No preview available
Item 6A TIAWay-Horn and AssoClateS, Inc. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: Mr. Marco Martinez, P.E., LEED AP ~r Vision Southwest Development 3 ~ From: Jeff Whitacre, P.E. td i;....... R JEFFREY A. 1'~r;-;ITAC"' Christian Sax, E.I. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. -0 Date: October 30, 2009 1 Subject: Invitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis Update Southlake, Texas Introduction The purpose of this study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed Invitation Park office condominium development located along Southlake Blvd. (FM 1709) just west of Carroll Avenue in the City of Southlake, Texas. This is an updated version of the TIA submitted. previously on September 2007. The update was performed to verify the change in land use did .not cause a change in overall TIA recommendations. The study.included.three (3) primary tasks: (1) to evaluate the impacts of the site-generated traffic from the Invitation Park development; (2) to evaluate the need for auxiliary lanes along FM 1709; and (3) to analyze the intersection and stopping sight distance requirements .along FM 1709 at the proposed site entrance. Level of service analysis was completed using the Synchro 6rM software for the build out year (2010) and horizon year (2015). Existing Conditions Currently, the site is vacant and does not generate traffic. Therefore, the impact of any existing development was not considered in this analysis. A vicinity map is shown as Exhibit 1. FM 1709 adjacent to the proposed site is a six-lane facility with a two-way left- turn lane. The posted speed limit along this section of FM 1709 is 45 mph. The future plan for FM 1709 is to construct a raised median with pre-defined medians openings and traffic signals. According to the most recent version of the plan, a median opening and traffic signal is planned at Drive B.. Drive B is a proposed access location for the property to the east of Invitation Park. Drive A will serve as the access location for Invitation Park until Drive B is constructed (by the City of Southlake or the developer to the east). In addition, there is an access easement between Drive A and future Drive B that provides a gravel roadway to serve a single-family residence south of the proposed development. It is planned for this low volume driveway onto FM 1709 to remain until Drive B is constructed. Invitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis Update Octaber 2009 Southlake, Texas Page 1 r m ,T. NOV 0' ~M09 ® andAAssoctbn, Inc. The existing lane use configurations, traffic control devices, and existing driveways can be seen in the previously referenced Exhibit 1. Proposed Development The proposed Invitation Park will total approximately 40,140 square feet of office space, and 20,000 square foot nursing college, and an assisted living center that will contain ninety (90) beds. The site plan includes one (1) connection onto FM 1709 (via Drive A), and provides for three (3) future cross access locations to the properties to the east and west of the site. It should be noted that Invitation Park will only utilize Drive A. Drive B will be used only after it is constructed, at which time Drive A and the access casement will be closed. Drive B is proposed to be located just to the east of the existing access easement. _ThP,r nr o Lsj P plop, t.lnv I5 :fk A s~K .SCtr'rx fi .:n Y 4 Access Connection Spacing Criteria TxDOT's Access Management Manual sets forth criteria for connection spacing. Per Table 2.2 (Other State Highways Minimum Connection Spacing), the minimum connection spacing on a roadway with a speed greater than or equal to 45 mph road is 360 feet. The City of Southlake Driveway Ordinance states that that the "minimum centerline spacing for full-access driveways on FM 1709 is 500 feet; however the minimum spacing may be reduced to 250 feet for right- in/right-out driveways." Based on the current site plan, Drive A is located approximately 490 feet to the west of the nearest existing drive. An additional drive is located approximately 340 feet from themcst of Drive A. Note several driveways exist on the north side of FM 1709 within the recommended spacing. Based on the manner which development has occurred along FM 1709, it is impossible to achieve the minimum spacing criteria and obtain reasonable interim access to this site. We believe the future Drive B will meet TxDOT's spacing criteria when Drive A and the access easement are closed. The driveway located 520' west of Carroll on the south side of FM 1709 will also likely be removed with the development of the property served by Drive B. Drive A would only give temporary access until Drive B is constructed. Therefore, it is reasonable to grant a variance from the connection spacing requirement in this case since Drive B is the location of a future median opening and will likely meet both the City's and TxDOT's spacing criteria. Invitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis Update October 2009 Southlake, Texas Page 2 ® anddAAssoci-&s, Inc. Trip Generation The Invitation Park development is projected to be built out by 2010. Therefore, for purposes of analysis, the build out year is 2010. To estimate the trips generated by the proposed development, trip generation rates from the 8th edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual were used. Table 1 shows the site- generated trips using these rates. Table 2 summarizes the total number of trips that .are expected to be generated at build out of the proposed development during the AM and PM peak periods and on a daily basis. The number of trips generated represents the number of vehicles entering and exiting the proposed development to and from the adjacent street system.. Note that the total traffic generated by the site is slightly less than what was projected in the 2007 study. Table 1. Estimated Trip Generation R ates AM Peak Hour PM Peak .flour Daily Land Use In:Out In:Out In:Out Description Rate Split Rate ..'Split Rate Split Assisted Living 0.14 (X) 65:35 0.22 (X) 44:56 2.66 (X) 50:5.0 . Junior/ Community 2.99 (Y) 74:26 2.54 (Y) 58:42 27.49 (Y) 50:50 College General Office 1.55 (Y) 88:12 1.49 (Y) 17:83 11.01 (Y) 50:50 Number of Trips Generated = Trip Rate (Development Unit); X = # of Beds ILY = 1000 sq. ft. Table 2. Estimated Trip Generation, Build Out of Development L d U Intensity 1 ITE Daily AM Peak PM Peak an se Units Code Total In but Total In Out Total Assisted 90 Beds 254 239 8 5 13 9 11 20 Living Junior/ Community 20,000 sq. ft. 540 550 44 16 60 30 21 51 College General 40,140 sq, ft. 710 442 56 8 64 10 50 60 Office TOTAL 1,231 1Q8 29 137 49 82 131 Invitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis Update October 2009 Southlake, Texas Page 3 ® IQmley-Fbtn and AssocMas, Inc. Traffic Volumes 24-hour recording machine counts along FM 1709 were collected west of White Chapel Boulevard on Thursday, October 12, 2006. Turning movement counts were also collected at the drive located northwest of Access Drive A (serving the existing medical offices). The existing traffic volumes are presented in Exhibit 3A. Raw traffic counts are included in the Appendix. Historic traffic volumes were obtained from the Southlake Traffic Count Report and TxDOT count maps. The historical counts in the vicinity of the site can be seen in Table 3. Based on the historic volumes, the traffic growth in the area appears to have leveled off or recently even reduced. However, based on previous guidance from TxDOT to include some background growth, a 3% growth rate was applied to the.existing traffic volumes to generate the background traffic in the build-out year (2010). The background traffic volumes are presented in Exhibit 3B. Table 3. Historic Traffic Counts Year City of Southlake TxDOT 2002 n/a 41,000 2003 n/a 40,000 2004 40,982 45,000 2005 45,056 43,570 2006 44,431 n/a 2007 - 48,000 2008 - 43,000 Based on examination of the existing traffic volumes, trip distributions at the existing medical office drive, and existing roadway network, reasonable assumptions for the trip distributions were made. Approximately 60% of the traffic will likely leave the site and travel east towards SH 114. The remaining traffic will travel west towards Davis Boulevard and the City of Keller. For analysis purposes, it was assumed all traffic will enter and exit the site via Drive A. It was assumed that by the horizon year (2015), the cross access drive will exist, and Drive B will be used. The assumptions for trip distribution are presented in Exhibit 3C, The projected site traffic volumes are presented in Exhibit 3D. The build out total traffic volumes presented in Exhibit 3E were estimated by combining the anticipated site generated traffic volumes (see Exhibit 3D) with the projected background traffic volumes (see Exhibit 3B). The horizon traffic volumes presented in Exhibit 3F were estimated by growing the projected background volumes (see Exhibit 3B) for five years (2015) with the same 3% growth rate. Invitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis Update October 2DO9 Southlake, Texas Page 4 i and Associates, Inc. Capacity Analysis Intersection level of service analysis was then performed to evaluate the proposed development's impacts on the roadway system for the build out year (2010). Using the Synchro 6TM software, both AM and PM peak hour intersection level of service analyses were completed. The results can be seen in Table 3. Synchro 6Tiu output sheets are attached in the Appendix. Based on the results, the study area intersection is projected to operate at an unacceptable level of service at build out. For the unsignalized analysis, the level of service (LOS) for a two-way stop controlled intersection is defined for each movement. Unlike signalized intersections which define LOS for each approach and for the intersection as a whole, LOS for two-way stop-controlled intersections is not defined as a whole. Motorists who approach a major arterial (FM 1709) from a minor drive (Drive AIB) are expecting to experience some delay. Synchro 6T" uses the HCM. procedure to calculate a LOS for each approach, but it often overestimates the delay incurred by the movements of the minor street when intersecting with a multi-lane major road. Through extensive observations of actual driver behavior, Zhou et all developed a new procedure for calculating delay for a multi-lane (Drive B) minor street at a two-way stop- controlled intersection when the major road has more than 4.1anes and the signal spacing is less than 2 miles (allowing for platooning to be considered in the delay calculation). For comparison to the Synchro 6TM HCM output, this procedure was used in the horizon year to compute the LOS for the minor street approaches and is denoted in in the Table 3 for unsignalized intersection analysis. The Zhou LOS procedure output sheets are located in the Appendix. Table 3 - Unsignalized Intersection Analysis I i Controlled AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ntersect on Movement Delay A LOS Delay A LOS Build Out Year Total Traffic Scenario (2010) NB Approach F D 21.6 C FM 1709 & Drive A 23 D , , 25.41 (D) WBLT 119 B Horizon Year Traffic Scenario 2015 10.8 B 9.8 A NBRT 38.00 E 19.80 C FM 1709 & Drive B 0 `T NBLT ~ 1 3 I ~ 6 ;X1 WBLT Q F 18.9 C "Delay is reported as HCM delay (Zhou delay) in sec / veh 1 Zhou, H., L. Hagen, J. Lu, and Z. Tian, Empirical Delay Models for Multi-Lane Two- Way Stop-Controlled Intersections, ITE Journal, September 2006. Invitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis Update October 2009 Southlakc, 'texas Page 5 ® ICS *y-Horn and Associates, Inc. In summary, while the HCM results indicate a poor level of service in the interim unsignalized condition at Drive A, the Zhou procedure indicates an acceptable level of service. It is anticipated the Zhou results will reflect actual field observations. When Drive B is constructed the level of service is projected to be poor if it remains unsignalized. However, with the installation of the future traffic signal Drive B is projected to operate at an acceptable level of service for the site traffic as well as the adjacent development traffic. Auxiliary Lanes TxDOT's Access Management Manual sets forth criteria for auxiliary lanes. Per Table 2.3 (Auxiliary Lane Thresholds), a right-turn deceleration lane is required on roads with a posted speed less than or equal to 45 mph if the projected right turn volume into a driveway is projected to be greater than 60 vehicles per hour. With projected EB right-turn volumes of 50 and 9 during the AM and PM peak hours, the proposed development does not warrant the installation of a right-turn deceleration lane per TxDOT criteria. The City of Southlake's. Driveway Ordinance states that if a street facility exceeds 40 mph, a deceleration lane may be required if the projected right-turn volume exceeds 40 vehicles per hour. Using the City's criteria, a right-turn deceleration lane is warranted. Similar to the discussion regarding driveway spacing, the need for a right-turn deceleration lane should be based on the ultimate configuration of FM 1709. With a commitment from the applicant that Drive A and the. access easement will be closed upon construction of Drive B and the cross access connection, the requirement for a right-turn deceleration lane should be waived. The developer should only be required to dedicate the necessary ROW for the future construction of a right-turn deceleration lane at Drive B. Intersection Sight and Stopping Sight Distance Based on field observations at the proposed site, no potential sight distance problems were observed. Adequate intersection and stopping sight distance is available at the existing drives. Pictures taken from the approximate location of the existing drives are included in the Appendix. Conclusions and Recommendations Based on our review of the proposed development, we offer the following conclusions and recommendations: • The results from the previous 2007 TIA were confirmed and the study is still valid. 0 The developer has planned for a connection with the adjacent roadway on the east side of the property. In the future, Drive A and the access easement Invitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis Update October 2009 5outhlake, Tcxas page 6 ® Nrnley-Mom ® and ksocialies, Inc. will be closed and Drive B will be the primary access point for Invitation Park. According to the most recent FM 1709 median plan, Drive B is the location of a future traffic signal and median opening. • The future intersection of FM 1709 and Drive B is projected to operate at an unacceptable level of service. A traffic signal is ultimately planned for this intersection. With a traffic signal in place, the intersection is projected to operate at an acceptable level of service. At the proposed interim Drive A and ultimate Drive B, the intersection and stopping sight distances will be adequate for vehicles entering and exiting the site. Based on the manner which development has occurred along FM 1709, it is impossible to achieve the minimum spacing criteria and obtain reasonable interim access to this site. We believe Drive B will meet TxDOT's spacing criteria when Drive A and the access easement are closed. The driveway located 520' west of Carroll on the south side of FM 1709 will also likely be removed with the development of the property served by Drive B. Drive A would only give temporary access until Drive B is constructed. Therefore, it is reasonable to grant a variance from the connection spacing requirement in this case since Drive B is the location of a future median opening and will likely meet both the City's and TxDOT's spacing criteria. • With the future plans for a median along FM 1709 and the closure of Drive A and the access easement, we recommend the developer dedicate the necessary ROW for the future construction of a right-turn deceleration lane at Drive B after Phase I approval and the permitting of Drive B. Invitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis Update October 2009 South lake,Tex as Page 7 Kitrgey--Fom and AssocWms, Inc. Appendix Sections Exhibits Photolog 3 Raw Traffic Count Sheets 4 Build Out (2010) Total Traffic Analysis 5 Horizon Year (2015) Traffic Analysis Invitation Park Traffic lmpaet Analysis October 2009 Soutblake, Texas ® 1(irday-Hom and Assac&s, Inc. 1. Exhibits Invitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis October 2009 Southlake, Texas C6 04-- UE I 4 SS!]f31'3HV'lH2llO$ a 3)IVIHinos tl ~t 2q':a 1.s3MHinos sNOesin o QEL c~ 4 a r t8 S® ~a 1 dMPIHMpC lp _ _ i f , ~ 3 ! ja z u U~ nM.++~wsuu~'vsrirs,' uvoc;f5r. cix c.spssnw...u~rtl.re.a~iuasxs.w~snsuoun`•n>sa~: ran O c o~ 21 26(5) .4 1,126(2,493) Southlake 1r(o} 2,272(1,307) r s49 I Blvd. E. I a CA IM c a lc A) Counted AM and PM Peak Hour Volumes 01 O X W 603 411% Southlake ~o i Blvd. °I w a ~ 0 Ica G U a Im C) Trip Distribution m n c w X LLI o a 1,230(2,724) 165(29) 2,493(1,429) 43(20)- Southlake w I M Blvd. a ~ Im ca I~ ¢ to W .L_ ,a LU 724 29(5 ) ) 1.230(2, Southlake 2,493(1,429) N.- 4D I Blvd, E I ~I a w. y' Jim 17 > C3 Q. a Ic, B) Build-Out (2010) Year Background AM and PM Peak Hour Volumes D 43(20) I Southlake Ma m Blvd. E'I U.,. a N' Im lob to Q I~ E) Build-Out (2010) Year Total F) Horizon (2015) Year Total AM and PM Peak Hour Volumes AM and PM Peak Hour Volumes LEGEND FUTURE ROAD Exhibit 3 X XXX 24-HOUR VOLUME XX(XX) AM(PM) PEAK HOUR VOLUMES Traffic Volume and Distribution Exhibits XX°/a(XX%) INBOUND(OUTBOUND) ❑M❑ a"WAs11w1"dftInc. .Z v .r2 .X o uu ~-1,559(3,45#) I 65(29) Southlake (43J20) f Blvd. rY Invitation m Park P EM" try IDm and Assod&s, Inc. 20 Photolog Invitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis October 2009 Southlake, Texas xim~yy-Hom ® and Associates, Inc. 3. Raw Traffic Count Sheets Invitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis October 2009 Southlake, Texas 9 N tad o 0p 0 ~ Q C ~ } m U C m ° ~ N ~ t m w O ° ° U ' OIIJp a;BAIld MON U C n m ~ r I(~E Q co Li Q 3 ❑ Q o N 4 m O Y U o ^ o 22 Q a a ep ~ o ° G y Y U 2 M r m m w a si ~I 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 m&m&mQQQ o.-caves C7 ui 4i6eN-r CL IL EL Inam 000 o0 itgrn v m m m m ~2t C fly ~ m a i~N o~;h °m 0 d CD m ° m Y a o i r ~ o I[ © o nn F- u WON 'OAIJCI m;enIaa a o 0 ° a d ° !2 ~ o S eq Y o o m o a. r m o Q io u4i r ° ri V ~t S r Y m 0) CL n. v, o r; M v , o r cn F°_ c www Ed o'E p o ~ La CD U.) LD CD Ica m i-7~h h mm - N N N ® Kimley-Hom i and Associates, Inc, 4. Build Out Year (2010) Total Traffic Analysis Invitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis October 2009 Soulhlake, Texas HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Invitation Park TIA Southlake Blvd. & Drive A Build Out (2010) AM Lane Configurations ttT* ' Sign `Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh./h) 2483 :43 65 1230 12 17. Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow .rate (vph) 2699 47 71 1337 13 18 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ftls) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 Upstream signal (ft) 7118 987 pX, platoon unblocked 0.59 0.66 0.59 vC, conflicting volume .'.2746 3309 923 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 2722 vC2st6 e 2 conf vol 587 vCu, unblocked vol 2565 2505 0 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (sj 2.2 _ .3.5 ; 3.3 p0 queue free % 29 50 97 cM capacity. (veh/h) 99 26 634 Volume Total 1080 :1080 587 71 446 446. .446. .:.:..32 Volume Left 0 0 0 71 0 0 0 13 Volume Right 0 0 47 0 0 0 0 18 cSH 1700 1700 1700 99 1700 1700 1700 59 Vdume to Capacity P.0.64 0.64. 0.35 0.71.. 026 0.26 0.26 0.53..:` Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 92 0 0 0 53 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 103.0 0.0 0.0. 0.0 120.5... Lane LOS F F Approach Delay (s) 0.0 5.2 120.5 Approach LOS F Average Delay 2.6 Intersection Ca pacity Utilization 64.0% ICU Level, of Service C. Analysis Period (min) 15 Timing Plan: Default Synchro 6 Report Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1 Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (vehih) 1428 ;20 29. :2724 33 49 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate {vph) 1552 22 32 2961 36 53 Pedestrians Lane W1dth (ff) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TW LTL Median storage veh) 2 Upstream signal (f#) 1118 987 pX, platoon unblocked 0.87 0.91 0.87 vC, conflicting volume. 1574 2613 528 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1563 VC2, stage .2 conf voI 1050 vCu, unblocked vol 1355 1921 148 tC, single (5) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0.qu.eue free % 93 78 93 cM capacity (vehih) 437 162 756 Volume Total ;621 621 332 32 987 987 987 89 Volume Left 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 36 Volume Right 0 0 22 0 0 p 0 53 cSH 1700 1700 1700 437 1700 1700 1700 305 Volume to Capacity 0:37 0.37 0.20 0.07 0.58 0.58 0 58 0.29 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 30 Gon#rol Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.6 Lane L.OS B C Approach Delay.(s) .0.0. 0,1 21.6 Approach LOS C Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization .64.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Timing Plan: Default Synchro 6 Report Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1 Z J W J J ~ J O W z O It U W 1.0 CL °o aW J 00 ~a z J Q J 0 J H :D ;W O Z m mco ED m z U) LU c 0 0 m 13 N Q a~ ZQOf ~--T 44 c Ir- U) 4, O N CQ mmm o ~ v m m m m U3 > Z C fn Co N z f WLmuw oce) N d W 4- 0 CD J C? 0 0 N 2 U E 0 ni c ~ 0 U to a~ N (D c ~ - U cu d. 0 Q C O 0) U CL o ~ ~o fl of c 0 r ~ a O CL m n. O O 0 N " m o OZ 0 .a ~ _Q b a~ 03 W co 0 O m n L 0 -n o cc 0 z z 0 J M W J J ~ MJ U LL UJ U z Ow W CL O.U. 0 N J a~ O❑ Z Z J W J W O z Cl W $ a X cn rL d mmrara zcnw3: G c N 0 *Z 0 -IR z0Of I- N N moFrlm a m c mCY) o z U O1 U) O z C m m c' j U z C') h- ul Lit Lu N co v d- U v Q d W J a 0 N U E N Eli c ca O U N ~ v U v Q N o c ~ b 2) U C o U a m N :3 o ' E 'E a E 4) cu J ` CO r+ N O ° 0 0 CL Ga. a ~CD UlU m0 a) ~ > sa C O U E p Q. as a) LU to 0 O E O a L o 7 m co N a U ui F F F O z i h*Y-Ham and Associates, Inc. 5. Horizon Year (2015) Traffic Analysis Imitation Park Traffic Impact Analysis October 2009 Southlake, Texas HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Invitation Park TIA Southlake Blvd. & Drive A Horizon (2015) AM Lane Configurations ttt* ttt I r Sign ;Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Voturne (veh1h) 3145 43 65 1559 12 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3418 47 71 1.695 13 18 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ftls) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 Upstream signal (ft) 1118 987 pX, platoon unblocked 0.58 0.69 0.58 vC, conflicting volume 3465 4148 1163 vC1, stage 1 corif vol 3442 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 706 vCu, unblocked vol 3795 3339 0 tC, single (s.). 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (sj `2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 0 0 97 cM capacity (vehlh) 31 0 634 Volume] otal 1367 7 367 73t) 71 565 565 565 13 1 t3 Volume Left 0 0 0 71 0 0 0 13 0 Volume Right 0 0 47 fl fl fl 0 fl 18 cSH 1700 1700 1700 31 1700 1700 1700 0 634 Volume to Capacity 0.80 0.80 0.43 2.26 :0.33 0.33... 033. Err ..0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 204 0 0 0 Err 2 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 848.7 0.0 0.0 OA Err 10.8 Lane LOS F F B Approach Delay (s)' 0.0 .:..34.0 Err. Approach LOS F ; Average Delay Err mon ism MENEM Intersection Capacity Utilization 71:7% 1CUl Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Timing Plan: Default Synchro 6 Report Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Invitation Park TIA Southlake Blvd. & Drive A Horizon (2015) PM Lane Configurations tt'* ttt I r Sign!Control; Free. Free Stop Grade 4% 0% Volume {veklh) 7809 20 ..:.29: .:3.451:. 33 49 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (v ph) 1966 22 32 3751 36 ;:..53- Pedestrians Lane Nidth (ft) Walking Speed (ftls) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 Upstream signal {ft)' 1118 987 pX, platoon unblocked 0.74 0.86 0.74 VC, conflicting volume . 1988 3291 .!666 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1977 vC2, :stage 2 conf vol 1313 vCu,`unblocked vol 1631 1969 0 tC.. s ngie (s 4.1 ..6.8. 6.9 . tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s): 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 89 65 93 cM capacity weft), 291 103 802 Volume Total 787 787 416.. .:.32 1250:: :.1250 `1250 36 53 Volume.i_eft 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 36 0 Volume Right 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 53 cSH 1700 1700 1700 291 1700 1700 1700 103 802 Volume to ;Capacity.! `€1:46 ; 0.46 0.24 . ..0.11. 0.74 0.74 .0.74 0.35 .0.07::..... Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 34 5 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.3 9.8 Lane LOS C F A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.2 28.9 Approach LOS D Average. Delay 0.5 Intersection..Capacity Utilization 76.7% ICU. Level`:,of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Timing Plan: Default Synchro 6 Report Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1 U) z Q J W J J °v ~ .V Z ° It LU 0. .0..U- 0 l- , J uu aw 00 ~a Lu Z `Q Q J J 0 7 J ~ W ~ LC N 4 Z m mmco m zcnua3y C O G r. A co 12 a~ c 0 x - = J .N o AC M w m w CO cn a z tm c m in N z 0~4 m co LLJ LU LU Lin ch c3 E o U ~ L c cn Q n C Q M U ~ CL O m Z) o E F 3 0 E 0) c' J O L N CD , N c ° a c ~ a b io a) ( U N p ~ Ql a O o a~ u E -0 n :3 •i. a= c a •Q a as an win mmm o m E c E o E r- LLI 2.2 co L) a Z cn z a J w J a U O uu V Z> O .IX V ~ a o L- H `Q Cl) J LU 'aw ? J 00 ~a za a~ J J W H C0 0 z m co co z0ul3: c o 1 0 o v c C z0D~ -:r Lf) 0) M N m c ED U) C z et V C Gi C~ E LX] z o C mmca w w w rn C) CY) U m a~ 6 41 0 G N U E N N ~ C ~ O U y N ~ N ~ N ~ C ~ a Q a c ~ 0 U a ~ o ~ U :3 o E 'F O p E 3 a a' J D = f4 5 S2 a 00 ~a co °o m m a -Fu .a ca CL CL m N win 0~ c =Ep O y O U w 3 U 0 z