Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix 5 - Traffic Impact Study Cannery District Planned Unit Development Preliminary PUD Application Cannery District Partners, llc Appendix 5 Traffic Impact Study TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY for CANNERY SITE DEVELOPMENT Bozeman, Montana Prepared for STAHLEY ENGINEERING Prepared by February 11, 2015 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY for CANNERY SITE DEVELOPMENT Bozeman, Montana Prepared for STAHLEY ENGINEERING Prepared by February 11, 2015 i TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 SITE LOCATION & DESCRIPTION 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 4 Streets & Intersections 4 Traffic Volumes 5 Speed 7 Capacity 7 TRIP GENERATION 9 TRIP DISTRIBUTION 13 SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 13 IMPACTS 20 Traffic Volumes 20 Capacity Impacts 25 Turn Lane Warrants 28 IMPACT MITIGATION 28 RECOMMENDATIONS 29 APPENDIX A – 24 Hour Traffic Count Summaries APPENDIX B – Speed Statistics APPENDIX C – Capacity Calculations APPENDIX D - Left-Turn Lane Warrants ii LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 1. Existing PM Peak Hour Capacity Analysis Summary 8 Table 2. Cannery Site Development Trip Generation Summary 10 Table 3. Passerby Trip Summary – AWT & Peak PM Hour 12 Table 4. Cumulative Summary of New Trips 12 Table 5. Existing Plus Phase 1 Site Traffic Capacity Analysis Summary 26 Table 5. Existing Plus Phase 1 thru 4 Site Traffic Capacity Analysis Summary 27 LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1. Site Location Map 2 Figure 2. Year 2014 Existing Traffic Volumes 6 Figure 3. Phase 1 Traffic Assignments 15 Figure 4. Phase 1&2 Traffic Assignments 16 Figure 5. Phase 1,2, &3 Traffic Assignments 17 Figure 6. Phase 1 thru 4 Traffic Assignments 18 Figure 7. Existing Plus Phase 1 Traffic Volumes 21 Figure 8. Existing Plus Phases 1&2 Traffic Volumes 22 Figure 9. Existing Plus Phases 1 thru 3 Traffic Volumes 23 Figure 10. Existing Plus Phases 1 thru 4 Traffic Volumes 24 Cannery Site Development TIS Cannery Site Development TIS Page 1 INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the findings of a traffic impact study (TIS) for the Cannery Site Development property, which is located on the northeast end of Bozeman, Montana. Marvin & Associates was retained by Stahly Engineering to prepare the TIS in accordance with City of Bozeman site development ordinances. The primary purposes of this study were to address specific traffic impacts related to development of Cannery Site Development and to provide recommendations regarding the mitigation of any identified impacts. Having reviewed the proposed land use development plan, Marvin & Associates completed an analysis of existing conditions, addressed trip generation, trip distribution and traffic assignment, and evaluated the resulting arterial and intersection capacity impacts, before making recommendations regarding mitigation of impacts. The study methodology and analysis procedures used in this study employed the most contemporary of analysis techniques, using nationally accepted standards in the areas of site development and transportation impact assessment. Recommendations made within this report are based upon those standards and the professional judgment of the author. SITE LOCATION & DESCRIPTION The Cannery Site Development is bounded by Rouse Avenue on the east; Oak Street on the south; Interstate 90 on the north; and undeveloped property on the west (see Figure 1). The Cannery Site Development currently has seven existing buildings that are accessed by two approaches onto Oak Street and one access onto Rouse Avenue. The development plans include four separate phases that will be developed consecutively within a three to five year time period. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 2 Cannery Site Development TIS Page 3 Four existing buildings located on the east end of the property are known as the Northside PUD Development and no changes will be made to that property. The Cannery development will be built adjacent to and integrated with the Northside PUD and these two developments will share access and circulation. The first phase of the Cannery Development includes remodeling of four existing buildings on the west end of the property. The new businesses within Phase 1 can only be accessed by an existing western approach to Oak Street. Phase 2 of the development would involve construction of two new buildings in the middle of the property adjacent to Oak Street. This phase would also involve closing the eastern ¾ access to Oak Street (located 350’ west of Rouse Avenue) and constructing a new access to Oak Street approximately 300’ west of the existing eastern access. This would allow the site access to operate outside of the Oak Street and Rouse Avenue intersection’s operational area of influence. The third phase of development would be construction of two additional buildings immediately north of the Phase 2 development. Phase 3 would also include construction of a second access to Rouse Avenue north of the existing access. The new Phase 3 Cannery access would be restricted to right-in and right-out movements only and has already been incorporated into the Rouse Street reconstruction project final plans. The fourth and final phase of development would involve construction of two new buildings on the far west end of the property that would be served by the accesses that are planned for the first three phases. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS Streets & Intersections Adjacent and potentially impacted public streets would include: Oak Street and Rouse Avenue. The intersections of Oak Street and Rouse Avenue and Tamarack Street and Rouse Avenue are the only public streets and intersections within an half mile of the site that would have potential for impacts . Oak Street is an east-west oriented arterial street that begins at Ferguson Avenue and ends at N. Rouse Avenue in Bozeman, a distance of approximately 3.0 miles. Oak Street has variable pavement widths and varying speed zones along its length. Adjacent to the site, Oak Street’s width ranges between 28’on the west end and 44’ on the east end, at its intersection with North Rouse Avenue. The City of Bozeman is in the process of developing plans to reconstruct Oak Street along its entire length and extend Oak Street to the west another o.5 miles to an intersection with Cottonwood Lane. That planning effort also envisions a long term project that would involve future construction of an Oak Street extension to the east over the railroad tracks to a connection with L Street. Rouse Avenue is a north-south aligned arterial street that begins at East Olive Street and extends 1.5 miles north to an intersection with West Griffin Drive. At that point Rouse Avenue continues in a northeast direction and is known as Bridger Drive. Rouse Avenue and Bridger Drive provides access to the Bridger Ski area, approximately 15 miles north of Bozeman. At the site, Rouse Avenue is approximately 40’ wide and has auxiliary turn lanes at its intersection with Oak Street. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 5 Tamarack Street is an east-west oriented collector street that extends from North Wallace Avenue to North 7th Avenue. It is approximately 44’ wide and carries two lanes of traffic along its length. Its primary function is to provide a connection between the North 7th Avenue and Rouse Avenue arterial streets. The two potentially impacted intersections are currently controlled by traffic signals. The North Rouse Avenue and Oak Street intersection has auxiliary turn lanes with exclusive signal phasing for north–south turn lanes while the Tamarack Street and Rouse Avenue intersection operates with two signal phases. The existing approaches to the Cannery property are “T” type intersections with full directional access except for the eastern-most access on Oak Street which has a divider island intended for right-in and right-out traffic movements only. However, traffic observations and counts indicate that numerous vehicles access the approach from the eastbound direction and turn left into the approach. Traffic Volumes Twenty-four hour automatic traffic counts were taken on multiple days in July 2014 on Rouse Avenue and on Oak Street. In addition, 24 hours counts were taken on all three existing Cannery accesses during the same days as the Oak Street and Rouse Avenue counts. The counts provided hourly variations, which were used to determine peak hours and provide base volumes for turning movement projections. Summaries of the counts can be found be Appendix A of this report. The weekday peak hour for traffic was found to occur between 4:30 and 5:30 p.m. Turning movement counts were taken at Rouse Avenue intersections with Oak Street and Tamarack Street on different days in July 2014 and they were also taken at the Cannery access intersections. Average weekday traffic (AWT) volumes were calculated on some street segments based on the AWT counts and turning movement counts. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 6 Cannery Site Development TIS Page 7 Figure 2 on the preceding page presents existing (2014) pm peak hour turning movement volumes at the potentially impacted intersections and AWT volumes on all street segments. Since the pm turning movement counts were taken in July 2014, it can be assumed that the peak hour counts replicate existing design hour counts, which would be slightly higher than volumes during the winter months. Pedestrian activity was found to be mostly insubstantial at all of the intersections and therefore was not indicated on the turning movement diagrams. Some bike traffic was observed, but bike volumes were substantial less than 1% of the vehicular volumes. Speeds The electronic counters used for traffic volume counts also recorded speeds and the speed data for both Rouse Avenue and Oak Street can be found in Appendix B of this report. On Oak Street, approximately 1,000’ west of Rouse Avenue it was determined that the 85th % speed in both the eastbound and westbound directions was approximately 39 miles per hour (mph). On Rouse Avenue, approximately 500’ south of Oak Street, the 85th % speed was 32 mph in the north bound direction and 31 mph to the southbound direction. Capacity Peak pm hour existing capacity calculations were completed (see Appendix C) for the two signalized intersection and the three existing accesses using the HCS 2010 and SigCinema software packages. Table 1 summarizes the results of the capacity calculations. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 8 Table 1. Existing Peak Hour Capacity Analysis Summary LTRLTRTLR Control Delay (s/veh)9.0 7.7 15.8 24.5 17.6 24.1 20.0 LOS A ABCBC B V/C Ratio 0.49 0.37 0.03 0.73 0.29 0.63 0.34 Queue Length (95%)7 50835 3 Control Delay (s/veh) LOS V/C Ratio Queue Length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS V/C Ratio Queue Length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS V/C Ratio Queue Length (95%) LR Control Delay (s/veh)20.1 11.2 LOS CB V/C Ratio 0.06 0.02 Queue Length (95%)0.2 0.1 Movement Group LTR 0.53 0.64 0.37 13 11 2 LTR Rouse Avenue And Tamarack Street PM 9.5 17.9 Movement Group Rouse Avenue and Oak Street PM 18.8 ABB 0.01 B 0 Intersection MOE NB SB EB LTR WB Movement Group Rouse Avenue and Northside PUD Access LTR 18.3 B 0.29 2 LTR 11.5 L 9.1 A 0.04 0.1 LR 19.2 C 0.23 0.9 Movement Group R L Oak Street and Northside PUD Access 11.4 8.4 BA 0.11 0.05 0.4 0.2 A 0.02 0.1 Movement Group L Oak Street and Western Cannery Access 8.4 Measures in the table include control delay (seconds/vehicle), level of service (LOS), volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio, and 95% queue length. The calculation results showed that all approach movements for each of the potentially impacted intersections and accesses currently operate at or above a LOS “C”. The highest volume to capacity ratio (v/c) occurs at the intersection of Rouse Avenue and Oak Street with a v/c of 0.76 for the southbound through movement. The highest vehicles queues occur in the northbound lanes at the Rouse Avenue and Tamarack Street intersection with 13 vehicles maximum. Observations at these intersections confirm that the calculated levels of service and queue conditions exist. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 9 One operational condition observed on two separate occasions during the study involved the Northside PUD Access and Rouse Avenue when a train crossed Rouse Avenue north of the intersection. The queue formation on Rouse Avenue backed-up and blocked access to and from the access for approximately 2 minutes in each occurrence. It was also observed that once the train had cleared, southbound traffic that had accumulated during the train crossing took approximately two cycles to clear the Oak Street and Rouse intersection, which resulted in queues backing-up from the signal and blocking the Northside PUD access to Rouse Avenue for an additional 2 to 3 minutes. TRIP GENERATION Table 2 presents a summary of trip generation for the Cannery Site Development. Within the table, trip generation rates and resulting trip projections for the average weekday, am, and pm peak hour are illustrated. Trip generation calculations for the development were based upon the specific land use information provided by the developer. Trip generation rates were taken from ITE’s Trip Generation Report, 9th Edition. The trip totals for average weekday trips (AWT) peak am and peak pm hours are shown for each phase of development along with the existing vehicular trips that currently access the site. The cumulative trips for the new development would be 2,582 AWT with the am hour having 236 new trips and the pm hour having 272 new trips. When combined with existing trips (traffic counts) accessing the site, full development of the site would have 5,429 AWT with 529 trips (230 entering and 299 exiting) in the peak pm hour period. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 10 Table 2. Cannery Development Trip Generation Estimates ITE No. of Rate Total Total Total Code Land Use Units Units Rate Trips Rate Trips Enter Exit Rate Trips Enter Exit Phase 1: 826 Speciality Retail 1.67 1000 sf *1 74 *2 211*3 523 710 General Office Building 36.37 1000 sf *4 401 *5 57 50 7 *6 54 9 45 932 High Turnover Restaurant 3.50 1000 sf *7 445 *8 38 21 17 *9 34 20 14 Phase 1 Totals = 920 97 72 25 93 31 62 Phase 2: 826 Speciality Retail 10.72 1000 sf *1 475 *2 10 6 4 *3 29 13 16 710 General Office Building 1.50 1000 sf *4 17 *5 220 *6 202 492 Health Club 11.90 1000 sf *10 392 *11 17 9 8 *12 43 25 18 Phase 2 Totals = 884 29 17 12 74 38 36 Phase 3: 710 General Office Building 42.50 1000 sf *4 469 *5 66 58 8 *6 63 11 52 Phase 3 Totals = 469 66 58 8 63 11 52 Phase 4: 710 General Office Building 28.00 1000 sf *4 309 *5 44 39 5 *6 42 7 35 Phase 4 Totals = 309 44 39 5 42 7 35 Phase 1 977225 933162 Phase 2 126 89 37 167 69 98 Phase 3 192 147 45 230 80 150 Phase 4 236 186 50 272 87 185 ITE Code Trip Rates AWT 826 *1 - (T) = 44.32(X) *2 - (T) = 0.95(X) (62% Enter) *3 - (T) = 2.71(X) (44% Enter) 710 *4 - (T) = 11.03(X) *5 - (T) = 1.56(X) (88% Enter) *6 - (T) = 1.49(X) (17% Enter) 932 *7 - (T) = 127.15(X) *8 - (T) = 10.81(X) (55% Enter) *9 - (T) = 9.85(X) (60% Enter) 492 *10 - (T) = 32.93(X) *11 - )T) = 1.41(X) (50% Enter) *12 - Ln(T) = 0.95Ln(X)+1.43 (57% Enter) 2582 Peak AM HourAverage Weekday Peak PM Hour Trip Rates - AM Hour Trip Rates - PM Hour CUMULATIVE TOTALS OF NEW DEVELOPMENT 920 1804 2273 Land use developments typically produce multi-modal trips that include pedestrian, bicycle, and transit trips, in addition to other vehicular trips. When evaluating vehicular impacts, these non-vehicular and transit-related types of trips can often be considered negligible in terms of their potential impacts on site access points. Since the Cannery Development is on the fringe of residential areas in a mostly industrial environment bike and pedestrian trip modes would appear to be minimal based on observations and traffic counts. For that reason, no reduction in vehicular trips could be justified. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 11 Trip generation potential can be further refined by determining the number of “new” external trips that would appear, as vehicular traffic, at development access points. It is common that, for developments which contain multiple land uses and/or complementary facilities, a portion of trips that would have origins or destinations at such facilities are captured internally. These trips are part of the total trip generation number, but do not have origins or destinations external to the development site, and as such, do not have an impact of the traffic network external to the development. These types of trips are known as “Internal Capture Trips” (ICT). The ITE Trip Generation Handbook contains information regarding procedures for estimating ICT. In the case of Cannery Site Development, the high number of vehicular trips attributed to existing businesses indicates that there is minimal if any ICT within the site. Even though future development may have an enhanced level of ICT, none of the trips were assumed to be ICT trips in order to introduce a higher level of conservatism in the TIS analysis. Trips can be further categorized as primary purpose, diverted link, or passerby purpose trips. Primary purpose trips are trips for which the development is a primary destination from any particular origin. Diverted link trips are trips made to a development as a secondary destination that must be diverted from a path between the origin and primary destination. Passerby trips are also trips made to a development as a secondary destination, but without a diversion from the primary trip path (i.e., a stop on the way home from work). Passerby trips do not represent “new” trips added to the adjacent street system. Thus, site generated passerby trips must be considered as new external trips (movements) at the site approach or approaches, but do not appear as new trips on the adjacent street system. The ITE Trip Generation Report provides methods for estimating passerby trips for a variety of facilities. In the case of Cannery Site Development, there are only a few land uses that are associated with passerby trip attraction. Table 3 is a summary of the land uses and the calculated passerby trips associated with the development in which they are included. Only Cannery Site Development TIS Page 12 Phases 1 and 2 would have passerby trips which would total 238 AWT or approximately 10% of the total new development trips. Table 3. Passerby Trip Summary - AWT & Peak PM Hour ITE AWT Total Code Land Use Trips Trips Enter Exit Phase 1 826 Speciality Retail 19 3 1 2 932 High Turnover Restaurant 100 17 10 7 Phase 2 0 826 Speciality Retail 119 15 7 8 Peak PM Hour Table 4 presents a summary of new trips that would be added to the existing street system without passerby trips included. The number of new trips for each phase is cumulative where Phase 1 would add 801 AWT and when Phase 4 is constructed and full development of the property has been completed, there would be an additional 2,344 AWT on the existing street system. Table 4. Cumulative Summary of New Trips AWT Total Enter Exit Phase 1 801 73 20 53 Phase 2 1566 132 51 81 Phase 3 2035 195 62 133 Phase 4 2344 237 69 168 Peak PM Hour Cannery Site Development TIS Page 13 TRIP DISTRIBUTION There are various methods available for determining the directional distribution of trips to and from site developments. For developments within a large urbanized area, the task is best accomplished through the creation of a computerized transportation model of the urban street system, which includes the proposed development changes. When the creation of a model is not feasible, realistic estimates can be made by determining the distribution of existing traffic volumes on the surrounding street system. The existing distribution can then be applied to newly generated trips, with adjustments made based upon the likely trip origins and destinations associated with the particular development land use or uses. For this development, an existing condition distribution model was developed based upon the distribution of existing traffic to and from the existing site development. Overall, approximately 57% of the trips would be to and from the west; 17% would be to and from the north; 26% would be to and from the south; and 0% would be to and from the east. At the intersection of Tamarack Street and Rouse Avenue, the distribution is further split with 2% to and from the west; 3% to and from the east; and 21% to and from the south. At some point in time when Oak Street is extended across the railroad tracks connecting with the street system on the east end of Bozeman, changes in trip distribution can be expected to occur. SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT The assignment of site traffic to a development’s street system and site access points is dependent upon several factors. Two such factors are external directional distribution and localized operational site conditions (i.e., the developments layout of streets and access conditions). The combined Cannery Site Development TIS Page 14 calculation of demand and least time accessibility are then used to estimate likely movement volumes at each individual access point. Turning movements at each access point were then calculated through the application of the distribution to full development vehicular trip generation totals. For the Cannery Site Development, the aforementioned access points consist of two existing accesses to Oak Street and one access to Rouse Avenue. These accesses would serve to distribute newly generated trips from Cannery Site Development to and from external origins and destinations. The directional distributions mentioned above in combination with the location of the phased development conditions were used in computer models developed for each of the phases. Least travel time routing to existing and new accesses determine the percentages of internal traffic at each access and the trip distribution demand was used to distribute traffic to the street system. This determined the directional traffic flow at each of the access points and at the potentially impacted intersections. Both AWT and peak pm hour traffic volumes represented by trip generation estimates for each phase were the routed onto the street system. Results of the traffic assignment analysis are illustrated in Figures 3 through 6, on the following pages. The volumes shown in Figure 3 are site generated traffic volumes associated with phase one of the development. The negative numbers shown at the western Oak Street access resulted from passerby traffic adjustments. This serves to illustrate the fact that the accesses include all trips generated, but the traffic assignments on the street system only include new trips (total trips less passerby trips). Cannery Site Development TIS Page 15 Cannery Site Development TIS Page 16 Cannery Site Development TIS Page 17 Cannery Site Development TIS Page 18 Cannery Site Development TIS Page 19 Figure 4 illustrates traffic assignment associated with new trips for both phases 1 and 2 of the site development. The assignment model for this condition had to account for the change in access locations and the internal connection path between the existing buildings on the west end and on the east end of the property, within the site. The existing eastern Oak Street access would be closed and a new access would be constructed 300’ west of the existing eastern Oak access. Internal redistribution of traffic due to alternative internal paths was modeled by performing least travel time/delay calculations. Figure 5 shows the traffic assignment for the first three phases of development and the addition of a second access to Rouse Avenue. The new Rouse Avenue access to the Phase 3 Cannery development would be a right-in and right-out only access. As can be seen in Figure 5, the new Rouse access would serve a limited volume of traffic due to its location and operational restrictions. It can also be seen that the eastern Oak Street access would have a higher volume than the western Oak Street access. Figure 6 illustrates traffic assignment associated with new trips for Phase 4, which represents full development of the site property. It can be seen that the traffic demand at both of the Oak Street accesses are approximately equal and the demand at the new Phase 3 Rouse Street Access would still be substantially less than the other accesses. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 20 IMPACTS Traffic Volumes Traffic volume impacts for site developments can be quantified by determining the change in traffic volumes expected at various points within the surrounding network of streets. Site traffic assignments give an indication of what volume of traffic could potentially be added to the street system during the average weekday. Yet in almost all cases, it is very difficult to determine AWT on any section of street to within 10% accuracy. Thus, impact analyses on streets with relative percentage increases less than 10% are not normally considered critical. In any case, the percent change in daily traffic can only be used to identify general locations where impacts could be significant. It is the determination of volume changes during peak traffic flow periods that provides specific information on the type and location of impacts that could potentially occur. Figures 7 thru 10, on the following pages, illustrates the relative traffic volume impacts related to development site traffic and along with traffic from the apartments that are currently under construction. The figures illustrate existing traffic plus site traffic at each of the site access intersections that would result if Cannery Site Development existed today (2014 traffic volume base). The percentage of AWT attributable to the subject development along key area streets is calculated and shown those figures. In Figure 7 it can be seen that none of the traffic volumes on the surrounding streets would increase by more than 5%, which would indicate no substantial impacts for the Phase 1 development. The turning movement volumes includes both exiting traffic and new traffic generated by the development, as is the case for all of the traffic impact figures. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 21 Cannery Site Development TIS Page 22 Cannery Site Development TIS Page 23 Cannery Site Development TIS Page 24 Cannery Site Development TIS Page 25 Figure 8 shows similar information as Figure 7 except these impacts are related to development of both Phase 1 and 2. It can be seen that all of the AWT increases would still be below 10% except for Oak Street, west of the development, which would experience a 10% increase. This could be significant since the AWT on this segment of street is currently near the maximum volumes that a two lane street can accommodate at LOS “C”. Figure 9 shows the traffic impacts to existing traffic from development of Phases 1 through 3. It can be seen that similar to Figure 9, the only significant impact would be the segment of Oak Street west of the site with a 13% increase. All of the traffic increases on Rouse Avenue would still be below 5%. Figure 10 illustrates the full development (Phase 1 through 4) traffic impacts. While similar to Phase 3 impacts, another segment of Oak Street would exceed a 10% increase in traffic volumes. The segment of Oak Street west of the site would be 15% and the segment between the site accesses would be right at 10%. Capacity Impacts Table 5 presents capacity analysis results for existing plus Phase 1 site generated traffic at potentially impacted intersections and accesses. The addition of site development traffic to existing traffic would not substantially impact any of the two intersections or site accesses. The eastbound and northbound approaches to the Oak Street and Rouse Avenue intersection would be the only intersections with any change in the volume to capacity (v/c) ratio. Changes in delay would be less than 1 second. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 26 Table 5. Existing Plus Phase 1 Site Traffic Capacity Analysis Summary LTRLTRTLR Control Delay (s/veh)9.1 7.7 15.8 24.5 17.6 25.0 20.2 LOS A ABCBC C V/C Ratio 0.51 0.37 0.03 0.33 0.33 0.63 0.38 Queue Length (95%)9 60835 3 Control Delay (s/veh) LOS V/C Ratio Queue Length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS V/C Ratio Queue Length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS V/C Ratio Queue Length (95%) LR Control Delay (s/veh)24.3 11.8 LOS CB V/C Ratio 0.20 0.09 Queue Length (95%)0.7 0.3 Intersection MOE NB SB EB WB Movement Group LTR Rouse Avenue and Oak Street PM 17.9 B 0.01 0 Movement Group LTR LTR LTR LTR Rouse Avenue And Tamarack Street PM 9.6 11.9 18.8 18.4 ABBB 0.54 0.66 0.37 0.30 14 14 2 3 Movement Group L LR Rouse Avenue and Northside PUD Access 9.1 19.2 AC 0.04 0.23 0.1 0.9 Movement Group R L BA 0.11 0.05 0.4 0.2 Movement Group L Oak Street and Northside PUD Access 11.5 8.4 Oak Street and Western Cannery Access 8.5 A 0.04 0.1 Rather than complete capacity calculations for each intersection and access for each phase of development, it was decided to perform the calculations for full development (Phases 1 through 4) and if any movement was impacted beyond acceptable levels, subsequent calculations for specific conditions would be made to determine at what point the impact would occur. Table 6 presents the capacity calculations for existing plus Phases 1 through 4 (full development) conditions. It can be seen that both the Northside PUD Rouse Avenue access and the western Oak Street access would operate at LOS “D”. An additional analysis of the Northside PUD access to Rouse Avenue for Phase 1 and 2 indicated that the access would operate at LOS “C”. Therefore, it can be concluded that the additional traffic associated with Phase 3 would create the capacity impact at that access. Capacity calculations for the western Oak Street Cannery Site Development TIS Page 27 access for Phase 3 and Phase 2 were completed and it was determined that even in Phase 2 the left-turn onto Oak would operate at LOS “D”. Thus it was concluded that Phase 2 traffic was creating the impact. Additional capacity calculations indicated that both the Rouse Avenue and the Oak Street accesses would operate at LOS “C” if a continuous left turn lane were provided on Oak Street and on Rouse Avenue. Table 6. Existing Plus Phases 1 thru 4 Site Traffic Capacity Analysis Summary LTRLTRTLR Control Delay (s/veh)9.8 7.7 15.8 25.8 17.6 25.4 20.3 LOS A ABCBC C V/C Ratio 0.54 0.37 0.03 0.76 0.30 0.66 0.39 Queue Length (95%)8 50827 3 Control Delay (s/veh) LOS V/C Ratio Queue Length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS V/C Ratio Queue Length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS V/C Ratio Queue Length (95%) LR Control Delay (s/veh)31.6 12.4 LOS DB V/C Ratio 0.35 0.10 Queue Length (95%)1.5 0.3 Intersection MOE NB SB EB WB Movement Group LTR Rouse Avenue and Oak Street PM 17.9 B 0.01 0 Movement Group LTR LTR LTR LTR Rouse Avenue And Tamarack Street PM 9.6 12.1 18.9 18.4 ABBB 0.54 0.67 0.38 0.30 13 14 2 2 Movement Group L LR 28.4 AD 0.04 0.38 0.1 1.7 Movement Group R L Rouse Avenue and Northside PUD Access 9.2 CA 0.31 0.07 1.3 0.2 Movement Group L Oak Street and New Eastern Cannery Access 15.6 8.6 Oak Street and Western Cannery Access 8.8 A 0.04 0.1 Cannery Site Development TIS Page 28 Turn Lane Warrants Auxiliary turn lane warrants were investigated for the existing and new accesses. (see Appendix D). The existing eastern access on Oak Street has a painted median transition that currently operates as a defacto left-turn lane even though left-turns are not technically allowed. The existing Cannery access on Rouse Avenue has a fully painted median that is successfully used as a left-turn lane. None of the site access traffic projections have right-turn volumes that exceed 40 vehicles per hour (vph) in the peak pm hours even in Phase 4 of development. Thus, left-turn warrants were only completed for the Oak Street sites accesses. It was determined that left-turning traffic at the western Oak Street approach would marginally be met in Phase 1 of development and would definitely be met in Phases 2 through 4. At the new eastern Oak Street access a left-turn lane warrant would be met in Phase 2, when the new access is constructed. Since the two Oak Street accesses would be within 350’ of each other, a continuous two-way left turn lane (TWLTL) would be required. IMPACT MITIGATION As is currently proposed, Cannery Site Development would not substantially impact efficient operations at any of the key intersections within a one-half mile distance of the development site. Thus, mitigation of impacts to operational efficiency would not be required. Warrants for auxiliary left-turn lanes on Oak Street at the existing western access and at the new Phase 2 access would be required when Phase 2 site development is constructed. Capacity calculations indicate that the LOS “D” condition at the Northside PUD Access on Rouse Avenue could be mitigated by constructing a TWLTL on Rouse Avenue when Phase 3 is developed. Also the LOS “D” on the western Oak Street access would be mitigated by construction of a TWLTL on Oak Street in Phase 2 of the development plan. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 29 RECOMMENDATIONS Development of Cannery Site Development properties as detailed in this report would add approximately 2,344 vehicle trips to the surrounding street system on the average weekday. The TIS has determined that while this development will not impact the intersection of Rouse Avenue and Oak Street to any significant degree. The same would be true of the Rouse Avenue and Tamarack Street intersection. Safety impacts on Oak Street were investigated and it was determined that an auxiliary left-turn lane would be warranted at both of the site accesses during Phase 2 of development. In evaluating the current geometric requirements for construction of an auxiliary left-turn lane at this intersection, it was determine that a TWLTL would be required from the intersection of Oak Street and Rouse Avenue to a point west of the western most access to allow both accesses to operate safely. The TWLTL would also improve the efficiency of both accesses which would mitigate the projected LOS “D” operations at the western access. It is not known whether planned improvements on Oak Street will be completed prior to the construction of Phase 2 site improvements. However, coordination in the design of both projects should be considered to avoid construction of improvements that could possibly be wasted. It would seem reasonable to delay construction of the TWLTL until definitive plans for Oak Street have been developed so that any geometric improvements completed prior to total reconstruction of Oak Street can be fully incorporated into the future street section. Cannery Site Development TIS Page 30 Projected capacity deficiency at the existing Cannery Access on Rouse Avenue could also be mitigated by constructing a TWLTL on Rouse Avenue. The status of this improvement is similar to that of Oak Street, since MDT has plans to reconstruct Oak Street, but the timing is not certain. The new Phase 3 Cannery Access on Oak Street would operate as a right-in and right-out approach and will only serve minor traffic demand. Since this access has already been incorporated into t he Rouse Avenue reconstruction plans, it can be assumed that no impacts will need to be mitigated. If future operations could be improved by allowing northbound left-turn movements at this access, the planned TWLTL on Rouse Avenue could allow that movement while still restricting left-turns onto Rouse Avenue from the site. Appendix A 24 Hour Traffic Count Summaries Hour 7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014 Average % of 7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014Average % of 7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014Average % ofBegin Tues Weds Thurs Weekday Weekday Tues Weds Thurs Weekday Weekday Tues Weds Thurs Weekday Weekday118 11150.2% 8 13110.2% 26 26260.2%28880.1% 8 990.1% 16 16160.1%312 7100.2% 6 1080.1% 18 18180.2%414 16150.3% 13 12130.2% 27 27270.2%542 43430.7% 49 47480.8% 91 91910.8%6137 1281332.3% 168 1411552.5% 305 3053052.6%7288 2742814.8% 348 3603545.8% 636 6366365.4%8313 3333235.6% 424 4294277.0% 737 7377376.2%9345 3283375.8% 396 4064016.6% 741 7417416.3%10299 3753375.8% 396 3923946.4% 695 6956955.9%11429 4664487.7% 410 4774447.3% 839 8398397.1%12467 5435058.7% 444 4474467.3% 911 9119117.7%13419 4354277.3% 433 4624487.3% 852 8528527.2%14458 4524557.8% 422 4384307.0% 880 8808807.5%15434 437 4494407.6% 439 412 5074537.4% 873 849 8498577.3%16487 487 4364708.1% 442 439 4834557.4% 929 926 9269277.8%17517 501 3754648.0% 427 414 4564327.1% 944 915 9159257.8%18350 306 2453005.2% 413 334 4183886.3% 763 640 6406815.8%19299 236 1792384.1% 305 282 2842904.7% 604 518 5185474.6%20287 204 2142354.0% 226 233 1672093.4% 513 437 4374623.9%21130 174 1961672.9% 158 169 1161482.4% 288 343 3433252.7%2278 90 96881.5% 112 92 64891.5% 190 182 1821851.6%2335 40 85530.9% 31 44 55430.7% 66 84 84780.7%2417 34 39300.5% 24 23 29250.4% 41 57 57520.4%00Total 2634 5758 5733 5820 100.0% 2577 5967 6222 6117 100.0% 5211 11725 11725 11812 100.0%Northbound Southbound Both DirectionsRouse Avenue 500' South of Oak Street0.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%7.0%8.0%9.0%1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations0.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%7.0%8.0%9.0%10.0%1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations0.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%7.0%8.0%123456789101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations Hour 7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014 Average % of 7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014Average % of 7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014Average % ofBegin Tues Weds Thurs Weekday Weekday Tues Weds Thurs Weekday Weekday Tues Weds Thurs Weekday Weekday1614100.2% 13 10120.3% 19 19190.2%27770.1% 7 560.1% 14 14140.2%3911100.2% 9 570.2% 18 18180.2%48880.2% 9 990.2% 17 17170.2%553 54541.1% 21 28250.6% 74 74740.8%6164 1481563.2% 84 82832.0% 248 2482482.8%7300 2972996.1% 160 1521563.7% 460 4604605.1%8337 3043216.6% 189 2142024.8% 526 5265265.8%9290 2942926.0% 261 2572596.2% 551 5515516.1%10298 3173086.3% 271 2622676.3% 569 5695696.3%11346 3813647.5% 349 3783648.6% 695 6956957.7%12376 3593687.6% 381 4123979.4% 757 7577578.4%13363 3773707.6% 308 3053077.3% 671 6716717.4%14331 3703517.2% 273 3533137.4% 604 6046046.7%15351 294 3453306.8% 323 341 3533398.1% 674 635 6356487.2%16419 340 3203607.4% 349 355 3223428.1% 768 695 6957198.0%17407 327 3263537.3% 432 378 2883668.7% 839 705 7057508.3%18332 246 3042946.1% 265 241 1772285.4% 597 487 4875245.8%19205 214 1902034.2% 191 163 1221593.8% 396 377 3773834.3%20155 176 1521613.3% 169 140 1351483.5% 324 316 3163193.5%21125 127 1031182.4% 95 101 1151042.5% 220 228 2282252.5%2261 68 75681.4% 71 59 73681.6% 132 127 1271291.4%2327 27 52350.7% 22 22 54330.8% 49 49 49490.5%2414 20 32220.5% 16 24 26220.5% 30 44 44390.4%00Total 2096 4727 4840 4859 100.0% 1933 4159 4137 4211 100.0% 4029 8886 8886 9008 100.0%Eastbound Westbound Both DirectionsOak Street 1000' West of Rouse Avenue0.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%7.0%8.0%9.0%1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations0.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%7.0%8.0%1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations0.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%7.0%8.0%9.0%10.0%123456789101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations Hour7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014 Average % of7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014Average % of7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014Average % ofBegin Tues Weds Thurs WeekdayWeekdayTues Weds Thurs WeekdayWeekdayTues Weds Thurs WeekdayWeekday10000.0% 0 000.0% 0 000.0%20110.1% 0 110.1% 0 000.0%31010.1% 1 010.1% 2 220.2%40110.1% 0 000.0% 0 000.0%51110.2% 1 320.3% 2 220.2%612 27203.1% 27 31294.4% 39 39393.1%741 34386.0% 39 46436.5% 80 80806.3%850 57548.5% 89 697912.1% 139 13913910.9%972 52629.8% 75 626910.5% 147 14714711.5%1047 40446.9% 37 41396.0% 84 84846.6%1161 38507.9% 59 42517.7% 120 1201209.4%1284 727812.4% 82 908613.2% 166 16616613.0%1344 45457.1% 39 54477.1% 83 83836.5%1440 45436.7% 38 58487.4% 78 78786.1%1549 43 52487.6% 41 35 48416.3% 90 78 78826.4%1632 33 42365.7% 36 45 40406.2% 68 78 78755.8%1744 38 38406.3% 48 41 41436.6% 92 79 79836.5%1845 22 38355.6% 21 17 20193.0% 66 39 39483.8%1915 20 18182.8% 6 4 860.9% 21 24 24231.8%2013 10 13121.9% 9 4 1081.2% 22 14 14171.3%2176350.8% 2 1 320.3% 9 7 780.6%2260020.3% 1 0 110.1% 7 0 020.2%2300410.2% 0 0 100.1% 0 0 000.0%2400000.0% 0 0 000.0% 0 0 000.0%Total 211 625 621 630 100.0% 164 634 669 653 100.0% 375 1259 1259 1278 100.0%Eastbound - Exit Westbound - Enter Both DirectionsCannery Access to Rouse Avenue North of Oak Street0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%10.0%12.0%14.0%1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%10.0%12.0%14.0%1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%10.0%12.0%14.0%123456789101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations Hour 7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014 Average % of 7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014Average % of 7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014Average % ofBegin Tues Weds Thurs Weekday Weekday Tues Weds Thurs Weekday Weekday Tues Weds Thurs Weekday Weekday10000.0% 0 000.0% 0 000.0%20000.0% 0 000.0% 0 000.0%30110.1% 0 000.0% 0 010.0%40000.0% 1 110.2% 1 110.1%51320.4% 0 000.0% 1 120.2%610 891.8% 9 12112.1% 19 19201.9%729 31305.9% 15 19173.4% 44 44474.7%880 787915.4% 39 22316.2% 119 11911010.9%954 30428.2% 56 36469.3% 110 110888.8%1024 29275.2% 39 22316.2% 63 63575.7%1136 44407.8% 25 28275.4% 61 61676.6%1259 676312.3% 64 636412.9% 123 12312712.6%1335 34356.7% 38 38387.7% 73 73737.2%1434 35356.7% 24 45357.0% 58 58696.9%1529 34326.2% 36 53459.0% 0 65 65767.6%1649 24 29346.6% 27 27 42326.5% 76 51 51666.6%1757 34 38438.4% 53 41 36438.8% 110 75 75868.6%1826 13 30234.5% 41 29 45387.8% 67 42 42616.1%19981091.8% 11 19 8132.6% 20 27 27222.2%20731171.4% 10 8 13102.1% 17 11 11171.7%2110210.2% 5 5 19102.0% 6 5 5111.1%2250120.4% 4 0 840.8% 9 0 060.6%2300000.0% 0 0 000.0% 0 0 000.0%2400000.0% 0 0 000.0% 0 0 000.0%Total 154 473 515 512 100.0% 151 475 510 493 100.0% 305 948 948 1004 100.0%Northbound - Enter Southbound - Exit Both DirectionsCannery Access to Oak Street 350' West of Rouse Avenue0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%10.0%12.0%14.0%1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%10.0%12.0%14.0%16.0%18.0%1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%10.0%12.0%14.0%123456789101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations Hour 7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014 Average % of 7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014Average % of 7/1/2014 7/2/2014 7/3/2014Average % ofBegin Tues Weds Thurs Weekday Weekday Tues Weds Thurs Weekday Weekday Tues Weds Thurs Weekday Weekday10000.0% 0 000.0% 0 000.0%20110.2% 0 320.5% 0 000.0%32010.3% 1 010.2% 3 330.5%40000.0% 0 000.0% 0 000.0%50000.0% 0 000.0% 0 000.0%66241.4% 1 110.4% 7 771.2%761293.1% 5 551.8% 11 11111.9%8714113.7% 3 16103.4% 10 10101.8%916 10134.5% 9 782.9% 25 25254.4%1023 16206.8% 25 17217.5% 48 48488.5%1123 25248.4% 25 23248.6% 48 48488.5%1231 17248.4% 17 18186.3% 48 48488.5%1325 19227.7% 20 17196.6% 45 45458.0%1414 29227.5% 17 14165.5% 31 31315.5%1523 27258.7% 17 25217.5% 0 40 40274.7%1623 26 26258.7% 30 27 302910.4% 53 53 53539.4%1737 40 303612.4% 18 26 17207.3% 55 66 666211.0%1822 30 19248.3% 31 29 272910.4% 53 59 595710.1%1911 17 16155.1% 23 25 14217.4% 34 42 42397.0%20311872.6% 20 27 22238.2% 23 38 38335.8%2122531.0% 10 4 982.7% 12 6 681.4%2222220.7% 3 5 441.4% 5 7 761.1%2310210.3% 1 3 431.0% 2 3 330.5%2410000.1% 1 0 000.1% 2 0 010.1%Total 102 304 280 287 100.0% 137 286 273 280 100.0% 239 590 590 565 100.0%Northbound - Enter Southbound - Exit Both DirectionsCannery Access to Oak Street 900' West of Rouse Avenue0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%10.0%12.0%1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%10.0%12.0%14.0%1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%10.0%12.0%123456789101112131415161718192021222324% AWTBegin HourHourly Variations Appendix B Speed Statistics SPOT SPEED STUDY ANALYSIS (Counter) SITE :Rouse Avenue 500' South of Oak DIRECTION:Northbound DATE:June 30 to July 5, 2014 TIME:118 Hours SPEED SPEED CUMULATIVE RELATIVE CUMULATIVE VALUE FREQUENCY FREQUENCY FREQ (%) FREQ (%) 0 to 15 15 536 536 2.79% 2.79% 16 to 20 20 440 976 2.29% 5.07% 21 to 25 25 3400 4376 17.67% 22.74% 26 to 30 30 9953 14329 51.73% 74.47% 31 to 35 35 4092 18421 21.27% 95.73% 36 to 40 40 472 18893 2.45% 98.19% 41 to 45 45 118 19011 0.61% 98.80% 46 to 50 50 52 19063 0.27% 99.07% 51 to 55 55 28 19091 0.15% 99.22% 56 to 60 60 44 19135 0.23% 99.44% 61 to 65 65 56 19191 0.29% 99.73% 66 to 70 70 51 19242 0.27% 100.00% TOTAL VEHICLES =19242 MEAN SPEED =30.05 mph 85TH PERCENTILE =32.48 mph PACE SPEED =26 mph TO 35 mph Number of Vehicles in Pace =14045 % of Total Vehicles in Pace =73.0% RANGE SPEED 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00% 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65PERCENTAGE OF VEHICLESSPEED (MILES/HOUR) SIGMOID CURVE SPOT SPEED STUDY ANALYSIS (Counter) SITE :Rouse Avenue 500' South of Oak DIRECTION:Southbound DATE:June 30 to July 5, 2014 TIME:118 Hours SPEED SPEED CUMULATIVE RELATIVE CUMULATIVE VALUE FREQUENCY FREQUENCY FREQ (%) FREQ (%) 0 to 15 15 794 794 3.95% 3.95% 16 to 20 20 971 1765 4.83% 8.77% 21 to 25 25 5475 7240 27.21% 35.98% 26 to 30 30 9179 16419 45.62% 81.60% 31 to 35 35 3016 19435 14.99% 96.59% 36 to 40 40 330 19765 1.64% 98.23% 41 to 45 45 103 19868 0.51% 98.74% 46 to 50 50 67 19935 0.33% 99.07% 51 to 55 55 33 19968 0.16% 99.23% 56 to 60 60 44 20012 0.22% 99.45% 61 to 65 65 48 20060 0.24% 99.69% 66 to 70 80 62 20122 0.31% 100.00% TOTAL VEHICLES =20122 MEAN SPEED =28.72 mph 85TH PERCENTILE =31.14 mph PACE SPEED =21 mph TO 30 mph Number of Vehicles in Pace =14654 % of Total Vehicles in Pace =72.8% RANGE SPEED 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00% 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65PERCENTAGE OF VEHICLESSPEED (MILES/HOUR) SIGMOID CURVE SPOT SPEED STUDY ANALYSIS (Counter) SITE :Rouse Avenue 500' South of Oak DIRECTION:Both Directions DATE:June 30 to July 5, 2014 TIME:118 Hours SPEED SPEED CUMULATIVE RELATIVE CUMULATIVE VALUE FREQUENCY FREQUENCY FREQ (%) FREQ (%) 0 to 15 15 1330 1330 3.38% 3.38% 16 to 20 20 1411 2741 3.58% 6.96% 21 to 25 25 8875 11616 22.55% 29.51% 26 to 30 30 19132 30748 48.60% 78.11% 31 to 35 35 7108 37856 18.06% 96.17% 36 to 40 40 802 38658 2.04% 98.21% 41 to 45 45 221 38879 0.56% 98.77% 46 to 50 50 119 38998 0.30% 99.07% 51 to 55 55 61 39059 0.15% 99.23% 56 to 60 60 88 39147 0.22% 99.45% 61 to 65 65 104 39251 0.26% 99.71% 66 to 70 70 113 39364 0.29% 100.00% TOTAL VEHICLES =39364 750 MEAN SPEED =29.37 mph 85TH PERCENTILE =31.91 mph PACE SPEED =21 mph TO 30 mph Number of Vehicles in Pace =28007 % of Total Vehicles in Pace =71.1% RANGE SPEED 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00% 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65PERCENTAGE OF VEHICLESSPEED (MILES/HOUR) SIGMOID CURVE SPOT SPEED STUDY ANALYSIS (Counter) SITE :Oak Street 1000' West of Rouse DIRECTION:Eastbound DATE:June 30 to July 5, 2014 TIME:118 Hours SPEED SPEED CUMULATIVE RELATIVE CUMULATIVE VALUE FREQUENCY FREQUENCY FREQ (%) FREQ (%) 0 to 15 15 4948 4948 31.44% 31.44% 16 to 20 20 140 5088 0.89% 32.33% 21 to 25 25 364 5452 2.31% 34.65% 26 to 30 30 1070 6522 6.80% 41.45% 31 to 35 35 3811 10333 24.22% 65.66% 36 to 40 40 4132 14465 26.26% 91.92% 41 to 45 45 999 15464 6.35% 98.27% 46 to 50 50 129 15593 0.82% 99.09% 51 to 55 55 42 15635 0.27% 99.36% 56 to 60 60 34 15669 0.22% 99.57% 61 to 65 65 36 15705 0.23% 99.80% 66 to 70 80 31 15736 0.20% 100.00% TOTAL VEHICLES =15736 MEAN SPEED =30.18 mph 85TH PERCENTILE =38.68 mph PACE SPEED =31 mph TO 40 mph Number of Vehicles in Pace =7943 % of Total Vehicles in Pace =50.5% RANGE SPEED 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00% 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65PERCENTAGE OF VEHICLESSPEED (MILES/HOUR) SIGMOID CURVE SPOT SPEED STUDY ANALYSIS (Counter) SITE :Oak Street 1000' West of Rouse DIRECTION:Westbound DATE:June 30 to July 5, 2014 TIME:118 Hours SPEED SPEED CUMULATIVE RELATIVE CUMULATIVE VALUE FREQUENCY FREQUENCY FREQ (%) FREQ (%) 0 to 15 15 366 366 2.73% 2.73% 16 to 20 20 281 647 2.09% 4.82% 21 to 25 25 352 999 2.62% 7.44% 26 to 30 30 1841 2840 13.72% 21.16% 31 to 35 35 5163 8003 38.47% 59.63% 36 to 40 40 4353 12356 32.43% 92.06% 41 to 45 45 849 13205 6.33% 98.39% 46 to 50 50 103 13308 0.77% 99.16% 51 to 55 55 19 13327 0.14% 99.30% 56 to 60 60 22 13349 0.16% 99.46% 61 to 65 65 42 13391 0.31% 99.78% 66 to 70 70 30 13421 0.22% 100.00% TOTAL VEHICLES =13421 MEAN SPEED =35.65 mph 85TH PERCENTILE =38.91 mph PACE SPEED =31 mph TO 40 mph Number of Vehicles in Pace =9516 % of Total Vehicles in Pace =70.9% RANGE SPEED 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00% 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65PERCENTAGE OF VEHICLESSPEED (MILES/HOUR) SIGMOID CURVE SPOT SPEED STUDY ANALYSIS (Counter) SITE :Oak Street 1000' West of Rouse DIRECTION:Both Directions DATE:June 30 to July 5, 2014 TIME:118 Hours SPEED SPEED CUMULATIVE RELATIVE CUMULATIVE VALUE FREQUENCY FREQUENCY FREQ (%) FREQ (%) 0 to 15 15 5314 5314 18.23% 18.23% 16 to 20 20 421 5735 1.44% 19.67% 21 to 25 25 716 6451 2.46% 22.13% 26 to 30 30 2911 9362 9.98% 32.11% 31 to 35 35 8974 18336 30.78% 62.89% 36 to 40 40 8485 26821 29.10% 91.99% 41 to 45 45 1848 28669 6.34% 98.33% 46 to 50 50 232 28901 0.80% 99.12% 51 to 55 55 61 28962 0.21% 99.33% 56 to 60 60 56 29018 0.19% 99.52% 61 to 65 65 78 29096 0.27% 99.79% 66 to 70 70 61 29157 0.21% 100.00% TOTAL VEHICLES =29157 750 MEAN SPEED =32.70 mph 85TH PERCENTILE =38.80 mph PACE SPEED =31 mph TO 40 mph Number of Vehicles in Pace =17459 % of Total Vehicles in Pace =59.9% RANGE SPEED 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00% 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65PERCENTAGE OF VEHICLESSPEED (MILES/HOUR) SIGMOID CURVE Appendix C Capacity Calculations Appendix C-1 Existing Traffic Capacity Calculations HCM Analysis Summary Marvin & Associates R Marvin Paek PM Existing Analysis Duration: 15 mins. Oak Street/Rouse Avenue 10/24/2014 Case: Oak & Rouse Exist Area Type: Non CBD 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 WB NB SB 2 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 LT 12.0 LTR 12.0 L 12.0 L 12.0 R 12.0 TR 12.0 T 12.0 R 12.0 East West North South LTRLTRLTRLTRData Movement Volume (vph) PHF % Heavy Vehicles Lane Groups Arrival Type RTOR Vol (vph) Peds/Hour % Grade Buses/Hour Parkers/Hour (Left|Right) LT 3 R 3 LTR 3 L 3 TR 3 L 3 T 3 R 3 220 0.88 2 1 0.88 2 195 0.88 2 1 0.50 2 1 0.50 2 1 0.50 2 236 0.89 2 356 0.89 2 1 0.89 2 1 0.86 2 383 0.86 2 174 0.86 2 60 5 0 0 --- --- 0 5 0 0 --- --- 0 5 0 0 --- --- 45 5 0 0 --- --- Signal Settings: Operational Analysis Cycle Length: Lost Time Per Cycle: Phase: EB WB NB SB Green Yellow All Red 12345678Ped Only LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP 0 20.0 3.0 1.5 15.0 3.0 0.0 23.0 3.0 1.5 Actuated 70.0 Sec 12.0 Sec Capacity Analysis Results Approach: App Group Lane Cap(vph)v/sRatio g/CRatio LaneGroup v/cRatio Delay(sec/veh) LOS Delay(sec/veh) LOSEB * L 398 0.180 0.286 L 0.628 24.1 C 22.6 C R 448 0.098 0.286 R 0.342 20.0 B WB LTR 505 0.003 0.286 LTR 0.012 17.9 B 17.9 B NB Lper 162 0.000 0.393 8.2 A * Lpro 379 0.150 0.214 L 0.490 9.0 A TR 1091 0.215 0.586 TR 0.368 7.7 A SB L 321 0.001 0.329 L 0.003 15.8 B 22.8 C * T 612 0.239 0.329 T 0.727 24.5 C R 516 0.095 0.329 R 0.291 17.6 B Intersection: Delay = 16.9sec/veh Int. LOS=B Xc= 0.69 * Critical Lane Group (v/s)Crit= 0.57 SIG/Cinema v3.08 Marvin & Associates Page 1 NETSIM Summary Results Marvin & Associates R Marvin Paek PM Existing Oak Street/Rouse Avenue 10/24/2014 Case: Oak & Rouse Exist App Group Lane (veh) Avg/MaxPer LaneQueues (mph) SpeedAverage Period) (% of PeakWorst LaneSpillback in EB L 4 / 5 13.9 0.0 R 2 / 3 13.6 0.0 All 13.8 0.0 WB LTR 0 / 0 21.5 0.0 All 21.5 0.0 NB L 3 / 7 9.1 0.0 TR 3 / 5 19.0 0.0 All 15.4 0.0 SB L 0 / 0 0.0 0.0 T 6 / 8 13.6 0.0 R 1 / 3 17.2 0.0 All 14.0 0.0 Intersect. 14.4 SIG/Cinema v3.08 Marvin & Associates Page 2 220 1 195 1 1 1 236 356 1 1 383 174 1 20 23 1 20 23 2 15 03 3 22 23 3 22 23 HCM Analysis Summary Existing 2014 R Marvin Peak PM Analysis Duration: 15 mins. Tamarack Street/Rouse Avenue 01/06/2015 Case: Rouse & Tamarack Exist Area Type: Non CBD 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 WB NB SB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LTR 12.0 LTR 12.0 LTR 12.0 LTR 12.0 East West North South LTRLTRLTRLTRData Movement Volume (vph) PHF % Heavy Vehicles Lane Groups Arrival Type RTOR Vol (vph) Peds/Hour % Grade Buses/Hour Parkers/Hour (Left|Right) LTR 3 LTR 3 LTR 3 LTR 3 64 0.90 1 28 0.90 1 31 0.90 1 4 0.90 1 34 0.90 1 93 0.90 1 26 0.90 1 471 0.90 1 4 0.90 1 43 0.90 1 525 0.90 1 29 0.90 1 5 5 0 0 --- --- 20 5 0 0 --- --- 0 5 0 0 --- --- 5 5 0 0 --- --- Signal Settings: Operational Analysis Cycle Length: Lost Time Per Cycle: Phase: EB WB NB SB Green Yellow All Red 12345678Ped Only LTP LTP LTP LTP 0 15.0 3.5 1.5 35.0 3.5 1.5 Pretimed 60.0 Sec 10.0 Sec Capacity Analysis Results Approach: App Group Lane Cap(vph)v/sRatio g/CRatio LaneGroup v/cRatio Delay(sec/veh) LOS Delay(sec/veh) LOSEB * LTR 356 0.092 0.250 LTR 0.368 18.8 B 18.8 B WB LTR 422 0.073 0.250 LTR 0.291 18.3 B 18.3 B NB LTR 1046 0.310 0.583 LTR 0.532 9.5 A 9.5 A SB * LTR 1022 0.376 0.583 LTR 0.644 11.5 B 11.5 B Intersection: Delay = 11.9sec/veh Int. LOS=B Xc= 0.56 * Critical Lane Group (v/s)Crit= 0.47 SIG/Cinema v3.08 Marvin & Associates Page 1 NETSIM Summary Results Existing 2014 R Marvin Peak PM Tamarack Street/Rouse Avenue 01/06/2015 Case: Rouse & Tamarack Exist App Group Lane (veh) Avg/MaxPer LaneQueues (mph) SpeedAverage Period) (% of PeakWorst LaneSpillback in EB LTR 2 / 2 13.4 0.0 All 13.4 0.0 WB LTR 1 / 2 15.8 0.0 All 15.8 0.0 NB LTR 5 / 13 13.9 0.0 All 13.9 0.0 SB LTR 8 / 11 11.4 0.0 All 11.4 0.0 Intersect. 12.8 SIG/Cinema v3.08 Marvin & Associates Page 2 64 28 31 4 34 93 26 471 4 43 525 29 1 14 24 1 14 24 2 34 24 2 34 24 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 1/2/2015 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Rouse & Cannery Access Jurisdiction Bozeman Analysis Year 2014 Existing Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Cannery Access North/South Street: Rouse Avenue Intersection Orientation: North-South Study 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)35 542 523 15 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.78 0.78 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)38 589 0 0 670 19 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T 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)10 35 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.60 1.00 0.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)16 0 58 0 0 0 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 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR v (veh/h)38 74 C (m) (veh/h)915 327 v/c 0.04 0.23 95% queue length 0.13 0.85 Control Delay (s/veh)9.1 19.2 LOS A C Approach Delay (s/veh)----19.2 Approach LOS ----C Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/2/2015 3:33 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 1/2/2015file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k80F3.tmp TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 10/24/2014 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Oak & 1st App. West Rouse Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Analysis Year 2014 Existing Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Oak Street North/South Street: 1st Access W Rouse Intersection Orientation: East-West Study 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)48 416 403 8 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)53 462 0 0 447 8 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 1 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h)51 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.70 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)0 0 0 0 0 72 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 0 0 0 0 1 Configuration R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT R v (veh/h)53 72 C (m) (veh/h)1109 636 v/c 0.05 0.11 95% queue length 0.15 0.38 Control Delay (s/veh)8.4 11.4 LOS A B Approach Delay (s/veh)----11.4 Approach LOS ----B Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 10/24/2014 4:29 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 10/24/2014file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kA9DB.tmp TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 10/24/2014 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Oak & 2nd App. West Rouse Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Analysis Year 2014 Existing Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Oak Street North/South Street: 2nd Access W Rouse Intersection Orientation: East-West Study 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)17 454 434 20 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)18 504 0 0 482 22 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 1 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h)10 8 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.70 1.00 0.70 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)0 0 0 14 0 11 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 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R 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 R v (veh/h)18 14 11 C (m) (veh/h)1065 253 587 v/c 0.02 0.06 0.02 95% queue length 0.05 0.17 0.06 Control Delay (s/veh)8.4 20.1 11.2 LOS A C B Approach Delay (s/veh)----16.2 Approach LOS ----C Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 10/24/2014 4:34 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 10/24/2014file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kA9DB.tmp Appendix C-2 Existing Plus Phase 1 Site Traffic HCM Analysis Summary Marvin & Associates R Marvin Paek PM Existing Plus Phase 1 Analysis Duration: 15 mins. Oak Street/Rouse Avenue 10/24/2014 Case: Oak & Rouse Exist Plus Phase 1 Area Type: Non CBD 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 WB NB SB 2 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 LT 12.0 LTR 12.0 L 12.0 L 12.0 R 12.0 TR 12.0 T 12.0 R 12.0 East West North South LTRLTRLTRLTRData Movement Volume (vph) PHF % Heavy Vehicles Lane Groups Arrival Type RTOR Vol (vph) Peds/Hour % Grade Buses/Hour Parkers/Hour (Left|Right) LT 3 R 3 LTR 3 L 3 TR 3 L 3 T 3 R 3 229 0.88 2 1 0.88 2 209 0.88 2 1 0.50 2 1 0.50 2 1 0.50 2 245 0.89 2 356 0.89 2 1 0.89 2 1 0.86 2 383 0.86 2 177 0.86 2 60 5 0 0 --- --- 0 5 0 0 --- --- 0 5 0 0 --- --- 45 5 0 0 --- --- Signal Settings: Operational Analysis Cycle Length: Lost Time Per Cycle: Phase: EB WB NB SB Green Yellow All Red 12345678Ped Only LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP 0 20.0 3.0 1.5 15.0 3.0 0.0 23.0 3.0 1.5 Actuated 70.0 Sec 12.0 Sec Capacity Analysis Results Approach: App Group Lane Cap(vph)v/sRatio g/CRatio LaneGroup v/cRatio Delay(sec/veh) LOS Delay(sec/veh) LOSEB * L 398 0.187 0.286 L 0.653 25.0 C 23.1 C R 448 0.108 0.286 R 0.377 20.2 C WB LTR 505 0.003 0.286 LTR 0.012 17.9 B 17.9 B NB Lper 162 0.000 0.393 8.3 A * Lpro 379 0.155 0.214 L 0.508 9.1 A TR 1091 0.215 0.586 TR 0.368 7.7 A SB L 321 0.001 0.329 L 0.003 15.8 B 22.7 C * T 612 0.239 0.329 T 0.727 24.5 C R 516 0.097 0.329 R 0.297 17.6 B Intersection: Delay = 17.1sec/veh Int. LOS=B Xc= 0.70 * Critical Lane Group (v/s)Crit= 0.58 SIG/Cinema v3.08 Marvin & Associates Page 1 NETSIM Summary Results Marvin & Associates R Marvin Paek PM Existing Plus Phase 1 Oak Street/Rouse Avenue 10/24/2014 Case: Oak & Rouse Exist Plus Phase 1 App Group Lane (veh) Avg/MaxPer LaneQueues (mph) SpeedAverage Period) (% of PeakWorst LaneSpillback in EB L 5 / 5 13.4 0.0 R 2 / 3 15.0 0.0 All 13.8 0.0 WB LTR 0 / 0 20.5 0.0 All 20.5 0.0 NB L 4 / 9 8.6 0.0 TR 3 / 6 19.8 0.0 All 15.3 0.0 SB L 0 / 0 0.0 0.0 T 6 / 8 13.8 0.0 R 1 / 3 18.5 0.0 All 14.2 0.0 Intersect. 14.5 SIG/Cinema v3.08 Marvin & Associates Page 2 229 1 209 1 1 1 245 356 1 1 383 177 1 20 23 1 20 23 2 15 03 3 22 23 3 22 23 HCM Analysis Summary Existing 2014 Plus Phase 1 R Marvin Peak PM Analysis Duration: 15 mins. Tamarack Street/Rouse Avenue 01/06/2015 Case: Rouse & Tamarack Exist Plus Phase 1 Area Type: Non CBD 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 WB NB SB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LTR 12.0 LTR 12.0 LTR 12.0 LTR 12.0 East West North South LTRLTRLTRLTRData Movement Volume (vph) PHF % Heavy Vehicles Lane Groups Arrival Type RTOR Vol (vph) Peds/Hour % Grade Buses/Hour Parkers/Hour (Left|Right) LTR 3 LTR 3 LTR 3 LTR 3 65 0.90 1 28 0.90 1 31 0.90 1 4 0.90 1 34 0.90 1 94 0.90 1 26 0.90 1 475 0.90 1 4 0.90 1 45 0.90 1 536 0.90 1 30 0.90 1 5 5 0 0 --- --- 20 5 0 0 --- --- 0 5 0 0 --- --- 5 5 0 0 --- --- Signal Settings: Operational Analysis Cycle Length: Lost Time Per Cycle: Phase: EB WB NB SB Green Yellow All Red 12345678Ped Only LTP LTP LTP LTP 0 15.0 3.5 1.5 35.0 3.5 1.5 Pretimed 60.0 Sec 10.0 Sec Capacity Analysis Results Approach: App Group Lane Cap(vph)v/sRatio g/CRatio LaneGroup v/cRatio Delay(sec/veh) LOS Delay(sec/veh) LOSEB * LTR 356 0.093 0.250 LTR 0.371 18.8 B 18.8 B WB LTR 422 0.074 0.250 LTR 0.294 18.4 B 18.4 B NB LTR 1046 0.313 0.583 LTR 0.536 9.6 A 9.6 A SB * LTR 1019 0.386 0.583 LTR 0.661 11.9 B 11.9 B Intersection: Delay = 12.1sec/veh Int. LOS=B Xc= 0.57 * Critical Lane Group (v/s)Crit= 0.48 SIG/Cinema v3.08 Marvin & Associates Page 1 NETSIM Summary Results Existing 2014 Plus Phase 1 R Marvin Peak PM Tamarack Street/Rouse Avenue 01/06/2015 Case: Rouse & Tamarack Exist Plus Phase 1 App Group Lane (veh) Avg/MaxPer LaneQueues (mph) SpeedAverage Period) (% of PeakWorst LaneSpillback in EB LTR 2 / 2 12.6 0.0 All 12.6 0.0 WB LTR 1 / 2 15.5 0.0 All 15.5 0.0 NB LTR 6 / 14 13.1 0.0 All 13.1 0.0 SB LTR 9 / 14 10.5 0.0 All 10.5 0.0 Intersect. 11.9 SIG/Cinema v3.08 Marvin & Associates Page 2 65 28 31 4 34 94 26 475 4 45 536 30 1 14 24 1 14 24 2 34 24 2 34 24 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 1/2/2015 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Rouse & Cannery Access Jurisdiction Bozeman Analysis Year Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Cannery Access North/South Street: Rouse Avenue Intersection Orientation: North-South Study 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)35 542 523 15 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.78 0.78 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)38 589 0 0 670 19 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T 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)10 35 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.60 1.00 0.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)16 0 58 0 0 0 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 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR v (veh/h)38 74 C (m) (veh/h)915 327 v/c 0.04 0.23 95% queue length 0.13 0.85 Control Delay (s/veh)9.1 19.2 LOS A C Approach Delay (s/veh)----19.2 Approach LOS ----C Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/7/2015 12:39 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 1/7/2015file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kFFB7.tmp TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 10/24/2014 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Oak & 1st App. West Rouse Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Analysis Year 2014 Existing Plus Phase 1 Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Oak Street North/South Street: 1st Access W Rouse Intersection Orientation: East-West Study 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)48 439 412 8 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)53 487 0 0 457 8 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 1 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h)51 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.70 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)0 0 0 0 0 72 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 0 0 0 0 1 Configuration R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT R v (veh/h)53 72 C (m) (veh/h)1099 627 v/c 0.05 0.11 95% queue length 0.15 0.39 Control Delay (s/veh)8.4 11.5 LOS A B Approach Delay (s/veh)----11.5 Approach LOS ----B Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 10/24/2014 4:31 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 10/24/2014file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kA9DB.tmp TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 10/24/2014 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Oak & 2nd App. West Rouse Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Analysis Year 2014 Existing Plus Phase 1 Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Oak Street North/South Street: 2nd Access W Rouse Intersection Orientation: East-West Study 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)34 454 434 34 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)37 504 0 0 482 37 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 1 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h)38 42 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)0 0 0 47 0 52 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 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R 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 R v (veh/h)37 47 52 C (m) (veh/h)1052 233 581 v/c 0.04 0.20 0.09 95% queue length 0.11 0.73 0.29 Control Delay (s/veh)8.5 24.3 11.8 LOS A C B Approach Delay (s/veh)----17.7 Approach LOS ----C Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 10/24/2014 4:39 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 10/24/2014file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kA9DB.tmp Appendix C-3 Existing Plus Phases 1 thru 4 Capacity Calculations HCM Analysis Summary Marvin & Associates R Marvin Peak PM Existing Plus Phase 123&4 Analysis Duration: 15 mins. Oak Street/Rouse Avenue 10/24/2014 Case: Oak & Rouse Exist Plus Phase 1_4 Area Type: Non CBD 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 WB NB SB 2 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 LT 12.0 LTR 12.0 L 12.0 L 12.0 R 12.0 TR 12.0 T 12.0 R 12.0 East West North South LTRLTRLTRLTRData Movement Volume (vph) PHF % Heavy Vehicles Lane Groups Arrival Type RTOR Vol (vph) Peds/Hour % Grade Buses/Hour Parkers/Hour (Left|Right) LT 3 R 3 LTR 3 L 3 TR 3 L 3 T 3 R 3 232 0.88 2 1 0.88 2 225 0.88 2 1 0.50 2 1 0.50 2 1 0.50 2 254 0.89 2 356 0.89 2 1 0.89 2 1 0.86 2 397 0.86 2 177 0.86 2 70 5 0 0 --- --- 0 5 0 0 --- --- 0 5 0 0 --- --- 45 5 0 0 --- --- Signal Settings: Operational Analysis Cycle Length: Lost Time Per Cycle: Phase: EB WB NB SB Green Yellow All Red 12345678Ped Only LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP 0 20.0 3.0 1.5 15.0 3.0 0.0 23.0 3.0 1.5 Actuated 70.0 Sec 12.0 Sec Capacity Analysis Results Approach: App Group Lane Cap(vph)v/sRatio g/CRatio LaneGroup v/cRatio Delay(sec/veh) LOS Delay(sec/veh) LOSEB * L 398 0.190 0.286 L 0.663 25.4 C 23.3 C R 448 0.112 0.286 R 0.393 20.3 C WB LTR 505 0.003 0.286 LTR 0.012 17.9 B 17.9 B NB Lper 149 0.000 0.393 8.6 A * Lpro 379 0.161 0.214 L 0.540 9.8 A TR 1091 0.215 0.586 TR 0.368 7.7 A SB L 321 0.001 0.329 L 0.003 15.8 B 23.7 C * T 612 0.248 0.329 T 0.755 25.8 C R 516 0.097 0.329 R 0.297 17.6 B Intersection: Delay = 17.7sec/veh Int. LOS=B Xc= 0.72 * Critical Lane Group (v/s)Crit= 0.60 SIG/Cinema v3.08 Marvin & Associates Page 1 NETSIM Summary Results Marvin & Associates R Marvin Peak PM Existing Plus Phase 123&4 Oak Street/Rouse Avenue 10/24/2014 Case: Oak & Rouse Exist Plus Phase 1_4 App Group Lane (veh) Avg/MaxPer LaneQueues (mph) SpeedAverage Period) (% of PeakWorst LaneSpillback in EB L 5 / 7 13.3 0.0 R 2 / 3 15.9 0.0 All 13.8 0.0 WB LTR 0 / 0 22.7 0.0 All 22.7 0.0 NB L 3 / 8 9.7 0.0 TR 3 / 5 20.2 0.0 All 16.2 0.0 SB L 0 / 0 0.0 0.0 T 6 / 8 13.0 0.0 R 1 / 2 17.2 0.0 All 13.5 0.0 Intersect. 14.5 SIG/Cinema v3.08 Marvin & Associates Page 2 232 1 225 1 1 1 254 356 1 1 397 177 1 20 23 1 20 23 2 15 03 3 22 23 3 22 23 HCM Analysis Summary Existing 2014 Plus Phase 123&4 R Marvin Peak PM Analysis Duration: 15 mins. Tamarack Street/Rouse Avenue 01/06/2015 Case: Rouse & Tamarack Exist Plus Phase 4 Area Type: Non CBD 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 WB NB SB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LTR 12.0 LTR 12.0 LTR 12.0 LTR 12.0 East West North South LTRLTRLTRLTRData Movement Volume (vph) PHF % Heavy Vehicles Lane Groups Arrival Type RTOR Vol (vph) Peds/Hour % Grade Buses/Hour Parkers/Hour (Left|Right) LTR 3 LTR 3 LTR 3 LTR 3 66 0.90 1 28 0.90 1 31 0.90 1 4 0.90 1 34 0.90 1 94 0.90 1 26 0.90 1 476 0.90 1 4 0.90 1 46 0.90 1 543 0.90 1 31 0.90 1 5 5 0 0 --- --- 20 5 0 0 --- --- 0 5 0 0 --- --- 5 5 0 0 --- --- Signal Settings: Operational Analysis Cycle Length: Lost Time Per Cycle: Phase: EB WB NB SB Green Yellow All Red 12345678Ped Only LTP LTP LTP LTP 0 15.0 3.5 1.5 35.0 3.5 1.5 Pretimed 60.0 Sec 10.0 Sec Capacity Analysis Results Approach: App Group Lane Cap(vph)v/sRatio g/CRatio LaneGroup v/cRatio Delay(sec/veh) LOS Delay(sec/veh) LOSEB * LTR 355 0.094 0.250 LTR 0.375 18.9 B 18.9 B WB LTR 422 0.074 0.250 LTR 0.294 18.4 B 18.4 B NB LTR 1045 0.314 0.583 LTR 0.538 9.6 A 9.6 A SB * LTR 1018 0.391 0.583 LTR 0.671 12.1 B 12.1 B Intersection: Delay = 12.3sec/veh Int. LOS=B Xc= 0.58 * Critical Lane Group (v/s)Crit= 0.48 SIG/Cinema v3.08 Marvin & Associates Page 1 NETSIM Summary Results Existing 2014 Plus Phase 123&4 R Marvin Peak PM Tamarack Street/Rouse Avenue 01/06/2015 Case: Rouse & Tamarack Exist Plus Phase 4 App Group Lane (veh) Avg/MaxPer LaneQueues (mph) SpeedAverage Period) (% of PeakWorst LaneSpillback in EB LTR 2 / 2 13.2 0.0 All 13.2 0.0 WB LTR 1 / 2 15.6 0.0 All 15.6 0.0 NB LTR 6 / 13 13.0 0.0 All 13.0 0.0 SB LTR 8 / 14 11.9 0.0 All 11.9 0.0 Intersect. 12.7 SIG/Cinema v3.08 Marvin & Associates Page 2 66 28 31 4 34 94 26 476 4 46 543 31 1 14 24 1 14 24 2 34 24 2 34 24 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 1/2/2015 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Rouse & Cannery Access Jurisdiction Bozeman Analysis Year 2014 + Phases 1,2,3,&4 Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Cannery Access North/South Street: Rouse Avenue Intersection Orientation: North-South Study 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)35 554 535 24 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.78 0.78 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)38 602 0 0 685 30 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T 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)26 35 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.65 1.00 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)40 0 53 0 0 0 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 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR v (veh/h)38 93 C (m) (veh/h)895 245 v/c 0.04 0.38 95% queue length 0.13 1.69 Control Delay (s/veh)9.2 28.4 LOS A D Approach Delay (s/veh)----28.4 Approach LOS ----D Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/6/2015 4:05 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 1/6/2015file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k74B0.tmp TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 1/6/15 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Oak & 1st App. West Rouse Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Analysis Year 2014 Existing + Phase 1,2,3,&4 Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Oak Street North/South Street: 1st Access W Rouse Intersection Orientation: East-West Study 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)67 444 412 20 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)74 493 0 0 457 22 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 1 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h)17 106 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)0 0 0 21 0 132 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 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (veh/h)74 153 C (m) (veh/h)1085 490 v/c 0.07 0.31 95% queue length 0.22 1.32 Control Delay (s/veh)8.6 15.6 LOS A C Approach Delay (s/veh)----15.6 Approach LOS ----C Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/6/2015 4:14 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 1/6/2015file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kF69.tmp TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 1/6/15 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Oak & 2nd App. West Rouse Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Analysis Year 2014 Existing + Phase 1,2,3,&4 Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Oak Street North/South Street: 2nd Access W Rouse Intersection Orientation: East-West Study 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)41 467 479 36 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)45 518 0 0 532 40 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 1 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h)57 44 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)0 0 0 71 0 54 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 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R 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 R v (veh/h)45 71 54 C (m) (veh/h)1004 205 542 v/c 0.04 0.35 0.10 95% queue length 0.14 1.46 0.33 Control Delay (s/veh)8.8 31.6 12.4 LOS A D B Approach Delay (s/veh)----23.3 Approach LOS ----C Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/6/2015 4:19 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 1/6/2015file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k71A4.tmp Appendix C-4 Existing Plus Intermediate Phases Oak Street & Rouse Avenue Accesses TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 1/6/15 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Oak & 2nd App. West Rouse Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Analysis Year 2014 Existing + Phase 1&2 Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Oak Street North/South Street: 2nd Access W Rouse Intersection Orientation: East-West Study 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)37 460 449 34 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)41 511 0 0 498 37 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 1 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h)37 28 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)0 0 0 46 0 34 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 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R 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 R v (veh/h)41 46 34 C (m) (veh/h)1037 221 568 v/c 0.04 0.21 0.06 95% queue length 0.12 0.76 0.19 Control Delay (s/veh)8.6 25.5 11.7 LOS A D B Approach Delay (s/veh)----19.7 Approach LOS ----C Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/9/2015 4:58 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 1/9/2015file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kF9C4.tmp TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 1/6/15 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Oak & 2nd App. West Rouse Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Analysis Year 2014 Existing + Phase 1,2,&3 Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Oak Street North/South Street: 2nd Access W Rouse Intersection Orientation: East-West Study 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)37 466 479 34 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)41 517 0 0 532 37 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 1 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h)37 29 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)0 0 0 46 0 36 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 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R 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 R v (veh/h)41 46 36 C (m) (veh/h)1006 209 543 v/c 0.04 0.22 0.07 95% queue length 0.13 0.81 0.21 Control Delay (s/veh)8.7 27.0 12.1 LOS A D B Approach Delay (s/veh)----20.5 Approach LOS ----C Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/9/2015 4:55 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 1/9/2015file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kF9C4.tmp TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 1/2/2015 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Rouse & Cannery Access Jurisdiction Bozeman Analysis Year 2014 + Phases 1&2, Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Cannery Access North/South Street: Rouse Avenue Intersection Orientation: North-South Study 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)35 542 521 24 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.78 0.78 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)38 589 0 0 667 30 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T 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)18 35 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.65 1.00 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)27 0 53 0 0 0 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 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR v (veh/h)38 80 C (m) (veh/h)909 281 v/c 0.04 0.28 95% queue length 0.13 1.14 Control Delay (s/veh)9.1 22.8 LOS A C Approach Delay (s/veh)----22.8 Approach LOS ----C Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/9/2015 5:02 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 1/9/2015file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k28A.tmp Appendix C-5 Existing Plus Phases 1 thru 4 Oak Street & Rouse Avenue With TWLTLs TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 1/2/2015 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Rouse & Cannery Access Jurisdiction Bozeman Analysis Year 2014 + Phases 1-4 w/ TWLTL Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Cannery Access North/South Street: Rouse Avenue Intersection Orientation: North-South Study 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)35 554 535 24 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.78 0.78 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)38 602 0 0 685 30 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Two Way Left Turn Lane RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T 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)26 35 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.65 1.00 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)40 0 53 0 0 0 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 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR v (veh/h)38 93 C (m) (veh/h)895 364 v/c 0.04 0.26 95% queue length 0.13 1.00 Control Delay (s/veh)9.2 18.3 LOS A C Approach Delay (s/veh)----18.3 Approach LOS ----C Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/9/2015 5:05 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 1/9/2015file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kF40A.tmp TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Agency/Co.Marvin Associates Date Performed 1/6/15 Analysis Time Period Peak PM Intersection Oak & 2nd App. West Rouse Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Analysis Year Existing + Phase 1-4 TWLTL Project Description Cannery Development East/West Street: Oak Street North/South Street: 2nd Access W Rouse Intersection Orientation: East-West Study 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)41 467 479 36 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)45 518 0 0 532 40 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Type Two Way Left Turn Lane RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 1 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h)57 44 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h)0 0 0 71 0 54 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 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R 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 R v (veh/h)45 71 54 C (m) (veh/h)1000 340 546 v/c 0.05 0.21 0.10 95% queue length 0.14 0.77 0.33 Control Delay (s/veh)8.8 18.4 12.3 LOS A C B Approach Delay (s/veh)----15.7 Approach LOS ----C Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/9/2015 5:08 PM Page 1 of 1Two-Way Stop Control 1/9/2015file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kC08C.tmp Appendix D Left-turn Lane Warrants