The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20112291.tiff I IDIETZLER LOADING FACILITY PROJECT • • <H Draft TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY I I I I I -- _ ; 1 cam, .. - I • PROJECT SITE • .w , I i ill I dI lip, r 4spir, II IN b' ! III'iae.a.'.=w I I PREPARED FOR: PATRICK COMPANIES 1 499 W. 1 20TH AVE., DATE: MAY 5, 201 1 I SUITE 200 FH PROJECT #1 1 015 DENVER, CD 80234 • 2011-2291 FOX P.O. Box 1 9768, BOULDER, CO B0308-2768 TRANSPORTATION GROUP IPHONE: 303.485.01 14 FAX: 303.772.2329 1 Dietzler Loading Facility Project (FH#11015) draft Traffic Impact Study Itt i � TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 3.0 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 1 3.1 Study Area 1 3.2 Circulation Network 2 3.3 Existing Traffic Volumes 2 3.4 Intersection Levels of Service 3 3.5 Accident Analysis 3 4.0 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 4 ' 4.1 Annual Growth Factor and Future Volume Methodology 4 4.2 Year 2013 Intersection Analysis (Without Proposed Development) 4 I • 5.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC 4 5.1 Trip Generation 4 5.2 Trip Distribution 5 6.0 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH SITE DEVELOPMENT 5 6.1 Site Specific Roadway Improvements 5 6.2 Year 2013-plus-Site Capacity Analysis 6 7.0 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE SCENARIO ANALYSIS 6 ' 7.1 Future Volume Methodology 6 7.2 Year 2035 Total Intersection Levels of Service 7 8.0 CONCLUSION 7 ' • Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC Page i May 5, 2011 Dletzler Loading Facility Project (FH#11015) draft Traffic Impact Study • • LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Summary Table 2 Site Trip Generation Estimate LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map ' Figure 2 Site and Access Plan Figure 3 Existing (April 2011) Traffic Volumes Figure 4 2013 Background Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' Figure 5 Site Trip Distribution Figure 6 Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Figure 7 2013 + Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Figure 8 Year 2035 Total Peak Hour Traffic Volumes APPENDIX I • Existing Traffic Count Data ' Level of Service Definitions Intersection Capacity Worksheets I Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC Page ii May 5,2011 1 ' Dietzler Loading Facility Project (FH#11015) draft Traffic Impact Study ' • 1.0 INTRODUCTION This traffic impact study has been prepared by the Fox Higgins Transportation Group for the Dietzler Loading Facility Project proposed generally on the southeast quadrant of the WCR 95 and WCR 118 intersection in unincorporated Weld County. Figure 1 illustrates the site location within the general vicinity. The development proposal includes the ' construction loading facility for pumped water in roughly the center of the 80-acre parcel of open land. A gravel access is planned along WCR 95 to circulate water tanker trucks one-way through the site. The purpose of this study is to assist in identifying potential any traffic impacts within the general study area as a result of this project. This traffic study addresses existing, near ' term Year 2013, and long term 20-year peak hour intersection conditions throughout the study area. The information contained in this study is anticipated to be used by the County in identifying roadway needs on the site or directly adjacent to the parcel in both the near term and long term future scenarios. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Dietzler Loading Facility project site is located on the southeast quadrant of WCR 95 I • and WCR 118 intersection. The site is an 80-acre parcel of open land with water wells on it. The proposal involves constructing water storage and 12 loading areas for tanker trucks. A gravel access is planned approximately 1/4 mile south of WCR 118 on the east side of WCR 95. The circulation throughout the site to the loading area is one-way. There will be no on-site employees or storage of vehicles. This is a 24-hour operation, seven days a week. A maximum of 40 tanker trucks will provide water to the oil and gas industry area ' within a 50-mile radius of the site. The 40 tanker trucks will have a maximum of 8 loads (round trip) per day. ' Figure 2 illustrates the site layout and proposed access to the adjacent gravel roadway network. It is anticipated that the site will be developed in the next year. This study analyzes traffic associated with construction of the loading facility which is anticipated within the next year or by 2013. ' 3.0 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 3.1 Study Area ' The study area boundaries and intersections identified for project analysis were established based on discussions with Weld County Engineering staff. These boundaries took into consideration the amount of site traffic added to the surrounding street network and existing I • Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC Page 1 May 5, 2011 Dietzler Loading Facility Project (FH#11015) draft Traffic Impact Study ' • traffic volumes on the adjacent gravel roadways. The study area is bounded by the site on the south and east, WCR 390 on the west and WCR 122 on the north. 3.2 Circulation Network Because the site is located in a rural area in Northern Colorado, the existing study area circulation network consists of only gravel collector and local roadways. All roadways are 2-lane and no turn lanes are present at any of the intersections along the corridors within the study area. Sight distances at intersections in the area are more than sufficient due to the relatively flat open terrain. The primary roadways that serve the project site are discussed in the following text. ' Weld County Road 95 is a 2-lane gravel roadway providing north-south access to farms and open land in the area. All intersections along this corridor within the site vicinity are controlled by either yield signs or no control. ' Weld County Roads 122 and 118 are 2-lane local gravel roadways currently serving east- west access to the WCR 390 corridor and Grover. Yield signs control intersections at WCR 390. Weld County Road 390 is a 2-lane gravel collector corridor extending from SH 14 on the I • south to roughly the Wyoming border on the north. The average speed on this roadway near the site is 65 miles per hour(mph). The truck percentages are approximately 30% of the total 120 annual average daily traffic volumes, according to data submitted by the ' County. 3.3 Existing Traffic Volumes ' Existing daily traffic volumes were collected along roadway corridors adjacent to the site in April 2011 on a typical weekday. Copies of the existing count data are included in the Appendix. The roadway count data was collected for two consecutive days to obtain an average daily traffic (ADT) volume, as well as peak hour directional traffic characteristics on the roadways. The traffic volumes collected showed minimal daily traffic of less than ' 400 vehicles per day on any of the corridors throughout the study area. The ADT corridor data was used to interpolate peak hour intersection turning movement data at the following study area intersections identified for analysis in this study. This methodology was approved for use by County staff. • WCR 95 / WCR 118 • WCR 95 /WCR 122 • WCR 390 / WCR 390 Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC Page 2 May 5,2011 ' Dietzler Loading Facility Project (FH#11015) draft Traffic Impact Study ' • Based on the data above, the existing A.M. and P.M. weekday peak traffic volumes for the study area intersections are illustrated on Figure 3. The peak hour periods in the area were identified to occur between 11AM-12PM for the A.M. peak hour period and 3-4PM for the P.M. peak hour period according to existing traffic characteristics on each of the roadway sections. ' 3.4 Intersection Levels of Service The intersections surrounding the site were reviewed to determine baseline or existing ' operations and identify any capacity constraints. In determining the operational characteristics of an intersection, "Levels of Service" (LOS) A through F are applied, with LOS A indicating very good operations and LOS F indicating congested operations. The ' intersection LOS is represented as a delay in seconds per vehicle for the intersection as a whole and for critical turning movements. A more detailed discussion of LOS methodology is contained in the Appendix for reference. Criteria contained in the Highway ' Capacity Manual (HCM)1 was applied to the study area intersections in order to determine existing levels of service during peak hour periods. ' The results of the LOS calculations for the intersections are summarized in Table 1. The intersection level of service worksheets are attached in the Appendix. The data in the tables show that all of the study area intersections are operating acceptably (LOS A range I • overall and for all approaches) and well within capacity levels for yield control intersections along gravel roadways. ' 3.5 Accident Analysis The Weld County 2035 Transportation Plan completed this year was referenced to identify ' any safety concerns on the study area corridors. The Plan includes accident information for a 3-year period from 2007 to 2010. According to the data, there were no accidents along WCR 95. There was one accident each on WCR 122 and WCR 112 corridors in the ' year 2007. These corridors are 2 miles north and south of the loading facility site. Typically, the frequency of five similar accidents within a 12-month period in a single location is considered a benchmark for potential correction measures. Because the accident frequency within the study area is very low, it was determined that the surrounding intersections are currently functioning within acceptable safety levels. I ' t Highway Capacity Manual, Highway Research Board Special Report 209,Transportation Research Board, National Research Council. Synchro v.7 software utilized. • ,` Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC Page 3 May 5, 2011 1 Dietzler Loading Facility Project (FH#11015) draft Traffic Impact Study P • 4.0 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT It is anticipated that the site will be constructed and operational within the next year or by ' 2013. Therefore, the short term planning horizon for site-specific analysis is Year 2013. 4.1 Annual Growth Factor and Future Volume Methodology ' In order to forecast near term 2013 traffic volumes at the study area intersections, future traffic volumes contained in the recently completed 2035 Transportation Plan were ' reviewed. The Plan shows a relatively low annual traffic growth factor of 1.2% per year for the next 25 years. The 0.012 annual growth factor was applied to the 2011 traffic volumes to obtain 2013 forecast traffic volumes. This traffic growth does not include any site traffic increases. It was determined that the adjacent intersection volumes are so low, that application of the growth factor results in no traffic increase in the next 2 years over existing volumes. Therefore, the Year 2013 background traffic volumes are equivalent to existing ' peak hour traffic volumes and are illustrated on Figure 4. 4.2 Year 2013 Intersection Analysis (Without Proposed Development) Intersection level of service calculations were conducted with the Year 2013 background peak hour traffic volumes shown on Figure 4 at the study area intersections. The LOS I • methodology discussed previously was applied to the Year 2013 background volumes to project short term capacity at the study area intersections. The Year 2013 intersection LOS calculation worksheets are attached in the Appendix. The intersection LOS are summarized for each location in Table 1. There is no change in operations over existing traffic because the volumes did not increase. ' 5.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC ' 5.1 Trip Generation A trip generation estimate was made to determine the traffic characteristics of the ' anticipated site land use. Because of the unique land use, the proposed operations were reviewed to determine the traffic characteristics of the loading facility. The site involves the construction of a water load out facility from an existing groundwater well that will service the oil and gas industry within a 50-mile radius of the site. The operations for the loading facility are listed below. Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC Page 4 May 5,2011 Dietzler Loading Facility Project (FH#11015) draft Traffic Impact Study ' • • operations are 24-hours per day, seven days per week • maximum 40 water tanker trucks per day • maximum 8 loads per truck per day ' • no on-site office or employees • no on-site vehicle storage ' Based on the data presented above, trip generation for the proposed land use was estimated and is shown in Table 2. The estimated traffic volumes generated by the proposed project are summarized below. Site Trip Generation: • 640 average daily one-way trips • 27 peak hour one-way trips (14 in / 13 out) Because the operations are continuous 24-hours a day, seven days a week, the hourly traffic generated by the site is distributed equally throughout the day/night. Therefore, on any hour of the day/night,there will be approximately 14 tanker trucks entering the site and 13 tanker trucks exiting the site. 5.2 Trip Distribution The estimated traffic volumes presented in Table 2 were distributed onto the adjacent I • roadway network based on knowledge of oil and gas industry areas within a 50-mile radius of the site. In addition, site traffic will not travel on the gravel sections of WCR 390. Each tanker truck will have GPS to direct the drivers travel route, and guarantee no travel on WCR 390. ' The trip distribution percentages formulated for this project are illustrated on Figure 5. The site generated volumes were assigned to the adjacent street network based on these percentages and are illustrated on Figure 6. 6.0 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH SITE DEVELOPMENT ' 6.1 Site Specific Roadway Improvements This scenario analysis has been conducted in order to determine any impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed water loading facility. The following roadway improvements are anticipated with the site construction. ' • Site Access at WCR 95: This 2-lane gravel roadway will serve as the access to the site from WCR 95. The access is planned approximately 1/4 mile or 1320 feet south of the WCR 118 intersection. Therefore, adequate spacing will be provided between I Ili Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC Page 5 May 5, 2011 I Dietzler Loading Facility Project (FH#11015) draft Traffic Impact Study Ds ' • the adjacent intersections. A stop sign will control access onto WCR 95. The site access intersection will include 80 foot radius curves for the tanker trucks to maneuver in and out of the site to/from WCR 95. The access will become one-way travel within the site to facilitate the water loading process. 6.2 Year 2013-plus-Site Capacity Analysis The projected 2013 background volumes were added to the buildout site generated volumes and are illustrated on Figure 7. The level of service criteria discussed in prior ' sections was applied to the study area intersections to determine impacts with the addition of Year 2013-plus-site generated volumes. The results of the LOS calculations for the intersections are summarized in Table 1. The data contained in the LOS tables illustrates that all of the study area intersections will continue to operate acceptably overall and at individual approaches in the LOS A range. ' County mitigation criteria was reviewed and determined the following: • off-site improvements are not warranted • signals or auxiliary lanes are not warranted as yield control intersections are projected to operate well within acceptable levels with forecast volumes • sight distances are more than adequate at intersections due to the open and Irelatively flat landscape throughout the study area • • only signing needed is a stop sign at the site access to control traffic entering WCR 95 • no pavement maintenance is necessary as all roadways are gravel surface • 80-foot radius curves at the site access intersection with WCR 95 will provide for adequate turning radius for the tanker trucks entering and leaving the site • no impacts to school bus routes, pedestrian/bicycle access or public transit as facilities do not exist within site vicinity 7.0 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE SCENARIO ANALYSIS ' This section analyzes long term 25 year traffic forecast or Year 2035 on the adjacent street network. This analysis includes estimated site traffic in the long term total traffic scenario. 7.1 Future Volume Methodology The traffic volumes in the 25-year long term horizon period or Year 2035 were analyzed to determine buildout traffic conditions. The Weld County 2035 Transportation Plan was reviewed to determine forecast traffic volumes and any roadway improvements in the area of the site. The 2035 Transportation Plan calls for the same number of lanes on all roadways in the area that exist today. The Plan forecasts a 1.2% annual growth rate to r Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC Page 6 May 5, 2011 Dietzler Loading Facility Project (FH#11015) draft Traffic Impact Study ' • 2035 which equates to a 1.33 factor above existing 2011 traffic volumes used in this study as base volumes. The forecast Year 2035 total peak hour volumes are illustrated on Figure 8. 7.2 Year 2035 Total Intersection Levels of Service ' Intersection levels of service were calculated with the Year 2035 total intersection peak hour traffic volumes shown on Figure 8. The HCM and peak hour methodology discussed previously were used to estimate the intersection levels of service for the 2035 total traffic (including site)scenario. The 2035 intersection level of service calculation worksheets are attached in the Appendix. The intersection LOS are summarized for each location in Table 1. ' The summary table shows that all of the intersections are projected to operate acceptably and well within their capacities in the LOS A range overall with 2035 total peak hour traffic volumes, and site specific improvements. Very slight increases in vehicle delays will occur in the 2035 scenario over existing conditions, but none require capacity improvements. 8.0 CONCLUSION IThe traffic volumes associated with the construction of the proposed Dietzler Loading . Facility project have been analyzed on the existing, short term Year 2013, and long term Year 2035 roadway network.The 80-acre site is located on the southeast quadrant of WCR ' 95 and WCR 118 intersection on open land with a water well. The proposal involves constructing water storage and loading areas for tanker trucks. A gravel access driveway is planned approximately 1/4 mile south of WCR 118 on the east side of WCR 95. The ' circulation throughout the site to the loading area is one-way. There will be no on-site employees or storage of vehicles. This is a 24-hour operation, seven days a week. A maximum of 40 tanker trucks will provide water to the oil and gas industry area within a 50- mile radius of the site. The 40 tanker trucks will have a maximum of 8 loads (round trip) per day. The breakdown of trip generation estimates for the project is as follows: ' • 640 average daily one-way trips • 27 peak hour one-way trips (14 in / 13 out) ' The surrounding roadway network was reviewed to identify existing, future year 2013, and 2035 operations. The Year 2013 and 2035 total (long term) total traffic scenarios were analyzed with the site generated traffic volumes to determine future roadway capacity operations of the surrounding network. It was determined that the 2013-plus-total site traffic volumes on the adjacent roadway links will operate within the projected roadway and intersection capacities. The access and I • s Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC Page 7 May 5, 2011 1 Dietzler Loading Facility Project (FH#11015) draft Traffic Impact Study 1 1 • circulation for the site will provide for efficient ingress and egress of tanker trucks. The access will include: 1 • Site Access at WCR 95: The gravel site access intersection will include 80 foot radius curves for the tanker trucks to maneuver in and out of the site to/from WCR 95. The access will become one-way travel within the site to facilitate the 1 water loading process. A stop sign should be installed to control outbound traffic onto WCR 95. 1 The 2035 traffic volumes will be adequately served by the adjacent gravel roadway system in the site vicinity. 1 � 1 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC Page 8 May 5, 2011 1 I I 8 J O X • • N C in v N m I N CO r ¢1 0 r_O. O ^ F- $.. 0 0 x Y N r , F NN I f d m CD K o I in r e�- O. F O CO Y 75 d w a 0 N- N A ~ CD N C a N U7:1) Q. N T.; W O O co C n' O O C U O 7 ;¢r in O M N .C 2F o. __ a c C F` a O O L • o d) =` M M > a R 2 d 0 0 5 VL N Y a O C LL CO m I O O m IM O a Ql N F O V 7 J (n Q 4+ O L N Ce co N C m N a N U (c . F U J C H C = 0` co Y C N f° a H I co N T N co V -O N `7 16 Z ° y C ' I.7 N .T. E '5 E I c u_ co CO m I3hi C O v o Z • o I E 1 I a ' in 19 -IC o Q ¢ ¢ ¢ a ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ Q ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ Q ¢ ¢ O a I a M 2 n7 IT '- O co pr,r I'- N o o h co, co O M O in o p (o N-: co h ^ K N o ai o (\i h ai ci I la acE oa ¢ ¢ ¢ aI¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a ¢ ¢ I ca - I I. . .,-.._.-------.---- — - - ' J Q T N O N .- n N 0) (') .- m T- co aJ O .- )(1 LL) t') G ti h to re; o ro o c`i ui 06 h . c o a a ¢ ¢ ¢ a ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ja ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ Q ¢ ¢ 1 d N C1 O O tb O O N Ch O) 010 tO O R i CI IO O X 1 o w N: N.: O h h h O (O (yid a0 O N n ro R E1:2 ,� '� E N o a ¢ ¢ ¢ a ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ la's.¢ ¢ o a. I U) 2 0 c ti O I N O N r N N O O) M O N O N (O up co aal Q K K6 h M K K K tD d aj d a] to t0 O a C N I N m Y o a ¢ ¢ ¢ a ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ Q ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ 1 I e ocO. r 2 N GO 0 0 0 ,0,, .- co O dO O 0 O R t j 6- a O iW K d d I I.: K td N d ro d N )- J c., i m N d MC ' u o y a - I N Q N I 2 ItC1 N N 4O 'r I N .- O) O M O ^ O N ' LL (C n n )o ti r--: r-: to to M d m d of I o C V) B m o a ¢ ¢ ¢ a ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a ¢ *2 ¢ ¢ I , v O a) n 2 6 d ^ � l _ ---_ - II L',2Y f R N O O O O n 10 o co O R U aCa o cdKoro r K Od InjdofdN w W A J -._ - I a`) O Q ¢ ¢ ¢ Q ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a,¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ I t a 01 m a a j A rL A ' O4O4U) r N .- to W M'O r- O N li O F Q a Q (p I h K c0 P K K b b M O 06 O a] t a) I a m (0 _ _ N 1 L L L L L L ' ��-4--. � O)E b12 O) � m _rn a J f0 �+ J L I I d' t d' �'' K C C q a K CO m K N m m m o r c o n p z a o N C d ♦- r t O L 0 0 0 r 0 O O O 0 i L L c 0 O J Z r p) L s t L L F L L L r a U Ls' I— N u 2d a CCcc � a ICH ~ ~ x 0,FF � I Z ,Q!max m o m U U J >U>Iw. m t9 d a cp r J J J J J >IJ J J J N J D `I 18 W U to O O O in = 20o 0 0 0 a 0 a O O � to n L a) X 6 I� t t T a n z t M nO n n z u) a p d' y r cc y >� C C>C Tn >� r EY'>m z 6 'a O U w z (%7 w > z U) I> w > z (!Ol > U7 Z Iv - 5 I • I I0 I N im O ir a ' W U Wa a U H L W LL O ' H I16 elOM r:/ U Q c w 23 ry o i- N a z ' f oo U i. i 3 U 1 LL G6 MOM v O, _ ' Z U O• N • 3 O o J m K W J F 3 w F. K N U E 3 o 50 I SOP _ O O o in I To O tO - Cu C ' 69 S0M 69 MOM m O n 0 L o a (j z in o r ' —.Nor— a a o it U0 0 _ a a7• .5 F LL I I >- • I CY I- Q • U ° Z 1 ___.,_' 0 CO aW H ch I LL m CI o H n CO I U d = 1 - u_ Q LL I § a F- — I- n 1 wW Q 1 ' t o . V t LL W Z u) 7 1 a g ❑ o • Q a _`m a o m n CC 1 tu • o n ICJ o NI- W_ r ❑ N 3 To 1 N C t O a j 3 m W N m o U o N U di o a 4 1CO LL CD CO C _ � I N O a O I 56 �M a u m 21 m to o 0 K 0 _ 0 ry 1 3 _ .. o a o a )!01 0 u N I N Q z _ a 17) F LL I I I • m /yv \ o W > 0 D 0 7 = a J Q O [ I U ' U n LL 'I F Q n O CC c � 6 JAM cc r o O N IU Et N. a d 3 \ CD z Q • - - j '/G Q Z 'Co ' ., ! X LL W o m m / p a 3 O ' 7 N 0 II S° - 7,� Ce / T \ 6 J N ,C _ �/ O J�\�ji R " 1 ] —z� / o • 4 �I x ., /� in o E, 1 I 1 p o a ' N N Q Z O a a` p f LL I I • 'I . a 'N N. / / J ry T / /j [ am I 1 N D • i u Y W D I . 0 O U > _ a U U LL LL LL 4 Y g F N H CK d 1 Ui 3 ` $6 i1GM K 1 o a Q W J d �// U cc 3 Z I a O 27 ❑ cK o 0 J / N 03 \' / W CO O N O m N ❑ i 00 x o 3 O 0 in G 9 ,NGR To U N To o` ❑ tJ / v LI o z 0 \ a F ❑ I • X • n It /\ N '2) N OZ a a p F I1 I I I • Lo o an I >- 0 o u) I O ~ a I CV a a I LL Q I a4, ~ $6 210M 12 I � O..,:tO ..: o Z ' c s o • O o 0 J rc J N W_ O 5 NN CO I CA m K 3 3 O 0 I N I y9 in ,Nev N To c I c 0 n a o —.am_z a rc I La o k ill a a 0 ak I . ^ N N ❑ . a`Ls. n f LL I I • I 1 � i , , I 4t i - i . oCO / v H w I — U) 2 a J I0 O U 'L 1 g6 JAM 0 j o co 0- O I I W ce u_ a I . 3 > . , Ja / w w 1 N H / W_ CO O d m 0 oo I ix _ o 3 0 0 i in II 9 MGR 1 oN c i \_ i h I 76 n i i ti 1 I • I 1I • i I L X` tk �� 0 LL I - `.}/ O / \\ W I 0 F U D J - 2 0 U I LL U u Q Li- ce ~ Q T a .O F 3 I Im a 0 I 2 Q LL w 3 z W I6 H o !� W I F \ / W N N m o Ill 03 3 0 I o n +j9 ,tGR I To U �V y v A m C D I I rr • O. _ LL I I I 1 • N// j co o 33c c\ ,o- C, \o. it / y CO an p w W J Q 0 = Q __ __— 1 2 U ' m U LL U LL U- 0 LL Q f i- H v _ 0 I —11 � -__ __ $6 HDM o O o a, 2 a Y I N /77 / U 0- / cc cC o Q 9 Z H W N 1CC N o W m N } co 1 co U ii �_z� is' ❑ a v ; o 0 x a i- 6 I in u` Q z o a a p F LL I I I• • I I I APPENDIX I Existing Traffic Count Data Level of Service Definitions • Intersection Capacity Worksheets 1. WCR 95 / WCR 118 2. WCR 95 / WCR 122 3. WCR 390 / WCR 118 1 4. WCR 95 / Site Access I I I I 1 • I I I 1 0 1 I I I I I 1 • EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNT DATA I I I I I I I 1 . I • Station Name: 48-Hour Roadway-Directiolnal Count Site ID:040267000000 Description: CR-118 W/O CR-95 City: GROVER County: WELD Count TUES,APRIL 5,2011 WED,APRIL 6,2011 Average Both Days Start NB SB All Lanes NB SB All Lanes NB SB Both 00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:00 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:00 0 0 0 4 2 6 2 1 3 08:00 4 1 5 4 8 12 4 4.5 8.5 09:00 0 4 4 17 10 27 8.5 7 15.5 10:00 5 4 9 15 20 35 10 12 22 11:00 6 2 8 22 18 40 14 10 24 • 12:00 6 7 13 13 10 23 9.5 8.5 18 13:00 13 7 20 7 1 8 10 4 14 14:00 16 22 38 2 9 11 9 15.5 24.5 15:00 15 13 28 10 4 14 12.5 8.5 21 16:00 6 2 8 1 1 2 a5 1.5 5 17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AM Peak Hour 11:00- 11:59 09:00-09:59 10:00-10:59 11:00- 11: 10:00- 10: 11:00-11:59 AM Peak Value 6 4 9 22 20 40 PM Peak Hour 14:00- 14:59 14:00- 14:59 14:00- 14:59 12:00- 12: 12:00-12: 12:00- 12:59 PM Peak Value 16 22 38 13 10 23 Total 71 63 134 95 83 178 83 73 156 • I • • I Station Name: 48-Hour Roadway-Directioinal Count Site ID:040264000000 Description: CR-95 5/O CR-118 I City: GROVER County: WELD Count TUES,APRIL 5,2011 WED,APRIL 6,2011 Average Both Days I Start NB SB All Lanes NB SB All Lanes NB SB Both 00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:00 2 0 2 1 0 1 1.5 0 1.5 I 07:00 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.5 0 0.5 08:00 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0.5 0.5 09:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 0 3 3 3 2 5 1.5 2.5 4 I • 11:00 0 4 4 1 0 1 0.5 2 2.5 12:00 1 0 1 0 1 1 0.5 0.5 1 13:00 1 1 2 0 1 1 0.5 1 1.5 I 14:00 1 0 1 0 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 15:00 1 6 7 0 3 3 0.5 4.5 5 16:00 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0.5 0.5 17:00 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 1 I 18:00 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 19:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20:00 1 0 1 0 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 21:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 22:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AM Peak Hour 06:00-06:59 11:00-11:59 11:00-11:59 10:00-10:5910:00- 10:5910:00-10:59 AM Peak Value 2 4 4 3 2 5 I PM Peak Hour 12:00-12:59 15:00-15:59 15:00-15:59 00:00-00:59 15:00-15:59 15:00-15:59 PM Peak Value 1 6 7 0 3 3 Total 7 16 23 6 11 17 6.5 13.5 20 1 I I • Station Name: 48-Hour Roadway-Directioinal Count Site ID:040257000000 Description: CR-122 W/O CR-95 City: GROVER County: WELD Count TUES,APRIL 5,2011 WED,APRIL 6,2011 Average Both Days Start NB SB All Lanes NB SB All Lanes NB SB Both 00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:00 1 0 1 0 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 0 0 0 1 1 2 0.5 0.5 1 05:00 1 2 3 5 0 5 3 1 4 06:00 10 5 15 8 4 12 9 4.5 13.5 07:00 7 4 11 11 12 23 9 8 17 08:00 6 6 12 19 8 27 12.5 7 19.5 09:00 14 12 26 19 16 35 16.5 14 30.5 10:00 31 12 43 43 21 64 37 16.5 53.5 11:00 16 13 29 46 38 84 31 25.5 56.5 • 12:00 12 12 24 14 23 37 13 17.5 30.5 13:00 16 10 26 9 11 20 12.5 10.5 23 14:00 20 28 48 15 6 21 17.5 17 34.5 15:00 25 25 50 8 17 25 16.5 21 37.5 16:00 15 25 40 5 19 24 10 22 32 17:00 4 5 9 5 4 9 4.5 4.5 9 18:00 10 9 19 5 4 9 7.5 6.5 14 19:00 2 0 2 1 0 1 1.5 0 1.5 20:00 3 0 3 2 1 3 2.5 0.5 3 21:00 1 0 1 0 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 22:00 0 2 2 1 0 1 0.5 1 1.5 23:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AM Peak Hour 10:00- 10:5!11:00-11:59 10:00-10:59 11:00-11::11:00- 11:!11:00-11:59 AM Peak Value 31 13 43 46 38 84 PM Peak Hour 15:00-15:5!14:00-14:59 15:00- 15:59 14:00-14:112:00-12:112:00- 12:59 PM Peak Value 25 28 50 15 23 37 Total 194 170 364 217 185 402 206 177.5 383 • I • I I I I I • LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS I I I I I • FOX TRANSPORTATION GROUP • LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS In rating roadway and intersection operating conditions with existing or future trail is volumes, "Levels of Service" (LOS) A through F are used, with i I SA indicating very good operation and i I Sc indicating poor operation. i evels of service at signalized and unsignalized intersections are closely associated with vehicle delays experienced in seconds per vehicle. More complete level of service definitions and delay data for signal and stop sign controlled intersections are contained in the following table for reference. Level Delay in seconds per vehicle (a) of Service Rating Signalized Unsignallzed Definition Low vehicular traffic volumes; primarily free flow operations. Density is low A 0.0 to 10.0 0.0 to 10.0 and vehicles can freely maneuver within the traffic stream. Drivers are able to maintain their desired speeds with little or no delay. Stable vehicular traffic volume flow with potential for some restriction of B 10.1 to 20.0 10.1 to 15.0 operating speeds due to traffic conditions. Vehicle maneuvering is only • slightly restricted. The stopped delays are not bothersome and drivers are not subject to appreciable tension. Stable traffic operations,however the ability for vehicles to maneuver is more C 20.1 to 35.0 15.1 to 25.0 restricted by the increase in traffic volumes. Relatively satisfactory operating speeds prevail, but adverse signal coordination or longer vehicle queues cause delays along the corridor. Approaching unstable vehicular traffic flow where small increases in volume D 35.1 to 55.0 25.1 to 35.0 could cause substantial delays. Most drivers are restricted in ability to maneuver and selection of travel speeds due to congestion. Driver comfort and convenience are low, but tolerable. Traffic operations characterized by significant approach delays and average travel speeds of one-half to one-third the free flow speed. Vehicular flow is E 55A to 80.0 35.1 to 50.0 unstable and there is potential for stoppages of brief duration. High signal density, extensive vehicle queuing,or corridor signal progression/timing are the typical causes of vehicle delays at signalized corridors. Forced vehicular traffic flow and operations with high approach delays at F >80.0 > 50.0 critical intersections. Vehicle speeds are reduced substantially and stoppages may occur for short or long periods of time because of downstream congestion. (a) Delay ranges based on 2000 Highway Capacity Manual criteria. • I I 1 I . I I I I I ' • INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS I I I I I I I I . I WCR 95 / WCR 118 • 1 6: WCR 118 & WCR 95 Existing-AM Peak Hour ' • 4\ T r }@.y{eor;%3.sa� R"" EIV t . m%, I ..x!:..,: 1 ''re a- .+a.-. AN. Lane Configurations '� 4 13 ' Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 13 1 1 0 1 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 14 1 1 0 1 10 I Volume Total(vph) 15 1 11 Volume Left(vph) 14 1 0 ' Volume Right(vph) 1 0 10 Had (s) 0.18 0,23 •0.51 Departure Headway(s) 4.1 4.2 3.4 ' Degree Utilization,x 0.02 0.00 0.01 Capacity(veh/h) 869 845 1039 Control Delay(s) 7.2 7.2 6.5 Approach Delay(s) 7.2 7.2 6.5 I Approach LOS A A A ww .qa a .. o�_ —. y'a tdl � .I , td.31 8'f✓ %¢s9 'M _ 'N . x`--_`z'S3 Delay 6.9 HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 133% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 1 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 6: WCR 118 & WCR 95 Existing-PM Peak Hour 4\ T 4/ • .- .•,, ' r rt g r ',e R ' u a 0 i $ _ - .,1r 1 Y . . '' Lane Configurations y 4 3 Sign Control Yield Yield a Yield Volume(vph) 9 3 0 0 2 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0,92 '; 0.92 10.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 10 3 0 0 2 10 ?.ri. .":.,. f4 -111 a; Volume Total(vph) 13 0 12 Volume Left(vph) 10 0 0 Volume Right(vph) 3 0 10 Hadj(s) 0.03 0.00 -0A6 Departure Headway(s) 4.0 3.9 3.5 Degree Utilization,x 0.01 0.00- 0.01 Capacity(veh/h) 900 900 1027 Control Delay(s) 7.0 6.9' 6.5 Approach Delay(s) 7.0 0.0 6.5 Approach LOS A A A ?�5ic c., gam. Delay :' 6.6 :! 6� HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 6: WCR 118 & WCR 95 2013 Background-AM Peak Hour 4\ T l -' Lane Configurations V 4 I+ ' Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 13 1 1 0 1 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 14 1 1 0 1 10 Volume Total(vph) 15 1 11 Volume Left(vph) 14 1 0 ' Volume Right(vph) 1 0 10 Had}(s) 0.18 0,23 -0.51 Departure Headway(s) 4.1 4.2 3.4 Degree Utilization,x 0.02 0.00 0 o1 Capacity(veh/h) 869 845 1039 Control Delay(a) 7:2 7.2 6,5 Approach Delay(s) 7.2 7.2 6.5 Approach LOS A A A It Lile-KItgaintaitikaaitiliSttailL;CAttilifittatikaillia. iarre' Delay 6.9 ' HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 • I • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 ' Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 6: WCR 118 & WCR 95 2013 Background-PM Peak Hour 4\ T 1 J • Lane Configurations 4 'A Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 9 3 0 0 2 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 ;0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 10 3 0 0 2 10 Ltv�.. 41 G rwr,�-"e.,n�°`' `+�....._,mb `,g7int" . v; y,I:ihce gd.. Volume Total(vph) 13 0 12 Volume Left(vph) 10 0 0 Volume Right(vph) 3 0 10 Had](s) 0.03 0.00 -0.46 Departure Headway(s) 4.0 3.9 3.5 Degree Utilization,x 0.01 0.00 0.01 Capacity(veh/h) 900 900 1027 Control Delay(s) 7.0 6.9 6.5 Approach Delay(s) 7.0 0.0 6.5 Approach LOS A A A ume TKIV n. =,w"r^i __ hm: 'TFI ,- iHdri ,'„ Delay 6.8 HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service, A Analysis Period(min) 15 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I IAll 6: WCR 118 & WCR 95 2013+Site-AM Peak Hour • • 4\ t 1 ' _J�_ WSSa . �ii.ice+ MI - .-...-.J��2 ii. � � e-evtiuU-Jnhir..s '^'_-_�:r,:Sx -.P »u-,„— Lane Configurations 4 1' Sign Control Yield Yield Yield I Volume(vph) 13 1 1 7 9 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 14 �j�y 1 1 8 10 10 f1G gg:� 5t"w`6a.��a�a ffa1 ' �eL ^w(xpn a,n^ .r ' - �..,{ ........�_.�.,:..at... o �:�i.►�J .e aE l�ixn:.�ififr,.. �'.... ..a. Volume Total(vph} 15 9 20 Volume Left(vph) 14 1 0 I Volume Right(vph) 1 0 10 Hadj(s) 0.18 0.06 -0.27 Departure Headway(s) 4.1 4.0 3.7 Degree Utilization,x 0.02 0.01 0.02 I Capacity(veh/h) 859 880 969 Control Delay(s) 7.2 7.0 6.8 Approach Delay(s) 7.2 7.0 6.8 I Approach LOS A A A • :-.14114...- -->T.4 - • D Delay', 7.0 l HCM Level of Service A intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 I • I I I I I 0 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 I Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC,(303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I 6: WCR 118 & WCR 95 2013+Site-PM Peak Hour 4\ t 1 r • _...,�-_ r ._ _ -_..wa ..w '+ -mss'=E '?Rry ,iAA.�'.. �. .. g �,, m n Lane Configurations V 4 1* Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 9 3 0 7 10 9 Peak Hour Factor :' 0.92 0,92 0.92 0.92 0:92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 10 3 0 8 11 10 vi tI �..-�P"r - tt4 �- x-,-- a -r..Ww;, mmm_ ........ �i�.� �E. ... _ �� tea. .gym°li ��ec ._��„8, � `m�a- Volume Total(vph) 13 8 21 Volume Left(vph) 10 0 0 Volume Right(vph) 3 0 10 Hadj(s) 0.03 0.03 -0.25 Departure Headway(s) 4.0 4.0 3.7 Degree Utilization,x 001 0;01 0.02 Capacity(veh/h) 889 897 967 Control Delay(s) 7.0 7.0 08 Approach Delay(s) 7.0 7.0 6.8 Approach LOS A A A ...,- x` x> .,tea, ...,. ...«. .di"'.�.._.."�,'.._ -'r 4.,ti .ai'._.z°:w 4..,.... F Delay 6,9 HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC,(303)652-3571 5/5/2011 6: WCR 118 & WCR 95 Year 2035 Total-AM Peak Hour t Lane Configurations M 4 13 ' Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 17 1 1 7 9 12 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92' Hourly flow rate(vph) 18 1 1 8 10 13 Volume Total(vph) 20 9 23 Volume Left(vph) 18 1 0 ' Volume Right(vph) 1 0 13 Hadj(s) 019 0.06 -0.31 Departure Headway(s) 4.2 4.0 3.6 ' Degree Utilization,x 0,02 0.01 0.02 Capacity(veh/h) 854 876 977 Control Delay(s) ,, 7.2 7.1 6,7 Approach Delay(s) 7.2 7.1 6.7 ' Approach LOS A A A ctr ,:,w..:,.,e, § a �- nx; r.7$�x.kt�;' %;+q .11 Delay` 7.0 ' HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 1 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 ' Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 6: WCR 118 & WCR 95 Year 2035 Total-PM Peak Hour 4\ T 1 J Lane Configurations ►e 4 t Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 12 4 0 7 11 12 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0:92 0.92 ` 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 13 4 0 8 12 13 ;dire n i2 i .? tawj,L. E� y '4:07 4; a 49T., "'lS ;�gl: Alva .sq�3�a nr e� a.,. -,W � �d ;nea ..,.,,. _ ©t . �..,IiL.a �� iiawa�..� � nv... Volume Total(vph) 17 8 25 Volume Left(vph) 13 0 0 Volume Right(vph) 4 0 13 Hadj(s) 0.03 0.03 -0,28 Departure Headway(s) 4.0 4.0 3.7 Degree Utilization,x 0.02 0.01 0:03 Capacity(veh/h) 887 883 971 Control,Delay(a) 7.1 7.0 6.8 Approach Delay(s) 7.1 7.0 6.8 Approach LOS A A A a A ae a, i..owf'a 1.g "% m k 25 r 9 _l 3 } Delay 6.9 HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 133% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 4, Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 le i • WCR 95 / WCR 122 I I I I I I I I • I 3: WCR 122 & WCR 95 Existing-AM Peak Hour —► 7 '— t T 4, r • snit, .,.. ..<_. z u�_. .§ . y...IAA y-•rar cqw n �rlp Lane Configurations 4+ 4. 4+ 4+ Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 9 19 2 3 18 1 0 8 5 1 6 8 Peak Hour Factor_ 0.92 _ 0.92 0.92 '' 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 ;, 0.92 0.92 0.92 - 0.92 ' 0:92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 10 21 2 3 20 1 0 9 5 1 7 9 B mr s' ti F seem °°tea : } ...a 7 -.,, : °°y .� {?�at F r F .._ rn: fl -a» rer. ' ._., eFati:�d au�a� a�R ''��6 alt �ti9diUm��He`£�,ti�"., as �,: -o-+-.: Volume Total(vph) 33 24 14 16 Volume Left(vph) 10 3 0 1 Volume Right(vph) 2 1 5 9 Hadj(s) 0.05 0.03 -0.20 -0:27 Departure Headway(s) 4.0 4.0 3.8 3.8 Degree Utilization,x 0.04 0,03 0.02 0.02 Capacity(veh/h) 878 881 911 937 Control Delay(s) 7.2 7.1 6,9 r- 6,8 Approach Delay(s) 7.2 7.1 6.9 6.8 Approach LOS A A A A Delay 7.1 HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC,(303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I 1 3: WCR 122 & WCR 95 Existing-PM Peak Hour . III -# 4\ t /* \* 1 4/ I mi. , -- MIAMI , _AMIMNO - --,. - -- , JIM Lane Configurations 4. 4+ 4. 4+ Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Yield I Volume(vph) 5 11 1 3 15 1 0 5 4 1 5 6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 5 12 1 3 16 1 0 5 4 1 5 7 Volume Total(vph) 18 21 10 13 Volume Left(vph) 5 3 0 1 I Volume Right(vph) 1 1 4 7 Hadj(s) 0.06 0,03 -0.23 -0.25 Departure Headway(s) 4.0 4.0 3.8 3.7 Degree Utilization,x 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 I Capacity(veh/h) 883 890 943 946 Control Delay(s) 7.1 7.1 6.8 6.8 Approach Delay(s) 7.1 7.1 6.8 6.8 Approach LOS` A A A A I Delay 7.0 I HCM Level of Service A 13.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 96 ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 • I I I I I I 1 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 1 Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC,(303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I 3: WCR 122 & WCR 95 2013 Background-AM Peak Hour { '— `1 t t `► 1 -' • ...,,` :111s' .,.' ,e...... art �I.f v. bl:ii kE•«" .q°i: ..g“:: Lane Configurations 4, 4, 4, 4, Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 9 19 2 3 18 1 0 8 5 1 6 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0:92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0:92 0.92 0.92 0:92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 10 21 2 3 20 1 0 9 5 1 7 9 ..>,�I..S4 Volume Total(vph) 33 24 14 16 Volume Left(vph): 10 3 0 1 Volume Right(vph) 2 1 5 9 Hadl(s) 0.05 0.03 -0.20 ,-0.27 Departure Headway(s) 4.0 4.0 3.8 3.8 Degree Utilization,x 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 Capacity(veh/h) 878 881 911 937 Control Delay(s)' 7.2 7:1 6.9 6.8 Approach Delay(s) 7.2 7.1 6.9 6.8 Approach LOS A A A A Delay '7.1 HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3°/4 ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 3: WCR 122 & WCR 95 2013 Background-PM Peak Hour ' , ` ~ &- 4\ t t x l 4 Pie . al dH=1ii._., a yi = " ran, {(. ^�, :a • Lane Configurations 4, 4, 4, Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 5 11 1 3 15 1 0 5 4 1 5 6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0:92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 5 12 1 3 16 1 0 5 4 1 5 7 o �0* Volume Total(vph) 18 21 10 13 Volume Left(vph) 5 3 0 1 Volume Right(vph) 1 1 4 7 Hadj(s) 0,06 0.03 -0.23 -0.25 Departure Headway(s) 4.0 4.0 3.8 3.7 ' Degree Utilization,x 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 Capacity(veh/h) 883 890 943 946 Control Delay(s) 7.1 7.1 6.8 6.8 Approach Delay(s) 7.1 7.1 6.8 6.8 ' Approach LOS A A A A re' ^ .. r S ^ rG 3 akn�. Delay 7.0 HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3%, ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 I I • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 3: WCR 122 & WCR 95 2013+Site-AM Peak Hour Lane Configurations 4, 4, 4, 4, Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 9 19 5 6 18 1 3 10 7 1 8 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0,92 0.92 0.92 r: 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0,92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 10 21 5 7 20 1 3 11 8 1 9 9 Volume Total(vph) 36 27 22 18 Volume Left(vph) 10 7 3 1 Volume Right(vph) 5 1 8 9 Hadj(s) 0:00 006 -0.15 ;0.24 Departure Headway(s) 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.8 Degree Utilization x 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 Capacity(veh/h) 883 869 894 922 Control Delay(s)' 7.2 7:2 7.0 6.9 Approach Delay(s) 7.2 7.2 7.0 6.9 Approach LOS A A A r; A Delay 7.1 HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 1 ' 3: WCR 122 & WCR 95 2013+Site-PM Peak Hour 7,P,.111 th`i Lane Configurations 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ ' Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 5 11 4 6 15 1 3 7 6 1 7 6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0:92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0:92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 5 12 4 7 16 1 3 8 7 1 8 7 Ie:�`�.�.u �'., Volume Total(vph) 22 24 17 15 Volume Left(vph) 5 7 3 1 Volume Right(vph) 4 1 7 7 Hadj(s) -0.04 0.06 -0.15 -0.21 Departure Headway(s) 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.8 ' Degree Utilization,x 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.02 Capacity(veh/h) 896 877 909 929 Control Delay(s) 7.0 7.2 6.9 6,9 Approach Delay(s) 7.0 7.2 6.9 6.9 ' Approach LOS A A A A Delay 7,0 ' HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 1 • 1 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 IFox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 1 3: WCR 122 & WCR 95 Year 2035 Total-AM Peak Hour f4- 44\ t t ti 1 r • " ncs,:.-c 2'f"•...,�w.a. " 's= . sra:.a'lr Asa �1 '.Att,1211:n 'war A} �.',!1,:f. Lane Configurations 4, ,j, 4+ 4+ Sign,Control Yield Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 11 25 5 7 24 1 5 13 9 1 10 11 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0:92 0.92 -I 0.92 - 0.92 0.92 0.92 O.92 ,0:92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 12 27 5 8 F6 26 1 5 14 10 1 11 12 e e „ 1. .t 6 a Ey e,�; I#E�'" _ Cas;.: �n C ja'"t`Pac n f R " a"' ' o 3 Volume Total(vph) 45 35 29 24 Volume Left(vph) 12 8 5 1 Volume Right(vph) 5 1 10 12 Hadj(s) 0.01 0.06 0;13 •0.26 Departure Headway(s) 4.1 4.1 4.0 3.8 Degree Utilizations x 0.05 0.04 0:03 0.03 Capacity(veh/h) 869 858 878 912 Control Delay(s) 7.3 7.3 7.1 '' 6.9 Approach Delay(s) 7.3 7.3 7.1 6.9 Approach LOS A A A A Delay 7.2 HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 133% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC,(303)652-3571 5/5/2011 1 I3: WCR 122 & WCR 95 Year 2035 Total-PM Peak Hour • -N r ' 4\ t , 17 4/ 1 kpryge` llit9�+ ��SY.#I'LJRCG AL �� Lane Configurations 4 4+ 4 4 I Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Yield Volume(vph) 7 12 4 7 24 1 5 9 7 1 9 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0,92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 8 13 4 8 26 1 5 10 8 1 10 9 Volume Total(vph) 25 35 23 20 Volume Left(vph) 8 8 5 1 I Volume Right(vph) 4 1 8 9 Hadj(s) -0.01 0.06 -0.12 -0,22 Departure Headway(s) 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.8 I Degree Utilization,x 0.03 0.04 0.02 0,02 Capacity(veh/h) 881 870 890 920 Control Delay(s) 7.1 7.2 7.0 6.9 Approach Delay(s) 7.1 7.2 7.0 6.9 IApproach LOS A A A A Delay 71 I HCM Level of Service A Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3°% ICU Level of Service • A Analysis Period(min) 15 I .• I I 1 I I I I . HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 ' Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC,(303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I WCR 390 / WCR 118 • I 9: WCR 118 & WCR 390 Existing-AM Peak Hour is • f —. "v i ~ t 4\ t /' \ l 4/ Lane Configurations 44 44 4 44 I Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 7 0 3 0 10 6 8 10 0 Sign Control Yield Yield Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 I Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 8 0 3 0 11 7 9 11 0 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) I Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None I Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 46 46 11 42 42 14 11 17 I vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 46 46 11 42 42 14 11 17 I tC,single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 99 100 100 100 99 M capacity(veh/h) 949 841 1070 957 845 1066 1608 1600 I • c !mom �Volume Total 0 11 17 20 I Volume Left 0 8 0 9 Volume Right 0 3 7 0 cSH 1700 987 1608 1600 I Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 1 0 0 Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.7 0.0 3.2 Lane LOS A A A II Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.7 0.0 3.2 Approach LOS A A Average Delay 3.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.6% ICU Level of Service. : : : A Analysis Period(min) 15 I I • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 I Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC,(303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I 9: WCR 118 & WCR 390 Existing-PM Peak Hour Tr t t l r • 9.4i1 rale. Lane Configurations . 4* Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 r 4 0 5 0 10 7 5 10 0 Sign Control Yield Yield Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0,92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 4 _' 0 5 0 11 8 5 11 0 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 42 40 11 36 36 15 11 18 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 42 40 11 36 36 15 11 18 tC,single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 '' 4.1 41 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4:0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 99 100 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 954 849 1070 967 853 1065 1608 1598 • @,p..•a i:°i ItiitialrialiereatniTIEMFtir " t; SSU' str a...,.»� Volume Total 0 _' 10 18 16 Volume Left 0 4 0 5 Volume Right 0 5 8 0 cSH 1700 1019 1608 1598 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 1 0 0 Control Delay(s); 0.0 8.6 0.0 2.4 Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay,(s) 0.0 8.6 0.0 24 Approach LOS A A e ,H a,a .v;:'LT' ..m. gIT)....,, .. :,NaT `;tpa`" ,;ew Average Delay 2.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 15,0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Unsignalized Intersection.Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I I9: WCR 118 & WCR 390 2013 Background-AM Peak Hour IR 0 J C 4- k- 4\ t P \* ,IY I Lane Configurations 4. 4+ 4. 4 Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 7 0 3 0 10 6 8 10 0 I Sign Control Yield Yield Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 I Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 8 0 3 0 11 7 11 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) I Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None I Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX,platoon unblocked vC conflicting volume; 46 46 11 42 42 14 11 17 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 46 46 11 42 42 14 11 17 I tC,single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 99 100 100 100 99 I • cm capacity(veh/h) 949 841 1070 957 845 1066 1608 1600 Volume Total 0 11 17 20 l Volume Left 0 8 0 9 Volume Right 0 3 7 0 cSH 1700 987 1608 1600 I Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 1 0 0 Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.7 0.0 3.2 Lane LOS A A A I Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.7 0.0 3.2 Approach LOS A A I Average Delay 3.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 I I I • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility T1S-FH#11015 I Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I 9: WCR 118 & WCR 390 2013 Background-PM Peak Hour Lane Configurations 4, 44 4, Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 4 0 5 0 10 7 5 10 0 Sign Control Yield Yield Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 4 0 5 0 11 8 5 11 0 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 42 40 11 36 36 15 11 18 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu unblocked vol 42 40 11 36 36 15 11 18 tC,single(s) 7.1 6:5; 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 41 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 3.5 4.0' 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2,2 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 99 100 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 954 849 1070 967 853 1065 1608 1598 • iA! 5 ". si �5� > > M� - e i�N�U ._. 'k � a� a a c:'�.+ � � 8�Er N.;T° � ..�ft3h r rR xa a. .�. ......,..,1 . ,. ....,�'._.—. .�:.,..,.,��S,.av � s. mom .m.. �r�t� �"6 �' R s _,_a `°',i Volume Total 0 10 18 16 Volume Left 0 4 0 5 Volume Right 0 5 8 0 cSH 1700 1019 1608 1598 Volume to Capacity 0,00 0.01 0.00 0.00 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 1 0 0 Control Delay(s) - 0.0 8.6 0.0 2.4 Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay(s)` 0.0 8,6 0.0 2.4 Approach LOS A A at:iia.. :a.c,..,;:- u rl'-...-r.-':.: tt �, ... 'i f kp L spa -1+A ,�r . _ air. .� „�..„e ,,,„.«;�x��.�4'se,;M°u"�'°�"au,.},r-w��qn.w�.4�6��'&�..a��"m`t6..+x „��a.ah a�EG.� Average Delay 2.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 15.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I 9: WCR 118 & WCR 390 2013+Site-AM Peak Hour i • - --w - , C ' k- 4\ 1 , %. 1 i/ O ifs 2 - # 167 no ;,_'' - - P2 t : - Lane Configurations 4+ 4. 4. 4+ Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 7 0 3 0 10 6 8 10 0 I Sign Control Yield Yield Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 I Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 8 0 3 0 11 7 11 0 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) I Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None I Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 46 46 11 42 42 14 11 17 I vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 46 46 11 42 42 14 11 17 tC,single(s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 99 100 100 100 99 I • cM capacity(veh/h) 949 841 1070 957 845 1066 1608 1600 .,:, I il U ,• ±M a x w *.kwe M. • , .-- _ ar Volume Total 0 11 17 20 I Volume Left 0 8 0 9 Volume Right 0 3 7 0 cSH 1700 987 1608 1600 I Volume to Capacity 0,00 0.01 0.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 1 0 0 Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.7 0.0 3.2 Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8,7 0.0 3.2 Approach LOS A A Intersectitin Summa . .-i - - r'. I Average Delay 3.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 I I I il HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 IFox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I 9: WCR 118 & WCR 390 2013+Site-PM Peak Hour lG:,{rdl ka..�ff;:.t:.1O...a..= ',�.1a.r . .P r; fi Lane Configurations 4' 4 4+ 4, Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 4 0 5 , 0 10 7 5 10 0 Sign Control Yield Yield Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 4 0 5 0 11 8 5 11 0 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC;conflicting volume 42 40 11 36 36 15 11 18 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 42 40 11 36 36 15 11 18 tC,single(s) 7,1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 41 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 3.5 _ 4.0 3.3 3.5' 4.0 3.3-`- 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 100 99 100 100 cM capacity(veh/h), 954 849 1070m� 967 863 1065 1608 1598 • a i 4 .F .F_`_� .igp't I 2r« I Volume Total 0 10 18 16 Volume Left 0 4 0 5 Volume Right 0 5 8 0 cSH 1700 1019 1608 1598 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 1 0 0 Control Delay(s) 0.0- - 8.6 0.0 2.4 Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.6 0.0 2.4 Approach LOS A A Average Delay 2.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 15.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC,(303)652-3571 5/5/2011 1 I9: WCR 118 & WCR 390 Year 2035 Total-AM Peak Hour ii • f --.* - T C 4— k- 4\ t P 1 4/ Lane Configurations 4+ 4+ 4 4'+ Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 8 0 4 0 15 8 11 15 0 I Sign Control Yield Yield Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 I Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 9 0 4 0 16 9 12 16 0 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) I Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None I Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 65 65 16 61 61 21 16 25 I vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 65 65 16 61 61 21 16 25 I tC,single(s) 7.1 6,5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4,1 4.1 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 99 100 100 100 99 I • cM capacity(vehlh) _ 919 819 1063 929 824 1057 1601 1589 Volume Total 0 13 25 28 I Volume Left 0 9 0 12 Volume Right 0 4 9 0 cSH 1700 968 1601 1589 I Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 1 0 1 Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.8 0.0 3.1 Lane LOS A A A I Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.8 0,0 3.1 Approach LOS A A , ;: far=q tsx Average Delay 3.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 18.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 I I I • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 IFox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC,(303)652-3571 5/5/2011 9: WCR 118 & WCR 390 Year 2035 Total-PM Peak Hour ,�..='i 'c m{'.w.,w°:..Ff...__..«':'. ri=: Lane Configurations 4, 4, 4, 4, Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 5 0 7 0 15 9 7 15 : 0 Sign Control Yield Yield Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 0 0 5 0 8 0 16 10 8 16 0 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 60 58 16 53 53 21 — 16 26 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 60 58 16 53 53 21 16 26 tC,single(s) 7.1 6:5 6.2 " 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 3.5 4.0 33-; 35 4.0 3.3 22 22 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 99 100 99 100 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 925 829 1063 942 835 1056 1601 1588 Volume Total 0 13 26 24 Volume Left 0 5 0 8 Volume Right 0 8 10 0 cSH 1700 1006 1601 1588 Volume to Capacity 0:00 0.01 0,00 0:00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 1 0 0 Control Delay(s) 0.0 8.6 0.0 2.3 Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 8.6 0.0 2.3 Approach LOS A A . ". .., r cif 4 t f 9 �: l ., ' ._ems* •rTit hr' 6 ti t N Z' hG,no-ttn ar d �.:nm r y L �, x h � iM.K.Ynv..A:..nil•T .� m -rW mnb°� ....F:. %�'I I.'t�nn,tie.a"^P S'x,uk�PFew uI..pa..5!�dA.Pva prnmSi pT #Ti°n �...�'��mm9 Average Delay 2.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I I • I I I I I I ' • WCR 95 / Site Access I I I I I I 1 I . I 12: Site & WCR 95 2013+Site-AM Peak Hour 1 , 3.1• .'.,'Ft Lane Configurations M j, 4 Volume(veh/h) 6 7 1 6 8 2 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 7 8 1 7 9 2 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 24 4 8 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 24 4 8 tC,single(s) 6.4 6.2 4,1 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 35 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free% 99 99 99 cM capacity(veh/h) 987 1079 1613 • i . �i'� =,t�r� 3, c£.; " •rs -� a._�'� e. fly f s: r1P9 y�d . r astn, , u' t °�� _"a ni :n� " = Volume Total 14 8 11 Volume Left 7 0 9 Volume Right 8 7 0 cSH 1034 1700 1613 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th(ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay(s) ` 8.5 0.0 5.8 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay(s) 8:5 0.0 5.8 Approach LOS A ...,z o.. .Z .. h ,:.n.1Yi ..iff Il } 4 . ig Average Delay 5.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC,(303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I 1 12: Site &WCR 95 2013+Site-PM Peak Hour • • C k- t t \ x - Tyr..., n rfkar F ��.3...�si..ear.. �.�.r.T.lr..a..lLFY3 .i { ,.....h...M .. Lane Configurations I 4 Volume(veh/h) 6 7 0 6 8 5 I Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 I Hourly flow rate(vph) 7 8 0 7 9 5 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) I Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None I Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 26 3 7 I vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 26 3 7 I tC,single(s) 6.4 6.2 4,1 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s), 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free% 99 99 99 I • cM capacity(veh/h) 984 1081 1614 d . _. 1gl _ - M _ L Volume Total 14 7 14 I Volume Left 7 0 9 Volume Right 8 7 0 cSH 1034 1700 1614 1 Volume to Capacity 0.01 4.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th(ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay(s) 8.5 0.0 4.5 Lane LOS A A I Approach Delay(s) 8.5 0.0 4.5 Approach LOS A Mae :�x'n2� R ..-ti._...V: a rv.k. .. .� .a` ' c-r -� , n�_ '5.src caE;-drida�.:y1 �. anti. 5+]i}-r- r.�_.�+r, .a. I Average Delay 5.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 I I iiHCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 I Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I 12: Site & WCR 95 Year 2035 Total-AM Peak Hour ,..�.t-10.!:1. 5„�.? h7i ws -n w ntli: Lane Configurations ► 4 Volume(veh/h) 6 7 1 6 8 3 -1 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0,92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 7 8 1 7 9 3 Pedestrians Lahe Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 25 4 8 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 25 4 8 tC,single(s) 6.4 6.2' 4.1 tC,2 stage(s) tF'(s) 3:5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free% 99 99 99 cM capacity(veh/h) 985 y1i0�79 g ° eiF '` f4 1613 • b 1'elM 's4F `�'Y—...: , t i,-f u •`k i3W 511:6=`5'i�:,5,v'� ? ivi"4m 'M IPP k ., i' _ Volume Total 14 8 12 Volume Left 7 0 9 Volume Right 8 7 0 cSH 1034 1700 1613 Volume to Capacity 0:01 0:00 0.01 Queue Length 95th(ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay(s) 8.5 0.0 5:3 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay(s) ' 8.5, 0.0 5.3 Approach LOS A Average Delay 5.5 -n, Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 • Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC,(303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I 1 12: Site & WCR 95 Year 2035 Total-PM Peak Hour • 0 C t t , \ I '! @H�1x.`�a _I F:---" v4MYt�...*"�-.ris r'- ; x �.^�" t��.,..: 4 n:. ,,': K K=IM ..Lit�� KIM Lane Configurations V' I 4 Volume(veh/h) 6 7 0 6 8 7 I Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 I Hourly flow rate(vph) 7 8 0 7 9 8 Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) I Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None I Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX,platoon unblocked vC,conflicting volume 28 3 7 1 vC1,stage 1 conf vol vC2,stage 2 conf vol vCu,unblocked vol 28 3 7 1 tC,single(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC,2 stage(s) tF(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free% 99 99 99 I • cM capacity(veh/h) 981 1081 1614 r .` 1 n . d am - ,q VA .:, .:=: _ 14 " '` ,,:: ., Volume Total 14 7 16 I Volume Left 7 0 9 Volume Right 8 7 0 cSH 1032 1700 1614 I Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th(ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay(s) 8.5 0.0 3.9 Lane LOS A A I Approach Delay(s) 8.5 0.0 3.9 Approach LOS A ��- g�nwx ,��,;;,fi,...si�BP =-- �:. v ".�dNGm;ekenrear , 'W� ��3Pe�.�:.�=r:t�� I+�� .�� d.;v�i^ . .�,-�4`�F ,.� ht� L' I Average Delay 5.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 I 1 I HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Dietzler Loading Facility TIS-FH#11015 1 Fox Higgins Transportation Group,LLC, (303)652-3571 5/5/2011 I Hello