Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 - Traffic Impact Study - The Village Downtown f, Pecd o July 7, 2003 ® ® Bob Murry ® City of Bozeman Oct p 20 E. Olive St. Bozeman, MT 59715 Civil Transportation rans Environmental Re: Traffic Impact Analysis Appendix—The Village Downtown Engineers Dear Marl: P.O.Box 5653 Attached is the Appendix from the Village Downtown Traffic Impact Custer Avenue Hel Study. Please feel free to contact us if you have an additional questions. Helena,MT 59604 Y Y q (406)447-5000 FAX(406)447-5036 www.rpa-hln.com Sincerely, ROBERT PECCIA &ASSOCIATES f Robert L. Abelin, P.E. Project Engineer 1 � 4 sJi lYi V J_ 'l i.:lL VJ_V V l._L4) lY V VJV V V UJi: ____._..__LG L:1lvL"L U :•!.__ __._ _ .. __ _ _.__ 46.1 V Val - i rdfj LC IMPdCl StUdy The Village Dowtao Wn Roban Peccia&Assodwas t3ozew4n,Mortana May,=3 Traffic Impact Study - The Village Downtown Bozeman, Montana r 1. GENERAL. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This study analyzes and documents the potential traffic impacts resulting fmm a proposed 29-au-re residential development near East Main Street in Bozeman. The site is located just north of East Main Street and east of Broadway Avenue, The developerplans to subdivide this property into 250 residential units. If. EXISTING CONDI^nDNS The site of the proposed development currently consists of large areas ofcut andlill material,an old abandon horne site,and a.portion of designated wetlands. Much ofthe area would need to be graded before any development can take place. Montana Rail Tank maintains a.rarely used Uaclt just wet,[of the property. See FIGURE 1 for a location map of the paoposed development_ ExisdAg Roadways The areas around the proposed development have experienced substantial redev!_Iopment ov4r the Iast five years. The proposed development site is located just to the northeast of this developed area along East Maim Street in Bozeman. The primary road feature in this area is tho principal arterial Main Street. '11is road is the Maj0t•W_JtfW69t Mum through the City of Bozernar and serves all of the: areas within the downtown central business district. Most of the areas around Main Streethavebeen developed into a well-established,grid network. Some of these str=Ls ir)clude Broadway Avenue, Wallace Avenue,Rouse Avenue,Alendenha]l Street, and Babcock Street. Maine Street(P-50) is a four4arte;two-way,east-west principal arterial.. All roads that cuss Main Streets are either signalized or have STOP controls ort the side streets. The road-i;>56 fit wide with two eight-foot wide parking Imes, and has a post d speed limit of 25 NTH. According to the Montana Aeparu=nt of Transportation(MDT)the road has an average daily undffic(ADT)`volume, of approximatcly 14,000 vehicles per day(VPD)in the vicinity of the proposed development, Broadway Avenue is a two-lane,two-way collector mute Lhat extents no:th of Alain Street. The intersection of Broadway and Maln Street is STOP controlled. The road passes through a variety of residential and industrial areas,Traffic counts performed by Roben Peccia&Associates(RPA)in April of 2003 indicate that this road has a dail; traffic volume of 2,000 WD. 1 mLit FF Bo man N � < 77-1 Proposed _ � ;-�- — Development ,w Site 1 ` ! r 1 t I � ��`�-L... i i ''1 •N I I t '�7— -~t lj(`� 'w_ \ _..1 � —�I——is ' I { I I eta•..,'>9, I �,.-} i m f �'/Ju'twar 4 L� 1 ! '• I-c, t,.J � �wA\„` p�9 '�. 1 i I� � { >/ pNottoScale MW Figure 1 Locafion Mai Traffl-Impacr Study The ViUagc Doiwdown Robert Peccia&.Atrocfares Bort�nan,Montana May 2003 louse Avenue('P.8£)is another tiro-lane,two-way principal arterial that serves the areas north of the Main Street. The road begins two blocks south of Main Street and continims north. Traffic counts performed in 2001 indicate that the road caries approximately 8,200 VPD. The intersections of MairdRoosd and RouseJMendenhali are signalized- Mendemball Street is a collector route. Bast of louse Avenue,Mendenhall has two-way traffic. Forest of Douse Avenue,Mendenhall carries one-'way westbound traffic. Traffic counts performed by Robert Peccia&Associates(RP A.)in April of 2W3 indicate that this road has a daily traffic volume of T,000 vehicles per day(VPD).near the proposed developarent sire. Babcock Street is also a one-way collector route. Babcock carries eastbousad traffic only and ends at an intersection with Wallace Street.Traffic counts perforrued in 2001 indicate that the road carries approximately 7,400 VPD. Traffic Co€ao,ts RPA collected turning movement comet data in the spring of 2003 at the intersecdon of Main Street I Broadway Avenue and at the intevs&c6n of Broadway Avenue I Mendenhall. IZ.F'A also collected 24-hour hose counts along Broadway and Mendenhall in the.vicinity of'the proposed developtaeatt. Traffic volume data was collected£torn state and local agencies for otherroads around the proposed development. This data was used to Exoduce base traffic volume information. Anticipated area growth rates were determined to establish future traffic volumes within the area. Annual growth rates were determined using historical traffic volumes collected:along Bast Main Street_ Data for 2001 was not available due to construction in this area.These volumes are shown in Table 1. Table 1 -ADT Traffic.Volumes ozr Bast N aS.n Street Year Traffic Volunw 1997 13,840 1998 14,010 1999 14,020 2000 14,370 Table I shoes that traffic volumes along East Main.Street have not increased sigv.ficantly over the last five years_ Worrnation contained in the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2001 Updare indicates that traffic volumes along East Main Street may increase to 16,500 vpd by the year 2010. Considering the:current rate of tic increase along East Main Street,it w.:)Ud seeta aalikely 3 Traffic Impact Study The Village Downtown Roberi Peccu: &A.ssociares Boumcw,Montana Max, 003 that traffic vplurr es Would reach this level by 2010. Rowcver,with the posed construction of the Public Libr uy in the area aDd the completion of several new retail and office buildi; Qs it is possible that this could occur. Anticipated Roadway hmprovemeuts The City of Bozeman is currently plauning to install a traffic signal at the int=--a:ion of Main Street and Wallace Avenue. The signal should be in operation by the Fall of 2003. T}ds will shift some traffic from other intersections in the area to this intc=ction. Level of Service A level of service (LOS) analysis was conducted using existing traffic volumes for critical intersections around the proposed development. LOS levels are given letter designations from A.to F,whereby LOS.A represents the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst or saturated flow conditions. This analysis is intended to deterFaine how well tht intersection is currently functioning with respect to variables such as traffic flow and other prevailing conditions. Levels of sezvace for intersections in this area should be LOS C or better. Intersections with.a LOS below C should be considered for improvements. The LOS evaluation was conducted according to the procedures outlined,in the Transportation Research Boards'Highway Copacz ;lt2ranrcat()Y A.i)>Specral R- n 209 and the Highway Capacity Software(HCS version 4.1c)for intersection analysis. 'This datais shown in TABLE 1. TABLE I —Existing and Future Level of Servi- S mary 2003 2003 BQ08 2008 Intersection "Peak �'1Y1 Pedlr A41 Peak PH Peak Main Street&Broadway D - F D _ F Main Street&Wallace B/D* D/Bk B-* B** Main Street&Rousc B B B B Mendenhall&Broadway A A A A Mendenhall &Wallace B B B B Mendenhall&Rouse ! B B ! B .B *Northbound LOSISouthbound LOS - *"With anticipatrd sigt Wiaadw in 2003 The data shows that most of the intersections in the area are currently operating Nvell. However,the intersections of Mainz/Broadway and Main I Wallace have some existing operational deficiencies. The planned installation of the traffic signal at the Main/Wallace intersection should significantly improve the operations at this intersection and will draw some traffic away from the Main / 4 rii��r-i t^as nr1; 3a FC2fJIN=FtcrSERT FZ GCIA&ASSGtC, __ ID:405g4?5036 PAGE Traf is Impact scruffy The Village Downtown Rouen Pecc7a &Associates POOH ua,MOnWna - May,2003 Broadway interwction. Most of the intersections should continue to function well through the year 2008,however the intersection of Main[Broadway will continue to have operational problems. RFA analyzed the Main/Broadway intersection With additional turning lanes for the southbound traffic. The analysis showed that adding lanes would not significantly improve the LOS at the intersection. RPA then reviewed the peak-Hour (Wan-ant 3) signalization warrants for the intersection; in accordance with the Manzwl of Uniform Trq&' Control X)evices (M lleruzilm, Lditian).The analysis showed that although the intersection is funcdoning at a poor level of service, it does not meet any sigrnalization warrants under existing conditions. Ill. PROPOSED DEVELt9PMSNT The proposed development includes a total bounded=a of 29 acres.The daveloprnent consists of a concentrated area of residential homes connected to two major streets with small alleys_ Nine acres in the northeast comer of tho property has been designated as wetlands and would remain undisturbed. The devcloperplans to construct a variety of recroational homes,condominiums,and duplexes totaling 250 residential units. Of these units, 32 would be high-ond single-family recreational homes Mthout full-time residents. There would be another 144 condominium type units and another 78 attached duplex units. The developer anticipates that as much as;65%of the units would be sold to retirees. FTGIME 2 shows a preliminary plat of the develtaprzrvnt_ Proposed Roadway Layout The developer proposes to build two sections of roadway to serve as prim.aq routes within the development. These roads include Village Boulevard and Village Crossing and would be constructed with 12-foot d-dving lanes and on-street parking. The roads would also have 12-I5 foot wide landscaped medians_ The intersectiou of Village Boulevard and Village Crossing would be controlled by a modern roundabout. The primary access to the site would be along Village,- Boulevard, which would cor:mct to the Bozeman ,street network opposite Mendenhall Street at Broadway.Avenue. All roads would be constructed to urban standards. The developer also plans to construct two alleys to provide access to ibe residential garages_ These roads would be constructed with a 12-15 Foot wide paved surface. An additional section of road would be eonsncted along the northern edge of the property to act as an emergmcy access to the development. A series of trails would be conMeted along the perimeter of the development.. The `Trestle Trail' would have a,gravel or all-weather surface and a width of 6-10 fe4,t. 5 l 1 Iry -- l 6(WMERN PA'Gi'8. SMt LWE LOT 3 THE/ `N'•uhy'wy 'y r s Vi"GE DOWWowm As I p J I L•. f4 ( r~ t3� lt_01 Iso rT ^ 2yi: 'G, ' .?!�f• _�. 1�K"a.��,,,r4.+a+�:.•,,r_,,,... -„ors-;-�t?' f tLOT 1. v t AN L.ZaLl 2`ra,�"cc 7rrtpacr Study The irillage Daywnrown Robert Peceia&AssocWps Bozeman.ManrW= M>xy,2003 N-velopment TTmeframe The development would be constracted in three or more phases. Construction of Phase r would begin as soon as the developer receives approval from the Bozeman City/Country Planning Board, -and all permitting agemcies. Phasel would include the construction of the 32 recemational homes,all of the roadways,the development infrastructure,and would take 1-2 years to cornplere. The rest of the home-sites vrould be constructed over the next 34 years. The d&velopmen!:would real;h.t' ) build-out by the yeax 2009. IV. TRIP GENERATION AND ASSIGNMENT A, trip gereration analysis was perf4mied to determine future traffic volumes for the proposed development. RPA used the nationally accepted trip generafion gates contained in T}i'p Generation (institute of Transportation Engineers,Sixth Edition).The imalysis establishes the number of trips venerated by the proposed development. For the purposes of this analysis,a vehicle trip is defined as any trip that either begins or ends at the development site.Tt was determined that the critical traffic impacts on the intersections and roadways would occur dc-fing the weekday rmmi3ng and evening peak hours. The trip generation rates for the various f6m. s of land uses proposed for this development were obtained from Trip Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers, Sixth Edition). At full buildout the proposed development would produce 1,379 trips each day. Table:2 shows the Wp 7eneration rates and totals by land trse- lrt is probable that with the large number-of retixees that arc- anticipated to live in the development the actual number of daily trips would bo even loser then what is stated above_ ffowever,for the purposes pf this rap' ort,the full number of trips was used to provide a more conservative estimate. TABLE 2 -Trip Generation Fetes AAA Peok; AM Peak PM Peak PM Peak � Hour_ Hour—Trip Hour- Hour—Trip I Weekday- Avg.Trip Ends Avg-Trip Ends Avq.Trip En&,%per (°k Entering Ends per (%Erdering t=nds per Weekday Land Use Units Unit f %Exiting) Unit %Exiting) unit Trip Ends Recreational 32 0.16 5 0.26 8 0.16 101 Homes CondominKim 144 0.44 63 0.54 78 ,;.86 8" Units (17°v83 (67-/A %o Attached 74 0.44 33 0,54 40 1 ;;_80" 434 Dupex Units (17%/831/6) (67%i3%) Tetal z5a 101 t25 ` _ T 1,379 r Traffic IPV&4t-14-dy The Vdlagd Do"town Roberi,Peccia ek Asycelatei BOZ&rW4)Lfoatdna V. TRIP DISTRIBUTION Upon leaving the proposed development site vehicles can choose a number-of different routes to connect to the major street and, Vehicles can proceed west along Mendenhall and use[bat route to connect to downtown Bozeman,North 7"Avenue,'West Main.Street,and MS'U- Vehicles can also (Pm onto Rouse Avenue and proceed towards destinations in northern Bozeman. It is likely that some vehicles would turn north an Broadway and access areas to the north via that route. Vehicles turning south on Broadway can proceed to Main Street and thew t= left to;3.4x-eas areas east of Bozeman and the Hospital area. Return trips would be along siniflax routes. The only major diff=nce would be that drivers would use Babcock Street to return to the area and would likely proceed through the new sipalized intersection at Main/Wallace to return to the Village Downtovm. The anticipated proportions for directional distributions are shown on FTGURE 3- This information was used to model the traffic volumes within the area, 25%Exitiag, A FIG U RE 3- Development Trip Distftutio n to 0 Deie T site 40%ExitiAg Returning Mendenhall 20%Exiting 417.Ddfing 20.7"R�turnin'-�' East Main Street 4%Ren=inna 0%ExidM 40%F--Uuuina Babcock 696 Exiting 5%Exiting 6%12etwnjug v.a ..Y u.. ._.✓ vc.v. C.n_a ...��....�v�..a.. ✓1.,i.,:>_Li r `v. � is.i Traffic Impact Swzl� no vilkge Downrohm Robert Peccia &Associates Bnxeman,jVfc rtiana M4v,2003 VI. TRAFFIC IMPACTS OUTSIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT -Using the trip gemeration and trip distribution numbers it was possible t4 determine the Level of Service(LOS)at the critical intersections=und the development. TABU 3 shows The mimt and anticipated.LOS fot the intersections that would be directly affected by the propose d developr ,,rot for current and 2008 traffic conditions. TABLE 3--Level of Service LOS Summa with Developi-nent 2003 2003. 2008 .Intersection AM Peck f PM Peak�lt7 Peak PM Peak Main Street&Broadway D I B D F Main Street&1W3llace D/D* D/P. B** B** Maia Sttcet&Douse B B B C Mendenhall&Broadway ,A, A B B h2end$nhall &Wallace B B B �� B Mendenl I&Xouse B B B -BB ,%Nerthbotratd LOS/Southbound LOS - -- ** With anticipated siZnalizarion in 2003 The table shows that all of the intersections except Main/Broadway would function adequately under peak hour2008 conditions with the traffic froirt the proposed development and no additional improvements. This analysis also takes into account the ambient traffic grow6 based on recent projections for the area. The intersection of Main and Broadway would continue to have operttioraal problems,however these problems would not be significantly increased due to the traffic from the proposed development. Traffic volumes would still.riot be sufficient to warrant s:ga.alization at this lotion. VII. TRAFFIC IMPACTS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT Traffic volumes within the development were analyzed to determine how the roadways within the developrnenc wound function. Traffic volumes on these xmads would vary from ICI)to 1,300 vehicles per day. A. review of the traffic volumes showed that all intersections should function at LOS A underpeak conditions at full buildout. The roundabout at the intersection of Village Boulevard and Village Crossing should also function well with iaiitdmal delay. IX. IMPACT SUMMARY The proposed development would have a small impact rin the traffic conditions is the areas around Last Nbin Street and would have a negligible impact on traffic outside this area. 9 reajfic Impact study 77=Vttlage Downtown Robert Peccda&Associates $Dte►rtan.Montana _ May,2003 v, None of the intersections around the proposed development wouitd experience a sigziEcant increase in delay due to traffic f*m the proposed developmmnt. + The intersecdon of Main/Broadway is currently exnaQeacing operational deficiencies. With the added traffic from the proposed development, the delay at the intermction would increase only slightly and would still not meet the zmirdmum traffic volumes for signalization. The addition of turning lanes for southbound traffic would not signficantly improve the operations at this intersection. • All of the intersections with the development including the roundabout would function with minimal delay to drivers. X_ RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are provided to help ensure that the prox&ed development functions with minimal impacts within,as well as around,the area. The roundabout at the intersection of Village Boulevard and Yllage Crossing should be designed using the most recent roundabout design techniques. The design of this roundabout should also be reviewed by a professional roundabout designer to ensure proper operation. The approaches of die,0eys to Village Boulevard should be controlled by STOP signs. At intersections,all pedestrian crosswalks should be marked with pavement markings. 10 Appendix I Traffic Data 04/30/03 Robert Peccia & Associates Page : 1 11 : 22 : 16 825 Custer Avenue Helena, MT 59601 406-447-5000 *** Dual Channel Weekly *** Site ID BROAD NO MEND Week Starts Apr 28, 2003 Mon Info 1 RPA Week Ends May 4, 2003 Sun Info 2 NUM 6 Adj . Factor 1 . 00 Lane 1 NB, Lane Subtract, Axle Sensor, Divide by 2 Lance 2 SB, Lane Subtract, Axle Sensor, Divide by 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hour Mon 28 Tue 29 Wed 30 Thu 1 Fri 2 Weekday Avg Sat 3 Sun 4 Weekend Avg Avg Day Starts 1-NB 2-SB 1-NB 2-SB 1-NB 2-SS 1-NB 2-SE 1-NB 2-SB 1-NB 2-SB 1-NB 2-SB 1-NB 2-SB 1-NB 2-SB 1-NB 2-SB --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12am 3 1 0 5 2 3 2 3 1 0 3 1 0 1 2 1 2 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 4 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 5 13 6 14 8 14 8 14 8 6 39 35 33 32 36 34 36 34 7 71 75 67 63 69 69 69 69 8 63 76 63 76 63 76 9 50 62 50 62 50 62 10 59 68 59 68 59 6$ 11 57 81 57 81 57 81 12pm 73 90 73 90 73 90 1 63 82 63 82 63 82 2 74 77 74 77 74 77 3 73 80 73 80 73 80 4 65 99 72 72 69 86 69 86 5 46 84 68 110 57 97 57 97 6 20 36 31 44 26 40 26 40 7 19 25 22 24 21 25 21 25 8 14 24 11 21 13 23 13 23 9 6 16 13 16 10 16 10 16 10 6 7 10 8 8 8 8 8 11 8 7 5 5 7 6 7 6 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTALS 184 298 871 1042 117 108 848 1036 848 1036 Weekdays: 1172 1448 Weekend: 7 Day: 1172 1448 ---------—----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMBZNED TOTALS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12am 4 5 5 5 1 3 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 0 1 1 4 2 1 2 2 5 21 22 22 22 6 74 65 70 70 7 146 130 138 138 8 139 139 139 9 112 112 112 10 127 127 127 11 138 138 138 12pm 163 163 163 1 145 145 145 2 151 151 151 3 153 153 153 4 164 144 154 154 5 130 178 154 154 6 56 75 66 66 7 44 46 45 45 8 38 32 35 35 9 22 29 26 26 10 13 18 16 16 11 15 10 13 13 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTALS 482 1913 225 1878 1878 Weekdays: 2620 Weekend: 7 Day: 2620 04j30/03 Robert Peccia & Associates Page : 1 11 :22 : 16 825 Custer Avenue Helena, MT 59601 406-447-5000 *** Dual Channel Weekly *** Site ID MEND Week Starts Apr 28, 2003 Mon Info 1 Robert Peccia Week Ends May 4, 2003 Sun Info 2 Unicorn #4 Adj . Factor 1 . 00 Lane 1 WB, Lane Subtract, Axle Sensor, Divide by 2 Lane 2 EB, Lane Subtract, Axle Sensor, Divide by 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hour Mon 28 Tue 29 Wed 30 Thu 1 Fri 2 Weekday Avg Sat 3 Sun 4 Weekend Avg Avg Day Starts 1-WB 2-EB 1-WB 2-EB 1-WB 2-EB 1-WB 2-EB 1-WB 2-EB 1-W13 2-EB 1-WB 2-EB 1-WB 2-EB 1-WB 2-EB 1-WB 2-EB ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12am 0 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 5 2 1 1 0 2 1 2 1 6 11 3 6 2 9 3 9 3 7 16 15 30 20 23 18 23 18 8 39 18 39 1s 39 18 9 36 19 36 19 36 19 10 39 22 39 22 39 22 11 50 27 50 27 50 27 12pm 65 40 65 40 65 40 1 45 27 45 27 45 27 2 58 19 58 19 58 19 3 54 25 54 25 54 25 4 46 18 41 30 44 24 44 24 5 64 25 70 23 67 24 67 24 6 17 5 24 14 21 10 21 10 7 14 3 17 7 16 5 16 5 8 4 4 7 6 6 5 6 5 9 5 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 10 1 5 9 2 5 4 5 4 11 2 0 1 2 2 1 2 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTALS 153 64 588 306 39 26 587 300 587 300 Weekdays: 760 396 Weekend: 7 Day: 780 396 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMBINBD TOTALS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12am 1 5 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 4 2 0 1 1 5 3 1 2 2 6 14 8 11 11 7 31 50 41 41 8 57 57 57 9 55 55 55 10 61 61 61 11 77 77 77 12pm 105 105 105 1 72 72 72 2 77 77 77 3 79 79 79 4 64 71 68 68 5 89 93 91 91 6 22 38 30 30 7 17 24 21 21 8 8 13 11 11 9 9 7 8 8 10 6 11 9 9 11 2 3 3 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 'OTALS 217 894 65 883 883 Weekdays: 1176 Weekend: 7 Day: 1176 Appendix II Model Volumes cf' LO U') N O 00 LO 00 LO T T �R c _co (0 rr N 00 (f T N CNO (0 TO 1 D cocz ♦ yY♦R � ♦ 3 co T N CY) LO N cP r Cl) d' O C) "T LO N C) f- 00 00 N r r f- 00 N C") T LOca T �� �1 �♦R �� �1 .�4R `o � �►� R �� yL -►� Rya/ LO U) 0) r CM r (O I- C() M 00 (O N r N C') T It 00 C) 0) (- (fl O 00 t- 0 ((0 O P- �T O CO (0 T r T T (0 0:) ♦') ♦' r r N r Cf) N rr 0000 CY)O � 0') 00 o r T N C O E co O � 0) 0)O C CD � H N g N O rn F- I- 0N <C W LO Ln (0 0 NT r r (D 't r N r _W �x i I� r LO LO LO r 0 0 0 � r O Nt o 1 1(fl 3 m It LO C\j CY) O CY) O T dV (0 (D OD LO LO CY) O r N N f- C) t- N O 1- LO (,- LO r (p r- N r N N O N v I- r- LO O C•e) CY) O O N Ce) N C7 Cfl d N LO r C7 LC) r r Ln O I� CO r (C) a) d• C3) O CO Gf) U) C7 (C) r q r r 0) (O CO LO co r r C7 r V' N N *- O CY) CO 00 (O O O CO N N O (0 r- 00 C S' N O E 0 o as 0) 0 > O O •U = "p C!) O) O - C C cz � cz i— a) g > = Cr) a O cts O !- f- NO O W d' d' rO LON .f, O- xx U') O CO CV O O O N � O 00 CD ca �� � ♦k � ♦ cu m � LO - Cl) Cl) L0O (0 It r LO It r t t C7 O LIB 00 O CV N N r 00 d N LO T � T U O 00 CO O N LO d' I- O T r O f- N r T CV NJ N LO CV It CO Cf' 00 - 00) (fl LO O T t- d' cP 00 r CV rt r I- N LO d' r T CV r q N ir r00CY) r o (0 (DCn0 O N Co C+) O N O a) N 0 c � E T iZ 0 O O _ > O N Q O U O > O O N .. O)O — 0) U � i Y Qcz O C ca LL > F OC) a O C F�- cmcm < 0 w 0 r 00 (C) O) N C7 00 �t r N T CV) (0 T C� T O O O o � O LO O It co �� � ♦� � � m � -►� RTC � � � '� CY)' 000 �ocorn Itcoon � 0 co00000r Cf) d 00c+r) N0 LO r r• LO r � M r N N 0 co � ♦� R �� Y ►� R4� cF N (C) O CO LO N T LO 00 Cl) q r LO T N (p T d' LO LOC) r Cl) It t LO It r ce) (D O r• 00 N CY) 00 T LC) T N r r 0 r. r• T r N LO N NN O000I O LB O 00 00 N N T T 0 N O T Q > O � _ C 0) 0) O OU Y LL = � F- N � � 00 d N O H F` c\l IL '�3 w LO It N 0 LLf N r CA 04 ?� N T CC) r C) N d r CO It 00 d' O T Cfl T CV CQ I� IO czCO �♦�3 Y .,� T xco It It r 'q LO 0 CA 00 0 CA T LC) r T Cr) C7 Cp CO r (� q T d" C) C7 f- (fl 00 LO CO I, r N r T 00 'IT CV r LC) T CD T ca `z Y -►aI R �'JI Y -►�I R �`JI O CO (p 0 O lf) r CC) C) CO CV CA 1- CV r r CV c} CV LO N Nt 00 1- O - 0 - CO C)) O r C7) (C) LO *- N CV d' CV i- cr) d" LO d' CV r N r 'ITCV rr Y ►�I Y ►�IR �� - 00N o C) (D (0 It 0 N N - N C 'S N O E C 5 C — N co O 0 E -C N Q > C1 C= CU V O 0 a) O cz � Y j c C= d N cz O O U) 0 co t- F- N Q W CY) t` Cl) (4 O) N ct 00 ";t . N r 't Cn (.0r N CM 0) �O Oro r LO r- O cz co co co CO V) Coo r� r It 'tO CY) 00 c0 00 r r- LO LO "t CO T- "It N cz cc Y ►�I R �� Y ��I R ��► It N CO O 0) U') (D N LO O Cfl ct t- LO t— N N CO r- "t t- CO +— LO ,- N O LO d• ,- CO d O t\ CO r- d• O .- LO . C") r N O 00 00 N r 'IT N LO N N d r- d O C'0 CO — 0 N LO N C'0 O 00 00 LO C � N O C — 30 O C N ❑ CL C CU O •V 0 _O O U) m O 1 7 � a) W 00 r CD O Ocn E� E` cm w Appendix III LOS Calculations Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information IAnalyst :RLA Intersection Main& Broadway Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2003 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Main Street North/South Street: Broadway 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 53 426 0 0 610 62 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 1 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 58 473 0 0 677 68 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 1 0 36 0 28 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 1 0 44 0 1 34 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT LTR LTR v(vph) 58 0 1 78 C (m) (vph) 872 1099 145 249 /C 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.31 95% queue length 0.21 0.00 0.02 1.29 Control Delay 9.4 8.3 30.0 25.9 LOS A A D D Approach Delay -- -- 30.0 25.9 Approach LOS -- -- D D HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d_temp\u2k36.tmp 7/7/03 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Broadway Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2003 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Main Street North/South Street: Broadway 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 65 582 3 0 609 41 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 72 1 646 1 3 0 1 676 45 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Signal 0 1 1 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 2 0 3 64 2 44 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 1 0 1 3 79 2 1 54 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT LTR LTR v(vph) 72 0 5 135 C (m) (vph) 890 947 263 205 vlc 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.66 95% queue length 0.26 0.00 0.06 3.98 Control Delay 9.4 8.8 19.0 51.1 LOS A A C F Approach Delay -- -- 19.0 51.1 Approach LOS -- -- C F HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d_temp\u2k39.tmp 7/7/03 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information IAnalyst RLA Intersection Main& Wallace Agency/Co. RPA urisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2003 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Main Street North/South Street: Wallace Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 15 6 L T R L T R Volume 46 383 8 23 582 75 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 54 j 455 9 27 692 89 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Signal 0 1 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 7 8 138 17 6 31 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 8 9 172 21 7 38 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 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L TR LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT L TR LTR v(vph) 54 27 8 181 66 C (m) (vph) 845 1108 177 621 218 v/c 0.06 0.02 0.05 0.29 0.30 95% queue length 0.20 0.07 0.14 1.21 1.22 Control Delay 9.6 8.3 26.3 13.2 28.5 LOS A A D B D Approach Delay -- -- 13.7 28.5 pproach LOS -- -- B D HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d_temp\u2k3D.tmp 7/7/03 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information k l st RLA Intersection Main& Wallace nc /Co. RPA urisdiction e Performed 517103 jAnalysis Year 2003 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Main Street North/South Street: Wallace 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 53 512 13 27 673 67 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 58 568 14 30 1 747 1 74 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR LI stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 12 20 227 32 10 56 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 14 1 24 1 283 39 12 1 69 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 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L TR LTR D9,21ay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT L TR LTR v(vph) 58 30 14 307 120 C (m) (vph) 817 1002 120 482 135 lc 0.07 0.03 0.12 0.64 0.89 95% queue length 0.23 0.09 0.39 4.38 5.84 Control Delay 9.7 8.7 38.9 24.7 112.9 LOS A A E C F Approach Delay -- -- 25.3 112.9 Approach LOS -- -- D F HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file:/ID:\d_temp\u2k40.tmp 7/7/03 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Broadway Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2003 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Mendenhall NorthJSouth Street: Broadway 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 22 62 0 0 49 13 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF a80 1 0.80 0.80 0.80 a80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 27 77 1 0 0 61 16 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 1 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 4 0 18 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 a80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 0 1 0 4 0 1 22 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 ILTR I LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v(vph) 27 0 0 26 C (m) (vph) 1535 1535 952 v/c 0.02 0.00 0.03 95%queue length 0.05 0.00 0.08 Control Delay 7.4 7.3 8.9 LOS A A A Approach Delay -- -- 8.9 Approach LOS -- -- A Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d_temp\u2k43.tmp 7n103 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Broadway Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2003 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Broadway 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 36 79 0 0 73 35 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 1 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 44 98 1 0 0 1 91 43 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 1 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal 0 1 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 3 0 17 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 0 0 3 0 1 21 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 Len th and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v(vph) 44 0 0 24 C (m) (vph) 1463 1508 894 v/c 0.03 0.00 0.03 95% queue length 0.09 0.00 0.08 Control Delay 7.5 7.4 9.1 LOS A A A Approach Delay -- -- 9.1 Approach LOS -- -- A Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file•//DAd temn\n?,k47.tmn 7/7/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Wallace Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2003 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Wallace Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud 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 110 13 4 2 25 64 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 1 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 129 15 1 4 2 1 29 75 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 4 23 1 9 11 23 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 27 1 10 12 1 27 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 Dgelay, Queue Len th and Level of Service pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 129 2 32 49 C (m) (vph) 1500 1611 516 718 /C 0.09 0.00 0.06 0.07 95% queue length 0.28 0.00 0.20 0.22 Control Delay 7.6 7.2 12.4 10.4 LOS A A B B Approach Delay -- -- 12.4 10.4 Approach LOS -- -- B B Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c fi1P-//D-\d te.mn\n?.k4A tmn 7/7/M Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Wallace Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2003 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Wallace Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud 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 71 52 12 5 47 67 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 1 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 83 j 61 14 5 55 1 78 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 9 53 5 9 3 23 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 10 62 1 5 10 3 1 27 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 Len th and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 83 5 77 40 C (m) (vph) 1464 1537 544 754 v/c 0.06 0.00 0.14 0.05 95% queue length 0.18 0.01 0.49 0.17 Control Delay 7.6 7.3 12.7 10.0+ LOS A A B B Approach Delay -- -- 12.7 10.0+ Approach LOS -- -- B B Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d_temp\u2k4D.tmp 7/7/03 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Rouse Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 Jurisdiction Time Period AM Peak Analysis Year 2003 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 Lane group LT TR L TR L R Volume v h 5 239 386 160 37 234 40 96 34 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 10.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 Unit Extension 13.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 10.0 1 10.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 10.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 1 13.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 1 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 33.0 G = G = G = G = 21.0 G = G = G = iming IY= 3 IY= Y= Y= IY= 3 Y= Y= ly= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 C cle Lencith C = 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit Control Dela and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 272 607 41 304 107 38 Lane group cap. 1579 1594 568 586 264 475 /c ratio 0.17 0.38 0.07 0.52 0.41 0.08 Green ratio 0.55 1 0.55 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 Unif. delay d1 6.7 7.7 13.0 15.5 14.8 1 13.0 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 0.2 0.7 1 0.2 3.3 1 4.6 0.3 PF factor 1.000 1 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 6.9 8.4 13.2 18.7 19.3 13.4 Lane group LOS A A B B B B Apprch. delay 6.9 8.4 18.1 17.8 Approach LOS A A B B Intersec. delay 11.5 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.Ic file://D:\d temn\s2k59.tmn 7/7/03 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Rouse Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 Jurisdiction Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2003 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 Lane group LT TR L TR L R Volume v h 78 406 469 194 88 253 65 166 93 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P I P P P P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 10.0 10.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 110.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 I hasin EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 1 06 07 1 08 G = 33.0 G = G = G = G = 21.0 G = G = G = iming IY= 3 IY= Y= IY= IY= 3 Y= Y= ly= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 Cycle Length C= 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit Control Dela and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 538 737 98 353 184 1103 Lane group cap. 1295 1594 568 580 227 475 v/c ratio 0.42 0.46 0.17 0.61 0.81 0.22 Green ratio 0.55 0.55 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 Unif. delay dl 7.9 8.1 13.5 16.1 17.7 13.7 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 10.50 Increm. delay d2 1.0 1.0 1 0.7 4.7 26.0 1.0 PF factor 1.000 1 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 8.9 9.1 14.1 20.8 43.7 14.8 Lane group LOS A A B C D B pprch. delay 8.9 9.1 19.4 33.3 Approach LOS A A B C Intersec. delay 14.8 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d temi)\s2k64.tmp 7/7/03 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Rouse Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 Jurisdiction Time Period AM Peak Analysis Year 2003 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LTR L LTR L TR Volume v h 16 167 39 110 218 17 30 189 183 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P P P P Startup lost time 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 rrival type L3.O 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 00 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasin WB Only02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 i g G = 21.0 G = G = G = G = 33.0 G = G = G = imn Y= 3 Y= Y= Y= IY= 3 Y= Y= ly= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 Cycle Length C = 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit 1, Control Dela and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 247 122 261 33 413 Lane group cap. 582 415 930 536 871 /c ratio 0.42 0.29 0.28 0.06 0.47 Green ratio 10.35 0.55 10.55 0.55 0.55 Unif. delay d1 14.9 7.2 7.2 6.3 8.2 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 2.3 1.8 0.8 0.2 1.8 PF factor 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 17.1 9.0 7.9 6.5 10.1 Lane group LOS B A A A B pprch. delay 17.1 8.3 9.8 Approach LOS B A A Intersec. delay 11.0 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d temp\s2k6F.tmn 7/7/03 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Rouse Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 Jurisdiction Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2003 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT I TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LTR L LTR L TR Volume v h 13 167 30 141 376 19 20 231 202 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P P P P Startup lost time 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- Lane Width 1 12.0 1 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N I N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasin WB Only02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 21.0 G = G = G = G = 33.0 G = G = G = iming Y= 3 Y= Y= Y= Y= 3 Y= Y= ly= Duration of Analysis hrs = a25 C cle Length C= 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit 1, Control Dela and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 233 157 439 22 481 Lane group cap. 585 364 934 395 875 v/c ratio 0.40 0.43 0.47 0.06 0.55 Green ratio 1 10.35 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 Unif. delay di 14.7 8.0 8.2 6.3 8.7 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 a50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 2.0 1 3.7 1.7 0.3 12.5 PF factor 1 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 16.7 11.7 9.9 6.5 11.2 Lane group LOS B B A A B Apprch. delay 16.7 10.4 11.0 Approach LOS B B B Intersec. delay 11.7 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file-//l)Ad temn\s?k7A_tmn 7/7/03 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Broadway Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction 2008 Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year Without Development Analysis Time Period AM Peak evelo meet Project Description East/West Street: Main Street North/South Street: Broadway 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 58 469 0 0 671 68 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 64 521 0 0 1 745 75 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 1 0 30 0 31 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 1 1 0 37 0 1 38 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 '0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration I LTR T LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT LTR LTR v(vph) 64 0 1 75 C (m) (vph) 818 1056 119 229 lc 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.33 95% queue length 0.25 0.00 0.03 1.36 Control Delay 9.8 8.4 35.5 28.2 LOS A A E D Approach Delay -- -- 35.5 28.2 Approach LOS -- -- E D Two-Way Stop Control - Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Broadway Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction 2008 Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year eve Without D Analysis Time Period PM Peak evela meet Project Description East/West Street: Main Street North/South Street: Broadway 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 72 640 3 0 670 45 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 80 711 3 0 744 50 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Sign 1 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 2 0 3 60 2 48 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 0 3 74 2 59 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 TT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT LTR LTR (vph) 80 0 5 135 C (m) (vph) 836 895 217 176 v/c 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.77 95% queue length 0.32 0.00 0.07 5.00 Control Delay 9.8 9.0 22.0 72.1 LOS A A C F I pproach Delay -- -- 22.0 72.1 pproach LOS -- -- C F file://D:\d temp\u2k9A.tmn 7/7/03 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Inalyst eneral Information Site Information RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Broadway Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 5/7/03 Analysis Year 2008 Without Development Analysis Time Period AM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Broadway 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 24 68 0 0 54 14 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 1 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 29 84 0 1 0 1 67 1 17 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 1 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 4 0 10 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 0 1 0 4 0 1 12 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration I LTR LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 29 0 0 16 C (m) (vph) 1526 1526 910 /c 0.02 0.00 0.02 95% queue length 0.06 0.00 0.05 Control Delay 7.4 7.4 9.0 LOS A A A Approach Delay -- -- 9.0 Approach LOS -- -- A Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d__temp\u2k9D.tMD 7/7/nl Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Broadway Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2008 Without Development Analysis Time Period PM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Broadway 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 40 87 0 0 80 39 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 1 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 49 108 1 0 0 99 48 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 1 -- -- Median Type Undivided FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 3 0 9 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 a80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 1 0 3 0 1 11 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 49 0 0 14 C (m) (vph) 1447 1495 838 v/c 0.03 0.00 0.02 95% queue length 0.11 0.00 0.05 Control Delay 7.6 7.4 9.4 LOS A A A Approach Delay -- -- 9.4 pproach LOS -- -- A Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 c file://D:\d temu\u2kA0.trnn 7/7/03 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Wallace Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2008 Without Development Analysis Time Period AM Peak Pro ect Description East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Wallace 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 121 14 4 6 28 70 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 1 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0,85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 142 16 4 7 32 1 82 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 4 25 1 10 12 25 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 1 29 1 1 11 1 14 29 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach NB SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v (vph) 142 7 34 54 C (m) (vph) 1488 1609 478 676 v/c 0.10 0.00 0.07 0.08 95% queue length 0.32 0.01 0.23 0.26 Control Delay 7.7 7.2 13.1 10.8 LOS A A B B Approach Delay -- - 13.1 10.8 Approach LOS -- -- B B Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file:/1D-\d temp\u2kA3_tmn 7/71nq Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Wallace Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2008 Without Development Analysis Time Period PM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Wallace 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 78 57 13 6 52 74 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 91 67 1 15 1 7 1 61 1 87 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Si nal 0 f 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 10 58 6 10 3 25 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 11 1 68 1 7 11 1 3 29 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FT_Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach NB SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v(vph) 91 7 86 43 C (m) (vph) 1446 1528 517 719 v/c 0.06 0.00 0.17 0.06 95% queue length 0.20 0.01 0.59 0.19 Control Delay 7.7 7.4 13.3 10.3 LOS A A B B Approach Delay -- -- 13.3 10.3 Approach LOS -- -- B B Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c f;tn•//Tl•\rl tame\n71rAh tmn 7/7/0'A Short Report Page I of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Rouse Agency or Co. RPA rea Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 urisdiction I Time Period AM Peak Analysis Year 2008 Without Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SIB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 Lane group LT TR L TR L R Volume (vph) 6 263 425 176 41 257 44 106 37 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0 P c ctuated (P/A) P I P P P P P P P P S tartup lost time 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 92.0 . 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 1 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 10.0 1 10.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 10.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N I N 0 N N 0 N N 0 1 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 1 0 0 Unit Extension 1 13.0 3.00 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 33.0 JG = G = G = G = 21.0 G G =Y I G iming = 3 jY= Y= IY= IY= 3 Y= IY= jY= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 Cvcle Length C= 60.0 Lane Group Capacit Control Dela and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 299 668 46 335 118 41 Lane group cap. 1575 1594 568 585 240 475 v1c ratio 0.19 0.42 10.08 0.57 10.49 0.09 Green ratio 0.55 1 10.55 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 Unif. delay dl 6.8 7.9 13.0 15.9 15.3 113.1 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 0.3 0.8 0.3 1 4.0 1 7.0 0.4 PF factor 1.000 1 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 7.1 8.7 13.3 19.9 22.3 113.4 Lane group LOS A I A B B C I B Apprch. delay 7.1 8.7 19.1 20.0+ Approach LOS A A B C Intersec. delay 12.2 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright(D 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c ffle://DAd-ternv\s2k105.tmv 7/7/03 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Rouse Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 urisdiction Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2008 Without Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 Lane group LT TR L TR L R Volume v h 86 447 516 213 97 278 72 183 102 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P I P P P P P P P P Startup lost time 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 10.0 1 10.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 110.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 1 0 N I N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 01A 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 ID' hasin EWPerm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 iming G = 33.0 G = G = G = G = 21.0 G = G = G= Y= 3 Y= Y= Y= Y= 3 Y= Y= Y= urationn of Analysis hrs = 0.25 Cycle Length C = 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit Control Dela and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 593 810 108 389 203 113 Lane group cap. 1260 1594 568 580 201 475 /c ratio 0.47 0.51 0.19 0.67 1.01 0.24 Green ratio 0.55 1 0.55 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 Unif. delay d1 8.2 8.4 13.6 16.6 19.5 13.8 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 1.3 1.2 0.7 6.1 66.1 1.2 PF factor 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 Control delay 9.5 9.6 14.3 22.6 85.6 15.0 Lane group LOS A I A B C F B Apprch. delay 9.5 9.6 20.8 60.3 pproach LOS A A C E Intersec. delay 19.3 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d_temp\s2kl l0.tmp 7/7/03 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Wallace Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 urisdiction Time Period AM Peak Analysis Year 2008 Without Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 Lane group ILTR LTR L TR LTR Volume v h 51 421 9 25 640 83 8 9 152 29 7 34 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 0.90 0,90 0.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P P P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 110.0 1 10.0 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 13.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasin EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 33.0 G = G = G = G = 21.0 G = G = G iming = Y= 3 Y= Y= Y= Y= 3 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 C cle Length C = 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit 1, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 535 831 9 179 78 Lane group cap. 1378 1527 429 514 491 v/c ratio 0.39 0.54 0.02 0.35 0.16 Green ratio 0.55 1 10.55 0.35 0.35 0.35 Unif. delay dl 7.7 8.7 12.8 14.4 13.4 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 0.8 1.4 0.1 1.9 0.7 PF factor 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 8.6 10.1 12.9 16.3 14.1 Lane group LOS A B 8 B B pprch. delay 8.6 10.1 16.1 14.1 Approach LOS A B B B Intersec. delay 10.5 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d_temp\s2k1 1C.tmp 7/7/03 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Wallace Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 urisdiction Time Period PM Peak �Analysis Year 2008 Without Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume (vph) 58 563 14 30 740 74 13 22 250 45 11 62 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 PHF 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated (P/A) P P P P P P P P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 10.0 Mo 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 1 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr I Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension #300 3.0 [A 3.0 3.0 3.0 PhafsinjEW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 I T i 33.0 G G G G = 21,6 G = G G iming Y= 3 Y= Y= Y= JY= 3 Y= IY= jY= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 Cycle Length C= 60.0 Lane Group Capacit Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj.flow rate 706 937 14 302 131 Lane group cap. 1363 1514 413 516 440 v/c ratio 0.52 0.62 0.03 0.59 0.30 Green ratio 0.55 1 10.55 0.35 0.35 10-35 Unif. delay dl 8.5 9.2 12.8 15.9 14.1 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 1.4 1.9 10.2 4.8 1.7 ,PF factor 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 Control delay 9.9 11.1 13.0 20.7 5.9 Lane group LOS A I B B C I B Apprch. delay 9.9 11.1 20.4 15.9 Approach LOS A B C B Intersec. delay 12.4 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file-IA-)-\d te.mn\q?-k427.tmn 7n103 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Rouse Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 urisdiction Time Period AM Peak Analysis Year 2008 Without Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LTR L LTR L TR Volume v h 18 184 43 121 240 19 33 208 201 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 Actuated P/A P P P P I P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 21.0 G = G = G JG = 33.0 G = G = G = iming IY= 3 IY= Y= IY= JY= 3 Y= Y= ly= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 C cle Length C= 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit 1, Control Delal.F, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 272 134 288 37 454 Lane group cap. 582 384 930 513 871 /c ratio 0.47 0.35 0.31 0.07 0.52 Green ratio 10.35 0.55 0.55 10.55 0.55 Unif. delay d1 15.2 7.5 7.3 6.3 8.5 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 2.7 2.5 0.9 0.3 2.2 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 Control delay 17.8 10.0+ 8.2 6.6 10.7 Lane group LOS B B A A B pprch. delay 17.8 8.8 10.4 Approach LOS B A B Intersec. delay 11.5 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.Ic f;1P•/[n-\d tmn 7/7/03 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Rouse Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 Jurisdiction Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2008 Without Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LTR L LTR L TR Volume v h 14 184 33 155 414 21 22 254 222 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 13.0 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 21.0 G = G = G = G = 33.0 G = G = G= Timing IY= 3 IY= Y= jY= IY= 3 Y= Y= jY= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 1 C cle Len th C= 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit 1, Control Della and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 1257 172 483 24 529 Lane group cap. 585 330 934 363 875 /c ratio 0.44 10.52 0.52 0.07 0.60 Green ratio 0.35 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 Unif. delay d1 15.0 8.5 8.5 6.3 9.1 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 2.4 5.8 2.0 1 0.4 3.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 1174 14.3 10.5 6.7 12.2 Lane group LOS B B B A B Apprch. delay 17.4 11.5 12.0 Approach LOS B B B Intersec. delay 12.7 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D-\d temn\s2k13D.tmn 7/7/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information IAnalyst RLA Intersection Main& Broadway Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 5/7/03 Analysis Year 2008 With Development Analysis Time Period AM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Main Street North/South Street: Broadway 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 60 469 0 0 671 70 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 1 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 66 521 0 0 745 1 77 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 1 0 38 1 39 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1 1 0 47 1 48 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 Len th and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT LTR LTR (vph) 66 0 1 96 C (m) (vph) 816 1056 118 225 lc 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.43 95% queue length 0.26 0.00 0.03 1.99 Control Delay 9.8 8.4 35.8 32.4 LOS A A E D -Approach Delay -- -- 35.8 32.4 Approach LOS -- -- E D HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d_temp\u2kEC.tmp 7/7/03 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Broadway Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2008 With Development Analysis Time Period PM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Main Street North/South Street: Broadway 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 80 640 3 0 670 54 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 1 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 88 711 3 0 1 744 1 60 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Signal 0 1 1 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 2 0 3 65 2 53 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 1 0 1 3 81 1 2 1 66 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration I LTR I L LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT LTR LTR (vph) 88 0 5 149 C (m) (vph) 829 895 209 172 v/c 0.11 0.00 0.02 0.87 95% queue length 0.35 0.00 0.07 6.17 Control Delay 9.9 9.0 22.6 91.1 LOS A A C F Approach Delay -- -- 22.6 91.1 Approach LOS -- -- C F HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c fi1P //T) \rl tPmn\n�.kF.F_tmn 7/7/03 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY [Analyst eneral Information Site Information RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Broadway Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2008 With Development Analysis Time Period AM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Broadway Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud 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 24 68 4 1 54 14 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 1 0.80 0.80 0,80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 29 84 1 4 1 1 67 17 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 16 61 4 4 15 10 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 19 76 4 4 18 12 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 29 1 99 34 C (m) (vph) 1526 1520 673 745 v/c 0.02 0.00 0.15 0.05 95% queue length 0.06 0.00 0.51 0.14 Control Delay 7.4 7.4 11.3 10.1 LOS A A B B ,Approach Delay -- -- 11.3 10.1 Approach LOS -- -- B B Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d_temp\u2kF2.tmp 7/7/03 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Inalyst eneral Information Site Information RLA Intersection Mendenhall&Broadway gency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2008 With Development Analysis Time Period PM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Broadway 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 40 87 0 4 80 39 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 49 108 0 4 99 48 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 __ -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Ll stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R V P H olume 9 33 2 3 63 9 eak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 ourly Flow Rate, HFR 11 1 41 1 2 3 78 1 11 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RI Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration I LTR LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound ovement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 a nee Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 49 4 54 92 C (m) (vph) 1447 1495 544 591 v/c 0.03 0.00 0.10 0.16 95% queue length 0.11 0.01 0.33 0.55 Ipproach ontrol Delay 7.6 7.4 12.3 12.2 OS A A B B pproach Delay -- -- 12.3 12.2 LOS -- -- B B Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d_temp\u2kF5.tmp 7/7/03 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Wallace Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2008 With Development Analysis Time Period AM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Wallace 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 121 14 13 6 28 70 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 142 1 16 1 15 7 32 1 82 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR ! stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 14 77 1 10 18 25 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 16 90 1 11 21 1 29 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v (vph) 142 7 107 61 C (m) (vph) 1488 1595 469 618 v/c 0.10 0.00 0.23 0.10 95%queue length 0.32 0.01 0.87 0.33 Control Delay 7.7 7.3 14.9 11.5 LOS A A B B Approach Delay -- -- 14.9 11.5 Approach LOS -- -- B B Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d temp\u2kF8.tmn 7/7/03 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Wallace Agency/Co. RPA Jurisdiction Date Performed 517103 Analysis Year 2008 With Development Analysis Time Period PM Peak Project Description East/West Street: Mendenhall North/South Street: Wallace 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 78 57 51 6 52 74 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 1 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 91 67 59 7 1 61 87 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 1 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal 0 1 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 15 86 6 10 29 25 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 17 101 7 11 1 34 1 29 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR v(vph) 91 7 125 74 C (m) (vph) 1446 1473 490 582 v/c 0.06 0.00 0.26 0.13 95% queue length 0.20 0.01 1.01 0.43 Control Delay 7.7 7.5 14.8 12.1 LOS A A B B ,Approach Delay -- -- 14.8 12.1 Approach LOS -- -- B B Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d temp\u2kFC.tmn 7/7/03 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Rouse Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 Jurisdiction Time Period AM Peak Analysis Year 2008 With Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SIB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 Lane group LT TR L TR L R Volume v h 6 264 439 176 41 259 46 1106 40 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 10.0 10.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 10.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasin EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 33.0 G = G = G = G = 21.0 G = G = G = iming Y= 3 Y= Y= Y= IY= 3 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 C cle Len th C = 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit Control Dela and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 300 684 46 339 118 44 Lane group cap. 1575 1596 568 585 237 475 v/c ratio 0.19 0.43 0.08 0.58 0.50 0.09 Green ratio 0.55 1 0.55 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 Unif. delay dl 6.8 7.9 13.0 15.9 15.3 13.1 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 0.3 0.8 10.3 4.1 1 7.3 0.4 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 Control delay 7.1 8.8 13.3 20.0+ 22.6 13.5 Lane group LOS A A B C C B Apprch. delay 7.1 8.8 19.2 20.2 Approach LOS A A B C Intersec. delay 12.3 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c fi1P•//T)•\d tPmn\c7kAF tmn 7/7/01 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Rouse Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 5/7/03 urisdiction Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2008 With Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 Lane group LT TR L TR L R Volume v h 88 451 524 213 97 286 81 1183 104 o Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PH F 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ctuated P/A P P P P P P P P P Starfu lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 rrival type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 10.0 10.0 1 12.0 12.0 12.0 110.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasin EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 iming G = 33.0 G = G = G = G = 21.0 G = G = G= Y= 3 Y= Y= IY= IY= 3 Y= IY= 1Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 Cycle Len th C= 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit Control Dela , and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 599 819 108 408 203 116 Lane group cap. 1253 1596 568 579 187 475 /c ratio 0.48 0.51 0.19 0.70 1.09 0.24 Green ratio 0.55 1 0.55 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 Unif. delay d1 8.2 8.5 13.6 16.8 19.5 13.9 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 1.3 1.2 0.7 7.0 1 90.5 1 1.2 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 9.6 9.6 14.3 23.9 110.0 15.1 Lane group LOS A_ A B C F B Apprch. delay 9.6 9.6 21.9 75.5 Approach LOS A A C E Intersec. delay 21.7 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d temp\s2kBA.tmp 7/7/03 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Wallace Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 urisdiction Time Period AM Peak Analysis Year 2008 With Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 Lane group LTR LTR L TR LTR Volume v h 53 422 9 26 647 83 8 15 153 29 8 41 % Heavy veh 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PH 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P P P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext, eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 10.0 1 10.0 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 1 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 P hasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 iming G = 33.0 G = G = G = G = 21.0 G = G = G = Y= 3 Y= Y= IY=_ Y= 3 Y= IY= Y= of Analysis hrs = 0.25 C cle Length C = 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit 1, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 538 840 9 187 87 Lane group cap. 1368 1526 429 517 492 v/c ratio 0.39 0.55 0.02 0.36 0.18 Green ratio 0.55 1 0.55 0.35 0.35 0.35 Unif. delay d1 7.8 8.7 12.8 14.5 13.5 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 0.9 1.4 0.1 2.0 0.8 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 8.6 10.1 12.9 16.5 14.3 Lane group LOS A B B B B pprch. delay 8.6 10.1 16.3 14.3 Approach LOS A B B B Intersec. delay 10.6 Intersection LOS B HCS2006TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d temp\s2kC6.tMD 7/7/0*3 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main& Wallace Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 Jurisdiction Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year 2008 With Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 Lane group LTR LTR L TR LTR Volume v h 70 566 14 30 744 74 13 48 256 45 12 66 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P I P P P P P P P P P P P Startup lost time 12.0 1 2.0 12.0 2.0 1 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 rrival type 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 10.0 10.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 1 13.0 3.0 3.0 3.71 1 13,0 Phasin EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 1 08 iming G = 33.0 G = G = G = G = 21.0 G = G = G = Y= 3 jY= Y= Y= IY= 3 Y= IY= ly= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 C cle Length C = 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 723 942 14 337 1136 Lane group cap. 1314 1513 409 523 418 v/c ratio 0.55 0.62 0.03 0.64 0.33 Green ratio 0.55 0.55 0.35 0.35 0.35 Unif. delay d1 8.7 9.2 12.8 16.4 14.3 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 1.7 1 1.9 0.2 6.0 2.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 10.4 11.2 13.0 22.4 16.4 Lane group LOS B I B B C B Apprch. delay 10.4 11.2 22.0 16.4 Approach LOS B B C B Intersec. delay 13.0 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d_temp\s2kD 1.tmp 7/7/03 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Rouse Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 Purisdiction Time Period AM Peak nalysis Year 2008 With Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LTR L LTR L TR Volume v h 20 217 58 121 240 21 37 208 201 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 10.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 rrival type 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 1;1 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasin WB Only02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 iming G = 21.0 G = G = G = I G = 33.0 G = G = :1 G = Y= 3 Y= Y= Y= JY= 3 Y= IY= Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 Cycle Length C = 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 327 134 290 41 454 Lane group cap. 581 384 930 512 871 v/c ratio 0.56 0.35 0.31 0.08 0.52 Green ratio 0.35 0.55 0.55 1 0.55 0.55 Unif. delay d1 15.8 7.5 7.3 6.4 8.5 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 3.9 2.5 0.9 0.3 2.2 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 Control delay 19.7 10.0+ 8.2 6.7 110.7 Lane group LOS B B A A B pprch. delay 19.7 8.8 10.4 Approach LOS B A B Intersec. delay 12.3 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d temp\s2kDC.tmn 7/7/n'; Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Mendenhall& Rouse Agency or Co. RPA Area Type CBD or Similar Date Performed 517103 urisdiction Time Period PM Peak Falysis Year 2008 With Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LTR L LTR L TR Volume v h 16 202 41 155 414 31 37 254 222 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P P P P St artup ulost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension F 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ph inMWB 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 imingG = G = G = G = 33.0 G = G = GY= Y= Y= Y= 3 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 C cle Len th C= 60.0 Lane Group Ca acit 1, Control Dela and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj.flow rate 288 172 494 41 529 Lane group cap. 584 330 931 355 875 v/c ratio 0.49 10.52 0.53 0.12 0.60 Green ratio 0.35 0.55 0.55 1 0.55 0.55 Unif. delay di 15.3 8.5 8.6 6.5 9.1 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 3.0 5.8 2.2 0.7 3.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 Control delay 18.3 14.3 10.7 7.1 12.2 Lane group LOS B B B A B pprch. delay 18.3 11.7 11.8 Approach LOS B B B Intersec, delay 13.0 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file://D:\d temn\s2kE7_tmn 7/7/0l Appendix IV Signal Warrants P/i P,-, ak Au r �2008 December 2000 Pa e 4C-9 Pil/C�i 117�VK G Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3,,Peak Hour t 600 T CL 500 > 2 OR MORE LANES&2 OR MORE LANES T U W04 400 2 OR MORE LANES&1 LANE a:Ta � CL 300 1 LANE&1 LANE ccW Z 2 200 *150 > 100 *100 T 0 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) *Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane. Figure °g re 4 C-4. Warrant 3, Peak Hour(7D/ Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h(40 mph)ON MAJOR STREET) T a T 400 2 OR MORE LANES&2 OR MORE LANES U 2 OR MORE LANES& 1 LANE lu d 300 r j Q 1 LANE& 1 LANE Cr z LU 200 � J O > 100 *100 T *75 0 S 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) *Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane. June 2001 Sect.4C.05 Del December 2000 Page 4C-7 Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2, Four-Hour.Vehicular Volume 500 2 OR MORE LANES&2 OR MORE LANES = 400 2 OR MORE LANES&1 LANE F- W O 1 LANE& 1 LANE W Cr- 300 Ha c/) Q 0 2 200 z_ 2 100 *115 *80 0 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) *Note: 115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-2. Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume(70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h(40 mph) ON MAJOR STREET) = 400 CL > _ -2 OR MORE LANES&2 OR MORE LANES W.Q 300 W0 2 OR MORE LANES&1 LANE Ir CO a- 200 1 LANE& 1 LANE OW z � J 100 _ *80 C7 — *60 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) *Note:80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 60 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane. June 2001 Sect.4C.04