Item 6H and 6I - Traffic Impact Analysis ExhibitA TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR
SOUTHLAKE CENTER
A PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
Prepared for:
WWirikelmanii
&Associates, Inc.
Winkelmann & Associates, Inc.
6750 Hillcrest Plaza
Suite 325
Dallas, Texas 75230
Prepared by:
DeShazo Group
Texas Registered Engineering Firm F-3199
Engineers • Planners
400 South Houston Street
Suite 330 • Union Station
Dallas, Texas 75202
Phone: 214-748-6740
Fax: 214-748-7037
April 24, 2014
DeShazo #13057
IL DeShazo Group
Traffic. Transportation Planning. Parking. Design.
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
To: Michael Clark, P.E.
Winkelmann & Associates, Inc.
From: DeShazo Group, Inc.
Date: April 24, 2014
Re: A Traffic Impact Analysis for Southlake Center, a Proposed Commercial Development in
Southlake, Texas (DeShazo #13057)
Introduction
The services of DeShazo Group, Inc. were retained by Winkelmann & Associates, Inc. to conduct a Traffic
Impact Analysis and Access Assessment for Southlake Center, a proposed commercial development located
at the intersection of Dove Road and White Chapel Boulevard in Southlake, Texas (see Exhibit 1). The
DeShazo Group is an engineering consulting firm providing licensed engineers skilled in the field of traffic &
transportation engineering.
This study will examine the potential traffic generated by the proposed development plan and will determine
the general availability of access and roadway capacity available to serve it for the following scenarios:
• Existing conditions (2013)
• Project buildout (2015 - if needed)
• Project buildout + 5 years (2020).
The 2015 scenario will only be analyzed if the 2020 scenario is found to require mitigation. If the 2020
scenario provides acceptable levels of service without roadway improvements beyond those proposed as
part of the project, it can be assumed that the 2015 scenario (which will reflect lower traffic volumes) will
also provide acceptable levels of service.
Once completed, this report will be provided to City of Southlake staff (Staff) and TxDOT for review and to
fulfill the associated requirements of the local approval process.
Proposed Development Characteristics
This proposed development consists of approximately 200,000 square feet of commercial uses on the
western tract and 69 single-family dwelling units on the eastern tract. The overall project is proposed to be
fully developed by the end of 2015. Exhibit 2 offers a conceptual site plan and shows the roadway
improvements included with the project including:
1) The construction of deceleration lanes on Dove at Kirkwood, on Kirkwood and the site driveways and
on SH 114 at Drives 1 and 2,
2) the construction of a raised median on Dove at Drive 3 and
3) the completion of Kirkwood as a 4-lane, divided facility south of Dove.
400 South Houston Street, Suite 330 Dallas, Texas 75202 P. 214.748.6740 F. 214.748.7037 www.deshazogroup.com
Roadways and Accessibility
The following existing roadways will provide primary (direct) access to the subject site and are included in the
study area (refer to Exhibit 3 for Southlake's Mobility Plan):
• Dove Road
a 4-lane, divided roadway with additional turn lanes at major intersections between
Kirkwood Boulevard and SH 114 and a 2-lane, undivided roadway east of Kirkwood Boulevard
and West of SH 114. Shown as an A4D between Kirkwood Boulevard and SH 114 and an A2U
east of Kirkwood Boulevard and West of SH 114 (with the possibility of an upgrade to an A4D
if/when traffic volumes warrant).
• White Chapel Boulevard
o a 2-lane, undivided roadway. Shown as an A4D between Dove Road and SH 114 and a C2U
north of Dove Road.
• SH 114 Frontage Roads
o the northbound frontage road is a 4-lane, one-way roadway adjacent to the site and the
southbound frontage road is a 3-lane, one-way roadway.
• Kirkwood Boulevard
o a 4-lane, divided roadway north of Dove Road and east of White Chapel Boulevard. The
portion of Kirkwood Boulevard between Dove Road and White Chapel Boulevard has not
been constructed.
The following intersections will also be included in the impact analysis:
• Dove Road @ White Chapel Boulevard,
• Dove Road @ Kirkwood Boulevard,
• Dove Road @ the SH 114 frontage roads,
• Dove Road @ 2 site driveways,
• White Chapel Boulevard @ 2 site driveways and
• SH 114 northbound frontage road @ 2 site driveways.
Traffic Volumes
The TIA presented in this report will analyze the operational conditions for the peak hours and study area as
defined above using standardized analytical methodologies where applicable. It will examine current traffic
conditions, future background traffic conditions, future traffic conditions with the proposed project fully
developed and operational and a final scenario occurring 5 years after development is complete. Once
current traffic information was collected, future background volumes were developed by applying an annual
growth rate to the existing count data. Then, the traffic generated by the proposed development was
projected using the standard four -step approach: Trip Generation, Mode Split, Trip Distribution and Traffic
Assignment. By adding the site -generated traffic to the future background traffic, the resulting traffic impact
to operational conditions may be assessed from which mitigation measures may be recommended.
Existing Traffic Volumes
Existing peak hour traffic volumes were collected in the study area in May and August of 2013. These
volumes are shown in Exhibits 4 - 6. Detailed traffic counts can be found in the Appendix.
Page 2
Future Background Traffic Volumes
The standard procedure for determining the future background or non -site -related traffic involves several
steps. The first is to determine an average annual growth rate for the roadways in the study area. The
second is to determine a buildout or horizon year for the analysis. Finally, the existing traffic volumes are
factored using the assumed annual growth rate for the selected number of growth years. For this project, we
have assumed a horizon/buildout year of 2020 and that an average annual growth rate of 4% will occur each
year for the next 7 years. Applying this factor to the existing traffic volumes yields the 2020 background
volumes shown in Exhibits 7 - 9.
Site -Related Traffic Volumes
Trip Generation and Mode Split
Trip generation for the Project was calculated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation manual (9th Edition). ITE Trip Generation is a compilation of actual traffic generation data by land
use as collected over several decades by creditable sources across the country and it is accepted as the
standard methodology to determine trip generation volumes for various land uses where sufficient data
exists. Because there is no proposed connection between the commercial and residential developments, the
development was analyzed as two separate traffic generators - one east of proposed Kirkwood and one west
of proposed Kirkwood.
No reductions were applied for internally captured trips (because the ITE Shopping Center land use code
already reflects this characteristic) or pass -by trips (motorists who patronize the site, but who already pass
through the study area during the peak periods). A summary of the site -related trips calculated for the
proposed building program is provided in Table 1 which shows the net trips added by the proposed
development. The appropriate ITE Trip Generation Manua1-8th Edition excerpts are provided in the
Appendix.
Table 1
Southlake Center Trip Generation
AM Peak
PM Peak
Weekend Peak
Daily
Land Use
Quantity
Hour
Hour
I
Hour
Traffic
In
Out
In
I Out
In
Out
Eastern Tract
69 DU
746
15 43
47 28
38 32
210 —Single Family
Western Tract
199,678 SF
8,526
119 73
457 495
712 658
820 — Shopping Center
944 — Gas Station
18 Pumps
3,034
112 107
125 125
125 125
Totals
12,306
246 223
629 648
750 690
Trip Distribution and Assignment
Traffic generated by the proposed development at site buildout conditions was distributed and assigned to
the study area roadway network using professional judgment to interpret the traffic orientation
characteristics of existing traffic volumes in the study area and a technical understanding of the available
roadway network. Exhibits 10 - 12 illustrate the approach and departure percentages assumed for site -
generated traffic in this study.
Traffic Volumes
Determination of the traffic impact associated with the Project is measured by comparing the change in
operational conditions before and after site -related traffic is added to the roadway system. This involves the
development of traffic volumes that include both background and site -related traffic. The site -generated
traffic was calculated by multiplying the trip generation values (from Table 1) by the corresponding traffic
approach and departure orientations (Exhibits 10 - 12). The resulting peak -hour, site -generated traffic
volumes of the Project are summarized in Exhibits 13 - 15.
Page 3
Future Background Plus Site Traffic Volumes
Adding the new site -related traffic volumes from Exhibits 13 - 15 to the 2020 background traffic volumes
shown in Exhibits 7 - 9 yields the total peak period traffic volumes at the Project buildout year shown
Exhibits 16 -18.
Access Assessment
The access assessment portion of this study will examine three major areas:
1) The spacing between the proposed driveways and adjacent driveways,
2) The spacing between proposed driveways and adjacent public street intersections and
3) The need for acceleration / deceleration lanes based on the projected turning movements at the
proposed driveways.
Access Point -to -Access Point Spacing
The TxDOT Access Management Manual requires 305' between access points on a one-way facility with a
posted speed limit of 40 mph as is the case on the SH 114 northbound frontage road in the area of the
proposed development (see Appendix). The site plan (Exhibit 2) shows that:
• Driveway 1 is located approximately 475' from Driveway 2 and
• Driveway 2 is located approximately 425' from Dove Road
Therefore, both distances exceed the minimum separation requirements.
The City of Southlake controls the access spacing on both Dove Road White Chapel Boulevard and requires
250' between driveway centerlines and 200' between driveways and street intersections on an arterial.
Applying these criteria to the proposed site plan (Exhibit 2), we find that:
• Driveway 3 is over 400' from the SH 114 northbound frontage road,
• Driveway 4 is approximately 300' from Driveway 3 and 230' from Kirkwood Boulevard,
• Driveway 5 is approximately 400' from Dove Road and over 550' from Drive 6 and
• Drive 7 is over 300' from Drive 6.
Therefore, all distances exceed the minimum driveway separation requirements.
Auxiliary Lane Assessment
This portion of this study will examine the need for auxiliary or turn lanes based on the projected turning
movements at the proposed access points. Both TxDOT and the City of Southlake require that auxiliary turn
lanes be provided when the turning movements exceed 50 vehicles per hour for right turns on a roadway
with a speed of 40 mph or less (see Appendix). Applying the volume threshold standard to the proposed site
traffic (Exhibits 13 -15) shows that:
1) The projected right turn traffic volumes on the SH 114 northbound frontage road at Driveways 1 and
2 exceed the volume threshold for an auxiliary lane (both are shown on the site plan).
2) The projected eastbound right turn traffic volumes on Dove Road at Drive 3 exceed the volume
threshold for an auxiliary lane.
3) The projected eastbound right turn traffic volumes on Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard exceed the
volume threshold for an auxiliary lane (one is proposed and shown on the site plan).
4) The projected right turn traffic volumes on Kirkwood at Driveways 5 and 6 exceed the volume
threshold for an auxiliary lane (both are shown on the site plan).
Page 4
Traffic Impact Analysis
Analysis Methodology
Traffic operational conditions for unsignalized and signalized roadway intersections are quantitatively
measured in terms of average delay per vehicle in a one -hour period through the intersection as a function of
roadway capacity and operational characteristics of the traffic signal. The standardized methodology applied
herein was developed by the Transportation Research Board as presented in the 2010 Highway Capacity
Manual (HCM). HCM also qualitatively rates the overall delay conditions in terms of "Level -of -Service" (LOS)
ranging from "A" (free -flowing conditions) to "F" (over -capacity conditions). Generally, LOS D or better is
considered an acceptable condition for intersections in urban and suburban areas.
Summary of Results
The intersection capacity analyses presented in this study were performed using the Synchro 8 software
package. Table 2 provides a summary of the intersection operational conditions during the peak periods
under the analysis conditions presented previously. Detailed software output is provided in the Appendix.
The findings are as follows:
Existing (2013) Conditions
The following assumptions were included as part of the existing conditions analysis:
• The traffic volumes collected in May and August of 2013 are representative of average daily traffic
levels.
As Table 2 indicates, all interchanges and intersections operate acceptably during the morning and
afternoon peak periods with 2013 traffic volumes.
In order to determine the feasibility of signalizing the Dove/Kirkwood intersection, a traffic signal warrant
analysis has been conducted. This study found that existing volumes do not satisfy the warrant criteria.
However, with the addition of seven years of background traffic growth and the retail traffic, the projected
volumes satisfy one -hour, four-hour and eight -hour volume warrants. The detailed warrant analysis can be
found in the Appendix.
Future (2020) Background Conditions
The following assumptions were included as part of the future background conditions analysis:
• The traffic volumes collected in May and August of 2013 have been increased by 4% per year for
seven years to reflect the normal growth in the study area and represent average daily traffic levels
for the year 2020.
As Table 2 indicates,
1) The SH 114/Dove Road interchange operates acceptably during the morning and afternoon peak
periods with 2020 background traffic volumes.
2) The Kirkwood Boulevard /Dove Road intersection fails as an unsignalized operation during the AM
peak. if this location is signalized, however, the levels of service will return to acceptable values.
3) The Dove Road/White Chapel roundabout fails during the AM and PM peak periods. if bypass
lanes are added, the LOS does improve.
In order to determine the feasibility of signalizing the Dove/Kirkwood intersection, a traffic signal warrant
analysis has been conducted. This study found that existing volumes do not satisfy the warrant criteria.
However, with the addition of seven years of background traffic growth and the retail traffic, the
projected volumes satisfy one -hour, four-hour and eight -hour volume warrants. The detailed warrant
analysis can be found in the Appendix.
Future (2020) 'Buildout Plus 5 Years' Conditions
The following assumptions were included as part of the future background plus site conditions analysis:
• The proposed project will be fully developed by the end of the year 2015 and
Page 5
Table 2
Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Results
2013
2020
Intersection
Traffic
Background
Background + Site
Movement
AM
RM
Weekend
AM
RM
Weekend
AM
RM
Weekend
SH 114 SBFR @ Dove
B
(14.7)
B
(11.2)
B
(11.1)
C
(23.6)
B
(15.0)
B
(12.5)
C (30.9)
C (27.8)
B
(14.7)
SH 114 NBFR @ Dove
B
(14.4)
C
(20.6)
B
(12.9)
C
(25.9)
C
(31.1)
B
(16.3)
C (33.8)
D (41.1)
B
(17.9)
ALL
A
(4.2)
A
(6.0)
A
(2.8)
A
(9.0)
A
(8.8)
A
(2.9)
F (53.1)
F (160.9)
F
(100.3)
NBL
F (168.9)
F Err
F
(941.0)
NBT
F (90.0)
F (51.6)
D
(33.4)
NBR
C (23.2)
C (15.6)
B
(14.7)
Dove @ Kirkwood
EBL
A
(9.2)
A
(8.2)
A
(7.6)
B
(10.5)
A
(8.6)
A
(7.8)
B (10.9)
A (8.8)
A
(8.1)
WBL
A (8.4)
A (8.9)
A
(8.2)
SBL
D
(31.7)
C
(18.1)
B
(10.6)
F
(108.5)
D
(32.8)
B
(11.5)
F (877.9)
F (1342.0)
F
(66.8)
SBTR
D
(31.7)
B
(12.0)
A
(8.9)
B
(12.0)
C
(15.4)
A
(9.2)
C (18.4)
C (18.5)
D
(27.6)
w/Signal
C
(23.3)
C
(29.2)
8
(18.4)
A (0.0)
A (0.0)
A
(0.0)
ALL
C
(17.2)
B
(14.6)
A
(5.2)
F
(60.0)
E
(43.5)
A
(6.1)
F (98.6)
F (135.7)
B
(10.9)
EB
B
(14.5)
B
(11.4)
A
(5.1)
E
(36.9)
C
(20.5)
A
(5.9)
F (68.9)
F (74.4)
B
(11.5)
w/EB Bypass
C
(24.0)
C
(15.1)
A
(S.S)
D (32.2)
D (28.6)
A
(7.2)
W B
C
(22.6)
C
(15.6)
A
(5.5)
F
(104.5)
E
(45.8)
A
(6.6)
F (164.8)
F (158.7)
B
(11.6)
Dove @White Chapel
w/WB Bypass
E
(46.0)
D
(25.2)
A
(6.1)
F (82.0)
F (89.7)
8
(10.6)
NB
B
(12.6)
C
(19.1)
A
(5.0)
D
(26.0)
F
(75.7)
A
(5.7)
E (38.4)
F (231.8)
A
(9.5)
w/NB Bypass
B
(14.0)
C
(19.8)
A
(4.7)
C (17.9)
F (67.2)
A
(7.2)
SIB
C
(16.8)
A
(8.1)
A
(5.2)
F
(53.6)
B
(11.5)
A
(6.1)
F (96.0)
C (18.6)
B
(10.5)
w/SB Bypass
C
(15.9)
A
(8.5)
A
(S.S)
C (18.8)
B (10.9)
A
(7.4)
ALL
A
(1.9)
A
(1.6)
A
(2.3)
A
(2.5)
A
(2.0)
A
(2.5)
A (3.4)
A (4.3)
A
(5.0)
WBL
C
(15.1)
B
(13.7)
B
(11.0)
C
(20.7)
C
(17.4)
B
(12.3)
D (25.4)
D (28.2)
C
(21.3)
White Chapel @ Kirkwood
WBR
A
(9.9)
B
(10.1)
A
(9.2)
B
(10.6)
B
(10.9)
A
(9.5)
B (11.2)
B (13.1)
B
(11.8)
SBL
A
(8.0)
A
(8.0)
A
(7.6)
A
(8.2)
A
(8.4)
A
(7.8)
A (8.4)
A (8.8)
A
(8.3)
ALL
A (0.3)
A (0.8)
A
(1.7)
SH 114 NBFR @ Drive 2
WBR
A (9.9)
B (12.2)
B
(11.0)
ALL
A (0.5)
A (1.2)
A
(3.2)
SH 114 NBFR @ Drive 1
WBR
A (10.0)
B (13.2)
B
(12.1)
ALL
A
(1.5)
A
(1.4)
A
(1.7)
A
(1.8)
A
(0.0)
A (2.7)
A (2.7)
A
(3.0)
NB
A
(0.0)
A
(0.0)
A
(0.0)
A
(0.0)
A
(0.0)
F (56.1)
C (21.3)
C
(21.2)
EBL
A
(9.3)
A
(0.0)
B
(10.6)
A
(0.0)
A
(0.0)
B (11.1)
A (0.0)
A
(0.0)
Dove @ Drive 3
WBL
A
(0.0)
A
(0.0)
A
(0.0)
A
(0.0)
A
(0.0)
A (9.7)
A (8.8)
A
(9.1)
SBL
B
(10.1)
A
(0.0)
B
(10.9)
A
(0.0)
A
(0.0)
A (0.0)
A (0.0)
A
(0.0)
SBR
A
(0.0)
B
(12.0)
A
(0.0)
B
(14.6)
A
(0.0)
B (11.2)
C (18.0)
A
(0.0)
ALL
A (1.6)
A (2.5)
A
(1.4)
Kirkwood @ Drive 5
EBL
A (9.6)
B (12.2)
B
(12.3)
ALL
A (4.0)
A (5.3)
A
(4.9)
Kirkwood @ Drive 6
EBL
A (8.8)
A (9.7)
A
(9.9)
ALL
A (1.0)
A (0.8)
A
(0.6)
NBL
E (41.4)
E (46.5)
C
(20.2)
Dove @ Drive 8
NBR
B (13.2)
C (15.9)
B
(11.0)
WBL
A (9.0)
A (9.9)
A
(8.3)
ALL
A (0.1)
A (0.1)
A
(0.1)
NBL
A (8.3)
A (8.1)
A
(8.0)
White Chapel @ Drive 9
EBL
C (17.6)
C (20.0)
B
(14.0)
EBR
B (11.2)
B (10.4)
B
(10.3)
ALL
A (0.1)
A (0.0)
A
(0.1)
NBL
A (8.3)
A (8.0)
A
(7.9)
White Chapel @ Drive 10
EBL
C (16.1)
C (16.5)
B
(13.9)
EBR
B (11.2)
B (10.3)
B
(10.1)
KEY.'
A, B, C, D, E, F= Level -of -Service for each intersection approach NB, SB, Ell, WB -North, South-, East-, Westbound approach L, T, R = Left Through, Right Approach turning movement
Page 6
• The traffic volumes collected in May and August of 2013 have been increased by 4% per year for
seven years to reflect the normal growth in the study area and represent average daily traffic levels
for the year 2020.
As Table 2 indicates,
1) The SH 114/Dove Road interchange operates acceptably during the morning and afternoon peak
periods with 2020 background plus site traffic volumes.
2) The Kirkwood Boulevard/ Dove Road intersection fails as an unsignalized operation during the AM
and PM peak periods. If this location is signalized, however, the levels of service will return to
acceptable values.
3) The Dove Road/White Chapel roundabout fails during the AM and PM peak periods. Even if all 4
bypass lanes are added, the LOS does not improve. This single -lane roundabout will need to be
widened to a multi -lane roundabout in the very near future and Dove Road may need to be
widened to a 4-lane facility.
Conclusions and Recommendations
This report has examined the access and traffic impact of Southlake Center (a proposed Commercial
development in Southlake, Texas) on the adjacent roadway system. The findings indicate the following:
1) All site driveways meet TxDOT and Southlake access spacing requirements,
2) Site Driveways #3 may require an auxiliary/deceleration lane.
3) The intersection of Dove Road and Kirkwood Boulevard should be signalized when volumes
satisfy the warrant criteria. In order to determine the feasibility of signalizing the
Dove/Kirkwood intersection, a traffic signal warrant analysis has been conducted. This study
found that existing volumes do not satisfy the warrant criteria. However, with the addition of
seven years of background traffic growth and the retail traffic, the projected volumes satisfy
one -hour, four-hour and eight -hour volume warrants. The detailed warrant analysis can be
found in the Appendix.
4) Because one approach of the single -lane roundabout at Dove and White Chapel already fails
during the AM peak period, this roundabout will need to be widened to a multi -lane
roundabout in the very near future and Dove Road may need to be widened to a 4-lane facility.
By-pass lanes may also be needed by 2020.
NOTE: Recommendations for public improvements within the study area presented in this report reflect the opinion of
DeShazo based solely upon technical analysis and professional judgment and are not intended to define, imply, or
allocate funding sources nor required improvements. Applicable legal precedent indicates that the Owner of a Project
should only be required to proportionately fund necessary infrastructure improvements that are directly attributable to
implementation of the Project. Such requirements will depend upon the individual circumstances of each project that
may be viewed differently by each particular agency/municipality.
END OF MEMO
Page 7
��r 9lal aor .�' � �' 'y. � �•
' °tea r } z ^'' •ri:
M
d'fll d
{L� •IJi��r 1 rr� J- � !� R— * r Cp'Z/ .•���3•�
• � - �..eg-4'. y'a. •''%dAFr: ` .. � y- _CY i•f N�n°. � 1 � �.. -
i•
x
.d
u
{ ryY�r
ii��►� e•a _ _ T-
Mrpov �ti . y Gy- 1=�oosc - iice�Rd 'L-• VL
Iti� . �✓ Yam. ' .•�••.!�•.. -� •. •�
A.
IF
�. ,� �'aik♦ .� •� �� ��. PEEL•
. � •„� .! yam• � wlvc`ering Ln�.._i'r�
� 3t esfcr�v V rf
w iawooaLn_
.,`
�. .!r�.••_r F,: 1� a n r • La kt Woad �r w rhk
3 J`.+ rr.. J/•' ti} W,ChaPa1•Qowns'Dr -•�- 1Gh3oel�Oowni�OrsT _-�• l sr
16
,p �'..• Ai �,. fl � r r
�? y x'. •i'•f �'.� �yY +�-`Mrssiompr� .. .Y'• �1 �•
r �" �� -'� .•.�i+. r•i rti . 5� r S! .' f.Aa IL� +a`? Feder Y ar
•_. _ .� �,..�? r ` � ♦. � • � •�' u -iT.. - ' + �amaMc� r ••�wnhy��•sr . ' ' a n
T.. 'r.'• .imp E•` :� - •+-N '� 9 -. �'. -'
ed�r� [o»1l'r
f r - arc
d^� vudilake.
W!-]ulhake
O
O
�
T
3
3
M saa I—}
•L Hl
� r �
r-I
T
t'6
3
N
f�6
0
3
v
0
NO
w
Page 9
� � 1... .�I1•111,�I ' aa � � � r �� ��
I�l nn...p..::�■M�11�■ ■�!I♦1� �� r�r�� I�� /~V yr � _
if�r relm!ME
rI�p���\■� ll WIN IR g Elsoon
MISSl � ■it i
OEM
WINSIP ION MINES
lllllllllll J�s7��''■�:NINE �� ■
r■.�:
� •�_ •fir,-:� ■ � �. � rnnlllh������,��.■
o mom ME
-��� 1-,,►� : Ica,.�,,� � , • , � -- � ,
♦ ♦ a n� ui
_ � ��� ' it r'rr � ►.:��es� , �:�
mom
IN
r�u=■■I�M �7■�f■!!+ -1■��rlhd �IIII 111�-I■•1■ ..a
NO
75
0
V
0
N
A
Page 11
NO
75
0
V
0
N
A
Page 12
NO
75
0
V
0
N
A
Page 13
NO
75
0
V
0
N
A
Page 14
NO
75
0
V
0
N
A
Page 15
NO
75
0
V
0
N
A
Page 16
NO
75
0
0
N
C.0
A
Page 17
2
CL
NO
C.0
A
Page 18
-7
NO
75
0
0
N
C.0
A
Page 19
i
NO
75
0
V
0
N
NO
75
O
C�
O
N
A
Page 21
rO
75
`0` �
0
N
NO
75
0
V
0
N
A
Page 23
NO
75
0
V
0
N
A
Page 24
NO
75
0
V
0
N
A
Page 25
Appendix A
Traffic Counts
Start Date:
8/3/2013
Start Time:
10:00:00 AM
Site Code:
00000002
Comment 1:
#2 SH 114 NB FRT RD @ DOVE
Comment 2:
SOUTH LAKE, TX
Comment 3:
HOT
Comment 4:
MR
Westbound
Northbound
Eastbound
Start Time
Thru
Right
Left
Thru
Right
Left
Thru
10:00 AM
15
8
22
17
5
5
18
10:15 AM
20
9
20
22
4
7
17
10:30 AM
16
10
45
15
8
12
17
10:45 AM
32
14
29
27
6
6
16
11:00 AM
36
18
36
22
3
7
22
11:15 AM
21
10
29
20
8
7
21
11:30 AM
19
27
33
28
13
6
19
11:45 AM
42
18
41
31
11
133
28
12:00 PM
23
25
32
23
13
9
16
12:15 PM
26
21
41
32
4
13
20
12:30 PM
40
20
47
23
6
9
27
12:45 PM
29
24
58
29
7
8
25
01:00 PM
14
7
61
25
8
6
25
01:15 PM
23
12
53
22
11
7
13
01:30 PM
20
24
47
24
7
8
18
01:45 PM
28
16
55
39
7
8
27
02:00 PM
20
10
61
23
7
10
27
02:15 PM
28
13
55
19
11
9
20
02:30 PM
30
24
63
46
28
22
22
02:45 PM
28
23
61
35
18
11
18
Peak Hour:
131
84
161
109
34
164
91
PHF:
0.78
0.84
0.86
0.85
0.65
0.31
0.81
Start Date:
8/3/2013
Start Time:
10:00:00 AM
Site Code:
00000001
Comment 1:
#1 SH 114 SB FRT RD @ DOVE
Comment 2:
SOUTH LAKE, TX
Comment 3:
HOT
Comment 4:
MH
Southbound
Westbound
Eastbound
Start Time
Left
Thru
Right
Left
Thru
Thru
Right
10:00 AM
8
22
5
9
28
15
41
10:15 AM
10
24
6
10
30
17
44
10:30 AM
10
21
7
7
54
19
38
10:45 AM
8
28
13
11
50
14
37
11:00 AM
10
25
8
18
54
19
43
11:15 AM
10
20
8
8
22
18
40
11:30 AM
9
34
8
8
44
16
59
11:45 AM
10
21
9
17
66
34
54
12:00 PM
10
26
5
9
44
15
51
12:15 PM
10
31
5
12
55
23
37
12:30 PM
20
21
10
24
63
16
38
12:45 PM
8
18
6
29
58
25
57
01:00 PM
7
25
5
15
60
24
44
01:15 PM
10
13
12
17
59
10
51
01:30 PM
12
17
7
12
54
14
39
01:45 PM
16
23
6
16
57
19
44
02:00 PM
21
14
10
15
66
16
34
02:15 PM
14
17
7
20
63
15
40
02:30 PM
14
18
6
20
63
20
40
02:45 PM
19
22
11
23
66
10
30
Peak Hour:
45
95
26
80
236
88
176
PHF:
0.56
0.77
0.65
0.69
0.94
0.88
0.77
J
W
O_
a
2
U
w
H
=
x
LU
Y
a
0 O
O
>
_
0
O
H N
O
O
0 0
w ri
O
u
Ln 2
I
N
m zT
4.1
c
c
c c
ru
~
O
E
E
E E
L L
E
E
E E
(6 (6
a
U
U
U U
can ci
Ln
Epp
M M N N M r-I r-I O M l0 l0 M G M Ln N r-I M
00
O
C
7
O
i
M:* M N Ln :* 00 l0 m I, r-I M N M M r-I -:* l0 M Ln
M
M
r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I N r-I N N N r-I r-I N N r-I r-I N
N C
en
LU
w
v
0M NO-:* O M r-I N r-I O N Ln M r-I N
t0
Gl LM
J
O
++
M O ^ N 00 l0 r-I O N O I, n N O 00 l0
N N
r-I r-I -I
rr-Ir-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I N r-I N r-I r-I r-I
In
O
C
7
m
L
n O 00 Ql I� N M n N n O 'D l0 00 Ln MkD `-I Ql
eq
OR
t
r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I
O
L
z
J
M NN N MN N M r-I N N M:* NI,
cn
O
r-I l0 Ln M O I, M M N O N Ln Ln l0 Ln r-I r-I r-I
rn
14
O
C
7
O
i
00 r, Ln M w m l0 N w l0 O Ln M I, w M
14
t
r-I r-I N N N r-I r-I r-I N M r-I N r-I N N r-I r-I r-I r-I N
0`i0
00
�
�
O
>O1
V
M O r-I w I, l0 :* Ln N O r-I r-I M Ln O O-tt O
Ln
N
J
r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I N r-I r-I r-I r-I
O
N l0 l0 M -:* n N r-I M r-I r-I r-I M r-I M r-I N M
Ln
ri
O
c
i
t
M O 00 I, 00 M N N l0 n O 00 M 00 N m Ln R* R*
r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I N r-I r-I r-I r-I
In
In
C
O
Ln
tf
J
Ln r-I O Ln M Ln N l0 N N r-I M M N r-I M r-I
Ln n
14 O
i LL
=
O a
=
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln
Y
L
O r-I M O r-I M O r-I M O r-I M O r-I M
y
+'
0 0 0 0 r-I r-I r-I r-I N N N N r-I r-I r-I r I N N N N
ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri O O O O O O O O
OL
Start Date:
8/3/2013
Start Time:
10:00:00 AM
Site Code:
00000005
Comment 1:
#5 WHITE CHAPEL @ KIRKWOOD
Comment 2:
SOUTH LAKE, TX
Comment 3:
HOT
Comment 4:
SC
Southbound
Westbound
Northbound
Start Time
Left
Thru
Left
Right
Thru
Right
10:00 AM
0
38
9
1
18
7
10:15 AM
2
20
10
2
27
8
10:30 AM
1
26
4
1
21
11
10:45 AM
0
36
11
1
22
4
11:00 AM
0
27
6
0
24
8
11:15 AM
1
39
7
0
30
8
11:30 AM
0
39
9
0
25
5
11:45 AM
0
36
2
0
33
7
12:00 PM
1
28
11
1
40
2
12:15 PM
2
23
6
1
26
8
12:30 PM
1
27
14
1
27
7
12:45 PM
1
30
10
2
31
9
01:00PM
3
17
9
0
21
10
01:15 PM
1
16
11
2
27
11
01:30 PM
4
20
7
0
32
4
01:45 PM
1
29
9
1
33
6
02:00 PM
1
34
3
1
31
7
02:15 PM
1
25
7
0
29
7
02:30 PM
1
28
6
1
37
7
02:45 PM
0
29
12
2
34
6
Peak Hour:
5
108
41
5
124
26
PHF:
0.63
0.90
0.73
0.63
0.78
0.72
J
w
d
Q
2
U
w
H
2
H
LJ
r-IQ
(5
O
w
Q
OO
O
0
0
O
0
~ < N
� W
0
U
0
I
N
m
+�
ai
+-
+-
+- +-
c
c
c c
r�
~
0
E
E
E E
L
L
w
E
E
E E
m
+,
U
U
UU
can
ci
cn
w
N N r-I l -1 0 M M
Lm
M
0
C
7
0
i
I, MIn N r-I I, O
Ln 0000
n
r-I NM
M In l0
0
N O
LU
w
+-
w
rI N N
rl
LA
iN-I In
O
+'
t
Ln
O
�W
N r�.ol iM-I N N rl iM-I
n
C
C
7
0 r IZ Ln M
rn In
t
L
t
I 0 iM-I N
0
z
J
NN��NNI�In
Lq
Ln
O
oA
O O N 00 r-I N In
14 Lq
�
w
O
C
7
O
i
rl N N In r-I l0 l0 r-IDD
en
t
H
rI N M-:* 00 M In In
N O
>O1
OJ1
^ rN-I r^-I N N M r-I ^
0 O
O O O M M N I,
Ln
0
C
c
t
00 �
�
H
rN-I rM-I r-q
-I N L rl
rM-I C
0
V)
w
N M N� Ln
00
N r-I
In
O
i LL
W
0 a
a a a a a a a a
=
0 In O In O In O In
Y
i
M O rl M O rl
N
V;
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a
l0 M 00 N
M
n
iM-I iM-I
O
In I, Ln M r-I M l0 N
O
Ln
DO
l0 In I, 00 I, �.o In :
M
0
N
O�
00
r-I rl iM-I r�l iN-I
O
I� N N l0 R* In In M
^
N
00
00
r-I r-I N M M M N M
14
0
I, In N 0 r-I 00 r-I
00
0
W
r-I N N N:* N M
14
O
N
M N l0 In In I, M r-I
N
00
O
N
O
l0 l0 N l0 rl Ol Ol
M
V1
In
00
R* R* l0 n l0 In
N
0
O O P O N
rM-I r-IN
O
C
^
rn
r-I iM-I r^-I N N r�I -q
d
O
00 I, In n l0 Ql
N
rn
00
O
i
LL
O In O In O In O In
Y
N
M:* 0 r-I M� 0 r-I
� In vi In In �o io
a
O O O O O O O O
a
0
O
O
X
c-I
Q
(5
L
LU
Q
00
O
0O
00
W
~
O
O
O
C)
0
N
�
l0
O
U
+1
c
c
c c
°
E
E
E E
L
i
L
-
+,
E
E
E E
Ln
Li
N
U
U
U U
i
O m m 00 M�* l0 00
r-I
N N M�* 00 M Ln M
^ C
N
C
7
O
ns
W
,
kD m w
w O
v
r-IO
rN M Ln
W
N r-I 00 00
N r-I NN
O
C
7
O
en
O1
N N m
eq
w
rr-I-I N Qml lM0
M
O
O 00 O O N N N 0r0
c14 00
n
O
7
O
t
wO
M M I� N l0 M
LLR
J
N
LNR
O
°1��������
i LL
a
O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln
Y
i
M O r-I M O r"I
N
l0 l0 I, ri n n 00 00
OL
L;
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a
�* M �* Ln M O Ln N
00
:T
Ln
cn
Ln M l0 l0 Ln l0 �* M
N
0
O�
Gl
OR
rr-I rr-I rN-I rr-I rr-I rr-I rr-I
Ln
O
n
M mI� Ln M
M
l0
rN-I
O
-tt n -tt 00 l0 O I, n
00
Ln
M
O0
Ln -tt l0 n l0 Ln Ln
N
0
r-I Ql r-I r-I N I� n l0
14
cn
0
cn
M 00 00 I, Ln M M
N
0
r-I 00 l0 Ln I, 00 Ln M
w
0
w
n
N N N M N r-I r-I r-I
ri
0
i
LL
a a a a a a a a
O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln
Y
m
M H O r-I M H O r-I
� Ln Ln Ln Ln ko io
a
O O O O O O O O
a
0
LLLL
W
z
I:T
r-I
r-I
N
,-I Q
LU
Q
\ O
O
O
LL
O
J
=
O
O
0
N
W
O
U
I
N
m
E
a)
c
c
c c
°
E
E
E E
L
L
w
E
E
E E
m
Li
nLi
+,
Ln
U
U
U U
00 Ln
00 00
t
M Ln Lin Ln 0� 00 n
m
-a
r-I r-I
M C
C
7
O
LL.I
J
<D 00 Ql N
00
N NN r^-I
0000
O
�
M Ln m <D O
M
M Ln � m M M � � to
00
00
�
O
C
7
0
i
r-I N Ln 00 00 r-I
OR
M
t
�
L
H
r-I r-I r-I N N M M
r-I O
z
$
O M Ln 00 N M Ln 00
00
J
N N r-I N Ln Ln
N O
to to l0 00 m 00 r-I
w Ol
00
r-I r-I r-I N N N N
C
C
�
7
O
>O1
i
I, Ln r-q M r-q N M r-q
n wr-I
r-I N MI, Ln
M O
i LL
O a
a a a a a a a a
=
0 Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln
Y
i
M O r-I M O r-I
N
L;
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a
Ln r-I m m M l0 00 00
Ln
M
Ln �* Ln <D <D <D �* M
N
p
M
O�
00
rr-I rr-I rN-I rr-I rr-I rN-I
LMn
O
O� w
00
Ln
n
rr-I rr-I rr-I r�-I r�-I
O
Ln M Ln r-I to l0 00 00
00
Ln
W
00
M M :* N
14
O
<D Ql
00
LM
N � <D � r�-I NN
W00
r-I r-Ir-Ir-Ir-Ir-ILn
p
N :* N r-I r-I Ql 00 N
M
M
14
00
M M M R* M N N N
14
O
00
LD
00 O `�
M O N IM R*
N
00
00 r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I ^ ^
Ln
p
i
LL
a a a a a a a a
O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln
Y
N
M R* 0 r-I M� 0 r-I
� Ln Ln Ln Ln �o io
a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a
0
L.L
N
c-I
r-I
N
,-I Q
LU
Q
\ o
O
O
LL
O
J
O
O
C)
N
0
� W
O
U
I
N
m
E
a)
c
c
c c
0
E
E
E E
L
L
w
E
E
E E
m
ca
nci
+,
cn
U
U
U U
IZ
^O
lo l Q01 QMl
n QM
M 00
"a
O
C
7
O
en
ns
W
ko DM rl
n
t
r^-I N � m NN 000 Ln
rI
Ln
M O
t
0 Ul 00
N DM N Ln
0 O
-a
�
�
rN-I r,
O
7
O
>N
ON
O 00
J
r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I
O
r-I O M to N ^
N
00 Ln
r-I r-I r-I N r-
LA
O
C
7
iLn
to N m w m Ln O n
t
�
H
r-I N r-I N N N N M
C
7
O
V)
N O M 00 r-I 00 00 Ln
eq
J
N M N M N N M
O
i L1
O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln
m
N
to to I, ri n n o0 0o
a
V;
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a
M r-I M �* N Ln r-I
O
O
Ln
OR
Ln Ln Ln M �* M Ln
ri
O
r-I m M I, 00 N W to
O
00
00
R* M R* M:* Ln M M
�
O
M
M r, O Ln r-I to to M
OR
r-I r-I N N N r-I r-I r-I
00
O
R* m M I, O M Ln U)
M
W
C71
to to I, <D M M
N
0
M
r-I to N Ul O rl r-I
M
n
N N r-I M r-I M r-I N
m
O
00 O r-I I, N M r-I
rn
14
W
00
M M M N N M M N
14
O
m r-I 00 N O O N O
O
M
N N N M M N N
ri
O
i
L1
a a a a a a a a
O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln
Y
N
M R* O r-I M R* O r-I
� Ln vi Ln Ln �o io
a
O O O O O O O O
a
0
O
O
Y
Y
W
J
W
Q
U
LU
ON O
O
O
O
~
=
2
Om O
m
�
0
0
U
of
Q N
0
W
o
1��
c
c
c c
°
E
E
E E
L
L
E
E
E E
a
cn
-
ci
+,
cn
U
U
U U
*'
In m In
rn
^
Ian
O
7
O
t
L
0
O
L
r I 1p to O to M I, Ln
00
O
t
H
N M N M I, l0 M M
N O
+'
t
b0
O O O r-I N r-I r-I r-I
M
LM
�
�
�
O
7
O
>N
to w O0 ON ko n ko
en l0
w
Ln
O
i
m r-I :* M M Ln NLn
l�0
-a
t
N r-I M M to 00 ko N
N O
C
O
t
V
$
N O O N r-I 0 r-I r-I
o
:T V1
J
O
N
i LL
O a
0 In 0 In 0 In 0 In
Y
i
M O r-I M O r-I
N
l0 to I, ri n n w w
a
L;
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a
0
M 00 I, n n n
l0
rM-I rr-I
M
O
O M N M M M I, N
eq
Ln
OR
M M In In �.o I, Ln I,
N
0
Ln
r-I O M O O M O�*
M
N
O
00 00 00 Ol
l0
r-I r-I rr-I
O
I- O O M w I, N
N
^
O
OR
M G M In N In M M
14
O
OO
N M r-I r-I 0 r-I r-I
w
M
O
i
LL
0
a
a a a a a a a a
0 In 0 In 0 In 0 In
Y
N
M R* 0 r-I M R* 0 r-I
� In vi In In ko io
a
O O O O O O O O
a
QUALITY COUNTS, INC.
DATA COLLECTION & ANALYSIS
SOUTH LAKE, TX
DOVE EAST OF - SH 114
24-Hour Traffic Counts
30-Anr-13
Time
EB DOVE EAST OF
WB DOVE EAST OF
Start
:00
:15
:30
:45
Ttl.
:00
:15
:30
:45
Ttl.
12 AM
0
5
3
3
11
10
1
5
1
17
1AM
3
4
1
2
10
3
2
4
3
12
2AM
2
0
1
1
4
5
3
1
0
9
3AM
0
1
0
2
3
6
2
3
1
12
4 AM
2
3
1
2
8
11
6
3
5
25
5 AM
4
9
15
37
65
11
9
21
17
58
6 AM
19
40
90
116
265
23
22
22
32
99
7 AM
99
100
160
164
523
52
71
139
163
425
8 AM
130
133
118
89
470
82
70
48
43
243
9 AM
83
60
59
46
248
47
49
45
36
177
10 AM
31
35
32
45
143
34
33
40
37
144
11 AM
34
40
37
47
158
38
55
87
84
264
12 PM
55
67
59
74
255
59
43
41
46
189
1 PM
63
64
54
50
231
45
29
49
37
160
2 PM
52
60
64
72
248
45
41
71
81
238
3 PM
52
44
63
56
215
124
89
124
105
442
4 P M
58
53
51
56
218
115
109
131
144
499
5 PM
62
75
78
65
280
172
160
161
105
598
6 P M
59
51
70
77
257
99
82
97
85
363
7 P M
51
36
26
38
151
73
43
60
42
218
8 PM
33
34
28
23
118
41
22
45
28
136
9 PM
38
15
17
13
83
19
22
13
5
59
10 PM
15
19
17
9
60
4
2
20
3
29
11 PM
6
4
8
5
23
18
14
5
4
41
24 Hour
4,047
4,457
700
600
500
v
E
Z)
>0 400
U
w
w
f0
~ 300
0
200
100
C
Grand Total: 8,504
AM Peak Hour: 1,041 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM
PM Peak Hour: 908 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM
12 AM 2 AM 4 AM 6 AM 8 AM 10 AM 12 PM 2 PM 4 PM 6 PM 8 PM 10 PM
QUALITY COUNTS, INC.
DATA COLLECTION & ANALYSIS
SOUTH LAKE, TX
WHITE CHAPEL - SOUTH OF DOVE
24-Hour Traffic Counts
30-Apr-13
Time
NB WHITE CHAPEL
SB WHITE CHAPEL
Start
:00
:15
:30
:45
Ttl.
:00
:15
:30
:45
Ttl.
12 AM
1
2
2
1
6
1
0
2
1
4
1AM
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
2AM
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
2
3AM
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
2
0
2
4AM
0
1
0
3
4
1
0
1
4
6
5 AM
2
0
2
8
12
4
3
9
14
30
6 AM
6
6
20
36
68
8
18
23
18
67
7 AM
23
31
76
113
243
30
36
61
103
230
8 AM
34
38
27
36
135
55
25
38
29
147
9 AM
31
24
27
34
116
27
38
20
29
114
10 AM
24
30
28
24
106
35
40
29
31
135
11AM
30
30
30
25
115
31
43
31
33
138
12 PM
22
45
32
28
127
29
25
28
26
108
1 PM
31
42
24
37
134
38
37
27
36
138
2 PM
32
42
55
69
198
25
21
27
61
134
3 PM
35
39
45
46
165
65
38
74
52
229
4 PM
54
50
38
38
180
50
49
48
37
184
5 PM
48
36
73
60
217
34
35
33
23
125
6 PM
57
88
75
64
284
41
36
39
36
152
7 PM
48
45
41
29
163
32
25
50
53
160
8 PM
39
40
32
31
142
47
19
29
22
117
9 PM
17
17
21
11
66
14
41
5
5
65
10 PM
9
10
6
3
28
17
5
3
4
29
11PM
2
4
2
2
10
1
6
1
1
9
24 Hour
2,522
2,326
300
250
E 200
Z)
0
U
�o
150
Z)
= 100
50
Grand Total: 4,848
AM Peak Hour: 509 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM
PM Peak Hour: 436 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM
0 0.08333323866666670.250.333333[R.436666667 0.5 0.58333323366666670.750.833333:R936666667
QUALITY COUNTS, INC.
DATA COLLECTION & ANALYSIS
SOUTHLAKE,TX
DOVE EAST OF - KIRKWOOD
24-Hour Traffic Counts
9.9,-Mav-1 3
Time
EB DOVE EAST OF
WB DOVE EAST OF
Start
:00
:15
:30
:45
Ttl.
:00
:15
:30
:45
Ttl.
12AM
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
4
lAM
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
4
2AM
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
4
3AM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
4AM
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
2
5
5 AM
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
14
8
26
6 AM
0
0
0
0
0
8
16
10
16
50
7 AM
0
0
0
0
0
23
45
117
151
336
8 AM
0
0
0
0
0
92
80
45
29
246
9 AM
0
0
0
0
0
25
22
24
23
94
10 AM
0
0
0
0
0
20
21
28
22
91
11 AM
0
0
0
0
0
18
17
30
31
96
12 PM
0
0
0
0
0
31
29
18
36
114
1 PM
0
0
0
0
0
23
24
40
26
113
2 PM
0
0
0
0
0
29
33
28
95
185
3 PM
0
0
0
0
0
75
38
66
57
236
4 PM
0
0
0
0
0
60
48
50
47
205
5 PM
0
0
0
0
0
60
57
56
54
227
6 PM
0
0
0
0
0
63
74
50
48
235
7 PM
0
0
0
0
0
60
22
25
37
144
8 PM
0
0
0
0
0
26
32
26
19
103
9 PM
0
0
0
0
0
29
27
11
10
77
10 PM
0
0
0
0
0
5
11
7
5
28
11PM
1 0
0
0
0
0
1 4
3
5
5
17
24 Hour
0
2,641
400
350
300
U
2250
0
U
�E200
H
T
�5150
O
100
50
1
Grand Total: 2,641
AM Peak Hour: 440 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM
PM Peak Hour: 274 2:45 PM to 3:45 PM
12 AM 2 AM 4 AM 6 AM 8 AM 10 AM 12 PM 2 PM 4 PM 6 PM 8 PM 10 PM
QUALITY COUNTS, INC.
DATA COLLECTION & ANALYSIS
SOUTHLAKE,TX
KIRKWOOD - NORTH OF DOVE
24-Hour Traffic Counts
9.9,-Mav-1 3
Time
NB KIRKWOOD
SB KIRKWOOD
Start
:00
:15
:30
:45
Ttl.
:00
:15
:30
:45
Ttl.
12 AM
3
0
1
1
5
0
0
0
0
0
lAM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2AM
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3AM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4AM
1
1
1
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
5AM
4
1
1
4
10
0
0
0
0
0
6 AM
3
8
14
17
42
0
0
0
0
0
7 AM
17
18
54
52
141
0
0
0
0
0
8 AM
34
24
8
16
82
0
0
0
0
0
9 AM
23
12
10
12
57
0
0
0
0
0
10 AM
10
7
12
11
40
0
0
0
0
0
11 AM
11
30
43
23
107
0
0
0
0
0
12 PM
26
29
28
17
100
0
0
0
0
0
1 PM
12
12
16
14
54
0
0
0
0
0
2 PM
14
13
14
33
74
0
0
0
0
0
3 PM
26
23
32
29
110
0
0
0
0
0
4 PM
56
41
75
69
241
0
0
0
0
0
5 PM
100
121
85
56
362
0
0
0
0
0
6 PM
53
62
51
33
199
0
0
0
0
0
7 PM
32
30
11
9
82
0
0
0
0
0
8PM
14
6
12
6
38
0
0
0
0
0
9PM
6
6
4
5
21
0
0
0
0
0
10 PM
0
3
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
11PM
1 0
1
2
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
24 Hour
1,777
0
400
350
300
U
2250
0
U
�E200
H
T
�5150
O
100
50
0
Grand Total: 1,777
AM Peak Hour: 164 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM
PM Peak Hour: 375 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM
12 AM 2 AM 4 AM 6 AM 8 AM 10 AM 12 PM 2 PM 4 PM 6 PM 8PM 10 PM
Appendix 8
ITE Trip Generation Excerpts
PF
M�=
Single-family detached housing includes all single-family detached homes on individual lots. A
typical site surveyed is a suburban subdivision.
The number of vehicles and residents had a high correlation with average weekday vehicle trip
ends. The use of these variables was limited, however, because the number of vehicles and
residents was often difficult to obtain or, predict. The number of dwelling units was generally used
as the independent variable of choice because it was usually readily available, easy to project
and had a high correlation with average weekday vehicle trip ends.
This land use included data from a wide variety of units with different sizes, price ranges,
locations and ages. Consequently, there was a wide variation in trips generated within this
category. As expected, dwelling units that were larger in size, more expensive, or farther away
from the central business district (CBD) had a higher rate of trip generation per unit than those
smaller in size, less expensive, or closer to the CBS). Other factors, such as geographic location
and type of adjacent and nearby development, may also have had an effect on the site trip
generation.
Single-family detached units had the highest trip generation rate per dwelling unit of all residential
uses because they were the largest units in size and had more residents and more vehicles per
unit than other residential land uses; they were generally located farther away from shopping
centers, employment areas and other trip attractors than other residential land uses; and they
generally had fewer alternate modes of transportation available because they were typically not
as concentrated as other residential land uses.
The peak hour of the generator typically coincided with the peak hour of the adjacent street
traffic,
The sites were surveyed between the late 1960s and the 2000s throughout the United States and
Canada,
1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 19, 20, 21, 26, 34, 35, 36, 38, 40, 71, 72, 84, 91, 98, 100, 105,
108,110,114,117,119,157,167,177,187,192,207,211,246,275,283,293,300,319,320,
357,384,435,550,552,579,598,601,603,611,614,637
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 289 Institute of 'Transportation Engineers
a
Single -Family Detached Housing
(210)
Average Vehicle Trip • vs: Dwelling Units
• a: Weekday
Number of Studies, 351
Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 197
Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting
Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
1 9,57 4.31 21,85 3.69
IT,
30,000
20,000
10,000
0 -?
0
1000
X = Number of Dwelling Units
Actual Data Points Fitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.92 Ln(X) + 2.71
2000
- - " Average Rate
R 2 = 0.96
3000
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 290 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Single -Family Detached Housing
(210)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 7 and 9 am.
Number of Studies: 286
Avg. Number of Dwelling Units- 194
Directional Distribution: 25% entering, 75% exiting
Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
0.75 0.33 2.27 OM
Single -Family Detached Housing
(210)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 292 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Single -Family Detached Housing
(210)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Weekday,
A.M. Peak Hour of Generator
Number of Studies: 341
Avg. Number of Dwelling Units- 181
Directional Distribution: 26% entering, 74% exiting
Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
0-,7-7- 033- 227 0."9" 1
1.11at-quidg1w LMULMIL
2,000
W
a
z
li 1,000
0 f
0
1000
X = Number of Dwelling Units
Actual Data Points Fitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation. T = 010(X) + 12.37
2000
— - Average Rate
R 2 = 0.89
3000 1
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 293 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Single -Family Detached Housing
(210)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Weekday,
P.M. Peak Hour of Generator
Number of Studies: 360
Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 174
Directional Distribution: 64% entering, 36% exiting
Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
1.02 0.42 2,98 1.05
1,900
1,800
1,700
1,600
1,500
1,400
1,300
1,200
1.100
1,000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
X = Number of Dwelling Units
Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Average Rate
R 2 = 0.91
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 294 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Single -Family Detached Housing
(210)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Saturday
Avg, Number of Dwelling Units: 213
Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting
Trip Generation per Dwell i n g Unit
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
10.08 5.32 15.25 168
Data Plot ancl tcluavon
11,000
10,000
9M0
8,000
va
W 7,000
2
a) 6,000
a)
a) 5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
X = Number of Dwelling Units
Actual Data Points Fitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.95 Ln(X) + 2.59
700 800 900 1000
- - - Average Rate
R 2 = 0.92
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 295 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Single -Family Detached Housing
(210)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Saturday,
Peak our of Generator
Number of Studies: 53
Avg, Number of Dwelling Units: 217
Directional Distribution: 53% entering, 47% exiting
Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
OM O50 1,750.99
Data Plot and Equation
W
700
600
100
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
X = Number of Dwelling Units
Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.8%X) + 9.56 R2 = 0.91
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 296 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Single -Family Detached Housing
(210)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Sunday
Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 216
Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting
Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
8.77 4,74 12.31 133
Data Plot and Equation
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
43000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 9QO 1000
X = Number of Dwelling Units
Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: T = 8.84(X) - 13.31 R 2 = 0.94
Thp Generation, 8th Edition 297 Institute of Transportation Engineers
or -
Single -Family Detached Housing
(210)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs:
On a:
Z
I M-1 ►
I M
Dwelling Units
Sunday,
52
215
53% entering, 47% exiting
Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
-----------
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
0.86 0.55 - 1 A8 0.95
----------
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 298 Institute of Transportation Engineers
A shopping center is an integrated group of commercial establishments that is planned,
developed, owned and managed as a unit. A shopping center's composition is related to its
m,,2rket arpa-i* ter -its of size. location and tvQe of store, A shopping center also provides on-sitit
WHIMEMUMIM
U#T ff =# I
Shopping centers, including neighborhood centers, community centers, regional centers and
super regional centers, were surveyed for this land use, Some of these centers contained non -
as office buildinks, movie theaters, restaurants, lost offices, banks
health clubs and recreational facilities (for example, ice skating rinks or indoor miniature it
courses), The centers ranged in size from 1,700 to 2.2 million square feet gross leasable area
(GLA). The centers studied were located in suburban areas throughout the United States and
therefore represent typical U.S. suburban conditions,
Many shopping centers, in addition to the integrated unit of shops in one building or
enclosed around a mail, include outparcels (peripheral buildings or pads located on the
perimeter of the center adjacent to the streets and major access points). These buildings
are typically drive-in banks, retail stores, restaurants, or small offices. Although the data
immWrt"l, it'l�-krcftiA* XQc�X-he_r2!
assumed that some of the data show their effect.
The vehicle trips generated at a shopping center are based upon the total GLA of the center. In
cases of smaller centers without an enclosed mall or peripheral buildings, the GLA could be ft'
same as the gross floor area of the building,
Separate equations have been developed for shopping centers during the Christmas shopping
season. Plots were included for the weekday peak hour of adjacent street traffic and the Saturday
peak hour of the generator.
occurs, it is suggestea TaNff
used, as they are based on a larger number of studies.
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1497 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Win- MO
Percent of 24-
Hour Entering
Traffic
Percent of•
Hour Entering
Traffic
•
MUMN111=
Source numbers - 95, 124; based on four studies
Source numbers - 95, 124, based on four studies
Table 2
Hourly Variation in Shopping Center Traffic
le Area
More Than 300,000 Square Feet Gross LeasabII
Average Weekdaya
Avera e Saturdayb
Average Sunday!
—Percent
Percent of
24-Hour
Entering
Traffic
Percent of
24-Hour
Exiting
Traffic
Percent of
24-Hour
Entering
Traffic
�-Pe men—to—f
24-Hour
Exiting
Traffic
i
of
24-Hour
Entering
Traffic
Percent of===
24-Hour
Exiting
a Source numbers - 48, 73, 88, 124: based on seven studies
b Source numbers - 73, 88; based on three studies
c Source number - 88; based on two studies
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1498 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Table 3
Daily Variation in Shopping Center Traffic
Percenta e We e�A�"a Monday throug Y)
#
Source numbers - 88, 124
Table 4
Monthly Variation in Shopping Center Traffic
Percenta e of Avera e Month
Month
P rcentage
Month
Percentage
January
85.3
77September
July
100,8
February
78,1
Aunust
1021
March
92.0
94.8
April
93.2
October
98.9
May
105A
November
101,5
June
106.0
December
141 .8
Sample size: 2
Average gross leasable area: 938,000 square feet
The sites were surveyed between the 1960s and the 2000s throughout the United States and
Canada.
6, 13, 14, 18, 19, 22, 2640, 42, 48, 49, 54, 59, 60, 61 64, 65, 72, 7175, 76, 77, 78,
79,87,89190,98,99,100,105,110,124,156,159,172,186,193,194195,196,197,198,199,
202,204,211,213,260,263,269,295,299,300,301,304,305,307,308,309,310,311,312,
313,314,315,316,317,318,319,358,365,376,385,390,400,404,414,420,423,428437,
440,442,444,446,507,562,563,580,598,629,658
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1499 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Shopping Center
(820)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
On a: Weekday
Number of Studies: 302
Average 1000 Sq. Feet GSA: 328
Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
42.94 12.50 - 270-89 21.38
MIRM
50
as
40,000
a)
ro 30.000
20,000
10,000
0 -
0
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600
X = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ------ Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.65 Ln(X) + 5.83 R 2 = 0.78
Trip Generation. 8th Edition 1500 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Shopping Center
(820)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
• a: Weekday,
Peak Hour • • Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 7 • 9 a.m.
•' • Studies: 101
Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: •
Directional Distribution* 61% entering, 39% exiting
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
0,10 - 9,05 138
Data Plot and
z
1,600
1,500
1,400
1,300
1,200
1.100
1,000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600
X = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
X Actual Data Points - Fitted Curve ------ Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.59 Ln(X) + 2.32
R2 = 0.52
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1501 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Shopping Center
(820)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Number of Studies: 412
Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 379
Directional Distribution: 49% entering, 51 % exiting
Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
i
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
173 O68 29.2 7 2,74
Data Plot and Equation
0
M
70
C U00
LU
M--
2 5-000
as
4.000
3M0
2.000
1,000
0
0 1000 2000
X = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.67 Ln(X) + 3.37
-
----- Average Rate
R 2 = 0.81
3000 1
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1502 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Shopping Center
(820)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
On a: Saturday
Number of Studies: 123
Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 450
Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
49.97 16,70 - 227.50 22.62
Data Plot and Equation
80,000
70,000
60,000
Cn
w
Q- 50.000
T 40,000
W
< 30,000
z
20,000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600
X = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
Actuai Data Points - Fitted Curve ------ Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.63 Ln(X) + 6.23 R 2 = 0.82
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1503 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Shopping Center
(820)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
On a: Saturday,
Peak Hour of Generator
Number of Studies: 127
Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 450
Directional Distribution: 52% entering, 48% exiting
Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
4.89 1.46 1832 3.10
i-onma mynmo==
ii
9,000
RIM
712MMERM
w
CL
1--
6,000
5.000
4,000
U00
iii
111111012
0 -t-T-,
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600
X = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ------ Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.65 Ln(X) + 3.76 R 2 = 0.83
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1504 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Shopping Center
(820)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
On a: Sunday
Number of Studies: 77
Average 1000 Sq. Feet GSA: 439
Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
2524 4.15 - 148.15 17.23
Data Plot and Equation
I
z
20.000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600
X = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
X Actual Data Points - Fitted Curve ------ Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: T = 15.63(X) + 4214.46 R 2 = 0.52
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1505 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Shopping Center
(820)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
On a: Sunday,
Peak Hour of Generator
Number of Studies: 39
Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 369
Directional Distribution: 49% entering, 51 % exiting
Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
3.12 0,39 - 12,40 2,78
Lu
3,000
.S2
cn
ro
a) 2.000
z
lipilitz
0
0 100 200 300 400 Soo 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
X = 1000 Sq, Feet Gross Leasable Area
X Actual Data Points
------ Average Rate
R2 = .*.*
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1506 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Shopping Center - Christmas Season
(820)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Number of Studies: 24
Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 459
Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
3.76 2.16 - 10.01 2.30
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1507 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Shopping Center - Christmas Season
(820)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area
On a: Saturday,
Peak Hour of Generator
Number of Studies: 10
Average 1000Sq. Feet GLA: 526
Directional Distribution: 51 % entering, 49% exiting
Trip Generation per 1000 Sq, Feet Gross Leasable Area
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
5.88 4.33 - 7,57 2,58
Data Plot and Equation
6,000
Lu
4,000
0)
3.000
32
500 600 700
X = 1000 Sq, Feet Gross Leasable Area
X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation: T = 4.90(X) + 515.88
1.000
300
400
800 900
------ Average Rate
R 2 = 0.77
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1508 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Appendix C
LOS & Synchro Analysis Output
Timings
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR 4/8/2014
__11� Ir .4- t
Lane Group
EBT
WBL
WBT
SBL
SBT
o4
o5
o6
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
+I+
tt
t
Volume (vph)
354
70
480
122
111
Turn Type
NA
Prot
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
2
1
12
4 12
4
5
6
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
4 12
Detector Phase
2
1
12
4 12
4 12
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
25.0%
25.0%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
None
Min
None
Min
C-Max
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
22.7
23.2
45.9
18.1
18.1
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.28
0.29
0.57
0.23
0.23
v/c Ratio
0.77
0.14
0.28
0.40
0.26
Control Delay
22.2
21.8
4.5
15.9
8.2
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
22.2
21.8
4.5
15.9
8.2
LOS
C
C
A
B
A
Approach Delay
22.2
6.5
11.5
Approach LOS
C
A
B
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 80
Actuated Cycle Length: 80
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.77
Intersection Signal Delay: 14.7 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR
#1
04
#1
4-
Ob2
#1
012
#1
01
20 s
20 s I 120s
20 s
#2
}
416
#2
A5
#2
}
108
#2
6 R
20 s I 120s
I 120s
120s
2013 AM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
Timings
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/8/2014
Lane Group
EBL
EBT
WBT
NBL
NBT
01
o2
o4
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
tt
Volume (vph)
82
398
347
204
137
Turn Type
Prot
NA
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
5
5 6
6
8 16
1
2
4
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
8 16
Detector Phase
5
5 6
6
8 16
8 16
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
25.0%
25.0%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lag
Lag
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
Min
C-Max
Min
None
None
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
19.7
40.8
21.1
23.2
23.2
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.25
0.51
0.26
0.29
0.29
v/c Ratio
0.23
0.24
0.57
0.46
0.40
Control Delay
23.4
5.9
27.0
14.3
5.2
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
23.4
5.9
27.0
14.3
5.2
LOS
C
A
C
B
A
Approach Delay
9.2
27.0
8.3
Approach LOS
A
C
A
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 80
Actuated Cycle Length: 80
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.77
Intersection Signal Delay: 14.4 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove
#1
04
#1
4-
Ob2
#1
012
#1
01
20 s
20 s I 120s
20 s
#2
}
416
#2
A5
#2
}
108
#2
6 R
20 s I 120s
I 120s
120s
2013 AM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 5
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
4.2
Movement
EBL
EBT
WBT
WBR
SBL
SBR
Vol, veh/h
165
271
344
76
52
91
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
150
-
-
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
0
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
89
95
83
67
76
90
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
185
285
414
113
68
101
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
528
0
0
984
264
Stage 1
-
-
-
471
-
Stage 2
-
513
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
6.84
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.84
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.84
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
3.52
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
1035
246
734
Stage 1
-
594
-
Stage 2
-
566
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
1035
202
734
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
202
-
Stage 1
594
Stage 2
465
Approach
EB
WB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
3.6
0
19.2
HCM LOS
C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
EBL
EBT
WBT WBR SBLn1
SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
1035
202
734
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.179
0.339
0.138
HCM Control Delay (s)
9.2
31.7
10.7
HCM Lane LOS
A
D
B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0.7
1.4
0.5
2013 AM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 10
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/8/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 17.2
Intersection LOS C
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SIB
Entry Lanes
1
1
1
1
Conflicting Circle Lanes
1
1
1
1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
438
552
350
388
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
447
564
357
396
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
400
420
456
544
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
540
393
391
440
Follow -Up Headway, s
3.186
3.186
3.186
3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh
14.5
22.6
12.6
16.8
Approach LOS
B
C
B
C
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
Assumed Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Critical Headway, s
5.193
5.193
5.193
5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h
447
564
357
396
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
757
742
716
656
Entry HV Adj Factor
0.980
0.980
0.981
0.980
Flow Entry, veh/h
438
552
350
388
Cap Entry, veh/h
742
727
702
643
V/C Ratio
0.590
0.760
0.498
0.604
Control Delay, s/veh
14.5
22.6
12.6
16.8
LOS
B
C
B
C
95th %tile Queue, veh
4
7
3
4
2013 AM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 12
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: White Chapel & E Kirkwood 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Vol, veh/h
53
5
206
54
4
265
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
0
0
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
0
-
0
0
Grade, %
0
-
0
-
0
Peak Hour Factor
67
25
86
60
38
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
79
20
240
90
11
331
Major/Minor
Minor1
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
637
285
0
0
330
0
Stage 1
285
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
352
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.42
6.22
4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.42
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.42
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.518
3.318
2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
441
754
1229
Stage 1
763
-
-
Stage 2
712
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
436
754
1229
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
436
-
-
Stage 1
763
Stage 2
704
Approach
WB
NB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
14.1
0
0.2
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBT
NBR WBLn1
WBLn2
SBL
SBT
Capacity (veh/h)
436
754
1229
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.181
0.027
0.009
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
15.1
9.9
8
0
HCM Lane LOS
C
A
A
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0.7
0.1
0
2013 AM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 15
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Dove & Verizon 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
1.5
Movement
EBL
EBT
WBT
WBR
SBL
SBR
Vol, veh/h
148
436
435
0
0
18
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
None
-
None
Storage Length
0
-
0
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
0
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
185
545
544
0
0
22
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
544
0
0
1187
272
Stage 1
-
-
-
544
-
Stage 2
-
643
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
6.84
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.84
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.84
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
3.52
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
1021
181
726
Stage 1
-
546
-
Stage 2
-
485
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
1021
148
726
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
148
-
Stage 1
546
Stage 2
397
Approach
EB
WB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
2.4
0
10.1
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
EBL
EBT
WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
1021
726
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.181
0.031
HCM Control Delay (s)
9.3
0 10.1
HCM Lane LOS
A
A B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0.7
0.1
2013 AM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 17
Timings
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR 4/8/2014
__11� Ir .4- t
Lane Group
EBT
WBL
WBT
SBL
SBT
o4
o5
o6
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
+I+
tt
t
Volume (vph)
180
263
840
130
113
Turn Type
NA
Prot
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
2
1
12
4 12
4
5
6
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
4 12
Detector Phase
2
1
12
4 12
4 12
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
20.0
30.0
20.0
20.0
30.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
22.2%
33.3%
22%
22%
33%
22%
22%
22%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
None
Min
None
Min
C-Max
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
18.7
32.2
50.9
23.1
23.1
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.21
0.36
0.57
0.26
0.26
v/c Ratio
0.50
0.44
0.51
0.37
0.29
Control Delay
17.3
17.9
5.7
16.9
11.5
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
17.3
17.9
5.8
16.9
11.5
LOS
B
B
A
B
B
Approach Delay
17.3
8.4
13.6
Approach LOS
B
A
B
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 90
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.68
Intersection Signal Delay: 11.2 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.1 % ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR
#1
04
#1
4-
k2
#1
0121
#1
20 s I 120s
I 120s
I 130s
#2
#2
#2 1416
#
6 R
#2
t48
20 s I 120s
I 130s
I 120s
2013 PM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
Timings
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/8/2014
Lane Group
EBL
EBT
WBT
NBL
NBT
01
o2
o4
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
tt
Volume (vph)
53
257
527
568
158
Turn Type
Prot
NA
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
5
5 6
6
8 16
1
2
4
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
8 16
Detector Phase
5
5 6
6
8 16
8 16
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
20.0
30.0
30.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
22.2%
33.3%
33%
22%
22%
22%
22%
22%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lead
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
Min
C-Max
Min
None
None
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
9.0
38.4
29.5
35.6
35.6
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.10
0.43
0.33
0.40
0.40
v/c Ratio
0.36
0.18
0.68
0.53
0.45
Control Delay
58.1
11.8
29.4
14.8
12.1
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
58.1
11.8
29.4
14.8
12.1
LOS
E
B
C
B
B
Approach Delay
20.5
29.4
13.1
Approach LOS
C
C
B
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 90
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.68
Intersection Signal Delay: 20.6 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.1 % ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove
#1
04
#1
4-
k2
#1
0121
#1
20 s I 120s
I 120s
I 130s
#2
#2
#2 1416
#
6 R
#2
t48
20 s I 120s
I 130s
I 120s
2013 PM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 5
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
6
Movement
EBL
EBT
WBT
WBR
SBL
SBR
Vol, veh/h
57
248
258
32
106
291
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
150
-
-
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
0
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
89
95
83
67
76
90
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
64
261
311
48
139
323
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
359
0
0
594
179
Stage 1
-
-
-
335
-
Stage 2
-
259
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
6.84
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.84
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.84
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
3.52
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
1196
436
833
Stage 1
-
697
-
Stage 2
-
761
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
1196
413
833
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
413
-
Stage 1
697
Stage 2
720
Approach
EB
WB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
1.6
0
13.8
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
EBL
EBT
WBT WBR SBLn1
SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
1196
413
833
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.054
0.338
0.388
HCM Control Delay (s)
8.2
18.1
12
HCM Lane LOS
A
C
B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0.2
1.5
1.8
2013 PM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 10
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/8/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 14.6
Intersection LOS B
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SIB
Entry Lanes
1
1
1
1
Conflicting Circle Lanes
1
1
1
1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
466
458
487
191
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
475
467
497
195
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
236
407
451
431
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
390
541
260
443
Follow -Up Headway, s
3.186
3.186
3.186
3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh
11.4
15.6
19.1
8.1
Approach LOS
B
C
C
A
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
Assumed Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Critical Headway, s
5.193
5.193
5.193
5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h
475
467
497
195
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
892
752
720
734
Entry HV Adj Factor
0.981
0.981
0.979
0.979
Flow Entry, veh/h
466
458
487
191
Cap Entry, veh/h
875
738
705
719
V/C Ratio
0.532
0.621
0.691
0.266
Control Delay, s/veh
11.4
15.6
19.1
8.1
LOS
B
C
C
A
95th %tile Queue, veh
3
4
6
1
2013 PM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 12
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: White Chapel & E Kirkwood 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
1.6
Movement
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Vol, veh/h
40
3
253
36
6
172
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
0
0
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
0
-
0
0
Grade, %
0
-
0
-
0
Peak Hour Factor
67
25
86
60
38
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
60
12
294
60
16
215
Major/Minor
Minor1
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
571
324
0
0
354
0
Stage 1
324
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
247
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.42
6.22
4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.42
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.42
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.518
3.318
2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
482
717
1205
Stage 1
733
-
-
Stage 2
794
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
475
717
1205
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
475
-
-
Stage 1
733
Stage 2
782
Approach
WB
NB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
13.1
0
0.5
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBT
NBR WBLn1
WBLn2
SBL
SBT
Capacity (veh/h)
475
717
1205
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.126
0.017
0.013
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
13.7
10.1
8
0
HCM Lane LOS
B
B
A
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0.4
0.1
0
2013 PM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 15
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Dove & Verizon 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
1.4
Movement
EBL
EBT
WBT
WBR
SBL
SBR
Vol, veh/h
0
305
549
0
0
111
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
None
-
None
Storage Length
0
-
0
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
0
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
0
381
686
0
0
139
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
686
0
0
877
343
Stage 1
-
-
-
686
-
Stage 2
-
191
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
6.84
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.84
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.84
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
3.52
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
904
288
653
Stage 1
-
461
-
Stage 2
-
822
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
904
288
653
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
288
-
Stage 1
461
Stage 2
822
Approach
EB
WB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
0
0
12
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
EBL
EBT
WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
904
653
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
-
0.212
HCM Control Delay (s)
0
0 12
HCM Lane LOS
A
A B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
0.8
2013 PM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 17
Timings
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR 4/8/2014
__11� Ir .4- t
Lane Group
EBT
WBL
WBT
SBL
SBT
o4
o5
o6
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
+I+
tt
t
Volume (vph)
88
80
236
45
95
Turn Type
NA
Prot
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
2
1
12
4 12
4
5
6
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
4 12
Detector Phase
2
1
12
4 12
4 12
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
25.0%
25.0%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
None
Min
None
Min
C-Max
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
10.7
21.6
32.3
25.6
25.6
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.13
0.27
0.40
0.32
0.32
v/c Ratio
0.52
0.18
0.20
0.10
0.13
Control Delay
13.8
24.1
6.0
10.4
7.8
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
13.8
24.1
6.0
10.4
7.8
LOS
B
C
A
B
A
Approach Delay
13.8
10.2
8.5
Approach LOS
B
B
A
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 80
Actuated Cycle Length: 80
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.52
Intersection Signal Delay: 11.1 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR
#1
04
#1
4-
Ob2
#1
012
#1
01
20 s
20 s I 120s
20 s
#2
}
416
#2
A5
#2
}
108
#2
6 R
20 s I 120s
I 120s
120s
2013 Weekend.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
Timings
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/8/2014
Lane Group
EBL
EBT
WBT
NBL
NBT
01
o2
o4
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
tt
Volume (vph)
44
91
131
161
109
Turn Type
Prot
NA
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
5
5 6
6
8 16
1
2
4
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
8 16
Detector Phase
5
5 6
6
8 16
8 16
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
25.0%
25.0%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lag
Lag
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
Min
C-Max
Min
None
None
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
8.0
47.8
39.8
16.2
16.2
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.10
0.60
0.50
0.20
0.20
v/c Ratio
0.30
0.05
0.15
0.37
0.35
Control Delay
32.5
3.6
7.9
19.2
14.7
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
32.5
3.6
7.9
19.2
14.7
LOS
C
A
A
B
B
Approach Delay
13.7
7.9
16.2
Approach LOS
B
A
B
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 80
Actuated Cycle Length: 80
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.52
Intersection Signal Delay: 12.9 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove
#1
04
#1
4-
Ob2
#1
012
#1
01
20 s
20 s I 120s
20 s
#2
}
416
#2
A5
#2
}
108
#2
6 R
20 s I 120s
I 120s
120s
2013 Weekend.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 5
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
2.8
Movement
EBL
EBT
WBT
WBR
SBL
SBR
Vol, veh/h
45
79
107
16
8
51
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
150
-
-
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
0
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
89
95
83
67
76
90
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
51
83
129
24
11
57
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
153
0
0
284
76
Stage 1
-
-
-
141
-
Stage 2
-
143
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
6.84
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.84
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.84
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
3.52
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
1425
683
970
Stage 1
-
871
-
Stage 2
-
869
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
1425
659
970
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
659
-
Stage 1
871
Stage 2
838
Approach
EB
WB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
2.9
0
9.2
HCM LOS
A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
EBL
EBT
WBT WBR SBLn1
SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
1425
659
970
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.035
0.016
0.058
HCM Control Delay (s)
7.6
10.6
8.9
HCM Lane LOS
A
B
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0.1
0
0.2
2013 Weekend.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 10
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/8/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 5.2
Intersection LOS A
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SIB
Entry Lanes
1
1
1
1
Conflicting Circle Lanes
1
1
1
1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
108
209
142
118
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
110
213
144
120
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
197
95
116
208
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
131
165
191
100
Follow -Up Headway, s
3.186
3.186
3.186
3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh
5.1
5.5
5.0
5.2
Approach LOS
A
A
A
A
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
Assumed Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Critical Headway, s
5.193
5.193
5.193
5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h
110
213
144
120
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
928
1028
1006
918
Entry HV Adj Factor
0.984
0.982
0.983
0.987
Flow Entry, veh/h
108
209
142
118
Cap Entry, veh/h
913
1009
989
905
V/C Ratio
0.119
0.207
0.143
0.131
Control Delay, s/veh
5.1
5.5
5.0
5.2
LOS
A
A
A
A
95th %tile Queue, veh
0
1
0
0
2013 Weekend.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 12
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: White Chapel & E Kirkwood 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
2.3
Movement
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Vol, veh/h
41
5
124
26
5
108
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
0
0
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
0
-
0
0
Grade, %
0
-
0
-
0
Peak Hour Factor
67
25
86
60
38
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
61
20
144
43
13
135
Major/Minor
Minor1
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
327
166
0
0
188
0
Stage 1
166
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
161
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.42
6.22
4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.42
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.42
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.518
3.318
2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
667
878
1386
Stage 1
863
-
-
Stage 2
868
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
660
878
1386
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
660
-
-
Stage 1
863
Stage 2
859
Approach
WB
NB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
10.6
0
0.7
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBT
NBR WBLn1
WBLn2
SBL
SBT
Capacity (veh/h)
660
878
1386
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.093
0.023
0.009
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
11
9.2
7.6
0
HCM Lane LOS
B
A
A
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0.3
0.1
0
2013 Weekend.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 15
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Dove & Verizon 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
0
Movement
EBL
EBT
WBT
WBR
SBL
SBR
Vol, veh/h
0
125
215
0
0
0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
None
-
None
Storage Length
0
-
0
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
0
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
0
156
269
0
0
0
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
269
0
0
347
134
Stage 1
-
-
-
269
-
Stage 2
-
78
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
6.84
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.84
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.84
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
3.52
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
1292
624
890
Stage 1
-
752
-
Stage 2
-
936
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
1292
624
890
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
624
-
Stage 1
752
Stage 2
936
Approach
EB
WB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
0
0
0
HCM LOS
A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
EBL
EBT
WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
1292
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
-
- -
HCM Control Delay (s)
0
0 0
HCM Lane LOS
A
A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
2013 Weekend.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 17
Timings
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR 4/8/2014
__11� Ir .4- t
Lane Group
EBT
WBL
WBT
SBL
SBT
o4
o5
o6
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
+I+
tt
t
Volume (vph)
466
92
632
161
146
Turn Type
NA
Prot
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
2
1
12
4 12
4
5
6
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
4 12
Detector Phase
2
1
12
4 12
4 12
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
41.0
29.0
20.0
41.0
29.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
37.3%
26.4%
18%
37%
26%
18%
18%
18%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
None
Min
None
Min
Max
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
36.9
33.6
74.5
25.7
25.7
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.34
0.31
0.69
0.24
0.24
v/c Ratio
0.90
0.18
0.31
0.50
0.31
Control Delay
36.2
19.2
1.0
39.8
21.3
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
36.2
19.2
1.4
39.8
21.3
LOS
D
B
A
D
C
Approach Delay
36.2
3.4
29.3
Approach LOS
D
A
C
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 110
Actuated Cycle Length: 108.2
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.90
Intersection Signal Delay: 23.6 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR
#1
:Ift2
#1
04
#1
1 012
#1
01
41 s I
20 s I 120s
29 s
#2 1016
#2
5
#
#2
-446
#2
t08
20 s 1
41 s I 129s
I 120s
2020 AM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
Timings
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/8/2014
Lane Group
EBL
EBT
WBT
NBL
NBT
01
o2
o4
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
tt
Volume (vph)
108
524
457
268
180
Turn Type
Prot
NA
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
5
5 6
6
8 16
1
2
4
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
8 16
Detector Phase
5
5 6
6
8 16
8 16
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
41.0
29.0
29.0
41.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
37.3%
26.4%
26%
37%
18%
18%
18%
18%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
Min
Max
Min
None
None
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
40.1
69.1
25.0
31.1
31.1
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.37
0.64
0.23
0.29
0.29
v/c Ratio
0.20
0.25
0.86
0.61
0.51
Control Delay
16.6
2.3
50.2
39.3
14.5
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
16.6
2.3
50.2
39.3
14.5
LOS
B
A
D
D
B
Approach Delay
5.0
50.2
22.8
Approach LOS
A
D
C
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 110
Actuated Cycle Length: 108.2
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.90
Intersection Signal Delay: 25.9 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove
#1
:Ift2
#1
04
#1
1 012
#1
01
41 s I
20 s I 120s
29 s
#2 1016
#2
5
#
#2
-446
#2
t08
20 s 1
41 s I 129s
I 120s
2020 AM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 5
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
E
Movement
EBL
EBT
WBT
WBR
SBL
SBR
Vol, veh/h
217
357
453
100
68
120
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
150
-
-
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
0
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
89
95
83
67
76
90
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
244
376
546
149
89
133
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
695
0
0
1296
348
Stage 1
-
-
-
620
-
Stage 2
-
676
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
6.84
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.84
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.84
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
3.52
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
897
154
648
Stage 1
-
499
-
Stage 2
-
467
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
897
112
648
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
112
-
Stage 1
499
Stage 2
340
Approach
EB
WB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
4.1
0
50.8
HCM LOS
F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
EBL
EBT
WBT WBR SBLn1
SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
897
112
648
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.272
0.799
0.206
HCM Control Delay (s)
10.5
108.5
12
HCM Lane LOS
B
F
B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
1.1
4.6
0.8
2020 AM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 10
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/8/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 60.0
Intersection LOS F
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SIB
Entry Lanes
1
1
1
1
Conflicting Circle Lanes
1
1
1
1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
577
726
462
510
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
588
741
471
521
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
526
553
600
717
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
712
518
514
577
Follow -Up Headway, s
3.186
3.186
3.186
3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh
36.9
104.5
26.0
53.6
Approach LOS
E
F
D
F
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
Assumed Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Critical Headway, s
5.193
5.193
5.193
5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h
588
741
471
521
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
668
650
620
552
Entry HV Adj Factor
0.981
0.980
0.980
0.979
Flow Entry, veh/h
577
726
462
510
Cap Entry, veh/h
655
637
608
540
V/C Ratio
0.881
1.140
0.760
0.944
Control Delay, s/veh
36.9
104.5
26.0
53.6
LOS
E
F
D
F
95th %tile Queue, veh
11
23
7
12
2020 AM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 12
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: White Chapel & E Kirkwood 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
2.5
Movement
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Vol, veh/h
70
7
271
71
5
349
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
0
0
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
0
-
0
0
Grade, %
0
-
0
-
0
Peak Hour Factor
67
25
86
60
38
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
104
28
315
118
13
436
Major/Minor
Minor1
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
837
374
0
0
433
0
Stage 1
374
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
463
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.42
6.22
4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.42
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.42
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.518
3.318
2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
337
672
1127
Stage 1
696
-
-
Stage 2
634
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
332
672
1127
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
332
-
-
Stage 1
696
Stage 2
624
Approach
WB
NB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
18.6
0
0.2
HCM LOS
C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBT
NBR WBLn1
WBLn2
SBL
SBT
Capacity (veh/h)
332
672
1127
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.315
0.042
0.012
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
20.7
10.6
8.2
0
HCM Lane LOS
C
B
A
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
1.3
0.1
0
2020 AM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 15
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Dove & Verizon 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
1.7
Movement
EBL
EBT
WBT
WBR
SBL
SBR
Vol, veh/h
195
574
572
0
0
24
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
None
-
None
Storage Length
100
-
0
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
0
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
244
718
715
0
0
30
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
715
0
0
1561
358
Stage 1
-
-
-
715
-
Stage 2
-
846
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
6.84
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.84
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.84
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
3.52
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
881
103
638
Stage 1
-
446
-
Stage 2
-
381
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
881
74
638
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
74
-
Stage 1
446
Stage 2
275
Approach
EB
WB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
2.7
0
10.9
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
EBL
EBT
WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
881
638
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.277
0.047
HCM Control Delay (s)
10.6
0 10.9
HCM Lane LOS
B
A B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
1.1
0.1
2020 AM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 17
Timings
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR 4/8/2014
__11� Ir .4- t
Lane Group
EBT
WBL
WBT
SBL
SBT
o4
o5
o6
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
+I+
tt
t
Volume (vph)
237
346
1105
171
149
Turn Type
NA
Prot
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
2
1
12
4 12
4
5
6
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
4 12
Detector Phase
2
1
12
4 12
4 12
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
20.0
30.0
20.0
20.0
30.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
22.2%
33.3%
22%
22%
33%
22%
22%
22%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
None
Min
None
Min
C-Max
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
16.0
34.5
54.5
27.5
27.5
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.18
0.38
0.61
0.31
0.31
v/c Ratio
0.71
0.54
0.62
0.41
0.33
Control Delay
24.8
23.1
4.1
27.3
22.6
Queue Delay
0.0
0.6
0.3
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
24.8
23.7
4.4
27.3
22.6
LOS
C
C
A
C
C
Approach Delay
24.8
8.6
24.4
Approach LOS
C
A
C
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 90
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.93
Intersection Signal Delay: 15.0 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.6% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR
#1
4-
2
#1
04
#1
0121
#1
20 s I 120s
I 120s
I 130s
#21416
#2
5
#
4- R
#2 48
20 s
I 130s
I 120s
2020 PM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
Timings
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/8/2014
Lane Group
EBL
EBT
WBT
NBL
NBT
01
o2
o4
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
tt
Volume (vph)
70
338
693
747
208
Turn Type
Prot
NA
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
5
5 6
6
8 16
1
2
4
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
8 16
Detector Phase
5
5 6
6
8 16
8 16
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
20.0
30.0
30.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
22.2%
33.3%
33%
22%
22%
22%
22%
22%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
Min
C-Max
Min
None
None
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
15.6
47.8
28.2
34.2
34.2
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.17
0.53
0.31
0.38
0.38
v/c Ratio
0.27
0.19
0.93
0.72
0.62
Control Delay
29.8
4.8
45.5
31.2
24.3
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
29.8
4.8
45.5
31.2
24.3
LOS
C
A
D
C
C
Approach Delay
9.5
45.5
26.8
Approach LOS
A
D
C
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 90
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.93
Intersection Signal Delay: 31.1 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.6% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove
#1
4-
2
#1
04
#1
0121
#1
20 s I 120s
I 120s
I 130s
#21416
#2
5
#
4- R
#2 48
20 s
I 130s
I 120s
2020 PM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 5
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
8.8
Movement
EBL
EBT
WBT
WBR
SBL
SBR
Vol, veh/h
75
326
340
42
139
383
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
150
-
-
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
0
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
89
95
83
67
76
90
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
84
343
410
63
183
426
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
472
0
0
781
236
Stage 1
-
-
-
441
-
Stage 2
-
340
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
6.84
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.84
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.84
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
3.52
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
1086
332
766
Stage 1
-
616
-
Stage 2
-
692
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
1086
306
766
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
306
-
Stage 1
616
Stage 2
638
Approach
EB
WB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
1.7
0
20.6
HCM LOS
C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
EBL
EBT
WBT WBR SBLn1
SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
1086
306
766
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.078
0.598
0.556
HCM Control Delay (s)
8.6
32.8
15.4
HCM Lane LOS
A
D
C
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0.3
3.6
3.5
2020 PM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 10
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/8/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 43.5
Intersection LOS E
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SIB
Entry Lanes
1
1
1
1
Conflicting Circle Lanes
1
1
1
1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
614
604
642
252
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
625
617
655
257
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
312
536
593
568
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
513
712
344
585
Follow -Up Headway, s
3.186
3.186
3.186
3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh
20.5
45.8
75.7
11.5
Approach LOS
C
E
F
B
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
Assumed Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Critical Headway, s
5.193
5.193
5.193
5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h
625
617
655
257
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
827
661
624
640
Entry HV Adj Factor
0.982
0.979
0.980
0.981
Flow Entry, veh/h
614
604
642
252
Cap Entry, veh/h
812
647
612
628
V/C Ratio
0.756
0.933
1.049
0.401
Control Delay, s/veh
20.5
45.8
75.7
11.5
LOS
C
E
F
B
95th %tile Queue, veh
7
13
17
2
2020 PM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 12
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: White Chapel & E Kirkwood 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
2
Movement
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Vol, veh/h
53
4
333
47
8
226
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
0
0
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
0
-
0
0
Grade, %
0
-
0
-
0
Peak Hour Factor
67
25
86
60
38
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
79
16
387
78
21
282
Major/Minor
Minor1
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
751
426
0
0
466
0
Stage 1
426
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
325
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.42
6.22
4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.42
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.42
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.518
3.318
2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
378
628
1095
Stage 1
659
-
-
Stage 2
732
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
369
628
1095
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
369
-
-
Stage 1
659
Stage 2
715
Approach
WB
NB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
16.3
0
0.6
HCM LOS
C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBT
NBR WBLn1
WBLn2
SBL
SBT
Capacity (veh/h)
369
628
1095
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.214
0.025
0.019
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
17.4
10.9
8.4
0
HCM Lane LOS
C
B
A
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0.8
0.1
0.1
2020 PM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 15
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Dove & Verizon 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
1.8
Movement
EBL
EBT
WBT
WBR
SBL
SBR
Vol, veh/h
0
305
722
0
0
146
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
None
-
None
Storage Length
100
-
0
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
0
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
0
381
902
0
0
182
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
903
0
0
1094
451
Stage 1
-
-
-
903
-
Stage 2
-
191
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
6.84
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.84
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.84
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
3.52
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
749
208
556
Stage 1
-
356
-
Stage 2
-
822
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
749
208
556
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
208
-
Stage 1
356
Stage 2
822
Approach
EB
WB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
0
0
14.6
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
EBL
EBT
WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
749
556
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
-
0.328
HCM Control Delay (s)
0
0 14.6
HCM Lane LOS
A
A B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
1.4
2020 PM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 17
Timings
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR 4/8/2014
__11� Ir .4- t
Lane Group
EBT
WBL
WBT
SBL
SBT
o4
o5
o6
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
+I+
tt
t
Volume (vph)
116
105
311
59
125
Turn Type
NA
Prot
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
2
1
12
4 12
4
5
6
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
4 12
Detector Phase
2
1
12
4 12
4 12
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
25.0%
25.0%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
None
Min
None
Min
C-Max
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
11.5
22.0
37.5
34.5
34.5
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.14
0.28
0.47
0.43
0.43
v/c Ratio
0.59
0.23
0.23
0.10
0.13
Control Delay
14.0
23.7
6.8
16.9
12.4
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
14.0
23.7
6.8
16.9
12.4
LOS
B
C
A
B
B
Approach Delay
14.0
10.7
13.7
Approach LOS
B
B
B
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 80
Actuated Cycle Length: 80
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.59
Intersection Signal Delay: 12.5 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 31.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR
#1
#1
#1
#1
2
04
012
01
20 s 120s
20 s
20 s
#2
#2
#2
#2
}
416
A5
6 R
1} 08
20 s I 120s
I 120s
I 120s
2020 Weekend Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
Timings
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/8/2014
Lane Group
EBL
EBT
WBT
NBL
NBT
01
o2
o4
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
tt
Volume (vph)
58
120
172
212
143
Turn Type
Prot
NA
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
5
5 6
6
8 16
1
2
4
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
8 16
Detector Phase
5
5 6
6
8 16
8 16
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
25.0%
25.0%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
Min
C-Max
Min
None
None
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
12.6
49.0
32.4
23.0
23.0
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.16
0.61
0.40
0.29
0.29
v/c Ratio
0.25
0.06
0.24
0.34
0.33
Control Delay
32.9
2.8
11.6
23.6
19.4
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
32.9
2.8
11.6
23.6
19.4
LOS
C
A
B
C
B
Approach Delay
13.4
11.6
20.8
Approach LOS
B
B
C
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 80
Actuated Cycle Length: 80
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.59
Intersection Signal Delay: 16.3 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 31.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove
#1
#1
#1
#1
2
04
012
01
20 s 120s
20 s
20 s
#2
#2
#2
#2
}
416
A5
6 R
1} 08
20 s I 120s
I 120s
I 120s
2020 Weekend Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 5
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
2.9
Movement
EBL
EBT
WBT
WBR
SBL
SBR
Vol, veh/h
59
104
141
21
11
67
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
150
-
-
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
0
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
89
95
83
67
76
90
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
66
109
170
31
14
74
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
201
0
0
373
101
Stage 1
-
-
-
186
-
Stage 2
-
187
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
6.84
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.84
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.84
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
3.52
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
1368
601
935
Stage 1
-
827
-
Stage 2
-
826
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
1368
572
935
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
572
-
Stage 1
827
Stage 2
786
Approach
EB
WB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
2.9
0
9.6
HCM LOS
A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
EBL
EBT
WBT WBR SBLn1
SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
1368
572
935
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.048
0.025
0.08
HCM Control Delay (s)
7.8
11.5
9.2
HCM Lane LOS
A
B
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0.2
0.1
0.3
2020 Weekend Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 10
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/8/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 6.1
Intersection LOS A
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SIB
Entry Lanes
1
1
1
1
Conflicting Circle Lanes
1
1
1
1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
143
277
186
153
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
145
283
190
156
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
258
126
152
276
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
174
216
251
133
Follow -Up Headway, s
3.186
3.186
3.186
3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh
5.9
6.6
5.7
6.1
Approach LOS
A
A
A
A
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
Assumed Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Critical Headway, s
5.193
5.193
5.193
5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h
145
283
190
156
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
873
996
971
857
Entry HV Adj Factor
0.984
0.980
0.980
0.980
Flow Entry, veh/h
143
277
186
153
Cap Entry, veh/h
859
977
951
840
V/C Ratio
0.166
0.284
0.196
0.182
Control Delay, s/veh
5.9
6.6
5.7
6.1
LOS
A
A
A
A
95th %tile Queue, veh
1
1
1
1
2020 Weekend Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 12
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: White Chapel & E Kirkwood 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
2.5
Movement
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Vol, veh/h
54
7
163
34
7
142
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
0
0
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
0
-
0
0
Grade, %
0
-
0
-
0
Peak Hour Factor
67
25
86
60
38
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
81
28
190
57
18
178
Major/Minor
Minor1
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
432
218
0
0
246
0
Stage 1
218
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
214
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.42
6.22
4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.42
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.42
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.518
3.318
2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
581
822
1320
Stage 1
818
-
-
Stage 2
822
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
572
822
1320
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
572
-
-
Stage 1
818
Stage 2
810
Approach
WB
NB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
11.6
0
0.7
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBT
NBR WBLn1
WBLn2
SBL
SBT
Capacity (veh/h)
572
822
1320
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.141
0.034
0.014
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
12.3
9.5
7.8
0
HCM Lane LOS
B
A
A
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0.5
0.1
0
2020 Weekend Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 15
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Dove & Verizon 4/8/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
0
Movement
EBL
EBT
WBT
WBR
SBL
SBR
Vol, veh/h
0
164
283
0
0
0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
None
-
None
Storage Length
100
-
0
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
0
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
0
205
354
0
0
0
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
354
0
0
457
177
Stage 1
-
-
-
354
-
Stage 2
-
103
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
6.84
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.84
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.84
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
3.52
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
1201
532
835
Stage 1
-
681
-
Stage 2
-
910
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
1201
532
835
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
532
-
Stage 1
681
Stage 2
910
Approach
EB
WB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
0
0
0
HCM LOS
A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
EBL
EBT
WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
1201
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
-
- -
HCM Control Delay (s)
0
0 0
HCM Lane LOS
A
A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
2020 Weekend Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 17
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 27.2
Intersection LOS D
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SB
Entry Lanes
1
1
1
1
Conflicting Circle Lanes
1
1
1
1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
577
726
462
510
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
588
741
471
521
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
526
553
600
717
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
529
402
448
464
Follow -Up Headway, s
3.186
3.186
3.186
3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh
24.0
46.0
14.0
15.9
Approach LOS
C
E
B
C
Lane
Left
Bypass
Left
Bypass
Left
Bypass
Left
Bypass
Designated Moves
LT
R
LT
R
LT
R
LT
R
Assumed Moves
LT
R
LT
R
LT
R
LT
R
RT Channelized
Yield
Yield
Yield
Yield
Lane Util
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Critical Headway, s
5.193
5.193
5.193
5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h
522
66
628
113
355
116
338
183
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
668
722
650
710
620
756
552
666
Entry HV Adj Factor
0.980
0.980
0.980
0.980
0.980
0.980
0.979
0.980
Flow Entry, veh/h
512
65
615
111
348
114
331
179
Cap Entry, veh/h
655
708
637
697
608
741
540
653
V/C Ratio
0.782
0.092
0.966
0.159
0.572
0.154
0.613
0.274
Control Delay, s/veh
26.2
6.1
53.0
6.9
16.4
6.5
19.7
9.0
LOS
D
A
F
A
C
A
C
A
95th %tile Queue, veh
8
0
14
1
4
1
4
1
2020 AM Background with Bypass Lanes.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 18.6
Intersection LOS C
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SB
Entry Lanes
1
1
1
1
Conflicting Circle Lanes
1
1
1
1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
614
604
642
252
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
625
617
655
257
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
312
536
593
568
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
438
518
274
498
Follow -Up Headway, s
3.186
3.186
3.186
3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh
15.1
25.2
19.8
8.5
Approach LOS
C
D
C
A
Lane
Left
Bypass
Left
Bypass
Left
Bypass
Left
Bypass
Designated Moves
LT
R
LT
R
LT
R
LT
R
Assumed Moves
LT
R
LT
R
LT
R
LT
R
RT Channelized
Yield
Yield
Yield
Yield
Lane Util
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Critical Headway, s
5.193
5.193
5.193
5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h
555
70
530
87
461
194
182
75
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
827
859
661
687
624
673
640
729
Entry HV Adj Factor
0.981
0.980
0.980
0.980
0.980
0.980
0.979
0.980
Flow Entry, veh/h
545
69
519
85
452
190
178
74
Cap Entry, veh/h
812
842
648
673
612
660
627
715
V/C Ratio
0.671
0.082
0.802
0.126
0.738
0.288
0.284
0.104
Control Delay, s/veh
16.3
5.1
28.2
6.7
24.3
9.1
9.4
6.1
LOS
C
A
D
A
C
A
A
A
95th %tile Queue, veh
5
0
8
0
6
1
1
0
2020 PM Background with Bypass Lanes.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 5.5
Intersection LOS A
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SB
Entry Lanes
1
1
1
1
Conflicting Circle Lanes
1
1
1
1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
143
277
186
153
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
145
283
190
156
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
258
126
152
276
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
146
137
236
109
Follow -Up Headway, s
3.186
3.186
3.186
3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh
5.5
6.1
4.7
5.5
Approach LOS
A
A
A
A
Lane
Left
Bypass
Left
Bypass
Left
Bypass
Left
Bypass
Designated Moves
LT
R
LT
R
LT
R
LT
R
Assumed Moves
LT
R
LT
R
LT
R
LT
R
RT Channelized
Yield
Yield
Yield
Yield
Lane Util
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Critical Headway, s
5.193
5.193
5.193
5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h
130
15
259
24
111
79
128
28
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
873
892
996
1013
971
985
857
976
Entry HV Adj Factor
0.983
0.980
0.979
0.980
0.983
0.980
0.984
0.980
Flow Entry, veh/h
128
15
253
24
109
77
126
27
Cap Entry, veh/h
858
875
975
993
954
966
843
957
V/C Ratio
0.149
0.017
0.260
0.024
0.114
0.080
0.149
0.028
Control Delay, s/veh
5.7
4.3
6.3
3.8
4.8
4.4
5.8
4.0
LOS
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
95th %tile Queue, veh
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
2020 Weekend Background with Bypass Lanes.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
Timings
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR 4/24/2014
__11� Ir .4- t
Lane Group
EBT
WBL
WBT
SBL
SBT
o4
o5
o6
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
+I+
tt
t
Volume (vph)
532
112
676
188
146
Turn Type
NA
Prot
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
2
1
12
4 12
4
5
6
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
4 12
Detector Phase
2
1
12
4 12
4 12
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
57.0
40.0
20.0
57.0
42.0
21.0
23.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
40.7%
28.6%
14%
41%
30%
15%
16%
14%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
None
Min
None
Min
C-Max
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
53.0
44.6
101.6
30.4
30.4
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.38
0.32
0.73
0.22
0.22
v/c Ratio
0.91
0.21
0.32
0.64
0.34
Control Delay
44.8
25.5
1.8
57.1
30.5
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
44.8
25.5
2.6
57.1
30.5
LOS
D
C
A
E
C
Approach Delay
44.8
5.5
43.0
Approach LOS
D
A
D
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 140
Actuated Cycle Length: 140
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 100
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.91
Intersection Signal Delay: 30.9 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.9% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR
#1
2
#1
04
#1
012
140s
#1
01
57s
20s I 123s
#21416
157s
#�5
#4- R
#2 48
20s
I 142s
1
21 s
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
Timings
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/24/2014
Lane Group
EBL
EBT
WBT
NBL
NBT
01
o2
o4
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
tt
Volume (vph)
108
617
507
283
198
Turn Type
Prot
NA
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
5
5 6
6
8 16
1
2
4
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
8 16
Detector Phase
5
5 6
6
8 16
8 16
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
57.0
42.0
40.0
57.0
20.0
21.0
23.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
40.7%
30.0%
29%
41%
14%
15%
16%
14%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
Min
C-Max
Min
None
None
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
55.3
97.5
38.1
34.5
34.5
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.40
0.70
0.27
0.25
0.25
v/c Ratio
0.19
0.27
0.81
0.76
0.64
Control Delay
19.9
1.9
53.8
61.5
31.8
Queue Delay
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
19.9
2.4
53.8
61.5
31.8
LOS
B
A
D
E
C
Approach Delay
5.3
53.8
41.8
Approach LOS
A
D
D
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 140
Actuated Cycle Length: 140
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 100
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.91
Intersection Signal Delay: 33.8 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.9% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove
#1
2
#1
04
#1
012
140s
#1
01
57s
20s I 123s
#21416
157s
#�5
#4- R
#2 48
20s
I 142s
1
21 s
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 5
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Dove & Kirkwood II 4/24/2014
--1. .4--- t i
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
tt
r
t
Volume (veh/h)
217
383
42
65
499
104
27
16
50
69
12
120
Sign Control
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
Grade
0%
0%
0%
0%
Peak Hour Factor
0.89
0.95
0.80
0.80
0.83
0.67
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.76
0.80
0.90
Hourly flow rate (vph)
244
403
52
81
601
155
34
20
62
91
15
133
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
None
None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
1050
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
756
456
1495
1810
202
1603
1785
378
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol
756
456
1495
1810
202
1603
1785
378
tC, single (s)
4.1
4.1
7.5
6.5
6.9
7.5
6.5
6.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)
2.2
2.2
3.5
4.0
3.3
3.5
4.0
3.3
p0 queue free %
71
93
14
61
92
0
72
78
cM capacity (veh/h)
850
1101
39
51
806
34
53
620
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
EB 2
EB 3
EB 4
WB 1
WB 2
WB 3
NB 1
NB 2
NB 3
SB 1
SB 2
Volume Total
244
202
202
52
81
401
356
34
13
69
98
141
Volume Left
244
0
0
0
81
0
0
34
0
0
91
0
Volume Right
0
0
0
52
0
0
155
0
0
62
0
133
cSH
850
1700
1700
1700
1101
1700
1700
39
51
334
35
396
Volume to Capacity
0.29
0.12
0.12
0.03
0.07
0.24
0.21
0.86
0.26
0.21
2.80
0.36
Queue Length 95th (ft)
30
0
0
0
6
0
0
81
22
19
280
39
Control Delay (s)
10.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.5
0.0
0.0
258.3
97.8
18.6
1052.8
19.0
Lane LOS
B
A
F
F
C
F
C
Approach Delay (s)
3.8
0.8
97.3
444.0
Approach LOS
F
F
Intersection Summary
Average Delay
63.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization
52.0%
ICU Level of Service
A
Analysis Period (min)
15
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 9
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
53.1
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
Vol, veh/h
217
383
42
65
499
104
27
16
50
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
-
None
-
None
Storage Length
150
150
150
150
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
-
-
0
-
0
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
89
95
80
80
83
67
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
244
403
52
81
601
155
34
20
62
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor1
Conflicting Flow All
756 0 0
403 0 0
1362
1810
202
Stage 1
- - -
- - -
891
891
-
Stage 2
-
-
471
919
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
4.14
7.54
6.54
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
-
6.54
5.54
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
-
6.54
5.54
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
2.22
3.52
4.02
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
851
1152
107
78
805
Stage 1
-
-
304
359
-
Stage 2
-
-
542
348
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
851
1152
50
52
805
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
-
50
52
-
Stage 1
217
256
Stage 2
379
324
Approach
EB
WB
NB
HCM Control Delay, s
3.8
0.8
71.2
HCM LOS
F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBLn1
NBLn2
NBLn3
EBL
EBT EBR WBL
WBT WBR SBLn1
SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
50
52
269
851
1152
40
409
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.675
0.192
0.27
0.287
0.071
2.457
0.344
HCM Control Delay (s)
168.9
90
23.2
10.9
8.4
$ 877.9
18.4
HCM Lane LOS
F
F
C
B
A
F
C
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
2.7
0.6
1.1
1.2
0.2
10.7
1.5
Notes
-: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 10
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
SBL
SBT
SBR
69
12
120
0
0
0
Stop
Stop
Stop
None
0
0
76
80
90
2
2
2
91
15
133
Major/Minor
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
1540
1732
378
Stage 1
841
841
-
Stage 2
699
891
-
Critical Hdwy
7.54
6.54
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
6.54
5.54
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
6.54
5.54
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.52
4.02
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
— 79
87
620
Stage 1
326
379
-
Stage 2
397
359
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
— 39
58
620
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
— 39
58
-
Stage 1
233
352
Stage 2
241
256
Approach SIB
HCM Control Delay, s $ 371.7
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 11
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 98.6
Intersection LOS F
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SIB
Entry Lanes
1
1
1
1
Conflicting Circle Lanes
1
1
1
1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
672
773
496
547
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
685
788
505
558
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
532
616
661
794
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
820
550
556
610
Follow -Up Headway, s
3.186
3.186
3.186
3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh
68.9
164.8
38.4
96.0
Approach LOS
F
F
E
F
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
Assumed Moves
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Critical Headway, s
5.193
5.193
5.193
5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h
685
788
505
558
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
664
610
583
511
Entry HV Adj Factor
0.981
0.980
0.982
0.980
Flow Entry, veh/h
672
773
496
547
Cap Entry, veh/h
651
598
573
501
V/C Ratio
1.032
1.291
0.866
1.092
Control Delay, s/veh
68.9
164.8
38.4
96.0
LOS
F
F
E
F
95th %tile Queue, veh
17
31
10
18
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 13
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: White Chapel & E Kirkwood II 4/24/2014
t i
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
r
Volume (veh/h)
70
19
286
71
16
369
Sign Control
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
Peak Hour Factor
0.67
0.25
0.86
0.60
0.38
0.80
Hourly flow rate (vph)
104
76
333
118
42
461
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
None
None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
937
392
451
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol
937
392
451
tC, single (s)
6.4
6.2
4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)
3.5
3.3
2.2
p0 queue free %
63
88
96
cM capacity (veh/h)
283
657
1110
Direction, Lane #
WB 1
WB 2
NB 1
SB 1
Volume Total
104
76
451
503
Volume Left
104
0
0
42
Volume Right
0
76
118
0
cSH
283
657
1700
1110
Volume to Capacity
0.37
0.12
0.27
0.04
Queue Length 95th (ft)
41
10
0
3
Control Delay (s)
25.0
11.2
0.0
1.1
Lane LOS
D
B
A
Approach Delay (s)
19.2
0.0
1.1
Approach LOS
C
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 3.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 15
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: White Chapel & E Kirkwood 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
3.4
Movement
WBL
WBR
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Vol, veh/h
70
19
286
71
16
369
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
0
0
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
0
-
0
0
Grade, %
0
-
0
-
0
Peak Hour Factor
67
25
86
60
38
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
104
76
333
118
42
461
Major/Minor
Minor1
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
937
392
0
0
451
0
Stage 1
392
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
545
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.42
6.22
4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.42
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.42
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.518
3.318
2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
294
657
1109
Stage 1
683
-
-
Stage 2
581
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
279
657
1109
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
279
-
-
Stage 1
683
Stage 2
551
Approach
WB
NB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
19.4
0
0.7
HCM LOS
C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBT
NBR WBLn1
WBLn2
SBL
SBT
Capacity (veh/h)
279
657
1109
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.374
0.116
0.038
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
25.4
11.2
8.4
0
HCM Lane LOS
D
B
A
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
1.7
0.4
0.1
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 16
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: SH 114 NBFR & Drive 2 4/24/2014
i
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
r
ttM
Volume (veh/h)
0
23
732
16
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
Peak Hour Factor
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
Hourly flow rate (vph)
0
29
915
20
0
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)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
925
239
935
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol
925
239
935
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
96
100
cM capacity (veh/h)
268
762
728
Direction, Lane #
WB 1
NB 1
NB 2
NB 3
NB 4
Volume Total
29
261
261
261
151
Volume Left
0
0
0
0
0
Volume Right
29
0
0
0
20
cSH
762
1700
1700
1700
1700
Volume to Capacity
0.04
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.09
Queue Length 95th (ft)
3
0
0
0
0
Control Delay (s)
9.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Lane LOS
A
Approach Delay (s)
9.9
0.0
Approach LOS
A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.9% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 17
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
7: SH 114 NBFR & Drive 1 4/24/2014
i
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
r
ttM
Volume (veh/h)
0
36
713
28
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
Peak Hour Factor
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
Hourly flow rate (vph)
0
45
891
35
0
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)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
909
240
926
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol
909
240
926
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
94
100
cM capacity (veh/h)
275
761
734
Direction, Lane #
WB 1
NB 1
NB 2
NB 3
NB 4
Volume Total
45
255
255
255
162
Volume Left
0
0
0
0
0
Volume Right
45
0
0
0
35
cSH
761
1700
1700
1700
1700
Volume to Capacity
0.06
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.10
Queue Length 95th (ft)
5
0
0
0
0
Control Delay (s)
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Lane LOS
B
Approach Delay (s)
10.0
0.0
Approach LOS
B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 19
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: Drive 3Nerizon & Dove II 4/24/2014
--1. .4--- t i
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
0
t
Vii
r
Volume (veh/h)
195
635
35
23
622
0
9
0
18
0
0
24
Sign Control
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
Grade
0%
0%
0%
0%
Peak Hour Factor
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
Hourly flow rate (vph)
244
794
44
29
778
0
11
0
22
0
0
30
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
None
None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
300
pX, platoon unblocked
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
vC, conflicting volume
778
838
1779
2138
419
1742
2160
389
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol
778
711
1708
2088
267
1668
2111
389
tC, single (s)
4.1
4.1
7.5
6.5
6.9
7.5
6.5
6.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)
2.2
2.2
3.5
4.0
3.3
3.5
4.0
3.3
p0 queue free %
71
97
72
100
97
100
100
95
cM capacity (veh/h)
835
835
40
34
690
43
33
610
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
EB 2
EB 3
WB 1
WB 2
WB 3
NB 1
SB 1
SB 2
Volume Total
244
529
308
29
518
259
34
0
30
Volume Left
244
0
0
29
0
0
11
0
0
Volume Right
0
0
44
0
0
0
22
0
30
cSH
835
1700
1700
835
1700
1700
107
1700
610
Volume to Capacity
0.29
0.31
0.18
0.03
0.30
0.15
0.31
0.00
0.05
Queue Length 95th (ft)
30
0
0
3
0
0
30
0
4
Control Delay (s)
11.1
0.0
0.0
9.5
0.0
0.0
53.3
0.0
11.2
Lane LOS
B
A
F
A
B
Approach Delay (s)
2.5
0.3
53.3
11.2
Approach LOS
F
B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay
2.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization
Err%
ICU Level of Service
H
Analysis Period (min)
15
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 21
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Drive 3Nerizon & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
2.7
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
Vol, veh/h
195
635
35
23
622
0
9
0
18
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
-
None
-
None
Storage Length
100
150
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
-
0
-
0
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
244
794
44
29
778
0
11
0
22
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor1
Conflicting Flow All
778
0
0 838
0 0 1749
2138
419
Stage 1
-
-
- -
- - 1303
1303
-
Stage 2
-
-
446
835
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
4.14
7.54
6.54
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
-
6.54
5.54
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
-
6.54
5.54
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
2.22
3.52
4.02
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
834
792
55
48
583
Stage 1
-
-
170
229
-
Stage 2
-
-
561
381
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
834
792
39
33
583
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
-
39
33
-
Stage 1
120
162
Stage 2
514
367
Approach
EB
WB
NB
HCM Control Delay, s
2.5
0.3
56.1
HCM LOS
F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBLn1
EBL
EBT EBR WBL
WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
103
834
792
610
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.328
0.292
0.036
0.049
HCM Control Delay (s)
56.1
11.1
9.7
0 11.2
HCM Lane LOS
F
B
A
A B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
1.3
1.2
0.1
0.2
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 22
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Drive 3Nerizon & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
SBL
SBT
SBR
Vol, veh/h
0
0
24
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
Storage Length
0
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
0
0
30
Major/Minor
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
1719
2160
389
Stage 1
835
835
-
Stage 2
884
1325
-
Critical Hdwy
7.54
6.54
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
6.54
5.54
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
6.54
5.54
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.52
4.02
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
58
47
610
Stage 1
328
381
-
Stage 2
307
223
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
42
32
610
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
42
32
-
Stage 1
232
367
Stage 2
209
158
Approach SIB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.2
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 23
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
9: Drive 4 & Dove 4/24/2014
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
+I+
tt
Volume (veh/h)
642
12
0
645
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Stop
Grade
0%
0%
0%
Peak Hour Factor
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
Hourly flow rate (vph)
802
15
0
806
0
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)
645
pX, platoon unblocked
0.97
0.97
0.97
vC, conflicting volume
802
1213
409
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol
732
1156
326
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
100
cM capacity (veh/h)
841
184
649
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
EB 2
WB 1
WB 2
Volume Total
535
282
403
403
Volume Left
0
0
0
0
Volume Right
0
15
0
0
cSH
1700
1700
1700
1700
Volume to Capacity
0.31
0.17
0.24
0.24
Queue Length 95th (ft)
0
0
0
0
Control Delay (s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Lane LOS
Approach Delay (s)
0.0
0.0
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 24
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
10: Drive 5 4/24/2014
I
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Y
tt
tt
r
Volume (veh/h)
36
0
0
58
69
49
Sign Control
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
Peak Hour Factor
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
Hourly flow rate (vph)
45
0
0
72
86
61
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
Raised
None
Median storage veh)
1
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
122
43
148
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
86
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
36
vCu, unblocked vol
122
43
148
tC, single (s)
6.8
6.9
4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
5.8
tF (s)
3.5
3.3
2.2
p0 queue free %
95
100
100
cM capacity (veh/h)
824
1018
1432
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
NB 1
NB 2
NB 3
SB 1
SB 2
SB 3
Volume Total
45
0
36
36
43
43
61
Volume Left
45
0
0
0
0
0
0
Volume Right
0
0
0
0
0
0
61
cSH
824
1700
1700
1700
1700
1700
1700
Volume to Capacity
0.05
0.00
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.04
Queue Length 95th (ft)
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
Control Delay (s)
9.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Lane LOS
A
Approach Delay (s)
9.6
0.0
0.0
Approach LOS
A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.3% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 26
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Drive 5 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
1.6
Movement
EBL
EBR
NBL
NBT
SBT
SBR
Vol, veh/h
36
0
0
58
69
49
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
None
-
None
None
Storage Length
0
150
-
150
Veh in Median Storage, #
1
-
0
0
-
Grade, %
0
-
-
0
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
45
0
0
72
86
61
Major/Minor
Minor2
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
122
43
86
0
0
Stage 1
86
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
36
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.84
6.94
4.14
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.84
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.84
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.52
3.32
2.22
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
860
1018
1508
Stage 1
927
-
-
Stage 2
982
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
860
1018
1508
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
824
-
-
Stage 1
927
Stage 2
982
Approach
EB
NB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
9.6
0
0
HCM LOS
A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBL
NBT EBLn1
SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)
1508
824
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
-
0.055
HCM Control Delay (s)
0
9.6
HCM Lane LOS
A
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
0.2
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 27
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
11: Drive 6 4/24/2014
t
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Y
tt
tt
r
Volume (veh/h)
58
0
0
0
0
69
Sign Control
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
Peak Hour Factor
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
Hourly flow rate (vph)
72
0
0
0
0
86
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
None
None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
0
0
86
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol
0
0
86
tC, single (s)
6.8
6.9
4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)
3.5
3.3
2.2
p0 queue free %
93
100
100
cM capacity (veh/h)
1023
1084
1508
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
NB 1
NB 2
NB 3
SB 1
SB 2
SB 3
Volume Total
72
0
0
0
0
0
86
Volume Left
72
0
0
0
0
0
0
Volume Right
0
0
0
0
0
0
86
cSH
1023
1700
1700
1700
1700
1700
1700
Volume to Capacity
0.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.05
Queue Length 95th (ft)
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
Control Delay (s)
8.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Lane LOS
A
Approach Delay (s)
8.8
0.0
0.0
Approach LOS
A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 4.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 7.6% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 28
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Drive 6 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
0
Movement
EBL
EBR
NBL
NBT
SBT
SBR
Vol, veh/h
58
0
0
0
0
69
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
None
-
None
None
Storage Length
0
150
-
150
Veh in Median Storage, #
1
-
0
0
-
Grade, %
0
-
-
0
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
72
0
0
0
0
86
Major/Minor
Minor2
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
0
0
0
0
0
Stage 1
0
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
0
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.84
6.94
4.14
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.84
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.84
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.52
3.32
2.22
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
-
-
-
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
EB
NB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
0
0
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBL
NBT EBLn1
SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
0
HCM Lane LOS
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 29
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
13: Drive 8 & Dove 4/24/2014
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
'+
Vii
r
Volume (veh/h)
543
9
1
660
27
8
Sign Control
Free
Free
Stop
Grade
0%
0%
0%
Peak Hour Factor
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
Hourly flow rate (vph)
679
11
1
825
34
10
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
None
None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
690
1512
684
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol
690
1512
684
tC, single (s)
4.1
6.4
6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)
2.2
3.5
3.3
p0 queue free %
100
74
98
cM capacity (veh/h)
905
132
448
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
WB 1
NB 1
NB 2
Volume Total
690
826
34
10
Volume Left
0
1
34
0
Volume Right
11
0
0
10
cSH
1700
905
132
448
Volume to Capacity
0.41
0.00
0.26
0.02
Queue Length 95th (ft)
0
0
24
2
Control Delay (s)
0.0
0.0
41.4
13.2
Lane LOS
A
E
B
Approach Delay (s)
0.0
0.0
35.0
Approach LOS
D
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 30
HCM 2010 TWSC
13: Drive 8 & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
NBL
NBR
Vol, veh/h
543
9
1
660
27
8
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
None
None
-
None
Storage Length
-
0
0
Veh in Median Storage, #
0
0
0
-
Grade, %
0
-
0
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
679
11
1
825
34
10
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor1
Conflicting Flow All
0
0
690
0
1512
684
Stage 1
-
-
-
-
684
-
Stage 2
-
828
-
Critical Hdwy
4.12
6.42
6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
5.42
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
5.42
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.218
3.518
3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
905
132
449
Stage 1
-
501
-
Stage 2
-
429
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
905
132
449
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
132
-
Stage 1
501
Stage 2
428
Approach
EB
WB
NB
HCM Control Delay, s
0
0
35
HCM LOS
E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBLn1
NBLn2
EBT
EBR WBL
WBT
Capacity (veh/h)
132
449
905
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.256
0.022
0.001
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
41.4
13.2
9
0
HCM Lane LOS
E
B
A
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
1
0.1
0
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 31
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
14: White Chapel & Drive 9 II 4/24/2014
t t
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
r
Volume (veh/h)
2
4
1
370
387 2
Sign Control
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
Peak Hour Factor
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate (vph)
2
5
1
462
484 2
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
None
None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
950
485
486
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol
950
485
486
tC, single (s)
6.4
6.2
4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)
3.5
3.3
2.2
p0 queue free %
99
99
100
cM capacity (veh/h)
288
582
1077
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
EB 2
NB 1
SB 1
Volume Total
2
5
464
486
Volume Left
2
0
1
0
Volume Right
0
5
0
2
cSH
288
582
1077
1700
Volume to Capacity
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.29
Queue Length 95th (ft)
1
1
0
0
Control Delay (s)
17.6
11.2
0.0
0.0
Lane LOS
C
B
A
Approach Delay (s)
13.4
0.0
0.0
Approach LOS
B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 30.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 32
HCM 2010 TWSC
14: White Chapel & Drive 9 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
M
Movement
EBL
EBR
NBL
NBT
SBT
SBR
Vol, veh/h
2
4
1
370
387
2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
0
0
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
0
-
0
0
Grade, %
0
-
0
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
2
5
1
462
484
2
Major/Minor
Minor2
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
950
485
486
0
0
Stage 1
485
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
465
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.42
6.22
4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.42
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.42
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.518
3.318
2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
289
582
1077
Stage 1
619
-
-
Stage 2
632
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
289
582
1077
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
289
-
-
Stage 1
619
Stage 2
631
Approach
EB
NB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
13.3
0
0
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBL
NBT EBLn1
EBLn2
SBT
SBR
Capacity (veh/h)
1077
289
582
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.001
0.009
0.009
HCM Control Delay (s)
8.3
0 17.6
11.2
HCM Lane LOS
A
A C
B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
0
0
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 33
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
15: White Chapel & Drive 10 II 4/24/2014
t t
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
r
Volume (veh/h)
1
2
1
304
383 1
Sign Control
Stop
Free
Free
Grade
0%
0%
0%
Peak Hour Factor
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate (vph)
1
2
1
380
479 1
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
None
None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
862
479
480
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol
862
479
480
tC, single (s)
6.4
6.2
4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)
3.5
3.3
2.2
p0 queue free %
100
100
100
cM capacity (veh/h)
325
586
1082
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
EB 2
NB 1
SB 1
Volume Total
1
2
381
480
Volume Left
1
0
1
0
Volume Right
0
2
0
1
cSH
325
586
1082
1700
Volume to Capacity
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.28
Queue Length 95th (ft)
0
0
0
0
Control Delay (s)
16.1
11.2
0.0
0.0
Lane LOS
C
B
A
Approach Delay (s)
12.8
0.0
0.0
Approach LOS
B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 30.2% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 34
HCM 2010 TWSC
15: White Chapel & Drive 10 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
M
Movement
EBL
EBR
NBL
NBT
SBT
SBR
Vol, veh/h
1
2
1
304
383
1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
None
None
None
Storage Length
0
0
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
0
-
0
0
Grade, %
0
-
0
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
80
80
80
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
1
2
1
380
479
1
Major/Minor
Minor2
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
862
479
480
0
0
Stage 1
479
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
383
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.42
6.22
4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.42
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.42
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.518
3.318
2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
325
587
1082
Stage 1
623
-
-
Stage 2
689
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
325
587
1082
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
325
-
-
Stage 1
623
Stage 2
688
Approach
EB
NB
SIB
HCM Control Delay, s
12.8
0
0
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBL
NBT EBLn1
EBLn2
SBT
SBR
Capacity (veh/h)
1082
325
587
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.001
0.004
0.004
HCM Control Delay (s)
8.3
0 16.1
11.2
HCM Lane LOS
A
A C
B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
0
0
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 35
Timings
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR 4/24/2014
__11� Ir .4- t
Lane Group
EBT
WBL
WBT
SBL
SBT
o4
o5
o6
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
+I+
tt
t
Volume (vph)
319
384
1319
247
149
Turn Type
NA
Prot
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
2
1
12
4 12
4
5
6
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
4 12
Detector Phase
2
1
12
4 12
4 12
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
24.0
55.0
20.0
24.0
51.0
25.0
21.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
20.0%
45.8%
17%
20%
43%
21%
18%
17%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
None
Min
None
Min
C-Max
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
20.0
56.1
80.1
31.9
31.9
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.17
0.47
0.67
0.27
0.27
v/c Ratio
0.99
0.49
0.67
0.68
0.38
Control Delay
72.3
22.2
4.0
47.0
32.6
Queue Delay
0.0
2.2
1.3
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
72.3
24.4
5.3
47.0
32.6
LOS
E
C
A
D
C
Approach Delay
72.3
9.2
39.6
Approach LOS
E
A
D
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 120
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.99
Intersection Signal Delay: 27.8 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.3% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR
#1
4-
2
#1
04
#1
012
#1
01
24 s
120s
1
21 s I 155s
#2 1016
#A5
#--*46 R
#2 I08
20 s I
24 s 1
51 s I 125s
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
Timings
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/24/2014
Lane Group
EBL
EBT
WBT
NBL
NBT
01
o2
o4
o8
o12
o16
Lane Configurations
tt
Volume (vph)
70
495
895
797
270
Turn Type
Prot
NA
NA
Perm
NA
Protected Phases
5
5 6
6
8 16
1
2
4
8
12
16
Permitted Phases
8 16
Detector Phase
5
5 6
6
8 16
8 16
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Minimum Split (s)
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
Total Split (s)
24.0
51.0
55.0
24.0
20.0
25.0
21.0
20.0
Total Split (%)
20.0%
42.5%
46%
20%
17%
21%
18%
17%
Yellow Time (s)
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
All -Red Time (s)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Lost Time Adjust (s)
0.0
0.0
Total Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lead/Lag
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lead
Lag
Lag
Lead
Lead
Lead -Lag Optimize?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Recall Mode
Min
C-Max
Min
None
None
None
None
None
Act Effct Green (s)
20.8
71.8
47.0
40.2
40.2
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.17
0.60
0.39
0.34
0.34
v/c Ratio
0.27
0.25
0.94
0.87
0.81
Control Delay
39.5
3.7
48.1
55.2
42.5
Queue Delay
0.0
0.0
2.4
0.0
0.0
Total Delay
39.5
3.7
50.5
55.2
42.5
LOS
D
A
D
E
D
Approach Delay
8.6
50.5
46.9
Approach LOS
A
D
D
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 120
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:EBWB, Start of Green, Master Intersection
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.99
Intersection Signal Delay: 41.1 Intersection LOS: D
Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.3% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove
#1
4-
2
#1
04
#1
012
#1
01
24 s
120s
1
21 s I 155s
#2 1016
#A5
#--*46 R
#2 I08
20 s I
24 s 1
51 s I 125s
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 5
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Dove & Kirkwood II 4/24/2014
--1. .4--- t i
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
tt
r
t
Volume (veh/h)
75
413
58
157
388
42
186
19
136
147
87
383
Sign Control
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
Grade
0%
0%
0%
0%
Peak Hour Factor
0.89
0.95
0.80
0.80
0.83
0.67
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.76
0.80
0.90
Hourly flow rate (vph)
84
435
72
196
467
63
232
24
170
193
109
426
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
None
None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
1050
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume
530
507
1709
1526
217
1459
1567
265
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol
530
507
1709
1526
217
1459
1567
265
tC, single (s)
4.1
4.1
7.5
6.5
6.9
7.5
6.5
6.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)
2.2
2.2
3.5
4.0
3.3
3.5
4.0
3.3
p0 queue free %
92
81
0
73
78
0
0
42
cM capacity (veh/h)
1033
1054
0
87
787
46
82
733
Direction, Lane #
EB 1
EB 2
EB 3
EB 4
WB 1
WB 2
WB 3
NB 1
NB 2
NB 3
SB 1
SB 2
Volume Total
84
217
217
72
196
312
219
232
16
178
248
480
Volume Left
84
0
0
0
196
0
0
232
0
0
193
0
Volume Right
0
0
0
72
0
0
63
0
0
170
0
426
cSH
1033
1700
1700
1700
1054
1700
1700
0
87
580
50
387
Volume to Capacity
0.08
0.13
0.13
0.04
0.19
0.18
0.13
Err
0.18
0.31
4.91
1.24
Queue Length 95th (ft)
7
0
0
0
17
0
0
Err
16
32
Err
512
Control Delay (s)
8.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.2
0.0
0.0
Err
55.2
13.9
Err
158.9
Lane LOS
A
A
F
F
B
F
F
Approach Delay (s)
1.3
2.5
Err
3509.5
Approach LOS
F
F
Intersection Summary
Average Delay
Err
Intersection Capacity Utilization
62.8%
ICU Level of Service
B
Analysis Period (min)
15
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 9
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
160.9
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
Vol, veh/h
75
413
58
157
388
42
186
19
136
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
-
None
-
None
Storage Length
150
150
150
150
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
-
-
0
-
0
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
89
95
80
80
83
67
80
80
80
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
84
435
72
196
467
63
232
24
170
Major/Minor
Major1
Major2
Minor1
Conflicting Flow All
530 0 0
435 0 0
1284
1526
217
Stage 1
- - -
- - -
603
603
-
Stage 2
-
-
681
923
-
Critical Hdwy
4.14
4.14
7.54
6.54
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
-
-
6.54
5.54
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
-
6.54
5.54
-
Follow-up Hdwy
2.22
2.22
3.52
4.02
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
1033
1121
— 122
117
787
Stage 1
-
-
453
487
-
Stage 2
-
-
407
347
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
1033
1121
-
89
787
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
-
-
89
-
Stage 1
416
447
Stage 2
—89
286
Approach
EB
WB
NB
HCM Control Delay, s
1.3
2.4
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBLn1 NBLn2
NBLn3
EBL
EBT EBR WBL
WBT WBR SBLn1
SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h)
89
520
1033
1121
67
410
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.133
0.35
0.082
0.175
3.698
1.171
HCM Control Delay (s)
51.6
15.6
8.8
8.9
$ 1342.7
130.2
HCM Lane LOS
F
C
A
A
F
F
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0.4
1.6
0.3
0.6
26.2
18.5
Notes
-: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 10
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
SBL
SBT
SBR
147
87
383
0
0
0
Stop
Stop
Stop
None
0
0
76
80
90
2
2
2
193
109
426
Major/Minor
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
1289
1494
265
Stage 1
891
891
-
Stage 2
398
603
-
Critical Hdwy
7.54
6.54
6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
6.54
5.54
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
6.54
5.54
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.52
4.02
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
— 121
122
733
Stage 1
304
359
-
Stage 2
599
487
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
— 62
— 92
733
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
— 62
— 92
-
Stage 1
279
296
Stage 2
409
447
Approach SIB
HCM Control Delay, s $ 543.1
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 11
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay,s/veh 135.7
Intersection LOS F
Approach EB WB NB SIB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow,veh/h 865 707 738 292
Demand Flow Rate,veh/h 883 722 753 298
Vehicles Circulating,veh/h 315 688 772 767
Vehicles Exiting,veh/h 750 837 426 643
Follow-Up Headway,s 3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg,#/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay,s/veh 74.4 158.7 231.8 18.6
Approach LOS F F F C
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Critical Headway,s 5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
Entry Flow,veh/h 883 722 753 298
Cap Entry Lane,veh/h 825 568 522 525
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.980 0.979 0.980 0.980
Flow Entry,veh/h 865 707 738 292
Cap Entry,veh/h 808 556 512 514
V/C Ratio 1.071 1.271 1.442 0.568
Control Delay,s/veh 74.4 158.7 231.8 18.6
LOS F F F C
95th%tile Queue,veh 22 28 36 4
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 13
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: White Chapel & E Kirkwood I 4/24/2014
t i
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations r
Volume(veh/h) 53 35 383 47 40 252
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.67 0.25 0.86 0.60 0.38 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 79 140 445 78 105 315
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal(ft)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 1010 485 524
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 1010 485 524
tC,single(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
p0 queue free% 67 76 90
cM capacity(veh/h) 239 582 1043
Direction, Lane# WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 79 140 524 420
Volume Left 79 0 0 105
Volume Right 0 140 78 0
cSH 239 582 1700 1043
Volume to Capacity 0.33 0.24 0.31 0.10
Queue Length 95th(ft) 35 23 0 8
Control Delay(s) 27.3 13.1 0.0 3.0
Lane LOS D B A
Approach Delay(s) 18.3 0.0 3.0
Approach LOS C
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 4.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 15
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: White Chapel & E Kirkwood 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 4.3
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Vol,veh/h 53 35 383 47 40 252
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None None None
Storage Length 0 0 -
Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 0
Grade,% 0 - 0 - 0
Peak Hour Factor 67 25 86 60 38 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 79 140 445 78 105 315
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1011 485 0 0 524 0
Stage 1 485 - - - - -
Stage 2 526 - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 265 582 1043
Stage 1 619 - -
Stage 2 593 - -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 233 582 1043
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 233 - -
Stage 1 619
Stage 2 521
Approach WB NB SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 18.6 0 2.2
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity(veh/h) 233 582 1043
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.34 0.241 0.101 -
HCM Control Delay(s) 28.2 13.1 8.8 0
HCM Lane LOS D B A A
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 1.4 0.9 0.3
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 16
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: SH 114 NBFR & Drive 2 II 4/24/2014
t i
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations r f f t
Volume(veh/h) 0 81 1156 58 0 0
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 101 1445 72 0 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)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 1481 398 1518
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 1481 398 1518
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 83 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 116 602 436
Direction, Lane# WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4
Volume Total 101 413 413 413 279
Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0
Volume Right 101 0 0 0 72
cSH 602 1700 1700 1700 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.17 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.16
Queue Length 95th(ft) 15 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 12.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Lane LOS B
Approach Delay(s) 12.2 0.0
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 29.4% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 17
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
7: SH 114 NBFR & Drive 1 II 4/24/2014
t i
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations r f f t
Volume(veh/h) 0 124 1090 105 0 0
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 155 1362 131 0 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)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 1428 406 1494
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 1428 406 1494
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 74 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 126 594 445
Direction, Lane# WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4
Volume Total 155 389 389 389 326
Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0
Volume Right 155 0 0 0 131
cSH 594 1700 1700 1700 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.26 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.19
Queue Length 95th(ft) 26 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 13.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Lane LOS B
Approach Delay(s) 13.2 0.0
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 31.9% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 19
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: Drive 3Nerizon & Dove II 4/24/2014
--1. .4--- t i
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 0 t Vii r
Volume(veh/h) 0 417 58 29 927 0 12 0 62 0 0 146
Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 521 72 36 1159 0 15 0 78 0 0 182
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal(ft) 300
pX,platoon unblocked 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
vC,conflicting volume 1159 594 1392 1789 297 1569 1825 579
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 1159 426 1280 1704 109 1470 1743 579
tC,single(s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free% 100 97 78 100 91 100 100 60
cM capacity(veh/h) 599 1056 67 82 864 74 77 458
Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 SB 1 SB 2
Volume Total 0 348 246 36 772 386 92 0 182
Volume Left 0 0 0 36 0 0 15 0 0
Volume Right 0 0 72 0 0 0 78 0 182
cSH 1700 1700 1700 1056 1700 1700 296 1700 458
Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.20 0.14 0.03 0.45 0.23 0.31 0.00 0.40
Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 0 3 0 0 32 0 47
Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.5 0.0 0.0 22.6 0.0 18.0
Lane LOS A C A C
Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.3 22.6 18.0
Approach LOS C C
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 2.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization Err% ICU Level of Service H
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 21
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Drive 3Nerizon & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 2.7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR
Vol,veh/h 0 417 58 29 927 0 12 0 62
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 100 150 0
Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - 0 - 0
Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 521 72 36 1159 0 15 0 78
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 1159 0 0 594 0 0 1210 1789 297
Stage 1 - - - - - - 558 558 -
Stage 2 - - 652 1231 -
Critical Hdwy 4.14 4.14 7.54 6.54 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 6.54 5.54 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - 6.54 5.54 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 2.22 3.52 4.02 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 599 978 138 80 699
Stage 1 - - 482 510 -
Stage 2 - - 423 248 -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 599 978 81 77 699
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - 81 77 -
Stage 1 482 510
Stage 2 245 239
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay,s 0 0.3 21.3
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2
Capacity(veh/h) 312 599 978 458
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.296 - 0.037 0.398
HCM Control Delay(s) 21.3 0 8.8 0 18
HCM Lane LOS C A A A C
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 1.2 0 0.1 1.9
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 22
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Drive 3Nerizon & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh
Movement SBL SBT SBR
Vol,veh/h 0 0 146
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None
Storage Length 0 0
Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 -
Grade,% - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 0 182
Major/Minor Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 1492 1825 579
Stage 1 1231 1231 -
Stage 2 261 594 -
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 85 76 458
Stage 1 188 248 -
Stage 2 721 491 -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 73 73 458
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 73 73 -
Stage 1 188 239
Stage 2 641 491
Approach SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 18
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 23
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
9: Drive 4 & Dove 4/24/2014
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations +I+ tt
Volume(veh/h) 546 29 0 957 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 682 36 0 1196 0 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) 645
pX,platoon unblocked 0.96 0.96 0.96
vC,conflicting volume 682 1299 359
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 586 1228 250
tC,single(s) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3
p0 queue free% 100 100 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 945 164 720
Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2
Volume Total 455 264 598 598
Volume Left 0 0 0 0
Volume Right 0 36 0 0
cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.27 0.16 0.35 0.35
Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Lane LOS
Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.0
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 29.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 24
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
10: Drive 5 } I 4/24/2014
I
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations Y tt tt r
Volume(veh/h) 130 0 0 211 175 128
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 162 0 0 264 219 160
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type Raised None
Median storage veh) 1
Upstream signal(ft)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 351 109 379
vC1,stage 1 conf vol 219
vC2,stage 2 conf vol 132
vCu,unblocked vol 351 109 379
tC,single(s) 6.8 6.9 4.1
tC,2 stage(s) 5.8
tF(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
p0 queue free% 75 100 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 662 923 1176
Direction, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3
Volume Total 162 0 132 132 109 109 160
Volume Left 162 0 0 0 0 0 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 160
cSH 662 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.25 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.09
Queue Length 95th(ft) 24 0 0 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 12.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Lane LOS B
Approach Delay(s) 12.2 0.0 0.0
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 2.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 19.7% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 26
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Drive 5 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 2.5
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Vol,veh/h 130 0 0 211 175 128
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None None
Storage Length 0 150 - 150
Veh in Median Storage,# 1 - 0 0 -
Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 162 0 0 264 219 160
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 351 109 219 0 0
Stage 1 219 - - - -
Stage 2 132 - -
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 4.14
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 2.22
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 620 924 1348
Stage 1 796 - -
Stage 2 880 - -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 620 924 1348
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 662 - -
Stage 1 796
Stage 2 880
Approach EB NB SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 12.2 0 0
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
Capacity(veh/h) 1348 662
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.245
HCM Control Delay(s) 0 12.2
HCM Lane LOS A B
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0 1
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 27
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
11: Drive 6 II 4/24/2014
t t
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations Y tt tt r
Volume(veh/h) 211 0 0 0 0 175
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 264 0 0 0 0 219
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal(ft)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 0 0 219
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 0 0 219
tC,single(s) 6.8 6.9 4.1
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
p0 queue free% 74 100 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 1023 1084 1348
Direction, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3
Volume Total 264 0 0 0 0 0 219
Volume Left 264 0 0 0 0 0 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 219
cSH 1023 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13
Queue Length 95th(ft) 26 0 0 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 9.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Lane LOS A
Approach Delay(s) 9.7 0.0 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 5.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 15.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 28
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Drive 6 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 0
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Vol,veh/h 211 0 0 0 0 175
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None None
Storage Length 0 150 - 150
Veh in Median Storage,# 1 - 0 0 -
Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 264 0 0 0 0 219
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 0 0 0
Stage 1 0 - - - -
Stage 2 0 - -
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 4.14
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 2.22
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - -
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach EB NB SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 0 0
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
Capacity(veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -
HCM Control Delay(s) 0
HCM Lane LOS A
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh)
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 29
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
13: Drive 8 & Dove 4/24/2014
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations '+ Vii r
Volume(veh/h) 708 32 6 568 19 4
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 885 40 8 710 24 5
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal(ft)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 925 1630 905
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 925 1630 905
tC,single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3
p0 queue free% 99 79 99
cM capacity(veh/h) 739 111 335
Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2
Volume Total 925 718 24 5
Volume Left 0 8 24 0
Volume Right 40 0 0 5
cSH 1700 739 111 335
Volume to Capacity 0.54 0.01 0.21 0.01
Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 1 19 1
Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.3 46.2 15.9
Lane LOS A E C
Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.3 40.9
Approach LOS E
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.2% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 30
HCM 2010 TWSC
13: Drive 8 & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 0.8
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Vol,veh/h 708 32 6 568 19 4
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized None None - None
Storage Length - 0 0
Veh in Median Storage,# 0 0 0 -
Grade,% 0 - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 885 40 8 710 24 5
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 925 0 1630 905
Stage 1 - - - - 905 -
Stage 2 - 725 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 739 112 335
Stage 1 - 395 -
Stage 2 - 479 -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 739 110 335
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - 110 -
Stage 1 395
Stage 2 470
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay,s 0 0.1 41.2
HCM LOS E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity(veh/h) 110 335 739
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.216 0.015 0.01 -
HCM Control Delay(s) 46.5 15.9 9.9 0
HCM Lane LOS E C A A
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.8 0 0
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 31
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
14: White Chapel & Drive 9 II 4/24/2014
t t
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations r
Volume(veh/h) 2 2 5 548 298 2
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 2 2 6 685 372 2
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal(ft)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 1071 374 375
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 1071 374 375
tC,single(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
p0 queue free% 99 100 99
cM capacity(veh/h) 243 672 1183
Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB 2 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 2 2 691 375
Volume Left 2 0 6 0
Volume Right 0 2 0 2
cSH 243 672 1183 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.22
Queue Length 95th(ft) 1 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 20.0 10.4 0.1 0.0
Lane LOS C B A
Approach Delay(s) 15.2 0.1 0.0
Approach LOS C
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 32
HCM 2010 TWSC
14: White Chapel & Drive 9 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 0.1
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Vol,veh/h 2 2 5 548 298 2
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None None None
Storage Length 0 0 -
Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 0
Grade,% 0 - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 2 2 6 685 372 2
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1072 374 375 0 0
Stage 1 374 - - - -
Stage 2 698 - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 244 672 1183
Stage 1 696 - -
Stage 2 494 - -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 242 672 1183
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 242 - -
Stage 1 696
Stage 2 490
Approach EB NB SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 15.2 0.1 0
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity(veh/h) 1183 242 672
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 0.01 0.004
HCM Control Delay(s) 8.1 0 20 10.4
HCM Lane LOS A A C B
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0 0 0
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 33
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
15: White Chapel & Drive 10 II 4/24/2014
t t
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations r
Volume(veh/h) 1 1 1 417 292 1
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 1 1 1 521 365 1
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal(ft)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 889 366 366
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 889 366 366
tC,single(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
p0 queue free% 100 100 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 313 680 1192
Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB 2 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 1 1 522 366
Volume Left 1 0 1 0
Volume Right 0 1 0 1
cSH 313 680 1192 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22
Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 16.5 10.3 0.0 0.0
Lane LOS C B A
Approach Delay(s) 13.4 0.0 0.0
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 32.7% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 34
HCM 2010 TWSC
15: White Chapel & Drive 10 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 0
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Vol,veh/h 1 1 1 417 292 1
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None None None
Storage Length 0 0 -
Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 0
Grade,% 0 - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 1 1 1 521 365 1
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 890 366 366 0 0
Stage 1 366 - - - -
Stage 2 524 - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 313 679 1193
Stage 1 702 - -
Stage 2 594 - -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 313 679 1193
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 313 - -
Stage 1 702
Stage 2 593
Approach EB NB SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 13.4 0 0
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity(veh/h) 1193 313 679
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 0.004 0.002
HCM Control Delay(s) 8 0 16.5 10.3
HCM Lane LOS A A C B
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0 0 0
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 35
Timings
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR II 4/24/2014
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT o4 o5 o6 o8 o12 o16
Lane Configurations +I+ tt t
Volume(vph) 291 161 474 173 125
Turn Type NA Prot NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 2 1 12 4 12 4 5 6 8 12 16
Permitted Phases 4 12
Detector Phase 2 1 12 4 12 4 12
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split(s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
Total Split(s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
Total Split(%) 25.0% 25.0% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25%
Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time(s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None Min None Min Max None None None
Act Effct Green(s) 14.8 23.1 42.0 23.3 23.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.31 0.57 0.32 0.32
v/c Ratio 0.73 0.31 0.28 0.40 0.17
Control Delay 23.3 16.2 2.1 22.5 14.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 23.3 16.2 2.1 22.5 14.2
LOS C B A C B
Approach Delay 23.3 5.3 18.7
Approach LOS C A B
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length:80
Actuated Cycle Length:73.4
Natural Cycle:80
Control Type:Semi Act-Uncoord
Maximum v/c Ratio:0.73
Intersection Signal Delay: 14.7 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
Splits and Phases: 1: Dove&SH 114 SBFR
#1 #1 #1 #1
4-
2 04 012 01
20 s 120s 20 s 20 s
#2 1416 #2 #2
#�46 #2 148
20 s I 120s I 120s I 120s
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
Timings
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/24/2014
--1. .4- t
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT NBL NBT 01 o2 o4 o8 o12 o16
Lane Configurations tt
Volume(vph) 58 408 328 275 261
Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 5 5 6 6 8 16 1 2 4 8 12 16
Permitted Phases 8 16
Detector Phase 5 5 6 6 8 16 8 16
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split(s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
Total Split(s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
Total Split(%) 25.0% 25.0% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25%
Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time(s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0
Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode Min Max Min None None None None None
Act Effct Green(s) 19.1 39.4 16.2 25.9 25.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.54 0.22 0.35 0.35
v/c Ratio 0.15 0.23 0.69 0.40 0.40
Control Delay 17.9 2.9 28.7 20.6 17.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 17.9 2.9 28.7 20.6 17.8
LOS B A C C B
Approach Delay 4.9 28.7 18.7
Approach LOS A C B
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length:80
Actuated Cycle Length:73.4
Natural Cycle:80
Control Type:Semi Act-Uncoord
Maximum v/c Ratio:0.73
Intersection Signal Delay: 17.9 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
Splits and Phases: 2:SH 114 NBFR&Dove
#1 #1 #1 #1
4-
2 04 012 01
20 s 120s 20 s 20 s
#2 1416 #2 #2
#�46 #2 148
20 s I 120s I 120s I 120s
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 5
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Dove & Kirkwood II 4/24/2014
--1. .4--- t i
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations tt r t
Volume(veh/h) 59 204 126 193 245 23 125 39 157 15 92 67
Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.95 0.80 0.80 0.83 0.67 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.76 0.80 0.90
Hourly flow rate(vph) 66 215 158 241 295 34 156 49 196 20 115 74
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal(ft) 1050
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 330 372 1109 1159 107 1255 1300 165
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 330 372 1109 1159 107 1255 1300 165
tC,single(s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free% 95 80 0 67 79 68 5 91
cM capacity(veh/h) 1227 1183 18 146 926 61 121 851
Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 EB 4 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SIB 1 SB 2
Volume Total 66 107 107 158 241 197 133 156 32 212 77 132
Volume Left 66 0 0 0 241 0 0 156 0 0 20 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 158 0 0 34 0 0 196 0 74
cSH 1227 1700 1700 1700 1183 1700 1700 18 146 658 97 234
Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.09 0.20 0.12 0.08 8.49 0.22 0.32 0.80 0.56
Queue Length 95th(ft) 4 0 0 0 19 0 0 Err 20 35 107 78
Control Delay(s) 8.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.8 0.0 0.0 Err 36.5 13.1 121.1 38.7
Lane LOS A A F E B F E
Approach Delay(s) 1.2 3.7 3903.6 69.1
Approach LOS F F
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 977.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.7% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 9
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 100.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR
Vol,veh/h 59 204 126 193 245 23 125 39 157
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 150 150 150 150
Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - 0
Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 89 95 80 80 83 67 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 66 215 158 241 295 34 156 49 196
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 330 0 0 215 0 0 1035 1159 107
Stage 1 - - - - - - 347 347 -
Stage 2 - - 688 812 -
Critical Hdwy 4.14 4.14 7.54 6.54 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 6.54 5.54 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - 6.54 5.54 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 2.22 3.52 4.02 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1226 1352 186 194 926
Stage 1 - - 642 633 -
Stage 2 - - 403 390 -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1226 1352 —57 151 926
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - —57 151 -
Stage 1 607 599
Stage 2 196 320
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay,s 1.2 3.5 $376.5
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 NBLn3 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2
Capacity(veh/h) 57 151 591 1226 1352 130 288
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 2.741 0.161 0.373 0.054 0.178 0.594 0.458
HCM Control Delay(s) $941 33.4 14.7 8.1 8.2 66.8 27.6
HCM Lane LOS F D B A A F D
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 16.1 0.6 1.7 0.2 0.6 3 2.3
Notes
-:Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +:Computation Not Defined *:All major volume in platoon
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 10
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh
Movement SBL SBT SBR
Vol,veh/h 15 92 67
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized None
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage,# 0
Grade,% - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 76 80 90
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 20 115 74
Major/Minor Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 1059 1142 165
Stage 1 795 795 -
Stage 2 264 347 -
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 179 199 850
Stage 1 347 398 -
Stage 2 718 633 -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 89 155 850
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 89 155 -
Stage 1 328 327
Stage 2 492 599
Approach SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 42.1
HCM LOS E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 11
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay,s/veh 10.9
Intersection LOS B
Approach EB WB NB SIB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow,veh/h 448 410 333 223
Demand Flow Rate,veh/h 456 418 340 227
Vehicles Circulating,veh/h 265 322 306 558
Vehicles Exiting,veh/h 520 324 415 182
Follow-Up Headway,s 3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg,#/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay,s/veh 11.5 11.6 9.5 10.5
Approach LOS B B A B
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Critical Headway,s 5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
Entry Flow,veh/h 456 418 340 227
Cap Entry Lane,veh/h 867 819 832 647
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.982 0.981 0.980 0.982
Flow Entry,veh/h 448 410 333 223
Cap Entry,veh/h 851 803 815 635
V/C Ratio 0.526 0.510 0.409 0.351
Control Delay,s/veh 11.5 11.6 9.5 10.5
LOS B B A B
95th%tile Queue,veh 3 3 2 2
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 13
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: White Chapel & E Kirkwood II 4/24/2014
t i
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations r
Volume(veh/h) 54 50 242 34 47 215
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.67 0.25 0.86 0.60 0.38 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 81 200 281 57 124 269
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal(ft)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 826 310 338
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 826 310 338
tC,single(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
p0 queue free% 74 73 90
cM capacity(veh/h) 307 730 1221
Direction, Lane# WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 81 200 338 392
Volume Left 81 0 0 124
Volume Right 0 200 57 0
cSH 307 730 1700 1221
Volume to Capacity 0.26 0.27 0.20 0.10
Queue Length 95th(ft) 26 28 0 8
Control Delay(s) 20.8 11.8 0.0 3.3
Lane LOS C B A
Approach Delay(s) 14.4 0.0 3.3
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 5.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 15
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: White Chapel & E Kirkwood 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 5
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Vol,veh/h 54 50 242 34 47 215
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None None None
Storage Length 0 0 -
Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 0
Grade,% 0 - 0 - 0
Peak Hour Factor 67 25 86 60 38 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 81 200 281 57 124 269
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 826 310 0 0 338 0
Stage 1 310 - - - - -
Stage 2 516 - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 342 730 1221
Stage 1 744 - -
Stage 2 599 - -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 301 730 1221
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 301 - -
Stage 1 744
Stage 2 528
Approach WB NB SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 14.5 0 2.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity(veh/h) 301 730 1221
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.268 0.274 0.101 -
HCM Control Delay(s) 21.3 11.8 8.3 0
HCM Lane LOS C B A A
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 1.1 1.1 0.3
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 16
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: SH 114 NBFR & Drive 2 II 4/24/2014
t i
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations r f f t
Volume(veh/h) 0 125 628 75 0 0
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 156 785 94 0 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)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 832 243 879
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 832 243 879
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 79 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 308 758 765
Direction, Lane# WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4
Volume Total 156 224 224 224 206
Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0
Volume Right 156 0 0 0 94
cSH 758 1700 1700 1700 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.21 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.12
Queue Length 95th(ft) 19 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 11.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Lane LOS B
Approach Delay(s) 11.0 0.0
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.7
Intersection Capacity Utilization 24.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 17
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
7: SH 114 NBFR & Drive 1 II 4/24/2014
t i
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations r f f t
Volume(veh/h) 0 219 484 117 0 0
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 274 605 146 0 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)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 678 224 751
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 678 224 751
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 65 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 386 779 854
Direction, Lane# WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4
Volume Total 274 173 173 173 233
Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0
Volume Right 274 0 0 0 146
cSH 779 1700 1700 1700 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.35 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.14
Queue Length 95th(ft) 40 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 12.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Lane LOS B
Approach Delay(s) 12.1 0.0
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 3.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 29.2% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 19
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: Drive 3Nerizon & Dove II 4/24/2014
--1. .4--- t i
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 0 t Vii r
Volume(veh/h) 0 353 109 84 429 0 39 0 78 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 441 136 105 536 0 49 0 98 0 0 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) 300
pX,platoon unblocked 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
vC,conflicting volume 536 578 988 1256 289 1064 1324 268
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 536 432 866 1151 125 948 1223 268
tC,single(s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3
p0 queue free% 100 90 77 100 89 100 100 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 1028 1061 215 167 850 166 151 730
Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 SB 1 SB 2
Volume Total 0 294 283 105 358 179 146 0 0
Volume Left 0 0 0 105 0 0 49 0 0
Volume Right 0 0 136 0 0 0 98 0 0
cSH 1700 1700 1700 1061 1700 1700 429 1700 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.10 0.21 0.11 0.34 0.00 0.00
Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 0 8 0 0 37 0 0
Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.8 0.0 0.0 17.7 0.0 0.0
Lane LOS A C A A
Approach Delay(s) 0.0 1.4 17.7 0.0
Approach LOS C A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 2.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization Err% ICU Level of Service H
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 21
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Drive 3Nerizon & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR
Vol,veh/h 0 353 109 84 429 0 39 0 78
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 100 150 0
Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - 0 - 0
Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 441 136 105 536 0 49 0 98
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 536 0 0 578 0 0 987 1255 289
Stage 1 - - - - - - 509 509 -
Stage 2 - - 478 746 -
Critical Hdwy 4.14 4.14 7.54 6.54 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 6.54 5.54 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - 6.54 5.54 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 2.22 3.52 4.02 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1028 992 202 170 708
Stage 1 - - 515 536 -
Stage 2 - - 537 419 -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1028 992 186 152 708
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - 186 152 -
Stage 1 515 536
Stage 2 480 375
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay,s 0 1.5 21.2
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 SBLn2
Capacity(veh/h) 366 1028 992
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.4 - 0.106 - -
HCM Control Delay(s) 21.2 0 9.1 0 0
HCM Lane LOS C A A A A
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 1.9 0 0.4
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 22
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Drive 3Nerizon & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh
Movement SBL SBT SBR
Vol,veh/h 0 0 0
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None
Storage Length 0 0
Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 -
Grade,% - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 0 0
Major/Minor Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 967 1324 268
Stage 1 746 746 -
Stage 2 221 578 -
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 209 155 730
Stage 1 372 419 -
Stage 2 761 499 -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 166 139 730
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 166 139 -
Stage 1 372 375
Stage 2 656 499
Approach SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 0
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 23
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
9: Drive 4 & Dove 4/24/2014
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations +I+ tt
Volume(veh/h) 390 42 0 513 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 488 52 0 641 0 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) 645
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 488 834 270
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 488 834 270
tC,single(s) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3
p0 queue free% 100 100 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 1072 307 728
Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2
Volume Total 325 215 321 321
Volume Left 0 0 0 0
Volume Right 0 52 0 0
cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.19 0.13 0.19 0.19
Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Lane LOS
Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.0
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 24
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
10: Drive 5 } I 4/24/2014
I
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations Y tt tt r
Volume(veh/h) 86 0 0 235 243 167
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 108 0 0 294 304 209
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type Raised None
Median storage veh) 1
Upstream signal(ft)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 451 152 512
vC1,stage 1 conf vol 304
vC2,stage 2 conf vol 147
vCu,unblocked vol 451 152 512
tC,single(s) 6.8 6.9 4.1
tC,2 stage(s) 5.8
tF(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
p0 queue free% 82 100 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 598 867 1049
Direction, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3
Volume Total 108 0 147 147 152 152 209
Volume Left 108 0 0 0 0 0 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 209
cSH 598 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.18 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.12
Queue Length 95th(ft) 16 0 0 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Lane LOS B
Approach Delay(s) 12.3 0.0 0.0
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 18.1% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 26
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Drive 5 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 1.4
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Vol,veh/h 86 0 0 235 243 167
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None None
Storage Length 0 150 - 150
Veh in Median Storage,# 1 - 0 0 -
Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 108 0 0 294 304 209
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 451 152 304 0 0
Stage 1 304 - - - -
Stage 2 147 - -
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 4.14
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 2.22
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 537 867 1254
Stage 1 722 - -
Stage 2 865 - -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 537 867 1254
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 598 - -
Stage 1 722
Stage 2 865
Approach EB NB SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 12.3 0 0
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
Capacity(veh/h) 1254 598
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.18
HCM Control Delay(s) 0 12.3
HCM Lane LOS A B
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0 0.7
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 27
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
11: Drive 6 I 4/24/2014
t t
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations Y tt tt r
Volume(veh/h) 235 0 0 0 0 243
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 294 0 0 0 0 304
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal(ft)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 0 0 304
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 0 0 304
tC,single(s) 6.8 6.9 4.1
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
p0 queue free% 71 100 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 1023 1084 1254
Direction, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3
Volume Total 294 0 0 0 0 0 304
Volume Left 294 0 0 0 0 0 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 304
cSH 1023 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18
Queue Length 95th(ft) 30 0 0 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 9.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Lane LOS A
Approach Delay(s) 9.9 0.0 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 4.9
Intersection Capacity Utilization 18.4% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 28
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Drive 6 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 0
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Vol,veh/h 235 0 0 0 0 243
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None None
Storage Length 0 150 - 150
Veh in Median Storage,# 1 - 0 0 -
Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 294 0 0 0 0 304
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 0 0 0
Stage 1 0 - - - -
Stage 2 0 - -
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 4.14
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 2.22
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - -
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach EB NB SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 0 0
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
Capacity(veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -
HCM Control Delay(s) 0
HCM Lane LOS A
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh)
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 29
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
13: Drive 8 & Dove 4/24/2014
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations '+ Vii r
Volume(veh/h) 353 25 2 438 22 3
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 441 31 2 548 28 4
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal(ft)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 472 1009 457
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 472 1009 457
tC,single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3
p0 queue free% 100 90 99
cM capacity(veh/h) 1089 265 604
Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2
Volume Total 472 550 28 4
Volume Left 0 2 28 0
Volume Right 31 0 0 4
cSH 1700 1089 265 604
Volume to Capacity 0.28 0.00 0.10 0.01
Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 9 0
Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.1 20.1 11.0
Lane LOS A C B
Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.1 19.0
Approach LOS C
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.6% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 30
HCM 2010 TWSC
13: Drive 8 & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 0.6
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Vol,veh/h 353 25 2 438 22 3
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized None None - None
Storage Length - 0 0
Veh in Median Storage,# 0 0 0 -
Grade,% 0 - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 441 31 2 548 28 4
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 473 0 1010 457
Stage 1 - - - - 457 -
Stage 2 - 553 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1089 266 604
Stage 1 - 638 -
Stage 2 - 576 -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1089 265 604
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - 265 -
Stage 1 638
Stage 2 574
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay,s 0 0 19.1
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity(veh/h) 265 604 1089
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.104 0.006 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay(s) 20.2 11 8.3 0
HCM Lane LOS C B A A
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 0
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 31
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
14: White Chapel & Drive 9 II 4/24/2014
t t
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations r
Volume(veh/h) 1 3 4 262 294 3
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 1 4 5 328 368 4
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal(ft)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 707 369 371
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 707 369 371
tC,single(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
p0 queue free% 100 99 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 400 676 1187
Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB 2 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 1 4 332 371
Volume Left 1 0 5 0
Volume Right 0 4 0 4
cSH 400 676 1187 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.22
Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 14.0 10.4 0.2 0.0
Lane LOS B B A
Approach Delay(s) 11.3 0.2 0.0
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 27.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 32
HCM 2010 TWSC
14: White Chapel & Drive 9 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 0.1
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Vol,veh/h 1 3 4 262 294 3
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None None None
Storage Length 0 0 -
Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 0
Grade,% 0 - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 1 4 5 328 368 4
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 707 369 371 0 0
Stage 1 369 - - - -
Stage 2 338 - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 402 677 1188
Stage 1 699 - -
Stage 2 722 - -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 400 677 1188
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 400 - -
Stage 1 699
Stage 2 718
Approach EB NB SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 11.2 0.1 0
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity(veh/h) 1188 400 677
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 0.003 0.006
HCM Control Delay(s) 8 0 14 10.3
HCM Lane LOS A A B B
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0 0 0
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 33
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
15: White Chapel & Drive 10 II 4/24/2014
t t
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations r
Volume(veh/h) 1 1 2 291 262 2
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
Hourly flow rate(vph) 1 1 2 364 328 2
Pedestrians
Lane Width(ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare(veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal(ft)
pX,platoon unblocked
vC,conflicting volume 698 329 330
vC1,stage 1 conf vol
vC2,stage 2 conf vol
vCu,unblocked vol 698 329 330
tC,single(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1
tC,2 stage(s)
tF(s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
p0 queue free% 100 100 100
cM capacity(veh/h) 406 713 1229
Direction, Lane# EB 1 EB 2 NB 1 SB 1
Volume Total 1 1 366 330
Volume Left 1 0 2 0
Volume Right 0 1 0 2
cSH 406 713 1229 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19
Queue Length 95th(ft) 0 0 0 0
Control Delay(s) 13.9 10.1 0.1 0.0
Lane LOS B B A
Approach Delay(s) 12.0 0.1 0.0
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.9% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period(min) 15
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 34
HCM 2010 TWSC
15: White Chapel & Drive 10 4/24/2014
Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 0.1
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Vol,veh/h 1 1 2 291 262 2
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None None None
Storage Length 0 0 -
Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 0
Grade,% 0 - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 1 1 2 364 328 2
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 698 329 330 0 0
Stage 1 329 - - - -
Stage 2 369 - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 407 712 1229
Stage 1 729 - -
Stage 2 699 - -
Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 406 712 1229
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 406 - -
Stage 1 729
Stage 2 697
Approach EB NB SIB
HCM Control Delay,s 12 0.1 0
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity(veh/h) 1229 406 712
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.002 0.003 0.002
HCM Control Delay(s) 7.9 0 13.9 10.1
HCM Lane LOS A A B B
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0 0 0
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 35
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay,s/veh 41.9
Intersection LOS E
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow,veh/h 672 773 496 547
Demand Flow Rate,veh/h 685 788 505 558
Vehicles Circulating,veh/h 532 616 661 794
Vehicles Exiting,veh/h 603 433 454 497
Follow-Up Headway,s 3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg,#/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay,s/veh 32.2 82.0 17.9 18.8
Approach LOS D F C C
Lane Left Bypass Left Bypass Left Bypass Left Bypass
Designated Moves LT R LT R LT R LT R
Assumed Moves LT R LT R LT R LT R
RT Channelized Yield Yield Yield Yield
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Critical Headway,s 5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
Entry Flow,veh/h 583 102 675 113 388 117 341 217
Cap Entry Lane,veh/h 664 718 610 687 583 733 511 618
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.981 0.980 0.980 0.980 0.981 0.980 0.979 0.980
Flow Entry,veh/h 572 100 662 111 381 115 334 213
Cap Entry,veh/h 651 704 598 674 572 718 500 606
V/C Ratio 0.878 0.142 1.106 0.165 0.665 0.160 0.668 0.351
Control Delay,s/veh 36.7 6.7 94.6 7.2 21.2 6.8 23.8 10.9
LOS E A F A C A C B
95th%tile Queue,veh 11 0 20 1 5 1 5 2
2020 AM Total with Bypass Lanes.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay,s/veh 54.2
Intersection LOS F
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow,veh/h 865 707 738 292
Demand Flow Rate,veh/h 883 722 753 298
Vehicles Circulating,veh/h 315 688 772 767
Vehicles Exiting,veh/h 635 641 277 556
Follow-Up Headway,s 3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg,#/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay,s/veh 28.6 89.7 67.2 10.9
Approach LOS D F F B
Lane Left Bypass Left Bypass Left Bypass Left Bypass
Designated Moves LT R LT R LT R LT R
Assumed Moves LT R LT R LT R LT R
RT Channelized Yield Yield Yield Yield
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Critical Headway,s 5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
Entry Flow,veh/h 734 149 635 87 557 196 183 115
Cap Entry Lane,veh/h 825 857 568 648 522 595 525 599
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.980 0.980 0.980 0.980 0.980 0.980 0.979 0.980
Flow Entry,veh/h 719 146 622 85 546 192 179 113
Cap Entry,veh/h 808 840 556 635 512 584 514 587
V/C Ratio 0.890 0.174 1.118 0.134 1.067 0.329 0.349 0.192
Control Delay,s/veh 33.1 6.1 101.0 7.2 87.1 10.8 12.5 8.6
LOS D A F A F B B A
95th%tile Queue,veh 12 1 20 0 17 1 2 1
2020 PM Total with Bypass Lanes.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 1
HCM 2010 Roundabout
4: White Chapel & Dove 4/24/2014
Intersection
Intersection Delay,s/veh 8.2
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow,veh/h 448 410 333 223
Demand Flow Rate,veh/h 456 418 340 227
Vehicles Circulating,veh/h 265 322 306 558
Vehicles Exiting,veh/h 424 242 243 158
Follow-Up Headway,s 3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg,#/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay,s/veh 7.2 10.6 7.2 7.4
Approach LOS A B A A
Lane Left Bypass Left Bypass Left Bypass Left Bypass
Designated Moves LT R LT R LT R LT R
Assumed Moves LT R LT R LT R LT R
RT Channelized Yield Yield Yield Yield
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Critical Headway,s 5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
Entry Flow,veh/h 284 172 394 24 258 82 131 96
Cap Entry Lane,veh/h 867 886 819 965 832 887 647 739
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.981 0.980 0.979 0.980 0.981 0.980 0.984 0.980
Flow Entry,veh/h 279 169 386 24 253 80 129 94
Cap Entry,veh/h 851 869 802 946 816 870 636 725
V/C Ratio 0.328 0.195 0.481 0.025 0.310 0.092 0.203 0.130
Control Delay,s/veh 7.9 6.1 11.0 4.0 7.9 5.0 8.1 6.4
LOS A A B A A A A A
95th%tile Queue,veh 1 1 3 0 1 0 1 0
2020 Weekend Total with Bypass Lanes.syn Synchro 8 Report
Pagel
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/24/2014
--1. .4--- t i
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations tt r t
Volume(veh/h) 217 383 42 65 499 104 27 16 50 69 12 120
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 186.3 186.3 186.3 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0
Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 244 403 52 81 601 155 34 20 62 91 15 133
Adj No.of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.95 0.80 0.80 0.83 0.67 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.76 0.80 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 383 1179 573 425 721 186 476 728 651 476 70 452
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.11 0.11 0.05 0.26 0.26 0.03 0.41 0.41 0.31 0.31 0.31
Sat Flow,veh/h 1774 3539 1583 1774 2788 718 1774 1770 1583 1153 224 1441
Grp Volume(v),veh/h 244 403 52 81 381 375 34 20 62 106 0 133
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1774 1770 1583 1774 1770 1736 1774 1770 1583 1377 0 1441
Q Serve(g_s),s 5.4 6.1 1.6 1.9 11.9 11.9 0.7 0.4 1.4 2.9 0.0 4.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 5.4 6.1 1.6 1.9 11.9 11.9 0.7 0.4 1.4 3.2 0.0 4.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.41 1.00 1.00 0.86 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 383 1179 573 425 457 449 476 728 651 547 0 452
V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.34 0.09 0.19 0.83 0.84 0.07 0.03 0.10 0.19 0.00 0.29
Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 405 1179 573 488 485 476 546 728 651 547 0 452
HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 15.1 20.1 16.5 14.6 20.4 20.5 11.9 10.2 10.5 14.8 0.0 15.1
Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 3.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 11.3 11.7 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.8 0.0 1.7
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 2.9 3.1 0.7 0.9 7.2 7.1 0.3 0.2 0.7 1.4 0.0 1.8
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 18.1 20.2 16.6 14.9 31.7 32.2 11.9 10.3 10.8 15.6 0.0 16.8
LnGrp LOS B C B B C C B B B B B
Approach Vol,veh/h 699 837 116 239
Approach Delay,s/veh 19.2 30.3 11.1 16.3
Approach LOS B C B B
Ti 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 29.6 6.9 23.4 5.7 23.9 11.3 19.1
Change Period (Y+Rc),s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax),s 24.0 5.0 19.0 4.0 16.0 8.0 16.0
Max Q Clear Time(g_c+I1),s 3.4 3.9 8.1 2.7 6.1 7.4 13.9
Green Ext Time(p-c),s 1.9 0.0 5.6 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 23.3
HCM 2010 LOS C
2020 AM Total with Signal and Bypass Lanes.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 3
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/24/2014
--1. .4--- t i
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations tt r t
Volume(veh/h) 75 413 58 157 388 42 186 19 136 147 87 383
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 186.3 186.3 186.3 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0
Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 84 435 72 196 467 63 232 24 170 193 109 426
Adj No.of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.95 0.80 0.80 0.83 0.67 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.76 0.80 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 347 774 515 406 854 115 317 817 731 348 147 409
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.07 0.07 0.11 0.27 0.27 0.11 0.46 0.46 0.28 0.28 0.28
Sat Flow,veh/h 1774 3539 1583 1774 3137 421 1774 1770 1583 856 516 1441
Grp Volume(v),veh/h 84 435 72 196 262 268 232 24 170 302 0 426
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1774 1770 1583 1774 1770 1788 1774 1770 1583 1372 0 1441
Q Serve(g_s),s 2.0 6.7 2.1 4.6 7.1 7.2 4.9 0.4 3.6 11.1 0.0 16.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 2.0 6.7 2.1 4.6 7.1 7.2 4.9 0.4 3.6 11.3 0.0 16.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.24 1.00 1.00 0.64 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 347 774 515 406 482 487 317 817 731 495 0 409
V/C Ratio(X) 0.24 0.56 0.14 0.48 0.54 0.55 0.73 0.03 0.23 0.61 0.00 1.04
Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 411 1006 619 406 534 540 317 817 731 495 0 409
HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 16.5 23.5 16.1 14.3 17.5 17.5 13.5 8.3 9.1 18.4 0.0 20.2
Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.4 0.6 0.1 0.9 1.0 1.0 8.4 0.1 0.7 5.5 0.0 55.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.0 3.3 0.9 2.3 3.6 3.7 3.1 0.2 1.7 5.0 0.0 12.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.8 24.2 16.2 15.2 18.5 18.5 22.0 8.3 9.9 24.0 0.0 75.5
LnGrp LOS B C B B B B C A A C F
Approach Vol,veh/h 591 726 426 728
Approach Delay,s/veh 22.1 17.6 16.4 54.1
Approach LOS C B B D
Ti 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 33.7 10.0 16.3 10.0 23.7 7.0 19.3
Change Period (Y+Rc),s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax),s 26.0 6.0 16.0 6.0 16.0 5.0 17.0
Max Q Clear Time(g_c+I1),s 5.6 6.6 8.7 6.9 18.0 4.0 9.2
Green Ext Time(p-c),s 6.5 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 29.2
HCM 2010 LOS C
2020 PM Total with Signal and Bypass Lanes.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 3
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/24/2014
--1. .4--- t i
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations tt r t
Volume(veh/h) 59 204 126 193 245 23 125 39 157 15 92 67
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q(Qb),veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus,Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 186.3 186.3 186.3 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0
Adj Flow Rate,veh/h 66 215 158 241 295 34 156 49 196 20 115 74
Adj No.of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 2 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.95 0.80 0.80 0.83 0.67 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.76 0.80 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap,veh/h 352 568 376 456 821 94 651 923 826 141 728 436
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.14 0.26 0.26 0.08 0.52 0.52 0.38 0.38 0.38
Sat Flow,veh/h 1774 3539 1583 1774 3202 366 1774 1770 1583 202 1892 1133
Grp Volume(v),veh/h 66 215 158 241 162 167 156 49 196 111 0 98
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1774 1770 1583 1774 1770 1798 1774 1770 1583 1732 0 1495
Q Serve(g_s),s 2.1 3.9 6.0 7.1 5.0 5.1 3.3 0.9 4.5 0.0 0.0 2.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c),s 2.1 3.9 6.0 7.1 5.0 5.1 3.3 0.9 4.5 2.6 0.0 2.9
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00 1.00 0.18 0.76
Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 352 568 376 456 454 461 651 923 826 730 0 576
V/C Ratio(X) 0.19 0.38 0.42 0.53 0.36 0.36 0.24 0.05 0.24 0.15 0.00 0.17
Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h 381 950 547 606 765 777 805 923 826 730 0 576
HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay(d),s/veh 22.8 28.5 24.6 17.8 20.4 20.4 9.7 7.9 8.8 13.5 0.0 13.6
Incr Delay(d2),s/veh 0.3 0.4 0.7 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.7 0.4 0.0 0.6
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 1.0 2.0 2.7 3.5 2.5 2.6 1.6 0.5 2.1 1.4 0.0 1.3
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 23.0 28.9 25.3 18.8 20.9 20.9 9.9 8.0 9.4 13.9 0.0 14.2
LnGrp LOS C C C B C C A A A B B
Approach Vol,veh/h 439 570 401 209
Approach Delay,s/veh 26.7 20.0 9.4 14.1
Approach LOS C B A B
Ti 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Assigned Phs 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration(G+Y+Rc),s 51.9 13.3 14.8 9.2 42.7 6.9 21.2
Change Period (Y+Rc),s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax),s 35.0 15.0 18.0 11.0 20.0 4.0 29.0
Max Q Clear Time(g_c+I1),s 6.5 9.1 8.0 5.3 4.9 4.1 7.1
Green Ext Time(p-c),s 3.0 0.3 2.8 0.2 2.5 0.0 3.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 18.4
HCM 2010 LOS B
2020 Weekend Total with Signal and Bypass Lanes.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 3
Queues
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR II 4/8/2014
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 883 74 578 158 208
v/c Ratio 0.77 0.14 0.28 0.40 0.26
Control Delay 22.2 21.8 4.5 15.9 8.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 22.2 21.8 4.5 15.9 8.2
Queue Length 50th(ft) 134 12 13 31 12
Queue Length 95th(ft) 193 m51 103 41 21
Internal Link Dist(ft) 435 342 509
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 1151 514 2032 708 1382
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.77 0.14 0.28 0.22 0.15
Intersection Summary
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2013 AM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
Queues
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/8/2014
--1. -4- t
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT NBL NBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 99 428 534 216 431
v/c Ratio 0.23 0.24 0.57 0.46 0.40
Control Delay 23.4 5.9 27.0 14.3 5.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 23.4 5.9 27.0 14.3 5.2
Queue Length 50th(ft) 26 23 111 42 16
Queue Length 95th(ft) m53 m71 165 54 24
Internal Link Dist(ft) 342 220 228
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 436 1804 934 644 1384
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.23 0.24 0.57 0.34 0.31
Intersection Summary
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2013 AM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 6
Queues
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR II 4/8/2014
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 426 280 1012 169 258
v/c Ratio 0.50 0.44 0.51 0.37 0.29
Control Delay 17.3 17.9 5.7 16.9 11.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 17.3 17.9 5.8 16.9 11.5
Queue Length 50th(ft) 51 73 32 46 27
Queue Length 95th(ft) 90 166 56 59 38
Internal Link Dist(ft) 435 342 509
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 861 633 2014 645 1233
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 80 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.49 0.44 0.52 0.26 0.21
Intersection Summary
2013 PM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
Queues
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/8/2014
--1. .4- t
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT NBL NBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 64 276 777 334 582
v/c Ratio 0.36 0.18 0.68 0.53 0.45
Control Delay 58.1 11.8 29.4 14.8 12.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 58.1 11.8 29.4 14.8 12.1
Queue Length 50th(ft) 39 54 201 90 73
Queue Length 95th(ft) 67 73 253 130 95
Internal Link Dist(ft) 342 220 228
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 314 1788 1147 648 1316
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.15 0.68 0.52 0.44
Intersection Summary
2013 PM.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 6
Queues
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR II 4/8/2014
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 314 85 284 58 146
v/c Ratio 0.52 0.18 0.20 0.10 0.13
Control Delay 13.8 24.1 6.0 10.4 7.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 13.8 24.1 6.0 10.4 7.8
Queue Length 50th(ft) 24 38 21 11 11
Queue Length 95th(ft) 51 63 23 21 20
Internal Link Dist(ft) 435 342 509
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 805 514 1772 780 1522
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.39 0.17 0.16 0.07 0.10
Intersection Summary
2013 Weekend.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
Queues
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/8/2014
--1. .4- t
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT NBL NBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 53 98 256 121 240
v/c Ratio 0.30 0.05 0.15 0.37 0.35
Control Delay 32.5 3.6 7.9 19.2 14.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 32.5 3.6 7.9 19.2 14.7
Queue Length 50th(ft) 20 4 20 41 34
Queue Length 95th(ft) 38 10 45 59 43
Internal Link Dist(ft) 342 220 228
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 354 2468 1705 644 1323
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.15 0.04 0.15 0.19 0.18
Intersection Summary
2013 Weekend.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 6
Queues
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR II 4/8/2014
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 1162 98 761 209 274
v/c Ratio 0.90 0.18 0.31 0.50 0.31
Control Delay 36.2 19.2 1.0 39.8 21.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 36.2 19.2 1.4 39.8 21.3
Queue Length 50th(ft) 326 20 5 127 50
Queue Length 95th(ft) 382 m36 6 160 77
Internal Link Dist(ft) 435 342 509
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 1298 549 2440 557 1121
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 1069 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.90 0.18 0.56 0.38 0.24
Intersection Summary
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2020 AM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
Queues
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/8/2014
--1. -4- t
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT NBL NBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 130 563 703 283 568
v/c Ratio 0.20 0.25 0.86 0.61 0.51
Control Delay 16.6 2.3 50.2 39.3 14.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 16.6 2.3 50.2 39.3 14.5
Queue Length 50th(ft) 27 14 241 191 74
Queue Length 95th(ft) m51 m48 #313 253 109
Internal Link Dist(ft) 342 220 228
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 655 2259 816 523 1222
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.25 0.86 0.54 0.46
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2020 AM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 6
Queues
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR II 4/8/2014
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 561 368 1331 222 340
v/c Ratio 0.71 0.54 0.62 0.41 0.33
Control Delay 24.8 23.1 4.1 27.3 22.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 24.8 23.7 4.4 27.3 22.6
Queue Length 50th(ft) 87 110 28 100 70
Queue Length 95th(ft) 130 m187 77 131 97
Internal Link Dist(ft) 435 342 509
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 786 679 2143 650 1224
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 94 301 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.71 0.63 0.72 0.34 0.28
Intersection Summary
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2020 PM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
Queues
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/8/2014
--1. -4- t
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT NBL NBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 84 363 1022 439 766
v/c Ratio 0.27 0.19 0.93 0.72 0.62
Control Delay 29.8 4.8 45.5 31.2 24.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 29.8 4.8 45.5 31.2 24.3
Queue Length 50th(ft) 34 45 293 220 179
Queue Length 95th(ft) m53 47 #406 313 225
Internal Link Dist(ft) 342 220 228
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 314 1832 1099 644 1307
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.27 0.20 0.93 0.68 0.59
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2020 PM Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 6
Queues
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR I 4/8/2014
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 412 112 375 77 192
v/c Ratio 0.59 0.23 0.23 0.10 0.13
Control Delay 14.0 23.7 6.8 16.9 12.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 14.0 23.7 6.8 16.9 12.4
Queue Length 50th(ft) 32 41 38 22 22
Queue Length 95th(ft) 61 64 23 48 46
Internal Link Dist(ft) 435 342 509
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 857 486 1857 782 1531
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.48 0.23 0.20 0.10 0.13
Intersection Summary
2020 Weekend Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
Queues
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/8/2014
--1. .4- t
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT NBL NBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 70 129 337 157 318
v/c Ratio 0.25 0.06 0.24 0.34 0.33
Control Delay 32.9 2.8 11.6 23.6 19.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 32.9 2.8 11.6 23.6 19.4
Queue Length 50th(ft) 28 5 32 67 57
Queue Length 95th(ft) 40 7 69 104 79
Internal Link Dist(ft) 342 220 228
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 366 2163 1427 636 1310
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.19 0.06 0.24 0.25 0.24
Intersection Summary
2020 Weekend Background.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 6
Queues
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR II 4/24/2014
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 1240 119 814 244 274
v/c Ratio 0.91 0.21 0.32 0.64 0.34
Control Delay 44.8 25.5 1.8 57.1 30.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 44.8 25.5 2.6 57.1 30.5
Queue Length 50th(ft) 486 33 4 205 73
Queue Length 95th(ft) 534 m77 117 230 100
Internal Link Dist(ft) 435 342 509
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 1366 563 2568 483 978
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 1355 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.91 0.21 0.67 0.51 0.28
Intersection Summary
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
Queues
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/24/2014
--1. -4- t
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT NBL NBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 130 663 773 300 594
v/c Ratio 0.19 0.27 0.81 0.76 0.64
Control Delay 19.9 1.9 53.8 61.5 31.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 19.9 2.4 53.8 61.5 31.8
Queue Length 50th(ft) 46 46 336 272 164
Queue Length 95th(ft) m59 m48 391 364 213
Internal Link Dist(ft) 342 220 228
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 699 2463 950 425 981
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 1259 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.19 0.55 0.81 0.71 0.61
Intersection Summary
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 6
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: White Chapel & Dove II 4/24/2014
--1. .4--- t i
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Right Turn Channelized
Volume(veh/h) 184 296 71 140 404 80 96 174 101 68 178 164
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.85 0.71 0.75 0.85 0.72 0.82 0.66 0.88 0.89 0.69 0.77
Hourly flow rate(vph) 224 348 100 187 475 111 117 264 115 76 258 213
Approach Volume(veh/h) 673 773 495 547
Crossing Volume(veh/h) 521 605 649 779
High Capacity(veh/h) 918 858 828 746
High v/c(veh/h) 0.73 0.90 0.60 0.73
Low Capacity(veh/h) 741 688 661 589
Low v/c(veh/h) 0.91 1.12 0.75 0.93
Intersection Summary
Maximum v/c High 0.90
Maximum v/c Low 1.12
Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.0% ICU Level of Service E
2020 AM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 12
Queues
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR II 4/24/2014
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 657 409 1589 321 340
v/c Ratio 0.99 0.49 0.67 0.68 0.38
Control Delay 72.3 22.2 4.0 47.0 32.6
Queue Delay 0.0 2.2 1.3 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 72.3 24.4 5.3 47.0 32.6
Queue Length 50th(ft) 220 168 76 222 100
Queue Length 95th(ft) #310 m243 225 251 128
Internal Link Dist(ft) 435 342 509
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 664 827 2362 545 1034
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 279 522 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.99 0.75 0.86 0.59 0.33
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
Queues
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/24/2014
--1. -4- t
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT NBL NBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 84 532 1277 469 884
v/c Ratio 0.27 0.25 0.94 0.87 0.81
Control Delay 39.5 3.7 48.1 55.2 42.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 39.5 3.7 50.5 55.2 42.5
Queue Length 50th(ft) 41 54 485 369 333
Queue Length 95th(ft) m60 m64 #557 #512 392
Internal Link Dist(ft) 342 220 228
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 306 2116 1363 550 1116
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 38 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.27 0.25 0.96 0.85 0.79
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 6
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: White Chapel & Dove II 4/24/2014
--1. .4--- t i
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Right Turn Channelized
Volume(veh/h) 105 502 104 97 419 61 106 275 169 33 98 87
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.85 0.71 0.75 0.85 0.72 0.82 0.66 0.88 0.89 0.69 0.77
Hourly flow rate(vph) 128 591 146 129 493 85 129 417 192 37 142 113
Approach Volume(veh/h) 865 707 738 292
Crossing Volume(veh/h) 308 674 756 752
High Capacity(veh/h) 1087 812 760 762
High v/c(veh/h) 0.80 0.87 0.97 0.38
Low Capacity(veh/h) 892 647 602 604
Low v/c(veh/h) 0.97 1.09 1.23 0.48
Intersection Summary
Maximum v/c High 0.97
Maximum v/c Low 1.23
Intersection Capacity Utilization 101.0% ICU Level of Service G
2020 PM Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 12
Queues
1: Dove & SH 114 SBFR II 4/24/2014
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 618 171 571 225 192
v/c Ratio 0.73 0.31 0.28 0.40 0.17
Control Delay 23.3 16.2 2.1 22.5 14.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 23.3 16.2 2.1 22.5 14.2
Queue Length 50th(ft) 90 25 8 85 26
Queue Length 95th(ft) 139 m58 14 115 44
Internal Link Dist(ft) 435 342 509
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 906 558 2092 785 1539
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.68 0.31 0.27 0.29 0.12
Intersection Summary
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
Queues
2: SH 114 NBFR & Dove 4/24/2014
--1. -4- t
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT NBL NBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 70 439 554 230 468
v/c Ratio 0.15 0.23 0.69 0.40 0.40
Control Delay 17.9 2.9 28.7 20.6 17.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 17.9 2.9 28.7 20.6 17.8
Queue Length 50th(ft) 15 11 110 87 82
Queue Length 95th(ft) m26 24 163 138 113
Internal Link Dist(ft) 342 220 228
Turn Bay Length(ft)
Base Capacity(vph) 482 1892 808 725 1495
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.15 0.23 0.69 0.32 0.31
Intersection Summary
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 6
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: White Chapel & Dove II 4/24/2014
--1. .4--- t i
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Right Turn Channelized
Volume(veh/h) 52 184 120 98 217 17 132 61 70 20 74 72
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.85 0.71 0.75 0.85 0.72 0.82 0.66 0.88 0.89 0.69 0.77
Hourly flow rate(vph) 63 216 169 131 255 24 161 92 80 22 107 94
Approach Volume(veh/h) 449 410 333 223
Crossing Volume(veh/h) 260 317 302 547
High Capacity(veh/h) 1129 1080 1092 899
High v/c(veh/h) 0.40 0.38 0.30 0.25
Low Capacity(veh/h) 929 885 896 724
Low v/c(veh/h) 0.48 0.46 0.37 0.31
Intersection Summary
Maximum v/c High 0.40
Maximum v/c Low 0.48
Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.6% ICU Level of Service C
2020 Weekend Total.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 12
Queues
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/24/2014
t
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT SBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 244 403 52 81 756 34 82 239
v/c Ratio 0.70 0.31 0.06 0.20 0.81 0.08 0.06 0.25
Control Delay 22.7 13.4 1.1 10.8 27.9 11.6 5.1 8.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 22.7 13.4 1.1 10.8 27.9 11.6 5.1 8.9
Queue Length 50th(ft) 51 60 0 15 123 7 2 15
Queue Length 95th(ft) 107 91 4 31 162 19 11 32
Internal Link Dist(ft) 325 170 331 452
Turn Bay Length(ft) 150 150 150 150
Base Capacity(vph) 347 1309 849 397 952 429 1313 960
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.70 0.31 0.06 0.20 0.79 0.08 0.06 0.25
Intersection Summary
2020 AM Total with Signal and Bypass Lanes.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
Queues
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/24/2014
t
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT SBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 84 435 72 196 530 232 194 728
v/c Ratio 0.28 0.56 0.10 0.58 0.57 0.66 0.12 0.75
Control Delay 11.8 21.2 2.4 20.1 21.0 23.0 2.9 17.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 11.8 21.2 2.4 20.1 21.0 23.0 2.9 17.2
Queue Length 50th(ft) 14 93 6 46 85 48 2 70
Queue Length 95th(ft) m27 m126 m14 70 110 #99 13 102
Internal Link Dist(ft) 325 170 331 452
Turn Bay Length(ft) 150 150 150 150
Base Capacity(vph) 304 943 681 337 1027 354 1570 977
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.28 0.46 0.11 0.58 0.52 0.66 0.12 0.75
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
2020 PM Total with Signal and Bypass Lanes.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
Queues
3: Dove & Kirkwood 4/24/2014
t
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT SBT
Lane Group Flow(vph) 66 215 158 241 329 156 245 209
v/c Ratio 0.30 0.46 0.27 0.55 0.35 0.24 0.13 0.17
Control Delay 20.3 32.1 2.0 24.1 23.3 10.9 3.0 12.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 20.3 32.1 2.0 24.1 23.3 10.9 3.0 12.5
Queue Length 50th(ft) 20 41 0 89 67 36 5 22
Queue Length 95th(ft) 40 62 1 116 86 66 18 44
Internal Link Dist(ft) 325 170 331 452
Turn Bay Length(ft) 150 150 150 150
Base Capacity(vph) 223 796 618 458 1273 673 1815 1246
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 0.27 0.26 0.53 0.26 0.23 0.13 0.17
Intersection Summary
2020 Weekend Total with Signal and Bypass Lanes.syn Synchro 8 Report
Page 2
Appendix D
TxDOT Access Manual
Roadway Design Manual Excerpts
Chapter 2—Access Management Criteria Section 7—Auxiliary Lanes
Functional Criteria
Table 2-3 presents thresholds for auxiliary lanes. These thresholds represent examples of
where left turn and right turn lanes should be considered. Refer to the TxDOT Roadway
Design Manual, Chapter 3, for proper acceleration and deceleration lengths.
Table 2-3:Auxiliary Lane Thresholds
Median Type Left Turn to or from Property Right Turn to or from Property (5)
Acceleration Deceleration Acceleration Deceleration
Non-Traversable (2) All Right turn egress> ♦ >45mph where
(Raised median) 200vph(4) right turn
volume is>
50vph(3)
♦ <_ 45 where right
turn volume is>
60V h(3)
Traversable (2) (1) Same as above Same as above
Undivided Road
(1)Refer to Table 3-11, TxDOTRoadway Design Manual, for alternative left-turn-bay operational
considerations.
(2)A left-turn acceleration lane may be required if it would provide a benefit to the safety and operation of
the roadway. A left-turn accelerati on lane is generally not required where the posted speed is 40 mph or
less,or where the acceleration lane would interfere with the left-turn ingress movements to any other
access connection.
(3)Additional right-turn considerations:
♦ Conditions for providing an exclusive right-turn lane when the right-turn traffic volume projections are
less than indicated in Table 2-3:
• High crash experience
• Heavier than normal peak flow movements on the main roadway
• Large volume of truck traffic
• Highways where sight distance is limited
♦ Conditions for NOT requiring a right-turn lane where right-turn volumes are more than indicated in Table
2-3:
• Dense or built-out corridor where space is limited
• Where queues of stopped vehicles would block the access to the right turn lane
• Where sufficient length of property width is not available for the appropriate design
(4)The acceleration lane should not interfere with any downstream access connection.
♦ The distance from the end of the acceleration lane taper to the next unsignalized downstream access
connection should be equal to or greater than the distances found in Table 2-2.
♦ Additionally,if the next access connection is signalized,the distance from the end of the acceleration lane
taper to the back of the 90th percentile queue should be greater than or equal to the distances found in
Table 2-2.
(5)Continuous right-turn lanes can provide mobility benefits both for through movements and for the turning
vehicles.' Access connections within a continuous right turn lane should meet the spacing requirements
found in Table 2-2. However,when combined with crossing left in movements,a continuous right-turn
lane can introduce additional operational conflicts.
'Florida Department of Transportation(FDOT),Florida's Driveway Handbook,2002.
Access Management Manual 2-17 TxDOT 612004
Chapter 2 Access Management Criteria Section 6 Other State System Highways
Table 2-2 does not apply to rural highways outside of metropolitan planning organization
boundaries where there is little, if any,potential for development with current ADT volumes
below 2000. For those highways, access location and design will be evaluated based on
safety and traffic operation considerations. Such considerations may include traffic
volumes, posted speed, turning volumes,presence or absence of shoulders, and roadway
geometrics.
Table 2-2: Other State Highways Connection Spacing Criteria
Other State Highways Minimum Connection Spacing(1)(2)(3)
Posted Speed(mph) Distance ft
<30 200
35 250
40 305
45 360
>_ 50 425
(1)Distances are for passenger cars on level grade. These distances may be adjusted for
downgrades and/or significant truck traffic.Where present or projected traffic
operations indicate specific needs,consideration may be given to intersection sight
distance and operational gap acceptance measurement adjustments.
(2)When these values are not attainable,refer to the deviation process as described in
Chapter 3,Section 1 or Chapter 2,Section 2.
(3)Access spacing values shown in this table do not apply to rural highways outside of
metropolitan planning organization boundaries where there is little,if any,potential
for development with current ADT levels below 2000.Access connection spacing
below the values shown in this table may be approved based on safety and operational
considerations as determined by TxDOT.
Corner Clearance
Corner clearance refers to the separation of access connections from roadway intersections.
Table 2-2 provides minimum corner clearance criteria.
Where adequate access connection spacing cannot be achieved, the permitting authority may
allow for a lesser spacing when shared access is established with an abutting property.
Where no other alternatives exist, construction of an access connection may be allowed
along the property line farthest from the intersection. To provide reasonable access under
these conditions but also provide the safest operation, consideration should be given to
designing the driveway connection to allow only the right-in turning movement or only the
right-in/right out turning movements if feasible.
Access Management Manual 2-15 RDOT 612004
Chapter 2 Access Management Criteria Section S Frontage Roads
Section 5
Frontage Roads
Overview
This section describes the function and characteristics of freeway frontage roads, including
how access connections will be applied along these frontage roads. Frontage roads are
roadways that are constructed generally parallel to a freeway or other highway. Figure 2-2
shows a typical frontage road application.
Freeway frontage roads normally have at-grade interchanges with the arterial streets,which
are generally perpendicular to the freeway and are grade-separated from the freeway
mainlanes. Under fully developed conditions, the at-grade intersections of frontage roads
and arterials are typically signalized.
Ramps provide connections between the frontage roads and the freeway. Traffic traveling
from an arterial street to the freeway first turns from the arterial onto the frontage road and
then travels along the frontage road to a freeway entrance ramp. Traffic traveling from the
freeway to an arterial street leaves the freeway by means of an exit ramp that connects to the
frontage road and then travels along the frontage road to its intersection with the arterial
street.
Other streets may also intersect with frontage roads. By means of these intersections, access
is provided between the freeway system and the developments that have access onto these
streets.
� s
aL
R �
Tw "
r
r�
.Y
wi
Figure 2-2: Freeway with Frontage Roads
Access Management Manual 2-10 TxDOT 612004
Chapter 2 Access Management Criteria Section S Frontage Roads
Application of the Criteria
Frontage roads may be considered in order to provide direct access to abutting property
where 1) alternative access is not available and the property would otherwise be landlocked,
2) it is not feasible for the Department to purchase the access, and 3) the frontage road
allows for improved mobility together with the property access.
Direct access to the frontage road is prohibited in the vicinity of ramp connections, as
described in the TxDOT Roadway Design Manual, Chapter 3. Otherwise, on roadways
where TxDOT does not control the access, access connecting to the frontage road is
typically permitted subject to the access connection criteria set forth in this manual. For
application of access connections where TxDOT controls the access,refer to Chapter 2,
Section 2, Application of Access Criteria.
Connection Spacing Criteria for Frontage Roads
Table 2-1 gives the minimum connection spacing criteria for frontage roads. However, a
lesser connection spacing than set forth in this document may be allowed without deviation
in the following situations:
♦ To keep from land-locking a property where such land-locking is solely the result of
action by TxDOT (for example, design and construction modifications which physically
prevent a driveway installation due to grade changes,retaining walls, or barrier
installations)where TxDOT does not control the access; or
♦ Replacement or re-establishment of reasonable access to the state highway system
under highway reconstruction/rehabilitation projects.
The above references to land-locking do not apply to circumstances where an existing larger
tract of land is subsequently (after the effective date of this manual) further subdivided(and
the subdivided lots sold to separate owners) and the original tract of land either already has
an existing permitted access connection point, or would qualify for such an access
connection point based upon the spacing requirements of this manual. Potential land-locking
caused by subdivision and resale is the result of such subdivision process and will not alone
justify variances or deviations in the spacing requirements contained in this manual.
Therefore, as part of the subdividing process, the party proposing the subdivision (and the
municipality approving such subdivisions) should require and provide some type of internal
access easements to the existing access connection points (or to such access connection
point locations that qualify for future permits based on this manual's spacing requirements).
It should be noted that for areas with conventional diamond ramp patterns the most critical
areas for operations are between the exit ramp and the arterial street and between the arterial
street and the entrance ramp. In X-ramp configurations, the most critical areas are between
the exit ramp and the subsequent entrance ramp. While Table 2-1 gives minimum
connection spacing criteria, the critical areas with respect to the ramp pattern may need
greater spacing requirements for operational, safety, and weaving efficiencies.
The distance between access connections is measured along the edge of the traveled way
from the closest edge of pavement of the first access connection to the closest edge of
Access Management Manual 2-11 TxDOT 612004
Chapter 2 Access Management Criteria Section S Frontage Roads
pavement of the second access connection (Refer to Figure 2-1). Additionally, the access
connection spacing in the proximity of frontage road U-turn lanes will be measured from the
inside edge of the U-turn lane to the closest edge of the first access connection (Refer to
Figure 2-3)
C
m
E
m
7
0
Access Connection Spec ng -
{refer to Table 2- 11
FRONTAGE ROAD
Li
� w
ZFREEWAY MAINLANES
� UJ
� a
FRONTAGE ROAD
}
Access Connection Spacing
(refer to Table 2 - 1 )
a a
4- 4-
0 0
m 0
v 0
W Ld
Figure 2-3: Frontage Road U-Turn Spacing Diagram
Access Management Manual 2-12 TxDOT 612004
Chapter 2 Access Management Criteria Section S Frontage Roads
Table 2-1:Frontage Road Connection Spacing Criteria
Minimum Connection Spacing Criteria for Frontage Roads(1)(2)
Minimum Connection Spacing(feet)
Posted Speed(mph) One-Way Frontage Two-Way Frontage
Roads Roads
<30 200 200
35 250 300
40 305 360
45 360 435
>_50 425 510
(1)Distances are for passenger cars on level grade. These distances
may be adjusted for downgrades and/or significant truck traffic.
Where present or projected traffic operations indicate specific
needs,consideration may be given to intersection sight distance
and operational gap acceptance measurement adjustments.
(2)When these values are not attainable,refer to the deviation
process as described in Chapter 3,Section 1 or Chapter 2,
Section 2.
Access Management Manual 2-13 TxDOT 612004
Appendix E
Traffic Signal Warrant Study
A TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ASSESSMENT FOR THE
INTERSECTION OF
DOVE ROAD AND KIRKWOOD BOULEVARD
IN SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
Prepared for:
WWinkelmann
AssociatM Inc,
Winkelmann &Associates, Inc.
6750 Hillcrest Plaza
Suite 325
Dallas, Texas 75230
Prepared by:
DeShazo Group ash
Texas Registered Engineering Firm F-3199 ;
Engineers• Planners ��
400 South Houston Street
Suite 330• Union Stations
Dallas, Texas 75202 1
Phone: 214-748-6740 `
Fax: 214-748-7037
f
October 31, 2013
DeShazo#12186
Traffic Signal Warrant Assessment
for the Intersection of
Dove Road and Kirkwood Boulevard
in Southlake, Texas
Table of Contents
Introduction.......................................................................................................................................................................... 1
SignalWarrant Assessment.................................................................................................................................................. 1
TrafficSignal Warrants......................................................................................................................................................1
TrafficVolumes.................................................................................................................................................................. 1
RightTurn Reductions....................................................................................................................................................... 1
WarrantAnalysis................................................................................................................................................................ 1
Conclusions/Recommendations.........................................................................................................................................2
111L -A
DeShazo Group
Traffic.Transportation Planning.Parking. Design.
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
To: Mr. Mike Clark, P.E.
Winkelmann &Associates, Inc.
From: DeShazo Group, Inc.
Date: October 31, 2013
Re: Traffic Signal Warrant Assessment for the Intersection of Dove Road and Kirkwood Boulevard in
Southlake,Texas(DeShazo#13057)
Introduction
The services of DeShazo Group, Inc. (DeShazo) were retained by Winkelmann & Associates, Inc. to conduct a
Traffic Signal Warrant Assessment for the intersection of Dove Road and Kirkwood Boulevard in Southlake,
Texas. DeShazo is an engineering consulting firm providing licensed engineers skilled in the field of traffic &
transportation engineering.
The subject intersection is located on Dove Road approximately 1,000 feet east of the SH 114 northbound
frontage road and 1,000 feet west of White Chapel Boulevard (see Exhibit 1). This intersection will also serve
a proposed commercial development located south of Dove Road between SH 114 and White Chapel
Boulevard (see Exhibit 2).
This report will summarize the findings of the Traffic Signal Warrant Assessment in a request for approval of
the installation of a traffic signal at the subject intersection. This report will be provided to the City of
Southlake staff(Staff)for technical review to fulfill the associated requirements of the local approval process.
Signal Warrant Assessment-Existing Conditions
Traffic Signal Warrants
The Texas MUTCD defines a series of traffic signal warrants to be used in the investigation of a traffic signal
installation. These warrants are listed as follows (also see Appendix):
Warrant 1Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Warrant 5—School Crossing
Warrant 2—Four-Hour Vehicular Volume Warrant 6--Coordinated Signal System
Warrant 3—Peak Hour Warrant 7—Crash Experience
Warrant 4—Pedestrian Volume Warrant 8—Roadway Network
400 South Houston Street,Suite 330 Dallas,Texas 75202 P.214.748.6740 F.214.748.7037 www.deshazogroup.com
Traffic Volumes
The traffic volumes to be used in the signal warrant analyses include the sum of the approach volumes (i.e.,
traffic volumes entering the intersection) on the major street and the higher of the two minor street
approach volumes. These volumes were taken from the manual and automated traffic counts collected in
May and August of this year and are shown in Table 1 (also see Appendix). If current traffic volumes do not
satisfy the signal warrant criteria, traffic for the proposed development will be generated and added to the
existing volumes for a 'future scenario' analysis.
Table 1
2013 Hourly Volumes
Time Dove WB Kirkwood SB Dove EB Kirkwood NB
Start L T R L T R L T R L T R
6:00 AM 50 42 265
7:00 AM 336 141 523
8:00 AM 246 82 470
9:00 AM 94 57 248
10:00 AM 91 40 143
11:00 AM 96 107 158
12:00 PM 114 100 255
1:00 PM 113 54 231
2:00 PM 185 74 248
3:00 PM 236 110 215
4:00 PM 205 241 218
5:00 PM 227 362 280
6:00 PM 235 199 257
7:00 PM 144 82 151
8:00 PM 103 38 118
9:00 PM 77 21 83
10:00 PM 28 3 60
11:00 PM 17 4 23
Right Turn Reductions
The Texas MUTCD has provisions for different adjustments in the assessment of the traffic-volume-related
warrants. For instance, right-turning vehicles may turn "right-on-red" at a traffic signal under the same
conditions as turning right at an unsignalized, STOP-controlled intersection approach. At intersection
approaches on the minor street where the ability to turn right is uninhibited due to the intersection
geometry (e.g., an exclusive right-turn lane exists) or where a disproportionately high percentage of vehicles
are turning right (i.e., there is not a significant queue of vehicles turning left or traveling straight), then:
"Engineering judgment should be used to determine what, if any, portion of the right-turn traffic is subtracted from the
minor-street traffic count when evaluating the count against the above signal warrants."1
Because the data collected was not described in terms of turning movements, no adjustments for right turns
have been made.
Warrant Analysis
The warrant analysis is based on the following assumptions:
• The subject intersection will be studied under existing volume conditions. The traffic volumes for this
study were collected on a typical weekday in May and August of 2013 (see Appendix). If current
traffic volumes do not satisfy the signal warrant criteria, traffic for the proposed development will be
generated and added to the existing volumes for a 'future scenario' analysis.
• Integration of a traffic signal at the subject intersection shall be appropriately coordinated with
surrounding, existing traffic signals where applicable. However, these considerations were not
directly evaluated as a primary factor in the justification of the traffic signal installation.
TxMUTCD 2006-Sect.4C.01 page 4C-1
• Based upon background knowledge of the subject intersections, the basis for this traffic signal
warrant assessment is derived primarily from vehicular traffic volumes. The pedestrian activity and
accident history warrants will only be examined if the volumetric warrants are not satisfied.
• The remaining volume-related warrants (1, 2 and 3)are considered in this analysis.
The results of the analysis for existing (2013)traffic volumes are summarized in Table 2 and detailed results
are provided in Appendix.
Table 2
Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Results
Weekday
Warrant 1. Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Not Satisfied
Warrant 2. Four-Hour Vehicular Volume Not Satisfied
Warrant 3. Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume Not Satisfied
The Texas MUTCD stipulates that a traffic signal control may be installed at the discretion of the authorized
agency responsible for traffic control installation and maintenance provided that one or more of the
published signal warrants are met. However, the existing volumes do not satisfy any of the volume-based
warrants at the subject intersection.
Signal Warrant Assessment-Future Conditions
Future Traffic Volumes
Table 4 illustrates the future background traffic volumes on Dove and Kirkwood assuming a 4% growth rate
over a 7-year period. The traffic volumes to be used in the future signal warrant analyses include the sum of
the approach volumes (i.e., traffic volumes entering the intersection) on the major street and the higher of
the two minor street approach volumes. The volumes used for analysis include the existing traffic volumes
and traffic volumes for the proposed development derived from the Institute of Transportation Engineers
(ITE) Trip Generation manual (9th Edition). ITE Trip Generation is a compilation of actual traffic generation
data by land use as collected over several decades by creditable sources across the country and it is accepted
as the standard methodology to determine trip generation volumes for various land uses where sufficient
data exists. It is assumed that the "mode split"characteristics inherent to the ITE trip rates will adequately
reflect the mode choices associated with this development. No reductions for transit usage or internally
captured trips were taken, but adjustments were made for pass-by traffic (motorists who patronize the
shopping center as a part of another trip).
Table 3 summarizes the trip generation calculations for the proposed center. The appropriate excerpts from
the ITE Trip Generation Manual-8`h Edition are provided in the Appendix.
Table 3
Southlake Center Trip Generation
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Weekend Peak Hour
Land Use Quantity Daily Total In Out Total In Out Total In Out
Traffic
Eastern Tract 246,741 SF 12,215 270 168 102 1,097 527 570 1,572 818 754
820—Shopping Center
Western Tract 820—Shopping Center 456,892 SF 18,231 377 230 147 1,761 863 898 1,761 863 898
Pass-By Trips -- -- -- -- 692 332 360 761 396 365
Totals 22,719 505 314 191 1,344 645 698 2,163 1,125 1,038
In order to develop more than just these two hours of trip generation, the ITE manual offers information
regarding the hourly, daily and monthly variation factors for shopping centers of various sizes. Exhibit 3
illustrates these factors as shown in the ITE Trip Generation manual (8t" Edition). Using the factors shown in
Table 1 of Exhibit 3, an additional 12 hours of traffic data for the shopping center was generated. These
volumes are shown in Exhibit 4. Hourly turning movements were then calculated for the intersection by
applying the trip orientation percentages shown in the DeShazo traffic study dated October 31, 2013 to the
shopping center volumes shown in Exhibit 4 (and assuming that these percentages remain the same all day).
The traffic volumes associated with the proposed shopping center are shown in Table 5. Table 6 shows the
sum of the 2020 background traffic and the 2020 site traffic and it is this volume set which will be used for
the future signal warrant analysis.
Table 4
2020 Hourly Background Volumes
Time Dove WB Kirkwood SB Dove EB Kirkwood NB
Sta rt L T R L T R L T R L T R
6:00 AM 66 55 350
7:00 AM 444 186 690
8:00 AM 325 108 620
9:00 AM 124 75 327
10:00 AM 120 53 189
11:00 AM 127 141 209
12:00 PM 150 132 337
1:00 PM 149 71 305
2:00 PM 244 98 327
3:00 PM 312 145 284
4:00 PM 271 318 288
5:00 PM 300 478 370
6:00 PM 310 263 339
7:00 PM 190 108 199
8:00 PM 136 50 156
9:00 PM 102 28 110
10:00 PM 37 4 79
11:00 PM 1 22 1 5 1 30
Table 5
Hourly Shopping Center Traffic Using Dove Road and Kirkwood Boulevard
Based on ITE Hourly Shopping Center Trip Rates
Time Dove WB Kirkwood SB Dove EB Kirkwood NB
Sta rt L T R L T R L T R L T R
6:00 AM
7:00 AM 47 6 31 10 79 57 11 32
8:00 AM
9:00 AM
10:00 AM 129 17 86 37 216 222 44 126
11:00 AM 129 17 86 48 216 286 57 162
12:00 PM 129 17 86 47 216 279 56 158
1:00 PM 118 16 78 43 196 256 51 145
2:00 PM 153 20 102 44 256 266 53 151
3:00 PM 164 22 109 54 273 324 65 183
4:00 PM 165 22 110 59 275 354 71 201
5:00 PM 228 30 152 70 380 421 84 239
6:00 PM 126 17 84 47 210 283 57 160
7:00 PM 92 12 61 30 153 181 36 102
8:00 PM 72 10 48 24 119 147 29 83
9:00 PM 32 4 22 10 54 61 12 35
10:00 PM
11:00 PM
Table 6
Hourly Total Traffic Using Dove Road and Kirkwood Boulevard
Based on ITE Hourly Shopping Center Trip Rates
Time Dove WB Kirkwood SB Dove EB Kirkwood NB
Start L T R L T R L T R L T R
6:00 AM 66 55 350
7:00 AM 47 450 218 700 79 57 11 32
8:00 AM 325 108 620
9:00 AM 124 75 327
10:00 AM 129 137 139 226 216 222 44 126
11:00 AM 129 144 228 256 216 286 57 162
12:00 PM 129 168 218 383 216 279 56 158
1:00 PM 118 165 150 348 196 256 51 145
2:00 PM 153 265 200 372 256 266 53 151
3:00 PM 164 333 254 338 273 324 65 183
4:00 PM 165 293 428 347 275 354 71 201
5:00 PM 228 330 630 440 380 421 84 239
6:00 PM 126 327 347 386 210 283 57 160
7:00 PM 92 202 170 229 153 181 36 102
8:00 PM 72 146 98 180 119 147 29 83
9:00 PM 32 106 49 120 54 61 12 35
10:00 PM 37 4 79
11:00 PM 1 22 1 5 1 30
Right Turn Reductions
The Texas MUTCD has provisions for different adjustments in the assessment of the traffic-volume-related
warrants. For instance, right-turning vehicles may turn "right-on-red" at a traffic signal under the same
conditions as turning right at an unsignalized, STOP-controlled intersection approach. At intersection
approaches on the minor street where the ability to turn right is uninhibited due to the intersection
geometry (e.g., an exclusive right-turn lane exists) or where a disproportionately high percentage of vehicles
are turning right (i.e., there is not a significant queue of vehicles turning left or traveling straight), then:
"Engineering judgment should be used to determine what, if any, portion of the right-turn traffic is subtracted from the
minor-street traffic count when evaluating the count against the above signal warrants. ,2
In order to be consistent with the existing conditions analysis, no adjustments for right turns have been
made.
Warrant Analysis
The warrant analysis is based on the following assumptions:
• The traffic volumes for this study are composed of existing counts on Dove Road and Kirkwood
Boulevard (May &August 2013—see Appendix) and a portion of the ITE Trip Generation volumes for
the proposed shopping center.
• Integration of a traffic signal at the subject intersection shall be appropriately coordinated with
surrounding, existing traffic signals where applicable. However, these considerations were not
directly evaluated as a primary factor in the justification of the traffic signal installation.
• Based upon background knowledge of the subject intersections, the basis for these traffic signal
warrants is derived primarily from vehicular traffic volumes. The pedestrian activity and traffic
accident history are typically only applicable traffic signal warrants in extreme or severe conditions.
Pedestrian and traffic accident conditions at these locations are assumed to be insufficient to satisfy
2 TxMUTCD 2006-Sect.4C.01 page 4C-1
the respective traffic signal warrants. Therefore, this data was not collected or included in this
analysis. Should assessment of pedestrian activity, traffic accident history and/or other warrants be
desired, additional study will be required.
• The remaining volume-related warrants (1, 2, and 3) are considered in this analysis.
The results of the analysis are summarized in Table 7 and detailed results are provided in the Appendix.
Table 7
Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Results (ITE Profile Traffic Volumes)
2020 Background 2020 Total
Warrant 1. Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Not Satisfied Satisfied (11 hours)
Warrant 2. Four-Hour Vehicular Volume Not Satisfied Satisfied (10 hours)
Warrant 3. Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume Not Satisfied Satisfied (7 hours)
The Texas MUTCD stipulates that a traffic signal control may be installed at the discretion of the authorized
agency responsible for traffic control installation and maintenance provided that one or more of the
published signal warrants are met. The criteria for Warrant 1-Eight Hour, Warrant 2-Four Hour and Warrant
3-Peak Hour are satisfied at the subject intersection with consideration of the future traffic volumes
generated by the proposed shopping center.
In order to provide the greatest safety and highest level of service possible, therefore, the installation of
this traffic signal should be pursued with the opening of proposed shopping center.
Conclusions / Recommendations
The purpose of a Traffic Signal Warrant Assessment is to determine the feasibility of installing a traffic control
signal at a designated location. Based on a combination the existing traffic volume information and the
projected traffic generated by the proposed shopping center, the intersection of Dove Road and Kirkwood
Boulevard will satisfy at least three of the signal warrants listed in the TMUTCD:
- Warrant 1—Eighth Hour Volumes (satisfied 11 hours)
- Warrant 2—Four Hour Volumes (satisfied 10 hours) and
- Warrant 3—Peak Hour Volumes (satisfied 7 hours).
Therefore, in order to provide the greatest safety and highest level of service possible, the installation of a
traffic signal at the intersection of Dove Road and Kirkwood Boulevard should be pursued.
END OF MEMO
+w:�-ram,, .� • 3 i�a �j� o
41 -
��
SAL
UJ
M -{
_ . .
go
•. 1Y 4.0
``• /r/r y 4
or
co
o
N
_ A
N r-
H �
— a
2 �
W Q
O
� O
T
o4Q o o c
6 _ -- -- ----�_ -- -- ---
-----
---- -�
00
i
- I 3
�- L
- Q x
—LTA
-
n�e'noanrnir ;
a �
❑ _ \� r —
e aT F-
M 153a
C r 3
N i
3 0 0O
o O
N
co
A
CI-4
F- 0
C',0
0 15 N 6—T 6 rn�1J LL
a M
�
LU (D
E
m Cjo oi ON
M�
M Z�5
0
C 0
0 m —
w o Z.� E E E 0
o =U ID o
W (o�6 m�t'o
uz. Im 4)2 <�i T d--li C5
E r a .0 0 W Om
ZO C) Nm Cl)
0 C�
.0 Lo
o > 0 41 6 m 00 cn m
<8 m m w C -C�N
�Z 4= E c 0 c m m(o 06
W 0 m Im ca 6 10
p� <0 Lf)
ON (o �V�N m
.10 �2
>
6.n a)m
6 C,��i <0
4; 0 C-4 M 10 o
04
>,Y c!-j
0 OC7 c W No
, 4) C7�U0 Nm 20 n C6 'i.6'i
4) 0 C? w 0 C5
LL 0�N N W
mL 0)M m 0) Odhh N w 10 .0
-�o—0 .00
to z a) 40 F1 m-n
M
Go w
CL-1 C')
> w E
> = (0-
M > c.0 2 tj . . C5 6 4
2 z "i CD —-It Co 53 2 2
W 0 N 'T D g
2.0
'w '2 LL Cd
LL
a) C'i C'i 6
U) 0
0
LU
F—
ogm cl lcw�
U� Cl! R a)
CM0
(D
r
W 00 CD 0) 06 06 0 C�i Oi (o .9
> W V, �P 0 c
2 0
4) 16 s w
o 0
m x ®
76
N LU
(i cn oi U)N 00
E *:C'�-�IT
< 4,
W .2
E E 'wo 1. c osr
Z r-
L'i c)N 00 N—co—————
r fa
[-6
Q E C os
av N a i
Gm mxomppOrN
Z:6 6 C'i r N
0 U. Cd 0 U.< 4 Z
73= -6 = e WNW .0
U) 9L
12 2 S.. 0
r x co V�',�q m q m w 9(n a
= W w 00 0) 00 c
CO 0
cr
00 0
. 4, =
0 4,CL lE 0) Cl!OD(3�'77 U)ll�
,t o�s
AS a 0=— L,)r-:w w�o 0 m fl-m Oil
R -9 - 1 1!vi
0
CD r r
s = 11
0
mo m 6 w co w 0) 10 r- N 0, Cr, cm 0 f g
r,:t,�r,�(6 Niam E f!E o-S C,!Cl).0 r-00 W tl:L6.4 o 0 (q U�r-:C�P�
2 04 w m w�—moor q— ,6-N 0
CL X
0 0 W 66 1.
IL ..2
ui m
d E E E E E E E E �'E'Em rN �i d d d d ri d d. E E
7 1 T T T T 7
cd d 6 E� I
E c*,''o E� E
d d d d d d d d d
Cd
U)
M L
F— O
_ +r
m C)
2LL
X c
w (D
E
nW W w I� ro ro c w O N O o W C N w M Iff N
w c n o � n m � c ro c ro w � o N m n ro �n n
m e w ro ro n ro o ro a N a a° ro o 0 0 c o w �n N n
'O V r4 N £ r4 rl r4 rl rl N
O emi — w w w M O m T
N w c w O V — N C N r W w
w w W O N N vl W ei T T T N �1 N r r r r T m O O I� vl C m p W N
rl r4 rl r4 rl r4
LU
C N M N O N vl w W m I� m C N w w O w I� M
C C I� N O r r w m w O
w w ro I� r O O W vNl C
v � y
LL O M M M C N N M vl w ro > O W M W I� M O w W O
W O ei O O O W vl W O W
w m ro m O I� vMl C Z I� r r N W W W m w
M WN m. wOw I W vW w C CMM 1O OIN� w 1
a m w Ow ro N ro ro ro N 0I0f0O Oe 0f
Ilf
o w a o n w c m n n W 00 m o c o N p O1 ro ro ro n N w ro m
n n n ro a m w w w �o ro ro ro m w a
n m w w m c o w n w ro c ,� ,� I� W w w Q�
O > C I� O r W N O C I� m M vl N E
O I� r w I� W T T I� C m W P r w w . . m l C N N
w
o ro ro mc m n n n w w o w o m n a
m 3 - ro ro ro m a m N N - 1. .1 . °; n ro m. ro T c m `N O
o '
m n c O ro c o w w c w c m o w m
w o w o ro �o ro n o m L
>,N O N I� r r r W O I� C C Ilf y O w I� r N I� W O 1 C C M A♦
9 N ewi O N w
y M m N
O C C C W w N W vl W vl O n r r W M N r
o
r •� _ c c o°i m m � m N Q •� 0 0 o c o vmi ro o m n n w ro ro m w
U
a a ro m. ro N W oo n m n w o n m O
� c �o ro ,� � w m vmi a m �o ro m p m
> = n n w w ro m n c ,� In = �n n n w n ro m o n c m
'a ° ° w
o
c n w m w I o w w w o w w
O1 n n n o a o n m ro Im row e Im
w n w o 0
a°
N O N O N N
O C C C N N C M N Ilf O
� y c N N n
r W C N O m O C C C I� O W r vl N w c
C C C C vMl v^1 v^1 l0 C M N N r r r N W T m m I VNl a I
�n o w .� m n n m
. . n n m m o n � c N m
>y ° w
� N
o 0
vu'i n �o �o °ro ro m c m N m
Q N
Q m w w w w w e m n
c ro m c n N w c n
o
w o w a
m w c ro w o ro m w m m o N a
�n n n w n ro o n c m ei
O N W a° O N
O ei
vl N vl c Vl c rvl rvt rvl
w ro of c o
ro
- �o � ro n o .-i roi c ro
� m N n ro m n m ro n a o �n m ro o
w
� M
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o I N ONO N r O w C N vl O I� w
w w w m o Lq n m a N m O^ ^ ^ Oro P m
m O I� C
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O (P O
w I� w m O w m O w m O w m O N `
O
N
Cd
U)
N
A
Appendix TSW-A
Traffic Signal Warrant Descriptions
Texas MUTCD
0
1 _ _
1
. � I
I
2006
2006 Edition Page 4C-1
CHAPTER 4C. TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL NEEDS STUDIES
Section 4C.01 Studies and Factors for Justifying Traffic Control Signals
Standard:
An engineering study of traffic conditions,pedestrian characteristics, and physical characteristics of
the location shall be performed to determine whether installation of a traffic control signal is justified at a
particular location.
The investigation of the need for a traffic control signal shall include an analysis of the applicable
factors contained in the following traffic signal warrants and other factors related to existing operation
and safety at the study location:
Warrant 1,Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume.
Warrant 2,Four-Hour Vehicular Volume.
Warrant 3,Peak Hour.
Warrant 4,Pedestrian Volume.
Warrant 5, School Crossing.
Warrant 6, Coordinated Signal System.
Warrant 7, Crash Experience.
Warrant 8,Roadway Network.
The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a
traffic control signal.
Support:
Sections 8D.07 and 10D.05 contain information regarding the use of traffic control signals instead of gates
and/or flashing light signals at highway-railroad grade crossings and highway-light rail transit grade crossings,
respectively.
Guidance:
A traffic control signal should not be installed unless one or more of the factors described in this Chapter are
met.
A traffic control signal should not be installed unless an engineering study indicates that installing a traffic
control signal will improve the overall safety and/or operation of the intersection. The study should consider the
effects a traffic control signal will have on the current road users at the location, such as whether the traffic
control signal will reduce the amount of road user delay at the intersection.
A traffic control signal should not be installed if it will seriously disrupt progressive traffic flow.
The study should consider the effects of the right-turn vehicles from the minor-street approaches.
Engineering judgment should be used to determine what, if any, portion of the right-turn traffic is subtracted
from the minor-street traffic count when evaluating the count against the above signal warrants.
Engineering judgment should also be used in applying various traffic signal warrants to cases where
approaches consist of one lane plus one left-turn or right-turn lane. The site-specific traffic characteristics dictate
whether an approach should be considered as one lane or two lanes. For example, for an approach with one lane
for through and right-turning traffic plus a left-turn lane, engineering judgment could indicate that it should be
considered a one-lane approach if the traffic using the left-turn lane is minor. In such a case, the total traffic
volume approaching the intersection should be applied against the signal warrants as a one-lane approach. The
approach should be considered two lanes if approximately half of the traffic on the approach turns left and the
left-turn lane is of sufficient length to accommodate all left-turn vehicles.
Similar engineering judgment and rationale should be applied to a street approach with one lane plus a right-
turn lane. In this case,the degree of conflict of minor-street right-tum traffic with traffic on the major street
should be considered. Thus, right-turn traffic should not be included in the minor-street volume if the movement
enters the major street with minimal conflict. The approach should be evaluated as a one-lane approach with
only the traffic volume in the through/left-turn lane considered.
At a location that is under development or construction and where it is not possible to obtain a traffic count
that would represent future traffic conditions, hourly volumes should be estimated as part of an engineering study
for comparison with traffic signal warrants. Except for locations where the engineering study uses the
satisfaction of Warrant 9 to justify a signal, a traffic control signal installed under projected conditions should
Page 4C-2 2006 Edition
have an engineering study done within 1 year of putting the signal into stop-and-go operation to determine if the
signal is justified. If not justified,the signal should be taken out of stop-and-go operation or removed.
For signal warrant analysis, a location with a wide median, even if the median width is greater than 30 ft.,
should be considered as one intersection.
When a traffic control signal is to be installed, it is presumed that the signal and all related traffic control
devices are installed according to this Manual,the roadways are properly designed,the signal indications are
properly phased, engineering judgment is used to select the traffic signal controller, the adjacent traffic signal are
properly coordinated, and there is adequate supervision of the operation and maintenance of the signal and
related traffic control devices.
Option:
At an intersection with a high volume of left-turn traffic from the major street,the signal warrant analysis
may be performed in a manner that considers the higher of the major-street left-turn volumes as the "minor-
street"volume and the corresponding single direction of opposing traffic on the major street as the "major-street"
volume.
For signal warrant analysis, bicyclists may be counted as either vehicles or pedestrians.
Support:
When performing a signal warrant analysis,bicyclists riding in the street with other vehicular traffic are
usually counted as vehicles and bicyclists who are clearly using pedestrian facilities are usually counted as
pedestrians.
Option:
Engineering study data may include the following:
A. The number of vehicles entering the intersection in each hour from each approach during 12 hours of an
average day. It is desirable that the hours selected contain the greatest percentage of the 24-hour traffic
volume.
B. Vehicular volumes for each traffic movement from each approach, classified by vehicle type (heavy
trucks,passenger cars and light trucks, public-transit vehicles, and, in some locations, bicycles), during
each 15-minute period of the 2 hours in the morning and 2 hours in the afternoon during which total
traffic entering the intersection is greatest.
C. Pedestrian volume counts on each crosswalk during the same periods as the vehicular counts in Item B
above and during hours of highest pedestrian volume. Where young, elderly, and/or persons with
physical or visual disabilities need special consideration, the pedestrians and their crossing times may be
classified by general observation.
D. Information about nearby facilities and activity centers that serve the young, elderly, and/or persons with
disabilities, including requests from persons with disabilities for accessible crossing improvements at the
location under study. These persons might not be adequately reflected in the pedestrian volume count if
the absence of a signal restrains their mobility.
E. The posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the uncontrolled approaches to the
location.
F. A condition diagram showing details of the physical layout, including such features as intersection
geometries, channelization, grades, sight-distance restrictions, transit stops and routes, parking
conditions, pavement markings, roadway lighting, driveways,nearby railroad crossings, distance to
nearest traffic control signals,utility poles and fixtures, and adjacent land use.
G. A collision diagram showing crash experience by type, location, direction of movement, severity,
weather, time of day, date, and day of week for at least 1 year.
The following data,which are desirable for a more precise understanding of the operation of the intersection,
may be obtained during the periods specified in Item B of the preceding paragraph:
A. Vehicle-hours of stopped time delay determined separately for each approach.
B. The number and distribution of acceptable gaps in vehicular traffic on the major street for entrance from
the minor street.
C. The posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on controlled approaches at a point near
to the intersection but unaffected by the control.
D. Pedestrian delay time for at least two 30-minute peak pedestrian delay periods of an average weekday or
2006 Edition Page 4C-3
Table 4C-1. Warrant 1, Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume
Condition A - Minimum Vehicular Volume
Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street Vehicles per hour on
moving traffic on each (total of both approaches) higher-volume
approach minor street approach
(one direction only)
Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%° 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%° 56%d
1................. 1................. 500 400 350 280 150 120 105 84
2 or more... 1................. 600 480 420 336 150 120 105 84
2 or more... 2 or more ... 600 480 420 336 200 160 140 112
1................. 2 or more .... 500 400 350 280 200 160 140 112
Condition B- Interruption of Continuous Traffic
Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street Vehicles per hour on
moving traffic on each (total of both approaches) higher-volume
approach minor street approach
(one direction only)
Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%° 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%° 56%d
1................. 1................. 750 600 525 420 75 60 53 42
2 or more... 1................. 900 720 630 504 75 60 53 42
2 or more... 2 or more ... 900 720 630 504 100 80 70 56
1................. 2 or more .... 750 600 525 420 100 80 70 56
'Basic minimum hourly volume.
'Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures.
'May be used when the major-street speed exceeds(40mph)or in an isolated community with a population of
less than 10,000.
°May be used for conbination of conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures when major I
street exceeds 40 mph or in as isolated community with a population of less than 10,000.
like periods of a Saturday or Sunday.
E. Queue length on stop-controlled approaches.
Section 4C.02 Warrant 1, Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume
Support:
The Minimum Vehicular Volume, Condition A, is intended for application at locations where a large volume
of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal.
The Interruption of Continuous Traffic, Condition B, is intended for application where the traffic volume on a
major street is so heavy that traffic on a minor intersecting street suffers excessive delay or conflict in entering or
crossing the major street.
It is intended that Warrant 1 be treated as a single warrant. If Condition A is satisfied, then the criteria for
Warrant 1 is satisfied and Condition B and the combination of Conditions A and B are not needed. Similarly, if
Condition B is satisfied, then the criteria for Warrant 1 is satisfied and the combination of Conditions A and B is
not needed.
Page 4C-4 2006 Edition
Standard:
The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that one of the
following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours of an average day:
A. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 100 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 exist
on the major-street and the higher-volume minor-street approaches, respectively,to the
intersection; or
B. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 100 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exist
on the major-street and the higher-volume minor-street approaches, respectively, to the
intersection.
In applying each condition the major-street and minor-street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours. On
the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of these
8 hours.
Option:
If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 40 mph, or if
the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000,
the traffic volumes in the 70 percent columns in Table 4C-1 may be used in place of the 100 percent columns.
Guidance:
The combination of Conditions A and B is intended for application at locations where Condition A is not
satisfied and Condition B is not satisfied and should be applied only after an adequate trial of other alternatives
that could cause less delay and inconvenience to traffic has failed to solve the traffic problems.
Standard:
The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that both of the
following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours of an average day:
A. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 exist
on the major-street and the higher-volume minor-street approaches, respectively,to the
intersection; and
B. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exist
on the major-street and the higher-volume minor-street approaches,respectively,to the
intersection.
These major-street and minor-street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours for each condition; however,
the 8 hours satisfied in Condition A shall not be required to be the same 8 hours satisfied in Condition B.
On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of
the 8 hours.
Option:
If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 40 mph, or if
the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000,
the traffic volumes in the 56 percent columns in Table 4C-1 may be used in place of the 80 percent columns.
Section 4C.03 Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
Support:
The Four-Hour Vehicular Volume signal warrant conditions are intended to be applied where the volume of
intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal.
Standard:
The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that, for each of
any 4 hours of an average day,the plotted points representing the vehicles per hour on the major street
(total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher-volume minor-street
approach (one direction only) all fall above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-1 for the existing
combination of approach lanes. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the
same approach during each of these 4 hours.
Option:
If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 40 mph, or if
the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000,
Figure 4C-2 may be used in place of Figure 4C-1.
2006 Edition Page 4C-5
Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
n
> 500
2 OR MORE LANES&2 OR MORE LANES
2
U
O 400 20 MORE LANES& 1 LANE
w o= I I
LJJ300 1 LANE& 1 LANE
ct) Q
rrw
02
J 200
20
> *115
W 100 *80
2
C7
2
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES—
VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH)
*Note: 115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street
approach with two or more lanes and 80 vph applies as the lower
threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Figure 4C-2. Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor)
(COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 mph ON MAJOR STREET)
400
2 �2 OR MORE LANES&2 OR MORE LANES
Q 300
~
w O 0 2 OR MORE LANES& 1 LANE
Lu
CD Q 200 1 LANE& 1 LANE
rrw
02
Z
- J
2 O> 100
OC *80
w *60
2
C7
2
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES—
VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH)
*Note:80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street
approach with two or more lanes and 60 vph applies as the lower
threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Appendix TSW-8
Traffic Count Data
QUALITY COUNTS, INC.
DATA COLLECTION & ANALYSIS
SOUTH LAKE,TX
DOVE EAST OF - SH 114
24-Hour Traffic Counts
30-Apr-13
Time EB DOVE EAST OF WB DOVE EAST OF
Start :00 :15 :30 :45 Ttl. :00 :15 :30 :45 Ttl.
12 AM 0 5 3 3 11 10 1 5 1 17
1AM 3 4 1 2 10 3 2 4 3 12
2AM 2 0 1 1 4 5 3 1 0 9
3AM 0 1 0 2 3 6 2 3 1 12
4 AM 2 3 1 2 8 11 6 3 5 25
5 AM 4 9 15 37 65 11 9 21 17 58
6 AM 19 40 90 116 265 23 22 22 32 99
7 AM 99 100 160 164 523 52 71 139 163 425
8 AM 130 133 118 89 470 82 70 48 43 243
9 AM 83 60 59 46 248 47 49 45 36 177
10 AM 31 35 32 45 143 34 33 40 37 144
11 AM 34 40 37 47 158 38 55 87 84 264
12 PM 55 67 59 74 255 59 43 41 46 189
1 PM 63 64 54 50 231 45 29 49 37 160
2 PM 52 60 64 72 248 45 41 71 81 238
3 PM 52 44 63 56 215 124 89 124 105 442
4 P M 58 53 51 56 218 115 109 131 144 499
5 PM 62 75 78 65 280 172 160 161 105 598
6 P M 59 51 70 77 257 99 82 97 85 363
7 P M 51 36 26 38 151 73 43 60 42 218
8 PM 33 34 28 23 118 41 22 45 28 136
9 PM 38 15 17 13 83 19 22 13 5 59
10 PM 15 19 17 9 60 4 2 20 3 29
11 PM 6 4 8 5 23 18 14 5 4 41
24 Hour 4,047 4,457
Grand Total: 8,504
AM Peak Hour: 1,041 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM
PM Peak Hour: 908 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM
700
600 11113 DOVE EAST OF
■WB DOVE EAST OF
500
v
E
Z)
>0 400
U
w
w
f0
~ 300
0
200
100
0
12 AM 2 AM 4 AM 6 AM 8 AM 10 AM 12 PM 2 PM 4 PM 6 PM 8 PM 10 PM
QUALITY COUNTS, INC.
DATA COLLECTION & ANALYSIS
SOUTH LAKE,TX
WHITE CHAPEL- SOUTH OF DOVE
24-Hour Traffic Counts
30-Apr-13
Time NB WHITE CHAPEL SB WHITE CHAPEL
Start :00 :15 :30 :45 Ttl. :00 :15 :30 :45 Ttl.
12 AM 1 2 2 1 6 1 0 2 1 4
1AM 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1
2AM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 2
3AM 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 2
4AM 0 1 0 3 4 1 0 1 4 6
5 AM 2 0 2 8 12 4 3 9 14 30
6 AM 6 6 20 36 68 8 18 23 18 67
7 AM 23 31 76 113 243 30 36 61 103 230
8 AM 34 38 27 36 135 55 25 38 29 147
9 AM 31 24 27 34 116 27 38 20 29 114
10 AM 24 30 28 24 106 35 40 29 31 135
11AM 30 30 30 25 115 31 43 31 33 138
12 PM 22 45 32 28 127 29 25 28 26 108
1 PM 31 42 24 37 134 38 37 27 36 138
2 PM 32 42 55 69 198 25 21 27 61 134
3 PM 35 39 45 46 165 65 38 74 52 229
4 PM 54 50 38 38 180 50 49 48 37 184
5 PM 48 36 73 60 217 34 35 33 23 125
6 PM 57 88 75 64 284 41 36 39 36 152
7 PM 48 45 41 29 163 32 25 50 53 160
8 PM 39 40 32 31 142 47 19 29 22 117
9 PM 17 17 21 11 66 14 41 5 5 65
10 PM 9 10 6 3 28 17 5 3 4 29
11PM 2 4 2 2 10 1 6 1 1 9
24 Hour 2,522 2,326
Grand Total: 4,848
AM Peak Hour: 509 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM
PM Peak Hour: 436 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM
300
❑NB WHITE CHAPEL
250 ■SB WHITE CHAPEL
200
Z)
0
U
150
= 100
50
0
0 0.08333323866666670.250.333333(R-436666667 0.5 0.58333323366666670.750.8333331936666667
QUALITY COUNTS,INC.
DATA COLLECTION &ANALYSIS
SOUTHLAKE,TX
DOVE EAST OF-KIRKWOOD
24-Hour Traffic Counts
22-May-13
Time EB DOVE EAST OF WB DOVE EAST OF
Start :00 :15 :30 :45 Ttl. :00 :15 :30 :45 Ttl.
12AM 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4
lAM 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 4
2AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 4
3AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
4AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 5
5 AM 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 14 8 26
6 AM 0 0 0 0 0 8 16 10 16 50
7 AM 0 0 0 0 0 23 45 117 151 336
8 AM 0 0 0 0 0 92 80 45 29 246
9 AM 0 0 0 0 0 25 22 24 23 94
10 AM 0 0 0 0 0 20 21 28 22 91
11 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 18 17 30 31 96
12 PM 0 0 0 0 0 31 29 18 36 114
1 PM 0 0 0 0 0 23 24 40 26 113
2 PM 0 0 0 0 0 29 33 28 95 185
3 PM 0 0 0 0 0 75 38 66 57 236
4 PM 0 0 0 0 0 60 48 50 47 205
5 PM 0 0 0 0 0 60 57 56 54 227
6 PM 0 0 0 0 0 63 74 50 48 235
7 PM 0 0 0 0 0 60 22 25 37 144
8 PM 0 0 0 0 0 26 32 26 19 103
9 PM 0 0 0 0 0 29 27 11 10 77
10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5 11 7 5 28
11PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 3 5 5 17
24 Hour 0 2,641
Grand Total: 2,641
AM Peak Hour: 440 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM
PM Peak Hour: 274 2:45 PM to 3:45 PM
400
350 ■EB DOVE EAST OF
■WB DOVE EAST OF
300
U
2250
0
U
�E200
H
150
100
50 - All I - - - - - -ilta ri
0 1 1 1 1
12 AM 2 AM 4 AM 6 AM 8 AM 10 AM 12 PM 2 PM 4 PM 6 PM 8 PM 10 PM
QUALITY COUNTS,INC.
DATA COLLECTION &ANALYSIS
SOUTHLAKE,TX
KIRKWOOD-NORTH OF DOVE
24-Hour Traffic Counts
22-Ma -13
Time NB KIRKWOOD SB KIRKWOOD
Start :00 :15 :30 :45 Ttl. :00 :15 :30 :45 Ttl.
12 AM 3 0 1 1 5 0 0 0 0 0
lAM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2AM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
3AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4AM 1 1 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 0
5AM 4 1 1 4 10 0 0 0 0 0
6 AM 3 8 14 17 42 0 0 0 0 0
7 AM 17 18 54 52 141 0 0 0 0 0
8 AM 34 24 8 16 82 0 0 0 0 0
9 AM 23 12 10 12 57 0 0 0 0 0
10 AM 10 7 12 11 40 0 0 0 0 0
11 AM 1 11 30 43 23 107 0 0 0 0 0
12 PM 26 29 28 17 100 0 0 0 0 0
1 PM 12 12 16 14 54 0 0 0 0 0
2 PM 14 13 14 33 74 0 0 0 0 0
3 PM 26 23 32 29 110 0 0 0 0 0
4 PM 56 41 75 69 241 0 0 0 0 0
5 PM 100 121 85 56 362 0 0 0 0 0
6 PM 53 62 51 33 199 0 0 0 0 0
7 PM 32 30 11 9 82 0 0 0 0 0
8PM 14 6 12 6 38 0 0 0 0 0
9PM 6 6 4 5 21 0 0 0 0 0
10 PM 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0
11PM 1 0 1 2 1 4 0 0 0 0 0
24 Hour 1,777 0
Grand Total: 1,777
AM Peak Hour: 164 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM
PM Peak Hour: 375 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM
400
350 MNB KIRKWOOD
■SB KIRKWOOD
300
U
2250
0
U
�E200
H
150
100
50
0
12 AM 2 AM 4 AM 6 AM 8 AM 10 AM 12 PM 2 PM 4 PM 6 PM 8PM 10 PM
Appendix TSW-C
Traffic Signal Warrant Summary
2011 Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices _ DeShazo Group
Traffic Signal Warrant Study
Intersection Traffic Volumes
Intersection: Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard
Dove Road Kirkwood Boulevard
Existing MAJOR STREET APPROACHES MINOR STREET APPROACHES
Time WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND
Beg End L T R Ra L T R Ra L R Ra L T R Ra
7:00 8:00 0 336 0 0 0 523 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 141 0 0
8:00 9:00 0 246 0 0 0 470 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 0 0
9:00 10:00 0 94 0 0 0 248 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 0 0
10:00 11:00 0 91 0 0 0 143 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 0
11:00 12:00 0 96 0 0 0 158 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 0 0
12:00 13:00 0 114 0 0 0 255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0
13:00 14:00 0 113 0 0 0 231 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 0 0
14:00 15:00 0 185 0 0 0 248 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 74 0 0
15:00 16:00 0 236 0 0 0 215 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 0
16:00 17:00 0 205 0 0 0 218 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 241 0 0
17:00 18:00 0 227 0 0 0 280 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 362 0 0
18:00 19:00 0 235 0 0 0 257 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 199 0 0
19:00 20:00 0 144 0 0 0 151 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 0 0
20:00 21:00 0 103 0 0 0 118 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 0
21:00 22:00 0 77 0 0 0 83 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0
22:00 1 23:00 1 0 1 28 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 60 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 3 1 0 1 0
Ra= 1005o Ra 100% Ra 100% Ra 75%
Guidance:
1 The 2011 Texas MUTCD states that the investigation of the need for a traffic control signal shall include an analysis of the applicable factors contained in the traffic
signal warrants as well as other factors related to existing operation and safety at the study location. This analysis studies the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant
based on Eight-Hour Vehicular Volue,Four-Hour Vehicular Volume,and Peak Hour(Warrants 1,2,and 3,respectively).
2 Engineering judgment should be used to determine what,if any,portion of the right-turn traffic is subtracted from the minor-street traffic count. In this analysis,Re
is the right-turn factor applied to each approach as shown above.
3.Throughout this analysis and in accordance with the 2011 TMUTCD methodology,S denotes the sum of vehicles per hour on both major street approaches while F
represents vehicles per hour on the higher-volume minor-street approach only.
4.The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.A traffic control signal should not be installed
unless one or more of the factors described in this[manual]are met.A traffic control signal should not be installed unless an engineering study indicates that
installing a traffic control signal will improve the overall safety and/or operation of the intersection.
Traffic Signal Warrant Study
Intersection: Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard Date: 10/30/2013
Description: Existing Volumes
Adjustment Factors
1. Major Street Approach 2 or more lane(s) 5. Horizon Years(Projection) 0 years
2. Minor Street Approach 2 or more lane(s) 6. Average Annual Growth Factor
3. Community Population > 10,000 Major Street Approach 0.0%
4. Major Street Posted Speed <_ 40 mph Minor Street Approaches 0.0%
Traffic Volume
TIME MAJOR STREET APPROACHES MINOR STREET APPROACH
Begin WB EB S NB SB F
7:00 AM 336 523 859 0 141 141
8:00 AM 246 470 716 0 82 82
9:00 AM 94 248 342 0 57 57
10:00 AM 91 143 234 0 40 40
11:00 AM 96 158 254 0 107 107
12:00 PM 114 255 369 0 100 100
1:00 PM 113 231 344 0 54 54
2:00 PM 185 248 433 0 74 74
3:00 PM 236 215 451 0 110 110
4:00 PM 205 218 423 0 241 241
5:00 PM 227 280 507 0 362 362
6:00 PM 235 257 492 0 199 199
7:00 PM 144 151 295 0 82 82
8:00 PM 103 118 221 0 38 38
9:00 PM 77 83 160 0 21 21
10:00 PM 11 28 1 60 L__L8__Jl 0 1 3 3
Source: 0
Texas Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices
MUTCD Conditional No. Hrs No. Hrs
Warrant Parameters Satisfied Required Warrant
1- Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Not Met
Major Minor
• Condition A(100%) 600 200 0 8 N
• Condition B(100%) 900 100 0 8 N
• Condition A(70%Factor) N/A N/A 0 8 N/A
• Condition B(70%Factor) N/A N/A 0 8 N/A
• Condition A(80%Factor)& 480 160 2 8
Condition B(80%Factor) 720 80 1 8 N
• Condition A(56%Factor)& N/A N/A 0 8
• Condition B(56%Factor) N/A N/A 0 8 N/A
2-Four-Hour Vehicular Volume(see attached Figure 1) 0 4 Not Met
3-Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume(see attached Figure 2) 0 1 Not Met
4-Pedestrian Volume.................... Not Analyzed in this study
5-School Crossing........................ Not Analyzed in this study
6-Coordinated Signal System......... Not Analyzed in this study
7-Crash Experience...................... Not Analyzed in this study
8-Roadway Network.................... Not Analyzed in this study
9-Intersection near Grade Crossing Not Analyzed in this study
Results
Existing approach volumes do satisfy Warrant One(based on Interruption of Countinuous Traffic only and not on the Minimum
Vehicular Volume condition),Warrant Two--Four-Hour Vehicle Volume,and Warrant Three--Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume at this
intersection. The MUTCD stipulates that a traffic signal control maybe installed provided that these warrants are met at the discretion
of the authorized agency representative responsible for traffic control installation and maintanance. As needed,further analysis or
assessments are required prior to final determination.
Traffic Sienal Warrant Study
Intersection: Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard Date: 10/30/2013
Description: Existing Volumes
Figures/Results:
Figure 1. Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
600 —
NOTE:The threshold curve shown
on this graph is a graphic
representation of Figure 4C-1.
= 500 Referral to TMUTCD is
d recommended for any data point
> near the vicinity of this curve.
2 �
U 400
W 0 •
� a
u 300
XW
o
Z_ •
J 200
O
2 •
100 ♦ • •
0
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH)
Figure 2. Warrant 3, Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume
600
NOTE:The threshold cure shown
on this graph is a graphic
representation of Figure 4C-3.
= 500 Referral to TMUTCD is
Cl- recommended for any data points
> near the vicinity of this curve.
U 400
w0 •
uu)i a 300
X
zw
� •
J 200
O
2 •
100 • •
0
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH)
Page 2
Cursory Traffic Signal Warrant Study
Intersection: Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard Date: 10/30/2013
Description: Existing Volumes
Figures/Results:
Figure 1. Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor)
(COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET)
400
N TE:The threshold curve shown on
♦ this graph is a graphic representation of
350 Figure 4C-2. Referral to TMUTCD is
= recommended for any data point near
Z the vicinity of this curve.
300
2
tW a0 250
F-a
N a 200
�a
150
J
2 100
U'
50
0
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES(VPH)
Figure 2. Warrant 3, Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor)
(COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET)
500
NOTE:The threshold curve shown on
this graph is a graphic representation of
Figure 4C-4. Referral to TMUTCD is
recommended for any data points near
= 400 the vicinity of this curve.
a
x
�U
w 0 300
�a
~a
N a
0w
Z 2 200
J
O
a 100
0
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH)
Page 2
Excerpt from the 2006 Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
Table 4C-1.Warrant 1,Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume
Condition A-Minimum Vehicular Volume
Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street Vehicles per hour on minor street
moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) (higher volume direction only)
Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d
1............ 1............ 500 400 350 280 150 120 105 280
2 or more 1............ 600 480 420 336 150 120 105 336
2 or more 2 or more 600 480 420 336 200 160 140 336
1............ 2 or more 500 400 350 280 200 160 140 280
Condition B-Interruption of Countinuous Traffic
Number of lanes for 2hicles per hour on major strei Vehicles per hour on minor street
moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) (higher volume direction only)
Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d
1............ 1............ 750 600 525 420 75 60 53 420
2 or more 1............ 900 720 630 504 75 60 53 504
2 or more 2 or more 900 720 630 504 100 80 70 504
1............ 2 or more 750 600 525 420 100 80 70 420
a Basic minimum hourly volume.
b Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures.
`May be used when the major street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of
less than 10,000.
d May be used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measues when major
street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000.[sic]
2011 Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices _ DeShazo Group
Traffic Signal Warrant Study
Intersection Traffic Volumes
Intersection: Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard
Dove Road Kirkwood Boulevard
Existing MAJOR STREET APPROACHES MINOR STREET APPROACHES
Time WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND
Beg End L T R Ra L T R Ra L R Ra L T R Ra
7:00 8:00 0 444 0 0 0 690 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 186 0 0
8:00 9:00 0 325 0 0 0 620 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 108 0 0
9:00 10:00 0 124 0 0 0 327 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 0 0
10:00 11:00 0 120 0 0 0 189 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 0 0
11:00 12:00 0 127 0 0 0 209 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 141 0 0
12:00 13:00 0 150 0 0 0 337 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 132 0 0
13:00 14:00 0 149 0 0 0 305 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 0 0
14:00 15:00 0 244 0 0 0 327 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98 0 0
15:00 16:00 0 312 0 0 0 284 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 145 0 0
16:00 17:00 0 271 0 0 0 288 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 318 0 0
17:00 18:00 0 300 0 0 0 370 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 478 0 0
18:00 19:00 0 310 0 0 0 339 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 263 0 0
19:00 20:00 0 190 0 0 0 199 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 108 0 0
20:00 21:00 0 136 0 0 0 156 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 0
21:00 22:00 0 102 0 0 0 110 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0
22:00 1 23:00 1 0 1 37 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 79 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 4 1 0 1 0
Ra= 1005o Ra 100% Ra 100% Ra 75%
Guidance:
1 The 2011 Texas MUTCD states that the investigation of the need for a traffic control signal shall include an analysis of the applicable factors contained in the traffic
signal warrants as well as other factors related to existing operation and safety at the study location. This analysis studies the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant
based on Eight-Hour Vehicular Volue,Four-Hour Vehicular Volume,and Peak Hour(Warrants 1,2,and 3,respectively).
2 Engineering judgment should be used to determine what,if any,portion of the right-turn traffic is subtracted from the minor-street traffic count. In this analysis,Re
is the right-turn factor applied to each approach as shown above.
3.Throughout this analysis and in accordance with the 2011 TMUTCD methodology,S denotes the sum of vehicles per hour on both major street approaches while F
represents vehicles per hour on the higher-volume minor-street approach only.
4.The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.A traffic control signal should not be installed
unless one or more of the factors described in this[manual]are met.A traffic control signal should not be installed unless an engineering study indicates that
installing a traffic control signal will improve the overall safety and/or operation of the intersection.
Traffic Signal Warrant Study
Intersection: Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard Date: 10/30/2013
Description: 2020 Background Volumes
Adjustment Factors
1. Major Street Approach 2 or more lane(s) 5. Horizon Years(Projection) 0 years
2. Minor Street Approach 2 or more lane(s) 6. Average Annual Growth Factor
3. Community Population > 10,000 Major Street Approach 0.0%
4. Major Street Posted Speed <_ 40 mph Minor Street Approaches 0.0%
Traffic Volume
TIME MAJOR STREET APPROACHES MINOR STREET APPROACH
Begin WB EB S NB SB F
7:00 AM 444 690 1,134 0 186 186
8:00 AM 325 620 945 0 108 108
9:00 AM 124 327 451 0 75 75
10:00 AM 120 189 309 0 53 53
11:00 AM 127 209 335 0 141 141
12:00 PM 150 337 487 0 132 132
1:00 PM 149 305 454 0 71 71
2:00 PM 244 327 572 0 98 98
3:00 PM 312 284 595 0 145 145
4:00 PM 271 288 558 0 318 318
5:00 PM 300 370 669 0 478 478
6:00 PM 310 339 649 0 263 263
7:00 PM 190 199 389 0 108 108
8:00 PM 136 156 292 0 50 50
9:00 PM 102 110 211 0 28 28
10:00 PM 37 1 79 116 0 1 4 4
Source: 0
Texas Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices
MUTCD Conditional No.Hrs No. Hrs
Warrant Parameters Satisfied Required Warrant
1- Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Not Met
Major Minor
• Condition A(100%) 600 200 2 8 N
• Condition B(100%) 900 100 2 8 N
• Condition A(70%Factor) N/A N/A 0 8 N/A
• Condition B(70%Factor) N/A N/A 0 8 N/A
• Condition A(80%Factor)& 480 160 4 8
Condition B(80%Factor) 720 80 2 8 N
• Condition A(56%Factor)& N/A N/A 0 8
• Condition B(56%Factor) N/A N/A 0 8 N/A
2-Four-Hour Vehicular Volume(see attached Figure 1) 2 4 Not Met
3-Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume(see attached Figure 2) 0 1 Not Met
4-Pedestrian Volume.................... Not Analyzed in this study
5-School Crossing........................ Not Analyzed in this study
6-Coordinated Signal System......... Not Analyzed in this study
7-Crash Experience...................... Not Analyzed in this study
8-Roadway Network.................... Not Analyzed in this study
9-Intersection near Grade Crossing Not Analyzed in this study
Results
Existing approach volumes do satisfy Warrant One(based on Interruption of Countinuous Traffic only and not on the Minimum
Vehicular Volume condition),Warrant Two--Four-Hour Vehicle Volume,and Warrant Three--Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume at this
intersection. The MUTCD stipulates that a traffic signal control maybe installed provided that these warrants are met at the discretion
of the authorized agency representative responsible for traffic control installation and maintanance. As needed,further analysis or
assessments are required prior to final determination.
Traffic Sienal Warrant Study
Intersection: Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard Date: 10/30/2013
Description: 2020Background Volumes
Figures/Results:
Figure 1. Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
600 —
NOTE:The threshold curve shown
on this graph is a graphic
representation of Figure 4C-1.
= 500 Referral to TMUTCD is
d ♦ recommended for any data point
> near the vicinity of this curve.
2 �
U 400
WO
WX
l.- a
u) 300
0 W
Z_
J 200
O
100
0
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH)
Figure 2. Warrant 3, Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume
600
NOTE:The threshold cure shown
on this graph is a graphic
representation of Figure 4C-3.
= 500 Referral to TMUTCD is
Cl- ♦ recommended for any data points
> near the vicinity of this curve.
U 400
w0
wX
uu)i a 300
bW
Z �
J 200
O
2
100
0
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH)
Page 2
Cursory Traffic Signal Warrant Study
Intersection: Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard Date: 10/30/2013
Description: 2020 Background Volumes
Figures/Results:
Figure 1. Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor)
(COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET)
450
NOTE:The threshold curve shown on
400 ♦ this graph is a graphic representation of
Figure 4C-2. Referral to TMUTCD is
= recommended for any data point near
Z350 the vicinity of this curve.
x ♦
F_U 300
X d 250
N d
Lu 0 a 200
Z2
0 150
100
x �
50
0
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES(VPH)
Figure 2. Warrant 3, Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor)
(COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET)
500
♦ NOTE:The threshold curve shown on
this graph is a graphic representation of
Figure 4C-4. Referral to TMUTCD is
recommended for any data points near
x 400 the vicinity of this curve.
a
x
F-
U
w 0 300
ya
�a
ZLU
2 200
J
0
a 100
x �
0
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH)
Page 2
Excerpt from the 2006 Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
Table 4C-1.Warrant 1,Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume
Condition A-Minimum Vehicular Volume
Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street Vehicles per hour on minor street
moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) (higher volume direction only)
Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d
1............ 1............ 500 400 350 280 150 120 105 280
2 or more 1............ 600 480 420 336 150 120 105 336
2 or more 2 or more 600 480 420 336 200 160 140 336
1............ 2 or more 500 400 350 280 200 160 140 280
Condition B-Interruption of Countinuous Traffic
Number of lanes for 2hicles per hour on major strei Vehicles per hour on minor street
moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) (higher volume direction only)
Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d
1............ 1............ 750 600 525 420 75 60 53 420
2 or more 1............ 900 720 630 504 75 60 53 504
2 or more 2 or more 900 720 630 504 100 80 70 504
1............ 2 or more 750 600 525 420 100 80 70 420
a Basic minimum hourly volume.
b Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures.
`May be used when the major street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of
less than 10,000.
d May be used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measues when major
street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000.[sic]
2011 Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices _ DeShazo Group
Traffic Signal Warrant Study
Intersection Traffic Volumes
Intersection: Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard
Dove Road Kirkwood Boulevard
Existing MAJOR STREET APPROACHES MINOR STREET APPROACHES
Time WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND
Beg End L T R Ra L T R Ra L R Ra L T R Ra
7:00 8:00 47 450 0 0 0 700 79 79 57 11 32 32 0 218 0 0
8:00 9:00 0 325 0 0 0 620 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 108 0 0
9:00 10:00 0 124 0 0 0 327 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 0 0
10:00 11:00 129 137 0 0 0 226 216 216 222 44 126 126 0 139 0 0
11:00 12:00 129 144 0 0 0 256 216 216 286 57 162 162 0 228 0 0
12:00 13:00 129 168 0 0 0 383 216 216 279 56 158 158 0 218 0 0
13:00 14:00 118 165 0 0 0 348 196 196 256 51 145 145 0 150 0 0
14:00 15:00 153 265 0 0 0 372 256 256 266 53 151 151 0 200 0 0
15:00 16:00 164 333 0 0 0 338 273 273 324 65 183 183 0 254 0 0
16:00 17:00 165 293 0 0 0 347 275 275 354 71 201 201 0 428 0 0
17:00 18:00 228 330 0 0 0 440 380 380 421 84 239 239 0 630 0 0
18:00 19:00 126 327 0 0 0 386 210 210 283 57 160 160 0 347 0 0
19:00 20:00 92 202 0 0 0 229 153 153 181 36 102 102 0 170 0 0
20:00 21:00 72 146 0 0 0 180 119 119 147 29 83 83 0 98 0 0
21:00 22:00 32 106 0 0 0 120 54 54 61 12 35 35 0 49 0 0
22:00 1 23:00 1 0 1 37 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 79 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 4 1 0 1 0
Ra= 1005o Ra= 100% Ra 100% Ra 75%
Guidance:
1 The 2011 Texas MUTCD states that the investigation of the need for a traffic control signal shall include an analysis of the applicable factors contained in the traffic
signal warrants as well as other factors related to existing operation and safety at the study location. This analysis studies the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant
based on Eight-Hour Vehicular Volue,Four-Hour Vehicular Volume,and Peak Hour(Warrants 1,2,and 3,respectively).
2 Engineering judgment should be used to determine what,if any,portion of the right-turn traffic is subtracted from the minor-street traffic count. In this analysis,Re
is the right-turn factor applied to each approach as shown above.
3.Throughout this analysis and in accordance with the 2011 TMUTCD methodology,S denotes the sum of vehicles per hour on both major street approaches while F
represents vehicles per hour on the higher-volume minor-street approach only.
4.The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.A traffic control signal should not be installed
unless one or more of the factors described in this[manual]are met.A traffic control signal should not be installed unless an engineering study indicates that
installing a traffic control signal will improve the overall safety and/or operation of the intersection.
Traffic Signal Warrant Study
Intersection: Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard Date: 10/30/2013
Description: 2020 Total Volumes
Adjustment Factors
1. Major Street Approach 2 or more lane(s) 5. Horizon Years(Projection) 0 years
2. Minor Street Approach 2 or more lane(s) 6. Average Annual Growth Factor
3. Community Population > 10,000 Major Street Approach 0.0%
4. Major Street Posted Speed <_ 40 mph Minor Street Approaches 0.0%
Traffic Volume
TIME MAJOR STREET APPROACHES MINOR STREET APPROACH
Begin WB EB S NB SB F
7:00 AM 497 778 1,275 101 218 218
8:00 AM 325 620 945 0 108 108
9:00 AM 124 327 451 0 75 75
10:00 AM 267 442 708 391 139 391
11:00 AM 273 472 746 506 228 506
12:00 PM 297 599 896 494 218 494
1:00 PM 282 543 826 452 150 452
2:00 PM 418 627 1,045 470 200 470
3:00 PM 497 610 1,107 572 254 572
4:00 PM 458 622 1,080 626 428 626
5:00 PM 558 820 1,378 744 630 744
6:00 PM 453 597 1,050 500 347 500
7:00 PM 294 383 677 319 170 319
8:00 PM 217 299 517 259 98 259
9:00 PM 138 174 312 108 49 108
10:00 PM 37 1 79 116 0 1 4 4
Source: 0
Texas Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices
MUTCD Conditional No.Hrs No. Hrs
Warrant Parameters Satisfied Required Warrant
1- Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Met
Major Minor
• Condition A(100%) 600 200 11 8 Y
• Condition B(100%) 900 100 7 8 N
• Condition A(70%Factor) N/A N/A 0 8 N/A
• Condition B(70%Factor) N/A N/A 0 8 N/A
• Condition A(80%Factor)& 480 160 12 8
Condition B(80%Factor) 720 80 10 8 Y
• Condition A(56%Factor)& N/A N/A 0 8
• Condition B(56%Factor) N/A N/A 0 8 N/A
2-Four-Hour Vehicular Volume(see attached Figure 1) 10 4 Met
3-Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume(see attached Figure 2) 7 1 Met
4-Pedestrian Volume.................... Not Analyzed in this study
5-School Crossing........................ Not Analyzed in this study
6-Coordinated Signal System......... Not Analyzed in this study
7-Crash Experience...................... Not Analyzed in this study
8-Roadway Network.................... Not Analyzed in this study
9-Intersection near Grade Crossing Not Analyzed in this study
Results
Existing approach volumes do satisfy Warrant One(based on Interruption of Countinuous Traffic only and not on the Minimum
Vehicular Volume condition),Warrant Two--Four-Hour Vehicle Volume,and Warrant Three--Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume at this
intersection. The MUTCD stipulates that a traffic signal control maybe installed provided that these warrants are met at the discretion
of the authorized agency representative responsible for traffic control installation and maintanance. As needed,further analysis or
assessments are required prior to final determination.
Traffic Sienal Warrant Study
Intersection: Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard Date: 10/30/2013
Description: 2020 Totai Volumes
Figures/Results:
Figure 1. Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
700
NOTE:The threshold curve shown
on this graph is a graphic
representation of Figure 4C-1.
= 600 ♦ Referral to TMUTCD is
d Tecommended for any data point
> near the vicinity of this curve.
= 500
� a •
W
LU
400
� a
U)
0 LU 300
Z_
� J ♦
0 200
2
2 100
0
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH)
Figure 2. Warrant 3, Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume
600
♦ NOTE:The threshold curve shown
on this graph is a graphic
representation of Figure 4C-3.
= 500 ♦ ♦ ♦ Referral to TMUTCD is
Cl- ♦ recommended for any data points
> ♦ near the vicinity of this curve.
a 400
w0
wX
uu)i a 300
bw
J 200
O
2
100 •
0
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH)
Page 2
Cursory Traffic Signal Warrant Study
Intersection: Dove Road at Kirkwood Boulevard Date: 10/30/2013
Description: 2020 Totai Volumes
Figures/Results:
Figure 1. Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor)
(COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET)
450
N TE:The threshold curve shown on
this grajj��h is a graph is representation of
400 ♦ ♦ Figure d�-2. ReferraTto TMUTCD is
= recommended for any data point near
Z350 the vicinity of this curve.
2 ♦
F U 300
W Q
F-d 250
fA 1
O Lu 200
Z2
J 150
O
100
2 ♦
50
0
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES(VPH)
Figure 2. Warrant 3, Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor)
(COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET)
500
iWTE:The threshold curve shown on
♦ t is graph is a graphic representation of
Figure 4C-4. Referral to TMUTCD is
recommended for any data points near
a 400 ♦ the vicinity of this curve.
2
�U ♦
w 0 300
�a
~a •
N Q
ZLU
2 200
J
O
>
0 100
2
0
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH)
Page 2
Excerpt from the 2006 Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
Table 4C-1.Warrant 1,Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume
Condition A-Minimum Vehicular Volume
Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street Vehicles per hour on minor street
moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) (higher volume direction only)
Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d
1............ 1............ 500 400 350 280 150 120 105 280
2 or more 1............ 600 480 420 336 150 120 105 336
2 or more 2 or more 600 480 420 336 200 160 140 336
1............ 2 or more 500 400 350 280 200 160 140 280
Condition B-Interruption of Countinuous Traffic
Number of lanes for 2hicles per hour on major strei Vehicles per hour on minor street
moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) (higher volume direction only)
Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d
1............ 1............ 750 600 525 420 75 60 53 420
2 or more 1............ 900 720 630 504 75 60 53 504
2 or more 2 or more 900 720 630 504 100 80 70 504
1............ 2 or more 750 600 525 420 100 80 70 420
a Basic minimum hourly volume.
b Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures.
`May be used when the major street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of
less than 10,000.
d May be used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measues when major
street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000.[sic]
Appendix F
Detailed Traffic Data
Tract I AM%
7'T"7
MEE]
REM
RKliq
PFPq
EZ7
Tract I PM%
MEE]
REM
HzHzHz
R-EFE]
EZ7
Tract 1 Weekend%
KIM
FfEll
REM
FFFR�
EZ7
Tract 2 AM%
mill
'T"7
REM
RFFA�
RE
PFFEq
Tract 2 PM%
mill
kH;Hz i ck i ok i iz
FEE]
FEEll
PFFEq
Tract 2 Weekend%
n L L L