The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1.28 ImpactAnalysis-TrafficAssessmentTRAFFIC ASSESSMENT River Edge Colorado J FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Submitted by: Fehr & Peers 621 17th Street, Ste. 2301 Denver, CO 80293 (303) 296-4300 December, 2010 App. M-2 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3 1.2 STUDY OBJECTIVES 3 1.3 STUDY CONDITIONS 6 1.4 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 6 CHAPTER 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS 10 2.1 ROADWAY SYSTEM 10 2.2 TRANSIT, PEDESTRIAN, AND BICYCLE FACILITIES 10 CHAPTER 3. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION 12 CHAPTER 4. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT 14 CHAPTER 5. EXISTING AND PROJECTED TRAFFIC 17 5.1 EXISTING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS 17 5.2 2018 PROJECTED TRAFFIC AND INTERSECTION OPERATIONS 17 5.3 2030 PROJECTED TRAFFIC AND INTERSECTION OPERATIONS 17 5.4 2018 BACKGOUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC 21 5.5 2030 BACKGOUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC 21 CHAPTER 6. ACCESS CODE HIGHWAYS IMPROVEMENTS 24 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY AND LOS ANALYSIS 25 7.1 EXISTING CAPACITY AND LOS 25 7.2 2018 BACKGROUND CAPACITY AND LOS 26 7.3 2018 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC 28 7.4 2030 BACKGROUND CAPACITY AND LOS 30 7.5 2030 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC 32 CHAPTER 8. SIGNAL WARRANT AND PROGRESSION ANALYSIS 33 8.1 SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS 33 8.2 PROGRESSION ANALYSIS 34 CHAPTER 9. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 35 fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 LIST OF FIGURES 11111111=1 FIGURE 1: PROJECT VICINITY 4 FIGURE 2: SITE LAYOUT 5 FIGURE 3: EXTERNAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION 15 FIGURE 4: ASSIGNED PROJECT TRIPS 2018 AND 2030 16 FIGURE 5: ADJUSTED EXISTING COUNTS 18 FIGURE 6: 2018 BACKGROUND VOLUMES 19 FIGURE 7: 2030 BACKGROUND VOLUMES 20 FIGURE 8: 2018 TOTAL TRAFFIC 22 FIGURE 9: 2030 TOTAL TRAFFIC 23 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA 7 TABLE 2. UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA 8 TABLE 3: TRIP RATES AND GENERATION TABLE 13 TABLE 4: EXISTING INTERSECTION LOS RESULTS 25 TABLE 5: 2018 BACKGROUND LOS RESULTS 26 TABLE 6: MITIGATED 2018 BACKGROUND LOS RESULTS 27 TABLE 7: 2018 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT LOS RESULTS 28 TABLE 8: 2018 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT MITIGATED LOS RESULTS 29 TABLE 11: 2030 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT LOS RESULTS 32 TABLE 13: PROGRESSION EFFICIENCY 34 fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS ii Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 APPENDICES Appendix A: Existing Traffic Counts Appendix B: Synchro Reports - Existing Appendix C: Synchro reports - Future Appendix D: Signal Warrant Analysis Appendix E: Progression Analysis fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The River Edge Colorado development is located in Garfield County. It is west of State Highway (SH) 82 approximately six miles south of Glenwood Springs, Colorado. The project site encompasses approximately 160 acres. The development is planned to be mostly residential and is proposed to include 366 Residential units comprised of single family homes plus a neighborhood center and a water treatment and maintenance facility. Transportation impacts on SH 82 were assessed for the years 2018 and 2030 with and without the development. Analysis was conducted based upon CDOT criteria and the existing roadway category. Analysis included intersection Level of Service (LOS), signal warrant analysis, and signal progression analysis. Three intersections were analyzed during the AM, PM, and Saturday peak hours. The intersections included: • SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road • SH 82 at Marand Road • SH 82 at Spring Valley Road Spring Valley Road is the closest signalized intersection to the proposed development and is north of the development. 2018 Background Traffic volumes along State Highway 82 are expected to increase by a compounded growth factor of 1.11 into 2018. The following mitigation efforts will be needed without the project in order to maintain efficient operations along the corridor: • Spring Valley Road at SH 82 - Re -timing improvements in order to maintain acceptable LOS operations during the peak hours. This improvement will allow for LOS D or better during all peak hours. • Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 — The westbound right turn should be separated Although Cattle Creek Road and Marand Road side -street approaches notice delay at the stop controlled intersections, it is not expected that the side street volumes will be high enough to warrant a signal without the project. The suggested mitigation efforts are not necessitated by the project. 2030 Background Traffic volumes along State Highway 82 are expected to increase by a compounded growth factor of 1.31 into 2030. The following mitigation efforts will be needed without the project in order to maintain efficient operations along the corridor: • Spring Valley Road at SH 82 — The eastbound and westbound turn movements should be separated from the through movements. This mitigation will allow for LOS D or better during all peak hours. fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS App. MIS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 • Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 — This intersection will need to be signalized in 2030 due to background growth. Peak hour signal warrants are expected to be met in the AM and PM peak hours. This improvement will allow for LOS C or better during all peak hours. Although Marand Road side -street approaches notice delay at the stop controlled intersection, it is not expected that the side street volumes will be high enough to warrant a signal. The suggested mitigation efforts are not necessitated by the project. 2018 Plus Project All River Edge Colorado development traffic will access SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road in the year 2018. The following mitigation efforts will be needed with the project in order to maintain efficient operations along the corridor: • Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 - A signal will be needed at Cattle Creek Road and SH 82 upon buildout. With a signal at Cattle Creek Road, the intersection is shown to operate at a LOS B or better during all peak hours. The westbound right turn will not need to be separated if a signal is present. The mitigation efforts are necessitated by the project traffic. The project does not significantly impact Marand Road at SH 82 or Spring Valley Road at SH 82. Peak hour signal warrants were conducted for the intersection of Cattle Creek Road at SH 82. Cattle Creek Road is expected to meet the peak hour warrants in 2018 with the project. 2030 Plus Project Similar to 2018 all River Edge Colorado development traffic will access SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road in the year 2030. The mitigation efforts are necessitated by the project traffic. The project does not significantly impact Marand Road at SH 82 or Spring Valley Road at SH 82. No additional mitigation efforts are recommended. Highway Access Requirements SH 82 is currently a Category E -X roadway. According to the Access Code, direct access service to abutting land is subordinate to providing service to through traffic movements. The following requirements will be necessary to gain improved access: • The spacing of Cattle Creek Road is such that a signal will be appropriate based upon the approximate 1 mile spacing to Spring Valley Road. • Auxiliary left turn lanes are required at Cattle Creek Road. The transition taper length will be included with the required storage and deceleration length. • A right turn deceleration lane with taper is required for southbound traffic turning onto Cattle Creek Road Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements To accommodate recreational bicycle activity in the area, a bicycle connection to the RFTA trail near the main entrance should be requested and bicycle traffic internal to the site be considered in the design. Adequate facilities are recommended within the development to accommodate pedestrian traffic throughout the development and to facilitate safe pedestrian crossings at SH 82. fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The River Edge Colorado development is located in Garfield County. It is west of State Highway (SH) 82 approximately six miles south of Glenwood Springs, Colorado. The project site encompasses approximately 160 acres. The Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA) runs along the east edge of the property, somewhat parallel to SH 82. The Roaring Fork River runs along the west side of the property. Figure 1 shows the site vicinity. Current access to the site exists on SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road The development is planned to be residential in and is proposed to include 366 Residential units comprised of single family homes plus a neighborhood center and a water treatment and maintenance facility. Figure 2 shows the internal roadway layout and general site layout. 1.2 STUDY OBJECTIVES This report provides an assessment of potential traffic impacts to SH 82 associated with the development of the River Edge Colorado project. It includes an assessment of traffic operations along three intersections along SH 82. The study intersections included are as follows: • SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road • SH 82 at Marand Road • SH 82 at Spring Valley Road fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 11 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Figure 1: Project Vicinity cIi-nwvo-1 Springs MunicipaI Airpari Wil} I:,n% FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS f1W'airk Po "1.`& r nr 1 cJe. r�E° Cr¢P 9 L;v F d 11 4 GalufBdo rnoLntan Colkye Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Figure 2: Site Layout fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS. Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 1.3 STUDY CONDITIONS This traffic impact analysis has been compiled in order to determine what impacts the proposed development will have on the infrastructure system. The AM peak hour, PM peak hour, and Saturday peak hour were included in the study to provide an evaluation of the potential impact of the development during the weekday morning and evening peak hour commuter traffic as well as the weekend peak. The following three conditions were analyzed in this study with the corresponding volumes and network configurations as indicated. These study conditions are consistent with CDOTs Traffic Impact Study guidelines. Existing Conditions Analysis of the existing conditions in the study area were based on turning movement volumes collected in May 2010 and the existing roadway, intersection geometry, and traffic control as observed in the field. The counts were adjusted to reflect summer conditions. Analysis included existing summer peak season, peak hour traffic operations, and an assessment of intersection delay and level of service performance. The existing conditions provide a baseline for the future analysis. 2018 Background Conditions Analysis of the 2018 background traffic was conducted to evaluate the impact of background traffic to the study intersections. The analysis of this condition represents volumes associated with traffic growth in the region based upon CDOTs growth rates. 2030 Background Conditions Analysis of the 2030 background traffic was conducted to evaluate the impact of background traffic to the study intersections. The analysis of this condition represents volumes associated with traffic growth in the region based upon CDOTs growth rates. 2018 Background Plus Project Conditions Analysis of the 2018 background traffic plus project traffic was conducted to evaluate the impact of the project in 2018. This includes full build out of the development. The volumes include the existing counts with the background growth rate applied to year 2018 along SH 82, combined with the site - generated trips for all land uses. Project access to SH 82 is via one intersection located at Cattle Creek Road for 2018. 2030 Background Plus Project Conditions Analysis of the 2030 background traffic plus project traffic was conducted to evaluate the impact of the project in 2030. The volumes include the existing counts with the background growth rate applied to year 2030 along SH 82, combined with the site -generated trips for all land uses. Project access to SH 82 is via one intersection located at Cattle Creek Road for 2030. fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 1.4 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS METHOD The traffic operations analysis addressed unsignalized and signalized intersection operations using the procedures and methodologies contained in the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM), Transportation Research Board, 2000 for the weekday AM and PM peak hour and weekend peak hour traffic operations. Study intersection operations were evaluated using level of service calculations as analyzed in the Synchro software version 7. Level of Service Criteria To measure and describe the operational status of the local roadway network and corresponding intersections, transportation engineers and planners commonly use a grading system called level of service (LOS). LOS is a description of an intersection's operation, ranging from LOS A (indicating free flow traffic conditions with little or no delay) to LOS F (representing over -saturated conditions where traffic flows exceed design capacity, resulting in long queues and delays). Signalized Intersections At signalized intersections, traffic conditions were evaluated using procedures and methodologies contained in the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM), Transportation Research Board, 2000. The operation analysis uses various intersection characteristics (such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, and signal phasing) to estimate the intersection's volume -to -capacity (v/c) ratio. For signalized intersections the HCM defines the level of service as the average delay per vehicle for the overall intersection. Table 1 summarizes the relationship between delay and LOS for signalized intersections. Table 1. Signalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria Level of Service Average Stopped Delay Description A < 10 Very low delay. Most vehicles do not stop. B 10.1 to 20 Generally good progression of vehicles. Slight delays. C 20.1 to 35 Fair progression. Increased number of stopped vehicles. D 35.1 to 55 Noticeable congestion. Large portion of vehicles stopped. E 55.1 to 80 Poor progression. High delays and frequent cycle failure. F > 80 Oversaturation. Forced flow. Extensive queuing. Source: Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000). fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Unsignalized Intersections For unsignalized (all -way stop -controlled and side -street stop -controlled) intersections, the Transportation Research Board's 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology for unsignalized intersections was utilized. With this methodology, operations are defined by the average control delay per vehicle (measured in seconds) for each stop -controlled movement. The method incorporates delay associated with deceleration, acceleration, stopping, and moving up in the queue. For all -way stop - controlled intersections the HCM defines the level of service as the average delay per vehicle for the overall intersection. For side street stop -controlled intersections, LOS is reported for the worst approach. Table 2 summarizes the relationship between delay and LOS for unsignalized intersections. MEN Table 2. Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria Level of Service Average Total Delay (seconds/vehicle) Description a < 10 Little or no conflicting traffic for minor street approach. b 10.1 to 15 Minor street approach begins to notice absence of available gaps. c 15.1 to 25 Minor street approach begins experiencing delay for available gaps. d 25.1 to 35 Minor street approach experiences queuing due to a reduction in available gaps. e 35.1 to 50 Extensive minor street queuing due to insufficient gaps. f > 50 Insufficient gaps of suitable size to allow minor street traffic demand to cross safely through a major traffic stream. Source: Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000). Significance Criteria Minimum Acceptable Levels of Service: Garfield County Traffic Study guidelines indicate that all county roads must maintain an overall Level of Service C while intersections should operate at an overall Level of Service D or better. Colorado Department of Transportation minimum design criteria indicate intersections operate at an overall Level of Service D or better. fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Significant Impact Criteria: A project typically is considered to have a significant impact at a study intersection when one of the following criteria is satisfied: For Signalized Intersections: When the added project traffic causes an intersection to exceed the Level of Service standard; or when the background traffic conditions (without project traffic) exceeds the established Level of Service standards, and the project traffic causes more than a 20 percent increase in the intersection delay. For Unsignalized Intersections: Queuing of traffic to adjacent intersections would create impeded traffic flows; or excessive delays are determined to create potential safety problems. It is typical for an unsignalized intersection to notice delay higher than 35 seconds (LOS e) for a single approach without meeting signal warrants. Therefore LOS e or better for a single movement at an unsignalized intersection is typically tolerated. fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS SH82 at Marand Road, Looking North] Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 CHAPTER 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS An assessment of the existing transportation system surrounding the project site was conducted. This provides a clear picture of the system today and sets a baseline for future analysis. 2.1 ROADWAY SYSTEM SH 82 is a regional highway connecting Interstate 70 (1-70) to the north with Highway 24 to the south and east. The speed limit along the highway varies from 55 to 65 miles per hour. Within the vicinity of the River Edge Colorado Development, the roadway is a median divided rural highway with two lanes in each direction. Auxiliary turn lanes exist at full movement intersections as well as acceleration and deceleration lanes. SH 82 is classified as an Expressway, Category E -X by CDOT. North of the site is the intersection of Spring Valley Road. The intersection is signalized at SH 82. On the west side of the intersection is a small park—n-ride lot for the transit stop that is located at the intersection. East of the intersection are industrial and commercial uses. Marand Road is located north of the site and is a local 2 lane access roadway on the east side of the highway, providing access to industrial and commercial uses. Access exists to a former restaurant site which is currently vacant on the west side of the highway directly across from Marand Road. The access is unsignalized and full movement. Cattle Creek Road intersects CR 110 and the frontage road prior to intersecting SH 82 on the east side of Highway 82. Commercial uses exist along CR 110. West of SH 82, the land is currently undeveloped. The intersection is a full movement access. 2.2 TRANSIT, PEDESTRIAN, AND BICYCLE FACILITIES Transit Facilities The Roaring Fork Transit Authority currently operates along SH 82 between Glenwood Springs and Aspen. Valley fare buses operate as Local "L" and Express "X" buses. Both L and X busses stop at the intersection of Spring Valley Road and SH 82 on the near side of the intersection. fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Bus Shelter at Spring Valley Road Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities The Rio Grande Trail is a multi -use trail system that travels from 1-70 to the north to Aspen and runs parallel to SH 82 on the west side of the highway in the vicinity of the site. This trail was built within the former rail corridor of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad (D&RGW) Aspen Branch. In 1997, the rail corridor and track were purchased using a combination of funding from local governments, Great Outdoors Colorado, the Colorado Department of Transportation, and Pitkin County Open Space and Trails. This purchase presented an opportunity to explore transportation alternatives to SH 82 congestion and the challenge of creating recreation connectivity in the Roaring Fork Valley. The Roaring Fork Transit Authority manages and maintains the Rio Grande Trail with the Roaring Fork Valley. nwagdSpring, THE RIO GRANDE TRAIL Basalt Me linknitle UPVIETe .111111. 1111.3115 Mc. A 111, Ing ,64 El Popular recreational bicycle routes in the area include loops on Cattle Creek Road and Spring Valley Road east of Highway 82 to the RFTA trail. The photo to the right shows the "mapmyride" routes in the area. The roadways in the area have limited to no sidewalks. "r FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 CHAPTER 3. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION The vehicle trips associated with the River Edge Colorado project were calculated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, Eighth Edition. Trip generation forecasts were developed for full build- out of the property. The ITE method consists of choosing an appropriate independent variable for each land use for a particular time of day. The value of the independent variable is multiplied by a weighted average rate or inserted into a regression equation to calculate the trips generated by each land use. The ITE land uses planned for development are Single Family Housing (210) and Recreation Center (495) Table 3 shows the proposed project trip generation. The notes following the table indicate the regression equation used to generate trips. fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 TABLE 3: TRIP RATES AND GENERATION TABLE Land Use Size Trip Generation Rates [a] Estimated Trip Generation ITE Code Daily Rate A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Rate In Out Rate In Out Rate In Out In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Housing Recreation Center 366 6.0 du ksf 210 495 [b] 22.80 [b] 1.62 25% 61% 75% 39% [b] 1.45 63% 37% 37% 63% [b] 1.07 53% 54% 47% 46% 3,430 137 66 6 200 4 266 10 213 3 125 6 338 9 178 3 158 3 335 6 TOTAL VEHICLE TRIPS 3,567 72 204 276 216 131 347 181 161 341 Notes: [a] Source: Trip Generation, 8th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) [b] ITE 210 trip generation equations used rather than linear trip generation rate: Daily: Ln(T) = 0.92 * Ln(x) + 2.71, where T = trips, x = area in ksf AM Peak Hour: T = 0.70 * x + 9.74, where T = trips, x = area in ksf PM Peak Hour: LN(T) = 0.90 *LN(x) + 0.51, where T = trips, x = area in ksf Sat Peak Hour: T = 0.89 *x + 9.56, where T = trips, x = area in ksf The Maintenance Facility is not expected to generate peak hour trips that will effect SH 82 and has not been included 13 App. M-18 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 CHAPTER 4. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT Trip distribution was based upon existing traffic patterns. In general, 65% of the traffic along SH 82 travels south towards Carbondale in the AM peak, leaving 35% to travel north. In the evening the traffic shifts so that 35% travels south and 65% travels north. Saturday peak hour traffic is more evenly split between northbound and southbound traffic at 50% to 50%. Figure 3 shows the external trip distribution. Traffic was assigned based upon: • One access point onto SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road in 2018 • One access point onto SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road in 2030 Figure 4 shows the project trips as assigned. w FEl-[EZ & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Figure 3: External Trip Distribution fp FEHR Sz_ PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 1 1 App. Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Figure 4: Assigned Project Trips 2018 and 2030 !LEGEND -44. Lane Cor iguratizn rx xxfiu AMIPM+SAT Peak how volumes w FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 16 App. M-21 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 CHAPTER 5. EXISTING AND PROJECTED TRAFFIC 5.1 EXISTING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS Existing Traffic counts were conducted in May 2010 by All Traffic Data for AM, PM and Saturday peak hours. These counts were adjusted to reflect summer peak traffic. According to CDOT records, May traffic is 0.8 times the average annual traffic. Summer peaks are noticed in July along SH 82 and are 1.25 of the average annual traffic. The counts were factored up by 1.56 to reflect the summer peak. Figure 5 shows the adjusted, existing counts along SH 82 and the intersection lane configuration. Appendix A contains the unadjusted traffic count data. 5.2 2018 PROJECTED TRAFFIC AND INTERSECTION OPERATIONS Background traffic projections were developed for year 2018. Background traffic is the traffic that is expected to travel along SH 82 irrespective of the development. Traffic volumes on SH 82 can be expected to increase in accordance with historical growth rates, and "background" traffic, without the development can be estimated using annualized rates of growth developed from the Colorado Department of Transportation 20 -year growth factor for this segment of SH 82. Calculations based on the CDOT 20 -year growth factor produced an eight-year composite growth factor (2010 to 2018) of 1.11. These volumes provide the baseline conditions for comparative purposes with the total traffic projections including the project. Figure 6 shows the projected 2018 background peak hour volumes at each of the study intersections. 5.3 2030 PROJECTED TRAFFIC AND INTERSECTION OPERATIONS Background traffic projections were developed for year 2030. Background traffic is the traffic that is expected to travel along SH 82 irrespective of the development. Traffic volumes on SH 82 can be expected to increase in accordance with historical growth rates, and "background" traffic, without the development can be estimated using annualized rates of growth developed from the Colorado Department of Transportation 20 -year growth factor for this segment of SH 82. The CDOT 20 -year growth factor is 1.31. These volumes provide the baseline conditions for comparative purposes with the total traffic projections including the project. Figure 7 shows the projected 2030 background peak hour volumes at each of the study intersections. w FEI-[EZ & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Figure 5: Adjusted Existing Counts Lane Cor iguratizn x�rxxfiu Al MM+SAT Peak he LA VOL u me5 NOTE: All counts shown have been adjusted to reflect Sum tner Peak, Counts taken May 2010 and adjusted to the Summer Peak with a factor of 1.56 fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 18 App. M-23 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Figure 6: 2018 Background Volumes (LEGEND Lane Configuration Kiterotinco AWPANSAT Peak hour volumes NOTE All counts shown have been adjusted to reflect Summer Peak. Counts taken May 2010 and adjusted to the Summer Peakwkh a factor of 1.56 fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 19 App. M-24 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Figure 7: 2030 Background Volumes 111411111 Tr LEGEND Lane Contiguratio n Al14a'PM SATPeak hour volumes NOTE: Aril counts shown have been adjusted to reflect Summer Peak Counts taken May20l0 and adjusted to the Suirettiier"P4ak with a factor of 136 fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 20 App. M-25 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 5.4 2018 BACKGOUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC The total site generated traffic will be a combination of background traffic and project traffic generated from the new development. Figure 8 show the total traffic along SH 82 for 2018 conditions plus project. 5.5 2030 BACKGOUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC The total site generated traffic will be a combination of background traffic and project traffic generated from the new development. Figure 9 show the total traffic along SH 82 for 2030 conditions plus project. w FEI-[EZ & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Figure 8: 2018 Total Traffic 1/64 b 1—(11910 121.73/4S 'nA jrtif e"? 'LEGEND - Lane G6 rrhg drat i raukaC e MN? M./SATPeak hour volumes • NOTE: All counts shown have been adjusted to reflect Summer Pf-4k, Counts taken May2010 and adjusted to the 'Sun:W ter; Peak with a Factor of 136 fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 22 App. M-27 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Figure 9: 2030 Total Traffic CLEGEND +. Lane Cordig urat ion rxx AWP1&SAT Pea k haur volume_ " NOTE:All counts shown have been adjusted to reflect Summer Peak. Counts taken May2010and adjusted to the SkEmrn r Peak with a factor of 1.56 fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 23 App. M-28 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 CHAPTER 6. ACCESS CODE HIGHWAYS IMPROVEMENTS According to the State Highway Access Code Direct access from a subdivision to the highway shall be permitted only if the proposed access meets the purposes and requirements of the Code. Local traffic from a subdivision abutting a state highway shall be served by an internal street system of adequate capacity, intersecting and connecting with state highways in a manner that is safe as well as consistent with the assigned access category (Code Section Three) and design requirements (Code Section Four). SH 82 is designated as an Expressway (Category E -X). This category is appropriate for use on highways that have the capacity for high speed and relatively high traffic volumes in an efficient and safe manner. They provide for interstate, interregional, intra- regional, and intercity travel needs and to a lesser degree, some intracity travel needs. Direct access service to abutting land is subordinate to providing service to through traffic movements. Typical spacing of intersecting streets, roads and highways shall be planned on intervals of one mile and normally based upon section lines where appropriate. One-half mile spacing of public ways may be permitted to the highway only when no reasonable alternative access to the general street system exists. No access to private property may be permitted unless reasonable access cannot be obtained from the general street system. When private access is permitted, left turns may be allowed if in the opinion of the department such left turns can be reasonably accomplished and it is not a divided highway. When direct private access is permitted, appropriate terms and conditions shall be included in the permit to achieve the following criteria; a) the access should be closed when other reasonable access to a lower functional street, road or highway is reasonably available, b) the access permit should specify under what circumstances the closure may be required, and c) if known, the future access location and the date the closure may occur. The following lists the auxiliary requirements based upon the Expressway (Category E -X) requirements: • A left turn deceleration lane will be required for Cattle Creek Road left turn pocket. The transition taper length will be included within the required deceleration length. • A right turn lane with deceleration and taper lengths will be required for Cattle Creek Road for the southbound right turning traffic. • Signal progression analysis must indicate a 40 percent efficiency or better or shall not degrade the existing progression. (See Chapter 8) • Signals at intersections with major cross streets or roads of equal importance may be programmed to optimize traffic on both streets equally. Cross -streets of lesser importance need not be optimized equally. w FEl-[EZ & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 11 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY AND LOS ANALYSIS 7.1 EXISTING CAPACITY AND LOS Table 4 provides the results of the existing capacity analysis for the AM, PM, and Saturday peak hours. TABLE 4: EXISTING INTERSECTION LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control Peak Hour Existing Delay LOS A.M. 23 C 1 SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SIGNAL P.M. 41 D SAT 18 B A.M. 22 c 2. SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SIDE -STREET STOP CONTROL P.M. 51 f SAT 23 c A.M. 41 e 3. SH 82 & CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIDE -STREET STOP CONTROL P.M. >100 f SAT 23 c Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 4, the intersections currently operate at acceptable levels during peak hours except the westbound side street stopped approaches at Marand Road and at Cattle Creek Road in the PM peak hours. Peak hour signal warrants are not expected to be met at either intersection. Refer to Chapter 8 for further discussion regarding signal warrant analysis. Appendix B provides the LOS calculations for the existing conditions analysis. w FEI-if & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 25 App. M-30 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 7.2 2018 BACKGROUND CAPACITY AND LOS Table 5 provides the results of the 2018 capacity analysis for the AM, PM, and Saturday peak hours without the development assuming the same geometry as existing conditions. TABLE 5: 2018 BACKGROUND LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control Peak Hour Existing Delay LOS A.M. 27 C 1 SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SIGNAL P.M. 69 E SAT 19 B A.M. 26 d 2. SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SIDE -STREET STOP CONTROL P.M. 82 f SAT 27 d A.M. 71 f SH 82 & CATTLE SIDE -STREET 3' CREEK ROAD STOP CONTROL - P.M. >100 f SAT 29 d Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 5, Marand Road continues to notice significant side street delay during the PM peak hour. Cattle Creek Road notices significant side street delay during AM and PM peak hours. Marand Road at SH 82 is not expected to meet peak hour warrants. Partial mitigation at Cattle Creek Road includes separating the westbound left turn and right turn movements. The AM peak hour warrant is expected to be met, however the PM peak hour warrant is not expected to be met, full signal warrants are not expected to be met and delay will continue to be noticed. The signalized intersection of Spring Valley Road notices overall delay in the PM peak. Mitigation at this intersection would require adjustment of the signal timing at the intersection. Refer to Chapter 8 for further discussion regarding signal warrant analysis. w FEI-IR. & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Table 6 shows the operational improvements with the noted mitigation above for Cattle Creek Road and Spring Valley Road. TABLE 6: MITIGATED 2018 BACKGROUND LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control Peak Hour Existing Delay LOS A.M. 18 B 1 SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SIGNAL P.M. 46 D SAT 17 B A.M. 26 d SH 82 & SIDE -STREET 2. MARAND ROAD STOP CONTROL P.M. 82 f SAT 27 d A.M. 44 e SH 82 & CATTLE SIDE -STREET 3' CREEK ROAD STOP CONTROL P.M. >100 f SAT 23 c Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 6, delay will continue to be noticed for the side street stop controlled intersections in the PM peak hour. w FEI-IR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 7.3 2018 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC As mentioned previously, all project traffic will access SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road. Table 7 provides the results of the 2018 plus project capacity analysis for the AM, PM, and Saturday peak hours. The mitigation previously mentioned for Spring Valley Road was assumed to be in place. TABLE 7: 2018 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control Peak Hour Existing Delay LOS A.M. 28 C 1 SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SIGNAL P.M. 51 D SAT 19 B A.M. 28 d SH 82 & SIDE -STREET 2' MARAND ROAD STOP CONTROL P.M. 99 f SAT 30 d A.M. >100 f SH 82 & CATTLE SIDE -STREET 3' CREEK ROAD STOP CONTROL P.M. >100 f SAT 61 f Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 7, the intersection of Marand Road continues to notice significant delay during the PM peak hour due to the westbound approach delay. Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 also continues to notice significant delay. Analysis assumes geometry based upon existing conditions To mitigate the excessive delay at Cattle Creek Road, a signal is needed. A signal at this intersection is expected to meet AM and PM peak hour warrants. A signal warrant and progression analysis was completed and is described in Chapter 8. The Marand Road intersection is not expected to meet peak hour warrants in 2018. Delay at this intersection will continue to be noticed. Refer to Chapter 8 for further discussion regarding signal warrant analysis. w FEI-1EZ & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS App. M-1 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 Table 8 provides the mitigated results. TABLE 8: 2018 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT MITIGATED LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control Peak Hour Existing Delay LOS A.M. 28 C 1.SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY VALLEY ROAD SIGNAL - 51 D SAT 18 B A.M. 28 d SH 82 & SIDE -STREET 2' MARAND ROAD STOP CONTROL - P.M. 99 f SAT 30 d A.M. 13 B 3 SH 82 & CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIGNAL P.M. 13 B SAT 7 A Notes: 1 The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. 2 Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds 3 Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. As shown in Table 8, the suggested mitigation alleviates delay at the intersection of SH 82 and Cattle Creek Road. w FEI-1t & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 29 App. M-34 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 7.4 2030 BACKGROUND CAPACITY AND LOS Build out of the River Edge Colorado development is expected to be completed around 2018. However, in the event the project is not completed or in place by 2030, an analysis of background traffic in 2030 was completed. TABLE 9: 2030 BACKGROUND LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control Peak Hour Existing Delay LOS 1 SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SIGNAL A.M. 23 C P.M. 95 F SAT 20 B 2 SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SIDE -STREET STOP CONTROL A.M. 38 e P.M. >100 f SAT 37 e 3 SH 82 & CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIDE -STREET STOP CONTROL A.M. >100 f P.M. >100 f SAT 32 d Notes: The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. 1 2 3 As shown in Table 9, Spring Valley Road intersection notices significant delay during the PM peak hour. Marand Road continues to notice significant side street delay during the PM peak hour. Cattle Creek Road notices significant side street delay during AM and PM peak hours. In order to mitigate the delay at Spring Valley Road, the westbound and eastbound turning movements need to be separated from the through movements. Marand Road at SH 82 is not expected to meet peak hour warrants. Mitigation at Cattle Creek Road includes signalizing the intersection. Both AM and PM peak hour warrants are expected to be met. Refer to Chapter 8 for further discussion regarding signal warrant analysis. w FEI-1t & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 11 MIN 30 App. M-35 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 TABLE 10: MITIGATED 2030 BACKGROUND LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control Peak Hour Existing Delay LOS 1 SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SIGNAL A.M. 23 C P.M. 43 D SAT 20 B 2 SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SIDE -STREET STOP CONTROL A.M. 38 e P.M. >100 f SAT 37 e 3 SH 82 &CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIGNAL A.M. 12 B P.M. 22 C SAT 5 A Notes: The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. 1 2 3 As shown in Table 10, the suggested mitigation alleviates delay for the intersections of SH 82 at Spring Valley Road and SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road. FEI-HR. & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 7.5 2030 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC All project traffic will access SH 82 to Cattle Creek Road. Table 11 provides the results of the 2030 plus project analysis for the AM, PM, and Saturday peak hours. The background mitigation for Spring Valley Road and Cattle Creek Road were assumed to be in place. TABLE 11: 2030 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT LOS RESULTS No. Intersection Control Peak Hour Existing Delay LOS 1 SH 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD SIGNAL A.M. 24 C P.M. 43 D SAT 21 C 2. SH 82 & MARAND ROAD SIDE -STREET STOP CONTROL A.M. 42 e P.M. >100 f SAT 43 e 3 SH 82 & CATTLE CREEK ROAD SIGNAL A.M. 19 B P.M. 32 C SAT 7 A Notes: The Signalized intersection LOS and delay results are reported for the overall intersection. The unsignalized results are reported for the worst case approach. Delay is reported as the average delay per vehicle in seconds Level of Service for Signalized intersections are indicated in uppercase. Lower case is used for stop controlled intersections. 1 2 3 As shown in Table 11, Marand Road westbound side street stop control approach continues to notice delay during all peak hours, however signal warrants are not expected to be met. No additional mitigation is recommended. Refer to Chapter 8 for further discussion regarding signal warrant analysis. w FEI-IR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 11..im "71 CHAPTER 8. SIGNAL WARRANT AND PROGRESSION ANALYSIS 8.1 SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS A signal warrant analysis was performed on the two side -street stop -controlled intersections that operated with high levels of delay: Marand Road/ SH 82 and Cattle Creek Road/ SH 82. The warrants identified in the Federal Highway Administration's Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) were used for the analysis. The Peak Hour Volume Warrant, the Four-hour Volume Warrant, and other relevant factors were considered in evaluating the addition of signal operations at these intersections. Appendix D contains the signal warrant analysis worksheets. Peak Hour Warrant The Peak Hour Warrant, which compares the volumes at an intersection during the peak hour of operation to the warrant requirements for the major street and minor street traffic, was evaluated for the scenario in the 2018 and 2030 plus project conditions. The rural warrants were used for both intersections. 2018 Cattle Creek Road/ SH 82 was considered for signalization as a mitigation measure. Cattle Creek Road is expected to meet the AM peak hour warrants without the project. Both AM and PM peak hour warrants are expected to be met with the project in 2018. Marand Road is not expected to meet the peak hour warrants in 2018. If project build -out happens prior to 2018, signal warrants will most likely be met by that time. 2030 Peak hour warrants were run in 2030 without the project in the case the project was not built. Without the project, Cattle Creek Road meets both AM and PM peak hour warrants. Marand Road is not expected to meet the peak hour warrants in 2030 with or without the project. w FEI-IR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS App;. M-38 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 8.2 PROGRESSION ANALYSIS A signal progression analysis was completed to ensure SH 82 will operate with the appropriate efficiently based upon the existing category of the highway. CDOT requires an efficiency of at least 40. Efficiency represents the proportion of all green time that is in progression along a corridor. As a guideline, efficiency below 12% is considered poor, efficiency between 13% to 24% is considered fair, and efficiency between 25 to 36% is good. Great progression is anything over 36%. Table 12 provides the 90th percentile arterial bandwidths on SH 82 the AM and PM peak hours for horizon year 2018 and 2030 plus project. TABLE 12: PROGRESSION EFFICIENCY Scenario Peak Hour Cycle Length (Seconds) 90th Percentile Bandwidth (%) 2018 A.M. 100 49 P.M. 120 59 2030 A.M. 100 53 P.M. 120 52 As shown in Table 12, both 2018 and 2030 scenarios with the project meet the minimum 40% efficiency for the highway. Appendix E provides the Time — Space Diagrams of the progression analysis completed with Synchro 7. w FEI-IR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS 34 App. M-39 Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 CHAPTER 9. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 2018 Background Traffic volumes along State Highway 82 are expected to increase by a compounded growth factor of 1.11 into 2018. The following mitigation efforts will be needed without the project in order to maintain efficient operations along the corridor: • Spring Valley Road at SH 82 - Re -timing improvements in order to maintain acceptable LOS operations during the peak hours. This improvement will allow for LOS D or better during all peak hours. • Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 — The westbound right turn should be separated Although Cattle Creek Road and Marand Road side -street approaches notice delay at the stop controlled intersections, it is not expected that the side street volumes will be high enough to warrant a signal without the project. The suggested mitigation efforts are not necessitated by the project. 2030 Background Traffic volumes along State Highway 82 are expected to increase by a compounded growth factor of 1.31 into 2030. The following mitigation efforts will be needed without the project in order to maintain efficient operations along the corridor: • Spring Valley Road at SH 82 — The eastbound and westbound turn movements should be separated from the through movements. This mitigation will allow for LOS D or better during all peak hours. • Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 — This intersection will need to be signalized in 2030 due to background growth. Peak hour signal warrants are expected to be met in the AM and PM peak hours. This improvement will allow for LOS C or better during all peak hours. Although Marand Road side -street approaches notice delay at the stop controlled intersection, it is not expected that the side street volumes will be high enough to warrant a signal. The suggested mitigation efforts are not necessitated by the project. 2018 Plus Project All River Edge Colorado development traffic will access SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road in the year 2018. The following mitigation efforts will be needed with the project in order to maintain efficient operations along the corridor: • Cattle Creek Road at SH 82 - A signal will be needed at Cattle Creek Road and SH 82 upon buildout. With a signal at Cattle Creek Road, the intersection is shown to operate at a LOS B or better during all peak hours. The westbound right turn will not need to be separated if a signal is present. w FEI-[R. & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Traffic Assessment River Edge Colorado December 2010 The mitigation efforts are necessitated by the project traffic. The project does not significantly impact Marand Road at SH 82 or Spring Valley Road at SH 82. Peak hour signal warrants were conducted for the intersection of Cattle Creek Road at SH 82. Cattle Creek Road is expected to meet the peak hour warrants in 2018 with the project. 2030 Plus Project Similar to 2018 all River Edge Colorado development traffic will access SH 82 at Cattle Creek Road in the year 2030. The mitigation efforts are necessitated by the project traffic. The project does not significantly impact Marand Road at SH 82 or Spring Valley Road at SH 82. No additional mitigation efforts are recommended. Highway Access Requirements SH 82 is currently a Category E -X roadway. According to the Access Code, direct access service to abutting land is subordinate to providing service to through traffic movements. The following requirements will be necessary to gain improved access: • The spacing of Cattle Creek Road is such that a signal will be appropriate based upon the approximate 1 mile spacing to Spring Valley Road. • Auxiliary left turn lanes are required at Cattle Creek Road. The transition taper length will be included with the required storage and deceleration length. • A right turn deceleration lane with taper is required for southbound traffic turning onto Cattle Creek Road Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements To accommodate recreational bicycle activity in the area, a bicycle connection to the RFTA trail near the main entrance should be requested and bicycle traffic internal to the site be considered in the design. Adequate facilities are recommended within the development to accommodate pedestrian traffic throughout the development and to facilitate safe pedestrian crossings at SH 82. w FEI-IR. & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS traffic Assessment liver Edge Colorado december 2010 APPENDIX A: EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS App. M-42 All Traffic Data S �a� a:foioaia Sex -Aces Inc. File Name : AM_16280 SH82&CR113 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/20/2010 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 - TRUCKS App. M-43 SH82 Southbound CR113 Westbound SH82 Northbound CR113 Eastbound Start Time Left I Thru I Rght I Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru I Rght I Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 07:00 AM 4 288 0 0 12 0 10 0 0 75 10 0 0 0 0 0 399 07:15 AM 6 276 0 0 14 0 4 0 0 99 6 0 0 0 0 0 405 07:30 AM 17 256 0 0 21 0 13 0 0 121 10 0 0 0 0 0 438 07:45 AM 7 227 0 0 25 0 11 0 0 121 4 0 0 0 0 0 395 Total 34 1047 0 0 72 0 38 0 0 416 30 0 0 0 0 0 1637 08:00 AM 8 235 0 0 10 0 15 0 0 125 9 0 0 0 0 0 402 08:15 AM 9 213 0 0 8 0 6 0 0 146 6 0 0 0 0 0 388 08:30 AM 3 199 0 0 13 0 10 0 0 137 9 0 0 0 0 0 371 08:45 AM 8 192 0 0 14 0 12 0 0 150 9 0 0 0 0 0 385 Total 28 839 0 0 45 0 43 0 0 558 33 0 0 0 0 0 1546 Grand Total 62 1886 0 0 117 0 81 0 0 974 63 0 0 0 0 0 3183 Apprch % 3.2 96.8 0 0 59.1 0 40.9 0 0 93.9 6.1 0 0 0 0 0 Total % 1.9 59.3 0 0 3.7 0 2.5 0 0 30.6 2 0 0 0 0 0 Class 1 62 1839 0 0 117 0 66 0 0 946 63 0 0 0 0 0 3093 % Class 1 100 97.5 0 0 100 0 81.5 0 0 97.1 100 0 0 0 0 0 97.2 TRUCKS 0 47 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 % TRUCKS 0 2.5 0 0 0 0 18.5 0 0 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.8 App. M-43 All Traffic Data 11 IMM#1.101COXID Services Inc. File Name : AM_16280 SH82&CR113 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/20/2010 Page No : 2 Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:15 AM Int. Total 07:15 AM SH82 Southbound CR113 Westbound SH82 Northbound CR113 Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:15 AM Int. Total 07:15 AM 6 276 0 0 282 14 0 4 0 18 0 99 6 0 105 0 0 0 0 0 405 07:30 AM 17 256 0 0 273 21 0 13 0 34 0 121 10 0 131 0 0 0 0 0 438 07:45 AM 7 227 0 0 234 25 0 11 0 36 0 121 4 0 125 0 0 0 0 0 395 08:00 AM 8 235 0 0 243 10 0 15 0 25 0 125 9 0 134 0 0 0 0 0 402 Total volume 38 994 0 0 1032 70 0 43 0 113 0 466 29 0 495 0 0 0 0 0 1640 App. Total 3.7 96.3 0 0 61.9 0 38.1 0 0 94.1 5.9 0 0 0 0 0 P H F .559 .900 .000 .000 .915 .700 .000 .717 .000 .785 .000 .932 .725 .000 .924 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .936 0 co O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 h v a Out 509 SH82 In 10321 01 9941 381 01 Rpht Thru Left Peds 1—i' 1 Total 15411 Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Begins at 07:15 AN Class 1 TRUCKS 47 I Left Thru Rght Peds 1 01 4661 291 01 1 4951 In SH82 1 10641 Out 15591 Total W 0 0 0 V w o O C n 7 13 w 31 m App. M-44 All Traffic Data S �a� a:foioaia Sex -Aces Inc. File Name : PM_16280 SH82&CR113 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/20/2010 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 - TRUCKS App. M-45 SH82 Southbound CR113 Westbound SH82 Northbound CR113 Eastbound Start Time Left I Thru I Rght I Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru I Rght 1 Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 04:00 PM 3 123 0 0 10 1 13 0 0 242 19 0 0 0 0 0 411 04:15 PM 5 134 0 0 8 1 20 0 0 276 11 0 0 0 0 0 455 04:30 PM 8 135 0 0 8 0 18 0 0 309 15 0 0 0 0 0 493 04:45 PM 3 171 0 0 11 2 18 0 0 295 11 0 0 0 0 0 511 Total 19 563 0 0 37 4 69 0 0 1122 56 0 0 0 0 0 1870 05:00 PM 5 183 0 0 16 1 14 0 0 304 13 0 0 0 0 0 536 05:15 PM 5 151 0 0 7 2 14 0 0 313 9 0 0 0 0 0 501 05:30 PM 6 146 0 0 9 1 11 0 0 270 14 0 0 0 0 0 457 05:45 PM 7 125 0 0 9 1 13 0 0 242 10 0 0 0 0 0 407 Total 23 605 0 0 41 5 52 0 0 1129 46 0 0 0 0 0 1901 Grand Total 42 1168 0 0 78 9 121 0 0 2251 102 0 0 0 0 0 3771 Apprch % 3.5 96.5 0 0 37.5 4.3 58.2 0 0 95.7 4.3 0 0 0 0 0 Total % 1.1 31 0 0 2.1 0.2 3.2 0 0 59.7 2.7 0 0 0 0 0 Class 1 42 1132 0 0 78 0 121 0 0 2206 102 0 0 0 0 0 3681 % Class 1 100 96.9 0 0 100 0 100 0 0 98 100 0 0 0 0 0 97.6 TRUCKS 0 36 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 % TRUCKS 0 3.1 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.4 App. M-45 All Traffic Data 11 IM,,xo.o..a Services Inc. File Name : PM_16280 SH82&CR113 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/20/2010 Page No : 2 Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM Int. Total 04:30 PM SH82 Southbound CR113 Westbound SH82 Northbound CR113 Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM Int. Total 04:30 PM 8 135 0 0 143 8 0 18 0 26 0 309 15 0 324 0 0 0 0 0 493 04:45 PM 3 171 0 0 174 11 2 18 0 31 0 295 11 0 306 0 0 0 0 0 511 05:00 PM 5 183 0 0 188 16 1 14 0 31 0 304 13 0 317 0 0 0 0 0 536 05:15 PM 5 151 0 0 156 7 2 14 0 23 0 313 9 0 322 0 0 0 0 0 501 Total volume 21 640 0 0 661 42 5 64 0 111 0 1221 48 0 1269 0 0 0 0 0 2041 App. Total 3.2 96.8 0 0 37.8 4.5 57.7 0 0 96.2 3.8 0 0 0 0 0 P H F .656 .874 .000 .000 .879 .656 .625 .889 .000 .895 .000 .975 .800 .000 .979 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .952 M C re U O 0 0 0 0 0 h v a Out 12851 SH82 In 1 6611 1 1 0 6401 211 01 Rght Thru Left Peds 1 Total 1 19461 Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 Pk Class 1 TRUCKS 47 I Left Thru Rght Peds 01 12211 481 01 1 12691 In SH82 6821 Out 1 19511 Total 0 0 co 0 O 0 m App. M-46 All Traffic Data 1 11•1aa IQ1O11a =enncec Inc. File Name : NOON_16281 SH82&CR113 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/22/2010 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 - TRUCKS App. M-47 SH82 Southbound CR113 Westbound SH82 Northbound CR113 Eastbound Start Time Left I Thru I Rght I Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru I Rght I Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 11:00 AM 4 128 0 0 6 0 10 0 0 160 6 0 0 0 0 0 314 11:15 AM 3 133 0 0 5 0 8 0 0 165 3 0 0 0 0 0 317 11:30 AM 9 121 0 0 3 0 8 0 0 190 9 0 0 0 0 0 340 11:45 AM 5 133 0 0 12 0 11 0 0 163 6 0 0 0 0 0 330 Total 21 515 0 0 26 0 37 0 0 678 24 0 0 0 0 0 1301 12:00 PM 1 148 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 186 5 0 0 0 0 0 352 12:15 PM 5 149 0 0 5 0 12 0 0 158 11 0 0 0 0 0 340 12:30 PM 0 134 0 0 4 0 10 0 0 171 7 0 0 0 0 0 326 12:45 PM 3 140 0 0 5 0 12 0 0 148 5 0 0 0 0 0 313 Total 9 571 0 0 20 0 40 0 0 663 28 0 0 0 0 0 1331 Grand Total 30 1086 0 0 46 0 77 0 0 1341 52 0 0 0 0 0 2632 Apprch % 2.7 97.3 0 0 37.4 0 62.6 0 0 96.3 3.7 0 0 0 0 0 Total % 1.1 41.3 0 0 1.7 0 2.9 0 0 50.9 2 0 0 0 0 0 Class 1 30 1073 0 0 46 0 72 0 0 1322 52 0 0 0 0 0 2595 % Class 1 100 98.8 0 0 100 0 93.5 0 0 98.6 100 0 0 0 0 0 98.6 TRUCKS 0 13 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 % TRUCKS 0 1.2 0 0 0 0 6.5 0 0 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 App. M-47 All Traffic Data 11 IMM#1.101COXID Services Inc. File Name : NOON_16281 SH82&CR113 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/22/2010 Page No : 2 Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:30 AM Int. Total 11:30 AM SH82 Southbound CR113 Westbound SH82 Northbound CR113 Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:30 AM Int. Total 11:30 AM 9 121 0 0 130 3 0 8 0 11 0 190 9 0 199 0 0 0 0 0 340 11:45 AM 5 133 0 0 138 12 0 11 0 23 0 163 6 0 169 0 0 0 0 0 330 12:00 PM 1 148 0 0 149 6 0 6 0 12 0 186 5 0 191 0 0 0 0 0 352 12:15 PM 5 149 0 0 154 5 0 12 0 17 0 158 11 0 169 0 0 0 0 0 340 Total volume 20 551 0 0 571 26 0 37 0 63 0 697 31 0 728 0 0 0 0 0 1362 App. Total 3.5 96.5 0 0 41.3 0 58.7 0 0 95.7 4.3 0 0 0 0 0 P H F .556 .924 .000 .000 .927 .542 .000 .771 .000 .685 .000 .917 .705 .000 .915 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .967 0 co U O 0 O O O 0 0 0 h v a Out 7341 SH82 In 1 5711 1 1 0 5511 201 01 Rght Thru Left Peds 1 Total 1 13051 Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Begins at 11:30 AN Class 1 TRUCKS 47 I Left Thru Rght Peds 1 01 6971 311 01 1 7281 In SH82 5771 Out 1 13051 Total 0 tP w O c n 7 13 w 0 m App. M-48 All Traffic Data 11 to nxu,onD Services Inc. File Name Site Code Start Date Page No Groups Printed- Class 1 - TRUCKS : AM_16283 SH82&MARAND :00000000 : 5/20/2010 :1 0 1- 0 ❑CY O 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 O 00 0 00 0 00 0 Out 978 38 1016 SH82 In Total 1856 58 1914 2834 96 2930 0 0 1837 58 19 0 0 0 0 1895 19 0 Rpht Thru Left Peds 1--i' 1 North 5/20/2010 07:00 AM 5/20/2010 08:45 AM Class 1 TRUCKS 47 I Left Thru Rght Peds 0 0 960 38 56 0 0 0 0 998 56 0 1908 58 1966 Out 1016 38 1054 2924 96 3020 In Total SH82 4c 1 -o 0. N CO 0 c 0 00 V O —V+ 0 0 0 0) 0 0) CO CO CO 0 O orn 0 5 z 0 0m App. M-49 SH82 Southbound MARAND RD Westbound SH82 Northbound MARAND RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 07:00 AM 2 286 0 0 12 0 4 0 0 75 10 0 0 0 0 0 389 07:15 AM 2 279 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 102 5 0 0 0 0 0 399 07:30 AM 1 249 0 0 9 0 4 0 0 126 5 0 0 0 0 0 394 07:45 AM 1 242 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 124 4 0 0 0 0 0 381 Total 6 1056 0 0 42 0 8 0 0 427 24 0 0 0 0 0 1563 08:00 AM 4 232 0 0 8 0 2 0 0 130 11 0 0 0 0 0 387 08:15 AM 4 218 0 0 6 0 2 0 0 151 8 0 0 0 0 0 389 08:30 AM 1 191 0 0 4 0 3 0 0 134 4 0 0 0 0 0 337 08:45 AM 4 198 0 0 11 0 3 0 0 156 9 0 0 0 0 0 381 Total 13 839 0 0 29 0 10 0 0 571 32 0 0 0 0 0 1494 Grand Total 19 1895 0 0 71 0 18 0 0 998 56 0 0 0 0 0 3057 Apprch % 1 99 0 0 79.8 0 20.2 0 0 94.7 5.3 0 0 0 0 0 Total % 0.6 62 0 0 2.3 0 0.6 0 0 32.6 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 Class 19 1837 0 0 71 0 18 0 0 960 56 0 0 0 0 0 2961 % Class 1 100 96.9 0 0 100 0 100 0 0 96.2 100 0 0 0 0 0 96.9 TRUCKS 0 58 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 96 % TRUCKS 0 3.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.1 0 1- 0 ❑CY O 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 O 00 0 00 0 00 0 Out 978 38 1016 SH82 In Total 1856 58 1914 2834 96 2930 0 0 1837 58 19 0 0 0 0 1895 19 0 Rpht Thru Left Peds 1--i' 1 North 5/20/2010 07:00 AM 5/20/2010 08:45 AM Class 1 TRUCKS 47 I Left Thru Rght Peds 0 0 960 38 56 0 0 0 0 998 56 0 1908 58 1966 Out 1016 38 1054 2924 96 3020 In Total SH82 4c 1 -o 0. N CO 0 c 0 00 V O —V+ 0 0 0 0) 0 0) CO CO CO 0 O orn 0 5 z 0 0m App. M-49 All Traffic Data 11 IMM#1.101COXID Services Inc. File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : AM_16283 SH82&MARAND :00000000 : 5/20/2010 :2 Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:00 AM Int. Total 07:00 AM SH82 Southbound MARAND RD Westbound SH82 Northbound MARAND RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:00 AM Int. Total 07:00 AM 2 286 0 0 288 12 0 4 0 16 0 75 10 0 85 0 0 0 0 0 389 07:15 AM 2 279 0 0 281 11 0 0 0 11 0 102 5 0 107 0 0 0 0 0 399 07:30 AM 1 249 0 0 250 9 0 4 0 13 0 126 5 0 131 0 0 0 0 0 394 07:45 AM 1 242 0 0 243 10 0 0 0 10 0 124 4 0 128 0 0 0 0 0 381 Total volume 6 1056 0 0 1062 42 0 8 0 50 0 427 24 0 451 0 0 0 0 0 1563 App. Total 0.6 99.4 0 0 84 0 16 0 0 94.7 5.3 0 0 0 0 0 P H F .750 .923 .000 .000 .922 .875 .000 .500 .000 .781 .000 .847 .600 .000 .861 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .979 0 ct 2 O O O O 0 0 0 r h v a Out 4351 SH82 In 1 10621 1 01 10561 61 01 Rght Thru Left Peds 1 Total 1 14971 Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Begins at 07:00 AN Class 1 TRUCKS 47 I Left Thru Rght Peds 1 01 4271 241 01 1 4511 In SH82 1 10981 Out 1 15491 Total 0 0 O cn co 0 0 z 0 0 0 m App. M-50 All Traffic Data 11 tanxu,onD Services Inc. Groups Printed- Class 1 File Name Site Code Start Date Page No TRUCK : PM_16283 SH82&MARAND :00000000 : 5/20/2010 :1 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 Out 2289 56 2345 SH82 In Total 1145 51 1196 3434 107 3541 0 0 1137 51 8 0 0 0 0 1188 8 0 Rpht Thru Left Peds 1--i' 1 North 5/20/2010 04:00 PM 5/20/2010 05:45 PM Class 1 TRUCK 47 I Left Thru Rght Peds 0 0 2243 56 79 0 0 0 0 2299 79 0 1165 51 1216 Out 2322 56 2378 3487 107 3594 In Total SH82 0 00) 0 00 co 00) 0 0 0 co 0 co O ? rn o App. M-51 SH82 Southbound MARAND RD Westbound SH82 Northbound MARAND RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 04:00 PM 5 132 0 0 3 0 8 0 0 251 6 0 0 0 0 0 405 04:15 PM 0 126 0 0 2 0 4 0 0 276 17 0 0 0 0 0 425 04:30 PM 0 138 0 0 6 0 7 0 0 314 6 0 0 0 0 0 471 04:45 PM 0 176 0 0 4 0 7 0 0 305 9 0 0 0 0 0 501 Total 5 572 0 0 15 0 26 0 0 1146 38 0 0 0 0 0 1802 05:00 PM 1 180 0 0 4 0 8 0 0 301 13 0 0 0 0 0 507 05:15 PM 2 154 0 0 3 0 10 0 0 323 8 0 0 0 0 0 500 05:30 PM 0 152 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 279 13 0 0 0 0 0 448 05:45 PM 0 130 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 250 7 0 0 0 0 0 391 Total 3 616 0 0 13 0 20 0 0 1153 41 0 0 0 0 0 1846 Grand Total 8 1188 0 0 28 0 46 0 0 2299 79 0 0 0 0 0 3648 Apprch % 0.7 99.3 0 0 37.8 0 62.2 0 0 96.7 3.3 0 0 0 0 0 Total % 0.2 32.6 0 0 0.8 0 1.3 0 0 63 2.2 0 0 0 0 0 Class 8 1137 0 0 28 0 46 0 0 2243 79 0 0 0 0 0 3541 % Class 1 100 95.7 0 0 100 0 100 0 0 97.6 100 0 0 0 0 0 97.1 TRUCK 0 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 % TRUCK 0 4.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 Out 2289 56 2345 SH82 In Total 1145 51 1196 3434 107 3541 0 0 1137 51 8 0 0 0 0 1188 8 0 Rpht Thru Left Peds 1--i' 1 North 5/20/2010 04:00 PM 5/20/2010 05:45 PM Class 1 TRUCK 47 I Left Thru Rght Peds 0 0 2243 56 79 0 0 0 0 2299 79 0 1165 51 1216 Out 2322 56 2378 3487 107 3594 In Total SH82 0 00) 0 00 co 00) 0 0 0 co 0 co O ? rn o App. M-51 All Traffic Data 11 IM,,xo.o..a Services Inc. File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : PM_16283 SH82&MARAND :00000000 : 5/20/2010 :2 Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM Int. Total 04:30 PM SH82 Southbound MARAND RD Westbound SH82 Northbound MARAND RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM Int. Total 04:30 PM 0 138 0 0 138 6 0 7 0 13 0 314 6 0 320 0 0 0 0 0 471 04:45 PM 0 176 0 0 176 4 0 7 0 11 0 305 9 0 314 0 0 0 0 0 501 05:00 PM 1 180 0 0 181 4 0 8 0 12 0 301 13 0 314 0 0 0 0 0 507 05:15 PM 2 154 0 0 156 3 0 10 0 13 0 323 8 0 331 0 0 0 0 0 500 Total volume 3 648 0 0 651 17 0 32 0 49 0 1243 36 0 1279 0 0 0 0 0 1979 App. Total 0.5 99.5 0 0 34.7 0 65.3 0 0 97.2 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 P H F .375 .900 .000 .000 .899 .708 .000 .800 .000 .942 .000 .962 .692 .000 .966 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .976 O O O 0 O 0 t h v a Out 12751 SH82 In 1 6511 01 6481 31 01 Rpht Thru Left Peds 1—i' 1 I`1 Total 1 19261 Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 Pk Class 1 TRUCK 47 I Left Thru Rght Peds 1 01 12431 361 01 1 1 12791 In SH82 6651 Out 1 19441 Total 0 0 A 0 ZD7 —z z 0 0 0 m App. M-52 All Traffic Data 11 to nxu,onD Services Inc. File Name : NOON_16282 SH82&MARAND Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/22/2010 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 - TRUCKS 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 Out 1365 35 1400 SH82 In Total 1082 24 1106 2447 59 2506 0 0 1078 24 4 0 0 0 0 1102 4 0 Rpht Thru Left Peds 1--i' 1 North 5/22/2010 11:00 AM 5/22/2010 12:45 PM Class 1 TRUCKS 47 I Left Thru Rght Peds 0 0 1352 35 34 0 0 0 0 1387 34 0 1101 24 1125 Out 1386 35 1421 2487 59 2546 In Total SH82 W O G) O 00 w 0w O 0 0 CO 0 0) O m O A 0 5 z 0 0 App. M-53 SH82 Southbound MARAND RD Westbound SH82 Northbound MARAND RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 11:00 AM 0 127 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 169 4 0 0 0 0 0 305 11:15 AM 1 141 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 174 5 0 0 0 0 0 324 11:30 AM 2 124 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 202 7 0 0 0 0 0 338 11:45 AM 0 131 0 0 7 0 1 0 0 163 3 0 0 0 0 0 305 Total 3 523 0 0 15 0 4 0 0 708 19 0 0 0 0 0 1272 12:00 PM 0 156 0 0 2 0 4 0 0 181 2 0 0 0 0 0 345 12:15 PM 0 147 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 163 1 0 0 0 0 0 315 12:30 PM 1 139 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 180 5 0 0 0 0 0 328 12:45 PM 0 137 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 155 7 0 0 0 0 0 303 Total 1 579 0 0 8 0 9 0 0 679 15 0 0 0 0 0 1291 Grand Total 4 1102 0 0 23 0 13 0 0 1387 34 0 0 0 0 0 2563 Apprch % 0.4 99.6 0 0 63.9 0 36.1 0 0 97.6 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 Total % 0.2 43 0 0 0.9 0 0.5 0 0 54.1 1.3 0 0 0 0 0 Class 1 4 1078 0 0 23 0 13 0 0 1352 34 0 0 0 0 0 2504 % Class 1 100 97.8 0 0 100 0 100 0 0 97.5 100 0 0 0 0 0 97.7 TRUCKS 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 % TRUCKS 0 2.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.3 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 Out 1365 35 1400 SH82 In Total 1082 24 1106 2447 59 2506 0 0 1078 24 4 0 0 0 0 1102 4 0 Rpht Thru Left Peds 1--i' 1 North 5/22/2010 11:00 AM 5/22/2010 12:45 PM Class 1 TRUCKS 47 I Left Thru Rght Peds 0 0 1352 35 34 0 0 0 0 1387 34 0 1101 24 1125 Out 1386 35 1421 2487 59 2546 In Total SH82 W O G) O 00 w 0w O 0 0 CO 0 0) O m O A 0 5 z 0 0 App. M-53 All Traffic Data 11 IMM#1.101COXID Services Inc. File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : NOON_16282 SH82&MARAND :00000000 : 5/22/2010 :2 Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:15 AM Int. Total 11:15 AM SH82 Southbound MARAND RD Westbound SH82 Northbound MARAND RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:15 AM Int. Total 11:15 AM 1 141 0 0 142 3 0 0 0 3 0 174 5 0 179 0 0 0 0 0 324 11:30 AM 2 124 0 0 126 2 0 1 0 3 0 202 7 0 209 0 0 0 0 0 338 11:45 AM 0 131 0 0 131 7 0 1 0 8 0 163 3 0 166 0 0 0 0 0 305 12:00 PM 0 156 0 0 156 2 0 4 0 6 0 181 2 0 183 0 0 0 0 0 345 Total volume 3 552 0 0 555 14 0 6 0 20 0 720 17 0 737 0 0 0 0 0 1312 App. Total 0.5 99.5 0 0 70 0 30 0 0 97.7 2.3 0 0 0 0 0 P H F .375 .885 .000 .000 .889 .500 .000 .375 .000 .625 .000 .891 .607 .000 .882 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .951 ct 2 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 t h v a Out 7261 SH82 In 1 5551 0 5521 31 01 Rpht Thru Left Peds 1—i' 1 I`� Total 1 12811 Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Begins at 11:15 AN Class 1 TRUCKS 47 I Left Thru Rght Peds 01 7201 171 01 1 7371 In SH82 5661 Out 1 13031 Total W 0 0 0 N O 0 0 5 5 O O 0 N App. M-54 All Traffic Data 11 t a nxu,o}xa Services Inc. Groups Printed- Class 1 SH82 Southbound SPRING VALLEY RD Westbound File Name : AM_16284 SH82&SPRING Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/20/2010 Page No : 1 SH82 Northbound SPRING VALLEY RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 07:00 AM 07:15 AM 07:30 AM 07:45 AM Total 08:00 AM 08:15 AM 08:30 AM 08:45 AM Total 20 241 12 0 28 236 9 0 27 204 13 0 24 198 7 0 21 6 12 0 13 8 7 0 8 3 19 0 16 8 21 0 2 63 3 0 6 87 2 0 10 107 7 0 16 105 2 0 3 13 19 1 12 3 26 0 7 2 27 1 6 11 29 0 Grand Total Apprch % Total % 99 879 41 0 26 187 11 0 21 179 12 1 23 155 9 0 17 160 12 0 87 681 44 1 186 1560 85 1 10.2 85.2 4.6 0.1 5.5 46.3 2.5 0 58 25 59 0 18 4 11 2 16 4 20 1 12 4 11 1 13 3 18 0 59 15 60 4 117 40 119 4 41.8 14.3 42.5 1.4 3.5 1.2 3.5 0.1 34 362 14 0 10 112 6 0 9 130 5 0 13 116 7 1 14 137 5 0 46 495 23 1 28 29 101 2 80 857 37 1 8.2 87.9 3.8 0.1 2.4 25.5 1.1 0 5 9 14 0 5 8 20 1 5 4 17 3 4 8 17 0 19 29 68 4 47 58 169 6 16.8 20.7 60.4 2.1 1.4 1.7 5 0.2 r J E coco 0 m L h SH82 Out In Total 18321 1 851 15601 1861 11 Rght Thru Left Peds 1 1 10231 28551 North 5/20/2010 07:00 AM 5/20/2010 08:45 AM Class 1 47 T Left Thru Rght Peds 801 8571 371 1I 1 9751 Out In Total SH82 18461 28211 O O A W 0 rn 416 437 435 443 1731 415 432 381 408 1636 3367 App. M-55 All Traffic Data 11 IM,,xo.o..a Services Inc. File Name : AM_16284 SH82&SPRING Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/20/2010 Page No : 2 Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:00 AM Int. Total 07:00 AM SH82 Southbound SPRING VALLEY RD Westbound SH82 Northbound SPRING VALLEY RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:00 AM Int. Total 07:00 AM 20 241 12 0 273 21 6 12 0 39 2 63 3 0 68 3 13 19 1 36 416 07:15 AM 28 236 9 0 273 13 8 7 0 28 6 87 2 0 95 12 3 26 0 41 437 07:30 AM 27 204 13 0 244 8 3 19 0 30 10 107 7 0 124 7 2 27 1 37 435 07:45 AM 24 198 7 0 229 16 8 21 0 45 16 105 2 0 123 6 11 29 0 46 443 Total Volume 99 879 41 0 1019 58 25 59 0 142 34 362 14 0 410 28 29 101 2 160 1731 App. Total 9.7 86.3 4 0 40.8 17.6 41.5 0 8.3 88.3 3.4 0 17.5 18.1 63.1 1.2 PHF .884 .912 .788 .000 .933 .690 .781 .702 .000 .789 .531 .846 .500 .000 .827 .583 .558 .871 .500 .870 .977 re r F >- W J J O co 0 N 0 co N 0 N F 21-10 h 00)) a Out 449 SH82 In 1 10191 411 8791 991 01 Rgl ht Thru Left Peds 1 Total 1 14681 Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Begins at 07:00 AN Class 1 Left Thru Rght Peds 1 341 3621 141 01 1 4101 In SH82 1 10381 Out 1 14481 Total co N a 0 Q oI .7J 5 P 7 H73 o N App. M-56 All Traffic Data 11 t a nxu,o}xa Services Ice. Groups Printed- Class 1 SH82 Southbound SPRING VALLEY RD Westbound File Name : PM_16284 SH82&SPRING Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/20/2010 Page No : 1 SH82 Northbound SPRING VALLEY RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 04:00 PM 04:15 PM 04:30 PM 04:45 PM Total 05:00 PM 05:15 PM 05:30 PM 05:45 PM Total 26 106 7 0 21 105 8 0 23 114 7 0 25 147 8 0 12 4 30 0 16 4 18 0 10 9 24 0 8 6 15 0 20 227 4 0 19 250 4 0 17 284 6 0 17 273 3 0 14 6 9 0 13 1 12 0 12 18 7 0 16 9 7 0 Grand Total Apprch % Total % 95 472 30 0 30 151 4 0 27 127 7 0 21 126 7 0 27 104 4 0 105 508 22 0 200 980 52 0 16.2 79.5 4.2 0 4.9 24 1.3 0 46 23 87 0 15 1 28 1 5 13 33 1 15 9 24 0 6 2 25 0 41 25 110 2 87 48 197 2 26 14.4 59 0.6 2.1 1.2 4.8 0 73 1034 17 0 22 272 8 0 24 291 8 0 29 251 12 0 8 229 7 0 83 1043 35 0 156 2077 52 0 6.8 90.9 2.3 0 3.8 50.9 1.3 0 55 34 35 0 17 4 12 1 6 7 7 0 13 5 7 0 7 9 12 0 43 25 38 1 98 59 73 1 42.4 25.5 31.6 0.4 2.4 1.4 1.8 0 r E co 0 N co 0 1- J L h SH82 Out In Total 1 12321 521 9801 2001 01 Rght Thru Left Peds 1 1 23721 36041 North 5/20/2010 04:00 PM 5/20/2010 05:45 PM Class 1 47 T Left Thru Rght Peds 1561 20771 521 01 1 22851 Out In Total SH82 11401 34251 V CO N 465 471 531 534 2001 566 556 519 440 2081 4082 App. M-57 All Traffic Data 11 IMM#1.101COXID Services Inc. File Name : PM_16284 SH82&SPRING Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/20/2010 Page No : 2 Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM Int. Total 04:30 PM SH82 Southbound SPRING VALLEY RD Westbound SH82 Northbound SPRING VALLEY RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM Int. Total 04:30 PM 23 114 7 0 144 10 9 24 0 43 17 284 6 0 307 12 18 7 0 37 531 04:45 PM 25 147 8 0 180 8 6 15 0 29 17 273 3 0 293 16 9 7 0 32 534 05:00 PM 30 151 4 0 185 15 1 28 1 45 22 272 8 0 302 17 4 12 1 34 566 05:15 PM 27 127 7 0 161 5 13 33 1 52 24 291 8 0 323 6 7 7 0 20 556 Total Volume 105 539 26 0 670 38 29 100 2 169 80 1120 25 0 1225 51 38 33 1 123 2187 App. Total 15.7 80.4 3.9 0 22.5 17.2 59.2 1.2 6.5 91.4 2 0 41.5 30.9 26.8 0.8 PHF .875 .892 .813 .000 .905 .633 .558 .758 .500 .813 .833 .962 .781 .000 .948 .750 .528 .688 .250 .831 .966 OF W co 0 J CO N u) m 0) co F L i v a Out 1 12711 SH82 In 1 6701 1 1 261 5391 1051 01 Rgl ht Thru Left Peds Total 1 19411 Peak Hour Data I North Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 Pk Class 1 Left Thru Rght Peds 1 801 11201 251 01 1 12251 In SH82 1 6101 Out 1 18351 Total �A C r v a to O tD a lb m App. M-58 All Traffic Data File Name : NOON_16285 SH82&SPRING Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/22/2010 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 App. M-59 SH82 Southbound SPRING VALLEY RD Westbound SH82 Northbound SPRING VALLEY RD Eastbound Start Time Left I Thru I Rght I Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Left Thru I Rght I Peds Left Thru Rght Peds Int. Total 11:00 AM 18 108 6 0 14 3 17 0 10 150 6 0 6 6 9 1 354 11:15 AM 9 122 6 0 8 3 19 3 6 154 11 0 6 3 6 0 356 11:30 AM 17 107 6 0 6 6 35 0 11 179 9 0 5 3 6 0 390 11:45 AM 20 114 7 0 6 3 15 1 11 143 8 0 3 1 12 0 344 Total 64 451 25 0 34 15 86 4 38 626 34 0 20 13 33 1 1444 12:00 PM 19 139 5 0 8 1 14 0 11 161 7 0 2 2 5 0 374 12:15 PM 19 118 5 0 10 1 19 1 18 145 5 0 4 2 14 1 362 12:30 PM 6 121 4 0 8 2 18 0 4 161 4 0 4 2 8 0 342 12:45 PM 12 119 7 0 13 5 11 0 11 136 6 0 6 3 11 0 340 Total 56 497 21 0 39 9 62 1 44 603 22 0 16 9 38 1 1418 Grand Total 120 948 46 0 73 24 148 5 82 1229 56 0 36 22 71 2 2862 Apprch % 10.8 85.1 4.1 0 29.2 9.6 59.2 2 6 89.9 4.1 0 27.5 16.8 54.2 1.5 Total % 4.2 33.1 1.6 0 2.6 0.8 5.2 0.2 2.9 42.9 2 0 1.3 0.8 2.5 0.1 App. M-59 All Traffic Data 11 IM.M#1.3.Claga.ao, Se:.ices Inc. File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : NOON_16285 SH82&SPRING :00000000 : 5/22/2010 :2 Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:30 AM Int. Total 11:30 AM SH82 Southbound SPRING VALLEY RD Westbound SH82 Northbound SPRING VALLEY RD Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Left Thru Rght Peds App. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 11:30 AM Int. Total 11:30 AM 17 107 6 0 130 6 6 35 0 47 11 179 9 0 199 5 3 6 0 14 390 11:45 AM 20 114 7 0 141 6 3 15 1 25 11 143 8 0 162 3 1 12 0 16 344 12:00 PM 19 139 5 0 163 8 1 14 0 23 11 161 7 0 179 2 2 5 0 9 374 12:15 PM 19 118 5 0 142 10 1 19 1 31 18 145 5 0 168 4 2 14 1 21 362 Total Volume 75 478 23 0 576 30 11 83 2 126 51 628 29 0 708 14 8 37 1 60 1470 App. Total 13 83 4 0 23.8 8.7 65.9 1.6 7.2 88.7 4.1 0 23.3 13.3 61.7 1.7 PHF .938 .860 .821 .000 .883 .750 .458 .593 .500 .670 .708 .877 .806 .000 .889 .700 .667 .661 .250 .714 .942 OF w J co 0 v m L h v a Out 7251 SH82 In 1 5761 1 1 231 4781 751 01 Rght Thru Left Peds 1 Total 1 13011 Peak Hour Data 1 North Peak Hour Begins at 11:30 AN Class 1 Left Thru Rght Peds 1 511 6281 291 01 1 7081 In SH82 5451 Out 1 12531 Total �A w -u a to w m App. M-60 traffic Assessment 3iver Edge Colorado december 2010 APPENDIX B: SYNCHRO REPORTS - EXISTING App. M-61 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 7/6/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 0 8 0 427 24 6 1056 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 67 0 13 0 680 38 10 1681 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2046 2418 840 1539 2380 340 1681 718 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1700 1700 680 680 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 346 718 860 1700 vCu, unblocked vol 2046 2418 840 1539 2380 340 1681 718 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 74 100 98 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 92 134 308 257 138 662 386 892 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 80 340 340 38 10 1121 560 Volume Left 0 67 0 0 0 10 0 0 Volume Right 0 13 0 0 38 0 0 0 cSH 1700 306 1700 1700 1700 892 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.26 0.20 0.20 0.02 0.01 0.66 0.33 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 25 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 21.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.1 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A C A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 21.7 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Existing AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-62 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 7/6/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 11+ "i 11+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 70 0 43 0 466 29 38 994 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 116 0 71 0 773 48 63 1650 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2234 2597 825 1724 2549 387 1650 821 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1776 1776 773 773 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 458 821 951 1776 vCu, unblocked vol 2234 2597 825 1724 2549 387 1650 821 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 7.3 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.5 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 45 100 87 100 92 cM capacity (veh/h) 76 113 316 212 118 566 397 817 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 188 516 274 32 63 1100 550 Volume Left 0 116 0 0 0 63 0 0 Volume Right 0 71 0 16 32 0 0 0 cSH 1700 278 1700 1700 1700 817 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.67 0.30 0.16 0.02 0.08 0.65 0.32 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 111 0 0 0 6 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 41.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A E A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 41.0 0.0 0.4 Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Existing AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-63 Uniform Delay, d1 27.7 26.4 29.8 26.7 13.6 11.5 28.4 18.9 11.7 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 7/6/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Volume (vph) 28 29 101 58 25 59 34 362 14 99 879 41 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1800 1567 1749 1770 3539 1543 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.74 1.00 0.83 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1368 1567 1475 1770 3539 1543 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Growth Factor(vpnj 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% Adj. Flow (vph) 45 46 161 92 40 94 54 576 22 158 1399 65 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 130 0 31 0 0 0 12 0 0 24 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 91 31 0 195 0 54 576 10 158 1399 41 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.3 15.3 15.3 15.3 36.8 36.8 15.3 36.8 36.8 Effective Green, g (s) 15.3 15.3 15.3 15.3 36.8 36.8 15.3 36.8 36.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.46 0.46 0.19 0.46 0.46 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 264 302 284 341 1640 715 341 1640 717 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.16 c0.09 c0.40 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.02 c0.13 0.01 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.34 0.10 0.69 0.16 0.35 0.01 0.46 0.85 0.06 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 0.8 0.2 28.5 26.5 Level of Service Approach Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 6.8 1.0 0.1 0.0 4.5 4.5 0.0 36.6 27.7 13.8 11.5 32.9 23.4 11.8 C C D C B B C C B 27.3 36.6 14.9 23.9 Approach LOS C D B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 79.4 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Existing AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-64 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 7/6/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 17 0 32 0 1243 36 3 648 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 27 0 51 0 1979 57 5 1032 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2056 3077 516 2504 3020 989 1032 2036 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1041 1041 1979 1979 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 1015 2036 525 1041 vCu, unblocked vol 2056 3077 516 2504 3020 989 1032 2036 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 56 100 79 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 149 87 504 62 97 245 669 274 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 78 989 989 57 5 688 344 Volume Left 0 27 0 0 0 5 0 0 Volume Right 0 51 0 0 57 0 0 0 cSH 1700 177 1700 1700 1700 274 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.44 0.58 0.58 0.03 0.02 0.40 0.20 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 51 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 51.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.4 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 51.1 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Existing PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-65 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 7/6/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 11+ "i 11+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 5 64 0 1221 48 21 640 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 69 8 105 0 2005 79 34 1051 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2232 3204 525 2599 3125 1003 1051 2084 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1120 1120 2005 2005 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 1112 2084 594 1120 vCu, unblocked vol 2232 3204 525 2599 3125 1003 1051 2084 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 8.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 5.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 0 73 57 100 87 cM capacity (veh/h) 56 56 497 60 30 244 658 270 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 182 1337 695 53 34 701 350 Volume Left 0 69 0 0 0 34 0 0 Volume Right 0 105 0 26 53 0 0 0 cSH 1700 99 1700 1700 1700 270 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 1.84 0.79 0.41 0.03 0.13 0.41 0.21 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 375 0 0 0 11 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 488.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.3 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 488.1 0.0 0.6 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 26.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Existing PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-66 33.1 28.0 32.2 30.3 21.3 11.0 31.1 14.4 11.0 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 7/6/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Volume (vph) 51 38 33 38 29 100 80 1120 25 105 539 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1793 1567 1718 1770 3539 1543 1770 3539 1547 Flt Permitted 0.48 1.00 0.86 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 893 1567 1490 1770 3539 1543 1770 3539 1547 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor(vph) 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% Adj. Flow (vph) 82 61 53 61 47 161 129 1801 40 169 867 42 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 43 0 64 0 0 0 11 0 0 21 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 143 10 0 205 0 129 1801 29 169 867 21 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.1 41.1 41.1 15.1 41.1 41.1 Effective Green, g (s) 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.1 41.1 41.1 15.1 41.1 41.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.49 0.49 0.18 0.49 0.49 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 165 290 276 319 1738 758 319 1738 760 v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 c0.51 c0.10 0.24 v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.01 0.14 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.87 0.03 0.74 0.40 1.04 0.04 0.53 0.50 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 34.8 0.0 10.2 3.8 31.6 0.0 6.2 0.2 0.0 Delay (s) 67.9 28.0 42.5 34.1 52.9 11.1 37.3 14.6 11.0 Level of Service E C D C D B D B B Approach Delay (s) 57.1 42.5 50.8 18.0 Approach LOS E D D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 40.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.89 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 83.7 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Existing PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-67 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 7/6/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 14 0 6 0 720 17 3 552 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 23 0 10 0 1182 28 5 906 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1512 2127 453 1645 2099 591 906 1210 vC1, stage 1 confvol 916 916 1182 1182 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 596 1210 463 916 vCu, unblocked vol 1512 2127 453 1645 2099 591 906 1210 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 88 100 98 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 247 201 554 189 208 450 746 572 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 33 591 591 28 5 604 302 Volume Left 0 23 0 0 0 5 0 0 Volume Right 0 10 0 0 28 0 0 0 cSH 1700 270 1700 1700 1700 572 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.12 0.35 0.35 0.02 0.01 0.36 0.18 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 10 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 22.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.3 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A C B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 22.6 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Existing Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-68 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 7/6/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 11+ "i 11+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 26 0 37 0 697 31 20 551 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 42 0 60 0 1121 50 32 886 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1570 2121 443 1628 2071 560 886 1171 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 950 950 1121 1121 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 620 1171 507 950 vCu, unblocked vol 1570 2121 443 1628 2071 560 886 1171 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 7.0 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.4 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 80 100 87 100 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 214 188 562 204 213 459 772 598 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 101 747 390 33 32 591 295 Volume Left 0 42 0 0 0 32 0 0 Volume Right 0 60 0 17 33 0 0 0 cSH 1700 303 1700 1700 1700 598 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.33 0.44 0.23 0.02 0.05 0.35 0.17 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 36 0 0 0 4 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 22.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A C B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 22.8 0.0 0.4 Approach LOS A C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Existing Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-69 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Uniform Delay, d1 23.0 22.5 24.1 19.0 15.8 11.3 19.4 14.4 11.3 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 7/6/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r tt ri vi tt ri Volume (vph) 14 8 37 30 11 83 51 628 29 75 478 23 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1567 1699 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.72 1.00 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1329 1567 1567 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Growth Factor(vph) 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% 156% Adj. Flow (vph) 23 13 61 50 18 138 85 1042 48 124 793 38 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 51 0 90 0 0 0 27 0 0 23 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 36 10 0 116 0 85 1042 21 124 793 15 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.1 10.1 10.1 15.5 25.7 25.7 15.5 25.7 25.7 Effective Green, g (s) 10.1 10.1 10.1 15.5 25.7 25.7 15.5 25.7 25.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.24 0.41 0.41 0.24 0.41 0.41 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 212 250 250 433 1437 627 433 1437 628 v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.29 c0.07 0.22 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.01 c0.07 0.01 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.04 0.46 0.20 0.73 0.03 0.29 0.55 0.02 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 0.4 0.1 23.4 22.6 Level of Service Approach Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.4 1.0 1.8 0.0 1.7 0.5 0.0 25.5 20.0 17.7 11.3 21.1 14.9 11.3 C C C B B B C B B 22.9 25.5 17.6 15.5 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 63.3 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Existing Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-70 traffic Assessment liver Edge Colorado december 2010 APPENDIX C: SYNCHRO REPORTS - FUTURE App. M-71 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r vi tt ri vi tt ri Volume (vph) 28 29 101 58 25 59 34 362 14 99 879 41 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1800 1567 1749 1770 3539 1543 1770 3539 1547 Flt Permitted 0.72 1.00 0.82 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1328 1567 1467 1770 3539 1543 1770 3539 1547 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Growth Factor(vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) 49 51 178 102 44 104 60 639 25 175 1552 72 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 143 0 30 0 0 0 13 0 0 24 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 100 35 0 220 0 60 639 12 175 1552 48 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.7 16.7 16.7 15.1 40.0 40.0 15.1 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g (s) 16.7 16.7 16.7 15.1 40.0 40.0 15.1 40.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.48 0.48 0.18 0.48 0.48 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 265 312 292 319 1689 737 319 1689 738 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.18 c0.10 c0.44 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.02 c0.15 0.01 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.11 0.75 0.19 0.38 0.02 0.55 0.92 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 29.0 27.5 31.6 29.1 14.0 11.5 31.2 20.4 11.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 0.2 10.4 1.3 0.1 0.0 6.6 8.4 0.0 Delay (s) 30.0 27.6 42.0 30.5 14.1 11.5 37.9 28.8 11.9 Level of Service C C D CBBDCB Approach Delay (s) 28.5 42.0 15.4 29.0 Approach LOS C D B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 83.8 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Background AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-72 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 0 8 0 427 24 6 1056 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 74 0 14 0 754 42 11 1864 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2269 2682 932 1707 2639 377 1864 796 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1885 1885 754 754 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 384 796 953 1885 vCu, unblocked vol 2269 2682 932 1707 2639 377 1864 796 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 67 100 98 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 70 109 268 224 112 627 328 835 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 88 377 377 42 11 1243 621 Volume Left 0 74 0 0 0 11 0 0 Volume Right 0 14 0 0 42 0 0 0 cSH 1700 267 1700 1700 1700 835 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.33 0.22 0.22 0.02 0.01 0.73 0.37 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 35 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 25.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A D A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 25.9 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Background AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-73 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit fir "i 11+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 70 0 43 0 466 29 38 994 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 129 0 79 0 858 53 70 1829 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2477 2880 915 1912 2827 429 1829 911 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1969 1969 858 858 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 508 911 1055 1969 vCu, unblocked vol 2477 2880 915 1912 2827 429 1829 911 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 7.3 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.5 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 29 100 85 100 91 cM capacity (veh/h) 56 89 275 181 94 530 338 756 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 208 429 429 53 70 1220 610 Volume Left 0 129 0 0 0 70 0 0 Volume Right 0 79 0 0 53 0 0 0 cSH 1700 241 1700 1700 1700 756 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.86 0.25 0.25 0.03 0.09 0.72 0.36 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 175 0 0 0 8 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 71.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 71.0 0.0 0.4 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Background AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-74 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Volume (vph) 51 38 33 38 29 100 80 1120 25 105 539 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1793 1567 1719 1770 3539 1543 1770 3539 1547 Flt Permitted 0.48 1.00 0.83 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 878 15671434 1770 3539 1543 1770 3539 1547 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor(vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) 91 68 59 68 52 178 143 1998 45 187 961 46 RTOR Reduction ( 0 0 47 0 63 0 0 0 11 0 0 24 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 159 12 0 235 0 143 1998 34 187 961 22 Conti. Neds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 17.3 17.3 17.3 15.0 41.1 41.1 15.0 41.1 41.1 Effective Green, g (s) 17.3 17.3 17.3 15.0 41.1 41.1 15.0 41.1 41.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.48 0.48 0.18 0.48 0.48 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 178 317 290 311 1703 743 311 1703 745 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.56 c0.11 0.27 v/s Ratio Perm c0.18 0.01 0.16 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.89 0.04 0.81 0.46 1.17 0.05 0.60 0.56 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 33.2 27.4 32.5 31.6 22.2 11.7 32.4 15.8 11.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 38.6 0.0 15.6 4.8 84.6 0.0 8.3 0.4 0.0 Delay (s) 71.8 27.4 48.1 36.4 106.7 11.8 40.8 16.2 11.7 Level of Service Approach Delay (s) E C D D F B D B B 59.8 48.1 100.1 19.9 Approach LOS E D F B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 69.3 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 85.4 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.2% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Background PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-75 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 17 0 32 0 1243 36 3 648 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 30 0 56 0 2194 64 5 1144 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2280 3412 572 2777 3349 1097 1144 2258 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1155 1155 2194 2194 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 1125 2258 583 1155 vCu, unblocked vol 2280 3412 572 2777 3349 1097 1144 2258 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 33 100 73 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 118 66 463 45 76 208 607 224 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 86 1097 1097 64 5 763 381 Volume Left 0 30 0 0 0 5 0 0 Volume Right 0 56 0 0 64 0 0 0 cSH 1700 129 1700 1700 1700 224 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.67 0.65 0.65 0.04 0.02 0.45 0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 91 0 0 0 2 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 82.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.5 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 82.4 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Background PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-76 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit fir "i 11+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 5 64 0 1221 48 21 640 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 76 9 117 0 2224 87 38 1165 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2475 3553 583 2883 3465 1112 1165 2311 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1242 1242 2224 2224 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 1233 2311 659 1242 vCu, unblocked vol 2475 3553 583 2883 3465 1112 1165 2311 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 8.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 5.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 0 57 44 100 83 cM capacity (veh/h) 10 32 456 44 21 207 595 220 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 202 1112 1112 87 38 777 388 Volume Left 0 76 0 0 0 38 0 0 Volume Right 0 117 0 0 87 0 0 0 cSH 1700 74 1700 1700 1700 220 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 2.74 0.65 0.65 0.05 0.17 0.46 0.23 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 496 0 0 0 15 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 906.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 906.2 0.0 0.8 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 49.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Background PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-77 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r vi tt ri vi tt ri Volume (vph) 14 8 37 30 11 83 51 628 29 75 478 23 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1567 1699 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.68 1.00 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1254 1567 1565 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor(vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) 26 15 68 55 20 153 94 1156 53 138 880 42 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 57 0 90 0 0 0 26 0 0 24 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 41 11 0 138 0 94 1156 27 138 880 18 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 11.3 11.3 11.3 15.5 29.4 29.4 15.5 29.4 29.4 Effective Green, g (s) 11.3 11.3 11.3 15.5 29.4 29.4 15.5 29.4 29.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.23 0.43 0.43 0.23 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 208 260 259 402 1526 666 402 1526 667 v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.33 c0.08 0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.01 c0.09 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.04 0.53 0.23 0.76 0.04 0.34 0.58 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 24.5 23.9 26.0 21.5 16.4 11.2 22.1 14.7 11.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.1 2.1 1.4 2.2 0.0 2.3 0.5 0.0 Delay (s) 25.0 24.0 28.1 22.9 18.6 11.3 24.4 15.2 11.2 Level of Service C C C C B B C B B Approach Delay (s) 24.4 28.1 18.6 16.3 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 68.2 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Background Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-78 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 14 0 6 0 720 17 3 552 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 25 0 11 0 1311 31 5 1005 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1677 2358 503 1825 2327 656 1005 1342 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1016 1016 1311 1311 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 661 1342 514 1016 vCu, unblocked vol 1677 2358 503 1825 2327 656 1005 1342 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 84 100 97 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 214 173 514 158 180 408 685 509 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 36 656 656 31 5 670 335 Volume Left 0 25 0 0 0 5 0 0 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 31 0 0 0 cSH 1700 225 1700 1700 1700 509 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.16 0.39 0.39 0.02 0.01 0.39 0.20 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 14 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 26.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.1 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 26.8 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Background Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-79 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit fir "i 11+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 26 0 37 0 697 31 20 551 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 46 0 66 0 1243 55 36 983 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1742 2352 491 1806 2297 622 983 1298 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1054 1054 1243 1243 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 688 1298 563 1054 vCu, unblocked vol 1742 2352 491 1806 2297 622 983 1298 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 7.0 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.4 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 73 100 84 100 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 181 158 523 172 184 418 711 535 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 112 622 622 55 36 655 328 Volume Left 0 46 0 0 0 36 0 0 Volume Right 0 66 0 0 55 0 0 0 cSH 1700 263 1700 1700 1700 535 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.43 0.37 0.37 0.03 0.07 0.39 0.19 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 51 0 0 0 5 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 28.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.2 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 28.5 0.0 0.4 Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Background Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-80 32.1 29.8 14.1 11.4 31.9 20.6 11.7 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Volume (vph) 28 29 101 58 25 59 34 697 14 99 1567 41 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1800 1567 1749 1770 3539 1543 1770 3539 1547 Flt Permitted 0.72 1.00 0.82 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1324 1567 1467 1770 3539 1543 1770 3539 1547 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Growth Factor(vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 100% 173% 173% 100% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) 49 51 178 102 44 104 60 711 25 175 1599 72 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 143 0 30 0 0 0 13 0 0 23 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 100 35 0 220 0 60 711 12 175 1599 49 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.8 16.8 16.8 15.0 41.1 41.1 15.0 41.1 41.1 Effective Green, g (s) 16.8 16.8 16.8 15.0 41.1 41.1 15.0 41.1 41.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.48 0.48 0.18 0.48 0.48 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 262 310 290 313 1713 747 313 1713 749 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.20 c0.10 c0.45 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.02 c0.15 0.01 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.11 0.76 0.19 0.42 0.02 0.56 0.93 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 29.5 27.9 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 0.9 0.2 30.5 28.1 Level of Service Approach Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 10.7 1.4 0.2 0.0 7.0 9.8 0.0 42.9 31.1 14.3 11.4 39.0 30.5 11.7 C C D C B B D C B 29.0 42.9 15.5 30.5 Approach LOS C D B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.6 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 84.9 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.2% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group C 12.0 D 2018 Project AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-81 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r lit ri vi lit Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 0 8 0 810 24 6 1873 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.92 0.98 0.92 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 74 0 14 0 827 42 11 1911 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2353 2801 956 1803 2759 413 1911 869 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1932 1932 827 827 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 420 869 977 1932 vCu, unblocked vol 2353 2801 956 1803 2759 413 1911 869 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 65 100 98 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 65 103 259 210 103 594 307 784 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 88 413 413 42 11 956 956 Volume Left 0 74 0 0 0 11 0 0 Volume Right 0 14 0 0 42 0 0 0 cSH 1700 250 1700 1700 1700 784 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.35 0.24 0.24 0.02 0.01 0.56 0.56 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 38 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 28.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A D A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 28.1 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Project AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-82 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations " 't't r "i 11+ Volume (veh/h) 71 0 131 70 0 43 25 466 29 38 994 46 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly flow rate (vph) 76 0 139 129 0 79 27 858 53 70 1829 49 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2555 2958 939 2105 2929 429 1878 911 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1994 1994 911 911 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 561 964 1194 2018 vCu, unblocked vol 2555 2958 939 2105 2929 429 1878 911 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 7.3 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.5 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 0 100 47 0 100 85 92 91 cM capacity (veh/h) 54 85 265 57 64 530 324 756 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 215 208 27 429 429 53 70 1220 659 Volume Left 76 129 27 0 0 0 70 0 0 Volume Right 139 79 0 0 0 53 0 0 49 cSH 112 87 324 1700 1700 1700 756 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 1.92 2.39 0.08 0.25 0.25 0.03 0.09 0.72 0.39 Queue Length 95th (ft) 437 480 7 0 0 0 8 0 0 Control Delay (s) 510.9 738.2 17.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS F F C B Approach Delay (s) 510.9 738.2 0.5 0.4 Approach LOS F F Intersection Summary Average Delay 79.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Project AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-83 0 159 11 0 249 0 143 2084 35 187 1038 27 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Volume (vph) 51 38 33 38 29 100 80 2021 25 105 1007 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1793 1567 1719 1770 3539 1540 1770 3539 1546 Flt Permitted 0.43 1.00 0.75 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 793 1567 1300 1770 3539 1540 1770 3539 1546 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor(vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 100% 173% 173% 100% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) 91 68 59 68 52 178 143 2084 45 187 1038 46 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 48 0 49 0 0 0 10 0 0 19 Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot Perm 4 1 2 2 1 Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm 4 8 5 2 1 6 4 8 2 6 21.0 21.0 21.0 16.0 62.0 62.0 15.0 61.0 61.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 16.0 62.0 62.0 15.0 61.0 61.0 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.56 0.56 0.14 0.55 0.55 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 151 299 248 257 1995 868 241 1963 857 0.08 c0.59 c0.11 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm c0.20 0.01 0.19 0.02 0.02 vlc Ratio 1.05 0.04 1.01 U.5b 1.U4 0.04 U. lb U.5s 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 44.5 36.3 44.5 43.7 24.0 10.7 45.9 15.4 11.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 88.0 0.1 58.7 8.4 32.9 0.0 21.3 0.3 0.0 Delay (s) 132.5 36.3 103.2 52.1 56.9 10.7 67.2 15.7 11.1 Level of Service F D F D E B E B Approach Delay (s) 106.5 103.2 55.7 23.1 B Approach LOS F F E C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 51.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.5% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Project PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-84 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 17 0 32 0 2234 36 3 1196 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 30 0 56 0 2280 64 5 1220 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2399 3574 610 2900 3511 1140 1220 2343 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1231 1231 2280 2280 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 1168 2343 621 1231 vCu, unblocked vol 2399 3574 610 2900 3511 1140 1220 2343 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 24 100 71 100 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 107 59 437 39 68 195 567 207 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 86 1140 1140 64 5 814 407 Volume Left 0 30 0 0 0 5 0 0 Volume Right 0 56 0 0 64 0 0 0 cSH 1700 114 1700 1700 1700 207 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.76 0.67 0.67 0.04 0.03 0.48 0.24 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 106 0 0 0 2 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 98.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 98.9 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Project PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-85 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations " 't't r "i 11+ Volume (veh/h) 84 0 45 42 5 64 140 1221 48 21 640 75 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 88 0 47 76 9 117 147 2224 87 38 1165 79 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2809 3887 622 3225 3839 1112 1244 2311 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1281 1281 2518 2518 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 1528 2606 707 1321 vCu, unblocked vol 2809 3887 622 3225 3839 1112 1244 2311 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 8.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 5.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 0 100 89 0 0 44 73 83 cM capacity (veh/h) 0 2 429 21 0 207 555 220 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 136 202 147 1112 1112 87 38 777 467 Volume Left 88 76 147 0 0 0 38 0 0 Volume Right 47 117 0 0 0 87 0 0 79 cSH 0 5 555 1700 1700 1700 220 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity Err 37.89 0.27 0.65 0.65 0.05 0.17 0.46 0.27 Queue Length 95th (ft) Err Err 27 0 0 0 15 0 0 Control Delay (s) Err Err 13.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS F F B C Approach Delay (s) Err Err 0.8 0.7 Approach LOS F F Intersection Summary Average Delay Err Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Project PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-86 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r tt ri vi tt ri Volume (vph) 14 8 37 30 11 83 51 1166 29 75 917 23 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1567 1699 1770 3539 1544 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.66 1.00 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1225 1567 1564 1770 3539 1544 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor(vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 100% 173% 173% 100% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) 26 15 68 55 20 153 94 1240 53 138 976 42 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 57 0 91 0 0 0 23 0 0 23 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 41 11 0 137 0 94 1240 30 138 976 19 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 11.4 11.4 11.4 15.5 31.7 31.7 15.5 31.7 31.7 Effective Green, g (s) 11.4 11.4 11.4 15.5 31.7 31.7 15.5 31.7 31.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.22 0.45 0.45 0.22 0.45 0.45 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 198 253 253 389 1589 693 389 1589 695 v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.35 c0.08 0.28 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.01 c0.09 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.21 0.04 0.54 0.24 0.78 0.04 0.35 0.61 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 25.7 25.0 27.2 22.7 16.5 10.9 23.3 14.8 10.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.1 2.4 1.5 2.6 0.0 2.5 0.7 0.0 Delay (s) 26.2 25.1 29.6 24.2 19.1 11.0 25.8 15.5 10.9 Level of Service C C C C B B C B B Approach Delay (s) 25.5 29.6 19.1 16.6 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 70.6 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Project Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-87 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 14 0 6 0 1326 17 3 1045 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 25 0 11 0 1396 31 5 1100 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1814 2538 550 1957 2507 698 1100 1427 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1111 1111 1396 1396 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 703 1427 561 1111 vCu, unblocked vol 1814 2538 550 1957 2507 698 1100 1427 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 82 100 97 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 189 155 479 140 162 383 630 473 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 36 698 698 31 5 733 367 Volume Left 0 25 0 0 0 5 0 0 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 31 0 0 0 cSH 1700 200 1700 1700 1700 473 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.18 0.41 0.41 0.02 0.01 0.43 0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 16 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 29.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 29.9 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Project Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-88 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations " 't't r "i 11+ Volume (veh/h) 80 0 80 26 0 37 90 697 31 20 551 90 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Hourly flow rate (vph) 82 0 82 46 0 66 93 1243 55 36 983 93 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1974 2584 538 2074 2576 622 1075 1298 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1100 1100 1429 1429 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 873 1484 645 1147 vCu, unblocked vol 1974 2584 538 2074 2576 622 1075 1298 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 7.0 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.4 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 40 100 83 57 100 84 86 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 138 110 488 108 117 418 656 535 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 165 112 93 622 622 55 36 655 420 Volume Left 82 46 93 0 0 0 36 0 0 Volume Right 82 66 0 0 0 55 0 0 93 cSH 216 192 656 1700 1700 1700 535 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.77 0.59 0.14 0.37 0.37 0.03 0.07 0.39 0.25 Queue Length 95th (ft) 133 80 12 0 0 0 5 0 0 Control Delay (s) 61.3 47.4 11.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.2 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS F E B B Approach Delay (s) 61.3 47.4 0.8 0.4 Approach LOS F E Intersection Summary Average Delay 6.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Project Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-89 0.09 0.07 c0.18 0.01 0.04 C C D E B BCC A HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Volume (vph) 28 29 101 58 25 59 34 362 14 99 879 41 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1800 1567 1749 1770 3539 1544 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.70 1.00 0.81 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1292 1567 1453 1770 3539 1544 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Growth Factor (vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 58 60 208 120 52 122 70 746 29 204 1812 85 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 91 0 34 0 0 0 17 0 0 30 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 118 117 0 260 0 70 746 12 204 1812 55 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.6 15.6 15.6 4.0 29.4 29.4 15.1 40.5 40.5 Effective Green, g (s) 15.6 15.6 15.6 4.0 29.4 29.4 15.1 40.5 40.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.06 0.41 0.41 0.21 0.56 0.56 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 280 339 314 98 1443 630 371 1988 870 v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.21 c0.12 c0.51 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) 0.42 24.4 1.00 1.0 25.4 0.35 23.9 1.00 0.6 24.5 0.83 27.0 1.00 16.1 43.1 0.71 33.5 1.00 35.9 69.4 0.52 16.0 1.00 0.3 16.3 0.02 12.7 1.00 0.0 12.8 0.55 25.5 1.00 5.8 31.2 0.91 14.2 1.00 6.8 21.0 0.06 7.2 1.00 0.0 7.2 Level of Service Approach Delay (s) 24.8 43.1 20.6 21.4 Approach LOS C D C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.88 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 72.1 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.2% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Background AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-90 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 0 8 0 427 24 6 1056 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 87 0 16 0 880 49 12 2177 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2650 3131 1088 1993 3082 440 2177 930 vC1, stage 1 confvol 2201 2201 880 880 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 448 930 1113 2201 vCu, unblocked vol 2650 3131 1088 1993 3082 440 2177 930 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 51 100 97 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 44 76 211 178 78 570 248 744 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 103 440 440 49 12 1451 726 Volume Left 0 87 0 0 0 12 0 0 Volume Right 0 16 0 0 49 0 0 0 cSH 1700 212 1700 1700 1700 744 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.49 0.26 0.26 0.03 0.02 0.85 0.43 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 60 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 38.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.9 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A E A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 38.0 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Background AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-91 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations vi 4 ri lit ri "i 1't Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 70 0 43 0 466 29 38 994 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 150 0 92 0 1001 62 82 2136 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2892 3363 1068 2233 3301 501 2136 1064 vC1, stage 1 confvol 2299 2299 1001 1001 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 593 1064 1231 2299 vCu, unblocked vol 2892 3363 1068 2233 3301 501 2136 1064 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 7.3 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.5 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 0 100 80 100 88 cM capacity (veh/h) 33 59 217 137 62 473 257 663 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 150 0 92 501 501 62 82 1424 712 Volume Left 0 150 0 0 0 0 0 82 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 92 0 0 62 0 0 0 cSH 1700 137 1700 473 1700 1700 1700 663 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 1.10 0.00 0.20 0.29 0.29 0.04 0.12 0.84 0.42 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 209 0 18 0 0 0 10 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 168.6 0.0 14.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.2 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F A B B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 109.9 0.0 0.4 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 7.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Background AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-92 44.5 36.3 44.5 44.4 24.0 10.8 46.8 16.0 11.2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Volume (vph) 51 38 33 38 29 100 80 1120 25 105 539 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1793 1567 1718 1770 3539 1540 1770 3539 1546 Flt Permitted 0.38 1.00 0.64 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 698 1567 1120 1770 3539 1540 1770 3539 1546 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor (vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 106 79 69 79 60 208 167 2332 52 219 1122 54 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 56 0 49 0 0 0 10 0 0 21 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 185 13 0 298 0 167 2332 42 219 1122 33 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 21.0 21.0 21.0 16.0 62.0 62.0 15.0 61.0 61.0 Effective Green, g (s) 21.0 21.0 21.0 16.0 62.0 62.0 15.0 61.0 61.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.56 0.56 0.14 0.55 0.55 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 133 299 214 257 1995 868 241 1963 857 v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 c0.66 c0.12 0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.26 0.01 c0.27 0.03 0.02 v/c Ratio 1.39 0.04 1.39 0.65 1.17 0.05 0.91 0.57 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 215.3 0.1 202.0 12.1 81.8 0.0 38.4 0.4 0.0 Delay (s) 259.8 36.4 246.5 56.4 105.8 10.8 85.2 16.4 11.2 Level of Service F D F E F B F B B Approach Delay (s) 199.1 246.5 100.6 27.0 Approach LOS F F F C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 94.7 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.13 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 110.7% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Background PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-93 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 17 0 32 0 1243 36 3 648 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 35 0 66 0 2562 74 6 1336 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2662 3984 668 3242 3910 1281 1336 2636 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1348 1348 2562 2562 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 1314 2636 680 1348 vCu, unblocked vol 2662 3984 668 3242 3910 1281 1336 2636 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 0 100 58 100 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 74 40 401 26 49 156 512 158 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 101 1281 1281 74 6 890 445 Volume Left 0 35 0 0 0 6 0 0 Volume Right 0 66 0 0 74 0 0 0 cSH 1700 69 1700 1700 1700 158 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 1.47 0.75 0.75 0.04 0.04 0.52 0.26 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 213 0 0 0 3 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 378.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F D Approach Delay (s) 0.0 378.1 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 9.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Background PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-94 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations vi 4 ri lit ri "i 1't Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 5 64 0 1221 48 21 640 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 89 11 136 0 2596 102 45 1361 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2890 4148 680 3366 4046 1298 1361 2698 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1450 1450 2596 2596 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 1440 2698 770 1450 vCu, unblocked vol 2890 4148 680 3366 4046 1298 1361 2698 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 8.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 5.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 0 6 12 100 71 cM capacity (veh/h) 0 2 393 25 11 155 501 155 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 89 11 136 1298 1298 102 45 907 454 Volume Left 0 89 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 136 0 0 102 0 0 0 cSH 1700 25 11 155 1700 1700 1700 155 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 3.54 0.94 0.88 0.76 0.76 0.06 0.29 0.53 0.27 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 Err 49 151 0 0 0 28 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 Err 679.1 100.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.5 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F F F E Approach Delay (s) 0.0 3871.9 0.0 1.2 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 211.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Background PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-95 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r vi tt ri vi tt ri Volume (vph) 14 8 37 30 11 83 51 628 29 75 478 23 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1567 1699 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.60 1.00 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1099 1567 1557 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor (vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 30 17 80 64 24 178 110 1350 62 161 1027 49 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 67 0 103 0 0 0 29 0 0 23 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 47 13 0 163 0 110 1350 33 161 1027 26 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 11.4 11.4 11.4 9.1 30.3 30.3 15.2 36.4 36.4 Effective Green, g (s) 11.4 11.4 11.4 9.1 30.3 30.3 15.2 36.4 36.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.44 0.44 0.22 0.53 0.53 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 182 259 258 234 1556 679 390 1870 818 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.38 c0.09 c0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.01 c0.10 0.02 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.05 0.63 0.47 0.87 0.05 0.41 0.55 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 25.1 24.2 26.8 27.7 17.5 11.1 23.0 10.8 7.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.1 5.0 6.6 5.4 0.0 3.2 0.3 0.0 Delay (s) 25.8 24.3 31.8 34.3 22.9 11.1 26.2 11.1 7.8 Level of Service C C C C C B C B A Approach Delay (s) 24.8 31.8 23.2 13.0 Approach LOS C C C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 20.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 68.9 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Background Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-96 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 14 0 6 0 720 17 3 552 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 30 0 13 0 1531 36 6 1174 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1958 2754 587 2131 2717 765 1174 1567 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1186 1186 1531 1531 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 772 1567 600 1186 vCu, unblocked vol 1958 2754 587 2131 2717 765 1174 1567 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 74 100 96 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 168 133 453 116 141 346 591 417 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 43 765 765 36 6 782 391 Volume Left 0 30 0 0 0 6 0 0 Volume Right 0 13 0 0 36 0 0 0 cSH 1700 165 1700 1700 1700 417 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.26 0.45 0.45 0.02 0.02 0.46 0.23 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 24 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 37.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A E B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 37.4 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Background Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-97 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations vi 4 ri lit ri "i 1't Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 26 0 37 0 697 31 20 551 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 54 0 77 0 1451 65 42 1147 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2034 2747 574 2109 2682 726 1147 1516 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1231 1231 1451 1451 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 803 1516 657 1231 vCu, unblocked vol 2034 2747 574 2109 2682 726 1147 1516 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 7.0 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.4 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 58 100 78 100 91 cM capacity (veh/h) 133 114 462 129 144 356 616 442 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 54 0 77 726 726 65 42 765 382 Volume Left 0 54 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 77 0 0 65 0 0 0 cSH 1700 129 1700 356 1700 1700 1700 442 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.22 0.43 0.43 0.04 0.09 0.45 0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 46 0 20 0 0 0 8 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 51.9 0.0 17.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F A C B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 31.9 0.0 0.5 Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Background Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-98 0.09 0.08 c0.18 0.01 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 24.6 24.2 27.2 33.8 16.4 12.7 25.8 14.6 7.2 Level of Service C C D E B BCC A HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Volume (vph) 28 29 101 58 25 59 34 802 14 99 1822 41 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1800 1567 1749 1770 3539 1544 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.70 1.00 0.81 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1290 1567 1453 1770 3539 1544 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Growth Factor(vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 100% 202% 202% 100% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 58 60 208 120 52 122 70 818 29 204 1859 85 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 89 0 34 0 0 0 17 0 0 29 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 118 119 0 260 0 70 818 12 204 1859 56 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.7 15.7 15.7 4.0 29.9 29.9 15.1 41.0 41.0 Effective Green, g (s) 15.7 15.7 15.7 4.0 29.9 29.9 15.1 41.0 41.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.06 0.41 0.41 0.21 0.56 0.56 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 279 338 314 97 1456 635 368 1996 873 v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.23 c0.12 c0.53 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.42 0.35 0.83 0.72 0.56 0.02 0.55 0.93 0.06 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 1.0 0.6 25.6 24.8 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 16.1 37.1 0.5 0.0 5.9 8.5 0.0 43.3 70.9 16.9 12.7 31.7 23.1 7.2 Approach Delay (s) 25.1 43.3 20.9 23.3 Approach LOS C D C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.89 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 72.7 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Project AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-99 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations vi lit ri "i 11+ Volume (vph) 71 0 131 70 0 43 25 466 29 38 994 46 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1671 1631 1805 3505 1615 1805 3495 Flt Permitted 0.82 0.63 0.08 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1402 1060 156 3505 1615 473 3495 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor (vph) 100% 202% 100% 202% 202% 202% 100% 202% 202% 202% 202% 100% Adj. Flow (vph) 76 0 139 150 0 92 27 1001 62 82 2136 49 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 8 0 0 30 0 0 0 21 0 2 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 207 0 0 212 0 27 1001 41 82 2183 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 19% 0% 3% 0% 0% 3% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 17.1 17.1 48.8 48.8 48.8 48.8 48.8 Effective Green, g (s) 17.1 17.1 48.8 48.8 48.8 48.8 48.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 324 245 103 2315 1066 312 2308 v/s Ratio Prot 0.29 c0.62 v/s Ratio Perm 0.15 c0.20 0.17 0.03 0.17 v/c Ratio 0.64 0.87 0.26 0.43 0.04 0.26 0.95 Uniform Delay, d1 25.6 27.3 5.2 6.0 4.4 5.2 11.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.1 25.7 6.1 0.6 0.1 2.0 9.7 Delay (s) 29.7 53.0 11.3 6.6 4.4 7.2 21.1 Level of Service C D B A A A C Approach Delay (s) 29.7 53.0 6.6 20.6 Approach LOS C D A C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 73.9 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.0% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Project AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-100 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r lit ri vi lit Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 0 8 0 934 24 6 2179 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.92 0.98 0.92 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 87 0 16 0 953 49 12 2223 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2733 3251 1112 2090 3201 477 2223 1003 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 2248 2248 953 953 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 485 1003 1136 2248 vCu, unblocked vol 2733 3251 1112 2090 3201 477 2223 1003 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 48 100 97 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 41 71 203 167 72 540 231 699 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 103 477 477 49 12 1112 1112 Volume Left 0 87 0 0 0 12 0 0 Volume Right 0 16 0 0 49 0 0 0 cSH 1700 199 1700 1700 1700 699 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.52 0.28 0.28 0.03 0.02 0.65 0.65 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 66 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 41.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A E B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 41.9 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Project AM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-101 Lane Group Flow (vph) 106 79 8 79 60 39 167 2420 44 219 1200 37 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 51 38 33 38 29 100 80 2347 25 105 1164 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 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 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1844 1567 1796 1891 1607 1770 3539 1540 1770 3539 1546 Flt Permitted 0.72 1.00 1.00 0.66 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1324 1844 1567 1256 1891 1607 1770 3539 1540 1770 3539 1546 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor(vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 100% 202% 202% 100% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 106 79 69 79 60 208 167 2420 52 219 1200 54 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 61 0 0 169 0 0 8 0 0 17 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 20.0 77.0 77.0 15.0 72.0 72.0 Effective Green, g (s) 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 20.0 77.0 77.0 15.0 72.0 72.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.17 0.66 0.66 0.13 0.61 0.61 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 150 209 178 142 214 182 302 2323 1011 226 2172 949 v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.03 0.09 c0.68 c0.12 0.34 v/s Ratio Perm c0.08 0.00 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.38 0.04 0.56 0.28 0.21 0.55 1.04 0.04 0.97 0.55 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 50.1 48.2 46.3 49.2 47.6 47.2 44.6 20.1 7.1 50.9 13.2 9.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 14.1 1.1 0.1 4.7 0.7 0.6 7.1 30.6 0.0 52.4 0.3 0.0 Delay (s) 64.2 49.3 46.4 53.9 48.3 47.8 51.7 50.8 7.1 103.3 13.5 9.0 Level of Service EDDDDDDD A F B A Approach Delay (s) 54.8 49.3 50.0 26.7 Approach LOS D D D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 117.3 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.0% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Project PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-102 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit ri "i 11+ Volume (vph) 84 0 45 42 5 64 140 1221 48 21 640 75 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 0.95 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.97 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1719 1643 1770 3539 1583 1805 3482 Flt Permitted 0.59 0.84 0.14 1.00 1.00 0.08 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1053 1401 260 3539 1583 144 3482 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Growth Factor(vph) 100% 202% 100% 202% 202% 202% 100% 202% 202% 202% 202% 100% Adj. Flow (vph) 88 0 47 89 11 136 147 2596 102 45 1361 79 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 26 0 0 4 0 0 0 24 0 5 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 109 0 0 232 0 147 2596 78 45 1435 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 100% 0% 2% 2% 2% 0% 3% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.1 15.1 52.9 52.9 52.9 52.9 52.9 Effective Green, g (s) 15.1 15.1 52.9 52.9 52.9 52.9 52.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 209 278 181 2463 1102 100 2424 v/s Ratio Prot c0.73 0.41 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 c0.17 0.56 0.05 0.31 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.83 0.81 1.05 0.07 0.45 0.59 Uniform Delay, d1 27.2 29.2 8.1 11.6 3.7 5.1 6.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 18.9 31.4 34.4 0.1 13.9 1.1 Delay (s) 29.4 48.2 39.4 45.9 3.8 19.1 7.0 Level of Service C D D D A B A Approach Delay (s) 29.4 48.2 44.1 7.4 Approach LOS C D D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 32.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.00 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Project PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-103 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 17 0 32 0 2595 36 3 1384 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 35 0 66 0 2648 74 6 1412 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2782 4147 706 3366 4073 1324 1412 2722 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1425 1425 2648 2648 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 1357 2722 718 1425 vCu, unblocked vol 2782 4147 706 3366 4073 1324 1412 2722 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 0 100 55 100 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 65 35 378 23 44 146 479 146 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 101 1324 1324 74 6 941 471 Volume Left 0 35 0 0 0 6 0 0 Volume Right 0 66 0 0 74 0 0 0 cSH 1700 59 1700 1700 1700 146 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 1.71 0.78 0.78 0.04 0.04 0.55 0.28 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 233 0 0 0 3 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 494.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F D Approach Delay (s) 0.0 494.3 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 11.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Project PM Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-104 Uniform Delay, d1 25.5 24.6 27.3 28.1 17.9 10.9 23.6 11.1 7.7 C C C D C B C B A HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r tt ri vi tt ri Volume (vph) 14 8 37 30 11 83 51 1349 29 75 1056 23 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1567 1699 1770 3539 1544 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.59 1.00 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1083 1567 1557 1770 3539 1544 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor(vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 100% 202% 202% 100% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 30 17 80 64 24 178 110 1435 62 161 1123 49 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 67 0 103 0 0 0 26 0 0 23 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 47 13 0 163 0 110 1435 36 161 1123 26 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 11.4 11.4 11.4 9.1 31.3 31.3 15.1 37.3 37.3 Effective Green, g (s) 11.4 11.4 11.4 9.1 31.3 31.3 15.1 37.3 37.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.13 0.45 0.45 0.22 0.53 0.53 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 177 256 254 231 1587 692 383 1891 827 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.41 c0.09 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm we rcauo 0.04 0.01 0.27 0.05 c0.10 0.02 0.02 0.64 0.48 0.90 0.05 0.42 0.59 0.03 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 0.8 0.1 26.3 24.7 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.5 6.9 7.6 0.0 3.4 0.5 0.0 32.8 35.0 25.5 10.9 26.9 11.6 7.7 Level of Service Approach Delay (s) 25.3 32.8 25.6 13.3 Approach LOS C C C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 69.8 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Project Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-105 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit ri "i 11+ Volume (vph) 80 0 80 26 0 37 90 697 31 20 551 90 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 0.93 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1695 1646 1805 3574 1615 1787 3534 Flt Permitted 0.76 0.79 0.20 1.00 1.00 0.15 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1324 1323 374 3574 1615 278 3534 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor (vph) 100% 202% 100% 202% 202% 202% 100% 202% 202% 202% 202% 100% Adj. Flow (vph) 82 0 82 54 0 77 93 1451 65 42 1147 93 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 54 0 0 44 0 0 0 17 0 6 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 110 0 0 87 0 93 1451 48 42 1234 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 7% 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 1% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.6 10.6 51.5 51.5 51.5 51.5 51.5 Effective Green, g (s) 10.6 10.6 51.5 51.5 51.5 51.5 51.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 200 200 275 2626 1186 204 2596 v/s Ratio Prot c0.41 0.35 v/s Ratio Perm c0.08 0.07 0.25 0.03 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.43 0.34 0.55 0.04 0.21 0.48 Uniform Delay, d1 27.5 27.0 3.3 4.2 2.5 2.9 3.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.1 1.5 3.3 0.8 0.1 2.3 0.6 Delay (s) 30.6 28.5 6.6 5.0 2.6 5.2 4.4 Level of Service C C A A A A A Approach Delay (s) 30.6 28.5 5.0 4.4 Approach LOS C C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 7.1 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 70.1 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Project Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-106 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 14 0 6 0 1535 17 3 1205 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 30 0 13 0 1616 36 6 1268 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2095 2933 634 2263 2897 808 1268 1652 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1281 1281 1616 1616 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 814 1652 647 1281 vCu, unblocked vol 2095 2933 634 2263 2897 808 1268 1652 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 71 100 96 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 148 120 422 102 127 324 544 387 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 43 808 808 36 6 846 423 Volume Left 0 30 0 0 0 6 0 0 Volume Right 0 13 0 0 36 0 0 0 cSH 1700 146 1700 1700 1700 387 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.29 0.48 0.48 0.02 0.02 0.50 0.25 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 28 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 42.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.5 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A E B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 42.8 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Project Sat Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-107 22.1 21.6 24.1 29.8 15.8 13.0 21.2 12.1 7. C C C D B B C B A HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Volume (vph) 28 29 101 58 25 59 34 362 14 99 879 41 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1800 1567 1749 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.75 1.00 0.82 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1378 1567 1467 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Growth Factor(vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) 49 51 178 102 44 104 60 639 25 175 1552 72 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 100 0 35 0 0 0 16 0 0 30 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 100 78 0 215 0 60 639 9 175 1552 42 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.7 13.7 13.7 4.1 24.4 24.4 15.5 35.8 35.8 Effective Green, g (s) 13.7 13.7 13.7 4.1 24.4 24.4 15.5 35.8 35.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.06 0.37 0.37 0.24 0.55 0.55 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 288 327 306 111 1316 575 418 1931 845 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.18 c0.10 c0.44 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.05 c0.15 0.01 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.35 0.24 0.70 0.54 0.49 0.02 0.42 0.80 0.05 Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 0.7 0.4 22.9 22.0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 7.1 17.6 0.3 0.0 3.1 2.5 0.0 31.2 47.4 16.1 13.0 24.3 14.6 7.0 Level of Service Approach Delay (s) 22.3 31.2 18.6 15.2 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 65.6 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Background AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-108 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 0 8 0 427 24 6 1056 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 74 0 14 0 754 42 11 1864 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2269 2682 932 1707 2639 377 1864 796 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1885 1885 754 754 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 384 796 953 1885 vCu, unblocked vol 2269 2682 932 1707 2639 377 1864 796 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 67 100 98 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 70 109 268 224 112 627 328 835 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 88 377 377 42 11 1243 621 Volume Left 0 74 0 0 0 11 0 0 Volume Right 0 14 0 0 42 0 0 0 cSH 1700 267 1700 1700 1700 835 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.33 0.22 0.22 0.02 0.01 0.73 0.37 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 35 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 25.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A D A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 25.9 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Background AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-109 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations vi 4 ri lit ri "i 1't Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 70 0 43 0 466 29 38 994 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 129 0 79 0 858 53 70 1829 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2477 2880 915 1912 2827 429 1829 911 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1969 1969 858 858 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 508 911 1055 1969 vCu, unblocked vol 2477 2880 915 1912 2827 429 1829 911 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 7.3 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.5 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 29 100 85 100 91 cM capacity (veh/h) 56 89 275 181 94 530 338 756 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 129 0 79 429 429 53 70 1220 610 Volume Left 0 129 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 79 0 0 53 0 0 0 cSH 1700 181 1700 530 1700 1700 1700 756 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.71 0.00 0.15 0.25 0.25 0.03 0.09 0.72 0.36 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 111 0 13 0 0 0 8 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 63.0 0.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F A B B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 44.0 0.0 0.4 Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Background AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-110 0.02 0.02 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Volume (vph) 51 38 33 38 29 100 80 1120 25 105 539 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1793 1567 1719 1770 3539 1540 1770 3539 1546 Flt Permitted 0.43 1.00 0.75 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 793 1567 1300 1770 3539 1540 1770 3539 1546 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor(vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) 91 68 59 68 52 178 143 1998 45 187 961 46 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 48 0 49 0 0 0 10 0 0 20 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 159 11 0 249 0 143 1998 35 187 961 26 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 21.0 21.0 21.0 16.0 62.0 62.0 15.0 61.0 61.0 Effective Green, g (s) 21.0 21.0 21.0 16.0 62.0 62.0 15.0 61.0 61.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.56 0.56 0.14 0.55 0.55 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 151 299 248 257 1995 868 241 1963 857 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.56 c0.11 0.27 v/s Ratio Perm c0.20 0.01 1.05 0.04 1.AP 01 0.56 1.00 0.04 0.78 0.49 0.03 0.19 we rcauo Uniform Delay, d1 44.5 36.3 44.5 43.7 24.0 10.7 45.9 15.0 11.1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 88.0 0.1 132.5 36.3 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 58.7 8.4 20.5 0.0 21.3 0.2 0.0 103.2 52.1 44.5 10.7 67.2 15.2 11.1 Level of Service F D F D D B E B Approach Delay (s) 106.5 103.2 44.3 23.2 B Approach LOS F F D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 45.8 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.94 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.2% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Background PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-111 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 17 0 32 0 1243 36 3 648 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 30 0 56 0 2194 64 5 1144 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2280 3412 572 2777 3349 1097 1144 2258 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1155 1155 2194 2194 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 1125 2258 583 1155 vCu, unblocked vol 2280 3412 572 2777 3349 1097 1144 2258 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 33 100 73 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 118 66 463 45 76 208 607 224 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 86 1097 1097 64 5 763 381 Volume Left 0 30 0 0 0 5 0 0 Volume Right 0 56 0 0 64 0 0 0 cSH 1700 129 1700 1700 1700 224 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.67 0.65 0.65 0.04 0.02 0.45 0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 91 0 0 0 2 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 82.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.5 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 82.4 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Background PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-112 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations vi 4 ri lit ri "i 1't Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 5 64 0 1221 48 21 640 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 76 9 117 0 2224 87 38 1165 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2475 3553 583 2883 3465 1112 1165 2311 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1242 1242 2224 2224 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 1233 2311 659 1242 vCu, unblocked vol 2475 3553 583 2883 3465 1112 1165 2311 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 8.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 5.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 0 57 44 100 83 cM capacity (veh/h) 10 32 456 44 21 207 595 220 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 76 9 117 1112 1112 87 38 777 388 Volume Left 0 76 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 117 0 0 87 0 0 0 cSH 1700 44 21 207 1700 1700 1700 220 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 1.74 0.43 0.56 0.65 0.65 0.05 0.17 0.46 0.23 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 194 31 76 0 0 0 15 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 558.7 268.1 42.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F F E C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 248.2 0.0 0.8 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 13.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Background PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-113 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Uniform Delay, d1 23.6 23.0 24.7 24.9 16.2 11.1 20.2 10.2 7.7 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r tt ri vi tt ri Volume (vph) 14 8 37 30 11 83 51 628 29 75 478 23 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.0 1.00 1.00 4.0 1.00 1.00 4.0 0.95 1.00 4.0 1.00 0.98 4.0 1.00 1.00 4.0 0.95 1.00 4.0 1.00 0.98 0 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1567 1699 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.66 1.00 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1211 1567 1561 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Growth Factor(vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) 26 15 68 55 20 153 94 1156 53 138 880 42 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 57 0 104 0 0 0 30 0 0 20 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 41 11 0 124 0 94 1156 23 138 880 22 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.1 10.1 10.1 9.2 26.8 26.8 15.3 32.9 32.9 Effective Green, g (s) 10.1 10.1 10.1 9.2 26.8 26.8 15.3 32.9 32.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.14 0.42 0.42 0.24 0.51 0.51 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 191 247 246 254 1477 645 422 1814 793 v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.33 c0.08 c0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.01 c0.08 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.21 0.04 0.50 0.37 0.78 0.04 0.33 0.49 0.03 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.1 1.6 4.1 2.8 0.0 2.1 0.2 0.0 Delay (s) 24.2 23.0 26.4 29.0 19.0 11.1 22.3 10.4 7.8 Level of Service C C C C B B C B A Approach Delay (s) 23.4 26.4 19.4 11.8 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 64.2 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Background Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-114 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 14 0 6 0 720 17 3 552 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 25 0 11 0 1311 31 5 1005 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1677 2358 503 1825 2327 656 1005 1342 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1016 1016 1311 1311 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 661 1342 514 1016 vCu, unblocked vol 1677 2358 503 1825 2327 656 1005 1342 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 84 100 97 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 214 173 514 158 180 408 685 509 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 36 656 656 31 5 670 335 Volume Left 0 25 0 0 0 5 0 0 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 31 0 0 0 cSH 1700 225 1700 1700 1700 509 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.16 0.39 0.39 0.02 0.01 0.39 0.20 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 14 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 26.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.1 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 26.8 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Background Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-115 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations vi 4 ri lit ri "i 1't Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 26 0 37 0 697 31 20 551 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 46 0 66 0 1243 55 36 983 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1742 2352 491 1806 2297 622 983 1298 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1054 1054 1243 1243 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 688 1298 563 1054 vCu, unblocked vol 1742 2352 491 1806 2297 622 983 1298 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 7.0 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.4 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 73 100 84 100 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 181 158 523 172 184 418 711 535 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 46 0 66 622 622 55 36 655 328 Volume Left 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 36 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 66 0 0 55 0 0 0 cSH 1700 172 1700 418 1700 1700 1700 535 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.16 0.37 0.37 0.03 0.07 0.39 0.19 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 26 0 14 0 0 0 5 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 33.4 0.0 15.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.2 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A D A C B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 22.7 0.0 0.4 Approach LOS A C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Background Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-116 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Volume (vph) 28 29 101 58 25 59 34 697 14 99 1567 41 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped/bikes Flpb, ped/bikes 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1800 1567 1749 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.75 1.00 0.82 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1374 1567 1467 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Growth Factor(vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 100% 173% 173% 100% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) 49 51 178 102 44 104 60 711 25 175 1599 72 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 98 0 35 0 0 0 16 0 0 29 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 100 80 0 215 0 60 711 9 175 1599 43 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.8 13.8 13.8 4.1 25.1 25.1 15.5 36.5 36.5 Effective Green, g (s) 13.8 13.8 13.8 4.1 25.1 25.1 15.5 36.5 36.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.06 0.38 0.38 0.23 0.55 0.55 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 286 326 305 109 1338 584 413 1945 851 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.20 c0.10 c0.45 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.05 c0.15 0.01 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.35 0.24 0.71 0.55 0.53 0.02 0.42 0.82 0.05 Uniform Delay, d1 22.5 22.0 24.4 30.3 16.1 12.9 21.7 12.3 6.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.4 7.2 18.5 0.4 0.0 3.2 2.9 0.0 Delay (s) 23.2 22.3 31.6 48.8 16.5 12.9 24.8 15.2 6.9 Level of Service C C C D B B C B A Approach Delay (s) 22.7 31.6 18.8 15.8 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 66.4 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Project AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-117 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 11 lit ri vi 11+ Volume (vph) 71 0 131 70 0 43 25 466 29 38 994 46 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1671 1631 1805 3505 1615 1805 3494 Flt Permitted 0.83 0.62 0.08 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1409 1044 154 3505 1615 578 3494 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor (vph) 100% 173% 100% 173% 173% 173% 100% 173% 173% 173% 173% 100% Adj. Flow (vph) 76 0 139 129 0 79 27 858 53 70 1829 49 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 17 0 0 31 0 0 0 17 0 2 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 198 0 0 177 0 27 858 36 70 1876 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 19% 0% 3% 0% 0% 3% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.5 15.5 49.3 49.3 49.3 49.3 49.3 Effective Green, g (s) 15.5 15.5 49.3 49.3 49.3 49.3 49.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 300 222 104 2374 1094 391 2366 v/s Ratio Prot 0.24 c0.54 v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 c0.17 0.18 0.02 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.80 0.26 0.36 0.03 0.18 0.79 Uniform Delay, d1 26.2 27.2 4.6 5.0 3.9 4.3 8.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Intersection Summary 5.2 17.9 6.0 0.4 0.1 1.0 2.8 31.4 45.1 10.6 5.5 3.9 5.3 11.0 C D B A A A B 31.4 45.1 5.5 10.8 C D A B HCM Average Control Delay 12.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 72.8 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Project AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-118 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r lit ri vi lit Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 0 8 0 810 24 6 1873 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.92 0.98 0.92 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 74 0 14 0 827 42 11 1911 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2353 2801 956 1803 2759 413 1911 869 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1932 1932 827 827 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 420 869 977 1932 vCu, unblocked vol 2353 2801 956 1803 2759 413 1911 869 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 65 100 98 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 65 103 259 210 103 594 307 784 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 88 413 413 42 11 956 956 Volume Left 0 74 0 0 0 11 0 0 Volume Right 0 14 0 0 42 0 0 0 cSH 1700 250 1700 1700 1700 784 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.35 0.24 0.24 0.02 0.01 0.56 0.56 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 38 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 28.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A D A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 28.1 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Project AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-119 c0.20 0.01 0.20 0.02 0.02 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r Volume (vph) 51 38 33 38 29 100 80 2021 25 105 1007 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1793 1567 1719 1770 3539 1539 1770 3539 1545 Flt Permitted 0.43 1.00 0.73 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 787 1567 1274 1770 3539 1539 1770 3539 1545 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor(vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 100% 173% 173% 100% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) 91 68 59 68 52 178 143 2084 45 187 1038 46 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 48 0 44 0 0 0 9 0 0 18 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 159 11 0 254 0 143 2084 36 187 1038 28 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 17.0 70.0 70.0 15.0 68.0 68.0 Effective Green, g (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 17.0 70.0 70.0 15.0 68.0 68.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.14 0.58 0.58 0.12 0.57 0.57 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 151 300 244 251 2064 898 221 2005 876 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.59 c0.11 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm we rcauo 1.05 0.04 1.04 0.57 1.01 0.04 0.85 0.52 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 48.5 39.5 48.5 48.1 25.0 10.7 51.4 15.9 11.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 88.0 0.1 68.2 9.1 22.2 0.0 31.0 0.2 0.0 Delay (s) 136.5 39.5 116.7 57.2 47.2 10.7 82.3 16.2 11.5 Level of Service F D F E D B F B B Approach Delay (s) 110.3 116.7 47.1 25.7 Approach LOS F F D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 48.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.96 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.5% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Project PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-120 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit ri "i 11+ Volume (vph) 84 0 45 42 5 64 140 1221 48 21 640 75 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 0.95 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.97 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1719 1646 1770 3539 1583 1805 3478 Flt Permitted 0.61 0.84 0.19 1.00 1.00 0.07 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1078 1410 352 3539 1583 141 3478 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Growth Factor (vph) 100% 173% 100% 173% 173% 173% 100% 173% 173% 173% 173% 100% Adj. Flow (vph) 88 0 47 76 9 117 147 2224 87 38 1165 79 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 27 0 0 10 0 0 0 23 0 6 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 108 0 0 192 0 147 2224 64 38 1238 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 100% 0% 2% 2% 2% 0% 3% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.9 13.9 53.9 53.9 53.9 53.9 53.9 Effective Green, g (s) 13.9 13.9 53.9 53.9 53.9 53.9 53.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 198 259 250 2517 1126 100 2473 v/s Ratio Prot c0.63 0.36 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 c0.14 0.42 0.04 0.27 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.74 0.59 0.88 0.06 0.38 0.50 Uniform Delay, d1 28.1 29.3 5.4 8.5 3.3 4.3 4.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Intersection Summary 3.1 10.9 9.8 5.0 0.1 10.6 0.7 31.1 40.2 15.2 13.5 3.4 15.0 5.6 C D B B A B A 31.1 40.2 13.2 5.9 C D B A HCM Average Control Delay 12.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 75.8 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Project PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-121 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 17 0 32 0 2234 36 3 1196 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 30 0 56 0 2280 64 5 1220 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2399 3574 610 2900 3511 1140 1220 2343 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1231 1231 2280 2280 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 1168 2343 621 1231 vCu, unblocked vol 2399 3574 610 2900 3511 1140 1220 2343 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 24 100 71 100 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 107 59 437 39 68 195 567 207 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 86 1140 1140 64 5 814 407 Volume Left 0 30 0 0 0 5 0 0 Volume Right 0 56 0 0 64 0 0 0 cSH 1700 114 1700 1700 1700 207 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.76 0.67 0.67 0.04 0.03 0.48 0.24 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 106 0 0 0 2 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 98.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 98.9 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Project PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-122 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r tt ri vi tt ri Volume (vph) 14 8 37 30 11 83 51 1166 29 75 917 23 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1567 1699 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.64 1.00 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1186 1567 1560 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor(vph) 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 173% 100% 173% 173% 100% 173% Adj. Flow (vph) 26 15 68 55 20 153 94 1240 53 138 976 42 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 58 0 105 0 0 0 27 0 0 20 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 41 10 0 123 0 94 1240 26 138 976 22 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.1 10.1 10.1 9.2 28.2 28.2 15.3 34.3 34.3 Effective Green, g (s) 10.1 10.1 10.1 9.2 28.2 28.2 15.3 34.3 34.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.43 0.43 0.23 0.52 0.52 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 183 241 240 248 1521 664 413 1850 809 v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.35 c0.08 c0.28 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.01 c0.08 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.04 0.51 0.38 0.82 0.04 0.33 0.53 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 24.3 23.6 25.5 25.6 16.4 10.8 20.9 10.3 7.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.1 1.8 4.4 3.5 0.0 2.2 0.3 0.0 Delay (s) 24.9 23.7 27.3 30.0 19.9 10.9 23.1 10.6 7.6 Level of Service C C C CBBCB A Approach Delay (s) 24.2 27.3 20.2 12.0 Approach LOS C C C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 65.6 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Project Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-123 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit ri "i 11+ Volume (vph) 80 0 80 26 0 37 90 697 31 20 551 90 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 0.93 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1695 1646 1805 3574 1615 1787 3528 Flt Permitted 0.79 0.80 0.24 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1375 1343 461 3574 1615 369 3528 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor (vph) 100% 173% 100% 173% 173% 173% 100% 173% 173% 173% 173% 100% Adj. Flow (vph) 82 0 82 46 0 66 93 1243 55 36 983 93 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 54 0 0 56 0 0 0 14 0 7 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 110 0 0 56 0 93 1243 41 36 1069 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 7% 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 1% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.5 10.5 51.7 51.7 51.7 51.7 51.7 Effective Green, g (s) 10.5 10.5 51.7 51.7 51.7 51.7 51.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 206 201 340 2632 1189 272 2598 v/s Ratio Prot c0.35 0.30 v/s Ratio Perm c0.08 0.04 0.20 0.03 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.28 0.27 0.47 0.03 0.13 0.41 Uniform Delay, d1 27.6 26.5 3.1 3.7 2.5 2.7 3.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.6 0.8 2.0 0.6 0.1 1.0 0.5 Delay (s) 30.2 27.2 5.0 4.3 2.6 3.7 4.0 Level of Service C C A A A A A Approach Delay (s) 30.2 27.2 4.3 4.0 Approach LOS C C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 6.6 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.48 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 70.2 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2018 Project Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-124 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 14 0 6 0 1326 17 3 1045 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 25 0 11 0 1396 31 5 1100 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1814 2538 550 1957 2507 698 1100 1427 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1111 1111 1396 1396 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 703 1427 561 1111 vCu, unblocked vol 1814 2538 550 1957 2507 698 1100 1427 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 82 100 97 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 189 155 479 140 162 383 630 473 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 36 698 698 31 5 733 367 Volume Left 0 25 0 0 0 5 0 0 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 31 0 0 0 cSH 1700 200 1700 1700 1700 473 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.18 0.41 0.41 0.02 0.01 0.43 0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 16 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 29.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 29.9 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2018 Project Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-125 24.4 23.8 24.8 26.2 23.4 31.9 15.4 12.2 23.0 12.3 6.3 Level of Service C C C C C E B B C B A HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 I Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 ri ' 1 ri ' 1 ri Volume (vph) 28 29 101 58 25 59 34 362 14 99 879 41 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 4.0 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 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 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1844 1567 1827 1607 1770 3539 1544 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.55 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1012 1844 1567 1427 1607 1770 3539 1544 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Growth Factor (vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 58 60 208 120 52 122 70 746 29 204 1812 85 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 94 0 0 99 0 0 17 0 0 29 Lane Group Flow (vph) 58 60 114 0 172 23 70 746 12 204 1812 56 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.8 4.1 28.3 28.3 16.2 40.4 40.4 Effective Green, g (s) 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.8 4.1 28.3 28.3 16.2 40.4 40.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.06 0.41 0.41 0.23 0.58 0.58 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 187 341 289 264 297 105 1445 631 414 2063 902 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.04 0.21 c0.12 c0.51 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.07 c0.12 0.01 0.01 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.18 0.40 0.65 0.08 0.67 0.52 0.02 0.49 0.88 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.9 0.2 0.9 25.4 24.1 25.7 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.7 0.1 28.8 0.3 0.0 4.1 4.6 0.0 31.8 23.5 60.7 15.7 12.2 27.1 17.0 6.3 Approach Delay (s) 25.4 28.4 19.3 17.5 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 69.3 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Background AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-126 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit fir "i 11+ Volume (vph) 0 0 0 70 0 43 0 466 29 38 994 0 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1631 3505 1615 1805 3505 Flt Permitted 0.81 1.00 1.00 0.26 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1363 3505 1615 488 3505 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor (vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 150 0 92 0 1001 62 82 2136 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 212 0 0 1001 43 82 2136 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 19% 0% 3% 0% 0% 3% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.5 52.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 Effective Green, g (s) 14.5 52.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 265 2446 1127 341 2446 v/s Ratio Prot 0.29 c0.61 v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.03 0.17 v/c Ratio 0.80 0.41 0.04 0.24 0.87 Uniform Delay, d1 28.6 4.8 3.5 4.1 8.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 15.8 0.1 0.0 0.4 3.8 Delay (s) 44.4 4.9 3.5 4.5 12.5 Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Intersection Summary 0.0 A D A A A B 44.4 4.8 12.2 D A B HCM Average Control Delay 12.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 74.5 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Background AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-127 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 0 8 0 427 24 6 1056 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 87 0 16 0 880 49 12 2177 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2650 3131 1088 1993 3082 440 2177 930 vC1, stage 1 confvol 2201 2201 880 880 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 448 930 1113 2201 vCu, unblocked vol 2650 3131 1088 1993 3082 440 2177 930 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 51 100 97 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 44 76 211 178 78 570 248 744 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 103 440 440 49 12 1451 726 Volume Left 0 87 0 0 0 12 0 0 Volume Right 0 16 0 0 49 0 0 0 cSH 1700 212 1700 1700 1700 744 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.49 0.26 0.26 0.03 0.02 0.85 0.43 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 60 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 38.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.9 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A E A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 38.0 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Background AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-128 51.5 47.2 45.4 50.1 46.3 45.9 21.4 7.9 52.3 14.0 9.8 Level of Service F D D ED D D A F B A HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 I Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 ri ' 1 ri ' 1 ri Volume (vph) 51 38 33 38 29 100 80 1120 25 105 539 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 4.0 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 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 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1844 1567 1838 1607 1770 3539 1539 1770 3539 1545 Flt Permitted 0.47 1.00 1.00 0.74 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 866 1844 1567 1403 1607 1770 3539 1539 1770 3539 1545 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor (vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 106 79 69 79 60 208 167 2332 52 219 1122 54 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 60 0 0 167 0 0 9 0 0 19 Lane Group Flow (vph) 106 79 9 0 139 41 167 2332 43 219 1122 35 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 20.0 77.0 77.0 15.0 72.0 72.0 Effective Green, g (s) 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 20.0 77.0 77.0 15.0 72.0 72.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.17 0.64 0.64 0.13 0.60 0.60 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 114 243 207 185 212 295 2275 989 222 2127 929 v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.09 c0.66 c0.12 0.32 v/s Ratio Perm c0.12 0.01 we rcauo 0.93 0.33 0.04 0.10 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.75 0.19 0.57 1.03 0.04 0.99 0.53 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 1.00 61.7 0.8 0.1 113.2 47.9 45.5 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 15.7 0.5 7.7 25.6 0.0 57.0 0.2 0.0 65.8 46.8 53.6 47.0 7.9 109.3 14.2 9.8 Approach Delay (s) 74.5 54.4 46.6 29.0 Approach LOS E D D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 43.3 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.01 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 119.8 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 98.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Background PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-129 Growth Factor (vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit fir "i 11+ Volume (vph) 0 0 0 42 5 64 0 1221 48 21 640 0 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 0.92 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1643 3539 1583 1805 3505 Flt Permitted 0.88 1.00 1.00 0.06 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1466 3539 1583 109 3505 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 89 11 136 0 2596 102 45 1361 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 229 0 0 2596 82 45 1361 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 100% 0% 2% 2% 2% 0% 3% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.9 69.7 69.7 69.7 69.7 Effective Green, g (s) 15.9 69.7 69.7 69.7 69.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 249 2635 1179 81 2610 v/s Ratio Prot c0.73 0.39 v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.05 0.41 v/c Ratio 0.92 0.99 0.07 0.56 0.52 Uniform Delay, d1 38.2 11.5 3.2 5.2 5.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 36.4 14.4 0.1 24.7 0.7 Delay (s) 74.6 25.8 3.3 29.9 5.7 Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Intersection Summary 0.0 A E C A C A 74.6 25.0 6.5 E C A HCM Average Control Delay 21.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 93.6 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Background PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-130 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 17 0 32 0 1243 36 3 648 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 35 0 66 0 2562 74 6 1336 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2662 3984 668 3242 3910 1281 1336 2636 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1348 1348 2562 2562 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 1314 2636 680 1348 vCu, unblocked vol 2662 3984 668 3242 3910 1281 1336 2636 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 0 100 58 100 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 74 40 401 26 49 156 512 158 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 101 1281 1281 74 6 890 445 Volume Left 0 35 0 0 0 6 0 0 Volume Right 0 66 0 0 74 0 0 0 cSH 1700 69 1700 1700 1700 158 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 1.47 0.75 0.75 0.04 0.04 0.52 0.26 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 213 0 0 0 3 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 378.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F D Approach Delay (s) 0.0 378.1 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 9.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Background PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-131 Level of Service C C C CCCC B C B A HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 I Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 ri ' 1 ri ' 1 ri Volume (vph) 14 8 37 30 11 83 51 628 29 75 478 23 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 4.0 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 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 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1844 1567 1824 1607 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.70 1.00 1.00 0.77 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1291 1844 1567 1464 1607 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor (vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 30 17 80 64 24 178 110 1350 62 161 1027 49 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 69 0 0 153 0 0 28 0 0 23 Lane Group Flow (vph) 30 17 11 0 88 25 110 1350 34 161 1027 26 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 10.1 30.1 30.1 15.1 35.1 35.1 Effective Green, g (s) 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 10.1 30.1 30.1 15.1 35.1 35.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.45 0.45 0.23 0.53 0.53 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 179 255 217 203 223 269 1604 700 403 1871 818 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.06 c0.38 c0.09 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.01 c0.06 0.02 0.02 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.07 0.05 0.43 0.11 0.41 0.84 0.05 0.40 0.55 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 25.2 24.9 24.8 26.2 25.0 25.5 16.0 10.1 21.8 10.4 7.5 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.4 0.1 0.1 25.7 25.0 24.9 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.5 0.2 4.6 4.2 0.0 2.9 0.3 0.0 27.7 25.2 30.0 20.2 10.2 24.7 10.7 7.5 Approach Delay (s) 25.1 26.1 20.5 12.4 Approach LOS C C C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 66.4 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Background Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-132 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit fir "i 11+ Volume (vph) 0 0 0 26 0 37 0 697 31 20 551 0 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 0.92 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1646 3574 1615 1787 3574 Flt Permitted 0.87 1.00 1.00 0.16 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1454 3574 1615 297 3574 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor (vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 54 0 77 0 1451 65 42 1147 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 53 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 78 0 0 1451 51 42 1147 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 7% 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 1% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.2 59.4 59.4 59.4 59.4 Effective Green, g (s) 8.2 59.4 59.4 59.4 59.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 158 2808 1269 233 2808 v/s Ratio Prot c0.41 0.32 v/s Ratio Perm c0.05 0.03 0.14 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.52 0.04 0.18 0.41 Uniform Delay, d1 31.8 2.9 1.8 2.0 2.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.4 0.7 0.1 1.7 0.4 Delay (s) 34.2 3.6 1.9 3.7 3.0 Level of Service C A A A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 34.2 3.5 3.0 Approach LOS A C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 75.6 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Background Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-133 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 14 0 6 0 720 17 3 552 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 30 0 13 0 1531 36 6 1174 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1958 2754 587 2131 2717 765 1174 1567 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1186 1186 1531 1531 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 772 1567 600 1186 vCu, unblocked vol 1958 2754 587 2131 2717 765 1174 1567 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 74 100 96 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 168 133 453 116 141 346 591 417 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 43 765 765 36 6 782 391 Volume Left 0 30 0 0 0 6 0 0 Volume Right 0 13 0 0 36 0 0 0 cSH 1700 165 1700 1700 1700 417 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.26 0.45 0.45 0.02 0.02 0.46 0.23 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 24 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 37.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.8 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A E B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 37.4 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Background Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-134 Adj. Flow (vph) 58 60 208 120 52 122 70 818 29 204 1859 85 Lane Group Flow (vph) 58 60 113 120 52 20 70 818 12 204 1859 58 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 I Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 28 29 101 58 25 59 34 802 14 99 1822 41 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 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 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1844 1567 1796 1891 1607 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.72 1.00 1.00 0.72 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1333 1844 1567 1357 1891 1607 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Growth Factor(vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 100% 202% 202% 100% 202% RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 95 0 0 102 0 0 17 0 0 27 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 11.1 11.1 11.1 11.1 11.1 11.1 4.1 28.6 28.6 16.2 40.7 40.7 Effective Green, g (s) 11.1 11.1 11.1 11.1 11.1 11.1 4.1 28.6 28.6 16.2 40.7 40.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.06 0.42 0.42 0.24 0.60 0.60 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 218 301 256 222 309 263 107 1491 651 422 2121 928 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.23 c0.12 c0.53 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.07 c0.09 0.01 0.01 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.27 0.20 0.44 0.54 0.17 0.08 0.65 0.55 0.02 0.48 0.88 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 24.8 24.6 25.6 26.1 24.4 24.1 31.2 14.8 11.5 22.2 11.5 5.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.3 1.2 2.7 0.3 0.1 27.1 0.4 0.0 3.9 4.4 0.0 Delay (s) 25.5 24.9 26.8 28.7 24.7 24.2 58.3 15.2 11.5 26.2 15.9 5.7 Level of Service C C C C C C E B B C B A Approach Delay (s) 26.2 26.1 18.4 16.5 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 67.9 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.5% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Project AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-135 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit ri "i 11+ Volume (vph) 71 0 131 70 0 43 25 466 29 38 994 46 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1671 1631 1805 3505 1615 1805 3495 Flt Permitted 0.82 0.62 0.07 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1397 1035 139 3505 1615 478 3495 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor (vph) 100% 202% 100% 202% 202% 202% 100% 202% 202% 202% 202% 100% Adj. Flow (vph) 76 0 139 150 0 92 27 1001 62 82 2136 49 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 11 0 0 28 0 0 0 20 0 2 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 204 0 0 214 0 27 1001 42 82 2183 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 19% 0% 3% 0% 0% 3% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 17.6 17.6 54.7 54.7 54.7 54.7 54.7 Effective Green, g (s) 17.6 17.6 54.7 54.7 54.7 54.7 54.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 306 227 95 2388 1100 326 2381 v/s Ratio Prot 0.29 c0.62 v/s Ratio Perm 0.15 c0.21 0.19 0.03 0.17 v/c Ratio 0.67 0.94 0.28 0.42 0.04 0.25 0.92 Uniform Delay, d1 28.7 30.8 5.1 5.7 4.2 4.9 10.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.4 43.6 7.4 0.5 0.1 1.8 7.0 Delay (s) 34.1 74.5 12.4 6.3 4.3 6.8 17.9 Level of Service C E B A A A B Approach Delay (s) 34.1 74.5 6.3 17.5 Approach LOS C E A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.3 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.0% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Project AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-136 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r lit ri vi lit Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 42 0 8 0 934 24 6 2179 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.92 0.98 0.92 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 87 0 16 0 953 49 12 2223 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2733 3251 1112 2090 3201 477 2223 1003 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 2248 2248 953 953 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 485 1003 1136 2248 vCu, unblocked vol 2733 3251 1112 2090 3201 477 2223 1003 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 48 100 97 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 41 71 203 167 72 540 231 699 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 103 477 477 49 12 1112 1112 Volume Left 0 87 0 0 0 12 0 0 Volume Right 0 16 0 0 49 0 0 0 cSH 1700 199 1700 1700 1700 699 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.52 0.28 0.28 0.03 0.02 0.65 0.65 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 66 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 41.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A E B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 41.9 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Project AM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-137 Lane Group Flow (vph) 106 79 8 79 60 39 167 2420 44 219 1200 37 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 51 38 33 38 29 100 80 2347 25 105 1164 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 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 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1844 1567 1796 1891 1607 1770 3539 1540 1770 3539 1546 Flt Permitted 0.72 1.00 1.00 0.66 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1324 1844 1567 1256 1891 1607 1770 3539 1540 1770 3539 1546 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor(vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 100% 202% 202% 100% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 106 79 69 79 60 208 167 2420 52 219 1200 54 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 61 0 0 169 0 0 8 0 0 17 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 20.0 77.0 77.0 15.0 72.0 72.0 Effective Green, g (s) 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 20.0 77.0 77.0 15.0 72.0 72.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.17 0.66 0.66 0.13 0.61 0.61 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 150 209 178 142 214 182 302 2323 1011 226 2172 949 v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 0.03 0.09 c0.68 c0.12 0.34 v/s Ratio Perm c0.08 0.00 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.38 0.04 0.56 0.28 0.21 0.55 1.04 0.04 0.97 0.55 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 50.1 48.2 46.3 49.2 47.6 47.2 44.6 20.1 7.1 50.9 13.2 9.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 14.1 1.1 0.1 4.7 0.7 0.6 7.1 30.6 0.0 52.4 0.3 0.0 Delay (s) 64.2 49.3 46.4 53.9 48.3 47.8 51.7 50.8 7.1 103.3 13.5 9.0 Level of Service EDDDDDDD A F B A Approach Delay (s) 54.8 49.3 50.0 26.7 Approach LOS D D D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.9 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 117.3 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.0% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Project PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-138 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit ri "i 11+ Volume (vph) 84 0 45 42 5 64 140 1221 48 21 640 75 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 0.95 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.97 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1719 1643 1770 3539 1583 1805 3482 Flt Permitted 0.55 0.83 0.15 1.00 1.00 0.06 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 976 1389 275 3539 1583 113 3482 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Growth Factor(vph) 100% 202% 100% 202% 202% 202% 100% 202% 202% 202% 202% 100% Adj. Flow (vph) 88 0 47 89 11 136 147 2596 102 45 1361 79 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 21 0 0 7 0 0 0 20 0 4 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 114 0 0 229 0 147 2596 82 45 1436 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 100% 0% 2% 2% 2% 0% 3% 0% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.0 16.0 67.4 67.4 67.4 67.4 67.4 Effective Green, g (s) 16.0 16.0 67.4 67.4 67.4 67.4 67.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 171 243 203 2610 1167 83 2568 v/s Ratio Prot c0.73 0.41 v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 c0.17 0.54 0.05 0.40 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.94 0.72 0.99 0.07 0.54 0.56 Uniform Delay, d1 35.2 37.3 6.8 11.8 3.3 5.2 5.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.3 42.2 20.0 16.4 0.1 23.1 0.9 Delay (s) 44.5 79.5 26.8 28.2 3.4 28.3 6.2 Level of Service D E C C A C A Approach Delay (s) 44.5 79.5 27.3 6.9 Approach LOS D E C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 91.4 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Project PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-139 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 17 0 32 0 2595 36 3 1384 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 35 0 66 0 2648 74 6 1412 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2782 4147 706 3366 4073 1324 1412 2722 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1425 1425 2648 2648 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 1357 2722 718 1425 vCu, unblocked vol 2782 4147 706 3366 4073 1324 1412 2722 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 0 100 55 100 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 65 35 378 23 44 146 479 146 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 101 1324 1324 74 6 941 471 Volume Left 0 35 0 0 0 6 0 0 Volume Right 0 66 0 0 74 0 0 0 cSH 1700 59 1700 1700 1700 146 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 1.71 0.78 0.78 0.04 0.04 0.55 0.28 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 233 0 0 0 3 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 494.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A F D Approach Delay (s) 0.0 494.3 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A F Intersection Summary Average Delay 11.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Project PM Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-140 Lane Group Flow (vph) 30 17 10 64 24 23 110 1435 36 161 1123 27 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Spring Valley Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 14 8 37 30 11 83 51 1349 29 75 1056 23 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -3% 0% 0% Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 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 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 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 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1844 1567 1796 1891 1607 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Flt Permitted 0.74 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1368 1844 1567 1411 1891 1607 1770 3539 1545 1770 3539 1548 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor(vph) 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 202% 100% 202% 202% 100% 202% Adj. Flow (vph) 30 17 80 64 24 178 110 1435 62 161 1123 49 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 70 0 0 155 0 0 26 0 0 22 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 10.0 31.2 31.2 15.0 36.2 36.2 Effective Green, g (s) 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 10.0 31.2 31.2 15.0 36.2 36.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.15 0.47 0.47 0.22 0.54 0.54 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 174 235 200 180 241 205 265 1655 723 398 1921 840 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.01 0.06 c0.41 c0.09 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.01 c0.05 0.01 0.02 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.07 0.05 0.36 0.10 0.11 0.42 0.87 0.05 0.40 0.58 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 26.0 25.6 25.6 26.6 25.7 25.8 25.7 15.9 9.7 22.0 10.2 7.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.1 0.1 1.2 0.2 0.2 4.7 5.1 0.0 3.0 0.5 0.0 Delay (s) 26.4 25.8 25.7 27.8 25.9 26.0 30.4 21.0 9.7 25.1 10.7 7.1 Level of Service CCCCCCCC A C B A Approach Delay (s) 25.9 26.4 21.2 12.3 Approach LOS C C C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.71 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 66.7 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Project Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-141 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lit ri "i 11+ Volume (vph) 80 0 80 26 0 37 90 697 31 20 551 90 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 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 0.93 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.98 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1695 1646 1805 3574 1615 1787 3534 Flt Permitted 0.76 0.79 0.20 1.00 1.00 0.15 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1315 1320 374 3574 1615 279 3534 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Growth Factor (vph) 100% 202% 100% 202% 202% 202% 100% 202% 202% 202% 202% 100% Adj. Flow (vph) 82 0 82 54 0 77 93 1451 65 42 1147 93 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 53 0 0 50 0 0 0 17 0 6 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 111 0 0 81 0 93 1451 48 42 1234 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 7% 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 1% Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.9 10.9 53.5 53.5 53.5 53.5 53.5 Effective Green, g (s) 10.9 10.9 53.5 53.5 53.5 53.5 53.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 198 199 276 2641 1193 206 2611 v/s Ratio Prot c0.41 0.35 v/s Ratio Perm c0.08 0.06 0.25 0.03 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.41 0.34 0.55 0.04 0.20 0.47 Uniform Delay, d1 28.5 27.8 3.3 4.2 2.5 2.9 3.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.6 1.4 3.3 0.8 0.1 2.2 0.6 Delay (s) 32.2 29.2 6.6 5.0 2.6 5.1 4.4 Level of Service C C A A A A A Approach Delay (s) 32.2 29.2 5.0 4.4 Approach LOS C C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 7.2 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 72.4 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 2030 Project Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 App. M-142 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Marand Rd & SH 82 10/25/2010 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 fir lit fir vi 41+ Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 14 0 6 0 1535 17 3 1205 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 30 0 13 0 1616 36 6 1268 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) 4 Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2095 2933 634 2263 2897 808 1268 1652 vC1, stage 1 confvol 1281 1281 1616 1616 vC2, stage 2 cont vol 814 1652 647 1281 vCu, unblocked vol 2095 2933 634 2263 2897 808 1268 1652 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 6.5 5.5 6.5 5.5 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 71 100 96 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 148 120 422 102 127 324 544 387 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 0 43 808 808 36 6 846 423 Volume Left 0 30 0 0 0 6 0 0 Volume Right 0 13 0 0 36 0 0 0 cSH 1700 146 1700 1700 1700 387 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.29 0.48 0.48 0.02 0.02 0.50 0.25 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 28 0 0 0 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 42.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.5 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A E B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 42.8 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS A E Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2030 Project Sat Mitigate Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 App. M-143 rraffic Assessment 3iver Edge Colorado december 2010 APPENDIX D: SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS App. M-144 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2018 Background Period AM Peak 500 x a ▪ 400 co 0 `o. a w • 300 E 0 rn 200 x w in 100 `o 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) I I 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane i 1 Lane & Lan 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-145 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) Y N One Lane (Y/N) N Y Traffic Volume (VPH) * 2592 121 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-145 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2018 Background Period PM Peak 500 x a 400 co 0 `o. 0_ 300 0 rn 200 x w in 100 `o 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 3700 3900 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * Major Street Minor Street 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane Two or More Lane (Y/N) Y One Lane (Y/N) N Traffic Volume (VPH) * 3255 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane I Lane & 1 Lane I 1 411111 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 3700 3900 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-146 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) Y One Lane (Y/N) N Traffic Volume (VPH) * 3255 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-146 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2018 Background Period AM Peak 500 x a o 400 0 a 0. a) 300 E 0 > 0) 200 2 w m in 100 Lo 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-147 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-147 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2018 Background Period PM Peak 500 x a o 400 0 a 0. E 300 0 > 0) 200 2 w m in 100 Lo 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) I I I I 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane X 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 3700 3900 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-148 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) 1 One Lane (Y/N) N Traffic Volume (VPH) * 3276 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-148 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2030 Background Period AM Peak 500 x a ▪ 400 co 0 `o. a a) • 300 E 0 rn 200 x w in 100 `o 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) I I 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane i 1 Lane & Lan ff 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-149 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) Y N One Lane (Y/N) N Y Traffic Volume (VPH) * 3026 141 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-149 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2030 Background Period PM Peak 500 x a ▪ 400 co 0 `o. a a� • 300 E 0 rn 200 x w in 100 L 8 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 3700 3900 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-150 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) Y N One Lane (Y/N) N Y Traffic Volume (VPH) * 3801 85 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-150 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2030 Background Period AM Peak 500 x a o 400 0 a 0. a) 300 E 0 > 0) 200 2 w m in 100 `o 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-151 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-151 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2030 Background Period PM Peak 500 x a o 400 0 a 0. E 300 0 > 0) 200 2 w m in 100 Lo 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 3700 3900 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-152 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) 1 One Lane (Y/N) N Traffic Volume (VPH) * 3826 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-152 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2018 Background plus project Period AM Peak 500 x a ▪ 400 co 0 `o. a w • 300 E 0 rn 200 x w in 100 `o 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) I I 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane i 1 Lane & Lan 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-153 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) Y N One Lane (Y/N) N Y Traffic Volume (VPH) * 2592 121 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-153 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2018 Background plus project Period PM Peak 500 x a ▪ 400 co 0 `o. a w • 300 E 0 rn 200 x w in 100 `o 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) I I 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane i 1 Lane & Lan ff 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-154 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) Y N One Lane (Y/N) N Y Traffic Volume (VPH) * 3359 84 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-154 1 Lane & 1 Lane FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2018 Background plus project Period AM Peak 500 x a o 400 0 a 0. a) 300 E 0 > 0) 200 2 w m in 100 Lo 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 3700 3900 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-155 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-155 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2018 Background plus project Period PM Peak 500 x a o 400 0 a 0. a) 300 E 0 > 0) 200 2 w m in 100 Lo 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 1 I I I 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 3700 3900 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-156 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-156 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2030 Background plus project Period AM Peak 500 x a ▪ 400 co 0 `o. a w • 300 E 0 rn 200 x w in 100 `o 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) I I 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane i 1 Lane & Lan ff 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-157 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) Y N One Lane (Y/N) N Y Traffic Volume (VPH) * 3026 141 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-157 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Cattle Creek Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2030 Background plus project Period PM Peak 500 x a ▪ 400 co 0 `o. a w • 300 E 0 rn 200 x w L in 100 `o 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 1 1 1 1 1 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane Lane & 1 Lane rt 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 3700 3900 4100 4300 4500 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-158 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Cattle Creek Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) Y N One Lane (Y/N) N Y Traffic Volume (VPH) * 3899 129 *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-158 FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2030 Background plus project Period AM Peak 500 x a o 400 0 a 0. a) 300 E 0 > 0) 200 2 w m in 100 Lo 0 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-159 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-159 Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 2 or More Lane & 2 or More Lane 1 2 or More Lane & 1 Lane 1 Lane & 1 Lane FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Computed by AT Date 10/22/2010 Intersection Marand Rd & SH 82 Cattle Creek Crossing 2030 Background plus project Period PM Peak 500 x a o 400 0 a 0. a) 300 E 0 > 0) 200 2 w m inn 100 Lo 0 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 3700 3900 4100 4300 4500 Major Street -Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) *Note: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * App. M-160 Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Name of Streets SH 82 Marand Rd Lane Conditions Two or More Lane (Y/N) One Lane (Y/N) Traffic Volume (VPH) * *Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volumes of Both Approches. Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach. App. M-160 traffic Assessment liver Edge Colorado december 2010 _ lV NEM APPENDIX E: PROGRESSION ANALYSIS App. M-161 AM Peak Arterial and Link -Link Bandwidths, 90th Percentile Green Times 2018 w Project 10/25/2010 Main Street Cross Street Approach Offset Delays (s.) Lt Th Rt Int 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 II I I 1 II II 1 1 1 1 111 111 II 11 I I I I SI I I I 1 i i 1I i t Ili ir1I1 I1II I I1 I1 I1I I II1I II II I I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 II II 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 II 11 I I I I SI I I I 1 i i 1I 260 280 300 320 i t Ili ir1I1 I1II I I1 I1 11 I I II 1I II II I I II 1r SH82 SH 82_ @ Spring Valley Rd 0 SH 82 @ Marand Rd N 37 51 22 19 4 5 257 I I I /rin!Z)49 \ I I I 1 I I \NB Arterial I/77 I and 49 s / / /\ LEGEND NB or WB Arterial Bandwidtl NB or WB Link Bandwidth SB or EB Arterial Bandwidth SB or EB Link Bandwidth /II I i /II I / / / / r,\/\/,\/\\ \ \ \ \ \ �Thru Green SH 82 SH 82 ' ` ' 4. _ 5 15 18 al NB or WB Left-Thru Green SB or EB Left-Thru Green Dual Left Green Starvation Thru Starvation Left Spillback Uncoord Thru Spillback Uncoord Left Spillback Coord Thru Spillback Coord Left SISII •541 / \\ SB link Band\�2 s / \\ / \\ $I� A ■ I I @ Cattle Creek Rd 19 7 2 = 0 n Storage Blocking Thru Storage Blocking Left Baseline App. M-162 PM Peak Arterial and Link -Link Bandwidths, 90th Percentile Green Times 2018 w Project 10/25/2010 Main Street Cross Street Approach Offset Delays (s.) Lt Th Rt Int 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 I I I I 1 II II 1 1 1 1 111 111 II 11 I I I I SI I I I 1 i i 1I i t I1II I r1I1 I1II I I1 I1 I1I I1 1I II 11 I I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 II II 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 II 11 I I I I SI I I I 1 i i 1I i t I1II I r1I1 I1II I I1 I1 I1I I1 1I II 11 I I II 1 III, SH 82 SH 82 @Spring Valley Rd SH 82 @ Marand Rd SH 82 N, ` 4' _ _ _ _ 83 53 66 17 46 19 4 6 47 19 _ \ I0 IB Li k Band 59 s 11\ \ I \ / I NB Art j I Band 9 s / / / / LEGEND NB or WB Arterial Bandwidtl NB or WB Link Bandwidth SB or EB Arterial Bandwidth SB or EB Link Bandwidth Thru Green NB or WB Left-Thru Green SB or EB Left-Thru Green Dual Left Green Starvation Thru Starvation Left Spillback Uncoord Thru Spillback Uncoord Left Spillback Coord Thru /A\\ II \ /A\\ II I / / / / j0 \ \ \ \ \ \ 4:.; 1 //\\SH82 SB Link Ba V48 s \\ A \\VB Ai ■ I I -= @ Cattle Creek Rd 0 13 11 1 Spillback Coord Left Storage Blocking Thru Storage Blocking Left Baseline App. M-163 AM Peak Arterial and Link -Link Bandwidths, 90th Percentile Green Times 2030 w Project 10/25/2010 Main Street Cross Street Approach Offset Delays (s.) Lt Th Rt Int 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 I I I I 1 II II 1 1 1 1 111 111 II 11 I I I I SI I I I 1 i i 1I i t I1II I r1I1 I1II I I1 I1 I1I I1 1I II 11 I I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 II II 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 II 11 I I I I SI I I I 1 i i 1I 260 280 300 320 i t I1II I r1I1 I1II I I1 I1 I1I I1 1I II 11 I I II 1 III, SH82 SH 82 @ Spring Valley Rd 0 SH 82 @ Marand Rd N, , MIE=1 _ — 39 59 19 16 3 4 22 ' I I I I /!"°7/ B Link //93 \ \NB Arterial, \ I 1 nd 53 s I \ / / LEGEND NB or WB Arterial Bandwidtl NB or WB Link Bandwidth SB or EB Arterial Bandwidth SB or EB Link Bandwidth / \ / \ / \ / \ / / / / / \ \ \ \ LJThru Green SH 82 SH 82 ' ` 4' 4. _ 7 23 23 \/ /\/ / al NB or WB Left-Thru Green SB or EB Left-Thru Green Dual Left Green Starvation Thru Starvation Left Spillback Uncoord Thru Spillback Uncoord Left Spillback Coord Thru Spillback Coord Left :; / \\ SB Li/k Band7 s / \\ II \\ $I� Ai ■ I I @ Cattle Creek Rd 0 23 8 2 = Storage Blocking Thru Storage Blocking Left Baseline App. M-164 PM Peak Arterial and Link -Link Bandwidths, 90th Percentile Green Times 2030 w Project 10/25/2010 Main Street Cross Street Approach Offset Delays (s.) Lt Th Rt Int 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 II I I 1 II II 1 1 1 1 111 111 II 11 I I I I SI I I I 1 i i 1I i t Ili ir1I1 I1II I I1 I1 I1I I II1I II II I I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 II II 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 II 11 I I I I SI I I I 1 i i 1I 260 280 300 320 i t Ili ir1I1 I1II I I1 I1 11 I I II 1I II II I I II 1r SH82 SH 82 @ Spring Valley Rd 0 SH 82 @ Marand Rd i _ 79 48 16 63 4 5 47 \ / I \ I NB Lin Band 52 s NBA erial I Band \2 s7 LEGEND NB or WB Arterial Bandwidtl NB or WB Link Bandwidth SB or EB Arterial Bandwidth SB or EB Link Bandwidth II I II I / / / / \ \ \ \ �Thru Green SH 82 SH 82 4' 4` I' _ 79 18 32 al NB or WB Left-Thru Green SB or EB Left-Thru Green Dual Left Green Starvation Thru Starvation Left Spillback Uncoord Thru Spillback Uncoord Left Spillback Coord Thru PO / \\ SB Link Bind 47 s \\ / \\ / SB Ai ■ I I - @ Cattle Creek Rd 0 4. 39 36 3 = Spillback Coord Left Storage Blocking Thru Storage Blocking Left Baseline App. M-165