Item 7 - TIATraffic. Transportation Planning. Parking. Design.
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR
SOUTHWEST MEADOWS
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
DeShazo Project No. 17175
Prepared for:
Wilks Development
17018 IH20
Cisco, TX 76437
Prepared by:
DeShazo Group, Inc.
Texas Registered Engineering Firm F-3199
400 South Houston Street, Suite 330
Dallas, Texas 75202
214.748.6740
February 21, 2018
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Table of Contents
Traffic Impact Analysis for
Southwest Meadows
~ DeShazo Project No. 17175~
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 1
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 2
PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................................. 2
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS - METHODOLOGY ................................................................................... 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................................... 3
ANALYSIS SCENARIOS ......................................................................................................................... 6
STUDY PARAMETERS .......................................................................................................................... 7
STUDY AREA ........................................................................................................................................ 7
BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES ..................................................................................................... 8
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES .......................................................................................................... 8
PROJECTED BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES .............................................................................. 8
SITE-RELATED TRAFFIC ...................................................................................................................... 9
TRIP GENERATION .............................................................................................................................. 9
TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT .............................................................................................. 9
SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES ................................................................................................. 9
ROADWAY INTERSECTION ANALYSIS............................................................................................. 10
INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS - METHODOLGY ..................................................................... 10
2018 EXISTING – INTERSECTION ANALYSIS ...................................................................................... 11
2019 BACKGROUND WITHOUT AND WITH SITE – INTERSECTION ANALYSIS ................................... 12
ROADWAY LINK ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................... 15
ROADWAY LINK ANALYSIS - METHODOLGY .................................................................................... 15
ROADWAY LINK ANALYSIS - RESULTS ............................................................................................... 16
SITE ACCESS REVIEW ....................................................................................................................... 17
DRIVEWAY SPACING REVIEW ........................................................................................................... 17
INTERNAL STORAGE (STACKING) REVIEW ........................................................................................ 17
DECELERATION LANE ANALYSIS........................................................................................................ 18
INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE ....................................................................................................... 18
PARKING ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................... 19
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... 20
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES:
Table 1. Development Program Summary
Table 2. Development Scenarios Analyzed
Table 3. Projected Trip Generation Summary
Table 4. 2018 Existing Traffic Intersection Analysis
Table 5. 2019 Background Traffic Intersection Analysis
Table 6. 2019 Background plus Site-Generated Traffic Intersection Analysis
Table 7. Roadway Link Capacity Analysis Results Summary
Table 8. Driveway Spacing Summary
Table 9. Parking Analysis Summary
LIST OF EXHIBITS:
Exhibit 1. Site Location and Study Area Map
Exhibit 2. Site Plan
Exhibit 3. Existing Roadway Geometry and Traffic Control
Exhibit 4. Recommended Roadway Geometry and Traffic Control
Exhibit 5. Driveway Spacing
LIST OF APPENDICES:
Appendix A. Traffic Volume Exhibits
Appendix B. Existing Traffic Count Data
Appendix C. Site-Generated Traffic Supplement
Appendix D. Detailed Intersection Capacity Analysis Results
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The services of DeShazo Group, Inc., were retained by Wilks Development to conduct a traffic
impact analysis (TIA) for Southwest Meadows. The proposed commercial development will include
a 134-room business hotel and three (3) sit-down restaurants located on approximately six (6) acres
of land at the southeast of corner of SH 114 and Kirkwood Boulevard in Southlake, Texas.
Below is a summary of findings and recommendations from this TIA:
FINDING 1: Under existing conditions, some of the critical traffic movements at the intersections of
SH 114 and Kirkwood Blvd/Solana Blvd are currently operating at LOS F and E during the AM and
PM peak hours. Any other traffic movements at these intersections are currently operating at LOS
D or better.
FINDING 2: The unsignalized intersections at Kirkwood Blvd/T W King Rd and Kirkwood Blvd/The
Vista Driveway are currently operating at LOS C or better during both the AM and PM peak hours.
FINDING 3: Under full site buildout conditions, all unsignalized intersections are expected to
operate at LOS F or better during the AM and PM peak hours. Although Driveway 1 is expected to
operate at LOS F or better at full buildout conditions, the LOS at this driveway is expected to improve
significantly once the future SH 114 northbound frontage road is constructed and a third driveway
for Southwest Meadows is constructed as well.
RECOMMENDATION 1: In order to improve the LOS at SH 114/Solana Blvd, SH 114/Kirkwood Blvd,
and Kirkwood Blvd/ T W King Rd, signalization of the intersections should be considered. A traffic
signal warrant analysis should be conducted to determine if the installation of traffic signals is
warranted at these locations.
FINDING 4: The right-turn ingress volume (96 vehicles during PM peak hour) at Driveway 1 exceeds
the City of Southlake’s minimum right-turn volume to require the installation of a right-turn lane on
Kirkwood Blvd.
RECOMMENDATION 2: An eastbound right-turn lane at Driveway 1 is required. A third driveway is
planned to be constructed on the future SH 114 northbound frontage road and is expected to
reduce the right-turn ingress volumes by 35% at Driveway 1. However, the right-turn ingress volume
is still expected to exceed the threshold for an eastbound right-turn lane at Driveway 1.
FINDING 5: The City of Southlake requires that auxiliary left-turn lanes be provided on divided roads
when a proposed driveway will be served by an existing public street median opening.
RECOMMENDATION 3: Since Kirkwood Boulevard is a divided road and Driveway 1 will be served
by the existing median opening, a westbound left-turn lane into Driveway 1 is required.
FINDING 6: Driveway 2 does not meet the minimum driveway spacing of 250 feet required by the
City of Southlake.
RECOMMENDATION 4: An exception to the driveway spacing criteria may be pursued with the City
of Southlake to request a lesser driveway spacing requirement for Driveways 2.
FINDING 7: The internal storage (stacking) for the proposed driveways do not meet the City of
Southlake’s minimum internal storage criteria (100 feet).
RECOMMENDATION 5: An exception to the internal storage criteria may be pursued with the City
of Southlake to request a lesser internal storage requirement for Driveways 1 and 2.
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 2
INTRODUCTION
The services of DeShazo Group, Inc., were retained by Wilks Development to conduct a traffic
impact analysis (TIA) for Southwest Meadows. The proposed commercial development will include
a 134-room business hotel and three (3) sit down restaurants located on approximately six (6) acres
of land at the southeast of corner of SH 114 and Kirkwood Boulevard in Southlake, Texas
A site location map and preliminary site plan are provided in Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2, respectively.
PURPOSE
The city of Southlake is requiring that a TIA be completed for the subject site. The purpose of the
TIA is to determine if any improvements to the adjacent transportation system are needed to
maintain a satisfactory level of service, an acceptable level of safety, and appropriate access for the
proposed development.
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS - METHODOLOGY
To achieve this objective, this analysis summarizes the traffic operational characteristics of the
background conditions within a designated study area and the projected incremental impact of the
Project as determined through standardized engineering analyses. The standard methodology used
to conduct the traffic impact analysis is described below.
1. Collect current traffic volume data throughout the study area on a typical day to represent
existing traffic conditions.
2. Apply growth factors to the existing volumes to project future background traffic at the site
buildout year conditions.
3. Project traffic generated by the proposed development using trip generation, trip
distribution and traffic assignment as described below.
a. Trip generation is calculated in terms of “trip ends” – a trip end is a one-way
vehicular trip entering or exiting a site driveway (i.e., a single vehicle entering and
exiting a site represents two trip ends).
b. Trip distribution and assignment of site-generated trips to the surrounding roadway
system is determined by proportionally estimating the orientation of travel via
various travel routes. This is a subjective exercise based upon professional
judgment considering such factors as directional characteristics of existing local
traffic; trip attributes (e.g., trip purpose, trip length, travel time, etc.), roadway
features (e.g., capacity, operational conditions, character of environment), regional
demographics, etc.
4. Determine site-plus-background traffic by adding the projected site-generated traffic to the
background traffic.
5. Analyze existing, background and background-plus-site traffic volumes to evaluate the
roadway conditions in the vicinity of the proposed development.
6. If needed, mitigation measures are recommended based upon the analysis to improve
roadway operational conditions.
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 3
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The property is currently zoned “NR-PUD” – Non- Residential Planned Unit Development District
and is vacant.
The project will consist of 134-room business hotel and 15,000 SF of meeting space and three (3)
sit-down restaurants (17,868 SF) and is planned for buildout in 2019.
A summary of the proposed development program is provided in Table 1.
Table 1. Development Program Summary
Year Land Use Description Quantity
2019
Hotel 134 Rooms
High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 6,297 SF
High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 5,740 SF
High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 5,831 SF
KI
R
K
W
O
O
D
B
L
V
D
DOVE RO
A
D
T
X
1
1
4
T
W
K
I
N
G
R
D
1
N.T.S
SITE LOCATION MAP
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
PROJECT#:17167
DATE: FEB 2018
N
LEGEND:
SITE LOCATION
Page 4
-¾DeShuo Group
TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS
400 S. Houston Street Ste. 330
Dallas. Texas 75202
(214) 748-6740
LEGEND
C
DRAWN BY:
SHEET:
JOB NUMBER:
CHECKED BY:
DESIGNED BY:
Copyright 2017, Adams
DATE:
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
DA
T
E
Th
i
s
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
w
a
s
p
r
e
p
a
r
e
d
b
y
A
d
a
m
s
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
s
,
I
n
c
.
(
A
d
a
m
s
)
a
s
a
n
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
o
f
se
r
v
i
c
e
,
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
r
e
m
a
i
n
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
A
d
a
m
s
.
T
h
e
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
h
e
r
e
o
n
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
u
s
e
d
o
n
l
y
b
y
th
e
c
l
i
e
n
t
t
o
w
h
o
m
t
h
e
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
a
r
e
r
e
n
d
e
r
e
d
a
n
d
o
n
l
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
o
f
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
n
g
o
r
in
s
t
a
l
l
i
n
g
t
h
e
w
o
r
k
a
s
s
h
o
w
n
a
t
t
h
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
s
i
t
e
.
A
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
u
s
e
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
(w
i
t
h
o
u
t
l
i
m
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
)
a
n
y
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
r
a
l
t
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
,
i
s
s
t
r
i
c
t
l
y
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
u
s
e
r
s
h
a
l
l
h
o
l
d
ha
r
m
l
e
s
s
a
n
d
i
n
d
e
m
n
i
f
y
A
d
a
m
s
f
r
o
m
a
l
l
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
w
h
i
c
h
m
a
y
a
r
i
s
e
f
r
o
m
s
u
c
h
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
.
C
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
2
0
1
8
,
A
d
a
m
s
89
5
1
C
y
p
r
e
s
s
W
a
t
e
r
s
B
l
v
d
,
S
t
e
.
1
5
0
■
D
a
l
l
a
s
,
T
e
x
a
s
7
5
0
1
9
■
(
8
1
7
)
3
2
8
-
3
2
0
0
FEBRUARY 2018
SO
U
T
H
W
E
S
T
M
E
A
D
O
W
S
SO
U
T
H
L
A
K
E
,
T
E
X
A
S
G. ROBERT ADAMS, P.E.
THIS DOCUMENT IS NO
TBPE Registration #: F-1002
CO
N
C
E
P
T
P
L
A
N
S3.0
GRA
FI
L
E
N
A
M
E
:
S
3
.
0
C
O
N
C
E
P
T
P
L
A
N
.
d
w
g
PL
O
T
T
E
D
B
Y
:
M
i
k
e
P
e
t
e
r
s
o
n
PL
O
T
T
E
D
O
N
:
T
u
e
s
d
a
y
,
F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y
2
0
,
2
0
1
8
PL
O
T
T
E
D
A
T
:
4
:
2
5
:
4
1
P
M
PL
O
T
T
E
D
W
I
T
H
:
P
D
F
-
X
C
h
a
n
g
e
F
o
r
A
c
r
o
P
l
o
t
P
r
o
.
p
c
3
FU
L
L
P
A
T
H
:
I
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
2
0
1
7
\
2
0
1
7
.
1
2
9
W
i
l
k
s
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
H
o
t
e
l
\
D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
\
0
3
-
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
I
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
2
0
1
7
\
2
0
1
7
.
1
2
9
W
i
l
k
s
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
H
o
t
e
l
\
D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
\
0
3
-
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
\
S
3
.
0
C
O
N
C
E
P
T
P
L
A
N
2017.129
DWL
LMG
CASE NO: ZA18-006
CIVIL ENGINEER :
ADAMS - ENGINEERING/DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS
8951 CYPRESS WATER BLVD. SUITE 150
DALLAS, TX 75019
CONTACT: ROBERT ADAMS, P.E.
PHONE: (817) 328-3200
EMAIL: ROB.ADAMS@ADAMS-ENGINEERING.COM
OWNER/DEVELOPER
WILKS SOUTHLAKE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
17018 I-20.
CISCO, TX 76437
CONTACT: JOSH WILKS
PHONE: 254-488-0600
EMAIL: JOSH.WILKS@WILKSDEVELOPMENT.COM
APPLICANT / ARCHITECT :
HODGES ASSOCIATES
13642 OMEGA
DALLAS, TX 75244
CONTACT: CHARLES HODGES, AIA
PHONE: 972-387-1000
EMAIL: CHODGES@HODGESUSA.COM
NTS
SITE MAP
PROJECT
LOCATION
LOT 1R1R2, BLOCK 1
SABRE GROUP CAMPUS ADDITION
AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN
THE COUNTY CLERK'S DOCUMENT NUMBER
D215221562, PLAT RECORDS, TARRANT
COUNTY, TXPRELIMINARY
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
PROPOSED FACE AND
BACK OF CURB
PROPOSED VEHICULAR
PAVEMENT
PROPOSED SIDEWALK
OPEN SPACE
PROPOSED RETAINING
WALL
PROPOSED FIRE
HYDRANT
PROPOSED SANITARY
MANHOLE
PROPOSED CURB INLET
PARKING COUNT
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
PERMISSIBLE BUILDING
AREA
BACK OF CURB
TO BACK OF CURB
FH
1
ARTICLE V11 - PARK AND RECREATION
DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS.
SECTION 7.03-2 LAND DEDICATION
REQUIREMENTS
Non-Residential Developments: Although
non-residential development does not generate
residential occupancies per se, it does create
environmental impacts which may negatively affect the
living environment of the community. These impacts
may be ameliorated or eliminated by providing park or
open space areas which buffer adjoining land uses,
prevent undue concentration of paved areas, allow for
the reasonable dissipation of automotive exhaust
fumes, provide natural buffers to the spread of fire or
explosion, and provide separation of lighting, waste
disposal, and noise by-products of non-residential
operations and activities from adjacent residential
areas. The City has therefore determined that
non-residential developments must provide
dedicated parks and/or reserved open space at a ratio
of one (1) acre of park land for every fifty (50)
non-residential gross acres of development or prorated
portion thereof.
GRAPHIC SCALE
FEET08040
1"=40'
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ROUTE AS SHOWN
ALONG 6' WIDE SIDEWALKS
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS P.B.A
B TO B
*PARKING REQUIREMENTS WILL BE MET FOR THE SITE AS A WHOLE AND NOT ON A LOT BY LOT BASIS
LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENT
FOR THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 6
ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
This TIA analyzed the following peak hour periods required by the City of Southlake, which are
considered the most critical conditions on the public roadway system related to the proposed
Project.
Roadway Intersections:
Weekday: AM peak hour of adjacent street traffic (7:45 AM to 8:45 AM)
Weekday: PM peak hour of adjacent street traffic (4:45 PM to 5:45 PM)
Roadway Links Analysis:
Weekday: Peak Hour
Development scenarios considered in this analysis are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Development Scenarios Analyzed
Scenario Development Program Traffic Volumes
2018 Existing None Added Existing 2018 Volumes
2018 Background None Added Existing 2018 volumes grown at 3% per
year for one year
2018 Background + Site Site-Generated Traffic Existing 2018 volumes grown at 3% per
year for one year plus site-generated traffic
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 7
STUDY PARAMETERS
The study parameters used in this TIA are based upon the requirements of the Southlake and are
consistent with the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ standards and industry practices.
Specific study parameters were provided to Wilks Development/DeShazo in phone conversation
with City of Southlake staff on November 30, 2017.
STUDY AREA
The study area for a TIA is typically defined to allow an assessment of the most relevant traffic
impacts of the Project to the local area. The specific locations included in this TIA study area were
approved by the City of Southlake.
Roadway Intersections:
SH 114 SB Off-Ramp at Solana Boulevard: All-Way-Stop controlled
SH 114 NB On-Ramp at Kirkwood Boulevard: All-Way-Stop controlled
The Vista Driveway at Kirkwood Boulevard: STOP-controlled on driveway
T W King Road at Kirkwood Boulevard: All-Way-Stop controlled
Roadway Links:
Kirkwood Boulevard Between Driveways 1 and 2
Existing operation and cross-section: six lanes, median-divided, two-way operation
Speed Limit: 30 mph
City of Southlake Thoroughfare Plan Designation: Major Arterial
A summary of the existing intersection/roadway geometry and traffic control devices is shown in
Exhibit 3.
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 8
BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The existing traffic volumes were collected during the analyzed peak hours at the study area
intersections and roadway links on Thursday, April 7, 2015. The existing volumes were grown for
two years at a rate of 3% and used as 2018 existing volumes for this study.
Traffic volumes are graphically summarized in Appendix A; detailed data sheets are provided in
Appendix B.
PROJECTED BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Background traffic growth is defined as the normal traffic growth that is not directly related to the
subject development of this study.
DeShazo assumed an annual growth rate of 3% in determining background traffic growth based on
previous traffic impact studies completed for other site developments on the Wilks Track and
Southlake staff concurred with this growth rate percentage.
The background traffic volumes include the traffic generated by the Wilks Track office development
in the vicinity of Southwest Meadows.
Future background traffic volumes at the buildout years were calculated by applying the assumed
growth rate for the study area intersections. These volumes are graphically summarized in
Appendix A.
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 9
SITE-RELATED TRAFFIC
Traffic generated by the Project is projected by first determining the number of trips generated for
the planned land use, then distributing and assigning projected site-related trips to the roadway
system.
TRIP GENERATION
Trip generation for this Project was calculated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition).
Internal trip capture was considered to be of sufficient significance to justify adjustment of the base
ITE data for this study.
“Internal trip capture” refers to the phenomenon that some portion of the trips generated by a
given use originates from within the same site and, therefore, do not impact the external roadway
network. Internal capture of 4% and 8% was determined for the AM and PM peak hours,
respectively, derived from the Transportation Research Board’s NCHRP Report 684 (2011).
Table 3 provides a summary of the net increase in trip ends generated by the Project. Supplemental
information used in the trip generation calculations is provided in Appendix C.
Table 3. Projected Trip Generation Summary
TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
Traffic for the proposed development was distributed and assigned to the study area roadway
network based upon the roadway network and regional travel flow. Detailed trip distribution and
traffic assignment calculations and results are summarized in Appendix C.
SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Site-generated traffic is calculated by multiplying the trip generation value (from Table 3) by the
corresponding traffic assignments (from Appendix C). The resulting cumulative (for all uses) peak
period site-generated traffic volumes at buildout of the Project are graphically summarized in
Appendix A.
ITE ITE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Code Land Use Description Total In Out Total In Out
310 Hotel 134 Rooms 1,086 62 37 25 74 38 36
932 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 17,868 SF 2,004 178 98 80 175 109 66
Subtotals:3,090 240 135 105 249 147 102
(10) (5) (5) (20) (10) (10)
Totals:3,090 230 130 100 229 137 92
Weekda
y TripsQuantity
Internal Capture: 4% for AM and 8% for PM
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 10
ROADWAY INTERSECTION ANALYSIS
INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS - METHODOLGY
The level of performance of infrastructure can often be measured through an analysis of volume
and capacity that considers various physical and operational characteristics of the system. For
vehicular traffic, an operational analysis of roadway intersection capacity is the most detailed type
of analysis. An industry-standardized methodology for this type of analysis is presented in the 2010
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). HCM uses the term “level of service” (LOS) to qualitatively
describe the efficiency using a letter grade of A through F. Generally, LOS is described as follows.
LOS A = free, unobstructed flow
LOS B = reasonably free flow
LOS C = stable flow
LOS D = approaching unstable flow
LOS E = unstable flow, operating at design capacity
LOS F = operating over design capacity
Traffic operational analysis is typically measured in one-hour periods during day-to-day peak
conditions. In most urban settings, LOS C (or better) is desirable, although LOS D is considered to
be acceptable. Nevertheless, periods of LOS E or F conditions are not uncommon for brief periods
of time at major transportation facilities. In some cases, measures to add more capacity—either
through operational changes and/or physical improvements—can be identified to increase
efficiency and sometimes improve the level of service.
For traffic-signal-controlled (“signalized”) intersections and STOP-controlled (“unsignalized”)
intersections, LOS is determined based upon the calculated average seconds of delay per vehicle.
At unsignalized intersections of a minor street or driveway and a major roadway, the analysis
methodology often breaks down and yields low levels of service (often, LOS F) that cannot be
mitigated in the analysis unless a traffic signal is modeled. However, neither level of service nor
delay is considered a criterion for traffic signal installation.
The following table summarizes the LOS criteria for signalized and unsignalized intersections as
defined in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual.
Signalized Intersection
(Average Delay per Vehicle)
Unsignalized Intersection
(Average Delay per Vehicle)
LOS A < 10 < 10
LOS B >10 - <20 >10 - <15
LOS C >20 - <35 >15 - <25
LOS D >35 - <55 >25 - <35
LOS E >55 - <80 >35 - <50
LOS F >80 >50
NOTE: Signalized intersection operational parameters and operational results in this TIA were obtained directly from the optimized
software output and may differ slightly from actual traffic signal operations.
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 11
2018 EXISTING – INTERSECTION ANALYSIS
Existing traffic volumes were analyzed to determine current operational conditions. The
intersection capacity analyses presented in this study were performed using the Synchro 9.2
software package. Signalized intersectional operational parameters were obtained directly from
the optimized software output and may differ slightly from actual traffic signal operations. Table 4
provides a summary of peak period intersectional operational conditions. Detailed traffic volumes
and software output for all intersection analysis is provided in Appendix A and Appendix D,
respecitively.
Table 4. 2018 Existing Traffic Intersection Analysis
Key: A, B, C, D, E, F = Level-of-Service for each intersection approach
Based upon the analysis of the 2018 existing traffic volumes, the intersections at SH 114 and
Kirkwood Blvd/Solana Blvd are currently operating at LOS F, or better during the AM and PM peak
hour periods. All other unsignalized intersections are operating at LOS C or better during the
analyzed AM and PM peak hour periods.
Traffic
Movement
SH 114 SB Off-Ramp EBT B (13.4)B (12.7)
EBR B (11.1)E (40.9)
WBL C (21.9)F (74.7)
WBT C (20.8)B (13.9)
SBL B (13.3)B (13.1)
SBLT B (13.3)B (13.1)
SBTR B (10.8)B (11.1)
SH 114 NB Off-Ramp EBL C (17.9)F (>100)
EBT C (18.2)C (15.1)
WBT C (20.1)D (31.6)
WBR A (9.7)C (22.4)
NBL E (47.4)D (26.5)
NBLT C (19.3)F (101.8)
NBTR F (57.3)F (102.0)
T W King Road EBL A (9.7)B (11.0)
EBT C (18.7)A (9.5)
WBT B (10.5)C (20.6)
WBTR B (10.2)B (13.1)
SBL B (10.9)B (10.2)
SBR C (15.2)B (10.7)
The Vista Dr/Site Driveway 1 EBL B (10.3)B (13.2)
SBR B (10.3)C (15.1)
Kirkwood Boulevard at
Kirkwood Boulevard at
Kirkwood Boulevard at
Kirkwood Boulevard at
2018 Existing
PMAM
Unsignalized
Intersections
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 12
2019 BACKGROUND WITHOUT AND WITH SITE – INTERSECTION ANALYSIS
The site is expected to be completed in year 2019. Therefore, year 2019 background and
background-plus-site traffic volumes were analyzed to determine the incremental change in
operational conditions during peak periods without and with site-related traffic. LOS results are
provided in Table 5 and Table 6.
Table 5. 2019 Background Traffic Intersection Analysis
Based upon the analysis of the 2019 background volumes, the intersections at SH 114 and Kirkwood
Blvd/Solana Blvd are expected to continue to operate at LOS F, or better during the AM and PM
peak hour periods. Some traffic movements at T W King Road and Kirkwood Blvd are expected to
operate at LOS F or better during the AM and PM peak hours. Kirkwood Blvd at The Vista Drive is
expected to operate at LOS D or better during the analyzed peak hours.
Traffic
Movement
SH 114 SB Off-Ramp EBT D (27.7)B (13.5)
EBR C (24.9)F (54.8)
WBL F (59.1)F (>100)
WBT F (61.2)C (17.0)
SBL E (43.0)B (13.6)
SBLT E (43.1)B (13.6)
SBTR B (12.3)B (11.5)
SH 114 NB Off-Ramp EBL C (20.5)F (>100)
EBT F (>100)C (16.8)
WBT D (32.3)F (65.0)
WBR B (13.1)F (>100)
NBL F (>100)E (36.1)
NBLT C (23.5)F (>100)
NBTR F (>100)F (>100)
T W King Road EBL A (10.0)B (13.7)
EBT F (83.0)B (11.4)
EBR B (10.2)B (11.8)
WBLT B (11.3)F (>100)
WBTR B (10.9)F (61.8)
NBLT B (11.0)C (17.4)
NBTR A (9.3)B (11.2)
SBLT B (12.9)B (12.1)
SBR C (18.0)B (13.9)
The Vista Dr/Site Driveway 1 EBL B (10.4)C (22.3)
SBR B (10.3)D (26.1)
AM
Unsignalized
Intersections PM
2019 Background
Kirkwood Boulevard at
Kirkwood Boulevard at
Kirkwood Boulevard at
Kirkwood Boulevard at
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 13
Table 6. 2019 Background plus Site-Generated Traffic Intersection Analysis
Based upon the analysis of the 2019 background plus site-generated volumes, the intersections at
SH 114 and Kirkwood Blvd/Solana Blvd are expected to continue to operate at LOS F, or better
Traffic
Movement
SH 114 SB Off-Ramp EBT B (14.7)B (14.7)
EBR D (31.0)F (78.8)
WBL F (96.3)F (>100)
WBT E (39.4)B (12.9)
SBL F (59.3)C (15.4)
SBLT F (59.5)C (15.4)
SBTR B (12.5)B (11.8)
With Traffic Signal C (20.1)A (9.1)
SH 114 NB Off-Ramp EBL C (22.3)F (>100)
EBT F (>100)F (>100)
WBT E (39.9)F (96.7)
WBR C (15.9)F (>100)
NBL F (>100)E (37.7)
NBLT C (23.1)F (>100)
NBTR F (>100)F (>100)
With Traffic Signal C (25.5)D (37.7)
T W King Road EBL B (10.1)B (13.9)
EBT F (86.3)B (12.0)
EBR B (10.2)B (11.4)
WBLT B (11.3)F (>100)
WBTR B (10.9)F (65.3)
NBLT B (11.1)C (17.7)
NBTR A (9.3)B (11.3)
SBLT B (12.9)B (12.1)
SBR C (18.5)B (14.3)
With Traffic Signal B (11.1)B (10.6)
The Vista Dr/Site Driveway 1 EBL B (10.4)C (22.3)
WBL B (13.0)A (8.6)
NBLR F (>100)E (46.3)
SBR B (10.3)D (26.1)
Site Driveway 2 EBR B (15.0)A (8.7)
Unsignalized
Intersections PM
2019 Background + Site
AM
Kirkwood Boulevard at
Kirkwood Boulevard at
Kirkwood Boulevard at
Kirkwood Boulevard at
Kirkwood Boulevard at
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 14
during the AM and PM peak hour periods. The northbound approach at the intersection of Kirkwood
Blvd and Driveway 1 is expected to operate at LOS F during the AM peak hour and at LOS E during
the PM peak hour. The delay experienced by motorists on Driveway 1 cannot be mitigated with the
addition of turn lanes. However, a third driveway for the Southwest Meadows development is
planned on the future SH 114 northbound frontage road. The SH 114 northbound frontage road is
expected to be constructed after the full buildout of the Southwest Meadows development. The
future driveway is expected to improve the LOS at Driveway 1 significantly as at least 50% of the
exiting traffic is expected to use this driveway.
In order to improve the LOS at SH 114 and Kirkwood Blvd/Solana Blvd, a traffic signal should be
considered. A traffic signal warrant analysis should be conducted to determine if the installation of
traffic signals is warranted at these locations.
A traffic signal should also be considered at T W King Road and Kirkwood Blvd in order to improve
the LOS to B or better. A traffic signal warrant analysis should be conducted to determine if the
installation of a traffic signal is warranted at this location.
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 15
ROADWAY LINK ANALYSIS
ROADWAY LINK ANALYSIS - METHODOLGY
A roadway link is a roadway segment between two intersections. Roadway link capacity analysis is
a comparison of actual or forecasted traffic volumes to the theoretically optimum roadway capacity.
The capacity of the roadway link is a function of the roadway’s cross-section (i.e., number of lanes,
lane widths, type of center divider, etc.). However, other more theoretical factors also apply, such
as the character of environment and the functional classification of the roadway. Roadway link
capacity is less critical than intersection capacity; however, it can provide a gauge of the utilization
of given roadway.
A specific industry standard for roadway link capacity does not exist, but the typical concept is
derived from a base saturation flow rate (i.e., the maximum theoretical rate of continuous flow
under ideal, unobstructed conditions. In the traffic engineering industry, this value is generally
considered to range between 1,900-2,100 vehicles per lane per hour). A series of adjustment
factors are then applied to the saturation flow rate to reflect the characteristics of a given location.
The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) – the metropolitan planning agency for
the Dallas-Fort Worth region – has derived internal “hourly service volume” guidelines used for
transportation modelling purposes. Though these per-lane capacities, or “service volumes”
(summarized in the table below), are intended for modelling purposes, they do provide a reasonable
gauge of theoretical capacity.
Area Type
Hourly Service Volumes by Roadway Function
Principal Arterial Minor Arterial &
Frontage Road
Collector &
Local Street
Median-
Divided or
One-Way
Undivided
Two-Way
Median-
Divided or
One-Way
Undivided
Two-Way
Median-
Divided or
One-Way
Undivided
Two-Way
CBD 725 650 725 650 475 425
Urban/
Commercial 850 775 825 750 525 475
Suburban
Residential 925 875 900 825 575 525
Rural 1,025 925 975 875 600 550
To determine the utilization of a roadway, the volume-to-capacity ratio is calculated – a v/c ratio of
less than 1.0 indicates that the roadway is operating under capacity. NCTCOG’s level of service
denominations are as follows.
Volume:Capacity Ratio < 45% is LOS A/B
Volume:Capacity Ratio > 45% and < 65% is LOS C
Volume:Capacity Ratio > 65% and < 80% is LOS D
Volume:Capacity Ratio < 80% and < 100% is LOS E
Volume:Capacity Ratio > 100% is LOS F
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 16
ROADWAY LINK ANALYSIS - RESULTS
For purposes of the roadway link analysis, the area is considered urban/commercial. The highest
peak hour volume for each analyzed scenario was used to conduct the roadway link analysis. Table
7 summarizes the results of the roadway link analysis.
Table 7. Roadway Link Capacity Analysis Results Summary
Based upon the roadway link analysis, Kirkwood Boulevard currently operates at LOS A/B and is
expected to continue to operate at the same LOS after the buildout of Southwest Meadows is
complete.
Classification *Hourly #Median
for Analysis Volume Lanes Divided?Per Lane Roadway
Major Arterial 1,064 6 Y 850 5,100 0.21 A/B
Major Arterial 1,650 6 Y 850 5,100 0.32 A/B
Major Arterial 1,667 6 Y 850 5,100 0.33 A/B
2019 Background AM
2019 Background + Site AM
LOSCapacityV/CRoadway Link
Kirkwood Blvd (Between Dr. 2 and T W King Rd)
2018 Existing AM
I I I I I 111
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 17
SITE ACCESS REVIEW
Driveway spacing, deceleration lane and stopping sight distance criteria were also evaluated as
part of this TIA.
DRIVEWAY SPACING REVIEW
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE DRIVEWAY SPACING CRITERIA:
The City of Southlake’ Driveway Ordinance No. 634 requires 250 feet between access points on an
arterial facility such as Kirkwood Boulevard. Driveway spacing between access points is measured
from centerline to centerline of each proposed driveway. Exhibit 5 depicts the proposed driveway
spacing and Table 8 summarizes the driveway spacing for the proposed driveways along Kirkwood
Boulevard.
Table 8. Driveway Spacing Summary
Driveway 2 does not meet the City of Southlake’s minimum driveway spacing from Driveway 1 and
T W King Road. An exception to the driveway spacing criteria may be pursued with the City of
Southlake to request a lesser spacing requirement for Driveway 1.
INTERNAL STORAGE (STACKING) REVIEW
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE INTERNAL STORAGE CRITERIA:
This portion of the study examines the site driveways for minimum internal storage. The City of
Southlake Driveway Ordinance No. 634 (Table Two) states that the internal storage shall be based
upon the average number of parking spaces served per driveway (50 to 199 category for Driveways
1 and 2) and the total number of parking spaces (200+ category) for this project. Applying the
parking threshold standard to the proposed driveways shows that Driveways 1 and 2, as shown on
the preliminary site plan on Exhibit 2, do not meet the City of Southlake’s minimum internal storage
of 100 feet. The available internal storage for each driveway is approximately 48 feet (refer to
Exhibit 5). An exception to the internal storage criteria may be pursued with the City of Southlake
to request a lesser storage requirement for Driveways 1 and 2.
Driveway Spacing Between Required (ft)Available (ft) Meet City’s
Requirements?
SH 114 NB Off-Ramp and Driveway 1 250 459 Yes
Driveway 1 and Driveway 2 250 231 No
Driveway 2 and T W King Road 250 ±180 No
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 18
DECELERATION LANE ANALYSIS
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE RIGHT-TURN DECELERATION LANE CRITERIA:
The City of Southlake requires that auxiliary turn lanes be provided if the right-turn ingress volume
exceeds 50 vehicles in the design hour on an arterial street such as Kirkwood Boulevard or if the
speed limit on the street exceeds 40 MPH and the right-turn ingress volume is at least 40 vehicles
in the design hour (Refer to Driveway Ordinance No. 634). Applying the volume threshold standards
to the proposed site traffic turning volumes shows that:
The projected eastbound, right-turn traffic volume (96 vehicles during PM peak hour)
on Kirkwood Boulevard at Driveway 1 exceeds the volume threshold for an auxiliary
lane during the design hour (right-turn lane is required). After the construction of an
additional driveway on the future SH 114 northbound frontage road, the right-turn
volume into Driveway 1 is expected to be reduce by 35% exceed and still exceed the
minimum threshold for an auxiliary lane.
The projected eastbound, right-turn traffic volume (34 vehicles during the PM peak
hour) on Kirkwood Boulevard at Driveway 2 does not exceed the volume threshold for
an auxiliary lane during the design hour (right-turn lane is not required).
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE LEFT-TURN DECELERATION LANE CRITERIA:
The City of Southlake requires that auxiliary left-turn lanes be provided on divided roads when a
proposed driveway will be served by an existing public street median opening. Since Kirkwood
Boulevard is a divided road and Driveway 1 will be served by the existing median opening, a
westbound left-turn lane into Driveway 1 is required (Driveway Ordinance No. 634, pg. 13, par f).
INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE
INTERSECTION SIGHT CRITERIA:
Sight distance is the metric used to describe the ability of a motorist to physically see (via a direct
line of sight) objects and/or other vehicles to a degree sufficient to allow safe and efficient use of a
roadway in the intended manner. The sight distance is a function of the major roadway’s geometric
characteristics and 85th percentile speed.
INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE CURSURY REVIEW FOR PROJECT:
Cursory review of the site driveways with Google Earth found that the proposed driveways satisfy
the intersection sight distance of 470 feet. [NOTE: This does not rule out the potential that other
impediments such and landscaping, signage, etc. may exist.]
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 19
PARKING ANALYSIS
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE PARKING REQUIREMENTS:
The City of Southlake’s Zoning Ordinance (Section 35, Off-Street Parking Requirements) specifies
the number of parking spaces required for each land use. Table 9 compares the parking spaces
required by the City of Southlake and the parking spaces listed in the preliminary site plan.
Table 9. Parking Analysis Summary
Required
Parking
Spaces
Required
Handicapped
Parking Spaces
Provided
Parking
Spaces
Provided
Handicapped
Parking Spaces
1 Hotel 134 5 129 6 -5 1
2 Restaurant 63 3 34 2 -29 -1
3 Restaurant 58 3 47 2 -11 -1
4 Restaurant 59 3 42 2 -17 -1
314 14 252 12 -62 -2
Total 328 Parking Spaces Deficit: 64 Parking Spaces
Deficit
Parking
Spaces
Surplus/Deficit
Handicapped
Parking Spaces
Subtotal
Per City's Code Per Site Plan
Land UseLot No.
264 Parking Spaces
DeShazo Group, Inc. Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
February 2018 Page 20
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The services of DeShazo Group, Inc., were retained by Wilks Development to conduct a traffic
impact analysis (TIA) for Southwest Meadows development, which will include a 134-room hotel
and three (3) sit-down restaurants located on approximately six (6) acres of land at the southeast
of corner of SH 114 and Kirkwood Boulevard in Southlake, Texas.
Below is a summary of findings and recommendations from this TIA:
FINDING 1: Under existing conditions, some of the critical traffic movements at the intersections of
SH 114 and Kirkwood Blvd/Solana Blvd are currently operating at LOS F and E during the AM and
PM peak hours. Any other traffic movements at these intersections are currently operating at LOS
D or better.
FINDING 2: The unsignalized intersections at Kirkwood Blvd/T W King Rd and Kirkwood Blvd/The
Vista Driveway are currently operating at LOS C or better during both the AM and PM peak hours.
FINDING 3: Under full site buildout conditions, all unsignalized intersections are expected to
operate at LOS F or better during the AM and PM peak hours. Although Driveway 1 is expected to
operate at LOS F or better at full buildout conditions, the LOS at this driveway is expected to improve
significantly once the future SH 114 northbound frontage road is constructed and a third driveway
for Southwest Meadows is constructed as well.
RECOMMENDATION 1: In order to improve the LOS at SH 114/Solana Blvd, SH 114/Kirkwood Blvd,
and Kirkwood Blvd/ T W King Rd, signalization of the intersections should be considered. A traffic
signal warrant analysis should be conducted to determine if the installation of traffic signals is
warranted at these locations.
FINDING 4: The right-turn ingress volume (96 vehicles during PM peak hour) at Driveway 1 exceeds
the City of Southlake’s minimum right-turn volume to require the installation of a right-turn lane on
Kirkwood Blvd.
RECOMMENDATION 2: An eastbound right-turn lane at Driveway 1 is required. A third driveway is
planned to be constructed on the future SH 114 northbound frontage road and is expected to
reduce the right-turn ingress volumes by 35% at Driveway 1. However, the right-turn ingress volume
is still expected to exceed the threshold for an eastbound right-turn lane at Driveway 1.
FINDING 5: The City of Southlake requires that auxiliary left-turn lanes be provided on divided roads
when a proposed driveway will be served by an existing public street median opening.
RECOMMENDATION 3: Since Kirkwood Boulevard is a divided road and Driveway 1 will be served
by the existing median opening, a westbound left-turn lane into Driveway 1 is required.
FINDING 6: Driveway 2 does not meet the minimum driveway spacing of 250 feet required by the
City of Southlake.
RECOMMENDATION 4: An exception to the driveway spacing criteria may be pursued with the City
of Southlake to request a lesser driveway spacing requirement for Driveways 2.
FINDING 7: The internal storage (stacking) for the proposed driveways do not meet the City of
Southlake’s minimum internal storage criteria (100 feet).
RECOMMENDATION 5: An exception to the internal storage criteria may be pursued with the City
of Southlake to request a lesser internal storage requirement for Driveways 1 and 2.
END OF MEMO
DeShazo Group, Inc.
Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
Appendix
Exibits
Ex
h
i
b
i
t
3
.
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
R
o
a
d
w
a
y
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
a
n
d
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
^ North Not to Scale
TI
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
Deshazo Group SRK
T
W
K
i
n
g
R
d
So
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
SH-114 NB Off-Ramp
The Vista Dr
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
A
~
II
i
i
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
11
I
I
11
'-
-
J~
• N
-<
c
-
-
_
<
c
-
-
_
=
-
-
-
-
-
~
~
::
:
:
:
:
=
=
__
7
1
--
-
-
-
-
o
>
~,
r
--
-
-
-
-
o
>
--
-
-
-
-
o
>
I
I
I
I
I
I
11
I
I
i
i
11
11
11
ii
i
i
I
I
J~
•
Ex
h
i
b
i
t
4
.
B
u
i
l
d
o
u
t
R
o
a
d
w
a
y
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
a
n
d
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
^ North Not to Scale
TI
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
Deshazo Group SRKKirkwood Blvd
T
W
K
i
n
g
R
d
So
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
SH-114 NB Off-Ramp
Site Driveway 2
Site Driveway 1
T
h
e
V
i
s
t
a
D
r
II
i
i
i
I
I
,ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
i
i
11
11
I
I
I
I
J1
~
11
~
J1
~
J1
<E
-
-
-
<E
-
-
-
<E
-
-
-
<E
-
-
-
·
~
<E
-
-
-
-
<E
-
-
-
• ~
<E
-
-
-
-
.~
<E
-
-
-
-
<E
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
A
-
-
-
-
-
- - --
-
-
-
-
__
_
_
;
;
t
•
--
-
-
-
:
;
>
•
__
_
_
;
;
t
•
• -----:;>
--
-
-
-
:
;
>
T
--
-
-
-
:
;
>
r
--
-
-
-
:
;
>
,r -----:;>
--
-
-
-
:
;
>
~,
r
~
--
-
-
-
:
;
>
7
--
-
-
-
:
;
>
--
-
-
-
:
;
>
~
I
I
~
I
I
l
l
11
I
I
l
l
'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
l
1
11
I
I
D
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
1
D
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
2
5
N.T.S
DRIVEWAY SPACING FOR SOUTHWEST MEADOWS
TIA FOR SOUTHWEST MEADOWS IN SOUTHLAKE, TX
PROJECT#:17175
DATE: FEB 2018
\
\
% i \ ~ 0
~
(
I
r
1 UNDE ~
/ONSTRUCTIO /
DeShazo Group, Inc.
Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
Appendix
Ap pendix A. Traffic Volume Exhibits
A1
.
2
0
1
8
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
^ North Not to Scale
TI
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
Deshazo Group SRK29696364T W King Road 63303
24
7
24
8
28
4
61
3
S
H
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
181162
SH 114 NB Off-Ramp
5
6
8
1
2
1
4
3
1
12
7
30
2
33
1
6
97
73
3
Ki
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
33
9
The Vista Dri ve
20
==
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
::
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
-
-
=
:
:
:
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
:::=========
A2
.
2
0
1
8
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
^ North Not to Scale
TI
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
Deshazo Group SRK5819663111T W King Road 8123
22
7
59
9
41
4
31
1
S
H
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
122246
SH 114 NB Off-Ramp
2
8
6
8
7
0
3
4
35
5 48
48
5
30
2
17 82
Ki
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
78
7
The Vista Dri ve
127
==
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
::
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
-
-
=
:
:
:
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
:::=========
A3
.
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
^ North Not to Scale
TI
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
Deshazo Group SRK301120151374T W King Road 114313
35
6
25
6
29
3
63
2
S
H
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
590163
SH 114 NB Off-Ramp
5
8
5
1
2
5
4
9
4
13
1
81
5
34
1
7
97
13
0
9
Ki
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
35
0
The Vista Dri ve
20
==
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
::
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
-
-
=
:
:
:
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
:::=========
A4
.
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
^ North Not to Scale
TI
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
Deshazo Group SRK15260201089166T W King Road 9127
23
4
61
7
47
7
42
2
S
H
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
126247
SH 114 NB Off-Ramp
2
9
5
8
9
6
3
5
36
6 49
65
1
71
7
17 84
Ki
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
13
6
9
The Vista Dri ve
127
==
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
::
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
~ JJ ~ + :::========= .,, ~ ~
A5
.
S
i
t
e
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
^ North Not to Scale
TI
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
Deshazo Group SRK55T W King Road 7
13
3010
S
H
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
65
SH 114 NB Off-Ramp
4
6
78
4050
Site Driveway 2
5
5 3 3
Ki
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
7
Site Driveway 1
9
0
5
33 91
7
T
h
e
V
i
s
t
a
D
r
i
v
e
==
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
::
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
~=
=
=
=
=
=
~
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
'
.
_
~~ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_
~ rH
~r
fl
.,, •
A6
.
S
i
t
e
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
^ North Not to Scale
TI
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
Deshazo Group SRK55T W King Road 7
14
289
S
H
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
69
SH 114 NB Off-Ramp
4
8
82
3746
Site Driveway 2
5
5 3 4
Ki
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
7
Site Driveway 1
8
3
5
34 96
7
T
h
e
V
i
s
t
a
D
r
i
v
e
==
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
::
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
:
:
:
~=
=
=
=
=
=
~
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
:
:
'
.
_
~~ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_ -_
~ rH
~r
fl
.,, •
A7
.
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
P
l
u
s
S
i
t
e
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
^ North Not to Scale
TI
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
Deshazo Group SRK351125151374T W King Road 114319
36
9
25
6
32
3
64
2
S
H
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
655163
SH 114 NB Off-Ramp
5
8
5
1
2
5
5
3
9
13
1
89
3
38
1
57
Site Driveway 2
5
1 3 1 4 3 3
Ki
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
35
6
Site Driveway 1
9
0
5
97
13
4
2
91
73 5 0
T
h
e
V
i
s
t
a
D
r
i
v
e
20
+
~
+
~
JI,
t
~
It
:
"
+
JI,
Jr
+
JI,~ +
•
.,
,
'
+
fl
.,
,
rH
~1 fl
.,,
~
•
•
•
~
~
A8
.
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
P
l
u
s
S
i
t
e
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
^ North Not to Scale
TI
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
D
e
s
h
a
z
o
G
r
o
u
p
SRK15265241089166T W King Road 9134
24
8
61
7
50
5
43
1
S
H
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
194247
SH 114 NB Off-Ramp
2
9
5
8
9
6
8
3
36
6
13
1
68
8
76
3
Site Driveway 2
5
8 9 3 4
Ki
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
13
7
6
Site Driveway 1
8
3
5
17
11
8 96
71 3 6 9
T
h
e
V
i
s
t
a
D
r
i
v
e
127
+
~
+
~
JI,
t
~
It
:
"
+
JI,
Jr
+
JI,~ +
•
.,
,
'
+
fl
.,
,
rH
~1 fl
.,, '
~
•
•
•
~
DeShazo Group, Inc.
Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
Appendix
Appendix B. Existing Traffic Count Data
Page 1 of 3
Intersection Traffic Movements DeShazo Group, Inc.
Location:
1 City/State:Data Collector(s):
Day/Date:Weather Conditions:
Project-ID #:Traffic Control:
Data Source:Description:
B e g i n E n d ULTR ULTR ULTR ULTR
7:00 AM 7:15 AM 0 - - - 0 19 1 11 0 - 23 32 0 64 99 -
7:15 AM 7:30 AM 0 - - - 0 17 0 10 0 - 41 78 0 69 118 -
7:30 AM 7:45 AM 0 - - - 0 29 1 15 0 - 44 68 0 91 109 -
7:45 AM 8:00 AM 0 - - - 0 36 1 11 0 - 59 76 0 83 137 -
8:00 AM 8:15 AM 0 - - - 0 39 0 12 0 - 57 52 0 60 127 -
8:15 AM 8:30 AM 0 - - - 0 51 0 15 0 - 64 59 0 66 166 -
8:30 AM 8:45 AM 0 - - - 0 45 0 20 0 - 53 47 0 59 148 -
8:45 AM 9:00 AM 0 - - - 0 36 1 17 0 - 43 53 0 48 126 -
0 0 0 171 1 58 0 233 234 268 578 0
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.25 0.73 0.00 0.91 0.77 0.81 0.87 0.00
Intersection Peak Hour:Intersection PHF: 0.92
0 0 0 171 1 58 0 233 234 268 578 0
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.25 0.73 0.00 0.91 0.77 0.81 0.87 0.00
Study Peak Hour:Study Area PHF: 0.92
4:30 PM 4:45 PM 0 - - - 0 27 4 13 0 - 49 132 6 80 55 -
4:45 PM 5:00 PM 0 - - - 0 26 1 10 0 - 46 111 11 94 80 -
5:00 PM 5:15 PM 0 - - - 0 30 1 15 0 - 67 184 12 94 83 -
5:15 PM 5:30 PM 0 - - - 0 34 0 4 0 - 54 167 13 118 67 -
5:30 PM 5:45 PM 0 - - - 0 25 0 14 0 - 47 103 15 84 63 -
5:45 PM 6:00 PM 0 - - - 0 36 0 10 0 - 41 101 18 68 79 -
6:00 PM 6:15 PM 0 - - - 0 21 1 5 0 - 41 126 9 62 89 -
6:15 PM 6:30 PM 0 - - - 0 30 0 9 0 - 27 93 4 62 87 -
0 0 0 117 6 42 0 216 594 386 285 0
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.38 0.70 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.82 0.86 0.00
Intersection Peak Hour:Intersection PHF: 0.87
0 0 0 115 2 43 0 214 565 390 293 0
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.50 0.72 0.00 0.80 0.77 0.83 0.88 0.00
Study Peak Hour:Study Area PHF: 0.86
15035-03 Unsignalized
SH 114 SBFR at Kirkwood Blvd
Southlake, Texas Camera
Tuesday, April 7, 2015 Mild/Normal Conditions
CJ Hensch Minor-Street STOP Controlled
Time of Northbound on Southbound on Eastbound on Westbound on
Count SH 114 SBFR SH 114 SBFR Kirkwood Blvd Kirkwood Blvd
Intersection PHV:
PHF:
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM
Study Area PHV:
PHF:
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM
Intersection PHV:
PHF:
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM
Study Area PHV:
PHF:
4:45 PM - 5:45 PM
File: C2X3HRS - 4L&12Mv_Peds.XLS
Observations:
I
II
I II I II I II I II I I
I II II II II I
I
I II II II II I
Page 2 of 3
Intersection Traffic Movements DeShazo Group, Inc.
Location:
1 City/State:Data Collector(s):
Day/Date:Weather Conditions:
Project-ID #:Traffic Control:
Data Source:Description:
B e g i n E n d ULTR ULTR ULTR ULTR
7:00 AM 7:15 AM 0 89 18 27 0 - - - 0 13 29 - 0 - 72 4
7:15 AM 7:30 AM 0 105 11 39 0 - - - 0 26 32 - 0 - 81 2
7:30 AM 7:45 AM 0 103 27 66 0 - - - 0 26 47 - 0 - 111 2
7:45 AM 8:00 AM 0 122 27 79 0 - - - 0 26 70 - 0 - 90 2
8:00 AM 8:15 AM 0 127 32 95 0 - - - 0 38 61 - 0 - 68 0
8:15 AM 8:30 AM 0 152 31 110 0 - - - 0 25 87 - 0 - 79 1
8:30 AM 8:45 AM 0 134 24 122 0 - - - 0 31 67 - 0 - 75 3
8:45 AM 9:00 AM 0 121 29 100 0 - - - 0 21 60 - 0 - 56 3
535 114 406 0 0 0 120 285 0 0 312 6
0.88 0.89 0.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.50
Intersection Peak Hour:Intersection PHF: 0.92
535 114 406 0 0 0 120 285 0 0 312 6
0.88 0.89 0.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.50
Study Peak Hour:Study Area PHF: 0.92
4:30 PM 4:45 PM 0 48 230 6 0 - - - 0 77 6 - 0 - 100 57
4:45 PM 5:00 PM 0 73 211 10 0 - - - 0 75 8 - 0 - 108 62
5:00 PM 5:15 PM 0 72 199 11 0 - - - 0 88 16 - 0 - 123 65
5:15 PM 5:30 PM 0 69 198 7 0 - - - 0 92 16 - 0 - 126 85
5:30 PM 5:45 PM 0 56 212 4 0 - - - 0 80 5 - 0 - 100 73
5:45 PM 6:00 PM 0 71 214 3 0 - - - 0 86 10 - 0 - 93 73
6:00 PM 6:15 PM 0 87 244 9 0 - - - 0 68 8 - 0 - 76 57
6:15 PM 6:30 PM 0 71 248 9 0 - - - 0 56 7 - 0 - 78 16
268 823 25 0 0 0 346 47 0 0 442 296
0.93 0.96 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.87
Intersection Peak Hour:Intersection PHF: 0.95
270 820 32 0 0 0 335 45 0 0 457 285
0.92 0.97 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.91 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.91 0.84
Study Peak Hour:Study Area PHF: 0.95
15035-04 Unsignalized
SH 114 NBFR at Kirkwood Blvd
Southlake, Texas Camera
Tuesday, April 7, 2015 Mild/Normal Conditions
CJ Hensch Minor-Street STOP Controlled
Time of Northbound on Southbound on Eastbound on Westbound on
Count SH 114 NBFR SH 114 NBFR Kirkwood Blvd Kirkwood Blvd
Intersection PHV:
PHF:
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM
Study Area PHV:
PHF:
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM
Intersection PHV:
PHF:
5:00 PM - 6:00 PM
Study Area PHV:
PHF:
4:45 PM - 5:45 PM
File: C2X3HRS - 4L&12Mv_Peds.XLS
Observations:
I
II
I II I II I II I II I I
I II II II II I
I
I II II II II I
Page 3 of 3
Intersection Traffic Movements DeShazo Group, Inc.
Location:
1 City/State:Data Collector(s):
Day/Date:Weather Conditions:
Project-ID #:Traffic Control:
Data Source:Description:
B e g i n E n d ULTR ULTR ULTR ULTR
7:00 AM 7:15 AM 0 - - - 0 7 - 69 0 6 52 - 0 - 9 1
7:15 AM 7:30 AM 0 - - - 0 8 - 79 0 7 63 - 0 - 3 1
7:30 AM 7:45 AM 0 - - - 0 16 - 110 0 2 112 - 0 - 5 2
7:45 AM 8:00 AM 0 - - - 0 19 - 82 0 8 137 - 0 - 9 2
8:00 AM 8:15 AM 0 - - - 0 12 - 62 0 9 148 - 0 - 4 1
8:15 AM 8:30 AM 0 - - - 0 17 - 72 0 6 188 - 0 - 10 0
8:30 AM 8:45 AM 0 - - - 0 11 - 70 0 4 183 - 0 - 11 1
8:45 AM 9:00 AM 0 - - - 0 5 - 49 0 7 140 - 0 - 8 0
0 0 0 59 0 286 27 656 0 0 34 4
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.87 0.75 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.50
Intersection Peak Hour:Intersection PHF: 0.91
0 0 0 59 0 286 27 656 0 0 34 4
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.87 0.75 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.50
Study Peak Hour:Study Area PHF: 0.91
4:30 PM 4:45 PM 0 - - - 0 2 - 24 0 8 6 - 0 - 139 20
4:45 PM 5:00 PM 0 - - - 0 2 - 31 0 8 8 - 0 - 135 23
5:00 PM 5:15 PM 0 - - - 0 0 - 23 0 20 6 - 0 - 166 27
5:15 PM 5:30 PM 0 - - - 0 2 - 32 0 19 3 - 0 - 177 28
5:30 PM 5:45 PM 0 - - - 0 4 - 30 0 8 1 - 0 - 147 27
5:45 PM 6:00 PM 0 - - - 0 0 - 29 0 6 5 - 0 - 129 22
6:00 PM 6:15 PM 0 - - - 0 1 - 21 0 17 4 - 0 - 114 19
6:15 PM 6:30 PM 0 - - - 0 2 - 28 0 13 2 - 0 - 62 8
0 0 0 8 0 116 55 18 0 0 625 105
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.91 0.69 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.94
Intersection Peak Hour:Intersection PHF: 0.89
0 0 0 8 0 116 55 18 0 0 625 105
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.91 0.69 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.94
Study Peak Hour:Study Area PHF: 0.89
15035-06 Unsignalized
TW King Road at Kirkwood Blvd
Southlake, Texas Camera
Tuesday, April 7, 2015 Mild/Normal Conditions
CJ Hensch All-Way STOP Controlled
Time of Northbound on Southbound on Eastbound on Westbound on
Count TW King Road TW King Road Kirkwood Blvd Kirkwood Blvd
Intersection PHV:
PHF:
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM
Study Area PHV:
PHF:
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM
Intersection PHV:
PHF:
4:45 PM - 5:45 PM
Study Area PHV:
PHF:
4:45 PM - 5:45 PM
File: C2X3HRS - 4L&12Mv_Peds.XLS
Observations:
I
II
I II I II I II I II I I
I II II II II I
I
I II II II II I
DeShazo Group, Inc.
Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
Appendix
Appendix C. Site-Generated Traffic
Supplement
KIRKWOOD BLVD
SH
1
1
4
SH
1
1
4
N
B
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
R
O
A
D
SI
T
E
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
1
SI
T
E
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
2
T
W
K
I
N
G
R
O
A
D
KIRKWOOD BLVD
50
%
10%60%
35
%
35
%
70%
25%
25%
5%
5%5%
(9
0
%
)
(5
%
)
(5%)
(5
%
)
(5%)
(5%)
(40%)
(50%)(10%)
(30%)
TH
E
V
I
S
T
A
D
R
I
V
E
C1
N.T.S
TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT - INBOUND & OUTBOUND
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
PROJECT#:17175
DATE: FEB 2018
N
Legend :
XX - Inbound Traffic Assignment
(XX) - Outbound Traffic Assignment
~(PlaShazo Group
TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS
400 S. Houston Street Ste. 330
Dallas, Texas 75202
(214) 748-6740
L
..... ..... r
r
..... , r
""'
.... ;
.....
EXHIBIT
DeShazo Group, Inc.
Southwest Meadows in Southlake TIA
Appendix
Appendix D. Detailed Intersection Capacity
Analysis Results
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
8
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
2: Kirkwood Blvd & T W King Rd
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
1
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 14.3Intersection LOSBMovementEBL EBT W
B
T
W
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h29 696
3
6
4
6
3
3
0
3
Future Vol, veh/h29 696
3
6
4
6
3
3
0
3
Peak Hour Factor0.91 0.91 0.
9
1
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
1
Heavy Vehicles, %22
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow32 765
4
0
4
6
9
3
3
3
Number of Lanes12
2
0
1
1
ApproachEBWB
S
B
Opposing Approach WBEB
Opposing Lanes23
0
Conflicting Approach Left SB
W
B
Conflicting Lanes Left20
2
Conflicting Approach Right SB
E
B
Conflicting Lanes Right 02
3
HCM Control Delay 14.4 10
.
4
1
4
.
5
HCM LOSBB
B
LaneEBLn1 EBLn2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
Vol Left, %100% 0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
Vol Thru, %0% 100%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
7
5
%
0
%
0
%
Vol Right, %0% 0
%
0
%
0
%
2
5
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
Sign ControlStop Sto
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Traffic Vol by Lane29 34
8
3
4
8
2
4
1
6
6
3
3
0
3
L T V o l2
9
0
0
0
0
6
3
0
Through Vol0 34
8
3
4
8
2
4
1
2
0
0
R T V o l0
0
0
0
4
0
3
0
3
Lane Flow Rate32 38
2
3
8
2
2
6
1
8
6
9
3
3
3
Geometry Grp8
8
8
8
8
8
8
Degree of Util (X) 0.058 0.6
3
6
0
.
4
5
0
.
0
5
4
0
.
0
3
5
0
.
1
3
5
0
.
5
3
9
Departure Headway (Hd)6.496 5.99
4
.
2
3
6
7
.
3
3
8
7
.
1
5
9
7
.
0
3
2
5
.
8
3
1
Convergence, Y/NYes Ye
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Cap551 60
4
8
4
9
4
8
7
4
9
9
5
1
0
6
1
9
Service Time4.235 3.729
1
.
9
7
4
5
.
1
0
2
4
.
9
2
3
4
.
7
7
3
.
5
6
9
HCM Lane V/C Ratio0.058 0.63
2
0
.
4
5
0
.
0
5
3
0
.
0
3
6
0
.
1
3
5
0
.
5
3
8
HCM Control Delay9.6 18.
7
1
0
.
4
1
0
.
5
1
0
.
2
1
0
.
9
1
5
.
2
HCM Lane LOSA C
B
B
B
B
C
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 4
.
5
2
.
4
0
.
2
0
.
1
0
.
5
3
.
2
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
8
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
6
:
S
o
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
/
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
&
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
2
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
1
5
.
6
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
C
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
0
2
4
7
2
4
8
2
8
4
6
1
3
0
0
0
0
1
8
1
1
6
2
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
0
2
4
7
2
4
8
2
8
4
6
1
3
0
0
0
0
1
8
1
1
6
2
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
0
2
6
8
2
7
0
3
0
9
6
6
6
0
0
0
0
1
9
7
1
6
7
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
L
a
n
e
s
0
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
S
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
W
B
E
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
3
3
0
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
L
e
f
t
S
B
W
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
L
e
f
t
3
0
3
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
R
i
g
h
t
S
B
E
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
R
i
g
h
t
0
3
3
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
1
2
.
2
1
8
.
2
1
2
.
7
H
C
M
L
O
S
B
C
B
L
a
n
e
E
B
L
n
1
E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
W
B
L
n
3
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
S
B
L
n
3
V
o
l
L
e
f
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
9
9
%
0
%
V
o
l
T
h
r
u
,
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
1
%
1
%
V
o
l
R
i
g
h
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
9
9
%
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
b
y
L
a
n
e
1
2
4
1
2
4
2
4
8
2
8
4
3
0
7
3
0
7
9
1
9
1
6
3
L
T
V
o
l
0
0
0
2
8
4
0
0
9
1
9
1
0
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
V
o
l
1
2
4
1
2
4
0
0
3
0
7
3
0
7
0
0
1
R
T
V
o
l
0
0
2
4
8
0
0
0
0
0
6
2
L
a
n
e
F
l
o
w
R
a
t
e
1
3
4
1
3
4
2
7
0
3
0
9
3
3
3
3
3
3
9
8
9
9
6
8
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
G
r
p
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
D
e
g
r
e
e
o
f
U
t
i
l
(
X
)
0
.
2
8
4
0
.
2
8
4
0
.
3
8
6
0
.
6
3
2
0
.
6
3
5
0
.
4
7
2
0
.
2
2
4
0
.
2
2
5
0
.
1
3
2
D
e
p
a
r
t
u
r
e
H
e
a
d
w
a
y
(
H
d
)
7
.
6
2
9
7
.
6
2
9
5
.
1
5
6
7
.
3
6
8
6
.
8
6
1
5
.
1
0
3
8
.
1
8
3
8
.
1
8
6
.
9
7
8
C
o
n
v
e
r
g
e
n
c
e
,
Y
/
N
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
C
a
p
4
7
1
4
7
1
6
9
5
4
9
1
5
3
0
7
1
0
4
4
1
4
4
0
5
1
6
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
T
i
m
e
5
.
3
7
1
5
.
3
7
1
2
.
8
9
8
5
.
0
8
1
4
.
5
7
5
2
.
8
1
7
5
.
9
0
5
5
.
9
0
2
4
.
6
9
9
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
2
8
5
0
.
2
8
5
0
.
3
8
8
0
.
6
2
9
0
.
6
2
8
0
.
4
6
9
0
.
2
2
2
0
.
2
2
5
0
.
1
3
2
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
1
3
.
4
1
3
.
4
1
1
.
1
2
1
.
9
2
0
.
8
1
2
.
3
1
3
.
3
1
3
.
3
1
0
.
8
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
B
B
B
C
C
B
B
B
B
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
-
t
i
l
e
Q
1
.
2
1
.
2
1
.
8
4
.
3
4
.
4
2
.
5
0
.
8
0
.
9
0
.
5
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
.
,
t
+
.
,
'
i
t
+
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
8
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
8: SH-114 NB Off-Ramp & Kirkwood Blvd
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
3
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh34.4Intersection LOS DMovementEBL EBT EBR WBL
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 127 302 0
0
3
3
1
6
5
6
8
1
2
1
4
3
1
0
0
0
Future Vol, veh/h 127 302 0
0
3
3
1
6
5
6
8
1
2
1
4
3
1
0
0
0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 22
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow138 328 0 0
3
6
0
7
6
1
7
1
3
2
4
6
8
0
0
0
Number of Lanes 1 2 00
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
ApproachEBWB
N
B
Opposing Approach WBEB
Opposing Lanes 33
0
Conflicting Approach Left NB
E
B
Conflicting Lanes Left 03
3
Conflicting Approach Right NB
W
B
Conflicting Lanes Right 30
3
HCM Control Delay 16.519.9
4
5
.
7
HCM LOSCC
E
LaneNBLn1NBLn2NBLn3EBLn1E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
W
B
L
n
3
Vol Left, %100% 75% 0% 1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
Vol Thru, %0% 25% 12%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
Vol Right, %0% 0% 88%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
Sign ControlStop Stop Stop S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Traffic Vol by Lane386 242 492
1
2
7
1
5
1
1
5
1
1
6
6
1
6
6
6
L T V o l3 8 6 1
8
2
0
1
2
7
0
0
0
0
0
Through Vol0 60 6
1
0
1
5
1
1
5
1
1
6
6
1
6
6
0
R T V o l00 4
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
6
Lane Flow Rate420 263 534
1
3
8
1
6
4
1
6
4
1
8
0
1
8
0
7
Geometry Grp7 77
8
8
8
8
8
8
Degree of Util (X) 0.895 0.552 0.973 0.
3
6
8
0
.
4
1
4
0
.
3
3
3
0
.
4
6
7
0
.
4
6
7
0
.
0
1
2
Departure Headway (Hd) 7.676 7.551 6.555 9.
6
0
2
9
.
0
8
7
7
.
3
0
3
9
.
3
4
9
9
.
3
4
9
6
.
8
4
3
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Cap474 477 556
3
7
4
3
9
6
4
8
9
3
8
3
3
8
3
5
1
9
Service Time5.425 5.299 4.304 7.3
8
6
6
.
8
7
1
5
.
0
8
6
7
.
1
4
2
7
.
1
4
2
4
.
6
3
5
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.886 0.551 0.96 0.
3
6
9
0
.
4
1
4
0
.
3
3
5
0
.
4
7
0
.
4
7
0
.
0
1
3
HCM Control Delay 47.4 19.3 57.3
1
7
.
9
1
8
.
2
1
3
.
7
2
0
.
1
2
0
.
1
9
.
7
HCM Lane LOSE C
F
C
C
B
C
C
A
HCM 95th-tile Q9.8 3.3 13.2
1
.
7
2
1
.
4
2
.
4
2
.
4
0
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
8
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
4
0
:
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
&
T
h
e
V
i
s
t
a
D
r
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
4
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
1
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
W
B
T
W
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
9
7
7
3
3
3
3
9
0
0
2
0
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
9
7
7
3
3
3
3
9
0
0
2
0
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
P
e
d
s
,
#
/
h
r
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
R
T
C
h
a
n
n
e
l
i
z
e
d
-
N
o
n
e
-
N
o
n
e
-
N
o
n
e
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
7
0
-
-
-
0
0
V
e
h
i
n
M
e
d
i
a
n
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
,
#
-
0
0
-
0
-
G
r
a
d
e
,
%
-
0
0
-
0
-
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
1
0
5
7
9
7
3
6
8
0
0
2
2
M
a
j
o
r
/
M
i
n
o
r
M
a
j
o
r
1
M
a
j
o
r
2
M
i
n
o
r
2
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
F
l
o
w
A
l
l
3
6
8
0
-
0
8
9
8
1
8
4
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
3
6
8
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
5
3
0
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
5
.
3
4
-
-
-
5
.
7
4
7
.
1
4
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
1
-
-
-
-
6
.
6
4
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
2
-
-
-
-
6
.
0
4
-
F
o
l
l
o
w
-
u
p
H
d
w
y
3
.
1
2
-
-
-
3
.
8
2
3
.
9
2
P
o
t
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
7
8
1
-
-
-
3
4
9
7
0
4
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
5
7
7
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
5
0
6
-
P
l
a
t
o
o
n
b
l
o
c
k
e
d
,
%
-
-
-
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
7
8
1
-
-
-
3
0
2
7
0
4
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
2
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
-
-
-
-
3
0
2
-
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
5
7
7
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
4
3
8
-
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
S
B
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
1
.
2
0
1
0
.
3
H
C
M
L
O
S
B
M
i
n
o
r
L
a
n
e
/
M
a
j
o
r
M
v
m
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
W
B
T
W
B
R
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
v
e
h
/
h
)
7
8
1
-
-
-
-
7
0
4
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
1
3
5
-
-
-
-
0
.
0
3
1
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
(
s
)
1
0
.
3
-
-
-
0
1
0
.
3
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
B
-
-
-
A
B
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
%
t
i
l
e
Q
(
v
e
h
)
0
.
5
-
-
-
-
0
.
1
I
I
I
I
'i ++ ++
,
,
'
i
.
t
i
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
i
t
t
+
H
t
.
'
i
I
,
,
,
,
7
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
8
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
2: Kirkwood Blvd & T W King Rd
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
1
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 16Intersection LOSCMovementEBL EBT W
B
T
W
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h58 19 6
6
3
1
1
1
8
1
2
3
Future Vol, veh/h58 19 6
6
3
1
1
1
8
1
2
3
Peak Hour Factor0.89 0.89 0.
8
9
0
.
8
9
0
.
8
9
0
.
8
9
Heavy Vehicles, %22
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow65 21 7
4
5
1
2
5
9
1
3
8
Number of Lanes12
2
0
1
1
ApproachEBWB
S
B
Opposing Approach WBEB
Opposing Lanes23
0
Conflicting Approach Left SB
W
B
Conflicting Lanes Left20
2
Conflicting Approach Right SB
E
B
Conflicting Lanes Right 02
3
HCM Control Delay 10.4 17
.
4
1
0
.
7
HCM LOSBC
B
LaneEBLn1 EBLn2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
Vol Left, %100% 0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
Vol Thru, %0% 100%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
6
7
%
0
%
0
%
Vol Right, %0% 0
%
0
%
0
%
3
3
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
Sign ControlStop Sto
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Traffic Vol by Lane58 1
0
1
0
4
4
2
3
3
2
8
1
2
3
L T V o l5
8
0
0
0
0
8
0
Through Vol0 1
0
1
0
4
4
2
2
2
1
0
0
R T V o l0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
2
3
Lane Flow Rate65 1
1
1
1
4
9
7
3
7
3
9
1
3
8
Geometry Grp8
8
8
8
8
8
8
Degree of Util (X) 0.13 0.02
0
.
0
1
5
0
.
7
2
2
0
.
5
1
8
0
.
0
1
8
0
.
2
3
5
Departure Headway (Hd)7.188 6.682
4
.
9
2
7
5
.
2
3
3
4
.
9
9
8
7
.
3
3
6
.
1
2
7
Convergence, Y/NYes Ye
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Cap501 53
8
7
3
0
6
8
0
7
1
2
4
9
1
5
8
9
Service Time4.897 4.391
2
.
6
3
5
3
.
0
3
2
2
.
7
9
7
5
.
0
3
7
3
.
8
3
3
HCM Lane V/C Ratio0.13 0.02
0
.
0
1
5
0
.
7
3
1
0
.
5
2
4
0
.
0
1
8
0
.
2
3
4
HCM Control Delay11 9.
5
7
.
7
2
0
.
6
1
3
.
1
1
0
.
2
1
0
.
7
HCM Lane LOSB
A
A
C
B
B
B
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.4 0
.
1
0
6
.
2
3
0
.
1
0
.
9
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
8
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
6
:
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
R
d
/
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
&
S
o
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
/
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
2
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
3
7
.
3
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
E
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
0
2
2
7
5
9
9
4
1
4
3
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
2
2
4
6
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
0
2
2
7
5
9
9
4
1
4
3
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
2
2
4
6
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
0
2
6
1
6
8
9
4
7
6
3
5
7
0
0
0
0
1
4
0
2
5
3
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
L
a
n
e
s
0
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
S
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
W
B
E
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
3
3
0
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
L
e
f
t
S
B
W
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
L
e
f
t
3
0
3
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
R
i
g
h
t
S
B
E
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
R
i
g
h
t
0
3
3
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
3
3
.
2
4
7
.
8
1
2
.
5
H
C
M
L
O
S
D
E
B
L
a
n
e
E
B
L
n
1
E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
W
B
L
n
3
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
S
B
L
n
3
V
o
l
L
e
f
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
9
8
%
0
%
V
o
l
T
h
r
u
,
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
2
%
2
%
V
o
l
R
i
g
h
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
9
8
%
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
b
y
L
a
n
e
1
1
4
1
1
4
5
9
9
4
1
4
1
5
6
1
5
6
6
1
6
2
4
7
L
T
V
o
l
0
0
0
4
1
4
0
0
6
1
6
1
0
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
V
o
l
1
1
4
1
1
4
0
0
1
5
6
1
5
6
0
1
1
R
T
V
o
l
0
0
5
9
9
0
0
0
0
0
4
6
L
a
n
e
F
l
o
w
R
a
t
e
1
3
0
1
3
0
6
8
9
4
7
6
1
7
9
1
7
9
7
0
7
1
5
4
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
G
r
p
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
D
e
g
r
e
e
o
f
U
t
i
l
(
X
)
0
.
2
6
3
0
.
2
6
3
0
.
9
3
5
1
.
0
2
0
.
3
5
8
0
.
2
7
1
0
.
1
6
6
0
.
1
6
9
0
.
1
1
D
e
p
a
r
t
u
r
e
H
e
a
d
w
a
y
(
H
d
)
7
.
4
0
6
7
.
4
0
6
4
.
8
9
7
.
7
1
3
7
.
2
0
6
5
.
4
5
8
.
6
8
3
8
.
6
7
5
7
.
4
7
5
C
o
n
v
e
r
g
e
n
c
e
,
Y
/
N
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
C
a
p
4
8
8
4
8
8
7
3
7
4
7
1
5
0
0
6
6
1
4
1
6
4
1
6
4
8
2
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
T
i
m
e
5
.
1
0
6
5
.
1
0
6
2
.
6
3
9
5
.
4
3
6
4
.
9
3
3
.
1
7
3
6
.
3
8
3
6
.
3
7
5
5
.
1
7
5
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
2
6
6
0
.
2
6
6
0
.
9
3
5
1
.
0
1
1
0
.
3
5
8
0
.
2
7
1
0
.
1
6
8
0
.
1
7
1
0
.
1
1
2
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
1
2
.
7
1
2
.
7
4
0
.
9
7
4
.
7
1
3
.
9
1
0
.
2
1
3
.
1
1
3
.
1
1
1
.
1
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
B
B
E
F
B
B
B
B
B
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
-
t
i
l
e
Q
1
1
1
3
.
3
1
3
.
9
1
.
6
1
.
1
0
.
6
0
.
6
0
.
4
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
.
,
t
+
.
,
'
i
t
+
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
8
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
8: SH-114 NB Off-Ramp/SH-114 NB Fron
t
a
g
e
R
d
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
3
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh74.4Intersection LOS FMovementEBL EBT EBR WBL
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 355 48 0
0
4
8
5
3
0
2
2
8
6
8
7
0
3
4
0
0
0
Future Vol, veh/h 355 48 0
0
4
8
5
3
0
2
2
8
6
8
7
0
3
4
0
0
0
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 22
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow374 51 0 0
5
1
1
3
1
8
3
0
1
9
1
6
3
6
0
0
0
Number of Lanes 1 2 00
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
ApproachEBWB
N
B
Opposing Approach WBEB
Opposing Lanes 33
0
Conflicting Approach Left NB
E
B
Conflicting Lanes Left 03
3
Conflicting Approach Right NB
W
B
Conflicting Lanes Right 30
3
HCM Control Delay 131.728.1
8
5
.
6
HCM LOSFD
F
LaneNBLn1NBLn2NBLn3EBLn1E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
W
B
L
n
3
Vol Left, %100% 6% 0% 1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
Vol Thru, %0% 94% 93%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
Vol Right, %0% 0% 7%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
Sign ControlStop Stop Stop S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Traffic Vol by Lane257 464 469
3
5
5
2
4
2
4
2
4
3
2
4
3
3
0
2
L T V o l2 5 7
2
9
0
3
5
5
0
0
0
0
0
Through Vol0 435 43
5
0
2
4
2
4
2
4
3
2
4
3
0
R T V o l00 3
4
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
2
Lane Flow Rate271 488 494
3
7
4
2
5
2
5
2
5
5
2
5
5
3
1
8
Geometry Grp7 77
8
8
8
8
8
8
Degree of Util (X) 0.645 1.099 1.101 1.
1
8
9
0
.
0
7
7
0
.
0
6
5
0
.
6
7
2
0
.
6
7
2
0
.
6
2
3
Departure Headway (Hd) 8.92 8.44 8.357 11.
9
2
1
1
.
4
0
2
9
.
6
0
9
1
0
.
2
5
4
1
0
.
2
5
4
7
.
7
2
7
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Cap406 434 439
3
0
6
3
1
6
3
7
5
3
5
5
3
5
5
4
7
0
Service Time6.62 6.14 6.057 9.
6
2
9
.
1
0
2
7
.
3
0
9
7
.
9
5
4
7
.
9
5
4
5
.
4
2
7
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.667 1.124 1.125 1.
2
2
2
0
.
0
7
9
0
.
0
6
7
0
.
7
1
8
0
.
7
1
8
0
.
6
7
7
HCM Control Delay 26.5 101.8 102 1
4
7
.
6
1
5
.
1
1
3
3
1
.
6
3
1
.
6
2
2
.
4
HCM Lane LOSD F
F
F
C
B
D
D
C
HCM 95th-tile Q4.4 16.2 16.3 1
5
.
7
0
.
2
0
.
2
4
.
6
4
.
6
4
.
2
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
8
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
4
0
:
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
&
T
h
e
V
i
s
t
a
D
r
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
4
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
2
.
1
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
W
B
T
W
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
1
7
8
2
7
8
7
0
0
1
2
7
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
1
7
8
2
7
8
7
0
0
1
2
7
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
P
e
d
s
,
#
/
h
r
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
R
T
C
h
a
n
n
e
l
i
z
e
d
-
N
o
n
e
-
N
o
n
e
-
N
o
n
e
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
7
0
-
-
-
0
0
V
e
h
i
n
M
e
d
i
a
n
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
,
#
-
0
0
-
0
-
G
r
a
d
e
,
%
-
0
0
-
0
-
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
1
8
8
9
8
5
5
0
0
1
3
8
M
a
j
o
r
/
M
i
n
o
r
M
a
j
o
r
1
M
a
j
o
r
2
M
i
n
o
r
2
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
F
l
o
w
A
l
l
8
5
5
0
-
0
9
2
8
4
2
8
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
8
5
5
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
7
3
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
5
.
3
4
-
-
-
5
.
7
4
7
.
1
4
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
1
-
-
-
-
6
.
6
4
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
2
-
-
-
-
6
.
0
4
-
F
o
l
l
o
w
-
u
p
H
d
w
y
3
.
1
2
-
-
-
3
.
8
2
3
.
9
2
P
o
t
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
4
6
0
-
-
-
3
3
7
4
9
2
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
2
9
6
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
8
6
6
-
P
l
a
t
o
o
n
b
l
o
c
k
e
d
,
%
-
-
-
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
4
6
0
-
-
-
3
2
4
4
9
2
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
2
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
-
-
-
-
3
2
4
-
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
2
9
6
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
8
3
2
-
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
S
B
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
2
.
3
0
1
5
.
1
H
C
M
L
O
S
C
M
i
n
o
r
L
a
n
e
/
M
a
j
o
r
M
v
m
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
W
B
T
W
B
R
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
v
e
h
/
h
)
4
6
0
-
-
-
-
4
9
2
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
0
4
-
-
-
-
0
.
2
8
1
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
(
s
)
1
3
.
2
-
-
-
0
1
5
.
1
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
B
-
-
-
A
C
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
%
t
i
l
e
Q
(
v
e
h
)
0
.
1
-
-
-
-
1
.
1
I
I
I
I
'i ++ ++
,
,
'
i
.
t
i
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
i
t
t
+
H
t
.
'
i
I
,
,
,
,
7
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
2: Driveway 4/T W King Rd & Kirkwood Bl
v
d
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
1
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 344.3Intersection LOSFMovementEBL EBT E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h30 1120 1
5
1
0
3
7
4
0
0
0
1
1
4
0
3
1
3
Future Vol, veh/h30 1120 1
5
1
0
3
7
4
0
0
0
1
1
4
0
3
1
3
Peak Hour Factor0.91 0.91 0.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
1
Heavy Vehicles, %22
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow33 1231 1
6
4
0
4
1
4
0
0
0
1
2
5
0
3
4
4
Number of Lanes11
1
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
1
1
ApproachEB
W
B
N
B
S
B
Opposing Approach WB
E
B
S
B
N
B
Opposing Lanes2
3
2
2
Conflicting Approach Left SB
N
B
E
B
W
B
Conflicting Lanes Left2
2
3
2
Conflicting Approach Right NB
S
B
W
B
E
B
Conflicting Lanes Right 2
2
2
3
HCM Control Delay 461.3
1
2
.
5
0
2
0
HCM LOSF
B
-
C
LaneNBLn1 NBLn2
E
B
L
n
1
E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
Vol Left, %0% 0%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
Vol Thru, %100% 100
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
7
6
%
0
%
0
%
Vol Right, %0% 0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
2
4
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
Sign ControlStop Sto
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Traffic Vol by Lane0
0
3
0
1
1
2
0
1
5
1
2
5
1
6
1
1
4
3
1
3
L T V o l0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
4
0
Through Vol0
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
2
5
1
2
0
0
R T V o l0
0
0
0
1
5
1
0
4
0
3
1
3
Lane Flow Rate0
0
3
3
1
2
3
1
1
6
4
2
7
1
8
1
2
5
3
4
4
Geometry Grp8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
Degree of Util (X) 0 0
0
.
0
6
2
2
.
1
4
0
.
2
5
3
0
.
0
5
8
0
.
0
3
8
0
.
2
5
7
0
.
5
9
2
Departure Headway (Hd)10.108 8.317
6
.
7
6
6
6
.
2
5
9
5
.
5
5
9
.
4
3
5
9
.
2
5
6
9
.
2
8
3
8
.
0
8
Convergence, Y/NYes Ye
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Cap0
0
5
2
9
5
9
1
6
4
7
3
8
2
3
8
9
3
9
0
4
5
1
Service Time 7.808 6.0
1
7
4
.
5
1
4
.
0
0
3
3
.
2
9
3
7
.
1
3
5
6
.
9
5
6
6
.
9
8
3
5
.
7
8
HCM Lane V/C Ratio0 0
0
.
0
6
2
2
.
0
8
3
0
.
2
5
3
0
.
0
7
1
0
.
0
4
6
0
.
3
2
1
0
.
7
6
3
HCM Control Delay12.8 1
1
1
0
5
3
3
.
6
1
0
.
2
1
2
.
7
1
2
.
3
1
5
.
2
2
1
.
8
HCM Lane LOSN
N
A
F
B
B
B
C
C
HCM 95th-tile Q0
0
0
.
2
8
6
.
7
1
0
.
2
0
.
1
1
3
.
7
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
6
:
S
o
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
/
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
&
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
2
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
4
0
.
6
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
E
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
0
3
5
6
2
5
6
2
9
3
6
3
2
0
0
0
0
5
9
0
1
6
3
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
0
3
5
6
2
5
6
2
9
3
6
3
2
0
0
0
0
5
9
0
1
6
3
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
0
3
8
7
2
7
8
3
1
8
6
8
7
0
0
0
0
6
4
1
1
6
8
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
L
a
n
e
s
0
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
S
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
W
B
E
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
3
3
0
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
L
e
f
t
S
B
W
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
L
e
f
t
3
0
3
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
R
i
g
h
t
S
B
E
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
R
i
g
h
t
0
3
3
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
2
6
.
5
5
0
.
2
4
0
.
1
H
C
M
L
O
S
D
F
E
L
a
n
e
E
B
L
n
1
E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
W
B
L
n
3
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
S
B
L
n
3
V
o
l
L
e
f
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
V
o
l
T
h
r
u
,
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
%
V
o
l
R
i
g
h
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
9
9
%
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
b
y
L
a
n
e
1
7
8
1
7
8
2
5
6
2
9
3
3
1
6
3
1
6
2
9
5
2
9
6
6
4
L
T
V
o
l
0
0
0
2
9
3
0
0
2
9
5
2
9
5
0
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
V
o
l
1
7
8
1
7
8
0
0
3
1
6
3
1
6
0
1
1
R
T
V
o
l
0
0
2
5
6
0
0
0
0
0
6
3
L
a
n
e
F
l
o
w
R
a
t
e
1
9
3
1
9
3
2
7
8
3
1
8
3
4
3
3
4
3
3
2
1
3
2
1
6
9
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
G
r
p
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
D
e
g
r
e
e
o
f
U
t
i
l
(
X
)
0
.
5
8
2
0
.
5
8
2
0
.
6
4
2
0
.
9
0
3
0
.
9
2
5
0
.
7
5
4
0
.
8
2
2
0
.
8
2
3
0
.
1
5
4
D
e
p
a
r
t
u
r
e
H
e
a
d
w
a
y
(
H
d
)
1
0
.
8
2
1
0
.
8
2
8
.
3
0
3
1
0
.
2
0
9
9
.
6
9
2
7
.
9
0
1
9
.
2
2
6
9
.
2
2
5
8
.
0
1
1
C
o
n
v
e
r
g
e
n
c
e
,
Y
/
N
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
C
a
p
3
3
5
3
3
5
4
3
4
3
5
7
3
7
8
4
6
0
3
9
1
3
9
2
4
4
7
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
T
i
m
e
8
.
5
7
9
8
.
5
7
9
6
.
0
6
2
7
.
9
0
9
7
.
3
9
2
5
.
6
0
1
7
.
0
0
1
7
5
.
7
8
5
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
5
7
6
0
.
5
7
6
0
.
6
4
1
0
.
8
9
1
0
.
9
0
7
0
.
7
4
6
0
.
8
2
1
0
.
8
1
9
0
.
1
5
4
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
2
7
.
7
2
7
.
7
2
4
.
9
5
9
.
1
6
1
.
2
3
1
4
3
4
3
.
1
1
2
.
3
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
D
D
C
F
F
D
E
E
B
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
-
t
i
l
e
Q
3
.
5
3
.
5
4
.
4
9
9
.
7
6
.
3
7
.
4
7
.
5
0
.
5
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
+ .,,
.
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
8: SH-114 NB Off-Ramp & Kirkwood Blvd
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
3
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh96.8Intersection LOS FMovementEBL EBT EBR WBL
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 131 815 0
0
3
4
1
7
5
8
5
1
2
5
4
9
4
0
0
0
Future Vol, veh/h 131 815 0
0
3
4
1
7
5
8
5
1
2
5
4
9
4
0
0
0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 22
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow142 886 0 0
3
7
1
8
6
3
6
1
3
6
5
3
7
0
0
0
Number of Lanes 1 2 00
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
ApproachEBWB
N
B
Opposing Approach WBEB
Opposing Lanes 33
0
Conflicting Approach Left NB
E
B
Conflicting Lanes Left 03
3
Conflicting Approach Right NB
W
B
Conflicting Lanes Right 30
3
HCM Control Delay 90.931.9
1
2
0
.
2
HCM LOSFD
F
LaneNBLn1NBLn2NBLn3EBLn1E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
W
B
L
n
3
Vol Left, %100% 72% 0% 1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
Vol Thru, %0% 28% 11%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
Vol Right, %0% 0% 89%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
Sign ControlStop Stop Stop S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Traffic Vol by Lane421 226 557
1
3
1
4
0
8
4
0
8
1
7
1
1
7
1
7
L T V o l4 2 1 1
6
4
0
1
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
Through Vol0 62 6
3
0
4
0
8
4
0
8
1
7
1
1
7
1
0
R T V o l00 4
9
4
0
0
0
0
0
7
Lane Flow Rate458 246 605
1
4
2
4
4
3
4
4
3
1
8
5
1
8
5
8
Geometry Grp7 77
8
8
8
8
8
8
Degree of Util (X) 1.114 0.589 1.285
0
.
4
1
.
1
8
3
0
.
9
7
0
.
5
9
3
0
.
5
9
3
0
.
0
1
9
Departure Headway (Hd) 9.016 8.876 7.87710.79
3
1
0
.
2
7
8
8
.
4
8
9
1
2
.
6
9
3
1
2
.
6
9
3
1
0
.
1
7
5
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Cap407 408 466
3
3
6
3
5
9
4
3
0
2
8
7
2
8
7
3
5
4
Service Time6.716 6.576 5.577 8.4
9
3
7
.
9
7
8
6
.
1
8
9
1
0
.
3
9
3
1
0
.
3
9
3
7
.
8
7
5
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 1.125 0.603 1.298 0.
4
2
3
1
.
2
3
4
1
.
0
3
0
.
6
4
5
0
.
6
4
5
0
.
0
2
3
HCM Control Delay 109.3 23.5 167.8 2
0
.
5
1
3
8
.
8
6
5
.
7
3
2
.
3
3
2
.
3
1
3
.
1
HCM Lane LOSF C
F
C
F
F
D
D
B
HCM 95th-tile Q16.1 3.7 25.1
1
.
9
1
7
.
1
1
1
.
7
3
.
5
3
.
5
0
.
1
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
4
0
:
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
&
T
h
e
V
i
s
t
a
D
r
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
4
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
0
.
7
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
W
B
T
W
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
9
7
1
3
0
9
3
5
0
0
0
2
0
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
9
7
1
3
0
9
3
5
0
0
0
2
0
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
P
e
d
s
,
#
/
h
r
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
R
T
C
h
a
n
n
e
l
i
z
e
d
-
N
o
n
e
-
N
o
n
e
-
N
o
n
e
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
7
0
-
-
-
0
0
V
e
h
i
n
M
e
d
i
a
n
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
,
#
-
0
0
-
0
-
G
r
a
d
e
,
%
-
0
0
-
0
-
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
1
0
5
1
4
2
3
3
8
0
0
0
2
2
M
a
j
o
r
/
M
i
n
o
r
M
a
j
o
r
1
M
a
j
o
r
2
M
i
n
o
r
2
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
F
l
o
w
A
l
l
3
8
0
0
-
0
1
1
6
0
1
9
0
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
3
8
0
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
7
8
0
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
5
.
3
4
-
-
-
5
.
7
4
7
.
1
4
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
1
-
-
-
-
6
.
6
4
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
2
-
-
-
-
6
.
0
4
-
F
o
l
l
o
w
-
u
p
H
d
w
y
3
.
1
2
-
-
-
3
.
8
2
3
.
9
2
P
o
t
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
7
7
1
-
-
-
2
5
8
6
9
7
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
5
6
8
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
3
7
4
-
P
l
a
t
o
o
n
b
l
o
c
k
e
d
,
%
-
-
-
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
7
7
1
-
-
-
2
2
3
6
9
7
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
2
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
-
-
-
-
2
2
3
-
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
5
6
8
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
3
2
3
-
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
S
B
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
0
.
7
0
1
0
.
3
H
C
M
L
O
S
B
M
i
n
o
r
L
a
n
e
/
M
a
j
o
r
M
v
m
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
W
B
T
W
B
R
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
v
e
h
/
h
)
7
7
1
-
-
-
-
6
9
7
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
1
3
7
-
-
-
-
0
.
0
3
1
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
(
s
)
1
0
.
4
-
-
-
0
1
0
.
3
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
B
-
-
-
A
B
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
%
t
i
l
e
Q
(
v
e
h
)
0
.
5
-
-
-
-
0
.
1
I
I
I
I
'i ++ ++
,
,
'
i
.
t
i
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
i
t
t
+
H
t
.
'
i
I
,
,
,
,
7
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
2: Driveway 4/T W King Rd & Kirkwood Bl
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
1
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 122.1Intersection LOSFMovementEBL EBT E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h60 20
0
0
1
0
8
9
1
6
6
1
5
2
0
0
9
0
1
2
7
Future Vol, veh/h60 20
0
0
1
0
8
9
1
6
6
1
5
2
0
0
9
0
1
2
7
Peak Hour Factor0.89 0.89 0.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
8
9
0
.
8
9
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
8
9
0
.
9
2
0
.
8
9
Heavy Vehicles, %22
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow67 22
0
0
1
2
2
4
1
8
7
1
6
5
0
0
1
0
0
1
4
3
Number of Lanes11
1
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
1
1
ApproachEB
W
B
N
B
S
B
Opposing Approach WB
E
B
S
B
N
B
Opposing Lanes2
3
2
2
Conflicting Approach Left SB
N
B
E
B
W
B
Conflicting Lanes Left2
2
3
2
Conflicting Approach Right NB
S
B
W
B
E
B
Conflicting Lanes Right 2
2
2
3
HCM Control Delay 13.2
1
5
3
.
1
1
7
.
4
1
3
.
8
HCM LOSB
F
C
B
LaneNBLn1 NBLn2
E
B
L
n
1
E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
Vol Left, %100% 0%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
Vol Thru, %0% 100
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
6
9
%
0
%
0
%
Vol Right, %0% 0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
3
1
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
Sign ControlStop Sto
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Traffic Vol by Lane152
0
6
0
2
0
0
7
2
6
5
2
9
9
1
2
7
L T V o l1 5
2
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
Through Vol0
0
0
2
0
0
7
2
6
3
6
3
0
0
R T V o l0
0
0
0
0
0
1
6
6
0
1
2
7
Lane Flow Rate165
0
6
7
2
2
0
8
1
6
5
9
4
1
0
1
4
3
Geometry Grp8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
Degree of Util (X) 0.393 0
0
.
1
6
3
0
.
0
5
1
0
1
.
4
2
5
1
.
0
0
2
0
.
0
2
4
0
.
2
9
7
Departure Headway (Hd)9.022 8.511
9
.
1
8
8
8
.
6
7
5
8
.
6
7
5
6
.
2
8
8
6
.
0
6
6
9
.
1
4
4
7
.
9
1
8
Convergence, Y/NYes Ye
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Cap401
0
3
9
3
4
1
5
0
5
7
9
6
0
0
3
9
4
4
5
7
Service Time6.722 6.211
6
.
8
8
8
6
.
3
7
5
6
.
3
7
5
4
.
0
3
5
3
.
8
1
2
6
.
8
4
4
5
.
6
1
8
HCM Lane V/C Ratio0.411
0
0
.
1
7
0
.
0
5
3
0
1
.
4
0
9
0
.
9
9
0
.
0
2
5
0
.
3
1
3
HCM Control Delay17.4 11.
2
1
3
.
7
1
1
.
8
1
1
.
4
2
1
9
.
6
6
1
.
8
1
2
.
1
1
3
.
9
HCM Lane LOSC
N
B
B
N
F
F
B
B
HCM 95th-tile Q1.8
0
0
.
6
0
.
2
0
3
8
.
1
1
5
0
.
1
1
.
2
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
6
:
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
R
d
/
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
&
S
o
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
/
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
2
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
5
5
.
6
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
F
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
0
2
3
4
6
1
7
4
7
7
4
2
2
0
0
0
0
1
2
6
2
4
7
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
0
2
3
4
6
1
7
4
7
7
4
2
2
0
0
0
0
1
2
6
2
4
7
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
0
2
6
9
7
0
9
5
4
8
4
8
5
0
0
0
0
1
4
5
2
5
4
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
L
a
n
e
s
0
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
S
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
W
B
E
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
3
3
0
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
L
e
f
t
S
B
W
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
L
e
f
t
3
0
3
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
R
i
g
h
t
S
B
E
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
R
i
g
h
t
0
3
3
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
4
3
.
4
7
5
.
5
1
3
H
C
M
L
O
S
E
F
B
L
a
n
e
E
B
L
n
1
E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
W
B
L
n
3
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
S
B
L
n
3
V
o
l
L
e
f
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
9
8
%
0
%
V
o
l
T
h
r
u
,
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
2
%
2
%
V
o
l
R
i
g
h
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
9
8
%
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
b
y
L
a
n
e
1
1
7
1
1
7
6
1
7
4
7
7
2
1
1
2
1
1
6
3
6
4
4
8
L
T
V
o
l
0
0
0
4
7
7
0
0
6
3
6
3
0
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
V
o
l
1
1
7
1
1
7
0
0
2
1
1
2
1
1
0
1
1
R
T
V
o
l
0
0
6
1
7
0
0
0
0
0
4
7
L
a
n
e
F
l
o
w
R
a
t
e
1
3
4
1
3
4
7
0
9
5
4
8
2
4
3
2
4
3
7
2
7
4
5
5
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
G
r
p
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
D
e
g
r
e
e
o
f
U
t
i
l
(
X
)
0
.
2
7
9
0
.
2
7
9
0
.
9
9
1
1
.
1
8
6
0
.
4
9
1
0
.
3
7
2
0
.
1
7
5
0
.
1
7
7
0
.
1
1
5
D
e
p
a
r
t
u
r
e
H
e
a
d
w
a
y
(
H
d
)
7
.
7
9
3
7
.
7
9
3
5
.
3
2
3
7
.
7
8
7
7
.
2
8
1
5
.
5
2
4
9
.
0
2
2
9
.
0
1
4
7
.
8
1
1
C
o
n
v
e
r
g
e
n
c
e
,
Y
/
N
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
C
a
p
4
6
4
4
6
4
6
8
8
4
6
6
4
9
2
6
4
8
4
0
0
4
0
0
4
6
2
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
T
i
m
e
5
.
4
9
3
5
.
4
9
3
3
.
0
2
3
5
.
5
6
7
5
.
0
6
3
.
3
0
1
6
.
7
2
2
6
.
7
1
4
5
.
5
1
1
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
2
8
9
0
.
2
8
9
1
.
0
3
1
1
.
1
7
6
0
.
4
9
4
0
.
3
7
5
0
.
1
8
0
.
1
8
5
0
.
1
1
9
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
1
3
.
5
1
3
.
5
5
4
.
8
1
2
9
.
6
1
7
1
1
.
6
1
3
.
6
1
3
.
6
1
1
.
5
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
B
B
F
F
C
B
B
B
B
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
-
t
i
l
e
Q
1
.
1
1
.
1
1
5
.
5
2
0
.
5
2
.
7
1
.
7
0
.
6
0
.
6
0
.
4
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
+ .,,
.
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
8: SH-114 NB Off-Ramp/SH-114 NB Fron
t
a
g
e
R
d
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
3
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 155.6Intersection LOS FMovementEBL EBT EBR WBL
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 366 49 0
0
6
5
1
7
1
7
2
9
5
8
9
6
3
5
0
0
0
Future Vol, veh/h 366 49 0
0
6
5
1
7
1
7
2
9
5
8
9
6
3
5
0
0
0
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 22
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow385 52 0 0
6
8
5
7
5
5
3
1
1
9
4
3
3
7
0
0
0
Number of Lanes 1 2 00
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
ApproachEBWB
N
B
Opposing Approach WBEB
Opposing Lanes 33
0
Conflicting Approach Left NB
E
B
Conflicting Lanes Left 03
3
Conflicting Approach Right NB
W
B
Conflicting Lanes Right 30
3
HCM Control Delay 190.5169
1
2
8
.
9
HCM LOSFF
F
LaneNBLn1NBLn2NBLn3EBLn1E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
W
B
L
n
3
Vol Left, %100% 6% 0% 1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
Vol Thru, %0% 94% 93%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
Vol Right, %0% 0% 7%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
Sign ControlStop Stop Stop S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Traffic Vol by Lane266 478 483
3
6
6
2
5
2
5
3
2
6
3
2
6
7
1
7
L T V o l2 6 6
3
0
0
3
6
6
0
0
0
0
0
Through Vol0 448 44
8
0
2
5
2
5
3
2
6
3
2
6
0
R T V o l00 3
5
0
0
0
0
0
7
1
7
Lane Flow Rate279 503 508
3
8
5
2
6
2
6
3
4
3
3
4
3
7
5
5
Geometry Grp7 77
8
8
8
8
8
8
Degree of Util (X) 0.719 1.227 1.23 1.
3
4
8
0
.
0
8
7
0
.
0
7
4
0
.
9
1
7
0
.
9
1
7
1
.
5
1
Departure Headway (Hd) 10.53310.051 9.96713.416
1
2
.
8
9
9
1
1
.
1
0
5
1
1
.
0
0
6
1
1
.
0
0
6
8
.
4
7
4
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Cap347 367 371
2
7
4
2
8
0
3
2
5
3
3
2
3
3
2
4
3
8
Service Time8.233 7.751 7.66711.116
1
0
.
5
9
9
8
.
8
0
5
8
.
7
0
6
8
.
7
0
6
6
.
1
7
4
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.804 1.371 1.369 1.
4
0
5
0
.
0
9
3
0
.
0
8
1
.
0
3
3
1
.
0
3
3
1
.
7
2
4
HCM Control Delay 36.1 154.1 154.9 2
1
3
.
9
1
6
.
8
1
4
.
7
6
5
6
5
2
6
3
.
5
HCM Lane LOSE F
F
F
C
B
F
F
F
HCM 95th-tile Q5.3 18.9 19.1 1
8
.
9
0
.
3
0
.
2
9
9
3
4
.
1
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
4
0
:
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
&
T
h
e
V
i
s
t
a
D
r
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
4
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
2
.
3
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
W
B
T
W
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
1
7
8
4
1
3
6
9
0
0
1
2
7
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
1
7
8
4
1
3
6
9
0
0
1
2
7
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
P
e
d
s
,
#
/
h
r
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
R
T
C
h
a
n
n
e
l
i
z
e
d
-
N
o
n
e
-
N
o
n
e
-
N
o
n
e
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
7
0
-
-
-
0
0
V
e
h
i
n
M
e
d
i
a
n
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
,
#
-
0
0
-
0
-
G
r
a
d
e
,
%
-
0
0
-
0
-
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
1
8
9
1
1
4
8
8
0
0
1
3
8
M
a
j
o
r
/
M
i
n
o
r
M
a
j
o
r
1
M
a
j
o
r
2
M
i
n
o
r
2
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
F
l
o
w
A
l
l
1
4
8
8
0
-
0
1
5
6
1
7
4
4
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
1
4
8
8
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
7
3
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
5
.
3
4
-
-
-
5
.
7
4
7
.
1
4
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
1
-
-
-
-
6
.
6
4
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
2
-
-
-
-
6
.
0
4
-
F
o
l
l
o
w
-
u
p
H
d
w
y
3
.
1
2
-
-
-
3
.
8
2
3
.
9
2
P
o
t
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
2
2
6
-
-
-
1
6
0
3
0
6
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
1
2
0
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
8
6
6
-
P
l
a
t
o
o
n
b
l
o
c
k
e
d
,
%
-
-
-
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
2
2
6
-
-
-
1
4
7
3
0
6
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
2
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
-
-
-
-
1
4
7
-
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
1
2
0
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
7
9
7
-
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
S
B
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
3
.
8
0
2
6
.
1
H
C
M
L
O
S
D
M
i
n
o
r
L
a
n
e
/
M
a
j
o
r
M
v
m
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
W
B
T
W
B
R
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
v
e
h
/
h
)
2
2
6
-
-
-
-
3
0
6
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
0
8
2
-
-
-
-
0
.
4
5
1
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
(
s
)
2
2
.
3
-
-
-
0
2
6
.
1
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
C
-
-
-
A
D
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
%
t
i
l
e
Q
(
v
e
h
)
0
.
3
-
-
-
-
2
.
2
I
I
I
I
'i ++ ++
,
,
'
i
.
t
i
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
i
t
t
+
H
t
.
'
i
I
,
,
,
,
7
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
2: Kirkwood Blvd & T W King Rd
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
1
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 347.5Intersection LOSFMovementEBL EBT E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h35 1125 1
5
1
0
3
7
4
0
0
0
1
1
4
0
3
1
9
Future Vol, veh/h35 1125 1
5
1
0
3
7
4
0
0
0
1
1
4
0
3
1
9
Peak Hour Factor0.91 0.91 0.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
1
Heavy Vehicles, %22
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow38 1236 1
6
4
0
4
1
4
0
0
0
1
2
5
0
3
5
1
Number of Lanes11
1
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
1
1
ApproachEB
W
B
N
B
S
B
Opposing Approach WB
E
B
S
B
N
B
Opposing Lanes2
3
2
2
Conflicting Approach Left SB
N
B
E
B
W
B
Conflicting Lanes Left2
2
3
2
Conflicting Approach Right NB
S
B
W
B
E
B
Conflicting Lanes Right 2
2
2
3
HCM Control Delay 466.1
1
2
.
6
0
2
0
.
5
HCM LOSF
B
-
C
LaneNBLn1 NBLn2
E
B
L
n
1
E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
Vol Left, %0% 0%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
Vol Thru, %100% 100
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
7
6
%
0
%
0
%
Vol Right, %0% 0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
2
4
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
Sign ControlStop Sto
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Traffic Vol by Lane0
0
3
5
1
1
2
5
1
5
1
2
5
1
6
1
1
4
3
1
9
L T V o l0
0
3
5
0
0
0
0
1
1
4
0
Through Vol0
0
0
1
1
2
5
0
2
5
1
2
0
0
R T V o l0
0
0
0
1
5
1
0
4
0
3
1
9
Lane Flow Rate0
0
3
8
1
2
3
6
1
6
4
2
7
1
8
1
2
5
3
5
1
Geometry Grp8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
Degree of Util (X) 0 0
0
.
0
7
3
2
.
1
5
6
0
.
2
5
4
0
.
0
5
9
0
.
0
3
8
0
.
2
5
7
0
.
6
0
4
Departure Headway (Hd)10.149 8.358
6
.
7
8
6
6
.
2
7
9
5
.
5
7
9
.
4
8
1
9
.
3
0
2
9
.
3
0
4
8
.
1
0
1
Convergence, Y/NYes Ye
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Cap0
0
5
2
7
5
9
3
6
4
3
3
8
0
3
8
7
3
8
8
4
4
9
Service Time 7.849 6.058
4
.
5
3
3
4
.
0
2
6
3
.
3
1
6
7
.
1
8
1
7
.
0
0
2
7
.
0
0
4
5
.
8
0
1
HCM Lane V/C Ratio0 0
0
.
0
7
2
2
.
0
8
4
0
.
2
5
5
0
.
0
7
1
0
.
0
4
7
0
.
3
2
2
0
.
7
8
2
HCM Control Delay12.8 11.
1
1
0
.
1
5
4
0
.
8
1
0
.
2
1
2
.
8
1
2
.
4
1
5
.
2
2
2
.
4
HCM Lane LOSN
N
B
F
B
B
B
C
C
HCM 95th-tile Q0
0
0
.
2
8
7
.
5
1
0
.
2
0
.
1
1
3
.
9
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
6
:
S
o
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
/
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
&
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
2
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
5
5
.
9
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
F
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
0
3
6
9
2
5
6
3
2
3
6
4
2
0
0
0
0
6
5
5
1
6
3
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
0
3
6
9
2
5
6
3
2
3
6
4
2
0
0
0
0
6
5
5
1
6
3
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
0
4
0
1
2
7
8
3
5
1
6
9
8
0
0
0
0
7
1
2
1
6
8
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
L
a
n
e
s
0
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
S
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
W
B
E
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
3
3
0
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
L
e
f
t
S
B
W
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
L
e
f
t
3
0
3
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
R
i
g
h
t
S
B
E
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
R
i
g
h
t
0
3
3
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
3
2
.
4
7
1
.
5
5
5
.
3
H
C
M
L
O
S
D
F
F
L
a
n
e
E
B
L
n
1
E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
W
B
L
n
3
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
S
B
L
n
3
V
o
l
L
e
f
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
V
o
l
T
h
r
u
,
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
%
V
o
l
R
i
g
h
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
9
9
%
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
b
y
L
a
n
e
1
8
5
1
8
5
2
5
6
3
2
3
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
8
3
2
8
6
4
L
T
V
o
l
0
0
0
3
2
3
0
0
3
2
8
3
2
8
0
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
V
o
l
1
8
5
1
8
5
0
0
3
2
1
3
2
1
0
0
1
R
T
V
o
l
0
0
2
5
6
0
0
0
0
0
6
3
L
a
n
e
F
l
o
w
R
a
t
e
2
0
1
2
0
1
2
7
8
3
5
1
3
4
9
3
4
9
3
5
6
3
5
7
6
9
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
G
r
p
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
D
e
g
r
e
e
o
f
U
t
i
l
(
X
)
0
.
6
4
1
0
.
6
4
1
0
.
7
0
1
1
.
0
4
8
0
.
9
9
2
0
.
8
1
8
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
1
0
.
1
5
5
D
e
p
a
r
t
u
r
e
H
e
a
d
w
a
y
(
H
d
)
1
1
.
7
7
8
1
1
.
7
7
8
9
.
2
5
9
1
0
.
7
4
9
1
0
.
2
3
2
8
.
4
3
9
9
.
4
7
9
.
4
6
9
8
.
2
5
3
C
o
n
v
e
r
g
e
n
c
e
,
Y
/
N
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
C
a
p
3
0
9
3
0
9
3
9
2
3
4
1
3
5
6
4
3
3
3
8
4
3
8
5
4
3
7
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
T
i
m
e
9
.
4
7
8
9
.
4
7
8
6
.
9
5
9
8
.
4
4
9
7
.
9
3
2
6
.
1
3
9
7
.
1
7
7
.
1
6
9
5
.
9
5
3
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
6
5
0
.
6
5
0
.
7
0
9
1
.
0
2
9
0
.
9
8
0
.
8
0
6
0
.
9
2
7
0
.
9
2
7
0
.
1
5
8
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
3
3
.
3
3
3
.
3
3
1
9
6
.
3
7
8
.
7
3
9
.
4
5
9
.
3
5
9
.
5
1
2
.
5
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
D
D
D
F
F
E
F
F
B
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
-
t
i
l
e
Q
4
.
1
4
.
1
5
.
2
1
2
.
5
1
1
.
3
7
.
6
9
.
7
9
.
7
0
.
5
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
+ .,,
.
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
8: SH-114 NB Off-Ramp & Kirkwood Blvd
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
3
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 136.1Intersection LOS FMovementEBL EBT EBR WBL
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 131 893 0
0
3
8
1
5
7
5
8
5
1
2
5
5
3
9
0
0
0
Future Vol, veh/h 131 893 0
0
3
8
1
5
7
5
8
5
1
2
5
5
3
9
0
0
0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 22
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow142 971 0 0
4
1
4
6
2
6
3
6
1
3
6
5
8
6
0
0
0
Number of Lanes 1 2 00
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
ApproachEBWB
N
B
Opposing Approach WBEB
Opposing Lanes 33
0
Conflicting Approach Left NB
E
B
Conflicting Lanes Left 03
3
Conflicting Approach Right NB
W
B
Conflicting Lanes Right 30
3
HCM Control Delay 143.636.8
1
6
4
.
7
HCM LOSFE
F
LaneNBLn1NBLn2NBLn3EBLn1E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
W
B
L
n
3
Vol Left, %100% 70% 0% 1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
Vol Thru, %0% 30% 10%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
Vol Right, %0% 0% 90%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
Sign ControlStop Stop Stop S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Traffic Vol by Lane439 209 602
1
3
1
4
4
7
4
4
7
1
9
1
1
9
1
5
7
L T V o l4 3 9 1
4
6
0
1
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
Through Vol0 63 6
3
0
4
4
7
4
4
7
1
9
1
1
9
1
0
R T V o l00 5
3
9
0
0
0
0
0
5
7
Lane Flow Rate477 227 654
1
4
2
4
8
5
4
8
5
2
0
7
2
0
7
6
2
Geometry Grp7 77
8
8
8
8
8
8
Degree of Util (X) 1.197 0.56 1.437 0.
4
1
8
1
.
3
5
7
1
.
1
2
4
0
.
6
6
7
0
.
6
6
7
0
.
1
5
8
Departure Headway (Hd) 9.395 9.243 8.249 11.
5
8
1
1
.
0
6
5
9
.
2
7
5
1
3
.
6
1
3
1
3
.
6
1
3
1
1
.
0
9
9
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Cap391 393 445
3
1
3
3
3
5
3
9
3
2
6
7
2
6
7
3
2
5
Service Time7.095 6.943 5.949 9.
2
8
8
.
7
6
5
6
.
9
7
5
1
1
.
3
1
3
1
1
.
3
1
3
8
.
7
9
9
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 1.22 0.578 1.47 0.
4
5
4
1
.
4
4
8
1
.
2
3
4
0
.
7
7
5
0
.
7
7
5
0
.
1
9
1
HCM Control Delay 140.2 23.1 231.8
2
2
.
3
2
0
9
1
1
3
.
8
3
9
.
9
3
9
.
9
1
5
.
9
HCM Lane LOSF C
F
C
F
F
E
E
C
HCM 95th-tile Q18.7 3.3 31.
3
2
2
2
1
6
.
1
4
.
3
4
.
3
0
.
6
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
3
7
:
D
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
2
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
4
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
0
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
N
B
L
N
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
1
3
1
4
3
3
0
3
5
6
0
5
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
1
3
1
4
3
3
0
3
5
6
0
5
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
P
e
d
s
,
#
/
h
r
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
R
T
C
h
a
n
n
e
l
i
z
e
d
-
N
o
n
e
-
N
o
n
e
-
N
o
n
e
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
-
-
-
-
-
0
V
e
h
i
n
M
e
d
i
a
n
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
,
#
0
-
-
0
0
-
G
r
a
d
e
,
%
0
-
-
0
0
-
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
1
4
2
8
3
6
0
3
8
7
0
5
M
a
j
o
r
/
M
i
n
o
r
M
a
j
o
r
1
M
a
j
o
r
2
M
i
n
o
r
1
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
F
l
o
w
A
l
l
0
0
-
-
-
7
3
2
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
-
-
-
-
-
7
.
1
4
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
F
o
l
l
o
w
-
u
p
H
d
w
y
-
-
-
-
-
3
.
9
2
P
o
t
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
-
-
0
-
0
3
1
2
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
0
-
0
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
0
-
0
-
P
l
a
t
o
o
n
b
l
o
c
k
e
d
,
%
-
-
-
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
-
-
-
-
-
3
1
2
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
2
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
N
B
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
0
0
1
6
.
7
H
C
M
L
O
S
C
M
i
n
o
r
L
a
n
e
/
M
a
j
o
r
M
v
m
t
N
B
L
n
1
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
T
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
v
e
h
/
h
)
3
1
2
-
-
-
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
0
1
7
-
-
-
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
(
s
)
1
6
.
7
-
-
-
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
C
-
-
-
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
%
t
i
l
e
Q
(
v
e
h
)
0
.
1
-
-
-
I
I
I
I
'i ++ ++
,
,
'
i
.
t
i
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
H
t
.
+
+
+
I
,
,
,
,
7
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
40: Driveway 1/The Vista Dr & Kirkwood
B
l
v
d
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
5
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 14.8MovementEBL EBT EBR WBL
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 97 1342 91
7
3
5
0
0
9
0
0
5
0
0
2
0
Future Vol, veh/h 97 1342 91
7
3
5
0
0
9
0
0
5
0
0
2
0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
RT Channelized - - Non
e
-
-
N
o
n
e
-
-
N
o
n
e
-
-
N
o
n
e
Storage Length 70 - 150
1
0
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Grade, % - 0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor 92 95 92
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
6
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 22
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow105 1413 99 8
3
8
0
0
9
4
0
5
0
0
2
2
Major/Minor Major1Major2
M
i
n
o
r
1
M
i
n
o
r
2
Conflicting Flow All 380 0 0 1
4
1
3
0
0
1
7
9
1
2
0
2
0
7
0
6
1
1
7
2
2
0
2
0
1
9
0
Stage 1- - -
-
-
-
1
6
2
4
1
6
2
4
-
3
9
6
3
9
6
-
Stage 2 - -
-
-
-
-
1
6
7
3
9
6
-
7
7
6
1
6
2
4
-
Critical Hdwy 5.34 - - 5
.
3
4
-
-
6
.
4
4
6
.
5
4
7
.
1
4
6
.
4
4
6
.
5
4
7
.
1
4
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - -
-
-
-
-
7
.
3
4
5
.
5
4
-
7
.
3
4
5
.
5
4
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - -
-
-
-
-
6
.
7
4
5
.
5
4
-
6
.
7
4
5
.
5
4
-
Follow-up Hdwy 3.12 - - 3
.
1
2
-
-
3
.
8
2
4
.
0
2
3
.
9
2
3
.
8
2
4
.
0
2
3
.
9
2
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 771 - -
2
4
6
-
-
~
8
6
5
8
3
2
4
2
0
2
5
8
6
9
7
Stage 1 - -
-
-
-
-
~
7
2
1
5
9
-
5
1
5
6
0
2
-
Stage 2- - -
-
-
-
7
5
2
6
0
2
-
3
2
4
1
5
9
-
Platoon blocked, % -
-
-
-
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 771 - -
2
4
6
-
-
~
7
3
4
8
3
2
4
1
7
4
4
8
6
9
7
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - -
-
-
-
-
~
7
3
4
8
-
1
7
4
4
8
-
Stage 1- - -
-
-
-
~
6
2
1
3
7
-
4
4
5
5
8
2
-
Stage 2 - -
-
-
-
-
7
0
5
5
8
2
-
2
7
5
1
3
7
-
ApproachEBWB
N
B
S
B
HCM Control Delay, s 0.70.4
$
3
0
1
.
4
1
0
.
3
HCM LOS
F
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
Capacity (veh/h)76 771
-
-
2
4
6
-
-
-
6
9
7
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 1.305 0.137
-
-
0
.
0
3
1
-
-
-
0
.
0
3
1
HCM Control Delay (s) $ 301.4 10.4
-
-
2
0
.
1
-
-
0
1
0
.
3
HCM Lane LOS F B
-
-
C
-
-
A
B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 7.7 0.5
-
-
0
.
1
-
-
-
0
.
1
Notes~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +:
C
o
m
p
u
t
a
t
i
o
n
N
o
t
D
e
f
i
n
e
d
*
:
A
l
l
m
a
j
o
r
v
o
l
u
m
e
i
n
p
l
a
t
o
o
n
'i ttt ,, 'i ttt.
4
'
,
,
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
2: Kirkwood Blvd & T W King Rd
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
1
Lane GroupEBL EBT E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)35 1126 1
5
1
0
3
7
4
0
0
0
1
1
4
0
3
1
9
Future Volume (vph)35 1126 1
5
1
0
3
7
4
0
0
0
1
1
4
0
3
1
9
Peak Hour Factor0.91 0.91 0.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
1
Adj. Flow (vph)38 1237 1
6
4
0
4
1
4
0
0
0
1
2
5
0
3
5
1
Shared Lane Traffic (%)Lane Group Flow (vph) 38 1237
1
6
4
0
4
5
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
5
3
5
1
Turn TypePerm NA Perm
N
A
P
e
r
m
N
A
P
e
r
m
Protected Phases
4
8
2
6
Permitted Phases44
8
2
6
6
Detector Phase44
4
8
8
2
2
6
6
6
Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
Minimum Split (s)22.5 22.5 22
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
Total Split (s)55.0 55.0 55
.
0
5
5
.
0
5
5
.
0
3
5
.
0
3
5
.
0
3
5
.
0
3
5
.
0
3
5
.
0
Total Split (%)61.1% 61.1% 61.1%
6
1
.
1
%
6
1
.
1
%
3
8
.
9
%
3
8
.
9
%
3
8
.
9
%
3
8
.
9
%
3
8
.
9
%
Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
Total Lost Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5
4
.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None No
n
e
N
o
n
e
N
o
n
e
C
-
M
a
x
C
-
M
a
x
M
a
x
M
a
x
M
a
x
Act Effct Green (s)44.1 44.1 44.1
4
4
.
1
3
6
.
9
3
6
.
9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.49
0
.
4
9
0
.
4
1
0
.
4
1
v/c Ratio0.06 0.71 0.19
0
.
0
3
0
.
2
2
0
.
4
1
Control Delay8.2 13.4 2.0
9
.
3
2
0
.
6
4
.
1
Queue Delay0.0 0.0 0.0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
Total Delay8.2 13.4 2.0
9
.
3
2
0
.
6
4
.
1
LOSA B A
A
C
A
Approach Delay12.0
9
.
3
8
.
4
Approach LOSB
A
A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 8 165 5
5
4
6
0
Queue Length 95th (ft) m14 240 m16
1
2
9
5
5
7
Internal Link Dist (ft)288
9
0
0
3
9
5
8
2
5
Turn Bay Length (ft) 200Base Capacity (vph) 758 1985
9
6
0
1
9
6
1
5
7
7
8
5
5
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn0 0 0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio0.05 0.62 0.17
0
.
0
2
0
.
2
2
0
.
4
1
Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 90Actuated Cycle Length: 90Offset: 56 (62%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL, Start of Gree
n
Natural Cycle: 50Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.71
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
2
:
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
&
T
W
K
i
n
g
R
d
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
2
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
S
i
g
n
a
l
D
e
l
a
y
:
1
1
.
1
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
:
B
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
U
t
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
4
4
.
9
%
I
C
U
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
A
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
P
e
r
i
o
d
(
m
i
n
)
1
5
m
V
o
l
u
m
e
f
o
r
9
5
t
h
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
i
l
e
q
u
e
u
e
i
s
m
e
t
e
r
e
d
b
y
u
p
s
t
r
e
a
m
s
i
g
n
a
l
.
S
p
l
i
t
s
a
n
d
P
h
a
s
e
s
:
2
:
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
&
T
W
K
i
n
g
R
d
.,> -..
f
-
'
-
~
t
,
,
.
'
.
+
~
•
•
'i ++ .,,
4
'
f
>
4
'
f
>
4
'
.
,
,
I
I
&
.
t
:
~
t
;
:
l
•
•
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
6: Solana Blvd/Kirkwood Blvd & SH-114 S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
3
Lane GroupEBL EBT E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)0 369 2
5
6
3
2
3
6
4
2
0
0
0
0
6
5
5
1
6
3
Future Volume (vph)0 369 2
5
6
3
2
3
6
4
2
0
0
0
0
6
5
5
1
6
3
Peak Hour Factor0.92 0.92 0.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
Adj. Flow (vph)0 401 2
7
8
3
5
1
6
9
8
0
0
0
0
7
1
2
1
6
8
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
1
8
%
5
0
%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 401
2
7
8
2
8
8
7
6
1
0
0
0
0
3
5
6
4
2
5
0
Turn TypeNA Perm
p
m
+
p
t
N
A
P
e
r
m
N
A
Protected Phases2
1
1
2
4
Permitted Phases2
1
2
4
Detector Phase2
2
1
1
2
4
4
Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
Minimum Split (s)22.5 22.
5
9
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
Total Split (s)25.0 25.
0
2
3
.
0
4
2
.
0
4
2
.
0
Total Split (%)27.8% 27.8%
2
5
.
6
%
4
6
.
7
%
4
6
.
7
%
Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
Total Lost Time (s)4.5 4.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
Lead/LagLead Lea
d
L
a
g
Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Ye
s
Y
e
s
Recall Mode C-Max C-Ma
x
N
o
n
e
N
o
n
e
N
o
n
e
Act Effct Green (s)26.4 26.
4
4
2
.
1
4
2
.
1
3
4
.
4
3
4
.
4
Actuated g/C Ratio0.29 0.2
9
0
.
4
7
0
.
4
7
0
.
3
8
0
.
3
8
v/c Ratio0.39 0.4
2
0
.
5
8
0
.
5
2
0
.
5
8
0
.
3
4
Control Delay28.5 6.
0
2
5
.
8
1
6
.
9
2
5
.
6
1
8
.
6
Queue Delay0.1 0.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
Total Delay28.6 6.
0
2
5
.
8
1
6
.
9
2
5
.
6
1
8
.
6
L O SC
A
C
B
C
B
Approach Delay19.4
1
9
.
3
2
1
.
8
Approach LOSB
B
C
Queue Length 50th (ft)102
0
1
1
7
1
5
7
1
6
1
8
0
Queue Length 95th (ft)150 62
m
1
7
0
1
9
5
2
5
6
1
1
7
Internal Link Dist (ft)1214
3
2
7
1
0
3
6
8
3
6
Turn Bay Length (ft)
3
5
0
Base Capacity (vph) 1038 6
6
1
5
4
9
1
5
8
3
6
7
0
1
3
4
0
Starvation Cap Reductn0
0
0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn 89
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn0
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.42 0.
4
2
0
.
5
2
0
.
4
8
0
.
5
3
0
.
3
2
Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 90Actuated Cycle Length: 90Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBWB and 6:, Start of
G
r
e
e
n
Natural Cycle: 60Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.77
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
6
:
S
o
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
/
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
&
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
4
L
a
n
e
G
r
o
u
p
Ø
5
Ø
6
Ø
8
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
v
p
h
)
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
v
p
h
)
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
A
d
j
.
F
l
o
w
(
v
p
h
)
S
h
a
r
e
d
L
a
n
e
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
(
%
)
L
a
n
e
G
r
o
u
p
F
l
o
w
(
v
p
h
)
T
u
r
n
T
y
p
e
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
e
d
P
h
a
s
e
s
5
6
8
P
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d
P
h
a
s
e
s
D
e
t
e
c
t
o
r
P
h
a
s
e
S
w
i
t
c
h
P
h
a
s
e
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
I
n
i
t
i
a
l
(
s
)
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
S
p
l
i
t
(
s
)
9
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
T
o
t
a
l
S
p
l
i
t
(
s
)
2
0
.
6
2
7
.
4
4
2
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
S
p
l
i
t
(
%
)
2
3
%
3
0
%
4
7
%
Y
e
l
l
o
w
T
i
m
e
(
s
)
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
A
l
l
-
R
e
d
T
i
m
e
(
s
)
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
L
o
s
t
T
i
m
e
A
d
j
u
s
t
(
s
)
T
o
t
a
l
L
o
s
t
T
i
m
e
(
s
)
L
e
a
d
/
L
a
g
L
a
g
L
e
a
d
L
e
a
d
-
L
a
g
O
p
t
i
m
i
z
e
?
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
R
e
c
a
l
l
M
o
d
e
N
o
n
e
C
-
M
a
x
N
o
n
e
A
c
t
E
f
f
c
t
G
r
e
e
n
(
s
)
A
c
t
u
a
t
e
d
g
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
v
/
c
R
a
t
i
o
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
Q
u
e
u
e
D
e
l
a
y
T
o
t
a
l
D
e
l
a
y
L
O
S
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
D
e
l
a
y
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
L
O
S
Q
u
e
u
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
5
0
t
h
(
f
t
)
Q
u
e
u
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
9
5
t
h
(
f
t
)
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
L
i
n
k
D
i
s
t
(
f
t
)
T
u
r
n
B
a
y
L
e
n
g
t
h
(
f
t
)
B
a
s
e
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
v
p
h
)
S
t
a
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
R
e
d
u
c
t
n
S
p
i
l
l
b
a
c
k
C
a
p
R
e
d
u
c
t
n
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
C
a
p
R
e
d
u
c
t
n
R
e
d
u
c
e
d
v
/
c
R
a
t
i
o
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
•
•
•
•
I I
7
I
I
I
I
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
6: Solana Blvd/Kirkwood Blvd & SH-114 S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
5
Intersection Signal Delay: 20.1
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
:
C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.2%
I
C
U
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
C
Analysis Period (min) 15m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstrea
m
s
i
g
n
a
l
.
Splits and Phases: 6: Solana Blvd/Kirkwood Blvd & SH-11
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
8
:
S
H
-
1
1
4
N
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
6
L
a
n
e
G
r
o
u
p
E
B
L
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
v
p
h
)
1
3
1
8
9
3
0
0
3
8
1
5
7
5
8
5
1
2
5
5
3
9
0
0
0
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
v
p
h
)
1
3
1
8
9
3
0
0
3
8
1
5
7
5
8
5
1
2
5
5
3
9
0
0
0
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
A
d
j
.
F
l
o
w
(
v
p
h
)
1
4
2
9
7
1
0
0
4
1
4
6
2
6
3
6
1
3
6
5
8
6
0
0
0
S
h
a
r
e
d
L
a
n
e
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
(
%
)
1
0
%
2
5
%
L
a
n
e
G
r
o
u
p
F
l
o
w
(
v
p
h
)
1
2
8
9
8
5
0
0
4
1
4
6
2
4
7
7
8
8
1
0
0
0
0
T
u
r
n
T
y
p
e
p
m
+
p
t
N
A
N
A
P
e
r
m
P
e
r
m
N
A
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
e
d
P
h
a
s
e
s
5
5
6
6
8
P
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d
P
h
a
s
e
s
5
6
6
8
D
e
t
e
c
t
o
r
P
h
a
s
e
5
5
6
6
6
8
8
S
w
i
t
c
h
P
h
a
s
e
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
I
n
i
t
i
a
l
(
s
)
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
S
p
l
i
t
(
s
)
9
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
T
o
t
a
l
S
p
l
i
t
(
s
)
2
0
.
6
2
7
.
4
2
7
.
4
4
2
.
0
4
2
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
S
p
l
i
t
(
%
)
2
2
.
9
%
3
0
.
4
%
3
0
.
4
%
4
6
.
7
%
4
6
.
7
%
Y
e
l
l
o
w
T
i
m
e
(
s
)
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
A
l
l
-
R
e
d
T
i
m
e
(
s
)
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
L
o
s
t
T
i
m
e
A
d
j
u
s
t
(
s
)
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
L
o
s
t
T
i
m
e
(
s
)
4
.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
L
e
a
d
/
L
a
g
L
a
g
L
e
a
d
L
e
a
d
L
e
a
d
-
L
a
g
O
p
t
i
m
i
z
e
?
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
R
e
c
a
l
l
M
o
d
e
N
o
n
e
C
-
M
a
x
C
-
M
a
x
N
o
n
e
N
o
n
e
A
c
t
E
f
f
c
t
G
r
e
e
n
(
s
)
4
2
.
1
4
2
.
1
2
8
.
8
2
8
.
8
3
4
.
4
3
4
.
4
A
c
t
u
a
t
e
d
g
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
4
7
0
.
4
7
0
.
3
2
0
.
3
2
0
.
3
8
0
.
3
8
v
/
c
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
2
7
0
.
6
4
0
.
3
7
0
.
1
1
0
.
7
7
0
.
9
6
d
r
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
1
8
.
7
2
3
.
4
2
4
.
9
4
.
0
3
3
.
5
2
6
.
2
Q
u
e
u
e
D
e
l
a
y
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
D
e
l
a
y
1
8
.
7
2
3
.
4
2
4
.
9
4
.
0
3
3
.
5
2
6
.
2
L
O
S
B
C
C
A
C
C
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
D
e
l
a
y
2
2
.
8
2
2
.
1
2
8
.
8
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
L
O
S
C
C
C
Q
u
e
u
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
5
0
t
h
(
f
t
)
5
1
3
1
9
9
8
0
2
3
9
2
0
4
Q
u
e
u
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
9
5
t
h
(
f
t
)
9
3
3
9
6
1
4
8
2
5
3
7
1
2
7
8
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
L
i
n
k
D
i
s
t
(
f
t
)
3
2
7
2
4
7
1
0
5
5
1
0
9
5
T
u
r
n
B
a
y
L
e
n
g
t
h
(
f
t
)
B
a
s
e
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
v
p
h
)
5
2
6
1
6
3
8
1
1
3
3
5
5
6
6
7
0
1
2
9
2
S
t
a
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
R
e
d
u
c
t
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
p
i
l
l
b
a
c
k
C
a
p
R
e
d
u
c
t
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
C
a
p
R
e
d
u
c
t
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
R
e
d
u
c
e
d
v
/
c
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
2
4
0
.
6
0
0
.
3
7
0
.
1
1
0
.
7
1
0
.
6
8
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
C
y
c
l
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
:
9
0
A
c
t
u
a
t
e
d
C
y
c
l
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
:
9
0
O
f
f
s
e
t
:
0
(
0
%
)
,
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
d
t
o
p
h
a
s
e
2
:
E
B
W
B
a
n
d
6
:
,
S
t
a
r
t
o
f
G
r
e
e
n
N
a
t
u
r
a
l
C
y
c
l
e
:
6
0
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
T
y
p
e
:
A
c
t
u
a
t
e
d
-
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
d
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
v
/
c
R
a
t
i
o
:
0
.
7
7
_
,
)
-
-
-
,
.
f
+
-
'
-
"
t
,
.
.
\
.
+
.
,
'
•
I
I
I
1
i
4
-
t
t
t
.
,
,
'
i
+
t
f
.
[
#6
#
6
1
;
.
.
0
1
+~
~
2
1
1
>
.
l
'21 I
.
0
1
I
~
-
I
I
#8
#
8
1
#
8
n10a
~
0
6
/
l
l
l
4
0
s
'21 I
1
1
,
1
I
O
A
•
.
6
9
I
I
•
I
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
8: SH-114 NB Off-Ramp & Kirkwood Blvd
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
7
Lane GroupØ1 Ø2 Ø4Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)Future Volume (vph)Peak Hour FactorAdj. Flow (vph)Shared Lane Traffic (%)Lane Group Flow (vph)Turn TypeProtected Phases 1 2 4Permitted PhasesDetector PhaseSwitch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0Minimum Split (s)9.5 22.5 22.5Total Split (s) 23.0 25.0 42.0Total Split (%)26% 28% 47%Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0Lost Time Adjust (s)Total Lost Time (s)Lead/Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize? Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max NoneAct Effct Green (s)Actuated g/C Ratiov/c RatioControl DelayQueue DelayTotal DelayLOSApproach DelayApproach LOSQueue Length 50th (ft)Queue Length 95th (ft)Internal Link Dist (ft)Turn Bay Length (ft)Base Capacity (vph)Starvation Cap ReductnSpillback Cap ReductnStorage Cap ReductnReduced v/c RatioIntersection Summary
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
8
:
S
H
-
1
1
4
N
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
A
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
8
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
S
i
g
n
a
l
D
e
l
a
y
:
2
5
.
5
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
:
C
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
U
t
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
6
5
.
2
%
I
C
U
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
C
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
P
e
r
i
o
d
(
m
i
n
)
1
5
d
r
D
e
f
a
c
t
o
R
i
g
h
t
L
a
n
e
.
R
e
c
o
d
e
w
i
t
h
1
t
h
o
u
g
h
l
a
n
e
a
s
a
r
i
g
h
t
l
a
n
e
.
S
p
l
i
t
s
a
n
d
P
h
a
s
e
s
:
8
:
S
H
-
1
1
4
N
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
•
•
[
#
6
;
>
6
1
~
0
1
i
~
4
~
2
/
l
l
l
1
2
•
"
'
"
I
~
-
I
I
#
8
#
8
1
~
0
5
n
1
0
a
~
0
6
/
l
l
l
1
2
1
•
u
.
s
I
-
A
•
.
6
1
•
I
•
•
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
2: Kirkwood Blvd & T W King Rd
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
1
Lane GroupEBL EBT E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)65 24
0
0
1
0
8
9
1
6
6
1
5
2
0
0
9
0
1
3
4
Future Volume (vph)65 24
0
0
1
0
8
9
1
6
6
1
5
2
0
0
9
0
1
3
4
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 190
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
Storage Length (ft)2000
0
0
0
1
5
0
0
0
Storage Lanes11
0
0
0
1
0
1
Taper Length (ft)100
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
Lane Util. Factor1.00 1.00 1.
0
0
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
Frt
0
.
9
8
0
0
.
8
5
0
Flt Protected0.950
0
.
9
5
0
0
.
9
5
0
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1863 18
6
3
0
3
4
6
8
0
0
3
3
6
2
0
0
1
7
7
0
1
5
8
3
Flt Permitted0.950
0
.
9
5
0
0
.
9
5
0
Satd. Flow (perm)1770 1863 18
6
3
0
3
4
6
8
0
0
3
3
6
2
0
0
1
7
7
0
1
5
8
3
Link Speed (mph)30
3
0
3
0
3
0
Link Distance (ft)385
9
8
2
4
8
9
9
0
5
Travel Time (s)8.8
2
2
.
3
1
1
.
1
2
0
.
6
Peak Hour Factor0.89 0.89 0.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
8
9
0
.
8
9
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
8
9
0
.
9
2
0
.
8
9
Adj. Flow (vph)73 27
0
0
1
2
2
4
1
8
7
1
6
5
0
0
1
0
0
1
5
1
Shared Lane Traffic (%)Lane Group Flow (vph) 73 2
7
0
0
1
4
1
1
0
0
1
6
5
0
0
1
0
1
5
1
Enter Blocked Intersection No No
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
Lane AlignmentLeft Left Rig
h
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
Median Width(ft)28
3
5
0
0
Link Offset(ft)
0
0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 1
6
1
6
1
6
1
6
Two way Left Turn LaneHeadway Factor 1.00 1.00 1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
Turning Speed (mph) 159
1
5
9
1
5
9
1
5
9
Sign ControlStop
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Intersection SummaryArea Type:OtherControl Type: UnsignalizedIntersection Capacity Utilization 64.1%
I
C
U
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
C
Analysis Period (min) 15
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
2
:
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
&
T
W
K
i
n
g
R
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
2
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
1
2
5
.
6
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
F
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
6
5
2
4
0
0
1
0
8
9
1
6
6
1
5
2
0
0
9
0
1
3
4
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
6
5
2
4
0
0
1
0
8
9
1
6
6
1
5
2
0
0
9
0
1
3
4
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
0
.
8
9
0
.
8
9
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
8
9
0
.
8
9
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
8
9
0
.
9
2
0
.
8
9
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
7
3
2
7
0
0
1
2
2
4
1
8
7
1
6
5
0
0
1
0
0
1
5
1
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
L
a
n
e
s
1
1
1
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
1
1
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
N
B
S
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
W
B
E
B
S
B
N
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
2
3
2
2
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
L
e
f
t
S
B
N
B
E
B
W
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
L
e
f
t
2
2
3
2
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
R
i
g
h
t
N
B
S
B
W
B
E
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
R
i
g
h
t
2
2
2
3
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
1
3
.
4
1
5
8
.
9
1
7
.
7
1
4
.
2
H
C
M
L
O
S
B
F
C
B
L
a
n
e
N
B
L
n
1
N
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
1
E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
V
o
l
L
e
f
t
,
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
V
o
l
T
h
r
u
,
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
6
9
%
0
%
0
%
V
o
l
R
i
g
h
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
3
1
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
b
y
L
a
n
e
1
5
2
0
6
5
2
4
0
7
2
6
5
2
9
9
1
3
4
L
T
V
o
l
1
5
2
0
6
5
0
0
0
0
9
0
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
V
o
l
0
0
0
2
4
0
7
2
6
3
6
3
0
0
R
T
V
o
l
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
6
6
0
1
3
4
L
a
n
e
F
l
o
w
R
a
t
e
1
6
5
0
7
3
2
7
0
8
1
6
5
9
4
1
0
1
5
1
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
G
r
p
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
D
e
g
r
e
e
o
f
U
t
i
l
(
X
)
0
.
3
9
6
0
0
.
1
7
7
0
.
0
6
2
0
1
.
4
4
2
1
.
0
1
4
0
.
0
2
5
0
.
3
1
5
D
e
p
a
r
t
u
r
e
H
e
a
d
w
a
y
(
H
d
)
9
.
1
1
8
.
5
9
9
9
.
2
5
4
8
.
7
4
1
8
.
7
4
1
6
.
3
6
4
6
.
1
4
1
9
.
2
0
8
7
.
9
8
1
C
o
n
v
e
r
g
e
n
c
e
,
Y
/
N
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
C
a
p
3
9
8
0
3
9
0
4
1
2
0
5
7
1
5
8
8
3
9
1
4
5
3
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
T
i
m
e
6
.
8
1
6
.
2
9
9
6
.
9
5
4
6
.
4
4
1
6
.
4
4
1
4
.
1
1
6
3
.
8
9
3
6
.
9
0
8
5
.
6
8
1
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
4
1
5
0
0
.
1
8
7
0
.
0
6
6
0
1
.
4
2
9
1
.
0
1
0
.
0
2
6
0
.
3
3
3
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
1
7
.
7
1
1
.
3
1
3
.
9
1
2
1
1
.
4
2
2
7
.
1
6
5
.
3
1
2
.
1
1
4
.
3
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
C
N
B
B
N
F
F
B
B
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
-
t
i
l
e
Q
1
.
9
0
0
.
6
0
.
2
0
3
8
.
8
1
5
.
4
0
.
1
1
.
3
'
i
+
,
,
4
'
,
,
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
6: SH-114 SB Frontage Rd/SH-114 SB Of
f
-
R
a
m
p
&
S
o
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
/
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
3
Lane GroupEBL EBT E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)0 248 6
1
7
5
0
5
4
3
1
0
0
0
0
1
9
4
2
4
7
Future Volume (vph)0 248 6
1
7
5
0
5
4
3
1
0
0
0
0
1
9
4
2
4
7
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 190
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
Storage Length (ft)00
0
0
0
0
3
5
0
1
1
0
Storage Lanes01
1
0
0
0
1
0
Taper Length (ft)100
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
Lane Util. Factor1.00 0.95 1.
0
0
1
.
0
0
0
.
9
5
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
5
Frt0.850
0
.
9
5
2
Flt Protected0.
9
5
0
0
.
9
5
0
0
.
9
6
8
Satd. Flow (prot)0 3539 158
3
1
7
7
0
3
5
3
9
0
0
0
0
1
6
1
0
3
1
2
4
0
Flt Permitted0.
9
5
0
0
.
9
5
0
0
.
9
6
8
Satd. Flow (perm)0 3539 158
3
1
7
7
0
3
5
3
9
0
0
0
0
1
6
1
0
3
1
2
4
0
Link Speed (mph)30
3
0
3
0
3
0
Link Distance (ft)1296
4
0
7
1
1
1
6
9
1
6
Travel Time (s)29.5
9
.
3
2
5
.
4
2
0
.
8
Peak Hour Factor0.87 0.87 0.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
Adj. Flow (vph)0 285 7
0
9
5
8
0
4
9
5
0
0
0
0
2
2
3
2
5
4
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
5
0
%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 285
7
0
9
5
8
0
4
9
5
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
6
8
0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
Lane AlignmentLeft Left Rig
h
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
Median Width(ft)40
2
8
1
2
1
2
Link Offset(ft)
0
0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 1
6
1
6
1
6
1
6
Two way Left Turn LaneHeadway Factor 1.00 1.00 1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
Turning Speed (mph) 159
1
5
9
1
5
9
1
5
9
Sign ControlStop
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Intersection SummaryArea Type:OtherControl Type: UnsignalizedIntersection Capacity Utilization 101.5%
I
C
U
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
G
Analysis Period (min) 15
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
6
:
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
R
d
/
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
&
S
o
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
/
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
4
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
7
5
.
1
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
F
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
0
2
4
8
6
1
7
5
0
5
4
3
1
0
0
0
0
1
9
4
2
4
7
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
0
2
4
8
6
1
7
5
0
5
4
3
1
0
0
0
0
1
9
4
2
4
7
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
0
2
8
5
7
0
9
5
8
0
4
9
5
0
0
0
0
2
2
3
2
5
4
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
L
a
n
e
s
0
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
S
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
W
B
E
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
3
3
0
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
L
e
f
t
S
B
W
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
L
e
f
t
3
0
3
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
R
i
g
h
t
S
B
E
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
R
i
g
h
t
0
3
3
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
6
0
.
4
1
0
4
.
3
1
4
.
7
H
C
M
L
O
S
F
F
B
L
a
n
e
E
B
L
n
1
E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
W
B
L
n
3
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
S
B
L
n
3
V
o
l
L
e
f
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
9
9
%
0
%
V
o
l
T
h
r
u
,
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
1
%
2
%
V
o
l
R
i
g
h
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
9
8
%
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
b
y
L
a
n
e
1
2
4
1
2
4
6
1
7
5
0
5
2
1
6
2
1
6
9
7
9
8
4
8
L
T
V
o
l
0
0
0
5
0
5
0
0
9
7
9
7
0
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
V
o
l
1
2
4
1
2
4
0
0
2
1
6
2
1
6
0
1
1
R
T
V
o
l
0
0
6
1
7
0
0
0
0
0
4
7
L
a
n
e
F
l
o
w
R
a
t
e
1
4
3
1
4
3
7
0
9
5
8
0
2
4
8
2
4
8
1
1
1
1
1
3
5
5
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
G
r
p
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
D
e
g
r
e
e
o
f
U
t
i
l
(
X
)
0
.
3
1
0
.
3
1
1
.
0
6
7
1
.
3
1
0
.
5
2
5
0
.
4
0
6
0
.
2
7
3
0
.
2
7
5
0
.
1
1
7
D
e
p
a
r
t
u
r
e
H
e
a
d
w
a
y
(
H
d
)
8
.
3
4
1
8
.
3
4
1
5
.
8
5
9
8
.
3
5
7
7
.
8
4
8
6
.
0
8
1
9
.
2
5
4
9
.
2
4
9
8
.
0
4
1
C
o
n
v
e
r
g
e
n
c
e
,
Y
/
N
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
C
a
p
4
3
3
4
3
3
6
2
4
4
4
1
4
6
3
5
9
7
3
9
0
3
9
1
4
4
9
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
T
i
m
e
6
.
0
4
1
6
.
0
4
1
3
.
5
5
9
6
.
0
5
7
5
.
5
4
8
3
.
7
8
1
6
.
9
5
4
6
.
9
4
9
5
.
7
4
1
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
3
3
0
.
3
3
1
.
1
3
6
1
.
3
1
5
0
.
5
3
6
0
.
4
1
5
0
.
2
8
5
0
.
2
8
9
0
.
1
2
2
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
1
4
.
7
1
4
.
7
7
8
.
8
1
7
9
.
8
1
8
.
9
1
2
.
9
1
5
.
4
1
5
.
4
1
1
.
8
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
B
B
F
F
C
B
C
C
B
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
-
t
i
l
e
Q
1
.
3
1
.
3
1
8
.
5
2
5
.
1
3
2
1
.
1
1
.
1
0
.
4
_,.; -l'
.
-
-
'
-
~
t
,
,
.
'
-
.
!
.
.
'
•
•
•
•
++ .,,
'
i
+
+
'
i
4
f
.
I I
7
•
•
+
+
.
,
,
'
i
+
+
'
i
4
f
.
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
8: SH-114 NB Off-Ramp/SH-114 NB Fron
t
a
g
e
R
d
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
5
Lane GroupEBL EBT E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 366 13
1
0
0
6
8
8
7
6
3
2
9
5
8
9
6
8
3
0
0
0
Future Volume (vph) 366 13
1
0
0
6
8
8
7
6
3
2
9
5
8
9
6
8
3
0
0
0
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 190
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
Storage Length (ft)00
0
0
0
3
4
0
0
0
Storage Lanes10
0
1
1
0
0
0
Taper Length (ft)100
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
Lane Util. Factor1.00 0.95 1.
0
0
1
.
0
0
0
.
9
5
1
.
0
0
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
5
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
Frt
0
.
8
5
0
0
.
9
8
8
Flt Protected0.950
0
.
9
5
0
0
.
9
9
9
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 3539
0
0
3
5
3
9
1
5
8
3
1
6
1
0
3
3
4
6
0
0
0
0
Flt Permitted0.950
0
.
9
5
0
0
.
9
9
9
Satd. Flow (perm)1770 3539
0
0
3
5
3
9
1
5
8
3
1
6
1
0
3
3
4
6
0
0
0
0
Link Speed (mph)30
3
0
3
0
3
0
Link Distance (ft)407
3
2
0
1
1
3
5
1
1
7
5
Travel Time (s)9.3
7
.
3
2
5
.
8
2
6
.
7
Peak Hour Factor0.95 0.95 0.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
Adj. Flow (vph)385 138
0
0
7
2
4
8
0
3
3
1
1
9
4
3
8
7
0
0
0
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
1
0
%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 385 13
8
0
0
7
2
4
8
0
3
2
8
0
1
0
6
1
0
0
0
0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
Lane AlignmentLeft Left Rig
h
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
Median Width(ft)28
1
6
1
2
1
2
Link Offset(ft)
0
0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 1
6
1
6
1
6
1
6
Two way Left Turn LaneHeadway Factor 1.00 1.00 1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
Turning Speed (mph) 159
1
5
9
1
5
9
1
5
9
Sign ControlStop
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Intersection SummaryArea Type:OtherControl Type: UnsignalizedIntersection Capacity Utilization 101.5%
I
C
U
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
G
Analysis Period (min) 15
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
8
:
S
H
-
1
1
4
N
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
/
S
H
-
1
1
4
N
B
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
R
d
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
6
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
1
9
5
.
3
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
F
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
3
6
6
1
3
1
0
0
6
8
8
7
6
3
2
9
5
8
9
6
8
3
0
0
0
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
3
6
6
1
3
1
0
0
6
8
8
7
6
3
2
9
5
8
9
6
8
3
0
0
0
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
3
8
5
1
3
8
0
0
7
2
4
8
0
3
3
1
1
9
4
3
8
7
0
0
0
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
L
a
n
e
s
1
2
0
0
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
N
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
W
B
E
B
O
p
p
o
s
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
3
3
0
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
L
e
f
t
N
B
E
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
L
e
f
t
0
3
3
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
R
i
g
h
t
N
B
W
B
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
e
s
R
i
g
h
t
3
0
3
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
1
6
4
.
5
2
3
9
.
8
1
5
6
.
7
H
C
M
L
O
S
F
F
F
L
a
n
e
N
B
L
n
1
N
B
L
n
2
N
B
L
n
3
E
B
L
n
1
E
B
L
n
2
E
B
L
n
3
W
B
L
n
1
W
B
L
n
2
W
B
L
n
3
V
o
l
L
e
f
t
,
%
1
0
0
%
6
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
V
o
l
T
h
r
u
,
%
0
%
9
4
%
8
4
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
1
0
0
%
0
%
V
o
l
R
i
g
h
t
,
%
0
%
0
%
1
6
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
0
%
1
0
0
%
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
b
y
L
a
n
e
2
6
6
4
7
8
5
3
1
3
6
6
6
6
6
6
3
4
4
3
4
4
7
6
3
L
T
V
o
l
2
6
6
3
0
0
3
6
6
0
0
0
0
0
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
V
o
l
0
4
4
8
4
4
8
0
6
6
6
6
3
4
4
3
4
4
0
R
T
V
o
l
0
0
8
3
0
0
0
0
0
7
6
3
L
a
n
e
F
l
o
w
R
a
t
e
2
7
9
5
0
3
5
5
9
3
8
5
6
9
6
9
3
6
2
3
6
2
8
0
3
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
G
r
p
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
D
e
g
r
e
e
o
f
U
t
i
l
(
X
)
0
.
7
3
1
1
.
2
5
1
.
3
6
8
1
.
3
6
3
0
.
2
3
4
0
.
2
0
1
1
.
0
3
1
1
.
0
3
1
1
.
7
4
6
D
e
p
a
r
t
u
r
e
H
e
a
d
w
a
y
(
H
d
)
1
0
.
7
2
6
1
0
.
2
4
4
1
0
.
1
1
2
.
7
3
6
1
2
.
2
3
7
1
0
.
3
8
5
1
2
.
0
3
1
2
.
0
3
9
.
5
0
2
C
o
n
v
e
r
g
e
n
c
e
,
Y
/
N
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
C
a
p
3
4
1
3
5
7
3
6
3
2
8
9
2
9
6
3
4
7
3
0
4
3
0
4
3
9
4
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
T
i
m
e
8
.
4
2
6
7
.
9
4
4
7
.
8
1
0
.
3
9
5
9
.
8
7
8
8
.
0
8
5
9
.
7
3
9
.
7
3
7
.
2
0
2
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
8
1
8
1
.
4
0
9
1
.
5
4
1
.
3
3
2
0
.
2
3
3
0
.
1
9
9
1
.
1
9
1
1
.
1
9
1
2
.
0
3
8
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
3
7
.
7
1
6
3
.
7
2
0
9
.
9
2
1
7
.
3
1
8
.
6
1
5
.
7
9
6
.
7
9
6
.
7
3
6
8
.
8
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
E
F
F
F
C
C
F
F
F
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
-
t
i
l
e
Q
5
.
5
1
9
.
5
2
4
2
0
.
1
0
.
9
0
.
7
1
1
.
4
1
1
.
4
4
1
.
3
_,.; -l'
.
-
-
'
-
~
t
,
,
.
'
-
.
!
.
.
'
•
•
•
•
'I ++
+
+
,
,
'
I
4
'
f
.
I
I
I
I
•
•
'
I
+
+
+
+
,
,
'
I
4
'
f
.
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
37: Driveway 2 & Kirkwood Blvd
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
7
Lane GroupEBT EBR W
B
L
W
B
T
N
B
L
N
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)89 34
0
1
3
7
6
0
5
Future Volume (vph)89 34
0
1
3
7
6
0
5
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 190
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
Lane Util. Factor0.91 0.91 0.
9
1
0
.
9
1
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
Frt0.959
0
.
8
6
5
Flt ProtectedSatd. Flow (prot)4877 0
0
5
0
8
5
1
6
1
1
0
Flt PermittedSatd. Flow (perm)4877 0
0
5
0
8
5
1
6
1
1
0
Link Speed (mph)30
3
0
3
0
Link Distance (ft)219
3
8
5
3
0
7
Travel Time (s)5.0
8
.
8
7
.
0
Peak Hour Factor0.92 0.92 0.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
Adj. Flow (vph)97 37
0
1
4
9
6
0
5
Shared Lane Traffic (%)Lane Group Flow (vph) 134 0
0
1
4
9
6
5
0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
Lane Alignment Left Right L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
Median Width(ft)12
1
2
1
2
Link Offset(ft)0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft)16
1
6
1
6
Two way Left Turn LaneHeadway Factor1.00 1.00 1.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
Turning Speed (mph)9 15
1
5
9
Sign ControlFreeF
r
e
e
S
t
o
p
Intersection SummaryArea Type:OtherControl Type: UnsignalizedIntersection Capacity Utilization 36.6%
I
C
U
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
A
Analysis Period (min) 15
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
3
7
:
D
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
2
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
8
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
0
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
N
B
L
N
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
8
9
3
4
0
1
3
7
6
0
5
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
8
9
3
4
0
1
3
7
6
0
5
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
P
e
d
s
,
#
/
h
r
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
R
T
C
h
a
n
n
e
l
i
z
e
d
-
N
o
n
e
-
N
o
n
e
-
N
o
n
e
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
-
-
-
-
0
-
V
e
h
i
n
M
e
d
i
a
n
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
,
#
0
-
-
0
0
-
G
r
a
d
e
,
%
0
-
-
0
0
-
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
9
7
3
7
0
1
4
9
6
0
5
M
a
j
o
r
/
M
i
n
o
r
M
a
j
o
r
1
M
a
j
o
r
2
M
i
n
o
r
1
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
F
l
o
w
A
l
l
0
0
1
3
4
0
7
1
3
6
7
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
1
1
5
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
5
9
8
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
-
-
5
.
3
4
-
5
.
7
4
7
.
1
4
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
1
-
-
-
-
6
.
6
4
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
2
-
-
-
-
6
.
0
4
-
F
o
l
l
o
w
-
u
p
H
d
w
y
-
-
3
.
1
2
-
3
.
8
2
3
.
9
2
P
o
t
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
-
-
1
0
0
2
-
4
3
1
8
3
4
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
8
1
0
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
4
6
7
-
P
l
a
t
o
o
n
b
l
o
c
k
e
d
,
%
-
-
-
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
-
-
1
0
0
2
-
4
3
1
8
3
4
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
2
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
-
-
-
-
4
3
1
-
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
8
1
0
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
4
6
7
-
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
N
B
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
0
0
9
.
3
H
C
M
L
O
S
A
M
i
n
o
r
L
a
n
e
/
M
a
j
o
r
M
v
m
t
N
B
L
n
1
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
v
e
h
/
h
)
8
3
4
-
-
1
0
0
2
-
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
0
0
7
-
-
-
-
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
(
s
)
9
.
3
-
-
0
-
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
A
-
-
A
-
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
%
t
i
l
e
Q
(
v
e
h
)
0
-
-
0
-
•
•
•
•
I
I
•
•
I
I
I
t
t
t
+
.
f
t
t
V
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
•
•
I
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
40: Driveway 1/The Vista Dr & Kirkwood
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
9
Lane GroupEBL EBT E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)17 118
9
6
7
1
3
6
9
0
8
3
0
5
0
0
1
2
7
Future Volume (vph)17 118
9
6
7
1
3
6
9
0
8
3
0
5
0
0
1
2
7
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 190
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
1
9
0
0
Storage Length (ft)70100
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Lanes11
1
0
0
0
0
1
Taper Length (ft)50
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
Lane Util. Factor1.00 0.91 1.
0
0
1
.
0
0
0
.
9
1
0
.
9
1
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
Frt0.850
0
.
9
9
3
0
.
8
5
0
Flt Protected0.9500.
9
5
0
0
.
9
5
5
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 5085 158
3
1
7
7
0
5
0
8
5
0
0
1
7
6
6
0
0
1
8
6
3
1
5
8
3
Flt Permitted0.9500.
9
5
0
0
.
9
5
5
Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 5085 15
8
3
1
7
7
0
5
0
8
5
0
0
1
7
6
6
0
0
1
8
6
3
1
5
8
3
Link Speed (mph)30
3
0
3
0
3
0
Link Distance (ft)327
2
0
8
3
4
0
4
1
6
Travel Time (s)7.4
4
.
7
7
.
7
9
.
5
Peak Hour Factor0.92 0.92 0.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
Adj. Flow (vph)18 128 1
0
4
8
1
4
8
8
0
9
0
0
5
0
0
1
3
8
Shared Lane Traffic (%)Lane Group Flow (vph) 18 128
1
0
4
8
1
4
8
8
0
0
9
5
0
0
0
1
3
8
Enter Blocked Intersection No No
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
Lane AlignmentLeft Left Rig
h
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
L
e
f
t
L
e
f
t
R
i
g
h
t
Median Width(ft)12
1
2
0
0
Link Offset(ft)
0
0
0
0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 1
6
1
6
1
6
1
6
Two way Left Turn LaneHeadway Factor 1.00 1.00 1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
Turning Speed (mph) 159
1
5
9
1
5
9
1
5
9
Sign ControlFree
F
r
e
e
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
Intersection SummaryArea Type:OtherControl Type: UnsignalizedIntersection Capacity Utilization 49.2%
I
C
U
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
A
Analysis Period (min) 15
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
4
0
:
D
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
1
/
T
h
e
V
i
s
t
a
D
r
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
/
v
e
h
4
.
1
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
E
B
L
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
1
7
1
1
8
9
6
7
1
3
6
9
0
8
3
0
5
0
0
1
2
7
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
,
v
e
h
/
h
1
7
1
1
8
9
6
7
1
3
6
9
0
8
3
0
5
0
0
1
2
7
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
P
e
d
s
,
#
/
h
r
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
i
g
n
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
F
r
e
e
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
S
t
o
p
R
T
C
h
a
n
n
e
l
i
z
e
d
-
-
N
o
n
e
-
-
N
o
n
e
-
-
N
o
n
e
-
-
N
o
n
e
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
7
0
-
1
0
0
1
0
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
V
e
h
i
n
M
e
d
i
a
n
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
,
#
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
G
r
a
d
e
,
%
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
9
2
H
e
a
v
y
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
%
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
M
v
m
t
F
l
o
w
1
8
1
2
8
1
0
4
8
1
4
8
8
0
9
0
0
5
0
0
1
3
8
M
a
j
o
r
/
M
i
n
o
r
M
a
j
o
r
1
M
a
j
o
r
2
M
i
n
o
r
1
M
i
n
o
r
2
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
F
l
o
w
A
l
l
1
4
8
8
0
0
1
2
8
0
0
7
7
5
1
6
6
8
6
4
1
5
9
1
1
6
6
8
7
4
4
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
6
5
1
6
5
-
1
5
0
3
1
5
0
3
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
6
1
0
1
5
0
3
-
8
8
1
6
5
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
5
.
3
4
-
-
5
.
3
4
-
-
6
.
4
4
6
.
5
4
7
.
1
4
6
.
4
4
6
.
5
4
7
.
1
4
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
7
.
3
4
5
.
5
4
-
7
.
3
4
5
.
5
4
-
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
H
d
w
y
S
t
g
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
6
.
7
4
5
.
5
4
-
6
.
7
4
5
.
5
4
-
F
o
l
l
o
w
-
u
p
H
d
w
y
3
.
1
2
-
-
3
.
1
2
-
-
3
.
8
2
4
.
0
2
3
.
9
2
3
.
8
2
4
.
0
2
3
.
9
2
P
o
t
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
2
2
6
-
-
1
0
0
8
-
-
3
4
6
9
5
8
3
7
1
1
3
9
5
3
0
6
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
7
3
4
7
6
1
-
8
8
1
8
3
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
4
0
9
1
8
3
-
8
3
7
7
6
1
-
P
l
a
t
o
o
n
b
l
o
c
k
e
d
,
%
-
-
-
-
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
1
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
2
2
6
-
-
1
0
0
8
-
-
1
7
7
8
7
8
3
7
1
0
5
8
7
3
0
6
M
o
v
C
a
p
-
2
M
a
n
e
u
v
e
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
7
7
8
7
-
1
0
5
8
7
-
S
t
a
g
e
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
6
7
6
7
0
0
-
8
1
1
8
2
-
S
t
a
g
e
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
2
3
1
8
2
-
7
6
5
7
0
0
-
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
E
B
W
B
N
B
S
B
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
,
s
1
.
6
0
4
3
.
6
2
6
.
1
H
C
M
L
O
S
E
D
M
i
n
o
r
L
a
n
e
/
M
a
j
o
r
M
v
m
t
N
B
L
n
1
E
B
L
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
S
B
L
n
1
S
B
L
n
2
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
v
e
h
/
h
)
1
8
5
2
2
6
-
-
1
0
0
8
-
-
-
3
0
6
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
V
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
5
1
7
0
.
0
8
2
-
-
0
.
0
0
8
-
-
-
0
.
4
5
1
H
C
M
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
(
s
)
4
3
.
6
2
2
.
3
-
-
8
.
6
-
-
0
2
6
.
1
H
C
M
L
a
n
e
L
O
S
E
C
-
-
A
-
-
A
D
H
C
M
9
5
t
h
%
t
i
l
e
Q
(
v
e
h
)
2
.
6
0
.
3
-
-
0
-
-
-
2
.
2
•
•
•
•
4
'
.
,
,
I
•
•
I
7
I
'
I
t
t
t
'
f
'
H
t
f
.
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
•
•
I
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
2: Driveway 4/T W King Rd & Kirkwood Bl
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
1
Lane GroupEBL EBT E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)65 24
0
0
1
0
8
9
1
6
6
1
5
2
0
0
9
0
1
3
4
Future Volume (vph)65 24
0
0
1
0
8
9
1
6
6
1
5
2
0
0
9
0
1
3
4
Peak Hour Factor0.89 0.89 0.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
8
9
0
.
8
9
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
9
2
0
.
8
9
0
.
9
2
0
.
8
9
Adj. Flow (vph)73 27
0
0
1
2
2
4
1
8
7
1
6
5
0
0
1
0
0
1
5
1
Shared Lane Traffic (%)Lane Group Flow (vph) 73 2
7
0
0
1
4
1
1
0
0
1
6
5
0
0
1
0
1
5
1
Turn TypePerm NA Perm
N
A
P
e
r
m
N
A
P
e
r
m
N
A
P
e
r
m
Protected Phases
4
8
2
6
Permitted Phases44
8
2
6
6
Detector Phase44
4
8
8
2
2
6
6
6
Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
Minimum Split (s)22.5 22.5 22
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
Total Split (s)67.0 67.0 67
.
0
6
7
.
0
6
7
.
0
2
3
.
0
2
3
.
0
2
3
.
0
2
3
.
0
2
3
.
0
Total Split (%)74.4% 74.4% 74.4%
7
4
.
4
%
7
4
.
4
%
2
5
.
6
%
2
5
.
6
%
2
5
.
6
%
2
5
.
6
%
2
5
.
6
%
Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
Total Lost Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5
4
.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Ma
x
C
-
M
a
x
C
-
M
a
x
M
a
x
M
a
x
M
a
x
M
a
x
M
a
x
Act Effct Green (s)62.5 62.5
6
2
.
5
1
8
.
5
1
8
.
5
1
8
.
5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.69 0.69
0
.
6
9
0
.
2
1
0
.
2
1
0
.
2
1
v/c Ratio0.39 0.01
0
.
5
8
0
.
3
0
0
.
0
4
0
.
3
7
Control Delay8.3 1.8
7
.
9
3
2
.
1
2
9
.
3
1
3
.
9
Queue Delay0.0 0.0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
Total Delay8.3 1.8
7
.
9
3
2
.
1
2
9
.
3
1
3
.
9
LOSA A
A
C
C
B
Approach Delay6.5
7
.
9
3
2
.
1
1
4
.
9
Approach LOSA
A
C
B
Queue Length 50th (ft) 5 0
1
7
5
4
2
5
2
1
Queue Length 95th (ft) m13 m1
2
1
9
7
1
1
8
7
2
Internal Link Dist (ft)305
9
0
2
4
0
9
8
2
5
Turn Bay Length (ft) 200Base Capacity (vph) 187 24
5
7
2
4
2
1
5
4
6
2
4
8
4
0
9
Starvation Cap Reductn 0
0
0
0
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn0
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio0.39 0.01
0
.
5
8
0
.
3
0
0
.
0
4
0
.
3
7
Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 90Actuated Cycle Length: 90Offset: 84 (93%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBTL,
S
t
a
r
t
o
f
G
r
e
e
n
Natural Cycle: 60Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.58
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
2
:
D
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
4
/
T
W
K
i
n
g
R
d
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
2
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
S
i
g
n
a
l
D
e
l
a
y
:
1
0
.
6
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
:
B
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
U
t
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
6
5
.
9
%
I
C
U
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
C
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
P
e
r
i
o
d
(
m
i
n
)
1
5
m
V
o
l
u
m
e
f
o
r
9
5
t
h
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
i
l
e
q
u
e
u
e
i
s
m
e
t
e
r
e
d
b
y
u
p
s
t
r
e
a
m
s
i
g
n
a
l
.
S
p
l
i
t
s
a
n
d
P
h
a
s
e
s
:
2
:
D
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
4
/
T
W
K
i
n
g
R
d
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
.,> -..
f
-
'
-
~
t
,
,
.
'
.
+
~
•
•
'i ++ .,,
4
'
f
>
4
'
f
>
4
'
.
,
,
I
I
&
.
t
:
:
t
t
~
:
l
•
•
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
6: SH-114 SB Frontage Rd/SH-114 SB Of
f
-
R
a
m
p
&
S
o
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
/
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
3
Lane GroupEBL EBT E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)0 248 6
1
7
5
0
5
4
3
1
0
0
0
0
1
9
4
2
4
7
Future Volume (vph)0 248 6
1
7
5
0
5
4
3
1
0
0
0
0
1
9
4
2
4
7
Peak Hour Factor0.87 0.87 0.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
0
.
8
7
Adj. Flow (vph)0 285 7
0
9
5
8
0
4
9
5
0
0
0
0
2
2
3
2
5
4
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
4
4
%
5
0
%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 285
7
0
9
3
2
5
7
5
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
6
8
0
Turn TypeNA Perm
p
m
+
p
t
N
A
P
e
r
m
N
A
Protected Phases2
1
1
2
4
Permitted Phases2
1
2
4
Detector Phase2
2
1
1
2
4
4
Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
Minimum Split (s)22.5 22.
5
9
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
Total Split (s)43.9 43.
9
1
4
.
8
3
1
.
3
3
1
.
3
Total Split (%)48.8% 48.8%
1
6
.
4
%
3
4
.
8
%
3
4
.
8
%
Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
Total Lost Time (s)4.5 4.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
Lead/LagLead Lea
d
L
a
g
Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Ye
s
Y
e
s
Recall Mode Max M
a
x
M
i
n
N
o
n
e
N
o
n
e
Act Effct Green (s)39.4 39.
4
4
9
.
7
4
9
.
7
2
6
.
8
2
6
.
8
Actuated g/C Ratio0.44 0.4
4
0
.
5
5
0
.
5
5
0
.
3
0
0
.
3
0
v/c Ratio0.18 0.6
5
0
.
5
3
0
.
5
1
0
.
2
3
0
.
1
7
Control Delay15.9 4.
5
9
.
3
6
.
6
2
5
.
5
1
6
.
3
Queue Delay0.0 0.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
Total Delay15.9 4.
5
9
.
3
6
.
6
2
5
.
5
1
6
.
3
L O SB
A
A
A
C
B
Approach Delay7.8
7
.
4
1
9
.
9
Approach LOSA
A
B
Queue Length 50th (ft)50
0
6
1
7
1
5
1
2
5
Queue Length 95th (ft)73 5
1
m
8
5
m
8
6
9
5
4
8
Internal Link Dist (ft)1216
3
2
7
1
0
3
6
8
3
6
Turn Bay Length (ft)
3
5
0
Base Capacity (vph) 1549 10
9
1
6
1
1
1
4
7
5
4
7
9
9
6
8
Starvation Cap Reductn0
0
0
8
0
0
Spillback Cap Reductn0
0
0
0
0
0
Storage Cap Reductn0
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.18 0.
6
5
0
.
5
3
0
.
5
1
0
.
2
3
0
.
1
7
Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 90Actuated Cycle Length: 90Offset: 88 (98%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Gre
e
n
Natural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.02
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
6
:
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
R
d
/
S
H
-
1
1
4
S
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
&
S
o
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
/
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
4
L
a
n
e
G
r
o
u
p
Ø
5
Ø
6
Ø
8
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
v
p
h
)
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
v
p
h
)
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
A
d
j
.
F
l
o
w
(
v
p
h
)
S
h
a
r
e
d
L
a
n
e
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
(
%
)
L
a
n
e
G
r
o
u
p
F
l
o
w
(
v
p
h
)
T
u
r
n
T
y
p
e
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
e
d
P
h
a
s
e
s
5
6
8
P
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d
P
h
a
s
e
s
D
e
t
e
c
t
o
r
P
h
a
s
e
S
w
i
t
c
h
P
h
a
s
e
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
I
n
i
t
i
a
l
(
s
)
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
S
p
l
i
t
(
s
)
9
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
T
o
t
a
l
S
p
l
i
t
(
s
)
1
0
.
0
4
8
.
7
3
1
.
3
T
o
t
a
l
S
p
l
i
t
(
%
)
1
1
%
5
4
%
3
5
%
Y
e
l
l
o
w
T
i
m
e
(
s
)
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
A
l
l
-
R
e
d
T
i
m
e
(
s
)
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
L
o
s
t
T
i
m
e
A
d
j
u
s
t
(
s
)
T
o
t
a
l
L
o
s
t
T
i
m
e
(
s
)
L
e
a
d
/
L
a
g
L
a
g
L
e
a
d
L
e
a
d
-
L
a
g
O
p
t
i
m
i
z
e
?
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
R
e
c
a
l
l
M
o
d
e
M
i
n
C
-
M
a
x
N
o
n
e
A
c
t
E
f
f
c
t
G
r
e
e
n
(
s
)
A
c
t
u
a
t
e
d
g
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
v
/
c
R
a
t
i
o
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
Q
u
e
u
e
D
e
l
a
y
T
o
t
a
l
D
e
l
a
y
L
O
S
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
D
e
l
a
y
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
L
O
S
Q
u
e
u
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
5
0
t
h
(
f
t
)
Q
u
e
u
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
9
5
t
h
(
f
t
)
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
L
i
n
k
D
i
s
t
(
f
t
)
T
u
r
n
B
a
y
L
e
n
g
t
h
(
f
t
)
B
a
s
e
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
v
p
h
)
S
t
a
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
R
e
d
u
c
t
n
S
p
i
l
l
b
a
c
k
C
a
p
R
e
d
u
c
t
n
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
C
a
p
R
e
d
u
c
t
n
R
e
d
u
c
e
d
v
/
c
R
a
t
i
o
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
•
•
•
•
I I
7
I
I
I
I
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
6: SH-114 SB Frontage Rd/SH-114 SB Of
f
-
R
a
m
p
&
S
o
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
/
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
5
Intersection Signal Delay: 9.1
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
:
A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.7%
I
C
U
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
D
Analysis Period (min) 15m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstrea
m
s
i
g
n
a
l
.
Splits and Phases: 6: SH-114 SB Frontage Rd/SH-114 SB
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
&
S
o
l
a
n
a
B
l
v
d
/
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
8
:
S
H
-
1
1
4
N
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
/
S
H
-
1
1
4
N
B
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
R
d
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
6
L
a
n
e
G
r
o
u
p
E
B
L
E
B
T
E
B
R
W
B
L
W
B
T
W
B
R
N
B
L
N
B
T
N
B
R
S
B
L
S
B
T
S
B
R
L
a
n
e
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
v
p
h
)
3
6
6
1
3
1
0
0
6
8
8
7
6
3
2
9
5
8
9
6
8
3
0
0
0
F
u
t
u
r
e
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
v
p
h
)
3
6
6
1
3
1
0
0
6
8
8
7
6
3
2
9
5
8
9
6
8
3
0
0
0
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
F
a
c
t
o
r
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
9
0
.
9
9
0
.
9
9
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
0
.
9
5
A
d
j
.
F
l
o
w
(
v
p
h
)
3
8
5
1
3
8
0
0
7
2
4
8
0
3
2
9
8
9
0
5
8
4
0
0
0
S
h
a
r
e
d
L
a
n
e
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
(
%
)
5
0
%
1
0
%
L
a
n
e
G
r
o
u
p
F
l
o
w
(
v
p
h
)
1
9
2
3
3
1
0
0
7
2
4
8
0
3
2
6
8
1
0
1
9
0
0
0
0
T
u
r
n
T
y
p
e
p
m
+
p
t
N
A
N
A
P
e
r
m
P
e
r
m
N
A
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
e
d
P
h
a
s
e
s
5
5
6
6
8
P
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d
P
h
a
s
e
s
5
6
6
8
D
e
t
e
c
t
o
r
P
h
a
s
e
5
5
6
6
6
8
8
S
w
i
t
c
h
P
h
a
s
e
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
I
n
i
t
i
a
l
(
s
)
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
S
p
l
i
t
(
s
)
9
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
2
2
.
5
T
o
t
a
l
S
p
l
i
t
(
s
)
1
0
.
0
4
8
.
7
4
8
.
7
3
1
.
3
3
1
.
3
T
o
t
a
l
S
p
l
i
t
(
%
)
1
1
.
1
%
5
4
.
1
%
5
4
.
1
%
3
4
.
8
%
3
4
.
8
%
Y
e
l
l
o
w
T
i
m
e
(
s
)
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
3
.
5
A
l
l
-
R
e
d
T
i
m
e
(
s
)
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
L
o
s
t
T
i
m
e
A
d
j
u
s
t
(
s
)
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
L
o
s
t
T
i
m
e
(
s
)
4
.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
4
.
5
L
e
a
d
/
L
a
g
L
a
g
L
e
a
d
L
e
a
d
L
e
a
d
-
L
a
g
O
p
t
i
m
i
z
e
?
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
Y
e
s
R
e
c
a
l
l
M
o
d
e
M
i
n
C
-
M
a
x
C
-
M
a
x
N
o
n
e
N
o
n
e
A
c
t
E
f
f
c
t
G
r
e
e
n
(
s
)
4
9
.
7
4
9
.
7
4
4
.
2
4
4
.
2
2
6
.
8
2
6
.
8
A
c
t
u
a
t
e
d
g
/
C
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
5
5
0
.
5
5
0
.
4
9
0
.
4
9
0
.
3
0
0
.
3
0
v
/
c
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
5
4
0
.
3
0
0
.
4
2
0
.
9
9
0
.
5
6
1
.
0
2
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
D
e
l
a
y
2
0
.
8
9
.
0
1
2
.
5
4
3
.
7
3
2
.
0
6
4
.
9
Q
u
e
u
e
D
e
l
a
y
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
0
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
D
e
l
a
y
2
0
.
8
9
.
0
1
2
.
5
4
3
.
7
3
2
.
0
6
4
.
9
L
O
S
C
A
B
D
C
E
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
D
e
l
a
y
1
3
.
3
2
8
.
9
5
8
.
0
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
L
O
S
B
C
E
Q
u
e
u
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
5
0
t
h
(
f
t
)
4
8
4
1
1
1
0
2
2
6
1
4
0
~
3
2
4
Q
u
e
u
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
9
5
t
h
(
f
t
)
9
8
6
2
1
4
3
#
6
6
0
2
2
7
#
4
6
9
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
L
i
n
k
D
i
s
t
(
f
t
)
3
2
7
2
4
0
1
0
5
5
1
0
9
5
T
u
r
n
B
a
y
L
e
n
g
t
h
(
f
t
)
B
a
s
e
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
v
p
h
)
3
5
6
1
0
9
0
1
7
3
8
8
1
4
4
7
9
1
0
0
3
S
t
a
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
R
e
d
u
c
t
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
p
i
l
l
b
a
c
k
C
a
p
R
e
d
u
c
t
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
C
a
p
R
e
d
u
c
t
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
R
e
d
u
c
e
d
v
/
c
R
a
t
i
o
0
.
5
4
0
.
3
0
0
.
4
2
0
.
9
9
0
.
5
6
1
.
0
2
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
C
y
c
l
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
:
9
0
A
c
t
u
a
t
e
d
C
y
c
l
e
L
e
n
g
t
h
:
9
0
O
f
f
s
e
t
:
8
8
(
9
8
%
)
,
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
d
t
o
p
h
a
s
e
6
:
E
B
W
B
,
S
t
a
r
t
o
f
G
r
e
e
n
N
a
t
u
r
a
l
C
y
c
l
e
:
9
0
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
T
y
p
e
:
A
c
t
u
a
t
e
d
-
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
d
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
v
/
c
R
a
t
i
o
:
1
.
0
2
_
,
)
-
-
-
,
.
f
+
-
'
-
"
t
,
.
.
\
.
+
.
,
'
•
I
I
I
1
i
4
-
t
t
t
.
,
,
'
i
+
t
f
.
[
#6 #6
1
~
0
1
+~ ~2 l5Ll1 I ..,,91
I
1
4
,
8
1
I
I
#8 #8
1
#
8
n10a '~06nn
~
0
5
5L3s I -11
I
I
O
I
I
I
•
I
HCM 2010 Intersection Capacity Analysis
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
8: SH-114 NB Off-Ramp/SH-114 NB Fron
t
a
g
e
R
d
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
TIA for Southwest Meadows in Southlake, Texas
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
Feb 2018--MS
P
a
g
e
7
Lane GroupØ1 Ø2 Ø4Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)Future Volume (vph)Peak Hour FactorAdj. Flow (vph)Shared Lane Traffic (%)Lane Group Flow (vph)Turn TypeProtected Phases 1 2 4Permitted PhasesDetector PhaseSwitch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0Minimum Split (s)9.5 22.5 22.5Total Split (s) 14.8 43.9 31.3Total Split (%)16% 49% 35%Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0Lost Time Adjust (s)Total Lost Time (s)Lead/Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize? Yes YesRecall Mode Min Max NoneAct Effct Green (s)Actuated g/C Ratiov/c RatioControl DelayQueue DelayTotal DelayLOSApproach DelayApproach LOSQueue Length 50th (ft)Queue Length 95th (ft)Internal Link Dist (ft)Turn Bay Length (ft)Base Capacity (vph)Starvation Cap ReductnSpillback Cap ReductnStorage Cap ReductnReduced v/c RatioIntersection Summary
H
C
M
2
0
1
0
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
0
1
9
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
+
S
i
t
e
8
:
S
H
-
1
1
4
N
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
/
S
H
-
1
1
4
N
B
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
R
d
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
P
M
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
I
A
f
o
r
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
i
n
S
o
u
t
h
l
a
k
e
,
T
e
x
a
s
S
y
n
c
h
r
o
9
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
e
b
2
0
1
8
-
-
M
S
P
a
g
e
8
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
S
i
g
n
a
l
D
e
l
a
y
:
3
7
.
7
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
L
O
S
:
D
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
U
t
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
7
8
.
7
%
I
C
U
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
D
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
P
e
r
i
o
d
(
m
i
n
)
1
5
~
V
o
l
u
m
e
e
x
c
e
e
d
s
c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
,
q
u
e
u
e
i
s
t
h
e
o
r
e
t
i
c
a
l
l
y
i
n
f
i
n
i
t
e
.
Q
u
e
u
e
s
h
o
w
n
i
s
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
a
f
t
e
r
t
w
o
c
y
c
l
e
s
.
#
9
5
t
h
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
i
l
e
v
o
l
u
m
e
e
x
c
e
e
d
s
c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
,
q
u
e
u
e
m
a
y
b
e
l
o
n
g
e
r
.
Q
u
e
u
e
s
h
o
w
n
i
s
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
a
f
t
e
r
t
w
o
c
y
c
l
e
s
.
S
p
l
i
t
s
a
n
d
P
h
a
s
e
s
:
8
:
S
H
-
1
1
4
N
B
O
f
f
-
R
a
m
p
/
S
H
-
1
1
4
N
B
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
R
d
&
K
i
r
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
•
•
;
;
6
;
;
6
1
#
6
i
-
.
0
4
~
2
'
7
0
1
3
L
3
s
I
.
.
,
.
g
,
I
1
4
.
8
1
I
I
;
;
S
;
;
S
1
~
0
5
t
0
8
~
0
6
/
R
)
I
L
3
1
1
-
.
7
1
I
1
0
1
I
I
•
•