HomeMy WebLinkAbout08042_traffic analysis
October 3, 2008
Mr. Adam Williams
ARC Integrated Program Management, Inc.
1790 38th Street, Unit 105
Boulder, CO 80301
RE: Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact Analysis
Dear Mr. Williams:
Fox Higgins has completed a traffic impact analysis for the proposed Fairmont Vail
project located on the south side of the S. Frontage Road roughly 850 feet west of the
main Vail roundabout. This analysis has been completed following “Level Three” traffic
assessment requirements per Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Region 3.
Per CDOT requirements, this analysis evaluates potential traffic impacts along the S.
Frontage Road with respect to operational considerations and auxiliary lane needs for
the short-term build-out and long-term (20-year) scenarios. Since the project and
adjacent roadways are anticipated to generate the highest traffic volumes during the
peak winter season, this study analyzes the peak winter scenario for the highest of the
AM, PM and Saturday peak hour volumes. This memorandum summarizes our analysis
and findings.
Project Description
The Fairmont Vail project is proposing to redevelop the existing Evergreen Lodge hotel
with similar uses to include hotel rooms, on-site restaurant and meeting facilities,
fractional-ownership units, and residential condominium units. The project site is located
along the S. Frontage Rd. just west of mile marker 176. A vicinity map is provided on
Figure 1.
Nearby accesses and intersections include the main Vail roundabout (Vail Road and I-70
interchange) located roughly 850 feet east of the east site access, the existing
Lionshead parking structure access located roughly 650 feet west of the west site
access, and driveways for adjacent uses to the east.
Two access driveways along the S. Frontage Road currently serve the site. These
accesses are not shared or used by any other properties. The project proposes to
relocate the easternmost access roughly 45 feet to the west of the current location, with
the east access to serve only service vehicles with redevelopment. The existing
westernmost access will serve as the main site access. This access location may need
to be adjusted slightly to accommodate grades, though is shown in roughly the existing
access location based on the current site plan. The site plan depicting the existing and
proposed access points is shown on Figure 2.
Mr. Adam Williams
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact Analysis
October 3, 2008
Page 2
Existing Conditions
The project site is served by the S. Frontage Road, which is a two-lane roadway with a
two-way center left-turn lane (TWLTL) east of the site’s west access. The S. Frontage
Road has a posted speed limit of 25 miles per hour (mph). The existing TWLTL begins
to taper between the two site accesses. The existing site accesses are controlled with a
stop sign on the minor street (northbound) approaches.
Existing peak winter weekend volumes contained in the Vail Transportation Master Plan
Update1 (“TMP Update”) were reviewed along the S. Frontage Road and incorporated
into this analysis. These volumes were collected during peak winter ski weekends and
holidays in 2005 and 2006. The existing AM volumes reflect a heavy westbound
movement to enter the Lionshead parking structure just west of the site. The existing
PM peak hour volumes reflect a reverse-pattern from the AM peak, with a heavy
movement eastbound exiting the Lionshead parking structure and traffic destined for the
I-70 interchange at the main Vail roundabout to the east of the site.
PM peak observations were also performed by Fox Higgins in August 2008 to observe
operations at the site accesses and to determine the directional distribution of site traffic
along the S. Frontage Road. Since the existing hotel site was only 35% occupied when
the most recent observations were performed, adjustments were made to increase these
driveway volumes to represent peak winter use when the hotel would be expected to be
100% occupied. It was determined that the directional split of site traffic was roughly
80% oriented to/from the east along the S. Frontage Road with 20% oriented to/from the
west. The existing peak winter AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the site
driveways are shown on Figure 3.
In determining the operational characteristics of an intersection, “Levels of Service”
(LOS) A through F are applied, with LOS A indicating very good operations and LOS F
indicating congested operations. The intersection LOS is represented as a delay in
seconds per vehicle for the intersection as a whole and for critical turning movements.
Criteria contained in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)2 was applied to the site
access intersections in order to determine existing levels of service during the peak
winter AM and PM peak hours.
The results of the intersection level of service analysis are summarized in Table 1. As
shown in the table, both access intersections along the S. Frontage Road are operating
acceptably at LOS A overall and LOS C or better for the sidestreet approach.
Future Conditions
In order to evaluate long-term conditions within the study area, Year 2025 traffic
projections reflecting near build-out of the Town of Vail contained in the TMP Update
1 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update (Draft). Felsburg Holt & Ullevig. June 2008.
2 Highway Capacity Manual, Highway Research Board Special Report 209, Transportation Research
Board, National Research Council, 2001. Synchro v. 6 software utilized.
Mr. Adam Williams
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact Analysis
October 3, 2008
Page 3
were reviewed. The most recent traffic projections estimate a Year 2025 AM peak
volume of roughly 520 vehicles per hour (vph) westbound in front of the site with 320 vph
eastbound. In the PM peak hour, the TMP Update model estimates a volume of 890 vph
westbound in front of the site with 1160 vph eastbound. These forecasts equate to
between 2.2% and 3.7% annual growth, depending upon the direction of travel.
In order to provide a 20-year scenario (Year 2030), the Year 2025 forecasts were
increased at an annual rate of 1.5% for five additional years. This growth rate considers
that Vail anticipates to be nearly built out by the Year 2025. Additional growth after 2025
is anticipated to taper off at rates lower than what is currently being experienced with
major redevelopment projects in the area.
Trip Generation
The Fairmont Vail project is proposing to develop a hotel with 128 hotel rooms, 11
fractional-ownership units, and 91 residential units. The hotel will also include a 3,200
SF restaurant on-site, a full-service spa, and 3,600 SF of meeting space. In comparison,
the existing Evergreen Lodge has 128 hotel rooms with 4,950 SF of on-site restaurant
space and 2,000 SF of meeting space.
In order to estimate the projected site trips for the Fairmont Vail project, trip rates
contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation3 manual for
“Hotel” and “Residential Condominium/Townhouse” were utilized. Per the ITE
description for “Hotel”, these rates include “supporting facilities such as restaurants,
cocktail lounges, meeting and banquet or convention facilities, limited recreational
facilities (pool, fitness room) and/or other retail and service shops”. Though use of the
on-site supporting facilities is anticipated to be primarily by guests of the hotel and
residents, the ITE rates reflect that some portion of site traffic will be generated by non-
hotel guests. Thus, all trips associated with the proposed on-site uses are included
within the hotel rates, consistent with ITE methodology.
For the 11 fractional ownership units, ITE “Hotel” rates were applied since these units
will be anticipated to function similarly to the hotel rooms, with respect to traffic
generation. These guests would be anticipated to stay at the hotel for relatively short
periods (two weeks or less). For the 91 residential units, ITE trip rates for “Residential
Condominium/Townhouse” were applied. The estimated site trips based on these
assumptions are shown on Table 2.
Due to the proximity of the site to Vail village (within walking distance) and to transit
stops, it is anticipated that a portion of the trips to the site will involve transportation
modes other than private automobiles. The West Vail Red and Green Loop bus lines
stop at Municipal Building across S. Frontage Road. The In-Town Shuttle stops at the
rear of the hotel site adjacent to the Vail Valley Medical Center. Per the TMP Update,
recent studies in the area have determined that hotel/condo units within walking distance
to Vail village and to transit stops such as this experience up to a 30% trip reduction due
to non-auto use. The estimated site trips applying a 30% non-auto use reduction are
shown on Table 3.
3 Trip Generation, 7th Edition. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Washington D.C. 2003.
Mr. Adam Williams
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact Analysis
October 3, 2008
Page 4
It should be noted that the TMP Update and supporting non-auto use reduction data has
yet to be approved by CDOT (the Town hopes to have approvals completed by the end
of September 2008). Thus, for the purposes of analyzing potential traffic impacts,
capacity issues, and auxiliary lane requirements for the Fairmont Vail site, we have not
applied any reductions. The reduced trip estimates are provided for information only in
this study, though they may be more applicable for use by the Town of Vail for purposes
of traffic model updates and assessment of traffic impact fees.
With no reductions taken, the site is anticipated to generate roughly 885 daily weekday,
1,975 Saturday, 135 weekday AM peak hour, 145 weekday PM peak hour, and 165
Saturday PM peak hour trips at full build-out and 100% hotel/residence occupancy.
Since trips currently associated with the Evergreen Lodge site will be removed from the
surround roadway network with redevelopment of the site, we have also calculated the
“net-added” or “new” trips as a result of the project. As shown on Table 2, the project
represents a net-added trip increase of roughly 640 weekday daily, 640 Saturday, 45
weekday AM peak hour, 55 weekday PM peak hour, and 55 Saturday PM peak hour
trips versus the existing Evergreen Lodge use with no reductions applied.
Trip Distribution and Assignment
In order to determine the distribution of future traffic associated with the Fairmont Vail
site, existing PM peak hour observations were performed by Fox Higgins in August
2008. Based on these observations at both site access points, it was determined that
roughly 80% of the existing hotel site traffic is oriented to/from the east along the S.
Frontage Road with the remaining 20% oriented to/from the west.
The Fairmont Vail site is proposing to provide two access points along the S. Frontage
Road, though the east access is proposed to serve only hotel service vehicles and
deliveries. The majority of the service vehicle trips are anticipated to occur outside the
typical AM and PM peak hours and peak weekend traffic periods. Hotel guests,
residents, and visitors, which comprise the bulk of the site trips, will utilize only the west
access. The west access will provide access to the hotel underground parking structure.
The projected site trips estimated (with no non-auto reduction applied) were distributed
at the east and west access points consistent with the existing distribution patterns and
are shown on Figure 5. With the 30% non-auto use reduction applied, the estimated
site trips are shown on Figure 6 (for information only).
Using the estimated net-added site traffic volumes and existing traffic volumes contained
in the TMP Update, analysis was performed to determine if the project would result in a
5% or more increase to any adjacent intersections (per CDOT requirements). It was
determined that the project would result in roughly a 1% increase in traffic at the main
Vail roundabout (Vail Road / S. Frontage Road / I-70 interchange) and <1% increase at
the Lionshead parking structure access along the S. Frontage Road to the west of the
site. Thus, these intersections were not analyzed for capacity and operational impacts
as part of this study.
Mr. Adam Williams
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact Analysis
October 3, 2008
Page 5
Traffic Conditions with Project
The site-generated trips with no reductions were added to the existing traffic volumes
(minus the existing Evergreen Lodge trips) and are shown on Figure 7. For the
purposes of this analysis, the Saturday peak hour site trips representing the highest site
volumes were utilized. Intersection capacity analysis was performed for the existing-
plus-site scenario consistent with the HCM methodology previously described. As
shown on Table 1, the site access intersections are anticipated to continue to operate
acceptably at LOS A overall with side-street approaches at LOS C or better with build-
out of the Fairmont Vail site.
For the Year 2030-plus-site scenario, the site generated trips with no reductions were
added to the Year 2030 background traffic volumes (minus the existing Evergreen Lodge
trips). Similar to the existing-plus-site analysis above, the Saturday peak hour site trips
representing the highest site volumes were utilized. The Year 2030-plus-site volumes
are shown on Figure 8. The Year 2030 geometry used in this analysis assumed
widening of the S. Frontage Road to four lanes, with a TWLTL east of the site’s west
access. Intersection capacity analysis was performed for the existing-plus-site scenario
consistent with the HCM methodology previously described. As shown on Table 1, the
site access intersections are anticipated to continue to operate acceptably at LOS A
overall with side-street approaches at LOS C or better with build-out of the Fairmont Vail
site in the Year 2030 scenario.
Auxiliary Turn Lane Assessment
Using the projected site access volumes with no reductions, an assessment of the
auxiliary turn lane needs for the project was performed using criteria for an “F-R”
roadway contained in the State Highway Access Code4. Per the Access Code, the
minimum volume requirements for auxiliary turn lanes on an F-R roadway at the study
area posted speed limit (25 mph in both directions on the S. Frontage Road) are as
follows:
Left-Turn Deceleration Lane: > 25 vph
Right-Turn Deceleration Lane: > 50 vph
Right-Turn Acceleration Lane: (not required at this posted speed)
Based on the projected site trips, the project meets the requirements for a left-turn
deceleration lane at the west site access. Thresholds for right-turn lane improvements
are not met.
The existing TWLTL on the westbound left-turn approach at the site’s west access
narrows to 8 feet in width, insufficient to serve as a functional and safe left-turn lane
(though drivers do use it in this capacity today). In order to accommodate a full-width
left-turn lane, the Fairmont Vail project will need to include restriping and/or physical
widening of the S. Frontage Road to extend a full-width (minimum 12’) TWLTL to the
west site access. If additional physical widening is required, this additional width should
4 State Highway Access Code. State of Colorado. March 2002.
Mr. Adam Williams
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact Analysis
October 3, 2008
Page 6
be provided from the centerline, widening on both the north and south side of the
roadway.
Intersection Site Distance at Proposed Access
Intersection site distance requirements were evaluated using American Association of
State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO)5 criteria. The west site access
intersection is to be located along the inside of a curve on the S. Frontage Road at
approximately the existing site access location. There are no known accident trends at
this location due to any site distance limitations. However, the site distance in this area
was reviewed to determine if there are any site distance constraints should the access
location be modified to accommodate driveway grades. Based on measurements
conducted at the site, there will exist roughly 250 feet of site distance for vehicles exiting
the west site access (looking to the west around the curve). Per AASHTO design
guidelines, this meets minimum site distance requirements for the 25 mph posted speed.
Additionally, this distance will likely be increased significantly by the incorporation of a
multi-use path on the south side of the roadway which will also provide additional buffer
from snow bank obstructions in the winter. Proposed landscaping for the project should
consider site distance west of this access and should minimize possible view
obstructions due to landscaping.
Existing View Looking West from the West Site Access
5 A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. AASHTO. Washington, D.C. 2004.
Mr. Adam Williams
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact Analysis
October 3, 2008
Page 7
Access and Circulation
The Fairmont Vail site plan proposes two access locations along the S. Frontage Road,
similar to the existing use. It is proposed that the easternmost access be relocated
roughly 45 feet west of the existing locations, which will then be closed. The
westernmost site access may need to be adjusted slightly to accommodate grades.
Primary access to the site is proposed at the west access location, while the east access
location will serve service and delivery vehicles only. The proposed access plan is
preferred over the existing hotel access and circulation configuration since it will
concentrate vehicular volumes at the west access (which is more sufficiently spaced
from adjacent accesses and intersections) and will separate slower-turning
service/delivery vehicles from guest/resident/visitor traffic. Access to an underground
parking structure, which will provide for guest, resident, and visitor parking, is provided
off the porte-cochere at the west access.
Per discussions with the Town of Vail, we understand that there had been previous
conversations between the Fairmont Vail project and the Vail Valley Medical Center to
incorporate a shared service vehicle access at the east access location. Consolidation
of these accesses would help to improve corridor mobility. However, based on our latest
discussions, we understand that the medical center is no longer exploring this option.
The possibility for a right-in, right-out configuration at the east (service) access has also
been discussed, consistent with other similar redevelopment projects along the S.
Frontage Road. From a capacity and operational perspective, the relatively low
anticipated use of the service access does not warrant restriction of this access to a
right-in, in right-out configuration. However, from a larger corridor mobility perspective,
this configuration may provide a benefit, particularly if the service access is shared with
the Medical Center site.
Pedestrian and bicycle access is proposed via a new multi-use path to be constructed
along the south side of the S. Frontage Road with the ultimate 4/5-lane cross-section.
This path is shown as a 10’ attached sidewalk on the Fairmont Vail site plan, though the
Town of Vail has discussed the possibility of a meandering, detached path which may
require additional easement. An existing signed and marked pedestrian crossing exists
roughly 265 feet east of the site’s east access to facilitate crossing to the transit stop at
the Municipal Building. The site and development plan should facilitate access from the
rear of the facility to the In-Town Shuttle stop located adjacent to the Vail Valley Medical
Center.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The Fairmont Vail project is proposing to redevelop the existing Evergreen Lodge hotel
site with similar hotel, residential, and related uses. The two existing site accesses are
proposed to be relocated west of their current locations. A “Level Three” traffic
assessment was performed for the project per CDOT Region 3 requirements. This study
included analysis of the peak winter traffic scenario for the AM and PM (including
Saturday) peak hour periods. It was determined that the traffic increases associated
Mr. Adam Williams
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact Analysis
October 3, 2008
Page 8
with the project can be accommodated on the existing and future roadway network with
minimal effects with the recommended improvements in place.
The following site-specific improvements are recommended:
• Restripe and/or widen the S. Frontage Road to extend the existing two-way left-
turn lane (TWLTL) to the west access location; this will provide for a full-width
westbound left-turn access into the site, per CDOT Access Code requirements. If
physical widening is required to create this lane, widening should occur from the
centerline of the roadway.
• CDOT Access Permit applications must be submitted and approved to relocate
the two accesses from their current locations.
• Provide sufficient right-of-way to accommodate future widening (4-lanes plus
TWLTL) of the S. Frontage Road along the project frontage. Widening should
occur from the centerline of the roadway.
• Coordinate with the Town of Vail to determine the configuration of the multi-use
path on the south side of the S. Frontage Road
I hope that the contents of this memorandum are helpful to you. Please give me a call if
you would like to discuss our analysis or conclusions.
Sincerely,
Fox Higgins Transportation Group, LLC
Steve Tuttle, P.E.
Senior Engineer
Attachments:
Table 1 – Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Summary
Table 2 – Trip Generation Estimate – No Reductions
Table 3 – Trip Generation Estimate with Non-Auto Use Reduction
Figure 1 – Vicinity Map
Figure 2 – Site and Access Plan
Figure 3 – Existing Winter Peak Hour Volumes
Figure 4 – Year 2030 Peak Season Traffic Volumes
Figure 5 – Site-Generated Traffic Volumes - No Reductions
Figure 6 – Site-Generated Traffic Volumes with Non-Auto Use Reduction
Figure 7 – Existing Peak Season + Site-Generated Traffic Volumes
Figure 8 – Year 2030 Peak Season + Site-Generated Traffic Volumes
LOS Worksheets
FH
#
0
8
0
4
2
Fa
i
r
m
o
n
t
V
a
i
l
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
I
m
p
a
c
t
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
10-03-08
Ta
b
l
e
1
-
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
+
S
i
t
e
Yea
r
2
0
3
0
+
S
i
t
e
*
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
AM
P
e
a
k
P
M
P
e
a
k
AM
P
e
a
k
P
M
P
e
a
k
AM
P
e
a
k
P
M
P
e
a
k
Cr
i
t
i
c
a
l
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
D
e
l
a
y
L
O
S
D
e
l
a
y
L
O
S
D
e
l
a
y
L
O
S
D
e
l
a
y
L
O
S
D
e
l
a
y
L
O
S
D
e
l
a
y
L
O
S
ST
O
P
S
I
G
N
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
W
e
s
t
A
c
c
e
s
s
/
S
.
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
R
d
.
--
A
--
A
--
A
--
A
--
A--A
W
e
s
t
b
o
u
n
d
L
e
f
t
8.
1
A
9.
7
A
8.
1
A
10
.
0
A
9.
1
A13.6B
N
o
r
t
h
b
o
u
n
d
L
e
f
t
-
R
i
g
h
t
10
.
5
B
1
5
.
3
C
1
1
.
5
B
1
7
.
8
C
1
2
.
1
B
2
0
.
2C
Ea
s
t
A
c
c
e
s
s
/
S
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
R
d
--
A
--
A
--
A
--
A
--
A--A
Ea
s
t
Ac
c
e
s
s
/ S.
Fr
o
n
t
a
g
e
Rd
.
--
A
--
A
--
A
--
A
--
A--A
W
e
s
t
b
o
u
n
d
L
e
f
t
8.
0
A
9.
6
A
8.
1
A
9.
8
A
9.
1
A12.6B
N
o
r
t
h
b
o
u
n
d
L
e
f
t
-
R
i
g
h
t
11
.
0
B
1
5
.
6
C
1
1
.
7
B
1
5
.
7
C
1
2
.
7
B20.2C
(a
)
D
e
l
a
y
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
i
n
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
p
e
r
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
.
*
2
0
3
0
s
c
e
n
a
r
i
o
a
s
s
u
m
e
s
S
.
F
r
o
n
t
a
t
g
e
R
d
.
i
s
w
i
d
e
n
e
d
t
o
2
l
a
n
e
s
i
n
e
a
c
h
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
p
l
u
s
c
e
n
t
e
r
l
e
f
t
-
t
u
r
n
l
a
n
e
e
a
s
t
o
f
W
e
s
t
A
c
c
e
s
s
08042 LOS.xls
FH
#
0
8
0
4
2
Fa
i
r
m
o
n
t
V
a
i
l
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
I
m
p
a
c
t
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
10-03-08
Ta
b
l
e
2
.
T
r
i
p
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
-
N
o
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
IT
E
Co
d
e
L
a
n
d
U
s
e
S
i
z
e
U
n
i
t
R
a
t
e
T
o
t
a
l
I
n
O
u
t
R
a
t
e
T
o
t
a
l
I
n
O
u
t
R
a
t
e
T
o
t
a
l
I
n
O
u
t
R
a
t
e
T
o
t
a
l
I
n
O
u
t
R
a
t
e
T
o
t
a
l
I
n
O
u
t
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
d
U
s
e
(
E
v
e
r
g
r
e
e
n
L
o
d
g
e
)
31
0
H
o
t
e
l
1
2
8
Oc
c
u
p
i
e
d
Ro
o
m
s
0%
8
.
9
2
1
1
4
2
5
7
1
5
7
1
1
0
.
5
0
1
3
4
4
6
7
2
6
7
2
0
.
6
7
8
6
5
0
3
6
0
.
7
0
9
0
4
4
4
6
0
.
8
7
1
1
1
5
4
5
7
To
t
a
l
s
:
1
1
4
2
5
7
1
5
7
1
1
3
4
4
6
7
2
6
7
2
8
6
5
0
3
6
9
0
4
4
4
6
1
1
1
5
4
5
7
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
S
i
t
e
L
a
n
d
U
s
e
s
(
F
a
i
r
m
o
n
t
V
a
i
l
)
:
31
0
H
o
t
e
l
1
2
8
Oc
c
u
p
i
e
d
Ro
o
m
s
0%
8
.
9
2
1
1
4
2
5
7
1
5
7
1
1
0
.
5
0
1
3
4
4
6
7
2
6
7
2
0
.
6
7
8
6
5
0
3
6
0
.
7
0
9
0
4
4
4
6
0
.
8
7
1
1
1
5
4
5
7
31
0
H
o
t
e
l
(
F
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
O
w
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
)
1
1
Oc
c
u
p
i
e
d
Ro
o
m
s
0%
8
.
9
2
9
8
4
9
4
9
1
0
.
5
0
1
1
6
5
8
5
8
0
.
6
7
7
4
3
0
.
7
0
8
4
4
0
.
8
7
1
0
5
5
23
0
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
C
o
n
d
o
m
i
n
i
u
m
/
T
o
w
n
h
o
u
s
e
9
1
Dw
e
l
l
i
n
g
Un
i
t
s
0%
5
.
8
6
5
3
3
2
6
7
2
6
6
5
.
6
7
5
1
6
2
5
8
2
5
8
0
.
4
4
4
0
7
3
3
0
.
5
2
4
7
3
1
1
6
0
.
4
7
4
3
2
9
1
4
Ave
r
a
g
e
S
a
t
u
r
d
a
y
Da
i
l
y
T
r
i
p
s
We
e
k
d
a
y
AM
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
i
p
s
We
e
k
d
a
y
PM
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
i
p
s
Saturday PM Peak Hour Trips
Ave
r
a
g
e
W
e
e
k
d
a
y
Da
i
l
y
T
r
i
p
s
No
n
-
A
u
t
o
Us
e
Re
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
(a
)
Un
i
t
s
To
t
a
l
s
:
1
7
7
3
8
8
7
8
8
6
1
9
7
6
9
8
8
9
8
8
1
3
3
6
1
7
2
1
4
5
7
9
6
6
1
6
4
8
8
7
6
Ne
t
A
d
d
e
d
T
r
i
p
T
o
t
a
l
s
(
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
l
e
s
s
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
)
:
6
3
1
3
1
6
3
1
5
6
3
2
3
1
6
3
1
6
4
7
1
1
3
6
5
5
3
5
2
0
5
3
3
4
1
9
Ta
b
l
e
3
.
T
r
i
p
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
w
i
t
h
N
o
n
-
A
u
t
o
U
s
e
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
IT
E
Co
d
e
L
a
n
d
U
s
e
S
i
z
e
U
n
i
t
R
a
t
e
T
o
t
a
l
I
n
O
u
t
R
a
t
e
T
o
t
a
l
I
n
O
u
t
R
a
t
e
T
o
t
a
l
I
n
O
u
t
R
a
t
e
T
o
t
a
l
I
n
O
u
t
R
a
t
e
T
o
t
a
l
I
n
O
u
t
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
d
U
s
e
(
E
v
e
r
g
r
e
e
n
L
o
d
g
e
)
31
0
H
o
t
e
l
1
2
8
Oc
c
u
p
i
e
d
Ro
o
m
s
30
%
8
.
9
2
7
9
9
4
0
0
3
9
9
1
0
.
5
0
9
4
1
4
7
1
4
7
0
0
.
6
7
6
0
3
5
2
5
0
.
7
0
6
3
3
1
3
2
0
.
8
7
7
8
3
8
4
0
To
t
a
l
s
:
7
9
9
4
0
0
3
9
9
9
4
1
4
7
1
4
7
0
6
0
3
5
2
5
6
3
3
1
3
2
7
8
3
8
4
0
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
S
i
t
e
L
a
n
d
U
s
e
s
(
F
a
i
r
m
o
n
t
V
a
i
l
)
:
31
0
H
o
t
e
l
1
2
8
Oc
c
u
p
i
e
d
Ro
o
m
s
30
%
8
.
9
2
7
9
9
4
0
0
3
9
9
1
0
.
5
0
9
4
1
4
7
1
4
7
0
0
.
6
7
6
0
3
5
2
5
0
.
7
0
6
3
3
1
3
2
0
.
8
7
7
8
3
8
4
0
31
0
H
o
t
e
l
(
F
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
O
w
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
)
1
1
Oc
c
u
p
i
e
d
Ro
o
m
s
30
%
8
.
9
2
6
9
3
5
3
4
1
0
.
5
0
8
1
4
1
4
0
0
.
6
7
5
3
2
0
.
7
0
5
3
2
0
.
8
7
7
4
3
23
0
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
C
o
n
d
o
m
i
n
i
u
m
/
T
o
w
n
h
o
u
s
e
9
1
Dw
e
l
l
i
n
g
Un
i
t
s
30
%
5
.
8
6
3
7
3
1
8
7
1
8
6
5
.
6
7
3
6
1
1
8
1
1
8
0
0
.
4
4
2
8
5
2
3
0
.
5
2
3
3
2
2
1
1
0
.
4
7
3
0
2
0
1
0
To
t
a
l
s
:
1
2
4
1
6
2
2
6
1
9
1
3
8
3
6
9
3
6
9
0
9
3
4
3
5
0
1
0
1
5
6
4
5
1
1
5
6
2
5
3
Ne
t
A
d
d
e
d
T
r
i
p
T
o
t
a
l
s
(
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
l
e
s
s
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
)
:
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
3
3
8
2
5
3
8
2
5
1
3
3
7
2
4
1
3
(a
)
A
c
c
o
u
n
t
s
f
o
r
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
,
t
r
a
n
s
i
t
,
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
n
o
n
-
a
u
t
o
t
r
i
p
s
m
a
d
e
t
o
/
f
r
om
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
d
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
V
a
i
l
c
o
r
e
a
r
e
a
;
3
0
%
r
e
d
u
c
ti
o
n
a
s
s
u
m
e
d
p
e
r
t
h
e
V
a
i
l
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
M
a
s
t
e
r
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
(
D
r
a
f
t
,
J
u
n
e
2
0
0
8
)
.
No
n
-
A
u
t
o
Us
e
Re
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
(a
)
Ave
r
a
g
e
W
e
e
k
d
a
y
Da
i
l
y
T
r
i
p
s
Ave
r
a
g
e
S
a
t
u
r
d
a
y
Da
i
l
y
T
r
i
p
s
We
e
k
d
a
y
AM
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
i
p
s
We
e
k
d
a
y
PM
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
i
p
s
Saturday PM Peak Hour Trips 08042 trip gen.xls - Trip Generation
LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
In rating roadway and intersection operating conditions with existing or future traffic volumes, “Levels
of Service” (LOS) A through F are used, with LOS A indicating very good operation and LOS F
indicating poor operation. Levels of service at signalized and unsignalized intersections are closely
associated with vehicle delays experienced in seconds per vehicle. More complete level of service
definitions and delay data for signal and stop sign controlled intersections are contained in the
following table for reference.
Level
of Service
Rating
Delay in seconds per vehicle (a)
DefinitionSignalizedUnsignalized
A0.0 to 10.00.0 to 10.0
Low vehicular traffic volumes; primarily free flow operations. Density is low
and vehicles can freely maneuver within the traffic stream. Drivers are able
to maintain their desired speeds with little or no delay.
B10.1 to 20.010.1 to 15.0
Stable vehicular traffic volume flow with potential for some restriction of
operating speeds due to traffic conditions. Vehicle maneuvering is only
slightly restricted. The stopped delays are not bothersome and drivers are
not subject to appreciable tension.
C20.1 to 35.015.1 to 25.0
Stable traffic operations, however the ability for vehicles to maneuver is more
restricted by the increase in traffic volumes. Relatively satisfactory operating
speeds prevail, but adverse signal coordination or longer vehicle queues
cause delays along the corridor.
D35.1 to 55.025.1 to 35.0
Approaching unstable vehicular traffic flow where small increases in volume
could cause substantial delays. Most drivers are restricted in ability to
maneuver and selection of travel speeds due to congestion. Driver comfort
and convenience are low, but tolerable.
E55.1 to 80.035.1 to 50.0
Traffic operations characterized by significant approach delays and average
travel speeds of one-half to one-third the free flow speed. Vehicular flow is
unstable and there is potential for stoppages of brief duration. High signal
density, extensive vehicle queuing, or corridor signal progression/timing are
the typical causes of vehicle delays at signalized corridors.
F> 80.0> 50.0
Forced vehicular traffic flow and operations with high approach delays at
critical intersections. Vehicle speeds are reduced substantially and
stoppages may occur for short or long periods of time because of
downstream congestion.
(a) Delay ranges based on 2000 Highway Capacity Manual criteria.
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisExisting
1: S Frontage Rd & West Access AM
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact AnalysisSynchro 7 - Report
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)320525520110
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)348527565111
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneTWLTL
Median storage veh)2
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume353970351
vC1, stage 1 conf vol351
vC2, stage 2 conf vol620
vCu, unblocked vol353970351
tC, single (s)4.16.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)5.4
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %9810098
cM capacity (veh/h)1205470693
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1WB 2NB 1
Volume Total3532756512
Volume Left02701
Volume Right50011
cSH170012051700664
Volume to Capacity0.210.020.330.02
Queue Length 95th (ft)0201
Control Delay (s)0.08.10.010.5
Lane LOSAB
Approach Delay (s)0.00.410.5
Approach LOSB
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.4
Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.4%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisExisting
2: S Frontage Rd & East Access AM
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact AnalysisSynchro 7 - Report
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)33015515515
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)35915560516
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeTWLTLTWLTL
Median storage veh)22
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume360930359
vC1, stage 1 conf vol359
vC2, stage 2 conf vol571
vCu, unblocked vol360930359
tC, single (s)4.16.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)5.4
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %1009998
cM capacity (veh/h)1199496685
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1WB 2NB 1
Volume Total360556022
Volume Left 0505
Volume Right10016
cSH170011991700626
Volume to Capacity0.210.000.330.03
Queue Length 95th (ft)0003
Control Delay (s)0.08.00.011.0
Lane LOSAB
Approach Delay (s)0.00.111.0
Approach LOSB
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.1%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisExisting
1: S Frontage Rd & West Access PM
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact AnalysisSynchro 7 - Report
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)7601025435510
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)8261127473511
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneTWLTL
Median storage veh)2
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume8371359832
vC1, stage 1 conf vol832
vC2, stage 2 conf vol527
vCu, unblocked vol8371359832
tC, single (s)4.16.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)5.4
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %979997
cM capacity (veh/h)797364369
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1WB 2NB 1
Volume Total8372747316
Volume Left02705
Volume Right110011
cSH17007971700367
Volume to Capacity0.490.030.280.04
Queue Length 95th (ft)0303
Control Delay (s)0.09.70.015.3
Lane LOSAC
Approach Delay (s)0.00.515.3
Approach LOSC
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.4
Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.6%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisExisting
2: S Frontage Rd & East Access PM
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact AnalysisSynchro 7 - Report
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)77015430520
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)83715467522
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeTWLTLTWLTL
Median storage veh)22
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume8381316838
vC1, stage 1 conf vol838
vC2, stage 2 conf vol478
vCu, unblocked vol8381316838
tC, single (s)4.16.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)5.4
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %999994
cM capacity (veh/h)796373366
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1WB 2NB 1
Volume Total838546727
Volume Left 0505
Volume Right10022
cSH17007961700368
Volume to Capacity0.490.010.270.07
Queue Length 95th (ft)0106
Control Delay (s)0.09.60.015.6
Lane LOSAC
Approach Delay (s)0.00.115.6
Approach LOSC
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.4
Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.6%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisExisting + Site
1: S Frontage Rd & West Access AM
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact AnalysisSynchro 7 - Report
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)32010475151256
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)34811515601361
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneTWLTL
Median storage veh)2
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume3591015353
vC1, stage 1 conf vol353
vC2, stage 2 conf vol662
vCu, unblocked vol3591015353
tC, single (s)4.16.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)5.4
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %969791
cM capacity (veh/h)1200444690
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1WB 2NB 1
Volume Total3595156074
Volume Left051013
Volume Right110061
cSH170012001700629
Volume to Capacity0.210.040.330.12
Queue Length 95th (ft)03010
Control Delay (s)0.08.10.011.5
Lane LOSAB
Approach Delay (s)0.00.711.5
Approach LOSB
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.9%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisExisting + Site
2: S Frontage Rd & East Access AM
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact AnalysisSynchro 7 - Report
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)3752256022
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)4082260922
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeTWLTLTWLTL
Median storage veh)22
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume4101022409
vC1, stage 1 conf vol409
vC2, stage 2 conf vol613
vCu, unblocked vol4101022409
tC, single (s)4.16.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)5.4
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %100100100
cM capacity (veh/h)1149468643
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1WB 2NB 1
Volume Total41026094
Volume Left 0202
Volume Right 2002
cSH170011491700542
Volume to Capacity0.240.000.360.01
Queue Length 95th (ft)0001
Control Delay (s)0.08.10.011.7
Lane LOSAB
Approach Delay (s)0.00.011.7
Approach LOSB
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.5%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisExisting + Site
1: S Frontage Rd & West Access PM
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact AnalysisSynchro 7 - Report
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)76017694301460
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)82618754671565
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneTWLTL
Median storage veh)2
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume8451453835
vC1, stage 1 conf vol835
vC2, stage 2 conf vol617
vCu, unblocked vol8451453835
tC, single (s)4.16.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)5.4
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %919582
cM capacity (veh/h)792337367
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1WB 2NB 1
Volume Total8457546780
Volume Left075015
Volume Right180065
cSH17007921700361
Volume to Capacity0.500.090.270.22
Queue Length 95th (ft)08021
Control Delay (s)0.010.00.017.8
Lane LOSBC
Approach Delay (s)0.01.417.8
Approach LOSC
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.3%ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisExisting + Site
2: S Frontage Rd & East Access PM
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact AnalysisSynchro 7 - Report
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)8301150011
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)9021154311
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeTWLTLTWLTL
Median storage veh)22
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume9031448903
vC1, stage 1 conf vol903
vC2, stage 2 conf vol546
vCu, unblocked vol9031448903
tC, single (s)4.16.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)5.4
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %100100100
cM capacity (veh/h)753343336
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1WB 2NB 1
Volume Total90315432
Volume Left 0101
Volume Right 1001
cSH17007531700340
Volume to Capacity0.530.000.320.01
Queue Length 95th (ft)0000
Control Delay (s)0.09.80.015.7
Lane LOSAC
Approach Delay (s)0.00.015.7
Approach LOSC
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.7%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisYear 2030 + Site
1: S Frontage Rd & West Access AM
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact AnalysisSynchro 7 - Report
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)59010479601256
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)641115110431361
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneTWLTL
Median storage veh)2
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume6521271326
vC1, stage 1 conf vol647
vC2, stage 2 conf vol624
vCu, unblocked vol6521271326
tC, single (s)4.16.86.9
tC, 2 stage (s)5.8
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %959691
cM capacity (veh/h)930359670
Direction, Lane #EB 1EB 2WB 1WB 2WB 3NB 1
Volume Total4282255152252274
Volume Left00510013
Volume Right01100061
cSH1700170093017001700581
Volume to Capacity0.250.130.050.310.310.13
Queue Length 95th (ft)0040011
Control Delay (s)0.00.09.10.00.012.1
Lane LOSAB
Approach Delay (s)0.00.412.1
Approach LOSB
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.7
Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.3%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisYear 2030 + Site
2: S Frontage Rd & East Access AM
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact AnalysisSynchro 7 - Report
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)64522100522
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)70122109222
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeTWLTLTWLTL
Median storage veh)22
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume7031253352
vC1, stage 1 conf vol702
vC2, stage 2 conf vol551
vCu, unblocked vol7031253352
tC, single (s)4.16.86.9
tC, 2 stage (s)5.8
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %10099100
cM capacity (veh/h)890371645
Direction, Lane #EB 1EB 2WB 1WB 2WB 3NB 1
Volume Total46723625465464
Volume Left 002002
Volume Right 020002
cSH1700170089017001700471
Volume to Capacity0.270.140.000.320.320.01
Queue Length 95th (ft)000001
Control Delay (s)0.00.09.10.00.012.7
Lane LOSAB
Approach Delay (s)0.00.012.7
Approach LOSB
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.8%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisYear 2030 + Site
1: S Frontage Rd & West Access PM
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact AnalysisSynchro 7 - Report
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)125017699601460
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)1359187510431565
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneTWLTL
Median storage veh)2
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume13772040689
vC1, stage 1 conf vol1368
vC2, stage 2 conf vol672
vCu, unblocked vol13772040689
tC, single (s)4.16.86.9
tC, 2 stage (s)5.8
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %859183
cM capacity (veh/h)494178388
Direction, Lane #EB 1EB 2WB 1WB 2WB 3NB 1
Volume Total9064717552252280
Volume Left00750015
Volume Right01800065
cSH1700170049417001700317
Volume to Capacity0.530.280.150.310.310.25
Queue Length 95th (ft)00130025
Control Delay (s)0.00.013.60.00.020.2
Lane LOSBC
Approach Delay (s)0.00.920.2
Approach LOSC
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.4%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisYear 2030 + Site
2: S Frontage Rd & East Access PM
Fairmont Vail Traffic Impact AnalysisSynchro 7 - Report
MovementEBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)131011103011
Sign ControlFreeFreeStop
Grade0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)142411112011
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeTWLTLTWLTL
Median storage veh)22
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume14251986712
vC1, stage 1 conf vol1424
vC2, stage 2 conf vol562
vCu, unblocked vol14251986712
tC, single (s)4.16.86.9
tC, 2 stage (s)5.8
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %10099100
cM capacity (veh/h)473176375
Direction, Lane #EB 1EB 2WB 1WB 2WB 3NB 1
Volume Total94947615605602
Volume Left 001001
Volume Right 010001
cSH1700170047317001700239
Volume to Capacity0.560.280.000.330.330.01
Queue Length 95th (ft)000001
Control Delay (s)0.00.012.60.00.020.2
Lane LOSBC
Approach Delay (s)0.00.020.2
Approach LOSC
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.2%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15