HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_Traffic Study_190419_v1.pdf
WALKER NEW CAR DEALERSHIP
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction ...............................................................................................................3
II. Project Description ...................................................................................................3
III. Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................6
IV. Future Traffic Demand ..............................................................................................8
V. Conclusions and Mitigation .....................................................................................14
Appendix .............................................................................................................................15
LIST OF TABLES
1. Project Trip Generation ............................................................................................8
2. Level of Service ......................................................................................................14
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Vicinity Map & Roadway System ..............................................................................4
2. Site Plan ...................................................................................................................5
3. Existing PM Peak Hour Volumes ..............................................................................7
4. Trip Distribution & Assignment ...............................................................................10
5. 2021 PM Peak Hour Volumes Without Project .......................................................11
6. 2021 PM Peak Hour Volumes With Project ............................................................12
2
WALKER NEW CAR DEALERSHIP
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
I. INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes traffic impacts related to the Walker Dealership project. The
general goals of this impact study concentrate on 1) the assessment of existing roadway
conditions and intersection congestion, 2) forecasts of newly generated project traffic, 3)
estimations of future delay, and 4) recommendations for mitigation. Preliminary tasks
include the detailed collection of roadway information, road improvement information, and
peak hour traffic counts.
A level of service analysis for existing traffic conditions is then made to determine the
present degree of intersection congestion. Based on this analysis, forecasts of future
traffic levels on the surrounding street system are found. Following this forecast, the
future service levels for the key intersections are investigated. As a final step, applicable
conclusions and possible on-site or off-site mitigation measures are defined. The city of
Renton Traffic Impact Guidelines dated January 2016 was reviewed and incorporated into
this analysis.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project will add a new car dealership with a total of 35,000 square feet of
building space. The site is located on the east side of East Valley Road across from SW
34th Street. It is planned that one new main entrance will be added to join the two existing
accesses already connected to East Valley Road. The site was recently occupied by an
auto salvage business. The project is expected to be built out and operational by 2021.
For the purpose of analysis, the report will look at the future 2021 horizon year. Figure 1
on the following page shows the general site location along with the local street network.
The site plan is given in Figure 2.
3
4
5
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. Surrounding Roadway System
Roadways serving the proposed site consist of the SR-167 freeway and multi-lane
arterials. The primary roadways serving the site are listed and described below.
East Valley Road is a north-south, three-lane principal arterial that borders the west side of
the site. The roadway has an established speed limit of 45 mph. Paving is asphalt and
lane widths are around 12 feet. Curb, gutters, and sidewalks are provided along its length.
Grades are mild to flat in the area.
SW 34th Street is an east-west, four-lane collector that has a posted speed limit of 25 mph
and lies westerly of the project. Paving is asphalt and lane widths are around 12 feet.
Curb, gutters, and sidewalks are also provided along its length. Grades are generally mild
to flat.
B. Existing Peak Hour Volumes and Patterns
Field data for this study was collected in April of 2018. The evening traffic count was
taken during the peak period between the hours of 4 PM and 6 PM. This specific peak
period was targeted for analysis purposes since it generally represents the highest traffic
scenario for roadways. This is primarily due to the common 8 AM to 5 PM work schedule
and the greater number of personal trips occurring after work hours. Most commuters
return to their dwellings at the same time of day which translates to a natural peak in
intersection traffic loads. Figure 3 on the following page shows the weekday PM peak
volumes for the key intersections serving the project. Traffic count data can be found in
the appendix.
C. Roadway Improvements
A review of the latest City of Renton 6-Year Transportation Improvement Program shows
one project is planned in the direct vicinity of the site.
Lind Avenue SW – SW 16th St to SW 43rd St (Project No. 37)
Planned for construction in 2021 through 2023, this project will improve Lind Avenue SW
between SW 16th Street and SW 43rd Street. Improvements include roadway widening,
channelization improvements, curb and gutter improvements, and storm water
improvements. The total proposed cost is estimated at $4,400,000.
6
7
D. Public Transit
A review of the Metro Transit bus schedule shows transit service is provided near the
project along Lind Avenue which is located approximately 1400 feet from the site. Route
153 provides service at the corner of Lind Avenue SW and SW 34th Street. The route
times range from approximately 5:30 AM to 8 PM.
E. Sight Distance at Access Driveways
The proposed project will have several access driveways onto East Valley Road.
Assessments of the driveways were made to establish whether sufficient entering sight
distance is available. Preliminary review shows sight distance at all access points is
sufficient. The East Valley Road corridor is straight with no vertical curvature.
IV. FUTURE TRAFFIC DEMAND
A. Trip Generation
Data presented in this report was taken from the Institute of Transportation Engineer's
publication Trip Generation, 10th Edition. The designate land use is defined as
Automobile Sales (New) under Land Use Code 840. ITE average rates were used. Data
for the 4 PM to 6 PM peak hour was used for future traffic estimations and LOS
calculations. Table 1 gives a summary of the estimated project trip generation for the
proposed 35,000 square feet of building space. Included are the average weekday
volume and the AM and PM peak hour volumes.
TABLE 1
Project Trip Generation
35,000 s.f. Automobile Sales – LUC 840
Time Period Volume
AWDT 974 vpd
AM Peak Inbound 48 vph
AM Peak Outbound 18 vph
AM Peak Total 66 vph
PM Peak Inbound 34 vph
PM Peak Outbound 51 vph
PM Peak Total 85 vph
B. Trip Assignment and Distribution
8
The destination and origination of the generated traffic primarily influences the project
entrances and the key intersections which would effectively receive the majority of project
related traffic. Site generated trips are expected to follow the pattern shown in Figure 4 on
the following page. The figure reflects work-based and patron-based trips taken by project
traffic during the PM peak hour. Distribution percentages are based on existing travel
patterns. Figure 4 models all project traffic as only using the primary entrance to the
Walker project in order to analyze a potential worst-case scenario as far as delays and
safety issues are concerned.
C. Future Traffic Volumes With and Without the Project
The build out year of 2021 was used to assess future impacts. Future 2021 traffic
volumes were derived by applying a 2 percent growth rate per year over 3 years to the
existing volumes found in Figure 3. Figure 5 gives the volumes for future 2021 traffic
volumes without project traffic. Figure 6 shows 2021 volumes with project traffic included.
9
10
11
12
D. Future Level of Service
Future peak hour delays were determined through the use of the Highway Capacity
Manual. Capacity analysis is used to determine level of service (LOS) which is an
established measure of congestion for transportation facilities. LOS is defined for a variety
of facilities including intersections, freeways, arterials, etc. A complete definition for level
of service and related criteria can be found in the HCM.
The methodology for determining the LOS at signalized intersections strives to determine
the volume to capacity (/c) ratios for the various intersection movements as well as the
average control delay for those movements. Delay is generally used to measure the
degree of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and lost time. Control delay, in
particular, includes movements at slower speeds and stops on intersection approaches as
vehicles move up in queue position or slow down upstream of an intersection. Aside from
the overall quantity of traffic, three specific factors influence signalized intersection LOS.
These include the type of signal operation provided, the signal phasing pattern, and the
specific allocation of green time.
The methodology for determining the LOS at unsignalized intersections strives to
determine the potential capacities for the various vehicle movements and ultimately
determines the average total delay for each movement. Potential Capacity represents the
number of additional vehicles that could effectively utilize a particular movement, which is
essentially the equivalent of the difference between the movement capacity and the
existing movement volume. Total delay is described as the elapsed time from when a
vehicle stops at the end of a queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line. Average
total delay is simply the mean total delay over the entire stream. A number of factors
influence potential capacity and total delay including the availability/usefulness of gaps.
The range for intersection level of service is LOS A to LOS F with the former indicating the
best operating conditions with low control delays and the latter indicating the worst
conditions with heavy control delays. Detailed descriptions of intersection LOS are given
in the Highway Capacity Manual. Level of service calculations were made through the use
of Synchro, which follows procedures of the HCM for unsignalized and signalized
intersections. Refer to the HCM for a description of the analysis. Level of service results
and accompanying approach delays are shown in Table 2 on the following page. The
future results reflect 2021 future traffic conditions both without the project traffic and with
the project traffic. Existing delays are also given for reference.
13
TABLE 2
Level of Service
Delays given in Seconds Per Vehicle
Existing Without With
Intersection Control Geometry LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay
E Valley/34th St Stop Eastbound B 11.3 B 11.6 B 12.1
Northbound LT A 8.2 A 8.3 A 8.4
Lind/34th St Stop Eastbound C 19.3 C 21.2 C 22.1
Westbound C 15.8 C 16.8 C 19.0
Northbound LT A 8.8 A 8.9 A 8.9
Southbound LT A 8.1 A 8.2 A 8.2
E Valley/41st St Signal Eastbound D 44.4 D 46.2 D 46.2
Westbound D 54.6 E 57.3 E 57.6
Northbound D 40.8 D 47.2 D 49.5
Southbound D 36.0 D 38.5 D 39.8
Overall D 43.4 D 46.8 D 47.8
E Valley/Entrances Stop Westbound -- -- -- -- B 12.5
(Combined) Southbound LT -- -- -- -- A 8.0
As shown in Table 2 above, delays are generally mild at LOS C or better under all
scenarios with respect to the stop-controlled intersections. The signalized intersection of
E Valley & 41st Street/SR-167 Ramps is shown to operate at an acceptable LOS D for the
existing and future analyses. Furthermore, the project access is shown to operate with
minimal delays at LOS B when analyzed conservatively (distributed all inbound/outbound
volumes to one entrance) under the horizon 2021 timeframe.
V. CONCLUSIONS AND MITIGATION
The Walker New Car Dealership project consists of constructing a new dealership that will
provide 35,000 square feet of building. On a daily basis, 974 total trip movements into and
out of the site would be expected. Of this total daily traffic, 66 trips would be associated
with the AM peak hour and 85 trips with the PM peak hour. Access to the site is proposed
via one new main entrance onto East Valley Road in conjunction with the two existing
accesses serving the auto salvage company.
Future delay conditions for the project accesses are outlined in Table 2 and indicates
acceptable level or service. Overall the project will have a minimal impact on the
surrounding roadway system.
Proposed mitigation for the Walker Mazda project is as follows:
1.Pay traffic impact fees based on city of Renton requirements. Credit for the
automobile salvage yard should be given.
14
WALKER MAZDA CAR DEALERSHIP
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
APPENDIX
15
LEVEL OF SERVICE
The following are excerpts from the Highway Capacity Manual - Transportation Research
Board Special Report 209.
Quality of service requires quantitative measures to characterize operational conditions
within a traffic stream. Level of service (LOS) is a quality measure describing operational
conditions within a traffic stream, generally in terms of such service measures as speed
and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, and comfort and convenience.
Six LOS are defined for each type of facility that has analysis procedures available.
Letters designate each level, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating
conditions and LOS F the worst. Each level of service represents a range of operating
conditions and the driver’s perception of those conditions.
Level-of-Service definitions
The following definitions generally define the various levels of service for arterials.
Level of service A represents primarily free-flow operations at average travel speeds,
usually about 90 percent of the free-flow speed for the arterial classification. Vehicles are
seldom impeded in their ability to maneuver in the traffic stream. Delay at signalized
intersections is minimal.
Level of service B represents reasonably unimpeded operations at average travel speeds,
usually about 70 percent of the free-flow speed for the arterial classification. The ability to
maneuver in the traffic stream is only slightly restricted and delays are not bothersome.
Level of service C represents stable operations; however, ability to maneuver and change
lanes in midblock locations may be more restricted than in LOS B, and longer queues,
adverse signal coordination, or both may contribute to lower average travel speeds of
about 50 percent of the average free-flow speed for the arterial classification.
Level of service D borders on a range in which small increases in flow may cause
substantial increases in approach delay and hence decreases in arterial speed. LOS D
may be due to adverse signal progression, inappropriate signal timing, high volumes, or
some combination of these. Average travel speeds are about 40 percent of free-flow
speed.
Level of service E is characterized by significant delays and average travel speeds of one-
third the free-flow speed or less. Such operations are caused by some combination of
16
adverse progression, high signal density, high volumes, extensive delays at critical
intersections, and inappropriate signal timing.
Level of service F characterizes arterial flow at extremely low speeds, from less than one-
third to one-quarter of the free-flow speed. Intersection congestion is likely at critical
signalized locations, with long delays and extensive queuing.
These definitions are general and conceptual in nature, and they apply primarily to
uninterrupted flow. Levels of service for interrupted flow facilities vary widely in terms of
both the user's perception of service quality and the operational variables used to describe
them.
For each type of facility, levels of service are defined based on one or more operational
parameters that best describe operating quality for the subject facility type. While the
concept of level of service attempts to address a wide range of operating conditions,
limitations on data collection and availability make it impractical to treat the full range of
operational parameters for every type of facility. The parameters selected to define levels
of service for each facility type are called "measures of effectiveness" or "MOE's" and
represent available measures that best describe the quality of operation on the subject
facility type.
Each level of service represents a range of conditions, as defined by a range in the
parameters given. Thus, a level of service is not a discrete condition, but rather a range of
conditions for which boundaries are established.
The following tables describe levels of service for signalized and unsignalized
intersections. Level of service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of average
control delay. Delay is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption and
lost travel time, as well as time from movements at slower speeds and stops on
intersection approaches as vehicles move up in queue position or slow down upstream of
an intersection. Level of service for unsignalized intersections is determined by the
computed or measured control delay and is determined for each minor movement.
17
Control Delay per
Level of Service Vehicle (sec)
A 10
B 10 and 20
C 20 and 35
D 35 and 55
E 55 and 80
F 80
Unsignalized Intersections - Level of Service
Average Total Delay
Level of Service per Vehicle (sec)
A 10
B 10 and 15
C 15 and 25
D 25 and 35
E 35 and 50
F 50
As described in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, level of service breakpoints for all-
way stop controlled (AWSC) intersections are somewhat different than the criteria used for
signalized intersections. The primary reason for this difference is that drivers expect
different levels of performance from distinct kinds of transportation facilities. The
expectation is that a signalized intersection is designed to carry higher traffic volumes than
an AWSC intersection, thus a higher level of control delay is acceptable at a signalized
intersection for the same level of service.
AWSC Intersections - Level of Service
Average Total Delay
Level of Service per Vehicle (sec)
A 10
B 10 and 15
C 15 and 25
D 25 and 35
E 35 and 50
F 50
18
Signalized Intersections - Level of Service
Unsignalized Intersections - Level of Service
Average Total Delay
Level of Service per Vehicle (sec)
A 10
B 10 and 15
C 15 and 25
D 25 and 35
E 35 and 50
F 50
As described in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, level of service breakpoints for all-
way stop controlled (AWSC) intersections are somewhat different than the criteria used for
signalized intersections. The primary reason for this difference is that drivers expect
different levels of performance from distinct kinds of transportation facilities. The
expectation is that a signalized intersection is designed to carry higher traffic volumes than
an AWSC intersection. Thus a higher level of control delay is acceptable at a signalized
intersection for the same level of service.
AWSC Intersections - Level of Service
Average Total Delay
Level of Service per Vehicle (sec)
A 10
B 10 and 15
C 15 and 25
D 25 and 35
E 35 and 50
F 50
19
5/1/2018 https://itetripgen.org/PrintGraph.htm?code=840&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=35&edition=385&locationCode=General Urban…
https://itetripgen.org/PrintGraph.htm?code=840&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=35&edition=385&locationCode=General%20Urban/Suburban&countedMod
Automobile Sales (New)
(840)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
On a: Weekday
Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies: 18
Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA: 36
Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
27.84 14.98 - 41.78 7.01
Data Plot and Equation
T = Trip EndsX = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Study Site Average RateFitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation: T = 28.65(X) - 29.45 R²= 0.80
Trip Generation Manual,10th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers
0 20 40 60 800
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
35
974
973
20
5/1/2018 https://itetripgen.org/PrintGraph.htm?code=840&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=35&edition=385&locationCode=General Urban/S…
https://itetripgen.org/PrintGraph.htm?code=840&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=35&edition=385&locationCode=General%20Urban/Suburban&countedMode
Automobile Sales (New)
(840)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m.
Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies: 34
Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA: 31
Directional Distribution: 73% entering, 27% exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
1.87 0.59 - 6.17 0.95
Data Plot and Equation
T = Trip EndsX = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Study Site Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= ****
Trip Generation Manual,10th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers
0 20 40 60 800
50
100
150
200
35
65
21
5/1/2018 https://itetripgen.org/PrintGraph.htm?code=840&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=35&edition=385&locationCode=General Urban/…
https://itetripgen.org/PrintGraph.htm?code=840&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=35&edition=385&locationCode=General%20Urban/Suburban&countedMode
Automobile Sales (New)
(840)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies: 49
Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA: 34
Directional Distribution: 40% entering, 60% exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
2.43 0.94 - 5.81 0.99
Data Plot and Equation
T = Trip EndsX = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Study Site Average RateFitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation: T = 1.80(X) + 21.60 R²= 0.57
Trip Generation Manual,10th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers
0 20 40 60 800
100
200
300
35
85
85
22
Project Name: Walker Renton Dealership
Intersection: Lind Avenue SE & SW 34th Street Date of Count:
Jurisdiction: City of Renton Project Number:
HV R T L HV R T L HV R T L HV R T L Total
4:00 PM 141308027031657130138275
4:15 PM 33794011215611008510189
4:30 PM 3101349073322841101249288
4:45 PM 121045130012809014813240
5:00 PM 14132204502284143251611299
5:15 PM 341176001032733013412235
5:30 PM 23982003223591211368209
5:45 PM 10583010110344271221226:00
15 30 852 39 1 18 20 8 15 17 540 70 7 122 68 73 1,857
4:30 PM to 5:30 PM Total
8204872211493883213736432451,062
4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 0.2 288
240
299
529 380 235
20 487 22
14
66 9 26
4:30 PM ‐ 5:30 PM 388
207 45 Intersection PHF:0.89
141 32 62
64
37 321 8 142 9 73 51
86 4 76 23
554 366 153 13 97 25
111 3 91 35
153 13 97 25 138 9 100 52
111 3 91 35 127 1 78 29
138 9 100 52 103 5 74 27
127 1 78 29 61 2 38 21
Heath & Associates, Inc.
2214 Tacoma Road
Puyallup, WA 98371
Lind Ave SW
909
3/27/2018
4095
Peak Hour
Peak Total
Heavy Veh.
PHF
Total
SW 34th Street
Soutbound Westbound Northbound
920
Lind Ave SW
SW 34th Street
2.7%1.6% 2.2% 2.4%
0.86 0.50 0.92 0.68
SW 34th Street
EastboundTime
Period Lind Ave SW SW 34th Street Lind Ave SW
23
Project Name: Walker Renton Dealership
Intersection: E. Valley Road & SW 34th Street Date of Count:
Jurisdiction: City of Renton Project Number:
HV R T L HV R T L HV R T L HV R T L Total
4:00 PM 2 4 86 0 4 0 65 8 0 25 0 1 189
4:15 PM 2 1 71 0 3 0 53 4 2 15 0 2 146
4:30 PM 4 1 92 0 2 0 79 9 0 14 0 2 197
4:45 PM 1 1 104 0 1 0 61 6 0 16 0 1 189
5:00 PM 4 2 73 0 3 0 55 8 1 30 0 0 168
5:15 PM 0 0 77 0 0 0 56 2 2 15 0 1 151
5:30 PM 1 2 82 0 4 0 56 4 1 13 0 1 158
5:45 PM 1 0 51 0 1 0 37 6 0 11 0 2 1076:00
1511636000001804624761390101,305
4:00 PM to 5:00 PM Total
97353000001002582727006721
4:00 4:00 4:00 4:00 0.2 189
146
197
360 264 189
7 353 0
0
34 0 0
4:00 PM ‐ 5:00 PM 00
110 6 Intersection PHF:0.91
76 0 0
70
27 258 0 90 0 73 26
72 0 57 17
423 285 93 0 88 16
105 0 67 17
90 0 73 26 75 0 63 30
72 0 57 17 77 0 58 16
93 0 88 16 84 0 60 14
105 0 67 17 51 0 43 13
EastboundTime
Period E. Valley Road E. Valley Road
708
E. Valley Road
SW 34th Street
4.0%2.3% 3.5%
0.86 0.81 0.73
Heath & Associates, Inc.
2214 Tacoma Road
Puyallup, WA 98371
E. Valley Road
624
3/27/2018
4095
Peak Hour
Peak Total
Heavy Veh.
PHF
Total
SW 34th Street
Soutbound Westbound Northbound
24
Project Name: Walker Renton Dealership
Intersection: E. Valley Road & SW 41st Street Date of Count:
Jurisdiction: City of Renton Project Number:
HV R T L HV R T L HV R T L HV R T L Total
4:00 PM 1 11 61 47 3 12 20 82 5 88 53 7 2 32 90 9 512
4:15 PM 3 6 74 50 2 8 19 85 7 82 49 10 1 19 81 3 486
4:30 PM 2 4 70 26 4 8 19 61 1 86 72 7 0 51 122 8 534
4:45 PM 3 129058 4 8 3393 1 816414 1 318310577
5:00 PM 1 6 65 49 4 9 26 65 4 92 47 11 0 43 114 8 535
5:15 PM 1 13 70 55 5 10 15 89 0 101 54 10 2 60 101 4 582
5:30 PM 3 3 56 41 3 12 31 105 2 101 41 12 1 47 81 2 532
5:45 PM 2 4 77 31 4 10 25 81 2 62 47 7 0 33 52 5 4346:00
16 59 563 357 29 77 188 661 22 693 427 78 7 316 724 49 4,192
4:30 PM to 5:30 PM Total
7 35 295 188 17 35 93 308 6 360 237 42 3 185 420 30 2,228
4:30 4:30 4:30 4:30 0.2 534
577
535
518 302 582
35 295 188
35
170 93 436
4:30 PM ‐ 5:30 PM 308 1,404
805 30 Intersection PHF:0.96
635 420 968
185
42 237 360 119 114 148 131
130 112 141 103
788 639 100 88 165 181
160 134 159 124
100 88 165 181 120 100 150 165
160 134 159 124 138 114 165 165
120 100 150 165 100 148 154 130
138 114 165 165 112 116 116 90
EastboundTime
Period E. Valley Road SW 41st Street E. Valley Road
1,427
E. Valley Road
SW 41st Street
0.6%1.6% 3.1% 1.8%
0.81 0.81 0.97 0.88
SW 41st Street
Heath & Associates, Inc.
2214 Tacoma Road
Puyallup, WA 98371
E. Valley Road
820
3/27/2018
4095
Peak Hour
Peak Total
Heavy Veh.
PHF
Total
SW 41st Street
Soutbound Westbound Northbound
25
HCM 6th TWSC Existing PM Peak Hour
1: Lind Avenue SW & SW 34th Street 05/01/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 45 32 64 3 9 14 37 321 8 22 487 20
Future Vol, veh/h 45 32 64 3 9 14 37 321 8 22 487 20
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 150 - - 150 - - 200 - - 200 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333222
Mvmt Flow 51 36 72 3 10 16 42 361 9 25 547 22
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 878 1062 285 792 1069 185 569 0 0 370 0 0
Stage 1 608 608 - 450 450 -------
Stage 2 270 454 - 342 619 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.56 6.56 6.96 7.56 6.56 6.96 4.16 - - 4.14 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33 2.23 - - 2.22 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 241 221 709 278 218 823 993 - - 1185 - -
Stage 1 447 482 - 556 568 -------
Stage 2 710 565 - 644 476 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 217 207 709 207 204 823 993 - - 1185 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 217 207 - 207 204 -------
Stage 1 428 472 - 533 544 -------
Stage 2 655 541 - 523 466 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 19.3 15.8 0.9 0.3
HCM LOS C C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)993 - - 217 207 477 207 204 474 1185 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.042 - - 0.233 0.087 0.188 0.016 0.025 0.044 0.021 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.8 - - 26.6 24 14.3 22.7 23.1 12.9 8.1 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - D C B C C B A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.9 0.3 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 - -
26
HCM 6th TWSC Existing PM Peak Hour
2: E Valley Road & SW 34th Street 05/01/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.5
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 70 27 258 353 7
Future Vol, veh/h 6 70 27 258 353 7
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 150 - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 34444
Mvmt Flow 7 77 30 284 388 8
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 736 392 396 0 - 0
Stage 1 392 -----
Stage 2 344 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 4.14 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 2.236 - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 385 655 1152 - - -
Stage 1 681 -----
Stage 2 716 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 375 655 1152 - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 479 -----
Stage 1 663 -----
Stage 2 716 -----
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.3 0.8 0
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)1152 - 479 655 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.026 - 0.014 0.117 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.2 - 12.6 11.2 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - B B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0 0.4 - -
27
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing PM Peak Hour
4: E Valley Road & SW 41st Street/167 Ramps 05/01/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 30 420 185 308 93 35 42 237 360 188 295 35
Future Volume (veh/h) 30 420 185 308 93 35 42 237 360 188 295 35
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1885 1885 1885 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 31 438 193 321 97 36 44 247 375 196 307 36
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, %111333222222
Cap, veh/h 481 505 428 407 153 57 57 627 531 228 1382 161
Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.03 0.34 0.34 0.13 0.43 0.43
Sat Flow, veh/h 1795 1885 1598 3428 1290 479 1781 1870 1585 1781 3207 373
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 31 438 193 321 0 133 44 247 375 196 169 174
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1795 1885 1598 1714 0 1769 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1803
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 26.5 12.0 10.9 0.0 8.6 2.9 12.1 24.6 12.9 7.1 7.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 26.5 12.0 10.9 0.0 8.6 2.9 12.1 24.6 12.9 7.1 7.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.27 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.21
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 481 505 428 407 0 210 57 627 531 228 766 777
V/C Ratio(X) 0.06 0.87 0.45 0.79 0.00 0.63 0.77 0.39 0.71 0.86 0.22 0.22
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 744 781 662 617 0 318 142 627 531 410 766 777
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.6 41.7 36.5 51.2 0.0 50.2 57.4 30.4 34.6 51.1 21.4 21.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 6.6 0.7 3.9 0.0 3.1 19.1 1.9 7.7 9.2 0.7 0.7
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 13.2 4.8 4.9 0.0 4.0 1.6 5.8 10.6 6.3 3.1 3.2
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.7 48.3 37.2 55.2 0.0 53.3 76.5 32.3 42.3 60.2 22.0 22.1
LnGrp LOS C D D E A D E C D E C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 662 454 666 539
Approach Delay, s/veh 44.4 54.6 40.8 36.0
Approach LOS DDDD
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 19.8 44.6 36.5 8.3 56.0 18.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 27.5 33.5 49.5 9.5 51.5 21.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 14.9 26.6 28.5 4.9 9.3 12.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 1.7 3.5 0.0 2.2 1.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 43.4
HCM 6th LOS D
28
HCM 6th TWSC 2021 Without Project
1: Lind Avenue SW & SW 34th Street 05/01/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 48 34 68 3 10 15 39 341 8 23 517 21
Future Vol, veh/h 48 34 68 3 10 15 39 341 8 23 517 21
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 150 - - 150 - - 200 - - 200 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333222
Mvmt Flow 54 38 76 3 11 17 44 383 9 26 581 24
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 930 1125 303 838 1133 196 605 0 0 392 0 0
Stage 1 645 645 - 476 476 -------
Stage 2 285 480 - 362 657 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.56 6.56 6.96 7.56 6.56 6.96 4.16 - - 4.14 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33 2.23 - - 2.22 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 221 202 690 257 200 809 962 - - 1163 - -
Stage 1 425 463 - 536 552 -------
Stage 2 695 550 - 626 457 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 196 188 690 183 187 809 962 - - 1163 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 196 188 - 183 187 -------
Stage 1 405 453 - 511 527 -------
Stage 2 636 525 - 498 447 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 21.2 16.8 0.9 0.3
HCM LOS C C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)962 - - 196 188 450 183 187 442 1163 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.046 - - 0.275 0.102 0.212 0.018 0.03 0.051 0.022 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - - 30.2 26.3 15.1 25 24.8 13.6 8.2 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - -DDCDCBA - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 1.1 0.3 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 - -
29
HCM 6th TWSC 2021 Without Project
2: E Valley Road & SW 34th Street 05/01/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.5
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 74 29 274 375 7
Future Vol, veh/h 6 74 29 274 375 7
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 150 - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 34444
Mvmt Flow 7 81 32 301 412 8
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 781 416 420 0 - 0
Stage 1 416 -----
Stage 2 365 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 4.14 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 2.236 - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 362 634 1128 - - -
Stage 1 664 -----
Stage 2 700 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 352 634 1128 - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 460 -----
Stage 1 645 -----
Stage 2 700 -----
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.6 0.8 0
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)1128 - 460 634 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.028 - 0.014 0.128 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.3 - 12.9 11.5 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - B B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0 0.4 - -
30
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2021 Without Project
4: E Valley Road & SW 41st Street/167 Ramps 05/01/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 32 446 196 327 99 37 45 252 382 200 313 37
Future Volume (veh/h) 32 446 196 327 99 37 45 252 382 200 313 37
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1885 1885 1885 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 33 465 204 341 103 39 47 262 398 208 326 39
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, %111333222222
Cap, veh/h 504 529 449 423 158 60 61 592 501 239 1332 158
Arrive On Green 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.03 0.32 0.32 0.13 0.42 0.42
Sat Flow, veh/h 1795 1885 1598 3428 1283 486 1781 1870 1585 1781 3199 380
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 33 465 204 341 0 142 47 262 398 208 180 185
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1795 1885 1598 1714 0 1768 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1802
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 29.1 13.0 12.0 0.0 9.5 3.2 13.8 28.4 14.2 8.1 8.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 29.1 13.0 12.0 0.0 9.5 3.2 13.8 28.4 14.2 8.1 8.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.27 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.21
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 504 529 449 423 0 218 61 592 501 239 740 750
V/C Ratio(X) 0.07 0.88 0.45 0.81 0.00 0.65 0.77 0.44 0.79 0.87 0.24 0.25
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 718 754 639 596 0 307 137 592 501 396 740 750
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.6 42.5 36.7 52.8 0.0 51.7 59.3 33.6 38.6 52.5 23.5 23.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 8.5 0.7 5.5 0.0 3.3 18.6 2.4 12.2 11.0 0.8 0.8
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 14.7 5.2 5.5 0.0 4.4 1.8 6.7 12.7 7.1 3.6 3.7
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.7 51.0 37.4 58.3 0.0 54.9 77.9 36.0 50.8 63.5 24.2 24.3
LnGrp LOS C D D E A D E D D E C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 702 483 707 573
Approach Delay, s/veh 46.2 57.3 47.2 38.5
Approach LOS D E D D
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.1 43.6 39.2 8.7 56.0 19.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 27.5 33.5 49.5 9.5 51.5 21.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 16.2 30.4 31.1 5.2 10.3 14.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 1.0 3.6 0.0 2.3 1.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 46.8
HCM 6th LOS D
31
HCM 6th TWSC 2021 With Project
1: Lind Avenue SW & SW 34th Street 05/01/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 48 39 68 3 18 15 39 341 8 23 517 21
Future Vol, veh/h 48 39 68 3 18 15 39 341 8 23 517 21
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 150 - - 150 - - 200 - - 200 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333222
Mvmt Flow 54 44 76 3 20 17 44 383 9 26 581 24
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 935 1125 303 841 1133 196 605 0 0 392 0 0
Stage 1 645 645 - 476 476 -------
Stage 2 290 480 - 365 657 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.56 6.56 6.96 7.56 6.56 6.96 4.16 - - 4.14 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33 2.23 - - 2.22 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 219 202 690 256 200 809 962 - - 1163 - -
Stage 1 425 463 - 536 552 -------
Stage 2 691 550 - 624 457 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 187 188 690 178 187 809 962 - - 1163 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 187 188 - 178 187 -------
Stage 1 405 453 - 511 527 -------
Stage 2 621 525 - 490 447 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 22.1 19 0.9 0.3
HCM LOS C C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)962 - - 187 188 433 178 187 360 1163 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.046 - - 0.288 0.117 0.227 0.019 0.054 0.075 0.022 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - - 31.9 26.7 15.7 25.6 25.3 15.8 8.2 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - -DDCDDCA - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 1.1 0.4 0.9 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 - -
32
HCM 6th TWSC 2021 With Project
2: E Valley Road & SW 34th Street 05/01/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.6
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 11 74 29 291 403 15
Future Vol, veh/h 11 74 29 291 403 15
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 150 - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 34444
Mvmt Flow 12 81 32 320 443 16
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 835 451 459 0 - 0
Stage 1 451 -----
Stage 2 384 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 4.14 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 2.236 - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 336 606 1092 - - -
Stage 1 640 -----
Stage 2 686 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 326 606 1092 - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 439 -----
Stage 1 621 -----
Stage 2 686 -----
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.1 0.8 0
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h)1092 - 439 606 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.029 - 0.028 0.134 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.4 - 13.4 11.9 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - B B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0.1 0.5 - -
33
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2021 With Project
4: E Valley Road & SW 41st Street/167 Ramps 05/01/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 32 446 196 327 99 47 45 259 382 217 321 40
Future Volume (veh/h) 32 446 196 327 99 47 45 259 382 217 321 40
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1885 1885 1885 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 33 465 204 341 103 49 47 270 398 226 334 42
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Percent Heavy Veh, %111333222222
Cap, veh/h 504 529 449 424 147 70 61 572 485 257 1323 165
Arrive On Green 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.03 0.31 0.31 0.14 0.42 0.42
Sat Flow, veh/h 1795 1885 1598 3428 1188 565 1781 1870 1585 1781 3179 397
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 33 465 204 341 0 152 47 270 398 226 185 191
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1795 1885 1598 1714 0 1754 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1799
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 29.2 13.0 12.0 0.0 10.3 3.2 14.5 28.8 15.4 8.4 8.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 29.2 13.0 12.0 0.0 10.3 3.2 14.5 28.8 15.4 8.4 8.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.32 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.22
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 504 529 449 424 0 217 61 572 485 257 739 748
V/C Ratio(X) 0.07 0.88 0.45 0.80 0.00 0.70 0.77 0.47 0.82 0.88 0.25 0.25
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 718 754 639 595 0 305 137 572 485 396 739 748
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.6 42.5 36.7 52.8 0.0 52.0 59.3 34.8 39.8 51.9 23.6 23.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 8.5 0.7 5.4 0.0 4.1 18.6 2.8 14.4 13.5 0.8 0.8
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 14.7 5.2 5.5 0.0 4.8 1.8 7.1 13.1 7.8 3.7 3.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.7 51.0 37.4 58.2 0.0 56.1 77.9 37.6 54.2 65.4 24.4 24.4
LnGrp LOS C D D EAEEDDECC
Approach Vol, veh/h 702 493 715 602
Approach Delay, s/veh 46.2 57.6 49.5 39.8
Approach LOS D E D D
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 22.3 42.4 39.3 8.7 56.0 19.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 27.5 33.5 49.5 9.5 51.5 21.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.4 30.8 31.2 5.2 10.6 14.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 0.9 3.6 0.0 2.4 1.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 47.8
HCM 6th LOS D
34
HCM 6th TWSC 2021 With Project
11: E Valley Road & Project Access 05/01/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 36 19 280 22 12 382
Future Vol, veh/h 36 19 280 22 12 382
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 100 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 24224
Mvmt Flow 40 21 308 24 13 420
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 766 320 0 0 332 0
Stage 1 320 -----
Stage 2 446 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 371 721 - - 1227 -
Stage 1 736 -----
Stage 2 645 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 367 721 - - 1227 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 475 -----
Stage 1 728 -----
Stage 2 645 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.5 0 0.2
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h)- - 538 1227 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.112 0.011 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.5 8 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0 -
35