The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFOX GROVE - PDP - PDP130029 - REPORTS - TRAFFIC STUDYELB.Engineering, LLe Transportation .Engineering Solutions Transportation Jmpact5tud9 Fox Grove -Irelimina,:! Development ,Ian Fort Collins, Colorado June 201+ Fox Grove Preliminary Development Plan Transportation Impact Study Fort Collins, Colorado June 6, 2014 Prepared for: Mr. Les Kaplan Imago Enterprises 140 Palmer Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 Prepared by: Eric L. Bracke, P.E., P.T.O.E. 5401 Taylor Lane Fort Collins, CO 80528 Office:970-988-7551 ELBEngineering@lpbroadband.net This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization from ELB Engineering, LLC shall be without liability to ELB Engineering, LLC. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Introduction 1 II. Agency Discussions 1 ID. Existing Conditions 2 IV. Project Description 5 v. Traffic Projections 8 VI. Traffic Analysis 10 VII. Improvements 12 VIII. Multimodal Analysis 12 IX. Conclusions 15 List of Tables Table Page 1. LOS Definitions 2. Year 2013 Capacity Analysis 3. Trip Generation 4. 2018 Background Traffic Capacity Analysis 5. 2018 Total Traffic Capacity Analysis 5 5 7 11 11 Figures List of Figures Page 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Vicinity Map Existing Peak Hour Traffic Site Plan Trip Distribution Site Distributed Traffic Year 2018 Background Traffic Year 2018 Total Traffic Multimodal Evaluation Area 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 13 APPENDIX A. Base Assumptions/Scoping Form B. Traffic Counts C. HCM Capacity Analysis - Base Condition D. HCM Capacity Analysis - 2018 Total and Background E. HCM Capacity Analysis - 2018 Total and Background Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 1 1.0 Introduction This transportation impact study is a revision to the original study prepared in August, 2013 for the Fox Grove Preliminary Development Plan. The project is located on the eastern edge of the Fort Collins area. The project is situated between Mulberry (SH14 and Prospect Road) east of I-25. The site is currently in agricultural use and will abut to existing residential developments. The project will construct both single family units in two phase. This particular TIS only addresses Phase I – 66 SF units. Access to the site will be by connecting to Carriage Parkway where all traffic will head north to SH14. In the long term, Carriage Parkway is expected to connect to the I-25 frontage road and a collector roadway will connect southward to Prospect Road. Figure 1 on the following page is a vicinity map displaying the location of the project. 2.0 Agency Discussions Initial discussions with City staff indicated that an intermediate study traffic study as described in Chapter 4 of the Larimer County Urban Area Streets Standards (LCUASS) would be appropriate for this particular development. The project is considered green field development and there are no recently approved projects in the area that need to be considered in the analysis. There are no perceived capacity or infrastructure deficiencies in the immediate area that are of concern at the on- set of this study. Appendix A contains the form (Attachment A), which outlines the agreed to scope of the study. Site NORTH Figure 1: Vicinity Map 3.0 Existing Conditions 3.1. Current Traffic Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 2 Recent peak hour turning movements at the key intersection were obtained as part of this study. The counts were conducted in August 2013. Since the counts are less than a year old, they can still be considered valid for this revision to the TIS. Morning and afternoon peak hour traffic counts at the key intersections are displayed in Figure 2. The peak hour counts were conducted in 15 minute increments for the period 7:00-9:00 AM and 4:00-6:00 PM. The actual peak hour was determined by the highest consecutive 15- minute periods. The peak hours were determined to be 7:15 to 8:15 AM and 4:30- 5:30 PM. The raw information regarding the turning movements is provided in Appendix B. 29/28 0/0 0/4 Mulberry (SH14) SITE Carriage Parkway Camino del Mundo 6/36 313/629 21/70 81/54 0/0 8/11 0/2 618/390 2/8 NORTH Figure 2: Existing Peak Hour Turning Movements (AM/PM) 3.2 Current Street System The actual site is currently in agricultural use. Directly to the north of the site is the Sun Flower neighborhood and is advertised as an “active retirement community”. The Clydesdale neighborhood is to the northeast of the site, connecting via Carriage Parkway and is a single family detached housing neighborhood. Site - looking west Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 3 Carriage Parkway is a collector roadway, approximately 50 feet in width with no striping (bike lanes, center stripe, etc…). The pavement is in good condition and has a posted speed limit of 30 mph. This roadway will be the principle access to the development until such time it is extended. The Fort Collins Master Street Plan shows Carriage Parkway being extended to the south to make the connection to Prospect Road. Discussions regarding its future terminus also have been to extend the roadway to the west to connect to the I-25 frontage road. The intersection of Carriage Parkway and SH 14 is controlled with an 8-phase traffic signal maintained and operated by the Colorado Department of Transportation. Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 4 An emergency deeded access is Sun Chase Road through the Sun Flower Development. Sun Chase is a 32-foot roadway that makes a fairly direct connection from Carriage Parkway to SH 14. The intersection of Sun Chase and SH 14 is a limited movement (RI/RO) controlled by a raised median. The I-25 frontage road connects Prospect Road to State Highway 14. The roadway has a 26-foot cross section and a posted speed limit of 30 mph on the southern portion and a 45 mph speed limit on the northern portion. The pavement is in good condition. Sun Chase – look south Carriage Parkway looking northeast From an active modes of transportation perspective, the area is not served or connected to any on-street bikes lanes or multi-use trails. The area is also not served by any transit system. 3.3 Current Traffic Conditions Capacity analyses were performed at the key intersection to determine if existing deficiencies exist on the roadway network. The analyses followed the procedures of the Highway Capacity Manual 2000. 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 signalized and unsignalized intersections. Table 2 displays the results of the analyses. The intersection of Mulberry and Carriage Parkway currently operates at acceptable levels of service during the peak hours. The worksheets from the analyses can be found in Appendix C. Table 1 Level of Service Definitions Level of Service Signalized Intersection Average Total Delay (seconds/vehicle) Unsignalized Intersection Average Total Delay (seconds/vehicle) A <10 <10 B >10 and ≤20 >10 and ≤15 C >20 and ≤35 >15 and ≤25 D >35 and ≤55 >25 and ≤ 35 E >55 and≤ 80 >35 and ≤50 F >80 >50 Table 2 Existing Traffic – Capacity Analysis Year 2013 Existing Traffic AM PM Intersection Movement LOS Delay(sec/vehicle) LOS Delay(sec/vehicle) SH14/Carriage Parkway EBL B 15.4 B 12.6 (Traffic Signal control) EBT B 16.6 D 38.1 EBR B 13.2 B 13.3 WBL B 12.2 B 15.7 WBT D 37.8 B 18.6 WBR B 13.2 B 13.4 NBL B 14.5 B 14.8 NB T/R B 16.3 B 16.6 SBL B 15.8 B 16.0 SB T/R B 17.4 B 17.7 OVERALL C 28.7 C 27.8 4.0 Project Description 4.1 Project The project consists of a two-phase development where the first phase will be the construction of 66-single family dwelling units. Shortly following phase I, 49 single family dwelling units would be constructed as phase II. The project is directly adjacent to two existing neighborhood; Sunflower, a retirement community, and the Clydesdale neighborhood consisting of single family residential. Access to the site is via Carriage Parkway which leads to SH14. Additional access is unlikely through the Sunflower neighborhood since this is a development with private roadways. Phase II is only Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 5 presented for informational purposes. The analysis of this impact study is for Phase I only. A preliminary site plan is displayed in Figure 3. NORTH Figure 3: Site Plan 4.2 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 210, single family, was used in this analysis. There was no trip reductions assumed since the area is not served by transit, bike facilities, or nearby major traffic generators. Table 1 below summarizes the proposed trip generation for the project. For the entire project, during the morning peak hour, 86 trip ends can be expected and 117 trip ends Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 6 can be expected from the project during the afternoon peak hours. Phase I produces 50 morning trip ends and 66 afternoon trip ends. Table 3 – Trip Generation AM Rate AM Trips AM Rate AM Trips PM Rate PM Trips PM Rate PM Trips Use ITE CODE Size Daily Rate Daily TripsININOUT OUTININOUTOUT Project Phase I Single Family Residential 210 66.0 9.57 632 0.19 13 0.56 37 0.64 42 0.37 24 Phase II Single Family Residential 210 49.0 9.57 469 0.19 9 0.56 27 0.64 31 0.37 18 Total 1101 22 64 74 43 4.3 Trip Distribution Trip distribution is the process of determining where the trips are coming to and from the site. The distribution was based on the current distribution of the current traffic, the population center of Fort Collins, and engineering judgment. The distribution is not expected to change during the long term. The short-term distribution for the project is displayed in Figure 4. Site distributed traffic is shown in Figure 5. SITE NORTH SH14 0% 10% 100% 90% Carriage Parkway Figure 4: Trip Distribution Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 7 Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 8 SITE Carriage Parkway Camino del Mundo 10/40 35/20 5/5 Mulberry (SH14) 5/5 NORTH Figure 5: Site Distributed Traffic, Phase I(AM/PM) 5.0 Traffic Projections Background traffic for the year 2018 was estimated by utilizing the Colorado Department of Transportation traffic projection tool. Based on the analysis of CDOT, it is assumed that this particular stretch of SH14 will grow at a rate of 3% per year. This particular area has seen growth in recent years in both the industrial and residential land uses so it seems reasonable to project such a high growth rate. The same growth rate was applied to the minor street to provide conservative analyses. Background traffic for the year 2018 is displayed in Figure 6. Site-generated traffic was then added to the background traffic to determine the total traffic volumes at the key intersection. Total traffic for the year 2018 is displayed in Figure 7. 35/35 5/5 5/5 Mulberry (SH14) SITE Camino del Mundo 10/40 360/725 25/80 10/65 5/5 10/15 5/5 710/ 4 50 5/10 Carriage Parkway NORTH Figure 6: Year 2018 Background Traffic (AM/PM) Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 9 Mulberry (SH14) SITE Carriage Parkway Camino del Mundo 10/40 360/725 35/120 45/85 5/5 15/20 5/5 710/4 5 0 10/15 35/35 5/5 5/5 NORTH Figure 7: Year 2018 Total Traffic (AM/PM) 6.0 Traffic Analysis Capacity analysis was performed at the key intersections for both the background traffic as well as the total traffic. Table 4 displays the results of the background traffic analysis and Table 5 shows the results of the total traffic analysis to account for the project. As can be seen from the tables, the key intersection continues to operate at acceptable levels of service. Implementation of the project will not have an adverse effect on the operation of the intersections. The analyses followed the procedures of the Highway Capacity Manual. Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 10 Table 4 Capacity Analyses – 2018 Background Traffic Year 2018 Background Traffic AM PM Intersection Movement LOS Delay(sec/vehicle) LOS Delay(sec/vehicle) SH14/Carriage Parkway EBL B 15.0 B 12.5 (Traffic Signal control) EBT B 14.5 D 43.5 EBR B 11.2 B 12.8 WBL B 10.4 B 17.9 WBT D 38.6 B 19.6 WBR B 11.1 B 13.4 NBL B 17.0 B 1.1 NB T/R B 18.5 B 19.4 SBL B 17.0 B 19.5 SB T/R B 18.6 B 21.3 OVERALL C 29.1 C 31.0 Table 5 Capacity Analyses – 2018 Total Traffic Year 2018 Total Traffic AM PM Intersection Movement LOS Delay(sec/vehicle) LOS Delay(sec/vehicle) SH14/Carriage Parkway EBL B 16.7 B 12.7 (Traffic Signal control) EBT B 15.9 D 46.7 EBR B 12.3 B 13.4 WBL B 11.6 B 18.1 WBT D 41.5 B 19.5 WBR B 12.2 B 13.3 NBL B 16.8 B 17.7 NB T/R B 18.8 B 19.8 SBL B 18.3 B 19.7 SB T/R B 20.0 B 21.5 OVERALL C 30.7 C 31.9 Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 11 Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 12 7.0 Improvements 7.1. Traffic Signals Traffic signals are never installed until a warrant is satisfied under the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.. The Peak Hour Warrant, is usually the best indication of a whether or not a traffic signal will be needed in the future. Based on a review of the criteria, no new traffic signals will be required with this project. The key intersection is currently signalized and operates effectively. 7.2 Auxiliary Lanes Auxiliary lanes are currently in place at the key intersections – left turns and right turn lanes on all approaches to the intersection. The storage lengths and tapers meet the State Highway Access Code. Based on this review, no new auxiliary lanes are required as part of this project. 8.0. Multi-Modal Evaluation 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. The area of interest for the alternative modes of transportation is shown below in Figure 8. site Figure 8: Multimodal Evaluation Area 8.1 Pedestrian Level of Service The project area was evaluated for compliance with the pedestrian level of service standards. The site is located in a district noted as “other” within the Fort Collins Pedestrian Plan. There are no primary destinations such as schools or shopping areas within the immediate area. The project will construct sidewalks within the project and connect to the sidewalk system within the Sun Flower and Clydesdale neighborhoods. Directness – There will be direct sidewalk connections to the north and east of the site. The sidewalks will meet or exceed the city standard. Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 13 Continuity – The sidewalk system that is and will be in place has good continuity to the surrounding neighborhoods. As the area developments, future connections will be made to the east and south of the site. Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 14 Street Crossings – All street crossings are of low volume, low speed residential streets. No specific crossing treatments are needed. Visual Interest and Amenity – The area has been recently developed and in good condition and can be considered visually appealing. Security – The sidewalks in the area are lit and good sight distances are available. 8.2 Bicycles Level of Service In this area, the project needs to meet the “base line minimum” LOS for bicycle level of service. The criteria are met when the project connects to at least a north-south or east- west bicycle facility. Carriage Parkway is a collector street that is intended to have bike lanes. However, it was developed in the County and the bike lanes were never striped. When the striping occurs, the criteria will be met for the Fox Grove Development. 8.3 Transit Level of Service According to the LUCASS Multimodal Level of Service Manual, transit level of service for the City of Fort Collins is based on the routes and service levels planned for the year 2015. However, the Manual was written in 1997 and is significantly outdated and no longer considered valid. The transit LOS analyses are therefore based on the 2010 Transfort Strategic Plan. The analysis is based on 4 factors – hours of weekday service, weekday frequency of service, travel time factor, and peak load factor. There is no transit service in the area or planned for the area. Fox Grove - PDP ELB Engineering, LLC Transportation Impact Study - Revised 5401 Taylor Lane June 2014 Fort Collins, CO 80528 15 9.0 Conclusion This TIS assessed the impacts associated with The Fox Grove Development project located in eastern Fort Collins, Colorado. The project consists of constructing single family and multi-family dwelling units on a site that is currently in agricultural use. Based on the analyses, investigations, and findings documented in the various sections of this Transportation Impact Study, the following can be concluded. o Current operation is acceptable at all of the key intersection. o Operation at the key intersection will be acceptable under full build-out of the project. o For the entire Phase I project, and without assuming any trip reductions, during the morning peak hour, 50 trip ends can be expected and 66 trip ends can be expected from the project during the afternoon peak hours. o No new traffic signals or signal modifications will be required with the construction of the project. o No auxiliary lanes will need to be constructed with the project. o Multi-modal LOS standards for bicycles and pedestrians can be achieved with the project. At some point in time, bike lanes should be striped on Carriage Parkway. o The project is feasible from a traffic engineering perspective. 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. fox tArove?tJ? Revi5ed - tran5portation Impact ,AnalLj5i5 Appendix A fU} fnqineerinq UC June 2011 Chapter 4 - Attachments Attachment A Iransportatton impact Study Base Assumptions Project Information , Project Name q::e:,x. ~ 0:?~16 PlY:; - p~ s e: 1. (5.r::. 12.esi.cP~1I. f,AL) Project Location - .::A-F' ~:>j -'-- ..:fC>\z:j ,<;;;::;'C.-,L_i1~\.s sio tic,Gr;,2P:?-/" . TIS Assumptions ~'--- Type of Study Full: trne~te~ Study Area Boundaries North: tltAJ ILL South: East: {Arr 'f. .~", ~. P.r IL ." West: .:::r-z s; r-:~D"'+;'I.<:; Study Years Short Range: ';?oi ~ r Long Range: Future Traffic Growth Rate L'-nO/ / Nt:lJ?O (2.A,1::5 I Study Intersections 1. All access drives 5. 2'SH-l';'~r/.~U..l/Y':---t l~Pi 6. .,J. ., £.~t +1' \. . 1~er--ir: ~ -<->""4~ .~.•h =6- ( 7. 4. i 8. Time Period for Study AM(7 :OO-~,;.o.O)1 p~~6:0e I Sat Noon: Trip Generation Rates ~ Trip Adjustment Factors Passby: l-h~ I Captive Market: Overall Trip Distribution c)S<- ?' 0 -"'-.- l=. ~I ..sEE ATTACHED SKETCH Mode Split Assumptions t--~c.;-J~- Committed Roadway Improvements r-JQ,J= Other Traffic Studies I-I (:;i--ii:::, Areas Requiring Special Study SLrf\.L::,r -I:.v a..rv.-I-re> { /lCC.~Jf -1--0 r'Pru". (I..l- e. (!~MU A.! i 1:;],. AJ..,.--.[.I,... 0 C s ,(-c '.""lL ~ l: II..<. •• v.74. U r). Date:7/2~ ;J3 ,.. C~/"-~ Traffic Enginc,"C:;:?f ff;~ Local Entity Engineer: --I-tL..........,c==--../~~:.....=:=-+----~7c..,1~/-=:;'-'>.s-.=•. ..,/f--L-1 ~3"-- _ 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 fox t1rove PCP Revl5ed - fran5portatlon Impact AnalL/515 AppendiX B tL.l3 tnqlneerlnq UC June 2011 All Traffic Data Services, Inc. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 303-216-2439 File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : #1 MULBERRY&CARRIAGEAM : 00000000 : 8/8/2013 : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 CARRIAGE PKWY MULBERRY CARRIAGE PKWY MULBERRY Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Rght I Thru I Left I Other Rght I Thru I Left I Other Rght I Thru I Left I Other Rght I Thru I Left I Other Int. Total I 07:00 AM 4 0 1 0 0 120 1 0 2 0 17 0 4 59 3 0 211 07:15 AM 4 0 0 0 0 168 0 0 2 0 18 0 5 84 1 0 282 07:30 AM 5 0 0 0 0 170 0 0 3 0 25 0 5 90 3 1 302 07:45 AM 11 0 0 0 0 153 1 0 2 0 17 0 9 77 2 0 272 Total 24 0 1 0 0 611 2 0 9 0 77 0 23 310 9 1 1067 08:00 AM 9 0 0 0 0 127 1 0 1 0 21 0 2 62 0 0 223 08:15 AM 6 0 0 0 0 122 0 0 0 0 20 0 12 79 4 0 243 08:30 AM 10 0 0 0 0 128 1 0 4 0 18 0 9 74 5 0 249 08:45 AM 8 0 1 0 0 86 0 0 5 0 26 0 3 76 2 0 207 Total 33 0 1 0 0 463 2 0 10 0 85 0 26 291 11 0 922 Grand Total 1 57 0 2 ~I 0 1074 4 ~I 19 0 162 ~I49 601 20 o.~ 1 1989 Apprch % 96.6 0 3.4 0 99.6 0.4 10.5 0 89.5 7.3 89.6 3 Total % 2.9 0 0.1 0 54 0.2 1 0 8.1 2.5 30.2 1 0.1 t"'t\VVY Out ~ Total C]Q] 59 c::=::zm 57 0 2 0 ~ht Thru 1 Left 4 Other ~~ ~~ ~C\J 0 -..t3-J .t T U -tr 0 ~o ",s. ~B-g ~:::.c-l ----t North f-2~ -i~ '" ~~ _to f- Ol_ 18/8/201307:00 AM 1 .•• n .c 8/8/201308:45 AM +~ r -~ Class 1 -.,. ~-i o~ :::lC\J ~(5 ;; a g. .•.•g. ~o g~ ~ Left Thru T Raht ~ Other 162 0 19 0 ~~~ Out In Total CARRIAGE PKWY All Traffic Data Services,lnc. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 303-216-2439 File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : #1 MULBERRY&CARRIAGEAM : 00000000 : 8/8/2013 :2 07:15 AM 4 0 0 0 4 0 168 0 0 168 2 0 18 0 20 5 84 1 0 90 282 07:30 AM 5 0 0 0 5 0 170 0 0 170 3 0 25 0 28 5 90 3 1 99 302 07:45 AM 11 0 0 0 11 0 153 1 0 154 2 0 17 0 19 9 77 2 0 88 272 08:00 AM 9 0 0 0 9 0 127 1 0 128 1 0 21 0 22 2 62 0 0 64 223 Total Volume 29 0 0 0 29 0 618 2 0 620 8 0 81 0 89 21 313 6 1 341 1079 % App. Tolal 100 0 0 0 0 99.7 0.3 0 9 0 91 0 6.2 91.8 1.8 0.3 PHF .659 .000 .000 .000 .659 .000 .909 .500 .000 .912 .667 .000 .810 .000 .795 .583 .869 .500 .250 .861 .893 Peak Hour Data I-ro~ 00 ~ <0 .ii3-.J -.1 T U ::J ~o -0 ~s. <M.'>" .c-. North f--;!'" E~ I- 2a; NE Peak Hour Begins at 07:15 AM ~3" ::;: n Class 1 +~'" r 0 8•.~~ .. ~Q; 6 Q '!::1 J ~g =::~ 0 All Traffic Data Services,lnc. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 303-216-2439 File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : #1 MULBERRY&CARRIAGEPM : 00000000 : 8/8/2013 : 1 roups Printed- lass 1 CARRIAGE PKWY MULBERRY CARRIAGE PKWY MULBERRY Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Rght I Thru I Left I Other Rght I Thru I Left I Other Rght I Thru I Left I Other Rght I Thru I Left I Other In!. Total I 04:00 PM 1 0 0 0 1 103 1 0 1 0 8 0 10 124 12 0 261 04:15 PM 9 0 1 0 0 102 0 0 1 0 17 0 15 129 9 0 283 04:30 PM 6 0 0 0 0 97 1 0 3 0 19 0 19 155 6 0 306 04:45 PM 6 0 3 0 1 96 5 0 3 0 13 0 16 140 7 0 290 Total 22 0 4 0 2 398 7 0 8 0 57 0 60 548 34 0 1140 G C 05:00 PM 10 0 0 0 0 105 1 0 2 0 17 0 16 161 14 0 326 05:15 PM 6 0 1 0 1 92 1 0 3 0 5 0 19 173 9 0 310 05:30 PM 3 0 2 0 0 103 0 0 1 0 21 0 20 146 10 0 306 05:45 PM 4 0 0 0 0 108 2 0 3 0 15 0 13 108 13 2 268 Total 23 0 3 0 1 408 4 0 9 0 58 0 68 588 46 2 1210 Grand Total 1 45 Apprch % 86.5 Total % 1.9 o 7 o o 13.0.5 3 ~I 3 806 0.4 98.3 0.1 34.3 11 1.3 0.5 o~1 12.17 9 0.7 o o o 87.115 4.1 9 80 5.9 3.4 o.~ 1 0.1 2350 Out ~ Total ~ 52 ~ 45 0 7 0 ,ht Thru 1 Left 4 Other -~'" 19M ~ ~~-g ~-..J -.t . North T U ~w -zr i ~o ~c ~~ s~ f--:::r 00 -~ "'" ~f- "- .s: 18/818/8/2013 201305:04:45 00 PM PM 1 r eo> ~o ~~ "a ," ~ 5l'"I ,r-~= -~ a: "OF 6'" "'~ a '" Class 1 Q ~o zr i-"gg~ ,S. i ~ Left Thru T Roht ~ Other 115 0 17 0 ~dmom Out In Total CARRIAGE PKWY All Traffic Data Services,lnc. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 303-216-2439 File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : #1 MULBERRY&CARRIAGEPM : 00000000 : 8/8/2013 :2 04:30 PM 6 0 0 0 6 0 97 1 0 98 3 0 19 0 22 19 155 6 0 180 306 04:45 PM 6 0 3 0 9 1 96 5 0 102 3 0 13 0 16 16 140 7 0 163 290 05:00 PM 10 0 0 0 10 0 105 1 0 106 2 0 17 0 19 16 161 14 0 191 326 05:15 PM 6 0 1 0 7 1 92 1 0 94 3 0 5 0 8 19 173 9 0 201 310 Total Volume 28 0 4 0 32 2 390 8 0 400 11 0 54 0 65 70 629 36 0 735 1232 % ADD.Total 87.5 a 12.5 a 0.5 97.5 2 a 16.9 a 83.1 a 9.5 85.6 4.9 a PHF .700 .000 .333 .000 .800 .500 .929 .400 .000 .943 .917 .000 .711 .000 .739 .921 .909 .643 .000 .914 .945 Out ~ Total ~ 32 C2Q] :t 28 Thru 1 0 Left 4 4 Other 0 Peak Hour Data -~ ~ 1i5--.1 U ~~ I-ON ,"~ 0 -' T zr -", ISB fo_ "~ '" 1:I- ----' I Peak Hour Begins North at 04:30 PM I t--"'"2~ -W ; ~~0'" ".<:: r 0 ~ ~ n Class 1 .,r-g>. 00 6" -" t-o~ - a i-; '" 00 (.<5 :: ~o 5' t~ ~ ~ T ~ Left Thru Raht Other 54 0 11 0 I I c:Out ::1ID~c:In ::Total :@J r.ARRIAGE PKWY fox urove PCP Revi5ed - tran5portation Impact A1allj5i5 AppendilC. C u»Cnqineerinq UC June 2011 HeM Slgnalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Mulberry (SH14) & Camino del Munda 8/10/2013 ,} -+ ""). .f +- -, "\ f ~ \.. ! ..I Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations '\ t ." '\ t ." '\ t. '\ t. Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 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 4.0 4.0 Lane Uti!. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.87 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583 1770 1683 1770 1621 Fit Permitted 0.14 1.00 1.00 0.43 1.00 1.00 0.69 1.00 0.75 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 269 1863 1583 810 1863 1583 1282 1683 1394 1621 Volume (vph) 6 313 21 2 618 5 54 5 8 5 5 29 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) 7 340 23 2 672 5 59 5 9 5 5 32 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 14 0 0 3 0 6 0 0 22 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 7 340 9 2 672 2 59 8 0 5 15 0 Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 26.8 26.2 26.2 26.8 26.2 26.2 23.5 21.5 20.7 20.1 Effective Green, g (s) 29.8 27.7 27.7 29.8 27.7 27.7 26.5 23.0 23.7 21.6 Actuated glC Ratio 0.42 0.39 0.39 0.42 0.39 0.39 0.37 0.32 0.33 0.30 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 158 728 618 369 728 618 503 546 477 494 vis Ratio Prot cO.OO 0.18 0.00 cO.36 cO.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 vis Ratio Perm 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 cO.04 0.00 vlc Ratio 0.04 0.47 0.01 0.01 0.92 0.00 0.12 0.01 0.01 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 15.3 16.1 13.2 12.2 20.6 13.2 14.4 16.3 15.8 17.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.0 17.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Delay (s) 15.4 16.6 13.2 12.2 37.8 13.2 14.5 16.3 15.8 17.4 Level of Service B B B B D B B B B B Approach Delay (s) 16.3 37.6 14.8 17.2 Approach LOS B D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 70.9 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Fox Grove POP 8/10/2013 Existing - AM traffic ELB Ennineerinq. LLC Synchro 6 Report Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Mulberry (SH14) & Camino del Munda 8/10/2013 ,}- ~ ~ +- -, "\ f r \. --. + .I Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations " t ." " t ." " 1+ " 1+ Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 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 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.87 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583 1770 1666 1770 1623 Fit Permitted 0.33 1.00 1.00 0.14 1.00 1.00 0.69 1.00 0.75 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 614 1863 1583 270 1863 1583 1284 1666 1390 1623 Volume (vph) 36 629 70 8 390 2 54 5 11 4 5 28 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) 39 684 76 9 424 2 59 5 12 4 5 30 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 46 0 0 1 0 8 0 0 21 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 39 684 30 9 424 1 59 9 0 4 14 0 Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 28.1 26.8 26.8 26.7 26.1 26.1 23.4 21.4 20.6 20.0 Effective Green, g (s) 31.1 28.3 28.3 29.7 27.6 27.6 26.4 22.9 23.6 21.5 Actuated glC Ratio 0.44 0.40 0.40 0.42 0.39 0.39 0.37 0.32 0.33 0.30 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 313 738 627 156 720 612 499 534 471 489 vis Ratio Prot cO.OO cO.37 0.00 0.23 cO.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 vis Ratio Perm 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.00 cO.04 0.00 vlc Ratio 0.12 0.93 0.05 0.06 0.59 0.00 0.12 0.02 0.01 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 12.4 20.6 13.3 15.6 17.4 13.4 14.7 16.6 16.0 17.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 17.6 0.0 0.2 1.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 Delay (s) 12.6 38.1 13.3 15.7 18.6 13.4 14.8 16.6 16.0 17.7 Level of Service B D B B B B B B B B Approach Delay (s) 34.5 18.5 15.2 17.5 Approach LOS C B B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 71.4 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Fox Grove PDP 8/10/2013 Existing - PM traffic ELB Engineering, LLC Synchro 6 Report Page 1 fox urove PCP Revl5ed - fran5portatlon /mpad ltna/Lf515 Appendix f U[3 tnqlneerlnq UC June 20/1 fox urove PCP ReV/5ed - fran5poriation Impact h!allj515 Appendix D [U3 [nqlneerlnq, LLC June 20/4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Mulberry (SH14) & Camino del Munda 8/12/2013 ,}- ""\- of +- -, "\ t I'" \. -+ + ~ Movement E8L E8T E8R W8L W8T W8R N8L N8T N8R S8L S8T S8R Lane Configurations 'I + f 'I + " 'I 'ft 'I it Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 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 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.87 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583 1770 1671 1770 1616 Fit Permitted 0.13 1.00 1.00 0.41 1.00 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.75 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 243 1863 1583 765 1863 1583 1358 1671 1392 1616 Volume (vph) 10 360 25 5 710 5 10 5 10 5 5 35 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) 11 391 27 5 772 5 11 5 11 5 5 38 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 15 0 0 3 0 8 0 0 27 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 391 12 5 772 2 11 8 0 5 16 0 Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 29.7 29.2 29.2 29.7 29.2 29.2 18.5 18.0 18.5 18.0 Effective Green, g (s) 32.7 30.7 30.7 32.7 30.7 30.7 21.5 19.5 21.5 19.5 Actuated glC Ratio 0.47 0.44 0.44 0.47 0.44 0.44 0.31 0.28 0.31 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 157 815 692 385 815 692 428 464 437 449 vIs Ratio Prot cO.OO 0.21 0.00 cO.41 cO.OO 0.00 0.00 cO.01 vIs Ratio Perm 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 vlc Ratio 0.07 0.48 0.02 0.01 0.95 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 14.8 14.1 11.2 10.4 19.0 11.1 17.0 18.4 16.9 18.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 19.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 Delay (s) 15.0 14.5 11.2 10.4 38.6 11.1 17.0 18.5 17.0 18.6 Level of Service 8 8 8 8 0 8 8 8 8 8 Approach Delay (s) 14.3 38.2 17.9 18.5 Approach LOS 8 0 8 8 Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 29.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 70.2 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Fox Grove POP 8/12/20132018 Background - AM traffic EL8 Engineering, LLC Synchro 6 Report Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Mulberry (SH14) & Camino del Munda 8/12/2013 ..J- --to- 't • +- '- -, t ;-- \. + .."I Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1i t " 'i t " 'i it 'i it Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 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 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.87 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583 1770 1650 1770 1616 Fit Permitted 0.28 1.00 1.00 0.12 1.00 1.00 0.66 1.00 0.74 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 525 1863 1583 221 1863 1583 1225 1650 1385 1616 Volume (vph) 40 725 80 10 450 5 65 5 15 5 5 35 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) 43 788 87 11 489 5 71 5 16 5 5 38 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 49 0 0 3 0 11 0 0 27 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 43 788 38 11 489 2 71 10 0 5 16 0 Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 35.8 33.7 33.7 32.8 32.2 32.2 26.0 23.0 21.2 20.6 Effective Green, g (s) 38.8 35.2 35.2 35.8 33.7 33.7 29.0 24.5 24.2 22.1 Actuated glC Ratio 0.49 0.44 0.44 0.45 0.42 0.42 0.36 0.31 0.30 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 311 821 697 140 786 668 475 506 430 447 vis Ratio Prot cO.01 cO.42 0.00 0.26 cO.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 vis Ratio Perm 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.00 cO.05 0.00 vlc Ratio 0.14 0.96 0.05 0.08 0.62 0.00 0.15 0.02 0.01 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 12.3 21.7 12.8 17.7 18.1 13.4 16.9 19.3 19.5 21.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 21.8 0.0 0.2 1.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 Delay (s) 12.5 43.5 12.8 17.9 19.6 13.4 17.1 19.4 19.5 21.3 Level of Service B 0 B B B B B B B C Approach Delay (s) 39.1 19.5 17.6 21.1 Approach LOS 0 B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 31.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 79.9 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Fox Grove POP 8/12/20132018 background - PM traffic ELB Engineering, LLC - -- Synchro 6 Report Page 1 fox urove PCP ReV/5ed - fran5poriation Impad Ana11j5/5 Appendix f ELf} tnqineerinq Lie June 2011 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Mulberry (SH14) & Camino del Munda 6/5/2014 ~ -+ • of ..•.... '- "\ t ,. ~ + 4' Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ~ ; 7' ~ ; 7' ~ It ~ It Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 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 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.87 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583 1770 1635 1770 1616 Fit Permitted 0.29 1.00 1.00 0.12 1.00 1.00 0.66 1.00 0.74 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 541 1863 1583 217 1863 1583 1231 1635 1378 1616 Volume (vph) 40 725 120 15 450 5 85 5 20 5 5 35 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) 43 788 130 16 489 5 92 5 22 5 5 38 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 73 0 0 3 0 15 0 0 28 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 43 788 57 16 489 2 92 12 0 5 15 0 Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 35.8 33.7 33.7 34.2 32.9 32.9 26.1 23.1 21.5 20.8 Effective Green, g (s) 38.8 35.2 35.2 37.2 34.4 34.4 29.1 24.6 24.5 22.3 Actuated glC Ratio 0.48 0.44 0.44 0.46 0.43 0.43 0.36 0.30 0.30 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 315 812 690 154 793 674 473 498 429 446 vIs Ratio Prot cO.01 cO.42 0.00 0.26 cO.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 vIs Ratio Perm 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.00 cO.06 0.00 vlc Ratio 0.14 0.97 0.08 0.10 0.62 0.00 0.19 0.02 0.01 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 12.5 22.3 13.3 17.8 18.1 13.3 17.5 19.7 19.7 21.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 24.4 0.1 0.3 1.4 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 Delay (s) 12.7 46.7 13.4 18.1 19.5 13.3 17.7 19.8 19.7 21.5 Level of Service B 0 B B B B B B B C Approach Delay (s) 40.7 19.4 18.2 21.3 Approach LOS 0 B B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 31.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.8 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Fox Grove POP - Revised 6/5/20142018 TOTAL - PM traffic ELB Engineering, LLC Synchro 6 Report Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Mulberry (SH14) & Camino del Munda 6/5/2014 .,)- ~ ,. .f +- '- ~ t I'" '. + .; Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ~ ; r' ~ ; r' ~ ~ ~ ~ Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 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 4.0 4.0 Lane Uti!. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.87 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583 1770 1650 1770 1616 Fit Permitted 0.12 1.00 1.00 0.40 1.00 1.00 0.68 1.00 0.74 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 224 1863 1583 752 1863 1583 1270 1650 1385 1616 Volume (vph) 10 360 35 10 710 5 45 5 15 5 5 35 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) 11 391 38 11 772 5 49 5 16 5 5 38 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 21 0 0 3 0 11 0 0 27 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 391 17 11 772 2 49 10 0 5 16 0 Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt pm+pt Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 32.3 31.8 31.8 32.3 31.8 31.8 23.7 21.7 20.7 20.2 Effective Green, g (s) 35.3 33.3 33.3 35.3 33.3 33.3 26.7 23.2 23.7 21.7 Actuated glC Ratio 0.46 0.44 0.44 0.46 0.44 0.44 0.35 0.30 0.31 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 144 811 689 374 811 689 466 500 439 458 vIs Ratio Prot cO.OO 0.21 0.00 cO.41 cO.OO 0.01 0.00 0.01 vIs Ratio Perm 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 cO.03 0.00 vlc Ratio 0.08 0.48 0.02 0.03 0.95 0.00 0.11 0.02 0.01 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 16.5 15.4 12.3 11.6 20.8 12.2 16.7 18.7 18.3 19.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 20.7 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 Delay (s) 16.7 15.9 12.3 11.6 41.5 12.2 16.8 18.8 18.3 20.0 Level of Service B B B B 0 B B B B B Approach Delay (s) 15.6 40.9 17.4 19.8 Approach LOS B 0 B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 30.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.5 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Fox Grove POP Revised 6/5/20142018 TOTAL - AM traffic ELB Engineering, LLC Synchro 6 Report Page 1