark Jackson" <m0ckson@fcgov_com>. "Marc Virata"
MVIRATA4btogov.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 19.2004 9:58 AM
Attach: Cambridge Dr Signal Ur_jpg: Cambridge Ave Improvement 1Jr_jpg
Subject Cambridge Avenue tmprovements
M
I received your letter dated May 13, 2004, along with the attached memo
from Gary Diode dated April 24, 2001. We agree that the City will pay
for the design and installation of the signal at the Cambridge4iarmony
intersection_ Be advised that there will also be surface improvements
necessary on the street (turn lanes, median improvements, etc.) that
accompany the traffic signal_ he costs of the design and construction
of those surface improvements will be shared between the City and the
developer(s) in accordance with our normal Street Overs123ing and
Development Review practices. In order to avoid any apprehension or
misundemtanding, it might be a good idea to meet and discuss those cost
splits". Marc Virata (Development Review Civil Engineer) can
facilitate a meeting with Matt Baker to have those discussions.
Also, please have your design engineer work with Marc Virata to revise
the existing plans as needed, and to initiate the A -line modification
process.
Please let me know how I can assist further on this important project.
Cam
Cam McNair, PE
City Engineer
28I North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
Phone- 970-221-6605
Fax: 970-221-6378
mail : pincn> it0fpgQ .com
9/13/2004
a