Appendix D Traffic Impact Analysis - westplainseis.com

Recommendations

Info

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Hwy. 2 & Lawson St 2/10/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 73 1911 16 113 1335 63 73 54 114 108 47 51 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3570 1787 3550 1829 1599 1818 1599 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.55 1.00 0.57 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 3570 1787 3550 1034 1599 1081 1599 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 78 2055 17 122 1435 68 78 58 123 116 51 55 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 52 0 0 19 Lane Group Flow (vph) 78 2072 0 122 1501 0 0 136 71 0 167 36 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.9 80.2 8.1 80.4 22.9 22.9 22.9 22.9 Effective Green, g (s) 7.9 80.2 8.1 80.4 22.9 22.9 22.9 22.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.64 0.06 0.64 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.8 3.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 113 2287 116 2280 189 292 198 292 v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 c0.58 c0.07 0.42 v/s Ratio Perm 0.13 0.04 c0.15 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.91 1.05 0.66 0.72 0.24 0.84 0.12 Uniform Delay, d1 57.5 19.3 58.6 13.9 48.1 43.7 49.4 42.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 16.6 5.7 98.1 0.6 12.3 0.4 26.5 0.2 Delay (s) 74.1 25.0 156.7 14.5 60.5 44.2 75.9 43.0 Level of Service E C F B E D E D Approach Delay (s) 26.8 25.2 52.7 67.7 Approach LOS C C D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 29.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.90 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 125.2 Sum of lost time (s) 14.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 Description: Optimized c Critical Lane Group West Plains Develoment Traffic Impact Analysis Synchro 7 - Report 2032 Base Volumes Page 3
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Hwy. 2 & Garfield St. 2/10/2011 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 133 1795 9 46 1919 266 45 29 118 215 23 103 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.92 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3571 1787 3574 1599 1688 1818 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.74 0.52 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 3571 1787 3574 1599 1260 982 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 143 1930 10 49 2063 286 48 31 127 231 25 111 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 81 0 44 0 0 0 56 Lane Group Flow (vph) 143 1940 0 49 2063 205 0 162 0 0 256 55 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 Permitted Phases 2 4 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 9.5 76.9 3.9 71.3 71.3 36.1 36.1 36.1 Effective Green, g (s) 9.5 76.9 3.9 71.3 71.3 36.1 36.1 36.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.58 0.03 0.54 0.54 0.27 0.27 0.27 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 128 2066 52 1917 858 342 267 439 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.54 0.03 c0.58 v/s Ratio Perm 0.13 0.13 c0.26 0.03 v/c Ratio 1.12 0.94 0.94 1.08 0.24 0.47 0.96 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 61.7 25.8 64.4 30.8 16.4 40.4 47.7 36.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 114.5 9.0 102.9 44.5 0.1 1.0 43.3 0.1 Delay (s) 176.2 34.8 167.3 75.3 16.5 41.5 91.0 36.6 Level of Service F C F E B D F D Approach Delay (s) 44.5 70.2 41.5 74.5 Approach LOS D E D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 58.7 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.04 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 132.9 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 102.3% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 Description: Optimized c Critical Lane Group West Plains Develoment Traffic Impact Analysis Synchro 7 - Report 2032 Base Volumes Page 4
Page 1 and 2:
APPENDIX D TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Page 4 and 5:
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMM
Page 6 and 7:
Table 7. Alternative 1 - PM Peak Ho
Page 8 and 9:
• 10,480-square-foot Tribal Cultu
Page 10 and 11:
Hwy. 2 / Hayford Rd. S 2012 - Phase
Page 12 and 13:
Hwy 2 / Lundstrom: Restripe and wid
Page 14 and 15:
2032 Alternative 2 Mitigations (in
Page 16 and 17:
Table ES- 2. Operational Analysis S
Page 18 and 19:
Table ES- 4. Operational Analysis S
Page 20 and 21:
INTERSECTION MITIGATION - ALTERNATI
Page 22 and 23:
MITIGATION-ALT 2, CONTINUED 2012 PM
Page 24 and 25:
MITIGATION-ALT 3, CONTINUED INTERSE
Page 26 and 27:
• 41,633-square-foot commercial d
Page 28 and 29:
Project Site J 908 N. Howard St. St
Page 30 and 31:
J Map from Friedmutter Group, Decem
Page 32 and 33:
2.5 Methodology The weekday PM peak
Page 34 and 35:
2.7 Applicable Standards, Policies
Page 36 and 37:
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 Street N
Page 39:
3.5 Traffic Volumes The bulk of int
Page 42:
Pipeline Project Description and As
Page 46:
4.4 Operational Analysis and Level
Page 50 and 51:
5. TRIP GENERATION and DISTRIBUTION
Page 52 and 53:
5.3 Trip Generation - Alternative 2
Page 54 and 55:
5.6 Trip Reductions and Net New Tri
Page 56:
5.7 Trip Distribution (Proposed Pro
Page 65:
6.1.2 ALTERNATIVE 1 - 2015 Phase 2
Page 69 and 70:
6.1.4 ALTERNATIVE 1 - MITIGATION Th
Page 71 and 72:
Listed below are improvements recom
Page 73:
6.1.5 ALTERNATIVE 2 - 2012 Buildout
Page 76 and 77:
MITIGATION-ALT 2, CONTINUED 2012 PM
Page 79 and 80:
6.1.8 ALTERNATIVE 3 - MITIGATION Th
Page 81 and 82:
The Spokane Tribe should work with
Page 87 and 88:
Table 22. Level of Service for 2032
Page 89 and 90:
Alternative 3 is projected to gener
Page 91 and 92:
2032 Alternative 2 Mitigations:
Page 93 and 94:
8. CONCLUSIONS Based upon the techn
Page 95 and 96:
9. RECOMMENDATIONS Mitigation recom
Page 97 and 98:
Hwy 2 / Hayford: Optimize signal ti
Page 99:
Hwy 2 / Fairchild AFB: Modify signa
Page 102 and 103:
APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNT DATA Appen
Page 104 and 105:
PROJECT: West Plains Development DA
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
1 PROJECT: DAVID EVANS and ASSOCIAT
Page 114 and 115:
PROJECT: Project Location INTERSECT
Page 116 and 117:
Pipeline (Year 2012) Int. # INTERSE
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
APPENDIX C TRIP GENERATION/INTERNAL
Page 124 and 125:
TRIP GENERATION LAND USE: SHOPPING
Page 126 and 127:
TRIP GENERATION LAND USE: Quality S
Page 128 and 129:
TRIP GENERATION LAND USE: POLICE ST
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
ITE Multi-Use Project Internal Capt
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 156 and 157:
APPENDIX E SYNCHRO WORKSHEETS Appen
Page 158 and 159:
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capac
Page 160 and 161:
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacit
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
APPENDIX E4 YEAR 2019 EXISTING PLUS
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
APPENDIX E6 ALTERNATIVE 1 YEAR 2015
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
APPENDIX E7 ALTERNATIVE 1 YEAR 2019
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286: HCM Signalized Intersection Capacit
Page 289 and 290: HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capac
Page 291 and 292: HCM Signalized Intersection Capacit
Page 311 and 312: APPENDIX E9 ALTERNATIVE 3 YEAR 2012
Page 333 and 334: YEAR 2032 SYNCHRO WORKSHEETS Append
Page 335: HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capac
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
Page 393 and 394:
Page 395 and 396:
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
Page 405 and 406:
Page 407 and 408:
Page 409 and 410:
Page 411 and 412:
Page 413 and 414:
Page 415 and 416:
Page 417 and 418:
Page 419 and 420:
Page 421 and 422:
Page 423 and 424:
Page 425:
APPENDIX F SIDRA ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Page 428 and 429:
MOVEMENT SUMMARY Craig Rd./Hwy. (YE
Page 430 and 431:
INTERSECTION SUMMARY Craig Rd./Hwy.
Page 432 and 433:
QUEUE DISTANCE Largest 95% Back of
Page 434 and 435:
Page 436 and 437:
Page 438 and 439:
Page 440 and 441:
Page 443 and 444:
INTERSECTION SUMMARY Middle Dwy./Hw
Page 445 and 446:
Page 447 and 448:
MOVEMENT SUMMARY Middle Dwy./Hwy. (
Page 449 and 450:
Page 451 and 452:
Page 453 and 454:
Page 455 and 456:
Page 457:
Page 460 and 461:
MOVEMENT SUMMARY Craig Rd./Hwy. 902
Page 462 and 463:
Page 464 and 465:
Page 466 and 467:
Page 468 and 469:
Page 470 and 471:
Page 472 and 473:
Page 474 and 475:
YEAR 2032 SIDRA ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS
Page 476 and 477:
Page 478 and 479:
Page 480 and 481:
Page 482 and 483:
Page 484 and 485:
Page 486 and 487:
Page 488 and 489:
Page 490 and 491:
Page 492 and 493:
Page 494 and 495:
Page 496 and 497:
Page 498 and 499:
Page 500 and 501:
Page 502 and 503:
Page 504 and 505:
Page 506 and 507:
Page 508 and 509:
Page 510:
Page 513 and 514:
MOVEMENT SUMMARY Craig Rd./6th Ave.
Page 516 and 517:
MOVEMENT SUMMARY Craig Rd./Dwy. Nor
Page 518 and 519:
Page 520 and 521:
8 Hour-100%-Minimum Volume - Craig-
Page 522 and 523:
8 Hour-100%-Minimum Volume - Craig-
Page 524 and 525:
8 Hour-100%-Minimum Volume - Middle
Page 526 and 527:
8 Hour-100%-Minimum Volume - Middle
Page 528 and 529:
8 Hour-100%-Minimum Volume - SR-902
Page 530 and 531:
8 Hour-100%-Minimum Volume - SR-902
Page 532:
ADDENDUM TO TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Page 535 and 536:
overall site plan would not be sign
Page 537 and 538:
In lieu of the various mitigations
Page 539 and 540:
Project Proportional Share: 29.8% F
Page 541 and 542:
Hwy 2 / Fairchild AFB: Modify signa
Page 544 and 545:
Attachment B: Two Roundabout Access
Page 546 and 547:
Attachment C: Operational Analysis
Page 548 and 549:
Page 550:
Page 553 and 554:
LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY West Dwy./
Page 556 and 557:
MOVEMENT SUMMARY West Dwy./Hwy. (YE
Page 558:
Page 561 and 562:
Page 564 and 565:
MOVEMENT SUMMARY West Dwy./Hwy. (YE
Page 566:
Page 569 and 570:
Page 572 and 573:
MOVEMENT SUMMARY West RB 2032 Alt.1
Page 574:
Page 577 and 578:
LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY West RB 20
Page 580 and 581:
MOVEMENT SUMMARY West RB 2032 Alt.3
Page 582:
Page 585 and 586:
LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY Middle Dwy
Page 588 and 589:
Page 590:
Page 593 and 594:
Page 596 and 597:
Page 598:
Page 601 and 602:
Page 604 and 605:
Page 606:
Page 609 and 610:
Page 612 and 613:
Page 614:
Page 617 and 618:
LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY Craig Rd./
show all

Appendix D Traffic Impact Analysis - westplainseis.com

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?