Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout15 - Traffic Impact Study - Four Points Subdivision . { -. r �. lI TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY for FOUR POINTS SUBDIVISION Bozeman, Montana Prepared for MADISON ENGINEERING - - Prepared by � . Marvin & Associates April 22, 2015 I TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY for FOUR POINTS SUBDIVISION Bozeman, Montana Prepared for MADI=ON ENGINEERING Prepared by 'A" — Marvin & Associates TA T A April 22, 2015 _k ROBERT R. MARVIN o : 3697E ;W ��' S�Or11A1. ��. . TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 SITE LOCATION & DESCRIPTION 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 Streets & Intersections 3 Traffic Volumes 4 Capacity 6 TRIP GENERATION 7 TRIP DISTRIBUTION 11 SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 13 IMPACTS 16 Traffic Volumes 16 Capacity 18 Turn Lane Warrants 19 IMPACT MITIGATION 19 RECOMMENDATIONS 23 APPENDIX A—24 Hour Traffic Count Summaries APPENDIX B — Existing Condition Capacity Calculations APPENDIX C— Existing Plus Site Traffic Capacity Calculations APPENDIX D - Left-Turn Lane Warrants LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 1. Existing (2015) PM Peak Hour Capacity Analysis Summary 7 Table 2. Four Points Subdivision Trip Generation Summary 8 Table 3. Trip Mode & Classification Summary 10 Table 4. Existing (2015) Plus Full Development Capacity Analysis Summary 18 LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1. Four Points Subdivision Location 2 Figure 2. Year 2015 Existing Traffic Volumes 5 Figure 3. Site Trip Distribution Percentages 12 Figure 4. Site Traffic Volume Assignment 14 Figure 5. Site Traffic Volume Assignment - Apartments Under Construction 15 Figure 6. Existing Plus Full Site Traffic Volumes (Including Apartments Under Construction) 17 Figure 7. Full Site Peak PM Volume Assignment Without Lot 5c & Kimberwicke Connection 21 Figure 8. Existing Plus Full Site Peak PM Volumes Without Lot 5c & Kimberwicke Connection 22 AAM --I Marvin &Associates Four Points Subdivision TIS i INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the findings of a traffic impact study (TIS) for the Four Points Subdivision property, which is located on the west end of Bozeman, Montana. Marvin & Associates was retained by the developer to prepare the TIS in accordance with City of Bozeman subdivision development ordinances. The primary purposes of this study were to address specific traffic impacts related to full development of Four Points Subdivision 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 Four Points Subdivision is bounded by Kimberwicke Street on the south, Davis Lane on the east, Milkhouse Avenue on the west, and an extension of Cattail Street on the north (see Figure 1). The preliminary plat for the TIS property in Four Points Subdivision includes lots that would be developed in phases. Lot 1 of the subdivision currently has 195 apartment units being built in a parcel of land south of Kimberwicke Street. Lots 2 & 3 are located east of Milkhouse Avenue and south of Blondie Street. The 99 apartments contained mAIL Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 1 �"—' :s .. cam �� - '�m'�l'� 1►�..'-'�"r".,•-.� ,�i�L i �"•`f- 1Rv �1r, � r I r • Ilk • t, _17b, r err '' t •� _ � �i'I w� •2� J. -- --. Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 2 with those lots were the subject of an earlier preliminary traffic assessment. Street and utility infrastructure is currently being completed on Ferguson Avenue, Milkhouse Avenue, Cattail Street and Blondie Street, west of wetlands area as a pat of Lots 2 & 3 development. The remaining lots: 4, 5a, 5b, and 5c will be developed in future phases. The TIS for this subdivision addresses full development with all related infrastructure and accesses in-place Access to the subdivision would be provided by existing local streets that intersect with Baxter Lane and by extensions of Cattail Street and Kimberwicke Street to Davis Lane. There would be a total of three local street intersections with Baxter Lane and two intersections with Davis Lane that would have potential for traffic impacts. Arterial street intersections that would have potential for impacts are: Davis Lane and Baxter Lane and Ferguson Avenue and Baxter Lane. EXITSING CONDITIONS Streets & Intersections Adjacent and potentially impacted public streets would include: Baxter Lane and Davis Lane. The intersections of Baxter lane, Cattail Street, and Catron Street with Davis Lane along with the intersections of Ferguson Avenue, Gallatin Green Avenue, Vaquero Parkway, and Caballo Avenue Baxter lane would have potentials for impacts. Baxter Lane is an east-west oriented minor arterial that begins at Jackrabbit Lane, north of the Four Corners area and ends at N. 7th Avenue in Bozeman. Baxter lane has variable pavement widths and varying speed zones along its length. Between N. 19th Avenue and N. 7th Avenue, Baxter is classified by the State as Urban Route 1218. Davis Lane is a north-south oriented minor arterial that currently extends south from Valley Center Road to Oak Street. Davis Lane R12 Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 3 was extended one mile south of Baxter to connect Baxter Lane with Oak Street in the recent past. Ferguson Avenue is a north-south oriented collector street, which extends north from Huffine Lane to Oak Street and from Baxter Lane north to an Intersection with Cattail Street, which is designated as a collector street. Catron Street is also a collector street that connects Davis Lane and Valley Center Road. Vaquero Parkway, Gallatin Green Avenue, Caballo Avenue and Kimberwicke Street are all local streets. The majority of potentially impacted intersections are currently stop-controlled on the minor legs. The intersection of Davis Lane and Baxter Lane is an all-way stop controlled intersection that is currently being redesigned and will be controlled either by a signal or a roundabout in the near future. The intersection of Ferguson Avenue and Baxter Lane is controlled by a single lane roundabout. The intersections of Davis Lane with Cattail Street and Kimberwicke Street would be created by the development's roadway extensions and would have lane configurations and controls subject to current standards and potential operational requirements evaluated within this study. Traffic Volumes Twenty-four hour automatic traffic counts were taken in October 2012 on Davis Lane and Baxter Lane. Additional electronic counts were taken on Davis Lane north of Catron Street in February 2015. 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. New turning movement counts were taken at the intersection of Gallatin Green Avenue and Baxter Lane as well as the intersections of Catron Street and Cattail Street with Davis Lane in 2015. Average weekday traffic (AWT) volumes were calculated based on comparisons with 2012 peak hour turning movement counts. Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 4 /-M I Cahon Streot r AMOM 2300 101 6 b 4,�22 S Average Weekday a Traffic (Typ) 3 14975 r 730 197 � b �,�6 31 10mberwldce sr t �219 m LOT 1 UnG. a s 4 in M C e ¢ Q Galloway ST 0 5 r- _ iquwMan Lane g gwder Ln. 5100 Ypodor Ln. 4900 3900 4700 4"0 t e 4 so C 8 48 16416 �O r a Mf I Y 6 '41L 36 1 0 7 I 53- 1-43 154--3- a.�20© � (. 194� 4-167 6 18b� o-262 4 12 .470 5016447 47 .k-23 0 0 0 P�cPM Hour 173-P a�24o rnP) Figure 2. Year 2015 Existing Traffic Volumes Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 5 Figure 2 on the preceding page presents existing (2015) pm peak hour turning movement volumes at the potentially impacted intersections. Street segment average weekday traffic volumes are also depicted in this figure. Since the pm turning movement counts were also taken in July 2014, comparisons between the various counts were made to assure 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. Capacity Peak pm hour existing capacity calculations were completed for the potentially impacted intersections using the HCS 2010 and SIDRA software packages. Table 1 (below) summarizes the results of the capacity calculations. 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 currently operate at or above a LOS "C". The highest volume to capacity ratio (v/c) occurs at the intersection of Baxter Lane and Davis Lane with a v/c of 0.56 on the westbound approach. The highest vehicle queues also occur at this intersection with three vehicle queues on all the four intersection legs. Observations at this intersection confirm that the calculated levels of service and queue conditions exist. However, because of the offset lanes in the north-south direction and resultant driver hesitation, vehicle queues can sometimes exceed three vehicles. Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 6 Table 1. Existing(2015)Peak PM Hour Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection MOE Intersection Approaches NB SB EB WB Control Delay(stveh) 13.9 13.7 13.2 15.s Baxter Lane&Davis LOS B B B C Lane VIC Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.47 0.56 Max Queue 95% 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Control Delay(stveh) 0.0 12.3 7.8 7.6 Baxter Lane& Vaquero LOS A B A A Parkway, VIC Ratio 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 Max Queue 95% 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Control Delay(s/veh) 10.5 7.8 Ranter Lane& Gallatin LOS B A Green Avenue VIC Ratio 0.05 0.01 Max Queue 95% 0.2 0.0 Control Delay(s/veh) 44 5.5 41 Baxter Lane& LOS A A A Ferguson Avenue WC Ratio 0.04 0.24 0.16 Max Queue 95% 0 1 1 Control Delay(eveh) 7.8 11.6 Davis Lane&Cattail LOS A B Sireeet VIC Ratio 0.01 0.09 Max Queue(95%) 0.0 0.3 Control Delay(stveh) 7.8 11.6 Davis Lane& Catron LOS A B Street VIC Ratio 0.01 0.09 Max Queue 95%1 :10.0 0,3 TRIP GENERATION Table 2 presents a summary of trip generation for the Four Points Subdivision. 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. Data for ITE land use code 220 (Apartments) was used to predict generation trip totals for the proposed development. Development of Lots 2 through 5c will generate approximately 2,753 AWT and 256 trips during the peak PM hour. Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 7 Table 2. Four Points Subdivision Full Development Trip Generation Summary Average Weekday Peak AM Hour Peak PM Hour No. of Rate Total Total Total ITE Code 220 Apartments Units Units Rate Trips Rate Trips Enter Exit Rate Trips Enter Exit Lots 2&3 99 DUs 1 658 2 52 10 42 3 61 40 21 Lot 4 36 DUs 1 239 2 21 4 17 3 22 14 8 Lot 5A 27 DUs 1 180 2 17 3 14 3 17 11 6 Lot 513 87 DUs 1 579 2 46 9 37 3 54 35 19 Lot5C 165 DUs 1 1097 2 85 17 68 3 102 66 36 Total Development 414 DUs 2753 221 43 178 256 166 90 1-T=6.65(X) 2-T=0.49(X)+3.73(20%enter) 3-T=0.62())(65%enter) The apartments that are currently under construction would generate approximately 1,297 trips on the average weekday and 125 trips during the peak pm hour. Those trips and not shown within Table 2 since traffic assignment for that portion of the development were completed in an earlier study and modified for the accesses proposed as a part of Four Points Subdivision. The traffic assignment for the apartments currently under construction were added to existing traffic separately within this study. 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 Four Points Subdivision encompasses a large land area and Bozeman has a large population of bicycle and walking enthusiasts, bicycle and pedestrian trip modes could be considered as a portion of total trip generation. In addition, there is a large school on Ferguson Avenue adjacent to the subdivision which would involve pedestrian and bike trips. For this development it was estimated that approximately 2% of the trips would involve pedestrian and bike modes. Fow-Points Subdivision TIS Page 8 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 Four Points Subdivision, the recreational amenities planned with the development along with adjacent schools and offices would generate ICT trips. It was estimated that 4% of the average weekday trips and 2% of the peak pm hour trips would be ICT trips. 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 Four Points Subdivision, there are no land uses that are normally associated with passerby trip attraction. � '� Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 9 • Table 3, below, summarizes the trip classification and mode reduction relative to external trip generation that could be attributed to this development. The net number of new trips external to the site would be 2588 AWT with 246 new external trips in the peak pm hour. Table 3. Trip Mode & Classification Summary Total Ped/Bike Net Veh. ICT Net Ext. Passerby Net New Time Period Trips Trips Trips Trips Trips Trips Trips Average Weekday 2753 55 2698 110 2588 0 2588 Peak AM Hour 221 4 217 0 217 0 217 Peak PM Hour 1 256 1 5 1 251 5 1 246 0 246 External Trip Summary AM & PM Hours Peak AM Hour 7:00.8:00 Peak PM Hour 4:30-5:30 Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total New External Trips 43 174 217 160 86 246 ^� Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 10 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 conditions distribution was developed based upon area traffic patterns and an area of influence method, which considers the least travel time routing to external trip producers/attractors beyond the boundaries of the development. Results of the distribution analysis are summarized in Figure 3, on the following page. Overall, approximately 26% of the trips would be to and from the north; 22% would be to and from the east; 25% would be to and from the south; and 15% would be to and from the west. It was determined that approximately 12% of the trips would be to and from production and attractions within the surrounding Baxter Meadows Subdivision area. Those trips would involve offices, parks, and schools within the large subdivision. The percentages shown in Figure 3 would branch out onto other streets at distances farther from the site and the percentage of total trips on the Figure 3 streets would be diluted substantially at intersections located more than a half mile from the subdivision. The percentage trip distributions shown in Figure 3 were used to calculate site traffic assignments on the surrounding street system. � = Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 11 Cafron�Sheeet� �Y 5 r sx Cattall street LOT 38 a� LOT 6C V —Y"Illondle LOT K LOT 2 pox Klmberwicke ST i�1 a a CGalloway ST zx � n �Equeahlan Lone O Barger Ln. Baxter Ln. r Figure 3. Site Trip Distribution Percentages Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 12 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 subdivision layout of streets). The combined 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 Four Points Subdivision, the aforementioned access points consist of existing street intersections on Baxter Lane and new street accesses to Davis Lane. These accesses would serve to distribute newly generated trips from Four Points Subdivision to and from external origins and destinations. The directional distributions illustrated in Figure 3 in combination with internal subdivisions lot access locations served by the site approaches were used to develop trip tables from each lot or portions of lots to each of the external trip distribution routes. This determined the directional traffic flow at each of the access points. Both average daily and peak pm hour traffic volumes represented by trips in the trip table were the routed onto the street system. Results of the traffic assignment analysis are illustrated in Figures 4 and 5, on the following pages. The volumes shown in Figure 4 are site generated traffic volumes associated with full development. Figure 5 illustrates traffic assignment associated with the apartments currently under construction. Figure 5 is a modification to traffic assignments presented in an earlier study for the Baxter Meadows Phase 2 Subdivision development. The highest site traffic volumes would occur on Davis Lane between Kimberwicke Street and Baxter Lane. Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 13 6u�L LMO= t` Calron Street 3 4 5 5 0 466 U � 33 0 17 n r�4- 30 M Average Weekday ,If Site Traffic (Typ) h 3 15 0 �� �� 4 0 2 Cattall Street 625 128 1 14 54 LLQf er 3 LOT 15C 28 7 0 �C Biondi* St 1S� ---t 0 LOT ac 3-4> 4+6 LdT! LOT! lAT 4 V" Klmberwlcke ST � e �o 915 a a 1 M n o 8 2 4 $ ,g Galloway ST 4 � 0 26 EqueaMon Lane 49 4 r Border Ln. 381 Border Ln. 569 ass 715 635 C c nj � 0 15 13 L I I1 1 .9` �,25 412 9 0 0 5 � 410 6 0 12 s� ��0 -N a t2 13� ae 422 1228 0 ,.�``� ��� u�� T ��o Peak PM Hour 13--1> 4 9 Site Traffic (Ty►p) Figure 4. Site Traffic Volume Assignment Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 14 L= NAM L/MN= Catron Street 4 C 0 5 .�'12 Average Weekday 04 Site Traffic Mp) 2 6 i cattatt Street 39 LOT s■ LOT&C 0 160 on a St 0 LOT ec 0 -,> 4a0 LOT R LOT 7 LOT 4 0 Klmberwicke ST T; 634 �lol 8 1 ° u.r�wu.e c Q 0 16 0 q ,� Galloway ST O 9 .�J 13 EquestrInne � O L�J ° 18� Q.19 n Balder Ln. 300 Bwftr Ln. 334 136 K a c LL 0f� � I o .� l' 11 3 0 103 9 �J 0 6 � �3 10120 0 Ih aT p�oPeak PM Hour Site Traffic (Typ) Figure S. Site Traffic Volume Assignment - Apartments Under Construction Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 15 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 (AWT). 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. Figure 6, on the following page, illustrates the relative traffic volume impacts related to development site traffic and along with traffic from the apartments that are currently under construction. Figure 6 also illustrates existing traffic plus site traffic at each of the site access intersections that would result if Four Points Subdivision existed today (2015 traffic volume base). The percentage of AWT attributable to the subject development along key area streets is calculated and shown in Figure 6. Substantial volume increases over existing traffic would be realized on both Baxter Lane and Davis Lane. The percent increase attributable to subdivision development on other streets would be minor, yet significant in terms of percentage increases. 0 Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 16 Catron Street - - VWN L ASMAns Z900 110 6 b' b WI+Rdl Owdepnrnl AM 'Q.22 % I Ipad Thk RoMd 4.152 ,A e6 lam 950 cottoll Street 625 [2220 1 / 34 LOT 6. LOT 5C 20 3 �C Biondi* St LOT M n 15� �5 " 3� o-r6 � LOTS LOT 7 LOT a 2 w34 10mberwkke ST Q7 1549 4 230 43 WOW e o C -Gall -y sT FE � Tf� 13 s 5 8 3 9 72 765 4 6 b a Ln 227"0- 4 302 O t� 5750 Snider Ln. 5800 de Baar Ln. Ito] �+ n 96] [1996] 114% a 4 r J%36 54.,9` /2t 79 1824 4 22 13 0 17 4196 37 46 18.0. 25 204-0- 4-•287 71 0 4' 4) b 0�N # 0 0 14"11' +Q,43 0 0 0 Peak PM Hour 198-to o-255 ExMnq Plus Site Traffic Mp) Figure 6. Existing Plus Site Traffic Volumes (Including Apts Under Construction) Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 17 Capacity Table 4 presents capacity analysis results for existing (with new apartments) plus site generated traffic at potentially impacted intersections. The addition of site development traffic to existing traffic would only substantially impact one of the six existing intersections. The intersection of Baxter Lane and Davis Lane would have reduced LOS on three approaches. The LOS would be reduced from "B" to "C". The v/c ratio would still be in the 0.7 range, but there would be little reserve capacity remaining at LOS "C". Minor traffic increases beyond the level calculated herein would result in LOS "D" on the westbound approach. Table 4. Existing(2015)Plus Full Site Development Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection MOE Intersection Approaches NB SB ES WS Control Delay(s►veh) 21.2 19.1 17.1 23.3 Baxter Lane&Davis LOS C C C C Lane VIC Ratio 0.69 0.62 0.56 0.73 Max Queue(95%) 4.0 4.0 3.0 45.0 Control Delay(s►veh) 12.8 7.9 Baxter Lane& Caballo LOS B A Avenue VIC Ratio 0.08 0.01 Max Queue 95% 0.3 0.0 Control Delay(s(veh) 0.0 12.9 8.0 7.7 Baxter Lane& Vaquero LOS A B A A Parkway VIC Ratio 0.00 0.10 0.02 0.00 Max Queue 95% 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0 Control Delay(s►veh) 12.5 7.9 Baxter Lane& Gallatin LOS B A Green Avenue VIC Ratio 0.09 0.01 Max Queue 95% 0.3 0.0 Control Delay(s/veh) 4.5 5.6 5.0 Baxter Lane& LOS A A A Ferguson Avenue VIC Ratio 0.04 0.26 0.19 Max Queue 95% 1 1 1 Control Delay(s(veh) 7.8 7.8 13.8 14.3 Davis Lane& Cattail LOS A A B B .Streeel VIC Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.08 0 16 Max Queue 95% 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.6 Control Delay(s(veh) 8.0 11.8 Davis Lane& LOS A B Kin►benvicke.Street VIC Ratio 0.06 0.12 Max Queue(95%) 0 0.5 Control Delay(s/veh) 7.8 13.7 Davis Lane& Calron LOS A B Street VIC Ratio 0.01 0.36 Max Queue 95% 0.0 1 1.7 I I Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 18 Capacity calculations for the site accesses were completed for the new street extensions to Davis Lane. It can be seen in Table 3 that both access approaches (Cattail Street and Kimberwicke Street) would operate at LOS "B" or better. Turn Lane Warrants Auxiliary turn lane warrants were investigated for the new accesses on Davis Lane. It was determined that right-turning traffic at either Davis Lane intersection would not be substantial enough to warrant an auxiliary right-turn lane. However, analysis of left-turns lanes (Appendix D) indicates that a left-turn lane would be warranted at the new intersection of Davis Lane and Kimberwicke Street. Advancing and opposing volumes for existing plus site development traffic on Davis Lane could only accommodate approximately 18% left-turning vehicles in the northbound advancing traffic without becoming a safety concern. Since the anticipated left-turning volume would be 20% of advancing volume, a left-turn lane would be warranted. IMPACT MITIGATION As it is currently proposed, Four Points Subdivision 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 an auxiliary left-turn lane on Davis Lane at the proposed Kimberwicke Street intersection would be met and mitigation of potential safety concerns would be required. Thus, an auxiliary left turn lane on Davis Lane at Kimberwicke would be required to mitigate safety impacts, prior to development of lot 5c, which will be associated with the extension of Kimberwicke Street to Davis Lane. Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 19 Since the extension of Kimberwicke Street is a future improvement associated with Lot 5c of the development plan and is not currently scheduled for initial development phases, an additional analysis was completed to determine whether the delayed extension of Kimberwicke would adversely impact other intersections. Figure 7, on the following page, illustrates the peak pm hour traffic assignment that would result from subdivision development without Lot 5c and an extension of Kimberwicke Street to Davis Lane. The traffic assignment also includes the apartment buildings that are currently under construction. Figure 8 presents the resulting peak pm hour existing plus the site traffic shown in Figure 7. When comparing the traffic volumes in Figure 8 to those shown in Figure 6, it can be seen that while there are some mtraffic movements that would increase, but the net overall effect would be a reduction in traffic at most of the intersections. Capacity calculations for traffic shown in Figure 8 were checked for the highest volumes changes at two of the intersections, Vaquero Parkway and Cattail Street. It was determined that there would be no significant differences from the results shown in Table 4 of this report. Thus, Removal of Lot 5c and the connection of Kimberwicke Street to Davis Lane would not adversely affect any of the other intersections investigated within this study. Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 20 ONN A MOMS C tmn Slr@M 5 0 31 3 17 COMM Stre" �� O SA LOT U LOT aC U on • f LorscL°T 1 LOT 7 lOT 4 Ktmberwicke STw.i C c�.w...n�.., o ftilowar sT � a 5 3 10 Equeatr}an ne r—� �, `� a �20 ° 35'� 4 63 Bmdw Ln. 4wd�r Ln. ny CL C 0-4�- lil 2� 'CL0 22 Q-. 7 0 14 42 16� Q®24 3 11 0.N 4.0 4) t+ to 16-0- Q-10 Figure 7. Full Site Peak PM Volume Assignment Without Lot Sc & Kimberwicke Connection Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 21 kWh 1 ASSOQAnS Catron Street 106 6 42 3 b 141 Q 152 75 o� Cattail Street LOT &A I LOT 58 I'm LOT Be 36 197 3 �r Biondi* st 20-294 5 SOT Be 3--D 5 — —� LOT 2 Lc r a nor 4 IU 2 IN �-31 mberwicke ST LOT 4 219 41 C � a a a Gaiiowap ST 5 3 18 Equestrian Lane V �o l► Y 5 '�24 0 226—Ir- 4 331 Bwdl r Ln. Rader Ln. a 3 as 16517 36 53� 45 17�A 4 221 8 0 31 155-10- 4206 50";j $-46 12-79' 't-48 `G Q 0 2024 Qm 2" 94 1 UU"47 7 23 0 � $70 15 �tL44 'O 0 0 191-1> Q-250 Figure 8. Existing Plus Full Site Peak PM Volumes Without Lot 5c & Kimbetwicke Connection Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 22 RECOMMENDATIONS Development of Four Points Subdivision properties as detailed in this report would add approximately 2,588 vehicle trips to the surrounding street system on the average weekday. In addition, new apartment buildings currently under construction will add 1,297 trips to existing traffic prior to development of the study property. The TIS has determined that while this development will impact the intersection of Davis Lane and Baxter Lane to some degree, the additional traffic would not reduce the intersection's level of service sufficiently to warrant a change from four—way stop control operations. In addition substantial improvements to that intersection would be in-place prior to full development of the subdivision property. Safety impacts on Davis Lane were investigated and it was determined that an auxiliary left-turn lane would be warranted at the intersection of Davis Lane and Galloway Street. In evaluating the current geometric requirements for construction of an auxiliary left-turn lane at this intersection, it was determine that if Davis Lane were widened to both the east and the west, it would need to be widened for a distance of approximately 750 feet south of Kimberwicke Street. The widening would include a transition taper, deceleration length, storage length, and a bay taper south of Galloway Street. The taper distance back to a two lane street section, north of Galloway Street, would require approximately 290 feet. However, since the construction of the Kimberwicke Street connection to Davis Lane is contingent on the development of Lot 5c at some point in the future. It has be shown that the connection of Kimberwicke Street to Davis Lane would not be required until the development of Lot 5c commences. When that eventuality occurs, the above noted improvements should be considered. . Four Points Subdivision TIS Page 23 Appendix A 24 Hour Traffic Count Summaries -0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O � N N N N CD M M Cl! N N O V Cl) r 1N It O In V h 0 (D M C n e Q o O O O O N Lo L,5 (o (6 co CD a) m m [O M N r r co O O y N N 07 00 N (� M (o V M O 1n M ti M M N tD f- Y Q) Q) M O 7 N N M w r (o O) O 1 1O M (D V M N r M N " N N N N V CO -q N r N N ` tl! Q 0 a C C M 2 _O N O c +' +' O) N O ` o 0 M m N V N V 1M r V O O d � Z NBC') - NNNNNOl N •� m 0 N � tD m G 7 u) N N OD M 00 M N (D O O O) CO CO O � a) 00 OD r N O O � M N 1- 0 00 (o 0 0 V OD n I N = M Cl) N N N M N N R V V N r N O N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 C O 00 (D - N O 7 (D (D O m r00 O N N I Ma0 (D � F NN M M � M N 1MV% O (p o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'O N CO M N — 'q 1P) 00 r CO 100 00 (D V I M r t N V M N t-- V p N 0 ) O O O O O — 105 O V V 1 (o (D (D m r0 (D V N r O c � N NON O N � � 121� (D ID N 1- Ih 0 (D OOONhO M r •Y 0O (O 1(7 '7 O Cl) M O o M — In (n 11(7 (2 O M r M1+Oj (_p N .- •-- r r r N N N r N y � C M o 1C) d' N 10 V N 'O lC •p� t Or n n .-- M r (V o o - - (O '00 '� C mq1 V! r ~ m N r m N = (D r � 0 (D N (D (D(D (D Ih O 0) 10 (�lIpp') 00 (D M a O 1n M O to N M coN N O O 1 'ITN N N N N N M '(M M O r r r r r r r r N J N 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 ' o cc) _ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 7 V (D �' N 1f) O) O ^ V cy)N N 00 is fV O m co V fV O 0 M r r N N N r r r r r LMV% o N m c LU 0 0 0 0 o a Y o o - 00000000 00000000 o N yy — N N co 0) Cl) N CO) O r 0 OD 00 M I OD Mq O) -it r C N d o y O O O O O M 6 (D 6 6 6 6 6 OL1 6 h 6 N N r o 0 0 O N � 3 r m N J N W OJ L O N 10 N OD 1n 00 N O 1n 1D 1n W In 00 a0 K co Co 1f i (� W N N - N N - - - - - O 1f) 7 N r M N O iD � — — — r r r r r .a N O m = O i+ _ C 0 O M N O) N O CD N M M ,Zr (o N r r O •d m c0 W N ` O N N O O N O) lc"-) (o N h t2 D) M (D h 11) O O N m O N Co 1() I� O 0D N — N M r N (D O 1l7 (n 7 0') N O O = v M N r r r r r N M Y � N ON N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •�C 7 O (o ao 1n V N (� O OD �2 O 1n(O V N o M H O) _^ 1mv% r N M 11) (O h DO C) O r N M 11Y it) h O O) O r N M •7 N N N N N H m Marvin Associates Davis Lane North of Baxter Lane Both Directions Hour 10/30/2012 10/31/2012 1111/2012 Average %of Begin Tues. Wed. Thurs. Weekday Weekday 1 8 12 10 0.2% 2 3 6 5 0.1% 3 14 19 17 0.4% 4 15 15 15 0.3% 6 39 41 40 0.9% 6 87 91 89 2.1% 7 248 246 247 5.7% 8 238 287 263 6.1% 9 187 206 197 4.5% 10 225 247 236 5.4% 11 284 266 275 6.3% 12 275 284 280 6.4% 13 266 296 281 6.5% 14 295 273 284 6.6% 16 336 391 364 8.4% 16 421 422 422 9.7% 17 450 468 459 10.6% 18 326 285 306 7.0% 19 203 196 200 4.6% 20 146 150 148 3.4% 21 73 108 91 2.1% 22 50 68 59 1.4% 23 26 37 32 0.7% 24 14 25 20 0.4% Total 2340 4312 2016 4334 100.0% Hourly Variations 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% a 6.0% 0 4.0% - - - - - 2.0% mi & 0.0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Begin Hour m e p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 o O e RCN m m (O (- (M � M 00 I� hO .-- � O � OM c) m 00 (0 C 0) 0 0 0 6 r N m m -i (f) (O (O (D (- (O 00 r O co N M I O O O iz afD _ Y) (0 'D 00 00 00 (f) N O LO m N m O N H O C y � h V N � I--LO fl- 0 W V 1 'N O O (() m O O O LL�'1 N C C 'j O Nr NNNN .- NNN m O C V Q I�man W rn G ++ O 00 00 OD 8, N O � O �O O N 'C 0 � V (D (fi (� OoO �t u� 000 (A 000000000 (O 3 Ln m � LL N '1 f� N - .- r N N N N - co O I � N N Ln r 0 0 0 0 D O O O OOOOOOOOOOOOO �W � O Zo O W N m cn 0 00 (O v N O N ~II tNV r Ir� I LMV% 0 N � � � � � � � � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O ClO N O (O 00 (0 (l- LnLON CO lf) CO u) V m N m O N M m O N e dl O O O O NNOh u7 ui (O r.- (O (O m (D 00 (fi M � N N - O O N 3 r r D OD > LUY � rOM V C,4 Nm COm I-- (O 00Omp mM (O (Or O N I v O N tM � m to co h 00 Ih (Z (-- Ih r. (� co N co Nrr N L � rr � rn r F+ N 'C r r O co N co N m (O m f� (O a0 O r O 10 MLL NM mm (D (- O � P- h O O M C (n Om Nm p p00 G 0)cq � a ~ LMV Rio u w O > ° t 0 � 000000000000000000000000 0 c) N (M N (O O (() (n N N L WN u7 N (- (D m W U( u7 Q ON V U) -I (n � (O � n M Cl) m I- V N M 0 0 O cn 3 r � �a d > N co 4C, Y 00 co V N N V (� F- m N � � � - (O M m OD r N) (Fi � ' Q ?' r O Fi = 0 W C � •� S m O LO Z N C 00 O V MN (f) CD m N N E N � LO m (yLL N V lh mhm r T O n a r O to x " xm jNN N N r C O (D r- n e e o 0 0 0 0 NZ P-,r coCO M 00000 00 r � A N 2 LMV% C p rNMa (n (O I-- aO pfOrN ('9 � NtD h00mOrNM � a� r r r r r r r r r r N N N N N O = m H Appendix B Existing Condition Capacity Calculations All-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS eneral Information- formation , al sl R MarvinM=kAnalysis tion Baxter&Davis enc /Co. Marvin&Assoction Bozeman Date Performed 4Ji4/15 Year 2015 Existing nai sis Time Period IP&ak PM roiect ID Four Points Sub East/West Street: Baxter Lane North/Soulh Street: Davis Lane RI.Thrus Adjustments and Site Characteristics Eastbound Westbound L T R L T R eh/h) 53 134 26 46 167 43 ft Lane Northbound Southbound t L T R L T R eh/h) 50 164 47 16 164 48 ft Lane Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 Li L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 onfiguration LTR LTR LT R LTR HF 0.94 0.82 0.89 0.89 0.94 �LanesRate(veh/h) 225 311 240 52 242 eavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 Group 2 2 5 4a ation,T 0.25 turation Headwa Ad'ustment Worksheet p.Left-Tums 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 p.Right-Tums 0.1 0.2 0.0 1.0 0.2 p.Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 liLT-adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 iRT-adj -0.6 1 -0.6 1 -0.6 -0.6 -0.7 -0.7 -0.6 -0.6 iHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 iadj,computed -0.0 -0.1 0.1 -0.7 -0.1 De arture Headway and Service Time ,d,initial value(s) 3.20 E3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 initial 0.20 0.21 0.05 0.22 d,final value(s) 6.23 6.78 5.94 6.23 final value 0.39 0.45 0.09 0.42 ove-up time,m(s) 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.0 ervice Time,tg(s) 4.2 4.0 4.5 3.6 4.2 apacity and Level of Service Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 rapacity(veh/h) 475 558 490 302 492 Delay(s/veh) 13.16 15.29 14.94 9.20 13.65 _OS B C B A B pproach:Delay(s/veh) 13.16 15.29 13.92 13.65 LOS B C B B Intersection Delay(s/veh) 14.10 Intersection LOS B Copyright©2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 4/15/2015 12:15 PM file:///C:/IJsers/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kAF3C.tmp 4/15/2015 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 'General Information Site Information Analyst IR Marvin Intersection Baxter& Vaquero Agency/Co arvin &Associates Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Date Performed 114115 Analysis Year 2015 Existing Analysis Time Period eak PM IProiect Description Four Points Sub East/West Street: Baxter Lane North/South Street: Vaquero Parkway Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudv 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) 1 186 0 0 262 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 090 0.90 (Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 206 0 0 291 0 (veh/h) (Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 1 0 (Median Type Undivided IRT Channelized 0 0 (Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 Configuration L TR L TR U stream Signal 0 0 (Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R 'Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 7 0 1 Peak-Hour Factor. PHF 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 14 0 2 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 (Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LTR LTR v(veh/h) 1 0 0 16 C(m)(veh/h) 1282 1377 1 508 We 0.00 0.00 0.03 95%queue length 0.00 0.00 0.10 Control Delay(s/veh) 7.8 7.6 12.3 LOS A A B Approach Delay(s/veh) 12.3 Approach LOS B Copyright©2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 4/15/2015 12:17 PM file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kB IEB.trap 4/15/2015 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site-Information Analyst IR Marvin Intersection Baxter&Gallatin Green Agency/Co. arvin&Associates Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Date Performed Veak 14115 Analysis Year 2015 Existing Analysis Time Period PM Project Description Four Points Sub East/West Street: Baxter Lane North/South Street: Gallatin Green (Intersection Orientation: East-West IStUdy Period (hrs): 0.25 'Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 _ 2 3 4 1 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 9 175 240 23 Peak-Hour Factor PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate,HFR 10 194 0 0 266 25 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 — - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR lJ stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olUme veh/h 4 12 Peak-Hour Factor PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate,HFR 0 0 0 8 0 24 (veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 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 L LR v(veh/h) 10 32 C(m)(veh/h) 1282 692 v/c 0.01 0.05 95%queue length 0.02 0.15 Control Delay(s/veh) 7.8 10.5 LOS A B Approach Delay(s/veh) — 10.5 Approach LOS B Copyright m 2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 4/15/2015 12:16 PM file:///C:/IJsers/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k2D8.tmp 4/15/2015 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: Baxter& Ferguson Existing Baxter&Ferguson Roundabout Movement Performance-Vehicles Mov •■ Demand Flows Deg Average Level . Prop. TotalID Mov .. - East:Baxter Lane 6 T1 231 1.0 0.244 5.5 LOS A 1.1 26.9 0.05 0.01 28.4 16 R2 40 0.0 0.244 5.5 LOS A 1.1 269 0.05 0.01 27.7 Approach 271 0.8 0.244 5.5 LOS A 1.1 26.9 0.05 0.01 28.3 North:Ferguson Ave 7 L2 33 0.0 0.042 4.4 LOS A 0.1 3.6 0.33 0.21 27.5 14 R2 4 0.0 0.042 4.4 LOS A 0.1 3.6 0.33 0.21 26.5 Approach 38 0.0 0.042 4.4 LOS A 0.1 3.6 0.33 0.21 27.3 West:Baxter Lane 5 L2 7 1.0 0.164 4.8 LOS A 0.6 16.4 0.12 0.04 29.0 2 T1 171 1.0 0.164 4.8 LOS A 0.6 16.4 0.12 0 04 28.6 Approach 178 1.0 0.164 4.8 LOS A 0.6 16.4 0.12 0.04 28.6 All Vehicles 467 0.8 0.244 5.2 LOS A 1.1 26.9 0.10 0.04 28.3 Level of Service(LOS)Method:Delay&v/c(HCM 2010). Roundabout LOS Method:Same as Sign Control. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio(degree of saturation)per movement LOS F will result if v/c>1 irrespective of movement delay value(does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements(v/c not used as specified in HCM 2010). Roundabout Capacity Model:US HCM 2010. HCM Delay Formula option is used.Control Delay does not include Geometric Delay since Exclude Geometric Delay option applies. Gap-Acceptance Capacity:Traditional M1. HV(%)values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.1 1 Copyright©2000-2016 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd I sidrasolutions.com Organisation:MARVIN&ASSOCIATES I Processed:Tuesday,April 14,2015 5:33:35 PM Project: Not Saved Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 'General Information Site-Information Analyst Marvin Intersection avis & Cattail Agency/Co arvin Associates .Jurisdiction Bozeman Date Performed 114115 Analysis Year 2015 Existing Analysis Time Period eak PM Project Description Four Points Sub EastJWest Street: Cattail Lane North/South Street: Davis Lane Intersection Orientation Noah-South IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 219 41 3 197 Peak-Hour Factor,PHF 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 243 45 3 197 0 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 — — Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 (Minor Street Eastbound Westbound (Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 31 5 (Peak-Hour Factor. PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.60 1.00 0.60 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 51 0 8 (vehlh) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 IRT Channelized 0 0 (Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LR Delay, Queue Length,and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound (Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 (Lane Configuration LT LR v(veh/h) 3 59 C(m)(veh/h) 1286 577 vlc 0.00 0.10 95%queue length 0.01 0.34 Control Delay(s/veh) 7.8 11.9 ILOS A 8 Approach Delay(s/veh) 11.9 Approach LOS I 8 Copyright©2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 4/15/2015 12:18 PM file:///C:fUsers/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k4A 14.tmp 4/15/2015 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst IR Marvin Intersection Davis&Cattail Agency/Co. arvin Associates Jurisdiction i3ozeman Date Performed 114115 Analysis Year 2015 Existing Analysis Time Period eak PM Pro ect Description Four Points Sub East/West Street: Cattail Lane North/South Street: Davis Lane Intersection Orientation North-South IStudy Period 'hrs : 0.25 'Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R 'Volume(veh/h) 219 41 3 197 Peak-Hour Factor. PHF 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 243 45 3 197 0 (veh/h) Percent Heavv Vehicles 0 0 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 31 5 Peak-Hour Factor. PHF 1.00 1.00 1-00 0.60 1.00 0.60 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 51 0 8 veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 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 LT LR v(veh/h) 3 59 C(m)(veh/h) 1286 577 v/c 0.00 0.10 95%queue length 0.01 0.34 Control Delay(s/veh) 7.8 11.9 LOS A B Approach Delay(s/veh) 11.9 Approach LOS I B Copyright©2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5 6 Generated: 4/15/2015 12:1 S PM file:///C:[Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k4A 14.tmp 4/15/2015 Appendix C Existing Plus Site Traffic Capacity Calculations All-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS General Information :site Information Analyst R Marvin Intersection Baxter&Davis Agency/Co. Marvin&Assoc lunsdiction 16ozenian Date Performed 4114115 Analysis Year 12015 Existing Plus Site Analysis Time Period Peak PM Project ID Four Points Sub East/West Street: Baxter Lane North/South Street: Davis Lane Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics 4pproach Eastbound Westbound (Movement L T R L T R Jolume(veh/h) 54 144 37 46 186 79 %Thrus Left Lane 4p{aoacl Northbound Southbound Movement L T R L T R 'Volume(veh/h) 72 204 47 35 186 48 ''NoThrus Left Lane Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 Configuration LTR LTR LT R LTR PHF 0.94 0.85 0.89 0.89 0.94 Flow Rate(veh/h) 249 364 1 309 52 285 '/u Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 No.Lanes 1 1 2 1 Geometry Group 2 2 5 4a Duration,T 0.25 Saturation Headway Adjustment Worksheet Prop.Left-Turns 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.1 Prop.Right-Turns 0.2 0.3 0.0 1.0 0.2 Orop.Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 iLT-adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 iRT-adj 1 -0.6 1 -0.6 1 -0.6 -0.6 -0.7 1 -0.7 -0.6 -0.6 iHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 iadj,computed -0.0 -0.1 0.1 -0.7 -0.1 I3e arture Headway and Service Time id,initial value(s) 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 c,initial 0.22 0.32 0.27 0.05 0.25 id,final value(s) 7.19 6.78 7.55 6.69 7.15 .c,final value 0.50 0.69 0.65 0.10 0.57 clove-up time,m(s) 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.0 Service Time,is(s) 5.2 4.8 5.2 4.4 5.1 [capacity and Level of Service Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 Capacity(veh/h) 443 499 449 302 457 Delay(s/veh) 17.08 23.25 23.09 10.11 19.05 !_OS C C C B C Approach:Delay(s/veh) 17.08 23.25 21.22 19.05 LOS C C C C Intersection Delay(s/veh) 20.49 ,Intersection LOS C Copyright©2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 4/2112015 5:09 PM file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kEEFF.tmp 4/21/2015 SINGLE-CHANNEL QUEUE CALCULATION PROGRAM FOR: Baxter & Davis EB Approach Marvin&Associates Existing Plus Site BY: R. Marvin, P.E., P.T.O.E. DATE: 4/15/15 INPUT DATA FOR PEAK HOUR: No. of Vehicles Arriving, N= 249 Vehicles/Hr. Average Service Time,t= 0.117 Minutes CALCULATED PARAMETERS: Arrival Rate (Lambda), 1= N/60 = 4.15 Veh/Min Service Rate(mu), m = 1/t= 8.56 Veh/Min Utilization Factor, Lambda/mu (1/m)- 0.48 (must be< 1.0) Probability of No Vehicles in Systerr 0.52 PROBABILITY TABLES: P(X=n) P(X<=n) P( 0 ) 51.51% 51.51% P( 1 ) 24.98% 76.49% P( 2 ) 12.11% 88.60% P( 3 ) 5.87% 94.47% P( 4 ) 2.85% 97.32% P( 5 ) 1.38% 98.70% P( 6 ) 0.67% 99.37% P( 7 ) 0.32% 99.69% P( 8 ) 0.16% 99.85% P( 9 ) 0.08% 99.93% P( 10 ) 0.04% 99.97% P( 11 ) 0.02% 99.98% P( 12 ) 0.01% 99.99% P( 13 ) 0.00% 100.00% P( 14 ) 0.00% 100.00% P( 15 ) 0.00% 100.00% P( 16 ) 0.00% 100.00% P( 17 ) 0.00% 100.00% P( 18 ) 0.00% 100.00% P( 19 ) 0.00% 100.00% P( 20 ) 0.00% 100.00% P( 21 ) 0.00% 100.00% RESULTS: Avg.Vehicles in Sys.= 0.94 Vehicles(incl. veh. being served) Avg.Waiting Time= 0.11 Minutes Avg.Time in Sys.= 0.23 Minutes Max.Vehicles in Sys.(95%conf.)= 3 Vehicles STORAGE LENGTHS: Min.Acceptable= 24 Feet Min. Design= 75 Feet SINGLE-CHANNEL QUEUE CALCULATION PROGRAM FOR: Baxter & Davis NB Approach Marvin&Associates Existing Plus Site BY: R. Marvin, P.E., P.T.O.E. DATE: 4/15115 INPUT DATA FOR PEAK HOUR: No. of Vehicles Arriving, N= 309 Vehicles/Hr. Average Service Time,t= 0.125 Minutes CALCULATED PARAMETERS: Arrival Rate (Lambda), 1= N/60= 5.15 Veh/Min Service Rate (mu), m = 1/t= 8.00 Veh/Min Utilization Factor, Lambda/mu (1/m)- 0.64 (must be< 1.0) Probability of No Vehicles in Systerr 0.36 PROBABILITY TABLES: P(X=n) P(X<=n) P( 0 ) 35.63% 35.63% P( 1 ) 22.93% 58.56% P( 2 ) 14.76% 73.32% P( 3 ) 9.50% 82.83% P( 4 ) 6.12% 88.94% P( 5 ) 3.94% 92.88% P( 6 ) 2.54% 95.42% P( 7 ) 1.63% 97.05% P( 8 ) 1.05% 98.10% P( 9 ) 0.68% 98.78% P( 10 ) 0.44% 99.21% P( 11 ) 0.28% 99.49% P( 12 ) 0.18% 99.67% P( 13 ) 0.12% 99.79% P( 14 ) 0.07% 99.86% P( 15 ) 0.05% 99.91% P( 16 ) 0.03% 99.94% P( 17 ) 0.02% 99.96% P( 18 ) 0.01% 99.98% P( 19 ) 0.01% 99.99% P( 20 ) 0.01% 99.99% P( 21 ) 0.00% 99.99% RESULTS: Avg.Vehicles in Sys.= 1.81 Vehicles(incl. veh. being served) Avg.Waiting Time= 0.23 Minutes Avg.Time in Sys.= 0.35 Minutes Max.Vehicles in Sys.(95%conf.)= 4 Vehicles STORAGE LENGTHS: Min.Acceptable= 45 Feet Min. Design= 100 Feet SINGLE-CHANNEL QUEUE CALCULATION PROGRAM FOR: Baxter & Davis SBA roach PP Marvin 6 Associates Existing Plus Site BY: R. Marvin, P.E., P.T.O.E. DATE: 4/16/15 INPUT DATA FOR PEAK HOUR: No. of Vehicles Arriving, N= 285 Vehicles/Hr. Average Service Time,t= 0.119 Minutes CALCULATED PARAMETERS: Arrival Rate(Lambda), 1= N/60= 4.75 Veh/Min Service Rate(mu), m= 1/t= 8.39 Veh/Min Utilization Factor, Lambda/mu (1/m)- 0.57 (must be< 1.0) Probability of No Vehicles in Systerr 0.43 PROBABILITY TABLES: P(X=n) P(X<=n) P( 0 ) 43.40% 43.40% P( 1 ) 24.56% 67.96% P( 2 ) 13.90% 81.86% P( 3 ) 7.87% 89.73% P( 4 ) 4.45% 94.19% P( 5 ) 2.52% 96.71% P( 6 ) 1.43% 98.14% P( 7 ) 0.81% 98.95% P( 8 ) 0.46% 99.40% P( 9 ) 0.26% 99.66% P( 10 ) 0.15% 99.81% P( 11 ) 0.08% 99.89% P( 12 ) 0.05% 99.94% P( 13 ) 0.03% 99.97% P( 14 ) 0.02% 99.98% P( 15 ) 0.01% 99.99% P( 16 ) 0.00% 99.99% P( 17 ) 0.00% 100.00% P( 18 ) 0.00% 100.00% P( 19 ) 0.00% 100.00% P( 20 ) 0.00% 100.00% P( 21 ) 0.00% 100.00% RESULTS: Avg.Vehicles in Sys.= 1.30 Vehicles(incl.veh. being served) Avg.Waiting Time= 0.16 Minutes Avg.Time in Sys.= 0.27 Minutes Max. Vehicles in Sys.(95%conf.)= 4 Vehicles STORAGE LENGTHS: Min.Acceptable= 33 Feet Min. Design= 100 Feet SINGLE-CHANNEL QUEUE CALCULATION PROGRAM FOR: Baxter $ Davis WB Approach Marvin&Associates Existing Plus Site BY: R. Marvin, P.E., P.T.O.E. DATE: 4/15/15 INPUT DATA FOR PEAK HOUR: No. of Vehicles Arriving, N= 364 Vehicles/Hr. Average Service Time,t= 0.113 Minutes CALCULATED PARAMETERS: Arrival Rate (Lambda), 1= N/60= 6.07 Veh/Min Service Rate (mu), m= 1/t= 8.85 Veh/Min Utilization Factor, Lambda/mu (1/m)= 0.69 (must be< 1.0) Probability of No Vehicles in System 0.31 PROBABILITY TABLES: P(X=n) P(X<=n) P( 0 ) 31.45% 31.45% P( 1 ) 21.56% 53.00% P( 2 ) 14.78% 67.78% P( 3 ) 10.13% 77.91% P( 4 ) 6.95% 84.86% P( 5 ) 4.76% 89.62% P( 6 ) 3.26% 92.88% P( 7 ) 2.24% 95.12% P( 8 ) 1.53% 96.66% P( 9 ) 1.05% 97.71% P( 10 ) 0.72% 98.43% P( 11 ) 0.49% 98.92% P( 12 ) 0.34% 99.26% P( 13 ) 0.23% 99.49% P( 14 ) 0.16% 99.65% P( 15 ) 0.11% 99.76% P( 16 ) 0.07% 99.84% P( 17 ) 0.05% 99.89% P( 18 ) 0.04% 99.92% P( 19 ) 0.02% 99.95% P( 20 ) 0.02% 99.96% P( 21 ) 0.01% 99.98% RESULTS: Avg.Vehicles in Sys.= 2.18 Vehicles(incl.veh. being served) Avg.Waiting Time= 0.25 Minutes Avg.Time in Sys.= 0.36 Minutes Max.Vehicles in Sys.(95%conf.)= 4 Vehicles STORAGE LENGTHS: Min.Acceptable= 54 Feet Min. Design= 100 Feet Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY ,General-Information Site-Information Analyst R Malvin Intersection Baxter&Caballo Agency/Co, Marvin &Associates Jurisdiction Cit,y of Bozeman Date Performed 4114115 Analysis Year 2015 Existing Plus Site Analysis Time Period Peak PM Project Description Four Points Sub East/West Street: Baxter Lane North/South Street: Caballo Ave Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period(hrs): 0.25 'Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 6 227 302 4 Peak-Hour Factor,PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 6 252 0 0 335 4 (veh/h) (Percent Heavv Vehicles 0 - 0 - -- (Median TyRe Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume(veh/h) 17 13 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.60 0.50 0.60 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 28 0 21 (veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 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 L LR v(veh/h) 6 49 C(m)(veh/h) 1231 546 v/c 0.00 0.09 95%queue length 0.01 0.29 Control Delay(s/veh) 7.9 12.2 LOS A B Approach Delay(s/veh) - 12.2 Approach LOS I B Copyright©2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5 6 Generated: 4/15/2015 3:27 PM file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k2EF9.tmp 4/15/2015 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst tR Marvin Intersection Baxter& Vaquero Agency/Co. arvin &Associates Jurisdiction City of Bozernan Date Performed Veak 14115 Analysis Year 2015 Existing Plus Site Analysis Time Period PM Project Description Four Points Sub East/West Street: Baxter Lane North/South Street: Vaquero Parkway 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) 18 204 0 0 287 25 Weak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 U.9U 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 20 226 0 0 318 27 (Veh/h) Percent Heavv Vehicles 0 -- 0 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 Configuration L TR L TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R 'Volume veh/h 0 0 0 17 0 13 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.60 0.60 0.60 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 28 0 21 (veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Length,and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LTR LTR v(veh/h) 20 0 0 49 C(m)(veh/h) 1225 1354 1 503 We 0.02 0.00 0.10 95%queue length 0.05 0.00 0.32 Control Delay(s/veh) 8.0 7.7 12.9 ILOS A A 8 Approach Delay(s/veh) -- 12.9 Approach LOS B Copyright©2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 4/15/2015 3:24 PM file:///C:/IJsers/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k3502.tmp 4/15/2015 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General-Information Site Information Analyst IR Marvin Intersection iBaxter& Gallatin Green Agency/Co. IMarvIn &Associates Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Date Performed /14/15 Analysis Year 12015 Existing Plus Site Analysis Time Period jPeak PM Project Description Four Points Sub IEast/West Street: Baxter Lane North/South Street: Gallatin Green 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 14 198 255 45 Peak-Hour Factor PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 6.46 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 15 220 0 0 283 50 (veh/h) (Percent Heavv Vehicles 0 -- - 1 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided IRT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume(veh/h) 24 7 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.60 0.50 0.60 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 39 0 11 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 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 L LR v(veh/h) 15 50 C(m)(veh/h) 1238 527 vlc 0.01 0.09 95%queue length 0.04 0.31 Control Delay(s/veh) 7.9 12.5 LOS A 8 ,Approach Delay(s/veh) -- 12.5 Approach LOS -- B Copyright©2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 4/15/2015 3:25 PM file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k2EF9.tmp 4/15/2015 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: Baxter 8 Ferguson_Existing Plus Baxter&Ferguson Existing Plus Roundabout Movement Performance-Vehicles Mov •s Demand Flows s Prop. s Mov Total HV J&atn ik Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued StopRate - perveh mph East:Baxter Lane 6 T1 244 09 0.256 5.6 LOS A 1.1 28.8 0.06 0.01 28.4 16 R2 40 0 0 0.256 5.6 LOS A 1.1 28.8 0.06 0.01 27.6 Approach 284 0.8 0.256 5.6 LOS A 1.1 28.8 0.06 0.01 28.2 North:Ferguson Ave 7 L2 33 0.0 0.044 4.5 LOS A 0.2 3.8 0.34 0.22 27.5 14 R2 6 0.0 0.044 4.5 LOS A 02 38 0.34 0.22 26.5 Approach 39 0.0 0.044 4.5 LOS A 0.2 3.8 0.34 0.22 27.3 West:Baxter Lane 5 L2 9 0.8 0.185 5.0 LOS A 0.7 18.8 0.13 0.05 28.9 2 T1 191 0.9 0.185 5.0 LOS A 0.7 18.8 0.13 0.05 28.5 Approach 200 0.9 0.185 5.0 LOS A 0.7 18.8 0.13 0.05 28.5 All Vehicles 523 0.8 0.256 5.3 LOS A 1.1 28.8 0.11 0.04 28.3 Level of Service(LOS)Method:Delay&v/c(HCM 2010). Roundabout LOS Method:Same as Sign Control. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio(degree of saturation)per movement LOS F will result if v/c>1 irrespective of movement delay value(does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements(v/c not used as specified in HCM 2010). Roundabout Capacity Model:US HCM 2010. HCM Delay Formula option is used.Control Delay does not include Geometric Delay since Exclude Geometric Delay option applies. Gap-Acceptance Capacity:Traditional M1. HV(%)values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.1 1 Copyright©2000-2016 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd I sidrasolutions.com Organisation:MARVIN&ASSOCIATES I Processed:Wednesday,April 15,2015 1:48:03 PM Project: C:\Users\Bob\Documents\A PROJECT FOLDERS\14-784 4 Points Minor Sub TIS\Capacity\Existing\E Calcs\Baxter&Ferguson Existing.sip6 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General-Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Intersection Davis&Cattail Agency/Co Marvin Associates ,Jurisdiction Bozeman Date Performed 4114115 Analysis Year 2015 Existing Plus Site Analysis Time Period Peak PM Project Description Four Points Sub East/West Street: Cattail Lane North/South Street: Davis Lane Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 4 230 43 3 220 28 Peak-Hour Factor.PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 255 47 3 244 31 'veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 1 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR tJ stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume(veh/h) 15 3 2 34 6 5 Peak-Hour Factor PHF 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.60 0.60 0.60 Hourly Flow Rate,HFR 27 5 3 56 9 8 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Length and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v(veh/h) 4 3 73 35 C(m)(veh/h) 1300 1270 458 444 vlc 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.08 95%queue length 0.01 0.01 0.56 0.26 Control Delay(s/veh) 7.8 7.8 14.3 13.8 LOS A A 8 8 Approach Delay(s/veh) — 14.3 1 13.8 Approach LOS -- g g 77771 Copyright©2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 4/15/2015 3:30 PM file:///C:/IJsers/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k9DO7.tmp 4/15/2015 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY (General Information Site Information lAnalyst IR Marvin Intersection Catron &Davis Lane Agency/Co. arvin Associates .Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Date Performed /14/2015 Analysis Year 2015 Existing Plus Site Analysis Time Period eak PM Hour (Project Description Four Points Sub East/West Street: Catron Street North/South Street: Davis Lane Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period hrs): 0.25 'Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R 'Volume(veh/h) 154 96 6 110 Freak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.89 0.89 0.81 0.81 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 173 107 7 135 0 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 1 0 -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT U stream Sicinal 0 0 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R `Volume(veh/h) 152 22 Peak-Hour Factor,PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 a74 1.00 0.74 (Hourly Flow Rate,HFR 0 0 0 205 0 29 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 (Percent Grade(%) 0 0 (Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 IRT 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 LT LR v(veh/h) 7 234 C(m)(veh/h) 1294 645 v/c 0.01 0.36 95%queue length 0.02 1.65 Control Delay(s/veh) 7.8 13.7 LOS A B Approach Delay(s/veh)j 13.7 Approach LOS I - -- B Copyright©2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 4/15/2015 3:31 PM file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k7DO9.tmp 4/15/2015 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General-Information Site Information Analyst R Marvin Intersection Kimberwicke&Davis Lane Agency/Co. Marvin Associates Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Date Performed 411412015 Analysis Year 2015 Existing Plus Site Analysis Time Period Peak PM Hour Project Description Four Points Sub East/West Street Kimberwicke Street North/South Street: Davis Lane Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments (Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 72 265 230 24 Peak-Huur 1-actur NHF U.90 0.90 0.89 0.81 0.87 0.87 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 80 294 0 0 264 27 'veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 Median Type Undivided IRT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Si nal 0 0 (Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R `Volume veh/h 13 39 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.70 1.00 0.70 0.70 1.00 0.70 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 18 0 55 0 0 0 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 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 LT LR v(veh/h) 80 73 C(m)(veh/h) 1282 601 v/c 0.06 0.12 95%queue length 0.20 0.41 Control Delay(s/veh) 8.0 11.8 LOS A 8 Approach Delay(s/veh) 11.8 Approach LOS -- g Copyright©2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5 6 Generated: 4/15/2015 3:33 PM file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/LocaUTemp/u2kD9A9.tmp 4/15/2015 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst IR Marvin Intersection Baxter& Vaquero Agency/Co arvin &Associates .Jurisdiction City of Bozeman Date Performed 114115 Analysis Year 2015 Existing Plus Partial Analysis Time Period eak PM (Project Description Four Points Sub East/West Street: Baxter Lane INorthISOLIth Street: Vaquero Parkway 'Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25 'Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R 'Volume(veh/h) 12 202 0 0 286 48 Peak-Hour Factor. PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0 90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 13 224 0 0 317 53 veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 1 0 -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 Confi oration L TR L TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound (Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R 'Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0 8 0 31 (Peak-Hour Factor.PHF 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.60 0.60 0.60 (Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 13 0 51 (veh/h) (Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 (Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Length and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LTR LTR v(veh/h) 13 0 0 64 C(m)(veh/h) 1200 1357 1 617 v/c 0.01 0.00 0.10 95%queue length 0.03 0.00 0.35 Control Delay(s/veh) 8.0 7.7 11.5 LOS A 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: 4/21/2015 5:31 PM file:///C:/Users/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kA514.tmp 4/21/2015 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY ,General Information Site Information nal s R Marvin Intersection Davis&Cattail Agency/Co. Marvin Associates Jurisdiction Bozeman Date Performed 4114115 Analysis Year 2015 Existing Plus Site Analysis Time Period Peak PM Project Description Four Points Sub East/West Street: Cattail Lane North/SOUt11 Street: Davis Lane Intersection Orientation: North-SOLiti) IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T i� 'Volume(veh/h) 4 219 41 3 197 1 36 fPeak-Hour Factor. PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0_90 f0.90 (Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 243 45 3 218 40 (veh/h (Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 1 0 -- Median Type Undivided IRT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal 0 0 (Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R 'Volume veh/h 20 3 2 31 5 5 Peak-Hour Factor PHF 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.60 0.60 0.60 (Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 36 5 3 51 8 8 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 (Percent Grade(%) 0 0 (Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 IRT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR IDela ,Queue Length and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound IMovement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 (Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v(veh/h) 4 3 67 44 C(m)(veh/h) 1318 1286 482 466 v/c 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.09 95%queue length 0.01 0.01 0.48 0.31 Control Delay(s/veh) 7.7 7.8 13.7 13.5 LOS A A B 8 Approach Delay(s/veh) 13.7 13.5 Approach LOS I - B B Copyright©2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 4/21/2015 5:35 PM file:///C:iUsers/Bob/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k75CB.tmp 4/21/2015 Appendix D Left-turn Lane Warrants Z O Z wWo-) r W � 40.. r S � U Z r v3 0 N J LAJ N W W W W w z F J J m w o ? W Z r Q w o O O ~ _ W r Z N w 0 r > � to cr J W cr z LL i a a Z N w O Q r r a AUjLLj z wzr ``' 0 Q N ~ a z Uj r w s 2 Z Z O w N �.. w LL = Z r VLLJ Cr S >-(a W J U a W J w = 2 i LJ Cr m W ? > � r U D r ~ rw W > 0WzW 0 � O � ZU. .J > r > z z ? z O w Q r O U c� W W a N O Z O VZ0 cr � > U ZmZ � O C� OO> wp 3 zd ; 00 OJ a _5I=- OJ N J Q > Z w 1- W WOW> Z oDtnQ > w � Nzc� O J 14i. r� O O --- Z � � S ~ i 2 N W Li rQ Q = it •i I,., W crr ? rr W 0' o Z s JHH = �Q/� N N �'') V/ WZ >a Z LU � _ Z � © O V Q F- m —Z - - - — V►� t0 Q J ° L O Z W o ? J (n J 4! ��„ �1? o\o .j a .. W N .a o 3 = J Ind .. o Z - ----— ---- -- Z — 0 > O Cam° W LL z 0 1 --- --- --- O j Z O _ _ M O V ° oN° o J W O oo Ii _ Q in o Z W u CD L� CV Z Z . . ar. z F . ,,,. Q LU > 11 L L. W ~O j 0 1! W It O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O co I- LO Ln w N7 (V HnOH NOIS30 ONi6nci (HdA) 3W(1-IOn ONISOddO —On