TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT River Edge Colorado

Transcription

1 TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT River Edge Colorado Submitted by: Fehr & Peers th Street, Ste. 231 Denver, CO 8293 (33) December, 21 App. M-2

2 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION PROJECT DESCRIPTION STUDY OBJECTIVES STUDY CONDITIONS INTERSECTION ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY... 6 CHAPTER 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS ROADWAY SYSTEM TRANSIT, PEDESTRIAN, AND BICYCLE FACILITIES... 1 CHAPTER 3. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION CHAPTER 4. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT CHAPTER 5. EXISTING AND PROJECTED TRAFFIC EXISTING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS PROJECTED TRAFFIC AND INTERSECTION OPERATIONS PROJECTED TRAFFIC AND INTERSECTION OPERATIONS BACKGOUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC BACKGOUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC CHAPTER 6. ACCESS CODE HIGHWAYS IMPROVEMENTS CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY AND LOS ANALYSIS EXISTING CAPACITY AND LOS BACKGROUND CAPACITY AND LOS BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC BACKGROUND CAPACITY AND LOS BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC CHAPTER 8. SIGNAL WARRANT AND PROGRESSION ANALYSIS SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS PROGRESSION ANALYSIS CHAPTER 9. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS i App. M-3

3 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: PROJECT VICINITY... 4 FIGURE 2: SITE LAYOUT... 5 FIGURE 3: EXTERNAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 4: ASSIGNED PROJECT TRIPS 218 AND FIGURE 5: ADJUSTED EXISTING COUNTS FIGURE 6: 218 BACKGROUND VOLUMES FIGURE 7: 23 BACKGROUND VOLUMES... 2 FIGURE 8: 218 TOTAL TRAFFIC FIGURE 9: 23 TOTAL TRAFFIC LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA... 7 TABLE 2. UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA... 8 TABLE 3: TRIP RATES AND GENERATION TABLE TABLE 4: EXISTING INTERSECTION LOS RESULTS TABLE 5: 218 BACKGROUND LOS RESULTS TABLE 6: MITIGATED 218 BACKGROUND LOS RESULTS TABLE 7: 218 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT LOS RESULTS TABLE 8: 218 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT MITIGATED LOS RESULTS TABLE 11: 23 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT LOS RESULTS TABLE 13: PROGRESSION EFFICIENCY ii App. M-4

4 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 APPENDICES Appendix A: Existing Traffic Counts Appendix B: Synchro Reports - Existing Appendix C: Synchro reports - Future Appendix D: Signal Warrant Analysis Appendix E: Progression Analysis iii App. M-5

5 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The River Edge Colorado development is located in Garfield County. It is west of State Highway (SH) 82 approximately six miles south of Glenwood Springs, Colorado. The project site encompasses approximately 16 acres. The development is planned to be mostly residential and is proposed to include 366 Residential units comprised of single family homes plus a neighborhood center and a water treatment and maintenance facility. Transportation impacts on SH 82 were assessed for the years 218 and 23 with and without the development. Analysis was conducted based upon CDOT criteria and the existing roadway category. Analysis included intersection Level of Service (LOS), signal warrant analysis, and signal progression analysis. Three intersections were analyzed during the AM, PM, and Saturday peak hours. The intersections included: SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road SH 82 at Marand Road SH 82 at Spring Valley Road Spring Valley Road is the closest signalized intersection to the proposed development and is north of the development. 218 Background Traffic volumes along State Highway 82 are expected to increase by a compounded growth factor of 1.11 into 218. The following mitigation efforts will be needed without the project in order to maintain efficient operations along the corridor: Spring Valley Road at SH 82 - Re-timing improvements in order to maintain acceptable LOS operations during the peak hours. This improvement will allow for LOS D or better during all peak hours. Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 The westbound right turn should be separated Although Cattle Creek Road and Marand Road side-street approaches notice delay at the stop controlled intersections, it is not expected that the side street volumes will be high enough to warrant a signal without the project. The suggested mitigation efforts are not necessitated by the project. 23 Background Traffic volumes along State Highway 82 are expected to increase by a compounded growth factor of 1.31 into 23. The following mitigation efforts will be needed without the project in order to maintain efficient operations along the corridor: Spring Valley Road at SH 82 The eastbound and westbound turn movements should be separated from the through movements. This mitigation will allow for LOS D or better during all peak hours. 1 App. M-6

6 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 This intersection will need to be signalized in 23 due to background growth. Peak hour signal warrants are expected to be met in the AM and PM peak hours. This improvement will allow for LOS C or better during all peak hours. Although Marand Road side-street approaches notice delay at the stop controlled intersection, it is not expected that the side street volumes will be high enough to warrant a signal. The suggested mitigation efforts are not necessitated by the project. 218 Plus Project All River Edge Colorado development traffic will access SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road in the year 218. The following mitigation efforts will be needed with the project in order to maintain efficient operations along the corridor: Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 - A signal will be needed at Cattle Creek Road and SH 82 upon buildout. With a signal at Cattle Creek Road, the intersection is shown to operate at a LOS B or better during all peak hours. The westbound right turn will not need to be separated if a signal is present. The mitigation efforts are necessitated by the project traffic. The project does not significantly impact Marand Road at SH 82 or Spring Valley Road at SH 82. Peak hour signal warrants were conducted for the intersection of Cattle Creek Road at SH 82. Cattle Creek Road is expected to meet the peak hour warrants in 218 with the project. 23 Plus Project Similar to 218 all River Edge Colorado development traffic will access SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road in the year 23. The mitigation efforts are necessitated by the project traffic. The project does not significantly impact Marand Road at SH 82 or Spring Valley Road at SH 82. No additional mitigation efforts are recommended. Highway Access Requirements SH 82 is currently a Category E-X roadway. According to the Access Code, direct access service to abutting land is subordinate to providing service to through traffic movements. The following requirements will be necessary to gain improved access: The spacing of Cattle Creek Road is such that a signal will be appropriate based upon the approximate 1 mile spacing to Spring Valley Road. Auxiliary left turn lanes are required at Cattle Creek Road. The transition taper length will be included with the required storage and deceleration length. A right turn deceleration lane with taper is required for southbound traffic turning onto Cattle Creek Road Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements To accommodate recreational bicycle activity in the area, a bicycle connection to the RFTA trail near the main entrance should be requested and bicycle traffic internal to the site be considered in the design. Adequate facilities are recommended within the development to accommodate pedestrian traffic throughout the development and to facilitate safe pedestrian crossings at SH App. M-7

7 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The River Edge Colorado development is located in Garfield County. It is west of State Highway (SH) 82 approximately six miles south of Glenwood Springs, Colorado. The project site encompasses approximately 16 acres. The Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA) runs along the east edge of the property, somewhat parallel to SH 82. The Roaring Fork River runs along the west side of the property. Figure 1 shows the site vicinity. Current access to the site exists on SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road. The development is planned to be residential in and is proposed to include 366 Residential units comprised of single family homes plus a neighborhood center and a water treatment and maintenance facility. Figure 2 shows the internal roadway layout and general site layout. 1.2 STUDY OBJECTIVES This report provides an assessment of potential traffic impacts to SH 82 associated with the development of the River Edge Colorado project. It includes an assessment of traffic operations along three intersections along SH 82. The study intersections included are as follows: SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road SH 82 at Marand Road SH 82 at Spring Valley Road 3 App. M-8

8 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Figure 1: Project Vicinity 4 App. M-9

9 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Figure 2: Site Layout 5 App. M-1

10 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December STUDY CONDITIONS This traffic impact analysis has been compiled in order to determine what impacts the proposed development will have on the infrastructure system. The AM peak hour, PM peak hour, and Saturday peak hour were included in the study to provide an evaluation of the potential impact of the development during the weekday morning and evening peak hour commuter traffic as well as the weekend peak. The following three conditions were analyzed in this study with the corresponding volumes and network configurations as indicated. These study conditions are consistent with CDOTs Traffic Impact Study guidelines. Existing Conditions Analysis of the existing conditions in the study area were based on turning movement volumes collected in May 21 and the existing roadway, intersection geometry, and traffic control as observed in the field. The counts were adjusted to reflect summer conditions. Analysis included existing summer peak season, peak hour traffic operations, and an assessment of intersection delay and level of service performance. The existing conditions provide a baseline for the future analysis. 218 Background Conditions Analysis of the 218 background traffic was conducted to evaluate the impact of background traffic to the study intersections. The analysis of this condition represents volumes associated with traffic growth in the region based upon CDOTs growth rates. 23 Background Conditions Analysis of the 23 background traffic was conducted to evaluate the impact of background traffic to the study intersections. The analysis of this condition represents volumes associated with traffic growth in the region based upon CDOTs growth rates. 218 Background Plus Project Conditions Analysis of the 218 background traffic plus project traffic was conducted to evaluate the impact of the project in 218. This includes full build out of the development. The volumes include the existing counts with the background growth rate applied to year 218 along SH 82, combined with the sitegenerated trips for all land uses. Project access to SH 82 is via one intersection located at Cattle Creek Road for Background Plus Project Conditions Analysis of the 23 background traffic plus project traffic was conducted to evaluate the impact of the project in 23. The volumes include the existing counts with the background growth rate applied to year 23 along SH 82, combined with the site-generated trips for all land uses. Project access to SH 82 is via one intersection located at Cattle Creek Road for App. M-11

11 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December INTERSECTION ANALYSIS METHOD The traffic operations analysis addressed unsignalized and signalized intersection operations using the procedures and methodologies contained in the Highway Capacity Manual 2 (HCM), Transportation Research Board, 2 for the weekday AM and PM peak hour and weekend peak hour traffic operations. Study intersection operations were evaluated using level of service calculations as analyzed in the Synchro software version 7. Level of Service Criteria To measure and describe the operational status of the local roadway network and corresponding intersections, transportation engineers and planners commonly use a grading system called level of service (LOS). LOS is a description of an intersection s operation, ranging from LOS A (indicating free flow traffic conditions with little or no delay) to LOS F (representing over-saturated conditions where traffic flows exceed design capacity, resulting in long queues and delays). Signalized Intersections At signalized intersections, traffic conditions were evaluated using procedures and methodologies contained in the Highway Capacity Manual 2 (HCM), Transportation Research Board, 2. The operation analysis uses various intersection characteristics (such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, and signal phasing) to estimate the intersection s volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio. For signalized intersections the HCM defines the level of service as the average delay per vehicle for the overall intersection. Table 1 summarizes the relationship between delay and LOS for signalized intersections. Table 1. Signalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria Level of Service Average Stopped Delay Description (seconds/vehicle) A < 1 Very low delay. Most vehicles do not stop. B 1.1 to 2 Generally good progression of vehicles. Slight delays. C 2.1 to 35 Fair progression. Increased number of stopped vehicles. D 35.1 to 55 Noticeable congestion. Large portion of vehicles stopped. E 55.1 to 8 Poor progression. High delays and frequent cycle failure. F > 8 Oversaturation. Forced flow. Extensive queuing. Source: Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2). 7 App. M-12

12 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Unsignalized Intersections For unsignalized (all-way stop-controlled and side-street stop-controlled) intersections, the Transportation Research Board s 2 Highway Capacity Manual methodology for unsignalized intersections was utilized. With this methodology, operations are defined by the average control delay per vehicle (measured in seconds) for each stop-controlled movement. The method incorporates delay associated with deceleration, acceleration, stopping, and moving up in the queue. For all-way stopcontrolled intersections the HCM defines the level of service as the average delay per vehicle for the overall intersection. For side street stop-controlled intersections, LOS is reported for the worst approach. Table 2 summarizes the relationship between delay and LOS for unsignalized intersections. Table 2. Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria Level of Service Average Total Delay (seconds/vehicle) Description a < 1 Little or no conflicting traffic for minor street approach. b 1.1 to 15 Minor street approach begins to notice absence of available gaps. c 15.1 to 25 Minor street approach begins experiencing delay for available gaps. d 25.1 to 35 Minor street approach experiences queuing due to a reduction in available gaps. e 35.1 to 5 Extensive minor street queuing due to insufficient gaps. f > 5 Insufficient gaps of suitable size to allow minor street traffic demand to cross safely through a major traffic stream. Source: Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2). Significance Criteria Minimum Acceptable Levels of Service: Garfield County Traffic Study guidelines indicate that all county roads must maintain an overall Level of Service C while intersections should operate at an overall Level of Service D or better. Colorado Department of Transportation minimum design criteria indicate intersections operate at an overall Level of Service D or better. 8 App. M-13

13 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Significant Impact Criteria: A project typically is considered to have a significant impact at a study intersection when one of the following criteria is satisfied: For Signalized Intersections: When the added project traffic causes an intersection to exceed the Level of Service standard; or when the background traffic conditions (without project traffic) exceeds the established Level of Service standards, and the project traffic causes more than a 2 percent increase in the intersection delay. For Unsignalized Intersections: Queuing of traffic to adjacent intersections would create impeded traffic flows; or excessive delays are determined to create potential safety problems. It is typical for an unsignalized intersection to notice delay higher than 35 seconds (LOS e) for a single approach without meeting signal warrants. Therefore LOS e or better for a single movement at an unsignalized intersection is typically tolerated. 9 App. M-14

14 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 CHAPTER 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS An assessment of the existing transportation system surrounding the project site was conducted. This provides a clear picture of the system today and sets a baseline for future analysis. 2.1 ROADWAY SYSTEM SH 82 is a regional highway connecting Interstate 7 (I-7) to the north with Highway 24 to the south and east. The speed limit along the highway varies from 55 to 65 miles per hour. Within the vicinity of the River Edge Colorado Development, the roadway is a median divided rural highway with two lanes in each direction. Auxiliary turn lanes exist at full movement intersections as well as acceleration and deceleration lanes. SH 82 is classified as an Expressway, Category E-X by CDOT. SH82 at Marand Road, Looking North North of the site is the intersection of Spring Valley Road. The intersection is signalized at SH 82. On the west side of the intersection is a small park n-ride lot for the transit stop that is located at the intersection. East of the intersection are industrial and commercial uses. Marand Road is located north of the site and is a local 2 lane access roadway on the east side of the highway, providing access to industrial and commercial uses. Access exists to a former restaurant site which is currently vacant on the west side of the highway directly across from Marand Road. The access is unsignalized and full movement. Cattle Creek Road intersects CR 11 and the frontage road prior to intersecting SH 82 on the east side of Highway 82. Commercial uses exist along CR 11. West of SH 82, the land is currently undeveloped. The intersection is a full movement access. 2.2 TRANSIT, PEDESTRIAN, AND BICYCLE FACILITIES Transit Facilities The Roaring Fork Transit Authority currently operates along SH 82 between Glenwood Springs and Aspen. Valley fare buses operate as Local L and Express X buses. Both L and X busses stop at the intersection of Spring Valley Road and SH 82 on the near side of the intersection. Bus Shelter at Spring Valley Road 1 App. M-15

15 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities The Rio Grande Trail is a multi-use trail system that travels from I-7 to the north to Aspen and runs parallel to SH 82 on the west side of the highway in the vicinity of the site. This trail was built within the former rail corridor of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad (D&RGW) Aspen Branch. In 1997, the rail corridor and track were purchased using a combination of funding from local governments, Great Outdoors Colorado, the Colorado Department of Transportation, and Pitkin County Open Space and Trails. This purchase presented an opportunity to explore transportation alternatives to SH 82 congestion and the challenge of creating recreation connectivity in the Roaring Fork Valley. The Roaring Fork Transit Authority manages and maintains the Rio Grande Trail with the Roaring Fork Valley. Popular recreational bicycle routes in the area include loops on Cattle Creek Road and Spring Valley Road east of Highway 82 to the RFTA trail. The photo to the right shows the mapmyride routes in the area. The roadways in the area have limited to no sidewalks. 11 App. M-16

16 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 CHAPTER 3. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION The vehicle trips associated with the River Edge Colorado project were calculated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, Eighth Edition. Trip generation forecasts were developed for full buildout of the property. The ITE method consists of choosing an appropriate independent variable for each land use for a particular time of day. The value of the independent variable is multiplied by a weighted average rate or inserted into a regression equation to calculate the trips generated by each land use. The ITE land uses planned for development are Single Family Housing (21) and Recreation Center (495) Table 3 shows the proposed project trip generation. The notes following the table indicate the regression equation used to generate trips. 12 App. M-17

17 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 TABLE 3: TRIP RATES AND GENERATION TABLE Trip Generation Rates [a] Estimated Trip Generation Land Use Size ITE Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Code Rate Rate In Out Rate In Out Rate In Out In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Housing 366 du 21 [b] [b] 25% 75% [b] 63% 37% [b] 53% 47% 3, Recreation Center 6. ksf % 39% % 63% % 46% TOTAL VEHICLE TRIPS 3, Notes: [a] [b] Source: Trip Generation, 8th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) ITE 21 trip generation equations used rather than linear trip generation rate: Daily: Ln(T) =.92 * Ln(x) , where T = trips, x = area in ksf AM Peak Hour: T =.7 * x , where T = trips, x = area in ksf PM Peak Hour: LN(T) =.9 *LN(x) +.51, where T = trips, x = area in ksf Sat Peak Hour: T =.89 *x , where T = trips, x = area in ksf The Maintenance Facility is not expected to generate peak hour trips that will effect SH 82 and has not been included App. M-18 13

18 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 CHAPTER 4. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT Trip distribution was based upon existing traffic patterns. In general, 65% of the traffic along SH 82 travels south towards Carbondale in the AM peak, leaving 35% to travel north. In the evening the traffic shifts so that 35% travels south and 65% travels north. Saturday peak hour traffic is more evenly split between northbound and southbound traffic at 5% to 5%. Figure 3 shows the external trip distribution. Traffic was assigned based upon: One access point onto SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road in 218 One access point onto SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road in 23 Figure 4 shows the project trips as assigned. 14 App. M-19

19 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Figure 3: External Trip Distribution 15 App. M-2

20 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Figure 4: Assigned Project Trips 218 and App. M-21

21 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 CHAPTER 5. EXISTING AND PROJECTED TRAFFIC 5.1 EXISTING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS Existing Traffic counts were conducted in May 21 by All Traffic Data for AM, PM and Saturday peak hours. These counts were adjusted to reflect summer peak traffic. According to CDOT records, May traffic is.8 times the average annual traffic. Summer peaks are noticed in July along SH 82 and are 1.25 of the average annual traffic. The counts were factored up by 1.56 to reflect the summer peak. Figure 5 shows the adjusted, existing counts along SH 82 and the intersection lane configuration. Appendix A contains the unadjusted traffic count data PROJECTED TRAFFIC AND INTERSECTION OPERATIONS Background traffic projections were developed for year 218. Background traffic is the traffic that is expected to travel along SH 82 irrespective of the development. Traffic volumes on SH 82 can be expected to increase in accordance with historical growth rates, and background traffic, without the development can be estimated using annualized rates of growth developed from the Colorado Department of Transportation 2-year growth factor for this segment of SH 82. Calculations based on the CDOT 2-year growth factor produced an eight-year composite growth factor (21 to 218) of These volumes provide the baseline conditions for comparative purposes with the total traffic projections including the project. Figure 6 shows the projected 218 background peak hour volumes at each of the study intersections PROJECTED TRAFFIC AND INTERSECTION OPERATIONS Background traffic projections were developed for year 23. Background traffic is the traffic that is expected to travel along SH 82 irrespective of the development. Traffic volumes on SH 82 can be expected to increase in accordance with historical growth rates, and background traffic, without the development can be estimated using annualized rates of growth developed from the Colorado Department of Transportation 2-year growth factor for this segment of SH 82. The CDOT 2-year growth factor is These volumes provide the baseline conditions for comparative purposes with the total traffic projections including the project. Figure 7 shows the projected 23 background peak hour volumes at each of the study intersections. 17 App. M-22

22 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Figure 5: Adjusted Existing Counts 18 App. M-23

23 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Figure 6: 218 Background Volumes 19 App. M-24

24 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Figure 7: 23 Background Volumes 2 App. M-25

25 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December BACKGOUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC The total site generated traffic will be a combination of background traffic and project traffic generated from the new development. Figure 8 show the total traffic along SH 82 for 218 conditions plus project BACKGOUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC The total site generated traffic will be a combination of background traffic and project traffic generated from the new development. Figure 9 show the total traffic along SH 82 for 23 conditions plus project. 21 App. M-26

26 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Figure 8: 218 Total Traffic 22 App. M-27

27 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Figure 9: 23 Total Traffic 23 App. M-28

28 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 CHAPTER 6. ACCESS CODE HIGHWAYS IMPROVEMENTS According to the State Highway Access Code Direct access from a subdivision to the highway shall be permitted only if the proposed access meets the purposes and requirements of the Code. Local traffic from a subdivision abutting a state highway shall be served by an internal street system of adequate capacity, intersecting and connecting with state highways in a manner that is safe as well as consistent with the assigned access category (Code Section Three) and design requirements (Code Section Four). SH 82 is designated as an Expressway (Category E-X). This category is appropriate for use on highways that have the capacity for high speed and relatively high traffic volumes in an efficient and safe manner. They provide for interstate, interregional, intraregional, and intercity travel needs and to a lesser degree, some intracity travel needs. Direct access service to abutting land is subordinate to providing service to through traffic movements. Typical spacing of intersecting streets, roads and highways shall be planned on intervals of one mile and normally based upon section lines where appropriate. One-half mile spacing of public ways may be permitted to the highway only when no reasonable alternative access to the general street system exists. No access to private property may be permitted unless reasonable access cannot be obtained from the general street system. When private access is permitted, left turns may be allowed if in the opinion of the department such left turns can be reasonably accomplished and it is not a divided highway. When direct private access is permitted, appropriate terms and conditions shall be included in the permit to achieve the following criteria; a) the access should be closed when other reasonable access to a lower functional street, road or highway is reasonably available, b) the access permit should specify under what circumstances the closure may be required, and c) if known, the future access location and the date the closure may occur. The following lists the auxiliary requirements based upon the Expressway (Category E-X) requirements: A left turn deceleration lane will be required for Cattle Creek Road left turn pocket. The transition taper length will be included within the required deceleration length. A right turn lane with deceleration and taper lengths will be required for Cattle Creek Road for the southbound right turning traffic. Signal progression analysis must indicate a 4 percent efficiency or better or shall not degrade the existing progression. (See Chapter 8) Signals at intersections with major cross streets or roads of equal importance may be programmed to optimize traffic on both streets equally. Cross-streets of lesser importance need not be optimized equally. 24 App. M-29

29 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY AND LOS ANALYSIS 7.1 EXISTING CAPACITY AND LOS Table 4 provides the results of the existing capacity analysis for the AM, PM, and Saturday peak hours. TABLE 4: EXISTING INTERSECTION LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SH 82 & CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIGNAL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL Peak Hour Delay Existing LOS A.M. 23 C P.M. 41 D SAT 18 B A.M. 22 c P.M. 51 f SAT 23 c A.M. 41 e P.M. >1 f SAT 23 c Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 4, the intersections currently operate at acceptable levels during peak hours except the westbound side street stopped approaches at Marand Road and at Cattle Creek Road in the PM peak hours. Peak hour signal warrants are not expected to be met at either intersection. Refer to Chapter 8 for further discussion regarding signal warrant analysis. Appendix B provides the LOS calculations for the existing conditions analysis. 25 App. M-3

30 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December BACKGROUND CAPACITY AND LOS Table 5 provides the results of the 218 capacity analysis for the AM, PM, and Saturday peak hours without the development assuming the same geometry as existing conditions. TABLE 5: 218 BACKGROUND LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SH 82 & CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIGNAL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL Peak Hour Delay Existing LOS A.M. 27 C P.M. 69 E SAT 19 B A.M. 26 d P.M. 82 f SAT 27 d A.M. 71 f P.M. >1 f SAT 29 d Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 5, Marand Road continues to notice significant side street delay during the PM peak hour. Cattle Creek Road notices significant side street delay during AM and PM peak hours. Marand Road at SH 82 is not expected to meet peak hour warrants. Partial mitigation at Cattle Creek Road includes separating the westbound left turn and right turn movements. The AM peak hour warrant is expected to be met, however the PM peak hour warrant is not expected to be met, full signal warrants are not expected to be met and delay will continue to be noticed. The signalized intersection of Spring Valley Road notices overall delay in the PM peak. Mitigation at this intersection would require adjustment of the signal timing at the intersection. Refer to Chapter 8 for further discussion regarding signal warrant analysis. 26 App. M-31

31 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Table 6 shows the operational improvements with the noted mitigation above for Cattle Creek Road and Spring Valley Road. TABLE 6: MITIGATED 218 BACKGROUND LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SH 82 & CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIGNAL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL Peak Hour Delay Existing LOS A.M. 18 B P.M. 46 D SAT 17 B A.M. 26 d P.M. 82 f SAT 27 d A.M. 44 e P.M. >1 f SAT 23 c Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 6, delay will continue to be noticed for the side street stop controlled intersections in the PM peak hour. 27 App. M-32

32 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC As mentioned previously, all project traffic will access SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road. Table 7 provides the results of the 218 plus project capacity analysis for the AM, PM, and Saturday peak hours. The mitigation previously mentioned for Spring Valley Road was assumed to be in place. TABLE 7: 218 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SH 82 & CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIGNAL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL Peak Hour Delay Existing LOS A.M. 28 C P.M. 51 D SAT 19 B A.M. 28 d P.M. 99 f SAT 3 d A.M. >1 f P.M. >1 f SAT 61 f Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 7, the intersection of Marand Road continues to notice significant delay during the PM peak hour due to the westbound approach delay. Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 also continues to notice significant delay. Analysis assumes geometry based upon existing conditions To mitigate the excessive delay at Cattle Creek Road, a signal is needed. A signal at this intersection is expected to meet AM and PM peak hour warrants. A signal warrant and progression analysis was completed and is described in Chapter 8. The Marand Road intersection is not expected to meet peak hour warrants in 218. Delay at this intersection will continue to be noticed. Refer to Chapter 8 for further discussion regarding signal warrant analysis. 28 App. M-33

33 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 Table 8 provides the mitigated results. TABLE 8: 218 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT MITIGATED LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SH 82 & CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIGNAL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL SIGNAL Peak Hour Delay Existing LOS A.M. 28 C P.M. 51 D SAT 18 B A.M. 28 d P.M. 99 f SAT 3 d A.M. 13 B P.M. 13 B SAT 7 A Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 8, the suggested mitigation alleviates delay at the intersection of SH 82 and Cattle Creek Road. 29 App. M-34

34 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December BACKGROUND CAPACITY AND LOS Build out of the River Edge Colorado development is expected to be completed around 218. However, in the event the project is not completed or in place by 23, an analysis of background traffic in 23 was completed. TABLE 9: 23 BACKGROUND LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SH 82 & CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIGNAL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL Peak Hour Delay Existing LOS A.M. 23 C P.M. 95 F SAT 2 B A.M. 38 e P.M. >1 f SAT 37 e A.M. >1 f P.M. >1 f SAT 32 d Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 9, Spring Valley Road intersection notices significant delay during the PM peak hour. Marand Road continues to notice significant side street delay during the PM peak hour. Cattle Creek Road notices significant side street delay during AM and PM peak hours. In order to mitigate the delay at Spring Valley Road, the westbound and eastbound turning movements need to be separated from the through movements. Marand Road at SH 82 is not expected to meet peak hour warrants. Mitigation at Cattle Creek Road includes signalizing the intersection. Both AM and PM peak hour warrants are expected to be met. Refer to Chapter 8 for further discussion regarding signal warrant analysis. 3 App. M-35

35 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 TABLE 1: MITIGATED 23 BACKGROUND LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SH 82 & CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIGNAL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL SIGNAL Peak Hour Delay Existing LOS A.M. 23 C P.M. 43 D SAT 2 B A.M. 38 e P.M. >1 f SAT 37 e A.M. 12 B P.M. 22 C SAT 5 A Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 1, the suggested mitigation alleviates delay for the intersections of SH 82 at Spring Valley Road and SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road. 31 App. M-36

36 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC All project traffic will access SH 82 to Cattle Creek Road. Table 11 provides the results of the 23 plus project analysis for the AM, PM, and Saturday peak hours. The background mitigation for Spring Valley Road and Cattle Creek Road were assumed to be in place. TABLE 11: 23 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SH 82 & CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIGNAL SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL SIGNAL Peak Hour Delay Existing LOS A.M. 24 C P.M. 43 D SAT 21 C A.M. 42 e P.M. >1 f SAT 43 e A.M. 19 B P.M. 32 C SAT 7 A Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 11, Marand Road westbound side street stop control approach continues to notice delay during all peak hours, however signal warrants are not expected to be met. No additional mitigation is recommended. Refer to Chapter 8 for further discussion regarding signal warrant analysis. 32 App. M-37

37 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 CHAPTER 8. SIGNAL WARRANT AND PROGRESSION ANALYSIS 8.1 SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS A signal warrant analysis was performed on the two side-street stop-controlled intersections that operated with high levels of delay: Marand Road/ SH 82 and Cattle Creek Road/ SH 82. The warrants identified in the Federal Highway Administration s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) were used for the analysis. The Peak Hour Volume Warrant, the Four-hour Volume Warrant, and other relevant factors were considered in evaluating the addition of signal operations at these intersections. Appendix D contains the signal warrant analysis worksheets. Peak Hour Warrant The Peak Hour Warrant, which compares the volumes at an intersection during the peak hour of operation to the warrant requirements for the major street and minor street traffic, was evaluated for the scenario in the 218 and 23 plus project conditions. The rural warrants were used for both intersections. 218 Cattle Creek Road/ SH 82 was considered for signalization as a mitigation measure. Cattle Creek Road is expected to meet the AM peak hour warrants without the project. Both AM and PM peak hour warrants are expected to be met with the project in 218. Marand Road is not expected to meet the peak hour warrants in 218. If project build-out happens prior to 218, signal warrants will most likely be met by that time. 23 Peak hour warrants were run in 23 without the project in the case the project was not built. Without the project, Cattle Creek Road meets both AM and PM peak hour warrants. Marand Road is not expected to meet the peak hour warrants in 23 with or without the project. 33 App. M-38

38 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December PROGRESSION ANALYSIS A signal progression analysis was completed to ensure SH 82 will operate with the appropriate efficiently based upon the existing category of the highway. CDOT requires an efficiency of at least 4. Efficiency represents the proportion of all green time that is in progression along a corridor. As a guideline, efficiency below 12% is considered poor, efficiency between 13% to 24% is considered fair, and efficiency between 25 to 36% is good. Great progression is anything over 36%. Table 12 provides the 9 th percentile arterial bandwidths on SH 82 the AM and PM peak hours for horizon year 218 and 23 plus project. TABLE 12: PROGRESSION EFFICIENCY Scenario Peak Hour Cycle Length (Seconds) 9th Percentile Bandwidth (%) 218 A.M P.M A.M P.M As shown in Table 12, both 218 and 23 scenarios with the project meet the minimum 4% efficiency for the highway. Appendix E provides the Time Space Diagrams of the progression analysis completed with Synchro App. M-39

39 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 CHAPTER 9. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 218 Background Traffic volumes along State Highway 82 are expected to increase by a compounded growth factor of 1.11 into 218. The following mitigation efforts will be needed without the project in order to maintain efficient operations along the corridor: Spring Valley Road at SH 82 - Re-timing improvements in order to maintain acceptable LOS operations during the peak hours. This improvement will allow for LOS D or better during all peak hours. Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 The westbound right turn should be separated Although Cattle Creek Road and Marand Road side-street approaches notice delay at the stop controlled intersections, it is not expected that the side street volumes will be high enough to warrant a signal without the project. The suggested mitigation efforts are not necessitated by the project. 23 Background Traffic volumes along State Highway 82 are expected to increase by a compounded growth factor of 1.31 into 23. The following mitigation efforts will be needed without the project in order to maintain efficient operations along the corridor: Spring Valley Road at SH 82 The eastbound and westbound turn movements should be separated from the through movements. This mitigation will allow for LOS D or better during all peak hours. Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 This intersection will need to be signalized in 23 due to background growth. Peak hour signal warrants are expected to be met in the AM and PM peak hours. This improvement will allow for LOS C or better during all peak hours. Although Marand Road side-street approaches notice delay at the stop controlled intersection, it is not expected that the side street volumes will be high enough to warrant a signal. The suggested mitigation efforts are not necessitated by the project. 218 Plus Project All River Edge Colorado development traffic will access SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road in the year 218. The following mitigation efforts will be needed with the project in order to maintain efficient operations along the corridor: Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 - A signal will be needed at Cattle Creek Road and SH 82 upon buildout. With a signal at Cattle Creek Road, the intersection is shown to operate at a LOS B or better during all peak hours. The westbound right turn will not need to be separated if a signal is present. 35 App. M-4

40 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 The mitigation efforts are necessitated by the project traffic. The project does not significantly impact Marand Road at SH 82 or Spring Valley Road at SH 82. Peak hour signal warrants were conducted for the intersection of Cattle Creek Road at SH 82. Cattle Creek Road is expected to meet the peak hour warrants in 218 with the project. 23 Plus Project Similar to 218 all River Edge Colorado development traffic will access SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road in the year 23. The mitigation efforts are necessitated by the project traffic. The project does not significantly impact Marand Road at SH 82 or Spring Valley Road at SH 82. No additional mitigation efforts are recommended. Highway Access Requirements SH 82 is currently a Category E-X roadway. According to the Access Code, direct access service to abutting land is subordinate to providing service to through traffic movements. The following requirements will be necessary to gain improved access: The spacing of Cattle Creek Road is such that a signal will be appropriate based upon the approximate 1 mile spacing to Spring Valley Road. Auxiliary left turn lanes are required at Cattle Creek Road. The transition taper length will be included with the required storage and deceleration length. A right turn deceleration lane with taper is required for southbound traffic turning onto Cattle Creek Road Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements To accommodate recreational bicycle activity in the area, a bicycle connection to the RFTA trail near the main entrance should be requested and bicycle traffic internal to the site be considered in the design. Adequate facilities are recommended within the development to accommodate pedestrian traffic throughout the development and to facilitate safe pedestrian crossings at SH App. M-41

41 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 APPENDIX A: EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS App. M-42

42 File Name : AM_1628 SH82&CR113 Site Code : Start Date : 5/2/21 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 - TRUCKS SH82 Southbound CR113 Westbound SH82 Northbound CR113 Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 7: AM :15 AM :3 AM :45 AM Total : AM :15 AM :3 AM :45 AM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % Class % Class TRUCKS % TRUCKS App. M-43

43 File Name : AM_1628 SH82&CR113 Site Code : Start Date : 5/2/21 Page No : 2 SH82 Southbound CR113 Westbound SH82 Northbound CR113 Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 7: AM to 8:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 7:15 AM 7:15 AM :3 AM :45 AM : AM Total Volume % App. Total PHF SH82 Out In Total Rght 994 Thru 38 Left Peds Peak Hour Data CR113 Out In Total Thru Left Rght Peds Peak Hour Begins at 7:15 AM Class 1 TRUCKS North 43 7 Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total CR113 Left Thru 466 Rght 29 Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-44

44 File Name : PM_1628 SH82&CR113 Site Code : Start Date : 5/2/21 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 - TRUCKS SH82 Southbound CR113 Westbound SH82 Northbound CR113 Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 4: PM :15 PM :3 PM :45 PM Total : PM :15 PM :3 PM :45 PM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % Class % Class TRUCKS % TRUCKS App. M-45

45 File Name : PM_1628 SH82&CR113 Site Code : Start Date : 5/2/21 Page No : 2 SH82 Southbound CR113 Westbound SH82 Northbound CR113 Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 4: PM to 5:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 4:3 PM 4:3 PM :45 PM : PM :15 PM Total Volume % App. Total PHF SH82 Out In Total Rght 64 Thru 21 Left Peds Peak Hour Data CR113 Out In Total 5 5 Thru Left Rght Peds Peak Hour Begins at 4:3 PM Class 1 TRUCKS North Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total CR113 Left Thru 1221 Rght 48 Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-46

46 File Name : NOON_16281 SH82&CR113 Site Code : Start Date : 5/22/21 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 - TRUCKS SH82 Southbound CR113 Westbound SH82 Northbound CR113 Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 11: AM :15 AM :3 AM :45 AM Total : PM :15 PM :3 PM :45 PM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % Class % Class TRUCKS % TRUCKS App. M-47

47 File Name : NOON_16281 SH82&CR113 Site Code : Start Date : 5/22/21 Page No : 2 SH82 Southbound CR113 Westbound SH82 Northbound CR113 Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 11: AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:3 AM 11:3 AM :45 AM : PM :15 PM Total Volume % App. Total PHF SH82 Out In Total Rght 551 Thru 2 Left Peds Peak Hour Data CR113 Out In Total Thru Left Rght Peds Peak Hour Begins at 11:3 AM Class 1 TRUCKS North Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total CR113 Left Thru 697 Rght 31 Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-48

48 File Name : AM_16283 SH82&MARAND Site Code : Start Date : 5/2/21 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 - TRUCKS SH82 Southbound MARAND RD Westbound SH82 Northbound MARAND RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 7: AM :15 AM :3 AM :45 AM Total : AM :15 AM :3 AM :45 AM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % Class % Class TRUCKS % TRUCKS SH82 Out In Total Rght Thru Left Peds MARAND RD Out In Total Thru Left Rght Peds 5/2/21 7: AM 5/2/21 8:45 AM Class 1 TRUCKS North Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total MARAND RD Left Thru Rght Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-49

49 File Name : AM_16283 SH82&MARAND Site Code : Start Date : 5/2/21 Page No : 2 SH82 Southbound MARAND RD Westbound SH82 Northbound MARAND RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 7: AM to 8:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 7: AM 7: AM :15 AM :3 AM :45 AM Total Volume % App. Total PHF SH82 Out In Total Rght 156 Thru 6 Left Peds Peak Hour Data MARAND RD Out In Total Thru Left Rght Peds Peak Hour Begins at 7: AM Class 1 TRUCKS North 8 42 Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total MARAND RD Left Thru 427 Rght 24 Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-5

50 File Name : PM_16283 SH82&MARAND Site Code : Start Date : 5/2/21 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 - TRUCK SH82 Southbound MARAND RD Westbound SH82 Northbound MARAND RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 4: PM :15 PM :3 PM :45 PM Total : PM :15 PM :3 PM :45 PM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % Class % Class TRUCK % TRUCK SH82 Out In Total Rght Thru 8 8 Left Peds MARAND RD Out In Total Thru Left Rght Peds 5/2/21 4: PM 5/2/21 5:45 PM Class 1 TRUCK North Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total MARAND RD Left Thru Rght Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-51

51 File Name : PM_16283 SH82&MARAND Site Code : Start Date : 5/2/21 Page No : 2 SH82 Southbound MARAND RD Westbound SH82 Northbound MARAND RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 4: PM to 5:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 4:3 PM 4:3 PM :45 PM : PM :15 PM Total Volume % App. Total PHF SH82 Out In Total Rght 648 Thru 3 Left Peds Peak Hour Data MARAND RD Out In Total Thru Left Rght Peds Peak Hour Begins at 4:3 PM Class 1 TRUCK North Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total MARAND RD Left Thru 1243 Rght 36 Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-52

52 File Name : NOON_16282 SH82&MARAND Site Code : Start Date : 5/22/21 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 - TRUCKS SH82 Southbound MARAND RD Westbound SH82 Northbound MARAND RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 11: AM :15 AM :3 AM :45 AM Total : PM :15 PM :3 PM :45 PM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % Class % Class TRUCKS % TRUCKS SH82 Out In Total Rght Thru 4 4 Left Peds MARAND RD Out In Total Thru Left Rght Peds 5/22/21 11: AM 5/22/21 12:45 PM Class 1 TRUCKS North Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total MARAND RD Left Thru Rght Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-53

53 File Name : NOON_16282 SH82&MARAND Site Code : Start Date : 5/22/21 Page No : 2 SH82 Southbound MARAND RD Westbound SH82 Northbound MARAND RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 11: AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:15 AM 11:15 AM :3 AM :45 AM : PM Total Volume % App. Total PHF SH82 Out In Total Rght 552 Thru 3 Left Peds Peak Hour Data MARAND RD Out In Total Thru Left Rght Peds Peak Hour Begins at 11:15 AM Class 1 TRUCKS North 6 14 Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total MARAND RD Left Thru 72 Rght 17 Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-54

54 File Name : AM_16284 SH82&SPRING Site Code : Start Date : 5/2/21 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 SH82 SPRING VALLEY RD SH82 SPRING VALLEY RD Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 7: AM :15 AM :3 AM :45 AM Total : AM :15 AM :3 AM :45 AM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % SH82 Out In Total Rght 156 Thru 186 Left 1 Peds SPRING VALLEY RD Out In Total Left 58 Thru 169 Rght 6 Peds 5/2/21 7: AM 5/2/21 8:45 AM Class 1 North Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total SPRING VALLEY RD Left 8 Thru 857 Rght 37 Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-55

55 File Name : AM_16284 SH82&SPRING Site Code : Start Date : 5/2/21 Page No : 2 SH82 Southbound SPRING VALLEY RD Westbound SH82 Northbound SPRING VALLEY RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 7: AM to 8:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 7: AM 7: AM :15 AM :3 AM :45 AM Total Volume % App. Total PHF SH82 Out In Total Rght 879 Thru 99 Left Peds Peak Hour Data SPRING VALLEY RD Out In Total Left 29 Thru 11 Rght 2 Peds Peak Hour Begins at 7: AM Class 1 North Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total SPRING VALLEY RD Left 34 Thru 362 Rght 14 Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-56

56 File Name : PM_16284 SH82&SPRING Site Code : Start Date : 5/2/21 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 SH82 SPRING VALLEY RD SH82 SPRING VALLEY RD Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 4: PM :15 PM :3 PM :45 PM Total : PM :15 PM :3 PM :45 PM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % SH82 Out In Total Rght 98 Thru 2 Left Peds SPRING VALLEY RD Out In Total Left 59 Thru 73 Rght 1 Peds 5/2/21 4: PM 5/2/21 5:45 PM Class 1 North Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total SPRING VALLEY RD Left 156 Thru 277 Rght 52 Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-57

57 File Name : PM_16284 SH82&SPRING Site Code : Start Date : 5/2/21 Page No : 2 SH82 Southbound SPRING VALLEY RD Westbound SH82 Northbound SPRING VALLEY RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 4: PM to 5:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 4:3 PM 4:3 PM :45 PM : PM :15 PM Total Volume % App. Total PHF SH82 Out In Total Rght 539 Thru 15 Left Peds Peak Hour Data SPRING VALLEY RD Out In Total Left 38 Thru 33 Rght 1 Peds Peak Hour Begins at 4:3 PM Class 1 North Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total SPRING VALLEY RD Left 8 Thru 112 Rght 25 Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-58

58 File Name : NOON_16285 SH82&SPRING Site Code : Start Date : 5/22/21 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 SH82 SPRING VALLEY RD SH82 SPRING VALLEY RD Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 11: AM :15 AM :3 AM :45 AM Total : PM :15 PM :3 PM :45 PM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % App. M-59

59 File Name : NOON_16285 SH82&SPRING Site Code : Start Date : 5/22/21 Page No : 2 SH82 Southbound SPRING VALLEY RD Westbound SH82 Northbound SPRING VALLEY RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 11: AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:3 AM 11:3 AM :45 AM : PM :15 PM Total Volume % App. Total PHF SH82 Out In Total Rght 478 Thru 75 Left Peds Peak Hour Data SPRING VALLEY RD Out In Total Left 8 Thru 37 Rght 1 Peds Peak Hour Begins at 11:3 AM Class 1 North Rght Thru Left Peds Out In Total SPRING VALLEY RD Left 51 Thru 628 Rght 29 Peds Out In Total SH82 App. M-6

60 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 APPENDIX B: SYNCHRO REPORTS - EXISTING App. M-61

61 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 7/6/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 67 1 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 25 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A C A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A C Intersection Summary Average Delay.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Existing AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-62

62 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 7/6/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 3. Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Existing AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-63

63 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 7/6/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.3.16 c.9 c.4 v/s Ratio Perm.7.2 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C D C B B C C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C D B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.73 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 79.4 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 7.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Existing AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-64

64 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 7/6/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 27 5 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 51 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Existing PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-65

65 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 7/6/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 26.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 7.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Existing PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-66

66 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 7/6/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.7 c.51 c.1.24 v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service E C D C D B D B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS E D D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.89 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 83.7 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Existing PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-67

67 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 7/6/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 23 5 Volume Right 1 28 csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A C Intersection Summary Average Delay.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Existing Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-68

68 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 7/6/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 36 4 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Existing Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-69

69 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 7/6/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.5 c.29 c.7.22 v/s Ratio Perm.3.1 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C B B B C B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.54 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 63.3 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Existing Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-7

70 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 APPENDIX C: SYNCHRO REPORTS - FUTURE App. M-71

71 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.3.18 c.1 c.44 v/s Ratio Perm.8.2 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C D C B B D C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C D B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.8 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 83.8 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Background AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-72

72 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 35 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A D A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) Background AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-73

73 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) Background AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-74

74 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.8 c.56 c v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service E C D D F B D B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS E D F B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 69.3 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.99 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 85.4 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.2% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Background PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-75

75 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 3 5 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 91 2 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) Background PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-76

76 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 49.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) Background PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-77

77 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.5 c.33 c.8.25 v/s Ratio Perm.3.1 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C C B B C B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.6 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 68.2 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Background Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-78

78 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 25 5 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 14 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Background Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-79

79 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 51 5 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Background Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-8

80 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 1% 173% 173% 1% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.3.2 c.1 c.45 v/s Ratio Perm.8.2 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C D C B B D C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C D B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.82 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 84.9 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Project AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-81

81 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 38 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A D A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) Project AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-82

82 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS F F C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS F F Intersection Summary Average Delay 79.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 8.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) Project AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-83

83 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 1% 173% 173% 1% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.8 c.59 c v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service F D F D E B E B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS F F E C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 51.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.97 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 11. Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.5% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Project PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-84

84 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 3 5 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 16 2 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) Project PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-85

85 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Err Queue Length 95th (ft) Err Err Control Delay (s) Err Err Lane LOS F F B C Approach Delay (s) Err Err.8.7 Approach LOS F F Intersection Summary Average Delay Err Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) Project PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-86

86 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 1% 173% 173% 1% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.5 c.35 c.8.28 v/s Ratio Perm.3.1 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C C B B C B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.62 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 7.6 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Project Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-87

87 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 25 5 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 16 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Project Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-88

88 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS F E B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS F E Intersection Summary Average Delay 6.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) Project Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-89

89 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.4.21 c.12 c.51 v/s Ratio Perm.9.7 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C D E B B C C A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C D C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.88 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 72.1 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.2% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Background AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-9

90 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 7.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) Background AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-91

91 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F A B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 7.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 7.% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) Background AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-92

92 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.9 c.66 c v/s Ratio Perm.26.1 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service F D F E F B F B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS F F F C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 94.7 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.13 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 11. Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 11.7% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Background PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-93

93 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 35 6 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F D Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 9.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 8.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) Background PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-94

94 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Err Control Delay (s). Err Lane LOS A F F F E Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 211. Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) Background PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-95

95 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.6 c.38 c.9 c.29 v/s Ratio Perm.4.1 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C C C B C B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 2. HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.75 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 68.9 Sum of lost time (s) 16. Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Background Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-96

96 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 3 6 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 24 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 5.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Background Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-97

97 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F A C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 5.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Background Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-98

98 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 1% 22% 22% 1% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.4.23 c.12 c.53 v/s Ratio Perm.9.8 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C D E B B C C A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C D C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.89 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 72.7 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Project AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-99

99 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 1% 22% 1% 22% 22% 22% 1% 22% 22% 22% 22% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% % % 19% % 3% % % 3% % Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.29 c.62 v/s Ratio Perm.15 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C D B A A A C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C D A C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.92 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 73.9 Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Project AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-1

100 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 66 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) Project AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-11

101 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 1% 22% 22% 1% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c.68 c v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service E D D D D D D D A F B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS D D D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.99 Actuated Cycle Length (s) Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Project PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-12

102 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 1% 22% 1% 22% 22% 22% 1% 22% 22% 22% 22% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% % 1% % 2% 2% 2% % 3% % Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c v/s Ratio Perm.1 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C D D D A B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C D D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 32.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1. Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76. Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Project PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-13

103 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 35 6 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F D Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 11.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) Project PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-14

104 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 1% 22% 22% 1% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.6 c.41 c.9 c.32 v/s Ratio Perm.4.1 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C D C B C B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.78 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 69.8 Sum of lost time (s) 16. Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Project Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-15

105 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 1% 22% 1% 22% 22% 22% 1% 22% 22% 22% 22% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% % % 7% % 1% % 1% 1% 1% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C A A A A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 7.1 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 7.1 Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Project Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-16

106 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 3 6 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 28 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Project Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-17

107 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.3.18 c.1 c.44 v/s Ratio Perm.7.5 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C D B B C B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18. HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.76 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 65.6 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Background AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-18

108 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 35 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A D A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) Background AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-19

109 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F A B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 6.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) Background AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-11

110 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.8 c.56 c v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service F D F D D B E B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS F F D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 45.8 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.94 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 11. Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.2% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Background PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-111

111 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 3 5 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 91 2 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) Background PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-112

112 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F F E C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 13.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) Background PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-113

113 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.5 c.33 c.8 c.25 v/s Ratio Perm.3.1 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C C B B C B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.65 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 64.2 Sum of lost time (s) 16. Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Background Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-114

114 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 25 5 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 14 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Background Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-115

115 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A D A C B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Background Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-116

116 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 1% 173% 173% 1% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.3.2 c.1 c.45 v/s Ratio Perm.7.5 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C D B B C B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.77 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 66.4 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Project AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-117

117 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 1% 173% 1% 173% 173% 173% 1% 173% 173% 173% 173% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% % % 19% % 3% % % 3% % Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.24 c.54 v/s Ratio Perm.14 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C D B A A A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C D A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.79 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 72.8 Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 8.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Project AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-118

118 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 38 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A D A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) Project AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-119

119 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 1% 173% 173% 1% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.8 c.59 c v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service F D F E D B F B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS F F D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 48.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.96 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 12. Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.5% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Project PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-12

120 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 1% 173% 1% 173% 173% 173% 1% 173% 173% 173% 173% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% % 1% % 2% 2% 2% % 3% % Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c v/s Ratio Perm.1 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C D B B A B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C D B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.85 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 75.8 Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Project PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-121

121 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 3 5 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 16 2 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) Project PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-122

122 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 1% 173% 173% 1% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.5 c.35 c.8 c.28 v/s Ratio Perm.3.1 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C C B B C B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.68 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 65.6 Sum of lost time (s) 16. Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Project Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-123

123 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 1% 173% 1% 173% 173% 173% 1% 173% 173% 173% 173% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% % % 7% % 1% % 1% 1% 1% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c.35.3 v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C A A A A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 6.6 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.48 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 7.2 Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 218 Project Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-124

124 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 25 5 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 16 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Project Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-125

125 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c.12 c.51 v/s Ratio Perm.6.7 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C C C E B B C B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.81 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 69.3 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 8.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Background AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-126

126 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) 3 19 Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% % % 19% % 3% % % 3% % Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.29 c.61 v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service D A A A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A D A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.86 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 74.5 Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Background AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-127

127 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 7.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) Background AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-128

128 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.4.9 c.66 c v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service F D D E D D D A F B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS E D D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 43.3 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.1 Actuated Cycle Length (s) Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 98.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Background PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-129

129 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) 7 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% % 1% % 2% 2% 2% % 3% % Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service E C A C A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A E C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.97 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 93.6 Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Background PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-13

130 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 35 6 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F D Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 9.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 8.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) Background PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-131

131 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.1.6 c.38 c.9.29 v/s Ratio Perm.2.1 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C C C C C B C B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18. HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.65 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 66.4 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Background Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-132

132 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% % % 7% % 1% % 1% 1% 1% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C A A A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.51 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 75.6 Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Background Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-133

133 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 3 6 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 24 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 5.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Background Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-134

134 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 1% 22% 22% 1% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c.12 c.53 v/s Ratio Perm.4.7 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C C C C E B B C B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.79 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 67.9 Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.5% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Project AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-135

135 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 1% 22% 1% 22% 22% 22% 1% 22% 22% 22% 22% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% % % 19% % 3% % % 3% % Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot.29 c.62 v/s Ratio Perm.15 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C E B A A A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C E A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.92 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 8.3 Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Project AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-136

136 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 66 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) Project AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-137

137 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 1% 22% 22% 1% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c.68 c v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service E D D D D D D D A F B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS D D D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.99 Actuated Cycle Length (s) Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Project PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-138

138 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 1% 22% 1% 22% 22% 22% 1% 22% 22% 22% 22% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% % 1% % 2% 2% 2% % 3% % Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c v/s Ratio Perm.12 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service D E C C A C A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS D E C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24. HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.98 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 91.4 Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Project PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-139

139 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 35 6 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A F D Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 11.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) Project PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-14

140 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Grade (%) 2% -3% % % Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 1% 22% 22% 1% 22% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c.41 c.9 c.32 v/s Ratio Perm.2.1 c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C C C C C C C A C B A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.71 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 66.7 Sum of lost time (s) 16. Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Project Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-141

141 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Peak-hour factor, PHF Growth Factor (vph) 1% 22% 1% 22% 22% 22% 1% 22% 22% 22% 22% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% % % 7% % 1% % 1% 1% 1% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/c Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot c v/s Ratio Perm c v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service C C A A A A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 7.2 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 72.4 Sum of lost time (s) 8. Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 23 Project Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-142

142 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 1/25/21 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) 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 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total Volume Left 3 6 Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) 28 1 Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A E B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Project Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-143

143 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 21 APPENDIX D: SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS App. M-144

144 Cattle Creek Crossing 218 Background Computed by AT Date 1/22/21 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Period AM Peak Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * * Name of Streets Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Conditions One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * Major Street Minor Street SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Y N N Y Warrant Met YES *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-145

145 Cattle Creek Crossing 218 Background Computed by AT Period PM Peak Date 1/22/21 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH 5 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 4 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 3 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) * * *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. Name of Streets Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Conditions One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * Major Street Minor Street SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Y N N Y Warrant Met NO *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-146

146 Cattle Creek Crossing 218 Background Computed by AT Date 1/22/21 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Period AM Peak Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * * Major Street Minor Street Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Y N Conditions One Lane (Y/N) N Y Warrant Met NO Traffic Volume (VPH) * *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-147

147 Cattle Creek Crossing 218 Background Computed by AT Period PM Peak Date 1/22/21 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * * Major Street Minor Street Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Y N Conditions One Lane (Y/N) N Y Warrant Met NO Traffic Volume (VPH) * *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-148

148 Cattle Creek Crossing 23 Background Computed by AT Date 1/22/21 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Period AM Peak Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * * Name of Streets Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Conditions One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * Major Street Minor Street SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Y N N Y Warrant Met YES *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-149

149 Cattle Creek Crossing 23 Background Computed by AT Period PM Peak Date 1/22/21 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH 5 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 4 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 3 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) * * *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. Name of Streets Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Conditions One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * Major Street Minor Street SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Y N N Y Warrant Met YES *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-15

150 Cattle Creek Crossing 23 Background Computed by AT Date 1/22/21 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Period AM Peak Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * * Major Street Minor Street Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Y N Conditions One Lane (Y/N) N Y Warrant Met NO Traffic Volume (VPH) * 32 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-151

151 Cattle Creek Crossing 23 Background Computed by AT Period PM Peak Date 1/22/21 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * * Major Street Minor Street Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Y N Conditions One Lane (Y/N) N Y Warrant Met NO Traffic Volume (VPH) * 3826 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-152

152 Cattle Creek Crossing 218 Background plus project Computed by AT Date 1/22/21 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Period AM Peak Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * * Name of Streets Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Conditions One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * Major Street Minor Street SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Y N N Y Warrant Met YES *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-153

153 Cattle Creek Crossing 218 Background plus project Computed by AT Period PM Peak Date 1/22/21 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * * Name of Streets Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Conditions One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * Major Street Minor Street SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Y N N Y Warrant Met YES *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-154

154 Cattle Creek Crossing 218 Background plus project Computed by AT Date 1/22/21 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Period AM Peak Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * * Major Street Minor Street Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Y Y Conditions One Lane (Y/N) N N Warrant Met NO Traffic Volume (VPH) * 2693 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-155

155 Cattle Creek Crossing 218 Background plus project Computed by AT Period PM Peak Date 1/22/21 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * * Major Street Minor Street Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Y Y Conditions One Lane (Y/N) N N Warrant Met NO Traffic Volume (VPH) * 3435 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-156

156 Cattle Creek Crossing 23 Background plus project Computed by AT Date 1/22/21 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Period AM Peak Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * * Name of Streets Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Conditions One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * Major Street Minor Street SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Y N N Y Warrant Met YES *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-157

157 Cattle Creek Crossing 23 Background plus project Computed by AT Period PM Peak Date 1/22/21 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Minor Street High Volume Approach - VPH Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane Major Street-Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 1 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * * Name of Streets Two or More Lane Lane (Y/N) Conditions One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * Major Street Minor Street SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Y N N Y Warrant Met YES *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-158