Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06 - Traffic Impact Study - Downtown Intermodal Facility (Parking Garage) TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY for BOZEMAN DOWNTOWN INTERMODAL FACILITY Prepared for CITY OF BOZEMAN Prepared by 'f��; ,�'}.4 r-�r� ,Ya OY:Y^.Ci.:llJ•1. [tit 'J .1 'r�1�, �}11 i,��is � ��•o '�ie Yl.`l.* I4i:':��dtCG �}�� as �• o°'POrr/� pp a e° "OPri'�' R.• °� r MARVIN & ASSOCIATES 1300 North Transtech Way .......... w IN A Billings, MT 59102 P.T.O.E. #259 September 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 TRANSIT LOCATION & OPERATION 5 EXISTING STREETS & TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 7 Streets & Intersections 7 Traffic Volumes 8 Capacity 10 Traffic Speeds 11 Accidents 11 FUTURE CONDITIONS 12 Future Traffic Volume Projections 12 Planned System Improvements 13 TRIP GENERATION 13 TRIP DISTRIBUTION 15 TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 16 TRAFFIC IMPACTS 19 Traffic Volumes 19 Capacity Impacts 19 Safety Impacts 21 MITIGATING MEASURES 22 Traffic Signal Warrants 22 SITE ACCESS IMPACTS 23 Capacity 23 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS 23 APPENDIX "A" —TRAFFIC VOLUMES APPENDIX "B" — CAPACITY CALCULATIONS APPENDIX "D" — TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSES ii LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 1. Existing PM Peak Hour Capcity Analysis Summary 11 Table 2. Trip Generation — Bozeman Parking Garage/Transit Facility 13 Table 3. Trip Generation by Mode 14 Table 4. Peak PM Hour Trips by Mode 15 Table 5. Existing Plus Site PM Peak Hour Capacity Analysis Summary 21 LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1. Site Location Map 2 Figure 2. Building Layout and Access Locations 4 Figure 3. Selected Alternative —Transit Transfer Station on Mendenhall 6 Figure 4. Existing (2006) Traffic Volumes 9 Figure 5. Vehicular and Pedestrian Trip Distribution 17 Figure 6. Site Development Traffic Volume Assignment 18 Figure 7. Existing (2006) Plus Site Traffic Volumes 20 iii Bozeman Downtown Intermodal Facility TIS INTRODUCTION This report summarizes existing conditions, trip generation characteristics, trip distribution assessments, traffic assignments and resulting impact analyses included within the structure of a formal traffic impact study (TIS). The study was completed at the request of the City of Bozeman. An earlier study was completed by Marvin & Associates for Arts at City Center Master Plan, which included a parking garage in the same location as the intermodal facility. Much of the data collected for that study was used for the analysis contained herein The Bozeman Downtown Intermodal Facility TIS focused on construction of a parking structure and transit facility within a one block area of the Central Business District (CBD) in an effort to determine the extent of traffic impacts that could be expected within the immediate area of the proposed facility. Study methodologies and analysis procedures within this study employ the latest technology and nationally accepted standards in the areas of site development and transportation impact assessment. Because of the unique nature of this development and the CBD area in which it would be located, a number of assumptions and qualifications were required in trip generation estimates and traffic assignment analysis. Extensive research into the current literature provided a basis for many of the assumptions utilized within this study. Recommendations made within this report are based on accepted standards and the professional judgment of the author, with consideration of the traveling public's interests as a primary objective. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project in Bozeman, Montana will construct an intermodal facility in the downtown area and includes the construction of a parking structure, retail space, and a transit hub. The facility location is the unit block of East Mendenhall Street, between Black and Tracy Avenues (see Figure 1). �I .\ Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 1 ._ �� �,t. � r r � ��• >«�--' � a�` gyp` e ` 'rl NO AP lam• ( o R,� F ,+i �'T .1 w 1 �, I': ..�n fy: mn.9v 1. •'! s- Nei ♦tk �� t +;� rr *,z a r �� �,_( 1,� A .•�•/ y r 1 It. A ,� r ,x,�f f •- lo- .r , �e�_ �'��, •F�.T w? �r¢ r , _ ,� � fir. r ry� " M1T � ��}.�:T,.f '_ �.��.. rT .�' �� - ," mot'`I r�l•fi,:'— ra I'E. T ' k fn� t (17 rir Ul 44 l" Ali ! l : Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 2 Construction of this facility will provide both additional parking in the Downtown area and a clearly identifiable central location for public transit, single vehicle, a pedestrian and bicycle travel. Q �'4� xc( t ���'The site is currently used as a surface parking lot with no structures on site. The lroposed Bozeman Bozeman Intermodal Facility will provide for considerable 1� �+ more parking than is currently available in the downtown area, and will result in a net gain of 300 spaces with room for future expansion. The current design plan calls for sub surface parking, surface parking and rooftop parking on the first `r � level. An alternate will be bid on the project to add a second level over the back `XIt half, south end, of the garage footprint, creating another 150 spaces.- For the p g p I J purposes of this study, it was assumed that the maximum number of parking spaces would be constructed. Plans for the garage site also include approximately 10,070 square feet of retail development. The types of retail business that would occupy this space are not currently known. The site will incorporate transfer facilities for Streamline, the new fixed route transit system that operates in the greater Bozeman area. Streamline will utilize the new inter-modal facility as major downtown hub/transfer site for the newly established fixed-route service. A transfer station and pedestrian shelter are elements that will be incorporated into the inter-modal facility. Two vehicular accesses to the parking structure are planned (see Figure 2). One access will be located on Black Avenue, just south of Mendenhall Street. The other access is planned for Mendenhall Street just east of Tracy Avenue. The parking structure has already been designed and the access locations are fixed, with the garage's operation relative to the development site dependent upon these locations. i �. Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 3 � N i N) W V V g m IU W o n-- iN 4 Q a W f W -- C ° o a 115 a =� H __ \ o` (. Z a ._ 0 m N e o y y L I � .m �i 3nN3" ADVIl - I - Z _.r-`: Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 4 TRANSIT LOCATION & OPERATION Various alternatives were considered for location of the transit related facilities. Due to operational characteristics of the garage and concern for ventilation within the structure, it was determined that the facility could not be located within the building. Two external facilities provided the required storage area for 4 - 30' buses and were evaluated by the transit committee. Figure 3, on the following page, presents features of the selected alternative. The selected alternative would utilize the garage frontage along Mendenhall Street. Since passenger access is on the right side of the bus and Mendenhall is a one-way street westbound, an 8' face-of-curb to face-of curb raised island is required to separate passenger loading and unloading from thru traffic on Mendenhall Street. A 10' wide bus lane would be provided on the building side of the island and a 10' sidewalk would be maintained between the bus lane and the building. A bus shelter would be built next to the parking structure and passengers would only access the island when boarding or exiting the buses. Entrance to the bus lane would be partially shadowed by a curb bulb in the southwest corner of the Black and Mendenhall intersection and signing would clearly delineate the bus lane and thru traffic lanes. The bus departure path would enter the southern most thru traffic lane at an acute angle, but sight distance to the east would be maintained by keeping the island clear of structures or tall plants. lillIMf Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 5 y a o s _ I` 1 qn, 1 cG� TA I as W = i Z a L� 3 0 w m O fl � o � � Q a 3 m - i l ` Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 6 EXISTING STREET& TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Streets & Intersections Main Street is a Principal Arterial within the study area. Mendenhall Street is a one-way westbound minor arterial street. Both Black Avenue and Tracy Avenue are local streets within the CBD. The Main Street intersections with Tracy and Black are both signalized. On Mendenhall, the only signalized intersections are at Willson Avenue and Rouse Avenue, west and east of the study area respectively. The intersections of Tracy and Black with Mendehall are two-way stop controlled. Mendenhall Street, which is approximately 41' wide through the study area, carries two westbound lanes of traffic with parking on both sides of the street. It is essentially on a straight horizontal alignment, with the exception of sharp angle-point alignment changes in the block Between Black and Tracy. There are also some slightly offset curb-lines at some of the intersections along its length. Main Street is approximately 63' wide through the study area and carries four traffic lanes with parking on both sides. Observations of the signal operation concluded that Main Street signals operate on a 60 second fixed-time background cycle. The stop-controlled intersections on Mendenhall have some intersection sight distance restrictions due to on-street parking. Thus, safety and efficiency is somewhat degraded by the limited sight distance at the intersections with Tracy and Black. _ Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 7 Tracy and Black Avenues within the study area are approximately 38' wide. Parking is currently allowed on both sides of the street, with thru lanes that are approximately 11' wide. Access to alleys, which run in and east-west direction, is gained from both Tracy and Black. Within the study area, sidewalks are approximately 10' to 12' wide and abut building walls, as is typical of most downtown environments. The mixture of vehicles, pedestrians, delivery truck loading and unloading operations, and high parking utilization uniquely identifies this area as being within the CBD. Typical in CBDs, the balance between mobility and access is greatly skewed toward access and slower operating speeds are not only expected, but encouraged. Traffic Volumes Electronic recording counters collected hourly traffic volumes on a number of streets within the study area. Summaries of approach counts at the intersection of Black and Mendenhall can be found in Appendix A of this report. In addition, intersection turning movement counts were taken during the peak p.m. hour at the majority of intersections. Figure 5 presents a summary of the peak p.m. hour traffic counts at the four intersections included within this study. It also presents a summary of Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes calculated for all of the street segments. Figure 4 indicates that the highest traffic volumes are on the Principal and Minor 2 Arterial streets. Main Street ranges from 13,500 ADT to 15,X00 ADT as the highest volume street in the study area. Mendenhall Street has ADTs ranging from 6000 to 8000. Pedestrian activity is evidenced by the number of street crossings shown in Figure 4. Pedestrian activity is especially heavy along Main Street, where the highest level of commercial density lies. Peak pedestrian hour traffic is not Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 8 o Q Q LO p NCOin • H OOSL OSZZ OS8Z E anN3" )EMS Goi� �- o ^ O I b I w ��b O N o Lcnq Inc LU . CO. • OSEZOM 3nN3" A3VdIIM IM a ' C O O 04 UI) If Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 9 included in the traffic volume numbers, since the heaviest pedestrian activity typically occurs during the noon hour. Appendix A contains the daily and monthly traffic variation summaries that were used to calculate AWT. It was determined that Saturday and Sunday traffic volumes are so low within the study area that all daily traffic volumes would be referenced in terms of AWT. Of the five weekdays, Friday produce the highest volumes, with 107% of AWT and 121 % of average daily traffic (ADT). Data from four Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) permanent count stations within urbanized areas of Montana were combined to provide an estimate of monthly traffic variations (see Appendix A). Since the majority of traffic counts were taken in November and December, adjustments to the counts were necessary to develop peak design hour traffic volumes. The hourly and monthly traffic variation factors contained in Appendix A were used to calculate the peak p.m. design hour volumes, as shown in Figure 5. Peak p.m. design hour traffic volumes were projected to be approximately 20% higher than the counts taken in November and December and are equivalent to peak hour traffic volumes that would typically be experienced in July. Capacity Capacity calculations were completed for the 4 study area intersections using HCS 2000 software for unsignalized intersections and SigCinema software was used to calculate capacity at the two signalized intersections on Main Street. Capacity calculation worksheets for all intersections and design hour cases can be found in Appendix B of this report. Table 1, on the following page, provides a summary of the existing capacity calculations. Existing p.m. design hour capacity calculation results indicate that all approach movements currently operate at an acceptable LOS "C", or better, during the design hour period except for the northbound approaches on Tracy and Black at Mendenhall, which both operate at LOS "D. Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 10 Table 1. Existing PM Peak Hour Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection F MOE NB SB EB WB Movement Group T L TR LT Control Delay(s/veh) 33.5 23.2 7.3 Tracy Avenue and LOS D c A Mendenhall Street VIC Ratio 053 0.44 0.03 Queue Length 95% 2.8 2.2 0.1 Movement Group TL TR LT Control Delay(s/veh) 31.5 20.0 7.3 Black Avenue and LOS D c A Mendenhall Street VIC Ratio 0.61 0.35 0.03 Queue Len th 95% 3.9 1.6 0.1 Movement Group LTR LTR LTR LTR Control Delay(s/veh) 30.2 25.0 5.2 6.0 Tracy Avenue and Main LOS c c A A Street VIC Ratio 0.61 0.43 0.36 0.46 Queue Length 95% 3.0 2.0 3.0 4 Movement Group LIR LIR LIFE LIR Control Delay(s/veh) 28.8 18.5 8.3 8.4 Black Avenue and Main LOS c B A A Street VIC Ratio 0.71 0.33 0.44 0.45 Queue Length 95% 4.0 2.0 4.0 4 Traffic Speeds Speeds studies were not conducted as a part of this study. The speed limit on all streets within the study area is 25 mph. Observations during peak traffic periods indicate that 85t" % speed would be somewhat less than 25 mph in the core area of the CBD. Accidents An accident history for the Bozeman CBD area was constructed using three years (2000-2002) of detailed accident information provided to Marvin & Associates by MDT and the City of Bozeman. It was found that the four intersection in this study had crash rates that averaged approximately 0.60 crashes/million vehicles entering. Twenty-six total crashes resulted in 8 injuries and no fatalities. Approximately 60% of crashes occurred on dry roads and just 30% occurred at night. Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 11 FUTURE CONDITIONS Future Traffic Volume Projections The "Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2001 Update" presents historic traffic volume growth within Bozeman's CBD (page 8-6). A plot of traffic volumes over the past twenty years indicates substantial fluctuations from year to year, yet there has been little if any overall growth. Projected traffic increases associated with this study are the only definitive events that can be associated with future traffic demand increases. While the proposed development may set the stage for future redevelopment, it is not possible to predict the extent of future development induced growth. The base design hour volumes used within this study are substantially greater than for average or off-season peak hours. As such, analysis of impacts and recommended improvements would intrinsically account for a substantial portion of development induced growth. Planned System Improvements One MDT project is planned for construction within the study area. Reconstruction of the Main Street signals will occur at some future date. That project will retain the current lane and parking configuration and may add curb- bulbs at the intersections to improve sight distance and reduce pedestrian crossing time. New signals may also include left-turn restrictions during peak hours to enable better progression and improve thru-traffic mobility on the major street traversing the CBD. 7 Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 12 TRIM GENERATION Estimating trip generation for the proposed development is both unique and complex for the following reasons: o Existing land uses will be changed. o New parking facilities, in and of themselves, will not attract additional trips, but will attract and redistribute existing traffic. o New trip generating facilities will attract a substantial number of trips from within the study area. o A substantial number of trips will be attributed to the pedestrian mode. Because of these unique and complex conditions, trip generation estimates required a multi-level evaluation. Table 2, below, summarizes trip generation estimates for the parking garage and the related retail area. It should be noted that land use categories are extracted directly from the "ITE Trip Generation Report, 7th Edition" and are not necessarily descriptive of the actual land use. As an example, "Specialty Retail' is a land use category commonly used when the exact nature of the retail land use is not known. In this case, it may include clothing stores, delis, sporting good stores, book stores, or any number of other retail sales establishments. Table 2. Trip Generation - Bozeman Parking Garage/Transit Facility Rate Average Refer. Weekday Peak PM Hour Land Use Units No. Units No. Trips Enter Exit Total Parking Garage Spaces* 450 1 2160 119 241 360 Specialty Retail 1000 s.f. 10.1 2 470 20 26 46 Transit Facility Buses 4 3 128 8 8 16 Totals = 1 2758 147 275 422 Reference No. *Net Gain Maximum 1 0.25 Turn-over rate/80%Utilization over a 12 hour period Peak PM Hour is twice the average hourly rate(33%enter) 2 AWT=42.78()0+37.66 PM T=2.4(X)+21.48 (44%enter) 3 AWT=32(X) PM=4(X) (50%enter) Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 13 Parking trip generation is based on a utilization rate of 80% during average weekday conditions and various turn-over rates as indicated in the notes at the bottom of Table 2. We have assumed the garage would be built at its full potential, which would result in a net gain of 450 parking spaces. The total net trip generation potential of the garage would be approximately 2160 trips on the average weekday. When combined with 551 AWT generated by the retail portion of the project and 128 buses from the transit facility, the total number of trips would be approximately 2758 on the average weekday. Trip generation is further defined by examining trip mode. Since all trips related to the transit facility would be made by pedestrians, with the exceptions of the bus trips themselves, trip generation related to transit is integral to trip mode classifications. Table 3, below, presents estimates of trips by vehicle and pedestrian (including bicycles) modes. Table 3. Trip Generation by Mode Average Weekday Trips Peak PM Hour Refer. Land Use Total Pedestrian Vehicular Total Pedestrian Vehicular Note Parking Garage 2160 2592 2160 360 432 360 1 Specialty Retail 470 551 0 46 46 0 2 Transit Facility 0 1344 128 16 1 336 16 3 Totals= 2630 4487 2288 422 1 814 1 376 Reference Notes: 1 It is assummed that each parked vehicle trip will have associated pedestrian trips and the average vehicle occupancy would be 1.2 persons per vehicle. 2 It is assummed that 40%of retail trips will be Internal Capture Trips associated with garage and transit trip. All remaining trips would be pedestrian modes from other downtown areas. Thus,no vehicular trips are assigned to retail use. 3 It is assummed that each of the 4 Buses would average 15 passengers, with 30 minute headways over an 8 hour period. Peak pm hour passengers would avergae 30 per bus. Each passsenger would represent two pedestrain trips. Transfer rate between buses was assummed to be 30%. There would be 8 buses per hour or 16 bus trips per hour The complexity of mode interchange can be seen relative to the reference notes in Table 3. Each parking trip has an associated pedestrian trip with a vehicle occupancy factor of 1.2. Thus, the number of pedestrian trips related to the garage is 20% higher than the number of vehicle trips. A' Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 14 The pedestrian trip mode would encompass almost all trips associated with the retail space. Approximately 40% of the trips would be related to vehicle trips to the garage, as Internal Capture Trips, while all of the remaining retail trips would be pedestrian trips from off-site parking. Thus, all retail trips are considered to be pedestrian trips. On an AWT basis there would be 4487 pedestrian trips and 2288 vehicular trips to and from the proposed facility. In the peak pm hour, there would be 814 pedestrian trips and 376 vehicular trips. Table 4, below provides a more definitive accounting of trip mode during the peak pm hour period. Table 4. Peak PM Hour Trips by Mode Pedestrians Vehicles Land Use Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Parking Garage 289 143 432 119 241 360 Specialty Retail 22 38 60 0 0 0 Transit Facility 163 163 326 8 8 16 Totals = 474 344 818 1 127 249 376 TRIP DISTRIBUTION Distribution of trips to the site developments can usually be completed using a traffic model, a basic area of influence calculation, or by assigning distribution based on existing traffic patterns. In this case, the aforementioned complexities make it difficult to use any one method with complete confidence. There are no existing traffic models that would adequately address the multi-modal aspects and the fact that a high percentage of all origins and destinations would be associated with on-street parking. Therefore, trip distribution estimates and traffic assignments were separated into two components. The first component involves primary vehicular trips external to the study area. It is assumed that these trips enter the area with development facilities as the destination and return Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 15 to their original origin. The other component is external pedestrian trips to and from off-site parking and other origins and destinations within the CBD. Figure 5, on the following page, presents the calculated trip distribution for primary vehicular trips and pedestrian trips around the study area. These percentages are based on existing traffic counts at the cordon area intersections and density of attractions and parking external to the study area. TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Primary trip distribution percentages were applied to the net number of new vehicular trips to determine AWT and peak hour traffic assignments on area streets. Pedestrian assignments were based on the directional trip distribution percentages and were split equally when side of street and crossing locations provided equal walking distance to external areas. Figure 6 present the results of site traffic assignment analysis for both AWT and peak p.m. hour traffic. All of the AWT traffic assignments represent additional traffic on the existing street system. The highest AWT assignment on any street segment would be on Black Avenue between Main And Mendenhall. Figure 6 presents individual turning movement volumes at each intersection that are considered additional to existing traffic volumes. All pedestrian volumes shown in Figure 6 are also additional to existing pedestrian crossing movements. Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 16 i o YI - N �O co G M ° i a ° i G •O 0 a ' c N o° ? 014 3nN3" )IDVie • �, ' %6L %9 = a N 0 Oil — �! Z LU c y N V s %L %9S l 10 6 • vi --- 3nN3" A3VHI Q D O I G •_ N 0 Q 1 a0 M 44� N Ica o LMIn N MN Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 17 i o----fly oso C4 C N C b b � 1 i to ZSOL _ r SOL 04 N � M {�t� , d a----09! n n o M CL L1 Q Eti titrtr 90L 3nN3AV A3Va1 • _ _; - — g CL ; 2 V a Ln 0 4 = ink �� N N �-\� Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 18 TRAFFIC IMPACTS Traffic Volumes Figure 7 illustrates the percentage increase in AWT volumes on the study area street system as well as existing plus development traffic volumes that would result at the four area intersections during the peak p.m. design hour. In almost all cases, traffic volumes increases on area streets would be less than 10%, except for Tracy, Black, and Mendenhall where increases would be 20%, 46%, and 12% respectively. Typically, traffic volume increases below 10% do not signify substantial impacts on the street system at intersections. Since it is difficult to calculate ADT with an accuracy better than 10%, it can be assumed that no substantial impacts would result from this development. Figure a? also indicates the peak p.m. hour traffic volumes and pedestrian crossings at the study area intersections. These volumes are used to determine capacity impacts that may be associated the addition of development traffic. Capacity Impacts Table 5, on page 21, presents results of capacity calculations based on existing streets and traffic control devices with existing plus site generated traffic. For the existing p.m. design hour, it was found that the two signalized intersection operations throughout the network would not be adversely affected as a result of the additional demand of site-generated traffic. Only the eastbound and westbound approaches at Main and Black would experience a drop in LOS, from A to B. The two unsignalized intersections on Mendenhall would realize a significant degradation in LOS as a result of p.m. design hour site-generated traffic being added to the system. The intersections of Tracy and Black with Mendenhall, because of their proximity to the development area and because Mendenhall is a primary westbound downtown travel route, would realize a substantial reduction Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 19 I � t !i o a ! LO I LM M %ZIO£SL [% WOOI S _ LI%b1OS6Z MN3" MOM V CO L r Z 10 F N V V ✓ F�1 .M � I y d 1 - N L" M O `/ O N o ... 0 1 I I = a ----0� H I%ZIOObZ I NOZ100a -- - — 3nN3" ADVa1 L p L6 i „ � �� I d �' vLO a IVO, IL o ` Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 20 in level of service. At both intersections, the northbound and southbound, minor- street approaches, currently operate at a LOS "D" and "C", respectively, during the evening design hour. With site-generated traffic included, the approaches would operate at a LOS "F", and average delays would range between 57.1 and 359.2 seconds/vehicle, while v/c ratios would range between 0.76 and 1.59, signifying "failure" on the northbound approaches. Table 5. Existing Plus Site PM Peak Hour Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection I MOE NB SB EB WB Movement Group 1TL 1TR LT Control Delay(s/veh) 247.8 70.0 8.0 Tracy Avenue and LOS F F A Mendenhall Street VIC Ratio 1.26 0.79 0.11 Queue Len th 95% 9 5.5 0.4 Movement Group , LT Control Delay(s/veh) 359.2 57.1 8.2 Black Avenue and LOS F F A Mendenhall Street VIC Ratio 1.59 0.76 0.04 Queue Len th 95% 14.7 5.3 0.1 Movement Group LTR LTR LTR LTR Control Delay(s/veh) 25.9 26.8 6.6 7.4 Tracy Avenue and Main LOS C C A A Street VIC Ratio 0.56 0.58 0.40 0.49 Queue Len th 95%) 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 Movement Group LTR LTR LTR LTR Control Delay(s/veh) 23.3 24.0 12.2 10.8 Black Avenue and Main LOS C C B B Street VIC Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.60 0.52 Queue Length 95% 6.0 6.0 11.0 6.0 Safety Impacts The addition of site-generated traffic to the network of intersections in Bozeman's CBD could potentially affect safety by increasing conflict exposure. An increase in the total number of accidents within the study area is likely, although accident rates for individual intersections may or may not increase. Likewise, increased pedestrian activity near the development area would magnify the opportunity for accidents to occur. Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 21 MITGATING MEASURES Traffic Signal Warrants The two unsignalized intersections, which would have significant traffic volume impacts, would also have substantial reductions in LOS (from "D" to "F"). Because of these impacts, traffic signal warrants were evaluated for the intersections of Tracy Avenue and Black Avenue with Mendenhall Street under existing p.m. design hour plus site traffic conditions. Note that the 100% warrant minimum volumes controlled in all cases, because Bozeman's population is greater than 10,000 and because 85th percentile speeds on Mendenhall Street are less than 40 mph. Traffic signal warrant worksheets for each intersection can be found in Appendix C of this document. It was determined that both intersections would meet traffic signal warrant number 3, "Peak Hour Warrants", condition A. Since Mendenhall is a one-way street, the major leg of the intersections have relative low volumes, which makes it difficult to meet primary volume warrants number 1 and 2. The MUTCD indicates that peak hour traffic signal warrants are not normally considered justification for traffic signal installation. A previous traffic signal warrant study for the intersection of Black and Mendenhall yielded similar results and the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) did not concur that a traffic signal was warranted based on the peak hour traffic warrant. Since the City of Bozeman has a policy that all intersections on the CBD area must operates at a LOS "D" or better, it will be imperative that discussions with MDT provide justification for using peak hour warrants. Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 22 SITE ACCESS IMPACTS Capacity There are only two access points to the parking structure one on Mendenhall and one on Black Street. The main access on Mendenhall would have approximately 40 vehicles entering and 149 exiting during the peak p.m. design hour, while the Black Avenue access would have 80 entering and 92 exiting. It has been assumed that the Black Avenue access would not allow left-turns out. Capacity calculations (Appendix B) indicate that both accesses would operate at a LOS "C" or better and queue storage within the garage would be 3 vehicles or less. A new signal at Black and Mendenhall would also provide additional gaps for the Mendenhall approach, which would insure more efficient access operations. A signal at Black and Mendenhall would reduce queue lengths on , the northbound approach so that the Black Avenue garage approach would not �' e be blocked. The signal at Tracy would have maximum queue length of 6 -�- vehicles during the peak hour (see Appendix B), which could be reduced byf) 6,.: signal timing adjustments if the vehicle queues back-up past the garage entrance too frequently. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS Development of the Bozeman Downtown Intermodal Facility would represent a substantial change in land use within a one block area of the CBD. Because CBD areas are unique in terms of trip mode and the dynamics of internal capture trips, the overall increase in CBD traffic would be minimal in comparison to a similar development constructed in a suburban or fringe environment. Even though the net increase in traffic would be minimal on most of the CBD streets, there would be substantial traffic increases on streets immediately �.^ Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 23 adjacent to the development. Capacity and operations analysis have identified impacts on Mendenhall intersections that are already operating below acceptable levels of service "C". Signalization of both the Tracy and Black intersections with Mendenhall would insure that they operate at LOS "B". However, MDT would need to review the traffic signal warrant study and other unique characteristics of these intersections to determine whether the Peak Hour warrant would be sufficient justification for traffic signal installation. Several circumstances related to these intersections would indicate that the peak hour warrant would be ample justification for signal installation. • The intersections are within the CBD and arterial mobility along Mendenhall Street is not a primary concern. • Side street congestion within the CBD affects circulation patterns and impacts congestion within the entire grid system. • Peak hour queues on Black Avenue would adversely impact the garage access. • A traffic signal at Black Avenue would create a safer operating environment for the transit facility on Mendenhall by creating traffic gaps. • Substantial increases in pedestrian activity at these intersections would present increased potential for accidents as impatient drivers try to access or cross Mendenhall from the side streets. l —. Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 24 APPENDIX A TRAFFIC VOLUMES W\ Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 25 a� L.L L:o,ii�i I f 0 M � W L O �c m ° a � 1 O m C "r:r o l ~Yip. r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 C0 N O 00 CO N O O O O 0 O O O O SI��C ,yr f0 ' N 1: tl - LL 0 M 7 r Q ' O � m . C O � � 0 0 r4. S O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O co t0 N T T T Mendenhall/Black Intersection Northbound Approach Volume Hour 3/7/2005 3/8/2005 3/9/2005 Average %of Begin Monday Tuesday Wednesday Day Day 1 2 3 3 0.2% 2 2 1 2 0.1% 3 0 0 0 0.0% 4 1 1 1 0.1% 5 3 2 3 0.2% 6 19 13 16 1.4% 7 51 32 42 3.6% 8 73 56 65 5.6% 9 83 65 74 6.5% 10 76 67 72 6.3% 11 103 94 99 8.6% 12 107 107 9.4% 13 115 115 10.1% 14 79 79 6.9% 15 92 92 8.1% 16 112 112 9.8% 17 98 98 98 8.6% 18 59 64 62 5.4% 19 27 28 28 2.4% 20 19 35 27 2.4% 21 27 19 23 2.0% 22 13 12 13 1.1% 23 9 8 9 0.7% 24 3 9 6 0.5% Total 255 1191 334 1143 100.0% Northbound Approach Distribution t00% {:� J wO 6.0%,. -------.-�..- -- .......... - -•------------------- >- 4.0% ------------------------------•-- ........................ U 2.0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 HOUR OF DAY (BEGINNING) --- ■HOURLY%OF VOLUME Mendenhall/Black Intersection Southbound Approach Volume Hour 3/7/2005 3/8/2005 3/9/2005 Average %of Begin Monday Tuesday Wednesday Day Day 1 0 0 0 0.0% 2 0 0 0 0.0% 3 0 1 1 0.1% 4 0 0 0 0.0% 5 1 2 2 0.2% 6 15 14 15 2.1% 7 37 35 36 5.3% 8 63 48 56 8.2% 9 57 50 54 7.9% 10 39 39 39 5.8% 11 39 49 44 6.5% 12 46 46 6.8% 13 46 46 6.8% 14 55 55 8.2% 15 56 56 8.3% 16 55 55 8.2% 17 50 54 52 7.7% 18 40 52 46 6.8% 19 37 23 30 4.4% 20 9 22 16 2.3% 21 11 8 10 1.4% 22 12 7 10 1.4% 23 5 7 6 0.9% 24 6 1 4 0.5% Total 170 683 238 675 100.0% Southbound Approach Distribution w 9.0% ------- v % ---- . ..................... .. .. ........................................ wo ................................... .. .---•- .............. .. .. .. ................................... ' 5.0%, ...........-•-•---•-• • - 7. /o 0 O ° .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. . 0 > 4.00% •-------------------- _.........•.......... E" Q 3.0% ............................. . .. . •• - U Q 2.0% •----•-•---------- • - G. 0.0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15ilwil7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 HOUR OF DAY(BEGINNING) 0 HOURLY%OF VOLUME Mendenhall/Black Intersection Westbound Approach Volume Hour 3/7/2005 3/8/2005 3/912005 Average %of Begin Monday Tuesday Wednesday Day Day 1 9 38 24 0.4% 2 5 23 14 0.2% 3 3 10 7 0.1% 4 12 16 14 0.2% 5 35 29 32 0.6% 6 82 99 91 1.6% 7 347 298 323 5.5% 8 435 412 424 7.3% 9 325 325 325 5.6% 10 396 361 379 6.5% 11 451 430 441 7.6% 12 465 465 8.0% 13 468 468 8.0% 14 408 408 7.0% 15 493 493 8.5% 16 536 536 9.2% 17 496 513 505 8.7% 18 324 316 320 5.5% 19 160 187 174 3.0% 20 117 131 124 2.1% 21 97 109 103 1.8% 22 50 85 68 1.2% 23 52 40 46 0.8% 24 27 46 37 0.6% Total 1323 5897 2041 5816 100.0% Westbound Approach Distribution w 10 C7 9.. o•. ••.........--•- �" 8.0% ....•............................................,.. - .--..•. -- -- ......•-•------.................. o 7.0%- ............................... ....... ... .................................... Q4 6.0% ---------------------- -- -- -- 0 0 5.0%07............................... -- •• .. .. 4.0% ------------•---•--•----•---- . •• .. .. . .. . . .. .. .. ...... .� 3.0% •-•....... UA 2.0% ..... ......, . 1.0% .......--•---•••-----•-- - --•- a. 0.0% . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 HOUR OF DAY (BEGINNING) ■HOURLY%OF VOLUME Mendenhall/Black Intersection Total Entering Volume Hour 3/7/2005 3/8/2005 3/9/2005 Average %of Begin Monday Tuesday Wednesday Day Day 1 11 41 26 0.3% 2 7 24 16 0.2% 3 3 11 7 0.1% 4 13 17 15 0.2% 5 39 33 36 0.5% 6 116 126 121 1.6% 7 435 365 400 5.2% 8 571 516 544 7.1% 9 465 440 453 5.9% 10 511 467 489 6.4% 11 593 573 583 7.6% 12 618 618 8.1% 13 629 629 8.2% 14 542 542 7.1% 15 641 641 8.4% 16 703 703 9.2% 17 644 665 655 8.6% 18 423 432 428 5.6% 19 224 238 231 3.0% 20 145 188 167 2.2% 21 135 136 136 1.8% 22 75 104 90 1.2% 23 66 55 61 0.8% 24 36 56 46 0.6% Total 1748 7771 2613 7633 100.0% Total Entering Approach Distribution Q9 p% ------------------------------------------------------- ......... ---•••----•-----...-•--••. ........... xw &0% . -----•-••---••••..................................... ---• • . ................................... > o s6.0% ------- -------------------------- .. .. .. .. . 4.0%° ------------------------------- .. .. .. .....------••---••-•-.•••. Q3.0% .........................._.. .. .. .. .. .. . • . •. -- -• - U 2.0% - 1.0% .�. 0.0% . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2 23 24 HOUR OF DAY (BEGINNING) ■HOURLY%OF VOLUME APPENDIX B CAPACITY CALCULATIONS Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 26 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Intersection Tracy&Mendenhall Agency/Co. Marvin&Assoc Jurisdiction Bozeman Date Performed 8/20/2006 Analysis Year 2006 EXISTING Analysis Time Period Peak PM Design Project Description Bozeman Parking Garage East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Tracy Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 50 715 40 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 54 785 43 veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 40 75 70 60 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 47 88 0 0 82 70 veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration I LT TR Delay,Queue Length,and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT TR v(veh/h) 54 135 152 C (m) (veh/h) 1614 257 347 v/c 0.03 0.53 0.44 95%queue length 0.10 2.80 2.15 Control Delay(s/veh) 7.3 33.5 23.2 - J LOS A D C Approach Delay(s/veh) -- 33.5 23.2 Approach LOS -- - D C Copyright 0 2005 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+rM Version 5.2 Generated: 8/23/2006 11:16 AM TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site ifff3Pmation Analyst R Marvin Intersection Black&Mendenhall Agency/Co. Marvin&Assoc Jurisdiction Bozeman Date Performed 8/20/2006 Analysis Year 2006 EXISTING Analysis Time Period Peak PM Project Description Bozeman Parking Garage East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Black Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 40 615 15 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 43 675 16 veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 — -- 0 — — Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 1 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 105 70 80 30 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 123 82 0 0 94 35 veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT i I I TR Delay,,Queue Lenaith,and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT TR v(veh/h) 43 205 129 C(m) (veh/h) 1614 334 367 v/C 0.03 0.61 0.35 95%queue length 0.08 3.85 1.55 Control Delay(s/veh) 7.3 31.5 20.0 LOS A D C Approach Delay(s/veh) -- -- 31.5 20.0 Approach LOS -- -- D C Copyright©2005 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.2 Generated: 8/23/2006 11:17 AM HCM Analysis Summary 2006 EXISTING Main Street/Tracy Area Type: CBD R Marvin 08/20/2006 Analysis Duration: 15 mins. Peak PM Design Hour Case: MAIN&T---1 Lanes Geometry:Movements Serviced by Lane and Lane Widths (feet) A roach Outbound Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 4 Lane 5 Lane 6 EB 2 2 LT 12.0 TR 12.0 WB 2 2 LT 12.0 TR 12.0 NB 1 1 LTR 12.0 SB 1 1 LTR 12.0 East West North South Data L T R L T R L T R L T R Movement Volume h 35 525 50 50 700 15 50 85 30 33 45 40 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 %Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Groups LTR I L I LTR I LTR Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 RTOR Vol h 20 5 10 10 Peds/Hour 82 166 74 111 %Grade 0 0 0 0 Buses/Hour 0 0 0 0 Parkers/Hour(L.eftlRight) 1 _. Signal Settings:Pretimed Operational Analysis Cycle Length: 60.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle: 8.0 Sec Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ped Only EB LTP WB LTP NB LTP SB LTP Green 39.2 12.8 0 Yellow All Red 3.0 1 1.0 1 3.01 1.0 Cava i Analysis Results Approach: Lane Cap v/s g/C Lane v/c Delay Delay Ap (sec/v_ EB LTR 1845 0.232 0.653 LTR 0.355 5.2 A 5.2 A WB * LTR 1856 0.297 0.653 LTR 0.455 6.0 A 6.0 A NB * LTR 300 0.131 0.214 LTR 0.610 30.2 C 30.2 C SB LTR 294 0.092 0.214 LTR 0.432 25.0 C 25.0 C Intersection:Delay= 9.5 sec/veh Int.LOS=A XC 0.49 *Critical Lane Group (v/s)Crit=0.43 SIG/Cinema v3.03 Page 1 NETSIM Summary Results 2006 EXISTING Main Street/Tracy R Marvin 08/20/2006 Peak PM Design Hour Case: MAIN&T-1 Queues Spillback in Per Lane Average Worst Lane Lane Avg/Max Speed (%of Peak 45 App Group (veh) (mph) Period) 40 i 33 4 EB LTR 2/ 3 21.3 0.0 L 15 —700 All 21.3 0.0 4— 50 .............................................. ."--'--"--"-'-----"--..................... WBLTR 3 / 4 20.7 0.0 .............................................. "------............-'•-"......'--.. ........ 35 All 20.7 0.0 525 50 NB LTR 2/ 3 12.4 0.0 f 50 30 85 All 12.4 0.0 1 2 SB LTR 2/ 2 12.3 0.0 39 3 1 13 3 1 All 12.3 0.0 Intersect. 18.6 SIG/Cinema v3.03 Page 2 HCM Analysis Summary 2006 EXISTING Main Street/Black Area Type: CBD R Marvin 08/20/2006 Analysis Duration: 15 mins. Peak PM Design Hour Case: MAIN&,B-1 Lanes Geometry:Movements Serviced by Lane and Lane Widths (feet) Approach Outbound Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 4 Lane 5 Lane 6 EB 2 2 LT 12.0 TR 12.0 WB 2 2 LT 12.0 TR 12.0 NB 1 1 LTR 12.0 SB 1 1 LTR 12.0 East West North South Data L T R L T R L T R L T R Movement Volume h 45 535 65 40 610 25 90 130 50 30 55 55 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 %Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Groups LTR LTR LTR LTR Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 _ RTOR Vol h 25 10 20 20 Peds/Hour 84 141 76 61 %Grade 0 0 0 0 Buses/Hour 0 0 0 0 Parkers/Hour LeftJRight) --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- Signal Settings:Pretimed Operational Analysis Cycle Length: 6.0.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle: 8.0 Sec Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ped Only EB LTP WB LTP NB LTP SB LTP Green 34.1 17.9 0 Yellow All Red 3.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 j Cap ity Analysis Results Approach: Lane Cap v/s g/C Lane v/c Delay Delay .. EB LTR 1578 0.248 0.569 LTR 0.436 8.3 A 8.3 A WB * LTR 1632 0.258 0.569 LTR 0.453 8.4 A 8.4 A NB * LTR 413 0.212 0.298 LTR 0.712 28.8 C 28.8 C SB LTR 426 0.099 0.298 LTR 0.331 18.5 B 18.5 B Intersection:Delay= 12.3 sec/veh Int.LOS=B Xc 0.54 *Critical Lane Group 2(v/s)Crit=0.47 SIG/Cinema v3.03 Page 1 NETSIM Summary Results 2006 EXISTING Main Street/Black R Marvin 08/20/2006 Peak PM Design Hour Case: MAIN&B-1 Queues Spillback in Per Lane Average Worst Lane Lane Avg/Max Speed (%of Peak 55 App. Group (veh) (mph) Period) 55 i 3IO 4 EB LTR 3 / 4 18.1 0.0 L 25 �610 All 18.1 0.0 40 .............................................. .............................................. .r WBLTR 3 / 4 18.3 0.0 .............................................. ..------------------------------------------ 45 + All 18.3 0.0 535 65 NB LTR 3 / 4 12.5 0.0 � 1 90 50 130 All 12.5 0.0 1 2 SB LTR 2/ 2 14.6 0.0 --. ? f ~ 1 34 3 1 18 ��� 3 1 All 14.6 0.0 Intersect. 16.6 SIG/Cinema v3.03 Page 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Stl Ion Analyst R Marvin Intersection Tracy&Mendenhall Agency/Co. Marvin&Assoc Jurisdiction Bozeman Date Performed 8/20/2006 Analysis Year 2006 EXISTING PLUS Analysis Time Period Peak PM Design Project Description Bozeman Parking Garage East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Tracy Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period(hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 132 795 45 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 145 873 49 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 — — 0 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 I 0 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 40 75 72 60 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 47 88 0 0 84 70 veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Delay,Queue'Len th and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT TR v(veh/h) 145 135 154 C (m) (veh/h) 1356 I 107 195 v/c 0.11 1.26 0.79 '95%queue length 0.36 9.08 5.46 Control Delay(s/veh) 8.0 247.8 70.0 LOS A F F Approach Delay(s/veh) -- -- 247.8 70.0 Approach LOS -- -- F F Copyright 0 2005 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.2 Generated: 9/17/2006 2:10 PM TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARI General Information L Site Information Analyst R Marvin Intersection Black&Mendenhall Agency/Co. Marvin&Assoc Jurisdiction Bozeman Date Performed 8/20/2006 Analysis Year 2006 EXISTING PLUS SITE Analysis Time Period Peak PM Design Project Description Bozeman Parking Garage East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Black Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 40 659 15 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0,85 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 43 724 16 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 — — Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 105 70 115 34 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 123 82 0 0 135 39 veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration I LT TR Delay,Queue Length.and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT TR v(veh/h) 43 205 174 C (m) (veh/h) 1179 129 230 v/c 0.04 1.59 0.76 95%queue length 0.11 14.72 I 5.30 Control Delay(s/veh) 8.2 359.2 57.1 LOS A F F Approach Delay(s/veh) - -- 359.2 57.1 Approach LOS -- -- F F Copyright©2005 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.2 Generated: 9/17/2006 2:08 PM HCM Analysis Summary 2006 EXISTING PLUS SITE Main Street/Tracy Area Type: CBD R Marvin 08/20/2006 Analysis Duration: 15 mins. Peak PM Design Hour Case: MAIN&T-2 Lanes Geometry:Movements Serviced by Lane and Lane Widths (feet) Approach Outbound Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 4 Lane 5 Lane 6 EB 2 2 LT 12.0 TR 12.0 WB 2 2 LT 12.0 TR 12.0 NB 1 1 LTR 12.0 SB 1 1 LTR 1 12.0 East West North South Data L T R L T R L T R L T I R Movement Volume h 35 567 50 50 700 15 50 85 36 35 57 100 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 %Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Groups LTR LTR LTR LTR Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 RTOR Vol h) 20 5 10 30 Peds/Hour 131 220 205 160 %Grade 0 0 0 0 Buses/Hour 0 0 0 0 Parkers/Hour(LeftIRight) i --- I --- --- I --- --- --- i --- I --- Signal Settings:Pretimed Operational Analysis Cycle Length: 60.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle: 8.0 Sec Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ped Only EB LTP WB LTP _ NB LTP SB LTP Green 36.9 15.1 0 Yellowl All Red 1 3.0 1 1.0 1 3.0 1 1.0 Ca a ity Analysis Results Approach: Lane Cap v/s g/C Lane v/c Delay Delay R sec/veh) EB LTR 1739 0.248 0.614 LTR 0.404 6.6 A 6.6 A WB * LTR 1733 0.300 0.614 LTR 0.488 7.4 A 7.4 A NB LTR 341 0.141 0.252 LTR 0.557 25.9 C 25.9 C SB * LTR 329 0.146 0.252 LTR 0.578 26.8 C 26.8 C Intersection:Delay= 10.8 sec/veh Int.LOS=B XC 0.51 *Critical Lane Group 2�(v/s)Crit=0.45 SIG/Cinema v3.03 Page 1 NETSIM Summary Results 2006 EXISTING PLUS SITE Main Street/Tracy R Marvin 08/20/2006 Peak PM Design Hour Case: MAIN&T- 2 Queues Spillback in Per Lane Average Worst Lane Lane Avg/Max Speed (%of Peak 57 App Group (veh) _(mph) Period) 100135 EB LTR 3 / 4 20.1 0.0 L 15 f-700 All 20.1 0.0 F— 50 .............................................. .............................................. WBLTR 4/ 5 18.8 0.0 ........... .................................. .............................................. 35 ? All 18.8 0.0 567 —► 50 NB LTR 2/ 4 13.2 0.0 + 50 136 85 All 13.2 0.0 1 2 SB LTR 2/ 4 12.7 0.0 37 3 1 15 3 1 All 12.7 0.0 Intersect. 17.5 SIG/Cinema v3.03 Page 2 HCM Analysis Summary 2006 EXISTING PLUS SITE Main Street/Black Area Type: CBD R Marvin 08/20/2006 Analysis Duration: 15 mins. Peak PM Design Hour Case: MAIN&B-2 Lanes Geometry:Movements Serviced by Lane and Lane Widths (feet) Approach Outbound Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 4 Lane 5 Lane 6 EB 2 2 LT 12.0 TR 12.0 WB 2 2 LT 12.0 TR 12.0 NB 1 1 LTR 12.0 SB 1 1 LTR 12.0 East West North South Data L T R L T R L T R L T R Movement Volume h) 95 535 65 40 610 49 90 136 50 110 67 55 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 %Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Groups LTR LTR LTR LTR Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 RTOR Vol h 25 20 20 25 Peds/Hour 121 276 109 155 %Grade 0 0 0 0 Buses/Hour 0 0 0 0 Parkers/Hour(LeftlRight)j --- I --- --- --- --- - --- I --- Signal Settings:Pretimed Optimization Analysis Cycle Length: 60.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle: 8.0 Sec Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ped Only EB LTP WB LTP NB LTP SB LTP Green 31.1 20.9 0 Yellowl All Red 1 2.31 1.71 2.3 1.7 Cava i Analysis Results Approach: Lane t1246 v/s g/C Lane v/c Delay Delay Opp Gronn Ratio -_(se (sec/veh) EB * LTR 0.310 0.519 LTR 0.597 12.2 B 12.2 B WB LTR 1462 0.268 0.519 LTR 0.516 10.8 B 10.8 B NB - * LTR 464 0.226 0.348 LTR 0.649 23.3 C 23.3 C SB LTR 385 0.220 0.348 LTR 0.631 24.0 C 24.0 C Intersection:Delay= 14.7 sec/veh Int.LOS=B Xc 0.62 *Critical Lane Group 2:(v/s)Crit=0.54 SIG/Cinema v3.03 Page 1 NETSIM Summary Results 2006 EXISTING PLUS SITE Main Street/Black R Marvin 08/20/2006 Peak PM Design Hour Case: MAIN&B-2 Queues Spillback in Per Lane Average Worst Lane Lane Avg/Max Speed (%of Peak 67 App Group (veh) (mph) Period) 55 1110 EB LTR L 1 7.9 0.0 t— 49 t-610 All 7.9 0.0 w— 40 ._ .._......_ .� WBLTR 4/ 6 15.3 0.0 ---------------------------------------------- -------- -----------.....-----...... ....... —z• 95 1 F�-► All 15.3 0.0 535 65 —z NB LTR 4/ 5 11.2 0.0 t 90 150 136 All 11.2 0.0 1 2? ?.... SB LTR 3 / 6 11.7 0.0 31 2 2 21 2 2 All 11.7 0.0 Intersect. 10.7 SIG/Cinema v3.03 Page 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Isite Information Analyst R Marvin Intersection Mendenhall Parking Garage Agency/Co. Marvin&Assoc App Date Performed 8/22/2006 Jurisdiction Bozeman Analysis Time Period Peak PM Design Analysis Year 2006 Project Description Bozeman Parking Garage East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Garage App Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Ad uftnents Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R 'Volume veh/h 40 790 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 44 877 0 veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 — — 0 — — Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 149 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 165 0 0 0 0 0 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration L Delay,Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT L v(veh/h) 44 165 C(m) (veh/h) 1264 356 vlc 0.03 0.46 95%queue length 0.11 2.36 Control Delay(s/veh) 8.0 23.6 LOS A C Approach Delay(s/veh) -- -- 23.6 Approach LOS -- -- C Copyright 0 2005 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.2 Generated: 8/23/2006 11:22 AM TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information SiteTR ��oln Analyst R Marvin Intersection Black Parking Garage App Agency/Co. Marvin&Assoc Jurisdiction Bozeman Date Performed 8/22/2006 Analysis Year 2006 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Design Project Description Bozeman PArking Garage East/West Street: Garage Approach North/South Street: Black Ave Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 80 175 1 155 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 108 0 0 0 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 I -- — 0 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 92 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 182 94 205 0 veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach I N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration I R Delay,Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT R v(veh/h) 94 108 C (m) (veh/h) 989 627 v/c 0.10 0.17 95%queue length 0.31 0.62 Control Delay(s/veh) 9.0 11.9 LOS A B Approach Delay(s/veh) -- -- 11.9 Approach LOS -- -- B Copyright 0 2005 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.2 Generated: 8/23/2006 11:24 AM HCM Analysis Summary EXISTING PLUS SITE Black Ave Area Type: CBD R Marvin 09/17/2006 Analysis Duration: 15 mins. Peak PM Case: Black&Men Lanes Geometry:Movements Serviced by Lane and Lane Widths (feet) Approach I Outbound Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 4 Lane 5 Lane 6 EB 0 0 WB 2 2 LT 12.0 TR 12.0 NB 1 1 LT 12.0 SB 1 1 TR 12.0 East West North South Data L T R L T R L T R L T R Movement Volume v h 0 0 0 40 659 15 105 70 0 0 115 34 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 %Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 Lane Groups LTR LT TR Arrival Type _ 3 3 3 RTOR Vol h) 0 2 0 14 Peds/Hour 188 10 0 80 %Grade 0 0 0 0 Buses/Hour 0 0 0 0 Parkers/Hour(LeftIRight) I --- I --- I --- I -- --- --- - --- Signal Settings:Actuated Operational Anal sis Cycle Length: 61.9 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle: 9.9 Sec Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ped Only EB WB LTP NB LT SB TP Green 32.4 19.6 0 Yellow All Red 3.3 1.7 3.3 1.7 Capacity Analysis Results Approach: Lane Cap v/s g/C Lane v/c Delay Delay App Group ( u do (s i NB * 51 4y]76 5 SB Intersection:Delay= 12.5 sec/veh Int.LOS=B Xc=0.50 *Critical Lane Group 2(v/s)Crit=0.42 SIG/Cinema v3.03 Page 1 NETSIM Summary Results EXISTING PLUS SITE /Black Ave 4 R Marvin 09/17/2006 Peak PM Case: Black&Men Queues Spillback in Per Lane Average Worst Lane Lane Avg/Max Speed (%of Peak 115 App Group (veh) (mph) Period) 34 L 15 t-659 All 18.0 0.0 40 .............................................. .............................................. WB LTR 3 / 6 18.0 0.0 All 14.8 0.0 NB LT 2/ 3 14.8 0.0 1 1051 70 All 15.3 0.0 1 z SB TR 2/ 2 15.3 0.0 32 3 220 .1 3 2 Intersect. 17.0 SIG/Cinema v3.03 Page 2 HCM Analysis Summary EXISTING PLUS SITE /Tracy Ave Area Type: CBD `--1 R Marvin 09/17/2006 Analysis Duration: 15 mins. Peak PM Case: Tracy &Men Lanes Geometry:Movements Serviced by Lane and Lane Widths (feet) Avvroachl Outbound Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 4 Lane 5 Lane 6 EB 0 0 WB 2 2 LT 12.0 TR 12.0 NB 1 1 LT 12.0 SB 1 1 TR 12.0 East West North South Data L T R L T R L T R L T R Movement Volume v h 0 0 0 132 795 45 40 75 0 0 72 60 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 %Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 Lane Groups LTR LT TR Arrival Type 3 3 3 RTOR Vol h 0 5 0 15 Peds/Hour 110 22 0 65 %Grade 0 0 0 0 Buses/Hour 0 0 0 0 Parkers/Hour LeftlRi ht) I --- I --- --- -- --- -» -- --- Signal Settings:Actuated Operational Anal sis C cle Length: 62.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle: 9.9 Sec Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ped Only EB WB LTP NB LT SB TP Green 37.0 15.1 0 Yellow All Red 3.3 1.7 3.3 1.7 Cap ity Analysis Results roach: Lane Ca ' v/s g/C Lane v/c Delay Delay ----Ratio Ratio a --( ejQe e OS WB * LTR 1897 Q.-I-;q M-96— LTR Q-5.69 &9 NB * LT 350q SB TR 382 n ,5 Intersection:Delay= 11.0 sec/veh Int.LOS=B Xc 0.51 *Critical Lane Group 2:(v/s)Crit=0.43 SIG/Cinema v3.03 Page 1 NETSIM Summary Results EXISTING PLUS SITE /Tracy Ave R Marvin 09/17/2006 Peak PM Case: Tracy &Men Queues Spillback in Per Lane Average Worst Lane Lane Avg/Max Speed (%of Peak 72 App Group (veh) (mph) Period) 60 t- 45 795 All 18.4 0.0 4-132 ------------------------------- ............ .............................................. WB LTR 4/ 6 18.4 0.0 All 13.0 0.0 NB LT 1 / 2 13.0 0.0 t 401 75 All 15.0 0.0 1 ? 2 SB TR 1 / 2 15.0 0.0 37 3 2 15 3 2 Intersect. 17.3 SIG/Cinema v3.03 Page 2 APPENDIX C SIGNAL WARRANTS AM� Bozeman Parking Garage&Transit Facility-TIS page 27 Intersection: Mendenhall Street and Black Avenue Case: Existing(2006 Adjusted)Plus Garage Tra c Demand Conditions Date: Augusl 21,2006 Major Street. Mende! al reef Minor Street 1: Black Avenue Minor Street 2: Nlajor•Street Dir.(N-S or E-W): E-W I Minor Street 1 Die(N-S or E-W): N-S Minor Street 2 Dir.(N-S or E-W): Approach Dir.(NB or SB) NB Approach Dir.(EB or NVB) Major Street Speed Limit: mph Major Street 851h%Speed: mph Total Intersection Approaches: 3 Hour Beginning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Mendenhall Street WB 29 16 8 19 40 111 396 520 399 465 541 57. Dlack Avenue NB 4 2 0 1 4 23 6'1 95 110 106 146 159 Black Avenue SB 0 0 1 0 3 23 55 85 82 60 68 71 Major A t roach Totals 1 29 18 8 18 40 1 Ill 396 520 399 1 465 541 571 Max Minor Approach Vol. 1 4 2 1 1 4 1 23 61 95 110 1 106 146 159 Total Entering Volume 1 33 20 9 19 47 157 512 700 591 1 631 755 801 Hour Beginning 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 24 Nlendenhall Street N1B 1 575 1 502 600 1 659 620 393 213 153 127 83 56 45 Black Avenue NB 1 171 1 117 137 1 166 145 92 40 40 34 18 12 9 Black Avenue S11 1 71 1 85 1 87 1 85 80 71 47 24 14 14 10 6 Major Approach Totals 1 575 1 502 606 659 620 393 213 153 1 127 1 83 56 45 Max Minor Approach Vol. 171 117 137 166 145 92 47 40 34 18 12 9 Total Entering Volume 817 1 704 830 910 845 556 300 217 1 175 1 115 78 60 Condition A C:onditiOn B Volume Warrants Values Minimums Values Minimums Major fl'otal Entering) I Minor Major('['alai Entering) I Minor Major I Minor Major Minor 8th Hour Vehicular Volume warrant 465 106 150 465 106 900 75 4th Hour Vehicular Volume Warrant 571 159 571 300 Peak Hour'Vehicular Volume Warrant 910 IN (650) 100 659 166 659 435 Crash Experience Warrant/80%8th Hour 4(0 96 480 120 465 106 720 60 Roadway Network warrant 910) (1000) Warrant#1-Eight-hour Vehicular Volume Warrant#2-Four-hour Vehicular Volume Warrant I Condition A Met NO 77.5% Warrant 2 Conditions Met r•,C) Warrant I Condition 11 Met NO 511% Warrant 1 801 Condtions A d2 B Met NO 64.6% Warrant#3-Peak Hour Warrant#4-Pedestrian Volumes Warrant 3 Condtion A.1 Met YES 400.0 k Warrant 4 Condtion A 51ct NO 80.O-, Warrant Condtion A.2 Met YES I 166.00/o Warrant 4 Condition B Met YES J11:1% Warrant 3 Condtion A.3 Met YES I 140.00,'0 Warrant 3 Condtion B Met NO 1 38.2% Warrant#5-School Crossing Warrant#6-Coordinated Signal System Warrant 5 Condtions Met I Warrant 6 Condtions Met n) Warrant#7-Crash Experience Warrant#8-Roadway Network Warrant 7 Condtion A Met YES 100.0% Warrant 8 Condtions Met I•::z Warrant 7 Condtion H Met NO 33.3% Warrant 7 Condtion C Met NO 75.00,o Warrant Number and Title Met Percent Met 1 Eight-hour Vehicular Volume NO 62.3% 2 Four-hour Vehicular Volume NO 44.496 3 Peak Hour YES Condition A.1 4 Pedestrian Volumes NO 71.0% 5 School Crossing N/A I N/A 6 Coordinated Signal System N/A N/A 7 Crash Experience NO 33.3% 8 Roadway Network NO 81.4% Total Number of Warrants Alec Intersection: Mendenhall Street and Tracy Avenue Case: Existing( 006 Adjusted)Plus Garage Traffic Dernand Conditions Date: August 21,2006 Major Street: Mendenhall Street Minor Street 1: racy venuE Mtnor Street 2: Major Street Dir.(N-S or I E-W Minor Street 1 Dir.(N-S or E-1V'): I N-5 I Minor Street 2 Dir.(N-S or E-W): Approach Dir.(NB or SR) J NB I Approach Dir.(EB or Will Major Street Speed Limit: mph Major Street 85th%Speed: ®mph Total Intersection Approaches: 0 Hour Beginning 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Nlendenhall Street WB 39 23 10 23 54 151 538 706 542 632 735 854 Tracy Avenue NB 2 2 0 1 2 16 41 65 75 72 99 E04 Tracy Avenue SB 0. 0 2, 0 4 33 82 125_ 121' 88 100 Major A roach 1otafs 1 39 23 10 23 54 151 538 706 1 542 632 735 854 Max Minor Approach Vol. 1 2 2 2 1 4 33 82 125 121 88 100 108 'I ,I;][Entering Volume 1 42 25 12 214 60 199 661 895 737 792 935 I 1066 HourBcginninE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 MendenhallStrect WB 781 681 823 1 894 1 842 533 290 207 171 112 77 61 Tracy Avenue NB 116 80 93 1 113 1 99 62 27 27 23 12 8 6 1'racv Avenue SB 104 125 12+' 125- 104 70 35 20 20 14 8 iviajor Approach'iotais 781 681 823 894 1 842 533 290 207 171 112 77 61 Max Minor Approach Vol. 116 126 127 125 117 104 1 70 35 23 20 14 8 'total Entering Volume 1 1002 886 1043 1132 1057 700 387 269 215 144 99 75 Condition A Condition B Volume Warrants Values I Minimums Values Minimums Major rl otal Entering) Minor I Major Crotal Entering,) Minor Major Minor Major Minor Sth flour Vehicular Volume Warrant eal 125 1 boo 150 881 1 125 1 900 75 4th flour Vehicular Volume Warrant 823 i2 823 198 Peak Hour Vehicular Volume Warrant ( 132 i25 (650) 100 894 1 125 1 894 1 326 Crash Experience Warrant/80%8th Hour 681 125 460 120 681 125 720 60 Koadway Network Warrant (1132) {10001 Warrant#1-Eight-hour Vehicular Volume Warrant#2-Four-hour Vehicular Volume Warrant I Condition A Met NO 83.30/u Warrant 2 Conditions Met NO 64.1% Warrant I Condition B Met NO 75.70/a Warrant 1 80%Condtions A&13 Met NO 94.60/o Warrant#3-Peak Hour Warrant All 4-Pedestrian Volumes Warrant 3 Condtion A.1 Met NO 193.00,u Warrant 4 Condtion A Met .Q Warrant 3 Condtion A.2 Met YES 125.0t'1,U Warrant 4 Condition 13 Met YES 162; Warrant 3 Condfion A.3 Met YES 174.24c Warrant 3 Condtion B Met I NO 38.3"5 Warrant#5-School Crossing Warrant#6-Coordinated Signal System Warrant 5 Condtions Nlel N/A N,A I Wnrrant G Condtions Met NO Ila Warrant Al 7-Crash Experience Warrant#8-Roadway Network Warrant 7 Condtion A Met YES 100:0%`s Warrant 8 Condtions Met NO 81.4010 Warrant 7 Condtion B Met NO 80.00&, Warrant 7 Condtion C Met NO 94.6% Warrant Number and 77tle Met Percent Mel 1 Eight-hour Vehicular Volume NO 64.00k* 17 2 Four-hour Vehicular Volume NO 43.9% 3 Peak Hour YES Condition A 4 Pedestrian Volumes NO 54.0% 5 School Crossing N/A N/A 6 Coordinated Signal System N/A N/A 7 Crash Experience NO 80.0% 8 Roadway Network NO 81.4% Total Number of 11 arrants Met I Intersection: Mendenhall Street and Black Avenue Case: ack ne-wa 12 0 A justed us Garage TraffiFffemand Conditions Date:E Auoust 21,2006 Major Street: Mendenhall Street Ntinor Street 1: . Black Avenue Minor Street 2: Major Street Dir.(N-S or K N): I E-W Minor Street 1 Dir.(N-S or I.-W): N.$ Minor Street 2 Dir.(N-S or E-W): Approach Dir.(NB or SB) NB Approach Dir.(Ell or WB) Major Street Speed Limit: mph Major Street 85th%Speed: mph Total Intersection Approaches. Hour Beginning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to 11 12 Mendenhall Street WR 29 18 8 18 40 111 396 520 399 465 541 571 Black Avenue NB 8 6 0 3 6 53 140 219 253 244 337 365 Black Avenue SB 0 0 1 0 3 23 55 85 82 60' 68 71 Major A roach'totats 1 29 18 8 18 40 111 396 620 399 465 541 571 Max Minor Approach Vol. 8 6 1 3 8 53 140 219 253 244 337 365 Total i.uteriuk\'alums 37 24 9 21 51 187 591 824 734 769 946 1007 [lour Rep,innin g 13 1.4 15 16 17 1s 19 20 21 22 23 24 Mendenhall Street WB 575 502 606 659 820 393 213 153 '127 83 56 45 Illack Avollic NB 393 269 314 382 334 210 93 93 79 42 2B 20 Black Avenue Sit 71 J 85 1 87 1 85 1 BO 1 71 1 47 1 24 1 14 1 14 1 10 J 6 Major Approach'Aotals 575 502 606 659 1 620 393 213 153 127 83 56 45 Max Minor Approach Vol. 393 269 314 382 334 210 93 93 79 42 28 20 'Total Entering Volume 1039 856 1007 1126 1034 674 353 270 220 139 94 71 Condition A Condition B Volume Warrants Values Minimums Values %linitnunrs Major(Total L•)rerrng) Mirror Major(T'ora/8orering; tifinor Mawr Minor '.furor Minor sth flour Vehicular Volume Warrant 2 9 150 520 219, - - 900 75 41h(lour Vehicular Volume Warrant 71 .365 571 300 Peak Hour Vehicular Volume Warrant (11,261 382 650) 100 659 382 659 435 Crash Experience Warrant/80%8th(lour 520 219 480 120 520 219 720 60 Roadway Network Warrant 126) (7000) Warrant#1-Eight-hour Vehicular Volume Warrant#2-Four-hour Vehicular Volume Warrant I Condition A Met NO 86.7°io Warrant 2 Conditions Met - , - HM Warrant j Condition B Met NO 57.8% Warrant 1 80%Condtions A&It Met NO 72.211/o Warrant#3-Peak Hour Warrant#4-Pedestrian Volumes Warrant 3 C:ondpon A.j Met YES 700.0010 Warrant 4 Condtion A Met 1 fO 0' r Warrant 3 Condtion A. Met YES 382.0% Warrant 4 Condition B Met YES 'I, Warrant 3 Condtion A.3 Met YES 173.2co Warrant 3 Condtion B Met NO 87.E0,1'o Warrant#5-School Crossing Warrant#6-Coordinated Signal System Warrant c Condtions Niel N(A NIA I Warrant 6 Condtions Met fl0 eta Warrant#7-Crash Experience Warrant#8-Roadway Network Warrant 7 Condtion:> Met YES E373, J.O% Warrant 8 Condtions N1et NO 112.6%n Warrant 7 Condtion B Met NO 3% Wart ant 7 Condtion C N1et NO I72.20/0 Warrant Number and 77t[e Met Percent Met 1 Eight-hour Vehicular Volume NO 86.7% 2 Four-hour Vehicular Volume YES 121.7% 3 Peak Hour YES Condition A 4 Pedestrian Volumes NO 71.0% 5 School Crossing NIA N/A 6 Coordinated Signal System N/A N/A 7 Crash Experience NO 33.3% 8 Roadway Network NO 81.4% Total Nrurzber of Warrants Met 2