The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About011.05 - Appendix K.6 - TrafficSignalWarrantAnalysisLetter July 25, 2024 Blake Bernard Virga Capital, Development Associate 515 North State Street, 14th Floor Chicago, IL 60654 Reference: Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis – Davis Lane & East Valley Center Road Project No. 22396 Dear Mr. Bernard: The purpose of this letter is to provide a summary of a traffic signal warrant study that has been completed for the Davis Lane & East Valley Center Road intersection in Bozeman, Montana. The signal warrant study was requested by MDT as part of their SIAP approval process. Data used for the analysis included 24-hour turning movement and pedestrian counts, intersection crash history, and other related information presented in the Turnrow Development Traffic Impact Study (Sanderson Stewart, 2023) as well as additional information provided by the developer for Phase 1.1 of Turnrow Development. Existing Site Conditions East Valley Center Road (U-1211) is an east-west route classified as a principal arterial by the City of Bozeman and a minor arterial by MDT. It connects North 19th Avenue in Bozeman to Jackrabbit Lane south of Belgrade. Adjacent to its intersection with Davis Lane, East Valley Center Road has a single thru lane in each direction and a posted speed limit of 60-mph. Davis Lane (L-16-716) is a north-south route classified as a minor arterial by the City of Bozeman and a local street by MDT. It currently extends between East Valley Center Road and West Oak Street with plans to construct connections to Fowler Avenue and reach Huffine Lane in the near future. The intersection of Davis Lane & East Valley Center Lane is currently stop-controlled on the south leg (Davis Lane), which currently experiences a moderate level of traffic. East Valley Center Road experiences an elevated volume of commuter traffic, and once the adjacent Turnrow Development is completed, both roads will carry a higher volume of vehicular traffic. Figure A on the following page depicts the study area. Blake Bernard July 25, 2024 Page 2 Existing Traffic Volumes Weekday AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts were collected at the Davis Lane/East Valley Center Road intersection on Tuesday, October 11, 2022 in support of the Turnrow Development TIS. The weekday peak hour periods were found to occur from 7:30 to 8:30 AM and 4:45 to 5:45 PM. Raw count data was adjusted for seasonal variation using MDT seasonal adjustment factors. Figure A also shows the resulting calculated peak hour turning movement volumes. Detailed traffic count data worksheets are included as an attachment. Existing Intersection Capacity Existing Conditions (2022) capacity calculations were performed using Synchro, Version 11, which is based on the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition (Transportation Research Board, 2016) methodologies. The intersection currently operates at LOS D on the northbound approach in the PM peak hour, with a 95th percentile queue of four (4) vehicles. The AM peak hour operates at LOS C or better. Table A below shows the results of the Existing Conditions (2022) capacity calculations, and capacity worksheets are attached. Figure A. Study Area, Existing (2022), and Phase 1.1 (2026) Volumes Blake Bernard July 25, 2024 Page 3 Crash History Analysis Historical crash data was obtained from MDT for the 5-year period from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2019. Three (3) crashes were reported at the Davis Lane/East Valley Center intersection during that timeframe. Two (2) were right-angle collisions and one (1) was a rear end collision. All three (3) crashes occurred with wet, snowy, or icy pavement conditions, two (2) were in the dark with no lighting, and one (1) crash cited glare as being a possible contributing factor. Trip Generation The Turnrow Development is anticipated to add a substantial volume of trips at the Davis Lane/East Valley Center Road intersection. The previously referenced TIS utilized Trip Generation, 11th Edition, published by ITE to estimate site-generated traffic for the new development. Full buildout of the Turnrow Development is projected to generate 9,514 new daily external trips and Phase 1.1 is projected to generate 958 new daily external trips. Approximately 40 percent of Phase 1.1 trips are anticipated to utilize the Davis Lane/East Valley Center Road intersection. Future Traffic Volumes It was assumed that Phase 1.1 of the development would be occupied in 2026 for the purposes of calculating future volumes for analysis. Projections for Phase 1.1 (2026) were calculated by combining site-generated traffic assignments with existing traffic volumes grown to the future year by applying a yearly background growth rate of 2.0 percent and including trips from several adjacent developments with similar buildout timelines. The background growth rate was determined after reviewing historical MDT traffic data. These projections are also shown in Figure A. Table A. Existing Conditions (2022) Capacity Calculations Summary Avg Delay (s/veh) LOS 95th % Queue (veh) Avg Delay (s/veh) LOS 95th % Queue (veh) EB 0.0 A 0 0.0 A 0 WB 1.2 A 0 0.4 A 0 NB 16.2 C 2 25.1 D 4 Intersection 4.1 A --5.7 A -- Davis Lane & East Valley Center Road Intersection Control One-Way Stop Control (NB) Intersection Approach Existing (2022) AM Peak PM Peak Blake Bernard July 25, 2024 Page 4 Future Intersection Capacity Phase 1.1 (2026) capacity calculations show that, under existing stop control, the Davis Lane/East Valley Center Road intersection is projected to operate at LOS E on the northbound approach during the PM peak hour with a 95th percentile queue of eight (8) vehicles. The northbound approach is projected to operate at LOS C in the AM peak hour. Table B below shows the results of the capacity calculations and worksheets are attached. Signal Warrant Analysis Traffic signal warrants were evaluated using criteria outlined in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), which presents several warrants that can be considered based on traffic volumes, school crossings, crash history, and others. For the purposes of this analysis, Warrants 4, 5, and 9 (Pedestrian Volume, School Crossing, and Intersection Near a Grade Crossing) were not evaluated because there are no pedestrians, schools, or railroad crossings at or near the study intersection. Additionally, satisfaction of the Peak Hour warrant alone should not be considered as warranting a signal, as it is primarily meant for application at office complexes, manufacturing plants, or other high-occupancy vehicle facilities that attract or discharge a large number of vehicles over a short time. Existing Conditions (2022) and Phase 1.1 (2026) signal warrant results are shown in Table C on the following page, and the analysis worksheets are attached. A traffic signal is very nearly met with Existing Conditions (2022) volumes; the required 8th hour for Warrant 1 is one (1) vehicle from being met and the required 4th hour for Warrant 2 is just below the warranting graphed line. In the Phase 1.1 (2026) scenario, Warrants 1, 2, 3, and 8 (Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume, Peak Hour, and Roadway Network) are all projected to be met. Table B. Future Scenarios – Capacity Calculations Summary Avg Delay (s/veh) LOS 95th % Queue (veh) Avg Delay (s/veh) LOS 95th % Queue (veh) EB 0.0 A 0 0.0 A 0 WB 1.3 A 1 0.6 A 1 NB 17.2 C 2 48.0 E 8 Intersection 4.4 A --12.1 B -- Intersection Control One-Way Stop Control (NB) Davis Lane & East Valley Center Road Intersection Approach Phase 1.1 (2026) AM Peak PM Peak Blake Bernard July 25, 2024 Page 5 Mitigation Alternatives Sanderson Stewart evaluated traffic signal operations at the Davis Lane/East Valley Center Road intersection and found that all approaches are projected to operate at LOS B or better in the Phase 1.1 (2026) scenario with a traffic signal. It was assumed that the lane configuration with a traffic signal would include separate northbound left-turn and right-turn lanes, as well as a dedicated westbound left-turn lane. It was also assumed that the speed limit on East Valley Center Road would be lowered to 55- mph or less due to the installation of the traffic signal. The HCM does not recommend that traffic signals are installed where speed limits are above 55-mph. The signalized capacity results are shown in Table D below, and calculation worksheets are attached. Table C. Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary x  x    -- -- -- -- x x x x x  -- -- Yes  No x Phase 1.1 (2026)Existing (2022) Davis Lane & East Valley Center Road 5. School Crossing 6. Coordinated Signal System TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS 8. Roadway Network Signals Warranted 1. Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume 7. Crash History 9. Intersection Near a Grade Crossing 2. Four-Hour Vehicular Volume 3. Peak Hour 4. Pedestrian Volume Table D. Future Scenarios – Traffic Signal Capacity Summary Avg Delay (s/veh) LOS 95th % Queue (veh) Avg Delay (s/veh) LOS 95th % Queue (veh) EB 7.2 A 7 8.4 A 7 WB 5.1 A 2 7.1 A 6 NB 12.7 B 4 12.7 B 6 Intersection 8.2 A --9.0 A -- Intersection Control Signalized, WB LT, NB LT, NB RT lanes Davis Lane & East Valley Center Road Intersection Approach Phase 1.1 (2026) - Improved AM Peak PM Peak Blake Bernard July 25, 2024 Page 6 Conclusions and Recommendations The preceding analysis has shown that traffic volumes at the Davis Lane/East Valley Center Road intersection very nearly meet traffic signal warrants in 2022 and a traffic signal is projected to be warranted after construction of Phase 1.1 of the Turnrow Development in 2026. Capacity is projected to deteriorate to LOS E on the northbound approach during the PM peak hour in the Phase 1.1 (2026) scenario when evaluated with existing stop- control. A traffic signal is projected to operate at LOS B or better on all approaches during both peak hours in the Phase 1.1 (2026) scenario. Based on the Existing (2022) and projected (2026) capacity and traffic signal warrant analysis presented in this letter, it is recommended that a traffic signal should be installed prior to or concurrently with development of Phase 1.1 of the Turnrow Development. The speed limit on East Valley Center Road should also be lowered to no more than 55-mph, as it is not recommended for signals to operate on roadways with speeds higher than that. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at 406-922-4306 or jstaszcuk@sandersonstewart.com. Sincerely, Joey Staszcuk, PE, PTOE, RSP1 Senior Engineer | Community Transportation Studio Manager ARS/jhs Enc. Traffic volume data Capacity calculation worksheets Signal warrant worksheets P:22396_Turnrow_Development_Signal_Warrant_Study Intersection: Jurisdiction: Project Description: Int. Start Time Right Thru Left U-turn Total Right Thru Left U-turn Total Right Thru Left U-turn Total Right Thru Left U-turn Total Total Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 38 0 40 23 76 0 0 99 0 20 4 0 24 163 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 43 0 53 30 95 0 0 125 0 16 3 0 19 197 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 24 0 30 31 66 0 0 97 0 11 4 0 15 142 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 22 0 30 12 55 0 0 67 0 26 1 0 27 124 Grand Total 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 127 0 153 96 292 0 0 388 0 73 12 0 85 626 Medium Truck % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 1.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 3.5 Heavy Truck % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 8.3 0.0 1.2 Total Truck % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 1.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 4.1 8.3 0.0 4.7 Total % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 0.0 20.3 0.0 24.4 15.3 46.6 0.0 0.0 62.0 0.0 11.7 1.9 0.0 13.6 100.0 PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.77 0.77 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 73TH12LT0UU0TH292RT960 127 26 U LT RT Westbound Agency/Company: Gannon Chamberlain Sanderson Stewart North/South Street: Davis Ln AM Peak Hour (7:30 - 8:30 AM) 22396Project Number: Southbound Davis Ln Northbound E Valley Center Rd Eastbound East/West Street: INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY General Information Davis Ln & E Valley Center RdCounted By:E Valley Center RdE Valley Center Rd388Bozeman, MT /MDTTuesday, October 11, 2022Date Performed: Count Time Period: North Bozeman 115 Davis Ln E Valley Center Rd E Valley Center Rd Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Davis Ln 153 InOut 108In200 In85Out318Total Entering 626Out NNNNNNNNNN Intersection: Jurisdiction: Project Description: Int. Start Time Right Thru Left U-turn Total Right Thru Left U-turn Total Right Thru Left U-turn Total Right Thru Left U-turn Total Total Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 35 0 42 20 51 0 0 71 0 69 5 0 74 187 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 43 0 51 39 75 0 0 114 0 84 5 0 89 254 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 52 0 57 41 73 0 0 114 0 76 2 0 78 249 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 42 0 45 29 47 0 0 76 0 65 3 0 68 189 Grand Total 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 172 0 195 129 246 0 0 375 0 294 15 0 309 879 Medium Truck % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 1.5 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.6 Heavy Truck % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Truck % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 1.5 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.6 Total % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 19.6 0.0 22.2 14.7 28.0 0.0 0.0 42.7 0.0 33.4 1.7 0.0 35.2 100.0 PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 294TH15LT0UU0TH246RT1290 172 23 U LT RT Agency/Company: Sanderson Stewart INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY General Information Counted By: Gannon Chamberlain Davis Ln & E Valley Center Rd North/South Street: Davis Ln E Valley Center Rd Date Performed: Tuesday, October 11, 2022 Bozeman, MT /MDT Count Time Period: PM Peak Hour (4:45 - 5:45 PM) Project Number: 22396 North Bozeman 115 East/West Street:E Valley Center RdOut466Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Davis Ln Davis Ln E Valley Center Rd E Valley Center Rd Southbound Northbound Eastbound Westbound In375269OutDavis Ln 309InE Valley Center RdTotal Entering 879 144 195 Out In NNNNNNNNNN HCM 6th TWSC3: Davis Lane & E Valley Center Rd02/13/2023AM Peak Turnrow Development 12:59 pm 02/13/2023 Existing Conditions (2022) Synchro 11 ReportPage 3IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 4.1Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NERLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 292 96 12 73 127 26Future Vol, veh/h 292 96 12 73 127 26Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - - - - 0 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80Heavy Vehicles, % 2 1 8 4 0 4Mvmt Flow 365 120 15 91 159 33 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1Conflicting Flow All 0 0 485 0 546 425 Stage 1 - - - - 425 - Stage 2 - - - - 121 -Critical Hdwy - - 4.18 - 6.4 6.24Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 -Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.272 - 3.5 3.336Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1047 - 502 625 Stage 1 - - - - 664 - Stage 2 - - - - 909 -Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1047 - 494 625Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 494 - Stage 1 - - - - 664 - Stage 2 - - - - 895 - Approach SE NW NEHCM Control Delay, s 0 1.2 16.2HCM LOSC Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SERCapacity (veh/h) 512 1047 - - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.374 0.014 - - -HCM Control Delay (s) 16.2 8.5 0 - -HCM Lane LOS C A A - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.7 0 - - - HCM 6th TWSC 3: Davis Lane & E Valley Center Rd 02/13/2023 PM Peak Turnrow Development 2:21 pm 02/13/2023 Existing Conditions (2022) Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.7 Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 246 129 15 294 172 23 Future Vol, veh/h 246 129 15 294 172 23 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 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 0 0 1 2 0 Mvmt Flow 286 150 17 342 200 27 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 436 0 737 361 Stage 1 - - - - 361 - Stage 2 - - - - 376 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.42 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.518 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1134 - 386 688 Stage 1 - - - - 705 - Stage 2 - - - - 694 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1134 - 379 688 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 379 - Stage 1 - - - - 705 - Stage 2 - - - - 681 - Approach SE NW NE HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 25.1 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 400 1134 - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.567 0.015 - - - HCM Control Delay (s) 25.1 8.2 0 - - HCM Lane LOS D A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 3.4 0 - - - HCM 7th TWSC 3: Davis Lane & E Valley Center Rd 07/24/2024 AM Peak Turnrow Development 4:16 pm 07/24/2024 Phase 1.1 (2026) Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.4 Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 343 116 17 94 154 30 Future Vol, veh/h 343 116 17 94 154 30 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 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 1 7 3 0 3 Mvmt Flow 373 126 18 102 167 33 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 499 0 575 436 Stage 1 - - - - 436 - Stage 2 - - - - 139 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.17 - 6.4 6.23 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.263 - 3.5 3.327 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1040 - 483 618 Stage 1 - - - - 656 - Stage 2 - - - - 893 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1040 - 474 618 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 474 - Stage 1 - - - - 656 - Stage 2 - - - - 876 - Approach SE NW NE HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 1.31 17.21 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 493 276 - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.406 0.018 - - - HCM Control Delay (s/veh) 17.2 8.5 0 - - HCM Lane LOS C A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.9 0.1 - - - HCM 7th TWSC 3: Davis Lane & E Valley Center Rd 07/24/2024 PM Peak Turnrow Development 4:17 pm 07/24/2024 Phase 1.1 (2026) Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 12.1 Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 290 143 28 339 235 28 Future Vol, veh/h 290 143 28 339 235 28 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 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 3 0 0 1 2 0 Mvmt Flow 315 155 30 368 255 30 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 471 0 822 393 Stage 1 - - - - 393 - Stage 2 - - - - 429 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.42 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.518 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1102 - 344 660 Stage 1 - - - - 682 - Stage 2 - - - - 656 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1102 - 332 660 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 332 - Stage 1 - - - - 682 - Stage 2 - - - - 634 - Approach SE NW NE HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0.64 48.01 HCM LOS E Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 350 137 - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.816 0.028 - - - HCM Control Delay (s/veh) 48 8.4 0 - - HCM Lane LOS E A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 7.1 0.1 - - - Queues 3: Davis Lane & E Valley Center Rd 07/24/2024 AM Peak - signal Turnrow Development 3:17 pm 07/24/2024 Phase 1.1 (2026) Signalized Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group SET NWL NWT NEL NER Lane Group Flow (vph) 499 18 102 167 33 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.05 0.13 0.31 0.07 Control Delay (s/veh) 10.4 6.6 6.7 14.3 6.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 10.4 6.6 6.7 14.3 6.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 59 2 10 25 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 159 10 33 83 16 Internal Link Dist (ft) 580 2788 527 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 100 Base Capacity (vph) 1429 630 1456 987 871 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 0.35 0.03 0.07 0.17 0.04 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary 3: Davis Lane & E Valley Center Rd 07/24/2024 AM Peak - signal Turnrow Development 3:17 pm 07/24/2024 Phase 1.1 (2026) Signalized Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 343 116 17 94 154 30 Future Volume (veh/h) 343 116 17 94 154 30 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1723 1736 1654 1709 1750 1709 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 373 126 18 102 167 33 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 1 7 3 0 3 Cap, veh/h 530 179 443 735 249 216 Arrive On Green 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.15 0.15 Sat Flow, veh/h 1232 416 863 1709 1667 1448 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 499 18 102 167 33 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1648 863 1709 1667 1448 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 6.2 0.4 0.9 2.4 0.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 6.2 6.7 0.9 2.4 0.5 Prop In Lane 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 709 443 735 249 216 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.70 0.04 0.14 0.67 0.15 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2026 1133 2101 1216 1057 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 5.9 8.6 4.4 10.1 9.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.1 3.1 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 0.0 7.2 8.6 4.4 13.3 9.7 LnGrp LOS A A A B A Approach Vol, veh/h 499 120 200 Approach Delay, s/veh 7.2 5.1 12.7 Approach LOS A A B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.9 8.4 16.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 4.6 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 31.0 18.4 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.7 4.4 8.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 0.4 2.8 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 8.2 HCM 7th LOS A Queues 3: Davis Lane & E Valley Center Rd 07/24/2024 PM Peak - signal Turnrow Development 3:17 pm 07/24/2024 Phase 1.1 (2026) Signalized Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group SET NWL NWT NEL NER Lane Group Flow (vph) 470 30 368 255 30 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.07 0.39 0.46 0.06 Control Delay (s/veh) 10.4 8.1 10.0 15.3 5.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 10.4 8.1 10.0 15.3 5.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 60 3 51 41 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 172 17 136 126 14 Internal Link Dist (ft) 580 2788 527 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 100 Base Capacity (vph) 1321 650 1385 957 886 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 0.36 0.05 0.27 0.27 0.03 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary 3: Davis Lane & E Valley Center Rd 07/24/2024 PM Peak - signal Turnrow Development 3:17 pm 07/24/2024 Phase 1.1 (2026) Signalized Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 290 143 28 339 235 28 Future Volume (veh/h) 290 143 28 339 235 28 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1709 1750 1750 1736 1723 1750 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 315 155 30 368 255 30 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 0 0 1 2 0 Cap, veh/h 442 218 412 710 351 318 Arrive On Green 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.21 0.21 Sat Flow, veh/h 1081 532 938 1736 1641 1483 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 470 30 368 255 30 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1613 938 1736 1641 1483 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 6.8 0.8 4.5 4.1 0.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 6.8 7.6 4.5 4.1 0.5 Prop In Lane 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 660 412 710 351 318 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.71 0.07 0.52 0.73 0.09 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1721 1029 1852 1132 1023 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 6.9 10.1 6.2 10.3 8.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.4 0.1 0.6 2.9 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.4 1.2 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 0.0 8.4 10.2 6.8 13.1 9.0 LnGrp LOS A B A B A Approach Vol, veh/h 470 398 285 Approach Delay, s/veh 8.4 7.1 12.7 Approach LOS A A B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.5 10.6 17.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 4.6 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 30.0 19.4 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.6 6.1 8.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.9 0.7 2.5 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 9.0 HCM 7th LOS A Sanderson Stewart 3/16/2023 22396 Turnrow City of Bozeman/MDT 60 mph E Valley Center Rd (1 lane) Davis Ln (1 lane) Analysis Year/Case: Existing (2022) Hour Begin NB SB EB WB 0:00 5 0 17 6 23 5 1:00 0 0 6 3 9 0 2:00 1 0 6 1 7 1 3:00 4 0 8 3 11 4 4:00 17 0 19 10 29 17 5:00 33 0 57 28 85 33 6:00 84 0 151 38 189 84 7:00 153 0 347 81 428 153 8:00 106 0 339 101 440 106 9:00 77 0 257 105 362 77 10:00 71 0 221 136 357 71 11:00 91 0 257 157 414 91 12:00 128 0 278 196 474 128 13:00 116 0 275 199 474 116 14:00 98 0 274 214 488 98 15:00 129 0 300 226 526 129 16:00 144 0 326 297 623 144 17:00 189 0 394 302 696 189 18:00 104 0 264 215 479 104 19:00 58 0 136 152 288 58 20:00 34 0 92 102 194 34 21:00 31 0 55 56 111 31 22:00 14 0 35 26 61 14 23:00 5 0 16 19 35 5 TOTAL 1692 0 4130 2673 6803 1692 Condition A - Minimum Vehicular Volume (70% Columns):Hrs No 7 Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic (70% Columns): No 3 Combination of Conditions A & B (56% Columns): Yes 10 Yes 9 Warrant 1 Satisfied?No Project Description: Warrant 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume General Information Agency/Company: Date: Project Number: Major Street Total (Both Approaches) Jurisdiction: Major Street Speed Limit: Major Street (Approach Lanes): Minor Street (Approach Lanes): Avg. Entering Volume Major Street Total >350 and Higher Minor Street Total > 105 for 8 hours? Major Street Total > 525 and Higher Minor Street Total > 53 for 8 hours? Major Street Total > 280 and Higher Minor Street Total > 84 for 8 hours? Major Street Total > 420 and Higher Minor Street Total > 42 for 8 hours? Higher Volume Minor Approach Sanderson Stewart 7/23/2024 22396 Turnrow City of Bozeman/MDT 60 mph E Valley Center Rd (1 lane) Davis Ln (1 lane) Analysis Year/Case: Phase 1.1 (2026) Hour Begin NB SB EB WB 0:00 6 0 20 7 27 6 1:00 0 0 7 4 11 0 2:00 1 0 7 1 8 1 3:00 5 0 9 4 13 5 4:00 22 0 22 12 34 22 5:00 42 0 67 34 101 42 6:00 108 0 177 46 223 108 7:00 197 0 406 98 504 197 8:00 136 0 396 123 519 136 9:00 99 0 300 127 427 99 10:00 91 0 258 165 423 91 11:00 117 0 300 190 490 117 12:00 164 0 325 238 563 164 13:00 149 0 321 241 562 149 14:00 126 0 320 260 580 126 15:00 166 0 351 274 625 166 16:00 185 0 381 360 741 185 17:00 243 0 461 366 827 243 18:00 134 0 309 261 570 134 19:00 75 0 159 184 343 75 20:00 44 0 108 124 232 44 21:00 40 0 64 68 132 40 22:00 18 0 41 32 73 18 23:00 6 0 19 23 42 6 TOTAL 2174 0 4828 3242 8070 2174 Condition A - Minimum Vehicular Volume (70% Columns):Hrs Yes 10 Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic (70% Columns): No 7 Combination of Conditions A & B (56% Columns): Yes 12 Yes 12 Warrant 1 Satisfied?Yes Project Description: Warrant 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume General Information Agency/Company: Date: Project Number: Jurisdiction: Major Street Speed Limit: Major Street (Approach Lanes): Minor Street (Approach Lanes): Avg. Entering Volume Major Street Total > 420 and Higher Minor Street Total > 42 for 8 hours? Higher Volume Minor Approach Major Street Total >350 and Higher Minor Street Total > 105 for 8 hours? Major Street Total > 525 and Higher Minor Street Total > 53 for 8 hours? Major Street Total > 280 and Higher Minor Street Total > 84 for 8 hours? Major Street Total (Both Approaches) Sanderson Stewart 3/16/2023 22396 Turnrow City of Bozeman/MDT 60 mph E Valley Center Rd (1 lane) Davis Ln (1 lane) Analysis Year/Case: Existing (2022) Hour Begin NB SB EB WB 0:00 5 0 17 6 23 5 1:00 0 0 6 3 9 0 2:00 1 0 6 1 7 1 3:00 4 0 8 3 11 4 4:00 17 0 19 10 29 17 5:00 33 0 57 28 85 33 6:00 84 0 151 38 189 84 7:00 153 0 347 81 428 153 8:00 106 0 339 101 440 106 9:00 77 0 257 105 362 77 10:00 71 0 221 136 357 71 11:00 91 0 257 157 414 91 12:00 128 0 278 196 474 128 13:00 116 0 275 199 474 116 14:00 98 0 274 214 488 98 15:00 129 0 300 226 526 129 16:00 144 0 326 297 623 144 17:00 189 0 394 302 696 189 18:00 104 0 264 215 479 104 19:00 58 0 136 152 288 58 20:00 34 0 92 102 194 34 21:00 31 0 55 56 111 31 22:00 14 0 35 26 61 14 23:00 5 0 16 19 35 5 TOTAL 1692 0 4130 2673 6803 1692 Meets warrant criteria on graph for minimum of 4 hours (100% thresholds)?No (3 hrs) Warrant 2 Satisfied?No Project Description: Warrant 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume General Information Agency/Company: Date: Project Number: Higher Volume Minor Approach Jurisdiction: Major Street Speed Limit: Major Street (Approach Lanes): Minor Street (Approach Lanes): Avg. Entering Volume Major Street Total (Both Approaches) Sanderson Stewart 7/23/2024 22396 Turnrow City of Bozeman/MDT 60 mph E Valley Center Rd (1 lane) Davis Ln (1 lane) Analysis Year/Case: Phase 1.1 (2026) Hour Begin NB SB EB WB 0:00 6 0 20 7 27 6 1:00 0 0 7 4 11 0 2:00 1 0 7 1 8 1 3:00 5 0 9 4 13 5 4:00 22 0 22 12 34 22 5:00 42 0 67 34 101 42 6:00 108 0 177 46 223 108 7:00 197 0 406 98 504 197 8:00 136 0 396 123 519 136 9:00 99 0 300 127 427 99 10:00 91 0 258 165 423 91 11:00 117 0 300 190 490 117 12:00 164 0 325 238 563 164 13:00 149 0 321 241 562 149 14:00 126 0 320 260 580 126 15:00 166 0 351 274 625 166 16:00 185 0 381 360 741 185 17:00 243 0 461 366 827 243 18:00 134 0 309 261 570 134 19:00 75 0 159 184 343 75 20:00 44 0 108 124 232 44 21:00 40 0 64 68 132 40 22:00 18 0 41 32 73 18 23:00 6 0 19 23 42 6 TOTAL 2174 0 4828 3242 8070 2174 Meets warrant criteria on graph for minimum of 4 hours (100% thresholds)?Yes (9 hrs) Warrant 2 Satisfied?Yes Project Description: Warrant 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume General Information Agency/Company: Date: Project Number: Higher Volume Minor Approach Jurisdiction: Major Street Speed Limit: Major Street (Approach Lanes): Minor Street (Approach Lanes): Avg. Entering Volume Major Street Total (Both Approaches) Sanderson Stewart 3/16/2023 22396 Turnrow City of Bozeman/MDT 60 mph E Valley Center Rd (1 lane) Davis Ln (1 lane) Analysis Year/Case: Existing (2022) Category A:Peak Period: PM Total stopped time delay for minor approach > 4 veh-hrs?No (1.36) High minor approach volume > 100 for peak hour?Yes (195) Total entering volume > 650 for peak hour?Yes (879) Category A warrant satisfied?No Category B: Meets warrant criteria on graph for minimum of one hour (70% thresholds)?Yes Warrant 3 Satisfied?Yes High Minor Approach Volume (vehs) 195 Total Entering Volume (vehs) 879 PM Peak Hour 4:45 - 5:45 PM High Minor Total Stopped Time Delay (hrs) 1.36 Total Volume of Major Approaches (vehs) 684 Total Volume of Major Approaches (vehs) 473 High Minor Approach Volume (vehs) 153 Total Entering Volume (vehs) 626 AM Peak Hour 7:30 - 8:30 AM High Minor Total Stopped Time Delay (hrs) 0.69 Project Description: Jurisdiction: Major Street Speed Limit: Major Street (Approach Lanes): Minor Street (Approach Lanes): Warrant 3: Peak Hour General Information Agency/Company: Date: Project Number: Sanderson Stewart 7/23/2024 22396 Turnrow City of Bozeman/MDT 60 mph E Valley Center Rd (1 lane) Davis Ln (1 lane) Analysis Year/Case: Phase 1.1 (2026) Category A:Peak Period: PM Total stopped time delay for minor approach > 4 veh-hrs?No (3.51) High minor approach volume > 100 for peak hour?Yes (263) Total entering volume > 650 for peak hour?Yes (1063) Category A warrant satisfied?No Category B: Meets warrant criteria on graph for minimum of one hour (70% thresholds)?Yes Warrant 3 Satisfied?Yes Project Description: Warrant 3: Peak Hour General Information Agency/Company: Date: Project Number: High Minor Approach Volume (vehs) 184 Jurisdiction: Major Street Speed Limit: Major Street (Approach Lanes): Minor Street (Approach Lanes): AM Peak Hour 7:30 - 8:30 AM High Minor Total Stopped Time Delay (hrs) 0.88 Total Volume of Major Approaches (vehs) 570 Total Entering Volume (vehs) 754 PM Peak Hour 4:45 - 5:45 PM High Minor Total Stopped Time Delay (hrs) 3.51 Total Volume of Major Approaches (vehs) 800 High Minor Approach Volume (vehs) 263 Total Entering Volume (vehs) 1063 Sanderson Stewart 3/16/2023 22396 Turnrow City of Bozeman/MDT 60 mph E Valley Center Rd (1 lane) Davis Ln (1 lane) Analysis Year/Case: Existing (2022) This warrant is intended for application where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that pedestrians experience excessive delay in crossing the major street. Hour Begin 0:00 23 0 1:00 9 0 2:00 7 0 3:00 11 0 4:00 29 0 5:00 85 0 6:00 189 0 7:00 428 0 8:00 440 0 9:00 362 0 10:00 357 0 11:00 414 0 12:00 474 0 13:00 474 0 14:00 488 0 15:00 526 0 16:00 623 0 17:00 696 0 18:00 479 0 19:00 288 0 For each of any 4 hours of an average day, do the plotted points representing 20:00 194 0 representing the vehicles per hour on the major street and the corresponding 21:00 111 0 pedestrians per hour crossing the major street fall above the curve in 22:00 61 0 Figure 4C-5?N/A 23:00 35 0 TOTAL 6,803 0 For 1 hour of an average day, does the plotted point representing vehicles per hour on the major street and the corresponding pedestrians per hour crossing the major street fall above the curve in Figure 4C-7?N/A Warrant 4 Satisfied?N/A Pedestrian Volume Crossing Major Street Warrant 4: Pedestrian Volume General Information Agency/Company: Date: Project Number: Project Description: Jurisdiction: Major Street Speed Limit: Major Street (Approach Lanes): Minor Street (Approach Lanes): Major Street Total Traffic Sanderson Stewart 3/16/2023 22396 Turnrow City of Bozeman/MDT 60 mph E Valley Center Rd (1 lane) Davis Ln (1 lane) Analysis Year/Case: Existing (2022) This warrant is intended for application where the fact that school children (elementary through high school students) cross the major street is the principle reason to consider installing a traffic signal. This warrant shall not be applied at locations where the distance to the nearest traffic control signal along the major street is less than 300 feet, unless it can be shown that the proposed traffic signal would not restrict the progressive movement of traffic. Is the number of adequate gaps in the major crossing traffic steam during the primary crossing period less than the number of minutes in that crossing period?N/A Do 20 or more students cross at this location during the highest crossing hour?N/A Warrant 5 Satisfied?N/A Are any adjacent traffic signals located so far away that they do not provide a necessary degree of platooning and/or progressive operation?No Warrant 6 Satisfied?No This warrant is intended for application where the severity and frequency of crashes are the principal reasons to consider installing a traffic control signal Have adequate trials of alternatives failed to reduce the crash frequency?N/A Have at least one of the following conditions apply to the reported crash history: 1. Do the number of reported angle crashes and pedestrian crashes within a 1-year period equal or exceed the threshold number in Table 4C-2 for total angle crashes and pedestrian crashes? 2. Do the number of reported fatal-and-injury angle crashes and pedestrian crashes within a 1-year period equal or exceed the threshold number in Table 4C-2 for total fatal-and-injury angle crashes and pedestrian crashes? 3. Do the number of reported angle crashes and pedestrian crashes within a 3-year period equal or exceed the threshold number in Table 4C-3 for total angle crashes and pedestrian crashes? 4. Do the number of reported fatal-and-injury angle crashes and pedestrian crashes within a 3-year period equal or exceed the threshold number in Table 4C-3 for total fatal-and-injury angle crashes and pedestrian crashes? No Is Condition A criterion met for 80% columns of Warrant 1 met?Yes Is Condition B criterion met for 80% columns of Warrant 1 met?Yes Are observed pedestrian volumes equal to or greater than 80% of what is required for Warrant 4? No Warrant 7 Satisfied?No General Information Agency/Company: Date: Project Number: Project Description: Jurisdiction: Major Street Speed Limit: Major Street (Approach Lanes): Minor Street (Approach Lanes): Warrant 5: School Crossing Warrant 6: Coordinated Signal System This warrant is intended for application where installation of a traffic signal would help to provide proper platooning of vehicles and therefore provide progressive movement in a coordinated signal system. Warrant 7: Crash Experience Sanderson Stewart 7/23/2024 22396 Turnrow City of Bozeman/MDT 60 mph E Valley Center Rd (1 lane) Davis Ln (1 lane) Analysis Year/Case: Phase 1.1 (2026) This warrant is intended for application where the fact that school children (elementary through high school students) cross the major street is the principle reason to consider installing a traffic signal. This warrant shall not be applied at locations where the distance to the nearest traffic control signal along the major street is less than 300 feet, unless it can be shown that the proposed traffic signal would not restrict the progressive movement of traffic. Is the number of adequate gaps in the major crossing traffic steam during the primary crossing period less than the number of minutes in that crossing period?N/A Do 20 or more students cross at this location during the highest crossing hour?N/A Warrant 5 Satisfied?N/A Are any adjacent traffic signals located so far away that they do not provide a necessary degree of platooning and/or progressive operation?No Warrant 6 Satisfied?No This warrant is intended for application where the severity and frequency of crashes are the principal reasons to consider installing a traffic control signal Have adequate trials of alternatives failed to reduce the crash frequency?N/A Have at least one of the following conditions apply to the reported crash history: 1. Do the number of reported angle crashes and pedestrian crashes within a 1-year period equal or exceed the threshold number in Table 4C-2 for total angle crashes and pedestrian crashes? 2. Do the number of reported fatal-and-injury angle crashes and pedestrian crashes within a 1-year period equal or exceed the threshold number in Table 4C-2 for total fatal-and-injury angle crashes and pedestrian crashes? 3. Do the number of reported angle crashes and pedestrian crashes within a 3-year period equal or exceed the threshold number in Table 4C-3 for total angle crashes and pedestrian crashes? 4. Do the number of reported fatal-and-injury angle crashes and pedestrian crashes within a 3-year period equal or exceed the threshold number in Table 4C-3 for total fatal-and-injury angle crashes and pedestrian crashes? No Is Condition A criterion met for 80% columns of Warrant 1 met?Yes Is Condition B criterion met for 80% columns of Warrant 1 met?Yes Are observed pedestrian volumes equal to or greater than 80% of what is required for Warrant 4? No Warrant 7 Satisfied?No Jurisdiction: General Information Agency/Company: Date: Project Number: Project Description: Major Street Speed Limit: Major Street (Approach Lanes): Minor Street (Approach Lanes): Warrant 5: School Crossing Warrant 6: Coordinated Signal System This warrant is intended for application where installation of a traffic signal would help to provide proper platooning of vehicles and therefore provide progressive movement in a coordinated signal system. Warrant 7: Crash Experience Sanderson Stewart 3/16/2023 22396 Turnrow City of Bozeman/MDT 60 mph E Valley Center Rd (1 lane) Davis Ln (1 lane) Analysis Year/Case: Existing (2022) This warrant is intended for application where installation of a traffic signal could be justified in order to encourage concentration and organization of traffic flow on a roadway network Do two or more of the intersecting routes at this location have at least one of the following characteristics: A. It is part of the street or highway system that serves as the principal roadway network for through traffic flow; or B. It includes rural or suburban highways outside, entering, or traversing a City; or C. It appears as a major route on an official plan. Yes Does this intersection have an existing or immediately projected total entering volume of a least 1000 vehicles during a weekday typical peak hour and have a 5-year projected traffic volume that meets one or more of Warrants 1, 2, and 3 during an average weekday?No Does this intersection have an existing or immediately projected total entering volume of at least 1000 vph for each of any 5 hours of a Saturday or Sunday?N/A Warrant 8 Satisfied?No This warrant is intended for application where none of the conditions described in the other eight traffic signal warrants are met, but the proximity to the intersection of a grade crossing on an intersection approach controlled by a STOP or YIELD sign is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic signal. Does a grade crossing exist on an approach controlled by a STOP or YIELD sign whereby the center of the track nearest to the intersection is within 140 feet of the stop or yield line? No During the highest traffic volume hour during which the rail traffic uses the crossing, does the plotted point representing vehicles per hour on the major street and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the minor-street approach that crosses the track fall above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-9 or 4C-10 (whichever is applicable) for the existing combination of approach lanes over the track and the distance D, which is the clear storage distance?N/A Warrant 9 Satisfied?N/A Jurisdiction: General Information Agency/Company: Date: Project Number: Project Description: Major Street Speed Limit: Major Street (Approach Lanes): Minor Street (Approach Lanes): Warrant 8: Roadway Network Warrant 9: Intersection Near a Grade Crossing Sanderson Stewart 7/23/2024 22396 Turnrow City of Bozeman/MDT 60 mph E Valley Center Rd (1 lane) Davis Ln (1 lane) Analysis Year/Case: Phase 1.1 (2026) This warrant is intended for application where installation of a traffic signal could be justified in order to encourage concentration and organization of traffic flow on a roadway network Do two or more of the intersecting routes at this location have at least one of the following characteristics: A. It is part of the street or highway system that serves as the principal roadway network for through traffic flow; or B. It includes rural or suburban highways outside, entering, or traversing a City; or C. It appears as a major route on an official plan. Yes Does this intersection have an existing or immediately projected total entering volume of a least 1000 vehicles during a weekday typical peak hour and have a 5-year projected traffic volume that meets one or more of Warrants 1, 2, and 3 during an average weekday?Yes Does this intersection have an existing or immediately projected total entering volume of at least 1000 vph for each of any 5 hours of a Saturday or Sunday?N/A Warrant 8 Satisfied?Yes This warrant is intended for application where none of the conditions described in the other eight traffic signal warrants are met, but the proximity to the intersection of a grade crossing on an intersection approach controlled by a STOP or YIELD sign is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic signal. Does a grade crossing exist on an approach controlled by a STOP or YIELD sign whereby the center of the track nearest to the intersection is within 140 feet of the stop or yield line? No During the highest traffic volume hour during which the rail traffic uses the crossing, does the plotted point representing vehicles per hour on the major street and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the minor-street approach that crosses the track fall above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-9 or 4C-10 (whichever is applicable) for the existing combination of approach lanes over the track and the distance D, which is the clear storage distance?N/A Warrant 9 Satisfied?N/A Jurisdiction: General Information Agency/Company: Date: Project Number: Project Description: Major Street Speed Limit: Major Street (Approach Lanes): Minor Street (Approach Lanes): Warrant 8: Roadway Network Warrant 9: Intersection Near a Grade Crossing