Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-06 Traffic Impact Analysis1. A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Located in: Frederick County, Virginia Prepared for: Jacob, Inc. PO Box 480 Stephens City, Virginia 22655 Prepared by: Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc Engneers. Surveyors. Planners. Lcndsccpe Architects. 300 Foxcroft Avenue, Suite 200 Martinsburg, West Virginia 25401 P T 304.264.2711 F 304.264.3671 May 25, 2005 OVERVIEW Report Summary Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc (PHR +A) has prepared this document to present the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Cedar Meadows development located south of Tasker Road along the west side of White Oak Road in Frederick County, Virginia. The proposed project is comprised of 140 age- restricted detached residential units with access to be provided via a single site driveway located along White Oak Road The proposed development will be built -out over a single transportation phase by the year 2007. Figure 1 is provided to illustrate the location of the proposed Cedar Meadows development with respect to the surrounding roadway network. Methodology The traffic impacts accompanying the Cedar Meadows development were obtained through a sequence of activities as the narratives that follow document: Assessment of background traffic including other planned projects in the area of impact, Calculation of trip generation for the proposed Cedar Meadows development, Distribution and assignment of the Cedar Meadows generated trips onto the completed roadway network, Analysis of capacity and level of service using the latest version of the highway capacity software, HCS -2000, for existing and future conditions. EXISTING CONDITIONS PHR +A conducted AM and PM peak hour manual turning movement counts at the intersection of Tasker Road/White Oak Road in Frederick County, Virginia. ADT (Average Daily Traffic) was established along each of the study area roadway links using an average "k" factor (the ratio of PM peak hour traffic volumes to 24 -hour traffic volumes) of nine percent (9 Figure 2 shows the existing ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at the intersection of Tasker Road /White Oak Road. Figure 3 shows the respective existing lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All traffic count data and HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. P A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Project Number: 13502 -1 -0 May 25, 2005 Page 1 P Vicinity Map Cedar Meadows in Frederick County, VA A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Project Number: 13502 -1 -0 May 25, 2005 Page 2 No Scale AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Average'Daily PHRA r Figure 2 Existing Traffic Conditions A Tragic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Project Number: 13502 -1 -0 May 25, 2005 Page 3 No Scale Unsignalized Intersection AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement r P H R+1- I Figure 3 Existing Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Project Number: 13502 -1 -0 May 25, 2005 Page 4 Code Land Use Amount In AM Peak Hour Out Total In I'M Peak Hour Out Total ADT Background Development 41: Crosspointe Center (Phase 1) 210 Single Family Detached 555 units 99 298 398 316 185 501 5,550 230 Townhouse /Condo 140 units 11 56 68 53 26 79 1,218 252 Elderly Housing Attached 100 units 4 4 8 7 4 I I 348 710 Office 95,000 SF 158 22 180 31 154 185 1,282 820 Retail 375,000 SF 211 135 346 719 779 1,498 16,035 Total Trips 484 515 999 1,126 1,148 2,274 24,433 Total Internal 74 74 147 304 304 608 6,478 Total Pass -by 26 26 52 112 112 225 2,405 Total "New Trips" 384 416 800 709 732 1,441 15,550 Background Development 42: Wakeland Manor 210 Single Family Detached 199 units 37 111 148 125 74 199 1,985 230 Townhouse /Condo 107 units 9 45 55 43 21 64 931 Total Trips 46 157 203 168 94 262 2,916 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2007 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS Existing traffic volumes were increased along Tasker Road and White Oak Road using a annual growth rate of five percent (5 as determined in the report titled: A Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of the Villages at Artrip, by PHR +A, dated December 15, 2004. Additionally, PHR +A utilized this report to incorporate all trips relating to the following "other developments" located within the vicinity of the proposed Cedar Meadows site. Using the 7 Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report, PHR +A has provided Table 1 to summarize the 2007 "other developments" trip generation. Figure 4 shows the 2007 background ADT and AM /PM peak hour traffic volumes at the intersection of Tasker Road /White Oak Road. Figure 5 shows the respective 2007 background lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. P Table 1 "Other Developments" ri Generation Summa A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Project Number: 13502 -1 -0 May 25, 2005 Page 5 No Scale AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Averi a Daily :Trip d P Figure 4 2007 Background Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Project Number: 13502 -1 -0 May 25, 2005 Page 6 No Scale Tasker Road SITE Site °ew a Unsignalized Intersection Signalized Intersection LOS =B(B) V V Ta ske Road (B)B "Suggested Improvement" Signalization A(A)* Denotes stop sign control Denotes traffic signal control AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement Figure 5 2007 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Project Number: 13502 -1 -0 May 25, 2005 Page 7 Code Land Use Amount AM Peak Hour In Out Total PM Peak Hour In Out Total ADT Cedar Meadows 251 Elderly Housing Detached 140 units Total Cedar Meadows Trips 14 24 38 14 24 38 38 24 62 38 24 62 721 721 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TRIP GENERATION Using the 7th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report, PHR +A has prepared Table 2 to summarize the trip generation for the proposed Cedar Meadows development. Table 2 Cedar Meadows Development Trip Generation Summary TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT The distribution of trips, shown in Figure 6, was based upon local travel patterns for the roadway network surrounding the proposed Cedar Meadows site. Figure 7 shows the respective development generated AM/PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments at the intersections of Tasker Road/White Oak Road and White Oak Road/Site- driveway. 2007 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS Cedar Meadows assigned trips (Figure 7) were added to the 2007 background traffic volumes (Figure 4) to obtain 2007 build -out conditions. Figure 8 shows the 2007 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at the intersections of Tasker Road /White Oak Road and White Oak Road /Site- driveway. Figure 9 shows the respective 2007 build -out lane geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Project Number: 13502 1 0 May 25, 2005 Page 8 Trip Distribution Percentages A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Project Number: 13502 -1 -0 May 25, 2005 Page 9 Development- Generated Trip Assignments A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Project Number: 13502 -1 -0 May 25, 2005 Page 10 No Scale SITE AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) 't`Averag ;Daily riliT P Figure 8 2007 Build -out Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Project Number: 13502 -1 -0 May 25, 2005 Page 11 No Scale SITE Tasket Road Sit 17 ew (I aY Unsignalized Intersection (A)A Unsignalized Intersection 7 Signalized Intersection LOS =B(B) Tasker Road B(g) (B)B as Y "Suggested Improvement" Signalization Denotes stop sign control Denotes traffic signal control AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement P Figure 9 2007 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of Cedar Meadows Project Number: 13502 -1 -0 May 25, 2005 Page 12 1 1 CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the proposed Cedar Meadows development are acceptable and manageable. Based upon HCS -2000 results for 2007 build -out conditions, the intersection of White Oak Road and the proposed site driveway will maintain a level of service "A" throughout the project buildout, while the intersection of Tasker Road and White Oak Road will maintain levels of service "C" or better throughout the project buildout as a signalized intersection. The applicant has agreed to install traffic signals at the intersection of Tasker Road/White Oak Road upon the satisfaction of traffic signal warrants as outlined in the MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices). 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A Tragic Impact Analysis Cedar Meadows P H RA Numbumber: r: 13502 -1 -0 T T May 25, 2005 Page 13 13 INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS and LEVEL OF SERVICE The most current analysis methodologies used fore valuating the capacity ofi ntersections were developed by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) in conjunction with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and other members of the transportation profession. This methodology is represented in TRB Special ReportN umber 209, The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Computerized methods for conducting these analyses were developed by FHWA; and are the methods used in this report. The following brief explanations oft he methodologies are adapted from the HCM. UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS TWSC At an unsignalized two -way stop controlled (TWSC) intersection, the major street has continuous right of way while the side street is controlled by as top sign or yield sign. In operation, vehicles exiting the side street and crossing or turning into the main street flow must wait for "acceptable gaps" in the main street flow. The same is true of left- turning traffic from the main street that must cross the opposing flow. The analysis takes into account the probability of a gap in the main street traffic. The probability and number of acceptable gaps is lower in higher volume flows. The acceptability of a gap is modified by physical factors( sight distance, tuming radius, etc.) and by characteristics of the traffic flow (percentage trucks, buses, etc.). In the analysis in theser eports, all default values suggested by theH CM wereu sed unless additional information was available. These defaults include the estimated percentage of trucks (single unit and tractor trailer), buses and motorcycles. The level of service forT WSC intersections is determined only fori ndividual movements not for the intersection as a whole. The total delay is defined as the total elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of the queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line; this time includes the time required for the vehicle to travel from the last -in -queue position to the first -in- queue position. evel;of Service;Crteria for;TWSC Intersections Average Total Delay, UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS AWSC At an unsignalized all -way stop controlled (AWSC) intersection, all directions are controlled by a stop sign. Operation of AWSC intersections requires thate very vehicle stop att he intersection before proceeding. Since each driver is required to stop, the judgment as to whether to proceed into the intersection is a function of the traffic conditions on the other (opposing and conflicting) approaches. Therefore, a driver proceeds only after determining that there are no vehicles currently in the intersection and that it is safe to proceed. The analysis takes into account the problem of determining,u nder capacity conditions for a given approach, the factors that influence the rate at which vehicles can depart successfully from the STOP line. Traffic at other approaches,w hich increases potential conflict,t ranslates directly into longer driver decision times and saturation headways. The saturation headways are also influenced by characteristics of the traffic flow (slow accelerating vehicles, left tums,e tc.). In the analysis in this reports, all default values suggested by the HCM were used unless additional information was available. These defaults include the estimated percentage of trucks (single unit and tractor trailer), buses and motorcycles. The level of service for AWSC intersections is determined only for individual movements not for the intersection as a whole. The total delay is defined as the total elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of the queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line; this time includes the time required for the vehicle to travel from the last -in -queue position to the first -in- queue position. LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level of Service Description A B C D E F Levelo f Service A describes operations with very low delay,u p to 10 sec per vehicle. This level of service occurs when progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. Levelo f Service B describes operations with delay greater than 10 and up to 20 sec per vehicle. This level generally occurs with good progression, shortc ycle lengths, r both. More vehicles stop than for LOS A,c ausing higher levels of average delay. Level Of Service C describeso perationsw ith delay greater than 20 and up to 35 sec per vehicle. These higher delays may result from fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear in this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level,t hough many still pass though the intersection without stopping. Level of Service D describes operationsw ith delay greater than 35 and up to 55 sec per vehicle. At level D, the influence of congestion becomesm ore noticeable. Longer delaysm ay result from some combination of unfavorable progression, longer cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop,a nd the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. Levelo f Service E describes operations with delay greater than 55 and up to 80 sec per vehicle. This level is considered by many agencies to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. Levelo f Service F describes operations with delay in excess of 80 sec per vehicle. This level, considered to be unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with over saturation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. It may also occur at high v/c ratios below 1.0 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and cycle lengthsm ay also be major contributing causes to such delay levels. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS The operation (and therefore the capacity) of a signalized intersection is complicated by the fact that the signal is allocating time between conflicting traffic movements movements that must use the same physical space. The analysis, therefore, must not only look at the physical geometry of the intersection, but the signal timing aspects as well. In the analysis of signalized intersections, two termsa re important: volume to capacity ratio (v /c) and; average stopped delay (seconds per vehicle). The theoretical capacity is based on the physical geometry, the available green time (often expressed as G /C), and the traffic mix (e.g. trucks use more capacity than cars). The average stopped delay may be calculated from the v/c ratio, cycle length, quality of progression on the arterial and available green time on each approach. In this report all the default values recommended by the HCM are used unlesso ther specific information is available (percentage of trucks, pedestrians, etc.). Existing signal timings are observed and used whenever possible. When future signals are being evaluated, an "optional" signal timing is calculated based on projected volumes. The level of service is based on the calculated average delay per vehicle for each approach and for the intersection as a whole. Based on extensive research studies, the maximum delay acceptable by the average driver is sixty seconds per vehicle at a signalized intersection. This is defined as the upper limit on the possible range of delay /level of service criteria. The following criteria describe the full range of level of service: Stopped„ Delay er Vehicle (sec) 5_10.0 >10.0 and 5__20.05_' >20.0 and >35.0 and .55.0 >55.0 and 5_80.0; TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Intersection Tasker Road White Oak Road Analyst P HR +A Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdicti n Winchester, VA Date Performed 2/24/2005 Analysis Year Existing Conditions Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Project Description Cedar Meadows Development East/West Street: Tasker Road North /South Street: White Oak Road Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 127 261 37 6 114 4 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 133 274 38 6 120 4 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv 2 2 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT 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) 17 57 15 9 87 94 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 17 60 15 9 91 98 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent grade 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT LTR LTR Volume, v (vph) 133 6 92 198 Capacity, c (vph) 1463 1248 325 465 /c ratio 0.09 0.00 0.28 0.43 Queue length (95 0.30 0.01 1.14 2.09 Control Delay (s /veh) 7.7 7.9 20.4 18.4 LOS A A C C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Patton Harris Rust Associates pproach delay (s /veh) pproach LOS HC Copyright© 2003 Unive sity of Florida,A II Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust Associates 20.4 I C 18.4 C TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Road Tasker Road White Oak Analyst PHR +A Intersection Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Winchester, VA Date Performed 2/24/2005 Analysis Year Existing Conditions Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Project Description Cedar Meadows Development East/West Street: Tasker Road North /South Street: White Oak Road Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 90 113 8 3 205 32 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 94 118 8 3 215 33 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHV 2 2 Median type Undivided RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT 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) 17 54 4 7 40 147 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (vehih) 17 56 4 7 42 154 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHV 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent grade 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR LTR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Se vice pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LT LTR LTR Volume, v (vph) 94 3 77 203 Capacity, c (vph) 1318 1460 375 662 /c ratio 0.07 0.00 0.21 0.31 Queue length (95 0.23 0.01 0.76 1.30 Control Delay (s /veh) 7.9 7.5 17.1 12.8 LOS A A C B 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Patton Harris Rust Associates 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) c ratio Cueue length (95 Control Delay (s /veh) LOS pproach delay (s /veh) Eastbound 1 L 140 0.95 147 2 Undivided 0 LT Northbound 7 L 19 0.95 20 2 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service pproach EB 1 LT 147 1405 0.10 0.35 7.9 A TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 2 T 298 0.95 313 1 0 8 T 63 0.95 66 2 N 0 1 LTR WB 4 LT 7 1203 0.01 0.02 8.0 A Site Information North /South Street: White Oak Road Study Period (hrs): 0.25 3 R 41 0.95 43 0 1 R 9 R 17 0.95 17 2 0 0 0 Northbound 7 8 LTR 103 258 0.40 1.82 27.9 D Westbound 4 L 7 0.95 7 2 0 LT Southbound 10 L 10 0.95 10 2 0 9 27.9 5 T 160 0.95 168 1 0 11 T 96 0.95 101 2 N 0 1 LTR 10 6 R 4 0.95 4 0 1 R 12 R 104 0.95 109 2 0 0 0 Southbound 11 LTR 220 395 0.56 3.28 25.0 C 12 25.0 n Project Description Cedar Meadows Development East/West Street: Tasker Road Intersection Orientation: East -West Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc Intersection R Ra o s r Road White Oak ad Analyst PHR +A Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Winchester, VA Date Performed 4/14/2005 Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) c ratio Cueue length (95 Control Delay (s /veh) LOS pproach delay (s /veh) Eastbound 1 L 140 0.95 147 2 Undivided 0 LT Northbound 7 L 19 0.95 20 2 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service pproach EB 1 LT 147 1405 0.10 0.35 7.9 A TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 2 T 298 0.95 313 1 0 8 T 63 0.95 66 2 N 0 1 LTR WB 4 LT 7 1203 0.01 0.02 8.0 A Site Information North /South Street: White Oak Road Study Period (hrs): 0.25 3 R 41 0.95 43 0 1 R 9 R 17 0.95 17 2 0 0 0 Northbound 7 8 LTR 103 258 0.40 1.82 27.9 D Westbound 4 L 7 0.95 7 2 0 LT Southbound 10 L 10 0.95 10 2 0 9 27.9 5 T 160 0.95 168 1 0 11 T 96 0.95 101 2 N 0 1 LTR 10 6 R 4 0.95 4 0 1 R 12 R 104 0.95 109 2 0 0 0 Southbound 11 LTR 220 395 0.56 3.28 25.0 C 12 25.0 n Project Description Cedar Meadows Development East/West Street: Tasker Road Intersection Orientation: East -West Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc 1 1 Approach delay (s /veh) I I I 17 1 I 12 8 B A pproach LOS C ucs2000no Copyright@ 2003 University of Florida,A 11 Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust Associates (Approach LOS HC52000TM 1 1 1 0 1 C Copyright© 2003 University of Florida,A 11 Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 General Information Project Description Cedar Meadows Development East/West Street: Tasker Road ntersection Orientation: East -West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, P Median type RT Channelized? L anes C onfiguration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? 'Lanes Configuration Approach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95 Control Delay (s /veh) LOS Approach delay (s /veh) Eastbound L 99 0.95 104 2 Undivided 0 LT Northbound 7 L 19 0.95 20 2 0 0 EB 1 LT 104 1279 0.08 0.27 8.1 A TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 2 T 150 0.95 157 1 0 8 T 60 0.95 63 2 N 0 1 LTR WB 4 LT 3 1412 0.00 0.01 7.6 A Site Information North /South Street: White Oak Road Study Period (hrs): 0.25 3 R 9 0.95 9 0 1 R 9 R 4 0.95 4 2 0 0 7 8 LTR 87 316 0.28 1.10 20.7 C Westbound 4 L 3 0.95 3 2 0 LT Southbound 10 L 8 0.95 8 2 0 Northbound 9 20.7 5 T 235 0.95 247 1 0 11 T 44 0.95 46 2 N 0 1 LTR 10 6 R 35 0.95 36 0 1 R 12 R 162 0.95 170 2 0 0 0 !Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Southbound 11 LTR 224 609 0.37 1.69 14.3 8 12 14.3 Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc Intersection Tasker Road White Oak Analyst PHR +A Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Winchester,VA Date Performed 4/14/2005 Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 General Information Project Description Cedar Meadows Development East/West Street: Tasker Road ntersection Orientation: East -West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, P Median type RT Channelized? L anes C onfiguration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? 'Lanes Configuration Approach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95 Control Delay (s /veh) LOS Approach delay (s /veh) Eastbound L 99 0.95 104 2 Undivided 0 LT Northbound 7 L 19 0.95 20 2 0 0 EB 1 LT 104 1279 0.08 0.27 8.1 A TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 2 T 150 0.95 157 1 0 8 T 60 0.95 63 2 N 0 1 LTR WB 4 LT 3 1412 0.00 0.01 7.6 A Site Information North /South Street: White Oak Road Study Period (hrs): 0.25 3 R 9 0.95 9 0 1 R 9 R 4 0.95 4 2 0 0 7 8 LTR 87 316 0.28 1.10 20.7 C Westbound 4 L 3 0.95 3 2 0 LT Southbound 10 L 8 0.95 8 2 0 Northbound 9 20.7 5 T 235 0.95 247 1 0 11 T 44 0.95 46 2 N 0 1 LTR 10 6 R 35 0.95 36 0 1 R 12 R 162 0.95 170 2 0 0 0 !Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Southbound 11 LTR 224 609 0.37 1.69 14.3 8 12 14.3 Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc (Approach LOS 1 1 1 C 1 B HC52000TTt Copyright® 2003 University of Florida,A 11 Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc HCS2000" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PI-113+A Date Performed 4/14/2005 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker Road White Oak Road Jurisdiction Type All other areas Jurisdiction Winchester, a VA Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Cedar Meadows Project ID Development Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 Lane group LT R LT R LTR LTR Volume, V (vph) 140 298 41 7 160 4 19 63 17 10 96 104 Heavy vehicles, %HV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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 20 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, 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 12.0 120 120 12.0 120 120 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 Min time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only EW Perm 03 04 SB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G =1 0.0 G= 42.0 G= G= G =1 1.0 G= 17.0 G= G= Y -0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y =0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T 0.25 Cycle Length, C 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 461 43 175 4 104 221 Lane group capacity, c 851 933 873 754 319 534 v/c ratio, X 0.54 0.05 0.20 0.01 0.33 0.41 Total green ratio, g/C 0.58 0.58 0.47 0.47 0.19 0.31 Uniform delay, d 11.7 8.2 14.1 128 31.5 24.5 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc Progression factor, PF Delay calibration, k 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.5 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 12.4 8.3 14.2 12.8 32.1 25.0 Lane group LOS B A B B C C Approach delay 12.0 14.2 32.1 25.0 Approach LOS 8 8 C C Intersection delay 17.3 X 0.57 Intersection LOS 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HCS2000 Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida,A II Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc erslon a.le HCS2000" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 4/14/2005 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker Road White Oak Road Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Winchester, VA Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Cedar Meadows Project ID Development Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 Lane group LT R LT R LTR LTR Volume, V (vph) 99 150 9 3 235 35 19 60 4 8 44 162 Heavy vehicles, %HV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped Bike RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 120 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 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only EW Perm 03 04 SB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G =1 0.0 G= 42.0 G= G= G =1 0.2 G= 17.8 G= G= Y =0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y =0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T 0.25 Cycle Length, C 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 262 9 250 37 87 225 Lane group capacity, c 758 933 884 754 335 524 v/c ratio, X 0.35 0.01 0.28 0.05 0.26 0.43 Total green ratio, g/C 0.58 0.58 0.47 0.47 0.20 0.31 Uniform delay, d 10.0 8.1 14.7 13.1 30.5 24.6 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc Progression factor, PF Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.4 0.6 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 10.3 8.1 14.9 13.1 30.9 25.2 Lane group LOS 8 A B B C C Approach delay 10.2 14.7 30.9 25.2 Approach LOS B B C C Intersection delay 17.6 X 0.52 Intersection LOS B 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HCS Copyright 200 University of Florida,A 11 Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc Version 4.1e Analyst PHR +A Agency /Co. PHR +A Date Performed 4/14/2005 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 General Information Project Description Cedar Meadows Development East/West Street: Tasker Road Intersection Orientation: East -West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy v ehicles, P Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy v ehicles, PHv Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Eastbound 1 L 140 0.95 147 2 0 LT 7 L 26 0.95 27 2 0 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 2 T 298 0.95 313 1 0 Northbound 8 T 70 0.95 73 2 0 N 0 1 LTR Site Information Intersection Jurisdicti n Analysis Year Tasker Road White Oak Road Winchester, VA 2007 Buildout Conditions North /South Street: White Oak Road Study Period (hrs): 0.25 3 R 45 0.95 47 0 1 R 9 R 19 0.95 20 2 0 0 Westbound 4 L 8 0.95 8 2 Undivided 0 LT Southbound 10 L 10 0.95 10 2 0 0 5 T 160 0.95 168 1 0 11 T 100 0.95 105 2 N 0 1 LTR 6 R 4 0.95 4 0 1 R 12 R 104 0.95 109 2 0 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95 Control Delay (s /veh) LOS Approach delay (s /veh) EB 1 LT 147 1405 0.10 0.35 7.9 A WB 4 LT 8 1199 0.01 0.02 8.0 A Northbound 7 8 LTR 120 249 0.48 2.43 32.2 D 9 32.2 Southbound 10 11 LTR 224 387 0.58 3.52 26.3 D 12 26.3 Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc 'Approach LOS HC52000TM 0 Copyright® 2003 University of Florida,A II Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc D Analyst PHR +A Agency /Co. PHR +A Date Performed 4/14/2005 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 General Information Project Description Cedar Meadows Development East/West Street: Tasker Road Intersection Orientation: East -West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHV Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration pproach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) c ratio Queue length (95 Control Delay (s /veh) LOS pproach delay (s /veh) Eastbound 1 L 99 0.95 104 2 Undivided 0 LT 7 L 26 0.95 27 2 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service EB 1 LT 104 1279 0.08 0.27 8.1 A TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 2 T 150 0.95 157 1 0 8 T 67 0.95 70 2 N 0 1 LTR WB 4 LT 7 1398 0.01 0.02 7.6 A Site Information Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Year Tasker Road White Oak Road Winchester, VA 2007 Buildout Conditions North /South Street: White Oak Road Study Period (hrs): 0.25 3 R 20 0.95 21 0 1 R Northbound 9 R 7 0.95 7 2 0 0 0 Northbound 7 8 LTR 104 305 0.34 1.47 22.8 C Westbound 4 L 7 0.95 7 2 0 LT Southbound 10 L 8 0.95 8 2 0 9 22.8 5 T 235 0.95 247 1 0 11 T 56 0.95 58 2 N 0 1 LTR 10 6 R 35 0.95 36 0 1 R 12 R 162 0.95 170 2 0 0 0 Southbound 11 LTR 236 580 0.41 1.97 15.4 C 12 15.4 Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc 'Approach LOS HCS2000TM I 1 1 c 1 c I Copyright® 2003 University of Florida,A 11 Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc HCS2000" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A y Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 4/14/2005 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker Road White Oak Road Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Winchester, VA Analysis Year 2007 Build-out Conditions Cedar Meadows Project ID Development Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input nst e- nM` as %L EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 Lane group LT R LT R LTR LTR Volume, V (vph) 140 298 45 8 160 4 26 70 19 10 100 104 Heavy vehicles, %HV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped Bike RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 120 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 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only EW Perm 03 04 SB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G =1 0.8 G= 41.4 G= G= G =1 0.2 G= 17.6 G= G= Y =0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y =0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T 0.25 Cycle Length, C 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 461 47 176 4 121 225 Lane group capacity, c 855 937 857 743 323 533 v/c ratio, X 0.54 0.05 0.21 0.01 0.37 0.42 Total green ratio, g/C 0.58 0.58 0.46 0.46 0.20 0.31 Uniform delay, d 11.5 8.2 14.5 13.2 31.4 24.7 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc Progression factor, PF Delay calibration, k 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.7 0.5 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 12.2 8.2 14.6 13.2 32.2 25.3 Lane group LOS B A B B C C Approach delay 11.9 14.6 32.2 25.3 Approach LOS B B C C Intersection delay 17.6 X 0.58 Intersection LOS 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HCS2000 Copyright 2000 University of Florida,A II Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc Version 4.1 e HCS2000" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 4/14/2005 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Tasker Road White Oak Road Area Type Al) other areas Jurisdiction Winchester, VA Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Cedar Meadows Project ID Development Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 Lane group LT R LT R LTR LTR Volume, V (vph) 99 150 20 7 235 35 26 67 7 8 56 162 Heavy vehicles, %HV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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 Extension of effective green, a 2.0 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 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 12.0 120 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 Min. time for pedestrians, G, 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only EW Perm 03 04 SB Only NS Perm 07 08 Timing G =1 0.0 G= 42.0 G= G= G =1 0.5 G= 17.5 G= G= Y =0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y =0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T 0.25 Cycle Length, C 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 262 21 254 37 105 238 Lane group capacity, c 754 933 880 754 319 526 v/c ratio, X 0.35 0.02 0.29 0.05 0.33 0.45 Total green ratio, g/C 0.58 0.58 0.47 0.47 0.19 0.31 Uniform delay, d 10.0 8.1 14.8 13.1 31.2 24.9 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc Progression factor, PF Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.6 0.6 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 10.3 8.1 15.0 13.1 31.8 25.5 Lane group LOS B A 8 8 C C Approach delay 10.2 14.7 31.8 25.5 Approach LOS B B C C Intersection delay 18.1 X 0.55 Intersection LOS 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HCS2000 Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida,A II Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc Version 4,1e TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst PHR +A gency /Co. PHR +A Date Performed 4/14/2005 nalysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection White Oak Rd &Site- driveway Jurisdiction Winchester, VA Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project Description Cedar Meadows Development East/West Street: Site- driveway North /South Street: White Oak Road Intersection Orientation: North -South Study Period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 4 98 0 0 143 10 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 103 0 0 150 10 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 17 0 7 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 17 0 7 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 0 0 2 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 pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane. Configuration LT LR (vph) 4 24 C (m) (vph) 1419 765 lc 0.00 0.03 95% queue length 0.01 0.10 Control Delay 75 9.9 LOS A A pproach Delay 9 9 pproach LOS A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Rights Reserved Copyright() 2003 University of Florida,A 11 Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust Associates Version 4.Id TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency /Co. PHR +A Date Performed 4/14/2005 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection White Oak Rd &Site driveway Jurisdiction Winchester, VA Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project Description Cedar Meadows Development East/West Street: Site- driveway North /South Street: White Oak Road Intersection Orientation: North -South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 11 83 0 0 56 27 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 11 87 0 0 58 28 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 17 0 7 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 17 0 7 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 0 0 2 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 Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 11 24 C (m) (vph) 1510 850 v/c 0.01 0.03 95% queue length 0.02 0.09 Control Delay 7.4 9.4 LOS A A Approach Delay 9.4 Approach LOS A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 1 1 Rights Reserved Copyright® 2003 University of Florida,A 11 Rights Reserved Patton Hams Rust Associates Version 4.1d Intersection: E -W: TASKER RD Weather RY File InputB Name NS: WHITE OAK RD CountB y 111' y IHP Location winchester,va CountD ate 126/2005 15 Minute EB: TASKER RD WB: TASKER RD NB: WHITE OAK RD SB: WHITE OAK RD 15 Min. Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thor Right Total E W Begining 7:00 19 64 2 85 2 21 0 23 3 8 7 18 6 10 16 32 158 7:00 7:15 22 70 7 99 3 24 2 29 4 0 4 18 4 20 24 48 194 7:15 7:30 27 73 16 116 2 26 1 29 7 4 5 26 2 29 22 53 224 7:30 7:45 42 66 10 118 1 30 1 32 4 4 4 22 I 24 28 53 225 7:45 8:00 36 52 4 92 0 34 0 34 2 9 2 23 2 14 20 36 185 8:00 8:15 29 47 3 79 1 37 3 41 4 2 4 20 4 8 16 28 168 8:15 8:30 18 41 2 61 2 31 1 34 3 8 3 14 0 6 16 22 131 8:30 8:45 15 36 3 54 0 26 2 28 5 0 5 20 2 7 12 21 123 8:45 A.M.T otal 208 449 47 704 II 229 10 250 32 95 34 161 21 118 154 293 1408 A.M.T otal 16:00 19 29 3 51 I 51 6 58 3 8 1 12 1 10 29 40 161 16:00 16:15 18 31 2 51 0 48 4 52 4 8 0 12 2 8 29 39 154 16:15 16:30 17 30 1 48 2 50 8 60 3 10 1 14 0 11 34 45 167 16:30 16:45 21 30 3 54 0 55 8 63 2 15 2 19 1 10 34 45 181 16:45 [7:00 22 29 2 53 1 49 6 56 7 19 0 26 3 14 37 54 189 17:00 17:15 30 24 2 56 0 51 10 61 5 10 I 16 3 5 42 50 183 17:15 17:30 24 20 1 45 1 52 7 60 2 7 2 11 2 7 30 39 155 17:30 17:45 17 16 3 36 0 44 5 49 3 6 0 9 0 5 21 26 120 17:45 P.M.T otal 168 209 17 394 5 400 54 459 29 83 7 119 12 70 256 338 1310 P.M.T otal 1 Hour EB: TASKER RD WB: TASKER RD NB: WHTTE OAK RD SB: WHITE OAK RD 1 Hour Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thor Right Total Left Thru Right Total E W Begining 7:00 110 273 35 418 8 101 4 113 18 46 20 84 13 83 90 186 801 7:00 7:15 127 261 37 425 6 114 4 124 17 57 15 89 9 87 94 190 828 7:15 7:30 134 238 33 405 4 127 5 136 17 59 15 91 9 75 86 170 802 7:30 7:45 125 206 19 350 4 132 5 141 13 53 13 79 7 52 80 139 709 7:45 8:00 98 176 12 286 3 128 6 137 14 49 14 77 8 35 64 107 607 8:00 16:00 75 120 9 204 3 204 26 233 12 41 4 57 4 39 126 169 663 16:00 16:15 78 120 8 206 3 202 26 231 16 52 3 71 6 43 134 183 691 16:15 16:30 90 113 8 211 3 205 32 240 17 54 4 75 7 40 147 194 720 16:30 16:45 97 103 8 208 2 207 31 240 16 51 5 72 9 36 143 188 708 16:45 17:00 93 89 8 190 2 196 28 226 17 42 3 62 8 31 130 169 647 17:00 1 Hour EB: TASKER RD WB: TASKER RD NB: WHITE OAK RD SB: WHITE OAK RD 1 Hour Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E W Begining 7:15 127 261 37 425 6 114 4 124 17 57 15 89 9 87 94 190 828 7:15 A.M.P eak PHF 0.90 PHF 0.91 PHF 0.86 PHF 0.90 0.92 A.M.P eak 16:30 90 113 8 211 3 205 32 240 17 54 4 75 7 40 147 194 720 16:30 P.M. Peak PHF 0.94 PHF 0.95 PHF 0.72 PHF 0.90 0.95 P.M.P eak 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1