The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMITSUBISHI @ 2712 S. COLLEGE AVE. - MJA - MJA120007 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - TRAFFIC STUDY-=--ELBEngineerintJ,LLC -:-. Transportation EngineerinB Solutions Memorandum TO: ....c.:~sss:ss~S'"' Mr. Jeff Wood, Wood Management ...t::S7;G HE(~7;~},! Mr. Ward S~~rd, Tr~c Operati?ns Engin#~~~~~:c~.;'i·c:",l.:::~;~t: Ms. Stephanie SIgler, Ripley Associates (:·?.:~:r/"T " .• ~>if) Eric L. Bracke, P,E" P,T.D.E ~l~~':~;~~.':D J;J November 12, 2012'~'ifii;;1k;;i,(;:jJJ 2712 South College - Mitsubishi Dealership - Transliiiitli'iion Impact Memorandum FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: This memorandum addresses the transportation impacts of the proposed Mitsubishi Dealership located at 2712 South College Avenue in Fort Collins, CO. The project is a renovation of an existing retail building that is currently vacant. Business uses along the frontage road include specialty retail, restaurant, furniture store and office. The site is located on the east frontage road of South College between Thunderbird road to the north and Harvard Street to the South. A vicinity map of the location is displayed in Figure I on the following page. A scoping form was sent to the City Traffic Engineer to determine the scope of the transportation impact study. It was agreed that the project will have relatively minor (if any) impact to the surrounding street system and that an expanded memorandum would be sufficient to address the related transportation impacts. Capacity analyses would be required for the key intersections and special attention should be given to the frontage road intersections. The scoping form for the transportation study can be found in Appendix A. Existing Conditions South College Avenue is a principal arterial and the most heavily traveled roadway in Fort Collins. The immediate area is generally business oriented. Directly to the east of the site are residential neighborhoods. The South College Avenue Frontage Road is a thirty-foot roadway that runs north and south on the east side of College Avenue. The primary purpose of the frontage road is to provide access to businesses. The roadway does not have a posted speed limit and is therefore assumed to have a prima facie speed of 25 mph. The roadway appears to have ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-7551 ELBEngineering@lpbroadbandnel 1 chip sealed in the last year. Parking is allowed along the roadway on the east side. There are no bike lanes on the roadways and sidewalks are not continuous. The intersection of College and Harvard is controlled by a 6-phase traffic signal that has protected/permitted left turns for the north-south movements. Pedestrian heads and crosswalks are in place at the intersection. The intersection of Harvard and the Frontage road is a stop sign controlled intersection with the north-south movements being controlled. The intersection is very close to the CollegelHarvard intersection and queues from the westbound movement at College will block the intersection on occasion. The intersection of the frontage road and Thunderbird is to the north of the site. The intersection is also a two-way stop controlled intersection with the frontage road being controlled. Access to the site is via a curb cut on the frontage road as well as an alley to the east of the property. The alley is well used and the pavement is in good condition. ELB Engineering, LLC 540/ Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-7551 ELBEngineering@lpbroadband.net Frontage Road/Harvard Intersection Frontage Road/Thunderbird Intersection 2 Lor.e,ColO(....' Ve!ild ein3'Y Sta~t: rel~~9 "'iO$P'~~'; WOrakeRd 4 .'ff', l""e ~ W DraKe Ro sr"rv.~·¥.~I1i~""• " P';ilOt $~Ofe Pr.,oiffi (,j RO('ky to ---- Mo,,~tajnRe"~"r~ rne t.;Jhl • Certf::f IN Harvalll st E Ora~eRd U l"~1,1001 '<ccse E Df3keRo enrr.;t Lni!e,j ~.I-t!'hocf,st Chw'" 1tAl ,-------, E Ttur.cefblnl Dr E Tllunderbjf{ Site Dele ~4~ ~~ f'i\l'J~ North ~P data --_.- ---~.- (Figure 1: Vicinit,Y Map J ,-. ----------' Peak hour turning movements were conducted at the key intersections surrounding the project site. The results of those counts are shown in Figure 2. Capacity analyses were performed at the key intersections to determine if existing deficiencies exist on the roadway network. The analyses followed the procedures of the Highway Capacity Manual. Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative term describing operating conditions and expressed in terms of delay. Table 1 below provides the definitions of LOS for both ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-7551 ELBEngineering@/pbroadband.net 3 signalized and unsignalized intersections. Table 2 displays the results of the analyses. The worksheets from the analyses can be found in Appendix C. JQ) OJ) --o Q) U ~~~ ~~47 ."' .•..-,.••.-,-,-, -," ..,", -;-,...•.-, : 4/6 Thunderbird osn ...................t-..-.-..-.+..-.-.=..-..-.-.-.-.-..-.-.-.-.-..- ......... '<, on 0>"- ".-., - 20/59 6/9 9/29 Harvard SITE A -"~ ..- , -on"- .-., - : ~~~10 ( ~ 12/11 ~ .......................................... Figure 2: R.ecent Feak Hour T uming Movements CAM/FM) ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-7551 ELBEngineering@lpbroadband.net 4 Table 1 Level of Service Definitions Level of Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection Service Average Total Delay (seconds/vehicle) Average Total Delay (seconds/vehicle) A <10 <10 B >10 and <20 >10 and <15 C >20 andS35 >15 andS25 D >35 and <55 >25 andS35 E >55 andS 80 >35 andS50 F >80 >50 As can be seen from the Table 2, all of the key intersections are operating at acceptable levels of service. Table 2 - Existing Condition Capacity Analysis Existing Traffic - Year 2012 AM PM Intersection IMovement LOS DelaY(SectveniCle) LOS DelaY(Sectvenlcle) South College @ Harvard EB LEFT 0 46.7 0 51.7 (Traffic Signal control) EBT/R 0 46.0 0 49.1 WB LEFT 0 46.4 0 50.3 WBT/R 0 46.2 0 49.0 NB LEFT A 2.0 A 5.7 NBT/R A 5.0 A 7.1 SB LEFT A 2.8 A 4.1 SBT/R A 4.4 A 7.7 OVERALL A 5.7 A 9.4 Harvard @ Frontage Road EB A 2.2 A 0.5 Stop sign Control WB A 0.9 A 0.2 NB A 8.8 B 10.2 SB A 9.1 A 9.5 OVERALL A 3.4 A 1.9 Thunderbird @ Frontage Road EB A 1.5 A 0.4 Stop sign Control WB A 1.1 A 0.8 NB A 9.1 A 9.3 SB A 8.9 A 9.0 OVERALL A 5.1 A 4.0 South College @ Thunderbird WB Right B 12.9 B 14.5 Stop sign Control SB LEFT B 13.6 C 16.5 OVERALL A 0.6 A 1.3 ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-7551 ELBEngineering@lpbroadband.net 5 Project The project is a Mitsubishi Dealership located at 2712 South College. The project is utilizing an existing building and renovating for the new use. Access to the site is via one curb cut on the frontage road and will also have access via the alley on the east of the property. The building itself is 6,702 square feet of which 1500 square feet will be show room and a service area of 3,630 square feet. Exterior display is 1050 square feet and a 12,414 square foot area in the back for outdoor inventory. The site plan is provided below in Figure 3. !;! -;; " I To Itr_~"Rlr'n 't.::. \.-. f-'.)' '" .\ t~ ' :I EAST l4~.62' I~I ~G3~31'10"E 2O::9.6Z' (r.-I) I ~_~'-_-_~l-__~__- ------'- --~~--~---'------~~~'~~-- \-~ -- ~----------------~~ ! r j , 'I -.;- ;. • , ·1 " r.c I 0 III ,~·DfRBh0 L.iI" _. -t. ,";:;13 ~I •.••••• ~:ie:== ~·=I'o!#! $i"I~W<l [ figure J:Site Flan 1 ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-7551 ELBEngineering@lpbroadband.net 2712 S Colaga Ale. Milsutis..>W ..'-.__.-~~~~' -.-.-_ -.- .- 6 Trip Generation Trip generation rates for the proposed project are based on the Trip Generation, 9th Edition manual prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. The manual presents data from numerous trip generation studies for a variety of land uses from across the country. ITE Code 841, automobile dealership was used in the analysis. No trip reductions due to active modes of transportation have been assumed in the analysis. Since the previous use of the site is no longer in place, it is not possible to do a trip generation comparison between the dealership and the previous use (retail). It is likely, and therefore assumed, that the uses are similar. Table 1 below summarizes the proposed trip generation for the project. For the entire project, during the morning peak hour, 15 trip ends can be expected and 18 trip ends can be expected from the project during the afternoon peak hours. Table 3- Trip Generation Estimates units rate tris Daily 32.3 21 TALTRIP 21 Trip Distribution and Assignment The traffic on the frontage road is distributed fairly evenly and a 50% to the north and 50% from the south distribution has been assumed for the project. Figure 3 shows the assigned trips resulting from the project and Figure 4 displays the total traffic projected for the year 2013. ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-755/ ELBEngineering@lpbroadband.net 7 ~ ~ (!) OJ.) 8 (!) €~;~: 5/5 ...••.•••.•••.•••••.••.••.•.••..••.• ..•.•..• ~ % Thunderbird ....+..-.-.-. --+--..::"------------ ............................................. 00 o !:Qgg '" 0 0 5/5 SITE (~~ 5/5 : 5/5 0/0 ({> /f / ~ % :: 0/~ 0 :/ . Harvard [ Figure J: Trip Assignment CAtvVFM) 1 ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-7551 ELBEngineering@/pbroadband.net 8 JQ) b1) ;Q) 3 €~~ ....-•,.•"'."', ..-.,..-. .,..-.. -,.,.... ;:; Thunderbird ;:g . ,~----4-.~.. ~ ~..-.. . -... --------------------- ~ '0 . ~ N ................................................. Harvard [ Figure +: Total 20 J J T raffieCAM/FM) 1 ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-7551 ELBEngineering@lpbroadband.net 9 Capacity Analysis Capacity analysis was performed on the Year 2013 build-out of the project. As can be seen in the Table 4 shown below, the project has very little impact on the traffic operations of the key intersections. All intersections and movements continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. Worksheets can be found in Appendix D. Table 4 - Year 2013 Capacity Analysis Total Traffic - Year 2013 AM PM Intersection IMovement LOS Oelay(secJvehicle) LOS DelaY(SeClvehICle) South College @ Harvard EB LEFT D 46.8 D 52.0 (Traffle Signal control) EBT/R D 46.0 D 49.3 WB LEFT D 46.7 D 50.7 WBTIR D 46.4 D 49.0 NB LEFT A 2.2 A 6.0 NBT/R A 5.5 A 7.3 SB LEFT A 2.7 A 4.3 SBT/R A 4.5 A 7.8 OVERALL A 6.3 A 9.7 Harvard @ Frontage Road EB A 2.7 A 0.9 Stop sign Control WB A 0.8 A 0.4 NB A 9.0 B 10.5 SB A 9.3 A 9.6 OVERALL A 4.2 A 2.5 Thunderbird @ Frontage Road EB A 1.1 A 0.8 Stop sign Control WB A 1.2 A 1.1 NB A 9.2 A 9.5 SB A 9.1 A 9.3 OVERALL A 5.1 A 4.4 South College @ Thunderbird WB Right B 13.1 B 14.8 Stop sign Control SB LEFT B 13.8 C 17.1 OVERALL A 0.4 A 1.5 What the analysis does not show is the operation of the intersection of Harvard and the Frontage Road and the associated impacts of such close proximity to Harvard and College Avenue. Observation during the traffic counting procedure revealed that the intersection operated exceptionally welL Eastbound traffic, -c: when approaching College Avenue obeyed the stop bar placed directly east of the Frontage Road intersection, thereby leaving a gap at the Frontage Road. This allowes eastbound vehicles to make a relatively easy left turn movement from Harvard to northbound Frontage Road. When people don't obey the stop bar, the eastbound left turning vehicle gets queued up and causes a backup onto Stop bar,just east of frontage road ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Tay/or Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-7551 ELBEngineering/@,lpbroadband.net College Avenue. Fortunately, this only happenes rarely at the intersection. The area east of the project is primarily residential and is built-out. It is not likely that traffic volumes on Harvard will increase over the years so the potential problem at the intersection is not likely to occur. A queue analysis was performed for the signalized intersection of College and Harvard. For the Eastbound movement: • AM - 95th percentile queue is 28 feet • PM - 95th percentile queue is 68 feet Both of these queue lengths are long enough to block the frontage road is people do not obey the stop bar that is in place. The City has signed the intersection notifying drivers where to stop and it is illegal to block an intersection. No other remedies to the potential problem are identified. Alternative Modes Analysis Section 4.5.3 (B) of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards requires that projects undergo a level of service analysis for alternative modes of transportation. The modes of transportation that must meet LOS standards are bicycles, and pedestrians. Transit service LOS must also be analyzed at the time of development review. However, transit LOS is not part of the Adequate Public Facilities test. Pedestrian Level of Service The project area was evaluated for compliance with the pedestrian level of service standards. The site is within walking distance to numerous businesses including restaurants and the Mall. Sidewalks exist to both the north and south of the site but not currently at 2712 South College. The project will be required to construct a sidewalk on the property. Directness - There will be direct sidewalk connections to the commercial areas to the north and south of the site. Connections can also be made directly to the east to the residential areas. The Mason Corridor is two blocks to the west of the site. Continuity - The sidewalk system that will be in place has continuity to all surrounding areas. ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fori Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-755/ ELBEngineering@lpbroadband.net 11 Street Crossings - The intersection of South CollegelHarvard has crosswalks and pedestrian phases. Crosswalks and pavement markings are at the intersection are consistent with City Standards. Visual Interest and Amenity - The area is an aging commercial area and the landscaping is mature. The area is considered visually appealing. Security - The sidewalks and roadways in the area are lit and good sight distances are available. Bicycles Level of Service Frontage Roads are generally considered local roads where bike lanes are not required. The roadway was built 40-50+ years ago with the principle purpose of providing access to the properties adjacent to College Avenue. The roadway is 30 feet wide and bike lanes will not fit within the existing roadway. Harvard, Thunderbird, and the frontage road are local roadways and carry low volumes of traffic and bicycling is considered safe on these roadways. At this time, bicycles are prohibited on College Avenue adjacent to the site. The Mason Corridor is a short distance away to the west. Transit Level of Service There is a bus stop directly south of the project site. The site is directly served by the Flex route as well as Route 1. The site is also within a short walking distance of the Mall Transfer Point and several blocks from the Mason Corridor. Conclusion This memorandum documented the transportation impacts associated with the Mitsubishi Dealership planned for 2712 South College Avenue. Based on the analyses, investigations, and findings documented in the various sections of this Transportation Impact Study, the following can be concluded. • The project will not present a significant impact to the surrounding roadway system. • The project will likely produce similar trips when compared to the the retail that was currently on site. ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-7551 ELBEngineering@lpbroadband.net 12 • All key intersections operate at acceptable levels of service. • The project is expected to produce approximately 216 daily vehicular trips. During the morning peak hour, 15 trip ends can be expected and 18 trip ends can be expected from the project during the afternoon peak hours. It is likely that the trips produced by the Mitsubishi dealership are equal to or less than the previous use on the site. • The key intersections are not negatively impacted by the development and will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. • Blockage of the frontage road at College and Harvard doesn't appear to be a problem at this time with the low volumes of traffic currently on Harvard. • A sidewalk should be constructed on the property filling in the gap of the existing pedestrian system. • Multi-modal level of service is acceptable. Statement of Adequacy: The transportation facilities will be adequate and available to serve this development as contained in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. All applicable LOS standards will be met since all transportation facilities are in place or will be in place upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy. ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Phone: 970-988-7551 ELBEngineering@lpbroadband.net 13 Appendix A 2712 South College Avenue Transportation Impact Analysis ELB Engineering, LLC November 2012 Chapter 4 - Attachments Attachment A Transportation Impact Study Base Assumptions Project Information Project Name -89'& -IS Project Location Z 71z, TIS Assumptions Type of Study ~;A'WJ"" rl"I'1D Full: Intermediate: Study Area Boundaries North: -rJ,.u..J.,-b,,..,}. Study Years Future TrafIic Growth Rate East: West: Study Intersections Short Range: ZOI,3 Long Range: Time Period for Study Trip Generation Rates I I Trip Adjustment Factors Overall Trip Distribution 1. All access drives 5. 3'-rl ";,..J J, d 7. AM~:OO I PM:~o:O{f"1 Sat Noon: Passby: / LLo~I), captive Market: Mode Split Assumptions Committed Roadway Improvements Other Traffic Studies Areas Requiring Special Study Traffic Engineer: -t:::.d~-1-::::::~~~~===:::.---------:------- Local Entity Engineer: -I f-.• Jf-"'=--¥'7'7!~H-----------+-T--H-~7------ Page 4-34 Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards - Repealed and Reenacted April 1, 2007 Adopted by Larimer County, City of Loveland, City of Fort Collins Appendix B 2712 South College Avenue Transportation Impact Analysis ELB Engineering, LLC November 2012 ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 (970) 988-7551 Tabular Summary of Vechicle Counts Date 7-Nov-2012 CitylTown Fort Collins Intersection Harvard/East S. College Frontage Time Eastbound Westbound Total Southbound Northbound Total Total Begins L T R Total L T R Total east/west L T R Total L T R Total north/south ALL 7:30 7 4 7 18 0 10 4 14 32 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 6 6 38 7:45 3 2 3 8 0 8 4 12 20 1 0 1 2 1 1 1 3 5 25 8:00 1 4 1 6 2 4 2 8 14 2 1 3 6 1 0 5 6 12 26 8:15 1 6 1 8 3 5 2 10 18 1 1 2 4 0 0 2 2 6 24 I 7:30·8:30 I 12 161 121 401 51 271 121 44 84 41 21 6 121 41 2 11 171 29 113 I PHF I I 0.56 I 0.79 0.501 0.711 Time Eastbound Westbound Total Southbound Northbound Total Total Begins L T R Total L T R Total east/west L T R Total L T R Total north/south ALL 4:30 1 31 5 37 1 23 1 25 62 0 0 4 4 2 0 1 3 7 69 4:45 4 35 1 40 1 26 5 32 72 1 1 2 4 3 2 2 7 11 83 5:00 0 25 2 27 0 13 5 18 45 2 2 7 11 2 1 1 4 15 60 5:15 3 19 3 25 0 16 0 16 41 0 2 0 2 2 3 1 6 8 49 I 4:30·5:30 I 8 1101 111 129 21 781 11 91 220 31 51 131 211 91 61 5 411= 2611 201 I PHF I I 0.81 0.71 I 0.481 0.711 Eric L. Bracl<e, P.E., P.T.O.E ELB Engineering, LLC 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 (970) 981J..7551 Tabular Summary of Vechicle Counts Date 6-Nov-2012 City/Town FortCollins Intersection S CollegeFrontagelThunderbird Time Eastbound Westbound Total Southbound Northbound Total Total Begins L T R Total L T R Total east/west L T R Total L T R Total north/south ALL 7:30 1 4 1 6 1 4 0 5 11 1 1 0 2 1 0 1 2 4 15 7:45 0 4 1 5 1 8 2 11 16 4 3 3 10 5 1 1 7 17 33 8:00 3 1 0 4 2 5 2 9 13 7 1 2 10 4 2 0 6 16 29 8:15 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 3 4 1 1 0 2 6 0 2 8 10 14 4:30-5:30 I 4 10 2 16 4 20 4 28 44 13 6 5 24 161 3 41 231 471 911 PHF I 0.67 I 0.64 ~ I 0.721 Time Eastbound Westbound Total Southbound Northbound Total Total Begins L T R Total L T R Total east/west L T R Total L T R Total north/south ALL 4:30 1 11 1 13 1 10 1 12 25 1 0 4 5 3 2 2 7 12 37 4:45 2 9 2 13 2 12 2 16 29 1 3 4 8 2 1 3 6 14 43 5:00 1 10 2 13 2 14 1 17 30 2 2 4 8 5 1 3 9 17 47 5:15 1 17 1 19 1 11 3 15 34 2 0 7 9 6 1 3 10 19 53 4:30-5:30 5 47 6 58 61 47 7 60 118 621,~ 6 5 19 30 161 51 111 321 I PHF I I 0.761 I 0.88 ~ I 0.801 Appendix C 2712 South Cof/ege Avenue Transportation Impact Analysis ELB Engineering, LLC November 2012 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Harvard & South College 11/10/2012 ..,}- •••••• of ~ -, , t I" \.. ~ ~ ~ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 'i 1+ 'i 1+ ~~eal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 .1900 1900 1900 'i +1900 t1+ '1900 1900· 'i .ia.... tt1+ 1900 . 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util, Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ·1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.89 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1723 1770 1651 1770 5077 1770 5047 FltPermitted 0.74 1.00 0.75 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.14 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1375 1723 1402 1651 546 5077 260 5047 Volume (vpht 13 4 4 9 6 20 24 1415 15 21 785 41 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) ~ -14- 4 "4 10 .. 7 22 26 1538 16 23 853 45 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 4 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 lane Group Flow (vph) 14 4 0 10 9 0 26 1554 0 23 896 0 Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 84.0 80.4 81.8 79.3 Effective Green, g (s) 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 89.5 83.4 87.3 82.3 Actuated gIG Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.81 0.76 0.79 0.75 Clearance Time (s) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 7.0 6.5 7.0 'ilE?hicleExtension (s) 3.6 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.(;) 3.0 " Lane Grp Cap (vph) 120 150 122 144 512 3849 275 3776 vIs Ratio Prot 0.00 0.01 0.00 cO.31 cO.OCr 0.18 vIs Ratio Perm cO.01 0.01 0.04 0.06 vlc Ratio 0.12 0.03 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.40 0.08 0.24 Uniform Delay, d1 46.3 45.9 46.1 46.1 2.0 4.6 2.6 4.2 Pmgression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 Deiay (s) 46.7 46.0 46.4- 4-6.2 2.0 5.0 2.8 4.4 Level of Service D D D D A A A A Aj::>proachbelay- (s) 46.5 46.3 4.9 4.3 -{~ '" ~ ._ .. :,; _. w Approach LOS D D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 5.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.35 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 6 Critical Lane Group 2712 South College 11/10/2012 Existing AM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE Existing AM Condition Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Harvard & East Frontage Road 11/10/2012 ~ "'). ." +- -, -, t /'" ~ ~ -+ -cI Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ~ ~ ~ ~ Sign Control . Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 12 16 12 5 27 12 4 :2 11 6 2 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow ratetvpn) 13 17 13 5 29 13 4 2 12 7 2 4 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) ~e_rcent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type- . None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 42 30 102 103 24 110 103 36 vC 1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 42 30 102 103 24 110 103 36 tC;;, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7:1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tFJs) , 2:2 2.2 3.5 4·.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 pO queue free % 99 100 99 100 99 99 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1567 1582 865 778 1053 849 718 1037. Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 43 48 18 13 Volume Left 13 5 4 7 Volume Right 13 13 12 4 cSH 1567 1582 963 889 Volume to Capacjty 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 1 1 Control Delay (s) 2.2 0.9 8.8 9.1 Lane LOS A A A A Approach Delay (s) 2.2 0.9 8.8 9.1 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.4 intersection Capacity Utilization 14.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis .Period (m.in) 15 2712 South College 11/10/2012 Existing AM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE Existing AM Condition Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Thunderbird & East Frontage Road 11/10/2012 --" -+ ~ .- +- -\.. , t I" ~ + .; Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ~lgr:Lane tControl Configurations ." Free • Free • Stop • Stop • Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 4 10 5 4 20 4 16 3 4 5' 6 13 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 4 11 5 4 22 4 17 3 4 5 7 14 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blocl<age Right turn flare (veh) Median type ' .~ None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 26 16 72 57 14 61 58 24 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 26 16 72 57 14 61 58 24 fe, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) fr:(s) 2:2., 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 pOqueue free % 100 100 98 100 100 99 99 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 1588 1601 897 829 1066 924 829 1053 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 21 30 25 26 Volume Left 4 4 17 5 Volume Right 5 4 4 14 cSH 1588 1601 913 960 Volume to CapaCity 0.00 ' 0.00 0.03 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 2 2 Control Delay (s) 1,5 1.1 9.1' 8.9 ' Lane LOS A A A A Approach Delay (s) 1.5 1.1 9.1 8.9 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.5% ICU Level of Service A A~alysis Period (m.in) 15 2712 South College 11/10/2012 Existing AM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE Existing AM Condition Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Thunderbird & South College 11/10/2012 ~ '- t ~ ~ + Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT %Lane ig~nControl' Configurations Stop " . ;Free ;tt , Free, ., Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) o 49 1379 19 ·14 o Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 53 1499 21 15 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage ". Right turn flare (veh) Median type -5- None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1540 510 1520 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, ic. single unblocked (s). vol 1540 6.8 510 6.9 1520 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF: ~- (s) !( . 3.5. 3.3 2.2 pO queue free % 100 90 97 eM capacity (veh/h) 102 509 435 Direction, Lane # WB1 NB 1 NB2 NB3 SB 1 Volume Total 53 600 600 320 15 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 15 Volume Right 53 0 0 21 0 cSH 509 1700 1700 1700 435 ~olume to Capacity 0.10 0.35 0.35 0.19 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 9 0 0 0 3 <;;pntrol Delay (5) 12.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.6 Lane LOS B B Approach Delay (s) 12}f 0.0 13.6 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2712 South College 11/10/2012 Existing AM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE. PTOE Existing AM Condition Page 1 Queues 3: Harvard & South College 11/10/2012 ..J- --+ of ~ "" t '. + Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 14 8 10 29 26 1554 23 898 v/c Ratio 0.10 0.04 0.07 0.15 0.05 0.37 0.09 0.22 Control Delay 41.9 30.3 40.9 20.7 3.2 5.4 3.7 5.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 41.9 30.3 40.9 20.7 3.2 5.4 3.7 5.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 9 3 7 5 2 61 2 62 Queue Length 95th (ft) 25 16 20 29 13 264 12 134 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1814 1323 1108 3372 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (yph) 519 653 529 636 504 4225 292 4088 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spiffback Cap Reductn o "". x 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.37 0.08 0.22 Intersection Summary 2712 South College 11/10/2012 Existing AM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE Existing AM Condition Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Harvard & South College 11/10/2012 ~ --.... ~ .f +- -\... "\ t ~ \.. + 4' Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR lane Ideal Flow Configurations (vphpl) 1900 1i 1900 1+ 1900 1900 1i 1900 1+ 1900 1900 1i tt1+ 1900 1900 1900 1i tt1+ 1900 1900 Total Lost time (5) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1660 1770 1621 1770 5058 1770 5061 Fit Permitted 0.67 1.00 0.72 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.10 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1255 1660 1340 1621 107 5058 188 5061 Volume (vph) 42 15 39 29 9 59 33 1563 59 55 1984 64 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 46 16 42 32 10 64 36 1699 64 60 2157 70 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 38 0 0 57 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 46 20 0 32 17 0 36 1761 0 60 2225 0 Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (5) 9.9 9.9 9.9 9.9 88.5 84.7 91.7 86.3 Effective Green, g (5) 12.4 12.4 12.4 12.4 94.0 87.7 97.2 89.3 Actuated glC Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.78 0.73 0.81 0.74 Clearance Time (5) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 7.0 6.5 7.0 Vehicle Extension (5) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 130 172 138 168 171 3697 256 3766 vis Ratio Prot 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.35 cO.02 cO.44 vis Ratio Perm cO.04 0.02 0.15 0.17 vlc Ratio 0.35 0.12 0.23 0.10 0.21 0.48 0.23 0.59 Uniform Delay, d1 50.1 48.8 49.4 48.7 5.1 6.7 3.6 7.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 0.3 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.7 Delay (5) 51.7 49.1 50.3 49.0 5.7 7.1 4.1 7.7 Level of Service D D D D A A A A Approach Delay (5) 50.3 49.4 7.1 7.6 Approach LOS D D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.4 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (5) 120.0 Sum of lost time (5) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2712 South College 11/10/2012 Existing PM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE Existing PM Condition Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Harvard & East Frontage Road 11/10/2012 /' --+ -,. of .•...... "'- -, t I'" '. ! .; Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4t 4t 4t 4t Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 8 110 11 2 78 11 9 6 5 3 5 13 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 120 12 2 85 12 10 7 5 3 5 14 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 97 132 255 244 126 247 244 91 vC 1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 97 132 255 244 126 247 244 91 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 pOqueue free % 99 100 99 99 99 100 99 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 1497 1454 680 653 925 694 653 967 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 140 99 22 23 Volume Left 9 2 10 3 Volume Right 12 12 5 14 cSH 1497 1454 719 826 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 2 2 Control Delay (s) 0.5 0.2 10.2 9.5 Lane LOS A A B A Approach Delay (s) 0.5 0.2 10.2 9.5 Approach LOS B A Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2712 South College 11/10/2012 Existing PM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE Existing PM Condition Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Thunderbird & East "Frontage . --+ Road ""). .f +- '- "\ t I'" \. ~ 11/10/2012 .t/ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Sign Lane Control Configurations Free • Free • Stop • Stop • Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 2 27 6 6 47 7 16 5 11 6 5 19 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 29 7 7 51 8 17 5 12 7 5 21 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 59 36 128 109 33 120 108 55 vC 1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 59 36 128 109 33 120 108 55 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 pOqueue free % 100 100 98 99 99 99 99 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1545 1575 820 777 1041 838 778 1012 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volum~;ff otal 38 65 35 33 Volume Left 2 7 17 7 Volume Right 7 8 12 21 cSH 1545 1575 876 927 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 3 3 Control Delay (s) 0.4 0.8 9.3 9.0 Lane LOS A A A A Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.8 9.3 9.0 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 15.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2712 South College 11/10/2012 Existing PM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE Existing PM Condition Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Thunderbird & South College 11/10/2012 of "- t ,.. '. + Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Sign Lane Control Configurations Stop l' +Free +t. , Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 82 1501 35 63 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 89 1632 38 68 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1788 563 1670 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1788 563 1670 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 pOqueue free % 100 81 82 cM capacity (veh/h) 59 470 381 Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 NB2 NB 3 SB 1 Volume Total 89 653 653 364 68 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 68 Volume Right 89 0 0 38 0 cSH 470 1700 1700 1700 381 Volume to Capacity 0.19 0.38 0.38 0.21 0.18 Queue Length 95th (ft) 17 0 0 0 16 Control Delay (s) 14.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.5 Lane LOS B C Approach Delay (s) 14.5 0.0 16.5 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 'Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2712 South College 11/10/2012 Existing PM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE Existing PM Condition Page 1 Queues 3: Harvard & South College .» ~ of <f- "\ t '-. + 11/10/2012 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 46 58 32 74 36 1763 60 2227 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.26 0.21 0.31 0.17 0.46 0.26 0.56 Control Delay 52.0 21.3 48.9 16.8 4.9 8.1 5.7 8.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 52.0 21.3 48.9 16.8 4.9 8.1 5.7 8.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 34 12 23 7 4 179 6 262 Queue Length 95th (ft) 64 47 49 48 16 328 23 457 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1814 1323 1108 3372 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 413 548 418 551 212 3845 230 3967 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.13 0.17 0.46 0.26 0.56 Intersection Summary <'1'1\.; 2712 South College 11/10/2012 Existing PM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE Existing PM Condition Page 1 Appendix D 2712 South College Avenue Transportation Impact Analysis ELB Engineering, LLC November 2012 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Harvard & South College 11/10/2012 ~ -+ "")- ~ +- "- "\ t ~ \.. + .; Movement EBL EBR WBR NBR SBR Lane Configurations Iqeal Flow (vpni:1l) 1900 ""1900 Total Lost time (s) lane Util. Factor Frt Pit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted. Satd. Flow (perm) VoJume (VRh) ;Peak-a;al: Flow hour (VRh) factor, ,.0 PHF RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Turn Type Protected Phases 4 8 6 Permitted Phases 4 Actuatea Green, G (s) 7.2 "~ Effective Green, g (s) 9.7 Actuatea gIG Rat.fo 0.09 Clearance Time (s) 6.5 Vetl)ele ExtenslGn (s) :fe Lane Grp Cap (vph) 120 vIs Ratio prof vIs Ratio Perm cO.01 0.01 vk: Ratio 0:13 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 46.3 46.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.5 Delay (§) . "" '46.8 46.7 Level of Service D D ~f.>pr(i)achDelay(s) ~ Approach LOS Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to CaRaci!y' ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Ca acity Utilization ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) e Critical Lane Grou 2712 South College 11/10/2012 2013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - AM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE 2013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - AM Condition Page 1 Queues 3: Harvard & South College 11/10/2012 ..J- ~ of ~ "" t \. + EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL 16 10 16 38 27 1576 27 0.11 0.05 0.11 . 0.19 0.06 0.38 0.10 42.2 29.4 42.1 21.5 3.2 6.3 3.8 0.0 0.0 ·'0.0, 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.0 42.2 29.4 42.1 21.5 3.2 6.3 3.8 11 3 1t 7 2 134 2 28 17 28 34 13 270 13 1814 1323 1108 - , :'. ~:;' Intersection Summary 2712 South College 11/10/2012 2013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - AM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE 2013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - AM Condition Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Harvard & East Frontage .» -Road -+ 't ~ 11/10/2012 ..•..... '- -, t ". \. + .; Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4t 4t 4t 4t Sign Control Free Free StoR StoR Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 20 20 15 5 30 5 . 5 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourl~ flow rate v h) 22 22 16 5 33 5 5 11 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage : Right turn flare (veh) Median tyRe' -~~ '''t • e_ , ,.;' Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) ~.~, -s pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 49 38 vC 1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 38 139 133 30 144 133 41 tC,single (s) 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (5) 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 pO queue free % 100 99 99 98 99 99 99 cM caRacity (veh/h) 1572 808 744 1045 797 744 1030 Direction, Lane # WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 54 27 Volume Left 5 11 Volume Right 16 11 cSH 1572 863 Volume t9 Capacity (lOO 0.03 " ".,.. . Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 2 Contron:••...)'elay . ,,-~ (s) ."".- . 0.8 9.3 Lane LOS A A Approach DelayW 0.8 9.3 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay Intersection CClpacity Utilization A Analysis Period (min) 2712 South College 11/10/20122013 TOTAL TRAFFIC -AM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE 2013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - AM Condition Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Thunderbird & East Frontage Road 11/10/2012 t - 3.5 4.0 .' 4.'0 3.3. 97 99 99 98 868 . 814 806 10!;i2 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 MOlumeTotal '!' 38 33 33 Volume Left 5 5 22 Volume Right 22 5 '5 cSH 1587 1579 884 Volume to CaRacity 0.00 0.00 0.04 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 3 9.qntrofDelay (s) 1.1 1.2 9.2 ' ,~ Lane LOS A A A Apwoach Delay (s) 1.1 1.2 9.2 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.1 ~ntersectlon Capaciw Utilization 13.5% ICU L.:evel-6fService Analysis Period (min) 15 '-.. ~ EBR WBL WBR NBL NBR SBL SBR ;,~ 2712 South College 11/10/20122013 TOTAL TRAFFIC -AM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE 2013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - AM Condition Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Thunderbird & South College 11/10/2012 ~ "- t I"" '. + Movement WBL WBR NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations r' •• t Sig!:1Control' . Free Grade 0% Volume (veh/h) 55 20 760 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (v(:!h) 60 22 826 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage ~-.-~ Right turn flare (veh) Median tyRe ~, ~'. ...•- .. Median storage veh) URstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 513 1527 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 513 tC single (s) - 6.9 tC, tf' (s)2 ' stage . (s) ,. 3.3 pO queue free % 88 eM calJaciW (veh/h) 506 Direction, Lane # NB 1 NB2 NB3 SB2 Volume Total 602 ·602 323 826 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 Volume Riglit 0 0 22 0 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 Voiume to CaRaci1;y . 0.35 0.35 0.19 0.49 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 9~6ntrol Delay (s) 0.0 -O,Q 0.0 0.0 ~ . 1.;, Lane LOS Approach Delay (s) 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection CalJaci!y Utilization 43.3% A Analysis Period (min) 15 2712 South College 11/10/20122013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - AM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE 2013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - AM Condition Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Harvard & South College 11/10/2012 J- -+ "'). .f +- -, "" t I'" '. ~ .; Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations " it " it " ttit " ttit Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1.900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1678 1770 1624 1770 5055 1770 5061 Fit Permitted 0.67 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.10 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1240 1678 1328 1624 104 5055 183 5061 Volume (vph) 45 20 40 35 10 60 35 1570 65 60 2000 65 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 49 22 43 38 11 65 38 1707 71 65 2174 71 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 39 0 0 58 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 49 26 0 38 18 0 38 1776 0 65 2243 0 Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 88.2 84.4 91.8 86.2 Effective Green, g (s) 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 93.7 87.4 97.3 89.2 Actuated glC Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.78 0.73 0.81 0.74 Clearance Time (s) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 7.0 6.5 7.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 129 175 138 169 169 3682 256 3762 vIs Ratio Prot 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.35 cO.02 cO.44 vIs Ratio Perm cO.04 0.03 0.16 0.19 vlc Ratio 0.38 0.15 0.28 0.11 0.22 0.48 0.25 0.60 Uniform Delay, d1 50.1 48.9 49.6 48.7 5.3 6.8 3.8 7.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 0.4 1.1 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.7 Delay (s) 52.0 49.3 50.7 49.0 6.0 7.3 4.3 7.8 Level of Service D D D D A A A A Approach Delay (s) 50.5 49.5 7.3 7.7 Approach LOS D D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2712 South College 11/10/20122013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - PM Condition 2013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - PM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE Page 1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Queues 3: Harvard & South College 11/10/2012 ~ --+ .f +- "\ t \. + Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 49 65 38 76 38 1778 65 2245 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.29 0.25 0.31 0.18 0.46 0.28 0.57 Control Delay 52.4 22.9 49.9 16.9 5.1 8.4 6.0 8.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 52.4 22.9 49.9 16.9 5.1 8.4 6.0 8.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 36 16 28 8 4 184 7 268 Queue Length 95th (ft) 68 53 57 49 16 338 25 465 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1814 1323 1108 3372 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 412 554 416 552 212 3825 231 3960 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.14 0.18 0.46 0.28 0.57 Intersection Summary 2712 South College 11110120122013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - PM Condition Eric L Bracke PE, PTOE 2013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - PM Condition Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Harvard & East Frontage .» -Road + "'). .- +- "- "" t ". 11/10/2012 \. ~ ../ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 15 112 13 5 80 15 10 10 7 5 5 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 16 122 14 5 87 16 11 11 8 5 5 22 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 103 136 292 276 129 280 274 95 vC 1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 103 136 292 276 129 280 274 95 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 pOqueue free % 99 100 98 98 99 99 99 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1489 1448 634 623 921 650 623 962 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 152 109 29 33 Volume Left 16 5 11 5 Volume Right 14 16 8 22 cSH 1489 1448 685 822 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.04 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 3 3 Control Delay (s) 0.9 0.4 10.5 9.6 Lane LOS A A B A Approach Delay (s) 0.9 0.4 10.5 9.6 Approach LOS B A Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 22.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2712 South College 11/10/20122013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - PM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE 2013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - PM Condition Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Thunderbird & East Frontage Road 11/10/2012 --'" -. " .f +- '- ~ t /"" ~ ! .,; Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 5 30 15 10 47 10 20 5 15 10 10 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 33 16 11 51 11 22 5 16 11 11 22 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 62 49 157 135 41 149 138 57 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 62 49 157 135 41 149 138 57 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 pOqueue free % 100 99 97 99 98 99 99 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1541 1558 777 748 1030 795 745 1010 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 54 73 43 43 Volume Left 5 11 22 11 Volume Right 16 11 16 22 cSH 1541 1558 851 873 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.05 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 1 4 4 Control Delay (s) 0.8 1.1 9.5 9.3 Lane LOS A A A A Approach Delay (s) 0.8 1.1 9.5 9.3 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 16.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2712 South College 11/10/20122013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - PM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE 2013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - PM Condition Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Thunderbird & South College 11/10/2012 # -, t /'" \. + Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations 7' ttt. ~ Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 90 1520 35 70 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 98 1652 38 76 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Median storage veh) 0 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1823 570 1690 vC 1, stage 1 conf vol 1671 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 152 vCu, unblocked vol 1823 570 1690 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 pO queue free % 100 79 80 cM capacity (veh/h) 81 465 374 Direction, Lane # WB1 NB 1 NB2 NB3 SB 1 Volume Total 98 661 661 368 76 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 76 Volume Right 98 0 0 38 0 cSH 465 1700 1700 1700 374 Volume to Capacity 0.21 0.39 0.39 0.22 0.20 Queue Length 95th (ft) 20 0 0 0 19 Control Delay (s) 14.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.1 Lane LOS B C Approach Delay(s) 14.8 0.0 17.1 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2712 South College 11110120122013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - PM Condition Eric L. Bracke PE, PTOE 2013 TOTAL TRAFFIC - PM Condition Page 1