Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout00 - Traffic Impact Study - Harvest Creek West TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY P%rivEn vy FOR 2 3 ZnZ1 HARVEST CREEK WEST SUBDIVISION z � � s yvt cssih5 PREPARED FOR HOMELANDS DEVELOPMENT CO. PREPARED BY MARVIN do ASSOCIATES Suite 211 Creekside ROBERT R. ° 1001 S. 24" Street West MARVIN oc Billings, MT 59102 36 E •2 . 'rj"'NA`1 1 �01'1211 ���. Professional Traffic Operation Engineer#259 June 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 LOCATION DESCRIPTION & BACKGROUND 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS Street characteristics 3 Traffic Volumes 4 Traffic Operations 6 TRIP GENERATION 6 TRIP DISTRIBUTION 8 TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 9 TRAFFIC IMPACTS Traffic Volumes 15 Capacity Impacts 19 Safety 23 IMPACT MITIGATION & RECOMMENDATIONS 23 APPENDIX "A" Traffic Volume Summary 25 APPENDIX "B" Capacity Calculations 26 APPENDIX "C" AASHTO Turn Lane Justification 27 LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1. Site Location Map 2 Figure 2. Existing Traffic Volumes 5 Figure 3. Trip Distribution 10 Figure 4. Street System Traffic Assignment Harvest Creek West 12 Figure 5. Street System Traffic Assignment Total Harvest Creek 13 Figure 6. Site Access Traffic Assignment - Total Harvest Creek 14 Figure 7. Existing Plus Harvest Creek West Traffic 16 Figure 8. Existing Plus Total Harvest Creek Traffic 17 Figure 9. Existing Plus Total Harvest Creek Traffic At Accesses 18 Figure 10. Level Of Service Capacity Summary 22 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Trip Generation Harvest Creek & Harvest Creek West 6 Table 2. Trip Mode, Classification & Net Trips 7 Harvest Creek West Subdivision �.,. •m'yJ:�:�,�.,wc� Sy�,,,9ssioca4"a 4���cCY:-tit Jva,aW�::;c.� . _�- Traffic Impact Study INTRODUCTION This report identifies traffic impacts for the Harvest Creek West Subdivision located in the SW 1/4 of Section 2, T.2S, R, 5E pf P.M.M. Gallatin County, Bozeman, Montana. Figure L, on the following page, illustrates the relative location with respect to other areas of Bozeman and the relative magnitude of the subdivision area. The proposed subdivision encompasses a land are of approximately 79 acres. The purpose of this study is to determine what traffic impacts the development of this subdivision would have on the surrounding public street system and what impacts would be associated with planned subdivision street intersection with existing streets adjacent to the subdivision. The study methodology and analysis procedures within this study employ the latest technology and nationally accepted standards in the area of site development and transportation impact assessment. Recommendations made within this report are limited to the intersections involving Oak Street and Durston Road since the City of Bozeman, during preliminary platting procedures, had expressed specific concern regarding these streets. LOCATION DESCRIPTION do BACKGROUND Subdivision platting and layout is being completed by C&H Engineering and Surveying of Bozeman, Montana. All physical details of the subdivision have been or will be presented in the documents prepared by C&H Engineering and Surveying. Harvest Creek West is being planned to accommodate approximately 311 lots for single family dwelling units. This subdivision is located adjacent to and directly west of the Harvest Creek Subdivision. Homelands Development Co. Is the developer of both these properties. The existing Harvest Creek Subdivision has been approved and phase 1 construction of single family homes is currently underway. Page 1 BAXTER LANE L Harvest Creek West Sub. Z Phases 1 - 7 Harvest Creek Sub. Phase 1 - 4 a Oak St. Oak St. s Me lawood St. 0 0 � a y - ° o a q o Y St vans m � St. Windsor Z a N I Terrace Ave. o --� 4 Durston Rd. z m � Durston Rd. Boaverhead L N � Z (� L � N N N S Ol n Y lq Z Z Z Z ..j z z Z W.Beall m a a L`e on nhnll I c m m m C L W. Main St. IFx Babcock St. 3 z m / F-I v c N m t L15 m 3 U N T N t L s � Huffine Lane - W.College St. qo�m ��`�(I n r '�I II I Figure 1. Site Location Map Page 2 Harvest Creek Subdivision was platted with two approach roads to Oak Street and Durston Road. Harvest Creek West would add one street approach to Oak Street and two to Durston Road. Analysis within this report assumed that the total system of planned subdivision streets would exist. A significant degree of circulation within each subdivision and between the two subdivisions was forecast within the traffic assignment model. Accuracy of traffic projections at the street approaches depend on implementation of subdivision streets for both developments. During platting of the Harvest Creek Subdivision, a traffic impact study (TIS) was completed by Morrison&Maierle. That study concentrated on impacts associated with the intersection of Durston Road and N. 19'Avenue. Subsequent to that study,Homelands Development Co. was required to participate in the cost of upgrading the signal and Durston Road approaches at that intersection. Costs were to be shared with at least one other major developer. The signal upgrade was designed and will soon be implemented. The City of Bozeman completed a corridor study on Durston between N. 19''Avenue and N. 7`h Avenue, and is currently beginning design of a three lane street construction project in that corridor. This TIS has accounted for the above noted projects as a part of the impact analysis and assumes that both projects would be completed prior to total development of either the Harvest Creek or Harvest Creek West Subdivisions. EXISTING CONDITIONS Street Characteristics This study is limited to investigation of impacts on the main streets accessed by the subdivision. Durston Road and Oak Street along with critical intersections on these streets. Both Durston Road and Oak Street are east-west arterial streets. Durston Road has continuity from Ferguson Avenue west of the site to Rouse Road on the east end of Bozeman. It varies in width along its length, but is approximately 28'wide along the subdivision boundary. Major intersections with Durston occur at North 191h Avenue and North 7' Avenue. Both intersections are signalized and currently have traffic movements that operate below level of service(LOS) "C". Plans are currently being made Page 3 to reconstruct Durston between N. 19`h and N. 7`' which would provide a three lane roadway. Reconstruction of the N. 19`h intersection is also planned to provide east-west left turn lanes and to increases the number of signal phases. Oak Street was recently constructed from a point west of N. 19'h to Rouse Avenue and a new traffic signal was installed at its intersection with North 19`h Avenue. Oak Street will be extended to the west end of the Harvest Creek Subdivision at the time of development. This will provide a second arterial access to the planned subdivision improvements. Traffic Volumes Wta-4) 2-0 Turning movement counts were taken at two major intersections on Oak and Durston. In addition, five automatic recording counters were set for a period of 24 hours on both Oak Street approaches to N. 19",just east of N. 2r on Durston, and on both Durston Approaches to N. 19`h. Hourly count summaries can be found in Appendix A of this report. Figure 2., on the following page,presents a summary of average daily traffic (ADT) on the surrounding street system and turning movement counts at the two critical intersections. The turning movement counts represent the existing peak hour demand at these intersections. ADT volumes for Durston and Oak were determined from the 24 hour counts and current ADT on N. 19`'was calculated from the peak hour turning movement counts. Traffic volumes on Durston are approximately 9700 ADT just west of 19`h Avenue, but drop by approximately 33%to 6450 ADT west of N. 22" Street. These volumes are significantly different than counts taken by Marvin&Associates for the Durston Road corridor study in 1996. At that time ADT west of N 19'h was approximately 6100 and east of N 19`h it was 11,600 ADT. This represents a 62 % increase west of 19`h and a 10% decrease east of 19`h. Traffic on N. 19`h was approximately 15800 ADT south of Durston and 11300 ADT north of Durston,which resulted in increases of 17% and 65%respectively. Page 4 BAXTER LANE 586 136 52 49 ��32 169—'� �� 98 z 17—/ 74 164— ---242 32 31 42---,,, f—222 4 r-171 1 # r 1 f 16200 73 1110 ° 816 3212000 18 773 278 a ADT (Typical) PM PEAK HOUR COUNTS 1400 Oak St. Oak-St. 8050 ' Ma lawood St. •��- 18500 /1 n s 8 3i` o StevensCD r Z St. Windsor sr Z 18600 I Co Terrace Ave. Durston Rd. 6450 z 9700 Durston Rd. Beaverhead 1 2 Z135 0 m L N n L0 z z z z ZI z ` z W.Bea11 t < 500 C' an nhall v_ o � •"i m W. Main St. Babcock-St - F-I I y a .m L �•I / Koch St. L m 1;" i� Lj LL I 0 NI // N O � A a o �C = N L In s � Huffine Lane W.College St. m in I n F N Figure 2. Existing Traffic Volumes Page 5 Traffic Operations The most obvious operational deficiencies on the surrounding street system occur at the intersection of Durston and North 191h Avenue. Lack of left turn lanes on the Durston Street approaches along with current signal phasing creates long delays on Durston and long vehicle queues on both Durston approaches. The calculated level of service (LOS) at this intersection is "D"with 46.0 seconds of delay per vehicle during the peak hour period (see Appendix B). Observations indicate that there is just enough pavement width on the Durston approaches to accommodate defacto right turn lanes which are used to some extent, but these free movements do not improve the overall intersection efficiency to any significant degree. All other intersections along Durston operate at varying levels of service, with side street approaches experiencing delay. Left turn movements from Durston to the side streets operate at LOS `B"or"A"with no more than 5 seconds delay per vehicle. The Oak Street intersection with N. 19`h Avenue operates at LOS `B". TRIM GENERATION Table 1., below, presents trip generation estimates for the Harvest Creek and Harvest Creek West subdivisions using trip generation rates taken from the ITE Trip Generation Report, Sixth Edition. Rates and total trips are shown for the average weekday and for peak PM hours. Table 7. Trip Generation-Harvest Creek 6 Harvest Creek West ITE Code: 210 Generation Units = Dwelling Units Average Weekday Rate = Ln(T)=0.920Ln(X)+2.707 Peak PM Hour Rate = Ln(T)=0.901 Ln(X)+0.527 64% Enter Average Peak PM Hour WeekdaV Enter Exit Total Harvest Creek 2011 145 82 227 (230 units) Harvest Creek West 2944 191 107 298 (311 units) Totals = 4955 336 189 52�5 Page 6 The total projected average weekday trips (AWT) for the total of the two developments would be 4955 with 2944 trips associated with the Harvest Creek West development. Harvest Creek West would generate approximately 298 trips during the peak p.m. hour period or approximately 57% of the total peak p.m. hour trips. In order to properly evaluate traffic impacts, it is important to consider trip mode and various types of trips. Table 2., below, details trip mode and trip classification. Table 2. Trip Mode,classification&Net Trips Harvest Creek West Total Development Peak PM Hour: Peak PM Hour: Completed Building Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Gross Number of Trips 191 107 298 336 189 525 Ped, Bike &Transit (5%) 10 5 15 17 9 26 Net Vehicular Trips 181 102 283 319 180 499 Internal Capture Trips (2%) 4 2 6 6 4 10 Net Vehicles At Access 177' 100 277 313 176 489 Passerby Trips 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net No. of New Vehicles 177 100 277 313 176 489 At this point, it can be assumed that transit would not play a substantial role in modal trip exchange. Therefore, minimal trips could be attributed to that mode. Some percentage of trips could also be assigned to pedestrians and bikes. This number would probably not be significant during winter months, but could be during summer months. For purposes of analysis, it was assumed that pedestrian bicycle modes would represent approximately 5% of all trips. Since total development of this subdivision will not involve diverse or complementary businesses within the residential area, trip interchange between internal areas of the subdivision will not be substantial. However, the subdivision is large enough to generate inter-neighborhood trips. Trips Page 7 which take place within the subdivision are part of the total trip generation number, but do not involve trips with origins or destinations external to the site are known as "Internal Capture Trips" (ICT). From our distribution model analysis it appears that approximately 2% of the trips would be internal capture trips. There are also three classifications of trip types related to use of the street system: 1) Primary purpose trips are trips for which the development is a primary destination from any particular origin. 2) Diverted linked trips are trips made to the development as a secondary destination and are diverted from a path between an origin and a primary destination. 3) Passerby trips are also trips made to a development as a secondary destination,but the primary trip path is on the adjacent street system, ie. stop on the way home from work. In this case, all trips to and from the subdivision would be primary trips and no passerby traffic is expected. By applying these factors to trips generation estimates in Tables 2., net traffic projections are calculated. On a peak p.m.hour basis, 489 vehicular trips will be made from total development of both subdivisions. Harvest Creek West would be associated with 277 of those trips. On an average weekday basis,Harvest West subdivision would generate approximately 2738 additional trips on the surrounding street system. TRIP DISTRIBUTION There are various methods of determining the directional distribution of trips to and from site developments. For large and complex developments within the middle of a large urbanized area, the task is best accomplished by creating a computerized transportation model of the urban street system and including the proposed development changes. Trip distribution for moderate sized developments may be completed by manipulation of data provided by a current transportation plan. Smaller developments or developments on the fringe of a small urban area can be easily handled by using existing traffic volumes on adjacent streets or by an area of influence method, or both. Page 8 In this case,a transportation planning model was developed for the 1990 Bozeman Transportation Plan and 1993 plan update. In 1995,Marvin&Associates modified the model for the Durston Road Corridor Study to reflect accelerated growth being experienced in Bozeman. Further modifications have been added to the model for various TIS studies since that time. The addition of Oak Street and land development changes within the area were also added to the model. Additional modifications which represent specific details within the subject subdivision area were added to the QRS II model for purposes of analyzing trip distribution and projecting future street system volumes. Translation of subdivision trips to employment data was necessary within the modified model. In addition,the model parameters and path tree building functions assigns traffic to the street system in a manner that would be difficult to illustrate sufficiently for an accessibility study. Therefore,the model was used on a macro level to determine traffic volumes and then translated in terms of trip distribution to and from the subdivision. Figure 3., on the following page, is a graphic summary of directional trip distribution extracted from the traffic model for primary trips. These distributions primarily account for general distribution of trips to and from external areas far removed from the immediate site, but there would also be some trips made to areas shown within Figure 3. The convenience store located in the northwest corner of 19`h and Durston would capture approximately 2% of the trip distribution. Basically, Durston Road would accommodate 56% of all trips, with 8% to the west and 48%to the east. Trips to and from the site east of 19`h Avenue would account for 42% of all trips. Twenty two % of all trips would be to and from the south and 27% of all trips would be to and from the north. As development increases to the west,the distribution on Durston will change somewhat in future years. TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Assignment of peak hour site traffic to the street system and at site access points is dependent upon several factors. Two of them are, directional distribution and operational site conditions, with directional distribution being applied to average weekday traffic assignments. These proportions are used to provide traffic access demand and represent traffic movements to and from the site which would occur if street operations and internal site circulation had no effect on the direction of arrival Page 9 fn I�e -0 ca O c Q � cc 4191'N r O a) �, 41L1 'N I4IL1 'N N > aao �iael8 4;s�'N ul6L 'N N ho ol N 4joZ'N 1 Fo C 3slZ 3 , \-J M3: - ✓�1,,� PuZZ'NI Pull N 0 any pooh Jual8� / PitZ 'N �Q puel M L T� All U) ON c a� 4iLZ CO y-8 o o10 i 10 =3 •— p � �a AalleA r m a� r m 0-1I any sseJ6�aannS �— orth Co m f ahy uepua4S Page 10 or departure other than the access point used. Traffic distribution is further refined by calculating potential travel times within the sites and at ingress and egress points. The combined calculations of demand and least time accessibility were used to estimate the optimum traffic volumes at each access point. Manual calculations of least travel times and proportional distribution to the subdivision street accesses were used to provide definitive turning movement traffic assignments at critical intersections. Figures 4., 5., and 6., on the following pages,represent the results of the traffic assignment analysis for two levels of development. Figure 4 indicates the Harvest Creek West average weekday traffic (AWT) assignments on the surrounding street system and peak hour assignments at both the Oak Street and Durston Road intersections with North 19`h. Figure 5 presents similar information for total development of both subdivisions. The highest traffic concentration would be on Durston Road between N. 271h and N. 22"d Streets, with 1314 AWT for Harvest Creek and 2212 AWT for total development. Figure 6 presents traffic assignments at the subdivision street intersections with Oak and Durston. It was determined that the highest volume street access would be Valley Drive at Oak Street with 914 AWT. Hunters Way at its intersection with Durston would be very close at 860 AWT. The highest peak p.m. hour turning movement volumes would be the westbound right turns and the southbound left turns at Durston Road intersection and the eastbound left and the northbound right turns on Oak Street. Page 11 co U .Q a I— U f0 co ? - �c p - 4�56'N m :3 (D u a� P i to \ 4ILL'N n [�l a) N - - - 4iLl'N d) Q �� 0) o U) a)o oe19 rm �•- N V -7 - ---� 416l N N C9 � 410Z'N F-- y C4 ! a c 1slZ'N T 0 3 i PUZZ'N PuZZ N w 'e,ly pppM lue)8 `0 PJEZ'N c° 'J0 puel Q all 4i9Z'N ._�.�� •� N � J T M 4iLZ'N N oaao c+')�\ �� NT-Y ocn ~ cn N Nw } cn jQ MUM LU orlh O� m •aNny sse�6iaan ng nF �— Lo i �a m co C4 •any uepiJayg a �L CY) Page 12 m U .Q t— U uu c0 a+ i H Y � ca 0 co O c L a�i acn419L'N y j�—m1 41=% N oy3Ll'N m QO 41CL'N 3 TTa c 1 i m ui ego �g18 '� 4 4�61. 'N N a 416L 'N N ^ v7 410Z'N F" %o 'N r C �f7 co PUU a^b paan� ival8 c``O pJCZ IFE �3puei L' 'c 439Z'N Is I Q C4 E7 m V 4;LZ'N - a aaao Y .n +1 NINE >14 L _+ 1f � M N N w� N wW 0 cn 'ja AattaA %0 z_I ui a T -0 L _ ?� any sse�6IaannS 00 or7h co M -IF— LL any ueptJayg 00r- Lf) Page 13 0 �62 35~ 27 50 89 P1981 1 r 0 � 0 � /--18 0 35 I 0 150 10914 Oak St. 1306 1571 914 92 265 1410 C a { m N CZ ElAverage Weekday ❑ Traffic (Typical) a C a 860 455 368 155 N 1662 1870 2213 Durston Rd. 46 I 3 126 / l f 3I 24 4I 32 1I 17 6 41 19— 11 5 —/ 37 12 46 4 27 r 40— —49 52— 82 80 — ---127 1 2 Figure 6. Site Access Traffic Assignment - Total Harvest Creek Page 14 TRAFFIC IMPACTS J Traffic Volumes Figures 7., 8., and 9., on the following pages,present summaries of ADT and peak p.m. hour traffic volume impacts on the surrounding street system and at critical intersections for two development conditions. Existing plus site development traffic volumes projections do not necessarily represent a condition that will ever occur, since these developments would need to be completed within a very limited time frame. Because of other development proposals, developments under construction and general growth in the Bozeman area, existing traffic volumes will not remain stagnant. Growth in the background traffic will occur while Harvest Creek West is being developed and these volumes will change accordingly. However, the traffic projections presented in Figures 7 thru 9 are only intended to illustrate impacts that could be attributed to the subject site development using existing conditions as a basis of comparison. Figure 7 illustrates resulting ADT and percentage volume increases attributable to development of Harvest Creek West. The highest increase would be on Oak Street west of N. 19t}'. Durston Road would experience a 20% increase between N 27`h and N 22❑d Streets. No other streets would experience increases greater than 10%of existing. Peak p.m.hour traffic volumes at the 19`h Avenue intersections represent the sum of existing and assigned traffic volumes. Figure 8 presents similar information for development of both Harvest Creek and Harvest Creek West subdivisions. The resulting impacts appear to be similar with a magnitude of increase proportionate to the relative trip generation potential of both developments. Figure 9 illustrates ADT and peak p.m.hour existing plus site traffic assignments at the Oak Street and Durston Road intersections with the subdivision streets. Since Oak Street does not currently exist along the north boundary of the subdivision, all traffic would be subdivision traffic. Page 15 rn � c � n Q X w +�+ N O + � y co c co i , C C X ai �O w 41 - a L y151'N c 419L'N fo r0 41L1'N F' f� 41L1'N 3 m V CO c M m aJo �I�e18 �� u.a�G L116L 'N F. �r r fN y166 'N N v, o 0 00 y10Z'N 0�y M O ISV'N v o 0 c 00 m Pull N Pull N I •anb poota �ual9 �y pJEZ'N I L Qg° V 'JO puel 04 =' 2 415Z'N o = a 0.1 rCN 43LZcc 00 F cn •x -.e L- W rncoF- y c • Na o O D JQ /laIIPn c,4 — L acfl`, m 00 —� 00 SSeJB;aaM SIA o0 1.0 m % •any uePI104S Page 16 rn � c � ai Q LU +� `m O + (D rn y O c w > can a L 4�51 'N c a� co M_.0--4391'N ru - c O 41L1'N ^ o In .� 4ILL'N V c O 0 n pCl) C4 — O 3 .� l <n ago yI61 'N a o OO 1-0 y16L N N O C.) N 430Z'N C4co c N IstZ'N 0 3 L p m puZZ'N PuZZ N V CO) m any pooh juaJ9 ``'� PJEZ �4 puel �c L .X D"\ " r_ r' %00�0co 0 41LZ'N 0 CY) 04 rl 000 00 Lo 0LO coi .y�C.a a .o •� W rn co ` c (1) • � d O jQ MUM � _ 00 M N W V) =0 rn M N c O U L iIT N L m N--loll � 00 o vKh ^ C m( any sseJ6�aannSl LO —� /r- 10 Ll 01) ` •any uepiaa4S rl LO rl r N Page 17 0 � 62 0A0akSt- 50— 89 60—_ _ 107 1 0 �18 28 0 35 01 � 1 � 0 10 0 16 9141306 1571 1981 NO EXISTING TRAFFIC 914 92 265 1410 C x ; a e o o m � � m m >" N aZ Existing + Site ADT - C—i ` a Percent Increase Over Existing a860 455 [34%] - �` �_� _ �� -f—► Durston Rd. d [24%] [26%] [29%] 8000 8100 8300 J2417 41 337 5 37 12—/ 46 4 — `�27 27 72 -- -- 402 284 — —435 312-- 4g0 I Figure 9. Existing Plus Total Harvest Creek Traffic At Accesses Page 18 Capacity Impacts Capacity calculations are very complex and not entirely understood by the average layperson. The word "capacity" in traffic terminology does not mean "being full", as would be used to describe a reservoir or a pipeline. Traffic capacity is not an absolute measure of how many vehicles can occupy a section of roadway or how many vehicles can pass a single point in a certain amount of time. Rather, capacity refers to set limits differentiating levels-of-service (LOS). These LOS limits are defined in the Transportation Research Board's Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 1998. On extended two-lane roadways, LOS is a measure of percent time delay and average speed. Under ideal conditions,the ultimate capacity(full condition) a two lane roadway is 2800 passenger cars per hour total, in both directions. Capacity at various levels of services are dependent upon delay and average speeds. LOS ranges from"A"to"F"and are much like school grades. At LOS "A", speeds are above 60 mph with only 30%time delay. At LOS "C", which is generally considered the LOS used for design of new facilities, speeds are greater than 52 mph and time delay is less than 60%. LOS "F" is considered the "full" condition where time delay is 100% and speeds are less than 45 mph. Even with a consistent understanding two-lane roadway capacity and LOS, there are many misconceptions, even among traffic professionals, of what the LOS actually means. As an example, two-lane roadway capacity in urban areas is not typical of conditions encountered in rural areas, where capacity calculations usually apply. On most urban streets, speed criteria is not applicable since most urban streets have speed limits less than 45 mph. The effect of trucks and no passing zones are not as applicable to calculation of time delay since operating characteristics on urban streets are completely different. Thus, LOS limits may not necessarily measure what drivers experience in terms of level of service. Intersection LOS is measured by delay and reflects the average driver's tolerance to waiting time. While specific LOS values for delay in seconds per vehicle are presented in the HCM, a general description for LOS would be:LOS "A"-stops with little if any delay waiting for a traffic gap;LOS "C"(design level)-moderate length stops with tolerable levels of stopped delay; and LOS "F"-long Page 19 waits with little opportunity to cross or enter the traffic stream (complete congestion). Similar to the capacity of two-lane roadways,there are many circumstances that may exist which would make the LOS value inadequate in describing an intersection's actual efficiency. In large urban areas, delay is much more acceptable than in small towns. What seems to be LOS "D" for someone in ~ Bozeman would seem like LOS `B"to someone from Los Angeles. Many times a minor one-lane approach can be calculated at a LOS less than "C", but since the approach lane is wide enough to accommodate stacking of cars side-by-side, a defacto thru and right turn lane would be available for use. By calculating and stating that the LOS of this approach is a"D" or"E"would not correspond with most drivers' experience. Also, a separate left turn lane on the approach to a high volume street will almost always calculate to be less than LOS "C" and often times LOS "F". If the left turn volume is less than 30 vehicles in an hour, a seemingly dire situation is no more than a slight inconvenience to a minor number of motorists. The overall efficiency of the intersection can be at LOS "A" even though some minor movements experience excessive delay. Appendix B contains capacity calculations for various conditions based on the estimated design hour volumes as indicated in the previous report section. It has been a practice, in the City of Bozeman, to use the "Two-Lane Highway"HCM procedure to calculate LOS on city streets even though the methods and resultant LOS calculations are not applicable to city streets. The reasons for using this method are ease of data input and results that seem to correlate with the layperson's understanding of LOS. The traditional LOS calculations for two-lane highways were used for Durston Road between N 27`h and N 191h and can be found in Appendix B. These calculations indicate that the roadway currently operates at the upper end of LOS "C". It is known that many two lane arterial and collector streets can carry up to 9000 ADT at LOS "C". Addition of Harvest Creek West traffic `4&*V; 7 would result in LOS "D", even though the ADT would be 7750. Since Durston Road is not replete with high volume intersections and driveway approaches and the peak hour volume is only 9% of ADT, it should be able to carry volumes very near the upper limit of LOS "C"even with the added traffic. An HCM capacity method exists for arterial streets which is seldom used except on high volume arterial streets that have a series of signalized intersections. However, it is the accepted standard for Page 20 capacity and LOS measurements on urban arterial streets. It has not been used extensively as an analysis tool related to traffic impact studies because it is complicated, requires more data and calculations, and is not easily understood by the average layperson. LOS measurements are based on travel time(running time) along a continuous length of arterial street. The suggested minimum length of arterial is one mile. Data inputs require: specific signal timing and calculated capacity factors; facility classification based on specific criteria;miscellaneous control delay; and other delay factors. Appendix B contains summaries of arterial capacity calculations for Durston Road between Valley Drive and North 7'Avenue. It was determined that the existing LOS on Durston between 15`h and 19`h is "E" and is"C" on the remainder of the arterial street except west of Western Street which is at LOS `B". Long delays at the signal at 19`h is the reason for the LOS "E" calculation. A second calculation was completed which assumed that the planned signal and roadway improvements were completed and existing traffic volumes were used. This calculation indicated that the 15"'to 191h section would improve to LOS "C" and the remainder of Durston would be at LOS "C" or better. The third calculation was similar to the second except the traffic assignment for both Harvest Creek and Harvest Creek West developments was added. The results indicated that only the section west of Western Street would be degraded from LOS `B"to LOS "C". From this analysis it can be stated that development of the Harvest Creek West will not significantly degrade the arterial LOS on Durston Road, but the average travel speed would drop by 10%. Figure 10., on the following page,presents intersection capacity impacts at all critical intersections. Three out of 4 approaches at the intersection of 19'' &Durston currently operate below LOS "C". With planned improvements at that intersection, the LOS would improve to provide LOS "C", or better, on all approaches. The addition of traffic from both Harvest Creek subdivisions would not degrade the LOS on any of the approaches or individual traffic movements. Existing LOS at the Oak and 19`t' intersection is currently at LOS "C" or better on all approaches. Addition of traffic from both subdivisions would impact some movements which currently operate at LOS "A"or`B",but none of the movements would be below LOS "C". All of the Harvest Creek Subdivision street intersections would operate at LOS "C" or better. Page 21 y cn a cr. o a� O C L Q U a L 4156'N N CD O -C O yl9l'N L C N ylLL'N ►-C =: r y1LlN a c thaAR O � cn aio �I�el9 _ - -NJ a n 0 0 y166 'N 'x C4 W J J o _c lslZ'N o � Pull N Pull N any pooh luaa8 cc`� P�EZ'N •V �0 Puel a CL V co 00 U w 4lLZ'N •� RU-1 co co o U U oN 92 U❑ c N •id Aepen O o -� � O W��Fc-ol 0 �jf,M�11 W •any sseiBleam O U r `-'a v- C © UU � _� O� U .UO any uepuays r oa� an co CD Page 22 Safety In addition to capacity impacts, safety of the proposed site layout and access would be a prime factor in consideration of impacts to the street system. From observations of existing conditions, it appears that sufficient sight distance exists on all intersection approaches. One other factor that may be involved with potential safety would be an increased number of left and right turn traffic at the subdivision approach streets. Appendix C contains a graphic equivalent Table IX-15., found in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), "A Policy For Geometric Design of Highways and Streets 1995. This graph indicates what volumes of approaching and opposing traffic are required to warrant a left turn bay when various percentages of the advancing volume are left turn movements. Design hour volumes were checked on this graph and it was determined that left turn lanes would not be justified given the projected traffic volumes. Similarly,right turn bay justification from the MDT design manual was checked and it was determined that right turn lanes would not be required. IMPACT MITIGATION & RECOMMENDATIONS The City of Bozeman policy generally states that all street and intersection facilities must maintain a LOS"C"or better and any development impacts that would degrade LOS to a level lower than"C" requires the developer to construct necessary improvements to mainta' "C". The study analysis indicates that the proposed HarvestCreek West developmen , by itself, 1 not reduce the arterial street LOS on Durston Roadf�ifthe Ianne intersection and street improvement projects are constructed prior to full development of the subdivision. It should be noted that several other developments along Durston, both east and west of the site, are in the planning, design or construction phase. The cumulative impacts of these developments was not within the scope of this study, but it is apparent that the total of these developments will eventually educe the Avenue. It is known that no provisions have been made to assess developers of these planned subdivisions for proportionate costs of future improvements on Durston Road. It seems incomprehensible that the first development that Page 23 would degrade the LOS to a point below "C" would be required to pay for the entire street reconstruction project. Some mechanism should be instituted to assess a fair share of costs based on such factors such as: development area, trip generation or traffic assignment. From our analysis and comparison of periodical traffic counts,the convenience store located in the northwest corner of 19t" and Durston has substantially increased traffic volumes on Durston west of rD 19th, b o 2Mo meats were required at the intersection prior to construction of that facility -�� Homelands Development Co., as a part of the Harvest Creek Subdivision approval was required to1v pay for a large portions of planned intersection improvements. They will also be constructing a� substantial portion of Oak Street which borders the northern portion of Harvest Creek and Harvest Creek West Subdivisions. In many urban areas, standard policy requires the developer to construct arterial street improvements adjacent to the development property. It could be considered reasonable to make this requirement on Durston Road, but this would not do anything to improve future LOS between N. 27`h and N 19"Avenues. It appears that the only equitable way to proportion costs of improving Durston would be a special improvement district (SID) encompassing property on both sides of Durston Road. Waivers of protest for this SID should be required as a part of all subdivision developments. Perhaps a combination of SID waivers and adjacent arterial construction could be instituted. Whatever conditions are imposed,costs for off-site improvements must be equitable and just. Page 24 APPENDIX "A" Traffic Volume Summaries Page 25 DURSTON ROAD EAST OF 27TH ST EASTBOUND Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 4 4 0.1% 2 4 4 0.1% 3 4 4 0.1% 4 10 10 0.3% 5 31 31 1.0% 6 95 95 3.0% 7 292 292 9.1% 8 344 344 10.8% 9 185 185 5.8% 10 161 161 5.0% 11 162 162 5.1% 12 238 238 7.4% 13 218 218 6.8% 14 209 209 6.5% 15 232 232 7.3% 16 228 228 7.1% 17 230 230 7.2% 18 205 205 6.4% 19 115 115 3.6% 20 83 83 2.6% 21 77 77 2.4% 22 40 40 1.3% 23 20 20 0.6% 24 13 13 0.4% Total 1243 1957 3200 100% GRAPH 14% 13% 11% --- -- - - - - 10% - - �--- 9% - - - -- 10 8% ---. }, 7% . -- - Weekday N 6% - - U 5% - 4% - 11. 3% - - - 2% - 1% - 0 Hours of the Day DURSTON ROAD EAST OF 27TH ST WESTBOUND Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 18 18 0.6% 2 10 10 0.3% 3 5 5 0.2% 4 6 6 0.2% 5 8 8 0.2% 6 38 38 1.2% 7 149 149 4.6% 8 195 195 6.0% 9 132 132 4.0% 10 110 110 3.4% 11 198 198 6.1% 12 239 239 7.3% 13 215 215 6.6% 14 238 238 7.3% 15 286 286 8.7% 16 274 274 8.4% 17 356 356 10.9% 18 248 248 7.6% 19 163 163 5.0% 20 134 134 4.1% 21 126 126 3.9% 22 56 56 1.7% 23 42 42 1.3% 24 24 24 0.7% Total 1709 1561 3270 100% GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% 0 10% - - - - — -- - -- — 9% -- - O 7% � 6% - - --------- - - - Weekday EL A 2% - 1% f Hours of the Day DURSTON ROAD EAST OF 27TH ST EB & WB Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 22 22 0.3% 2 14 14 0.2% 3 9 9 0.1% 4 16 16 0.2% 5 39 39 0.6% 6 133 133 2.1% 7 441 441 6.8% 8 539 539 8.3% 9 317 317 4.9% 10 271 271 4.2% 11 360 360 5.6% 12 477 477 7.4% 13 433 433 6.7% 14 447 447 6.9% 15 518 518 8.0% 16 502 502 7.8% 17 586 586 9.1% 18 453 453 7.0% 19 278 278 4.3% 20 217 217 3.4% 21 203 203 3.1% 22 96 96 1.5% 23 62 62 1.0% 24 37 37 0.6% Total 2952 3518 6470 100% GRAPH 14% - 13% ....... . 12% - 11% p 10% ---- 1- 9% -- 8% - C: 6% -- - - - - - ---- i 4% 2% - - - - - - 1% - 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324 Hours of the Day DURSTON ROAD WEST OF 19TH ST EASTBOUND Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 14 14 0.3% 2 10 10 0.2% 3 6 6 0.1% 4 21 21 0.4% 5 49 49 0.9% 6 135 135 2.6% 7 414 414 7.8% 8 464 464 8.8% 9 289 289 5.5% 10 264 264 5.0% 11 296 296 5.6% 12 401 401 7.6% 13 398 398 7.5% 14 385 385 7.3% 15 376 376 7.1% 16 395 395 7.5% 17 376 376 7.1% 18 356 356 6.7% 19 215 215 4.1% 20 162 162 3.1% 21 138 138 2.6% 22 65 65 1.2% 23 31 31 0.6% 24 26 26 0.5% Total 2140 3146 ` 5286 100% GRAPH 14% --- - - -- 13% - - 12%- .., , - - 11% -- -- - - - --- 40 8% - --- - ----- -- — 7% Weekday 6% U 5% .. N 4% - a. 3% - - - - - --- 2% 0% Hours of the Day DURSTON ROAD WEST OF 19TH ST WESTBOUND Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 26 26 0.6% 2 15 15 0.3% 3 12 12 0.3% 4 6 6 0.1% 5 14 14 0.3% 6 49 49 1.1% 7 176 176 4.0% 8 238 238 5.4% 9 179 179 4.0% 10 180 180 4.1% 11 246 246 5.6% 12 322 322 7.3% 13 315 315 7.1% 14 331 331 7.5% 15 346 346 7.8% 16 373 373 8.4% 17 474 474 10.7% 18 361 361 8.1% 19 246 246 5.6% 20 165 165 3.7% 21 166 166 3.7% 22 89 89 2.0% 23 56 56 1.3% 24 45 45 1.0% Total 2321 2109 4430 100% GRAPH 14% � - - - - - - - 13% 12% 11% 10% 1— 9% O 8% - 7% _ _ Weekday N 6% - _ U 5% - - - - ` 4% O IL 3% 2% - 1% 0% Hours of the Day DURSTON ROAD WEST OF 19TH ST EB & WB Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 40 40 0.4% 2 25 25 0.3% 3 18 18 0.2% 4 27 27 0.3% 5 63 63 0.6% 6 184 184 1.9% 7 590 590 6.1% 8 702 702 7.2% 9 468 468 4.8% 10 444 444 4.6% 11 542 542 5.6% 12 723 723 7.4% 13 713 713 7.3% 14 716 716 7.4% 15 722 722 7.4% 16 768 768 7.9% 17 850 850 8.7% 18 717 717 7.4% 19 461 461 4.7% 20 327 327 3.4% 21 304 304 3.1% 22 154 154 1.6% 23 87 87 0.9% 24 71 71 0.7% Total 4461 5255 9716 100% GRAPH - 14% 13% 12% --- 11% - - 0 10% 9% 8% - C 6% - U 5% - - - - _. N 4% 3% - - - - - 2% - -111 - 1% - - - 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12131415161718 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hours of the Day DURSTON ROAD EAST OF 19TH ST EASTBOUND Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 10 10 0.2% 2 8 8 0.2% 3 6 6 0.1% 4 8 8 0.2% 5 35 35 0.7% 6 130 130 2.6% 7 459 459 9.1% 8 475 475 9.4% 9 282 282 5.6% 10 246 246 4.9% 11 326 326 6.5% 12 393 393 7.8% 13 308 308 6.1% 14 352 352 7.0% 15 370 370 7.4% 16 387 387 7.7% 17 316 316 6.3% 18 307 307 6.1% 19 198 198 3.9% 20 145 145 2.9% 21 131 131 2.6% 22 73 73 1.5% 23 39 39 0.8% 24 25 25 0.5% Total 1991 3038 5029 100% GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% 11�O 10% - �- 9% 8% - - - --- ---- - - O +-, 7% -- -— - ---- _ Weekday U5% - - - ----- - - i 4% IZ 3% - - - - 2% 1% 0% � Hours of the Day DURSTON ROAD EAST OF 19TH ST WESTBOUND Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 30 30 0.6% 2 14 14 0.3% 3 9 9 0.2% 4 5 5 0.1% 5 14 14 0.3% 6 71 71 1.4% 7 158 158 3.1% 8 246 246 4.8% 9 224 224 4.3% 10 216 216 4.2% 11 305 305 5.9% 12 405 405 7.9% 13 384 384 7.4% 14 403 403 7.8% 15 427 427 8.3% 16 480 480 9.3% 17 562 562 10.9% 18 368 368 7.1% 19 267 267 5.2% 20 194 194 3.8% 21 180 180 3.5% 22 109 109 2.1% 23 51 51 1.0% 24 36 36 0.7% Total 2674 2484 5158 100% GRAPH 14% - 13% _-- 12% --- 11% 4- 8% -- - - - --- -- - - 4- 7% - --— — -- - -- Weekday 6% 4% - IL 3% - - 2% - - 1% - 0% Hours of the Day DURSTON ROAD EAST OF 19TH ST EB & WB Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 40 40 0.4% 2 22 22 0.2% 3 15 15 0.1% 4 13 13 0.1% 5 49 49 0.5% 6 201 201 2.0% 7 617 617 6.1% 8 721 721 7.1% 9 506 506 5.0% 10 462 462 4.5% 11 631 631 6.2% 12 798 798 7.8% 13 692 692 6.8% 14 755 755 7.4% 15 797 797 7.8% 16 867 867 8.5% 17 878 878 8.6% 18 675 675 6.6% 19 465 465 4.6% 20 339 339 3.3% 21 311 311 3.1% 22 182 182 1.8% 23 90 90 0.9% 24 61 61 0.6% Total 4665 5522 10187 100% GRAPH 14% 13% 12% 11% p 10% 1-- 9% - -- _ - - - - - --- - ----- -- 8% 4- 7% ---- -- -- - - -----__�_- 6% U 5% N 4% - Q_ 3%. 1% -- ---. - - - 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2122 23 24 Hours of the Day OAK STREET EAST OF 19TH EASTBOUND Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 15 15 0.4% 2 10 10 0.3% 3 4 4 0.1% 4 3 3 0.1% 5 16 16 0.4% 6 47 47 1.2% 7 118 118 3.0% 8 192 192 4.9% 9 175 175 4.5% 10 199 199 5.1% 11 281 281 7.2% 12 311 311 7.9% 13 305 305 7.8% 14 321 321 8.2% 15 338 338 8.6% 16 393 393 10.0% 17 449 449 11.5% 18 247 247 6.3% 19 182 182 4.6% 20 137 137 3.5% 21 84 84 2.1% 22 46 46 1.2% 23 24 24 0.6% 24 17 17 0.4% Total 1917 1997 3914 100% i GRAPH 14% — - 13% _ - - 12% - 11% � 10% - f— 9% - - O 8% -- �.., 7% 6% _ _ Weekday U 5% L 4% - N - - a. 3% - 2% 1% 0% Hours of the Day OAK STREET EAST OF 19TH WESTBOUND Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 5 5 0.1% 2 3 3 0.1% 3 5 5 0.1% 4 16 16 0.4% 5 42 42 1.0% 6 140 140 3.4% 7 409 409 9.9% 8 313 313 7.6% 9 246 246 6.0% 10 229 229 5.6% 11 298 298 7.2% 12 332 332 8.0% 13 312 312 7.6% 14 305 305 7.4% 15 288 288 7.0% 16 301 301 7.3% 17 266 266 6.4% 18 232 232 5.6% 19 164 164 4.0% 20 91 91 2.2% 21 67 67 1.6% 22 30 30 0.7% 23 22 22 0.5% 24 10 10 0.2% Total 1471 2655 4126 100% GRAPH 14% -- 13% 12% 11% 0 10% F— 9% O g% 7% C 6% Weekday U 5% O 4% - — 0. 3% 2% - - - 1% I - 0% h`�-��.la I11 1 n; Hours of the Day OAK STREET EAST OF 19TH EB & WB Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 20 20 0.2% 2 13 13 0.2% 3 9 9 0.1% 4 19 19 0.2% 5 58 58 0.7% 6 187 187 2.3% 7 527 527 6.6% 8 505 505 6.3% 9 421 421 5.2% 10 428 428 5.3% 11 579 579 7.2% 12 643 643 8.0% 13 617 617 7.7% 14 626 626 7.8% 15 626 626 7.8% 16 694 694 8.6% 17 715 715 8.9% 18 479 479 6.0% 19 346 346 4.3% 20 228 228 2.8% 21 151 151 1.9% 22 76 76 0.9% 23 46 46 0.6% 24 27 27 0.3% Total 3388 4652 8040 100% GRAPH 14% 13% - - 11% p 10% ---- 9% O 8% - - - - - --- 4-1 7% -- - -- C•) 5% - - - -- - 3% - - 2% - 1% - - - 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 13141516171819 20 21 22 23 24 Hours of the Day OAK STREET WEST OF 19TH WESTBOUND Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 2 2 0.3% 2 0 0 0.0% 3 0 0 0.0% 4 0 0 0.0% 5 2 2 0.3% 6 7 7 0.9% 7 21 21 2.7% 8 36 36 4.7% 9 31 31 4.0% 10 22 22 2.9% 11 44 44 5.7% 12 60 60 7.8% 13 58 58 7.5% 14 56 56 7.3% 15 62 62 8.0% 16 77 77 10.0% 17 95 95 12.3% 18 62 62 8.0% 19 44 44 5.7% 20 43 43 5.6% 21 25 25 3.2% 22 11 11 1.4% 23 10 10 1.3% 24 3 3 0.4% Total 432 339 771 100% GRAPH 14% 13% - — 12% -- - — ---- - 11% -- —--- -- -— 0 10% - - - - - - -- - �- 9% --- --- - 8% - - -- -- - - - - 7% - -- 6% Weekday 4% - CL 3% •----_ - 2% - - - 1% - - 0% }1® Hours of the Day OAK STREET WEST OF 19TH EB & WB Hour 03/21/2000 03/22/2000 Avg. % of Begin TUES WED Weekday Weekday 1 2 2 0.1% 2 1 1 0.1% 3 2 2 0.1% 4 3 3 0.2% 5 9 9 0.6% 6 32 32 2.3% 7 ill 111 7.9% 8 103 103 7.3% 9 61 61 4.3% 10 43 43 3.1% 11 70 70 5.0% 12 97 97 6.9% 13 87 87 6.2% 14 97 97 6.9% 15 107 107 7.6% 16 117 117 8.3% 17 148 148 10.5% 18 109 109 7.7% 19 75 75 5.3% 20 55 55 3.9% 21 40 40 2.8% 22 18 18 1.3% 23 15 15 1.1% 24 6 6 0.4% Total 690 718 1408 100% GRAPH 14% - - --- 10% -- -- ---- ----- 9% -- - -- O 8% - +. 7% - - - N 6% - -- - -- - - U 5% (L 3% ---- - 2% ---- -- - - - 1% - - 0% - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 1213141516171819 20 21 22 23 24 Hours of the Day APPENDIX "B" Capacity Calculations Page 26 HCM Analysis Stimmary EXISTING TRAFFIC & GEOMETRY DURSTON ROAD/N. 19TH AVE R MARVIN 04/09/2000 PEAK PM HOUR Case: DL RST19E Analysis Duration: 15 minutes Area Type: Non CBD Lanes Geometry:Movements Serviced by Lane and Lane Widths (feet) ApproachlOutbound Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 4 Lane 5 dLane6 EB 1 1 LTR 12.0 WB 1 1 LTR 12.0 NB 3 2 L 12.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 SB 3 2 L 12.0 T 12.0 TR 1 12.0 East West North South Data L T R L T R L T R L T R Movement Volume h 169 164 42 222 242 98 73 816 110 52 586 136 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 %Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Lane Groups LTR LTR L I TR L TR Arrival Type 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 RTOR Vol h 15 20 30 45 Peds/Hour 0 0 0 0 %Grade 0 0 0 0 Parkers/Hour Buses/flour 0 0 0 0 Signal Settings: Semi-Actuated Operational Analysis Cycle Length: 110.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle:14.0 Sec Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ped Only EB LTP WB LTP NB L LTP SB L LTP Green 53.0 8.0 35.0 1 0 Yellow 3.4 4.0 3.3 All Red 1.7 0.0 1.7 Ca a ity Analysis Results Approach: Lane Cap v/s g/C Lane We Delay Delay App Group (vph) Ratio Ratio Group Ratio (sec/veh) LOS (sec/veh) LOS EB LTR 1 475 0.384 0.482 LTR 0.798 37.1 D 37.1 D WB *LTR 553 0.497 0.482 LTR 1.033 75.4 E 75.4 E NB L er 130 0.000 0.363 41.7 D * L ro 129 0.044 0.073 L 0.297 23.2 C * TR 1111 0.270 0.318 TR 0.849 43.2 D SB L er 68 0.000 0.363 34.5 C L ro 129 0.031 0.073 L L79 25.6 C TR 1103 0.206 0.318 TR 35.1 D Intersection:Delay= 46.0 sec/veh Int.LOS=D XC­ 0.93 * Critical Lane Group 2(v/s)Crit= 0.81 SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 1 i HCM Summary Results EXISTING TRAFFIC & GEOMETRY DURSTON ROAD/N. 19TH AVE R MARVIN 04/09/2000 PEAK PM HOUR Case: DLJRST19E Lane Group Approach Delay Delay Lane X (sec/ (sec/ 586 App Grp v/s v/c veh) LOS veh) LOS 136 52 EB I LTR 0.38 0.80 37.1 D 37.1 D L 98 �—242 WB �--222 * 169 ; f LTR 0.50 1.03 75.4 E 75.4 E 164 -� I 42 -� i NB Lper 0.00 41.7 D * L ro 0.04 0.30# 23.2 C * I i TR 0.27 0.85 43.2 D 73 �110 i 816 SB L er 0.00 34.5 C 1 2 3 L ro 0.03 0.28# 25.6 C —__1► —_ + TR 0.21 0.65 35.1 D 53 3 2 8 4 0 35 3 2 Int. 0.81 0.93 46.0 D * Critical Lane Group #Left Movement Total SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 2 HCM Analysis Summary EXISTING TRAFFIC NEW GEOMETRY & SIG DURSTON RD/N 19TH AVE R MARVIN 04/09/2000 PEAK PM HOUR Case: DURSTEIMP Analysis Duration: 15 minutes Area Type: Non CBD Lanes I Geometry:Movements Serviced by Lane and Lane Widths (feet) Approach Outbound Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 4 Lane 5 Lane 6 EB 2 1 L 12.0 TR 12.0 WB 2 1 L 12.0 TR 12.0 NB 3 2 L 12.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 SB 3 2 L 12.0 T 12.0 TR 1 12.0 ' East West North South Data L T R L T R L T R L T R Movement Volume h 169 164 42 222 242 98 73 816 110 52 586 136 PBT 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 %Bea Vehicles 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 3 0 Lane Groups L TR L TR L TR L TR Arrival Type 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 RTOR Vol v h 15 30 45 45 Peds/Hour 0 0 0 0 %Grade 0 0 0 0 Parkers/Hour --- --- --- Buses/Hour 1 0 1 0 0 0 Signal Settings:Actuated Optimization Analysis Cycle Length: 80.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle:12.0 Sec Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ped Only EB LTP WB LTP LTP NB LTP LTP SB LTP Green 8.0 25.7 8.2 22.0 0 Yellow 4.0 2.3 4.0 2.3 All Red 0.0 1.7 0.0 1.7 Ca acity Analysis Results Approach: Lane Cap v/s g/C Lane v/c Delay Delay App Group (vph) Ratio Ratio Group Ratio (sec/veh) LOS (sec/veh) LOS EB * L 344 0.166 0.321 L 0.517 23.5 C 22.2 C TR 598 0.108 0.321 TR 0.336 21.0 C WB L er 340 0.060 0.371 13.9 B * L ro 179 0.100 0.100 L 0.451 13.9 B TR 866 0.178 0.471 TR 0.378 13.9 B NB L er 97 0.000 0.326 _ 18.4 B L ro 186 0.043 0.103 L 0.272 15.8 B * TR 1486 0.267 0.429 TR 0.624 18-6 B SB L 126 0.120 0.276 L 0.437 26.3 C 29.4 C TR 956 0.206 0.276 TR 0.746 29.7 C Intersection:Delay= 21.1 sec/veh Int.LOS=C X� 0.63 * Critical Lane Group (v/s)Crit= 0.53 SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 1 HCM Summary Results 4 EXISTING TRAFFIC NEW GEOMETRY & SIG DURSTON RD/N 19TH AVE R MARVIN 04/09/2000 PEAK PM HOUR Case: DURSTEINIP Lane Group Approach Delay Delay Lane X (sec/ (sec/ 586 App Grp v/s We veh) LOS veh) LOS 136 52 EB + t *L 0.17 0.52 23.5 C 22.2 C TR 0.11 0.34 21.0 C ! I t 98 t--242 � 222 WB L er 0.06 13.9 B L ro 0.10 0.45# 13.9 B - � TR 0.18 0.38 13.9 B 169 -� 1 164 42 NB Lper 0.00 18.4 B Lpro 0.04 0.27# 15.8 B TR 0.27 0.62 18.6 B 73 j110 816 I SB 1 2 3 4 L 0.12 0.44 26.3 C 29.4 C r TR 0.21 0.75 29.7 C 8 4 0 26 2 2 8 ' 4 0 22 2 2 Int. 0.53 0.63 21T1C * Critical Lane Group # Left Movement Total SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 2 ' HCM Analysis Summary TOTAL HARVEST CREEK TRAFFIC ADDED DURSTON RD/N 19TH AVE R MARVIN 04/09/2000 PEAK PM HOUR Case: DURSTEIMP Analysis Duration: 15 minutes 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 2 1 L 12.0 TR 12.0 WB 2 1 L 12.0 TR 12.0 NB 3 2 L 12.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 SB 3 2 L 12.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 East West North South Data L T R L T R L T R L T R Movement Volume h 177 215 87 222 333 98 154 816 110 52 586 150 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 %Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 3 0 Lane Groups L TR L TR L TR L TR Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 RTOR Vol h 30 30 45 45 Peds/Hour 0 0 0 0 %Grade 0 0 0 0 Parkers/Hour --- --- -- -- Buses/Hour 0 0 0 0 Signal Settings:Actuated Optimization Analysis Cycle Length: 80.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle:16.0 Sec Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ped Only EB LTP WB LTP LTP NB LTP LTP SB LTP Green 8.0 25.8 8.0 22.2 0 Yellow 4.0 2.3 4.0 2.3 All Red 0.0 1.7 0.0 1.7 Ca a ity Analysis Results Approach: Lane Cap v/s g/C Lane v/c Delay Delay App Group (vph) Ratio Ratio Group Ratio (sec/veh) LOS (sec/veh) LOS EB * L 303 0.197 0.322 L 0.614 26.6 C 24.1 C TR 592 0.155 0.322 TR 0.483 22.4 C WB L er 268 0.076 0.372 14.9 B * L ro 179 0.100 0.100 L 0.523 14.8 B TR 874 0.229 0.472 TR 0.484 14.9 B NB Lper 95 0.000 0.328 18.8 B * L ro 181 0.090 0.100 L 0.587 19.6 B TR 1484 0.267 0.428 TR 0.625 18.7 B SB L 126 0.121 0.278 L 0.437 26.1 C 29.6 C * TR 962 0.211 0.278 TR 0.757 29.9 C Intersection:Delay 21 = .6 sec/,eh Int.LOS=C X� 0.75 *Critical Lane Group (v/s)Crit= 0.60 SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 1 HCM Summary Results TOTAL HARVEST CREEK TRAFFIC ADDED DURSTON RD/N 19TH AVE R.MARVIN 04/09/2000 L PEAK PM HOUR Case: DURSTEINIP Lane Group Approach Delay Delay Lane X (sec/ (sec/ 586 App Grp v/s v/c veh) LOS veh) LOS EB 150 52 * � �► � f L 0.20 0.61 26.6 C 24.1 C i TR 0.16 0.48 22.4 C L 9 8 333 ' 222 WB Lper 0.08 14.9 B L ro 0.10 0.52# 14.8 B � TR 0.23 0.48 14.9 B 177 215 -► 87 I f NB L er 0.00 18.8 B i L ro 0.09 0.59# 19.6 B TR 0.27 0.62 18.7 B r ` 154 t110 816 j SB 1 2 3 4 ' L 0.12 0.44 26.1 C 29.6 C -_-- * i TR 0.21 0.76 29.9 C 8 4 0 26 2 2 8 i 4 0 22 2 2 Int. 0.60 0.75 21.6 C * Critical Lane Group #Left Movement Total SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 2 f HCM Analysis Summary EXISTING CONDITIONS OAK ST/N 19TH AVE R MARVIN 04/09/2000 PEAK PM HOUR Case: OAKEX Analysis Duration: 15 minutes 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 2 1 L 12.0 TR 12.0 WB 2 1 L 12.0 TR 12.0 NB 3 2 L 12.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 SB 3 2 L 12.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 East West North South Data L T R L T R L T R L T R Movement Volume( h) 17 32 4 171 31 74 18 773 278 132 610 49 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 %Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 1 1 3 0 Lane Groups L TR L TR L TR L TR Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 RTOR Vol v h 2 28 52 12 Peds/Hour 0 0 0 0 %Grade 0 0 0 0 Parkers/Hour --- --- --- Buses/Hour 0 0 0 0 Signal Settings: Semi-Actuated Optimization Analysis Cycle Length: 70.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle:je Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB LTP WB LTP LTP NB LTP SB LTP LTP Green 8.0 9.6 8.0 28.4 Yellow 4.0 2.3 4.0 2.3 All Red 0.0 1.7 0.0 1.7 Capacity Analysis Results Approach: Lane Cap v/s g/C Lane v/c Delay Delay App Group (vph) Ratio Ratio Group Ratio (sec/veh) LOS (sec/veh) LOS EB L 183 0.013 0.137 L 0.098 27.5 C 27.7 C * TR 257 0.019 0.137 TR 0.140 27.7 C WB L er 243 0.000 0.194 20.4 C * L ro 204 0.101 0.114 L 0.403 21.3 C TR 528 0.047 0.308 TR 0.153 18.2 B NB L 303 0.025 0.406 L 0.063 13.1 B 21.6 C * TR 1389 0.308 0.406 TR 0.757 21.7 C SB L er 107 0.000 0.463 9.3 A * L ro 204 0.078 0.114 L 0.447 14.6 B TR 2007 0.196 0.578 TR 0.339 8.2 A Intersection:Delay= 17.0 sec/veh Int.LOS=B X� 0.66 *Critical Lane Group Z(v/s)C rit= 0.51 SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 1 HCM Summary Results EXISTING CONDITIONS OAK ST/N 19TH AVE R MARVIN 04/09/2000 PEAK PM HOUR Case: OAKEX Lane Group Approach Delay Delay Lane X (sec/ (sec/ 610 App Grp v/s v/c veh) LOS veh) LOS 49 1132 EB L 0.01 0.10 27.5 C 27.7 C * I TR 0.02 0.14 27.7 C j J I i f 34 171 WB Lper 0.00 20.4 C L ro 0.10 0.40# 21.3 C TR 0.05 0.15 18.2 B 17 32 I 4 NB L 0.03 0.06 13.1 B 21.6 C TR 0.31 0.76 21.7 C 18 1278 773 I SB Lper 0.00 9.3 A 1 2 3 I 4 Lpro 0.08 0.45# 14.6 B _� +:._. TR 0.20 0.34 8.2 A 8 4 0 10 2 2 s 4 0 28 '� 2 2 Int. 0.51 0.66 17.0 B * Critical Lane Group # Left Movement Total SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 2 HCM Analysis Summary EXISTING PLUS TOTAL HARVEST CREEK OAK ST/N 19TH AVE R MARVIN 04/09/2000 PEAK PM HOUR Case: OAKEX Analysis Duration: 15 minutes 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 2 1 L 12.0 TR 12.0 WB 2 1 L 12.0 TR 12.0 NB 3 2 L 12.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 SB 3 2 L 12.0 T 12.0 TR 1 12.0 East West North South Data L T R L T R L T R L T R Movement Volume h 56 55 24 171 72 74 54 773 278 132 610 88 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 %Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 1 1 3 0 Lane Groups L TR L TR L TR L TR Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 RTOR Vol h 10 28 52 20 Peds/Hour 0 0 0 0 %Grade 0 0 0 0 Parkers/Hour --- -- --- Buses/Hour f 0 0 0 0 Signal Settings: Semi-Actuated Optimization Analysis Cycle Length: 80.0 Sec Lost Time Per Cycle:12.0 Sec Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ped Only EB LTP WB LTP LTP NB LTP SB LTP Green 8.0 14:9 45.1 0 Yellow 4.0 2.3 2.3 All Red 0.0 1.7 1 1.7 Ca a ity Analysis Results Approach: Lane Cap v/s g/C Lane v/c Delay Delay App Group (vph) Ratio Ratio Group Ratio (sec/veh) LOS_ (sec/veh) LOS EB * L 240 0.046 0.187 L 0.246 30.2 C 29.5 C TR 344 0.040 0.187 TR 0.212 29.0 C WB L er 270 0.001 0.237 21.2 C * L ro 179 0.100 0.100 L 0.401 22.3 C TR 597 0.070 0.337 TR 0,208 19.7 B NB L 360 0.089 0.563 L 0.158 9.3 A 12.0 B TR 1926 0.308 0.563 TR 0.546 12.1 B SB * L 215 0.365 0.563 L 0.647 26.1 C 12.7 B TR 1944 0.207 0.563 TR 0.367 10.2 B Intersection:Delay= 14.4sec/veh Int.LOS=B Xc­ 0.60 * Critical Lane Group :2(v/s)Crit= 0.51 SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 1 HCM Summary Results EXISTING PLUS TOTAL HARVEST CREEK OAK ST/N 19TH AVE R MARVIN 04/09/2000 PEAK PM HOUR Case: OAKEX Lane Group Approach Delay Delay Lane X (sec/ (sec/ 610 I App Grp v/s v/c veh) LOS veh) LOS 88 I132 EB + * L 0.05 0.25 30.2 C 29.5 C TR 0.04 0.21 29.0 C j L 74 72 � ! i . `► i 171 WB L er 0.00 21.2 C .L . L ro 0.10 0.40# 22.3 C -� TR 0.07 0.21 19.7 B 56 «� 1 55 I II 24 ; i NB L 0.09 0.16 9.3 A 12.0 B TR 0.31 0.55 12.1 1 B i I 54 1278 773 i SB 1 �- 2 �~ 3 ,l *L 0.36 0.65 26.1 C 12.7 B TR 0.21 0.37 10.2 B 8 4 0 15 2 2 45 2 2_ _ Int. 0.51 0.60 14.4 B * Critical Lane Group #Left Movement Total SIG/Cinema v2.12 Page 2 MARVIN &ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS April 09,2000 12:59 PM C:\UNSIG3\DURSTVAL.INT DURSTON ROAD&VALLEY DRIVE EXISTING PLUS TOTAL SUB. TRAFFIC INTERSECTION GEOMETRY PREVAILING SPEED= 35 MPH S=STOP CONTROL Minor Top Leg Y=YIELD CONTROL SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Grade = SHARED LANES X X X 0% RADIUS<50 ft S S S NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN NO ACCELERATION LANE`J J, \7 NO RIGHT TURN LANE Grade= 0%Major Right Leg LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. SHARED LEFT LANE 14 (2 LANES) SHARED LEFT LANE LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg Grade= 0% � NO RIGHT TURN LANE �NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN S S S RADIUS <50 ft Grade= X X X SHARED LANES 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. LARGE POPULATION Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right Leg Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg left thru right left thru right left thru right left thru right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 6 1251 3 27 337 41 2 1 20 26 1 3 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .75 .90 .75 .75 .90 .75 .75 .75 .75 .75 .75 .75 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 8 279 4 36 374 55 3 1 27 35 1 4 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 9 279 4 1 40 374 1 55 1 3 1 29 38 1 4 VOLUMES IN PCPH Minor Top Leg (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) AND SATURATION VOLUMES 3 4 1 8 �J 55 120 y 374 180 Major Right Leg 40 9 Major Left Leg 800 279 200 4 E� 3 1 2 NOTE: 9 Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. Minor Bottom Leg MARVIN &ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.Ob 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS April 09, 2000 12:59 PM DURSTON ROAD&VALLEY DRIVE C:\UNSIG3\DURSTVAL.INT EXISTING PLUS TOTAL SUB. TRAFFIC CAPACITY ANALYSIS RIGHT TURN FROM: Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 281 vph 402 vph Critical Gap: 5.7 seconds 5.7 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 982 pcph 847 pcph Movement Capacity: 982 pcph 847 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 97.0% 99.5 % LEFT TURN FROM: Major Right Leg Major Left Leg Conflicting Flow: 283 vph 429 vph Critical Gap: 5.1 seconds 5.1 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 1247 pcph 1058 pcph Movement Capacity: 1247 pcph 1058 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 96.8% 99.1 % Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 95.7% 99.0% THROUGH FROM: Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 754 vph 729 vph Critical Gap: 6.3 seconds 6.3 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 412 pcph 426 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movemer&.95 0.95 Movement Capacity: 390 pcph 403 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 99.7% 99.8 % LEFT TURN FROM: Minor Bottom Leg Minor Top Leg Conflicting Flow: 729 vph 741 vph Critical Gap: 6.8 seconds 6.8 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 377 pcph 371 pcph Major Left, Minor Through, Impedance Factor(p"): 0.95 0.94 Major Left, Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance FactorQ19P 0.96 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movemen0s95 0.93 Movement Capacity: 359 pcph 345 pcph SHARED LANE CAPACITYAND LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Minor Bottom Leg Volume Capacity Capacityl DELAY Level Of Service Left Turn 3 359 816 4.6 A - Little Delay Ave Delay Through 1 390 816 4.6 A - Little Delay 4.6 sec. Right Turn 29 982 816 4.6 A - Little Delay Shared Minor Top Leg Volume 1 Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service Left Turn 38 345 366 11.1 C - Normal Delays Ave Delay Through _ 1 403 366 11.1 C - Normal Delays 11.1 sec Right Turn 4 847 366 11.1 C - Normal Delays Major Street Left Turns Volume Capacity DELAY Level Of Service Ave Delay Major Left Leg 9 1058 3.4 A - Little Delay 0.1 sec. Major Right Leg 40 1247 3.0 A - Little Delay 1 0.3 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 0.9 seconds MARVIN &ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.0b 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS April 09, 2000 01:02 PM DURSTON & HUNTERS WAY C:\UNSIG3\DURSHUNT.INT EXISTING PLUS TOTAL SUB TRAFFIC INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOLUMES IN PCPH S=STOP CONTROL (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND PREVAILING SPEED=34 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES Grade= 0% F— 347 1800 (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Major Left Leg SHARED LEFT LANE Major Left Leg / 18 Grade= 0% --> Major Right Leg 483 - •G Major Right Leg - -- NO RIGHT TURN LANE � 1 � NO ACCEL. LANE 58 � �\ NO RIGHT TURN ` S S RADIUS <50 ft 4 6 STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade= X X SHARED LANES 7 NOTE: 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Saturation Volumes are us LARGE to calculate Probability of POPULATION Queue Free States when tl Major Street Left Turn Lani is shared. Minor Bottom Leg Minor Bottom Leg VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Major Left Leg Major Right LegMinor Bottom Leg thru right I left thru left right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 435 46 12 312 32 4 PEAK HOUR FACTORS 90 .80 .75 .90 .75 .75 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 483 58 16 347 43 5 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 1 483 58 18 1 347 47 6 CAPACITY ANALYSIS Minor Bottom Leg LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 875 vph 512 vph Critical Gap: 6.7 seconds 5.7 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 311 pcph 745 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Moveme6tg8 - Movement Capacity: 304 pcph 745 pcph LEFT TURN FROM Major Right Leg Conflicting Flow: 541 vph Critical Gap: 5.1 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 936 pcph Movement Capacity: 936 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 98.1 % Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) 97.6% SHARED LANE CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Movements Volume ICapacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service Left From Minor Bottom Leg 47 304 326 13.2 C - Normal Delays Ave Del 13.2 sec. Right From Minor Bottom Le 6 745 326 13.2 C - Normal Delays Left From Major Right Leg 18 936 - 3.9 A - Little Delay 0.2 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 0.9 seconds 1g85 HCM:TWO-LANE HIGHWAYS-- FACILITY LOCATION. . . . DURSTON ANALYST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R MARVIN TIME OF ANALYSIS . . . . . PEAK PM DATE OF ANALYSIS . . . . . 04-09-2000 OTHER INFORMATION. . . . EXISTING CONDITIONS A) ADJUSTMENT FACTORS ------------ ------------------------ - ------------------------ PERCENTAGE OF TRUCKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 PERCENTAGE OF BUSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 PERCENTAGE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES . . . . . . . . . 2 DESIGN SPEED (MPH) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 PEAK HOUR FACTOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION (UP/DOWN) . . . . . . . . . . 40 / 60 LANE WIDTH (FT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 ' USABLE SHOULDER WIDTH (AVG. WIDTH IN FT. ) . . . 2 PERCENT NO PASSING ZONES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 B) CORRECTION FACTORS LEVEL TERRAIN E E E f f f LOS T B R w d HV A 2 1 . 8 2 . 2 . 81 . 94 . 98 B 2 . 2 2 2 . 5 . 81 . 94 . 97 C 2 . 2 2 2 . 5 . 81 . 94 . 97 D 2 1 . 6 1 . 6 . 81 . 94 . 99 E 2 1 . 6 1 . 6 . 93 . 94 . 99 C) LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS --- - - -- ---- - ---- ------------------- ------------------------- - INPUT VOLUME (vph) : 586 ACTUAL FLOW RATE : 630 SERVICE LOS FLOW RATE V/C --- --------- ----- A 83 . 04 B 331 . 16 662 . 32 D 1201 . 57 E 2419 1 LOS FOR GIVEN CONDITIONS : C _.. . . . r/off 4- 1985 HCM:TWO-LANE H I GHWAY_S------.._--- FACILITY LOCATION. . . . DURSTON ANALYST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . R MARVIN TIME OF ANALYSIS. . . . . PEAK PM DATE OF ANALYSIS . . . . . 04-09-2000 OTHER INFORMATION. . . . EXISTING PLUS HARVEST WEST A) ADJUSTMENT FACTORS - --------- ----- --- ---------------- ----------- ----------- - - - - - PERCENTAGE OF TRUCKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 PERCENTAGE OF BUSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 PERCENTAGE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES. . . . . . . . . 2 DESIGN SPEED (MPH) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 PEAK HOUR FACTOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION (UP/DOWN) . . . . . . . . . . 40 / 60 LANE WIDTH (FT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 USABLE SHOULDER WIDTH (AVG. WIDTH IN FT. ) . . . 2 PERCENT NO PASSING ZONES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 B) CORRECTION FACTORS ------------ -- ------------------------- - - ---------- ------- --- LEVEL TERRAIN E E E f f f LOS T B R w d HV A 2 1 . 8 2 . 2 . 81 . 94 . 98 B 2 . 2 2 2 . 5 . 81 . 94 . 97 C 2 . 2 2 2 . 5 . 81 . 94 . 97 D 2 1 . 6 1 . 6 . 81 . 94 . 99 E 2 1 . 6 1 . 6 . 93 . 94 . 99 C) LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS INPUT VOLUME (vph) 703 ACTUAL FLOW RATE : 740 SERVICE LOS FLOW RATE V/C --- - - - - - - - - - A 83 . 04 B 331 . 16 662 . 32 1201 . 57 E 2419 1 HCS : Urban and Suburban Arterials Release 3 . 1c ROBERT R MARVIN MARVIN & ASSOCIATES SUITE #211 CREEKSIDE 1001 S 24TH ST W BILLINGS, MT 59102 Phone : (406) 655-4550 Fax: (406) 655-4991 E-Mail : marvin@enginc . com OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS Arterial Name : DURSTON ROAD 27TH TO 7TH ,, File Case : EXISTING ' Prepared By: R MARVIN Direction: West-bound Date : 04/10/2000 Description of Arterial Analysis Period Length 0 . 25 hr Free Art . Flow Running Seg. Cross Street Name Length Class Speed Time Section (mi) (mph) (sec) 0 N 7TH 1 N 11TH 0 . 25 3 35 30 . 0 1 2 N 15TH 0 . 25 3 35 30 . 0 2 3 N 19TH 0 . 25 3 35 30 . 0 3 4 WESTERN 0 . 40 3 35 41 . 1 4 5 VALLEY DR 0 . 45 3 35 46 . 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Intersection Delay Estimates !Seg Cycle Green v/c Lane PVG Arr . I Unit Init . Cntrl . Other Inter. Length Ratio Ratio Cap. if Type Fac- Ext . Queue Delay Delay LOS C g/C X c Input AT for (sec) (veh) (sec) (sec) 1 0 . 0 0 . 000 0 4 1 . 000 0 . 0 0 0 . 0- 20 . 0 A 2 0 . 0 0 . 000 0 4 1 . 000 0 . 0 0 0 . 0- 12 . 0 A 3 80 . 0 0 . 482 0 . 384 475 4 1 . 000 0 . 0 0 37 . 1* 12 . 0 D 4 0 . 0 0 . 000 0 4 1 . 000*0 . 0 0 0 . 0- 32 . 0 A 5 0 . 0 0 . 000 0 4 1 . 000 0 . 0 0 0 . 0- 12 . 0 A 6 7 8 19 10 11 12 13 14 15 Arterial Level of Service Inter. Sum of Sum of Arterial Running Control . Other Time by Length by Arterial LOS by Seg. Sect . Time Delay Delay Section Section Speed Section (sec) (sec) (sec) (sec) (mi) (mph) + 1 1 30 . 0 0 . 0- 20 . 0 50 . 0 0 . 25 18 . 0 C 2 2 30 . 0 0 . 0- 12 . 0 42 . 0 0 . 25 21 .4 C 3 3 30 . 0 37 . 1* 12 . 0 79 . 1 0 . 25 11 . 4 E 4 4 41 . 1 0 . 0- 32 . 0 73 . 1 0 . 40 19 . 7 C 5 5 46 . 3 0 . 0- 12 . 0 58 .3 0 .45 27 . 8 B 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Grand Sum of Time (x) = 302 . 5 sec Grand Sum of Length (y) = 1 . 60 miles !Arterial Speed = 3600 x (y) / (x) = 19 . 0 mph ,Arterial Level of Service, LOS = C Intersection Files in the Analysis _ 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10 : 11 : 12 : s 13 . 14 : 15 : HCS : Urban and Suburban Arterials Release 3 . 1c ROBERT R MARVIN MARVIN & ASSOCIATES SUITE #211 CREEKSIDE 1001 S 24TH ST W BILLINGS, MT 59102 Phone : (406) 655-4550 Fax: (406) 655-4991 E-Mail : marvin@enginc . com OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS Arterial Name : DURSTON ROAD 27TH TO 7TH File Case : EXISTING W/PLANNED IMPROVE Prepared By: R MARVIN Direction: West-bound Date : 04/10/2000 Description of Arterial Analysis Period Length 0 . 25 hr Free Art . Flow Running Seg. Cross Street Name Length Class Speed Time Section (mi) (mph) (sec) 0 N 7TH 1 N 11TH 0 . 25 3 35 30 . 0 1 12 N 15TH 0 . 25 3 35 30 . 0 2 3 N 19TH 0 . 25 3 35 30 . 0 3 1 WESTERN 0 . 40 3 35 41 . 1 4 5 VALLEY DR 0_.45 3 35 46 . 3 5 6 7 ,3 9 L0 L1 12 l 3 L4 i5 Intersection Delay Estimates Seg Cycle Green v/c Lane PVG Arr. I Unit Init . Cntrl . Other Inter. Length Ratio Ratio Cap. if Type Fac- Ext . Queue Delay Delay LOS C g/C X c Input AT for (sec) (veh) (sec) (sec) 0 . 0 0 . 000 0 4 1 . 000 0 . 0 0 0 . 0- 8 . 0 A -2 0 . 0 0 . 000 0 4 1 . 000 0 . 0 0 0 . 0- 2 . 0 A 3 80 . 0 0 . 471 0 . 178 866 4 1 . 000 0 . 0 0 13 . 8* 0 . 0 B 0 . 0 0 . 000 0 4 1 . 000*0 . 0 0 0 . 0- 34 . 0 A 0 . 0 0 . 000 0 4 1 . 000 0 . 0 0 0 . 0- 12 . 0 A 6 ,9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Arterial Level of Service Inter. Sum of Sum of Arterial Running Control . Other Time by Length by Arterial LOS by �Seg. Sect . Time Delay Delay Section Section Speed Section (sec) (sec) (sec) (sec) (mi) (mph) 1 1 30 . 0 0 . 0- 8 . 0 38 . 0 0 . 25 23 . 7 C 2 2 30 . 0 0 . 0- 2 . 0 32 . 0 0 . 25 28 . 1 B 3 3 30 . 0 13 . 8* 0 . 0 43 . 8 0 . 25 20 . 5 C 4 4 41 . 1 0 . 0- 34 . 0 75 . 1 0 .40 19 . 2 C 5 5 46 . 3 0 . 0- 12 . 0 58 .3 0 . 45 27 . 8 B 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 '13 14 15 Grand Sum of Time (x) = 247 . 2 sec Grand Sum of- Length (y) = 1 . 60 miles Arterial Speed = 3600 x (y) / (x) = 23 . 3 mph Arterial Level of Service, LOS = C Intersection Files in the Analysis 1 : - 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10 : Ll : L2 . ,13 : f14 . L5 . HCS : Urban and Suburban Arterials Release 3 . 1c ROBERT R MARVIN MARVIN & ASSOCIATES , SUITE #211 CREEKSIDE 1001 S 24TH ST W BILLINGS, MT 59102 Phone : (406) 655-4550 Fax: (406) 655-4991 E-Mail : marvin@enginc . com OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS Arterial Name: DURSTON ROAD 27TH TO 7TH File Case : TOTAL HARVEST W/PLAN IMPROVE Prepared By: R MARVIN Direction : West-bound Date : 04/10/2000 Description of Arterial Analysis Period Length 0 . 25 hr Free Art . Flow Running Seg. Cross Street Name Length Class Speed Time Section (mi) (mph) (sec) 0 N 7TH 1 N 11TH 0 . 25 3 35 30 . 0 1 2 N 15TH 0 . 25 3 35 30 . 0 2 3 N 19TH 0 . 25 3 35 30 . 0 3 4 WESTERN 0 . 40 3 35 41 . 1 4 5 VALLEY DR 0 . 45 3 35 46 . 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Intersection Delay Estimates Beg Cycle Green v/c Lane PVG Arr. I Unit Init . Cntrl . Other Inter. Length Ratio Ratio Cap . if Type Fac- Ext . Queue Delay Delay LOS C g/C X c Input AT for (sec) (veh) (sec) (sec) 1 0 . 0 0 . 000 0 4 1 . 000 0 . 0 0 0 . 0- 12 . 0 A 2 0 . 0 0 . 000 0 4 1 . 000 0 . 0 0 0 . 0- 6 . 0 A ,3 80 . 0 0 .472 0 . 229 874 4 1 . 000 0 . 0 0 14 . 9* 0 . 0 B 4 0 . 0 0 . 000 0 4 1 . 000*0 . 0 0 0 . 0- 38 . 0 A D 0 . 0 0 . 000 0 4 1 . 000 0 . 0 0 0 . 0- 22 . 0 A 16 7 3 ,9 i 10 11 12 13 14 15 Arterial Level of Service Inter. Sum- of Sum of Arterial Running Control . Other Time by Length by Arterial LOS by Seg. Sect . Time Delay Delay Section Section Speed Section (sec) (sec) (sec) (sec) (mi) (mph) 1 1 30 . 0 0 . 0- 12 . 0 42 . 0 0 .25 21 .4 C 2 2 30 . 0 0 . 0- 6 . 0 36 . 0 0 . 25 25 . 0 B 3 3 30 . 0 14 . 9* 0 . 0 44 . 9 0 . 25 20 . 0 C 4 4 41 . 1 0 . 0- 38 . 0 79 . 1 0 .40 18 . 2 C 5 5 46 . 3 0 . 0- 22 . 0 68 . 3 0 .45 23 . 7 C 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Grand Sum of Time (x) = 270 . 3 sec iGrand Sum of Length (y) = 1 . 60 miles Arterial Speed = 3600 x (y) / (x) = 21 . 3 mph Arterial Level of Service, LOS = C Intersection Files in the Analysis 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10 : nl : 12 : 13 : 14 : 15 : APPENDIX "C" AASHTO Turn Lane Justification Page 27 AASHTO Table IX-15. Guide For Left Turn Lane 800 -1 - 700 ` � J40 m p h 600 5% LT > 500 10% LT �- N c _ .� )AY v 400 _ 15% LTO '0 300 — $ 20% LT 200 100 7H 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Opposing Volume I 13.4(2) INTERSECTIONS AT-GRADE April 1994 120 100 RIGHT—TURN LANE MAY = 80 BE JUSTIFIED 0 0 z > > 00 x w w _J a. 60 -- 0 W I - > W z J cr U 0 = RIGHT-TURN LANE AWAY ~ > NOT BE JUSTIFIED rr cr 40 1 }� NTfRS 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 TOTAL DHV, VEHICLES PER HOUR,IN ONE DIRECTION Note: For highways with a design speed below 80 km/h with a DHV<300 and where right turns > 40, an adjustment should be used. To read the vertical axis of the c'lart, subtract 20 from the actual number of right turns. Example Given: Design Speed 60 km/h DHV = 250 vph Right Turns = 100 vph Problem: Determine if a right-turn lane is necessary. Solution: To read the vertical axis, use 100 - 20 = 80 vph. The figure indicates that a right-turn lane is not necessary, unless other factors (e.g., high accident rate) indicate a lane is needed. GUIDELINES FOR RIGHT-TURN LANES AT UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS ON 2-LANE HIGHWAYS Figure 13.4A