Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5617-A Application 3HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 32.4 HCM Level of Service C FICM Volume to Capacity ratio 0-93 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 154.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Page 18 31: Chenal Parkway & Kirk Road 15 * I 15/30/2006 t --1.� Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NST NBR SSL SBT SiEg Lane Configurations tO M t t r l Ideal. w (vphpl) 190(j 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Laneb'ili. Factor � 0.97 0.91 1-00 0.97 0-91 0-97 1.40 1-00 0.97 1 00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1,00 0.85 1.00 0.98 1.00 1-00 0.85 1-00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1-00 0.95 1_00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 5085 1583 3433 4989 3433 1863 1583 3433 1863 1583 Flt Permuted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0-95 1.00 1-00 3433 5085 1583 3433 4989 3433 1863 1583 3433 1863 1583 Volume (vph) 174 2439 182 240 2350 338 237 135 165 337 140 172 Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.92 0.92 0-92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0-92 Adj. Flow (vph) 189 2651 198 -26,11 2554 367 258 147 179 366 152 187 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 43 0 12 0 0 0 79 0 0 82 Lane Group Flow (vph) 189 2651 155 261 2909 0 258 147 100 366 152 105 Turn Type Prot pm+ov Prot Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 8 1 6 8 8 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green. G (s) 9.0 90.0 104.0 13.0 94.0 14-0 14.0 14-0 17.0 17.0 17.0 Effective Green. g (s)10.0 91.0 106.0 14.0 95.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Actuated 9/C Ratio _ 0.06 0.59 0.69 0.09 0.62 0.10 0.10 0-10 0.12 0.12 0.12 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3-0 3.0 3.0 3-0 3.0 3-0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3-0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 223 3005 1131 312 3078 334 181 154 401 218 185 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 0-52 0.01 c0.08 c0.58 0.08 c0.08 c0-11 0.08 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.06 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.85 0.88 0.14 0.84 0.95 0.77 0.81 0.65 0-91 0-70 0.57 Uniform Delay. d1 71.2 26.9 8.3 68.9 27.1 67.8 68.1 66.9 67-2 65.4 64-3 Progression Factor 0.93 0.50 0.00 0.90 0.73 1-00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 Incremental Delay. d2 9.4 1.4 0.1 1.9 0.9 15.8 31.4 19.1 27.6 16.9 12-0 belay (s) . �. 76.0 14.'g 0.1 63-7 20.5 83.7 99.5 86.0 94.8 82.3 76-3 Level ofService E B A E C F F F F F E Approach Delay (s) 17.7 24.1 88.4 87-2 Approach LOS B C F F Intersection Summa HCM Average Control Delay 32.4 HCM Level of Service C FICM Volume to Capacity ratio 0-93 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 154.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88-0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometrics; Scenario 3 PM Peak Hour Peters & Associates Engineers. Inc. P1180; Chenal Area Road Network Queues Page 19 33: Chenal Parkway & Kanis Road 5/30/2006 NA ' Lane Group SET SER NVVL NVVC NEL NER Lane Group Flow (vph) 2652 749 686 2500 420 596 We Ratio 0.95 0.47 0.83 0.61 0.90 0.94 Control Delay 27.4 0.1 45.4 0.9 88.4 67.1 Queue Delay 9.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 Total Relay 36.9 0.1 45.4 1.0 88.4 67.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 539 0 348 43 217 570 Queue Length 95th (ft) m411 m0 m370 38 #312 #818 Internal Link Dist (ft) 308 410 266 Turn Say Length (ft) 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 2777 1583 825 4130 468 637 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 610 0 0 Spil€back Cap Reductn 158 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced vlc Ratio 1.01 0.47 0.83 0.71 0.90 0.94 Intersection Summa # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity. queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometrics; Scenario 3 PM Peak Hour Peters & Associates Engineers. Inc. P1180; Chenal Area Road Network HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Page 20 33: Chenal Parkway & Kanis Road 5/30/2006 Lane Grp Cap (vph) S 1583 Jr-, 4131 I v/s Ratio Prot Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER Lane Configurations ttt if v%c Ratio 0.95 0.47 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 19.00 1900 Total Lost 11 time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4. Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1 11 100 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 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) 5085 1583 3433 5085 3433 1583 Fit Permitted 1.06'"" 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 5085 1583 3433 5085 3433 1583 Volume (vph) 2440 689 631 2300 386 548 ' Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 2652 749 686 2500 420 596 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2652 749 686 2500 420 595 - -- - Turn TypeFree Prot pm+ov Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 1 Permitted Phases Free 3 Actuated Green. G (s) 83_.1 154.0�36.0� 124.1 19.9 55.9 Effective Green. g (s) 84.1 154.0 37.0 125.1 20.9 W. 57.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.55 '1 b0 0.240.8'1 0.14 0.38 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2777 1583 825 4131 466 v/s Ratio Prot c0.52 Analysis Period (min) 0.20 0.49 0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.47 v%c Ratio 0.95 0.47 0.83 0.61 0.90 Uniform Delay. d1 33.2 0.0 55.5 5.3 65.5 ProgressionYFactor 0.78 1.00 0.72 0.10 1.00 Incremental Delay. d2 1.2 0.1 3.6 0.3 20.3 Delay (s) 27.1 0.1 43.8 0.9 85.9 Level of Service C A D A F Approach Delay (s) 21.2 10.1 75.1 Approach LOS C B E fntersection Summa 636 e0.22- 0.15 0.94 46.3 1.00 21.2 67.5 E Average Control Delay 23.7 HCM Level of Service C Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95 Actuated Cycle Length (s)154.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Groin Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometrics; Scenario 3 PM Peak Hour Peters & Associates Engineers. Inc. P1180; Chenal Area Road Network HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Page 21 41: Pride Valley Drive & Kirk Road 5/30/2006 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations t t r V Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 130 125 135 80 110 135 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 141 136 147 87 120 147 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 234 565 147 vC1. stage 1 conf vol vC2. stage 2 conf vol vCu. unblocked vol 234 565 147 tC. single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC. 2 stage (s) tF (s) 22 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 89 72 84 cM capacity (veh/h) 1334 435 900 Direction. Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 S81 SB'. Volume Total 141 136 147 87 120 147 Volume Left 141 0 0 0 120 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 87 0 147 cSH 1334 1700 1700 1700 435 900 Volume to Capacity 0.11 0.08 0.09 0.05 0.28 0.16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 9 0 0 0 28 15 Control Delay (s) 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.4 9. B Lane LOS A C A Approach Delay (s) 4.1 0.0 12.7 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 30.4% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometrics; Scenario 3 PM Peak Hour Peters & Associates Engineers. Inc. P1180; Chenal Area Road Network Queues Page 22 55: La Grande & Rahling Road 5/30/2006 �t t I # -► Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR 5BL SBT SSR _77- Lane Group Flow (vph) 41 82 33 54 66 5 373 60 45 364 5 v!c Ratio 0.16 0.23 0.07 0.21 0.18 0.01 0.15 0.05 0.07 0.14 0.00 Control Delay 12.9 12.4 2.9 13.4 7.3 3.8 6.6 4.2 4.5 6.6 7.4 Quem Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.9 12.4 2.9 13.4 7.3 3.8 6.6 4.2 4.5 6.6 7.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 26 42 9 32 25 3 63 18 13 61 5 Internal Link Dist (ft) 366 1688 848 482 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 150 150 100 150 100 Base Capacity(vph) 568 796 570 560 736 851 2780 1256 794 2779 1244 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillhack Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.07 0.10 0.06 0.10 0.09 0.01 0.13 4.05 0.06 0.13 0.00 latf raection Summary Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometrics; Scenario 3 PM Peak Hour Peters & Associates Engineers. Inc. P1180; Chenal Area Road Network HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Page 23 55: La Grande & Rahling Road 5/30/2006 � -+-- t rY IJ Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometrics; Scenario 3 PM Peak Hour Peters & Associates Engineers. Inc. P1180; Chenal Area Road Network EBL EBT EBR_ WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR _Movement Lane Configurations I t r c0.11 T+ c0.00 Vi ++ r v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 tt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 19.00 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Uniform Delay. d1 21.6 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 --1.06 ._ 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '64 1.do' 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.89 0.4 0.0 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.05 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 4.4 6.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1863 1583 1770 1655 A 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted _ 0.77 -..,.1.00 1.00 0.77 1.00 0:53 _1:00 1.00 0.53 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1433 1863 1583 1433 1655 996 3539 1583 987 3539 1583 Volume (vph) 38 75 30 50 16. 45 5 343 55 41 335 5 Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 41 82 33 54 17 49 5 373 60 45 364 5 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 27 0 44 0 0 0 24 0 0 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 41 82 6 54 22 0 5 373 36 45 364 3 Turn Type Perm pm+ov Perm D.P+P Perm D.P+P Perm - Protected Phases 4 .6 .-. _ 8._. 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 6 2 2 6 Actuated Green. G (s) 4.2 4.2 7.1 4.2 4.2 32.6 0.7 "20.7 32.0 29.7 29.7 Effective Green. g (s) 5.2 5.2 9.1 5.2 5.2 34.6 30.7 30.7 34.6 30.7 30.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.18 0.10 0.10 0.67 0.59 0.59 0.67 0.59 .5 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 IJ Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometrics; Scenario 3 PM Peak Hour Peters & Associates Engineers. Inc. P1180; Chenal Area Road Network Lane Grp Cap (vph) 144 187 400 144 166 724 2097 938 718 2097 938 vis Ratio Prot c0.04 0.00 0.01 0.00 c0.11 c0.00 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.00 0.04 0,00 0.02 0.04 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.44 0.01 0.38 0.13 0.01 0.18 0.04 0.06 0.17 0.00 Uniform Delay. d1 21.6 21.9 17.6 21.8 21.2 2.9 4.8 4.4 3.0 4.8 4.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay. d2 1.1 1.6 0.0 1.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay (s)-" 22.7 23.6 17.7 23.4 21.6 2.9 4.8 4.4 3.0 4.8 4.3 Level of Service C C B C C A A A A A A Approach Delay (s) 22.1 22.4 4.8 4.6 Approach LOS C C A A -} intersection Sumrna HCM Average Control Delay 9.0 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to,Capaclty ratio 0.20 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 51.8 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 �) Intersection Capacity Utilization 32.3% it Level of'Serv'ice A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group IJ Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometrics; Scenario 3 PM Peak Hour Peters & Associates Engineers. Inc. P1180; Chenal Area Road Network Queues Page 24 57: Kanis Road & Rahling Road 5/30/2006 --m. 4--- \► Lane Group EBL EBT W8T SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 212 533 891 183 201 vlc Ratio 0.63 0.36 0.73 0.72 0.50 Control Delay 14.8 4.8 18.2 64.9 10.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.8 4.8 18.2 64.9 10.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 34 106 409 136 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 88 159 669 213 66 Internal Link DistfE) 272 414 1310 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (ypl) 390 1471 1226 295 431 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 S,pi" ack Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.54 0.36 0.73 0;62 0.47 Intersection Summary Projected Traffic; Proposed Geometrics; Scenario 3 PM Peak Hour Peters & Associates Engineers. Inc. P1180; Chenal Area Road Network