The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTHE MARKET PLACE PUD - PRELIMINARY - 21-89 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - TRAFFIC STUDY (2)THE MARKET PLACE SITE ACCESS STUDY' FORT COLLINS, C:OLORADO APR, I L 1989 Prepared for: Rosenbaum/Dean 101 North Cascade, Suite 400 Colorado Springs, CO 80903 Prepared by: MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E. 3413 Banyan Avenue Loveland, Colorado 80538 Phone 303-669-2061 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Market Place is a. proposed commercial use develop- ment located east of South College Avenue and north of Troutman Parki,aay in Fort Collins, Colorado. This traffic impact study involved the steps of trip generation, trip distribution, trip assignment, capacity analysis, traffic signal t,aar•r•ant analysis, tr•aff i c signal progression analysis, and accident analysis. This study assessed the impacts of the Market Place on the existing (short range - 1991) and future (long range - 201n) street system in the vicinity of the proposed development. As a result of this analysis, the follotrainq is concluded: - The development of the Market Place is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. At full development of the Market Place as proposed, approximately 6,400 trip ends will be generated at this site on a typical vleekda.y. Some of these t�,li 1 1 be from the background traff i c already passing by this site. The land to the north will generate approximately 3,100 additional daily trip ends when it is developed. - Using the existing peak hour traffic volumes, acceptable operation exists at the College/Troutman and Troutman/Pavillion access intersections. - By 19'1, given the existing traffic and proposed development of the Market Place, acceptable operation talill exist at all key intersections. The geometric requirement on Troutman will be minimal given the existing location of the Pav i 1 1 i on Access. This constraint may necessitate side - by -side left -turn lanes at this location. ' - At full development of the Market Place, the land to the north, and considerable other development (east of JFK Parka. -!ay) in this part of Fort Collins, acceptable operation ' is achievable at the College/Troutman intersection with double left -turn lanes in the southbound direction on College Avenue. Left -turn exits at the Troutman/Access intersection u,lill experience some unacceptable operation during the peak hours. This will not likely last for very long. The delayed vehicles !,,ii 1 1 be on -site and v1i 1 1 not nega.t i vel y affect the public street system. It is anticipated that ,JFK, Parkvlay 1 1 1 serve as a recirculation street east of College Avenue, reducing some of the left -turn requirements on Troutman. - With proper traffic control and geometric=, the ' accident rate should be minimal for an urban condition. - The site plan acce=_.=_. for the Market Place is in accordance with the South College Avenue Access Control Plan. �I r I I. INTRODUCTION This site access study addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near a proposed development known hereinafter as the Market Place. It i located east of South College Avenue and north of Troutman Parkway in Fort Collins, Colorado. This study addresses the traffic impacts. at two levels of development: 1) a short range future C1s91) which includes the development of the Market Place as proposed, and 2) a long range future (2010) t,ii th development of the Market Place and additional commercial development between the Market Place and the Fountainhead to the north. During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project planning consultant (Yergensen, Obring, & Whittaker, P.C., Architects) and the Fort Collins. Traffic Engineering Department. This study conforms to the format set forth in the Fort Collins Traffic Impact Study Guidelines. The study involved the following steps: - Collect physical, traffic and development data. - Perform trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment. - Determine peak hour traffic volumes. - Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses on key intersections. - Analyze signal vlarrants. - Analyze signal progression. - Analyze potential changes in accidents and safety cons i derat ions. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location of the Market Place is shoo-in in Figure 1. Since the impact in the short range, as well as, the long range is of concern, it is important that a. thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented. Land Use The Market Place parcel is bounded by the Pavi11ion Shopping Center across Troutman Parkway on the south, and the Sea Galley, Pic 'n Save, Best shopping center across College Avenue on the west. Land to the east is. vacant across JFK Parkway. Land immediately to the north is vacant with the Fountainhead Center further to the north across this vacant parcel. The vacant parcel was assumed to have commercial development in the long range future. 1 J Ci I 1 �.Haa o r n �C'f fln;l/ l-cxh ng Hospital r ]�.+ = 0-o"Cr.� PARKWPO "e• n eY r.t.aren J cdKE `Rollin _ Pl • [ Orin<e nn ae -r• Ro ler SI. 8R WpO Ct rrz•w�d;Y- C' 5 °' ,n<eeSler O.. < b. NHIM C. Itan r Ct. u G v 1lrac al CryLk A,t., dF ` Ed�nw. nCf. n ULU UV st .if �, eets I ler �,aj N,ynlNw. I °u Y ae C n C V J tiL. wallow Rd. F. Ju c _ ;u E E c .n RU e^tenn ,al-1r"r•`��. l c Rl.d. ¢ W Swa11Lw R, C C r CI. ^ E Swallow n Slraf eo•w3 ! y8r 1 s a' un, ' f10 nrrr a Cir � Pwa•! o o .f _ Ner't, v <,e`° ,o ♦. e C . PuLfn Ct. I ¢° ; �Na ►awy. � � t � S>.,aV•ee �' 2 m.as< t. � S 1� E 44 a t;d Rlueelyd I T ,,. Ct. P Ct Z Qa It. . Ln—d 5t W Juauc< Dr�iei CI �Or Mnn• ✓. Monroe Ur N,anfT field Or •Fi�. .. i • 0" iwv St. e o 5 z $h raw �d - z W. H_tto°f Rd. 3 ! tmgs fen a J NLndin Tr<e 1. ° Horatloot Rd ....... ..... )Ilindole Golf , gmda n,e - _� cwz < < p r.od Cc•n°„,o.n 5 .. �u: f f Dfrr�en sad pf1 �•On i O t' pt w C1. N Trodlriona pl - I C Doord C 0 WARREN LAKE ............... _ K I The Market Placer a;✓ P., r, < � of �t Gwn gores Cr � I ' I � '�, •< Dr rt•Rao,t vtr d D' ° 4 n e r Cf � �n�q �b "b ,� N _ _ � Trouf n P t 1n c: Q t•C R. npv em _ ce°e C... Iv. pr. f. l' g O,t Torae< r a P, �l 2l one q C�k 0.k repe Dr 'a Pr>,rre 51 2I Rr q jI mI v lr. to I Ce r•x �•°"'>' \tr � ysrnl CarelDerry Ct o- >o�rhRidge Greens -� Golf 'four saR. � D - off, / t' � .;. : Gtw+•�F . arlN _ Sre— Di� Hlnwew cr. 3 .(I Crevfr e mote Sr :•..•••:;.:: ;.•'. M,It W rrrn+e ' lMr Dr • C� _ ►pRTNER :I RES ,V• : I t - SITE LOCATION FIGURE 1 t • • r� 1 L I I I Roads The pr imary roads. and streets near- the Market PI ace are shown in Figure 2. South College Avenue (U.S. 287) borders the Market Place on the viest . It is a north -south street designated as a major arterial on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. It has an urban cross section with three 12 foot lanes in each direction with a center turn lane. There are right -turn auxiliary lanes along College Avenue at various locations, most notably at the Pavillion Shopping Center and the Fountainhead Center. The posted speed limit is 45 mph in this area of College Avenue. Sight distance is generally not a problem along College Avenue. Currently, signalized intersections along this section of College Avenue are at Harmony, Troutman, Boardwalk, and Horsetooth. It is expected that in the future, signals will be warranted at College/Kensington and at a. location north of Boardvlal k. , as documented in the South College Avenue Access Control Plan. Troutman Parkway borders the Market Place on the south. It is an east -west street designated as a collector on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Adjacent to the Market Place, Troutman is improved to a 68 foot curb to curb width. Geometrics on Troutman will be addressed later in this report. It is expected that Troutman Parkway will be posted at 35 mph. _1FK Parkway is. a collector street which will eventually connect Horsetooth Road to Harmony Road. It wi 1 1 primarily serve as a recirculation road, similar to the way Mason Street functions on the west side of College Avenue. Existing Traffic Daily traffic flow is shown in Figure 3. These are machine counted volumes conducted by the City of Fort Collins i n 19e6. In addition to the daily count data, noon Saturday and weekday afternoon peak hour traffic data were obtained in April 19851 and fall 1988, respectively. The peak hour turning movements are shown in Figure 4. Existing Operation The peak hour operation using the volumes shovjn in Figure 4 is shown in Table 1. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix A. Appendix B describes level of service for unsi gnal i zed and signalized intersec- tions from the 1i85 Highway Capacity Manual. The College: Troutman signalized intersection operates acceptably. The 2 z 0 W a PRIMARY STREETS FIGURE 2 • • ln� IHORSETOOTH N 0 0 0 0 Site TROUTMAN w o � o w O J U HARMONY RECENT DAILY TRAFFIC COUNTS FIGURE 3 Q W N W J r J O / 1 40�32 / 1 IloS/133 ( 155/141 —_ TROUTMAN 53/43 103/50 —� Pavillion Sat. / Weekday PM I RECENT PEAK HOUR COUNTS FIGURE 4 Table 1 1989 Peak Hour Operation Operation Intersection Sat. noon Weekday Pt-1 College/Troutman (signal) A (0.52) A (0.45) Tr ou tmani Pav i l 1 i on (Stop Sign) NB L A A NB R A A WB L A A Land Use Phase 1 The Market Place 94.0 ksf Phase 2 Land to the North 45.5 ksf Total Table 2 Trip Generation Gaily Sat. Peak P.M. Peak Trips Trips Trips Trips Trips. in out in out 6400 363 367 252 269 3100 176 177 122 130 9500 539 544 374 399 i Troutman/Pavillion Access intersection operates acceptably with stop sign control. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Market Place is a proposed commercial use develop- ment located east of College Avenue and north of Troutman Parkway in Fort Collins. It will include primarily retail uses. Figure 5 shows. a schematic of the site plan of the Market Place. As indicated earlier, two levels of analysis were performed: the short range 1 1991 1 which includes Phase 1 as noted in Table 2, and the long range (2010) which includes development of the Market Place and the land to the north at a comparable development density. Access to this site is in conformance lv.jith the South College Avenue Access Control Plan. Service access from Troutman Parkway is proposed to 1 i ne up with an access- on the south side of the street. There will likely be no traffic between these two accesses. In order to share the driveway between two properties, this s_. accesto Troutman may be moved approximately 40 feet to the east. If this occurs, the curb cute will no longer line up. This slight off -set should not present operational problems i for either straight -through traffic or conflicting left turns due to the low traffic volumes anticipated. Troutman Parkway will have a center left -turn lane in this area.. iThe street system in the area in the short range was assumed to consist of the streets as they currently exist. In the year 2010, at full development of the Market Place, ' the street system was assumed to be what is indicated in the Fort Collins Master Street Plan with appropriate additions. The long range analysis also assumed build out of the land to the north and east of the Market Place. Trip Generation Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this upon the existing and proposed street system. A compilation of trip generation information was prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in 1976, updated in 19E7, and was used to project trips that would be generated by the proposed uses at'this site. Table 2 shot.,js the expected trip generation on a. da. i 1 y and peak hour basis.. The land use type from the ITE Trip Generation Manual chosen for the Market Place was. 100,000-200,000 square foot shopping center. Included in the approximately 9500 vehicle trips generated on an average weekday are the 20-30 trucks which will service the needs of the proposed retail uses. A vehicle trip is defined as having either an origin or destination at the site. w M Z w Q A • Fountain Head Long Range Commercial a TROUTMAN • Q N G. T W-1 Parcel ww4!!W.,MZ, P Nftyw 10 SITE PLAN FIGURE 5 In order to determine a t,.iouId likely use College and level of Troutman other traffic that near the Market Place, it vja=_- assumed that by 1991 (short range), background traffic would increase at 2 percent per year. In the long range (2010), it was assumed that background traffic t,,lou1d increase as reflected in the North Front Range Corridor Study. Trip Distribution ' Tv,io directional distributions. t.-jere determined for the Market Place. The short range and long range distributions used residential uses as the production variable. The distribution was performed by obtaining t,,1here the dale 1 1 i ng unit locations were, by Traffic Analysis. Zone, and creating a gravity model. Data used in this analysis ,,as obtained from the Fort Collins Planning Department. The trip distributions ' are =_hotain in F i pure 6. Trip Assignment Trip assignment is how the generated and distributed trips are expected to be loaded on the street system. The a -signed trips are the resultant of the trip distribution process. Several land use generators such as shopping centers., drive-in (fast food) restaurants, service stations, convenience markets, and other support service_ (banks, etc.) capture trips from the normal traffic passing by the site. For many of these trips, the stop at the site is a secondary part of a 1 i nked trip such as from work to shopping center to home. In all of these cases., the dr i veviay volumes at the site are higher than the actual amount of traffic added to ' the adjacent street system, since some of the site generated traffic was already counted in the adjacent street traffic. A pass -by factor of 40%* was applied to the newly generated shopping center trips. This pass -by factor t,,ias obtained by averaging pass -by factors. from the following sources: 1. Transportation Engineering Design Standards, City of Lakewood, June 1985. 2. Development and Application of Trip Generation Pates, FKA.IA/LiSDOT, January 1985. 3. "A Methodology for Consideration of Pass -by Trips in Traffic Impact Analys-es. for Shopping Centers," Smith, S., ITE Journal, August 1986, Pg. 37. 4. Trip Generation, 4th Edition, ITE, 1967. 5. Transportation and Land Development, StoveriKoepke, ITE, 1988. 4 � • Q a N a W a W Site O 10 / V 15 TROUTMAN SHORT RANGE Q N 0 LD en ► W W Site O TROUTMAN N LONG RANGE TRIP DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 6 L The procedure used to account for both pass -by traffic and primary destination traffic is as follows, - Estimate the trip generation rate as is currently done and determine the total number of trips forecast to occur, based on the size of the development. - Estimate the percentage of pass -by trips, and split the total number• of trips into two components, one for pass -by trips and one for new trips. - Estimate the trip distributions for• the two individual components.. The distribution of pass -by trips must reflect the predominant commuting directions on adjacent and nearby roadv,aay facilities. Most peak period pass -by trips are an intermediate link in a work trip. - Conduct two separate trip assignments, one for• pass -by trips and one for• nev,, trips. The distribution for pass -by trips will require that trips be subtracted from some intersection approaches and added back in to others. Typically, this wi 1 1 involve reducing through-r•oa.dvlay volumes and increasing certain turning movements' - Combine the assigned trips. to yield the total link loadings, and proceed with capacity analysis as normally done. Figure 7 shows the short range Saturday peak hour• assignment and the afternoon peak hour assignment of the Market Place generated traffic with background traffic in the area. Figure 8 shows the long range peak hour assignments of the Market Place generated traffic with the background traffic in the area. Traffic Projections Daily traffic projections for the short range time period were obtained by factoring the peak hour assignment by 1/0 .09. Figure 9 shov,1s the expected daily traffic in this area by 1991 given the development as assumed in this report. For 20 year projections (yeas• 2010), the usual source ' for projections is the Traffic Flow Map as provided by the Ci ty. Hoviever•, the 1 ast Traff i c Fl ov,, Map does not prov i de projections for this area. of Fort Col 1 i n=_.. Therefore, an ' estimation was made of traff i c in th i =_. area by the year 2010 using the latest Traffic Flow Map, the North Front Range Corridor 'study, and the knowledge of what has been occurring and what is expected to occur in this area of Fort Collins. ' These projections ar•e shown in Figure 10. ISignal Warrants Sionals are not a.niticipated at the access on Troutman Parkway due to the proximity to the signal at the College! Sat. / Weekday PM SHORT RANGE PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FIGURE 7 Sat. / Weekday PM LONG RANGE PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FIGURE 8 • 0 0 0 m 6Z00 V. -74 00 Site TROUTMAN SHORT RANGE DAILY TRAFFIC a 0 o Site 0 i400 1 9900 TROUTMAN w 0 w O J O J r O M U Q N FIGURE 9 Q N LONG RANGE DAILY TRAFFIC FIGURE 10 J 1 C 11 I 11 n Troutman intersection. The right-in/right-out access does not require signal control. Signal Progression Signal pr-ogr•ession was evaluated as. part of the South College Avenue Access Control Plan. The time -space diagrams from that study are included in Appendix. C. Operations Analysis. Capacity analyses were performed on key intersections adjacent to the Market Place in both the short range and long range condi t ions.. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 7 and the existing geometric=_., the intersections operate in the short range condition as indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix D. It i expected that all intersections will operate at acceptable levels (level of service D or better) during both peak hours. LJith the existing signal control, the College/Troutman intersection operates acceptably. The short range geometric requirements. are shown in Figure 1 1 . The left -turn lanes can be accommodated on College Avenue. Hot;jever, the left -turn lanes cannot be accommodated on Troutman Parkway. (,•Jest of College, observation indicated that during the peak hours, left -turning vehicles exceeded the available storage and stacked in the through lane. It is likely that this would occur- on the east side of Col 1 ege. There wi 1 1 be approximately 230 feet, from stop bar to stop bar, on Troutman between College and the access to the Market Place. This is not enough to accommodate the left -turn lane requirements., which minimumly total 325 feet plus taper. There is little that can be done to correct this. The access point to the Pavillion is established and it is proper that the access to the Market Place line up with this access. The 68 foot width of Troutman Parkway can provide the possi bi 1 i ty of side -by -side left -turn lanes. which can be accommodated using the minimum left -turn lane lengths. Detailed design is beyond the scope of this study. It is recommended that the proposed curb cut to Pad A from the right-in/eight-out access be eliminated. This pad can get adequate access from the curb cut located approximately 200 feet from College Avenue. Usi nq the traffic volumes shown in Figure 8 and recommended geometries., the intersections operate in the long r•ang_e condition as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix. E. At the signalized intersection, operation during the peak hours will 1 6 0 • Table 3 Short Range (1991) Peak Hour Operation Operation Intersection Sat. noon Weekday PM College/Troutman (signal) C (0.69) B (0.57) Trautman/Access 1,18 L D C PJB P./T A A SB L C B S B RII/T A A EB L A A WB L A A Table 4 Long Range (2010) Peak Hour Operation Operation Intersection Sat. noon Weekday PM College/Troutman (signal) D (0.80) C (0.70) Troutman/Access NB L F E h1B R/T A A SB L E D SB P./T A A EB L A A LJB L A A T = Taper SHORT RANGE GEOMETRICS FIGURE 11 0 • 1 11 1 be acceptable with a double left -turn lane in the s.outhbound direction on College Avenue. Without this geometric improvement, the intersection will operate very inefficiently as indicated by the unacceptable operation with the existing geometr•ics. Left -turn exits from the Market Place and the Pavillion will experience level of service E operation during the peak hours. While unacceptable, there is little that can be done to improve this. This condition will likely last for only a few minutes (15-30) during the peak hour. Provision of a left -turn lane and a through/right-turn lane will confine delays• to only those vehicles desiring to turn left. However, most of the traffic assigned to these movements do have alternative means of egress which may be a little longer - in distance but will be shorter in time during the peak hours. Figure 12 shows a schematic of the geometric requirements at each analyzed intersection under the lono range condition. Much of the geometric discussion in the short ra.nge applies to the lono range condition. In the long range condition, even the minimum left -turn lane lengths will not be able to be accommodated on Troutman Parkway east or west of College Avenue. It is. hoped that the recirculation roads, Mason t.,test of College and JFK Parkway east of College will remove some of this traffic from this. area. The r i oht-i n 'right -out access from Col 1 ege Avenue is in accordance with the South College Avenue Access• Control Plan. College Avenue has three lanes in each direction in this area. According to Section 4.7.1 e. of the State Highway Access Code, "Where there are three or more through lanes in the direction of travel, the Department will normally drop the requirement for right turn acceleration and deceleration lanes. However, each case shall be reviewed independently and a decision made based upon site specific conditions. Generally, the lanes will be required only for high volume access or when a specific geometric safety problem exist." The site plan shows_. a right -turn deceleration lane into this access. With the 45 mph posted speed, a deceleration lane of 375 feet is required. The tangent distance south of this access is 420 feet. This is long enough to accommodate the northbound right -turn deceleration lane (including taper) and allow a. 45 foot "bulb" just north of the Troutman curb return. The taper should be included in the overall deceleration lane length due to the physical constraint and since the deceleration lane is not absolutely required according to the access code. This combined deceleration lane and taper has been designed at other locations_., most notably at the right-in/right-out to the Pavillion Shopping Center. As. previously stated, the access to the Market Place is. in conformance with the South College Avenue Access Control Plan. A right-in/right-out acces_.s_. is recommended at the approximate location proposed in this plan. While not 7 N T = Taper LONG RANGE GEOMETRICS FIGURE 12 I L I suggested in the South College Avenue Access Control Plan, a left -in only at the proposed right-in/right-out access to College Avenue would decrease the number of left -turns on Troutman Parkway. This, in turn, improves the operation and the left -turn lane requirements on Troutman Parkway. It is not suggested that this limited left turn be implemented as part of this plan, but rather that it be considered as. a potential solution should operation of the area streets warrant it. This potential solution will require more analysis and design considerations that are beyond the scope of this report. Accident Analysis In 1985, 1986, and 1987, there were 13, 14, and 15 accidents, respectively at/near the College/Troutman intersection. This is 7% of the accidents that occurred in the South College Corridor (Swallow,, to Trilby) in that same time period. While no one wants. an accident, some are inevitable. This number generally is at an acceptable level for urban conditions. The recommended control devices and geometrics should minimize vehicular conflicts and maximize vehicle separation. Therefore, the accident rate should be at its minimum for a typical urban condition. I V . COHCLUS I Qh1S This study assessed the impacts of the Market Place on the existing (short range - 1991) and future (long range - 2010) street system in the vicinity of the proposed development. As a result of this analysis, the following is concluded: - The development of the Market Place is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. At full development of the Market Place as proposed, approximately 6,400 trip ends will be generated at this site on a typical weekday. Some of these will be from the background traffic already passing by this site. The land to the north will generate approximately 3,100 additional daily trip ends when it is developed. - Using the existing peak hour traffic volumes, acceptable operation exists at the College/Troutman and Troutman/Pavillion access intersections. - By 1991, given the existing traffic and proposed development of the Market Place, acceptable operation will exist at all key inter -sections. The geometric requirements on Troutman will be minimal given the existing location of the Pavillion Access. This constraint may necessitate side - by -side left -turn lanes at this location. 0 0 At full development of the Market Place, the land to the north, and considerable other development (east of JFK Parkway) in this part of Fort Collins, acceptable operation is achievable at the College/Troutman intersection with double left -turn lanes in the southbound direction on College Avenue. Left -turn exits at the Troutman/Access intersection will experience some unacceptable operation during the peak hours. This will not likely last for very long. The delayed vehicles will be on -site and will not negatively affect the public street system. It is anticipated that JFK Parktalay will serve as a recirculation street east of College Avenue, reducing some of the left -turn requirements on Troutman. - With proper traffic control and geometrics, the accident rate should be minimal for an urban condition. - The site plan access for the Market Place is in accordance vjith the South College Avenue Access Control Plan. C 1 1 1 f::�vPPEhJD I :X , A 1 1 1 I 1 m m m m m = = = m = m = m = m m m MATTHEW J DELICH CRITICAL MOVEMENT ANALYSIS COLLEGE/TROUTMAh1(gi>PF1 09i± R@ 1 @ DATE LEVEL OF SERVICE A SATURATION 52 CRITICAL N/S VOL 678 CRITICAL E/W VOL 183 CRITICAL SUM 861 LANE GEOMETRY NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LANE MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH 1 RT. 12.0 RT. 12.0 R.. 12.0 R.. 12.0 2 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 3 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 4 L.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 ... .... ... .... 5 ... .... ... .... ... .... ... .... 6 ... .... ... .... ... .... ... .... TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LEFT 95 179 165 43 THRU 1278 1102 53 40 RIGHT 26 195 76 70 TRUCKS (%) LOCAL BUSES (M/HR) PEAK HOUR FACTOR NORTHBOUND 7 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 7 1 1 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 WESTBOUND 1 0 1 PHASING N/S :4. BOTH TURNS PROTECTED (WITH OVERLAP) E/W :4. BOTH TURNS PROTECTED (WITH OVERLAP) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY 1. 0 - 99 (#PEDS/HR) CYCLE LENGTH 120 SECONDS CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES BY MOVEMENT NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND THRU -RIGHT 511 503 53 40 LEFT 73 167 143 13 LEFT TURN CHECK. NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND INPUT VOLUME 95 179 165 43 ADJUSTED VOL 73 167 143 13 CAPACITY 0 0 0 0 MOVEMENT N/A N/A N/A N/A MATTHEW J DELICH CRITICAL MOVEMENT ANALYSIS COLLEGE/TROUTMAN DATE LEVEL OF SERVICE A SATURATION 45 CRITICAL N/S VOL 593 CRITICAL E/W VOL 141 CRITICAL SUM 734 LANE GEOMETRY NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LANE MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH MOV WIDT* 1 RT. 12.0 RT. 12.0 R.. 12.0 R.. 12.0 2 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 3 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 4 L.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 ... .... ... .... 5 ... .... ... .... ... .... ... .... 6 ... .... ... .... ... .... ... .... TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LEFT 76 157 133 32 THRU 1110 1237 43 32 RIGHT 21 157 61 56 TRUCKS C%) LOCAL BUSES (#/HR) PEAK HOUR FACTOR NORTHBOUND 7 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 7 1 1 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 WESTBOUND 1 0 1 PHASING N/S :4. BOTH TURNS PROTECTED (WITH OVERLAP) E/W :4. BOTH TURNS PROTECTED (WITH OVERLAP) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY 1. 0 - 99 (NPEDS/HR) CYCLE LENGTH 120 SECONDS CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES BY MOVEMENT NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND THRU -RIGHT 444 542 43 32 LEFT 51 142 109 2 LEFT TURN CHECK NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND INPUT VOLUME 76 157 133 32 ADJUSTED VOL 51 142 109 2 CAPACITY 0 0 0 0 MOVEMENT N/A N/A N/A N/A 1985 HCM: LINSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 xx:x*xxxaxxxx*xxxxxxx*xzx**xxx*xxxxxxxxxxx wac*�*x:r .x x:�x*:sxxxx*xxxxzxx*.ti:x IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED. MAJOR STREET .............. 30 PEAK HOUR FACTOR ................................. 1 AREA POPULATION .................................. 80000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET ..................... Troutman NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET ................... Access NAME OF THE ANALYST .............................. MJD DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy).................. 4/14/89 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ............................. � l- 4ti61 0 OTHER INFORMATION: INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL --------------------------------------------------------------------- INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST CONTROL TYPE NORTHBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES --------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB SB ---- ---- ---- ---- LEFT 0 15 61 -- THRU 155 92 0 -- RIGHT 103 0 11 -- NUMBER OF LANES --------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB ------- SE. ------- -------------- LANES. 2 2 - -- CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Page-3 --------------------------------------------------------------------- POTEN- ACTUAL FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS ------- -P M--SH------- --k SH MINOR STREET N8 LEFT 67 569 562 562 495 A RIGHT 12 965 965 965 952 A MAJOR STREET WB LEFT 17 832 832 832 816 A 0 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET .............. 30 PEAK HOUR FACTOR ................................. 1 AREA POPULATION .................................. 80000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET. .................... Troutman NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET ................... Access NAME OF THE ANALYST .............................. MJD DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy).................. 4/14/89 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ............................. Sat p 89 6 OTHER INFORMATION: INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL --------------------------------------------------------------------- INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST CONTROL TYPE NORTHBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES --------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB SB ---- ---- ---- ---- LEFT 0 11 38 -- THRU 141 82 0 -- RIGHT 80 0 6 -- NUMBER OF LANES --------------------------------------------------------------------- EE W°, NE SE. ------- ------- ------- ------- LANES -- CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Page-3 --------------------------------------------------------------------- POTEN- ACTUAL FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS p M SH R SH MINOR STREET NB LEFT 42 601 596 596 554 A RIGHT 7 964 984 984 977 A MAJOR STREET WB LEFT 12 869 869 869 857 A • • AF'FP'Et-JG I X L M CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE 0-041w : r r w M M= M M The concepts of capacity and level of service are central to the analysis of intersections, as they are for all types of facilities. In intersection analysis, however, the two concepts are not as strongly correlated as they are for other facility types. In pre- vious chapters, the same analysis results yielded a determination of both the capacity and level of service of the facility. For signalized intersections, the two are analyzed separately, and are not simply related to each other. It is critical to note at the outset, however, that both capacity and level of service must be fully considered to evaluate the overall operation of a signalized intersection. Capacity analysis of intersections results in the computation of v/c ratios for individual movements and a composite v/c ratio for the sum of critical movements or lane groups within -the intersection. The r/c ratio is the actual or projected rate of flow on an approach or designated group of lanes during a peak 15-min interval divided by the capacity of the approach or designated group of lanes. Level of service is based on the average stopped delay per vehicle for various movements within the intersection. While v/c affects delay, there are other param- eters that more strongly affect it, such as the quality of pro- gression, length of green phases, cycle lengths, and others. Thus, for any given v/c ratio, a range of delay values may result, and vice -versa. For this reason, both the capacity and level of service of the intersection must be carefully examined. These two con- cepts are discussed in detail in the following sections. Capaalty of Signalized Intersections Capacity at intersections is defined for each approach. Inter- section approach capacity is the maximum rate of flow (for the subject approach) which may pass through the intersection un- der prevailing traffic, roadway, and signalization conditions. The rate of flow is generally measured or projected for a 15-min period, and capacity is stated in vehicles per hour. Traffic conditions include volumes on each approach, the dis- tribution of vehicles by movement (left, through, right), the vehicle type distribution within each movement, the location of and use of bus stops within the intersection area, pedestrian crossing flows, and parking movements within the intersection area. Roadway conditions include the basic geometries of the in- tersection, including the number and width of lanes, grades, and lane -use allocations (including parking lanes). Signalization conditions include a full definition of the signal phasing, liming, type of control, and an evaluation of signal progression on each approach. The capacity of designated lanes or groups of lanes within an approach may also be evaluated and determined using the pro- cedures of this chapter. This may be done to isolate lanes serving a particular movement or movements, such as an exclusive right - or left -turn lane. Lanes so designated for separate analysis are referred to as "lane groups." The procedure herein contains guidelines for when and how separate lanes groups should be designated in an approach. Capacity at signalized intersections is based on the concept of saturation flow and saturation flow rates. Saturation flow rate is defined as the maximum rate of flow that can pass through a given intersection approach or lane group under prevailing traffic and roadway conditions, assuming that the approach or lane group had 100 percent of real time available as effective green time. Saturation flow rate is given the symbol s, and is expressed in units of vehicles per hour of effective green time (vphg). HIGNWAY CAPACITK M"L)^t,• S. R. 24� TRB/N RCr ; ,J&5 N. D.C. 19 8 S. The flow ratio for a given approach or lane group is defined The critical r/c ratio for the intersection is defined in terms as the ratio of the actual flow rate for the approach or lane of critical lane groups or approaches: group, Y. to the saturation flow rate. The flow ratio is given the symbol, (v/s)„ for approach or lane group I. The capacity of a given lane group or approach may be stated X, _ (r/s)„ X [C/(C—L)) (9-3) as: where: c, = s, X (g/c), (9-1) where: c, = capacity of lane group or approach 4 in vph; s, — saturation flow rate for lane group or approach 4 in Yphg; and (g/C), — green ratio for lane group or approach I. The ratio of flow rate to capacity, v/c, is given the symbol X in intersection analysis. This new symbol is introduced in this chapter to emphasize the strong relationship of capacity to sig- nalization conditions, and for consistency with the literature, which also refers to this variable as the "degree of saturation." For a given lane group or approach is X, _ (v/c), = v,/[s, X (g/c),] (9-2) X, — r,C/sg, = (►/s),/(g/C), where: X, = r/c ratio for lane group or approach f; Y. = actual flow rate for lane group or approach i. in vph; s, = saturation flow rate for lane group or approach I. in vphg; and g, — effective green time for lane group i or approach 4 in sec. Values of X, range from 1.00 when the flow rate equals ca- pacity to 0.00 when the flow rate is zero. The capacity of the full intersection is not a significant concept and is not specifically defined herein. Rarely do all movements at an intersection become saturated at the same time of day. It is the ability of individual movements to move through the intersection with some efficiency which is the critical concern. Another rapacity concept of utility in the analysis of signal- ized intersections is, however, the critical v/c ratio, X,. This is a v/c ratio for the intersection as a whole, considering only the lane groups or approaches that have the highest flow ratio, v/s, for a given signal phase. For example, in a two-phase signal, opposing approaches move during the same green time. Generally, one of these two approaches will require more green time than the other (i.e., it will have a higher flow ratio). This would be the "critical' approach for the subject signal phase. Each signal phase will have a critical lane group or approach that determines the green time requirements for the phase. Where signal phases overlap, the identification of these critical lane groups or approaches is somewhat complex, and is discussed in the "Methodology" sec- tion of this chapter. X, = critical v/c ratio for the intersection; 1(v/s)„ = the summation of flow ratios for all crit- ical lane groups or approaches, G C = cycle length, in sec; and L = total lost time per cycle, computed as the sum of "start-up" and change interval lost time minus the portion of the change in- terval used by vehicles for each critical signal phase. This equation is useful in evaluating the overall intersection with respect to the geometries and total cycle length provided, and is also useful in estimating signal timings where they are not known or specified by local policies or procedures. It gives the v/c ratio for all critical movements, assuming that green time has been appropriately or proportionally allocated. It is therefore possible to have a critical r/c ratio of less than 1.00, end still have individual movements oversaturated within the signal cycle. A critical r/c ratio less than 1.00, however, does indicate that all movements in the intersection can be accom- modated within the defined cycle length and phase sequence by proportionally allocating green time. In essence, the total avail- able green time in the phase sequence is adequate to handle all movements if properly allocated. The analysis of capacity in this chapter focuses on the com- putation of saturation flow rates, v/e ratios, and capacities for various approaches or lane groups of the intersection. Proce- dures for these computations are described in greater detail in the "Methodology" and "Procedures for Application" sections of this chapter. Level of Service for Signalized Intersections Level of service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of delay. Delay is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and lost travel time. Specifically, level -of - service criteria are stated in terms of the average stopped delay per vehicle for a 15-min analysis period. The criteria are given in Table 9-I. Delay may be measured in the field, or may be estimated using procedures presented later in this chapter. Delay is a complex measure, and is dependent on a number of variables, including the quality of progression, the cycle length, the green ratio, and the v/c ratio for the lane group or approach in question. Level -of -service A describes operations with very low delay, i.e., less than 5.0 sec per vehicle. This occurs when progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. Level-of-senice B describes operations with delay in the range of 5.1 to 15.0 sec per vehicle. This generally occurs with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. _ 9.1. dM-SERV4MRIA FMLIZED- SECrtONs SrOITED DELAY rER VEHICLE LEVEL OF SERVICE (SEC) A 5 5.0 B 5.1 to 15.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 D 25.1 to 40.0 E 40.1 to 60.0 F > 60.0 Level -of -service C describes operations with delay in the range of 15.1 to 25.0 sec per vehicle. These higher delays may result from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear in this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, although many still pass through the intersection without stopping. Level -of -service D describes operations with delay in the range of 25.1 to 40.0 sec per vehicle. At level D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the pro- portion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cyr - ores are noticeable. Level -of -service E describes operations with delay in the range of 40.1 to 60.0 sec per vehicle. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ration. In- dividual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. Level -of -service Fdescribes operations with delay in excess of 60.0 sec per vehicle. This is considered to be unacceptable to most drivers. This condition often occurs with oversaturation, i.e., when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersec- tion. It may also occur at high v/c ratios below 1.00 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing causes to such delay levels. Relsting Capacity and Level of Service Because delay is a complex measure, its relationship to ca- pacity is also complex. The levels of service of Table 9-1 have been established based on the acceptability of various delays to drivers. It is important to note that this concept is not related to capacity in a simple one -tonne fashion. In previous chapters, the lower bound of LOS E h ys been defined to be capacity, i.e., the v/c ratio is, by definition, 1.00. This is not the case for the procedures of this chapter. It is possible, for example, to have delays in the range of LOS F (unacceptable) while the v/c ratio is below 1.00, perhaps as low as 0.75-0.85. Very high delays can occur at such r/c ratios when some combination of the following conditions exists: (1) the cycle length is long, (2) the lane group in question is dis- advantaged (has a long red time) by the signal timing, and/or (3) the signal progression for the subject movements is poor. The reverse is also possible: a saturated approach or lane group (i.e., v/c ratio = 1.00) may have low delays if: (1) the cycle length is short, and/or (2) the signal progression is favor- able for the subject movement. Thus, the designation of LOS F does not automatically imply that the intersection, approach, or lane group is overloaded, nor does a level of service in the A to E range automatically imply that there is unused capacity available. The procedures and methods of this chapter require the anal. ysis of both capacity and level -of -service conditions to fully evaluate the operation of a signalized intersection. It is imper- ative that the analyst recognize the unique relationship of these LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR ' UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level -of -service criteria for unsianalized intersec- tions are stated in very general terms, and are related to general delay ranges. Analysis for a stop- or yield -controlled intersection results in solutions for - the capacity of each lane on the minor approaches. The level -of -service criteria are then based on the reserve, or unused, capacity of the lane in question, expressed in passenger cars per hour- (PCPH). ' RESERVE CAPACITY LEVEL OF EXPECTED DELAY TO (PCPH) SERVICE MINOR STREET TRAFFIC ------------------------------------------------------- 4t►t► A Little or no del av '�►�►-T99 B Short traffic delays 2�►0-299 C Average traffic delays 1i►i►-199 D Long traffic delays !►- 99 E Very long traffic delay=_. F *When demand volume exceeds the capcitY of the lane, e;;treme delays will be encountered with queuing which may cause severe congestion affecting other traffic movements in the intersection. This condition usually warrants improvement to the intersection. Reference: Fli.gtj.icy Cg�p.�!gj ty hl riu 1 . Special Report 209. Transportation Research Hoard, Nation- al Research Council. Washington, D.C. 1 985 . 1 APPFEE "D I X C 11 I EFFICIENCY, 24 7 ATTAINABILITY, 64 INTERFERENCE, 24 ------------------ t10. ------------------------------- .........TIME -LOCATION ------------ DIAGRAM.......... DIS CE SPEED RIGHTBOUND ... READ DOWN LEFT RIGHT LEFT RIGHT 1 XY.XXIXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX 1370 0 35 33 2 XXXXXXXXXXXX 1170 1390 35 33 3 xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxXY.X 8;0 1170 35 35 4 X XXXXXXXXXXXX.xxx 10?0 890 35 35 5 xxxY.XYY.xxxxxxXx XXY.X 740 1090 33 33 6 XXxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXX 1880 740 35 35 7 xxxxxxxxxX 1550 1880 33 35 8 XXXx XXXXXXXXXXXX 1320 1350 33 33 9 530 1320 33 35 10 XXXXXXXXXXXXXxx XXXXXXXX 0 530 33 33 NO. OFFSET .........TIME -LOCATION DIAGP.AM.......... PHASE LENGTHS LEFTSOLR,ID ... READ UP 1 2 3 4 3 6 7 8 1 20 XXXxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXX 45 55 2 57 XXXXXXXXXXXX 70 30 3 70 XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX 52 48 4 62 Y.xxxxxxxxXXXXXX X 60 40 3 15 XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX 56 44 6 20 XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX 40 60 7 55 XXXXXXXXXX 75 23 8 60 xXxxxxxxx,XX XXXXX 60 40 9 0 100 10 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20 XXXXXXXY, XXXXXXXXXXXXY.XX 44 56 TIME SPACE DIAGP.AN P.OUTEe COLLEGE AVENUE DP.K-HAR COI II TENT a P.U118 CYCLE LENGTH 110 SECMIDS, SCALE IINCH-40Y OF CYCLEe I LINE- 264 FT RRRRifRRRRifR•►R RifRRRRRRRRRMR#;IRRRRRRRRR RifRRRRNRRRifRRRMRMRRRMI!iFRMMiF IFRRRMIF; 1l R�!iRRR IVR"�(,'!X _— YXXXXXXI xxx XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX QG� 2 {J IIev4 R D XXXXXXX XXXXXXX r� XXXXXXX I. Q 3 3 wAu ocJ XXXXXXXXXXXX I XXXXXXXXXXXX vO XXXXXXXXXXXX i, 4 FOOT N,L L !§CXXXXXXXX I xxxxxxxxx XXXXXXxxx 5 F'ioXi Rbi� xxxxx>JCXX lxxxxxxx*xxl XXXXXx 6{{o�BB FeOrM XxxxxxxxxxxxxXX YXXXXXXXXXXXXXX xxxxxxxXXX P0-T SIC; 7 13o,tf-DWALC.XXXXXX RTOV TMA WXXXXXXXX 9 K$A1 S, AJ4 TO 4) XXXXXX XXXXXY.XXXY.XXXX i. --- XXXXXX - ---- - xxxxxx ...- xxxxxxxxxx-- --Q- -- xxxxxxxxxx --- . xxxxx xxx 10HAW610Y xY,xxxxxx F IruRE 1 RAIIDWIDTH LEFTt 38$Br RIGHT? 41 G&C- PERFORMANCE INDEXt 51 EFFICIENCYt 35°. arTTAIMABILITYt 87 INTERFERENCEt0 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO. .........TIME -LOCATION DIAGRAH.......... DISTAhICE SFEED RI13HTBOLUD ... READ D%JN LEFT RIGHT LEFT RIGHT XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 720 0 40 40 2 2700 720 40 40 3 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX IBBO 2700 40 40 4 2430 1980 40 40 5 XXXXXXXXXX 2640 2420 40 40 6 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 0 2640 40 40 NO. OFFSET .........TIME -LOCATION DIAGPAM.......... PHASE LEIIGTHS LEFTBOLRJD ... REAb UP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 1 10 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX 44 56 2 0 f00 3 52 (XXYYXXXXXXXXXXX 60 40 4 0 100 5 72 XXXXXXXXXX 75 25 6 55 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 57 43 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TIME SPACE DIAGPW ROUTE? COLLEGE AVEt4UE MAR-TRIL COI II IEI IT t RLR IB CYCLE LENGTH 110 SECONDS? SCALE IIVICH-40X OF CYCLE? 1 LINES 264 FT 1 "At 2 MAI FAIFZW, 3 Fe s SMOKC`+ 5 sry MINOR SIG. I N 1; ZI < I ISIGHAL PROGRESSION SOUTH OF HARMONY FlCtURL 2, �J • 11 m m m� m m m m� m m m� m m ■s m r r MATTHEW J DELICH CRITICAL MOVEM ANALYSIS COLLEGE/TROUTMA " 91 2etlu ' vvv DATE LEVEL OF SERVICE C SATURATION 69 CRITICAL N/S VOL 923 CRITICAL E/W VOL 221 CRITICAL SUM 1144 LANE GEOMETRY NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LANE MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH 1 RT. 12.0 RT. 12.0 R.. 12.0 R.. 12.0 2 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 3 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 4 L.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 ... .... 5 ... .... ... .... .... ... .... 6 ... .... ... .... ... .... ... .... TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LEFT 99 361 172 166 THRU 1356 1091 77 64 RIGHT 54 203 79 117 TRUCKS (%) LOCAL BUSES (#/HR) PEAK HOUR. FACTOR NORTHBOUND 7 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 7 1 1 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 WESTBOUND 1 0 1 PHASING N/S :4. BOTH TURNS PROTECTED (WITH OVERLAP) E/W :4. BOTH TURNS PROTECTED (WITH OVERLAP) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY 1. 0 - 99 (#PEDS/HR) CYCLE LENGTH 120 SECONDS CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES BY MOVEMENT NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND THRU -RIGHT 552 501 77 64 LEFT 77 371 150 144 LEFT TURN CHECK NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND INPUT VOLUME 99 361 172 166 ADJUSTED VOL 77 371 150 144 CAPACITY 0 0 0 0 MOVEMENT N/A N/A N/A N/A MATTHEW J DELICH CRITICAL MOVEMENT ANALYSIS COLLEGE./TROUTMAN IrtT P1 91 iaB4'4__ DATE LEVEL OF SERVICE B SATURATION 57 CRITICAL N/S VOL 771 CRITICAL E/W VOL 166 CRITICAL SUM 937 LANE GEOMETRY NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LANE MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH 1 RT. 12.0 RT. 12.0 R.. 12.0 R.. 12.� 2 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 3 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 4 L.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 ... .... ... .... 5 ... .... ... .... ... .... ... .... 6 ... .... ... .... ... .... ... .... TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LEFT 79 293 138 130 THRU 1173 1232 60 49 RIGHT 41 163 63 90 TRUCKS (%) LOCAL BUSES (#/HR) PEAK HOUR FACTOR NORTHBOUND 7 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 7 1 1 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 WESTBOUND 1 0 1 PHASING N/S :4. BOTH TURNS PROTECTED (WITH OVERLAP) E./W :4. BOTH TURNS PROTECTED (WITH OVERLAP) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY 1. 0 - 99 (#PEDS/HP.) CYCLE LENGTH 120 SECONDS CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES BY MOVEMENT i NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND THRU -RIGHT 476 542 60 49 LEFT 55 295 114 106 LEFT TURN CHECK NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND INPUT VOLUME 79 293 138 130 ADJUSTED VOL 55 295 114 106 CAPACITY 0 0 0 0 MOVEMENT N/A N/A N/A N/A � M= M M= M r r M M M r M M s= i M 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET .............. 30 PEAK HOUR FACTOR ................................. 1 AREA POPULATION .................................. 80000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET ..................... Troutman NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET ................... Access NAME OF THE ANALYST ......................... — ... MJO DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy).................. 4/14/89 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ............................. sa /9 OTHER INFORMATION: INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL --------------------------------------------------------------------- INTERSECTION TYPE: 4-LEG MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST CONTROL TYPE NORTHBOUND: STOP SIGN CONTROL TYPE SOUTHBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES --------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB SB ---- ---- ---- ---- LEFT 224 16 64 33 THRU 161 96 5 5 RIGHT 107 33 12 187 NUMBER. OF LANES AND LANE USAGE --------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB ------- SB ------- -------------- LANES 2 LANE USAGE L + TP L 4 TR CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Page-3 --------------------------------------------------------------------- POTEN- ACTUAL FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS p M SH R SH ------------------------------------------------ --- MINOR STREET • NB LEFT 70 278 189 189 119 D THROUGH 6 436 351 > 351 > 345 > B RIGHT 13 959 959 > 635 959 > 616 946 >A A MINOR STREET SB LEFT 36 350 277 277 241 C THROUGH 6 413 332 > 332 > 327 > B RIGHT 206 997 997 > 947 997 > 736 791 >A A MAJOR STREET EB LEFT 246 965 965 965 718 A WB LEFT 18 822 822 822 804 A M� r � M M M M M M M r r! r M M i M 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET .............. 30 PEAK HOUR FACTOR ................................. 1 AREA POPULATION .................................. 80000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET ..................... Troutman NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET ................... Access NAME OF THE ANALYST .............................. MJD DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy).................. 4/14/89 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ............................. OTHER INFORMATION: INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL --------------------------------------------------------------------- INTERSECTION TYPE: 4-LEG MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST CONTROL TYPE NORTHBOUND: STOP SIGN CONTROL TYPE SOUTHBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES --------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NS SB ---- ---- ---- ---- LEFT 164 11 39 24 THRU 147 85 5 5 RIGHT 83 23 7 145 NUMBER OF LANES AND LANE USAGE --------------------------------------------------------------------- E6 WB NB SB LANES --- ---------- -- 2 LANE USAGE L + TR L + TR CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Page-3 --------------------------------------------------------------------- POTEN- ACTUAL FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS p M SH R SH ------------------------------------------------ --- MINOR STREET • NB LEFT 43 359 275 275 232 C THROUGH 6 512 443 > 443 > 438 > A RIGHT 8 979 979 > 651 979 > 638 972 >A A MINOR STREET SB LEFT 26 426 365 365 339 B THROUGH 6 491 426 > 426 > 420 > A RIGHT 160 997 997 > 955 997 > 790 838 >A A MAJOR STREET EB LEFT 180 987 987 987 806 A WB LEFT 12 860 860 860 848 A • 1 APPFEE F` D I X E 11 P it P 1 m m r r m m m r m m r r m m m r m m r MATTHEW J DELICH CRITICAL MOVEM T ANALYSIS T COLLEGE/TROUTMAN ... '20 DATE LEVEL OF SERVICE D SATURATION 80 CRITICAL N/S VOL 961 CRITICAL E/W VOL 353 CRITICAL SUM 1314 LANE GEOMETRY NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LANE MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH 1 RT. 12.0 RT. 12.0 R.. 12.0 R.. 12.0 2 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 3 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 4 L.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 .... ... .... 5 ... .... L.. 12.0 ... .... ... .... 6 ... .... ... .... ... .... ... .... TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LEFT 150 450 230 240 THRU 1700 I500 130 130 RIGHT 130 160 120 I50 TRUCKS (%) LOCAL BUSES (#/HP,) PEAK HOUR FACTOR NORTHBOUND 7 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 7 1 1 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 WESTBOUND 1 0 1 PHASING N/S :4. BOTH TURNS PROTECTED (WITH OVERLAP) E/W :4. BOTH TURNS PROTECTED (WITH OVERLAP) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY 1. 0 - 99 (OPEDS/HR) CYCLE LENGTH 120 SECONDS CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES BY MOVEMENT NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND THRU -RIGHT 714 646 131 131 LEFT 134 247 212 222 LEFT TURN CHECK NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND INPUT VOLUME 150 450 230 240 ADJUSTED VOL 134 471 212 222 CAPACITY 0 0 0 0 MOVEMENT N/A N/A N/A N/A MATTHEW J DELICH CRITICAL MOVEMENT ANALYSIS COLLEGE/TROUTMAN-ftM DATE LEVEL OF SERVICE C SATURATION 70 CRITICAL N/S VOL 855 CRITICAL E/W VOL 291 CRITICAL SUM 1146 LANE GEOMETRY NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LANE MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH MOV WIDTH 1 RT. 12.0 RT. 12.0 R.. 12.0 R. 12 2 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 3 T.. 12.0 T.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 4 L.. 12.0 L.. 12.0 ... .... ... .... 5 ... .... L.. 12.0 ... .... ... .... 6 ... .... ... .... ... .... ... .... TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LEFT 120 360 180 200 THRU 1400 1800 110 100 RIGHT 100 130 100 120 TRUCKS (%) LOCAL BUSES (k/HR) PEAK HOUR FACTOR NORTHBOUND 7 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 7 1 1 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 WESTBOUND 1 0 1 PHASING N/S :4. BOTH TURNS PROTECTED (WITH OVERLAP) E/W :4. BOTH TURNS PROTECTED (WITH OVERLAP) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY 1. 0 - 99 (NPEDS/HR) CYCLE LENGTH 120 SECONDS CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES BY MOVEMENT • NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND THRU -RIGHT 586 754 111 101 LEFT 101 194 159 180 LEFT TURN CHECK NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND INPUT VOLUME 120 360 180 200 ADJUSTED VOL 101 370 159 180 CAPACITY 0 0 0 0 MOVEMENT N/A N/A N/A N/A i M M r M M M M s r M M= M M M r s M 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET .............. 30 PEAK HOUR FACTOR ................................. 1 AREA POPULATION .................................. 80000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET ..................... Troutman NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET ................... Access NAME OF THE ANALYST .............................. MJD DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy).................. 4/14/89 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ............................. sat p«r-B�j91/ 010 OTHER INFORMATION: INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL --------------------------------------------------------------------- INTERSECTION TYPE: 4-LEG MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST CONTROL TYPE NORTHBOUND: STOP SIGN CONTROL TYPE SOUTHBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES --------------------------------------------------------------------- ES WB NB SB ---- ---- ---- ---- LEFT 320 80 100 70 THRU 190 130 5 5 RIGHT 200 70 70 290 NUMBER OF LANES AND LANE USAGE --------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB SB ------- ------- -------------- LANES 2 2 2 LANE USAGE L 4 TR L + TR CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Page-3 --------------------------------------------------------------------- POTEN- ACTUAL FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS p M SH R SH ------- ----------------------------------------- --- MINOR STREET 40 NB LEFT 110 144 66 66 -44 F THROUGH 6 274 170 > 170 > 165 > D RIGHT 77 895 895 > 697 895 > 615 818 >A A MINOR STREET SB LEFT 77 183 106 106 29 E THROUGH 6 248 154 > 154 > 149 > D RIGHT 319 995 995 > 911 995 > 586 676 >A A MAJOR STREET EB LEFT 352 890 890 890 538 A WB LEFT 88 709 709 709 621 A m m r M ■s m m M s seem m m m r m ors r it 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET .............. 30 PEAK HOUR FACTOR ................................. 1 AREA POPULATION .................................. 80000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET ..................... Troutman NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET ................... Access NAME OF THE ANALYST .............................. MJD DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy).................. 4/14/89 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ............................. �rt� &-7-9 010 OTHER INFORMATION: INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL --------------------------------------------------------------------- INTERSECTION TYPE: 4-LEG MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST CONTROL TYPE NORTHBOUND: STOP SIGN CONTROL TYPE SOUTHBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES --------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB SB ---- ---- ---- ---- LEFT 230 60 80 50 THRU 190 110 5 5 RIGHT 150 50 50 230 NUMBER OF LANES AND LANE USAGE --------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB SB -------------- -------------- LANES 2 2 2 2 LANE USAGE L 4 TR L 4 Tk CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Page-3 - - - ------ ---- ------------- - -- ---- - -- ----------------- ---- ------ -- ---- POTEN- ACTUAL FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS p M SH R SH ------------------------ ------------------------ --- MINOR STREET 0 NB LEFT 88 209 128 128 40 E THROUGH 6 359 272 > 272 > 266 > C RIGHT 55 922 922 > 757 922 > 696 867 >A A MINOR STREET SB LEFT 55 258 186 186 131 D THROUGH 6 330 250 > 250 > 244 > C RIGHT 253 996 996 > 936 996 > 678 743 >A A MAJOR STREET EB LEFT 253 932 932 932 679 A WB LEFT 66 754 754 754 688 A E