The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01 - Traffic Impact Study - Northern Rockies Professional Center ANI;�� Marvin & Associates Traffic, Transportation, & Civil Engineers Matt Cotterman 2415 West Main Street, Suite 1 Bozeman, MT 597.18 January 30, 2001 Re: Northern Rockies Professional Center Traffic Impact Study Dear Matt: This letter is in response to the City of Bozeman's concerns regarding off-site improvements relative to our traffic impact study,which was submitted in December 2000. It is my understanding that there are two separate issues that the City would like to have addressed. They would like to know: 1. What mitigating measures are the developers responsible for at the intersection of Haggerty Lane and Main Street?;and 2.What impact does this development have at the intersection of Kagy Boulevard and Highland Boulevard? With respect to Haggerty and Main Street, Figure 6, in the report indicates that there would be no level of service(LOS)decreases at this intersection. The northbound left turn currently operates at LOS "F", but this in an existing condition. It can be seen in Figure 4 that absolutely no site traffic could be assigned to that movement because travel time from the site to the westbound direction on Main street is much less than for the Highland to Main routing. The minimal volume of site traffic assigned to other movements at Haggerty and Main has little or no impact on this intersection's operation. Therefore, the development should have no responsibility for correcting a preexisting condition for which it will not impact. Traffic counts were taken at the intersection of Kagy and Highland during the peak a.m. and p.m. hours on 1/22/01. Figure A (attached) illustrates the results of these counts. Table 2 in the report, indicates that the number of new vehicular trips on the street system would be 220 during the peak a.m.hour and 173 during the peak p.m.hour. Trip distribution to the south would be 34%of all new trips according to Figure 3. It is also estimated that at least 15%of the trips directed south of the site would be to and from areas south of the site, but north of Kagy Boulevard. Therefore, the number of new vehicles entering the Highland - Kagy Boulevard intersection would be: Inbound Outbound Peak AM 51 13 Peak PM 13 36 These vehicle trips were assigned to the intersection based on existing traffic flow percentages. The resultant site traffic plus existing traffic volumes are shown in Figure B (attached). Capacity calculations were completed for both existing conditions and site traffic added conditions. Those calculations are attached to this letter and a summary is presented in the attached Figure C. Currently,the lowest LOS for any movement at this intersection is`B". The addition of site traffic Page 1 Suite I I I Creekside 1001 South 24th Street West Q P.O. Box 80785 Billings, Montana 59 1 08-07 85 Phone(406) 655-4550 Fax(406) 655-4991 Email marvin©enginc.com would reduce the northbound approach movements from LOS`B"to LOS"C"during the peak p.m. hour. The northbound approach traffic during the peak p.m. hour is only 5 vehicles. From this analysis, it appears that there would be no capacity impacts created by this development at this intersection. Safety impacts would follow a similar trend. Whatever safety concerns might currently exist would still exist and this development would simply add to the historic traffic increases that have been occurring at this intersection. As our original report indicated, the only off-site impact which may require mitigation relates to a southbound left turn lane at the intersection of Ellis and Highland Boulevard. In reality, other concerns expressed by the City of Bozeman should not be associated with this development. Respectfully Submitted, Robert R. Marvin, P.E., P.T.O.E. Page 2 0 w J D 0 m 7 0 Z 0 � J KAGY BOULEVARD 2251 29 146 � 0 136 14 � 1 � 2 EXISTING PEAK AM HOUR 0 0 cc w J D O m 23 0 z 1 � g KAGY BOULEVARD 2091 14 71 � 0 252 123 3 t � 2 EXISTING PEAK PM HOUR 0 Figure A. Existing Peak Hour Traffic Periods 1/2"l 0 w J O m 7 0 QZ 0 � J KAGY BOULEVARD 2381 3f 146 0 � 180 14 -�-► 1 2 EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC PEAK AM HOUR 0 0 w J 0 m 27 0 Z 1 � Q KAGY BOULEVARD 2411 �15 71 0 264 123 3 3 EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC 2 PEAK PM HOUR 0 3 r Figure B. Existing Plus Site Traffic Peak Hours 0 OC uJ J M B In B 0 A Q J A = KAGY BOULEVARD 2 Existing LOS Existing Plus Site Traffic LOS A A A B PEAK AM HOUR 0 0 w J 0 B °m B 0 O z g A = KAGY BOULEVARD I J = Existing LOS Existing Plus Site Traffic LOS � A A OA PEAK PM HOUR B 0 Figure C. Summary of Capacity Impacts MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS January 29,2001 04:25 PM C:\LJNSIG3\KAGYHIGH.fNT KAGY&HIGHLAND EXISTING PEAK PM HOUR INTERSECTION GEOMETRY PREVAILING SPEED=30 MPH S=STOP CONTROL Minor Top Leg Y=YIELD CONTROL SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. I I Grade= SHARED LANES X X 0% RADIUS<50 ft S/ ,S St NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN NO ACCELERATION LANE,/ NO RIGHT TURN LANE c 7 <-- Grade= 0% Major Right Leg LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. SHARED LEFT LANE (2 LANES) EXCLUSIVE LEFT LANE LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg Grade= 0% _ —) NO RIGHT TURN LANE �NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN S S S RADIUS<50 ft Grade= X X X SHARED LANES 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. [J' LARGE POPULATION Minor Bottom Leg VOL UME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg left thru right left thru right left thru right I left thru fight UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 252 123 3 0 71 1 14 2 3 0 23 1 209 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .90 .80 .70 .70 .80 .70 .70 .70 .70 .70 .70 .90 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 280 154 4 0 89 20 3 4 _0 33 1 232 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 308 154 4 0 89 20 3 5 0 36 2 255 VOL UMES IN PCPH Minor Top Leg (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) AND SATURATION VOLUMES 2 5 3 5 2 6 \ - 20 1200 y <-- 89 1800 _ Major Right Leg 0 308 Major Left Leg 1800 154 1200 4 T 3 5 0 NOTE: Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS January 29,2001 04:25 PM C:\UNSIG3\KAGYHIGH.INT KAGY&HIGHLAND EXISTING PEAK PM HOUR CAPACITYANALYSIS RIGHT TURN FROM: Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 156 vph 99 vph Critical Gap: 5.5 seconds 5.5 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 1154 pcph 1234 pcph Movement Capacity: 1154 pcph 1234 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 100.0% 79.3% LEFT TURN FROM. Major Right Leg Major Left Leg Conflicting Flow: 158 vph 109 vph Critical Gap: 5.0 seconds 5.0 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1441 pcph 1521 pcph Movement Capacity: 1441 pcph 1521 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 100.0% 79.8% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 100.0% NA THROUGH FROM: Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 545 vph 537 vph Critical Gap: 6.0 seconds 6.0 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 565 pcph 570 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.80 0.80 Movement Capacity: 451 pcph 455 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 98.9% 99.6% LEFT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 651 vph 537 vph Critical Gap: 6.5 seconds 6.5 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 444 pcph 518 pcph Major Left,Minor Through,Impedance Factor(p"): 0.79 0.79 Major Left,Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance Factor(p'):0.84 0.84 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.67 0.84 Movement Capacity: 297 pcph 433 pcph SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Minor Bottom Leg Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 3 l 297 377 9.8 B- Short Delays I Ave Delay X, Through 5 451 _377_ 9.8 B- Short Delays 9.8 sec. 1 Right Turn 0 1154 1 377 9.8 B- Short Delays Shared Minor Top Leg Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 36 433 434 9.1 B- Short Delays Ave Delay X Through 2 455 434 9.1 B- Short Delays 4.4 sec. Right Turn 255 1234 3.7 A-Little Delay Major Street Left Turns Volume Capacity : DELAY� Level Of Service Ave Delay Major Left Leg 308 1521 _ 3.0 Little Delay 2.0 sec. X Major Right Leg 0 1441 2.5 [_�- -Little Delay 0.0 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 2.6 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS January 29,2001 04:50 PM C:\LTNSIG3\KAGYHIGH.INT KAGY&HIGHLAND EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC-PEAK PM HOUR INTERSECTION GEOMETRY PREVAILING SPEED=30 MPH S=STOP CONTROL Minor Top Leg Y=YIELD CONTROL SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Grade= SHARED LANES ix X 0% RADIUS<50 ft S I S S NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN NO ACCELERATION LANE I � � NO RIGHT TURN LANE <-- Grade= 0% Major Right Leg LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. SHARED LEFT LANE (2 LANES) EXCLUSIVE LEFT LANE LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg Grade= 0% NO RIGHT TURN LANE <� �NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN S S S RADIUS<50 ft Grade= X X X SHARED LANES 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. [�LARGE POPULATION Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg left thru rim left thru right left thru right left thru right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 264 123 3 0 71 15 2 3 0 27 1 241 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .90 _ .80 .70 .70 .80 .70 .70 .70 70 .70 u .70 .90 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 293 1 154 4 0 89 21 3 4 0 39 1 268 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 323 154 4 0 89 21 3 5 0 42 2 295 VOLUMES INPCPH Minor Top Leg (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) AND i SATURATION VOLUMES 2 9 4 5 2 2 21 1200 89 I$00 Major Right Leg 323 Major Left Leg 1800 154 1200 4 3 5 �0 NOTE: Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the is ajorStreet Left Tum Lane Minor Bottom Leg MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS January 29,2001 04:50 PM C:\UNSIG3\KAGYHIGH.INT KAGY&HIGHLAND EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC-PEAK PM HOUR CAPACITYANAL YSIS RIGHT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 156 vph 99 vph Critical Gap: 5.5 seconds 5.5 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 1154 pcph 1233 pcph Movement Capacity: 1154 pcph 1233 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 100.0% 76.1 % LEFT TURN FROM. Major Right Leg Major Left Leg Conflicting Flow: 158 vph 110 vph Critical Gap: 5.0 seconds 5.0 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1441 pcph 1519 pcph Movement Capacity: 1441 pcph 1519 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 100.0% 78 7 Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 100.0% NA THROUGH FROM: Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 559 vph 551 vph Critical Gap: 6.0 seconds 6.0 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 555 pcph 561 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.79 0.79 Movement Capacity: 437 pcph 441 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 98.9% 99.5% LEFT TURN FROM: Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 683 vph 551 vph Critical Gap: 6.5 seconds 6.5 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 426 pcph 508 pcph Major Left,Minor Through,Impedance Factor(p"): 0.78 0.78 Major Left,Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance Factor(p'):0.83 0.83 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.63 0.83 Movement Capacity: 270 pcph 421 pcph SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Minor Bottom Leg Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 3 { 270 355 10.4 C -Normal Delays Ave Delay Through 5 437 355 10.4 C-Normal Delays I 10.4 sec. X Right Turn 0 1154 355 i 10.4 C -Normal Delays Shared Minor Top Leg Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service Left Turn 42 421 _ 422 9.5 B- Short Delays Ave Delay Through 2 441 422-1 9.5 B- Short Delays f 4.6 sec. Right Turn 295 1233 - 3.8 A- Little Delay Major Street Left Turns Volume Capacity DELAY Level Of Service Ave Delay Major Left Leg 323 1519 ! 3.0 A-Little Delay i 2.0 sec- X Major Right Le J b g 0 1441 2.5 A- Little Delay L0.0 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 2.8 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS January 29,2001 04:53 PM C:\tFNSIG3\KAGYHIGH.INT KAGY&HIGHLAND EXISTING TRAFFIC-PEAK AM HOUR INTERSECTION GEOMETRY PREVAILING SPEED=30 MPH S=STOP CONTROL Minor Top Leg Y=YIELD CONTROL ix SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. GradeSHARED LANES X 0% RADIUS<50 ft S1 S S NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN NO ACCELERATION LANE,c/ � � NO RIGHT TURN LANE Grade= 0% Major Right Leg LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. SHARED LEFT LANE (2 LANES) EXCLUSIVE LEFT LANE LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg Grade= 0% NO RIGHT TURN LANE NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN S S S RADIUS<50 ft Grade= X X X SHARED LANES 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. LARGE POPULATION Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg left thru riehl left thru right left thru right left thru right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 136 14 1 0 146 29 2 1 0 7 0 225 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .90 .80 70 .70 .80 .70 .70 .70 :70 .70 .70 .90 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 151 18 1 0 182 41 3 1 0 10 0 250 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 166 18 1 0 182 41 3 2 0 11 0 275 VOLUMES INPCPH Minor Top Leg (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) AND SATURATION VOLUMES 2 7 1 5 0 7 E— 182 1800 Major Right Leg 0 166 J Major Left Leg 1800 18 1200 v 3 2 0 NOTE: Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the is sharStreet Left Turn Lane Minor Bottom Leg MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS January 29,2001 04:53 PM C:\UNSIG3\KAGYHIGH.INT KAGY&HIGHLAND EXISTING TRAFFIC-PEAK AM HOUR CAPACITYANALYSIS RIGHT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 18 vph 203 vph Critical Gap: 5.5 seconds 5.5 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 1356 pcph 1092 pcph Movement Capacity: 1356 pcph 1092 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 100.0% 74.8% LEFT TURN FROM. Major Right Leg Major Left Leg Conflicting Flow: 19 vph 224 vph Critical Gap: 5.0 seconds 5.0 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1679 pcph 1341 pcph Movement Capacity: 1679 pcph 1341 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 100.0% 87.6% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 100.0% NA THROUGH FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 393 vph 373 vph Critical Gap: 6.0 seconds 6.0 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 678 pcph 695 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.88 0.88 Movement Capacity: 594 pcph 609 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 99.7% 100.0% LEFT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 498 vph 373 vph Critical Gap: 6.5 seconds 6.5 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 545 pcph 644 pcph Major Left,Minor Through,Impedance Factor(p"): 0.88 0.87 Major Left,Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance Factor(p'):0.91 0.90 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.68 0.90 Movement Capacity: 369 pcph 581 pcph SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Minor Bottom Leg Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service 1_ X,Left Turn 3 369 435 8.4 B- Short Delays Ave Delay X Through 2 594 435 8.4 B- Short Delays 8.4 sec. X Right Turn 0 J 1356 435 8.4 B- Short Delays Shared Minor Top Leg Volume Capacity Capacity1 DELAY Level Of Service it eft Turn 1 1 581 581 6.3 B- Short Delays Ave Delay Through 0 - .1092 609 581 l 6.3 B- Short Delays 4.5 sec. Right Turn 275 1 - 44 I A-Little Delay Major Street Left Turns Volume Capacity DELAY Level Of Service Ave Delay Major Left Leg _ 166 1341 3.1 A-Little Delay _2.8 sec. X Major Right Leg 0 1679 2.1 A-Little Delay 0.0 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 2.6 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS January 29,2001 04:52 PM C:\UNSIG3\KAGYHIGH.INT KAGY&HIGHLAND EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC-PEAK AM HOUR INTERSECTION GEOMETRY PREVAILING SPEED=30 MPH S=STOP CONTROL Minor Top Leg Y=YIELD CONTROL SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Grade= SHARED LANES X X 0% RADIUS<50 ft S S S NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN NO ACCELERATION LANE � � NO RIGHT TURN LANE c � Grade= 0% Major Right Leg LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. SHARED LEFT LANE (2 LANES) EXCLUSIVE LEFT LANE LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg Grade= 0% NO RIGHT TURN LANE �NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN I S I S S RADIUS<50 ft Grade= X X X SHARED LANES 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. LARGE POPULATION Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg left thru right left thru right left thru right left thru right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 180 l 14 1 0 146 �38 _ 2 1 0 7 0 1238 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .90 80 .70 .70 .80 .70 .70 70 .70 .70 .70 .90 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 200 18 1 0 182 v54 3 1 0 10 0 264 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 220 18 1 0 182 54 3 2 0 11 0 291 VOLUMES INPCPH Minor Top Leg (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) AND SATURATION VOLUMES 2 9 1 1 0 1 Q 54 1200 <-- 182 1800 Major Right Leg 220 / �G Major Left Leg 1800 18 1200 1 3 2 0 NOTE: Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS January 29,2001 04:52 PM C:\LJNSIG3\KAGYHIGH.INT KAGY&HIGHLAND EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC-PEAK AM HOUR CAPACITYANALYSIS RIGHT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 18 vph 210 vph Critical Gap: 5.5 seconds 5.5 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 1356 pcph 1084 pcph Movement Capacity: 1356 pcph 1084 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 100.0% 73.2% LEFT TURN FROM. Major Right Leg Major Left Leg Conflicting Flow: 19 vph 237 vph Critical Gap: 5.0 seconds 5.0 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1679 pcph 1322 pcph Movement Capacity: 1679 pcph 1322 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 100.0% 83.4% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 100.0% NA THROUGH FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 455 vph 429 vph Critical Gap: 6.0 seconds 6.0 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 630 pcph 650 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.83 0.83 Movement Capacity: 525 pcph 542 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 99.6% 100.0% LEFT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 560 vph 429 vph Critical Gap: 6.5 seconds 6.5 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 502 pcph 598 pcph Major Left,Minor Through,Impedance Factor(p"): 0.83 0.83 Major Left,Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance Factor(p'):0.87 0.87 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.64 0.87 Movement Capacity: 320 pcph 520 pcph SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Minor Bottom Leg Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service A' Left Turn 3 � 320 379 9.6 B- Short Delays Ave Delay X Through 2 525 379 9.6 B- Short Delays 9.6 sec. X Right Turn 0 1356 379 9.6 B- Short Delays Shared Minor Top Leg Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 11 520 520 7.1 B- Short Delays Ave Delay X Through 0 542 520 7.1 B- Short Delays 4.6 sec. Right Turn 291 1084 - 4.5 A-Little Delay Major Street Left Turns Volume Capacity DELAY Level Of Service Ave Delay Major Left Leg 220 1322 3.3 A-Little Delay L_3.0 sec_ XMajor Right Leg o 1679 2.1 A-Little Delay 0.0 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 2.8 seconds } a.JAN � 1 2001 C&H ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC.—""" 2415 West Main Street, Suite 1, Bozeman, MT 59718 ❑Phone (406) 587-1115 ❑ Fax (406) 587-9768 email: chengineers@theglobal.net LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 31, 2001 TO: City of Bozeman Engineering Department ATTN: Dave Koltz FROM: Matt Cotterman RE: Northern Rockies Professional Center OTY. DESCRIPTION 1 Addendum/Response/Traffic Impact Study PURPOSE: ✓ As You Requested For Design Revisions ✓ For Your Information/Records For Your Signature/return ✓ For Your Approval Other: (See Remarks) U.S. Mail Federal Express ✓ Hand Delivered REMARKS: Copies to: Northern Rockies Professional Center Prepared for: Campbell/Lusin, L.L.C. Bozeman, Montana Prepared By: C&H Engineering and Surveying, Inc. 2415 West Main Street, Suite 1 Bozeman, MT 59718 Bayliss Architects 212 South Tracy Avenue Bozeman, MT 59715 December 2000 Project 00220 C & H ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC. 2415 West Main Street,Suite 1 • Bozeman,Montana 59718 Phone(406)587-1115 • Fax(406)587-9768 E-Mail:c&hengineering@theglobal.net December 15, 2000 City of Bozeman Planning and Community Development Attn: Jami Morris P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 RE: Northern Rockies Professional Center P.U.D. Subdivision(00220) Dear Jami, Enclosed are two checks in the amount of$1116.90 and$221.00,a P.U.D.Preliminary Plan Application, and a Preliminary Plat Application. The Traffic Report was prepared by Marvin&Associates, and the Statement of Planning Objectives (Section E) was prepared by Bayliss Architects. The following response letter is provided as supplemental information to both applications. Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan 1. Document Requirements: A. A completed application form is included with this submittal B. Developer: Campbell/Lusin, L.L.C., Members: Gary Lusin and John Campbell C. Legal Description: Tract C, Certificate of Survey No. 1177C, located in the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 2 South, Range 6 East of P.M.M.. D. A list of adjacent property owners is included with this submittal. E. See attached information from Bayliss Architects. F. Construction will begin as soon as plan approval has been received, and is tentatively scheduled for the spring of 2001. No phasing is planned for this development. G. Reduced versions of the plans are included with this submittal. 2. Site Plan Requirements: All items listed are included on the site plan, landscape plan and the supplemental vicinity map. 3. Supplemental Plan Requirements: A. Architectural elevations are included with this submittal. Civil/Structural Engineering and Surveying B. Landscape plans are included with this submittal. C. Utility plans are included with the site plan. D. Ellis Street cross sections are included with this submittal. E. Four test holes were drilled on July 13, 2000. A black topsoil with few organics was found from zero to six inches below grade. An abundant root zone was found to a depth of 12 inches. A silt loam exhibiting medium to moderate density and medium plasticity was found between four and 12 inches below grade. A brown sandy loam exhibiting moderate density, and medium plasticity was encountered from a depth of one to 12 feet. No evidence of groundwater was encountered in any of the test holes. Soils information obtained from the NRCS indicates the site consists mainly of a Blackmore soil type. This soil type offers few limitations to construction assuming groundwater is not a problem. Well logs in the area indicate a static water level of approximately 42 feet. It is safe to assume that the seasonal high is no closer than 20 feet from the ground surface. The nearest body of water is Placer Creek located approximately 325 feet from the east property line of the site. The creek lies approximately 45 vertical feet below the lowest point on site. The site is located outside of the 500 year floodplain. A copy of the floodplain map is included with this submittal. F. Drainage plans are included on the site plan. Preliminary drainage calculations for the detention structures are also included with this submittal G. No temporary facilities will be required. H. The preliminary subdivision plat is being submitted concurrently with this plan. I. A traffic impact analysis was prepared by Marvin and Associates. The report is included with this submittal. J. A complete Environmental Assessment and Community Impact Statement is included with this submittal. 4. Reproducible Copies One set of mylars and 8.5" x 11" clear film reductions are included with this submittal. Preliminary Plat A. 25 copies of the preliminary plat are included with all items listed shown on the plat. B. Supplemental Information: L. One copy of the frill Environmental Assessment and Community Impact Statement is included with this submittal 2. A map of the entire subdivision on an 11" x 17" sheet is enclosed. 3. No variances are being requested 4. A certified list of adjoining property owner,their mailing addresses and property descriptions is enclosed. 5. Three sets of self-adhesive mailing labels with the names and addresses of the Adjoiners are included. 6a. Covenants, Restrictions and Articles of Incorporation of Homeowners Association are included. 6b. Encroachment permits 6c. No zoning changes will be required. 6d. No other certificates are required. 6e. Provisions for maintenance of all roads,parks,and other required improvements are included in the covenants. 6f. No improvements agreement and guarantee is required. 7. A profile sheet for Ellis Street is included. 8. A noxious Weed Management and Revegetation Plan approved by the Weed Control District is enclosed. 9. Fire protection requirements of Chapter 16.14.060 will be met by paying a fire impact fee in accordance with the Fire Impact Fee regulation. 10. A Preliminary Platting Certificate prepared by a Montana Title Company is included with this submittal. If you have any questions or comments please give me a call. Thank you. Sincerely, Matt Cotterman, E.I. Enc. G:\c&h\00\00220\o Ffice\pud pl ansub.wpd bayfissss 1. The immediate area around and including this site is agricultural land, which is, zoned R- O. There are no adjacent neighborhoods around to draw architectural designs ideas for this project. There are two large buildings, which are visually noticeable, and the architectural interest is lacking from one. These buildings have been completed at different times and the styles vary, however, their overall mass will allow for our development to blend into the area without increasing the visual impact. Our buildings will be smaller in square footage and height. The "neighborhood" identity will continue as planned by the present zoning regulations since this development is trying to cluster the buildings and providing a clear pedestrian network for all buildings. This development has also provided a neighborhood feeling for the main road by placing a tree lined median to help lesson the vehicular impact in the center. The new landscaping plan will have similar species of shrubs as well as larger trees as well as a meandering berm in the front yard to further separate the buildings from Ellis Road. This will improve the existing hillside and breakdown the vertical scale of the buildings in relationship to the pedestrian as well as focusing the buildings to the main internal street. There is no historic character to draw from on the present site. The orientation and placement of all buildings has been approached with the idea of working with the major contours and minimizing the amounts of cut into the existing grades. 2. Yes, please see the engineering documents. 3. Yes, please see the preliminary landscape plan. 4. No, this does not apply to this site. 5. Project is not located within a historic district. 6. Yes, this has been addressed in the Architectural Guidelines. 7. Yes, please see the preliminary landscape plan. 8. Yes, please see the preliminary site plan. 9. Yes, please-see the preliminary site plan. 10. Yes, the model energy code must be used in the design of each structure. 11. Not applicable, there are no residents adjacent to this project. 12. Open space, the area has been calculated and at least 30% of the project has been left as open space. We have also included picnic tables and small parks in the center of the project for the enjoyment of the people utilizing this center. 13. Not applicable. The park areas are not intended for active recreational usage rather more gathering and eating during business hours. 14. Yes, please see the preliminary landscape plan. 15. No, at this present time there are no adjacent neighborhoods. 16, Yes,please see the preliminary landscape plan. 17. Yes, please see the preliminary landscape plan. Ellis Road is being improved and a sidewalk on our side shall be installed as well. 18. Yes, please see the preliminary landscape plan. 3aytissArchitects,P.C.,212 South Tracy Avenue,Bozeman,MT59715 406 586-5007 11 406 585-8337 In baylissObaylissarchitects.com Pwavvifir'scis 19. Yes, please see the preliminary landscape plan. This is a schematic plan and each building needs to be designed as the lots are sold. The Architectural Guidelines explain the landscape requirements. 20. The project is not located next to a public park or public open space. The areas located in this project are accessible at all times. Commercial PUD 1. Not applicable, this is a professional business center. 2. Yes, please see the engineering documents. 3. Yes, please see the engineering documents. Total project size is 7.7 acres. 4. Yes, see the Architectural Guidelines for the acceptable uses. 7. The immediate area around and including this site is agricultural land,which is, zoned R-O. There are no adjacent neighborhoods around to draw architectural designs ideas for this project. There are two large buildings, which are visually noticeable, and the architectural interest is lacking from one. These buildings have been completed at different times and the styles vary, however, their overall mass will allow for our development to blend into the area without increasing the visual impact. Our buildings will be smaller in square footage and height. The "neighborhood" identity will continue as planned by the present zoming regulations since this development is trying to cluster the buildings and providing a clear pedestrian network for all buildings. This development has also provided a neighborhood feeling for the main road by placing a tree lined median to help lesson the vehicular impact in the center. The new landscaping plan will have similar species of shrubs as well as larger trees as well as a meandering berm in the front yard to further separate the buildings from Ellis Road. This will improve the existing hillside and breakdown the vertical scale of the buildings in relationship to the pedestrian as well as focusing the buildings to the main internal street. There is no historic character to draw from on the present site. The orientation and placement of all buildings has been approached with the idea of working with the major contours and minimizing the amounts of cut into the existing grades. 8. No, no off street parking has been included in the parking counts for this project. 9. This project demonstrates compliance to the Bozeman master plan. 10. Yes, please see the preliminary landscape plan. It shows the areas in the center of the project and the picnic tables. Bayliss Architects,P.C.,212 South Tracy Avenue,Bozeman,MT 59715 406 586-5007 IN 406 585-8337 In bayliss®baylissarehitects.com CITY OF BOZEMAN DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ALFRED M. STIFF PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING-20 EAST OLIVE STREET P. 0. BOX 1230,BOZEMAN,MONTANA 59771-1230 (406) 582-2360,FAX(406)582-2363 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION ____ Certain uses,while generally not suitable in a particular Zoning District,may,under certain circumstances, be acceptable. When such circumstances exist, a Conditional Use Permit may be granted subject to certain conditions. The permit is granted for a particular use and not for a particular person or firm. No Conditional Use Permit shall be granted for a use which is not specifically designated as a conditional use in the subject district regulations of the Bozeman Zoning Ordinance. This review will also include a review for Certificate of Appropriateness, if applicable. Deviations and/or variances will be processed concurrently. Additional submittal materials apply. 1. Name and mailing address of property owner: Campbell/Lusin LLC 3499 Bridger Canyon Road, Bozeman, MT 59715 Phone: 587-4501 2. Name and mailing address of applicant/representative: C&H Engineering and Surveying, Inc. 2415 W.Main Street, Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: 587-1115 3. Name and mailing address of Engineer/Architect/Planner: same as#2 Phone: 4. Name of project/development: Northern Rockies Professional Center 5. Address of proposed development: Ellis Street(no assigned address yet) 6. Legal Description: Tract C, COS 1177C, SE'/4, SW'/4, Section 8, T2S,R6E 7. Current Zoning R-0 Land Area: sq.ft. or 7.6909 acres 8. Describe the proposed development(use additional sheets if necessary): The proposed project is a Planned Unit Development with seven commercial lots which will include seven two-story buildings,primarily medical offices. 9. Review Fee: $660.00 (Minimum fee after refund: $400.00) This application must be accompanied by appropriate fee and twenty (20) copies of a completed site plan (see submittal requirements) drawn to scale on paper not smaller than 8'/2" x I I" nor larger than 24"x 36", folded in individual sets no larger than 8'/2"x 14"in size. Application deadline varies. This application must be signed by both the applicant and property owner(if different)before the submittal will be accepted. I (We) hereby certify that the above information is true and correct to the best of my(our)knowledge. �4 u Applicant's Signature Property Owner's Signature GAc&h\00\00220\office\CUP App.wpd BOZEMAN CITY-COUNTY PLANNING OFFICE w J P. O. BOX 640, BOZEMAN, MT 59771 (406) 582-2360, FAX 582-2363 SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION FOR MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The preliminary plat shall be legibly drawn at a horizontal scale no smaller than 100 feet to the inch, and may show approximate boundaries, dimensions, distances and areas, unless specifically noted. The plat shall be on one or more sheets of 18"x 24" or 24"x 36"paper. Where accurate information is required, surveying and engineering data shall be prepared under the supervision of a registered engineer or registered land surveyor, licensed in the State of Montana, as their respective licensing laws allow. A completed"Subdivision Procedures Form"and Preliminary Platting Certificate must accompany this I --- ---n. ----------------_------------------____--_____ 1. Name and address of property owner: Campbell/Lusin L.L.C. 3499 Bridger Canyon Road, Bozeman, MT 59715 Phone: 587-4501 2. Name and address of applicant/representative: C&H Engineering and Surveying 2415 W. Main St., Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: 587-1115 3. Name of Subdivision: Northern Rockies Subdivision 4. Location (legal): Tract C, COS 1177C, SE 1/4, SW 1/4, SEC. 8, T2S, R6E Common address: 5. Acres: Gross: 7.6909 Net: 1.8699 6. Total Number of Lots: 7 7. School District: Bozeman Fire District: Fort Ellis 8. Date of Pre-Submittal or Pre-Application Review: August 22, 2000 9. Indicate the proposed use(s) and number of lots, spaces, or units for each use: Residential, single family Residential, multiple family MaSubPrehm. App. 9/97 7 Planned Unit Development Condominium Townhouse Recreation or Second Home Mobile Home Park Recreational Vehicle Park Commercial Industrial Other (please describe in narrative) 10. Current land use: The land is currently vacant 11. Existing zoning or other regulations: R-O 12. Review Fee: Major Subdivision: $200 plus $3 per lot to 100 lots,then$1 per lot for each lot in excess of 100 13. A Preliminary Platting Certificate,prepared by a Montana Title Company, must accompany this application. Please refer to the Subdivision Procedures Form for the number of copies and supplemental information needed. The correct number of copies plus one copy of the completed Subdivision Procedures form must be submitted,with the appropriate fee, or the application will not be accepted. This application form must be signed by the applicant and the property owner (if different). Applicant's Signature Property wner s Signature Date: Date: 0 MaSubPrehm.App. 9/97 BOZEMAN CITY-COUNTY PLANNING OFFICE SUBDIVISION PROCEDURES FORM PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION FOR MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS This form is used to evaluate and accept preliminary plat applications for major subdivisions. Failure to provide all applicable information will result in an incomplete submittal and will cause a delay in the review of the project. This form must be completely filled out and returned with the appropriate fee and application. NAME OF PROJECT: NORTHERN ROCKIES P.U.D. SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT PROCEDURES Subdivisions consisting of six or more parcels will be considered a Major Subdivision,and will be reviewed per Chapter 16.10 of the Bozeman Area Subdivision Regulations. At least thirty(30)days prior to the next available Planning Board meeting,the following number of copies of the preliminary plat and supplemental information must be submitted: Within the City of Bozeman or the Zoning Jurisdictional Area --- 25 copies Within the Planning Jurisdiction,but outside the Zoning Jurisdiction -- 20 copies After a complete submittal is received, the application will be distributed to affected agencies for review. The Planning Board will conduct a public hearing on the application and will forward a recommendation to the appropriate governing body. For subdivisions within the City of Bozeman, or for subdivisions on land which has concurrently applied for annexation to the corporate limits of the City of Bozeman, the City Commission will consider the application and the Planning Board's recommendation during a regular public meeting of the Commission. Since the Planning Board is the designated agency to hold the public hearing on the subdivision, additional public comment can not be accepted by the City Commission at that meeting. For subdivisions located outside the corporate limits of the City of Bozeman, the Gallatin County Commission will consider the application and Planning Board recommendation during a public hearing before the County Commission. Additional comment will be accepted at this additional public hearing. The appropriate governing body shall approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove the preliminary plat within 60 days of determination that the application is complete,unless a written extension is provided from the subdivider. Findings of Fact and Order will be prepared for the subdivision once the appropriate governing body makes a final decision on the subdivision. Preliminary plat approval is in force for not more than three calendar years or less than one calendar year. Extensions may be granted. If a final plat is not submitted within the allotted time,preliminary plat approval expires. PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS The preliminary plat application for a major subdivision must contain all of the following information. The preliminary plat shall be legibly drawn at a horizontal scale no smaller than 100 feet to the inch, and may show approximate boundaries,dimensions,distances and areas,unless specifically noted. The plat shall be on one or more sheets of 18" x 24" or 24" x 36" paper. Where accurate information is required, surveying and engineering data shall be prepared under the supervision of a registered engineer or land surveyor, licensed in the State of Montana. Prelimprocedure.fins Major Sub. 9/97 A. The submittal shall include the following (refer to Chapter 16.08.030): YES NO N/A 1. All information required with the preapplication submittal X 2. Name and location of subdivision, scale, scale bar,north arrow, date of preparation, lots and blocks (designated by number), dimensions and area of each lot, and use of each lot, if other than single-family 3. Streets, roads, alleys, and easements,width of r/w, grades and curvature of each; existing and proposed road names; location,of intersections with arterials or x collectors 4. Names of adjoining platted subdivisions and numbers of adjoining COSs X 5. Approximate survey of exterior boundaries with bearings, distances and curve data 6. Approximate location of all section corners or legal subdivisions corners of �( sections pertinent to the subdivision boundary 7. Ground contours at 2-foot intervals if slope is under 10%; at 5-foot intervals if slope is between 10% and 15%; and at 10 feet if slope is 15% or greater 8. Phase lines, including distinct lines of phased infrastructure improvements x 9. All appropriate certificates (refer to Chapter 16.32) B. The supplemental information shall include the following: YES NO N/A 1. Environmental Assessment, Community Impact and Flood Hazard Evaluation K per Chapters 16.18 and 16.20 2. Map of entire subdivision on either 8'/z"xi I"; 81/2"x14"; or 11"x17" sheet 3. Written statement describing requested variance(s) and facts of hardship upon X which the request is based(refer to Chapter 16.30) 4. A certified list of adjoining property owners, their mailing addresses and property descriptions, including property owners across public r/w and/or easements. 5. Self-adhesive mailing labels; one list for first minor subdivisions and three sets of labels for all other subdivisions, of the names and addresses required in B.4, above 6. Draft of the following documents and certificates,unless printed on the preliminary plat a) Covenants, Restrictions and Articles of Incorporation of Homeowners Association Prelimprocedure.frm Major Sub. 9/97 b) Encroachment permits or letter indicating intention to issue a permit where new streets,roads, easements, r/w or driveways intersection State, County or City highways, streets or roads c) Letter of approval where a zoning change is necessary d) Draft of other appropriate certificates e) Provision for maintenance of all roads, parks, and other required V improvements (\ f) Public improvements agreement and guarantee 7. Profile sheets for street or road grades greater than 5% 8. Noxious Weed Management and Revegetation Plan approved by the Weed Control District effective upon preliminary plat approval and during construction of improvements. 9. Written explanation of how the fire protection requirements of Chapter 16.14.060 will be met J� 10. Preliminary Platting Certificate,prepared by a Montana Title Company Prelimprocedure.frm Major Sub. 9/97 CITY OF BOZEMAN DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ALFRED M. STIFF PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING - 20 EAST OLIVE STREET P.O. BOX 1230, BOZEMAN, MT 59771-1230 (406) 582-2360 FAX (406) 582-2363 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicant l,arno b t i- Lusio L.L.(2. Date: 2 SOU Residential PUD Project No rz+herrl Ror-Kies Probe ss i ana l Cen-te2 Commercial PUD The following is a checklist of submittal requirements for all Planned Unit Development(PUD)Preliminary Plans. The applicant must complete this checklist and submit it along with the items listed for the application to be considered complete. Any item checked"NO"or"N/A"(not applicable)must be explained in a narrative attached to the checklist. Upon submittal, staff will review the checklist and determine if the application as submitted is complete. If so, it will be placed on the Development Review Committee (DRC) and Design Review Board(DRB) agendas, followed by a City Planning Board review. Incomplete submittals will be returned to the applicant. 1. Document Reguirements YES NO N/A The following information shall be presented in an 8'V2"x I V vertically bound document. The document shall be bound so that it will open and lie flat for reviewing and organized in the following order: A. Application forms; — B. A list of names of all general and limited partners and/or officers and directors of the corporation involved as either applicants or owners of the PUD; — — C. Legal description of the site; — — D. Adjacent property owners: (1) A copy of the list of the names and addresses of record of real property within 400' of the property lines of the parcel of land for which the PUD is proposed, exclusive of public r/w; _ — (2) The original list shall be included in the document; — (3) Names and addresses shall be included on plain(no return address), — #10 (4-1/8" x 9-1/2"), stamped envelopes; — E. A statement of planning objectives, including: (1) Statement of applicable City land use policies and objectives achieved by the proposed plan and how it furthers the / implementation of the Bozeman Area Master Plan; PUD.PREL PLAN SUBMITTAL REQ Aug 2000 1 (2) Statement of proposed ownership of public and private open space areas and applicant's intentions with regard to future ownership of all or portions of the PUD; _ (3) Estimate of number of employees for business, commercial, and industrial uses; (4) Description of rational behind the assumptions and choices made by the applicant; (5) The applicant shall submit as evidence of successful completion of the applicable Community Design objectives and Criteria of Section 18.54.100,documentation pursuant to these regulations for each proposed use;the applicant shall submit written explanation for each of the applicable objectives or criteria as to how the plan does or does not address the objective or criterion; the Planning Director may require, or the applicant may choose to submit, evidence that is beyond what is required in that section; any variance from the criterion shall be described; (6) Detailed description of how conflicts between land uses are being avoided or mitigated; (7) Statements of design methods to reduce energy consumption, (e.g. - home/business, utilities, transportation fuel,waste recycling); F. A development schedule indicating the approximate date when construction of the PUD, or stages of the same, can be expected to begin and be completed, including the proposed phasing of construction of public improvements and recreational and common space areas; G. Reduced versions of all preliminary plan and supplemental plan maps and graphic illustrations at 81/z"x 1 1" or 1 1" x 17" size. 2. Site Plan Requirements YES NO N/A A site plan of the proposed development drawn at a scale not greater than 1" = 40' or less than 1" = 100'; and composed of one (1) or more sheets not lager than 24' x 36", showing the following information: B. Name of project/development; C. Location of project/development by street address; D. Location map; including area within one (1)mile of site; E. Name and mailing address of developer/owner; F. Name and mailing address of engineer/architect; V/ G. Date of plan preparation; ,/ G. North point indicator; _ H. Location of municipal and extra-territorial boundaries within or near the development; I. Listing of specific land uses being proposed; ✓ _ _ J. Parcel size(s) in gross acres and square feet; ✓ _ _ K. Total number, type, and density per type of dwelling units; L. Total gross residential density and density per residential parcel; M. Estimated total floor area and estimated ratio of floor area to lot size (Floor Area Ratio, FAR), with a breakdown by land use; _✓ _ N. Proposed coverage of buildings and structures for parcel(s) and total site, including the following: PUD.PREL PLAN SUBMITTAL HQ Aug 2000 2 (1) Percentage and square footage of building coverage; (2) Percentage and square footage of driveway and parking; — (3) Percentage and square footage of public street r/w; — — — (4) Percentage and square footage of open space and/or landscaped area; — (5) Percentage and square footage of"active recreational use" area; Q. Number and location of off-street parking, including guest,handicapped, bicycle and motorcycle parking,with typical dimensions of each; — P. Topographic contours at two-foot intervals,unless differently permitted by the Planning Director; — — — Q. Watercourses,water bodies and irrigation ditches; ✓/ - R. Floodplains as designated on the Federal Insurance Rate Maps; S. Unique natural features, significant wildlife areas and vegetative cover, including existing trees and shrubs,having a diameter greater than 2'/2", by species; — — — T. Tentative location and floor area of existing and proposed buildings; U. Boundary and square footage of each area designated as active ✓ recreational use; — — — V. Location and acreage of common open areas and all public and semi-public land uses, including public parks, recreational areas, school sites, and similar uses; —W. Location of existing and proposed pedestrian circulation system,indicating the proposed treatment of points of conflict; —X. Maximum building height of all structures; ✓ — — Y. The existing and proposed circulation system of arterial, collector and local streets, including off-street parking areas; service areas; loading zones; and major'points of ingress and egress to the development; notations of proposed ownership,public or private, should be included f where appropriate; — — — Z. Existing zoning; — — AA. The proposed treatment of the perimeter of the PUD, including materials and techniques used, such as screening, fences, walls, and other landscaping; BB. Proposed signage,with locations and illustrative examples; — — YES .NO N/A CC. Adjacent site information: Area shown on the site plan shall extend beyond the property lines of the 3 PUD.PREL PLAN SUBMITTAL REQ Aug 2000 proposal to include a survey of the area and uses within 200' of the proposal, exclusive of public r/w at the same scale as the proposal and including the following: (1) Land uses and location of principle structures; (2) Densities of residential uses; (3) Existing trees and major features of landscape; (4) Topographic contours at two-foot intervals,unless differently permitted by the Planning Director ✓ (5) Traffic Circulation System; DD. Supplemental vicinity map: Vicinity map of the area surrounding the site within a distance of at least one (1)mile showing: (1) Zoning districts; ✓ (2) Location of municipal boundary lines; (3) Traffic circulation system; _ (4) Major public facilities including schools,parks, trails, etc.; EE. Attorney's or owner's certification of ownership; FF. Chairperson and Secretary of the City Planning Board and Zoning Commission certification of approval of the site plan, including a statement of any variances to the Community Design Objectives and Criteria of Section 18.54.100; GG. Owner certification of acceptance of conditions and restrictions as set forth on the site plan; 3. Supplemental Plan Requirements YES NO N/A A. Architectural elevations: Preliminary architectural elevations of all buildings sufficient to convey the basic architectural intent of the proposed improvements; B. Landscape treatment: A general landscaping plan indicating: (1) Treatment of materials used for private and common open spaces; (2) All existing vegetation with identification of trees by sizes of species; (3) Specific proposals to protect and preserve existing trees during and after construction; ✓ _ _ (4) The scale shown on plant materials; C. Utility plans: The existing and proposed utility systems and proposed utility systems, including: (1) Sanitary sewers; f _ (2) Storm sewers; PUD.PREL PLAN SUBMITTAL REQ Aug 2000 4 (3) Water; /_ — (4) Electric; ✓ �. (5) Gas; ✓ (6) Telephone lines; (7) Fire hydrants; (8) Trash collection areas; ✓ D. Street cross sections if different from City standards; street cross sections schematics shall be submitted for each general category of street, including the proposed width, treatment of curbs and gutters, sidewalk systems and bikeway systems where deviations from the design criteria and standards of the City are proposed; E. Physiographic data, including the following: (1) A description of soils existing on the site, accompanied by analysis as to the suitability of such soils for the intended construction and proposed landscaping; (2) A map showing all permanent and temporary streams and sketch showing the 100'year floodplain for each period as designated in the design criteria as established by the City; (3) A description of the hydrologic conditions of the site with analysis of water table, fluctuations, and a statement of site suitability for intended construction and proposed landscaping; F. Drainage plan: Preliminary drainage report and calculations and/or plan, including: (1) All watercourses on the property or which are located within 200' of the property,must be shown; in addition, the floodways and/or / flood fringe areas of these watercourses must be delineated; J (2) All drainage, streets, arroyos, dry gullies, diversion ditches, spillways,reservoirs, etc.,which may be incorporated into the storm drainage system for the property shall be designated; ✓ (3) All irrigation ditches, laterals, and structures shall be shown; (4) All required on-site detention areas, including notes indicating the approximate area and volume of the facility; (5) All plans shall indicate the proposed outlet for the storm drainage from the property, including the name of the drainage-way (where appropriate),the downstream conditions (developed, available drainage-ways, etc.), and any downstream restrictions; (6) Existing and/or proposed grading plan; G. Temporary facilities plan: A plan of the site showing the location of all temporary model homes, PUD.PREL PLAN SUBMITTAL REQ Aug 2000 5 sales offices and/or construction facilities, including temporary signs and parking facilities; _ H. Preliminary subdivision plat: If the project involves or requires platting, a preliminary subdivision plat, subject to the requirements of the City's Subdivision Ordinance shall be submitted; I. Traffic impact analysis: _ At the discretion of the Public Service Director a traffic impact analysis , shall be prepared based upon the proposed development, including the previsions of the approved Master Plan, if part of such Master Plan, and upon surrounding land uses; the Public Service Director may require the traffic analysis to include the following: (1) Land use and trip generation- a table of each type of land use, the number of units or square footage, as appropriate, the trip rates used(daily and.peak hour) and resulting trip generation; (2) Traffic graphics showing: , (a) AM peak hour site traffic; (b) PM peak hour site traffic; (c) AM peak hour total traffic; (d) PM peak hour total traffic (e) Total daily traffic (with site generated traffic shown separately); ✓ _ _ (3) AM and PM capacity analysis: An AM and PM peak hour capacity analysis for all major drive € accesses that intersect collector or arterial streets and all site arterial-arterial, collector-collector, and arterial-collector intersections within one (1)mile of the site or as directed by the Director of Public Service; ✓ _ _ ( ) Report ort format shall be as follows: t (a) Trip generation-using Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual; (b) Trip distribution; (c) Traffic assignment; (d) Capacity analysis; (e) Evaluation; ✓ _ _ (f) Recommended access plan, including access points, modifications and any mitigation techniques; (5) Additional Analysis Criteria: Appropriate clearance intervals shall be provided for each exclusive movement; pedestrian movements must be provided for each cycle And pedestrian overpasses shall not be at intersections; maximum pedestrian walking speeds shall be 4' per second with a minimum PUD.PREL PLAN SUBMITTAL REQ Aug 2000 6 "WALK"time of seven seconds;intersection pavement widths shall not exceed that required to provide three (3)through lanes in each direction, dual left-turn lanes and right-turn lanes. Traffic progression will be of paramount importance; consequently, all potential intersections with signals will be placed on '/4 mile points unless otherwise approved by the'Director of ' Public Service. Intersection Level of Service "C" shall be the design objective and under no conditions will less than Level of Service"D"be accepted for site operations; arterial intersections and turning operations shall operate at Level of Service"C"; if Level of Service `E"is the result of the study, then alternatives of providing Level of Service"D" shall be analyzed and included as part of the study; generally, the design year will be approximately fifteen (15) years following construction. (6) Summary analysis explaining: (a) The proposed access points for the project,their location and the rationale for their placement in terms of circulation; _ (b) Future off-site road improvements for access,which roads they will be, the projected time frame for their completion and who is responsible for their completion; (c) ADT and level of service changes to all streets; --V-/ (d) How traffic impacts to existing streets will be minimized by the PUD; (e) Describe bicycle and pedestrian pathways within the / development, if used; ✓ _ J. Additional studies and plans: The City Planning Board and Zoning Commission or City Commission may require additional impact studies or other plans as it is deemed ' necessary for providing thorough consideration of the proposed PUD; particularly if the development's compliance with the Community Design Objectives and Criteria is under question; r4. Reproducible Copy Requirements YES NO N/A In addition to the above document, Site plan and Supplemental Plan requirements the applicant shall i ' submit the following for review purposes: A. One full size rolled(not folded)mylar of all plans and renderings; ,L _ B. One 8'/z"x 11" clear film reduction of all plans and renderings for — — reproduction and overhead projector use. * Reference to 18.54.061 "Preliminary Plan Submittal Requirements" of the Bozeman Interim Zoning Ordinance (7/02/90) Fee: $660.00 plus $6.00 per residential unit and/or$4.00 per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross leasable industrial or commercial(includes professional business offices) floor area. Minimum fee after refund: $500.00 PUD.PREL PLAN SUBMITTAL REQ Aug 2000 7 Adjoiners to COS 1177C Campbell-Lucia Jay Lyndes COS 1177 Remainder Tract 600 Indian Trail 120 fin 2551 Billings, MT 59105-2702 City of Bozeman C-38-A, Drum Lummon Addition, 43 fin 2137 Administration Dept. and P.O. Box 1230 Tract 12, Drum Lummon Addition, 141-355 Bozeman, MT 59771 Bozeman Deaconess Foundation Tract 3, COS 2047, 139 fin 879 901 Highland Boulevard and Bozeman,MT 59715 Tract 13, Drum Lummon Addition 136-164 G:\c&h\00\00220\office\Adjoiners.wpd CERTIFICATION OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS LIST I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the attached name and address list of all adjoining property owners of record and each purchaser under contract for deed of property within 400 feet of the property located at Tract C, COS 1177C, is a true and accurate list of names from the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder records and mailing addresses from the Gallatin County Assessor Records. I further understand that an inaccurate list may delay review of the project. December 14, 2000 ature Date G:\c&h\00\00220\office\Adjoiner Cert.wpd . •• -- -' �i�,� 1___.-L' l..-J �C:-h Jt^ill • l�,. }• � 4ffWA CARNEGIE . •• t. 1 t eL p .. .u... . . -... . . J Ln l'1i• L'ir- J t i r- PLI \ 8.2 R-0 f^''�� J C 1 \V HOAPITAL R 3A Z R-a �'. 1 BP r, : . . . : t AS -s•-t. R 2 R. A p_I R-1 1 v RS e-i - •R7 l _ � Y _ � =p '� • �- .wJJee.��.. .i• �'••fir'•' RS . . R- AS . - ENGINEERING AND Project NumberUi� SURVEYING, INC. Project Name: • 12, �:I- -— "t Civil Engineering *Structural Engineering @Land Surveying Date: 1 14 Fig By: 4, 2415 W.Main Street,Suite 1 (406)587-1115 Bozeman,Montana 59718 Fax: (406)587-9768 Subject: Page: - 07 7- 011C 017 4 Ool 82- 757 t pna : -.4 — 1) p r f z 2v 015 A —Z rn�m e4i zo loo Olo, o" 7a A&Z Awe- 31 o.,274 7 7 Detention Pond #1 c= 0.737 A= 3.1465 acres release = 0.8225 cfs Storm Storm Runoff Release Required length(min) len th hrs Intensity Q future Volume Volume Storage 5 0.083333 3.218458 7.463508 2239.052 246.75 1992.302 10 0.166667 2.05106 4.756347 2853.808 493.5 2360.308 15 0.25 1.575865 3.654384 3288.946 740.25 2548.696 20 0.333333 1.3071 3.031126 3637.351 987 2650.351 25 0,416667 1.130622 2.621878 3932.817 1233.75 2699.067 30 0.5 1.004268 2.328867 4191.961 1480.5 2711.461 35 0.583333 0.908519 2.106829 4424.341 1727.2..5 2697.091 40 0.666667 0.832989 1.931677 4636.025 1974 2662.025 45 0.75 0.771596 1.789309 4831.135 2220.75 2610.385 50 0.833333 0.720523 1.670871 5012.614 2467.5 2545.114 i 100 800 be ae O O 40 dP i h O b 90 :<cn ►; 700 0 O" 80 600 ale CO)* 70 500 60 400 c ; 50 ILL 300 O• � a� F- 40 — cz 200 m r O EO 30 ~ 100 0 I o�� 20 o • 10 0 Figure 2-1 Overland Flow Travel Time 2-10 rce�EENGINEERING AND Is Project Nu SURVEYING, INC. Project Name: •Civil Engineering s Structural Engineering a Land Surveying Date: 2415 W.Main Street,Suite 1 (406)587-1115 Fig By: Bozeman,Montana 59718 Tax: (406)587-9768 Subject: Page: A- 5 z _TT 1 7 A L T 4- 7-1 7 7, 7 7 T t Detention Pond #2 c= 0.737 A= 4.2762 acres release = 1.0143 cfs Storm Storm Runoff Release Required length(min) len th hrs Intensit Q future Volume Volume Storage 5 0.083333 3.218458 10.14316 3042.948 304.29 2738.658 10 0.166667 2.05106 6.464036 3878.422 608.58 3269.842 15 0.25 1.575865 4.966432 4469.789 912.87 3556.919 20 0.333333 1.3071 4.119403 4943.284 1217.16 3726.124 25 0.416667 1.130622 3.563221 5344.832 1521.45 3823.382 30 0.5 1.004268 3.165009 5697.016 1825.74 3871.276 35 0.583333 0.908519 2.863252 6012.829 2130.03 3882.799 40 0.666667 0.832989 2.625214 6300.515 2434.32 3866.195 45 0.75 0.771596 2.431732 6565.675 2738.61 3827.065 50 0.833333 0.720523 2.270771 6812.312 3042.9 3769.412 .t 800 100 h cy 4j '` 90 700 ' I� 600 I 80 o 500 70 400 80 c 300 50 a) O a� UAl //f C I 200 40 }-- � m � c>a O L 100 ^ 6 30 ~ o 2 3.2 I i 10 0 Figure 2-1 Overland Flow Travel Time 2-10 ly �\ n LU e GA sa`� z �kr O X �pd i r w N � � I �1f W l'l 3. jLOld ttQ 1 x W z N 6 l a a v� S m J .;q a W ZO 8 48 , N .0 W W y� z O Lu 0 z �' g X.�^� T X a `�p ? vY _0 z O V N N N N Z Z ✓s,.. "tr-@ g�y i°y x cc O O 0 �3 PP� y z w i O 0 N 9 Q w x X x s Dry ° a ►� P a W 6 Z Z z z v x x ° b "m ► P ON O O - Z Z X. W m N N Nz X XO b Z z u<i N?c N o w l o N , ov a 5 x x u z Q¢ O z w X OXw• Zp < Z 3 c, s 3QO O O �1 Zv •s n v 'S-a�'n.� _n.� a X Galatin Count SUBDIVISION NOXIOUS WEED MANAGEMENT AND Weed Control REVEGETATION PLAN (PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL) District (Revised November 1999) Projected date for preliminary Plat application 1 a-(S-00 Date Plan received OCT 19 2000 Before construction/disturbance begins, please complete and submit a copy of the Noxious Weed Management and Revegetation Plan to the Gallatin County Weed Control Office for review by the Board This plan may require rovision to meet the requirements of the Noxious Weed Management Plan of the District, and the Montana County Noxious Weed Control Act. Upon approval by the Board, this plan must be signed by the Chairman of the Board or appointed Representative in cooperation with the agency resppnsible for the disturbance and constitutes a binding agreement between the Board and such person or agency. A) GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Name of Cooperator: C i}YADLN' U L,6,'- L L (Pnrrt F II Name and/or Name of Company) (Address-City-State-Zip) 2. Geographic Location to be Covered by this Plan: (Telephone) Legal Description: 15E 114 6W 1/4, Sec. --a If applicable include the name and address of the Subdivision/Gravel Pit/Etc: 3 ppropnate box( � Land Use (Please check the a �r (a) Previous or Historical Land Use Agriculture ❑ Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ Pasture non-crop� Other ❑ Please explain (b) Future Land Use Agriculture ❑ Residential ❑ Commercial Pasture non-crop ❑ Other Please explain 4. Is a Map of the Area or a Copy of the Subdivision Plat Attached? Yes Z�' No ❑ 5. Has the Cooperator been informed of the District's Noxious Wee Management Plan of and Revegetation Requirements for Disturbed Areas? Yes [f No ❑ 6. Has the Cooperator een informed of the Noxious Weed Management Plan of the District? Yes Z No ❑ 7. Has the Cooperator been informed oft a relevant sections of the Montana County Noxious Weed Control Act? Yes n No ❑ 901 N. Black Bozeman, MT 59715 (406)582-3265 B) NOXIOUS WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN 1) Are noxious weeds present on the property? Yes © No ❑ If yes, list which species and the approximate size of infestation(s) — GC96h v,� ca, r/tip,, — giu�7`�•• � e -►S/ S ��' r,7` f�!^�:c.:�.�ci�T /-h � //SQi7Zr /t,7e/'Al��js 7 �+u, �lcl /.y e CGHad/a i, t�ii5711r - 5CA/7106- a2l,91tlr fh•-asragt L, � (Gallatin County no)dous weeds are listed in section III of No)dous Weed Management&Revegetation Requirements) 2. Briefly explain the noxious weed control method(s)to be used on noxious weeds -already existing on the property or that may arise during construction/development/ disturbance of the property. Note: If noxious weeds already exist on the property, please outline these infestations on a map of'the area or the subdivision plat ................ 3. Please complete the appropriate section(s) corresponding to the noxious weed management methods mentioned above. (a) Chemical Control: Ta4f SY f *Chemical Name e5c r Rate Chemical Name L Rate ,/,��re� *Timing and method of treatment(s): e irs/� . 7`'.�ti C r., w,7c� 1;' ��ioT�t� AMJ /�4!-,ocU/X f�SR�.1C Gv� / C �aLtrdilt� /kls�G� -A- uy e_ f jz;1 v (b) Cultural/Mechanical Control: *Methods of weed control *Timing of control method(s): *Weed control work done by-Self❑ or Contracted ❑ Name of Contractor (c) Biological Control: *Biological control agent(s) Timing of the release(s) of the Bio-control agent(s): Weed control method(s) used to control weed spread while insects establish *Weed control work done by- Self 0 or Contracted ❑ Name of Contractor C) REVEGETATION PLAN FOR DISTURBED AREAS 1. Are there land(s) already disturbed or that will be disturbed on the property? I Yes© No❑ / If yes, explain l41 -s 4 ":r- 7 Y a►e-trr Le, // cr Ae d u trr d o C c 4..f A-cc 6.4 o i-, 2. If the answer was (YES)to question 1 above, what method(s)will be used to accomplish revegetation of the disturbed arrgas/ (seeding, planting,, sod, etc.) O a /,N 4 3. If applicable list the type and amount of seed/sod to be used for revegetation: TYPe`' ►7�fsEa f ass �iy,ro.�,,•/�,,. �i �.a c ,Rate Type S aj Rate os ��c uMsa.rw ! 6�y z• 1 �r�r-* Type Rate 4. If applicable list the type and amount of fertilizer to be used: Type Rate Type Rate 5. Timing of revegetation practices: Approximate cultivation date(s) Sn� � be►�� /�,�4 �S�t Fu//, ff� ��,( iy-'`: Approximate seeding/sod date(s) Approximate fertilizer date(s) NOTE: For revegetation recommendations contact the Gallatin County Conservation District(Natural Resource Conservation Service). D) APPROVAL OF NOXIOUS WEED MANAGEMENT AND REVEGETATION PLAN APPROVED ❑ APPROVED WITH RECOMMENDATIONSXUg NOT APPROVED ❑ RECOMMENDATIONSThe Gallatin County Weed District approves the submitted Weed Management and Revegetation Plan with the following recommendatinne Recommendation One: Cooperator will initiate weed control measures on that portion of the property that will not be under disturbance in the Spring of 2001. Cooperator will contact and inform the Weed District when the control measures are completed. Vj—-,-,z)— (Signature of Weed Board Cha' . Re resents e) (Signature f�ator) Supervisor, Gallatin Co. Weed District (Date) (Date) WMP-1 coo.mo F. log 71 Aim it IM ru 14 It I 00 4r OPEN ills LO 4,ki� 1 — ---- — ------ PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE OF TITLE DATED: DEUEMBER 14, 2000 27 3 3 9 1 089 0 0 5 5 9 ORDER NO. : 1-65090 TO: C & H ENGINEERING (2) CC: C & H ENGINEERING ATTN: MATT COTTERMAN 2415 WEST MAIN STREET, SUITE 1 BOZEMAN, MT 59715 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY To the County of GALLATIN and the City of BOZEMAN in Montana CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY,a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Missouri, with its principal office in the City of Chicago, Illinois, and duly authorized to insure titles in Montana hereby certifies that from its examination of these public records which impart constructive notice of matters affecting the title to the real estate described in Schedule A hereof, as of the 30TH day of NOVEMBER I 2000at 5 o'clock P.M.,the title to the described real estate was indefeasibly vested in fee simple of record in: Merle H. Adams, Jr. and Deborah K. Adams; Michael E. Tate; Gary F. Lusin, LLC p and Campbell, LLC as their respective interests appear of record. subject only to the objections,liens charges,encumbrances and other matters shown under Schedule B hereof. The maximum liability of the undersigned under this certificate is limited to the sum of$ 200.00 This certificate of title is made in consideration of the payment of the premium by the subdivider of the land and for the use of the County and City above named. Issued by: AMERICAN LAND CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY TITLE COMPANY By: P. 0. Box 396 Bozeman, Montana 59715 r�,• """.. 587 - 5-63 �Ntirf.r ATTEST: Pres' ent Authorized Signatory Thomas A. Cahill Secretary _ i M PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE OF TITLE(MONTANA) Reorder Form No.9113 Schedule A Page 2 Certificate No.: 27-3391-089-00559 Order No.: 1-65090 Being the legal description of the real estate covered by this certificate. The following described parcels of real estate: Tract C of Certificate of Survey No. 1177C, according to the plat thereof, on file and of record in the office of the Clerk and Recorder, Gallatin County, Montana, and located in the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 2 South, Range 6 East, P.M.M., and being further described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast Corner of said Tract C: thence westerly 269°51'30" assumed azimuth from north, 1097.34 feet along the south line of said Tract C: thence northerly 000°06'31" azimuth 212.87 feet along the west line of said Tract C; thence easterly 079°16'14" azimuth 109.65 feet along the west line of said Tract C; thence easterly 079°24'12" azimuth 495.61 feet along said north line; thence easterly 081°25'05" azimuth 180.05 feet along said north line; thence easterly 087°00'37" azimuth 323.73 feet along said north line; thence southerly 179°53'16" azimuth 365.47 feet along the east line of said Tract C, to the point of beginning. SCHEDULE A Preliminary Subdivision Certificate of Title(Montana) Schedule B Page 3 Certificate No.: 27-3391-089-00559 Order No.: 1-65090 Being all of the estates, interests, equities, lawful claims, or demands, defects, or objections whatsoever to title; and all easements, restrictions, liens, charges, taxes (general, special, or inheritance, or assessments of whatever nature), or encumbrances; and all other matters whatsoever affecting said premises, or the estate, right, title or interest of the record owners,which now do exist of record. 1. Except all minerals in or under said land including, but not limited to, metals, oil, gas, coal, stone and mineral rights, mining rights and easement rights or other matters relating thereto, whether expressed or implied. 2. Taxes for the second half of the year 2000 and subsequent years. Taxes for the first half of the year 2000 are paid. Taxes for the second half of the year 2000 are due and payable and will be delinquent if not paid on or before May 31, 2001. Included within the General Taxes are Gallatin Conservation District, Gallatin County Water Quality District and Bozeman Planning Board. (Taxes for the year 2000--first half- $788.94, second half- $782.61. Parcel No. RGH23190) 3. Special assessments levied by the City of Bozeman for 2000-2001 under Receipt No. First Half: District No. 8000 Street Maintenance. Installment - $1,354.19. District No. 8001 Tree Maintenance. Installment- $276,54. First Half Installment is paid. Second Half: District No. 8000 Street Maintenance. Installment - $1,354.18. District No. 8001 Tree Maintenance. Installment- $276.53. (continued) Schedule B Preliminary Subdivision Certificate of Title(Montana) Schedule B Page 4 Certificate No.: 27-3391-089-00559 Order No.: 1-65090 Second Half Installment is due and will be delinquent if not paid on or before May 31, 2001. No liability is assumed for any special assessments, snow removal, sewer assessment or garbage assessment not set forth in the Assessment Books of the City of Bozeman. 4. Matters disclosed on the proposed plat as follows: a. Certificate of Dedication The above described tract of land is to be known and described as NORTHERN ROCKIES SUBDIVISION P.U.D., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana: and the lands included in all roads, avenues, alleys, and parks or public squares shown on said plat are hereby granted and donated to the use of the public forever. The roadways dedicated to the public are accepted for public use, but the County accepts no responsibility for maintaining the same. The owner(s) agree (s) that the County has no obligation to maintain roads hereby dedicated to public use. The undersigned hereby grants unto each and every person or firm, whether public or private, providing or offering to provide telephone, electric power, gas cable television, water or sewer service to the public, the right to the joint use of an easement for the construction, maintenance, repair and removal of their lines and other facilities, in, over, under and across each area designated in the plat as "Utility Easement" to have and to hold forever. b. 10 foot wide utility easements c. 25 foot wide utility and Stormwater Drainage Easement. 5. Right of way for, or any portion falling within Ellis Road running across the above described property as disclosed by Certificate of Survey No. 1177-C. 6. Right of Way Easement to The Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Company, recorded June 6, 1977 in Film 37, page 1830, records of Gallatin County, Montana. 7. No Search has been made for water rights and unpatented mining claims, and liability thereon is excluded from coverage of this certificate. TC/CB END OF SCHEDULE B Schedule B Preliminary Subdivision Certificate of Title(Montana) , frN � NORTHERN ROOKIES PROFESVS ONAL CENTER PRELI'MINAIRY FUD. PLAN IIOIS 3ANIIAR,�R AND w". PARCEL 1 FJ 51e R-,-" rp 10 r151INc\Ik'NS 47 CCI,15700K APAPtrIF 13 cos NO. C-3;�-A r-(PI • L:VE QF lC11TAIJA 2' No (NOT 1 PART-r 7l�.H PPOIEC7) UPJGE E L C,P ED {,DRAM13 To�!v0"":7 " 1—a-A NE C� 6P ;8 -Tr U��'11EVEII -IT) CF E'DZEN46h RC-FEATICIJ CCMFLET Plal 31 C-904 UMQI4 ADDITION 4t ZONED PLI 5/3'Rk'n". '111 o'I 1-1 OF No 9' ^JIII ' - - - LOT-5'-, FT 4102017 AM #-7CP -L"El LOT 3 F.F.CAV-41111A f1V ao� Fr 41 ip 0.11ILD JIM F.F. ELh-1 ------------------ L (41 A bo-u%TJ 0';—. L j•%, P4 7 IF Q0 * OPENS N .rim SPAICk' LOT 7 it I '.-"a --nrm- A,` 1 O °�tNAS, f Z� rRAtf 1111,AUX(6o 3� M85 \ ------- 4411y 7"Il LOT lu BQ I of f ALM4 air !RF7 W171 F 104� III, F.1—.JV71'.Q 7&41 TFT yI .1 'X -V ilk 21, DEACONESS HUSPITIL JOI u�G reEw OPTIC LINES "T, _Z 88 :1F SOZEMAN ;-IMITS s -1 -- —< 1�1. ONED A-S UNDEVELOPED 1 1/2'1 hum.COD(PI-L') ZONED R--" AREA TABULATION AREA OF BUILDINGS; 81451,2 50, FT, 1371 ACRE, AREA OF PAVE D/CQI`ICRETE SURFACES: 16102972 5C, FT 3,-,- ARE.A OF OPEN SPACE: 92535.78 SQ Fr. 2.1_4 ACRES TOTAL AREA: 335.017 SO FT 76909 ACRES LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARKING TABULATION ELLIS STREET CA FUTURE T TO BE CON11RUCTED H 7PdC1 C, CERTIFICATE OF SURVE, NO 1177C RELII-AS FARMING SPACES 316 RAV SE 1/4, SW1/4. SECTICrI 8, 1. ?1, p 5 E A t,:OICAPPED PARKING IPACE3 5 P.M M M-, GALLAIIN CCIJNI". WONTANA CCh PAC' PARKING SPACES 79 lay 403 73 IDPE 3%SLOPE I BENCHMARK ALF -------j 9DE%Tg- • 7DP OF NORTH S�TCPbl DRAIN t. LEGEND Y BITUMINOUS SURFACE L STRIP TOPSOJI 10 5U13-GRA01 ELEVATION ELEVATION = 4557 60 FEET (CITY OF 3OZRIAN DAT�kl� COMPACTED 10 97%MARS14ALL OUTSDE Of EXISTING CR.i4EL RoaD SURFACE Scale In Fret PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE 6"OF 1 1;2-MINUS CRUSHED 41�� BASE COARSE COMPACTED moym 12 OWNER PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER LINE 10 95%DF AAWO 7-99 1 INTEGRAL CURB AND CUTTER AS PER C QLB'SPEC 02528 AND C.0,8.STD.DV�C.#025,18-1 PROPOSED WATER LINE INSTALL 9'OF 6'MINUS PIT RLIN MATERIAL Ofth ,Vetere - SIDEWALK AS PER C0.8 STD, 402529-1C AND#1]2529 CAMPBELL iLUON. -,L.C PROPOSED HYDRANT COMPACTED 1 UBGRADE(INSTALL CIEDIE'TILE 3 FERTILIZOAG AND SELCINC AS PER GOB SPEC 02223 E 3499 BPID:;ER C4jY0N ROAD AS REO'D 91 ENGIN ER) (TOPSCILINC&SEEDING ON CUT l,-FILL AREAS IN -tal; I F�01 907EKIAN. Nil 5�713 PROPERI(SIDE OF SIDEIAALK) (75 1) PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION 4 CEOTF.(I)Lt FABRIC WILL BE I�ED DEPPIDING CrI SITE�LXILNTION�, - PRAINAGE DIRE!, AS REO'D BY ENGINEER(LIGIHTWEIGHT NON-WOWN GE ARCHITECT PROPOSED STORM DRAIN FABRIC CONTECO C-45) ��TYPICAL STREET SECTIONS (C�C um d�JMGMMMWG Y.ILIS$ ARUHIIECIS. P.0 13 111 S �;O PARKING'PARKING' ANYTIME"E" SION smi; JNC. -1] 5- TRACT AVENUE PER C,LI.9, STD D',k, NO. 09810-1 SCALE:NIS .—e—.'i- BOZEMAN, N17 59715 SO :ALE a STOP STOP SIGN N 4 wv,!t 1161A sawl. 13,113 tl% LATE PREPARED: 12/15/00 48tO 4040 4111 Jero wr 1820 ----------- DT'I -&V'f Vu 6 -11,60 S-,V-35pvc S p!Fqpq pq-1 tr or a- _W er 4.ulw 3_j pvc ss•0 A 95j.1 L"L A-1 0-�-r M., "4 9 ft'TO rif TO MA04 C,AWL ol, •c-co 1�co 2 GG 4..Xl 5,00 B-OG 84W )roo 114M "SEWER MAIN EXTENSION/STREET PROFILE '2'00 's.co 1600 7,00 184 Ba m 20,011 �Cq HOR170WIL IND on, PARCEL ZolNED ap PARCEL 2 W 'All Pl 0-NED EP 'P ZONED If WEDNI sp A love Kk Seale In FM 60 Q 60 M0 ELL AS 87??EET A.\ C-t-1� -----2FV-U STREEr APROVEWENTS f Fo.f 0 00 2 21 it ` X. C*17Y=)WMG, INC. ZONED A-% • ZWt—UN-111 S.tl 1 UIM...Uld... W711 15 X.101!li�l 1-4 111 w-Im--tt-,g Y qwbxt k!I w •Y;tom :.?ram-7n �.'F,STD iy��" .1$'a n''��.y',7C•'•r�M 'S,.L.."'�-G,_-c>rr.k' c y^. +. .`9i•� ;$...�Y .r- S. »,.•+•....ice - - _ 'sc;�.#}:: � 1,'.6 &'. :6N+°%..�'�i Valy °' "" ":is"- 51'-i'S^� ,' y ti.- rc,-__r•�s.,.. .t-,.i•. -_�: .. •R_.<_ {d�� .:•4-• Y_tr 1• ,.L, .It'lr "S0^! k •+i„'Q`l,+• �� cf ".�.' - - •ty ?3 it i i• t. r . ' - 1� n - l R. 4 `4� Y-.t. 1' i v-1 :C [- K t,_ .r �L' s'h I: i n _ •�. •Inv.. �: .i�. .�I� W � ��-.�. � 4. � :-a-• I # ix n �� a-vL rt_. ;.3-'.elf' +��¢� at1'�.J`�P. c.'r`'�, ..,F!. ti?f:.-" •k- r.` .�:. '. ^.'.�J��ta.-= _�•. �;•,:ar F,_. �t•t, .� Y::�. Kai. t.- - ^ � -f, 6"�?+' •Y' �'dr- 7 Y N.• -'a �;,�•+'s,,,.,,t, � r ,�':.y� .r� '#:;r•t� y r.., 5 �:. at d .1 •a :� C.� '�,' arc .a � 'k'r�„i=q: .•c �+3 ��.,n•„- ,•.yFi:�,nit. 1ta :Ht.-. ' ay - 57"'•��'•' `r. •a"•fi- �'•. ,}n�{ ,� r �; r- 'c `' 3- .`5 •?r. 7• .++�.<: e - <:,z._i�+,'.'h ��6.:vi-+is�a•�e�'..r`.:�n:ir.�.V.d.�� ;a'vda:Fs�. u. 73.i�.+�ti�r�. ��L��''"��'"b -.. .•r--.� - - _ .•.. s= t _ ti is �.i 'L :. k'•t':31�_ ..r -p.. - --r �••� --.tea.,,_n ...fm+ - S }y a'' -Sn .-. >w.•yf _ ->x - -t`tr�.- .fvr .�C+.:.'e-'.^CcT�';:•,�.. a:. �?�z� ,.r ors �• �� ^•F a... �iyc '�r.�� rx'. Ake „•Y!' '�'S+y"+'' a �t;la�,`y�M. .1. .f�" �lR, i� �v. ._� .�� .��-.Ipc�t •• . ��-i _•r- w,.y.• 1.- , • • i� 1 • y�am} ��B7�Yalu��OwRlsl! � ■ .� �: /� � ��'• � +F.R(: • y.:� .,asv 'o'' - - -- �final � i i • rt� �pf�.Cl1'fa .p• sP„•. � ..'� ��nld �+� �Mi� `�'-� � �� • ra r_ rev .., � ! wt� _ r ouw� .°�QI `t� i 4® �, -�-- d,$ :' • �- _ �^?: _•� ri mil. � '�• � - �!sY�r� ��' � •� __ o�K man OEM ji M MAW Ayer',_�_ '� .�.�'� $� ��- c • � ��y � yC -1 —`��5 ®� �� ,�� rr •�I'�1�: '�� 'E'- ■+ � •r� � �• Cr � t�� • A� �•it � ■ � �'�177. _s� � pf ��: .:� �_..�-,�4.S�ir��':-"� — � ��„ u�i �� ra��ss 1�•-i� � s�accr* :i ~: nary j, ?'n'� ■ y ! /r, _ ' ""__ a r �._ - '� ■u�-.� .:� _ �`O tea.. ®�'■ Li, ! rd '+ a II� ■ �It ' ,•�-tir�� ti:..�.. c'' �' ,'�i�A ,.''..'�,... Y�: �f � ,can �� _i of�' .> "�_ 1 i>;Ui+ .s _ ;r ��Tv:' - Yam'• �� ;�.• _ :�� ,3� r - M � .: ti as�m � `` � �� • -�;a 'J .'�' ea� � ..., ,:iZ'.'- Y'�n� try' {, ��I � ',Ftii-�:�+. � .Cllf a` �.:■'� ,Y� �rc,sy°'� �� (��1� '�1�c?; _ Ifl■! ��,j'` � Y` � `` 1 �� +�7y<�� ■�i 17 � .•a1E�o+.ii: dC&�lN.i`�,i a7 n:.�F - � _ �; � � ' 1 lsuRi � � .� !t, � .A '� i■-.•""�-•-�_� � ■ � c�;.ra' � •;,' l.■e .�"sl �.'.'"�.� �•�,,� `'��ora� �� , ice:r�'`� ..r£�� c _ '.� � �� ii �_ � �r * 4 �` �;� .■`.�� Q�- rates ■ _a" � -��'�� jr�~g � ��_• � r� �® .�I _ - -- .>-x r,pep y i TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Highland Boulevard and Ellis Street BOZEMAN, MONTANA PREPARED FOR C&H Engineering & Surveying, Inc. PREPARED BY �.�C N TA ROBERT R. MARVIN & ASSOCIATES 36r.VINLU 1001 S. 24m Street West#111 ,� . qEc �o •'2;: Billings, MT 59102 •••••'��,�' NA L .•, December, 2000 Professional Tragic Operations Engineer#259 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 SITE LOCATION & DESCRIPTION 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS Streets 3 Traffic Volumes 5 Traffic Operations 7 Speeds 8 TRIP GENERATION 8 TRIP DISTRIBUTION 10 TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 11 TRAFFIC IMPACTS Traffic Volumes 13 Capacity Impacts 15 Safety 18 Pedestrians 18 ACCESS & INTERNAL CIRCULATION 18 IMPACT MITIGATION & RECOMMENDATIONS 20 APPENDIX"A"Traffic Volumes 22 APPENDIX"B" Capacity calculations 23 APPENDIX"C" Speed Study 24 APPENDIX"D"Turn Lane Warrants 25 LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1. Site Location Map 2 Figure 2. Existing ADT& Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes 6 Figure 3. Primary Trip Distribution 12 Figure 4. Site Traffic Assignment 14 Figure 5. Existing Plus Site Traffic 16 Figure 6. Off-Site Capacity Impacts 17 Figure 7. Peak Hour Traffic At Site Accesses 19 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Trip Generation Northern Rockies Professional Center 8 Table 2. Trip Mode, Trip Type& Net Vehicular Trips 10 Northern Rockies Professional Center Traffic Impact Study INTRODUCTION This report summarizes existing conditions,trip generation characteristics,trip distribution,traffic assignment, and impact analysis within the structure of a traffic accessibility study. The study was completed for a proposed development to be located in the southeast comer of Highland Boulevard and Ellis Street in Bozeman,Montana(see Figure 1). The study was prepared for C&H Engineering,who is preparing the P.U.D. documents and site plan for the developers. The property is known as the Northern Rockies Professional Center P.U.D. This development is Tract C.,C.of S. 1177C, located in the SE 1/4, SW 1/4, of Sec.8,T.2 S., R.6E of P.M.M., Gallatin County, Montana. Because of local laws and ordinances pertaining to subdivision developments with potential for traffic impacts on the surrounding street system,a traffic accessibility study is required prior to site plan approval, and building permit approvals. Marvin & Associates was retained by C&H Engineering to provide a traffic impact study for the proposed development. Having reviewed the proposed development plan,Marvin&Associates completed an extensive analysis of existing conditions; trip generation and traffic assignment; capacity and safety impacts; and mitigation measures. All of those efforts are summarized within this report. The primary purpose of this study is to address specific impacts of the new development with regard to street system access and circulation,and to provide mitigating measures to reduce or eliminate identifiable impacts. In addition, the study provides a specific evaluation of planned street system changes and redirection of existing traffic created by those plans. Study methodology and analysis procedures within this study employ the latest technology and nationally accepted standards in the area of site development and transportation impact assessment. Recommendations made within this report are based on accepted standards and the professional judgement of the author, with consideration of the traveling public's interests as a primary objective. Page 1 F Md�n St Qj rE. Qabcock UE.Olive y I \`J E. Curti tid9 9 d� N 1 � ° /nte�Sra�e 90 l Ellis St. � All: HOSPITAL Northern Rockies Professional Center Figure 1. Site Location Map Page 2 SITE LOCATION & DESCRIPTION The proposed development would be located in the southeast comer of an intersection involving an arterial street(Highland Boulevard)and a local street(Ellis Street)which connects to another arterial Street(Haggerty Lane). The existing property is currently vacant with no existing structures. The proposed development would contain 6 lots with building pads ranging in size from 7600 to 28200 square feet. The buildings within this development will be medical offices, which will compliment Bozeman Deaconess Hospital (southwest of the site) operations. Within the subdivision, a circulation road which would serve all parking lots for each building would be accessed by two intersections with Ellis Street. The internal circulation road and all parking lots would be channelized with curb &gutter and landscaping. Access to the existing street system would be provided on Ellis Street at two locations. The western approach would be located approximately 500 feet east of the Highland Boulevard intersection. The eastern approach would be located approximately 600'east of the west approach and approximately 120' west of the eastern property line. EXISTING CONDITIONS Streets Adjacent and potentially impacted public streets are: Ellis Street, Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane. Streets and intersections which are not adjacent to the site, but which could experience some degree of MY, impact are: Highland and Main, Haggerty & Ellis, and Haggerty and Main. Ellis Street is local street with variable width and surfacing. At its intersection with Highland (photo right), it has a paved width of approximately 28 feet. The pavement only extends for a distance of Page 3 approximately 150 feet where it becomes an unimproved dirt road. Within the dirt road section, it has steep grades,sharp curves,and a rutted surface. Ellis also extends west of the Highland intersection. The western section of Ellis is a 28' wide paved streets and serves as one of several accesses to Bozeman Deaconess Hospital. Ellis Street is stop controlled at its intersection with Highland Boulevard. At the Haggerty Lane end of Ellis (photo left), Ellis becomes a 36' wide paved street with curb &gutter on both sides. An apartment complex is located near the intersection of Haggerty and Ellis and it is the only property along Ellis Street that is currently developed. The undeveloped roadway portion of Ellis extends for a distance of approximately 1500 feet. Highland Boulevard is a north-south arterial street which has two travel lanes within a 28'wide(bc-bc) curbed street section(photo right). It has a 10'wide paved bicycle path on the west side. Highland Boulevard extends from Main Street on the North, to a point south of Kagy Boulevard, a distance of approximately 2.1 miles. It serves as the primary access to Bozeman Deaconess Hospital which is located southwest of the planned development. Highland Boulevard was apparently constructed at half of it future width,since it is apparent that the roadway is not centered within the street right-of-way. It is not known whether the bicycle path is a temporary facility which will be incorporated into a future roadway expansion or if some other type of facility will be constructed Page 4 in the future. Highland Boulevard widens south of the Ellis intersection to provide turns lanes into the main hospital entrance. Haggerty Lane is an arterial roadway which serves as primary access to subdivisions southeast of Bozeman. It has a continuity of approximately 1 mile and is half urban and half rural in nature. Near its intersection with Main Street, it is 44'wide with curb&gutter on each side. At it intersection with Ellis Street(photo left), it is 28'wide with no curb&gutter. Ellis is stop controlled at Haggerty and site distance along Haggerty at the intersection is good. Traffic Volumes Detailed traffic counts were taken on all area streets in early November of 2000. Hourly count summaries can be found in Appendix"A"of this report. Turning movement counts were taken at four intersections during the peak AM and PM hours, between 7:00 and 8:00 a.m. and between 4:30 and 5:30 p.m. on November 2 &3, 2000. Figure 2.illustrates these counts along with factored Average Daily Traffic(ADT)calculated from peak hour volumes and automatic recording counts. There were no significant pedestrian movements at any of these intersections,during the counting periods. Only 3 bicyclists and pedestrians used the path at Ellis along Highland during the peak a.m.and p.m.counting periods. Trucks were approximately 3%of ADT on Highland, 1%of ADT on Haggerty, 3%of ADT on Main, and 0%of ADT on Ellis. The most significant feature of traffic volumes illustrated in Figure 2 is the directional split on Highland Boulevard. During the peak p.m. hour, 60% of the traffic is northbound and 40% is southbound. In the a.m. peak hour the directional split is opposite in direction with a 39/61%split. Page 5 0 3 1 7-8 AMA 0 2 4 30-5:00 PM 0 7-8 AM 4:30-5:00 PM 215— 312 552 491 214— 366 575— 475 127�� f— 171 163--.,, f— 138 90 —` /--- 40 154— �� 38 96 1t � 18f2� 1 � 1 � 0 1 134 43 17400 4,Maid St aj E. Babcock t.P200 H o� 7�00 � E. Olive 3 4S 00 E.Curti y°'9 9 L O s 0 ? O 47t, \—ADT I'7YP) ate 90 Q30 ,900 Ellis St. 20 1700 � : 00 30 0 69 2 HOSPITAL 10 � 2 7-8 AM 0 7-8 AMA-— 0 5 �� 4 175 4 P 256 37 1 I2 52 �- 3 4:30-5:00 PM 1 4 30-5:00 PM 0 2 r- 0 1 rV ry 6 f 2 402 Figure 2. Existing ADT & Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes Page 6 Traffic Operations Traffic operations on the surrounding street system during peak hour conditions vary by location. The only intersections that experience noticeable delay is the intersection of Main and Highland and the intersection of Main and Haggerty. The northbound lane on Highland at Main occasionally develops vehicle queues that are 15 to 20 vehicles long. These queues disperse rather quickly and do not occur throughout the entire peak p.m. hour. That approach currently operates at level of service (LOS) "C"during the peak a.m. and p.m. hours. The northbound approach on Haggerty at Main suffers from extensive delay on the left turn movement. Sufficient roadway width exists so that right turn traffic is not delayed by the left turn movement. Existing capacity calculations (see Appendix B) indicate that the northbound left turn movement operates at LOS"D" in the a.m. and LOS"F" in the p.m. Capacity calculations using the HCM procedure for two lane highways,which is not entirely applicable to urban street sections, indicate that Highland Boulevard currently operates at LOS "D". However, observations of actual conditions would classify the LOS higher than "D" because there are very few approaches and intersections along its length. Traffic appears to flow at reasonable rates of speed between intersections. Therefore,intersection capacity actually controls this street's level of service. Left turn movements on Highland at the intersection of Ellis and Highland are calculated at LOS A. The most striking operational character of Highland Boulevard is the fact that the street section provides absolutely no room for stalled or emergency vehicles. Since this is the main access to the Hospital, it would appear that 10' shoulders should be made available to accommodate the most basic concepts of incident management. One incident was observed, during the short data collection period, which involved a stalled truck. Long queues formed in both lanes and the driver had to control traffic until help arrived. From the conditions noted, it appears that very serious traffic operation issues could be related to the current typical street section on Highland Boulevard. Page 7 Speeds Appendix C contains a spot speed summary conducted for northbound and southbound traffic,north of the Ellis Street intersection of Highland Boulevard. This study indicates that 85t'percentile speeds are 41 mph in both directions during free flow operations (off-peak hours). TRIP GENERATION Table 1. presents trip generation estimates for the Northern Rockies Professional Center with the land use assumed to be Medical and Dental Office Buildings, ITE Code 720.Trip generation rates were taken from the ITE Trip Generation Report, Sixth Edition. Rates and total trips are shown for the average weekday and for peak a.m. and p.m. hours. Table 1. Trip Generation -Northern Rockies Professional Center ITE Code 720 - Medical-Dental Office Building Generation Units = 1000 Square Feet Number of Units = 85.7 Average Weekday Rate = T=40.892(X)-214.970 Peak AM Hour Rate = 2.43 80% Enter Peak PM Hour Rate = Ln(T)=0.921Ln(X)+1.476 27% Enter Number of Trips: Enter Exit Total Average Weekday= 1644 1644 3288 Peak PM Hour= 56 152 208 Peak AM Hour= 211 53 264 The total projected average weekday trips (AWT) of 3288 appears to be high compared to existing ADT volumes of 9700 on Highland Boulevard. However,not all of these trips will be vehicular trips nor will all of the trips result in new traffic on the street system. Thus, it is important to know the type of trips to properly evaluate traffic impacts. At this point,it can be assumed that transit would not play a substantial role in modal trip exchange. Therefore,minimal trips could be attributed to that mode. Some percentage of trips could also be assigned to pedestrians and bikes. This number would probably not be significant during winter months, but could be during summer months. For purposes of analysis, a conservative estimate of approximately 2% of all trips generated was used to account for transit, pedestrians and bike modes. Page 8 Since this development would incorporate six different buildings with some diverse and complementary businesses, trip interchange between businesses will likely occur. It is known that developments which are built adjacent to complimentary facilities, such as those found in shopping centers and office parks, tend to capture trips from and to adjacent developments. These trips are part of the total trip generation number, but do not involve trips with origins or destinations external to the site. They are known as"Internal Capture Trips" (ICT). The ITE Trip Generation report contains information used to estimate ICT. The Colorado-Wyoming section of ITE has completed some studies of these factors and have developed some guidelines. A moderate degree of internal trip exchange could be projected forthis subdivision with approximately 10%of all trips being Internal Capture Trips. There are also three classifications of trip types related to use of the street system: 1) Primary purpose trips are trips for which the development is a primary destination from any particular origin. 2) Diverted linked trips are trips made to the development as a secondary destination and are diverted from a path between an origin and a primary destination. 3)Passerby trips are also trips made to a development as a secondary destination, but the primary trip path is on the adjacent street system, ie. stop on the way home from work. The ITE Trip Generation report provides methods of estimating passerby trips for various facilities. In most cases involving medical offices, passerby trips would be very minimal. In this case, the location of the hospital with respect to the site would tend to increase passerby traffic numbers. Also,this site is located on a commuter route with housing developments on one end and commercial developments on the other. This would add to potential passerby trips. It was estimated that approximately 5%of the trips would be passerby trips,even though the potential for higher proportions exists. Table 3., on the following page, is a summary of the various trip types that can be expected with this development. The net number of vehicular trips at the site access points is equal total trip generation less transit/pedestrian trips and internal capture trips. The number of new vehicular trips using the existing street system would be all of the primary and diverted linked trips or net vehicular trips less the number of passerby trips. Thus, on the average weekday, there would be approximately 2750 more vehicles on the surrounding street system and during the peak PM and AM hours there would be 220 and 173 more vehicles respectively. Page 9 Table 2. Trip Mode, Classification & Net Trips Peak AM Hour: Peak PM Hour: Completed Building Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Gross Number of Trips 211 53 264 56 152 208 Ped &Transit(2%) 4 1 5 1 3 4 Net Vehicular Trips 207 52 259 55 149 204 Internal Capture Trips 21 5 26 6 15 21 Net Vehicles At Access 186 47 233 49 134 183 Passerby Trips 10 3 13 3 7 10 Net No. of New Vehicles 176 44 220 46 127 173 TRIP DISTRIBUTION There are various methods of determining the directional distribution of trips to and from site developments, For large and complex developments within the middle of a large urbanized area,the task is best accomplished by creating a computerized transportation model of the urban street system and including the proposed development changes. Trip distribution for moderate sized developments may be completed by manipulation of data provided by a current transportation plan. Smaller developments or developments on the fringe of a small urban area can be easily handled by using existing traffic volumes on adjacent streets or by an area of influence method, or both. In this case, a transportation planning model was developed for the 1990 Transportation Plan and 1993 plan update. In 1995, Marvin & Associates modified the model for the Durston Road Corridor Study to reflect accelerated growth being experienced in Bozeman. Additional modifications and specific details within the subject development area were added to the year 2016 QRS II model for purposes of analyzing trip distribution and projecting future street system volumes. Translation of subdivision trips to employment data was necessary within the modified model. In addition, the model parameters and path tree building functions Page 10 assigns traffic to the street system in a manner that would be difficult to illustrate sufficiently for an accessibility E r, study. Therefore,the model results were extracted in terms of trip distribution to and from the subdivision. With --1 this information, manual traffic assignments were completed, which provides a better level of detail for accessibility analysis. Figure 3., on the following page, is a graphic summary of directional trip distribution extracted from the traffic model for primary trips. Since the major population centers are south and northwest of the proposed development, the model tended to load primary trips to and from those directions, with 52% north and 43% south. The model indicated a split in traffic at Main Street with about the same number accessing northwest regions of Bozeman from west Main Street as those utilizing 1-90. Travel time calculations were made for two alternate routes that could be used from Main Street. It was determined that the travel time to and from the Main Street Haggerty intersection to the site is almost exactly equal. Therefore,a split in the 27%primary trips utilizing the 1-90 corridor was made at that juncture. Passerby traffic distribution is based on the percentage of total traffic entering the surrounding street system during the peak a.m. and p.m, hours. In the morning the highest percentage entering the site would be 61% in the southbound direction and in the evening the highest would be 60% in the northbound direction. TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Assignment of site traffic to the street system and site access points is dependent upon several factors. Two of them are, directional distribution and operational site conditions. Directional distribution was discussed in the previous section. These proportions are used to provide traffic access demand which represent traffic movements to and from the site which would occur if street operations and internal site circulation had no effect on the direction of arrival or departure other than the access point used. Traffic distribution is further refined by calculating potential travel times within the sites and at ingress and egress points. The combined calculations of demand and least time accessibility are used to estimate the optimum traffic volumes at each access point. Page 11 25% E.Babcock Q L \�\70� � E. Olive O 0 / a y E. Curti yd� 9 o � ! L \38% 14% o /n�erState 90 23% �� l Ellis St. � 77% 90Y0 5% 34% HOSPITAL �\Ja. Figure 3. Primary Trip Distribution Page 12 Figure 4., on the following page, represents the assignment of vehicular site traffic volumes on the existing street system. Also indicated on this figure,are percentages that this traffic is of existing ADT. As an example, Highland Boulevard,north of Main would experience an additionall045 vehicles during the average weekday. This is approximately 11% of current ADT calculated for this section of street. It is highly unlikely that 1045 vehicles would be added to this street immediately. By the time this development is complete and fully occupied, it is likely that the background traffic on Highland would have increased by 5 to 10%and the actual impact of 1045 vehicles would be less than 11 percent. Therefore, the percentage numbers shown in Figure 4. only serve to illustrate relative volume differences. Figure 4., also presents the results of traffic assignment analysis for the peak a.m. and p.m. hours. These volumes were calculated by applying primary and passerby trips distributions to full development vehicular trip generation. Proportional trip generation of each lot and least travel time for each access to and from each of the site lots were used to assign traffic to each possible turning movement. The negative numbers indicated in Figure 4., represents the result of passerby traffic redirection. TRAFFIC IMPACTS Traffic Volumes Impact for site development can be found simply by determining the change in traffic volumes expected. Site traffic assignments indicate what volume of traffic could potentially be added to the street system during the average weekday (AWT)and at the peak PM hour. The percent change in AWT only provides a general level of change and is used to identify locations where impacts could be significant. Determination of volume changes during peak traffic flow periods provides specific information on the type of impacts that could potentially occur. In almost all cases, it is very difficult to determine ADT on any section of street to within 10% accuracy. Because of that fact, impact analysis on street with relative percentage increases less than 10% are not normally considered critical. The percentages indicated on Figure 4., indicate that Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane would both experience increases slightly greater than 10%. Ellis Street,which currently carries less than 200 ADT, would experience an increase many times that of its current level. Page 13 AM PM AM PM 6 24 12 — 6 24 12 - 6 0 -� �� 24 0 �- 6 11 6 32 12 p 6 0 19 685 4% F Main St E. Babcock I - E. OiivuCL 3 U ` •3 8 OlB E. Curti /Y. 9 d I III J � 8 o f lote�state 90 15 ?4s, Ave. Weekday Site Traffic Ellis St. 211 140[8%] : w % of Existing ADT _L 72 D o HOSPITAL 19 AM 8 -- AM 2 �— 16 63 a d -3 PEAK HOUR SITE TRAFFIC j 19 °� � of AM PM L 51 PM Enter 186 49 2 ---_ PM 6 Exit 47 134 fir— 45 18 -2 Figure 4. Site Traffic Assignment Page 14 Figure 5.,illustrates the assignment of full development site traffic to the surrounding street system and relative volumes that would result if the development existed today. None of these volumes or conditions will probably occur due to the dynamics of background traffic growth and other unknown development schedules. Capacity Impacts Appendix B contains capacity calculations for existing conditions along with existing plus site traffic. Figure 6.,on the page following,presents a summary of capacity calculation in terms of level of service(LOS)for two different conditions: existing and existing plus site traffic. Level of service(LOS)designations (A thru F) are shown for critical movements at five intersections and access points. The following narratives explain the capacity impacts at each intersection. It was determined that the only intersection which would be impacted by the added site traffic would be the intersection of Ellis Street and Highland Boulevard. Those impacts would occur in the peak p.m. hour period and they would occur on the Ellis Street eastbound approaches. The eastbound movements would go from LOS"A"to LOS"C". Even though the amount of site added traffic on that approach is minimal, added traffic on other legs of the intersection would cause enough delay for eastbound traffic that the LOS would be reduced. Capacity calculations on Highland Boulevard using the HCM"Two Lane Highway"method,which is not entirely appropriate for this situation,indicate that the LOS would drop from"D"to"E". Since existing capacity was only 32 vehicles away from LOS "E", this change is somewhat misleading. As stated earlier, the capacity of Highland is totally dependent upon the capacity of its intersections. Therefore,capacity impacts on Highland are relatively insignificant. Page 15 J 0 J 3 l 1 7-8 AMA 0 2 4 30-5:00 PM 0 7-8 AM 4:30-5:00 PM 215-- f— 312 552 — 491 Y20 390 587— 481 171 fir— 195 175-� r- 90 6411 r ) 144 } � 154 /- 44 107 I 95 2501 220 0 1 117 27 134 62 18100 Sr ai E.Babcock � 500 Q \ 9) E. Olive \\ / a h / v F� 49 00 E. Curti 61 9 o 1 �ADT (TYp) /nte`SrOre 9 0 Ellis St. 260 - 1850 At '0 26 0 69 � 74 HOSPITAL 10 --� �— 21 17 10 7-8 AM_ ` 7-8 AM 5 —` r— 30 lb 1t � 10.1a' 1so 2 85 a 255 I1 52 4 30-5:00 PM J4 4:30-5:00 PM 25- 6 2 � �� 45 1t � 6 20 400 Figure 5. Existing Plus Site Traffic Page 16 C/ _.,,._ B® aMPM C© C PM �—C C �—AO �Be C© _ �-C8t t D A © @ 0 F Main st Qi E. Babcock Q tN a E. Olive 3 C H U E. Curti yd9 o /nre�s�at`g 90 Ellis St. A AM O AM HOSPITAL B —Existing LOS ©B---< B® ~A ®—LOS wc/Site Traffic A A a 0\Ja. O A A PM A ® PM Figure 6. Of-site Capacity Impacts Page 17 Safety It has been determined that no substantial impacts to efficiency of the existing street system would be related to the site development. However, some degree of impacts may be associated with traffic safety. Sight distance was checked at the Ellis and Highland Boulevard intersection along with sight distance at the Ellis Street approaches. It was determined that adequate intersection sight distance exists. AASHTO and MDT guidelines were checked to determine if auxiliary turn lanes are warranted for any of the intersections and approaches. Appendix D contains both right and left turn nomography used in the warrant procedure. From this reference material, it was determined that the additional southbound left turn movements on Highland at Ellis would require an additional left turn lane. A right turn lane for northbound traffic would not be triggered by this development, but may be warranted as background traffic grows in the future. Pedestrians From traffic counts and observations, pedestrian demand is not high during the winter months. It is expected that the proximity of the bike/pedestrian path will encourage pedestrian access to the site. A crossing at Ellis should be noted as a concern, but study data is unable to define the exact demand and what level of control is required. It may be necessary to measure demand after development has begun and determine if that demand is sufficient to justify a formal pedestrian crosswalk. ACCESS& INTERNAL CIRCULATION Figure 7., on the following page, is a summary of existing plus site traffic at the two ste approaches for peak a.m. and p.m. hours. Capacity calculations ( Appendix B) indicate that both of these approaches would operate at LOS "A"during both peak hours. Both intersections will operate efficiently with single approach lanes and no vehicle storage problems at the intersections would be encountered. Since both of these approaches would have traffic volumes at the same level as Ellis Street traffic, it is recommended that stop signs be installed to reinforce the right of way rules. Page 18 s � — Ln 00 Ln L1n Ily I■ !! 0 s �" LnIL —_ M con !t ! Zo _ H y V V p_� a aa W O< O N N wii' T y � V malty ! J� i V N IT a = Ln �_co I 0 IL to a f—N Ln IL C1 L\ lD N o1 J e�• Im VTFFFUTTFFFFFFL .� un n r0I'Ih .1®�RA UM , _ s f N j n J a PM8 Puo146IH Page 19 Circulation within the site is provided by an internal roadway with a proposed median. Because of unique problems that can occur with medians, the following design recommendations are made: • Medians within an approach to a public street should be setback behind the crosswalk and marked crosswalks should be carried across the approach. The minimum face-of-curb to face-of-curb width for both entering and exiting lanes should be 18 feet to avoid blockage by stalled vehicles or maintenance equipment. • As with medians at the intersection approaches,a minimum width of 18 feet is required to allow room for circulation around maintenance or stalled vehicles in the single lanes. • Medians within the site should be designed so that moving vans can turn into and out of individual approaches, this requires geometric layout with SU turning radius templates. • Medians at intersections should not have landscaping taller than 30 inches to protect critical line of sight. • "Keep Right" signs on the end of median islands and turn restriction signs are needed is some circumstances. IMPACT MITIGATION & RECOMMENDATIONS Development of this property as proposed would generate a substantial volume of traffic. The most significant impacts would be on Ellis Street adjacent to the site. C&H Surveying and Engineering has submitted a plan to reconstruct Ellis Street east of Highland Boulevard along the development's property boundary. The new street section will provide approximately 30 feet of paving within a future 37'(bc-bc)curbed street section. This would mitigate potential impacts on Ellis at the access points. Some consideration should be given to transitions and connections to the existing roadway on the east end of Ellis Street during design review, to ensure that the transition is safe. Page 20 This study also determined that a left turn lane would be needed for anticipated southbound traffic volumes on Highland Boulevard, at the Ellis Street intersection,to mitigate potential rear-end and left-turn accidents. The study also determined that the existing width of Highland Boulevard presents potential safety and efficiency problems with regard to incident management. Observed capacity of the street sections appears to be acceptable except when incidents block a lane. Therefore,it is believed that Highland Boulevard should have been constructed as a multi-lane facility from Main Street to the Hospital. Widening near the intersection for the left turn lane will improve the safety of the Ellis intersection,but will not alleviate the potential problems that were built into the original roadway. It is recommended that the City of Bozeman consider implementing the phase 2 construction plan as soon as possible. If such a task is not possible, it is recommended that the southbound left turn lane be implemented prior to full development of the site plan. Page 21 APPENDIX "A" TRAFFIC VOLUMES Page 22 HAGGERETY LANE S OF MAIN NORTHBOUND Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 3 3 0.2% 2 1 1 0.1% 3 3 3 0.2% 4 4 4 0.2% 5 9 9 0.5% 6 50 50 2.6% 7 138 138 7.1% 8 126 126 6.5% 9 125 125 6.5% 10 123 123 6.4% 11 153 153 7.9% 12 169 169 8.7% 13 144 144 7.4% 14 134 134 6.9% 15 121 121 6.3% 16 139 139 7.2% 17 175 175 9.0% 18 132 132 6.8% 19 75 75 3.9% 20 46 46 2.4% 21 32 32 1.7% 22 15 15 0.8% 23 15 15 0.8% 24 3 3 0.2% Total 753 1182 1935 100% GRAPH 14% r- 13% 12% 11% 10% IO 9% 0 6% ■ 4-+ 7% Weekday 6% U 5% ' L 4% IZ 3% 2% 1% 0% ' Hours of the Day HAGGERETY LANE S OF MAIN SOUTHBOUND Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 7 7 0.3% 2 2 2 0.1% 3 1 1 0.0% 4 1 1 0.0% 5 43 43 2.1% 6 36 36 1.8% 7 130 130 6.4% 8 167 167 8.2% 9 103 103 5.1% 10 104 104 5.1% 11 116 116 5.7% 12 152 152 7.5% 13 157 157 7.7% 14 150 150 7.4% 15 144 144 7.1% 16 165 165 8.1% 17 206 206 10.1% 18 121 121 5.9% 19 64 64 3.1% 20 74 74 3.6% 21 36 36 1.8% 22 34 34 1.7% 23 16 16 0.8% 24 7 7 0.3% Total 867 1169 2036 100% GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% 0 10% 9% O 8% 7% ■ C 6% Weekday V 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% -LAh Hours of the Day HAGGERETY LANE S OF MAIN NB & SB Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 10 10 0.3% 2 3 3 0.1% 3 4 4 0.1% 4 5 5 0.1% 5 52 52 1.3% 6 86 86 2.2% 7 268 268 6.7% 8 293 293 7.4% 9 228 228 5.7% 10 227 227 5.7% 11 269 269 6.8% 12 321 321 8.1% 13 301 301 7.6% 14 284 284 7.2% 15 265 265 6.7% 16 304 304 7.7% 17 381 381 9.6% 18 253 253 6.4% 19 139 139 3.5% 20 120 120 3.0% 21 68 68 1.7% 22 49 49 1.2% 23 31 31 0.8% 24 10 10 0.3% Total 1620 2351 3971 100% Day Factor Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 4457 i GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% - 10% 9% 0 6% �+ 7% 6% V 5% 4% rL 3% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2122 23 24 Hours of the Day HAGGERETY LANE S OF ELLIS NORTHBOUND Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. % of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 0 0 0.0% 2 0 0 0.0% 3 3 3 0.4% 4 3 3 0.4% 5 11 11 1.3% 6 33 33 4.0% 7 93 93 11.3% 8 73 73 8.9% 9 44 44 5.4% 10 30 30 3.7% 11 58 58 7.1% 12 76 76 9.3% 13 72 22 8.8% 14 51 51 6.2% 15 46 46 5.6% 16 47 47 5.7% 17 55 55 6.7% 18 49 49 6.0% 19 30 30 3.7% 20 16 16 2.0% 21 15 15 1.8% 22 6 6 0.7% 23 8 8 1.0% 24 1 1 0.1% Total 273 547 820 100% GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% 10% O 1L.- 9% 0 6% ■ 4-0 7% C 6% Weekday U5% L 4% Il 3% 2% 1% 0% Hours of the Day HAGGERETY LANE S OF ELLIS SOUTHBOUND Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 2 2 0.2% 2 0 0 0.0% 3 1 1 0.1% 4 0 0 0.0% 5 1 1 0.1% 6 13 13 1.5% 7 28 28 3.2% 8 40 40 4.6% 9 41 41 4.8% 10 42 42 4.9% 11 57 57 6.6% 12 53 53 6.1% 13 54 54 6.3% 14 52 52 6.0% 15 65 65 7.5% 16 71 71 8.2% 17 113 113 13.1% 18 65 65 7.5% 19 41 41 4.8% 20 54 54 6.3% 21 23 23 2.7% 22 30 30 3.5% 23 11 11 1.3% 24 5 5 0.6% Total 478 384 862 100% GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% O 10% 9% O 6% ■ 4� 7% Weekday 6% () 5% L Q� 4% 3% 1111111 2% 1% 0% Hours of the Day HAGGERETY LANE S OF ELLIS NB & SB Hour 11/02/00 11103/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 2 2 0.1% 2 0 0 0.0% 3 4 4 0.2% 4 3 3 0.2% 5 12 12 0.7% 6 46 46 2.7% 7 121 121 7.2% 8 113 113 6.7% 9 85 85 5.1% 10 72 72 4.3% 11 115 115 6.8% 12 129 129 7.7% 13 126 126 7.5% 14 CC 103 6.1% 15 111 111 6.6% 16 118 118 7.0% 17 168 168 10.0% 18 114 114 6.8% 19 71 71 4.2% 20 70 70 4.2% 21 38 38 2.3% 22 36 36 2.1% 23 19 19 1.1% 24 6 6 0.4% Total 751 931 1682 100% Day Factor= 1.1 Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 1888 GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% O 10% 9% O 8% 7% C S% ` 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 1-2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 121314 15 16 17 18 19 20 2122 23 24 Hours of the Day ELLIS WEST OF HAGGERTY EB & WB Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. % of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 4 4 1.0% 2 0 0 0.0% 3 1 1 0.3% 4 0 0 0.0% 5 4 4 1.0% 6 5 5 1.3% 7 27 27 7.0% 8 17 17 4.4% 9 14 14 3.6% 10 26 26 6.7% 11 14 14 3.6% 12 36 36 9.3% 13 22 22 5.7% 14 31 31 8.0% 15 35 35 9.1% 16 39 39 10.1% 17 24 24 6.2% 18 23 23 6.0% 19 21 21 5.4% 20 12 12 3.1% 21 17 17 4.4% 22 5 5 1.3% 23 6 6 1.6% 24 3 3 0.8% Total 185 201 386 100% Day Factor= 1.1 Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 433 GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% O 10% 9% I 0 e% 7% N 6% U 5% 4% Q_ 3% 2% 0% t 11 1.1 ■ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2122 23 24 Hours of the Day ELLIS WEST OF HIGHLAND EB & WB Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. % of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 1 1 0.1% 2 4 4 0.3% 3 0 0 0.0% 4 2 2 0.1% 5 13 13 0.9% 6 40 40 2.7% 7 86 86 5.8% 8 146 146 9.8% 9 147 147 9.8% 10 117 117 7.8% 11 149 149 10.0% 12 132 132 8.8% 13 146 146 9.8% 14 128 128 8.6% 15 111 111 7.4% 16 124 124 8.3% 17 88 88 5.9% 18 27 27 1.8% 19 12 12 0.8% 20 6 6 0.4% 21 6 6 0.4% 22 7 7 0.5% 23 0 0 0.0% 24 1 1 0.1% Total 382 1111 1493 100% Day Factor= 1.1 Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 1676 GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% O 10% 9% O 6% .1--- 7% C6% U 5% a) 4% a 3% 2% 1% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 021r22 2324 Hours of the Day ELLIS EAST OF HIGHLAND EB & WB Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 6 6 3.1% 2 5 5 2.6% 3 1 1 0.5% 4 0 0 0.0% 5 0 0 0.0% 6 1 1 0.5% 7 11 11 5.7% 8 18 18 9.3% 9 10 10 5.2% 10 14 14 7.2% 11 21 21 10.8% 12 30 30 15.5% 13 11 11 5.7% 14 15 15 7.7% 15 19 19 9.8% 16 8 8 4.1% 17 11 11 5.7% 18 1 1 0.5% 19 7 7 3.6% 20 3 3 1.5% 21 2 2 1.0% 22 0 0 0.0% 23 0 0 0.0% 24 0 0 0.0% Total 51 143 194 100% Day Factor Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 218 GRAPH 14% 13% 12% j - 11% O 10% �-- 9% j 8% f 7% 6%CD r (U 5% 4% j Q. 3% 2% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2122 23 24 Hours of the Day HIGHLAND SOUTH OF ELLIS NORTHBOUND Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 6 6 0.2% 2 6 6 0.2% 3 4 4 0.1% 4 6 6 0.2% 5 30 30 0.8% 6 59 59 1.6% 7 185 185 5.1% 8 207 207 5.7% 9 235 235 6.4% 10 234 234 6.4% 11 311 311 8.5% 12 313 113 8.6% 13 206 206 5.6% 14 275 275 7.5% 15 294 294 8.1% 16 407 407 11.1% 17 361 361 9.9% 18 188 188 5.1% 19 105 105 2.9% 20 99 99 2.7% 21 43 43 1.2% 22 35 35 1.0% 23 27 27 0.7% 24 15 15 0.4% Total 1574 2077 3651 100% Day Factor= 1.1 Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 4098 GRAPH 14% 13% 12% - 11% 0 10% i F.. 9% 0 6% 7% 6% Q) 5% 4% a 3% 2% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2223 24 Hours of the Day HIGHLAND NORTH OF ELLIS SOUTHBOUND Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 16 16 0.4% 2 5 5 0.1% 3 4 4 0.1% 4 6 6 0.1% 5 21 21 0.5% 6 92 92 2.1% 7 301 301 6.8% 8 458 458 10.4% 9 338 338 7.7% 10 323 323 7.3% 11 273 273 6.2% 12 330 330 7.5% 13 390 390 8.8% 14 365 365 8.3% 15 324 324 7.3% 16 295 295 6.7% 17 293 293 6.6% 18 196 196 4.4% 19 127 127 2.9% 20 78 78 1.8% 21 81 81 1.8% 22 53 53 1.2% 23 34 34 0.8% 24 14 14 0.3% Total 1495 2922 4417 100% Day Factor= 1.1 Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 4958 I GRAPH 14% 13% I 12% 11% 0 10% 9% I� 8% I *- 7% C6% L 5% 4% 3% I 2% 1% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2122 23 24 Hours of the Day APPENDIX "B" CAPACITY CALCULATIONS Page 23 MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:27 AM C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.rNT HIGHLAND&ELLIS EXISTING CONDITIONS-AM CAPACITYANALYSIS RIGHT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 197 vph 299 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 1112 pcph 994 pcph Movement Capacity: 1112 pcph 994 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 99.7% 99.3% LEFT TURN FROM. Major Right Leg Major Left Leg Conflicting Flow: 200 vph 342 vph Critical Gap: 4.9 seconds 4.9 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1384 pcph 1189 pcph Movement Capacity: 1384 pcph 1189 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 99.8% 99.7% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 99.7% 99.7% THROUGH FROM: Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 544 vph 504 vph Critical Gap: 5.7 seconds 5.7 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 591 pcph 619 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.99 0.99 Movement Capacity: 588 pcph 615 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 100.0% 100.0% LEFT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 505 vph 503 vph Critical Gap: 6.2 seconds 6.2 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 563 pcph 565 pcph Major Left,Minor Through,Impedance Factor(p"): 0.99 0.99 Major Left,Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance Factor(p'):1.00 1.00 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.99 0.99 Movement Capacity: 557 pcph 561 pcph SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OFSERVICEANALYSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Minor Bottom Leg Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 6 557 i 668 5.5 B- Short Delays Ave Delay X Through _ 0 588 668 5.5 ( B-Short Delays 5.5 sec. i X Right Turn 3 1112 i 668 5.5 1 B-Short Delays Shared Minor Top Leg i Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 15 561 651 5.7 B-Short Delays 1 Ave Delay X Through 0 615 ( 651 5.7 B-Short Delays 5.7 see. X Right Turn _ 7 994 651 5.7 B-Short Delays Major Street Left Turns Volume Capacity DELAY Level Of Service Ave Delay X Major Left Leg 3 1189 3.0 1 A-Little Delay 0.0 see. X Major Right Leg 3 1384 2.6 A-Little Delay O.O�sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 0.3 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WMUNSIG 3.Ob version 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30, IG version 11:27 AM HIGHLAND&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.INT EXISTING CONDITIONS-AM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY PREVAILING SPEED=25 MPH S=STOP CONTROL Minor Top Leg —� Y=YIELD CONTROL SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Grade= SHARED LANES X X X 0% RADIUS<50 ft S S S NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN LANE Grade= 0% Major Right Leg LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. / SHARED LEFT LANE SHARED LEFT LANE �G LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. (2 LANES) Major Left Leg Grade= 0% NO RIGHT TURN LANE �NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN S S S RADIUS<50 ft Grade= X X X SHARED LANES 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. LARGE POPULATION Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg left thru right left thru right left thru right left thru right , UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 2 175 4 2 230 69 4 0 2 10 0 5 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .80 .90 1 .70 .70 .90 .80 .70 .70 .70 .75 75 .75 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 2 194 6 3T256 56 86 6 0 3 13 i 0 7 , PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 3 194 6 3 86 6 01 3 15 0 7 ! VOL UMES IN PCPH Minor Top Leg (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) AND SATURATION VOLUMES 1 7 0 `5 86 1200 7 f— 256 1800 Major Right Leg 3 3 Major Left Leg 1800 194 1200 6 6 0 3 NOTE: Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:31 AM HIGHLAND&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.INT EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC-AM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY PREVAILING SPEED=25 MPH S=STOP CONTROL Minor Top Leg —� Y=YIELD CONTROL SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Grade= SHARED LANES X X X 0% RADIUS<50 ft S S S NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN LANE <__ Grade= 0% Major Right Leg LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. SHARED LEFT LANE SHARED LEFT LANE LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. (2 LANES) Major Left Leg Grade= 0% —� NO RIGHT TURN LANE �NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN S I S S RADIUS<50 ft Grade= X X X SHARED LANES 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. LARGE POPULATION Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg left thru right left thru right left thru rijtht left thru right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 2 1160 85 74 1226 69 30 17 21 10 10 5 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .80 .90 .80 .80 .90 .80 .75 .75 i .75 .75 ' .75 .75 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 2 178 106 92 251 86 40 23 28 13 ! 13 7 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 3 178 106 102 251 86 44 25 31 15 15 7 VOL UMES IN PCPH Minor Top Leg (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) AND SATURATION VOLUMES 1 1 7 5 5 86 1200 E— 251 1800 Major Right Leg 102 3 Major Left Leg 1800 178 1200 106 'r 4 2 3 NOTE: 4 5 1 Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the i Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:31 AM HIGHLAND&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.INT EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC-AM CAPACITYANALYSIS RIGHT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 231 vph 294 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 1071 pcph 998 pcph Movement Capacity: 1071 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 97.1 % 998 pcph 99.3 /o LEFT TURN FROM. Major Right Leg Major Left Leg Conflicting Flow: 284 vph 337 vph Critical Gap: 4.9 seconds .9 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 4.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1265 pcph 1195 pcph Movement Capacity: 1265 pcph P P Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 91.9% 119 99. pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 89.8% 7 99.7% THROUGH FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 663 vph 673 vph Critical Gap: 5.7 seconds 5.7 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 517 pcph 511 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.89 0.89 Movement Capacity: 463 pcph .89 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 94.6% 96.7% LEFT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 630 vph 645 vph Critical Gap: 6.2 seconds 6.2 seconds 3. Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 482 pcph 3.4 seconds Major Left,Minor Through,Impedance Factor(p"): 0.87 473 pcph Major Left,Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance Factor(p'):0.90 0.85 0.8 8 .8 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.89 0 Movement Capacity: 429 pcph .8405 pcph SHARED LANE CAPA CITY AND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Minor Bottom Le Volume Capacity Shared DELAY g P h' P h Level Of Service X Left Turn 44 429 539 8.2 B-Short Delays Ave Delay X Through 25 463 539 g.2 B-Short Delays ! I 8.2 sec. X Right Turn 31 1071 539 8.2 B-Short Delays Minor To Le Volume Ca aci Shared DELAY--- P g P tY P tY Level Of Service X Left Turn 15 405 482 8.1 B-Short Delays ! Ave Delay X Through _ Y 15 458 482 8.1 B-Short Delays 8.1 sec. X Right Turn 7 I 998 482 8.1 B-Short Delays ~ _Major Street Left Turns ! Volume Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Mpjor Left Leg Ave Delay 3 1195 3.0 A-Little Delay 0.0 sec. X Major Right Leg j 102 1265 3.1 A-Little Delay 0.7cc, Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 1.7 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:29 AM HIGHLAND&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.INT EXISTING CONDITIONS-PM CAPACITYANALYSIS RIGHT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 448 vph 308 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 842 pcph 984 pcph Movement Capacity: 842 pcph 984 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 99.4% 99.7% LEFT TURN FROM. Major Right Leg Major Left Leg Conflicting Flow: 450 vph 331 vph Critical Gap: 4.9 seconds 4.9 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1060 pcph 1204 pcph Movement Capacity: 1060 pcph 1204 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 99.7% 99.3% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 99.6% 99.1 % THROUGH FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 789 vph 767 vph Critical Gap: 5.7 seconds 5.7 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 449 pcph 460 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.99 0.99 Movement Capacity: 443 pcph 454 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 100.0% 99.8% LEFT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 768 vph 768 vph Critical Gap: 6.2 seconds 6.2 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 405 pcph 405 pcph Major Left,Minor Through,Impedance Factor(p"): 0.99 0.99 Major Left,Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance Factor(p'):0.99 0.99 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.99 0.98 Movement Capacity: 400 pcph 399 pcph SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Minor Bottom Leg Volume I Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 0 400 842 4.3 A-Little Delay Ave Delay X Through 0 443 842 4.3 A-Little Delay -4.3 sec. X Right Turn 5 842 842 4.3 I A-Little Delay ! Shared Minor Top Leg i Volume I Capacity i Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 76 399 409 ; 10.9 C-Normal Delays Ave Delay X Through 1 454 I 409 10.9 C-Normal Delays 10 es c X Right Turn 3 984 409 10.9 , C-Normal Delays Major Street Left Turns I Volume Capacity DELAY I Level Of Service Ave Delay X Major Left Leg 8 1204 3.0 A- Little Delay 0.1 sec. X Major Right Leg 1 3 1060 3.4 A-Little Delay I 0.0 see. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 1.1 seconds TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Highland Boulevard and Ellis Street BOZEMAN, MONTANA PREPARED FOR C&H Engineering & Surveying, Inc. PREPARED BY �.�C N TA ROBERT R. MARVIN & ASSOCIATES 36r.VINLU 1001 S. 24m Street West#111 ,� . qEc �o •'2;: Billings, MT 59102 •••••'��,�' NA L .•, December, 2000 Professional Tragic Operations Engineer#259 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 SITE LOCATION & DESCRIPTION 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS Streets 3 Traffic Volumes 5 Traffic Operations 7 Speeds 8 TRIP GENERATION 8 TRIP DISTRIBUTION 10 TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 11 TRAFFIC IMPACTS Traffic Volumes 13 Capacity Impacts 15 Safety 18 Pedestrians 18 ACCESS & INTERNAL CIRCULATION 18 IMPACT MITIGATION & RECOMMENDATIONS 20 APPENDIX"A"Traffic Volumes 22 APPENDIX"B" Capacity calculations 23 APPENDIX"C" Speed Study 24 APPENDIX"D"Turn Lane Warrants 25 LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1. Site Location Map 2 Figure 2. Existing ADT& Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes 6 Figure 3. Primary Trip Distribution 12 Figure 4. Site Traffic Assignment 14 Figure 5. Existing Plus Site Traffic 16 Figure 6. Off-Site Capacity Impacts 17 Figure 7. Peak Hour Traffic At Site Accesses 19 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Trip Generation Northern Rockies Professional Center 8 Table 2. Trip Mode, Trip Type& Net Vehicular Trips 10 Northern Rockies Professional Center Traffic Impact Study INTRODUCTION This report summarizes existing conditions,trip generation characteristics,trip distribution,traffic assignment, and impact analysis within the structure of a traffic accessibility study. The study was completed for a proposed development to be located in the southeast comer of Highland Boulevard and Ellis Street in Bozeman,Montana(see Figure 1). The study was prepared for C&H Engineering,who is preparing the P.U.D. documents and site plan for the developers. The property is known as the Northern Rockies Professional Center P.U.D. This development is Tract C.,C.of S. 1177C, located in the SE 1/4, SW 1/4, of Sec.8,T.2 S., R.6E of P.M.M., Gallatin County, Montana. Because of local laws and ordinances pertaining to subdivision developments with potential for traffic impacts on the surrounding street system,a traffic accessibility study is required prior to site plan approval, and building permit approvals. Marvin & Associates was retained by C&H Engineering to provide a traffic impact study for the proposed development. Having reviewed the proposed development plan,Marvin&Associates completed an extensive analysis of existing conditions; trip generation and traffic assignment; capacity and safety impacts; and mitigation measures. All of those efforts are summarized within this report. The primary purpose of this study is to address specific impacts of the new development with regard to street system access and circulation,and to provide mitigating measures to reduce or eliminate identifiable impacts. In addition, the study provides a specific evaluation of planned street system changes and redirection of existing traffic created by those plans. Study methodology and analysis procedures within this study employ the latest technology and nationally accepted standards in the area of site development and transportation impact assessment. Recommendations made within this report are based on accepted standards and the professional judgement of the author, with consideration of the traveling public's interests as a primary objective. Page 1 F Md�n St Qj rE. Qabcock UE.Olive y I \`J E. Curti tid9 9 d� N 1 � ° /nte�Sra�e 90 l Ellis St. � All: HOSPITAL Northern Rockies Professional Center Figure 1. Site Location Map Page 2 SITE LOCATION & DESCRIPTION The proposed development would be located in the southeast comer of an intersection involving an arterial street(Highland Boulevard)and a local street(Ellis Street)which connects to another arterial Street(Haggerty Lane). The existing property is currently vacant with no existing structures. The proposed development would contain 6 lots with building pads ranging in size from 7600 to 28200 square feet. The buildings within this development will be medical offices, which will compliment Bozeman Deaconess Hospital (southwest of the site) operations. Within the subdivision, a circulation road which would serve all parking lots for each building would be accessed by two intersections with Ellis Street. The internal circulation road and all parking lots would be channelized with curb &gutter and landscaping. Access to the existing street system would be provided on Ellis Street at two locations. The western approach would be located approximately 500 feet east of the Highland Boulevard intersection. The eastern approach would be located approximately 600'east of the west approach and approximately 120' west of the eastern property line. EXISTING CONDITIONS Streets Adjacent and potentially impacted public streets are: Ellis Street, Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane. Streets and intersections which are not adjacent to the site, but which could experience some degree of MY, impact are: Highland and Main, Haggerty & Ellis, and Haggerty and Main. Ellis Street is local street with variable width and surfacing. At its intersection with Highland (photo right), it has a paved width of approximately 28 feet. The pavement only extends for a distance of Page 3 approximately 150 feet where it becomes an unimproved dirt road. Within the dirt road section, it has steep grades,sharp curves,and a rutted surface. Ellis also extends west of the Highland intersection. The western section of Ellis is a 28' wide paved streets and serves as one of several accesses to Bozeman Deaconess Hospital. Ellis Street is stop controlled at its intersection with Highland Boulevard. At the Haggerty Lane end of Ellis (photo left), Ellis becomes a 36' wide paved street with curb &gutter on both sides. An apartment complex is located near the intersection of Haggerty and Ellis and it is the only property along Ellis Street that is currently developed. The undeveloped roadway portion of Ellis extends for a distance of approximately 1500 feet. Highland Boulevard is a north-south arterial street which has two travel lanes within a 28'wide(bc-bc) curbed street section(photo right). It has a 10'wide paved bicycle path on the west side. Highland Boulevard extends from Main Street on the North, to a point south of Kagy Boulevard, a distance of approximately 2.1 miles. It serves as the primary access to Bozeman Deaconess Hospital which is located southwest of the planned development. Highland Boulevard was apparently constructed at half of it future width,since it is apparent that the roadway is not centered within the street right-of-way. It is not known whether the bicycle path is a temporary facility which will be incorporated into a future roadway expansion or if some other type of facility will be constructed Page 4 in the future. Highland Boulevard widens south of the Ellis intersection to provide turns lanes into the main hospital entrance. Haggerty Lane is an arterial roadway which serves as primary access to subdivisions southeast of Bozeman. It has a continuity of approximately 1 mile and is half urban and half rural in nature. Near its intersection with Main Street, it is 44'wide with curb&gutter on each side. At it intersection with Ellis Street(photo left), it is 28'wide with no curb&gutter. Ellis is stop controlled at Haggerty and site distance along Haggerty at the intersection is good. Traffic Volumes Detailed traffic counts were taken on all area streets in early November of 2000. Hourly count summaries can be found in Appendix"A"of this report. Turning movement counts were taken at four intersections during the peak AM and PM hours, between 7:00 and 8:00 a.m. and between 4:30 and 5:30 p.m. on November 2 &3, 2000. Figure 2.illustrates these counts along with factored Average Daily Traffic(ADT)calculated from peak hour volumes and automatic recording counts. There were no significant pedestrian movements at any of these intersections,during the counting periods. Only 3 bicyclists and pedestrians used the path at Ellis along Highland during the peak a.m.and p.m.counting periods. Trucks were approximately 3%of ADT on Highland, 1%of ADT on Haggerty, 3%of ADT on Main, and 0%of ADT on Ellis. The most significant feature of traffic volumes illustrated in Figure 2 is the directional split on Highland Boulevard. During the peak p.m. hour, 60% of the traffic is northbound and 40% is southbound. In the a.m. peak hour the directional split is opposite in direction with a 39/61%split. Page 5 0 3 1 7-8 AMA 0 2 4 30-5:00 PM 0 7-8 AM 4:30-5:00 PM 215— 312 552 491 214— 366 575— 475 127�� f— 171 163--.,, f— 138 90 —` /--- 40 154— �� 38 96 1t � 18f2� 1 � 1 � 0 1 134 43 17400 4,Maid St aj E. Babcock t.P200 H o� 7�00 � E. Olive 3 4S 00 E.Curti y°'9 9 L O s 0 ? O 47t, \—ADT I'7YP) ate 90 Q30 ,900 Ellis St. 20 1700 � : 00 30 0 69 2 HOSPITAL 10 � 2 7-8 AM 0 7-8 AMA-— 0 5 �� 4 175 4 P 256 37 1 I2 52 �- 3 4:30-5:00 PM 1 4 30-5:00 PM 0 2 r- 0 1 rV ry 6 f 2 402 Figure 2. Existing ADT & Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes Page 6 Traffic Operations Traffic operations on the surrounding street system during peak hour conditions vary by location. The only intersections that experience noticeable delay is the intersection of Main and Highland and the intersection of Main and Haggerty. The northbound lane on Highland at Main occasionally develops vehicle queues that are 15 to 20 vehicles long. These queues disperse rather quickly and do not occur throughout the entire peak p.m. hour. That approach currently operates at level of service (LOS) "C"during the peak a.m. and p.m. hours. The northbound approach on Haggerty at Main suffers from extensive delay on the left turn movement. Sufficient roadway width exists so that right turn traffic is not delayed by the left turn movement. Existing capacity calculations (see Appendix B) indicate that the northbound left turn movement operates at LOS"D" in the a.m. and LOS"F" in the p.m. Capacity calculations using the HCM procedure for two lane highways,which is not entirely applicable to urban street sections, indicate that Highland Boulevard currently operates at LOS "D". However, observations of actual conditions would classify the LOS higher than "D" because there are very few approaches and intersections along its length. Traffic appears to flow at reasonable rates of speed between intersections. Therefore,intersection capacity actually controls this street's level of service. Left turn movements on Highland at the intersection of Ellis and Highland are calculated at LOS A. The most striking operational character of Highland Boulevard is the fact that the street section provides absolutely no room for stalled or emergency vehicles. Since this is the main access to the Hospital, it would appear that 10' shoulders should be made available to accommodate the most basic concepts of incident management. One incident was observed, during the short data collection period, which involved a stalled truck. Long queues formed in both lanes and the driver had to control traffic until help arrived. From the conditions noted, it appears that very serious traffic operation issues could be related to the current typical street section on Highland Boulevard. Page 7 Speeds Appendix C contains a spot speed summary conducted for northbound and southbound traffic,north of the Ellis Street intersection of Highland Boulevard. This study indicates that 85t'percentile speeds are 41 mph in both directions during free flow operations (off-peak hours). TRIP GENERATION Table 1. presents trip generation estimates for the Northern Rockies Professional Center with the land use assumed to be Medical and Dental Office Buildings, ITE Code 720.Trip generation rates were taken from the ITE Trip Generation Report, Sixth Edition. Rates and total trips are shown for the average weekday and for peak a.m. and p.m. hours. Table 1. Trip Generation -Northern Rockies Professional Center ITE Code 720 - Medical-Dental Office Building Generation Units = 1000 Square Feet Number of Units = 85.7 Average Weekday Rate = T=40.892(X)-214.970 Peak AM Hour Rate = 2.43 80% Enter Peak PM Hour Rate = Ln(T)=0.921Ln(X)+1.476 27% Enter Number of Trips: Enter Exit Total Average Weekday= 1644 1644 3288 Peak PM Hour= 56 152 208 Peak AM Hour= 211 53 264 The total projected average weekday trips (AWT) of 3288 appears to be high compared to existing ADT volumes of 9700 on Highland Boulevard. However,not all of these trips will be vehicular trips nor will all of the trips result in new traffic on the street system. Thus, it is important to know the type of trips to properly evaluate traffic impacts. At this point,it can be assumed that transit would not play a substantial role in modal trip exchange. Therefore,minimal trips could be attributed to that mode. Some percentage of trips could also be assigned to pedestrians and bikes. This number would probably not be significant during winter months, but could be during summer months. For purposes of analysis, a conservative estimate of approximately 2% of all trips generated was used to account for transit, pedestrians and bike modes. Page 8 Since this development would incorporate six different buildings with some diverse and complementary businesses, trip interchange between businesses will likely occur. It is known that developments which are built adjacent to complimentary facilities, such as those found in shopping centers and office parks, tend to capture trips from and to adjacent developments. These trips are part of the total trip generation number, but do not involve trips with origins or destinations external to the site. They are known as"Internal Capture Trips" (ICT). The ITE Trip Generation report contains information used to estimate ICT. The Colorado-Wyoming section of ITE has completed some studies of these factors and have developed some guidelines. A moderate degree of internal trip exchange could be projected forthis subdivision with approximately 10%of all trips being Internal Capture Trips. There are also three classifications of trip types related to use of the street system: 1) Primary purpose trips are trips for which the development is a primary destination from any particular origin. 2) Diverted linked trips are trips made to the development as a secondary destination and are diverted from a path between an origin and a primary destination. 3)Passerby trips are also trips made to a development as a secondary destination, but the primary trip path is on the adjacent street system, ie. stop on the way home from work. The ITE Trip Generation report provides methods of estimating passerby trips for various facilities. In most cases involving medical offices, passerby trips would be very minimal. In this case, the location of the hospital with respect to the site would tend to increase passerby traffic numbers. Also,this site is located on a commuter route with housing developments on one end and commercial developments on the other. This would add to potential passerby trips. It was estimated that approximately 5%of the trips would be passerby trips,even though the potential for higher proportions exists. Table 3., on the following page, is a summary of the various trip types that can be expected with this development. The net number of vehicular trips at the site access points is equal total trip generation less transit/pedestrian trips and internal capture trips. The number of new vehicular trips using the existing street system would be all of the primary and diverted linked trips or net vehicular trips less the number of passerby trips. Thus, on the average weekday, there would be approximately 2750 more vehicles on the surrounding street system and during the peak PM and AM hours there would be 220 and 173 more vehicles respectively. Page 9 Table 2. Trip Mode, Classification & Net Trips Peak AM Hour: Peak PM Hour: Completed Building Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Gross Number of Trips 211 53 264 56 152 208 Ped &Transit(2%) 4 1 5 1 3 4 Net Vehicular Trips 207 52 259 55 149 204 Internal Capture Trips 21 5 26 6 15 21 Net Vehicles At Access 186 47 233 49 134 183 Passerby Trips 10 3 13 3 7 10 Net No. of New Vehicles 176 44 220 46 127 173 TRIP DISTRIBUTION There are various methods of determining the directional distribution of trips to and from site developments, For large and complex developments within the middle of a large urbanized area,the task is best accomplished by creating a computerized transportation model of the urban street system and including the proposed development changes. Trip distribution for moderate sized developments may be completed by manipulation of data provided by a current transportation plan. Smaller developments or developments on the fringe of a small urban area can be easily handled by using existing traffic volumes on adjacent streets or by an area of influence method, or both. In this case, a transportation planning model was developed for the 1990 Transportation Plan and 1993 plan update. In 1995, Marvin & Associates modified the model for the Durston Road Corridor Study to reflect accelerated growth being experienced in Bozeman. Additional modifications and specific details within the subject development area were added to the year 2016 QRS II model for purposes of analyzing trip distribution and projecting future street system volumes. Translation of subdivision trips to employment data was necessary within the modified model. In addition, the model parameters and path tree building functions Page 10 assigns traffic to the street system in a manner that would be difficult to illustrate sufficiently for an accessibility E r, study. Therefore,the model results were extracted in terms of trip distribution to and from the subdivision. With --1 this information, manual traffic assignments were completed, which provides a better level of detail for accessibility analysis. Figure 3., on the following page, is a graphic summary of directional trip distribution extracted from the traffic model for primary trips. Since the major population centers are south and northwest of the proposed development, the model tended to load primary trips to and from those directions, with 52% north and 43% south. The model indicated a split in traffic at Main Street with about the same number accessing northwest regions of Bozeman from west Main Street as those utilizing 1-90. Travel time calculations were made for two alternate routes that could be used from Main Street. It was determined that the travel time to and from the Main Street Haggerty intersection to the site is almost exactly equal. Therefore,a split in the 27%primary trips utilizing the 1-90 corridor was made at that juncture. Passerby traffic distribution is based on the percentage of total traffic entering the surrounding street system during the peak a.m. and p.m, hours. In the morning the highest percentage entering the site would be 61% in the southbound direction and in the evening the highest would be 60% in the northbound direction. TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Assignment of site traffic to the street system and site access points is dependent upon several factors. Two of them are, directional distribution and operational site conditions. Directional distribution was discussed in the previous section. These proportions are used to provide traffic access demand which represent traffic movements to and from the site which would occur if street operations and internal site circulation had no effect on the direction of arrival or departure other than the access point used. Traffic distribution is further refined by calculating potential travel times within the sites and at ingress and egress points. The combined calculations of demand and least time accessibility are used to estimate the optimum traffic volumes at each access point. Page 11 25% E.Babcock Q L \�\70� � E. Olive O 0 / a y E. Curti yd� 9 o � ! L \38% 14% o /n�erState 90 23% �� l Ellis St. � 77% 90Y0 5% 34% HOSPITAL �\Ja. Figure 3. Primary Trip Distribution Page 12 Figure 4., on the following page, represents the assignment of vehicular site traffic volumes on the existing street system. Also indicated on this figure,are percentages that this traffic is of existing ADT. As an example, Highland Boulevard,north of Main would experience an additionall045 vehicles during the average weekday. This is approximately 11% of current ADT calculated for this section of street. It is highly unlikely that 1045 vehicles would be added to this street immediately. By the time this development is complete and fully occupied, it is likely that the background traffic on Highland would have increased by 5 to 10%and the actual impact of 1045 vehicles would be less than 11 percent. Therefore, the percentage numbers shown in Figure 4. only serve to illustrate relative volume differences. Figure 4., also presents the results of traffic assignment analysis for the peak a.m. and p.m. hours. These volumes were calculated by applying primary and passerby trips distributions to full development vehicular trip generation. Proportional trip generation of each lot and least travel time for each access to and from each of the site lots were used to assign traffic to each possible turning movement. The negative numbers indicated in Figure 4., represents the result of passerby traffic redirection. TRAFFIC IMPACTS Traffic Volumes Impact for site development can be found simply by determining the change in traffic volumes expected. Site traffic assignments indicate what volume of traffic could potentially be added to the street system during the average weekday (AWT)and at the peak PM hour. The percent change in AWT only provides a general level of change and is used to identify locations where impacts could be significant. Determination of volume changes during peak traffic flow periods provides specific information on the type of impacts that could potentially occur. In almost all cases, it is very difficult to determine ADT on any section of street to within 10% accuracy. Because of that fact, impact analysis on street with relative percentage increases less than 10% are not normally considered critical. The percentages indicated on Figure 4., indicate that Highland Boulevard and Haggerty Lane would both experience increases slightly greater than 10%. Ellis Street,which currently carries less than 200 ADT, would experience an increase many times that of its current level. Page 13 AM PM AM PM 6 24 12 — 6 24 12 - 6 0 -� �� 24 0 �- 6 11 6 32 12 p 6 0 19 685 4% F Main St E. Babcock I - E. OiivuCL 3 U ` •3 8 OlB E. Curti /Y. 9 d I III J � 8 o f lote�state 90 15 ?4s, Ave. Weekday Site Traffic Ellis St. 211 140[8%] : w % of Existing ADT _L 72 D o HOSPITAL 19 AM 8 -- AM 2 �— 16 63 a d -3 PEAK HOUR SITE TRAFFIC j 19 °� � of AM PM L 51 PM Enter 186 49 2 ---_ PM 6 Exit 47 134 fir— 45 18 -2 Figure 4. Site Traffic Assignment Page 14 Figure 5.,illustrates the assignment of full development site traffic to the surrounding street system and relative volumes that would result if the development existed today. None of these volumes or conditions will probably occur due to the dynamics of background traffic growth and other unknown development schedules. Capacity Impacts Appendix B contains capacity calculations for existing conditions along with existing plus site traffic. Figure 6.,on the page following,presents a summary of capacity calculation in terms of level of service(LOS)for two different conditions: existing and existing plus site traffic. Level of service(LOS)designations (A thru F) are shown for critical movements at five intersections and access points. The following narratives explain the capacity impacts at each intersection. It was determined that the only intersection which would be impacted by the added site traffic would be the intersection of Ellis Street and Highland Boulevard. Those impacts would occur in the peak p.m. hour period and they would occur on the Ellis Street eastbound approaches. The eastbound movements would go from LOS"A"to LOS"C". Even though the amount of site added traffic on that approach is minimal, added traffic on other legs of the intersection would cause enough delay for eastbound traffic that the LOS would be reduced. Capacity calculations on Highland Boulevard using the HCM"Two Lane Highway"method,which is not entirely appropriate for this situation,indicate that the LOS would drop from"D"to"E". Since existing capacity was only 32 vehicles away from LOS "E", this change is somewhat misleading. As stated earlier, the capacity of Highland is totally dependent upon the capacity of its intersections. Therefore,capacity impacts on Highland are relatively insignificant. Page 15 J 0 J 3 l 1 7-8 AMA 0 2 4 30-5:00 PM 0 7-8 AM 4:30-5:00 PM 215-- f— 312 552 — 491 Y20 390 587— 481 171 fir— 195 175-� r- 90 6411 r ) 144 } � 154 /- 44 107 I 95 2501 220 0 1 117 27 134 62 18100 Sr ai E.Babcock � 500 Q \ 9) E. Olive \\ / a h / v F� 49 00 E. Curti 61 9 o 1 �ADT (TYp) /nte`SrOre 9 0 Ellis St. 260 - 1850 At '0 26 0 69 � 74 HOSPITAL 10 --� �— 21 17 10 7-8 AM_ ` 7-8 AM 5 —` r— 30 lb 1t � 10.1a' 1so 2 85 a 255 I1 52 4 30-5:00 PM J4 4:30-5:00 PM 25- 6 2 � �� 45 1t � 6 20 400 Figure 5. Existing Plus Site Traffic Page 16 C/ _.,,._ B® aMPM C© C PM �—C C �—AO �Be C© _ �-C8t t D A © @ 0 F Main st Qi E. Babcock Q tN a E. Olive 3 C H U E. Curti yd9 o /nre�s�at`g 90 Ellis St. A AM O AM HOSPITAL B —Existing LOS ©B---< B® ~A ®—LOS wc/Site Traffic A A a 0\Ja. O A A PM A ® PM Figure 6. Of-site Capacity Impacts Page 17 Safety It has been determined that no substantial impacts to efficiency of the existing street system would be related to the site development. However, some degree of impacts may be associated with traffic safety. Sight distance was checked at the Ellis and Highland Boulevard intersection along with sight distance at the Ellis Street approaches. It was determined that adequate intersection sight distance exists. AASHTO and MDT guidelines were checked to determine if auxiliary turn lanes are warranted for any of the intersections and approaches. Appendix D contains both right and left turn nomography used in the warrant procedure. From this reference material, it was determined that the additional southbound left turn movements on Highland at Ellis would require an additional left turn lane. A right turn lane for northbound traffic would not be triggered by this development, but may be warranted as background traffic grows in the future. Pedestrians From traffic counts and observations, pedestrian demand is not high during the winter months. It is expected that the proximity of the bike/pedestrian path will encourage pedestrian access to the site. A crossing at Ellis should be noted as a concern, but study data is unable to define the exact demand and what level of control is required. It may be necessary to measure demand after development has begun and determine if that demand is sufficient to justify a formal pedestrian crosswalk. ACCESS& INTERNAL CIRCULATION Figure 7., on the following page, is a summary of existing plus site traffic at the two ste approaches for peak a.m. and p.m. hours. Capacity calculations ( Appendix B) indicate that both of these approaches would operate at LOS "A"during both peak hours. Both intersections will operate efficiently with single approach lanes and no vehicle storage problems at the intersections would be encountered. Since both of these approaches would have traffic volumes at the same level as Ellis Street traffic, it is recommended that stop signs be installed to reinforce the right of way rules. Page 18 s � — Ln 00 Ln L1n Ily I■ !! 0 s �" LnIL —_ M con !t ! Zo _ H y V V p_� a aa W O< O N N wii' T y � V malty ! J� i V N IT a = Ln �_co I 0 IL to a f—N Ln IL C1 L\ lD N o1 J e�• Im VTFFFUTTFFFFFFL .� un n r0I'Ih .1®�RA UM , _ s f N j n J a PM8 Puo146IH Page 19 Circulation within the site is provided by an internal roadway with a proposed median. Because of unique problems that can occur with medians, the following design recommendations are made: • Medians within an approach to a public street should be setback behind the crosswalk and marked crosswalks should be carried across the approach. The minimum face-of-curb to face-of-curb width for both entering and exiting lanes should be 18 feet to avoid blockage by stalled vehicles or maintenance equipment. • As with medians at the intersection approaches,a minimum width of 18 feet is required to allow room for circulation around maintenance or stalled vehicles in the single lanes. • Medians within the site should be designed so that moving vans can turn into and out of individual approaches, this requires geometric layout with SU turning radius templates. • Medians at intersections should not have landscaping taller than 30 inches to protect critical line of sight. • "Keep Right" signs on the end of median islands and turn restriction signs are needed is some circumstances. IMPACT MITIGATION & RECOMMENDATIONS Development of this property as proposed would generate a substantial volume of traffic. The most significant impacts would be on Ellis Street adjacent to the site. C&H Surveying and Engineering has submitted a plan to reconstruct Ellis Street east of Highland Boulevard along the development's property boundary. The new street section will provide approximately 30 feet of paving within a future 37'(bc-bc)curbed street section. This would mitigate potential impacts on Ellis at the access points. Some consideration should be given to transitions and connections to the existing roadway on the east end of Ellis Street during design review, to ensure that the transition is safe. Page 20 This study also determined that a left turn lane would be needed for anticipated southbound traffic volumes on Highland Boulevard, at the Ellis Street intersection,to mitigate potential rear-end and left-turn accidents. The study also determined that the existing width of Highland Boulevard presents potential safety and efficiency problems with regard to incident management. Observed capacity of the street sections appears to be acceptable except when incidents block a lane. Therefore,it is believed that Highland Boulevard should have been constructed as a multi-lane facility from Main Street to the Hospital. Widening near the intersection for the left turn lane will improve the safety of the Ellis intersection,but will not alleviate the potential problems that were built into the original roadway. It is recommended that the City of Bozeman consider implementing the phase 2 construction plan as soon as possible. If such a task is not possible, it is recommended that the southbound left turn lane be implemented prior to full development of the site plan. Page 21 APPENDIX "A" TRAFFIC VOLUMES Page 22 HAGGERETY LANE S OF MAIN NORTHBOUND Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 3 3 0.2% 2 1 1 0.1% 3 3 3 0.2% 4 4 4 0.2% 5 9 9 0.5% 6 50 50 2.6% 7 138 138 7.1% 8 126 126 6.5% 9 125 125 6.5% 10 123 123 6.4% 11 153 153 7.9% 12 169 169 8.7% 13 144 144 7.4% 14 134 134 6.9% 15 121 121 6.3% 16 139 139 7.2% 17 175 175 9.0% 18 132 132 6.8% 19 75 75 3.9% 20 46 46 2.4% 21 32 32 1.7% 22 15 15 0.8% 23 15 15 0.8% 24 3 3 0.2% Total 753 1182 1935 100% GRAPH 14% r- 13% 12% 11% 10% IO 9% 0 6% ■ 4-+ 7% Weekday 6% U 5% ' L 4% IZ 3% 2% 1% 0% ' Hours of the Day HAGGERETY LANE S OF MAIN SOUTHBOUND Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 7 7 0.3% 2 2 2 0.1% 3 1 1 0.0% 4 1 1 0.0% 5 43 43 2.1% 6 36 36 1.8% 7 130 130 6.4% 8 167 167 8.2% 9 103 103 5.1% 10 104 104 5.1% 11 116 116 5.7% 12 152 152 7.5% 13 157 157 7.7% 14 150 150 7.4% 15 144 144 7.1% 16 165 165 8.1% 17 206 206 10.1% 18 121 121 5.9% 19 64 64 3.1% 20 74 74 3.6% 21 36 36 1.8% 22 34 34 1.7% 23 16 16 0.8% 24 7 7 0.3% Total 867 1169 2036 100% GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% 0 10% 9% O 8% 7% ■ C 6% Weekday V 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% -LAh Hours of the Day HAGGERETY LANE S OF MAIN NB & SB Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 10 10 0.3% 2 3 3 0.1% 3 4 4 0.1% 4 5 5 0.1% 5 52 52 1.3% 6 86 86 2.2% 7 268 268 6.7% 8 293 293 7.4% 9 228 228 5.7% 10 227 227 5.7% 11 269 269 6.8% 12 321 321 8.1% 13 301 301 7.6% 14 284 284 7.2% 15 265 265 6.7% 16 304 304 7.7% 17 381 381 9.6% 18 253 253 6.4% 19 139 139 3.5% 20 120 120 3.0% 21 68 68 1.7% 22 49 49 1.2% 23 31 31 0.8% 24 10 10 0.3% Total 1620 2351 3971 100% Day Factor Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 4457 i GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% - 10% 9% 0 6% �+ 7% 6% V 5% 4% rL 3% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2122 23 24 Hours of the Day HAGGERETY LANE S OF ELLIS NORTHBOUND Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. % of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 0 0 0.0% 2 0 0 0.0% 3 3 3 0.4% 4 3 3 0.4% 5 11 11 1.3% 6 33 33 4.0% 7 93 93 11.3% 8 73 73 8.9% 9 44 44 5.4% 10 30 30 3.7% 11 58 58 7.1% 12 76 76 9.3% 13 72 22 8.8% 14 51 51 6.2% 15 46 46 5.6% 16 47 47 5.7% 17 55 55 6.7% 18 49 49 6.0% 19 30 30 3.7% 20 16 16 2.0% 21 15 15 1.8% 22 6 6 0.7% 23 8 8 1.0% 24 1 1 0.1% Total 273 547 820 100% GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% 10% O 1L.- 9% 0 6% ■ 4-0 7% C 6% Weekday U5% L 4% Il 3% 2% 1% 0% Hours of the Day HAGGERETY LANE S OF ELLIS SOUTHBOUND Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 2 2 0.2% 2 0 0 0.0% 3 1 1 0.1% 4 0 0 0.0% 5 1 1 0.1% 6 13 13 1.5% 7 28 28 3.2% 8 40 40 4.6% 9 41 41 4.8% 10 42 42 4.9% 11 57 57 6.6% 12 53 53 6.1% 13 54 54 6.3% 14 52 52 6.0% 15 65 65 7.5% 16 71 71 8.2% 17 113 113 13.1% 18 65 65 7.5% 19 41 41 4.8% 20 54 54 6.3% 21 23 23 2.7% 22 30 30 3.5% 23 11 11 1.3% 24 5 5 0.6% Total 478 384 862 100% GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% O 10% 9% O 6% ■ 4� 7% Weekday 6% () 5% L Q� 4% 3% 1111111 2% 1% 0% Hours of the Day HAGGERETY LANE S OF ELLIS NB & SB Hour 11/02/00 11103/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 2 2 0.1% 2 0 0 0.0% 3 4 4 0.2% 4 3 3 0.2% 5 12 12 0.7% 6 46 46 2.7% 7 121 121 7.2% 8 113 113 6.7% 9 85 85 5.1% 10 72 72 4.3% 11 115 115 6.8% 12 129 129 7.7% 13 126 126 7.5% 14 CC 103 6.1% 15 111 111 6.6% 16 118 118 7.0% 17 168 168 10.0% 18 114 114 6.8% 19 71 71 4.2% 20 70 70 4.2% 21 38 38 2.3% 22 36 36 2.1% 23 19 19 1.1% 24 6 6 0.4% Total 751 931 1682 100% Day Factor= 1.1 Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 1888 GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% O 10% 9% O 8% 7% C S% ` 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 1-2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 121314 15 16 17 18 19 20 2122 23 24 Hours of the Day ELLIS WEST OF HAGGERTY EB & WB Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. % of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 4 4 1.0% 2 0 0 0.0% 3 1 1 0.3% 4 0 0 0.0% 5 4 4 1.0% 6 5 5 1.3% 7 27 27 7.0% 8 17 17 4.4% 9 14 14 3.6% 10 26 26 6.7% 11 14 14 3.6% 12 36 36 9.3% 13 22 22 5.7% 14 31 31 8.0% 15 35 35 9.1% 16 39 39 10.1% 17 24 24 6.2% 18 23 23 6.0% 19 21 21 5.4% 20 12 12 3.1% 21 17 17 4.4% 22 5 5 1.3% 23 6 6 1.6% 24 3 3 0.8% Total 185 201 386 100% Day Factor= 1.1 Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 433 GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% O 10% 9% I 0 e% 7% N 6% U 5% 4% Q_ 3% 2% 0% t 11 1.1 ■ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2122 23 24 Hours of the Day ELLIS WEST OF HIGHLAND EB & WB Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. % of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 1 1 0.1% 2 4 4 0.3% 3 0 0 0.0% 4 2 2 0.1% 5 13 13 0.9% 6 40 40 2.7% 7 86 86 5.8% 8 146 146 9.8% 9 147 147 9.8% 10 117 117 7.8% 11 149 149 10.0% 12 132 132 8.8% 13 146 146 9.8% 14 128 128 8.6% 15 111 111 7.4% 16 124 124 8.3% 17 88 88 5.9% 18 27 27 1.8% 19 12 12 0.8% 20 6 6 0.4% 21 6 6 0.4% 22 7 7 0.5% 23 0 0 0.0% 24 1 1 0.1% Total 382 1111 1493 100% Day Factor= 1.1 Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 1676 GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% O 10% 9% O 6% .1--- 7% C6% U 5% a) 4% a 3% 2% 1% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 021r22 2324 Hours of the Day ELLIS EAST OF HIGHLAND EB & WB Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 6 6 3.1% 2 5 5 2.6% 3 1 1 0.5% 4 0 0 0.0% 5 0 0 0.0% 6 1 1 0.5% 7 11 11 5.7% 8 18 18 9.3% 9 10 10 5.2% 10 14 14 7.2% 11 21 21 10.8% 12 30 30 15.5% 13 11 11 5.7% 14 15 15 7.7% 15 19 19 9.8% 16 8 8 4.1% 17 11 11 5.7% 18 1 1 0.5% 19 7 7 3.6% 20 3 3 1.5% 21 2 2 1.0% 22 0 0 0.0% 23 0 0 0.0% 24 0 0 0.0% Total 51 143 194 100% Day Factor Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 218 GRAPH 14% 13% 12% j - 11% O 10% �-- 9% j 8% f 7% 6%CD r (U 5% 4% j Q. 3% 2% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2122 23 24 Hours of the Day HIGHLAND SOUTH OF ELLIS NORTHBOUND Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 6 6 0.2% 2 6 6 0.2% 3 4 4 0.1% 4 6 6 0.2% 5 30 30 0.8% 6 59 59 1.6% 7 185 185 5.1% 8 207 207 5.7% 9 235 235 6.4% 10 234 234 6.4% 11 311 311 8.5% 12 313 113 8.6% 13 206 206 5.6% 14 275 275 7.5% 15 294 294 8.1% 16 407 407 11.1% 17 361 361 9.9% 18 188 188 5.1% 19 105 105 2.9% 20 99 99 2.7% 21 43 43 1.2% 22 35 35 1.0% 23 27 27 0.7% 24 15 15 0.4% Total 1574 2077 3651 100% Day Factor= 1.1 Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 4098 GRAPH 14% 13% 12% - 11% 0 10% i F.. 9% 0 6% 7% 6% Q) 5% 4% a 3% 2% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2223 24 Hours of the Day HIGHLAND NORTH OF ELLIS SOUTHBOUND Hour 11/02/00 11/03/00 Avg. %of Begin THU FRI Weekday Weekday 1 16 16 0.4% 2 5 5 0.1% 3 4 4 0.1% 4 6 6 0.1% 5 21 21 0.5% 6 92 92 2.1% 7 301 301 6.8% 8 458 458 10.4% 9 338 338 7.7% 10 323 323 7.3% 11 273 273 6.2% 12 330 330 7.5% 13 390 390 8.8% 14 365 365 8.3% 15 324 324 7.3% 16 295 295 6.7% 17 293 293 6.6% 18 196 196 4.4% 19 127 127 2.9% 20 78 78 1.8% 21 81 81 1.8% 22 53 53 1.2% 23 34 34 0.8% 24 14 14 0.3% Total 1495 2922 4417 100% Day Factor= 1.1 Month Factor= 0.98 ADT= 4958 I GRAPH 14% 13% I 12% 11% 0 10% 9% I� 8% I *- 7% C6% L 5% 4% 3% I 2% 1% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2122 23 24 Hours of the Day APPENDIX "B" CAPACITY CALCULATIONS Page 23 MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:27 AM C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.rNT HIGHLAND&ELLIS EXISTING CONDITIONS-AM CAPACITYANALYSIS RIGHT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 197 vph 299 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 1112 pcph 994 pcph Movement Capacity: 1112 pcph 994 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 99.7% 99.3% LEFT TURN FROM. Major Right Leg Major Left Leg Conflicting Flow: 200 vph 342 vph Critical Gap: 4.9 seconds 4.9 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1384 pcph 1189 pcph Movement Capacity: 1384 pcph 1189 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 99.8% 99.7% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 99.7% 99.7% THROUGH FROM: Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 544 vph 504 vph Critical Gap: 5.7 seconds 5.7 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 591 pcph 619 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.99 0.99 Movement Capacity: 588 pcph 615 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 100.0% 100.0% LEFT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 505 vph 503 vph Critical Gap: 6.2 seconds 6.2 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 563 pcph 565 pcph Major Left,Minor Through,Impedance Factor(p"): 0.99 0.99 Major Left,Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance Factor(p'):1.00 1.00 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.99 0.99 Movement Capacity: 557 pcph 561 pcph SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OFSERVICEANALYSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Minor Bottom Leg Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 6 557 i 668 5.5 B- Short Delays Ave Delay X Through _ 0 588 668 5.5 ( B-Short Delays 5.5 sec. i X Right Turn 3 1112 i 668 5.5 1 B-Short Delays Shared Minor Top Leg i Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 15 561 651 5.7 B-Short Delays 1 Ave Delay X Through 0 615 ( 651 5.7 B-Short Delays 5.7 see. X Right Turn _ 7 994 651 5.7 B-Short Delays Major Street Left Turns Volume Capacity DELAY Level Of Service Ave Delay X Major Left Leg 3 1189 3.0 1 A-Little Delay 0.0 see. X Major Right Leg 3 1384 2.6 A-Little Delay O.O�sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 0.3 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WMUNSIG 3.Ob version 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30, IG version 11:27 AM HIGHLAND&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.INT EXISTING CONDITIONS-AM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY PREVAILING SPEED=25 MPH S=STOP CONTROL Minor Top Leg —� Y=YIELD CONTROL SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Grade= SHARED LANES X X X 0% RADIUS<50 ft S S S NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN LANE Grade= 0% Major Right Leg LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. / SHARED LEFT LANE SHARED LEFT LANE �G LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. (2 LANES) Major Left Leg Grade= 0% NO RIGHT TURN LANE �NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN S S S RADIUS<50 ft Grade= X X X SHARED LANES 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. LARGE POPULATION Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg left thru right left thru right left thru right left thru right , UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 2 175 4 2 230 69 4 0 2 10 0 5 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .80 .90 1 .70 .70 .90 .80 .70 .70 .70 .75 75 .75 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 2 194 6 3T256 56 86 6 0 3 13 i 0 7 , PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 3 194 6 3 86 6 01 3 15 0 7 ! VOL UMES IN PCPH Minor Top Leg (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) AND SATURATION VOLUMES 1 7 0 `5 86 1200 7 f— 256 1800 Major Right Leg 3 3 Major Left Leg 1800 194 1200 6 6 0 3 NOTE: Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:31 AM HIGHLAND&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.INT EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC-AM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY PREVAILING SPEED=25 MPH S=STOP CONTROL Minor Top Leg —� Y=YIELD CONTROL SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Grade= SHARED LANES X X X 0% RADIUS<50 ft S S S NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN LANE <__ Grade= 0% Major Right Leg LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. SHARED LEFT LANE SHARED LEFT LANE LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. (2 LANES) Major Left Leg Grade= 0% —� NO RIGHT TURN LANE �NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN S I S S RADIUS<50 ft Grade= X X X SHARED LANES 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. LARGE POPULATION Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg left thru right left thru right left thru rijtht left thru right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 2 1160 85 74 1226 69 30 17 21 10 10 5 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .80 .90 .80 .80 .90 .80 .75 .75 i .75 .75 ' .75 .75 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 2 178 106 92 251 86 40 23 28 13 ! 13 7 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 3 178 106 102 251 86 44 25 31 15 15 7 VOL UMES IN PCPH Minor Top Leg (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) AND SATURATION VOLUMES 1 1 7 5 5 86 1200 E— 251 1800 Major Right Leg 102 3 Major Left Leg 1800 178 1200 106 'r 4 2 3 NOTE: 4 5 1 Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the i Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:31 AM HIGHLAND&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.INT EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC-AM CAPACITYANALYSIS RIGHT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 231 vph 294 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 1071 pcph 998 pcph Movement Capacity: 1071 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 97.1 % 998 pcph 99.3 /o LEFT TURN FROM. Major Right Leg Major Left Leg Conflicting Flow: 284 vph 337 vph Critical Gap: 4.9 seconds .9 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 4.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1265 pcph 1195 pcph Movement Capacity: 1265 pcph P P Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 91.9% 119 99. pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 89.8% 7 99.7% THROUGH FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 663 vph 673 vph Critical Gap: 5.7 seconds 5.7 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 517 pcph 511 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.89 0.89 Movement Capacity: 463 pcph .89 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 94.6% 96.7% LEFT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 630 vph 645 vph Critical Gap: 6.2 seconds 6.2 seconds 3. Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 482 pcph 3.4 seconds Major Left,Minor Through,Impedance Factor(p"): 0.87 473 pcph Major Left,Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance Factor(p'):0.90 0.85 0.8 8 .8 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.89 0 Movement Capacity: 429 pcph .8405 pcph SHARED LANE CAPA CITY AND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Minor Bottom Le Volume Capacity Shared DELAY g P h' P h Level Of Service X Left Turn 44 429 539 8.2 B-Short Delays Ave Delay X Through 25 463 539 g.2 B-Short Delays ! I 8.2 sec. X Right Turn 31 1071 539 8.2 B-Short Delays Minor To Le Volume Ca aci Shared DELAY--- P g P tY P tY Level Of Service X Left Turn 15 405 482 8.1 B-Short Delays ! Ave Delay X Through _ Y 15 458 482 8.1 B-Short Delays 8.1 sec. X Right Turn 7 I 998 482 8.1 B-Short Delays ~ _Major Street Left Turns ! Volume Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Mpjor Left Leg Ave Delay 3 1195 3.0 A-Little Delay 0.0 sec. X Major Right Leg j 102 1265 3.1 A-Little Delay 0.7cc, Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 1.7 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:29 AM HIGHLAND&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.INT EXISTING CONDITIONS-PM CAPACITYANALYSIS RIGHT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 448 vph 308 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 842 pcph 984 pcph Movement Capacity: 842 pcph 984 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 99.4% 99.7% LEFT TURN FROM. Major Right Leg Major Left Leg Conflicting Flow: 450 vph 331 vph Critical Gap: 4.9 seconds 4.9 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1060 pcph 1204 pcph Movement Capacity: 1060 pcph 1204 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 99.7% 99.3% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 99.6% 99.1 % THROUGH FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 789 vph 767 vph Critical Gap: 5.7 seconds 5.7 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 449 pcph 460 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.99 0.99 Movement Capacity: 443 pcph 454 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 100.0% 99.8% LEFT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 768 vph 768 vph Critical Gap: 6.2 seconds 6.2 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 405 pcph 405 pcph Major Left,Minor Through,Impedance Factor(p"): 0.99 0.99 Major Left,Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance Factor(p'):0.99 0.99 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.99 0.98 Movement Capacity: 400 pcph 399 pcph SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Minor Bottom Leg Volume I Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 0 400 842 4.3 A-Little Delay Ave Delay X Through 0 443 842 4.3 A-Little Delay -4.3 sec. X Right Turn 5 842 842 4.3 I A-Little Delay ! Shared Minor Top Leg i Volume I Capacity i Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 76 399 409 ; 10.9 C-Normal Delays Ave Delay X Through 1 454 I 409 10.9 C-Normal Delays 10 es c X Right Turn 3 984 409 10.9 , C-Normal Delays Major Street Left Turns I Volume Capacity DELAY I Level Of Service Ave Delay X Major Left Leg 8 1204 3.0 A- Little Delay 0.1 sec. X Major Right Leg 1 3 1060 3.4 A-Little Delay I 0.0 see. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 1.1 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:29 AM HIGHLAND&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.INT EXISTING CONDITIONS-PM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY PREVAILING SPEED=25 MPH S=STOP CONTROL Minor Top Leg Y=YIELD CONTROL SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Grade= SHARED LANES XIX X 1 0% RADIUS<50 ft S S S NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN NO ACCELERATION LANE 1 NO RIGHT TURN LANE Grade= 0% Major Right Leg LT SIGHT DISTANCE Q.K. SHARED LEFT LANE SHARED LEFT LANE LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. (2 LANES) Major Left Leg Grade= 0% NO RIGHT TURN LANE �` �NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN ` S S S RADIUS<50 ft Grade= X X X SHARED LANES 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. LARGE POPULATION Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg left thru right left thru ri t left thru right left thru _right _UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 6 402 2 2 256 37 0 0 3 52 1 2 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .80 .90 .70 .70 .90 1 .80- .70 .70 .70 .75 .75 .75 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 8 447 3 3 284 46 0 0 4 69 1 3 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 8 ( 447 3 3 284 46 0 0 5 76 1 3 VOL UMES IN PCPH Minor Top Leg (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) AND SATURATION VOLUMES 7 3 1 6 E— 284 1800 Major Right Leg 8 � •� 3 Major Left Leg 1800 447 —� 120:0:1 3 'r W 0 0 5 NOTE: Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.0b 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:32 AM HIGHLAND&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.INT EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC-PM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY PREVAILING SPEED=25 MPH S=STOP CONTROL Minor Top Leg —� Y=YIELD CONTROL SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Grade= SHARED LANES X X X 0% RADIUS<50 ft S S Sl NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN NO ACCELERATION LANE,,� �, \` NO RIGHT TURN LANE 7 Grade= 0% Major Right Leg LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. SHARED LEFT LANE SHARED LEFT LANE LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. (2 LANES) Major Left Leg Grade= 0% —� NO RIGHT TURN LANE <� �NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN S 1 S S RADIUS<50 ft Grade= X I X X SHARED LANES 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. LARGE POPULATION Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg left thru right left thru right left thru right left_ thru right I UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 6 1400 20 21 255 37 45 I 6 I 54 52 25 ! 2 ___PEAK HOUR FACTORS .80 .90 .80 .80 .90 .80 .75 .75 .75 .75 .75.75 75 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 8 444 25 26 283 i 46 60 8 72 69 33 3 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 1 8 444 25 1 29 283 46 66 9 79 76 37 3 VOLUMES INPCPH Minor Top Leg (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) AND SATURATION VOLUMES 3 7 3 7 6 ;6 1200 F— 283 1800 Major Right Leg 29 8 _ - - Major Left Leg 1800 444 1200 25 6 19 7 NOTE: 6 9 Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:32 AM HIGHLAND&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HIGHEL.INT EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC-PM CAPACITYANALYSIS RIGHT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 457 vph 306 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 833 985 c P pcph pcph h Movement Capacity: 833 pcph 985 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 90.5% 99.7 LEFT TURN FROM. Major Right Leg Major Left Leg Conflicting Flow: 469 vph 330 vph Critical Gap: 4.9 seconds 4.9 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1038 pcph 1205 pcph Movement Capacity: 1038 pcph 1205 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 97.2% 99.3% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 96.5% 99.1 % THROUGH FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 820 vph 810 vph Critical Gap: 5.7 seconds 5.7 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 434 pcph 439 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.96 0.96 Movement Capacity: 415 pcph 420 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 97.8% 91.2% LEFT TURN FROM. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 815 vph 837 vph Critical Gap: 6.2 seconds 6.2 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 382 pcph 372 pcph Major Left,Minor Through,Impedance Factor(p"): 0.87 0.94 Major Left,Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance Factor(p'):0.90 0.95 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.90 0.86 Movement Capacity: 344 pcph 320 pcph SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Minor Bottom Le Volume Capacity Capacityd DELAY g I � P tY � Level Of Service X Left Turn ! 66 j�499 99 10.4 C-Normal Delays Ave Delay X Through 9 10.4 C-Normal Delays 10.4 sec. X Right Turn 1 79 1 833 1 499 10.4 C-Normal Delays Minor Top Leg Volume Capacity Capacity Shared DELAY I Level Of Service X Left Turn I 76 320 353 1 15.1 C-Normal Delays Ave Delay X Through 37 420 ( 353 15.1 C-Normal Delays 1 see. X Right Turn 3 985 I 353 15.1 C-Normal Delays Major Street Left Turns Volume Capacity DELAY Level Of Service 1 Ave Delay X Major Left Leg 8 1205 3.0 A-Little Delay X Major Right Leg - 0�1 29 1038 3.6 A-Little Delay 0.3 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 3.1 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.0b 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:35 AM HAGGERTY&ELLIS EXISTING CONDITIONS-AM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOL UMES IN PCPH S=STOP CONTROL �— (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND PREVAILING SPEED=45 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES-, Grade= 0% F— 106 1800 (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg SHARED LEFT LANE Major Left Leg 13 Grade= 0% Major Right Leg 31 Major Right Leg NO RIGHT TURN LANE I �NO ACCEL.LANE I NO RIGHT TURN ' RADIUS<50 ft 1 1 6 STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade= X X SHARED LANES 9 NOTE: 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Saturation Volumes are used LARGE to calculate Probability of POPULATION ! Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg thru right left thru left right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 23 1 8 85 12 4 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .75 .70 .70 .80 .70 .70 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 31 1 11 106 17 6 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 31 1 13 106 19 6 CAPACITYANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 149 vph 31 vph Critical Gap: 7.4 seconds 6.1 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 836 pcph 1328 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.99 Movement Capacity: 829 pcph 1328 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 32 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1651 pcph Movement Capacity: 1651 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 99.2% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 99.2% SHARED LANE CAPA CITY AND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Movements Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left From Minor Bottom Leg 19 829 911 4.1 A-Little Delay Ave Delay 1 4.1 sec. X Right From Minor Bottom Leg 6 1328 911 4.1 A-Little Delay X Left From Major Right Leg 13 1651 - 2.2 A-Little Delay i 0.2 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 0.7 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS WINUNSIG version 3.Ob November 30,2000 11:37 AM HAGGERTY&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HAGGEL.INT EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC-AM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOLUMES INPCPH S=STOP CONTROL (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND PREVAILING SPEED=45 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES Grade= 0% <— 85 1800 (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg SHARED LEFT LANE Major Left Leg 49 Grade-= 0% — Major Right Leg 29 —� j NO RIGHT TURN LANE � �,, �NO ACCEL.LANE 37 Major Right Leg NO RIGHT TURN S FrSHARED S<50 ft 2 2 STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade= X X LANES 8 0 NOTE: 0% DISTANCE O.K. Saturation Volumes are used LARGE to calculate Probability of POPULATION I I n.,,.,;e Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane i 1 is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg _ thru ri t left thru left right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 22 26 31 68 18 13 PEAK HOUR FACTORS 75 .70 .70 .80 .70 .70 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 29 37 44 85 26 19 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 29 37 49 85 28 I 20 CAPACITYANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 177 vph 8 vph Critical Gap: 7.4 seconds 4 4 seconds . Headway Gap: 34 seconds 6.1 Potential Capacity: 2.6 seconds 800 pcph 1299 pcph Capacity Adiustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.97 Movement Capacity: 774 pcph 1299 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 66 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1585 pcph Movement Capacity: 1585 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 96.9% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 96.8% SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Movements Volume Capacity Shared P tT Capacity ' DELAY Level Of Service X Left From Minor Bottom Leg 28 774 931 4.1 A-Little Delay Ave�Dela� X Right From Mino�Bto�Leg �49 1299 931 4.1 A-Little Delay 4, sec. X Left From Major g 1585 - 2.3 A-Little Delay 0.9 sec Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 1.3 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:36 AM HAGGERTY&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HAGGEL.INT EXISTING CONDITIONS-PM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOLUMES INPCPH S=STOP CONTROL (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND_ PREVAILING SPEED=45 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES Grade= 0% � 66 1800 ' (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg SHARED LEFT LANE Major Left Leg 3 Grade= 0% �>Major Right Leg 140 —� Major Right Leg <� NO RIGHT TURN LANE � 1 � NO ACCEL.LANE 17 � NO RIGHT TURN S SRADIUS<50 ft 9 3 STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade= X J SHARED LANES NOTE: 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Saturation Volumes are used LARGE to calculate Probability of POPULATION Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg thru right left thru left right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 105 12 2 53 6 2 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .75 .70 .70 .80 ]?q0 .70 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 140 17 3 66 3 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 140 17 3 66 9 3 CAPACITYANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 218 vph 149 vph Critical Gap: 7.4 seconds 6.1 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 750 pcph 1136 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 1.00 Movement Capacity: 748 pcph 1136 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 157 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1424 pcph Movement Capacity: 1424 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 99.8% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 99.8% SHARED LANE CAPA CITY AND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Movements Volume ` Ca ci Capacity DELAY-_ _. _ Pa tY P tY Level Of Service X Left From Minor Bottom Leg 9 748 818 4.5 I A-Little Delay Ave Del�a X Right From Minor Bottom Leg 3 1136 818 4.5 A-Little Delay 4.5 sec, l X Left From Major Right Leg 3 1424 - 2.5 A-Little Delay I- 0,1 sec, Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 0.3 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:38 AM HAGGERTY&ELLIS C:\UNSIG3\HAGGEL.INT EXISTING PLUS SITE TRAFFIC-PM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOL UMES IN PCPH S=STOP CONTROL (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND PREVAILING SPEED=45 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES i <-- Grade= 0% E--- 66 1800 (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg SHARED LEFT LANE Major Left Leg 16 Grade.= 0% Major Right Leg 140 Major Right Leg NO RIGHT TURN LANE �\'1 NO ACCEL.LANE 26 NO RIGHT TURN S S RADIUS<50 ft 4' S STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade= X X SHARED LANES 1 3 NOTE: 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Saturation Volumes are used LARGE to calculate Probability of POPULATION Queue Free States when the IMajor Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg thru right left thru left right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 105 18 10 53 26 34 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .75 .70 .70 .80 .70 .70 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 140 26 14 66 37 49 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 140 26 16 66 41 53 CAPACITYANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 233 vph 153 vph Critical Gap: 7.4 seconds 6.1 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 732 pcph 1129 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.99 _ Movement Capacity: 723 pcph 1129 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 166 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1410 pcph Movement Capacity: 1410 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 98.9% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 98.8% SHARED LANE CAPA CITY AND LEVEL OF SEW VICE ANAL YSIS X Indicates shared lanes Movements Shared Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left From Minor Bottom Leg 41 723 907 4.4 A-Little Delay Ave Dela 4.4 sec. X Right From Minor Bottom Leg 53 I 1129 907 4.4 A-Little Delay X Left From Major Right Leg 16 1410 - 2,6 A-Little Delay 0.5 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 1.4 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.0b 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:42 AM MAIN STREET&HAGGERTY C:\UNSIG3VvLAINHAG.INT EXISTING CONDITIONS-PM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOLUMES INPCPH S=STOP CONTROL (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND PREVAILING SPEED=45 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES E— Grade= 0% � 528 1800 (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg EXCLUSIVE LEFT LANE Major Left Leg � 52 Grade-= 0% Major Right Leg 639 Major Right Leg NO RIGHT TURN LANE w <� �NO ACCEL.LANE 181 NO RIGHT TURN 1 S S RADIUS<50 ft I ' 5 STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade=0% NO SHARED LANES 71 9 NOTE: -- SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. I 3 Saturation Volumes are used LARGE I I to calculate Probability of POPULATION j Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg _ thru right left i thru left right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 575 154 38 475 1_ 34 43 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .90 .85 .80 .90 .85 .80 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 639 181 48 528 158 54 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 639 181 52 528 173 59 CAPACITYANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 1305 vph 729 vph Critical Gap: 7.4 seconds 6.1 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 134 pcph 524 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.92 - Movement Capacity: 123 pcph 524 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 820 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 651 pcph Movement Capacity: 651 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 92.0% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) NA SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OFSERVICEANALYSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Movements Volume I Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service Left From Minor Bottom Leg 173 123 - 282.4 F- Severe Congestion Ave Delay , Right From Minor Bottom Leg 59 524 - 7.7 B-Short Delays 212.6 sec. Left From Major Right Leg 52 651 - 6.0 B-Short Delays 0.5 Sce Average Total Delay for the entire intersection:30.4 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.0b 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:42 AM MAIN STREET&HAGGERTY C:\UNSIG3kMAINHAG.INT EXISTING CONDITIONS-PM MINOR STREET QUEUE LENGTHS NOTE: AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS Queue lengths are displayed by lane 95th Percentile Queue Lengths groupings-not by movement according to the 1994 HCM for a 15 minute counting period based on saturation and capacity in vehicles per hour. 7 1 Left and Right movements use Exclusive Lanes MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:44 AM MAIN STREET&HAGGERTY C:\UNSIG3\MAINHAG.INT EXISTINGPLUS SITE TRAFFIC-PM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOLUMES INPCPH S=STOP CONTROL (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND PREVAILING SPEED=45 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES'i <__ Grade= 0% E— 534 1800 (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. - 61 Major Left Leg EXCLUSIVE LEFT LANE Major Left Leg v- Grade= 0% Major Right Leg 652 Major Right Leg NO RIGHT TURN LANE �\ ' �NO ACCEL.LANE 181 NO RIGHT TURN RADIUS<50 ft 1 8 STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade= I I NO SHARED LANES 7 5 NOTE: 0% 3 Saturation Volumes are used LARGE SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. to calculate Probability of POPULATION Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOL UME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg thru I right left thru left right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 587 154 44 481 134 62 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .90 .85 .80 .90 .85 .80 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 652 181 55 534 158 78 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 652 181 61 534 173 85 CAPACITYANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 1332 vph 743 vph Critical Gap: 7.4 seconds 6.1 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 128 pcph 514 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.90 _ Movement Capacity: 116 pcph 514 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 833 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 641 pcph Movement Capacity: 641 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 90.5% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) NA SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Movements Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service F-Severe Congestion Ave Delay Left From Minor Bottom Leg 173 116 - 322.- g � ,218.7 sec.] Right From Minor Bottom Leg 85 514 - 8.4 B-Short Delays Left From Major Right Leg 61 641 - 6.2 B-Short Delays 0.6 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection:33.7 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:44 AM MAIN STREET&HAGGERTY C:\UNSIG3\MAINHAG.INT EXISTINGPLUS SITE TRAFFIC-PM MINOR STREET QUEUE LENGTHS NOTE: AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS Queue Lengths are displayed by lane 95th Percentile Queue Lengths groupings-not by movement according to the 1994 HCM for a 15 minute counting period based on saturation and capacity In vehicles per hour. 7 1 Left and Right movements use Exclusiv e ve Lanes MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.0b 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:41 AM MAIN STREET&HAGGERTY EXISTING CONDITIONS-AM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOLUMES INPCPH S=STOP CONTROL (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND PREVAILING SPEED=45 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES <-- Grade= 0% F--- 407 1800 (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg EXCLUSIVE LEFT LANE Major Left Leg 55 Grade= 0% Major Right Leg 238 Major Right Leg NO RIGHT TURN LANE �NO ACCEL.LANE 106 NO RIGHT TURN S S RADIUS<50 ft 11 2 STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade= NO SHARED LANES 5 9 NOTE: 0% I SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. 1 Saturation Volumes are used LARGE to calculate Probability of POPULATION Queue Free Major Street States Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg thru right left thru left f right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 214 90 40 366 117 21 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .90 .85 .80 .90 .85 .80 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 238 106 50 407 138 26 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 238 106 55 407 151 29 CAPACITY ANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 747 vph 291 vph Critical Gap: 7.4 seconds 6.1 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 324 pcph 940 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.95 Movement Capacity: 309 pcph 940 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 344 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1143 pcph Movement Capacity: 1143 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 95.2% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) NA SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Movements Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service Left From Minor Bottom Leg 151 309 '- 22.3 D-Long Delays Ave Dela 19.4 sec. Right From Minor Bottom Leg 29 940 - 4.0 A- Little Delay Left From Major Right Leg 55 1143 - 3.3 A-Little Delay 0.4 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection:3.7 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:41 AM MAIN STREET&HAGGERTY EXISTING CONDITIONS-AM MINOR STREET QUEUE LENGTHS NOTE: AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS Queue Lengths are displayed by lane 95th Percentile Queue Lengths groupings-not by movement according to the 1994 HCM for a 15 minute counting period based on saturation and capacity in vehicles per hour. 2 1 Left and Right movements use Exclusive Lanes MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:43 AM C:\UNSIG3VAAINHAG.INT MAIN STREET&HAGGERTY EXISTINGPLUS SITE TRAFFIC-AM INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOLUMES INPCPH S=STOP CONTROL (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL _ AND PREVAILING SPEED=45 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES] <-- Grade= 0% <-- 433 1800 (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg EXCLUSIVE LEFT LANE Major Left Leg !— 88 Grade= 0% Major Right Leg 244 Major Right Leg NO RIGHT TURN LANE S NO ACCEL.LANE 106 NO RIGHT TURN I RADIUS<50 ft 1 3 STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade= i NO SHARED LANES 5 7 NOTE: 0% I SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. I Saturation Volumes are used LARGE to calculate Probability of POPULATION ( I I Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOL UME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg thru right left thru left right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 220 90 64 390 117 27 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .90 .85 .80 .90 .85 .80 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 244 106 80 433 138 34 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 244 106 88 433 1151 37 CAPACITYANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 811 vph 297 vph Critical Gap: 7.4 seconds 6.1 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 293 pcph 931 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.92 - Movement Capacity: 271 pcph 931 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 350 vph Critical Gap: 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1134 pcph Movement Capacity: 1134 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 92.2% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) NA SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Movements Volume ' Capacity Capacity I DELAY Level Of Service D-Lon Delays Ave Delay Left From Minor Bottom Leg 151 271 - 28.9 g y � 24.0 sec. Right From Minor Bottom Leg 37 931 - 4.0 A-Little Delay Left From Major Right Leg 88 1134 - 3.4 A-Little Delay O.b sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 4.6 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 11:43 AM MAIN STREET&HAGGERTY C:\UNSIG3\MAINHAG.INT EXISTINGPLUS SITE TRAFFIC-AM MINOR STREET QUEUE LENGTHS NOTE: AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS Queue Lengths are displayed by lane 95th Percentile Queue Lengths groupings-not by movement according to the 1994 HCM for a 15 minute counting period based on saturation and capacity in vehicles per hour, 3 1 Left and Right movements use Exclusive Lanes i HCM Analysis Summary MAIN & HIGHLAND EXISTING MAIN/HIGHLAND R MARVIN 1 1/30/2000 PEAK AM Case: MAINHIGH Analysis Duration: 15 minutes Area Type: Non CBD Lanes_ Geometry:Movements Serviced by Lane and Lane Widths (feet) Approach Outbound Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 4 - Lane 5 Lane 6 _ EB - 3 2 L 16.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 1 WB 3 2 L 16.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 -` NB 1 _ 1 LTR 16.0 SB I - I-- LTR 12.0 East West North _ South _ Data _- _ L _-T R L 1 T R L T R -L T R_ Movement Volume(vph) 1 215 127 171 312 0 96 0 89 - 0 0 0 PHF -_ 0.80 _0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 _0.80 0.80 0.80- 0.80 0.80 % Heavy Vehicles 0 2 1 1 2 0 1 0 _ 1 0 0 0 1 Lane Groups _ L TR L TR LTR LTR _ 1 Arrival Type 3 3 3 I 3 3 3 _ RTOR Vol (vph) _ `_- _- 50�- 0 20 0 Peds/Hour- _ - 0 _ 0 0 _ _ 0 %Grade - ---- ---0 --- 0 0 --0 ---- Parkers/Hour -- -- Buses/Hour 0 0 0 0 Signal Settings: Semi-Actuated- Optimization Analysis Cycle Length: 60.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle: 12.0 Sec `- Phase: -_-- 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 7 $ Only EB L TP WB L TP NB LTP -- S B - - •-- � LTP - - - - ----- -- Green -_ 15.5 14.7 17.8 - 0 Yellow 2.3 2.3 2.3 All Red 1.7 1.7 1.7 _ Capacity Anasis Results _ _____ _ APproaCh: Lane - Cap - v/s g/C Lane v/c 1 Delay Delay App Group (vph) Ratio Ratio Group Ratio (sec/veh) LOS (sec/veh) LOS 1. 528 0.000_ 0.258 L 0.002 16.5 B 20.8 C TR 835 0.107 0.246 I TR 0.437 20.8 C ---- -- WB --- _ _ * L 523 0.106 0.258 L 0.409 20.8 C 20.9 C _ * TR 869 0.110 0.246 TR 0.449 20.9 C NB LTR - - 438 0.139 0.296 LTR 0.470 20.9 C 20.9 C SR _ LTR - 563_ 0.000 _ 0.296 _ _ LTR 0.000 0.0 - A 0.0 A- Intersection: Delay= 20.8sec/veh Int.LOS=C Xc 0.44 * Critical Lane Group (v/s)Crit= 0.36 SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 1 HCM Summary Results MAIN 8c HIGHLAND EXISTING MAIN/HIGHLAND R MARVIN 11/30/2000 PEAK AM Case: MAINHIGH Lane Group Approach Delay Delay Lane X (sec/ (sec/ 0 App Grp v/s v/c veh) LOS veh) LOS EB L _ 0.00 ` 0.00 16.5 B 20.8 C — - 0 TR 0.11 0_44 20.8 C 312 171- - - - W B .--- *L 0.11 0.41 20.8 C 209C TR 0.11 0.45 20.9' C _► 1 4 -, 215 NB ( 127 I LTR 0.14 0.47 20.9 C ! 20.9 C 96 89 0 SB - LTR 0.00 0.00 0.0 A 0.0 A 15 2 2i 15 2 2 18 2 2 i Int. 0.36 0.44 20.8 i C i * Critical Lane Group SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 2 HCM Analysis Summary MAIN & HIGHLAND EXISTING MAINIHIGHLAND R MARVIN 1 1/30/2000 PEAK PM Case: MAINHIGH Analysis Duration: 15 minutes Area Type: Non CBD Lanes _ _ _ _Geometry: Movements Serviced by Lane and Lane Widths (feet) Approach Outbound` Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 4 Lane 5 Lane 6 EB 3 2 L 16.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 WB 3 2 L 16.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 NB l 1 LTR 16.0 SB 1 I LTR 12.0 East West _ North South_ Data _ L T_ R L T _ R L T� R L _T_ R Movement Volume(yph) 2 552 163 138 -1 491 ' 0 218 1 _ _208 - 1__ 3 - 4 PHF_ _ 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 I 0.90 i 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 %Heavy Vehicles - �_-0 _ 2 ` 1 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 Lane Groups L TR L TR r LTR LTR Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 RTOR Vol(vph) -- - --8-- ------ ---- 0 - 60 - ---. .... .. _. ._. 0_ Peds/Hour 0 0 0 0 %Grade 0 0 _ 0 0 Parkers/Hour _ _ --- ,- -- --- Buses/Hour 0 0 0 0 Signal Settings: Semi-Actuated -Optimization Analysis Cycle length: 60.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle: 12.0 Sec Phase: �^ 1 2 - --3 _ --4 5 6 _ 7 _- 8 -- Ped Only EB L TP WB L r TP _.. NB -- - 1 LTP - - - SB ------ 1 LTP Green 10.2 15.9 21.9 0 Yellow ^_- 2.3 2.3 1 2.3 All Red -_ -1.7 -- 1.7 1.7 Capacity Analysis Results - _ _Approaeh:- Lane Cap v/s g/C Lane v/c ! Delay Delay App Group (vph) Ratio -- Ratio Group Ratio ' (sec/veh) LOS- -(sec/veh) LOS EB L 347 �- 0.001 0.170 L 0.006 20.7 _C - 26.5 C * TR _ _ - _ 918�_ 0.203 0.265 TR 0.768 ! 26.5 C WB _._--- * L _ 343 0.076 0.170 ! L 0.446 26.5 C 22.9_ C- - _ TR 937 0.154 0.265 TR 0.583 21.8 C NB - *.LTR- _- 536 0.278 0.366 LTR 0.759 26.4 C 26.4 C LTR_ 561 - 0.005 0.366 LTR 0.014 12.2 B 12.2-- B Intersection: Delay= 25.Osec/veh Int. LOS=C Xc= 0.70 • Critical Lane Group `(v/s)Crit= 0.56 SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page I HCM Summary Results MAIN & HIGHLAND EXISTING MAIN/HIGHLAND R MARVIN 1 1/30/2000 PEAK PM Case: MAINHIGH Lane Group Approach y Delay j Delay c Lane X (sec/ (sec/ 3 A_ pp Grp v/s v/c veh) LOST veh) ILOSI E 4 1 B . — 4j L 0.00 0.01 20.7' C 26.5 C _ TR 0.20 ,0.77 26.5 . C 40 91 138 _WB *L 0.08 0.45 _26.5 ! C 22.9 C - TR- 0.15 0.58 21.81 C I --T• 2 - _ ` -- - 552 NB 163 LTR-.-0.28 0.76 26.4' C 26.4 C •218 1208 f 1 SB 2 3 LTR - 0.01 - 0.01 12.21 B 12.2 B� I 0 2 2I I—i 6 2 2: 22 2--2- -7 i Int. 0.56 0.70 25.01 C * Critical Lane Group SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 2 HCM Analysis Summary Jai MAIN & HIGHLAND EXISTING PLUS SITE MAIN/HIGHLAND R MARVIN 1 1/30/2000 PEAK AM Case: MAINHIGH Analysis Duration: 15 minutes Area Type: Non CBD Lanes Geometry: Movements Serviced by Lane and Lane Widths (feet) Approach Outbound, Lane I Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 4 Lane 5 - Lane 6 _ EB 3 2 L - 16.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 - - - i WB 3 2 L 16.0 T 12.0 ill 12.0 N B I I LTR 16.0 SB I 1 LTR 12.0 East West North South Data L T R L I T R 1 L T T R L T R Movement Volume(vph), 1 + 215 171 195 1 312 0 107 0 95 0 0 _^ 0 PHF_ 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 i 0.80 0.80 I 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 %Heavy Vehicles 0 2 1 E 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Lane Groins _ _ L TR L TR I LTR LTR Arrival-Type -- 3 3 3 3 - -3 -- 3 - - RTOR Vol (vph) 80 _ 0 30 0 Peds/Hour 0 0 0 0 %Grade - - 0 0 0 0 Parkers/Hour - _ --- Buses/Hour 0 0 0 0 f Signal Settings: Semi-Actuated ` Optimization Analysis Cycle Length: 60.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle: 12.0 Sec -- Phase: 2 3 I 4 5 6 7 8 - Ped Only EB L TP WB - - L TP - NB L-TP T SB ----- __. --- LTP ' +. Green 15.8 14.5 17.7 0 Yellow _- _ 2.3 2.3 2.3 �-- ---- All Red 1.7 ! 1.7 i 1.7 1 I ' Capacity Analysis Results Approach:- - � ------ Lane Cap v/s g/C Lane v/c Delay i Delay App Group - _- (vph) Ratio Ratio Group Ratio (sec/veh) LOS (sec/veh) LOS EB L 537 0.000 0.263 L i 0.002 16.3 B 21.4 C * TR 818 0.113 0.242 TR :_ 0.4468 ,_ 21.4 C WB * L - 532 0.120 0.263 L 0.459 21.4 C _ 21.2 C TR -^ - 856 _ 0.110 0.242 J TR 0.456 21.1 C -_ - NB * LTR 436 0.146 0.295 LTR 0.493 21.4 C 21.4 _ C SB - - LTR 561 0.000 0.295 I LTR 0.000 0.0 A 0.0 A Intersection: Delay= 21.3 sec/veh Int.LOS=C Xc 0.47 *Critical Lane Group 1.(v/s)Crit= 0.38 SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page I HCM Summary Results MAIN & HIGHLAND EXISTING PLUS SITE MAIN/HIGHLAND 1 R MARVIN 11/30/2000 PEAK AM Case: MAINHIGH Lane Group Approach '— _ r Delay j Delay i Lane X (sec/ (sec/ App Grp v/s _v/c veh) !LOS veh) �LOSi 0 ` 1 EB 0 ' 0 F L 0.00 0.00 16.3 B 21.4 C *TR 0.11 0.47 21.4 C' --- 0 -- f---- 3 12 -- ---- -----�'i --- 195 W B *L _0.12 0.46 21.4' C 21.2 C ! -- TR 0.11 0.46 21.1 , C • -- 215 —� NB 171 LTR 0.15 0.49 21.4 C 21.4 C 107, 95 0 SB - - - 2 3 LTR 0.00 0.00 0.0' A 0.0 A 16 - 2_ z 15 _- 2 2 17 2 2 Int. 0.38 0.47 21.31 C j * Critical Lane Group SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 2 l� HCM Analysis Summary f MAIN & HIGHLAND EXISTING PLUS SITE MAIN/HIGHLAND R MARVIN 1 1/30/2000 PEAK PM Case: MAINHIGH Analysis Duration: 15 minutes Area Type: Non CBD Lanes _Geometry:Movements Serviced by Lane and Lane Widths (feet) - _Approach Outbound' Lane I Lane 2 Lane 3- Lane 4 Lane 5_ _ Lane 6 EB 3_ 2 _`-L 16.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 WB 3 2 L 16.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 NB 1 1 LTR 16.0 SB I 1 LTR 12.0 East West North South Data L T R L T R L T R L T _R_ Movement Volume(vph) 2 552 175 144 1__491 I 0 250 1 220 1 _ `3 _4 --- P H F 0.90 0.90 0.90_ 0.90 0.90 0.90 ---0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 %Heavy Vehicles _ 0 2 1 I 2 0 1 0- I 0- __0 - _0 Lane Groups L TR _- L TR LTR _ LTR.--- Arrival p - -- Type _ - 3 3 3 3 3 -_-- - 3 _ RTOR Vol (vph) __ _ _80 4 - _ _0 65 0 Peds/Hour. 0 0 0 _ 0 %Grade .-_O_.-_._...- 0 0 - � --- 0----- Parkers/Hour --- --- --- Buses/Hour 0 0 0 0 Signal Settings: Semi-Actuated Optimization Analysis Cycle Length: 60.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle: 12.0 Sec ' Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 - 8 Ped Only EB L TP ------ W B L TP NB LTP SB - -- LTP --- -•----- -•--•-- --- Green 9.5 15.5 22.9 0 Yellow 2.3 2.3 •-----2.3 ---------»----_ �..- --- - --_. .___ .---- -- _--_--- All Red 1.7 -- ----_. 1.7 1.7 ---- ---_ - ---_-� • Capacity Analysis Results Approach: Lane Cap v/s g/C Lane v/c Delay Delay App Group (vph) Ratio Ratio Group Ratio �-(sec/veh) LOS (sec/veh) LOS EB L 325 0.001 0.159 L - 0.006 J 21.3 C 28.4 C * TR 895 0.208 0.259 TR 0.803 i 28.4 C * L 322-,^0.079 0.159 L 0.497 r28.4 C 23.7 C TR 915 '0.154 0.259 TR ; 0.597 22.4 C NB - * LTR 558 0.309 0.382 LTR 0.808 28.5 C 28.5 C LTR 586 - 0.005- 0.382 LTR +� 0.014 11.5 B 11.5 B Intersection: Delay= 26.6sec/veh Int. LOS=C Xc= 0.74 *Critical Lane Group =-(v/s)Crit= 0.60 SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 1 HCM Summary Results MAIN & HIGHLAND EXISTING PLUS SITE MAIN/HIGHLAND , R MARVIN 11/30/2000 PEAK PM Case: MAINHIGH Lane Group Approach Delay Delay Lane X (sec/ (sec/ 3 App Grp v/s We veh) !LOS veh) L.OSI EB L 0.00 0.01 21.3 C 28.4 C TR 0.21 0.80 28.4 C 0 •—- 491 -----— --------- - �� -- 144 —------------= WB - - - - ! r - L 0.08 0.50 28.4 C 23.7 C TR 0.15 0.60 22.4 C _� I 2 ♦ , - - -._ -�— 552 —� NB 175 LTR 0.31 0.81 28.51 C 28.5 C .125041220 1 SB - - - LTR 0.01 0.01 11.5 B 11.5 B 10 _. �2 2 16 2 2 22 2 2 Int. 0.60 0.74 26.6 C * Critical Lane Group SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 2 MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 03:43 PM WEST APPROACH-ELLIS PEAK AM HOUR INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOL UMES IN PCPH S=STOP CONTROL (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND PREVAILING SPEED=25 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES] <__ Grade= 0% E-- 60 1800 (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg SHARED LEFT LANE Major Left Leg 33 Grade= 0% — Major Right Leg 113 Major Right Leg NO RIGHT TURN LANE \ �NO ACCEL.LANE 99 NO RIGHT TURN �L S I S RADIUS<50 ft 2 7 STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade= XI X SHARED LANES 8, NOTE: 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Saturation calculatelacalculateol ilume r used LARGE POPULATION ( Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOL UME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg thru right left thru left right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 90 79 24 48 20 5 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .80 .80 .80 .80 .80 .80 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 113 99 30 60 25 6 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 113 99 33 60 28 7 CAPACITY ANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 252 vph 162 vph Critical Gap: 6.2 seconds 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 773 pcph 1157 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.98 - Movement Capacity: 754 pcph 1157 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 211 vph Critical Gap: 4.9 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1368 pcph Movement Capacity: 1368 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 97.6% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 97.5% SHARED LANE CAPA CITY AND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Movements Volume ' Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left From Minor Bottom Leg 28 754 810 4.6 A-Little Delay Ave Delay - 4. sec. X Right From Minor Bottom Leg 7 1157 810 4.6 A-Little Delay X Left From Major Right Leg 33 1368 - 2.7 A-Little Delay 1.0 Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 0.7 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 03:43 PM WEST APPROACH-ELLIS PEAK PM HOUR INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOLUMES INP--CPH S=STOP CONTROL (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND PREVAILING SPEED=25 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES) F— Grade= 0% � 61 1800 (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. _ — Major Left Leg SHARED LEFT LANE Major Left Leg % 7 Grade= 0% Major Right Leg 73 \G Major Right Leg NO RIGHT TURN LANE� �NO ACCEL.LANE 26 �> NO RIGHT TURN I W � S S RADIUS<50 ft 7 2 F STOP OR YIELD SIGN I Grade= X X SHARED LANES ! 7 5 NOTE: 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. I Saturation Volumes are uses LARGE to calculate Probability of POPULATION Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane' is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg thru right left thru left right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 58 21 5 49 56 1 18 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .80 .80 .80 .80 .80 1 .80 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 73 26 6 61 70 23 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 1 73 26 7 1 61 77 25 CAPACITYANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 153 vph 86 vph Critical Gap: 6.2 seconds 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 874 pcph 1259 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 1.00 _ Movement Capacity: 870 pcph 1259 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 99 vph Critical Gap: 4.9 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1542 pcph Movement Capacity: 1542 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 99.5% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 99.5% SIL4RED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Movements Volume Capacity Capacity I DELAY Level Of Service X Left From Minor Bottom Leg 77 870 942 4.3 A-Little Delay Ave Delay i 4.3 sec. X Right From Minor Bottom Leg 25 1259 942 4.3 A-Little Delay X Left From Major Right Leg 7 1542 - 2.3 A-Little Delay 0. ss c Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 1.7 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS November 30,2000 03:45 PM EAST APPROACH-ELLIS PEAK AM HOUR INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOL UMES IN PCPH S=STOP CONTROL T (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND PREVAILING SPEED=25 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES! <— Grade= 0% <-- 69 1800 (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. 26 Major Left Leg SHARED LEFT LANE_ Major Left Leg Grade= 0% Major Right Leg 39 Major Right Leg NO RIGHT TURN LANE �NO ACCEL.LANE 80 NO RIGHT TURN S S RADIUS<50 ft 2 7 STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade X X SHARED LANES 3 NOTE: Saturation Volumes are used SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. to calculate Probability of LARGE Queue Free States when the POPULATION Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg thru right left thru left ' right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 31 64 19 55 17 5 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .80 .80 .80 .80 .80 .80 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 39 80 24 69 21 6 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 39 80 26 69 23 7 CAPACITYANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 171 vph 79 vph Critical Gap: 6.2 seconds 5.3 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 855 pcph 1269 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.98 - Movement Capacity: 839 pcph 1269 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 119 vph Critical Gap: 4.9 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1510 pcph Movement Capacity: 1510 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 98.3% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 98.2% SHARED LANE CAPA CITY AND LEVEL OF SER VICE ANAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Movements I Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service A-Little Delay Ave t ec. elav X Left From Minor Bottom Leg 23 839 911 4.1 4.1 sec. X Right From Minor Bottom Leg 7 1269 911 4.1 A-Little Delay X Left From Major Right Leg 26 1510 - 2.4 A- Little Delay 0.7 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 0.8 seconds MARVIN&ASSOCIATES 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS WINUNSIG version 3.Ob EAST APPROACH-ELLIS November 30,2000 03:44 PM PEAK PM HOUR INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOLUMES INPCPH S=STOP CONTROL (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND PREVAILING SPEED=25 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES Grade= 0% <- 10 1800(2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg SHARED LEFT LANE Major Left Leg 7 Grade= 0% —� Major Right Leg 73 Major Right Leg NO RIGHT TURN LANE �NO ACCEL.LANE 23 NO RIGHT TURN S I S RADIUS<50 ft STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade= 6 1 0% X X SHARED LANES 3 9I NOTE: vLARGE SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of POPULATION Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg thru right left thru left ' ri t UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 58 18 5 8 46 14 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .80 .80 .80 .80 .80 .80 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 73 23 6 10 58 18 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 73 23 7 10 63 19 CAPACITYANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 100 vph Critical Gap: 6.2 seconds 84 vph Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 5.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 934 pcph 2.6 seconds Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 1.00 1262 pcph Movement Capacity: 930 pcph 1262 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 95 vph Critical Gap: 4.9 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1549 pcph Movement Capacity: 1549 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 99.5% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 99.5% SHARED LANE CAPA CITY AND LEVEL OF SER VICE A NAL YSIS X indicates shared lanes Movements Volume Sha red _ lume Capacity S tact t3' DELAY Level Of Service X Left From Minor Bottom Leg 63 930 990 4.0 A-Little Delay Ave Delay X Right From Minor Bottom Leg 19 1262 990 4.0 A-Little Delay 4.0 sec. X Left From Major Right Leg 7 1549 _ 2.3 A-Little Delay 1.0 sec Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 1.8 seconds 1985 HCM:TWO-LANE HIGHWAYS **************************************************************** FACILITY LOCATION. . . . HIGHLAND BLVD ANALYST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . R MARVIN TIME OF ANALYSIS . . . . . PEAK PM DATE OF ANALYSIS . . . . . 12-12-2000 OTHER INFORMATION. . . . EXISTING CONDITIONS A) ADJUSTMENT FACTORS -- - -- ---- - - ---- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PERCENTAGE OF TRUCKS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 PERCENTAGE OF BUSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 PERCENTAGE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES . . . . . . . . . 1 DESIGN SPEED (MPH) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 PEAK HOUR FACTOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION (UP/DOWN) . . . . . . . . . . 40 / 60 LANE WIDTH (FT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 USABLE SHOULDER WIDTH (AVG. WIDTH IN FT. ) . . . 2 PERCENT NO PASSING ZONES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 B) CORRECTION FACTORS - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - -- -- - - - - - - ROLLING TERRAIN E E E f f f LOS T B R w d HV - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - A 4 3 3 . 2 . 81 . 94 . 93 B 5 3 .4 3 . 9 . 81 . 94 . 91 C 5 3 .4 3 . 9 . 81 . 94 . 91 D 5 2 . 9 3 . 3 . 81 . 94 . 92 E 5 2 . 9 3 . 3 . 93 . 94 . 92 C) LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS ---------------------------- - - ----- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - INPUT VOLUME (vph) : 750 ACTUAL FLOW RATE: 815 SERVICE LOS FLOW RATE V/C --- --------- - - - - - A 60 . 03 B 254 . 13 C 546 . 28 D 847 .43 E 2036 . 9 LOS FOR GIVEN CONDITIONS : D 1985 HCM:TWO-LANE HIGHWAYS **************************************************************** FACILITY LOCATION. . . . HIGHLAND BLVD ANALYST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . R MARVIN TIME OF ANALYSIS . . . . . PEAK PM DATE OF ANALYSIS. . . . . 12-12-2000 OTHER INFORMATION. . . . EXISTING PLUS SITE A) ADJUSTMENT FACTORS - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - PERCENTAGE OF TRUCKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 PERCENTAGE OF BUSES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 PERCENTAGE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES . . . . . . . . . 1 DESIGN SPEED (MPH) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 PEAK HOUR FACTOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION (UP/DOWN) . . . . . . . . . . 40 / 60 LANE WIDTH (FT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 USABLE SHOULDER WIDTH (AVG. WIDTH IN FT. ) . . . 2 PERCENT NO PASSING ZONES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 B) CORRECTION FACTORS --------- - - - -- --- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - ROLLING TERRAIN E E E f f f LOS T B R w d HV - - - -- - -- - - - -- - -- - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - -- A 4 3 3 . 2 . 81 . 94 . 93 B 5 3 .4 3 . 9 . 81 . 94 . 91 C 5 3 . 4 3 . 9 . 81 . 94 . 91 D 5 2 . 9 3 . 3 . 81 . 94 . 92 E 5 2 . 9 3 . 3 . 93 . 94 . 92 C) LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS - ------ -- ----- - -- ---- - -- -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - INPUT VOLUME (vph) : 815 ACTUAL FLOW RATE: 886 SERVICE LOS FLOW RATE V/C - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - A 60 . 03 B 254 . 13 C 546 . 28 D 847 . 43 E 2036 . 9 APPENDIX "C" SPOT SPEED STUDY Page 24 SPOT SPEED STUDY ANALYSIS (Radar) SITE ; HIGHLAND BOULEVARD DIRECTION: NORTHBOUND DATE: 11/03/00 TIME: 10:30 TO 11:30 am SPEED SPEED CUMUL. RELATIVE CUMULATIVE RANGE VALUE FREQ FREQ. FREQ(%) FREQ(%) 20 to 22 22 1 1 0.85% 0.85% 23 to 25 25 2 3 1.71% 2.56% 26 to 28 28 4 7 3.42% 5.98% 29 to 31 31 14 21 11.975,o' 17.95% 32 to 34 34 22 43 18.80% 36.75% 35 to 37 37 24 67 20.51% 57.26% 38 to 40 40 25 92 21.37% 78.63% 41 to 43 43 16 108 13.68% 92.31% 44 to 46 46 5 113 4.27% 96.58% 47 to 49 49 2 115 1.71% 98.29% 50 to 52 52 0 115 0.00% 98.29% 53 to 55 55 1 116 0.85% 99.15% 56 to 58 58 1 117 0.85% 100.00% 59 to 61 61 0 117 0.00% 100.00% 62 to 64 64 0 117 0.00% 100.00% TOTAL VEHICLES= 117 MEAN SPEED= 37.46 mph 85TH PERCENTILE = 41.40 mph PACE SPEED= 29 mph TO 38 mph SIGMOID CURVE 100% -- ■ co w 80% ■ J _U 2 W 9 Bo% LL ■ O W 0 H 40% Z ■ W d 20% ■ 22 25 2E 71 31 37 40 17 46 49 52 55 5e 61 01_. SPEED(MILES/HOUR) SPOT SPEED STUDY ANALYSIS (Radar) SITE ; HIGHLAND BOULEVARD DIRECTION: SOUTHBOUND DATE: 11/03/00 TIME: 10:30 TO 11:30 am SPEED SPEED CUMUL. RELATIVE CUMULATIVE RANGE VALUE FREQ FREQ. FREQ(%) FREQ(%) 20 to 22 22 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 23 to 25 25 1 1 0.85% 0.85% 26 to 28 28 4 5 3.42% 4.27% 29 to 31 31 16 21 13.68% 17.95% 32 to 34 34 21 42 17.95% 35.90% 35 to 37 37 30 72 25.64% 61.54% 38 to 40 40 21 93 17.95% 79.49% 41 to 43 43 16 109 13.68% 93.16% 44 to 46 46 3 112 2.56% 95.73% 47 to 49 49 2 114 1.71% 97.44% 50 to 52 52 1 115 0.85% 98.29% 53 to 55 55 2 117 1.71% 100.00% 56 to 58 58 0 117 0.00% 100.00% 59 to 61 61 0 117 0.00% 100.00% 62 to 64 64 0 117 0.00% 100.00% TOTAL VEHICLES= 117 MEAN SPEED= 37.46 mph 85TH PERCENTILE = 41.21 mph PACE SPEED= 30 mph TO 39 mph SIGMOID CURVE 100% -- w 60% w J U_ W > 60% .. .. O W / 40% Z ■ W 0 / W d 20% 6f J0% 22 25 26 31 34 37 40 43 46 46 52 55 56 61 64 SPEED(MILES/HOUR) APPENDIX "D" TURN LANE WARRANTS Page 25 AASHTO Table IX-15. Guide For Left Turn Lane 800 ' I 700 600 - 5% LT _ i i 5 > 500 10% LT = I --SB LT TURN ON HIGHLAND AT ELLIS (� 400 M WARRANTED �- 15% LTO 10 300 20% LT 200 100 a a� 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Opposing Volume I 13.4(2) INTERSECTIONS AT-GRADE April 1994 120 r- t If r 1414 IC AriQ 100 F_U-Is \ I RIGHT-TURN LANE MAY 0 80 �l BE JUSTIFIED � I o0 o x C 25 W a 60 o ti I > W Z U w RIGHT-TURN LANE MAY 17 > NOT BE JUSTIFIED x ZE ZE 40 20 1 t 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 TOTAL DHV,VEHICLES PER HOUR,IN ONE DIRECTION Note: For highways with a design speed below 80 km/h with a DHV<300 and where right turns > 40, an adjustment should be used. To read the vertical axis of the chart, subtract 20 from the actual number of right turns. Example Given: Design Speed 60 km/h DHV = 250 vph Right Turns = 100 vph Problem: Determine if a right-turn lane Is necessary.. Solution: To read the vertical axis, use 100 - 20 = 80 vph. The-figure Indicates that a right-turn lane Is not necessary, unless other factors (e.g., high accident rate) Indicate a lane is needed. GUIDELINES FOR RIGHT-TURN LANES AT UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS ON 2-LANE HIGHWAYS Figure 13.4A NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER A Planned Unit Development Covenants and Architectural Guidelines As submitted for recording 1211512000 See recorded documents for final changes. Prepared and submitted by: John Campbell and Gary Lusin, Owners Bayliss Architects, P.C., Architects C&H Engineering, Civil Engineers NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER COVENANTS AND LOT OWNERS ASSOCIATION GUIDELINES It is the general intent of this Document to establish the legal authority for and to list the Covenants that pertain to the Northern Rockies Professional Center Subdivision, and to establish the Northern Rockies Professional Center Owners' Association, and the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee. These Covenants detail how the properties within the Northern Rockies Professional Center Subdivision are to be developed and maintained. More specifically, the Covenants define how the buildings are to be designed and landscaped, and how the Common Open Space which is within the property is to be used, managed and maintained. When a lot is bought in the Northern Rockies Professional Center Subdivision property, the owner automatically becomes a member of the Northern Rockies Professional Center Owners' Association. This Lot Owners' Association will be run by its members. It is the Association's duty to implement, administrate, and enforce all the Covenants including the maintenance and management of the Common Open Space, Paths and Roads, and to carry on the day-to-day activities of the Lot Owners' Association. There will be an Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee which will be chosen by the Declarant. The Architectural and Landscaping Committee's duty is to, in general, approve or disapprove the building plans brought to it by the individual Lot Owners. 3 DECLARATION OF COVENANTS AND LOT OWNERS ASSOCIATION GUIDELINES FOR NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER PROPERTY This declaration, made this 15th day of December 2000, by XXXXX or assigns, with principle office in Bozeman, Montana, hereinafter referred to as "declarant'. A. WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of the following described land in Gallatin, County, Montana: Tract C Certificate of Survey 1177C. B. WHEREAS, Declarant intends to sell, dispose of, divide into lots, and convey The real property above described and more specifically described in the final plat of NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER, Gallatin County, Montana, and C. WHEREAS, Declarant desires to subject all of said real property and the lots and subdivisions thereof to protective and restrictive covenants, conditions, restrictions, guidelines and reservations herein set forth and referred to as "Covenants", each and all of which is and are for the benefit of said property, lots and subdivisions and the owners thereof, and shall run with the land applying and binding the present owners and all future owners and successors in interest. D. WHEREAS, Declarant desires to establish that these Covenants do hereby create the Northern Rockies Professional Center Subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, Declarant does hereby establish, dedicate, publish, and impose upon the Parcel, the following protective and restrictive covenants upon the property which shall run with the land and shall be binding upon and be for the benefit of all persons claiming such property, their grantors, legal representatives,heirs, successors, and assigns, and shall be for the purpose of maintaining a uniform and stable value, character, architectural design, use, and development of the Parcel, and all improvements placed or erected thereon, unless otherwise specifically excepted as herein mentioned, and said Covenants shall inure to and pass with each and every parcel, tract, lot, or division. Said Covenants are as follows. 4 ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS 1.1 "Lot Owners' Association" or "Association" shall mean the Northern Rockies Professional Center Lot Owners' Association, its successors and assigns. The Association may be incorporated as a Montana nonprofit corporation or a Limited Liability Corporation with its members as the lot owners. 1.2 "Member" shall mean any person or entity owning or purchasing a lot in the Northern Rockies Professional Center Subdivision property. Each lot owner shall be a member of the Association and agrees to abide by and be bound by these Covenants, and the Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws, and Resolutions of the Association, if any. 1.3 "Owner" shall mean the legal title holders, or contract purchasers, whether one or more persons or entities, owning or purchasing a fee simple title to any lot but excluding those having an interest merely as security for the performance of an obligation; provided, however, that prior to the first conveyance of each portion of the properties for value, owner shall mean Declarant. 1.4 "Declarant" shall mean XXXXX or assigns, and shall not mean a purchaser of a lot from the Declarant. 1.5 "First President of the Association"or"First President" shall mean the person who has the complete, final, and binding authority over all matters and decisions of the Association, including but not limited to, the operation hiring, accounting, financing, management, and the operation hiring, accounting, and management of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee or"Committee". The First President of the Association will be either the Declarant himself or a representative of the Declarant, and the First President's position and authority over the Association shall be permanent unless he chooses, in writing, to resign at an earlier time. 1.6 "Architectural and Landscape Review Committee" or"Committee" or A.L.R.C. shall mean the Committee appointed by the Declarant whose function is to review and approve or disapprove plans, specifications, designs, landscaping, sites and locations of improvements to be constructed or erected on the property. 1.7 "Declaration" shall mean this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Northern Rockies Professional Center Subdivision, and as it may, from time to time, be amended or supplemented. 1.8 "Parcel" shall mean all of the real property described and platted as NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Subdivision, according to the official 5 subdivision plats thereof filed of record in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Gallatin County, Montana. 1.9 "Property" shall mean a specific part of the Parcel which has a specific zoning designation and use, i.e., Office Use, as shown on the plat of the Northern Rockies Professional Center Subdivision. J 1.10 "Project" shall mean the organization, division, improvement, operation and sale of property in NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Subdivision. 1.11 "Lot" shall mean the smallest subdivided unit of land for sale in the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER property as shown on the plat for NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Subdivision. 1.12 "Common Area" or"Open Space" shall mean all of the Parcel conveyed to the Lot Owner's Association for use by the Association and its Members and the Owners in common. The Common Area shall be the parts of the Parcel within the zoned property which are not specifically owned by individual Lot owners. 1.13 "Open Space Management Plan"shall mean the management plan for the Common Area or Open Space conveyed to the Lot Owner's Association for use by the Association and its Members and the Owners in common. 1.14 "Beneficiary" shall mean a Mortgagee under a Mortgage, as well as a Beneficiary under a Trust Indenture. 1.15 "Mortgage" shall mean a Trust Indenture as well as a Mortgage. 1.16 "Mortgagee" shall mean a Beneficiary under, or holder of, a Trust Indenture as well as a Mortgagee under a Mortgage. 1.17 "Architect" shall mean a person holding a certificate of registration to practice architecture in the State of Montana or any state in the United States. 1.18 "Improvement (s)" shall include,but not exclusively, all building, outbuildings, bridges, roads,paths, pathways, driveways, parking areas, fences, screening walls and barriers, retaining walls, stairs, decks, water lines, sewer lines, springs, ponds, lagoons, ditches, viaducts and electrical, gas and TV distribution facilities hedges; windbreaks, natural and or planted trees and shrubs, poles, signs, loading areas and all other structures, installations and landscaping of every type and kind, whether above or below the land surface. 1.19 "Capital Improvement(s)" shall mean an Improvement or two or more interdependent improvements of a substantial nature benefiting the Association, Common Area, which, when undertaken, may reasonably be anticipated to require a projected expenditure by the Association of a total amount greater than $10,000.00. 6 1.20 "Occupant" shall mean a lessee or licensee of an Owner, or any other person or entity other than the Owner in lawful possession of a Lot or Lots with the permission of the Owner. 1.21 "Record", "recording", "recorded"or"recordation", shall mean, with respect to any document, the recordation of said document, the recordation of said document in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Gallatin County, Montana. 1.22 "Developer" or"Building Contractor" shall mean any person or entity buying one or more Lots from the Declarant for the purpose of building office. 1.23 "Office", refer to a specific classification of R-O office buildings as defined in the Bozeman Zone Code. 1.24 "A.L.R.C."is an abbreviation for the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee. ARTICLE II AUTHORITY These guidelines shall apply to the subdivision plats for NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Subdivision as will be recorded at the Gallatin County Courthouse. Declarant hereby declares that the entire Parcel, more particularly described above, is, and shall be, conveyed, hypothecated, encumbered, leased, occupied,built upon or otherwise used, improved, or transferred in whole or in part, subject to this Declaration. All of the covenants, conditions and restrictions set forth herein are declared and agreed to be in furtherance of a general plan for the division, improvement and sale of the property and are established for the purpose of enhancing, conserving, and protecting the value, desirability and attractiveness of the property and every part thereof. All of the covenants, conditions and restrictions herein shall run with all of the property for all purposes and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Declarant, the Association and all Owners, Occupants, and their successors in interest as set forth in the Declaration. The Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee and the Association is established under the authority of these Restrictive Covenants for the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Subdivision property, Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws of the Owners' Association of NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Subdivision and the Montana Non-Profit or L.C.C. Corporation Act. ARTICLE III 7 GENERAL COVENANTS 3.1 Owner's Right to Common Area,Paths and Roads. Every Owner shall have a right to use the Common Areas, Paths, and Roads as shown on the approved final plat of NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Subdivision. The Owner's right to use the Common Areas, Paths and Roads shall be appurtenant to and shall pass with the title to every Lot, subject to the following Provisions: a) The right of the Association to provide reasonable restrictions on the use of the Common Areas, Paths, and Roads for the overall benefit of the Association and its members including limitations on the number of guests permitted to use the Common Area and restrictions or prohibitions on the type of activity and use including, but not limited to, the use of firearms, fireworks, all motor driven vehicles, loud music, and loud parties in the Common Area or as otherwise specified in the Open Space Management Plan; b) The Open Space Management Plan and any other reasonable restrictions on the use of the Common Areas and Paths shall be enforced and implemented by the president of the Association. c) The right of the Association to dedicate or transfer all or any part of its right to the Common Area and Trials to any public agency, authority, utility,person, corporation or other entity for such purposes and subject to such conditions as may be agreed to by the Association. No such dedication or transfer shall be effective unless approved by sixty seven percent (67%) of the Directors. 3.2 Owners Right to Parking Area. Every Owner shall have a right to use the parking areas. The Owner's right to use the parking areas shall be appurtenant to and shall pass with the title to every Lot or building subject to the following provisions: a) Compliance with the Bozeman City Zone Code. b) The right of the Association and the First President to provide reasonable restrictions on the use of the parking areas for the overall benefit of the Association and its members including restrictions or prohibitions on the type of activity and use including, but not limited to, special sales events, merchandise display stands or tables, signs, fireworks, loud music, and loud parties in the parking area. c) The right of the Association to charge reasonable fees for the disproportionate use by Owners or their clients of the parking area. d) The right of the Association to suspend the voting rights and right to use of the parking areas of any Owner and/or Occupant for any period during which any assessment against his Lot or person remains unpaid and for any infraction of its published rules and regulations for any period of time the Association deems necessary. 3.3 Nuisance. No Owner, guest or invitee may use or occupy the Common Area, Paths, Roads, building, parking area, or any Lot in such a manner as to disturb or interfere with the peaceful use, occupancy or enjoyment of any other Lot or building Owner in the 8 subdivision. Violations shall be enforced as provided in paragraph 12.1 of these Covenants. 3.4 Control and Management. The Association shall have the exclusive right and obligation to manage, control, and maintain the Common Area, Paths, Roads, and Parking Areas including but not limited to the layout, design, and installation of any improvements in accordance with these Covenants and the Open Space Management Plan for the Common Area. 3.5 Delegation of Use. Any Owner may delegate, upon notification to the Association, to the members of his immediate family, or contract purchasers who reside on the property, his right of enjoyment to the Common Area, Paths, Roads and facilities. 3.6 Reservation of Easements. The Declarant reserves the right to grant and/or dedicate an easement or easements in any location on, over or across any Road, Parking Area, Common Area, or Path for water, sewer, natural gas, electrical, fiber optics or cable TV for the installation, maintenance and repair of all such new or existing services and utilities. 3.7 Right of Access. The Association, First President, delegated representatives, or the Declarant shall have the irrevocable right to have access across any Road, Lot(s), Parking Areas, and Common Area to each building or Improvement from time to time during reasonable hours as may be necessary for the inspection, maintenance, repair, or replacement of any Improvements thereon in accordance with Sections 11.1, 11.4, 11.5, and 12.1. Such right of access therefore, shall be for the purpose of ensuring compliance with the Committee approval and architectural controls in the subdivision. Except for improvements owned by the Association or used by the Association for its benefit or that of its members, all maintenance, repairs, or replacements on any Lot or on any structure thereon belonging to any Owner shall, as otherwise provided herein, be at the expense of the Owner thereof. A similar right of access shall also be reserved and be immediate for the making of emergency repairs therein in order to prevent property damage or personal injury. All damaged Improvements shall be restored to substantially the same condition in which they existed prior to the damage. All maintenance, repairs, and replacements of the Common Area, Paths, and Improvements shall be the common expense of the Association and all of the Owners; provided however, if such damage is caused by a negligent or tortuous act of any Owner,members of his family, his Occupant, agents, employees, invitee(s), or licensee(s), then such Owner shall be responsible and liable for all such damage. 3.8 Underground Utilities. All lines, pipes, wires and all other improvements relating to water, sewer, natural gas, power, cable TV and any and all other utilities and services must be buried underground except for the Improvements required to be above ground by the provider of the utility service. 3.9 Agricultural uses of neighboring plMerties Lot Owners in the subdivision are informed that adjacent uses may be agricultural. Lot owners accept and are aware that 9 standard agricultural and farming practices can result in dust, animal odors, flies, burning and machinery noise. Standard agricultural practices feature the use of heavy equipment, chemical sprays and the use of machinery early in the morning an sometimes late into the evening. ARTICLE IV ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIP AND VOTING RIGHTS 4.1 Membership. Every Owner of a Lot or building which is subject to assessment shall be a member of the Association. Membership shall be appurtenant to and may not be separated from ownership of a Lot which is subject to assessment. Membership is automatically transferred on any sale of an Lot to the new Owner, The Declarant shall be the First President of the Association. 4.2 Voting. Within the Association each member shall be entitled to one vote for each Lot owned. It is estimated that there will be approximately eight (8) lots within the property, and therefore a potential for approximately eight (8) votes. When more than one person holds an interest in any Lot or building, Owners shall designate one person to be the agent for receiving notices hereunder, and for the purpose of voting. Each Lot Owner shall be responsible for advising the Association in writing of their current address and the person designated to vote. The Association shall be deemed to have complied with notice requirements and these covenants by mailing notice to the address of the designated Lot Owner which is on file in writing with the Association. The First President of the Association shall have the complete, final, and binding authority over all matters and decisions as necessary to carry out all the purposes of the association, until the total number of votes of the Association members has reached a total of five (5) or more votes, and until all the buildings are built in phase I. At this time the First President will resign, in writing, and relinquish his sole decision making authority over the Association. At this time the Association will elect a new President. The new President will not have the same power the First President had, and he will have only one vote which will be equal to the one vote of any one member of the Association. A new President will be elected annually unless the Association chooses to elect the same President again. But, until such time as the First President resigns his position, if the First President is absent for any reason, then the remaining members of the Association are completely powerless to vote or decide on any issue whatsoever pertaining to the business of the Association. 4.3 Notice and Quorum For Any Authorized Action. During the development and building of the buildings, the presence of the First President is all that is necessary for final decisions to be made and a quorum will not be required. But as in paragraph 4.2, once construction of all buildings is complete and the First President resigns, then meetings shall require the presence of Association members entitled to cast a minimum of sixty six (66%)percent of all votes of the association. The presence of Association members entitled to cast sixty-six (66%)percent of all votes of the Association shall constitute a quorum. 10 4.4 Meetinas. There shall be a minimum of two (2)meetings per year called by the First President or subsequent Presidents at a date, time, and place shall be determined by the President. The President of the association has the right to call as many meetings as he/she deems necessary in order to perform all the functions of the Association in an efficient and professional manner. 4.5 Hired Officers and Contractual A eements. The First President and subsequently the Association shall have the authority to hire additional professional officers or other personnel which they deem necessary for the smooth, efficient, and professional functioning of the Association. It is the general intent of this paragraph that these professional officers or other personnel are hired because they serve some specific function which is not able to be professionally performed by a regular member of the Association. Although, if one of the Association members is professionally qualified to perform a specific function which the Association needs, then it is permissible for a member to also be hired on this specific professional capacity. Although, these hired officers or other personnel shall not have a vote, unless they are a member of the Association. They may include, but not be limited to the manager, secretary, treasurer, accountant, and maintenance personnel. The Association shall also have the authority to make contractual arrangements with outside entities, including but not limited to an attorney, accountant, engineer, maintenance contractors, and building contractors to provide for the smooth, efficient, and professional function of the Association. ARTICLE V ASSESSMENTS 5.1 Creation of Lien and Personal Obligation of Assessments The Declarant, for each Lot owned within the properties, hereby covenants and each Owner of any Lot by acceptance of a deed thereof, whether or not it shall be so expressed in such deed, is deemed to covenant and agree to pay to the Association: (1) Annual assessment or charges; (2) Special assessments; Such assessments are to be established and collected as hereinafter provided. The annual and special assessments shall be in charge on the land and shall be a continuing lien upon the property against which each such assessment is made. Each lien upon the property against which each such assessment is made. Each such assessment, together with interest, costs, and reasonable attorney's fees shall be the personal obligation of the person who was the Owner of such property at the time when the assessment fell due. 5.2 Purpose of Assessments. The assessments levied by the Association shall be used exclusively to promote the recreation,health, safety, and welfare of the Owners of the property within the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER and the Association and for the improvement, repair, maintenance, and protection of the roads, Common Area, Paths, Parking Areas, Common Areas facilities. As such, these purposes 11 may also include, but shall not be limited to, funding for: the payment of taxes; the purchase of insurance for the Common Area and risks involving the Association maintenance (including snow removal) of roads, parking areas, utilities, streams, creeks, drainage ditches, ponds, paths, bridges and other improvements or easements owned by the Association or used by the Owners in common: the establishment, maintenance, and protection of pasture lands, crops, streams, creeks, drainage ditches, ponds, lagoons, timber, wildlife and animals within the property; the planting, cultivating, mowing, maintenance, harvesting and cutting of fields, grass, weeds or lands within the property; the construction, maintenance and repair of all Improvements, including buildings, structures, ponds, lagoons, drainage ditches, utilities, recreational facilities owned by the Association and constructed on the Common Area or elsewhere for the benefit of the Association; and the cost of labor, equipment, services, materials, management, protection and supervision of the assets and interests of the Association. 5.3 Annual Assessments. Annual Assessments shall be determined by the Association in an amount estimated to cover the normal operating expenses of the Association for each year as determined in conformity with standard accounting practices, together with such additional amounts as may, in their reasonable judgment, be necessary to cover any past deficits from operations or to create reasonable reserves for the future cost of operations of the Association. Annual assessments shall be apportioned among the individual Lot Owners according to the square footage of the Owner's building. Proximity to the Common Area, percentage of street use, or any other variables which may seem more or less favorable to an individual building Owner will not be valid in the determination of the annual assessments. 5.4 Special Assessments. In addition to an annual assessments to cover the Association's operating expenses, the Association, may levy, in any assessment year, special assessment(s) for the purpose of reserving or paying for, in whole or in part, the cost of any construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair or replacement of a Capital Improvement of the Association upon the Common Area and Parking Areas including personal property related there on, and for such other purposes or projects benefiting the Association and its interests provided that any such assessments shall have the assent of two-thirds of the votes of the Association at a meeting called for this purpose. Nothing stated therein shall restrict the right of the Association to provide for the repayment of the special assessment, and upon terms and conditions it deems appropriate, including the collection of interest on the deferred balance. 5.5 Notice and Quorum for Any Action Authorized Under Section 5.4. Written notice of any meeting called for the purpose of taking any action authorized under Section 5.4 of Article V shall be sent to all members not less than ten(10) days nor more than thirty (30) days in advance of the meeting. At the first such meeting called, the presence of members entitled to case sixty six percent (66%) of all of the votes of the Directors shall constitute a quorum. If the required quorum is not present, another meeting may be called subject to the same notice requirement, and the required quorum at the subsequent meetings shall be one-half of the required quorum at the preceding meeting. No such 12 subsequent meeting shall be held sooner than fifteen (15) days following the preceding meeting. 5.6 Uniform Rate of Assessment. Both annual and special assessments will be determined according to the square footage of the Owner's building. However, when in the judgment of the Association, a Capital Improvement is of a nature that uniquely restores damages or provides value only to certain individual Lot or building Owners then, to the extent determined by the Association that such Improvements are not beneficial to the Association as a whole or to the Owners of Lots or buildings in general, such portion of costs which solely contribute to those certain individual Lots or buildings may be pro-rated, scheduled and assessed among only those Owners of Lots or buildings affected. 5.7 Date of Conunencement of Annual Assessment; Due Date. The annual assessments shall be assessed on a calendar year basis. The first annual assessment shall be adjusted according to the number of months remaining in the calendar year. The Association shall fix the amount of the annual assessment against each Lot or building at least (30) days in advance of each annual assessment period. Written notice of the annual assessment shall be sent to every Owner subject thereto. The due dates shall be established by the Association. The Association shall, upon demand, and for a reasonable charge, furnish a certificate signed by the Association President or his representative setting forth whether the assessments on a specific Lot or building have been paid. 5.8 Effect of Nonpayment of Assessments; Remedies of the Association. Any assessment not paid within thirty(30) days after the due date shall bear interest from the due date at a rate of six (6)percentage points above the Prime Rate for Bank Lending in New York City. The Association may record a notice of lien against the property and bring an action at law against the Owner personally obligated to pay the same, or foreclose the lien against the property in the same manner as a mortgage on real property, and the Association shall be entitled in any such actions or foreclosures proceedings to recover its costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys' fees. No Owner may waive or otherwise escape liability for the assessments provided for herein by non-use of the Common Area or abandonment of his Lot. 5.9 Subordination of Lien to First Mortgasze. The lien of the assessments provided for herein shall not subordinate to the lien of any first mortgage. Sale or transfer of any Lot shall not affect the assessment lien, whether such lien arises prior to such sale or transfer, or thereafter becomes due. 5.10 Declarant Assessments. For the purpose of assessments, any Lots owned by the Declarant shall be subject to the same assessments and provisions of these Articles as any other Owner. 13 ARTICLE VI ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL i 6.1 Intent. The architectural and design Covenants and guidelines which follow are intended to compliment the Bozeman Zoning Code and any future protective covenants which govern this Project, and to clarify the intention for the design of buildings for the Project. Specifically, these guidelines set forth design criteria which addresses the building design and location landscaping, lot density, and other improvements. The intent of these guidelines is to allow as much flexibility as possible while at the same time define a minimum level of quality and consistency of building design which will be consistent with and maximize the quality of the overall Project. The unique design elements of the Developer, Building Contractor, Architect, and Owners for both the landscaping and the buildings will be respected, and individual expression is encouraged, provided they are harmonious with the overall plan of the area and the Project. Except insofar as its duties may be extended with respect to a particular area by the Association, the Committee shall review and approve or disapprove all plans and specifications submitted to it for any proposed improvement. No construction or alteration of any improvement or any work affecting the external appearance of any improvement shall be made, erected, altered, placed or permitted to remain upon the Lot until a site plan, floor plans, elevations, trim details, specifications and landscaping showing the design, location, material(s), and color(s) together with the name of the contractor shall have been submitted to and such site plan and specifications are approved in writing by the Committee. 6.2 Membership of Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee. The Committee shall consist of three (3)members appointed by the First President. One (1) of the (3) members of the Committee shall be the First President. The second member shall be representative of the First President, and the third member shall be appointed by the First President. It is also suggested that at least one of the members of the Committee have professional qualifications in the area of architecture. In this regard, the First President may, as provided for in paragraph 4.5 of these Covenants, hire an architect to reside on the Committee in lieu of the third member of the Committee. 6.3 Standards For Review. It shall be the applicant's responsibility to ensure that all proposed construction shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, National Plumbing Code and the National Electrical Code,NEPA, and the Design Guidelines. All plans must be harmonious with the overall plan for the development. All plans, materials and specification must be suitable to the site, adjacent properties and the neighborhood. All improvements must be compatible with the surrounding properties so as to not impair or degrade property or aesthetic values. 6.4 Approval or Disapproval by Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee. The Committee has fifteen (15) days to approve or disapprove the location, construction design, landscaping, and materials used for the building, This fifteen (15) day approval time period will not start until after the detailed site plan, floor plans, roof plans, trim details, project specifications, color samples, sample materials and landscaping plan have 14 all been submitted to the Committee. The Committee will then notify the Owner, in writing, of the date of the start of the fifteen (15) day approval period. If the Committee feels that insufficient plans,project specifications, color samples, sample materials or landscaping plans have been submitted either by the Lot owner or the Owners representative, then the fifteen (15) day time period will not begin until the Committee informs the Owner, in writing that all plans, samples, and materials provided are acceptable. As a protection to the Owner, if the Owner has been notified in writing by the Committee of the starting date of the fifteen (15) day approval period and the Committee does not respond with approval or disapproval by the end of the fifteen (15) day approval period, then the approval shall be deemed granted. Any plans, specification, samples, and proposals approved, either expressly in writing or by the expiration of the fifteen (15) day period hereinabove provided, shall then permit the Owner to commence construction in accordance with said plan, but any deviation from said plan which, in the judgment of the Committee, is also; a) a deviation of substance from either the Design Guidelines; b)the requirements of this Declaration; c) a detriment to the appearance of the structure or to the surrounding area shall be promptly corrected to conform with the submitted plan by the Owner or corrected by the Association at the Owner's expense as provided in sections 6.5 and 7.1 of these Covenants. 6.5 Inspection of Work. Upon the completion of any Improvement, if the Committee finds that such work was not done in strict compliance with all approved plans and specifications submitted or required to be submitted for its prior approval, it shall notify the Owner and the Association of such noncompliance, and shall require the Owner to remedy the same. If, upon the expiration of(7) days from the date of such notification, the Owner has failed to commence to remedy such noncompliance, the Association shall determine the nature and extent of noncompliance thereof and the estimated cost of correction or removing the same (this (7) day period does not apply to any case as described in paragraph 11.11 which shall be subject to remedy within 2 hours of the infraction). The Association shall notify the Owner in writing of the estimated cost of correction or removal. The Owner shall then only have five (5) days to commence such remedy and thirty(30) days to complete such remedy. If the Owner still does not comply with the Association's ruling within five (5) day period, the Association, at their option, may either remove the non-complying improvement or remedy the non-compliance, and the Owner shall reimburse the Association upon demand for all expenses incurred in connection therewith. If such expenses are not promptly repaid by the Owner to the Association, the Association shall levy an assessment and file a lien against such Owner and the Improvement in question and the land on which the same is situated for reimbursement and the same shall be enforced and/or foreclosed upon in the manner provided for by law for mortgages. The Committee may inspect all work in progress and give notice of noncompliance as provided above. 6.6 Design Submittal. It is suggested that the applicant submit a schematic set of drawings for review by the A.L.R.C. While this preliminary submittal is optional, it can be used by the applicant to determine aspects of the design that might be changed to assure later approval prior to the time and expense of a complete set of Construction Drawings. Following is the minimum Submittal required by the A.L.R.C.: 15 a) Site plans including landscaping, walks and decks. (Scale: 1/8" = 1'0" or similar engineering scale) b) Complete Construction Drawings—At least two (2) sets shall be submitted to the Committee for approval. This includes floor plans, exterior elevations of all sides, roof design, specifications and any construction details. Additional submittal elements may be requested by the Committee for clarification of the design if needed and shall be supplied by the applicant. (Scale '/4"= l'0") c) Samples of all exterior materials with their respective color proposals in an adequate size to evaluate properly. The time allowed for review of the plans will be no longer than fifteen(15) days from the time all design submittal requirements are received by the Committee. The time for plan review shall be adjusted accordingly if plans are submitted during any holidays. Approval of plan submittal shall require a majority by the Committee. d) A review fee will be required at the time of submission of all the design submittal documents and materials. The Owner shall submit the required design review fee to the Committee. It shall be the duty of the Association to establish the amount of the design review fee. The purpose of the design review fee shall be to defray the Association's cost of review of all proposed site plans and specifications submitted to them. 6.7 Start of Construction. There shall be no construction work initiated without a building permit issued by the City of Bozeman and without written approval of the plans by the Committee. All building construction and landscaping must conform to both the final approved plans by the City of Bozeman and the Committee. If the Owner does not intend to start construction within three (3) months of purchasing the Lot, then permission in writing will need to be obtained from the Committee to suspend construction of their building until some future date. The Owner will be required to submit in writing a Lot maintenance program that is acceptable to the Committee. Such a program will minimally include but is not limited to killing and removing all existing weeds on the Lot, finish grading the lot if deemed necessary by the Committee,planting an acceptable seeding program as a new ground cover, providing a mowing maintenance schedule, mowing Lot in accordance to the maintenance schedule, and otherwise keeping the Lot in an attractive and presentable condition at all times. Storage of anything on the Lot during this time is completely forbidden. 6.8 Completion. All work on any improvement in the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER property must be complete wotjom twelve (12) months of the date of commencement unless the Committee in writing agrees to an extension. 16 ARTICLE VII GENERAL PROVISIONS 7.1 Enforcement. Violation by an Owner, Occupant, Licensee, Architect, or representative of the Owner of any restrictions, conditions, covenants or agreements herein contained shall give the Association, with reasonable notice, the right to enter upon the property concerned, and to summarily abate and remove at the expense of the Owner any erection, thing, or condition that may be in, or upon, said Lot, building, Common Area, road or right of ways contrary to the provisions hereof without being deemed guilty of trespass. The result of every act or omission whereby ant restrictions, condition, covenant, or agreement is violated in whole, or in part, is hereby declared to be and constitute a nuisance, and every remedy allowed by law against a nuisance, either public or private, shall be applicable against every such result. The Association, or any Owner, shall have the right to enforce, by any proceeding at law or in equity, all restrictions, conditions, covenants,reservations, liens, fines and charges now or hereafter imposed. Failure by the Association or by any Owner to enforce any covenant or restriction herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. 7.2 Costs of Enforcement. Should any lawsuit or other legal proceeding be instituted by the Association against an Owner alleged to have violated one or more of the provisions of this Declaration and should the Association be wholly or partially successful in such proceeding, the offending Owner shall be obligated to pay the costs of such proceeding, including reasonable attorney's fees at both the trial and appellate level. 7.3 Seve�. Invalidation of any of these covenants or restrictions by legal judgment or court order shall in no way affect any other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. 7.4 Amendment. Except those provisions requiring a greater consent, any provision herein may be amended or revoked and additional provisions added, at any time by a written instrument recorded in the office of Clerk and Recorder of Gallatin County, Montana, duly signed and acknowledged by the Owners or record of not less than eighty(80)percent of the Lots subject to this Declaration. 7.5 Term. The provisions of this Declaration shall be binding for a term of twenty five(25) years from the date of this Declaration, after which time the Declaration shall be automatically extended for successive periods of ten (10) years not to exceed three (3) such extensions unless an instrument agreeing to amend, revoke or terminate this Declaration has been signed by the Owner's of eighty(80)percent of the Lots has been recorded. 17 7.6 Non-liability of Committee Members. Neither the Committee nor any member thereof, nor the Association nor any member thereof shall be liable to the ` Association or to any Owner or to any other person of any loss, damage or injury arising out of or in any way connected with the performance of the Committee's or the Association's respective duties under this Declaration unless such loss, damage or injury is due to the willful misconduct of the Committee or its members or of the Association or its members. 7.7 Reservation of Authority. Notwithstanding anything contained therein to the contrary, the Declarant hereby reserves all rights and authorities granted to him in this declaration, to the Association and to the Committee until such time as the Declarant waives such reservation of rights in a writing recorded at the Gallatin County Clerk & Recorder's office. ARTICLE VIII SPECIAL IMPROVEMENTS DISTRICTS 8.1 Waiver Of Protest to Future S.I.D.W. All Owners of Buildings will be required to sign waivers of protest on all future S.I.D.(s) which the City of Bozeman may require them to participate in. ARTICLE IX BUILDING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT 9.1 Intent of Design Criteria. The primary goal is to ensure that the proposed Project design including landscaping maintains or exceeds the general level of quality, size, appearance, and marketability. All initial or subsequent improvements to the privately owned Lots shall be subject to the following architectural and landscaping requirements and guidelines. Approval by the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER and Landscape review Committee shall be obtained prior to application to the City of Bozeman for a building permit. The submittal requirements for review by the A.L.R.C. are specified herein. The A.L.R.C. shall have no power to approve any structure failing to meet, at a minimum, the conditions set forth in this Declaration. 9.2 General Regulations. All lands within the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER are subject to the zoning regulations of the City of Bozeman except for any variances thereto granted by the City of Bozeman as shown on the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER plat as filed in the Gallatin County Courthouse on . As such variances to the zoning requirements of the City of Bozeman shall be specified on the final plat noted above or within the body of this Declaration. In addition to these Regulations,building design may be regulated by City, County, State and Federal regulatory agencies having jurisdiction. The Owner or his or her agent shall be responsible to ensure conformance with any applicable regulations and 18 should check with the City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, and State of Montana Building Codes Division to verify that the most recently adopted edition of any applicable regulation is being used. No construction of, or alteration to, any improvements, whether temporary or permanent, including but not necessarily limited to buildings, fences, walls, earthwork,paving, vegetation, signs, or secondary structures such as utility or trash enclosure, antermas and storage tanks shall be commenced on any lot prior to receiving the written approval of the A.L.R.C. and the City of Bozeman. Interior modification and/or improvements that do not alter the exterior appearance of a building, or the site improvements, shall not require the approval of the A.L.R.C. Although an Owner is responsible to check with the City of Bozeman to see if such interior modification and/or improvements requires their approval. 9.3 Density. Allowable Uses Allowable Areas and Setbacks. a.) Density. The density of the NRPC P.U.D. shall be as follows: Overall land coverage by principal and accessory buildings shall not be more than 60 percent for commercial uses. The percentage of coverage is based on the total project, as the parking areas and open space are common area and not part of the lot as in a conventional subdivision. b.) Permitted Uses. Permitted Uses shall be as follows: principal uses: Essential services (Type I, see Bozeman Zone Code for definition) Medical Offices, clinics, and centers Offices (professional offices and business headquarters) Conditional Uses: Day Care Centers Accessory Uses: Fences Tool sheds for storage of domestic supplies Other buildings and structures typically accessory to permitted uses. Signs, subjects to Chapter 18.65 pf the Bozeman Zoning Board Temporary buildings and yards incidental to construction work Parking areas C) Building Envelone or Buildable Area. Each lot in NRPC the building envelope determined on the site plan. All construction other than landscaping improvements shall be limited to this buildable area. The building will be subject to additional requirements elsewhere in this document. D) Buildin Setbacks. All buildings or structures shall have a setback shown on the site plan. Note that setbacks are created by the common open space of the P.U.D. and that the buildable area is defined by the lot and the landscape strip shown on the Final site plan. Additionally, a minimum 10' separation must occur between individual buildings 19 on adjoining lots. Therefore, each building on adjoining lots must maintain a 5' setback from the adjoining lot. 9.4 Height Limits. Maximum roof heights will be 38' with roof pitches of 3/12 or greater and 32' for buildings with flat roofs or with roof pitches of less than 3/12. Measurement of building height shall be in the same manner as specified by the Bozeman Zone Code. 9.5 Minimum and Maximum BuildingS izes. a) Minimum. 2400 Square Feet. b) Maximum. Limited by the parking calculations for square footages as set forth in this document allocating maximum square footage for the number of parking places provided for each lot and the maximum building coverage as set forth in section 9.3 a(above). 9.6 Buildings on Multiple Lots. A single building may be constructed on contiguous lots, but may not use more the 2 lots unless approved by the A.L.R.C. and the City of Bozeman's Design Review Board as having adequate massing delineation to address the increased linearity of the building. 9.7 Master Signage Plan. The signage plan for the P.U.D. incorporates 3 main elements. They are as follows: Planned Unit Development Identification Signs. These 3 signs are located at the 3 main entrances to the Development, located off Ellis Road. The locations are noted on the Final site plan and details are shown. Building Identification Signs. These signs are located on the interior street. The locations are noted on the Final site plan and details are shown. The information on the signs will be limited to the name of the building complex and the number range of the units serviced by that entrance. Unit Identification Signs. These would be individual signs for each unit within the buildings showing the name of the particular business and the number of the unit. An example would be: Smith, Smith and Smith, C.P.A.'s, 404 Northern Rockies Drive. The wall signs for each unit will comply with the formulas set forth in Section 18.65 of the Bozeman Area sign code dated June 15, 2000. All signs must be approved by the A.L.R.C. and receive a permit from the City of Bozeman. 20 ARTICLE X BUILDING GUIDELINES 10.1 Intent and Design Theme. The intent of the following Building Guidelines is to provide for a degree of continuity throughout the built-up setting of the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER without stifling personal taste in choice of building style. Furthermore, the intent is to establish minimum standards to ensure that the type of building constructed is at least comparable to and blends with the eclectic styles of architecture found in the surrounding developments. The purpose of the design theme is to produce functional and cost effective structures that have a light commercial with residential accents character, including protected entrances, varying roof lines (including multiple roofs and dormers), exterior spaces such as decks. 10.2 Design Concepts. a) Articulation of main entrances. Each building shall have a clearly defined main entrance that is articulated by roof and building massing as well as landscaped design elements such as sidewalks, planting, lighting elements, etc. b) Orientation of buildings. Each building shall be oriented to the parking area provided for it in terms of egress and ingress. The building may be additionally oriented to views or to adjacent buildings for purposes of pedestrian circulation between buildings. Each building should be particularly sensitive to the pedestrian traffic between buildings and parking and relate well to the sidewalk required along the building side of the parking lots and shown on the Final P.U.D. plan. c) Scale and Massing of Buildings. Each building design must address the scale and massing not only of the particular building itself but also of adjacent buildings within the P.U.D. Each building will be reviewed by the A.L.R.C. on this basis. 10.3 Roofs. Roofs are a major element in the building design and therefore will be emphasized by the A.L.R.C. a) Shape and Form. It is the intention of these guidelines to require traditional gable, hip, and shed roof designs used in creative and aesthetically pleasing combinations. Potential flat roofs may be accepted by the A.L.R.C. Secondary roof forms are highly recommended in designs for NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER. These are particularly useful to give proper scale to large roof masses. They can be particularly effective when special care is given to their massing and pattern. In addition, no roof ridgeline shall extend more than forty(40) feet without interruption by an intersecting roofline, secondary roof structure, or step down roof in order to break up the overall mass. 21 ROOF ARTICULATION MEASUREMENT CRITERIA b) Pitches. The minimum roof pitch shall be 5:12 for the major components of any roof. Minor components and secondary roof structures, such as shed roofs and dormer roofs may have pitches as low as 4:12. No component of any roof shall have a pitch less than 4:12. Under certain special circumstances the roof design may incorporate as a minor component of the overall roof design a flat roof. Should the applicant demonstrate that a lesser pitch on the major components can achieve the desired results of these guidelines, the committee may approve the design solely at their discretion. However, the applicant will in that case be required to provide a conceptual submittal as described in the submittal requirement section of this document. c) Secondary Roof Structures. Dormers, skylights, chimneys and solar collectors are considered secondary roof structures. Dormers and most other secondary roof structures are encouraged, both to add interest and scale to major roof areas and to make habitable use of space within the roofs. Dormers and other secondary roofs may have gable, hip or shed forms and may be stacked in multiple forms. When designing the location of skylights, consideration should be given to both the interior and exterior appearance of the unit. Locations should also be coordinated with window and door locations. Skylights shall be located away from valleys, ridges and all other areas where drifting snow and snow ice may hinder the performance and safety of the unit. d) Eves, Soffits, and Fascias. All major roof components shall have a minimum horizontal eve projection of 18 inches measured from the finished wall. Minor roof structures may have a reduced eve projection as necessary to maintain proper proportion or for a specific architectural effect demonstrated to the Committee. Eves may have a horizontal or angled return to the wall. Soffits shall be required to cover all rafter tails and rough framing material except where framing members are finished and protected from exposure. All roof edges shall have a minimum facia of 6 inches in height. For further illustration see drawing below. 10.4 Roofing Materials. Roofing materials enhance the building and need to be compatible with a residential neighborhood. The recommended roofing materials are natural cedar shakes or shingles, heavy gauge, high quality metal, or fiberglass composition shingles in an architectural grade. Other materials may also be considered, but must have written approval from the A.L.R.C. 10.5 Gutters, Downspouts, and Flashing. Gutters and downspouts are allowed but they must be of a color and finish that blends with the finish colors of the structure. Unpainted gutters, downspouts or flashing will not be allowed unless made of copper. Flashing materials shall be of a copper or painted or anodized sheet metal. 22 10.6 Equipment and Ventilating Roof Projections. All roof-mounted equipment shall be integrated into the overall roof design and screened. All roof mounted HVAC equipment will be screened from view with an architectural element consistent with the design of the building and oriented away from the street side of the building. All sewer, bath fan, hot water heater, stove, or other roof venting stacks shall be painted a color as similar as possible to the roof material color. Other non-roof mounted equipment shall likewise be screened from view either with architectural elements such as approved fencing or with the use of landscaping. 10.7 Exterior Walls. The exterior walls are one of the most important aesthetic elements on the building design and will reflect the image of the entire subdivision. Elements of specific concern are scale,proportion, texture and color. The scale and proportion of the exterior walls must have inherent interest and diversity, and harmonized with the high quality nature of the P.U.D. All buildings will be of new construction and there will be no log, manufactured, mobile,pre-assembled, or modular buildings allowed. a) Material. The materials that are acceptable to provide the desired look and textures are real stone and brick, wood beams and siding which is painted or stained, and stucco. Color lock and vinyl siding may be acceptable provided it is of high quality and simulates wood materials faithfully, and the specific brand is approved by the A.L.R.C. Steel or aluminum siding, unless specifically approved by committee, standard usages of plywood siding, such as T1-11, and unnatural appearing simulated stone, brick or wood are unacceptable. Some simulated stone may be acceptable with approval by the A.L.R.C. The Committee will consider new building materials on the market that maintain the aesthetic character of the subdivision. b) Colors. The colors used must be muted earth tones and must also be considered to harmonize and compliment the surrounding site and neighboring buildings. Trim colors should demonstrate only subtle color changes from the main body of the building, unless demonstrated to the A.L.R.C. to be compatible with the character of the PUD. If the applicant can demonstrate to the A.L.R.C. that brighter trim and accent colors can meet the spirit of this document without detracting from the overall development, then the A.L.R.C. has the option of approving the proposed color scheme solely at their discretion. c) Concrete. Exposed concrete shall be limited to a maximum of 8 inches from the bottom of the siding to the finish grade. Exposures of more than 8 inches shall be covered by shrubs, masonry veneer, and texture concrete surface such as exposed aggregate or synthetic stucco. d) Wall No wall shall consist of a single finish treatment for more than 28 horizontal feet without interruption by a wall projection. Window, wall corner, wall recess,porch or other architectural form that adds interest. 23 All windows shall be of double or triple glazing. Low"E" coatings are permitted but nomirror glazing shall not be allowed. All windows and sliding glass, French or atrium 4:7 doors shall be aluminum clad wood. A specific brand of plastic windows may be approved by the Committee, but a sample will need to be produced to the Committee. Unclad custom-built windows for individual applications shall be trimmed and painted to appear the same as the other windows in the structure. The patterns, sizing, symmetry(or asymmetry) of windows and doors determines the scale and feel of the building. The Committee will require that the following aspects be carefully addressed in the window and door design. 1) Consistency of types and shapes. 2) Special shapes used for"feature"windows in appropriate areas. 3) Use of window patterns consistent with the design and massing of the structure. 4) Consistent use of window forms in conjunction with adjacent window forms. 10.8 Parking. Each building is required to have the number of parking spaces required by the City of Bozeman Zoning Code. There will be absolutely no parking of cars, trucks, or any other vehicles in the street by Owners. Parking cars over-night in the parking areas is forbidden, except for those buildings with residential use. ARTICLE XI SITE DEVELOPMENT AND LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES All site improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER A.L.R.C. prior to commencement of construction or alteration. Minor adjustments to the building and landscaping after initial construction shall not require submittal of plans. Minor adjustments shall include replacement of dead or dying vegetation and the addition of trees, shrubs or other landscaping features providing that such additions are consistent with the Site Development and Landscape Guidelines. 11.1 Driveway Culverts. All driveways and parking areas shall be surfaced with asphalt or concrete. Driveway culverts shall have attached flared ends of sheet metal or concrete construction. Culvert ends, not counting the flared ends, shall extend a minimum of 4 feet beyond the edge of the driveway. All culverts damaged by construction shall be replaced prior to final surfacing of the driveway. 11.2 Fences. One of the primary goals of the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER is to create an atmosphere that is open and expansive. Because of the importance of this goal,perimeter lot fencing will not be allowed in this subdivision. Fencing for screening of loading areas and mechanical equipment should be only as high as necessary to screen the area or equipment in question, and will in no instance exceed 6' in height unless specifically approved in writing by the A.L.R.C. 24 11.3 Privacy Screening. Privacy screens will be allowed but must be constructed of wood siding(same as the main building), stucco, brick, or stone materials, and they shall be an integrated part of the main buildings. There shall be a size restriction. Plans for privacy screening must be submitted and approved by the A.L.R.C. 11.4 Exterior Lighting.ting. While lighting for safety and security is encouraged, the elimination of excessive light is of prime concern. All lighting for parking and driving areas shall be fully shielded as shown in the following example, and in no case shall exceed 20' in height. Additionally, all lighting for the buildings and walk areas shall be concealed or recessed into the structure where possible. Also, where wall mounted fixtures or Ballard type lighting for pedestrian circulation areas are required, all lighting will be of a type that has the luminaire of the fixture shielded from view from any angle with the exception of the area intended to be illuminated. In no case shall lighting be of a type that is not consistent with light commercial development. Lighting for signage shall be limited to landscape type lighting. In cases where internal lighting of signs is required, the translucent lighted portion shall be the letters only and the background shall be dark. Only enough light shall come through the background to give a sense of the background color. 11.5 Utilities. All utilities including, but not limited to, natural gas, electricity, telephone, fiber optics, and cable TV shall be located underground. 11.6 Mail Boxes. Mailboxes shall be designed in accordance with the U.S. Postal Service regulations and approved by the local Postmaster as shown on the site plan. 11.7 Temporary Structures. No temporary structures, trailers, campers, motor buildings, tents, shacks, or similar structures shall be used at any time on the lot. 11.8 Construction Material: Cleanup and Debris. A list of acceptable procedures and guidelines will be given to the Owner prior to actual construction commencing and will require the written acceptance of compliance by the Owner prior to starting construction or construction will not be approved. Construction materials shall not at any time prior to or during construction be placed or stored in the street or placed anywhere else so as to impede, obstruct or interfere with pedestrians within the street right of way. Absolutely all construction materials shall be removed from the entire Lot within thirty(30) days of substantial completion of construction. Construction sites shall be kept clean, neat and well organized at all times. Any construction debris shall be the responsibility of the Building Contractor and Owner and shall be kept clean and properly stored on a daily basis. If construction debris blows onto another Owners lot it is the responsibility of the Owner's contractor to clean it up immediately. Of particular concern to the Declarant is street cleanliness. Any 25 construction debris, and especially dirt, gravel,rocks, and concrete which find their way into the street, shall be removed immediately(within 60 minutes of the start of the infraction) from the street and be brought back to a broom clean condition or clean up costs and a fine may be levied and enforced as in Sections 6.5 and 7.1 of this Declaration. Owners are highly encouraged to notify their building contractors of this important condition prior to signing their construction contract with them. 11.9 Solid Waste Containers. Dumpster enclosures shall be designed in the same style as the main buildings. If the enclosure is designed to match the building(s) served, it shall be approved in writing by the A.L.R.C. All enclosures shall have an impervious floor. All solid waste containers must be stored in their enclosures except during reasonable periods prior to and after pickup, and only on day of pickup. 11.10 Sims. Signs shall not be permitted on the private, public, or commonly owned lands within NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER except as follows: Signs shall comply to the Master sign plan addressed in section 9.7. 11.11 Landscaping. Landscaping will be required to enhance the value of the property and the aesthetics of the site. The entire site shall be landscaped, including up to the actual edge of the road, and all owners are required to maintain their grounds. Landscape, grading and irrigation plans shall be submitted and approved by the Committee concurrently with all structural building plans. In locating bushes and trees consideration must be given to surrounding neighbors concerning view corridors and sun penetration to their site. Rock and Gravel type ground covers will not be allowed as landscaping. Certain types of gravel and rock ground covers will be allowed for certain specific non-landscaping uses. All such uses must be approved by the Committee. This limitation does not apply to specific large rocks or rock clusters being used in an artistic manner. Owners shall maintain the transition from the formal landscaping around the buildings and the Open Space areas will be maintained to a lesser degree according to the Open Space Management Plan. Where lawn is planted, an underground sprinkler system will be required. 11.12 Landscaping Maintenance. Lawns and landscaping shall be maintained in a manner which shall not detract from the appearance and value of adjoining Lots or diminish the aesthetics of the subdivision. Infractions will be dealt with as defined in paragraphs 6.5 and 7.1 of these Covenants. 11.13 Landscaping Requirements for Individual Buildings. Each proposed building will provide a landscape plan for the review committee of the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Lot Owner's Association. This plan will show all foundation and perimeter plantings, irrigation system plans, sidewalks, and other landscape elements. For every 3 linear feet of foundation wall, the owner will be required to provide and plant as a minimum 1 small ornamental tree, 1 evergreen shrub, or 1 deciduous shrub as defined in the Bozeman Zoning Ordinance. This landscape plan 26 will be designed to soften the transition between the building and the landscaped lot and will be consistent with the approved landscape plan of NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER. There will be a minimum of 6 trees required per Lot, and all trees will be a minimum of ten G 0') feet in height. Trees are encouraged to be planted in clusters rather than in regular intervals around the property. Shrubs and flowers can be used to provide a transitional mass from the tree clusters to the lawn surfaces. Deciduous trees and shrubs can be placed on the southern and western sides to provide shade in the summer months and allow sun to penetrate in the winter months. Suggested deciduous trees are Aspen, European Green Birch, Rocky Mountain and Big Tooth Maple, and others recommended by the City of Bozeman Code. Suggested evergreen trees are Douglas Fir, Lodge Pole Pine, Engleman, and White Spruce, Subalpine Fir and Scotch Pine. Additionally for each building built directly adjacent to another building, the landscape plan shall denote 1 large canopy tree for every 30' of adjacency. In the event that a large tree is inappropriate, 2 small ornamental trees may be substituted. Definitions for plantings will be from the Bozeman Zoning Code. Each building will be required to provide a substantial landscape strip between the building and the sidewalk along the parking. In no case shall the width be less than 4 feet,with the exception of those places where the sidewalk abuts the entrances. Each building will provide a bicycle rack consistent with the following detail or an alternate design approved by the A.L.R.C. 11.14 Numbering System of Buildings. 27 ARTICLE XII OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT PLAN 12.1 Intent. This declaration provides the authority for this Open Space Management Plan through the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Subdivision Lot Owners Association. The intent of the Open Space Management Plan is to provide for the management, maintenance, implementation, and protection of the Common Open Space within NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER property. The intent of the Open Spaces is to provide: a) a general feeling of openness b) a buffer zone between lot clusters, c) corridors for paths The following Open Space management standards apply to the Open Space lands in the property within NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Subdivision. 12.2 Open Space. The project has 3 levels of space: Public Space, constituted by the roads and pedestrian system. Private Space, constituted by the lots and buildings within the P.U.D., and those areas immediately adjacent to buildings not served by elements such as pedestrian facilities or recreational elements such as benches or picnic tables. Semi-Public Spaces, such as parking lots, which are intended for the users of the offices within the P.U.D. as well as their guests. 12.3 Landscaping. Landscaping plantings shall feature native species but may incorporate non-native and ornamental species of trees and shrubs. The dominant theme for landscaping shall be large open grassy areas with clusters of trees, to create visual backdrops and vegetated islands requiring little maintenance. 12.4 Maintenance Practices. The president shall determine frequency and schedule of all open space maintenance practices. 12.5 Noxious Weeds. Noxious weeds shall be controlled on all common open space areas. The preferred method is by introduction of desirable plant species that eliminate weeds. Interim measures permitted include herbicide applications, mowing and biological control. All herbicide applications shall be conducted according to applicable State laws. 12.6 Animal Control. Domestic pets shall not be allowed at any time in the open space areas or paths unless on a leash. Temporary fencing around shrubs and trees to prevent animal depredation shall be permitted for the period of time necessary to ensure survival of the plantings. 28 Rodents may be controlled if levels of depredation threaten the survival of plantings or constitute a health hazard. If poisons are used they shall be applied only n accordance with applicable State laws. Pesticides may be used to control insect populations that are a nuisance, threaten the survival of plantings or constitute a health hazard. Pesticides may be applied only in accordance with applicable State laws. 12.7 Additional Restrictions. a) All buildings shall be prohibited in the common open space areas except structures related to the function and intent of the common areas. b) Motorized vehicles are prohibited within the common open space areas except for maintenance and construction of landscaping, facilities or structures related to the function or intent of the open spaces. c) No open burning of privately generated debris shall be permitted on commonly held open spaces. Open burning of debris generated from the commonly held spaces may be allowed in accordance with local burning regulations, but only by someone authorized by the Board. Individual lot owners shall not be allowed to burn in either their private property or in the common open spaces. 12.8 Road and Sidewalk Management Plan. The intent of this section is to NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Lot Owners Association to establish a maintenance plan for the commonly owned vehicular and pedestrian facilities within the subdivision. The purpose of the management plan shall be to provide for the long term maintenance, reconstruction and replacement of all street and sidewalk surfaces located in the common area in the subdivision. The Association shall accept ownership and maintenance of all streets and sidewalks when constructed to the standards approved on the final plat for the NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Subdivision. The NORTHERN ROCKIES PROFESSIONAL CENTER Lot Owners Association shall have no authority, duty or right to obstruct, delay or harass the Declarant in regards to additions to or extensions of streets or sidewalks that are approved by the City of Bozeman. The Association, acting for the Association, shall establish a plan for long term maintenance of all roads and sidewalks. The Association shall also establish a plan for the day to day maintenance of the roads and sidewalks. In accordance with such plans, the Association shall see to it that the sidewalks and roads are maintained, cleaned and snowplowed in a timely fashion. The Association shall hire contract services for road, sidewalk and driveway maintenance. The Association shall have the authority to assess the Lot Owners for services rendered in maintaining and repairing all streets and sidewalks as specified in Article 5, titled Assessments. 29