Bistro 6. City of Barrie. Traffic Impact Study for Pratt Hansen Group Inc. Type of Document: Final Report. Project Number: JDE 1748

Transcription

1 City of Barrie Traffic Impact Study for Pratt Hansen Group Inc. Type of Document: Final Report Project Number: JDE 1748 Date Submitted: June 12 th, /12/17 John Northcote, P.Eng. Professional License #: JD Northcote Engineering Inc. 86 Cumberland Street Barrie, ON

2 Legal Notification Pratt Hansen Group Inc. This report was prepared by JD Northcote Engineering Inc. for the account of Pratt Hansen Group Inc. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decisions to be made based on it, are the responsibility of such third parties. JD Northcote Engineering Inc. accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this project. ii

3 Table of Contents Pratt Hansen Group Inc. 1 Introduction Background Study Area Study Scope and Objectives Horizon Year and Analysis Periods Information Gathering Street and Intersection Characteristics Local Transportation Infrastructure Improvements Horizon Year Traffic Volumes Proposed Development Traffic Generation and Assignment Traffic Generation Traffic Assignment Total Horizon Year Traffic Volumes with the Proposed Development Intersection Operation with Proposed Development Introduction Total (2020) Intersection Operation Total (2021) Intersection Operation Total (2031) Intersection Operation Sight Distance Review Barrie South GO Station Access Phasing and Site Access Construction Parking Summary List of Tables Table 1 Estimated Traffic Generation of Proposed Development... 9 Table 2 Distribution of Traffic from the Proposed Development... 9 Table 3 Site Access Summary Table 4 Level of Service Criteria for Intersections Table 5 Total (2020) LOS Table 6 Total (2021) LOS Table 7 Total (2031) LOS iii

4 List of Figures Figure 1 Proposed Site Location and Study Area... 2 Figure 2 Existing (2017) Intersection Spacing and Lane Configuration with in Study Area... 4 Figure 3 Background (2020) Traffic Volumes... 6 Figure 4 Background (2021) Traffic Volumes... 7 Figure 5 Background (2031) Traffic Volumes... 8 Figure 6 Subject Site Traffic Assignment (2020) Figure 7 Subject Site Traffic Assignment (2021) Figure 8 Subject Site Traffic Assignment (2031) Figure 9 Total (2020) Traffic Volumes Figure 10 Total (2021) Traffic Volumes Figure 11 RIRO Access Redistribution Figure 12 Total (2031) Traffic Volumes List of Appendices APPENDIX A Crisdawn Lands Functional Design Review and Hewitt Transportation Study Excerpts APPENDIX B Site Plan APPENDIX C Synchro Analysis Output Total Traffic Volumes APPENDIX D OTM Signal Justification Sheets iv

5 1 Introduction 1.1 Background Pratt Hansen Group Inc. [The Developer] is proposing to develop a high-density residential phase [subject site] of the Crisdawn Lands located within Block 613 of the Hewitt s Gate Subdivision in the City of Barrie [City]. The Crisdawn Lands are located on the south side of Mapleview Drive between Yonge Street and 20 th Sideroad (excerpt showing the Crisdawn Lands area provided in Appendix A). The subject site is located on the southeast corner of the future collector road [Street D] within the Crisdawn Lands area. The subject site includes six residential apartment buildings with a total of 440 units. The proposed development includes a right-in, right-out access [RIRO] onto Mapleview Drive East [RIRO Access] and two full-movement access driveways onto the future collector road [North Street D Access and South Street D Access]. The City has confirmed that the RIRO Access can operate as a fullmovement access prior to the reconstruction of Mapleview Drive East (construction currently scheduled to start in 2022). The Developer has retained JD Northcote Engineering Inc. [JD Engineering] to prepare this traffic brief in support of the proposed phase of the residential development. A Transportation Study was completed for the Hewitt Secondary Plan Area, dated February 2017 by LEA Consulting Ltd. [Hewitt Transportation Study], which functions as the traffic study for the Draft Plans of Subdivision for the lands within the Hewitt Secondary Plan Area. A Functional Design Review by LEA Consulting Ltd. was also completed for the proposed draft plan of subdivisions for the Crisdawn Construction Inc. Lands (now referred to as the Hewitt s Gate subdivision), dated February 2017 [Crisdawn FDR]. This traffic brief will build on the findings of these previous studies. 1.2 Study Area Figure 1 shows the location of the subject site and study area intersections in relation to the surrounding area. The Conceptual Site Plan by Jones Consulting Group Limited is shown in Appendix B. The subject site is bound by Mapleview Drive East to the north and the undeveloped Crisdawn Lands to the west, south and east. Through consultation with the City, the following intersections are included in the Traffic Brief: Mapleview Drive East/ RIRO Access; North Street D Access / Street D; and South Street D Access / Street D. 1

6 Figure 1 Proposed Site Location and Study Area 1.3 Study Scope and Objectives The purpose of this study is to identify the potential impacts to traffic flow at the site access and on the surrounding roadway network. The study analysis includes the following tasks: Consult with the City to address any traffic-related issues or concerns they have with the proposed development; Determine existing traffic volumes and circulation patterns; Estimate future traffic volumes if the proposed development was not constructed, including the impact of additional proposed developments in the area based on the Hewitt Transportation Study; Estimate the amount of traffic that would be generated by the proposed development and assign to the roadway network; Complete level-of-service [LOS] analysis of horizon year (with the proposed development) traffic conditions and identify additional operational deficiencies; Identify improvement options to address operational deficiencies; 2

7 Review the available sight distance at all site access driveways; Complete a review of traffic calming requirements within the study area; Review and comment on how pedestrians will access Mapleview Drive East and cross midblock to access the GO Train Station; Review and comment on the phasing of build-out in relation to the construction of Street D and the proposed internal roadways / site entrances; Review and comment on the construction staging plan as it relates to parking of trades people, delivery of construction material, maintenance of adjacent property access, pedestrian movements, City infrastructure, etc.; and Document findings and recommendations in a final report. 1.4 Horizon Year and Analysis Periods Traffic scenarios for 67% buildout year (2020), full-buildout year (2021) and 10-year post full-buildout year (2031) were selected for analysis of traffic operations in the study area. The weekday morning [AM] and weekday afternoon [PM] peak hours have been selected as the analysis periods for this study. 2 Information Gathering 2.1 Street and Intersection Characteristics Mapleview Drive East is a two-lane major arterial road with paved shoulders and an urban cross section within the study area. Mapleview Drive East generally has a sidewalk on the north side of the road within the study area. Mapleview Drive East has a posted speed limit of 60km/h and is under the jurisdiction of the City within the study area. The existing intersection spacing and lane configuration within the study area is illustrated in Figure 2. 3

8 Figure 2 Existing (2017) Intersection Spacing and Lane Configuration with in Study Area 2.2 Local Transportation Infrastructure Improvements According to the City of Barrie Multi-Modal Active Transportation Master Plan [MMATMP], the following road improvements were anticipated to be completed prior to 2016, but have not been completed at the time of this study: Mapleview Drive East (within study area) o Addition of one lane in both directions plus a two way left turn lane Through discussions with City staff, construction for the above-noted road widening is anticipated to begin in

9 2.3 Horizon Year Traffic Volumes The Hewitt Transportation Study analyzes the impact of the entire Hewitt Lands, including a detailed traffic study for each land parcel including the Crisdawn Lands. Traffic volumes for the Mapleview Drive East / Street D intersection during the 2020 PM, 2031 AM and 2031 PM peak hours were calculated in this study 1 (excerpts are provided in Appendix A). Since the 2020 AM peak hour traffic projections were not calculated as a part of the Hewitt Transportation Study, we have estimated the 2020 AM peak hour traffic volumes using the 2020 and 2031 PM peak hour traffic volumes assuming the same ratio of traffic will exist in 2020 compared to 2031 for both the AM and PM peak hour. Linear traffic growth from 2020 to 2031 for the AM and PM peak hour has been assumed. The AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes for the 2021 horizon year scenario have been estimated using this traffic growth rate assumption. Figure 3, 4 and 5 illustrate the background (2020, 2021 and 2031) AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes within the study area. 1 Street D is identified as Street 1 in the Hewitt Transportation Study 5

10 Figure 3 Background (2020) Traffic Volumes 6

11 Figure 4 Background (2021) Traffic Volumes 7

12 Figure 5 Background (2031) Traffic Volumes 8

13 3 Proposed Development Traffic Generation and Assignment 3.1 Traffic Generation The traffic generation for the subject site has been based on the Crisdawn FDR. Residential traffic generation in the Crisdawn FDR was based on trip rates obtained from a proxy site survey of the residential development located along Prince William Way between Mapleview Drive and Big Bay Point Road. The trip rates for the above-noted proxy site and the estimated trip generation of the proposed development is illustrated below in Table 1. Development Table 1 Estimated Traffic Generation of Proposed Development Size AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL Crisdawn Lands FDR Proxy Site Subject Site 67% Buildout 293 units Subject Site Full Buildout 440 units In order to be conservative, no transportation modal split has been applied to the above-noted traffic generation calculation. 3.2 Traffic Assignment For the purposes of this study, it has been assumed that all residential traffic generated by the proposed development will follow the traffic distribution calculated in the 2031 horizon year at the Mapleview Drive East / Street D intersection in the Hewitt Transportation Study. The distribution of trips is illustrated in Table 2 using the methodology outlined above. Table 2 Distribution of Traffic from the Proposed Development Peak Hour Eastbound via Mapleview Drive East Ingress Traffic Direction Westbound via Mapleview Drive East Eastbound via Mapleview Drive East Egress Traffic Direction Westbound via Mapleview Drive East AM 97.2% 2.8% 0.6% 99.4% PM 98.9% 1.1% 2.5% 97.5% The distribution of traffic entering at each access location is based on our review of the internal parking and building layout, in conjunction with the external traffic distribution. For the 2020 horizon year, the RIRO Access will function as a full-movement access and the South Street D Access will not yet be constructed. For the 2021 horizon year, the RIRO Access will function as a full-movement access and both Street D accesses will be operational. For the 2031 horizon year, the RIRO Access will function as a RIRO access and both Street D accesses will be operational. A summary of the site accesses for each horizon year is provided in Table 3. 9

14 Table 3 Site Access Summary Horizon Year Site Accesses RIRO Access North Street D Access South Street D Access 2020 Full Movement Access Full Movement Access Not Constructed 2021 Full Movement Access Full Movement Access Full Movement Access 2031 RIRO Access Full Movement Access Full Movement Access The total traffic generation by the subject site is illustrated in Figures 6, 7 and 8 for the AM and PM peak hour. 10

15 Figure 6 Subject Site Traffic Assignment (2020) 11

16 Figure 7 Subject Site Traffic Assignment (2021) 12

17 Figure 8 Subject Site Traffic Assignment (2031) 3.3 Total Horizon Year Traffic Volumes with the Proposed Development The background traffic volumes calculated from the Hewitt Transportation Study and Crisdawn FDR in Section 2.3 include traffic generated as a result of the development of the subject site, as the subject site is a small component of the Crisdawn Lands area. However, in the 2020 and 2021 horizon year, the site-generated volumes calculated in Section 3.1 are higher than the traffic volume projected on Street D in the Hewitt Transportation Study. This is due to the occupancy and buildout 13

18 assumptions for the Crisdawn Lands in the Hewitt Transportation Study. Therefore, in order to be conservative, the total (2020 and 2021) horizon year traffic volumes were calculated by adding the subject site traffic to the background (2020 and 2021) traffic volumes. We have conservatively assumed that all the projected traffic on Street D from the Hewitt Transportation Study will travel past the Subject Site. The resulting total (2020 and 2021) horizon year traffic volumes for the AM and PM peak hour can be found in Figures 9 and 10. Figure 9 Total (2020) Traffic Volumes 14

19 Figure 10 Total (2021) Traffic Volumes The background (2031) traffic volumes (illustrated in Figure 5) were developed based on the Hewitt Transportation Study, which included the full buildout of the Crisdawn Lands. Consequently, the traffic generated by the subject site (illustrated in Figure 8) have been deducted from the volume of traffic passing by the Subject Site on Street D. The RIRO Access would not have been accounted for in the Hewitt Transportation Study; consequently, the volume of traffic using the RIRO Access has been removed from the traffic volume projections for the Mapleview Drive East / Street D intersection and reassigned to the RIRO Access. The RIRO Access redistribution is illustrated in Figure 11. The 15

20 resulting total (2031) horizon year traffic volumes for the AM and PM peak hour can be found in Figure 12. Figure 11 RIRO Access Redistribution 16

21 Figure 12 Total (2031) Traffic Volumes 17

22 4 Intersection Operation with Proposed Development 4.1 Introduction Traffic operations within the study area were evaluated using the horizon year traffic volumes with the existing road configuration and traffic control. The intersection performance was measured using the traffic analysis software, Synchro 9, a deterministic model that employs Highway Capacity Manual and Intersection Capacity Utilization methodologies for analyzing intersection operations. These procedures are accepted by provincial and municipal agencies throughout North America. Synchro 9 enables the study area to be graphically defined in terms of streets and intersections, along with their geometric and traffic control characteristics. The user is able to evaluate both signalized and unsignalized intersections in relation to each other, thus not only providing level of service for the individual intersections, but also enabling an assessment of the impact the various intersections in a network have on each other in terms of spacing, traffic congestion, delay, and queuing. Individual turning movements with a volume-to-capacity [V/C] ratio of 0.85 or greater are considered to be critical movements and have been highlighted in the LOS tables. The intersection operations were also evaluated in terms of the LOS. LOS is a common measure of the quality of performance at an intersection and is defined in terms of vehicular delay. This delay includes deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and acceleration delay. LOS is expressed on a scale of A through F, where LOS A represents very little delay (i.e. less than 10 seconds per vehicle) and LOS F represents very high delay (i.e. greater than 50 seconds per vehicle for a stop sign controlled intersection and greater than 80 seconds per vehicle for a signalized intersection). The LOS criteria for signalized and stop sign controlled intersections are shown in Table 4. A description of traffic performance characteristics is included for each LOS. 18

23 Table 4 Level of Service Criteria for Intersections LOS LOS Description Control Delay (seconds per vehicle) Signalized Intersections Stop Controlled Intersections A Very low delay; most vehicles do not stop (Excellent) less than 10.0 less than 10.0 B Higher delay; more vehicles stop (Very Good) between 10.0 and 20.0 between 10.0 and 15.0 C D E F Higher level of congestion; number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many still pass through intersection without stopping (Good) Congestion becomes noticeable; vehicles must sometimes wait through more than one red light; many vehicles stop (Satisfactory) Vehicles must often wait through more than one red light; considered by many agencies to be the limit of acceptable delay This level is considered to be unacceptable to most drivers; occurs when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection (Unacceptable) between 20.0 and 35.0 between 15.0 and 25.0 between 35.0 and 55.0 between 25.0 and 35.0 between 55.0 and 80.0 between 35.0 and 50.0 greater than 80.0 greater than Total (2020) Intersection Operation The results of the LOS analysis under total (2020) traffic volumes during the AM and PM peak hour can be found below in Table 5. The interim intersection geometry and traffic control from the Hewitt Transportation Study has been utilized for this scenario. Detailed output of the Synchro analysis can be found in Appendix C. Table 5 Total (2020) LOS Location (E-W Street / N-S Street) Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour V/C Delay (s) LOS V/C Delay (s) LOS Mapleview Drive East / RIRO Access B B NB E E Street D North Access / Street D A A WB A A The results of the LOS analysis indicate that all intersections are operating within the typical design limits noted in Section 4.1. An analysis was completed for left turn movements at unsignalized intersections within the study area, based on the criteria outlined in Section E.9.1 of the MTO GDSOH. No additional left turn lanes are warranted at any of the study area intersections. The criterion outlined in Section E.7 of the MTO GDSOH (60vph minimum right turn volume warrant) has been used to assess whether an auxiliary right turn lane is required at any unsignalized study area intersections. The eastbound right-turn volume in the PM peak hour at the Mapleview Drive East / RIRO Access intersection exceeds the minimum volume threshold; however, this infrastructure improvement is not recommended based on the excellent LOS for this movement at this intersection. Furthermore, the planned Mapleview Drive East road widening (planned for 2022) includes two eastbound lanes which will provide additional eastbound capacity for through movements on 19

24 Mapleview Drive East. No additional right turn lanes are warranted at any of the other study area intersections. Based on the Ontario Traffic Manual Book 12 Signal Justification, traffic signals are not warranted at any of the unsignalized intersections (results are provided in Appendix D). No infrastructure improvements are recommended within the study area. 4.3 Total (2021) Intersection Operation The results of the LOS analysis under total (2021) traffic volumes during the AM and PM peak hour can be found below in Table 6. The interim intersection geometry and traffic control from the Hewitt Transportation Study has been utilized for this scenario. Detailed output of the Synchro analysis can be found in Appendix C. Location (E-W Street / N-S Street) Table 6 Total (2021) LOS Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour V/C Delay (s) LOS V/C Delay (s) LOS Mapleview Drive East / RIRO Access B C NB F F Street D North Access / Street D A A WB A A Street D South Access / Street D A A WB A A The results of the LOS analysis indicate that the northbound movements at the Mapleview Drive East / RIRO Access intersection are operating at an LOS F during the AM and PM peak hour. Although the control delay for the northbound movements exceeds the typical design thresholds specified in Section 4.1, infrastructure improvements are not recommended at this intersection as traffic signals are not warranted at this intersection based on the OTM Book 12 Signal Justification (results are provided in Appendix D). Furthermore, the control delay at this intersection is heavily influenced by the northbound left turn movement control delay. As the control delay at this driveway increases, it is anticipated that traffic will be diverted to the Street D North Access / Street D intersection which would allow for northbound left turn movements at the intersection of Mapleview Drive East / Street D. This redistribution of traffic would improve the control delay at the RIRO Access. The results of the LOS analysis indicate that all other intersections are operating within the typical design limits noted in Section 4.1. An analysis was completed for left turn movements at unsignalized intersections within the study area, based on the criteria outlined in Section E.9.1 of the MTO GDSOH. No additional left turn lanes are warranted at any of the study area intersections. The criterion outlined in Section E.7 of the MTO GDSOH (60vph minimum right turn volume warrant) has been used to assess whether an auxiliary right turn lane is required at any unsignalized study area intersections. The eastbound right-turn volume in the PM peak hour at the Mapleview Drive East / RIRO Access intersection exceeds the minimum volume threshold; however, this infrastructure improvement is not recommended based on the excellent LOS for this movement at this intersection. Furthermore, the planned Mapleview Drive East road widening (planned for 2022) includes two eastbound lanes which will provide additional eastbound capacity for through movements on 20

25 Mapleview Drive East. No additional right turn lanes are warranted at any of the other study area intersections. Based on the Ontario Traffic Manual Book 12 Signal Justification, traffic signals are not warranted at any of the unsignalized intersections (results are provided in Appendix D). No infrastructure improvements are recommended within the study area. 4.4 Total (2031) Intersection Operation The results of the LOS analysis under total (2031) traffic volumes during the AM and PM peak hour can be found below in Table 7. The ultimate intersection geometry and traffic control from the Hewitt Transportation Study has been utilized for this scenario. Detailed output of the Synchro analysis can be found in Appendix C. Location (E-W Street / N-S Street) Table 7 Total (2031) LOS Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour V/C Delay (s) LOS V/C Delay (s) LOS Mapleview Drive East / RIRO Access A A NB B B Street D North Access / Street D A A WB B A Street D South Access / Street D A A WB A A The results of the LOS analysis indicate that all intersections are operating within the typical design limits noted in Section 4.1. An analysis was completed for left turn movements at unsignalized intersections within the study area, based on the criteria outlined in Section E.9.1 of the MTO GDSOH. No additional left turn lanes are warranted at any of the study area intersections. The criterion outlined in Section E.7 of the MTO GDSOH (60vph minimum right turn volume warrant) has been used to assess whether an auxiliary right turn lane is required at any unsignalized study area intersections. The eastbound right-turn volume in the PM peak hour at the Mapleview Drive East / RIRO Access intersection exceeds the minimum volume threshold; however, this infrastructure improvement is not recommended based on the excellent LOS for right turn movements at this intersection and the excess capacity available for eastbound through movements on Mapleview Drive East. There are two eastbound lanes on Mapleview Drive East at this intersection and there is sufficient excess capacity to accommodate right turn movements in the first eastbound lane and provide the necessary eastbound through capacity for this scenario in the second lane. No additional right turn lanes are warranted at any of the other study area intersections. Based on the Ontario Traffic Manual Book 12 Signal Justification, traffic signals are not warranted at any of the unsignalized intersections (results are provided in Appendix D). No infrastructure improvements are recommended within the study area. 21

26 4.5 Sight Distance Review A review of the available sight distance for the proposed RIRO Access was completed as part of this analysis. The sight distance east and west of the Site Access is significantly greater than the minimum stopping sight distance requirements as identified in the Transportation Association of Canada Design Guide for Canadian Roads (2011) [TAC Guidelines] for a design speed of 70km/h (110 meters). There are no issues with the sight distance available for the proposed RIRO Access. A review of the sight distance for the proposed Street D North Access and Street D South Access was completed as part of this analysis. Based on the proposed alignment of Street D, there are no horizontal sight line constraints within the minimum stopping sight distance requirements as identified in the Transportation Association of Canada Design Guide for Canadian Roads (2011) [TAC Guidelines] for a design speed of 60km/h (85 meters). A review of the vertical sight distance should be completed for the proposed Street D North Access and Street D South Access, once the vertical profile of Street D has been confirmed. Based on our preliminary review, the vertical profile of Street D will not result in sight distance issues for the proposed Street D North Access and Street D South Access. 4.6 Barrie South GO Station Access There is currently no sidewalk on the south side of Mapleview Drive East between Yonge Street and the subject site. In order to provide access to the Barrie South GO Station, a temporary asphalt walkway is recommended starting at Street D and extending to Yonge Street on the south side of Mapleview Drive East. The Barrie South GO Station is located northeast of the Yonge Street / Mapleview Drive East intersection. Currently, the only pedestrian access to this GO Station is through the GO Station access driveway on Yonge Street, north of the Yonge Street / Mapleview Drive East intersection. It is not anticipated that a direct pedestrian access to Mapleview Drive East from the Barrie South GO Station will be constructed before 2031; therefore, a midblock crossing on Mapleview Drive East is not required. Pedestrians would cross at the Yonge Street / Mapleview Drive East intersection, since this path would be the most direct pedestrian route to the existing pedestrian access to the GO Station property. After 2031, if an additional pedestrian access is provided to Barrie South GO Station, near the southwest corner of the GO Station property, pedestrians from the subject site will be able to cross Mapleview Drive East at the signalized intersection of Mapleview Drive East / Street D. According to the recommendation outlined in the Hewitt Transportation Study, the Mapleview Drive East / Street D intersection will be signalized prior to Phasing and Site Access The residential development will be constructed in two phases. Phase 1 will include 67% buildout of the development and Street D will be constructed to a location just south of the North Street D Access. In this phase, the subject site will have a single full-movement access onto Street D at the North Street D Access, with a single lane for ingress and egress movements. Phase 1 will also include an access directly onto Mapleview Drive East at the RIRO Access, with a single lane for ingress and egress movements. Prior to 2022 and the planned Mapleview Drive East road widening, the RIRO Access onto Mapleview Drive East will be temporarily configured as a full-movement 22

27 access. The Phase 1 traffic can be adequately conveyed by the above-noted site access configuration. Phase 2 will include buildout of the remaining development and Street D will be extended to just south of the South Street D Access. In this phase, the subject site will have two full-movement access driveways onto Street D at the North Street D Access and South Street D Access. Both access driveways onto Street D will have a single lane for ingress and egress movements. Phase 2 will also include an access directly onto Mapleview Drive East at the RIRO Access, with a single lane for ingress and egress movements. Prior to 2022 and the planned Mapleview Drive East road widening, the RIRO Access onto Mapleview Drive East will be temporarily configured as a fullmovement access. The Phase 2 (ultimate site buildout) traffic can be adequately conveyed by the above-noted site access configuration. During each phase, the proposed development access as illustrated on the Site Plan will not cause any operational issues and will not add significant delay or congestion to the local roadway network. Subsequent to 2022 and the Mapleview Drive East road widening, the access onto Mapleview Drive East (RIRO Access) will be converted from the temporary full-movement configuration to the final right-in right-out configuration, with a single lane for ingress and egress movements. Along with the North Street D Access and South Street D Access the ultimate site buildout traffic can be adequately conveyed by the above-noted site access configuration. In the event that the subject site remains in the Phase 1 configuration subsequent to 2022 (with the reconstruction of Mapleview Drive East), the Phase 1 traffic can be adequately conveyed by the fullmovement North Street D Access and the ultimate right-in, right-out configuration of the RIRO Access on Mapleview Drive East. The proposed 54 metre spacing 2 between the proposed intersection of Street E / Street D and the South Street D Access and the 50 metre spacing 2 between the proposed intersection of Street F / Street D and the South Street D Access both meet the TAC Guidelines (Figure ) for suggested minimum corner clearance to access or public lanes at major intersections. 4.8 Construction Parking Based on our correspondence with the design team for this project, the Developer is committed to the following arrangement for construction parking: The parking of construction vehicles and vehicles owned by staff and subcontractors employed by the Developer will be formally directed (in writing where possible) to avoid parking on municipal streets surrounding the subject site and avoid parking within private parking lots surrounding the subject site, without consent from the owner of the parking lots. 5 Summary Pratt Hansen Group Inc. retained JD Engineering to prepare this traffic brief in support of the high density residential phase of the Crisdawn Lands located within Block 613 of the Hewitt s Gate Plan of Subdivision in the City of Barrie. The proposed Site Plan is shown in Appendix B. This chapter summarizes the conclusions and recommendations from the study. 1. The subject site includes six residential apartment buildings with a total of 440 units. 2 Measured centre of intersection to centre of intersection. 23

28 2. The proposed development is expected to generate a total of 212 AM and 290 PM peak hour primary trips. 3. Traffic volumes were obtained for the Mapleview Drive East / Street D intersection during the 2020 PM, 2031 AM and 2031 PM peak hours from the Hewitt Transportation Study. Using these traffic volumes and assuming year-over-year linear traffic growth within the study area, the 2020 AM, 2021 AM and 2021 PM traffic volumes were calculated within the study area. 4. An estimate of the amount of traffic that would be generated by the subject site was prepared and assigned to the study area intersections. In the 2020 and 2021 horizon year scenarios, the subject site volumes were included over-and-above Hewitt Transportation Study traffic volume projections for the study area. In the 2031 horizon year scenario, the Hewitt Transportation Study traffic volumes include the subject site traffic volumes at the Street D / Mapleview Drive East intersection; consequently, a reassignment of the traffic volume projections was made to account for the traffic volumes at the Mapleview Drive East / RIRO Access intersection. 5. An intersection operation analysis was completed under total (2020, 2021 and 2031) traffic volumes with the proposed development operational at the study area intersections. No infrastructure improvements are recommended. 6. The sight distance available for the RIRO Access driveway meet the minimum stopping sight distance requirements. There are no horizontal sight line constraints on Street D at the North Street D Access or the South Street D Access. A review of the vertical sight lines along Street D at the North Street D Access or the South Street D Access is recommended once the final vertical profile of Street D has been confirmed. 7. A single ingress and egress lane will provide the necessary capacity to convey the traffic generated by the subject site at the proposed Street D North Access and Street D South Access. For the ultimate buildout of the subject site (prior to 2022 and the Mapleview Drive East road widening), a single ingress and egress lane at the RIRO Access on Mapleview Drive East will provide the necessary capacity to convey the traffic generated by the proposed development. 8. For the ultimate buildout of the subject site (subsequent to 2022 and the Mapleview Drive East road widening), a single RIRO ingress and egress lane will provide the necessary capacity to convey the traffic generated by the proposed development, in conjunction with the proposed Street D North Access and Street D South Access. 9. In summary, the proposed development will not cause any operational issues and will not add significant delay or congestion to the local roadway network. 24

29 Appendix A Crisdawn Lands Functional Design Review and Hewitt Transportation Study Excerpts 25

30 Crisdawn Construction Inc. Hewitt Land Parcel I & J Draft Plan of Subdivision Phase 1 Functional Design Review 1 1 INTRODUCTION LEA Consulting Ltd. (LEA) was retained by Crisdawn Construction Inc. to conduct a Functional Design Review for the proposed lands (herein referred to as the Crisdawn Lands ) located within the Hewitt Secondary Plan Area in the City of Barrie (herein referred to as the City ). The Crisdawn Lands, which are currently vacant, are located on the south side of Mapleview Drive between Yonge Street and 20 th Sideroad, as illustrated in Figure 1-1. The lands are bounded by Mapleview Drive to the north, a cemetery and the GO train lines to the west, and vacant lands to the south and east. Subject Site Crisdawn Lands Figure 1-1: Site Context The proposal for the lands includes a residential development with single-detached, street and back-toback townhouse, multi-unit and high density units, and an institutional development, with the main accesses provided through the extension of Royal Jubilee Drive and Prince William Way south of Mapleview Drive. An additional access will be provided through Street 1, which is proposed to be located east of Yonge Street. Figure 1-2 illustrates the Crisdawn Lands with respect to the Hewitt 2031 Development Plan. February /200

31

32

33

34

35 Appendix B Site Plan 26

36

37 Appendix C Synchro Analysis Output Total Traffic Volumes 27

38 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: RIRO Access & Mapleview Dr E Total (2020) AM Peak Hour Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 162 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

39 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Street D & Street D North Access Total (2020) AM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 182 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 6.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 18.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

40 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: RIRO Access & Mapleview Dr E Total (2020) PM Peak Hour Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 162 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

41 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Street D & Street D North Access Total (2020) PM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 182 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 6.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

42 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: RIRO Access & Mapleview Dr E Total (2021) AM Peak Hour Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 162 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

43 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Street D & Street D North Access Total (2021) AM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 182 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

44 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: Street D & Street D South Access Total (2021) AM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 400 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 15.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

45 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: RIRO Access & Mapleview Dr E Total (2021) PM Peak Hour Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 162 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

46 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Street D & Street D North Access Total (2021) PM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 182 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 24.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

47 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: Street D & Street D South Access Total (2021) PM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 400 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

48 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: RIRO Access & Mapleview Dr E Total (2031) AM Peak Hour Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) 162 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol 630 vc2, stage 2 conf vol 768 vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

49 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Street D & Street D North Access Total (2031) AM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 182 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

50 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: Street D & Street D South Access Total (2031) AM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 400 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 22.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

51 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: RIRO Access & Mapleview Dr E Total (2031) PM Peak Hour Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) 162 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol 1380 vc2, stage 2 conf vol 452 vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

52 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Street D & Street D North Access Total (2031) PM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 182 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

53 Development HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: Street D & Street D South Access Total (2031) PM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 400 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 JD Engineering Synchro 9 Report 06/07/2017

54 Appendix D OTM Signal Justification Sheets 28