Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development Halifax Regional Municipality Traffic Impact Study Final Draft Report Prepared by: GRIFFIN transportation group inc. 30 Bonny View Drive Fall River, NS B2T 1R2 www.griffininc.ca Prepared for: FS Industries Limited April 2015
April 22, 2015 Mr. Rick Cecchetto FS Industries Limited PO Box 220 4881 Main Street Oxford, NS B0M 1P0 Dear Mr. Cecchetto: RE: Traffic Impact Study for the proposed changes to the Rockingham Ridge Plaza - DRAFT The GRIFFIN transportation group inc. is pleased to present the results of the enclosed traffic impact study carried out in support of the planning approval process for the proposed addition of commercial floor space to the Rockingham Ridge Plaza, located in the southwest quadrant of the Dunbrack Street / Farnham Gate Road intersection in Clayton Park, Halifax Regional Municipality. It is understood the proposed addition to the plaza will be comprised of a new two-storey building with ground floor retail businesses and general office space on the second floor. The results flowing from this study indicate the forecast site-generated trips associated with the proposed building will have a marginal traffic operational impact on the study area streets. The study area intersections have considerable residual capacity to accommodate traffic growth well beyond the 2020 planning horizon and no new roadway infrastructure is required to accommodate the forecast site-generated trips. It has been a pleasure working with the project team in completing this study. Feel free to contact the undersigned anytime to further discuss the details of this project. Yours truly, Original Signed James J. Copeland, P.Eng. Managing Principal GRIFFIN transportation group inc.
GRIFFIN transportation group inc. This document and the information contained within has been prepared exclusively for the Client identified on the cover of this report for the purpose for which it has been prepared. The GRIFFIN transportation group inc. undertakes no duty to or accepts any responsibility to any third party who may rely upon this document. This document may not be used for any purpose other than that provided in the contract between the Owner/Client and the Engineer nor may any section or element of this document be removed, reproduced, electronically stored or transmitted in any form without the express written consent of the GRIFFIN transportation group inc. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development Traffic Impact Study P a g e i
TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES II IV IV 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Context 1 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 2.1 The Study Area Road Network 3 2.1.1 Overview 3 2.1.2 Dunbrack Street 3 2.1.3 Farnham Gate Road 3 2.1.4 Site Accesses 3 2.2 Traffic Data 6 2.3 Existing Conditions Operational Analysis 6 3. FUTURE BACKGROUND CONDITIONS 9 3.1 Overview 9 3.2 Traffic Growth Assumptions 9 3.3 Future Adjacent Development 9 3.4 Planned Road Network Changes 10 3.5 Summary of Future Background Volumes 10 3.6 Future Background 2020 Operational Analysis 10 4. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 13 4.1 Overview of Existing Site 13 Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development Traffic Impact Study P a g e ii
4.2 The Trip Generation Survey 13 4.3 An Addition to the Rockingham Ridge Plaza 13 4.4 Site Trip Generation 15 4.4.1 Overview 15 4.4.2 Summary of Site Trip Generation Volumes 15 4.5 Distribution of Trips to the Road Network 16 5. FUTURE TOTAL CONDITIONS 18 5.1 Overview 18 5.2 Total 2020 Operational Analysis Results 18 5.2.1 Overview of Results 18 5.2.2 The Site Accesses 18 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 21 6.1 Conclusions 21 6.2 Recommendations 21 Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development Traffic Impact Study P a g e iii
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Key Map and Site Location 2 Figure 2: Study Area and Site Context 5 Figure 3: Existing 2015 Peak Hour Volumes 8 Figure 4: Future Background 2020 Peak Hour Volumes 12 Figure 5: Proposed Site Plan 14 Figure 6: Site-Generated Peak Hour Volumes 17 Figure 7: Future Total 2020 Peak Hour Volumes 19 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Plaza Access Available Sight Lines 4 Table 2: Existing 2015 Operational Analysis Results Critical Movements 7 Table 3: Future Background 2020 Operational Analysis Results Critical Movements 11 Table 4: Trip Generation Survey Results (49,169 ft 2 ) 13 Table 5: Summary of Proposed Development Land Use Types 15 Table 6: AM Peak Hour Site-Generated Trips (vph) 15 Table 7: PM Peak Hour Site-Generated Trips (vph) 16 Table 8: Forecast Residential Trip Distribution 16 Table 9: Future Total 2020 Operational Analysis Results Critical Movements 20 Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development Traffic Impact Study P a g e iv
1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background The GRIFFIN transportation group has been retained by FS Industries Limited (FS Industries) to carry out a traffic impact study (TIS) in support of the planning approval process for a proposed addition to the Rockingham Ridge Plaza located in the southwest quadrant of the Dunbrack Street / Farnham Gate Road intersection in Clayton Park, Halifax Regional Municipality (HRM). The subject property (PID 00417212) measures about 4 acres in size and contains two buildings with a total floor area of 49,169 ft 2. This development is bounded by Dunbrack Street to the east, Farnham Gate Road to the north, and existing residential development to the south and west. A key map showing the general location of the site is shown in Figure 1. Based on discussions with representatives of FS Industries, it is understood that a new twostorey detached building will be located in the northeast corner of the property. The new building will contain ground floor retail businesses (8,000 ft 2 ) and general office space on the second floor (8,000 ft 2 ). Vehicular access will continue to be provided by the two existing accesses connecting to Farnham Gate Road and no new accesses are being proposed. 1.2 Context It is understood that the approval agency for the traffic impact study process is the HRM. As such, the general assumptions of the TIS process were discussed with HRM Traffic Services. The terms of reference for this impact study were developed based on the following: The HRM s guidelines for conducting traffic impact studies. A conceptual site plan drawing provided by FS Industries. A meeting with HRM representatives held on March 4 th, 2015 to establish the general scope and approach of the TIS A site review carried out in April 2015 The approach and technical findings of this traffic impact study are discussed in the following sections of this report. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 1 Traffic Impact Study
Kearney Lake Rd Site Location Dunbrack St 102 Lacewood Dr Source: Explore HRM GIS www.griffininc.ca Key Map Figure 1
2. EXISTING CONDITIONS This chapter describes the roadway network, traffic volumes, operational analysis results and other notable characteristics under the baseline conditions. 2.1 The Study Area Road Network 2.1.1 Overview The proposed additional development on the Rockingham Ridge Plaza site is to be generally located in the northeast corner of the property. The site will continue to be served by the two existing accesses connecting to Farnham Gate Road. Both the Farnham Gate Road and Dunbrack Street corridors are key streets in HRM s roadway network and carry commuter traffic during the peak times of a typical weekday. As such, the following intersections were explicitly evaluated as part of this study: Dunbrack Street / Farnham Gate Road; Farnham Gate Road / Plaza East Access; and Farnham Gate Road / Plaza West Access. The immediate study area and site context are illustrated in Figure 2. 2.1.2 Dunbrack Street Dunbrack Street is aligned in a north-south direction and functions as an arterial roadway through the Fairview and Clayton Park neighbourhoods of HRM. This corridor provides an important transportation link between Kearney Lake Road to the north and the community of Spryfield to the south. This street has a full urban cross-section with two core lanes in each direction, a raised centre median, and additional widening at intersections. This is also an important public transit route and bus stops are located at the signalized intersection with Farnham Gate Road. 2.1.3 Farnham Gate Road Farnham Gate Road has a curvilinear alignment but is generally aligned in an east-west direction. It functions as a collector street serving the predominantly residential neighbourhood. The street has a full urban cross-section with one travel lane in each direction and an exclusive left turn lane provided at the signalized intersection with Dunbrack Street. This corridor also serves as a key route for Metro Transit and the posted speed limit is 50 km/h. 2.1.4 Site Accesses The Rockingham Ridge Plaza has two site driveways connecting to Farnham Gate Road, referred to in this report as the east access and the west access. Both driveways are 7 m wide with one inbound lane and one outbound lane. No exclusive turn lanes are provided along Farnham Gate Road. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 3 Traffic Impact Study
A sight line review was undertaken at both site accesses as they are located on the inside of a horizontal curve of the Farnham Gate Road alignment. The posted speed limit on Farnham Gate Road is 50 km/h and the critical approach was identified to be the eastbound travel direction. Vehicle operating speeds were recorded in the eastbound direction using a handheld radar unit and speeds were generally in compliance with the posted speed limit. This may be due in part to the fact that Farnham Gate Road terminates immediately east of the site accesses at Dunbrack Street Using Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) guidelines, the minimum stopping sight distance (SSD) for drivers traveling at 50 km/h is 65 m. A summary of the available sight lines at each driveway is contained in Table 1. Table 1: Plaza Access Available Sight Lines East Access West Access TAC minimum SSD (50km/h) 65 m 80 m Available sight line 65 m 65 m Based on the field review, minimum SSD values are available at both driveways for a 50 km/h operating speed. Minimum design values are associated with increased road safety risk. Therefore, it is important to ensure that appropriate daylighting triangles are provided and maintained at the intersection of these accesses with Farnham Gate Road to ensure drivers are provided with as much sight distance as possible. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 4 Traffic Impact Study
Metro Transit Bus Stops Fanham Gate Rd Lansdowne Dr West Access East Access Rockingham Ridge Plaza Dunbrack St Source: Bing Maps wwww.griffininc.ca Study Area and Site Context Figure 2
2.2 Traffic Data In order to assess the existing traffic operations a set of baseline traffic volumes is typically assembled for the study analyses. Recent historical traffic volume data were provided by HRM that was collected as part of a traffic impact study process for the adjacent Rockingham South development. These volumes were collected at the Dunbrack Street / Farnham Gate Road intersection in 2010. These data were supplemented by intersection turning movement counts gathered by the GRIFFIN transportation group in April 2015 at the same intersection as well as the two Rockingham Ridge Plaza accesses. All of the traffic volume data were reviewed to identify any trends or patterns between 2010 and 2015. The results indicate there was very little change in volume at the Dunbrack Street / Farnham Gate Road intersection over this 5-year time period. As such, the current 2015 observed volumes were used for analysis purposes in this study. Given that the proposed development is located on two key commuter routes, the weekday AM and PM peak hours have been selected for this analysis. The specific peak hours were determined using the recently recorded hourly traffic counts in the study area. A summary of the Existing 2015 peak hour traffic volumes applied to the study analyses are illustrated in Figure 3. 2.3 Existing Conditions Operational Analysis A capacity analysis process was carried out using the Existing 2015 traffic volumes (Figure 3) as well as the existing lane configurations and traffic control at the study area intersections. The analysis process used the methodologies contained in Trafficware s Synchro 8 software tool. The results of the existing conditions peak hour analysis are provided in Table 1 below. Following HRM guidelines, the measures of effectiveness used to describe the operational performance included the average vehicle delay, volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c ratio) and 95 th percentile queue length (metres) for the critical movement at each of the study area intersections. The capacity analysis process used the existing intersection lane configurations as well as the observed traffic signal phasing sequence at the Dunbrack Street / Farnham Gate Road intersection. The results in Table 2 indicate the following: The critical movements at the study area intersections, during both peak hours, operate with average delays of 28 seconds and v/c ratios of 0.25, or better. This suggests there is residual capacity to accommodate traffic growth into the future. There is sufficient queue storage capacity between the signalized intersection and the east plaza access. The eastbound 95 th percentile vehicle queue lengths at the signalized intersection were calculated to be about 25m and not expected to encroach into the functional area of the east plaza access. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 6 Traffic Impact Study
Table 2: Existing 2015 Operational Analysis Results Critical Movements 1. Dunbrack St / Farnham Gate Rd (signalized) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Existing 2015 B EB Left: 25.8s 0.13 15m EB Left: 28.0s 0.25 25m 2. Farnham Gate Rd / East Access (unsignalized) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Existing 2015 NB L-R: 10.5s 0.05 <10m NB L-R: 10.7s 0.15 <10m 3. Farnham Gate Rd / West Access (unsignalized) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Existing 2015 NB L-R: 10.6s 0.04 <10m NB L-R: 10.8s 0.12 <10m A Queue represents the calculated vehicle queue length in metres occurring 95% of the time (95 th percentile). B The signal phase sequence observed in the field was applied to the analysis. The general findings of the existing conditions analysis were consistent with the observations made during the field review. Detailed summaries of the Existing 2015 operational analysis results are provided in Appendix I. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 7 Traffic Impact Study
Farnham Gate Rd (85) 243 (27) 16 STOP 12 (42) 10 (33) 58 (219) 30 (48) (119) 250 (8) 5 STOP 20 (76) 10 (29) 78 (238) 45 (73) (69) 36 (126) 234 (354) 801 (59) 48 259 (511) 75 (252) Future Access to Rockingham South Legend Traffic Signals STOP Stop Control 12 AM Peak Hour Volumes (21) PM Peak Hour Volumes Dunbrack St wwww.griffininc.ca Existing 2015 Peak Hour Volumes Figure 3
3. FUTURE BACKGROUND CONDITIONS This chapter summarizes the assumptions used to develop future year traffic volumes as well as the operational analysis results for the background traffic scenario. 3.1 Overview The future planning horizon chosen for a traffic impact study represents a milestone in the development process. It is assumed the future planning horizon year used in the analysis for this type of development will occur 5 years beyond the baseline planning horizon of 2015. Therefore, the future planning horizon year selected for this study was 2020. Developing the future background traffic volumes excludes the forecast traffic explicitly associated with the proposed development under study but considers other contributing factors to traffic volume increases including: General traffic growth that is typically associated with population and employment increases in the area; Traffic volumes explicitly associated with any adjacent planned developments; and Traffic volume and travel pattern changes associated with any planned roadway network changes in the vicinity of the study area. Each of these contributing factors is discussed in the following Sections. 3.2 Traffic Growth Assumptions In order to account for general population and employment increases in the study area, from the baseline year to the future planning horizon, a background traffic growth rate is typically applied. Using historical traffic volume information contained in the 2010 Rockingham South TIS, and in order to be consistent with this earlier study, an average traffic growth rate of 1.6% per year (compounding) was applied. 3.3 Future Adjacent Development It is understood that a large mixed-use development is being proposed east of the Dunbrack Street / Farnham Gate Road intersection, referred to as Rockingham South. This development is proposed to include a mix of residential and commercial land uses. Three vehicle access points are planned as part of this development, one of which will connect to Dunbrack Street opposite Farnham Gate Road. At the request of HRM, the forecast site-generated trips associated with this development were explicitly evaluated as part of this study. The weekday AM and PM peak hour volumes were referenced from the Rockingham South Mixed Use Development Traffic Impact Study report, submitted to HRM in May 2011. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 9 Traffic Impact Study
3.4 Planned Road Network Changes Through discussions with HRM representatives it is understood that the only road network change in the vicinity of the study area is the new street connection to the Rockingham South development. As such, the analysis of the future planning horizons in this study included a fourth leg at the Dunbrack Street / Farnham Gate Road signalized intersection. It should be noted that the existing vehicle travel patterns are not expected to change as a result of the new street connection. 3.5 Summary of Future Background Volumes The information presented in the previous Sections was used to develop a set of peak hour traffic volumes for the future Background 2020 planning horizon. The development of these volumes was comprised of the following: Existing 2015 weekday peak hour traffic volumes (Figure 3); plus A 1.6% per year background traffic growth factor (1.083) to account for population and employment increases in the vicinity of the study area; plus Weekday peak hour traffic volumes associated with the proposed Rockingham South development. A summary of the future Background 2020 peak hour traffic volumes used in the analysis are illustrated in Figure 4. 3.6 Future Background 2020 Operational Analysis A capacity analysis effort was carried out for the study area intersections using the future Background 2020 forecast traffic volumes. The analysis process used Trafficware s Synchro 8 software tool. The results for the critical movements at the study area intersections are contained in Table 3. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 10 Traffic Impact Study
Table 3: Future Background 2020 Operational Analysis Results Critical Movements 1. Dunbrack St / Farnham Gate Rd (signalized) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Existing 2015 B EB Left: 25.8s 0.13 15m EB Left: 28.0s 0.25 25m Background 2020 WB Left: 29.8s 0.22 15m EB Left: 31.2s 0.37 25m 2. Farnham Gate Rd / East Access (unsignalized) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Existing 2015 NB L-R: 10.5s 0.05 <10m NB L-R: 10.7s 0.15 <10m Background 2020 NB L-R: 10.8s 0.06 <10m NB L-R: 11.3s 0.18 <10m 3. Farnham Gate Rd / West Access (unsignalized) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Existing 2015 NB L-R: 10.6s 0.04 <10m NB L-R: 10.8s 0.12 <10m Background 2020 NB L-R: 11.1s 0.04 <10m NB L-R: 11.6s 0.14 <10m A Queue represents the calculated vehicle queue length in metres occurring 95% of the time (95 th percentile). B The signal phase sequence observed in the field was applied to the analysis. The capacity analysis results for the future Background 2020 conditions suggest that the study area intersections will continue to operate with acceptable measures of effectiveness and are all forecast to have residual capacity to accommodate growth. Detailed summaries of the Background 2020 operational analysis are provided in Appendix I. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 11 Traffic Impact Study
Farnham Gate Rd (123) 277 (29) 17 STOP 13 (45) 11 (36) 89 (261) 32 (52) (159) 285 (9) 5 STOP 22 (82) 11 (31) 110 (282) 49 (79) (75) 39 (30) 14 (136) 254 (27) 12 (383) 867 (64) 52 12 (26) 280 (553) 81 (273) 23 (21) 26 (24) 24 (21) Legend Traffic Signals STOP Stop Control 12 AM Peak Hour Volumes (21) PM Peak Hour Volumes Dunbrack St wwww.griffininc.ca Future Background 2020 Peak Hour Volumes Figure 4
4. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT This chapter describes the existing site, proposed changes to the buildings/operations, and the development of the site generated traffic. 4.1 Overview of Existing Site The existing Rockingham Ridge Plaza is located on PID 00417212 which measures about 4 acres in size. It is located in the Halifax Mainland By-law Area and contains businesses that are of a commercial nature. According to HRM documentation the property currently has a K zoning designation. There are two buildings located on the property, a 48,169 ft 2 plaza building and a 1,000 ft 2 convenience store / gas station. The larger plaza building contains a variety of businesses including a Post Office, Dooly s pool hall, a tanning business, two sit-down restaurants, a pharmacy, a medical clinic, a dental clinic and so forth. 4.2 The Trip Generation Survey In order to understand the traffic volume generating characteristics of the existing plaza the GRIFFIN transportation group carried out a trip generation survey at the existing Rockingham Ridge plaza accesses during typical weekday peak period conditions. The results of this process identified how many patrons drive their vehicles to the site, expressed as a basis of the overall floor area (i.e. trips per 1,000 ft 2 ). The findings of this process are shown in Table 4. Table 4: Trip Generation Survey Results (49,169 ft 2 ) Inbound Trips (vehicles/hour) Outbound Trips (vehicles/hour) Total Trips (vehicles/hour) Trip Rate (Trips/1,000ft 2 ) AM Peak Hour 96 52 148 3.0 65% 35% 100% PM Peak Hour 148 176 324 6.6 46% 54% 100% The vehicle trip rates for the Rockingham Ridge Plaza were calculated to be 3.0 trips/1,000 ft 2 and 6.6 trips/1,000 ft 2 for the weekday AM and PM peaks, respectively. A review of the Institute of Transportation Engineer s (ITE) published trip rates suggest these calculated values are similar to the ITE land use 820 Shopping Centre. It was concluded that these trip rates were representative for this type of land use, and were therefore, appropriate for use in the calculation of new trips associated with the proposed development changes on-site. 4.3 An Addition to the Rockingham Ridge Plaza FS Industries is proposing to construct a new detached building in the northeast corner of the property. It will be a two-storey building with ground floor retail businesses and general office space on the second floor. Each floor will have a useable area measuring 8,000 ft 2. The site plan layout showing the existing and proposed buildings is contained in Figure 5. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 13 Traffic Impact Study
Existing Building Proposed 2-Storey Building Existing Plaza Building Source: FS Industries Limited www.griffininc.ca Proposed Site Plan Figure 5
4.4 Site Trip Generation 4.4.1 Overview Typically, traffic engineers use vehicle generation rates for new developments that are published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), if deemed appropriate and suitable for the land use(s) under study. Discussions were held with FS Industries to better understand the types of tenants that are likely to operate within the new building and it is understood that the ground floor retail space will contain similar businesses to those that operate out of the existing plaza building. As such, the existing traffic generating characteristics would apply. However, the second floor will be marketed as general office area and it was determined that the ITE land use 710 General Office trip rates were appropriate for this space. A summary of the land use type and trip generation source used in this study is provided in Table 5. Table 5: Summary of Proposed Development Land Use Types Zoning Type Land Use Type Area / Size Trip Generation Source Commercial Retail Shops (1 st floor) 8,000 ft 2 Trip Generation Survey Office space (2 nd floor) 8,000 ft 2 ITE LU 710 General Office A A Taken from ITE s Trip Generation, 9 th Edition document. 4.4.2 Summary of Site Trip Generation Volumes A summary of the AM and PM peak hour site trip generation results is provided in Tables 6 and 7, respectively. The volume of new traffic attracted to the study area streets for each peak hour is forecast to be: AM Peak: Forecast to be 37 new two-way trips during the AM peak hour including 27 inbound and 10 outbound from the site. PM Peak: Forecast to be 65 new two-way trips during the PM peak hour including 26 inbound and 39 outbound from the site. Table 6: AM Peak Hour Site-Generated Trips (vph) Total Trips (In / Out) Pass-by Trips (Rate) On-Site Linked Trips (Rate) New Trips (vph) Trip Rate Commercial Land Uses Retail Shops 3.0 24 (65%/35%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 24 Office space 1.56 13 (88%/12%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 13 Sub-Total - 37 0 0 37 AM Peak Hour Summary (vph) In - 27 0 0 27 Out - 10 0 0 10 Total - 37 0 0 37 Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 15 Traffic Impact Study
Table 7: PM Peak Hour Site-Generated Trips (vph) Total Trips (In / Out) Pass-by Trips (Rate) On-Site Linked Trips (Rate) New Trips (vph) Trip Rate Commercial Land Uses Retail Shops 6.6 53 (65%/35%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 53 Office space 1.49 12 (17%/83%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 12 Sub-Total - 65 0 0 65 PM Peak Hour Summary (vph) In - 26 0 0 26 Out - 39 0 0 39 Total - 65 0 0 65 Commercial retail businesses are known to attract patrons from the background traffic stream on adjacent roadways. This phenomenon is known as pass-by traffic. In addition, commercial plaza developments have a mix of businesses that create shared trip-making and patrons will drive to the site and some visit multiple stores. Given the low number of additional sitegenerated trips forecast for the new building, and to remain conservative (i.e. use of higher volumes) in the analysis, it was assumed that no pass-by and shared trips occurred. Therefore, the total site-generated trips were all assumed to be new trips traveling on the study area streets. 4.5 Distribution of Trips to the Road Network A review of the observed traffic volumes and travel patterns at the Dunbrack Street / Farnham Gate Road intersection and study area gateways was carried out to establish the future distribution pattern of the site-generated trips. It was assumed that these trips would generally follow the same travel patterns that exist today on the study area roads. The proposed trip distribution to/from each of the study area gateways is contained in Table 8. Table 8: Forecast Residential Trip Distribution AM Peak PM Peak Direction Via Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound North Dunbrack St. 56% 21% 31% 41% East Farnham Gate Rd. 4% 2% 4% 5% South Dunbrack St. 22% 71% 55% 34% West Farnham Gate Rd. 18% 6% 10% 19% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% All of the site-generated trips contained in Tables 5 and 6 were assigned to the study area roadways and intersections. These peak hour site-generated volumes are illustrated in Figure 6. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 16 Traffic Impact Study
Farnham Gate Rd (0) 1 (2) 4 STOP 2 (8) 0 (4) 0 (3) 9 (10) (8) 2 (0) 1 STOP 8 (24) 0 (3) 9 (10) 13 (14) (16) 3 (3) 0 (13) 7 (0) 0 (0) 0 (8) 15 0 (0) 0 (0) 6 (15) 0 (0) 1 (1) 0 (0) Legend Traffic Signals STOP Stop Control 12 AM Peak Hour Volumes (21) PM Peak Hour Volumes Dunbrack St wwww.griffininc.ca Site-Generated Peak Hour Volumes Figure 6
5. FUTURE TOTAL CONDITIONS This chapter summarizes the assumptions used to develop future year traffic volumes and summarize the operational analysis results. 5.1 Overview The future total traffic conditions represent a combination of general traffic growth out to the 2020 planning horizon with the new site-generated traffic associated with the proposed building on the Rockingham Ridge Plaza property. The assembly of future Total 2020 AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes was based on the following: Existing 2015 weekday peak hour traffic volumes (Figure 3); plus A 1.6% per year background traffic growth factor (1.083) to account for population and employment increases in the vicinity of the study area; plus Weekday peak hour traffic volumes associated with the proposed Rockingham South development. Site-generated traffic associated with the proposed building. The set of future year traffic volumes for the 2020 planning horizon used in the analyses are illustrated in Figure 7. 5.2 Total 2020 Operational Analysis Results 5.2.1 Overview of Results A capacity analysis procedure was carried out for the future Total 2020 traffic conditions. The analysis process used Trafficware s Synchro 8 software tool following the Transportation Research Board s Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology. The operational analysis results for the critical movements at the study area intersections are contained in Table 9. The comparison of results contained in Table 9 for the Background 2020 and Total 2020 traffic conditions indicate the relative change in operations associated with the addition of new sitegenerated traffic. The results suggest these relatively low volumes will have very little impact on the operations of the study area streets and intersections. A more detailed comparison among results can be made from the detailed summaries of the future operational analysis results contained in Appendix I. 5.2.2 The Site Accesses The analysis results at the proposed site accesses to Farnham Gate Road indicate the forecast site-generated volumes will have little to no operational impact on the existing site driveways. These accesses have sufficient residual capacity to accommodate increases in traffic well beyond the 2020 planning horizon. As such, there are no infrastructure changes required and the existing number of lanes entering/exiting the site can remain. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 18 Traffic Impact Study
Farnham Gate Rd (123) 278 (31) 21 STOP 15 (53) 11 (40) 89 (264) 41 (62) (167) 287 (9) 6 STOP 30 (106) 11 (34) 119 (292) 62 (93) (91) 42 (33) 14 (149) 261 (27) 12 (383) 867 (72) 67 12 (26) 280 (553) 87 (288) 23 (21) 27 (25) 24 (21) Legend Traffic Signals STOP Stop Control 12 AM Peak Hour Volumes (21) PM Peak Hour Volumes Dunbrack St wwww.griffininc.ca Future Total 2020 Peak Hour Volumes Figure 7
Table 9: Future Total 2020 Operational Analysis Results Critical Movements 1. Dunbrack St / Farnham Gate Rd (signalized) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Existing 2015 B EB Left: 25.8s 0.13 15m EB Left: 28.0s 0.25 25m Background 2020 WB Left: 29.8s 0.22 15m EB Left: 31.2s 0.37 25m Total 2020 WB Left: 30.0s 0.23 15m EB Left: 32.8s 0.43 30m 2. Farnham Gate Rd / East Access (unsignalized) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Existing 2015 NB L-R: 10.5s 0.05 <10m NB L-R: 10.7s 0.15 <10m Background 2020 NB L-R: 10.8s 0.06 <10m NB L-R: 11.3s 0.18 <10m Total 2020 NB L-R: 10.8s 0.07 <10m NB L-R: 11.7s 0.22 <10m 3. Farnham Gate Rd / West Access (unsignalized) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Critical Move: Delay V/C Queue A Existing 2015 NB L-R: 10.6s 0.04 <10m NB L-R: 10.8s 0.12 <10m Background 2020 NB L-R: 11.1s 0.04 <10m NB L-R: 11.6s 0.14 <10m Total 2020 NB L-R: 11.1s 0.05 <10m NB L-R: 11.9s 0.16 <10m A Queue represents the calculated vehicle queue length in metres occurring 95% of the time (95 th percentile). B The signal phase sequence observed in the field was applied to the analysis. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 20 Traffic Impact Study
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter summarizes the salient findings of the analysis and identifies any necessary changes to the transportation infrastructure. 6.1 Conclusions The following conclusions were gleaned from the traffic impact assessment of the proposed development: FS Industries has proposed a new two-storey building in the northeast corner of the Rockingham Ridge Plaza property, located on the corner of the Dunbrack Street / Farnham Gate Road intersection. The operational assessment of the existing study area intersections indicates there is residual capacity to accommodate future traffic growth and there are no vehicle queue issues between these intersections. The proposed new building is expected to comprise of ground floor retail businesses (8,000 ft 2 ) similar to those that currently exist in the plaza, and second floor general office space (8,000 ft 2 ) The new site-generated vehicle trips for this development are forecast to include: o Weekday AM peak: 37 two-way trips including 27 inbound and 10 outbound. o Weekday PM peak: 65 two-way trips including 26 inbound and 39 outbound. The future Total 2020 analysis results suggest that the proposed development will have a minimal and acceptable level of traffic operational impact on the study area streets and intersections and there is residual capacity in the network beyond the 2020 planning horizon. In addition, the existing site accesses can accommodate the future vehicle demand and no additional turn lanes are required. However, sight lines to the west along Farnham Gate Road should be maintained on an on-going basis. 6.2 Recommendations The following recommendations are required to accommodate future traffic volumes on the road network: That the required daylighting triangles be maintained at both site accesses where they intersect with Farnham Gate Road. This could include the relocation of any signage or removal of vegetation located with the daylighting triangle area to ensure that drivers are provided with maximized sight lines to/from the west. Rockingham Ridge Plaza Commercial Development P a g e 21 Traffic Impact Study
APPENDIX I Intersection operational analyses
Existing Conditions Results
Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Dunbrack & Farnham Exist 2015 - AM Pk Hr Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 36 234 75 259 801 48 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 40.0 0.0 60.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 0.98 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.992 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3505 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.290 Satd. Flow (perm) 1759 1552 539 3539 3505 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 158 13 Link Speed (k/h) 50 60 60 Link Distance (m) 69.2 155.1 135.8 Travel Time (s) 5.0 9.3 8.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 5 5 5 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 2 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 39 254 82 282 871 52 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 39 254 82 282 923 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm NA NA Protected Phases 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 2 Detector Phase 4 4 2 2 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 Total Split (s) 26.0 26.0 54.0 54.0 54.0 Total Split (%) 32.5% 32.5% 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Recall Mode None None Max Max Max Act Effct Green (s) 12.5 12.5 49.7 49.7 49.7 Actuated g/c Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.67 0.67 0.67 v/c Ratio 0.13 0.65 0.23 0.12 0.39 Control Delay 25.8 19.2 7.9 5.1 6.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 25.8 19.2 7.9 5.1 6.5 LOS C B A A A Approach Delay 20.1 5.7 6.5 Approach LOS C A A Rockingham Plaza TIS Synchro 8 Light Report 22/04/2015
Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Dunbrack & Farnham Exist 2015 - AM Pk Hr Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 4.8 12.3 3.5 5.7 23.1 Queue Length 95th (m) 12.4 33.8 13.6 14.5 50.1 Internal Link Dist (m) 45.2 131.1 111.8 Turn Bay Length (m) 40.0 60.0 Base Capacity (vph) 475 534 360 2367 2349 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.08 0.48 0.23 0.12 0.39 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 74.3 Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.65 Intersection Signal Delay: 8.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.6% Analysis Period (min) 15 Intersection LOS: A ICU Level of Service B Splits and Phases: 1: Dunbrack & Farnham Rockingham Plaza TIS Synchro 8 Light Report 22/04/2015
Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Dunbrack & Farnham Exist 2015 - PM Pk Hr Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 69 126 252 511 354 59 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 40.0 0.0 60.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 0.98 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.979 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3449 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.423 Satd. Flow (perm) 1759 1552 784 3539 3449 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 137 30 Link Speed (k/h) 50 60 60 Link Distance (m) 69.2 155.1 135.8 Travel Time (s) 5.0 9.3 8.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 5 5 5 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 2 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 75 137 274 555 385 64 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 75 137 274 555 449 0 Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt NA NA Protected Phases 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 2 Detector Phase 4 4 5 2 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 26.0 26.0 12.0 26.0 26.0 Total Split (s) 26.0 26.0 12.0 54.0 42.0 Total Split (%) 32.5% 32.5% 15.0% 67.5% 52.5% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None Max Max Act Effct Green (s) 11.9 11.9 48.8 50.3 36.6 Actuated g/c Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.71 0.73 0.53 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.36 0.43 0.21 0.24 Control Delay 28.0 8.1 7.5 4.9 10.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 28.0 8.1 7.5 4.9 10.0 LOS C A A A A Approach Delay 15.1 5.8 10.0 Approach LOS B A A Rockingham Plaza TIS Synchro 8 Light Report 22/04/2015
Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Dunbrack & Farnham Exist 2015 - PM Pk Hr Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 9.4 0.0 11.5 12.3 15.6 Queue Length 95th (m) 20.3 13.1 30.9 28.2 31.3 Internal Link Dist (m) 45.2 131.1 111.8 Turn Bay Length (m) 40.0 60.0 Base Capacity (vph) 519 554 643 2588 1849 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.14 0.25 0.43 0.21 0.24 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 68.8 Natural Cycle: 65 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.43 Intersection Signal Delay: 8.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.2% Analysis Period (min) 15 Intersection LOS: A ICU Level of Service B Splits and Phases: 1: Dunbrack & Farnham Rockingham Plaza TIS Synchro 8 Light Report 22/04/2015
HCM 2010 TWSC 2: East Dwy & Farnham Exist 2015 - AM Pk Hr Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 250 5 45 78 10 20 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 5 5 0 5 5 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 1 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 272 5 49 85 11 22 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 282 0 462 284 Stage 1 - - - - 279 - Stage 2 - - - - 183 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12-6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218-3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1280-558 755 Stage 1 - - - - 768 - Stage 2 - - - - 848 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1275-531 749 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 601 - Stage 1 - - - - 765 - Stage 2 - - - - 811 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.9 10.5 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 692 - - 1275 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.047 - - 0.038 - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.5 - - 7.9 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.1 - Rockingham Plaza TIS Synchro 8 Light Report 22/04/2015
HCM 2010 TWSC 2: East Dwy & Farnham Exist 2015 - PM Pk Hr Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 119 8 73 238 29 76 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 5 5 0 5 5 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 1 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 129 9 79 259 32 83 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 143 0 556 144 Stage 1 - - - - 139 - Stage 2 - - - - 417 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12-6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218-3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1440-492 903 Stage 1 - - - - 888 - Stage 2 - - - - 665 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1434-457 895 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 525 - Stage 1 - - - - 884 - Stage 2 - - - - 620 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.8 10.7 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 749 - - 1434 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.152 - - 0.055 - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.7 - - 7.7 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0.2 - Rockingham Plaza TIS Synchro 8 Light Report 22/04/2015
HCM 2010 TWSC 3: West Dwy & Farnham Exist 2015 - AM Pk Hr Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 243 16 30 58 10 12 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 5 5 0 5 5 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 264 17 33 63 11 13 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 287 0 406 283 Stage 1 - - - - 278 - Stage 2 - - - - 128 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12-6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218-3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1275-601 756 Stage 1 - - - - 769 - Stage 2 - - - - 898 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1270-580 750 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 580 - Stage 1 - - - - 766 - Stage 2 - - - - 870 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.7 10.6 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 662 - - 1270 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.036 - - 0.026 - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.6 - - 7.9 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.1 - Rockingham Plaza TIS Synchro 8 Light Report 22/04/2015
HCM 2010 TWSC 3: West Dwy & Farnham Exist 2015 - PM Pk Hr Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.6 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 85 27 48 219 33 42 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 5 5 0 5 5 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 92 29 52 238 36 46 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 127 0 454 117 Stage 1 - - - - 112 - Stage 2 - - - - 342 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12-6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218-3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1459-564 935 Stage 1 - - - - 913 - Stage 2 - - - - 719 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1453-536 927 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 536 - Stage 1 - - - - 909 - Stage 2 - - - - 687 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.4 10.8 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 702 - - 1453 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.116 - - 0.036 - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.8 - - 7.6 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 0.1 - Rockingham Plaza TIS Synchro 8 Light Report 22/04/2015
Background 2020 Results
Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Dunbrack & Farnham Bkgd 2020 - AM Pk Hr Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 39 14 254 24 26 23 81 280 12 12 867 52 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 40.0 0.0 40.0 0.0 60.0 0.0 60.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 0.858 0.929 0.994 0.991 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1568 0 1770 1714 0 1770 3514 0 1770 3501 0 Flt Permitted 0.722 0.340 0.260 0.560 Satd. Flow (perm) 1337 1568 0 631 1714 0 483 3514 0 1036 3501 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 135 25 9 14 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 60 60 Link Distance (m) 69.2 129.1 155.1 135.8 Travel Time (s) 5.0 9.3 9.3 8.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 2 2 2 2 Peak Hour Factor 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) 42 15 276 26 28 25 88 304 13 13 942 57 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 291 0 26 53 0 88 317 0 13 999 0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 Total Split (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 54.0 54.0 54.0 54.0 Total Split (%) 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Recall Mode None None None None Max Max Max Max Act Effct Green (s) 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 48.8 48.8 48.8 48.8 Actuated g/c Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.73 0.22 0.16 0.28 0.14 0.02 0.44 Control Delay 26.3 26.0 29.8 16.3 9.6 5.5 6.0 7.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 26.3 26.0 29.8 16.3 9.6 5.5 6.0 7.4 LOS C C C B A A A A Approach Delay 26.1 20.8 6.4 7.4 Approach LOS C C A A Rockingham Plaza TIS Synchro 8 Light Report 22/04/2015
Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Dunbrack & Farnham Bkgd 2020 - AM Pk Hr Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 5.2 20.9 3.3 3.4 4.6 7.5 0.6 30.7 Queue Length 95th (m) 13.4 46.5 10.1 12.1 15.6 15.8 2.9 55.7 Internal Link Dist (m) 45.2 105.1 131.1 111.8 Turn Bay Length (m) 40.0 40.0 60.0 60.0 Base Capacity (vph) 359 519 169 478 316 2301 677 2294 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.56 0.15 0.11 0.28 0.14 0.02 0.44 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 74.6 Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.73 Intersection Signal Delay: 11.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.9% Analysis Period (min) 15 Intersection LOS: B ICU Level of Service C Splits and Phases: 1: Dunbrack & Farnham Rockingham Plaza TIS Synchro 8 Light Report 22/04/2015
Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Dunbrack & Farnham Bkgd 2020 - PM Pk Hr Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 75 30 136 21 24 21 273 553 26 27 383 64 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 40.0 0.0 40.0 0.0 60.0 0.0 60.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.877 0.930 0.993 0.978 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1607 0 1770 1716 0 1770 3510 0 1770 3446 0 Flt Permitted 0.725 0.605 0.407 0.413 Satd. Flow (perm) 1343 1607 0 1122 1716 0 755 3510 0 766 3446 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 148 23 10 31 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 60 60 Link Distance (m) 69.2 129.1 155.1 135.8 Travel Time (s) 5.0 9.3 9.3 8.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 2 2 2 2 Peak Hour Factor 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) 82 33 148 23 26 23 297 601 28 29 416 70 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 82 181 0 23 49 0 297 629 0 29 486 0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 12.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 Total Split (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 12.0 54.0 42.0 42.0 Total Split (%) 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 15.0% 67.5% 52.5% 52.5% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Max Max Max Act Effct Green (s) 12.1 12.1 12.1 12.1 48.1 48.1 36.1 36.1 Actuated g/c Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.67 0.67 0.50 0.50 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.46 0.12 0.16 0.51 0.27 0.08 0.28 Control Delay 31.2 11.5 26.4 17.0 9.1 5.6 11.4 10.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 31.2 11.5 26.4 17.0 9.1 5.6 11.4 10.8 LOS C B C B A A B B Approach Delay 17.7 20.0 6.7 10.9 Approach LOS B C A B Rockingham Plaza TIS Synchro 8 Light Report 22/04/2015