RESPONSE TO TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY COMMENTS

Transcription

1 RESPONSE TO TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY COMMENTS Proposed Gas Station 40 Arthur Street (Highway 26), Town of the Blue Mountains (Thornbury), County of Grey, Ontario AUGUST 2013

2

3 August 27, 2013 MR. REG RUSSWURM Director of Engineering and Public Works Town of the Blue Mountains 32 Mill Street, Box 310 Thornbury, ON N0H 2P0 Re: 40 Arthur Street, Town of the Blue Mountains, Proposed Gas Station Response to Traffic Impact Study Comments Dear Mr. Russwurm, TRANS-PLAN INC is pleased to submit this update to our Traffic Impact Study (TIS) for the proposed gas station at 40 Arthur Street in the Town of the Blue Mountains (Thornbury), dated May 21, This update addresses the Town of the Blue Mountains Technical Comments for Roads (Comments 5 through 14) relating to our TIS. Yours truly, Anil Seegobin, P.Eng. Associate Partner Engineer Trans-Plan Inc. Transportation Consultants Stamp cc: Shadi Hagag, President, Trans-Plan Inc. Anatoly Graber, Ontario Limited Krystin Rennie, Georgian Planning Solutions

4

5 Table of Contents Transmittal Letter Table of Contents 1. PREAMABLE SITE PLAN COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TRAFFIC ANALYSIS...5 Appendix A Town of the Blue Mountains, Technical Comments Roads Appendix B Capacity and Queue Analyses Worksheets List of Tables Table 1 - Traffic Growth Rate Review, Hwy 26 from Victoria Street to Bruce Street, Years 2013 to Table 2 - Traffic Growth Rate Review, Hwy 26 from Victoria Street to Bruce Street, Years 2013 to Table 3 Percent Site Traffic Compared to Total Traffic at the Highway 26 and Elma Street Intersection...3 Table 4 - Capacity and Vehicle Queue Analysis Results, Existing and Future Year Table 5 - Capacity and Vehicle Queue Analysis Results, Existing and Future Year Table 6 - Capacity and Vehicle Queue Analysis Results, Existing and Future Year List of Figures Figure 1 Site Plan...6 Figure 2 Fuel Tanker Truck Entering Site (Counter-clockwise Circulation)...7 Figure 3 Fuel Tanker Truck Entering Site (Clockwise Circulation)...8 Figure 4 Existing Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours...9 Figure Background Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours...10 Figure Background Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours...11 Figure Background Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours...12 Figure Total Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours...13 Figure Total Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours...14 Figure Total Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours admin@trans-plan.com Yonge Street, Toronto, ON M4S 3E2 Canada i

6

7 Proposed Gas Station, 40 Arthur Street, Town of the Blue Mountains Response to Traffic Impact Study Comments 1. PREAMABLE Trans-Plan Inc. is pleased to provide this report to address Town of the Blue Mountains Technical Comments (see Appendix A) on our Traffic Impact Study (TIS) report, dated May 21, 2013 in support of the proposed gas station at 40 Aurthur Street (Highway 26) in the Town of the Blue Mountains. 2. SITE PLAN The site plan by Crozier & Associates Consulting Engineers, dated April 26, 2013, is provided in Figure COMMENTS AND RESPONSES Responses are organized in a similar manner to the comments received from The Town of the Blue Mountains Engineering and Public Works Section, as provided in this report section. The comments being addressed relate to Roads, comments 5 through 14. 5) T.I.S. Section 5.2: The report references the Town of The Blue Mountains Comprehensive Transportation Strategic Plan and employs a 2% background growth rate as otherwise assumed in the TOBM Plan. It is noted however, that the TOBM Plan also considered increases in traffic volumes resulting from specific area development, and thus the overall growth exceeds the noted 2%. The consultant should refer to Figures 4.5 through 4.7 of the TOBM Plan from which appropriate growth rates through the study area can be established, following confirmation of the associated growth assumptions. The TOBM plan has been reviewed for growth rate assumptions. Using figure 4.5 (future 2013 traffic volumes), figure 4.6 (future 2018 traffic volumes) and figure 4.7 (future 2028 traffic volumes) for the Highway 26 road section from Victoria Street to Bruce Street, the traffic volume growth rate review, using a compounded annual growth rate, is provided in Table 1 and Table 2. Table 1 - Traffic Growth Rate Review, Highway 26 from Victoria Street to Bruce Street, Years 2013 to 2018 Peak Future 2013 Traffic Volumes Future 2018 Traffic Volumes Hour Eastbound Westbound Total Eastbound Westbound Total AM ,370 PM , ,350 Total 910 1,070 1,980 1,145 1,575 2,720 Growth 6.4% Source: Town of The Blue Mountains, Comprehensive Transportation Strategic Plan, March 2010, Figures 4.5 to 4.7. Table 2 - Traffic Growth Rate Review, Highway 26 from Victoria Street to Bruce Street, Years 2013 to 2028 Peak Future 2013 Traffic Volumes Future 2028 Traffic Volumes Hour Eastbound Westbound Total Eastbound Westbound Total AM ,940 PM ,055 1,055 1,170 2,225 Total 910 1,070 1,980 2,040 2,125 4,165 Growth 5.0% Source: Town of The Blue Mountains, Comprehensive Transportation Strategic Plan, March 2010, Figures 4.5 to admin@trans-plan.com Yonge Street, Toronto, ON M4S 3E2 Canada 1

8 Proposed Gas Station, 40 Arthur Street, Town of the Blue Mountains Response to Traffic Impact Study Comments The traffic growth rate review indicates that between years 2013 and 2018, traffic volumes on Highway 26 are expected to increase by approximately 6.4 percent per annum (ln[2,720/1,980]/5yrs). Between years 2013 and 2028, traffic volumes are expected to increase by approximately 5.0 percent per annum (ln[4,165/1,980]/15yrs). Based on the growth rate review, a 6.4 percent growth rate per annum has been incorporated in the traffic analysis for turning movements at the Highway 26 and Elma Street intersection for horizon years 2015 and A 5.0 percent growth rate per annum has been incorporated in the traffic analysis for horizon year ) T.I.S. Section 5.3: Reference is made to a proposed grocery store at the SW corner of Highway 26 and Victoria Street, to the west of the subject site. This development is anticipated to generate 117 new AM peak hour trips and 368 new PM peak hour trips (after consideration for pass-by trips) that have been considered in the development of the future background volumes. In comparing the 2013 and 2025 background volumes on Highway 26 through the study area, the increases associated with the grocery store are in the order of 40 and 110 trips in the AM and PM peak hours (approximately 30 to 35% of the total grocery store traffic). The consultant should confirm that an appropriate assignment and distribution of the grocery store traffic to the area road system has been undertaken. A greater proportion of the grocery store to travel through the study area is expected. Based on the a review of the TOBM plan for existing traffic volumes at the Highway 26 and Victoria Street intersection and based on the distribution of residential development in the surrounding area (which is more concentrated to the east of proposed grocery store), approximately 70 percent of traffic generated by the grocery store has been assigned to / from the east along Highway 26, passing through the study area. 7) T.I.S. Section 5.4: MTO s Guidelines for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies requires horizon years corresponding to build-out in addition to 5 and 10-years beyond buildout. While traffic forecasts are presented for these horizons, the operational analyses presented in Section 9 address only 2013 and 2025 conditions. The assessment of 2015 and 2020 operations, under background and total conditions, should also be provided. This report update includes the operational analysis for 2013 existing conditions and 2015, 2020 and 2025 background and total conditions. 8) T.I.S. Section 9: There is mention of the provision of a centre turn lane and left turn lanes at intersection approaches as warranted by background conditions. However, there is no discussion pertaining to the background traffic operations or the improvements considered necessary to support such. The Town will expect the proponent to contribute to the future centre turn lane. The centre left turn lane was noted in the TOBM plan as a required roadway improvement and was therefore incorporated in the analysis of future conditions. However, since the improvements will also benefit site traffic entering and exiting the proposed development, the percent contribution of the proponent is reviewed in Table 3 based on a comparison of site traffic and total traffic volumes at the Highway 26 and Elma Street intersection. admin@trans-plan.com Yonge Street, Toronto, ON M4S 3E2 Canada 2

9 Proposed Gas Station, 40 Arthur Street, Town of the Blue Mountains Response to Traffic Impact Study Comments Table 3 Percent Site Traffic Compared to Total Traffic at the Highway 26 and Elma Street Intersection Peak Hour Site Traffic Total Traffic % Site Traffic AM PM Sum % The results indicate that based on traffic volumes, the proponent would be responsible for approximately 2 percent of the cost of the centre left turn lane on Highway 26 for the road section adjacent the property limits. 9) T.I.S. Section 9: MTO Guidelines does not permit multi-lane approaches on side streets that are under stop control (NB and SB left turn lanes have otherwise been assumed in the assessment on Elma Street). Such are only permitted under signal control, when appropriate control for all lanes can be implemented. The operation analysis has been revised such that NB and SB turn lanes on Elma Street are not provided at the Highway 26 and Elma Street intersection. NB and SB turn lanes are not required to support the proposed development. 10) T.I.S. Section 9: With consideration for a centre turn lane, the Synchro default median storage of 2 vehicles has been assumed (refer to the operational worksheets for the Elma Street intersection). Should a turn lane be implemented, the storage of 2 vehicles in the median is not appropriate given the density of driveways and potential for opposing left turns in the turn lane. The Synchro default median storage setting for the centre turn lane cannot be changed in Synchro; however, for the study area being reviewed (the intersection and site driveway on Highway 26 only), changing this Synchro setting would likely have little or no impact on the operational analysis results. 11) TIS Section 9: The 95th percentile queue results as presented on the Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis worksheets do not correspond to those noted on the Queuing and Blocking Report. The Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Worksheet queue results are based on HCM methodology using Synchro 7 (a macroscopic model) whereas the Queuing and Blocking Report Worksheet queue results are based on SimTraffic (a microscopic model). The more conservative of the two results (SimTraffic results) are presented in the report. 12) T.I.S. Section 10.1: While Figure 2 denotes a fuel tanker truck navigating through the site, the following are noted/questioned: a) are there any impacts to internal circulation for other vehicles when the truck is parked above the fuel tanks (a figure to show the position of the truck over top the fuel tanks is suggested); b) given the proximity of the Elma Street access to Highway 26, will there be impacts to NB admin@trans-plan.com Yonge Street, Toronto, ON M4S 3E2 Canada 3

10 Proposed Gas Station, 40 Arthur Street, Town of the Blue Mountains Response to Traffic Impact Study Comments travel on Elma Street when the fuel truck is stopped at the stop sign which may in turn impact operations on Highway 26 (a figure to show the position of the truck at the stop sign and edge of pavement for Elma Street is suggested); c) it is unclear on the figure as to the edge of the travel lanes on Highway 26 and to what extent the turning truck will deviate from their lane in entering the site and passing through the Elma Street intersection (the edge of pavement for Highway 26 should be clearly shown); and d) based on the outcome of the above, it may be considered that the truck circulate counterclockwise within the site - entering via Elma Street and exiting to Highway 26. Figure 2 shows a fuel tanker truck entering the site in a counter-clockwise circulation. The truck would need to re-enter the roadway to reverse over the fuel tanks, which may not be an ideal solution. Figure 3 shows a fuel tanker truck entering the site in a clockwise circulation and reversing on-site to park over the fuel tanks. When the truck is parked, sufficient width is available for other vehicles to manoeuvre on-site. Although a fuel tanker truck exiting the site driveway on Elma Street may temporarily block northbound travel on Elma Street, fuel tanker deliveries are planned to be scheduled during off-peak times of the day. Traffic volumes on Elma Street would be relatively low during off-peak times (about 20 to 30 vehicles per hour in both directions), meaning that the impact of tanker truck operations would be marginal. The edge of pavement and curb on Highway 26 is shown on the updated Figure 2 and Figure 3. Although the fuel tanker truck may encroach on the centreline of Highway 26 before making a westbound left turn into the site, with the planned centre left turn lane on Highway 26 in place, opposing (eastbound) traffic would not be affected. 13) T.I.S. Section10.2: MTO s Commercial Site Access Policy and Standards stipulates a distance of 35 metres between the centre of the side street access and the through edge of pavement (refer to CSAS 6). Table 6 notes only 30 metres, as measured to the centre of the intersection (and thus likely in the order of 26 metres when measured from the through edge of pavement). This requirement is necessary to accommodate the manoeuvrability of a WB 17.5 tractor trailer. Along the main road, a separation of 57 metres is required as per CSAS 6 (from centre of access to centre of side street), whereas only 45 metres is provided. Given the limits of the site plan (location of property lines), the CSAS requirements for driveway to intersection spacing cannot be met; however, the accesses are proposed to be located as far from the intersection as possible such that any conflict between traffic operations at the intersection and at the proposed site driveways are minimized. 14) T.I.S. Section 10.3: CSAS 6 dictates an access width of 9 metres with radii of 10 metres. The site plan does not comply with these guidelines. The fuel tanker truck requires the 11m driveway width to exit the site driveway at Elma Street (as previously shown in the review of fuel tanker truck circulation in the TIS). admin@trans-plan.com Yonge Street, Toronto, ON M4S 3E2 Canada 4

11 Proposed Gas Station, 40 Arthur Street, Town of the Blue Mountains Response to Traffic Impact Study Comments 4. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Based on the comments received, the updated weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic volume figures for existing traffic volumes and future background and total traffic volumes for 2015, 2020, 2025 are provided in Figure 4 through Figure 10. Intersection capacity and vehicle queuing analyses were performed for the study area intersection and site driveways based on the methodology contained in the Highway Capacity Manual. The software package employed in this regard was Synchro and SimTraffic, version 7.0. Synchro summary sheets are provided in Appendix B and the results are shown in Table 4 through Table 6. The capacity results indicate that the intersections and site driveways would operate at a good to acceptable level of service with minimal to average delay in the weekday AM and PM peak hours under future conditions. The queue analysis results indicate that there would be sufficient storage length for vehicles turning at the at the intersection and site driveways. admin@trans-plan.com Yonge Street, Toronto, ON M4S 3E2 Canada 5

12

13

14

15 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Proposed Gas Station 40 Arthur Street Town of the Blue Mountains Figure 4: Existing Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours 0 45 North Driveway West Driveway Elma Street SITE Highway (Arthur Street) xx xx LEGEND Stop Sign AM / PM Peak Hour Schematic Not To Scale

16 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Proposed Gas Station 40 Arthur Street Town of the Blue Mountains Figure 5: 2015 Background Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours 0 51 North Driveway West Driveway Elma Street SITE Highway (Arthur Street) xx xx LEGEND Stop Sign AM / PM Peak Hour Schematic Not To Scale

17 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Proposed Gas Station 40 Arthur Street Town of the Blue Mountains Figure 6: 2020 Background Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours 0 70 North Driveway West Driveway Elma Street SITE Highway (Arthur Street) xx xx LEGEND Stop Sign AM / PM Peak Hour Schematic Not To Scale

18 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Proposed Gas Station 40 Arthur Street Town of the Blue Mountains Figure 7: 2025 Background Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours 0 81 North Driveway West Driveway Elma Street SITE Highway (Arthur Street) xx xx LEGEND Stop Sign AM / PM Peak Hour Schematic Not To Scale

19 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Proposed Gas Station 40 Arthur Street Town of the Blue Mountains Figure 8: 2015 Total Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours 3 49 North Driveway West Driveway Elma Street SITE Highway (Arthur Street) xx xx LEGEND Stop Sign AM / PM Peak Hour Schematic Not To Scale

20 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Proposed Gas Station 40 Arthur Street Town of the Blue Mountains Figure 9: 2020 Total Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours 3 68 North Driveway West Driveway Elma Street SITE Highway (Arthur Street) xx xx LEGEND Stop Sign AM / PM Peak Hour Schematic Not To Scale

21 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Proposed Gas Station 40 Arthur Street Town of the Blue Mountains Figure 10: 2025 Total Traffic Volumes, Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours 3 79 North Driveway West Driveway Elma Street SITE Highway (Arthur Street) xx xx LEGEND Stop Sign AM / PM Peak Hour Schematic Not To Scale

22 Table 4 - Capacity and Vehicle Queue Analysis Results, Existing and Future Year 2015 Intersection / Driveway Storage Movement Length Existing Conditions Year 2015 Future Background Conditions Year 2015 Future Total Conditions AM PM AM PM AM PM (m) V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS Queue V/C Delay LOS Queue (sec) (sec) (sec) (sec) (sec) (m) (sec) (m) Highway 26 and Elma Street Eastbound Left A A A A 11 Eastbound Through/Right A A A A A A Westbound Left > A A A A 8 Westbound Through/Right A A A A A A Southbound Approach B C B C B C 17 Elma Street and North Site Driveway Eastbound Left/Right A A 10 Highway 26 and West Site Driveway Eastbound Left > A A 10 Southbound Left/Right B B 17 Note: Available storage length at intersection turn lanes are measured to nearest upstream driveway. Available storage length at site driveways are measured to nearest point of conflict on site plan.

23 Table 5 - Capacity and Vehicle Queue Analysis Results, Existing and Future Year 2020 Intersection / Driveway Storage Movement Length Existing Conditions Year 2020 Future Background Conditions Year 2020 Future Total Conditions AM PM AM PM AM PM (m) V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS Queue V/C Delay LOS Queue (sec) (sec) (sec) (sec) (sec) (m) (sec) (m) Highway 26 and Elma Street Eastbound Left A A A A 12 Eastbound Through/Right A A A A A A Westbound Left > A A A A 12 Westbound Through/Right A A A A A A Southbound Approach B C C C C C 22 Elma Street and North Site Driveway Eastbound Left/Right A A 11 Highway 26 and West Site Driveway Eastbound Left > A A 12 Southbound Left/Right B C 20 Note: Available storage length at intersection turn lanes are measured to nearest upstream driveway. Available storage length at site driveways are measured to nearest point of conflict on site plan.

24 Table 6 - Capacity and Vehicle Queue Analysis Results, Existing and Future Year 2025 Intersection / Driveway Storage Movement Length Existing Conditions Year 2025 Future Background Conditions Year 2025 Future Total Conditions AM PM AM PM AM PM (m) V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS Queue V/C Delay LOS Queue (sec) (sec) (sec) (sec) (sec) (m) (sec) (m) Highway 26 and Elma Street Eastbound Left A A A A 12 Eastbound Through/Right A A A A A A Westbound Left > A B A A 14 Westbound Through/Right A A A A A A Southbound Approach B C C D C D 23 Elma Street and North Site Driveway Eastbound Left/Right A A 7 Highway 26 and West Site Driveway Eastbound Left > A A 13 Southbound Left/Right C C 17 Note: Available storage length at intersection turn lanes are measured to nearest upstream driveway. Available storage length at site driveways are measured to nearest point of conflict on site plan.

25 Proposed Gas Station, 40 Arthur Street, Town of the Blue Mountains Response to Traffic Impact Study Comments APPENDICES Appendix A Town of the Blue Mountains, Technical Comments Roads Appendix B Capacity and Queue Analyses Worksheets admin@trans-plan.com Yonge Street, Toronto, ON M4S 3E2 Canada 19

26

27 APPENDIX A Town of Blue Mountains Technical Comments - Roads

28

29

30

31 APPENDIX B Capacity and Queue Analyses Worksheets

32 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing AM Peak Hour 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 1

33 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing PM Peak Hour 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A C C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 1

34 2015 Traffic Conditions

35 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2015 Background> AM Peak Hour 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 2

36 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2015 Background> PM Peak Hour 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A C C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 1

37 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2015 Total> AM Peak Hour 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A B B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 2

38 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2015 Total> AM Peak Hour 1: North Driveway & Elma Street 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians 7 Lane Width (m) 3.6 Walking Speed (m/s) 1.2 Percent Blockage 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 1

39 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2015 Total> AM Peak Hour 3: Highway 26 & West Driveway 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians 4 Lane Width (m) 3.6 Walking Speed (m/s) 1.2 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTLTWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol 513 vc2, stage 2 conf vol 374 vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 3

40 Queuing and Blocking Report <2015 Total> AM Peak Hour 7/30/2013 Intersection: 1: North Driveway & Elma Street Movement EB Directions Served LR Maximum Queue (m) 9.0 Average Queue (m) th Queue (m) 11.4 Link Distance (m) 23.9 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (m) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street Movement EB NB SB Directions Served TR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (m) Average Queue (m) th Queue (m) Link Distance (m) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (m) Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Intersection: 3: Highway 26 & West Driveway Movement EB SB Directions Served L LR Maximum Queue (m) Average Queue (m) th Queue (m) Link Distance (m) 20.2 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (m) 20.0 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 40 Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study SimTraffic Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 1

41 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2015 Total> PM Peak Hour 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A C C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 2

42 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2015 Total> PM Peak Hour 1: North Driveway & Elma Street 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 19.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 1

43 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2015 Total> PM Peak Hour 3: Highway 26 & West Driveway 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians 7 Lane Width (m) 3.6 Walking Speed (m/s) 1.2 Percent Blockage 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTLTWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol 546 vc2, stage 2 conf vol 745 vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 3

44 Queuing and Blocking Report <2015 Total> PM Peak Hour 7/30/2013 Intersection: 1: North Driveway & Elma Street Movement EB Directions Served LR Maximum Queue (m) 9.0 Average Queue (m) th Queue (m) 9.9 Link Distance (m) 23.9 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (m) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street Movement EB WB WB NB SB Directions Served L L TR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (m) Average Queue (m) th Queue (m) Link Distance (m) Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (m) Storage Blk Time (%) 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 9 Intersection: 3: Highway 26 & West Driveway Movement EB SB Directions Served L LR Maximum Queue (m) Average Queue (m) th Queue (m) Link Distance (m) 20.2 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (m) 20.0 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 9 40 Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study SimTraffic Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 1

45 2020 Traffic Conditions

46 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2020 Background> AM Peak Hour 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A B C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 1

47 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2020 Background> PM Peak Hour 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A C C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 1

48 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2020 Total> AM Peak Hour 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A B C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 2

49 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2020 Total> AM Peak Hour 1: North Driveway & Elma Street 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians 7 Lane Width (m) 3.6 Walking Speed (m/s) 1.2 Percent Blockage 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 18.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 1

50 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2020 Total> AM Peak Hour 3: Highway 26 & West Driveway 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians 4 Lane Width (m) 3.6 Walking Speed (m/s) 1.2 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTLTWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol 682 vc2, stage 2 conf vol 488 vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) 5.4 tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 3

51 Queuing and Blocking Report <2020 Total> AM Peak Hour 7/30/2013 Intersection: 1: North Driveway & Elma Street Movement EB NB Directions Served LR LT Maximum Queue (m) Average Queue (m) th Queue (m) Link Distance (m) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (m) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served TR L LTR LTR Maximum Queue (m) Average Queue (m) th Queue (m) Link Distance (m) Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (m) 20.0 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Intersection: 3: Highway 26 & West Driveway Movement EB SB Directions Served L LR Maximum Queue (m) Average Queue (m) th Queue (m) Link Distance (m) 20.2 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (m) 20.0 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 40 Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study SimTraffic Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 1

52 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis <2020 Total> PM Peak Hour 2: Highway 26 & Elma Street 7/30/2013 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL TWLTL Median storage veh) 2 2 Upstream signal (m) px, platoon unblocked vc, conflicting volume vc1, stage 1 conf vol vc2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol tc, single (s) tc, 2 stage (s) tf (s) p0 queue free % cm capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right csh Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (m) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS A A C C Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) Arthur Street, Blue Mountains, Traffic Impact Study Synchro 7 - Report Trans-Plan Inc. Page 2