The URL can be used to link to this page

Item 6E - Kimball Park TIA - 12-19-2013TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Commercial Development Southlake, Texas ....................... ti 94903 4 tt th '.NNALLE�acG`'r' 7,/z/19/zo)3 AVO 29858 December 19, 2013 Prepared for Adams Engineering ■■. HALFF mo 1201 North Bowser Road Richardson, Texas 75081 Firm Registration No. 312 Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 Executive Summary Halff Associates, Inc. (Halff) conducted a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for Adams Engineering related to the proposed commercial development located in the northwest quadrant of SH 114 and Kimball Avenue in Southlake, Texas. This TIA report is an update to the report and analysis previously prepared in June of 2012. The site is approximately 14 acres in size and is being redeveloped to include office and restaurant uses and a hotel with approximately 175 rooms. There is also a small pad site on the southwest corner that is proposed to be a high quality sit-down restaurant facility. Halff used standard transportation engineering practices in conducting the TIA for the proposed development. The TIA examined the projected impacts of the development on the three development driveways and the following intersections: • Kimball Avenue at westbound SH 114 frontage road • Kimball Avenue at eastbound SH 114 frontage road Study scenarios include the following: • Existing conditions • Build -out conditions • Five years after build -out The resulting trip generation totals (combined trips in and out) are 399 trips in the AM peak, 476 trips in the PM peak, and 5,294 trips over a 24-hour period. Halff believes these trip generation numbers to be a worst case scenario for the proposed development. Given the location and the proposed uses, it is anticipated that 50 percent of the traffic will be to and from the east using SH 114 and the frontage roads. Another 25 percent will be to and from the west along SH 114 and will mainly use the Texas U-turn under the freeway main lanes. The remaining 25 percent is split between the north and south directions along Kimball Avenue. The assumed split is 10 percent to and from the south and 15 percent to and from the north. For the scenarios with the development in place the background traffic was increased by applying an annual growth rate of 3.0 percent. Build out of the development was assumed to occur in the year 2014. The results of the study show that the impacts of traffic related to the proposed development to the existing system are minimal. The proposed driveway on Kimball Avenue and on the westbound SH 114 frontage road will operate at a LOS ranking of B or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hours in both the year 2014 and 2019. The signalized intersections at Kimball Avenue and the SH 114 frontage roads will continue to operate at a LOS of C or better during the AM and PM peak hours in the year 2019 with the exception of the westbound frontage road, which just crosses the threshold (3.1 seconds above the threshold of 35.0 seconds) for a LOS ranking of D in the PM peak for both the year 2014 and the year 2019. i - mom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 Halff recommends construction of the proposed driveway on the westbound frontage even though the recommended spacing is not fully met. The proposed location of the driveway has maximized the spacing from adjacent drives based on the location of the TxDOT control of access. Although the right turn volume at the proposed frontage road driveways exceeds the threshold for consideration of right -turn deceleration lane, Halff does not believe a right -turn deceleration lane is necessary, due to the low frontage road volumes for a three lane facility, limited right-of-way, and given that most of the frontage road traffic will be in the left most lane to access downstream entrance ramp. - ii - mom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... I 1.1 Existing Roadway Conditions and Access.......................................................................1 1.2 Future Roadway Conditions.............................................................................................2 II. ANALYSIS.............................................................................................................................3 2.1 Traffic Volumes................................................................................................................3 2.1.1 Existing Traffic Patterns............................................................................................3 2.1.2 Projected Background Traffic Patterns.....................................................................3 2.2 Land Uses and Trip Generation........................................................................................4 2.3 Site -Generated Traffic Distributions/Assignments ...........................................................4 2.4 Background plus Site -Generated Traffic Volumes ...........................................................4 III. RESULTS.............................................................................................................................5 3.1 Intersection Analysis Results............................................................................................6 3.1.1 Existing Conditions...................................................................................................6 3.1.2 Year 2014 Build -out Conditions...............................................................................6 3.1.3 Year 2019 Build -out Conditions...............................................................................7 3.2 Link Analysis....................................................................................................................7 3.3 Intersection Sight Distance............................................................................................... 8 3.4 Driveway Spacing and Deceleration Lanes...................................................................... 8 3.4.1 Driveway Spacing.....................................................................................................9 3.4.2 Right -Turn Deceleration Lane...................................................................................9 IV. SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................10 ONEmom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 List of Figures Figure1 - Area Map........................................................................................................................1 - iv- mom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 List of Tables Table 1 — Trip Generation Summary...............................................................................................4 Table 2 — Level -of -Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections................................................5 Table 3 — Level -of -Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections....................................................5 Table 4 — LOS Summary (2013 Existing Conditions).................................................................... 6 Table 5 — LOS Summary (2014 Build -out Conditions)..................................................................6 Table 6 — LOS Summary (2019 Build -out Conditions)..................................................................7 Table 7 — LOS Ranking for Roadways............................................................................................7 Table 8 — Intersection Sight Distance Summary............................................................................. 8 - v - mom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 I. INTRODUCTION Halff Associates, Inc. (Halff) conducted a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for Adams Engineering related to the proposed commercial development located in the northwest quadrant of SH 114 and Kimball Avenue in Southlake, Texas. The following study is an update of the traffic impact study completed in 2012. Figure 1 below is a map detailing the site location and a copy of the preliminary site plan has been included in Appendix A. Figure 1 - Area Map The site is approximately 14 acres in size and is being redeveloped to include office and restaurant uses and a hotel with approximately 175 rooms. 1.1 Existing Roadway Conditions and Access The only roadway directly adjacent to the site is the westbound SH 114 frontage road that runs along the southern edge of the site. The frontage road is a three -lane one-way facility with curb along the edge. Near the site along the westbound SH 114 frontage road is the westbound entrance ramp to the SH 114 main lanes. East of the site is Kimball Avenue, which is a four -lane divided facility. There is one access point that connects the proposed development to Kimball Avenue. It is located on the south side of the existing strip center that is adjacent to Kimball Avenue, just east of the proposed development. This access point on Kimball Avenue is at a full median opening. ONE -1- mom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 1.2 Future Roadway Conditions There are no known improvements to the adjacent roadway system near the proposed development. The only change to site access is the addition of a proposed main access driveway on the westbound SH 114 frontage road approximately 170 feet east of the entrance ramp. The location of this proposed driveway is determined by the area in which TxDOT is allowing access to the frontage road. This is discussed in greater detail in section 3.4.1 below. 2 - mom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 II. ANALYSIS Halff used standard transportation engineering practices in conducting the TIA for the proposed Commercial Development. The TIA examined the projected impacts of the development on the two development driveways and the following intersections: • Kimball Avenue at westbound SH 114 frontage road • Kimball Avenue at eastbound SH 114 frontage road Study scenarios include the following: • Existing conditions • Build -out conditions • Five years after build -out 2.1 Traffic Volumes Both turning movement counts and 24-hour count data were collected as part of the study in May of 2012, which was when the original TIA study and report were prepared. Turning movement counts at the existing study intersections listed above were collected during both the weekday morning (7:00 am to 9:00 am) and evening (4:00 pm to 6:00 pm). From that data, the AM peak (7:30 am to 8:30 am) and PM peak (5:00 pm to 6:00 pm) hours of operation were selected. Copies of the traffic count data can be found in Appendix B. 2.1.1 Existing TrafficPatterns Exhibits 2 and 3 in Appendix C show the existing turning movement volumes at the study intersections and driveways during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. Because the background traffic data was collected in the year 2012, the existing volumes for the revised study were generated by applying a growth rate of 3.0 percent to the year 2012 counts to reflect year 2013 (existing) volumes. The U-turn volumes at the intersection (if shown) do not pass through the intersections, but use the existing Texas U-turn lanes. 2.1.2 Projected Background Traffic Patterns For the scenarios with the development in place, build -out and five years after build -out, the background traffic was increased by applying an annual growth rate of 3.0 percent. Build out of the development was assumed to occur in the year 2014. Therefore, by the year 2019 (build -out plus five years); the background traffic will have increased by 19.4 percent over the adjusted 2013 existing volumes. 3 - mom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 2.2 Land Uses and Trip Generation Trips for the uses of the proposed development (hotel, office, and restaurant) were generated based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual - Ninth Edition and information provided by the developer. The proposed hotel (ITE Land Use Code 310) will have 175 rooms, the office building (Land Use Code 710) will have 48,000 square feet total and the restaurant use will total 21,075 square feet. The restaurant use will be broken into two subcategories. They are a quality type restaurant (ITE Land Use Code 931) with 10,000 square feet of space and high -turnover restaurants (ITE Land Use Code 932) for the remaining 11,075 square feet of space. Table 1 below contains a summary of the trip generation for all parts of the development at build -out. Table 1— Trip Generation Summary AM -peak PM -peak 24-hour Land Use Independent Units Weekday (ITE Code) Variable In Out Total In Out Total Total Hotel Rooms 175 96 69 165 78 82 160 2,230 310 Office 1000 Sq Ft 96 163 22 185 32 154 186 1,273 710 Restaurant 1000 Sq Ft 1 1 .1 66 54 120 65 44 109 1,412 932 Restaurant 1000 Sq Ft 10 7 1 8 50 25 75 900 931 Total Trips 332 146 478 225 305 530 5,815 In the above table, it was not assumed that the trips related to the restaurant would be reduced due to the adjacent hotel or office. Therefore, the trip generation totals presented in the above table are conservative estimates for the overall development. 2.3 Site -Generated Traffic Distributions/Assignments Given the location and the proposed uses, it is anticipated that 50 percent of the traffic will be to and from the east using SH 114 and the frontage roads. Another 25 percent will be to and from the west along SH 114 and will mainly use the Texas U-turn under the freeway main lanes. The remaining 25 percent is split between the north and south directions along Kimball Avenue. The assumed split is 10 percent to and from the south and 15 percent to and from the north. Exhibits 4 and 5 show the traffic volumes for the development related trips for the AM and PM peak, respectively. 2.4 Background plus Site -Generated Traffic Volumes With the proposed development trips distributed at the development driveways and on the study intersections, they can be combined with the background traffic volumes for build -out and five year past build -out. Exhibits 6 through 9 in Appendix C show the combined traffic volumes for these scenarios. - 4 - mom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 III. RESULTS All analyses of the study intersections and driveways were conducted using the Synchro 8 traffic analysis software package. Copies of the analysis reports can be found in Appendix D. Table 2 below details the LOS rankings for unsignalized intersections based on the information provided in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Table 3 summarizes the LOS rankings for signalized intersections. LOS rankings shown in the results section are based on the combined average delay for all approaches at the study intersections. At unsignalized intersections where only two (or one) approaches are controlled (stop or yield); the LOS ranking shown is based on the worst approach. Table 2 — Level -of -Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections LOS Characteristics Average Stopped Delay (sec / veh) A Completely free -flow conditions < 10.0 B Indicative of free -flow conditions, although the presence of other vehicles is noticeable > 10.0 and <_ 15.0 C The influence of traffic density on operations becomes marked > 15.0 and <_ 25.0 The ability to maneuver is severely restricted due to congestion > 25.0 and <_ 35.0 E Operations are at or near capacity and are unstable > 35.0 and <_ 50.0 F Forced flow or breakdown characterized by queues > 50.0 Table 3 — Level -of -Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections Average LOS Characteristics Stopped Delay (sec/veh) A No delays at intersection with smooth progression of traffic. Uncongested operations; all vehicles clear in a single signal cycle. <-10.0 B >10.0 and <-20.0 C Moderate delays at intersections with satisfactory to good progression of traffic. Light >20.0 and <_35.0 congestion; occasional backups on critical approaches. 40-percent probability of delays of one cycle or more at every intersection. No progression of traffic along the roadway with 90 percent probability of being stopped at every intersection experiencing "D" condition. Significant congestion on critical >35.0 and <-55.0 approaches, but intersections are functional. Vehicles are required to wait through more than one cycle during short peaks. No long standing lines formed. Heavy traffic flow condition. Delays of two or more cycles are probable. No E progression. 100 percent probability of stopping at intersection. Blockage of >55.0 and <-80.0 intersection may occur if traffic signal does not provide for protected turning movements. F Unstable flow. Heavy congestion. Traffic moves in forced flow condition. Three or >80.0 more cycles to pass through intersection. Total breakdown with stop -and -go operations. - 5 - HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 3.1 Intersection Analysis Results 3.1.1 Existing Conditions Table 4 below summarizes the LOS ranking for the study intersections and driveways for the AM and PM peak hours for the existing conditions. Signalized intersections are shaded. Table 4 — LOS Summary (2013 Existing Conditions) Intersection AM Peak PM Peak LOS Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) WB SH 114 Frontage Road at Kimball Ave C 28.7 C 30.5 EB SH 114 Frontage Road at Kimball Ave C 20.2 C 23.6 Kimball Ave at Driveway A B 11.5 B 11.0 WB SH 114 Frontage Road at Main Drive n/a n/a n/a n/a No LOS ranking is given for the main driveway on the westbound frontage road, because it is not in place under existing conditions. 3.1.2 Year 2014 Build -out Conditions Table 5 below summarizes the LOS ranking for the study intersections and driveways during the AM and PM peak hours under build -out conditions. LOS rankings for the driveways are based on the stop controlled outbound driveway movements only. Traffic on Kimball Avenue and the westbound frontage road are unimpeded. Table 5 — LOS Summary (2014 Build -out Conditions) Intersection AM Peak PM Peak LOS Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) WB SH 114 Frontage Road at Kimball Ave C 29.6 D 35.5 EB SH 114 Frontage Road at Kimball Ave C 22.6 C 28.1 Kimball Ave at Driveway A B 14.3 C 16.0 WB SH 114 Frontage Road at Main Drive B 10.6 B 12.4 The addition of traffic related to the development in the year 2014 causes a slight increase in the average delay at the signalized intersections. The increase in delay of approximately five seconds per vehicle and does result in a LOS ranking increase to a D for the intersection at the westbound frontage road during the PM peak hour. All other intersections/driveways remain at the same LOS ranking as compared to existing conditions. The northbound left -turn from Kimball Avenue into the site operates at a LOS of B during both the AM and PM peak hours. - 6- mom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 3.1.3 Year 2019 Build -out Conditions Table 5 below summarizes the LOS ranking for the study intersections and driveways five years after the development is built out, which is the year 2019. Table 6 — LOS Summary (2019 Build -out Conditions) Intersection AM Peak PM Peak LOS Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) WB SH 114 Frontage Road at Kimball Ave C 31.0 D 38.1 EB SH 114 Frontage Road at Kimball Ave C 23.3 C 29.9 Kimball Ave at Driveway A C 16.1 C 17.7 WB SH 114 Frontage Road at Main Drive B 10.8 B 13.2 In the year 2019, there is no increase in traffic related to the proposed development, but there is a significant increase in background traffic volumes. The increase in background traffic volumes results in an increase of two to three seconds in the average delay times at the signalized intersections. The LOS ranking at the westbound frontage road intersection remains at a LOS of D in the PM peak. The northbound left -turn from Kimball Avenue into the site continues to operate at a LOS of B during both the AM and PM peak hours. 3.2 Link Analysis The level of service on roadways can be determined by comparing the demand to the estimated service volume (or capacity) of the roadway. This ratio can be converted to a LOS ranking based on the breakdown shown in Table 7 below. The demand is based on either existing or projected traffic volumes on the study roadway network. Estimated capacity of the study roads is based on field conditions and information from the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). A copy of the roadway capacity estimates from NCTCOG is located in Appendix E. Table 7 — LOS Ranking for Roadways Volume to Service Volume (Capacity) Ratio LOS Ranking Greater Than Less Than/Equal To --- 0.45 A or B 0.45 0.65 C 0.65 0.80 D 0.80 1.00 E 1.00 --- F - mom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 The only link that was analyzed in this study was the westbound SH 114 frontage road just east of the proposed main driveway serving the facility. Under existing and build -out conditions, the PM peak hour has nearly double the traffic volume when compared to the AM peak hour. So the PM peak was assumed to be the worst case scenario for a link analysis. Existing traffic volumes (year 2013) in the PM peak hour are 951 vehicles total. Divided over three lanes, the average volume per lane is 317 vehicles per lane per hour (vplph), which is a volume to capacity (v/c) ratio 0.44 and a LOS ranking of B. With the proposed development in place and six additional years of background traffic growth added, the frontage road volume is 1,281 vehicles in the PM peak hour. That is a per lane average of 427 vehicles per hour, which is a v/c ratio of 0.59 and a LOS ranking of C. Therefore, the proposed development does not have a significant impact on frontage road operations. 3.3 Intersection Sight Distance As part of the study, the intersection sight distance at the study driveways was examined. Recommended ISD is based upon the guidelines presented in the AASHTO Green Book, where the ISD is calculated by the following equation: ISD = 1.4 / Vmajortg V„.jo, is the speed of the street that the vehicle is turning on to and tg is the time required to execute the turning maneuver, which includes time to accelerate up to speed. The required time gap tg is based on the number of lanes/medians the turning vehicle must cross to complete the turning maneuver. Table 8 below contains a summary of the ISD measurements for all project driveways. In the table, the required sight distance for the given maneuver and speed limit is shown and it is indicated if the available sight distance exceeds the required distance. Table 8 — Intersection Sight Distance Summary Intersection/Driveway Intersection Sight Distance (ft) To the left (for right -turn) To the right (for left -turn) WB SH 114 Frontage Road at Main Drive >430 n/a Kimball Avenue at Driveway A >335 >440 3.4 Driveway Spacing and Deceleration Lanes For developments with driveway access to TxDOT facilities, it is necessary to review access management spacing guidelines and the need for right and/or left -turn lanes. Access spacing is based on the posted speed limit of the roadway being accessed via the proposed driveway. The need for turn lanes is based on threshold criteria set forth by TxDOT. - 8- mom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 According to the TxDOT Access Management Manual, for facilities with a posted speed limit less than or equal to 45 miles per hour, a right -turn deceleration lane should be considered if the number of right -turning vehicles exceeds 60 in any one hour. For facilities where the posted speed limit exceeds 45 miles per hour, the threshold is lowered to 50 right -turning vehicles in any one hour period. Meeting the threshold criteria is not the only reason for considering right - turn deceleration lanes and the Access Management Manual provides guidance for situations where the deceleration lane may be or may not be recommended regardless of the projected volume. Since the proposed driveway connecting to the westbound frontage road is right -in right -out only, it is not necessary to examine the need for a left -turn deceleration lane. 3.4.1 Driveway Spacing The speed limit on the existing frontage road is 45 miles per hour. Based on that speed, the recommended driveway spacing is 360 feet between drives and/or streets. The location of the proposed driveway is based on the TxDOT control of access as it relates to the existing entrance ramp to SH 114 and is at the western most edge of the section where access is allowed. Refer to the attached site plan regarding location of proposed driveway. Therefore, the proposed driveway is approximately 300 feet west of an existing driveway serving the gas station east of the site. This is 83 percent of the recommended spacing of 360 feet. The next closest intersecting driveway/street is Cherry Lane, which is approximately 400 feet west of the proposed driveway. Although the driveway does not meet the recommended spacing to the east (300 feet from existing driveway), it is Halff's opinion that the proposed driveway be constructed since it is positioned as best as possible given the TxDOT control of access limits. 3.4.2 Right -Turn Deceleration Lane In the AM peak hour, it was estimated that 178 vehicles would turn right at the proposed driveway located on the westbound SH 114 frontage road. In the PM peak hour, it was projected that 146 vehicles would make a right -turn at the proposed driveway. Based on the projected volumes, the proposed driveway does exceed the threshold 60 vehicles per hour (for a 45 mile per hour facility). Therefore, a right -turn deceleration should be considered, but there are additional factors to take into account before making a recommendation. Based on the presence of existing adjacent developments and driveways, there is limited right-of- way width that may restrict proper design of a right -turn deceleration lane. Another factor to be considered is the limited volume on the frontage road section adjacent to the site. Based on the existing counts and projected volumes from the study, the frontage road through volume in 2019 will be approximately 427 vehicles per lane per hour during the PM peak hour, which is LOS of C. Given that this is a three lane frontage road and that the majority of traffic will be in the left lane to access the existing entrance ramp, the impact of right -turning traffic into the main - 9 - mom HALFF Commercial Development December 19, 2013 Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 driveway should be minimal to frontage road operations. Therefore, Halff does not see a significant need for a right -turn deceleration for the proposed driveway. IV. SUMMARY The results presented in the above report show that the impacts of traffic related to the proposed development to the existing system are minimal. The proposed driveway on Kimball Avenue is located at an existing median opening and will operate at a LOS ranking of C or better during the AM and PM peak hours in both the year 2014 and 2019. The proposed driveway on the westbound SH 114 frontage road will operate at a LOS of B or better through year 2019. At the signalized intersections on Kimball Avenue and the SH 114 frontage roads, there is sufficient capacity to accommodate the increase in traffic due to the proposed development. The intersections will continue to operate at a LOS of C during the AM and PM peak hours in the year 2019 with the exception of the westbound frontage road, which is just into the threshold of a LOS ranking of D (3.1 seconds above the threshold) in the PM peak for both the year 2014 and the year 2019. Halff recommends construction of the proposed driveway on the westbound frontage even though the recommended spacing is not fully met. The location of the driveway has maximized the spacing from adjacent drives based on the location of the TxDOT control of access. Although the right turn volume at the proposed frontage road driveway exceeds the threshold for consideration of right -turn deceleration lane, Halff does not believe a right -turn deceleration lane is necessary, due to the low frontage road volumes for a three lane facility, limited right-of-way, and given that most of the frontage road traffic will be in the left most lane to access the downstream entrance ramp. -10 - mom HALFF Commercial Development Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 APPENDIX A Site Plan A - mom HALFF ono KIMBALL PARK ((�� ]]��^^��''�� W z�a8 SOUTHLAKE, TX 13Adams CONCEPT PLAN A a,K, ,1102 b„_h_�� Commercial Development Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 APPENDIX B Traffic Count Data B - mom HALFF ry -,a Cade 0>0 C7 n p]u7'n 7 Npppp �M�1 CS] CD mon Ln m0-t vowam omOnd N C� Cl) c� v u� v v m n LO Lo CD Lo tD V� LL - m m co d dad c7 p p d d d r l S r r r r N N N C4 0 H r Q Q r � d+ !CO T� rrrrm �tn V mCo C11 NNNtl7 ddaop pd a CD CD V N mp C d O r (D r 4 a O 6 Q a O O O O p d d o O r(D p J m J W Q r N 2o0dao ooddo pdddo opdao 000 [] a r IE �Qo popdd'd apddd pdddd oopdd aoo Q � r O r *k 0 u7 r- . �p m m N O N v darNC`7 m V u7u7NOLo CO T u7 d V d do Co n CDT- n n�Cl) - [p n M r rr r V rrrru7 C+INNry61 C4 C4N NZT CMo M� � 2 QCL Z[ O `) m a d O O.O 6 4 d a a O 6 m p d a a O 6. CD p d d LL ° p 0000p da000 daaOo CD CD000 aad +�• ° Z ` 2 o V MW [p co n:N N LO to C4 co It CO V pr u]of C7 J F 41 i� n m T O T O r r C] N W u] (V 1 �C•)NCC Z Q V m :CO V V u7 n (D nd� GD tP! IT co CA CID mCV0)n N Odd N NrtCDn'a) p O Ol M.N V �r N C 1 tC] r QU) y' a crysc�t"irno`$ �mmm mrciIn rM-LOica-�M v F _ r N N N N N W C w ¢ L1 Q ❑ ¢' J G 0 ° NNC7NO r C� f+](V1fM CNhN r Lo DLO V tN Ln L]1n Lo .N tDNCC 90 J ¢ ~ C 0: Gon+nmm V inoocor.co u7n<cn� rpm -tM V Can 0 r r r r N- n C V C y M C 7^ N N V V 3 [Ar V mN N N N mN dNo]C7 N V V NC7];CA pu7 COpN n V m r r N'� mC'7 C] C7.C7 C7 Cl) CO Co tomnm TtonM'o VtotiN:o1 aLOaC7Co aar r- n n rn a7 rn m o:m Co [a O T:� p N of N U-) of uN-i CP M fop co NW)CY] LA N(']N N(A V Gd CA o] V d CA �'r� ❑ N N 4 1LL N o d a o 0 0 o O p p d d d 0 d'd a a a a O a o O LL LL Q7 c a m ° of m0 N CO a0r nLL7 ncD 1- Co N�'7-T .0�r ryC7 :Nrrn Nd r N r rN CA LD ? � r r N L 00) co N o) Wd7 CV C)m NLO nm �iaacam nNNnW co 4nLn L mrn m TA) p> d2 0 mrn rnoM o, F_ r m U) ]C dddd'd ddapo p00700 pppdd dpp W J J Y J Q N2222 is a m ��gg m cc��iv mo e m E¢¢¢¢'o ¢¢¢¢ o aaa� p 0.d[id D ❑L— f6 = o0Lnl- oU-304, Wr o ra+n� r � C �.O rC7 V or ro V cicococo y pr co V vv prCYv 6nF` '0 do ❑ ❑ oaoa oC7dp Q U v. p>pp uiLdLo dada: mQ 06 `9 r0��co U) ry co co LLJ T Z m O C7 O N Y a ti (N C 0 Ln r {6 O c Z Z0❑ U- co co CL ❑N 7.L LL co LU v T 2 J^N X V r J LU JY co C i6 mmw On * Woo0r- n-w Nip S'7 mNm�N Q7 YO ar u7r 1C147 Y7O No1mmv 1*r-z" v WnON W O1 [D �[)Y7YN n[DnN nnW n0 r r.m o mc4m rNNNco cpNa NNNNW Lo W No c7Nmmm nto cD NN MMcoco LO coF ITco Q .. ..NLnu'> -m r rrr u] NcorNm cV cl)NNd 00rD m u7[o n cc v) mcoNam mco 01D C7 NCD[v V 1.9 r N ce) n r o T C]R1N m to 1�Om mn WOO r[D r.0 coN P]fDnNa7 m1.mWO ONQ1 Nf7 mm Q1 m[D Nmm N m r m U) LLI nm W r nrncoln cr Inn co �1:cDto(z) rn [p Nr- N r Nca N mNm o hrmr2 rUN Cy cp ui �" N r rrry rrrry C7r�'j W 0) V LO n 10 rD N u7 u) r- N n u7 u7 W ao oo c) n li r J NNmcr]N ?mn -Irrri0-wao CD u7 w]W) tir61: �p N m c'V n V' FO N r N � r co W ko (D.co u] u7 C2 OD L7] O m u)�m N N �:W m O r d N N N 47 n n r r r j r r r r 1L7 N N Ooo N N d a a 0 0 0 d 0 0 0 a O C. O 0 a a C O'o 0 O d c IL c o- J M t W61 V co(n co rp u)n N Ic)i[1Y 61 [DNnnN V [']NNm u7 u7 coNa cn mm?u7 mrr c')cj J K r r r r cp (o N O x �. 2 vv co M:u) NYWN ccmco NW rcc) N M 0 NWT Y g [Q n 1•ED0 dCr nl�T) r NnOt2 r, r N47 r a0000 odoo:o oadoo a0000 040 _ v �y m .a a C O,O 0 0 d a C O 0 d d a O C 4 o O d d C O i- a m Q Q. 7 w O00 da O a00:0 d d 17 O:o 000 Cl s a m C. O � � � a o �ooaoo 00d00 00000 aodo;o 000 r H O a d O O o o d O a o O o O O o d d G O O o o L61 � t O o o o o O d a a a 0 0 0 0 a d a a a 0 o O o 1 ' � fp � r Q1 O a u)n1�rN n cp N W Irpp tTr n'O u7 n N ❑1 ,[i r WrA n r N o r(pp 1+Q1r O co LL'] r W O N N r m r r N �'n r r C,N 1- O m Cl) Q Q M O 000 Cl a 0 0 O 0 d a d a 0 0 0 0 O 0 000 a s a e o y o O O d d a G 00.0 d a a a C:-00000 O d C)�' -J y 7 S O N LO +- N Mmn� Co W o7 m.00 if7 Cp �D4� m N Cr�p O r m o o m o7 co p- v � r r ��rpnryo �u"!W rD� �n cV r r r r r r r r r r N ew N?m IT al C) W to co Nu7061N WrNn ca I�Mr J m'r Cl)'T CO 4 C) ? Y v. N'r2 N 4 m m m co r r r cod N .� E¢¢¢¢o ¢¢¢¢o D- dELao aaaao ❑r- a t2 CD Lc) o U-)d Lo CD Lc) CoW) o Sri 0 1n � � drm or cnY arm"q Or cry sr a a6 nnn 1D d a d a oW of 0 q 0 o co O L L i gg�O' OOLO oO CL �QF [7 V, m Quality Counts TWO CHANNEL SUMMARY Page: 1 Starting: 5/17/2012 Site Reference: 000000000000 File: 114.prn Site ID: #3 KIMBALL City: SOUTHLAKE, TX Location: #3 KIMBALL NORTH OF SH 114 County: TIME LANE 1 LANE 2 TOTAL NB SB am pm --------------------------------------------------------------- am pm am pm 00:15 20 141 22 104 42 245 00:30 25 139 24 125 49 264 00:45 16 147 24 92 40 239 01:00 12 73 153 580 19 89 95 416 31 162 248 996 01:15 13 156 15 97 28 253 01:30 15 155 13 98 28 253 01:45 20 164 7 103 27 267 02.00 17 65 116 591 14 49 94 392 31 114 210 983 02:15 13 126 13 99 26 225 02:30 9 120 9 90 18 210 02:45 11 151 14 112 25 263 03:00 10 43 120 517 9 45 102 403 19 88 222 920 03:15 13 159 17 100 30 259 03.30 7 143 9 112 16 255 03:45 5 169 12 102 17 271 04:00 13 38 152 623 27 65 100 414 40 103 252 1037 04.15 7 168 29 101 36 269 04:30 10 163 31 109 41 272 04.45 17 135 41 118 58 253 05:00 15 49 151 617 53 154 106 434 68 203 257 1051 05:15 31 140 88 93 119 233 05:30 32 116 78 105 110 221 05:45 38 120 74 80 112 200 06:00 43 144 144 520 76 316 90 368 119 460 234 888 06:15 62 172 95 101 157 273 06:30 63 130 104 93 167 223 06:45 54 177 106 75 160 252 07:00 78 257 156 635 111 416 72 341 189 673 228 976 07:15 107 143 130 75 237 218 07:30 102 133 115 80 217 213 07:45 76 131 123 76 199 207 08:00 105 390 113 520 139 507 69 300 244 897 182 820 08:15 80 129 115 72 195 201 08.30 107 118 108 57 215 175 06:45 109 122 86 73 195 195 09:00 93 389 120 489 87 396 60 262 160 785 180 751 09.15 95 121 74 59 169 180 09:30 102 102 98 44 200 146 09:45 93 96 96 45 189 141 10:00 114 404 100 419 80 348 34 182 194 752 134 601 10:15 116 77 92 37 208 114 10:30 120 58 87 30 207 88 10:45 124 61 107 32 231 93 11:00 146 506 63 259 92 378 21 120 238 884 84 379 11.15 144 36 85 23 229 59 11:30 139 43 96 20 235 63 11:45 151 30 99 24 250 54 12:00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 141 575 40 149 98 378 22 89 239 953 62 238 TOTALS 8852 6862 15714 AM Times 11:00 07:15 11.15 AM Peaks 580 507 953 Factors PHF: .96 PHF: .91 PHF: .95 PM Times 15.45 16:15 15:45 PM Peaks 652 434 1064 Factors PHF: .96 PHF: .91 PHF: .97 Quality Counts TWO CHANNEL SUMMARY Starting: 5/17/2012 Site Reference: 000000000000 Site ID: #4 SH 114 WB Location: #4 SH 114 WB FRT RA WEST OF KIMBALL TIME LANE WB LANE 2 ws File: KIMBALL_prn City: SOUTHLAKE, TX County: 01MyWTV Pae1e - I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- am pm am pm am pm 00:15 14 156 0 0 14 156 00.30 15 180 0 0 15 180 00:45 11 210 0 0 11 210 01:00 6 46 243 789 0 0 0 0 6 46 243 789 01:15 10 228 0 0 10 228 01:30 5 209 0 0 5 209 01:45 1 221 0 0 1 221 02.00 6 22 186 844 0 0 0 0 6 22 186 844 02.15 3 200 0 0 3 200 02.30 11 183 0 0 11 183 02.45 3 209 0 0 3 209 03:00 2 19 187 779 0 0 0 0 2 19 187 779 03.15 1 197 0 0 1 197 03.30 1 185 0 0 1 185 03:45 6 187 0 0 6 187 04.00 2 10 180 749 0 0 0 0 2 10 180 749 04:15 1 200 0 0 1 200 04:30 1 214 0 0 1 214 04:45 4 202 0 0 4 202 05.00 1 7 202 818 0 0 0 0 1 7 202 818 05.15 9 242 0 0 9 242 05:30 13 237 0 0 13 237 05.45 15 230 0 0 15 230 06:00 18 55 214 923 0 0 0 0 18 55 214 923 06:15 21 228 0 0 21 228 06:30 30 233 0 0 30 233 06:45 35 221 0 0 35 221 07:00 70 156 213 895 0 0 0 0 70 156 213 895 07:15 78 197 0 0 78 197 07:30 102 148 0 0 102 148 07:45 126 141 0 0 126 141 08:00 124 430 163 649 0 0 0 0 124 430 163 649 08:15 119 147 0 0 119 147 08:30 120 148 0 0 120 148 08:45 100 137 0 a 100 137 09:00 98 437 119 551 0 0 0 0 98 437 119 551 09:15 94 105 0 0 94 105 09:30 83 109 0 0 83 109 09:45 95 82 0 0 95 82 10:00 100 372 83 379 0 0 0 0 100 372 83 379 10:15 101 75 0 0 101 75 10:30 90 77 0 0 90 77 10.45 109 50 0 0 109 50 11:00 114 414 35 237 0 0 0 0 114 414 35 237 11:15 113 33 0 0 113 33 11:30 130 28 0 0 130 28 11:45 148 19 0 0 148 19 12:00 181 572 20 100 0 0 0 0 181 572 20 100 TOTALS 10253 0 10253 '- AM Times 11:15 AM Peaks 572 Factors PHF: .79 PM Times 17:15 PM Peaks 923 Factors PHF: .95 11:15 572 PHF: .79 17:15 923 PHF: .95 Quality Counts TWO CHANNEL SUMMARY Starting: 5/17/2012 Site Reference: 000000000000 Site ID: #5 SH 14 ON Location: #5 SH 114 WB ON RAMP WEST OF KIMBALL TIME LANE 1 WB LANE 2 WB File: KIMBA-LL. prn City: SOUTHLAKE, TX County: 11011V M Page: 1 am Pm ----- am -------------- PM am pm 00:15 10 111 0 --------------------------------------- 0 10 111 00:30 13 131 0 0 13 131 00:45 11 142 0 0 11 142 01:00 5 39 161 545 0 0 0 0 5 39 161 545 01:15 9 156 0 0 9 156 01.30 2 155 0 0 2 155 01:45 1 164 0 0 1 164 02:00 2 14 116 591 0 0 0 0 2 14 116 591 02:15 2 126 0 0 2 126 02:30 10 120 0 0 10 120 02:45 2 151 0 0 2 151 03.00 2 16 120 517 0 0 0 0 2 16 120 517 03:15 0 136 0 0 0 136 03:30 1 141 0 0 1 141 03:45 6 135 0 0 6 135 04:00 0 7 127 539 0 0 0 0 0 7 127 539 04:15 1 140 0 0 1 140 04.30 1 157 0 0 1 157 04.45 3 150 0 0 3 150 05:00 1 6 151 598 0 0 0 0 1 6 151 598 05:15 5 198 0 0 5 198 05.30 3 175 0 0 3 175 05:45 5 165 0 0 5 165 06:00 12 25 149 687 0 0 0 0 12 25 149 687 06:15 16 154 0 0 16 154 06:30 20 133 0 0 20 133 06:45 24 157 0 0 24 157 07:00 41 101 148 592 0 0 0 0 41 101 146 592 07:15 55 145 0 0 55 145 07:30 74 118 0 0 74 118 07:45 86 106 0 0 86 106 08:00 73 288 132 501 0 0 0 0 73 288 132 501 08:15 79 108 0 0 79 108 08:30 58 118 0 0 58 118 08:45 57 100 0 0 57 100 09:00 55 249 100 426 0 0 0 0 55 249 100 426 09:15 55 85 0 0 55 85 09:30 50 79 0 0 50 79 09:45 56 60 0 0 56 60 10:00 55 216 64 288 0 0 0 0 55 216 64 288 10:15 53 62 0 0 53 62 10:30 53 66 0 0 53 66 10:45 66 42 0 0 66 42 11:00 72 244 25 195 0 0 0 0 72 244 25 195 11:15 73 25 0 0 73 25 11:30 94 28 0 0 94 28 11:45 89 18 0 0 89 18 12:00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 101 357 16 87 0 0 0 0 101 357 16 87 TOTALS 7126 0 7128 AM Times 11:15 AM Peaks 357 Factors PHF: .88 PM Times 17:00 PM Peaks 689 Factors PHF: .86 11:15 357 PHF: .88 17:00 689 PHF: .86 Commercial Development Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 APPENDIX C Turning Movement Volume Exhibits C- mom HALFF IuvI rCQK - r-AlbUn Exhibit 2 rivI rCQK - r-AlbUn Exhibit 3 AM Peak - inos Exhibit 4 r1V1 rCQK - 1 f 1 Exhibit 5 AM Peak - BUIICIOUt (2014 Exhibit 6 PM Peak - BUIICIOUt (2014 Exhibit 7 AM Peak - Buimout plus 5 vears (2u19 Exhibit 8 PM Peak - Buimout plus 5 vears (2u19 Exhibit 9 Commercial Development Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 APPENDIX D Analysis Output/Reports - D - ;■; HALFF HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AM Peak - Existing --1. .4--- i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r tt tt Volume (vph) 0 0 0 365 98 58 222 333 0 0 464 115 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3283 1583 1770 3539 4934 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3283 1583 1770 3539 4934 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 397 107 63 241 362 0 0 504 125 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 198 306 63 241 362 0 0 603 0 Turn Type Perm NA Free Prot NA NA Protected Phases 8 16 5 56 6 Permitted Phases 8 16 Free Actuated Green, G (s) 29.1 29.1 120.0 22.8 82.9 56.1 Effective Green, g (s) 29.1 29.1 120.0 22.8 82.9 56.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.24 1.00 0.19 0.69 0.47 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 390 796 1583 336 2444 2306 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 c0.10 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm c0.12 0.09 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.38 0.04 0.72 0.15 0.26 Uniform Delay, d1 39.3 38.0 0.0 45.6 6.4 19.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.38 1.13 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 0.3 0.0 7.0 0.0 0.3 Delay (s) 40.3 38.3 0.0 70.0 7.2 19.7 Level of Service D D A E A B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 34.7 32.3 19.7 Approach LOS A C C B Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 28.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.44 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Halff Associates, Inc. 1: Kimball Ave & WB SH 114 Frontage Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AM Peak - Existing --1. .4--- i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r ttt r Vii tt Volume (vph) 171 303 393 0 0 0 0 384 188 176 653 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3381 1583 5085 1583 1770 3539 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3381 1583 5085 1583 1770 3539 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 186 329 427 0 0 0 0 417 204 191 710 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 166 349 427 0 0 0 0 417 97 191 710 0 Turn Type Perm NA Free NA Perm Prot NA Protected Phases 412 2 1 12 Permitted Phases 412 Free 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 29.1 29.1 120.0 57.2 57.2 21.7 82.9 Effective Green, g (s) 29.1 29.1 120.0 57.2 57.2 21.7 82.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.24 1.00 0.48 0.48 0.18 0.69 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 390 819 1583 2423 754 320 2444 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.11 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.10 0.27 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.43 0.43 0.27 0.17 0.13 0.60 0.29 Uniform Delay, d1 38.4 38.4 0.0 17.9 17.5 45.1 7.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.16 1.53 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.4 2.9 0.1 Delay (s) 39.1 38.8 0.4 18.1 17.9 55.1 11.1 Level of Service D D A B B E B Approach Delay (s) 21.4 0.0 18.0 20.4 Approach LOS C A B C Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 20.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Halff Associates, Inc. 2: Kimball Ave & EB SH 114 Frontage Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AM Peak -Existing t t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Y tt tt Volume (veh/h) 1 2 2 379 500 0 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 2 2 412 543 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 959 pX, platoon unblocked 0.96 vC, conflicting volume 754 272 543 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 652 272 543 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 382 726 1022 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 3 2 206 206 272 272 Volume Left 1 2 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 2 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 559 1022 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.16 0.16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 11.5 8.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 11.5 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 23.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Halff Associates, Inc. 3: Kimball Ave & Driveway A HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis PM Peak - Existing --1. .4--- i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r tt tt Volume (vph) 0 0 0 441 157 138 442 557 0 0 369 99 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3294 1583 1770 3539 4923 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3294 1583 1770 3539 4923 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 479 171 150 480 605 0 0 401 108 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 239 411 150 480 605 0 0 474 0 Turn Type Perm NA Free Prot NA NA Protected Phases 8 16 5 56 6 Permitted Phases 8 16 Free Actuated Green, G (s) 32.9 32.9 120.0 41.2 79.1 33.9 Effective Green, g (s) 32.9 32.9 120.0 41.2 79.1 33.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 1.00 0.34 0.66 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 441 903 1583 607 2332 1390 v/s Ratio Prot c0.27 0.17 c0.10 v/s Ratio Perm c0.15 0.12 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.54 0.46 0.09 0.79 0.26 0.34 Uniform Delay, d1 37.1 36.1 0.0 35.5 8.4 34.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.39 0.85 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 0.4 0.1 6.6 0.1 0.7 Delay (s) 38.5 36.5 0.1 55.8 7.2 34.8 Level of Service D D A E A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 30.3 28.7 34.8 Approach LOS A C C C Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 30.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Halff Associates, Inc. 1: Kimball Ave & WB SH 114 Frontage Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis PM Peak - Existing --1. .4--- i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r ttt r Vii tt Volume (vph) 247 505 374 0 0 0 0 752 155 176 653 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3382 1583 5085 1583 1770 3539 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3382 1583 5085 1583 1770 3539 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 268 549 407 0 0 0 0 817 168 191 710 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 91 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 241 576 407 0 0 0 0 817 77 191 710 0 Turn Type Perm NA Free NA Perm Prot NA Protected Phases 412 2 1 12 Permitted Phases 412 Free 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 32.9 32.9 120.0 54.9 54.9 20.2 79.1 Effective Green, g (s) 32.9 32.9 120.0 54.9 54.9 20.2 79.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 1.00 0.46 0.46 0.17 0.66 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 441 927 1583 2326 724 297 2332 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 c0.11 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.15 0.17 0.26 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.62 0.26 0.35 0.11 0.64 0.30 Uniform Delay, d1 37.2 38.1 0.0 21.0 18.6 46.5 8.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.87 Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 1.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 4.4 0.1 Delay (s) 38.6 39.4 0.4 21.5 18.9 46.4 16.3 Level of Service D D A C B D B Approach Delay (s) 26.3 0.0 21.0 22.7 Approach LOS C A C C Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 23.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Halff Associates, Inc. 2: Kimball Ave & EB SH 114 Frontage Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis PM Peak -Existing t t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Y tt tt Volume (veh/h) 2 3 2 536 379 0 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 3 2 583 412 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 959 pX, platoon unblocked 0.92 vC, conflicting volume 708 206 412 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 520 206 412 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 448 800 1143 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 5 2 291 291 206 206 Volume Left 2 2 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 3 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 609 1143 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.12 0.12 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 11.0 8.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 11.0 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 24.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Halff Associates, Inc. 3: Kimball Ave & Driveway A HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AM Peak- BulIildout(2014) --1. .4--- t i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r tt tt Volume (vph) 0 0 0 376 234 93 246 366 0 0 566 118 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3319 1583 1770 3539 4954 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3319 1583 1770 3539 4954 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 409 254 101 267 398 0 0 615 128 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 217 446 101 267 398 0 0 723 0 Turn Type Perm NA Free Prot NA NA Protected Phases 8 16 5 56 6 Permitted Phases 8 16 Free Actuated Green, G (s) 31.0 31.0 120.0 24.9 81.0 52.1 Effective Green, g (s) 31.0 31.0 120.0 24.9 81.0 52.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 1.00 0.21 0.68 0.43 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 415 857 1583 367 2388 2150 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 c0.11 c0.15 v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.13 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.52 0.06 0.73 0.17 0.34 Uniform Delay, d1 38.2 38.1 0.0 44.4 7.1 22.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.39 1.08 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 0.6 0.1 6.9 0.0 0.4 Delay (s) 39.3 38.7 0.1 68.7 7.7 22.9 Level of Service D D A E A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 33.8 32.2 22.9 Approach LOS A C C C Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 29.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.50 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Halff Associates, Inc. 1: Kimball Ave & WB SH 114 Frontage Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AM Peak- BulIildout(2014) --1. .4--- t i Movement IBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r W r Vii ft Volume (vph) 183 312 405 0 0 0 0 429 194 254 688 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3378 1583 5085 1583 1770 3539 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3378 1583 5085 1583 1770 3539 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 199 339 440 0 0 0 0 466 211 276 748 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 173 365 440 0 0 0 0 466 86 276 748 0 Turn Type Perm NA Free NA Perm Prot NA Protected Phases 412 2 1 12 Permitted Phases 412 Free 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 31.0 31.0 120.0 48.8 48.8 28.2 81.0 Effective Green, g (s) 31.0 31.0 120.0 48.8 48.8 28.2 81.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 1.00 0.41 0.41 0.23 0.68 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 415 872 1583 2067 643 415 2388 v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 c0.16 c0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.11 0.11 0.28 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.42 0.28 0.23 0.13 0.67 0.31 Uniform Delay, d1 37.0 37.0 0.0 23.3 22.3 41.6 8.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.36 1.31 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 3.8 0.1 Delay (s) 37.7 37.3 0.4 23.5 22.8 60.3 10.6 Level of Service D D A C C E B Approach Delay (s) 20.8 0.0 23.3 24.0 Approach LOS C A C C Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 22.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.46 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Halff Associates, Inc. 2: Kimball Ave & EB SH 114 Frontage Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AM Peak- Buildout(2014) t t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Y tt t Volume (veh/h) 23 90 56 390 515 50 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 25 98 61 424 560 54 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 959 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 921 307 614 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 921 307 614 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 90 86 94 cM capacity (veh/h) 253 689 961 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 123 61 212 212 373 241 Volume Left 25 61 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 98 0 0 0 0 54 cSH 510 961 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.24 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.22 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 23 5 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 14.3 9.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 14.3 1.1 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Halff Associates, Inc. 3: Kimball Ave & Driveway A HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AM Peak- Buildout(2014) Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tO r Volume (veh/h) 0 0 519 226 0 36 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 564 246 0 39 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 590 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 810 687 311 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 810 687 311 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 94 cM capacity (veh/h) 812 381 685 Direction, Lane # WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 SB 1 Volume Total 226 226 358 39 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 246 39 cSH 1700 1700 1700 685 Volume to Capacity 0.13 0.13 0.21 0.06 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 5 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.6 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 10.6 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 25.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Halff Associates, Inc. 6: WB SH 114 Frontage Rd & Main Drive HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis PM Peak- BulIildout(2014) --1. .4--- t i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r tt tt Volume (vph) 0 0 0 454 252 164 466 590 0 0 563 102 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3313 1583 1770 3539 4968 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3313 1583 1770 3539 4968 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 493 274 178 507 641 0 0 612 111 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 251 516 178 507 641 0 0 704 0 Turn Type Perm NA Free Prot NA NA Protected Phases 8 16 5 56 6 Permitted Phases 8 16 Free Actuated Green, G (s) 32.1 32.1 120.0 42.4 79.9 33.5 Effective Green, g (s) 32.1 32.1 120.0 42.4 79.9 33.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 1.00 0.35 0.67 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 430 886 1583 625 2356 1386 v/s Ratio Prot c0.29 0.18 c0.14 v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.16 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.58 0.11 0.81 0.27 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 38.2 38.1 0.0 35.2 8.2 36.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.93 0.84 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.0 1.0 0.1 7.1 0.1 1.3 Delay (s) 40.2 39.1 0.1 75.0 6.9 37.7 Level of Service D D A E A D Approach Delay (s) 0.0 32.1 37.0 37.7 Approach LOS A C D D Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 35.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.67 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Halff Associates, Inc. 1: Kimball Ave & WB SH 114 Frontage Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis PM Peak- BulIildout(2014) --1. .4--- t i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r ttt r Vii tt Volume (vph) 259 520 385 0 0 0 0 797 160 333 704 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3382 1583 5085 1583 1770 3539 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3382 1583 5085 1583 1770 3539 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 282 565 418 0 0 0 0 866 174 362 765 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 254 593 418 0 0 0 0 866 68 362 765 0 Turn Type Perm NA Free NA Perm Prot NA Protected Phases 412 2 1 12 Permitted Phases 412 Free 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 32.1 32.1 120.0 43.6 43.6 32.3 79.9 Effective Green, g (s) 32.1 32.1 120.0 43.6 43.6 32.3 79.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 1.00 0.36 0.36 0.27 0.67 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 430 904 1583 1847 575 476 2356 v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 c0.20 0.22 v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 0.18 0.26 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.66 0.26 0.47 0.12 0.76 0.32 Uniform Delay, d1 38.2 39.0 0.0 29.3 25.4 40.3 8.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.22 1.69 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 1.7 0.4 0.9 0.4 6.2 0.1 Delay (s) 40.4 40.8 0.4 30.2 25.8 55.6 14.5 Level of Service D D A C C E B Approach Delay (s) 27.4 0.0 29.4 27.7 Approach LOS C A C C Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 28.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.63 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Halff Associates, Inc. 2: Kimball Ave & EB SH 114 Frontage Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis PM Peak- Buildout(2014) t t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Y tt t Volume (veh/h) 49 187 38 552 390 34 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 53 203 41 600 424 37 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 959 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 825 230 461 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 825 230 461 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 82 74 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 299 772 1097 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 257 41 300 300 283 178 Volume Left 53 41 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 203 0 0 0 0 37 cSH 581 1097 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.44 0.04 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.10 Queue Length 95th (ft) 56 3 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 16.0 8.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 16.0 0.5 0.0 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Halff Associates, Inc. 3: Kimball Ave & Driveway A HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis PM Peak- Buildout(2014) Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tO r Volume (veh/h) 0 0 980 153 0 76 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 1065 166 0 83 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 590 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1232 1148 438 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1232 1148 438 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 85 cM capacity (veh/h) 562 192 566 Direction, Lane # WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 SB 1 Volume Total 426 426 379 83 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 166 83 cSH 1700 1700 1700 566 Volume to Capacity 0.25 0.25 0.22 0.15 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 13 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.4 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 12.4 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Halff Associates, Inc. 6: WB SH 114 Frontage Rd & Main Drive HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AM Peak - Buildout plus 5lIyears (2019) --1. .4- t i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r tt tt Volume (vph) 0 0 0 436 250 102 282 421 0 0 642 137 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3315 1583 1770 3539 4951 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3315 1583 1770 3539 4951 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 474 272 111 307 458 0 0 698 149 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 246 500 111 307 458 0 0 824 0 Turn Type Perm NA Free Prot NA NA Protected Phases 8 16 5 56 6 Permitted Phases 8 16 Free Actuated Green, G (s) 32.6 32.6 120.0 27.7 79.4 47.7 Effective Green, g (s) 32.6 32.6 120.0 27.7 79.4 47.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 1.00 0.23 0.66 0.40 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 437 900 1583 408 2341 1968 v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 c0.13 c0.17 v/s Ratio Perm c0.15 0.15 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.07 0.75 0.20 0.42 Uniform Delay, d1 37.6 37.5 0.0 43.0 7.9 26.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.45 1.03 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 0.7 0.1 7.4 0.0 0.7 Delay (s) 39.2 38.2 0.1 69.8 8.1 26.8 Level of Service D D A E A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 33.6 32.9 26.8 Approach LOS A C C C Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 31.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Halff Associates, Inc. 1: Kimball Ave & WB SH 114 Frontage Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AM Peak - Buildout plus 5lIyears (2019) --1. .4- t i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r ttt r Vii tt Volume (vph) 211 362 469 0 0 0 0 491 224 283 795 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3379 1583 5085 1583 1770 3539 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3379 1583 5085 1583 1770 3539 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 229 393 510 0 0 0 0 534 243 308 864 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 151 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 202 420 510 0 0 0 0 534 92 308 864 0 Turn Type Perm NA Free NA Perm Prot NA Protected Phases 412 2 1 12 Permitted Phases 412 Free 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 32.6 32.6 120.0 45.2 45.2 30.2 79.4 Effective Green, g (s) 32.6 32.6 120.0 45.2 45.2 30.2 79.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 1.00 0.38 0.38 0.25 0.66 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 437 917 1583 1915 596 445 2341 v/s Ratio Prot 0.11 c0.17 c0.24 v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.12 0.32 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.46 0.32 0.28 0.15 0.69 0.37 Uniform Delay, d1 36.4 36.4 0.0 26.0 24.7 40.7 9.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.37 1.25 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.5 4.2 0.1 Delay (s) 37.2 36.7 0.5 26.4 25.3 60.1 11.4 Level of Service D D A C C E B Approach Delay (s) 20.5 0.0 26.1 24.2 Approach LOS C A C C Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 23.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Halff Associates, Inc. 2: Kimball Ave & EB SH 114 Frontage Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AM Peak - Buildout plus 5 years (2019) t t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Y tt t Volume (veh/h) 24 91 56 453 597 50 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 26 99 61 492 649 54 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 959 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1044 352 703 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1044 352 703 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 88 85 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 209 645 890 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 125 61 246 246 433 271 Volume Left 26 61 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 99 0 0 0 0 54 cSH 449 890 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.28 0.07 0.14 0.14 0.25 0.16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 28 5 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 16.1 9.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 16.1 1.0 0.0 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Halff Associates, Inc. 3: Kimball Ave & Driveway A HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis AM Peak - Buildout plus 5 years (2019) Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tO r Volume (veh/h) 0 0 602 226 0 36 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 654 246 0 39 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 590 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 900 777 341 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 900 777 341 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 94 cM capacity (veh/h) 751 333 655 Direction, Lane # WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 SB 1 Volume Total 262 262 377 39 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 246 39 cSH 1700 1700 1700 655 Volume to Capacity 0.15 0.15 0.22 0.06 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 5 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.8 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 10.8 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Halff Associates, Inc. 6: WB SH 114 Frontage Rd & Main Drive HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis PM Peak - Buildout plus 5lIyears (2019) --1. .4- t i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r tt tt Volume (vph) 0 0 0 527 277 187 539 681 0 0 624 118 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3309 1583 1770 3539 4964 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3309 1583 1770 3539 4964 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 573 301 203 586 740 0 0 678 128 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 286 588 203 586 740 0 0 785 0 Turn Type Perm NA Free Prot NA NA Protected Phases 8 16 5 56 6 Permitted Phases 8 16 Free Actuated Green, G (s) 33.9 33.9 120.0 46.1 78.1 28.0 Effective Green, g (s) 33.9 33.9 120.0 46.1 78.1 28.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.28 1.00 0.38 0.65 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 454 934 1583 679 2303 1158 v/s Ratio Prot c0.33 0.21 c0.16 v/s Ratio Perm 0.18 0.18 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.13 0.86 0.32 0.68 Uniform Delay, d1 37.6 37.6 0.0 34.0 9.2 41.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.01 0.84 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.7 1.3 0.2 9.4 0.1 3.2 Delay (s) 40.3 38.9 0.2 77.7 7.8 45.1 Level of Service D D A E A D Approach Delay (s) 0.0 32.0 38.7 45.1 Approach LOS A C D D Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 38.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Halff Associates, Inc. 1: Kimball Ave & WB SH 114 Frontage Rd HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis PM Peak - Buildout plus 5lIyears (2019) --1. .4- t i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r ttt r Vii tt Volume (vph) 259 603 447 0 0 0 0 920 185 362 811 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3383 1583 5085 1583 1770 3539 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3383 1583 5085 1583 1770 3539 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 282 655 486 0 0 0 0 1000 201 393 882 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 96 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 254 683 486 0 0 0 0 1000 105 393 882 0 Turn Type Perm NA Free NA Perm Prot NA Protected Phases 412 2 1 12 Permitted Phases 412 Free 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 33.9 33.9 120.0 39.6 39.6 34.5 78.1 Effective Green, g (s) 33.9 33.9 120.0 39.6 39.6 34.5 78.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.28 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.29 0.65 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 454 955 1583 1678 522 508 2303 v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 c0.22 0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 0.20 0.31 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.72 0.31 0.60 0.20 0.77 0.38 Uniform Delay, d1 36.7 38.7 0.0 33.5 28.8 39.2 9.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.23 1.88 Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 2.6 0.5 1.6 0.9 5.7 0.1 Delay (s) 38.2 41.3 0.5 35.1 29.7 53.8 18.4 Level of Service D D A D C D B Approach Delay (s) 26.8 0.0 34.2 29.3 Approach LOS C A C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 29.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Halff Associates, Inc. 2: Kimball Ave & EB SH 114 Frontage Rd HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis PM Peak - Buildout plus 5 years (2019) t t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Y tt t Volume (veh/h) 49 187 38 640 453 34 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 53 203 41 696 492 37 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 959 pX, platoon unblocked 0.98 vC, conflicting volume 941 265 529 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 890 265 529 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 80 72 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 264 734 1034 Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 257 41 348 348 328 201 Volume Left 53 41 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 203 0 0 0 0 37 cSH 536 1034 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.48 0.04 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.12 Queue Length 95th (ft) 64 3 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 17.7 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 17.7 0.5 0.0 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Halff Associates, Inc. 3: Kimball Ave & Driveway A HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis PM Peak - Buildout plus 5 years (2019) Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tO r Volume (veh/h) 0 0 1135 153 0 76 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 1234 166 0 83 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 590 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1400 1317 494 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1400 1317 494 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 84 cM capacity (veh/h) 484 149 521 Direction, Lane # WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 SB 1 Volume Total 493 493 413 83 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 166 83 cSH 1700 1700 1700 521 Volume to Capacity 0.29 0.29 0.24 0.16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 14 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.2 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 13.2 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Halff Associates, Inc. 6: WB SH 114 Frontage Rd & Main Drive Commercial Development Southlake, Texas AVO 29858 APPENDIX E North Central Texas Council of Governments Capacity Estimates for Roadways - E - ;■; HALFF ROADWAY SERVICE VOLUME (CAPACITY) ESTIMATES THOROUGHFARE CAPACITY SUMMARY Level of Service "C" Level of Service "D" Level of Service "E" Roadway Type Daily Service Hourly Service Volume Range Daily Service Hourly Service Volume Range Daily Service Hourly Service Volume Range Volume Range* Volume Range* Volume Range* per Lane** er Lane** per Lane** 8 D-A*** 41,000 - 47,000 620 - 700 47,000 - 52,000 700-775 52,000 - 58,000 775 - 875 6 D-A*** 31,000 - 35,000 620 - 700 35,000 - 39,000 700-775 39,000 - 44,000 775 - 875 4 D-C*** 21,000 - 23,000 620 - 700 23,000 - 26,000 700-775 26,000 - 39,000 775 - 875 4U-At 17,000-18,000 500-550 18,000 - 21,000 550-625 21,000 - 23,000 625 - 675 4 U-B$ 15,000-17,000 440 - 500 17,000-18,000 500-550 18,000 - 21,000 550-625 2U-C 6,000 - 8,000 350 - 400 8,000 - 9,000 400 - 450 9,000-10,000 450-500 * Level of Service with "K" = 0.10 and T" = 60/40 ** Assumes signal progression; no parking; some access management; and increased intersection capacity *** Assumes 12-foot lanes and divided roadway t 4-lane undivided with 12-foot lanes t 4-lane undivided with 11-foot lanes HOURLY SERVICE VOLUME PER LANE (Divided or One-Wav Roads) Functional Class Area Type Freeway Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Local Ramp Frontage Road HOV Lane CBD 2,050 575 575 475 475 1,250 575 1,800 Fringe 2,125 625 625 500 500 1,375 625 1,800 Urban Residential 2,150 675 650 525 525 1,425 650 1,800 Suburban Residential 2,225 750 725 575 575 1,600 725 1,800 Rural 2,300 1 825 775 1 600 600 1,725 775 1,800 HOURLY SERVICE VOLUME PER LANE (Undivided Roads) Functional Class Area Type Freeway Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Local Ramp Frontage Road HOV Lane CBD N/A 525 525 425 425 1,250 525 N/A Fringe N/A 575 575 450 450 1,375 575 N/A Urban Residential N/A 625 600 475 475 1,425 600 N/A Suburban Residential N/A 700 650 525 525 1,600 650 N/A Rural N/A 750 700 1 550 1 550 1 1,725 1 700 1 N/A Source: NCTCOG