Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout16-05 Traffic Impact AnalysisA Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run Located in: Frederick County, Virginia Prepared for: Cl Miller and Smith Greystone Properties 8401 Greensboro Drive Suite 300 McLean, VA 22102 Prepared by: Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Eng neers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Ar chi tects. A y l � M A-j l 300 Foxcroft Avenue, Suite 200 AL Martinsburg, West Virginia 25401 T 304.264.2711 F 304.264.3671 July 12, 2005 (Revised from the November 2004 submission) 0 r OVERVIEW Report Summary Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc (PHR +A) has prepared this "revised" traffic study (from November 2004 submission) for Miller and Smith and Greystone Properties to present the impacts associated with the proposed Willow Run development located northeast of the Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622)/Route 37 interchange in Frederick County, Virginia. The purpose of this report is to provide new Phase 2 (full build -out) analyses assuming the anticipated future roadway network that includes the following: 1) Completion of Jubal Early Drive Extended from the existing Jubal Early Drive, through Willow Run, to Merrimans Lane; 2) Completion of Willow Run Drive from Jubal Early Drive Extended to Cedar Creek Grade and 3) Completion of minor spine road from Jubal early Drive Extended to Cedar Creek Grade. The total Willow Run development remains consistent with the November 2004 submission that includes: 850 units of residential, 50,000 square feet of retail, 50,000 square feet of office and a 10,000 square feet of restaurant space. Primary access will be provided via Jubal Early Drive Extended (proposed roadway) and Cedar Creek Grade via Willow Run Drive (proposed roadway). The proposed development will be built -out by the year 2010. Phase 1 analyses, as published in the November 2004 submission, is provided as well. Figure 1 is provided to illustrate the location of Willow Run with respect to the surrounding roadway network. • Methodology The traffic impacts accompanying the Willow Run development were obtained through a sequence of activities as the narratives that follow document: • Assessment of background traffic including other planned projects in the area of impact, • Calculation of trip generation for Willow Run, • Distribution and assignment of Willow Run generated trips onto the completed study area road network, • Analysis of capacity and level of service using the newest version of the highway capacity software, HCS -2000, for existing and future conditions. • P � A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page I 0 0 No Scale r ^+ !r y i i '"'c'Y Rk w 50 Nprthwe o:Hill =Crest. S t a r�i y`" y ��� k rlt' �t I L d Xx #� r �v1 ah ti n t7 r e �? " 522 `. C5g11 YPYr � f < SITE 1� f ! 2 `- � i e37 n b aw ,! Ott C 4 ems i'n, �~ e d Ced Creek 1 Figure 1 Vicinity Map PH \..L i IL A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 2 0 EXISTING CONDITIONS Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc (PHR +A) obtained AM and PM peak hour manual turning movement counts at the intersections of Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622) / Merrimans Lane (Route 621), Cedar Creek Grade /Route 37 interchange ramps, Cedar Creek Grade /Harvest Drive, US Route 50/Route 37 interchange ramps, US Route 50/Merrimans Lane, Merrimans Lane /Breckinridge Lane, Jubal Early Drive/Handley Avenue and Jubal Early Drive /Valley Avenue. Additionally, 24 -hour automatic "tube" counts were conducted along the Cedar Creek Grade west of Harvest Drive. PHR +A established the ADT (Average Daily Traffic) along each of the study area roadway links using an assumed "k" factor (the ratio of PM peak hour traffic volumes to 24 -hour traffic volumes) of 10 %. Figure 2 shows the existing ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 3 shows the respective existing lane geometry and AM /PM peak hour levels of service. All traffic count data and HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. • PW A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of July Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 3 • 1 X194(288) 4-439(126 ( Route 50 / (43 99-.* No Scale C Ne b '� •v 45(43) 274 (1067) Route 50 X133(159) ( 44)311 �h l ( ( 47)981' .N 4 �n A .. X461(1086) / 4° 53(45) � 228(W3) 16(19) (41fip064--► p w p Route 50 8 roek. Handley (388)537 3 end o Ave 621 Lp �w q i Q r in m n w > o � E Handley Ave 1 y� 64 (360 re 15(89j ) & c k � nd 6e 37 y� o f � 60(3 ro O FF �'c d �36 *ft ft 15 6(265) 23 4(365) — 51(98) 275 855) 24(63) 622 I603p��� 4� 39(128) e�59(91) 1• eek (14)211 P Cedar Ct (51)53 1 Grade ( e ^ n 1 g� o %387(662 4.56(115) X27(147) (45)89.,x' Route 622 e"43(69) ( 441 (59)1081 w Route 622 z (56)47 n AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) I R +n Figure 2 Existing ADT and AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes • P � A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 4 • 0. 0 L 4— D(C) Signalized 4— Intersection Route 50 LOS = o(c; `J' Signalized G a� Intersection � �B(C) rte► a Route 50 � a Q e Unsignalized Intersection Q Unsignalized < ° Intersection av o O � ss c � �J Figure 3 A(B) r 1 V � Signalized (C)B 7V Intersection 0.0 LOS =R(C) L Two -Lane ry Roadway LOS = A(A) No Scat E o C �A(B)* i y Handley 1 Ave M G� Unsignalized d � Intersection Made �Ri Unsignalized Intersection * Denotes critical unsignalized movement AM Peak HOUr(PM Peak Hour) Existing Lane Geometry and Levels of Service P A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 5 _ ✓pb ary f . C(C) r r Pjr Signalized Intersection 4— LOS =QQ *(B)A Unsignalized lnlersection Made �Ri Unsignalized Intersection * Denotes critical unsignalized movement AM Peak HOUr(PM Peak Hour) Existing Lane Geometry and Levels of Service P A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 5 PHASE 1 TRAFFIC ANALYSES (2007) In coordination with the completion of Phase 1 of Willow Run, Jubal Early Drive Extended is to be constructed from the existing Jubal Early Drive through the westernmost extents of site to provide a connection from the existing Jubal Early Drive into the site with Merriman's Lane (Route 621). 2007 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS In order to accurately depict future conditions within the study area, PHR +A utilized the following traffic study to determine the trips associated with not yet completed area developments: A Traffic Impact Analvsis of the WWW Property by PHR +A, dated December 5, 2002. Based upon the 7 th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report and the aforementioned traffic study, Tables la and lb are provided to summarize the calculated trips associated with each of the 2007 "other developments ". Table la Background Development #1: WWW Property Phase 1 Trip Generation Summary 0 17 h Land Use Amount Code AM Perk Hour PM Peak Hour I ADT In Out Total In I Out I Total 750 Office Park 5 acres 350 30 381 34 194 228 2,241 813 Discount Superstore 135,000 SF 127 122 248 253 263 516 6,101 820 Shopping Center 25,000 SF 43 27 70 121 131 252 2,795 Total 520 179 699 408 588 995 11,137 Table lb Background Development #2: Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties Phase 1 Trip Generation Summary • ITT AM Peak Hour PM Peak hour Land Use Anwmrt ADT In Out Total In Out Total Code Valley Health Systems Property 150 Warehousing (Distribution Center) 5 acres 63 25 88 25 47 73 383 710 Office (Administration Building) 50,000 SF 94 13 107 23 112 135 779 750 Office Park 5 acres 350 30 381 34 194 228 2,241 620 Nursing Home 24,000 SF 7 4 10 4 6 10 164 253 Elderly Housing- Attached 80 units 4 2 6 5 3 8 278 Sub -total 518 74 592 91 363 454 3,846 Degrange Property 312 Business Hotel 50 rooms 17 12 29 19 12 31 364 760 Research & Development Park 5 acres 70 13 84 9 68 77 398 820 Shopping Center 25,000 SF 43 27 70 121 131 252 2,795 912 Drive -in Bank 2.400 SF 17 13 30 66 66 131 805 832 H -T Restaurant 7,600 SF 37 34 70 50 33 83 991 Sub -101a1 184 100 284 264 310 574 5,352 Total 702 173 875 355 672 1,027 9,198 P H A A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 6 In addition to the trips relating to the specific background developments shown in Tables la and lb, the existing traffic volumes were increased along study area roadways using an historic growth rate of 5% per year (compounded annually) through Year 2007 as determined in aforementioned WWW Property traffic study. Figure 4 shows the 2007 background ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 5 shows the corresponding 2007 background lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. PHASE 1 TRIP GENERATION PHR +A determined the number of trips entering and exiting the site using equations and rates provided in the 7' Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report Table 2 was prepared to summarize the trip generation associated with the Phase 1 Willow Run development. Table 2 Proposed Development: Willow Run Phase 1 Trip Generation Summary I FL Land Use Amount Code AM Peak Hour I'M Peak Hour ADT In Ou[ Total In Out Total 210 Single Family Detached 315 units 251 Elderly Housing. Detached 85 units S7 9 172 1' 230 24 190 27 I I 1 17 301 44 3,150 472 Total 67 188 254 1 216 1 128 345 3,622 PHASE 1 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the road network surrounding the proposed site. PHR +A utilized the trip distribution percentages shown in Figure 6 to assign the Phase 1 Willow Run trips (Table 2) throughout the study area roadway network. Figure 7 shows the respective Phase 1 development- generated AM/PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments. PHASE 12007 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS The Phase 1 Willow Run assigned trips (Figure 7) were added to the 2007 background traffic volumes (Figure 4) to obtain 2007 Phase 1 build -out conditions. Figure 8 shows Phase 1 2007 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 9 shows the respective Phase 12007 build -out lane geometry and levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run PH \_L L July12, 7 Page 7 0 • h i 1358) N 4 & recL1 j � 1p3 1 r ^ _ n�N 28(73) � 45(148; f�68(105) G6) 1 t� 5 9) 14 ( bo O 41, (65)54 `t No Scale �..� 0bal Farly 1� �� °Extend I f�154(I8A) bpd lb (5])36 l M 10 L 69 (848)8 ° ra (4 24 °S �6j �� °27](423) (286)113�'1i o`'ti�o� Ul �� ( 0 �� � J Z° Br 1 19(20) Handley "k n'id � Ave 621 a /.p rn (698)815 tz 622 .4 Creek 1358) N 4 & recL1 j � 1p3 1 r ^ _ n�N 28(73) � 45(148; f�68(105) G6) 1 t� 5 9) 14 ( bo O 41, (65)54 `t Handley Ave �..� 0bal Farly �i °Extend bpd lb 37 l M 10 L 69 ° ra (4 24 °S �6j �� °27](423) SITE Ul �� ( 0 �� � 59(113) J� 4 (41)59 �/i 40 318(990) N (698)815 622 .4 Creek — Cedat &ade X448(766) - 4°65(133) 3 Route 622 l.y j e AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Figure 4 Phase 1: 2007 Background ADT and AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes P \_L 1 A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 8 • • JI Signalized Inersection C(C) LOS = C(C) Q s Unsignalized Intersection Two -Lane Roadway LOS= A(A) S z(B Unsignalized Intersection Cedar Creek 4 No Scal a_ d > BB)* Handb 1 t t Ave v O Unsignalized Intersect v G 4- D(D) = r C(C) 4— 1 t� Ruu J ro `J Intersection LOS = C(C) JI Signalized Inersection C(C) LOS = C(C) Q s Unsignalized Intersection Two -Lane Roadway LOS= A(A) S z(B Unsignalized Intersection Cedar Creek 4 No Scal a_ d > BB)* Handb 1 t t Ave v O Unsignalized Intersect v G D(D) Q � ♦ Signalized J ro `J Intersection LOS = C(C) G A(B) r Y nalized (C)B Intersection LOS =R(C) / / 4/ .Y C 3i �i 3; SITE Intersection Suggested Suggested lmprorements Rt 622 4_—_ A(B) ' pa - x 00 py& % e A Figure 5 Signalized Intersection Los = IUC) Phase 1: 2007 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service P AWJA '7 B(C) (B)B4 tUnsignaiized (B)C T► Route 622 G Rt 622 l L � Signalized q ` Signalized ' A Intersection q Intersection ni I,OS =BB) ' , LOS =B(B) ion `� Denotes Free -Flow Lane * Denotes critical unsignalized movement AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 9 E 0 Residential Figure 6 Phase 1: Trip Distribution Percentages • P R+A A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 10 0 • i %..47( 4.- 9(6 (65)20 tr 4 r 4 � L 4( t �• B �r k�dSe ti o n N No Scale /� f= 13(43) 0 (65)20 .% 4 : 6 s✓ 47(1s,) 1 2 * 1* r h a t r � , 13 (43) Qt �19�Z88 `� L f - SITE 6 f � L a1 >3� I ✓ f (Ar Figure 7 Phase 1: Development- Generated Trip Assignments P 1� 9(6) (11)3 Grade T 4 - 9(6) 9(6) )622 AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) 1. New Intersection aer Phase 1 A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 11 r� u jti ' 5 4113 d 4 X5 41(1336) X 51)36 )�7 351)1 �, y (351)133�1i � M �, &a& � a ® r N n N Q V6S ) °l ✓ub t (41 )59�f 70 9)818 No Scale 19(2 59(113) 4 69 (421) 194 (350) � b rr N � M h c ry O p 4 0 AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Z ro Q New Intersection per Phase ' 1 Figure 8 Phase 1: 2007 Build -out ADT and AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 111 o� Al i 1 1 1 6 (�1) Ere�L. (116 SITE � � N - X31(14) 11 4 � 4s(148) ... 68(105) (27)28 61 ( � �� ( oN v e P � A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12. 2005 Page 12 0 Signalized Intersection d Route 50 LOS = B(e) } j I A(C) v d V �� tP 1 �/ Signalized (C)B , Intersection ,� LOS =B(C) G' «e Signalized �a Imersection AAA C(C) LOS = C(C) Q Br B(Fja � Onsignalized Intersection Two-lane Roadway LOS= A(A) E B(f Unsignalized ized Intersection VC SS$wo e vs 4 Figure 9 l Overall LOS A(A) SITE Intersection B(B)" / I Rural Two -Lane Roadway LOS = A(A) Q G� C(C) 1y °` l e r 1 v Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) x(B)A y Unsignalized °�� Intersection i No Seal Grad �Rtf 4� a� Uns'ignalized Denotes Free -Flow Lane * Denotes critical Unsignalized movement AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) 0 New Intersection per Phase I Phase 1: 2007 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service (NOTE: SEE FIGURE 9a FOR SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS) A R v' ed Phased Traffic Inn act Anal sis of Willow Run A e Is P y P July 12, 2005 H J� � l Page 13 • 0 1 Figure 9a Phase 1: 2007 Build -out LOS (Suggested Improvements) P A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 14 _Pr rl { +/ ` AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) C , • PHASE 2 TRAFFIC ANALYSES (2010) Phase 2 (full build -out) is analyzed assuming the anticipated future roadway network that includes the following: 1) Completion of Jubal Early Drive Extended from the existing Jubal Early Drive, through Willow Run, to Merrimans Lane; 2) Completion of Willow Run Drive from Jubal Early Drive Extended to Cedar Creek Grade and 3) Completion of minor spine road from Juba] early Drive Extended to Cedar Creek Grade. 2010 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS In order to accurately depict future conditions within the study area, PHR +A utilized the following traffic study to determine the trips associated with not yet completed area developments: A Traffic Impact Analysis of the WW Property by PHR +A, dated December 5, 2002. Based upon the 7 th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report and the aforementioned traffic study, Tables 3a and 3b are provided to summarize the calculated trips associated with each of the 2010 "other developments ". Table 3a Background Development #1: WWW Property Total Trip Generation Summary ITE Land Use Amount Code AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ADT In I Out I Total In I Out I Total 750 Office Perk 35 acres 702 61 763 136 769 905 6,304 813 Discount Superstore 135,000 SF 127 122 248 253 263 516 6,101 820 Shopping Center 150,000 SF 124 79 203 394 427 821 8,847 Total 953 262 1,215 782 1,459 2,242 21,252 0 P A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 15 a Table 3b Background Development #2: Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties Total Trip Generation Summary I tL ANI Peak Hour PNI Peak Hour Land Use Amount ADT In Out Total In Out Total Code Valle Health Systems Propertv 150 Warehousing (Distribution Center) 10 acres 90 35 125 43 80 122 645 710 Office (Administration Building) 108,900 SF 176 24 200 34 167 201 1,417 750 Office Park 15 acres 468 41 508 75 422 497 3,595 620 Nursing Home 24,000 SF 7 4 10 4 6 10 164 253 Elderly Housing - Attached 80 units 4 2 6 5 3 8 278 Sub-total 744 105 849 160 678 838 6,100 Degrange Property 312 Business Hotel 100 rooms 34 24 58 37 25 62 727 760 Research & Development Park 23 acres 324 62 386 43 313 355 1,831 820 Shopping Center 162,325 SF 130 83 213 415 450 864 9,308 912 Drive -in Bank 2,400 SF 17 13 30 66 66 131 805 832 H -T Restaurant 7,600 SF 37 34 70 50 33 83 991 Suh -101al 542 216 758 610 886 1,496 13,661 Total i 1,286 321 1 1,607 770 1,564 2,334 19,761 • In addition to the trips relating to the specific background developments shown in Tables 3a and 3b, the existing traffic volumes were increased along study area roadways using an historic growth rate of 5% per year (compounded annually) through Year 2010 as determined in aforementioned WWW Property traffic study. Figure 10 shows the 2010 background ADT and AM /PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 11 shows the corresponding 2010 background lane geometry and AM /PM peak hour levels of service. HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are provided in the Appendix section of this report. P +L i A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 16 0 • i fl N-1 Figure 10 Phase 2: 2010 Background ADT and AN"M Peak Hour Traffic Volumes •' P RA A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 17 0 Intersection Los = C(C) (C)C C(C) Br E(E) x Unsignalixed Intersection Signalized Intersection LOS = GO 7 Intersection LOS= B *; Ln 0 Two -Lane Roadway LOS= C(C) Q .0 Gla • Unsignalized Intersection I wpVeeo � �pSg ee V 1fHl� Figure 11 � n � ems• C(C) Ron 4 1 Intersection No Scal / Two -Lane Roadway LOS = C(C) All 4. G� ✓ vb r G Signalized Intersection F. LOS =C(E) A� Unsignalized am* Intersection �r Rt 622 4 t G U nsignalized Denotes Free -Flow Lane Interseecnn * Denotes critical unsignalized movement AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) O New Intersection Phase 2: 2010 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service (NOTE: SEE FIGURE l III FOR SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS) P A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 18 Two -Lane Roadway LOS = Clot Overall 1 LOS A(A) f ✓ub,l X11 ve�nve E t , SITE � n � ems• C(C) Ron 4 1 Intersection No Scal / Two -Lane Roadway LOS = C(C) All 4. G� ✓ vb r G Signalized Intersection F. LOS =C(E) A� Unsignalized am* Intersection �r Rt 622 4 t G U nsignalized Denotes Free -Flow Lane Interseecnn * Denotes critical unsignalized movement AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) O New Intersection Phase 2: 2010 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service (NOTE: SEE FIGURE l III FOR SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS) P A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 18 0 0 Figure Ila Phase 2: 2010 Background LOS (Suggested Improvements) P � A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Wil Run July 12, 2005 Page 19 D TP+n AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) 0 PHASE 2 TRIP GENERATION PHR +A determined the number of trips entering and exiting the site using equations and rates provided in the 7` Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report Table 4 was prepared to summarize the trip generation associated with the Phase 2 (total) Willow Run development. Table 4 Proposed Development: Willow Run Phase 2 Trip Generation Summary 0 0 ITE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Amount ADT In I Out Total In Out Total Code 210 Single Family Detached 573 units 103 308 411 325 191 516 5,730 230 Single Family Attached 192 units 15 72 87 69 34 103 1,670 251 Elderly Housing Detached 85 units 9 15 24 27 17 44 472 710 Office 50,000 SF 95 13 108 23 112 135 782 820 Retail 50,000 SF 63 40 103 190 206 396 4328 932 H -T Restaurant 10,000 SF 60 55 115 67 43 109 1272 Total 344 504 848 700 602 1,302 14,254 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the road network surrounding the proposed site. PHR +A utilized the trip distribution percentages shown in Figure 12 to assign the Phase 2 Willow Run trips (Table 4) throughout the study area. Figure 13 shows the corresponding development - generated AM/PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments. 2010 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS The Willow Run assigned trips (Figure 13) was then added to the 2010 background volumes (Figure 10) to obtain 2010 build -out conditions. Figure 14 shows 2010 Phase 2 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 15 shows the corresponding 2010 build -out lane geometry and AM /PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. P IH� A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 20 0 0 • U "N-1 %- Figure 12 Phase 2: Trip Distribution Percentages PH A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 21 • %.153(241 b ti 4-20(12) �p X20(12) 1 (26 Route 50 6)]47s� � 1 j S(18) (21)6 Route 50 § No Scale r ec k 14r] dE'ezo ( (d Route 50 �4 x"'25(84) ;, k t A� ' '� 4 • r a 4 ti Y r4 4 1 � 1r�3j (283) L m� w� 621 In ';. k (4d9)79L1'��6 7r ;,': u i ~16 �.�� �} Handley Ave ((]39192` 42)Jubal U` �, I Oriv � 4l a o EXtd 11 � SI � c` (77)50 �� , Grade a C ®� o %it.....j..; 37 f ra , 062 36(98) X28(49) 1104) 622 (48)31,,* d° Ce 1 C (35)17 1 dffi ade "� ,4� t'r N N W & � JUb" J� ' �'� 3":}" '5 x �y. x 1 ..,,jj)vo� �is(z8 >r :x ts, �lq'� e r Creek- I I,- I'd"In u ''(30)15+wi'�•ts„�r .,< �► Route 622 , � r � ?;xo. �`' � '- (18)S�o. _ ° `' AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) m P Q New Intersection H Figure 13 Phase 2: Development- Generated Trip Assignments A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run H July ]2, e22 Page 22 • • X413(626) 4. 1019(190 X1049(1669 (z S Route 50 t306(SOS) j 1340)]4,3 41( 1 072)15161 0. Route 50 -� 0. T g r 3) � 6 -� -� No Scale Bre, 0(1 (5211)720 m H ` o^ o dge I M �;�` 60(58 Lp 14 4 s7 79(1631) � Route50 . ( S X204(297) ' 1 (59)4 I (1244)9 k�j (597) it 1 3 96(80 Br`okin�d yr i. , s rve. - 621 u L0 cu 1��, % �;r �� (297)Ijgm�L{'J46dJOyfy� nr. b r i t lJ i (495 ( �212(a8 Handley Ave (73 y) .. i€ M�1 3(g2J 3h1b�) E arly t ♦ ¢ i � qa 18(28) '.v§ Dye m ti� .. �a457(1213) q`' ,o° e Sxtd ~ryp9gti� e ar Cree Grade , �,p0 SIT L' s � t ay a roC0 O� a Q y dr 61 80(488) � r ,'�,% �::,= F • 3 � N l`�a._, ; ss3?rI�L r� Z4s(Q53) 37 M b J jjj x°52(172) f 79(l 1 (54)45 Ceda C {e ( ( n o^ e X51'. �4 4 ®13 �47(2ll) 4 (60) � R x119(189) ( �1 Route 622 • F Ll'Hl + Figure 14 ftft1 a ° AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) q` C 1 i Q New Intersection Phase 2: 2010 Build -out ADT and AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 23 PHRA • Intersection LOS = Il(D) Q T dr B(Fja � � ck � db ' e ta b ^r Onsignalized Intersection s Q Lt, • Two -Lane Roadway Los = C(C) A(A)* Cade Unsignalized Intersection I w 6.6` sav e i � � Ovwse� k ;1 il Figure 15 1'xo -Lane ^ mersecnon a ;: p1 IntersMion := Roadway LOS = D(D) 4 T o > B�)* 9£ Overall Handley Ave LOS A(A) t Two -Lane � obB1 Ea Roadway IV, Eztd LOS =C(R) s� p� 7 � D(E) SITA. �Q �j hi %d �„ �'- * � jr 5 Q. Signalized Intersection � LOS = C(E) * 622 Unsignalized Intersection fie. Signalized Rt622 � f� -� Intersection p qp LOS = C(C) ji.t'Lenect.o. C(C) �/� C(D) AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) New Intersection �[� d • Signalized a �r Route 50 a Route 50 Intersection B)B� LOS =B(F) IS, NoScal (D)D� tis sp C(F) Route 50 Yr m 9► 1'xo -Lane ^ mersecnon a ;: p1 IntersMion := Roadway LOS = D(D) 4 T o > B�)* 9£ Overall Handley Ave LOS A(A) t Two -Lane � obB1 Ea Roadway IV, Eztd LOS =C(R) s� p� 7 � D(E) SITA. �Q �j hi %d �„ �'- * � jr 5 Q. Signalized Intersection � LOS = C(E) * 622 Unsignalized Intersection fie. ". t, N �/ �, ' �► Uns�gn. 'A � Rt622 � w r t ! _ � ___ ;L ,... d Denotes Free -Flow Lane ji.t'Lenect.o. * Denotes critical unsignalized mo AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) New Intersection Phase 2: 2010 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service (NOTE: SEE FIGURE I5a FOR SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS) A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run 'J `� July 12, e 24 g� 24 1 H Page 0 • • Q LOS = / ezi G4 4� ✓ «® B(C) �� ,ro to 622 Signalized 3 3� W Signalized y t Intersection (C)C e Q� Los =C(C) a C SIT o Signalized Intersection LOS = B(C) `J JA -1� Figure 15a T -grade No Seal G� 4 06 a� Rt622 A(B) C(C) (C)R ,ro to 622 Signalized Intersection y t 0 Signalized �I,OS Intersection =R(C1 No Seal G� 4 06 a� °�ttr ,ro Signalized Intersection LOS = C(C) AM Peak HOUr(PM Peak Hour) Phase 2: 2010 Build -out LOS (Suggested Improvements) P L A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run July 12, 2005 Page 25 • CONCLUSIONS The traffic impacts associated with the proposed Willow Run development are acceptable and manageable. For Phase l and Phase 2, PHR +A has provided the following conclusions as well as "suggested improvement measures" as required to achieve levels of service "C" or better per the Frederick County minimum standards. For unsignalized intersections with levels of service of "E ", "suggested improvement measures" were not provided since traffic signalization warrants would not be satisfied. 2007 Phase 1 - As shown in Figure 9, all existing intersections except Merrimans Lane /Breckenridge Lane, Cedar Creek Grade/Route 37 interchange ramps and Cedar Creek Grade /Harvest Drive, will maintain levels of service "C" or better during 2007 Phase 1 build -out conditions (improvements are shown at the intersection of Route 50 /Route 37 interchange ramps since upgrades are currently underway). "Suggested improvement measures" are shown in Figure 9a to maintain acceptable levels of service during build -out conditions. 2010 Phase 2 - As shown in Figure 15, all existing intersections except Route 50/Merrimans Lane, Merrimans Lane / Breckimidge Lane, Jubal Early Drive /Valley Avenue, Cedar Creek Grade/Route 37 interchange ramps and Cedar Creek Grade/Harvest Drive, will maintain levels of service "C" or better during Phase 2 2010 build -out conditions (improvements are shown at the intersection of Route • 50/Route 37 interchange ramps since upgrades are Currently underway). Each of the aforementioned intersections will maintain unacceptable levels of service during background and build -out conditions. PHR +A has provided Figure lla and Figure 15a to show "suggested improvement measures" for 2010 background and build -out conditions, respectively. Miller and Smith and Greystone Properties have utilized the information from this "revised" traffic study to develop a proffered transportation improvement program for the Willow Run development. The following proffered improvements mitigate the impacts from this project and will allow the Willow Run development to maintain acceptable levels of service during build -out conditions. Furthermore, these proffered transportation improvements improve existing and future conditions associated with off -site regional transportation matters. Proffered Transportation Improvement Program • Completion of the ultimate section of Jubal Early Drive from the City of Winchester to the roundabout intersection with Willow Run Drive. • A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run Pu A July 112005 e 26 l Page 26 • Completion of a half - section of Jubal Early Drive from the roundabout S intersection with Willow Run Drive to Merriman's Lane with right -of -way dedication for the ultimate section. • Completion of the ultimate section of Willow Run Drive from the roundabout intersection with Jubal Early Drive to the Solenberger property. • Completion of a half - section of Willow Run Drive through an easement on the Solenberger property to Cedar Creek Grade with traffic signalization and appropriate turn and taper lanes. • Installation of traffic signalization at the Cedar Creek Grade/Route 37 interchange for the northbound and southbound on and off ramps. • Construction of a center turn lane at the Cedar Creek Grade/Route 37 interchange. • Realignment of Merriman's Lane on the north side of Juba] Early Drive. • Completion of an additional connection to Cedar Creek Grade (Minor Spine Road) with appropriate turn and taper lanes. • Continuation of the Green Circle bicycle and pedestrian facility along Jubal Early Drive and Willow Run Drive. n U • P �� A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Wil 12. Run July I2, 2005 Page 27 W Fqc N4mcl lntw F3,11 tK C7- D1 14 0 i B R,,a, 0 WE, P.w, 62 37 S Rou: Penod B,� x LLf, Twat Litt 1'.= lll,ht - 1 ola. 1-,!l 1-,, & W11 Bes J" IN 7:00 90 X12 i s i-15 7 4z I I l'! ;4 4 1 c (1 91 0 i5 11 :1 F4 L �44 39 10 12 I;o 0 2& :GS 133 _, A.1. lwal 99 S 0 1 1 o 0 0. iQ 95 11 1 A 1, Io!.! 4 JO S S 3 3 3 i1G 1 r5 1 J l '.w 415 II Is la f4 J ;- 0 i 9 14 1 1 6 1 4 14 1 t3 Z3 v 131 I 156 1 - ,c, 10 10 17 i- 1 0 -9 6-, 1 - 1 5 iw 17 17 2l 21 0 1-7 0 42 139 r oo 5A 5 15 I S is t 9 n 137 2 5: 11) f 12 12 i 5 1 116 1 "It i4$ 175 v 4 5 4� 6:00 0 0 0 6,00 UZ P . f,,:ai 7 0 5 0 2-1j, i2:,7 P1 J�tai 111 I Hc,n, EB� Rt u 6' WB: go-am 622 NB: €t le S9 : R0 I 37 Nnc,j llc,irirz L�:l Pjahi T�,ml Ix ft T h.� J T.:�! U:l Jn,. ,m ToW I L�- - i N& To�l Btgmim 1 00 0 51 ,4 D 0 3- D r) 395 79 475 �hl 7:00 i 5 0 0 t3 43 16 D C 0 2 1 0 0 1 13 rl 6 4; 0 0 D 0 4" 1 95 1 S 6N 5i 51 43 0 0 431 0 0 0 0 392 111 � ;,'5 46 -7 11) 0 17 1) 0 a u W 0 i I -7i �?f, >Oo h.15 0 T) 3" 30 �j 0 0 1 fl 0 0 G 251 0 i a7 E 4!f; 515 330 li 0 25 25 23 0 0 23 0 0 0 (,2 --6 a ',:30 P 45 W 10 il 0 0 12 0 0 1) 9 S0 0 28 109 J� 1:45 9aHl 6 D C 0 p 0 0 4 f 0 4y 42 52 0 0 i2 0 0 li 0 5 03 2 )o 595 640 4,K) 4,' 5 0 S2 41 C. 0 5; , f) 0 0 514 1 :14 - 166 4 [ 5 4 -'0 0 0 56 6q 0 0 69 0 0 0 549 J, L'5 6?7 M2 30 4 15 0 f, j 4 - 11 r) -'2 & ` 9 S114 -':-'5 0 2 2 G, 0 0 0 5qio 3 p) 1,4? '7i9 OD 0 0 35 D 0 44 0 0 0 0 3 45� 0 L 20 c 26 0 0 6 D 0 0 216 1 - :74 2 0 f.3D 0 1) 11 0 0 11 0 fj 0 1 t)O 26 126 145 ? 45 L 1) 0 0 0 0 rl 0 0 0 (1,00 --b I H D; Rowr 6'2 W13 R w!, Z 'MI. Rok;tc -, 7 SB, E0ul, ,7 111"ur B,z-gm, 1,41 TI'm Riph. Nul hr rhm Ri"I'L Twal LXI Rwhi r, al I W"Ilt Tot2l F, Vv F'C'm"g 7,Y) 0 fl 47 11 -'3 0 0 0 422 1 9K i I S 60E - : -, (J A PHF M4 Pill" 077 0 95 (1,9f, Peak D f) 56 6 1 69 0 0 0 11 f, 549 3 35 6S7 Sl��2 4 ,11 Pt+k NiF 0 ', I PfIF 12 1�;� - ;4 PUN 0', 0 Luid=k" TwJif"? ph NTA nowso cv� 2"R MA NNIK v own �Pwvo 0 NSA ym. 'm Wo Rn, 42 t. 4 13 J7 --- On, Q2 r 0 0 lkww 3 I(IOR R=17 400-1W to p7m IB 3 N9 13+ 56 60 5;q Luid=k" TwJif"? • irm - cr".. E - w T N � k I LAL)O',% 1311 N C I I A, E 1 (1 ca t Lo T11 T 1 V: I C"m NO T? how HyjjjP • ON= EB: VIM: !IANf,)[ AVH Ai3 II MOW SM MWOWDRANCHAVE 15 Non. P W Mod lx-.t RkI kilo? lmd 1 U - - l : llu� OW Lzji 7 1 n , Right 10:11 lxrl 11111, Twal r & ',V 13vinin, nm 0 0 0 0 z 0 4 6 n 31 10 41 1 25 P 36 ES -CA P15 0 u 0 0 l 1 0 1 14 0 39 i 2 50 - 37 0 39 M 715 70) 0 5 0 1 i 16 0 40 1 y 1 42 0 A 1 A 7: 36 7 4 51 a 0 0 0 0 0 1b _ 0 41 12 53 4 1i 0 49 1 1-2 j 7 45 ITO 0 0 0 0 4 0 12 !6 c 48 16 ,-, ! 1 44 0 45 2± S:W PA5 0 3 0 14 i 0 42 i4 )b 0 40 0 4 U 1 1 .3 1 sAS ED 0 0 0 0 e 0 10 a 0 16 12 1F 2 's 0 40 * s TA-1 0 0 11 is u 0 14 m S 35 41 1.1 S:45 U 38 0 - 85 1_3 1 1 a 4i3 7 1600 0 4 0 6 3o 0 i2 ]4 96 6 76 0 El 13s :6:00 1 5. 15 0 (t 0 0 3 0 10 13 0 90 7 97 5 SO 0 k5 Ind L6:1$ 530 0 0 0 0 z 9 8 l 0 94 t 100 4 83 0 v M j W o 16:45 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 4 u Im m 10 7 91 0 104 rl 1605 u 0 2 0 16 I E 0 110 4 1A I1 I177 ij I I I 2 17:00 ;to "Af 0 0 0 0 i 0 w 1 5 0 96 17 1:3 III v6 p 106 2 1 4 17:15 .736 0 0 0 o -, 0 Is 15 0 SP 15 304 S S4 0 92 21 17:10 o 7 0 8 15 0 0 m W) 6 vu D m NO 1 "S 0 0 0 o o 7 0 759 17D6 PAL WS H. 11IM1 E13 AV 6. ITAN11MY AVE NI& MFAI)IDW 3111 l AV SO: NIKADOV, DRANCH AVE I Ilcur J N PMIJ Bczirin IxE Tbu Rid;l 1(,!.[ Ixft rho fight Total LcA Thro 1 idn L Tola T ef*, III po P., ��, NI *," m, I F R W H,umig 75 0 0 0 0 u is 0 38 56 5 so A WS 7 160 0, i 67 1 41; 7, (K) 7 15 0 0 0 0 20 0 46 66 0 M7 T B 7 Is 0 176 jut 115 Am u 0 0 0 16 a 53 69 0 171 '3 224 5 1 n 0 07 470 7:30 to 0 0 0 0 17 0 52 tq a 167 51 '21 6 10 0 174 W 0 0 0 0 26 0 47 67 0 167 m in 5 is 0 :65 E A 1 ROG 1650 I i E 0 0 0 0 12 u 35 47 0 ms IS 56 n 336 0 53 h0 low,) 16,15 0 0 0 0 la 0 45 55 u 396 38 434 r 30 0 394 Rl IM5 !6:10 0 0 0 o lz 0 45 1, 0 402 48 z50 32 033 j - qn ": 10 G: 0 It II 0 7 7 0 45 62 0 397 57 454 16 W 420 1,6 MY 7 0 0 0 0 2 0 4? 03 0 375 56 431 25 366 1 I lfo�r 1, �, F, R WB HANIILEYAVE NB� V.iAf)0A'RRANCTfAJ SB AlHADOWBRAN(TAVE I ,lour IWO N i 'mj I sA IblU Riz-'I lulal La 0 Rba lad Al lou Rwa Nis uk Um NOL OW E I W Qdw m (1 0 0 0 16 0 Q 0 171 53 224 5 172 0 1'7 117D 7:30 PHF IF 0.86 PHW 0 A li 94 A M 0 0 0 0 45 62 0 197 04 3 0 1 S4 0 1'0 9P b 16,4i C.86 J� 0,92 PIT i1.59 C 90 IY.M. 1 • 9 F ' IHANDI,ttY AV ' r Wcath r I ilz�� 1 1 �Ilp Lccaticnjwmchm,r.va Co: I I)AC 1 ,'2,'Hcol, . WADOW BRAN( 14 E A PEAK HOUR ?-<) 1,30 I .4 P;) 0 17-1 HANDLEY AVE U9 b y {� � i r M 5 04`0 224 MEADOAVBJRANCIT AVE MHADOW BRANCH AVIR, M. PEAK I IOUR W45 - 1 7:+11 420 441 0 3N4 36 L HANDI,FY AVE 0 t" �4 (83v4 3 401 '15 ,J-ADOV :IRANCH AVE if,, pi'vil, W�v (101; North 44 i5. I oq% "! he- *D! , F ile 0:'m ;I flil:f �mgl itf. fill • Hit, R RRECItIMIK"Cu L\ \3 %IERRiMAN� LN Sl) : ME:G!V.*As LIN I j3 %lim 1-;1 I ho p R,h( Total 1-d lim Ri&l To�,l Ift M, RiO;I TM)l I Ri�!ht TG ial i 1 S V.1 B i p i R 7 ,00 0 Q C 2 0 s 10 0 6 2 3 f2 2 0 0 0 0 G 4 0 6 14 -0 0 I1 2 1 6 0 It i 5 0 1 if 0 3 0 S. 'I tj 0 s S ci 0 7 D 5 4 0 15 19 0 i 6 2 2 64 95 45 ,Z Zll! - I vZj f 0 o c el I 1 0 ifI4 i I kg) 19 09 i 115 0 40 J 7 A.Nl ".onl. 1! fn7 0 19 4 It, 1 0 6R q 4 0 s 0 c 45 I D 19 15i 16:00 15 0 0 0 0 , 1 4) - ,7 q1t 0 11 1 12 '1 T'l o 6� 16;:5 16-lb 9 0 0 19 o 5-' i63 D 6 's 6 14 o -0 1'j i if 45 if U 0 G 15 0 S !63 D 3 0 i6 7( 1"9 i < aj 0 to 0 17 0 19 s9 1 DO 1 0 7 0 0 4s n :6 0 12 i :5 1 74 16 17 t 0 0 cf 1 0 1 ") 1 :L, 0 to 1 11 C 14 0 i 2 " 17�3O 1 7 �4 5 ri 0 1 17 0 76 93 1 2 17 �45 I%M lwd C, 0 fl 3 >5 0 66 I WW bl�F(:r.INVUDU LN N3 MERRIMANS LN Sil -RRI' -\If j 1 _IZ11101" — 1 -C.It Thm Riciht loul I�a Tho Righi '!.�A Left IhTli R�tilz I I�c-' Vh� R;gbt Ti al I E a '.1 -1 0 0 1.) Q 56 1 20 0 js7 'SS 701) 715 0 0 0 r3 to 0 -6 0 4s i 196 0 1 U 0 SS 5 r, 1 ) 56 cq 74 11 >d It (f, 7! -17 26 -,.q 0 0 7. P 3 ti 6 2 '145 f:(O 0 0 0 c 1 0 (14 - 19 0 $ 64 24Z 0 7 3 0 G 0 f) 0 2 5 6f;0 16: OD j 0 0 0 0 0 -;4' its 0 1 7 'j 1 3 � si I o: o 0 U S7 4 0 t6 7 0 . 'q o I { -, f) 59 0 iot) •49 0 »rt v =fi d G 3 L 3 0 o 0 V (I I As 0 4-'q 4 0 6 7 331 6 :7XJ 1 1 I H',w LH WD BRF.( KINIUDGIF LN V(5: MERRIMANS IN ST: WRIMMARS LN p"it"d N, S, Periud LcIl I [Vi L Rl-ht Lcl Tilt.' R fa ht loml IZI Iliv, Rishl ll) it LI-ft D" $ R , l I I & n 1, Of) 0 0 0 I. 0 IA - l " ) , Q 5� 11 C' 1 25 0 2 1 - i sfoo {wk J PHr 0 i, i Ir PI W , AAl, Peak U o 5 1 0 0 C : 11 — j li 0 0 ilyi -q f) -'0 6 46 7. 63 0 p NI P P::J' Mir PO F 0.7 P111- • • nu Luc. V, MFRR !MANS LN n 0731 I A\S TV PEAK WAY 110 40, 71 "n BRE&KORWE W; MORNOSO" %L PEAK jum • Win - 104S 3p too wl". 61 2m BRP� 09 71� U 1 1 1", %*RKIMANF L� we" 01% 55 " , Im. • 0 4 • 151 kim-le 1:11, ROUTES( WD ROUTE tC TI IN S11 \11, DIC A L CINTI: R 14 Mir, 11c: r llel,, m 'o RighL lo ;at Lf - w Left 111 F, Jn 129 12 10 {2 19 .1 0 241 700 2 7 270 i14 - (.1 [72 26 Cr S c 44 G i I 8 " 4; b I 69 - 6 26 32 r 2 lis 10 2 G 1 74 27 ?09 33 13 1 22 1 4 6 14 3v6 0 3 106 1 170 37 nIt II 1 15 i 4 6 6 i 6 ID 4 i fM 0 171 3 ('6 I I I [ , 6 1J 1,1 R 45 12"0 1 j 7 76 7 -i 7 - 1 i M IZ6 4-, :2 ; ;0 1. : 67� A M. Toni 6'A' 2 gi 5 3 i G"I 10 I "1 9 294 2J 7 i 8 (A x I (,: 55 2 1 V, 5's :10 37 36 10 3 ± =5 tE Sb a ? ?i yj 71 t ,t.7 16:30 1 4 7 13n (1-1 10 41) 279 14 111 S4 5 21 So 4t 13 11 55 7 16:45 t 140 21 4- 775 11 3 1 9 52 (1 14 3 -2 ?4 i 2 F, 7 u* (10 31 J 2 4 i s 2q 4 6 " �7 A 1 58 i '5 1 4, to .1" 4cl 4 :0 6 2 i I 6s 63 111 �l 30 ,5 x 47 11 �-,j 6 20S 41 5 �s A4 2 5 17, -' 5 I 1 ,:, 33 1 .4 45 20-16 - 6 21 i ?6L 4 151 1 1 To:ai HI ROUl 1: W'k ROU r. SO \B: Nll:' RRIMANS LA S7: M F DICA L CEN"! E R 3 JwL- TI', I llel � LA Th,v Right To To Is'l I h,u I o I I,ft Thr., Right Tnal ,til 1 h... F 1, It BCLiMn c� kr 7 28 4 ,61 -,2 (16 i 200 29 3 4 i GS • f, 1 1) (1 1 1 7 8 700 of 1 5 C01 S6 722 16S :30 `6 - 74 6! 4- - 9 ;i 23 11 1 2 7A 5 -- 1 .6 P±5 9 771 1 4 0 -1 i S 70 4 C 6 2; 25 4 z 1 44� �311 7 ; 5 3 t � f,( u,� - ,F� W .5 1 : 7 5, 67 51 0 h 2 i 19 60 1 5 416 7 :`5 Sfl 42 Sl :�i 2 5 . . . ...... H Moo 1 W 1133 41 1 1 E37 S 70 5 I 11 7 36" 16; 1 16,11 'jl - , I I I �0 X0 42. '�4 �X) �'9 74 3 03 (10 1 " — 4 1 114 27 1 S I (,, `0 '10 :06 �20 1 2!2 26 50 ', 1 �9 26 1 1 - I 3- S - 1, �� I" I o 4 5 4 ,, - 21 ONO 's - S4 W 1 1 19 4 i - 1 1 3 1 b 4 1 -, :00 4 6 40 it S T 7 or", I � "1 30' Q i o-I L I 197 160"1 1 " �'i 7 T — l'u - � -- - .1 k0l- it' 50 Wit R.. I E NIL RP. MANS I N SB VI D1CALfS lER Dour N. ,d t S I'mod 43,v-ong ],t I I L'Ifi It �4 " Itizhi Fm m I La il 1 1", R 1 Olt 'I vu,8 Uil 11 1 3'vi7ing -5 51 btlo Ob 1 ) j 1 27-' 452 6 1 S7 705 25 1L 9 (11 1 fll4 7; IS A-M YIF i9., 1 —11" 16 AO - W, 126 i , j 4 • 0 0 0 IN \ \ \ ry IN C.V," R0�71: ( DR Loa MM! c'"I 1004111.4 • RLI U7E WB, ST PART Es! DR %!m c ; 1 Im &A I","; [U U XiAht L. I R iktL f .ci Rqu onn r Al v M=A 19 0 54 7 a 0 i A a 11 0 8 !9 239 711 12 mg L 17 0 V!, i 77 0 D i1i A IQ �0 i 0 ;'r4 R A :0 6 0 ]» 1 2,r 31 l)p' 730 45 :0 islz 0 13t ?2 14 6 0 1 G 0 23 81F) I'l 174 1 1" ISS 0 C,6 A 71 v 0 c 0 iI 1 IC _ 7 12 6 U I -, e 1 1 C,4 1 � Q 0 S J 14 22 27 9 5 1 F03 p 4 0 55 3 66 t 52 0 0 6 0 8 J 12 M a F.30 Z74 IM ANIL Rnma! LLI-j- 1 1349 ��4 ) tv D ❑ -- I KMAW 6 139 Q IN it IQ A 'Y U V 0 0 U 12 i$ 364 7-- 11011 6 112 0 1% IN n 20 0 0 0 0 lu it W A as 190 6 14- 11 151 J 207 2! PS 0 0 0 0 !. is il 20 F. .6:R) it 1. f) (,R 0 Iii 26 7 0 0 P 0 11) q 111 :1 1 I . ; J& 5 159 0 6 0 2 29 no 0 0 0 q II U 11 22 09 1 1710 IT11 i0 IN 0 161 0 36 22 zm a 0 D 0 16 0 3 . 1 - - 1 142 0 M 0 02 1 1 20 it 0 0 u 111 0 10 2 0 12 MAll 1745 133 0 141 0 1 H IT N4 0 R D 9 H 0 7 A M A IV5 r.,%!, owl (14 1!59 0 i 0 lw,'O I M 0 R I IV, i F "'JurE 112, "B: RCUTF122 [v: Su MM IIENDIt 1 Van- Immd !u :-:d Mwe ua Is. PON . 00 Is •". MOM Ws W TWu R:�'w Imy Le: I ,, vU RiUlh: iU:a] i 31 Re2min -'5 674 0 719 0 2H m In 0 0 0 0 I •3 0 AS H 14 15 51 u97 0. - 4 7 4, -�l 4 3 2.1 0 0 Q 43 Q 162 1 ...> 1() "1 7,'M P 755 0 ' 'I b26 if 0 0 0 .11 0 51 B2 ? I '30 7 45 30 699 0 Ta 0 ms V 35 0 0 0 0 35 0 5 `5 1 16' :'S U 675 0 06 0 2 6 51 3 1 0 0 0 0 36 0 51 S7 AT 6'W 6 RS 11 5 0 bw 0 TPZ 91 513 0 0 0 0 40 0 45 "7' - i 4 1 CUM I t 1 ?3 594 0 On 0 03 99 42 0 0 0 0 45 0 -14 � 6- I t6 1 Wo 15 W3 a 65 A 05 05 03 1 0 0 0 51 1) AM 1550 Mys 26 w! 0 c 0 140 of Q& 0 0 0 0 47 o 1661 1615 '3 set 0 64 1 so ss 9n 0 0 0 :607 1710 I Ii"', ED: ROL FE 622 wil! RO,:M-62- Jp tiH IIARVI-STIM 1 IM IINT j N . YmUl � B,mnz I-cfT Thru -,, ul !--Il - H", To a! LeR IOU ROw nal LUR Ih,A Rqh� Ii k V, d<<'w.R 75 0 275 51 326 I, o 0 Al 1 103 pm 'n6 P76 IF at )5 P 11110 w I s , VI NI. Puk 1 (1- AD —IT U4 'IT5 �1— 51 o ;68 -, F 7 -TIF 056 7 i IF u 9,95 HIF I , ,IV • iA ;uw R, �A ;7 2 1 3 .E - 1 F.Sl i R 92 i 3 ll 41 L 98 fr • 0 4 0 fVc FI it IZ fmc i3 RITE r A 12GLf. Bii Sil: 1 13 If' 3 16 2 11 11 2 3 4 II § i 12 :00 4 i 6 2 22 ko 3 11 P 1- 101 7:30 2 i 6 16 6 2' 20 12 90 7:45 20 !7 6 1 7 2 2 21 16 fi 6 .'O 6 8,15 Q ' i 6 1 Ib 11 5 _0 40 8 8 D I 1 "'6 SIM l i LL -------- 11 M 6 S 2 6 1 - 14 2 if f, k . 11 16A lo 1 5 26 2 7 2" . ! 1 , 79 Q It i 0 31 1 1 31� 3 fl 15 4 1! I S i TI IG 1111 i2 1 01 14 , 4 1i 1 20 145 1'1 16 i - ,O0 12 0 1 5 27 f 17 7 1 1 0 10 0 1 1 17:00 14 1 1 9 e4 30 14 CIS 7 1 11 12 1 1 ' 1; 2 1 1 1 6 21 2b 12 b 76 : 1 Is 2 14 1 (1 �7 19 730 17:-3 4 1 0 17 19 2. 1 51 q 9 ' A I � 0 174 P.M, I o 2! �o 1 115 lfi2 -24 , F' 4 I ifi) 11 1' \9.I w I 1 l 119 C 4 I F r,l? ll'. M (1 1 62 2 POU I'll 621 ROL IT 6' 1 1 P Ni"s, Nfiol Tom! Lf," 11, Cma. Tc l E & Wj! 3.,.zinirig Left T hor Riah: Itru1 I-cfll rh, R,ghlt 'ff 9(F 3 ' 79 Sr IM1n I7 al 2 f DO 1 1 , 2 9 2 6 20 105 1 37 1 140 1 5 iji C, " q , I 1 2 9i (IS 16� 20 42 66 3 C 7.0 1 - I'S 55 12 6- 17 8 - 9 71 164 2 5 47�6 - 45 12 tf, =9 tt 1- 161 2, 7 6, 4", ;•'00 - - - - - - - — - - 6 0) 1r 4.': 6s 7i 1 1 12 5g 41 1 7 fs 9 a :'J - f 600 496 : il 14 6 1 2 4 61 66 40 43 I_5 -1 45 8 1 G: 15 I( lo 14 S 1 3 tin 1 1 21.11 61 IS2 40 1'r q, t , fi 9.1 I 4 26 id -6 14 st b 1645 f4 2 67 i i2 —7 1 4� 21 12 4� �4, - I GO 7 � I -Jk RO!, 11 61' V. f: ROU IT R 1 1 i: (12 S13, R01; - M 621 flo" P,rind L-e-1 Thou A l va Mal Len Tluu 11, ipho Tot I ell I1,11 Ri ?ht I "I'l I,P, '1�lw PIL H C f� 1 13 C 'P. W lz 12 q, 59 �9 12 1 ( 17 37 4 61 4 8 , A) AAI P�— [ q N;F '' - 0.. 1 A-ill. ','zk M 14 51 --iliff 91 1 -,2 T 40 4 5 19 45 (1 5,�5 P '.I. N.L PlIF - cf,S9 p; tF plly P,,,k 0 Loan VvmN 7 1 ;)r , -- L ):1 406 A mm Bv 11 �'m111 111 0 ALL MAK WAT M .01 61 ism M 4 37 HO-TL 62' ox) 1"5 ,POUTt 62- 05 ROUTE 621 ROM 62; 14 PLAK HOUR 1630- 17: i11 P24 G 4F 11) J L R(H 174 14 — t riS us �i 128 3 ANE A_ 47 in T"T,l P,'Cv. W -, J W� A m HE Wl� 2026% Am. 0 LIILIUIMIWi Ch�'IWI, l A 0 tarn H, N-nd le N— F" g Ltp. . luga; 7 "a1 nru Ri T";= 0 & Ill 41� ;7 4 14 4 e E 66 44 1 4 O I Z 5 " i 02 1 14 I o w S6 .4 16 04 2 54 i 7 'All -'4 15 19 i 4 7, u t = u 9 : -, S 45 14 11C 15 41, IS 20 i t '0 3 Q 4 1 7(; 1 c 4so '14 66 -'62 go; u 5tl2 39 1 r6l -, 4 - " '67 1:2 q 16 ft,j I I G _5 61 47 72 4 17 0 14 S , 14 9.; 2(' SO IF S4 -17 6 %,'o 16 41 1 S 91 fq c)6 40 vz C' 1 ?3 1 74 11 b D 34 14S i 07 �4 -7 2fi3 7.3 '1 17 JO 15 In, 21 q0 (I'd F,9 , �2 9 - �: I If, 44 96 17 l'I 1 <10 20 Ir, 52 72 1 10 e 37 2 0 t i5 i IS 1 9 6:r (16 zo 6 r it 0 45 P. M. local ! 6 i I 9�9 1 655 5 -, 7 1 717 2-' (, 1 4-5 130 1 1! I't 0 L5 3 -' m rani 1 i Lo� VT; J,b3i Vn !� rl. R�t- hn R, I . W 209 416 '2s 0 4 2 � I 30 1 - - 1 5 f 2 1`' 7:00 S 2 i4 -93 2 i t 0 —9 2 -sa L) s iN 18" 7 15 511 �3� a7 _ - 11:3 1 41, 4 CII) 103 0A 4?2 S - 130 2cc GO - -41 - - 1 5 5�� 1)1 I --, ' I j 2-' 90 24 V 63 - 07 , 'I'S ,I JO 5 2L0 b! _3 7 4 i4 >o 60 H) �2 31" 2-2 �S", 197 274 -'D ill : S �5 3 19; -2 i7i i 1 4 46 4 2 156 426 131 215 1440 S "C 2 1 26 1:6 19 lri 2 4.7 1 (A 271) So I ol) 32 2 9711 30 1 211 1 r G 139 4 1 76 6 i+ 0 a 409 "02 1 n S-• I 1 I _ ^61 1 11 <;I i6l 1 02 16, 1 - j(1 17 9 3 �47 5,R 9-4 Jr 2 01 1 3IQ (I 1 - '1." :6 :5 16 , 'f) 4 - �4 '29 26's "I � 6 1 bo I e 6 15 ;45 67Z 9 l :6 'C' I( 31 S1, 3 F -'0 >65 26� -,(4 944 Ol 7+9 i 9 Z 17 00 90 ` 0 ' D 1 60 - ; 9 =' 12 ii7 235 69P i 1 640 1 ' 00 1 2 80 ? G 402 I's S i i 6113 Sp 24 I S- 495 i14 - 4 7 i VI: "5-, l-1: 1 9 18 3i 2 <S i6s 12 41^ 141 10 KID U Ill n sI qr 1 1 0 C4) 65 2r,< I lr yli: Ii p ..... o 53 we I I'mod I \z,S. i'mtd Tt:-,,i 1 hm it, T 1 ct, lx T!�rl Rln! I I K. j w � 2 66 f, 1 74 1 rl 0 s 2 S(, is, 2 ', 4 5 Sol) 11, 16:45 91 363 p ,< fv 64 - -fi :I 1 P,O, pff 1111 ass FIT Iq3 EI 11,911-111 M- M F jl o� • .",k "n "74 lS7 juhal tr.Iy D, 50 1%, t vly 1), --64 91 ,14v A! 9" 0a l"'i, n 2 4.I ti lv" F_ - I L -A • N zrn S f i 11 f ', 7 b, B RA S I I' Co r<HV j1P :ajl L; I _N I aI IV H­5­1 A ml Dt 20032 i� 1 3 , i liqj. I I *H 10 kAmi 11 1, 1 37 1 5 Min, r: r, d 13� I T:gu Lv� Rit-h 1 Lft T D F Th. ❑ITu F'utlq 7.,.I Fswine 7 W I DO 1 0 ss 0 4 I(i) t) "s 0 sv 14; p 0 4) 5 1 7 0 1 44 199 1; 64 1 124 1 (1 C C 6 ':70 45 '13 J o 1,7 b@ fT) � l IK Q C, S�, 41) o I 1 9, J 0 0 0 56 22 I'S 4 0 1 1 J 11 0 S: 1 0 ilo 1 9 Sa 4 0 1 3 0 4 U a- 1 SAS rt z �S 4 )( 1 ;"? i b.0 , 3 7 1 0 112 6 240 40 2 ?6 0 )4 ' I I I J - 2;9 4, Y1 81 4 0 it ni f 5 10 »I ol f) ., 0 '7 sg 1 C 3 0 5 i-O 0 0 C, 101 Q 7 50 0 2$_i 611 3?4 Lo 0 S9 iN9 0 i 53 29 73 31 _lS 99 0 5 1 1 5�� b c 00 71, 3 1 1 Q.4 C. 1 0 2S 70 3�8 S2 0 !tii 4( 0 (1 1) G13 1'. 15 - 7 . 0 1 - 2 0 2 60 li 4 - 6) 0 g T 1 0 0 0 it � 51 1 i30 I - � a3 n 74 2 0 2 j YIq 5 1 rI2 7 029 H ... EH: ROIJ I F 5 0 ROI I I E 51" N B: Rl'_ RAMP Sli- &7` 37 RAM? I Hour Pc 1 M. P�dod q [C II H,ru �_:2E: lc!a Ic ft Ti� R3gll1 I otal i-ep. ft 7 .2 N iz;�rh: & 0 0 I lj 369 t - 23�_ (to I q 514 0 0 1316 C 410 1 �1: C 0 1 2 645 15 442 Sis 0 1 307 0 "198 j7f, � ,4 1 27 0 556 7,-xs 0 C 16 - (11 7:i0 kt d 4 76s 1 f) T39 G91 o lJ9 1 O i 6 0 k -'40 i-7 0 0 s_�S 508 fo 9 o C, 0 t- - 2 2125, SAO 1 ": (IF I 6i 3 57 L. 5i6 0 1060 1 99 2s9 363 0 1 A 53 2 It 0 0 0 2 9 1 (1: 00 36� 1 84 S 4 5 IS5 0 • 1) p 1 4 1 4 16 15 16 M i `13 I l _10 0 1 i4 6 2�1 14u x 3(l 0 �tO 5� ;1 0 j �l �o S o -" 11 -71, 1 12 1 7 0 i '19 1 3 IS 0 206 it It lzi� - F jti��5 7 0 0 �q s -. 0 0 Ill 17:00 t [ear dJ, iIA: 11, iG 13- RI i ", 12 0 SBl it 'F 7 1', A 1 S13 Rr Ilm T R,gh: 'foul !, Ti pjdl� Tm.1 1 11 ll'i Right E V. 3=mln6 492 915 0 IA7 0 los 175 5t 227 0 0 0 2(4 41 5 7 30 NIF .. ... . ....... 1 � jltA ;v7 7 �I, 0 1 146 2f,l 20 0 - 7(, j i io o P,M, Pea' O'S9 pHr - pHr � • CI I ljv ! C , T ril I iF I I ll ° 171 RT Ranh , .Nl, PEA : I 1MR C) ROUTE 50 398 5 74 ROU F. 227 e 6 R 57 Vl� I p 1 110 'R 16 Irl - 1730 4 9 L ROUT F ;o 41141 1 261 3- ftCGTE 386 0 103 5 S9 171 Ranh 171 rc,s,cV iR,) TT 5f, 'Wcad rjDr; L fi� 1 — E-W: R - 37 SR RAW C ... �11 Bllflf 1; 1; 171ft: I 'I' I IN C I I } is I IN 71 1) 11 25 n( Pcii FF : `.1 t3: ROU I I' H; TI 37 R I p i B RT R A 1, 1 P i. ne,miria led Tnru iurat Total Left int, Right lotal i Left Thru Right Total i Lct! - .1ru Rich; - II(al L . .r Pr 'cunt i:0 0 0 - ,o 7 0 0 c 0 0 3S C 2 9 v7 16 :00 0 1) XA/ 4 0 0 43 u 0 0 1 4) c 15 ; 7 {I 1 16 4l, 0 1) Ij 11 it SS a ;s c ii• 13� 22 M 51 G 0 51 0 J f. Ell, 0 4r. c I4• - ,:-5 60 l) 60 0 0 U ul 911 T; -, 6 S (10 iii) 1 50 C 50 0 0 - 9c -S 1 5 i( IQL c o 41 o o r, 50 QAS i J t )6 A 0 49 S r!4, A,M. Total f) 0 346 i4 1 359 0 U 1h 0 0 0 1 0 Its 1 on A.NI- T=1 0 0 0 0 234 DO 15 0 -, 6 0 1(, 0 0 O C 36 0 92 123 2 jil 5:1 1 ) S4 c lv, 0 E) Q Ij Z46 5i3flf 90 kA. I i f 01 IT W, 0 D 0 fl s f i.,S 2 C- 7 4! OA 0 0 92 02 i 1 :14 J ft jj. ci 16 0 349 199 .14> I - Oo 10 6 C G all D :7:15 -: el C, 66 66 ' 0 C, 11.3 it 0 0 4c, 1 )2 142 0 3 4= 0 0 M r) 0 - 9 7 T 111. — TTo4A 1 0 — 062 6-- 2 N - 0 — ils - , 0 0 0 C 7 0 EAE I Z3�t 9 1 Ht,r ITB; ROU SO 'A'Bi ROUTE SG N13: RA 3,7, RANIP SB It 37 E2,iod I-c-,l 711M 1 I Toul L c ft TIV. PUi. IM 7 f, Le 'h7u R i ml, c - iral Uft TT"m Rignt rQ!a] E & 11,.mmg — 0 If 3)i 397 75 U u 1 7� Q 0 0 l) 2 0 257 T95 1 167 GO 7:5 0 0 417 4-7 05 0 11 20 0 0 u 11 3 10 l) 44 454 1 .15 7:30 0 el 4,R7 4S7 20" 0 0 207 c 0 0 a 342 0 ;±2 .:g- I + 3S 7. 74 i 0 G 47 475 'o, D 0 202 0 ci 0 0 317 0 i 46 1! =4 - .45 it 00 0 C 4 4 Q 449 iti A 0 0 0 0 j 230 `. +0 '20 It," 3.a0 6 x v 0 322 3 2, 2 -39 0 0 439 c 0 0 Q 7 0 16:03 �(,A o 0 ' +42 5C3 0 0 503 0 u 0 0 l)3 0 -96 D$. 1 5 14 ] 6:1 5 16:70 0 0 4 = 2 i�2 547 (T J 5�, 7 0 0 0 0 211 5 17 720 ( (11 9, 16:30 G 1 1 34 571 0 0 573 6 0 0 0 1 0 112 797 1614 16.4 i ... iij ;L 3 5 14S L it �48 1 0 5 0 - ,4 C, 3 "'T I475 F LO 1 Licur I I ED RC TH 50 VVB. ROUTE 50 Nij; RT 1 7 R.A.M1 S B: T V` F- �Mp i Hour 1, . eli"d s Vud 3ciii,Tm,' I I,ft Thr, R' N Toill I cft 7i'm KrS',' Ihru i',, f,)ial ;'Ifi H TIM F, - jol"I F k iv 11 -fining L) c 484 1 1 - 1 0 0 20 1 G t D f 342 0 1 3)4 1199 730 Ar,M P,.I,. i t PIT 0,11 PIT 0 8 N I F ).')S G9. A-'& Pa" r i . f) 0 3 '52 -4 C! Cl 547 r 0 4) 0 C. it- I tit 16:3 —,-, - 1111 PI IF = 1 " pf i;V - ?I i F = I ft' ' 1'r 1 PINI PCs • 50 w!qco Q 1 W • ;`.r RAMP 4.d9. TH"R ]�2 L i s = 2 , D 207 C 0 RT 37 KAVP RT PANT NI :'EAK HOUR • ROUTE SO D -'7 (23%) Ry 3 7 ILkNul • N-S mi Nan Liii .. v A, L] Nod MW F&A t low Iwo P, I �h( Total 1-cr; ;ol i o 1,3:.! I'm III; �1 M.0 &K T Wi Th. Ri Tciiai I-' 3c -nnme hi 4, 14 4 0 69 64 0 21 i1 W7 Oj �1 i - 0 D3 � I j 2— 25 � !t 700 y A 21 0 W Q 1 4 9 27 31 i 0 02 700 Ff m 0 20 0 1; M, t 3 0 23 26 b 2 it S:15 21 C, 21 1 ')j 96 5 0 20 q IN R15 45 1 21 0 70 7, 3 0 20 29 0 IN. m A,i 'l,i.! :-9 ii 0 159 1 199 223 All OW e. It, 0 5 Is 167 4 j A 0 N; 0 142 1 - 11 a 7 it 0 !71 A! Tj l 71 0 13 0 1.4 15" 1 7 II 2g 0 191, 4: -',,9 1 4 to D 10 0 In I t N 0 16 4l. 0 227 145 5 GO 1.; 0 14 0 T$ 17C, 0 21 50 0 210 3 "GO 5 Is 44 0 2iw 5:15 1> 8 D a s !z" 129 22 F !4 1,; 0 173 500 to 9 0 9 0 in 3 20 H 0 11 29 0 its TO W(X: 0 0 D 0 it 0 A) 9 615 0 9 U 0 n A I woo tl t 0 0 q 030 0 0 i &45 76 0 0 u C 0 i IS3 11.1-` 171 (1 103 274 0 0 103 1 AM 1%; M lour y I ED, IW.W 422 WB: Rom 622 N M We 37 M Rcute3" I IWwr mi 1 N loved Lt [t T'.ru Riau 1 Itn Am RWU Am I"ft Hh't, stiol Total j"R In,,, lan,hl !oral is &M Bownm 710 71 0 0 72 0 0 30 311 A 0 95 m; 0 U 0 0 512 7:00 W Rs 0 0 65 0 u 30 30 99 mg 0 0 0 u 46 V 5 730 i Sp 0 0 R9 0 1; Y7 jQ 4 0 102 H 8 0 u 0 D 04 Ill 7 u il 6 sd' 0 W 35 73 Q 0 All 10 0 0 0 3 00 S7 0 0 Si 0 0 354 354 3 IS 14 117 0 0 0 0 0 to W 9 ll (10 0 0 2= 25 0 "1 9 911) 0 0 hoo so 0 u 39 0 u M 1 Al 6 0 50 26 0 0 0 ":-5 0 21 0 0 70 "O 26 29 0 0 0 0 so SAS o C 0 0 a 1) . ...... . ..... 03 35 0 0 .11 0 1, 19 WS 71 0 37 110 U 0 0 :(3 4:00 4 15 '3 0 u 43 0 0 654 (151" S4 it .15 -1 9 j 0 0 Ud 4:15 403 45 0 0 45 2 u 60 6A 1.11 (16 11� 1) , . Nil & M ":�S 42 t1 � 0 2 it 0 02 02 1 `}6 0 69 1 E C 0 0 0 so 145 41 IV 0 1 0 0 575 f I f?i 0 0 0 0 'AS 2 ' 0 n 27 it 0 3" Al 0 0 114 1 0 u 0, I 5 30 .. 0 i 0 t 2" so A 0 25 h5 1 0 fi 0 0 130 5,45 9 G 0 0 1 - 5 1- 18 l l� 29 ki 0 �l 1 513 c W 0 0 0 0 0 u 0 0 0 0 l 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 &00 I ht ut EM WOO= ETI Rolgeh-'2 NB- Ri,,,io S.3 itL3--tN IT P."icj I N.S, Yt 5d 'I Rr-lit Tw:lj Lcc,�t T Rq w I cm! Th, a P d it I L 1, T. ru Ri_hl Total Ira Dow 0 0 39 0 0 397 3,S7 14 0 104 113 0 C, 5cst 70) IT IA PHI. 0. 32 PHI - C"o) MI, fM)2 A I Nt J 0 0 15 0 662 6Q ID! 0 66 1W 0 0 to! Vol NA No 030 PHY - IQ PHF M (Aso v " t L] R,ul M,1 1 lc e. 7 :3 - 1 8., 4 R.t, 57 P.M. Pz.lj: 'R 430 l') 707 0 Rout MI 45 S Jl 0 66 1? L"I <1,9% "Yc" & SM No'll, 401 Soirh nary., • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A to Performed 09114104 me Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Existing Conditions Project ID Willow Run Volume and Timin Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 0 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group L T T R L TR Volume, V (vph) 542 899 439 194 250 0 613 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 6 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A j A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 1 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 60 0 0 0 ne width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only I EW Perm 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 G= 24.5 G= 13.7 G= G= G= 36.8 G= G= G= Timing I Y= 5 IY= 5 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY = Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 571 946 462 141 263 645 Lane group capacity, c 559 1638 520 239 716 641 v/c ratio, X 1.02 0.58 0.89 0.59 0.37 1.01 Total green ratio, g/C 0.48 0.48 0.15 0.15 0.41 0.41 Uniform delay, d 23.6 16.8 37.4 35.5 18.5 26.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.17 0.41 0.18 0.11 0.50 L_ -A Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pe Incremental delay, d 43.6 1 0.5 1 17.0 3.8 1 0.3 37.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 67.2 17.3 t544 39.4 18.8 63.7 ne group LOS E 8 D 8 E Approach delay 36.1 50.9 50.7 Approach LOS D D D Intersection delay 43.4 X = 1.04 Intersection LOS D HCS2000TM Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved • • Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, PC HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A ate Performed 09114104 ime Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Existing Conditions Project ID Willow Run Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 1 2 0 0 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group L T T R L TR Volume, V (vph) 206 433 1263 288 426 0 224 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 6 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1 2.0 2.0 12.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 100 0 0 0 ane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 arking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only EW Perm 03 04 1 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 8.0 G= 35.5 G= JG= I G= 26.5 G= G= G= Y= 5 1Y= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 85.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 217 456 1329 198 448 236 Lane group capacity, c 252 1947 1425 655 546 489 v/c ratio, X 0.86 0.23 0.93 0.30 0.82 0.48 Total green ratio, g/C 0.57 0.57 0.42 0.42 0.31 0.31 Uniform delay, d 20.0 9.0 F 23.6 16.5 27.1 23.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.39 0.11 0.45 0.11 0.36 0.11 4 L Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Incremental delay, d 24.8 0.1 11.4 0.3 9.7 0.8 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 44.8 9.1 16.8 36.7 24.4 ne group LOS D A E tCo 8 D C Approach delay 20.6 32.6 32.5 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 29.8 X = 0.90 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, AD Rights Reserved 1 IL_ J u Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • HCS2000' "DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour ntersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Existing Conditions Project ID Willow Run Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes. N 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 Lane group L TR L T R L T R L TR Volume, V (vph) 53 260 61 234 156 60 52 312 222 187 274 70 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTCR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade ! Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 Al N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N. Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left I NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 8.9 G= 24.6 1 G= G= G= 7.9 1 G= 33.6 1 G JG= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= IY= 5 IY= 5 IY= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 1 Cycle Length, C Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB I WB NB SB LT I TH I RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 56 338 246 164 63 55 328 234 197 362 Lane group capacity, c 474 884 397 909 619 472 653 784 418 1204 We ratio, X 0.12 0.38 0.62 0.18 0.10 0.12 0.50 0.30 0.47 0.30 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.26 0.41 0.26 0.39 0.49 0.35 0.50 0.49 0.35 Uniform delay, d 17.5 29.0 23.3 27.4 18.1 13.1 24.1 14.0 15.2 22.2 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.1 0.3 3.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.8 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Control delay 17.6 29.2 1 26.3 27.5 18.2 13.2 24.7 14.2 16.0 22.3 Lane group LOS 8 I C C I C B 8 I C B 8 C Approach delay 276 25.6 19.7 20.1 Approach LOS C C B C Intersection delay 22.7 X, = 0.55 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright (D 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Versioa 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc ICJ • HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour I ntersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Existing Conditions Project ID Willow Run Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 Lane group L TR L T R L T R L TR Volume, V (vph) 91 363 86 365 265 364 131 373 255 158 372 150 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 [12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 1 08 Timing G= 9.7 G= 32.7 JG= G= G= 32.6 G= JG= I G= Y= 5 Y= 5 1Y= 1Y= Y= 5 Y= 1Y= I Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 1 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH I RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 96 473 384 279 383 1 138 393 268 166 550 Lane group capacity, c 577 1239 470 1276 570 244 668 824 234 1217 We ratio, X 0.17 0.38 0.82 0.22 0.67 0.57 0.59 0.33 0.71 0.45 Total green ratio, g/C 0.53 0.36 0.53 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.53 0.36 0.36 Uniform delay, d 10.8 21.2 21.7 19.8 24.1 23.0 23.3 12.2 24.6 21.9 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.36 0.11 0.24 0.16 0.18 0.11 0.27 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.1 0.2 10.8 0.1 1 3.1 3.0 1.4 1 0.2 9.6 0.3 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 Control delay 11.0 21.4 1 32.5 19.9 272 26.1 24.6 12.4 34.2 22.2 Lane group LOS B I C C I B C C I C B C I C Approach delay 19.6 27.2 20.8 24.9 Approach LOS B C C C Intersection delay 23.7 X = 0.74 Intersection LOS C HCS2000 Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A kate Performed 09114104 ime Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Existing Conditions Project ID Willow Run Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 0 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane group T R L T LT R Volume, V (vph) 1064 537 228 461 377 0 168 Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 ane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 arking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 8.0 JG= 41.0 G= JG= I G= 26.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 1120 565 240 485 397 177 Lane group capacity, c 1555 714 272 2048 508 453 v/c ratio, X 0.72 0.79 0.88 0.24 0.78 0.39 Total green ratio, g/C 0.46 046 0.60 0.60 0.29 0.29 Uniform delay, d 19.9 20.9 15.9 8.4 29.4 25.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.28 0.34 0.41 0.11 1 0.11 4 I L Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Incremental delay, d 1.7 6.1 26.9 0.1 1 1 7.7 1 0.6 nitial queue delay, d Control delay 21.5 26.9 42.8 8.5 371 26.2 ne group LOS C C D A D C Approach delay 23.3 19.8 33.8 Approach LOS C B C Intersection delay 24.5 X = 0.77 Intersection LOS C r L HCS20001M Copyright C 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved 11 0 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Versioe 4.1e HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A ate Performed 09114104 ime Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Existing Conditions Project ID Willow Run Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane group T R L T LT R Volume, V (vph) 416 388 603 1086 224 0 570 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 1 3 3 6 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A I A A A A A A Start -up lost time, 1, 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 100 0 0 175 ne width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 Al N 0 N Al N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 37 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 20.0 G= 23.0 G= G= G= 27.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Al alysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 85.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 438 303 635 1143 236 416 Lane group capacity, c 924 424 617 1927 558 498 v/c ratio, X 0.47 0.71 1.03 0.59 0.42 0.84 Total green ratio, g/C 0.27 0.27 0.56 0.56 0.32 0.32 Uniform delay, d 25.9 28.0 30.2 12.1 22.9 26.9 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.28 0.50 0.18 0.11 0.37 qW Patton HaiTis Rust & Associates, pc Incremental delay, d 0.4 5.6 43.9 0.5 0.5 11.8 nitial queue delay, d Control delay 26.3 33.7 74.1 12.6 23.4 38.7 ne group LOS C C E B C D Approach delay 29.3 34.6 33.2 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 33.1 X, = 0.97 Intersection LOS C HCS2000Tm Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Pc Version 4.1e Rights Reserved IICS2006FM Copyright V 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Vetsinn 4_1d • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst gency /Co. to Performed nal sis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 PM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Breckinridge Ln & Route 621 Existing Conditions Project Description Willow Run East/West Street: Breckinrid e Lane North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Ad ustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 40 6 274 63 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 42 6 288 66 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Undivided FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 89 0 360 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF a95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 93 0 378 0 0 0 rcent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 ercent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 288 471 C (m) (vph) 1553 727 c 0.19 0.65 95% queue length 0.68 4.80 Control Delay 7.8 18.6 LOS A C A pproach Delay 18.6 A pproach LOS C Rights Reserved IICS2006FM Copyright V 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Vetsinn 4_1d • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.1d 4 r L Rights Reserved HCS200drM Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4,1d 0 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.Id TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst gency /Co. to Performed nal sis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 AM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Breckinridge Ln & Route 621 Existing Conditions Project Description Willow Run East/West Street: Breckinrid e Lane North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 53 11 248 25 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 55 11 261 26 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT , Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 15 0 64 0 0 0 Pe -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 15 0 67 0 0 0 rcent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 ercent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service A pproach NB SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 261 82 C (m) (vph) 1529 771 c 0.17 0.11 95% queue length 0.62 0.36 Control Delay 7.8 10.2 LOS A B A pproach Delay 10.2 A pproach LOS B 4 r L Rights Reserved HCS200drM Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4,1d 0 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.Id Rights Reserved HCS2006TM Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 1.Id TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst gency /Co. to Performed nal sis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 AM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr Existing Conditions Pro ect Description Willow Run East West Street: Handle Ave North/South Street: Jubal Earl Drive Intersection Orientation: North -South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 171 53 5 172 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 180 55 5 181 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 1 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T , Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 16 0 53 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 16 0 55 0 0 0 rcent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 rcent Grade ( %) 0 0 red Approach N N orage IRT 0 0 Channel ized 0 0 nes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LR Delay, Queue Lencith, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 5 71 C (m) (vph) 1326 808 c 0.00 0.09 95% queue length 0.01 0.29 Control Delay 7.7 79 LOS A A ,A pproach Delay 9.9 pproach LOS — A Rights Reserved HCS2006TM Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 1.Id Rights Reserved HCS2006i m Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id • Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed A nalysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 PM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr Existing Conditions Project Description Willow Run EasUWest Street: Handle Ave North /South Street: Jubal Early Drive Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 397 57 36 384 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 417 60 37 404 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 17 0 45 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 17 0 47 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 r 2122! ercent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N Al Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 37 64 C (m) (vph) 1080 560 We 0.03 0.11 5% queue length 0.11 0.38 Control Delay 8.5 12.3 LOS A B pproach Delay 12.3 pproach LOS B Rights Reserved HCS2006i m Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id • Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc W Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc HCS2000' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Existing Conditions Project ID Willow Run Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 31 660 98 133 274 45 67 51 87 25 16 19 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 one width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Onl EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing 10.0 PFY= G= 42.0 G= G= G= 23.0 G= G= G= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 33 695 103 140 288 47 125 92 26 37 Lane group capacity, c 496 1593 732 472 2162 993 383 662 319 433 v/c ratio, X 0.07 0.44 0.14 0.30 0.13 0.05 0.33 0.14 0.08 0.09 Total green ratio, g/C 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.63 0.63 0.63 026 0.42 0.26 0.26 Uniform delay, d 13.2 16.1 13.7 76 6.6 6.2 272 16.0 25.5 25.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 1 a 11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 W Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Incremental delay, d 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 13.3 16.3 13.8 8.0 6.6 6.3 27.7 16.1 25.6 25.6 Lane group LOS B B B A A A C B C C Approach delay 15.8 7.0 22.8 25.6 Approach LOS B A C C Intersection delay 14.5 1 X = 0.44 Intersection LOS B HCS7000"M Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved • • Version 4.1c Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc W Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR + A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Existing Conditions Project ID Willow Run Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 44 560 247 159 1067 43 212 28 80 159 126 43 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N. Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I WB Only I EW Perm 03 04 1 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 11.0 G= 38.0 G= G= G= 36.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 46 589 260 167 1123 1 45 252 84 167 178 Lane group capacity, c 171 1297 596 432 1843 847 396 815 340 639 v/c ratio, X 0.27 0.45 0.44 0.39 0.61 0.05 0.64 0.10 0.49 0.28 Total green ratio, g/C 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.36 0.52 0.36 0.36 Uniform delay, d 21.4 123.2 23.0 12.7 15.8 10.9 26.6 12.2 24.9 22.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 j 0.11 0.22 0.11 0.11 0.11 W Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Incremental delay, d 0.9 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.0 3.4 1 0.1 1.1 0.2 Initial queue delay. d Control delay 22.3 23.5 23.6 13.3 16.4 10.9 29.9 12.2 26.0 23.0 Lane group LOS C C C B B B C B C C Approach delay 23.4 15.8 25.5 24.5 Approach LOS C B C C Intersection delay 20.3 X� = 0.62 Intersection LOS C HCS2000rs' Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved • 0 Version Me Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 4 Rights Reserved HCS200JM Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4,11 • Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pe TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed A nalysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 AM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Route 621 & Route 622 Existing Conditions Pro ect Description Willow Run East1west Street: Route 622 orth /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 1 87 75 27 37 4 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 91 78 28 38 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Median Type Raised curb FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 59 39 24 21 53 12 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 62 41 25 22 55 12 ercent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 1 28 128 89 C (m) (vph) 1561 1402 696 668 We 0.00 0.02 0.18 0.13 95% queue length 0.00 0.06 0.67 0.46 Control Delay 7.3 7.6 11.3 11.2 LOS A A 8 8 pproach Delay 11.3 11.2 pproach LOS B B Rights Reserved HCS200JM Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4,11 • Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pe Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Copyright m 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4_Id Version 4 l • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency/Co. ate Performed A nalysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 PM Peak Hour Intersection Jurisdiction A nalysis Year Route 621 & Route 622 Existing Conditions Project Description Willow Run East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 40 47 45 19 48 6 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 42 49 47 20 50 6 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal 0 1 1 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 91 128 63 14 51 3 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 95 134 66 14 53 3 ercent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NS SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 42 20 295 70 C (m) (vph) 1542 1491 686 590 c 0.03 0.01 0.43 0.12 95% queue length 0.08 0.04 2.17 1 0.40 Control Delay 7.4 7.4 14.1 11.9 LOS A A B B A pproach Delay 14.1 11.9 pproach LOS B B Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Copyright m 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4_Id Version 4 l • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Pc I TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMA General Information ISite Information Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 622 & Harvest Drive Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction 2 Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Year Existing Conditions A nalysis Time Period A M Peak Hour T R n Willow Run rsection Orientation: East -West (Study Period (hrs): 0.25 iicle Volumes and Adjustments or Street Eastbound Westbound , ement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R ime veh/h) 51 704 0 0 275 51 k -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 rly Flow Rate (veh /h) 53 741 0 0 289 53 Dortion of heavy cles, P 3 3 lian type Raised curb Channelized? 0 0 es 0 2 0 0 2 0 ifiguration LT T T TR tream Signal 0 0 or Street Northbound Southbound fement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ime veh/h) .k -hour factor, PHF irly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0.95 0 0 0.95 0 0 0,95 0 41 0.95 43 0 0.95 0 51 0.95 53 oortion of heavy cles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 cent grade ( %) 0 0 ed approach N N forage 0 0 Channelized? 0 0 es 0 0 0 0 0 0 ifiguration LR itrol Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service iroach EB WB Northbound Southbound rement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 e Configuration LT LR ime, v (vph) 53 96 )acity, c (vph) 1207 584 ratio 0.04 0.16 sue length (95 %) 0.14 0.58 drol Delay (s /veh) 8.1 12.4 i A B roach delay (s /veh) — 12.4 iroach LOS B Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY I (General Information (Site Information I Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc A nalyst PHR +A Intersection Route 622 & Harvest Drive Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction East/West Street: Route 622 Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Year Existing Conditions A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Project Description Willow Run East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Harvest Drive ntersection Orientation: East -West I Study Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 35 603 0 0 855 98 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 36 634 0 0 900 103 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P 3 3 Median type Raised curb FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT T T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume veh/h) 0 0 0 51 0 41 eak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 ourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 53 0 43 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR V olume, v (vph) 36 96 Capacity, c (vph) 680 325 c ratio 0.05 0.30 Q ueue length (95 %) 0.17 1.21 Control Delay (s /veh) 10.6 20.7 LOS B C A pproach delay (s /veh) 20.7 pproach LOS C Mw Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CO SU MMARY General Information Isite Information I� A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Time Period A M Peak Hour EasWJest Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 NB Ram Intersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 [V ehicle Volumes and Ad ustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound ement Route 622 & Route 37 NB Intersection Ram J urisdiction 5 A nalysis Year Existing Conditions L EasWJest Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 NB Ram Intersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 [V ehicle Volumes and Ad ustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound ement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R ime veh/h) 89 441 0 0 56 387 k -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 rly Flow Rate (veh /h) 93 464 0 0 58 407 )ortion of heavy Iles, PHV 3 3 lian type Undivided Channelized? 0 0 es 0 1 0 0 1 1 figuration LT T R tream Signal 0 0 or Street Northbound Southbound , ement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ime veh/h) 14 0 104 0 0 0 k -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 irly Flow Rate (veh /h) 14 0 109 0 0 0 oortion of heavy icles, PHV 3 3 3 3 3 3 cent grade ( %) 0 0 ed approach N N forage 0 0 Channelized? 0 0 es 0 1 0 0 0 0 rfiguration LTR itrol Delay. Queue Len th Level of Service roach EB WB Northbound Southbound tement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 e Configuration LT LTR ime, v (vph) 93 123 )acity, c (vph) 1091 527 ratio 0.09 0.23 ue length (95 %) 0.28 0.90 itrol Delay (s /veh) 8.6 13.9 i A B )roach delay (s /veh) 13.9 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ite Information C_ A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Street: Route 37 NB hicle Volumes and Ad ustments Route 622 & Route 37 NB Intersection Ram J urisdiction 1 A nalysis Year Existing Conditions 4 5 Street: Route 37 NB hicle Volumes and Ad ustments or Street Eastbound Westbound cement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R .ime veh/h) 45 563 0 0 115 662 tk -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 irly Flow Rate (veh /h) 47 592 0 0 121 696 portion of heavy isles, PHV 3 3 lian type Undivided Channelized? 0 0 es 0 1 0 0 1 1 ifiguration LT T R stream Signal 0 0 or Street Northbound Southbound cement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ime veh/h) 101 0 66 0 0 0 ik -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 irly Flow Rate (vehih) 106 0 69 0 0 0 portion of heavy isles, PHV 3 3 3 3 3 3 cent grade ( %) 0 0 ed approach N N storage 0 0 Channelized? 0 0 es 0 1 0 0 0 0 ifiguration LTR itrol Delay Queue Length, Level of Service iroach EB WB Northbound Southbound Cement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 e Configuration LT LTR ime, v (vph) 47 175 )acity, c (vph) 807 267 ratio 0.06 0.66 we length (95 %) 0.19 4.18 drol Delay (s /veh) 9.7 40.9 i A E roach delay (s /veh) 40.9 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite In formation a Analyst PHR +A Agency/Co. Date Performed PHR +A 9115104 A nalysis Time Period A M Peak Hour & Route 37 SB ovement 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 L T R L T R )fume veh 0 108 47 43 27 0 ,ak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 ourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 113 49 45 28 0 oportion of heavy ;hicles, P 0 3 edian type Undivided T Channelized? 0 0 apes 0 1 0 0 1 0 onfiguration TR LT stream Signal 0 0 inor Street Northbound Southbound ovement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R plume veh/h) 0 0 0 422 1 95 aak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 ourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 444 1 100 , oportion of heavy �hicles, PHV 3 0 3 3 3 3 arcent grade ( %) 0 0 ared approach N N Storage 0 0 T Channelized? 0 0 Ines 0 0 0 0 1 0 o nfiguration I LTR ontrol Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service eproach EB WB Northbound Southbound ovement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ine Configuration LT LTR plume, v (vph) 45 545 apacity, c (vph) 1411 752 c ratio 0.03 0.72 ueue length (95 %) 0.10 6.34 ontrol Delay (s /veh) 7.6 21.3 DS A C Doroach delav (s /veh) 21.3 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Isite informati a A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Route 37 SB Ram Jurisdiction 3 Analysis Year Existing Conditions 6 Route mes and vement 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 L T R L T R ume veh/h) 0 59 56 69 147 0 sk -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 irly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 62 58 72 154 0 portion of heavy iicles, P 0 3 than type Undivided Channelized? 0 0 ies 0 1 0 0 1 0 ifiguration TR LT stream Signal 0 0 io Street Northbound Southbound vement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ume veh/h) 0 0 0 549 3 135 sk -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 irly Flow Rate (vehih) 0 0 0 577 3 142 portion of heavy kles, PHV 3 0 3 3 3 3 cent grade ( %) 0 0 red approach N N >torage 0 0 Channelized? 0 0 ies 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lfiguration LTR ntrol Delay. Queue Len th Level of Service )roach EB WB Northbound Southbound vement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ie Configuration LT LTR ume, v (vph) 72 722 pacity, c (vph) 1462 625 ratio 0.05 1.16 eue length (95 %) 0.16 23.60 ntrol Delay (s /veh) 7.6 110.6 S A F irnnrh rialav /S /vPhl -- -- 110.6 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 6proach LOS I I I I F HCS2000TNI Copyright C 2003 University dFlorida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id 0 • • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc ` r 1 u 4 TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information Site Information A nalyst PHR +A A gency or Company PHA +A Date Performed 9/20/2004 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Highway Route 621 From /To Route 622 /Breckinridge Lane urediction Analysis Year Existinq Conditions input Data _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Shoubder ,eid tl F Class I highway r Class II highway Terrain 'g Level a'i Rolling Two -way hourly volume 200 verni Di recti o na l D split 66/34 P factor, PHF 0.95 passing - passing zone 0 . Show Nonfi 6Jroer %Trucks and Buses, P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 8 �— Lane uidth _ ti lder Shoukbx width _ _ _ _ _ 11 _ Segment length, L, mi Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, i (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger car equivalents for bucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E. (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f f / + P T (E i 1) +P 0 -878 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PH F f `f 215 v ' highest directional split preporlionz (pc /h) 142 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S n i/h Observed volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed FFS FFS = S +0.00776(V /f 58.0 mi /h Base free -flow speed, BFFS FM A dj. for lane width and shoulder widths, f (Exhibit 20 -5) A dj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS =BFFS -f fA) 60.0 mi /h 0.0 mi /h 2.0 mi/h 580 mi /h dj. for no- passing zones, f ( mi /h) (Exhibit 20-11) 1 0.0 verage travel speed, ATS ( mi/h) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v -f 56.3 Percent Time-Spent—Following Grade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E. (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f I1V fHV =1/ (1+ P 1) +P 1)) 0.997 T wo-way flow rater, v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' fc fHV) 211 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 139 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) 13PTSF- 100(1- e 0,000 16.9 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f d/h (%) Exh. 20 -12) 22 Percent time - spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f d/np 18.1 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class II A V olume to capacity ratio We v /c =V 3,200 0.07 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh- mi) Vl l 025L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- mi) VMT =V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pc /h, terminae analysis -the LOS is F, 2. If highest directional split v 1,700 pc /h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000 E Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.1d C i TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information J Sife Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 9/20/2004 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Highway Route 621 From /TO Route 622 /Ereckinridge Lane unsdiction nal sis Year Exislinq Conditions Input Data — — —._ — — — — — Shoulder width it F Class I highway Class If highway Terrain F Level r Rolling Two -way hourly volume 197 veh /h Directional split 63/37 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 0 ,9mv tArth Lrrovi. Trucks and Buses, P 3% %Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 8 Lane width It Lane width It _$_hn wi It Segment length, L, mi Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f f 1 /(1 +P +P 0.979 T wo-way flow rate 1 , v (pGh) v =V/ (PHF' f f 212 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 134 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S mi /h Observed volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS = S +0.00776(V / f 58.0 mi /h Base free -flow speed, BFFS FM Adj. for lane width and shoulder width3, fLS (Exhibit 20 -5) Adj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS- fLSfA) 60.0 mi /h 0.0 mi/h 2.0 mil mdh0 dj. for no- passing zones, f ( mi/h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 verage travel speed, ATS ( mi/h) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v -f 56.4 Percent Time-Spent—Following Grade Adjustment factor, f. (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy- vehicle adjustment factor, f HV fHV 1f (1+ P 1) +P 1) J 0.997 Two-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' f f 208 v ' highest directional split proportion (pGh) 131 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF = 100(1 -e 0,000879v P ) 16,7 Adj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f (%)(Exh. 20 -12) 1.9 Percent time- spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f o /nrr 18.6 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class II A Volume to capacity ratio We v /c =V /3,200 0.07 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh - mi) VMT 0.25L,(V /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh - mi) VMT V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT VMT 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pc /h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v >= 1,700 pc/h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000 0 Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.1 d • HCS2000' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 2 3 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group L T T L T Volume, V (vph) 628 1091 731 290 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only Thru Only 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 25.0 G= 32.0 G= I G= G= 18.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 661 1148 769 305 0 Lane group capacity, c 945 3364 1736 681 369 v/c ratio, X 0.70 0.34 0.44 0.45 0.00 Total green ratio, g/C 0.28 0.69 0.36 0.20 0.20 Uniform delay, d 29.1 5.7 22.2 31.6 28.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.27 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 2.3 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 31.4 5.8 22.4 32.1 28.8 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Pc Lane group LOS C I A C C C Approach delay 15.1 22.4 32.1 Approach LOS B C C Intersection delay 18,9 X� = 0.53 Intersection LOS B • ficsw00 Copyright m 2000 Universit) of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e • r L J Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A gency or Co. PHR +A ate Performed 09114104 ime Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 2 3 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group L T T L T Volume, V (vph) 239 701 1563 493 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Fed / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 ane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EB Only Thru Only 03 04 1 NB Only 06 1 07 1 08 Timing G= 11.0 G= 42.0 G= G= G= 22.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SIB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 252 738 1645 519 0 Lane group capacity, c 416 3147 2279 832 451 We ratio, X 0.61 0.23 0.72 0.62 0.00 Total green ratio, g/C 0.12 0.64 0.47 0.24 0.24 Uniform delay, d, 37.4 6.7 19.3 30.3 25.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 elay calibration, k 0.19 0.11 1 1 0.28 0.21 0.11 F_ C Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc al delay, d 2.5 0.0 1.1 1.5 0.0 ue delay, d lay 40.0 6.7 20.5 31.8 p LOS (Appr D A C C delay 15.2 20.5 31.8 LOS B C C n delay 20.7 T = 0.68 Intersection LOS C IICS2000TS Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved • • Patton Hans Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.1 e HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A gency or Co. PHR +A to Performed 09114104 me Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lane group T L T LT Volume, V (vph) 1282 264 757 436 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 3 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, a 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 ne width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only Thru Only 03 04 SB Only 06 07 38 Timing G= 8.5 1 Y= G= 32.3 G= G= G= 34.2 G= G= G= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 1349 278 797 459 Lane group capacity, c 1752 321 1737 668 vic ratio, X 0.77 0.87 0.46 0.69 Total green ratio, g/C 0.36 0.09 0.51 0.38 Uniform delay, d 25.6 40.2 14.2 23.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 ,elay calibration, k 0.32 0.40 0.11 0.26 L Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Incremental delay, d 2.2 21.2 0.2 1 1 3.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 27.7 61.4 14.4 26.4 ne group LOS C E B C Approach delay 27.7 26.5 26.4 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 27,1 X�= 0.74 Intersection LOS C 4 HCS2000TM Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved • C J Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.1e HCS2000TO DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A gency or Co. PHR +A ate Performed 09114104 ime Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lane group T L T LT Volume, V (vph) 681 698 1358 259 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 3 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, C 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 RTOR volumes 0 0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 rTCR rade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N neuvers, N ing, N 0 0 0 0 r pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only Thru Only 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 21.5 G= 23.0 G= G= G= 25.5 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 1Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 85.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 717 735 1429 273 Lane group capacity, c 1321 861 1988 527 v/c ratio, X 0.54 0.85 0.72 0.52 Total green ratio, g/C 0.27 0.25 0.58 0.30 Uniform delay, d 26.5 1 30.3 12.8 24.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 elay calibration, k 0.14 0.39 0.28 0.12 4 r I• L Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Incremental delay, d 0.5 8.4 1.3 0.9 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 27.0 38.6 14.0 25.6 ane group LOS C D B C Approach delay 27.0 22.4 25.6 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 23.7 X = 0.65 Intersection LOS C 4 HC32000Ts' Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved • • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.1 e 4 Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Copyright 01003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst gency /Co. to Performed nal sis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 AM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction Analysis Year Breckinridge Ln & Route 621 2007 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run - Phase #1 EastM/est Street: Breckinrid e Lane North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North - South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 61 13 287 29 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 64 13 302 30 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Undivided FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT , Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 17 0 74 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 17 0 77 0 0 0 rcent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 ercent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LR Delay Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 302 94 C (m) (vph) 1515 720 c 0.20 0.13 95% queue length 0.74 0.45 Control Delay 8.0 10.7 LOS A B A pproach Delay 10.7 pproach LOS B 4 Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Copyright 01003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.1d r L r L Rights Reserved HC52000"M Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4, to • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4,1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency /Co. to Performed nal sis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 PM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Breckinridge Ln & Route 621 2007 Background Conditions Pro ect Description Willow Run - Phase #1 East West Street: Breckinrid e Lane North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South ] Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 46 7 317 73 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 48 7 333 76 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT ,Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R V olume 103 0 417 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 108 0 438 0 0 0 rcent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 ercent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 333 546 C (m) (vph) 1544 666 c 0.22 0.82 95% queue length 0.82 8.66 Control Delay 8.0 30.2 LOS A D A pproach Delay 30.2 A pproach LOS D r L r L Rights Reserved HC52000"M Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4, to • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4,1d 4 Rights Reserved HCS2000'M Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 41d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst A ency /Co. to Performed nal sis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 AM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr 2007 Background Conditions P ro Description Willow Run - Phase #1 East West Street: Handle Ave North /South Street: Jubal Earl Drive Intersection Orientation: North - South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 198 61 6 199 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 208 64 6 209 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 19 0 61 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 20 0 64 0 0 0 scent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 ercent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 6 84 C (m) (vph) 1286 774 c 0.00 0.11 5% queue length 0.01 0.36 Control Delay 7.8 10.2 LOS A e pproach Delay 10.2 pproach LOS B 4 Rights Reserved HCS2000'M Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 41d • • TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency /Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9115104 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr J urisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run - Phase #1 East/West Street: Handley Ave North /South Street: Jubal Early Drive Intersection Orientation: North -South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 4 5 6 L T L T R v olume 0 460 42 445 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 g69 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 484 44 468 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal D 1 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 20 0 52 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 21 0 54 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LR Delay, Queue Length. and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 44 75 C (m) (vph) 1012 504 c 0.04 0.15 95% queue length 0.14 0.52 Control Delay 8.7 13.4 LOS A a A pproach Delay 13.4 Approach LOS B Rights Reserved IICS2000TM Copyright C 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 4 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT G eneral Informati Site Information Analyst PHR +A gency or Co. PHR +A ate Performed 9114104 me Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Area Type Jurisdiction Analysis Year Project ID Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue All other areas 2007 Background Conditions Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timinq Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 Lane group L TR L T R L T R L TR Volume, V (vph) 61 301 71 271 181 69 60 361 257 216 317 81 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ed / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 9.0 G= 20.0 G= G= G= 6.0 G= 40.0 G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 5 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 1 Cycle Length, C = 95.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 64 392 285 191 73 63 380 271 227 419 Lane group capacity, c 411 718 321 739 512 479 777 891 426 1434 v/c ratio, X 0.16 0.55 0.89 0.26 0.14 0.13 0.49 0.30 0.53 0.29 Total green ratio, g/C 0.36 0.21 0.36 0.21 0.33 0.54 0.42 0.57 0.54 0.42 Uniform delay, d 20.5 33.4 31.9 31.3 22.6 10.9 20.0 10.7 17.3 18.2 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 4 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.15 1 0.41 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.14 0.11 ncremental delay, d 0.2 0.9 24.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.2 1.3 0.1 nitial queue delay, d ontrol delay 20.6 34.3 56.5 31.5 22.7 11.0 20.5 10.9 18.6 183 ane group LOS C C E C C B C B B B Approach delay 32.4 43.3 16.0 18.4 Approach LOS C D B B Intersection delay 26.2 X = 0.67 Intersection LOS C 4 HCS2WOrm Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Pc Version 4.1e HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A R gency or Co. PHR +A ate Performed 9114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 Lane group L TR L T R L T R L TR Volume, V (vph) 105 420 100 423 307 421 152 432 295 183 431 174 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 1 2.0 j 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ed / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 1 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 1 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 9.7 G= 32.7 G= G= G= 32.6 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= IY= 5 Y 1Y= I Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 111 547 443 160 455 311 193 637 Lane group capacity, c 551 1239 570 206 668 824 187 1217 We ratio, X 0.20 0.44 T29,020.1 0.78 0.78 0.68 0.38 1.03 0.52 Total green ratio, g/C 0.53 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.53 0.36 0.36 Uniform delay, d, 11.0 21.7 25.4 25.5 24.3 12.6 28.7 22.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Patton Hams Rust & Associates, pc Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.50 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.25 0.11 0.50 0.13 Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.3 49.1 0.1 6.7 16.9 2.8 0.3 74.5 0.4 Initial queue delay, cl ontrol delay 11.2 22.0 78.1 20.2 32.2 42.4 27.1 12.9 103.2 23.0 Lane group LOS B C E C C D C B F C Approach delay 20.2 45.8 25.0 41.6 Approach LOS C D C D LL Intersection delay 34,9 X� = 1.03 Intersection LOS C 4 11052000' Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved • • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4,1e • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 36 815 113 154 541 52 78 59 101 29 19 22 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking I Grade 1 Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 10.0 G= 42.0 G= I G= E = 23.0 IG= JG= JG= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= 1Y= Y= 5 1Y= 1Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 1 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 38 858 119 162 569 55 144 106 31 43 Lane group capacity, c 378 1593 732 405 2162 993 378 662 302 434 v/c ratio, X 0.10 0.54 0.16 0.40 0.26 0.06 0.38 0.16 0.10 0.10 Total green ratio, g/C 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.26 0.42 0.26 0.26 Uniform delay, d 13.4 17.1 13.9 8.6 7.3 6.3 27.6 16.1 25.6 25.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • Control delay 13.5 17.5 14.0 9.3 1 7.3 1 6.3 28.3 16.2 25.8 25.7 Lane group LOS 8 I B B A I A A I C B C I C Approach delay 16.9 77 23.2 25.7 Approach LOS B A C C Intersection delay 14 X� = 0.53 Intersection LOS B HCS2000� 1 Copyright D 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Pc • • C� HCS2000" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 51 848 286 184 1336 50 245 32 93 184 146 50 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 j 2.0 j 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 7.0 1 G= 32.3 G= JG= I G= 30.7 G JG= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= ly= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 85.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SIB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 54 893 301 194 1406 53 292 98 194 207 Lane group capacity, c 87 1297 596 274 1779 817 382 788 318 641 We ratio, X 0.62 0.69 0.51 0.71 0.79 0.06 0.76 0.12 0.61 0.32 Total green ratio, g/C 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.36 0.50 0.36 0.36 Uniform delay, d 21.4 22.1 20.2 14.0 16.6 10.1 24.0 11.2 22.2 19.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.20 026 0.11 0.27 0.34 0.11 0.32 0.11 0.20 0.11 Incremental delay, d 12.9 1.6 0.7 8.2 2.5 0.0 8.9 0.1 3.4 0.3 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • , r u Control delay 34.2 23.7 20.9 22.1 19.1 10.1 32.9 11.3 25.6 19.9 Lane group LOS C I C C C I 8 8 I C 8 C I 8 Approach delay 23.5 19.1 27.5 22.7 Approach LOS C 8 C C Intersection delay 21.9 X = 0.78 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright V 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4 l Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • 11 Rights Reserved 11CS2000TM Copyright C 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reamed Version 4.1d Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency /Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 AM Peak Hour Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year Route 621 & Route 622 2007 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run - Phase 111 EasUWest Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North - South tud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 1 101 87 31 43 5 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 106 91 32 45 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- 3 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 68 45 28 24 61 14 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 71 47 29 25 64 14 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration I LTR LTR Delay Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 1 32 147 103 (m) (vph) 1550 1370 633 620 c 0.00 0.02 0.23 0.17 95% queue length 0.00 0.07 0.89 0.59 Control Delay 7.3 7.7 1 12. 1 12.0 LOS A A B B Approach Delay 12.4 12.0 Approach LOS B 8 Rights Reserved 11CS2000TM Copyright C 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reamed Version 4.1d Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc E 0 11 Rights Reserved FICS2000 Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, PC TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 PM Peak Hour Intersection Jurisdiction A nalysis Year Route 621 & Route 622 2007 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run - Phase #1 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 46 54 52 22 56 7 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 48 56 54 23 58 7 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Median Type Undivided FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR , Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 105 148 73 16 59 3 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 110 155 76 16 62 3 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration I LTR LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 48 23 341 81 C (m) (vph) 1531 1474 633 532 c 0.03 0.02 0.54 0.15 95% queue length 0.10 0.05 3.22 0.53 Control Delay 7.4 7.5 1 17.1 13.0 LOS A A C B Approach Delay 17.1 13.0 Approach LOS C B Rights Reserved FICS2000 Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, PC I TWO -WAY STOP CO SUMMARY General Information Site Information 0 A nalyst PHR + Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Time Period A M Peak Hour Year 622 & Hary Background Run - Phase #1 []I Movement 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 59 815 0 0 318 59 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 62 857 0 0 334 62 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT T T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 47 0 59 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 49 0 62 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 I 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 62 111 Capacity, c (vph) 1152 537 c ratio 0.05 0.21 Queue length (95 %) 0.17 0.77 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.3 13.4 LOS A B A pproach delay (s /veh) 13.4 A pproach LOS 8 • HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved version 4. ]d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc I TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY I • C � • (General Information (Site Information I Pro'ect Descri lion Willow Run - Phase #1 Intersection Route 622 & Harvest Drive A nalyst PHR +A J urisdiction East West Street: Route 622 Agency/Co. PHR +A A nalysis Year 007 Background Conditions Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour tud Period hrs : 0.25 Pro'ect Descri lion Willow Run - Phase #1 East West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Harvest Drive ntersection Orientation: East -West tud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 41 698 0 0 990 113 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 43 734 0 0 1042 118 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Raised curb FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT T T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 59 0 47 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 62 0 49 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay, Queue Len th Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 43 111 Capacity, c (vph) 592 273 c ratio 0.07 0.41 Queue length (95 %) 0.23 1.88 Control Delay (s /veh) 11.6 26.9 LOS e D A pproach delay (s /veh) 26.9 A pproach LOS D 11CS2000TM Copyright 02003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4J Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Sits Infnrmntinn • A A nalyst PHR +A Intersection Route 622 & Route 37 NB Ram Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction EasUWest Street: Route 622 Date Performed 9115104 Analysis Year 007 Background Conditions A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour IStudy Period hrs : 025 11 o ect uescri hon Willow Hun - Phase tf l EasUWest Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 NB Ram Intersection Orientation: East -West IStudy Period hrs : 025 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 103 511 0 0 65 448 Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 108 537 0 0 68 471 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Undivided FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 16 0 120 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h ) 16 0 126 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LTR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 108 142 Capacity, c (vph) 1024 466 c ratio 0.11 0.30 Queue length (95 %) 0.35 1.27 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.9 16.1 LOS A C Approach delay (s /veh) 16.1 Approach LOS C HCS200dr" Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Verxion 4J]d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY I • C � J General Information Site Information I 'ro ect Uescri lion Willow Run - Phase #1 I ntersecti o n Route 622 & Route 37 NB Ram A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Year 2007 Background Conditions A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Study Period hrs : 0.25 'ro ect Uescri lion Willow Run - Phase #1 East West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 NB Ram Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 52 652 0 0 133 766 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 54 686 0 0 140 806 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 117 0 76 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h ) 123 0 80 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LTR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 54 203 Capacity, c (vph) 721 209 We ratio 0.07 0.97 Queue length (95 %) 0.24 8.36 Control Delay (s /veh) 10.4 102.8 LOS B F A pproach delay (s /veh) 102.8 Approach LOS F IICS200JM Copyright © 2003 University of 1=lorida, All Rights Reserved Vusion 4J Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • CJ HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR + A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Project ID willow Run - Phase #1 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group LT T R LTR Volume, V (vph) 103 511 65 448 16 0 120 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, 1, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 100 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 1 02 03 04 1 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 55.0 JG= G= JG= I G= 25.0 G= G= JG= Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 646 68 366 143 Lane group capacity, c 1050 1127 958 449 v/c ratio, X 0.62 0.06 0.38 0.32 Total green ratio, g/C 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.28 Uniform delay, d 10.9 7.1 8.9 25.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.20 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 1.1 0.0 0.3 0.4 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 12.0 7.1 9.1 26.2 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 11 • • Lane group LOS 1 8 1 A A C Approach delay 12.0 8.8 26.2 Approach LOS 8 A C Intersection delay 12,5 X c = 0.52 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000r' l Copyright C 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc DETAILED REPORT 0 • • Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Number of lanes, N Lane group Volume, V (vph) % Heavy vehicles, %HV Peak -hour factor, PHF t Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) Start -up lost time, 1 Extension of effective green, e Arrival type, AT Unit extension, UE Filtering /metering, I Initial unmet demand, O Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes Lane width Parking / Grade /Parking Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N Min. time for pedestrians, G Phasing I EW Perm 02 Timing G= 55.0 JG= Y= 5 IY= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Lane Group Capacity, Control Adjusted flow rate, v Lane group capacity, c v/c ratio, X Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d Progression factor, PF Delay calibration, k Incremental delay, d Initial queue delay, d Control delay Area Type All other areas 13.4 7.4 112.2 I 127.3 0 N Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Jurisdiction AnalysisYear 2 007 Backg Conditio Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 (Su ggested imp Velay and LOS Dete rmination 13.4 7.4 112.2 I 127.3 0 N Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc L • 1 r� u Lane group LOS I B I A 8 C Approach delay 13.4 11.3 27.3 Approach LOS B B C Intersection delay 14,2 X = 0.60 Intersection LOS B HCS2000i' t Copyright m 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY I • • E (General Information ISite Information I Pro'ect Descri lion Willow Run - Phase 1f 1 ntersection Route 622 & Route 37 SB Ram A nalyst PHR + Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction North /South Street: Route 37 SB Ram Date Performed 9115104 Analysis Year 007 Background Conditions A nalysis Time Period A M Peak Hour Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Pro'ect Descri lion Willow Run - Phase 1f 1 EasUWest Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 SB Ram Intersection Orientation: East -West [S tudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 125 54 50 31 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 131 56 52 32 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 3 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 0 0 0 489 1 110 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 514 1 115 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 0 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR Control Delav, Queue encith, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 52 630 Capacity, c (vph) 1381 714 c ratio 0.04 0.88 Queue length (95 %) 0.12 10.99 Control Delay (s /veh) 7.7 35.6 LOS A E A pproach delay (s /veh) 35.6 Approach LOS E HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc I TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY I • 11 • (General Information ISite Information I Pro ect Descri lion Willow Run - Phase #1 Intersection Route 622 & Route 37 SB Ram A nalyst PHR + Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction Date Performed 9115104 Analysis Year 007Background Conditions A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Pro ect Descri lion Willow Run - Phase #1 East West Street: Route 622 No th /South Street: Route 37 SB Ram Intersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 68 65 80 170 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 71 68 84 178 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 3 Median type Undivided FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT 1 Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 636 3 156 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 669 3 164 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 0 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 I 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration I LTR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 84 836 Capacity, c (vph) 1438 574 We ratio 0.06 1.46 Queue length (95 %) 0.19 40.49 Control Delay (s /veh) 77 235.0 LOS A F A pproach delay (s /veh) 235.0 Approach LOS F HCS200(i " - Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • 11 HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Project ID willow Run - Phase #1 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane group TR LT LT R Volume, V (vph) 125 54 50 31 489 1 110 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, a 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade i Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 1 02 03 04 1 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 33.0 JG= G= I G= I G= 47.0 G= I G= IG = Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= IY= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 189 86 516 116 Lane group capacity, c 649 518 918 819 We ratio, X 0.29 0.17 0.56 0.14 Total green ratio, g/C 0.37 0.37 0.52 0.52 Uniform delay, d 20.2 19.2 14.5 11.1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.16 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.3 0.2 0.8 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 20.5 19.4 15.3 11.2 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • CJ Lane group LOS I C I B B B Approach delay 20.5 19.4 14.6 Approach LOS C B B Intersection delay 16.3 X� = 0.45 Intersection LOS B HCS2000t m Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • E HCS2000" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR + A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane group TR LT LT R Volume, V (vph) 68 65 80 170 636 3 156 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 j 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, a 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N Al 0 j N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 02 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 33.0 IG = G= G= G= 470 G I G JG= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= IY= IY= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 140 263 672 164 Lane group capacity, c 632 579 918 819 vie ratio, X 0.22 0.45 0.73 0.20 Total green ratio, g/C 0.37 0.37 0.52 0.52 Uniform delay, d 19.6 21.7 16.6 11.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.29 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.6 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 19.8 22.2 19.7 11.6 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Lane group LOS 1 g C B B Approach delay 19.8 22.2 18.1 Approach LOS B C B Intersection delay 19.2 X = 0.62 Intersection LOS B HCS2000 Copyright C 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc I TW - WAY S CONTRO SU MMARY General Information ISite Information • Ca Anal st PHR +A Intersection I New Jubal & Jubal Early Dr Agency/Co. PHR +A urisdiction Eastbound Date Performed 9/15/04 nal sis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour 5 6 F I Uj Ul L vUOUI I y OVI I vv1111Vv I lull - I uaJC I East/West Street: New Jubal Early Dr Norfh /South Street: Jubal Early Drive Intersection Orientation: East -West IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 122 66 0 0 23 259 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 128 69 0 0 24 272 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 218 0 43 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 229 0 45 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R Control Delay, Queue Len th Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT L R Volume, v (vph) 128 229 45 Capacity, c (vph) 1260 618 1050 c ratio 0.10 0.37 0.04 Queue length (95 %) 0.34 1.71 0.13 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.2 14.2 8.6 LOS A B A Approach delay (s /veh) 13.3 Approach LOS B • HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc I TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SU MMARY General Information Site Information • A nalyst PHR +A Intersection I New Jubal & Jubal Early Dr Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction Volume veh/h) Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour 3 Median type Vehicle Volumes and Major Street L Movement 1 Peak -hour factor, PHF L Volume veh/h) 83 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.9! Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 87 Proportion of heavy vehicles, P HV 3 Median type LOS FIT Channelized? Approach delay (s /veh) 1 North /South Street: Study Period (hrs): is Eastbound • Hourly EB L Volume veh/h) 0000 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.9. Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P HV 0 Percent grade ( %) Queue length (95 %) Flared approach Control Delay (s /veh) Storage LOS RT Channelized? Approach delay (s /veh) Approach LOS 000 0000 000 000 0 - -0 • Hourly EB L Volume veh/h) 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.9. Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P HV 0 Percent grade ( %) Queue length (95 %) Flared approach Control Delay (s /veh) Storage LOS RT Channelized? Approach delay (s /veh) Approach EB Movement 1 Lane Configuration LT Volume, v (vph) 87 Capacity, c (vph) 945 We ratio 0.09 Queue length (95 %) 0.30 Control Delay (s /veh) 9.2 LOS A Approach delay (s /veh) Approach LOS 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 L R vice WB Northbound Southbound 10 11 12 6 R 526 9.95 553 R 141 ).9: 148 E 0 HCS20003M Copyright 0 2003 Univeaity of 19oride, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Patton HatTis Rust & Associates, pc LI • TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 9/20/2004 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour rom/TO Route 622 /Breckinridge Ln [Analysis ighway Route 621 misdiction Year 2007 Back round Conditions Input Data Should-r ridth It r.. Class I highway Fr Class II highway Terrain F Level r Rolling Two -way hourly volume 120 veh /h Directional split 62/38 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 0 Show 1hufala ®w % Trucks and Buses, P 3 9 /6 % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 8 Lone idth 11 Lanc. ridth _ _- It — ; — Shoul de r width ---- _ tt Segment length, mi A verage Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, t (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, fnv R V '1 /(1 +P +P 0.979 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' fG' f HV ) 128 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 80 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S min Observed volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed, FPS FFS =SFM +0.00776(Vf f HV ) 58.0 mi /h Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder widtfi f, (Exhibit 20 -5) Adj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FPS (FSS= BFFS -f fA) 60. mi /h 0.0 mi /h 2. mi /h 58.0 mi/h Adj. for no passing zones, u ( mi/h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 Average travel speed, ATS (mi/h) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v -f 57.0 Percent Tine—Spent—Following Grade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f HV fHV 1 /(1 +P +P 0'997 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' f f HV ) 127 ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 79 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1- e 0 10.6 Adj. for directional distribution and no passing zone, f d/h ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 2.3 Percent time- spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f d/o 12.9 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class Ip A Volume to capacity ratio v/c vlc =V /3,200 0.04 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh- mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh - mi) VMT V "L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT 15 (veh -h) TT 15= VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes 1, If v >= 3,200 pc/h, terminate analysis -the LOS Is F. 2. If highest directional split v >= 1,700 pc /h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000 Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rtlst & Associates, Pc • C J • TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information ISite Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 9120/2004 nal sis Time Period PM Peak Hour From/To Route 622 /Breckinridge Lane [Analysis ighway Route 621 unsdiction Year 2007 Back round Conditions Input Data Shoulder -.eidth it F1 Class I highway F, Class II highway Terrain F Level r Rolling Two-way hourly volume 229 veh /h Directional 76/24 fact Peak hour factor, PEP 0.95 No passing zone 0 Elmo• flunk Arroce % Trucks and Buses, P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 8 it Lanc ue r'idth _ it shouldeer •. 0 Ith _ _ 1[ Segment length, I mi A verage Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 Passenger - car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f f 1 /(1 +P *P 0.979 Two-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' fD tHV) 246 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc/h) 187 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, SHM mi/h Observed volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS = S +0.00776(V / f 58.0 mil Base free - flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder width f (Exhibit 2D -5) for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS =BFFS -f fA) 60.0 mil 0.0 mi /h 2.0 mi mVh 58.0 rum Adj. for no- passing zones, t ri p ( mi /h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 Average travel speed, ATS (mi /h) ATS= FFS- 0.00776v -f 56.1 Percent Tire-Spent-Following Grade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 2D -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f HV fHV =t /(1+ P T (E 7 1)+ P R (E R l)) 0.997 Two-way flow rate v (pc/h) v =V/ (PHF `f f HV ) 242 " highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 184 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF(%) BPTSF= 100(1 -a 00009)9v 19.2 Adj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, fmno( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 3.7 Percent time- spent- following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f d/np 22.8 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class 11 A Volume to capacity ratio We v /c =V /3,200 0.08 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh- mi) VMT 025L,(V /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (van- mi) VMT V'L, 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT1s(veh-h) TT75= VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pc /h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v >= 1,700 belt, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 of Patton Harris Rust & Associates, PC • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 2 3 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group L T T L T Volume, V (vph) 628 1111 741 290 0 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, C 0.0 j 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only Thru Only 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 25.0 1 G= 32.0 G= JG= I G= 18.0 G= G JG= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 661 1169 780 305 1 0 Lane group capacity, c 945 3364 1736 681 369 v/c ratio, X 0.70 0.35 0.45 0.45 0.00 Total green ratio, g/C 0.28 0.69 0.36 0.20 0.20 Uniform delay, d 29.1 5.7 22.2 31.6 28.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.27 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 2.3 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 31.4 5.8 22.4 32.1 28.8 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • J Lane group LOS C I A C C C Approach delay 15.1 22.4 32.1 Approach LOS B C C Intersection delay 18.8 X, = 0.53 Intersection LOS B HCS2000 M Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR + A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 2 3 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group L T T L T Volume, V (vph) 239 766 1570 493 0 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, a 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking Al 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only Thru Only 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 11.0 G= 42.0 G= I G= I G= 22.0 IG= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= ly= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 252 806 1653 519 0 Lane group capacity, c 416 3147 2279 832 451 v/c ratio, X 0.61 0.26 0.73 0.62 0.00 Total green ratio, g/C 0.12 0.64 0.47 0.24 0.24 Uniform delay, d, 37.4 6.8 19.3 30.3 25.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.19 0.11 0.29 0.21 0.11 Incremental delay, d 2.5 0.0 1.2 1.5 0.0 Initial queue delay, d Control May 40.0 6.9 20.5 31.8 25.7 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • Lane group LOS D I A C C C Approach delay 14.7 20.5 31.8 Approach LOS B C C Intersection delay 20,4 X� = 0.68 Intersection LOS C HCS2000 1 Copyright CO 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 • HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase Ni Volume and Timing input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lane group T L T LT Volume, V (vph) 1286 264 766 453 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 3 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start -up lost time, 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min, time for pedestrians, G 3.2 32 Phasing WB Only Thru Only 03 04 SS Only 06 07 0" Timing G= 7.8 G= 30.1 G= JG= G= 32.1 0 JG= JG= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 85.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 1354 278 806 477 Lane group capacity, c 1729 312 1723 664 v/c ratio, X 0.78 0.89 0.47 0.72 Total green ratio, g/C 0.35 0.09 0.50 0.38 Uniform delay, d 24.5 38.2 13.6 22.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.33 0.42 0.11 0.28 Incremental delay, d 2.4 25.7 0.2 3.8 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 27.0 63.9 13.9 26.4 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc E • Lane group LOS I C E I 8 C Approach delay 27.0 26.7 26.4 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 26.8 X c = 0.77 Intersection LOS C 11CS2000 Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patten Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • 0 HCS20W DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR + A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timin Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lane group T L T LT Volume, V (vph) 692 698 1364 313 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 3 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 j 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 1 1 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 1 1 3.2 Phasing WB Only I Thru Only 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 22.7 1 G= 25.1 G= J G= I G= 27.2 G= G= IG= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 728 735 1436 329 Lane group capacity, c 1362 858 2002 531 We ratio, X 0.53 0.86 0.72 0.62 Total green ratio, g/C 0.28 0.25 0.59 0.30 Uniform delay, d, 27.5 32.1 13.3 270 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.14 0.39 0.28 0.20 Incremental delay, d 0.4 8.6 1.3 2.2 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 27.9 40.7 14.5 29.2 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Lane group LOS I C D I 8 C Approach delay 279 23.4 29.2 Approach LOS C C • C � 0 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 C� 0 Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information A nalyst Agency /Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 AM Peak Hour Intersection s Year aly sis Analysis Breckinridge Ln & Route 621 2007 Build-out Conditions Pro ect Description Willow Run - Phase k1 East/West Street: Breckinrid e Lane North /South Street: Route 621 ntersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 61 19 320 29 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 64 20 336 30 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 1 1 1 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT , Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 36 0 168 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 37 0 176 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 1 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 336 213 C (m) (vph) 1506 688 c 0.22 0.31 95% queue length 0.86 1.32 Control Delay 8.1 12.6 LOS A B A pproach Delay 12.6 [A pproach LOS B Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • Rights Reserved 1ICS2000 " Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency /Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 PM Peak Hour Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year Breckinridge Ln & Route 621 2007 Build -out Conditions Project Description Willow Run - Phase N1 East/West Street: Breckinrid a Lane North /South Street: Route 621 ntersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 0 46 29 425 73 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 48 30 447 76 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Undivided FIT Channelized 1 0 1 1 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 116 0 481 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 122 0 506 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 447 628 C (m) (vph) 1514 530 c 0.30 1.18 95% queue length 1.25 22.65 Control Delay 8.4 126.6 LOS A F Approach Delay 126.6 A pproach LOS F Rights Reserved 1ICS2000 " Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 • L� HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID willow Run - Phase #I ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SIB LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L R T R L T Volume, V (vph) 45 168 61 23 320 29 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I WB Only 1 02 03 04 SIB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 39.0 JG= G= G= G= 26.0 G= 10.0 G= G= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 47 177 64 24 337 31 Lane group capacity, c 759 679 205 941 653 841 v/c ratio, X 0.06 0.26 0.31 0.03 0.52 0.04 Total green ratio, g/C 0.43 0.43 0.11 0.60 0.46 0.46 Uniform delay, d 14.8 16.3 36.8 73 16.7 13.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.0 0.2 0.9 0.0 0.7 0.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 14.9 16.5 37.7 7.3 17.4 13.6 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • 0 • Lane group LOS B I I 8 I D A 8 I B Approach delay 16.2 29.4 17.1 Approach LOS B C B Intersection delay 18.4 X = 0.41 Intersection LOS B HC52000 Copyright m 2000 University of norida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 0 1 LJ HCS2000'° DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID willow Run - Phase Jf l ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L R T R L T Volume, V (vph) 122 481 46 39 425 73 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I WB Only 1 02 03 04 1 SB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 40.0 JG= G= JG= I G= 31.0 G= 9.0 G= G= Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= IY= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 128 506 48 41 447 77 Lane group capacity, c 779 697 185 941 685 820 v/c ratio, X 0.16 0.73 0.26 0.04 0.65 0.09 Total green ratio, g/C 0.44 0.44 0.10 0.60 0.44 0.44 Uniform delay, d 15.0 20.5 37.4 7.4 18.8 14.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.29 0.11 0.11 0.23 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.1 3.8 0.7 0.0 2.2 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 15.1 24.3 38.2 7.4 21.1 14.5 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9115104 nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project Descri tion Willow Run - Phase #1 East/West Street: Handle Ave North /South Street: Jubal Earl Drive ntersection Orientation: North -South Siud Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 0 310 61 6 239 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 326 64 6 251 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 1 1 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 19 0 61 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 20 0 64 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 6 84 C (m) (vph) 1163 668 We 0.01 0.13 95% queue length 0.02 0.43 Control Delay 8.1 11.2 LOS A B Approach Delay 11.2 [A pproach LOS B Rights Reserved IICS2000T Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 • • Lane group LOS B I I C I D A C I B Approach delay 22.4 24.0 20.1 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 21.6 Xc = 0.72 Intersection LOS C 11m000l M Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 41 e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc r1 I`J • • Rights Reserved HCS20W M Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 PM Peak Hour Intersection s Year Analysis Annaly Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr 2007 Build-out Conditions Project Description Willow Run - Phase #1 East/West Street: Handle Ave North /So uth Street: Jubal Earl Drive Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period h rs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 0 537 66 42 574 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 565 69 44 604 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 20 0 52 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 21 0 54 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 44 75 C (m) (vph) 944 441 We 0.05 0.17 95% queue length 0.15 0.61 Control Delay 9.0 14.8 LOS A B Approach Delay 14.8 A pproach LOS B Rights Reserved HCS20W M Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • r1 LJ HCS2000" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build-out Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 Lane group L TR L T R L T R L TR Volume, V (vph) 71 338 99 271 194 69 70 361 257 216 317 84 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 Al N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 9.0 G= 25.6 G= G= G= 7.9 G= 32.5 G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 5 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 95.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB I NB SB LT I TH I RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 75 460 285 204 73 74 380 271 227 422 Lane group capacity, c 476 914 354 946 635 428 631 767 362 1164 v/c ratio, X 0.16 0.50 0.81 0.22 0.11 0.17 0.60 0.35 0.63 0.36 Total green ratio, g/C 0.42 0.27 0.42 0.27 0.41 0.48 0.34 0.49 0.48 0.34 Uniform delay, d 17.0 29.3 27.7 26.9 17.6 14.0 25.9 15.0 16.8 23.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.35 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.19 0.11 0.21 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.4 12.8 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.6 0.3 3.4 0.2 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Control delay 17.2 29.8 1 40.5 27.0 17.7 14.2 27.5 15.3 20.2 23.7 Lane group LOS B I C D I C B B I C B C I C Approach delay 28.0 32.6 21.6 22.5 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection delay 25.7 X = 0.70 Intersection LOS C HCS2000 Copyright m ?000 University or tlodda, All Rights Reserved Vcrsion 4.1 e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • HCS2000'° DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 Lane group L TR L T R L T R L TR Volume, V (vph) 112 446 119 423 350 421 184 432 295 183 431 184 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 13.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 20 0 120 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade/ Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 17.4 G= 25.0 G= G= G= 32.6 G= G= G= Y= 5 JY= 5 Y= JY= JY= 5 Y= Y= JY= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SIB LT TH I RT I LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 118 573 1 445 368 317 194 455 311 193 648 Lane group capacity, c 581 949 491 976 436 202 668 958 187 1215 We ratio, X 0.20 0.60 0.91 0.38 0.73 0.96 0.68 0.32 1.03 0.53 Total green ratio, g/C 0.53 0.28 0.53 0.28 0.28 0.36 0.36 0.61 0.36 0.36 Uniform delay, d 11.2 28.2 15.6 26.2 29.4 28.1 24.3 8.5 28.7 22.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.19 1 0.43 0.11 0.29 0.47 0.25 0.11 0.50 0.14 ncremental delay, d 0.2 1.1 120.4 0.2 6.0 51.9 2.8 0.2 74.5 0.5 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Control delay 11.4 29.3 1 36.0 26.5 35.4 79.9 27.1 1 8.7 103.2 23.1 Lane group LOS 13 1 C D I C D E I C A F I C Approach delay 26.2 32.7 31.8 41.5 Approach LOS C C C D Intersection delay 33.3 X = 0.90 Intersection LOS C HCS2000T'M Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • I - I \ J HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume, V (vph) 71 338 89 271 194 69 67 361 257 216 317 84 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pod / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 32 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 8.9 G= 24.6 G= G= G= 7.9 G= 33.6 G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 5 IY= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 95.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 75 356 94 285 204 73 71 380 271 227 334 88 Lane group capacity, c 462 909 619 388 909 619 488 653 1 784 377 1242 784 v/c ratio, X 0.16 0.39 0.15 0.73 0.22 0.12 0.15 0.58 0.35 0.60 0.27 0.11 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.26 0.39 0.41 0.26 0.39 0.49 0.35 0.50 0.49 0.35 0.50 Uniform delay, d 17.7 29.0 18.5 26.1 27.7 18.3 13.2 25.0 14.4 16.1 21.9 12.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.29 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.17 0.11 0.19 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.3 0.1 71 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.3 2.7 0.1 0.1 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 11 1 r � u 1 f ,, u Initial queue delay, d Control delay 17.9 29.3 18.6 33.2 27.8 18.3 13.3 26.3 14.6 18.8 22.0 12.6 Lane group LOS 8 I C B C I C B 8 I C B B C B Approach delay 25.8 29.3 20.6 19.6 Approach LOS C C C B Intersection delay 23.4 X = 0.65 Intersection LOS C 11CS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, NI Rights Reserved Version 4.Ic Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 • • HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume, V (vph) 112 446 112 423 350 421 173 432 295 183 431 184 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, h 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 13.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 15.0 G= 26.0 G= I G= G= 34.0 G= I G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= ly= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 118 469 118 445 368 338 182 455 311 193 454 194 Lane group capacity, c 547 1015 453 499 1015 453 306 697 941 206 1327 941 v/c ratio, X 0.22 0.46 0.26 0.89 0.36 0.75 0.59 0.65 0.33 0.94 0.34 0.21 Total green ratio, g/C 0.51 0.29 0.29 0.51 0.29 0.29 0.38 0.38 0.60 0.38 0.38 0.60 Uniform delay, d 11.9 26.3 24.6 15.6 25.4 29.0 22.5 23.1 9.0 27.0 20.0 8.2 Progression factor, PF 1,000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.42 0.11 0.30 0.18 0.23 0.11 0.45 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.3 0.3 18.0 0.2 6.7 3.1 2.2 0.2 45.2 0.2 0.1 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • Initial queue delay, d Control delay 12.1 26.6 24.9 33.6 25.6 35.7 25.6 25.3 1 9.2 72.1 20.2 1 8.3 Lane group LOS B I C C C I C D C I C A E I C A Approach delay 23.9 31.7 20.1 29.4 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection delay 26.6 X c = 0.87 Intersection LOS C HCS2000Tst Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 41e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 36 815 133 167 541 52 134 59 138 29 19 22 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 1 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 10.0 G= 42.0 G= G= I G= 23.0 G= LG = JG= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT I TH I RT LT TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 38 858 140 176 569 55 203 145 31 43 Lane group capacity, c 378 1593 732 405 2162 993 361 662 252 434 We ratio, X 0.10 0.54 0.19 0.43 0.26 0.06 0.56 0.22 0.12 0.10 Total green ratio, g/C 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.26 0.42 0.26 0.26 Uniform delay, d 13.4 17.1 14.1 8.7 73 6.3 29.1 16.6 25.7 25.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.0 2.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 Initial queue delay, d 13.5 17.5 14.2 9.5 7.3 6.3 31.1 16.7 26.0 25.7 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Control delay Lane group LOS B 1 B B A I A A I C B C I C Approach delay 16.9 7.7 25.1 25.8 Approach LOS B A C C Intersection delay 15,2 X = 0.59 Intersection LOS B IICS2000 Copyright 0 2000 University of Morida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc L� • HCS2000" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase a1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 51 848 351 227 1336 50 284 32 118 184 146 50 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 13.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I WB Only I EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 70 1 G= 34.5 G= I G= I G= 33.5 G I G= JG= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH I RT LT I TH I RT LT I TH RT LT I TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 54 893 369 239 1406 53 333 124 194 207 Lane group capacity, c 83 1308 601 266 1763 810 390 793 295 660 We ratio, X 0.65 0.68 0.61 0.90 0.80 0.07 0.85 0.16 0.66 0.31 Total green ratio, g/C 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.37 0.51 0.37 0.37 Uniform delay, d 22.8 23.2 22.4 15.8 17.9 10.9 26.0 11.9 23.5 20.1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.23 0.25 0.20 0.42 0.34 0.11 0.39 0.11 0.23 0.11 Incremental delay, d 16.6 1.5 1.9 30.3 2.7 0.0 16.6 0.1 5.3 0.3 Initial queue delay, d 39.4 24.7 24.3 46.1 20.6 10.9 42.6 12.0 28.8 20.4 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc r1 U • i Control delay Lane group LOS D C C D C I B 1 D B C C Approach delay 25.2 23.8 34.3 24.4 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection delay 25.8 X c = 0.84 Intersection LOS C HCS2000T Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc L_J • • Rights Reserved HCS2000 Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4 ,1d Verson 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency /Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 AM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction Analysis Year Route 621 & Route 622 2007 Build -out Conditions Project Descri lion Willow Run - Phase #1 East West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 621 ntersection Orientation: North - South Study Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T L T R Volume 1 101 41 43 14 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 E R 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 106 43 45 14 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR , Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 68 45 31 28 61 14 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 71 47 32 29 64 14 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 1 43 150 107 C (m) (vph) 1538 1370 649 619 c 0.00 0.03 0.23 0.17 95% queue length 0.00 0.10 0.89 0.62 Control Delay 7.3 77 12.2 12.0 LOS A A B B Approach Delay 12.2 12.0 A pproach LOS B B Rights Reserved HCS2000 Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4 ,1d Verson 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Movement TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 7 General Information 9 Site Information 11 Analyst Agency /Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 9115104 PM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Route 621 & Route 622 2007 Build -out Conditions Project Description Willow Run - Phase #1 R L EasUWest Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 621 Volume ntersection Orientation: North - South 148 Stud Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments 59 3 Major Street Northbound 0.95 Southbound 0.95 Movement 1 0.95 2 3 4 5 6 110 L 155 T R L T R V olume 46 3 54 52 28 56 13 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 3 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 48 0 56 54 29 58 13 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 Flared Approach 3 N Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized Storage 0 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR 0 LTR Movement 7 1 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 105 148 84 27 59 3 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 110 155 88 28 62 3 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 48 29 353 93 C(m)(vph) 1523 1474 654 520 c 0.03 0.02 0.54 0.18 95% queue length 0.10 0.06 3.24 0.65 Control Delay 7.4 75 16.8 1 13.4 LOS A A C B Approach Delay 16.8 13.4 pproach LOS C B Rights Reserved HCS2000 Versiov 4.Id Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc T - STOP CO SUMMARY General Information ISite Information CN CA A nalyst PHR +A Intersection l Route 622 & Harvest Drive Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions A nal sis Time Period A M Peak Hour Pro ect Descri lion Willow Run - Phase #1 EasUWest Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Harvest Drive ntersection Orientation: East -West Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 59 818 0 0 328 59 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 62 861 0 0 345 62 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT T T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 47 0 59 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 49 0 62 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR C ontrol Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 62 111 Capacity, c (vph) 1141 531 We ratio 0.05 0.21 Queue length (95 %) 0.17 0.78 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.3 13.6 LOS A B A pproach delay (s /veh) 13.6 Approach LOS B 0 I1CS2000T" Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Patton Flan Rust & Associates, pc • • • IICS2000T'M Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information A nalyst PHR +A Intersection Route 622 & Harvest Drive Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Year 2 007 Build -out Conditions A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Project Description Willow Run - Phase #1 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Harvest Drive ,I ntersection Orientation: East -West I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 41 709 0 0 996 113 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 43 746 0 0 1048 118 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 1 0 Configuration LT T T I TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 59 0 47 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 62 0 49 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 43 111 Capacity, c (vph) 589 270 c ratio 0.07 0.41 Queue length (95 %) 0.24 1.91 Control Delay (s /veh) 11.6 27.3 LOS 8 D Approach delay (s /veh) 27.3 Approach LOS D • IICS2000T'M Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite Information • A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour 37 • Project Uescri tlon Willow Hun - Phase #1 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 NB Ramp Intersection Orientation: East -West IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 103 511 0 0 74 448 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 108 537 0 0 77 471 Proportion of heavy vehicle s' PHV 3 3 Median type Undivided FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 20 0 124 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 21 0 130 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration LTR Control Delay, Queue Len th, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 108 151 Capacity, c (vph) 1016 450 c ratio 0.11 0.34 Queue length (95 %) 0.36 1.46 Control Delay (s /veh) 9.0 17.0 LOS A C Approach delay (s /veh) 17.0 A pproach LOS C HCS2000TS' Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information • A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction nalvsis Year KMVTI MII #1 CA tasVWest Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 NB Ramp ntersection Orientation: East -West IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments viuv UHICItt I I e� 3 4 5 1 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 52 652 0 0 140 766 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 54 686 0 0 147 806 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 128 0 87 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 134 0 91 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration LTR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 54 225 Capacity, c (vph) 717 208 v/c ratio 0.08 1.08 Queue length (95 %) 0.24 10.31 Control Delay (s /veh) 10.4 134.3 LOS B F Approach delay (s /veh) 134.3 Approach LOS F IICS2000 sl Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, NI Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc LJ • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build - out Conditions Project ID willow Run - Phase #1 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group LT T R LTR Volume, V (vph) 103 511 65 448 23 0 120 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, l 1 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 110 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade/ Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 55.0 G= G= G= G= 25.0 G JG= G= Y= 5 IY= Y= ly= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 646 68 356 150 Lane group capacity, c 1050 1127 958 451 v/c ratio, X 0.62 0.06 0.37 0.33 Total green ratio, g/C 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.28 Uniform delay, d 10.9 7.1 8.8 25.9 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.20 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 1.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 12.0 7.1 9.0 26.3 Patton Hart Rust & Associates, pc • C J • Lane group LOS I 8 I A A I C Approach delay 12.0 8.7 26.3 Approach LOS B A C Intersection delay 12,6 X c = 0.53 Intersection LOS B HCS2000 Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID willow Run - Phase #1 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group LT T R LTR Volume, V (vph) 52 652 133 766 139 0 76 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 200 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 Al N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N. Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 1 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 55.0 1 G= G= J G= I G= 25.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 741 140 596 226 Lane group capacity, c 1091 1127 958 473 We ratio, X 0.68 0.12 0.62 0.48 Total green ratio, g/C 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.28 Uniform delay, d, 11.6 74 11.0 27.1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.25 0.11 0.21 0.11 Incremental delay, d 1.7 0.0 1.3 0.8 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 13.4 74 12.2 27.8 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • Lane group LOS I B I A B C Approach delay 13.4 11.3 27.8 Approach LOS B B C Intersection delay 14,4 X = 0.62 Intersection LOS B HCS2000 ' Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le Patton Halris Rust & Associates, pc TWO - WAY STOP CONTROL SUMM General Information ISite Information 0 A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Time Period A M Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Route 37 SB Ram J urisdiction Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments A nalysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Westbound Movement • Project Description Willow Run - Phase 111 East/West Street: Route 622 No th /South Street: Route 37 SB Ramp Intersection Orientation: East -West I Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 Lane Configuration L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 125 64 59 35 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 131 67 62 36 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHV 0 3 0.92 Median type Undivided FIT Channelized? 0.14 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration 41.9 TR LT A Upstream Signal 0 E 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 1 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 489 1 110 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 514 1 115 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHV 3 0 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 62 630 Capacity, c (vph) 1369 686 c ratio 0.05 0.92 Queue length (95 %) 0.14 12.26 Control Delay (s /veh) 7.8 41.9 LOS A E A pproach delay (s /veh) 41.9 Approach LOS E 11CS2000"m Copyright 02003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc I TWO - WAY STOP CONTROL SUMM General Information ISite Information • 111 A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 9115104 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour 622 & Route 37 SB r Build -out Conditions EasUWest Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 SB Ramp Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 68 71 86 181 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 71 74 90 190 0 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHV 0 3 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 1 1 1 0 Lanes 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 Street Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV Percent grade ( %) Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) /c ratio Queue lenqth (95° dela LOS • HCS2000 Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 00000 --0--0 00000 h, Level of Service • HCS2000 Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • 0 HCS2000" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run - Phase #1 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane group TR LT LT R Volume, V (vph) 125 73 50 38 489 1 110 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 1 02 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 33.0 JG= G= JG= I G= 47.0 G= JG= G= Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 209 93 516 116 Lane group capacity, c 643 521 918 819 v/c ratio, X 0.33 0.18 0.56 0.14 Total green ratio, g/C 0.37 0.37 0.52 0.52 Uniform delay, d 20.5 19.3 14.5 11.1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.16 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.3 0.2 0.8 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 20.8 19.5 15.3 11.2 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc CI • Lane group LOS C B B B Approach delay 20.8 19.5 14.6 Approach LOS C B B Intersection delay 16,5 X c = 0.46 Intersection LOS B HCS2000' Copyright m 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • E HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 09114104 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID willow Run -Phase #1 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane group TR LT LT R Volume, V (vph) 68 78 80 192 636 3 156 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I j 2.0 j 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N JNd N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 1 02 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 33.0 JG= G= I G= G- 47.0 G= G JG= Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 154 286 672 164 Lane group capacity, c 628 581 918 819 v/c ratio, X 0.25 0.49 0.73 0.20 Total green ratio, g/C 0.37 0.37 0.52 0.52 Uniform delay, d 19.8 22.0 16.6 11.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.29 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.7 3.0 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 20.0 22.7 19.7 11.6 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 9/20/2004 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour rom/TO Route 622 /Breckinridge Lane Inalysis ighway Route 621 urisdiction Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Input Data Shruldei :ri dth ft Ri Class I highway F Class II highway Terrain F, Level r Rolling Two -way hourly volume 160 veh /h Directional split 52/48 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No passing zone 0 .Show flonh Firow %Trucks and Buses , P 3% %Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 8 +— lane iai th It Lane width It _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _S Wi It Segment length, 4 mi A verage Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, t (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, I 1 (1+ P T (E r 1) +P 1)) 0.979 Two-way flaw rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' fG IHV) 172 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc/h) 89 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S mi/h Observed volume, V veh/h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS= S +0.00776(V t HV ) 58.0 mi /h Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder widths, f, (Exhibit 20 5) Adj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFSALSW 60. milh 0.0 mi /h 2.0 mi /h 58. mi /h Adj. for no- passing zones, I.P ( mi/h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 Average travel speed, ATS ( mi /h) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v Pi 56.7 Percent Time-Spent-Followin Grade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, uV IHV 11(1+ P T (E T 1) +P R (E q 1)) 0.997 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' t f 169 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc/h) 88 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) 3PTSF= 100(1- a -0,000879 13.8 Adj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f %)(Exh. 20 -12) 0.4 Percent time- spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f dfr 142 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS (Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 204 for Class II ) A Volume to capacity ratio We v /c =V /3,200 0.05 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh - mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- mi) VMT V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT 15 = VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pc/h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v o >= 1,700 pc /h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2O0OTM Copyright (D 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Patton Han Rust & Associates, pc • • • Lane group LOS C C B B Approach delay 20.0 22.7 18.1 Approach LOS C C B Intersection delay 19.4 X� = 0.63 Intersection LOS B HCS2000� 4 Copyright 02000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Pc u F J • TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information ISite Information A nalyst PHR +A A gency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 9/20/2004 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour roni Route 622 /Breckinridge Lane I nalysis ighway Route 621 urisdiction Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Inp ut Data Slwulderridgl It F. Class I highway F Class II highway Terrain F Level F� Rolling Two -way hourly volume 281 veh/h Directional split 69/31 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No passing zone 0 Short North Anow %Trucks and Buses, P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 8 Lane width It — — Lane ridth It _Should- er_ridth ft Segment length, 4 mi A verage Travel Speed G rade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 13 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f f I /(1 +P +P 0.979 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) vp V/ (PHF' f f 302 ' highest directional split proportion (pi 208 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S mi /h O bserved volume, V veh/h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS= S +0.00776(Vf i/h f 58.0 m Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder width3, fLs (Exhibit 20 5) dj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f fA) 60. mi/h 0. mi /h 2 mi /h 58. mim A dj. for no- passing zones, t ( mi/h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 A verage travel speed, ATS ( mi /h) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v Pi 55.7 Percent Thine—Spent—Following G rade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, fHV fHV 1 /(1 +PT(ET1) +PR(ERt)) 0.997 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' f fHV) 297 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc/h) 205 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1- e- -0.000e7evp) 23.0 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f %)(Exh. 20 -12) 1.6 Percent time- spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f 11n 24.6 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS (Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 204 for Class II ) A V olume to capacity ratio v/c v /c =V / 3,200 0.09 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of lravel,VMT (veh - mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- mi) VMT V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT VMTts /ATS 0.0 Notes 1. It v >= 3,200 pc/h, terminate analysis the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v"= 1,700 pc/h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 of Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information ISite Information nalyst PHR +A ency or Company PHR +A Performed 9/20/2004 sis Time Period AM Peak Hour rom/To R 621 /Juba) Early Dr linalysis ighway New Jubal Early Drive urisdiction Year 2007 Build out Conditions In of Data Shoulder nid[h It F Class I highway r Class II highway o -way hourly volume 2 ve j1(�� \j Terrain R1 Level r Rolling ak -hour fa PHF 0.. h /h Dir ectional split 76/24 m, Pe 95 No- passing zone 0 .Sham Ilmlfi �irovi Trucks and Buses , P 3% %Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 8 Wne width If —� Lane vndth -- -It _ - _4_ho wi _ _ _ It Segmeix length, L, mi Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, I. (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1 . 7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, T f 1 /(1 +P +P 0'979 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v V/ (PHF' f f 291 P ' highest directional split proportion (ooh) 221 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, SPA mi /h Observed volume, V veh/h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS = S +0.00776(V /f 58.0 mi /h Base free -flow speed, BFFS FM A dj. for lane width and shoulder width3, f ,S (Exhibit 20 -5) A dj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f LS fA) mi ld 6 0.0 miih 2.0 milk 58.0 dj. for no- passing zones, t (mi /h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 verage travel speed, ATS ( ri ATS= FFS- 0.00776v -f 55.7 Percent Time-Spent-Followin Grade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy- vehicle adjustment factor, f HV fHv =1 / (1+ PT(ET 1) +PRIER 1)) 0'997 T wo-way flow rate 1 , v (pc /h) v,-V/ (PHF' f ti 286 v ' highest directional split proportion loom) 217 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSFI%) BPTSF = 100(1- e- 0 .000e79vP) 22.2 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 3.1 Percent time - spent - following, PTSFI%) PTSF= BPTSF +f id/nip 25.3 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class 1 r 20-4 for Class II A V olume to capacity ratio v/c v /c =V / 3,200 0.09 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh - mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle miles of travel, VMT6o (veh- mi) VMT =V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pc /h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v"= 1,700 pc /h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. &2000TM Copyright© 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information Site Information nalyst PHR +A gency or Company PHR +A e Performed 9/20/2004 sis Time Period PM Peak Hour Highway New Jubal Early Drive From/To Rt 621 /Juba) Early Dr unsuction nal sis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions n ut Data Shoulder,rid[h It Rj Class I highway Fj Class It highway Terrain F( Level rtL Rolling Two -way hourly volume 348 veh /h Directional split 64/36 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 0 :Shaer hrlh Arrowi. %Trucks and Buses , P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 8 Lane •width it Lane midth _ _ It S_ho _ — _ _ _ _ it Segment length, l nii Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1 . 7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f HV fHV =1 /(1+ PT(Ei1)`PRjERI)) 0.979 T wo-way flow rate v (pGh) v =V/ (PHF' f0 fHV) 374 v. ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Field Measured speed, SFM mint Observed volume, V veh/h Free -flow speed, FPS FFS= S +0.00776(V /f 58.0 mUh 238 Estimated Free -Flow Speed Base free flow speed, BFFSFM A dj. for lane width and shoulder width f (Exhibit 20 -5) dj, for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free-flows peed, FFS FSS= BEES -f 1 P ( lS A) 60.0 mi /h 0.0 milk 2.0 mil 58.0 mi /h dj. for no- passing zones, f ( mil (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 verage travel speed, ATS ( mi/h) ATS= FFS- 0.00776vp fe 55.1 Percent Time-Spent—Following Grade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy- vehicle adjustment factor, f HV fu (1+ P 1) +P 1) j 0.997 T wo-way flow rate 1 , v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' f�' fHV) 367 v ' highest directional split proportion (pcm) 235 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF = 100(1- e- -0.000879vP) 27.6 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, fdm ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 0.8 Percent time - spent - fallowing, PTSF( %) PTSF= BPTSF +f d /On 28.3 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class II A Volume to capacity ratio v/c v /c =V / 3,200 0.12 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of havel,VMT (van- mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- mi) VMT V'Lt 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, Ti TT VMT15/ATS 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pGh, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v >= 1,700 pc/h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. or 200'M Copyright 02000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, PC Movement Summary C' akcelik �.. &associates aaTraffic SIDRA illow Run Peak Hour 1 Roundabout Vehicle Movements T: \Projects \12883 -1 -0 (Willow Run) \Willow Run (12883 -1 -0) from P- Drive \HCS \HT Working Files \HCS Files_Phase #1 \AM Produced by aaSIDRA 2.0.1.206 Copyright© 2000 -2002 Akcelik & Associates _Pty Ltd Generated 4/4/2005 3:59:53 PM • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Deg of 95% Dem Flow Cap Aver Delay Level of Back of Eff. Stop Aver Speed Oper Cost Mov No Turn (veh /h) (veh /h) Sato (sec) Service Queue Rate (mi /h) ($ /h) (v /c) (ft) South Approach 32 L 1 1181 0.113 6.4 LOS A 20 0.94 33.4 35 32 R 132 1181 0.113 6.4 LOS A 20 0.94 33.4 35 Approach 134 1181 0.113 12.8 LOS A 20 1.87 33.4 71 East Approach 22 L 42 1968 0.071 5.9 LOS A 11 0.81 34.6 39 22 T 98 1968 0.071 5.9 LOS A 11 0.81 34.6 39 Approach 140 1968 0.071 5.9 LOS A 11 0.81 34.6 39 West Approach 12 T 292 1912 0.154 3.2 LOS A 27 0.57 36.2 74 12 R 1 1912 0.154 3.2 LOS A 27 0.57 36.2 74 �proach 294 1912 0.154 3.2 LOS A 27 0.57 36.2 74 All Vehicles 568 5062 0.154 4.7 LOS A 27 0.71 35.1 148 T: \Projects \12883 -1 -0 (Willow Run) \Willow Run (12883 -1 -0) from P- Drive \HCS \HT Working Files \HCS Files_Phase #1 \AM Produced by aaSIDRA 2.0.1.206 Copyright© 2000 -2002 Akcelik & Associates _Pty Ltd Generated 4/4/2005 3:59:53 PM • Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc `,Q BB���Q y� , e r -- 2 Movement S l�l akcelik �r �r V � � i �� & associates aa"Craffic SiDRA illow Run Peak Hour 1 Roundabout Vehicle Movements T: \Projects \12883 -1 -0 (Willow Run) \Willow Run (12883 -1 -0) from P- Drive \HCS \HT Working Files \HCS Files_Phase #1 \PM Produced by aaSIDRA 2.0.1.206 Copyright© 2000 -2002 Akcelik_& A_ ssociates Pty Ltd Generated 4/4/2005 4:00:16 PM • Patton HaiTis Rust & Associates, pc 950/0 Dem Flow Cap Deg of Aver Delay Level of Back of Eff. Stop Aver Speed Oper Cost Mov No Turn (veh /h) (veh /h) Satn (sec) Service Queue Rate (mi /h) ($ /h) (v /c) (ft) South Approach 32 L 1 1262 0.066 5.7 LOS A 10 0.86 33.9 22 32 R 81 1262 0.066 5.7 LOS A 10 0.86 33.9 22 Approach 83 1262 0.066 11.5 LOS A 10 1.71 33.9 44 East Approach 22 L 140 1976 0.237 5.9 LOS A 43 0.81 34.6 129 22 T 328 1976 0.237 5.9 LOS A 43 0.81 34.6 129 Approach 468 1976 0.237 5.9 LOS A 43 0.81 34.6 129 West Approach 12 T 178 1441 0.125 3.7 LOS A 22 0.65 35.4 46 12 R 1 1441 0.125 3.7 LOS A 22 0.65 35.4 46 �proach 180 1441 0.125 3.7 LOS A 22 0.65 35.4 46 All Vehicles 731 4679 0.237 5.4 LOS A 43 0.78 34.7 196 T: \Projects \12883 -1 -0 (Willow Run) \Willow Run (12883 -1 -0) from P- Drive \HCS \HT Working Files \HCS Files_Phase #1 \PM Produced by aaSIDRA 2.0.1.206 Copyright© 2000 -2002 Akcelik_& A_ ssociates Pty Ltd Generated 4/4/2005 4:00:16 PM • Patton HaiTis Rust & Associates, pc PA • • HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Con Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 2 3 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group L T T L T Volume, V (vph) 727 1288 1000 335 0 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start -up lost time, 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade i Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min, time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only Thru Only 03 04 1 NB Only 06 1 07 08 Timing G= 25.0 G= 32.0 G= G= G= 18.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 IY= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 1 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 765 1356 1053 353 0 Lane group capacity, c 945 3364 1736 681 369 We ratio, X 0.81 0.40 0.61 0.52 0.00 Total green ratio, g/C 0.28 0.69 0.36 0.20 0.20 Uniform delay, d 30.3 6.0 23.8 32.1 1 28.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.35 0.11 0.19 0.12 0.11 Incremental delay, d 5.4 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 35.6 6.1 24.4 32.8 28.8 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc E C� • Lane group LOS D I A I C C I C Approach delay 16.8 24.4 32.8 Approach LOS 8 C C Intersection delay 20.7 X� = 0.65 Intersection LOS C 11CS2000TA1 Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Intersection Agency or Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Route 50 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Analysis Year Con Background Conditions Proiect ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 2 3 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group L T T L T Volume, V (vph) 276 1074 1895 570 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 R N 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only Thru Only 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 11.0 G= 42.0 G= G= G= 22.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 291 1131 1995 600 0 Lane group capacity, c 416 3147 2279 832 451 We ratio, X 0.70 0.36 0.88 0.72 0.00 Total green ratio, g/C 0.12 0.64 0.47 0.24 0.24 Uniform delay, di 7.4 21.6 31.2 25.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.40 0.28 0.11 Incremental delay, d L43. 0.1 4.2 3.1 0.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 7.5 125 .8 34.3 25.7 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • r 1 U • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Con Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lane group T L T LT Volume, V (vph) 1509 306 1029 505 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 3 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped 1 Bike I RTOR volumes p 1 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N D 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only Thru Only 03 T 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 8.5 G= 32.3 G= G= G= 34.2 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Gycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB I WB NB SB LT TH I RT I LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 1588 1 322 1083 532 Lane group capacity, c 1752 321 1737 668 We ratio, X 0.91 1.00 0.62 0.80 Total green ratio, g/C 0.36 0.09 0.51 038 Uniform delay, d, 27.4 40.8 15.9 24 - 8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.43 0.50 0.21 j 0.34 Incremental delay, d 7.2 51.0 0.7 6.7 [Initial queue delay, d Control delay 34.7 91.8 6.6 31.5 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc E F - 1 L J • Lane group LOS I C F I 8 C Approach delay 34.7 33.8 31.5 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 33.9 X = 0.87 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4,1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc E 11 • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Con Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lane group T L T LT Volume, V (vph) 1051 808 1657 300 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 3 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A i A j A A Start -up lost time, 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, a 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade; Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only Thru Only 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 21.5 G= 23.0 G= G= G= 25.5 G= G= G= 1 Y= Y= 5 IY= 5 1 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 85.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT I TH I RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 1106 851 1744 316 Lane group capacity, c 1321 861 1988 527 vie ratio, X 0.84 0.99 0.88 0.60 Total green ratio, g/C 0.27 0.25 0.58 0.30 Uniform delay, d 29.2 11 31.6 15.2 25.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.37 0.49 0.40 0.19 Incremental delay, c1 4.9 27.7 4.8 1.9 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 34.1 59.3 20.0 27.3 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc C • • Lane group LOS I C E I B C Approach delay 34.1 32.9 27.3 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 32.8 X� = 0.78 Intersection LOS C 11CS2000TM Copyright 02000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc r1 LJ • TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency /Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Breckinridge Ln 8 Route 621 Jurisdiction A nalysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Pro ect Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Breckinridge Lane North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 0 121 15 239 127 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate. HFR 0 127 15 251 133 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Undivided IT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 20 0 36 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 21 0 37 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LR � Delay , Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 251 58 C (m) (vph) 1435 529 c 0.17 0.11 95% queue length 0.63 0.37 Control Delay 8.0 12.6 LOS A B Approach Delay 12.6 Approach LOS B Rights Reserved • HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.1d E • TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency /Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Breckinridge Ln & Route 621 J urisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 EastAVest Street: Breckinridge Lane North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 272 8 174 277 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 286 8 183 291 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT U stream Siclnal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 119 0 264 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 125 0 277 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LR Delay Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 183 402 C (m) (vph) 1262 458 c 0.15 0.88 95% queue length 0.51 9.27 Control Delay 8.3 47.5 LOS A E pproach Delay 47.5 Approach LOS E Rights Reserved • IICS2000TM Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 1] • • HCS2000"DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 621 & Breckinridge Lane Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L R TR L T Volume, V (vph) 20 36 121 15 239 127 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start -up lost time, 1, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 j 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade 1 Parking N N N 0 Al N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 SB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 24.9 G= G= JG= G= 6.8 G= 68.3 G= G= Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= IY= 0 Y= 5 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 110.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH I FIT Adjusted flow rate, v 21 38 143 252 134 Lane group capacity, c 397 523 1128 810 1260 v/c ratio, X 0.05 0.07 0.13 0.31 0.11 Total green ratio, g/C 0.23 033 1 0.62 0.68 0.68 Uniform delay, d 33.3 25.0 8.6 6.6 6.0 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 Initial queue delay, d Patton Hams Rust & Associates, pc • • • Control delay 33.4 1 25.1 8.6 6.9 6.0 Lane group LOS C I I C A A A Approach delay 28.0 8.6 6.6 Approach LOS C A A Intersection delay 9.2 X� = 0.22 Intersection LOS A HCS2000 ' Copyright @ 2000 Univeaity of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version Me Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc E • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 621 & Breckinridge Lane Area Type All otherareas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L R TR L T Volume, V (vph) 119 264 272 8 174 277 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A I A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 12.0 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 1 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade/ Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 1 SB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 24.9 G= G= G= G= 6.8 G= 68.3 G= G= Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= IY= 0 Y= 5 IY= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 110.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT I TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 125 278 294 1 183 292 Lane group capacity, c 397 523 1141 681 1260 v/c ratio, X 0.31 0.53 0.26 0.27 0.23 Total green ratio, g/C 0.23 0.33 0.62 0.68 0.68 Uniform delay, d, 354 29.7 9.4 6.7 6.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.5 1.0 10.1 1 0.2 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • 11 u 1 ] Control delay 35.9 1 30.7 1 9.5 1 6.9 1 6.7 Lane group LOS D C A A A Approach delay 32.3 9.5 6.8 Approach LOS C A A Intersection delay 16.2 X� = 0.35 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2006rM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Ie Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pe • • TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency /Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr J urisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Handley Ave North /South Street: Jubal Early Drive Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 184 76 2 142 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 193 80 2 149 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Undivided FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 26 0 66 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 27 0 69 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 2 96 C (m) (vph) 1284 779 c 0.00 0.12 95% queue length 0.00 0.42 Control Delay 7.8 10.3 LOS A B Approach Delay 10.3 A pproach LOS B Rights Reserved 11CS2000F"' Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id • Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Copyright @ 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d • Version 4 .1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency /Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 01124105 PM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction Analysis Year Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr 2010 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Handle Ave North /South Street: Jubal Early Drive Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 0 319 81 43 327 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 335 85 45 344 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 28 0 55 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 29 0 57 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 45 86 C (m) (vph) 1134 528 c 0.04 0.16 95% queue length 0.12 0.58 Control Delay 8.3 13.1 LOS A B Approach Delay 13.1 Approach LOS B Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Copyright @ 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d • Version 4 .1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Pc TWO -WAY STOP CO NTR O L SUMMARY Gpnpral Infnrmation ISite Information • • rlu Cul VCJIAI hull vvulVVV nw - i uaac ntersection New Jubal & Jubal Earl Dr A nalyst PHR +A Jurisdiction East West Street: New Jubal Early Dr Agency/Co. PHR +A A nalysis Year kground 01 Bac s 0 Condition Date Performed 01/24/05 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour hrs : 0.25 rlu Cul VCJIAI hull vvulVVV nw - i uaac East West Street: New Jubal Early Dr North /South Street: Jubal Early Drive ntersection Orientation: East -West I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh /h 5 88 0 0 45 255 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 5 92 0 0 47 268 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Raised curb FIT Channelized? 0 1 1 1 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 Configuration LT T R U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 164 0 5 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 172 0 5 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LR Control Dela , Queue Len th, Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 5 177 Capacity, c (vph) 1240 860 c ratio 0.00 021 Queue length (95 %) 0.01 0.77 Control Delay (s /veh) 7.9 10.3 LOS A B Approach delay (s /veh) 10.3 Approach LOS B • HCS200d"' Copyright V 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.10 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite Information • A nalyst PHR +A enc /Co. PHR +A Date Performed T A nalysis Time Period I PM Peak Hour Willow Run - Phase 2 w Jubal Early Dr a: East -West and Adiustments • Hourly Flow Rate Proportion of hea chides, PHv Median tvoe Minor Street Movement Volume veh /h Peak -hour factor, PH Hourly Flow Rate (ve Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHv Percent grade ( %) Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? r e, v (vph) ity, c (vph) io length (95`. delay LOS Year w Jubal & JUbe 10 Background editions Drive • �H�uM HCS2000 Copyright O 2003 Univerxity of Florida, All Kignts Ke$erv Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 000000 Raised curb 00000 0000 0v0�0© 0000© --0-- 00000 ,th, Level of Service • �H�uM HCS2000 Copyright O 2003 Univerxity of Florida, All Kignts Ke$erv Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc r1 L J • HCS2000' . DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Con Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 42 968 131 178 779 60 90 68 117 34 21 25 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 11.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade i Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 0" Timing G= 10.0 G= 42.0 G= G= G= 23.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH 7 RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 44 1019 138 187 820 63 167 123 36 48 Lane group capacity, c 295 1593 732 349 2162 993 376 662 282 433 v/c ratio, X 0.15 0.64 0.19 0.54 0.38 0.06 0.44 0.19 0.13 0.11 Total green ratio, 91C 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.26 0.42 0.26 0.26 Uniform delay, d, 13.8 18.2 14.0 10.4 8.0 6.3 28.1 16.3 25.8 25.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.22 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.9 0.1 1.6 0.1 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • , I 11 u Control delay 14.0 19.1 14.2 12.0 8.1 1 6.3 29.0 16.4 26.0 25.8 Lane group LOS 8 I B B 8 I A A I C B C C Approach delay 18.4 8.7 23.7 25.9 Approach LOS B A C C Intersection delay 15.3 X� = 0.62 Intersection LOS B HCS20001-M Copyright Q 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • r1 L J • HCS200V DETAILED REPORT General Information Site information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year Con Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 59 1244 331 213 1631 58 284 38 107 213 169 58 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak-hour factor, 1 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 11.000 11.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I WB Only I EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 1 06 1 07 08 Timing G= 7.0 G= 37.0 G= G= G= 31.0 G= G= G= Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 1 Cycle Length, C Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 62 1309 348 224 1717 61 339 113 224 239 Lane group capacity, c 87 1486 683 231 1767 812 359 793 284 647 We ratio, X 0.71 0.88 0.51 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc E • Rights Reserved • HCS2000T' Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency /Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 01124105 AM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction Analysis Year Route 621 & New Jubal Early Dr 2010 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: New Jubal Early Dr North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 0 86 0 93 54 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 90 0 97 56 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 Configuration TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 50 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 52 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach Y N Storage 1 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 97 52 C (m) (vph) 1499 We 0.06 95% queue length 0.21 Control Delay 7.6 8.9 LOS A pproach Delay 8.9 Approach LOS A Rights Reserved • HCS2000T' Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 1 0 FJ Rights Reserved IICS2000TM Copyright C 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Vcaion 4. Id Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency /Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 01124105 PM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction nalysis Year Route 621 & New Jubal Early Dr 2010 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: New Jubal Early Dr North /S outh Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 0 62 0 193 204 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 65 0 203 214 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 Configuration TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 218 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 229 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach y 1 N Storage 1 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 203 229 C (m) (vph) 1531 /C 0.13 95% queue length 0.46 Control Delay 7.7 LOS A Approach Delay pproach LOS Rights Reserved IICS2000TM Copyright C 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Vcaion 4. Id Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1d TWO -WA" STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: PHR +A Agency /Co.: PHR +A 40n to Performed: 01/24/05 alysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Intersection: Route 621 & Route 622 Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2010 Background Conditions Project ID: Willow Run Phase 2 East /West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 6 6 21 Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 1 117 101 36 50 5 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HER 1 123 106 37 52 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- -- 3 -- -- Median Type /Storage Raised curb / 1 0.00 RT Channelized? No / 7.3 No Lanes 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR LTR Upstream Signal? No B No • Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 79 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HER 83 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 Percent Grade ( %) Flared Approach: Exists? /Storage Lanes 0 Configuration Approach Movement Lane Con£ig v (vph) C (m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS 52 32 28 71 16 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 54 33 29 74 16 3 3 3 3 3 0 0.03 0.27 0 0.00 0.09 No / 7.3 No 1 0 0 1 0 LTR LTR 12.4 lay, Queue Length, and Level of Service NB SB Westbound Eastbound 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 LTR LTR I LTR LTR 1 37 170 119 1541 1333 632 606 0.00 0.03 0.27 0.20 0.00 0.09 1.08 0.72 7.3 7.8 12.8 12.4 A A B B 12.8 12.4 B B HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1d • Phone: Fax: E -Mail: TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS Analyst: PHR+A Agency /Co.: PHR +A Date Performed: 01/24/05 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Intersection: Route 621 & Route 622 Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2010 Background Conditions Project ID: Willow Run Phase 2 East /West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movements 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 1 117 101 36 50 5 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 � eak -15 Minute Volume 0 31 27 9 13 1 ourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 123 106 37 52 5 Pe-cent Heavy Vehicles 3 -- -- 3 -- -- Median Type /Storage Raised curb / 1 RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street Movements 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 79 52 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak -15 Minute Volume 21 14 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 83 54 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 29 0 Flared Approach: Exists? /Storage 3 RT Channelized? 3 3 Lanes 0 1 0 Configuration LTR 32 28 71 16 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 8 7 19 4 33 29 74 16 3 3 3 3 0 No / No 0 1 0 LTR Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustment Movements 13 14 15 16 low (ped /hr) C 0 0 0 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft /sec) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 0 0 Upstream Signal Data Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal vph vph sec sec mph feet S2 Left -Turn Through S5 Left -Turn Through Worksheet 3 -Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles Movement 2 Movement 5 Shared In volume, major th vehicles: 123 52 Shared In volume, major rt vehicles: 106 5 Sat flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 1700 Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles: 1700 1700 Number of major street through lanes: 1 1 Worksheet 4- Critical Gap and Follow -up Time Calculation Critical Gap Calculation Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R (c,base) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 t(c,hv) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 P (hv) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 t(c,g) 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.10 Grade /100 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 t(3,lt) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 t(c,T): 1 -stage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 -stage 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 t(c) 1 -stage 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 2 -stage 4.1 4.1 6.1 5.5 6.2 6.1 5.5 6.2 Follow -Up Time Calculations Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R t(f,base) 2.20 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 3.50 4.00 3.30 t(f,HV) 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 P (HV) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 t(f) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 Worksheet 5- Effect of Upstream Signals Computation 1 -Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) prog Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) Arrival Type Effective Green, g (sec) Cycle Length, C (sec) Rp (from Exhibit 16 -11) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P �(4 (q2) g(q) Computation 2- Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time blocked Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) aloha beta Travel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F Proportion of conflicting flour, f Max platooned flow, V(c,max) Min platooned flow, V(c,min) Duration of blocked period, t(p) Proportion time blocked, p 0.000 0.000 Computation 3- Platoon Event Periods Result p(2) 0.000 P(5) 0.000 p (dom) p (subo) Constrained or unconstrained? Proportion nblocked (1) O (2) (3) for minor Single -stage Two -Stage Process movements, p(x) Process Stage I Stage II p(1) p(4) p( p(8) p(9) P(10) P( p(12) Computation 4 and 5 Single -Stage Process Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R V c,x 57 229 352 309 176 350 359 54 s Px V ,u,x C r, x C plat,x Two -Stage Process 7 8 10 11 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 V(c,x) 178 174 178 131 128 222 128 231 s 1500 1500 1500 1500 P (x) A NIL U, x ) 'W(r, x) C (plat ,x) Worksheet 6- Impedance and Capacity Equations Step 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 Conflicting Flows 176 54 Potential Capacity 865 1010 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 865 1010 Probability of Queue free St. 0.96 0.98 Step 2: LT from Major St. 4 1 Conflicting Flows 229 57 Potential Capacity 1333 1541 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 1333 1541 Probability of Queue free St. 0.97 1.00 Mal L- Shared Prob Q free St. 0.97 1.00 Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Conflicting Flows 309 359 � otential Capacity 604 566 edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.97 0.97 Movement Capacity 586 549 Probability of Queue free St. 0.91 0.87 Step 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 Conflicting Flows 352 350 Potential Capacity 601 603 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.85 0.88 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.88 0.91 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.87 0.88 Movement Capacity 521 529 Worksheet 7- Computation of the Effect of Two -stage Gap Acceptance Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows 178 128 Potential Capacity 750 788 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 0.97 cvement Capacity 749 765 robability of Queue free St. 0.93 0.90 Part 2 - Second Stage Conflicting Flows 131 231 Potential Capacity 786 711 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.97 1.00 ,ovement Capacity 763 710 Part 3 - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 309 359 Potential Capacity 604 566 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.97 0.97 Movement Capacity 586 549 Result for 2 stage process: a 0.91 0.91 y 0.93 1.74 C t 612 573 Probability of Queue free St. 0.91 0.87 Step 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows 178 128 Potential Capacity 821 873 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 0.97 Movement Capacity 820 848 Part 2 - Second Stage Conflicting Flows 174 222 Potential Capacity 825 778 0 edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.86 0.89 Movement Capacity 712 694 Part 3 - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 352 350 Potential Capacity 601 603 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.85 0.88 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.88 0.91 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.87 0.88 Movement Capacity 521 529 Results for Two -stage process: a 0.91 0.91 y 1.57 2.49 C t 582 566 Wo- ksheet 8- Shared Lane Calculations Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (vph) 83 54 33 29 74 16 Movement Capacity (vph) 582 612 865 566 573 1010 Shared Lane Capacity (vph) 632 606 Wo °ksheet 9- Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches LTR Movement LTR 7 8 9 10 11 12 119 C(m) (vph) L T R L T R sep 0.03 582 612 865 566 573 1010 fume 0.72 83 54 33 29 79 16 Delay A A B B Approach Delay stream Q sep 12.8 12.4 Approach LOS B Q sep +1 Worksheet 11- Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay round (Qsep +1) n max C sh 632 606 SUM C sep n C act Worksheet 10- Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LTR LTR LTR LTR v (vph) 1 37 170 119 C(m) (vph) 1541 1333 632 606 v/c 0.00 0.03 0.27 0.20 95% queue length 0.00 0.09 1.08 0.72 Control Delay 7.3 7.8 12.8 12.4 LOS A A B B Approach Delay stream 2 or 5 12.8 12.4 Approach LOS B B Worksheet 11- Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay Movement 2 Movement 5 p(0j) 1.00 0.97 v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 123 52 v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6 106 5 s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5 1700 1700 s(i2) , Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6 1700 1700 P *(oj) 1.00 0.97 d(M,LT) , Delay for stream 1 or 4 7.3 7.8 N, Number of major street through lanes 1 1 d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5 0.0 0.2 • EM Movement TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 8 General Information 10 Site Information 1 Analyst Agency /Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 01124105 PM Peak Hour L Intersection J A nalysis Year Route 621 & Route 622 Background Con ditions Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 L T East/West Street: Route 622 R Volume North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 68 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments 4 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 Major Street Northbound Southbound 0.95 Movement 1 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 3 4 5 6 20 L T R L T R Volume 54 63 60 25 64 3 8 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 56 66 63 26 67 8 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 Storage 3 0 Median Type 0 Raised curb FIT Channelized D 1 1 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 Configuration LTR I I LTR Configuration Movement 7 8 9 10 11 1 12 L T R L T R Volume 122 172 84 19 68 4 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 128 181 88 20 71 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 56 26 397 95 C (m) (vph) 1518 1451 623 509 c 0.04 0.02 0.64 0.19 95% queue length 0.11 0.05 4.54 0.68 Control Delay 7.5 7.5 20.4 13.7 LOS A A C B Approach Delay 20.4 13.7 Approach LOS C B Rights Reserved IICS2000TM Copyright @ 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id • Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Pc I TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY I Information • • • Project Descri tion Willow Run Phase 2 Intersection Route 622 & Harvest Drive A nalyst PHR +A urisdiction Agency/Co. PHR +A A nalysis Year Background Conditions Date Performed 01124105 A nalysis Time Period M Peak Hour Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Project Descri tion Willow Run Phase 2 East West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Harvest Drive ntersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume veh/h) 68 943 0 0 369 68 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 71 992 0 0 388 71 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P 3 3 Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT T T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 55 0 68 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 57 0 71 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 71 128 Capacity, c (vph) 1091 482 We ratio 0.07 0.27 Queue length (95 %) 0.21 1.06 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.5 15.1 LOS A C A pproach delay (s /veh) 15.1 A pproach LOS C IICS2000TM Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Rcscrvcd Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc J • • HC,S2000TM Copyright @2003 University of Florida, All Rights Rescrvcd Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information ntersection Route 622 & Harvest Drive A nalyst J urisdiction Agency/Co. PHR + A nalysis Year Background Conditions Date Performed 01124105 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Pro ect Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Harvest Drive Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 47 808 0 0 1146 131 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 49 850 0 0 1206 137 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P HV 3 3 Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT T T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 68 0 55 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 71 0 57 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 49 128 Capacity, c (vph) 504 224 c ratio 0.10 0.57 Queue length (95 %) 0.32 3.17 Control Delay (s /veh) 12.9 40.5 LOS B E pproach delay (s /veh) 40.5 Approach LOS E HC,S2000TM Copyright @2003 University of Florida, All Rights Rescrvcd Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information A nalyst Intersection Rome 622 & Route 37 NB Agency/Co. PHR + J urisdiction Date Performed 01124105 Analysis Year 010 Background Conditions A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street. Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 NB Ram Intersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 119 591 0 0 75 519 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 125 622 0 0 78 546 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Undivided FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 19 0 139 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate veh/h) 20 0 146 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration LTR Control Delay. Queue Len th Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 125 166 Capacity, c (vph) 952 397 /c ratio 0.13 0.42 Queue length (95 %) 0.45 2.02 Control Delay (s /veh) 9.4 20.4 LOS A C Approach delay (s /veh) 20.4 Approach LOS C HCS2000 "M copyright ® 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite Information • A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 A nalysis Time Period I PM Peak Hour Ca • Year Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 NB Ram Intersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 60 754 0 0 154 887 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 63 793 0 0 162 933 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P 3 3 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 135 0 88 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 142 0 92 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration LTR Control Delay, Queue Len th Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 63 234 Capacity, c (vph) 634 157 /c ratio 0.10 1.49 Queue length (95 %) 0.33 15.34 Control Delay (s /veh) 11.3 304.3 LOS B F Approach delay (s /veh) 304.3 A pproach LOS F HCS2000T'" Copyright 02003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc v ers'on 4. to • • 11 HCS2000"DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR + A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group LT T R LTR Volume, V (vph) 119 591 75 519 19 0 139 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 150 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 55.0 JG= G= JG= G= 25.0 G= I G JG= Y= 5 IY= Y= ly= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 025 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 747 79 388 166 Lane group capacity, c 1045 1127 958 449 We ratio, X 0.71 0.07 0.41 0.37 Total green ratio, g/C 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.28 Uniform delay, d 12.1 7.1 9.0 26.2 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.28 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 2.4 0.0 0.3 0.5 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 14.4 7.1 9.3 26.7 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Lane group LOS 8 A A C Approach delay 14.4 9.0 26.7 Approach LOS B A C Intersection delay 14.1 X = 0.61 Intersection LOS B HCS2000Tst Copyright m 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1n Patton Hands Rust & Associates, pc • • r1 ILJ HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR + A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Im rovements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group LT T R LTR Volume, V (vph) 60 754 154 887 135 0 88 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 250 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 1 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 55.0 JG= G JG= I G= 25.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 857 162 671 235 Lane group capacity, c 1087 1127 958 471 v/c ratio, X 0.79 0.14 0.70 0.50 Total green ratio, g/C 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.28 Uniform delay, d 13.1 7.5 11.9 272 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.33 0.11 0.27 0.11 Incremental delay, d 4.0 0.1 2.3 0.8 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 171 7.5 14.2 28.1 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Lane group LOS I B I A B C Approach delay 17.1 12.9 28.1 Approach LOS B B C Intersection delay 16.6 X = 0.70 Intersection LOS B IICS2000 Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, Al Rights Reserved Version 4Ae Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY I • 0 • neral Information Project Descri lion Willow Run Phase 2 Intersection Route 622 & Route 37 SB Ram A nalyst PHR +A A gency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction Date Performed 01124105 nalysis Year 010 Background Conditions A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Project Descri lion Willow Run Phase 2 East West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 SB Ram ntersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 145 63 58 36 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 152 66 61 37 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P 0 3 Median type Undivided FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 566 1 127 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 595 1 133 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 0 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR Control Delay. Queue Len th Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 61 729 Capacity, c (vph) 1346 669 c ratio 0.05 1.09 Queue length (95 %) 0.14 20.70 Control Delay (s /veh) 78 85.8 LOS A F A pproach delay (s /veh) 85.8 A pproach LOS F HCS2000TM Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4_I d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pe TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Aanaral Information Site Information • CA Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Intersection Route 622 & Route 37 SB Ram A nalyst PHR + Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction 4 Date Performed 01124105 Analysis Year 010 Background Conditions A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour L T R Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 79 75 92 197 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 83 78 96 207 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P HV 0 3 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 1 1 1 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 am Signal Street n of heavy P HV IRT Channelized? dela LOS i 0000 000 • r: • pproac HCS2000 Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) /c ratio Copyright m 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4. Id • 17J • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane group TR LT LT R Volume, V (vph) 145 63 58 36 566 1 127 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 12.0 1 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N. Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 1 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 1 02 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 33.0 G= G= G= G= 47.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 JY= Y= JY= JY= 5 Y= JY= JY= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 219 99 597 134 Lane group capacity, c 649 498 918 819 We ratio, X 0.34 0.20 0.65 0.16 Total green ratio, g/C 0.37 1 0.37 0.52 0.52 Uniform delay, d, 20.6 19.5 15.6 111.2 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.23 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.3 0.2 1.6 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 20.9 19.7 172 11.3 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • L Lane group LOS I C I 8 8 8 Approach delay 20.9 19.7 16.1 Approach LOS C g 8 Intersection delay 17.5 X = 0.52 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000TM Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • Ll HCS2000w DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane group TR LT LT R Volume, V (vph) 79 75 92 197 736 4 181 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2,0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 1 02 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 33.0 JG= G= G= I G= 47.0 G= IG= G= Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 162 304 779 191 Lane group capacity, c 632 546 918 819 v/c ratio, X 0.26 0.56 0.85 0.23 Total green ratio, g/C 0.37 0.37 0.52 0.52 Uniform delay, d 19.9 22.7 18.4 11.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.15 0.38 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 1.3 7.6 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 20.1 24.0 26.0 11.8 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Lane group LOS I C I C C B Approach delay 20.1 24.0 23.2 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 23.0 X� = 0.73 Intersection LOS C FIC52000Ts' Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Ie Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 Lane group L TR L T R L T R L TR Volume, V (vph) 122 486 115 489 355 488 176 500 342 212 499 201 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 12.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, NB 0 #3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 1 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 OS Timing G= 20.0 G= 24.0 G= G= G= 8.0 G= 28.0 G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 128 633 515 374 514 185 526 360 223 737 Lane group capacity, c 543 819 440 843 376 231 517 831 214 941 We ratio, X 0.24 0.77 1.17 0.44 1.37 0.80 1.02 0.43 1.04 0.78 Total green ratio, g/C 0.49 0.24 0.49 0.24 0.24 0.41 0.28 0.53 0.41 0.28 Uniform delay, d 14.5 35.5 26.4 32.3 38.0 22.1 36.0 14.3 24.4 33.2 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.32 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.34 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.33 Incremental delay, d 0.2 4.6 98.6 0.4 181.4 18.0 44.0 0.4 73.0 4.4 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Initial queue delay, d Control delay 14.8 40.1 124.9 32.7 219.4 40.1 80.0 14.7 97.4 37.6 Lane group LOS 8 I D F I C F D I F 8 F D Approach delay 35.8 135.0 51.2 51.5 Approach LOS D F D D Intersection delay 76.5 X, = 1.32 Intersection LOS E HCS2000T Copyright U 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Vet'sioa 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • U HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 42 968 131 178 779 60 90 68 117 34 21 25 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 13.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 10.0 G= 42.0 G= G= G= 23.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= IY= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 44 1019 138 187 820 63 167 123 36 48 Lane group capacity, c 295 1593 732 349 2162 993 376 662 282 433 We ratio, X 0.15 0.64 0.19 0.54 0.38 0.06 0.44 0.19 0.13 0.11 Total green ratio, g/C 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.26 0.42 0.26 0.26 Uniform delay, d, 13.8 18.2 14.0 10.4 8.0 6.3 28.1 16.3 25.8 25.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.22 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.9 0.1 1.6 0.1 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • .I L Control delay 14.0 19.1 14.2 12.0 1 8.1 1 6.3 29.0 16.4 26.0 25.8 Lane group LOS 8 I B B 8 I A A C B C C Approach delay 18.4 8.7 23.7 25.9 Approach LOS B A C C Intersection delay 15.3 X� = 0.62 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 11 • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Juba[ Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume, V (vph) 71 348 82 314 209 80 70 418 298 251 367 94 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 j 2.0 j 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 13.0 13.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 15.0 G= 17.0 G= J G= I G= 6.0 G= 370 1 G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 95.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 75 366 86 331 220 84 74 440 314 264 386 99 Lane group capacity, c 476 628 281 409 628 462 463 1368 941 434 1368 611 We ratio, X 0.16 0.58 0.31 0.81 0.35 0.18 0.16 0.32 0.33 0.61 0.28 0.16 Total green ratio, g/C 0.39 0.18 0.18 0.39 0.18 0.29 0.51 0.39 0.60 0.51 0.39 0.39 Uniform delay, d, 18.7 35.7 33.9 22.5 34.2 25.0 12.4 20.2 9.5 19.5 19.9 18.9 Progression factor, PF 1,000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.17 0.11 0.35 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.19 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 1.4 0.6 11.6 0.3 0.2 02 10.1 10.2 12.5 10.1 1 0.1 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc u 0 0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 18.8 37.1 34.5 34.1 34.5 25.2 12.6 20.4 1 9.7 21.9 20.0 19.0 Lane group LOS B I D C C I C C B I C A C I C B Approach delay 34.1 33.0 15.6 20.6 Approach LOS C C B C Intersection delay 24.6 X = 0.64 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright Q 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved VHSion 4,1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • L J HCS2000`" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume, V (vph) 122 486 115 489 355 488 176 500 342 212 499 201 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) q j A i A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 11.000 11.000 1.000 11.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 150 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade/ Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N. Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 275 G= 21.5 G= G= G= 6.0 G= 25.0 G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= IY= IY= 5 Y= 5 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB 1 WB NB SB LT TH I RT I LT TH I RT LT TH I RT LT I TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 128 512 121 515 374 356 185 526 360 223 525 212 Lane group capacity, c 647 755 510 591 755 510 244 878 902 243 878 902 v/c ratio, X 0.20 0.68 0.24 0.87 0.50 0.70 0.76 0.60 0.40 0.92 0.60 0.24 Total green ratio, g/C 0.54 0.22 0.32 0.54 0.22 0.32 0.36 0.25 0.57 0.36 0.25 0.57 Uniform delay, d 11.9 36.1 24.7 20.7 34.5 29.5 31.9 33.1 11.7 35.5 33.1 10.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.25 0.11 0.40 0.11 0.26 0.31 0.19 0.11 0.44 0.19 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 2.5 0.2 13.4 j 0.5 4.2 12.9 i 1.1 1 0.3 136.3 1 1.1 0.1 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 C� Initial queue delay, d Control delay 12.1 38.5 24.9 34.1 350 33.7 44.8 34.2 12.0 71.8 34.2 10.6 Lane group LOS g I D C C I C C D 1 C 8 E I C 8 Approach delay 31.9 34.3 28.6 37.7 Approach LOS C C C D Intersection delay 33,1 X = 0.84 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • 1 J • HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 03/25/05 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour rom/To Route 622 /Juba) Early Dr Inalysis ighway Route 621 urisdiction Year 2010 Back round Conditions Input Data _ — _ _ — _ _ _ _ — _ _ _._ Sh OUldzr,ridth _ it Pq Class I highway F_N' Class II highway Terrain "- Level .`d Rolling Two -way hourly volume 268 veh /h Directional split 56/44 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No-passing zone 0 Shan Wrlh Arrow %Trucks and Buses , P 3 % Recreational vehicles, P 3 Access points/ mi 4 Lane width It Lane. rudth _ It shouli'r;urth =_ — It Segment length, 4 n'i A verage Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f nV fHV 1 /(t +P +P 0.879 Two-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' fG fHV) 288 ' highest directional split proponion (pc/h) 161 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S mi /h Observed volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS= S +0.00776(Vf f HV ) 49.0 mi /h Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder width f, (Exhibit 20 -5) Adj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f fA) 50.0 mi /h 0.0 mi /h 1.0 mi /h 49.0 mi /h Adj. for no- passing zones, f ( mi/h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 Average travel speed, ATS ( mi/h) ATS= FFS- 0.00776v -f 46.8 Percent Time-Spent-Followin Grade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger - car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f HV '11-1/ (1+ P T (E i 1) +P 1)) 0.997 Two-way flow rate v pc/h) v =V/ (PHF' f - f HV ) 283 v ' highest directional split proponion (pc /h) 158 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1 -e 0000e79v 22.0 dj, for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f %)(Exh. 20 -12) 0.7 Percent time- spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF= BPTSF +f drn 22.7 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class II C Volume to capacity ratio We v /c =V 3,200 0.09 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh - mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- unit VMT V'L, 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT15(veh -h) TT15= VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 porn, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v"= 1,700 pc/h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. Patton Farris Rust & Associates, PC • 0 TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information ISite Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 03/25/05 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Highway Route 621 [Analysis rom/To Route 622 /Juba) Early Dr urisdiction Year 2010 Back round Conditions Input Data -- - - - - - - - ---- Sltduldar,ridlh - - - - - tt R' Class I highway Class 11 highway Terrain F Level `, Rolling Two -way hourly volume 263 veh/h Directional split 63/37 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No passing zone 0 Shnw Nwihlarm %Trucks and Buses, P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 4 Lanc idth it Lane n dth _ _ It _ _ _ Shoulder_ i 1th _ __ it Segment length, Lf ._ mi Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f HV f HV = 1 /(1 +P T (E T 1) +P 0.979 Two-way flow rate, v (pc /h) v.-V/ (PHF' f f HV ) 283 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 178 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S FM mi /h Observed volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS = S / f HV ) 49.0 min Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder widtha, f,s (Exhibit 20 -5) Adj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f LS fA) 50.0 mi/h 0.0 mi /h 1.0 mi/h 49. milh Adj. for no- passing zones, f ( mi /h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 Average travel speed, ATS ( mi /h) ATS= FFS- 0.00776v -f 46.8 Percent Time-Spent-Followin Grade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f HV fHV 1 /(1 +P +P 0.997 Two-way flow rate', v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' f G - f HV ) 278 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 175 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1 -e 0.000879v P) 21.7 Adj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f,,, ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 1.4 Percent time - spent - fallowing, PTSF( %) PTSF= BPTSF +f dmn 23'1 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class II) C Volume to capacity ratio We v /c =V / 3,200 0.09 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh- mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- mi) VMT V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT,,- VMT 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pc/h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. It highest directional split v >= 1,700 pc/h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc E • C� HCS2000TM Copyright (9) 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 of TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information I Site Information A nalyst PHR +A A gency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 03/25/05 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour rom Route 622 /Breckenridge Lane [Analvsis ighway Route 621 urisdiction Year 2010 Back round Conditions Input Data Shoulderxldth It r. Class I highway F Class II highway Two -way hourly volume 263 veh /h j1(- /- T�f��1/ Terrain F' Level Rolling Directional split 56/44 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No passing zone 0 Stow ftorlh Arrow % Trucks and Buses, P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 5 Lene r idth f i Lanc r idth ___ t tihordd. va Ith it - - - - - - - - - - - Segment length, L - nii verage Travel Speed G rade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.0D Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 H eavy-vehicle adjustment factor, f HV fHV =1/ (1 +P 1) +P 1)) 0.979 wo -way flow rate (pc /h) v= V /(PHF'f 283 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 158 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S mi /h bserved volume, V veh/h Free -flow speed, FPS FFS= S +0.00776(V f 46.8 mi/h Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder width f, (Exhibit 20 -5) A dj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f fA) 50. mile 0.0 mill 13 mi/h 48.8 mil A dj. for no passing zones, f ( mi /h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 A verage travel speed, ATS ( mi/h) ATS= FFS- 0.00776v -f 46.6 Percent Time -S ent -Fie lowin G rade Adjustment factor, l (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f HV fHv =t / (1+ P 1) +P 1)) 0.997 T wo - way flow rale v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' to' fHV) 278 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 156 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF =1 Dull e 0,000879v 21.7 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f d/h ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 0.7 Percent time- spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF=BPTSF d /np 22'4 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class II C V olume to capacity ratio We v /c =U 3,200 0.09 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of havel,VMT (veh - mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh - mi) VMi 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pc/h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. It highest directional split v >= 1,700 pc /h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. Patton Harris Rust & Associates, PC • l r 1 u 6 TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information I Site Information A nalyst PHR +A A gency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 03/25/05 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour [Fromrro ighway Route 621 Route 622 /Breckinridge Lane urisdiction nal sis Year 2010 Back round Conditions Input Data _ _ _ _ _ _ -._. Sh OUbdenci_ _ dth - _ _ _ _ _ _ t[ Class I highway F Class II highway Terrain fe,- Level s''•- Rolling Two -way hourly volume 677 veh /h Directional split 58/42 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No passing zone 0 Show Norlinlrrow %Trucks and Buses, P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 5 �- Lane width it — Lane i:idth _ ft _ _ _ _ Shoul de r width — - tr Segment length, L, mi A verage Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1 -2 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f ill fHV 1 /(1 +P +P -1)) 0.994 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v,-V/ (PHF' f f 717 v ' highest directional split proportion (pi 416 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S mi /h O bserved volume, V veh/h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS= S +0.00776(V /1 48.8 mi /h Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder width f (Exhibit 20 -5) A dj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free-flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f fA) 50.0 mi/h 0.0 mil 1.3 rum 48. mil A dj. for no- passing zones, f ( mi /h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 verage travel speed, ATS ( min) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v -f 43.2 Percent Time-Spent-Followin rade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f f =1 /(1 +P 1) +P 0.997 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' f f 715 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 415 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1 - a - .000979vP) 46.7 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f N(Exh. 20 -12) 0.0 Percent time - spent- following, PTSF( %) PTSF- BPTSF +f d/np 46.7 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service. LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class 1 or 20 -4 for Class II D V olume to capacity ratio we v /c =U 3,200 022 Peak 15- min veh -mites of travel, VMT (veh -mi) VMT 025L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- mi) V1v V"L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes I. If v >= 3,200 pc /h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v >= 1,700 cc/h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 of Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information I Site Information A nalyst PHR +A A gency or Company l Date Performed 03/25/05 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour rom Rt 621 /Juba)Early Dr Inalysis ighway New Juba] Early Drive urisdiction Year 2010 Background Conditions Input Data Shoulder •orid[h k- r'. Class I highway FU Class II highway Terrain F Level � Rolling Two-way hourly volume 143 veh/h Directional split 65/35 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No passing zone 0 Show Horthfunow. % Trucks and Buses, P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P. 3% Access points/ mi 3 �— Lane idth It Lanc width It — _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Shouh %viJth it Segmern length,. L, mi A verage Travel Speed G rade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, fHV fHV-l/ (1 + P 0.979 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF - t . f 154 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 100 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, SFM mil O bserved volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS= S +0.00776(V f 49.3 mi /h Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder widi f, (Exhibit 20 -5) A dj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f L6 fA) 50.0 mill 0.0 mi /h 0. mill 49.3 mil dj+ for no- passing zones, t ri p ( mi/h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 A verage travel speed, ATS (mi /h) ATS= FFS- 0.00776v i 48.1 Percent Time-Spent-Followin Grade Adjustment factor, I. (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f f =1/ (1+ P 1) +P 1) ) 0.997 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF - f f 151 vp ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 98 Base percent time - spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1 -e 0.000e79v 12.4 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 2 . 6 Percent time - spent - following, PTSF(%) PTSF = BPTSF +f a/o 15.0 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class 11 C V olume to capacity ratio v/c v /c =V /3,200 0.05 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh- mh VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- mi) VMT 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 loom, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v >= 1,700 pclh, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000 Copyright© 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • 0 • TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information Site Information A nalyst PHR +A A gency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 03/25/05 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour rom1Tc Rt 621 /Juba) Early Dr Inalysis ighway New Jubal Early Drive urisdiction Year 2010 Background Conditions Input Data Shoulder width It F. Class I highway F Class II highway Terrain F Level 1, Rolling Two-way hourly volume 411 veh /h Directional split 53/47 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0,95 No- passing zone 0 Shrw Gonh G ow %Trucks and Buses, P 3% %Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 3 �— Lane vndlh ._ ... ... .. .................... ... .1[ Lane rcidth it _5_hm_ti = it segment length, l mi A verage Travel Speed G rade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f f 1 /(1 +P +P 0.979 T wo-way flow rate v (pGh) v =V/ (PHF' f f 442 v ' highest directional split proportion (par /h) 234 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement = stimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured spares, SFM mi /h O bserved volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS= S +0.00776(V 49.3 mi/h Base free flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder width3, fLS (Exhibit 20 -5) A dj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f LS fA) 50.0 mil 0. mi /h 0.8 ni 49.3 mVh dj, for no- passing zones, f, ( mi /h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 A verage travel speed, ATS ( mi/h) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v -f 45.8 Percent Time-Spent-Followin rade Adjustment factor, f. (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, fHV fHV 1 /(1 +P 1) +P I)) 0.997 T wo-way flow tota v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' fc fHV) 434 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc/h) 230 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1 -e 00e0879v 31.7 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f &h ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 0.1 Percent time- spent - following, PTSF(% PTSF = BPTSF +f dMi, 31.8 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class 1 or 20 -4 for Class Ih C V olume to capacity ratio v/c v /c =V /3,200 0.14 Peak 15- min veh -miles of travel,VMT -mi) VMT15= 0.25L,(1JIPHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- mi) VMT V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT VMT15 /ATS 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pc /h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v"= 1,700 pc/h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000TM Copyright 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, Pc • • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timin Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 2 3 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group L T T L T Volume, V (vph) 727 1435 1019 335 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade 1 Parking Al 0 Al N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 32 Phasing EB Only Thru Only 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 25.0 G= 32.0 G= G= G= 18.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Anal sis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SIB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 765 1511 1073 353 0 Lane group capacity, c 945 3364 1736 681 369 v/c ratio, X 0.81 0.45 0.62 0.52 0.00 Total green ratio, g/C 0.28 0.69 0.36 0.20 0.20 Uniform delay, d, 30.3 6.3 24.0 32.1 28.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.35 0.11 0.20 0.12 0.11 Incremental delay, d 5.4 0.1 0.7 0.7 0.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 1 35.6 6.4 24.6 32.8 28.8 Patton Han is Rust & Associates, pc r1 LJ u • Lane group LOS D I A I C C I C Approach delay 16.2 24.6 32.8 Approach LOS B C C Intersection delay 20.2 X = 0.66 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University or Florida, All Rights Resmed Version 4,1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • E HCS2000"DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timinq Input EB WB NB SB LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 2 3 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group L T T L T Volume, V (vph) 276 1340 1907 570 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 11 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 1 1 3.2 Phasing I EB Only I Thru Only 1 03 04 1 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 11.0 G= 42.0 G= G= G= 22.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 IY= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= IY= ly= Duration of Anal sis, T = 0.25 1 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH FIT LT I TH I FIT LT TH FIT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 291 1411 2007 1 600 0 Lane group capacity, c 416 3147 2279 1 832 451 We ratio, X 0.70 0.45 0.88 1 0.72 0.00 Total green ratio, g/C 0.12 0.64 0.47 1 0.24 0.24 Uniform delay, d 37.9 8.0 121.7 1 31.2 25.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.27 0.11 0.41 0.28 0.11 Incremental delay, d Z 5.2 0.1 4.4 3.1 0.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 43.1 8.1 26.1 34.3 25.7 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 0 Lane group LOS D I A C C C Approach delay 14.1 26.1 34.3 Approach LOS 8 C C Intersection delay 22.5 X = 0.81 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TS1 Copyright C 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • 1] HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lane group T L T LT Volume, V (vph) 1516 306 1049 646 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 3 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start -up lost time, 1, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, a 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N to Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 1 3.2 Phasing WB Only I Thru Only 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 8.4 G= 31.8 G= G= G= 35.8 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Len th, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 1596 322 1104 680 Lane group capacity, c 1725 318 1714 699 v/c ratio, X 0.93 1.01 0.64 0.97 Total green ratio, g/C 0.35 0.09 0.50 0.40 Uniform delay, d 28.0 40.8 16.5 26.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.44 0.50 0.22 0.48 Incremental delay, d 9.0 53.7 0.8 27.3 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 37.0 94.5 17.3 53.9 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 1 r 1 u • Lane group LOS I D F I B D Approach delay 37.0 34.7 53.9 Approach LOS D C D Intersection delay 39.2 X� = 0.96 Intersection LOS D 7rC52000rnt Copyright m 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • HCS2000'° DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Pt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lane group T L T LT Volume, V (vph) 1072 808 1669 545 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 3 6 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHI 0.95 0.95 0.95 1 1 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, a 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm tO Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only Thru Only 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 21.7 G= 23.5 G= G= G= 30.8 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= ly= IY= 4 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT I TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 1128 851 1757 574 Lane group capacity, c 1275 821 1904 601 We ratio, X 0.88 1.04 0.92 0.96 Total green ratio, g/C 0.26 0.24 0.56 0.34 Uniform delay, d 31.9 34.2 18.1 28.9 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.41 0.50 0.44 0.46 Incremental delay d 7.7 41.2 8.1 25.9 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 39.7 75.4 26.2 54.9 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 1 0 • Lane group LOS I D E I C D Approach delay 39.7 42.3 54.9 Approach LOS D D D Intersection delay 43.3 X = 0.93 Intersection LOS D HCS2000 1 Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 11e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc U r 1 LJ TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency /Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Breckinridge Ln &Route 621 alysi Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Analysis n Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Breckinrid e Lane North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 0 368 15 250 288 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 387 15 263 303 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R V olume 20 0 41 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 21 0 43 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Queue Length and Level of Service ch NB SB Westbound Eastbound ent FLane 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 onfiguration LT LR 263 64 C (m) (vph) 1151 457 c 0.23 0.14 95% queue length 0.88 0.48 Control Delay 9.1 14.2 LOS A B A pproach Delay 14.2 Approach LOS B Rights Reserved 11CS2000ro Copyright 9) 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4. t d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 • • TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour I ntersection Breckinridge Ln & Route 621 Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project Descri tion Willow Run Phase 2 EasUWest Street: Breckinrid e Lane North /South Street: Route 621 ntersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 0 555 8 188 614 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 584 8 197 646 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 1 0 1 0 Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 Configuration I TR LT Upstream Signal 0 1 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 119 0 283 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 125 0 297 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Queue Len th and Level of Service ch NB SB Westbound Eastbound ent rLane 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 onfiguration LT LR (vph) 197 422 C (m) (vph) 979 356 We 0.20 1.19 95% queue length 0.75 17.36 Control Delay 9.6 141.3 LOS A F pproach Delay 141.3 Approach LOS F Rights Reserved 11CS2000T1 Copyright @ 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. 1d Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • 11 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 621 & Breckinridge Lane Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L R TR L T Volume, V (vph) 20 41 368 15 250 288 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, U 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 2.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N N N 0 N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N. H3.2 Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 SB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 24.9 G= G= G= G= 6.8 G= 68.3 G= G= Y= 5 ly= Y= ly= IY= 0 Y= 5 IY= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 110.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 21 43 403 263 303 Lane group capacity, c 397 523 1139 604 1260 We ratio, X 0.05 0.08 0.35 0.44 0.24 Total green ratio, g/C 0.23 0.33 0.62 0.68 0.68 Uniform delay, d 33.3 25.1 10.1 74 6.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • r • Control delay 33.4 1 25.2 10.3 1 7.9 1 6.7 Lane group LOS C I I C I B A A Approach delay 27.9 10.3 7.3 Approach LOS C B A Intersection delay 9.7 X = 0.34 Intersection LOS A HCS2000' M Copyright © 2000 Univcrsily of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 621 & Breckinridge Lane Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Su ested Im rovements Volume and Timinq Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L R TR L T Volume, V (vph) 119 283 555 8 188 614 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start -up lost time, h 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade f Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 1 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 1 SB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 24.9 G= G= G= G= 6.8 G= 68.3 G= G= Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= Y= 0 Y= 5 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB I NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 125 298 592 198 646 Lane group capacity, c 397 523 1143 494 1260 v/c ratio, X 0.31 0.57 0.52 0.40 0.51 Total green ratio, g/C 0.23 0.33 0.62 0.68 0.68 Uniform delay, d 135.4 30.2 11.7 7.8 8.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.16 0.12 0.11 0.12 Incremental delay, d 0.5 1.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • Control delay 35.9 1 31.6 12.1 1 8.3 1 8.9 Lane group LOS D I I C I B A A Approach delay 32.9 12.1 8.7 Approach LOS C B A Intersection delay 15,3 X = 0.54 Intersection LOS B HCS2000T'�t Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc L J • • TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Pro'ect Descri tion Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Handle Ave North /South Street: Jubal Earl Drive Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 0 190 76 2 153 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 200 80 2 161 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R V olume 26 0 66 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 27 0 69 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Oueue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 2 96 C (m) (vph) 1277 784 c 0.00 0.12 95% queue length 0.00 042 Control Delay 7.8 10.2 LOS A B pproach Delay 10.2 pproach LOS B Rights Reserved HCS2000Tkf Copyright m 2003 University of Merida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • J TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst PHR +A Agency /Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr Analysis n alysi Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street, Handle Ave North /South Street: Jubal Earl Drive Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 0 337 81 43 340 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate HFR 0 354 85 45 357 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 28 0 55 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 29 0 57 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 45 86 C (m) (vph) 1116 586 We 0.04 0.15 95% queue length 0.13 0.51 Control Delay 8.4 12.2 LOS A B Approach Delay 12.2 pproach LOS B Rights Reserved IIC52000T.N Copyright m 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY I • • 1 7 J General Information Site Information A nalyst HR +A Intersection New Jubal & Jubal Earl Dr Agency/Co. HR +A J urisdiction EasUWest Street: New Jubal Early Date Performed 1/24/05 [AM A nalysis Year 010 Build -out Conditions A nalysis Time Period Peak Hour Study Period hrs : 0.25 Project Descri lion Willow Run - Phase 2 EasUWest Street: New Jubal Early Dr North /South Street: Jubal Early Drive Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 10 218 0 0 105 255 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 10 229 0 0 110 268 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P 3 3 Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 164 0 16 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 172 0 16 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay. Queue Len th Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 10 188 Capacity, c (vph) 1175 735 /c ratio 0.01 0.26 Queue length (95 %) 0.03 1.02 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.1 11.6 LOS A B Approach delay (s/veh) 11.6 A pproach LOS B 11CS20001'M Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY I lu • General Iniormation Site Information A nalyst PHR +A Intersection New Jubal & Jubal Early Dr Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction East/West Street: New Jubal Early Dr Date Performed 01124105 A nalysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour I Study Period Project Description Willow Run - Phase 2 East/West Street: New Jubal Early Dr North /South Street: Jubal Early Drive ntersection Orientation: East -West I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 23 297 0 0 367 395 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 24 312 0 0 386 415 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 349 0 19 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 367 0 20 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N y Storage 0 2 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay, Queue Len th Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L7 LR Volume, v (vph) 24 387 Capacity, c ra (vph) 818 570 c ratio 0.03 0.68 Queue length (95 %) 0.09 5.17 Control Delay (s /veh) 9.5 23.6 LOS A C A pproach delay (s /veh) 23.6 Approach LOS C • HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • 11 0 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour I ntersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 Lane group L TR L T R L T R L TR Volume, V (vph) 91 433 107 314 245 80 87 418 298 251 367 100 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 13.0 1 3.0 1 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 11.000 1.000 11.000 Initial unmet demand, Q. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTCR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade I Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 14.0 G= 20.1 G= G= G= 7.9 G= 33.0 G= G= Y_ 5 IY= 5 Y= ly= IY= 5 Y= 5 IY= . Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 95.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB I WB NB SB LT TH RT I LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 96 569 331 84 92 440 314 264 491 Lane group capacity, c 477 721 345 545 400 641 858 323 1181 v/c ratio, X 0.20 0.79 0.96 0.15 0.23 0.69 0.37 0.82 0.42 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.21 0.41 0.35 0.48 0.35 0.55 0.48 0.35 Uniform delay, d, 17.6 35.4 22.4 [31.9 21.4 14.0 26.6 12.2 25.6 23.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.34 0.47 0.11 0.11 0.26 0.11 0.36 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 5.9 37.7 0.1 0.3 3.1 0.3 15.1 0.2 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Control delay 17.8 41.3 1 60.1 32.2 21.5 14.3 29.6 12.4 40.6 23.9 Lane group LOS 8 I D E I C C e I C 8 D C Approach delay '38.0 44.6 21.6 29.7 Approach LOS D D C C Intersection delay 32.6 X = 0.80 Intersection LOS C IICS2000TM Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc u • 0 HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timin In ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 Lane group L TR L T R L T R L TR Volume, V (vph) 134 553 145 489 453 488 211 500 342 212 499 222 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N M Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 +L 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 22.0 G= 19.0 G= G= G= 8.0 1 G= 26.0 G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 5 Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 C cle Lena th, C = 95.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 141 735 515 477 514 222 526 360 223 759 Lane group capacity, c 515 681 484 702 528 229 505 875 226 917 v/c ratio, X 0.27 1.08 1.06 0.68 0.97 0.97 1.04 0.41 0.99 0.83 Total green ratio, g/C 0.48 0.20 0.48 0.20 0.34 0.41 0.27 0.56 0.41 0.27 Uniform delay, d 14.7 38.0 26.6 352 31.1 34.2 34.5 12.1 23.0 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.25 0.48 0.48 0.50 0.11 0.49 E6.4 Incremental delay, d 0.3 57.9 59.0 2.7 32.3 50.7 51.3 0.3 55.9 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc LJ 0 • Control delay 15.0 95.9 1 85.6 378 63.4 84.9 85.8 12.4 79.0 38.8 Lane group LOS B F F D E F I F B E D Approach delay 82.8 62.9 61.8 479 Approach LOS F E E D Intersection delay 63.2 X = 1.10 Intersection LOS E HCS2000 d Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume, V (vph) 91 433 107 314 245 80 87 418 298 251 367 100 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 10.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 13.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 10.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade! Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I Excl. Left I EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 14.7 G= 19.0 G= G= G= 7.9 G= 33.4 G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 5 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 025 Cycle Length, C = 95.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB I WB NB SB LT I TH I RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 96 456 113 331 258 1 84 92 440 264 386 105 Lane group capacity, c 476 702 527 388 702 527 457 1235 429 1235 876 We ratio, X 0.20 0.65 0.21 0.85 0.37 0.16 0.20 0.36 F34 0.62 0.31 0.12 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.20 0.34 0.41 0.20 0.34 0.49 0.35 0.49 0.35 0.56 Uniform delay, d, 17.9 34.9 22.6 21.7 32.8 22.1 13.5 22.8 19.8 22.4 9.9 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.23 0.11 0.39 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 2.1 0.2 16.6 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 12.6 0.1 0.1 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • rI L • Initial queue delay, d Control delay 18.1 37.1 22.8 38.3 33.1 22.3 13.7 23.0 11.8 22.5 22.6 10.0 Lane group LOS B D C D C C B C B C C A Approach delay 31.9 34.3 17.8 20.8 Approach LOS C C B C Intersection delay 25.6 X� = 0.64 Intersection LOS C 110520001M Copyright m 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4 1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, PC 0 I� • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Jubal Early Dr & Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID willow Run Phase 2 Su ested Im rovements Volume and Timin Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT I TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume, V (vph) 134 553 145 489 453 488 211 500 342 212 499 222 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 150 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left I NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 25.2 G= 17.8 G= G= G= 6.5 G= 20.5 G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= IY= IY= 5 IY= 5 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 1 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB I WB I NB SB LT TH I RT LT TH I RT LT TH I RT LT I TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 141 582 153 515 477 356 6 360 223 525 234 Lane group capacity, c 600 695 510 573 695 510 0 883 248 800 883 We ratio, X 0.23 0.84 0.30 0.90 0.69 0.70 6 0.41 0.90 0.66 0.27 Total green ratio, g/C 0.53 0.20 0.33 0.53 0.20 0.33 3 0.56 0.36 0.23 0.56 Uniform delay, d 11.6 34.7 22.7 21.9 33.5 26.5 131.6 .6 11.1 31.4 31.6 10.1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 00 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.37 0.11 0.42 0.26 0.26 23 0.11 0.42 0.23 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 8.9 0.3 17.1 2.8 4.2 .0 0.3 32.0 2.0 0.2 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Initial queue delay, d Control delay 11.8 43.6 23.0 39.0 36.3 30.7 62.5 33.5 11.4 63.4 33.5 10.2 Lane group LOS B I D C D I D C E I C B E I C B Approach delay 34.9 35.8 32.2 34.8 Approach LOS C D C C Intersection delay 34.5 X = 0.89 Intersection LOS C HCS2000 ' Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 u E HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 42 968 278 204 779 60 263 68 196 34 21 25 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A I A A i A I A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 12.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 11.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N Al 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N. Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 1 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 1 07 08 Timing G= 50.0 1 G= G= G= G= 30.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT I TH I RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 44 1019 293 215 620 63 349 206 36 48 Lane group capacity, c 298 1896 871 220 1896 871 454 523 233 565 v/c ratio, X 0.15 0.54 0.34 0.98 0.43 0.07 0.77 0.39 0.15 0.08 Total green ratio, g/C 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 Uniform delay, d 9.7 12.7 10.9 19.4 11.7 9.3 26.9 23.0 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.48 0.11 0.11 0.32 0.11 M120. Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.3 0.2 54.0 0.2 0.0 7.8 0.5 Initial queue delay, d 113.O 9.9 11.2 73.5 11.9 9.3 34.7 23.5 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Control delay Lane group LOS A I B B E I B A I C C C I C Approach delay 12.5 23.8 30.6 21.0 Approach LOS B C C C Intersection delay 20.0 Xc = 0.90 Intersection LOS B IICS2000 Copyright ED 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • u \J HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 59 1244 597 297 1631 58 537 38 156 213 169 58 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A I A A I A I A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 12.0 12,0 12.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, C 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I WB Only I EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 1 08 Timing G= 5.0 1 G= 35.0 G= G= G= 35.0 G= G= Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y G= = Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 85.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH I RT LT TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 62 1309 628 313 1717 61 605 1 164 224 239 Lane group capacity, c 87 1405 646 190 1606 738 409 830 139 1 730 v/c ratio, X 0.71 0.93 0.97 1.65 1.07 0.08 1.48 0.20 1.61 0.33 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.41 0.53 0.41 0.41 Uniform delay, d 20.8 23.9 24.5 20.9 22.5 12.4 25.0 10.5 25.0 117.0 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.28 0.45 0.48 j 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.11 Incremental delay, d 23.9 11.4 28.4 313.7 43.5 0.0 2 28.5 0.1 305.9 0.3 Initial queue delay, d 44.7 35.2 53.0 334.6 66.0 12.4 253.5 10.6 330.9 17.3 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Control delay Lane group LOS D I D D F I E B I F B F I B Approach delay 41.1 104.6 201.7 169.0 Approach LOS D F F F Intersection delay 100.4 X = 1.95 Intersection LOS F HCS2000 Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4 l Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • HCS2000' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Su ested lm rovements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume, V (vph) 42 968 278 204 779 60 263 68 196 34 21 25 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade/ Parking rN 0 N rN 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left Thru & RT 07 O8 Timing G= 10.5 G= 36.8 G= G= G= 17.3 G= 10.4 G= G= Y= 0 IY= 5 Y= IY= IY= 5 Y= 5 IY= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 44 1019 293 215 820 63 277 72 206 36 22 26 Lane group capacity, c 259 1396 1822 397 1794 1213 654 213 451 654 213 181 v/c ratio, X 0.17 0.73 0.16 0.54 0.46 0.05 0.42 0.34 0.46 0.06 0.10 0.14 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.41 0.66 0.12 0.53 0.77 0.19 0.12 0.29 0.19 0.12 0.12 Uniform delay, d 16.9 22.4 5.9 137.5 13.3 2.4 32.0 36.6 26.3 29.7 35.6 35.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.29 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d Z 0.3 2.0 0.0 1.5 0.2 0.0 0.4 0.9 0.7 0.0 0.2 0.4 Initial queue delay, d 3 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • u • Control delay 17.2 24.4 1 6.0 39.0 13.5 1 2.4 32.4 37.6 27.0 29.7 35.8 36.2 Lane group LOS B I C A D I B A C I D C C I D D Approach delay 20.2 17.9 31.1 33.3 Approach LOS C B C C Intersection delay 21,7 X� = 0.58 Intersection LOS C HCS2000't Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • r1 U i HCS2000' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 201 o Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Su ested Im rovements Volume and Timina Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes N 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume, V (vph) 59 1244 597 297 1631 58 537 38 156 213 169 58 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 10.95 10.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N E12.O12.0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left Thru & RT 07 08 Timing G= 10.5 G= 36.8 G= G= G= 17.3 G= 10.4 G= G= Y= 0 IY= 5 Y= IY= IY= 5 Y= 5 Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SIB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 62 1309 628 313 1717 61 565 40 164 224 178 61 Lane group capacity, c 82 1396 1822 397 1794 1213 654 213 451 654 213 181 We ratio, X 0.76 0.94 0.34 0.79 0.96 0.05 0.86 0.19 0.36 0.34 0.84 0.34 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.41 0.66 0.12 0.53 0.77 0.19 0.12 0.29 0.19 0.12 0.12 Uniform delay, d 22.8 25.5 6.9 38.7 20.4 2.4 35.2 36.0 25.5 31.4 39.0 36.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.31 0.45 0.11 0.33 0.47 0.11 0.39 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.37 0.11 Incremental delay, d 32.5 12.2 0.1 10.2 12.6 0.0 11.6 0.4 0.5 0.3 24.1 1.1 Initial queue delay, d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 r, L_J Control delay 55.3 37.7 1 7.0 48.9 33.0 1 2.4 46.8 36.4 26.0 31.7 63.1 37.7 Lane group LOS E I D A D I C A D I D C C I E D Approach delay 28.6 34.5 41.8 44.6 Approach LOS C C D D Intersection delay 34.2 X = 0.92 Intersection LOS C HCS2000 -rm Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • \J Rights Reserved 11CS2000T" Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id • Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 01124105 AM Peak Hour Intersection n aly Year Analysis Route 621 & New Jubal Early Dr 2010 Build -out Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: New Jubal Early Dr North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 0 86 28 254 54 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 90 29 267 56 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 r 3 -- Median Type Undivided FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 Configuration TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 31 0 296 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 32 0 311 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach y N Storage 2 0 FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 267 343 C (m) (vph) 1463 1046 lc 0.18 0.33 95% queue length 0.67 1.44 Control Delay 8.0 11.2 LOS A B A pproach Delay 11.2 Approach LOS B Rights Reserved 11CS2000T" Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id • Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • r\ Rights Reserved 11C52000T'st Copyright (D 2003 University of Florida, All Nights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 01124105 PM Peak Hour Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year Route 621 & New Jubal Early Dr 2010 Build -out Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: New Jubal Earl Dr North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 62 49 529 204 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 65 51 556 214 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Median Type Undivided FIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 Configuration TR L T , Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 48 0 501 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 50 0 527 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach y N Storage 2 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 556 577 C (m) (vph) 1466 882 c 0.38 0.65 95% queue length 1.80 5.02 Control Delay 8.9 1 16.5 LOS A C Preach Delay 16.5 Approach LOS C Rights Reserved 11C52000T'st Copyright (D 2003 University of Florida, All Nights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • r 1 0 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR + A Agency /Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 621 & Route 622 J urisdiction A nalysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North - South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 1 117 101 42 50 31 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 123 106 44 52 32 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 1 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 1 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 79 52 43 45 71 16 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 83 54 45 47 74 16 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Chan nelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration I LTR LTR Delay Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 1 44 182 137 C (m) (vph) 1506 1333 624 581 W e 0.00 0.03 0.29 0.24 95% queue length 0.00 0.10 1.21 0.91 Control Delay 7.4 7.8 13.1 13.1 LOS A A B B A pproach Delay 13.1 13.1 Approach LOS B B Rights Reserved //CS2000T'M Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc i • • Rights Reserved HCS2000 i's' Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. id Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency /Co. Date Performed A nalysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 01124105 PM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Route 621 & Route 622 2010 Build -out Conditions Pro ect Descri lion Willow Run Phase 2 East West Streel: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 621 ntersection Orientation: North -South Study Period hrs : 0.25 V ehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 54 63 60 43 64 38 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate. HFR 56 66 63 45 67 40 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR 1 Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 122 172 98 54 68 4 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 128 181 103 56 71 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Delay Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach NB SIB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR (vph) 56 45 412 131 C (m) (vph) 1478 1451 592 424 W e 0.04 0.03 0.70 0.31 95% queue length 0.12 0.10 5.51 1.30 Control Delay 7.5 7.6 23.8 172 LOS A A C C A pproach Delay 23.8 17.2 A pproach LOS C C Rights Reserved HCS2000 i's' Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. id Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY (General Information ISite Information I nal st PHR +A ntersection Route 622 & Harvest Drive r 1 U r1 r1 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pe 11CS2000TM Copyright G 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id 11 • • HCS2000nd Copyright C) 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information A nalyst PHR + Intersection Route 622 & Harvest Drive Agency/Co. PHR + J urisdiction Date Performed 01124105 A nalysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Harvest Drive Intersection Orientation: East -West I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 47 856 0 0 1195 131 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 49 901 0 0 1257 137 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P HV 3 3 Median type Raised curb FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT T T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 68 0 55 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 71 0 57 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay. Queue Len th Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 49 128 Capacity, c (vph) 481 211 /c ratio 0.10 0.61 Queue length (95 %) 0.34 3.47 Control Delay (s /veh) 13.3 45.3 LOS B E Approach delay (s /veh) 45.3 A pproach LOS E • HCS2000nd Copyright C) 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CO NT R OL SUMMARY f:nnnr�l Infnrmatinn Sites Infnrmation A nalyst PHR +A Intersection I Route 622 &Sine Road Agency/Go. PHR +A J urisdiction Eastbound Date Performed 01124105 A nalysis Year U 010 Build -out Conditions A nal sis Time Period AM Peak Hour 5 6 Project Description Willow Hun rnase 1 East/West Street: Route 622 No th /South Street: Sine Road Intersection Orientation: East -West I Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 6 1027 0 0 455 10 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 6 1081 0 0 478 10 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P 3 3 Median type Raised curb FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT T T TR U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh /h 0 0 0 15 0 20 Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 1 15 0 21 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delav, Queue Len th Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 6 36 Capacity, c (vph) 1064 515 c ratio 0.01 0.07 Queue length (95 %) 0.02 1 0.22 Control Delay (s,!veh) 8.4 12.5 LOS A B Approach delay (s /veh) 12.5 ,A pproach LOS B • • 11CS2000TM Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Verso. 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONT SUMMARY C,anaral Infnrmatinn lqitp Infnrmatinn • A nalyst PHR +A Intersection Route 622 &Sine Road Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction Movement Date Performed 01124105 A nalysis Year 2 010 Build -out Conditions A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour L Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Sine Road Intersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 21 885 0 0 1229 21 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 22 931 0 0 1293 22 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Raised curb FIT Channelized? 0 1 0 Lanes 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 0 Configuration LT T T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 18 0 12 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 18 0 12 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 0 0 3 0 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 I 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LR Control Delay, Queue Len th Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 22 30 Capacity, c (vph) 516 21 5 c ratio 0.04 0.14 Queue length (95 %) 0.13 0.48 Control Delay (s /veh) 12.3 24.4 LOS B C A pproach delay (s /veh) 24.4 Approach LOS C • • HCS2000TM Copyright C 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Keserved Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc version a' in • • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Willow Run Dr Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane group LT TR LR Volume, V (vph) 50 1018 457 18 15 41 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2,0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N 0 N N N N Parking maneuvers, Nm to Buses stopping, NB E#N 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 50.0 G= G= G= G= 30.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 1125 500 59 Lane group capacity, c 1759 1940 547 v/c ratio, X 0.64 0.26 0.11 Total green ratio, g/C 0.56 0.56 0.33 Uniform delay, d 13.8 10.4 20.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.22 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.8 0.1 1 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 14.6 10.4 20.8 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc �J LJ r� ►.J HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Willow Run Dr Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane group LT TR LR Volume, V (vph) 77 876 1213 28 30 84 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, a 2,0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade i Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N Al 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 1 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 50.0 G= G= G= G= 30.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= Y= IY= IY= 5 Y= Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 025 Cycle Length, Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 1003 1306 120 Lane group capacity, c 1263 1945 547 v/c ratio, X 0.79 0.67 0.22 Total green ratio, g/C 0.56 0.56 0.33 Uniform delay, d 15.9 14.2 21.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.34 0.24 0.11 Incremental delay, d 3.6 0.9 0.2 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 19.5 15.1 21.8 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc r� • Lane group LOS I B I B C Approach delay 19.5 15.1 21.8 Approach LOS B B C Intersection delay 17.2 X = 0.58 Intersection LOS B 11052000rm Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version J.Ie Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CON SUMMARY C,Pn PYAI Infnrmatinn ISite Information • M • • East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 NB Ramp Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments Movement Ir I ntersection Route 622 & Route 37 NB Ram A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Judi diction L Date Performed 01124105 A nalysis Year 2 010 Build -out Conditions A nalysis Time Period A M Peak Hour 119 591 0 M • • East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 NB Ramp Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments Movement 1 2 3 4 5 1 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 119 591 0 0 136 519 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 125 622 0 0 143 546 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P 3 3 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 30 0 196 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 31 0 206 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration LTR Control Dela , Queue Len th, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 125 237 Capacity, c (vph) 901 379 c ratio 0.14 0.63 Queue length (95 %) 0.48 4.07 Control Delay (s /veh) 9.6 29.1 LOS A D pproach delay (s /veh) 29.1 Approach LOS D IICS20007M Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4.1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY I Information Site Information • • Am A nalyst PHR + Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection urisdiction nalvsis Year ute 622 & Route 37 NB m 10 Build -out Conditions Pro'ect D lion Willow Run Phase 2 East West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37NB Ramp ntersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 60 754 0 0 250 887 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 63 793 0 0 263 933 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 1 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R Upstream Signal 0 f 1 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 1 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 149 0 186 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 156 0 195 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 FIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration LTR Control Delay, Queue Len th, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 63 351 Capacity, c (vph) 580 165 c ratio 0.11 2.13 Queue length (95 %) 0.36 27.96 Control Delay (s /veh) 12.0 572.4 LOS B F A pproach delay (s /veh) 572.4 Approach LOS F HCS2006FM Copyright © 2W3 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Version 4 1d • 0 • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Im rovements Volume and Timingr Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group LT T R LTR Volume, V (vph) 119 591 136 519 30 0 196 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, I j 2.0 j 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 150 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 1 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 1 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 1 08 Timing G= 55.0 IG = G= JG= I G= 25.0 G I G JG= Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 747 143 388 238 Lane group capacity, c 1029 1127 958 449 vie ratio, X 0.73 0.13 0.41 0.53 Total green ratio, g/C 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.28 Uniform delay, d 12.2 7.4 9.0 27.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.29 0.11 0.11 0.13 Incremental delay, d 2.6 0.1 0.3 1.2 Initiai queue delay, d Control delay 14.8 74 9.3 28.7 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • / 1 �J Lane group LOS 8 A A C Approach delay 14.8 8.8 28.7 Approach LOS 8 A C Intersection delay 14.9 X = 0.66 Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000` o Copyright 02000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • 0 • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build-out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Im rovements Volume and Timinq Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group LT T R LTR Volume, V (vph) 60 754 250 887 149 0 186 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 10.0 1 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 250 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade )' Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 1 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 50.0 JG= G= JG= G= 30.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 857 263 671 353 Lane group capacity, c 978 1025 871 556 v/c ratio, X 0.88 0.26 0.77 0.63 Total green ratio, g/C 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.33 Uniform delay, d 173 10.4 15.5 25.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.40 0.11 0.32 0.22 Incremental delay, d 9.0 0.1 4.3 2.4 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 26.4 10.5 19.8 27.8 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • 0 Lane group LOS I C I B 8 C Approach delay 26.4 17.2 27.8 Approach LOS C B C Intersection delay 22.6 X� = 0.79 Intersection LOS C 11052000Th' Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 11 • LJ 11CS2000'M Copyright 02003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Intersection Route 622 & Route Ram 37 SB A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction Date Performed 01124105 A nalysis Year 2 010 Build -out Conditions nal sis Time Period A M Peak Hour Project Descri tion Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 SB Ramp Intersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 145 68 119 47 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 152 71 125 49 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 3 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 566 1 127 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 595 1 133 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 0 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration I LTR Control Delay. Queue Len th, Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 125 729 Capacity, c (vph) 1340 539 /c ratio 0.09 1.35 Queue length (95 %) 0.31 32.23 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.0 192.8 LOS A F Approach delay (s /veh) 192.8 pproach LOS F 11CS2000'M Copyright 02003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • CI HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Intersection Route 622 & Route Ram 37 SB A nalyst PHR + Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction Date Performed 01124105 I PM A nalysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions A nalysis Time Period Peak Hour Project Descri lion Willow Run Phase 2 East West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 SB Ramp ntersection Orientation: East -West P tudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 4 5 6 L T L T R Volume veh /h 0 79 R R 189 211 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 83 198 222 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 3 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 0 0 736 4 181 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 774 4 190 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 0 3 3 3 3 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR Control Dela , Queue Len th, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 198 968 Capacity, c (vph) 1389 367 c ratio 0.14 2.64 Queue length (95 %) 0.50 79.68 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.0 767.2 LOS A F A pproach delay (s /veh) 767.2 Approach LOS F HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 • • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Im rovement; Volume and Timing Input EB W8 NS SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane group TR LT LT R Volume, V (vph) 145 68 119 47 566 1 127 Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 10,0 1 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 02 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 33.0 G= G= G= G= 47.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 225 174 597 134 Lane group capacity, c 647 370 918 819 We ratio, X 0.35 0.47 0.65 0.16 Total green ratio, g/C 0.37 0.37 0.52 0.52 Uniform delay, d 20.7 21.8 15.6 11.2 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0,11 0.11 0.23 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.3 0.9 1.6 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 21.0 22.8 172 11.3 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • Lane group LOS C C B B Approach delay 21.0 22.8 16.1 Approach LOS C C B Intersection delay 18.1 X = 0.58 Intersection LOS B HCS2000" Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Ic Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • lJ • HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 01124105 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes. N 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane group TR LT LT R Volume, V (vph) 79 93 189 211 736 4 181 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A I A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 12.0 2.0 12.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 1 02 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 37.0 G= G= G= G= 43.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 181 421 779 191 Lane group capacity, c 703 516 839 749 vie ratio, X 0.26 0.82 0.93 0.26 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.41 0.48 0.48 Uniform delay, d 17.5 23.5 22.1 14.0 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.36 0.44 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 9.8 16.4 0.2 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 17.6 33.3 38.5 14.2 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • Lane group LOS I g C D 8 Approach delay 17.6 33.3 33.7 Approach LOS 8 C C Intersection delay 31,7 X = 0.88 Intersection LOS C HCS2000 Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, NI Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc \J C • HCS2000TM Copyright 02003 University of Florida, All Rights Reservec Version 4_Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information ntersection Jubal Early Dr & Spine Road A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A urisdiction Date Performed nal sis Time Period 01124105 I AM Peak Hour nal sis Year 010 Build -out Conditions Pro ect Descri tion Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Jubal Earl Drive North /South Street: Spine Road Intersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 183 119 24 97 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 192 125 25 102 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 3 Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 1 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 127 0 45 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 133 0 47 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 25 180 Capacity, c (vph) 1237 672 c ratio 0.02 0.27 Queue length (95 %) 0.06 1.08 Control Defay (s /veh) 8.0 12.3 LOS A B A pproach delay (s /veh) 12.3 Approach LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright 02003 University of Florida, All Rights Reservec Version 4_Id Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 0 • TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Intersection Jubal Early Dr & Spine Road A nal y st PHR + Ag enc y /Co. PHR +A I PM Jurisdiction Date Performed 01124105 A nalysis Year 2 010 Build -out Conditions nal sis Time Period Peak Hour Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 - Scenario #3 EastiWest Street: Jubal Early Drive North /South Street: Spine Road Intersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 0 277 242 56 330 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 291 254 58 347 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P 0 3 Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 1 1 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 195 0 42 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 205 0 44 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Dela , Queue Len th, Level of Service A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Volume, v (vph) 58 249 Capacity, c (vph) 1019 446 We ratio 0.06 0.56 Queue length (95 %) 0.18 3.34 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.7 22.8 LOS A C A pproach delay (s /veh) 22.8 A pproach LOS C IICS2000 M Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information Site Information A nalyst PHR +A A gency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 03/25/05 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour romi Rt 621 /Juba) Early or [�nalvsis ighway New Jubal Early Drive unsdiction Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Input Data _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Shouldet',ridth It r-. Class I highway F Class II highway Terrain �` .F' Rollin Level u g Two -way hourly volume 349 veh/h Directional split 65 / 35 Peak hour factor, PHF 0.95 No passing zone 0 Shoe With Isrow %Trucks and Buses P 3 % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 8 �— Lone vvidth tt —� Lane width ._ It Sheuldol Wdth — — It segment length. Lr - __..._ mi A verage Travel Speed G rade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1,7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f fHV= 1 /(1 +PT(ET1) +PR(ER1)) 0.979 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF f f 375 highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 244 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S mi /h bsermc! volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS = SFM +0.00776(Vt / f ) 48.0 mi/h Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Nei. for lane width and shoulder witltha, fLS (Exhibit 20 -5) A dj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f LS f A) 50. mm 0.0 mi /h 2. mi /h 48. mm A dj. for no- passing zones, I ( mi/h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 A verage travel speed, ATS ( mi /h) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v -f 45.1 Percent Time-Spent-Followin G rade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -1 D) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f HV fHv l/ (1+ P 1) +P 1)) 0.987 T wo-way flow rate v (pc/h) v =V/ (PHF' f f 368 highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 239 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF(%) BPTSF= 100(1 -e 0 .00067ev 27.6 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 0.8 Percent time - spent- following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f a,P 28.4 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class II C V olume to capacity ratio we v /c =V /3,200 0.12 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh- mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- unit VMT =V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT VMT15 /ATS 0.0 Notes terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v >= 1,700 pc /h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • E L J HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET Genera/ Information ISife Information A nalyst PHR +A A gency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 03/25/05 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour rom/To Rt 621 /Juba) Early Dr [Analysis ighway New Jubal Early Drive urisdiction Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Input Data Shoulder .c"It, it F Class I highway Class II highway Terrain rl Level Rolling Two way hourly volume 706 veh /h Directional split 55/45 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No passing zone 0 Shure. Garth Arrow %Trucks and Buses, P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 2 Lunc itllh At Lanc ridth It _ Shouldee clil _ _ it r Segment length, L mi Average Travel Speed G rade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 12 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f Hv f,v =1/ (1+ P I) +P 1)) 0.994 T wo-way flow rate v fpc/h) v =V/ (PHF' f f 748 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 411 Free Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S mi /h O bserved volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS= S +0.00776(Vd i 59.5 mi /h Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder width3, fus (Exhibit 20 -5) A dj. for access points, t (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FPS (FSS= BFFS -i W 60.0 mi/h 0.0 mUh 0.5 mi/h 59. mi/h A dj. for no- passing zones, f, ( rl (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 A verage travel speed, ATS ( mi/h) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v -f 53.7 Percent Time-Spent-Followin G rade Adjustment factor, f� (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, fHv fHv =1 / (1+ P 1) +P 1)) (.997 T wo-way flow rate v hoc /h) v =V/ (PHIL ' f i 745 v ' highest directional split proportion pc/h) 410 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1 -e 0.000879v 48.0 A dj. for directional distribution and no passing zone, i dfh ( %)(Exh. 20 - 12) 0.0 Percent time - spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF= BPTSF +f a/o 480 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class 11 B V olume to capacity ratio v/c v /c =V / 3,200 0.23 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh- mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- mil VMT =V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT TT VMT, /ATS 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pc/h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v 1,700 pc /h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. Patton HafTis Rust & Associates, Pc 0 E • TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General information ISite Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 03/25/05 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour rom/To Route 622 /Breckenridge Lane [Analys[s ighway Route 621 urisdiction Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Input Data Shoulder si ith it r Class I highway F Class II highway Terrain I Level Rolling Two way hourly volume 691 veh /h Directional split 55145 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 0 Shm tludh ?frnry % Trucks and Buses , P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ ml 5 Lone ;ndth it - - Lane. width It Should-[ width _- it Segm ern length, 4 m Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.2 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f 1 / (1+ P 1) +P 1)) 0'994 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF f f HV ) 732 v ' highest directional split proponion (pc/h) 403 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S mi /h Observed volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS= S +0.00776(V ) f 48.8 mi /h Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder weth f (Exhibit 20 -5) Adj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -1 f LS A) 50.0 ril 0.0 mVh 1.3 mi /h 48.8 mi/h Adj. for no- passing zones, f, ( mi /h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 Average travel speed, ATS ( mi/h) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v -f 43.1 Percent Time -S ent- Followin Grade Adjustment factor, I. (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, fHV fHV 1 /(1 +P 1) +P 1) ) 0.997 T wo-way flow rate v (pc/h) v =V/ (PHF' f O ' f 730 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc/h) 402 Base percent time - spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1 -e o.00087ev 47.4 Adj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f a /n ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 0.0 Percent time- spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF= BPTSF +f e/n 47.4 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class If D Volume to capacity ratio vie v /c =u o / 3,200 0.23 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh- mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- mil VMT V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT VMT 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pc /h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v >= 1,700 pc /h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000TM Copyright© 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, PC • • 0 TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information ISite Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 03/25/05 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour rom/To Route 622 /Breckinridge Lane [Analysis ighway Route 621 urisdiction Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Input Data _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — _ _ — _ _ _ _ — _ Shoulder "rldth It r'. Class I highway r Class II highway Terrain F Level r Rolling Two -way hourly volume 1296 veh/h Directional split 55/45 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 100 Show 1lorlh Arrow %Trucks and Buses , P 3 % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 3 Lane width It Lane width It ft Segment length, l mi A verage Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.1 Passenger - car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, fHV f 1 /(1 +P +P 0.997 Two-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' f f HV ) 1368 v ' highest directional split proportion focal 752 Free Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S min bserved volume, V, veh /h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS = S +0.00776(Vd f HV ) 53.0 mi /h Base free - flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder width f (Exhibit 20 -5) dj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free flow speed, FFS (FSS =BFFS -f fA) 55.0 pull 0.0 mill 2. mil 53.0 mi/h Adj. for no- passing zones, f ( mi/h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 1.8 Average travel speed, ATS ( mi/h) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v -f 40.6 Percent rime-Spent-Followin Grade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger - car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Passenger - car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, fHV fHV-l/ (1+ P T (E T 1) +P 1) ) 1.000 Two-way flow rater, v (pc h) v =V/ (PHF' f f 1364 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 750 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF(%) BPTSF= 100(1- e-- 0.0o0979vP) 69.8 Adj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f wh ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 8.4 Percent time- spent- following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f dmo 78.3 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class 10 D Volume to capacity ratio v/c v /c =V / 3,200 0.43 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh- mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- mil VMT =V'L, 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT 15 (veh -h) TT VMT15/ATS 0.0 Notes terminate analysis the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v >- 1,700 corn, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000TM Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • Cl C_J TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information ISite Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 03/25/05 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour roni Route 622 /Juba) Early Dr Inalysis ighway Route 621 unsdiction Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Input Data Shoulder midUt ft. F Class I highway F Class II highway Terrain F Level F Rolling Two -way hourly volume 328 veh/h Directional split 63/37 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 0 Show Nutlh,gru v % Trucks and Buses , P 3 %Recreational vehicles, P 3 Access paints/ mi 4 Lane ridth At Lane width idth _ It _ _ _ _ Shotd _ __ 11 Segment length, l mi Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger - car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 Passenger - car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f HV f HV = 1 /(1 +P T (E T 1) +P 0.979 Two-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PEE * f f HV ) 353 c ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 222 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed, S mi /h bserved volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed, FFS FFS = S +0.00776(V / 1 49.0 mi /h Base free - flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder widths, f LS (Exhibit 20 -5) Adj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -t t LS A) 50.0 mi /h 0. mUh 1 mi /h 49. mi/h Adj. for no- passing zones, t r ip ( tri (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 Average travel speed, ATS (mi /h) ATS= FFS- 0.00776v -f 46.3 Percent Time-Spent-Followin Grade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger - car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger - car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f HV f HV -1/ (1+ P 1) +P 1) j 0.997 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' f 0 ' f HV ) 346 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc/h) 218 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1- e- 0.000879vP) 26.2 Adj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f d/h ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 0.9 Percent time - spent- following, PTSF( %) PTSF= BPTSF +f d/n 27.1 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class II C Volume to capacity ratio we v /c =V /3,200 0.11 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travc,VMT (veh - mi) 'JMT 0.25L,(V /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh- mi) VMT V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT15(veh -h) TT15= VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pe/h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v 1,700 pc /h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc • • • TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information ISite Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 9/20/2004 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour rom/To Route 622 /Juba) Early Dr [Analvsis ighway Route 621 urisdiction Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Want Data _._ _ _ - _ - _ - - _ ShOUl'I" th i[. r. Class I highway F Class II highway Terrain &? Level s' Rolling Two -way hourly volume 360 veh/h Directional split 60/40 Peak hour factor, PHF 0.95 No passing zone 0 Show Wril Arrow %Trucks and Buses , P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 4 It } Lane. rridih __ It Should ?r :udth _ If Segment length, L, mi Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 Passenger car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, fHV f 1 /(1 +P +P 0.979 T wo-way flow rate v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' f f 387 i ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 232 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Field Measured speed., SFM mi /h Observed volume, V veh /h Free -flow speed, FPS FFS= S +0.00776(V / f 1 49.0 mi /h Base free flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder widths, f (Exhibit 20 -5) Adj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS =BFFS -f fA) 50.0 mi /h 0.0 mi /h 1.0 mi /h 49.0 mVh A ct. for no- passing zones, f ( mi/h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 Average travel speed, ATS ( mi /h) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v -i 46.0 Percent Tine-Spent-Following Grade Adjustment factor, G (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f HV f11/ (1+ 11) + P (E 1) ) 0.997 Two way flow rate v (pi v =V/ (PHF' fG' TV) 380 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 228 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF(%) BPTSF= 100(1 -e 0.000979v 28.4 Adj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f wh ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 0.6 Percent time - spent - fallowing, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f mn 29.0 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS i Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class II C Volume to capacity ratio v/c v/c =V / 3,200 0.12 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh- mi) VMT 025L /PHF) 0 Peak -hour vehicle -miles of travel, VMT (veh - mi) VMT =V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT15(veh -h) TT15= VMT 0.0 Notes 1. If v >= 3,200 pc /h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. IT highest directional split v 1,700 pc/h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000TM Copyright (D 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d Patton Harris Rust & Associates, PC ppB�gBq Jr- Movement � ary � ak tl 7 ear �`�� & associates aaTraffic SIDRA • Willow Run Peak Hour 1 Roundabout Vehicle Movements • All Vehicles 724 4790 0.164 5.4 LOS A 28 0.74 34.5 193 T: \Projects \12883 -1 -0 (Willow Run) \Willow Run (12883 -1 -0) from P- Drive \HCS \HT Working Files\ HCS_03 -25- OS_Phase#2\AM Produced by aaSIDRA 2.0.1.206 Copyright© 2000 -2002 Akcel & Associate Pty Ltd Generated 4/4/2005 4:45:40 PM 11 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 95070 Dem Flow Cap Deg of Aver Level of Back of Eff. Stop Aver Open Mov No Turn (veh /h) (veh /h) Satin Delay Service Q Rate Speed Cost (v /c) (sec) (mi /h) ($ /h) South Approach 32 L 109 1218 0.126 11.7 LOS B 23 1.19 30.6 47 32 R 44 1218 0.126 11.7 LOS B 23 1.19 30.6 47 Approach 153 1218 0.126 23.4 LOS B 23 2.39 30.6 95 East Approach 22 L 14 1617 0.155 4.1 LOS A 26 0.66 35.2 64 22 T 236 1617 0.155 4.1 LOS A 26 0.66 35.2 64 Approach 250 1617 0.155 4.1 LOS A 26 0.66 35.2 64 West Approach 12 T 277 1955 0.164 3.4 LOS A 28 0.59 36.4 82 12 R 44 1955 0.164 3.4 LOS A 28 0.59 36.4 82 Approach 321 1955 0.164 3.4 LOS A 28 0.59 36.4 82 • All Vehicles 724 4790 0.164 5.4 LOS A 28 0.74 34.5 193 T: \Projects \12883 -1 -0 (Willow Run) \Willow Run (12883 -1 -0) from P- Drive \HCS \HT Working Files\ HCS_03 -25- OS_Phase#2\AM Produced by aaSIDRA 2.0.1.206 Copyright© 2000 -2002 Akcel & Associate Pty Ltd Generated 4/4/2005 4:45:40 PM 11 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc � z Mo vement Summary akcelik & associates aaTraffic SIDRA ;• Willow Run Peak Hour 1 Roundabout Vehicle Movements T: \Projects \12883 -1 -0 (Willow Run) \Willow Run (12883 -1 -0) from P- Drive \HCS \HT Working Files\ H CS_03 -25- 05_Phase #2 \PM Produced by aaSIDRA 2.0.1.206 Copyright© 2000 -2002 Akcelik & Ass Pt Ltd Generated 4/4/2005 4:46:08 PM 0 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc 95% Deg of Aver Aver Oper Dem Flow cap Level of Back of Eff . Stop Mov No Turn Satn Delay Speed Cost (veh /h) (veh /h) (v /c) (sec) Service Queue Rate (mi /h) ($ /h) (ft) South Approach 32 L 111 1006 0.137 14.5 LOS B 29 1.30 29.4 44 32 R 27 1006 0.137 14.5 LOS B 29 1.30 29.4 44 Approach 138 1006 0.137 29.0 LOS B 29 2.59 29.4 88 East Approach 22 L 47 1738 0.335 4.3 LOS A 67 0.69 35.0 151 22 T 537 1738 0.335 4.3 LOS A 67 0.69 35.0 151 Approach 583 1738 0.336 4.3 LOS A 67 0.69 35.0 151 West Approach 12 T 521 1890 0.353 3.7 LOS A 77 0.62 35.8 170 12 R 146 1890 0.353 3.7 LOS A 77 0.62 35.8 170 Approach 667 1890 0.353 3.7 LOS A 77 0.62 35.8 170 • All Vehicles 1388 4634 0.353 5.0 LOS A 77 0.72 34.6 365 T: \Projects \12883 -1 -0 (Willow Run) \Willow Run (12883 -1 -0) from P- Drive \HCS \HT Working Files\ H CS_03 -25- 05_Phase #2 \PM Produced by aaSIDRA 2.0.1.206 Copyright© 2000 -2002 Akcelik & Ass Pt Ltd Generated 4/4/2005 4:46:08 PM 0 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc