HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL LIONSHEAD FILING 3 BLOCK 1 LOT 8 LION SQUARE NORTH COMMON 5D"part,nent of Public Works & Transportalion
1309 Elkhorn Drive
Vail, CO 81 657
970-479-21 5E
Far:970-479-2166
www.vailgov.com
MEMO
To:
From:
Re:
Date:
1.
Bill Gibson
Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer
Lions Square Lodge North Redevelopment Plan PEC Review
6t22106
The Town of Vail publio Works Department has reviewed the revised Lions Square Lodge North Plans dated
6120106. The following shall be conditions of approval'
2.
The developrnent shall agree to install, operate and maintain an approved intelligent transportation
,igilt airt*"" system. Tiis shall include adequate detection devices and warning system' The
s'"stem snaff address all turning movements that h-ave inadequate sight distance.
per the Traffrc Study dated luie tS, 2006 the peak hour additional trips generated by the
development is 7. The o"""r"p".trt"tl paY t traffic impact fee of $6500 per peak hour trip for a total
of S+S,SOO, prior to the issuance of a TCO for any part of the project'
please add in. fo*o of Vail General Notes. (Notes can be e-mailed upon request)
Please add Utility Signature block and have ail utilities sign acknowledging acceptance of utility
design.
All construction staging issues shall be resolved prior to construction including staging, phasing'
access, schedules, traffic control' emergency access' etc"'
,q. puUii" Way permit shall be obtained-and approved by the Town of Vail prior to commencing any
construction within the Public Way.
A Town of Vail Revocable Row permit shall be recorded for all private properfy improvements
located within public waYs.
prior to upprouul of a Building permit alt necessary permanent and temporary easements are
recorded with Eagle CountY'
Prior to approval of a Builiing permit a shoring and excavation plan shall be submitted including;
excavation phasing, .ng|rr""r"?it oring plans ti'ittt pt*, profile and cross sections' Cross Sections
and plans shall include all existing conflicts (i'e' utilities)'
Any excavation shoring methods used that encroach upon adjacent public or private property shall
have approval by the appropriate owner and have a reiorded €asement prior to construction'
A CDPHE Permit, u
"opy
oith" stormwater management plan, and all applicable ACOE permits
(i.e. Dewatering) shall be submitted prior to construction'
provide full civil constnrction drawings meeting Town of Vail standards prior to building permit
submittal. Allow up to 2 months for review'
J.
4.
5.
6.
8.
9.
10.
I l.
12.
,
An employeeewned company
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDT]M
Chip Melick, Melick Associates; Mark Luna, Peak Land Consultants
David Millar, P.E., PTOE, Senior Engineer W
June 2,2006
Lion Square Lodge Access Mitigation Feasibility Assessment
PBS&J has been asked to review the proposed access from Lion Square Lodge via a new driveway onto
Lionsbead Place. It is our understanding that due to existing development, topography, and physical
constraints, the location of the proposed driveway is fixed and solutions to sight distance issues must be
addressed through means other than relocation.
To assess the situation, the plans for the proposed driveway and Lion Square Lodge redevelopment have
been rwiewed. A site visit was made on May 31, 2006 to observe the location of the proposed driveway
in the context ofthe surrounding environment. Based oo tle plan review and site visit a clear
understanding of the conditionsl which the driveway would operate was obtained.
It was observed that the driveway would be located on the inside of a curye along Lionshead Place and
that the road follows a substantial downgrade. The site distance from the proposed driveway to the left is
compromised by the curvature of the road, the grade of the road, and a retaining wall. Visibility to the
right and to other access points across from tle proposed driveway appears adequate. Visibility to the
left where the Lionshead Place descends from the upper level parking areas also ap,pears adequate. The
primary concern for vehicles on the driveway will be the limited sight distance to vehicles emerging from
the tunnel to the left. Similarly, vehicles emerging from the tunnel will have limited visibility of the
proposed driveway.
Based on the nature of ttre are4 ttre road would appear to function primarily as access to local
development parkiog areas. No through traffic is anticipated. Speeds on the road are anticipated to be
quite slow. Based on the nature ofthe area it is believed that virtually all ofthe traffic exiting the
proposed driveway would be oriented to the west along Lionshead Place toward the I-70 South Frontage
Road.
Given the constraints regarding the placement of the driveway, the issue of limited visibility needs to be
addressed. Based on our observations of the area we have deternxined that it is feasible to design and
implement a solution that would consist of vehicle detection devices, communication components, and
signs and flashing lights that would alert drivers to the presence of conflicting vehicles. It is not
anticipated that the solution would include any control oftraffrc on Lionshead Place. That is, stop signs
or traffic signals would not be placed on the Lionshead Place.
There are several factors that need to be considered. First is detecting when vehicles would be in conflicL
with each other. To do this vehicle detection devices would be ueeded for vehicles emerging from the
tunnel aod, perhaps, emerging from the driveway. Several options exist. The two principal options are
loops that could be placed in the pavement or video detection systems ttrat would use cameras to detect
vehicles. The loops or cam€ras could be positioned to detect vehicles at a point far enough in advance of
4601 DTC Blvd., Suite 700.Denver, Colorado 80237 '
Phone 303-221-727 5tF ax 30T221-7 276.v*aat pbsj.com
Lion Square Lodge Acc*s Mittgatio)asibility Assessmenr
June 2,2006
Page 2 of?
the intersection to provide approaching drivers adequate waming of the conflicting vehicle.
The warning devices could consist of signs and flashing lights that would be activated when conflicting
vehicles are detected. For drivers emerging from the driveway the sign could be placed near the exit
point or across the street. The sign would likely be a diamood-shaped waming sign with lights above and
below. The sign legend could state "Vehicles Approaching from Left When Flashing" "Caution Traffic
Approaching When Flashing," or something similar. As part of the system, the lights would flash when a
vehicle is detected on the approach from the tunnel.
$imilarly, a sign could be placed on Lionshead Place for vehicles emerging from the tunnel to wam them
of vehicles on ttre driveway. It is less critical that this be an active waming sign with flashers, but that is
a feasible option. Again, this would be a diamond-shaped waming sign. A sideways "T" symbol that
shows a roadway intersecting from the right is one optiol. Other options include a message waming of a
blind approach. Ifthe warning is active (that is ifthere is a vehicle detection system in place on the
driveway) then flashing lights could be placed on the sign to provide extra attention to th€ situation. This
sign would likely be placed on the retaining wall near the funnel portal.
Communication between the detection devices and the warning devices could be achieved with simple
hard wire, in-ground communication or wireless technologies. Given the cunent state of construction in
the area it may be most economical to install conduit now in anticipation of the desigu and
implementation of a complete system. A controller would be needed to provide the 'brains' for the
system.
This type of system is relatively routine to design and install, and has been deployed in numerous
locations. Such a system would be very feasible to design and install in this situation and would provide
excellent waming for vehicles emerging from the driveway of approaching vehicles. Of course, other
traffic control devices are likely to be needed and a complete study ofthe intersection and proper design
of the driveway signing and pavernent marking needs is still required.
In short, it is feasible in this situation to provide an appropriate and safe desip using the above
mentioned technologies.
Please call if you have any questions.
4601 DTC Blvd., Suite 700oDenver, Colorado 80237
Phone 303-221 -727 5tF ax 303-221 -7276.wwwpbsj.com
PEAK LAND CONSULTANTS, INC.
PEAK LAND SURVEYING, INC
PEAK CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC
1000 LroN's RTDGE LOOP, VA|L, CO 81657
PHONE 970476-8644
FA)( 370.47&8616
MEMO
TOt Town of Vail Public Works
ATTNT Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer
FROM: L. Mark Luna, P.E.
JOB No.z 1257.1
DATE: 06-02-06
RE: Lions Square North - Sight Distance Issues
The following is a summary of all the sight distances and issues for both driveway locations.
The criteria used are 3.5' eye and object heights and a design speed of 15 mph.
WEST DRfVEWAYt The driveway is located in the same location as the uisting driveway..
Lookine Rieht: There is clear sight distance of the entire intersection of Lionshead Circle
and Lionshead Place. The sight distance will not change from the existing coodition.
Looking Left: The existing configuration allows for 90' of sight distance looking
through the existing tree, Sight distance outside the tree is 75'. A new transformer is
proposed at the location ofthe existing tree. The new sight distance is 85' which is
greater than the existing sight distance.
SOUTH IIRfVEWAYz New Driveway location.
Lookine Righl The sight distance as shown on the submittal is 86'. According to
AASHTO criteriq this distance is calculated to be 170' plus a l.l factor adjustment for
grade, resulting h 187'. This criteria can not be met with the proposed configuration.
The Performance Altemative is proposing a detection system that will prohibit left-hand
turns from the driveway.
Looking Left: The sight distance as shown on the DRB submittal is 8l'. A Performance
Altemative will be submitted by PBS&J. The requirement foTAASIITO stopping sight
distance of 77' has beeu met.
Turning Left Into Drivewav from Lionshead Place: The sight distance provided is 130'.
AASTO Case F requirbs 125' for intersection sight distance. This condition has been
met.
West Ramp
Worksheet for Triangular Ghannel
Project Description
Projec{File pl1200-1299\1257.1\flovvmasteApancalc.ftn2
Worksheet West Driveay
Flow Element Triangular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth
Inpqt Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.013
Channel Slope 0.048200ft/fl
Left Side Slope 12.000000 H : V
Right Side Slope 12.000000 H : V
Discharge 0.40 cfs
Depth 0.10 ft
FlowArea 0.12 tr
Weiled Perimeter 2.39 ft
Top Width 2.38 ft
Critical Depth 0.15 ft
Critical Slope 0.005902ft/ft
Velocig 3.38 fr/s
Velocity Head 0.18 ft
Specific Energy 0.28 ft
Froude Number 2.68
Flow is supercritical.
06/ozo6
1 1 :,18:50 AM
FbwMaster v5.15
Page 1 of 1Haestad Melhods, Inc. 37 Brooksid€ Road Waterbury, cT 06708 (203) 75F1666
o
South Driveay
Worksheet for Triangular Channel
Project Description
Project File
Worksheet
Flow Element
Method
Solve For
p:\1200-1299\1257.1\ffow masteflpan calc.frn2
South Driveway
Triangular Channel
Manning's Formula
Channel Deoth
Input Data
Mannings Coefficient
Channel Slope
Lefi Side Slope
Right Side Slope
Discharge
0.013
0.080000 fi/ft
12.000000 H : V
12.000000 H : V0.40 cfs
Resulls
Depth
Flow Area
Wetted Perimeter
Top Width
Critical Depth
Critical Slope
Velocity
Velocity Head
Specific Energy
Froude Number
Flow is supercritioal.
0.09 ft0.10 tr
2.17 fl
2.17 ft
0.15 ft
0.005903 ft/ft
4.0S fr./s
0.26 fi
0.35 fl
3.39
06/02/06
1l:50:58 AM
FlowMaster v5.15
Pag€ 1 of IHaestad Methods, lnc. 37 Brookside Road waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666
PEAK IAND CONSULTANTS, INC.
PEAK LAND SURVEYING, INC
PEAK CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC
1000 LroN's RTDGE LOOP, VA|L, CO 81657
PHONE 970'470-8644
FAX 97G476{616
MEMO
TO: Town of Vail Public Works
ATTNz Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer
FROMz L. MarkLuna, P.E.
JOB No.z 1257.1
DATE; 06-02-06
RE: Lions Square North - 4' Pan Justification
The Town requirement for multi-family cross pans is 8'. We are proposing ttre
installation of a 4' cross pan. To justifo the installation of a 4' pan the capacity will have
to handle the 100-year flow.
Alpine Engineering has provided us with the drainage report; both the south driveway
and west driveway are part of the same drainage basin. The 100-year flow at the lowest
end of this basin is 0.4 cfs.
A iummary of the results:
4' Cross Pan Flow Depths (2" deep)*
Location Cross-Slope Flow Depth
West Driveway 4.8o/o 0.10' (1.2")
South Drivewa!. 8.0o/o 0.09' (l.l')
As shown above, a 4' cross pan wittr a 2" depth will handle the 100-year flow.
* The Public Works Comments date April 13, 2006 requested a l'l depth for a 4' pan.
The Development Code allows for a2" depth on a4' pan.
PEAK I.AND CONSULTANTS, INC.
PEAK LAND SURVEYING, INC
PEAK CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC
1m0 LloN's RIDGE LOOP, VAIL, CO 81657
PHONE 970-476{&K
FAX 97G476€616
MEMO
TOz Town of Vail Public Works
ATTN: Tom Kassmel, Town Eugineer
FROMz L. MarkLuna, P.E.
JOB No.: 1257.1
DATEz 06-02-06
RE: Lions Square North - Sight Distance Issues
The following is a summary of all the sight distances and issues forboth driveway locations'
The criteria used are 3.5' eye and object heights and a design speed of l5 mph.
WEST DRMWAYz Ihe driveway is located in the same location as the existing driveway..
Lookine Riqhe There is clear sight distance of the entire intersection of Lionshead Circle
and Lionshead Place. The sight distance will not change from the existing condition.
Looking Left: The existing coofiguration allows for 90' of sight distance looking
througb the existing tree. Sight distance outside the tree is 75'. A new transformer is
proposed at the location of the existing [ee. The new sight distance is 85' which is
greater than the existing sight distance.
SOUTH DRMWAYz New Driveway location.
Lookine Rishfi The sight distance as shown on the submittal is 86'. According to
AASHTO criteria" this distance is calculated to be 170' plus a 1.1 factor adjusfineut for
grade, resulting in 187'. This sriteria can not be met with the proposed configuratiol.
The Performance Alternative is proposing a detection system that will prohibit left-hand
turns from the driveway.
Looking Left: The sight disance as shown on the DRB submittal is 8l'. A Performance
Alternative will be submitted by PBS&J. The requirement for AASHTO stopping sight
distance of 77' has been met.
Tumine Left Into Drivewa], from Lionshead Place: The sigbt distance provided is 130'.
AASTO Case F requires 125' for intersection sight distance. This condition has been
ln€t;
'\-
An e nployee-owned c om pa ny
June 20.2006
Mr. Chip Mellck
Mellck Associates, Inc.
355 Soulh Teller Street, Suite 370
Lakewood, Colorado 80226
BE: LION SOUARE LODGE NORTH ACCESS MtTtcATtON
Dear Mr. Melick:
PBS&J has reviewed lhe ptoposed lower parking drfueway whlch exlls onto Lionshead Place, planned as
a component of lh€ Lion Square Lodge North erpansion proJect. Thls lixed drlveway location has both
horizonlal and vedical sight distance conslralnts, which do not meet the standard deSffO critEria for
slght distance. As a resu{t, it was deemed necessary to mltigale any polenual safety conems lhrough the
use ol tratlic signage and inlelligent lransporlallon system {lTS) technologies.
Peak Land Con€ullanls, Inc. provided a memo which summarized slght distance issueg lor Lions Square
North on May 8',2006. lt stales that from the soulh drfueway, bofin-g ri,ght, lhere was a sight distante of
87 feel, and looking le{t from lhe south drfueway there was a sight dlslanie ol 8'l feet. Based on AASHTO
criteria. 187 feet of sbht distance would be required lor vehicles looking dght frcm lhe driveway, and
approxlmalely '130 feet of sight distance would be required for vehicles looking left from tha driveway.
From the soulh driveway, neilher vehicles looklng right or left, meet th6 AASIITO recommended minlmum
sight dislance.
It ls not desirable h lhis situallon to slop control the trallic along Uonshead Place al this d{veway
localion. lt ls proposed that a WJ.10 (modlfied) tralllc sign. which is a side road on right turn curvi
waming Elgn, be modlfied so lhe slde road ls shown intersecling lhe inside of lhe curve.-ln additlon, a
special W16 warning plaque can ba installed whidr stales "HIDOEN DRIVEWAY'. This sign comblnalion
can be placsd at lhg tunnel exit, approximately tunnel slatlon 1+00, olfset lefl, posslbly mounted lo Sre
lunnel wall wllh a brackel and spring fhlure, which wlll allow it to bend lt struck by a vehidb. Converseln a
W1'10 (moditied) tratth sign, which is a skle road on lelt turn cuwe wamlng sigh, can be modlfled so-the
sids road b shown lnlers€cling the inside of lh€ curve, and paired wilh th6 spicial W16 waming plaque
lor lhe opposite dlreclion of lravel. This slgn comblnation can be placed lust soulh ol th€ drlwway lo the
upper parklng level, approximalely statlon 1+50, ottsel right, eilher at lhe back of ourb or back of
sidewalk.
It is proposed lhat the lower parking driveway be slop controlled, with the use ot a R1-1 regutalory stop
sign. Thls will be placed on lhe near-slde of the driveway exit. However, lt ls proposed thlt additlonat
Tgasues be itnplenented al lhls localign to mitigate lhe tlmited eight dlstance lor vehicles exiting tom
lhis driveway. A thorough review ol existlng and emerging ITS tedrnologles was pedormetl. In-pavement
loop deleclors, video camera detection, hard-wlred power conneclivity, solar power, flashing beacons,
and LED components w€re all considered. lt appears as lhough many of these leatures cfl be us€d
colleclivelY lo creale a custom trallic signal warning devloe that will meet lhe padlcular needs of this
proiect. Seveml producl lnfomallon pamphlets have been IncludEd as an altachment to lhis l€tter to
proride a visual underslanding of serreral of the componenls proposed.
Several mltigallon layouts have been considered tor thls location. One concepl ls lo oraate a wamlng
system which will alerl drivers exlting lrom lhe lower parking driveway il there is a vehicle approaching
tuom the left or right, or bo& dlrectlom, direclly outside of lhe driver's llne of vision. Looklng ilght from lhe
2270 Corlorale Circle, Suite i00, Hendenon, Ne'rada 890i4-6382 . Telspilone 702.263.7?15. tax702.263.7200 . t*t*pbsl.com
1
dilveway, slaning at approxlmately slallon 1+50, in.pavernenl loop delectors could be inslallEd for 100
leet to detect lraflic approacfihg the ddveway. Looking lett from the ddveway, stading al approximalely
tunn€l slation 0+35, in-pavemenl loop deleclors could be installed for 100 leel lo detect tralfic
approaching the driveway. The available sight distance from vehioles looking ilghl or lEtl from thls
driveway, plus the 100 feet of advanced loop deteclion would potenllally equal or exceed the calculated
AASI{TO dlstinces for lhis driveway, A special Wl6 waming slgn whlch slales 'TRAFFIC
APPROACHING WHEN FLASHING", used in coniunclion wlth a W1-7 LED wamlng slgn which can be
parlial or lully illuminated depending on the direction ol approaching lrafllc, or two W1-6 LED warnlng
sign, where eilher sign or both signs can be llluminaled depending on lhe dlrection of approachlng tralfic,
and a single llashing beacon when the apprmching vehicles are detecled ls proposed. This lralflc
deleclion syst€m can be placed on lhe farside ol he driveway exit, across the slreet lrom lhe drlventay.
al approximately stalion 2+50, offsel right, at the back of curb. Thls concept has bean sketched in lhe
ligure labeled C1.0.
Another rnitignlion suggeslion would be lo proride a sirnilar wamlng system lo the one proposad ln lhe
lirst oplion; howevsr only one W1-6 LED wamhg sign would be used lvhich lndktal€d lrallie apprmching
fiom the lefl of the ddveway. This warning system would be placed at lhe n€ar-sids of lhe lower drlveway,
on lhe lett slde ol lhe road. There is mlnimal polenlial lor left twns hom lhis &ivewan due to lhe layout of
lhe lacility. As a result, In addition lo lh€ W1-6 waming slgn, a H$2 regulatory *No lett turn" sign can be
used to prevent vehbhs from rnaking lhis movemenl. This concefl has been sketched ln the flgure
labeled G1.3 using carneras as an allernalive lo loop deleGlion. Supplem€nlal to bolh of lhese
aforemenlioned oplions could be lo install loop deleclors on lhe lower driveway exil, whlch would trigger a
llasher on the W'l-10 and W16 sign combinalions along Lionshead Place lo alerl drlvers lo potent'al
conlllcts,
ln-pavemenl loop deleclors have been suggested, In lieu of detec{bn carneras, due !o lhe wealher
conditions in the area, and th6 ninimal mainlenanca and adjustrnent required. Allhough, camera
tecfinology has been rapidly advancing lo accommodale inclement wealher. and adverse lighllng
condilions making lham a vlable optlon. There are several possible locallons lor mounlhg camelalt lor
advanced detecllon. For delectlon looking righl lmm lhe driveway, a Glmera could be placed on Llons
Square Lodge North properly, approximately statlon 2+00, oflset blt, possibly from the new buildlng. For
delection looklng lelt from lhe driveway, a camen could be alfixed to the ceiling of the tunnEl porlal. This
conceplual placernent of cameras has been sketched in conlunc.l,ion with lhe dual direc{lon advanced
warnlng sy$lem, and is labeled as figure C1.1. Another altemalive would be to placa cameras on lhe
Antlers properly approximalely across frorn lhe lower driveway. This option would prodde extended slght
dislanc€ lo both lhe lunnel and up the hlll from the drlveway. Thls allernalive placement ol cameras has
been sketched in conjunclion wlth lhe dual direction advanced warning system, and is labeled as figure
C12. Solar panels are an opllon lor providing power lo lhis syEtsm lf hard-wiring for electriclty ls nol
p.oferred or not available; howevsr limited solar exposure may be an lssue through lhis conidor.
A sketch of devices and pmposed locatlons ls provided In an attrachment to thls htter. ll you have any
quesfions regarding lhe Infonnalion hereln, please c€ntacl me el(702r265-7?'5, exl.3192'
Sincerely,
PBS&J,il
-/ //- F/ -\J/tt/!A!,uarlu
Theresa Galsser, P,E.
Trafllc Engineer
ru$t
oo
Autoscopet
Autoscope lrnage Sienson
Model AIS Eolon Zoom
Coloro a zoom lans, easy setup,
and optimized traffic performance accuracy
in an economical Autoscope hnage Sensor.
Elescrfption
The Autoscope@ lmogc Scnsor, is
a high resolution, color image sensor,
cspecially optimized as a video source
for thc Autoscope stand-alone MVP
(mochine vision processor) producl
suite.
The Auioscopc lmage Sensor pmduces
eonsistent video quality in all weather,
lighting, and haffic congestion tcvcls
common to the traffic indusry. The
imagc sensor has high semitivity
for sccurate vehicle dctcction at niglrt
and other times of low light levels,
The solid-statc design providcs mani-
mum hardware reliability and coo-
sistcnt 24-hour operation. The color
image sensor minirnizes sueaking
and blooning from bright tight sources
like beadlights and wet pavement
that could advesely affect detection
performancc.
During setup, lhe 22x zoom auto.irh
lens quickly ndjusts to o fiold ofvicw
best suited for tbe detection objectives.
A coax modcm nscd witb a lapop
computer adjunB the zoom. Control of
the zoom is over the colx cable, thus
minimizing thc numbcr of wires up tbc
pole
A sealed aod optionally pressurized
barrel protects the image rensor agoinst
tbe demands of tbe outdoor envimn-
ment. An adjustable wcathcr shield
helps minimize rain, snow and ice
on the heatcd faccplatg rtducing
glare and improving video contrast.
Rotating thc barrcl helps impmve
dctcction accuracy-
A variety of awitable mounting
brackeb allow easy inslallation
of the Autoscopc lmage Sensor on
existing poles, masl ffms, or olher
struci$res. The unique bracket design
speeds installntion by minimizing
loose parts and eliminsting steps
in the sctup prrcess.
ElengfiGs
. Flexibility of application.
. Reliable detection pcrformure.
. Ease of installatiou snd
cost-effective maintenance.
. Light wcight"
. Uses standard AIS csbles.
6EECINtrILITEIEiO]|.TFOL FIE !tU€?E. I lra Cl.
Fowen
. RS|70/NTSC: l15 VAC50 Ha
. CCIR/PAL: 24 VAC 50 Ha
' l0 to 28 VDg.. l0 *olls wilh hcatcr ON.
. 5 wdts wilh hestor OFF.
. Oplional lower or higher voltagc.
Etlmenslone
. Mounting: Stsndard oamsrs bracke
lilt top providcd.
, Housing Enclosun:
- 3.5" diometer, 10,5" long
. Weother sunsbield: | 6.!" long,
Welght
. 3 lbs. looa
AmblerrtftmpenaGuFe
Limite
. -3,1"9 to +60"C.
. -40'F lo +l40oF.
HurnldltyrLlmirs
. Up lo l0tl% rrlrlivc hsmidity pcr
MIL-E-54[X}T porag.uth 4.3.24.
Clptdona
' Video output
. Porvct sourcs.
. Seolcd or presurizcd enclooure,
Ullanr.arrty
. Tlvo-year qatranty.
. Extcndcd warrurty ovoilsblc
(5-)'!or $lr4nty plcksgc).
FroductSuppor.t
. Prgduct supFort & tnining by a lcam of
lrsined Auloscope Tcchnical Suppoa
spcciali*ls.
Golor Zoom Al5
Thc Autosc-op lmlgp Sensor orlputs color
vidco os a sounc forAutoscogc stan4alore
F]UC€SSDtS.
FaceplateHeateF
New teelmology hos gtcstly reduced ahc
power cotrsumption of tfie Als. By npplying
hcrt directly to thc fsccplotg tbeAlS can kcep
thc hreplste clerr it| erlrsms condlaions with
mtrh le6s powrr. Ar on oplicsl fril.sqf€, lhc
Autos€opc Strpcrrlso! softwnr€ ptovides
Contrist Dclcclolr lo compcnsatc for ton-
slcslricsl hilurcs in much lhc somc woy
!s the elcctdcal fiil-safu turns on dacctots
on failure offi alectrical conrponcnt
ToannEontnol
New rccbnology to djust lhc zoom lens
climinales udlptcroblcg or cxm cq rol
wircs in the pola Thir grcatly simpliffcs
inslallsdod. Zoom and cam€ta conlrcls
lBvcl lo thGAlS rlong lhe cou cablc' Tte
Coax Modem plugs inlo the coox cablc !1.
lowing a laptop computet to sdusl thc lrns
lield-oI.vicw.
o:itrt EEdibcocd l'odc'' lc. An.idraa trr.rr.d
Ardd.!p. dd Ar|.raqa lolo rr q!|tdt|htrb.f ld|t
S.irinr Srrrltnr l|B A|t d''r Erdsnrak rt! lta Fqt<nt ofltri.
inlt.aftt ofii{n, &drdlitl Catttd ldFtr ltc. lt*tr.| d. tlftl
bstq! qrWLt. $arr*.3ioc|ti.nt *uttitE x{ho{Fit
etilLdld,
6ECCINCILITE:C.'tilTFaL FnC|EuElTtr I tl Ei.
:iir'1 1i
Veliicle
i!i
:.1
Sensltivlty Controls
@ loop Diagnostics
@ Loop lsolation
Transformer
@ Loop Conditioner
@ Aluminum RF
Shield Houslng
@ Surge Protectlon
@ Loop Frequency
Counter
@ lO Gold Plated
@ 8 Gold Plated
Function Controls
@ 6 Gold Plated
€ontrols for
Frequency, Beset 6r
Frequency Counter
@ Two High lntensity
loop Detector
ji!
We at EMX have designed the new D-TEK Vehicle Loop
Detectors with the following obiectives in mind:
1. Allow for easy installation into small operator housings'
2. All the controls must be accessible for easy installation and
operation.
3. Detector must operate reliably wlth marginal loops.
4. Provide all the features and controls necessary for a varlety
of applications.
5, Use four layer board for maximum durability and M blocking.
5. Provtde maximum surge protection on all inputs and
outputs of the detectotLED Indicators
!.
j
i
lgl:alI lilIII'
ii
i rlirlft,
fD a.-iii
::
tftlil I
:i
POWEN:
tow PowEn
TEMPERATURE
ENVIRONMSI{TAL
PROTECTION:
5|ze
OI'TPUT RELAYS:
CONNECTOR:
SURGE PNOTE€TION:
tooP tNPun
GROUNDED LOOP:
LOOP INDUCfANCEBANGEI
TUNING:
IRACI$NGr
POWEN NDKATOi:
LOOP FAILUNE INDICATOf,:
LOOP TfitUNE MEMOBY:
DETECT INDICATOR:
EXTEND INDICATOR:
SENSIT]VITY:
FRT,qUENCY!
INFII{ITE PBHENCS MODE
LlM]rED 4 MNUTES!
Pf,T.IEH(E TIME:
SECOND PRESENCE REIAYT
Putll oN ExlT / rNTnY:
FAII SAFE / STCUBE
FILTER:
EXTENDED DETECIION:
COMPATIBILITY:
!!.e {qtqctgy ls avallable ln the follo!4'Jng voltages, 12V AC/DC, Z4y AC,24V DC,
1f0V AC. Maximum current draw 100m:{.
Detector ls avallable rvlth maxlmum cument dmw of 60mA.
-40F to + 180F
Clrcult board is conformally coated
Helght = 2.687 inches 68 mm - Wdth = 4.125 Inches 104 mm
5A1125 V AC standard verslon, 1A1125 V AC lol cuffent version
Male Molex D.TEK.P-7, O9J2-21O1or Female Molex D.TEK.P9, 09-62-310l
The detector ls pmtected wlth neon dlscharge lamps, zener diodes and surge anestorg
Transformer lsolated
The loop lsolatlon transformer allows operatlon wlth poor qualtty loops
20 to 2000 mlcrohenrles rvlth Q factor of 5 or hlgher
Detector automatlcally tun6 to the loop after power applicirtlon or reset
Detector automatically trocks and compensates for environrnental dranges
Green LED solld llght Indlcates power
Green LED bllnks lndlcates loop problem
Green LED bllnk wlth fast conseqftve bllnkr lndlcates past loop problem that healed
Red IJD soltd llSht Indlcates detectlon
Red LED bllnks after a car left the loop Indlcates tlme extend feature
15 set by 10 podltlon rotary slvltch
Is set by DIP swltch 9 and l0
DIP swltch relectable presence
DIP switch relec{lble presence
DIP swltch selectable
DIP swltch selectable
DIP switch relectable
DIP swttch selec-table
DIP swttch setectable 2 seconds
DIP srvitch selectable 3, 6 ond 9 seconds
The D-TEK Is compatlble wlth LD2000
Loop detectors LD20 and LD40
bit&L gneercner
o
Loop detectors LD20 and LD40
Loop detectors are used whelev€r vehlcles have to
be detected. For example for monitoring and safe.
guardlng accessways or fa counthg vehicles. The
output signal can be us€d for controlllng door and gat€
drive mechanisms, operating barrlers, controlling traffic
light syst€ms In car parks or activating c6rd dlspensers
ln car parks.
Loop delectors in the LD20 series are evaluation
d€vlces whlch each monitor one inductlve loop. LD40
series units each monitor lwo Inductive loops. The
prlnciple is based on a change in the Induclance within
the loop which is caused by the m€tallic components
of passlng vehicles. The changes are pkked up and
evaluated by a mieroprocessor.
. Ease of use thanks to automatic calibration when
ills op€raung voltage ls applled
. Reliability thanks to compensation for
temperature fluctuatlon
. Direclion recognition by special direcilon logic
functions (LD40 series only)
. Pre.conligured rnils can be ordered so that the
optimum pfoduct can be quickly and easily used
in every applicatbn
. Avoidance of malfunctions by the opponunity
to s€lect dlfferent frequencies
. Setting the senoltlvity on a 3-posltlon switch
ftlgh. m€dium, low)
. Simple fault d.tecuon with llght-emittlng dlode
to clisplay posslble malFunctions
. Safe response to malfunctions and fault
message display by light emittlr€ dbde or a relay
. Simpla reset lunction to force a te-callbratlon ty
changing the sensitivity. There is no need to shut
off tho voltage to do this
Ar 11 A2 2't 22 31 't2 14
A1 11 A2 21 22 31 12 14
Th6 following Funcuons are pres€t at the facbry ard
can be ordered as required.
.|-ru r*p
fl- Reray r
t
H = Hold int€rvsl
J-*--|- uoop
--,,=!-.
Retay t
N = Afteroulse
-{--t- uoop.,.HT- neray r
A = on delay
Functions of the second output relay
lLD20 sedes ooly)
LD21 The s€cond outpul relay has the same
function as the fifst cxltput relay.
LD22 The second output r€lay produces a pulse
of 'l00ms when the loop as activated.
LD23 The second output relay acts as a fault relay
and plcks up when a fault occlrrs. .
LD24 The second output relay ptoduces a pulse
of 100ms when the loop is deactirated'
The required mode can elther be set by the user on a DIP switch or the unit can be configured for a particulaf
mode in advance. Refer to the operadng instructions for the precise switch setungs.
Standard setrings for door and gate (.1.)
The output relay energises when the loop is actlvated
and ls.eleosed when the loop returns to a non.acti-
vated conditlon. A malfunctlon causes the output relay
to drop out automatically.
Banler systems (.2.)
The output relay energises when the lmp is activated
and releases when the loop returns to I non.activated
condition. A malfunction causs the qltput r€lay ener-
gise aulornatically.
Quisscent cErBnt {.3.)
The output. relay energises after calibration. The qrtput
relay r€leases \ fien the loop is activated and energlses
again when the loop returns t0 a non-aclivated condl-
tion. A malfunction causes the output relay telease
automatically.
Standard settings lor doot and gate (.1'l
The corresponding output [day enetgises when loop 'l
or ? is activated and rel€ases when (he loop returns to
a non-activated conditlon. A malfunctbn causes both
output relays to rel€ase automatically,
Barrler systems (,2.)
The correspondlng oltput relay ene.gises when loop 'l
or 2 is activated and releases when the loop returns to
a non-acthrated conditbn. A malfunction causes both
output relays energise automatically.
Quiescent cunent (3.)
Both output lelays energise after calibratlon. The cor'
respondtng output relay releases when a loop is actl'
vated and en€rglses again when the loop returns to a
non-activated condition, A malfunction causes both
output rela)6 release auomalically.
Direcrion logic (.1.)
Thls mode makes lt posslble to dlsplsy which dlrec'
taon a vshich ls moving in. lf it rnoves from loop 1 in
the directlon of loop 2. output relay 1 energises' In the
reverse dlrectlon , rcla,! 2 energlses, A malfunctlon
causes both outpu! relays lelease autorkttlcally.
B = Dropout delay
bi$Et @neorcuer
Ouptn reblF ModoBaslc rrerslon
2 omioop unt
a lrobl !r*
ftm aiFf r€q
gloo!)
I lh(r ard gats lrefafl
e Irrier 3ysEm
E oi5 G|ton€rt FiEhE
I frrcthn bgt ltD{0 $4d
Fmcliorl
(ser !ltlE fatorlf
N ,{l€[pds8
H Hob ircnEl
B l!.pdrrEry
A 0n delay
R lliedbr h* 0.0{0
Snppty votuge
eroAc l3offc
lt6ec 115\,lc
AADC 24YAOC
Tfie'
(1. 2, 3 afi r g|t brsEtot uru
0 one ouprt nhyrlm!
I lm (a:d: sarE [rrlioo as l$]
2 &o (ait: lmms Ftre wlP't rltYatd
3 lYo Bd: fa* rcl4l
I lrio{H. Brrt*ftr b{bd.d|v4ed 04
. Tlme
Ofrput fuiElbn tI
OJrpur fijncdon H
outPu! tunctlon B
OutFn functlon A
Outpur functlon n
Pre.fabricated loops (type 5F! can be $pdl€d ftr lnstallation on requesl
Please stato the clrcumference ard requlred lsngth of connection wblng,
0 ls 2s 5s 10$60s 5 mln zmh Inlldts
x x x x
x x x x
x X x
x x x x t
x
. Elrafiar Reglornet AG
Wies€rEEsse 20
CH.8222 Berlngen
Switzorland
Phone +41(0152 68? 1l 11
Far +11(0)52 687 1210
info@blrdler.com
wwwbirsher.roglomat,com
llotc
tcctrtkal detafis a]d recornmendaddE Gmcerdng dlr Fo{tucts arE bGei, oar etperle||Ge ad do aH fo( lhe qleatllin of
rhe uset Oeldb stated In our brochrres and ds*r shiois do nol gua]d e€ speclol pjopenles ot lhc producB. Ihls does not 4ply
ro sp€clal producr propenies conlhmed h wrnhg r hdMtual!' on a casety.case b6ls. gtbJecr, to rrctl{lbd dteratbtt9.
c
Q
c
a
=|rIFa
a(t
=IJJ
2(5
Ia
CJ
I
lJ-lJ.
EF
ffi gc so[ar
When lt comes to solar powered traffic products,
you wanl to make the right choice - to know that
the products you selectare well deslgned, well
enEineered, and properly configured to rneet
the demands that will be placed on them,
Slmply pu$ you want to know that your system
will work in your application and environment
the way it was deslgned - for the long-term.
That's why 5C Solar should be your choice
for all of your appllcations. SC Solar has
engineered and manufuctured our systems to
be the highest quality, most stable systems
amilable today. It represenB a Fue breakthrough
in solar technology!
Building onfidence...
. one system... and one
customer at a time.
Assistance, call 5C Solar
or vlslt us on the web at
wuur.scsolancom
...i.;.....'.,-. ---.-...,.,-'
Cross Alert Systems, Inc. tectlogy Solutions for Bike Poth Safety O Page 1of2
Crrss
$ls#'
HOME
OUR ADVERTISING
ouR$ystEM
COilTACTUS
Q&A/COMMENTS
FIND A BIKE PATH
otR
ADI'ERTISII{G
$Gil LOCATIONS
NEWS
OUR PRESS
EIFONE & ATTER
CROSS ATERT
Thc rlmple dlflorcnce brtlvccn hlndrlght and fui:cltht I
t'trlrml.rrl rthr.tunl tlthl brnh|t lrn lrad io dtnSlto$s vlhtalc/rP h r
rbr. nJry of lhcsa bddmtr cel h ana6cd.
th. Crstsr'h' ry{lt|| drhrn crrnt olrtrd P|lbdhn b, l*rrt|! nok
rppord{ng prlt uccrr.
Tdapnd br prth xUrlly lhr €mrr Alat Spllm .rtlvrlE :rr .ttSlt itrn
bnrrrr*rg tppro&lL4 nrolorkle ol pelh uns al rnoet tht Intltr.au
mhancad wllprt aibftt th! ,lsw ol Itdft. Fh:hhg rod bcrror foru
u 13 lDtl€p.
htp:l/www.crossal ert-com/sdv. html 6r13no06
Cross Alert Systems, Inc. T*h;; Solutions for Bike Path safety I Pa4.1e2of 2
n:db onlrollcd oriy rarl6 pofur caa br phcld up to.lgo {rd {utt I
whcn Hprar lpcd hnll3 prcrrdl, pmvidhg .tttclC rdurttd wunl4 of t .
for pbnncr, sprdflar:, hddcrs end ru&rtrfun of tltralhnd pdftt llv
lordr ha rlrplr dllhmnco bdrnan hhd$$t! ad hn:lgl* b Clus Aa
Clus For :prcr i
|nforndloIert
D4stems
866-276
855-CRt
www.crossalerlcom
@2005Cross Alert Syslems, lnc, All rlghts reserved I.865,CROSSALERT { r,866.276-7725) ll Webslie by Jump lnto The }let
http//www.crossalcrt.com/adv.h tml &'3noa6
Cross Alert Systems, tn". rrrhfiogy Solutions for Bike Path Safety- Sigto.otioo,
TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIOIIIS FOR BIKE PATH SAFETY
SIGN LOCATIONS
OUR SYSTEM
cottTAcT us
Q&A/COMMENTS
FIND A BIKE PAT}I
ouR
ADVERTISTNG
SIGN LOCATIONS
TIEWS
OUR PRESS
BEFORE & AFTER
CROSS ALERT
http://www.crossalert.comllocationslnorthcorolina-Jrtm
fiarkia-gs!-hraUqnamap
@2004 Cross Alert Systems, Inc. Atl rights reserved 1.E66,CROSSALERT ( !.866.275-7725) ll Webstte by lump tnto The tl€t
I
I
Barony subdMslon
Cary, Nc
(v,€0a{e uEvdabh)t
Cr!6s Alert Systems dellvers unlque acuve Eamc wdrnlng system to cary, NC Thls system
provldes !'rarnhg to carg odthg a ntMlvHon lhat vehldcs approachlng on a State hlghway
are Ndden by a dlp In the road. T!',o poles werE phcEd .bout 6$ feet fmm the g|bdlytslon
odL These poles are A/C Fwercd wlth battery backup, and thq are o{ffitted wlth vehlde
mlcmwave d€tectoF trom M55ED@. When B vehkle ls detectcd, a rrdlo u€nsrnls,rl0n ls sent
to a pole In the drlve/ray of ttre srMlvlsbn, whk$ raus€s a wamlng llght to llash.
Page I of I
Crtss
$3,t*,
North Carolina
slgng are In$alled at the lndkated locaEons. clck o|| a locauon to be dteded b the tnlupath
webslte.
Phase check our news page fof upcomlng Insbllauons.
HO14E
6tr3t2m6
Superior - Traffi" Nrunage, ntng LEDs Split Anow Lights
llomo
AtuatAa
Eoilac, Ag
0lstlbatad
Pmdrtd/ UnEs
Employmonl.
Eou to Oriier
Onllno htalog
@r*a,,*
Page 1 of2
@.ARRCIWtIffIITI
Flashlng LEI) Spllt Arraw
,4dprt56g'
srg4€@di"bb
lr|kdc, frds, efi*twelg6/a€g'ustsA44Mfurbrd$attlh
SY850LED Splft Arrow
.frj2.3J
Amp draw:
Vollagrl
E!aa:
MounUng:
Rtlblng
modaa!
gra:
sYStOlZ;
sY8l aL:
sY05t:
sY81012
s37.90
(ut@
G@
7
r2vDc
488 HgFlmp8ct conoslot r8sblanl
plastic wlth a soshd bod(
P€rm{n€nt mount t opllo{rrl nsgns$o mounl k[
La[, rldrt and ddlbh anofl cautlon
2?.5L x 1 0'hH-2 ploc€s per Bsl
lndr&s anow llghl conlfol bor and 25'lrlrhE harnsr3 psr arow
Bepl6eement Parls
R!!hs. pand, lardc
LEO Lamp
Ed Carud. l2v0o
sY6S[-r.EO '
SYEsTIB.IED
SY85:IR.LED
$ 243.25
(It@
L€D tell Attrl
L€O Blghl Aflow
sY851
st36.40
{EEEI
sY812L
s26.95
@rc
SY853L.LED
$ 243.25
oI@
http://www.superiorsignals,com/trafman l/trafman2. t .html dt4n0w
Superior - Traffic Manage, ArrQ Liglrts, Directional Arrow Page I ofZ
@'Annowufiilrs
DlrcctlonalAna*
LED Dhscllonel, SdllJ$[s!d, LEo $ptf $quqltlel, LEO Saquontid, Splt Saguantlal
nomo
AfuUAS
Eontaot As
glslrlbutad
FmduelUnes
EmF oynont
llow lo o'd,or
Anitaa hblog
fipnnmas
Np&3€,'e
$gg'5,9did66,tr
Fr*eg frara c6etlE€lo@t62ttElt
FMrrA'*ibulfr
disErl,rE
SY010 Dhec[onal Arrow
n76.e5 (!E@
AmpdEw! 20
Volaaga! lavDc
Ba|.r Heavygaugsenamel.dlppsdalumioum
ounllng: Psmsrant mount & oplbnal magnqtc mount lll
Flo.hlngmodolr bll. ruhl, double ano and csullon bat
SLo: 55'L r 13'H
lndu(h6 aJrour &hl. co.tbol bor ad 25'wldlg hamosg
SYSI 0-24VDG Dlrectlonal Arrovl
s346.ts {!EE@
Amp drow: 10
Voltaqs: 24VDC
Bam: lbary gauga 6nanat{ipFE
lilamllng: Psrmrtsd momt & optlonal
Fl.Ghlngttrodo!3 L€tl. dghl. doubls arovr atdgha: 55'Lx lStl
Indud6 at ow lbhl, cmrtd bd afid 2S wktl
Replacement Parls
SYBlOfe Fla6h€rpand, latDGSY81024: Flashor panel, 24VDCSY610A: Aro{, pan€l 12VOCSYE!0A-34: turoxp6nel,24vocSr8le Lrnp, IArDCSY0l3: Corfd bo& taroo
SYO!3.24VDC: Controlbor,?4VDCSY824: tamp, e4V0C
sY81012 SY81024
837,90 $47.70GEB G@
Accessorles
SYgll: llagnatc tndrnl NtSY626: Hhged btsal€l
EYB3o| Or$l cowt
sY810A
$r5s.N
@
sY810A.24
$t55,00
GIIEB
sY811
$$-M
Gtrtr'
sY813-
http://www.superiorsignals.com/uafmanl/trafmanl.html ilL4AOA6
Superior - Traffic Manag", fftne LED Directional Arrows Page I of2
@'ARfiowuGHTl
Flashlag LED Dhcctlonal Atmwtoma
Aboat lls
coaait vs
Dlslrlbatad
Pmtuct Uncs
Emgloymenl
llou lo Ordor
oallna Catatog
@nrarcr
SY810LED Dlrecllonal Anow
Npicq sFqggg.#ld06,e
ASoi./*|sc4t
lr9la lofFt bct,lsfurEa.tl&&,l,or
r8cartdi
8499.9s
Anp rlraw:
Vollagor
Ba!El
llo(rdlngi
FlashlnE
omdotl
Ekri 55'Lx l3'H
Irdsdes anox tghl, cd$lol bo|( ard 25'rdrt€ harnegs
Beplacoment Parte
SY810le Fhrher pand, IA,DC
SYel OA'LED: Arow paml. I A/OCSY8tzL: tED tamp9f813: Confol bo& i2VDC
sY81012
637,90gtro
gi@
t2voc
llgavy gaugs €namd{lppod alumlnum
Pemansnt mount & opdonal magnsuc ||!o|nl A
l3lL right, douus srow and oaudon bor
SY81OA-LED
s376.95
{@
Accessgrlea
sY8fi:
sY825:
SYSiN
Mrgrdctmlntkll
HlngEd brid(rl
(hrsl covor
sYstt
.843.N
@
sY830
$48.8J
@
sY8r2L
s 26.95(No
sY813
$1zj.w
(s@
sY825
$42.30
@
hnpJ/www,superiorsignals.com/trafmanl/uafman l. l.html 6t1412006
t
+
+s
I
tlo
*
-
;
'
a
:a-1
5
-j1-1h'i ",
***
+
i
c,
9-
-fF
r.4.
n*
*
Tt
T
o
39-
,.,
"t*
F*x
I
o
,,
cr-
Ordlnance Nos. 7079 (2000); 7279 JP3).
g-3. 3-5 Sight Distance.
(a) Sight TriangJe Required: Were a driveway intersects a public right-of'way or where property abuts the
ii"rt*tn, "tw" p"tt* rtshts-of-way, unobstructed sight distance as described in subsection (c) of this
section shall be provided alall times within the sight triangle area on the property adjac9ltt to the intersection
in order to ensure that safe and adequate sight distance is providedfor the public use ofthe right-of-way.
(b) Obstruction Prohibited: No person shall place or msintqin any structures, fences, landscaping,-or any other
}ijurc *itnt" ory tiyht t iongle area described in subsection k) of this section that obstructs or obscures sight
distance visibitity thiough suih structures,fencing, landscaping, or other objects by more than-twenty-Jive
percent ofthe toial viei in the vertical plane above the sight triangle area between a height ofthirty inches and
ninely-six inches above the roadway surface, exceptfor thefollowing:
(l) Landscaping, structures, orfences that protrude no more than thirty inches above the adiacent roadway
surface may be permitted within the sight triangle area'
(2) Trees may be planted and maintained within the sight triangle area if all branches are trimmed to maintain
'a'clear visionfor a vertical height of ninety-six inches above the roadway surface and the locatio,n of the trees
planted, based on the tree tpt"irt expected mature height and size, does not obstruct sight visibility by more
than twenty-five percent of the sight triangle area.
(c) Sisht Triqngle Areq: For purposes ofthis section, the sight ttiangle area is:
(1) The areaformed at a corner intersection of public right-of-way and a driveway, whose two sides arefifteen
fe'et, measurid along the right-of-way line of the street and the edge of the driveway, and whose third side is a
line connecting the two sides;
(2) The area formed at a corner intersection of an alley public right-of-way and a street right-of-way whose two
'si-des
are Jiftien feet, measured along the right-of-way line of the alley and the right-of-way line of the street,
and whose third side is a line connecting the two sides; or
(3) The area formed at a corner intersection of two public rights-of-way lines deJined by q width of dimension X
'and
a length- of dimewion Y ss shown in Diagram A. The Y dimension will vary depending on the speed limit
and confgurition of the intersecting street, and is outlined in Table A. The X distance shall be thirteenfeet
*rorurLi prrpendicutar from the cirb line of the intersecting street This triangular area is significant for the
determination ofsight distance requirementsfor right angle intersections only.
Diagram A - Typical Sight Triangle Area Guide
i o
trivcrT 6}!. !.tr aFFr€ .E.rttthsltf
of4 rct' tzigtr +. f+' .at4'io pev+nant
Table A Typical Sight Triangle Area Guide
3 or 4 Lanes
b,u.i*"*,;';";;;;;;;'Lt:g i _-*ftl--*---
i - 130/35 mph il25 feet ll00 feet
It+s feet
I i25 mph ,90 feet i50 feet
| - **f "_-: --lBike Lane and On-Street Parking i30i35 mph jl25 feet 165 feet
:'i i40l45 mph il60 feet i85 feet
/ '#ffiffi;,[!t::;r:x:::#.!:x:l;:rx,l;ffi{:J!:':;;;ffii::::[!!":,1,0,]f"l,nu"aieptabliir necessaryfor the safety of pedesiians, motorists, andbicyclistls.
(e) Violations: No person shall violate or fail to prevent or remedy any violation ofthe provisions ofthis section
;; t*W*prrty. l(hen a violation of this section is observed the city manager will provide a written notice to
correctiheiondfnon tu the property owner or occupant, whichever is applicable. Personal service ofsuch
notice or mailing such notiie to thi last known address of the owner of the premis,es by certiJied mail shall be
deemed sfficieit service. Arry such notice shall describe the violation, describe the corrective measures
n "rrrorli"ord
setforth a tiie limit for compliance, dependent upon the hazard created, which time limit shall
not be less than seven days from the service ofthe notice.
(fl Failure to Compht: In the event that there is failure to comply with the notice when the time linit prescribed
iirt rin n^
"Wirta,
tne city manager may trim or csuse to be nimmed or otherwise remove the obsffuction
described in the notice. Such actiin shali not preclude any prosecutionfor violation ofthe terms ofthis section'
The costs of such action shall be paid by the property owner, and, if not paid, may be certified by the city
mqnager to the CountyTreasurerfor collection as taxes.
(g) Public Nuisance: Notwithstandingany other provisioninthis section, anylandscaping, structure,fence or
other obstructionwhich the city ^onogti deems-as an immediaie and serious danger to the public, is hereby
declared a public nuisance ond ^oy ie immediately trimmed or otherwise removed by the city manager dthe
property owner or occupsnt fails n do so; provided that the city monager shall attempt by all reasonable tneans
to give the owner or occupant at least twenty'four hours'notice.
l
l,
I
Tom Kassemel, TOV
(follodng cover)
Lions Square North
E Uqent El For Rcrriqrr I Pleesc Gonnpnt tr Pleasa Rcplyt
o Gomments: Please callto discuss.
1m0 LiorE Ridge Loop, Suit€ lD
Vail, @ 81657
Ph (970) 476{644
Fax (970 ) 4788616
Geometric design should not be considered cornplete nor should it be irrylemented until it has
been determined that needed naffic devices will have the desired effect in controlling traffrc'
Most of the intersection types illustrated and described in the fotlowing discussions are
adaptable to eithef siping ,orroot, signal control, or a combination of both' At intenections that
do not need signal control, the normal roadway widths of the approach highways are carried
tbrougb the intersection with the possible addition of speed+hange lanes, rr-dian-lanes' auxiliary
lanes, or pavemnt tapers. Where volumes are sufficient to indicate sipnal cOutrol, the nucrber of
lanes for through movements may also need to be increased. Where the volume approacbes the
unintemrpted flow capacity of the intersection leg, tbe number of lanes in each dfuection may
have to be doubled at the intersection to accommodate the volume under stop'and-go control'
Other geometric features that may be affected by signalization are le' gth and width of storage
*"ur, io"nti* and position of turning roadways' spacing of other subsidiary intersections' access
connections, and tie possible location and size of islands to accommodate signal posts or
supPorts.
At high-volume intersections at grade, the desip of the signals should be sophisticated
enough to respond to the varying uafrrc demands, the objective being to keep the vehicles moving
through the intersection. fa"to.s affecting capacrty and computation procedgres for sigualized
intersections are covered in ttp HCM (O.
An intersection that needs traffic sigral con&ol is best designed by consideringjointty tbe
geometric desiga, capacity, analysis, design hour volumes, and physical controls' Details on the
iesigrr and location of most forms of tafFrc conrol sipals, including the general warraots' ale
given in the MUTCD (9).
INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE
General Considerations
Each intersectioq has the potential for several clifferent ffis of vehicular conflicts' The
possibility of these conflicts a"tuauy occurring can be greatly du:f thtou^g} the provision of
proper sight distances and appropriate traffic controls. The avoidance of conflicts and the
etficiency of traffic operations itift a.p*o on the judgment, capabilities, and resPonse of each
individual driver.
Stopping sight distance is provided condnuously along each highway or street so that drivers
have a view of the roa,clway aiead that is sufficient to allow drivers to stop. The provision of
stopping sight distance at all locatious along each highway or street, including intersection
approaches, is fundarnental to intersection oPeration'
Vehicles are assigrred the right-of-way at intersectiotrs by traffic-control devices or. where
no trafFrc-control devices are preient, by the rules of the road' A basic rule of the road' at an
intersection where no faffic-control devices are present, requires the vehicle on the left to yield to
the vehicle on the right ifthey arrive at aPProxfunately the same time' Sight distance is provided at
654
intersections to allow drivers to perceive the presence of potentially connttinq vehicles' This
"rirte tn evoid'i::trl.:Tllffi;#tr"'l'T.""n.ii"G*"0i"1*"y','li?l1illllHl?"'",lLlj
::ilffi il,#Hffi ;;;-"*Jro'u"t"o'ini"eT""tl1:T'-'11?"i:Lg3;Tl:
;;IH','T, i:,ffffiffi
"
;;;; ;i ,".". T":lrf : *^:,:_','::"":f ::.:'^*' o*
Hfi#J#"ffi iiJry,io""t"red on observed driver behavior at intersections'
Thedriverofavehicleapproachinganintersectionshouldhaveanunobstructedviewofthe
entire intersection, including any trafnc<ontrol devices, and sufficient len$hs along the
intersecting highway . *#, ,h" drit", to anticipate and avoid potential collisions' The sight
distance needed under various assumptions of physical conditions and driver behavior is directly
related to vehicle speeds and to the resuttant distances traversed during perception-reaction time
and braking.
sight distance is also provided at intersltf.nt T tu:l:T-Y1t;:::":];t"Til;ff:T;
,15.]"il'""T;-T;'. ffiffi,*ilrt*"yio a*n" when to enter the-",:XjT:.T*:1t:'J:
:"ffi :itH;"'ff#Hf, Tti#T"iJ*"'*"t":J"::r''c':T:-t".'f:,::':':l*'::,*:
[Til:ffi iltr;-",fi ;;;'h";G#:i:".9Y":::::,,'.:T"#::]:L1'.ftTaPPropnaE StOPPrng $rErr urlr4rlr',er- *" ":'- -_ -' 'or-road vehicle
to anticipate and avoid collisions. However, in soT *t"19::l t::::""t#'""hance
trafftc[.T,il'T':tH","*.'"Hff #;;;G"*i'-'-'oi,:.T*:::y*ff
":ifi ::ffi;J:,
-t"il;,ffi".ff;air*"",
that exceed stoPPins sight rlistances are desirable along
the major road.
Sight Triangles
Specified areas along intersection approach legs and across their included corners should be
clear of obstructions that migbt block a driver's view of potentially conflicting vehicles' These
specified areas are f.oo* * i"r, sight triangles. The dimension' oith" l"gt of the sight triangles
depend on tbe design ,poa, ot,rr"iote secting roadways and the type of traffic control used at
the intersection. These dirnensions are based on ou."."o driver behavior and are documented by
space-time profiles ana speJchoices of drivers oo irr*rr""rioo approaches (10)' Two typ€s of
clear sigbt triangles o. "oorn",,6
in intersection design, approach sight triangles' and departure
sight triangles'
Approach Sight Triangles
Eachquadrantofanintersectionshouldcontainatriangularareafreeofobstructionsthat
might block * .pp.or"rriog-a.r"", r rt"* of potentially .onilictiog vehicles' The tength of the
legs of this triangular ur"u.-olorrg both intersecting roadways, should be such that the drivers can
see any potentially "onni.tiog
u""hi.l", in sufncient.tine to slow or stop before colliding within
the intersection. Exhibit s-50i ,ho*, rypical clear sight triangles to the left and to the right for a
vehicle approaching an uncontrolled or yield+ontrolled intersection'
Intersections
I
tr
i
!
AASHTo-Geom"r*ten of Highways and Streent
d.er Slgtrt Tdangb brvbrlUlng
TrEdilc Apn|€d|lr4g from |he l-dt
Cl€r Sgn T.*angL b.Vi.r,hg
Trdc ApproacheE turn th. Eght
A - ApFo.rt Cfh TrlnSl..
cLar sight Tdangle tuv|.|fng
Trafic AFproachhg fiorn the L€fr
Clar E$f Tti'|gb hr Vleulttg
Trdlts ApFEdJng liq|t lh. RlSlt
B - Dcarrorc SIE Trlrrlg
Exhibit 9-50. Intersection Sight Triangles
The vertex of the sight tiangle on a minor-road approach (or an uocontrolled approach)
represents the decision point for the minor-road driver (see Exhibit 9-504). This decision point is
the location at which ths minor-road driver should begin to brake to a stop if another vehicle is
present on an intersecting approach. The distance from the rnajor road, along the minor road, is
illustrated by the dimensioo'b: io Exhibit 9-50.A.
ToV =tuI fcsn eoF
The geometry of a clear siglt triangle is such that when the driver ofa vehicle without the
right of way sees a vehicle that has the right of way on an intersecting approach, the driver of that
potentially conflicting vehicle can also see the fust vehicle. Dirnension 'ts" illustrates the length
ofthis leg ofthe sight triangle. Thus, the provision ofa clear sight riangle for vehicles without
the rightof-way also permits the drivers of vehicles with the right-of-way to slow, stop, or avoid
other vehicles, should it become necessary.
Although desirable at higher volurne intersections, approach sight triangles like those shown
in Exhibit 9-504 are not needed for intersection approaches controlled by stop signs or trafEc
signals. In that case, the need for approaching vehicles to stop at the intersection is determined by
656
Cber SlgttTftngb
o
lntersections
the traffic control devices and not by the presence or absence of vehicles on the intersecting
approaches.
Departure Sight Triangles
A second type of clear sight niangle provides sight distance sufficient for a stopped driver on
a minor-road approach to depart from the intersection and enter or ctoss the major road'
Exhibit 9-508 shows typical departure sight triangles to the left and to the right of tlrc location of
a stopped vehicle on the minor road. Departure sight triangles should be provided in each
quadrant of each intenection app(oach controlled by stop or yield signs. Departure sight triangles
should also be provided for some signalized intersection approaches (see Case D in the section on
"Intersection Control").
The recommended dimensions of tbe clear sight triangle for desirable traffic operations
where stopped vehicles enter or cross a major road are based on assumptions derived from field
obseryations of driver gap-acceptance behavior (10). The provision of clear sight triangles like
those shown in Exhibit 9-508 also allows the drivers of vehicles on the major road to see any
vehicles stopped on the minor-road approach and to be prepared to slow or stop, if necessary.
ldentiflcation ot Sight Obstructlons Within Slght Triangles
The profiles ofthe intersecting roadways should be designed to provide the recormnended
sight distances for drivers on the intersection approaches, Within a sight riangle, any object at a
height above the elevation of the adjacent roadways that would obstruct the driver's view should
be removed or lowered, if practical. Such objects may include: buildings, parked vehicles'
highway structures, roadside hardware, hedges, trees, bushes, unmowed grass, tall crops' walls,
fences, and the terrain itself. Particular attention sbould be given to the evaluation of clear sight
triangles at interchange rarrp/crossroad intersections wherc features such as bridge railings, piers'
and abutrnents are potential sight obstructions.
The determination of whether an object constitutes a sight obstruction should consider both
the horizontal and vertical alignrnent of both intersecting roadways, as well as the height and
position of the object. kr making this determination, it should be assumed that the driver's eye is
1,080 mm [3.5 ft] above the roadway surface and that the object to be seen is 1,080 mm [3.5 ft]
above the surface of the intersecting road.
This object height is based on a vehicle height of 1,330 mm [4.35 ft], which represents the
l5th percentile of vehicle heights in the current passenger car population less an allowance of
250 mm u0 inl. This allowance represents a near-maximum value for the portion of a passenger'
car height that needs to be visible for another driver to recognize it as the object. The use of an
object height equal to the driver eye height makes intersection sight distances reciprocal (i.e., if
one driver can see another vehicle, then the driver of that vehicle can also see the first vehicle)
657
o
AASHTO4eometric Design of Highways and Streets
wbere the sightdistance value used in design is based ou a siugle-unit or cornbination truck
as tbe design vehicle, it is also appropriate to use the eye height of a nuck driver io .rrouog ,igrrtobstuctions. The recommended value of a truck driver,s eye height is 2,330 mur p:6 ftl above
the roadway surface,
Intersection Control
The recommended dirnensions of the sight triangles uary with the type of traf6c control usedat an intersection because different types ofcontrol impose different blal constraints on drivers
and, tberefore, result in different driver behavior. Procedures io determine sight distances at
intersections are presented below according to different types of haffic control, as follows:
Case A--Intersections with no control
Case B-Intersections with stop control on the minor road
Case B l-left turn from the minor road
Case B2-Right turn from the minor road
Case B3{rossing maneuver from the minor road
Case C-Intersections with yield control on the minor road
Case Cl{rossing maneuver from the minor road
Case C2-Left or right tura from the minor road
Case D--Intersections with naffic sipal connol
Case E-Intersections with all-way stop control
Case F-I*ft turns from the major road
Case A-lntersectlons With No Gontrol
For intersections not controlled by yield sips, stop signs, or traffic sipals, the driver of avehicle approaching an intersection should be able to see potentially conflicting vehiclqs in
lfficient time to stop before reaching the intersection. The location of the decision poitrt(driver's eye) of the sight triangles on each approach is determined from a model that isanalogous to the stopping sight distance model, with slightly differcnt adsumptions.
while some perceptual tasla at intersections may need substantially ress tirne, tbe detection
and recognition of a vehicle that is a substantial distance away on an intersecting appr,oach, and is
near the limits of tbe driver's peripheral vision, may take up to 2.5 s. The distance to brake to astop can be determined from the same braking coeffrcients used to detennine stopping sight
distance in Exhibit 3-1.
Field obsenvations indicate that vehicles approaching uncontrolled intersections typicallyslow to approximately 50 percent of their midblock running speed. This occurs even when nopotentially conflicting vehicles arc p-resent (10). This initial slowing typically occuni at
deceleration rates up to 1.5 m/s2 [5 ft/s2]. Deceleration at this gradual rate has been observed tobegin even before a potentially conflicting vehicle comes into view. Braking at greater
deceleration rates, which can approach those assumed in stopping sight distance, can begin up to2'5 s after a vehicle on the intersecting approach comes into viiw. Thus, approaching vehicles
658
maybetravelingatlessthantheirmidblockrunningspeedduringallorpartoft}reperception.
reaction tinte and .*, tft"*f*", where necessary' b'rake to a stop from a s@ less than tlrc
midblockrunning sPeed.
Exhibit g-51 shows the distance traveled by an approachins lehicle-during
perception-
reaction and b,raking * t' " ntt'i* of the design- tpt"a of -S"-
t**? on which the
intprsection approach is located. These distances .nooti ue or"a as tbe legs of the sight triangles
shown in Exhibit 9-504- Refening to Exhibit 9-50A' highway n *ttT-*tyd design speed
of g0 dh t50 nphl and higbway B with an assurned a"ttgo spe"a of 50 l(m/h I30 rnphl require
aclearsightriangtewithlefr"*i"nainsatleast'75mand sS^PqS and l4oftl alonghigbways
A and B, respectively. e*liii 9-52 iidicates the length of the legs of the sight Eiangle from
Exhibit 9-51.
-"-------'- the sight distance values in this exhibit by
ilor"t f* approach grades greater than 3%' muttiply- |''-*' ih; frit"p,i"tdioiustirent tactor lrom Exhibh 9'53'
E rhibit 9-51. Leryth of Sight Triangte l*g-Crse A-No Traffic Control
This clear triangrlar area will permit ttre vehicles on either road to stoP' if necessary' before
reaching the intersection. If trre design speed of any approach is not known' it can be estimated by
;J;ff"E; p"*entile of the mi'lblocl running speeds for that approach'
ThedistancesstrowninExhibitg-5laregenerallylessthanthelonesnSdingvaluesof
stoppingsightdisuncero,tl"_,*<lesignspeed.ThisrelationshipisillustratedinExhibit9-52.
where a clear sight triangle has legs tbat correspond to the stopPing sight distances on their
respective approaches, * "r"o
g*i, naryln of .ffi"i.ot operation is provided- However, since
field observations show *rat moltorists slow down to sonre '*tuot
on approaches to uucontrolled
intersections, the provision of a clear sight triangle with legs equal to the full stopping sight
distance is not essential'
dffi;eerd-- Lengthof leg
Design sPeed Length
(m
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
70
90
115
140
165
195
220
245
2E5
325
365
405
445
485
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
13t)
n
25
35
45
55
66
75
90
105
120
135
150
maybetravelingatlesstbantheirmidblockruoningspeedduringallorpartoftheperception-
reaction time and .-, ,U"*]f*' *1"r" o""",'*y' U'ut" to a stop from a speed less than the
midblock running sP€ed'
Exhibit 9-51 shows the distance taveled by an approachin-C -vehicle'during
percepion-
reaction and b,raking tims as a function of the desiga tp""a of
-th"-
t*d:-"y ou which the
intersection approach is tocated. firese distance, ,t outi'u" used as the legs of the sight triangles
shown in Ftdibit 9-50A" Refenbg to Exhibit 9-50d bighway a *ttT-^tyd design s@
of 80 lo/h t50 rrphl and highway B with an assumed aJsigr speed of 50 kn/h [30 ryh] require
a clear sight triangf" *m [i' "*il"aittg 1least.75
m anO +s m [245 and 12() ft] along highways
A and B, respectively. n*fiii' 9'52 iri<licates the length of the legs of the sight triangle from
Exhibit 9-51'
distance values in thls exhibit bY
''"'- i# il;;Pti"t6ioiustirent tactor from Exhibil 9-53'
Exhibit 9-51. L€ngth of Sight Triangtc I*g-Case A-No Traffc Control
Ttris clear triangular area will permit the vehicles on either road to stop' if necessary' before
reachingtbeintersection'Ifthedesigns@ofanyapproachisnotlarown'itcanbeestimatedby
riii;tlieE b percentile of the midblock running speeds for that ap'proach'
The distances shown in Exhibit 9-51 are generally less than tfre
'corre1ry1Aing
values of
sto,pping sight disraDcE f* rh"-; d"sign speed. Trris relationship is illustrated in Exhibit 9-52'
where a clear sight triangle has legs ttrat correspono to the stopping sight distances on their
respecrive approacbes, * ;;;;# margin of emcient operation is provided. However' since
field observations show that moltorists slow down ,o ,oa" extent on approaches to rmcontrolled
inrersections, tle prouision-J u .1ga, sight triangle with legs equal to the firtt stopping sight
distance is oot essential.
66n-rpe€d- Length of l€g
D6s.5-n speed- Length of leg
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
70
90
115
140
165
195
2N
245
285
325
365
/t05
445
485
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
n
25
35
45
55
65
75
90
105
120
135
150
659
ees nfO--Ceo ) Design of Highways and Streas
where the grade along 4n intersection approach exceeds 3 percent, the leg of the clear sight
9Tgt" along that approach.shourd be adjustJ by multiplying the
"pprop.iu* ,'igr,t distance &omExhibit 9-51 by the appropriate a jusrneut factoifromExhibit 9-53.
If the sight distances grveo in Exhibit 9_51, as adjusteC for grades, cennot be provided,consideration should be given to installing regulatory speed signing to reduce speeds or installingstop signs on one s rDorc approaches,
No.aen-artue sight triangle like ttrat shown in Exhibit 9-508 is needed at an uDco'horedl|t uur.vutfoltcg
f:-T::$ yause such intenections tvpicatv iane uery low traffic vorumps. If a mororist finds
E4vlrg6 YerIrLtEon au intersectiug approactl-it-is very unlikely another potentially cmflicting vehicle will beencountered as the first vehicle departs the intersection.
Case B-lntersectons Wlth Stop Control on the Mlnor Road
Departure sight triangles for intersections with stop control on the minor road should beconsidered for threp situations:
Case Bl-I-eft tunrs from the minor road;
Case B2-Right turns fromthe minorroad; and
Case B3-{rossing the rnajor roacl from a minor-road approach.
Intersection sight distance criteria for stop*ontrolled intersections arc louger than stoppingsight distance to ensure that tbe intersec{on operates smoothly. Minor+oad vehicle operators canwait until they can proceed safery without forc-ing a major-road vehicle to stop
Case Bl-Left Turn From the Minor Road
Departure sight tiangles for traffic approaching from eitber the right or tbe left, like thoseshown in Exhibit 9-508, shourd be p-nii"a for lei turns from the mtor roao onto the majorroad for all stop'controlled approactris. The ten$hoi.the leg of the departure sight triangle alongthe major road in both directions is the recomme-nded intersection sight distance for case Bl.
-. , -11"-nt*"* (decision qoint) of the deparnre sigbt triangle on the minor road should be 4.4 m0!'4ry fr:T lh" edge of the major*oad travelea iay. This represents the typical position of theminor-road driver's ele whgn a vehicle is stoppeA'relatively close to ,i; .d;;;:H;;observations of vehicle stopping positions found tiat, where necessary, drivers will stop with the Ifront of their vehicle 2.0 m [6.5 ft] or less from the edge of the major-road traveled way. lMeasurernents of passenger cars indicate that the distance from the front of th" ";;-il d; Is ,q.driver's eye for the current u.S. passenger car population is nearly always 2.4nn tE ftFor less /, .,.sv\(10). where practical, it is desirabre to in"rr*i ,L dir*r. from the.og. oriJfi;-ffj o;$\
traveled way ro the vertex of the clear sight triangle from 4.4m to 5.4 m [14.4 to r7.g ft]. Thisincrease allows 3.0 m Il0 ftl from the edge of ti" q*--oa traveled way to tlre front of the
660
-
i oa
Intersections
E.t
oo
o,all
co
doo
r30
r20
lt0
r00
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
;60aE
iuooq
Eoo
o,oo
30
r0 o loo 2oo 300 400 500
Lenofn of sight Trionole Leg
500 7OO
(ff,
L
METRIC
Lerxgth of Sighf Triongle Leg (n'
US CUSTOMARY
ll
;osetl
,
tl
ss0tl
//
I
/
j
Exhibit 9-52. t ength of Sight Triangle Leg-Case A-No Traflic Control
661
,qASIfTe-G"o)ic Oesign of Highways and Streets
It)€F
969
r
€
El!
E
v1
EO
u)
h
o
I
rl
!9
.a
(fltaI€t\
n
dl dolEdtb
3lE
o?l e
?l 5
3l e
3l $rlE
JI.c
nl .Eltif3?t .c)l cLql &)1 Eille-lo
rl Els
,l I
IRJSIE| .!9
t8la
l5tototctdto
l=€.9'o(tcog
ut
o
o
E
E
Itoo(6
co
o
oz
rli:: :3 3 3)lqqrgqolof.lr-FFF,OOO
116{ Al - q o) ol ol,lr-FF-OOOI
rlnot-coteotlrfFFF-ooc)l
'lq-:eqo?qlrlFFy-FOOoI
f::::SBsllo{rrqqqqlIFFFF.OOOI
f::::gBBl
f::::BBSflr-rqqolotll;;;;;;31_ ... o ol-rqqCCo?lr-F-FF_._OlrgsgCCef
FFF'FFF-Ff
-gsqCeqlF F, Fl? l.f?TET?EITI
oN
o
tolsi
.g;toAE
=!dOEd9l
il::::3 3 3
ilqot-go?otolFOOO
lc\ cY r g ol o? er-OOo
|c\lr-qo?ololllF-i--.OOOl
f:::3S331l::::3 3 Sll:-rqo?eo?l_oool
lrq-qqqelFF'FFoOOl
---9golelF'F''FF_OOlrrggCqel
FFFFFFct|r999eCel
FFFIrQ99qeelF,Fr-Fr-rf
(,)
I99To9to(9rtt-?t+
?
Interscctions
stqpedvehicle,providingatargersightniangle'Thelengthofthesightnianglealongtheminor
road (distance a in g*hibit 9--5;i) it-th" sun of the distance from the major road plus ll2 lane
width for vehicles uppr*"f,iog il-ths le& q l'lt1lare width for vehicles approaching from
thc rigbt
Field obaervations of the gaps in major-road traffic actually accepted by drivers h[oing onto
thc najor road have .rrorno tlit'tt" values in Exhibit 9-54 provide sufncienl tine for tbe minor-
road vehicle to accelerate il,o " oop and complete a left t'rn without unduly interfering with
major-road traffic oper.ations. Tbe time gsP accePt nce time does not vary with approach speed
ooglernajorroad'StudieshaveindicatedthataconstantvalueoftiflPgap,indepe'ndeirtof
approachspee4canbeu'"dasabasisforintersectionsightdistancedeterminations.
obsenations havc also shown that major-road drivers will reduce their speed to some extEnt
whss minor-road vehicles turn ofio th; major road. whcre the time gap accePtance values in
Exhibit 9-54 are used to t*i"" tbe leDglh of the leg of the deparnre sielrt triangle' most
major_road arlners snouu nit need to reauce sped to less than ?0 percent of their initial spe€d
(10).
Theintersectionsightdistanceinbothdirectimsshouldbeequaltothedistancetravelcdat
tbcdesigrrspecdofo"'":**"odruingaperiodoftineequaltothetinegap.Inapplying
E dibit g_54, it can *udt; assurned tlr"t th" minu-road vehicle is a passeng€r car. Ilowever'
where substantial volurps of heavy vehicles ent€f the major road, such as from a rar4 terminal'
thc use of tabul.t"o n"t*s iq ,iogi"-*it *
"ombination
trucks should be considcred-
Exhibitg-54includesappropriateadjustmentstothegaptirnelfuthenumberoflaneson
the major road and for tne ffi*O grade- of the miqor roaa. the adjustment for the grade of the
minor-road approach is oJJ oti o * rear wheels of the desip vehicle would be on an
il;;ffof,, j p"r"*, o,t* the vehicle is at the stop line of the minor-road approach
Theintersectionsightdistancealongthemajorroad(dirrnnsionbinExhibit9498)is
determined by:
ISD =t.47 V,,q*t, ( $1 )ISD=0.278V*nt,
where:
ISD = interseslion sighl distance
(length of ths leg of sight
triangle along the major
road) (ft)
Vneo. = design sPeed of maior' road (mph)
L = time gaP tor minor road' vehicie to enter the major
road (s)
where:
ISD = intersection sight distance
(length of the leg of sight
triangle along the major
road) (m)
V*r.' = design sPeed of maior' road (km/h)
L = tirne gaP lor minor road' vehicle to enter the maior
road (s)
63
vehlcle
Tlme gap (s) at design speed
of maior road
Passenger car
Single-unit tnrck
7.s
9.5
11.5truck
1
ri
Note: Time gaps are lor a gtopped vehicle to turn right or left onto a two.lane highway with
no_ median and grades 3 percent or less. The table values require a-Cirlsmint as
follows:
For multilane hbhways;
For left lurns onto two-way highways wilh more lhan two lanes, add 0.5
seconds for passenger cars or 0.7 seconds for trucks for each additional lane,
trom the lett, in excess of one, to be crossEd by the turning vehicle.
For minor road approach grades:
! rte approach grade is an upgrade that exceeds g percenq add 0.2 seconds
for each perc€nt grade for left tums
Exhibit 9.54. Time Gap for Case Bl-Left Turn from Stop
For example, a Passenger car tuming left onto a two-lane major road should be provided
sight disance equivalent to a time gap of 7.5 s in rnajor-road traffic. If the design speed of the
mejor road is 90 lsr/h [60 mph], this corresponds to a sight distance of 0.27g(90X2.5) = 1g2.7 or
190 m [.47(CI)(7.5) = O0t.S or 665 ft], rounded for design.
A passenger car turning left onto a four-lane undivided roadway will need to cross two near
lanes, ratber than one. This increases the recomrnended gap in major-road taffic from 7.5 to
8'0 s. The conesponding value of sight distance for this exarnple would be 200 m t704 ft1. If the
minor-road approach to such an intersection is located on a 4 percent upgrade, then the time gap
selected for intersection sight distance desiga for left tums should be increased from 8.0 to 8.8 s,
equivaleirt to an increase of 0.2 s for each percent grade.
The design values for intersection sight distance for passenger crus 4re shown in
Exhibit 9-55. Exhibit 9-56 includes design values, based on the tinre gaps for the design vehicles
included in Exhibit 9-54.
No adjustment of the recommended sight distance values for the major-road grade is
generally needed because both the major- and minor-road vehicle will be on the same grade when
departing from the intersection. However, if the minor-road desigr vehicle is a heavy uuck and
the intersection is located near a sag vertical curve with grades over 3 percent, then an a_djustment
to extend the recomrended sight distance based on tbe major-road grade should be considered.
664
Intersections
lntersection sight
StopPing distance tor
;pdJ distince -Calcu-lated Design
Stopping distance lor
Design sight - Paqpengergarc;p& distince catculated D9"i9n
{es.+ 17015
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
115 u:0.5 225
155 n16 280
200 330.E 335
250 385,9 390
305 441.0 M5
360 496.1 500
425 551.3 555
495 606.4 610
570 661.5 665
645 716.6 7n
730 771.8 715
820 826.9 8!10
45
65
85
105
130
150
170
190
210
230
255
275
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
m 4't.735 62.6
50 8i1.4
65 104.3
85 12s.1
105 146.0
130 166.8
160 187.7
185 208.5
220 229.42s0 2ffi.2
285 n1.1
Exhibit 9'55. Desip Intersection Slght DistanceJase B1-L€ft Turn trlom Stop
sight distance design for left turns at divided-highway intersections should consider multiple
desig;n vehicles and median width. If the desigt vehicle used to determhe sight distarrce for a
divided.bighwayintenectionislargerthanapassengercar,thensightdistancefqlefttrrrnswill
need to be checked for that setectei desip vehicle and for srnaller design vehicles as well' If the
divided_highway median i, *ia" "*uir, to store the desrp vehicle with a clearance to the
ttnough lanes of approxirnar"fv i n P ttt ",
U",ft ends of the vehicle, no seParate analysis for thc
depart're sight triangle tor t"i turns is needed on the minor-road approach for tbe near roadway
to the left. In most cases, the daartu€ sight triangte for rigbt turns (case 82) will provide
sufficie,lrtsigbtdisunceforapassengercartocrossthenearroadwaytorcachthcredian.
Possible exceptions are addressed in thc discussion of Case 83'
If the design vebicle can be stored in the median with adequate clearance to the through
lanes, a departr:re sight ti;gb to the dght for Ieft turns sbould be provided for that deign
vehicle tuming left from the ..ai* roadway. where the redian is not wide enough to store the
design vehiclg a ileparture sight triangle strould be provided for that design vehicle to turn left
from the minor-road aPProacb'
Themedianwidthshouldbecorrsideredindetenniningtbenumberof]T*tobecfossed.
rlre nredian width should be converted to eguivalent lanes. For example, a7'2-m tZ-ft] median
shouldbeconsideredastwoadditionallanestobecrossedinapplyingthemultilanehighway
adjustmentfortimegapsinExhibitg-54.Furthermore,adePafiuresighttriangleforleftturns
from the median roadway should be provided for the largest design vehicle that can be stored on
ffis
I
I
I
_tE
z
;atI,l
g
aaa
6g
gl
s
5
aJo
30
130 200 250
L.n€rrn of Sl$rt Trlmgl. L.9 lr|l
US CUSTCIIIARY
0 t@ 200 300 {oo g{n 600 ?@ E00 $o 1000 ||00 tuoo t:loo
Llngth of slch+ lrloilr. L!0 (ftt
Exhibit 9-56. Intersecfon Sight Distanc*Case Bl-Left Turn fron Stop
30
20
r0
200 250
\
Intersections
the median roadway with adequate clearance to the through lanes. If a divided highway
intersection has a l2-m taGftl median width and the design vehicle for sight distance is a22'm
F4-ft1 combination truck, departure sigbt triangles should be provided for the combination truck
iurning left from the minor-road. approach and through the redian. In addition, a departure sight
riangie should also be provided to the right for a 9-m [30-ft] single unit truck tuming left from a
stopped position in the median.
11.t6g sight distanc€ along the nujor road shown in Exhibit 9-55, including any appropriate
adjustments, cannot be provided, then consideration should be glven to installing rcgulatory speed
signing on the major-road approaches.
CasE B2-Right Turn from the Minor Road
A departure sight triangle for traftic approaching from the left like that shown in
Exhibir 9-508 shoutd be provided for rigbt turns from the minor road onto the major road. The
intenection sight distance for right turns is detennined in the sarne [unner iN for Case Bl' except
that the tinr gaps (t) in Exhibit 9-54 shoutd bc adjusted. Field observations indicate that' in
making right turns, drivers generally accept gaps that are slightly shorter than those accepted in
rnaking left turns (10). The tirre gaps in Etibibit 9-54 caa be decreased by 1.0 s fs' right'tttnt
rumeuvers without undue interferenice with major-road traffic. These adjusted tinr gaps for the
right tum from the minor road are shown in Exhibit 9-57. Design values based on these adjusted
time gaps are shown in Exhibit 9-58 for passenger cars. Exhibit 9-59 includes the design values
for the design vehicles for each of the time gaps in Exhibit 9-57. Wheu ths minimurrr.
recorunended sight distance for a right+urn nuneuver cannot be provided, even with the
reduction of 1.0 s from the values in Exhibit 9-54, consideration should bc given to installing
regulatory speed sigrring or otber taffrc contr.ol devices on the major+oad approactbs.
Case B34rossing Maneuverlrom tho Minor Road
ln most cases, the departure sight triangles for left and right tums onto the major road, as
described for Cases Bl and 82, will also provide more than adequate sight distance for minor'
road vehicles to cross the major road. However, in the following situations, it is advisable to
check the availability of sight distance for crossing maneuvers:
r where left and/or right turns are not permitted from a particular approach and the
crossing naneuver is the only legal maneuver;
o where the crossing vehicle would cross the equivalent width of more than six lanes; or
o where substantial volurres of heavy vehicles cross the higlrway and steeP grades that
might slow the vehicle while its back portion is still in the intersection arc present on
the departure roadway on the far side of the intersection'
;
,!
"r.:t
.17.+
ri
,.-
F
Tt
5..i
3
:,i
+
,.6I
E'.t
-*
F
,{,
:l,'i
Ft.
*
t
,.-
'1.
4.
..',.J
'+
i:
i
i
:!.7
667
AASHTO-Geometric of Highways and Streets
I
Design
i
Note: Time gaps are tor a stopp€d vehicle to tum right
onto or cross a two-lane highway with no m€dian
and grades 3 percent or l€ss. The table values
require adjustment as follows:
For multilane highways:
For crossing a major road with more than two
lanes, add 0.5 seconds lor passenger cars and
0.7 seconds for trucks for each additional lane to
be crossed and tor narrow medians that cannot
slore the design vehicle.
For minor road approach grades:
lf the approach grade is an upgrad€ that exceeds
3 percent, add 0.1 seconds for each percent
grade.
Brhibit 9-57. Tlme Gap for Case B2-Right Thrn from
Stop and Case BfCroeslng Maneuver
NotE: Intersection sight distance shown is lor a stopped passenger car lo tum right onto or cross a
two-lane highway with no median and grades 3 porcent or less. For other conditions, the time
gap must be adjusted and required sight distance recalculated.
Exhibit 9-5E. Design Intersection Sight Distance-Case B2-Right Turn from Stop and
Casc BfCrossing Maneuver
668
Tlme gap (s) al
deslgn speed ofvehicle maior roadPassengercar 6.5
Single-unit truck 8.5
Gombination truck 10.5
Metrlc US Customary
Intersection sightStopping distance forDesign sight passenger carsspeed distance Calculated Design(km/h) (m) (m) (m)
Inlersection sight
Stopping distance forDesign sight passengercars
speed distance Calculated Design(mph) (ft) (ft) (ft)
20 20 36.1 4030 35 54.2 5540 50 72.3 7550 65 90.4 9560 85 '108.4 I 1 070 105 126.5 13080 130 1M.6 14590 160 162.6 16s100 185 180,7 185110 220 198.8 200120 250 216.8 220130 285 234.9 235
15 8020 11525 15530 2@35 25040 30545 36050 425s5 49560 57065 64570 73075 82080 9'10
143.3 145 .,
191.1 195238.9 240286.7 29033r',4 335382.2 385430.0 430477.8 ,t80
525.5 530573.3 57562r.1 625668.9 670716.6 720764.4 765
o
lnterseaions
METRIC
rsol
r20,1
I
I r0l
I
loo.
E
! ro'
t 80'tta?oI;60oa
50
40
I
oo.tatl
g
aoc!
EO,
?o
60
50
!0
20
t0
rio z6o 25o
L.mth ol sl.crt rrtcrgte L'g lst
ffi?b a6o 9oo looo lloo3OO 4OO 3OO eooro0
Ler8th of sifit lriongtG Lrg Ittl
Exhibit 9-59. Intemection Sight Distance{ase B2-Right Tum fron Stop and Case 83-
Crosslng Maneuver
4:|.
US CUSTOUIARY
;:..
? )l
f.i;ii rr.q. r':3:i
l:-
Bi'
E',i,.
!,
I;1
{ !i
.q i.:
Iri'],'i,'i r:
i'r:.l :,..
!:i
L
l:i,
l,.i.,i ,
i,:
I ,,
i r'
t:
The formula foa intersection sight distance in Case Bl is used again for the cmssing
uEneuver exc€pt that time gaps (Q are obtained from Exhibit 9-57. Exhibit 9-57 prcsents time
gaPs and appropriate adjushert factors to determine the intersection sight distance along the
major road to accommodate crossing maneuverE. At divided highway interLtions, depending on
the relative rragnitudes of the median width and tb length of the design vehicle, intersection
sight distance may need to be considered for crossing both roadways ofme Civiaea highway or
for ctossing tle near lanes only and stopping in the median before proceeding. The applicatim of
adjustment factors for rnedian width and grade are discussed under case Bl.
Exhibit 9-58 shows the design varues for passenger cars for the crossing manspvsl based sa
the unadjusted time gaps in Exhibit 9-57. Exhibit 9-59 includes the designlalues based on thetine gaps for the desigl vehicles in Exhibir 9-57.
Gase C-lnterssc{ons With yield Confol on the Minor Road
Drivers approaching yield sigas are permitted to enter or cross the major road withoutttoplTg' if there are no potentially conflicting vehicles on the major road. The sight distances
needed by drivers on yield+onholled approaches exceed those for stop+ontrolled approaches.
For fourJeg intersections with yield control on the minor roa4 rwo separate pairs of
approach sight triangles like those shown in Exhibir 9-504, should be provided. One set of
approach sight triangles is needed to accommodate crossing the major road and a separate set ofsight tiangles is needed to accommodate left and right tums onto the major road. Both sets of
sight riangles should be checked for potential sight obstructions.
For tlnee-leg iutersections with yield control on fte minsl roa4 only the approach sight
niangles to accommodate left- and right+ura mrneuvers need be considered, because the ctossing
maoeuver does not exist.
Case Cl-{rosslng Maneuver From the Minor Road
The length of the leg of the approach sight triangle along rhe minor road to accommodate thecrosing nEneuver from a yield-controlled approach (distance a in Exhibit 9-504) is grven in
Exhibit 9{0. The distances in Exhibit 9{() are based on the same assumptions as those for CaseA except that, based on field observations, minor-road vehicles tut ao not stop are ass,,nred to
decelerate to 60 percent of the minor-road desip speed, rather than 50 percent.
Sufftcient navel time for the major road vehicle should be provided to allow the minor-road
vehicle: (l) to bavel from the decision point to the intersection, while decelerating at the rate of
1.5 ds2 {5 fl/szl to 60 percent of the minor-road desig;n speed; and then (2) to cross and clear the
intersection at that same speed. The intenection sigtt distance along the major road to
1-commodate the crossing nuneuver (distance b in Exhibit 9-504) shou6L computed with the
following equations:
670
;
I
l
j
i
I
J
I
.1l
I
lntersectiotts
Metric us C!9!9m3ry
tE=ta+6leiif-
b = 0.278V,"i.te
te=tq+0.88y.b,. ( $2 )
b = 1.47V,-rte
wher€:
t!
b
te
travel time lo reach and
clear the major road (s)
lengith ol leg of sight
triangle along the malor
road (m)
travel time to reach the
major road from the
decisbn poinl lor a
veh'|cb that does not
stop (s) (usa
appropriate value for
the minot-road design
speed from Exhibit 9'60
adjusted lor aPproach
grad8, wherB
appropriate)
width ol intersection to
be crossed (m)
length ot design vehicle
(m)
design speed of minor
road (km/h)
design speed of major
road (km/h)
w
h
Vtt,ror
V*io,
travel time to reach and
clear the maior road (s)
length ol leg of sight
triangle along the major
road (ft)
trawl timeto reach the
major road from the
decision point lor a
vehicle that does nol
stop (s) (use
appropriate value for the
minor-road design sPeed
trorn Exhibit 9-60
adjusted for approach
grade, where
appropriate)
width of inlersoction to
be crossed (ft)
length of design vehicle
(ft)
design speed of minor
road (mPh)
design speed of maior
road (mph)
tit
l*
Vtrtot
Vr"l*
The value of t, should equal or exceed the appropriate travel time for crossing the major road
from a stop.controlled approach, as shown in Exhibit 9-57' The desigr values for the time gap (U
shown in Exhibit 9{0 incorporate these crossing times for two-lane highways and are used to
develop the length of the leg of the sight triangle aloug the major road in Exhibit 961' These
uasic unaa3ust.a mgtm are illustrarcd in Exhibit 942 for Passenger cars and should be
calculared separately for other design vehicle types'
The clistances and times in Exhibit 9{0 should be adjusted for the grade of the minor-road
approach using the factors in Exhibit 9-53. If the major road is a divided highway with a median
*iA"
"ooogt
io store the desip vehicle for the crossing fluneuver' then only crossing of the near
lanes needs to be considerJ and a departure sight triangle for accelerating from a stopped
position in the median should be providea Uased on Case 83. For nedian widths not wide enough
io store the design vehicle, the crossing width should be adjusted as discussed in Case B I '
671
I
Design of
o
MSIITO4eometric Highways and Streas
EETex
"3 $E(Ddh(E;E
s gE
HC.)€o/4go
sF g fE; E 3gF € i;g E;
EE FEEgE s +E
sE g !iOCLO(ag5 g Fg;gs
tg $ a'
EF E i
;e $ ?Ef g ;
*;e s E
E EA i E
l*
ItEIRtltgt-
lEtcl:
lote
tgl€toIE
t>lcL
It
lqlcloeoo-
(r)
oooxo
q
;frogt
EE9.'E-xbul8EEE
ts-b
EE
EgEEb5ll- a6
B6
EIot(,
cn
=
Bft
HE;
HE-E
Elgu=
=lr
sBe
t\ lO lO lO lO lO lO rO f\ O, N t 1.. O,ddtrtddddd<tdF.F.F:F.
I
PRS8S9g8E8ERR8l
I
FiOo)O-c)tONOr(\lvF@dGtddd<rtdcctdF.F.F.
R888EBPRRRR888Ic\l(\tcrcit$<tr,|o(ol
a\qd?qols| qcg-a\qo?
(r? (D t * t $ to |o lo (o (o (o F N
(,E
o
=
gJ E*
3l
$;
aD^EO
;r-Ei-H
E
Eee
3
.E,8 €.ltiDc
6 Bsl R8 98 8R8 88 e R8
lru?u?u?u?u?rqcg-a\qlF (ll G, (O (O @ (O (O F ts F. @
I
I
rqgq-q'(|cqra\gt\ (D (o (o (o (o (o (D I\ t\ N o
$l@OtOFIOOt(r)NOtatc.itssutdd<o@F.F.
R89EEg8PSE88r-FFrrAl
672
Intersections ,
.,
ct
lio
a)Ed
E
o0
q,
EU
U
E6Ulc!6E5ttoe
6-C>:aoE
=E<:rnld'x
(9
ao
.ErF
a!
ah
a!ac)
j\cIo\.t
,1
aitut
oi
tt
=EE trl
FC
EE(E(,oE
8E
!l sr-eE
pi]
*R36
EoaEql
Es
=o;i!t;EtDcHoi:99odEaE
FE2c
o tt,
LOotr?EgE
(a.E
8e
E(J,$J C;.9Eg)(5E
-!! o.o<(61.-
9d
=((,co!
qE
FE
g
oz
HHSS€$€EFpgs
RHSg$;8BE3PE
R*gH3€SEEEPE
lttN
oN
rl)(o
frH$8$€fiHEEpp
HHHgEgSgEE€P
RRg$$$€HH$EF
ERRHH$9fifril8F
RRg$H$$SH8ER
EPRRHg$€ESFB
r.ct
@
oo)F
rO(oN
o(t)N
o
(rt
o(o
u)lO
ort
rO
olo
oo
9RR8BEg8E8ERR8
ilE6l
8la
Hl*
Els
l;
-EECora60€
gE
eR8:pgFHKRRR
SEEeEEFEfrRRR
sEtspsppERRRR
e88FF39ERRRR
ssEEgpEFERRR
?EpE:EpgERR$
e888F3gERRRR
REEEEPEEERRH
R8e88R88F:FE
I
o(\l
o
oo
oo
$-go
gEE
673
v-
MSI{TO-Geometric Design of Highways and Streets
METRIC
t30
r20
rr0
r00
90
80
?o
60
50
c
.2.
;ooov,
EIo6
loo t5o 200
L.n€rtn of slqhi Trtd|gtr Lct (rn,
g
t'oIvl
g
ot
Exhibit 9'62. Length of sigbt Triangre Leg Arong l\{qior Road for passenger carc-
Case Cl-Croesing Maneuver
200 300 a00 500 600 7@
LerEfh of S19ht Trlfigtr Leg tf+)
US CUSTOMARY
674
, I ersections
Case C2-Left- and Right'Turn Maneuvere
The length of the leg of the approach sight triengle along the minor road to accommodate
left and right tums without stopping (distance a in Exhibit 9-50A should be 25 m [82 ft])' Tlfs
distance is based on the assumption that drivers rraking left and right tums without stoppiag will
slow to a turdtrg speed of 16 lor/h [10 mph].
The leg of the approacb sight niangle along the major road (distance b in Exhibit 9-50A) is
similar to the rnaju-road leg of the departure sight tiangle for a stqrcontrolled intersectims in
Cases Bl and 82. However, the time gaps in Exhibit 9-54 should be increased by 0'5 s to tbe
values shown in Exhibit 963. The appropriate lengths of the sight tiangle leg are shown ia
Exhibit 9{4 forpassenger cars and in Exhibit 9{5 for the general design vehiclo categories. The
minor-road vehicle needs 3.5 s to travel from the decision point to the intersection- This
represents additional travel time that is Deeded at a yield+ontolled intersection, but is not needed
at a stop-controlled intersection (Case B). However, the acceleration timc after entering the major
roaO isi.0 s less for a yield sip than for a stop sign because the tuming vehicle accelerates from
16 km/h t10 nphl rather than from a stop condition. The net 0.5-s increase in tavel time for a
vehicle tprning from a yield<ontrolled approach is the difference between the 3.5-s increase in
travel tim and the 3.0-s reduction in travel tima.
Deparnge sight triangles like those provided for stop-controlled approaches (see C:ses Bt'
82, and 83) should also be provided for yield-controlled approacbes to accommodate minor*oad
vehicles that stop at the yield sip to avoid conflicts with rnajor-road vehicles. Ilowever. since
approach sight tiangles for turning Enneuvers at yietd*ontrolled approaches are largsr than tbo
A"panne siglt tiangtes used at stop.contnolled intersections, no specific chcck of departure sigbt
triangles at yield+onnolled intersection should be needed.
. yield-controlled approaches generally need greater sight distance thaD stotrcootrolled
approaches, especially at four-leg yield+ontrolled intersections wtrere the sight distance needs of
the crossing rumeuver should be considered. If sight distance sufftcient fo yield cotrtrol is not
available, use of a stop sign instead of a yield sigp should be considered' kr addition' at locations
where the recommended sight distance carmot be provided, consideration should be given to
installing regulatory speed rigniog or other traffic control devices at the intersection on the tnqjor
road to reduce the speeds of approaching vehicles.
Case D-lntsrsecdons Wlth Trafflc Slgnal Control
At signalized intersections, the first vehicle stopped on one apProach should be visible to the
driver ofthe lirst vehicle stopped on each ofthe other approaches. Left+urning vehicles should
have suffrcient sight distance to select gaps in oncoming EafEc and complete Ieft turns. Apart
from these sight conditions, there ap generally no other approach c departure sight triangles
needed for signalized intersections. Signalization may be an appropriate crash counterrneasure for
higher volume intersections'\ilith restricted sight distance that have experienced a pattern of sight-
distance related crashes.
675
AASHTO-Geomaric Design of Highways and Streets
-.._----.-.--.--
il*l^*:rliffT]f,i:::ilTteria ror local roads that carry less than 400 vehicres per dav
LOCAL RURAL ROADS
General Design Considerations
A major part of the rural highway system consists of two-lane local roads. These roadwaysshould be designed to accommodate thi highest practical criteria corpatible with traffic andtopography.
Deslgn Trafflc Volume
Roads should be designed for a specific Eaffic volume and a specified acceptable level ofservice. The average daily traffrc raoo ooru-r, either current or projected to some fuilredesign year, should be the basis fo1 design. usuaxy, the design y"* i, uuoot-20 yean frorn trel#::ffiTh::ili"'":ffi;*" uo''u'v '-f?o. tre cu,,"ni v.*,o zo y,,,. depending on
Design Speed
Desigr speed is a selected speed used to determine the various design features of theroadway' Geometric design featrnes should be consistent with a specific design speed selected asappropriate for environmental and terrain conditions- oesigaers are ;;"g"d to select desigrspeeds equal to or greater than the minimum varuo,rror"n in n*uuit s-I. r"i" i*is, speeds aregenerally applicable to roaj.s with winding aligument in rolting or -o*oioo* terrain or whereenvironmental conditions dictate' rrigrr oesipspeeas are generally applicable to roads in levelterrain or where other environrnental-conditiins
"r, r.uo.uit.. h,"LH;;;;ign speeds wouldbe' appropriate where terrain and other
"orri.onmeotat conditions are a combination of thosedescribed for row aad high speed. Exhibit i-r il" varues for minimumlesign speeds as
Hlt".*"r
for traffic needs and rype' of terain; rerrain types are aiscusseJn Jer in chapters 2
Slght Distance
Minimum stopping sight- distance and passing sight distance should be as shown inExhibits 5-2 and 5-3. criteria,for measuring *igrr, Jir*.r, both vertical and horizontar, are asfollows: For sroppitrg, siebt disran€c; th" h;id;f; ! l,0so m trs ti r* ,1,, height of,.object is, 60o. mm [2 fd; tor passiag sight di'stance, ,t" r,.igh,
"r "u;..i iri,6o mm t3.5 ft].Chapter 3 provides a general ai..u.rion if rigfrt aistunc..
384
LocalRoads and (RumI Roads)
o
Stre4rs
Type of
tsrrain
Metrlc US Custorlrary
Design speed (km/h) for
specilied design volume (vefy'day)
Design speed (mph) lor
sFc#led desrgnlpqes (vevday)
50 2ffi 400 '1500 2000
under to to to to and
50 250 '100 1500 2000 over
50 250 ,4go'1500 2OOO
und€r to to. .:, to to and
50 25q @' 15ff) 2000 over
Level
Rolling
Mountainous
80
60
50
80
60
50
80
60
50
@
50
30
s0
50
30
50
30
30
30 30 40 50 50 50N 30 30 40 40 40
20 20 2g-,,'r 30 ]i, 30 30
Metrlc US Customary
Design
stopping
lnitial sight Rate of vertical
speed distance curvature, K (mPlo)
(km/h) (m) Crest Sas
Design
stopPing
lnitial sighl Rate of vartical
sp€€d distance curvature, Ka (ftPld
(mph) (tt) Crest Sao
2020 13
303526
405049
5065713
60 85 11 18
70 105 17 23
80 't30 26 30s0 160 39 38100 185 52 45
1580310
20 115 7 1z
25 1s5 12 26
30 n0 19 gz
35 2fi 29 49
40 305 44 64
45 360 6t 79
S0 425 84 96
SS 495 114 t1S
60 570 1S1 1s6
" Rate of vertical curvature, K, is th€ length of curvs per perceni algebraic dltferencE in the
intersecting grades (i.e., K = UA). (See Chapter 3 for dehils.)
E)rhibit 5-f. Minimum Desip Speeds for Local Rursl Rmds
Exhibit 5-2. Desip Controls for Stopping Sight Distance and for Crest and
Sag Vertical Curva
>-_-_
J85
-...E
i
'
CHAPTER 3
ELEMENTS OF DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
The alisment of a highway or steet produces a great impact on the environmenl the fabricof the community, and the highway user. The alignment is comprised of a variety of elementsjoined together to create a facility that serves ttr" timc in a safe and efficient rlanner, consistentwith the facility's intended .f ^*:o:* Each arigunent erement should comprement others toproduce a consistent, safb, and efficient design.
The design of highways and streets within panicular functional classes is aeated separ:atelyin later chapters' common to
-all
classes of highways and sree$ are several principal elements ofdesip' These include sight distance, ,,rpere[nution, havered way widening, grades, horizontaland vertical alignments, and- other elernents of geometric design. These arifrrn"ot elements are
il:::,rj*T,#r:chapt"',
and, as appropriate, inLe hter chaptl p"rt"iotoito ,p.cific highway
SIGHT DISTANCE
General Considerations
A driver's ability to see ahead is of the utmost irnportance in the safe and eff,rcient operationof a vehicle on a highway. For exarnple, on a railroad, trains are confined to a fixed path, yet ablock signal system and aained operators are needed for safe operation. on the other hand, thepath and speed of motor vehicles on highways and streets are subject to the confrol of driverswhose ability, naining, and experienceL qoit. varied. For safety on highways, the designershould provide sight distance of sufficient Iength that drivers can confol the operation of theirvehicles to avoid striking an unexpected object in the traveled way. certain two-rane highwaysshould also have suffrcient sight distance to enable drivers to occupy the opposing traf6c lane forpassing other vehicles without risk of a crash. Two-lane rural highways should generally providesuch passing sight distance at frequent intervals and for substaitial ponio* oitr,.ir length. Bycontrast' it is normally of little practical value to provide passing sighi distance on two-Iane urbanstreets or arterials' The proportion of a highway's length with sufficient sight distance to passanother vehicle and interval between p*riog opiortunities should be.oropuriut, with the designcriteria established in the subsequeni
"rr"pt*'p"n"ining ,o the functional classification of thespecific highway or street.
Four aspects of sight distance are discussed below: (1) the sight distances needed forstopping, which are appricable on all highways; (2) the sighr distances needed for the passing ofovertaken vehicles, applicable onry on t*o-i*" highways; (3) the sight distances needed fordecisions at complex iocations; and (4) the criteria for measuring these sight distances for use indesign' The design of alignment and profile to provide sight distances and that satisfy the
r09
applicable design criteria are described later in this chapter. The special conditions related to sight
airt*t.t at intersections are discussed in Chapter 9'
StoPPlng Sight Distance
Sightdistanceisthelengthoftheroldwayaheadthatisvisibletothedriver.Theavailable
sight distance on a roadway iodd be suffrciently long to enable a vehicle raveling at or near the
design speed to stop before reaching a stationary object in its path' Although greater lengths of
visible roadway are desirable, the sight distance at every point along a roadway should be at least
that needed for a below-average driver or vehicle to stop'
Stoppingsightdistanceisthesumoftwodistances:(1)tlredistancetaversedbythevehicle
fromtheinstanttheo,in",.ignt,anobjectnecessitatingastoptott'eiTtanlthebrakesare
applied; and (2) the disrance #A"a,o stop the vehicle from the insunt brake application begins'
These are referretl to as brake reaction distance and braking distance, respectively.
Brake Reaction Time
Brakereactiontimeistheintervalfromtheinstantthatthedriverrecognizestheexistenceof
an obstacle on the roadway ahead that necessitates braking to the instant that the driver actually
applies the brakes. under iertain conditions, such as ernergency situations denoted by flares or
flashinglights,driversu..o,opti*t,thesetasksalmostinstantly.Undermostothelconditions,the
driver must not only see the object but must also recognize it as a stationary or slowly moving
object against the backgrouna tr *re roadway and oti", objects, such as walls, fences, trees'
poles, or bridges. Such determinations take time' and thl amount of time needed varies
considerably with the distaoce to the object, the visual acuity of the clrivel, the
natural rapidity
withwhichthedriverreacts,theatmosphericvisibility,thetyPeand*reconditi3loftheroadway'
and nature of the obstacle. Vehicle speed and .oud*"y ett"i.onront -lr-obablv
also influencq
reaction time. Normally, a driver traveling at or near tire desiga speed is more alert than one
traveling at a lesser speed. A driver on an urban ,t ""t .oodoot o by innumerable potential
conflicts with parked vehicles, driveways, and cross streets is also likely to be more alert than the
samedriveronalimited.accessfacilitywheresuchconditionsshouldbealmostnonexistent.
The study ofreaction tirnes by Johansson and Rumar (l) refened.to in chapter 2 was based
on data from 321 drivers who expected to apply ,t.i.i*t"t"fhe rnedian reaction-time value for
these drivers was 0.66 s, with l0 percent using t.s s o, looger. These findings correlate with those
of eadier studies in which alerti drivers were also evaluated' Another study (2) found 0'64 s as
the average reaction time, while 5 percent or tn" ori*n n eded over I s' In a thid study (3)' the
values of brake reaction time ranged from 0.4 ," Li;.-h th. Johansson and Rumar study (l)'
when the event that required application of the brakes was unerpected, the drivers' resPonse
times were found to increase by approxirnately 1 , o, *o..; some reaction times were greztet than
1.5 s. This increase in reacrion tirne substantiat.a ".rfi., iutotatory and road tests in which the
conclusion was drawn that a driver who needed Oi r" O.l s of r"action tirne under alerted
conditions would need 1.5 s of reaction time under normal conditions'
110
v-
Eletnents of Design
Minimum brake reaction times for drivers could thus be at least 1.64 s and 0.64 s for alerted
drivers as well as I s for the unexpected evenL Because the studies discussed above used sirnple
prearranged sipals, they represent the least colrylex of roadway conditions. Even under these
iinple conditions, it was foun<l that sorrc drivers took over 3.5 s to respond. Because actual
conditions on the highway are generatly more conrplex than those of the studies' and because
there is wide variation in driver reaction times, it is evident that the criterion adopted for use
should be greater than 1.64 s. The brake reaction time used in design should be large enough to
include the reaction tinps needed by neatly all drivers undel most highway conditions' Both
recent research (4) and tbe studies documented in the literature (1, 2,3) show that a 2'5-s brake
reaction time for stopping sight situation$ encompasses the capabilities of most drivers, including
those of older drivers. Tlg recommendcd design criierion of 2.5 s fm trake reactioa tine exceeds
the 90th percentile of reaction time for all driven and has been used in the developurcnt of
Exhibit 3-1.
A:-b4rkp,re*tion'tilU of'?-$5,.r;,g-qgipqgq 4eqtsf-G.for:e€4ditimethd are me corylex
ttran 1!rg iimpte conditions used in iaboratory and road tests, but it is not adequate for the most
complex .ooditioo, encountered in actual driving. The need for greater reaction time in the most
complex conditious encountered on the roadway, such as those found at multiphase at-grade
intersections and at ramp terminals on tlnough roadways, can be found later in ttris chapter in the
section on "Decision Sight Distance."
Braking Dlstance
The approximate braking distance of a vehicle on a level roadway traveling at the design
speed of the roadway may be deternrined from the following equation:
fr
Metrlc US Customary
d.=0.039L
a
v2d=L075_. (&1)
a
where:
d=
V=
braking distance, r!;
design speed, km/h;
^doceleration rate, m/s'a
wh€re:
d
V
a
braking distance, ft:
design speod, mPh;
^deceleration rate, ws'
Studies documented in the literature (4) show that most drivers decelerate at a rate greater
than 4.5 n/s'? t14,8 ff/s2l when confronted with the need to stop for an unexpected object in the
roadway. Approxirnately 90 percent of all drivers decelerate at fates gleater than 3.4 ds2
tI1.2 ft/s'z1. iuch dereterations arc within the driver's capability to stay within his or her !* ql
rnaintain steering control during the braking naneuver on wet sulfaces' Therefore, 3'4 nls'
tll.2ftls'?l (a cJmfortable deceleration for most driven) is recommended as the deceleration
I
MSHTO-Geonetric Design of Highwavl au!fiets
q)
C)
6
o
bo
(A
u0
ta
(?)
x
t
ai
o
o
Eco
E
-coI€
,;
u?
6l
LoloIE
l(u
loloto
IEIEI(D
latotolcl(!
l-o
tElet6
IRtot;t.:<
IE
ldt1..lototz
EEERRHg$.$TEFB3
F*oro)F6r@Qeacaqtqp=rERH$*$H$Ng
(otot(o(oqqo?u?u?c?ol
FEsE:EERRg€8fi
TTDCDF)(oOrtefu?O?qq
hF;eFSpPHRftR*
gRRBSgSBBSSRP
co
dtoo
T'o6EIJ
(Eo
R6
a-q
Es
5gEbx.9Ett
.E,Et, ooo6.t
RtsEEEPEEFRRH
loNArroqaqu?qa?qo{
=seasptsEEHRH
(oC.,riNCrlN90?\0qc\q+ESSEER$iEpp
o,s)co@F-l!Qqu?u?aa
PRN;iSEEEEFEE
88e88R88F:FF
c
-9.Aoo
Ea
(E3ll6O
o
ozo
oc(tt
.!2
$t
=l
f,'61
El
CDc
JI16
l-
lE
112
thrcsltoq for determining stopping sight distance. Implicit in the choice of this decelerationthreshold is the assessment that most vehicle braking systems and the tire-pavement frictionIevels ofmost roadways are capable ofproviding a deceleration ofat least l.+ "vrtiJi.z tlr;i.The friction available on most wet pavement surfaces and the capabilities of most vehicle brakingsystefits can provide braking friction that exceeds this deceleration rate.
Design Values
The sum of the distance traversed during the brake reaction time and the distance to brake
the- vehicle to a stop is the stopping sight distance. The computed distances for wet pavements
and for various speeds at the assumed conditions are shown in Exhibit 3-1 and were developedfrom the following equation:
stopping sight distances exceeding those shown in Exhibit 3-l should be used as the basisfor design wherever practical. Use of longer stopping sight distances increases the margin ofsafety for all drivers and, in particurar, for those- who operate at or near the design speed. Toensure that new pavements will have initially, and will retain, friction coefficients cornparable tothe deceleration rates used to develop n*riuit g-t, pavement desigas should meet the criteriaestablished in the AASHTO Guidelinesfor Skid Resisiant pavemenbesign (S).
stopping righ6 4i6rmces,
d the hcilght of the object
Effect of Grade on Stopping
- When a highway is on a grade, the equation for braking distance should be modified asfollows:
gpv\
- ;i{s
:,::i; ,
,:
/X,:t:fwqLL,+
d = 0.278Vt+ O.$gL
a d =I.47Vt+ |.WSL' ($2 )a
l. = brake reaction time, 2.5 s;V = design speed, km/h;a = deceleration rate, m/s2
brake reaclion time,2.S s;
design speed, mph;
deceleration rate. fVsz
where:
t=
V=
a=
-
113
(:-)' c
\32.2)
AASIITO-4eometrtc Desi$ of Hithways anil Steets
rn this equation, G is the percent of "ry
*:*-1.?*:T;"Titr'*i""ffi"fft
E:;:l{:::""il: H11l;.1ffi'"':"ffi ii'ifg;;;;""' grades are shown in
Exhibit 3-2. rbese adjrrsted"ight di'onti values are t:*S"i:mi"**;S:i:"
rrfrt ii" ,.-"
"sign
speeds oid u""tt t"*tioo tioes used
On nearly all roacls ard sfteets' tbe grade is traversed by traffic in b"th ditttiT of travel'
but trre sight distance * i", iil *; tqt-"r:*1il*'fffil^f1,ff#"fi
',*l*i::x;*'m':I#;TH1;I:{i:":"Tf tl;tf;,Uffi rffi
;;;,t""t for grade' Thi: nrv explain whv d":ttn:-"r;.;"I*-o"ii.a-higlwavs with
*xJ:, ".s; ;-Ti;H, tr,tr-##:1':J#ffi ;'oud'""v" adjustments ror
grade maY be needed'
Varlation for Trucks
rherecommendedstoppingsightdistances-are-Tfff J,ff,|:ft.iln'fl|- il:*:"il:
*nriawli*i_a1:::nnffiL"mTJHf#;i"*i"e.1"!n"tf-.T:I""o''n"*
unis, need longer stoppng
is one ractor that tends;ffi;1ieoaiitioni ty"ti;A;J* yf TS
those ror
passenger cars. The *J ff;;r'lur"-io-r"" *il*T,i.uv-r."r"t-bevond lltical sieht
Lbstructions because of tbe higher nosi-tion -of ": :iff *'""-*-" sy3te-1onn'rns sieht
distances for tnrcks *a p**rfi, .*r, therefore, are not generally used in highway desrgn'
There is one situation in which "u"'y !{9ft^*uld be rnade to'Provi&- stopping sight
distancesgreaterthan*,iil"',.i;;,pqy-.ry;grl;ffiif*Hll':i*ii"SrtrH
:l*xrr*;#;$:'"[:'"H$l*#]f *'1fg""m*$**r;gm:'"*;
i;t**J:nfm:ru:U5"rlj'iff;;aiaquickertorecosrizepotentiar
risks, it is desirable *uJJ;;;;:H t; n'""* it"nn.i,igliiiraittuot" that exceeds the
values in Exhibits 3-1 or 3-2'
?rs,?rr'.<i
I t.t
\
Metrlc US Gustomary
spe6d -Downgrades
UPgrades--.i*,nt --*t *a qoa ?o/" e/" 9oh
Desion StoPping slgnl q|slance (n,
lpeio oov,,ngrades = UPqrgges--.
knehlW
?o202020 19 18 18
30 32 35 35 31 30 29
4050505345M4350 66 70 74 61 s9 58
60 87 92 97 80 T7 75
70 110 116 ',t24 100 97 93
80 136 1M 154 123 118 1',t4
90 164 174 187 148 141 136'foo 194 207 ng 174 167 160
i rro zz7 249 262 2og 194 186
i rzo 269 za1 go4 2u 223 214
I rso 302 g2o 350 267 2Y 243
ffi--ez- e5 75 74 73
|20 116 120 126 109 107 104 |
25 158 165 173 147 143 140
30 205 215 227 200 184 179
35 257 271 287 237 229 22'
40 315 3:t3 , ggt 289 278 2@
45 378 400 427 u4 331 320
50 M6 474 fi7 lo5 388 375
55 520 553 593 469 450 433
60 598 638 686 538 515 495
I es 082 7zs 785 612 584 s6l
i 70 Tl1 825 891 690 658 63'l
I zs Boo 927 loog Ttz 736 704
I ao 905 loss 114---ffi9 w 782-
er(f,8
Exhtbit}2. Stopptng Sigbt Distance on Grades
Decision Sight Distance
stopping sigbt distances are usually sufficient to allow reasonably cosrpetent and alert
drivefs to corne to a hunied stop under ordinary circuustances. However, these dis&nces are
often inadequate when drivers rnott *ut" cornplex or instantaneous decisions, when information
is difficult to perceive or when unexpected or unusual maneuvels are required' Limiting sight
distances to those needed for stoppingmay preclude drivers from performing evasive Euneuvers'
which often involve less risk ani-ore-otter*ise preferable to stoPPing' Even with an appropriate
complement of standard traffic conrol devices in accordance with the MUTCD (6)' stopping
sight distances may not provide sufficient visibility distances for drivers to corroborate advance
*-u*iog and to pcrforrthe appropriate ltraoeuvers. ft is evident that there arc numy locations
where it would be prudent to irovide longer sight distances' In these circumstances' decision
sight distance provides the greater visibility distance that drivers need.
Derision sight distance is the distance needed for a driver to detect an unexpected or
otherwise dfficult-to-perceive inforrration sourc€ or condition in a roadway environment that
may b€ visually cluttered, te*ognzn the condition or its potential th€at, select an appropriate
speed and path, and initiate aid complete the maneuver safely and efficiently (7)' Because
decision sight aistance offers drivers uOaitioout rnargin for error and affords them sufficient
length to ,oi*"o.ro, their vehicles at the sanrc or reduced speed, rather than to just stop, its values
are substantially greatelthatr stopping sight distance'
Drivers need decision sight distances whenever there is a likelihood for error in either
information reception, decision-mating, or control actions (8). Exarnples of critical locations
where these kinds of enors are likely ,o o".*, and where it is desirable to provide decision sight
distance include interchange and intersection locations where unusual or unexpected nraneuverE
are require4 changes in crlss section such as toll plazas and lane drops, and areas of co:rcentrated
115
From:
To:
Date:
Sublect:
ryi
Bill Gibson
Tom Kassmel
06/19/2006 3:'16:51 PM
Fwd: LSL NORTH - landscape plan
Torn Kassmel -
From:
To:
Date:
Subiect:
"Mark Luna" <mluna@peakland.nef>
<BGibson@vailgov.com>,'Tom Kassrnel" <TKassmel@vaiQor.com>
06/20/2006 1 1:25:13 AM
LS North - 4' Pan Justification
Bill and Tom,
Attached is the Memo justirying the installation of a 4' pan with the
calculations. Please call or email that you accept and approve the 4'
pan. lf there are any issues with this please let me know.
Thank you,
Mark
L. Mark Luna, P.E.
Peak Land Consultants, Inc.
1000 Lions Ridge Loop
Vail, Co 81657
Ph.- 970476-86,44
Fax - 970-476-8616
Email: luna@peakland.net
"Ghip MelicK' <Chip@melick.com>GC:
From:
To:
Date:
Subiect:
BillGibson
Tom Kassmel
06t2112006 7:48:09 AM
Fwd: l-ion Square Lodge - North - 1 of 3
From:
To:
Date:
Subiect:
"Chip MelicK' <Chip@melick.com>
"Bill Gibson - TOV' <bgibson@vailgov.com>
08t21120C67:45''22 AM
Lion Squaie Lodge - North - 1 of 3
Bill: Attached is a lefter with accompanying drawings of the proposed
signalling for the parking ramps, as previously discussed. Please
contact me with any questions or comments. Thanks
Chip Melick
MELICK ASSOCIATES. INC.
355 South Teller Street, Suite 370
Lakewood, Colorado 80226
303-534-1930 (office)
303-534-1931 (fax)
303-898-8766 (cell)
CC: "Bill Anderson - Lion Square Lodge" <banderson@lionsquare.com>, "David Viele'
<david@vieleconshuction.com>, "Hank Krause - attachment emai['<peakwest@ixpres.com>, "Shelly
Mello - Viele" <shelly@vieleconstruction.com>
From:
To:
Date:
SubJect:
BillGibson
Tom KaEsmel
06fiXn00a 7:48:21AM
Fwd: Lion Square Lodge Norlh - 3 of 3
irograggryrglj]g19sgeFLo9qeNgIlug3 __ _- rec91
|
From: "Chip Melick" <Chip@melick.com>
To: "Bill Gibson - TOV' <bgibson@vailgov.com>
Date: 06121120067:47'.25 AMSubject Lion Square Lodge North - 3 of 3
Bill: Attached is a letter with accompanying drawings of the proposed
signalling for the parking ramps, as previously discussed. Please
contact me with any questions or comments. Thanks
Chip Melick
MELICK ASSOCIATES, INC.
355 South Teller Street. Suite 370
Lakewood, Colorado 80226
303-534-1930 (office)
303-534-1931 (fax)
303-898-8766 (cell)
GC: "Bill Anderson - Lion Square Lodge" <banderson@lionsquare.com>, "David Viele'
<david@vieleconstruction.com>, "Hank Krause - attachment email" <peakwest@ixpres.com>, "Shelly
Mello - Viele" <shelly@vieleconstruction.com>
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
BillGibson
Tom l€ssmel
06,121n0O0 7:48:30 AM
Fwd; Lion Square Lodge North - 2 of 3
Tom Kassmel - Lion
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
"Ghip Melick" <Chip@melick.com>
"Bill Gibson - TOV' <bgibson@vailgov.com>
06t 21 t2006 7'.4T.25 AM
Lion Square Lodge North - 2 of 3
Bill: Attached is a lefter with accompanying drawings of the proposed
signalling for the parking ramps, as previously discussed. Please
contact me with any questions or comments. Thanks
Chip Melick
MELICK ASSOCIATES, INC.
355 South Teller Street. Suite 370
Lakewood, Colorado 80226
303-534-1930 (office)
303-534-1931 (fax)
303-898-8766 (cell)
CC: "Bill Anderson - Lion Sguare Lodge" <banderson@lionsquare.com>, "David Viele"
<david@vieleconstruction.com>, "Hank Krause - attachment email" <peahrest@ixpres.com>, "Shelly
Mello - Viele' <shelly@vieleconstruction.com>
Tom Kassmel - RE:
From:
To:
"Shelly Mello" <shelly@vieleconstruction.com>
"Leonard Sandoval" <LSandoval@vailgov.mm>, "Bill Gibson"
<BGibson@vailgov.com>, "Charlie Davis" <CDavis@vailgov.com>, "Mike McGee"
<MMcGee@vailgov.com>,'Tom Kassmel" <TKassmel@vailgov.com>
Date:
Subject:
09/06/2006 12:12:18 PM
RE: Lionsquare Lodge North Project
I think that we can cancel this meeting because we are delayed to 2008
due to the lawsuit filed last week.
Thanks for your help.
Shelly Mello
--Original Message--
From: Leonard Sandoval [mailto: LSandoval@vailgov.com]
Sent Wednesday, September 06, 2006 7:41 AM
To: Bill Gibson; Charlie Dayis; Mike Mccee; Tom Kassmel
Cc: Chris Gunion; Shelly Mello
Subject: Re: Lionsquare Lodge North Project
Charlie,
I will not be able to attend, However I will see if Tom Kassmel is
available.
Tom, Can you make this meeting?
IS
>>> Charlie Davis 08/30/200€i 4:06 PM >>>
Good Afternoon,
I have been contacted by the PM for this poject requesting a meeting
regarding:
Staging
Construction Phasing
Occupancy of units while the building is under construction.
I have tentatively set this meeting for Friday September 8th at 9AM in
our office.
Can you all attend at this time??
Let me know.
Charlie Davis
Chief Building Official
Town of Vail
"Chris Gunion" <CGunion@vailgov.com>CC:
From:
To:
Date;
Subject:
Bill Gibson
Tom Kassmel
06/1212006 7:21:14 Nl
Fwd: Lion S4tare Lodge-Trafic Memo
From:
To:
Date:
Subiect:
"Chip MelicK' <Chip@melick.com>
"Bill Gibson - TOV' <bgibson@vailgov.com>
06/112006 2:57:'11 PM
Lion Square Lodge - Trafic Memo
Bill: Attached is fte PBS&J Traffc Memo if you do not have it.
Thanks.
Chip Melick
MELICK ASSOCIATES, INC.
355 South Teller Steet, Suite 370
Lakewood, Colorado 80226
303-534-1930 (offce)
303-534-1931 (fax)
303-898-8766 (cell)
Tom Kassmel -
From:
To:
Date:
Sublect:
thanks
Bill Gibson
Tom lGssmel
CFI1121200A 4:02:58 PM
Re: LSL N
>>> Tom Kassmel O6nA200g 3:59:07 PM >>>
Commenls
Thomas lGssmel, P.E.
Town Engineer
Town of Vail
Public Works Department'
1309 Elkhom Di.
Vail, CO 81657
(970) 479-223s
From:
To:
Date:
Subioct:
Bill Gibson
Tom Kassmel
00/16/2006 8:01:15 AM
Fwd: F1/\t Lion Square Lodge - North - Traffic St'tdy
Tom Kassmel - FW: Lion
From:
To:
Date:
Subiect:
"Chip MelicK' <Ghip@melick.com>
"Bill Gibson - TOV' <bgibson@vailgov.com>
06/15/2006 4:21;33 PM
FW Lion Square Lodge - North - Traffic Study
Bill: Per your request, atbched is the revised traffic report citing
the speciiic number of units being added to the North project. Also' . . .
tne r&iseO draurings in response to your comments are being overnighted
to you so you will receive them tomorrow. Once I have received the
re'iiseo tairdscape plan and the PBS&J report in response to sight line
issues I will fonvard it to you. Thanks
Chip Melick
MELICK ASSOCIATES, INC.
355 South Teller Street, Suite 370
Lakewood. Colorado 80226
303-534-1930 (offce)
303-534-1931 (fax)
303-898-8766 (cell)
CC: "Bill Anderson - Lion Square Lodge" <banderson@lionsquare.-c9m>, "David Viele".
<david@vieleconstruction.com>, "Hank Krause - attachment email" <peakwest@ixpres'mm>, "Shelly
Mello - Viele' <shelly@vieleconstruction'com>
F om:
To:
Date;
Subieet:
ti
Bill Gibson
Tom Kassmel
0W1912006 3:46:51 PM
Fwd: LSL NORTH - landscape Plan
Frpm:
To:
Date:
Subieet:
"Chip MelicK' <Chip@melick.com>
"Bill Gibson - TOV' <bgibson@vailgov.com>
O6/19t2006 3:34:41 PM
LSL NORTH - landscaPe Plan
Bill: Attrabhed is the revised landscape plan as requested. I am having
houble getting this to plot but hopetully it will go out either today
or tomonow. Thanks
Chip Melick
MELICK ASSOCIATES, INC.
355 South Teller Steet, Suite 370
Lakewood, Colorado 80226
303-534-1930 (office)
303-534-1931 (fax)
303-898-8766 (cell)
GC: "Bill Anderson - Lion square Lodge" <banderson@lionsquarE.com>, "David Viele"
iOaviO@vieleconstruction.com>, "Hank (rause - attrachment email'<peakwest@ixpres'com>, "Shelly
Mello - Viele" <shelly@vieleconstruction.com
From: "Chris coopel,'<Chris@melick.com>
To: <bgibson@vaipov.com>
Date: C/,t2512006 9:28:09 AM
Subiect LSL - North Building
Bill, attrached is the s19n off from Xcel Energy on the utilities
verification fonn. I believe that this was already sent to you March.
20th but I wanted to make sure you had a copy in case it had not been
sent already.
Thanks.
Chris Cooper
Melick Associates, Inc
355 South Teller Street Suite 370
Lakerruood, Golondo 80226
Tel 303.534.1930
Fax 303.534.1931
From:
To:
Date:
Subiect:
"Mark Luna" <mluna@peakland. nef>
<TKassrnel@vailgov.com>
O4l271200610:08:08 AM
Lions Square North - Sight Distiance
Tom,
Have you had a chance to look at the sight distance issue at Lions
Squ"rl ruortnZ They are asking to have updated plans from us by next
VfLOnesOaV and I w6uld like to'include the finished driveway design if
you accepf it. You can reach me at the office today and I will be out
6t tne om'ce tomorrow, you can reach me on my cell tomorro\il if you need
to discuss 970-389'5750.
Thanks
Mark
L. Mark Luna, P.E.
Peak Land Consultants, Inc.
1000 Lions Ridge LooP
Vail, Co 81657
Ph.- 970476-8644
Fax - 970-476-8616
Email: luna@Peakland.net
cc:"Romeo Baylosis' <Romeo@peakland'net>
From: "Mark Luna" <mluna@peakland.netr
To: <TlGssmel@vailgov.com>
Date: 05/08/2006 8:54:48 AM
Subject LS North
Tom, M/ould the proposecl detection system icr LS North Driveway have to
go through DRB?
Mark
L. Mark Luna, P.E.
Peak Land Consultiants, Inc.
1000 Lions Ridge LooP
Vail. Go 81657
Ph.- 970476S644
Fax - 970-,47&8616
Email: luna@peakland.net
Tom Kassmel - RE: LS North
From:
To:
Date:
Subjeet:
"Mark Luna" <mluna@peakland.net>
"Tom Kassmel" <TKassmel@vailgov.com>
05/08/2006 1 1:09:45 AM
RE: LS North
Tom, Could you comment on that once you receive our proposal. I don't
think the architect realizes this. Thanks
L. Mark Luna, P.E.
Peak Land Consultants, Inc.
1000 Lions Ridge Loop
Vail, Co 81657
Ph.- 970-.476-8644
Fax - 970476-8616
Email: luna@peakland.net
--Original Message---
From: iom Kassmel [mailto:TKassmel@vailgov.com]
Sent Monday, May 08, 2006 10:59 AM
To: Mark Luna
Subject: Re: LS North
lf it is seen from the outside, Yes.
Thomas Kassmel, P.E.
Town Engineer
Town of Vail
Public Works Department
1309 Elkhorn Dr.
Vail, CO E1657
1970) 479-2235
>>> "Mark Luna" <mluna@peakland.nef> 05/08/2006 E:54:05 AM >>>
Tom, Would the proposed detection system for LS North Driveway have
to
go through DRB?
Mark
L. Mark Luna, P.E.
Peak Land.Consultants, lnc.
1000,Lions Ridge LooP
Vail. Co 81657
Ph.- 970-476-8644
Fax - 970-476-8616
Email: luna@peakland.net
From:
To:
Data:
Sublect:
Hi Tom,
Mark asked me to send you the attrached PDF'
Thanks,
Grant
Grant Anderson, P.E.
Peak Land Cqnsultants
Oflice: 970-.47&8644
Fax 970.476€616
1000 Lion's Ridge LooP
Vail, CO 81657
<<1257.1 - Sight distance 2.Pdf,>
"Grant Anderson'r <Grant@peakland.nef>
<tkassmel@vailgov.com>'
05/09/2006 4:02:45 PM
Sight Distance Memo Attached
"Mark Luna' <mluna@peakland.net>GG:
From: "Mark Luna" <mluna@peakland.nef>
To: 'Tom Kassmel" <TKassmel@vai[w.com>
Date: OSI2?/Z0CF10:45:25AMSubjeck LS north sight disbnce
Tom, I can not remember if we spoke about our detection system after we
had submitted the letter. How do you think we should proceed at this
point? Do you want to comment on the lefter, have you shopped it around
at all?
L. Mark Luna, P.E.
Peak Land Consultants, Inc,
1000 Lions Ridge Loop
Vail, Co 81657
Ph.- 970-476-8&t4
Fax - 970.476€616
Ernail: luna@peakland.net
Thanks
Mark
Torn Kassmel - LS North
From:
To:
Date:
SubJect:
"Mak Luna" <mluna@peakland.nef>
"Tom Kassmel' <TKassmel@vailgov,com>
05122f200812:01:40 PM
LS North
Tom, Could you send a memo stating that the initial proposal seems like
an option for the sight distance issue, and you would request a more
detailed plan. Also mention the possibility of having b goto DRB
because the poles/signs will be seen fiom the roadway, orwhatever
criteria you mentioned. Chip was hoping to have something by the PEC
meeting this afremoon if possible.
Mark
L. Mark Luna, P.E.
Peak Land Consultants, Inc.
1000 Lions Ridge Loop
Vail, Co 81657
Ph.- 970.47S,8644
Fax - 970-476-8616
Email: luna@peakland.net
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Mark,
\Nith regards to your memo dated May 8th, 2006 regarding sight disbnce for the redevelopment of the
Lions Square Lodge North project the Town will require at a minimum that either;
1. lntersection sight distange per AASHTO is acheived OR
2. That Stopping sight disbnce per MSHTO is acheived in addtion to a performance altemative (i.e.
green lighVred light and appropriate signage and warnings) that acheives the adequate intersection sight
distance. Trafnc on Lionshead Place shall remain the thru movement and shall not be stopped by the
perfonnance altemative.
The above solutions shall be engineered and stramped by a colorado professional engineer.
Please submitt the proposed solution for additional comment.
Thank you.
Thomas Kassmel, P.E.
Town Engineer
Town of Vail
Public Works Department
1309 Elkhom Dr.
Vail, CO 81657
(9701479-2235
GC:Bill Gibson
Tom Kassmel
luna@peakland.net
05123/2006 9:45:07 AM
Lions Square Lodge North
From:
To:
. Date:
SubJect:
Bill Gibson
Tom lGssrnel
Ml2qZA0610:34:59 AM
Fwd: LSL -l'l,orth Building
i Tom Kassmel - LSL -North
From: "Chris coope/'<Chris@melick.com>To: <bgibson@vailgov.com>
Dare: M121120066"41:36 PMSubrect LSL -North Building
Email 2 of 3 for L'ron Square Lodge North responses. .
Chris Cooper
Melick Associates, Inc
355 South Teller Street, Suite 370
Lakewood, Colorado 80226
Te|303.534.1930
Fax 303.534.1931
"Chip MelicK' <Chip@melick.com>CC:
Frpm:
To:
Date:
Sublect:
BillGibson
Tom Kasqnel
A4/24120ffi 10:35:124M
Fwd: LSL - Noilh Building
Tom Kassmel - LSL - North
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
"Chris coope/' <Chris@melick.com>
<bgibson@vailgov.com>
0412112006 6:40:14 PM
LSL - North Building
Bill, attached is a response letter to the planning and public works
comments dated April 13,2006. We have also included revised drawings and
documents that reflect changes made in response to those comments. Hard
copies of these drawings will arrive via UPS Monday to your attention.
Peak Land Consultants will hand deliver their revised drawings to your
office Monday morning as well. I will be sending three emails due to
attachment size. Please let us know if you have any questions or need
anything additional at this time.
Thanks.
Chris Coooer
Melick Associates. Inc
355 South Teller Street. Suite 370
Lakewood, Colorado 80226
Te|303.534.1930
Fax 303.534.1931
CC:"Chip MelicK' <Chip@melick.com>
From:
To:
Date:
Sublect:
BillGibson
Tom Kassrnel
0Fl|242:0A810:35:43 AM
LSN sit€ plan
paper copy revisions are in the routing box
.From:
To:
DaSe:
Sublect:
Bill Gibson
Tom l(asBmel
04/26/2006 8:57:59 AM
Fwd: LSL - North Building
r"m_Gssm"lllio1:sqggp-t-9-!991tr{8f, lrys-**-----
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
<<Lion Square Lodge Final.pdF> Attrached -are.the
results of a traffc
irp"Ji"n}v"il ioi t-ne lions'square Lodge North. project located along
in,i ""rt sidL of Lionshead ptacb in Lionshead Village, Vail, Coloraclo.
ii ;;il" anv questions regarding this analysis' please feel free to
contact Curtis Rowe at (303) 228-2304'
Thank you,
Elizabeth
Elizabeth Goodremont
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc'
Suite 1050
950 Seventeenth Street
Denver, Colorado 80202
Ph: (303) 228-2300 Fax (303) 446€678
elizabeth. goodremont@kimley-horn com
<elizabeth. goodremont@kimley-horn' com>
.Cilip<,ir"i"f comr, .ilassmil@vailgov.com>, <bgibson@vailgov.com>
0212112006 8:22:54 AM
Lion Square Lodge Traffic AnalYsis
r Tom Kassmel - Lion
February 21, 2006
Town of Vail Public Works/Transpo*ation
1309 Elkhorn Drive
Vail, Colorado 81557
AtEu Thomas E. Kassmel
Re: Lion Square Lodge North
Lionshead Village, Vail, Colorado
Dear Mr. Kassmet
This letter has bem prepared to docunent the results of a baffic impact
analysis of future trallic conditions associated trith the proposed expansion
of the Lion Square lodge North. The Uon Square Lodge North is'Iocated
along the east side of Lioruhead Place in Lionshead Village in Vail,
Colorado. The expansion of the exi6ting site is anticipated to include up to
12 new condominium/townhome units and 550 square feet oI additional
retail use. The vicinity map iUustrating the proiect location is shown in
Figue 1, attached.
The purpose of this letter is to identidy trip genetation characteristics to
deterrnine potential Faffic related inrpacts on the local street oysteEl" and to
develop mitigation rneazures as may be neceslrary as a result of Lion Square
Lodge North Condominiumsproiect impacb. Thie study hac bem prepared
in accordance with Town of Vail standa;ds and indudes Level of Service
(lOS) analysis for study area intersectioru. This study specifically includea
evaluation of the following key intetrsectioru that will provide traffic access
to the project from the South Frontage Road:
South Frontage Road and West Lionshead Circle (east portal)
South Frontage Road and West Lionehead Circle $vest portal)
The project is currently proposed to include development of up to 13
condominiumr/ townhome units and 650 square leet of retail use on the site
of the existing Lion Square Lodge. A conceptual site plan is attached.
For analysis purpos€s, it is assumed that the Lion Square Lodge North
project will be complete around year 2007, and was therefore analyzed with
I
TrL SS 22E 2U'
FAX m 14 &7t
I
s& 1(E0
S50 Sqr.rbnh S&rt
od|d,C.tdw
;'r_g9 fg:!gg:_!iot _sgg?-!o! g e ril*
this horizon. The arralysis of a long-term 2025 horizon is also included
within this shrdy, as required by the Colorado Departnent ofTtaruportation
(cDor).
Regional access !o the Uon Square Lodge North is provided by I-70.
Primary access will be gained ftom the South Frontage Road. Diiect access
to the project will be provided by two driveways al,ong Lionshead place.
South Frontage Road ie a CDOT roadway (classilication F-R) with one tsavel
lane in eadr dbectiorr It runs along the south side of Inbersbte 70,
Primarily, the frontage road is located north of Lionshead Village. The
roadway hae a speed limit of 25 miles per hour through the proii* area.
West Lionshead Circle eerves as a collector roadway with one lane of travel
in each direction Both eaet and west portal intersectionr of W6t Liorchead
Circle with the South Frontage Road are 6top controlled on the minor sEeet
approach with free flow movements along the Frontage Road, Existing lane
configurationsand traffic control at the key intersectidne studied ate stlown
in.Figure 2, attached.
To accuately detemine ttre inpact of the Lion Square Lodge North project,
traffic volumes efpected at the tine of proiect btrildout were neceesary. The
NA7 and ?fi2Sbe,ckground pre development tsa.ffic volumes were obtained
ftom the RiE€arlton Residences at Vail Traffic Lnpact Study completed in
October 2005 by Kimley Hom and Associates, Inc. The total trafficvolurrns
ftom the Ritz{arlton Reoidences at Vail study were obtained from the Vail
Reso-rts'- Lionshead Redevelopoent Master Plan Traffic Impact Study,
Kinley-Hom and Associates, Septer$er 16, 2003. These vohurpc wete used
as -the background tralfic volumeo for this study. Background haffic
volumes for 2fi)7 are shown in Figure 3. Background traffic volumee for
2025 are shown in Figure 4.
Site-generated baffic estisEies are detemined through a procees known as
trip generation, Rates are applied to proposed land uees to estinate traffic
generated by developments during a specific time interval The
acknowledged source for trip generation rates is the curent edition of the
Tnp-Generatioa Reporlt published by Institute of Traruportation Engineers
(lTE). ITE has eefablished trip rates in nationwide studies of similir land
gec- The It! Trip Generation Report average trip rate6 that apply to
Residential Condominium/Townlouse (230) were used to estimate tiffic
generated by the condominiuns. Trip generation for the retail space was
determined using ITE Land Use Code: Specialty Retail (814) for the pM peak
hour. ITE does not provide trip generation rates for this land use for theAM
I Institute of Transportation Engineers,
Seventh Edition, Washington DC, 20{)3.
ML Thomes E. KassneL Febnv! 21,2006, Pa$ 2
Trip &rcrntiott: Atr lnfonntion Rryort,
Tom Kassmel - Lion
Z.-Jla Kimlev-Horn\JIL-I andAssoctates. tnc.
Mr- Tlonus E. Kassmcl, Ffrtuary 2I.2006, page 3
u Trarsportation Research Board, Higlnuqr Cqfldtv Mrrrrrrnl, Special R€port 209,
washington DC, 2000.
Distribution of site traffic on the street system was based on ttre distibutixr
developed and approved-previously within the Lionshead Village Traffic
Inp_act Studies. ,Figure 5 illusbates the expected project trip distriiution for
the Lio_ n Squarc Lodge North. Traffic assigrunentwa; obtained by applyirgthe distributiors to the estimated traffic generation. noi,eci -t"ift
assignment for the Lion Square Lodge North prolect is shown in Figure f.
Lion Square l,odge Nortl traffic volumes were added to the backfroundvolulnes to represent estilnated haffic conditions for full project
development. Total tralfic volumes are illustsated in Figure Z for thL 2bOZ
horizon and Figure 8 for the 2025 horizon.
Kimley-Hornls analyses of haffic operaHons in the site vicinity were
c-on.lucted to detersdne potential capacity deficimcies in the ZnT ar.d202'
development horizons. 'Ihe background (pre developmmt) traffic volumes
have been studied p,teviously as the total (background ptus project) taffic
volumes in the Ritz-Carlton Residences at Vail hkfic im;ct studv, i?esule
from this,analysis are shown for informational purposes. These horizons
were shrdied with the addition of Lion Square Lod[e North proiect haffic,
The mknowledged source for determining overall=capacity is the current
edition of the Hrgkruy Ccpacity Mtnuap.
?3k -hoq: Therefore, moming trip generation lates provided in the
Lionshead Redevelopment Masterplanfor Specialty Retaii were used.
Table 1 sur:rnarizes the estimated balfic generation for the Lion Square
Lodge North. The bip generation wo*sheets are attached. Tlrese
calculations illustsate the rates used and directional distribution of bips.
Table 1 - The Lion Square lodge North projert Traffic Generation
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hous
ln Out Total In Out Total
Condosriniun
(12 unib)1 4 2 6
Retail
(650 square feet)0 0 0 1 1 2
Total 1 5 I
ZIITI Kimley'Hom\lI7 \ and Associal€s. lnc.
Mt. Thomas E. K]lssnel, Fehruary 21,2006, Pagt 4
Capacity analysis resulb ate listed in terms of level of service (LOS). LOS is
a qualitative term derribing operating conditions a driver will experience
while uaveling on a particular sbeet during a particular time interval. It
ranges from A (very little delay) to F (long delays and congestion). The
Town of Vail recommends LOS C or better as the measure of desirable level
of sewice and LOS D as acceptable level of service during the peak hours.
The intersection operations at key intersections were analyzed using the
unsignalized analysis methodologies found in tlre Higtnoay Cqacity l\tfuual,
(HCA4) using the Highway Capacity Software (HCS 2(M)) pmgram, Release
4.1. The following provides a discussion of the level of service results on an
intersection-by-intersectionbasis (calculationsattached), Level of service ie
shown for both of the study intersections using the existing intersection
geornetry a8 well a6 with improrred geonretry. It is important to note that the
critical gaps were modified to demorEbate the needed gap acceptance
differences created by the installaHon of left hrm acceletation lanes at the
subject intersections. The critical gap for left tums exiting from the side
streeb was natched with those for the left tums entering frorr the ftontage
road. These gaps would be similar since these both cross the eastbound
traffic. This was done to utost accurately model inbrsections with
acceleration lanes.
South Frontage Road and Weat Llonshead Circle (west portal)
The West Liorahead Circle (west portal) approach to this unsignalized
intersection of the South Frontage Road is expected to operate at
rmacceptable level oI service in the sholt term 2007 future prior to the
addition of Lions Square Lodge Northproject haffic. ThiE is due to the
expected traffic volume increases anticipated by the Lionshead
Redevelopment proiects. The results indicate that the northbound left
hrming vehicles may find it dilficultto enter the South Frontage Road due to
the high through volumes along the frontage road. An improvementto the
intersection that is needed based on the Lionshead Redevelopment projects
and prior to the addition of Lions Square Lodge North project traffic
includes the construction of a left tum lane along the South Fmntage Road.
Construction of this lelt turn lane along the frontage road is anticipated to
improve operations of the minor str&t uppt*.[ by atlowing left tum
vehicles to enter the Frontage Road more easily by having a designated lane
or refuge area to tum into before merging with through westbound traJfic.
ln addition, per the State Aceess Code, both eagtbound right h:rn and
westbourd left turn lanes from the South Frontage Road atr warranted at
this intersection. With these improvements, all movements at this
intersection are expected to operate acceptably in the near term and long
term horizons. with or without the addition of project traffic. If adequate
right-of-way is available, the Town of Vail may wish to consider the
designation of separabe left and right tum lanes from the minor street
ZII7I Kimlev-flom\JIZ--! andAssociares.tnc.
Mr. Thomes E. Kassrnel, Febn/dry 27, 2005, Ptge 5
approach to this intersection. This improvementis notneeded based upon
level of service analysis, but would improve the overall operatioru ofthe
intersec tion. Table 2 provides the level of seryice results at this intersection.
Table 2 - South Frontage Road/ West Liorshead Circle (west portal) LOS Results
South Frontage Road and Weat Lionshead Circle (eaat po al)
A westbound left tum lane was found to be required at this in@section in
2007 prior to project developmen t based upon S-tate Highway Access Code
tequirements for category F-R roadways. With this improvement thig
unsignalized east portal intersection of the South Fronfage Road with West
Uonshead Circle is anticipated to continue to operate with an acceptable
level of service in 2007 with and without the additim oI project traffL
Prior to the addition of project haffic in 2025, separate northbound left and
right turn lanes along West bonshead Circle areanticipated to be needed to
maintain acceptable level of service. ln addition, a right.tum deceleration
Iane is anticipated to be waranted by 2025 based upon redwelopment of the
North Day tot as identified in the Lionshead RedevelopmentTia.ffic Impact
Study. Table 3 provides the level of service results at thjs intersection.
Scenrrlo
Without Proiect wllh Proieci
AM Peek Hour PM Perk Hour AM Pe.k Hol|r PM Peak Hour
D.Iay
G.C/ireh)LOS Delay
(s€qr!eh)[('S Delay
(6eq&eh)lI)s Detry
(!eq&ch)I.oS
a)Cr Shqt T.rm
Without lmprovcmentr
West}ound AwrAdr
Notthbc/'md. Avnoach
9.2
79.6
9.7
67.7 I
9.2
r95
A
c
9.1
4.6 FAXt Sholt Trtrn
With Improv!ment3
Weslbound Lcfl.
Northbqand Awredr
o,
15.0 E.O c
9.2
l5.l
9.1
25,7 D
2025 LonS Term
Wlthout Improvementg
l^,l*tbound ApVoadt
Northfuund Awtua.1
103
46,5
I
5?z3
B 103
45.5
B
E
70:/
534.,r
B
F
2025 L.ong Tertn
With Imprcvemcntt
W''lhound f.I
Northfuund, Awtoadt
10.3
lo.9
B
c
to.7 B
D
103
16.5
B 70.7
8.8
B
D
=n
KhlepHon
and Assodalos, Inc.
Mt. Tla nos E,
Based on the analysis presented in this repo4 Kimley-Hom believes the
Lion Square Lodge North project traffic will be successfully incorporated
without any additional improvements needed beyond what has previously
been identilied with the Lionshead Redevelopnmtproject. If you have ary
questioru relating to this analysis, please call meat (300) n&?ilL
Sincerelv,
KIMLEY,-HORN AND ASSOCIAIIS, INC./'t'n E"l
Curtis D. Rowe, P.E., PIOE
Associate
Tabh 3 - South FronFaF Road/WBt Lionshead Circle (east porht) LOS Resulb
Scen.do
Wilhout Proiect With hoiert
AM Peek Hour PM Pcak Hour AM Perk Hour FM Pc.k llour
Detey
(se{,/veh}LOS Dday
(rcfleh)tlrs Dehy
(seqtu€h)LOS Delay
(seq/veh)ros
2qt Shoit Term
F.xisting Rordway
Westbonnd, Apptuclt
Notthbound Avaroadl
8.9
JA ''c
8.9
34.6
A
D
8.9
n,3 c
6.9
35:7zfit Short Teryl
Witlr ImFovements
Wetbound I2Jl
Northbound Avptoach
8.9
77.7
A E.9
20.4
A
c
8.9
77.4
8.9
20.8
A
20{i Long Tenrl
Exisdng Ro.dway
Westbrnd Apprudr
Notthbo
'|'d
Awvacll
103 B
F
l1.r
5y|.7
I
F
103
143.rt
B
F
11.1
6?4,.1
B
F
2025 Lont Tcrtn
wlth Improvemer*r
lN.s,,dund 12ft
Notlhboutut I4l
Notthbound Richt
10.3
n.8
27.6
B
D
c
11.1
26.9
20
B
D
c
10.3
28.4
21.8
I
D
tti
26.8
77\
B
D
i Tom Kassmel - Lion
FIOFITH
ME Oe6ozo.lp
,y*
r:::]J
tt I Ilt *'
t.-:.1 -.!!r'-- $
,1
i"-:."-/i *"-tt 1lrrell"i
-\=---l
LION SQUARE LODGE NOHTH
SITE LOCATION FIGURE 1
K.i,'W,a{A ...r ffi4(.\ / "":';:.',,,'''r'.ii,^4.7^_i
Il l lsnley+hnt
IZ_l and Assoc'a16. Ino
4:,snv-^l".. .*L.
7'tnt*tt^," ' ., '; it$l
Lu'i /' t^;'{i5gi-
lrtg{r7r--
5;d&l'l;-*J
i-I).r'j
'J:*-"
,/ llil[::J
Qt*
O
@
EI
!E-ENg
Stdy A€r Xoy Inb.!.adoal
$p Cd{roLd Aff.E{h
Roadwiy Sp6€d t-Ht
LION SQUARE LODGE NORTH
EXISTING LANEAGE AND CONTROL FIGURE 2
=nro*,*
I yf,l!tg.--l r " '-l {-\_,/ L -
\ -.i l ir*
) ,.\,j4 II
", I
coiG$c
114i\-
11_"*t i
L " _ _-_.1
LEGEND
O Stity Anr t(6y htr.!..too
xx0q AM{P t P.* Hdr lr€rrc vdnr.
LION SOUARE LODGE NORTH
2OO7 BACKGHOUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGUFE 3
ffi,,'a1
/ ,.'\/ ''-"-J^.' i.' . '"t 'ffi
f /irr. it' t,.,-r-i**
i ! **i'",r- -
w, 4'P-Y \:l--.,*,,
' .J-
I
-.:--ffiorrr-o
I)r
7#
LE-8N9,
O S$dy t'ta Kry ltttldbn
)O(/iro ,{a(Ptf) Po* Ho|' Trdfic vditr€8
LION SQUAHE LODGE NORTH
2025 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 4
,*'6@.',.;;lt
, i 4,
!-.,', ,''' i:..--"{fog.-
ad-:.*.,
l\IOFITH
ils @.00
Ti-'-'"\) i**{T -,1
LEGEND
O shry &e. lby Inbn€.Jo|l
Xfi(D$) Enbtug (Erdim) rrip Dbitobn
LION SQUAHE LODGE NORTH
PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION
FIGURE 5
I[ ximteYttom
I7 I aod Assodales. Inc.
Tom Kassme_l - !i9n Sguare Lod99.FirclI
*@.,w
,'u^n*^,4./'\.,.,
.'. t'\ ': - li;&
Q$n
LEGEND
O SUdy aitt xsy InErd.l
xx(XX) A {PMl Ptsk Hdl''rnib VoiutE
LION SQUARE LODGE NORTH
PROJECT TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT
FIGUHE 6
<=n S'ff***
I'n*T''tl
ii
i:.,'t'd
i:ffif r;;":t
LEGEND
a sllrq Ar€! Ksy InbG€lc'Ion
xx(XX) Alr(PM) Ff.ak Ho|rTt|ffic Volurl€r
LION SQUARE LODGE NOHTH
2OO7 TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGUHE 7
tzllt! lftlsrHqn
\.1I7 I 3nd lssocjales. !x.
lrom-rissrn"r--ron9s FI
t, - ----- -**l- "' Fagq t5l
'r].-fra ltudeltlomNIf I andAssochtGlnc.
Prolea
Sublect
Deslgmd by
Checked by SheetNo. 1 of 1
TRIP GENERATION iIANUAL TECHNIQUES
ITE Trip Generatlon Menual 7th Edilion' Avetge Rate
L3nd Use Code - Residential Condominlunr'Townhouse (230)
lndependart Varlable - Dwelling Unns (x)
X= 12
T = Awrage Vehicb TrlP Ends
Peak Hour ot ACiacent Stt€st TEffla On. Hour BetYvoen 7 and I a'm' lDaoe 3681
e)dl,
O) = 0.44 (n
(T) = o.+l '12.O
Directionaf oltttibutioni 17'h enl 8il%
T = 5 Aver4e Vehicle TriP Elds
I etioting 4 exiting
Peak Hout of Adlacent Strcet Trafnc. One Hour Eetut€en '0 a4d 6 D'm' loac 3601
(r) = 0.s2 (x)
(T)=0.52' 12.0
Diredlonal Dlstributon: 67% ent. 33%
T = 6 Average Vehide Trh Ends
4 eriterim 2 exiting
G:Llon
ffimley+bm
and Asssisbs, lm.
Wect
Sub/ecf
/Vo.Des?ned 0y
Chef,fect W Slreel /Vo.
TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIO{JES
ITE Tdo Generation Manuat 7th Edition, Average Rate Equal'rons
Land Use Code - Spscialty Retail CenGt (81 4)
Indepsndent Variable - 1O0O Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Arsa (X)
x = 0.65
T = Avereoe Vehlcle TriP E]ds
AM Peak Hour of Adlacent Street Trafflc. lrates from Llonshead Mastomlanl
Average Weekday
entering (Ii.) = 0.11 00
odtirp CI*r) = 0.07 (X)
entering Oil=011 ' (0.7)
exitirE F*r) = 0.07' (0'7)
fi)= o
(Tn)= o enlering
(T"")= o exiting
Peak Hour of AdlacEnt Street Trafffc, One Hour Belureen 4 enlt e D'm' (Dase 13391
Avsrege Weekclay
fD=2.71 (n
Fl=2.71' (0.7)
Dir€dional Dlstdfu0on: 43% ant' 57%
T = 2 Average vehicle TtiP Erds
1 eritedng 1 ariting
o(t.
Peak Hour of Gensrtlor. Seturdav tDade 13361'
[n = 4.432 (x)
A=4.4s2t (0,7)
Directional Disltibution: 50% entedng, 50"6 exftim
T = 2 Average Vehlcle TdP Ends
1 enteritu 1 exrung
'paak hout ol get'F,r',al.l, ott Stttrdry Essqmsd to ba 10% ot MW
i Tom Kassmel Lodge 17i
TWO-WAY STOP C ONTROL SUMMARY
lsitE lnformation
-
Anafyst EAG
Agency/Co , KmleY-t1om
Date Pertomed 2/13/06
Anatysis Time Period Total AM
.. Frcntagaw Was, Lbngrcadfntersection Cir
Jurisdiclion Tov'n ot Vail
Analysis Year 2007
6,,t;o_cr Descfrtul,n Lion Souarc Lodge: no imorovemenls -
lstudY Poriod (hrs): 0.25
=Vehicle Volumes 'and
Malor Street I
Movemenl I
L T R L T R
/olume (vsh/h)0 441 181 25 416 0
Peak-hour fac{or, PHF 0.95 495 0.95 0.95 a95 0.95
Hourlv Flow Rate (veh/h)o 464 190 28 437 0
Proportion of heavy
vehicles, PHv 0 11
Median typ€Undil,ided
RT ChannBlized?o 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 0
:.tnflirrralion TR LT
Uostream Signal o 0
Mln.rr Streal Nodhbound Southbound
Movemenl I q 10 1t 12
L T R L T R
Vdumg (vehi h)a 0 23 0 v 0
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 o95 0.95 0.s5 0.95 0.95
HourlY Flow Rate (v€h/h)0 24 0 0 0
troportion ot heaw
,ehicles, PHv I 0 I 0 0 0
Percenl grEde (%)0 0
Flared approach N
Storage 0 0
RT channelized?
n
Lanes 0 o 0 0
onfiouration LR
""t,."1 ft"h"-O|l6ric Lendtlr- Level o enrlce
Approach I EB WB I Nortrbound Southbound
Movement 4 I I 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LT LR
Volume, v (vph)26 59
Capacity, cln (vph)892 305
vic ratio 0.03 0.19
Queue length (95%)0.09 0.70
Control Oelay (s/vsh)9.2 19.6
tos
Approach delay (s/v€h) | -19.6
Approach l.OS I .'--- -l c
Copyrishr O 2003 tlni\crir(y ol fhtidr' All ftilhls R6.rv!dH(t:'ol2orM
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
fnterseclion Ci
Jurisdi6lion Town ot vail
Anatysis Yed 2007
'Analyst EAG
Agensy/Co. KimlaY-tlom
Date Performed ?J13/Oo
Anafysis Tkne Period Tdal PM
Copyrigh C 2001 Unav.t ny of Fld&. Alt RilhB Rc:lAld
HCSl^tntt^
rTom
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst EAc
Agency/Co. Kimley-rlom
Dale Performed Zt13/06
Anafysis Time Poriod Tdal AM
fntersection F#:tase/w' West Lianshead
Jurisdictbn Town otvail
Anslysis Year 2007
Hcs?oooaB Coplngh O 1003 UniwRny ofFbndr ll Rithrs Rcscrwd
rTom Kassmet - Lion Square-t-ooge F^jGto
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
%
Anafyst EAGAgency/Co. Kimley-Hom
Date Perfomed 2/13/06
Anafysis Tlme Period Totat pM
lntersection Frcntage/W. West Lionshead
GllJurisdiction Town of Vail
i{nafysis Year 2007
lh Frontage Road
: Easf-Wesf
with
Easuwesl strs€t so{i
htersection Oi€ntation
North/South Street W. Wost Lbnshead Ctrcleffi
Maior Strret
Movemenl
__.-:.:::-rme (veh/h)454 124 44 612 UPeak-hour faotor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 495 0.95 0.95l-lourly Flor/ Rat€ (veh/h)0 477 1n 48 a4 0Proporlion of haaey
vehicles, PHV 0 11
l\r8dian type Two Way Lt )fl, Tum Lane
RT Channellzed?0 0
anes I 0UonlBurationTR.
Upstr€am Sional n o
Mhor Strsol , Northbound Southbound
,vruvemqnt 7 E 9 t0 11 12
I T t(L T R
Volume (veh/h)114 0 12 0 0 0Peak-hour faclor. PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0-95 0.95Hourty Flow R6le (veh/h)120 0 12 o 0 0Proporlion of heavy
yehiclss, PHv 12 0 12 0 0 0
Pefcent grade (%)0
Flared approaoh
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized?0 0
Lanes 0 n 0 0ConflguralionLR
Colqol:Deliii, aEiiue Lanoifr. Lov-;
qpProach EB WB Northbound Souihbound
Vov6ment 1 4 I 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L LR
Volume, v (vph)46 132
capacity, cm (vph)929 309
v/c iatio 0.05 0,43
Queue length (95%)0.16 2.05
Control Delay (s/vsh)9.1 25.1
tos A
Approach delay (s/veh)25.1
Approach LOS
Hcs2ouirM Copynil|l C 2tl0l L rni!.rs rry of Ftord., Al Righn Reicl!€d
' Tom Kassmel - Lion Souare Lodoe Final.odf
^,_____Jage21 iro
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
Anafyst EAG
Agency/Co. Kimley-Hom
Dale Performed 2/1Y06
Analysis Time Period Total AM
lntersection FrcntageJw. West Lionsha ad
Cil
Jufisdklion Town of Val
fuiafysis Year 2025
Prgecl Oescdption Llon Square Lodge: no improvemenls
Easuwest Streel; South Frcntahe Road North/South Streel: W. West Lbnshaad Clrcle
nters€ction Orientation:3sd-Wesl udv Pedod (hrB 0.25
Vehlcle Vol0mes and Adi u.stnents
Maior Strost Eastbound W6stbound
l\4ovemenl 'l 4 o
tt I .I R
Volume 695 189 25 18 0
Peak-hour factor. PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h)731 198 26 650 0
Proportion of heavy
vehicl€s, PHV 0 11
Median typ8 Undivided
RT Channeliz€d?0
Lanes o 1 0 o 0
tion IR LT
Upstroam Signal 0 0
lUinor Street Southbound
lrovsm€nt 7 I 9 10 11 12
L T R L R
Volums (veh/h)44 0 z5 0 0
Peak+our faclor. PHF 0.95 0-95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate (vely'h)46 U 24 0 0
Proporlion of heavy
vehicles, PHv 9 0 0 0
Percent grade (0/6)0 0
flared approadl /v
Storag€0 0
RT Channelized?0 0
Lanes 0 0 0
Configuration LR
q Length, l-evel'ot Servlea'
Approach EB WB Norlhbound Southbound
l\4ovement 1 8 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LT LR
Volume, v (vph)26 70
Capacity, c, (vph)701 154
v/c ratio 0.u 0.45
Queue length (95o/.)n 12 2.09
Control D€lay (*eh)10.3 46.5
os B
Approach delay (s/v€h)46.5
Approach LOS E
Hcs!oo[M Copynth G 2orilj thtrrGily of Flondr"
^tl
RighG R.s.n.d
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
ieneral lnformation Site lnformation
Analysl EAG
Agency/Co. KmEy-Hom
Dats Performed 2/13/06
Anafysis Time Period Total PM
e' ^ ^' a geM| Wesf L,bnsheadfnterseclion 'i;''
Jurisdiclion Town of Vail
Analysis Year 2025
Pmigct Descriotion Lion SauaB Lodoe: no imorcvements
ast/West Slresl:. South Frcntaae Road Norlh/South Streel: W. Wast Llonshead Circle
Intersection Ori€ntation: Easl-West Studv Pariod (hrs): O25
Vehicle Volumes add Adiustmonti '
Msior Stre€t Easl Westbound
l\rovemenl 1 4 E 6
L T R L T R
Vdum6 (vBh/h)0 765 135 54 8&0
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.9 0.95
Houdv Flow Rale (veMr U 805 142 56 877 0
Proportion oi heavy
,rehicl63, PHv 0 11
Median type Undwed
RT channelizod?0 0
LaneS 0 0 0 0
Configuration ?rR LT
upslream Signal 0 o
Mlnor Steet Norlhbound Southbound
lovemenl 7 9 10 11
T R L T R
Vduma iveh/h)0 0 o
Peak-hour bclof . PHF 0.95 0.95 0.0.95 t95 0.95
Hourlv Flow Rate (veh/h 127 0 12 0 0
Proportlon of hsavy
vehicl€s, PHv 12 0 0 0 0
Percenl grads (%)0 0
Flared approach N N
Siorage 0 0
RT Channelized?0 0
_ane8 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sonliguration tF
I ilehv. Queue Leridh. Letet ol5eniirio
Approach EB WB Northbound soulhbound
Movement 1 4 8 I t0 11 12
Lane Co nftgu ration LT IR
Yolume, v (vph)r39
Capacity, dm (vph)689 74
v/c ratio 0.0E 1.88
Queue length (95%)0.26 12.35
Gontrol Delay (s/veh)10.7 534.4
LOS B
Approach delay (s/veh)534.4
Approach LOS F
Copyrighr O 200] Unile'snyof f lorid.. All RithB Rcsr^rdHcsiooorM
I Tom Kassmel
TWO.WAY STOP GONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
Anafysl EAGAgency/Co. Kimley-tionr
Date Performed A13/06
Analysis Time Period Totat AM
lntersection FrcntageM. West Lionshaad
Jurisdiction Town of Vail
Analysis Year 2025
Frolect Uesoription Lbn Squar€ Lodgs: wlth tinprolqmerts
Easwvest shaet lqffi Norlh/South slreEt' W l,,//a.t t i^h.haad ii6tA
Intersection Odenlationr Easl-ty€st StuOy PeridO (nrs): OeS-
Vehiele Votumes an(Adjusbnents
Malor Street Eastbound WestDoundMovement1J4 o
L T L T R
Volume lvehi h)0 189 z5 618 0PeaK{our lacbr. PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.s5
Hourly Flow Rat€ (veh/h 0 198 26 650 0
Proportion of heavy
vehicles, PHV 0 11
Medbn lype Two Way Lafi Tum Lane
RT Channelized?0 0
anE{t 0 0 1 1
uonnguralron TR .L T
L,pstream Signal 0 0
Mlnor Street Northbo!nd Souhbound
MOvemem 7 I I 10 11 12
T R L R
Volume (vsh/h 44 0 23 U o 0Peak-hour faclor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 o.95 0.95 0.s5nouny F|ow Hats (velvhl 46 0 24 o 0 0Proportion of heavy
vehicles, PHV I 0 0
Percent grade (%)0
Flared approach ,v
Storago 0 0
RT Channelized?0 o
Lanes 0 0 0 0 0uo Euralion
-:
Codtiol'Dolay, Qubue I
Lt!
,en sth, Levet ol 6L
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
MovemBnl 4 8 I 10 'tl 1?
Lane Configuralion L LR
\/olume, v (vph)26 70
3apacity, cm (vph)701 382
c rclio 0.04 0.18
Queue length (957o)0.12 0.66
Control Delay (sr'veh)10.3 16.5
LOS a c
Approach delay (s/veh)16.5
Approach LOS t'
Copyflrht @:00J Un'wBrry of Ftorit . All Ri!h$ tcrcrv.das2aooru
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst EAGAgency/Co. Kmley-Hom
Date Perfomsd Z/B/OA
Analysis Tme Period Totat pM
fnters€clion Frontagelw. West Lhng:pact
CirJurisdlctlon Town of Vai!
Anafysis Year 2025
Copr'rhr @ 2001 ttr, v.A,ry of I tond.. A R,gt ! Re!.r.vrd
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
ieneral Intormaiion Site lnformation
Analyst EAGAgenq/Co. Kmley-Hom
Date Parfomed 2/1y06
Analysis Time Period Totat AM
E^at age/E. We st Lion sh6adhterseclion 'Cl;'^
Jurisdiction Town ol Vait
Analysis Year 2007
trdect Oescdptbn Lrbn Sgua|e Lodo'oj rq inprcyenents
Easvwest Slreet Sguth Ftontage Road North/South Street: E, West Lionshead Clrcb
hterseclion Gientation: Eagt-lyos,Study Period (hrs): 425
/ehidle Vdlum€E and Adiuetments ,
_
Malor Stroot Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 c 6
T |a L T R
Volume (veh/h)0 4N l6 86 4Ut 0P€k-hour iactor, PHF 0.95 o.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h)451 .ro 90 425 0
Proportlon ot heavy
vehicles, PHv 0 16
yeqF0 type UNivlded
RT Channelized?o 0
Lane9 0 1 0 1 0qonlgqratlonIRLT
Upstre€m 9ignal 0 0
Mlnor Str€6t Northbound Soulhbound
irovement E o 10 1 12
L T R L T R
Yolums (v6h/h)a7 0 155 0 0 0
Peak-hour faclor. PHF U,YJ 0.95 0.95 0.95 495 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h)38 163 0 o 0
Proportion of heavy
vehicleG, PHV 22 22 0 0 0
Percenl grade (%)o 0
flar€d approach N N
Storago 0
RT Channellzed?0 0
LanoS 0 0 0 0
Configu ration LR
Mo\remont 1 4 7 I 9 10 '11 12
Lane Configuratlon LT LR
Volume, v (vph)90 201
Capacity, c, (vph)1007 418
vlc ratio 0.09 0.48
Queue length (95%)0.n 2.54
Contral Delsy (s/veh)8.9 21.3
LOS
Approach dslay (siveh)?1.3
Approach LOS
Hcs2ooolM Copyr,lthl € 200J UniwrEity offlonda, All Rigls R6.rv.d
rom Kassmel Lion
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
('Eneral Information Site Infonnatioh
Analyst EAGAgencyico. KmlefHom
Date Performed 2n3n6
tuElysis Time Period Totat pM
lnlersection FrontagelE. West Lionshead
ctlJutisdictim Town ot Vail
Anafysis Year 2007
lroFct uescriptton L,.on arpLodgejnoimp/oyemants
East/West Street: Soulh F/ontage Road tlorfi/South Street: E. West Lionshead Circle
lntersection Orier ation: E 9sf-fYest Studv Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehlcla Voldmes an
[ajor Street Eastbound Wsstbound
loyement 1 ,l 5 6
L T R t:T R(v6h/h)429 77 98 600 0
Peak-hour factor, PHF o.95 u.vc o95 0.95 U.YC 0.95
Hou y Ftow Rate (veh/h)0 451 38 103 63t 0
Proportion of heavy
vehicles, PHV 0 11
Median type Undivided
RT Channelized?0 o
0 1 0 0
ConFrguralion TR
Upslream Signal 0
Mlnor Strset Nodhbound
lovemenl I 9 10 11 't2
L T R L T t{
Volums (veh/h)ft 0 t39 U 0 o
Peak-hour faclor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Froufly Ftow Rale (velth)58 0 146 0 0 0
Proporlion of heaq/
vehiclss, PHV 17 0 17 0 0
D8rcent grade (%) | o 0
Flared approach
Storage 0
RT Channelized?0 0!af!F I 0 0 o 0 0 0
Configuration LRrdd6toitiv,oui@
Approacfi EB WB Northbound Soulhbound
Movement I 4 7 8 I 10 1'l 12
Lan6 Configurahon LT LR
Volume, v (vph)103 2U
Capacity, c, (vPh)1029 3f3
,/c ratio 0.10 0.65
Q|rcue lenglh (95%)0.33 4.27
Control Detay (s/veh)8.9
LlJ!A E
Approach delay (s/veh). 35.7
Approach LOS E
HcszwrM ('opy gnt O 200! UniycBiry ofFloridr, Alt RjEhrs R.scrvld v.dion 4.ld
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
Anslyst EAGAgency/co. Kmley-Hom
Date Performed ?/13n6
Anafysis Time Period Totat AM
fnterssction T:on* West Lio,]shead
Jurisdiction Town ot Vai!
Anafysb Year 2@7
lt"iL:t, D"yl"ti."
=
lrryrt
a?"**a St"."t,. S.o"n tlort n" EouOI"brseclion Orienlat
thicle'\,
uqlor :rre6t Eastbqqnd Weslbound
MOVemenl 'l 2 I 4 5 6
L T R L T Rvorume (ventn,0 429 qE
8t 404 0Peak-hour faclor. PHF o95 0.95 0.95 u.va u.vo 0.95Hourly Flo\r/ Rate (Veh/hl 0 451 36 90 425 0Proporlion of heavy
/ehicl6s, PHv 0 16
Medlan type Two Wav Lefl Tum Lane
RT Channelized?0 0Lanes0I0onl|gufttoon TR I T
Upstream Signal 0 0
Mlnor Sbcet Norlhbound Soulhbound
MOVSmenI 7 I I 10 't1 12
T R I T Rvorume (veh/hl 37 0 155 0 0 0PeaK{OUr taclor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95noufly rtow KaIe (vetvn)3E 0 163 0 0 0Proportion of hsavy
,ehides, PHV 0 22 0 0 0
Percent grade (%)0 o
Flarod approach ry
Storage
RT Channelized?
Lan6a 0
Configur tlon
r. @frer
pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movernent 1 7 I I 10 11 12
Lans Conligu ration L tR
Volums, v (vph)w 201
Capaclty, cm (vph)1007 490
v/c ratio 0.09 0.41
Queue length (95%)0.29 1.98
Contol Delay (s/veh)8.9 17.4
LOS A
Approa€fi dolay (s/veh)17.4
Approach LOS
Hcs2ofrla Copyright O 20Ol Univc6iry of Florid., Alt Riehri Rllcrttd
Tom Kassmel - Lion
Copyri8ht () 2001 Univcniry of Ftorid., A0 RiSnr! Rc!.rvqf
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Gerie?al'lnformation "Site lnfonnailon
Anavst EAGAgency/Co, Kimley-Horn
Date Performed A1A06
Anafysis Time Period Total PM
Intersection Frontag6/E. Wast Lion shead
Cir
Jurisdiction Town ot Vail
Anafysis Year z00T
Project Descriplion Lbn Squars Lodote: no iil'nprovemgnfs
East/West Strset Sou{? Flontage Road Norlh/South Strgof E. West Llonshead Ckclalmersecllm Unenlaflon: Easl-tyosl Study Pedod (hrs : 0.25
etiielrt ldfrihtr"s Xn{*di'i
Major Strosl Easlbound Westbound
lovement 'I 2 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume (veh/D 429 37 98 &0 0
Peak+our facbr. PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0-95 0.95 0.95
Houriv Florv Rste (veh/h)v 451 38 103 631 0
Proportion of heavy
vehlcles, PHv 0 11
luedian type Two Way Len Tum Lane
RT Channeliz€d?o 0
Lanes 0 1 0 1 0
Configuration rR I T
Upstream Signal 0 0
Mlnor Slreet Norlhbound Southbound
ovement 7 I 9 10 11 12
I T R L T R
Volume (veh/h)56 '0 139 0 0
Peak+lour faclor. PHF 0.95 o95 0.95 U.YC 0.95 0.95
Houriy Flow Rate (veh/h 56 0 146 u 0 0
Proportion of heavy
vBhiclos, PHV 17 0 17 0 0 0
Perc€nt grads (%)0 o
Flared approach ,v N
Storago 0 0
RT Channeliz€d?0 0
LANOE 0 0 0 0 0
Coaltiguralion
:i:LR
enirth, Li i.y
=ll:i!:ft.ry:!,.X ;i!:'.r'.51 '.,pprcadr E8 WB Norlhbound Soulhbound
l\4ovem€nt I 4 7 E 9 10 11 12
Lane Contiguration L LR
'/olume, v (vph)103 204
Capacity, cm (vph)1029 428
v/c ratio 0.10 0.48
Queue length (95%)0.33 2.51
Control DBlay (slveh)8.9 20.8
LOS A
Approach delay (stueh)20.8
Approach LOS c
Hcs2ooorM
: rom !!q!9T91- llon Square !99-s.,e_Fi!?$[ -, __,lggf4 ieleg-se-Fi!?f, _=-_!-
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
AnalFt EAGAgency/Co. Kmley-tjom
Date Pefomed 2/19/06
Anafysis Time Perjod Totat AM
E.^^' age./E. West L,?rsh6adlnterseclion ';;'^
Jurisdiction Town ot Vai!
Analysis Yeaf. 2025
erotect Descriptlon Llbn Sguam Lodge: no l.nprovemCnts l
East/West Streel: South F(ontage Road Northlsouth Streel: E Wesl Lionshead Circle
lnterseclionOrientation: East-Wast Study Period (hrs): 0.25
Vdhlcle Voluines anrl AdiUitnients
Malor gtreel Eastbound Weslbound
Movemenl 1 3 b 0
L I D L I R
Volums (vsh/h)0 654 a 112 590 0
Peak-hour faclor, PHF o.95 0.95 0.95 495 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flo$/ Rale (veh/h)0 688 67 117 621 0
Proporllon of hsavy
vehicles, PHv 16
Median typ€Utdivided
RT Channelized?0 0
LANBS 1 0 0 1 0
lonflguratlon LTgpslg3ms!83!
Minor Stseet
0 0
Northbound Soulhbound
Movsm6nt I I 10 12
L T R L T R
Volume (veh/h)57 0 175 0 o.0
Peak-hour bctor. PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 o-95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h 60 0 184 0 0 0
Proporlion of heavy
vehicles, PHV 22 0 22 0 0 0
Percent grade (%)0 0
Flared approach
Storag€0
RT Channelized?0 0
Lanes 0 0 o 0 0 0
UonligUration
l+^hr'^l |rr-I-.,
^.F.
tR
[-dfol oJ Servlci
Approach EE|WB I Northbound Southbound
lVovement 1 4 7 I I 10 tl 12
Lane Contiguration LT L^t
VolumB, v (vph)117 244
capacity. cm (vph)796 218
ulc rclio o.15 1.12
Queue Iength (95%)0.51 11.33
control Delay (Yveh)10.3 143.4
OS B F
Approach delay (siveh)- | 143.4
Approach LOS F
Hcs]optg Cspynshr O ?003 Uni\.crsit) !rFbrida. Afl ttithts R.r.rvd
iTom Kassqel ; !911_-S_g-u-arg
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General lnform
Analyst EAGAgency/co. Kinley-Hon
Date Performed 2/19/06
Analysis Time Period Totat pM
lnterseclion Ftontage/E. Wes, LrbnsDsad
Cir
Jurisdiction Town of Vail
Anafysis Year 2025
-'eteur usqr uon L no imprown en|E
Easuwest stroet @ North/South straetW
nlersEtf=n Odentati
-lEtudy
p"rioo (hrs): O.Zs-
Major gtrsst Easlbound Wss'tbound
MOvemenl 2 3 5 6
L T R I T Ruolqlne (veh/h)U 660 117 178 816 0seaK-nour lador. PHF 0.95 495 0.0.95 0.95 0.95iouny hro\ff f<ate (veh.th)0|a94 123 187 858 0Proporllon of h6avy
vehicles, PHv 11
Median typ6 Undlvlcfed
RT Channellzed?0 0
0 1 0 n 0Jonrgura$q!l rR LT
Jpsrrearl SEnal 0 n
Minor Street Norihbound Southbound
Movement 7 I o 10 11 12
T R T RYolume (velvh)76 0 171 0 0 0JeaK-nour lactof. PHI 0.95 o95 o95 0.95 0.95 0.95nouny Ftofl Kate (vgh/h)80 0 180 0 0 0Proporlion of heavy
,ehicles, PHv,17 17 o 0 0
Perc€nt grade (%)o 0
Flared approach N
Sbraga 0
RT Channelized?o
Lanes 0 0 0 0tonnourauon:-
Contidl Dolav: dueua.
LR
.ensur, Lbtt;is;rvffi-
Approach EB WB Nodhbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 I I '10 11 12
Lane Conliguralion L'LR
Volume, v (vph)187 260
Capacity, cm (vph)n3 118
v/c ratio 0.24
Queue lelrglh (95%)0.95 22.15
Control Delay (srveh)11.1 628.1
LOS B F
Approach delay (s/veh)628.1
Approaoh LOS F
Copyridr O 2mi thirrR'ry of ljtondr, A I Rights R.lcntllllcs2ofurg
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Anafyst EAGAgenoy/Co. Kimtey-Hom
Oate Performed ?JiA/06
Analysis Time Period Totel AM
Interseclion Fmntage/E. We,sl Lrbnst ead' CirJurisdiction Town of Vait
Analysis Year Z02S
Soualt
v
Houdy Flc|,v Raie (!
Propodion of heavy
yehicl€s, PHv
N,ledian typs
RT Channellzed?
1
L
o
0.95
0
0
I
654
0.95
688
1
67
6t
0
0
TR
4
L
112
0.95
117
16
Turi k
--;------
5
590
0.95
621
-7
T
0
mrnor tueal Nodhbound SouhboundIIt0 12
t-T R L T RYolglne (veh/h )57 0 175'0 o 0rea|(-nour Taqof , PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0:95 0.95 0.95-guny r|()/rf KaIe (verunl 60 0 164 a o 0Proportion of heavy
vehicles, P"u n o 0 0 0
Porcsnt gFde (%)0 0
lar9d approadt N /v
Storago 0
RT Channelized?
0
-anes 1 0 I 0 0 0eurxtguri ron R
Control DeHy. Oir€ud Lanbth. Lev€l ofqpproach I ee I,.-
Servlie
wolNorthboundlSouhbouno
l'rl 4 8 t0 11 12Lane ConFrguratlon R
Volume, v (vph)117 o{.r 1U
Capacity, cm (vph)796 395
v/c ratio o.15 0.28 0.47
Queue lsngth (950/6)0.51 1.11 2.40
Conlrol Delay (s/veh)10.3 28.4 21.8
LOS c
Approach delay (stueh)23.4
Approach LOS cJ
HCT:ooorM CopyriShr C ?001 Universiry ol fto.rtl &,!hrr R.s.rvcd
Tom,Ka1s1el - Lion Square L
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMTT,IARY
Analyst EAGAgency/Co. KinloyJlom
Date Porformed AIS/N
Analysis Time Period Total pM
fnters€ction FrontagdE. West Lionshead
CirJufisdiciion Town of Vai!
Anafysis Yoar 2OZo
Coptrighr O 2003 UniE siry o I Fto,i{t!. A I R;sn$ keslrlcd
From:
To:
Date:
Sublect:
BillGibson
Tom l€ssmel
O4i?4AW610:&4:47 AM
Fud: LSL - North Buildhrg
lionorch
uoDEtl{o.
TYPE:
JOBM}IE:
CERTIFICATIOI{: UL LISTED
FINISH- Available h high quaility pot{der oat,
or anodized fin'sh'
Llttp opnOng Accommadates Incandescenq Compact
fluorescent or fffgh htensity Disdlarge Lamp' (ordered sepanty)
l,loUNIrl{G- rP" or 3/4" tapped hub is suppll€d' Top or slde mount availaUe' Fbthtres are pre
wired with 48" or 96" leads, Available wlth cord or stern s€ts'
REFI.ECTOR' Spun out of lrearyduty Aluminum or GahranH consiuction'
SoCKETS- Incandescent (rated for 60owaq66wolt), .9n{ ff.fQ (+lcv nrlse nte<l) are medium
6;'dhil, Con pac nioto."nt are thernoplasfrc' (+pin triple urbe larnps)
l,hddd oda I wUrffrB
Sorc6
941tu trnsn'
44,4q lFs 4441tu pd rra &
/Atu]I[rdrgh.E
a
,sqs9,
gathlsdEl
Fctrg|Ebb€ld
adi(rBs€P947
12260 Edt B|d Avq
Chlno, Ca. 91710
Phone 8249$1990
Fax 82-9S+1955
€ddhhu&E!
tulErdab€H
od('EsePg4T
c@rsrn
, Tom Kassmel - LIGHT SPEC AND
tu Ern ofiEhrl ,
42-44tur pod ni8 t Pob .
48b 6ts(c(tlbE c pq
4SluEDb&drh :
hbl
'ffi1a1,7.,d,vJ/ 1E.|J l.r
Baselite CorPoration Page I of I
Producll
Productt
W.n lq|||r
P..a loun
PCx
t !-t-ti
Ioirfig q
Ob- olo.|
F.rLh Of|b
Ptclon.lb
ftd|{rr
l-.lha Oo
talo hl
cltno' cA I
lCl F|..''
Tl|.6G6J
F Xroaa
.fad rlx
http://www.baselite.coE/blirdex.asp?PglD=finishoptions.hb&PgTyPFritemenu 4finn6
J.n 3t l15 O3t lor
t
9?Og2633go F. {
ALFINE El|gINEERIiO
..SlffElt--"t .-'*'*r.*-tt*r..Jtld.d5r.!aFr _
3i*H.3H',H.'"t"1,nM""a'
ffiffiffi#*H^;txc,
a ,rra,l oa rrnd b.int . rctll9n -otilill"!" *':iEl:ti:"Lii*1"1"
.tl trtr' '
ar^: E OO q|.,ll'l
C't'? ' !'
:l |.6t .t |i.n..r txt!'fi
It t|rc
..a.h lnrlt' 'u.h
Jllr !a'1. tt,r f"xud
$.1H$ rri '.{ar
hn .rrqfl !
lu[isllBll[i
. I OM KASSMEI - LIGHT SPEC AND
InENLP
iil:'
E Ct rEER rHC
From:
To:
Date:
Sugec,t:
Bill Gibson
Tom l(assmel
O4?4EO0f.10:14:59 AM
Fwd: LSL -North Building
i l_ee [1s_ertlEylgED_I lut-ELffi
ll rli;E'i r€:;E
il
:ait
ir----l; 5iizl
lolrClr >lt : :dl
i :!EU]
P!!EFi
' :oli ,lt
Fl
Or
2loi_.- _l
,tBt
ili
rti
i!l
tom Kassmel - REVTSED ROOF HEI
,,t9Ir Kgssmet - REVTSED WEST ELEV
l'om Kassmel - Fwd: LSL - North
Frpm:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Bill Gibson
Tom lGssrnel
44n41200610:35:12 AM
Fwd; LSL - North Building
i lom Kassmel -
at!tct attoctai!t tNG
MEIvtORANDUM
Projecl: Lion Squore Lodge - Norih BuitdingDoie: April 21,2006To: Bill Gibson - Town of Voil
Tonn Plonner
From:
CC:
Re:
Chip Melick - Melick Associqt€s
Eill Anderson - lion Squore Lodgc
Plonning Deporf menl Revicw
The following lisi serves os o ilem by hcm response fo thc proliminory
comments from lhe plonning deportment dotid April 13, iOO6.
I . The setbock ond eosement orcos hove been cleorly morked on bofh ih.orchifecturol floor plons ond fhc civil sitc plons.
2, The oukide foce of the aosl woll linc cunently lies outside of the requirad
] 0'-9' :.tF:!. The only proposed conshucrion shovm wirhin the jbock-
is o. deck which proiacts ovcr ihe enlronce odjocenf fo fhe raloil spocc
ond onother deck locotad to fic cost of fhe orisling condo unit I iXl.
3 kf is o. prescriplivc eosement fior ihc currenl one story porfion ofbuilding thot lies within rhc norfh sefbocl, Th€ oosr rowsr wifl mointoin
I.:9.: "1rg .o-1q foorprinr ofihis oreo ond subsequcnf floorr will srep
bock fo be l0'-O" from fhe north bordcr of the eosement. See tho
ofioched documenfrof ion,
4. The-p^orking requiremenl for the 650 r.f, rcloil spoce bbsed on seciionl2-10-10 is.2.3 spoces per 1,000 s.f.. This wor.ild require 3 refoit porking
spo<os which we lwo provided on the surhco porking lot (spoces
indicoted by on ,R,).
5, Dovid Viale will confoct Town of Voil Housing DMsion to coondinote
complionce with fhe lown employee housinglrequirements.
6. Plcose sea lhe oftoched luminonce colculolions.
I5150(,lH ftUtr 5n6Er
AlChlt ECIUtC grEDlEl|.tOtEltlilll
r Nr !tr or3 texcwboocorourr
tla INC ttt io3.5!4.l9JO
wwr. arlltcl. co^r tar !ot.!!a.t93t
l_ I gt 5E s. nellglpgr s9 letrer,
7.Ihc rcof heighf plon- hos rwised f,o include existing ond proposed grodes
underncofh qll roof linee. Averoge moximum heigl* colculoiions orc
olloched,
Elwqtions whidr ddns the mechoniool equipmenl scrccning how bcen
oddcd f,o lhe extcrior clcvolions sheet
9. A motcriol somple boord ond colored rcnderings will bc prwidcd ot the
pr€6€ntqlion.
lO. A digifot model hos been creoted ond viervs from s€v.rol locofionr will
be owilobla ot the prercntofion.
Ihc follorving lisf ssrves os q iiam by itcm rarpons€ fo fhc praliminory
commentr from lhc public works deporfment dof,ed April l'3, 2006. '
l. Ses otfoched response lcltcr kom pcok Lond Consuhonfs.
2. See oiloched respomc lsttcr'from psok lond Consultonb.
3. See otfochcd r€spon!6 lcfier from peok lond Coneulionts.
,1. See oltoched r€sponse lefler from pcok Lond Consulionts.
5. See oltoched nEsponrc lcfier fiom peok Lond Consultonts.
6. See otloched responss lcfi€r from.peok tond Consuhonrs,
7. See otf,ochcd re{rponso letter from peok lond Consuhonr,
8. Soc otfoched responss lefler from pcok Lond ConsuhonF.
9. We.ors in fhc procesr of obroining thc Arrobelle lighfing plon ond will
odd their lighting on our plons.
8.
lom
10. The po*ing.spoce configurotion hos been revicrd for improwd occees.
Ptqose se6 sllocfied lowcr level porking plon.
.l l.The.prinfed cory of this drcwing wos incorrectly xoled which rcsuhed inthc porking spoces. oppeoring to bi smoller fhon rc required widfh. fhls "
hos b€sn corrgeled ond o fypicol full cizc qnd compocl 3psc€ hos beendimensioned. Sce sttoched iloor plon.
l2,The cMl plon hos been updoted to rsfcct the currenf porking loyouf.
I 3. lhe surfocc porking phn hos becn rwised !o prwide beflcr qccoss ondfhr tumang nadius hos bean shorvn f,or lhc spcces iequcsfcd,
l4'A copy ol thc prescripfirrc encroodrmenf ecis€mcr is induded with thismemo,
l5.Sse otlochcd relponrc lrfier fnom pcok Lond Consultonts.
l6.See otfqchcd ralponsc lctfer from pcok Lond Consulronrs.
17. The grode diffurence will be rcsohred with o stone woll. Any portion ofthe woll oaceding gir frcf will how o four foof bcnch.
18. An eoscmenl from odiocenl prop€rfy ownec ir nol required,
I9,The troffic study will be updotod to refle<t rhe most updotcd plons.
20.The dorclopment doc not require o looding boy.
lfyou horo ony quostions obouf theso ifems or need onything odditionol olthis lime, ploosc give us o coll.
Thonks.
Kassmel -
PEAK LAND CONSULTATiITS, .INC.
PEAI( LAND SURVEYING, INC
PEAI( CML ENGINEERNq NC
l{m uo}ts nDGE t@P, VAL @ 8 657
PHONE 0704tG86a4
FA,Y Et0.1?e€610
MEMO
TO. Molick Altochcs, foc
AfINt Cldp Mclick Ctdr Coopcr
FROMz L MEL hs!, P"E.
N)B No.? 1257.1
DATE| 04-2 )6
REr llolr Squ.r.No b - Publlc Wortr CommcDtr
The followi4 adrtcecor &c co.n@ driod Apdl 13,2m6 by tlc Town ofvrit public wotu Drp't'crtfc anc rbovo t!ftraccd FojEct
Owrd Comrots
l. Eagirolriog&Nlyris ofSbDDi!8 Sight Dlstrtrcc: poak ir crrrcutly ll,orkbg wlth Ton Karccool !o
dctsloias vhat thc Tocn rill disbnce tho Tov|l nil rcqutE lcrvhg thc soulh scccls wb6$ it ir,
2J. Soutb Accrrs crosEdopo & rllomlt grado: A po6liblo cohxioo to ttcro ir to !!grd" Lio[rhld
Clplc aod lsrw rhc rccs rvtcG it ic. pc&ir ct[rrotly ryo*ing vith Ts[ K|sEd o thir iraF
|s it dcc io thc *opping ligbt dilec,
4. Show tln il8tluod md Fopo|od utilidcs tomArr$oltc plau: Tbc urilittc' will bc sbow! (E th!phe
5, 8'cooarrt! p!n3: Prak will Fovido a lett€r thlrlbowr ! 4' pe will bc adcqurD to bedb rbc lO&
)'€ol ovcll.
6. Drfuony Crols-Slopc: Onca tho &iwwry irsuo blr bca rcrotw4 the Sndcr will b€ trbclcd aod
will bo a oaxiuso 8%
Z. Fart proporty gadiry aod Arnbcllc Gndillg: pcak w f vorifythc Arrabollo gndiq ia oonoct ol
lhc pbD!.
8, f d$qilg rld Sigbr Dirbocs OE€ 6e rigbt tdasglcs Uw 6cco aosnfuod rbcy wil bG rbow!
on thc laodrcrpbg plo.
15. hblic cltiay uility car€olob: Oroc tha finsl locltio! ofthG Hoty Ctorr turforocr ir
drtcrEiDo4 rlr i€s€Ecd wiu b€ prwidcd" No othrr public utiliticr lrc p{lraot
16. WEI Hcigh6: Wrtl hci8btr will bo bb.f!d.
I om Kassmel - 4.21.06 roof
lallLtz;,|l| rar !rl! lrr ,r0tairtlt CcBrat Sotr/002
@omcost
frr NUEIt
tt{Or.l x9|.|$t
r{ofltlsorxtlr7*
ElrorrgvrS* ClplE tB coro.B{T O rs,r$ rrrur EprE sB EcycLB
2tr McA!t tD lTt. 0,to !ox .!t . vo| co llatc Flt tt!.t.t.t!ra
{i .t
t.'fl
.^ i€._
""i.u- F.rnc[ (cca
,]El.| tSrtttr,ca dulolr
Itrrt t!?qtrlct truf{rr
tl/aLl2lla trt tttt r|r g tatt!t! ColEr.t B0t a/to2
rtdl.ol 0l !00r trFt l 0 V r COX tt E*torgr Stutnr& I.St p.m/!0? Fol
/ M unlrry ADpmvAL r vEpnFlcnrro'r; tMcwv/ I tlb|'t lrfib vff iir! ilr Fqc6ld inDtullflrnE$[ ffit ft|pd rny !4thg d prupGd,tq!r{d, r.l rbD/ wfy !! vtbrtrhulv lnd to6um tbr |lr corwr.dcr'arld,iiddE sssi il'-p,r,sg|,r|Br p,tgntrg !,ul, un,DLIffi ffi*i",Fu,r,l,tcrE"t-;d;0t|U-d&ilfr ir*iu,*s"rd*i*bd-6-ffi ;r;
Artliqbd!|an0|'.t C.r |re El
tr0,$3t18r (s)
. . t!.l|.@5r(r!0. SEJg,ot:l (cdDore. Sr:ir tirUnft-lltadi\|rf"6,rl
ea,xtolrngorercr3
9?!J!f/a@ll.(U)re,$ar€ 0b0' Qritt FlCr €zB
HotYqroE'd.FrE'tu9{7r2t (ul
,70t{5.,oat b0
Qqb(! Jill/l€ollldrroi[dfElqo
DrcllDII
9q:6ar€3(x,
Onods
r{r 8ollat 9t!,8d0:l.ll$tgtr logst
tacu ttvtr, rmtlR a
EAt[f l(tr olsrrrcr
tt(t at6.?480 (td)
t0.fft,/n89 obdGttb+ H irdttirra6.,$d"dtr
ool'|cAst cut tttr,4r#l ' tu rl
rTto'?{1.9136
!%
IqIEI
:.l!-tl udL4otlrat t Eittc|tb fo.tD tn|trt r iu._ dr of m dry o|iprlr, I!t| rodr|!r*|'| ni*cnqqlltclt tt1tllrrlntdt rrr o.t3r;! 11 no nUani il-ure-Jtrffiindt tffir4
1' t r Uity c!firmy lru o6€f flEl tlllrodrd cDn rtdo,t, E ,JuE, nDilt{f|[ ddl nedt ldy c| 6. {&lattlotlgn ts tnn liatr ba pmdar nhh na6to L, rEt\rld ru br stn dtsr EdclltatInatr6did lGI5ll$rlg,g1r*, plrr' rrlE tn
"!na
u'. n tri;;oifrGiiil iiq omnrv ryr-rr #EFi
3,lb vlsadoE tb r$t nbv. th rE|frcbr 6ttlt trlrcftillt? b otbh I Aflcu,.| ffifr$ntr hftrmdHffi''HH,tHrWElFffitiffi,ffi
Tlr D_3/c$tc lr ftstrd uc qr D l|brr drt-|errd ddwirgr ts d|G |Eltu tb |*|'FsFl *,Hrsitia&l !!r:$ltg drtr !r."4"q b !trrydbunldrrood'rb,'lu,e &n 4,,;G-d;;;id,nry,*!d"ifi"d;-Er ||.lt|]lr sfdLtutfl)
FjC.vUfiUStDFltUrf ril..nt_r LtS.e 1Zl4
,tua$5.9.s{r$td}r lt4f,,.aril|f,l (tbr)
Tom KassTet- LrcHTtNb CALC SH
AJV'Id (VilISNOI'I
DNI(ruN8HTUONgmo.IswnbsNotl
il
tl
tl
I
ll||l1ili
iffiili
t.
Frcm:
To:
DatE:
Subiect:
Bill Gibson
Tom Kassmel
04P42:006 10:35:43AM
LSN site plan
paper copy revisions are in the roufing box
; Tom Kassmel - Fwd: LSL - l,lorth
From:
To:
Date:
Subfect:
Bill Gibson
Tom Kaesmel
04/268006 8:57:59AM
Fwd: LSL - North BuiHing
4.25ru 8140 P.otrrog- s.urr crv
tLa €r.rg
fllffio#''''li.-t to.tatq6.: lt&tllJqt
fab{iitriiid a.antriitral
|r!
-..-l--
trLlFt trFrRsri.' Ctbtcturar C!tc:!R+q G?!.tr.ffl*
Kassmel xcel
I€EL'=l*,S,HTII -Cry_.._ _ Fax;9?0262rt05? . Sr 25 ?Jo6 B:lu p.@X)allt(lnrc | r,LJcAS SduARE- rJltxllk-
' ;,f
ffi ufl.,ry.,'ovlLrt[r,.ca?rul
f,{t#5-.*tfitn F r:t h?'rridrr{ rsr irrdrt adFr twtrrbd.||$Ud Satbrt,?E luthr ff iltrld ia rld h lqtrEwrYrtbrd$0U$d Setlttr,u rfl nctirDGrt od r
'|otorl
uurt ,t.|[JlrFrD{l lluiC t r l h lcrl'rrl! l|tt Fgtl|otrlin' *r]v]|l rtE dd$rryf! ElltE,UEl!r*t fE llr-ra ItXfrtcttuElrtfit ttfm*t!l'b -1d-g!4!|nllqlalirdrr,,rl.lriis"ttrri00rttn,r!rmqr rr, rrfir|dD tDrii.,&tbr|rd||lt'rlltfrn
rery.Ilu!g!!t tq|ltl
. trollttri (rat'0.r&lr0lttlt ,@r2(dq|t i ni\{ar|rEES
4|l[!tlI}['tll.Ol
I ro,{at,t{016r*r5l
nYtrfl]rglllc
tr+trr,J{tt (r,rrox$rtt 0L0ffi.! .hflv|U||l@!!
G,tl av'
ttoJ|Lroll tlr{cliEfi lrl.n tr!.lrl.aflakrfrrht
lr t r$lwrraltat{rrllff{ !8mEt?0.flrt|! tt)ttoiP&.cr (i$ffiG rd H*TET
coxElttGlfltto{attrr c rroo (!0
tro.{l|aryl0dffi lrd hcEl.CEI[ets
!r
hifi'H[iffij H,-,|fr $lT.F,ilffr mffi g g"ffi"$ ,'o con!''!t n .r or'*!'
t. tf a-ftb l'lFarv raa CCEIr ith Er l!fi 6 hr!oa, tra ,J!ht Ell|IiLllr trai tt 0|f'' !r $lD,yr t|llrlb'rtrdlrnhIrtlu|tt*.hrrdbhrrad. tlt lrJr iouit d* h ddrd h-&idh?6T.rfln_r. y3r.. uftrf, taat rio h !!hd !fi I r $a twt$try t hr drry a'rDry ri !r llb* b rrti|l!ii-ftufti
f. fl|r efffl! dc i!!nf,|.U! currECh. ttullttb frh. n|lk tyrr t|trt ftqi |t| Oa DiJt tffiffi:s ;.e;|'.
'iltr b,*F-. rqrr! tE Tul t5ma ||t r|lF atri$W ! !t {S!r flf |tiFuld l, |t{[tE|l tfir,tE9rnrnl.lrabl?fiF l'|rua rl|FA ! (r rcr !fl ardttttlm rl! m!cttit!*,t.IatlllEntl,
ril|tutlmfidlfrraa
3'A0,06
r\itr]t trurutl
Pldri,tlti1fliiEltb'*dgllJfJitff$.[{l{r*. F|ttcU
t 't 8!tc 0l|SC:itlirlt0it
u/|l/rol
ftiglrt 9004 '0l tttl
i Tom Kassmel - Lions
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
"Mark Luna" <mluna@peakland.net>
<TKassmel@vailgov.com>
041271200610:08:08 AM
Lions Square North - Sight Distance
Tom.
Have you had a chance to look at the sight dishnce issue at Lions
:11"j:^Y.1!ifh"v 1:.,""rjns to have-upoated pLni rrorn us by nextweqnesday anct I woutd like to include the finished driveway desiln ifyou accept it. You can reach me at the offce today and | \,r;ill be ;utof the office tgmorow, you can reach rn" on ,y
"6rf
iororrow if you needto discuss 970-389-S7s0.
Thanks
Mark
L. Mark Luna, p.E.
Peak Land Consultants, Inc.
1000 Lions Ridge Loop
Vail, Co 81657
Ph.-970476-8644
Fax - 970-476-8616
Email: luna@peakland.net
CC:"Romeo Baylosis', <Romeo@peakland.net>
From: "Mark Luna', <mluna@peakland.net>
Io: <TKassmel@vaitgovlc6m>Date: 05108/2006 e:S,l:+a Rl,tSubjech LS North
ro1, Woirlllp proposed detection sysbm for LS North Driveway have togo through DRB?
Mark
L. Mark Luna, p.E.
Peak Land Consultants, lnc.
1000 Lions Ridge Loop
Vail, Co 81657
Ph.- 970-476-E644
Fax - 970-476{616
Email: luna@peakland.net
Iqr r?:grygt- RE: LS North
From:
To:
Date:
Subjectt
"Mark Luna" <mluna@peakland. net>
"Tom Kassmel" <TlGssmel@vailgov.com>
05/08/2006 11:09:45 AM
RE: LS North
Tom,..Could you comrnent.on that once you receive our proposal. I don,tthink the architect realizes this. Thanks
L. Mark Luna, p.E.
Peak Land Consultants, Inc.
1000 Lions Ridge Loop
Vail, Co 81657
Ph.- 970-476€644
Fax - 970-476-8616
Email: luna@peakland.net
---Original Message---
From: Tom Kassrnel [mailto:TKassmel@vailgov.coml
Sent: Monday, May 0-8, 2006 10:59 AM- "- -'--"',
To: Mark Luna
Subject Re: LS North
lf it is seen from the outside, yes.
Thomas Kassmel, p.E.
Town Engineer
Town of Vail
Public Works Department
1309 Elkhorn Dr.
Vail, CO 81657
(970) 479-2235
lr "Yi.rk Luna" <mtuna@peaktand.net> 05/08/2006 8:54:08 AM >>>Tom, Would the proposed detection .V.turn toi f_Sf6rth Driveway haveto
go through DRB?
Mark
L. Mark Luna, P.E.
Peak Land Consultants, Inc.
1000 Lions Ridge Loop
Vail, Co 81657
Ph.-970476-8644
Fax - 970476-8616
Email: luna@peakland.net
Distance
Frpm; ,,Grant Anderson" <Grant@peakland.net>To: <tkassmel@vailgov.com>-'Date: os/09/2006 4:oa:4s pMSubject Sight Distance Memo Attached
Hi Tom,
Mark asked me b s€nd you the attached pDF.
Thanks,
Grant
Grant Anderson, p.E.
Peak Land Consultants
Office: 970476{644
Far 970-,,476€616
1000 Lion's Ridge Loop
Vail, CO 816b7
<<1257 .1 - Sight distance 2.pdb>
CC: ,'Mark Luna,,<mluna@peakland.nef,
I rom K?99Te! : 12sJ] : pig["9jpt"_G
PEAK LAND CONSULTANTS, INC.
PEAK LAND SURVEYING. INC
PEAK CIVIL ENGINEERING. INCimo uoN's RtoGE LOOP, VAI- CO E165/
FHON E 97G4768ff4
FAX 97G,f/&st6
MEMO
TO: Tor,rn of.Vail public Vlb rks
ArTN:. Tom Kassnel, Town Engineer
FROMT L. Mark Luna. p.E.
JOB Na: 1257.1
DATE: 05-08-06
RE: Liom Squar"e t{orth - ggm Distance lssues
The followng is a sunrrury of afl fre sight distances and issues for boh driveway rocations.The crihria used are 3.5' eye and object-heighb ail ;il; ;i;eea of r s npfr.
-,
WEST DRIVEWAY: This driveway has been relocated to tte nofth approxinately g0,.
Loqking R ioh!.There is clear sig ht disbnce of fie en tire intrsiton of Lionshead c ircreand Lionshead place.
I'ookino Left: The exisring configuration aflovre for90'ofsightdisbhce. Bv ryDvinobe driveuay t0 $e norh, \,ve havo increased the disbnce *lt.rt.f,,*girg -ft iil.';isightto 117'.
SOUTH DRIVEWAY: l/6r Driveway location.
to:qkirr!Ri0ht rhe sight disbnce as shovn on fie DRB subnittar is 87'. According bMSHTO criteria, tlis dishnce is carcurabd b be i 70' prus a t .t tactor ao;ustmni ior. grade, resurting in 187'. This criteria can notbe n,t wrh tre propoect *niigr"lion. '
Loqkino Left rhe sightdisbnce as shown on the DRB subnitbl is g1'. sib constrainbsuch.as.lhe pafrway along tre top of he wing ranll down to tre funnel; restrict trepossibility
9f.ingrqsiq.O ti:^lpg.q. Accordins b AASHTO .,iteria, trerijniaisunceis catcu labd b be 1 4s,.
^oLH
Tg does not shdw a reduction factr for l rad Js ;;;;;t";butinbrporating frombe bbres itappears ao.ti ieo-uction racrorr,,orio ipirv;li"iniii"'in a I 30' sight disbnce.
ln,of :l ro nitigab he sight distance issue on he soutr d riva,.ay it is proposed b insbrla debction sysbm alerting vehicres _reaving tre drivevray to vetri-ctm aiproactrirg r;;;
[r.]l.na.Ata nininum, Bre debction vriutd be located attre disbnce equal dbe
:l!ltjir9i..g:le uaming r,routd eitrer arert srppeo verrictes ro .pp.iiiirs rriii or.
TI^p-r_rl]y9lt/l/t|en a.right tum is safe. Specific reconnpndations on signagi and0eefl.n r.cau.n uourd be provided byatraffic engineer speciarizing iniig;at oeiign.
I __ Pagel i
Tom Kassmel - 1257.1 -
lf ho dligation eeerm rike a vrab re oprion, no-wourd procaed on a nD," dehiled pmposd. rfyou have any quotionr or euggeetioni, ptese tJ fce"b ;ii. -"
P\12Gt2St2t t\dt2s.t,t - Setr dra.E Z"(bs
From: "Mark Luna" <mluna@peakland.net>To: 'Tom Kassmel', <Tklimel@vailgov.com>Date: 05t22120C{J 10:45:28 AMSublect LS north sight distance
'Tom, I can not remember if we spoke about our detection system ater wehad submited the letter. How do you think we should proceed at thispoint? Do you want to comment on the letter, have yod shopped itiround
at all?
Thanks
Mark
L. Mark Luna, P.E.
Peak Land Consultants, Inc.
1000 Lions Ridge Loop
Vail, Co 81657
Ph.- 970476-8644
Fax - 970-476€616
Email: luna@peakland.net
Flom:
To:
Date:
SubJect:
"Mark Luna" <mluna@peakland. net>
T_om Kassmel" <TKassmel@vailgov. com>
05r22n0/J612;01:40 pM
LS North
Tom, .Could you send a memo stating that he initial proposal seems like
lTplglpl tt'e.sighr disbnce issue,-and you wouiOiequest a moreoetat|eo ptan. AIso mention,the possibility of having to gb to One
!_u,?1,." the pole.s/signswiil be ieen trori ttre d.fi;y, orwhatevercflrena you mentioned. Chip was hoping to have sorrething by Sre pEC
meeting this aftemoon if possible.
Mark
L. Mark Luna, P.E.
Peak Land Consultants, Inc.
1000 Lions Ridge Loop
Vail, Co 81657
Ph.- 970*476-86/t4
Fax - 97047&8616
Email luna@peakland.net
From:
To:
Date:
SubJect:
Mark,
Tom Kassmel
luna@peakland.net
05123120C6 9:45:07 AM
Lions Square Lodge North
Bill Gibson
wth regards to your memo d{90. ltav-etn, 2006 regarding sight distance for the redevelopment of theLions square Lodge North project thaTown wirr reqiire lt"a ,iifiuilli"t;itil'
1. lntersection sight distance per MSHTO is acheived OR
z rnq! Stopping sight distance perMSHTO is acheived in addtion to a perbrmance atternative (i.e.green lighVredlight and appropiate sig.nage and warnings) that acheives preioiquate intersection sightdistance' Traffic on Lionshead Place Jhaliremain the th-ru'movement ano strJtinot be stopped by theperformance allernative.
The above solutions shall be engineered and stamped by a colorado professional engineer.
Please submitt the proposed solution for actditional comment.
Thank you.
Thomas lGssmel, P.E.
Town Engineer
Town of Vail
Public Works Department
1309 Elkhorn Dr.
Vail, CO E1657
(970) 479-2235
cc:
LIqn
Frpm:
To:
Date;
Subiect:
Bill Gibson
Tom lGssmel
06/1212006 7:21:14AM
Fwd: Lion Square Lodge - Traffc Memo
Tom Kassmel - Re: LSL N
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
thanks
BillGibson
Tom Kassmel
06/1212006 4:02:58 PM
Re: LSL N
>>> Tom Kassmel 06112n006 3:59:07 PM >>>
Comrnents
Thomas Kassrel. P.E.
Town Engineer
Town of Vail
Public Works Department
1309 Elkhorn Dr.
Vail. CO 81657
(S7O't 479-2235
i Tom Kassmel - Fwd: FW:
From:
To:
Date!
Subfect:
Bill Gibson
Tom Kassrnel
06/16t2006 8:01:15 AM
Fwd: FW Lion Square Lodge - |.lorUr - Trafic Study
i Tom Kassmel - Lion Square Revised Traffic Letter.
V-fl lffileFlom\lfZ-l andAssociates.lnc,
June 15, 2006
Town of VaiI Public Works/Tmnsportation
1309 Elkhom Drive
Vail Colorado 81657
Attr: Thomas E Kassmel
Re: Lion Sguare Lodge North
Iionshead Village Vail, Colorado
Dear Mr. Kassmel .
This letter hac been prepared o document the reaulb of a baffic impact
analyeis of future tra.ffic csriditions associated with the propoeed exparuion
of the Lion Square lodge North- The Lion Square l-odge North is located
along Ore east side of Lionshead Place in Lioruhead Village in Vait
Colorado. Specifically. this study Fovides an updaE to the February 2006
analysis that included developmerrt of up to 12 curdominium/towhnhome
units. The expansion of fie existing site is currently anticipated to irtlude 9 '
new condominium/townhomeunits and 650 square feet of additional retail
use. The vicinity map illustating the project location i5 shown in Figure 1,
attached.
The purpose of this letter is to identify trip generaticr characteristice to
determine potential traffic related impacte on the local stseet systesr and to
dwelop mitigation measures as nay be necessary as a reaultof LionSquare
Lodge North Condorniniume proiect impacts. This study has been prepared
in accordance with Town of Vail gtandards and includes Level of Service
(LCE) analysis for study area intersections. This study sPecificallyindudes
evaluation of the following key intersectiurs that will provide traffic actess
to the project from the South Frontage Road:
South Frontage Road and West Lionslead Circle (east portat)
South Frontage Road and West Uonshead Circle $ryest Pottat)
I
9at@
$0 s$ntedr stEllbE,offi
&E
The project ie currently proposed to include development of 9
condominium/ townhomeunits and 650 square feet of retail use on the site
of the existing Lion Square Lodge. A cotrceptual site plan isattached
I
ta fi%@
Frx m{006
Revised Traffic Letter.odf
Z-fl Kimlgv.Hom\lILl andAisociares.tnc.
For analysis puposes, it i.s assurned that the Lion Square lodge North
project will be complete around year 2007, and was th€refore analyzed with
this horizon. The analysis of a long-term 202,5 horizon is also included
within this study, as required by the Colorado Departrrnt ofTransportation
(cDor).
Regional access to the Lion Square Lodge North is provided by I-70,
Primary access will be gained from the South Frontage Road. Direct access
to the project will be provided by two driveways along Uonshead Place.
South Frontage Road is a CDOT roadway (ctassification F-R) with on€ Eavel
lane in each direction. It runs along the south cide of Interstate 20.
Primarily, the frontage road is located north of Uonshead Village. The
roadway has a speed lirrit of 25 miles pe.r hour through the project area.
West Lionshead Grcle serves as a collector roadway with one lane of travel
in each dtection. Both east and weet portal interseitions of West Lionshead
Circle with the South Frontage Road ire stop controlled on the minor stseet
approach with ftee flow movements along the Frontage Road. Exfsting lane
configuratioru and tralfic control at the key intersections studied are shown
in Figure t attadred.
To ac. cuately determine the impact of the Lion Square Lodge North projec!
traffic volumes expected at the tbne of project buildout were necessary. Tlre
2007 and 2025 background pre development traffic volumes were obtained
from the Ritz{arlon Residences at Vail Traffic lmpact Study completed in
october 2005 by Kimley Hom and Associates, Inc. The total taffic volumes
fuom the Ritz-Carlton Residencee at Vail study were obtained from the Vail
Resorts' Lionshead Redevelopment Mastei Plan Traffic Impact Study,
Kianley-Hom and Associates, September 16 20ffi. These volumes wer€ used
ae the backgrouhd traific volumes for this study. Background traffic
volumes for 2007 are shown in Figure 3, Backgound tralfic volumee for
2025 are shown in Figure 4
Site-generated traffic estimates are determined through a process known ae
tip generation. Rates are appled to pruposed Iand u6es to estimate haffic
generated by developments during a specific time interval. The
acknowledged sourte for trip generation rates is the currmt ediHon of the
Trip &neration Reporfr published by Institu@ of Transportation Engineers
(ITE). ITE has established trip rates in nationwide studies of similir l,and
3ses, The ITE Trip Generation Report average trip rates that apply to
Residential Condominium/Townhouse (230) were used to estimate h;ffic
generated by the condorniniums. Trip generation for the retail space was
determined usint tTE Land Use Code: Specialty Retail (E14) for ttre-pM peak
--O-
P?qsz
I
Ml Tlanas E. Kasnel, Iune 75, 2N6, Page 2
I Institute of Transportation Engineers, Tip Genention: An Inlormation Report,
S€venth Edition, Washington DC, 20@.
:Tom lGssmel -Lion
VIfl Kimlsy'Ilom\JI7 \ ard Associates. Inc,
Mt Tls,zarc E.KB d, furu 15;2006, Pagz 3
hour. IfE does not provide trip generation rateo for thir land uee for fhe AM
peak hour. Thetefote, moming bip generation rates provided in the
Lionshead Redevelopmer* Masterplanfor Specialty Rehil were used.
Table 1 sunmarizeo the estimated traffic gmeration for the Lion Square
Lodge North The trip gmeratiron worksheeb are attached- These
calculatione illusFate the rates ueed and directional diseibution of trip6.
Table 1 - The Lion Square lodge North Proyect Traffic Gen€ration
The February 2(tr6 baffic impact analysis ascumed devdopment oI up to 12
condomium/bwnhome units on the site. This analysis found that the
project would be accommodated on the existing sr:rrourding st€etnetwork
without any improverrrents. Since the curmt proposal contairu 3 less unit8
than the original study, it ie believed that the arulysie presend herein i8
conservative, Therefore, rtre analysia was not revised per the curent
development plan and reaultant trip gmeraHon
Distributionof sib balfic on the street sysEm was basd on tlre disEibufiott
developed and approved previously within the Lionshead Village Traffic
lmpact Shrdiea Figure 5 illusbabs the expected project trip distributior for
the Liron Square Indge North. Traffic assignment was obtained by applying
the distrib'utiora to the estimated haffic generation Project tralfic
assignmort for the Lion Square lodge North project is ehown in Figure 6.
Lion Square lodge North traffic volumes were added to the background
volumeg to repre8ent esti[|ated taffic corrilitions for full project
developmmt. Total traffic volurres are illusbaled in Figue 7 for the 2007
horizon and Figure E for $e 2025 hodzoqr.
Kimley-Flom's analysec of balfrc opemtionc h the Eite vicinity were
conducted to determine potential capacity deficierrles in the 2007 and 2025
develo,pnent horizons. fire background (pre developr:renQ traffic vohrmes
have been studied previously as the total (backgrannd pluc prcject) tralfic
volumes in the Ritz{arlton Residmces at Vail baffic impactstudy. Results
frorn this analysis are shown for inforrntional purposes. These hori?trrs
AM Peet Hour PM Pe.k llotrr
ln Out Total .In Out Totd
Condominium
(9 unib)
1 3 4 3 2 5
Retail
(550 square feet)0 0 0 1 7 2
Total 1 3 4 *t 7
Zlltf Kiml€y-Horn\JIZ-l andAssociatss.tnc.
MJ1 Thonrw E. Kst{'r',d, Iuw 15, 2006 PtEc 4
2 TransFortation Reeearh Board, Higlwqt C"Wity Mnrual, Special Report m9,
Waohington DC, 2000.
were studied with the addition of Lion Squate Lodge North proiect tsaffic.
The acknowledged souce for determining overal capacity is the current
edition of the Hrgftrory C-tprcity MamaY.
Capacity analysir results are listed in terms of level of service (LOS). LG is
a quaDtative term describing operating cocrditions a ddver will experience
while Eaveling on a particular str€et during a particular time interval lt
ranges from A (very little delay) to F (long delays and congeetion). The
Town of Vail recomnends IOS C or better as the sreasure of desirable level
of service and LS D as acceptable level of service during Ore peal hours,
The intersecdon operations at key inters€ctior|s were analyzed using the
uasignalized analysis rrethodologieefound in frle Higlnwy C-qocity Mmwal2
(HC/VI) using lhe Highway Crp.city Softvrare (HCS 2000) progranr, Release
4.1, The following provides a discureion of the levd of service reeults on an
intersectiorlby-inte$ection basie (calculations attachefl. Level of service ic
shown for both of the study intereectione using the existing inters€ction
geomeky as well as wi0l improved geometry, It is important b noE that tlE
critical gaps were nodified to dernonstrate the needed gap accepbrre
differences creaEd by tre irutallation of left tum acceleration lanes at the
subject intersections, The critisal gap for Ieft turnb exiting from the side
sbeete wao matched with those for the left tuxls entering ftom ttre frontage
road. These gaps would be similar girrce these both cross the eaabound
traffic. Thic wae done b mo8t acnrmtely model intersectims wilh
aceleration lanes,
South Frontage Road and West Lionehead Circlc (weot portel)
The Wesf Lionshead Circle (west portal) approadr to this unsigndLed
inErsection of the South Frontage Road is orpected to qrerate at
unacceptable level of service in the short term 2007 future prior to the
addition of Lioru Square Lodge Northproject tralfic, This is due to the
expected traffic volume increaeeg anticipated by the Lionshead
Redevelopment projects. The results indicate that the nothbound lelt
tuming vehicleamay find it dilficultto €trter theSouth Frortage Road due to
the high through volumes along the frontage road. An irnproveurcnt to the
intersecdon that is needed based on the Lionstread Redevelopment projecb
and prior to the addition of Liong Square Lodge Nortfr-proieci ckft
includes the corutsuctiotr of a left tum lane al,ong the South Frontage Road.
Construction of thiE left turn lane along the frontage road is anticipated to
improve operations of the minor stse€t approach by allowing left turn
vehicles to enter the Frontage Road more easily by having a $eeignated Iane
Tom Kassmel
V-fl Kimley'Hom\lI/ I and Associales. lnc.
Mi Thr,na6 E. K$snd, Iuru 15, 2006, Page 5
or refuge area to tum into belore merging with through westbound traffic.
In additioo per the State Acress Code, both eastbound right tum and
westbound left tum lanes from the South Frortage Road are waEanted at
0ds inters€ctiorl With thece improvements, all rnovements at this
inte$€ction are o<pected to operate acceptably in the near tertrr and long
term horizons, with or without the addition of project fraffic. If adeguate
right-of-way is availablg the Town of Vail may wish to consider the
designation of separate left and right tum lanes ftom lhe minor sbeet
approach to this intersection This improvement is not ne€ded ba6ed upon
level of service analysic, but would improve the overall operatione of the
intersection. Table 2 provides the level of service results at this intersectiorL
Table 2 - South Frontage Road/W6t Lionshead Circle (west portal) tOS R€ulb
South Frontage Road md West Uonehead Clrcle (eaot portal)
A westbound left tum lane was found to be reqrired at this intersection in
2007 prior to project development based upon State Highway Accese Code
requirem€nts Ior category F-R roadways. With this improvemenq this
unsignalized east portal intersection of the South Frontage Road with West
Lionshead Circle is anticipated to continlre to operab with an ac€€ptable
level of service in 2007 with and without the addition of poject traffic
Prior to the addition oI project traffic in 2025, e€parate northbound left and
right tum lanes along West Lionshead Citcle arc anticipated to be needed to
maintain acceptable level of sewice. In additio+ a right tum deceleration
lane is anticipated to be warranted by 2025 based upon redevelopment of the
sccnrdo
Withoqt Projecr lMth Ptoiect
AM feal tlout PM Pe.k Hour AM Pa.k Hour PM P€rL Hout
Delry
(seqlveh)LOS Delry
(s€qeeh)LOS Delay
(seCtseD LOS Dehy
(seq&ch)LOS
AXt Short T€tm
lVllhoqt ImF6remr!{a
W.stbol',,tt App'patll
Northbolltl Apprsh
92
19.6 c
9.1
57.7 F
9.2
19.5 c
ol
6.6
A
F
2007 Short Term
With Inprovementc
Wcatbount Lcf
Norlhbound, Atproedt
9.2
15.0
9.7
25.0
92
15.1
A 9.1
E1 D
Zns lrtrg Term
Without Inproveneitr
W$tbound AWrMcll
Nqrthbqand Apvrudr
10.3
45-5
B
E
70.7
5D3
B
F
103
65
B 10J
534.4
B
ADli Long T€lm
With IEFove ments
l{estlovnd I4t
Northbound Atnoaalt
10.3
16.5
B 10.7 B
D
10.3
to.5
B
c
70:/
254
B
rt
Mr. Tlwnat E, f\astmel, Iuac 75, 2@6 Poge 5
North Day Lot as identified in the Lionshead Redeveloprrent Tnffic Impact
Study, Table 3 provides the level of seryice results at this inEsection
Table 3 - South Frontage Road/Wect Lionshead Circle (east portal) LOS Reeults
Based on the analysis presented in thio report, Kirrley-Hom believee the
Lion Square Lodge Norft project trFffi. will be successfully incorporated
without any additiorul improvements needed beyond whathas previously
been idmtified with the Lionshead Redevelopmerrt project II you have any
questions relating to this analysis, please call meat (3031?2&23rM-
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOqATES, INC.
// j-'
/,iln -q rrut
Curtis D. Rowe, P.8., PIOE
Associate
Scenrdo
Wlthort Proiea With Proiccl
AM Peal Hoqr PM Pe.k Hour AM Peal Hour PM PeaI Hour
Dehy
(rcctteh)LO8 DeLy
(req,beh)to9 Dehy
(req&eh)tos Delay
(r€Cfteh)I.oS
AX'T Short T€rm
Edsdng Loadwry
Watbouwt Appoadr
Northbuld Awrqclr
8.9
n.7 c
8.9
34.6 D
8.9
n3 c
E.9
ztxt thorl Term
With llrprwet[ettt8
V,lhtbunil ltf
Narthbound Aovroadl
E9
17.1
A
c
8.9
m.4
A &9
77.4
A
c
8.9
20.8 c
2lI5 Long TerE
Ed.tiry Ro.dway
W|ftboutnt Appradt
Northhound Awmedt
103
7U.4
I 11.1
592:t
B
F
10.3
143.4
B
F
11.1
624.7
B
F
2025 lrnt Tetlr
With luFsvcmet !
WestDclrld W
Northbqand IcJl
Notthbottnd. Nchl
10.3
77.8
27,6
B
D
c
11.1
26.3
n.o
B
D
c
10.3 .
4,4
4A
B
c
11.1
ztt.E
23
D
c
l\tc>FtTH
xt5 a@zo,oa
_11rJirnl I
i\ il --f4 i
lrtEffr!9
!11 r'1IL*lil'**r' nij
/L-J_Grsr^ I I II r----/
. I'i---J--.'J
LION SQUARE LODGE NORTH
SITE LOCATION FIGURE 1
ig;s
1*._-___--_
V-fll l(||hfihn
\lI7 \ and Associabs,lrc.
Tom Kassmel - Lion Square Lodge Revised Traffic Letter.o fe.$ q l
t@ ,."'. ':".,
;tii-., i -':i ffi"L[$ry
-,.iio^ttor
L..grts'.- -l
ij
*ffi'S'"*
a
@
tg,
LEGEND
Strdy Ar* lQy hha.dio.l
Sb9 Conlro!.d ApFasdl
Rodway Speod Ur*
LION SQUARE LODGE NORTH
EXISTING LANEAGE AND CONTFOL FIGURE 2
Itl KinorlqnIZ_! ad Arsq*|t€s, |m.
i Tom Kassmel -
||E oaaotb.@
,lt-
I
t'd{iljli -''. r...r"t
\ rr-l
1'.i,,) .l --''-.---'--
i-''tr|-' | **
tE-Glr.,rg
O Study ArEe fily Ini.rslctbl
XrcOq A,j(PM) P6el tlqtr Tritc VduE
LION SQUARE LODGE NORTH
2OO7 BACKGHOUND THAFFIC VOLUMES FIGUHE 3
,'-'"-\ \,'' l"
l*@ -.il!i -.- -- *'
.*
r6--t"'F: #
/ rr..
/ ,'';;;l^..;', "i '€'l 'i.n 4' r,..'r-''irhcr'e
i; ofl':'':.{^
^,
l.L'' /.lii_-_"*
=z\
fl'ffii:*'"
..f --
I--"t*ii'*t tt
,_l
l,
?1
I
I(
dts
LEGEND
O Srrdy ArEs Kry lnEtcdion
xx{xxl ,'li4(F'M} tbsr HqJr Tr
'tc
votunEr
LION SOUARE LODGE NORTH
2025 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 4
ad";.*
Revised Traffic Lefter.
41,'/$r'!r1L-q3gf"t '' '*I 1"
i
6
t
i- cd',"trrl.fYr;*/ ii#)
\J
LEGENO
a Sidy A,ta Xa, InB!€.aon
Xxttllx6) EnFtng (E)dtng) Trtp Dsuhjbn
LION SQUARE LODGE NORTH
PHOJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 5
IJI ximleY'ttom
f L \ rrd Assodabs, hrc.
I\r€>Ft-rH
tls og!&!.(Ir,
I
-- --'-tto'jo^'-
j n",
I(- ,-
""t
LEGEND
a Strjdy &r! K.y Inbt!€dion
XXXX) AM(PM) P..k Hotl' tlafic Votuh.r
LION SQUARE LODGE NOBTH
PROJECT TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT FIGUFE 6
tzllt[ r(m|8y ]rom
\JI7 t ad Atloclal*. lic.
i rom Kassmel - Lton $ouare_._* *-__ .. ! __._Revised Traffic Letter.
Itrfsftlrn
a|!d Aesodaba |rc.
TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIOUES
ITE Trio Generetion Mdtual 7lh Edruon, Avsrye Rab
Lend Use Codo . Resldgntial CondomlniurdTownhousB (230)
Indeper6ant Varhble - Dlye ing Units (X)
X= S
T = A\rer{a VeNcle Tdp End3
Diredionaf Dtstrihlbn:, 17% eflL qt%
T =. 4 Average Vehicle Trlp Ends1 ente.lng g odlrE
3=4
Directionat Distribution: 6Z% srd. 33%. T = S Averaoe Ve ch Trip ErEs3 entedng 2 oqns
3+Z=o
[D = 0.44 (x)(r)=0.44' 9.0
(r) = 0.52 (x)
CD = osz' e.0
exlt;
Lion
Khfry+lorn
tnd Associ8les, Inc.
TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIAUES
ITE Trio Cen€ration Manual 7th Edruon, Average Rate Equa ons
Land Use Cnde - Specialty Retail Center (914)
Indeperdart Variable - 10(}o Sq. Feet Gmss Leasabte Aree (X)
X = 0.65
T = Average Vehicle T.lp Ends
AM Peak Hour of Adlacent Strget Trafnc. lrates from Llonshsad Ma8tarptan)
Average Weekdey
entering (Th) = O.11 (X)
exiting (TJ = 0.OZ (X)
entering (Th) = 0.11 . (0.7)
e)(it[E Cf.d) = 0.07, (O.Z)
iD= ofrJ= o entedng
(To,J = 0 exiting
Di|octional Dislrlbution; €% er , SZ%
T = 2 Average Vehlcle Trlp Ends1 enterlng 1 exiting
Average Weekday
fD = 2.71 (X)(tl=2.7r' (0.7)
Peak Hour ot Goneralor. Saturdav {paoe t33El.
fi) = a.a32 (x)
$)= 4.432' (0.7)
1, + I = z
Dlrectional Dlttributbn: 5096 edering, 50% sdtingT = 2 Average Vehide Trip Ends1 entenng 1 exiting
1+1=2
Veak hc,,t ol gEnenl* ql Siturday assutned to te t O% ol daity
'
u'J | .'1a9sl9r- -_Lp n y$ a lg, leqs e-RglEgif g[r1c !9.Sry0 ro itrlPel__ --u __:_rlGrl
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analysl EAGAg€ncy/Co. Kmtey-Hon
Oate Perfofmed A13n6
Anafysis Time Period Total AM
tntersection F;fntaseM west Lionshead
Jurisdiction Town ot Vait
Analysis Vear 2OOT
Copyrithr O 200J UnNc6iryoffbrda. Att Rig13 R.s.rwd
I I om Kassmel - Lion
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst EAGAgency/Co. Kmlev-tlom
Date P€rformed 2/1U66
Analysis Time Poriod Totat pM
lntorsection Frontagew. West Lionshead
CirJurisdiclion Town otVall
Analysis Year Z0O7
, '
on [?!!T9l-_!'ol Sqqqg_-Lodge Revised Traffic Lefter.
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst EAeAgencylco. Kimtey-Hom
Dato Pertormed 213/06
Anafysis Time Period Total AM
fnterseclion ,Jfnr**t . West Lionshaad
Jr.Jrisdiction Town of Vail
Analysis Year ZO0T
Copyright O 20Ol tjniwairy ofFtorid!, Alt RifhB l(.!!rv.d
, Iom |g,s_s,ae! -r!olgqygF_-r,999q leyrseo iiJmc r_etter poro
TWO.WAY STOP CI )NTROL SUMMARY
Analyst EAcAgency/Co. Kimtey-Hom
Dats Performed 2/1g/06
Analysis Time Period Total pM
Intorseclion Frcntagettw. West Lionshead
ctfJurisdiction Town of Wtit
Analysis Year 20A7
Study Pedoo (hrs): 0.iS-tTtq?Y?lrtne*ana,nd. t"
Malor Strset I
MOvement 2 il 4 5 o
T R L TVolume (vehih)0 454 124 44 612 0icar-nour ractor. HHI-0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h)0 477 130 46 644 0Proportion of heavy
vohiclas, PHv o |- t-
Median type m llt I um Lane
RT Channellzed?0 0Lanes010II0sur ||rgurau(Jn IR L TJPsuea|I| Dtgnal 0 o
Mlnor strool Northbound Soulhbound
7 I 9 10 11 12
L T R I T RVolume (v€h/h)114 0 12 0 0 0rcal-nqqr'€crcr, HHI-0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 o95nuur|y rt()w F(aI€ (venrn)120 0 12 0 0 0Proporlion of heavy
,ehicles, PHV 12 0 12 o 0 0
Percent grade (yo)o
Flared approach N N
0 0
0 0
U 0 0 0 0
Lt{
Movement
Lane Conf
EB
1
WB
4
L
Southbound
10 11 12
.46 132
Capacity, c,n (vph)929 309
v/c ratio 0.05 0.43
Queue length (9570)0,16 2.05
Control Delay (s/veh)9.1 25.1
D
Approach delay (s/veh)25.1
Approach LOS o --f---
H(Jlunw Copyrighr Ol(toJ trrxv€ri'lt o I Ftondo. AI RilnB R6.rv.d
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY'
Analyst EAGAgency/Co. Kjmtey-Hom
Date Perfonned 2/19/06
Anafysis Time Period Totat AM
fnteraection Frontagelw, West Lionshead
CrJurisdilion Townofvait
Analysis Year ?OZs
Copyrighr G 2(X13 t h[,rr' rrt of f tor{,.. AI RithBR.r.n€d
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
ieneral lnformation Site lnformation
Analyst EAG
Agenry/Co. Kimley-Hom
Date Pertormed 413/06
Anafysis Time Period Total PM
E' ^tage/W. West Lionsheadfntersechon 'i;""
Jurisdbtion Town ot Vail
Anafysis Year 2025
Proiect Description Lion Square Ladg6: no improvements
East/Wsst Str6el: Sottrh Frcntaae Road North/South Street: W. Wast Lionsh9ad CIrcE
Inlersection Orisntation: Easl-Wesl Studv Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehiclo Vohmesanr Adiusffiients
Maior Slrsot Eastbound Westbound
Movement J 4 D
L T R L R
Volume (v€h/h)0 765 t35 64 8U 0
Peak+our factor. PHF 0.95 0.95 o95 0.95 0-95 0.95
Hourly Flo,v Rate (veh/h)805 142 56 877 0
Proporlion of heavy
yehbles, PHV 0 1l
Medlan tpe Undivided
RT Channelized?0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 0
Configuration rR LT
Uostream Signal 0 0
Minor Stroot Northbound Soulhbound
\4ovement I I 10 1t 12
L T R L T R
Vdums (vdr/h)121 0 12 0 0 0
Peak+our iactor. PHF 0.95 0-95 0.95 o95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flo,v Rste (veh/h 127 0 t2 o 0
Proporlion of heavy
vehicles, PHV 12 0
Percent grade (%)0 0
Flared approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized?0
Lanes 0 0 0 0 0
Confouration LR
Ol.Delay, Queue Lrtnsth, LhV-6ir od
Approach Ett WB Northbound Soulhbound
Movernent 4 8 I 10 11 12
Lane Contigurallon LT LR
Volume, v (vph)56 r39
Capocity, cm (vph)689 74
v/c ratio 0-08 1.88
Queue length (95%)0.26 12.35
Control Delay (s/veh)10.7 534.4
LOS B F
Approach delay (s/vsh)534.4
Approach LOS
HCs2ooo Copyrirht O 2003 Uniwrs ity of Florid,r. A ll Rislt5 R66ld
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General lnformation Sib Informatioi
Analyst EAGAgency/Co. Kimley-Hom
Date Performed 2/13/06
Analysis Tirne Period Total AM
E 6 -tagelw. West LfuJnshe adfnlerseclion 'C;"'
Judsdfction Towof Vail
AnalysisYear 2025
Proiect DoscriDtion Lion Square Lodse: with imomvements
Easuwesl Stre€t: Soulh fuontase Road \orwsouh Sfreel: W. West Lionshead Circb
lnterEection Orienlalion: Easl-l.yest itudv Period {hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Ad ii.tsttriant$
Maior Sbeet Eastbound Westbound
lvlovement t 4 o
L T R L T R
Volume (volvh)695 189 25 618
reak-hour factor. PHF 0.95 o95 o95 u.t c 0.95 0.95
Houdy Flow Rate (veh/h 731 198 26 650 0
Proportion of heavy
rehlcles, PHV 0
Madian type Two Way Laft Tum Lane
RT Channelized?0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration TR T
Upstream Sional a
Mlnor Streot Northbound Southbound
Mov6m€nt I 10 1t 12
T R L T R
Volume (veh/h)44 0 23 0 0 0
Peak-hour faclor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Houdy Flo,v Rale (veh/h)46 0 24 o o o
Proportion of heaw
,ehicles, PHV I 0 9 o 0
Perc€nt grade (%)0
Flared approach N
Slorags 0 0
RT Channelized?o 0
Lanes 0 0 o 0
ConFlguration tR
ontrol,Dslat, QuEuai Lenqth. Levbfot S;ivic€ ,. :, .
Approach WB I Norlhbornd Southbound
l\,lovement 1 4 I 9 t0 tl 12
Lane Configuration L LR
Volume, v (vph)10 70
Capacity, cm {vph)701 382
vlc ratio 0.04 0.18
Queue length (95%)0.12 0.66
Control Delay (siveh)10.3 16.5
LOS I
Approach delay (s,/veh)- | 16.5
Approach LOS
HCs2,,orr'l Copyritht O 2001 Univ.Bily of Flod., A ll Rr8hrs R.!.rvcd
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Anafyst EAGAgencyiCo. Kimley-Hom
Date Performed A13/06
Analysis Tims Period Total PM
E ^ ^.age/W. Wesf Lionsrreadlntersection 'i;'^
Jurisdiction Town ol Vail
Analysis Yoar 2025
Lions Squarc Lodde: wilh
Ha900d "l CoFyritl O 200.! U nivcBny of FtorytE. Att Rilhn R.j.ry.d
j Tom Kassmel - Lion Square L
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Sitb lnfomatl6n
Analyst . EAGAgency/Co. Klmley-Hom
Dats Performsd A13!06
Anafysis Time Period Total AM
lntersaction F rontag.e/E. West Lion shead
Cir
Jurisdiclion TNn of Vail
Anafysis Year 2007
Projecl Descriptlon Lion Square Lodge: no improvements
East/West She€t: South Frontage Road North/South Street E U/ss,Lionshead Circta
Intersection Orisnlalion: Ea$-!ryssl Sludv Period (hrs): 0,25
;lo Voluft bs and, Adlustnenti
Malor Street EaEtbound Westbound
Movemenl 1 2 4 c o
L T R I I R
Volume (veh/h)429 35 86 404 0
Peak-hour faclor. PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 .0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rale (veh/h 0 451 30 90 425 0
Proportion ofh€avy
r'ehicle8, PHv 16
Median typs Undivided
RT Channelized?o 0
LEN&5 0 1 0 0 0
Coafigu16lion TR ,T
Jpstrsam Siglal 0 0
Minor Stsoet Northbound Soulhbound
Movemenl E I 10 12
L T R L R
Volume (veh/h)0 155 o 0 0
Pssk+our facto,r. PHF u-vc 0.95 o95 o.95 0.95 0.95
Hourlv Flolx Rat€ (veh/h 38 163 o o 0
Proportion of h€avy
vehicjes, PHV 22 0 22 0 0 o
Percent grade (%)0 0
=larad approach /v N
Storage 0
RT Channelizgd?0
Lanes 0 o 0
Conflguration LR
cpttrot beldfi tloiue i renqth, Level of Sfrtce - r : .-, ll ,i "- ,l ir,. i:j'
Approaci EB WB Norlhbound Southbound
Movement 4 7 I I 't0 11 12
-ane Configuration LT LR
r'olume, v (vph)90 201
Capaclty, cm (vph)1007 418
v/c ratio 0.09 0.4E
Queue length (95%)0.29 2.U
Control Delay (sr!6h)E,9 21.3
tnq A
Approach delay (s/vBh)- | - I 21-3
Approach LOS
rrcszodt'l (lopynlhl C 2003 Univlrsity of Floridr, AllRaght! nca.rvEd
Tom Kassmel - Lion Square Lodge Revise_d Traffic Lefter.pdf
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information.
Analyst EAG
Agency/Co. Kimleyfiom
Dat6 Performed A13/06
Anafysis Time Period Total PM
lnterssction Frontage/E, We d Lionshe ad
ck
Jurisdiction Town of Vail
tuElysis Year 2007
oroiecl Description Lion Square Lodqe: no improwments
East/West Street: South Frontage Road North/South Sfreet: E. Wast Lionshead Clrcle
Intersection Orientation: Easf-rvest Shdv Period ftrs 0.25
Major Street Eastbound W8stbound
lrovemenl 1 2 il 4
L T R L T R
Votume (veh/h)0 429 98 600 0
P8ak-hour tactor, PHF 0.95 o95 0.95 0.95 0.95 n.16
Hourly Flow Rate (v6h/h)0 451 38 103 637 0
Proportion of heavy
vehicles, P*0
l\redian type Undividad
RT Channelized?0 0
LaneE 1 0 0 1 0
Contig uration IR LT
Upstream Signal 0 0
Minor Stroot Norihbound Soulhbound
MoverYlent s I 't0 11 12
L T R L T R
i/olume (veh/h)56 0 139 0 o 0
Peak+our faclor. PHF 0.9 0.95 o.0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rats (veh/h 58 146 0 0 0
Proportion of heavy
v6hicle6, PHV 17 0 0 o 0
Percenl grad6 (0/6)0
Flared approach N
Storags 0 0
RT Channellzed?0 0
Lan6s 0 o 0
Configuration LR
lua Lahdth. Levg ; "..
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 4 7 I 10 11 12
Lan€ Configuration LT LR
Volume, v (vph)103 204
Capaciiy, c, (vph)1029 313
v/c ralio 0.10 o65
Queue length (95o/o)0.33 4.27
Conkol Delay (stueh)8.9 35.7
LOS E
Approach delay (s/veh)35.7
Approach LOS F
HCszo,0rn^( qryirhr O 200.1 Un'v€En, of Floridr, A ll Rigrts R.i.ryd
Tom Kassmel - Lion Square
Hcs2oaor$Cotyngtr O 2003 Uniecrsiry ofFlorirh, Alt Ridtrs R...t!rd
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
en€ral Informatlon Sib.lnformation :
Analysl EAG
Agency/Co . KimlefHom
Date Performed 2/13/06
Analysis Tlme Period Total AM
lntersection Frontage/E. West Llon sh6ad
CirJurisdicfion Town otvail
Analysis Year 2007
Projec,t Description Uon Square Lodge: no improvoments
East/West Street: South Frontage Road Norlh/South Streef E, Wed Lionshead Chcle
Interseclion Ori€ntatlon: East-West Sludv Period (hrs); 0.25
rlcle,VoliimeCin .*ditistrhbnts i-. n.
Malor Stresi Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 o
T R L T R
y'olume (\€hlh)429 JC 86 404 0
Peak-hour factor. PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0-95
Hourly Flow RatB (veh/h 451 36 90 425 0
Proporlion of h6avy
vahicles, PHv 0 16
lvledian type Two Way Lefl Tum Lana
RT Channelized?0
Lanes 1 1 0
Configuration 7R L
Upstream Signal 0 0
Minor StsoEt Northbound Southbound
Movgment 7 E.I 10 1 12
I R T R
Volume (\/eh/h)?7 o 155 0 o 0
Peaktour factor. PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.9t 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flo,v Rate (veh/h)?A 0 163 0 0 0
P@poriion of h6avy
vehicles, PHv 22 0 22 0 0 0
Porcant grade (%)0
Flared approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelizsd?0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 0
ionfiguralion LR
;otirffi fD€|n/:ofei|iit$iia6d'tsvb$6fi GerurE{:i*---,4E1-'=FF;'" &if ,: I.l, .r : .it.TI'1,1 $i
{pproach EB WB I Northbound Soutrbound
Movement 4 8 o 10 11 12
:ane Configuration L LR
r'obme, v (vph)90 201
Sapacity. c, (vph)1007 490
v/c ratio 0.09 4.41
lueue length (95%)0.?9 1.9E
Conlrol Delay (s/veh)8.9
LOS
Approach delay (Yveh)- I 17.4
Approach LOS
i Tom Kassmel Revised Traffic Letter.
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
;En-eral liifdrmatoh,iG JnfuriirCtioir ; ., r 1":
Analyst EAG.
Agency/Co. Kimley-llun
Date Psriormed A13/06
Analysis Time Period Total PM
lnterseclion Frontage/E, West Uon shead
chJurisdicton Town of Vat
Anafysis Year 2007
Project Oescription Lion &uare Lodae: no imptovemenb
East/WestSfeet Sonth Frcntags Road North/South Street: E. West Lionshead Circla
Intersection Ori6ntalion: East-l.yest Studv Period (hrs): 0.25
3.a ri * ';.; t t,= .ii.F.')- :.:f,l!
Uaior Str.ot.Eastbound Westbound
Mov6ment 1 ?4 o
L R L T R
Volume (v€h/h)0 4 37 98 ffio
Peak+our factor. PHF 0.95 0.95 n|l4 0.95 0.95 0.9!
Hourly Floriv Rate (v3h/h 451 38 103 631 0
Proportion of heavy
vehides, PHV 0 11
[,ledian type Two Way Lafr Tum Lane
RT Channelized?0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 1
Configuration IR L
Upsheam SiEnal 0 0
Minor Stest Northbound Soulhbound
Movemenl ,I 10 12
T R L T R
/olume (v6h/h)56 0 139 0 0
Peak-hour faclor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h)cd 0 146 U 0 0
Proporlion of hBavy
,ehicl63, PHV 17 0 17 0 0
Percent grads (%)0 0
Flared aporoach N
Storage 0
RT Channelized?0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 0 v 0
Configuration LR
pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound
l\,lovemenl 4 8 10'11 12
Lane Configuratlon L tR
Volums, v (vph).103 204
Capadly, c- (vph)1029 428
v/c ratlo 0.10 0.48
Queue lenglh (95%)0.33 2.51
Control Delay (siveh)8.9 20.8
LOS A c
Approach delay (s/veh)20.8
{pproach LOS
Hcs2mlv CopFitlt o 2003 Univ.Fiiy offlond. All Ritht! R6lwcd Ve'tion 4.ld
, rqg_rgs-sggJ - lion lgggry _l_o_oge Bgyj_s,glgllg !-e,ft-ele! ,-..-, -_- - 4.-..
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General lnformaticin Site lnlormaton
Analyst EAG
Agency/Co. Kimley-Hom
Date Porformed 2/13/06
Analysis Time Period Total AM
F ronlageE. !/est Liofl shaadInlerseclon cir
Jurisdhlion Town of vail
Analysis Year 2025
Proiect DeseriDfion Lion Square Ldse: no improvemants
EastMest Skeel South Frontage Road {orth/South Street E. Wed Uonshead Clrcla
lnlarsection Orientation: East-Wes,studv Period (hrs): 0.25
llehicle \Ioluniei in ,Ailiusffirents
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Mov€menl 4 5 6
L T R L T F(
Volum€ (vehlh)0 6&64 112 590 0
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 o95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flor/ Ral6 (voh/h)o 688 67 117 621 0
Propo.lion of heavy
vehict€s, PHv 0 16
Median type Undivkted
RT Channelized?0 0
Lanes 1 o o 1 0
Configuration LT
Upstream Signal 0 0
Minor Streot Norlhbound Southbound
Movement 7 E I 10 11
T I R
r'olume (veh/h)57 0 175 0 0
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 o.95 0.95 0.95 0.1
Hourly Flow Rale (veh/h)M 0 1U o 0 0
Proporlion of heavy
r'ehiclos, PHV 22 0 22 0 0 0
Perc€nt grade (%)0 0
Flared approach N N
Storage 0 o
RT Channelizad?
Lan€s 0 0 0 0 o
Configuralion LR
lohtrot D6Hv. Qudud ;ewlce
Approach EB WB Norlhbound Southbound
lrovement 1 4 7 I o t0 11
Lane Contiguraton LT LR
Vdume, v (vph)117 244
capacity, c,o (vph)796 218
v/c ralio 0.15 1.12
Queue length (95%)0.51 11.33
ControlDelay (s/veh)10.3 143.4
-os tt F
Approach delay (s/veh)143.4
Approach LOS
Copyritht O 20ol U. n llsny of f lora&. A ll R I thls R6lritdcs2Nors
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Seneral Information Site.lnformation
Anafyst EAGAgency/Co. Kimley-Hom
Dat€ Psrforned A13/06
Analysis Time Period Total PM
lnterseclion Frcntage/E. West Lbn sha a d
CirJurisdiclion Town ol Vail
Analysis Y6ar 2025
Prorect Osss{iption L,bn Sguar€ Lodge,. no imprcyements
Easuwesl Strset: South F onlase Road 'forth/South Sheet: E. West Llonshead Circle
Intersection Orien!4ion: Easf-Wasl itudy Psriod (hrs): 0.25
/ohiota Voiumes and Adjiiitililits
Major Strost Eastbound Westbound
Movement J 4 5 o
L T R L T R
Volumq (vqh/h)0 660 117 178 E16 0
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h 0 694 123 187 858 0
Proportion of heavy
/ehicles, PHV 0 11
UedtCn type UNivide.l
RT Channelizod?0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuratlon IR LT
Upslream Signal 0
inor Street !{orhbound Southbound
Mov6ment I o '10 1 12
L T R I T R
Volume (vehy'h)76 0 0 0 0
Peak-hour factor. PHF o95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h EO 0 180 0 0 0
Proportion of heavy
r'ahicle8, PHV 17 0 17 0 0
Percent grade (%)0 o
lared aDoroach N
Storage o 0
RT Channelized?o 0
mea 0 0 o 0 0 0
Configuration LR
;ontrot-Deriv, Qucue LensrhirLdiliol s5f$Fi:-
Approach EB . WB I Norlhbound Southbound
Movernent 1 4 o 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LT LR
Volume, v (vph)187 260
capacity, cm (vph)773 118
v/c ratio 0.24 2.20
Queue lsngth (95%)0-95 22.15
Control Delay (s^/eh)628.1
os E
Approach delay (vveh)- | 628.1
Approach LOS f
//c,9?ooorM Copyright O2001tin'leliiry orFb'ida All Righrs Rrs€w€d
Tom Kassmel - Lion
General lnformation
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
lSito Informition
Analyst EAG
Agency/Co. KimleY'Hon
Date Perionned 2n3no
turafysis Tim€ Poriod Total AM
lntersection
Frcntaga/E. Wesl Lionshead
Cil
Jurisdiction Town of Vail
Analysis Year 2025
Project Description Lrbn I
E^^r^^t--r a'^^r. a^rrt r E,
':nrnrc | rulna wilh im!'rrawemenls
FNl];h./slnfth sbeet. E Wesl Lionshead Circle
,ntersection Orientation: East-Wesl .itudY Period (hrs): 0.25
Vahialo V.lliillrris anrl Adi[stmants ., 1 ''
Maior Slroct Eastbound Wesbound
Movement 1 4 5 o
L T R L T R
/olume (vof/h)0 654 04 112 80 o
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 U-YC
Hourlv Flow Rato (veh/h)0 688 67 117 621 0
Prportion of heavy
r'ehiclos, PHv o 16
Median typo Two WalLefl Iurn LanE
RT Channelized?o
lanes 0 1 0 I 0
configuration fR L T
Upsbeam Signd 0 o
Minol Street Norlh Southbound
llovement 7 I q 10 1 12
L T R L T R
Volume (vewh)57 175 0 0
Peak-hour faclor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 ,95 0.95 0.95
-loudv Flow Rate (veh/h)60 1U 0 o 0
Proportlon of heavy
vehicles, PHV 22 0 0 0
Percent grado (%)0 0
Flared approach N
Slorage 0 o
RT Channelized?0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 0
Confiquration L R
ib:,i
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
4 7 I I 10 11 '12
ane Configuralion L R
Volume, v (vph)117 60 1W
Capacity, cm (vph)796 .213 395
v/c ratio o.15 0-28 o.47
Queue length (95%)1.11 240
Control Delay (s/veh)10.3 28.4 21.8
LOS E D w
Approach delay (s/veh)23.4
Approach LOS
Copy r'!r O 2003 Univ..r'ly of lldtda All Rig}|lt R.rat dttcslooor14
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Intormatlod iite lnfonnatlon
Analyst EAG
Agency/Co. Kmley-ttom
Date Performed 41Y06
Analysis Tim€ PEriod Total PM
lntereec{ion F rontagelE. West Lbrstaad
Ctr
Jurisdiction Town of Vail
Analysis Year 2025
Proiact DescriDtion Lion Squarc Lodge: with imqovenl€nts
East/West Street South Fmntags Road North/South Street: E. Wesl Llonshead Cltvle
lntersection Orienletion: Eas{-}yast tudy Period (hrs): 0.2
Malor Streei Eastbound ' Wostbound
l\4ovement 1 3 4 5 6
L T R L R
Vdume (vewh)0 660 117 178 816 0
Peak-hour factor. PHF o95 0.95 o.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Houdy Row Rate (veh/h)0 694 123 187 858
Proportion of heavy
vehlcles, PHv 0
Median Vpa Two Way Left Tum Lane
RT Channelized?0 0
LanSs 0 1 0 1 I 0
Conllgu ration 7R I T
Upstream Signal 0 0
Mlnor Strest Northbound Southbowd
Movemsnt 7 8 9 t0 'l'l 12
L T R L T R
Volume (votvh)76 0 171 0 0
Peak-hour taclor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 o.95
Hourlv Flow Rate (veh/h)EO 180 0 0 0
Proporllon of heavy
vehicles, PHv o 17 o 0
Percent grade (o/o)0
Flared appro€ch N
Storage 0 0
RT Channalized?0 0
Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0
Configuration L F
driii6l Dd-liv] oiieiub LbhA0i;iEsv{
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 I q 10 1l 12
Lane Configuratbn L L R
Volume, v (vph)187 80 180
Capacity, c,n (vph)773 244
v,lc ralio 0.24 0.33 0.47 I
Queue length (95%)0.95 1.37 2.41
Control Delay (s/veh)11.1 ,AR 22.3
LOS 6
fuDroach deiay (stueh)
Approach LOS c
Copyndrr O 200J Unrvc6 yolFlorili,All R'dt! R(!..EdI/caooorH