City of Sarnia Michigan Avenue Traffic Study Final Report November 29, 218 B17 SUBMITTED BY CIMA CANADA INC. 4 327 Harvester Road Burlington, ON L7N 3G7 T 289 288-287 F 289 288-285 cima.ca CONTACT Stephen Keen stephen.keen@cima.ca T 289 288-287, 6834
November 29, 218 Table of Contents 1. Introduction... 1 1.1. Background and Purpose... 1 1.2. Road Diets... 1 1.3. Study Area... 2 1.4. Study Approach... 3 2. Existing Conditions... 4 2.1. Roadway Cross-Section... 4 2.2. Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations... 4 2.3. Existing Intersection Operations... 5 2.4. Pedestrian and Cyclist Facilities... 7 2.5. Parking... 7 3. Potential Road Diet Cross-Sections... 7 4. Traffic Operations with Road Diet... 12 4.1. Lane Configurations with Road Diet... 12 4.2. Traffic Forecasting... 12 4.3. Future Intersection Traffic Operations... 13 5. Discussion and Recommendations... 16 5.1. EA Process... 16 5.2. Recommended Cross Section... 16 5.3. Additional Recommendations... 16 List of Tables Table 1: LOS Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections... 3 Table 2: Existing Intersection Operations... 6 Table 3: Evaluation of Proposed Cross-Sections... 11 Table 4: 231 Future Intersection Operations with Existing Lane Configurations 13 Table 5: Future Intersection Operations with Road Diet... 14 B17_Traffic Study_Michigan Avenue_e2.docx iii
November 29, 218 List of Figures Figure 1: Typical Road Diet... 1 Figure 2: Study Area... 2 Figure 3: Michigan Avenue Existing Cross-Section... 4 Figure 4: Existing Traffic Volumes... 5 Figure 5: Michigan Avenue Lane Configurations... 5 Figure 6: Proposed Cross-Section No. 1 (Two-way Left Turn Lane)... 8 Figure 7: Proposed Cross-Section No. 2 (Parking Lanes)... 8 Figure 8: Proposed Cross-Section No. 3 (Multi-use Path)... 9 Figure 9: Proposed Cross-Section No. 4 (Bicycle Lanes)... 9 Figure 1: Proposed Cross-Section No. 5 (Parking Lane on north side and MUP on south side)... 1 Figure 11: Proposed Cross-Section No. 6 (Parking Lane on north side and Bicycle Lane on south side)... 1 Figure 12: Michigan Avenue Lane Configurations with Road Diet... 12 Figure 13: Average Annual Daily Traffic Trend 27-217... 13 List of Appendices Appendix A: Traffic Volumes Appendix B: Synchro Reports Appendix C: iv B17_Traffic Study_Michigan Avenue_e2.docx
November 29, 218 1. Introduction 1.1. Background and Purpose Michigan Avenue is within the County of Lambton s jurisdiction and the current capital plan includes reconstruction of the roadway in 219. During preliminary dialogue between the County and City staff, the capacity of the existing road was discussed. From this, an alternative solution of a possible lane reduction (road diet) from 4 to 3 lanes was proposed. CIMA+ was retained by the City of Sarnia (the City) to undertake a traffic study of a 62-metre section of Michigan Avenue, between Christine Street North and Colborne Road, regarding the viability of reducing the current 4-lane cross-section with the implementation of a road diet. This study evaluates various cross-sections that include a two-way left-turn lane, on-street parking and a multi-use trail to recommend the ideal cross-section. The purpose of this assignment is to review existing traffic conditions and opportunities for future improvement, as well as to provide qualitative and quantitative review of benefits and disbenefits of a proposed road diet within the study area. 1.2. Road Diets According to the Federal Highway Administration s (FHWA) Road Diet Informational Guide, a road diet is generally described as removing travel lanes from a roadway and utilizing the space for other users and travel modes. The most common road diet reconfiguration consists of converting an undivided four-lane roadway to a three-lane undivided roadway (one of which being a two-way left-turn lane) and reassigning the remaining width to be reallocated for bicycle lanes, parking lanes, pedestrians or transit users. Figure 1 illustrates a typical road diet. BEFORE AFTER Figure 1: Typical Road Diet 1 1 FHWA Road Diet Informational Guide (p. 3) 1
November 29, 218 Since their inception, road diets have consistently produced reductions in operating speeds, collisions, and aggressive driving behaviours. Conceived as a reaction to over-designed fourlane roadways where growth was anticipated beyond what transpired, as well as certain operating difficulties with four-lane roadways, road diets provide an adequate solution for neighbourhood thoroughfares where more effective, but correspondingly more intrusive, measures such as speed humps are considered inappropriate. Ontario cities have implemented road diets to great effect. In the Region of Waterloo, Frederick Street between Bruce and Edna Streets was reduced from two travel lanes in each direction to one travel lane per direction and a TWLTL, resulting in 44% fewer collisions.2 The City of Toronto reduced St. George Street between Bloor and College Streets West from four lanes to two lanes with left-turn lanes at major intersections. This resulted in a 4% reduction in collisions, as well as an increase in cycling by 1%. Further, it became part of a cycling network which saw cycling trips rise by 23%.3 1.3. Study Area The study area is a 62-metre four-lane road section along Michigan Avenue between Christine Street North and Colborne Road. The study area includes two (2) signalized and two (2) unsignalized intersections, as illustrated in Figure 2. Michigan Avenue is a major east-west arterial road that runs from Alexandra Avenue in the west to Modeland Road in the east, where it then turns into Michigan Line. Colborne Rd March Rd Study area Newell St Christine St N Legend Michigan Ave Figure 2: Study Area The land use surrounding the study area is predominantly residential, with a golf course on the south side of Michigan Avenue (no direct access to Michigan Avenue). In addition, a fire station 2 3 Region of Waterloo, Road and Traffic Safety, Road Diets Transport Canada St. George Street Revitalization: Road Diets in Toronto 2 B17_Traffic Study_Michigan Avenue_e2.docx
November 29, 218 is located on the southwest corner of Michigan Avenue and Colborne Road. The current posted speed limit on Michigan Avenue within the study area is 5 km/h. 1.4. Study Approach This study focussed on a quantitative review of intersection operations in terms of capacity, delays and queues because of the reduced number of lanes. Intersection capacity analysis was undertaken using procedures described in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The analysis primarily focuses on performance measures such as level-of-service (LOS), volume to capacity (v/c) ratio, and queueing. LOS is a qualitative measure of operational performance and is based on control delay. The LOS criteria for signalized and unsignalized intersections is shown in Table 1. LOS A represents a control delay of less than 1 seconds per vehicle. LOS F is represented by a control delay greater than 5 seconds per vehicle or if the volume-to-capacity ratio for the movement exceeds 1., regardless of the control delay. Table 1: LOS Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection A 1 1 B >1 2 >1 15 C >2 35 >15 25 D >35 55 >25 35 E >55 8 >35 5 F >8 >5 V/C ratio is the ratio between traffic volumes and the capacity of an intersection movement. A v/c ratio greater than 1. indicates that the movement is operating over capacity. 95 th Percentile Queue is the queue length that has only a 5 percent probability of being exceeded during the analysis period. It is industry practice and accepted methodology to use the 95 th percentile queue length for design and operational analysis purposes. The study also examined the benefits and disbenefits of the proposed road diet considering the following aspects: Pedestrian and cyclist safety and convenience Parking operations; and Overall traffic safety 3
November 29, 218 2. Existing Conditions 2.1. Roadway Cross-Section Within the study limits, Michigan Avenue presents one consistent cross-section as illustrated in Figure 3. The available pavement width is 12.6 metres (curb to curb), consisting of two 3.2- metre and two 3.1-metre (2.8 metres + gutters) wide travel lanes in both the eastbound and westbound directions. Sidewalks are provided within the study area on the north side of Michigan Avenue with a width of 1.2 metres. Boulevards are also present on the north side with a width between 1.4 and 2. metres. No sidewalks or boulevards are present in the south side. Figure 3: Michigan Avenue Existing Cross-Section 2.2. Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations Traffic counts were provided by the City for the intersections of Michigan Avenue at Christina Street North, Michigan Avenue and Colborne Road. These counts were taken on September 13 th, 218 during the AM and PM peak hours of 8:15 to 9:15 and 16: to 17:, respectively. The referenced volumes are provided in Appendix A. Trip generation, distribution and assignment were performed for the unsignalized intersections of Michigan Avenue and Newell Street and Michigan Avenue and Marcin Road since no traffic counts were available. Trip generation was performed using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 1 th Edition methodology. The ITE trip generation land use type Single-Family Detached Housing (21) for AM and PM weekday was used to estimate the generated trips along Marcin Road and adjacent roads to Newell Street (Prentice Avenue and Hollywood Place). The trips generated at Marcin Road and Newell Street were assigned to Michigan Avenue with the assumptions that the traffic in and out of the intersections is evenly distributed eastbound and westbound. The trips generated at Hollywood Place were also evenly distributed westbound and eastbound, distributing the latter trips evenly for the northbound and southbound 4 B17_Traffic Study_Michigan Avenue_e2.docx
November 29, 218 directions. The trips estimated at Prentice Avenue were similarly distributed with the exception that all the eastbound trips were assigned to the southbound direction towards Michigan Avenue. Finally, the volumes were balanced for the AM and PM peak hour. The existing traffic volumes are summarized in Figure 4. The study area currently has two lanes in each direction with a shared through/left-turn and shared through/right-turn configuration at all intersections along Michigan Avenue. Figure 5 illustrates this configuration. Figure 4: Existing Traffic Volumes 2.3. Existing Intersection Operations Figure 5: Michigan Avenue Lane Configurations An intersection operational analysis was undertaken for the signalized and stop-controlled intersections along Michigan Avenue in the study area. The results of the analysis are 5
November 29, 218 summarized in Table 2. Detailed Synchro reports are provided in Appendix B for further reference. Direction / Movement Table 2: Existing Intersection Operations Storage Length (m) v/c ratio AM Peak LOS 95% ile Queue (m) Michigan Avenue and Christina Street North v/c ratio PM Peak LOS 95% ile Queue (m) EB L/T T/R 452.15 B 12.38 B 3 WB L/T T/R 39.22 B 18.22 B 18 NB L 38.5 B 5.15 B 12 T/R 729.8 B 9.25 B 24 SB L 48.6 B 7.6 B 6 T/R 158.23 B 19.16 B 14 Overall -.22 B -.33 B - Michigan Avenue and Newell Street EB L/T T/R 39.4 A 1.1 A 1 WB L/T T/R 92.8 A.9 A 1 NB L/T/R 42.1 A 1.2 A 1 SB L/T/R 11.5 B 2.5 B 2 Overall - - A - - A - Michigan Avenue and Marcin Road EB L/T 92.6 A 1.13 A 1 WB T/R 73.11 -.11 - SB L/R 34.3 B 1.4 B 1 Overall - - A - - A - Michigan Avenue and Colborne Road EB WB NB SB L/T T/R 73.13 B 1.27 B 2 L/T T/R 16.41 B 27.37 B 23 L/T 267.14 B 12.29 B 21 R 34.7 A.14 A L/T T/R 16.24 B 18.8 B 15 6 B17_Traffic Study_Michigan Avenue_e2.docx
November 29, 218 Overall -.33 B -.33 B - The results indicate that all movements, approaches and intersections are operating at LOS B or better and with v/c ratios of.41 or lower under existing conditions. No queueing issues were observed. Therefore, no operational issues were identified in the study area under existing conditions. 2.4. Pedestrian and Cyclist Facilities Pedestrians are accommodated with the 1.2-metre-wide sidewalk on the north side of Michigan Avenue within the study limits, which is narrower than the minimum requirement of 1.5-metres for exterior travel paths 4. Depressed curbs are present at in all approaches with the exception of the south-west corner at the intersections of Christina Street North and Newell Street. The depressed curbs do not have tactile walking surface indicators except for those at Newell Street. According to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA), where the depressed curb is provided at a pedestrian crossing, it must have tactile walking surface indicators. Dedicated bicycle facilities are not currently present along Michigan Avenue, resulting in bicyclists having to share the road with vehicular traffic (however, no bicycle volumes were provided for review). It is important to note that there is a 2.7-metre multi-use path on the north side of Michigan Avenue, west of Christina Street North. The City s Transportation Master Plan shows Michigan Avenue as a long-term route, however no further details are available currently. 2.5. Parking Parking is currently allowed on both the north and south sides of Michigan Avenue except for the north side between Christina Street North and Newell Street, where a No Parking sign is present. 3. Potential Road Diet Cross-Sections Using minimum and desirable lane widths from various industry standards and guidelines, including the Geometric Design Standards for Ontario Highways (GDSOH), TAC Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads, and Ontario Traffic Manual (OTM) Book 18 Cycling Facilities, the potential cross-sections illustrated in Figure 6 to Figure 11Figure 8 were developed for Michigan Avenue within the study area. The first cross-section includes a 5.-metre wide two-way left-turn lane with two 3.8 metres travel lanes (3.5 metres + gutter). 4 Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, O.Reg. 191/11 7
November 29, 218 Figure 6: Proposed Cross-Section No. 1 (Two-way Left Turn Lane) The second cross-section includes two 3.5-metre travel lanes and two 2.8-metre wide (2.5 metres + gutter) parking lanes on the north and south sides of Michigan Avenue. The parking lanes would appear to be redundant for the land uses adjacent to the roadway these lanes could also be used as through lanes unless bump outs were used to delineate the parking spaces. Figure 7: Proposed Cross-Section No. 2 (Parking Lanes) 8 B17_Traffic Study_Michigan Avenue_e2.docx
November 29, 218 The third potential cross-section includes a 4.-metre wide buffered multi-use path on the south side. Figure 8: Proposed Cross-Section No. 3 (Multi-use Path) The fourth cross-section includes a one-directional bicycle lane on each side of the road. Figure 9: Proposed Cross-Section No. 4 (Bicycle Lanes) 9
November 29, 218 The fifth cross-section includes a parking lane adjacent to the housing on the north side and a sub-standard multiuse path on the south side. Figure 1: Proposed Cross-Section No. 5 (Parking Lane on north side and MUP on south side) The sixth and final cross-section option replaces the multiuse path on the south side with a oneway bicycle lane (however, no provision is provided for bicycle travelling in the other direction. Figure 11: Proposed Cross-Section No. 6 (Parking Lane on north side and Bicycle Lane on south side) A summary assessment and evaluation table is shown overleaf for the different cross-section options. Green shaded squares indicate a positive; red - negative and no shading indicates a neutral assessment. 1 B17_Traffic Study_Michigan Avenue_e2.docx
November 29, 218 Table 3: Evaluation of Proposed Cross-Sections Criteria\Option TWLTL Parking MUP Bike Lanes Parking Lane + MUP Parking Lane + Bike Lane (Figure 1) (Figure 2) (Figure 3) (Figure 4) (Figure 5) (Figure 6) Transition to 3 lanes at intersection Can easily transition to exclusive left-turn lane Can transition to exclusive left-turn lane by interrupting parking and shifting lanes outward Cannot transition to exclusive leftturn lane Can potentially transition to exclusive left-turn lane but may require geometric modifications at I/S Can potentially transition to exclusive left-turn lane but may require MUP modifications at I/S Can potentially transition to exclusive left-turn lane but may require dropping bike lane at I/S Provision of cycling facilities None Cyclists share the road with motor vehicles None - Cyclists can use parking lanes if usage is low Cyclists are physically separated from motor vehicle Cyclists have a designated space Cyclists have a designated space (sub-standard) Cyclists have a designated space (sub-standard) Serving actual needs No major entrances along the study area (effectively a 1- way LT) No apparent demand for onstreet parking Study area is designated as a long-term cycling route in the TMP Study area is designated as a long-term cycling route in the TMP No apparent demand for onstreet parking No apparent demand for onstreet parking Providing clear direction to drivers TWLTL may be used as an EB through lane (no entrances on south side) Drivers could use parking lane if usage is low Lane uses are clearly designated Lane uses are clearly designated Drivers could use parking lane if usage is low Drivers could use parking lane if usage is low SUMMARY GOOD OPTION BUT SOME POTENTIAL MIS- USE OF TWLTL INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE CORRIDOR NEEDS VERY GOOD OPTION MEETS CORRIDOR NEEDS (EB lane can be made a little wider) VERY GOOD OPTION MEETS CORRIDOR NEEDS PARKING INAPPROPRIATE FOR CORRIDOR NEEDS MUP SUB-STANDARD PARKING INAPPROPRIATE FOR CORRIDOR NEEDS BIKE LANE 1 DIRECTION ONLY 11
November 29, 218 4. Traffic Operations with Road Diet 4.1. Lane Configurations with Road Diet The lane configurations with the road diet were assumed to include eastbound and westbound shared through/right-turn lanes and exclusive left-turn lanes (extension of TWLTL) at the intersections, as illustrated in Figure 12. 4.2. Traffic Forecasting Figure 12: Michigan Avenue Lane Configurations with Road Diet Based on a review of historical Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) data provided by the City, it was found that the AADT on Michigan Avenue decreases by approximately 3% per year (Figure 13). However, after reviewing historical traffic counts for the intersections of Michigan Avenue and Christina Street North and Michigan Avenue and Colborne Road it was found that volumes increased at a rate of 3% per year and 1-2%, respectively. Following discussions with the City, a growth factor of 2% over the next 13 years (i.e. a growth rate of 1.4% per year to 231) was considered to be a reasonable assumption. 12 B17_Traffic Study_Michigan Avenue_e2.docx
November 29, 218-3% per year Figure 13: Average Annual Daily Traffic Trend 27-217 4.3. Future Intersection Traffic Operations Table 4 and Table 5 summarize the traffic operations within the study area during the AM and PM peak hours with the existing and proposed lane configuration, respectively. Table 4: 231 Future Intersection Operations with Existing Lane Configurations AM Peak PM Peak Direction / Storage v/c 95% Movement Length (m) LOS ile v/c 95% LOS ile ratio Queue (m) ratio Queue (m) Michigan Avenue and Christina Street North EB WB NB SB EB L/T T/R L/T T/R 452.18 B 14.48 B 37 39.26 B 22.27 B 21 L 38.8 B 6.18 B 14 T/R 729.1 B 1.31 B 28 L 48.8 B 8.8 B 7 T/R 158.27 B 22.2 B 18 Overall -.27 B -.4 B - L/T T/R Michigan Avenue and Newell Street 39.5 A 1.12 A 1 WB L/T 92.1 A.11 A 1 13
November 29, 218 T/R NB L/T/R 42.1 B 1.2 B 1 SB L/T/R 11.6 B 2.7 B 2 Overall - - A - - A - Michigan Avenue and Marcin Road EB L/T 92.7 A 1.16 A 1 WB T/R 73.13 -.14 - SB L/R 34.5 B 1.6 B 2 EB WB NB Overall - - A - - A - L/T T/R L/T T/R Michigan Avenue and Colborne Road 73.16 B 11.34 B 24 16.51 B 33.46 B 28 L/T 267.17 B 13.36 B 26 R 34.8 A.17 A L/T SB 16.29 B 21.26 B 18 T/R Overall -.4 B -.41 B - The results presented in Table 4 indicate that all intersections within the study area are expected to operate at LOS B or better with acceptable v/c ratios. Additionally, no queuing issues were identified. Direction / Movement EB WB NB SB Table 5: Future Intersection Operations with Road Diet AM Peak PM Peak Storage v/c 95% Length (m) LOS ile v/c 95% LOS ile ratio Queue (m) ratio Queue (m) Michigan Avenue and Christina Street North L/ 35.19 B 14.44 B 34 T/R 452.15 B 18.39 B 45 L/ 15.12 B 12.14 B 11 T/R 39.35 B 38.35 B 38 L 38.8 B 6.18 B 14 T/R 729.1 B 1.31 B 28 L 48.8 B 8.8 B 7 T/R 158.27 B 22.2 B 17 Overall -.31 B -.38 B - Michigan Avenue and Newell Street EB L 15.1 A 1.1 A 1 14 B17_Traffic Study_Michigan Avenue_e2.docx
November 29, 218 T/R 39.1 -.23 - WB L 15 - A - A 1 T/R 92.2 -.21 - NB L/T/R 42.1 B 1.3 B 1 SB L/T/R 11.6 B 2.6 B 2 Overall - - A - - A - Michigan Avenue and Marcin Road EB L 15.1 A 1.1 A 1 T 92.11 -.24 - WB T/R 73.2 -.21 - SB L/R 34.4 B 1.5 B 1 Overall - - A - - A - Michigan Avenue and Colborne Road EB L 15.7 B 6.11 B 8 T/R 73.23 B 21.51 B 5 WB L 35.44 B 32.44 B 26 T/R 16.45 B 42.42 B 39 NB L/T 267.17 B 13.36 B 26 R 34.8 A.17 A SB L/T T/R 16.29 B 21.26 B 18 Overall -.37 B -.44 B - The results presented in Table 5 indicate that all movements, approaches and intersections are expected to operate at a LOS B or better and with acceptable v/c ratios. 95 th percentile queues range between and 6 metres. A fire station entrance is located approximately 3 metres west of the intersection of Michigan Avenue and Colborne Road, and the expected eastbound queue length during the PM peak hour is 5 metres, which could potentially block the access to the emergency vehicles along Michigan Avenue. However, the City indicated that this is not the main access for emergency vehicles (the entrance on Colborne Road is typically used). If this queue is found to be a concern, the City may consider providing hatched pavement markings in front of the fire station access to prevent vehicles from blocking it stopping in that area, as well as a FIRE TRUCK ENTRANCE sign (WC-25). A sensitivity analysis was completed assuming all east-west intersection approaches as single lane (shared left/through/right) to verify how the intersections may operate with the multi-use path option. The results show v/c ratios of up to.88 (Michigan Avenue & Christina Street EB) and LOS up to C. Although operations would still acceptable, this configuration could experience vehicles waiting to turn left blocking through traffic at intersections, which could contribute to rear end collisions. This would be a worsened condition compared to the existing configuration, since the 4-lane cross section allows through vehicles to use the right lane to bypass left-turning vehicles. 15
November 29, 218 5. Discussion and Recommendations 5.1. EA Process The companion guide to the Municipal Class EA document provides a clarification on proposed Road Diets: Where it can be demonstrated through the completion of a traffic study that sufficient capacity in the roadway will remain following the removal of travel lanes, project proponents may determine, through the use of their engineering judgement, that the objective and application of the roadway remain unchanged and the volume, size and capability do not exceed the minimum municipal standard, or the existing rated capacity, and that on this basis, a road diet may be more appropriately subject to a Schedule A+ process. If the traffic study concludes that a reallocation of travel lanes to other purposes will not cause serious congestion, then a Schedule A+ process could be followed. The results of the analysis presented in this report has shown that traffic operations will remain very good should a lane be taken away and it is therefore possible for the City/County to proceed with a Schedule A+ process to pursue the road diet. 5.2. Recommended Cross Section Based on the results presented in the previous sections, there are three potential two-lane cross-sections that have merit in further consideration. These are: A bicycle lane on either side of the road; A multiuse path on the south side of the road; and Addition of a centre two-way left-turn lane. In order to make a final recommendation on a preferred cross-section, it is recommended that a functional design exercise for these short-listed options be carried out in order to determine how each option is modified as it approaches each intersection (an exclusive left turn lane is needed) and also how the road diet transitions back to the 4-lane cross-section outside of the study area. This exercise will allow a proper costing of options including any potential utility impacts. It is important to note that after the review was completed, the City informed CIMA + that a road diet had already been implemented on Colborne Road. Further analysis was carried out to evaluate the updated lane configuration with the recommended cross-section. The results indicate no significant change on the traffic operations of this intersection as all movements and approaches continue to operate at a LOS B or better and with acceptable v/c ratios. 95 th percentile queues increased due to the reduction of lanes on the north-south approaches. The queues range between 25 and 47 metres for the northbound approach and between 33 and 42 metres for the southbound approach. However, no queues exceed the provided storage length of 267 and 16 metres for the northbound and southbound approaches, respectively. 5.3. Additional Recommendations - Hatched area at fire station entrance if queues are considered an issue 16 B17_Traffic Study_Michigan Avenue_e2.docx
November 29, 218 - Consider widening sidewalk to a minimum of 1.5 m to comply with AODA - If multi-use path, need to monitor conflicts between left-turning and through vehicles - 17
A Appendix A
Michigan Ave @ Christina St Morning Peak Diagram Specified Period From: 7:: To: 1:: One Hour Peak From: 8:15: To: 9:15: Municipality: Site #: Intersection: TFR File #: Count date: Lambton 2 Michigan Ave & Christina St 2 13-Sep-218 Weather conditions: Clear/Dry Person(s) who counted: Cam ** Signalized Intersection ** Major Road: Michigan Ave runs W/E North Leg Total: 527 Heavys 2 2 Heavys 6 East Leg Total: 375 North Entering: 365 Trucks Trucks 2 East Entering: 241 North Peds: 5 Cars 132 26 25 363 Cars 154 East Peds: 3 Peds Cross: Totals 134 26 25 Totals 162 Peds Cross: Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 7 1 316 324 Michigan Ave Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 4 63 67 2 87 89 16 16 6 166 Christina St N W E S Christina St Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 14 14 17 4 174 53 53 237 4 Michigan Ave Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 129 2 3 134 Peds Cross: Cars 275 Cars 14 77 17 18 Peds Cross: West Peds: Trucks Trucks 1 2 2 5 South Peds: West Entering: 172 Heavys Heavys 1 2 1 4 South Entering: 117 West Leg Total: 496 Totals 275 Totals 16 81 2 South Leg Total: 392 Comments
Michigan Ave @ Christina St Mid-day Peak Diagram Specified Period From: 1:: To: 14:: One Hour Peak From: 12:: To: 13:: Municipality: Site #: Intersection: TFR File #: Count date: Lambton 2 Michigan Ave & Christina St 2 13-Sep-218 Weather conditions: Clear/Dry Person(s) who counted: Cam ** Signalized Intersection ** Major Road: Michigan Ave runs W/E North Leg Total: 553 Heavys 1 1 2 Heavys 3 East Leg Total: 395 North Entering: 265 Trucks 1 2 1 4 Trucks 2 East Entering: 27 North Peds: 4 Cars 11 134 24 259 Cars 283 East Peds: 3 Peds Cross: Totals 13 137 25 Totals 288 Peds Cross: Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 2 5 28 287 Michigan Ave Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 3 1 17 111 2 136 138 1 22 23 3 4 265 Christina St N W E S Christina St Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 23 23 149 2 1 152 31 1 32 23 2 2 Michigan Ave Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 185 3 188 Peds Cross: Cars 187 Cars 3 153 25 28 Peds Cross: West Peds: 1 Trucks 3 Trucks 2 1 3 South Peds: 3 West Entering: 272 Heavys 2 Heavys South Entering: 211 West Leg Total: 559 Totals 192 Totals 32 154 25 South Leg Total: 43 Comments
Michigan Ave @ Christina St Afternoon Peak Diagram Specified Period From: 14:: To: 17:: One Hour Peak From: 16:: To: 17:: Municipality: Site #: Intersection: TFR File #: Count date: Lambton 2 Michigan Ave & Christina St 2 13-Sep-218 Weather conditions: Clear/Dry Person(s) who counted: Cam ** Signalized Intersection ** Major Road: Michigan Ave runs W/E North Leg Total: 72 Heavys Heavys 1 East Leg Total: 54 North Entering: 267 Trucks 1 1 2 Trucks 1 East Entering: 247 North Peds: 5 Cars 13 143 19 265 Cars 451 East Peds: 4 Peds Cross: Totals 14 143 2 Totals 453 Peds Cross: Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 1 4 322 327 Michigan Ave Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 1 162 163 224 224 22 22 1 48 Christina St N W E S Christina St Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 29 29 169 2 1 172 46 46 244 2 1 Michigan Ave Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 291 2 293 Peds Cross: Cars 211 Cars 5 26 48 358 Peds Cross: West Peds: Trucks Trucks 1 1 1 3 South Peds: 2 West Entering: 49 Heavys Heavys South Entering: 361 West Leg Total: 736 Totals 211 Totals 51 261 49 South Leg Total: 572 Comments
Total Count Diagram Michigan Ave @ Christina St Municipality: Site #: Intersection: TFR File #: Count date: Lambton 2 Michigan Ave & Christina St 2 13-Sep-218 Weather conditions: Clear/Dry Person(s) who counted: Cam ** Signalized Intersection ** Major Road: Michigan Ave runs W/E North Leg Total: 557 Heavys 6 9 3 18 Heavys 3 East Leg Total: 3744 North Entering: 2658 Trucks 6 6 3 15 Trucks 24 East Entering: 1995 North Peds: 51 Cars 943 1492 19 2625 Cars 2345 East Peds: 25 Peds Cross: Totals 955 157 196 Totals 2399 Peds Cross: Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 25 26 2648 2699 Michigan Ave Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 17 8 881 96 13 12 1288 1313 2 3 226 231 32 23 2395 Christina St N W E S Christina St Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 189 6 1 196 1386 15 16 1417 374 2 6 382 1949 23 23 Michigan Ave Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 1714 18 17 1749 Peds Cross: Cars 292 Cars 319 1275 236 183 Peds Cross: West Peds: 2 Trucks 11 Trucks 5 1 3 18 South Peds: 9 West Entering: 245 Heavys 17 Heavys 3 12 1 16 South Entering: 1864 West Leg Total: 5149 Totals 212 Totals 327 1297 24 South Leg Total: 3984 Comments
Michigan Ave @ Colborne Rd Morning Peak Diagram Specified Period From: 7:: To: 1:: One Hour Peak From: 8:15: To: 9:15: Municipality: Site #: Intersection: TFR File #: Count date: Lambton 3 Michigan Ave & Colborne Rd 3 13-Sep-218 Weather conditions: Clear/Dry Person(s) who counted: Cam ** Signalized Intersection ** Major Road: Michigan Ave runs W/E North Leg Total: 467 Heavys 1 5 6 Heavys 6 East Leg Total: 653 North Entering: 268 Trucks 1 1 2 Trucks 3 East Entering: 415 North Peds: 7 Cars 25 24 31 26 Cars 19 East Peds: 2 Peds Cross: Totals 26 21 32 Totals 199 Peds Cross: Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 3 3 251 257 Michigan Ave Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 1 2 21 2 2 16 11 28 28 3 2 154 Colborne Rd N W E S Colborne Rd Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 43 1 44 26 3 2 211 155 1 4 16 44 4 7 Michigan Ave Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 23 4 4 238 Peds Cross: Cars 387 Cars 2 127 93 24 Peds Cross: West Peds: 7 Trucks 2 Trucks 3 1 4 South Peds: 1 West Entering: 159 Heavys 9 Heavys 4 2 6 South Entering: 25 West Leg Total: 416 Totals 398 Totals 2 134 96 South Leg Total: 648 Comments
Michigan Ave @ Colborne Rd Mid-day Peak Diagram Specified Period From: 1:: To: 14:: One Hour Peak From: 12:3: To: 13:3: Municipality: Site #: Intersection: TFR File #: Count date: Lambton 3 Michigan Ave & Colborne Rd 3 13-Sep-218 Weather conditions: Clear/Dry Person(s) who counted: Cam ** Signalized Intersection ** Major Road: Michigan Ave runs W/E North Leg Total: 444 Heavys 1 2 3 Heavys 1 East Leg Total: 627 North Entering: 221 Trucks 1 2 1 4 Trucks 9 East Entering: 294 North Peds: Cars 2 169 25 214 Cars 213 East Peds: 3 Peds Cross: Totals 22 173 26 Totals 223 Peds Cross: Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 2 6 211 219 Michigan Ave Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 1 24 25 2 17 172 2 41 43 2 3 235 Colborne Rd N W E S Colborne Rd Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 29 1 3 16 3 1 164 98 2 1 287 6 1 Michigan Ave Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 325 6 2 333 Peds Cross: Cars 38 Cars 31 16 13 321 Peds Cross: West Peds: 5 Trucks 6 Trucks 2 7 5 14 South Peds: West Entering: 24 Heavys 2 Heavys 1 1 South Entering: 336 West Leg Total: 459 Totals 316 Totals 33 168 135 South Leg Total: 652 Comments
Michigan Ave @ Colborne Rd Afternoon Peak Diagram Specified Period From: 14:: To: 17:: One Hour Peak From: 16:: To: 17:: Municipality: Site #: Intersection: TFR File #: Count date: Lambton 3 Michigan Ave & Colborne Rd 3 13-Sep-218 Weather conditions: Clear/Dry Person(s) who counted: Cam ** Signalized Intersection ** Major Road: Michigan Ave runs W/E North Leg Total: 571 Heavys 1 2 1 4 Heavys 2 East Leg Total: 849 North Entering: 232 Trucks 1 1 Trucks 4 East Entering: 355 North Peds: 3 Cars 28 164 35 227 Cars 333 East Peds: 8 Peds Cross: Totals 29 167 36 Totals 339 Peds Cross: Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 1 4 271 276 Michigan Ave Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 34 34 1 251 252 45 45 1 33 Colborne Rd N W E S Colborne Rd Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 42 1 43 194 4 198 112 2 114 348 7 Michigan Ave Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 49 3 1 494 Peds Cross: Cars 321 Cars 49 257 24 51 Peds Cross: West Peds: 7 Trucks 3 Trucks 3 2 5 South Peds: West Entering: 331 Heavys 2 Heavys 2 2 South Entering: 517 West Leg Total: 67 Totals 326 Totals 49 262 26 South Leg Total: 843 Comments
Total Count Diagram Michigan Ave @ Colborne Rd Municipality: Site #: Intersection: TFR File #: Count date: Lambton 3 Michigan Ave & Colborne Rd 3 13-Sep-218 Weather conditions: Clear/Dry Person(s) who counted: Cam ** Signalized Intersection ** Major Road: Michigan Ave runs W/E North Leg Total: 4323 Heavys 4 3 2 36 Heavys 31 East Leg Total: 6213 North Entering: 2174 Trucks 2 19 5 26 Trucks 49 East Entering: 3181 North Peds: 62 Cars 21 162 3 2112 Cars 269 East Peds: 45 Peds Cross: Totals 216 1651 37 Totals 2149 Peds Cross: Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 18 34 2126 2178 Michigan Ave Heavys Trucks Cars Totals 3 4 179 186 14 19 1425 1458 5 353 358 17 28 1957 Colborne Rd N W E S Colborne Rd Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 323 7 4 334 1597 21 13 1631 1192 13 11 1216 3112 41 28 Michigan Ave Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 2964 38 3 332 Peds Cross: Cars 3147 Cars 319 1567 1239 3125 Peds Cross: West Peds: 66 Trucks 37 Trucks 11 38 14 63 South Peds: 7 West Entering: 22 Heavys 41 Heavys 1 24 14 39 South Entering: 3227 West Leg Total: 418 Totals 3225 Totals 331 1629 1267 South Leg Total: 6452 Comments
Appendix A B Appendix B 1
Queues Existing Conditions 3: Christina St N & Michigan Ave Timing Plan: AM Peak Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 187 3 17 11 27 37 v/c Ratio.15.22.5.9.6.29 Control Delay 1. 11. 15.5 12.4 15.4 1.2 Queue Delay...... Total Delay 1. 11. 15.5 12.4 15.4 1.2 Queue Length 5th (m) 6.2 11.1 1.4 3.9 2.3 1.4 Queue Length 95th (m) 11.5 18. 5.2 8.6 6.9 19.1 Internal Link Dist (m) 142.1 394.4 31.1 2.1 Turn Bay Length (m) 36. 46. Base Capacity (vph) 1222 1375 323 1212 464 1334 Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio.15.22.5.9.6.28 B17_Sarnia Traffic Study CIMA Canada Inc. 1/17/218
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Conditions 3: Christina St N & Michigan Ave Timing Plan: AM Peak Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 67 89 16 53 29 14 16 81 2 25 26 134 Future Volume (vph) 67 89 16 53 29 14 16 81 2 25 26 134 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 Lane Width 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.5 3.5 Total Lost time (s) 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. Lane Util. Factor.95.95 1..95 1..95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Flpb, ped/bikes 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Frt.99.99 1..97 1..94 Flt Protected.98.99.95 1..95 1. Satd. Flow (prot) 3338 3338 1558 3227 1741 3345 Flt Permitted.76.86.53 1..68 1. Satd. Flow (perm) 2577 297 872 3227 1251 3345 Peak-hour factor, PHF.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 73 97 17 58 227 15 17 88 22 27 224 146 RTOR Reduction (vph) 9 5 14 94 Lane Group Flow (vph) 178 295 17 96 27 276 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 5 3 3 Heavy Vehicles (%) 6% 2% % % 2% % 12% 5% 15% % % 1% Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2 2 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 33. 33. 25. 25. 25. 25. Effective Green, g (s) 33. 33. 25. 25. 25. 25. Actuated g/c Ratio.47.47.36.36.36.36 Clearance Time (s) 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. Vehicle Extension (s) 3. 3. 3. 3. 3. 3. Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1214 137 311 1152 446 1194 v/s Ratio Prot.3 c.8 v/s Ratio Perm.7 c.1.2.2 v/c Ratio.15.22.5.8.6.23 Uniform Delay, d1 1.5 1.9 14.8 14.9 14.8 15.8 Progression Factor 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Incremental Delay, d2.3.4.1..1.1 Delay (s) 1.8 11.2 14.8 14.9 14.8 15.9 Level of Service B B B B B B Approach Delay (s) 1.8 11.2 14.9 15.8 Approach LOS B B B B HCM 2 Control Delay 13.4 HCM 2 Level of Service B HCM 2 Volume to Capacity ratio.22 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 7. Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group B17_Sarnia Traffic Study CIMA Canada Inc. 1/17/218
Queues Existing Conditions 6: Colborne Rd & Michigan Ave Timing Plan: AM Peak Lane Group EBT WBT NBT NBR SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 173 451 168 14 291 v/c Ratio.14.42.14.7.24 Control Delay 9.3 13.1 12.5.1 12.2 Queue Delay..... Total Delay 9.3 13.1 12.5.1 12.2 Queue Length 5th (m) 4.8 16.4 6.1. 1.1 Queue Length 95th (m) 9.8 26.8 11.4. 17.4 Internal Link Dist (m) 69.2 176.5 27.5 156.9 Turn Bay Length (m) 33. Base Capacity (vph) 125 175 1171 1583 1194 Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio.14.42.14.7.24 B17_Sarnia Traffic Study CIMA Canada Inc. 1/17/218
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Conditions 6: Colborne Rd & Michigan Ave Timing Plan: AM Peak Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 21 11 28 16 211 44 2 134 96 32 21 26 Future Volume (vph) 21 11 28 16 211 44 2 134 96 32 21 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 Lane Width 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.5 3.5 3.8 3.5 3.5 3.5 Total Lost time (s) 6. 6. 6. 4. 6. Lane Util. Factor.95.95.95 1..95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1. 1. 1..99 1. Flpb, ped/bikes 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Frt.97.98 1..85.99 Flt Protected.99.98.99 1..99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3235 3246 3397 1583 3386 Flt Permitted.88.77.89 1..9 Satd. Flow (perm) 2851 2545 359 1583 38 Peak-hour factor, PHF.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 23 12 3 174 229 48 22 146 14 35 228 28 RTOR Reduction (vph) 18 15 14 Lane Group Flow (vph) 156 436 168 14 277 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 7 1 1 7 7 2 2 7 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 4% % 3% 2% 2% % 5% 3% 3% 3% 4% Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Free Perm NA Protected Phases 2 2 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 4 Free 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 25. 25. 23. 6. 23. Effective Green, g (s) 25. 25. 23. 6. 23. Actuated g/c Ratio.42.42.38 1..38 Clearance Time (s) 6. 6. 6. 6. Vehicle Extension (s) 3. 3. 3. 3. Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1187 16 1172 1583 118 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm.5 c.17.5.7 c.9 v/c Ratio.13.41.14.7.24 Uniform Delay, d1 1.8 12.3 12.1. 12.5 Progression Factor 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Incremental Delay, d2.1.3.1.1.1 Delay (s) 1.8 12.6 12.1.1 12.6 Level of Service B B B A B Approach Delay (s) 1.8 12.6 7.5 12.6 Approach LOS B B A B HCM 2 Control Delay 11.2 HCM 2 Level of Service B HCM 2 Volume to Capacity ratio.33 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 6. Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group B17_Sarnia Traffic Study CIMA Canada Inc. 1/17/218
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Conditions 9: Michigan Ave & Marcin Rd Timing Plan: AM Peak Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 3 145 254 3 14 8 Future Volume (Veh/h) 3 145 254 3 14 8 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % Peak Hour Factor.92.92.92.92.92.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 158 276 3 15 9 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 93 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume 279 362 14 vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol 279 362 14 tc, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p queue free % 1 98 99 cm capacity (veh/h) 1281 69 883 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 56 15 184 95 24 Volume Left 3 15 Volume Right 3 9 csh 1281 17 17 17 689 Volume to Capacity..6.11.6.3 Queue Length 95th (m).1....8 Control Delay (s).4... 1.4 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s).2. 1.4 Approach LOS B Average Delay.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 B17_Sarnia Traffic Study CIMA Canada Inc. 1/17/218
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Conditions 11: Newell St & Michigan Ave Timing Plan: AM Peak Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 3 13 1 1 259 2 3 3 15 14 Future Volume (Veh/h) 3 13 1 1 259 2 3 3 15 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 141 1 1 282 2 3 3 16 15 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 197 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume 284 142 36 434 71 364 433 142 vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol 284 142 36 434 71 364 433 142 tc, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4. 3.3 3.5 4. 3.3 p queue free % 1 1 1 1 1 97 1 98 cm capacity (veh/h) 1275 1438 612 512 977 564 513 88 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 74 72 142 143 6 31 Volume Left 3 1 3 16 Volume Right 1 2 3 15 csh 1275 17 1438 17 752 682 Volume to Capacity..4..8.1.5 Queue Length 95th (m).1....2 1.1 Control Delay (s).3..1. 9.8 1.5 Lane LOS A A A B Approach Delay (s).2. 9.8 1.5 Approach LOS A B Average Delay.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 B17_Sarnia Traffic Study CIMA Canada Inc. 1/17/218
Queues Existing Conditions 3: Christina St N & Michigan Ave Timing Plan: PM Peak Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 466 295 55 337 22 268 v/c Ratio.39.23.15.27.6.21 Control Delay 12.9 1.5 16.6 14.9 15.6 9.4 Queue Delay...... Total Delay 12.9 1.5 16.6 14.9 15.6 9.4 Queue Length 5th (m) 19.2 1.3 4.8 14.3 1.9 7. Queue Length 95th (m) 29.4 17.2 12. 23.2 6.1 14.3 Internal Link Dist (m) 142.1 394.4 31.1 2.1 Turn Bay Length (m) 36. 46. Base Capacity (vph) 126 131 392 139 355 138 Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio.39.23.14.26.6.2 B17_Sarnia Michigan Ave_Traffic Study CIMA Canada Inc. 1/17/218
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Conditions 3: Christina St N & Michigan Ave Timing Plan: PM Peak Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 163 244 22 46 196 29 51 261 49 2 143 14 Future Volume (vph) 163 244 22 46 196 29 51 261 49 2 143 14 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 Lane Width 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.5 3.5 Total Lost time (s) 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. Lane Util. Factor.95.95 1..95 1..95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Flpb, ped/bikes 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Frt.99.98 1..98 1..94 Flt Protected.98.99.95 1..95 1. Satd. Flow (prot) 3458 3311 1711 3466 1658 333 Flt Permitted.72.82.59 1..55 1. Satd. Flow (perm) 2547 2752 156 3466 958 333 Peak-hour factor, PHF.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 177 265 24 5 213 32 55 284 53 22 155 113 RTOR Reduction (vph) 5 13 23 73 Lane Group Flow (vph) 461 282 55 315 22 195 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 2 2 5 4 4 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% % % % 2% % 2% % 2% 5% % 1% Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2 2 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 33. 33. 25. 25. 25. 25. Effective Green, g (s) 33. 33. 25. 25. 25. 25. Actuated g/c Ratio.47.47.36.36.36.36 Clearance Time (s) 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. Vehicle Extension (s) 3. 3. 3. 3. 3. 3. Lane Grp Cap (vph) 12 1297 377 1237 342 1189 v/s Ratio Prot c.9.6 v/s Ratio Perm c.18.1.5.2 v/c Ratio.38.22.15.25.6.16 Uniform Delay, d1 11.9 1.9 15.3 15.9 14.8 15.4 Progression Factor 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Incremental Delay, d2.9.4.2.1.1.1 Delay (s) 12.9 11.3 15.4 16. 14.9 15.4 Level of Service B B B B B B Approach Delay (s) 12.9 11.3 15.9 15.4 Approach LOS B B B B HCM 2 Control Delay 13.9 HCM 2 Level of Service B HCM 2 Volume to Capacity ratio.33 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 7. Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group B17_Sarnia Michigan Ave_Traffic Study CIMA Canada Inc. 1/17/218
Queues Existing Conditions 6: Colborne Rd & Michigan Ave Timing Plan: PM Peak Lane Group EBT WBT NBT NBR SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 36 386 338 224 253 v/c Ratio.29.38.29.14.22 Control Delay 11.1 12.4 13.7.2 11.5 Queue Delay..... Total Delay 11.1 12.4 13.7.2 11.5 Queue Length 5th (m) 11.7 13.4 13.1. 8.2 Queue Length 95th (m) 19.7 22.6 21.3. 15. Internal Link Dist (m) 69.2 176.5 27.5 156.9 Turn Bay Length (m) 33. Base Capacity (vph) 1256 122 1163 1611 1146 Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio.29.38.29.14.22 B17_Sarnia Michigan Ave_Traffic Study CIMA Canada Inc. 1/17/218
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Conditions 6: Colborne Rd & Michigan Ave Timing Plan: PM Peak Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 34 252 45 114 198 43 49 262 26 36 167 29 Future Volume (vph) 34 252 45 114 198 43 49 262 26 36 167 29 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 Lane Width 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.5 3.5 3.8 3.5 3.5 3.5 Total Lost time (s) 6. 6. 6. 4. 6. Lane Util. Factor.95.95.95 1..95 Frpb, ped/bikes 1. 1. 1..99 1. Flpb, ped/bikes 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Frt.98.98 1..85.98 Flt Protected.99.98.99 1..99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3336 3262 3481 1611 3388 Flt Permitted.88.73.86 1..86 Satd. Flow (perm) 2964 241 334 1611 2942 Peak-hour factor, PHF.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 37 274 49 124 215 47 53 285 224 39 182 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 21 18 19 Lane Group Flow (vph) 339 368 338 224 234 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 3 7 8 8 7 Heavy Vehicles (%) % 1% % 2% 2% 2% % 2% 1% 3% 2% 3% Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Free Perm NA Protected Phases 2 2 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 4 Free 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 25. 25. 23. 6. 23. Effective Green, g (s) 25. 25. 23. 6. 23. Actuated g/c Ratio.42.42.38 1..38 Clearance Time (s) 6. 6. 6. 6. Vehicle Extension (s) 3. 3. 3. 3. Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1235 14 1163 1611 1127 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm.11 c.15 c.11.14.8 v/c Ratio.27.37.29.14.21 Uniform Delay, d1 11.5 12. 12.8. 12.4 Progression Factor 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Incremental Delay, d2.1.2.1.2.1 Delay (s) 11.6 12.3 13..2 12.5 Level of Service B B B A B Approach Delay (s) 11.6 12.3 7.9 12.5 Approach LOS B B A B HCM 2 Control Delay 1.6 HCM 2 Level of Service B HCM 2 Volume to Capacity ratio.33 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 6. Sum of lost time (s) 12. Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.4% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group B17_Sarnia Michigan Ave_Traffic Study CIMA Canada Inc. 1/17/218
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Conditions 9: Michigan Ave & Marcin Rd Timing Plan: PM Peak Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 315 266 1 16 5 Future Volume (Veh/h) 1 315 266 1 16 5 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade % % % Peak Hour Factor.92.92.92.92.92.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 11 342 289 11 17 5 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 93 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume 3 488 15 vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol 3 488 15 tc, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p queue free % 99 97 99 cm capacity (veh/h) 1258 55 87 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 125 228 193 17 22 Volume Left 11 17 Volume Right 11 5 csh 1258 17 17 17 558 Volume to Capacity.1.13.11.6.4 Queue Length 95th (m).2....9 Control Delay (s).8... 11.7 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s).3. 11.7 Approach LOS B Average Delay.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 25.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 B17_Sarnia Michigan Ave_Traffic Study CIMA Canada Inc. 1/17/218
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Conditions 11: Newell St & Michigan Ave Timing Plan: PM Peak Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 9 3 4 3 26 8 2 1 15 9 Future Volume (Veh/h) 9 3 4 3 26 8 2 1 15 9 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade % % % % Peak Hour Factor.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 326 4 3 283 9 2 11 16 1 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 197 px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume 292 33 56 646 165 488 644 146 vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol 292 33 56 646 165 488 644 146 tc, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4. 3.3 3.5 4. 3.3 p queue free % 99 1 1 1 99 96 1 99 cm capacity (veh/h) 1267 1226 441 385 85 454 386 875 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 173 167 144 15 13 26 Volume Left 1 3 2 16 Volume Right 4 9 11 1 csh 1267 17 1226 17 744 557 Volume to Capacity.1.1..9.2.5 Queue Length 95th (m).2..1..4 1.1 Control Delay (s).5..2. 9.9 11.8 Lane LOS A A A B Approach Delay (s).3.1 9.9 11.8 Approach LOS A B Average Delay.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 25.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 B17_Sarnia Michigan Ave_Traffic Study CIMA Canada Inc. 1/17/218