Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout16-05 Traffic Impact Analysis (2)Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc Engineers. Surveyors. Planners, Landscape Architects. P TT�--{TTT A 300 Foxcoff kenw, Suite200 1__l + ` M 304 64,2711 U�rcyrra25401 Memorandum To: 0 rgan ization /Company: From: Date: Project Name /Subject: PHR +A Project file Number: cc: Lloyd Ingram VDOT- I3dinburg Michael Glickman. Julv 12, 2005 Alternative Bulld -out Scenario for: A Phased Tig6Cu Impact Anrrllnis of lVilloiv Rirn elated April 2005 12883 -1 -0 D Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc (PFIR +A) has prepared this document as an update to the report titled: A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run by PHR +A, dated April 2005. The propose of this memorandum is to provide analyses for an Alternative Build -out Scenario that would occur should the City of Winchester not allow the applicant to connect with Jabal Early Drive. Per this scenario, primary access would be provided via the intersection of Willow Run Drive /Cedar Creek Grade and secondary access would be provided via the intersection of Minor Spine Road/Cedar Creek Grade. The total Alternative Build -out development includes: 850 units of residential and 10,000 square feet of office. Analyses are provided for 2010 D background and 2010 build -out conditions. PHR +A will also submit, upon your request, an "all encompassing" report that incorporates the information providing the April 2005 study as well as the analyses relating to the Alternative Build -out Scenario included in this memorandum. D 2010 Alternative Build -out Analyses D In order to accommodate the projected 2010 traffic volumes. PHR +A assumed the following infrastructure improvements: D ° The completion of an East -West Internal Roadway (Jabal Early Drive Extended in the April 2005 report) that will connect the Willow Run development with Merimans Lane. The completion of Willow Run Drive from the East -West Internal Roadway to Cedar Creek Grade. The completion of the Minor Spine Road from East -West Internal Roadway to Cedar Creek Grade. The completion of the Orchard Hill Drive Extended to provide an internal connection to Harvest Drive. 1 D Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc An Update to: A Phased Tragic Impact Analwzr oLWillow Run dated April 2005 Memorandum Page 2 2010 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS PHR +A utilized the 2010 background traffic volumes from the April 2005 report titled: A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run by PHR +A, as a basis for the revised volumes published in this report. The following reiterates the methodology utilized in the April 2005 traffic study: ' 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 WWW Property by PHR +A, dated ' December 5, 2002. 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. The total 2010 background traffic conditions were determined by summating the existing traffic volumes (as included in the April 2005 draft report), the annual growth through Year 2010 and all other future background development trip assignments. Figure 1 shows the 2010 background ADT and AMIPM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 2 shows the corresponding 2010 background lane geometry and levels of service. HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are provided in the appendix section of this memorandum. TRIP GENERATION Based upon the 7 edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Resort PHR +A has prepared Table 1 to summarize the trip generation for the proposed Willow Run Alternative Build -out development. Table 1 Alternative Build -out Scenario: Willow Run Trin Generation Summary ITE Land Use Amount Code AM Peak our I PM Peak Hour ADT Total In Out Total 210 Single Family Detached 573 units 411 325 191 516 5,730 230 Single Family Attached 192 units Z103308 87 69 34 103 1,670 251 Elderly Housing Detached 85 units 24 27 17 44 472 710 Office 10 000 SF 30 15 75 90 227 Total 552 436 317 752 8,099 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc An Update to: A Phased Traffic Impact Analy t of Willow Run dated April 2005 Memorandum Page 3 260(386) 1000(1895) X1029(1657 1 (276)727.0 Route 50 t 1"306(808) ) 10 74)1288► `86( 1 051)1509.. w Route 0 4 -� 4 M o • No Scale • � ° 2 &I . w 6 h e n F �- o 0 (21 9 (520)720°'% e %.60(58) �4 X779(1631) b -^� Route 5 S 1178(213) 4 h° 0 (124 (331)13 go 0 621 N n tG 1�> £x21(23) {� m Handley Ave `` t/�.In�emyl � •.� 1 ti.�Road N i- Q i ••• i S 1 • � of ^ � ti ti ^ . vie SITE FFroc 3, a; Ofc 1 ^ ( 2Zl � 009488 Eel h q ) 6I '��A S 1 374 qgs I G1 �b�\ CO 37 68(137) 'fro (47)68�r Xjoy 1146) %..32(84) i 622 (80g)943� 4 --52(172) x79022) Ce '�C,reek (19)28 6 8)71 } }} de (4)16 w �� GVA y ^ C b$ ti x...519(88 75(154) 036(197) (60)119 oute 622 x58(92) ( (79)145 Route 622 n o (75)63 —% AM s� Peak HOur(PM Peak Hour) PH+ .. _. ,. Figure 1 Alternative Build -out Scenario: 2010 Background Traffic Conditions Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc An Update to: A phased Traffic Import Analvris of Willow 1� a dated Apri12005 Memorandum Page 4 Unsignalized Inlerseetim Signalized Signalized R Intersection Intersection Los = C(C) G� �� Los =C(C) C(C) �J �[ C(C) Route 50 �+ �r ..� Signalized . f a Route 50 - .0 Pa Intersection (B)B LOS =6(C) No Seal gelP A(D) (C)n.i► G % 4� Ln Two -Lane Roadway LOS= C(C) z Q * (B)B � Ilnsignalized Intezeclion i o Figure 2 r • it Or • ti; • 3 • °r Tzl SITE ell of r I Grad gr Unsignalized Intersection B(C) 4 4— C(C) �r �§ s� Signalized Inlors Lion LOS = C(D) (b t) Intersection * 4 Unsignalized mtersedlon Denotes Free -Flow Lane * Denotes critical unsignalized movement AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Alternative Build -out Scenario: 2010 Background LOS (NOTE: SEE FIGURE 2a FOR SUGGESTED IMPI Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc An Update to: A Phased Tragic Zm ac2 Analvas of Willow Bun dated April 2005 622 4— A(A) G F y V� Signalized , Intersection h LOS =B(B) No Seal Ln �` =mot Road a; ` 3 z ` � G t arc SITE �l t 1 I coo o de Signalized Intersection LOS = B(C) 0 4 Memorandum Page 5 G� t Uba2 r'y dr �e Jr Signalized lnleeseclion LOS = C(C) AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Figure 2a Alternative Build -out Scenario: 2010 Background LOS (Suggested Improvements) Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc An Update to: A Phased Tra{rc Im a t Analysis o(II'/illow Run dated April 2005 Memorandum Page 6 I TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENTS The assumptions regarding the distribution of Willow Run development trips remain consistent with those determined for the April, 2005 draft report. PHR +A utilized the trip distribution percentages shown in Figure 3 to assign the revised Willow Run trips (Table 1) throughout the study area roadway network. Figure 4 shows corresponding development - generated AMIPM peak hour trips and ADT assignments. 2010 ALTERNATIVE BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS The Willow Run assigned trips (Figure 4) were added to the 2010 background traffic volumes (Figure 1) to obtain revised 2010 build -out conditions. Figure 5 shows the 2010 Alternative Build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 6 shows the corresponding 2010 build -out lane geometry and levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this addendum. Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc An Update to: A Phased Traffic LmPactAnalysis of Wlillow Rmn dated April 2005 Memorandum Page 7 t Residential Commercial I Figure 3 Alternative Build -out Scenario: Trip Distribution Percentages Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc An Update to: A Phased Tra zc lm�act Analysis of Willow Run dated April 2005 Memorandum Page 8 x.13(42) X20(12) J� �R So 1 t 13(42) &� (21)6 E Route 0 ,a�aw° o No Scale m o- 04 Be La 4• 13(42) 3 Route 50 0^I3(42) (yg40 � o N" P ~ .I�Z �d e 621 L b o V 1 �<f " c A r by (23) Handley Ave 8261 1 (1 ggjla �► X34(107). � �Ir zeeival l2oed Iss20(12), ,q b 'b SITE «� g � 3 el ...heF; � ���4(43) 37 C r Y ` ~ � s D 4.50(150) 622 (100)139...o !1 1— f _ dai Cteek . (22)8../ Ce Gra a 0► u 820)2 �1 !�„� 1®34(107) ne - 8..,160(134) j Creek 4 X40(43) �c 68)9 �� . 'Grade V / Route V4L o W l 840(43) ( �► Route 622 ° a AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) a e P + 0 New Intersection H Figure 4 Alternative Build -out Scenario: Development- Generated Trip Assignments Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc An Update to: A Phased Tragic Imtacl Analysis of Villmv Rtes dated April 2005 Memorandum Page 9 260(386) 4..1012(1937) 4-10 (276'27...I' Route 50 t e- 318(850) / ]07 4)1288vy j 8 6 1051 ) 1 509-0 a Route 50 -. C m "+ ° No Scale �20(jjg (541)726- �. �4n ti � q�ry 4 . er °c'Fuyd�) X60(58 4w- 79](1673) N S0 Route i Or 191(255) (59A 1m ,. C126 1 8)� b (331) w � 4� N N t � � �M hp �p 1� 4) Bre /Rd 621 °LR EL ry lr b N 71(60) y E x21(23) X9(23 1 Handley Ave 3 as (7q(200) 0(0)) r *' , ®.457(1213) . O~ e o Road go `^O ryy ry� Cree_ yyr� Gtade'.:> Sl l 3 a (886)101 y c y 80 �1% *' 3 (3) 'Vt��� 1 �zs(s3 2) z) 37 5� �b�y �� b _ j X68(131) (47 4 418(1 29 6) (908')"') •� 'L.32(84) 622 �► ,11 4 52(172, 179(122) Creek 0 ad (41 )36.../ ■♦ j� ��Csrade - .� a C ~ 0(0) 0 0 • .. '. �, i�471(130 1; Creek '`678(1021) ♦..11519 �► X923)1 b x.36(197) (60)119 S Route 622 Jh e �9 8(135) (79)1454 Route 622: o a 75)63 gyp, a� ° AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) T + Q New Intersection H Figure 5 Alternative Build -out Scenario: 2010 Build -out Traffic Conditions Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc An Update to: A Phased Traffic Impact Anal m of Willow Run dated April 2005 Memorandum Page 10 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc An Update to: A Phased Tra,�ic Wart Analysis of billow Awn dated April 2005 Memorandum Page 11 G G 1 621 B(C) 3t� Signalized l ate rsection (C) �� G LOS =QQ X11 G Unsignalized f nd f Intersection /� Lp Signalized Intersection LOS — Wrl `l No Scal ✓U�� G� 37 0 3 SITE S e m V Signalized Inlersedion 622 LOS = QQ Ce�T Creek o de Rt 622 L A(B) (c)B 4 q `' Signalized Intersection � r cos =sle1 AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) * Denotes critical unsignalized movement Figure 6a Alternative Build -out Scenario: 2010 Build -out LOS (Suggested Improvements) Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc An Update to: A Phased Trq it lrtact Analysis of Willow Run dated April 2005 Memorandum Page 12 1 CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the Willow Run 2010 Alternative Build -out Scenario are acceptable and manageable. 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. As shown in Figure 6, 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 2010 Alternative Build -out Scenario (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 build -out condition. PHR +A has provided Figures 2a and 6a to show "suggested improvement measures" for 2010 background and build -out conditions, respectively. Proffered Transportation Improvement Program • Completion of a half - section of Jubal Early Drive from the roundabout 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 Jubal 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. HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR + A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas J J Analysis Year Con Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH RT LT TH FIT 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 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 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 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 1 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 25.0 G= 32.0 G= JG= I G= 18.0 G= G i y= JG= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= ly= IY= 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 FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT Adjusted flow rate, v 765 1356 1053 353 0 Lane group capacity, c 945 3364 1736 681 369 v/c 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 28.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.35 0.11 0.19 1 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 Lane group LOS D A C C I C Approach delay 16.8 24.4 32.8 Approach LOS B C C Intersection delay 20.7 X = 0.65 Intersection LOS C HCS2000rM Copyright 9 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Info rmation Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 Time Period PM 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 1 Volume and Timing 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 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 I 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 1 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 F 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= Y= 5 Y= IY= 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 FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 291 1131 1995 600 0 Lane group capacity, c 416 3147 2279 832 451 v/c 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, d 37.9 7.4 21.6 31.2 25.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.27 0.11 0.40 0.28 0.11 Incremental delay, d 5.2 1 0.1 1 4.2 1 3.1 0.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 43.1 7.5 t25 34.3 25.7 Lane group LOS D A C C Approach delay 14.8 25.8 34.3 Approach LOS e C C Intersection delay 23.2 X = 0.80 Intersection LOS C i HCS2000TM Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR + A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 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 1 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH FIT LT I TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT 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, 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, 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 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing I WB Only 7hru Only 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 8.5 G= 32.3 G= I G= G= 34.2 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= 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 FIT LT TH FIT LT TH I FIT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 1588 322 1083 532 Lane group capacity, c 1752 321 1737 668 v/c ratio, X 0.91 1.00 0.62 0.80 Total green ratio, g/C 0.36 0.09 0.51 0.38 Uniform delay, d 27.4 40.8 15.9 1 1 1 124.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.43 1 0.34 Incremental delay, d 7.2 51.0 1 0.7 6.7 Initial queue delay, d Control delay t347 91.8 16.6 31.5 Lane group LOS F B C Approach delay 34.7 33.8 31.5 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 33.9 X� = 0.87 Intersection LOS C I HCS2000TM Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 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 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) 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 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, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 1 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= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= 5 Y= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C 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 1106 851 1744 1 316 Lane group capacity, c 1321 861 1988 527 v/c 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 31.6 15.2 25.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.37 0.49 0.40 1 0.19 Incremental delay, d 4.9 27.7 4.8 1.9 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 34.1 59.3 20.0 273 Lane group LOS C E e C Approach delay 34.1 32.9 27.3 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 32.8 ) Intersection LOS C HC52000TM Copyright 0 2000 University cf Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency/Go. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Breckinridge Ln & Route 621 J urisdiction A nalysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Breckinrid a Lane North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South Stud 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 71 15 332 34 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 74 15 349 35 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 3 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 20 0 86 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 90 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 0 3 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 PIT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Oueue 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) 349 111 C (m) (vph) 1500 721 (c 0.23 0.15 95% queue length 0.90 0.54 Control Delay 8.1 10.9 LOS A B pproach Delay 10.9 [A pproach LOS B Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Copyright O 3003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Vernon 4. Id Version 4.1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Inf ormation Analyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Breckinridge Ln & Route 621 J urisdiction A nalysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Breckinrid a 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 Volume 0 54 8 367 84 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 56 8 386 88 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR Ej LT Upstream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 119 0 482 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 125 0 507 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 LT LR (vph) 386 632 (m) (vph) 1532 672 We 0.25 0.94 95% queue length 1.00 13.10 Control Delay 8.1 46.4 LOS A E [Approach Delay 46.4 pproach LOS E ' Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Copyright 9) 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1d Rights Reserved 11CS2000TM Copyright O 3003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Version 4.Id TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst Agency/Co. Date Performed nalysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 0610212005 AM Peak Hour Intersection Jurisdiction 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 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 Volume 0 229 71 7 230 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 241 74 7 242 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 21 0 71 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 22 0 74 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 L LR (vph) 7 96 C (m) (vph) 1240 712 /c 0.01 0.13 95% queue length 0.02 0.46 Control Delay 7.9 10.8 LOS A B Approach Delay 10.8 pproach LOS B Rights Reserved 11CS2000TM Copyright O 3003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id Version 4.Id Rights Reserved HCS2000"M Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.1 d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 0610212005 PM Peak Hour Intersection alyear Analysis n Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr 2010 Background Conditions roject Description Willow Run Phase 2 ast/West Street: Handle Ave I North /South Street: Jubal Earl Drive tersection 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 0 532 76 48 515 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 560 80 50 542 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 23 0 60 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 24 0 63 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) 50 87 C (m) (vph) 939 355 lc 0.05 0.25 95% queue length 0.17 0.95 Control Delay 9.0 18.4 LOS A C Approach Delay 18.4 pproach LOS C Rights Reserved HCS2000"M Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.1 d HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Jubal Early Dr& Valley Avenue Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 1 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) 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 1 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 I 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 1 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 10.0 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 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 E12. N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 1 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 14.0 I Y= G= 20.0 G= G= G= 6.0 G= 35.0 i y= G= G= Y= 5 5 Y= ly= IY= 5 Y= 5 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 I TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 75 452 331 220 1 84 74 440 314 264 485 Lane group capacity, c 495 718 388 739 512 389 680 891 314 1254 v/c ratio, X 0.15 0.63 0.85 0.30 0.16 0.19 0.65 0.35 0.84 0.39 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.21 0.41 0.21 0.33 0.48 0.37 0.57 0.48 0.37 Uniform delay, d 17.4 34.1 121.4 31.6 22.8 13.8 24.9 111.1 27.5 22.1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 11.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.21 1 0.39 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.22 0.11 0.38 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.1 1 1.8 16.6 1 0.2 0.2 1 0.2 2.2 0.2 18.2 0.2 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 17.5 35.9 322.9 14.0 t1.3 1 45.6 22.3 Lane group LOS 8 D C B 8 D C Approach delay 33.3 33.9 19.9 30.5 Approach LOS C C B C Intersection delay 28.6 X� = 0.76 Intersection LOS C 11CS2000TNI Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version S.le HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610712005 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 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 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 I A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 12.0 1 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 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 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 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 40 0 100 0 0 0 70 Lane width 12.0 12.0 1 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 WB Only EW Perm 04 1 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 1 08 Timing G= 15.6 G= 4.1 G= 17.0 JG= J G= 7.2 G= 26.1 JG= Y= 5 Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB I WB I NB SB LT TH I RT I LT TH I RT I LT TH I RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 128 591 1 515 374 408 1 185 526 360 223 663 Lane group capacity, c 489 650 563 580 269 535 972 222 987 v/c ratio, X 0.26 0.91 0.91 0.70 0.69 0.98 0.37 1.00 0.67 Total green ratio, g/C 0.36 0.19 0.46 0.37 0.43 0.29 0.62 0.43 0.29 Uniform delay, d 19.7 35.7 21.7 L29.5 24.1 18.3 31.7 8.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 W 28.2 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.43 0.43 0.27 0.26 0.49 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.3 16.9 19.7 1 0.4 3.8 1 7.2 34.5 0.2 61.6 1.8 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 20.0 52.6 29.9 28.0 25.5 66.2 8.7 85.0 30.0 Lane group LOS C D E D C C C E A F C Approach delay 46.8 33.9 39.8 43.8 Approach LOS D C D D Intersection delay 40.0 X = 1.05 Intersection LOS D ' HCS2000TM Copyright m 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.,e HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 06102 Time Period AM 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 TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH I Number of lanes, N 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 g R T Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T Volume, V (vph) 71 348 82 314 209 80 70 418 298 251 367 % 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 12.0 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 1 3.0 j 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 j 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 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 1 0 0 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 I Excl. Left I EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 15.0 G= 17.0 G= G= G= 6.0 G= 37.0 G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= 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 I WB NB SB LT TH I RT I LT TH I RT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 75 366 86 331 220 84 440 314 264 386 99 Lane group capacity, c 476 628 281 409 628 462 1368 941 434 1368 611 v/c ratio, X 0.16 0.58 0.31 0.81 0.35 0.18 F 63 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 0.39 0.60 0.51 Uniform delay, d 18.7 35.7 33.9 22.5 34.2 25.0 20.2 9.5 19.5 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 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.17 HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 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 TH 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) 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 I A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1 2.0 12.0 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 1 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 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 10.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 1 0 0 175 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 SB Only NS Perm 08 Timing G= 28.0 G= 22.0 G= G= G= 7.0 G= 4.0 G= 19.0 G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= ly= 1Y= 5 Y= 0 IY= 5 IY= 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 I RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT Adjusted flow rate, v 128 512 121 515 374 329 185 526 360 223 525 212 Lane group capacity, c 662 773 533 605 773 674 284 667 815 354 808 878 v/c ratio, X 0.19 0.66 0.23 0.85 0.48 0.49 0.65 0.79 0.44 0.63 0.65 0.24 Total green ratio, g/C 0.55 0.22 0.34 0.55 0.22 0.43 0.26 0.19 0.52 0.35 0.23 0.56 Uniform delay, d, 11.4 35.6 23.6 19.7 34.0 20.6 33.9 38.6 15.0 25.4 34.9 11.2 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 0.24 0.11 0.38 0.11 0.11 0.23 0.34 0.11 0.21 0.23 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.1 2.1 0.2 11.2 1 0.5 0.6 1 5.2 1 6.3 0.4 1 3.6 1.9 1 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 11.6 37.7 23.8 30.9 34.5 21.1 39.1 44.9 15.3 29.0 36.7 11.3 Lane group LOS B D C C C C D D B C D B Approach delay 31.1 29.4 34.0 29.3 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection delay 30.9 X = 0.88 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 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 1 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 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 I A A A A Start-up lost time, 1 2.0 12.0 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 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 1 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 1 3.2 3.2 1 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 JG= G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 I 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 I TH RT LT I 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 Total green ratio, g/C 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.26 0.42 0.26 Uniform delay, d, 13.8 18.2 14.0 10.4 8.0 6.3 28.1 16.3 25.8 T25.7 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 0.22 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.9 0.1 1.6 1 0.1 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 14.0 19.1 14.2 1 6.3 29.0 16.4 26.0 25.8 Lane group LOS B B B 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 © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 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 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, 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 1 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 A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 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 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 1 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 '12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 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 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 1 04 1 NS Perm 06 I ut 1 08 Timing G= 7.0 1 G= 37.0 G= J G= JG= 31.0 G= G= JG= Y= 0 1Y= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= Y= 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 I RT LT TH I RT LT I TH RT LT I 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 v/c ratio, X 0.71 0.88 0.51 0.97 0.97 0.08 0.94 0.14 0.79 0.37 Total green ratio, g/C 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.36 0.51 0.36 0.36 Uniform delay, d 19.6 22.0 17.4 20.3 19.9 10.3 26.2 11.2 24.1 19.8 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 0.41 0.12 0.48 0.48 0.11 0.46 0.11 0.34 0.11 Incremental delay, d 23.9 1 6.5 0.6 50.5 15.2 0.0 1 33.3 0.1 13.8 0.4 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 43.5 28.5 18.1 70.8 35.1 10.3 59.5 11.3 37.9 20.2 Lane group LOS D C 8 E D 8 E 8 D C Approach delay 26.9 38.4 47.4 28.8 Approach LOS C D D C Intersection delay 34.0 X = 0.96 Intersection LOS C ' 11CS2000Tt"r Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY era[ Information Site Information st PHR +A Cy/Co. PHR +A Performed 0610212005 sis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year ct Description Willow Run Phase 2 Nest Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Rot. ection Orientation: North -South I Study Period cle Volumes and Adjustments te, HFR Vehicle: HFR 1 0 L 79 ).9: 83 3 0 _evel of NB- 1 LTR 1 1541 0.00 0.00 7.3 A 117 ).95 123 1 T 52 0.95 54 3 0 N 0 1 LTR SB 4 LTR 37 1333 0.03 0.09 7.8 A V 7 -0� 2010 Background Conditions ' Rights Reserved HCS2000 Version 4. Id Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d ©�G v0 ' Rights Reserved HCS2000 Version 4. Id Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d v0 —0 �0 t ' Rights Reserved HCS2000 Version 4. Id Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 621 & Route 622 J urisdiction A nalysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 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 Volume 54 63 60 25 64 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 3 Median Type Raised curb R Channelized T 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 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 PT 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 pproach Delay 20.4 13.7 pproach LOS C B Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information a,.,,#,. ascription Willo Street: Route 6 , n Orientation: I Volumes and Intersection urisdiction nalVsis Year Movement PHR +A o. PHR +A ormed D 06/02/2005 ime Period AM Peak Hour ascription Willo Street: Route 6 , n Orientation: I Volumes and Intersection urisdiction nalVsis Year Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (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, 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 ovement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R V olume 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 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) 71 128 Capacity, c (vph) 1091 482 /c ratio 0.07 0.27 Queue length (95 %) 0.21 1.06 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.5 15.1 LOS A C pproach delay (s /veh) 15.1 Approach LOS C TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst PHR + enc /Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 IPM nal sis Time Period Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 a Harvest Drive urisdiction nalvsis Year 1 2010 Background Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Harvest Drive Intersection Orientation: East -West IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments Volume (veh /h) 47 1 808 1 0 1 0 1 1146 1 131 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, PHV 3 3 Median type Raised curb RT 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 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 PIT 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) 504 224 /c ratio 0.10 0.57 Q ueue 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 I TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY r;Pn�nrmatinn [Site Information I I I 1 1 U 1 I 0 1 , _ _ -, - - Route 622 & Route 37 NB TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information A nalyst PHR +A Intersection Route 622 & Route 37 NB Ramp Ag ency/Co. PHR +A J u risdiction Date Performed 0610212005 Analysis Year 010 Background Conditions A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 NB Ram Intersection Orientation: East -West IStudy 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 (ve /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 IT 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 HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Fit 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 I FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT Number of lanes, N, 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group L T 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 I A I A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 12.0 12.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 150 0 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 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 02 03 1 04 1 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 60.0 JG= G= JG= I G= 20.0 G= G= JG= Y= 5 IY= 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 FIT LT TH I FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT Adjusted flow rate, v 125 622 79 388 166 Lane group capacity, c 868 1230 1230 1045 359 v/c ratio, X 0.14 0.51 0.06 0.37 0.46 Total green ratio, g/C 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.22 Uniform delay, d 5.5 7.5 5.2 6.6 130.3 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 0.3 0.0 0.2 1 1 0.9 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 5.6 7.9 5.2 6.9 31.3 Lane group LOS A A A A C Approach delay 7.5 6.6 31.3 Approach LOS A A C Intersection delay 10.1 X = 0.49 Intersection LOS 8 HC12000' M Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le HCS2000" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A y Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Willow Run Phase 2 Project ID (Suggested Improvements) Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH FIT LT TH I FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT Number of lanes, N 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane group L T 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, 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 1 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 1 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 10.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 250 0 1 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 1 3.2 32 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 02 03 1 04 1 NB Only 08 07 08 Timing G= 60.0 G= G JG= I G= 20.0 G= 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 FIT LT I TH FIT LT I TH RT LT TH FIT Adjusted flow rate, v 63 794 162 671 235 Lane group capacity, c 805 1230 1230 1045 377 v/c ratio, X 0.08 0.65 0.13 0.64 0.62 Total green ratio, g/C 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.22 Uniform delay, d 5.3 8.8 5.5 8.7 31.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.22 0.11 0.22 0.21 Incremental delay, d 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.4 1 3.2 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 5.3 10.0 5.5 10.1 34.8 Lane group LOS A A A B C Approach delay 9.6 9.2 34.8 Approach LOS A A C Intersection delay 12.5 X� = 0.64 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information A nalyst PHR +A Intersection Route 622 & Route 37 SB Ram Ag ency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction Date Performed A nalysis Time Period 0610212005 AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 37 SB Ram 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) 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 1 61 37 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHV 0 3 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 1 1 1 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 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 V olume 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 A pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR V olume, v (vph) 61 729 Capacity, c (vph) 1346 669 /c ratio 0.05 1.09 Queue length (95 %) 0.14 1 1 20.70 Control Delay (s /veh) 7.8 85.8 LOS A F Approach delay (s /veh) 85.8 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information 1 A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour ' Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 ' Intersection Orientation: East -West ©� V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement 1 L Volume (veh /h) 0 ' Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, P 0 Median type Channelized? ' FIT Lanes 0 Configuration Signal ' Upstream Minor Street Movement 7 L ' Volume veh/h) 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 Proportion of heavy 3 v ehicles, PHV ' Percent grade ( %) Flared approach Storage FIT Channelized? - Lanes 0 0000 Configuration Control Delay. Queue Len th, Level of Si A pproach EB Movement ' Lane Configuration V olume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) /c ratio Queue length (95 %) ' Control Delay (s /veh) LOS A pproach delay (s /veh) Intersection J urisdiction nalvsis Year Route 37 Background &IJ J �00 ©� J ©000 -0 - - 0000 � r I 1 1 1 1 1 HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 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 FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 Lane group TR LT L TR 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, 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, 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 18 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 1 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 EW Perm 02 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 34.0 G= G= G= G= 46.0 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 FIT LT TH RT LT TH FIT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 200 99 596 135 Lane group capacity, c 675 525 895 802 v/c ratio, X 0.30 0.19 0.67 0.17 Total green ratio, g/C 0.38 0.38 0.51 0.51 Uniform delay, d 19.6 18.8 16.3 11.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.24 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 1 0.2 1.9 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 19.9 18.9 18.2 11.9 Lane group LOS B B B B Approach delay 19.9 18.9 17.0 Approach LOS B B B Intersection delay 17.8 X = 0.51 Intersection LOS B 1 HC"000'M Copyright G 200 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 h 1 [] 1 I HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A y Agency or Co. PHA +A Date Performed 0610212005 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Background Conditions Willow Run Phase 2 Project ID (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 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 Lane group TR LT L TR 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 1 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A I 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 1 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 1 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 1 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 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 1 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 37.0 JG= G= J G= I G= 43.0 G= G= G= 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 FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT Adjusted flow rate, v 162 304 775 195 Lane group capacity, c 708 642 837 752 v/c ratio, X 0.23 0.47 0.93 0.26 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.41 0.48 0.48 Uniform delay, d 17.2 19.4 22.0 14.0 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.44 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.6 16.0 0.2 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 17.4 19.9 38.1 14.2 Lane group LOS g B D B Approach delay 17.4 19.9 33.3 Approach LOS B B C Intersection delay 28.6 X� = 0.72 Intersection LOS C 1 HCS2000rM Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le 1 1 11 1.1 [1 1 1 [1 1 1 1 TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information Site Information A nalyst PHR +A ighway Route 621 A gency or Company PHR +A [From/To Route 622/Jubal Eady Dr Date Performed 03125/05 unsdiction A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour nal sis Year 2010 Background Conditions Input Data r' Class I highway FA Class II highway _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Shoulderrviddh it Terrain F Level , Rolling Two-way hourly volume 268 veh /h Lane v:idth 11 Directional split 66/34 —� Lane width it Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 0 Shoulder_vi it _ _ _ _ Shah Noah Anary %Trucks and Buses, P 3% Segment length, 4 mi %Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 4 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, fHV fHV= 1 /(1 +PT(EYt) +PR(ER1)) 0.979 T wo-way flow rate v (pGh) v =V/ (PHF' f - fW) 288 v ' highest directional split proportion (pGh) 190 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed 50.0 Base free -flow speed, BFFS mi /h 0.0 mi /h Adj, for lane width and shoulder width f (Exhibit 20 -5) Field Measured speed, SFM mi/h O bserved volume, Vf veh /h A dj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) 1.0 Free -flow speed, FFS FFS= S +0.00776(Vd f 49.0 mi/h mUh 49.0 Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS =BFFS -f f ni A dj. for no- passing zones, f ( mUh) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 A verage travel speed, ATS ( mUh) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v -fa 46.8 Percent Time-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 (actor, f f =110+ P 1) +P 1)) 0.997 T wo-way flow rate v (inc/lb) v =V/ (PHF' t fHV) 283 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc/h) 187 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1 -e 0,00087N 22.0 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, I� ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 1.6 Percent time- spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +1 d/np 216 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class 1 or 20 -4 for Class II C 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, VMT (veh - mi) VMT =V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT VMT1s /ATS 0.0 Notes 1 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 1 [1 [1 1 11 F TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information J Site Information An alyst PHR +A A gency or Company PHR +A D ate Performed 06/02/2005 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour ronvTo Route 622/Jubal Early Dr [nalysis ighway Route 621 unsdiction Year 2010 Background Conditions Input Data Shoulder •,ridth _ it F Class I highway F Class II highway Terrain F Level r '.' Rolling Two -way hourly volume 263 veh/h Directional split 63/37 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 0 Show llonh Frrorr % Trucks and Buses , P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 4 Lane width It �— -- —� Lane width _ It _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _S_houlder_raidth _ ----- __. -_ 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 Hv fHV =1 / (1+ P 1) +P 1)) 0.979 T wo-way flow rate v (pclh) v =V/ (PHF' f f 283 V ' highest directional split propodion (pc /h) 178 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� f 49.0 mifh 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- fLSdA) 50.0 mi/h 0.0 mUh 1.0 mifh 49.0 ml/h A dj. for no- passing zones, f (mifh) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 A verage travel speed, ATS (mi /h) ATS= FFS400776v -f 46.8 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, f Hv fHV =1/ (1+ P 1) +P 1)) 0.987 T wo-way flow ratel, v (pc /h) v =V/ (PHF' f G fHV) 278 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 175 Base percent time - spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF = 100(1 -e 0,000879v 21.7 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 1 . 4 Percent time - spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF= BPTSF +f yn 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 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, VMT (veh- mi) VMT =V'L, 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes ' 11. If v >= 3,200 p c/h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. It highest directional split v 1,700 pc /h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. ' HCS2000 Copyright D 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d I 1 1 11 1 H TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information ISite Information A nalyst PHR +A A gency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 06/02/2005 A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour roMTo Route 622JBreckinddge Lane Inalysis ighway Route 621 urisdiction Year 2010 Background Conditions Input Data Shou IderaidU1 it r� Class I highway Class II highway Terrain F Level r Rolling Two -way hourly volume 231 veh /h Directional split 77/23 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 0 9mrn gotlh krari % Trucks and Buses, P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 5 Lane width ft — —► Lane vridth ft fShouldei _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __xi _ _ ___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 � Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f Hv fHV 1 /(1 +P +P 0.979 T wo-way flow rate v (pGh) v =V/ (PHF' f f 248 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc/h) 191 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(Vr f ) 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, I. (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f LS fA) 50.0 mi /h 0.0 mUh 1 . 3 mi /h 48.8 mVh 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 -fc 46.8 Percent Time- S nt- 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, f fHV=1/(1 +PT(ET'1) +PR(ER1)) 0.997 T wo-way flow rate v (pGh) v =V/ (PHF' f fHV) 244 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 188 Base percent time - spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1- e- 0.000879vP) 19.3 Ad j. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 3 . 9 Percent time - spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f an 23.2 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 0.08 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of travel,VMT (veh- mi) VMT 0.25L /PHF) 0 Peak- hourvehicle- milesoftmvel,VMT (veh -mi) VMT ,,=V'L, 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time TT -h) TT VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes ' 11. If v.>= 3,200 pc/h, te r m inate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v 1,700 pclh, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000 Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information Site Information An alyst PHR +A A gency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 06/0212005 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour rom/TO Route 622/Breckinddge Lane [Analysis ighway Route 621 urisdiction Year 2010 Background Conditions Input Data - - - - - - - - Shoulder width - - - - - tt F Class I highway F7 Class II highway Terrain'- Level F" Rolling Two -way hourly volume 369 veh /h Directional split 55/45 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 0 Show Ilorth Armw % Trucks and Buses , P 3% %Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 5 Lane •sidth tt ~- - -- —} Lane width tt _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Shoulder _,_ _ - ___ it 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) 1.7 Passenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f HV fHV 1/ (1+ P H +P 1)) 0,979 T wo-way flow rate v (pc/h) v =V/ (PHF' f f 397 v ' highest directional split proportion (pc /h) 218 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 f 48.8 mi/h Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder width f (Exhibit 20 -5) dj, for access points, I. (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f L S fA ) 50.0 mi /h 0.0 mi /h 1 . 3 mvh 48.8 mi/h 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 -fa 45.7 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, f fHV= 1 /(1 +PT(ET'1) +PH(ER1)) 0.997 T wo-way flow rate v (pc/h) v =V/ (PHF' f fHV) 390 v ' highest directional split propodion (pc /h) 215 Base percent time - spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1 - a -0,000679VP) 29.0 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 0.3 Percent time - spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f ryn 29.3 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 v/c v/c=V 3,200 0.12 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of tmvel,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 /ATS 0.0 Notes 11. If v >= 3,200 po/h, terminate analysis -the L OS is F. 2. 11 highest directional split v P >= 1,700 PC/11, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d 11 11 I HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610712005 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 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 1012 355 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 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 3.2 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 JY= 5 Y= JY= 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 TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 765 1356 1065 374 0 Lane group capacity, c 945 3364 1736 681 369 v/c ratio, X 0.81 0.40 0.61 0.55 0.00 Total green ratio, g/C 0.28 0.69 0.36 0.20 0.20 Uniform delay, d 30.3 6.0 23.9 32.4 28.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.35 0.11 0.20 0.15 0.11 Incremental delay, d 5.4 0.1 0.7 1.0 0.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 35.6 6.1 24.6 33.3 28.8 Lane group LOS D A C C C Approach delay 16.8 24.6 33.3 Approach LOS g C C Intersection delay 20,8 X c = 0.66 Intersection LOS C HCS2000 Copynght D 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e [1 I HCS2000 DETAILED. REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610712005 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 Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT 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 1937 582 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, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 Filtering /metering, 1 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 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 M Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EB Only 1ThruOn1l y 03 04 1 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 11.0 1 G= 42.0 G JG= I G= 22.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 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 PIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 291 1131 2039 613 0 Lane group capacity, c 416 3147 2279 832 451 v/c ratio, X 0.70 0.36 0.89 0.74 0.00 Total green ratio, g/C 0.12 0.64 0.47 0.24 0.24 Uniform delay, d 37.9 7.4 22.0 1 31.3 25.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.27 0.11 0.42 0.29 all Incremental delay, d 2 5.2 a 1 5.1 3.5 0.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 43.1. 7.5 270 34.8 25.7 Lane group LOS D A C C C Approach delay 14.8 27.0 34.8 Approach LOS B C C Intersection delay 23.9 X� = 0.82 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 1 1 I 1 O H I1 11 L HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610712005 Time Period PM 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) 1051 850 1669 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 A A I 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, 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 10.0 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= 25.0 G= 25.0 G= G= G= 25.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 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 I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 1106 895 1757 316 Lane group capacity, c 1356 945 2086 488 v/c ratio, X 0.82 0.95 0.84 0.65 Total green ratio, g/C 0.28 0.28 0.61 0.28 Uniform delay, d 30.3 31.9 14.0 28.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.36 0.46 0.38 0.23 Incremental delay, d 4.0 17.9 3.3 3.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 34.3 49.7 17.3 31.6 Lae a group LOS C D 1 8 C Approach delay 34,3 28.3 31.6 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 30,2 ) � = 0.78 Intersection LOS C UCS2000TM Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e lk HCS2060 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information . Ar�alyst PHR+A Agency or Co. PHR+A Date Performed 0610712005 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection= Route 50 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Ared 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 FIT LT I TH FIT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 3 0 2 2 0 Q 0 0 0 1 0 Lane group T L T LT Volume, V (vph) 1509 318 1049 505. 0 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 3 6 3 3 Peak-hour factor, PH F 0.95 1 0.95 0.95 1 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1 2.0 12.0 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 1.0 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 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 JON Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 Phasing 1 IThruOnly 03 1 04 1 SB Onl) 06 07 1 08 Timing JG= 9.0 JG= 33.0 G= I 1 G =, 313.0 G JG= JG= IY= 5 IY= 5 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 I NB SB LT TH I RT LT I TH I RT LT TH I FIT LT TH FIT Adjusted flow rate, v 1588 335 11104 532 Lane group capacity, c 1790 340 1782 644 v/c ratio, X 0.89 0.99 0.62 0.83 Total green ratio, g/C 0.37 0.10 0.52 0.37 Uniform delay, d 26.8 140.4 15.2 25.9 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.41 0.49 0.20 Incremental delay, c1 5.8 44.7 0.7 P 1 11 n P P U H I 1 L 1 P I k I Initial queue delay, d Control delay 32.6 1 85.1 15.9 34.6 Lane group LOS I C F 1 B C Approach delay 32.6 - 32.0 34.6 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 32.6 X�= 0.87 Intersection LOS C HCS2000TM Copyright m 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le I Rights Reserved HC52000 Version 4.1d Copynght O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed A nalysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 0610712005 AM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Breckinridge Ln & Route 621 2010 Build -out Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Breckinrid a Lane North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 111 15 332 46 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF a95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 116 15 349 48 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb 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 20 0 86 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 90 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 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R 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 L R (vph) 349 21 90 C (m) (vph) 1448 331 924 W e 0.24 0.06 0.10 95% queue length 0.95 0.20 0.32 Control Delay 8.3 16.6 9.3 LOS A C I A pproach Delay 10.7 pproach LOS B Rights Reserved HC52000 Version 4.1d Copynght O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Rights Reserved HC52000 Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst Agency/Co. Date Performed A nalysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 0610712005 PM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Breckinridge Ln & Route 621 2010 Build -out Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Breckinrid a 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 Volume 0 78 8 367 126 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 82 `> 8 386 132 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 Volume 119 0 482 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 125 0 507 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 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT L R (vph) 386 125 507, C (m) (vph) 1499 268 970 (c 0.26 0.47 0.52 95% queue length 1.03 2.32 3.12 Control Delay 8.2 29.7 12.7 LOS A D B [Approach Delay 16.1 pproach LOS C Rights Reserved HC52000 Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1d Rights Reserved IICS2000 Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4. Id TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst' genc`y /Co. Date Performed r alysjs Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 0610712005 AM Peak Hour Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr 2010 Build -out Conditions Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Handley Ave North /South Street: Jubal Early Drive Intersection 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 R L T R olume : 0 229 71 7 230 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly,Flow Rate, HFR 0 241 74 7 242 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 U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume ; 21 0 71 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 22 0 74 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) 7 96 C (m) (vph) 1240 740 !c 0.01 0.13 95% queue length 0.02 0.44 Control Delay 7.9 10.6 LOS A B pproach Delay 10.6 pproach LOS B Rights Reserved IICS2000 Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4. Id 1 r r r r 1 r r r r r r r 1 1 r r r 1 Rights Reserved HCS2000 Version 4.Id Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 0610712005 PM Peak Hour Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year Handley Ave & Jubal Early Dr 2010 Build -out Conditions roject Description Willow Run Phase 2 'Street: Handle Ave North /South Street: Jubal Earl Drive tersection Orientation: North -South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 [East/West ehicle Volumes and Adjustments a jor Street Northbound Southbound ovement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 532 76 48 515 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 560 80 50 542 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 L 0 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 23 0 60 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 24 0 63 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) 50 87 C (m) (vph) 939 451 /c 0.05 0.19 5% queue length 0.17 0.71 Control Delay 9.0 14.9 LOS A B A pproach Delay 14.9 pproach LOS 8 Rights Reserved HCS2000 Version 4.Id Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610712005 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 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 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 Lane group L TR L T R L T R L TR Volume, V (vph) 71 348 82 328 209 80 70 438 337 251 374 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, 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 j 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 j 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 a0 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 1 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 1 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 1 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 17.0 G= 19.0 G JG= JG= 8.0 G= 36.0 G= G= Y= 0 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 0 Y= 5 IY= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB I WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 75 452 345 220 84 74 461 355 264 493 Lane group capacity, c 507 720 414 741 558 417 738 1010 334 1362 v/c ratio, X 0.15 0.63 0.83 0.30 0.15 0.18 0.62 0.35 0.79 0.36 Total green ratio, g/C a40 0.21 0.40 0.21 0.36 0.49 0.40 0.64 0.49 a40 Uniform delay, d 17.1 32.3 21.2 29.9 21.6 7.4 23.1 18.9 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 419.712.8 00 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.21 0.37 0.11 1 0.21 0.11 0.34 0.11 I 1 L_J Incremental delay, d 0.1 1 1.7 13.6 1 0.2 0.1 1 0.2 1 1.7 0.2 12.1 0.2 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 17.2 34.0 34.8 t3O . 1 19.9 23 .3 7.6 35.2 19.1 Lane group LOS B C C C B EO C A D B Approach delay 31.6 31.3 16.1 24.7 Approach LOS C C B C Intersection delay 24,8 X� = 0.85 Intersection LOS C I HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e HCS2000" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHA +A Agency or Co. PHA +A Date Performed 0610712005 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 Timing Input EB WB NB SE; LT TH FIT LT TH PIT LT TH FIT LT TH I 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) 122 486 115 532 355 488 176 512 370 212 520 201 % 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, 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 j 3.0 j 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 j 3.0 j 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, 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 40 0 100 0 0 0 70 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 1 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left WB Only EW Perm 04 1 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 15.6 1 G= 4.1 G= 170 JG= I G= 7.2 G= 26.1 JG= G= Y= 5 IY= 0 Y= 5 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 5 Y= IY= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT Adjusted flow rate, v 128 591 560 374 408 185 539 389 223 685 Lane group capacity, c 489 650 563 823 580 262 535 972 222 988 v/c ratio, X 0.26 0.91 0.99 0.45 0.70 0.71 1.01 0.40 1.00 0.69 Total green ratio, g/C 0.36 0.19 0.46 0.23 0.37 0.43 0.29 0.62 0.43 0.29 Uniform delay, d 19.7 35.7 23.4 129.5 24.1 18.5 32.0 8.6 21.8 28.4 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 0.43 0.50 0.11 0.27 0.27 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.26 I 1 Incremental delay, d 0.3 169 36.5 1 0.4 3.8 1 8.4 40.8 0.3 61.6 2.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 20.0 52.6 59.t29 28.0 26.t72 8.9 83.3 30.5 Lane group LOS C D E C C A F C Approach delay 46.8 41.8 42.8 43.5 Approach LOS D D D D Intersection delay 43.3 X� = 1.00 Intersection LOS D I HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le 11 U I U 1 1 1 1 1 HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 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 PIT LT TH RT LT TH FIT 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 82 328 209 80 70 438 337 251 374 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 I 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 12.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, a 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 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 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 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 10.0 Ped / Bike/ RTOR volumes 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 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 I EW Perm 03 1 04 1 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 14.7 1 G= 19.0 G= J G= JG= 7.9 G= 33.4 JG= JG= Y= 5 IY= 5 Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= 5 Y= 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 I FIT LT I TH FIT LT I TH FIT LT TH FIT Adjusted flow rate,v 75 366 86 345 220 84 74 461 355 264 394 99 Lane group capacity, c 495 702, 527 426 702 527 453 1235 876 419 1235 876 vic ratio, X 0.15 0.52 0.16 0.81 0.31 0.16 0.16 0.37 0.41 0.63 0.32 1 0.11 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.20 0.34 0.41 0.20 0.34 0.49 0.35 0.56 0.49 0.35 0.56 Uniform delay, d 17.6 33.9 22.2 121.4 32.4 22.1 13.4 23.0 11.9 20.2 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 J Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.35 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.21 Incremental delay, d 0.1 0.7 0.1 11.2 1 0.3 0.1 1 0.2 0.2 0.3 3.0 0.2 1 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 177 34.6 22.3 32.6 32.7 22.3 13.6 23.2 12.3 23.3 22.6 9.9 Lane group LOS B C C C C C B C B C C A Approach delay 30.2 31.3 18.0 21.2 Approach LOS C C B C Intersection delay 24.2 X c = 0.60 Intersection LOS C 1 HCS2000 Copyright m 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le 1 1 P 1 HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst_ PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 06102 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 ( Suggested Improvements Volume and Timing Inp EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I 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) 122 486 115 532 355 488 176 512 370 212 520 201 %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, 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, a 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 lao 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 150 0 0 0 1 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 M 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 WB Only EW Perm 04 AExcl. Left NS Perm 07 1 08 Timing G= 15.0 G= 7.0 G= 19.0 G= G= 10.0 G= 19.0 G= G= Y= 5 Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= IY= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB I NB SB LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 128 512 121 560 374 356 185 539 389 223 547 212 Lane group capacity, c 498 741 592 608 1015 714 292 741 889 294 741 679 v/c ratio, X 0.26 0.69 0.20 0.92 0.37 0.50 0.63 0.73 0.44 0.76 0.74 0.31 Total green ratio, g/C 0.38 0.21 0.38 0.51 0.29 0.46 0.38 0.21 0.57 0.38 0.21 0.43 Uniform delay, d 18.8 32.8 18.9 121.6 125.5 117.3 20.8 33.1 11.2 21.3 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 1.000 h 16.7 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.26 0.11 0.44 0.11 0.11 0.21 0.29 0.11 0.31 0.30 Incremental delay, d 0.3 2.8 0.2 19.5 0.2 0.6 1 4.4 1 3.6 0.3 10.9 3.9 1 0.3 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 19.1 35.5 19.1 41.2 25.7 178 25.2 36.7 11.6 32.2 37.1 17.0 Lane group LOS B D B D C B C D B C D B Approach delay 30.2 30.2 26.0 31.6 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection delay 29.4 X = 0.92 Intersection LOS C HC52000TM Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e P 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 U 1 1 1 H HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHA +A Date Performed 0610712005 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 TH RT LT TH I 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 1008 131 191 791 60 90 68 156 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, 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, a 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 Fed / 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 EW Perm 1 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 50.0 G= G= I Y= G= G= 30.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 IY= Y= 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 I RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 44 1061 138 201 833 63 167 164 36 48 Lane group capacity,c 293 1896 871 206 1896 871 493 523 385 565 v/c ratio, X 0.15 0.56 0.16 0.98 0.44 0.07 0.34 0.31 0.09 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 12.9 9.7 119.4 11.8 9.3 22.5 22.3 20.6 20.6 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 0.16 0.11 0.48 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 1 0.1 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.4 0.1 55.5 0.2 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.1 11 [l Initial queue delay, d Control delay 9.9 13.3 9.8 75.0 11.9 1 9.3 23.0 22.7 20.7 20.6 Lane group LOS A B A E B A C C C C Approach delay 12.8 23.3 22.8 20.7 Approach LOS B C C C Intersection delay 18.4 X = 0.74 Intersection LOS B HC52000rm Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst. PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610712005 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 1268 331 255 1673 58 284 38 131 213 169 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 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, a 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 j 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 1 1 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 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 1 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= 37.0 G= G= G= 33.0 G= G= G= Y= 0 IY= 5 Y= Y= IY= 5 Y= IY= 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB I WB 1 NB SB LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 62 1335 348 268 1761 61 339 138 224 239 Lane group capacity, c 82 1403 645 277 1782 819 358 836 283 650 v/c ratio, X 0.76 0.95 0.54 0.97 0.99 0.07 0.95 0.17 0.79 0.37 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.37 0.53 0.37 0.37 Uniform delay, d 22.6 25.6 20.1 24.6 21.2 10.7 277 10.7 25.4 20.9 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 0.31 0.46 0.14 0.47 0.49 0.11 0.46 0.11 0.34 0.11 Incremental delay, d 32.5 14.1 0.9 45.0 18.5 0.0 34.0 0.1 14.2 0.4 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 55.2 39.8 21.0 69.6 39.7 10.7 61.6 10.8 39.6 21.2 Lane group LOS E D C E D B E B D C Approach delay 36.6 42.7 46.9 30.1 Approach LOS D D D C Intersection delay 39.7 X. = a97 Intersection LOS D HCS2000TM Copyright m 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT Genera/ Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 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 (Su ested Im rovements) 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 1 1 1 1 1 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume, V (vph) 42 1008 131 191 791 1 60 90 1 68 156 34 21 25 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 6 1 3 3 1 6 3 3 1 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 12.0 2.0 12.0 12.0 2.0 12.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, a 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 1 3 1 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 1 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 11.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 1 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0.0 1 0 . 0 10.0 0.0 10.0 10.0 0.0 lao 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 30 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 1 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G = 12.0 1 G = 43.0 G = 1 G= G = 15.0 G = 15.0 G = I V= IG= Y= 0 IY= 5 Y= ly= IY= 5 Y- 5 1Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB I NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 44 1061 138 201 833 63 95 72 133 36 22 26 Lane group capacity, c 269 1468 988 297 1877 1176 469 277 502 459 277 235 vic ratio, X 0.16 0.72 0.14 0.68 0.44 0.05 0.20 0.26 0.26 0.08 0.08 0.11 Total green ratio, g/C 0.43 0.43 0.63 0.55 0.55 0.75 0.35 0.15 0.32 0.35 0.15 0.15 Uniform delay, d, 175 23.6 7.5 16.9 13.4 3.3 22.5 37.6 25.3 21.7 36.6 36.7 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 0.28 0.11 0.25 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.3 1 1.8 0.1 6.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 1 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 Initial queue delay, d Control'.delay 178 25.4 7.6 23.0 13.6 3.3 22.7 38.1 25.5 21.8 36.7 136.9 Lane group LOS B C A C B A C D C C D D Approach delay 23.1 14.7 277 30.4 Approach LOS C B C C Intersection delay 20.4 X = 0.65 Intersection LOS C ' HCS2000TM Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.le I 11 1 1 11 1 1 HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 50 & Route 621 Area Type All otherareas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Su ested Im rovements) Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT Number of lanes, N, 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume, V (vph) 59 1268 331 255 1673 58 284 38 131 213 169 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 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 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 1 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 3 1 3 3 1 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 1 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 10.0 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 30 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 1 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 NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 12.0 G= 43.0 G= G= G= 15.0 G= 15.0 JG= JG= Y= 0 IY= 5 Y= IY= IY= 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 I WB NB SB LT TH I FIT I LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH I FIT Adjusted flow rate, v 62 1335 348 268 1761 61 299 40 106 224 178 61 Lane group capacity,c 74 1468 988 284 1877 1176 390 277 502 465 277 235 v/c ratio, X 0.84 0.91 0.35 0.94 0.94 0.05 0.77 0.14 0.21 0.48 0.64 0.26 Total green ratio, g/C 0.43 0.43 0.63 0.55 0.55 0.75 0.35 0.15 0.32 0.35 0.15 0.15 Uniform delay, d 25.4 26.7 8.8 28.7 20.9 3.3 26.1 36.9 24.8 24.4 40.0 37.6 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 0.37 0.43 0.11 0.46 0.45 0.11 0.32 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.22 0.11 Incremental delay, d 54.0 8.7 1 0.2 38.5 9.7 1 0.0 8.9 0.2 1 0.2 0.8 5.0 1 0.6 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 79.4 35.4 9.0 67.1 30.7 3.3 34.9 37.2 25.0 25.2 45.0 38.2 Lane group LOS E D A E C A C D C C D D Approach delay 31.7 34.5 32.8 34.5 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection delay 33.3 X� = 0.91 Intersection LOS C HCS2000' " Copyright 0 2000 University or Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Rights Reserved HCS2000 Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.ld Version 4. Id TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed nalysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour Intersection urisdiction Analysis Year Route 621 & New Jubal Early Dr 2010 Build -out Conditions P Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: New Jubal Earl Dr North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 86 8 13 54 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 90 8 13 56 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes" 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 20 0 40 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 42 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 LT LR (vph) 13 63 C (m) (vph) 1489 1440 !c 0.01 0.04 95% queue length 0.03 0.14 Control Delay 7.4 9.1 LOS A A A pproach Delay 9,1 A pproach LOS A Rights Reserved HCS2000 Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.ld Version 4. Id I 1 1 1 Rights Reserved HCS2000 Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.ld 11 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 0610212005 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 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 Volume 0 62 22 42 204 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 H ourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 65 23 44 214 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Median Type Undivided FIT Channelized 0 D 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 16 0 24 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 25 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 A pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 44 41 C (m) (vph) 1501 1548 Ic 0.03 0.03 5% queue length 0.09 0.08 Control Delay 7.5 9.7 LOS A A pproach Delay 9.7 pproach LOS A Rights Reserved HCS2000 Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Version 4.ld 11 Rights Reserved HCS2000 Copyright ©2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed A nalysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 0610712005 AM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Route 621 & Route 622 2010 Build -out Conditions Proiect Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 621 Intersection Orientation: North -South IS tudy Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Ad ustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 1 6 L T R L T R olume 1 117 101 36 50 25 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 123 106 37 52 26 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 C onfiguration LTR LTR U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R V olume 79 52 32 36 71 16 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 83 54 33 37 74 16 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) 1 37 170 127 C (m) (vph) 1514 1333 625 599 We 0.00 0.03 0.27 0.21 9 5% queue length 0.00 0.09 1.10 0.80 Control Delay 7.4 7.8 12.9 12.6 LOS A A B B A pproach Delay 12,9 12.6 A pproach LOS B B Rights Reserved HCS2000 Copyright ©2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1d Rights Reserved HCS2000 Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1d TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed A nalysis Time Period PHR +A PHR +A 0610712005 PM Peak Hour Intersection J urisdiction A nalysis Year Route 621 & Route 622 2010 Build -out Conditions Project E. Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Route 621 In Orientation: North -South I Study Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume 54 63 60 25 64 24 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 25 Percent Heavy Vehicles 3 3 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 onfiguration LTR LTR U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 1 11 12 L T R L T R olume 122 172 84 41 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 43 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 L anes 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 26 397 118 C (m) (vph) 1496 1451 664 503 We 0.04 0.02 0.60 0.23 5% queue length 0.12 0.05 3.98 0.90 Control Delay 7.5 7.5 18.2 14.3 LOS A A C B A pproach Delay 18.2 14.3 pproach LOS C B Rights Reserved HCS2000 Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Version 4.1d ' 1 1 1 1 HCS2000 Capynght 3003 University of Flori da, All Rights Reserved Versiot TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information h`at' st Time Period PHR +A Intersection Route 622 &Harvest Drive enc /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Date Performed 06/02/2005 A nal y sis Year 010 Build -out Conditions A nalysis Pro ect Description Willow Run Phase 2 Ea st/W est Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Harvest Drive Intersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle 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 1082 0 0 418 68 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 71 1138 0 0 440 71 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 V olume 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 vehicles, PH 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 Len th, Level of Service pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR olume, v (vph) 71 128 Capacity, c (vph) 1043 443 /c ratio 0.07 029 ueue length (95 %) 0.22 1.18 ontrol Delay (s /veh) 8.7 16.4 LOS A C pproach delay (s /veh) 16.4 pproach LOS C HCS2000 Capynght 3003 University of Flori da, All Rights Reserved Versiot Time Period M Peak Hour HCS2000 Capynght 3003 University of Flori da, All Rights Reserved Versiot T -W ST CO SUMMARY (General Information ito lnfnrm�f;n.. A naly st -' PHR +A Intersection _ Route 622 & Harvest Drive Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction Date Performed 1 06102 1 2005 A nalysis Year 2 010 Buildout Conditions nal sis Time Period I Peak Hour HCS2000 m Copyright O 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 d HCS2000TM Copyright (D 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst - PHR +A Intersection Route 622 & Spine Road Agency/Co. PHR +A J urisdiction Date Performed 0610712005 nal sis Year 2 010 Build -out Conditions A nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 North /South Street: Spine Road Intersection Orientation: East -West IStudy Period hrs : a25 V ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R V olume veh/h) 6 1111 0 0 471 15 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 6 1169 0 0 495 15 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 V olume veh/h) 0 0 0 40 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 42 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 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 V olume, v (vph) 6 63 Capacity, c (vph) 1044 475 /c ratio 0.01 a 13 Queue length (95 %) 0.02 a45 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.5 13.7 LOS A B A pproach delay (s /veh) 13.7 pproach LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright (D 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id ' General Inform ' al st= Project Description East/West Street: I ntersection.Orient, ' Vehicle-Volumt Major Street Movement ' V olume veh /h Peak -hour factor, F Hourly Flow Rate ( Proportion of heave ehicles, PHv Median type, RT= Channelized? Lanes,.'" Configuration U stream.Si nal Minor Street Movement olume veh /h ' Peak -hour factor, F Hourly Flow Rate ropo of heat' vehicles, PHv Percent grade /6) Flared approach ' Storage RT Channelized? Lanes. Configuration Control Delay, QL A pproach Movement Lane Configuration V olume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) /c ratio Queue length (95° Control Delay (s /vi LOS A pproach delay (s. pproach LOS ' HCS2000 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Site Information n ' - PHR +A ljl lntersection Route 622 &Sine Road Ag enc y /Co. /Co. PHR +A urisdiction Date Performed 06/0212005 nal sis Year 2 010 Build -out Conditions A nal y sis Time Period PM Peak Hour witiow Hun Ynase z ��00��111111 Raised curb �0000� �00v0� - evel of Service EB WB Nortrlboun 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 LT LR 22 45 481 180 0.05 0.25 0.14 1 0.95 12.8 31.5 B D 31.5 D Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610712005 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 FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT_ 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 1018 457 34 99 181 % 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, UE 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 12 0 0 66 Lane width 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 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing I EW Perm 1 02 03 04 SB Only 06 07 1 08 Timing G= 50.0 G= G= G= G= 31.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 1Y= Y= 1Y= IY= 4 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 FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH I FIT Adjusted flow rate, v 1153 504 225 Lane group capacity, c 1688 1938 576 v/c ratio, X 0.68 0.26 0.39 Total green ratio, g/C 0.56 0.56 0.34 Uniform delay, d, 14.3 10.4 22.3 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.25 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 1.2 0.1 0.4 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 15.5 10.5 1 22.8 Lane group LOS B B C Approach delay 15.5 10.5 22.8 Approach LOS B B C Intersection delay 15.0 X = 0 Intersection LOS B HCS2000T Copyright D 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610712005 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 FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT Number of lanes, N, 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 Lane group DefL T TR LR Volume, V (vph) 201 876 1213 107 68 165 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor,PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1 1 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 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 35 0 0 50 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 1 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only EW Perm 03 04 1 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 15.6 G= 40.0 G= IG= I G= 25.0 G= G= G= Y= 0 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 FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 212 922 1353 193 Lane group capacity, c 374 1127 1548 461 v/c ratio, X 0.57 0.82 0.87 0.42 Total green ratio, g/C 0.61 0.61 0.44 0.28 Uniform delay, d 17.6 13.6 22.7 26.6 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.16 0.36 0.40 0.11 Incremental delay, d 2 2.0 4.9 5.9 0.6 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 19.6 18.5 1 8.6' 1 28.T -F- 27.2 L ane group LOS B 1 B C C Approach delay 18.7 28.6 27.2 Approach LOS B C C Intersection delay 24.3 X = 1.21 Intersection LOS C HCS2000'M Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Intersection Route 622 & Route Ram 37 NB PHR +A MPerformed PHR +A 06/02/2005 J urisdiction A nalysis Year 010 Build -out Conditions e Period AM Peak Hour Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Route 622 orth /South Street: Route 37 NB Ram Intersection Orientation: East -West IS tudy Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume (veh /h) 119 655 0 0 115 678 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 125 689 0 0 121 713 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 U stream Signal 0 0 or Street Northbound Southbound vement 7 8 9 10 11 12 rolume L T R L T R veh/h) 19 0 159 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 0 167 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 V olume, v (vph) 125 187 Capacity, c (vph) 795 350 /c ratio 0.16 0.53 ueue length (95 %) 0.56 1 3.00 Control Delay (s /veh) 10.4 26.5 LOS 8 D pproach delay (siveh) 26.5 pproach LOS i D TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General. information ISite Information n... ..., Mono A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 06102 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour 2 [Vehicle Vo Movement 1 2 3 4 b b L T R L T R V olume veh/h) 60 930 0 0 197 1021 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 63 978 0 0 207 1074 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHv 3 3 Median type Undivided PIT Channelized? 0 1 1 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 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 V olume veh/h) 135 0 134 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 a95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 142 0 141 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv 3 3 3 3 3 3 Percent grade N 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 :IT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration LTR Control Delav, Queue Len th Level of Service pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 1 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR olume, v (vph) 63 283 Capacity, c (vph) 538 116 /c ratio 0.12 2.44 Queue length (95 %) 0.40 25.10 Control Delay (s /veh) 12.6 1 732.8 LOS e F pproach delay (s /veh) 732.8 pproach LOS F I HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Y Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 NS Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Willow Run Phase 2 Project ID ( Syqqested Improvements Volume and Timing Inp EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH PIT LT I TH FIT LT I 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) 119 655 115 678 19 0 159 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 1 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 2.0 2.0 12.0 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, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 10.0 10.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 1 230 0 58 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 1 04 NB Only I 06 I 07 08 Timing G= 60.0 JG= G= IG= G= 21.0 JG= IG= JG= Y= 5 IY= Y= 1Y= Y= 4 Y= IY= ly= 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 AT LT TH I FIT LT TH RT LT I TH I FIT Adjusted flow rate, v 814 121 472 126 Lane group capacity, c 1137 1230 1045 378 v/c ratio, X 0.72 0.10 0.45 0.33 Total green ratio, g/C 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.23 Uniform delay, d 9.6 5.4 7.2 28.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.28 0.11 0.11 0.11 I Incremental delay, d 2.2 0.0 0.3 0.5 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 11.7 5.4 7.5 29.2 Lane group LOS B A A C Approach delay 11.7 70 29.2 Approach LOS B A C Intersection delay 11.4 Xc = 0.62 Intersection LOS B 1 HCS2000rm Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e I HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Y Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 NB Ramp Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Willow Run Phase 2 Project ID (SLkqgested Improvements) Volume and Timing Inp EB WB NB SB LT TH PIT LT TH PIT LT TH I PIT LT TH FIT 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) 60 930 197 1021 135 0 134 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 10.95 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, Q. 0.0 0.0 10.0 10.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 356 0 1 1 53 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 EB Only I EW Perm 03 1 04 1 NB Only 06 07 1 08 Timing G= 6.0 1 G= 60.0 G= JG= JG= 25.0 G= G= G= Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= 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 FIT LT I TH I FIT LT I TH PIT LT TH FIT Adjusted flow rate, v 1042 207 700 227 Lane group capacity, c 1179 1107 941 425 v/c ratio, X 0.88 0.19 0.74 0.53 Total green ratio, g/C 0.66 0.60 0.60 0.25 Uniform delay, d 13.9 9.0 14.4 32.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.41 0.11 0.30 0.14 _## Incremental delay, d 8.2 0.1 3.2 1 1.3 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 22.1 9.1 177 33.8 Lane group LOS C A B C Approach delay 22.1 15.7 33.8 Approach LOS C B C Intersection delay 20.7 X = 0.79 Intersection LOS C 1 HCSMC0 'M Copyright m 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e L TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite Information 1. A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 A nalysis Time Period A M Peak Hour Volumes and Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 152 1 66 103 37 1 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P 0 3 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 P onfigu ration TR LT U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R V olume veh/h) 0 0 0 629 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 0 662 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 pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Volume, v (vph) 103 796 Capacity, c (vph) 1346 584 v/c ratio 0.08 1.36 Queue length (95 %) 0.25 35.02 Control Delay (s /veh) 7.9 195.1 LOS A F /approach delay (s /veh) 195.1 Approach LOS F TWO -W AY S CONT SUMM General Information ISite Information A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Date Performed 06102 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 83 78 142 207 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P 0 " 3 M edian type Undivided PIT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R V olume (ve /h 0 0 0 912 4 181 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 a95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 960 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 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 LTR V olume, v (vph) 142 1154 Capacity, c (vph) 1412 445 /c ratio 0.10 2.59 Queue length (95 %) a33 93.26 Control Delay (s /veh) 7.8 743.0 LOS A F Approach delay (s /veh) 743.0 Approach LOS F HCS20W DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 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 Su ested Im rovements) Volume and Timin Input EB WB NB SB LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT Number of lanes, N, 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 Lane group TR LT L TR Volume, V (vph) 145 63 98 36 629 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) I A I A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I 1 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, a 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 1 3 1 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 1 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 1 24 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 1 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 Phasing I EW Perm 1 02 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 37.0 JG= G= G= JG= 43.0 G= G= JG= Y= 5 Y= Y= 1Y= IY= 5 Y= Y= ly= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB I NB SB LT TH FIT LT TH FIT I LT TH FIT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 194 141 662 135 Lane group capacity, c 737 502 1626 750 v/c ratio, X 0.26 0.28 0.41 0.18 Total green ratio, g/C 0.41 0.41 0.48 0.48 Uniform delay, d, 175 17.6 15.2 13.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0,11 0,11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 17.7 18.0 15.4 13.5 Lane group LOS B B B B Approach delay 17.7 18.0 15,1 Approach LOS B B B Intersection delay 15,9 X� = 0.35 Intersection LOS B 1 HC52000T Copyright @ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e HCSOW DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 0610212005 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 622 & Rt 37 SB Ramp Area Type Ali other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Project ID Willow Run Phase 2 Su ested Improvements Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT LT TH FIT Number of lanes, N 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 Lane group TR LT L TR Volume, V (vph) 79 75 135 197 1 912 4 181 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 3 3 3 1 3 1 3 3 3 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) I A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1 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 Fed / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 27 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 O Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only I EW Perm 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 15.2 1 G= 24.8 G= G= G= 50.0 G= G= G= Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= IY= 5 Y= 1Y= Y= 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 FIT LT TH FIT LT TH RT LT I TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 134 349 960 195 Lane group capacity, c 434 496 1702 787 v/c ratio, X 0.31 0.70 0.56 0.25 Total green ratio, g/C 0.25 0.40 0.50 0.50 Uniform delay, d, 30.6 25.1 174 14.3 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.27 0.16 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.4 4.5 1 1 0.4 0.2 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 31.0 t295 17.8 14.4 Lane group LOS C B 8 Approach delay 31.0 29.5 17.3 Approach LOS C C e Intersection delay 21,0 X c = 0.57 Intersection LOS C ' HCS2000 Copyright m 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. le TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Intersection 010 Build -out Conditions ubal Early Dr &Spine Road A nal y st PHR +A Ag enc y /Co. /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Date Performed A nal y sis Time Period 0610212005 M Peak Hour A nal y sis Project Description Willow Run Phase 2 East/West Street: Jubal Earl Drive North /South Street: Sine Road Intersection Orientation: East -West tud 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 V olume veh /h) 0 0 20 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 0 21 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P 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 V olume veh /h 9 0 0 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 9 0 0 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 Len th Level of Service A pproach E6 W13 Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR V olume, v (vph) 0 9 Capacity, c (vph) 1588 1008 /c ratio 0.00 0.01 Queue length (95 %) 0.00 0.03 Control Delay (s /veh) 7.3 8.6 LOS A A pproach delay (s /veh) 8.6 pproach LOS A Year 010 Build -out Conditions I. TWO -WAY STOP C ONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite Information Hnase 2 umes and I l Heak -hour tactor, HHr Intersection ubal Eady Dr& Spine Road A nalyst PHR +A Agency/Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction 0 Date Performed A nalysis Time Period 0610212005 PM Peak Hour A nalysis Year 010 Build -out Conditions 0 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHV 0 Hnase 2 umes and I l Heak -hour tactor, HHr 0.95 1 0.95 1 0.95 1 0.95 1 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 0 21 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHV 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 Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (ve /h 23 0 0 0 0 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 24 0 0 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy Vehicles, 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 Len th 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) 0 24 Capacity, c (vph) 1588 1008 /c ratio 0.00 0.02 Queue length (95 %) 0.00 0.07 Control Delay (s /veh) 7.3 8.7 LOS A A Approach delay (s /veh) 8.7 A pproach LOS A I WO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information - Site Information Analyst PHR +A Highway Route 621 Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 06/02/2005 From/To Route 622/Jubal Early Dr Jurisdiction An alysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Input Data R) Class I highway FA Class II highway Shoulder•,vidth it Terrain r Level r4LI Rolling Two -way hourly volume 310 veh/h Lane width ft Directional split 62/38 —� Lane width It Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ S_ho _ _ _ _ it No- passing zone 0 %4 ticrlhkron % Trucks and Buses, P 3% Segment length. 4 mi / Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 4 verage Travel Speed rade adjustment factor, 1 (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 assenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 assenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1,0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, f f /(1+ P 1 ) +PR(ER 1 )) 0.979 T wo-way flow mtel, v (pGh) v =V/ (PHF' fG • f 333 v ' highest directional spit proportionZ (pC)h) 206 Free -Flow Speed from Field Measurement Estimated Free -Flow Speed Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM 50.0 mi/h 0.0 Field Measured speed, SR, mVh Adj. for lane width and shoulder width f (Exhibit 20.5) Observed volume, V I veh/h mVh 1 Free -flow speed, FFS FFS= S +0.00776(Vr f 49.0 mi/h A dj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) mi/h Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -I fA) 49.0 mi/h A dj. for no- passing zones, f ( mi/h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 verage travel speed, ATS ( mi /h) ATS= FFS- 0.00776v -f 46.4 Percent Time-Spent-Followin rade Adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -8) 1.00 Passenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1.1 assenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -10) 1,0 Heavy- vehicle adjustment factor, f f (1+ P 1) +P 1) ) 0.997 T wo-way flow ratel, v (pGh) v =V/ (PHF' f f 327 v ' highest directional split proportionZ (pc/h) 203 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1- e 70D087ea p) 25.0 A dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 1.0 Percent time - spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f cVnp 26.0 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 v/c v /c=V / 3,200 0.10 Peak 15 -min veh -miles of tmvel,VMT (veh- mi) VMT 0.25L 0 Peak- hourvehicle- milesof travel, VMT (veh -mi) VMT 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT15(veh -h) TT15= VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes Ii. If v >= 3,200 pdh, 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 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 TWO -WAY TWO-LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information ISite Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 06/02/2005 An alysis Time Period PM Peak Hour 11"alysis ghway Route 621 on /To Route 622/Jubal Early Dr risdiction Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Input Data ______ __ ____ _______ _ ____ Shoulder •width It P1 Class I highway 5 Class II highway Terrain r Level r Rolling Two -way hourly volume 329 veh/h Directional split 61/39 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 0 .91od Ilarlh Wrow.. % Trucks and Buses, P 3% % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 4 Lane 'width It [Shoulderwidth —► Lane width R it Segment length, 4 mi Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, l (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 +P +P 0.979 Two-way flow rate v (pr/h) v =V/ (PHF' f f 354 v ' highest directional split proponion (pc/h) 216 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(Vt' f 49.0 mVh Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder width I (Exhibit 20 -5) Adj. for access points, f A (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f LS f A) 50.0 mVh 0.0 mVh 1.0 mi/h 49.0 mVh Adj. for no- passing zones, I. ( mi/h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 Average travel speed, ATS (mill ATS= FFS- 0.00776v -I 46.3 Percent Time-Spent-Fallowin 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 f 1 /(1 +P +P 0.997 Two-way flow ratel, v (pe/h) v =V/ (PHF' f 0 ' f 347 v ' highest directional split proponion (pc/h) 212 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF = 100(1- a -0.000879v 26.3 Adj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f yh ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 0.8 Percent time - spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f Snp 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 olume to capacity ratio v/c vlc=VW 3,200 0.11 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 /5 = VMT 1ATS 0.0 Notes 11. If v >= 3,200 pc/h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v 1,700 peth, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. HCS2000TM Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d H 1 1 F 1 1 U U TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information ISite Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Performed 06 /02/2005 An alysis Time Period AM Peak Hour roMTo Route 622/Breckinridge Lane Inalysis ighway Route 621 udsdiction Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Inp Data Shoulder •n•idth tt RJ Class I highway FA Class II highway Terrain r Level r Rolling Two -way hourly volume 140 veh/h Directional split 61/39 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 0 9torv71ardiArrae.. `/ Trucks and Buses, P 3 / Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 5 Lane width It [ Shoulder Lane width It. width it Segment length, L, mi verage Travel Speed rade adjustment factor, f (Exhibit 20 -7) 1.00 assenger -car equivalents for trucks, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.7 assenger -car equivalents for RVs, E (Exhibit 20 -9) 1.0 Heavy - vehicle adjustment factor, fHV f Hv = 1 /(1 +P T (ET1) +P 0.979 wo -way flow ratel, v pc/h) v =V/ (PHF' f f HV ) 150 V ' highest directional split proportion (po/h) 92 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 widths, f Ls (Exhibit 20 -5) tlj. for access points, f (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BFFS -f f A ) 50.0 mf/h 0.0 mUh 1.3 mVh 48.8 mi/h Adj. for no- passing zones, f ( mi/h) (Exhibit 20 -11) 0.0 verage travel speed, ATS (milk) ATS = FFS- 0.00776v -f 47.6 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+ P 1) +P R (E R 1)) 0.997 wo -way flow ratel, v (pc/h) v =V/ (PHF' fd' fHV) 148 v ' highest directional split proportion P C /h) 90 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1 -e 0.000879v 12.2 Adj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, f yh ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 2.0 Percent time - spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f d1np 14.2 Level of Service and Other performance Measures Level of service, LOS Exhibit 20 -3 for Class I or 20 -4 for Class 11 C 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- hourvehicle -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 1. I f v >= 3,20 pc/h, terminate analysis -the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split v 1,700 pc/h, terminated anlysis -the LOS is F. O HCS2000 7 M Copyright © 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 of I H 1 1 1 1 1 1 C II 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 TWO -WAY TWO -LANE HIGHWAY SEGMENT WORKSHEET General Information ISite Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Company PHR +A Date Pedorrned 06/02/2005 A nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour 11"alysis ghway Route 621 omrro Route 622/Breckinndge Lane dsdiction Year 2010 Build -out Conditions Input Data Shoulder •.width h r Class I highway r Class It highway Terrain `'»i Level 4 Rollin 9 Two -way hourly volume 265 veh/h Directional split 77123 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 No- passing zone 100 Short Ilarlh Nrari. %Trucks and Buses P 3 % Recreational vehicles, P 3% Access points/ mi 3 Lane vridth It t —► Lane width _ If — — — — — — _ _ — _ _. Shoulder •,width h — — — — — — — — — — — — Segmers length, 4 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 t 1 /(1 +P +P 0.979 Two-way flow rate r,v (pc/h) v =V /(PHF t 285 v ' highest directional split proportion (pGh) 219 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 = SFM +0.00776(Vr fHV 53.0 mVh Base free -flow speed, BFFSFM Adj. for lane width and shoulder width f ts (Exhibit 20 -5) Adj. for access points, I (Exhibit 20 -6) Free -flow speed, FFS (FSS= BEES -f fA) 55.0 mi /h 0.0 mUh 2.0 mUh 53.0 mUh Adj. for no- passing zones, f ( mUh) (Exhibit 20 -11) 3.9 Average travel speed, ATS (mi/h) ATS = FFS - 0.00776✓ -f 46.9 Percent Time-Spent—Following Grade Adjustment factor, f0 (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 fHfI/ (1+ P 1) +P 1) ) 0.997 Two-way flow rater, v pc(h) v =V/ (PHF' fo'fHV) 280 ' highest directional split propor ionz (pc/h) 216 Base percent time- spent - following, BPTSF( %) BPTSF= 100(1 -e O.000879v 21.8 'dj. for directional distribution and no- passing zone, t yh ( %)(Exh. 20 -12) 28.5 Percent time- spent - following, PTSF( %) PTSF = BPTSF +f yn 50.3 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 v/c vlc=VW 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- ml) VMT V'L 0 Peak 15 -min total travel time, TT -h) TT 15 = VMT /ATS 0.0 Notes ' 11. 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 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i M ®vement Summary 1 illow Run Peak Hour 1 Roundabout k ehicle Movements 2 �J C 8, akcelik � associates aaTraffic SIDRA 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) Satn (sec) Service Queue Rate (mi /h) ($ /h) (v /c) (ft) South Approach 32 L 196 1952 0.154 11.0 LOS B 26 1.32 30.9 91 32 R 104 1952 0.154 11.0 LOS B 26 1.32 30.9 91 Approach 300 1952 0.154 22.1 LOS B 26 2.65 30.9 183 l ast Approach 22 L 96 1162 0.108 12.3 LOS B 18 1.27 30.2 38 22 T 29 1162 0.108 12.3 LOS B 18 1.27 30.2 38 ,Approach 125 1162 0.108 12.3 LOS B 18 1.27 30.2 38 est Approach 12 T 14 1599 0.146 7.8 LOS A 24 1.08 32.6 64 12 R 219 1599 0.146 7.8 LOS A 24 1.08 32.6 64 Approach 233 1599 0.146 7.8 LOS A 24 1.08 32.6 64 All Vehicles 658 4713 0.154 10.1 LOS B 26 1.23 31.3 194 1 : \Projects \12883 -1 -0 (Willow Run) \Willow Run (12883 -1 -0) from P- Drive \HCS \HT Working Files \HCS_05- 31 -05 \AM Produced by aaSIDRA 2.0.1.206 C pyright© 2000 -2002 celik & Associates Pty Ltd Generated 7/11/2005 10:30:07 AM t t 1 Patton Hams Rust & Associates, pc I ®ve Summery 1 illow Run Peak Hour 1 oundabout ehicle Movements r � 2 { lJ� akcelik �.. & associates aaTraffic SIDRA Mov No Turn Dem Flow (veh /h) Cap (veh /h) Deg of Satn (v /c) Aver Delay (sec) Level of Service 95% Back of Queue (ft) Eff. Stop Rate Aver Speed (mi /h) Oper Cost ($ /h) outh Approach 32 L 355 1870 0.280 11.3 LOS B 54 1.29 30.7 160 32 R 168 1870 0.280 11.3 LOS B 54 1.29 30.7 160 Approach 523 1870 0.280 22.6 LOS B 54 2.59 30.7 320 �ast Approach 22 L 176 1014 0.210 14.1 LOS B 40 1.37 29.3 67 22 T 37 1014 0.210 14.1 LOS B 40 1.37 29.3 67 'Approach 213 1014 0.210 14.1 LOS B 40 1.37 29.3 67 est Approach 12 l T 45 1377 0.265 8.2 LOS A 49 1.12 32.2 101 12 R 320 1377 0.265 8.2 LOS A 49 1.12 32.2 101 365 1377 0.265 8.2 LOS A 49 1.12 32.2 101 ' Approach All Vehicles 1101 4261 0.280 10.8 LOS B 54 1.25 30.9 327 R : \Projects \12883 -1 -0 (Willow Run) \Willow Run (12883 -1 -0) from P- Drive \HCS \HT Working Files \HCS_05- 31 -05 \PM Produced by aaSIDRA 2.0.1.206 � opyright© 2000 -2002 kcelik & Associates Pty Ltd Generated 7/11/2005 10:30:48 AM 1 Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc