Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
NorthwestCrossingPH01TIS
2880 Technology Boulevard West • Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 587-0721 • www.m-m.net Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 Tract 5 of Certificate of Survey 2552 | 5250 Baxter Lane Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana March 2020 Prepared For: NWX LLC 1735 South 19th Avenue PO Box 11890 Bozeman, MT 59718 MMI Project No. 5659.005 Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana Table of Contents | i Table of Contents Purpose of Report and Study Objectives ................................... 1 Proposed Development ........................ 1 Location .......................................................... 1 Development Description ................................ 1 Development Horizon ...................................... 4 Development Traffic .............................. 4 Forecast Trip Generation ................................ 4 Trip Distribution ............................................... 5 Trip Assignment .............................................. 5 Pedestrians & Bicyclists .................................. 5 Transit Service ................................................ 5 Non-Site Traffic ............................................... 8 Method of Projection ......................................... 8 Estimated Volumes ........................................... 8 Total Traffic ..................................................... 8 Transportation Analyses .................... 10 Methodologies ............................................... 10 Study Scenarios .............................................. 10 Analysis Methodologies .................................. 10 Roundabout Analyses .............................. 10 Traffic Operations .......................................... 11 Pedestrians & Bicyclists ................................ 12 Findings ............................................... 13 Need for Any Improvements ......................... 13 Pedestrians & Bicyclists ................................ 13 Connectivity .................................................... 13 Crossing Treatment Analyses ........................ 13 Transit Service.............................................. 13 Conclusions & Recommendations ... 14 West Oak Street & Cottonwood Road ........... 14 Interior Roadways & Intersections ................ 14 Pedestrian & Bicyclist Connectivity ............... 14 References ........................................... 15 Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana ii | Appendices Appendices Appendix A Level of Service Concepts, Analysis Methodologies, & Standards of Significance Appendix B Trip Generation Analyses Appendix C Capacity & Level of Service Analyses Appendix D Pedestrian Crossing Analyses Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana List of Figures & Tables | iii List of Figures Figure 1: Project Location ................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Proposed Subdivision Layout ............................................................................................. 3 Figure 3: Primary Trip Distribution ..................................................................................................... 6 Figure 4: Subdivision Traffic Assignment ......................................................................................... 7 Figure 5: Estimated 2023 Traffic ......................................................................................................... 9 List of Tables Table 1: Estimated Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 Trip Generation Summary ..................................................................................................... 4 Table 2: Estimated 2023 Background Traffic Intersection Operations Summary for West Oak Street & Cottonwood Road .............................. 11 Table 3: Estimated 2023 Total Traffic Intersection Operations Summary for West Oak Street & Cottonwood Road .............................. 12 Traffic Impact Study for Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 1 Purpose of Report and Study Objectives The intent of this traffic impact study is to assess potential impacts with the proposed Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 development proposed to be located in Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The information presented in this report is intended to evaluate the safety and operational aspects of the transportation system in the area of the proposed development under anticipated future conditions as well as with estimated impacts. Study recommendations and conclusions are intended to provide guidance with respect to the function of the area transportation system. Proposed Development Location The proposed Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 development is located in Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana on a portion of Tract 5 of Certificate of Survey No. 2552 located in the northeast quarter of Section 4, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Principal Meridian of Montana. Generally, the property is bordered by agricultural land to the west and north (remaining future phases of Northwest Crossing Subdivision), West Oak Street to the south, and the Bozeman Sports Park and future Cottonwood Road to the east. The project location is shown in Figure 1 on the following page. Development Description The Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 project is proposed to consist of a mix of commercial and residential development. The development is estimated to generate a total of 3,098 average weekday trips as well as 121 weekday AM and 136 PM peak hour trips. Access to and from the development is proposed to utilize connections on the adjacent transportation network: Cottonwood Road to the east and West Oak Street to the south. The preliminarily proposed site layout is shown in Figure 2 on page 3. Zoning The existing site is currently zoned REMU (Residential Emphasis Mixed-Use Zoning District) and B-2M (Community Business District-Mixed) under the City of Bozeman’s zoning designations. Descriptions of each of the zoning designations are provided on page 4. Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 2 Figure 1: Project Location Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 3 Figure 2: Proposed Subdivision Layout Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 4 Development Horizon It is anticipated that the proposed Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 development will progress over the course of the next 3 to 20 years. This study will evaluate traffic operations for just Phase 1 of Northwest Crossing Subdivision and its impact on the intersection of West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road as requested by the City of Bozeman. Additionally, year 2040 analyses for the intersection are also included for comparison purposes that are based on full build-out of the proposed Northwest Crossing Subdivision as well as with area traffic growth, being in-line with the analysis timeframe of the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (Bozeman TMP) dated April 25, 2017 prepared by Robert Peccia & Associates and Alta Planning & Design. Development Traffic Forecast Trip Generation Trip generation is a measure or forecast of the number of trips that begin or end at the development site. The traffic generated is a function of the extent and type of proposed development. This study utilized Trip Generation, 10th Edition published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) for estimating average vehicle trip ends based on LUC 220 – Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) and LUC 770 – Business Park. Trip ends are defined as a single or one-directional travel movement with either the origin or the destination of the trip inside the study site. The estimated primary purpose trip generation for the proposed Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 development is summarized in Table 1 below. Primary purpose trips are those where the site is the primary origin or destination, which result in new trips on the roadway system. Table 1: Estimated Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 Trip Generation Summary Lots Land Use Type Units Average Weekday Trips Average Weekday, AM Peak Hour Trips Average Weekday, PM Peak Hour Trips Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Tota l 1-14 Business Park 200,000 SF Gross Floor Area 1,244 1,244 2,488 49 31 80 39 45 84 15-16 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 86 Dwelling Units 305 305 610 9 32 41 33 19 52 TOTALS = 1,549 1,549 3,098 58 63 121 72 64 136 Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 5 Trip Distribution Trip distribution is the process of identifying the probable destinations, directions, and traffic routes that development related traffic will likely affect. Various methods are available for estimating trip distribution, including the analogy, trip distribution model, area of influence, origin-destination (O-D), and surrogate data methods. This study utilizes the trip distribution model method based on data adapted from the Bozeman TMP for the 2040 forecast travel demand model volumes along with consideration given to route limitations due to the partial development of West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road. The primary trip distribution for the proposed Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 development is shown in Figure 3 on the following page. Trip Assignment The assignment of development related traffic provides the information necessary to determine the level of site related impacts to the area roadway system and intersections. It involves determining the volume of traffic and its movements within the transportation system. At a minimum, trip assignment must also consider route choice, how the existing transportation system functions, and travel times to and from the site. The resulting traffic assignment at the study area intersections for the proposed Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 development is shown in Figure 4 on page 7. Pedestrians & Bicyclists Facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists are proposed to be included as part of the Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 development in accordance with City of Bozeman standards. The Bozeman TMP recommends the inclusion of bicycle lanes on Cottonwood Road and West Oak Street. Shared-use pathways are also proposed to be included along Cottonwood Road and West Oak Street. Transit Service Streamline currently provides transit service to Belgrade, Bozeman, Four Corners, and Montana State University. This service is currently free for all passengers, which creates an incentive for transit ridership. Streamline does not currently offer any routes that provide service within the study area. Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 6 Figure 3: Primary Trip Distribution Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 7 Figure 4: Subdivision Traffic Assignment Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 8 Non-Site Traffic Method of Projection In order to more accurately reflect the potential impacts from development generated traffic it is necessary to develop an estimate of non-site related traffic growth during the analysis period. Three primary means are typically used to estimate growth of non-site generated traffic, including the build-up method, the use of transportation plans or models, as well as the trends or growth rate method. The build-up method takes into account traffic growth due to approved or anticipated to be approved developments in the study area. Transportation plans or models typically provide estimates for traffic volumes for approximately 20 years into the future. The model volumes are usually provided for average weekday traffic, but can be converted to peak hour volumes including turning movements. The trends or growth rate method involves evaluating the historic traffic growth rates within a study area. The underlying assumption with this method is that historic growth trends will remain approximately the same and continue in the future. Estimated Volumes Estimated background traffic volumes at the intersection of West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road for the 2023 development horizon were established through the build-up method, accounting for existing traffic volumes and projected traffic generation for Gallatin High School obtained from the Traffic Impact Study for New Bozeman High School prepared by Marvin & Associates (January 31, 2016) along with estimated additional traffic generation from Traditions Subdivision. Estimated 2023 background traffic volumes are presented in Figure 5 on the following page. Total Traffic Traffic generated from the proposed Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 development for full build-out conditions was combined with the estimated 2023 background traffic volumes to establish the estimated 2023 total traffic volumes that were used in the impact analyses of the intersection of West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road. Those volumes are also shown in Figure 5 on the following page. Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 9 Figure 5: Estimated 2023 Traffic Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 10 Transportation Analyses Methodologies This section documents the methodologies and assumptions used to conduct the traffic impact analyses for the proposed Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 development. Study methodology and analyses are based on ITE’s Recommended Practices for Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development. These analyses are used to determine the project’s conformance with City of Bozeman policies and evaluate whether the proposed development’s impacts are perceptible to the average driver. Study Scenarios This study presents analyses of the following scenarios for the intersection of West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road: Estimated 2023 Background Traffic Estimated 2023 Total Traffic Analysis Methodologies Transportation system operating conditions are typically described in terms of “level of service”. Level of service (LOS) is the performance measure used to evaluate the cumulative effects of such things as travel speed, traffic volumes, roadway and intersection capacity, travel delay, and traffic interruptions. Operating conditions are designated as LOS A through LOS F, which represents the most favorable to the least favorable operating conditions. Level of service for intersections is determined by control delay. Control delay is defined as the total elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of a queue to the time the vehicle departs from the stop line. The total elapsed time includes the time required for the vehicle to travel from the last-in-queue position to the first-in-queue position, including deceleration of vehicles from the free flow speed to the speed of vehicles in the queue. Appendix A lists the delay/LOS criteria listed in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition | A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis (HCM) published by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) for unsignalized and signalized intersections. Roundabout Analyses Roundabout intersection capacity and level of service analyses were performed using HCS Roundabouts Version 7.4 also developed and maintained by the McTrans Center. Roundabout intersection analyses are based on Chapter 22 of the HCM. The HCM methodology for evaluating roundabout intersections is based on flow patterns and conflicting traffic for vehicles entering, circulating, and exiting the roundabout. Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 11 Traffic Operations Capacity and level of service analyses were performed for the intersection of West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road for estimated 2023 background and total traffic volumes. Detailed results of the analyses are provided in Appendix C and are summarized Tables 2 and 3 that follow. Table 2: Estimated 2023 Background Traffic Intersection Operations Summary for West Oak Street & Cottonwood Road Analysis Scenario Lane Group LOS Delay (sec/veh) Entry Volume (veh) Volume to Capacity Ratio (v/c) HCS 95% Max Queue Length (veh) HCS 95% Max Queue Length (ft) Estimated 2023 Background Traffic Weekday, AM Peak Hour Multilane Roundabout Controlled Intersection Intersection A 3.9 442 0.09 EB LT A 3.9 91 0.11 0.4 25 EB TR A 3.8 161 0.12 0.4 25 WB LT A 3.4 85 0.05 0.2 25 WB TR A 3.3 35 0.06 0.2 25 NB LT A 3.9 50 0.06 0.2 25 NB TR A 3.4 20 0.02 0.1 25 SB LT SB TR Estimated 2023 Background Traffic Weekday, PM Peak Hour Multilane Roundabout Controlled Intersection Intersection A 3.6 467 0.08 EB LT A 3.5 55 0.07 0.2 25 EB TR A 3.4 99 0.08 0.2 25 WB LT A 3.8 132 0.10 0.3 25 WB TR A 3.7 81 0.11 0.4 25 NB LT A 3.7 65 0.07 0.2 25 NB TR A 3.3 35 0.03 0.1 25 SB LT SB TR NB = Northbound; SB = Southbound; EB = Eastbound; and WB = Westbound LT = Left-Through; TR = Through-Right Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 12 Table 3: Estimated 2023 Total Traffic Intersection Operations Summary for West Oak Street & Cottonwood Road Analysis Scenario Lane Group LOS Delay (sec/veh) Entry Volume (veh) Volume to Capacity Ratio (v/c) HCS 95% Max Queue Length (veh) HCS 95% Max Queue Length (ft) Estimated 2023 Total Traffic Weekday, AM Peak Hour Multilane Roundabout Controlled Intersection Intersection A 3.9 558 0.10 EB LT A 4.2 101 0.13 0.5 25 EB TR A 4.1 181 0.14 0.5 25 WB LT A 3.6 96 0.07 0.2 25 WB TR A 3.5 61 0.08 0.3 25 NB LT A 4.2 65 0.07 0.2 25 NB TR A 3.6 24 0.03 0.1 25 SB LT A 3.7 25 0.02 0.1 25 SB TR A 3.4 5 0.01 0.0 0 Estimated 2023 Total Traffic Weekday, PM Peak Hour Multilane Roundabout Controlled Intersection Intersection A 3.9 598 0.10 EB LT A 3.8 63 0.08 0.3 25 EB TR A 3.7 115 0.09 0.3 25 WB LT A 4.1 146 0.12 0.4 25 WB TR A 4.0 112 0.13 0.4 25 NB LT A 4.1 86 0.09 0.3 25 NB TR A 3.5 38 0.04 0.1 25 SB LT A 4.4 32 0.03 0.1 25 SB TR A 3.9 6 0.02 0.0 0 NB = Northbound; SB = Southbound; EB = Eastbound; and WB = Westbound LT = Left-Through; TR = Through-Right Pedestrians & Bicyclists The intersection of West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road location was evaluated for recommended treatment options based on the anticipated pedestrian, bicyclist, and traffic volumes utilizing the recently constructed roundabout geometry of the roadway for estimated 2023 conditions. Additionally, a sensitivity analysis was performed based on projected 2040 conditions with higher than anticipated pedestrian volumes. The evaluations were based on a combination of TCRP Report 112 / NCHRP Report 562: Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings (Transit Cooperative Research Program and National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2006) and the City of Boulder, Colorado Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines (November 2011). Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 13 Based on the evaluations, with a 35 mph speed limit on West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road, marked crosswalks would be recommended. Additionally, consideration may be given to installation of rectangular rapid flashing beacons. The results of the crossing analyses are provided in Appendix D. Findings Need for Any Improvements Capacity and level of service analyses for traffic conditions based on estimated 2023 background and total traffic conditions identified the intersection of West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road is projected to function at LOS A for both the weekday, AM and PM peak periods. Therefore, no additional improvements are necessary to mitigate projected traffic operations with the development of the proposed Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 for estimated 2023 background or total traffic conditions. Pedestrians & Bicyclists Connectivity Facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists are proposed to be included as part of the Northwest Crossing development in accordance with City of Bozeman standards. The Bozeman TMP recommends the inclusion of bicycle lanes on Cottonwood Road and West Oak Street. Shared-use pathways are also proposed to be included along Cottonwood Road and West Oak Street. Crossing Treatment Analyses Pedestrian crossing treatment analyses for the intersection of West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road found that marked crosswalks would be recommended. Consideration may also be given to the installation of rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB) based on the volume of traffic on the roadway as well as the estimated volume of pedestrians and bicycles. The installation of a HAWK beacon (High- intensity Activated crossWalK beacon) may be excessive for the intersection based on anticipated vehicle speeds, traffic volumes, and the projected number of pedestrians and/or bicyclists. Transit Service Streamline currently provides transit service to Belgrade, Bozeman, Four Corners, and Montana State University. This service is currently free for all passengers, which creates an incentive for transit ridership. Streamline does not currently offer any routes that provide service within the study area. Routes may be added in the future as service expands within the Gallatin County area. Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 14 Conclusions & Recommendations Analysis of trip generation estimates, site circulation, and traffic operations reveal that the proposed Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 development is projected to have limited impact on the area transportation system as currently proposed through the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan. If the below improvements are implemented as recommended, any impacts resulting from the proposed development should operate safely and efficiently. All traffic control improvements should be installed in accordance with City of Bozeman and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices standards. West Oak Street & Cottonwood Road No additional modifications to the recently installed roundabout control are necessary with the proposed development of Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1. Interior Roadways & Intersections Each of the interior intersections is projected to function acceptably as uncontrolled based on the traffic projections included as a part of this study. To limit the potential for impacts resulting from cut-through traffic between Baxter Lane and West Oak Street as well as Laurel Parkway and Cottonwood Road, the central intersection within Northwest Crossing (noted as Node 11 in Figure 4 on page 7) is recommended to be installed with mini roundabout control as a traffic calming measure. Mini roundabout control may be considered for the remaining primary, internal intersections as desired for additional traffic calming measures within the development. Adequate sight distance in accordance with City of Bozeman standards, at a minimum, should be preserved at the interior intersections within the proposed Northwest Crossing development. On-site roadways should be constructed to City of Bozeman standards, at a minimum. All intersections and radius returns for asphalt and/or curb and gutter should be evaluated for the appropriate design vehicle per AASHTO standards. At a minimum, it is recommended that the largest fire vehicle utilized by the City of Bozeman or school bus (as necessary) be utilized as the basis for design. Pedestrian & Bicyclist Connectivity Sidewalk and/or trail improvements should be constructed to City of Bozeman standards, at a minimum. Pedestrian crossing treatment analyses for the intersection of West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road found that marked crosswalks would be recommended. Consideration may also be given to the installation of rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB) based on the volume of traffic on the roadway as well as the estimated volume of pedestrians and bicycles. Traffic Impact Study Northwest Crossing – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 15 References 1. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. (August 2012). A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 2011 6th Edition. Washington, DC: Author. 2. City of Bozeman. (August 20, 2019). Bozeman Unified Development Code. Tallahassee, FL: Municode. 3. Institute of Transportation Engineers. (2005). Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development: An ITE Proposed Recommended Practice. Washington, DC: Author. 4. Institute of Transportation Engineers. (September 2017). Trip Generation, 10th Edition. Washington, DC: Author. 5. Institute of Transportation Engineers. (September 2017). Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. Washington, DC: Author. 6. Marvin & Associates. (January 31, 2016). Traffic Impact Study for New Bozeman High School. Bozeman, MT: City of Bozeman. 7. Morrison-Maierle. (June 2016). Bozeman Sports Park Traffic Impact Study. Bozeman, MT: Author. 8. Morrison-Maierle. (August 2019). Transportation Planning Study: Northwest Crossing. Bozeman, MT: Author. 9. Robert Peccia & Associates. (January 21, 2016). Durston and Cottonwood Road Improvements Project. Bozeman, MT: City of Bozeman. 10. Robert Peccia & Associates. (2009). Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan (2007 Update). Bozeman, MT: City of Bozeman. 11. Robert Peccia & Associates and Alta Planning & Design. (April 25, 2017). Bozeman Transportation Master Plan. Bozeman, MT: City of Bozeman. 12. Sanderson Stewart. (February 24, 2016). Oak Street Improvements Project Pre-Design Report. Bozeman, MT: City of Bozeman. 13. Stover, Vergil G. and Frank K. Koepke. (2002). Transportation and Land Development, 2nd Edition. Washington, DC: Institute of Transportation Engineers. 14. Transportation Research Board. (2016). Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition: A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis. Washington, DC: Author. 15. United States Department of Transportation – Federal Highway Administration. (May 2012). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, 2009 Edition with Revision Numbers 1 and 2. Washington DC: Author. APPENDIX A LEVEL OF SERVICE CONCEPTS, ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES, & STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Transportation Planning Study Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana Appendix A: Level of Service Concepts, Analysis Methodologies, & Standards of Significance | A-1 Roundabout Intersection Level of Service The HCM analysis method for evaluating roundabout controlled intersections is also based on the average total delay for each impeded movement. Roundabout capacity and level-of-service is largely influenced by traffic flow patterns – the number of entering vehicles and on what approach legs; the volume of vehicles circulating within the roundabout; and the volume of vehicles exiting the roundabout and at what departure legs. The level-of-service criteria for a roundabout are summarized in Table A-2 below. Table A-1: Level of Service Criteria for Roundabout Controlled Intersections Average Control Delay Level of Service (LOS) Characteristics ≤ 10 seconds LOS A – Little or no delay 10.1 – 15.0 seconds LOS B – Short traffic delay 15.1 – 25.0 seconds LOS C – Average traffic delay 25.1 – 35.0 seconds LOS D – Long traffic delays 35.1 – 50.0 seconds LOS E – Very long traffic delays > 50.1 seconds LOS F – When the demand exceeds the capacity of the lane, extreme delays will be encountered and queuing may cause severe congestion to the intersection. Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition | A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis (Transportation Research Board, 2016) City of Bozeman Standards The City of Bozeman Unified Development Code (UDC) identifies specific standards for transportation facilities and access. The standards pertaining to this study are identified in the paragraphs that follow. Traffic Progression Section 38.400.060.B.3 of the UDC conveys specific requirements for the spacing of potential intersections with traffic signals. This Section states the following: “Traffic progression will be of paramount importance. Consequently, all potential intersections with signals will be placed on quarter-mile points unless otherwise approved by the review authority.” Transportation Planning Study Northwest Crossing Subdivision – Phase 1 | Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana A-2 | Appendix A: Level of Service Concepts, Analysis Methodologies, & Standards of Significance Level of Service Standards Level of service standards for arterial and collector streets as well as intersections with arterial and collector streets are stated in Section 38.400.060.B.4 of the UDC. Those standards are as follows: All arterial and collector streets and intersections with arterial and collector streets shall operate at a minimum level of service "C" unless specifically exempted by this subsection. Level of service (LOS) values shall be determined by using the methods defined by the most recent edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. A development shall be approved only if the LOS requirements are met in the design year, which shall be a minimum of 15 years following the development application review or construction of mitigation measures if mitigation measures are required to maintain LOS. Intersections shall have a minimum acceptable LOS of "C" for the intersection as a whole. a. Exception: If an intersection within the area required to be studied by section 38.41.060.A.12 does not meet LOS "C" and the intersection has been fully constructed to its maximum lane and turning movement capacity, then an LOS of less than "C" is acceptable. b. Exception: The review authority may accept an LOS of less than "C" at a specific intersection if: (1) A variance to allow a lesser LOS was approved not more than two years prior to the date an application for development being reviewed is determined to be adequate for review; (2) The request was made in writing with the application; and (3) The circumstances are in the professional judgment of the review authority substantially the same as when the variance was granted. Spacing Standards for Drive Accesses The City of Bozeman also specifies spacing standards for drive accesses in Section 38.400.090.D.2 of the UDC. Those standards are as follows: Table 38.400.090-I: Minimum distance between public and/or private accesses and intersections and the minimum distance between public and/or private accesses and other public and/or private accesses. Access Located on Arterial Streets Access Located on Collector Streets Access Located on Local Streets Average Spacing In All Districts In All Districts In All Districts Partial Access1 315’ 150’ 40’3 Full Access2 660’ 330’ 40’3 Minimum Separation 315’ 150’ 40’3 1Partial access includes right turn in and out only. 2Full access allows all turn movements, in and out. 3Accesses on local streets must be at least 150 feet from an intersection with an arterial. APPENDIX B TRIP GENERATION ANALYSES Area Independent Proposed Density Projected Lots (Acres)Description of Proposed Land Use Variable (Units / Acre)Units Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total 1-14 21.8 1Business Park 1,000 Square Feet of Gross Floor Area 9 200 1,244 1,244 2,488 49 31 80 39 45 84 15-16 5.6 2Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)Dwelling Units 15 86 305 305 610 9 32 41 33 19 52 Total Acres =27.4 1,549 1,549 3,098 58 63 121 72 64 136 1Business Park - ITE Land Use Code 770 | Independent Variable: 1000 Square Feet Gross Floor Area (GFA) | Setting Location: General Urban / Suburban 2Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) - ITE Land Use Code 220 | Independent Variable: Dwelling Units | Setting Location: General Urban / Suburban 1 & 2 Source: Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition - Volume 2: Data - Part 2 , Institute of Transportation Engineers (Washington, DC), September 2017 Average Vehicle Trip Ends On a:Fitted Curve Trip Generation Rate Equation:Directional Distribution:Coefficient of Determination: Weekday,Ln(TV) = 0.89 Ln(X) - 0.02 63% Entering 37% Exiting R2 = 0.86Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,TV = Average Vehicle Trip Ends One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.X = Independent Variable Units Average Vehicle Trip Ends On a:Fitted Curve Trip Generation Rate Equation:Directional Distribution:Coefficient of Determination: Weekday,Ln(TV) = 0.95 Ln(X) - 0.51 23% Entering 77% Exiting R2 = 0.90Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,TV = Average Vehicle Trip Ends One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m.X = Independent Variable Units Average Vehicle Trip Ends On a:Fitted Curve Trip Generation Rate Equation:Directional Distribution:Coefficient of Determination: Weekday TV = 7.56(X) - 40.86 50% Entering 50% Exiting R2 = 0.96TV = Average Vehicle Trip Ends X = Independent Variable Units Average Weekday Trips Weekday, AM Peak Hour Trips Weekday, PM Peak Hour Trips Average Trip Generation Rate Equation:Average Vehicle Trip Ends On a:Directional Distribution:Coefficient of Determination: NORTHWEST CROSSING SUBDIVISION - PHASE 1 | ESTIMATED TOTAL VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION Average Vehicle Trip Ends On a:Average Trip Generation Rate Equation:Directional Distribution:Coefficient of Determination: Weekday,TV = 0.40(X)61% Entering 39% Exiting R2 = ****Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,TV = Average Vehicle Trip Ends One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m.X = Independent Variable Units 50% Entering 50% Exiting R2 = **** Average Vehicle Trip Ends On a:Average Trip Generation Rate Equation:Directional Distribution:Coefficient of Determination: Weekday TV = 12.44(X) TV = Average Vehicle Trip Ends X = Independent Variable Units Weekday,TV = 0.42(X)46% Entering 54% Exiting R2 = ****Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,TV = Average Vehicle Trip Ends One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.X = Independent Variable Units N:\5659\005 NWX Phase 1 Major Sub\Traffic Data\Traffic Forecasting\NW-Xing-Ph-01_Trip-Generation-Analyses.xlsx Area Independent Proposed Density Projected Lots (Acres)Description of Proposed Land Use Variable (Units / Acre)Units Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total 1-14 21.8 1Business Park 1,000 Square Feet of Gross Floor Area 9 200 89 89 178 4 2 6 3 3 6 15-16 5.6 2Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)Dwelling Units 15 86 22 22 44 1 2 3 3 1 4 Total Acres =27.4 111 111 222 5 4 9 6 4 10 Non-Motorized Trip Generation Estimation: Assumption #1:Average number of persons per vehicle equals 1.35. Assumption #2:Vehicle trips represent approximately 95% of total person trips. Assumption #3:Transit oriented trips are considered negligible for the purposes of these analyses. Assumption #4:Non-motorized trips (pedestrians and bicyclists) are equal to the number of total person trips minus the total number of person trips by vehicle. where:TNM = Total Non-Motorized Person Trips TV = Total Vehicle Oriented Person Trips NORTHWEST CROSSING SUBDIVISION - PHASE 1 | ESTIMATED TOTAL NON-MOTORIZED TRIP GENERATION Average Weekday Trips Weekday, AM Peak Hour Trips Weekday, PM Peak Hour Trips 𝑇𝑀𝑀=1.35𝑇𝑉 0.95 −1.35𝑇𝑉≈0.071𝑇𝑉 N:\5659\005 NWX Phase 1 Major Sub\Traffic Data\Traffic Forecasting\NW-Xing-Ph-01_Trip-Generation-Analyses.xlsx APPENDIX C CAPACITY & LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSES HCS7 Roundabouts Report General Information Site Information Analyst T. Eastwood Intersection Oak & Cottonwood Agency or Co.Morrison-Maierle E/W Street Name West Oak Street Date Performed 1/31/2020 N/S Street Name Cottonwood Road Analysis Year 2023 Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Time Analyzed Weekday, AM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.85 Project Description Estimated Background Traffic Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics Approach EB WB NB SB Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Number of Lanes (N)0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 Lane Assignment LT TR LT TR LT TR LT TR Volume (V), veh/h 0 0 182 70 0 50 70 0 0 50 0 20 0 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles, %0 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 Flow Rate (vPCE), pc/h 0 0 225 86 0 62 86 0 0 62 0 25 0 0 0 0 Right-Turn Bypass None None None None Conflicting Lanes 2 2 2 2 Pedestrians Crossing, p/h 0 0 0 0 Critical and Follow-Up Headway Adjustment Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Critical Headway (s)4.6453 4.3276 4.6453 4.3276 4.6453 4.3276 4.6453 4.3276 Follow-Up Headway (s)2.6667 2.5352 2.6667 2.5352 2.6667 2.5352 2.6667 2.5352 Flow Computations, Capacity and v/c Ratios Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Entry Flow (ve), pc/h 146 165 70 78 62 25 0 0 Entry Volume veh/h 139 157 66 75 59 24 0 0 Circulating Flow (vc), pc/h 62 62 225 210 Exiting Flow (vex), pc/h 250 148 0 148 Capacity (cpce), pc/h 1275 1347 1275 1347 1098 1173 1113 1188 Capacity (c), veh/h 1214 1283 1214 1283 1045 1117 1073 1145 v/c Ratio (x)0.11 0.12 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 Delay and Level of Service Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Lane Control Delay (d), s/veh 3.9 3.8 3.4 3.3 3.9 3.4 3.4 3.1 Lane LOS A A A A A A A A 95% Queue, veh 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 Approach Delay, s/veh 3.9 3.3 3.8 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 3.7 A Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS7™Roundabouts Version 7.4 Generated: 2/11/2020 9:15:03 PM Int-21_W-Oak-St+Cottonwood-Rd_AM_2023-Bkgnd.xro HCS7 Roundabouts Report General Information Site Information Analyst T. Eastwood Intersection Oak & Cottonwood Agency or Co.Morrison-Maierle E/W Street Name West Oak Street Date Performed 1/31/2020 N/S Street Name Cottonwood Road Analysis Year 2023 Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Time Analyzed Weekday, PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.85 Project Description Estimated Background Traffic Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics Approach EB WB NB SB Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Number of Lanes (N)0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 Lane Assignment LT TR LT TR LT TR LT TR Volume (V), veh/h 0 0 109 45 0 50 163 0 0 65 0 35 0 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles, %0 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 Flow Rate (vPCE), pc/h 0 0 135 56 0 62 201 0 0 80 0 43 0 0 0 0 Right-Turn Bypass None None None None Conflicting Lanes 2 2 2 2 Pedestrians Crossing, p/h 0 0 0 0 Critical and Follow-Up Headway Adjustment Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Critical Headway (s)4.6453 4.3276 4.6453 4.3276 4.6453 4.3276 4.6453 4.3276 Follow-Up Headway (s)2.6667 2.5352 2.6667 2.5352 2.6667 2.5352 2.6667 2.5352 Flow Computations, Capacity and v/c Ratios Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Entry Flow (ve), pc/h 90 101 124 139 80 43 0 0 Entry Volume veh/h 85 96 118 133 76 41 0 0 Circulating Flow (vc), pc/h 62 80 135 343 Exiting Flow (vex), pc/h 178 281 0 118 Capacity (cpce), pc/h 1275 1347 1254 1327 1192 1266 985 1061 Capacity (c), veh/h 1214 1283 1194 1263 1136 1206 949 1023 v/c Ratio (x)0.07 0.08 0.10 0.11 0.07 0.03 0.00 0.00 Delay and Level of Service Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Lane Control Delay (d), s/veh 3.5 3.4 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.3 3.8 3.5 Lane LOS A A A A A A A A 95% Queue, veh 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 Approach Delay, s/veh 3.5 3.8 3.6 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 3.6 A Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS7™Roundabouts Version 7.4 Generated: 2/11/2020 9:12:26 PM Int-21_W-Oak-St+Cottonwood-Rd_PM_2023-Bkgnd.xro HCS7 Roundabouts Report General Information Site Information Analyst T. Eastwood Intersection Oak & Cottonwood Agency or Co.Morrison-Maierle E/W Street Name West Oak Street Date Performed 1/31/2020 N/S Street Name Cottonwood Road Analysis Year 2023 Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Time Analyzed Weekday, AM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.85 Project Description Estimated Total Traffic Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics Approach EB WB NB SB Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Number of Lanes (N)0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 Lane Assignment LT TR LT TR LT TR LT TR Volume (V), veh/h 0 0 201 81 0 50 92 15 0 61 8 20 0 20 10 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles, %0 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 Flow Rate (vPCE), pc/h 0 0 248 100 0 62 114 19 0 75 10 25 0 25 12 0 Right-Turn Bypass None None None None Conflicting Lanes 2 2 2 2 Pedestrians Crossing, p/h 0 0 0 0 Critical and Follow-Up Headway Adjustment Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Critical Headway (s)4.6453 4.3276 4.6453 4.3276 4.6453 4.3276 4.6453 4.3276 Follow-Up Headway (s)2.6667 2.5352 2.6667 2.5352 2.6667 2.5352 2.6667 2.5352 Flow Computations, Capacity and v/c Ratios Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Entry Flow (ve), pc/h 164 184 92 103 75 35 25 12 Entry Volume veh/h 156 176 87 98 71 33 24 11 Circulating Flow (vc), pc/h 99 85 273 251 Exiting Flow (vex), pc/h 298 189 29 174 Capacity (cpce), pc/h 1232 1305 1248 1321 1050 1126 1072 1147 Capacity (c), veh/h 1174 1243 1189 1258 1000 1072 1021 1093 v/c Ratio (x)0.13 0.14 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.03 0.02 0.01 Delay and Level of Service Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Lane Control Delay (d), s/veh 4.2 4.1 3.6 3.5 4.2 3.6 3.7 3.4 Lane LOS A A A A A A A A 95% Queue, veh 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 Approach Delay, s/veh 4.1 3.6 4.0 3.6 Approach LOS A A A A Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 3.9 A Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS7™Roundabouts Version 7.4 Generated: 2/11/2020 9:13:33 PM Int-21_W-Oak-St+Cottonwood-Rd_AM_2023-Total.xro HCS7 Roundabouts Report General Information Site Information Analyst T. Eastwood Intersection Oak & Cottonwood Agency or Co.Morrison-Maierle E/W Street Name West Oak Street Date Performed 1/31/2020 N/S Street Name Cottonwood Road Analysis Year 2023 Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Time Analyzed Weekday, PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.85 Project Description Estimated Total Traffic Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics Approach EB WB NB SB Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Number of Lanes (N)0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 Lane Assignment LT TR LT TR LT TR LT TR Volume (V), veh/h 0 0 125 53 0 50 192 16 0 82 7 35 0 25 13 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles, %0 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 Flow Rate (vPCE), pc/h 0 0 154 65 0 62 237 20 0 101 9 43 0 31 16 0 Right-Turn Bypass None None None None Conflicting Lanes 2 2 2 2 Pedestrians Crossing, p/h 0 0 0 0 Critical and Follow-Up Headway Adjustment Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Critical Headway (s)4.6453 4.3276 4.6453 4.3276 4.6453 4.3276 4.6453 4.3276 Follow-Up Headway (s)2.6667 2.5352 2.6667 2.5352 2.6667 2.5352 2.6667 2.5352 Flow Computations, Capacity and v/c Ratios Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Entry Flow (ve), pc/h 103 116 150 169 101 52 31 16 Entry Volume veh/h 98 111 143 161 96 50 30 15 Circulating Flow (vc), pc/h 109 110 185 400 Exiting Flow (vex), pc/h 228 338 29 143 Capacity (cpce), pc/h 1221 1294 1220 1293 1139 1213 934 1011 Capacity (c), veh/h 1163 1233 1162 1232 1084 1156 890 963 v/c Ratio (x)0.08 0.09 0.12 0.13 0.09 0.04 0.03 0.02 Delay and Level of Service Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Lane Control Delay (d), s/veh 3.8 3.7 4.1 4.0 4.1 3.5 4.4 3.9 Lane LOS A A A A A A A A 95% Queue, veh 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 Approach Delay, s/veh 3.7 4.1 3.9 4.2 Approach LOS A A A A Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 3.9 A Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS7™Roundabouts Version 7.4 Generated: 2/11/2020 9:10:28 PM Int-21_W-Oak-St+Cottonwood-Rd_PM_2023-Total.xro APPENDIX D PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ANALYSES West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road Estimated 2023 Total Traffic Conditions Crossing Location Evaluation Worksheet Analyst:Major Roadway: Analysis Date:Minor Roadway Jurisdiction:or Location: Existing Traffic Control:Is this an existing or proposed school crossing? Is this a multi-use path crossing? Posted or Statutory Speed Limit or 85th Percentile Speed on the Major Roadway =mph = 55 km/h Community with population less than 10,000?Existing or Proposed Major Transit Stop? Existing Crossing Treatments?If yes, they include: Nearby Pedestrian Generators (School, Transit Stop, Commercial, etc.): Major Roadway Total Number of Lanes, Both Directions = Is this a one-way street? Major Roadway Median Type = Major Roadway Direction 1 = Major Roadway Direction 2 = Stopping Sight Distance, Direction 1 (SSD1) =ft Stopping Sight Distance, Direction 2 (SSD2) =ft Is SSD1 ≥ 8x the Speed Limit or 85th Percentile Speed? If No, are improvements to SSD feasible? Is SSD2 ≥ 8x the Speed Limit or 85th Percentile Speed? If No, are improvements to SSD feasible? Pedestrian Crossing Distance - Curb to Curb =ft ft to Median ft to Median Nearest Marked or Protected Pedestrian Crossing: Distance to:ft ANALYST & SITE INFORMATION T. Eastwood 1/31/2020 City of Bozeman West Oak Street Cottonwood Road Yes Roundabout Gallatin High School and Bozeman No No No No School crossing defined as a crossing location where ten or more student pedestrians per hour are crossing. 35 West Oak Street & Flanders Mill Road GEOMETRIC DATA Major Roadway Configuration 1,400 5-Lane Total - LT Pedestrian Crossing Data 35.0 Yes Yes Raised Eastbound (EB) Westbound (WB) Sports Park. No If Applicable - LM1 35.0 If Applicable - LM2 > 300 > 300 Only required for uncontrolled location. Page 1 of 5 N:\5659\005 NWX Phase 1 Major Sub\Traffic Data\Pedestrian Analyses\Ped-Xing-Treatment-Analyses_Cottonwood-Rd+W-Oak-St_2023-Total_35-mph.xlsx West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road Estimated 2023 Total Traffic Conditions Crossing Location Evaluation Worksheet to to to to //// //// Major Roadway Average Daily Vehicular Volume - ADT =veh/day Does the peak period pedestrian volume exceed the following minimum volume thresholds? // // // MINIMUM PEDESTRIAN VOLUME THRESHOLDS:*Young, elderly, and disabled pedestrians count 2x towards volume thresholds. For speeds of - 20 peds per hour* in any one hour, or For speeds greater than 35 mph,- 14 peds per hour* in any one hour, or 35 mph or less:- 18 peds per hour* in any two hours, or community with population less - 13 peds per hour* in any two hours, or - 15 peds per hour* in any three hours than 10,000, or major transit stop:- 11 peds per hour* in any three hours Minimum signal warrant volume for peak hour, SC: Is there a traffic signal located within 300 ft of the crossing location? 16:00 18:00 MULTIMODAL VOLUME DATA Hourly Time Periods: AM Mid-Day PM Other 7:00 9:00 Date / Day of Week:Weekday Weekday Major Road Volume, Hourly Total of Both Approaches (veh/h):435 452 Number of Transit Boardings (if applicable): Total Number of Pedestrians:31 32 Total Number of Bicyclists: # of Young (Y) Peds / Bicyclists:31 0 32 0 0 0 # of Elderly (E) Peds:0 0 0 # of Disabled (D) Peds:0 0 0 2,850 0 TOTAL PEDS - Actual: Include. All Bicyclists in Total Sum 31 32 # Non-Y/E/D Peds / Bicyclists:0 TOTAL PEDS - Adjusted for 2x Y/E/D:62 64 CROSSING VOLUME & PEDESTRIAN / BICYCLIST DELAY ANALYSES Minimum Pedestrian Volumes Analysis Period Max Crossing Volume Speed 35 mph or Less Speed > 35 mph, Population < 10,000, or Major Transit Stop Actual Adj.Minimum Meets Yes 2-Hour 18 Yes Yes Yes Yes Minimum Meets Peak Hour 32 64 20 Yes Yes Yes No3-Hour 15 No No No No Does not meet signal warrant. Is 15th percentile crossing speed of pedestrians less than 3.5 ft / sec? No N/A N/A N/A N/A 452 32 590 No N/A N/A Minimum Pedestrian Volume for Traffic Signal Warrant Major Roadway Volume, Vmaj (veh/hr) Max Crossing Volume (ped/hr) Speed 35 mph or Less Speed > 35 mph, Population < 10,000, or Major Transit Stop Minimum Meets Minimum Meets Page 2 of 5 N:\5659\005 NWX Phase 1 Major Sub\Traffic Data\Pedestrian Analyses\Ped-Xing-Treatment-Analyses_Cottonwood-Rd+W-Oak-St_2023-Total_35-mph.xlsx West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road Estimated 2023 Total Traffic Conditions Crossing Location Evaluation Worksheet Pedestrian Crossing Distance - Curb to Curb =ft ft to Median ft to Median Pedestrian Walking Speed, SP =ft/s Pedestrian Start-Up Time and End Clearance Time, ts =sec Critical Gap Required for Crossing Pedestrian - tc = (L/SP) + ts =sec for LT - Total sec for LM1 - If Applicable sec for LM2 - If Applicable Major Roadway Volume - Total of Both Approaches, Vmaj =veh/hr Volume of Approach Being Crossed if Median Refuge Island is Present =VM1 =veh/hr VM2 =veh/hr Major Roadway Traffic Flow Rate, v =vmaj =veh/s vM1 =veh/s vM2 =veh/s v = V/3600 if Speed ≤ 35 mph v = (V/0.7)/3600 if Speed > 35 mph, Population < 10,000, or there is a Major Transit Stop Avg. Pedestrian Delay, dp =dp-maj =s/ped dp-M1 =s/ped dp-M2 =s/ped dp = (evtc - v tc -1) / v Total Pedestrian Delay, Dp =Dp-maj =hrs Dp-M1 =hrs Dp-M2 =hrs Dp = (dp x Vp) / 3600 This is estimated delay for all pedestrians crossing the major roadway without a crossing treatment - assumes 0% compliance. This calculated value can be replaced with the actual total pedestrian delay measured at the site. Expected motorist compliance at pedestrian crossings in region - Compliance = High or Low: Selection of treatment based on pedestrian volume, total pedestrian delay, and expected motorist compliance. CROSSWALK:This category encompasses standard crosswalk markings and pedestrian crossing signs, as opposed to unmarked crossings. ACTIVE:Also called “active when present,” this category includes those devices designed to display a warning only when pedestrians are present or crossing the street. ENHANCED:This category includes those devices that enhance the visibility of the crossing location and pedestrians waiting to cross. Warning signs, markings, or beacons in this category are present or active at the crossing location at all times. RED:This category includes those devices that display a circular red indication (signal or beacon) to motorists at the pedestrian location. SIGNAL:This category pertains to traffic control signals. 35.0 35.0 ESTIMATION OF PEDESTRIAN DELAY Enter Only if Applicable Enter Only if Applicable Total - LT If Applicable - LM1 If Applicable - LM2 3.5 3.0 13.0 13.0 452 178 274 PEDESTRIAN DELAY BASED CROSSING TREATMENT SELECTION 0.13 0.05 0.08 5.24 9.20 0.05 0.08 Motorist Compliance at Pedestrian Crossing High Total Roadway 32Median - M1 0.05 CROSSWALK N/A Median - M2 0.08 CROSSWALK N/A Crossing Max Crossing Volume (ped/hr) Total Pedestrian Delay (hrs) Speed 35 mph or Less Speed > 35 mph, Population < 10,000, or Major Transit Stop Page 3 of 5 N:\5659\005 NWX Phase 1 Major Sub\Traffic Data\Pedestrian Analyses\Ped-Xing-Treatment-Analyses_Cottonwood-Rd+W-Oak-St_2023-Total_35-mph.xlsx West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road Estimated 2023 Total Traffic Conditions Crossing Location Evaluation Worksheet A B C D E F Specific Guidance: Consider HAWK beacon, pedestrian traffic signal or grade-separated crossing; application of these treatments will consider corridor signal progression, existing grades, phyiscal contraints, and other engieering factors. Install marked crosswalk with enhanced road-side signs. Category Treatment Description Install marked crosswalk with enhanced road-side and in-roadway (bollard mounted) signs. Install marked crosswalk with enhanced signs and geometric improvements to increase pedestrian visibility and reduce exposure. B Install marked crosswalk with enhanced road-side and in-roadway (bollard mounted) signs. Specific Guidance: Install marked crosswalk with pedestrian crossing signs mounted on the side of the roadway and "State Law - Yield to Pedestrian" on in-roadway bollards; use standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations. SELECTION OF TREATMENT BASED ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUME, ROADWAY ADT, & SPEED. Treatment Descriptions Do not install marked crosswalk at uncontrolled crossing with 3 or more THROUGH lanes per direction or where the speed limit is ≥ 45 mph and/or there is not a median refuge on a 5-lane crossing. Consider HAWK beacon, pedestrian traffic signal, or grade-separated crossing. Specific Guidance: Install marked crosswalk with "State Law - Yield to Pedestrian" signs mounted on the side of the roadway with standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations. Specific Guidance: Install marked crosswalk with pedestrian crossing signs mounted on the side of the roadway and "State Law - Yield to Pedestrian" on in-roadway bollards; use standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations. Specific Guidance: For 2 or 3-lane roadways, install marked crosswalk with "State Law - Yield to Pedestrian" signs mounted on the side of the roadway and on in-roadway bollards or median mounted signs; use standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations. Add neckdowns or median refuge islands to shorten the pedestrian crossing distance and increase pedestrian visibility to motorists. Specific Guidance: Install raised median refuge island (unless it is a one-way street or one already exists) to shorten the pedestrian crossing distance and increase pedestrian visibility to motorists. [If a median refuge can not be constructed on a two-way street, Go To Scenario F]. Install marked crosswalk with "State Law - Yield to Pedestrian" signs WITH pedestrian activated RRFBs mounted on the side of the roadway and on median mounted signs; use standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations. Consider adding neckdowns at the crossing if on-street parking exists on the roadway and storm drain considerations will allow. [Note: If pedestrian volume falls above the RRFB limit line on Figure 1, consider Hawk beacon, pedestrian traffic signal, or grade-separated crossing.] Specific Guidance: Consider HAWK beacon, pedestrian traffic signal or grade-separated crossing; application of these treatments will consider corridor signal progression, existing grades, phyiscal contraints, and other engieering factors. Install marked crosswalk with enhanced signs, pedestrian activated RRFBs, and geometric improvements to increase pedestrian visibility and reduce exposure. Do not install marked crosswalk at uncontrolled crossing. Determine if the speed limit can be effectively reduced to 40 mph AND a raised refuge median can be installed. If so, utliize Scenario D criteria. If this is not possible, or if pedestrian volume falls above the RRFB limit line on Figure 1, consider HAWK beacon, pedestrian traffic signal, or grade-separated crossing. Page 4 of 5 N:\5659\005 NWX Phase 1 Major Sub\Traffic Data\Pedestrian Analyses\Ped-Xing-Treatment-Analyses_Cottonwood-Rd+W-Oak-St_2023-Total_35-mph.xlsx West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road Estimated 2023 Total Traffic Conditions Crossing Location Evaluation Worksheet Figure 1a - Guidelines for the Installation of Pedestrian Hybrid (HAWK) Beacons, Pedestrian Signals, or Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Signs on Low-Speed Roadways Adapted from Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines , City of Boulder (Boulder, Colorado) November 2011. Figure 1b - Guidelines for the Installation of Pedestrian Hybrid (HAWK) Beacons, Pedestrian Signals, or Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Signs on High-Speed Roadways Adapted from Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines , City of Boulder (Boulder, Colorado) November 2011. (435,32) Page 5 of 5 N:\5659\005 NWX Phase 1 Major Sub\Traffic Data\Pedestrian Analyses\Ped-Xing-Treatment-Analyses_Cottonwood-Rd+W-Oak-St_2023-Total_35-mph.xlsx West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road 2040 Sensitivity Analyses Crossing Location Evaluation Worksheet Analyst:Major Roadway: Analysis Date:Minor Roadway Jurisdiction:or Location: Existing Traffic Control:Is this an existing or proposed school crossing? Is this a multi-use path crossing? Posted or Statutory Speed Limit or 85th Percentile Speed on the Major Roadway =mph = 55 km/h Community with population less than 10,000?Existing or Proposed Major Transit Stop? Existing Crossing Treatments?If yes, they include: Nearby Pedestrian Generators (School, Transit Stop, Commercial, etc.): Major Roadway Total Number of Lanes, Both Directions = Is this a one-way street? Major Roadway Median Type = Major Roadway Direction 1 = Major Roadway Direction 2 = Stopping Sight Distance, Direction 1 (SSD1) =ft Stopping Sight Distance, Direction 2 (SSD2) =ft Is SSD1 ≥ 8x the Speed Limit or 85th Percentile Speed? If No, are improvements to SSD feasible? Is SSD2 ≥ 8x the Speed Limit or 85th Percentile Speed? If No, are improvements to SSD feasible? Pedestrian Crossing Distance - Curb to Curb =ft ft to Median ft to Median Nearest Marked or Protected Pedestrian Crossing: Distance to:ft ANALYST & SITE INFORMATION T. Eastwood 1/31/2020 City of Bozeman Cottonwood Road West Oak Street Yes Roundabout Gallatin High School and Bozeman No No No No School crossing defined as a crossing location where ten or more student pedestrians per hour are crossing. 35 West Oak Street & Flanders Mill Road GEOMETRIC DATA Major Roadway Configuration 1,400 5-Lane Total - LT Pedestrian Crossing Data 35.0 Yes Yes Raised Northbound (NB) Southbound (SB) Sports Park. No If Applicable - LM1 35.0 If Applicable - LM2 > 300 > 300 Only required for uncontrolled location. Page 1 of 5 N:\5659\005 NWX Phase 1 Major Sub\Traffic Data\Pedestrian Analyses\Ped-Xing-Treatment-Analyses_Cottonwood-Rd+W-Oak-St_2040-Total_35-mph.xlsx West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road 2040 Sensitivity Analyses Crossing Location Evaluation Worksheet to to to to //// //// Major Roadway Average Daily Vehicular Volume - ADT =veh/day Does the peak period pedestrian volume exceed the following minimum volume thresholds? // // // MINIMUM PEDESTRIAN VOLUME THRESHOLDS:*Young, elderly, and disabled pedestrians count 2x towards volume thresholds. For speeds of - 20 peds per hour* in any one hour, or For speeds greater than 35 mph,- 14 peds per hour* in any one hour, or 35 mph or less:- 18 peds per hour* in any two hours, or community with population less - 13 peds per hour* in any two hours, or - 15 peds per hour* in any three hours than 10,000, or major transit stop:- 11 peds per hour* in any three hours Minimum signal warrant volume for peak hour, SC: Is there a traffic signal located within 300 ft of the crossing location? 16:00 18:00 MULTIMODAL VOLUME DATA Hourly Time Periods: AM Mid-Day PM Other 7:00 9:00 Date / Day of Week:Weekday Weekday Major Road Volume, Hourly Total of Both Approaches (veh/h):990 1,059 Number of Transit Boardings (if applicable): Total Number of Pedestrians:70 75 Total Number of Bicyclists: # of Young (Y) Peds / Bicyclists:70 0 75 0 0 0 # of Elderly (E) Peds:0 0 0 # of Disabled (D) Peds:0 0 0 2,850 0 TOTAL PEDS - Actual: Include. All Bicyclists in Total Sum 70 75 # Non-Y/E/D Peds / Bicyclists:0 TOTAL PEDS - Adjusted for 2x Y/E/D:140 150 CROSSING VOLUME & PEDESTRIAN / BICYCLIST DELAY ANALYSES Minimum Pedestrian Volumes Analysis Period Max Crossing Volume Speed 35 mph or Less Speed > 35 mph, Population < 10,000, or Major Transit Stop Actual Adj.Minimum Meets Yes 2-Hour 18 Yes Yes Yes Yes Minimum Meets Peak Hour 75 150 20 Yes Yes Yes No3-Hour 15 No No No No Does not meet signal warrant. Is 15th percentile crossing speed of pedestrians less than 3.5 ft / sec? No N/A N/A N/A N/A 1059 75 247 No N/A N/A Minimum Pedestrian Volume for Traffic Signal Warrant Major Roadway Volume, Vmaj (veh/hr) Max Crossing Volume (ped/hr) Speed 35 mph or Less Speed > 35 mph, Population < 10,000, or Major Transit Stop Minimum Meets Minimum Meets Page 2 of 5 N:\5659\005 NWX Phase 1 Major Sub\Traffic Data\Pedestrian Analyses\Ped-Xing-Treatment-Analyses_Cottonwood-Rd+W-Oak-St_2040-Total_35-mph.xlsx West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road 2040 Sensitivity Analyses Crossing Location Evaluation Worksheet Pedestrian Crossing Distance - Curb to Curb =ft ft to Median ft to Median Pedestrian Walking Speed, SP =ft/s Pedestrian Start-Up Time and End Clearance Time, ts =sec Critical Gap Required for Crossing Pedestrian - tc = (L/SP) + ts =sec for LT - Total sec for LM1 - If Applicable sec for LM2 - If Applicable Major Roadway Volume - Total of Both Approaches, Vmaj =veh/hr Volume of Approach Being Crossed if Median Refuge Island is Present =VM1 =veh/hr VM2 =veh/hr Major Roadway Traffic Flow Rate, v =vmaj =veh/s vM1 =veh/s vM2 =veh/s v = V/3600 if Speed ≤ 35 mph v = (V/0.7)/3600 if Speed > 35 mph, Population < 10,000, or there is a Major Transit Stop Avg. Pedestrian Delay, dp =dp-maj =s/ped dp-M1 =s/ped dp-M2 =s/ped dp = (evtc - v tc -1) / v Total Pedestrian Delay, Dp =Dp-maj =hrs Dp-M1 =hrs Dp-M2 =hrs Dp = (dp x Vp) / 3600 This is estimated delay for all pedestrians crossing the major roadway without a crossing treatment - assumes 0% compliance. This calculated value can be replaced with the actual total pedestrian delay measured at the site. Expected motorist compliance at pedestrian crossings in region - Compliance = High or Low: Selection of treatment based on pedestrian volume, total pedestrian delay, and expected motorist compliance. CROSSWALK:This category encompasses standard crosswalk markings and pedestrian crossing signs, as opposed to unmarked crossings. ACTIVE:Also called “active when present,” this category includes those devices designed to display a warning only when pedestrians are present or crossing the street. ENHANCED:This category includes those devices that enhance the visibility of the crossing location and pedestrians waiting to cross. Warning signs, markings, or beacons in this category are present or active at the crossing location at all times. RED:This category includes those devices that display a circular red indication (signal or beacon) to motorists at the pedestrian location. SIGNAL:This category pertains to traffic control signals. 35.0 35.0 ESTIMATION OF PEDESTRIAN DELAY Enter Only if Applicable Enter Only if Applicable Total - LT If Applicable - LM1 If Applicable - LM2 3.5 3.0 13.0 13.0 1,059 331 360 PEDESTRIAN DELAY BASED CROSSING TREATMENT SELECTION 0.29 0.09 0.10 12.06 13.69 0.25 0.29 Motorist Compliance at Pedestrian Crossing High Total Roadway 75Median - M1 0.25 CROSSWALK N/A Median - M2 0.29 CROSSWALK N/A Crossing Max Crossing Volume (ped/hr) Total Pedestrian Delay (hrs) Speed 35 mph or Less Speed > 35 mph, Population < 10,000, or Major Transit Stop Page 3 of 5 N:\5659\005 NWX Phase 1 Major Sub\Traffic Data\Pedestrian Analyses\Ped-Xing-Treatment-Analyses_Cottonwood-Rd+W-Oak-St_2040-Total_35-mph.xlsx West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road 2040 Sensitivity Analyses Crossing Location Evaluation Worksheet A B C D E F Specific Guidance: Consider HAWK beacon, pedestrian traffic signal or grade-separated crossing; application of these treatments will consider corridor signal progression, existing grades, phyiscal contraints, and other engieering factors. Install marked crosswalk with enhanced road-side signs. Category Treatment Description Install marked crosswalk with enhanced road-side and in-roadway (bollard mounted) signs. Install marked crosswalk with enhanced signs and geometric improvements to increase pedestrian visibility and reduce exposure. B Install marked crosswalk with enhanced road-side and in-roadway (bollard mounted) signs. Specific Guidance: Install marked crosswalk with pedestrian crossing signs mounted on the side of the roadway and "State Law - Yield to Pedestrian" on in-roadway bollards; use standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations. SELECTION OF TREATMENT BASED ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUME, ROADWAY ADT, & SPEED. Treatment Descriptions Do not install marked crosswalk at uncontrolled crossing with 3 or more THROUGH lanes per direction or where the speed limit is ≥ 45 mph and/or there is not a median refuge on a 5-lane crossing. Consider HAWK beacon, pedestrian traffic signal, or grade-separated crossing. Specific Guidance: Install marked crosswalk with "State Law - Yield to Pedestrian" signs mounted on the side of the roadway with standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations. Specific Guidance: Install marked crosswalk with pedestrian crossing signs mounted on the side of the roadway and "State Law - Yield to Pedestrian" on in-roadway bollards; use standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations. Specific Guidance: For 2 or 3-lane roadways, install marked crosswalk with "State Law - Yield to Pedestrian" signs mounted on the side of the roadway and on in-roadway bollards or median mounted signs; use standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations. Add neckdowns or median refuge islands to shorten the pedestrian crossing distance and increase pedestrian visibility to motorists. Specific Guidance: Install raised median refuge island (unless it is a one-way street or one already exists) to shorten the pedestrian crossing distance and increase pedestrian visibility to motorists. [If a median refuge can not be constructed on a two-way street, Go To Scenario F]. Install marked crosswalk with "State Law - Yield to Pedestrian" signs WITH pedestrian activated RRFBs mounted on the side of the roadway and on median mounted signs; use standard (W11-2) advance pedestrian warning signs; use S1-1 signs for School Crossing locations. Consider adding neckdowns at the crossing if on-street parking exists on the roadway and storm drain considerations will allow. [Note: If pedestrian volume falls above the RRFB limit line on Figure 1, consider Hawk beacon, pedestrian traffic signal, or grade-separated crossing.] Specific Guidance: Consider HAWK beacon, pedestrian traffic signal or grade-separated crossing; application of these treatments will consider corridor signal progression, existing grades, phyiscal contraints, and other engieering factors. Install marked crosswalk with enhanced signs, pedestrian activated RRFBs, and geometric improvements to increase pedestrian visibility and reduce exposure. Do not install marked crosswalk at uncontrolled crossing. Determine if the speed limit can be effectively reduced to 40 mph AND a raised refuge median can be installed. If so, utliize Scenario D criteria. If this is not possible, or if pedestrian volume falls above the RRFB limit line on Figure 1, consider HAWK beacon, pedestrian traffic signal, or grade-separated crossing. Page 4 of 5 N:\5659\005 NWX Phase 1 Major Sub\Traffic Data\Pedestrian Analyses\Ped-Xing-Treatment-Analyses_Cottonwood-Rd+W-Oak-St_2040-Total_35-mph.xlsx West Oak Street and Cottonwood Road 2040 Sensitivity Analyses Crossing Location Evaluation Worksheet Figure 1a - Guidelines for the Installation of Pedestrian Hybrid (HAWK) Beacons, Pedestrian Signals, or Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Signs on Low-Speed Roadways Adapted from Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines , City of Boulder (Boulder, Colorado) November 2011. Figure 1b - Guidelines for the Installation of Pedestrian Hybrid (HAWK) Beacons, Pedestrian Signals, or Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Signs on High-Speed Roadways Adapted from Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines , City of Boulder (Boulder, Colorado) November 2011. (1059,75) Page 5 of 5 N:\5659\005 NWX Phase 1 Major Sub\Traffic Data\Pedestrian Analyses\Ped-Xing-Treatment-Analyses_Cottonwood-Rd+W-Oak-St_2040-Total_35-mph.xlsx 2880 TECHNOLOGY BOULEVARD WEST ● PO BOX 1113 ● BOZEMAN, MT 59771 PHONE: (406) 587-0721 ● FAX: (406) 922-6702 ● www.m-m.net