CITY OF MONTPELIER CAPITAL CITY OF VERMONT. City Manager s Weekly Report 10/12/2018. Design Review Committee, 5:30 PM, Council Chambers

CITY OF MONTPELIER CAPITAL CITY OF VERMONT City Manager s Weekly Report 10/12/2018 UPCOMING MEETINGS Monday, October 15 Monday, October 15 Monday, October 15 Tuesday, October 16 Tuesday, October 16 Tuesday, October 16 Wednesday, October 17 Design Review Committee, 5:30 PM, Council Chambers Development Review Board, 7 PM, Council Chambers Recreation Board, 7 PM, Barre Street Recreation Bldg. Social & Economic Justice Advisory Committee, 5:30 PM, Council Chambers Parks Commission, 6:00 PM, Police Dept. Community Room Energy Advisory Committee, 7:00 PM, Memorial Room Complete Streets Committee, 5:30 PM, City Manager s Conference Room ATTACHMENTS Trip Generation Report CITY MANAGER S REPORT 1 Taylor Street/Recreation Path As you might have noticed, the concrete walls on the 1 Taylor Street structure are going up. A general project timeline (which we will update periodically as warranted): Timeframe for 1 Taylor Street project: Weather tight building March 22, 2019 Substantial Completion Aug. 15, 2019 Project Completion Aug. 22, 2019 Completed: Erosion control and soil testing Excavation, most piles for support of structure Power line and Pole work, water/sewer work Upcoming: Sitework: on-going -- Dec. 2018 (pile caps, grade beams, concrete walls, elevator pit, slabs) Core and shell: Nov. 2018-April 2019 (structural steel, metal framing, stairs and rails, roofing, windows and exterior doors, siding) Interior Fit-up: March 2019 August 2019 (drywall, flooring, paint, etc.) Timeframe for Recreation Path: Project completion July 2019

Upcoming: Historic retaining walls and Pathway by end of Oct. 2018 Pedestrian bridge April 2019 Sitework and landscaping May 2019 Overlook deck June 2019 Benching and seating July 2019 City Manager s Report- October 12, 2018 Page 2 Public Parking Garage The project goes before Design Review Committee and Development Review Board for a second time on Monday night. This is another opportunity for public feedback, in addition to the Council meetings and hearings also scheduled. David Grover, PE, from RSG issued the trip generation and distribution report associated with the proposed hotel and public parking garage. The study took a conservative (i.e. worst-case) look at trip generation, noting that the analysis assumes that all trips associated with the garage are new trips, but adding that in fact some of those vehicles are already on the road network. He added, It is possible that the actual impact of the new garage will be smaller than estimated here. Based on our findings, we conclude that the LOS (level of service) at the study intersections will be acceptable for most approaches, the report concluded. For the northbound approach at Taylor Street, the operations [in the design year] are expected to be in a failed condition with and without traffic from the proposed project. The full report is attached. DPW Director Tom McArdle is reviewing the report and expects to issue his analysis by Monday, prior to the DRB meeting that evening. The report scope exceeded the VTrans analysis requirements for this amount of traffic. The city requested that a level of service also be included. Scooters We received the indemnification and insurance language as well as Bird s certificate of insurance. All appears to be in place for their roll out (bad pun) next week. Legal unchanged The City s petition to enter the proceedings concerning GMP s re-construction of the Marshfield Dam has been approved. We are now a party to the matter, for the purpose of monitoring the information in case there is anything relevant to the city. Legal unchanged In the appeal by Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) of the City s WWTF discharge permit, the matter has now been fully briefed by all parties, including motions for summary judgment, responses thereto and reply filings. In its submissions to the Court, the City supported the legal briefs filed by the State of Vermont, Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) and also filed a separate reply memo addressing the issue of whether the discharge permit authorized an increase in phosphorous, as CLF has claimed. A hearing before the Environmental Court was held on July 30 th to present oral arguments on the motions. We are now awaiting rulings on the motions and summary judgement. Council Chambers & Memorial Room Audio/Visual Access AV will be upgrading our sound and video system in the Council Chambers and Memorial Room. Installation will take two to three days starting Wednesday, December 5 th. City of Montpelier Help Wanted View the latest job opportunities at https://vt-montpelier.civicplus.com/jobs.aspx View the latest City committee vacancies at http://www.montpelier-vt.org/civicalerts.aspx?cid=22

WEEKLY REPORTS FROM DEPARTMENT HEADS City Manager s Report- October 12, 2018 Page 3 Community Justice Center The Montpelier Community Justice Center is excited to announce that filmmaker Bess O Brien is bringing her new film Coming Home to Montpelier. The movie provides an in-depth look at the work of Circles of Support and Accountability (COSAs) in Vermont and features a Montpelier COSA. Coming Home focuses on five core members as they navigate the challenges of reentering their communities after incarceration. The film highlights volunteers, staff and core members of the Barre, Montpelier, St. Johnsbury and Hartford CJCs. Bess O Brien is an award-winning documentary filmmaker and theater producer whose work focuses on pressing social issues. Her films shed light on the human stories behind opiate addiction, foster care, domestic violence, eating disorders, incarceration, and bullying. The film will be shown at the Savoy Theater in Montpelier on October 18 at 7:00 pm. The presentation is free, and donations are accepted. Watch the trailer at https://vimeo.com/288447403. See Press Release attached to this report. Planning The City of Montpelier was selected as the winner of the Stone Environmental s Vermont Municipal Arc GIS HUB competition. This grant award will allow Montpelier to develop a community web application to utilize the power of local information and stories to drive civic engagement and support local initiatives. ArcGIS HUB is a web based, two-way community engagement platform that can be customized, including interactive maps, informative charts, narrative story maps, dashboards, and a place to collaborate and connect with members of the community. The web application also helps communities enlist citizens to gather data in a useful digital format through surveys, development proposals, community events, and meet ups. The City would like to thank Stone Environmental for their generosity in establishing this grant competition and for selecting Montpelier to be the first winner. We look forward to working with their team over the coming year to get this project on line. Public Works Shared Use Path Project Granite St Gallison Hill Road: Little has changed from our report of October 5th. Currently awaiting approval of material & product submittals. Staff met with the contractor and engineer to receive a presentation about the proposed wall product materials, color selection for the pre-cast blocks to match the native stone, and the protective sealant. Work planned for the week of October 15th includes the installation of erosion control devices and check dams, tree protection systems, and installation of the project definition fencing. First Ave Sidewalk Reconstruction: The main work force from the streets division will continue work on the sidewalk reconstruction project. The curb base has been prepared a new curbing installation begun. We anticipate full completion by about the 19th or soon after. Lague Drive Reconstruction: We expect the contractor will complete the road reconstruction by the middle of next week. We are now attempting to obtain a schedule commitment from paving contractor and expect to have everything wrapped up including restoration by the end of the month with the possible exception of the new guardrail. One Taylor Street Transit Center: Water, wastewater, and stormwater connections on Taylor Street have been made. The contractor will continue to pour walls for the building. They will also be mobilizing to the west side of the North Branch to drive piles for the new pedestrian bridge abutments.

City Manager s Report- October 12, 2018 Page 4 Main, State & Elm Street Class One Highway Paving project: This contract remains open. The contractor has finally begun work on the punch list items including addressing some of the puddles that have been mentioned recently at City Council meetings. The contractor is also now applying a surface treatment to a few sections of the concrete sidewalks which have begun to spall. This repair technique will be evaluated in the spring to determine if this will be an acceptable long term solution. We ll also be reevaluating the untreated areas to see if the condition worsens or has stabilized. Northfield Street: Paving of the repaired section on Northfield Street along with other hand paving work located along Northfield Street. Miscellaneous: Our bagged leaf program is now in full swing. Please check the schedule for our daily pick-up areas. Other customary fall work is also underway including storm system inspection and cleaning, seasonal sign changes, and placing our orders for salt, sand and liquid de-icing materials, etc. The equipment division will be preparing for winter operations making ready our critical equipment for use on short notice as the season changes. Community Services Enchanted Forest! The Parks and Trees crew has been preparing for the Enchanted Forest taking place the afternoon and evening of Saturday, Oct. 13. Hubbard Park will turn into an even more enchanted forest; with a pumpkin lit road to the tower, hay wagon rides and guided tours to four performances in different locations throughout the forest. Since the event sold out last year, this year we are trying out an added event on Sunday. Sunday afternoon, the pumpkins and lanterns will be re-lit and we invite community members to come for a self-guided, performancefree by donation stroll through the forest. Repairs to Mountain Biking Infrastructure in North Branch River Park On Sunday, October 7, 2018, seven Norwich College students and 7 members from the local mountain bike club, MAMBA, as well as John Pelkey, helped replace decking and repair five bridge along the mountain bike path in the North Branch River Park. Congratulations Montpelier Youth Track! On Thursday, October 12, 2018, Arne McMullen was pleased to accept on behalf of the Youth Track program, the 2018 State Championship for Small Communities. Ski & Skate Sale Winter is coming.and so are winter sports! Get ready for your favorite winter activities by shopping the Recreation Department s Ski and Skate sale at Montpelier High School on October 20th. Volunteers at the sale get access to a special preview sale on Friday, October 19th! Please consider volunteering as either a check in volunteer on Friday, October 19th or at the sale the morning and afternoon of October 20th. For more information or to sign up today, please call or email Becky at rjohnston@montpelier-vt.org or 802-225-8694. Spooktacular Halloween Party Children in grades six and below are invited to join us for a not-so-scary Halloween party with games, prizes, and a magic show! We are seeking a team of volunteers to join us from Montpelier High School on October 27th from 1:00-2:30pm. These volunteers will help decorate the space, organize the games, and hand out prizes. If you re interested in joining us for the party, please call or email Becky at rjohnston@montpelier-vt.org or 802-225-8694. Governance Policies and Procedures for Montpelier Senior Activity Center At the Annual Meeting on June 19, MSAC membership approved a new Governance Policies and Procedures

City Manager s Report- October 12, 2018 Page 5 (GPP) document. The MSAC Advisory Council voted, at their September 17 meeting, to amend the GPP. The amendments and revised document are now available for viewing at: http://www.montpeliervt.org/369/msac-advisory-council MSAC s Swingin Over Sixty band to play at Fall Harvest Festival The MSAC Swingin Over Sixty band will once again be playing at the Montpelier High School Fall Festival on Thursday, October 18. New this year, the band will be joined by a high school pianist to round out their sound. MSAC Kitchen Receives near Perfect Score on Latest Health Inspection A surprise visit by the State Health Inspector was no big deal at the Montpelier Senior Activity Center earlier this week. The kitchen facility received a score of a whopping 96%. Bravo! to Michael Morse of Good Taste Catering and the entire FEAST team for the professional care with which they treat the facility, keeping it up to code, sanitary, and in great working order. UPCOMING COUNCIL MEETINGS... Oct 24 Nov 14 Dec 12 Art Synergy Master Plan P&D Investment Committee appts. - ATCM Energy Advisory Committee appts. ATCM Design Review Committee appts. - ATCM Body Cam Policy (budget) MPD DID Budget MA Energy Efficiency Update Facilities Central Vermont Internet Rep. ACM Parklet Ordinance, 2 nd reading Budget Guidelines Finance Budget Schedule Finance Community Profile ACM CVPSA Board Presentation joint w/barre CC MTIC & Tree Board appointments ATCM Budget Finance/CM Official Map P&D Complete Streets Plan DPW Oct 29 (Mon.) Nov 28 Dec 19 Special Meeting Public Information session for special election items CM Report on PCI Targets DPW Main/Barre Corridor Study DPW Personnel Plan Revision CM/Finance Master Plan Update P&D Zoning Fixes P&D Budget Finance/CM Economic Development Summary P&D MDC goals/measures CM/MDC Housing Strategy (Purchasing land?) P&D Sabins Pasture Plan CM/P&D Tax Stabilization Policy CM/P&D/MDC Storefront Incentives CM/P&D Livable Wage/Min wage ordinances CM Ex-Officio Committee Appts ATCM Jan 2 Budget if needed Finance/CM Jan 9 Budget Finance/CM Voluntary rental inspection program P&D Jan 16 Budget public hearing CM Warning Public hearing CM Riverfront Access plan P&D District heat summer operations plan ACM Jan 24 (Thurs) Budget public hearing CM Warning Public hearing CM Charter Public hearing CM Bond public hearing/necessity res. CM Approve warning CM Audit Report - Finance Feb 13 Restructure revolving loan funds P&D Complete Ordinance review 1 st reading ATCM Manager Review CM Feb 27 Main/Barre Implementation Plan DPW Ordinance review 2 nd reading ATCM

City Manager s Report- October 12, 2018 Page 6 Not calendared as agenda items: Utilize TIF for applicable projects being done with Garage Reinstitute council budget survey CM done Implement municipal facility best practices for stormwater DPW - ongoing Ensure any new facility or renovation meets net zero goals Facilities Publish and Post resources for landlords and tenants ACM/P&D done Conduct public outreach about housing rights and issues ACM/P&D done Add public dashboard from Envisio (October) ATCM Community workshops on social justice if approved by council Continue W/S master plan DPW - ongoing Continue planning for CSO elimination DPW ongoing Seek grants for EV Charging stations P&D Employee parking incentive (possibly with Oct 24 parking plan) ACM/P&D Substance Abuse prevention program with schools CS For Budget: Upgrade street lights to LED DPW Consider Net Zero fund/benefit charge CM/MEAC Seek funding to expand COSA to work with DCF families CJC Prioritize non-fossil fuel based vehicles in equipment plan DPW/Finance One Taylor Street develop & Fund maintenance plan DPW Evaluate compatible fuel match DPW Police staffing and training MPD Replace aging fire vehicles MFD Facility Management CM/Facilities Community Services integration and staffing ACM/CS Pending Meeting items: Parks tour and meeting with Parks Commission - done Open Meeting/Public records briefing William Fraser City Manager

MEMO TO: Gregory Rabideau AIA, Rabideau Architects Inc FROM: David Grover PE DATE: October 11, 2018 SUBJECT: Proposed Capitol Plaza Hotel and Parking Garage Traffic Study Greg, RSG has projected the trip generation and distribution associated with the proposed Capitol Plaza hotel and parking garage in Montpelier, Vermont. The following memo explains the project background, previous studies, existing background traffic, trip generation, and trip distribution. PROJECT BACKGROUND Our understanding of the proposed project is as follows: An 81-room hotel and a 348-space parking garage will be constructed behind (south of) the existing Capitol Plaza Hotel and Conference Center on the existing parking lot (see Figure 1 and Figure 2). The parking garage will be built on two properties the Capitol Plaza lot and the Heney lot (see Figure 1 and Figure 2). The site lies on the corner of to the north and Taylor Street to the west and has access to both streets via existing curb cuts. The distribution of new trips leaving and entering the site are assumed to be the same as the existing traffic flows. Building the parking garage and hotel on the existing surface parking lot will remove 185 surface parking spaces. Therefore, the garage will create a net gain of 163 spaces on the site. 200 spaces will be leased to the hotels. 80 spaces will be leased as monthly passes. 30 spaces will be leased to a new 25-unit multifamily housing project, and the remaining 38 spaces will be used as pay-by-the hour spaces. We assume these hourly spaces will be utilized by retail shoppers for our analysis The garage will provide additional pay-by-the hour spaces as demand allows, and these spaces will generate more trips than the other uses. To be conservative, our analysis assumes that the hotel is half-full with the remaining spaces devoted to retail shoppers. Additional details are included in the Parking and Trip Generation section. RSG wrote a memo describing the existing background traffic and traffic generated by the proposed hotel dated March 1, 2018, which referenced a 2015 study by DuBois and King studying traffic operations at the intersection of Taylor Street and and a draft bus circulation study by DuBois and King. This memo expands on RSG s original findings. RSG 180 Battery Street, Suite 350, Burlington, Vermont 05401 www.rsginc.com

FIGURE 1: PROJECT LOCATION MAP FIGURE 2: SITE LAYOUT 2

The new hotel and the 49 PM peak hour trips associated with it have already received approval at the City level. This memo includes trips associated with the new hotel due to the nature of the parking analysis. This study investigates traffic changes associated with the new hotel and parking garage at two intersections: o o /Taylor Street and /Elm Street. This study uses parking and trip generation rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineer s (ITE) publications Parking Generation 1 and Trip Generation Manual 2 to calculate parking and trip generation respectively. This study assumes a design year of 2025. SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS STUDIES AND BACKGROUND TRAFFIC In their 2015 study, DuBois and King studied traffic operations at the intersection of Taylor Street and. This is a stop-controlled intersection where, running east-west, is free and Taylor Street (northbound) and Governor Davis Avenue (southbound) have stop signs. They found that traffic volumes had been declining in recent years. Although they counted turning movements at the intersection in 2015, they used higher 2013 counts by VTrans to assess level of service (LOS). Using Synchro 3, they found that, in the PM peak hour, the Taylor Street and Governor Davis Avenue approaches experience LOS F and E respectively. This intersection did not meet the warrant for a traffic signal. It did meet the warrant for all-way stop control, but that created unacceptable LOS on the approaches. Given the poor level of service of these side streets and the result of the all-way stop control warrant, DuBois and King recommended that the City reconfigure the intersection s lanes to provide two lanes on Taylor Street while removing the right turn lane from eastbound. The City plans to implement this change in an upcoming road maintenance project, and analysis in this memo assumes that the change has taken place. According to the Synchro worksheets in report, the changes result in a northbound left/through lane with LOS F and a right turn lane with LOS B. DuBois and King also performed field measurement of delays, and the Taylor Street approach showed delays equivalent to LOS D. They concluded that the Synchro analysis was overly conservative and that actual delays were not excessive for peak hour conditions. It should be noted that the Synchro analysis included peak hour factors (PHF) of 0.76 and 0.84 on the approaches (PHF less than 1.0 create larger volumes), and these increased the volumes used in the Synchro analysis. VTrans traditionally increases volumes to a design hour volume (DHV) and then uses a PHF of 1.0, i.e. does not increase volumes with a PHF. 1 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Parking Generation 4th Edition (Washington, D.C.: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2010). 2 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation 10th Edition (Washington, D.C.: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2017). 3 A traffic analysis software by Trafficware which implements Highway Capacity Analysis equations 3

Taylor Street Existing Drive West Taylor Street Existing Drive West The bus circulation study is still in a draft version, so its volumes are not finalized. DuBois and King presented 2022 traffic volumes at the intersection of Taylor Street and the future One Taylor Transit Center (south of the proposed hotel). These volumes are approximately 50 percent higher than the volumes in the 2015 study along Taylor Street between and the Carr Lot. They include traffic from the busses using the proposed Transit Center and the proposed apartment building on this site. DuBois and King note that it is likely that traffic will actually decrease with the addition of the Transit Center because the Carr Lot traffic will be removed. For this reason our traffic projections are not changed to account for the Transit Center. RSG s March 1, 2018 memo projected 2022 background traffic using the Taylor Street volumes included in DuBois and King s draft memo as these were the most recent traffic projections. VTrans published a 2018 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volume for west of Taylor Street which is used here to update the background traffic. The 2017 VTrans Redbook recommends using the %K value of a nearby Continuous Traffic Counter (CTC) to estimate DHV from AADT. The 2018 AADT on State street west of Taylor Street is 7,262 vehicles per day. The closest CTC is W024 on Memorial Drive, which has a 2017 %K value of 12.2%. The resulting DHV on west of Taylor Street is 886 vehicles during the peak hour. This is less than the 949 vehicles counted in the 2013 traffic counts and would indicate that the 2013 counts should be reduced for a traffic analysis. This analysis follows DuBois and King s methodology of using the 2013 turning movement counts without reducing them. The Redbook expects traffic to grow 3% between 2018 and 2025, so the 2013 turning movement counts are increased by 3%. Based on DuBois and King s findings and the 2018 DHV being lower than the 2013 turning movement counts, traffic has not increased in recent years. However, to follow the Redbook methodology, this analysis grows DHV traffic volumes by 3%. Trip generation of the new hotel from the March 1, 2018 memo (49 PM trips) remains unchanged. Future trip distribution is typically assumed to follow existing traffic flows. RSG observed vehicles entering and exiting the two project driveways on February 20, 2018 during the PM peak traffic hour (4:30-5:30 PM). Figure 3 shows the observed entrances and exits at the site driveways and the approximate distribution of trips entering and exiting the site. FIGURE 3: OBSERVED ENTRANCES AND EXITS AND TRIP DISTRIBUTION Observed Driveway Entrances and Exits Approximate Observed Trip Distribution 17 I50 22 25% I58 30% 10 8 49 15% 10% 60% C50 6 16 Existing Drive North C58 10% Existing Drive North 20% 19 30% Figure 4 shows the background traffic after adjusting for traffic growth to 2025. 4

FIGURE 4: BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 2025 AM Peak Hour 2025 PM Peak Hour 2025 Gov. Davis Ave. Elm Street Gov. Davis Ave. Elm Street 73 16 3 298 1 85 81 9 4 198 3 77 45 13 146 21 83 14 267 38 332 C10 350 179 C20 169 407 I10 316 203 I20 136 37 79 5 12 59 102 13 15 23 15 87 0 0 4 22 32 112 2 3 5 Taylor Street Parking Lot Taylor Street Parking Lot PARKING AND TRIP GENERATION Trip Generation is the number of trips a land use is expected to generate over a given time period based on previous observations in the Trip Generation Manual. Trip generation is used to understand how traffic will change as land uses change. Similarly, parking generation is the number of parking spots a land use is expected to require based on previous observations in Parking Generation. Both parking and trip generation are based on the size of a land use. This study examines the trip generation of an 81-room hotel and the net gain of 163 parking spaces at the project site. Trip generation for the hotel is straightforward, as explained in our previous memo. The proposed parking garage will not create new trips on the road network since people will not visit the garage for the garage s sake. Instead, drivers attracted to nearby land uses will park at the garage. Except for the hotel guests, these vehicles parking at the garage are already on the road network. Since they are going to a nearby land use, they may already be driving past the site in search of a parking space. In that case, the trip generation of the parking garage is zero trips. However, if one assumes that the vehicles entering and exiting the garage were originally not traversing Taylor Street or, then these vehicles will add volume to the study intersections. They may also be removed from traffic volumes from other parts of the City that are outside the scope of this study. To be conservative, this analysis assumes that all trips associated with the garage are new trips at the project intersections. It is possible that the actual impact of the new garage will be smaller than estimated here. The 348 parking garage spaces are associated with four land uses, whose trips are modeled based on ITE land use types. Hotel, ITE 310 200 spaces Multifamily Housing, ITE 221 30 spaces Hourly Spaces, ITE 820 Shopping Center 38 spaces, additional spaces as supply allows Monthly Spaces, ITE 701 (parking) or 710 (trips) General Office Building 80 spaces The garage will create 163 net new parking spaces whose trip generation is modeled here, 47% of the 348 garage spaces. These spaces are distributed to the land uses according to the above proportion in Figure 5. When spaces are not in use, they will be leased out on a pay-by-hour basis, also modeled as 5

820 Shopping Center. For this analysis, we assume that that half of the hotel spaces (47) are available as pay-by-hour (see Figure 5). The ITE 820 land use generates more trips than the hotel land use, so this scenario provides a more conservative approach. FIGURE 5: NEW PARKING SPACE ALLOCATIONS WHEN HOTEL IS FULL AND HALF-FULL Land Use Hotel Full Hotel Half-Full Hotel 94 47 Pay-By-Hour 18 65 Multifamily Housing 14 14 Office Building 37 37 Total 163 163 The number of Hotel rooms and Multifamily Housing units are known: 81 and 25 total units respectively. Since only 47% of the spaces are considered new, 12 of the 25 proposed Multifamily housing units will be modeled. All trips associated with the new hotel will be modeled; assuming the hotel is half full results in 41 rooms generating trips. No trips associated with the existing Capitol Plaza hotel will be modeled because they are already part of background traffic. The size of pay-by-hour and office building land uses are not known, so the ITE Parking Generation rate is used to calculate the size of a land use that the available parking can serve. This calculated land use size is then used to calculate the trip generation (Figure 6). Note that ITE Land Use 701 Office Building is used for parking generation while ITE Land Use 710 General Office Building is used for trip generation because Parking Generation and Trip Generation Manual do not have the same land use numbers for General Office Building. FIGURE 6: TRIP GENERATION TABLE The new parking garage and hotel are projected to generate 55 and 103 trips distributed between the site driveways in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. TRIP DISTRIBUTION Parking Generation Rate Trip Generation Rate Total Trips Enters Exits Land Use Spaces Size 310 Hotel AM 47 0.89 41 Rooms 0.47 19 11 8 310 Hotel PM 47 0.89 41 Rooms 0.60 25 13 12 820 Shopping Center AM 65 4.41 15 ksf 0.94 14 9 5 820 Shopping Center PM 65 4.41 15 ksf 3.81 56 27 29 221 Multifamily Housing AM 14 1.2 12 Dwelling Units 0.36 4 1 3 221 Multifamily Housing PM 14 1.2 12 Dwelling Units 0.44 5 3 2 701/710 General Office Building AM 37 2.47 15 ksf 1.16 17 15 2 701/710 General Office Building PM 37 2.47 15 ksf 1.15 17 3 14 Total AM 163 55 36 19 Total PM 163 103 45 58 Future trip distribution is typically assumed to follow existing traffic flows. Figure 7 shows the projected trip distribution according the observed existing traffic flows in Figure 3. 6

Taylor Street Existing Drive West Taylor Street Existing Drive West FIGURE 7: TRIP DISTRIBUTION DURING PEAK TRAFFIC HOURS New Trip Distribution - AM Peak Trip Generation New Trip Distribution - PM Peak Trip Generation 9 I76 11 11 I76 14 5 2 11 7 6 35 2 Existing Drive 6 Existing Drive C76 North C76 North 4 12 11 14 The new trips projected to be generated by the hotel and parking garage represent a modest increase in traffic at the two study intersections. During the PM peak hour, the project is projected to generate 30 trips that will pass through the Taylor Street and intersection and 49 trips through the and Elm Street intersection (Figure 8). 26 trips are projected to pass by the Transit Center s entrance during the PM peak traffic hour, approximately one trip every two minutes. FIGURE 8: NEW TRIPS THROUGH PROJECT INTERSECTIONS AM Trip Generation PM Trip Generation Gov. Davis Ave. Elm Street Gov. Davis Ave. Elm Street 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 20 0 9 C10 2 6 C20 5 11 I10 6 15 I20 7 5 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 Taylor Street Parking Lot Taylor Street Parking Lot Figure 9 shows the total traffic volume expected at the project intersections after the project. FIGURE 9: INTERSECTION VOLUMES AFTER PROJECT AM Peak Hour 2025 After Project PM Peak Hour 2025 After Project Gov. Davis Ave. Elm Street Gov. Davis Ave. Elm Street 73 16 3 303 1 85 81 9 4 205 3 77 45 13 151 21 83 14 286 38 341 C10 352 185 C20 174 418 I10 322 218 I20 143 42 79 5 12 66 102 13 15 24 16 87 0 0 4 25 35 112 2 3 5 Taylor Street Parking Lot Taylor Street Parking Lot VTrans Traffic Impact Study Guidelines 4 stipulate that a Traffic Impact Study should be considered when the proposed development generates 75 or more peak hour trips directly accessing the State Highway System. The study should analyze intersections that would see an increase of 75 4 Vermont Agency of Transportation Policy and Planning Division. Traffic Impact Study Guidelines. Electronic document, 2018. https://vtrans.vermont.gov/sites/aot/files/planning/documents/trafficresearch/ TISGuidelinesRevisedSeptember2018CGC.pdf 7

or more trips. Due to traffic being distributed between the two driveways, no intersection will see an increase of 75 of more trips. LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS Level-of-service (LOS) is a qualitative measure describing the operating conditions as perceived by motorists driving in a traffic stream. LOS is calculated using the procedures outlined in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. In addition to traffic volumes, key inputs include the number of lanes at each intersection, traffic control type (signalized or unsignalized), and the traffic signal timing plans. The 2010 Highway Capacity Manual defines six qualitative grades to describe the level of service at an intersection. Level-of-Service is based on the average control delay per vehicle. Figure 10 shows the various LOS grades and descriptions for signalized and unsignalized intersections. FIGURE 10: LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED AND UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS UNSIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED LOS CHARACTERISTICS TOTAL DELAY (SEC) TOTAL DELAY (SEC) A Little or no delay 10.0 10.0 B Short delays 10.1-15.0 10.1-20.0 C Average delays 15.1-25.0 20.1-35.0 D Long delays 25.1-35.0 35.1-55.0 E Very long delays 35.1-50.0 55.1-80.0 F Extreme delays > 50.0 > 80.0 The Highway Capacity Manual congestion reports within Synchro (v9), a traffic analysis software package from Trafficware routinely relied upon by transportation engineering professionals, were used to assess traffic congestion at the study intersections. Figure 11 shows projected LOS and delay for the study intersection before and after the project is completed for the AM and PM peak hours in 2025. FIGURE 11: LOS AT STUDY INTERSECTIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Background Traffic With Project Background Traffic With Project Intersections LOS Delay v/c LOS Delay v/c LOS Delay v/c LOS Delay v/c State St/Taylor St/Gov. Davis Ave EB, along A <1 0.04 A <1 0.04 A 1 0.07 A 1 0.07 WB, along A 2 0.07 A 2 0.07 A 2 0.10 A 2 0.10 NB Left/Through, along Taylor Street D 34 0.23 D 35 0.25 F 62 0.46 F 73 0.54 NB Right, along Tayloer Street B 12 0.14 B 12 0.14 B 14 0.22 B 15 0.23 SB, along Gov. Davis Avenue C 16 0.21 C 16 0.22 C 19 0.26 C 19 0.27 State St/Elm St/Driveway EB, along A 4 0.11 A 4 0.11 A 5 0.19 A 5 0.21 WB, along A <1 0.01 A <1 0.01 A <1 0.01 A <1 0.01 NB, at driveway A 9 0.01 A 9 0.01 C 18 0.04 C 20 0.04 SB, along Elm Street C 19 0.61 C 20 0.63 D 26 0.63 D 32 0.68 Most approaches are projected to operate within an acceptable level of service. However, the northbound left/through lane on Taylor Street is projected to operate at LOS F before and after the project. This is similar to DuBois and King s finding in their 2015 study of the intersection. Also, this methodology does not account for drivers on waving in Taylor street turns, which 8

happens frequently. For that reason, the delays experienced by drivers turning off Taylor Street may be less than projected. Based on our findings, we conclude that the LOS at the study intersections will be acceptable for most approaches. For the northbound approach at Taylor Street, the operations are expected to be in a failed condition with and without traffic from the proposed project. Please let me know if you have any questions about this material or require additional information. 9

HCM 2010 TWSC 2025 AM 1: Taylor Street/Gov. Davis Ave & No Build Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 45 332 37 79 350 13 23 15 87 3 16 73 Future Vol, veh/h 45 332 37 79 350 13 23 15 87 3 16 73 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 22 0 21 21 0 22 15 0 22 22 0 15 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None Storage Length 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 200 4 4 4 Veh in Median Storage, # 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Grade, % 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 6 8 3 4 8 9 7 5 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 45 332 37 79 350 13 23 15 87 3 16 73 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 385 0 0 390 0 0 1036 1005 394 1007 1017 394 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 462 462 4 537 537 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 574 543 4 470 480 4 Critical Hdwy 4.12 4 4 4.13 4 4 7.19 6.57 6.25 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.19 5.57 4 6.1 5.5 4 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.19 5.57 4 6.1 5.5 4 Follow4up Hdwy 2.218 4 4 2.227 4 4 3.581 4.063 3.345 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap41 Maneuver 1173 4 4 1163 4 4 203 237 649 221 239 659 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 567 556 4 532 526 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 492 512 4 578 558 4 Platoon blocked, % 4 4 4 4 Mov Cap41 Maneuver 1158 4 4 1142 4 4 147 198 626 156 200 639 Mov Cap42 Maneuver 4 4 4 4 4 4 147 198 4 156 200 4 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 530 520 4 497 471 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 380 459 4 451 521 4 Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.9 1.5 18.3 15.6 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 164 626 1158 4 4 1142 4 4 431 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.232 0.139 0.039 4 4 0.069 4 4 0.213 HCM Control Delay (s) 33.5 11.7 8.2 0 4 8.4 0 4 15.6 HCM Lane LOS D B A A 4 A A 4 C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.9 0.5 0.1 4 4 0.2 4 4 0.8 Synchro 9 Report RSG Page 1

HCM 2010 TWSC 2025 AM 2: Driveway/Elm Street & No Build Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 9.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 146 179 5 12 169 21 0 0 4 85 1 298 Future Vol, veh/h 146 179 5 12 169 21 0 0 4 85 1 298 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None Storage Length 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Veh in Median Storage, # 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Grade, % 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Heavy Vehicles, % 3 6 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 Mvmt Flow 146 179 5 12 169 21 0 0 4 85 1 298 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 190 0 0 184 0 0 828 688 182 680 680 181 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 474 474 4 204 204 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 354 214 4 476 476 4 Critical Hdwy 4.13 4 4 4.1 4 4 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.12 6.5 6.21 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.1 5.5 4 6.12 5.5 4 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.1 5.5 4 6.12 5.5 4 Follow4up Hdwy 2.227 4 4 2.2 4 4 3.5 4 3.3 3.518 4 3.309 Pot Cap41 Maneuver 1378 4 4 1403 4 4 293 372 866 365 376 864 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 575 561 4 798 737 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 667 729 4 570 560 4 Platoon blocked, % 4 4 4 4 Mov Cap41 Maneuver 1377 4 4 1403 4 4 173 325 866 328 328 863 Mov Cap42 Maneuver 4 4 4 4 4 4 173 325 4 328 328 4 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 507 495 4 704 730 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 431 722 4 500 494 4 Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 3.5 0.5 9.2 19.4 HCM LOS A C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 866 1377 4 4 1403 4 4 632 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 0.106 4 4 0.009 4 4 0.608 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.2 7.9 0 4 7.6 0 4 19.4 HCM Lane LOS A A A 4 A A 4 C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 0.4 4 4 0 4 4 4.5 Synchro 9 Report RSG Page 2

HCM 2010 TWSC 2025 AM 1: Taylor Street/Gov. Davis Ave & Build Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 45 341 42 79 352 13 24 16 87 3 16 73 Future Vol, veh/h 45 341 42 79 352 13 24 16 87 3 16 73 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 22 0 21 21 0 22 15 0 22 22 0 15 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None Storage Length 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 200 4 4 4 Veh in Median Storage, # 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Grade, % 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 6 8 3 4 8 9 7 5 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 45 341 42 79 352 13 24 16 87 3 16 73 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 387 0 0 404 0 0 1049 1018 405 1021 1033 396 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 473 473 4 539 539 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 576 545 4 482 494 4 Critical Hdwy 4.12 4 4 4.13 4 4 7.19 6.57 6.25 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.19 5.57 4 6.1 5.5 4 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.19 5.57 4 6.1 5.5 4 Follow4up Hdwy 2.218 4 4 2.227 4 4 3.581 4.063 3.345 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap41 Maneuver 1171 4 4 1149 4 4 199 233 639 217 234 658 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 559 550 4 530 525 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 491 510 4 569 550 4 Platoon blocked, % 4 4 4 4 Mov Cap41 Maneuver 1156 4 4 1128 4 4 144 195 616 151 196 638 Mov Cap42 Maneuver 4 4 4 4 4 4 144 195 4 151 196 4 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 522 513 4 494 470 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 378 457 4 441 513 4 Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.9 1.5 19 15.8 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 161 616 1156 4 4 1128 4 4 426 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.248 0.141 0.039 4 4 0.07 4 4 0.216 HCM Control Delay (s) 34.7 11.8 8.2 0 4 8.4 0 4 15.8 HCM Lane LOS D B A A 4 A A 4 C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1 0.5 0.1 4 4 0.2 4 4 0.8 Synchro 9 Report RSG Page 1

HCM 2010 TWSC 2025 AM 2: Driveway/Elm Street & Build Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 9.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 151 185 5 12 174 21 0 0 4 85 1 303 Future Vol, veh/h 151 185 5 12 174 21 0 0 4 85 1 303 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None Storage Length 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Veh in Median Storage, # 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Grade, % 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Heavy Vehicles, % 3 6 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 Mvmt Flow 151 185 5 12 174 21 0 0 4 85 1 303 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 195 0 0 190 0 0 852 709 188 701 701 186 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 490 490 4 209 209 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 362 219 4 492 492 4 Critical Hdwy 4.13 4 4 4.1 4 4 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.12 6.5 6.21 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.1 5.5 4 6.12 5.5 4 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.1 5.5 4 6.12 5.5 4 Follow4up Hdwy 2.227 4 4 2.2 4 4 3.5 4 3.3 3.518 4 3.309 Pot Cap41 Maneuver 1372 4 4 1396 4 4 282 362 859 353 365 859 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 564 552 4 793 733 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 661 726 4 558 551 4 Platoon blocked, % 4 4 4 4 Mov Cap41 Maneuver 1371 4 4 1396 4 4 163 314 859 316 317 858 Mov Cap42 Maneuver 4 4 4 4 4 4 163 314 4 316 317 4 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 495 484 4 695 726 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 422 719 4 487 483 4 Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 3.5 0.4 9.2 20.3 HCM LOS A C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 859 1371 4 4 1396 4 4 622 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 0.11 4 4 0.009 4 4 0.625 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.2 8 0 4 7.6 0 4 20.3 HCM Lane LOS A A A 4 A A 4 C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 0.4 4 4 0 4 4 4.8 Synchro 9 Report RSG Page 2

HCM 2010 TWSC 2025 PM 1: Taylor Street/Gov. Davis Ave & No Build Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 83 407 59 102 316 14 22 32 112 4 9 81 Future Vol, veh/h 83 407 59 102 316 14 22 32 112 4 9 81 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 52 0 21 21 0 52 41 0 79 79 0 41 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None Storage Length 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 200 4 4 4 Veh in Median Storage, # 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Grade, % 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 2 4 3 7 5 3 1 0 0 1 Mvmt Flow 83 407 59 102 316 14 22 32 112 4 9 81 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 382 0 0 487 0 0 1237 1210 537 1277 1232 416 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 624 624 4 579 579 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 613 586 4 698 653 4 Critical Hdwy 4.14 4 4 4.14 4 4 7.15 6.53 6.21 7.1 6.5 6.21 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.15 5.53 4 6.1 5.5 4 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.15 5.53 4 6.1 5.5 4 Follow4up Hdwy 2.236 4 4 2.236 4 4 3.545 4.027 3.309 3.5 4 3.309 Pot Cap41 Maneuver 1166 4 4 1066 4 4 151 182 546 145 179 639 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 468 476 4 504 504 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 475 495 4 434 467 4 Platoon blocked, % 4 4 4 4 Mov Cap41 Maneuver 1126 4 4 996 4 4 98 135 501 69 132 590 Mov Cap42 Maneuver 4 4 4 4 4 4 98 135 4 69 132 4 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 414 421 4 434 421 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 339 414 4 262 413 4 Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.3 2.1 29.7 18.7 HCM LOS D C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 117 501 1126 4 4 996 4 4 357 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.462 0.224 0.074 4 4 0.102 4 4 0.263 HCM Control Delay (s) 61.5 14.3 8.5 0 4 9 0 4 18.7 HCM Lane LOS F B A A 4 A A 4 C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 2.4 0.9 0.2 4 4 0.3 4 4 1.1 Synchro 9 Report RSG Page 1

HCM 2010 TWSC 2025 PM 2: Driveway/Elm Street & No Build Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 10.2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 267 203 13 15 136 38 2 3 5 77 3 198 Future Vol, veh/h 267 203 13 15 136 38 2 3 5 77 3 198 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 3 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None Storage Length 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Veh in Median Storage, # 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Grade, % 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 0 0 2 5 0 0 0 1 33 2 Mvmt Flow 267 203 13 15 136 38 2 3 5 77 3 198 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 176 0 0 216 0 0 1030 950 213 938 937 157 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 744 744 4 187 187 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 286 206 4 751 750 4 Critical Hdwy 4.12 4 4 4.1 4 4 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.11 6.83 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.1 5.5 4 6.11 5.83 4 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.1 5.5 4 6.11 5.83 4 Follow4up Hdwy 2.218 4 4 2.2 4 4 3.5 4 3.3 3.509 4.297 3.318 Pot Cap41 Maneuver 1400 4 4 1366 4 4 214 262 832 246 235 889 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 410 424 4 817 691 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 726 735 4 404 376 4 Platoon blocked, % 4 4 4 4 Mov Cap41 Maneuver 1400 4 4 1363 4 4 136 202 830 199 181 888 Mov Cap42 Maneuver 4 4 4 4 4 4 136 202 4 199 181 4 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 321 332 4 639 682 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 555 725 4 311 294 4 Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 4.5 0.6 18.3 26.4 HCM LOS C D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 281 1400 4 4 1363 4 4 444 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.036 0.191 4 4 0.011 4 4 0.626 HCM Control Delay (s) 18.3 8.2 0 4 7.7 0 4 26.4 HCM Lane LOS C A A 4 A A 4 D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0.7 4 4 0 4 4 4.8 Synchro 9 Report RSG Page 2

HCM 2010 TWSC 2025 PM 1: Taylor Street/Gov. Davis Ave & Build Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 83 418 66 102 322 14 25 35 112 4 9 81 Future Vol, veh/h 83 418 66 102 322 14 25 35 112 4 9 81 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 52 0 21 21 0 52 41 0 79 79 0 41 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None Storage Length 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 200 4 4 4 Veh in Median Storage, # 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Grade, % 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 2 4 3 7 5 3 1 0 0 1 Mvmt Flow 83 418 66 102 322 14 25 35 112 4 9 81 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 388 0 0 505 0 0 1257 1230 551 1299 1256 422 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 638 638 4 585 585 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 619 592 4 714 671 4 Critical Hdwy 4.14 4 4 4.14 4 4 7.15 6.53 6.21 7.1 6.5 6.21 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.15 5.53 4 6.1 5.5 4 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.15 5.53 4 6.1 5.5 4 Follow4up Hdwy 2.236 4 4 2.236 4 4 3.545 4.027 3.309 3.5 4 3.309 Pot Cap41 Maneuver 1160 4 4 1049 4 4 146 177 536 140 173 634 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 460 469 4 501 501 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 471 492 4 425 458 4 Platoon blocked, % 4 4 4 4 Mov Cap41 Maneuver 1120 4 4 980 4 4 94 130 492 64 127 586 Mov Cap42 Maneuver 4 4 4 4 4 4 94 130 4 64 127 4 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 406 414 4 430 418 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 334 410 4 252 404 4 Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.2 2.1 34.8 19.3 HCM LOS D C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 112 492 1120 4 4 980 4 4 346 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.536 0.228 0.074 4 4 0.104 4 4 0.272 HCM Control Delay (s) 72.7 14.5 8.5 0 4 9.1 0 4 19.3 HCM Lane LOS F B A A 4 A A 4 C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 3.1 0.9 0.2 4 4 0.3 4 4 1.1 Synchro 9 Report RSG Page 1

HCM 2010 TWSC 2025 PM 2: Driveway/Elm Street & Build Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 11.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 286 218 13 15 143 38 2 3 5 77 3 205 Future Vol, veh/h 286 218 13 15 143 38 2 3 5 77 3 205 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 3 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None 4 4 None Storage Length 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Veh in Median Storage, # 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Grade, % 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 0 0 2 5 0 0 0 1 33 2 Mvmt Flow 286 218 13 15 143 38 2 3 5 77 3 205 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 183 0 0 231 0 0 1093 1010 228 998 997 164 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 797 797 4 194 194 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 296 213 4 804 803 4 Critical Hdwy 4.12 4 4 4.1 4 4 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.11 6.83 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.1 5.5 4 6.11 5.83 4 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 6.1 5.5 4 6.11 5.83 4 Follow4up Hdwy 2.218 4 4 2.2 4 4 3.5 4 3.3 3.509 4.297 3.318 Pot Cap41 Maneuver 1392 4 4 1349 4 4 193 242 816 224 216 881 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 383 401 4 810 685 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 717 730 4 378 355 4 Platoon blocked, % 4 4 4 4 Mov Cap41 Maneuver 1392 4 4 1346 4 4 118 182 814 178 163 880 Mov Cap42 Maneuver 4 4 4 4 4 4 118 182 4 178 163 4 Stage 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 293 306 4 618 676 4 Stage 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 541 720 4 283 271 4 Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 4.6 0.6 19.8 31.7 HCM LOS C D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 253 1392 4 4 1346 4 4 417 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.04 0.205 4 4 0.011 4 4 0.683 HCM Control Delay (s) 19.8 8.3 0 4 7.7 0 4 31.7 HCM Lane LOS C A A 4 A A 4 D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0.8 4 4 0 4 4 5.9 Synchro 9 Report RSG Page 2