Loading...
Z-5646-A Application 1Traffic Study West Little Rock U P prepared for.- Little or:Little Rock School "IJINUIUL 71 r�. yti PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. • CIVIL & TRAFFIC ENGINEERING • 5507 Ranch Drive - Suite 205 (501) 868-3999 Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 Fax (501) 868-9710 Taylor Loop Road and Forest L ane Little Rock, Arkansas 011,0*s � A 1 Em 67%t` ARKANSAS REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER ERNEST J. PETERS Project No.: P-736-41 June 11, 2007 Y TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Pa" EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION THE SITE STREET SYSTEM EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS TRIP GENERATION & SITE TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS TRAFFIC VOLUME ASSIGNMENTS CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FIGURES APPENDIX PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. Site Plan Vehicle Turning Movement Count Data Capacity and Level of Service Calculations Traffic Signal Warrants and Results 1 5 7 9 11 16 18 20 29 33 37 Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. conducted a traffic im- pact study for a proposed school in the Little Rock School District (LRSD) located on the west side of Taylor Loop Road (west), south of Highway 10 (Cantrell Road) and north of For- est Lane in Little Rock, Arkansas. The school is proposed to be constructed in two phases described as follows: • Phase 1 includes the development of an elementary school (Grades Pre -K thru 5) to accommodate a maxi- mum of 895 students. • Full Build -Out includes the development of Phase 1 plus the addition of a middle school (Grades 6-8) to accommo- date a maximum of an additional 440 students (total of 1,335 students). The parent pick-up / drop-off access drive to serve the school is proposed to intersect Forest Lane at the southwest edge of the site approximately 550 feet west of Taylor Loop Road. Approximately 330 feet east of the parent pick-up / drop-off access drive and approximately 250 feet west of Taylor Loop Road is the Pre -K pick-up / drop-off drive. This Pre -K pick-up / drop-off drive also serves as access to the school parking lot. The proposed one-way bus loop is located on-site and parallel to Taylor Loop Road. The entrance to the bus loop is proposed to be approximately 250 feet south of Highway 10 and the exit is approximately 850 feet south of the entrance. A reduced copy of the site plan is included in the Appendix for reference. There are expected to be few pedestrians (children walking to and from school) at this school because of the location of the school and its proximity to Highway 10. Information provided by LRSD for the breakdown of students expected to ride the bus and parent pick-up / drop-off is as follows: Elementary School (Phase 1) It is expected that approximately 55 percent of the elemen- tary school students will ride the bus (this is slightly lower PETERS & ASSOCIATES 1 Page 7 ENGINEERS. INC. - - - r AgP+ 1 C'r i T -r,_ r -'t ,rr('Y than the nearest existing schools in the vicinity - Fulbright Elementary School and Terry Elementary School). The majority of the remaining 45 percent of the elementary school students are expected to be picked -up and dropped -off by private vehicles. Middle School (Full Build -Out) It is expected that approximately 60 percent of the middle school students will ride the bus. The majority of the re- maining 40 percent of the middle school students are ex- pected to be picked -up and dropped -off by private vehi- cles. Existing 24-hour traffic counts were made in the vicinity of the site at the following locations: • Highway 10 at Taylor Loop Road. • Taylor Loop Road at the site. • Forest Lane at the site. Existing vehicle turning movement count data were gath- ered by this consultant for the following intersections in the vicinity of the site: Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane_ Projected traffic volumes for Phase 1 and for Full Build - Out of the proposed school were calculated. These pro- jected site -generated trips were added to the existing traf- fic volumes, which resulted in total projected traffic vol- umes at Phase 1 and full build -out of the proposed school site. There are no planned roadway improvements by the Ar- kansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) or the City of Little Rock, independent of the pro- posed school development, in the immediate vicinity of the study area. PETERS & ASSOCIATES ✓� ENGINEERS. INC. Page age+ L Existing conditions at the study intersections of Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road and Taylor Loop Road and For- est Lane were analyzed and compared to projected traffic conditions at these same two intersections as well as the access drives proposed to serve the school. Recommended schematic lane geometry for the immedi- ate vicinity surrounding the proposed school is shown on Figure 11, "Recommended Schematic Lane Geometry." Recommendations of this study, for both Phase 1 and full build -out, are summarized as follows: • It is recommended to widen Taylor Loop Road to three lanes from south of Forest Lane to Highway 10. It is recommended that Forest Lane be widened to three lanes from just west of the Parent Pick -Up / Drop -Off Loop to Taylor Loop Road. Additionally, For- est Lane, west of the site, should be widened to a minimum two-lane roadway section to allow for an eastbound lane and a westbound lane. It is recommended that Highway 10 be widened to accommodate the addition of an eastbound right -turn lane at Taylor Loop Road. • It is recommended that the roadway geometry for the Pre -K Pick -Up / Drop -Off Loop approach to Forest Lane be constructed to consist of an outbound lane and an inbound receiving lane. It is recommended that the roadway geometry of the Parent Pick -Up / Drop -Off Loop approach to Forest Lane be constructed to consist of an outbound left - turn lane, an outbound right -turn lane and two in- bound receiving lanes. • It is recommended that sidewalks be constructed ad- jacent to the site along Highway 10, Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane. PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS. INC. — - - Page 3 It is recommended that a fully -actuated traffic signal be installed at the intersection of Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road coincident with the Phase 1 site development. This traffic signal should have provisions to be a part of a closed-loop coordinated traffic signal system. It is recommended at full build -out conditions the intersec- tion of Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane be re- evaluated, based on actual traffic volumes, and traffic sig- nal warrants be re-examined. Traffic signal design at Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road and roadway improvements along Highway 10 must conform to AHTD and the City of Little Rock design stan- dards and will require approval by AHTD and the City. Roadway improvements along Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane must conform to the City of Little Rock de- sign standards and will require approval by the City. PETERS & ASSOCIATES n A 4 ENGINEERS, INC. Page rSr INTRODUCTIONPeters & Associates Engineers, Inc. conducted a traffic impact study for a proposed school in the Little Rock School District (LRSD) located on the west side of Taylor Loop Road (west), south of Highway 10 (Cantrell Road) and north of Forest Lane in Little Rock, Arkansas. The school is proposed to be constructed in two phases de- scribed as follows: Phase 1 includes the development of an elementary school (Grades Pre -K thru 5) to accommodate a maxi- mum of 895 students. Full Build -Out includes the development of Phase 1 plus the addition of a middle school (Grades 6-8) to accommodate a maximum of an additional 440 stu- dents (total of 1,335 students). The parent pick-up / drop-off access drive to serve the school is proposed to intersect Forest Lane at the south- west edge of the site approximately 550 feet west of Tay- lor Loop Road. Approximately 330 feet east of the parent pick-up / drop-off access drive and approximately 250 feet west of Taylor Loop Road is the Pre -K pick-up / drop- off drive. This Pre -K pick-up / drop-off drive also serves as access to the school parking lot. The proposed one- way bus loop is located on-site and parallel to Taylor Loop Road. The entrance to the bus loop is proposed to be approximately 250 feet south of Highway 10 and the exit is approximately 850 feet south of the entrance. A reduced copy of the site plan is included in the Appendix for reference. This is a report of methodology and findings relating to a traffic engineering study undertaken to: • Evaluate existing traffic conditions in the vicinity of the site. Determine projected traffic volumes for both phases of development entering and exiting the site at the adja- cent intersections of Highway 10 and Taylor Loop QagePETERS & ASSOCIATES 7� ENGINEERS INC. r .J Road and Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane as well as the access drive intersections proposed to serve the site. Identify the effects on traffic operations resulting from existing traffic in combination with site -generated traf- fic associated with the planned school development. Evaluate proposed access to the site and make rec- ommendations for mitigative improvements which may be necessary and appropriate to ensure mini- mum impact and acceptable traffic operations. In the following sections of this report there are presented traffic data, study methods, findings and recommenda- tions of this traffic engineering investigation. The traffic engineering study is technical in nature. Analysis tech- niques employed are those most commonly used in the traffic engineering profession for traffic impact analysis. Certain data and calculations relative to traffic operational analysis are referenced in the report. Complete calcula- tions and data are included in the Appendix of the report. PETERS & ASSOCIATES D L ENGINEERS. INC. - Page V The location of the proposed school is within the City of Lit- tle Rock, Arkansas. The site is located on the west side of Taylor Loop Road, south of Highway 10 and north of Forest Lane. The proposed school site location and vicinity are shown on Figures 1 and 2, which follow. f� ENGINEERS, INC. — — YagPi I - PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. The parent pick-up / drop-off access drive to serve the school is proposed to intersect Forest Lane at the south- west edge of the site approximately 550 feet west of Tay- lor Loop Road. Approximately 330 feet east of the parent pick-up / drop-off access drive and approximately 250 feet west of Taylor Loop Road is the Pre -K pick-up / drop- off drive. This Pre -K pick-up / drop-off drive also serves as access to the school parking lot. The proposed bus loop is located along Taylor Loop Road. The entrance to the bus loop is proposed to be approximately 250 feet south of Highway 10 and the exit is approximately 850 feet south of the entrance. The school is proposed to be constructed in two phases (same access for both phases of development) as de- scribed as follows: 0 Phase 1 includes the development of an elementary school (Grades Pre -K thru 5) to accommodate a maxi- mum of 895 students. Full Build -Out includes the development of Phase 1 plus the addition of a middle school (Grades 6-8) to accommodate a maximum of an additional 440 stu- dents (total of 1,335 students). Page 8 11 STREET SYSTEM Taylor Loop Road, at the site is a 22 -foot wide asphalt highway constructed with shoulders and drainage ditches. There are no sidewalks and the speed limit is 30 miles per hour. Highway 10, Cantrell Road, is a 60 -foot wide road con- sisting of two 12 -foot eastbound lanes, two 12 -foot west- bound lanes and a 12 -foot bi-directional center left -turn lane. This asphalt highway is constructed with curbs and gutters and there are no sidewalks in the vicinity of the site. The speed limit is 50 miles per hour in the vicinity of the school. Forest Lane at the site is a one -lane roadway (width var- ies) constructed with drainage ditches. There are no sidewalks and the speed limit is 30 miles per hour. There are no existing traffic signals in the immediate vi- cinity of the site. Approximately 0.8 mile to the east of the site, the intersection of Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road (East) is signalized. Approximately 0.5 mile to the west of the site, the intersection of Highway 10 and Ranch Drive / Drew Lane is signalized. The photos following show the general layout of Highway 10, Taylor Loop Road, Forest Lane and surrounding land uses in the vicinity of the site. These were taken at loca- tions as indicated in the photo captions. OIj PETERS & ASSOCIATES — — roc. Page 9 PETERS & ASSOCIATES 7� ENGINEERS, INC. Page, 10 rr- EXISTING TRAFFIC Hourly, 24-hour traffic counts were made at the following CONDITIONS locations in the vicinity of the site by this consultant as a part of this study. PETERS & ASSOCIATES QENGINEERS. INC. _- Hourly 24-hour traffic count data are summarized on Ta- bles and Charts 1, 2 and 3. Existing AM and school PM peak hours vehicle turning movement counts were made by this consultant in the vicinity of the site at the following intersections: • Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road • Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane. The AM and school PM peak hour turning movement count data made as a part of this study are shown in the following peak hours vehicle turning movement Charts 4 thru 7 and are presented in more detail in the Appendix of this report. AM and school PM peak hour vehicle turning movement counts made as a part of this study are shown on Figure 3, "Existing Traffic Volumes - AM and School PM Peak Hours." Page 11 24-HOUR TWO-WAY TABLE & STREET VOLUME CHART Highway 10 at Taylor Loop Road 1 25,507 Table 1/Chart 1 Taylor Loop Road at the Site 1,272 Table 2/Chart 2 Forest Lane at the Site 394 Table 3/Chart 3 PETERS & ASSOCIATES QENGINEERS. INC. _- Hourly 24-hour traffic count data are summarized on Ta- bles and Charts 1, 2 and 3. Existing AM and school PM peak hours vehicle turning movement counts were made by this consultant in the vicinity of the site at the following intersections: • Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road • Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane. The AM and school PM peak hour turning movement count data made as a part of this study are shown in the following peak hours vehicle turning movement Charts 4 thru 7 and are presented in more detail in the Appendix of this report. AM and school PM peak hour vehicle turning movement counts made as a part of this study are shown on Figure 3, "Existing Traffic Volumes - AM and School PM Peak Hours." Page 11 120 100 e0 0 > 60 z i 40 20 0 1600 1400 1200 91000 0 > 800 T L O 600 x 400 200 0 it : Sr o'` qr° P P� P� h Pt~ e P� e Hour Table 2—Chart 2 24 -Hour Traffic Counts Taylor Loop Road at the Site. Hour Table 1—Chart 1 24 -Hour Traffic Counts Highway 10 at Taylor Loop Road. Highway 10 atTayior LO Road TIME Eastbound Westbound EB + WB 01:00 PM 743 723 1466 02:00 PM 520 726 1246 03:00 PM 1400 1077 2477 04:00 PM 1116 1154 2270 05:00 PM 1156 1168 2324 06:00 PM 820 991 1811 07:00 PM 493 623 1116 08:00 PM 328 281 609 09:00 PM 272 206 478 10.00 PM 238 145 383 11:00 PM 85 101 186 12:00 AM 100 95 195 01:00 AM 24 23 47 02:00 AM 18 17 35 03:00 AM 15 23 39 04:00 AM 25 26 51 05:00 AM 39 45 84 06:00 AM 271 258 529 07:00 AM 1268 1172 2440 08:00 AM 1096 962 2058 09:00 AM 756 880 1636 10:00 AM 643 685 1328 11:00 AM 690 526 1216 12:00 PM 11 754 728 1482 24 -Hour Total: 12870 12636 25507 120 100 e0 0 > 60 z i 40 20 0 1600 1400 1200 91000 0 > 800 T L O 600 x 400 200 0 it : Sr o'` qr° P P� P� h Pt~ e P� e Hour Table 2—Chart 2 24 -Hour Traffic Counts Taylor Loop Road at the Site. Hour Table 1—Chart 1 24 -Hour Traffic Counts Highway 10 at Taylor Loop Road. PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INQ Page 12 Taylor Loop Road at the Site TIME Northbound Southbound NB + SB 01:00 PM 38 38 76 02:00 PM 42 54 96 03:00 PM 55 100 155 04:00 PM 36 59 95 05:00 PM 37 56 93 06:00 PM 33 30 63 07:00 PM 15 29 44 08:00 PM 25 28 53 09:00 PM 16 21 37 10:00 PM 9 6 15 11:00 PM 2 5 7 12:00 AM 1 1 2 01:00 AM 2 1 3 02:00 AM 1 0 1 03:00 AM 0 0 0 04:00 AM 4 1 5 05:00 AM 2 3 5 06:00 AM 13 11 24 07:00 AM 59 56 115 08:00 AM 55 59 114 09:00 AM 38 34 72 10:00 AM 34 23 57 11:00 AMP587 7 31 68 12:00 PM3 39 72 24 -Hour Total: 685 1272 PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INQ Page 12 TIME Forest Lane (Two -Way) at the Site Eastbound and Westbound 01:00 PM 36 02:00 PM 18 03:00 PM 37 04:00 PM 22 05:00 PM 27 06:00 P M 24 07:00 PM 14 08:00 PM 15 09:00 PM 4 10:00 PM 3 11:00 PM 3 12:00 AM 1 01:00 AM 3 02:00 AM 0 03:00 AM 0 04:00 AM 0 05:00 AM 06:00 AM 3 8 07:00 AM 38 08:00 AM 26 09:00 AM 36 10:00 AM 24 11:00 AM 16 12:00 PM 36 24Hour Total: 394 PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. 40 35 30 25 O > 20 0 15 x 10 le I FF,T` r 1 �1 r-r.'�r and 0 RsI'pR$' Qat' a P� � 0, 0, P4 .}. f�a A6 ate Aa Ad AO ' ,` tiry• a ' d( o'�' ;- of .�" Hour Table 3 --Chart 3 24 -Hour Traffic Counts Forest Lane at the Site. Page 13 Hwy 10. Taylor Loop Rd. . Hwy 10 .. From East-Thru From South -Right From West -Right Hwy 10 Taylor Loop Rd. Hwy 10 . From East -Left From South -Left From West-Thru 500 400 r 300 � 200 100 0 o 8 0 0 Time of Day Chart 4 AM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count Data Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road. 1063 1113 Count Data "00 PM Rd. PETERS & ASSOCIATES F[j] ENGINEERS, INC. 1251 1303 a 1 -.AM Count Data r WAS AM = 08.06AM ►1349 1413 64 1259 1261.+ 8 1356 1349 -7 e- l' North Chart 5 School PM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count Data 1077 1063 Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road. 14 ■ Hwy 10■ Taylor Loop Rd. ® HWY 10 From East-Thru From South -Right From West -Right Hwy 10 Taylor Loop Rd. ® HWY 10 From East -Left From South -Lett From West-Thru 400 400 s 350 G 300 250 200 '160 0 160 100 60 0 300 250 i Ellin 200 0 C! Iff 160 100 o 8 0 0 Time of Day Chart 4 AM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count Data Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road. 1063 1113 Count Data "00 PM Rd. PETERS & ASSOCIATES F[j] ENGINEERS, INC. 1251 1303 a 1 -.AM Count Data r WAS AM = 08.06AM ►1349 1413 64 1259 1261.+ 8 1356 1349 -7 e- l' North Chart 5 School PM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count Data 1077 1063 Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road. 14 ■ Hwy 10■ Taylor Loop Rd. ® HWY 10 From East-Thru From South -Right From West -Right Hwy 10 Taylor Loop Rd. ® HWY 10 From East -Left From South -Lett From West-Thru 400 400 s 350 G 300 250 200 '160 0 160 100 60 0 Time of Day Page 14 300 250 i 200 160 100 it 50 a a n a o a h a d O 10 a O a Y7 a O 0 l d 10 Time of Day Page 14 20 Is 16 10 6 0 FF. tC�- 1. `1 Tcl 23 Taylor Loop Rd. 3 20 1 2 J N e s s s s U_ Time of Day Chart 6 AM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count Data Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane. 28 Taylor Loop Rd. .a. SPM Count U) 0 03.. M w Ta Ior PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS. INC. 1 21 AM Q r r a� cp � n North InTavior Loon Rdi. '�' Chart 7 School PM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count Data Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane. 2 ■Taylor W1 Lmp itd For st Ln. ® Taylor Loop Rd. Fromhod),77 Fom East-Thru From Souttkeft .Rd. Forest Ln Forest Ln. From Nortlor h Thru _ From East -Left ■ Fm West-RIgM a ■ Traylor Loop Rd. ■ Taylor Loop Rd ® Forest Ln. From North -Left From SotkhRlgh From Weal-Thru y Forest LnTaylor Loop Rd Forest Ln. 'Y From Eestaghl ■ From South -Thu From West -Left r P 2s 20 E 16 10 6 0 Taylor Loop Rd. ® Forest Ln. ■ Teykr Loop Rd. From North -Right Ea From st-Thru From 5ovh-Len Loop Rd ® Forest Ln. est ForLn. ©Taylor From Nodh-Thru From Esstlett From West -Right ■ Taylor Loop Rd, ■ Taylor L ■ Fared o WLR From North -Left From South Right Thu Faad Ln . Taylor Loop Rd Forest Ln. From West -Left From East-RIgH From Snu<h•T1w 20 Is 16 10 6 0 FF. tC�- 1. `1 Tcl 23 Taylor Loop Rd. 3 20 1 2 J N e s s s s U_ Time of Day Chart 6 AM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count Data Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane. 28 Taylor Loop Rd. .a. SPM Count U) 0 03.. M w Ta Ior PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS. INC. 1 21 AM Q r r a� cp � n North InTavior Loon Rdi. '�' Chart 7 School PM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count Data Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane. 2 ■Taylor W1 Lmp itd For st Ln. ® Taylor Loop Rd. Fromhod),77 Fom East-Thru From Souttkeft .Rd. Forest Ln Forest Ln. From Nortlor h Thru _ From East -Left ■ Fm West-RIgM a ■ Traylor Loop Rd. ■ Taylor Loop Rd ® Forest Ln. From North -Left From SotkhRlgh From Weal-Thru y Forest LnTaylor Loop Rd Forest Ln. 'Y From Eestaghl ■ From South -Thu From West -Left r P 2s 20 E 16 10 6 0 o q, e cIt or a a $ a o 0 North Time of Day Page 15 pil I 1111111 .mlli o q, e cIt or a a $ a o 0 North Time of Day Page 15 F :i Information provided by LRSD for the breakdown of stu- dents expected to ride the bus and parent pick-up / drop- off is as follows: Elementary School (Phase 1) It is expected that approximately 55 percent of the elementary school students will ride the bus (this is slightly lower than the nearest existing schools in the vicinity - Fulbright Elementary School and Terry Elementary School). The majority of the re- maining 45 percent of the elementary school stu- dents are expected to be picked -up and dropped - off by private vehicles. Middle School (Full Build -Out) It is expected that approximately 60 percent of the middle school students will ride the bus. The ma- jority of the remaining 40 percent of the middle school students are expected to be picked -up and dropped -off by private vehicles. The Trip Generation, an Informational Report (7th Edi- tion), 2004, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and The Trip Generation Software (Version 5 by Microtrans), were researched in calculating the magnitude of traffic volumes expected to be gener- ated by the proposed school (for both scenarios) of this development. Although these are reliable sources for this information, it was found that the published trip - generation average rate for elementary school use and middle school use are slightly lower than expected for the proposed facility. For conditions of this site, information provided by LRSD, as stated above, was taken into con- sideration. The 45 percent of students associated with the elementary school not riding the bus total approxi- mately 403 students. The 40 percent of students associ- ated with the middle school not riding the bus total ap- proximately 176 students. Since the published ITE trip - generation rate was slightly lower than what is expected at this school, it was assumed and used as a part of this PETERS & ASSOCIATES _ -- C ENGINEERS. INC. Page �AgPi 1 V i I f: 1 7 f[ , r. 1 .�� + study that each private vehicle pick-up / drop-off aver- age 1.5 students per vehicle (within the ITE range of rates). This results in the following entering and exiting trip -generation rates: Using the selected trip -generation rates, calculations were made as a part of this study to provide a reliable estimate of traffic volumes that can be expected to be associated with the development as proposed. Apply- ing the appropriate trip -generation rates to the land use proposed for the development makes these calcula- tions. Results of this calculation are summarized on Table 4, "Trip -Generation Summary," below. These data have not been adjusted for "pass -by" trips (i.e. that portion of the site destined traffic that may come from the existing adjacent street traffic stream) due to the land use and location of the site. The major- ity of the vehicle trips destined for the site are not ex- pected to be in the existing traffic volumes. Table 4 — Trip -Generation Summary pans & ASSOCIATES FGY ENGINEERS, INC. Page 17 Elementary and middle school traffic, as will be associ- ated with this site, ordinarily does contribute to the ad- jacent street traffic conditions during the on -street AM peak traffic hour and the school PM peak traffic hour. Accordingly, both the AM and school PM peak traffic periods of the adjacent streets in the immediate vicinity of the site are the traffic operating conditions which have warranted primary traffic analysis as a part of this study. Once projected traffic was estimated for the site, direc- tional distributions were made to reflect the percent of left and right -turns at the study intersections. Direc- tional distribution percentages used in this report are shown on Figure 4, "Directional Distribution - Site Traf- fic." The directional distribution percentages for site traffic have been equated to percentage turns for each movement. These values are shown on: • Figure 5, "Entering Traffic Percentage Turns" • Figure 6, "Exiting Traffic Percentage Turns." The projected traffic volumes shown on Figure 7, "Phase 1 Site -Generated Traffic Volumes - AM and School PM Peak Hours," and Figure 8, "Full Build -Out Site -Generated Traffic Volumes - AM and School PM Peak Hours," result from applying the percentages shown on Figures 5 and 6 to the projected site - generated traffic summarized on Table 4, "Trip - Generation Summary," for Phase 1 and for full build- out conditions. Values shown on Figure 3, "Existing Traffic Volumes," have been combined with the site development pro- jected traffic volumes shown on Figure 7 and Figure 8 and the results are depicted on Figure 9, "Phase 1 No Traffic Signal - Site -Generated Traffic Plus Existing PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS INC. — Page 18 — r__ FFI 10 Traffic Volumes — AM and School PM Peak Hours," Fig- ure 9-A, "Phase 1 With Traffic Signal - Site -Generated Traffic Plus Existing Traffic Volumes — AM and School PM Peak Hours," Figure 10, "Full Build -Out No Traffic Signal - Site -Generated Traffic Plus Existing Traffic Vol- umes —AM and School PM Peak Hours," and Figure 10- A, "Full Build -Out With Traffic Signal - Site -Generated Traffic Plus Existing Traffic Volumes — AM and School PM Peak Hours." Under condition of traffic signal control at the intersection of Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road (West) it is expected that some northbound to westbound motorists with destinations west of the proposed school site currently using Highway 10 and Taylor Loop (East) may divert to the proposed signalized intersection. Ac- cordingly, traffic volumes shown on Figures 9-A and 10-A assume some diverted northbound left -turn traffic vol- umes on Taylor loop Road at Highway 10 taking into con- sideration the proposed traffic signal at this intersection. Traffic volumes shown on Figures 9, 9-A, 10 and 10-A are the values used capacity and level of service (LOS) cal- culations conducted as a part of this study. The effect of existing background traffic (i.e. the adjacent street non - site traffic which exists) has thus been accounted for in this analysis. PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. Page 19 Vii' . CCS r`f,rrr-: Sr Generally, the "capacity" of a street is a measure of its ability to accommodate a certain magnitude of moving vehicles. It is a rate as opposed to a quantity, measured in terms of vehicles per hour. More specifically, street capacity refers to the maximum number of vehicles that a street element (e.g. an intersection) can be expected to accommodate in a given time period under the prevailing roadway and traffic conditions. Level of Service (LOS) ordinarily has a letter designation relative to the various operating characteristics, ranging from "A" as the highest quality to "F" representing consid- erable delay. The various Levels of Service are generally described as follows: 12�__ & ASSOCIATES INEERS, INC Page 20 0110 1• • Av . Total Dela sec./veh. Descri ption This LOS is a free flow condition, with vehicles acting nearly A <10 — independently to one another. There is little or no delay. This LOS is slightly restrictive condition with short traffic delays. B >10 and <15 The presense of other vehicles is noticeable by the driver. This LOS is the design level that engineers strive for during the C >15 and <25 service life of the facility. LOS C results from an average delay, The traffic flow is stable, but more restrictive. This LOS is noticeably more restrictive, and there are long D >25 and <35 traffic delays. This LOS results in poor driver comfort and in greater accident probabilities. At this LOS, the intersection is operating at capacity with little or E >35 and <50 no gaps. There are very long traffic delays and unstable peration.F intersection operation- At this LOS, there are more vehicles arriving at the approach IF >50 than can be discharged. Extreme delays will be encountered. 12�__ & ASSOCIATES INEERS, INC Page 20 } EAvg. Total Dela sec.lveh. Descri tion This LOS is a free flow condition, with vehicles acting nearly A <10 independently to one another. There is little or no delay. This LOS is slightly restrictive condition with short traffic delays. B >10 and <20 The presense of other vehicles is noticable by the driver. This LOS is the design level that engineers strive for during the C >20 and <35 service life of the facility. LOS C results from an average delay. The traffic flow is stable, but more restrictive. This LOS is noticeably more restrictive, and there are long D >35 and <55 traffic delays. This LOS results in poor driver comfort and in greater accident probabilities. At this LOS, the intersection is operating at capacity with little or E >55 and <80 no gaps. There are very long traffic delays and unstable intersection operation. At this LOS, there are more vehicles arriving at the approach F >80 than can be discharged. Extreme delays will be encountered - LOS values that arereported for signalized intersections are based o PETERS & ASSOCIATES 172 ENGINEERS, INC. Traffic operational calculations were performed as a part of this study for traffic operating conditions of existing and projected traffic. This analysis was performed using Syn- chro Version 6, 2003. This computer program has been proven to be reliable when used to analyze capacity and levels of traffic service under various operating condi- tions. Detailed calculations for all capacity calculations are included in the Appendix. The worst-case conditions of adjacent street AM and school PM peak traffic periods were used for these calculations. Factors included in the analysis are as follows: o Existing traffic volumes and patterns. o Directional distribution of projected traffic volumes. o Existing or proposed intersection geometry (including elements such as turn lanes). o Existing background traffic volumes and projected site -generated volumes of the two development phases (Phase 1 and full build -out) of the site. o Existing and proposed traffic control. Page 21 1 f tr ��:Crff �r CAPACITY ANALYSIS Results and Level of Service Analysis Existing Traffic Conditions Capacity and level of service analysis was performed for existing traffic conditions (existing traffic volumes, lane geometry and traffic control) for the adjacent street AM and school PM peak hours for the two following intersec- tions: • Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road • Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane. As indicated in Table 5, "Level of Service Summary — Existing Traffic Conditions," all existing vehicle move- ments for existing traffic conditions at the two study inter- sections presently operate at what calculates as an ac- ceptable LOS "B" or better for the AM and school PM peak hours except for the northbound vehicle movements on Taylor Loop Road at Highway 10 (LOS "F") during the AM peak hour and school PM peak hour with the existing "Stop" sign control. Traffic volumes used for this analysis are shown on Figure 3, "Existing Traffic Volumes." Table 5 - Level of Service Summary - Existing Traffic Conditions PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS. INC. n - cage 22FU - ppiected Traffic Conditions Capacity and level of service analysis was performed for projected traffic conditions with the development of the proposed school for Phase 1 and for full build -out for the adjacent street AM and school PM peak hours for the fol- lowing intersections in the vicinity of the site: Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane Taylor Loop Road and Bus Loop Entrance Taylor Loop Road and Bus Loop Exit Forest Lane and Pre -K Pick -Up / Drop -Off Loop Forest Lane and Parent Pick -Up / Drop -Off Loop. For projected traffic conditions, for both Phase 1 and full build -out, analysis was conducted with the following road- way improvements assumed (shown on Figure 11, "Recommended Schematic lane Geometry"): ❑ Taylor Loop Road widened to three lanes from south of Forest Lane to Highway 10. ❑ Forest Lane widened to three lanes from just west of the Parent Pick -Up / Drop -Off Loop to Taylor Loop Road. ❑ The addition of an eastbound right -turn lane on High- way 10 at Taylor Loop Road. ❑ The roadway geometry of the Pre -K Pick -Up / Drop - Off Loop approach to Forest Lane to consist of an out- bound lane and an inbound receiving lane. ❑ The roadway geometry of the Parent Pick -Up / Drop - Off Loop approach to Forest Lane to consist of an out- bound left -turn lane, an outbound right -turn lane and two inbound receiving lanes. ❑ With and without traffic signal control at the intersec- tion of Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road. Page 23 Phase 1 Without TraffjLaLqnal As indicated in Table 6, "Level of Service Summary — Projected Traffic Conditions - Phase 1 Without Traffic Sig- nal," all vehicle movements for projected traffic conditions at the study intersections are expected to operate at what calculates as an acceptable LOS "C" or better for the AM and school PM peak hours except for the northbound left - turn vehicle movements on Taylor Loop Road at Highway 10 during the AM peak hour and school PM peak hour with the existing "Stop" sign control (LOS "F"). This con- dition already exists. Traffic volumes used for this analy- sis are shown on Figure 9, "Phase 1 Without Traffic Sig- nal - Site -Generated Traffic Plus Existing Traffic Volumes — AM and School PM Peak Hours." Table 6 - Level of Service Summary - Projected Traffic Conditions - Phase 1 without lrattic wgnai PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS. INC — _. - - Page 24 ... I i"r 'i t(-,,_ r s r Phase 1 With Traffic Si nal As indicated in Table 6-A, "Level of Service Summary — Projected Traffic Conditions - Phase 1 With Traffic Sig- nal," all vehicle movements for projected traffic conditions with the development of Phase 1 at the study intersec- tions are expected to operate at what calculates as an acceptable LOS "C" or better for the AM and school PM peak hours Traffic volumes used for this analysis are shown on Figure 9-A, "Phase 1 With Traffic Signal - Site - Generated Traffic Plus Existing Traffic Volumes — AM and School PM Peak Hours." Table 6-A - Level of Service Summary - Projected Traffic Conditions - Phase 1 With Traffic Signal PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. Page 25 ti AM PM P3�1 PM RM pM AM PM PM AM PM Full Build -Out Without Traffic Signal As indicated in Table 7, "Level of Service Summary — Projected Traffic Conditions - Full Build -Out Without Traf- fic Signal," all vehicle movements for these projected traf- fic conditions at the study intersections are expected to operate at what calculates as an acceptable LOS "D" or better for the AM and school PM peak hours except for the northbound left -turn vehicle movements on Taylor Loop Road at Highway 10 during the AM peak hour and school PM peak hour with the existing "Stop" sign control (LOS "F"). This condition already exists. Traffic volumes used for this analysis are shown on Figure 10, "Full Build Without Traffic Signal - Site -Generated Traffic Plus Exist- ing Traffic Volumes — AM and School PM Peak Hours." Table 7 - Level of Service Summary - Projected Traffic Conditions - Full Build -Out Without Traffic Signal PETERS & ASSOCIATES errc�Neexs. mc. Page 26 or U m w ID w p� m W 3 m ?i m m Z fa fR z r IIA > �r p c - • Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road SIGN A A A C A C A A F F C C nfa nla D B B A A A A n! - Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane SIGND B D A A A A ilia A A F; nla a 3ylor Loop Road and Bus Loop Entrance SIGN A A A nla B A A A nfa Taylor Loop Road and Bus Loop Ebt SIGN E A A A nla A A A A C Iva C Isla Forest Lane and Pre -K Pick -Up /Drop :1 Loop SIGN A A C C L A -HMI A A B A nfa Forest Lane and Parent Pick -Up I Drop -Off Loop SIGN A A A A 6 A nla Table 7 - Level of Service Summary - Projected Traffic Conditions - Full Build -Out Without Traffic Signal PETERS & ASSOCIATES errc�Neexs. mc. Page 26 1 �ifr­f� r�rr;'Sr Full Build -Out With TraiflC Si nal As indicated in Table 7-A, "Level of Service Summary — Projected Traffic Conditions - Full Build -Out With Traffic Signal," all vehicle movements for these projected traffic conditions at the study intersections are expected to oper- ate at what calculates as an acceptable LOS "D" or better for the AM and school PM peak hours except for the east- bound left -turn vehicle movement on Forest Lane at Tay- lor Loop Road during the AM peak hour (LOS "E"). This is expected to only occur during the busiest time during the AM peak hour with all other hours operating better. As addressed in the next section of this report, traffic vol- umes at this intersection are not projected to be sufficient to consider traffic control. Traffic volumes used for this analysis are shown on Figure 10-A "Full Build With Traffic Signal - Site -Generated Traffic Plus Existing Traffic Vol- umes —AM and School PM Peak Hours." Table 7-A - Level of Service Summary - Projected Traffic Conditions - Full Build-Vut wim iramc signal PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. Page 27 With the recommended lane geometry and traffic signal control, projected 95th percentile queue lengths are not expected to exceed available vehicle storage. Addition- ally, traffic signal control at the intersection of Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road would allow acceptable traffic op- erations and add safety and convenience for this intersec- tion, as well as accommodate growth in the vicinity of the site. Consideration was given to the possibility of a single -lane roundabout at the intersection of Taylor loop Road and Forest Lane. If a roundabout were constructed at this in- tersection, all vehicle movements at this intersection are expected to operate at what calculates as acceptable LOS for the AM and PM peak hours. Detailed results of the analysis of roundabout operation are included in the Appendix of this report. There will not be sufficient right- of-way at the intersection of Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane as a part of the proposed property acquisition for this school site, nor are there plans for this development to acquire additional property at this intersection. Future consideration could be given for the construction of a sin- gle -lane roundabout at this intersection. Traffic signal warrants are not projected to be met at this intersection with projected traffic volumes. PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. Page 28 i r , fffr : err: TRAFFIC In evaluating the need for a traffic signal, certain estab- WARRANTS ANALYSIS lished warrants must be examined by a comprehensive investigation of traffic conditions and physical characteris- tics of the location. The decision to install a traffic signal at a particular location must be evaluated quantitatively relative to these warrants. Satisfaction of conditions for only one of the warrants, as specified, is required for sig- nalization. These warrants, as specified in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), are described in detail in the appendix of this report. They are summa- rized as follows: ♦ Warrant One: Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume ♦ Warrant Two: Four -Hour Vehicular Volume ♦ Warrant Three: Peak Hour ♦ Warrant Four: Pedestrian Volume ♦ Warrant Five: School Crossing ♦ Warrant Six: Coordinated Signal System ♦ Warrant Seven: Crash Experience ♦ Warrant Eight: Roadway Network SIGNAL WARRANTS RESULTS Traffic signal warrants analysis was made for projected traffic conditions for Phase 1 development and for full build -out development of the site for the following inter- sections: • Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road • Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane. Highway 10 and Ta lar Loop Road It was found that traffic signal warrants are projected to be met for the intersection of Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road at Phase 1 and at full build -out development of the site. Volumes are projected to be sufficient at this intersection to satisfy any Warrants 1 B, 2 and 3 for both development conditions. Traffic signal control would be appropriate for this intersection to coincide with the devel- opment of Phase 1. The traffic signal warrants analysis PETERS & ASSOCIATES Page 29 I r 1 1 i t t'a i a results for this intersection are summarized in Table 8, "Traffic Signal Warrants Results - Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road - Projected Traffic Conditions - Phase 1," and Table 9, "Traffic Signal Warrants Results - Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road - Projected Traffic Conditions - Full Build -Out." Ta !or LooD Road and Forest Lane It was found that traffic signal warrants are not projected to be met for the intersection of Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane at Phase 1 or at full build -out development of the site. Volumes are projected to not be sufficient at this intersection to satisfy any warrants. The traffic signal warrants analysis results for this intersection are summa- rized in Table 10, "Traffic Signal Warrants Results - Tay- lor Loop Road and Forest Lane - Projected Traffic Condi- tions - Phase 1," and Table 11, "Traffic Signal Warrants Results - Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane - Projected Traffic Conditions - Full Build -Out." PETERS ERS, INC. Page & ASSOCIATES �} ENGINEages JO This intersection SATISFIES the warrants for signalization as outlined in the "M.U.T.C.D." QPETERS & ASSOCIATES �} ENGINEERS, INC. - - - Page J 1 — ~ r��r f• FINAL RESULTS: Projected Conditions PHASE 1 Hour warrant was met: major St.: Highway 10 (Cantrell Rd) 1�inor St.: Taylor Loop Road (West) VOLUME COMB. 4 He Peak 420 630 336 504 105 52 84 41 SUM MAX. #8-1 #8-2 HOUR MAJOR MINOR 1A 1B 1AB_ 2 3 7:00 2537 714 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8:00 2067 79 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 9:00 1640 58 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 Table 8 10:00 1333 51 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Traffic Signal Warrants Results 11:00 1220 58 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road 12:00 1488 64 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0' Projected Traffic Conditions - Phase 1 13:00 1470 59 0 14:00 1262 63 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 —' 15:00 2520 99 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 16:00 2276 62 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 17:00 2326 64 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 18:00 1813 47 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 19:00 1117 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20:00 611 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21:00 478 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 2 7 3 This intersection SATISFIES the warrants for signalization as outlined in the W.U.T.C.D." FINAL RESULTS: Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis Projected Conditions FULL BUILD -OUT Hour warrant was met: Major St.: Highway 10 (Cantrell Rd) Minor St.: Taylor Loop Road (West) VOLUME COMB. 4 Hr. Peak 420 630 336 504 105 52 84 41 SUM MAX. #8-1 #8-2 HOUR MAJOR MINOR 1A 1B — 1A6 2 3 700 2597 118 1 Table 9 Traffic Signal Warrants Results 9:00 2073 80 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road 9:00 1643 59 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 10:00 1336 51 Projected Traffic Conditions - Full Build -Out Pro J 11:00 1223 58 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 12:00 1492 64 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 13:00 1472 60 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 14:00 1271 64 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 15:00 2547 104 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 16:00 2279 63 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 17:00 2328 64 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 18:00 1815 47 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 19:00 1118 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20:00 612 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21:00 478 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 2 7 3 This intersection SATISFIES the warrants for signalization as outlined in the "M.U.T.C.D." QPETERS & ASSOCIATES �} ENGINEERS, INC. - - - Page J 1 — FINAL RESULTS Tra Trai6c Signal Warrants Analysis Projected Conditions Projected Conditions PHASE 1 FULL BUILD -OUT Hour warrant was met: Hour warrant was met: Major St.: Taylor Loop Road Minor St.: Forest Lane VOLUME VOLUME COMB. COMB 4 Hr 4 Hr. Peak 500 750 500 750 400 600 150 75 120 150 75 120 60 MAX SUM MAX. HOUR MAJOR MINOR 1A 1B HOUR MAJOR MINOR 1A 1B 1AB 0 2 3 7:00 442 82 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 173 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 110 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 91 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:00 105 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; 12:00 123 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 13:00 112 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14:00 164 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15:00 332 98 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:00 141 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00 132 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18:00 89 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19:00 63 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20:00 74 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21:00 47 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s intersection DOES NOT SATISFY the warrants for signalization outlined in the "M.U.T.C.D." Table 11 Traffic Signal Warrants Results Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane Projected Traffic Conditions - Full Build -Out Table 10 Traffic Signal Warrants Results Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane Projected Traffic Conditions - Phase 1 FINAL RESULTS: Tra Projected Conditions FULL BUILD -OUT Hour warrant was met: Major St.: Taylor Loop Road Miner St.: Forest Lane VOLUME COMB. 4 Hr Peak 500 750 400 600 150 75 120 60 SUM MAX HOUR MAJOR MINOR 1A 1B _ 1AB 2 3 7:00 582 115 0 0 0 0 R 0 0 8:00 188 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 117 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 100 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:00 112 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 134 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13:00 119 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14:00 191 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15:00 503 135 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 16:00 150 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00 136 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18:00 92 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19:00 65 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20:00 77 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21:00 47 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s intersection DOES NOT SATISFY the warrants for signalization outlined in the "M.U.T.C.D." PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS. INC. - — — - - - Page �} � "1 FINDINGS AND Findings of this study are summarized as follows: RECOMMENDATIONS • Existing conditions at the study intersections of High- way 10 and Taylor Loop Road and Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane were analyzed and compared to pro- jected traffic conditions at these same two intersec- tions as well as the access drives proposed to serve the school. Results of the analysis have indicated: Existing Traffic Conditions ♦ Analysis for existing traffic conditions (existing traffic volumes, lane geometry and traffic control) was conducted. Currently all existing vehicle movements for existing traf- fic conditions at the two study intersections presently operate at what calculates as an acceptable LOS "B" or better for the AM and school PM peak hours except for the northbound vehicle movements on Taylor Loop Road at Highway 10 (LOS "F") during the AM peak hour and school PM peak hour with the existing "Stop" sign control. ProLcted Traffic Conditions - Phase 9 ♦ Analysis for projected traffic conditions for Phase 1 development was conducted. With the recommended roadway improvements and traffic signal control at the intersection of Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road, all vehi- cle movements for these projected traffic conditions at the study intersections are ex- pected to operate at what calculates as an acceptable LOS "C" or better for the AM and school PM peak hours. projected Traffic Conditions - Full Build -Out ♦ Analysis for projected traffic conditions for full build -out was conducted. With the rec- ommended roadway improvements and traf- fic signal control at the intersection of High - `� PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. - - - - - Page 33 i rr i Cr r�r r" way 10 and Taylor Loop Road, all vehicle movements for these projected traffic condi- tions at the study intersections are expected to operate at what calculates as an accept- able LOS "D" or better for the AM and school PM peak hours except for the eastbound left -turn vehicle movement on Forest Lane at Taylor Loop Road during the AM peak hour (LOS "E"). This is expected to only occur during the busiest time during the AM peak hour with all other hours operating better. Traffic volumes at this intersection are not projected to be sufficient to consider traffic control. It was found that traffic signal warrants are projected to be met for the intersection of Highway 10 and Tay- lor Loop Road at Phase 1 and at full build -out devel- opment of the site. Volumes are projected to be suffi- cient at this intersection to satisfy any Warrants 1 B, 2 and 3 for both development conditions. Traffic signal control would be appropriate for this intersection to coincide with the development of Phase 1. It was found that traffic signal warrants are not pro- jected to be met for the intersection of Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane at Phase 1 or at full build -out development of the site. Volumes are projected to not be sufficient at this intersection to satisfy any war- rants. With the recommended lane geometry and traffic sig- nal control, projected 95th percentile queue lengths are not expected to exceed available vehicle storage. Additionally, traffic signal control at the intersection of Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road would allow ac- ceptable traffic operations and add safety and con- venience for this intersection, as well as accommo- date growth in the vicinity of the site. PETERS & ASSOCIATES ^� A ENGINEERS INC. - - Page 34 -Ir -F. i fr r'r:rrr Sr Consideration was given to the possibility of a single - lane roundabout at the intersection of Taylor loop Road and Forest Lane. If a roundabout were con- structed at this intersection, all vehicle movements at this intersection are expected to operate at what cal- culates as acceptable LOS for the AM and PM peak hours. Detailed results of the analysis of roundabout operation are included in the Appendix of this report. There will not be sufficient right-of-way at the intersec- tion of Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane as a part of the proposed property acquisition for this school site, nor are there plans for this development to acquire additional property at this intersection. Future consid- eration could be given for the construction of a single - lane roundabout at this intersection. Recommended schematic lane geometry for the immedi- ate vicinity surrounding the proposed school is shown on Figure 11, "Recommended Schematic Lane Geometry." Recommendations of this study, for both Phase 1 and full build -out, are summarized as follows: It is recommended to widen Taylor Loop Road to three lanes from south of Forest Lane to Highway 10. It is recommended that Forest Lane be widened to three lanes from just west of the Parent Pick -Up / Drop -Off Loop to Taylor Loop Road. Additionally, For- est Lane, west of the site, should be widened to a minimum two-lane roadway section to allow for an eastbound lane and a westbound lane. It is recommended that Highway 10 be widened to accommodate the addition of an eastbound right -turn lane at Taylor Loop Road. • It is recommended that the roadway geometry for the Pre -K Pick -Up / Drop -Off Loop approach to Forest Lane be constructed to consist of an outbound lane and an inbound receiving lane. PETERS & ASSOCIATES P ENGINEERS. INC. - - Page 35 i It is recommended that the roadway geometry of the Parent Pick -Up / Drop -Off Loop approach to Forest Lane be constructed to consist of an outbound left -turn lane, an outbound right -turn lane and two inbound re- ceiving lanes. • It is recommended that sidewalks be constructed adja- cent to the site along Highway 10, Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane. It is recommended that a fully -actuated traffic signal be installed at the intersection of Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road coincident with the Phase 1 site develop- ment. This traffic signal should have provisions to be a part of a closed-loop coordinated traffic signal system. ® It is recommended at full build -out conditions the inter- section of Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane be re- evaluated, based on actual traffic volumes, and traffic signal warrants be re-examined. • Traffic signal design at Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road and roadway improvements along Highway 10 must conform to AHTD and the City of Little Rock de- sign standards and will require approval by AHTD and the City. Roadway improvements along Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane must conform to the City of Little Rock de- sign standards and will require approval by the City. PETERS & ASSOCIATES Page 36 PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. 1349 -02 Q W o- 1521 64aQ�0 d8 N r N 1313-02E� o-1063 87 bILa0 414 to00 CANTRELL ROAD 2 2 y (D C 2 < -M 3r �nQLO o 3 CO Y cm o o`r- oc)'n n > .N L N U Z- U. T� EL 02 C f6 y d H .0o L N 0 U W v o . U N Y p o o a) O Z -a E m OL &i U) co LL 20 0Y 0>w z W C a W J O O 2 U U) 0 z Q Q J O Q O z = Q U cf) Q W Q z YOz Y C) ry O Of �- Y O (n U LJ O Ld J I ry LLJ ��0 O J J V) Q W F— 0% 5% CANTRELL ROAD 2% POND I PARENT PICK-UP Y > 9 DROP-OFF a a Ilillllldlllllllllli. fllElll�illl 9 MOM - V NJ I Illlllllllllllllllllll.l"1 :R l I CL 0 0 rn to 1 M N CU 0 C] z W ,q 7 W I 00 O z = Q U � (f) 0 W v' z Y O z UigY < O a- 0 V) U U 0 JOCYJ D' O -j O ~ J J } (n Q W --71ZN aU) i Z k � W Z < Y Z L W Z U L LU W CL i w Lr) V) z a Y a U O w w J F- F- -j H J U U) E: z LL �j �w z� �- z X w U w CL z Li(C) J o0 O z = Q U Q (/) C) Q z Y O z Y Uig O O u") U 0 J I ry O O ~ J J U') Q W zV' 14b QLLJ0 485 12 b aao 470 a, ru ON ro 00 l� I CANTRELL ROAD rn b b 5 p 5p Y W Ycr- IL 0 IL° �° 6 6 a a 0 M (D 00 0 O (n (A WU.1WW z° 2o¢[=O L.Alti 11 W O = z > Y c U IL W W LULL2 C/)H D_ O O U U) 0 z Q Q J Op O z = Q U (n Q v' Q z Y O z Y U ry O 0(f) U _jo� 0 O J af, LL - 0 `O H J (n Q W z U) W H d U O � U � V1 � � W (Y) wz J, o W z d N A, w zO LO U W W_ OF - ft: Hft: Q (LP 4aJ b 77 pab 94 Y Y IL 0 139 ba a O 169 b� 2 0 M (D O (n (A WU.1WW z° 2o¢[=O L.Alti 11 W O = z > Y c U IL W W LULL2 C/)H D_ O O U U) 0 z Q Q J Op O z = Q U (n Q v' Q z Y O z Y U ry O 0(f) U _jo� 0 O J af, LL - 0 `O H J (n Q W z U) W H d U O � U � V1 � � W (Y) wz J, o W z d N A, w zO LO U W W_ OF - ft: Hft: Q (LP �a� 20 ¢�0 d123 O � O POND 17 b a�0 d 10 M p N N CANTRELL ROAD Selp' ,C, 4 J� /. - PARENT PICK-UP Y r o DROP-OFF W W aa� i' Ilii4illlillllliilli ' I $ = I _ u 11 IIIIIi O) N 6� b 3 p�Q� 4266 3-0a�0o-4 co co M N 4pQ� 4289 4-0QLu0o-3 d 00 4� b 3p�¢� 448 289 0- a O o-266 M 00 G� �D 4p2*Q� 489 266 -0 Q � O *-289 I ■ in F- 0 U U ::)W W z° D F- 2 =) 0 0 0 W.j 0O 12 Z)zo Y m W Q IL W LL LL U) c d J 0 0 U (n 0 z Q Q Lo M O O 112 Q Y 135 p Y 202 b¢ I 0 243 ba O V No 0 N N J O Q O z = Q U (/')QW < z Y O z Y u Q-, O tz O V) L) 0 JOJ� �f1f0 O ~ J J W V2 W H U O V) V2 � U � V] � � W wz 6 N PW, w zi U � ow as u') 04 a b b 8 p 8p Y W Y Lu° CL 1Oa 1Oa NLo Lo M O O 112 Q Y 135 p Y 202 b¢ I 0 243 ba O V No 0 N N J O Q O z = Q U (/')QW < z Y O z Y u Q-, O tz O V) L) 0 JOJ� �f1f0 O ~ J J W V2 W H U O V) V2 � U � V] � � W wz 6 N PW, w zi U � ow as 1349 -u Q o- 1521 78b Qa0 d93 a, ru M 00 CD POND 313-0 2 Q W o- 1063 99 b EL a 0 d 84 o, ,a � M c0 � CANTRELL ROAD } PARENT PICK -IP Lo M 2p� ¢ j 4 176 15-00-uJ0 o-30 �r 3pg< 4195 26-0Q�do-21 M c�0 6� b 2 3' 4 40 208 -0 a a 0 o- 203 N ar O-' W 3p2i<j 468 199-0<�0o-214 CD b 5p Y w 6 Quj0 b 4 N po 00 p b 5 6 aa0 b 4 00 m n o 79 p a b w 4 1 Y� 0-0 2i<7) o-1 160b ¢ct° do *% 4 ru Lo 00 L o CD b 5p Y w 6 Quj0 b 4 N po 00 p b 5 6 aa0 b 4 00 T;<�Z)wW o z 0�OB)L LL OQLL <�a LL o Z ~ ~ O 0 �Lu—-r cow C/)<9Xp �2� W Q V] � Q J Op O z U Q (n 0W < Y o z Y ��gQ O Of O V) U LLI oo O J ch LL- O � J J W � 00 000 r, O 94 p a b w 40 Y� 0-0 2< o-0 182 b CL Lu d2 *% 4 ru 00 o to L T;<�Z)wW o z 0�OB)L LL OQLL <�a LL o Z ~ ~ O 0 �Lu—-r cow C/)<9Xp �2� W Q V] � Q J Op O z U Q (n 0W < Y o z Y ��gQ O Of O V) U LLI oo O J ch LL- O � J J W � 1349 -0 Q � o- 1466 78b aW d93 W r 313-0mQ� *-1030 99 a a a 0 484 a, .o O M O O CANTRELL ROAD POND < w <� a 4 1 11 (C) tr M 2 i�Q� 4176 15-0aa0o-30 CD 04 3pQ� 4195 26-0Qa0o-21 PICK -JP M co a� w 2 p24Q=) 440 208 -0 C- U-1 0 o- 203 N � 3p�Q� 468 199-0<LU0o-214 00 U) o-' b IL W O CL = (D O J (n (n (n Q M W W =d CDa5O �Q UW0 4� LQUw WF- W� ~W<a M~~O O �wz0 W_= z U W U wX 0 2Lij W �- Q Q (O (n rn r O 79 4.,b b 40 0-0Q w 0 o- 1 160b IL= d0 G-� Q i -D W co O 00 U) o-' b IL W O CL = (D O J (n (n (n Q M W W =d CDa5O �Q UW0 4� LQUw WF- W� ~W<a M~~O O �wz0 W_= z U W U wX 0 2Lij W �- Q Q I Op O z = Q U � Q Z YOz Y ma OQ O L) J0LLJ Ry - 0 O Q:� LL - 0 O J (n Q W C-4 00 000 O 94 p 4.,b b 40 0-0 Mwp o-0 182 b d 2 d 2 �M O O I Op O z = Q U � Q Z YOz Y ma OQ O L) J0LLJ Ry - 0 O Q:� LL - 0 O J (n Q W 1349 -0 m Q W o- 1521 84b <LU0 4131 IL a, .o ao cp 1313 -0 m YW *- 1063 104 b d Lu 0 4 117 IL O ao r N CANTRELL ROAD OETEN MAN F 9 POND < W a 2 W N � b 3 4 � � 4 266 16 o CL 8 -28 co M N 4p 4289 27-0QLuOzo-21 P�AREEQT PICK-UP A co G-+ b 3i�Q� 448 302 -p IL LLJ a O o- 290 M w 4p�Q 489 289 -0 ¢ LU 0o- 307 1 a M O O r 114 0-0 Q <:D o- 1 223 b CL z 4 0 4 0 X07 O N J fn (n fn < = LIJ W Zu zJ2� CD0-5O �o L2 V�0y LL [if ~ LL �oQa 0 w —i 1 0 F- Lu Z = 0wmU) 69 X p J LL I lJJ Z 5 L- Q m(o 2 J Q L- LL I O p O Z Q U V) C) W z Y O z Y O O C-) IM -J O J LL - 0 L OF- J J � Q W W E- r-� O ul Ul U � V] U) W Ce) wz it E-'.. do W o a A, w zl - u) F -i U �o -Wi w OF - W¢ r N O ap 135 p � b � 4 0 0 -0 m o- 0 4402 256 b 42 a 4 rfl N f0 O t[') N J fn (n fn < = LIJ W Zu zJ2� CD0-5O �o L2 V�0y LL [if ~ LL �oQa 0 w —i 1 0 F- Lu Z = 0wmU) 69 X p J LL I lJJ Z 5 L- Q m(o 2 J Q L- LL I O p O Z Q U V) C) W z Y O z Y O O C-) IM -J O J LL - 0 L OF- J J � Q W W E- r-� O ul Ul U � V] U) W Ce) wz it E-'.. do W o a A, w zl - u) F -i U �o -Wi w OF - W¢ 1349 -0Q W o- 1466 84a QUJ a00 4131 a-. r•c N 1313-0 2 Q � o-1030 104 b (L LOU 0x117 Lo 00 004 CANTRELL ROAD DETEN'nO v POND P 9 o� a rn -4-N N b 3p�Q� 4266 16-00-a0o-28 co M N 4pQoff) 4289 27-0Qa0o-21 � � d C ar o2 CL` j t 1 00 r 4� b 448 � b � 4 0 �2 ^ p 302 -o CL a0 o- 290 2QZ) o-0 114 p b b 4 1 256 b d2 Y N t0 O 0 -C> < o- 1 aa° 223a d0 M00 G -i �p 4p�Q� 489 � 4 rD 00 0 289 -0 Q a 0 o-307 Lo N J [Ij (n fA ZJW� zQ (DIL00 Wmo cn0J= 2T - C) LL L q U W ¢ 0 - LL 5; Or- - ~~O 00 �z1=U �Wcncn 0OOXo Q W Q U m Q J J LL J 07- D-- 0= Q U U) C)W a Q z Y O z Y c) [ g 0 O U) U J0LLJ Ld ��o LL - O J (� Q L J �- _ N O 135 p � b � 4 0 0-0 2QZ) o-0 IL Lu 256 b d2 4 fo N t0 O N � J [Ij (n fA ZJW� zQ (DIL00 Wmo cn0J= 2T - C) LL L q U W ¢ 0 - LL 5; Or- - ~~O 00 �z1=U �Wcncn 0OOXo Q W Q U m Q J J LL J 07- D-- 0= Q U U) C)W a Q z Y O z Y c) [ g 0 O U) U J0LLJ Ld ��o LL - O J (� Q L J �- NORTH ,} ■ R T PICK-UPIDI f y In m m I4k! P E-K PIC -UP1DR i 1 n a W CONSTRUCT EASTBOUND m RIGHT-TURN LAN I I r r I k O I � � mmm a , ■ ! i 1• I�! � I INSTALL TRAFFIC SIGNAL I ! I I Y RECOMMENDED PROJECT No. P-736-41 DATES 6-5-2007 SCHEMATIC j PETERS & ASSOCIATES LANE GEOMETRY E+` ENGINEERS, INC. FIGURE No. 11 PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. FTH f;RAllr — WLb I IATLVtt LVVr 7i ie - - SCHEME 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT i oo' 200' SCALE: 1:100 W Fmo V i PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. -ism) Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Peak Hours Turning Movement Count Data AM Hour Turning Movement Count Data Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road Little Rock, AR P-736-41 Groups Printed- AM Count Data I Hwv 10 1 Taylor Loop Rd. File Name : AM -10 From East 00000000 rrom 6oum Start Date : 05/17/2007 Start Time Thru left App. Tota{ R ht left . Tota Right Factor 1.0 1.0 Int. Total 1.0 1.0 1.0 07:00 AM 194 0 194 1 4 5 8 07:15 AM 235 1 236 0 8 8 12 07:30 AM 331 4 335 2 13 15 14 07:45 AM 407 0 407 1 15 16 13 Total 1167 5 11721 4 40 44 47 08:00 AM 278 3 281 4 16 20 25 08:15 AM 215 0 215 2 9 11 13 08:30 AM 226 0 226 1 14 15 10 08:45 AM 240 0 240 2 6 _ 8 8 Total 959 3 962 9 45 54 56 Grand Total 2126 8 2134 13 85 98 103 Apprch % 99.6 0.4 13.3 86.7 4.4 Total % 46.3 0.2 46.4 0.3 1.8 2.1 2.2 File Name : AM -10 Site Code 00000000 Start Date : 05/17/2007 Page No 1 Hwy 10 From West Thn .Total Int. Total 1.01 224 232 431 328 340 584 338 352 702 331 344 767 1221 1268 2484 352 377678 265 278 504 191 201 442 232 240.... _ 488 1040 109 2112 2261 2364 4596 95.6 49.2 51.4 1I N p 7 I A C+ _ North c s — FAMCount 00�74 0:00 005:00 AMta ON OY m - Left Rih1 8 73 111 98 209 Out In Total Ta or uop Rd. Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Peak Hours Turning Movement Count Data AM Hour Turning Movement Count Data Highway 10 and Taylor Loop Road Little Rock, AR P-736-41 File Name : AM -10 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 05/17/2007 Page No : 2 Intersection Volume 07:15 AM 1251 8 1259 7 52 59 64 1349 1413 2731 Percent 99.4 0.6 11.9 88.1 4.5 95.5 07:45 Volume 407 0 407 1 15 16 13 331 344 767 Peak Factor 0.890 High Int. 07:45 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM Volume 407 0 407 4 16 20 25 352 377 Peak Factor 0.773 0.738 0.937 �� T0 N O North O1 17 DQ 7: : O AM !712007 8:00:00 AM IPP - QCount Data a� LM Left R[ 52 7 72 so F 131 Out n Total TsAorl. 64, Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Peak Hours Turning Movement Count Data PM Hour Turning Movement Count Data File Name : PM -10 Hwy 10 and Taylor Loop Road Site Code : 00000000 Little Rock, AR Start Date : 05/17/2007 P-736-41 Page No 1 Groups Printed- PM Count Data Hwy 10 Taylor Loop Rd. F1NN 10 _ From East From South From West Start Time Thru Left App. Total Right Left . A . Total Ri ht Thru . Total Int. Total Factor 1.01 1.0 1.0 1.0 11 1.01 1.0 03:00 PM 278 3 281 0 20 20 17 288 305 606 03:15 PM 277 4 281 3 15 18 27 315 342 641 03:30 PM 233 2 235 2 5 7 30 395 425 667 03:45 PM 275 5 280 3 10 13 13 315 328 621 Total 1053 14 10771 8 50 58 87 1313 1400 2535 04:00 PM 290 1 291 3 11 14 11 268 279 584 04:15 PM 264 5 269 0 2 2 13 275 288 559 04:30 PM 284 3 287 1 10 11 5 264 269 567 04:45 PM 306 1 307 2 7 9 13 267 280 596 Total 1144 10 1154 6 30 36 42 1074 1116 2306 05:00 PM 283 2 285 0 4 4 22 290 312 601 05:15 PM 296 3 299 0 11 11 15 261 276 586 Grand Total 2786 29 2815 14 95 109 166 2938 3104 6028 Apprch % 99.0 1.0 12.8 87.2 5.3 94.7 Total % 46.2 0.5 46.7 0.2 1.6 1.8 2.8 48.7 51.5 N F h T N North .; 17 007 3:0000 PM " o° e 5 `m° t 7/2007 5:15:00 PM 2 '-" SCC w �m PM Court Data ON Left N 14 195 Ef] F 304 Out In Total TaAor Loop Rd. Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Peak Hours Turning Movement Count Data PM Hour Turning Movement Count Data File Name : PM -10 Hwy 10 and Taylor Loop Road Site Code : 00000000 Little Rock, AR Start Date : 05/17/2007 P-736-41 Page No : 2 Start Time Thru i Hwy 10 From East Left I App. Total I Right Taylor Loop Rd. From South I Left I App. Total I Right I r1wry -Iu From West Thru I App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour From 03:00 PM to 05:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 03:00 PM Volume 1063 14 1077 8 50 58 87 1313 1400 2535 Percent 98.7 1.3 13.8 86.2 6.2 93.8 03:30 Volume 233 2 235 2 5 7 30 395 425 667 Peak Factor 0.950 High Int. 03:00 PM 03:00 PM 03:30 PM Volume 278 3 281 0 20 20 30 395 425 Peak Factor 0.958 0.725. 0.824 y� I N N O North — e 1712 3:04:00 PM o s 1712007 3:45:00 PM r 5� PM Count Dala m— F), Left 50 S 101 !]�58 159 Out n Total !aft L 0 Rd. I Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Peak Hours Turning Movement Count Data AM Hour Turning Movement Count Data Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane Little Rock, AR P-736-41 upts Printed- AM Count Data Ln. I Taylor Loop App' Right Thru Left Total g Taylor Loop Rd. 1.0 1 1.0 From North Start Time Right Thru Left Factor _ 1_.0 21 1 07:00 AM 0 8 0 07:15 AM 0 11 0 07:30 AM 1 20 0 07:45 AM 0 17 0 Total 1 56 0 08:00 AM 0 19 0 08:15 AM 1 13 0 08:30 AM 0 14 0 08:45 AM 0 5 0 Total 1 51 0 Grand Total 2 107 0 Apprch % 1.8 98.2 0.0 Total % 0.8 42.5 0.0 upts Printed- AM Count Data Ln. I Taylor Loop App' Right Thru Left Total g File Name 1.01 1.0 1 1.0 8 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 21 1 0 0 17 0 0 0 57 1 0 1 19 0 0 0 14 0 1 0 14 0 0 0 5 0 1 0 52 0 2 0 109 1 2 1 9 25.0 50.0 25.0 43.3 Ij 0.4 0.8 0.4 File Name : AM -For Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 05/15/2007 Page No : 1 Forest Ln. From West App' Thru Left App' Right Thru Left, App. Int. Total Right Total Total 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 -Total 1.0 0 0 7 0 7 1 0 0 1 16 1 0 12 3 15 3 0 0 3 30 1 0 13 9 22 11 0 1 12 56 0 0 19 4 23 5 0 0 5 45 2F 0 51 16 67 20 6 1 21 147 01 0 10 2 12 1 0 0 1 32 1 0 11 1 12 4 0 1 5 32 0 0 6 1 7 0 0 0 0 21 1 1 6 1 8 6 0 0 6 20 2 t 33 5 39 11 0 1 12 105 4 1 84 21 1061 31 0 2 33 252 0.9 79.2 19.8 93.9 0.0 6.1 1.6 0.4 33.3 8.3 42.1 12.3 0.0 0.8 13.1 l ZyEor Lnop Out In Total 87 196 21 1071 0 �ht Thru Left 1 '4 T *moo' � 0 ~ n h Nortc C r O 15/2007:00:00 AM c LJ 5/2007 8:45:00 AM AAA Count Data �0 F+ Left Thru FUgN 21 T 841 1 139oa 245 Out n Total 'f ww LM PA Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Peak Hours Turning Movement Count Data AM Hour Turning Movement Count Data File Name : AM -For Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane Site Code :00000000 Little Rock, AR Start Date : 05/15/2007 P-736-41 Page No :2 Forest Ln. Taylor Loop Rd. Forest Ln. Taylor Loop Rd. From North From East From South From West Topa App App. AppInt. Start Time Right Thru Left TotalApp* Right Thru Left Total Right Thru Left Total Right Thru Left I Total Peak Hour From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 07:30 AM 69 0 71 1 1 0 2 0 53 16 69 21 0 2 23 165 Volume 2 Percent 2.8 97.2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 76.8 23.2 91.3 0.0 8.7 07:30 1 20 0 21 1 0 0 1 0 13 9 22 11 0 1 12 56 Volume 0.737 Peak Factor High Int. 07:30 AM 07:30 AM 07:45 AM 07:30 AM Volume 1 20 0 21I 1 0 0 1 0 19 4 23 11 0 1 12 Peak Factor 0.845 0.500 0.750 0.479 Taylor Loop Rd. Out In Total 56 71 F 127 2 89 N North_ ~ J CN 0 2 Sl H — 2 Wifir2U 7:90:00 —2 - c LAMCom 07 8:15:00 AM ^' LL r "� Data r Z� ip o O m N Left Thr RI ht 8 90 691 159 Out in Total Tayjork,00pRd. or Loop Rd - out to Total 86 130 216 5 125 0 4 - rt 1 L�► =° O T �- j North L o 0 i/15/2007 3:00:00 PM a - i/1512007 5:15:00 PM u � PM Count Data 0 LeftT �r 32 86 1 E-1-50019 269 Out n Total Taylor Lw Rd Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Peak Hours Turning Movement Count Data PM Hour Turning Movement Count Data File Name : PM -For Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane Site Code : 00000000 Little Rock, AR Start Date : 05/15/2007 P-736-41 Page No :1 Groups Printed- PM Count Data _ Taylor Loop Rd. Forest Ln. Taylor Loop Rd. Forest Ln. From North From East From South From West Start Time Right Thru Left TAPP otal Right Thru Left Total Right Thru Left Total' Right Thru Left App Total Int. i Total Factor 1.0 1 1.01 1.01 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.0 03:00 PM 2 8 0 10 0 0 1 1 0 13 2 15 3 0 0 3 29 03:15 PM 1 17 0 18 0 0 1 1 0 10 7 17 5 0 0 5 41 03:30 PM 1 22 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 11 3 14 4 0 0 4 41 03:45 PM 1 15 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 12 7 19 1 0 0 1 36 Total 5 62 0 67 0 0 2 2 0 46 19 65 13 0 0 13 1 147 04:00 PM 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 10 2 12 1 0 0 1 18 04:15 PM 0 12 0 12 0 0 1 1 1 4 3 8 1 0 0 1 22 04:30 PM 0 8 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 7 2 0 0 2 17 04:45 PM 0 17 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 10 3 0 0 3 30 Total 0 42 .0 42 0 0 1 1 1 26 10 37 7 0 0 7. 87 05:00 PM 0 9 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 11 1 12 1 0 0 1 22 05:15 PM 0 12 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 5 1 0 0 1 18 Grand Total 5 125 0 130 0 0 3 3 1 86 32 119 22 0 0 22 274 Apprch % 3.8 96.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100. 0.8 72.3 26.9 100. 0.0 0.0 Total % 1.8 45.6 0.0 47.4 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.4 31.4 11.7 43.4 8.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 . or Loop Rd - out to Total 86 130 216 5 125 0 4 - rt 1 L�► =° O T �- j North L o 0 i/15/2007 3:00:00 PM a - i/1512007 5:15:00 PM u � PM Count Data 0 LeftT �r 32 86 1 E-1-50019 269 Out n Total Taylor Lw Rd Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Peak Hours Turning Movement Count Data PM Hour Turning Movement Count Data Taylor Loop Road and Forest Lane Little Rock, AR P-736-41 File Name : PM -For Site Code 00000000 Start Date : 05/15/2007 Page No :2 Start lime Klgnt I nru I t_en Weak Hour From 03:00 PM to 05:151 Intersection 03:00 PM Volume 5 62 Percent 7.5 92.5 0. 03:30 1 22 Volume 0 Peak Factor 100. High Int. 03:30 PM Volume 1 22 Peak Factor 0.0 0 671 0 0 2 2� 0 46 19 65f 13 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 100. 0.0 70.8 29.2 `` 100. 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 11 3 14 4 0 0 03:00 PM 03:45 PM 03:15 PM 0 23 0 0 1 1 0 12 7 19 5 0 0,728 0.500 0.855 TaAqr Loop l Out In Total 46 67 1 113 62 0 iThru eR 1 L+ o � North � c o .• c c7 d a 2 1512007 3:00:00 P 4— a 0 512007 3:45:00 PM a Az � cn -- r o N o� PM Count Data o d N Left ihru Ri ht ti9 0 77 142 Out In Total Ta or Loo Rd. 131 147 1 4 41 0.896 0 5 0.650 PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Existing Traffic; Existing Geometry --,I. �-* 4e a-- 4% Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NI3L NBR Lane Configurations Tt Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 1349 64 8 1521 52 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 4.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly rate (vph) 1466 70 9 1653 57 8 -low Pedestrians Lane Vlydth (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median=type None Median storage veh) Upstream -signal (ft), pX, platoon unblocked VC, conflicting volume 1536 2345 768 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1536 2345 768 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 98 0 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 429 30 344 Direction, Lane # EB 1 Ela 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 978 558 9 827 827 64 Volume Left 0 0 9 0 0 57 Volume Right 0 70 0 0 0 8 cSH 1700 1700 429 1700 1700 33 Volume -to Capacity 0.58 0.33 6.02 0.49 0.49 1.93 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 2 0 0 180 Control -Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 13.6 0.0 0.0 692.2 Lane LOS B F Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.1 692.2 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 13.6 Critersebtion Capacity Utilization 56.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Existing Traffic; Existing Geometry HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3.5 4.0 Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 11: Forest Lane & West Taylor Loop Road cM capacity (veh/h) 785 716 Direction, Lane # EB 1 'NB 1 6/7/2007 --* -v Volume Left 2 `� t /� �► j *l 964 --. f- Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 0 Control Delay (s) Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations *T+ 4� 4� `1' Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 2 0 21 0 1 1 16 53 0 0 69 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 0 23 0 1 1 17 58 0 0 75 2 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 170 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 170 tC, single (s) 7.1 tC, 2 stage (s) None None 168 76 191 170 58 77 168 76 191 170 58 77 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 p0 queue free % 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 785 716 Direction, Lane # EB 1 'NB 1 Volume Total 25 2 Volume Left 2 0 Volume Right 23 1 cSH 964 837 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 0 Control Delay (s) 8.8 9.3 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 8.8 9.3 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 98 100 100 100 99 985 744 715 1009 1521 NB 1 SB 1 75 77 17 0 0 2 1521 1547 0.01 0.00 1 0 1.8 0.0 A 1.8 0.0 2.1 20.6% ICU Level of Service 15 A 58 58 4.1 2.2 100 1547 Page 2 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Existing Traffic; Existing Geometry HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations T'o Sign Control Free Grade 0% Volume (veh/h) 1313 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1427 Pedestrians 0.92 Lane Width (ft) 95 15 Walking Speed (ft/s) 54 9 Percent Blockage 3.3 Right turn flare (veh) 96 Median type 0 Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked 348 vC, conflicting volume WB1 vC1, stage 1 conf vol WB3 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 570 vCu, unblocked vol 578 tC, single (s) 63 tC, 2 stage (s) 15 tF (s) 0 p0 queue free % 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 0 Direction, Lane :# EB 1 Volume Total 951 Volume Left 0 Volume Right 0 cSH 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.56 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 Lane LOS 0.0 Approach Delay (s) 0.0 Approach LOS 343.1 Intersection 5urnmar B Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 0.2 None 1522 2083 Free Stop 1522 0%C 0% 87 14 1063 50 8 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 95 15 1155 54 9 None F 7.9 53.1%o ICU Level of Service A 15 Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Existing Traffic; Existing Geometry 1522 2083 761 1522 2083 761 4.1 6.8 6.9 2.2 3.5 3.3 96 0 98 434 44 348 EB2 WB1 WB2 WB3 NB9 570 15 578 578 63 0 15 0 0 54 95 0 0 0 9 1700 434 1700 1700 50 0.34 0.04 0.34 0.34 1.25 0 3 0 0 143 0.0 13.6 0.0 0.0 343.1 B F 0.2 343.1 F 7.9 53.1%o ICU Level of Service A 15 Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Existing Traffic; Existing Geometry HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3.5 4.0 p0 queue free % Timing Plan: School PM 11: Forest Lane & West Taylor Loop Road 796 721 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WS 1 Volume Total 6/7/2007 --* --* -- 4-- 4\ T 0 �► l -/ 768 -. f- 0.01 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 Control Delay (s) 8.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WST WBR HBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 4,, 4� -1� Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 13 2 0 0 19 46 0 0 62 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 14 2 0 0 21 50 0 0 67 5 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 161 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 161 tC, single (s) 7.1 tC, 2 stage (s) None None 161 70 176 164 50 73 161 70 176 164 50 73 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 tF (s) 3.5 4.0 p0 queue free % 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 796 721 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WS 1 Volume Total 14 2 Volume Left 0 2 Volume Right 14 0 cSH 993 768 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 Control Delay (s) 8.7 9.7 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 8.7 9.7 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 3.3 3.5 99 100 993 768 NB 1 SB 1 71 73 21 0 0 5 1527 1557 0.01 0.00 1 0 2.2 0.0 A 2.2 0.0 1.9 20.3% 15 50 50 4.1 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 100 100 99 100 719 1018 1527 1557 ICU Level of Service A Page 2 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Existing Traffic; Existing Geometry HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Movement EBT EBR WBL WST NBL NBR Lane Configurations TT Tt 'i Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 1349 78 93 1521 63 78 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1466 85 101 1653 68 85 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1551 2495 733 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1551 2495 733 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 76 0 77 cM capacity (veh/h) 423 18 363 Direction. Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WS 1 WB 2 WS 3 NB 1 NS 2 Volume Total 733 733 85 101 827 827 68 85 Volume Left 0 0 0 101 0 0 68 0 Volume Right 0 0 85 0 0 0 0 85 cSH 1700 1700 1700 423 1700 1700 18 363 Volume to Capacity 0.43 0.43 0.05 0.24 0.49 0.49 3.77 0.23 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 23 0 0 Err 22 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.2 0.0 0.0 Err 17.9 Lane LOS C F C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.9 4477.5 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 198.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 8: Bus Loop North & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 -A "t --'\ t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume Right 0 0 T cSH 1386 Sign Control Stop Volume to Capacity 0.00 Free Free Queue Length 95th (ft) Grade 0% 0 Control Delay (s) 0%v 0% 0.0 Volume (veh/h) 0 0 6 137 168 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 7 149 183 5 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 347 185 188 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 347 185 188 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 647 857 1386 Direction. Lane # NB 1 NS 2 SBI Volume Total 7 149 188 Volume Left 7 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 5 cSH 1386 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.09 0.11 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 7.6 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 19.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 2 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 10: Bus Loop South & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Direction. Lane # EBI E82 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total -P -IV 4� t 4 41 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SSR Lane Configurations cSH670 ?f 862 t T Volume to Capacity Sign Control Stop 0.08 0.11 Free Free 1 Grade 0% Control Delay (s) 10.4 0% 0% 0.0 Volume (veh/h) 5 6 0 132 166 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 7 0 143 180 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median„type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked v_C, conflicting -volume 324 180 180 vC1, stage 1 confvol v.C2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 324 180 180 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 670 862 1395 Direction. Lane # EBI E82 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 5 7 143 180 Volume Left 5 0 0 0 Volume'Right 0 7 0 0 cSH670 862 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0:01 0.01 0.08 0.11 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 10.4 9.2 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 9.8 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 19.7°% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 3 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 11: Forest Lane & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 '# -,* - - t 4'., t �► l --. f- Movement BBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL 5BT SBR Lane Configurations T. 4:1� 11 T+ Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 79 0 160 0 1 1 185 53 0 0 75 96 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 86 0 174 0 1 1 201 58 0 0 82 104 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 595 593 134 715 646 58 186 58 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 595 593 134 715 646 58 186 58 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 77 100 81 100 100 100 86 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 368 358 915 249 334 1009 1389 1547 Direction. Lane 4 ES 1 EB 2 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 5B 2 Volume Total 86 174 2 201 58 0 186 Volume Left 86 0 0 201 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 174 1 0 0 0 104 cSH 368 915 502 1389 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.23 0.19 0.00 0.14 0.03 0.00 0.11 Queue Length 95th (ft) 22 17 0 13 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 17.7 9.9 12.2 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C A B A Approach Delay (s) 12.5 12.2 6.2 0.0 Approach LOS B B Intersection Sumrn* Average Delay 6.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 4 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 14: Forest Lane & Pre -K Pick-UR/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 4--' 4�' \0' r '# --,, Movement EBL EBT WBT WSR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Vi + T Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 3 199 214 68 40 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 216 233 74 43 2 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 307 492 270 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 307 492 270 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 92 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1254 534 769 Direction, Lane # ES 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 3 216 307 46 Volume Left 3 0 0 43 Volume Right 0 0 74 2 cSH 1254 1700 1700 542 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.13 0.18 0.08 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 7 Control Delay (s) 7.9 0.0 0.0 12.2 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 12.2 Approach LOS B Intersection Summar Average Delay 1.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 5 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 15: Forest Lane & Parent Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 Movement ESL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 0 t T 0 Vi r Sign Control 212 Free Free cSH Stop 1700 Grade 825 0% 0% 0.00 0% 0.14 Volume (veh/h) 3 26 21 195 176 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 28 23 212 191 2 Pedestrians 0.0 10.7 Approach LOS Lane Width (ft) B Intersection Sumnary Walking Speed (ft/s) Average Delay 4.5 Percent Blockage Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.0% Right turn flare (veh) Analysis Period (min) 15 Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 235 164 129 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 235 164 129 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 77 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1333 825 921 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 3 28 235 191 2 Volume Left 3 0 0 191 0 Volume Right 0 0 212 0 2 cSH 1333 1700 1700 825 921 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.02 0.14 0.23 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 22 0 Control Delay (s) 7.7 0.0 0.0 10.7 8.9 Lane LOS A B A Approach Delay (s) 0.8 0.0 10.7 Approach LOS B Intersection Sumnary Average Delay 4.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 6 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NEL NOR Lane Configurations Tt r tt it Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 1313 99 84 1063 64 93 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1427 1 O8 91 1155 70 101 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage. Right turn flare (veh) Mediam.type- None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflict! hg volume 1535 2188 714 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1535 2188 714 tG, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 79 0 73 cM capacity (veh/h) 429 31 374 Direction, Lane EB -1 E92 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 W.B 3 NO 1 N13.2. Volume Total 714 714 108 91 578 578 70 101 Volume Left 0 0 0 91 0 0 70 0 Volume Right 0 0 108 U- 0 0 0 101 cSH 1700 1700 1700 429 1700 1700 31 374 Volu'MeAo rapacity 0.42 0.42 0.06 0:21 0.34 0.34 2.27 0.27 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 20 0 0 202 27 t ontrof Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.6 0.0 0.0 859.7 18.2 Lane LOS C F C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 (.1 361.2 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 21.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.3% ICU Level of Service 6 Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 8: Bus Loop North & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 --* --v 4\ t 4 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations + Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 6 157 178 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 7 171 193 5 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 380 196 199 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 380 196 199 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 619 845 1373 Direction, Lane # NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 7 171 199 Volume Left 7 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 5 cSH 1373 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.10 0.12 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 7.6 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 2 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 10: Bus Loop South & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 -# --v a t 1 -� Movement EBL EBR NSL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations in t t Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (vehlh) 5 6 0 158 178 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 7 0 172 193 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 365 193 193 vC1, stage 1 conf vol VC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 365 193 193 fC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 634 848 1380 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 5 7 172 193 Volume Left 5 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 7 0 0 cSH 634 848 1700 1700 Volume to Capaeity 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.11 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 1 0 0 Control Delay --(s) 10.7 9.3 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approachbelay (s) 9.9 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 3 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 11: Forest Lane & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 --* ~ *-- 4\ t �► l -A --1' 'r Movement FBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T. 4 1 1 1� Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 94 0 182 2 0 0 158 58 0 0 78 82 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 102 0 198 2 0 0 172 63 0 0 85 89 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 536 536 129 689 580 63 174 63 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 536 536 129 689 580 63 174 63 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 75 100 79 99 100 100 88 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 413 396 920 256 373 1002 1403 1540 Direction, Lane # ES 1 EB 2 WB 1 NS 1 NB 2 SS 1 SB 2 Volume Total 102 198 2 172 63 0 174 Volume Left 102 0 2 172 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 198 0 0 0 0 89 cSH 413 920 256 1403 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.25 0.21 0.01 0.12 0.04 0.00 0.10 Queue Length 95th (ft) 24 20 1 10 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 16.6 10.0 19.2 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C A C A Approach Delay (s) 12.2 19.2 5.8 0.0 Approach LOS B C Intersection Summary Average Delay 7.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 4 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 14: Forest Lane & Pre -K Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 ."* --w a-- k' \I. Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations T 1;r Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 2 208 203 40 68 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 226 221 43 74 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 264 473 242 vC 1, stage 1 cont vol vC2, stage 2 cont vol vCu, unblocked vol 264 473 242 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 87 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1300 549 796 Direction, Lane # Eli 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 2 226 264 77 Volume Left 2 0 0 74 Volume Right 0 0 43 3 cSH 1300 1700 1700 556 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.13 0.16 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 12 Control Delay (s) 7.8 0.0 0.0 12.5 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 12.5 Approach LOS B Intersection Su Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 5 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 15: Forest Lane & Parent Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 Movement 'A E13L --,0. EBT WBT Al WBR \11, SBL w SBR Lane Configurations 16 + 212 3 Volume Left 2 Sign Contrgl' 0 Free Free ValumeRight Stop 0 Grade 0 0% 0% 1345 0% 1700 Volume (veh/h) 2 15 30 176 195 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate-(vph) 2 16 33 191 212 3 Pedestrians B A Approach Delay (s) 0:9 Lane Width(ft) 0.0 10.7 Approach LOS Walking Speed (ft/s) B Intersection Summary Percent Blockage Average Delay 5.1 Right turn flare (veh) Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Median type 15 None Median storage veh) Upstream -signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked VC, conflicting volume 224 149 128 vC1, stage 1 conf vol v02, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 224 149 128 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 75 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1345 842 922 Direction, Lane # EBI E13 2 WB 1 S81 SB 2 Volume Total 2 16 224 212 3 Volume Left 2 0 0 212 0 ValumeRight 0 0 191 0 3 cSH 1345 1700 1700 842 922 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.01 0.13 0.25 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 25 0 Control,belay W 7.7 0.0 0.0 10.7 8.9 Lane LOS A B A Approach Delay (s) 0:9 0.0 10.7 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 6 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal Queues Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 --O� NV 41- 4--- 4\ /1111 Lane Group EST EBR WBL WBT NEIL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1466 85 101 1593 128 85 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.10 0.57 0.71 0.62 0.22 Control Delay 20.0 0.8 30.1 9.0 47.2 15.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 20.0 0.8 30.1 9.0 47.2 15.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 274 0 20 178 57 20 Queue Length 95th (ft) 481 9 86 322 145 68 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1352 5188 172 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 2113 899 229 2568 310 404 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.69 0.09 0.44 0.62 0.41 0.21 Intersection Summary Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay --,, -)V 1- "4 -- 71.1 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations ft r TT 'i r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1500 1200 1800 1200 1500 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 *0.85 *0.95 0.95 *0.95 '0.85 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3353 1062 1062 3353 1062 1062 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.09 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3353 1062 106 3353 1062 1062 Volume (vph) 1349 78 93 1466 118 78 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 1466 85 101 1593 128 85 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 23 0 0 0 20 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1466 62 101 1593 128 65 Turn Type pm+ov pm+pt pm+ov Protected Phases 2 8 1 6 8 1 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 38.2 52.1 49.2 49.2 13.9 20.9 Effective Green, g (s) 38.2 52.1 49.2 49.2 13.9 20.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.73 0.69 0.69 0.20 0.29 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1801 838 167 2320 208 372 v/s Ratio Prot c0.44 0.01 0.06 c0.48 c0.12 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.36 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.81 0.07 0.60 0.69 0.62 0.18 Uniform Delay, d1 13.5 2.7 10.8 6.4 26.2 18.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.9 0.0 6.1 0.9 5.3 0.2 Delay (s) 16.5 2.7 16.9 7.3 31.5 18.9 Level of Service B A B A C B Approach Delay (s) 15.7 7.9 26.5 Approach LOS B A C Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 12.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 71.1 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Page 2 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 8: Bus Loop North & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 --* "t 4% t Movement EBL EBR N(3L NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations I t a' Sign Control�� sign Stop Free Free 0% 0% V*me�(veh%h) . 0 0 6 192 166 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 7 209 180 5 Pedestrians Lane. Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Rercent,81ockage Right turn flare (veh) Mediarntype None Median storage veh) Upstream s'igral (ft) 252 pX, platoon unblocked VC,:conf ict'ing volume 405 183 186 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage'2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 405 183 186 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cN1 capacity (veh/h) 599 859 1389 Oireetion, Lane # NB 1 N&2 SO -1 Volume Total 7 209 186 Volume Left 7 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 5 cSH 1389 1700 1700 Volume"to Capacity 0:00 0.12 0.11 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 76 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach>Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity -,Utilization 20.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 3 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 10: Bus Loop South & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 -A --v -4\ t 4 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations + + Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 5 6 0 187 166 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly, flow rate (vph) 5 7 0 203 180 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percenlalockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type „ !None Median storage veh) Upstream signal#t) 1103 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 384 180 180 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol VCU, unblocked vol 384 180 180 tC, single(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 99 100 cM capacity (veli/h) 619 862 1395 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 NB 1 SBI Volume Total 5 7 203 180 Volume Left 5 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 7 0 0 cSH 619 862 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.01 _ 0.12 0.1.1 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 10:9 9.2 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 10:0 " 0.0 0:0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summar Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Uiiiizafon 20.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 4 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 11: Forest Lane & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT 1NBP. NBL _ NST NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 86 I. 2 201 4 0 186 T I T Sign Control 201 Stop 0 0 Stop 0 174 Free 0 Free Grade 104 0% 336 915 0% 1389 1700 0% 1700 0% Volume (veh/h) 79 0 160 0 1 1 185 108 0 0 75 96 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 86 0 174 0 1 1 201 117 0 0 82 104 Pedestrians 12.8 5.1 0.0 Approach LOS B B Lane Width (ft) Intersection Summary Walking Speed (ft/s) 6.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization Percent Blockage ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 655 653 134 775 705 117 186 117 vC 1, stage 1 cont vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 655 653 134 775 705 117 186 117 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 74 100 81 100 100 100 86 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 336 331 915 227 309 935 1389 1471 Direction, Lane # EB 1 E82 W81 IVB l NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 86 174 2 201 117 0 186 Volume Left 86 0 0 201 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 174 1 0 0 0 104 cSH 336 915 464 1389 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.26 0.19 0.00 0.14 0.07 0.00 0.11 Queue Length 95th (ft) 25 17 0 13 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 19.4 9.9 12.8 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C A B A Approach Delay (s) 13.0 12.8 5.1 0.0 Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Average Delay 6.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 5 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 14: Forest Lane & Pre -K Pick-UP/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 Page 6 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal Movement EBL E8T WBS" WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations t T Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 3 199 214 68 40 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (yph) 3 216 233 74 43 2 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type , None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, contlictingwolume 307 492 270 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vu, stage 2 confwol vCu, unblocked vol 307 492 270 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 92 100 cM capacity-(veh/h) 1254 534 769 Direction, Lane. # EB ;. EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 3 216 307 46 Volume Left 3 0 0 43 Volume Right 0 0 74 2 cSH1254 1700 1700 542 Volume -to Capacity 0:00 0.13 0.18 0.08 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 7 Control Delay (s) 7.9 0.0 0.0 12.2 Lane LOS A B Approach=Delay (s) 0:1 0.0 12.2 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 6 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 15: Forest Lane & Parent Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SOL SBR Lane Configurations + T* I � Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 3 26 21 195 176 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 28 23 212 191 2 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 235 164 129 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 235 164 129 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 77 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1333 825 921 Direction, Lane # ES 1 E3 2 WS 1 SB 1 S82 Volume Total 3 28 235 191 2 Volume Left 3 0 0 191 0 Volume Right 0 0 212 0 2 cSH 1333 1700 1700 825 921 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.02 0.14 0.23 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 22 0 Control Delay (s) 7.7 0.0 0.0 10.7 8.9 Lane LOS A B A Approach Delay (s) 0.8 0.0 10.7 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 7 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal Queues Timing Plan: School PM 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Intersection Sum Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal Lane Group EBT EBR WDL WET NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1427 108 91 1120 108 101 v/c Ratio 0.83 0.12 0.50 0.51 0.54 0.26 Control Delay 18.4 0.8 20.4 5.8 38.2 14.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 18.4 0.8 20.4 5.8 38.2 14.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 229 0 10 85 42 23 Queue Length 95th (ft) 384 10 60 147 105 70 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1352 5188 172 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 2006 889 217 2493 279 393 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.71 0.12 0.42 0.45 0.39 0.26 Intersection Sum Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 11.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 61.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization Movement EBT EBR WBL NBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tt r tt if Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1500 1200 1800 1200 1500 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 *0.85 *0.95 0.95 *0.95 *0.85 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3353 1062 1062 3353 1062 1062 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3353 1062 126 3353 1062 1062 Volume (vph) 1313 99 84 1030 99 93 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 1427 108 91 1120 108 101 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 32 0 0 0 19 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1427 76 91 1120 108 82 Turn Type pm+ov pm+pt pm+ov Protected Phases 2 8 1 6 8 1 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 31.6 43.1 41.5 41.5 11.5 17.4 Effective Green, g (s) 31.6 43.1 41.5 41.5 11.5 17.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.71 0.68 0.68 0.19 0.29 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1737 820 176 2281 200 373 v/s Ratio Prot c0.43 0.02 0.05 c0.33 c0.10 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.30 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.09 0.52 0.49 0.54 0.22 Uniform Delay, d1 12.3 2.8 8.6 4.7 22.4 16.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.3 0.0 2.6 0.2 3.0 0.3 Delay (s) 15.6 2.9 11.1 4.8 25.3 16.9 Level of Service B A B A C B Approach Delay (s) 14.7 5.3 21.3 Approach LOS B A C Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 11.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 61.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Page 2 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 8: Bus Loop North & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 --I -'V a t 4 Movement EBL EBR NK NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 6 191 178 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 7 208 193 5 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Per6e6tBlockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 252 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 417 196 199 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage -2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 417 196 199 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 td, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 590 845 1373 Direction, Lane # NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 7 208 199 Volume Left 7 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 5 cSH 1373 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.12 0.12 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 76 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach'Delay (s) 02 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.1 �j Intersection -Capacity Utilization 20.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 3 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal Page 4 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 10: Bus Loop South & West Ta for Loop Road 6/7/2007 t 4 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations t T Sign control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% �. Volume (veh%h) 5 6 0 186 178 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 ,y Hourlyfflow raze (vphj 5 7 0 262 1.98 0 Pedestrians Lane Width. (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) PercentBlockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1103 pX, platoon unblocked vC; conflicting volume 396 193 193 vC1, stage 1 confvol vC2, stage Zconf vol vCu, unblocked vol 396 193 193 ft, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 99 100 cM rapacity (yeh/h) 609 848 1380 Direction, Lane # FB 1 EB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 5 7 202 193 Volume Left 5 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 7 0 0 cSH 609 848 1700 1700 Volume fo-capacity 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.11 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 11.0 9.3 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach,IDelay (s) 10.0 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 4 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 102 198 2 Timing Plan: School PM 11: Forest Lane & West Taylor Loop Road 174 Volume Left Lane Width (ft) 0 2 172 6/7/2007 0 0 Volume Right 0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 0 0 0 0 89 cSH 389 920 Percent Blockage 1403 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.26 0.21 0.01 Movement EBL EBT EBR W8L WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Control Delay (s) T. 44� 20.0 7.9 T Median storage veh) 0.0 1 C Sign Control C Stop Stop Upstream signal (ft) Free 12.5 Free 5.0 Grade 0.0 0% 0% B 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 94 0 182 2 0 0 158 93 0 0 78 82 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 102 0 198 2 0 0 172 101 0 0 85 89 Pedestrians 102 198 2 172 101 0 174 Volume Left Lane Width (ft) 0 2 172 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 0 0 0 0 89 cSH 389 920 Percent Blockage 1403 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.26 0.21 0.01 Right turn flare (veh) 0.06 0.00 0.10 Queue Length 95th (ft) 26 20 1 10 Median type 0 None Control Delay (s) 17.5 None 20.0 7.9 0.0 Median storage veh) 0.0 Lane LOS C A C A Upstream signal (ft) Approach Delay (s) 12.5 20.0 5.0 0.0 pX, platoon unblocked B C Intersection Summar vC, conflicting volume 574 574 129 727 618 101 174 101 vC 1, stage 1 cont vol 6.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization vC2, stage 2 cont vol ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 vCu, unblocked vol 574 574 129 727 618 101 174 101 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 74 100 79 99 100 100 88 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 389 377 920 241 355 954 1403 1491 Direction. Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SBI SB 2 Volume Total 102 198 2 172 101 0 174 Volume Left 102 0 2 172 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 198 0 0 0 0 89 cSH 389 920 241 1403 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.26 0.21 0.01 0.12 0.06 0.00 0.10 Queue Length 95th (ft) 26 20 1 10 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 17.5 10.0 20.0 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS C A C A Approach Delay (s) 12.5 20.0 5.0 0.0 Approach LOS B C Intersection Summar Average Delay 6.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 5 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 14: Forest Lane & Pre -K Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations + k Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 2 208 203 40 68 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 226 221 43 74 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 264 473 242 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 264 473 242 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 87 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1300 549 796 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB i Volume Total 2 226 264 77 Volume Left 2 0 0 74 Volume Right 0 0 43 3 cSH 1300 1700 1700 556 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.13 0.16 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 12 Control Delay (s) 7.8 0.0 0.0 12.5 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 12.5 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 26.8% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 I_1 Page 6 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 15: Forest Lane & Parent Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 Page 7 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal k, 1* 4/ 'A ---*, Movement EBL EBT WBT VVBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations t 11 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 2 15 30 176 195 3 Peak Hour Factor 0,92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 16 33 191 212 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 224 149 128 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vcu, unblocked vol 224 149 128 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 75 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1345 842 922 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 2 1.6 224 212 3 Volume Left 2 0 0 212 0 Volume Right 0 0 191 0 3 cSH 1345 1700 1700 842 922 Volume to'Capacity 0.00 0.01 0.13 0.25 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 25 0 Control Delay (s) 7.7 0.0 0.0 10.7 8.9 Lane LOS A B A Approach Delay (s) 0:9 0.0 10.7 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 7 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 1 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 --11� -1-* � ~ 4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tt tt Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 1349 84 131 1521 68 111 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1466 91 142 1653 74 121 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1558 2578 733 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 cont vol vCu, unblocked vol 1558 2578 733 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 66 0 67 cM capacity (veh/h) 421 14 363 Direction. Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 W8 2 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 Volume Total 733 733 91 142 827 827 74 121 Volume Left 0 0 0 142 0 0 74 0 Volume Right 0 0 91 0 0 0 0 121 cSH 1700 1700 1700 421 1700 1700 14 363 Volume to Capacity 0.43 0.43 0.05 0.34 0.49 0.49 5.34 0.33 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 37 0 0 Err 36 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.9 0.0 0.0 Err 19.8 Lane LOS C F C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.4 3810.8 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 209.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 8: Bus Loop North & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 --* --* T 4 Movement EBL EBR NSL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations + Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 10 179 207 a Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 11 195 225 9 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 446 229 234 vC 1, stage 1 cont vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 446 229 234 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2,2 p0 queue free % 100 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 566 810 1334 Direction, Lane # NB 1 ws 2 Sal - Volume Total 11 195 234 Volume Left 11 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 9 cSH 1334 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.11 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 7.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summar Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 22.011/o ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 A Page 2 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 10: Bus Loop South & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Page 3 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal -A --v t 4 4/ Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations + t Sign Control Stop t=ree Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh%h) 8 10 0 171 207 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly,fiwrate�(vph) 9 11 0 186 225 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream.s„ignal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 411 225 225 v6 1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage-2,confvol vCu, unblocked vol 411 225 225 tC, single=(s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 PO queue free % 99 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 597 814 1344 [Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 9 11 186 225 Volume Left 9 0 0 0 Volume=Right 0 11 0 0 cSH 597 814 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.13 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 1 0 0 Control�Delay (s) 11.1 9.5 0.0 0.0 Lane LOSB A Approach Delay- (s) 10.2 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS 8 Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 22.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 3 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 11: Forest Lane & West Taylor Loop Road 1I6/7/2007 .,# --V 'r -+- A, 4\ t i Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Vi T 2 282 4�- 0 235 I I T3. Sign Control 282 Stop 0 0 Stop 0 242 Free 0 Free Grade 149 0% 255 885 0% 1333 1700 0% 1700 0% Volume (veh/h) 114 0 223 0 1 1 259 63 0 0 79 137 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 124 0 242 0 1 1 282 68 0 0 86 149 Pedestrians 14.7 6.8 0.0 Approach LOS C B Lane Width (ft) Intersection Summary Walking Speed (ft/s) 9.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization Percent Blockage ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 793 792 160 960 866 68 235 68 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 793 792 160 960 866 68 235 68 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 po queue free % 51 100 73 100 100 100 79 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 255 254 885 144 230 995 1333 1533 Direction. Lane # EB EB 2 WB 1 NB 9 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 124 242 2 282 68 0 235 Volume Left 124 0 0 282 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 242 1 0 0 0 149 cSH 255 885 373 1333 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.49 0.27 0.01 0.21 0.04 0.00 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 62 28 0 20 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 31.7 10.6 14.7 8.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS D B B A Approach Delay (s) 17.7 14.7 6.8 0.0 Approach LOS C B Intersection Summary Average Delay 9.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 4 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 14: Forest Lane & Pre -K Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 4 289 307 89 48 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 4 314 334 97 52 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 430 705 382 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 430 705 382 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 87 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1129 409 665 Direction, Lane # EB 1 ES 2 WB 1 SB i Volume Total 4 314 430 55 Volume Left 4 0 0 52 Volume Right 0 0 97 3 cSH 1129 1700 1700 411 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.18 0.25 0.13 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 12 Control Delay (s) 8.2 0.0 0.0 15.1 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 15.1 Approach LOS C Enterseetion' Surnrnary Average Delay 1.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 5 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc, Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 15: Forest Lane & Parent Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 'A --9. 4--- 4-, \1' 4/ Movement EBL EBT WBT WI3R SBL SBR Lane Configurations t T* r Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 4 27 21 289 266 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 4 29 23 314 289 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked VC, conflicting volume 337 218 180 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 337 218 180 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 po queue free % 100 62 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1222 768 863 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WS 1 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 4 29 337 289 3 Volume Left 4 0 0 289 0 Volume Right 0 0 314 0 3 cSH 1222 1700 1700 768 863 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.02 0.20 0.38 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 44 0 Control Delay (s) 8.0 o.0 0.0 12.5 9.2 Lane LOS A B A Approach Delay (s) 1.0 0.0 12.5 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 6 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 --i. f- a-- *\ /'0' Movement EST ESR WBL WBT NBL NOR Lane Configurations tt 714 113 tt 578 578 Sign Control Free Volume Left 0 Free Stop 127 Grade 0% 54 0 0% 0% 0 Volume (veh/h) 1313 104 117 1063 50 128 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1427 113 127 1155 54 139 Pedestrians 2.23 0.37 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 Lane Width (ft) 0 0 169 42 Control Delay (s) 0.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 0.0 17.0 0.0 0.0 903.8 20.2 Percent Blockage C Right turn flare (veh) C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.7 Median type 268.4 Approach LOS None Median storage veh) F Intersection Summar Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked Average Delay 17.9 vC, conflicting volume 1540 2259 714 vC1, stage 1 conf vol ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 vC2, stage 2 cont vol vCu, unblocked vol 1540 2259 714 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 70 0 63 cM capacity (veh/h) 427 24 374 Direction. Lane # EB 1 ES 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 NB 2 Volume Total 714 714 113 127 578 578 54 139 Volume Left 0 0 0 127 0 0 54 0 Volume Right 0 0 113 0 0 0 0 139 cSH 1700 1700 1700 427 1700 1700 24 374 Volume to Capacity 0.42 0.42 0.07 0.30 0.34 0.34 2.23 0.37 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 31 0 0 169 42 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.0 0.0 0.0 903.8 20.2 Lane LOS C F C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.7 268.4 Approach LOS F Intersection Summar Average Delay 17.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 8: Bus Loop North & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 --.* --* 4\ T 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT 5BT SBR Lane Configurations + a' Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 10 179 213 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 11 195 232 9 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 452 236 240 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 cont vol vCu, unblocked vol 452 236 240 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 561 803 1326 Direction, Lane # NB 1 NB -2 SB 1 Volume Total 11 195 240 Volume Left 11 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 9 cSH 1326 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.11 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 7.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 22.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 2 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal Page 3 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal I . i HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 10: Bus Loop South & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 -A -V 4% t 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NST SBT SBR Lane Configurations + + Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 8 10 0 191 213 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 11 0 208 232 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked VC, conflicting volume 439 232 232 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 439 232 232 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 575 808 1336 Direction, Lane 4 ES 1 EB 2 NS 1 SB 1 Volume Total 9 11 208 232 Volume Left 9 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 cSH 575 808 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.02 13.01 0.12 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 1 0 0 > Control Delay (s) 11.4 9.5 0.0 0.0 ' Lane LOS B A Approach'Delay (s) 10.3 0.0 0.0 4 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 22.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 3 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal I . i HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 11: Forest Lane & West Tavlor Loop Road 6/7/2007 -.1 --* 4\r l --1' f- Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Vi ilr 4 T T Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 135 0 256 2 0 0 221 56 0 0 82 117 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 147 0 278 2 0 0 240 61 0 0 89 127 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 694 694 153 909 758 61 216 61 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 694 694 153 909 758 61 216 61 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 52 100 69 99 100 100 82 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 308 301 893 152 277 1004 1353 1542 Direction, Lane # ES 1 EB 2 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 147 278 2 240 61 0 216 Volume Left 147 0 2 240 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 278 0 0 0 0 127 cSH 308 893 152 1353 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.48 0.31 0.01 0.18 0.04 0.00 0.13 Queue Length 95th (ft) 61 33 1 16 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 26.8 10.8 29.0 8.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS D B D A Approach Delay (s) 16.4 29.0 6.6 0.0 Approach LOS C D Intersection Summa Average Delay 9.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 4 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 14: Forest Lane & Pre -K Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 --0. a-- 4-, \10. 'V Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations t k Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 3 302 290 48 B9 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 328 315 52 97 4 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 367 676 341 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 367 676 341 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 77 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 1191 418 701 Direction. Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB i Volume Total 3 328 367 101 Volume Left 3 0 0 97 Volume Right 0 0 52 4 cSH 1191 1700 1700 425 Volume to Capacity 0:00 0.19 0.22 0:24 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 23 Control Delay (s) 8.0 0.0 0.0 16.1 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 16.1 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 5 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 15: Forest Lane & Parent Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 '# --., *-- k "* W Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations EB 11 t 11 S81 892 Sign-Control 3 Free Free Stop 4 Grade 3 0% 0% 0% 0 Volume (veh/h) 3 16 28 266 289 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (uph) 3 17 30 289 314 4 Pedestrians 0 0 0 48 0 Lane Width (ft) 7.9 0.0 0.0 12.6 9.2 Walking Speed (ft/s) A B A Percent Blockage 1.2 0.0 12.5 Right turn flare (veh) B Median type None Median storage veh) 6.1 Upstream-signal(ft) 50.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) pX, platoon unblocked 15 VC, conflicting volume 320 199 175 vC1, stage 1 conf vol V02, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 320 199 175 tc, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 60 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 1240 788 868 Direction, Lane 0 EB 11 lFB 2 WB 1 S81 892 Volume Total 3 17 320 314 4 Volume Left 3 0 0 314 0 Volume Right0 0 289 0 4 cSH 1240 1700 1700 788 868 Volume to Capacity 0:00 0:01 0:19 0.40 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 48 0 Control Delay (s) 7.9 0.0 0.0 12.6 9.2 Lane LOS A B A Approach Delay (s) 1.2 0.0 12.5 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 6.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 6 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; No Traffic Signal Queues Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Intersection Su Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal Lane Group EST ESR WBL WBT N6L NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1466 91 142 1593 134 121 v/c Ratio 0.84 0.10 0.71 0.70 0.66 0.29 Control Delay 25.0 1.1 45.6 9.2 54.6 19.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 25.0 1.1 45.6 9.2 54.6 19.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 341 0 52 203 73 43 Queue Length 95th (ft) 626 14 150 377 172 109 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1352 5188 172 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 2070 884 298 2626 332 456 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.71 0.10 0.48 0.61 0.40 0.27 Intersection Su Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Movement EBT EBR. WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 15.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 tt 81.7 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1500 1200 1800 1200 1500 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 "0.85 *0.95 0.95 "0.95 "0.85 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3353 1062 1062 3353 1062 1062 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.09 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3353 1062 95 3353 1062 1062 Voiume (vph) 1349 84 131 1466 123 111 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 1466 91 142 1593 134 121 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 25 0 0 0 13 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1466 66 142 1593 134 108 Turn Type pm+ov pm+pt pm+ov Protected Phases 2 8 1 6 8 1 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 43.0 59.0 57.7 57.7 16.0 26.7 Effective Green, g (s) 43.0 59.0 57.7 57.7 16.0 26.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.72 0.71 0.71 0.20 0.33 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1765 819 194 2368 208 399 v/s Ratio Prot c0.44 0.02 0.10 c0.48 c0.13 0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.42 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.83 0.08 0.73 0.67 0.64 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 16.3 3.3 19.6 6.7 30.2 20.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.5 0.0 13.3 0.8 6.7 0.4 Delay (s) 19.8 3.4 32.9 7.5 36.9 20.7 Level of Service B A C A D C Approach Delay (s) 18.8 9.6 29.2 Approach LOS B A C Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 15.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 81.7 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Page 2 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 8: Bus Loop North & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 --* -'V 4N t l Movement EBL EBR NBl_ NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 t 11 Sign Control Stop Volume Left 11 Free Free Grade 0% 0 9 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 10 234 207 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly -flow -rate (,vph) 0 0 11 254 225 9 Pedestrians 0.3 0.0 Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent-blocka9e Right turn flare (veh) Medamtype None Median storage veh) Upstream signal=(ft) 252 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 505 229 234 vC1, stage 1 conf vol VC2, sfage- 2- coff 01 vCu, unblocked vol 505 229 234 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 522 810 1334 Direction, Lane # NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 11 254 234 Volume Left 11 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 9 cSH 1334 1700 1700 Volumeto Capacity: 0.01 0.15 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control�Delay-(s)�. 7.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection=Capacity Utilization 23.1%p ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 3 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 10: Bus Loop South & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 -A --* 4\ T Movement ESL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations I 11 257 T + Sign Control Stop 0 0 Free Free Grade 0% 0 cSH 0% 0%f7 Volume (veh/h) 8 10 0 236 207 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 11 0 257 225 0 Pedestrians A Approach Delay (s) 10.5 Lane Width (ft) 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B Walking Speed (ft/s) Intersection Summary Percent Blockage Average Delay 0.4 Right turn flare (veh) 23.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) Median type None 15 Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1103 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 482 225 225 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 482 225 225 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 544 814 1344 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 NB I SBI Volume Total 9 11 257 225 Volume Left 9 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 cSH 544 814 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.01 0.15 0.13 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 11.7 9.5 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 10.5 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 23.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 4 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 11: Forest Lane & West Tavlor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Movement EBL EST EBR W6L WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Sign Control Grade Volume (veh/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol tC, single (s) tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % cM capacity (veh/h) Direction, Lane # None 4 Stop 0% 0 1 1 0.92 0.92 0.92 0 1 1 None 4.0 3.3 Stop 4.0 0% 114 0 223 0.92 0.92 0.92 124 0 242 None 4 Stop 0% 0 1 1 0.92 0.92 0.92 0 1 1 None 853 852 160 1020 926 128 235 853 852 160 1020 926 128 235 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 3.5 4.0 3.3 Free 4.0 0% 259 118 0 0.92 0.92 0.92 282 128 0 853 852 160 1020 926 128 235 853 852 160 1020 926 128 235 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 47 100 73 100 99 100 79 233 234 885 131 212 922 1333 EB 1 EB 2 W61 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 128 128 4.1 2.2 100 1458 Volume Total 124 242 Free 282 0% 0 79 137 0.92 0.92 0.92 0 86 149 128 128 4.1 2.2 100 1458 Volume Total 124 242 2 282 128 0 235 Volume Left 124 0 0 282 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 242 1 0 0 0 149 cSH 233 885 345 1333 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.53 0.27 0.01 0.21 0.08 0.00 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 71 28 0 20 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 36.9 10.6 15.5 8.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS E B C A Approach Delay (s) 19.5 15.5 5.8 0.0 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Average Delay 9.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 5 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 14: Forest Lane & Pre -K Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 } � 4— � \1' 4/ Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations EB 1 + WB 1 Y Volume Total SignControl 314 Free Free Stop 4 Grade 0 0% 0% 0% 0 Volume-(yen/h) 4 289 307 89 48 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly -flow rate (vph) 4 314 334 97 52 3 Pedestrians 0.0 0.0 15.1 Lane LOS A Lane Width (ft) C Approach Delay (s) ):1 Walking Speed (ft/s) 15.1 Approach LOS Percent Blockage Intersection Summary Right turn flare (veh) 1.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization Median type 33.9% ICU Level of Service A None Median storage veh) 15 upstream,.signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 430 705 382 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage=2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 430 705 382 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 PO queue free % 100 87 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1129 401 665 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SIB 1 Volume Total 4 314 430 55 Volume Left 4 0 0 52 Volume Right 0 "97,,_ 3 cSH 11� 1700 1700 411 Volume to Capacity 0:00 0.18 0.25 0.13 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 12 Controlbe'lay (s) 8:2 0.0 0.0 15.1 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) ):1 0.0 15.1 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 6 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour 15: Forest Lane & Parent Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 .-A --o' �*— 4�' 1* 'V Movement EBL EST WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Sign Control Grade Volume (veh/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vpl`) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) PercenfBlockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) Px, platoon unblocked VC, conflicting volume vC1, stage 1 conf vol v , 2, stage 2 co nf Vol vCu, unblocked vol to, single (s) tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % cM capacity (veh/h) $37 337 4.1 2:2 100 1222 I T T WB 1 Free Free 289 266 0% 0% 4 27 21 0.92 0.92 0.92 4 29 23 $37 337 4.1 2:2 100 1222 I r Stop WB 1 0% Volume Total 289 266 3 0.92 0.92 0.92 314 289 3 None 0 218 180 218 180 6.4 6.2 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB f Volume Total 4 29 337 289 Volume Left 4 0 0 289 Volume Right 0 0 314 0 cSH 1222 1700 1700 768 Volume to Capacity 0:00 0.02 0.20 0.38 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 44 Control Delay (s) 8.0 0.0 0.0 12.5 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 1.0 0.0 121 Approach LOS B 3.5 3.3 62 100 768 863 5B 2 3 0 3 863 0.00 0 9.2 A Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 7 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal Queues Timing Plan: School PM 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 --* � 411, 4\ /01 Lade Group EBT ESR WBL WBT NBL NRR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1427 113 127 1120 114 139 v/c Ratio 0.83 0.13 0.64 0.50 0.58 0.34 Control Delay 21.0 1.0 34.4 5.8 46.3 18.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 21.0 1.0 34.4 5.8 46.3 18.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 270 0 32 92 50 41 Queue Length 95th (ft) 481 14 109 164 132 112 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1352 5188 172 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 Base Capacity, (vph) 2071 881 278 2612 293 440 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.69 0.13 0.46 0.43 0.39 0.32 Intersection Summary Page 1 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 5: Cantrell Road & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 c Critical Lane Group B 12.0 C Page 2 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal __40� -IV 4e 4-- 4% 1* Movement EBT EBR INBL WBT NBL NSR Lane Configurations tt r V1 ft e Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1500 1200 1800 1200 1500 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 *0.85 "0:95 0.95 `0.95 -0.85 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3353 1062 1062 3353 1062 1462 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3353 1062 111 3353 1062 1062 Volume (vph) 1313 104 117 1030 105 128 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 1427 113 127 1120 114 139 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 33 0 0 0 18 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1427 80 127 1120 114 121 Turn Type pm+ov pm+pt pm+ov Protected Phases 2 8 1 6 8 1 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 36.3 49.3 48.8 48.8 13.0 21.5 Effective Green, g (s) 36.3 49.3 48.6 48.8 13.0 21.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.71 0.70 0.70 0.19 0.31 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.4 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1744 811 193 2344 198 388 v/s Ratio Prot 0.43 0:02 c0.08 0.33 c0.11 0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.38 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.10 0.66 0.48 0.58 0.31 Uniform Delay, d1 14.0 3.2 12.9 4.7 25.9 18.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.1 0.1 7.9 0.2 4.0 0.5 Delay (s) 17.1 3.3 20.7 4.9 29.9 18.9 Level of Service B A C A C B Approach Delay (s) 16.1 6.5 23.9 Approach LOS B A C Intersection Summar HCM Average Control Delay 12,8 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.74 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 69.8 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.8% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group B 12.0 C Page 2 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 8: Bus Loop North & West Taylor Loop Road 100 6/7/2007 518 --v -*\ f l SB 1 Movement E131_ EBR NBL NBT SST SBR Lane Configurations 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) + +T 0 Sign Control Stop 0.0 Free Free A Grade 0% Approach Delay (s) 0% 0% 0.0 Volume (veh/h) 0 0 10 233 213 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 11 253 232 9 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol tC, single (s) tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % cM capacity (veh/h) Direction. Lane # None 511 236 240 511 236 240 6.4 6.2 4.1 3.5 3.3 2.2 100 100 99 518 803 1326 IVB 1 NB 2 SB 1 252 Volume Total 11 253 240 Volume Left 11 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 9 cSH 1326 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.15 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 7.7 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 23.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 3 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 10: Bus Loop South & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 --* --* - I I i Movement EBL EBR NBL NST SBT SBR Lane Configurations t + Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 8 10 0 235 213 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 11 0 255 232 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1103 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 487 232 232 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 487 232 232 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 540 808 1336 Direction, Lane f# EB 1 EB 2 NS 1 SB 1 Volume Total 9 11 255 232 Volume Left 9 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 cSH 540 808 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.01 0.15 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 11.8 9.5 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 10.5 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 23.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 4 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 11: Forest Lane & West Taylor Loop Road 6/7/2007 Movement EBL EST EBR WBL W8T WBR NBL N87 NBR SBI- SBT SBR Lane Configurations '* 4 1 1� I T Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 135 0 256 2 0 0 221 96 0 0 82 117 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 147 0 278 2 0 0 240 104 0 0 89 127 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 738 738 153 952 801 104 215 104 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 738 738 153 952 801 104 216 104 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 49 100 69 98 100 100 82 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 288 284 893 142 261 950 1353 1487 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 147 278 2 240 104 0 216 Volume Left 147 0 2 240 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 278 0 0 0 0 127 cSH 288 893 142 1353 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.51 0.31 0.02 0.18 0.06 0.00 0.13 Queue Length 95th (ft) 67 33 1 16 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 29.7 10.8 30.7 8.2 0,4 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS D B D A Approach Delay (s) 17.4 30.7 5.7 0.0 Approach LOS C D Intersection Summary Average Delay 9.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 5 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: School PM 14: Forest Lane & Pre -K Pick-Up/Drop-Off 6/7/2007 Page 6 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal 4-- k 1* 4/ 'A --0' Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations + T Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (yeh/h) 3 302 290 48 89 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 328 315 52 97 4 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent BI,Qckage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting .volume 367 676 341 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 367 676 341 tC, single -(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3:5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 77 99 cM-capacity (veh/h) 1191 418 701 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 3 328 367 101 Volume Left 3 0 0 97 Volume Right 0 0 52 4 cSH1191 1700 1700 425 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.19 0.22 0.24 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 23 Control Delay (s) 8.0 0.0 0.0 16.1 Lane LOSA C Approach Delay' (s) 0.1 0.0 16.1 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 6 P736-41; West Little Rock School; Little Rock, Arkansas Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Phase 2 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometry; New Signal