DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING"

Transcription

1 DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING Final Report August 3, 216 #31, 316 5th Avenue NE Calgary, AB T2A 6K4 Phone: Fax: wattconsultinggroup.com

2 Dunbow Road Functional Planning Final Report Prepared for: Prepared by: MD of Foothills Watt Consulting Group Our File: 332.T1 Date: August, 216

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Organization of the Report Introduction Preamble Stage 1 Study Objective and Scope Study Area Study Location Studied Intersections Methodology Intersection Capacity Evaluation Intersection Improvements Criteria Existing Traffic Volumes Analysis... 7 STAGE Existing Conditions Future Conditions Network Conditions Network Conditions Two-Lane Road Cross-section Four-Lane Road Cross-section Four-Lane Road Cross-section (Improved) STAGE Timing of Improvements Widening Improvements at Intersections Alignment Cross-sections Horizontal and Vertical Alignments Intersection Layouts Right-of-Way and Construction Limits Construction Cost Access Management Speed Limit Zones Conclusions Recommendations Dunbow Road Functional Planning Final Report

4 Section 2 Sensitivity Analysis Introduction Improvement Criteria Results of the Analysis Horizon Horizon Horizon Horizon Conclusions LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX I: APPENDIX II: APPENDIX III: EXISTING AND FUTURE HORIZONS LINK VOLUMES SYNCHRO OUTPUT R.O.W REQUIREMENTS Dunbow Road Functional Planning Final Report

5 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1: Study Area... 5 Figure 2-2: Selected Intersections... 5 Figure 4-1: Existing Turning Movements... 9 Figure 4-2: Existing Intersections Layout... 9 Figure 4-3: 22 Turning Movements Figure 4-4: 245 Two-Lane Cross-Section Turning Movements Figure 4-5: 245 Two-Lane Cross-Section Intersection Layout Figure 4-6: 245 Four-Lane Cross-Section Turning Movements... 2 Figure 4-7: 245 Four-Lane Cross-Section Intersection Layout... 2 Figure 4-8: 245 Six-Lane Cross-Section Intersection Layout Figure 4-9: 23 Intersection Improvements Figure 4-1: 235 Intersection Improvements Figure 5-1: Dunbow Road Existing Cross-Section Figure 5-2: Dunbow Road Cross-Section Options (1-3)... 3 Figure 5-3: Dunbow Road Cross-Section Options (4-5) Figure 5-4: Option 1 Intersection Layout Figure 5-5: Option 2 Intersection Layout Figure 5-6: Option 3 Intersection Layout Figure 5-7: Typical Roundabout Layout Figure 11-1: Site Context Figure 11-2: 22 Horizon Year Figure 11-3: 225 Horizon Year Figure 11-4: 23 Horizon Year Figure 11-5: 235 Horizon Year LIST OF TABLES Table 3-1: LOS Criteria for Intersection... 6 Table 4-1: Capacity Evaluation Existing Conditions Summary of Results... 1 Table 4-2: Results of the 22 Horizon Year Capacity Analysis Table 4-3: Results of the 245 Horizon Year Capacity Analysis Two-Lane Cross-Section Table 4-4: 245 Horizon Year Intersection Improvements Two-Lane Cross-Section Table 4-5: Results of the 245 Horizon Year Capacity Analysis Four-Lane Cross-Section Table 4-6: 245 Horizon Year Intersection Improvements Four-Lane Cross-Section Table 4-7: Results of the 245 Horizon Year Capacity Analysis Four-Lane Cross-Section (Improved). 23 Table 4-8: 245 Horizon Year Intersection Improvements Four-Lane Cross-Section (Improved) Table 6-1: Estimated Construction Cost Table 9-1: Intersection and Cross-Section Upgrades Table 11-1: Progression of Development Analysed Scenarios Table 11-2: Road Classification and Environmental Capacity Table 11-3: Intersection and Road Improvements Dunbow Road Functional Planning Final Report

6 Organization of the Report This report summarizes the results of the Dunbow Road functional planning study. This study was conducted in two Stages: Stage 1 included o analysis of the existing and future operations; o review of the possible cross-section alternatives; o identification of the right-of-way (r/o/w) requirements; and o access management. Stage 2 involved a sensitivity analysis of the progression of the development to provide better understanding as to the timing of the required improvements. This report provides a summary of the results of the analysis and is formatted in two sections reflecting stages of the analysis. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 1 Final Report

7 SECTION 1 STAGE 1 of the ANALYSIS Long-Term Network Review Dunbow Road Functional Planning 2 Final Report

8 1. Introduction This Section of the report summarizes the results of the Stage 1 analysis, which included: o analysis of the existing and future operations; o review of the possible cross-section alternatives; o identification of the right-of-way (r/o/w) requirements; and o access management. The analysis was carried out for following two scenarios: o 22 horizon year and o Ultimate build-out. 1.1 Preamble This study was commissioned by the MD of Foothills to review the impact of the proposed residential developments on Dunbow Road and to determine required improvements and their timing. Planned development includes: 5, unit Development A located north of Dunbow Road and west of the Bow River Development B, including a 2,5 unit development planned north of Highway (Hwy) 552 and west of 8 Street In addition, results of the study were to identify an ultimate cross-section for Dunbow Road and develop an ultimate access management strategy as well as determine timing of the required improvements. This study was also intended to identify the impact of those improvements on the existing development. Currently, Dunbow Road has a two-lane rural cross-section with a posted speed limit of 8 km/hr. It follows the east-west road allowance of the provincial grid road system and its pavement is approximately 12.5 meters (m) wide between the Deerfoot Trail interchange and 96 Street and approximately 7 m wide east of 96 Street. 1.2 Stage 1 Study Objective and Scope The objective of Stage 1 of this Study was to review the existing operational conditions and the current access management strategy along Dunbow Road, identify the ultimate cross-section for Dunbow Road from the Bow River to the East to Deerfoot Trail to the West, and develop a long-term access management strategy. The analysis had to account for two proposed developments in the area: 5, unit Development A located north of Dunbow Road and west of the Bow River and the 2,5 unit Development B planned north of Hwy 552 and west of 8 Street. The Study scope included: 1. Review of the existing information including traffic volumes, the available development plans and as-built drawings; Dunbow Road Functional Planning 3 Final Report

9 2. Site reconnaissance; 3. Traffic analysis; 4. Traffic forecast using MD traffic forecasting model and operational and capacity analysis; 5. Development of conceptual cross-sections for Dunbow Road and access management strategy; 6. Identification of the improvements required; 7. Identification of the desired speed limit zones; 8. Preparation of plans showing three typical cross-section alternatives and 'typical' intersection configurations including: a four-legged, a T and an offset dual T for the desirable cross-section; as well as 9. Preparation of the report. 2. Study Area 2.1 Study Location The studied area is bordered by the Bow River to the north, Hwy 552 to the south, Range Road (RR) 284 to the east, and Deerfoot Trail to the west (Figure 2-1). The area includes residential developments and two 18 hole golf courses, as well as agricultural land uses. The studied road segment is approximately 9.9 km long and has currently more than 35 accesses and intersections. 2.2 Studied Intersections Seven key intersections along Dunbow Road were evaluated in detail. It should be noted that numerous accesses off of Dunbow Road lead to single farmsteads or residential subdivisions with limited number of units. Consequently, they were not included in the detailed capacity analysis. Intersections selected for analysis are listed below and shown in Figure Dunbow Road / 16 th Street: Connects significant southern residential areas to Dunbow Road. 2. Dunbow Road / Artesia Boulevard: Connects significant residential area to Dunbow Road. 3. Dunbow Road / 32 nd Street: Major south connector. 4. Dunbow Road / 56 th Street: Connects residential areas and river attractions to Dunbow Road. 5. Dunbow Road / RR 29: Connects residential area to Dunbow Road. 6. Dunbow Road / 8 th Street: Major north-south connector. 7. Dunbow Road / RR 285: Major south connector. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 4 Final Report

10 Figure 2-1: Study Area Figure 2-2: Selected Intersections Dunbow Road Functional Planning 5 Final Report

11 3. Methodology 3.1 Intersection Capacity Evaluation The operating conditions during the peak hours at the studied intersections were evaluated using the Synchro/SimTraffic software package, which is based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) evaluation methodology. For un-signalized (stop-controlled) intersections, the Level-of-Service (LOS) is based on the computed delays on each of the critical movements. LOS A represents minimal delays for minor street traffic movements, and LOS F represents a scenario with an insufficient number of gaps on the major street for minor street motorists to complete their movements without significant delays. For signalized intersections, the methodology considers the intersection geometry, traffic volumes, the traffic signal phasing/timing plan, and also pedestrian volumes. The average delay for each lane group is calculated, as well as the delay for the intersection overall. The operating conditions can also be expressed in terms of vehicle volume to carrying capacity (v/c) ratios. V/c ratios express the degree of saturation or the ability to accommodate traffic demand. As this ratio approaches one (1), traffic demand gets closer to capacity. Ratios exceeding one (1) indicate that traffic may become unstable and long delays may occur. LOS criteria for both unsignalized and signalized intersections, as summarized in the HCM, are illustrated in Table 3-1. TABLE 3-1: LOS CRITERIA FOR INTERSECTION Level of Service (LOS) Average Delay for UNSIGNALIZED Intersection Movements Average Delay for SIGNALIZED Intersection Movements A 1 seconds per vehicle 1 seconds per vehicle B > 1 15 seconds per vehicle > 1 2 seconds per vehicle C > seconds per vehicle > 2 35 seconds per vehicle D > seconds per vehicle > seconds per vehicle E > 35 5 seconds per vehicle > 55 8 seconds per vehicle F > 5 seconds per vehicle > 8 seconds per vehicle 3.2 Intersection Improvements Criteria The following criteria for acceptable LOS operations were used in this report: 1. A maximum v/c ratio of one (1) with a minimum LOS of E is acceptable for developments within urbanized areas. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 6 Final Report

12 2. A maximum v/c ratio of.9 with a minimum LOS of D is acceptable for developments within rural areas. Studied intersections were evaluated using a v/c ratio of.9 and LOS D as thresholds to consider improvements during all horizons and before the full completion of the proposed developments. In 245, a v/c ratio of 1 and LOS E were used as thresholds to consider improvements as traffic volumes are expected to be similar to those in urban areas. 3.3 Existing Traffic Volumes Traffic counts at the intersection of Dunbow Road / Deerfoot Trail were obtained from the available online Alberta Transportation (AT) intersection counts database. Unfortunately, there are no existing counts for the remaining seven intersections. Therefore, traffic was estimated for each residential development in the study area assuming that each residential unit produces one trip during peak hour. Then, traffic was superimposed to Dunbow Road using the existing accesses and was traced up to the interchange of Dunbow Road / Deerfoot Trail. The results of comparison of the estimated volumes with those obtained from the AT database indicated that the estimated traffic volumes exceeded the existing interchange counts at Dunbow Road/ Deerfoot Trail by 13%. Therefore, the generated traffic numbers were reduced by 13%. The estimated turning movements at the seven remaining intersection points are shown in Figure 4-1. Link volumes can be found in Appendix I. 4. Analysis The operational and capacity analysis was carried out in two stages: Stage 1 included review of the existing conditions and two horizon years, 22 and 245. This stage was used to determine the interim and ultimate Dunbow Road crosssection and traffic controls. Stage 2 included review of traffic forecasts for the years 225, 23, 235, and 24 to establish a preliminary schedule of improvements required throughout the studied section of Dunbow Road. For the background traffic, population and employment numbers have been incorporated into the model for the horizon years 22, 225, and 23 per information provided by the MD of Foothills. For the horizon years 235 and 24, the employment and population numbers were grown by an annual rate of 3% per year. Sections 4.1 to 4.4 summarize the results of the Stage 1 analysis, while Section 4.5 contains a summary of Stage 2 results. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 7 Final Report

13 STAGE Existing Conditions Using the traffic volumes (shown in Figure 4-1) and the existing intersection configurations (Figure 4-2), existing conditions were evaluated using Synchro. The results, seen in Table 4-1, show that all movements at the evaluated intersections are expected to operate at the acceptable LOS of C or better. Average delays are not expected to exceed 15 seconds, with a maximum v/c ratio of.2 or lower. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 8 Final Report

14 Figure 4-1: Existing Turning Movements Figure 4-2: Existing Intersections Layout Dunbow Road Functional Planning 9 Final Report

15 TABLE 4-1: CAPACITY EVALUATION EXISTING CONDITIONS SUMMARY OF RESULTS Intersection ID Dunbow Rd / Artesia Boulevard (TWSC) Dunbow Rd / 32 Street (TWSC) PM PEAK HOUR v/c Ratio LOS Delay (s) Queue (m)* EB WB NB Through Left Left.2..6 A A B 13 Right Through Right A A A Intersection Summary - A 1 - EB WB Left Through / Left.5. A A 8 Through / Right Right.17. A A NB Left / Through / Right. C 15 SB Through / Left. A Right.5 A 1 Intersection Summary - A 2 - EB WB NB SB Left / Through Left / Through Left / Through Through / Left...3. A A B A 12 Right Right Right Right.1... A A A B 11 Intersection Summary - A 1 - EB Left / Through / Right.1 A 1 WB Left / Through / Right. A NB Left / Through / Right. B 11 SB Left / Through / Right.1 A 9 Intersection Summary - A 1 - INTERSECTION / MOVEMENT Dunbow Rd / 16 Street (OWSC) Dunbow Rd / 56 Street (TWSC) Dunbow Rd / Range Road 29 (OWSC) Dunbow Rd / 8 Street (TWSC) Dunbow Rd / Range Road 285 (TWSC) EB Left / Through / Right.1 A WB Left / Through / Right.6 A SB Left / Through / Right.1 A 9 Intersection Summary - A 1 - EB Left / Through / Right.2 A 2 WB Left / Through / Right. A NB Left / Through / Right.2 B 1 SB Left / Through / Right.2 A 9 Intersection Summary - A 2 - EB Left / Through / Right.2 A 2 WB Left / Through / Right. A NB Left / Through.3 A 1 Right. A SB Left / Through / Right.2 A 8 Intersection Summary - A 4 - * Queues are rounded to the nearest 5 m; Delays are rounded to the nearest 1 sec. For Synchro Output refer to Appendix II. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 1 Final Report

16 4.2 Future Conditions The analysis accounts for the two proposed developments in the area: 5, unit Development A located north of Dunbow Road and west of the Bow River and 2,5 unit Development B planned north of Hwy 552 and west of 8 Street. Full build-out is expected at the 245 year horizon. For the 22 horizon year, it was assumed that the following number of units will be completed: 9 units for Development A and 45 units for Development B. Turning movements used in the analysis were obtained from the MD of Foothills Forecasting Model and reflect the traffic forecast for the analyzed horizon years and assumed progression. At the 245 horizon year, two access intersections were assumed for the Development A 5, unit development. The volumes entering/exiting Development A at the 245 horizon year were assigned to the two access intersections using a 5-5 split. A 3% yearly growth rate in the area was assumed for the purpose of this report. It was also assumed that by the year 245, the density of developments and traffic volumes could be closer to those encountered in urban areas. Therefore, a v/c of 1. and LOS E were used as thresholds for considered intersectional improvements Network Conditions The forecasted model traffic for the year 22 horizon year (Figure 4-3) was evaluated using Synchro and the existing traffic controls (shown previously on Figure 4-2). The results of the analysis are summarized in Table 4-2. Based on the results, all movements at the evaluated intersections are expected to operate at LOS D or better and with a delay of less than 32 seconds, with a maximum v/c ratio of.5. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 11 Final Report

17 Figure 4-3: 22 Turning Movements Dunbow Road Functional Planning 12 Final Report

18 TABLE 4-2: RESULTS OF THE 22 HORIZON YEAR CAPACITY ANALYSIS Intersection ID PM PEAK HOUR v/c Ratio LOS Delay (s) Queue (m)* EB WB NB Through Left Left A A D 26 Right Through Right A A A Intersection Summary - A - EB WB Left Through / Left.2. A A 8 Through / Right Right.42. A A NB Left / Through / Right.5 D 3 SB Through / Left.2 D 3 Right.3 B 11 Intersection Summary - A 1 - EB WB NB SB Left / Through Left / Through Left / Through Through / Left A A D A 27 1 Right Right Right Right A A A B 12 Intersection Summary - A 2 - EB Left / Through / Right. A WB Left / Through / Right. A NB Left / Through / Right.1 C 18 SB Left / Through / Right.1 B 12 Intersection Summary - A - INTERSECTION / MOVEMENT Dunbow Rd / 16 Street (OWSC) Dunbow Rd / Artesia Boulevard (TWSC) Dunbow Rd / 32 Street (TWSC) Dunbow Rd / 56 Street (TWSC) Dunbow Rd / Range Road 29 (OWSC) Dunbow Rd / 8 Street (TWSC) Dunbow Rd / Range Road 285 (TWSC) EB Left / Through / Right. A WB Left / Through / Right.21 A SB Left / Through / Right.1 B 1 Intersection Summary - A - EB Left / Through / Right.1 A WB Left / Through / Right.3 A 1 NB Left / Through / Right.11 C 18 5 SB Left / Through / Right.2 B 12 Intersection Summary - A 2 - EB Left / Through / Right.26 A 8 1 WB Left / Through / Right. A NB Left / Through.33 D 32 1 Right. A SB Left / Through / Right.5 C 16 2 Intersection Summary - B 12 - * Queues are rounded to the nearest 5 m; Delays are rounded to the nearest 1 sec. For Synchro Output refer to Appendix II. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 13 Final Report

19 Network Conditions It should be noted that evaluation of the 245 operational conditions has been carried out in two stages. The original evaluation of the 245 network was performed using a two-lane Dunbow Road. As the traffic forecast volumes suggested that Dunbow Road would be operating close to capacity, the network was subsequently re-evaluated using a four-lane cross-section. Intersection improvements were introduced wherever required Two-Lane Road Cross-section The forecast model traffic for the year 245 was evaluated using Synchro; results are summarized in Table 4-3. The traffic turning movements and link volumes shown in Figure 4-4 and Appendix I suggested modification of the existing traffic control system, especially at intersections with heavy left-turning volumes. Therefore, the initial evaluation was performed using the existing lane configuration with signal control where needed. Intersection improvements were applied wherever required (Figure 4-5). The results shown in Table 4-3 reflect introduction of signal controls with signal timing plans and improvements aimed at resulting in low delays and reasonable LOS. For example, signals were assumed to be actuated, which allows for skipping the minor roads phase when there are no vehicles at the minor roads approaches. Summary of the intersection improvements used in this evaluation is shown in Table 4-4. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 14 Final Report

20 TABLE 4-3: RESULTS OF THE 245 HORIZON YEAR CAPACITY ANALYSIS TWO-LANE CROSS-SECTION Intersection ID Dunbow Rd / Artesia Boulevard (Signal) Dunbow Rd / 32 Street (Signal) Dunbow Rd / 56 Street (Signal) Dunbow Rd / Range Road 29 (OWSC) Dunbow Rd / 8 Street (Signal) Dunbow Rd / Range Road 285 (Access A: Signal) Dunbow Rd / Future Access (Access B: Signal) PM PEAK HOUR v/c Ratio LOS Delay (s) Queue (m)* EB WB NB Through Left Left D A E #34 15 Right Through Right A B C Intersection Summary - C 27 - EB WB Left Left / Through A A Through / Right Right.87. B A 14 #25 NB Left / Through / Right.18 C 22 5 SB Through / Left.4 C 34 5 Right.21 B 16 1 Intersection Summary - B 11 - Left. A 1 EB Through 1.1 E 55 #41 Right.8 A 2 5 Left.74 D 53 #6 WB Through.48 A 8 85 Right. A NB SB Left Left.7. E A 59 6 Through / Right Through / Right.. A A Intersection Summary - D 41 - EB Left.2 A 2 Through / Right.74 A 8 95 WB Left / Through / Right.58 A 5 5 NB Left / Through / Right.5 C 34 5 SB Left / Through / Right.2 A Intersection Summary - A 6 - INTERSECTION / MOVEMENT Dunbow Rd / 16 Street (Signal) EB Left.1 A 1 Through.63 A WB Through / Right.5 A SB Left / Right.2 C 15 Intersection Summary - A - EB Left.4 A 7 5 Through / Right.92 C 29 #26 Left.73 C 33 #45 WB Through.55 A 6 85 Right.1 A 2 NB Left.27 D Through / Right.7 B 19 3 SB Left / Through / Right.36 C 31 1 Intersection Summary - C 21 - EB Left.99 E 75 #95 Through / Right.69 C Left.4 C 26 5 WB Through 1.1 E 77 #17 Right.77 B NB Left.3 B 19 5 Through / Right.35 B Left.98 E 73 #13 SB Through.16 C 2 25 Right.46 A 4 15 Intersection Summary - D 41 - EB WB SB Left Through Left E E E #1 #21 #115 Through Right Right A A A Intersection Summary - D 42 - * Queues are rounded to the nearest 5 m; Delays are rounded to the nearest 1 sec. For Synchro Output refer to Appendix II. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 15 Final Report

21 Figure 4-4: 245 Two-Lane Cross-Section Turning Movements Figure 4-5: 245 Two-Lane Cross-Section Intersection Layout Dunbow Road Functional Planning 16 Final Report

22 TABLE 4-4: 245 HORIZON YEAR INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS TWO-LANE CROSS-SECTION Intersection/Controls Improvements Dunbow Road / 16 Street The existing geometric configuration Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / Artesia Boulevard The existing geometric configuration Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / 32 Street Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / 56 Street Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / Range Road 29 No control upgrades Dunbow Road / 8 Street Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / Range Road 285 Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / Second Development A Access Signal Controlled Eastbound and Westbound approaches: one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane Northbound approach: two left turn lanes and shared through / right lane Southbound approach: one left turn lane and one shared through / right lane Eastbound approach: one left turn lane and one shared through right lane Westbound, northbound, and southbound approaches: one all turns lane One left turn lane and one through lane eastbound approach Eastbound and northbound approaches: one left turn lane and one shared through / right lane Westbound approach: one left turn lane and one shared through / right turn lane Southbound approach: one all turns lane Eastbound approach: two left turn lanes, one shared through / right lane. Westbound and southbound approaches: one left turn lane, one through lane and one right turn lane Northbound approach: one left turn lane and one shared through / right turn lane Eastbound approaches: two left turn lanes, one through lane Westbound approach: one through lane and one right turn lane Southbound approach: one left turn lane and one right turn lane Based on the results of the analysis, the following movements are expected to operate at LOS E, or v/c exceeding acceptable 1. level: Dunbow Road / 16 Street: The northbound left movements are expected to operate at LOS E and a delay of 75 seconds Dunbow Road / 32 Street: The eastbound through and northbound left movements are expected to operate at an LOS of E with delays of 55 and 59 seconds, respectively. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 17 Final Report

23 Eastbound through movement is expected to have a v/c ratio of 1.1. The overall LOS of the intersection is D. Dunbow Road / RR 285 (Access A): The eastbound left movements are expected to operate at LOS E and a delay of approximately 75 seconds with a v/c ratio of.99. Westbound through movements are expected to operate at LOS E and a delay of 77 seconds with a v/c ratio of 1.1. Southbound left movements are expected to operate at an LOS of E and a delay of 73 seconds with a v/c ratio of.98. The overall LOS of the intersection is D. Dunbow Road / Future Access (Access B): The eastbound left and the southbound left movements are expected to operate at LOS E, with delays of 57 and 55 seconds, respectively. Also, westbound through movement is expected to operate at LOS E and a delay of 67 seconds. The overall LOS of the intersection is D. As shown in the intersection evaluation Table 4-3, the eastbound through movements are close to or exceed capacity (v/c ratio reaching or exceeding 1.). Therefore, a four-lane cross-section throughout the length of the analyzed section of Dunbow Road was introduced Four-Lane Road Cross-section Forecasted traffic volumes using a four-lane cross-section in year 245 were evaluated using Synchro; results are summarized in Table 4-5. It should be noted that as the capacity of the road increased, the traffic volumes also increased reflecting short-cutting traffic destined to Deerfoot Trail. Traffic volumes shown in Figure 4-6 and Appendix II account for additional traffic short-cutting to and from Deerfoot Trail via Dunbow Road. Intersection improvements were applied wherever required as shown in Figure 4-7. Table 4-6 is a summary of the intersectional improvements used in the evaluation of the fourlane Dunbow Road cross-section scenario. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 18 Final Report

24 TABLE 4-5: RESULTS OF THE 245 HORIZON YEAR CAPACITY ANALYSIS FOUR-LANE CROSS-SECTION Intersection ID Dunbow Rd / Future Access (Access B: Signal) PM PEAK HOUR v/c Ratio LOS Delay (s) Queue (m)* EB WB NB Through Left Left D C E Right Through Right A A A Intersection Summary - C 27 - Left.4 B 14 1 EB Through 1.2 C Right.2 A 1 Left.15 A 8 WB Through.72 A 5 11 Right.1 A 1 NB Left / Through / Right.29 E SB Through / Left. A Right.32 C Intersection Summary - B 2 - Left.1 A 3 EB Through 1. C Right.2 A 2 1 Left.2 A 3 WB Through.64 A 6 95 Right. A NB SB Left Through / Left F A Through / Right Right.1.1 E A 62 Intersection Summary - D 41 - EB WB Left Left.6.2 A A 2 2 Through / Right Through / Right.92.6 B A NB Left / Through / Right.6 B 13 SB Left / Through / Right.9 C 2 5 Intersection Summary - A 8 - EB Left.6 C 17 Through.81 A WB Through / Right.72 A SB Left / Right.3 C 18 Intersection Summary - A - Left.21 B 15 1 EB Through.94 C Right.5 A 7 65 WB NB SB Left Left Left B E C Through / Right Through / Right Through / Right B E C Intersection Summary - C 25 - EB Left.95 D Through / Right.55 A 1 1 Left.4 C 27 WB Through.94 D Right.25 A 8 NB Left.7 D 35 Through / Right.57 D Left.69 D 47 3 SB Through.13 C 28 1 Right.7 A 8 Intersection Summary - C 31 - EB WB SB Left Through Left D D D Through Right Right A A B Intersection Summary - C 29 - INTERSECTION / MOVEMENT Dunbow Rd / 16 Street (Signal) Dunbow Rd / Artesia Boulevard (Signal) Dunbow Rd / 32 Street (Signal) Dunbow Rd / 56 Street (Signal) Dunbow Rd / Range Road 29 (OWSC) Dunbow Rd / 8 Street (Signal) Dunbow Rd / Range Road 285 (Access A: Signal) * Queues are rounded to the nearest 5 m; Delays are rounded to the nearest 1 sec. For Synchro Output refer to Appendix II. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 19 Final Report

25 Figure 4-6: 245 Four-Lane Cross-Section Turning Movements Figure 4-7: 245 Four-Lane Cross-Section Intersection Layout Dunbow Road Functional Planning 2 Final Report

26 TABLE 4-6: 245 HORIZON YEAR INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS FOUR-LANE CROSS-SECTION Intersection/Controls Improvements Dunbow Road / 16 Street Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / Artesia Boulevard Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / 32 Street Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / 56 Street Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / RR 29 No control upgrades Dunbow Road / 8 Street Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / RR 285 Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / Second Development A Access Signal Controlled Eastbound approach: two through lanes and one right turn lane Westbound approach: one left turn lane and two through lanes Northbound approach: one left turn lane and one shared left / right turn lane Eastbound and westbound approaches: one left turn lane, two through lanes, and one right turn lane Northbound approach: one all turns lane Southbound approach: one shared left / through lane and one right turn lane Eastbound and Westbound approaches: one left turn lane, two through lane, and one right turn lane Northbound approach: two left turn lanes and shared through / right lane Southbound approach: one shared left / through lane and one right turn lane Eastbound and Westbound approaches: one left turn lane, one through lane, and one shared through / right turn lane Northbound and Southbound approaches: one all turns lane Eastbound approach: one left turn lane and two through lanes Westbound approach: one through lane and one shared through / right turn lane Southbound approach: one shared left / right turn lane Eastbound approach: one left turn lane, two through lanes and one right turn lane Westbound approach: one left turn lane, one through lane and one shared through / right turn lane Northbound and southbound approach: one left turn lane and one shared through / right lane Eastbound approach: two left turn lanes, one shared through lane and one shared through / right lane Westbound approach: one left turn lane, two through lanes and one right turn lane Northbound approach: one left turn lane and one shared through / right turn lane Southbound approaches: one left turn lane, one through lane and one right turn lane Eastbound approaches: two left turn lanes, one through lane Westbound approach: one through lane and one right turn lane Southbound approach: one left turn lane and one right turn lane Dunbow Road Functional Planning 21 Final Report

27 Based on the analysis, the following movements are expected to operate at below acceptable level of service and/or with v/c ratios exceeding acceptable 1. level: Dunbow Road / 16 Street: o Eastbound through movement is expected to operate at LOS D with a delay of 42 seconds and a v/c of 1.5. o Northbound left movement is expected to operate at LOS E with a delay of 74 seconds and a v/c ratio of.46. The overall LOS of the intersection is C. Dunbow Road / Artesia Boulevard: o Eastbound through movement is expected to operate at LOS C with a delay of 3 seconds and a v/c of 1.2. o Northbound approach is expected to operate at LOS E with a delay of 72 seconds and a v/c ratio of.29. The overall LOS of the intersection is B. Dunbow Road / 32 Street: o Eastbound through movement is expected to operate at LOS C with a delay of 3 seconds and a v/c of 1.. o Northbound left movement is expected to operate at LOS F with a delay of 295 seconds and a v/c ratio of o Northbound through / right movement is expected to operate at LOS E with a delay of 62 seconds and a v/c ratio of.1. The overall LOS of the intersection is D. Dunbow Road / 8 Street: Northbound approach is expected to operate at LOS E with a delay ranging between 55 and 58 seconds for all movements and a v/c ratio of.81. The overall LOS of the intersection is C. The results of the traffic model indicate that short-cutting through Dunbow Road to reach Deerfoot Trail is expected by the 245 horizon year. As shown in Table 4-5, eastbound through movements at the intersections of Dunbow Road with 16 Street, Artesia Boulevard, and 32 Street are close to or exceed capacity (v/c near or exceeding 1.). Therefore, traffic flow is expected to be unstable. Long queues may reach up to 58 meters Four-Lane Road Cross-section (Improved) In order to improve the operations of through traffic at the intersections of Dunbow Road with 16 Street, Artesia Boulevard, and 32 Street, the cross-section was modified to a six-lane road while a four-lane cross-section was retained for all intersections east of Dunbow Road / 32 Street. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 22 Final Report

28 This improvement reduces queueing and through traffic delays. Results of the capacity analysis are summarized in Table 4-7. TABLE 4-7: RESULTS OF THE 245 HORIZON YEAR CAPACITY ANALYSIS FOUR-LANE CROSS-SECTION (IMPROVED) Intersection ID PM PEAK HOUR v/c Ratio LOS Delay (s) Queue (m)* EB WB NB Through Left Left A A C Right Through Right A A A Intersection Summary - A 7 - Left.39 B EB Through.81 A 7 95 Right.2 A 1 Left.7 A 4 WB Through.57 A 4 45 Right.1 A 1 NB Left / Through / Right.16 C 31 1 SB Through / Left. A Right.21 C 21 1 Intersection Summary - A 6 - Left.2 A 5 EB Through.85 B Right.23 A 2 1 Left.1 A 5 WB Through.54 A 7 55 Right. A NB SB Left Through / Left.85. D A 46 5 Through / Right Right..1 C A 24 Intersection Summary - B 13 - INTERSECTION / MOVEMENT Dunbow Rd / 16 Street (Signal) Dunbow Rd / Artesia Boulevard (Signal) Dunbow Rd / 32 Street (Signal) * Queues are rounded to the nearest 5 m; Delays are rounded to the nearest 1 sec. For Synchro Output refer to Appendix II. Summary of the intersection configuration used for the evaluation of the six-lane cross-section improved segment (Figure 4-8) of Dunbow Road is presented in Table 4-8. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 23 Final Report

29 Figure 4-8: 245 Six-Lane Cross-Section Intersection Layout TABLE 4-8: 245 HORIZON YEAR INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS FOUR-LANE CROSS-SECTION (IMPROVED) Intersection/Controls Improvements Dunbow Road / 16 Street Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / Artesia Boulevard Signal Controlled Dunbow Road / 32 Street Signal Controlled Eastbound approach: three through lanes and one right turn lane Westbound approach: one left turn lane and three through lanes Northbound approach: one left turn lane and one shared left / right turn lane Eastbound and westbound approaches: one left turn lane, three through lanes, and one right turn lane Northbound approach: one all turns lane Southbound approach: one shared left / through lane and one right turn lane Eastbound and Westbound approaches: one left turn lane, three through lanes, and one right turn lane Northbound approach: two left turn lanes and shared through / right lane Southbound approach: one shared left / through lane and one right turn lane As shown in Table 4-7, upgrading of the cross-section to a six-lane configuration improves operations at the intersections of Dunbow Road with 16 Street, Artesia Boulevard, and 32 Street. Queues are no longer expected to reach the interchange of Dunbow Road / Deerfoot Boulevard. Furthermore, all movements at these intersections are expected to operate at LOS D or better (delays of 46 seconds or lower) and a v/c ratio not exceeding.85. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 24 Final Report

30 STAGE Timing of Improvements This section summarizes results of the analysis with the focus of establishing timelines for the required improvements. It should be noted that the actual progression of the development may differ from assumptions made in this report. Consequently, it is recommended that a traffic monitoring program be established to ensure that the required improvements are introduced if and when required to address the actual traffic issues Widening Given the progression of the development, by 245 a two-lane road cross-section at Dunbow Road is expected to operate near capacity. Traffic operations are expected to become unstable and long queues will be expected. Therefore, it is recommended to upgrade Dunbow Road to a four-lane cross-section before the 245 horizon year. However, the additional capacity added by this improvement will result in increased short-cutting traffic. To address this issue, it is recommended Dunbow Road be upgraded as follows: A six-lane cross-section between the interchange of Dunbow Road / Deerfoot Trail and Dunbow Road / 32 Street. A four-lane cross-section east of the intersection of Dunbow Road / 32 Street Improvements at Intersections Based on the forecasted traffic volumes displayed in Appendix I, no improvements are required to the existing road network in the 22 and 225 horizon years. The need for improvements starts in 23, when traffic signals may be needed at some intersections due to delays at minor road approaches intersecting with Dunbow Road. It should be noted that these improvements depend mainly on the development progression. Consequently, it would be prudent to establish a traffic monitoring program to ascertain the timing of required improvements. Synchro files for all horizon years are included in Appendix II. 23 Horizon Improvements Based on the evaluation of the development s progression, three intersections will need signalization by 23, namely the Dunbow Road intersections with 16 Street, Artesia Boulevard, and 32 Street. No changes to the existing geometric configuration will be required. Furthermore, the intersection of Dunbow Road / RR 285 should be changed from a Two-Way Stop Control (TWSC) to an All-Way Stop Control (AWSC). 23 horizon year Improvements are shown in Figure 4-9. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 25 Final Report

31 235 Horizon Improvements It was assumed that 5% of the development will be complete by 235. Two intersections will require signals at this horizon year: Dunbow Road and 8 Street and Dunbow Road and RR 285. To accommodate site generated traffic, the intersection of Dunbow Road / RR 285 will require the following geometric improvements: Eastbound approach should be constructed to have 1 left turn lane and one shared through / right lane. Southbound approach should be constructed to have one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. 235 horizon year Improvements are shown in Figure 4-1. In addition, it is recommended that Dunbow Road be upgraded to a four-lane cross-section from the Interchange to the intersection with 32th Street. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 26 Final Report

32 Figure 4-9: 23 Intersection Improvements Figure 4-1: 235 Intersection Improvements Dunbow Road Functional Planning 27 Final Report

33 24 Horizon Improvements It was assumed that 75% of the development would be completed by this horizon. To accommodate site generated traffic, the intersection of Dunbow Road / RR 285 will require the following geometric improvements: Eastbound approach should be constructed to have 2 left turn lanes and one shared through / right lane Westbound approach should be constructed to have one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane Southbound approach should be constructed to have one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. In addition, it is recommended Dunbow Road be upgraded to a four-lane cross-section from the Interchange to the intersection with 32th Street. 245 Horizon Improvements During this horizon, Dunbow Road s cross-section would require major upgrades as outlined in Sections 2.4 and The 5, unit Development A is expected to have two access locations (intersections) by completion. All studied intersections are expected to be signalized except for the intersection of Dunbow Road and RR 29 (Section 4.4). 5. Alignment The existing alignment of Dunbow Road follows the east-west provincial grid road allowance and there are currently no plans to modify its horizontal alignment. The existing Dunbow Road was constructed as a two-lane rural cross-section and its paved surface is approximately 12.5 m wide between interchange with Deerfoot Trail and 96 Street and approximately 7 m wide east of 96 Street. Since there are currently no plans to augment its vertical alignment, vertical alignment upgrades were limited to minor adjustments. 5.1 Cross-sections The existing Dunbow Road cross-sections are shown on Figure 5-1 Dunbow Road Functional Planning 28 Final Report

34 Figure 5-1: Dunbow Road Existing Cross-Section Based on the results of the capacity analysis, Dunbow Road will have to be upgraded to an ultimate four-lane cross-section. There were four typical cross-sections developed, as shown in Figures 5-2 and 5-3. All alternative cross-sections include a four-lane typical roadway. They were established with the objective of minimizing the extent of the required right-of-way. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 29 Final Report

35 Figure 5-2: Dunbow Road Cross-Section Options (1-3) Dunbow Road Functional Planning 3 Final Report

36 Figure 5-3: Dunbow Road Cross-Section Options (4-5) The four-lane cross-section alternatives include: Option 1 - a rural cross-section with four 3.5 m wide driving lanes, 3 m wide shoulders and 3 m wide ditches with 3:1 side and back slopes, centered on a 4 m wide basic right-of-way. The 2 m wide median includes high tension cable (HTCB) barrier. Option 2 represents a modified Option 1, including infiltration swales instead of ditches and requiring only a 3 m wide right-of-way. Option 3 offers an urban divided cross-section with four 3.5 m lanes, a 5 m wide median with 2 m wide boulevards and two 3 m wide separate pedestrian/bicycle paths. Option 4 requires a 5 m wide right-of-way and includes a rural cross-section similar to that of Option 1. However, it also includes a 3 m wide pedestrian/bicycle pathway on one side of the roadway, separated from the driving lane by a 3 m wide boulevard. Option 5 places the 3 m wide pedestrian/bicycle pathway outside of the drainage ditch, providing increased separation between different modes of transportation. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 31 Final Report

37 It should be noted that Options 1 to 3 could be accommodated within the 3 m wide right-ofway, providing that a back sloping agreement is reached with the adjacent landowners in the areas where wider rights-of-way might be required (in case of Option 1). Option 4 was developed to demonstrate the extents of the right-of-way required if the rural cross-section is maintained and includes also a separate bicycle/pedestrian facility. 5.2 Horizontal and Vertical Alignments The horizontal alignment of Dunbow Road follows the provincial grid road right-of-way and no modification of this alignment was considered. The vertical alignment was established using GPS information provided by the MD of Foothills and the considered ultimate gradeline follows it as closely as possible. 5.3 Intersection Layouts Intersection layouts were prepared for cross-section options 1 to 3 on Dunbow Road (Figures 5-4 to 5-6). Furthermore, a roundabout intersection layout was also prepared (Figure 5-7). All intersection layout designs should be confirmed at subsequent stages of this project. 5.4 Right-of-Way and Construction Limits Construction limits were established for cross-sections for Options 1 through 3 to provide understanding as to the impact of Dunbow Road upgrading on the adjacent properties. Drawings illustrating the extents of the rights-of-way required are included in Appendix III. It should be noted that if back sloping agreements could be reached, the basic 3 m right-ofway could be used to accommodate the considered improvement options. Sections of retaining wall will be required to accommodate considered cross-sections and minimize the required right-of-way: Cross-section Options 1 and 2 south of Dunbow Road center-line between station 4+78 and 5+1 Cross-section Option 3 north and south of Dunbow Road center-line between station 4+78 and 5+1 Extends of the right-of-way for Option 4 were not determined at this time as this option was not considered desirable due to its impact on the adjacent properties. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 32 Final Report

38 Figure 5-4: Option 1 Intersection Layout Dunbow Road Functional Planning 33 Final Report

39 Figure 5-5: Option 2 Intersection Layout Dunbow Road Functional Planning 34 Final Report

40 Figure 5-6: Option 3 Intersection Layout Dunbow Road Functional Planning 35 Final Report

41 Figure 5-7: Typical Roundabout Layout Dunbow Road Functional Planning 36 Final Report

42 6. Construction Cost The order of magnitude construction costs for Options 1 through 3 were estimated and are included in Table 6-1. TABLE 6-1: ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST Option Item Grading $1,66, $1,559, $1,662, Carriageway $12,, $15,448, $17,465, Retaining wall $576, $576, Contingencies and Engineering $4,986, $5,952, $6,897, Total Cost $19,23, $22,959, 26,6, Costs shown in Table 6-1 are preliminary and should be confirmed at the subsequent stages of the project. 7. Access Management Currently, there are more than 35 accesses along Dunbow Road, some of which are private, leading only to single residences or small groups of residential units or farmsteads. Access management strategies were discussed with MD of Foothills and are shown in figures in Appendix III. Proposed spacing between intersections is approximately 3 m. Confirmation of the access strategy should be carried out in consultation with land owners. 8. Speed Limit Zones The current posted speed limit for Dunbow Road is 8 km/h. As spacing between intersections is 3 m or more, no changes to the posted speed limits are suggested up to the 24 horizon. Once a six-lane cross-section is implemented between Deerfoot Trail and 32 Street in 245, review of the speed limit between the Deerfoot Trail Interchange and Artesia Boulevard might be required. Introduction of a lower speed limit such as 6 km/h may be prudent to accommodate potential weaving and complex interchange maneuvers. 9. Conclusions As the improvements of Dunbow Road will result in the introduction of short-cutting, consideration should be given to proper timing of the improvements to ensure that parallel roads (e.g., Hwy 522) are properly utilized by the traffic destined for Deerfoot Trail and that the shortcutting in the area is minimized. Based on the evaluation and the assumed development progression, upgrading of Dunbow Road east of 32 Street to a four-lane cross-section and the remaining segment to the west to a Dunbow Road Functional Planning 37 Final Report

43 six-lane cross-section by 245 would provide acceptable LOS levels. The need to upgrade Dunbow Road east of the intersection with 32 Street to a six-lane cross-section depends on overall progression of the development in the area. A summary of the recommended intersection upgrades is included in Table 9-1. Four cross-section options were developed with a right-of-way ranging between 3 5 m as discussed in Section 5.1. It should be noted that Option 4 was developed to demonstrate extents of the right-of-way required if the rural cross-section is maintained and includes a separate bicycle/pedestrian pathway. No cost estimate was provided for Option 4. Based on the order of magnitude cost estimate, it was found that Option 1 is the least costly. However, confirmation of the construction cost estimate should be carried out at the subsequent stages of the project. An access management strategy was discussed with the MD of Foothills, which proposes a 3 metre spacing between intersections. No changes to the current speed limit are proposed up to 24. Periodic review of the speed limit for the six-lane cross-section between Deerfoot Trail and Artesia Boulevard would be beneficial to address any operational issues in this area. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 38 Final Report

44 TABLE 9-1: INTERSECTION AND CROSS-SECTION UPGRADES Horizon Year Up to Figure Figure Figure (Two-Lane) Figure (Four-lane/Sixlane) Figure 4-2 No improvements required Improvements Signalization of the intersections of Dunbow Road with: o 16 Street o Artesia Boulevard o 32 Street Upgrade intersection of Dunbow Road / RR 285 from a two-way Stop controlled to a four-way Stop controlled Signalization of the intersections of Dunbow Road with: o 8 Street o RR 285 Geometric improvements at the intersection of Dunbow Road / RR 285 Widening of Dunbow Road to a 4-lane cross-section between Interchange to the intersection with 32 Street Geometric improvements at the intersection of Dunbow Road / RR 285 Widening of Dunbow Road to a four-lane cross-section between Interchange to the intersection with 32th Street Signalization of the intersections of Dunbow Road with 56 Street Geometric improvements at the intersections of Dunbow Road with o 32 Street o 56 Street o 8 Street Introducing a second access point or intersection for Development A Widening of Dunbow Road to a four-lane cross-section and intersection improvements (Figure 4-2) Introducing a second access point or intersection for Development A Remaining west segment to be widened to a six-lane crosssection. Intersection improvements are summarized in Section 4.4 Introducing a second access point or intersection for Development A 1. Recommendations Based on the capacity analysis, development progression assumptions, and traffic forecast model, the following improvements should be considered by the MD Foothills along the Dunbow Road Corridor: Do nothing in the horizon years of 22 and 225. At the 23 horizon year following improvements should be implemented (Figure 4.4): Dunbow Road Functional Planning 39 Final Report

45 o o o o Dunbow Road / 16 Street: Signal controlled Dunbow Road / Artesia Boulevard: Signal controlled Dunbow Road / 32 Street: Signal controlled Dunbow Road / Range Road 285: All Way Stop Controlled (AWSC) By 235 o Upgrading of the traffic control systems at Dunbow Road / 8 Street and Dunbow Road / Range Road 285 to signals will be required o Improving of the layout of the intersection of Dunbow Road / Range Road 285 per Section and o Widening of Dunbow Road to a four-lane cross-section between the Deerfoot Interchange and the intersection with 32th Street will be required. At 24 o Improvements to the layout of the intersection of Dunbow Road / Range Road 285 per Section and o Widening of Dunbow Road to a four-lane cross-section between the Deerfoot Interchange and the intersection with 32th Street should be implemented. By the 245 horizon year: o Dunbow Road should be upgraded to A four-lane cross-section east of 32 Street, and A six-lane cross-section from east of the interchange of Dunbow Road / Deerfoot Trail to the east of Dunbow Road / 32 Street and intersectional layout improvements implemented as outlined in Section 4.4. The selection of the ultimate cross-section for Dunbow Road should be made based on the type of development and actual progression of the development in the area, the resulting traffic volumes, and the right-of-way availability. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 4 Final Report

46 SECTION 2 STAGE 2 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS Dunbow Road Functional Planning 41 Final Report

47 Section 2 Sensitivity Analysis 11. Introduction Following the request by MD of Foothills, a sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine how many units of development and at what at horizon year said development could be implemented before upgrading the road from a two-lane cross section to a four-lane cross section would be required, as well as when it would be necessary to implement signals on the major intersections. As in Stage 1 of this report, this Section summarises the results of the analysis which addressed two potential developments (shown in Figure 11-1): Development A, planned north of Dunbow Road and west of the Bow River with a full build-out of 5, units and Development B, planned north of Hwy 552 and west of 8 Street with a full build-out of 2,5 units. Figure 11-1: Site Context Dunbow Road Functional Planning 42 Final Report

48 The analysis described in this Section was carried out based on the assumptions of the development progression as summarized in Table TABLE 11-1: PROGRESSION OF DEVELOPMENT ANALYSED SCENARIOS Scenario Development A Development B #1 125 units 625 units # units 125 units #3 25 units 1875 units #4 375 units 25 units #5 5 units 25 units All the Scenarios identified in Table 11.1 were analyzed at the 22, 225, 23, and 235 horizon years. Detailed outputs from the traffic model for the different horizons and the corresponding land use scenarios are included in Appendix IV Improvement Criteria The technical link capacity is defined by number of lanes and measured in vehicle per hour. Road authorities use environmental capacity related to the functional road classification and expressed in vehicles per day to define improvement thresholds. Table 11.2 lists road classification and corresponding environmental capacities and number of lanes. As the technical capacity of the road is much higher, the upper limit of the environmental capacity was used in identification of timing for link improvements. The actual traffic patterns will decide when the actual upgrading should take place. TABLE 11-2: ROAD CLASSIFICATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CAPACITY Road Classification Daily Traffic Volume(vehicles/day) Number of Lanes Skeletal Road (Expressway/Freeway) >3, 4, 6 or 8 Arterial 2, - 35, 4 or 6 Collector Primary 8, - 15, 2 or 4 Collector 2, - 8, 2 Residential <2, 2 To calculate the daily traffic volumes, the peak hour volumes from the traffic model will be multiplied by a factor to gain the daily traffic volumes, based on the known correlations between Dunbow Road Functional Planning 43 Final Report

49 the volumes for the different periods. This factor can range between 9 and 12 depending on the area. For the purpose of this analysis the industry standard factor of 1 was adopted. 12. Results of the Analysis The following sections summarize results of the sensitivity analysis Horizon The forecasted model traffic volumes for the 22 horizon year were evaluated using Visum and the existing traffic controls. Figure 11.2 shows the daily link volumes per direction for the different land use scenarios. Based on the results, the required improvements are as follows: No improvements are required in case of Scenarios 1 to 3 Potential upgrade to a signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/RR 285 will be required in case of Scenario 4 (depending on how many access points to Development A are intended) Potential upgrade to a signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/RR 285 in case of Scenario 5 (depending on how many access points are planned for Development A). Dunbow Road Functional Planning 44 Final Report

50 Dunbow Road Functional Planning 45 Final Report

51 Figure 11-2: 22 Horizon Year Horizon The forecasted model traffic volumes for the 225 horizon year were evaluated using Visum. Figure 11.3 shows the daily link volumes per direction for the different options. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 46 Final Report

52 Dunbow Road Functional Planning 47 Final Report

53 Figure 11-3: 225 Horizon Year Based on the results, here are the required improvements: Option 1 no improvements Option 2 no improvements Option 3 potential upgrade to a signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/RR 285 (depending on how many access points will be intended for Development A) Option 4 signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/16 Street and Dunbow Road/32 Street. Some of the movements at the intersection of Dunbow Road/8 Street have the possibility to fail. Potential upgrade to a signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/RR 285 (depending on how many access points are intended for Development A) Option 5 signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/16 Street and Dunbow Road/32 Street. Some of the movements at the intersection at Dunbow Road/8 Street have the Dunbow Road Functional Planning 48 Final Report

54 possibility to fail. Potential upgrade to a signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/RR 285 (depending on how many access points are intended for Development A) Horizon The forecasted model traffic volumes for the 23 horizon year were evaluated using Visum. Figure 11.4 shows the link volumes for the different options. Based on the results, the following improvements are required: Option 1 Signals at intersection Dunbow Road/32 Street Option 2 - Signals at intersection Dunbow Road/32 Street Option 3 Signals at intersection Dunbow Road/16 Street and at intersection Dunbow Road/32 Street. Potential upgrade to a signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/RR 285 (depending on how many access points are intended for Development A) Option 4 Signals at intersection Dunbow Road/16 Street, Dunbow Road/32 Street and Dunbow Road/8 th Street. Potential upgrade to a signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/RR 285 (depending on how many access points are intended for Development A) Option 5 Signals at intersection Dunbow Road/16 Street, Dunbow Road/32 Street and Dunbow Road/8 th Street. Potential upgrade to a signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/RR 285 (depending on how many access points are intended for Development A) Dunbow Road Functional Planning 49 Final Report

55 Dunbow Road Functional Planning 5 Final Report

56 Figure 11-4: 23 Horizon Year Horizon The forecasted model traffic volumes for the 235 horizon year were evaluated using Visum. Figure 11.5 shows the daily link volumes per direction for the different options. Based on the results, the following improvements are required: Option 1 Signals at intersection Dunbow Road/16 Street and at intersection Dunbow Road/32 Street. Option 2 - Signals at intersection Dunbow Road/16 Street, Dunbow Road/32 Street and Dunbow Road/8 th Street. Potential upgrade to a signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/RR 285 (depending on how many access points are intended for Development A) Dunbow Road Functional Planning 51 Final Report

57 Option 3 Signals at intersection Dunbow Road/16 Street, Dunbow Road/32 Street and Dunbow Road/8 th Street. Potential upgrade to a signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/RR 285 (depending on how many access points are designed for Development A) Option 4 Signals at intersection Dunbow Road/16 Street, Dunbow Road/32 Street and Dunbow Road/8 th Street. Potential upgrade to a signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/RR 285 (depending on how many access points are intended for Development A) Option 5 Signals at intersection Dunbow Road/16 Street, Dunbow Road/32 Street and Dunbow Road/8 th Street. Potential upgrade to a signalized intersection at Dunbow Road/RR 285 (depending on how many access points are intended for Development A) Dunbow Road Functional Planning 52 Final Report

58 Dunbow Road Functional Planning 53 Final Report

59 Figure 11-5: 235 Horizon Year 13. Conclusions The sensitivity analysis leads to the following conclusions: Based on the results of the analysis, improvements to the network are expected to be required as summarized in Table A monitoring program should be initiated at the key intersections to provide up-to-date information on operational conditions throughout the development progression, to ensure that the required improvements are introduced in a timely fashion. A periodic review of the network performance should be undertaken, including a focus on the impact of the network modification, to verify improvement priorities and to make certain that considered future network improvements are introduced in a timely fashion. Dunbow Road Functional Planning 54 Final Report

60 The actual network improvements should be based on the actual traffic volumes related to the development progression in the area. TABLE 11-3: INTERSECTION AND ROAD IMPROVEMENTS Intersection Improvement Scenario Units Horizon Dunbow Road/16 Street Dunbow Road/32 Street Dunbow Road/8 Street Dunbow Road/RR 285 Link Upgrade #1 Dev A 125 Dev B X lane up to 32 Street intersection 235 X X lane up to 32 Street intersection #2 Dev A 1875 Dev B X lane up to 16 Street intersection 4 lane up to 32 Street intersection 235 X X X X 4 lane up to 32 Street intersection lane up to 32 Street intersection #3 Dev A 25 Dev B X 23 X X X 4 lane up to 32 Street intersection 4 lane up to 32 Street intersection 235 X X X X 4 lane up to 32 Street intersection Dunbow Road Functional Planning 55 Final Report

61 Intersection Improvement Scenario Units Horizon Dunbow Road/16 Street Dunbow Road/32 Street Dunbow Road/8 Street Dunbow Road/RR 285 Link Upgrade X 4 lane up to 32 Street intersection #4 Dev A 375 Dev B X X - X 23 X X X X 4 lane up to 32 Street intersection 4 lane up to 32 Street intersection 235 X X X X 4 lane up to 32 Street intersection X 4 lane full -build out #5 Dev A 5 Dev B X X - X 23 X X X X 4 lane full -build out 4 lane full -build out 235 X X X X 4 lane full -build out Dunbow Road Functional Planning 56 Final Report

62 APPENDIX I: EXISTING AND FUTURE HORIZONS LINK VOLUMES Dunbow Road Functional Planning 57 Final Report

63

64 APPENDIX II: SYNCHRO OUTPUT Dunbow Road Functional Planning 58 Final Report

65 5/4/216 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 1 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 28 Volume Right 43 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 27.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM Existing AA Page 1 5/4/216 5/4/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total Volume Left 65 1 Volume Right 2 44 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A C A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C A Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 1 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 4 15 Volume Right 22 3 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A B A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Average Delay.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM Existing AA Page 2 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM Existing AA Page 3

66 5/4/216 5/4/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 11 1 Volume Right 2 6 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B A Intersection Summary Average Delay.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 18 Volume Right 12 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m).3..3 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM Existing AA Page 4 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM Existing AA Page 5 5/4/216 5/4/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 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 B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B A Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 28.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 1 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 25 2 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay 4. Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM Existing AA Page 6 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM Existing AA Page 7

67 5/4/216 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 1 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 16 Volume Right 128 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS D Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AA Page 1 5/4/216 5/4/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A D D B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS D B Intersection Summary Average Delay.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 1 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A D A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS D B Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AA Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AA Page 3

68 5/4/216 5/4/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 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 C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C B Intersection Summary Average Delay.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 6 Volume Right 1 4 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m).1..1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AA Page 4 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AA Page 5 5/4/216 5/4/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 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 C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 1 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 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 D C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS D C Intersection Summary Average Delay 11.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AA Page 6 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AA Page 7

69 5/4/216 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 1 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 3 19 Volume Right 16 4 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 1 5/4/216 5/4/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total Volume Left 31 8 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS E B Intersection Summary Average Delay.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 1 Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right 21 1 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A D A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS D B Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 2 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 3

70 5/4/216 5/4/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 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 C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C B Intersection Summary Average Delay.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 4.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 6 Volume Right 1 3 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m).1..1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 4.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 4 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 5 5/4/216 5/4/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 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 C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E D F A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS D C Intersection Summary Average Delay 12.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 6 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 7

71 5/4/216 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt.85 Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 88 Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m)... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Thru Right Left Thru Left Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).. Turn Type NA Perm Perm NA Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 1 5/4/216 5/4/216 Splits and Phases: 1: 16 Street & Dunbow Road Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 64.6% 64.6% 64.6% 64.6% 35.4% 35.4% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode None None None None Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay..... Total Delay LOS B A A A C Approach Delay Approach LOS B A C Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 65 Actuated Cycle Length: 47.8 Natural Cycle: 65 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.79 Intersection Signal Delay: 1.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 2 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 3

72 5/4/216 5/4/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM Existing AA Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 5.% 5.% 5.% 5.% 5.% 5.% 5.% 5.% 5.% 5.% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS B F F A A A A Approach Delay Approach LOS F F A A Queue Length 5th (m) 1.3 ~93. ~ Queue Length 95th (m) 5.5 #148.6 # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 45 Actuated Cycle Length: 45 Offset: (%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 6 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.43 Intersection Signal Delay: 167. Intersection LOS: F Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 2 5/4/216 Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 2: Dunbow Road & Artesia Blvd Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 3 5/4/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m).... Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 1

73 5/4/216 5/4/216 Splits and Phases: 3: 32 Street & Dunbow Road Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 56.4% 56.4% 56.4% 56.4% 56.4% 56.4% 43.6% 43.6% 43.6% 43.6% 43.6% 43.6% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay..... Total Delay LOS B A B B A Approach Delay Approach LOS B B B Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 55 Actuated Cycle Length: 41.9 Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.72 Intersection Signal Delay: 12.6 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 2 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 3 5/4/216 5/4/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 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 C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C B Intersection Summary Average Delay.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 7 Volume Right 1 4 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m).2..2 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 1 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM AA Page 2

74 5/4/216 5/4/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 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 C C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total (vph) Volume Left (vph) Volume Right (vph) Hadj (s) Departure Headway (s) Degree Utilization, x Capacity (veh/h) Control Delay (s) Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C A A A Intersection Summary Delay 13.1 Level of Service B Intersection Capacity Utilization 6.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM AA Page 3 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 4 8/22/216 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 15 6 Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m)... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Thru Right Left Thru Left Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).. Turn Type NA Perm Perm NA Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM AA Page 1

75 8/22/216 8/22/216 Splits and Phases: 1: 16 Street & Dunbow Road Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 67.1% 67.1% 67.1% 67.1% 32.9% 32.9% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS B A A A C B Approach Delay Approach LOS B A C Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 7 Actuated Cycle Length: 6.9 Natural Cycle: 7 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.76 Intersection Signal Delay: 1.6 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Page 2 Page 3 8/22/216 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 64.6% 64.6% 64.6% 64.6% 64.6% 35.4% 35.4% 35.4% 35.4% 35.4% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode None None None None None Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS A B A A A C A Approach Delay Approach LOS B A A B Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 65 Actuated Cycle Length: 45.1 Natural Cycle: 65 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.78 Intersection Signal Delay: 9.1 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 2

76 8/22/216 Splits and Phases: 2: Dunbow Road & Residential Access 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected.953 Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m).... Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Page 3 Page 1 8/22/216 8/22/216 Splits and Phases: 3: 32 Street & Dunbow Road Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 6.% 6.% 6.% 6.% 6.% 6.% 4.% 4.% 4.% 4.% 4.% 4.% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay..... Total Delay LOS B A B C A Approach Delay Approach LOS B B C Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 6 Actuated Cycle Length: 45 Natural Cycle: 6 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.73 Intersection Signal Delay: 13.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 2 Page 3

77 8/22/216 8/22/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 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 D C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS D C Intersection Summary Average Delay.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 8 Volume Right 1 3 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m).2..1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 1 Page 1 8/22/216 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 61.7% 61.7% 61.7% 61.7% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s).... Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay.... Total Delay LOS A A B B Approach Delay Approach LOS A A B B Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 6 Actuated Cycle Length: 5 Natural Cycle: 6 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.59 Intersection Signal Delay: 8.5 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 7.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 6: 8 Street & Dunbow Road Page 2

78 8/22/216 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 37.5% 61.2% 23.7% 23.7% 23.7% 23.9% 23.9% 14.9% 38.8% 38.8% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode None None None None None Max Max None Max Max Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS D A D B C C D C A Approach Delay Approach LOS D C C C Queue Length 5th (m) ~ Queue Length 95th (m) # # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 95 Actuated Cycle Length: 91.6 Natural Cycle: 9 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1. Intersection Signal Delay: 37.1 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Page 2 8/22/216 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 7: RR 285 & Dunbow Road Page 3

79 8/22/216 8/22/216 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m)... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Thru Right Left Thru Left Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).. Turn Type NA Perm Perm NA Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM AA Page 1 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 71.3% 71.3% 71.3% 71.3% 28.8% 28.8% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS C A A B D B Approach Delay Approach LOS B B D Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 8 Actuated Cycle Length: 75.4 Natural Cycle: 8 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:.88 Intersection Signal Delay: 16.4 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.4% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Page 2 8/22/216 Splits and Phases: 1: 16 Street & Dunbow Road 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Page 3 Page 1

80 8/22/216 8/22/216 Splits and Phases: 2: Dunbow Road & Residential Access Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 71.3% 71.3% 71.3% 71.3% 71.3% 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode None None None None None Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS A B A A B C B Approach Delay Approach LOS B A B B Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 8 Actuated Cycle Length: 56 Natural Cycle: 8 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.82 Intersection Signal Delay: 9.2 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 2 Page 3 8/22/216 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected.95 Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m).... Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 61.7% 61.7% 61.7% 61.7% 61.7% 61.7% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay..... Total Delay LOS B A B C A Approach Delay Approach LOS B B C Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 6 Actuated Cycle Length: 45.5 Natural Cycle: 6 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.76 Intersection Signal Delay: 12.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 2

81 8/22/216 Splits and Phases: 3: 32 Street & Dunbow Road 8/22/216 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 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 D C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS D C Intersection Summary Average Delay.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 3 Page 1 8/22/216 8/22/216 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 11 Volume Right 4 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m).3..2 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Page 1

82 8/22/216 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 73.3% 73.3% 73.3% 73.3% 26.7% 26.7% 26.7% 26.7% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s).... Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay.... Total Delay LOS A C D C Approach Delay Approach LOS A C D C Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) 88.2 #197.5 # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 9 Actuated Cycle Length: 87.3 Natural Cycle: 9 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.9 Intersection Signal Delay: 23.5 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 118.% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 6: 8 Street & Dunbow Road Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Prot NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Page 1 8/22/216 8/22/216 Splits and Phases: 7: RR 285 & Dunbow Road Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 33.3% 67.% 33.7% 33.7% 33.7% 33.% 33.% 33.% 33.% 33.% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Max Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS D A C C D C C E C A Approach Delay Approach LOS D D C C Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) # # # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 9 Actuated Cycle Length: 88.7 Natural Cycle: 9 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.97 Intersection Signal Delay: 37.7 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Page 2 Page 3

83 8/22/216 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m)... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Thru Right Left Thru Left Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).. Turn Type NA Perm Perm NA Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM AA Page 1 8/22/216 8/22/216 Splits and Phases: 1: 16 Street & Dunbow Road Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 77.% 77.% 77.% 77.% 23.% 23.% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS D A A B E C Approach Delay Approach LOS C B E Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) # # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 1 Actuated Cycle Length: 99.7 Natural Cycle: 9 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:.99 Intersection Signal Delay: 27.4 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Page 2 Page 3

84 8/22/216 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 74.4% 74.4% 74.4% 74.4% 74.4% 25.6% 25.6% 25.6% 25.6% 25.6% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode None None None None None Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS A B A A C C B Approach Delay Approach LOS B A C B Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) 4. # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 9 Actuated Cycle Length: 77.7 Natural Cycle: 9 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.87 Intersection Signal Delay: 1.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.2% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Page 2 8/22/216 Splits and Phases: 2: Dunbow Road & Residential Access 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt Perm NA Protected Phases Permitted Phases Page 3 Page 1

85 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 6.% 6.% 6.% 11.3% 71.3% 71.3% 13.3% 28.7% 15.3% 15.3% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max None None Max Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS A E A D A E A Approach Delay Approach LOS D B E Queue Length 5th (m).2 ~ Queue Length 95th (m) 1.3 # # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 15 Actuated Cycle Length: 137 Natural Cycle: 13 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.1 Intersection Signal Delay: 4.9 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.2% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Page 2 8/22/216 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 3: 32 Street & Dunbow Road Page 3 8/22/216 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes 1 Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA NA Protected Phases Permitted Phases Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 74.4% 74.4% 74.4% 74.4% 25.6% 25.6% 25.6% 25.6% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s)..... Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay..... Total Delay LOS A A A C A Approach Delay Approach LOS A A C A Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) 4. Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 9 Actuated Cycle Length: 77.4 Natural Cycle: 8 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.74 Intersection Signal Delay: 6.2 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 2

86 8/22/216 Splits and Phases: 4: 56 Street & Dunbow Road 8/22/216 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 7 Volume Right 1 8 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 3 Page 1 8/22/216 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases Permitted Phases Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 61.1% 61.1% 12.9% 74.% 74.% 26.% 26.% 26.% 26.% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max None Max Max Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS A C C A A D B C Approach Delay Approach LOS C B C C Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) 3.7 #258.8 # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 9 Actuated Cycle Length: 8.7 Natural Cycle: 9 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.92 Intersection Signal Delay: 2.6 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 9.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Page 2

87 8/22/216 Splits and Phases: 6: 8 Street & Dunbow Road 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Prot NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Page 3 Page 1 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 22.6% 56.% 33.4% 33.4% 33.4% 44.% 44.% 44.% 44.% 44.% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Max Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS E C C E B B B E C A Approach Delay Approach LOS D D B D Queue Length 5th (m) ~ Queue Length 95th (m) # # # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 1 Actuated Cycle Length: 1 Natural Cycle: 9 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.1 Intersection Signal Delay: 41. Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Page 2 8/22/216 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 7: RR 285 & Dunbow Road Page 3

88 8/22/216 8/22/216 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m)... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Thru Right Left Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).. Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases 8 6 Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 26.7% 72.4% 45.8% 45.8% 27.6% 27.6% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode None None None None Max Max Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS E A E A E A Approach Delay Approach LOS D D D Queue Length 5th (m) ~ Queue Length 95th (m) # # # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 9 Actuated Cycle Length: 9 Natural Cycle: 9 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.2 Intersection Signal Delay: 41.8 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 9.9% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Page 2 8/22/216 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1: Dunbow Road Page 3

89 5/4/216 5/4/216 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt.85 Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 15 Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m)... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Thru Right Left Thru Left Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m)..... Detector 1 Position(m)..... Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s)..... Detector 1 Queue (s)..... Detector 1 Delay (s)..... Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).. Turn Type NA Perm Perm NA Prot Protected Phases Permitted Phases 4 8 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 1 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 84.7% 84.7% 84.7% 84.7% 15.3% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s)..... Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max C-Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay..... Total Delay LOS D A C A E Approach Delay Approach LOS D A E Queue Length 5th (m) ~ Queue Length 95th (m) # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 15 Actuated Cycle Length: 15 Offset: (%), Referenced to phase 2:NBL and 6:, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 15 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.5 Intersection Signal Delay: 27.1 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.5% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 2 5/4/216 Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1: 16 Street & Dunbow Road Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 3 5/4/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 4

90 5/4/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 84.7% 84.7% 84.7% 84.7% 84.7% 84.7% 15.3% 15.3% 15.3% 15.3% 15.3% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Max Max Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS B C A A A A E C Approach Delay Approach LOS C A E C Queue Length 5th (m) 1.5 ~ Queue Length 95th (m) 8.9 # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 15 Actuated Cycle Length: Natural Cycle: 15 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.2 Intersection Signal Delay: 19.7 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.7% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 5 5/4/216 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 2: Dunbow Road & Residential Access Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 6 5/4/216 5/4/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 7 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 77.3% 77.3% 77.3% 77.3% 77.3% 77.3% 7.2% 16.3% 6.3% 15.5% 15.5% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Max Max Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS A C A A A F E A Approach Delay Approach LOS C A F Queue Length 5th (m).1 ~ ~ Queue Length 95th (m).6 # # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 15 Actuated Cycle Length: Natural Cycle: 15 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.53 Intersection Signal Delay: 4.5 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 8

91 5/4/216 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 3: 32 Street & Dunbow Road Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 9 5/4/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes 1 1 Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 1 5/4/216 5/4/216 Splits and Phases: 4: 56 Street & Dunbow Road Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 81.5% 81.5% 81.5% 81.5% 18.5% 18.5% 18.5% 18.5% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS A B A A B C Approach Delay Approach LOS B A B C Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 13 Actuated Cycle Length: Natural Cycle: 13 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.92 Intersection Signal Delay: 8. Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.9% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 11 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 12

92 5/4/216 5/4/216 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % 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) 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) p queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left 19 Volume Right 2 7 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS C C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 14 5/4/216 5/4/216 Splits and Phases: 6: 8 Street & Dunbow Road Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 65.4% 65.4% 65.4% 65.4% 65.4% 17.3% 27.3% 7.3% 17.3% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Max Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS B C A B B E E C C Approach Delay Approach LOS C B E C Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) 9.2 # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 13 Actuated Cycle Length: Natural Cycle: 13 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.94 Intersection Signal Delay: 25.2 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 16

93 5/4/216 5/4/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Prot NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 17 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 36.% 66.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 23.8% 23.8% 9.6% 33.4% 33.4% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Max Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS D A C D A D D D C A Approach Delay Approach LOS C D D B Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) # # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 1 Actuated Cycle Length: 93.1 Natural Cycle: 1 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.95 Intersection Signal Delay: 31.3 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.1% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 18 5/4/216 Splits and Phases: 7: RR 285 & Dunbow Road 5/4/216 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m)... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Thru Right Left Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).. Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases 8 5 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 19 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 2

94 5/4/216 Splits and Phases: 1: Dunbow Road 5/4/216 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 38.9% 73.3% 34.4% 34.4% 26.7% 26.7% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS D A D A D B Approach Delay Approach LOS C D B Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) # # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) 5. Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 9 Actuated Cycle Length: 84.5 Natural Cycle: 9 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.91 Intersection Signal Delay: 29.3 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 21 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 PM Existing AA Page 22 5/4/216 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt.85 Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 21 Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m)... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Thru Right Left Thru Left Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m)..... Detector 1 Position(m)..... Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s)..... Detector 1 Queue (s)..... Detector 1 Delay (s)..... Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).. Turn Type NA Perm Perm NA Prot Protected Phases Permitted Phases 4 8 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 1

95 5/4/216 5/4/216 Splits and Phases: 1: 16 Street & Dunbow Road Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 71.3% 71.3% 71.3% 71.3% 28.8% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s)..... Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay..... Total Delay LOS A A A A C Approach Delay Approach LOS A A C Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 8 Actuated Cycle Length: 69 Natural Cycle: 8 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.84 Intersection Signal Delay: 7.1 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 2 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 3 5/4/216 5/4/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 71.3% 71.3% 71.3% 71.3% 71.3% 71.3% 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Max Max Max Max Max Max Min Min Min Min Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS B A A A A A C C Approach Delay Approach LOS A A C C Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 8 Actuated Cycle Length: 68.2 Natural Cycle: 8 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:.81 Intersection Signal Delay: 6.1 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 7.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 2

96 5/4/216 Splits and Phases: 2: Dunbow Road & Artesia Blvd 5/4/216 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (m) Storage Lanes Taper Length (m) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) Link Distance (m) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) Link Offset(m).... Crosswalk Width(m) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (k/h) Number of Detectors Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) Trailing Detector (m) Detector 1 Position(m) Detector 1 Size(m) Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(m) Detector 2 Size(m) Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s).... Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm pm+pt NA NA Protected Phases Permitted Phases Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 3 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 1 5/4/216 5/4/216 Splits and Phases: 3: 32 Street & Dunbow Road Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) 62.8% 62.8% 62.8% 62.8% 62.8% 62.8% 12.2% 26.7% 1.6% 25.% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All-Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode None None None None None None Max Min None Min Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/c Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS A B A A A D C A Approach Delay Approach LOS B A D Queue Length 5th (m) Queue Length 95th (m) # Internal Link Dist (m) Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 9 Actuated Cycle Length: 77.5 Natural Cycle: 9 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:.85 Intersection Signal Delay: 13. Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 2 Dunbow Rd 3/18/216 AA Page 3

97 APPENDIX III: R.O.W REQUIREMENTS Dunbow Road Functional Planning 59 Final Report

98 R.O.W Cross-Sections and Access Management Strategies

99 NOTE: DIMENSIONS IN METRES AND DECIMALS OF METRES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. DUNBOW ROAD ISSUED FOR DISCUSSION ONLY EXISTING CROSS-SECTION APRIL T1 FIGURE 5.1

100 NOTE: DIMENSIONS IN METRES AND DECIMALS OF METRES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. DUNBOW ROAD ISSUED FOR DISCUSSION ONLY CROSS-SECTION OPTIONS APRIL T1 FIGURE 5.2

101 NOTE: DIMENSIONS IN METRES AND DECIMALS OF METRES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. DUNBOW ROAD ISSUED FOR DISCUSSION ONLY CROSS-SECTION OPTIONS APRIL T1 FIGURE 5.3

102 NORTH DUNBOW ROAD INSCRIBED CIRCLE 3-4m DIAMETER ISSUED FOR DISCUSSION ONLY NOTE: DIMENSIONS IN METRES AND DECIMALS OF METRES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. DUNBOW ROAD TYPICAL INTERSECTION LAYOUTS ROUNDABOUT OPTION APRIL T1 FIGURE 5.4

103 NORTH 3.m R/O/W TYPICAL 4 LANES DIVIDED APPROACH Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1.Cross-sections.dwg 3.m R/O/W 3m SHOULDER 3m SHOULDER 9m DITCH MINIMUM 3m LEFT TURNING (VARIES) TYPICAL 2 LANES APPROACH R=55 R=18 25:1 TAPER R=55 3.m R/O/W DUNBOW ROAD 25:1 TAPER NOTE: DIMENSIONS IN METRES AND DECIMALS OF METRES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE 6:1 TAPER CONCRETE OR ASPHALT MEDIAN 3m SHOULDER 3m SHOULDER 9m DITCH 3.m R/O/W DUNBOW ROAD TYPICAL INTERSECTION LAYOUTS INTERSECTION OPTION 1 (DUNBOW ROAD AS RURAL X-SECTION WITH DITCHES) APRIL T1 FIGURE 5.5

104 NORTH 3.m TYPICAL 4 LANES DIVIDED APPROACH Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1.Cross-sections.dwg 3.m R/O/W 4m SWALE 4m SWALE MINIMUM 3m LEFT TURNING (VARIES) TYPICAL 2 LANES APPROACH R=55 R=18 25:1 TAPER R=55 3.m R/O/W DUNBOW ROAD 25:1 TAPER NOTE: DIMENSIONS IN METRES AND DECIMALS OF METRES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE CONCRETE OR ASPHALT MEDIAN 4m SWALE 4m SWALE 6:1 TAPER 3.m R/O/W DUNBOW ROAD TYPICAL INTERSECTION LAYOUTS INTERSECTION OPTION 2 (DUNBOW ROAD AS RURAL X-SECTION WITH SWALES) APRIL T1 FIGURE 5.6

105 NORTH 3.m R/O/W TYPICAL 4 LANES DIVIDED APPROACH Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1.Cross-sections.dwg 3.m R/O/W 3m PATHWAY 3m PATHWAY TYPICAL 2 LANES APPROACH R=55 R=18 25:1 TAPER R=55 3.m R/O/W NOTE: DIMENSIONS IN METRES AND DECIMALS OF METRES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE DUNBOW ROAD 25:1 TAPER MINIMUM 3m LEFT TURNING (VARIES) 3m PATHWAY 3m PATHWAY 3.m R/O/W CONCRETE OR ASPHALT MEDIAN APRIL 216 DUNBOW ROAD TYPICAL INTERSECTION LAYOUTS INTERSECTION OPTION 3 (DUNBOW ROAD AS URBAN ARTERIAL) 332.T1 FIGURE 5.7

106 BEGINNING OF STUDY STA +6 SW SE SW DUNBOW ROAD ARTESIA BLVD BACK SLOPE LIMITS 3M R.O.W. DUNBOW ROAD MATCHLINE STA 2+25 DEERFOOT TRAIL NW ST E NE ST E 32 ST E EDGE OF PAVEMENT RANGE ROAD 292A NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 1 APRIL T1 FIGURE 1.1

107 MATCHLINE STA 2+25 DUNBOW ROAD TWSHIP ROAD 22A SE RANGE ROAD 292 SW DUNBOW ROAD MATCHLINE STA NE NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 1 APRIL T1 FIGURE 1.2

108 MATCHLINE STA 3+9 DUNBOW ROAD SE RANGE ROAD 291 RETAINING WALL. L=APROX.19m SW DUNBOW ROAD MATCHLINE STA DUNBOW ROAD RETAINING WALL. L=APROX.19m 66 ST 56 ST E NE NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 1 APRIL T1 FIGURE 1.3

109 MATCHLINE STA 5+55 SE M R.O.W. EDGE OF PAVEMENT DUNBOW ROAD DUNBOW ROAD 8 ST E SW MATCHLINE STA 7+2 NE NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 1 APRIL T1 FIGURE 1.4

110 MATCHLINE STA 7+2 DUNBOW ROAD SE EDGE OF PAVEMENT ST E 96 ST E SW DUNBOW ROAD MATCHLINE STA NE NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 1 APRIL T1 FIGURE 1.5

111 MATCHLINE STA 8+85 SE DUNBOW ROAD EDGE OF PAVEMENT NE Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout.dwg 9+9 Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 1 APRIL T1 FIGURE 1.6

112 BEGINNING OF STUDY STA +6 SW SE SW DUNBOW ROAD ARTESIA BLVD BACK SLOPE LIMITS 3M R.O.W. DUNBOW ROAD MATCHLINE STA 2+25 DEERFOOT TRAIL NW ST E NE ST E 32 ST E EDGE OF PAVEMENT RANGE ROAD 292A NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout 2.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 2 APRIL T1 FIGURE 2.1

113 MATCHLINE STA 2+25 DUNBOW ROAD TWSHIP ROAD 22A SE RANGE ROAD 292 SW DUNBOW ROAD MATCHLINE STA NE NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout 2.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 2 APRIL T1 FIGURE 2.2

114 MATCHLINE STA 3+9 DUNBOW ROAD SE RANGE ROAD 291 RETAINING WALL. L=APROX.19m SW DUNBOW ROAD MATCHLINE STA ST DUNBOW ROAD 56 ST E NE NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout 2.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 2 APRIL T1 FIGURE 2.3

115 MATCHLINE STA 5+55 SE M R.O.W. EDGE OF PAVEMENT DUNBOW ROAD DUNBOW ROAD 8 ST E SW MATCHLINE STA 7+2 NE NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout 2.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 2 APRIL T1 FIGURE 2.4

116 MATCHLINE STA 7+2 DUNBOW ROAD SE EDGE OF PAVEMENT ST E 96 ST E SW DUNBOW ROAD MATCHLINE STA NE NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout 2.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 2 APRIL T1 FIGURE 2.5

117 MATCHLINE STA 8+85 SE DUNBOW ROAD EDGE OF PAVEMENT NE Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout 2.dwg 9+9 Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 2 APRIL T1 FIGURE 2.6

118 BEGINNING OF STUDY STA +6 SW SE SW DUNBOW ROAD ARTESIA BLVD BACK SLOPE LIMITS 3M R.O.W. DUNBOW ROAD MATCHLINE STA 2+25 DEERFOOT TRAIL NW ST E NE ST E 32 ST E EDGE OF PAVEMENT RANGE ROAD 292A NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout 3.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 3 APRIL T1 FIGURE 3.1

119 MATCHLINE STA 2+25 DUNBOW ROAD TWSHIP ROAD 22A SE RANGE ROAD 292 SW DUNBOW ROAD MATCHLINE STA NE NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout 3.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 3 APRIL T1 FIGURE 3.2

120 MATCHLINE STA 3+9 DUNBOW ROAD SE RANGE ROAD 291 RETAINING WALL. L=APROX.19m SW DUNBOW ROAD MATCHLINE STA ST DUNBOW ROAD 56 ST E NE NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout 3.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 3 APRIL T1 FIGURE 3.3

121 MATCHLINE STA 5+55 SE M R.O.W. EDGE OF PAVEMENT DUNBOW ROAD DUNBOW ROAD 8 ST E SW MATCHLINE STA 7+2 NE NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout 3.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 3 APRIL T1 FIGURE 3.4

122 MATCHLINE STA 7+2 DUNBOW ROAD SE EDGE OF PAVEMENT ST E 96 ST E SW DUNBOW ROAD MATCHLINE STA NE NW Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout 3.dwg Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 3 APRIL T1 FIGURE 3.5

123 MATCHLINE STA 8+85 SE DUNBOW ROAD EDGE OF PAVEMENT NE Paola Duma / Apr. 27, 16 / T:\Projects\Open\332.T1 - Dunbow Road Functional Planning Study\Graphics\CAD\332.T1-Vertical Layout 3.dwg 9+9 Horiz 1: NOTES: DIMENSIONS IN METERS AND DECIMALS OF METERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE MD OF FOOTHILLS DUNBOW ROAD FUNCTIONAL PLANNING STUDY PLAN-PROFILE LAYOUTS OPTION 3 APRIL T1 FIGURE 3.6

Chapter 4 Traffic Analysis

Chapter 4 Traffic Analysis Chapter 4 Traffic Analysis PURPOSE The traffic analysis component of the K-68 Corridor Management Plan incorporates information on the existing transportation network, such as traffic volumes and intersection

More information

Traffic Impact Analysis Chatham County Grocery Chatham County, NC

Traffic Impact Analysis Chatham County Grocery Chatham County, NC Chatham County Grocery Chatham County, NC TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION... 1 1.1. Location and Study Area... 1 1.2. Proposed Land Use and Access... 2 1.3. Adjacent Land Uses... 2 1.4. Existing ways...

More information

Figure 1: East West Connector Alignment Alternatives Concept Drawing

Figure 1: East West Connector Alignment Alternatives Concept Drawing Page 2 of 9 Figure 1: East West Connector Alignment Alternatives Concept Drawing The Montebello Drive extension will run north south and connect Wilsonville Road to the Boones Ferry Road to Brown Road

More information

Highway 111 Corridor Study

Highway 111 Corridor Study Highway 111 Corridor Study June, 2009 LINCOLN CO. HWY 111 CORRIDOR STUDY Draft Study Tea, South Dakota Prepared for City of Tea Sioux Falls Metropolitan Planning Organization Prepared by HDR Engineering,

More information

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TOWN OF THOMPSON S STATION, TENNESSEE PREPARED FOR: THE TOWN OF THOMPSON S STATION

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TOWN OF THOMPSON S STATION, TENNESSEE PREPARED FOR: THE TOWN OF THOMPSON S STATION TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TOWN OF THOMPSON S STATION, TENNESSEE PREPARED FOR: THE TOWN OF THOMPSON S STATION Transportation Consultants, LLC 1101 17 TH AVENUE SOUTH NASHVILLE, TN 37212

More information

List of Attachments. Location Map... Site Plan... City of Lake Elsinore Circulation Element... City of Lake Elsinore Roadway Cross-Sections...

List of Attachments. Location Map... Site Plan... City of Lake Elsinore Circulation Element... City of Lake Elsinore Roadway Cross-Sections... List of Attachments Exhibits Location Map... Site Plan... City of Lake Elsinore Circulation Element... City of Lake Elsinore Roadway Cross-Sections... Existing Lane Geometry and Traffic Controls... Existing

More information

NEW YORK CENTRAL PARK SUBDIVISION BLAIS STREET/ST-PIERRE STREET EMBRUN, ONTARIO TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Prepared for:

NEW YORK CENTRAL PARK SUBDIVISION BLAIS STREET/ST-PIERRE STREET EMBRUN, ONTARIO TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Prepared for: NEW YORK CENTRAL PARK SUBDIVISION BLAIS STREET/ST-PIERRE STREET EMBRUN, ONTARIO TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Prepared for: Solidex Holdings Limited & Investissement Maurice Lemieux Investments Attn: Mr. Anthony

More information

Traffic Impact Study WestBranch Residential Development Davidson, NC March 2016

Traffic Impact Study WestBranch Residential Development Davidson, NC March 2016 Traffic Impact Study WestBranch Residential Development Davidson, NC March 216 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR THE WestBranch Residential Development LOCATED IN DAVIDSON, NC Prepared For: Lennar Carolinas, LLC

More information

MEDICAL/OFFICE BUILDING 1637 BANK STREET OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW. Prepared for:

MEDICAL/OFFICE BUILDING 1637 BANK STREET OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW. Prepared for: MEDICAL/OFFICE BUILDING 1637 BANK STREET OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW Prepared for: 2434984 Ontario Inc. 13-5510 Canotek Road Ottawa, Ontario K1J 9J5 June 4, 2015 115-613 Report_2.doc D. J.

More information

REDEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY

REDEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY REDEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY For Wendy s Parker, Colorado January 215 Prepared for: Sterling Design Associates, LLC 29 W. Littleton Boulevard #3 Littleton, Colorado 812 Prepared by: 1233 Airport

More information

Traffic Impact Analysis Walton Acres at Riverwood Athletic Club Clayton, NC

Traffic Impact Analysis Walton Acres at Riverwood Athletic Club Clayton, NC Traffic Impact Analysis Walton Acres at Riverwood Athletic Club Clayton, NC 1. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...1 1.1. Site Location and Study Area...1 1.2. Proposed Land Use and Site Access...2 1.3.

More information

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

Bistro 6. City of Barrie. Traffic Impact Study for Pratt Hansen Group Inc. Type of Document: Final Report. Project Number: JDE 1748 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, 2017 06/12/17 John Northcote, P.Eng. Professional License

More information

Glenn Avenue Corridor Traffic Operational Evaluation

Glenn Avenue Corridor Traffic Operational Evaluation Glenn Avenue Corridor Traffic Operational Evaluation PREPARED FOR: THE CITY OF AUBURN PREPARED BY: DECEMBER 2007 Glenn Avenue Corridor Study--Auburn, Alabama TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction... 1 Background

More information

NO BUILD TRAFFIC OPERATIONS

NO BUILD TRAFFIC OPERATIONS 3. 23 NO BUILD TRAFFIC OPERATIONS This section addresses the operations of the transportation system and details how it would be expected to function under year 23 No Build conditions with the projected

More information

Evaluation of M-99 (Broad Street) Road Diet and Intersection Operational Investigation

Evaluation of M-99 (Broad Street) Road Diet and Intersection Operational Investigation Evaluation of M-99 (Broad Street) Road Diet and Intersection Operational Investigation City of Hillsdale, Hillsdale County, Michigan June 16, 2016 Final Report Prepared for City of Hillsdale 97 North Broad

More information

INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 3009 HAWTHORNE ROAD CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW REVISED. Prepared for: Canada Inc.

INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 3009 HAWTHORNE ROAD CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW REVISED. Prepared for: Canada Inc. INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 3009 HAWTHORNE ROAD CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW REVISED Prepared for: 7849648 Canada Inc. Octiober 1, 2015 114-598 Overview_2.doc D. J. Halpenny & Associates Ltd. Consulting

More information

Traffic Impact Study Little Egypt Road Development Denver, North Carolina June 2017

Traffic Impact Study Little Egypt Road Development Denver, North Carolina June 2017 Traffic Impact Study Little Egypt Road Development Denver, North arolina June 2017 N. Little Egypt Road DQ\ QDQFLQJ VDOHV RU RWKHU SHUIRUPDQFH EDVHG FULWHULD Proposed Site Driveways Site Driveway 1 TRAFFI

More information

Figure 1: Vicinity Map of the Study Area

Figure 1: Vicinity Map of the Study Area ARIZONA TEXAS NEW MEXICO OKLAHOMA May 5, 2016 Mr. Anthony Beach, P.E. BSP Engineers 4800 Lakewood Drive, Suite 4 Waco, Texas 76710 Re: Intersection and Access Analysis along Business 190 in Copperas Cove

More information

OFFICE/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT 1625 BANK STREET OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION BRIEF. Prepared for: Canada Inc.

OFFICE/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT 1625 BANK STREET OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION BRIEF. Prepared for: Canada Inc. OFFICE/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT 1625 BANK STREET OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION BRIEF Prepared for: 9402209 Canada Inc. December 15, 2015 115-625 Report_2.doc D. J. Halpenny & Associates Ltd. Consulting Transportation

More information

5858 N COLLEGE, LLC N College Avenue Traffic Impact Study

5858 N COLLEGE, LLC N College Avenue Traffic Impact Study 5858 N COLLEGE, LLC nue Traffic Impact Study August 22, 2016 Contents Traffic Impact Study Page Preparer Qualifications... 1 Introduction... 2 Existing Roadway Conditions... 5 Existing Traffic Conditions...

More information

4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 9. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC

4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 9. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 9. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC 4.9.1 INTRODUCTION The following section addresses the Proposed Project s impact on transportation and traffic based on the Traffic Study

More information

HILTON GARDEN INN HOTEL HOTEL EXPANSION 2400 ALERT ROAD, OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION BRIEF. Prepared for:

HILTON GARDEN INN HOTEL HOTEL EXPANSION 2400 ALERT ROAD, OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION BRIEF. Prepared for: HILTON GARDEN INN HOTEL HOTEL EXPANSION 2400 ALERT ROAD, OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION BRIEF Prepared for: Bona Building & Management Co. Ltd. Place Vanier, 333 North River Road Vanier, Ontario K1L 8B9 October

More information

MEETING FACILITY 2901 GIBFORD DRIVE CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION BRIEF. Prepared for: Holiday Inn Express 2881 Gibford Drive Ottawa, ON K1V 2L9

MEETING FACILITY 2901 GIBFORD DRIVE CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION BRIEF. Prepared for: Holiday Inn Express 2881 Gibford Drive Ottawa, ON K1V 2L9 MEETING FACILITY 2901 GIBFORD DRIVE CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION BRIEF Prepared for: Holiday Inn Express 2881 Gibford Drive Ottawa, ON K1V 2L9 December 18, 2012 112-566 Brief_1.doc D. J. Halpenny & Associates

More information

VIVA RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES OAKVILLE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY

VIVA RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES OAKVILLE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY VIVA RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES OAKVILLE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY VIVA RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES OAKVILLE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY DECEMBER 2012 READ, VOORHEES & ASSOCIATES TORONTO, ONTARIO Read, Voorhees & Associates

More information

METHODOLOGY. Signalized Intersection Average Control Delay (sec/veh)

METHODOLOGY. Signalized Intersection Average Control Delay (sec/veh) Chapter 5 Traffic Analysis 5.1 SUMMARY US /West 6 th Street assumes a unique role in the Lawrence Douglas County transportation system. This principal arterial street currently conveys commuter traffic

More information

Design Traffic Technical Memorandum

Design Traffic Technical Memorandum State Road 7 Extension PD&E Study Design Traffic Technical Memorandum Palm Beach County, FL October 2010 State Road 7 Extension PD&E Study Design Traffic Technical Memorandum Palm Beach County, FL Prepared

More information

QUICKIE C STORE AND GAS BAR 1780 HERON ROAD OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION BRIEF. Prepared for:

QUICKIE C STORE AND GAS BAR 1780 HERON ROAD OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION BRIEF. Prepared for: QUICKIE C STORE AND GAS BAR 1780 HERON ROAD OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION BRIEF Prepared for: Quickie Convenience Stores Larny Holdings Ltd. c/o PBC Group April 15, 2015 115-615 Report_1.doc D. J. Halpenny

More information

Intersection Traffic Control Feasibility Study

Intersection Traffic Control Feasibility Study Intersection Traffic Control Feasibility Study CSAH 9 at CSAH 60 (185th Avenue) Prepared For: Dakota County Transportation Department Western Service Center 14955 Galaxie Avenue, 3rd Floor Apple Valley,

More information

OTTAWA TRAIN YARDS PHASE 3 DEVELOPMENT CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY. Prepared for:

OTTAWA TRAIN YARDS PHASE 3 DEVELOPMENT CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY. Prepared for: OTTAWA TRAIN YARDS PHASE 3 DEVELOPMENT CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY Prepared for: The Ottawa Train Yards Inc. 223 Colonnade Road South, Suite 212 Nepean, Ontario K2E 7K3 January 17, 2012

More information

Subject: Solberg Avenue / I-229 Grade Separation: Traffic Analysis

Subject: Solberg Avenue / I-229 Grade Separation: Traffic Analysis MEMORANDUM Transportation Bill Troe, AICP Jason Carbee, AICP 12120 Shamrock Plaza Suite 300 Omaha, NE 68154 (402) 334-8181 (402) 334-1984 (Fax) To: Project File Date: Subject: Solberg Avenue / I-229 Grade

More information

Highway 49, Highway 351 and Highway 91 Improvements Feasibility Study Craighead County

Highway 49, Highway 351 and Highway 91 Improvements Feasibility Study Craighead County Highway 49, Highway 351 and Highway 91 Improvements Feasibility Study Craighead County Executive Summary March 2015 Highway 49, Highway 351 and Highway 91 Improvements Feasibility Study Craighead County

More information

Traffic Circulation Study for Neighborhood Southwest of Mockingbird Lane and Airline Road, Highland Park, Texas

Traffic Circulation Study for Neighborhood Southwest of Mockingbird Lane and Airline Road, Highland Park, Texas ARIZONA TEXAS NEW MEXICO OKLAHOMA February 13, 2015 Mr. Meran Dadgostar P.E., R.S. Town of Highland Park 4700 Drexel Dr. Highland Park, Texas 75205 Re: Traffic Circulation Study for Neighborhood Southwest

More information

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS... I APPENDICES... III LIST OF EXHIBITS... V LIST OF TABLES... VII LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS...

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS... I APPENDICES... III LIST OF EXHIBITS... V LIST OF TABLES... VII LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS... TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS... I APPENDICES... III LIST OF EXHIBITS... V LIST OF TABLES... VII LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS... IX 1 INTRODUCTION... 1 1.1 Project Overview... 1 1.2 Analysis Scenarios...

More information

5.0 Roadway System Plan

5.0 Roadway System Plan Southwest Boise Transportation Study Page 16 5.0 Roadway System Plan The Roadway System Plan outlines roadway improvements in the Initial Study Area. It forecasts future deficiencies on the arterial system,

More information

Place Vanier 250 Montreal Road Transportation Impact Study Addendum. Prepared for Broccolini Construction September 20 th, 2012

Place Vanier 250 Montreal Road Transportation Impact Study Addendum. Prepared for Broccolini Construction September 20 th, 2012 Update for the May 31 st, 2012 Traffic Impact Study Prepared for Broccolini Construction 111-23596-00 September 20 th, 2012 2611 Queensview Drive, Suite 300, Ottawa, Ontario CANADA K2B 8K2 Telephone: 613-829-2800

More information

Brian McHugh, Buckhead Community Improvement District. SUBJECT: Wieuca Road at Phipps Boulevard Intersection Improvements Project

Brian McHugh, Buckhead Community Improvement District. SUBJECT: Wieuca Road at Phipps Boulevard Intersection Improvements Project MEMO TO: FROM: Brian McHugh, Buckhead Community Improvement District Jagan Kaja, AICP, WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff SUBJECT: Wieuca Road at Phipps Boulevard Intersection Improvements Project DATE: October

More information

Walmart (Store # ) 60 th Street North and Marion Road Sioux Falls, South Dakota

Walmart (Store # ) 60 th Street North and Marion Road Sioux Falls, South Dakota Walmart (Store #4865-00) 60 th Street North and Marion Road Sioux Falls, South Dakota Prepared for: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Bentonville, Arkansas Prepared by: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. ã2013 Kimley-Horn

More information

URBAN QUARRY HEADQUARTERS 2717 STEVENAGE DRIVE CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW. Prepared for: Urban Quarry 4123 Belgreen Drive, Ottawa K1G 3N2

URBAN QUARRY HEADQUARTERS 2717 STEVENAGE DRIVE CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW. Prepared for: Urban Quarry 4123 Belgreen Drive, Ottawa K1G 3N2 URBAN QUARRY HEADQUARTERS 2717 STEVENAGE DRIVE CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW Prepared for: Urban Quarry 4123 Belgreen Drive, Ottawa K1G 3N2 February 27, 2014 113-584 Overview_1.doc D. J. Halpenny

More information

Simons Run Corridor Study

Simons Run Corridor Study Simons Run Corridor Study Campbell County & City of Lynchburg, Virginia Prepared on: September 30, 2014 Prepared for: Central Virginia Metropolitan Planning Organization 277 Bendix Road, Suite 500 Virginia

More information

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY GA SR 25 Spur at Canal Road Transportation Impact Analysis PREPARED FOR GLYNN COUNTY, GEORGIA 1725 Reynolds Street, Suite 300 Brunswick, Georgia 31520 PREPARED BY 217 Arrowhead Boulevard Suite 26 Jonesboro,

More information

3.2.2 Proposed Road Network within Phase 1B Lands

3.2.2 Proposed Road Network within Phase 1B Lands 3.2.2 Proposed Road Network within Phase 1B Lands Figure 3.1 also shows the proposed road network within the Premier Gateway Phase 1B Employment Area lands, which features two collector roads providing

More information

Northwest Corridor Project Interchange Modification, Interchange Justification and System Analysis Report Reassessment (Phase I)

Northwest Corridor Project Interchange Modification, Interchange Justification and System Analysis Report Reassessment (Phase I) Northwest Corridor Project Interchange Modification, Interchange Justification and System Analysis Report Reassessment (Phase I) Introduction The Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) prepared a

More information

Public Information Meeting. Orange Camp Road. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Beltway to I-4. Presented by: Volusia County August 2, 2018

Public Information Meeting. Orange Camp Road. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Beltway to I-4. Presented by: Volusia County August 2, 2018 Public Information Meeting Orange Camp Road Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Beltway to I-4 Presented by: Volusia County August 2, 2018 1 Project Goals To improve the operations and safety for Orange Camp Road

More information

INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 1660 COMSTOCK ROAD CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW. Prepared for:

INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 1660 COMSTOCK ROAD CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW. Prepared for: INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 1660 COMSTOCK ROAD CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW Prepared for: Simluc Contractors Limited 2550 Blackwell Street, Ottawa K1B 5R1 October 18, 2013 113-584 Overview_1.doc D. J.

More information

PRELIMINARY DRAFT WADDLE ROAD / I-99 INTERCHANGE PROJECT ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS FINAL TRAFFIC SUMMARY REPORT

PRELIMINARY DRAFT WADDLE ROAD / I-99 INTERCHANGE PROJECT ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS FINAL TRAFFIC SUMMARY REPORT PRELIMINARY DRAFT WADDLE ROAD / I-99 INTERCHANGE PROJECT ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS FINAL TRAFFIC SUMMARY REPORT Prepared by: In Association with: November 2013 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Patton Township, in partnership

More information

Project Report. South Kirkwood Road Traffic Study. Meadows Place, TX October 9, 2015

Project Report. South Kirkwood Road Traffic Study. Meadows Place, TX October 9, 2015 Meadows Place, TX October 9, 2015 Contents 1 Introduction... 1 2 Data Collection... 1 3 Existing Roadway Network... 2 4 Traffic Volume Development... 2 5 Warrant Analysis... 3 6 Traffic Control Alternative

More information

CarMax Auto Superstore/ Reconditioning Center #6002 Murrieta, California

CarMax Auto Superstore/ Reconditioning Center #6002 Murrieta, California CarMax Auto Superstore/ Reconditioning Center #6002 Murrieta, California TUSTIN 17782 17th Street Suite 200 Tustin, CA 92780-1947 714.665.4500 Fax: 714.665.4501 LOS ANGELES 145 S. Spring Street Suite 120

More information

INTERSECTION OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS AND NECESSARY RECOMMENDATIONS CIVL 440 Project

INTERSECTION OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS AND NECESSARY RECOMMENDATIONS CIVL 440 Project INTERSECTION OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS AND NECESSARY RECOMMENDATIONS CIVL 44 Project INTERSECTION: 16TH AVENUE & EAST MALL FOR AM PEAK HOUR Group Work: Syed Shafaat Ali Shah (2347426) Mohammad Moudud Hasan

More information

Low Level Road Improvements Traffic Analysis. Report

Low Level Road Improvements Traffic Analysis. Report Low Level Road Improvements Traffic Analysis Report June, 22 Table of Contents. INTRODUCTION.... LOW LEVEL ROAD PROJECT....2 STUDY AREA....2. West-End Corridor Improvements... 2.2.2 East-End Corridor Improvements...

More information

FINAL DESIGN TRAFFIC TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

FINAL DESIGN TRAFFIC TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FINAL DESIGN TRAFFIC TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM July 2014 FINAL (SR 43) Project Development and Environment Study From State Road 60 (Adamo Drive) to I-4 (SR 400) Hillsborough County, Florida Work Program Item

More information

Henderson Avenue Mixed-Use Development

Henderson Avenue Mixed-Use Development Zoning Case: Z145-3 Traffic Impact Analysis Henderson Avenue Mixed-Use Development Dallas, TX October 26 th, 216 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Dallas, Texas Project #644827 Registered Firm F-928 Traffic

More information

TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS REPORT US Route 6 Huron, Erie County, Ohio

TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS REPORT US Route 6 Huron, Erie County, Ohio TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS REPORT US Route 6 Huron, Erie County, Ohio December 12, 2012 Prepared for: The City of Huron 417 Main Huron, OH 44839 Providing Practical Experience Technical Excellence and Client

More information

Donahue Drive Corridor Traffic Operational Evaluation

Donahue Drive Corridor Traffic Operational Evaluation Donahue Drive Corridor Traffic Operational Evaluation PREPARED FOR: THE CITY OF AUBURN PREPARED BY: JANUARY 2007 Donahue Drive Corridor Study--Auburn, Alabama TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction... 1 Background

More information

Lyons Avenue/Dockweiler Road Extension Project Draft Environmental Impact Report. Appendix I Traffic Impact Study

Lyons Avenue/Dockweiler Road Extension Project Draft Environmental Impact Report. Appendix I Traffic Impact Study Lyons Avenue/Dockweiler Road Extension Project Draft Environmental Impact Report Appendix I Traffic Impact Study Street 0 80-1947 500.4501 RITA ld Court 0 91355-1096 400.7401 LA n Avenue 0 590-3745 300-9301

More information

TRAFFIC STUDY GUIDELINES Clarksville Street Department

TRAFFIC STUDY GUIDELINES Clarksville Street Department TRAFFIC STUDY GUIDELINES Clarksville Street Department 9/1/2009 Introduction Traffic studies are used to help the city determine potential impacts to the operation of the surrounding roadway network. Two

More information

Queensgate Drive Corridor Traffic Study

Queensgate Drive Corridor Traffic Study January 2015 Prepared for: City of Richland Prepared by: J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. 2810 W. Clearwater Avenue, Suite 201 Kennewick, Washington 99336 Table of Contents Introduction and Background... 1 Existing

More information

City of Homewood Transportation Plan

City of Homewood Transportation Plan City of Homewood Transportation Plan Prepared for: City of Homewood, Alabama Prepared by: Skipper Consulting, Inc. May 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION... 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION... 1 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION

More information

#!! "$% ##! &! # '#! % $ #!

#!! $% ##! &! # '#! % $ #! Executive Summary US Highway 16 (US 16) is the primary corridor connecting Rapid City to the Black Hills region. It serves a growing population of commercial and residential traffic, as well as seasonal

More information

FRONT RANGE CROSSINGS TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY

FRONT RANGE CROSSINGS TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FRONT RANGE CROSSINGS TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Prepared for: City of Thornton And Colorado Department of Transportation Prepared by: 11 Blake Street, Suite 2 Denver, Colorado 822 Contact: Brian Bern, PE, PTOE

More information

Troutbeck Farm Development

Troutbeck Farm Development Troutbeck Farm Development Willistown Township, Chester County PA For Submission To: Willistown Township Last Revised: October, 4 TPD# INLM.A. 5 E. High Street Suite 65 Pottstown, PA 9464 6.36.3 TPD@TrafficPD.com

More information

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Page 1 of 6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Page 1 of 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to identify conformance with the original traffic impact study for the proposed retail development on Lot 5 of Riverdale Retail Filing No. 1 located on the

More information

Road Conversion Study Plumas Street

Road Conversion Study Plumas Street Plumas Street Phase I Submitted to The Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County Submitted by Zong Tian, Ph.D., P.E. Saeedeh Farivar Haiyuan Li, Ph.D. Center for Advanced Transportation Education

More information

Harrah s Station Square Casino

Harrah s Station Square Casino Transportation Analysis Harrah s Station Square Casino Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Submitted To: City of Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board Prepared By: DKS Associates GAI Consultants December

More information

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Creekside Thornton, Colorado. For. August 2015 November 2015 Revised: August Prepared for:

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Creekside Thornton, Colorado. For. August 2015 November 2015 Revised: August Prepared for: TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY For Creekside Thornton, Colorado August 215 November 215 Revised: August 216 Prepared for: Jansen Strawn Consulting Engineers 45 West 2 nd Avenue Denver, Colorado 8223 Prepared by:

More information

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY CRITERIA

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY CRITERIA Chapter 6 - TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY CRITERIA 6.1 GENERAL PROVISIONS 6.1.1. Purpose: The purpose of this document is to outline a standard format for preparing a traffic impact study in the City of Steamboat

More information

HENDERSON DEVELOPMENT 213, 217, 221, 221 ½, 223 HENDERSON AVENUE and 65 TEMPLETON STREET OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW.

HENDERSON DEVELOPMENT 213, 217, 221, 221 ½, 223 HENDERSON AVENUE and 65 TEMPLETON STREET OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW. HENDERSON DEVELOPMENT 213, 217, 221, 221 ½, 223 HENDERSON AVENUE and 65 TEMPLETON STREET OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW Prepared for: 2294170 Ontario Inc. February 2, 2017 117-652 Report_1.doc

More information

Traffic Impact Study. Westlake Elementary School Westlake, Ohio. TMS Engineers, Inc. June 5, 2017

Traffic Impact Study. Westlake Elementary School Westlake, Ohio. TMS Engineers, Inc. June 5, 2017 TMS Engineers, Inc. Traffic Impact Study Westlake Elementary School Westlake, Ohio June 5, 2017 Prepared for: Westlake City Schools - Board of Education 27200 Hilliard Boulevard Westlake, OH 44145 TRAFFIC

More information

Shockoe Bottom Preliminary Traffic and Parking Analysis

Shockoe Bottom Preliminary Traffic and Parking Analysis Shockoe Bottom Preliminary Traffic and Parking Analysis Richmond, Virginia August 14, 2013 Prepared For City of Richmond Department of Public Works Prepared By 1001 Boulders Pkwy Suite 300, Richmond, VA

More information

Intersection LOS Intersection level of service (LOS) is defined by the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) by the following criteria:

Intersection LOS Intersection level of service (LOS) is defined by the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) by the following criteria: Page 2 of 9 Intersection LOS Intersection level of service (LOS) is defined by the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) by the following criteria: Table 1 LOS Definitions Level of Signalized Un-Signalized Definition

More information

9 Leeming Drive Redevelopment Ottawa, ON Transportation Brief. Prepared By: Stantec Consulting Ltd.

9 Leeming Drive Redevelopment Ottawa, ON Transportation Brief. Prepared By: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 9 Leeming Drive Redevelopment Ottawa, ON Transportation Brief Prepared By: Stantec Consulting Ltd. TIA GUIDELINES CHECKLIST Report Context Municipal Address Comment: Section 1.1 Location relative to major

More information

Los Altos Hills Town Council - June 18, 2015 Palo Alto City Council June 22, AGENDA ITEM #2.B Presentation

Los Altos Hills Town Council - June 18, 2015 Palo Alto City Council June 22, AGENDA ITEM #2.B Presentation Los Altos Hills Town Council - June 18, 2015 Palo Alto City Council June 22, 2015 AGENDA ITEM #2.B Presentation Previous Presentations Los Altos Hills Town Council in May 2014 and February 2015 Palo Alto

More information

FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES HOTEL 135 THAD JOHNSON PRIVATE OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION BRIEF. Prepared for:

FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES HOTEL 135 THAD JOHNSON PRIVATE OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION BRIEF. Prepared for: FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES HOTEL 135 THAD JOHNSON PRIVATE OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION BRIEF Prepared for: Bona Building & Management Co. Ltd. Place Vanier, 333 North River Road Vanier, Ontario K1L 8B9 August 12,

More information

Alberta Highway 881. Corridor Management Plan. Session Forum 1 - Highways. Tri-Party Transportation Conference Moving Alberta Into the Future

Alberta Highway 881. Corridor Management Plan. Session Forum 1 - Highways. Tri-Party Transportation Conference Moving Alberta Into the Future Tri-Party Transportation Conference Moving Alberta Into the Future Alberta Highway 881 Corridor Management Plan Lac La Biche to Anzac Session Forum 1 - Highways March 2017 INTRODUCTION + 241 km long, 2

More information

BLUE SEA VILLAGE MER BLEUE 2159 MER BLEUE ROAD OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ASSESSMENT. Prepared for: Ontario Limited.

BLUE SEA VILLAGE MER BLEUE 2159 MER BLEUE ROAD OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ASSESSMENT. Prepared for: Ontario Limited. BLUE SEA VILLAGE MER BLEUE 2159 MER BLEUE ROAD OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ASSESSMENT Prepared for: 2534189 Ontario Limited April 6, 2018 117-668 TIA Report_2.doc D. J. Halpenny & Associates

More information

DRAFT. Corridor study. Honeysuckle Road. October Prepared for the City of Dothan, AL. Prepared by Gresham, Smith and Partners

DRAFT. Corridor study. Honeysuckle Road. October Prepared for the City of Dothan, AL. Prepared by Gresham, Smith and Partners DRAFT Corridor study Honeysuckle Road October 2017 Prepared for the City of Dothan, AL Prepared by TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I... 1 STUDY SUMMARY... 1 INTRODUCTION... 1 CONCLUSIONS... 5 SECTION II... 7

More information

TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT River Edge Colorado

TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT River Edge Colorado TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT River Edge Colorado Submitted by: Fehr & Peers 621 17th Street, Ste. 231 Denver, CO 8293 (33) 296-43 December, 21 App. M-2 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 TABLE OF

More information

Capital Region Council of Governments

Capital Region Council of Governments March 23, 2018 Capital Region Council of Governments PROJECT CONCEPT REPORT Realignment of Swamp and Northfield Road s approaches to Route 44 (Boston Turnpike) Town of Coventry SUMMARY: The Town of Coventry

More information

ALLEY 24 TRAFFIC STUDY

ALLEY 24 TRAFFIC STUDY ALLEY 24 TRAFFIC STUDY in City of Frostburg, Maryland January 2013 3566 Teays Valley Road Hurricane, WV Office: (304) 397-5508 www.denniscorporation.com Alley 24 Traffic Study January 2013 Frostburg, Maryland

More information

University Hill Transportation Study Technical Memorandum Alternatives Modeling and Analysis May 2007

University Hill Transportation Study Technical Memorandum Alternatives Modeling and Analysis May 2007 Technical Memorandum May 2007 Syracuse Metropolitan Transportation Council Edwards and Kelcey with Wallace Roberts and Todd Alta Planning and Design CONTENTS SECTION ONE- INTRODUCTION...1 SECTION TWO-

More information

Traffic Impact Analysis

Traffic Impact Analysis Traffic Impact Analysis Isle of Capri Casinos, Inc. Waterloo, Iowa SEH No. A-CLAAS0501.00 November 16, 2004 Table of Contents (Continued) Table of Contents Certification Page Table of Contents Page 1.0

More information

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY And A TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS FOR A SENIOR LIVING AND APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY And A TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS FOR A SENIOR LIVING AND APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY And A TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS FOR A SENIOR LIVING AND APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT DEERFIELD TOWNSHIP, WARREN COUNTY, OHIO Nantucket Circle and Montgomery Road () Prepared for: ODLE

More information

Traffic Impact Study. Roderick Place Columbia Pike Thompson s Station, TN. Transportation Group, LLC Traffic Engineering and Planning

Traffic Impact Study. Roderick Place Columbia Pike Thompson s Station, TN. Transportation Group, LLC Traffic Engineering and Planning F i s c h b a c h Transportation Group, LLC Traffic Engineering and Planning Traffic Impact Study Roderick Place Columbia Pike Thompson s Station, TN Prepared March 2016 Ms. Gillian L. Fischbach, P.E.,

More information

The proposed development is located within 800m of an existing Transit Station where infill developments and intensification are encouraged.

The proposed development is located within 800m of an existing Transit Station where infill developments and intensification are encouraged. Stantec Consulting Ltd. 1331 Clyde Avenue, Suite 4 Ottawa ON K2C 3G4 Tel: (613) 722-442 Fax: (613) 722-2799 May 14, 213 File: 1638823 Robinson Park Development Corp. 5699 Power Road Ottawa, ON, K1G 3N4

More information

Meadowlake Ranch Traffic Impact Analysis (LSC #184600) August 27, 2018

Meadowlake Ranch Traffic Impact Analysis (LSC #184600) August 27, 2018 LSC TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 545 East Pikes Peak Avenue, Suite 210 Colorado Springs, CO 80903 (719) 633-2868 FAX (719) 633-5430 E-mail: lsc@lsctrans.com Website: http://www.lsctrans.com Traffic

More information

Grant Avenue Streetscape

Grant Avenue Streetscape REPORT TYPE GOES HERE Grant Avenue Streetscape PREPARED FOR City of Manassas 9027 Center Street Manassas, VA 20110 PREPARED BY 8300 Boone Boulevard Suite 700 Vienna, Virginia 22182 571.389.8121 July 31,

More information

Technical Memorandum TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. RIDLEY ROAD CONVENIENCE STORE Southampton County, VA. Prepared for: Mr. David Williams.

Technical Memorandum TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. RIDLEY ROAD CONVENIENCE STORE Southampton County, VA. Prepared for: Mr. David Williams. Technical Memorandum TRFFIC IMPCT STUDY RIDLEY ROD CONVENIENCE STORE Southampton County, V Prepared for: Mr. David Williams By: Charles Smith, P.E., PTOE EPR Charlottesville, V July 2014 1 TBLE OF CONTENTS

More information

Date: September 7, Project #: Re: Spaulding Youth Center Northfield, NH Property. Traffic Impact Study

Date: September 7, Project #: Re: Spaulding Youth Center Northfield, NH Property. Traffic Impact Study To: Ms. Susan C. Ryan Spaulding Youth Center 72 Spaulding Road Northfield, NH 03276 Date: September 7, 2017 Project #: 52455.00 From: Robin Bousa Director of Transportation Systems Re: Spaulding Youth

More information

Gateway Transportation Study

Gateway Transportation Study Gateway Transportation Study Amherst, Massachusetts SUBMITTED TO University of Massachusetts Amherst Town of Amherst SUBMITTED BY Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. Watertown, Massachusetts March 213 Back of

More information

Giles Run Connector Road

Giles Run Connector Road Giles Run Connector Road Laurel Hill Adaptive Reuse Area to Laurel Crest Drive South County Federation Meeting June 14, 2016 History Connector road included in the Laurel Hill Comprehensive Plan amendment

More information

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE CHAMPAIGN UNIT#4 SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPOSED HIGH SCHOOL (SPALDING PARK SITE) IN THE CITY OF CHAMPAIGN Final Report Champaign Urbana Urbanized Area Transportation Study 6/24/2014

More information

MEMO To: Darin Duersch, UDOT. September 4, Date: Robert Betts; Shruti Malik; Barry Banks. From:

MEMO To: Darin Duersch, UDOT. September 4, Date: Robert Betts; Shruti Malik; Barry Banks. From: MEMO To: Date: From: Subject: Darin Duersch, UDOT September 4, 29 Robert Betts; Shruti Malik; Barry Banks Ogden Traffic Modeling Methodology and Preliminary Results The following memo summarizes the methodology

More information

Traffic Impact Study, Premier Gold Mines Limited, Hardrock Property

Traffic Impact Study, Premier Gold Mines Limited, Hardrock Property Traffic Impact Study, Premier Gold Mines Limited, Hardrock Property Prepared for: Premier Gold Mines Limited Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. November 2014

More information

BLOSSOM AT PICKENS SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT STUDY

BLOSSOM AT PICKENS SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT STUDY BLOSSOM AT PICKENS SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT STUDY Class Project Report for ECIV 542 Traffic Engineering Submitted by Omor Sharif Muchun Song Narges Kaveshgar Quyen Pham Chih-Yao Lin Submission

More information

MEMORANDUM. Our project study area included the following locations:

MEMORANDUM. Our project study area included the following locations: MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Subject: Najib O. Habesch Nick M. Fomenko, PE, PTOE Bushnell Park North Traffic Assessment BETA Project #: 4461 As part of our contract to undertake the design of the Bushnell

More information

Gene Dillon Elementary School Traffic Study Division Street Site

Gene Dillon Elementary School Traffic Study Division Street Site To: From: Dr. James Hess, Superintendent Jordan Schwarze, PE, Senior Engineer Matt Pacyna, PE, Senior Associate Date: March 30, 2016 Subject: Gene Dillon Elementary School Traffic Study reet Site Memorandum

More information

FINAL REPORT Traffic Analysis Report Port Coquitlam Recreation Complex Port Coquitlam, BC

FINAL REPORT Traffic Analysis Report Port Coquitlam Recreation Complex Port Coquitlam, BC FINAL REPORT Traffic Analysis Report Port Coquitlam Recreation Complex Port Coquitlam, BC Howes Technical Advantage Ltd. This report was prepared by Howes Technical Advantage Ltd. for the City of Port

More information

APPENDIX D Traffic Impact Study (Draft Report)

APPENDIX D Traffic Impact Study (Draft Report) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA) REGISTRATION, TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY (DRAFT REPORT), AND WATER SUPPLY SOURCE ASSESSMENT (WSSA): CAMPING PLAGE ABOITEAU BEACH, CAP-PELÉ, NB APPENDIX D (Draft Report)

More information

STILLWATER AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY Old Town, Maine

STILLWATER AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY Old Town, Maine Draft Study STILLWATER AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY Old Town, Maine SUBMITTED TO: BANGOR AREA COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SUBMITTED BY: I MAY 23, 2017 DRAFT STILLWATER AVENUE STUDY FINAL REPORT Table

More information

Design Criteria. Design Criteria

Design Criteria. Design Criteria F Design Criteria Design Criteria Ministry of Transportation Ministère des Transports DESIGN CRITERIA Page: 1 of 13 WORK PROJECT NO. N/A GO Bloomington Station TYPE OF PROJECT LOCATION Bloomington Road

More information

TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS REPORT. Pacheco Boulevard Alignment Study and Alternatives Analysis

TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS REPORT. Pacheco Boulevard Alignment Study and Alternatives Analysis TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS REPORT Pacheco Boulevard Alignment Study and Alternatives Analysis PREPARED FOR: CITY OF MARTINEZ AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY OCTOBER 2016 FINAL REPORT Prepared By: under contract

More information