HomeMy WebLinkAboutTraffic Impact Study DraftChalet Marseilles Subdivision
Traffic Impact Study
For Submittal To:
City of Meridian
660 E. Watertower, Suite 202
Meridian, ID 83642
Ada County Highway District
3775 Adams Street
Garden City, ID 83714
CHALET MARSEILLES SUBDIVISION
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision is a 21.81 acre residential development located at
the northwest corner of Ustick Road and Locust Grove Road in Meridian, Idaho.
Both of these streets are classified as minor arterials. There are 67 residential
condominiums units (ITE Use 230) planned for this subdivision along with 87
detached senior adult housing units (ITE Use 251) resulting in a gross density of
7.06 units per acre. Direct access to the site is located on Locust Grove
approximately 660 feet north of Ustick Road. Another access is to north on
Heritage View Avenue through the Heritage Commons subdivision. A future third
access for the site south to Ustick Road may be through the Wanda's Meadow
Subdivision on Yellow Peak Lane. That potential connection is currently blocked
by an 8 foot strip of land owned by a third party.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS :
1. The site will generate 938 daily trip ends with 71 AM peak hour trips and
94 PM peak hour trips.
2. The intersection of Ustick Road and Locust Grove Road presently
operates at LOS C with an average delay of 34.7 seconds during the AM
peak hour and 30.4 seconds during the PM peak. No approach to the
intersection operates below LOS D.
In 2010 without the traffic added by the subdivision, the Ustick/Locust
Grove intersection will operate at LOS D during the morning and evening
peak hours; the average delay will be 49.0 seconds and 41.5 seconds,
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision
I J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
respectively. The westbound left turn will operate at LOS F in both the
morning and evening peak hours.
The Ustick/Locust Grove intersection with site traffic added in 2010 will
operate at LOS D during the morning and evening peak hours; the
average delay will be 51.2 seconds and 42.3 seconds, respectively. The
westbound left turn will operate at LOS F in both the morning and evening
peak hours.
3. The E Monet Street intersection at Locust Grove Road is expected to
operate at LOS B with 13.6 seconds average delay per vehicle in the PM
peak and 13.3 seconds delay in the AM peak. If the connection to Yellow
Peak Avenue is not made the intersection will still operate at LOS B with
an average delay of 12.6 seconds in the PM peak and 13.0 seconds
without the connection.
X
4. If the road connection is made between Chalet Marseilles and Wanda's
Meadow subdivision, Lilyford Avenue at Ustick Road will operate at LOS C
with 20.1 seconds average delay y per vehicle in the PM peak and at LOS B
with 14.7 seconds delay in the AM peak.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Construct the connection between Chalet Marseilles and Wanda's
Meadow subdivisions at the earliest possible time. This connection will
reduce the number of vehicle trips through the Ustick/Locust Grove
intersection. It may also keep the traffic volume on Park Commons
Avenue below in the Heritage Commons subdivision below the 1000
vehicle per day local street threshold.
2. Consider relocating Monet Street further south along Locust Grove Road
to obtain a125 minimum offset from Summerheights Drive. This will
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision
2 J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
reduce conflicts between the traffic from these two streets as well as the
adjacent church driveway.
3. Coordinate site improvement to facilitate installation of a southbound
through lane at the intersection of Ustick Road and Locust Grove Road.
This lane is need to maintain all movements within the intersection above
LOS F. This improvement is needed with or without the traffic generated
by the Chalet Marseilles subdivision.
STUDY OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study is to assess the traffic impacts of the proposed Chalet
Marseilles Subdivision on the local road system and evaluate the ability of the
system to accommodate the site -generated traffic. This study is to be done
conformance to Ada County Highway District's policies for traffic impact studies.
SITE DESCRIPTION
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision is a 21.81 acre residential development located at
the northwest corner of Ustick Road and Locust Grove Road in Meridian, Idaho
(Figure 1). At build -out the development will consist of 87 senior adult housing
units and 67 residential condominium units comprised primarily of four-plex
buildings. The gross density will be approximately 7.1 dwellings per acre.
Construction will be done in two phases with build out projected to be in the year
2010. Chalet Marseilles will connect to Locust Grove Road approximately 660
feet north of Ustick Road. The subdivision will also connect to the Heritage
Commons subdivision to the north via Heritage View Avenue. It is likely that
Chalet Marseilles will also connect to Ustick Road indirectly through Wanda's
Meadow subdivision via Yellow Peak Avenue. Presently another property owner
owns an 8 foot strip of land that divides the two subdivisions and prevents the
connection. It is expected that this connection will be made when that parcel of
land is developed in the future.
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision
3 J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
�TJ L I- LH
--J Ltu I'
_TL
Mut f
LA
J1
ET
SITE
ERHEIr'w-m
7 -AISTICK
T
_f J-1 . 111--i : -'- -1 . IUILN
0 415 830
1 1 1 1 1.360 Peet
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
VICINITY MAP 06:0&07
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision 4
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
J
-LI II Chalet Marseilles Subdivision
'11 Senior Adult Housing
� � j • �� • ~ � •�•' -� I rya" - C ' - l T`�
f
.-_ I 1 •f." a` .:4 7v • .: � r —ter — _ _
Senior Adult Housing L. •w I>~
Figure 2. Site Plan
STUDY APPROACH
lominiums I
r-
1. Determine existing traffic conditions and assess operational
characteristics of the Ustick Road/Locust Grove intersection.
2. Establish baseline conditions and evaluate the intersection capacities
based on the COMPASS 2010 Long Range Transportation model.
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision 5
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
3. Estimate traffic volumes generated by the proposed development using
the ITE Trip Generation manual and distribute the trips to the approach
road and adjacent arterial intersections.
4. Evaluate traffic conditions for baseline plus site generated traffic.
5. Identify capacity limitation of the existing roadway based and suggest
improvements to mitigate those limitations.
Facilities to be evaluated include the intersection of Ustick Road at Locust
Grove Road, Locust Grove Road at Monet Street, and Ustick Road at Lilyford
Avenue.
ASSUMPTIONS
The following are the assumptions used in this traffic study to analyze traffic
conditions:
The 2010 traffic volume on Ustick Road in the vicinity of the proposed
development is approximately 13400 vehicles per day. This value was
determined by using project growth rate through 2030 from COMPASS
"Trend" model and applying it to the 4/7/05 ACHD count of 10975. The
projected growth rate is approximately 4% per year.
2. The 2010 traffic volume on Locust Grove Road in the vicinity of the
proposed development is approximately 10125 vehicles per day. This
value was determined by using project growth rate through 2030 from
COMPASS "Trend" model and applying it to the 12/13/05 ACHD count
of 9399 in the vicinity of the proposed development. The projected
growth rate on Locust Grove north of Ustick is approximately 1.5% per
year.
3. This project is expected to be built out by 2010.
The COMPASS "Trend" Long Range Transportation model prediction was used
because the traffic volumes predicted are higher than the "Choice" model thereb
Providing a more conservative analysis. y
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision
6 J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The baseline level of service for the study area was calculated for the 2010 traffic
conditions. This provides the basis for determining the traffic impacts created by
the development. Existing roadway geometry and level terrain classification
were used in the analysis.
Table 5
2010 Traffic Volumes
Street Daily AM Peak PM Peak
Ustick Road 13400 947 952
Locust Grove Road 10125 810 911
The COMPASS model shows the 2010 traffic volumes on Locust Grove Road to
be less than the volumes recorded in 2005 by ACHD. The growth rate predicted
between the 2010 model and the 2030 model were used to calculate 2010 traffic
volumes for Locust Grove using the 2005 traffic counts as a base year.
Directional splits and peak hour volumes were calculated using the existing splits
and peak hour percentage of total daily traffic.
Site Generated Traffic
The vehicle trips to be generated by the proposed development were determined
using the latest edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual (7th Edition). There are
87 proposed Senior Adult Detached Housing units (Use 251) and 67 Residential
Condom inium/Townhouse units (Use 230). Using the fitted curve equation for
total daily trips generated, a total of 938 vehicle trips per will be generated by
this site. AM peak hour trips were calculated to be 71 trips and PM peak hours
trips were calculated to be 94 total trip ends. No trip capture is assumed for this
analysis.
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision
7
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
Trip Distribution
Existing demographics and directional traffic flows were used to determine future
traffic distributions on Ustick Road and Locust Grove Road. The predominant
direction of travel from the Chalet Marseilles subdivision will be to the south and
west. The primary access will be Monet Street at Locust Grove Road. A few trips
will utilize Heritage View Avenue to the north but should very low because of the
indirect connection to any functionally classified street.
If the connection to Yellow Peak Avenue is made, about 10% of the
development's traffic is likely to use this route to avoid traveling through the
Ustick/Locust Grove to travel to the west. Most of the new traffic that is likely to
travel through the Wanda's Meadow subdivision to access Ustick Road would be
from the Heritage Commons subdivision. This route is a much more direct route
for residents of that subdivision traveling to or from the west than what is
available to them now. Figures 3 and 4 show the site trip distribution with and
without the connection to Yellow Peak Avenue. ,
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision
8 J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
Site Trip Distribution (ADT)
W/Yellow Peak Connection
Figure 3.
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision
9
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
Site Distribution
W/O Yellow Peak Connection
Figure 4.
If the connection to Yellow Peak Avenue is not made the traffic volume on Park
Crossing Avenue within the Heritage Commons subdivision could exceed the
1000 vehicle per day for local streets as specified in ACHD's development
Policies. The traffic volume predicted on Park Crossing Avenue by the Heritage
Commons traffic impact study conducted by Washington Group International is
867 vehicles per day. The connection to Yellow Peak draws traffic out of Heritage
commons subdivision which counterbalances the additional traffic passing
through Heritage Commons generated by Chalet Marseilles.
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision 10
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
Baseline Plus Site Traffic
Site traffic was added to the baseline traffic to determine the capacity and level of
service for the Ustick/Locust Grove intersection and the intersections at the
subdivision access points for the build out year of 2010. Level of service is a
measure of average vehicular delay on the controlled approaches at an
intersection.
Analysis was conducted for AM and PM peak hour conditions. Tables 2, 3 & 4
show the peak hour traffic volumes for the study intersections for the baseline
plus sight conditions in 2010.
Ustick
AM Peak
Eas
' ound
Westb n
N
"hbound
Sou
`ound'
Exis in
T
Y 0
RU
LT
T
TH
RT
HRU
LT
RT Tl4kI
I
LT
201 No Build
'349
5 41,1
116
13
187
106
2
144
275
42
37
67
83
201, + Site
1 5 412
1
110
4 27
304�
175
1
40
1961
89
11
�.
175
340
52
47
11
100
PM . eak
'?
Eas,
ound
W
y
' bound
s:
Northbound
Sou
ound
Existin
RT
RU
LT
HRU LT
T
HRU
LT
_
RT T
U
LT
2010 No Build
83
101
342
416
32
39
97
394 195
1b1
444
143
68
297
47
2010 + Site
101
417
33
118
130
481 238
184
540
174
73
320
5 1
482 238
184
554
175
77
327
5
Table 2
Monet / Locust Grove
AM Peak
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
S un
2010 + Site
RT THRU
36
LT
RT THRU LT
RT THRU LT
RT
THRU LT
2010 No
18
381 12
5
430
Connection
40
15
381 16
4
430
PM Peak
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
S un
2010 + Site
RT THRU
19
LT
RT THRU LT
RT THRU LT
RT
THRU LT
2010 No
10
556 32
21
355
Connection
30
g
556 44
18
356
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision 11
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
Table 3
Ustick / Lil
ord
AM Peak
2010 + Site
2010 No
Eastbound
RT THRU
713
LT
5
Westbound
RT THRU LT
6 365
Northbound
RT THRU LT
RT
20
Southbound
THRU LT
12
Connection
713
3
4 365
9
12
PM Peak
2010 + Site
2010 No
Eastbound
RT THRU
532
LT
20
Westbound
RT THRU LT
14 801
Northbound
RT THRU LT
RT
14
Southbound
THRU LT
7
Connection
532
8
12 801
5
7
Operational Issues
Thi Ustick/Lo ust Gave inter
traA c. The west
ho ' s without s
veh les durin `f
con idered f in
Ustick Road to p
Table 4
at LOS in 2010 with or wi hout
F duri the AM and PM ak
bveme is appaching 3
i fit at v 4.ich a dual left tum, s
imo ment. There is spe on
turn lane tat cause of the existig
lane alignments adding the lane may cause other operational issues.
left turn
Thai
affic ho
ig the c<
tion opet't '
Perates L ,
lume fgthis n
Thi sis the pi
pcity bf a left t
an additiorai
Installation of a southbound through will improve the westbound left turn
movement LOS to E. The additional southbound lane reduces the time needed to
serve southbound through traffic and makes this additional time available to
serve the westbound left turn lane.
Another operational issue discovered in this investigation is the offset of Monet
Street from Summerheights Drive and the driveway of the church directly north of
Monet Street. ACHD's development policy calls for local street intersections to be
offset by at least 125 feet. The purpose of this policy is to minimize conflicts
between vehicles entering or exiting the side streets. There is ample distance
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision
12 J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
between Ustick Road and Monet Street to provide for the offset without losing
full access to Monet Street.
Chalet Marseilles Subdivision
13
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
Appendix
Cherry Springs Subdivision
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
ITD 0400 (Rev. 4-02) Change Order
See Contract Administration Manual Section 104.03
Contractor's Name Project No,
W.F. Construction Inc.
Location pChange
.
Eagle IC Ramps 7004
Authority No. er No.
G073170 05
You are ordered to perform the following described work in accordance with
Provisions governing the above contract or as herein amended. The cost t
equipment, materials, overhead, and all other incidental costs associated with co
Description of Work
CHANGE IN PLANS
��b
A09(980)
Key No.
09980
Date of Contractor Authorization
7/19/07
o
the Standard Specifications and Special
perform this work includes all labor,
mpleting the work.
Provide for signal modifications including replacing signal LED's on heads 25, 26, & 27 and adding a no right
turn on red sign to the mast arm of signal pole D. Provide other signal modifications include the installation of
a right turn signal head with tunnel louvers on pole B as discussed in the field meeting on July 19, 2007.
Supply and Install a recycled a pedestrian signal pole and relocate a pedestrian push button as necessary for the
signal operation at the Northwest corner of the intersection as shown in the drawings (attached). The Pedestrain
pole will be inspected and for installation and function per the attached drawings and accepted by Resident
Engineer letter of Acceptance (ITD-854). The pedestrian pole installation will be subject to ACHD standard
drawing TS 1107 (attached).
Materials and Construction Requirements for the Signal Modifications, Signal Head and the Signs to be installed
shall not change.
Method of Measurement is as shown below. C05-656A Signal Modifications includes the work to change out
the signal LED's for heads 25, 26, & 27 with LED's and add an R10-9 sign on the Pole D Mast arm. C05-656B
Pedestrian Pole includes the labor, concrete base, trenching, and materials to install a recycled pedestrian pole at
the northwest corner of the intersection. C05-656C Signal Head includes the installation of a louvered right turn
signal on pole B. Asterisked (*) items identify subcontractor work. Prime's Administrative costs are
reimbursed under item C05-104A.
Contract Time: There will be no change in contract time.
ESTIMATED INCREASE IN CONTRACT ITEMS AT CONTRACT PRICES
616-010A SIGN TY B 18 SF
@ $12.50 = $ 225.00
616-050A BRKAWY STL SIGN POST TY E 42.5 LB @ $5.50 =
$ 233.75
616-070A BRKAWY STL SIGN POST INST TY E 2 EACH @ $160.00 =
$ 320.00
Total Estimated Increase
Page 1 of 2
ITD 0400 (Rev. 4-02)
Contractor's Name
W.F. Construction Inc.
Location
Authority No.
Eagle IC Ramps
G073170
Change Order
Project No.
Contract No.
7004
Change Order No.
05
A09(980)
Key No.
09980
Date of Contractor Authorization
7/19/07
ESTIMATE OF EXTRA WORK AT AGREED PRICES:
C05-656A
Signal Modifications*
1 LS
@
$1,259.00
= $
1,259.00
C05-656B
Pedestrian Pole*
1 LS
@
$820.00 =
$
820.00
C05-656A
Signal Head*
1 LS
@
$644.00 =
$
644.00
C05-104A
Prime's Admin
1 CA
@
$272.30 =
$
272.30
Total Estimated Increase
=
2,995.30
Net Estimated Increase
=
3,774.05
By reason of this change, contract time will be adjusted by:
0
® Working Days ❑ Calendar Days
City, County, or Highway District Agency's Name
Authorized Representative's Signature
Title
Date
We agree that if this Change Order is approved, we will perform
the work detailed above and be compensated the prices shown.
Contractor's Signature Date
Approved for State of Idaho
Authorized Representative's Signature
Title
Date
Project Resident Engineer
Page 2 of 2
ITD 0400 (Rev. 4-02)
See Contract Administration Manual Section 104.03
Contractor's Name
Location
Authority No.
W.F. Construction Inc.
Eagle IC Ramps
G073170
Change Order
Project No.
Contract No.
7004
Change Order No.
05
A09(980)
Key No.
09980
Date of Contractor Authorization
7/19/07
You are ordered to perform the following described work in accordance with the Standard Specifications and Special
Provisions governing the above contract or as herein amended. The cost to perform this work includes all labor,
equipment, materials, overhead, and all other incidental costs associated with completing the work.
Description of Work
CHANGE IN PLANS
Provide for signal modifications including replacing signal LED's on heads 25, 26, & 27 and adding a no right
turn on red sign to the mast arm of signal pole D. Provide other signal modifications include the installation of
a right turn signal head with tunnel louvers on pole B as discussed in the field meeting on July 19, 2007.
Supply and Install a recycled a pedestrian signal pole and relocate a pedestrian push button as necessary for the
signal operation at the Northwest corner of the intersection as shown in the drawings (attached). The Pedestrain
pole will be inspected and for installation and function per the attached drawings and accepted by Resident
Engineer letter of Acceptance (ITD-854). The pedestrian pole installation will be subject to ACHD standard
drawing TS 1107 (attached).
Materials and Construction Requirements for the Signal Modifications, Signal Head and the Signs to be installed
shall not change.
Method of Measurement is as shown below. C05-656A Signal Modifications includes the work to change out
the signal LED's for heads 25, 26, & 27 with LED's and add an R10-9 sign on the Pole D Mast arm. C05-656B
Pedestrian Pole includes the labor, concrete base, trenching, and materials to install a recycled pedestrian pole at
the northwest corner of the intersection. C05-656C Signal Head includes the installation of a louvered right turn
signal on pole B. Asterisked (*) items identify subcontractor work. Prime's Administrative costs are
reimbursed under item C05-104A.
Contract Time: There will be no change in contract time.
ESTIMATED INCREASE IN CONTRACT ITEMS AT CONTRACT PRICES
616-010A SIGN TY B 18 SF
@ $12.50 = $ 225.00
616-050A BRKAWY STL SIGN POST TY E 42.5 LB @ $5.50 =
$ 233.75
616-070A BRKAWY STL SIGN POST INST TY E 2 EACH @ $160.00 =
$ 320.00
Total Estimated Increase
778.75
Page 1 of 2
ITD 0400 (Rev. 4-02)
Contractor's Name
W.F. Construction Inc.
Location
Authority No.
Eagle IC Ramps
G073170
Change Order
Project No.
Contract No.
7004
Change Order No.
05
A09(980)
Key No.
09980
Date of Contractor Authorization
7/19/07
ESTIMATE OF EXTRA WORK AT AGREED PRICES:
C05-656A
Signal Modifications*
1 LS
@
$1,259.00
= $
1,259.00
C05-656B
Pedestrian Pole*
1 LS
@
$820.00
= $
820.00
C05-656A
Signal Head*
1 LS
@
$644.00 =
$
644.00
C05-104A
Prime's Admin
1 CA
@
$272.30 =
$
272.30
Total Estimated Increase
=
2,995.30
Net Estimated Increase
=
3,774.05
By reason of this change, contract time will be adjusted by:
0 ® Working Days ❑ Calendar Days
City, County, or Highway District Agency's Name
Authorized Representative's Signature
Title
Date
We agree that if this Change Order is approved, we will perform
the work detailed above and be compensated the prices shown.
Contractor's Signature Date
Approved for State of Idaho
Authorized Representative's Signature
Title
Date
Project Resident Engineer
Page 2 of 2
U��6/�007vI,IIIV51
QNI III.J
o
a
US 20/26
0 $
�
N N
.830C
�
850(1
i6000
US 2a2s
a,rc 18000
US 20/28 US 20/26
8100
18000
18000 15800
8200
10000
�9GC 200 16700
6
16700 1 lasoo
i
O O
}g�
S
a
g o$
d
K
e�
McMillan Rd.
� $
7800
8600
7800
8700
McMillan Rd.
6300
71W
9400 9400
10000 8400
5300 4700
7000
8000 8600 8600
9500 9600
6200 55 00
N
A N
C
$ O
m 8
O $
a a
N N
Q
p
v
�
Ustidc Rd
N
7100
7300 6900
7900
NN
N
8300 8500
Us780tick �
Ustick Rd.
8 Ir 8200
8400 7800
8800 7700
5800
8500
9001X 8400
7800
8700
j $ $
Ir
@ $ $
8300
6200
o
N$ $
Ustick Rd.
S
1000 10o0
1�
700
1000 l000
700�400
rn
o
v
� o1000
800 1800
D800
1000
0
N N
ty
O $
N
rb
Lu
O O (»1
Q $
Cherry Ln
P
8000 10300
1030o 14100
Fairview Ave o 0
14100 1410C
Fairview o Ave7400
9600
9600 12700
12700
1270C
600 15200
16300
76400
15900800a
17300
1850018100N
IP&O
18001600r 270o
1900 v `�
Pine St
o
1400
3300
0$1500
2300
27010 A,
M1200 39001700
2600
1700 N 3100
2100
2400 3500
3900
3�0
$
1300
1600 $ N 4000 4000
J 900 3900
$
4p�
4000
gg
$ o
v
4000
O p3
o
o`z o
O
m O
Franklin Rd.
1100
�a �
�
w� N
10200 10200
o
0 8F $
10C$ 8000
Franklin Rl $ $
o
1100 12200
17300
11500 tD
0 1 )0
12500
Franklin Rd. $
m $ ranklin Rd.
12200
12600 30 �100
10200
1040A..- 10600
12500 N N 14800
14800 i
N
o o
m
00
10600 13800
c
13800
v W
O
O Q
G9 DTI
a p
O O
m O
N
00
N QQ
J
100
IAGnyvrmOanTIRy09IZIWMTro dWDIO1ROUN
CaN"san W Ma mutlN l is vaq �a M.bvncp,n �D_620f0.NE7
M h 1-9 a
_._.._._
Q O
per Federal H'gbrry Administration FHWA
vduma loretf are disPM •raw' or un
j'7('7'r-{�� edlaabd. Tbus, paresswnal lodgment s ujd ba ePWiedlwnen�using model bramsb
For are> speaRevaFdebn
d0]
i
n'%
sbtiatiu,
—I- COMPASS.
—
Licensed to Community Planning Association '!
8116/2007
207C10 20100 20200
ao0
p 0
S 8 �
8 0
o -o
m
a
20200 g r
22500 22500
0 0
cr`o ran
V
w
O
�
wf
cO
Nillan Rd.
o
10800
11500
10800
McMillan Rd.
12400
17300 17300
16000
12700 9500
9900
10500
10100
11800
16600 16600
15300
12300 9100
O
J
O
O2
�OSpp
O
8
ix
d
tcf
m
�b
O
� O
S
1W0 N
N
stick Rd
17500
20500
8900
8400
17200
17500 17700
1770 a
16700
Ustick Rd.
15300
Ustick Rd.
78000
17700
15600
14000 11700
18000 18100
18100
17500
16100 16500
15200
o c4i
12900
N N
ti
00
N
N
q2�
1200 1200
1
1300 1300
I
W
Stir Dr
g
1400
1000
0 2900
mq
1000
2900
goon
400
1400
g
$
F.
_m
N
tb
O
^
o
dg„_
Merry Ln
17400 19200
19200
FairviewAve
21700
o
21700 0
Fai23100 Ve �
Fairview Avg.
p j 27200
�""�'��
24700 26000 24700
18200
0
20000
20000
22100 22100
22100,?
,g
22500 r^y $ 26200 F
25200 26500
25300
�
�
^
�
'•00
N N
N
S
S
Qp O
W
S O
M O I
t09 N f V ONO
51005 rn 6000
4100 r
Pine St
g
g
20 a g
�800 3200
3000
3900
3900 4 �``6'
M N
8 48W N 5200
5200 6100
4t00 1$ 4000 3300
3100
4200
4200 49M
N 6000 0
5200 o
5� 7200
a 8i
mN g 7200
0
0
o In
o
g
2p0
�
$
i
Koa o i
o
O
N OOp
Franklin Rd.
S
o
c
^
W
14200 14200
0
126
Franklin Rd o
g
0 0
0 0
12200 18000
o
18000 N 1T
00
Franklin Rd. c, rn i
15200
13900 13900
18000
12500 17700
17800 15700
75200 N N 24200
24200
m =.
oo n
15700 75700 25900
i
N S O�j
25900
O
O
O
O O
(� GO o
S
N rfJ (p
O
O
o
�
N
700
:WAG4rewrrbOeI1TIP1y091219ase1b103UROUNOEO_Oyg70.N� ---
his ca Of the model ie In Me h'atauny regm Fed"
J
---
---
j
d_ f
lotlalraum. roreuats ara tliWleYetl'raw^or
Wy
Par
urladwatee. Thua, WNessionel
Mghway AEntiniatreEan FHWA
( )guitlMnea.
judgment
s1wWd be applNtl whorl using model Iorens4.
For area-apedfic wNtlefipn sUOaaca, please cg , COMPASS.
-------
_
Licensed to Community Planning
_
Association
.8/16/2007
a �
—
•
US 20/26
$ $
N N
99n0
9900
10200
N N
10600
US zags
11800
US 20/26
Us 20/26
10100
11700 19100 19100
19io,10100
10200
10600
11900 11800 100 18600
-18600
p
v
N N ;^•
O � O
W
a
$ $
0
r
m
1cMillan Rd.
o g
0
$ o
7200
7900
7500
8200 8500
McMillan Rd.
8500
7300
8000
8200 7000
4200
3600
7400
8100 8600 8600 8300
8000
N
4900
4300
4
O $
A
O
Q
O
G
M
o
N
�
a
PO)
Ustick Rd
N
7
7000
7100 6700
7300
N
7600 7600
Ustick Rd. Usft Rd.
00
6900 6400
----
6800 7400
5800
7200
75001 7500
6700 7600
$
O
7800
5900
o
v v
$ o
v `�
$ o
c v
N N
900 900_RV
1v
1000 1000
_
p
40pk Or
900 1900
t000
400 1000
Lu
WoCherry
F13
00 10500
10500
Fairview Av13300 13300^
Fairview523�
7600
00 d� ` t9100 Fairview Ave.
14800
9800
9800 12400
$
12400
12400
15700
16000
15400
g $
$
$ 0 18000 15300
0
16500
I
15800
S
O N N
$ $
M
O p
O
I
�
� O
O O
O O N N
0 1700r $ 2800
$ $
1800 v m
2800
Pine St
2300
w w
$ 0
260U
10 0 0
0 1800 2900
O o
1900 N 2700
2100
000
N m v
0 0 500 N N 2800 3200
3200
9 g
2300 2000
500 0 0
2900
32
$ $
3300
0
N
3CNI
300 3200
33pU
3300
D
�m om
Franklin Rd.
11200 11200
c $ $
10_ ro m 9200
12200
Franklin Rc o
12400 S 1 0
Fra' N g'ranIdin
12300 12300
)0
13400 3nORd.
Rd.
12800 80 H 300
11400
1160n. 11200
N N 13800
13800
o $
N
o
11200 11200 15100
o
0
15100
W
(7 7 O
O $
o
w m
200
D. WAGlnawrrpde1171Rlypg 1ZBasalb20I(AROUNDED—b2010.NET
rnie ""br.bon ---
or me .00d.l �s valid w m. nw
Modelvdume(orecesb
n
----000
-
aredispl.y.d'raw'.runed`III Par �l!Hqhray Adminntraaon(FHWA) galdeb�es.
)"7._ Ndpm.nt s/roWd be applied when using mpdH /.rerasb.
' ,v�+'Li'f J'I'i—IpIC/Ij
For area-spapM1c valida0m alatistica,
pl..y ��� DAP ASS
--
---
—
Licensed to Community
_
Planning Association
ZVJV DUHU.- zwu I-etwom with Zusu I rend Demographics
8/16/2007
21000
---
d
ag
�m
f
Willan Rd.
11300 12100
10000 10700
11500
10200
A
O
00 23300 23300 ( 205
0 0
!� o
�m m
g o
m �
0
0 o m m
13700 18800 18800 McMillan Rd.
18000 17200 13200
12400 16900 16900 16300
17100 13000
b O N (NJ
b
7 O
O O
O p
m 1�
O N
I
O O
O O
mp oo
�m n
C:n �
a
C
v
Ko g
JSft
QO 0
t7
�O N
Rd
`° m
18600
18500 18000
22500
1780' 18000
0Rd'
17100
UBdc eRd.
22400 22300 22700
22800
17100
i--r
0 0
22500
21100
21600
/8700
g
o
0 0
m a
�
o 0
m
V N
1Ip
1200 1200
1200 1200
O ppV
O O
O O
O 02�
Dr
8�
400 1100
500 1100
1000
0 o
O
O O
N g
m
a
O
m
9
SO
g 8
y,w
�
17900
20100
Fairview Ave
20100 )_3300 23300
o o
23300 ry
Fairview Ave
72� .+
17100
255W
��N % 293M
FaiviewAye.
25900
19300
19300 22100 22100
22100
27500
d o g o0
2egn0
$ 27600
27800
w
O
wn r
m g
29300
m0
O
O
O O
O oo
O O
O
5500'
o
4900 ip Pine St
X200
o a
b o
300
0 10
5600
6G00
R 31
4900 1 0
3100 0,00
7500
880^� o0
00 8800 N H 6400
6900
4100 3300
m
3200 8400
(3400
9700 9800 0 6900
6900
��
m N
7700
m
m
p O
O �
o
%
Frar� �'
_�
p
O
g
0
rn o
O! N
14500
14500
132
Frankl§� Rd g Q
12800 16400
}{
16500 NNi 13 (H1
FFanldin Rd.
N
13900
13900
15800 12800
t5700
15700
N N 27600
16300
16400 15700
15700
-_ 27600
N w w
15700
29200
---��
N oo a
o
29200
4
o
N
QQW
o Q
o-
7lda cabN126— ni2Q0 -
awn of ow
J_
,ao
MoCN �oYru (arq�a
th.
dItIlb11W =Z: anThZ�a �ra�Nalp�y ayA�abbon(FNNN)U�46w.
N rerif Yroule De ePP"d M n u "- b
Fo,
ML P
araa,jk vabdaM atnsstip. Weaas nuMacl
CCMp SS.
124*
1260(
13000
14500
_icensed to Community Planning Associatior
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Ustick & Locust
Grove
9/5/2007
Movement"`
Lane Configurations
EBL
EBT EBR
'F,
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900 1900
1900
t
1900
r
1900
1900
�
1900
1900
Lane Width
12
16 12
12
12
12
1900
1900
1900
Total Lost time (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
12
4.0
12
12
12
12
12
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
4.0
0.95
4.0
4.0
Frt
Fit Protected
1.00
0.95
0.97
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.96
1.00
1.00
0.95
0.97
Satd. Flow (prot)
1770
1.00
2049
0.95
1770
1.00
1863
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
Fit Permitted
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1583
1.00
1770
0.28
3407
1770
3438
Satd. Flow ()erm)
1770
2049
1770
1863
1583
527
1.00
3407
0.18
1.00
Volume (vph)
33
417 101
238
482
130
175
554
330
3438
Peak -hour factor, PHF
0.92
0.92 0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
184
57
327
77
Adj. Flow (vph)
36
453 110
259
524
141
190
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
7 0
0
602
200
62
355
84
Lane Group Flow (vph)
36
556 0
259
0
524
71
0
28
0
0
19
0
Turn Type
Prot
70
190
774
0
62
420
0
Protected Phases
7
4
Prot
Perm
pm+pt
m+ t
P P
Permitted Phases
3
8
5
2
1
6
Actuated Green, G (s)
4.2
32.1
15.5
43.4
8
43.4
2
37.8
27.4
6
Effective Green, g (s)
5.2
33.1
16.5
44.4
44.4
38.8
28.4
27.0
21.6
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.05
0.33
0.16
0.44
0.44
0.39
22.6
Clearance Time (s)
5.0
5.0
5.0
0.28
0.29
0.20
0.23
0..0
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
92
676
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
v/s Ratio Prot
0.02
c0.27
291
c0.15
824
0.28
700
355
964
187
774
v/s Ratio Perm
c0.07
c0.23
0.02
0.12
v/c Ratio
Uniform Delay, d1
0.39
0.82
0.89
0.64
0.04
0.10
0.14
0.54
0.80
0.07
0.33
0.54
Progression Factor
46.1
1.00
31.0
1.00
41.1
21.7
16.3
22.0
33.4
27.1
34.3
Incremental Delay, d2
1.0
7.6
11.2
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Delays
()
47.1
38.6
6.2
26.2
67.3
1.2
22.9
0.0
16.4
0.8
4.6
0.4
0.4
Level of Service
p
p
E
22.8
38.0
27.5
34.8
Approach Delay (s)
39.1
B
C
D
C
C
Approach LOS
D
34.4
35.1
33.9
Intersection Summary�
C
D
C
HCM Average Control Delay
35.5
,
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
HCM
Level
of Service.
D
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
0.82
100.4
Intersection Capacity Utilization
P Y
80.0%
Sum of lost
time
16.0
Analysis Period (min)
ICU
Level of
Service
is
p
c Critical Lane Group
15
Ustick/Locust Grove 9/5/2007 2010 PM with Site Plus SIB Lane
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Ustick & Locust Grove 9/5/2007
Lane Configurations
I
To
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
Lane Width
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Total Lost time (s)
12
4.0
16
4.0
12
12
4.0
12
4.0
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
4.0
1.00
4.0
1.00
4.0
0.95
4.0
4.0
Frt
Fit Protected
1.00
0.97
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.96
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.97
Satd. Flow (prot)
0.95
1770
1.00
2049
0.95
1770
1.00
1863
1.00
1583
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
Fit Permitted
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1770
0.13
3407
1.00
1770
1809
Satd. Flow (perm)
1770
2049
1770
1863
1583
239
3407
0.21
398
1.00
1809
Volume (vph)
Peak -hour factor, PHF
33
0.92
417
0.92
101
0.92
238
482
130
175
554
184
57
327
77
Adj. Flow (vph)
36
453
110
0.92
259
0.92
524
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
7
0
0
0
141
190
602
200
62
355
84
Lane Group Flow (vph)
36
556
0
259
524
75
66
0
190
26
776
0
0
7
0
Turn Type
Prot
Prot
Perm
pm+pt
0
62
432
0
Protected Phases
7
4
3
8
m+ t
p p
Permitted Phases
5
2
1
6
Actuated Green, G (s)
4.4
33.1
15.4
44.1
8
44.1
2
46.3
35.9
6
34.7
29.3
Effective Green, g (s)
5.4
34.1
16.4
45.1
45.1
47.3
36.9
36.7
30.3
Actuated g/C Ratio
Clearance Time (s)
0.05
5.0
0.31
0.15
0.41
0.41
0.43
0.34
0.33
0.28
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
5.0
2.0
5.0
2.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Lan G C
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
e rp ap (vph) 87
v/s Ratio Prot 0.02
636
264 765
650 284
1145
213
499
v/s Ratio Perm
c0.27
c0.15 0.28
c0.08
0.23
0.02
,
c0 24
v/c Ratio 0.41
0.87
0.98 0.68
0.04 0.21
0.10 0.67
0.68'
0.08
_ � "
Uniform Delay, d1 50.7
Progression Factor 1.00
35.8
46.5 26.5
19.9 23.7
31.3
25.9
0.87
37
Incremental Delay, d2 1.2
1.00
12.4
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.07.
0
0
Delay (s) 51.8
48.2
49.8 2.0
96.3 28.6
0.0 4.6
19.9 28.2
1.3
32.6
0.3
14.1 -
Level of Service D
D
F C
B
26.2
51.9
Approach Delay (s)
48.4
46.2
C
C
C
D-
Approach LOS
D
31.8
48.7
D
.,
InCe`�
=
HCMAverage Control Delay
42.3
HCM Level of Service
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
0.86
p
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
109.8
Sum of lost time (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
86.2%
ICU Level of Service
16.0
Analysis Period (min)
15
E
c Critical Lane Group
Ustick/Locust Grove 9/5/2007 2010 PM
with Site Synchro 6 Report
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
Page 1
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Ustick & Locust Grove
9/5/2007
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
Lane Width
12
16
Total Lost time (s)
4.0
4.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
1.00
Frt
1.00
0.96
Flt Protected
0.95
1.00
Satd. Flow (Prot)
1770
2021
Flt Permitted
0.95
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
1770
2021
Volume (vph)
140
412
Peak -hour factor, PHF
0.92
0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)
152
448
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
11
Lane Group Flow (vph)
152
616
Turn Type
P t
1900
12
190
12
1900
1900
1900
1900
190
1900
1900
19 00
4.0
12
4.0
12
4.0
12
4.0
12
4.0
12
12
12
12
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.95
4.0
1.00
4.0
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.0
0.95
1.00
0.98
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1770
1863
1583
1770
3359
1770
1834
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.13
1.00
1.00
1770
1863
1583
243
3359
504
3
1414
165
0.92
278
0.92
304
0.92
110
0.92
52
340
175
00
47
179
302
330
120
0.92
57
0.92
370
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0
0
0
76
0
56
190
109
447
51
0
302
330
44
57
504
0
n
0
1nn
3
A.
0
Protected
rO
`
Prot
Phases 7 4
Permitted Phases
3
Actuated Green, G (s)
12.2
35.1
15.2
Effective Green, 9 (s)
13.2
38.1
16.2
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.12
0.34
0.15
Clearance Time (s)
5.0
5.0
5.0
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
2.0.
2.
Lane GrpCa P (vph)
218
681
267
v/s Ratio Prot
0.09
c0.30
c0.17
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio
0.70
0.90
1.13
Uniform Delay, d1
45.1
33.9
45.5
Progression Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
Incremental Delay, d2
7.6
15.1
9
Delay (s)
Level of Service
52.7
49.0
140.1
.E
Approach Delay (s)
D
D
F
Approach LOS
49.7
D
HCM Average Control Delay 51 2
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.89
Actuated Cycle Length (s)'; 107.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.1 %
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Ustick/Locust Grove 9/5/2007 2010 AM W
ith Site
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
Perm Pm+Pt
8
5
8
2
38.1
38.1
35.4
39.1
39.1
37.4
0.36
0.36
0.35
5.0
5.0
5.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
- -
'tU%j U
Pm+Pt
2
1
6
6
29.7
38.4
31.2
30.7
40.4
32.2
0.29
0.38
0.30
5.0
5.0
5.0
2n
1)„
680
577
180
962
287
c0.18
0.02
0.15
c0.03
0.49
0.03
0.08
0.09
0.32
�
0.11
26.3
22.2
26.1
0.52
32.1y�
0.38
23.0
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.2
0.0
0.4
0.2
,
26.5
22.3
26.5
32.4
23.3
C
C ., Cam'
C
.3
C
71.6
31.8
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
16.0
E
55-1
c0.27
0.90
35.913
1.00
16.8
52.7
47D
D'
Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Ustick & Locust Grove
* 9/5/2007
Lane Configurations
I
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
Lane Width
12
Total Lost time (s)
4.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
Frt
1.00
Flt Protected
0.95
Satd. Flow (prot)
1770
Flt Permitted
0.95
Satd. Flow (perm)
1770
Volume (vph)
116
Peak -hour factor, PHF
0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)
126
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
Lane Group Flow (vph)
126
Turn Type
Prot
Protected Phases
7
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)
8.8
Effective Green, g (s)
9.8
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.10
Clearance Time (s)
5.0
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
185
v/s Ratio Prot
0.07
v/s Ratio Perm
l R •-R b.
�
t-;rtT*�.,..�
10
16
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
4.0
12
12
4.0
12
4.0
12
4.0
12
4.0
12
12
12
12
12
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
4.0
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.96
k W:
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.95
.00
1.00
.04.0
0.99
1.00
2020
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1770
1863
1583
1770
3356
837
1.00
2020
0.95
1770
1.00
1863
1.00
1583
0.19
350
1.00
0.32
349
140
229
250
87
42
3356
275
144
600
18837
0.92
379
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
8833
0.92
67
0,92
37
0.92
12
152
0
249
272
95
46
299
157
90
399
40
519
0
0
249
0
272
58
37
0
46
60
396
0
n
0
an
3
A)M
0
c0.26
Prot
Perm
pm+pt
4
3
8
5
8
2
28.1
16.3
35.6
35.6
26.9
29.1
17.3
36.6
36.6
28.9
0.31
0.18
0.39
0.39
0.31
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
627
327
728
618
179
c0.14
0.15
0.01
0.02
007
v c atio 0.68
Uniform Delay, d1 40.4
0.83
30.0
0.76
0.37
0.06
Progression Factor 1.00
1.00
36.2
20.4
17.8
Incremental Delay, d2 8.0
8.4
1.00
1.00
1.00
Delay (s) 48.4
38.4
9.1
45.3
0.1
20.5
0.0
17.8
Level of Service " _ D
P
a-*
D
C
B
Approach Delay (s)
40.3�� p. }
Approach LOS A�
30.1
HCM Average Control Delay 7. 7
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0_79
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 1# 93.7
Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.6%
Analysis Period (min) r 15
c Critical Lane Group
Ustick/Locust Grove 9/5/2007 2007 AM
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
0.26
24.3
1.00
0.3
24.6
C
HCM Level of Servi
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
pm+pt
2 1
AY
6
23.2
24.2
0.26
5.0
2.0
867
0.12
0.46
29.2
1.00
0.1
29.4
C
28.9
C
16.0
31.7
33.7
0.36
5.0
2.0
304
c0.02
0.08
0.30
20.7
1.00
0.2
20.9
C
6
25.6
26.6
0.28
2.0
52-- � -_-
c0.24
0.84
31.5
1.00
10.7
42.3
D
38.6
Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Ustick & Locust Grove 9/5/2007
Lane Configurations
+,�
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Lane Width
12
16
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
Total Lost time (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
Frt
1.00
0.97
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.96
1.00
0.97
Flt Protected
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)
1770
2049
1770
1863
1583
1770
3405
1770
1811
Flt Permitted
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.17
1.00
0.31
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
1770
2049
1770
1863
1583
325
3405
578
1811
Volume (vph)
32
342
83
195
394
97
143
444
151
47
297
68
Peak -hour factor, PHF
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)
35
372
90
212
428
105
155
483
164
51
323
74
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
7
0
0
0
62
0
27
0
0
7
0
Lane Group Flow (vph)
35
455
0
212
428
43
155
620
0
51
390
0
Turn Type
Prot
Prot
Perm
pm+pt
pm+pt
Protected Phases
7
4
3
8
5
2
1
6
Permitted Phases
8
2
-
�W
6
Actuated Green, G (s)
3.8
26.5
14.2
36.9
36.9
37.1
28.7
27.3
23.8
Effective Green, g (s)
4.8
27.&,°.
15.2
37.9
37.9
38.2
29.7�
29.3
24.8
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.05
0.30
0.16
0.41
0.41
0.41
0.32
F
0.32
0.27
Clearance Time (s)
5.0
5.0 *
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0 :~
5.0
5.0
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
20
20
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
91
607
290
760
646
280
1089
240
483
v/s Ratio Prot
0.02
c0.22
c0.12
0.23
c0.06
0.18
0.01
c0.22
v/s Ratio Perm
0.03
0.17
0.06
v/c Ratio
0.38
0.75
0.73
0.56
0.07
0.55
0.57
0.21
0.81
Uniform Delay, d1
42.6
29.6
36.9
21.1
16.7
20.0
26.3
22.6
31.8
Progression Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Incremental Delay, d2
1.0
4.4
7.9
0.6
0.0
1.3
0.4
0.2
9.0
Delay (s)
43.6
34.0
44.8
21.7
16.7
21.4
26.7
22.8
40.8
Level of Service
D
C
D
C
B
C
C
C
D
Approach Delay (s)
34.7
27.6
25.7
38
Approach LOS
C
C
D
HCM Average Control Delay
30.4 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
0.74
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
92.9 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization
74.9% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min)
15
c Critical Lane Group
Baseline Synchro 6 Report
J-U-B Engineers, Inc. Page 1
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Ustick & Locust Grove 9/5/2007
_14 � f- *_ t 4\ t �• l •�
Lane Configurations
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
Lane Width
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Total Lost time (s)
12
4.0
16
4.0
12
12
4.0
12
4.0
12
4.0
12
4.0
12
12
12
12
12
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
4.0
0.95
4.0
1.00
4.0
1.00
Frt
Flt Protected
1.00
0.95
0.96
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.99
Satd. Flow (prot)
1770
2021
0.95
1770
1.00
1863
1.00
1583
0.95
1770
1.00
3357
0.95
1.00
Flt Permitted
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.14
1.00
1770
0.27
1837
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
1770
2021
1770
1863
1583
254
3357
508
1837
Volume (vph)
137
411
165
278
304
106
51
335
175
89
396
40
Peak -hour factor, PHF
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)
149
447
179
302
330
115
55
364
190
97
430
43
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
11
0
0
0
72
0
58
0
0
Lane Group Flow (vph)
149
615
0
302
330
43
55
496
0
97
3
470
0
Turn Type
Prot
Prot
Perm
pm+pt
0
pm+pt
Protected Phases
7
4
3
8
5
2
Permitted Phases
8
1
6
Actuated Green, G (s)
11.9
34.9
15.3
38.3
38.3
2
33.9
28.3
6
36.1
29.4
Effective Green, g (s)
12.9
35.9
16.3
39.3
39.3
35.9
29.3
38.1
30.4
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.12
0.34
0.15
0.37
0.37
0.34
0.28
0.36
0.29
Clearance Time (s)
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Vehicle Extension (s)
L G
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
ane rp Cap (vph)
v/s Ratio Prot
217
690
274
696
591
182
935
276
531
v/s Ratio Perm
0.08
c0.30
c0.17
c0.18
0.02
0.15
c0.03
c0.26
v/c Ratio
0.69
0.89
1.10
0.47
0.03
0.07
0.08
0.30
0.53
0.10
0.35
0.89
Uniform Delay, d1
44.2
32.8
44.4
25.1
21.2
25.9
32.1
23.4
35.7
Progression Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Incremental Delay, d2
Delay (s)
7.0
13.4
84.5
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.3 ;�.:
w
0.3
15.7
Level of Service
51.2
D
46.2
D
129.0
25.3
21.2
26.2
32.4
23.7
51.5
Approach Delay (s)
47.2
F
C
66.6
C
C
C
C
D
Approach LOS
D
31
46.7
C
HCM Average Control Delay 49.0 HCM Level of Service D
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.87
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 105.2 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.8% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Ustick/Loc t G
us rove 9/5/2007 2010 AM No Build
J-U-B Engineers, Inc. Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Ustick & Locust Grove 9/5/2007
t --► '*v f- '- t 4N 4/
Lane Configurations
�,
.....
..-. Tr . ,
..�-.-�• ...
-..�rr7we` :. ►, `�: '-;
_ "ma's I
=
�- -
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
Lane Width
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
190 1
Total Lost time (s)
12
4.0
16
4.0
12
12
4.0
12
12
12
12
12
12
1122
122
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
4.0
1.00
4.0
1.00
4.0
1.00
4.0
0.95
Frt
Fat Protected
1.00
0.97
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.96
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.97
Satd. Flow (prot)
0.95
1770
1.00
2049
0.95
1770
1.00
1863
1.00
1583
0.95
1.00
� 70
1.00
Flt Permitted
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1770
0.14
3404
1.00
1811
Satd. Flow (perm)
1770
2049
1770
1863
1583
254
3404
0.22
414
1.00
Volume (vph)
Peak -hour factor, PHF
39
416
101
238
481
118
174
1811
540
184
51
320 73
Adj. Flow (vph)
0.92
42
0.92
452
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92 0.92
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
7
110
259
523
128
189
587
200
55
348 79
Lane Group Flow (vph)
42
555
0
0
0
259
0
523
68
60
0
189
27
0
0
7 0
Turn Type
Prot
Prot
Perm
pm+pt
760
0
55
420 0
Protected Phases
7
4
3
8
m+ t
p p
Permitted Phases
5
2
1
6
Actuated Green, G (s)
4.6
32.9
15.5
43.8
8
43.8
2
45.5
35.3
6
m 3F
Effective Green, g (s)
Actuated g/C Ratio
5.6
0.05
33.9
16.5
44.8
44.8
46.5
36.3
33.8
35.8
28.6
29.6
Clearance Time (s)
5.0
0.31
5.0
0.15
0.41
0.41
0.43
0.33
0.33
0 27
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
2.0
5.Q
2.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0.,
5.0
5.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2 0
2 0 `
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 91
v/s Ratio Prot
638
268 766 651 288
1135
213
492
0.02
v/s Ratio Perm
c0.27
c0.15 0.28 c0.08
0.22
0.01
c0.23
v/c Ratio 0.46
.;
0.87
0.04 0.20
0.97 0.68 0.09 0.66
0.67
0.07
Uniform Delay, d1 50.2
Progression Factor, 1.00
35.4w �
45.9 26.2 19.6 23.5
31.2
25.9
25.9
37 6
37.6
Incremental Delay, d2 1.3
1.00
12 (
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
45.1 2.0 OA
1.00
1.00
1.00
y<
Delay (s) 51.5
47.4
4.1
91.0 28.2 19.6 27.6
1.2
32.3
0.2
13.0
Level of Service D
Approach Delay (s)
131 ..,. F C B C
C`
26.2
C
50.6
D
g,z�=
Approach LOS
47.7
44.9
31.4
47 8
C
gLp
HCM Average Control Delay.:
41.5
HCM Level of Service
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
0.85
D
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
108.9
Sum of lost time (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
85.5%
ICU Level of Service
16.0
Analysis Period (min)
15
E
c Critical Lane Group
Ustick/Locust Grove 9/5/200
7 2010 PM No Build
J-U-8 Engineers, Inc. Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
J-U-B Staff
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
250 S Beechwood Ave
#201
Boise, ID. 83709
Phone: 2083767330
Fax:
E-Mail: it_purchaser@jub.com
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC)
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
J Rosenlund
Agency/Co.:
JUB Engineers Inc
Date Performed:
9/4/2007
Analysis Time Period:
AM Peak
Intersection:
Jurisdiction:
ACHD/Meridian
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year:
2010
Project ID: Chalet Marseilles Sub
East/West Street:
E. Monet Street
North/South Street:
Locust Grove Road
Intersection Orientation:
NS
Study period
(hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and
Adjustments
Major Street Movements
1 2 3
4 5
6
L T R
L T
R
Volume
12 381
430
5
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
Peak-15 Minute Volume
3 95
108
1
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
12 381
430
5
Percent Heavy Vehicles
0
Median Type/Storage
Undivided
/
RT Channelized?
Lanes
1 1
1
0
Configuration
L T
Upstream Signal?
No
No
TR
Minor Street Movements
7 8 9
10 11
12
L T R
L T
R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Peak-15 Minute Volume
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (%) 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Movements
Flow (ped/hr)
18 0 36
1.00 1.00 1.00
4 0 9
18 0 36
0 0 0
0
/ No /
0 1 0
LTR
Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments
13 14 15 16
0 0 0 0
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/sec)
Percent Blockage
Prog.
Flow
vph
S2 Left -Turn
Through
S5 Left -Turn
Through
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
0 0 0 0
Upstream Signal Data
Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog.
Flow Type Time Length Speed
vph sec sec mph
Distance
to Signal
feet
Worksheet 3-Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles
Movement 2 Movement 5
Shared In volume, major th vehicles:
Shared In volume, major rt vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major th vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles:
Number of major street through lanes:
Worksheet 4-Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation
Critical Gap Calculation
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10
L L L T R L
t(c,base) 4.1 7.1
t(c,hv) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
P (hv) 0
t(c,g)
Grade/100
t(3,lt)
0.00
t(c,T):
1-stage
0.00
0.00
2-stage
0.00
0.00
t(c)
1-stage
4.1
2-stage
Follow -Up
Time Calculations
Movement
1
4
L
L
t(f,base)
2.20
t(f,HV)
0.90
0.90
P(HV)
0
t (f)
2.2
0.20
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
7 8
L T
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
9
R
0.90 0.90 0.90
0
0.20
0.00
0.70
0.00
1.00
6.4
11
T
6.5
1.00
0
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
6.5
12
R
6.2
1.00
0
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.2
10
11
12
L
T
R
3.50
4.00
3.30
0.90
0.90
0.90
0
0
0
3.5
4.0
3.3
Worksheet 5-Effect of Upstream Signals
Computation 1-Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal
Movement 2 Movement 5
V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot)
V prog
• Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph)
Arrival Type
Effective Green, g (sec)
Cycle Length, C (sec)
Rp (from Exhibit 16-11)
Proportion vehicles arriving on green P
g(ql)
g (q2 )
g (q)
Computation 2-Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time blocked
Movement 2 Movement 5
VW V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot)
alpha
beta
Travel time, t(a) (sec)
Smoothing Factor, F
Proportion of conflicting flow, f
Max platooned flow, V(c,max)
Min platooned flow, V(c,min)
Duration of blocked period, t(p)
Proportion time blocked, p
Computation 3-Platoon Event Periods
p(2)
p (5)
p (dom)
p (subo)
Constrained or unconstrained?
Proportion
unblocked (1)
for minor Single -stage
movements, p(x) Process
p(1)
p(4)
p(7)
P(8)
P(9)
p (10)
p(11)
p(12)
Computation 4 and 5
Single -Stage Process
M......., i
V c, x
s
Px
V c, u, x
C r, x
C plat,x
Two -Stage Process
Result
0.000
0.000
(2) (3)
Two -Stage Process
Stage I Stage II
1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
R
435 837 837 432
7
10
11
V(c,x)
s
P (x)
V(c,u,x)
C (r-)
C (plat, x)
Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2
1500
Worksheet 6-Impedance and Capacity Equations
Step 1: RT from Minor St.
9
12
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
432
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
628
Movement Capacity
1.00
1.00
Probability of Queue free St.
628
1.00
0.94
Step 2: LT from Major St.
4
1
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
435
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
1135
Movement Capacity
1.00
1.00
Probability of Queue free St.
1135
Maj L-Shared Prob Q free St.
1.00
0.99
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
8
11
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
837
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
305
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
1.
0•99
99
1.00
Movement Capacity
0.99
Probability of Queue free St.
302
1.00
1.00
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
7
10
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
837
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
339
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
1.9
1.00
Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor.
0.999
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
0 99
0.94
0.99
335
Worksheet 7-Computation of the Effect of
Two -stage Gap
Acceptance
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
8
11
Part 1 - First Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Probability of Queue free St.
1500
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity 837
Pedestrian Impedance Factor 305
100
Cap. Adj, factor due to Impeding mvmnt .99 1.00
0
Movement Capacity 0.99 0.99
302
Result for 2 stage process:
a
y
C t
Probability of Queue free St. 302
1.00 1.00
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
7 10
Part 1 - First Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj, factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
837
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
339
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
1.00
1.00
Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor.
0.99
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
0.99
0.94
0.99
335
Results for Two -stage process:
a
y
C t
335
Worksheet 8-Shared Lane Calculations
Movement
7 8 9 10
11
12
L T R L
T
R
Volume (vph)
Movement Capacity (vph)
18
0
36
Shared Lane Capacity (vph)
335
302
628
486
Worksheet 9-Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches
Movement 7 8 9 10 11
L T R L T
C sep 335 302
Volume 18 0
Delay
Q sep
Q sep +1
round (Qsep +1)
n max
C sh
SUM C sep
n
C act
Worksheet 10-Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Movement 1 4 7 8 9
Lane Config L
v (vph) 12
C(m) (vph) 1135
v/c 0.01
95% queue length 0.03
Control Delay 8.2
LOS A
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
Worksheet 11-Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay
10
Movement 2
P (oj ) 0.99
v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5
v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6
s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5
s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6
P* (oj )
d(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4 8.2
N, Number of major street through lanes
d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5
11 12
LTR
54
486
0.11
0.37
13.3
B
13.3
B
12
R
628
36
Movement 5
1.00
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: J Rosenlund
Agency/Co.: JUB Engineers Inc
Date Performed: 9/4/2007
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection:
Jurisdiction: ACHD/Meridian
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2010
Project ID: Chalet Marseilles Sub
East/West Street: E. Monet Street
North/South Street: Locust Grove Road
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6
L T R I L T R
Volume 32 556 355 21
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 32 556 355 21
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
Median Type/Storage Undivided /
RT Channelized?
Lanes 1 1 1 0
Configuration L T TR
Upstream Signal? No No
Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 ( 10 11 12
L T R I L T R
Volume 10 0 19
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 10 0 19
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0
Percent Grade M 0 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No /
Lanes 0 1 0
Configuration LTR
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12
Lane Config L I I LTR
v (vph) 32 29
C(m) (vph) 1194 447
v/c 0.03 0.06
95% queue length 0.08 0.21
Control Delay 8.1 13.6
LOS A B
Approach Delay 13.6
Approach LOS B
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
J-U-B Staff
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
250 S Beechwood Ave
#201
Boise, ID. 83709
Phone: 2083767330 Fax:
E-Mail: it_purchaser@jub.com
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS
Analyst: J Rosenlund
Agency/Co.: JUB Engineers Inc
Date Performed: 9/4/2007
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection:
Jurisdiction: ACHD/Meridian
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2010
Project ID: Chalet Marseilles Sub
East/West Street: E. Monet Street
North/South Street: Locust Grove Road
Intersection Orientation: NS St d
Major Street Movements
Volume
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF
Peak-15 Minute Volume
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
Minor Street Movements
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Peak-15 Minute Volume
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (%)
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
u y
period (hrs):
Vehicle
Volumes
and
Adjustments
1
2
3
4
5
6
L
T
R
L
T
R
32
556
355
21
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
8
139
89
5
32
556
355
21
0
--
--
__
Undivided
/
1
1
1 0
L
T
TR
No
No
7
8
9
10
11
12
L
T
R
L
T
R
10
0
1.00
2
10
I
X
1.00
0
0
0
0
1 0
LTR
Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments
Movements 13 14 15 16
19
1.00
5
19
0
0.25
No /
Flow (ped/hr) 0 0 0 0
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/sec)
Percent Blockage
S2 Left -Turn
Through
S5 Left -Turn
Through
12.0
12.0
12.0
12.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
0
0
0
0
Upstream Signal Data
Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance
Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal
vph vph sec sec mph feet
Worksheet 3-Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles
Movement 2 Movement 5
Shared In volume, major th vehicles.
Shared In volume, major rt vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major th vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles:
Number of major street through lanes:
Worksheet 4-Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation
Critical Gap Calculation
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10
L L L T R L
t (c,base) 4.1 7.1
t(c,hv) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
P (hv) 0
t (c, g)
Grade/100
t(3,It)
0.00
t(c,T):
1-stage
0.00
0.00
2-stage
0.00
0.00
t(c)
1-stage
4.1
2-stage
Follow -Up
Time Calculations
Movement
1
4
L
L
t(f,base)
2,20
t (f, HV)
0.90
0.90
P (HV)
0
t (f)
2.2
0.20
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
7
8
L
T
0
0.10
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.70
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
6.4
9
R
0.90 0.90 0.90
Worksheet 5-Effect of Upstream Signals
11
T
6.5
1.00
0
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
6.5
12
R
6.2
1.00
0
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.2
10
11
12
L
T
R
3.50
4.00
3.30
0.90
0.90
0.90
0
0
0
3.5
4.0
3.3
Computation 1-Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal
Movement 2 Movement 5
V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot)
V prog
Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph)
Arrival Type
Effective Green, g (sec)
Cycle Length, C (sec)
Rp (from Exhibit 16-11)
Proportion vehicles arriving on green P
g (ql)
g (q2 )
g (q)
Computation 2-Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time blocked
Movement 2 Movement 5
V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot)
alpha
beta
Travel time, t(a) (sec)
Smoothing Factor, F
Proportion of conflicting flow, f
Max platooned flow, V(c,max)
Min platooned flow, V(c,min)
Duration of blocked period, t(p)
Proportion time blocked, p 0.000
Computation 3-Platoon Event Periods Result
p(2) 0.000
p (5) 0.000
p (dom)
p(subo)
Constrained or unconstrained?
Proportion
unblocked
for minor
movements, p(x)
p(1)
p(4)
p(7)
P(8)
P(9)
p (10)
P(11)
P(12)
Computation 4 and 5
Single -Stage Process
Movement
V C, x
s
Px
V c, U, x
C r, x
C plat,x
Two -Stage Process
(1)
Single -stage
Process
(2) (3)
Two -Stage Process
Stage I Stage II
1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
L L L T R L T R
376 986 986 366
7 8 10
11
V(c,X) —
s
P (X)
V(c,u,x)
C (r )
C (plat, x)
Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2
1500
Worksheet 6-Impedance and Capacity Equations
Step 1: RI from Minor St.
Conflicting Flows
9
12
Potential Capacity
366
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
684
Movement Capacity
1.00
1.00
Probability of Queue free St.
684
1.00
0.97
Step 2: LT from Major St.
4
1
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
376
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
1194
Movement Capacity
1.00
1.00
Probability of Queue free St.
1194
Maj L-Shared Prob Q free St.
1.00
0.97
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
Conflicting Flows
8
11
Potential Capacity
986
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
250
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
l•00
0•97
1.00
Probability of Queue free St.
097.
243
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
1.00
1.00
Conflicting Flows
7
10
Potential Capacity
986
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
277
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
Maj. L, Min
1.97
1.00
T Adj. Imp Factor.
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement
0.97
0.98
Capacity
0.95
0.97
270
Worksheet 7-Computation of the Effect
of
Step 3: TH
Two -stage Gap Acceptance
from Minor St.
Part 1 - First Stage
8
11
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Probability of Queue free St.
1500
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity 986
Pedestrian Impedance Factor 250
1.00 1.00
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.97 0.97
Movement Capacity
243
Result for 2 stage process:
a
y
C t
Probability of Queue free St. 243
1.00 1.00
Step 4: LT from Minor St. 7
10
Part 1 - First Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
986
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
277
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
1.00
1.00
Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor.
0.97
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
0.98
0.95
0.97
270
Results for Two -stage process:
a
y
C t
270
Worksheet 8-Shared Lane Calculations
Movement
7
L
8 9
T
10
11
12
Volume (vph)
R
L
T
R
Movement Capacity (vph)
10
0
19
Shared Lane Capacity (vph)
270
243
684
447
Worksheet 9-Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches
Movement 7
8 9 10 11
L T R L T
C sep
Volume 270 243
Delay 10 0
Q sep
Q sep +1
round (Qsep +1)
n max
C sh
SUM C sep 447
n
C act
Worksheet 10-Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Movement 1 4 7 8
Lane Config L 9 10 11
LTR
v (vph) 32
C(m) (vph) 1194 29
v/c 0.03 447
95% queue length 0.08 0.06
Control Delay 8.1 0.21
LOS A 13.6
Approach Delay B
Approach LOS 13.6
B
Worksheet 11-Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay
Movement—2
P(o'
v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 0.97
v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6
s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5
s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6
P* (oj )
d(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4
N, Number of major street through lanes 8.1
d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5
12
Movement 5
1.00
12
R
684
19
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
J-U-B Staff
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
250 S Beechwood Ave
#201
Boise, ID. 83709
Phone: 2083767330 Fax:
E-Mail: it_purchaser@jub.com
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS
Analyst:
J Rosenlund
Agency/Co.:
JUB Engineers Inc
Date Performed:
9/4/2007
Analysis Time Period:
AM Peak
Intersection:
Jurisdiction:
ACHD/Meridian
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year:
2010 No Yellow Peak
Project ID: Chalet Marseilles
Sub
East/West Street:
E. Monet Street
North/South Street:
Locust Grove Road
Intersection Orientation:
NS
Study period (hrs):
Major Street Movements
Vehicle Volumes and
1
Adjustments
2 3
4 5 6
L T R
L T R
Volume
16 381
430 4
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
Peak-15 Minute Volume
4 95
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
16 381
108 1
Percent Heavy Vehicles
0
430 4
Median Type/Storage
Undivided
/
RT Channelized?
Lanes
1 1
Configuration
L T
1 0
Upstream Signal?
No
TR
No
Minor Street Movements
7 8 9
L T
10 11 12
R
L T R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
15 0 40
Peak-15 Minute Volume
1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
4 0 10
Percent Heavy Vehicles
15 0 40
Percent Grade (o)
0 0 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage 0
0
RT Channelized?
/ No
Lanes
Configuration
0 1 0
LTR
Movements Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments
13 14 15 16
Flow (ped/hr)
0 0 0 0
0.25
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/sec)
Percent Blockage
S2 Left -Turn
Through
S5 Left -Turn
Through
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
0 0 0 0
Upstream Signal Data
Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance
Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal
vph vph sec sec mph feet
Worksheet 3-Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles
Movement 2 Movement 5
Shared In volume, major th vehicles:
Shared In volume, major rt vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major th vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles:
Number of major street through lanes:
Worksheet 4-Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation
Critical Gap Calculation
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10
L L L T R L
t(c,base) 4.1 7.1
t(c,hv) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
P (hv) 0
t(c,g)
Grade/100
t(3,It)
0.00
t(c,T):
1-stage
0.00
0.00
2-stage
0.00
0.00
t(c)
1-stage
4.1
2-stage
Follow -Up
Time Calculations
Movement
1
4
L
L
t(f,base)
2720
t (f, HV)
0.90
0.90
P (HV)
0
t (f)
2.2
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
7
8
9
L
T
R
0.90 0.90 0.90
0
0.20
0.00
0.70
0.00
1.00
6.4
11
T
6.5
1.00
0
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
6.5
12
R
6.2
1.00
0
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.2
10
11
12
L
T
R
3.50
4.00
3.30
0.90
0.90
0.90
0
0
0
3.5
4.0
3.3
Worksheet 5-Effect of Upstream Signals
Computation 1-Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal
Movement 2 Movement 5
V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot)
V prog
Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph)
Arrival Type
Effective Green, g (sec)
Cycle Length, C (sec)
Rp (from Exhibit 16-11)
Proportion vehicles arriving on green P
g(ql)
g(q2)
g (q)
Computation 2-Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time blocked
Movement 2 Movement 5
V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot)
alpha
beta
Travel time, t(a) (sec)
Smoothing Factor, F
Proportion of conflicting flow, f
Max platooned flow, V(c,max)
Min platooned flow, V(c,min)
Duration of blocked period, t(p)
Proportion time blocked, p
Computation 3-Platoon Event Periods
p(2)
p (5)
p (dom)
p (subo)
Constrained or unconstrained?
Proportion
unblocked
for minor
movements, p(x)
p(1)
p(4)
p(7)
P(8)
P(9)
P(10)
P(11)
p(12)
Computation 4 and 5
Single -Stage Process
Movement
V c, x
s
Px
V c, u, x
C r, x
C plat,x
Two -Stage Process
(1)
Single -stage
Process
Result
0.000
0.000
(2) (3)
Two -Stage Process
Stage I Stage II
1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
L L L T R L T
R
434
845 845 432
7
H.'
10
11
V(c,X)
s
P (X)
V(c,U,X)
C(r )—
C (plat, x)
Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2
1500
Worksheet 6-Impedance and Capacity Equations
Step 1: RT from Minor St.
9
12
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
432
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
628
Movement Capacity
1.00
1.00
Probability of Queue free St.
628
1.00
0.94
Step 2: LT from Major St.
4
1
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
434
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
1136
Movement Capacity
1.00
1.00
Probability of Queue free St.
1136
Maj L-Shared Prob Q free St.
1.00
0.99
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
8
11
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
845
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
302
Cap. Adj, factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement
100
0 .99
1.00
Capacity
•99
0.99
Probability of Queue free St.
298
1.00
1.00
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
7
10
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
845
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
336
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
1.00
1.00
Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor.
0.99
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
0.99
0•93
0.99
331
Worksheet 7-Computation of the Effect of Two -stage Gap Acceptance
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
11 Part 1 - First Stage 8
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj, factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Probability of Queue free St.
1500
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj, factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Result for 2 stage process:
a
y
C t
Probability of Queue free St.
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
Part 1 - First Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor.
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Results for Two -stage process:
a
y
C t
Worksheet 8-Shared Lane Calculations
Movement
Volume (vph)
Movement Capacity (vph)
Shared Lane Capacity (vph)
1.00
0.99
1.00
7
1.00
0.99
0.99
0.93
845
302
1.00
0.99
298
298
1.00
10
845
336
1.00
0.99
331
331
7 g
L T R 1L 11 12
T R
15 0 40
331 298 628
505
Worksheet 9-Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches
Movement 8 9
10 11
L T R L T
C sep
Volume 331 298
Delay 15 0
Q sep
Q sep +1
round (Qsep +1)
n max
C sh
SUM C sep
n
C act
Worksheet 10-Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Movement
1 4 8
Lane Config
9
L 10
v (vph)
16
C(m) (vph)
1136
v/c
0.01
95% queue length
0.04
Control Delay
8_2
LOS
A
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
Worksheet 11-Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay
Movement 2
P(oj)
v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 0.99
v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6
s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5
s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6
P* (oj )
d(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4
N, Number of major street through lanes 8.2
d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5
505
11 12
LTR
55
505
0.11
0.36
13.0
B
13.0
B
Movement 5
1.00
12
R
628
40
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL
SUMMARY
Analyst: J Rosenlund
Agency/Co.: JUB Engineers Inc
Date Performed: 9/4/2007
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection:
Jurisdiction: ACHD/Meridian
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2010 No Yellow Peak
Project ID: Chalet Marseilles Sub
East/West Street: E. Monet Street
North/South Street: Locust Grove Road
Intersection Orientation: NS
Study period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street: Approach
Northbound
Southbound
Movement 1 2 3
l 4 5 6
L T R
I L T R
Volume 44 556
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00
356 18
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 44 556
1.00 1.00
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
356 18
Median Type/Storage Undivided
/
RT Channelized?
Lanes 1 1
Configuration L T
1 0
Upstream Signal? No
TR
No
Minor Street: Approach Westbound
Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9
I 10 11 12
L T R
I L T R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
8 0
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
1.00 1.00 11.. 00
Percent Heavy Vehicles
8 0 30
Percent Grade (o) 0
0 0 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
0
/
Lanes
No /
Configuration
0 1 0
LTR
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach
NB SB Westbound
Movement 1 4
Eastbound
( 7 8
Lane Config L I
9 I 10 11 12
LTR
v (vph) 44
C(m) (vph) 1196
38
v/c 0.04
509
95% queue length 0.11
0.07
Control Delay 8.1
0.24
LOS A
12.6
Approach Delay
B
Approach LOS
12.6
B
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
J-U-B Staff
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
250 S Beechwood Ave
#201
Boise, ID. 83709
Phone: 2083767330 Fax:
E-Mail: it_purchaser@jub.com
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS
Analyst:
J Rosenlund
Agency/Co.:
JUB Engineers Inc
Date Performed:
9/4/2007
Analysis Time Period:
PM Peak
Intersection:
Jurisdiction:
ACHD/Meridian
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year:
2010 No Yellow Peak
Project ID: Chalet Marseilles Sub
East/West Street:
E. Monet Street
North/South Street:
Locust Grove Road
Intersection Orientation:
NS
Study
period
(hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and
1
Adjustments
Major Street Movements
2 3
4
5
6
L T R
L
T
R
Volume
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF
44 556
1.00 1.00
356 18
Peak-15 Minute Volume
11 139
1.00
1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
44 556
89
356
4
Percent Heavy Vehicles
0
18
Median Type/Storage
Undivided
/
RT Channelized?
Lanes
1 1
Configuration
L T
1
0
Upstream Signal?
No
TR
No
Minor Street Movements
7 8 9
10
11
L T R
L
T
12
R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
8
0
30
Peak-15 Minute Volume
1.00
1.00
1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
2
0
8
Percent Heavy Vehicles
8
0
30
Percent Grade (o)
0
0
0
0
Flared A
Approach: E
Exists?/Storage
0
RT Channelized?
/
No /
Lanes
Configuration
0
1
0
LTR
Movements
Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments
13
14 15 16
Flow (ped/hr)
0 0 0 0
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/sec)
Percent Blockage
S2 Left -Turn
Through
S5 Left -Turn
Through
12.0
12.0
12.0
12.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
0
0
0
0
Upstream Signal Data
Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance
Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal
vph vph sec sec mph feet
Worksheet 3-Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles
Movement 2 Movement 5
Shared In volume, major th vehicles.
Shared In volume, major rt vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major th vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles:
Number of major street through lanes:
Worksheet 4-Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation
Critical Gap Calculation
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10
L L L T R L
t(c,base) 4.1 7.1
t(c,hv) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
P (hv) 0
t(c,g)
Grade/100
t(3,It)
0.00
t(c,T):
1-stage
0.00
0.00
2-stage
0.00
0.00
t(c)
1-stage
4.1
2-stage
Follow -Up
Time Calculations
Movement
1
4
L
L
t(f,base)
2.20
t(f,HV)
0.90
0.90
P (HV)
0
t (f)
2.2
0.20
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
7
8
L
T
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.90 0.90 0.90
0
0.20
0.00
0.70
0.00
1.00
6.4
11
T
6.5
1.00
0
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
6.5
12
R
6.2
1.00
0
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.2
10
11
12
L
T
R
3.50
4.00
3.30
0.90
0.90
0.90
0
0
0
3.5
4.0
3.3
Worksheet 5-Effect of Upstream Signals
Computation 1-Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal
Movement 2 Movement 5
V prog
V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(i,prot)
Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph)
Arrival Type
Effective Green, g (sec)
Cycle Length, C (sec)
Rp (from Exhibit 16-11)
Proportion vehicles arriving on green P
g(ql)
g (q2 )
g (q)
Computation 2-Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time blocked
Movement 2
V(t) V(l,prot)
alpha
beta
Travel time, t(a) (sec)
Smoothing Factor, F
Proportion of conflicting flow, f
Max platooned flow, V(c,max)
Min platooned flow, V(c,min)
Duration of blocked period, t(p)
Proportion time blocked, p
Computation 3-Platoon Event Periods
P(2)
p (5)
p (dom )
p (subo)
Constrained or unconstrained?
Proportion
unblocked (1)
for minor Single -stage
movements, p(x) Process
P(1)
p(4)
P(7)
P(8)
P(9)
P(10)
P(11)
p(12)
Computation 4 and 5
Single -Stage Process
Movement 1 4
L L
V c, x 374
s
PX
V c, u, x
C r, x
C plat,x
Two -Stage Process
Result
0.000
0.000
Movement 5
V(t) V(l,prot)
(2) (3)
Two -Stage Process
Stage I Stage II
7 8 9 10
L T R L
11 12
T R
1009 1009 365
7 8
10 11
Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2
V(c,x)
s
p(X) 1500
V(c,U,X)
C(plat,x)
Worksheet 6-Impedance and Capacity Equations
Step 1: RT from Minor St.
9
12
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
365
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
1.00
685
Movement Capacity
1.00685
Probability of Queue free St.
1.00
0.96
Step 2: LT from Major St.
4
1
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
374
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
1.00
1196
Movement Capacity
1.00
Probabilityof Queue free St.
1.00
Mai L-Shared Prob Q free St.
0.96
0.96
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
8
11
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
1009
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
1.00
242
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
0.96
1.00
Movement Capacity
0.96
Probabilityof Queue free St.
1.00
233
1.00
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
7
10
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
1009
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
1.00
269
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
1.000.96
Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor.
0.97
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
0.93
Movement Capacity
0.96
259
Worksheet 7-Computation of the Effect of Two -stage Gap Acceptance
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
8 11
Part l - First Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Probability of Queue free St.
1500
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Result for 2 stage process:
a
y
C t
Probability of Queue free St.
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
Part 1 - First Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor.
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Results for Two -stage process:
a
y
C t
Worksheet 8-Shared Lane Calculations
Movement
volume (vph)
Movement Capacity (vph)
Shared Lane Capacity (vph)
1.00
7
1.00
0.96
0.97
0.93
1009
242
1.00
0.96
233
233
1.00
10
1009
269
1.00
0.96
259
259
7 g
L T R 1L 11 12
T R
8 0 30
259 233 685
509
Worksheet 9-Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches
Movement
7 8 9 10 11
L T R L T
C sep
Volume 259 233
Delay 8 0
Q sep
Q sep +1
round (Qsep +1)
n max
C sh
SUM C sep 509
n
C act
Worksheet 10-Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Movement 1 4 7
Lane Config L 8 9 10 11
LTR
v (vph) 44
C(m) (vph) 1196 38
v/c 0.04 509
95% queue length 0.11 0.07
Control Delay 8.1 0.24
LOS A 12.6
Approach Delay B
Approach LOS 12.6
B
Worksheet 11-Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay
Movement 2
p (oj )
v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 0.96
v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6
s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5
s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6
P*(oj)
d(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4
N, Number of major street through lanes 8.1
d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5
1
Movement 5
1.00
12
R
685
30
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL
SUMMARY
Analyst: J Rosenlund
Agency/Co.: JUB Engineers Inc
Date Performed: 9/4/2007
Analysis Time Period: AM Peak
Intersection:
Jurisdiction: ACHD/Meridian
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2010
Project ID: Chalet Marseilles Sub
East/West Street: Ustick Road
North/South Street: Lilyford Avenue
Intersection Orientation: EW
Study period
(hrs):
0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street: Approach
Eastbound
Westbound
Movement 1 2 3
14
5
6
L T R
I L
T
R
Volume 5 713
365
6
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00
1.00
1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 5 713
365
6
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
Median Type/Storage Undivided
/
RT Channelized?
Lanes 1 1
Configuration L T
1 0
Upstream Signal? No
TR
No
Minor Street: Approach Northbound
Southbound
Movement 7 8 9
( 10
11
12
L T R
I L
T
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (%) 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes
Configuration
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95% queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
R
12 0 20
1.00 1.00 1.00
12 0 20
0 0 0
0
/ No /
0 1 0
LTR
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
EB WB Northbound Southbound
1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12
L I I LTR
5
1199 32
0.00 402
0.01 0.08
8.0 0.26
A 14.7
B
14.7
B
HCS2000: Unsignalized
Intersections Release
4.1f
J-U-B Staff
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
250 S Beechwood Ave
#201
Boise, ID. 83709
Phone: 2083767330
E-Mail: it_purchaser@jub.com
Fax:
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS
Analyst: J Rosenlund
Agency/Co.: JUB Engineers Inc
Date Performed: 9/4/2007
Analysis Time Period: AM Peak
Intersection:
Jurisdiction: ACHD/Meridian
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2010
Project ID: Chalet Marseilles Sub
East/West Street: Ustick Road
North/South Street: Lilyford Avenue
Intersection Orientation: EW
Study period (hrs):
0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street Movements 1
2
L T
3 4 5
R L
6
T
R
Volume 5
713
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF- 1.00 1.00
365
6
Peak-15 Minute Volume 1
1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 5 713 13
91
2
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
365
6
Median Type/Storage Undivided
-- --
RT Channelized?
/
Lanes
1 1
Configuration
1 0
L T
Upstream Signal?
TR
No
No
Minor Street Movements 7 8
L T
9 10 11
R
12
L T
R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
12 0
20
Peak-15 Minute Volume
1.00 1.00
1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
3 0
5
Percent Heavy Vehicles
12 0
20
Percent Grade (o)
0 0
0
0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
0
RT Channelized?
/
No /
Lanes
Configuration
0 1 0
LTR
Movements -----Pedestrian Volumes
and Adjustments
13 14
15 16
Flow (ped/hr)
0 0
0 0
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/sec)
Percent Blockage
S2 Left -Turn
Through
S5 Left -Turn
Through
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
0 0 0 0
Upstream Signal Data
Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog, Distance
Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal
vph vph sec sec mph feet
Worksheet 3-Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles
Movement 2 Movement 5
Shared In volume, major th vehicles:
Shared In volume, major rt vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major th vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles:
Number of major street through lanes:
Worksheet 4-Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation
Critical Gap Calculation
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10
L L L T R L
t(c,base) 4.1 7.1
t(c,hv) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
P(hv) 0
t(c,g)
Grade/100
t(3,It)
0.00
t(c,T):
1-stage
0.00
0.00
2-stage
0.00
0.00
t(c)
1-stage
4.1
2-stage
Follow -Up
Time Calculations
Movement
1
4
L
L
t (f,base)
2.20
t (f, HV)
0.90
0.90
P (HV)
0
t (f)
2.2
0.20
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
7
8
L
T
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
9
R
0.90 0.90 0.90
0
0.20
0.00
0.70
0.00
1.00
6.4
11
T
6.5
1.00
0
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
6.5
12
R
6.2
1.00
0
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.2
10
11
12
L
T
R
3.50
4.00
3.30
0.90
0.90
0.90
0
0
0
3.5
4.0
3.3
Worksheet 5-Effect of Upstream Signals
Computation 1-Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal
Movement 2 Movement 5
V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot)
V prog
Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph)
Arrival Type
Effective Green, g (sec)
Cycle Length, C (sec)
Rp (from Exhibit 16-11)
Proportion vehicles arriving on green P
9(ql)
g (q2)
g(q)
Computation 2-Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time blocked
Movement 2 Movement 5
V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot)
alpha
beta
Travel time, t(a) (sec)
Smoothing Factor, F
Proportion of conflicting flow, f
Max platooned flow, V(c,max)
Min platooned flow, V(c,min)
Duration of blocked period, t(p)
Proportion time blocked, p
Computation 3-Platoon Event Periods
F(2)
P(5)
p (dom)
p (subo)
Constrained or unconstrained?
Proportion
unblocked (1)
for minor Single -stage
movements, p(x) Process
p (1)
p(4)
p(7)
P(8)
p(9)
p(10)
p(11)
p(12)
Computation 4 and 5
Single -Stage Process
Movement
V c, x
s
Px
V c, u, x
C r, x
C plat, x
Two -Stage Process
Result
0.000
0.000
(2) (3)
Two -Stage Process
Stage I Stage II
1 4 7 8 9 10
L L L T R L
371
11 12
T R
1091 1091 368
Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2
V(c,X)
s
p (X) 1500
V(C,U,X)
C(plat,x)
Worksheet 6-Impedance and Capacity Equations
Step 1: RT from Minor St.
9
12
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
368
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
1.00
682
Movement Capacity
1.00
Probabilityof Queue free St.
1.00
682
0.97
Step 2: LT from Major St.
4
1
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
3711199
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
1.00
Movement Capacity
1.00
Probabilityof Queue free St.
1.00
1199
Mai L-Shared Prob Q free St.
1.00
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
8
11
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
1091
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
1.00
217
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
1.00
1.00
Movement Capacity
1.00
Probabilityof Queue free St.
1.00
216
1.00
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
7
10
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
1091
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
240
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
1.00
1.001.00
Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor.
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement
1. 00
0•97
97
Capacity
1.00
239
Worksheet 7-Computation of the Effect of Two -stage Gap Acceptance
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
8 11
Part 1 - First Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Probability of Queue free St.
1500
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
1091
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
217
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
1.00
1
1.00
Movement Capacity
.00
1.00
216
Result for 2 stage process:
a
y
C t
Probability of Queue free St.
216
1.00
1.00
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
7
10
Part 1 - First Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
1091
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
240
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
1.00
1.00
Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor.
1.00
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
1.00
0.97
1.00
239
Results for Two -stage process:
a
y
C t
239
Worksheet 8-Shared Lane Calculations
Movement
7
L
g
T R
11
12
Volume (vph)
T
R
Movement Capacity (vph)
12
0
20
Shared Lane Capacity (vph)
239
216
682
402
Worksheet 9-Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches
Movement 7 8
9 10 11
L T R L T
C sep
Volume 239 216
Delay 12 0
Q sep
Q sep +1
round (Qsep +1)
n max
C sh
SUM C sep 402
n
C act
Worksheet 10-Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Movement
1 4 7
Lane Config
8 9
L
v (vph)
5
C(m) (vph)
1199
v/c
0.00
95°% queue length
0.01
Control Delay
8.0
LOS
A
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
Worksheet 11-Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay
10
Movement 2
P(oj)
v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 1.00
v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6
s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5
s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6
P* (oj )
d(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4
N, Number of major street through lanes 8.0
d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5
11
LTR
32
402
0.08
0.26
14.7
B
14.7
B
12
Movement 5
1.00
12
R
682
20
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL
SUMMARY
Analyst: J Rosenlund
Agency/Co.: JUB Engineers Inc
Date Performed:
9/4/2007
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection:
Jurisdiction: ACHD/Meridian
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2010
Project ID: Chalet Marseilles Sub
East/West Street: Ustick Road
North/South Street: Lilyford Avenue
Intersection Orientation: EW
Study period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street: Approach
Eastbound
Movement 1 2
Westbound
3
L T R
1 4 5
I L T
Volume
R
20
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 532
1.00
801 14
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0
20 532
1.00 1.00
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 _
801 14
Median Type/Storage Undivided
--
RT Channelized?
/
Lanes
1 1
Configuration
1 0
L T
Upstream Signal?
TR
No
No
Minor Street: Approach Northbound
Movement 7 8 9
Southbound
L T R
I 10 11 12
I L
Volume
T R
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
7 0 14
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
1.00 1.00 1.00
Percent Heavy Vehicles
7 0 14
Percent Grade (o)
0 0 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage0
0
Lanes
/ No /
Configuration
0 1 0
LTR
Approach Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service EB
Northbound
Movement 1 4
4
Southbound
1 7 8
Lane Config L
I
9 I 10 11 12
v (°ph) 20
I
LTR
C(m) (vph) 821
v/c
21
0.02
95% queue length 0.07
259
0.08
Control Delay 9.5
LOS
0.26
Approach Delay A
20.1C
Approach LOS
20.1
C
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
J-U-B Staff
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
250 S Beechwood Ave
#201
Boise, ID. 83709
Phone: 2083767330
E-Mail: it_purchaser@jub.com Fax:
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS
Analyst:
J Rosenlund
Agency/Co.:
Date Performed:
JUB Engineers Inc
9/4/2007
Analysis Time Period:
PM Peak
Intersection:
Jurisdiction:
ACHD/Meridian
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year:
2010
Project ID: Chalet Marseilles Sub
East/West Street:
Ustick Road
North/South Street:
Lilyford Avenue
Intersection Orientation:
EW
Study period
(hrs): 0.25
Major Street Movements
Vehicle Volumes and
1
Adjustments
2 3
L T R
4 5
L
6
T
R
Volume
20 532
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF
1.00 1.00
14
Peak-15 Minute Volume
5 133
1.0
1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
20 532
201
41.00
4
Percent Heavy Vehicles
0
80
14
Median Type/Storage
- --
Undivided
--
__
RT Channelized?
/
Lanes 1 1
Configuration L T
Upstream Signal? No
Kinor Street Movements 7 _-
L T
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Peak-15 Minute Volume
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (o)
0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Movements
Flow (ped/hr)
1
0
TR
No
9 10
11
12
R L
T
R
7
0
14
1.00
1.00
1.00
2
0
4
7
0
14
0
0
0
0
/
No
0
1
0
LTR
Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments
13 14 15 16
0 0 0 0
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/sec)
12.0 12.0
12.0
12.0
Percent Blockage
4.0 4.0
0
4.0
4.0
0
0
0
Upstream Signal
Data
Prog.
Flow
Sat Arrival
Flow
Green
Cycle Prog. Distance
vph
Type
vph
Time
Length Speed to Signal
sec
sec mph feet
S2 Left -Turn
Through
S5 Left -Turn
Through
Worksheet 3-Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles
Movement 2 Movement 5
Shared In volume, major th vehicles:
Shared In volume, major rt vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major th vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles:
Number of major street through lanes:
Worksheet 4-Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation
Critical Gap Calculation
Movement 1 4 7 8 9
10
L L
L T R L
t(c,base) 47.1
.1
t(c,hv) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
P (hv) 0
t(c,g)
Grade/100
t(3,it)
0.00
t(c,T):
1-stage
0.00
0.00
2-stage
0.00
0.00
t(c)
1-stage
4.1
2-stage
Follow -Up
Time Calculations
Movement
1
4
L
L
t (f,base)
2.20
t (f, HV)
0.90
0.90
P (HV)
0
t (f)
2.2
0
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.70
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
6.4
7 8 9 10
L T R L
3.50
0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
0
3.5
11
T
6.5
1.00
0
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
6.5
11
T
4.00
0.90
0
4.0
12
R
6.2
1.00
0
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.2
12
R
3.30
0.90
0
3.3
Worksheet 5-Effect of Upstream Signals
Computation 1-Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal
Movement 2 Movement 5
V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot)
V prog
Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph)
Arrival Type
Effective Green, g (sec)
Cycle Length, C (sec)
Rp (from Exhibit 16-11)
Proportion vehicles arriving on green P
9(ql)
g(q2)
g (q)
Computation 2-Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time blocked
Movement 2 Movement 5
al ha V(t) V(l,prot) V(t)
p V(l,prot)
beta
Travel time, t(a) (sec)
Smoothing Factor, F
Proportion of conflicting flow, f
Max platooned flow, V(c,max)
Min platooned flow, V(c,min)
Duration of blocked period, t(p)
Proportion time blocked, p
Computation 3-Platoon Event Periods
p(2)
P(5)
p (dom)
p (subo)
Constrained or unconstrained?
Proportion
unblocked
for minor
movements, p(x)
p (1)
p(4)
p(7)
p(8)
p(9)
p(10)
p(11)
P(12)
Computation 4 and 5
Single -Stage Process
Movement
V c' x —
s
Px
V c, u, X
C r, X
C plat,x
Two -Stage Process
(1)
Single -stage
Process
Result
0.000
0.000
(2) (3)
Two -Stage Process
Stage I Stage II
1 4
L L L T 9 10
R L
815
11 12
T R
7
8 10
11
V (c, X)
s
P (X)
V(c,U,X)
C(r j-.
C(plat,x)
Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2
1500
Worksheet 6-Impedance and Capacity Equations
Step 1: RT from Minor St.
9
1�
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
808
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
384
Movement Capacity
1.00
1.00
Probability of Queue free St.
384
1.00
0.96
Step 2: LT from Major St.
4
1
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
815
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
821
Movement Capacity
1.00
1.00
Probability of Queue free St.
821
Maj L-Shared Prob Q free St.
1.00
0.98
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
8
11
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
1380
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
146
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
1.
0•98
98
1.00
Movement Capacity
0.98
Probability of Queue free St.
142
1.00
1.00
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
7
10
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
1380
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
161
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
1.00
1.00
Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor.
0.98
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement
0.98
0•95
Capacity
0.98
157
Worksheet 7-Computation of the Effect of Two -stage Gap Acceptance
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
8 11
Part 1 - First Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Probability of Queue free St.
1500
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
1380
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
146
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
1.00
0.98
1.00
0.98
Result for 2 stage
g process:
142
a
y
C t
Probability of Queue free St.
142
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
1.00
1.00
Part 1 - First Stage
7
10
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
1380
161
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
Ma'. L
J Min
1.98
1.00
, T Adj. Imp Factor.
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impedin mvmnt
Movement
0.98
0.98
Capacity g
0.95
0.98
Results for Two-sta e
g process:
157
a
y
C t
157
Worksheet 8-Shared Lane Calculations
Movement
7 g
9 10 11 L T R L 12
Volume (vph) T R
Movement Capacity (vph) 7
Shared Lane Capacity (vph) 157 1 14
142 384
259