Belissa Residential Community - Biological Resource Desktop Review Purpose of Review: The developer seeks to construct the Belissa Residential Community near the corner of Demaree Street and Riverway Drive in Visalia, California. Currently, the project site is 58.78 acres of farmland on APNs 077-050-004 and 077-050-006. 4Creeks has tasked Soar Environmental Consulting to provide a proposal for a biological desktop review with the option to include a full CEQA Biological Resources Assessment.
Soar Environmental Consulting conducted a records search of three (3) database record systems for historical occurrences of special-status species within the vicinity of the project site.
Data Records Research included a review of the following database systems:
• California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB).
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC).
• California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Online Rare Plant Inventory.
The area covered by the data records search included nine (9) USGS 7.5 minute quadrangles:
1. Visalia (Project Site)
2. Cairns Corner
3. Exeter
4. Goshen
5. Ivanhoe
6. Monson
7. Paige
8. Traver
9. Tulare
Special-status species Identified within 5 miles of the project site include:
1. California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense)
2. Hoover's spurge (Euphorbia hooveri)
3. San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica)
4. San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass (Orcuttia inaequalis)
5. Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni)
6. vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi)
7. western yellow-billed cuckoo(Coccyzus americanus occidentalis)
Appendix C
Cultural Records Search Results
USGS Visalia 7.5’ topographic quadrangle;
58.78 total project acres; 58.78 acres surveyed
Keywords: Modoc Ditch
Cultural Resources Assessment for the
Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project, City of Visalia, Tulare County, California
Consuelo Y. Sauls
Prepared By
Taylored Archaeology
6083 N. Figarden Dr., Ste 616
Fresno, CA 93722
Prepared For
4Creeks, Inc.
324 S. Santa Fe St., Suite A
Visalia, CA 93292
October 2021
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology ii
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
Taylored Archaeology performed a cultural resources assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project (Project), City of Visalia, Tulare County. The Project seeks to construct a residential development consisting of 318 single-family units with an additional 6.88 acres zoned for the future neighborhood commercial development. The Project thus requires compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
To meet state standards, Taylored Archaeology completed a cultural resources assessment under contract to 4Creeks, Inc. to determine identify potential cultural resources within the 58.78 acres in the Project area. The assessment included a records search through the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), a search of the Native American Heritage Commission’s (NAHC) Sacred Lands File including tribal representatives’ contact information, and an archaeological pedestrian survey of the proposed Project area; and preparation of California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 series cultural resource record forms.
The records search results from SSJVIC indicated that there were no records of recorded cultural resources and no records of prior investigations in the Project area. In addition, no recorded cultural resource was identified within a 0.5-mile radius. The NAHC’s Sacred Lands File results and outreach to local tribal representatives did not result in the indicated identifications of sacred or important tribal cultural sites within the Project area, and no archaeological cultural resources were identified during archaeological pedestrian survey; however, Taylored Archaeology identified one segment of the Modoc Ditch canal system that intersect the Project boundary.
Based upon the results of this assessment, the Proposed Project work will cause a minor disturbance to the historical ditch within the Project boundary. Taylored Archaeology advises that in the event of accidental discovery of unidentified archaeological remains during development or ground-moving activities in the Project area, all work within the immediate vicinity (within a 100- foot radius) shall be halted until a qualified archaeologist can identify the discovery and assess its significance.
If human remains are uncovered during construction, the Tulare County Coroner is to be notified to investigate the remains and arrange proper treatment and disposition. If the remains are identified on the basis of archaeological context, age, cultural associations, or biological traits to be those of a Native American, California Health and Safety Code 7050.5 and PRC 5097.98 require that the coroner notify the NAHC within 24 hours of discovery. The NAHC will then identify the Most Likely Descendent who will be afforded an opportunity to make recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of the remains.
A copy of this report will be provided to the SSJVIC for inclusion in the CHRIS statewide database.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology iii
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................5
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION.......................................................5
1.2 REGULATORY SETTING.....................................................................................5
1.2.1 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT......................................... 6
1.3 PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS..................................................................6
1.4 REPORT ORGANIZATION.................................................................................10 2 PROJECT SETTING......................................................................................................11
2.1 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT..............................................................................11
2.2 PREHISTORIC SETTING ....................................................................................12
2.3 ETHNOGRAPHY..................................................................................................13
2.4 HISTORIC SETTING ...........................................................................................14
2.4.1 Central California History..................................................................................... 14
2.4.2 Local History ........................................................................................................ 14 3 METHODS.......................................................................................................................17
3.1 RECORDS SEARCH ............................................................................................17
3.2 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH.....................................................................................17
3.3 NATIVE AMERICAN OUTREACH....................................................................17
3.4 PEDESTRIAN SURVEY ......................................................................................17 4 FINDINGS........................................................................................................................18
4.1 RECORDS SEARCH ............................................................................................18
4.2 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH.....................................................................................18
4.3 NATIVE AMERICAN OUTREACH....................................................................19
4.4 PEDESTRIAN SURVEY RESULTS....................................................................20 5 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION...................................................................25 6 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................26
APPENDICIES
A Personnel Qualifications
B Records Search Results
C Native American Outreach
D Cultural Resource Record Forms
FIGURES
Figure 1-1 Project vicinity in Tulare County, California. ........................................................ 7 Figure 1-2 Project location on the USGS Visalia, CA 7.5-minute quadrangle. ....................... 8 Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology iv
Figure 1-4 Aerial view of the Project boundary showing survey coverage. ............................ 9 Figure 2-1 Modoc Canal in 1898. Arrow indicates approximate Project location................. 15 Figure 4-1 Central portion of project site, facing north. Abandoned orchard in foreground. 21 Figure 4-2 Ground visibility on project site. .......................................................................... 21 Figure 4-3 South central portion of project site, facing northwest. Modoc Ditch in foreground............................................................................................................. 22 Figure 4-4 Soil consistency on project site............................................................................. 22 Figure 4-5 Southeast corner of project site, facing west. Modoc ditch in foreground. .......... 23 Figure 4-6 South central portion of project site, facing northwest. Modoc Ditch in foreground............................................................................................................. 23 Figure 4-7 Rural residential house at eastern edge of project site, facing east....................... 24 Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 5 1
INTRODUCTION
The private developer proposes to construct a residential development consisting of 318 singlefamily units with an additional 6.88 acres zoned for future neighborhood commercial development on a 58.78-acre lot in the City of Visalia. 4Creeks, Inc., as the prime contractor to the private developer for environmental compliance services, retained Taylored Archaeology to conduct a Phase I cultural resource assessment of the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project (Project) for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The Project area is in the City of Visalia in Tulare County (Figure 1-1). Specifically, the Project site is located approximately 800 feet northwest of North Demaree Street and Riverway Drive within Section 14 of Township 18 South, Range 24 East, Mount Diablo Meridian of the Visalia, California 7.5-minute USGS topographic quadrangle (Figure 1-2).
The Project site is approximately 58.78-acres of agricultural land, comprised of Assessor Parcel Numbers 077-050-004 and 077-050-006 within the northwest area of the City of Visalia. The Project site is surrounded by agricultural uses and rural residences to the east, north, west, and south. Adjacent to the southwest is the Wildhorse single-family subdivision. The Project site is bordered by Riverway Drive to the south and North Demaree Street / County Road 108 to the east.
The proposed Project will involve construction of 318 single-family residential lots, a 168 multifamily residential unit apartment complex, five pocket parks totaling 1.03 acres, and zoning of
7.88 acres of neighborhood commercial for future development. The Project will additionally include a pool, parking, landscaping, neighborhood streets and associated utilities, and sidewalks along streets within the Project site. Wet utilities will be installed at a depth of 12 to 15 feet below ground surface (bgs), and dry utilities will be installed at a maximum depth of 4 feet bgs. Vehicle access will include entrances along Riverway Drive and North Chinowth Street to the south, and North Demaree Street / County Road 108 to the east. The apartment complex will have vehicle access to a future planned extension of Linwood Street to the west.
1.2 REGULATORY SETTING
Cultural resources within the context of this report is defined as a historical or prehistorical archaeological site, or a historical structure, object, or building. Consistent with 36 CFR 60.3, the term “historical” in this report applies to archaeological features and artifacts, and additionally to buildings, objects, or structures that are at least 50 years old. While exceptions to the 50-year criterion occur, they are relatively rare. The significance or importance of a cultural resource is dependent upon whether the resource qualifies for inclusion at the local or state in the California Register of Historical Places (CRHR). Cultural resources that are determined to be eligible for inclusion in the CRHR are called “historical resources” (CCR 15064.5[a]). Under Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 6 this statue the determination of eligibility is partially based on the consideration of the criteria of significance as defined in 14 CCR 15064.5(a)(3).
1.2.1 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
Pursuant to CEQA, a historical resource is a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources. Historical resources may include, but are not limited to, “any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically or archaeologically significant” (PRC §5020.1[j]). In addition, a resource included in a local register of historical resources or identified as significant in a local survey conducted in accordance with the state guidelines are also considered historic resources under California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5020.1.
According to CEQA guidelines §15064.5 (a)(3), criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources includes the following:
(A) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.
(B) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. (C) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values.
(D) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
According to CEQA guidelines §21074 (a)(1)(2), criteria for tribal cultural resources includes the following:
(1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following: (A) included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources. (B) included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1.
1.3 PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
Archaeologist Consuelo Y. Sauls (M.A.), a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA 41591505), served as project manager, providing technical and administrative oversight for all cultural resource tasks conducted, and as report author for the Project study. Ms. Sauls meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Professional Qualifications in Archaeology. Statement of Qualifications for key personnel is provided in Appendix A.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 7 Figure 1-1 Project vicinity in Tulare County, California.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 8 Figure 1-2 Project location on the USGS Visalia, CA 7.5-minute quadrangle.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 9 Figure 1-3 Aerial view of the Project boundary showing survey coverage.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 10 1.4 REPORT ORGANIZATION
This report documents the results of a cultural resource assessment of the proposed Project area.
In order to comply with California regulations for CEQA, the following specific tasks were completed: (1) requesting a records search from the Southern San Joaquin Information Center (SSJVIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), at California State University, Bakersfield; (2) requesting a Sacred Lands File Search and list of interested parties from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and initiating outreach to local Native American individuals and tribal representatives; (3) conducting an archaeological pedestrian survey, (4) preparing this technical report.
Taylored Archaeology prepared this report following the California Office of Historic Preservation standards in the 1990 Archaeological Resources Management Report Recommended Contents and Format. Chapter 1 describes the Project and its location, and identifies the key personnel involved in this report. Chapter 2 summarizes the Project setting, including the natural, prehistoric, historic, and ethnohistoric background for the Project area and surrounding area. Chapters 3 and 4 includes the methods and findings of the archival studies, Native American outreach, and pedestrian survey.
Chapter 5 discusses the Project findings and offers management recommendations. Chapter 6 is a bibliography of references cited within this report. The report also contains the following appendices: Qualifications of key personnel (Appendix A), the CHRIS records search results (Appendix B), and Taylored Archaeology’s nongovernmental Native American outreach (Appendix C) and (5) California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 series record forms for recorded cultural resources (Appendix D).
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 11 2
PROJECT SETTING
2.1 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Tulare County lies within the southern portion of the Central Valley, which is approximately 450 miles long from north to south, and ranges in width from 40 to 60 miles east to west (Prothero 2017). The Central Valley is divided into two subunits named after the primary rivers within the area, the Sacramento Valley in the north and the San Joaquin Valley in the south. The Project area is located approximately 315 feet above sea level on the open flat plains of the Southern San Joaquin Valley. The San Joaquin Valley is a comprised of a structural trough created approximately 65 million years ago and is filled with nearly 6 miles of sediment (Bull 1964). The San Joaquin Valley ranges from Stockton and San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta in the north to Wheeler Ridge to the south, ranging nearly sixty miles wide at its widest (Zack 2017). It is split by late Pleistocene alluvial fans between the San Joaquin River hydrologic area in the north and the Tulare Lake Drainage Basin in the south (Rosenthal et al 2007). Tulare County is located within the latter of the two hydrologic units. The Kaweah, Tule, Kern, and Kings rivers flowed into large inland lakes with no outflow except in high flood events, in which the lakes would flow from through the Fresno Slough into the San Joaquin River. The largest of these inland lakes was the Tulare Lake, which occupied a vast area of Tulare and Kings Counties.
The Project is in central western Tulare County on the valley floor of the San Joaquin Valley within the Kaweah River Delta alluvial fan. Specifically, the Project is located approximately 0.45 miles north of St. John’s River, which is a distributary of the Kaweah River. Distributaries form when debris-laden river waters meet abrupt changes in channel and slope confinement, resulting in unstable channel networks that change with time (Wagner et al. 2013). Before the appearance of agriculture in the nineteenth century, the Project location would have been comprised of prairie grasslands with scatter oak tree savannas near the foothills, and along the various streams and drainages (Preston 1981). Riparian environments would also have been present along various waterways, including drainages and marshes. Native vegetation likely would have consisted of needle grasses and other perennial bunchgrasses before the introduction of non-native species in the 1800s.
The valley floor of the region was largely dominated by marshlands, lakes, and annual grasslands.
Historically, these habitats provided a lush environment for large animals, including various migratory birds and other waterfowl, grizzly bear (Ursus arctos californicus), tule elk (Cervus sp.), pronghorn (Antilocapra americana), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), black bear (Ursus americanus), and mountain lion (Puma concolor) (Preston 1981). Native trees and plants observed in the Project vicinity include various blue, live, and white oaks (Quercus sp.), cottonwood (Populus aegiros), and willow (Salix sp.). The introduction of agriculture to region resulted in large animals being forced out of their habitat. Common land mammals now include valley coyote (Canis latrans), bobcat (Lynx rufus), gray fox, kit fox (Vulpes macrotis), and rabbits (Leporidae).
Rivers and lakes throughout the valley provide habitat for freshwater fish, including rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Sacramento sucker (Catostomidae sp.), and Sacramento perch (Archoplites interruptus), (Preston 1981).
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 12 2.2 PREHISTORIC SETTING
To better understand the past, archaeologists develop models of prehistoric resource chronologies and description of lifestyles based on data collected at the archaeological sites they investigate.
Models of prehistoric life patterns are developed from both archaeological and ethnographic research. Within archaeology, models of prehistoric lifestyles are based on data collected from archaeological sites. The Southern San Joaquin Valley is of one of the least understood areas within California (Rosenthal et al. 2007). This is largely due to the valley floor being filled with thick alluvial deposits, and from human activity largely disturbing much of the valley floor due to a century and a half of agricultural use (Dillon 2002; Siefken 1999). Much of the early to middle Holocene archaeological sites may have been as deep as 10 meters due to millennia of erosion and alluvial deposits from the western Sierras (Moratto 1984).
Agricultural activities have heavily disturbed and changed the landscape of the Southern San Joaquin Valley, from the draining of marshes and the vanishing of the extensive Tulare Lake, to grading nearly the entire valley for agricultural operations (Garone 2011). These activities have impacted or scattered much of the shallow surface deposits and mounds throughout the valley (Rosenthal et al 2007). Riddell suggested that potentially as much as 90 percent of all Central California archaeological sites have been destroyed (Riddell 2002).
The cultural traits and chronologies which are summarized below are largely based upon information discussed in multiple sources, including Bennyhoff and Fredrickson (Fredrickson 1973, 1974), Garfinkel (2015), McGuire and Garfinkel (1980), Moratto (1984), and Rosenthal et al. (2007).
The Paleo-Indian Period (13,500-10,600 cal B.P.) was largely represented by ephemeral lake sites which were characterized by atlatl and spear projectile points. Around 14,000 years ago, California was largely a cooler and wetter place, but with the retreat of continental Pleistocene glaciers, California largely experienced a warming and drying red. Lakes filled with glacial meltwater were located in the valley floor and used by populations of now extinct large game animals. A few prehistoric sites were discovered near the southwestern shore of Tulare Lake (Garfinkel 2015).
Foragers appear to have operated in small groups which migrated on a regular basis.
During the Lower Archaic Period (10,500-7450 cal B.P.), climate change created a largely different environment which led to the creation of larger alluvial fans and flood plains. Most of the archaeological records of the prior period wound up being buried by geological processes.
During this time, cultural patterns appear to have emerged between the foothill and valley populations of the local people. The foothill sites were often categorized by dense flaked and ground stone assemblages, while the valley sites were instead characterized by a predominance of crescents and stemmed projectile points. Variations in consumption patterns emerged as well, with the valley sites more marked by consumption of waterfowl, mussels, and freshwater fish, while the foothills sites saw an increase in nuts, seeds, and a more narrowly focused diet than the valley sites.
The Middle Archaic (7450-2500 cal B.P.) saw an increase in semi-permanent villages along river and creek settings, with more permanent sites located along lakes with a more stable supply of water and wildlife. Due to the warmer and drier weather of this period, many lakes within the Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 13 valley dramatically reduced in size, while some vanished completely (Garone 2011). Cultural patterns during this time saw an increase in stone tools, while a growth in shell beads, ornaments, and obsidian evidence an extensive and ever-growing long-distance trade network. Little is known of cultural patterns in the valley during the Upper Archaic (2500-850), but large village structures appeared to be more common around local rivers. An overall reduction of projectile point size suggests changing bow and arrow technologies. Finally, the Emergent Period (850 cal B.P.- Historic Era) was generally marked by an ever-increasing specialization in tools, and the bow and arrow generally replaced the dominance of the dart and atlatl. Cultural traditions ancestral to those recorded during ethnographic research in the early 1900s are identifiable.
2.3 ETHNOGRAPHY
The Project area is in the Southern Valley Yokuts ethnographic territory of the San Joaquin Valley.
The Yokuts are a sub-group of the Penutian language that covers much of coastal and central California and Oregon (Callaghan 1958). The Yokuts language contained multiple dialects spoken throughout the region, though many of them were mutually understandable (Merriam 1904). The Yokuts were generally divided into three major groups, the Northern Valley Yokuts, the Southern Valley Yokuts, and the Foothill Yokuts.
The Yokuts have been extensively researched and recorded by ethnographers, including Powers (1877), Kroeber (1925), Gifford and Schenck (1926, 1929), Gayton (1930, 1945), Driver (1937), Harrington (1957), Latta (1977), and Wallace (1978). Much of the research from these ethnographers focuses on the central Yokuts tribes due to the northernmost tribes being impacted by Euro-Americans during the California Gold Rush of the mid 1800s, and by the southernmost tries often being removed and relocated by the Spanish to various Bay Area or coastal missions.
The central Yokuts tribes, and especially the western Sierra Nevada foothill tribes, were the most intact at the time of ethnographic study.
Based upon Kroeber’s map of Southern and Central Yokuts (1925: Plate 47), the Project area is likely within the Telamni and Wukchamni Yokuts territory. The closest village for this area was Waitatshulu, which was located on Packwood Creek approximately 5.5 miles south of the Project site (Kroeber 1925). Primary Yokuts villages were typically located along lakeshores and major stream courses, with scattered secondary or temporary camps and settlements located near gathering areas in the foothills. Wukchamni Yokuts lived in conical houses that were made of oak poles, horizontal willow bands and covered with long grass or fine willow thatch (Anderson 2005).
Yokuts were organized into groups originally designated as tribelets by Kroeber, with one or more linked villages and smaller settlements within a territory (Kroeber 1925). Designation of these units as ‘tribelets’ is often viewed as pejorative by many Native Americans, and for the remainder of this report will be referred to as ‘local tribes’ instead. Each local tribe was a land-owning group that was organized around a central village, and shared common territory and ancestry. Most local tribe populations ranged from 150 to 500 people (Kroeber 1925). These local tribes were often led by a chief, who was often advised by a variety of assistants including the winatum, who served as a messenger and assistant chief (Gayton 1930).
Prior to Euro-American contact, the Yokuts were one of the densest populations of Native Americans in western North America due to the substantial natural resources surrounding Tulare Lake (Cook 1955). According to the Native American Heritage Commission, six Native American Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 14 tribal groups are currently associated with the Project area, including the Tubatulabals of Kern Valley, Wukasache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, the Kern Valley Indian Community, the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe, and the Tule River Indian Tribe.
2.4 HISTORIC SETTING
2.4.1 Central California History
While the California coast saw European contact as early as the 1500s, the San Joaquin valley did not experience contact until the late 1700s (Starr 2007). The earliest exploration of the San Joaquin Valley by Europeans was likely by the Spaniards when in the fall of 1772 when a group known as the Catalonian Volunteers entered into the valley through Tejon Pass in search deserters from the Southern California Missions (Zack 2017). However, the group only made it as far north as Buena Vista Lake before turning around due to the extensive swamps. Additional excursions to the valley were for exploration such as those led by Lieutenant Bariel Moraga in 1806, but also to find sites for suitable missions and to track down Native Americans fleeing the coastal missions (Cook 1958).
Subsequent expeditions were also sent to pursue outlaws from the coast who would often flee to the valley for safety. One of the subsequent explorations was an expedition in 1814 to 1815 with Sargent Juan Ortega and Father Juan Cabot, who left the Mission San Miguel with a company of approximately 30 Spanish soldiers and explored the San Joaquin Valley (Smith 2004). This expedition passed through the Kaweah Delta and modern-day Visalia and made a recommendation to establish a mission near modern-day Visalia. Some of the first Euro-Americans to reside in what would become modern-day Tulare County were Jedediah and Pegleg Smith (Menefee and Dodge 1913). As the valley was still relatively lawless in the 1830s, those drawn to it were often either trappers like Jedediah Smith or horse thieves like Pegleg Smith (Clough and Secrest 1984). In fact, horse and other livestock theft was so rampant that ranching operations on the Rancho Laguna de Tache by the Kings River and Rancho del San Joaquin Rancho along the San Joaquin River could not be properly established (Cook 1962). With the end of the Mexican-American War and the beginning of the gold rush in 1848, the San Joaquin Valley became more populated with ranchers and prospectors. By 1850, California became a state and Tulare County was established in 1853.
2.4.2 Local History
The City of Visalia is one of the oldest cities within the Southern San Joaquin Valley and was founded in 1852. By the mid-1850s the town of Visalia was a major station along the Butterfield Overland Mail state route as it traveled north from Los Angeles to Stockton (Helmich 2008; OHP 2019). During the first few decades, Visalia was a supply center for nearby gold rushes, and had an agricultural economy based on livestock (Dyett and Bhatia 2014).
The Southern Pacific Railroad was extended from Fresno into Tulare County in the early 1870s (ESA 2010). The City of Tulare was founded in 1872 as the San Joaquin Valley headquarters of the Southern Pacific Railroad and was later incorporated in 1888 (City of Tulare 2021). With it, the rail line brought an increased in agriculture and farms that clashed with existing ranching operations in the local area. Escalating conflicts and livestock disputes between ranchers and farmers lead to the “No Fence Law” in 1874, which forced ranchers to pay for crop and property Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 15 damage caused by their cattle (Ludeke 1980). With the passage of this law and the expansion of irrigation systems, predominant land use in the 1870s switched from grazing to farming (Mitchell 1974). This led to the beginning of the vast change of the San Joaquin Valley from native vegetation and grasslands to irrigated crops (Varner and Stuart 1975). One such irrigation system was the Modoc Canal, later known as the Modoc Ditch, which was constructed in 1876 and originally intended to be made a distributary for the Wutchumna Canal in Tulare County near the town of Visalia (Grunsky 1898). By 1898, the Modoc Canal was approximately 4 miles in length running from the St. John’s River north of Visalia, toward Goshen to the west and irrigated approximately 1,000 acres (Figure 2-1).
Figure 2-1 Modoc Canal depicted in Grunsky’s (1898:10) map of Kaweah and Tule canals. Arrow indicates approximate Project location.
Because water rights within California originally arose from the first come first serve policy of the Gold Rush era, diverting surface water to farms became big business, but a convoluted mess of customs, traditions, and conflicting claims (Zack 2019). To solve this mess, the Wright Act of 1887 was passed that allowed residents to petition a local county board of supervisors to create irrigation districts that had the power to issues bonds, and tax land within the district boundaries to pay for the creation and maintenance of canals and ditches for irrigation purposes.
One such district was the Tulare Irrigation District, which was organized on September 21, 1889.
The Tulare Irrigation District originally covered 219,000 acres from the foothills of the Sierra Nevada to the eastern boundary of Tulare Lake but was ultimately reduced to approximately 32,000 acres (PID 2012). Only two years later, the Modoc Ditch Company was incorporated in Tulare County, California on September 14, 1891 (California Secretary of State 1891). The Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 16 officers and founders of the company were L. Burrel, M.W. Smith, Charles Jogni, John R. Parr, and T.J. Akens; and the company was formed with 100 shares of stock totaling $10,000 in value.
The purpose of the company was to “clean out and keep in repair the Modoc Ditch . . . and to convey water from the St. John’s River through said ditch”. The Modoc Ditch Company may have been a successor to a previous company, as the original articles of incorporation referenced a transfer of rights from an “old Modoc Ditch Company” to the 1891 company. The Modoc Ditch diverted water from the St. John’s River near present-day Highway 63 and terminated approximately 6 miles to the west near the community of Goshen. By 1920, the Modoc Ditch irrigated approximately 3,500 acres of agricultural lands annually, and only diverted water from the St. John’s River between April and July of each year (California Department of Public Works 1923).
At the same time, an important step forward was made in ditch-digging technology that allowed irrigation systems to be built at a faster pace. From the 1840s to 1890s, farm ditches and canals were largely constructed through the use of buckboards and slip-scoops, which involved the use of a board pulled by horses in an uprights position in order to level ground (Bulls 2010). Between 1883 and 1885, Scottish immigrant James Porteous had moved to Fresno and made significant improvements to the buckboard style scraper that allowed the new scraper to be pulled by two horses and scrape and move soil while dumping it at a controlled depth. This new design was patented and sold as the “Fresno Scraper”, which lead to an explosion of ditch digging efforts within the San Joaquin Valley (Zack 2019).
Water conveyance systems were also developed throughout the region in order to minimize flooding and to divert water to the dryer areas (PID 2012). However, surface waters and local wells were only able to satisfy the water demands of the valley for so long, and in 1911 California created the State Reclamation Board to solve water issues in the valley. Various reports were commissioned and 12 years later the California State Water Plan was proposed (Stene 2015). The Central Valley Project was approved in 1933, but funds were stalled until funded by the Rivers and Harbors Act in 1937. Construction on the Central Valley Project began soon after and continued until the mid-1950s (Stene 2015). One cornerstone of this project was the Friant-Kern Canal (FKC), which is located along the base of the western Sierra foothills. The FKC, built between 1945 and 1951, is over 150 miles long and represents one of the largest lined canals in the western US (Hundley 2001). Creation of the FKC brought new opportunities for irrigation to the region and led to the creation of new irrigation districts.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 17 3
METHODS
3.1 RECORDS SEARCH
On August 20, 2021, Taylored Archaeology requested a copy of prior cultural resource studies reports in the result letter that the SSJVIC of the CHRIS at California State University in Bakersfield, California, provided to 4Creeks. The records search included the Project area and surrounding land within a 0.5-mile radius of the Project. Sources consulted included archaeological site and survey base maps, historical USGS topographic maps, reports of previous investigations, cultural resource records (DPR forms) as well as listings of the Historic Properties Directory of the Office of Historic Preservation, General Land Office Maps, Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility, and the California Inventory of Historic Resources (Appendix B).
3.2 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH
Taylored Archeology conducted archival research of historical maps, historical aerial photographs, historical US Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps, Google Earth aerial photographs, Google Street View photos, books, articles and other records regarding the prehistory and history of the Project area. The results of this research are presented in Chapter 4.
3.3 NATIVE AMERICAN OUTREACH
Taylored Archaeology sent a request to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search, to determine if any known Native American cultural properties (e.g., places of religious, sacred activity or traditional use or gathering areas) are present within the Project area. The NAHC also included contact information for local Native American tribal representatives who may have knowledge or interest in sharing information of resources of sacred or spiritual significance in the Project area and surrounding area.
3.4 PEDESTRIAN SURVEY
Archaeologist Consuelo Sauls performed an intensive Phase I pedestrian survey of the 58.78-acre Project site on September 4, 2021. The whole area in the Project boundary was accessible and surveyed. Additionally, the survey was completed by walking parallel transects spaced 5 to 15 meters apart. The survey began in the southwest corner of the Project area and was completed from west to east along transects oriented south-east. The purpose of this survey was to identify any archaeological or historical sensitive cultural resources such as archaeological sites, and historic-era features and structures, which may be present on the ground surface. Additionally, the survey sought to identify potential historical features, structures, and artifacts more than 50 years old. Plan maps and visible landmarks were used for navigation to locate and survey the Project area. Ms. Sauls photographed the survey area using an iPhone 11 Pro digital camera and recorded location data using the Gaia GPS application. Overviews of the Project site are shown in the photographs that follow (Figure 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3).
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 18 4
FINDINGS
4.1 RECORDS SEARCH
The SSJVIC provided the results of the records search in a letter dated July 19, 2021 (Records Search File No. 21-269; Appendix B). The letter indicated that there have been no previous cultural resource studies conducted within the Project area, and there has been one cultural resource study (TU-00103) conducted within a 0.5-mile radius of the Project area.
The SSJVIC also reported that no cultural resources were previously recorded within the Project area or within the 0.5-mile radius. Additionally, no recorded cultural resources are recorded within the Project area or 0.5-mile radius that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, the California Points of Interest, California Inventory of Historic Resources, or the California State Historic Landmarks.
4.2 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH
Available USGS topographic maps covering the Project area began in 1927. A review of the USGS Visalia, CA 7.5-minute 1927 topographic map showed one structure at the eastern edge of the Project site along a road corresponding with modern day North Demaree Street, and an irrigation ditch bisecting the Project site and running diagonally in a southeast to northwest direction. The 1950 Visalia topographic map shows two additional structures at the eastern edge of the Project site, and a realignment of the Modoc ditch south of the Project site from a southeastnorthwest alignment to a west-east alignment along the southern boundary of the Project site. The alignment of the Modoc ditch within the Project site appears unchanged in the 1950 topographic map.
Available historic aerial photograph coverage of the Project area began in 1948. The 1948 historical aerial photograph shows the Modoc Ditch in the Project site in the same alignment as modern aerial photographs show. Three structures are observed in the eastern portion of the Project site in the 1948 aerial photograph, with one structure located in approximately the same location as the rural residence on the Project site located along North Demaree Street. Most of the Project site appears to consist of low-lying row crops, with a small orchard near the Modoc Ditch in the center of the site. Historic aerial photographs between 1956 and 1969 show the Project site in a similar agricultural state. No historic aerial photographs were available between 1970 and 1991. Aerial photographs between 1992 and present day show the Project site in its current state as an orchard.
On September 13, 2021, Taylored Archaeology contacted Mr. James Silva of the Modoc Ditch Company via email requesting copies of any company archives pertinent to the historic of the company and the ditch. On September 29, 2021, Mr. Silva stated he was not able to locate any pertinent Modoc Ditch Company archives.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 19 4.3 NATIVE AMERICAN OUTREACH
On September 8, 2021, the NAHC sent a letter via email to Taylored Archaeology with the results of the SLF search findings and attached a list of Native American tribes and individuals culturally affiliated with the Project area. The letter stated the SLF results were negative and did not indicate the presence of resources in the immediate Project area (see Appendix C). All potentially interested tribes identified by the NAHC were contacted for information regarding their knowledge of cultural resources that were within the study locale.
The NAHC supplied a list of tribal representatives and recommended to contact the following representatives for information regarding Native American cultural resources in the study locale:
▪ Chairperson Elizabeth D. Kipp of Big Sandy Rancheria of Western Mono Indians; ▪ Chairperson Leo Sisco of the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe; ▪ Chairperson Neil Peyron of the Tule River Indian Tribe; ▪ Environmental Department Director Kerri Vera of the Tule River Indian Tribe; ▪ Tribal Archaeologist Joey Garfield of the Tule River Indian Tribe; and ▪ Chairperson Kenneth Woodrow of the Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band.
The letters were sent to each individual dated September 9, 2021 and included a description of the proposed Project and a map of the location. Follow-up email correspondence and phone calls were made to confirm receipt of the letter and gather any information or input tribal representatives may want to share about the Project area or general vicinity.
Kerri Vera, Director of the Department of Environmental Protection of the Tule River Indian Tribe, recommend Native American monitoring of Project construction activities.
Samantha McMarty, Cultural Specialist II for the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi-Yokut Tribe, commented and requested to be retained for a cultural presentation for all construction staff.
No other responses were received to date.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 20 4.4 PEDESTRIAN SURVEY RESULTS
The landscape in the Project site consisted primarily of plum orchards in a semi-abandoned state (Figure 4-1). The ground visibility at the time of survey was fair (50 to 68 percent) due to vegetation (e.g., fallen tree branches, leaves, tall grasses and weeds) (Figure 4-2). Visibility was greater near rodent burrows. Ground visibility along a ditch running through the eastern portion of the Project site was 100 percent (Figure 4-3). Surface sediments were observed to be grayishbrown sandy loam with abundant silt with many angular shaped pebbles and gravel (Figure 4-4).
All areas were examined for potential cultural remains. One potential cultural resource was encountered during the survey, the Modoc Ditch, and was observed on the Project site. That segment of Modoc Ditch within the Project site did not contain water at the time of the survey.
The ditch had a dirt bottom and was approximately 5 feet deep at the lowest point. The Modoc Ditch ran from the southeast corner of the Project site and continued directly west for approximately 800 feet (Figure 4-5), before turning northwest and continuing for an additional approximately 750 feet (Figure 4-6) before reaching the northern edge of the Project site. The Modoc Ditch was interrupted by a single concrete and corrugated metal culvert near the southern boundary of the Project site.
There were two houses on the northeastern portion of the Project site (Figure 4-7). The age of both structures was undetermined, and close study of the structures was not able to be conducted due to the presence of hostile canines.
No other cultural resources (e.g., isolated artifacts, features, archaeological sites, or historic-era built environment properties) were identified or collected during the field survey of the Project area.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 21 Figure 4-1 Central portion of project site, facing north. Abandoned orchard in foreground.
Figure 4-2 Ground visibility on project site.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 22 Figure 4-3 South central portion of project site, facing northwest. Modoc Ditch in foreground.
Figure 4-4 Soil consistency on project site.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 23 Figure 4-5 Southeast corner of project site, facing west. Modoc ditch in foreground.
Figure 4-6 South central portion of project site, facing northwest. Modoc Ditch in foreground.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 24 Figure 4-7 Rural residential house at eastern edge of project site, facing east.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 25 5
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION
Taylored Archaeology completed a cultural resource assessment for the Belissa TSM Project to identify potential cultural resources in the 58.78-acres Project boundary. The Project proposes to construct a residential development consisting of 318 single-family units with an additional 6.88 acres zoned for the future neighborhood commercial development in the City of Visalia.
As a subconsultant to 4Creeks, Inc., Taylored Archaeology conducted background research and pedestrian survey of the Project boundary to determine whether prehistoric and historic resources will be affected by the Project. The investigation included: (1) a records search at the SSJVIC; (2) a request of the NAHC Sacred Lands File including the tribal representatives’ contact information, and nongovernmental tribal outreach; (3) archival research; (4) an archaeological pedestrian survey; and (5) documentation of resources identified with the Project boundary.
The SSJVIC records search results indicated that there have been no previous cultural resource investigations conducted within the Project area. The records search did not identify any known cultural resources within the Project area or within a 0.5-mile radius surrounding area. Though, the records noted one cultural resource investigation conducted within a 0.5-mile radius (Appendix B).
The NAHC Sacred Lands File search and outreach to local tribal representatives did not result in the identification of sacred places or other special areas important to the tribes within the Project boundary. The pedestrian survey of the Project site did not identify any prehistoric resources.
However, a historic-era resource, a canal segment of the Modoc Ditch was identified in the Project boundary during the survey. The segment of the Modoc Ditch within the Project boundary was evaluated and found to not be eligible for inclusion within the CRHR.
Two houses were observed in the eastern portion of the project site but were unable to be assessed for potential age due to the presence of hostile canines. If the residences are more than 50 years old, they may need to potentially be evaluated by a qualified architectural historian.
Taylored Archaeology recommends that in the event of accidental discovery of unidentified archaeological remains during development or ground-moving activities in the Project area, all work shall be halted in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot radius) until a qualified archaeologist can identify the discovery and assess its significance.
If human remains are uncovered during construction, the Tulare County Coroner is to be notified to investigate the remains and arrange proper treatment and disposition. If the remains are identified on the basis of archaeological context, age, cultural associations, or biological traits to be those of a Native American, California Health and Safety Code 7050.5 and PRC 5097.98 require that the coroner notify the NAHC within 24 hours of discovery. The NAHC will then identify the Most Likely Descendent who will be afforded an opportunity to make recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of the remains.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 26 6
REFERENCES
Anderson, Kat M.
2005 Tending the Wild: Native American Knowledge and the Management of California’s Natural Resources. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California.
Bull, William B.
1964 Geomorphology of Segmented Alluvial Fans in Western Fresno County, California.
Geological Survey Professional Paper 352-E. United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Bulls, Diana.
2010 The Fresno Scraper: A Mechanical Engineering Marvel. Kings River Life Magazine.
August 14.
California Department of Public Works
1923 Bulletin No. 6, Irrigation Requirements of California Lands: Being Appendix B to Report to the Legislature of 1923 on the Water Resources of California. By the State of California Department of Public Works, Division of Engineering and Irrigation.
California State Printing Office, Sacramento, California.
California Secretary of State
1891 Modoc Ditch Company Articles of Incorporation. Sacramento, California.
Callaghan, Catherine A.
1958 California Penutian: History and Bibliography. International Journal of American Linguistics. 24(3):189-194.
Cook, Sherburne F.
1955 The Aboriginal Population of the San Joaquin Valley, California. Anthropological Records 16:31–80. University of California, Berkeley.
1958 The Project Gutenberg eBook, Colonial Expeditions to the Interior of California Central Valley, 1800-1820
1962 Expeditions to the Interior of California: Central Valley, 1820-1840. Anthropological Records 20(5):151-212.
Dillon, Brian D.
2002 California Paleo-Indians: Lack of Evidence, or Evidence of a Lack? In Essays in California Archaeology: A Memorial to Franklin Fenenga, edited by William J.
Wallace and Francis A. Riddell, pp. 110–128. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility No. 60. Berkeley.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 27 Driver, Harold E.
1937 Cultural Elements Distribution: VI, Southern Sierra Nevada. University of California Anthropological Records 1(2):53–154.
Dyett and Bhatia
2014 Visalia General Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report. August.
Fredrickson, David A.
1973 Early Cultures of the North Coast Ranges, California. Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.
1974 Cultural Diversity in Early Central California: A View from the North Coast Ranges.
Journal of California Anthropology 1(1):41-54.
Garfinkel, Alan P.
2015 Archaeological Background and Cultural Sequence for The San Joaquin, Central California. Electronic document,
https://www.academia.edu/14721089/ArchaeologicalBackgroundfor theSanJoaquinValleyCentralCalifornia, accessed July 13, 2020. Academia.edu Garone, Philip
2011 The Fall and Rise of the Wetlands of California’s Great Central Valley. University of the Press, Berkeley.
Gayton, Anna H.
1930 Yokuts-Mono Chiefs and Shamans. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 24(8):361–420.
1945 Yokuts and Western Mono Social Organization. American Anthropologist 47(3):409–426.
Gifford, E.W., and W. Egbert Schenck
1926 Archaeology of the Southern San Joaquin Valley, California. Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 23(1).
1929 Archaeology of the Northern San Joaquin Valley. Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 25(4).
Grunsky, Carl E.
1898 Water-Supply and Irrigation Papers of the United States Geological Survey, No. 18:
Irrigation Near Fresno, California. Department of the Interior, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Harrington, Mark R.
1957 A Pinto Site at Little Lake, California. No. 17. Southwest Museum.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 28 Helmich, Mary A.
2008 Stage Road Hazards. California State Parks, Interpretation & Education Division. https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=25445. Accessed March 20, 2021.
Kroeber, Alfred L.
1925 Handbook of California Indians. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78, Washington, D.C.
Latta, Frank F.
1977 Handbook of Yokuts Indians. Bear State Books, Santa Cruz, California.
Ludeke, John.
1980 The No Fence Law of 1874: Victor for San Joaquin Valley Farmers. California History 2(59):98-115. University of California Press, Berkley, California.
McGuire, Kelly R. and Alan P. Garfinkel.
1980 Archaeological Investigations in the Southern Sierra Nevada: The Bear Mountain Segment of the Pacific Crest Trail. Cultural Resources Publications, Archaeology, unnumbered: xii – 304.
Merriam, Hart C.
1904 Distribution of Indian Tribes in the Southern Sierra and Adjacent Parts of the San Joaquin Valley, California. Science 19(494):912-917.
Mitchell, Annie R.
1974 A Modern History of Tulare County. Limited Edition of Visalia, Incorporated.
Visalia, California.
Moratto, Michael J.
1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, New York, NY.
Powers, Stephen
1877 Tribes of California. Washington Press, Washington, D.C.
Preston, William L.
1981 Vanishing Landscapes: Land and Life in the Tulare Lake Basin. Olympic Marketing Corp, Hopkins.
Prothero, Donald R.
2017 California’s Amazing Geology. Taylor and Francis Group.
Riddell, Francis A.
2002 The Status of San Joaquin Valley Archaeological. In Essays in California Archaeology: A Memorial to Franklin Fenenga edited by William J. Wallace and Francis A. Riddell, pp. 55-61. University of California Archaeological Research Facility, Contribution Number 60. Berkeley, California.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 29 Roberts, Robert B.
1988 Encyclopedia of Historic Forts: The Military, Pioneer, and Trading Posts of the United States. MacMillan Publishing, New York.
Rosenthal, Jeffrey S., Gregory G. White, and Mark Q. Sutton 2007 The Central Valley: A View from the Catbirds’s Seat. In California Prehistory:
Colonization, Cultural, and Complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A.
Klar. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Maryland.
Siefken, Nelson.
1999 Archaeology of the Redfeldt Mound (CA-KIN-66), Tulare Basin, California. M.A.
Thesis, Department of Anthropology, California State University, Bakersfield.
Smith, Wallace.
2004 Garden of the Sun: A History of the San Joaquin Valley: 1772-1939. 2 nd ed., revised
by William B. Secrest, Jr. Linden Publishing, Fresno, California.
Tulare, City of
2021 History. Electronic document, https://www.tulare.ca.gov/community/about-tulare, accessed May 5, 2021
Tulare Irrigation District
2021 About Tulare. Electronic document, https://tulareid.org/districtprofile#:~:text=History,eventually%20reduced%20to%2032%2C500%20acres., accessed May 5, 2021
Tweed, William.
2012 “The Story of How Mooney Grove Park Came To Be Saved”. http://www.tularecountytreasures.org/mooney-grove-park.html. Accessed January 16, 2021.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
1927 Visalia, California, Quadrangle Map. 7.5-minute series. U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado.
1949 Visalia, California, Quadrangle Map, photorevised 1969. 7.5-minute series. U.S.
Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado.
Varner, Dudley M. and David R. Stuart.
1975 Survey of Archaeological and Historical Resources in the Central Yokohl Valley, Tulare County, California. Sacramento: Report to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
Wagner, David L., Jerome V. De Graff, and Jeremy T. Lancaster. 2013 Debris flows in the southern and eastern Sierra Nevada region, California. In Geologic Excursions from Fresno, California, and the Central Valley: A Tour of California’s Iconic Geology. Keith Daniel Putrika, pp. 99-128. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 30 Wallace, William J.
1978 Southern Valley Yokuts. In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, California.
Ed. Robert F. Heizer, pp. 448-461. The Geological Society of American, Inc., Boulder, Colorado
Zack, Richard.
2017 Quest for Water Tulare Irrigation District its History, People, and Progression.
PartnerPress.org, Carlsbad, California.
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 31 APPENDIX A
Personnel Qualifications
Consuelo Sauls, M.A., RPA 41591505 [email protected] Archaeologist 559.797.1572
6083 N. Figarden Dr., Ste. 616, Fresno, CA 93722
Areas of Expertise
Prehistoric archaeology
Rock art recordation and analysis
Laboratory management
Years of Experience
12
Education
M.A., Archaeology, University
of Durham, 2014
B.A., Anthropology, California
State University, Fresno, 2009
Registrations/Certifications
Registered Professional
Archaeologist 41591505
Professional Affiliations
California Rock Art Foundation
Coalition for Diversity in
California Archaeology
Society for American Archaeology
Society for California Archaeology
Society of Black Archaeologists
Professional Experience
2019 – 2021 Principal Investigator, Taylored Archaeology, Fresno, California
2018 – 2019 Staff Archaeologist, Applied EarthWorks, Inc., Fresno, California
2016 – 2018 Principal Investigator, Soar Environmental Consulting, Inc., Fresno, California
2015 Archivist/Database Technician, Development and
Conservation Management, Inc., Laguna Beach,
California
2013 Laboratory Research Assistant, Durham University
Archaeology Department and Archaeology Museum,
Durham, England, UK
2011 – 2012 Laboratory Technician (volunteer), University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
2008 – 2009 Laboratory Technician (intern), California State University, Fresno
2008 Field School, California State University, Fresno
Technical Qualifications
Ms. Sauls meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards as an archaeologist. She has conducted pedestrian surveys, supervised Extended Phase I survey, authored technical reports, and completed the Section 106 process with the State Historic Preservation Officer and Tribal Historic Preservation Officer. Her experience includes data recovery excavation at Western Mono sites and processing recovered artifacts in the laboratory as well as conducting archival research about prehistory and ethnography of Central California. Ms. Sauls has authored and contributed to technical and letter reports in compliance with of the National Historical Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). She also has supported NHPA tribal consultation and responded to Assembly Bill 52 tribal comments. Ms. Sauls also has an extensive background supervising laboratory processing, cataloging, and conservation of prehistoric and historical archaeological collections. In addition, she worked with the Rock Art Heritage Group in the management, preservation, and presentation of rock art in museums throughout England, including a thorough analysis of the British Museum’s rock art collections. At Durham University Archaeology Museum, Ms. Sauls processed the excavated skeletal remains of 30 individuals from the seventeenth century Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 32 APPENDIX B
Records Search Results
Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 33 APPENDIX C
Native American Outreach
To: Emily Huang Record Search 21-269
4Creeks, Inc.
324 S. Santa Fe Street, Suite A
Visalia, CA 93292
Date: July 19, 2021
Re: Belissa Tentative Subdivision Map
County: Tulare
Map(s): Visalia 7.5’
CULTURAL RESOURCES RECORDS SEARCH
The California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) contracts with the California Historical Resources Information System’s (CHRIS) regional Information Centers (ICs) to maintain information in the CHRIS inventory and make it available to local, state, and federal agencies, cultural resource professionals, Native American tribes, researchers, and the public. Recommendations made by IC coordinators or their staff regarding the interpretation and application of this information are advisory only. Such recommendations do not necessarily represent the evaluation or opinion of the State Historic Preservation Officer in carrying out the OHP’s regulatory authority under federal and state law.
The following are the results of a search of the cultural resource files at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center. These files include known and recorded cultural resources sites, inventory and excavation reports filed with this office, and resources listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the OHP Built Environment Resources Directory, California State Historical Landmarks, California Register of Historical Resources, California Inventory of Historic Resources, and California Points of Historical Interest. Due to processing delays and other factors, not all of the historical resource reports and resource records that have been submitted to the OHP are available via this records search. Additional information may be available through the federal, state, and local agencies that produced or paid for historical resource management work in the search area.
PRIOR CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDIES CONDUCTED WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA AND THE ONE-HALF MILE RADIUS
According to the information in our files, there have been no previous cultural resource studies conducted within the project area. There has been one cultural resource study conducted within a one-half mile radius, TU-00103.
Record Search 21-269
KNOWN/RECORDED CULTURAL RESOURCES WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA AND THE ONE-HALF MILE RADIUS There are no recorded resources within the project area or within the one-half mile radius, and it is not known if any exist there.
There are no recorded cultural resources within the project area or radius that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, the California Points of Historical Interest, California Inventory of Historic Resources, or the California State Historic Landmarks.
COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
We understand this project consists of dividing a 58.78-acre agricultural site into 318 single family residential parcels for development. Please note that agriculture does not constitute previous development, as it does not destroy cultural resources, but merely moves them around within the plow zone. Because a cultural resource study has not been conducted on this property, it is unknown if any exist there. Therefore, prior to any ground disturbance activities, we recommend a qualified, professional consultant conduct a field survey to determine if any cultural resources are present. A list of qualified consultants can be found at www.chrisinfo.org.
We also recommend that you contact the Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento. They will provide you with a current list of Native American individuals/organizations that can assist you with information regarding cultural resources that may not be included in the CHRIS Inventory and that may be of concern to the Native groups in the area. The Commission can consult their "Sacred Lands Inventory" file to determine what sacred resources, if any, exist within this project area and the way in which these resources might be managed. Finally, please consult with the lead agency on this project to determine if any other cultural resource investigation is required. If you need any additional information or have any questions or concerns, please contact our office at (661) 654-2289.
By:
Celeste M. Thomson, Coordinator Date: July 19, 2021
Please note that invoices for Information Center services will be sent under separate cover from the California State University, Bakersfield Accounting Office.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
September 8, 2021
Consuelo Sauls
Taylored Archaeology
Via Email to: [email protected]
Re: Belissa TSM Project, Tulare County
Dear Mr. Sauls:
A record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) was completed for the information you have submitted for the above referenced project. The results were negative. However, the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not indicate the absence of cultural resources in any project area. Other sources of cultural resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites.
Attached is a list of Native American tribes who may also have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential adverse impact within the proposed project area. I suggest you contact all of those indicated; if they cannot supply information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge. By contacting all those listed, your organization will be better able to respond to claims of failure to consult with the appropriate tribe. If a response has not been received within two weeks of notification, the Commission requests that you follow-up with a telephone call or email to ensure that the project information has been received.
If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify me. With your assistance, we can assure that our lists contain current information.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address: [email protected].
Sincerely,
Andrew Green
Cultural Resources Analyst
Attachment
CHAIRPERSON
Laura Miranda
Luiseño
VICE CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash
SECRETARY
Merri Lopez-Keifer
Luiseño
PARLIAMENTARIAN
Russell Attebery
Karuk
COMMISSIONER
William Mungary
Paiute/White Mountain
Apache
COMMISSIONER
Julie TumamaitStenslie
Chumash
COMMISSIONER
[Vacant]
COMMISSIONER
[Vacant]
COMMISSIONER
[Vacant]
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Christina Snider
Pomo
NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
[email protected]
NAHC.ca.gov
Big Sandy Rancheria of
Western Mono Indians
Elizabeth Kipp, Chairperson
P.O. Box 337
Auberry, CA, 93602
Phone: (559) 374 - 0066
Fax: (559) 374-0055
[email protected]
Western Mono
Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi
Yokut Tribe
Leo Sisco, Chairperson
P.O. Box 8
Lemoore, CA, 93245
Phone: (559) 924 - 1278
Fax: (559) 924-3583
Southern Valley
Yokut
Tule River Indian Tribe
Neil Peyron, Chairperson
P.O. Box 589
Porterville, CA, 93258
Phone: (559) 781 - 4271
Fax: (559) 781-4610
[email protected]
Yokut
Tule River Indian Tribe
Kerri Vera, Environmental
Department
P. O. Box 589
Porterville, CA, 93258
Phone: (559) 783 - 8892
Fax: (559) 783-8932
[email protected]
Yokut
Tule River Indian Tribe
Joey Garfield, Tribal Archaeologist
P. O. Box 589
Porterville, CA, 93258
Phone: (559) 783 - 8892
Fax: (559) 783-8932
joey.garfield@tulerivertribensn.gov
Yokut
Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom
Valley Band
Kenneth Woodrow, Chairperson
1179 Rock Haven Ct.
Salinas, CA, 93906
Phone: (831) 443 - 9702
[email protected]
Foothill Yokut
Mono
1 of 1
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resource Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.
This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources assessment for the proposed Belissa TSM Project, Tulare County.
PROJ-2021-
004734
09/08/2021 01:54 PM
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contact List
Tulare County
9/8/2021
Organization Name Position Address Phone Number Email Address Letter E-Mail Phone Summary of Contact Native American Heritage Commission 8/20/2021
In a letter dated September 8, 2021, the NAHC stated
that the results were negative, there are no known
resources within the project area. The NAHC alos sent a list of 6 Native American contacts.
Big Sandy Rancheria of Western Mono Indians Elizabeth Kipp Chairperson P.O. Box 337 Auberry, CA 93602 559-374-0066 [email protected] 9/9/2021 9/17/2021 9/22/2021 Unable to reach anyone by email and phone. Left a voice message.
Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe Leo Sisco Chairperson P.O. Box 8 Lemoore, CA 93245 559-924-1278 no email address 9/9/2021 9/22/2021 Spoke with Samantha McCarty.
Tule River Indian Tribe Neil Peyron Chairperson P.O. Box 589 Porterville, CA 93258 559-781-4271 neil.peyron@tulrivertribensn.gov 9/9/2021 9/17/2021 9/22/2021Unable to reach anyone by email and phone. Left a voice message.
Tule River Indian Tribe Kerri Vera
Environmental
Department P.O. Box 589 Porterville, CA 93258 559-783-8892 kerri.vera@tulerivertribensn.gov 9/9/2021 9/17/2021 9/22/2021 Kerri responded by email about the project.
Tule River Indian Tribe Joey Garfield
Tribal
Archaeologist P.O. Box 589 Porterville, CA 93258 559-783-8932 joey.garfield@tulerivertribensn.gov 9/9/2021 9/17/2021 9/22/2021Unable to reach anyone by phone and email and left a voice message.
Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band Kenneth Woodrow Chairperson 1179 Rock Haven Ct. Salinas, CA 93906 831-443-9702 [email protected] 9/9/2021 9/17/2021 9/22/2021 Unable to reach someone by email and phone. Left a
voice message.
Native American Outreach Log
Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project, Tulare County, California Cultural Resources Assessment for the Belissa Tentative Subdivision Project Taylored Archaeology 34 APPENDIX D
Cultural Resource Record Forms
(CONFIDENTIAL – NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION)
Appendix D
Energy Calculations
Construction Equipment Energy Use
Phase Name Off Road Equipment Type Off Road Equipment Unit Amount1
Usage Hours
Per Day1
Horse Power
(lbs/sec)1 Load Factor1
Total
Operational
Hours
BSFC2 Fuel Used
(gallons)3 MBTU4
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8 247 0.4 1120 0.367 5712.58 794.049 Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8 81 0.73 560 0.408 1900.41 264.1571 Demolition Excavators 3 8 158 0.38 1680 0.408 5788.97 804.6674 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8 247 0.4 960 0.367 4896.50 680.6135 Site Preparation Graders 0 8 187 0.41 0 0.367 0.00 0
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8 97 0.37 1280 0.408 2636.54 366.4797 7533.04 Grading Excavators 2 8 158 0.38 1760 0.367 5455.20 758.2732 Grading Graders 1 8 187 0.41 880 0.367 3483.10 484.1506 33057.81 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8 247 0.4 880 0.367 4488.46 623.8957 Grading Scrapers 2 8 367 0.48 1760 0.367 16005.80 2224.807 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8 97 0.37 1760 0.408 3625.25 503.9095 Building Construction Cranes 1 7 231 0.29 7770 0.367 26871.29 3735.11 144328.96 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8 89 0.2 26640 0.408 27214.85 3782.864 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8 84 0.74 8880 0.408 31679.30 4403.423 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7 97 0.37 23310 0.408 48013.94 6673.938 Building Construction Welders 1 8 46 0.45 8880 0.408 10549.57 1466.391 Paving Pavers 2 8 130 0.42 1200 0.367 3382.45 470.1606 8419.96 Paving Paving Equipment 2 8 132 0.36 1200 0.367 2943.85 409.1947 Paving Rollers 2 8 80 0.38 1200 0.408 2093.66 291.019
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 0 8 9 0.56 0 0.408 0.00 0 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8 97 0.37 0 0.408 0.00 0 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6 78 0.48 450 0.408 966.94 134.4048 Total 207708.68 28871.51
Construction Phases
PhaseNumber Phase Name Phase Type
Phase Start
Date Phase End Date
Num Days
Week
Total Number
of Days
1 Demolition Demolition 10/3/2022 1/6/2023 5 70
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/7/2023 3/3/2023 5 40 3 Grading Grading 3/4/2023 8/4/2023 5 110
4 Building Construction Building Construction 8/5/2023 11/5/2027 5 1110 5 Paving Paving 11/6/2027 2/18/2028 5 75
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 2/19/2028 6/2/2028 5 75 Notes
1. CalEEMod Default Values Used
3. Fuel Used = Load Factor x Horsepower x Total Operational Hours x BSFC / Unit Conversion
4. MBTU calculated for comparison purposes. Assumed 1 gallon of diesel = 0.139 MBTU
2. BSFC - Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (pounds per horsepower‐hour) – If less than 100 Horsepower = 0.408, if greater than 100 Horsepower = 0.367 Mobile Energy Use (Construction)
Worker Trips
Daily Worker
Trips1
Worker Trip
Length1 VMT/Day MPG Factor
(EMFAC2017)
Gallons of
Gas/Day # of Days Total Gallons of Gas MBTU Total Gallons in Construction Demolition 15 10.8 162 29.23 5.5 70 388.0 45.038 13790
Site Preparation 18 10.8 194.4 29.23 6.7 40 266.0 30.8832 7799 Grading 20 10.8 216 29.23 7.4 110 812.9 94.36532 33871
Building Construction 289 10.8 3121.2 29.23 106.8 1110 118526.6 13759.75 262856 Paving 15 10.8 162 29.23 5.5 75 415.7 48.25499 8836
Architectural Coating 58 10.8 626.4 29.23 21.4 75 1607.3 186.586 2574 Total N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1410 121628.4 14119.84 315935 Vendor Trips
Daily Vendor
Trips
Vendor Trip
Length VMT/Day MPG Factor Gallons of Diesel/Day # of Days Total Gallons of Diesel MBTU Building Construction 76 7.3 554.8 8.43 65.8 1110 73051.9573 10154.22 Hauling Trips
Daily Hauling
Trips
Hauling Trip
Length VMT/Day MPG Factor Gallons of Gas/Day # of Days Total Gallons of Diesel MBTU Demolition 45 7.3 328.5 8.43 39.0 70 2727.758007 379.1584 Fleet Characteristics 75779.7153
Vehicle Class Fleet Mix
2024 MPG
Factor
(EMFAC2017)
Average MPG
Factor
LDA 33% 33.24
LDT1 33% 28.07
LDT2 33% 26.38
MHD 50% 9.74
HHD 50% 7.12
Notes
1. CalEEMod Default values used
2. MBTU calculated for comparison purposes. Assumed 1 gallon of gasoline = 0.11609 MBTU Assumed Vehicle Fleet for
Workers 29.23
Assumed Vehicle Fleet for
Vendor Trips 8.43
Mobile Energy Use (Operations)
Total Annual
VMT from
Project
(CalEEMod) 14,141,034
Fleet Mix & Fuel Calculations
Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel
LDA 52.16% 7375963.3 100% 0% 7362437.00 13526.34 28.92 42.70 254546.3 316.8 29594.3 LDT1 21.00% 2969617.1 100% 0% 2968519.11 1098.03 23.79 24.66 124805.5 44.5 14494.9 LDT2 17.00% 2403975.8 100% 0% 2396219.60 7756.18 23.27 32.65 102995.4 237.5 11989.8 MDV 6.00% 848462.0 98% 2% 835040.23 13421.81 18.87 23.72 44258.0 565.8 5216.5 LHD1 0.08% 11312.8 50% 50% 5644.86 5667.97 9.67 15.77 583.6 359.4 117.7 LHD2 0.09% 12726.9 27% 73% 3445.10 9281.83 8.58 13.15 401.5 706.1 144.8 MHD 0.76% 107471.9 18% 82% 19185.06 88286.80 4.80 8.78 3996.9 10054.4 1861.6 HHD 2.00% 282820.7 0% 100% 62.16 282758.52 3.37 6.22 18.4 45483.9 6324.4 OBUS 0.00% 0.0 63% 37% 0.00 0.00 4.79 6.96 0.0 0.0 0.0
UBUS 0.43% 60806.4 64% 36% 39196.89 21609.55 8.41 12.12 4661.0 1782.4 788.9 MCY 0.25% 35352.6 100% 0% 35352.59 0.00 40.47 NA 873.6 0.0 101.4 SBUS 0.01% 1414.1 38% 62% 536.81 877.30 9.83 8.13 54.6 108.0 21.3 MH 0.22% 31110.3 65% 35% 20316.91 10793.36 4.41 9.39 4603.1 1149.2 694.1 Total 100.00% 14141034.0 13685956.31 455077.69 14.55 541798 60808 71349.6 Fleet Characteristics 23.5
Source: EMFAC 2021 (v1.0.1) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: County
Region: Tulare County
Calendar Year: 2028
Season: Annual
Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories
Units: miles/year for VMT, trips/year for Trips, tons/year for Emissions, 1000 gallons/year for Fuel Consumption
GASOLINE
Region
Calendar
Year
Vehicle
Category Model Year Speed Fuel Population VMT (Annual) Trips (Annual) Fuel
Consumption
(1000 gal/year)
Annual Fuel
Consumption
(gallons) MPG
Kings County 2025 HHDT Aggregated Aggregated GAS 2 164 36 0.0486 49 3.37 Kings County 2025 LDA Aggregated Aggregated GAS 62800 2580000 292000 89.2 89200 28.92 Kings County 2025 LDT1 Aggregated Aggregated GAS 5590 186000 24100 7.82 7820 23.79 Kings County 2025 LDT2 Aggregated Aggregated GAS 29000 1140000 135000 49 49000 23.27 Kings County 2025 LHDT1 Aggregated Aggregated GAS 2670 97700 39800 10.1 10100 9.67 Kings County 2025 LHDT2 Aggregated Aggregated GAS 336 12100 5010 1.41 1410 8.58 Kings County 2025 MCY Aggregated Aggregated GAS 3370 19100 6750 0.472 472 40.47 Kings County 2025 MDV Aggregated Aggregated GAS 27500 983000 125000 52.1 52100 18.87 Kings County 2025 MH Aggregated Aggregated GAS 356 3200 36 0.725 725 4.41 Kings County 2025 MHDT Aggregated Aggregated GAS 176 10800 3520 2.25 2250 4.80 Kings County 2025 OBUS Aggregated Aggregated GAS 73 3870 1460 0.808 808 4.79 Kings County 2025 SBUS Aggregated Aggregated GAS 28 1750 110 0.178 178 9.83 Kings County 2025 UBUS Aggregated Aggregated GAS 12 497 47 0.0591 59 8.41 DIESEL
Region Calendar Year
Vehicle
Category Model Year Speed Fuel Population VMT Trips
Fuel
Consumption
(1000 gal/year)
Annual Fuel
Consumption
(gallons) MPG
Kings County 2025 HHDT Aggregated Aggregated DSL 4890 746000 88700 120 120000 6.22 Kings County 2025 LDA Aggregated Aggregated DSL 159 4740 658 0.111 111 42.70 Kings County 2025 LDT1 Aggregated Aggregated DSL 4 69 12 0.00279 3 24.66 Kings County 2025 LDT2 Aggregated Aggregated DSL 88 3690 422 0.113 113 32.65 Kings County 2025 LHDT1 Aggregated Aggregated DSL 2760 98100 34700 6.22 6220 15.77 Kings County 2025 LHDT2 Aggregated Aggregated DSL 871 32600 11000 2.48 2480 13.15 Kings County 2025 MDV Aggregated Aggregated DSL 424 15800 1950 0.666 666 23.72 Kings County 2025 MH Aggregated Aggregated DSL 196 1700 20 0.181 181 9.39 Kings County 2025 MHDT Aggregated Aggregated DSL 1060 49700 12400 5.66 5660 8.78 Kings County 2025 OBUS Aggregated Aggregated DSL 32 2240 390 0.322 322 6.96 Kings County 2025 SBUS Aggregated Aggregated DSL 135 2860 1950 0.352 352 8.13 Kings County 2025 UBUS Aggregated Aggregated DSL 3 274 14 0.0226 23 12.12 Notes
1. Used project-specific vehicle fleet mix for residential
2. Proportion of diesel vs. gasoline vehicles calculated based on total annual VMT for each vehicle class Vehicle Class Proportion
of Fleet Mix1
Annual VMT
by Vehicle
Class
MBTU/Year3
Annual Fuel Use from Project
(gallons)
Fuel Efficiency (MPG) by
Vehicle Class and Fuel Type
(EMFAC2021)
Annual VMT by Vehicle Class
and Fuel Type
Proportion of vehicle class
using gas or diesel
(EMFAC2021)2
3. MBTU Calculated for comparison purposes. Assumed 1 gallon of gasoline = 0.116090 MBTU and 1 gallong of diesel = 0.139 MBTU Appendix E
Traffic Study
Project No: 646-02
TRAFFIC STUDY
CRANDELL TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION
LOCATED WEST OF DEMAREE STREET AND NORTH OF RIVER WAY
DRIVE
VISALIA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
WCP DEVELOPERS
March 2022
REVISED JUNE 2022
Prepared by:
1800 30TH STREET, SUITE 260
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301
__________________________________________
Ian J. Parks, RCE 58155
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pg
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 9 FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP ................................................................................................................................... 11 FIGURE 2: LOCATION MAP ................................................................................................................................ 12 FIGURE 3: PHASED SITE PLAN .......................................................................................................................... 13 FIGURE 4: STUDY INTERSECTIONS ................................................................................................................. 14 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION AND DESIGN HOUR VOLUMES................................................................... 17 TABLE 1a: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION – PHASE I ...................................................................................... 17 TABLE 1b: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION – PHASE II .................................................................................... 17 TABLE 1c: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION – PHASE III ................................................................................... 18 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT ........................................................................................................ 18 TABLE 2: PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION ........................................................................................................ 18 FIGURE 5a: PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES PHASES 1&2 ................................................ 19 FIGURE 5b: PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES PHASE 3 ....................................................... 20 EXISTING AND FUTURE TRAFFIC .................................................................................................................... 21 FIGURE 6: PM PHASE I PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ............................................................................. 22 FIGURE 7: AM PHASE I PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ............................................................................. 23 FIGURE 8: PM PHASE II PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ............................................................................ 24 FIGURE 9: AM PHASE II PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ........................................................................... 25 FIGURE 10: PM PHASE III PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ......................................................................... 26 FIGURE 11: AM PHASE III PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ........................................................................ 27 FIGURE 12: PM 2021 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC .................................................................................................... 28 FIGURE 13: AM 2021 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................................... 29 FIGURE 14: PM 2023 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC .................................................................................................... 30 FIGURE 15: AM 2023 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................................... 31 FIGURE 16: PM 2023+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................. 32 FIGURE 17: AM 2023+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................ 33 FIGURE 18: PM 2025 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC .................................................................................................... 34 FIGURE 19: AM 2025 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................................... 35 FIGURE 20: PM 2025+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................. 36 FIGURE 21: AM 2025+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................ 37 FIGURE 22: PM 2031 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC .................................................................................................... 38 FIGURE 23: AM 2031 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................................... 39 FIGURE 24: PM 2031+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................. 40 FIGURE 25: AM 2031+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................ 41 FIGURE 26: PM 2041 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC .................................................................................................... 42 FIGURE 27: AM 2041 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................................... 43 FIGURE 28: PM 2041+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................. 44 FIGURE 29: AM 2041+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ................................................................................ 45 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................ 46 TABLE 3a: PM INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ..................................................................................... 47 TABLE 3b: AM INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE .................................................................................... 49 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 51 TABLE 4: 8-HOUR TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS......................................................................................... 51 QUEUE LENGTH ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................................. 52 TABLE 5a: PM QUEUE LENGTH ANALYSIS .................................................................................................... 52 TABLE 5b: AM QUEUE LENGTH ANALYSIS ................................................................................................... 59 MITIGATION .......................................................................................................................................................... 60 Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 2
TABLE 6: FUTURE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL MITIGATION ................................. 60 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) ANALYSIS ............................................................................................ 61 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................ 62 APPENDIX .............................................................................................................................................................. 63 Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed residential and commercial development is located along River Way Drive, west of Demaree Street, in Visalia, CA. Site access is proposed along River Way Drive.
Proposed Project
The proposed project includes the following uses:
Phase 1: Single Family Residential 104 units
Phase 2: Single Family Residential 317 units (includes 104 units from Phase 1) Phase 3: Multi-Family Residential 180 units
Phase 3: Neighborhood Commercial 6.88 acres
Project Trip Generation
The following table shows the anticipated project trip generation and peak hour volumes calculated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 10th Edition. It is noted that a pass-by of 15% is shown for the commercial portion of the project.
Project Trip Generation – Phase III
ITE Development Variable ADT ADT Rate In Out Rate In Out Code Type RATE % Split/ % Split/ % Split/ % Split/
Trips Trips Trips Trips
210 317 eq 3005 eq 25% 75% eq 63% 37%
Dwelling Units =EXP(0.92*LN(317)+2.71) 230 57 172 308 194 114 220 180 eq 1320 eq 23% 77% eq 63% 37%
Dwelling Units =7.56*180+-40.86 83 19 64 100 63 37
820 65 eq 4485 eq 62% 38% eq 48% 52%
1000 sq ft GLA=EXP(0.68*LN(65)+5.57) 184 114 70 395 190 205 sub-total 8,811 190 306 447 356
Adjustments
Pass-by¹ 15% 673 17 11 29 31
Total 8,138 173 295 418 325
Shopping Center
General Information Daily Trips
¹Shopping Center only
AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips
Single-Family
detached Housing
Multifamily Housing
(Low Rise)
Project Study Scope
Based on the number of peak hour trips calculated (between 500-1,000 trips in the peak hour), the study falls into Category III traffic impact analysis. Category III requires all signalized and major intersections be studied within a one-mile radius of the project.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 4
Following is a list of the intersections:
Study Intersections:
• Akers St & Ave 320
Demaree St & Ave 320
Demaree St & Pratt Rd
County Center St & Pratt Rd
Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
N Chinowth St & River Way Dr
Demaree St & River Way Dr
Demaree St & Shannon Pkwy
County Center St & Shannon Pkwy
Demaree St & Flagstaff Ave
Akers St & Riggin Ave
Linwood St & Riggin Ave
Demaree St & Riggin Ave
County Center St & Riggin Ave
Linwood St & Ferguson Ave
Demaree St & Ferguson Ave
Also included in the analysis are the driveways for the multi-family and retail portions of the project.
Analysis Scenarios
In accordance with Category III requirements, analysis will be provided for the following scenarios:
Existing
2023 Traffic
2023 Traffic + Phase 1 Project Traffic
2023 Traffic + Phase 1 Project Traffic + Mitigation
2025 Traffic
2025 Traffic + Phase 1 & 2 Project Traffic
2025 Traffic + Phase 1 & 2 Project Traffic + Mitigation 2031 Traffic
2031 Traffic + Phase 1,2 & 3 Project Traffic
2031 Traffic + Phase 1,2 & 3 Project Traffic + Mitigation 2041 Traffic
2041 Traffic + Phase 1,2 & 3 Project Traffic
2041 Traffic + Phase 1,2 & 3 Project Traffic + Mitigation Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 5
Level of Service Analysis
PM Peak Hour Intersection Analysis
# Intersection Control
Type 2021 2023 2023+
Project 2025 2025+
Project 2031 2031+
Project
2031+
Project
w/Improvements¹
2041 2041+
Project
2041+
Project
w/Improvements¹
1 Akers St &
Ave 320 NB A A A A A B B - B B -
2 Demaree St &
Ave 320 EB B B B B B B B - B B -
3 Linwood St &
Project Road North NB A A A A A A A - A A -
4 Demaree St &
Arlet Ave EB A A A A A A A - A A -
5 Demaree St &
Pratt Rd WB B B B B B B B - C C -
6 County Center St &
Pratt Rd NB A A A A A A A - A A -
7 Mooney Blvd &
Pratt Rd SB A A A A A A A - A A -
8 Akers St &
Shannon Prkwy AWSC A A A A A A A - A A -
9 Linwood St &
Shannon Prkwy
EB
WB
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
-
-
A
A
A
A
-
-
9 Linwood St &
Shannon Prkwy2 Roundabout A A A A A A A - A A -
10 Project Entrance/
River Way Dr SB A A A A A A B - A B -
11 N Chinowth St/
River Way Dr SB A A A A A A B - A B -
12 Demaree St &
River Way Dr EB B B B B B B C - B C -
13 Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy
WB C C C C D D F
(93.3) - F
(>300)
F
(>300) -
Signal - - - - - - - A - - A
14 County Center St &
Shannon Pkwy Roundabout A A A A A A A - A A -
15 Demaree St &
Flagstaff Ave
EB
WB
A
B
A
B
A
C
A
B
A
D
A
D
A
F
(56.4)
-
A
F
(96.0)
A
F
(>300)
-
Signal - - - - - - - A - - A
16 Akers St &
Riggin Ave Signal D D D D D D D - D D -
17 Linwood St &
Riggin Ave
NB C C C C D D E
(39.9) - F
(>300)
F
(>300)
-
Signal - - - - - - - B - - F
(135.4)
18 Demaree St &
Riggin Ave Signal D D D D D D D - E
(61.7)
E
(77.4) -
19 County Center St &
Riggin Ave
AWSC C C C C D E
(35.3)
E
(47.5) - F
(54.1)
F
(56.6) -
Signal - - - - - - - - - - B
1 Mitigation measures shown in Table 6
2 Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy was analyzed for both stop-controlled and roundabout conditions pursuant to the City of Visalia NW Quadrant Traffic Circulation Plan.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 6
PM Peak Hour Intersection Analysis Continued
# Intersection Control Type 2021 2023 2023+
Project 2025 2025+ 2031 2031+
Project
2031+
2041 2041+
Project
2041+
Project Project
w/Improvements¹ w/Improvements¹
20 Linwood St &
Ferguson Ave AWSC A A A B B B B - C C -
21 Demaree St &
Ferguson Ave Signal D D D D D D D -
F F -
(88.5) (90.7)
22 Linwood St &
Residential Driveway WB A A A A A A A - A A -
23 Linwood St &
Commercial Driveway WB - - - - - A A - A A -
24 Commercial Driveway &
Shannon Prkwy SB - - - - - A A - A A -
1 Mitigation measures shown in Table 6
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 7
AM Peak Hour Intersection Analysis
# Intersection Control
Type 2021 2023 2023+ Project 2025 2025+ 2031 2031+ Project 2031+
2041 2041+
Project
2041+
Project Project
w/Improvements¹ w/Improvements¹
1 Akers St &
Ave 320 NB A A A A A B B - B B -
2 Demaree St &
Ave 320 EB B B B B B B B - C C -
3 Linwood St &
Project Road North NB A A A A A A A - A A -
4 Demaree St &
Arlet Ave EB A A A A A A A - A A -
5 Demaree St &
Pratt Rd WB B B B B B B B - C C -
6 County Center St &
Pratt Rd NB A A A A A A A - A A -
7 Mooney Blvd &
Pratt Rd SB A A A A A A A - A A -
8 Akers St &
Shannon Prkwy AWSC A A A A A A A - A A -
9 Linwood St &
Shannon Prkwy
EB A A A A A A A - A A -
WB A A A A A A A - A A -
9 Linwood St &
Shannon Prkwy3 Roundabout A A A A A A A - A A -
10 Project Entrance/
River Way Dr SB A A A A A A A - A A -
11 N Chinowth St/ River
Way Dr SB A A A A A A A - A A -
12 Demaree St &
River Way Dr EB A A A A B B B - B B -
13 Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy
WB B B B C C C E
(39.8) - F F - (156.3) (>300)
Signal - - - - - - - A - - A
14 County Center St &
Shannon Pkwy Roundabout A A A A A A A - A A -
15 Demaree St &
Flagstaff Ave
EB A A A A A A A - A A
- WB B B B B C C C - D E
(38.2)
Signal - - - - - - - - - - A
16 Akers St &
Riggin Ave Signal D D D D D D D - D D -
17 Linwood St &
Riggin Ave
NB B B C C C E
(36.7)
E
(40.6) - F F - (>300) (>300)
Signal - - - - - - - B - - C
18 Demaree St &
Riggin Ave Signal D D D D D D D - E
(68.9)
E
(74.6) -
19 County Center St &
Riggin Ave
AWSC B B B B B B B - B C -
Signal - - - - - - - - - - C²
1 Mitigation measures shown in Table 6
2 Mitigation necessary due to PM Peak Hour Traffic
3 Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy was analyzed for both stop-controlled and roundabout conditions pursuant to the City of Visalia NW Quadrant Traffic Circulation Plan.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 8
AM Peak Hour Intersection Analysis Continued
# Intersection Control Type 2021 2023 2023+
Project 2025 2025+ 2031 2031+
Project
2031+
2041 2041+
Project
2041+
Project Project
w/Improvements¹ w/Improvements¹
20 Linwood St &
Ferguson Ave AWSC B B B B B B B - D D -
21 Demaree St & Ferguson
Ave Signal D D D D D D D - D D -
22 Linwood St &
Residential Driveway WB - - - - - A A - A A -
23 Linwood St &
Commercial Driveway WB - - - - - A A - A A -
24 Commercial Driveway &
Shannon Prkwy SB - - - - - A A - A A -
1 Mitigation measures shown in Table 6
Mitigation
Based on the results of the Level of Service (LOS) analysis and eight-hour vehicular volume warrant, and the City of Visalia thresholds for mitigation, it is recommended that signals be constructed at four intersections in order to operate at an acceptable level of service by the year 2041. # Intersection
Improvements
Required
by 2031
Improvements
Required
by 2041
Percent
Share
13 Demaree St &
Shannon Parkway Signal - 25.03%
15 Demaree St &
Flagstaff Ave Signal - 33.95%
17 Linwood St & Riggin
Ave Signal - 5.75%
19 County Center St &
Riggin Ave - Signal 24.86%
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 9
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the potential traffic impacts of a proposed residential and commercial development located along River Way Drive, west of Demaree Street, in Visalia, CA. A vicinity map, location map, and tentative subdivision map are presented in Figures 1 through 3, respectively.
A. Land Use, Site and Study Area Boundaries
The existing zoning is AE-40 (County). The proposed general plan designation will be low, medium, and high density residential along with neighborhood commercial.
Based on the number of peak hour trips calculated (between 500-1,000 trips in the peak hour), the study falls into Category III traffic impact analysis. Category III requires all signalized and major intersections be studied within a one-mile radius of the project. The study area includes a total of 24 intersections (three signalized, 18 unsignalized and three driveways). The scope of the study was developed in association with the City of Visalia Public Works Department. Figure 4 shows the intersections included in the study.
B. Existing Site Uses and Site Access
The project site is currently being used for agricultural production. As currently planned, access to the proposed development would be provided along River Way Drive, Demaree Street, and Linwood Street.
Intersections for the residential portion of the project are shown on the tentative map. Retail access is assumed to be along Linwood Street and River Way Drive.
The proposed project includes the following uses:
Phase 1: Single Family Residential 104 units
Phase 2: Single Family Residential 317 units (includes 104 units from Phase 1) Phase 3: Multi-Family Residential 180 units
Phase 3: Neighborhood Commercial 6.88 acres
River Way Drive will be constructed to the extent of the of the single-family residential units in Phases 1 and 2. Phase 3 will complete the remaining improvements on River Way Drive, the River Way Drive/Linwood Street roundabout, and Linwood Street along the project frontage.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 10
C. Existing Uses in Vicinity of the Site
Existing land uses in the vicinity of the project site include a mix of agricultural land uses and residential subdivisions. Residential subdivisions exist to the east of the proposed project and agriculture uses exist to the north, west, and south of the site.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 11
FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 12
FIGURE 2: LOCATION MAP
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 13
FIGURE 3: SITE PLAN
Traffic Study 646-02
1 2
3 4
5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12
13 14
15 16 17 18 19
20 21
22 23
River Way Dr 24
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
14 STUDY INTERSECTION MAP
FIGURE 4
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
# STUDY INTERSECTION
EXISTING ROAD
FUTURE ROAD
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 15
D. Roadway Descriptions
Akers Street is currently a north-south arterial south of Ferguson Avenue and a proposed Year 1-20 arterial north of Ferguson Avenue. In the vicinity of the project it exists as four-lane roadway with curb and gutter. Akers Street provides access to residential, educational, and agricultural land uses.
Avenue 320 is classified as a Year 11-25 east-west arterial that currently extends west from N Demaree Street. In the vicinity of the project it exists as a two-lane roadway. Avenue 320 currently provides access to agricultural land uses.
County Center Street is a north-south collector that extends south from Pratt Road to Connelly Avenue.
In the vicinity of the project it exists as a two-lane roadway with curb and gutter. County Center Street provides access to residential land uses and east-west arterials Demaree Street is designated as a north-south arterial within the City of Visalia. In the vicinity of the project it exists as a four-lane roadway with curb and gutter and two-way left turn. Demaree Street provides access to agricultural, commercial, and residential land uses.
Ferguson Avenue is an east-west collector that currently extends from Kelsey Street to Santa Fe Street.
In the vicinity of the project it exists as a two-lane roadway and provides access to agricultural, residential, educational, and industrial land uses.
Linwood Street is a designated as a north-south collector south of Ferguson Avenue and a Year 1-10 collector north of Ferguson Avenue. In the vicinity of the project it exists as a two-lane roadway and provides access to residential land uses.
Pratt Road is an east-west collector between Demaree Street and Mooney Boulevard. In the vicinity of the project it exists as a two-lane roadway with curb and gutter on its south side and provides access to agricultural and residential land uses.
Riggin Avenue is designated as an east-west arterial with portions listed as a Year 11-25 arterial. Riggins Avenue currently extends from State Route 99 to its easterly extension at St John’s Parkway. In the vicinity of the project it exists a two-lane roadway. Riggins Avenue provides access agricultural, industrial, and residential land uses.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 16
Shannon Parkway is an east-west collector that extends from Demaree Street to Santa Fe Street. In the vicinity of the project it exists as a two-lane roadway with curb and gutter. Shannon Parkway provides access to residential, educational, and recreational land uses.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 17
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION AND DESIGN HOUR VOLUMES
The trip generation and design hour volumes for the residential development were calculated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 10th Edition. Trip generation and design hour volumes for all land uses in the various phases are shown in Tables 1a through 1c.
The ADT, AM and PM peak hour of adjacent street traffic rate equations, and peak hour directional splits for ITE Land Use Code 210 (Single-Family detached Housing), 220 (Multifamily Housing), and 820 (Shopping Center were used to estimate the project traffic.
Table 1a
Project Trip Generation – Phase I
ITE Development Variable ADT ADT Rate In Out Rate In Out Code Type RATE % Split/ % Split/ % Split/ % Split/
Trips Trips Trips Trips
210 104 eq 1078 eq 25% 75% eq 63% 37%
Dwelling Units =EXP(0.92*LN(104)+2.71) 79 20 59 105 66 39 AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips
Single-Family detached
Housing
General Information Daily Trips
Table 1b
Project Trip Generation – Phase II
ITE Development Variable ADT ADT Rate In Out Rate In Out Code Type RATE % Split/ % Split/ % Split/ % Split/
Trips Trips Trips Trips
210 317 eq 3005 eq 25% 75% eq 63% 37%
Dwelling Units =EXP(0.92*LN(317)+2.71) 230 57 172 308 194 114 General Information Daily Trips AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Single-Family detached
Housing
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 18
Table 1c
Project Trip Generation – Phase III
ITE Development Variable ADT ADT Rate In Out Rate In Out Code Type RATE % Split/ % Split/ % Split/ % Split/
Trips Trips Trips Trips
210 317 eq 3005 eq 25% 75% eq 63% 37%
Dwelling Units =EXP(0.92*LN(317)+2.71) 230 57 172 308 194 114 220 180 eq 1320 eq 23% 77% eq 63% 37%
Dwelling Units =7.56*180+-40.86 83 19 64 100 63 37
820 65 eq 4485 eq 62% 38% eq 48% 52%
1000 sq ft GLA=EXP(0.68*LN(65)+5.57) 184 114 70 395 190 205 sub-total 8,811 190 306 447 356
Adjustments
Pass-by¹ 15% 673 17 11 29 31
Total 8,138 173 295 418 325
Shopping Center
General Information Daily Trips
¹Shopping Center only
AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips
Single-Family
detached Housing
Multifamily Housing
(Low Rise)
TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
The project trip distribution in Table 2 represents the most likely travel routes for traffic accessing the project. Project traffic distribution was estimated based on a review of the potential draw from population centers within the region and the types of land uses involved. These assumptions were used to distribute the phased project traffic as shown in Figures 4-6.
Table 2
Project Trip Distribution
Direction Percent
North 5
East 35
South 50
West 10
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 0
3 00
3 0
2 00 3
0 0
3 3
0 0
00 0
0 4
30 26
0 3
26 5
0 6
206 20
0 6
0 5
10 5
1 7
00 5
0 0
5 8
0 0
0 000
000
0 0
0 9
0 0
0 000
000
0 0
0 10 0
37 037
0 0
11 37
15 015
0 37
12 020 5220
0 52
13 0
6 666 66
0 14 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 15 0
0 0
0660
0 66
0 0
0 0
16 3
17 0
000
003
0 17
0 17 1
20 01
20 0
18 0
0 24
211524
0 14
0 21
0 0
19 0
10 0
200
800
2 10
9 20 0
3 0
010
010
0 3
0 21 0
0 2
363
050
3 0
0 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
19 DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES PHASES 1&2
FIGURE 5a
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
EXISTING ROAD
FUTURE ROAD
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 0
1 30
1 3
2 00 1
0 0
1 3
1 0
01 0
0 4
00 12
0 0
12 5
0 3
93 9
0 6
0 2
10 2
1 7
00 2
0 0
2 8
26 0
3 003
00 26
0 0
0 9
0 22
26 7026
000
7 22
0 10 40
11 311
3 40
11 47
4 44
4 47
12 09 51
9 0
51 13 0
7 527 52
0 14 0
0 0
000
000
0 1
0 15 0
0 0
0520
0 52
0 0
0 0
16 2
5 0
7190
0 19
2 7
5 0
17 1
7 01
7 0
18 0
0 27
81127
0 10
0 8
0 0
19 0
14 0
200
11 00
2 14
8 20 0
2 0
010
010
0 2
0 21 0
0 1
242
030
2 0
0 22 11
1 01 011
23 22
1 111 1122
24 33
10 1510
15 33
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
20 DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES PHASE 3
FIGURE 5b
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
EXISTING ROAD
FUTURE ROAD
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 21
EXISTING AND FUTURE TRAFFIC
Traffic counts were conducted between the hours of 6:00 to 8:00 AM and 4:00 to 6:00 PM at the study intersections in May, June, and September 2021 and are shown in Figure 5. The count data was adjusted (+15 percent) to account for traffic volume reductions on public roadways because of the coronavirus pandemic. The adjustment was developed based on a review of historical (pre-pandemic) count data obtained from multiple sources (shown in Appendix).
Annual growth rates ranging between 0.50% and 5.62% were applied to existing traffic volumes to estimate future traffic volumes for the project phases. These growth rates were estimated based the future TCAG traffic model data and the addition of proposed developments in the vicinity of the project (cumulative project traffic).
In accordance with Category III requirements, analysis will be provided for the following scenarios:
• Existing
• 2023 Traffic
• 2023 Traffic + Phase 1 Project Traffic
• 2023 Traffic + Phase 1 Project Traffic + Mitigation
• 2025 Traffic
• 2025 Traffic + Phase 1 & 2 Project Traffic
• 2025 Traffic + Phase 1 & 2 Project Traffic + Mitigation • 2031 Traffic
• 2031 Traffic + Phase 1,2 & 3 Project Traffic
• 2031 Traffic + Phase 1,2 & 3 Project Traffic + Mitigation • 2041 Traffic
• 2041 Traffic + Phase 1,2 & 3 Project Traffic
• 2041 Traffic + Phase 1,2 & 3 Project Traffic + Mitigation Phases 1-3 and future peak hour volumes are shown in Figures 8 through 15.
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 0
1 00
1 0
2 00 1
0 0
1 3
0 0
00 0
0 4
10 16
0 1
11 5
0 4
83 12
0 6
0 3
10 2
1 7
00 3
0 0
2 8
0 0
0 000
000
0 0
0 9
0 0
0 000
000
0 0
0 10 0
24 013
0 0
11 24
11 06
0 13
12 08 3512
0 19
13 0
4 252 43
0 14 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 15 0
0 0
0250
0 43
0 0
0 0
16 1
6 0
000
002
0 11
0 17 0
7 00
13 0
18 0
0 15
739
080
13 0
0 19 0
7 0
100
300
1 4
2 20 0
0 0
000
000
0 1
0 21 0
0 1
000
020
1 0
0 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
22 PM PROJECT PHASE 1 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 6
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 0
2 00
0 0
2 00 2
0 0
0 3
0 0
00 0
0 4
00 5
0 2
17 5
0 1
135 3
0 6
0 1
00 3
2 7
00 1
0 0
3 8
0 0
0 000
000
0 0
0 9
0 0
0 000
000
0 0
0 10 0
7 020
0 0
11 7
3 09
0 20
12 013 10
3 0
29 13 0
1 383 13
0 14 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 15 0
0 0
0380
0 13
0 0
0 0
16 2
9 0
000
001
0 3
0 17 0
11 00
4 0
18 0
0 4
11514
020
4 0
0 19 0
2 0
000
100
2 6
3 20 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 21 0
0 0
000
010
0 0
0 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
23 AM PROJECT PHASE 1 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 7
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 0
3 00
5 0
2 00 3
0 0
5 3
0 0
00 0
0 4
50 50
0 3
29 5
0 11
227 39
0 6
0 8
30 5
2 7
00 8
0 0
5 8
0 0
0 000
000
0 0
0 9
0 0
0 000
000
0 0
0 10 0
70 041
0 0
11 70
29 017
0 41
12 022 9939
0 58
13 0
11 746 127
0 14 0
3 0
000
100
0 0
0 15 0
0 0
0740
0 127
0 0
0 0
16 4
19 0
000
007
0 33
0 17 1
23 02
40 0
18 0
0 49
241628
0 29
0 42
0 0
19 0
21 0
400
20 00
2 13
10 20 0
4 0
010
020
0 7
0 21 0
0 5
463
0 13
0 7
0 0
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
24 PM PROJECT PHASE 1&2 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 8
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 0
5 00
1 0
2 00 5
0 0
1 3
0 0
00 0
0 4
10 14
0 5
44 5
0 3
3411 11
0 6
0 2
10 8
3 7
00 2
0 0
8 8
0 0
0 000
000
0 0
0 9
0 0
0 000
000
0 0
0 10 0
21 063
0 0
11 21
9 026
0 63
12 034 2911
0 88
13 0
3 1129 38
0 14 0
1 0
000
000
0 0
0 15 0
0 0
01120
0 38
0 0
0 0
16 6
29 0
000
002
0 10
0 17 2
35 01
12 0
18 0
0 14
372442
090
13 0
0 19 0
6 0
100
600
3 20
16 20 0
6 0
020
010
0 2
0 21 0
0 1
695
040
2 0
0 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
25 AM PROJECT PHASE 1&2 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 9
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 0
7 10
0 7
12 2
00 7
0 0
7 3
2 0
02 0
0 4
23 49
3 2
40 5
0 11
349 41
0 6
0 8
30 7
2 7
00 8
0 0
7 8
86 0
10 0012
00 108
0 0
0 9
0 72
110
24090
000
30 90
0 10 164
45 1036
13 139
11 195
16 1413
17 158
12 331 20838
3 168
13 0
29 17224 213
0 14 0
19 0
000
300
0 15
3 15 0
0 0
01720
0 213
0 0
0 0
16 9
20 0
23630
0 7912
29 25
0 17 3
29 03
37 0
18 0
0 117
323995
0 49
0 40
0 0
19 0
58 0
900
46 00
8 46
38 20 0
10 0
030
030
0 13
0 21 0
0 10
10188
0 22
0 13
0 0
22 36
2 02 044
23 78
2 363 4496
24 134
40 4832
60 120
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
26 PM PROJECT PHASE 1,2&3 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 10
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 0
6 90
3 5
2 00 6
0 0
3 3
1 0
02 0
0 4
11 20
3 2
36 5
0 5
298 19
0 6
0 3
10 6
2 7
00 3
0 0
6 8
78 0
9 005
00 45
0 0
0 9
0 65
46 22082
000
12 37
0 10 75
19 933
5 118
11 81
7 1312
7 143
12 128 8616
3 153
13 0
12 15622 88
0 14 0
8 0
000
100
0 14
3 15 0
0 0
01560
0 88
0 0
0 0
16 8
18 0
21570
0 33
5 12
10 0
17 3
26 01
15 0
18 0
0 49
293586
0 20
0 17
0 0
19 0
24 0
400
19 00
7 42
34 20 0
9 0
030
010
0 5
0 21 0
0 4
9167
090
5 0
0 22 33
2 01 019
23 70
2 331 1940
24 68
16 4329
25 94
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
27 AM PROJECT PHASE 1,2&3 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 11
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 26
28 2646
98 18
2 25230 25 196
48 99
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 00 0
0 0
0 5
26 21
28150 20386
6 5
50 96
78 13
7 00 55
0 0
85 8
0 0
0 0650
0 87
0 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 1
4 07
0 1
11 0
0 00
0 0
12 4259 30 245
5 18
13 88
5 33213 304 129
14 17
59 9
14214
7 3942
5 60
23 15 33
0 20
039435
3 419
25 0
0 0
16 151
260
21 175728
3786
187
14 467
67 17 28
426
11 27
662
36 18 317
301
21 7930051
70 417173
158
443
80 19 82
395
49 376430
565971
42 502
88 20 24
144
29 275616
584014
48 253
109
21 106
99 30
3558931
58 656181
61 168
55 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
28 PM 2021 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 12
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 56
78 2132
43 18
2 80192 58 242
35 43
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 00 0
0 0
0 5
47 59
21325 24628
6 1
48 15
2 55
10 7
00 48
0 0
56 8
0 0
0 01161
1 95
1 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 1
2 14
0 1
11 0
0 00
0 0
12 2180 3 246
4 25
13 117
21 2838 25353
14 8
28 2
20292
7 1713
1 26
14 15 17
0 16
030118
4 378
25 0
0 0
16 144
345
89 6918665
33 153
112
78 207
32 17 23
554
1825
399
20 18 190
352
37 11431928
65 308104
103
284
75 19 33
334
17 344934
622355
16 260
16 20 47
259
48 5010550
129
4579
22 174
94 21 165
170
35 4958434
59 415105
39 91
91 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
29 AM 2021 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 13
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 28
30 2849
104
19 2
25234 26 207
49 101
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 00 0
0 0
0 5
26 21
29653 21792
6 5
51 10
7 80
13 7
00 56
0 0
86 8
0 0
0 0690
0 92
0 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 1
4 07
0 1
11 0
0 00
0 0
12 4277 32 265
5 19
13 91
5 35914 339 144
14 17
60 9
15234
8 4548
5 62
24 15 35
0 21
041837
3 445
27 0
0 0
16 157
270
22 185929
3888
192
14 481
69 17 31
470
1230
688
37 18 329
313
22 8833557
74 440183
164
460
88 19 85
408
51 386731
586173
44 522
91 20 25
153
31 295917
624215
51 268
116
21 109
102
31 3762233
65 725202
63 173
57 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
30 PM 2023 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 14
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 59
83 2234
46 19
2 81195 61 255
36 44
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 00 0
0 0
0 5
48 60
22426 26330
6 1
49 17
2 56
10 7
00 48
0 0
57 8
0 0
0 01231
1 101
1 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 1
2 14
0 1
11 0
0 00
0 0
12 2193 3 266
4 27
13 121
22 3069 28259
14 8
28 2
22322
8 1915
1 27
14 15 18
0 17
031919
4 401
27 0
0 0
16 150
359
93 7119367
34 157
115
80 213
33 17 25
612
2028
415
21 18 197
366
38 12735631
69 325
110
107
295
83 19 34
345
18 355135
642457
17 270
17 20 50
275
51 5311153
137
4884
23 185
100
21 170
175
36 5261636
66 459
117
40 94
94 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
31 AM 2023 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 15
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 28
31 2849
105
19 2
25234 27 207
49 102
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 10 16
0 1
11 5
26 25
30456 22992
6 5
54 11
7 82
14 7
00 59
0 0
88 8
0 0
0 0690
0 92
0 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 1
28 020
0 1
11 24
11 06
0 13
12 4285 67 277
5 38
13 91
9 38416 382 144
14 17
60 9
15234
8 4548
5 62
24 15 35
0 21
044337
3 488
27 0
0 0
16 158
276
22 185929
3888
194
14 492
69 17 31
477
1230
701
37 18 329
313
37 9533866
74 448183
177
460
88 19 85
415
51 396731
616173
45 526
93 20 25
153
31 295917
624215
51 269
116
21 109
102
32 3762233
65 727202
64 173
57 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
32 PM 2023+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 16
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 59
85 2234
46 19
2 81195 63 255
36 44
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 00 5
0 2
17 5
48 61
23731 26630
6 1
50 17
2 59
12 7
00 49
0 0
60 8
0 0
0 01231
1 101
1 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 1
9 124
0 1
11 7
3 09
0 20
12 2206 13 269
4 56
13 121
23 34412 29559
14 8
28 2
22322
8 1915
1 27
14 15 18
0 17
035719
4 414
27 0
0 0
16 152
368
93 7119367
34 157
116
80 216
33 17 25
623
2028
419
21 18 197
366
42 13836145
69 327
110
111
295
83 19 34
347
18 355135
652457
19 276
20 20 50
275
51 5311153
137
4884
23 185
100
21 170
175
36 5261636
66 460
117
40 94
94 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
31 AM 2023+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 17
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 29
32 2952
110
20 2
26237 28 218
50 103
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 00 0
0 0
0 5
27 21
31256 23399
6 5
51 11
7 81
14 7
00 56
0 0
87 8
0 0
0 0730
0 98
0 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 1
5 08
0 1
11 0
0 00
0 0
12 5297 35 287
6 20
13 94
5 38915 378 161
14 18
61 9
17265
9 5155
5 64
24 15 37
0 23
044339
3 472
28 0
0 0
16 163
281
23 186130
3991
198
15 495
71 17 34
519
1434
715
39 18 342
325
23 9837363
78 464193
171
479
98 19 88
422
52 406932
596375
45 542
95 20 27
162
33 306318
654516
54 285
123
21 112
105
32 3965635
72 801225
64 178
58 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
34 PM 2025 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 18
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 63
88 2436
48 20
2 83198 64 269
36 45
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 00 0
0 0
0 5
48 60
23728 28232
6 1
49 18
2 57
10 7
00 49
0 0
57 8
0 0
0 01311
1 107
1 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 1
2 15
0 1
11 0
0 00
0 0
12 2206 4 288
5 28
13 125
22 3329 31566
14 8
29 2
24362
9 2217
1 28
15 15 19
0 18
033920
5 425
28 0
0 0
16 156
373
96 7419970
35 162
118
83 219
34 17 28
675
2331
431
22 18 205
380
40 14239735
72 343
116
111
307
91 19 35
357
18 375337
662458
17 281
17 20 53
292
54 5611856
145
5189
25 196
106
21 174
180
37 5565038
73 507131
41 96
96 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
35 AM 2025 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 19
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 29
35 2952
115
20 2
26237 31 218
50 108
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 50 50
0 3
29 5
27 32
33463 27299
6 5
59 14
7 86
16 7
00 64
0 0
92 8
0 0
0 0730
0 98
0 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 1
75 049
0 1
11 70
29 017
0 41
12 5319 134 326
6 78
13 94
16 46321 505 161
14 18
64 9
17265
105155
5 64
24 15 37
0 23
051739
3 599
28 0
0 0
16 167
300
23 186130
3991
205
15 528
71 17 35
542
1436
755
39 18 342
325
72 12238991
78 493193
213
479
98 19 88
443
52 446932
796375
47 555
105
20 27
166
33 306418
654716
54 292
123
21 112
105
37 4366238
72 814225
71 178
58 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
36 PM 2025+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 20
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N Demaree St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N Mooney Blvd
Akers Rd
County Center Rd
Rd 104
Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 63
93 2436
49 20
2 83198 69 269
36 46
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 10 14
0 5
44 5
48 63
27139 29332
6 1
51 19
2 65
13 7
00 51
0 0
65 8
0 0
0 01311
1 107
1 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 1
23 168
0 1
11 21
9 026
0 63
12 2240 33 299
5 116
13 125
25 44418 35366
14 8
30 2
24362
9 2217
1 28
15 15 19
0 18
045120
5 463
28 0
0 0
16 162
402
96 7419970
35 162120
83 229
34 17 30
710
2332
443
22 18 205
380
54 17942177
72 352
116
124
307
91 19 35
363
18 385337
722458
20 301
33 20 53
298
54 5612056
145
5289
25 198
106
21 174
180
38 6165943
73 511
131
43 96
96 Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
37 AM 2025+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 21
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N
D
e
m
are
e
St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N
M
o
one
y
B
vl d
A
k
ers
R
d
C
o
u
nty
C
e
nter R
R
d
d 10
4 Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 35
38 3562
132
24 2
24927
33 255
53 110
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 00 0
0 0
0 5
28 22
65365
286121
6 5
53 1510
87 14
7 00 58
0 0
90 8
0 0
0 80
7 0
0 117
0 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 1
5 09
0 1
11 0
0 00
0 0
12 3656
45 364
0 24
13 103
6 19493
525223
14 18
64 10
37 5
23 147782
6 70
27 15
44 0
27 475300
4 563
34 0
0 0
16 183
315
25 336820
4399
215
16 540
78 17
46 699
2048
803
44 18
385
365
25 88518136
92 546226
192
537
131
19 97
466
58 367845
656882
51 609
107
20 32
194
39 227536
785419
65 340
146
21 122
114
34 4177146
100
1081
313
70 193
63 22
0 0
00 0
0 23
0 0
00 0
0 24 0
0 00
0 0
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
38 PM 2031 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 22
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
EXISTING ROAD
FUTURE ROAD
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N
D
e
m
are
e
St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N
M
o
one
y
B
vl d
A
k
ers
R
d
C
o
u
nty
C
e
nter R
R
d
d 10
4 Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 75
105
2843
58 24
2 20887
75 315
39 48
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 00 0
0 0
0 5
50 62
33277
346
39 6
1 51
25 3
61 11
7 00 50
0 0
59 8
0 0
0 11
56 0
1 128
1 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 1
3 15
0 1
11 0
0 00
0 0
12 2533
4 366
0 34
13 137
25 12421
437
92 14
9 30
2 43
8 33
143326
1 30
16 15
23 0
22 244050
5 508
34 0
0 0
16 175
418
108
7722182
38 176129
90 240
37 17
38 909
3244
484
24 18
230
427
45 48551197
85 403136
125
345
123
19 39
394
20 415941
722764
19 315
19 20
63 348
65 6714167
173
60 106
30 234
126
21 189
195
40 4576564
102684181
45 104
104
22 0
0 00 0
0 23
0 0
00 0
0 24 0
0 00
0 0
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
39 AM 2031 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 23
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
EXISTING ROAD
FUTURE ROAD
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N
D
e
m
are
e
St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N
M
o
one
y
B
vl d
A
k
ers
R
d
C
o
u
nty
C
e
nter R
R
d
d 10
4 Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 35
42 4562
139
36 2
24927
37 255
53 117
3 2
0 02
0 0
4 23 49
0 2
40 5
28 33
74399
324121
6 5
61 1810
94 16
7 00 66
0 0
97 8
86 0
10 12870
0 117
108
0 0
0 9
0 72
110
9020
4 000
30 90
0 10 165
50 4510
13 140
11 195
16 1314
17 158
12 3969
253402
0 195
13 103
35 49665
738223
14 18
83 10
37 5
23 177782
6 85
30 15
44 0
27 477020
4 776
34 0
0 0
16 192
335
25 3313143
43 178227
45 565
78 17
49 728
2051
840
44 18
385
365
142
183557168
92 595226
232
537
131
19 97
524
58 367854
111
6882
59 655
145
20 32
204
39 227836
785719
65 353
146
21 122
114
44 4978956
100
1103
313
83 193
63 22
36 2
02 0
44 23
78 2
33 6
4496
24 134
40 3248
60 120
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
40 PM 2031+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 24
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
EXISTING ROAD
FUTURE ROAD
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N
D
e
m
are
e
St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N
M
o
one
y
B
vl d
A
k
ers
R
d
C
o
u
nty
C
e
nter R
R
d
d 10
4 Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 75
105
3743
61 29
2 20887
81 315
39 51
3 1
0 02
0 0
4 11 20
3 2
36 5
50 67
41306
362
39 6
1 54
26 3
67 13
7 00 53
0 0
65 8
78 0
9 16
56 0
1 128
46 0
0 0
9 0
65 46
8220
2 000
12 37
0 10 76
22 3810
5 119
11 81
7 1213
7 143
12 2644
90 382
0 112
13 137
37 12510
525
92 14
9 38
2 43
8 33
153326
1 30
16 15
23 0
22 244940
5 596
34 0
0 0
16 183
436
108
77278103
38 209134
102
250
37 17
41 935
3245
499
24 18
230
427
94 67586226
85 423136
142
345
123
19 39
418
20 415945
912764
26 357
53 20
63 357
65 6714467
173
61 106
30 239
126
21 189
195
44 5278173
102693181
50 104
104
22 33
2 01 0
19 23
70 2
31 3
1940
24 68
16 2943
25 94
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
41 AM 2031+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 25
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
EXISTING ROAD
FUTURE ROAD
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N
D
e
m
are
e
St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N
M
o
one
y
B
vl d
A
k
ers
R
d
C
o
u
nty
C
e
nter R
R
d
d 10
4 Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 47
51 4783
177
33 2
26929
42 331
59 122
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 00 0
0 0
0 5
29 24
85475
402170
6 6
56 2517
96 16
7 00 61
0 0
95 8
0 0
0 10
17 0
0 157
0 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 2
7 130
0 2
11 0
0 00
0 0
12 5138
66 541
0 33
13 120
7 29733
907385
14 20
70 11
115839
27 150162
7 82
31 15
60 0
36 637120
5 757
45 0
0 0
16 222
383
31 408024
49 114
247
19 625
90 17
75 1148
3585
974
53 18
466
443
31 152895236
120715296
232
652
216
19 114
550
68 449454
757995
62 739
129
20 43
260
52 2910149
105
7225
87 457
197
21 140
130
40 53100960
173
1781
540
80 221
72 22
0 0
00 0
0 23
0 0
00 0
0 24 0
0 00
0 0
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
42 PM 2041 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 26
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
EXISTING ROAD
FUTURE ROAD
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N
D
e
m
are
e
St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N
M
o
one
y
B
vl d
A
k
ers
R
d
C
o
u
nty
C
e
nter R
R
d
d 10
4 Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 101
141
3858
78 33
2 22594
98 409
43 53
3 0
0 00
0 0
4 00 0
0 0
0 5
53 66
42360
488
55 6
1 54
41 6
68 12
7 00 53
0 0
63 8
0 0
0 21
10 0
1 172
1 0
0 0
9 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 10 2
4 27
0 2
11 0
0 00
0 0
12 3574
7 543
0 45
13 160
29 18625
755158
14 9
33 2
86 0
55 276650
1 36
19 15
31 0
29 335440
7 683
45 0
0 0
16 212
508
131
9226397
44 202148
104
277
43 17
62 1492
5779
587
29 18
280
518
54 84952340
111
528178
152
418
202
19 46
465
24 507250
833174
24 383
24 20
85 468
87 9019090
233
81 143
40 314
170
21 217
224
46 58100184
176
1127
313
51 120
120
22 0
0 00 0
0 23
0 0
00 0
0 24 0
0 00
0 0
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
43 AM 2041 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 27
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
EXISTING ROAD
FUTURE ROAD
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N
D
e
m
are
e
St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N
M
o
one
y
B
vl d
A
k
ers
R
d
C
o
u
nty
C
e
nter R
R
d
d 10
4 Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 47
55 5783
184
45 2
26929
46 331
59 129
3 2
0 02
0 0
4 23 49
0 2
40 5
29 35
94509
440170
6 6
64 2817
103
18 7
00 69
0 0
102
8 86
0 10
121170
0 157108
0 0
0 9
0 72
110
9020
4 000
30 90
0 10 166
52 4910
13 141
11 195
16 1314
17 158
12 54411
274579
0 204
13 120
36 59905
1120
385
14 20
89 11
115839
30 150162
7 97
34 15
60 0
36 638840
5 970
45 0
0 0
16 231
403
31 4014347
49 193259
48 650
90 17
78 1177
3588
1011
53 18
466
443
148
247934268
120764296
272
652
216
19 114
608
68 449463
121
7995
70 785
167
20 43
270
52 2910449
105
7525
87 470
197
21 140
130
50 61102770
173
1803
540
93 221
72 22
36 2
02 0
44 23
78 2
33 6
4496
24 134
40 3248
60 120
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
44 PM 2041+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 28
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
EXISTING ROAD
FUTURE ROAD
Traffic Study 646-02
River Way Dr
Pratt Rd
Ave 320
N
D
e
m
are
e
St
Shannon Pkwy
W Goshen Ave
Houston Ave
W Ferguson Ave
W Riggin Ave
N
M
o
one
y
B
vl d
A
k
ers
R
d
C
o
u
nty
C
e
nter R
R
d
d 10
4 Hurley Ave
Prospect Ave
Sequoia Home
1 101
141
4758
81 38
2 22594
104409
43 56
3 1
0 02
0 0
4 11 20
3 2
36 5
53 71
50389
504
55 6
1 57
42 6
74 14
7 00 56
0 0
69 8
78 0
9 26
10 0
1 172
46 0
0 0
9 0
65 46
8220
2 000
12 37
0 10 77
23 4011
5 120
11 81
7 1213
7 143
12 3685
93 559
0 123
13 160
41 18714
843158
14 9
41 2
86 0
55 286650
1 36
19 15
31 0
29 337000
7 771
45 0
0 0
16 220
526
131
92320118
44 235153
116
287
43 17
65 1518
5780
602
29 18
280
518
103
170987369
111
548178
169
418
202
19 46
489
24 507254
102
3174
31 425
58 20
85 477
87 9019390
233
82 143
40 319
170
21 217
224
50 65101793
176
1136
313
56 120
120
22 33
2 01 0
19 23
70 2
31 3
1940
24 68
16 2943
25 94
Map data ©2022
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA
45 AM 2041+PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
FIGURE 29
N
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
STUDY INTERSECTION
EXISTING ROAD
FUTURE ROAD
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 46
INTERSECTION ANALYSIS
A capacity analysis of the study intersections was conducted using Synchro software from Trafficware.
This software utilizes the 2010 capacity analysis methodology in the Transportation Research Board’s Highway Capacity Manual.
Criteria for intersection level of service (LOS) are shown in the tables below.
LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA
UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
Average Control Delay
(sec/veh) Level of Service Expected Delay to Minor Street Traffic ≤ 10 A Little or no delay
> 10 and ≤ 15 B Short traffic delays
> 15 and ≤ 25 C Average traffic delays
> 25 and ≤ 35 D Long traffic delays
> 35 and ≤ 50 E Very long traffic delays
> 50 F Extreme delays
LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Volume/Capacity Control Delay (sec/veh) Level of Service < 0.60 ≤ 10 A
0.61 - 0.70 > 10 and ≤ 20 B
0.71 - 0.80 > 20 and ≤ 35 C
0.81 - 0.90 > 35 and ≤ 55 D
0.91 - 1.00 > 55 and ≤ 80 E
> 1.0 > 80 F
Level of service for the study intersections is presented in Tables 3a and 3b. The level of service goal for roadway facilities in Visalia is LOS “D”. Intersection delays are shown for all intersections that operate below LOS “D”. For intersections operating below LOS D mitigation measures were identified and analyzed to confirm the measures meet the operational threshold. It is noted that two signalized intersections, Demaree Street at Riggin Avenue, and Demaree Street at Ferguson Avenue will operate below LOS D in the future baseline scenarios. The project traffic does not degrade the LOS at either of the intersections when added to the future baseline traffic, therefore the intersections do not require project mitigation.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 47
Table 3a
PM Intersection Level of Service
# Intersection Control
Type 2021 2023 2023+Project 2025 2025+Project 2031 2031+Project 2031+
Project
w/Improvements¹
2041 2041+
Project
2041+
Project
w/Improvements¹
1 Akers St &
Ave 320 NB A A A A A B B - B B -
2 Demaree St &
Ave 320 EB B B B B B B B - B B -
3 Linwood St &
Project Road North NB A A A A A A A - A A -
4 Demaree St &
Arlet Ave EB A A A A A A A - A A -
5 Demaree St &
Pratt Rd WB B B B B B B B - C C -
6 County Center St &
Pratt Rd NB A A A A A A A - A A -
7 Mooney Blvd &
Pratt Rd SB A A A A A A A - A A -
8 Akers St &
Shannon Prkwy AWSC A A A A A A A - A A -
9 Linwood St &
Shannon Prkwy
EB
WB
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
-
-
A
A
A
A
-
-
9 Linwood St &
Shannon Prkwy2 Roundabout A A A A A A A - A A -
10 Project Entrance/
River Way Dr SB A A A A A A B - A B -
11 N Chinowth St/
River Way Dr SB A A A A A A B - A B -
12 Demaree St &
River Way Dr EB B B B B B B C - B C -
13 Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy
WB C C C C D D F
(93.3) - F(>300)
F
(>300) -
Signal - - - - - - - A - - A
14 County Center St &
Shannon Pkwy Roundabout A A A A A A A - A A -
15 Demaree St &
Flagstaff Ave
EB
WB
A
B
A
B
A
C
A
B
A
D
A
D
A
F
(56.4)
-
A
F
(96.0)
A
F
(>300)
-
Signal - - - - - - - A - - A
16 Akers St &
Riggin Ave Signal D D D D D D D - D D -
17 Linwood St &
Riggin Ave
NB C C C C D D E
(39.9) - F(>300)
F
(>300)
-
Signal - - - - - - - B - - F
(135.4)
18 Demaree St &
Riggin Ave Signal D D D D D D D - E(61.7)
E
(77.4) -
19 County Center St &
Riggin Ave
AWSC C C C C D E
(35.3)
E
(47.5) - F(54.1)
F
(56.6) -
Signal - - - - - - - - - - B
1 Mitigation measures shown in Table 6 2
Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy was analyzed for both stop-controlled and roundabout conditions pursuant to the City of Visalia NW Quadrant Traffic Circulation Plan.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 48
Table 3a Continued
PM Intersection Level of Service
# Intersection Control Type 2021 2023 2023+
Project 2025 2025+ 2031 2031+Project
2031+
2041 2041+
Project
2041+
Project Project
w/Improvements¹ w/Improvements¹
20 Linwood St &
Ferguson Ave AWSC A A A B B B B - C C -
21 Demaree St &
Ferguson Ave Signal D D D D D D D - F F -
(88.5) (90.7)
22 Linwood St &
Residential Driveway WB A A A A A A A - A A -
23 Linwood St &
Commercial Driveway WB - - - - - A A - A A -
24 Commercial Driveway &
Shannon Prkwy SB - - - - - A A - A A -
1 Mitigation measures shown in Table 6
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 49
Table 3b
AM Intersection Level of Service
# Intersection Control
Type 2021 2023 2023+
Project 2025 2025+ 2031 2031+
Project
2031+
2041 2041+
Project
2041+
Project Project
w/Improvements¹ w/Improvements¹
1 Akers St &
Ave 320 NB A A A A A B B - B B -
2 Demaree St &
Ave 320 EB B B B B B B B - C C -
3 Linwood St &
Project Road North NB A A A A A A A - A A -
4 Demaree St &
Arlet Ave EB A A A A A A A - A A -
5 Demaree St &
Pratt Rd WB B B B B B B B - C C -
6 County Center St &
Pratt Rd NB A A A A A A A - A A -
7 Mooney Blvd &
Pratt Rd SB A A A A A A A - A A -
8 Akers St &
Shannon Prkwy AWSC A A A A A A A - A A -
9 Linwood St &
Shannon Prkwy
EB A A A A A A A - A A -
WB A A A A A A A - A A -
9 Linwood St &
Shannon Prkwy3 Roundabout A A A A A A A - A A -
10 Project Entrance/
River Way Dr SB A A A A A A A - A A -
11 N Chinowth St/ River
Way Dr SB A A A A A A A - A A -
12 Demaree St &
River Way Dr EB A A A A B B B - B B -
13 Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy
WB B B B C C C E
(39.8) - F F - (156.3) (>300)
Signal - - - - - - - A - - A
14County Center St &
Shannon Pkwy Roundabout A A A A A A A - A A -
15 Demaree St &
Flagstaff Ave
EB A A A A A A A - A A
- WB B B B B C C C - D E
(38.2)
Signal - - - - - - - - - - A
16 Akers St &
Riggin Ave Signal D D D D D D D - D D -
17 Linwood St &
Riggin Ave
NB B B C C C E
(36.7)
E
(40.6) - F F - (>300) (>300)
Signal - - - - - - - B - - C
18 Demaree St &
Riggin Ave Signal D D D D D D D - E(68.9)
E
(74.6) -
19 County Center St &
Riggin Ave
AWSC B B B B B B B - B C -
Signal - - - - - - - - - - C²
1 Mitigation measures shown in Table 6 2
Mitigation necessary due to PM Peak Hour Traffic 3
Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy was analyzed for both stop-controlled and roundabout conditions pursuant to the City of Visalia NW Quadrant Traffic Circulation Plan.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 50
Table 3b Continued
AM Intersection Level of Service
# Intersection Control Type 2021 2023 2023+
Project 2025 2025+ 2031 2031+Project
2031+
2041 2041+
Project
2041+
Project Project
w/Improvements¹ w/Improvements¹
20 Linwood St &
Ferguson Ave AWSC B B B B B B B - D D -
21 Demaree St & Ferguson
Ave Signal D D D D D D D - D D -
22 Linwood St &
Residential Driveway WB - - - - - A A - A A -
23 Linwood St &
Commercial Driveway
WB - - - - - A A - A A -
24 Commercial Driveway &
Shannon Prkwy SB - - - - - A A - A A -
1 Mitigation measures shown in Table 6
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 51
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS
In accordance with the City of Visalia policy, intersections were evaluated for Warrant #1 (Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume) in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Signal warrant analysis results are shown in Table 4. Traffic signals would be considered at intersections which meet the signal warrant and are not able to be mitigated by adding capacity to intersections with additional lanes. Warrant analysis was performed on arterial and collector street intersections. Count data for signal warrant analysis was obtained in March and May of 2022. The count data is included in the appendix.
Table 4
8-Hour Traffic Signal Warrants
1 Akers St at
Ave 320
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
2 Demaree St at
Ave 320
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES YES
4 Demaree St at
Arlet Ave
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
5 Demaree St at
Pratt Rd
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES YES
6 County Center St at
Pratt Rd
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
13 Demaree St at
Shannon Pkwy
NO NO YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
15 Demaree St at
Flagstaff Ave
NO NO NO YES YES YES YES YES YES
17 Linwood St at
Riggin Ave
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES YES
19 County Center St at
Riggin Ave
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
20 Linwood St at
Ferguson Ave
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
2031+
Project
Phase 1,2&3
# Intersection Existing 2023 2025 2041
2023+
Project
Phase 1
2025+
Project
Phase 1&2
2031
2031+
Project
Phase 1,2&3
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 52
QUEUE LENGTH ANALYSIS
Existing volumes and future volumes, both with and without project traffic were used to analyze turn movements at all intersections. Queue length analysis was conducted using the equations provided in the City of Visalia Traffic Guidelines. The results of the queue length analysis are shown in Tables 5a and 5b below.
Table 5a
PM Queue Length Analysis – Phase I
Cycle VOL CAP Cycle VOL CAP Cycle VOL CAP
WBR 200 - 21 18 - 26 22 - 25 21
NBR 375 - 86 72 - 92 77 - 92 77
WBL 125 - 5 4 - 5 4 - 5 4
NBL 235 - 6 5 - 7 6 - 7 6
12 Demaree St &
River Way Dr NBL 175 - 30 25 - 32 27 - 67 56
13 Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy SBL 105 - 13 11 - 15 13 - 16 13
EBL 305 120 14 23 120 14 23 120 14 23
EBR 305 120 67 112 120 69 115 120 69 115
WBL 305 120 151 252 120 157 262 120 158 263
WBR 305 120 21 35 120 22 37 120 22 37
NBL 305 120 37 62 120 38 63 120 38 63
NBR 305 120 187 312 120 192 320 120 194 323
SBL 300 120 28 47 120 29 48 120 29 48
SBR 155 120 17 28 120 18 30 120 18 30
EBL 280 120 158 263 120 164 273 120 177 295
EBR 155 120 80 133 120 88 147 120 88 147
WBL 155 120 317 528 120 329 548 120 329 548
WBR 155 120 21 35 120 22 37 120 37 62
NBL 255 120 70 117 120 74 123 120 74 123
SBL 210 120 51 85 120 57 95 120 66 110
EBL 250 - 42 35 - 44 37 - 45 38
WBL 160 - 82 68 - 85 71 - 85 71
NBL 195 - 56 47 - 58 48 - 61 51
SBL 130 - 30 25 - 31 26 - 31 26
SBR 130 - 37 31 - 38 32 - 39 33
EBL 150 - 48 40 - 51 43 - 51 43
WBL 150 - 24 20 - 25 21 - 25 21
EBL 210 120 61 102 120 63 105 120 64 107
WBL 300 120 106 177 120 109 182 120 109 182
WBR 160 120 30 50 120 31 52 120 32 53
County Center St
&
Pratt Rd
6 Demaree St &
Pratt Rd 5
#
County Center St
&
Riggin Ave
19 Linwood St &
Ferguson Ave
20 Akers St &
Riggin Ave 16
Demaree St &
Riggin Ave 18
Demaree St &
Ferguson Ave
21 Intersection Turn
Movement
Storage
Capacity
2021 2023 2023+
Project
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 53
Table 5a Continued
PM Queue Length Analysis – Phase II
Cycle VOL CAP Cycle VOL CAP
WBR 200 - 27 23 - 32 27
NBR 375 - 99 83 - 99 83
WBL 125 - 5 4 - 5 4
NBL 235 - 7 6 - 7 6
12 Demaree St &
River Way Dr NBL 175 - 35 29 - 134 112
13 Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy SBL 105 - 15 13 - 21 18
EBL 305 120 15 25 120 15 25
EBR 305 120 71 118 120 71 118
WBL 305 120 163 272 120 167 278
WBR 305 120 23 38 120 23 38
NBL 305 120 39 65 120 39 65
NBR 305 120 198 330 120 205 342
SBL 300 120 30 50 120 30 50
SBR 155 120 18 30 120 18 30
EBL 280 120 171 285 120 213 355
EBR 155 120 98 163 120 98 163
WBL 155 120 342 570 120 342 570
WBR 155 120 23 38 120 72 120
NBL 255 120 78 130 120 78 130
SBL 210 120 63 105 120 91 152
EBL 250 - 45 38 - 47 39
WBL 160 - 88 73 - 88 73
NBL 195 - 59 49 - 79 66
SBL 130 - 32 27 - 32 27
SBR 130 - 40 33 - 44 37
EBL 150 - 54 45 - 54 45
WBL 150 - 27 23 - 27 23
EBL 210 120 64 107 120 71 118
WBL 300 120 112 187 120 112 187
WBR 160 120 32 53 120 37 62
Turn
Movement
Storage
Capacity
2025 2025+
# Intersection Project
5 Demaree St &
Pratt Rd
6 County Center St
&
Pratt Rd
18 Demaree St &
Riggin Ave
19 County Center St
&
Riggin Ave
16 Akers St &
Riggin Ave
20 Linwood St &
Ferguson Ave
21 Demaree St &
Ferguson Ave
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 54
Table 5a Continued
PM Queue Length Analysis – Phase III
Cycle VOL CAP Cycle VOL CAP
WBR 200 - 22 18 - 33 28
NBR 375 - 121 101 - 121 101
WBL 125 - 5 4 - 5 4
NBL 235 - 15 13 - 18 15
12 Demaree St &
River Way Dr NBL 175 - 45 38 - 253 211
13 Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy SBL 105 - 19 16 - 43 36
EBL 305 120 16 27 120 45 75
EBR 305 120 78 130 120 78 130
WBL 305 120 183 305 120 192 320
WBR 305 120 25 42 120 25 42
NBL 305 120 43 72 120 43 72
NBR 305 120 215 358 120 227 378
SBL 300 120 33 55 120 33 55
SBR 155 120 20 33 120 43 72
EBL 280 120 192 320 120 232 387
EBR 155 120 131 218 120 131 218
WBL 155 120 385 642 120 385 642
WBR 155 120 25 42 120 142 237
NBL 255 120 92 153 120 92 153
SBL 210 120 88 147 120 183 305
EBL 250 - 51 43 - 59 49
WBL 160 - 97 81 - 97 81
NBL 195 - 65 54 - 111 93
SBL 130 - 36 30 - 36 30
SBR 130 - 47 39 - 54 45
EBL 150 - 65 54 - 65 54
WBL 150 - 32 27 - 32 27
EBL 210 120 70 117 120 83 138
WBL 300 120 122 203 120 122 203
WBR 160 120 34 57 120 44 73
2031 2031+
# Intersection Turn Project
Movement
Storage
Capacity
5 Demaree St &
Pratt Rd
6 County Center St
&
Pratt Rd
19 County Center St
&
Riggin Ave
20 Linwood St &
Ferguson Ave
16 Akers St &
Riggin Ave
18 Demaree St &
Riggin Ave
21 Demaree St &
Ferguson Ave
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 55
Table 5a Continued
PM Queue Length Analysis – 2041 Phase III
Cycle VOL CAP Cycle VOL CAP
WBR 200 - 24 20 - 24 20
NBR 375 - 170 142 - 170 142
WBL 125 - 6 5 - 6 5
NBL 235 - 17 14 - 25 21
12 Demaree St &
River Way Dr NBL 175 - 66 55 - 66 55
13 Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy SBL 105 - 29 24 - 29 24
EBL 305 120 19 32 120 19 32
EBR 305 120 90 150 120 90 150
WBL 305 120 222 370 120 222 370
WBR 305 120 31 52 120 31 52
NBL 305 120 49 82 120 49 82
NBR 305 120 247 412 120 247 412
SBL 300 120 40 67 120 40 67
SBR 155 120 24 40 120 24 40
EBL 280 120 232 387 120 232 387
EBR 155 120 216 360 120 216 360
WBL 155 120 466 777 120 466 777
WBR 155 120 31 52 120 31 52
NBL 255 120 120 200 120 120 200
SBL 210 120 152 253 120 152 253
EBL 250 - 62 52 - 62 52
WBL 160 - 114 95 - 114 95
NBL 195 - 75 63 - 75 63
SBL 130 - 44 37 - 44 37
SBR 130 - 54 45 - 54 45
EBL 150 - 87 73 - 87 73
WBL 150 - 43 36 - 43 36
EBL 210 120 80 133 118 80 131
WBL 300 120 140 233 118 140 233
WBR 160 120 40 67 118 40 66
2041 2041+
# Intersection Turn Project
Movement
Storage
Capacity
16 Akers St &
Riggin Ave
5 Demaree St &
Pratt Rd
6 County Center St
&
Pratt Rd
18 Demaree St &
Riggin Ave
19 County Center St
&
Riggin Ave
20 Linwood St &
Ferguson Ave
21 Demaree St &
Ferguson Ave
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 56
Table 5b
AM Queue Length Analysis – Phase I
Cycle VOL CAP Cycle VOL CAP Cycle VOL CAP
WBL - - 47 39 - 48 40 - 48 40
WBR 200 - 59 49 - 60 50 - 61 51
NBR 375 - 28 23 - 30 25 - 30 25
WBL 125 - 1 1 - 2 2 - 1 1
NBL 235 - 15 13 - 17 14 - 17 14
NBR - - 2 2 - 2 2 - 2 2
EBL - - 4 3 - 4 3 - 4 3
EBR - - 25 21 - 27 23 - 56 47
NBL 175 - 3 3 - 3 3 - 13 11
SBR - - 2 2 - 2 2 - 2 2
WBL - - 117 98 - 121 101 - 121 101
WBR - - 21 18 - 22 18 - 23 19
NBR - - 53 44 - 59 49 - 59 49
SBL 105 - 8 7 - 9 8 - 12 10
EBL 305 120 78 130 120 80 133 120 80 133
EBR 305 120 32 53 120 33 55 120 33 55
WBL 305 120 144 240 120 150 250 120 152 253
WBR 305 120 89 148 120 93 155 120 93 155
NBL 305 120 33 55 120 34 57 120 34 57
NBR 305 120 112 187 120 115 192 120 116 193
SBL 300 120 65 108 120 67 112 120 67 112
SBR 155 120 69 115 120 71 118 120 71 118
EBL 280 90 103 129 90 107 134 120 111 185
EBR 155 90 75 94 90 83 104 120 83 138
WBL 155 90 190 238 90 197 246 120 197 246
WBR 155 90 37 46 90 38 48 120 42 70
NBL 255 90 65 81 90 69 86 120 69 115
SBL 215 90 28 35 90 31 39 120 45 75
EBL 250 - 16 13 - 17 14 - 19 16
WBL 160 - 33 28 - 34 28 - 34 28
NBL 195 - 62 52 - 64 53 - 65 54
SBL 130 - 34 28 - 35 29 - 35 29
SBR 130 - 34 28 - 35 29 - 35 29
EBL 150 - 22 18 - 23 19 - 23 19
WBL 150 - 47 39 - 50 42 - 50 42
WBL 300 120 165 275 120 170 283 120 170 283
WBR 160 120 35 58 120 36 60 120 36 60
Demaree St &
Ferguson Ave
21 # Intersection Turn
Movement
Storage
Capacity
2021 2023 2023+
Project
Akers St &
Riggin Ave 16
Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy 12
Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy 13
Linwood St &
Ferguson Ave
20 Demaree St &
Riggin Ave 18
Country Center St &
Riggin Ave 19
County Center St &
Pratt Rd 6
Demaree St &
Pratt Rd 5
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 57
Table 5b Continued
AM Queue Length Analysis – Phase II
Cycle VOL CAP Cycle VOL CAP
WBL - - 39 33 - 39 33
WBR 200 - 53 44 - 53 44
NBR 375 - 36 30 - 94 78
WBL 125 - 2 2 - 2 2
NBL 235 - 18 15 - 19 16
NBR - - 2 2 - 11 9
EBL - - 5 4 - 5 4
EBR - - 28 23 - 116 97
NBL 175 - 4 3 - 33 28
SBR - - 2 2 - 2 2
WBL - - 113 94 - 113 94
WBR - - 22 18 - 25 21
NBR - - 54 45 - 54 45
SBL 105 - 8 7 - 17 14
EBL 305 120 31 52 120 31 52
EBR 305 120 14 23 120 14 23
WBL 305 120 144 240 120 150 250
WBR 305 120 38 63 120 38 63
NBL 305 120 47 78 120 47 78
NBR 305 120 81 135 120 83 138
SBL 300 120 14 23 120 14 23
SBR 155 120 28 47 120 28 47
EBL 280 90 81 101 90 94 118
EBR 155 90 87 109 90 78 98
WBL 155 90 172 215 90 172 215
WBR 155 90 35 44 90 49 61
NBL 255 90 53 66 90 53 66
SBL 215 90 26 33 90 68 85
EBL 250 - 16 13 - 19 16
WBL 160 - 33 28 - 33 28
NBL 195 - 56 47 - 62 52
SBL 130 - 29 24 - 29 24
SBR 130 - 36 30 - 37 31
EBL 150 - 15 13 - 15 13
WBL 150 - 32 27 - 32 27
WBL 300 120 174 290 120 174 290
WBR 160 120 20 33 120 21 35
20 Linwood St &
Ferguson Ave
21 Demaree St &
Ferguson Ave
2025 2025+
# Intersection Turn Project
Movement
Storage
Capacity
6 County Center St &
Pratt Rd
5 Demaree St &
Pratt Rd
12 Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy
13 Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy
18 Demaree St &
Riggin Ave
19 Country Center St &
Riggin Ave
16 Akers St &
Riggin Ave
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 58
Table 5b Continued
AM Queue Length Analysis – Phase III
Cycle VOL CAP Cycle VOL CAP
WBL - - 50 42 - 50 42
WBR 200 - 62 52 - 67 56
NBR 375 - 39 33 - 39 33
WBL 125 - 1 1 - 1 1
NBL 235 - 25 21 - 26 22
NBR - - 3 3 - 3 3
EBL - - 5 4 - 8 7
EBR - - 34 28 - 187 156
NBL 175 - 4 3 - 90 75
SBR - - 3 3 - 4 3
WBL - - 137 114 - 137 114
WBR - - 25 21 - 37 31
NBR - - 92 77 - 92 77
SBL 105 - 12 10 - 34 28
EBL 305 120 90 83 120 102 170
EBR 305 120 37 34 120 37 62
WBL 305 120 175 156 120 183 305
WBR 305 120 108 96 120 108 180
NBL 305 120 38 35 120 38 63
NBR 305 120 129 118 120 134 223
SBL 300 120 77 70 120 77 128
SBR 155 120 82 74 120 103 172
EBL 280 90 125 156 90 142 178
EBR 155 90 123 154 90 123 154
WBL 155 90 230 288 90 230 288
WBR 155 90 45 56 90 94 118
NBL 255 90 85 106 90 85 106
SBL 215 90 48 60 90 134 168
EBL 250 - 19 16 - 26 22
WBL 160 - 39 33 - 39 33
NBL 195 - 72 60 - 91 76
SBL 130 - 41 34 - 41 34
SBR 130 - 41 34 - 45 38
EBL 150 - 30 25 - 30 25
WBL 150 - 63 53 - 63 53
WBL 300 120 189 315 120 189 315
WBR 160 120 40 67 120 44 73
Demaree St &
Riggin Ave
Country Center St &
Riggin Ave
Akers St &
Riggin Ave
Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy
Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy
Linwood St &
Ferguson Ave
Demaree St &
Pratt Rd
County Center St &
Pratt Rd
Intersection Turn
Movement
Storage
Capacity
Demaree St &
Ferguson Ave
2031 2031+
Project
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 59
Table 5b Continued
AM Queue Length Analysis – 2041 Phase III
Cycle VOL CAP Cycle VOL CAP
- WBL - 53 44 - 53 44
200 WBR - 66 55 - 71 59
375 NBR - 55 46 - 55 46
125 WBL - 1 1 - 1 1
235 NBL - 41 34 - 42 35
- NBR - 6 5 - 6 5
- EBL - 7 6 - 10 8
- EBR - 45 38 - 198 165
175 NBL - 7 6 - 93 78
- SBR - 4 3 - 5 4
- WBL - 160 133 - 160 133
- WBR - 29 24 - 41 34
- NBR - 158 132 - 158 132
105 SBL - 18 15 - 40 33
305 EBL 120 104 173 120 116 193
305 EBR 120 43 72 120 43 72
305 WBL 120 212 353 120 220 367
305 WBR 120 131 218 120 131 218
305 NBL 120 44 73 120 44 73
305 NBR 120 148 247 120 153 255
300 SBL 120 92 153 120 92 153
155 SBR 120 97 162 120 118 197
280 EBL 90 152 190 90 169 211
155 EBR 90 202 253 90 202 253
155 WBL 90 280 350 90 280 350
155 WBR 90 54 68 90 103 129
255 NBL 90 111 139 90 111 139
215 SBL 90 84 105 90 170 213
250 EBL - 24 20 - 31 26
160 WBL - 46 38 - 46 38
195 NBL - 83 69 - 102 85
130 SBL - 50 42 - 50 42
130 SBR - 50 42 - 54 45
150 EBL - 40 33 - 40 33
150 WBL - 85 71 - 85 71
300 WBL 120 217 362 120 217 362
160 WBR 120 46 77 120 50 83
Demaree St &
Riggin Ave
19 Country Center St &
Riggin Ave
Linwood St &
Ferguson Ave
20 Demaree St &
Ferguson Ave
21 16 Akers St &
Riggin Ave
Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy
13 Demaree St &
Shannon Pkwy
County Center St &
Pratt Rd
5 Demaree St &
Pratt Rd
Intersection Turn
Movement
Storage
Capacity
#
6 12
18 2041 2041+
Project
Queue lengths which exceed capacity of the turn lane storage are shown in bold text in the table. An analysis of the highlighted queue lengths indicates that in all cases either existing baseline, or future baseline traffic exceeds the storage length prior to the addition of project traffic. With the addition of project traffic, some queue lengths are increased from existing or future base traffic, but by 20 feet or less (less than the average car length of 25 feet). Therefore, project traffic queue length impacts are minor and mitigation by the project is not required.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 60
MITIGATION
Based on the results of the Level of Service (LOS) analysis and eight-hour vehicular volume warrant, and the City of Visalia thresholds for mitigation, it is recommended that signals be constructed at the four intersections identified in Table 6 in order to operate at an acceptable level of service by the year 2041.
Table 6
Future Intersection Improvements
# Intersection
Improvements
Required
by 2031
Improvements
Required
by 2041
Percent
Share
13 Demaree St &
Shannon Parkway Signal - 25.03%
15 Demaree St &
Flagstaff Ave Signal - 33.95%
17 Linwood St & Riggin
Ave Signal - 5.75%
19 County Center St &
Riggin Ave - Signal 24.86%
The City of Visalia Traffic Impact Fee facilities list includes signal projects which are not individually identified. Three of the four intersections (excluding Demaree Street and Flagstaff Avenue) are arterial or collector roadways and are understood to be included in the traffic impact fee. The intersection of Demaree Street and Flagstaff Avenue is currently full access and will require signalization in the future with or without the project. Inclusion of Demaree Street and Flagstaff Avenue in the traffic impact fee facilities list should be considered.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 61
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) ANALYSIS
An evaluation of project vehicle miles traveled (VMT) was conducted based on VMT analysis guidelines adopted by the City of Visalia. The guidelines provide “screening thresholds” for identifying whether a land use project should be expected to result in a less than significant transportation impact under CEQA. Projects meeting one or more of these criteria would not be required to undergo a detailed VMT analysis. The project includes both residential and retail uses and is therefore analyzed as a mixed used development for VMT. One of the screening criteria is “Project Location Screening”.
Development projects that are located in a low VMT zone would be expected to generate similar low vehicle miles travelled. Using the City of Visalia online VMT screening application, the project was determined to be located in TAZ 1694. Utilizing the service population metric due to being a mixed-use project, the average VMT was determined to be 20.33 miles. The average VMT per service population for Tulare County is 29.0. Therefore, the project is determined to be in a low VMT zone and the project would be expected to result in a less than significant transportation impact under CEQA.
A printout of the application findings and mapping is included in the appendix.
Traffic Study 646-02
Crandell Tentative Subdivision
Visalia, CA 62
REFERENCES
1. Annual Traffic Census, TCAG
2. Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board
3. California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, 2012 Edition, Federal Highway Administration (FHA)
4. Trip Generation, 10th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
5. Visalia General Plan¸ October 2014
Traffic Study 646-02
4Creeks Tentative Development
Visalia, CA 63
APPENDIX
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 1
Akers St & Ave 320
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Akers St & Ave 320
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.7 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
98 18 26 28 26 46
98 18 26 28 26 46
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
107 20 28 30 28 50
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 126 0 203 116
- - - - 116 -
- - - - 87 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1460 - 786 936
- - - - 909 -
- - - - 936 -
- - -
- - 1460 - 770 936
- - - - 770 -
- - - - 909 -
- - - - 917 -
EB WB NB
0 3.6 9.6
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
868 - - 1460 -
0.09 - - 0.019 -
9.6 - - 7.5 0
A - - A A
0.3 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Akers St & Ave 320
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.7 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
104 19 28 30 28 49
104 19 28 30 28 49
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
113 21 30 33 30 53
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 134 0 216 123
- - - - 123 -
- - - - 93 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1451 - 772 928
- - - - 902 -
- - - - 931 -
- - -
- - 1451 - 756 928
- - - - 756 -
- - - - 902 -
- - - - 911 -
EB WB NB
0 3.6 9.7
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
857 - - 1451 -
0.098 - - 0.021 -
9.7 - - 7.5 0
A - - A A
0.3 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Akers St & Ave 320
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.7 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
105 19 28 31 28 49
105 19 28 31 28 49
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
114 21 30 34 30 53
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 135 0 219 124
- - - - 124 -
- - - - 95 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1449 - 769 927
- - - - 902 -
- - - - 929 -
- - -
- - 1449 - 753 927
- - - - 753 -
- - - - 902 -
- - - - 909 -
EB WB NB
0 3.6 9.7
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
855 - - 1449 -
0.098 - - 0.021 -
9.7 - - 7.5 0
A - - A A
0.3 - - 0.1 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:1
12 11 10
0 2 0
1 0 1 6
2 98 28 5
3 18 26 4
26 0 46
7 8 9
Major Total:171
Minor High Volume:72
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ave 320
(Minor Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:1
12 11 10
0 2 0
1 0 1 6
2 99 29 5
3 18 26 4
26 0 46
7 8 9
Major Total:173
Minor High Volume:72
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ave 320
(Minor Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:1
12 11 10
0 2 0
1 0 1 6
2 104 30 5
3 19 28 4
28 0 49
7 8 9
Major Total:182
Minor High Volume:77
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ave 320
(Minor Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:1
12 11 10
0 2 0
1 0 1 6
2 105 31 5
3 19 28 4
28 0 49
7 8 9
Major Total:184
Minor High Volume:77
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ave 320
(Minor Street)
Akers St
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Akers St & Ave 320
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.7 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
43 18 56 78 21 32
43 18 56 78 21 32
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
47 20 61 85 23 35
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 66 0 264 57
- - - - 57 -
- - - - 207 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1536 - 725 1009
- - - - 966 -
- - - - 828 -
- - -
- - 1536 - 695 1009
- - - - 695 -
- - - - 966 -
- - - - 793 -
EB WB NB
0 3.1 9.5
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
856 - - 1536 -
0.067 - - 0.04 -
9.5 - - 7.4 0
A - - A A
0.2 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Akers St & Ave 320
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.7 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
46 19 59 83 22 34
46 19 59 83 22 34
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
50 21 64 90 24 37
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 71 0 278 60
- - - - 60 -
- - - - 218 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1529 - 712 1005
- - - - 963 -
- - - - 818 -
- - -
- - 1529 - 681 1005
- - - - 681 -
- - - - 963 -
- - - - 782 -
EB WB NB
0 3.1 9.6
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
847 - - 1529 -
0.072 - - 0.042 -
9.6 - - 7.5 0
A - - A A
0.2 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Akers St & Ave 320
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.7 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
46 19 59 85 22 34
46 19 59 85 22 34
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
50 21 64 92 24 37
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 71 0 281 60
- - - - 60 -
- - - - 221 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1529 - 709 1005
- - - - 963 -
- - - - 816 -
- - -
- - 1529 - 678 1005
- - - - 678 -
- - - - 963 -
- - - - 780 -
EB WB NB
0 3.1 9.6
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
845 - - 1529 -
0.072 - - 0.042 -
9.6 - - 7.5 0
A - - A A
0.2 - - 0.1 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:1
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 43 78 5
3 18 56 4
21 1 32
7 8 9
Major Total:195
Minor High Volume:54
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ave 320
(Minor Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:1
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 43 80 5
3 18 56 4
21 1 32
7 8 9
Major Total:197
Minor High Volume:54
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ave 320
(Minor Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:1
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 46 83 5
3 19 59 4
22 1 34
7 8 9
Major Total:207
Minor High Volume:57
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ave 320
(Minor Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:1
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 46 85 5
3 19 59 4
22 1 34
7 8 9
Major Total:209
Minor High Volume:57
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ave 320
(Minor Street)
Akers St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 2
Demaree St & Ave 320
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Demaree St & Ave 320
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.2 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
48 99 25 196 230 25
48 99 25 196 230 25
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
52 108 27 213 250 27
Minor2 Major1 Major2
531 264 277 0 - 0
264 - - - - -
267 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
509 775 1286 - - -
780 - - - - -
778 - - - - -
- - -
497 775 1286 - - -
497 - - - - -
780 - - - - -
759 - - - - -
EB NB SB
12.3 0.9 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1286 - 655 - -
0.021 - 0.244 - -
7.9 0 12.3 - -
A A B - -
0.1 - 1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Demaree St & Ave 320
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.2 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
49 101 26 207 234 25
49 101 26 207 234 25
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
53 110 28 225 254 27
Minor2 Major1 Major2
550 268 282 0 - 0
268 - - - - -
282 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
496 771 1280 - - -
777 - - - - -
766 - - - - -
- - -
484 771 1280 - - -
484 - - - - -
777 - - - - -
747 - - - - -
EB NB SB
12.4 0.9 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1280 - 646 - -
0.022 - 0.252 - -
7.9 0 12.4 - -
A A B - -
0.1 - 1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Demaree St & Ave 320
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.3 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
49 102 27 207 234 25
49 102 27 207 234 25
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
53 111 29 225 254 27
Minor2 Major1 Major2
552 268 282 0 - 0
268 - - - - -
284 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
495 771 1280 - - -
777 - - - - -
764 - - - - -
- - -
482 771 1280 - - -
482 - - - - -
777 - - - - -
744 - - - - -
EB NB SB
12.5 0.9 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1280 - 645 - -
0.023 - 0.254 - -
7.9 0 12.5 - -
A A B - -
0.1 - 1 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:2
12 11 10
25 230 1
1 48 0 6
2 0 1 5
3 99 0 4
25 196 0
7 8 9
Major Total:477
Minor High Volume:147
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Ave 320
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:2
12 11 10
25 230 1
1 48 0 6
2 0 1 5
3 100 0 4
26 196 0
7 8 9
Major Total:478
Minor High Volume:148
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Ave 320
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:2
12 11 10
25 234 1
1 49 0 6
2 0 1 5
3 101 0 4
26 207 0
7 8 9
Major Total:493
Minor High Volume:150
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Ave 320
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:2
12 11 10
25 234 1
1 49 0 6
2 0 1 5
3 102 0 4
27 207 0
7 8 9
Major Total:494
Minor High Volume:151
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Ave 320
(Major Street)
Demaree St
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Demaree St & Ave 320
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.2 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
35 43 58 242 192 80
35 43 58 242 192 80
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
38 47 63 263 209 87
Minor2 Major1 Major2
641 252 296 0 - 0
252 - - - - -
389 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
439 787 1265 - - -
790 - - - - -
685 - - - - -
- - -
414 787 1265 - - -
414 - - - - -
790 - - - - -
645 - - - - -
EB NB SB
12.6 1.5 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1265 - 560 - -
0.05 - 0.151 - -
8 0 12.6 - -
A A B - -
0.2 - 0.5 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Demaree St & Ave 320
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.2 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
36 44 61 255 195 81
36 44 61 255 195 81
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
39 48 66 277 212 88
Minor2 Major1 Major2
666 256 300 0 - 0
256 - - - - -
410 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
425 783 1261 - - -
787 - - - - -
670 - - - - -
- - -
399 783 1261 - - -
399 - - - - -
787 - - - - -
628 - - - - -
EB NB SB
12.8 1.5 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1261 - 546 - -
0.053 - 0.159 - -
8 0 12.8 - -
A A B - -
0.2 - 0.6 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Demaree St & Ave 320
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.3 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
36 44 63 255 195 81
36 44 63 255 195 81
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
39 48 68 277 212 88
Minor2 Major1 Major2
670 256 300 0 - 0
256 - - - - -
414 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
422 783 1261 - - -
787 - - - - -
667 - - - - -
- - -
395 783 1261 - - -
395 - - - - -
787 - - - - -
624 - - - - -
EB NB SB
12.9 1.6 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1261 - 543 - -
0.054 - 0.16 - -
8 0 12.9 - -
A A B - -
0.2 - 0.6 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:2
12 11 10
80 192 0
1 35 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 43 2 4
58 242 1
7 8 9
Major Total:573
Minor High Volume:78
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Ave 320
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:2
12 11 10
80 192 0
1 35 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 43 2 4
60 242 1
7 8 9
Major Total:575
Minor High Volume:78
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Ave 320
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:2
12 11 10
81 195 0
1 36 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 44 2 4
61 255 1
7 8 9
Major Total:593
Minor High Volume:80
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Ave 320
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:2
12 11 10
81 195 0
1 36 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 44 2 4
63 255 1
7 8 9
Major Total:595
Minor High Volume:80
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Ave 320
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 3
Linwood St & Project Road North
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Linwood St & Project Road North
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 0 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB NB
0 0 0
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - 0 -
A - - A -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Linwood St & Project Road North
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 0 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB NB
0 0 0
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - 0 -
A - - A -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Linwood St & Project Road North
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 0 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB NB
0 0 0
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - 0 -
A - - A -
- - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:3
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Project Road North
(Minor Street)
Project Road North
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:3
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Project Road North
(Minor Street)
Project Road North
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:3
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Project Road North
(Minor Street)
Project Road North
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:3
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Project Road North
(Minor Street)
Project Road North
(Major Street)
Linwood St
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Linwood St & Project Road North
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 0 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB NB
0 0 0
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - 0 -
A - - A -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Linwood St & Project Road North
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 0 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB NB
0 0 0
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - 0 -
A - - A -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Linwood St & Project Road North
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 0 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB NB
0 0 0
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - 0 -
A - - A -
- - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:3
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Project Road North
(Minor Street)
Project Road North
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:3
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Project Road North
(Minor Street)
Project Road North
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:3
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Project Road North
(Minor Street)
Project Road North
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:3
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Project Road North
(Minor Street)
Project Road North
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 4
Demaree St & Arlet Ave
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Demaree St & Arlet Ave
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 - 0
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB NB SB
0 0 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - 0 - -
A - A - -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Demaree St & Arlet Ave
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 - 0
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB NB SB
0 0 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - 0 - -
A - A - -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Demaree St & Arlet Ave
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.4 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
1 11 16 0 0 1
1 11 16 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
1 12 17 0 0 1
Minor2 Major1 Major2
36 1 1 0 - 0
1 - - - - -
35 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
977 1084 1622 - - -
1022 - - - - -
987 - - - - -
- - -
967 1084 1622 - - -
967 - - - - -
1022 - - - - -
977 - - - - -
EB NB SB
8.4 7.2 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1622 - 1073 - -
0.011 - 0.012 - -
7.2 0 8.4 - -
A A A - -
0 - 0 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:4
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Arlet Ave (Minor Street)
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:4
12 11 10
1 0 0
1 1 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 11 0 4
16 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:17
Minor High Volume:12
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Arlet Ave
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:4
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Arlet Ave (Minor Street)
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:4
12 11 10
1 0 0
1 1 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 11 0 4
16 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:17
Minor High Volume:12
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Arlet Ave
(Major Street)
Demaree St
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Demaree St & Arlet Ave
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 - 0
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB NB SB
0 0 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - 0 - -
A - A - -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Demaree St & Arlet Ave
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 - 0
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB NB SB
0 0 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - 0 - -
A - A - -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Demaree St & Arlet Ave
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
2 17 5 0 0 0
2 17 5 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
2 18 5 0 0 0
Minor2 Major1 Major2
11 0 0 0 - 0
0 - - - - -
11 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
1009 - - - - -
- - - - - -
1012 - - - - -
- - -
1009 - - - - -
1009 - - - - -
- - - - - -
1012 - - - - -
EB NB SB
0 -
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:4
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Arlet Ave (Minor Street)
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:4
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 2 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 17 0 4
5 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:19
Minor High Volume:5
Demaree St
(Major Street)
Arlet Ave
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:4
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Arlet Ave (Minor Street)
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:4
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 2 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 17 0 4
5 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:19
Minor High Volume:5
Demaree St
(Major Street)
Arlet Ave
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Demaree St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 5
Demaree St & Pratt Rd
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Demaree St & Pratt Rd
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.4 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
26 21 203 86 50 281
26 21 203 86 50 281
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
200 - - 350 - -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
28 23 221 93 54 305
Minor1 Major1 Major2
635 221 0 0 221 0
221 - - - - -
414 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
443 819 - - 1348 -
816 - - - - -
667 - - - - -
- - -
422 819 - - 1348 -
422 - - - - -
816 - - - - -
635 - - - - -
WB NB SB
12 0 1.2
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 422 819 1348 -
- - 0.067 0.028 0.04 -
- - 14.1 9.5 7.8 0
- - B A A A
- - 0.2 0.1 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Demaree St & Pratt Rd
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.4 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
26 21 217 92 53 296
26 21 217 92 53 296
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
200 - - 350 - -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
28 23 236 100 58 322
Minor1 Major1 Major2
673 236 0 0 236 0
236 - - - - -
437 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
421 803 - - 1331 -
803 - - - - -
651 - - - - -
- - -
399 803 - - 1331 -
399 - - - - -
803 - - - - -
616 - - - - -
WB NB SB
12.4 0 1.2
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 399 803 1331 -
- - 0.071 0.028 0.043 -
- - 14.7 9.6 7.8 0
- - B A A A
- - 0.2 0.1 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Demaree St & Pratt Rd
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.5 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
26 25 229 92 56 304
26 25 229 92 56 304
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
200 - - 350 - -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
28 27 249 100 61 330
Minor1 Major1 Major2
701 249 0 0 249 0
249 - - - - -
452 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
405 790 - - 1317 -
792 - - - - -
641 - - - - -
- - -
382 790 - - 1317 -
382 - - - - -
792 - - - - -
604 - - - - -
WB NB SB
12.5 0 1.2
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 382 790 1317 -
- - 0.074 0.034 0.046 -
- - 15.2 9.7 7.9 0
- - C A A A
- - 0.2 0.1 0.1 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:5
12 11 10
0 281 50
1 0 21 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 26 4
0 203 86
7 8 9
Major Total:620
Minor High Volume:47
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:5
12 11 10
0 289 53
1 0 25 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 26 4
0 215 86
7 8 9
Major Total:643
Minor High Volume:51
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:5
12 11 10
0 296 53
1 0 21 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 26 4
0 217 92
7 8 9
Major Total:658
Minor High Volume:47
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:5
12 11 10
0 304 56
1 0 25 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 26 4
0 229 92
7 8 9
Major Total:681
Minor High Volume:51
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Demaree St
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Demaree St & Pratt Rd
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.3 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
47 59 246 28 25 213
47 59 246 28 25 213
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
200 - - 350 - -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
51 64 267 30 27 232
Minor1 Major1 Major2
553 267 0 0 267 0
267 - - - - -
286 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
494 772 - - 1297 -
778 - - - - -
763 - - - - -
- - -
482 772 - - 1297 -
482 - - - - -
778 - - - - -
745 - - - - -
WB NB SB
11.6 0 0.8
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 482 772 1297 -
- - 0.106 0.083 0.021 -
- - 13.4 10.1 7.8 0
- - B B A A
- - 0.4 0.3 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Demaree St & Pratt Rd
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.3 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
48 60 263 30 26 224
48 60 263 30 26 224
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
200 - - 350 - -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
52 65 286 33 28 243
Minor1 Major1 Major2
586 286 0 0 286 0
286 - - - - -
300 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
473 753 - - 1276 -
763 - - - - -
752 - - - - -
- - -
461 753 - - 1276 -
461 - - - - -
763 - - - - -
733 - - - - -
WB NB SB
11.8 0 0.8
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 461 753 1276 -
- - 0.113 0.087 0.022 -
- - 13.8 10.2 7.9 0
- - B B A A
- - 0.4 0.3 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Demaree St & Pratt Rd
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.3 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
48 61 266 30 31 237
48 61 266 30 31 237
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
200 - - 350 - -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
52 66 289 33 34 258
Minor1 Major1 Major2
614 289 0 0 289 0
289 - - - - -
325 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
455 750 - - 1273 -
760 - - - - -
732 - - - - -
- - -
441 750 - - 1273 -
441 - - - - -
760 - - - - -
709 - - - - -
WB NB SB
12.1 0 0.9
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 441 750 1273 -
- - 0.118 0.088 0.026 -
- - 14.3 10.3 7.9 0
- - B B A A
- - 0.4 0.3 0.1 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:5
12 11 10
0 213 25
1 0 59 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 47 4
0 246 28
7 8 9
Major Total:512
Minor High Volume:106
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:5
12 11 10
0 226 30
1 0 60 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 47 4
0 249 28
7 8 9
Major Total:533
Minor High Volume:107
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:5
12 11 10
0 224 26
1 0 60 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 48 4
0 263 30
7 8 9
Major Total:543
Minor High Volume:108
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:5
12 11 10
0 237 31
1 0 61 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 48 4
0 266 30
7 8 9
Major Total:564
Minor High Volume:109
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 6
Country Center St & Pratt Rd
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Country Center St & Pratt Rd
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.1 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
78 13 5 50 9 6
78 13 5 50 9 6
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - 125 - 235 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
85 14 5 54 10 7
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 99 0 157 92
- - - - 92 -
- - - - 65 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1494 - 834 965
- - - - 932 -
- - - - 958 -
- - -
- - 1494 - 831 965
- - - - 831 -
- - - - 932 -
- - - - 955 -
EB WB NB
0 0.7 9.2
A
NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
831 965 - - 1494 -
0.012 0.007 - - 0.004 -
9.4 8.8 - - 7.4 -
A A - - A -
0 0 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Country Center St & Pratt Rd
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.2 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
80 13 5 51 10 7
80 13 5 51 10 7
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - 125 - 235 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
87 14 5 55 11 8
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 101 0 160 94
- - - - 94 -
- - - - 66 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1491 - 831 963
- - - - 930 -
- - - - 957 -
- - -
- - 1491 - 828 963
- - - - 828 -
- - - - 930 -
- - - - 954 -
EB WB NB
0 0.7 9.2
A
NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
828 963 - - 1491 -
0.013 0.008 - - 0.004 -
9.4 8.8 - - 7.4 -
A A - - A -
0 0 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Country Center St & Pratt Rd
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.2 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
82 14 5 54 11 7
82 14 5 54 11 7
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - 125 - 235 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
89 15 5 59 12 8
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 104 0 167 97
- - - - 97 -
- - - - 70 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1488 - 823 959
- - - - 927 -
- - - - 953 -
- - -
- - 1488 - 820 959
- - - - 820 -
- - - - 927 -
- - - - 950 -
EB WB NB
0 0.6 9.2
A
NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
820 959 - - 1488 -
0.015 0.008 - - 0.004 -
9.5 8.8 - - 7.4 -
A A - - A -
0 0 - - 0 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:6
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 78 50 5
3 13 5 4
9 0 6
7 8 9
Major Total:146
Minor High Volume:15
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:6
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 80 53 5
3 14 5 4
10 0 6
7 8 9
Major Total:152
Minor High Volume:16
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:6
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 80 51 5
3 13 5 4
10 0 7
7 8 9
Major Total:149
Minor High Volume:17
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:6
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 82 54 5
3 14 5 4
11 0 7
7 8 9
Major Total:155
Minor High Volume:18
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Country Center St & Pratt Rd
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.3 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
55 10 1 48 15 2
55 10 1 48 15 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - 125 - 235 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
60 11 1 52 16 2
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 71 0 119 65
- - - - 65 -
- - - - 54 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1529 - 877 999
- - - - 958 -
- - - - 969 -
- - -
- - 1529 - 876 999
- - - - 876 -
- - - - 958 -
- - - - 968 -
EB WB NB
0 0.2 9.1
A
NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
876 999 - - 1529 -
0.019 0.002 - - 0.001 -
9.2 8.6 - - 7.4 -
A A - - A -
0.1 0 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Country Center St & Pratt Rd
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.3 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
56 10 1 49 17 2
56 10 1 49 17 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - 125 - 235 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
61 11 1 53 18 2
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 72 0 121 66
- - - - 66 -
- - - - 55 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1528 - 874 998
- - - - 957 -
- - - - 968 -
- - -
- - 1528 - 873 998
- - - - 873 -
- - - - 957 -
- - - - 967 -
EB WB NB
0 0.1 9.1
A
NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
873 998 - - 1528 -
0.021 0.002 - - 0.001 -
9.2 8.6 - - 7.4 -
A A - - A -
0.1 0 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Country Center St & Pratt Rd
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.3 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
59 12 1 50 17 2
59 12 1 50 17 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - 125 - 235 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
64 13 1 54 18 2
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 77 0 128 71
- - - - 71 -
- - - - 57 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1522 - 866 991
- - - - 952 -
- - - - 966 -
- - -
- - 1522 - 865 991
- - - - 865 -
- - - - 952 -
- - - - 965 -
EB WB NB
0 0.1 9.2
A
NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
865 991 - - 1522 -
0.021 0.002 - - 0.001 -
9.3 8.6 - - 7.4 -
A A - - A -
0.1 0 - - 0 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:6
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 55 48 5
3 10 1 4
15 0 2
7 8 9
Major Total:114
Minor High Volume:17
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:6
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 58 49 5
3 12 1 4
15 0 2
7 8 9
Major Total:120
Minor High Volume:17
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:6
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 56 49 5
3 10 1 4
17 0 2
7 8 9
Major Total:116
Minor High Volume:19
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:6
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 59 50 5
3 12 1 4
17 0 2
7 8 9
Major Total:122
Minor High Volume:19
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 7
Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 85 55 0 0 0
0 85 55 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 92 60 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 92 0 212 0
- - - - 120 -
- - - - 92 -
4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22
- - - - 5.52 -
- - - - - -
2.218 - - - 4.0183.318
- - - - 685 -
- - - - 796 -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
EB NB SB
0 0
A
NBL NBT EBL EBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - 0 - 0
- - A - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 86 56 0 0 0
0 86 56 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 93 61 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 93 0 215 0
- - - - 122 -
- - - - 93 -
4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22
- - - - 5.52 -
- - - - - -
2.218 - - - 4.0183.318
- - - - 683 -
- - - - 795 -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
EB NB SB
0 0
A
NBL NBT EBL EBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - 0 - 0
- - A - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 88 59 0 0 0
0 88 59 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 96 64 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 96 0 224 0
- - - - 128 -
- - - - 96 -
4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22
- - - - 5.52 -
- - - - - -
2.218 - - - 4.0183.318
- - - - 675 -
- - - - 790 -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
EB NB SB
0 0
A
NBL NBT EBL EBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - 0 - 0
- - A - A
- - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:7
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 85 0 4
55 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:85
Minor High Volume:55
Mooney Blvd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Mooney Blvd
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:7
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 87 0 4
58 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:87
Minor High Volume:58
Mooney Blvd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Mooney Blvd
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:7
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 86 0 4
56 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:86
Minor High Volume:56
Mooney Blvd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Mooney Blvd
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:7
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 88 0 4
59 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:88
Minor High Volume:59
Mooney Blvd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Mooney Blvd
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 56 48 0 0 0
0 56 48 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 61 52 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 61 0 165 0
- - - - 104 -
- - - - 61 -
4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22
- - - - 5.52 -
- - - - - -
2.218 - - - 4.0183.318
- - - - 728 -
- - - - 809 -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
EB NB SB
0 0
A
NBL NBT EBL EBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - 0 - 0
- - A - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 57 48 0 0 0
0 57 48 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 62 52 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 62 0 166 0
- - - - 104 -
- - - - 62 -
4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22
- - - - 5.52 -
- - - - - -
2.218 - - - 4.0183.318
- - - - 727 -
- - - - 809 -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
EB NB SB
0 0
A
NBL NBT EBL EBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - 0 - 0
- - A - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 60 49 0 0 0
0 60 49 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 65 53 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 65 0 172 0
- - - - 107 -
- - - - 65 -
4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22
- - - - 5.52 -
- - - - - -
2.218 - - - 4.0183.318
- - - - 721 -
- - - - 807 -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
EB NB SB
0 0
A
NBL NBT EBL EBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - 0 - 0
- - A - A
- - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:7
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 56 0 4
48 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:56
Minor High Volume:48
Mooney Blvd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Mooney Blvd
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:7
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 59 0 4
49 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:59
Minor High Volume:49
Mooney Blvd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Mooney Blvd
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:7
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 57 0 4
48 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:57
Minor High Volume:48
Mooney Blvd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Mooney Blvd
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 8
Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 AWSC
8: Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.5 A
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 0 0 0 65 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 0 0 0 65 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 0 71 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
1 1 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 1 1
NB SB WB EB
1 1 1 1
0 0 7.5 7.4
- - A A
NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
0% 0% 0% 0%
100% 100% 100% 100%
0% 0% 0% 0%
Stop Stop Stop Stop
87 0 0 65
0 0 0 0
87 0 0 65
0 0 0 0
95 0 0 71
1 1 1 1
0.105 0 0 0.079
3.986 4.218 4.218 4.004
Yes Yes Yes Yes
901 0 0 897
2 2.288 2.288 2.021
0.105 0 0 0.079
7.5 7.3 7.3 7.4
A N N A
0.4 0 0 0.3
HCM 2010 AWSC
8: Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.5 A
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 0 0 0 69 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 0 0 0 69 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 75 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
1 1 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 1 1
NB SB WB EB
1 1 1 1
0 0 7.5 7.4
- - A A
NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
0% 0% 0% 0%
100% 100% 100% 100%
0% 0% 0% 0%
Stop Stop Stop Stop
92 0 0 69
0 0 0 0
92 0 0 69
0 0 0 0
100 0 0 75
1 1 1 1
0.111 0 0 0.084
3.99 4.235 4.235 4.008
Yes Yes Yes Yes
901 0 0 896
2.004 2.309 2.309 2.026
0.111 0 0 0.084
7.5 7.3 7.3 7.4
A N N A
0.4 0 0 0.3
HCM 2010 AWSC
8: Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.5 A
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 0 0 0 69 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 0 0 0 69 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 75 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
1 1 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 1 1
NB SB WB EB
1 1 1 1
0 0 7.5 7.4
- - A A
NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
0% 0% 0% 0%
100% 100% 100% 100%
0% 0% 0% 0%
Stop Stop Stop Stop
92 0 0 69
0 0 0 0
92 0 0 69
0 0 0 0
100 0 0 75
1 1 1 1
0.111 0 0 0.084
3.99 4.235 4.235 4.008
Yes Yes Yes Yes
901 0 0 896
2.004 2.309 2.309 2.026
0.111 0 0 0.084
7.5 7.3 7.3 7.4
A N N A
0.4 0 0 0.3
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:8
12 11 10
0 65 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 87 0
7 8 9
Major Total:152
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Akers St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:8
12 11 10
0 65 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 87 0
7 8 9
Major Total:152
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Akers St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:8
12 11 10
0 69 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 92 0
7 8 9
Major Total:161
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Akers St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:8
12 11 10
0 69 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 92 0
7 8 9
Major Total:161
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Akers St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Akers St
HCM 2010 AWSC
8: Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.7 A
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 95 1 0 1 116 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 95 1 0 1 116 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 103 1 0 1 126 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
1 1 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 1 1
NB SB WB EB
1 1 1 1
0 0 7.6 7.7
- - A A
NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
1% 0% 0% 1%
98% 100% 100% 99%
1% 0% 0% 0%
Stop Stop Stop Stop
97 0 0 117
1 0 0 1
95 0 0 116
1 0 0 0
105 0 0 127
1 1 1 1
0.118 0 0 0.142
4.024 4.331 4.331 4.014
Yes Yes Yes Yes
891 0 0 894
2.048 2.43 2.43 2.034
0.118 0 0 0.142
7.6 7.4 7.4 7.7
A N N A
0.4 0 0 0.5
HCM 2010 AWSC
8: Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.7 A
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 101 1 0 1 123 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 101 1 0 1 123 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 110 1 0 1 134 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
1 1 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 1 1
NB SB WB EB
1 1 1 1
0 0 7.6 7.8
- - A A
NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
1% 0% 0% 1%
98% 100% 100% 99%
1% 0% 0% 0%
Stop Stop Stop Stop
103 0 0 124
1 0 0 1
101 0 0 123
1 0 0 0
112 0 0 135
1 1 1 1
0.125 0 0 0.15
4.03 4.458 4.458 4.019
Yes Yes Yes Yes
889 0 0 894
2.055 2.458 2.458 2.04
0.126 0 0 0.151
7.6 7.5 7.5 7.8
A N N A
0.4 0 0 0.5
HCM 2010 AWSC
8: Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.7 A
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 101 1 0 1 123 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 101 1 0 1 123 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 110 1 0 1 134 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
1 1 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 1 1
NB SB WB EB
1 1 1 1
0 0 7.6 7.8
- - A A
NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
1% 0% 0% 1%
98% 100% 100% 99%
1% 0% 0% 0%
Stop Stop Stop Stop
103 0 0 124
1 0 0 1
101 0 0 123
1 0 0 0
112 0 0 135
1 1 1 1
0.125 0 0 0.15
4.03 4.458 4.458 4.019
Yes Yes Yes Yes
889 0 0 894
2.055 2.458 2.458 2.04
0.126 0 0 0.151
7.6 7.5 7.5 7.8
A N N A
0.4 0 0 0.5
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:8
12 11 10
0 116 1
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
1 95 1
7 8 9
Major Total:214
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Akers St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:8
12 11 10
0 116 1
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
1 95 1
7 8 9
Major Total:214
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Akers St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:8
12 11 10
0 123 1
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
1 101 1
7 8 9
Major Total:227
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Akers St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:8
12 11 10
0 123 1
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
1 101 1
7 8 9
Major Total:227
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Akers St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Akers St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 9
Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
9: Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
3.5184.0183.318 3.5184.0183.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 0 0 0
A A
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 0 - -
A - - A A A - -
- - - - - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
9: Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
3.5184.0183.318 3.5184.0183.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 0 0 0
A A
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 0 - -
A - - A A A - -
- - - - - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
9: Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
3.5184.0183.318 3.5184.0183.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 0 0 0
A A
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 0 - -
A - - A A A - -
- - - - - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:9
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:9
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:9
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:9
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Linwood St
HCM 2010 TWSC
9: Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
3.5184.0183.318 3.5184.0183.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 0 0 0
A A
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 0 - -
A - - A A A - -
- - - - - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
9: Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
3.5184.0183.318 3.5184.0183.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 0 0 0
A A
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 0 - -
A - - A A A - -
- - - - - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
9: Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
3.5184.0183.318 3.5184.0183.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 0 0 0
A A
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 0 - -
A - - A A A - -
- - - - - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:9
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:9
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:9
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:9
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 10
N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
4.6 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 1 1 4 7 0
0 1 1 4 7 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 4 8 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
5 0 - 0 4 3
- - - - 3 -
- - - - 1 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1616 - - - 1018 1081
- - - - 1020 -
- - - - 1022 -
- - -
1616 - - - 1018 1081
- - - - 1018 -
- - - - 1020 -
- - - - 1022 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.6
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1616 - - - 1018
- - - - 0.007
0 - - - 8.6
A - - - A
0 - - - 0
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
4.6 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 1 1 4 7 0
0 1 1 4 7 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 4 8 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
5 0 - 0 4 3
- - - - 3 -
- - - - 1 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1616 - - - 1018 1081
- - - - 1020 -
- - - - 1022 -
- - -
1616 - - - 1018 1081
- - - - 1018 -
- - - - 1020 -
- - - - 1022 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.6
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1616 - - - 1018
- - - - 0.007
0 - - - 8.6
A - - - A
0 - - - 0
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.5 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 1 1 28 20 0
0 1 1 28 20 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 30 22 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
32 0 - 0 17 16
- - - - 16 -
- - - - 1 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1580 - - - 1001 1063
- - - - 1007 -
- - - - 1022 -
- - -
1580 - - - 1001 1063
- - - - 1001 -
- - - - 1007 -
- - - - 1022 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.7
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1580 - - - 1001
- - - - 0.022
0 - - - 8.7
A - - - A
0 - - - 0.1
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:10
12 11 10
0 0 7
1 0 4 6
2 1 1 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:7
Minor High Volume:5
(Major Street)
N Chinowth St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:10
12 11 10
0 0 20
1 0 28 6
2 1 1 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:30
Minor High Volume:20
(Minor Street)
N Chinowth St
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:10
12 11 10
0 0 7
1 0 4 6
2 1 1 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:7
Minor High Volume:5
(Major Street)
N Chinowth St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:10
12 11 10
0 0 20
1 0 28 6
2 1 1 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:30
Minor High Volume:20
(Minor Street)
N Chinowth St
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
4.7 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 1 1 2 4 1
0 1 1 2 4 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 2 4 1
Major1 Major2 Minor2
3 0 - 0 3 2
- - - - 2 -
- - - - 1 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1619 - - - 1019 1082
- - - - 1021 -
- - - - 1022 -
- - -
1619 - - - 1019 1082
- - - - 1019 -
- - - - 1021 -
- - - - 1022 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.5
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1619 - - - 1031
- - - - 0.005
0 - - - 8.5
A - - - A
0 - - - 0
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
4.7 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 1 1 2 4 1
0 1 1 2 4 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 2 4 1
Major1 Major2 Minor2
3 0 - 0 3 2
- - - - 2 -
- - - - 1 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1619 - - - 1019 1082
- - - - 1021 -
- - - - 1022 -
- - -
1619 - - - 1019 1082
- - - - 1019 -
- - - - 1021 -
- - - - 1022 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.5
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1619 - - - 1031
- - - - 0.005
0 - - - 8.5
A - - - A
0 - - - 0
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
6 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 1 1 9 24 1
0 1 1 9 24 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 10 26 1
Major1 Major2 Minor2
11 0 - 0 7 6
- - - - 6 -
- - - - 1 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1608 - - - 1014 1077
- - - - 1017 -
- - - - 1022 -
- - -
1608 - - - 1014 1077
- - - - 1014 -
- - - - 1017 -
- - - - 1022 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.6
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1608 - - - 1016
- - - - 0.027
0 - - - 8.6
A - - - A
0 - - - 0.1
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:10
12 11 10
1 0 4
1 0 2 6
2 1 1 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:5
Minor High Volume:3
(Major Street)
N Chinowth St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:10
12 11 10
1 0 24
1 0 9 6
2 1 1 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:25
Minor High Volume:10
(Major Street)
N Chinowth St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:10
12 11 10
1 0 4
1 0 2 6
2 1 1 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:5
Minor High Volume:3
(Major Street)
N Chinowth St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:10
12 11 10
1 0 24
1 0 9 6
2 1 1 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:25
Minor High Volume:10
(Major Street)
N Chinowth St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 11
Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 - 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB SB
0 0 0
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - - 0
A - - - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 - 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB SB
0 0 0
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - - 0
A - - - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 13 24 11 6 0
0 13 24 11 6 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 14 26 12 7 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
38 0 - 0 46 32
- - - - 32 -
- - - - 14 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1572 - - - 964 1042
- - - - 991 -
- - - - 1009 -
- - -
1572 - - - 964 1042
- - - - 964 -
- - - - 991 -
- - - - 1009 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.8
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1572 - - - 964
- - - - 0.007
0 - - - 8.8
A - - - A
0 - - - 0
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:11
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Coburn Ave
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:11
12 11 10
0 0 6
1 0 11 6
2 13 24 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:48
Minor High Volume:6
(Minor Street)
Coburn Ave
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:11
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Coburn Ave
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:11
12 11 10
0 0 6
1 0 11 6
2 13 24 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:48
Minor High Volume:6
(Minor Street)
Coburn Ave
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 - 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB SB
0 0 0
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - - 0
A - - - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 - 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB SB
0 0 0
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - - 0
A - - - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 20 7 3 9 0
0 20 7 3 9 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 22 8 3 10 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
11 0 - 0 31 9
- - - - 9 -
- - - - 22 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1608 - - - 983 1073
- - - - 1014 -
- - - - 1001 -
- - -
1608 - - - 983 1073
- - - - 983 -
- - - - 1014 -
- - - - 1001 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.7
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1608 - - - 983
- - - - 0.01
0 - - - 8.7
A - - - A
0 - - - 0
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:11
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Coburn Ave
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:11
12 11 10
0 0 9
1 0 3 6
2 20 7 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:30
Minor High Volume:9
(Minor Street)
Coburn Ave
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:11
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Coburn Ave
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:11
12 11 10
0 0 9
1 0 3 6
2 20 7 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:30
Minor High Volume:9
(Minor Street)
Coburn Ave
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 12
Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.9 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
5 18 30 245 259 4
5 18 30 245 259 4
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - 175 - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
5 20 33 266 282 4
Minor2 Major1 Major2
482 284 286 0 - 0
284 - - - - -
198 - - - - -
6.63 6.23 4.12 - - -
5.43 - - - - -
5.83 - - - - -
3.519 3.319 2.218 - - -
528 754 1276 - - -
763 - - - - -
817 - - - - -
- - -
514 754 1276 - - -
514 - - - - -
763 - - - - -
796 - - - - -
EB NB SB
10.5 0.9 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1276 - 685 - -
0.026 - 0.036 - -
7.9 - 10.5 - -
A - B - -
0.1 - 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.9 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
5 19 32 265 277 4
5 19 32 265 277 4
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - 175 - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
5 21 35 288 301 4
Minor2 Major1 Major2
517 303 305 0 - 0
303 - - - - -
214 - - - - -
6.63 6.23 4.12 - - -
5.43 - - - - -
5.83 - - - - -
3.519 3.319 2.218 - - -
503 736 1256 - - -
748 - - - - -
802 - - - - -
- - -
489 736 1256 - - -
489 - - - - -
748 - - - - -
780 - - - - -
EB NB SB
10.6 0.9 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1256 - 666 - -
0.028 - 0.039 - -
7.9 - 10.6 - -
A - B - -
0.1 - 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.5 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
5 38 67 277 285 4
5 38 67 277 285 4
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - 175 - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
5 41 73 301 310 4
Minor2 Major1 Major2
608 312 314 0 - 0
312 - - - - -
296 - - - - -
6.63 6.23 4.12 - - -
5.43 - - - - -
5.83 - - - - -
3.519 3.319 2.218 - - -
443 727 1246 - - -
741 - - - - -
729 - - - - -
- - -
417 727 1246 - - -
417 - - - - -
741 - - - - -
686 - - - - -
EB NB SB
10.8 1.6 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1246 - 669 - -
0.058 - 0.07 - -
8.1 - 10.8 - -
A - B - -
0.2 - 0.2 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:12
12 11 10
4 259 0
1 5 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 18 0 4
30 245 0
7 8 9
Major Total:538
Minor High Volume:23
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:12
12 11 10
4 267 0
1 5 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 37 0 4
65 257 0
7 8 9
Major Total:593
Minor High Volume:42
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:12
12 11 10
4 277 0
1 5 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 19 0 4
32 265 0
7 8 9
Major Total:578
Minor High Volume:24
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:12
12 11 10
4 285 0
1 5 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 38 0 4
67 277 0
7 8 9
Major Total:633
Minor High Volume:43
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.7 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
4 25 3 246 180 2
4 25 3 246 180 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - 175 - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
4 27 3 267 196 2
Minor2 Major1 Major2
337 197 198 0 - 0
197 - - - - -
140 - - - - -
6.63 6.23 4.12 - - -
5.43 - - - - -
5.83 - - - - -
3.519 3.319 2.218 - - -
646 843 1375 - - -
836 - - - - -
873 - - - - -
- - -
645 843 1375 - - -
645 - - - - -
836 - - - - -
871 - - - - -
EB NB SB
9.6 0.1 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1375 - 809 - -
0.002 - 0.039 - -
7.6 - 9.6 - -
A - A - -
0 - 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.7 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
4 27 3 266 193 2
4 27 3 266 193 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - 175 - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
4 29 3 289 210 2
Minor2 Major1 Major2
362 211 212 0 - 0
211 - - - - -
151 - - - - -
6.63 6.23 4.12 - - -
5.43 - - - - -
5.83 - - - - -
3.519 3.319 2.218 - - -
624 828 1358 - - -
824 - - - - -
862 - - - - -
- - -
623 828 1358 - - -
623 - - - - -
824 - - - - -
860 - - - - -
EB NB SB
9.7 0.1 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1358 - 794 - -
0.002 - 0.042 - -
7.7 - 9.7 - -
A - A - -
0 - 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.3 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
4 56 13 269 206 2
4 56 13 269 206 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - 175 - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
4 61 14 292 224 2
Minor2 Major1 Major2
399 225 226 0 - 0
225 - - - - -
174 - - - - -
6.63 6.23 4.12 - - -
5.43 - - - - -
5.83 - - - - -
3.519 3.319 2.218 - - -
593 814 1342 - - -
812 - - - - -
839 - - - - -
- - -
587 814 1342 - - -
587 - - - - -
812 - - - - -
830 - - - - -
EB NB SB
9.9 0.4 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1342 - 794 - -
0.011 - 0.082 - -
7.7 - 9.9 - -
A - A - -
0 - 0.3 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:12
12 11 10
2 180 0
1 4 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 25 0 4
3 246 0
7 8 9
Major Total:431
Minor High Volume:29
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:12
12 11 10
2 193 0
1 4 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 54 0 4
13 249 0
7 8 9
Major Total:457
Minor High Volume:58
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:12
12 11 10
2 193 0
1 4 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 27 0 4
3 266 0
7 8 9
Major Total:464
Minor High Volume:31
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:12
12 11 10
2 206 0
1 4 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 56 0 4
13 269 0
7 8 9
Major Total:490
Minor High Volume:60
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 13
Demaree St & Shannon Pkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
13: Demaree St & Shannon Pkwy
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.8 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
88 5 304 129 13 332
88 5 304 129 13 332
5 5 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 0 - - 105 -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
96 5 330 140 14 361
Minor1 Major1 Major2
615 240 0 0 476 0
406 - - - - -
209 - - - - -
6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
5.84 - - - - -
5.84 - - - - -
3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
423 761 - - 1082 -
641 - - - - -
806 - - - - -
- - -
416 758 - - 1082 -
416 - - - - -
638 - - - - -
796 - - - - -
WB NB SB
15.9 0 0.3
C
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 416 758 1082 -
- - 0.23 0.007 0.013 -
- - 16.2 9.8 8.4 -
- - C A A -
- - 0.9 0 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
13: Demaree St & Shannon Pkwy
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.9 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
91 5 339 144 14 359
91 5 339 144 14 359
5 5 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 0 - - 105 -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
99 5 368 157 15 390
Minor1 Major1 Major2
678 268 0 0 530 0
452 - - - - -
226 - - - - -
6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
5.84 - - - - -
5.84 - - - - -
3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
386 730 - - 1033 -
608 - - - - -
790 - - - - -
- - -
379 727 - - 1033 -
379 - - - - -
605 - - - - -
779 - - - - -
WB NB SB
17.4 0 0.3
C
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 379 727 1033 -
- - 0.261 0.007 0.015 -
- - 17.8 10 8.5 -
- - C B A -
- - 1 0 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
13: Demaree St & Shannon Pkwy
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.9 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
91 9 382 144 16 384
91 9 382 144 16 384
5 5 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 0 - - 105 -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
99 10 415 157 17 417
Minor1 Major1 Major2
741 291 0 0 577 0
498 - - - - -
243 - - - - -
6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
5.84 - - - - -
5.84 - - - - -
3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
352 706 - - 993 -
576 - - - - -
775 - - - - -
- - -
345 703 - - 993 -
345 - - - - -
574 - - - - -
762 - - - - -
WB NB SB
18.8 0 0.3
C
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 345 703 993 -
- - 0.287 0.014 0.018 -
- - 19.6 10.2 8.7 -
- - C B A -
- - 1.2 0 0.1 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:13
12 11 10
0 332 13
1 0 5 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 88 4
1 304 129
7 8 9
Major Total:779
Minor High Volume:93
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:13
12 11 10
0 357 15
1 0 9 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 88 4
1 347 129
7 8 9
Major Total:849
Minor High Volume:97
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:13
12 11 10
0 359 14
1 0 5 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 91 4
1 339 144
7 8 9
Major Total:857
Minor High Volume:96
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:13
12 11 10
0 384 16
1 0 9 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 91 4
1 382 144
7 8 9
Major Total:927
Minor High Volume:100
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
HCM 2010 TWSC
13: Demaree St & Shannon Pkwy
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.6 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
117 21 253 53 8 283
117 21 253 53 8 283
5 5 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 0 - - 105 -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
127 23 275 58 9 308
Minor1 Major1 Major2
480 171 0 0 338 0
309 - - - - -
171 - - - - -
6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
5.84 - - - - -
5.84 - - - - -
3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
515 843 - - 1218 -
718 - - - - -
842 - - - - -
- - -
509 839 - - 1218 -
509 - - - - -
715 - - - - -
836 - - - - -
WB NB SB
13.6 0 0.2
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 509 839 1218 -
- - 0.25 0.027 0.007 -
- - 14.4 9.4 8 -
- - B A A -
- - 1 0.1 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
13: Demaree St & Shannon Pkwy
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.7 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
121 22 282 59 9 306
121 22 282 59 9 306
5 5 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 0 - - 105 -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
132 24 307 64 10 333
Minor1 Major1 Major2
530 190 0 0 376 0
344 - - - - -
186 - - - - -
6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
5.84 - - - - -
5.84 - - - - -
3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
479 820 - - 1179 -
689 - - - - -
827 - - - - -
- - -
473 817 - - 1179 -
473 - - - - -
686 - - - - -
820 - - - - -
WB NB SB
14.6 0 0.2
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 473 817 1179 -
- - 0.278 0.029 0.008 -
- - 15.5 9.5 8.1 -
- - C A A -
- - 1.1 0.1 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
13: Demaree St & Shannon Pkwy
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.7 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
121 23 295 59 12 344
121 23 295 59 12 344
5 5 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 0 - - 105 -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
132 25 321 64 13 374
Minor1 Major1 Major2
571 197 0 0 390 0
358 - - - - -
213 - - - - -
6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
5.84 - - - - -
5.84 - - - - -
3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
451 811 - - 1165 -
678 - - - - -
802 - - - - -
- - -
444 808 - - 1165 -
444 - - - - -
675 - - - - -
793 - - - - -
WB NB SB
15.4 0 0.3
C
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 444 808 1165 -
- - 0.296 0.031 0.011 -
- - 16.5 9.6 8.1 -
- - C A A -
- - 1.2 0.1 0 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:13
12 11 10
0 283 8
1 0 21 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 117 4
0 253 53
7 8 9
Major Total:597
Minor High Volume:138
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:13
12 11 10
0 321 11
1 0 22 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 117 4
0 266 53
7 8 9
Major Total:651
Minor High Volume:139
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:13
12 11 10
0 306 9
1 0 22 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 121 4
0 282 59
7 8 9
Major Total:656
Minor High Volume:143
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:13
12 11 10
0 344 12
1 0 23 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 121 4
0 295 59
7 8 9
Major Total:710
Minor High Volume:144
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 14
Country Center St & Shannon Pkwy
HCM 2010 Roundabout
14: Country Center St & Shannon Pkwy
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Approach
Entry Lanes
Conflicting Circle Lanes
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
Follow-Up Headway, s
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
Ped Cap Adj
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Lane
Designated Moves
Assumed Moves
RT Channelized
Lane Util
Critical Headway, s
Entry Flow, veh/h
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
Entry HV Adj Factor
Flow Entry, veh/h
Cap Entry, veh/h
V/C Ratio
Control Delay, s/veh
LOS
95th %tile Queue, veh
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
4.2 A
EB WB NB SB
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
95 92 96 42
97 93 98 42
45 56 75 91
88 117 66 58
3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
5 5 5 5
0.999 0.999 0.999 0.999
4.2 4.2 4.3 3.9
A A A A
Left Left Left Left
LTR LTR LTR LTR
LTR LTR LTR LTR
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
97 93 98 42
1080 1068 1048 1032
0.976 0.986 0.981 0.989
95 92 96 42
1054 1053 1028 1020
0.090 0.087 0.094 0.041
4.2 4.2 4.3 3.9
A A A A
0 0 0 0
HCM 2010 Roundabout
14: Country Center St & Shannon Pkwy
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Approach
Entry Lanes
Conflicting Circle Lanes
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
Follow-Up Headway, s
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
Ped Cap Adj
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Lane
Designated Moves
Assumed Moves
RT Channelized
Lane Util
Critical Headway, s
Entry Flow, veh/h
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
Entry HV Adj Factor
Flow Entry, veh/h
Cap Entry, veh/h
V/C Ratio
Control Delay, s/veh
LOS
95th %tile Queue, veh
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
4.3 A
EB WB NB SB
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
98 93 110 45
100 94 112 46
47 64 77 93
91 125 70 65
3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
5 5 5 5
0.999 0.999 0.999 0.999
4.2 4.2 4.5 3.9
A A A A
Left Left Left Left
LTR LTR LTR LTR
LTR LTR LTR LTR
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
100 94 112 46
1078 1060 1046 1030
0.977 0.986 0.982 0.989
98 93 110 45
1052 1045 1027 1017
0.093 0.089 0.107 0.045
4.2 4.2 4.5 3.9
A A A A
0 0 0 0
HCM 2010 Roundabout
14: Country Center St & Shannon Pkwy
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Approach
Entry Lanes
Conflicting Circle Lanes
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
Follow-Up Headway, s
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
Ped Cap Adj
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Lane
Designated Moves
Assumed Moves
RT Channelized
Lane Util
Critical Headway, s
Entry Flow, veh/h
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
Entry HV Adj Factor
Flow Entry, veh/h
Cap Entry, veh/h
V/C Ratio
Control Delay, s/veh
LOS
95th %tile Queue, veh
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
4.3 A
EB WB NB SB
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
98 93 110 45
100 94 112 46
47 64 77 93
91 125 70 65
3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
5 5 5 5
0.999 0.999 0.999 0.999
4.2 4.2 4.5 3.9
A A A A
Left Left Left Left
LTR LTR LTR LTR
LTR LTR LTR LTR
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
100 94 112 46
1078 1060 1046 1030
0.977 0.986 0.982 0.989
98 93 110 45
1052 1045 1027 1017
0.093 0.089 0.107 0.045
4.2 4.2 4.5 3.9
A A A A
0 0 0 0
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:14
12 11 10
14 21 4
1 5 9 6
2 60 59 5
3 23 17 4
7 39 42
7 8 9
Major Total:173
Minor High Volume:88
Country Center St
(Major Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:14
12 11 10
14 21 4
1 5 9 6
2 60 59 5
3 23 17 4
7 39 42
7 8 9
Major Total:173
Minor High Volume:88
Country Center St
(Major Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:14
12 11 10
15 23 4
1 5 9 6
2 62 60 5
3 24 17 4
8 45 48
7 8 9
Major Total:177
Minor High Volume:101
Country Center St
(Major Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:14
12 11 10
15 23 4
1 5 9 6
2 62 60 5
3 24 17 4
8 45 48
7 8 9
Major Total:177
Minor High Volume:101
Country Center St
(Major Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Pkwy
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
HCM 2010 Roundabout
14: Country Center St & Shannon Pkwy
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Approach
Entry Lanes
Conflicting Circle Lanes
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
Follow-Up Headway, s
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
Ped Cap Adj
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Lane
Designated Moves
Assumed Moves
RT Channelized
Lane Util
Critical Headway, s
Entry Flow, veh/h
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
Entry HV Adj Factor
Flow Entry, veh/h
Cap Entry, veh/h
V/C Ratio
Control Delay, s/veh
LOS
95th %tile Queue, veh
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.7 A
EB WB NB SB
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
44 41 40 56
45 42 40 57
44 27 32 48
61 45 57 21
3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
5 5 5 5
0.999 0.999 0.999 0.999
3.7 3.6 3.6 3.8
A A A A
Left Left Left Left
LTR LTR LTR LTR
LTR LTR LTR LTR
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
45 42 40 57
1081 1100 1094 1077
0.987 0.986 0.991 0.989
44 41 40 56
1067 1083 1084 1064
0.042 0.038 0.037 0.053
3.7 3.6 3.6 3.8
A A A A
0 0 0 0
HCM 2010 Roundabout
14: Country Center St & Shannon Pkwy
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Approach
Entry Lanes
Conflicting Circle Lanes
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
Follow-Up Headway, s
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
Ped Cap Adj
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Lane
Designated Moves
Assumed Moves
RT Channelized
Lane Util
Critical Headway, s
Entry Flow, veh/h
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
Entry HV Adj Factor
Flow Entry, veh/h
Cap Entry, veh/h
V/C Ratio
Control Delay, s/veh
LOS
95th %tile Queue, veh
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.8 A
EB WB NB SB
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
45 41 46 61
46 42 46 62
47 31 33 49
64 48 60 24
3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
5 5 5 5
0.999 0.999 0.999 0.999
3.7 3.7 3.7 3.9
A A A A
Left Left Left Left
LTR LTR LTR LTR
LTR LTR LTR LTR
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
46 42 46 62
1078 1095 1093 1076
0.987 0.986 0.991 0.989
45 41 46 61
1064 1079 1083 1063
0.043 0.038 0.042 0.058
3.7 3.7 3.7 3.9
A A A A
0 0 0 0
HCM 2010 Roundabout
14: Country Center St & Shannon Pkwy
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Approach
Entry Lanes
Conflicting Circle Lanes
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
Follow-Up Headway, s
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
Ped Cap Adj
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Lane
Designated Moves
Assumed Moves
RT Channelized
Lane Util
Critical Headway, s
Entry Flow, veh/h
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
Entry HV Adj Factor
Flow Entry, veh/h
Cap Entry, veh/h
V/C Ratio
Control Delay, s/veh
LOS
95th %tile Queue, veh
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.8 A
EB WB NB SB
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
45 41 46 61
46 42 46 62
47 31 33 49
64 48 60 24
3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
5 5 5 5
0.999 0.999 0.999 0.999
3.7 3.7 3.7 3.9
A A A A
Left Left Left Left
LTR LTR LTR LTR
LTR LTR LTR LTR
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
46 42 46 62
1078 1095 1093 1076
0.987 0.986 0.991 0.989
45 41 46 61
1064 1079 1083 1063
0.043 0.038 0.042 0.058
3.7 3.7 3.7 3.9
A A A A
0 0 0 0
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:14
12 11 10
20 29 2
1 1 2 6
2 26 28 5
3 14 8 4
7 17 13
7 8 9
Major Total:88
Minor High Volume:41
(Major Street)
Country Center St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Pkwy
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:14
12 11 10
20 29 2
1 1 2 6
2 26 28 5
3 14 8 4
7 17 13
7 8 9
Major Total:88
Minor High Volume:41
(Major Street)
Country Center St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Pkwy
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:14
12 11 10
22 32 2
1 1 2 6
2 27 28 5
3 14 8 4
8 19 15
7 8 9
Major Total:98
Minor High Volume:42
(Major Street)
Country Center St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Pkwy
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:14
12 11 10
22 32 2
1 1 2 6
2 27 28 5
3 14 8 4
8 19 15
7 8 9
Major Total:98
Minor High Volume:42
(Major Street)
Country Center St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Pkwy
Shannon Pkwy
(Major Street)
Country Center St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 15
Demaree St & Flagstaff Ave
HCM 2010 TWSC
15: Demaree St & Flagstaff Ave
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.4 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 33 0 20 3 419 25 35 394 0
0 0 0 33 0 20 3 419 25 35 394 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 36 0 22 3 455 27 38 428 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
738 993 214 766 980 241 428 0 0 483 0 0
504 504 - 476 476 - - - - - - -
234 489 - 290 504 - - - - - - -
7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
306 244 791 292 248 760 1128 - - 1076 - -
518 539 - 539 555 - - - - - - -
748 548 - 694 539 - - - - - - -
- - - -
286 232 791 281 236 760 1128 - - 1076 - -
286 232 - 281 236 - - - - - - -
516 514 - 537 553 - - - - - - -
724 546 - 662 514 - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 16.6 0.1 0.9
A C
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
1128 - - - 369 1076 - -
0.003 - - - 0.156 0.035 - -
8.2 0 - 0 16.6 8.5 0.2 -
A A - A C A A -
0 - - - 0.5 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
15: Demaree St & Flagstaff Ave
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.5 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 35 0 21 3 445 27 37 418 0
0 0 0 35 0 21 3 445 27 37 418 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 38 0 23 3 484 29 40 454 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
783 1055 227 813 1040 257 454 0 0 513 0 0
535 535 - 505 505 - - - - - - -
248 520 - 308 535 - - - - - - -
7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
284 224 776 270 229 742 1103 - - 1049 - -
497 522 - 518 539 - - - - - - -
734 530 - 677 522 - - - - - - -
- - - -
264 212 776 259 216 742 1103 - - 1049 - -
264 212 - 259 216 - - - - - - -
495 495 - 516 537 - - - - - - -
709 528 - 642 495 - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 17.7 0.1 0.9
A C
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
1103 - - - 343 1049 - -
0.003 - - - 0.177 0.038 - -
8.3 0 - 0 17.7 8.6 0.2 -
A A - A C A A -
0 - - - 0.6 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
15: Demaree St & Flagstaff Ave
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.4 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 35 0 21 3 488 27 37 443 0
0 0 0 35 0 21 3 488 27 37 443 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 38 0 23 3 530 29 40 482 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
834 1128 241 873 1114 280 482 0 0 560 0 0
562 562 - 552 552 - - - - - - -
272 566 - 321 562 - - - - - - -
7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
261 203 760 244 207 717 1077 - - 1007 - -
479 508 - 486 513 - - - - - - -
711 506 - 665 508 - - - - - - -
- - - -
242 191 760 233 195 717 1077 - - 1007 - -
242 191 - 233 195 - - - - - - -
477 481 - 484 511 - - - - - - -
686 504 - 629 481 - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 19.3 0 0.9
A C
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
1077 - - - 312 1007 - -
0.003 - - - 0.195 0.04 - -
8.4 0 - 0 19.3 8.7 0.2 -
A A - A C A A -
0 - - - 0.7 0.1 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:15
12 11 10
0 394 35
1 0 20 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 33 4
3 419 25
7 8 9
Major Total:876
Minor High Volume:53
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Flagstaff Ave
(Minor Street)
Flagstaff Ave
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:15
12 11 10
0 419 35
1 0 20 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 33 4
3 462 25
7 8 9
Major Total:944
Minor High Volume:53
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Flagstaff Ave
(Minor Street)
Flagstaff Ave
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:15
12 11 10
0 418 37
1 0 21 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 35 4
3 445 27
7 8 9
Major Total:930
Minor High Volume:56
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Flagstaff Ave
(Minor Street)
Flagstaff Ave
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:15
12 11 10
0 443 37
1 0 21 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 35 4
3 488 27
7 8 9
Major Total:998
Minor High Volume:56
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Flagstaff Ave
(Minor Street)
Flagstaff Ave
(Major Street)
Demaree St
HCM 2010 TWSC
15: Demaree St & Flagstaff Ave
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.9 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 17 0 16 4 378 25 18 301 0
0 0 0 17 0 16 4 378 25 18 301 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 18 0 17 4 411 27 20 327 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
580 813 164 636 799 219 327 0 0 438 0 0
366 366 - 433 433 - - - - - - -
214 447 - 203 366 - - - - - - -
7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
398 311 852 363 317 785 1229 - - 1118 - -
626 621 - 571 580 - - - - - - -
768 572 - 780 621 - - - - - - -
- - - -
381 303 852 356 309 785 1229 - - 1118 - -
381 303 - 356 309 - - - - - - -
623 607 - 569 578 - - - - - - -
748 570 - 763 607 - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 13 0.1 0.6
A B
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
1229 - - - 484 1118 - -
0.004 - - - 0.074 0.018 - -
7.9 0 - 0 13 8.3 0.1 -
A A - A B A A -
0 - - - 0.2 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
15: Demaree St & Flagstaff Ave
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.9 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 18 0 17 4 401 27 19 319 0
0 0 0 18 0 17 4 401 27 19 319 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 20 0 18 4 436 29 21 347 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
615 862 173 674 847 233 347 0 0 465 0 0
388 388 - 459 459 - - - - - - -
227 474 - 215 388 - - - - - - -
7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
375 291 840 340 297 769 1209 - - 1093 - -
607 607 - 551 565 - - - - - - -
755 556 - 767 607 - - - - - - -
- - - -
358 283 840 333 289 769 1209 - - 1093 - -
358 283 - 333 289 - - - - - - -
605 592 - 549 563 - - - - - - -
734 554 - 749 592 - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 13.5 0.1 0.6
A B
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
1209 - - - 460 1093 - -
0.004 - - - 0.083 0.019 - -
8 0 - 0 13.5 8.4 0.1 -
A A - A B A A -
0 - - - 0.3 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
15: Demaree St & Flagstaff Ave
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.8 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 18 0 17 4 414 27 19 357 0
0 0 0 18 0 17 4 414 27 19 357 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 20 0 18 4 450 29 21 388 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
663 917 194 708 902 240 388 0 0 479 0 0
429 429 - 473 473 - - - - - - -
234 488 - 235 429 - - - - - - -
7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
347 270 815 322 276 761 1167 - - 1080 - -
574 582 - 541 557 - - - - - - -
748 548 - 747 582 - - - - - - -
- - - -
331 262 815 315 268 761 1167 - - 1080 - -
331 262 - 315 268 - - - - - - -
571 567 - 538 554 - - - - - - -
726 545 - 728 567 - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 14 0.1 0.5
A B
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
1167 - - - 440 1080 - -
0.004 - - - 0.086 0.019 - -
8.1 0 - 0 14 8.4 0.1 -
A A - A B A A -
0 - - - 0.3 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
15: Demaree St & Flagstaff Ave
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.8 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 18 0 17 4 414 27 19 357 0
0 0 0 18 0 17 4 414 27 19 357 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 20 0 18 4 450 29 21 388 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
663 917 194 708 902 240 388 0 0 479 0 0
429 429 - 473 473 - - - - - - -
234 488 - 235 429 - - - - - - -
7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
347 270 815 322 276 761 1167 - - 1080 - -
574 582 - 541 557 - - - - - - -
748 548 - 747 582 - - - - - - -
- - - -
331 262 815 315 268 761 1167 - - 1080 - -
331 262 - 315 268 - - - - - - -
571 567 - 538 554 - - - - - - -
726 545 - 728 567 - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 14 0.1 0.5
A B
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
1167 - - - 440 1080 - -
0.004 - - - 0.086 0.019 - -
8.1 0 - 0 14 8.4 0.1 -
A A - A B A A -
0 - - - 0.3 0.1 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:15
12 11 10
0 301 18
1 0 16 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 17 4
4 378 25
7 8 9
Major Total:726
Minor High Volume:33
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Flagstaff Ave
(Minor Street)
Flagstaff Ave
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:15
12 11 10
0 339 18
1 0 16 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 17 4
4 391 25
7 8 9
Major Total:777
Minor High Volume:33
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Flagstaff Ave
(Minor Street)
Flagstaff Ave
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:15
12 11 10
0 319 19
1 0 17 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 18 4
4 401 27
7 8 9
Major Total:770
Minor High Volume:35
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Flagstaff Ave
(Minor Street)
Flagstaff Ave
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:15
12 11 10
0 357 19
1 0 17 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 18 4
4 414 27
7 8 9
Major Total:821
Minor High Volume:35
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Flagstaff Ave
(Minor Street)
Flagstaff Ave
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 16
Akers St & Riggen Ave
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
16: Akers St & Riggen Ave
PM Existing
2021
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
14 467 67 151 260 21 37 86 187 28 57 17
14 467 67 151 260 21 37 86 187 28 57 17
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 15 508 73 164 283 23 40 93 203 30 62 18
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
49 572 440 217 764 581 67 348 262 392 1366 547
0.03 0.31 0.31 0.13 0.41 0.41 0.04 0.19 0.19 0.24 0.39 0.39 1634 1863 1432 1634 1863 1418 1634 1863 1404 1634 3539 1417 15 508 73 164 283 23 40 93 203 30 62 18
1634 1863 1432 1634 1863 1418 1634 1863 1404 1634 1770 1417
1.1 31.2 3.6 11.6 12.7 0.5 2.9 5.1 16.5 1.7 1.3 0.9
1.1 31.2 3.6 11.6 12.7 0.5 2.9 5.1 16.5 1.7 1.3 0.9
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
49 572 440 217 764 581 67 348 262 392 1366 547
0.31 0.89 0.17 0.76 0.37 0.04 0.60 0.27 0.77 0.08 0.05 0.03 82 714 549 259 916 697 72 512 386 392 1366 547
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
57.0 39.6 19.3 50.2 24.6 4.0 56.6 41.8 46.4 35.3 23.0 22.9
3.5 11.1 0.2 10.1 0.3 0.0 11.4 1.9 19.6 0.1 0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.5 17.9 1.4 5.8 6.6 0.2 1.5 2.8 7.8 0.8 0.6 0.4
60.5 50.7 19.4 60.3 24.9 4.0 68.0 43.6 66.0 35.4 23.1 23.0
E D B E C A E D E D C C
596 470 336 110
47.1 36.2 60.0 26.4
D D E C
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
32.8 26.4 19.9 40.9 8.9 50.3 7.6 53.2
5.3 5.3 5.7 6.0 5.3 5.3 6.0 5.7
4.7 31.7 17.3 44.0 4.0 32.4 4.0 57.3
3.7 18.5 13.6 33.2 4.9 3.3 3.1 14.7
0.0 0.9 0.7 1.7 0.0 0.4 0.0 1.7
45.1 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
16: Akers St & Riggen Ave
PM Future
2023
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
14 481 69 157 270 22 38 88 192 29 59 18
14 481 69 157 270 22 38 88 192 29 59 18
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 15 523 75 171 293 24 41 96 209 32 64 20
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
49 587 451 223 785 598 68 355 268 367 1323 529
0.03 0.31 0.31 0.14 0.42 0.42 0.04 0.19 0.19 0.22 0.37 0.37 1634 1863 1432 1634 1863 1418 1634 1863 1405 1634 3539 1417 15 523 75 171 293 24 41 96 209 32 64 20
1634 1863 1432 1634 1863 1418 1634 1863 1405 1634 1770 1417
1.1 32.1 3.6 12.1 13.0 0.5 3.0 5.3 17.0 1.9 1.4 1.1
1.1 32.1 3.6 12.1 13.0 0.5 3.0 5.3 17.0 1.9 1.4 1.1
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
49 587 451 223 785 598 68 355 268 367 1323 529
0.31 0.89 0.17 0.77 0.37 0.04 0.60 0.27 0.78 0.09 0.05 0.04 82 714 549 259 916 697 72 512 386 367 1323 529
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
57.0 39.2 18.7 50.0 23.8 4.1 56.5 41.5 46.2 36.8 24.0 23.9
3.5 11.8 0.2 11.3 0.3 0.0 12.1 1.9 20.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.5 18.5 1.4 6.2 6.7 0.2 1.6 2.9 8.1 0.8 0.7 0.4
60.5 50.9 18.9 61.2 24.1 4.1 68.7 43.3 66.1 36.9 24.0 24.0
E D B E C A E D E D C C
613 488 346 116
47.2 36.1 60.1 27.6
D D E C
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
31.0 26.9 20.4 41.8 9.0 48.8 7.6 54.6
5.3 5.3 5.7 6.0 5.3 5.3 6.0 5.7
4.7 31.7 17.3 44.0 4.0 32.4 4.0 57.3
3.9 19.0 14.1 34.1 5.0 3.4 3.1 15.0
0.0 1.0 0.6 1.7 0.0 0.4 0.0 1.8
45.2 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
16: Akers St & Riggen Ave
PM Future+Project
2023
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
14 492 69 158 276 22 38 88 194 29 59 18
14 492 69 158 276 22 38 88 194 29 59 18
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 15 535 75 172 300 24 41 96 211 32 64 20
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
49 598 460 224 798 607 68 357 269 355 1299 520
0.03 0.32 0.32 0.14 0.43 0.43 0.04 0.19 0.19 0.22 0.37 0.37 1634 1863 1432 1634 1863 1418 1634 1863 1405 1634 3539 1417 15 535 75 172 300 24 41 96 211 32 64 20
1634 1863 1432 1634 1863 1418 1634 1863 1405 1634 1770 1417
1.1 32.8 3.6 12.2 13.2 0.5 3.0 5.3 17.1 1.9 1.4 1.1
1.1 32.8 3.6 12.2 13.2 0.5 3.0 5.3 17.1 1.9 1.4 1.1
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
49 598 460 224 798 607 68 357 269 355 1299 520
0.31 0.89 0.16 0.77 0.38 0.04 0.60 0.27 0.78 0.09 0.05 0.04 82 714 549 259 916 697 72 512 386 355 1299 520
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
57.0 38.8 18.3 49.9 23.4 4.1 56.5 41.3 46.1 37.5 24.5 24.4
3.5 12.3 0.2 11.4 0.3 0.0 12.1 1.8 20.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.5 18.8 1.4 6.2 6.8 0.2 1.6 2.9 8.1 0.9 0.7 0.4
60.5 51.2 18.5 61.3 23.7 4.1 68.7 43.2 66.2 37.6 24.6 24.5
E D B E C A E D E D C C
625 496 348 116
47.5 35.8 60.1 28.2
D D E C
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
30.0 27.0 20.4 42.5 9.0 48.0 7.6 55.4
5.3 5.3 5.7 6.0 5.3 5.3 6.0 5.7
4.7 31.7 17.3 44.0 4.0 32.4 4.0 57.3
3.9 19.1 14.2 34.8 5.0 3.4 3.1 15.2
0.0 1.0 0.6 1.7 0.0 0.4 0.0 1.8
45.2 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
16: Akers St & Riggen Ave
AM Existing
2021
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
78 207 32 144 345 89 33 153 112 65 186 69
78 207 32 144 345 89 33 153 112 65 186 69
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 85 225 35 157 375 97 36 166 122 71 202 75
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
82 325 249 214 477 361 61 265 199 684 1852 743
0.05 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.26 0.26 0.04 0.14 0.14 0.42 0.52 0.52 1634 1863 1425 1634 1863 1411 1634 1863 1397 1634 3539 1420 85 225 35 157 375 97 36 166 122 71 202 75
1634 1863 1425 1634 1863 1411 1634 1863 1397 1634 1770 1420
6.0 13.6 2.1 11.1 22.5 2.0 2.6 10.1 9.9 3.2 3.5 3.2
6.0 13.6 2.1 11.1 22.5 2.0 2.6 10.1 9.9 3.2 3.5 3.2
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
82 325 249 214 477 361 61 265 199 684 1852 743
1.04 0.69 0.14 0.73 0.79 0.27 0.59 0.63 0.61 0.10 0.11 0.10 82 714 546 259 916 694 72 512 384 684 1852 743
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
57.0 46.5 29.1 50.1 41.6 3.4 56.8 48.5 48.4 21.2 14.5 14.4 111.1 2.6 0.3 8.3 2.9 0.4 8.5 10.7 13.4 0.1 0.1 0.3
0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
5.2 7.2 0.8 5.5 11.9 0.8 1.3 6.0 4.5 1.4 1.7 1.3
168.9 49.1 29.3 58.4 44.5 3.8 65.4 59.2 61.8 21.3 14.6 14.7
F D C E D A E E E C B B
345 629 324 348
76.6 41.7 60.9 16.0
E D E B
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
54.2 21.1 19.7 25.0 8.5 66.8 10.0 34.7
5.3 5.3 5.7 6.0 5.3 5.3 6.0 5.7
4.7 31.7 17.3 44.0 4.0 32.4 4.0 57.3
5.2 12.1 13.1 15.6 4.6 5.5 8.0 24.5
0.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.4
47.3 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
16: Akers St & Riggen Ave
AM Future
2023
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
80 213 33 150 359 93 34 157 115 67 193 71
80 213 33 150 359 93 34 157 115 67 193 71
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 87 232 36 163 390 101 37 171 125 73 210 77
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
82 331 254 220 489 370 63 269 202 669 1826 733
0.05 0.18 0.18 0.13 0.26 0.26 0.04 0.14 0.14 0.41 0.52 0.52 1634 1863 1425 1634 1863 1411 1634 1863 1397 1634 3539 1420 87 232 36 163 390 101 37 171 125 73 210 77
1634 1863 1425 1634 1863 1411 1634 1863 1397 1634 1770 1420
6.0 14.0 2.1 11.5 23.4 2.2 2.7 10.4 10.1 3.3 3.7 3.3
6.0 14.0 2.1 11.5 23.4 2.2 2.7 10.4 10.1 3.3 3.7 3.3
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
82 331 254 220 489 370 63 269 202 669 1826 733
1.06 0.70 0.14 0.74 0.80 0.27 0.59 0.64 0.62 0.11 0.12 0.11 82 714 546 259 916 694 72 512 384 669 1826 733
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
57.0 46.3 28.8 49.9 41.3 3.5 56.8 48.3 48.2 21.9 15.0 14.9 118.4 2.7 0.3 9.1 3.0 0.4 9.2 10.9 13.4 0.1 0.1 0.3
1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
5.4 7.5 0.9 5.8 12.4 0.9 1.4 6.1 4.6 1.5 1.8 1.4
176.5 49.0 29.0 59.1 44.3 3.9 66.0 59.3 61.7 22.0 15.1 15.2
F D C E D A E E E C B B
355 654 333 360
78.2 41.8 60.9 16.5
E D E B
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
53.2 21.3 20.1 25.3 8.6 65.9 10.0 35.5
5.3 5.3 5.7 6.0 5.3 5.3 6.0 5.7
4.7 31.7 17.3 44.0 4.0 32.4 4.0 57.3
5.3 12.4 13.5 16.0 4.7 5.7 8.0 25.4
0.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.5
47.8 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
16: Akers St & Riggen Ave
AM Future+Project
2023
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
80 216 33 152 368 93 34 157 116 67 193 71
80 216 33 152 368 93 34 157 116 67 193 71
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 87 235 36 165 400 101 37 171 126 73 210 77
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
82 334 256 222 493 374 63 269 202 665 1817 729
0.05 0.18 0.18 0.14 0.26 0.26 0.04 0.14 0.14 0.41 0.51 0.51 1634 1863 1425 1634 1863 1412 1634 1863 1397 1634 3539 1420 87 235 36 165 400 101 37 171 126 73 210 77
1634 1863 1425 1634 1863 1412 1634 1863 1397 1634 1770 1420
6.0 14.2 2.1 11.7 24.1 2.2 2.7 10.4 10.2 3.3 3.7 3.3
6.0 14.2 2.1 11.7 24.1 2.2 2.7 10.4 10.2 3.3 3.7 3.3
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
82 334 256 222 493 374 63 269 202 665 1817 729
1.06 0.70 0.14 0.74 0.81 0.27 0.59 0.64 0.62 0.11 0.12 0.11 82 714 546 259 916 694 72 512 384 665 1817 729
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
57.0 46.3 28.7 49.9 41.3 3.5 56.8 48.3 48.3 22.1 15.1 15.0 118.4 2.7 0.2 9.4 3.2 0.4 9.2 10.9 13.7 0.1 0.1 0.3
1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
5.4 7.6 0.9 5.9 12.9 0.9 1.4 6.1 4.7 1.5 1.8 1.4
176.5 49.0 28.9 59.3 44.5 3.9 66.0 59.3 61.9 22.1 15.2 15.3
F D C E D A E E E C B B
358 666 334 360
77.9 42.0 61.0 16.7
E D E B
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
52.9 21.3 20.3 25.5 8.6 65.6 10.0 35.8
5.3 5.3 5.7 6.0 5.3 5.3 6.0 5.7
4.7 31.7 17.3 44.0 4.0 32.4 4.0 57.3
5.3 12.4 13.7 16.2 4.7 5.7 8.0 26.1
0.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.6
47.9 D
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 17
Linwood St & Riggen Ave
HCM 2010 TWSC
17: Linwood St & Riggen Ave
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.8 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
662 36 28 426 11 27
662 36 28 426 11 27
0 0 0 0 5 5
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
720 39 30 463 12 29
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 764 0 1268 744
- - - - 744 -
- - - - 524 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 849 - 186 415
- - - - 470 -
- - - - 594 -
- - -
- - 849 - 176 413
- - - - 176 -
- - - - 468 -
- - - - 565 -
EB WB NB
0 0.6 19.1
C
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
297 - - 849 -
0.139 - - 0.036 -
19.1 - - 9.4 0
C - - A A
0.5 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
17: Linwood St & Riggen Ave
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.9 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
688 37 31 470 12 30
688 37 31 470 12 30
0 0 0 0 5 5
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
748 40 34 511 13 33
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 793 0 1351 773
- - - - 773 -
- - - - 578 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 828 - 166 399
- - - - 455 -
- - - - 561 -
- - -
- - 828 - 156 397
- - - - 156 -
- - - - 453 -
- - - - 529 -
EB WB NB
0 0.6 20.7
C
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
275 - - 828 -
0.166 - - 0.041 -
20.7 - - 9.5 0
C - - A A
0.6 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
17: Linwood St & Riggen Ave
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.9 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
701 37 31 477 12 30
701 37 31 477 12 30
0 0 0 0 5 5
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
762 40 34 518 13 33
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 807 0 1373 787
- - - - 787 -
- - - - 586 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 818 - 161 392
- - - - 449 -
- - - - 556 -
- - -
- - 818 - 151 390
- - - - 151 -
- - - - 447 -
- - - - 524 -
EB WB NB
0 0.6 21.1
C
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
269 - - 818 -
0.17 - - 0.041 -
21.1 - - 9.6 0
C - - A A
0.6 - - 0.1 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:17
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 662 426 5
3 36 28 4
11 0 27
7 8 9
Major Total:1152
Minor High Volume:38
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:17
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 675 433 5
3 36 28 4
11 0 27
7 8 9
Major Total:1172
Minor High Volume:38
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:17
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 688 470 5
3 37 31 4
12 0 30
7 8 9
Major Total:1226
Minor High Volume:42
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:17
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 701 477 5
3 37 31 4
12 0 30
7 8 9
Major Total:1246
Minor High Volume:42
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
HCM 2010 TWSC
17: Linwood St & Riggen Ave
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.9 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
399 20 23 554 18 25
399 20 23 554 18 25
0 0 0 0 5 5
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
434 22 25 602 20 27
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 460 0 1102 450
- - - - 450 -
- - - - 652 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1101 - 234 609
- - - - 642 -
- - - - 518 -
- - -
- - 1101 - 225 606
- - - - 225 -
- - - - 639 -
- - - - 500 -
EB WB NB
0 0.3 16.7
C
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
355 - - 1101 -
0.132 - - 0.023 -
16.7 - - 8.3 0
C - - A A
0.5 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
17: Linwood St & Riggen Ave
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.9 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
415 21 25 612 20 28
415 21 25 612 20 28
0 0 0 0 5 5
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
451 23 27 665 22 30
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 479 0 1188 468
- - - - 468 -
- - - - 720 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1083 - 208 595
- - - - 630 -
- - - - 482 -
- - -
- - 1083 - 199 593
- - - - 199 -
- - - - 627 -
- - - - 463 -
EB WB NB
0 0.3 18.2
C
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
325 - - 1083 -
0.161 - - 0.025 -
18.2 - - 8.4 0
C - - A A
0.6 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
17: Linwood St & Riggen Ave
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
419 21 25 623 20 28
419 21 25 623 20 28
0 0 0 0 5 5
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
455 23 27 677 22 30
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 483 0 1204 472
- - - - 472 -
- - - - 732 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1080 - 203 592
- - - - 628 -
- - - - 476 -
- - -
- - 1080 - 194 590
- - - - 194 -
- - - - 625 -
- - - - 457 -
EB WB NB
0 0.3 18.5
C
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
319 - - 1080 -
0.164 - - 0.025 -
18.5 - - 8.4 0
C - - A A
0.6 - - 0.1 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:17
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 399 554 5
3 20 23 4
18 0 25
7 8 9
Major Total:996
Minor High Volume:43
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:17
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 403 565 5
3 20 23 4
18 0 25
7 8 9
Major Total:1011
Minor High Volume:43
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:17
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 415 612 5
3 21 25 4
20 0 28
7 8 9
Major Total:1073
Minor High Volume:48
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:17
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 419 623 5
3 21 25 4
20 0 28
7 8 9
Major Total:1088
Minor High Volume:48
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 18
Demaree St & Riggen Ave
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
18: Demaree St & Riggen Ave
PM Existing
2021
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
Notes
User approved changes to right turn type.
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
158 443 80 317 301 21 70 417 173 51 300 79
158 443 80 317 301 21 70 417 173 51 300 79
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1750 172 482 87 345 327 23 76 453 188 55 326 86
1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
220 1569 636 396 1534 622 112 575 237 101 634 164
0.13 0.44 0.44 0.13 0.43 0.43 0.02 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.23 0.22 1634 3539 1435 3170 3539 1434 1634 2431 1000 1634 2761 715 172 482 87 345 327 23 76 329 312 55 207 205
1634 1770 1435 1585 1770 1434 1634 1770 1662 1634 1770 1706
12.2 10.5 4.3 12.8 6.9 0.8 5.5 21.9 22.2 3.9 12.2 12.7
12.2 10.5 4.3 12.8 6.9 0.8 5.5 21.9 22.2 3.9 12.2 12.7
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.60 1.00 0.42
220 1569 636 396 1534 622 112 419 393 101 406 392
0.78 0.31 0.14 0.87 0.21 0.04 0.68 0.78 0.79 0.55 0.51 0.52 324 1569 636 396 1534 622 114 507 476 251 655 631
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.89 0.89 0.89 1.00 1.00 1.00
50.2 21.5 19.8 51.5 21.2 10.2 57.3 52.3 52.6 54.7 40.3 40.7
7.2 0.5 0.4 18.5 0.3 0.1 13.0 5.9 6.8 4.5 1.0 1.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
6.0 5.3 1.8 6.6 3.4 0.3 2.9 11.4 11.0 1.9 6.1 6.1
57.4 22.0 20.2 70.0 21.5 10.4 70.4 58.2 59.4 59.2 41.3 41.8
E C C E C B E E E E D D
741 695 717 467
30.0 45.2 60.0 43.6
C D E D
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
11.4 32.4 19.0 57.2 12.2 31.6 20.2 56.0
5.3 5.3 5.7 5.7 5.3 5.3 5.7 5.7
17.1 33.1 13.3 34.5 7.1 43.1 22.1 25.7
5.9 24.2 14.8 12.5 7.5 14.7 14.2 8.9
1.3 1.8 0.0 3.9 0.0 1.7 0.3 3.6
44.7 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
18: Demaree St & Riggen Ave
PM Future
2023
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
Notes
User approved changes to right turn type.
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
164 460 88 329 313 22 74 440 183 57 335 88
164 460 88 329 313 22 74 440 183 57 335 88
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1750 178 500 96 358 340 24 80 478 199 62 364 96
1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
226 1516 614 396 1468 595 114 595 246 112 672 175
0.14 0.43 0.43 0.13 0.41 0.41 0.02 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.24 0.23 1634 3539 1434 3170 3539 1434 1634 2428 1003 1634 2760 717 178 500 96 358 340 24 80 347 330 62 231 229
1634 1770 1434 1585 1770 1434 1634 1770 1661 1634 1770 1707
12.6 11.3 4.9 13.4 7.5 0.9 5.8 23.2 23.4 4.4 13.7 14.1
12.6 11.3 4.9 13.4 7.5 0.9 5.8 23.2 23.4 4.4 13.7 14.1
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.60 1.00 0.42
226 1516 614 396 1468 595 114 434 407 112 431 415
0.79 0.33 0.16 0.90 0.23 0.04 0.70 0.80 0.81 0.55 0.54 0.55 324 1516 614 396 1468 595 114 507 476 251 655 632
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.86 0.86 1.00 1.00 1.00
50.0 22.8 21.0 51.8 22.7 10.9 57.4 52.3 52.5 54.1 39.5 39.9
7.9 0.6 0.5 23.4 0.4 0.1 15.0 6.8 7.7 4.2 1.0 1.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
6.2 5.6 2.0 7.2 3.7 0.4 3.1 12.2 11.6 2.1 6.8 6.8
57.9 23.4 21.6 75.2 23.1 11.0 72.4 59.1 60.2 58.4 40.6 41.0
E C C E C B E E E E D D
774 722 757 522
31.1 48.5 61.0 42.9
C D E D
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
12.2 33.4 19.0 55.4 12.4 33.2 20.6 53.8
5.3 5.3 5.7 5.7 5.3 5.3 5.7 5.7
17.1 33.1 13.3 34.5 7.1 43.1 22.1 25.7
6.4 25.4 15.4 13.3 7.8 16.1 14.6 9.5
1.5 1.8 0.0 4.1 0.0 2.0 0.3 3.8
46.0 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
18: Demaree St & Riggen Ave
PM Future+Project
2023
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
Notes
User approved changes to right turn type.
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
177 460 88 329 313 37 74 448 183 66 338 95
177 460 88 329 313 37 74 448 183 66 338 95
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1750 192 500 96 358 340 40 80 487 199 72 367 103
1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
240 1481 600 396 1404 569 114 603 245 125 688 190
0.15 0.42 0.42 0.13 0.40 0.40 0.02 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.25 0.24 1634 3539 1434 3170 3539 1434 1634 2442 991 1634 2718 751 192 500 96 358 340 40 80 352 334 72 237 233
1634 1770 1434 1585 1770 1434 1634 1770 1664 1634 1770 1700
13.6 11.5 5.0 13.4 7.7 1.5 5.8 23.5 23.7 5.1 13.9 14.3
13.6 11.5 5.0 13.4 7.7 1.5 5.8 23.5 23.7 5.1 13.9 14.3
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.60 1.00 0.44
240 1481 600 396 1404 569 114 437 411 125 448 430
0.80 0.34 0.16 0.90 0.24 0.07 0.70 0.81 0.81 0.58 0.53 0.54 324 1481 600 396 1404 569 114 507 477 251 655 629
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.86 0.86 1.00 1.00 1.00
49.5 23.6 21.7 51.8 24.2 11.5 57.4 52.3 52.5 53.6 38.6 39.0
9.8 0.6 0.6 23.4 0.4 0.2 15.0 7.1 7.9 4.2 1.0 1.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
6.8 5.8 2.1 7.2 3.9 0.6 3.1 12.4 11.9 2.4 6.9 6.8
59.3 24.2 22.3 75.2 24.6 11.8 72.3 59.3 60.4 57.7 39.6 40.1
E C C E C B E E E E D D
788 738 766 542
32.5 48.5 61.2 42.2
C D E D
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
13.1 33.6 19.0 54.2 12.4 34.4 21.6 51.6
5.3 5.3 5.7 5.7 5.3 5.3 5.7 5.7
17.1 33.1 13.3 34.5 7.1 43.1 22.1 25.7
7.1 25.7 15.4 13.5 7.8 16.3 15.6 9.7
1.5 1.7 0.0 4.1 0.0 2.0 0.3 3.8
46.3 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
18: Demaree St & Riggen Ave
AM Existing
2021
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
Notes
User approved changes to right turn type.
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
103 284 75 190 352 37 65 308 104 28 319 114
103 284 75 190 352 37 65 308 104 28 319 114
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1750 112 309 82 207 383 40 71 335 113 30 347 124
1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
159 1819 738 305 1816 736 106 481 159 117 488 171
0.10 0.51 0.51 0.10 0.51 0.51 0.04 0.12 0.12 0.07 0.19 0.18 1634 3539 1435 3170 3539 1435 1634 2597 860 1634 2543 891 112 309 82 207 383 40 71 226 222 30 239 232
1634 1770 1435 1585 1770 1435 1634 1770 1687 1634 1770 1665
8.0 5.6 3.5 7.6 7.1 1.1 5.1 14.7 15.2 2.1 15.2 15.7
8.0 5.6 3.5 7.6 7.1 1.1 5.1 14.7 15.2 2.1 15.2 15.7
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.51 1.00 0.54
159 1819 738 305 1816 736 106 328 312 117 339 319
0.71 0.17 0.11 0.68 0.21 0.05 0.67 0.69 0.71 0.26 0.71 0.73 324 1819 738 396 1816 736 114 507 484 251 655 616
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.67 0.67 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.96 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00
52.5 15.5 15.0 52.5 16.0 6.3 56.1 49.3 49.7 52.7 45.3 45.9
5.6 0.2 0.3 3.1 0.3 0.1 12.5 2.5 2.9 1.2 2.7 3.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
3.9 2.8 1.5 3.5 3.5 0.5 2.7 7.4 7.3 1.0 7.7 7.5
58.1 15.7 15.3 55.5 16.2 6.5 68.6 51.7 52.5 53.9 48.0 49.0
E B B E B A E D D D D D
503 630 519 501
25.1 28.5 54.4 48.8
C C D D
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
12.6 26.2 15.5 65.7 11.8 27.0 15.7 65.6
5.3 5.3 5.7 5.7 5.3 5.3 5.7 5.7
17.1 33.1 13.3 34.5 7.1 43.1 22.1 25.7
4.1 17.2 9.6 7.6 7.1 17.7 10.0 9.1
1.6 1.5 0.3 3.5 0.0 1.9 0.2 3.1
38.7 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
18: Demaree St & Riggen Ave
AM Future
2023
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
Notes
User approved changes to right turn type.
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
107 295 83 197 366 38 69 325 110 31 356 127
107 295 83 197 366 38 69 325 110 31 356 127
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1750 116 321 90 214 398 41 75 353 120 34 387 138
1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
163 1752 711 311 1747 708 111 496 166 134 523 184
0.10 0.50 0.50 0.10 0.49 0.49 0.05 0.13 0.12 0.08 0.21 0.19 1634 3539 1435 3170 3539 1435 1634 2591 866 1634 2543 893 116 321 90 214 398 41 75 239 234 34 267 258
1634 1770 1435 1585 1770 1435 1634 1770 1686 1634 1770 1666
8.3 6.0 4.1 7.8 7.7 1.2 5.4 15.5 16.0 2.3 17.0 17.5
8.3 6.0 4.1 7.8 7.7 1.2 5.4 15.5 16.0 2.3 17.0 17.5
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.51 1.00 0.54
163 1752 711 311 1747 708 111 339 323 134 364 343
0.71 0.18 0.13 0.69 0.23 0.06 0.68 0.71 0.72 0.25 0.73 0.75 324 1752 711 396 1747 708 114 507 483 251 655 616
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.67 0.67 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00
52.3 16.8 16.3 52.3 17.3 6.7 56.0 49.1 49.5 51.7 44.6 45.1
5.6 0.2 0.4 3.5 0.3 0.2 13.7 2.5 2.9 1.0 2.9 3.3
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
4.0 3.0 1.7 3.6 3.8 0.5 2.9 7.9 7.8 1.1 8.6 8.3
58.0 17.0 16.7 55.8 17.6 6.9 69.7 51.6 52.4 52.7 47.5 48.5
E B B E B A E D D D D D
527 653 548 559
26.0 29.5 54.4 48.2
C C D D
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
13.8 27.0 15.8 63.4 12.1 28.7 16.0 63.2
5.3 5.3 5.7 5.7 5.3 5.3 5.7 5.7
17.1 33.1 13.3 34.5 7.1 43.1 22.1 25.7
4.3 18.0 9.8 8.0 7.4 19.5 10.3 9.7
1.8 1.6 0.3 3.7 0.0 2.1 0.2 3.3
39.2 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
18: Demaree St & Riggen Ave
AM Future+Project
2023
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
Notes
User approved changes to right turn type.
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
111 295 83 197 366 42 69 327 110 45 361 138
111 295 83 197 366 42 69 327 110 45 361 138
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1750 121 321 90 214 398 46 75 355 120 49 392 150
1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
168 1734 703 311 1717 696 111 498 166 141 525 198
0.10 0.49 0.49 0.10 0.49 0.49 0.05 0.13 0.12 0.09 0.21 0.20 1634 3539 1435 3170 3539 1435 1634 2595 862 1634 2488 937 121 321 90 214 398 46 75 240 235 49 277 265
1634 1770 1435 1585 1770 1435 1634 1770 1687 1634 1770 1656
8.6 6.1 4.1 7.8 7.8 1.3 5.4 15.6 16.1 3.4 17.6 18.1
8.6 6.1 4.1 7.8 7.8 1.3 5.4 15.6 16.1 3.4 17.6 18.1
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.51 1.00 0.57
168 1734 703 311 1717 696 111 340 324 141 373 349
0.72 0.19 0.13 0.69 0.23 0.07 0.68 0.71 0.72 0.35 0.74 0.76 324 1734 703 396 1717 696 114 507 484 251 655 613
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.67 0.67 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00
52.1 17.2 16.7 52.3 17.9 6.9 56.0 49.0 49.4 51.6 44.3 44.8
5.7 0.2 0.4 3.5 0.3 0.2 13.7 2.6 2.9 1.5 2.9 3.4
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
4.2 3.0 1.7 3.6 3.9 0.6 2.9 7.9 7.8 1.6 8.9 8.6
57.8 17.4 17.0 55.8 18.2 7.1 69.7 51.6 52.4 53.1 47.2 48.2
E B B E B A E D D D D D
532 658 550 591
26.5 29.7 54.4 48.2
C C D D
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
14.4 27.0 15.8 62.8 12.1 29.3 16.4 62.2
5.3 5.3 5.7 5.7 5.3 5.3 5.7 5.7
17.1 33.1 13.3 34.5 7.1 43.1 22.1 25.7
5.4 18.1 9.8 8.1 7.4 20.1 10.6 9.8
1.8 1.6 0.3 3.7 0.0 2.2 0.2 3.3
39.5 D
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 19
Country Center St & Riggen Ave
HCM 2010 AWSC
19: Country Center St & Riggen Ave
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
19.3 C
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 42 502 88 0 82 395 49 0 56 59 71 0 30 64 37
0 42 502 88 0 82 395 49 0 56 59 71 0 30 64 37
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 46 546 96 0 89 429 53 0 61 64 77 0 33 70 40
0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 1
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
3 3 3 3
SB NB EB WB
3 3 3 3
NB SB WB EB
3 3 3 3
23.6 17.9 13.2 12.8
C C B B
NBLn1 NBLn2 NBLn3 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%
0% 100% 22% 0% 100% 66% 0% 100% 73% 0% 100% 0%
0% 0% 78% 0% 0% 34% 0% 0% 27% 0% 0% 100%
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop 56 39 91 42 335 255 82 263 181 30 64 37
56 0 0 42 0 0 82 0 0 30 0 0
0 39 20 0 335 167 0 263 132 0 64 0
0 0 71 0 0 88 0 0 49 0 0 37
61 43 99 46 364 278 89 286 196 33 70 40
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
0.155 0.103 0.222 0.1 0.747 0.551 0.2 0.603 0.404 0.084 0.171 0.091
9.145 8.645 8.097 7.891 7.391 7.15 8.09 7.59 7.4 9.328 8.828 8.128 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
391 414 442 454 487 505 443 475 485 383 406 440
6.913 6.413 5.865 5.646 5.146 4.904 5.847 5.347 5.157 7.103 6.603 5.903
0.156 0.104 0.224 0.101 0.747 0.55 0.201 0.602 0.404 0.086 0.172 0.091
13.6 12.4 13.2 11.5 29 18.4 12.9 21.3 15.1 13 13.4 11.7
B B B B D C B C C B B B
0.5 0.3 0.8 0.3 6.3 3.3 0.7 3.9 1.9 0.3 0.6 0.3
HCM 2010 AWSC
19: Country Center St & Riggen Ave
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
21 C
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 44 522 91 0 85 408 51 0 58 61 73 0 31 67 38
0 44 522 91 0 85 408 51 0 58 61 73 0 31 67 38
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 48 567 99 0 92 443 55 0 63 66 79 0 34 73 41
0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 1
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
3 3 3 3
SB NB EB WB
3 3 3 3
NB SB WB EB
3 3 3 3
26.4 19 13.5 13.2
D C B B
NBLn1 NBLn2 NBLn3 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%
0% 100% 22% 0% 100% 66% 0% 100% 73% 0% 100% 0%
0% 0% 78% 0% 0% 34% 0% 0% 27% 0% 0% 100%
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop 58 41 93 44 348 265 85 272 187 31 67 38
58 0 0 44 0 0 85 0 0 31 0 0
0 41 20 0 348 174 0 272 136 0 67 0
0 0 73 0 0 91 0 0 51 0 0 38
63 44 101 48 378 288 92 296 203 34 73 41
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
0.163 0.108 0.233 0.107 0.79 0.583 0.211 0.635 0.426 0.089 0.182 0.095
9.325 8.825 8.278 8.022 7.522 7.282 8.233 7.733 7.542 9.517 9.017 8.317 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
384 405 432 446 480 495 435 467 476 375 397 429
7.104 6.604 6.057 5.78 5.28 5.039 5.994 5.494 5.303 7.3 6.8 6.1
0.164 0.109 0.234 0.108 0.787 0.582 0.211 0.634 0.426 0.091 0.184 0.096
13.9 12.7 13.6 11.7 33.2 19.8 13.2 23.1 15.8 13.2 13.8 12
B B B B D C B C C B B B
0.6 0.4 0.9 0.4 7.2 3.7 0.8 4.3 2.1 0.3 0.7 0.3
HCM 2010 AWSC
19: Country Center St & Riggen Ave
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
21.6 C
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 45 526 93 0 85 415 51 0 61 61 73 0 31 67 39
0 45 526 93 0 85 415 51 0 61 61 73 0 31 67 39
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 49 572 101 0 92 451 55 0 66 66 79 0 34 73 42
0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 1
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
3 3 3 3
SB NB EB WB
3 3 3 3
NB SB WB EB
3 3 3 3
27.3 19.6 13.6 13.3
D C B B
NBLn1 NBLn2 NBLn3 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%
0% 100% 22% 0% 100% 65% 0% 100% 73% 0% 100% 0%
0% 0% 78% 0% 0% 35% 0% 0% 27% 0% 0% 100%
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop 61 41 93 45 351 268 85 277 189 31 67 39
61 0 0 45 0 0 85 0 0 31 0 0
0 41 20 0 351 175 0 277 138 0 67 0
0 0 73 0 0 93 0 0 51 0 0 39
66 44 101 49 381 292 92 301 206 34 73 42
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
0.173 0.109 0.235 0.11 0.802 0.594 0.212 0.65 0.434 0.09 0.184 0.099
9.386 8.886 8.338 8.071 7.571 7.328 8.28 7.78 7.592 9.585 9.085 8.385 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
381 402 429 443 476 490 432 463 473 373 393 426
7.17 6.67 6.122 5.835 5.335 5.092 6.049 5.549 5.36 7.373 6.873 6.173
0.173 0.109 0.235 0.111 0.8 0.596 0.213 0.65 0.436 0.091 0.186 0.099
14.1 12.8 13.7 11.8 34.6 20.3 13.3 24 16.1 13.3 13.9 12.1
B B B B D C B C C B B B
0.6 0.4 0.9 0.4 7.4 3.8 0.8 4.5 2.2 0.3 0.7 0.3
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Meets Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:19
12 11 10
37 64 30
1 42 49 6
2 502 395 5
3 88 82 4
56 59 71
7 8 9
Major Total:1158
Minor High Volume:186
Country Center St
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Meets Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:19
12 11 10
38 64 30
1 43 49 6
2 506 402 5
3 90 82 4
59 59 71
7 8 9
Major Total:1172
Minor High Volume:189
Country Center St
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Meets Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:19
12 11 10
38 67 31
1 44 51 6
2 522 408 5
3 91 85 4
58 61 73
7 8 9
Major Total:1201
Minor High Volume:192
Country Center St
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Meets Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:19
12 11 10
39 67 31
1 45 51 6
2 526 415 5
3 93 85 4
61 61 73
7 8 9
Major Total:1215
Minor High Volume:195
Country Center St
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
HCM 2010 AWSC
19: Country Center St & Riggen Ave
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
11.5 B
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 16 260 16 0 33 334 17 0 62 23 55 0 34 49 34
0 16 260 16 0 33 334 17 0 62 23 55 0 34 49 34
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 17 283 17 0 36 363 18 0 67 25 60 0 37 53 37
0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 1
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
3 3 3 3
SB NB EB WB
3 3 3 3
NB SB WB EB
3 3 3 3
11.6 12.2 10.6 10.4
B B B B
NBLn1 NBLn2 NBLn3 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%
0% 100% 12% 0% 100% 84% 0% 100% 87% 0% 100% 0%
0% 0% 88% 0% 0% 16% 0% 0% 13% 0% 0% 100%
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop 62 15 63 16 173 103 33 223 128 34 49 34
62 0 0 16 0 0 33 0 0 34 0 0
0 15 8 0 173 87 0 223 111 0 49 0
0 0 55 0 0 16 0 0 17 0 0 34
67 17 68 17 188 112 36 242 139 37 53 37
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
0.139 0.032 0.12 0.033 0.336 0.195 0.067 0.419 0.238 0.077 0.104 0.065
7.442 6.942 6.328 6.913 6.413 6.304 6.726 6.226 6.133 7.503 7.003 6.303 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
480 514 564 517 560 568 532 576 584 476 510 565
5.209 4.709 4.095 4.67 4.17 4.061 4.48 3.98 3.887 5.271 4.771 4.071
0.14 0.033 0.121 0.033 0.336 0.197 0.068 0.42 0.238 0.078 0.104 0.065
11.4 9.9 10 9.9 12.4 10.6 10 13.4 10.8 10.9 10.6 9.5
B A A A B B A B B B B A
0.5 0.1 0.4 0.1 1.5 0.7 0.2 2.1 0.9 0.2 0.3 0.2
HCM 2010 AWSC
19: Country Center St & Riggen Ave
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
11.8 B
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 17 270 17 0 34 345 18 0 64 24 57 0 35 51 35
0 17 270 17 0 34 345 18 0 64 24 57 0 35 51 35
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 18 293 18 0 37 375 20 0 70 26 62 0 38 55 38
0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 1
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
3 3 3 3
SB NB EB WB
3 3 3 3
NB SB WB EB
3 3 3 3
11.9 12.6 10.8 10.5
B B B B
NBLn1 NBLn2 NBLn3 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%
0% 100% 12% 0% 100% 84% 0% 100% 86% 0% 100% 0%
0% 0% 88% 0% 0% 16% 0% 0% 14% 0% 0% 100%
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop 64 16 65 17 180 107 34 230 133 35 51 35
64 0 0 17 0 0 34 0 0 35 0 0
0 16 8 0 180 90 0 230 115 0 51 0
0 0 57 0 0 17 0 0 18 0 0 35
70 17 71 18 196 116 37 250 145 38 55 38
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
0.146 0.034 0.126 0.036 0.353 0.206 0.07 0.438 0.249 0.08 0.109 0.068
7.54 7.04 6.426 6.992 6.492 6.381 6.805 6.305 6.21 7.604 7.104 6.404 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
474 507 555 511 552 561 525 570 577 469 502 556
5.31 4.81 4.197 4.752 4.252 4.141 4.561 4.061 3.966 5.378 4.878 4.178
0.148 0.034 0.128 0.035 0.355 0.207 0.07 0.439 0.251 0.081 0.11 0.068
11.6 10.1 10.1 10 12.8 10.8 10.1 13.9 11 11 10.8 9.7
B B B A B B B B B B B A
0.5 0.1 0.4 0.1 1.6 0.8 0.2 2.2 1 0.3 0.4 0.2
HCM 2010 AWSC
19: Country Center St & Riggen Ave
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
12 B
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 19 276 20 0 34 347 18 0 65 24 57 0 35 51 35
0 19 276 20 0 34 347 18 0 65 24 57 0 35 51 35
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 21 300 22 0 37 377 20 0 71 26 62 0 38 55 38
0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 1
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
3 3 3 3
SB NB EB WB
3 3 3 3
NB SB WB EB
3 3 3 3
12.1 12.8 10.9 10.6
B B B B
NBLn1 NBLn2 NBLn3 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%
0% 100% 12% 0% 100% 82% 0% 100% 87% 0% 100% 0%
0% 0% 88% 0% 0% 18% 0% 0% 13% 0% 0% 100%
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop 65 16 65 19 184 112 34 231 134 35 51 35
65 0 0 19 0 0 34 0 0 35 0 0
0 16 8 0 184 92 0 231 116 0 51 0
0 0 57 0 0 20 0 0 18 0 0 35
71 17 71 21 200 122 37 251 145 38 55 38
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
0.149 0.034 0.127 0.04 0.362 0.216 0.07 0.443 0.252 0.081 0.11 0.068
7.582 7.082 6.468 7.009 6.509 6.384 6.839 6.339 6.245 7.651 7.151 6.451 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
471 503 552 509 550 560 523 566 574 466 499 552
5.354 4.854 4.24 4.771 4.271 4.146 4.598 4.098 4.004 5.425 4.925 4.225
0.151 0.034 0.129 0.041 0.364 0.218 0.071 0.443 0.253 0.082 0.11 0.069
11.7 10.1 10.2 10.1 13 10.9 10.1 14.1 11.1 11.1 10.8 9.7
B B B B B B B B B B B A
0.5 0.1 0.4 0.1 1.6 0.8 0.2 2.3 1 0.3 0.4 0.2
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:19
12 11 10
34 49 34
1 16 17 6
2 260 334 5
3 16 33 4
62 23 55
7 8 9
Major Total:676
Minor High Volume:140
Country Center St
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:19
12 11 10
34 49 34
1 18 17 6
2 266 336 5
3 19 33 4
63 23 55
7 8 9
Major Total:689
Minor High Volume:141
Country Center St
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:19
12 11 10
35 51 35
1 17 18 6
2 270 345 5
3 17 34 4
64 24 57
7 8 9
Major Total:701
Minor High Volume:145
Country Center St
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:19
12 11 10
35 51 35
1 19 18 6
2 276 347 5
3 20 34 4
65 24 57
7 8 9
Major Total:714
Minor High Volume:146
Country Center St
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Major Street)
Riggen Ave
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 20
Linwood St & Ferguson Ave
HCM 2010 AWSC
20: Linwood St & Ferguson Ave
PM Existing
2021
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
10.1 B
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 48 253 109 0 24 144 29 0 58 40 14 0 16 56 27
0 48 253 109 0 24 144 29 0 58 40 14 0 16 56 27
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 52 275 118 0 26 157 32 0 63 43 15 0 17 61 29
0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
3 3 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 3 3
NB SB WB EB
1 1 3 3
10.2 9.4 10.9 10.3
B A B B
NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1
52% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 16%
36% 0% 100% 44% 0% 100% 62% 57%
12% 0% 0% 56% 0% 0% 38% 27%
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
112 48 169 193 24 96 77 99
58 48 0 0 24 0 0 16
40 0 169 84 0 96 48 56
14 0 0 109 0 0 29 27
122 52 183 210 26 104 84 108
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
0.218 0.087 0.279 0.296 0.046 0.169 0.13 0.185
6.441 6.107 5.601 5.201 6.345 5.838 5.571 6.196
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
560 590 645 696 566 616 645 581
4.155 3.807 3.301 2.901 4.066 3.559 3.291 3.912
0.218 0.088 0.284 0.302 0.046 0.169 0.13 0.186
10.9 9.4 10.5 10.1 9.4 9.7 9.1 10.3
B A B B A A A B
0.8 0.3 1.1 1.2 0.1 0.6 0.4 0.7
HCM 2010 AWSC
20: Linwood St & Ferguson Ave
PM Future
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
10.4 B
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 51 268 116 0 25 153 31 0 62 42 15 0 17 59 29
0 51 268 116 0 25 153 31 0 62 42 15 0 17 59 29
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 55 291 126 0 27 166 34 0 67 46 16 0 18 64 32
0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
3 3 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 3 3
NB SB WB EB
1 1 3 3
10.5 9.7 11.3 10.6
B A B B
NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1
52% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 16%
35% 0% 100% 44% 0% 100% 62% 56%
13% 0% 0% 56% 0% 0% 38% 28%
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
119 51 179 205 25 102 82 105
62 51 0 0 25 0 0 17
42 0 179 89 0 102 51 59
15 0 0 116 0 0 31 29
129 55 194 223 27 111 89 114
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
0.236 0.095 0.305 0.326 0.049 0.183 0.141 0.2
6.559 6.169 5.663 5.262 6.455 5.947 5.679 6.316
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
547 582 635 683 555 603 631 568
4.297 3.9 3.394 2.993 4.192 3.684 3.415 4.055
0.236 0.095 0.306 0.327 0.049 0.184 0.141 0.201
11.3 9.5 10.9 10.5 9.5 10 9.4 10.6
B A B B A A A B
0.9 0.3 1.3 1.4 0.2 0.7 0.5 0.7
HCM 2010 AWSC
20: Linwood St & Ferguson Ave
PM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
10.4 B
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 51 269 116 0 25 153 31 0 62 42 15 0 17 59 29
0 51 269 116 0 25 153 31 0 62 42 15 0 17 59 29
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 55 292 126 0 27 166 34 0 67 46 16 0 18 64 32
0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
3 3 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 3 3
NB SB WB EB
1 1 3 3
10.5 9.7 11.3 10.6
B A B B
NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1
52% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 16%
35% 0% 100% 44% 0% 100% 62% 56%
13% 0% 0% 56% 0% 0% 38% 28%
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
119 51 179 206 25 102 82 105
62 51 0 0 25 0 0 17
42 0 179 90 0 102 51 59
15 0 0 116 0 0 31 29
129 55 195 224 27 111 89 114
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
0.236 0.095 0.307 0.327 0.049 0.183 0.141 0.2
6.563 6.169 5.663 5.263 6.457 5.95 5.681 6.32
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
547 582 635 684 555 603 631 568
4.301 3.9 3.394 2.993 4.194 3.687 3.418 4.059
0.236 0.095 0.307 0.327 0.049 0.184 0.141 0.201
11.3 9.5 10.9 10.5 9.5 10 9.4 10.6
B A B B A A A B
0.9 0.3 1.3 1.4 0.2 0.7 0.5 0.7
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing
Intersection #:20
12 11 10
27 56 16
1 48 29 6
2 253 144 5
3 109 24 4
58 40 14
7 8 9
Major Total:607
Minor High Volume:112
Linwood St
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ferguson Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Existing+Project
Intersection #:20
12 11 10
27 56 16
1 48 29 6
2 254 144 5
3 109 24 4
58 40 14
7 8 9
Major Total:608
Minor High Volume:112
Linwood St
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ferguson Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:20
12 11 10
29 59 17
1 51 31 6
2 268 153 5
3 116 25 4
62 42 15
7 8 9
Major Total:644
Minor High Volume:119
Linwood St
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ferguson Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:20
12 11 10
29 59 17
1 51 31 6
2 269 153 5
3 116 25 4
62 42 15
7 8 9
Major Total:645
Minor High Volume:119
Linwood St
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ferguson Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
HCM 2010 AWSC
20: Linwood St & Ferguson Ave
AM Existing
2021
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
14.3 B
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 22 174 94 0 47 259 48 0 129 45 79 0 50 105 50
0 22 174 94 0 47 259 48 0 129 45 79 0 50 105 50
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 24 189 102 0 51 282 52 0 140 49 86 0 54 114 54
0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
3 3 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 3 3
NB SB WB EB
1 1 3 3
12.2 12.7 17.9 15.4
B B C C
NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1
51% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 24%
18% 0% 100% 38% 0% 100% 64% 51%
31% 0% 0% 62% 0% 0% 36% 24%
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
253 22 116 152 47 173 134 205
129 22 0 0 47 0 0 50
45 0 116 58 0 173 86 105
79 0 0 94 0 0 48 50
275 24 126 165 51 188 146 223
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
0.541 0.051 0.25 0.307 0.107 0.365 0.274 0.441
7.086 7.654 7.138 6.691 7.523 7.007 6.749 7.131
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
509 468 503 537 477 514 531 506
4.828 5.401 4.884 4.437 5.268 4.752 4.494 4.878
0.54 0.051 0.25 0.307 0.107 0.366 0.275 0.441
17.9 10.8 12.3 12.4 11.2 13.7 12 15.4
C B B B B B B C
3.2 0.2 1 1.3 0.4 1.7 1.1 2.2
HCM 2010 AWSC
20: Linwood St & Ferguson Ave
AM Future
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
15.6 C
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 23 185 100 0 50 275 51 0 137 48 84 0 53 111 53
0 23 185 100 0 50 275 51 0 137 48 84 0 53 111 53
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 25 201 109 0 54 299 55 0 149 52 91 0 58 121 58
0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
3 3 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 3 3
NB SB WB EB
1 1 3 3
13 13.6 20.2 16.9
B B C C
NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1
51% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 24%
18% 0% 100% 38% 0% 100% 64% 51%
31% 0% 0% 62% 0% 0% 36% 24%
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
269 23 123 162 50 183 143 217
137 23 0 0 50 0 0 53
48 0 123 62 0 183 92 111
84 0 0 100 0 0 51 53
292 25 134 176 54 199 155 236
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
0.593 0.055 0.275 0.339 0.117 0.401 0.301 0.483
7.307 7.908 7.39 6.942 7.766 7.249 6.99 7.374
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
494 452 485 517 461 496 513 488
5.063 5.669 5.15 4.701 5.525 5.008 4.748 5.133
0.591 0.055 0.276 0.34 0.117 0.401 0.302 0.484
20.2 11.1 13 13.2 11.6 14.8 12.8 16.9
C B B B B B B C
3.8 0.2 1.1 1.5 0.4 1.9 1.3 2.6
HCM 2010 AWSC
20: Linwood St & Ferguson Ave
AM Future+Project
2023
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
15.6 C
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 23 185 100 0 50 275 51 0 137 48 84 0 53 111 53
0 23 185 100 0 50 275 51 0 137 48 84 0 53 111 53
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 25 201 109 0 54 299 55 0 149 52 91 0 58 121 58
0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
3 3 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 3 3
NB SB WB EB
1 1 3 3
13 13.6 20.2 16.9
B B C C
NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1
51% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 24%
18% 0% 100% 38% 0% 100% 64% 51%
31% 0% 0% 62% 0% 0% 36% 24%
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
269 23 123 162 50 183 143 217
137 23 0 0 50 0 0 53
48 0 123 62 0 183 92 111
84 0 0 100 0 0 51 53
292 25 134 176 54 199 155 236
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
0.593 0.055 0.275 0.339 0.117 0.401 0.301 0.483
7.307 7.908 7.39 6.942 7.766 7.249 6.99 7.374
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
494 452 485 517 461 496 513 488
5.063 5.669 5.15 4.701 5.525 5.008 4.748 5.133
0.591 0.055 0.276 0.34 0.117 0.401 0.302 0.484
20.2 11.1 13 13.2 11.6 14.8 12.8 16.9
C B B B B B B C
3.8 0.2 1.1 1.5 0.4 1.9 1.3 2.6
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Meets Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing
Intersection #:20
12 11 10
50 105 50
1 22 48 6
2 174 259 5
3 94 47 4
129 45 79
7 8 9
Major Total:644
Minor High Volume:253
Linwood St
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ferguson Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Meets Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Existing+Project
Intersection #:20
12 11 10
50 105 50
1 22 48 6
2 174 259 5
3 94 47 4
129 45 79
7 8 9
Major Total:644
Minor High Volume:253
Linwood St
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ferguson Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Meets Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:20
12 11 10
53 111 53
1 23 51 6
2 185 275 5
3 100 50 4
137 48 84
7 8 9
Major Total:684
Minor High Volume:269
Linwood St
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ferguson Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Meets Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:20
12 11 10
53 111 53
1 23 51 6
2 185 275 5
3 100 50 4
137 48 84
7 8 9
Major Total:684
Minor High Volume:269
Linwood St
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ferguson Ave
(Minor Street)
Linwood St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 21
Demaree St & Ferguson Ave
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
21: Demaree St & Ferguson Ave
PM Existing
2021
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
61 168 55 106 99 30 58 656 181 31 589 35
61 168 55 106 99 30 58 656 181 31 589 35
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1750 66 183 60 115 108 33 63 713 197 34 640 38
1 2 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
100 290 92 136 246 187 717 1741 481 59 796 47
0.06 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.13 0.13 0.44 0.64 0.63 0.01 0.08 0.07 1634 2643 841 1634 1863 1420 1634 2731 754 1634 3395 201 66 121 122 115 108 33 63 462 448 34 333 345
1634 1770 1714 1634 1863 1420 1634 1770 1716 1634 1770 1827
4.7 7.8 8.2 8.3 6.4 2.5 2.7 15.4 15.5 2.5 22.2 22.3
4.7 7.8 8.2 8.3 6.4 2.5 2.7 15.4 15.5 2.5 22.2 22.3
1.00 0.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.44 1.00 0.11
100 194 188 136 246 187 717 1128 1094 59 415 429
0.66 0.62 0.65 0.84 0.44 0.18 0.09 0.41 0.41 0.58 0.80 0.80 177 360 349 136 332 253 717 1128 1094 72 749 774
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.84 0.84 0.84
55.1 51.0 51.5 54.2 48.0 46.3 19.6 10.7 10.9 58.4 52.6 52.7
7.2 3.2 3.7 35.9 1.2 0.4 0.1 1.1 1.1 7.2 12.9 12.7
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2.3 4.0 4.1 5.1 3.4 1.0 1.2 7.8 7.6 1.2 12.4 12.8
62.3 54.2 55.3 90.1 49.2 46.7 19.7 11.8 12.0 65.6 65.6 65.3
E D E F D D B B B E E E
309 256 973 712
56.4 67.3 12.4 65.5
E E B E
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
8.3 80.5 14.0 17.2 56.7 32.1 11.3 19.8
5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3
4.0 63.0 8.7 23.1 17.5 49.5 11.7 20.1
4.5 17.5 10.3 10.2 4.7 24.3 6.7 8.4
0.0 4.3 0.0 0.7 3.4 2.6 0.1 0.7
41.5 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
21: Demaree St & Ferguson Ave
PM Future
2023
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
63 173 57 109 102 31 65 725 202 33 622 37
63 173 57 109 102 31 65 725 202 33 622 37
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1750 68 188 62 118 111 34 71 788 220 36 676 40
1 2 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
102 295 94 136 247 188 695 1726 482 62 836 49
0.06 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.13 0.13 0.43 0.63 0.62 0.01 0.08 0.08 1634 2639 844 1634 1863 1420 1634 2724 760 1634 3396 201 68 124 126 118 111 34 71 512 496 36 352 364
1634 1770 1714 1634 1863 1420 1634 1770 1715 1634 1770 1827
4.9 8.0 8.5 8.6 6.6 2.6 3.1 17.9 18.1 2.6 23.5 23.5
4.9 8.0 8.5 8.6 6.6 2.6 3.1 17.9 18.1 2.6 23.5 23.5
1.00 0.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.44 1.00 0.11
102 198 192 136 247 188 695 1121 1087 62 436 450
0.66 0.63 0.66 0.87 0.45 0.18 0.10 0.46 0.46 0.58 0.81 0.81 177 360 348 136 332 253 695 1121 1087 72 749 774
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.82 0.82 0.82
55.0 50.9 51.4 54.3 48.0 46.3 20.7 11.3 11.5 58.3 52.3 52.4
7.2 3.3 3.8 40.5 1.3 0.5 0.1 1.3 1.4 7.0 12.5 12.3
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2.4 4.1 4.2 5.4 3.5 1.0 1.4 9.1 8.9 1.3 13.0 13.4
62.2 54.2 55.2 94.9 49.3 46.7 20.8 12.7 12.9 65.3 64.9 64.6
E D E F D D C B B E E E
318 263 1079 752
56.3 69.4 13.3 64.8
E E B E
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
8.5 80.1 14.0 17.4 55.0 33.5 11.5 19.9
5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3
4.0 63.0 8.7 23.1 17.5 49.5 11.7 20.1
4.6 20.1 10.6 10.5 5.1 25.5 6.9 8.6
0.0 5.0 0.0 0.7 3.8 2.7 0.1 0.7
41.1 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
21: Demaree St & Ferguson Ave
PM Future+Project
2023
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
64 173 57 109 102 32 65 727 202 33 622 37
64 173 57 109 102 32 65 727 202 33 622 37
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1750 70 188 62 118 111 35 71 790 220 36 676 40
1 2 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
105 295 94 136 244 186 695 1727 481 62 836 49
0.06 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.13 0.13 0.43 0.63 0.62 0.01 0.08 0.08 1634 2639 844 1634 1863 1420 1634 2726 759 1634 3396 201 70 124 126 118 111 35 71 513 497 36 352 364
1634 1770 1714 1634 1863 1420 1634 1770 1715 1634 1770 1827
5.0 8.0 8.5 8.6 6.6 2.6 3.1 17.9 18.1 2.6 23.5 23.5
5.0 8.0 8.5 8.6 6.6 2.6 3.1 17.9 18.1 2.6 23.5 23.5
1.00 0.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.44 1.00 0.11
105 198 192 136 244 186 695 1121 1087 62 436 450
0.67 0.63 0.66 0.87 0.45 0.19 0.10 0.46 0.46 0.58 0.81 0.81 177 360 348 136 332 253 695 1121 1087 72 749 774
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.82 0.82 0.82
54.9 50.9 51.4 54.3 48.2 46.5 20.7 11.3 11.5 58.3 52.3 52.4
7.1 3.3 3.8 40.5 1.3 0.5 0.1 1.3 1.4 7.0 12.5 12.2
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2.5 4.1 4.2 5.4 3.5 1.1 1.4 9.1 8.9 1.3 13.0 13.4
62.0 54.2 55.2 94.9 49.5 46.9 20.8 12.7 12.9 65.3 64.8 64.6
E D E F D D C B B E E E
320 264 1081 752
56.3 69.4 13.3 64.7
E E B E
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
8.5 80.1 14.0 17.4 55.0 33.5 11.7 19.7
5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3
4.0 63.0 8.7 23.1 17.5 49.5 11.7 20.1
4.6 20.1 10.6 10.5 5.1 25.5 7.0 8.6
0.0 5.0 0.0 0.7 3.8 2.7 0.1 0.7
41.1 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
21: Demaree St & Ferguson Ave
AM Existing
2021
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
39 91 91 165 170 35 59 415 105 34 584 49
39 91 91 165 170 35 59 415 105 34 584 49
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1750 42 99 99 179 185 38 64 451 114 37 635 53
1 2 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
70 189 169 136 275 210 98 1783 447 63 2039 170
0.04 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.64 0.63 0.01 0.20 0.20 1634 1770 1583 1634 1863 1422 1634 2795 701 1634 3308 276 42 99 99 179 185 38 64 284 281 37 339 349
1634 1770 1583 1634 1863 1422 1634 1770 1726 1634 1770 1814
3.0 6.4 7.2 10.0 11.3 2.8 4.6 8.3 8.5 2.7 19.6 19.6
3.0 6.4 7.2 10.0 11.3 2.8 4.6 8.3 8.5 2.7 19.6 19.6
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.15
70 189 169 136 275 210 98 1129 1101 63 1091 1118
0.60 0.52 0.59 1.31 0.67 0.18 0.65 0.25 0.26 0.59 0.31 0.31 177 360 322 136 332 254 256 1129 1101 72 1091 1118
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.80 0.80
56.4 50.7 51.7 55.0 48.4 44.8 55.2 9.4 9.5 58.3 26.1 26.2
8.1 2.2 3.2184.0 4.0 0.4 7.1 0.5 0.6 7.4 0.6 0.6
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1.5 3.2 3.3 11.5 6.1 1.1 2.3 4.2 4.2 1.4 9.8 10.1
64.6 52.9 54.9239.0 52.4 45.2 62.3 9.9 10.1 65.7 26.7 26.8
E D D F D D E A B E C C
240 402 629 725
55.8 134.8 15.3 28.7
E F B C
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
8.6 80.5 14.0 16.8 11.2 78.0 9.1 21.7
5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3
4.0 63.0 8.7 23.1 17.5 49.5 11.7 20.1
4.7 10.5 12.0 9.2 6.6 21.6 5.0 13.3
0.0 5.5 0.0 1.3 0.1 5.3 0.0 0.9
49.1 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
21: Demaree St & Ferguson Ave
AM Future
2023
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
40 94 94 170 175 36 66 459 117 36 616 52
40 94 94 170 175 36 66 459 117 36 616 52
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1750 43 102 102 185 190 39 72 499 127 39 670 57
1 2 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
71 183 163 136 266 203 108 1785 452 66 2028 172
0.04 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.14 0.14 0.07 0.64 0.63 0.01 0.20 0.20 1634 1770 1583 1634 1863 1421 1634 2789 706 1634 3302 281 43 102 102 185 190 39 72 315 311 39 359 368
1634 1770 1583 1634 1863 1421 1634 1770 1726 1634 1770 1813
3.1 6.6 7.4 10.0 11.7 2.9 5.2 9.4 9.6 2.8 20.8 20.8
3.1 6.6 7.4 10.0 11.7 2.9 5.2 9.4 9.6 2.8 20.8 20.8
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.15
71 183 163 136 266 203 108 1132 1104 66 1087 1114
0.61 0.56 0.62 1.36 0.71 0.19 0.67 0.28 0.28 0.59 0.33 0.33 177 360 322 136 332 253 256 1132 1104 72 1087 1114
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.78 0.78 0.78
56.4 51.2 52.2 55.0 49.1 45.3 54.8 9.5 9.6 58.2 26.7 26.8
8.1 2.7 3.9201.5 5.3 0.5 6.9 0.6 0.6 8.3 0.6 0.6
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1.6 3.4 3.4 12.1 6.4 1.2 2.5 4.7 4.7 1.4 10.4 10.7
64.4 53.9 56.1256.5 54.4 45.8 61.7 10.1 10.3 66.5 27.4 27.4
E D E F D D E B B E C C
247 414 698 766
56.6 143.9 15.5 29.4
E F B C
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
8.8 80.8 14.0 16.4 11.9 77.7 9.2 21.2
5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3
4.0 63.0 8.7 23.1 17.5 49.5 11.7 20.1
4.8 11.6 12.0 9.4 7.2 22.8 5.1 13.7
0.0 6.1 0.0 0.6 0.1 5.8 0.0 0.9
50.3 D
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary
21: Demaree St & Ferguson Ave
AM Future+Project
2023
Movement
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
Future Volume (veh/h)
Number
Initial Q (Qb), veh
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)
Parking Bus, Adj
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
Adj No. of Lanes
Peak Hour Factor
Percent Heavy Veh, %
Cap, veh/h
Arrive On Green
Sat Flow, veh/h
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln
Q Serve(g_s), s
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
Prop In Lane
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
V/C Ratio(X)
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
HCM Platoon Ratio
Upstream Filter(I)
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
LnGrp LOS
Approach Vol, veh/h
Approach Delay, s/veh
Approach LOS
Timer
Assigned Phs
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay
HCM 2010 LOS
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
40 94 94 170 175 36 66 460 117 36 616 52
40 94 94 170 175 36 66 460 117 36 616 52
7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1716 1716 1863 1750 1716 1863 1750 43 102 102 185 190 39 72 500 127 39 670 57
1 2 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
71 183 163 136 266 203 108 1786 451 66 2028 172
0.04 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.14 0.14 0.07 0.64 0.63 0.01 0.20 0.20 1634 1770 1583 1634 1863 1421 1634 2791 705 1634 3302 281 43 102 102 185 190 39 72 316 311 39 359 368
1634 1770 1583 1634 1863 1421 1634 1770 1726 1634 1770 1813
3.1 6.6 7.4 10.0 11.7 2.9 5.2 9.4 9.6 2.8 20.8 20.8
3.1 6.6 7.4 10.0 11.7 2.9 5.2 9.4 9.6 2.8 20.8 20.8
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.15
71 183 163 136 266 203 108 1132 1104 66 1087 1114
0.61 0.56 0.62 1.36 0.71 0.19 0.67 0.28 0.28 0.59 0.33 0.33 177 360 322 136 332 253 256 1132 1104 72 1087 1114
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.78 0.78 0.78
56.4 51.2 52.2 55.0 49.1 45.3 54.8 9.5 9.6 58.2 26.7 26.8
8.1 2.7 3.9201.5 5.3 0.5 6.9 0.6 0.6 8.3 0.6 0.6
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1.6 3.4 3.4 12.1 6.4 1.2 2.5 4.8 4.7 1.4 10.4 10.7
64.4 53.9 56.1256.5 54.4 45.8 61.7 10.1 10.3 66.5 27.4 27.4
E D E F D D E B B E C C
247 414 699 766
56.6 143.9 15.5 29.4
E F B C
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
8.8 80.8 14.0 16.4 11.9 77.7 9.2 21.2
5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3
4.0 63.0 8.7 23.1 17.5 49.5 11.7 20.1
4.8 11.6 12.0 9.4 7.2 22.8 5.1 13.7
0.0 6.1 0.0 0.6 0.1 5.8 0.0 0.9
50.3 D
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 1
Akers St & Ave 320
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Akers St & Ave 320
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.7 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
110 20 29 32 29 52
110 20 29 32 29 52
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
120 22 32 35 32 57
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 141 0 228 130
- - - - 130 -
- - - - 98 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1442 - 760 920
- - - - 896 -
- - - - 926 -
- - -
- - 1442 - 743 920
- - - - 743 -
- - - - 896 -
- - - - 905 -
EB WB NB
0 3.6 9.7
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
848 - - 1442 -
0.104 - - 0.022 -
9.7 - - 7.6 0
A - - A A
0.3 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Akers St & Ave 320
PM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.6 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
115 20 29 35 29 52
115 20 29 35 29 52
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
125 22 32 38 32 57
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 147 0 237 136
- - - - 136 -
- - - - 101 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1435 - 751 913
- - - - 890 -
- - - - 923 -
- - -
- - 1435 - 734 913
- - - - 734 -
- - - - 890 -
- - - - 902 -
EB WB NB
0 3.4 9.8
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
840 - - 1435 -
0.105 - - 0.022 -
9.8 - - 7.6 0
A - - A A
0.3 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Akers St & Ave 320
PM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.6 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
115 20 29 35 29 52
115 20 29 35 29 52
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
125 22 32 38 32 57
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 147 0 237 136
- - - - 136 -
- - - - 101 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1435 - 751 913
- - - - 890 -
- - - - 923 -
- - -
- - 1435 - 734 913
- - - - 734 -
- - - - 890 -
- - - - 902 -
EB WB NB
0 3.4 9.8
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
840 - - 1435 -
0.105 - - 0.022 -
9.8 - - 7.6 0
A - - A A
0.3 - - 0.1 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:1
12 11 10
0 2 0
1 0 1 6
2 110 32 5
3 20 29 4
29 0 52
7 8 9
Major Total:192
Minor High Volume:81
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ave 320
(Minor Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:1
12 11 10
0 2 0
1 0 1 6
2 115 35 5
3 20 29 4
29 0 52
7 8 9
Major Total:200
Minor High Volume:81
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ave 320
(Minor Street)
Akers St
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Akers St & Ave 320
AM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.8 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
48 20 63 88 24 36
48 20 63 88 24 36
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
52 22 68 96 26 39
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 74 0 296 63
- - - - 63 -
- - - - 233 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1526 - 695 1002
- - - - 960 -
- - - - 806 -
- - -
- - 1526 - 662 1002
- - - - 662 -
- - - - 960 -
- - - - 768 -
EB WB NB
0 3.1 9.7
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
831 - - 1526 -
0.078 - - 0.045 -
9.7 - - 7.5 0
A - - A A
0.3 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Akers St & Ave 320
AM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.7 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
49 20 63 93 24 36
49 20 63 93 24 36
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
53 22 68 101 26 39
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 75 0 302 64
- - - - 64 -
- - - - 238 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1524 - 690 1000
- - - - 959 -
- - - - 802 -
- - -
- - 1524 - 658 1000
- - - - 658 -
- - - - 959 -
- - - - 764 -
EB WB NB
0 3 9.7
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
828 - - 1524 -
0.079 - - 0.045 -
9.7 - - 7.5 0
A - - A A
0.3 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Akers St & Ave 320
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.7 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
49 20 63 93 24 36
49 20 63 93 24 36
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
53 22 68 101 26 39
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 75 0 302 64
- - - - 64 -
- - - - 238 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1524 - 690 1000
- - - - 959 -
- - - - 802 -
- - -
- - 1524 - 658 1000
- - - - 658 -
- - - - 959 -
- - - - 764 -
EB WB NB
0 3 9.7
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
828 - - 1524 -
0.079 - - 0.045 -
9.7 - - 7.5 0
A - - A A
0.3 - - 0.1 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:1
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 48 88 5
3 20 63 4
24 1 36
7 8 9
Major Total:219
Minor High Volume:61
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ave 320
(Minor Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:1
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 49 93 5
3 20 63 4
24 1 36
7 8 9
Major Total:225
Minor High Volume:61
(Major Street)
(Major Street)
Ave 320
(Minor Street)
Akers St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 2
Demaree St & Ave 320
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Demaree St & Ave 320
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.3 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
50 103 28 218 237 26
50 103 28 218 237 26
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
54 112 30 237 258 28
Minor2 Major1 Major2
570 272 286 0 - 0
272 - - - - -
298 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
483 767 1276 - - -
774 - - - - -
753 - - - - -
- - -
470 767 1276 - - -
470 - - - - -
774 - - - - -
733 - - - - -
EB NB SB
12.7 0.9 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1276 - 636 - -
0.024 - 0.261 - -
7.9 0 12.7 - -
A A B - -
0.1 - 1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Demaree St & Ave 320
PM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.4 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
50 108 31 218 237 26
50 108 31 218 237 26
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
54 117 34 237 258 28
Minor2 Major1 Major2
576 272 286 0 - 0
272 - - - - -
304 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
479 767 1276 - - -
774 - - - - -
748 - - - - -
- - -
464 767 1276 - - -
464 - - - - -
774 - - - - -
725 - - - - -
EB NB SB
12.7 1 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1276 - 636 - -
0.026 - 0.27 - -
7.9 0 12.7 - -
A A B - -
0.1 - 1.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Demaree St & Ave 320
PM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.4 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
50 108 31 218 237 26
50 108 31 218 237 26
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
54 117 34 237 258 28
Minor2 Major1 Major2
576 272 286 0 - 0
272 - - - - -
304 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
479 767 1276 - - -
774 - - - - -
748 - - - - -
- - -
464 767 1276 - - -
464 - - - - -
774 - - - - -
725 - - - - -
EB NB SB
12.7 1 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1276 - 636 - -
0.026 - 0.27 - -
7.9 0 12.7 - -
A A B - -
0.1 - 1.1 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:2
12 11 10
26 237 1
1 50 0 6
2 0 1 5
3 103 0 4
28 218 0
7 8 9
Major Total:510
Minor High Volume:153
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Ave 320
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:2
12 11 10
26 237 1
1 50 0 6
2 0 1 5
3 108 0 4
31 218 0
7 8 9
Major Total:513
Minor High Volume:158
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Ave 320
(Major Street)
Demaree St
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Demaree St & Ave 320
AM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.2 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
36 45 64 269 198 83
36 45 64 269 198 83
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
39 49 70 292 215 90
Minor2 Major1 Major2
692 260 305 0 - 0
260 - - - - -
432 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
410 779 1256 - - -
783 - - - - -
655 - - - - -
- - -
383 779 1256 - - -
383 - - - - -
783 - - - - -
611 - - - - -
EB NB SB
13.1 1.5 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1256 - 534 - -
0.055 - 0.165 - -
8 0 13.1 - -
A A B - -
0.2 - 0.6 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Demaree St & Ave 320
AM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.3 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
36 46 69 269 198 83
36 46 69 269 198 83
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
39 50 75 292 215 90
Minor2 Major1 Major2
702 260 305 0 - 0
260 - - - - -
442 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
404 779 1256 - - -
783 - - - - -
648 - - - - -
- - -
375 779 1256 - - -
375 - - - - -
783 - - - - -
602 - - - - -
EB NB SB
13.2 1.6 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1256 - 529 - -
0.06 - 0.168 - -
8 0 13.2 - -
A A B - -
0.2 - 0.6 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Demaree St & Ave 320
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.3 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
36 46 69 269 198 83
36 46 69 269 198 83
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
39 50 75 292 215 90
Minor2 Major1 Major2
702 260 305 0 - 0
260 - - - - -
442 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
404 779 1256 - - -
783 - - - - -
648 - - - - -
- - -
375 779 1256 - - -
375 - - - - -
783 - - - - -
602 - - - - -
EB NB SB
13.2 1.6 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1256 - 529 - -
0.06 - 0.168 - -
8 0 13.2 - -
A A B - -
0.2 - 0.6 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:2
12 11 10
83 198 0
1 36 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 45 2 4
64 269 1
7 8 9
Major Total:615
Minor High Volume:81
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Ave 320
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:2
12 11 10
83 198 0
1 36 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 46 2 4
69 269 1
7 8 9
Major Total:620
Minor High Volume:82
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Ave 320
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 3
Linwood St & Project Road North
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Linwood St & Project Road North
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 0 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB NB
0 0 0
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - 0 -
A - - A -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Linwood St & Project Road North
PM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 0 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB NB
0 0 0
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - 0 -
A - - A -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Linwood St & Project Road North
PM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 0 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB NB
0 0 0
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - 0 -
A - - A -
- - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:3
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Project Road North
(Minor Street)
Project Road North
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:3
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Project Road North
(Minor Street)
Project Road North
(Major Street)
Linwood St
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Linwood St & Project Road North
AM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 0 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB NB
0 0 0
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - 0 -
A - - A -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Linwood St & Project Road North
AM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 0 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB NB
0 0 0
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - 0 -
A - - A -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Linwood St & Project Road North
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 0 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB NB
0 0 0
A
NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - 0 -
A - - A -
- - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:3
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Project Road North
(Minor Street)
Project Road North
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:3
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Project Road North
(Minor Street)
Project Road North
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 4
Demaree St & Arlet Ave
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Demaree St & Arlet Ave
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 - 0
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB NB SB
0 0 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - 0 - -
A - A - -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Demaree St & Arlet Ave
PM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.3 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
3 29 50 0 0 5
3 29 50 0 0 5
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
3 32 54 0 0 5
Minor2 Major1 Major2
112 3 5 0 - 0
3 - - - - -
109 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
885 1081 1616 - - -
1020 - - - - -
916 - - - - -
- - -
856 1081 1616 - - -
856 - - - - -
1020 - - - - -
886 - - - - -
EB NB SB
8.5 7.3 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1616 - 1055 - -
0.034 - 0.033 - -
7.3 0 8.5 - -
A A A - -
0.1 - 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Demaree St & Arlet Ave
PM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.3 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
3 29 50 0 0 5
3 29 50 0 0 5
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
3 32 54 0 0 5
Minor2 Major1 Major2
112 3 5 0 - 0
3 - - - - -
109 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
885 1081 1616 - - -
1020 - - - - -
916 - - - - -
- - -
856 1081 1616 - - -
856 - - - - -
1020 - - - - -
886 - - - - -
EB NB SB
8.5 7.3 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1616 - 1055 - -
0.034 - 0.033 - -
7.3 0 8.5 - -
A A A - -
0.1 - 0.1 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:4
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Arlet Ave (Minor Street)
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:4
12 11 10
5 0 0
1 3 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 29 0 4
50 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:55
Minor High Volume:32
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Arlet Ave
(Major Street)
Demaree St
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Demaree St & Arlet Ave
AM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 - 0
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB NB SB
0 0 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - 0 - -
A - A - -
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Demaree St & Arlet Ave
AM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
8.1 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
5 44 14 0 0 1
5 44 14 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
5 48 15 0 0 1
Minor2 Major1 Major2
31 1 1 0 - 0
1 - - - - -
30 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
983 1084 1622 - - -
1022 - - - - -
993 - - - - -
- - -
974 1084 1622 - - -
974 - - - - -
1022 - - - - -
984 - - - - -
EB NB SB
8.5 7.2 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1622 - 1072 - -
0.009 - 0.05 - -
7.2 0 8.5 - -
A A A - -
0 - 0.2 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Demaree St & Arlet Ave
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
8.1 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
5 44 14 0 0 1
5 44 14 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
5 48 15 0 0 1
Minor2 Major1 Major2
31 1 1 0 - 0
1 - - - - -
30 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
983 1084 1622 - - -
1022 - - - - -
993 - - - - -
- - -
974 1084 1622 - - -
974 - - - - -
1022 - - - - -
984 - - - - -
EB NB SB
8.5 7.2 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1622 - 1072 - -
0.009 - 0.05 - -
7.2 0 8.5 - -
A A A - -
0 - 0.2 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:4
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Arlet Ave (Minor Street)
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:4
12 11 10
1 0 0
1 5 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 44 0 4
14 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:49
Minor High Volume:14
Demaree St
(Major Street)
Arlet Ave
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Demaree St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 5
Demaree St & Pratt Rd
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Demaree St & Pratt Rd
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.4 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
27 21 233 99 56 312
27 21 233 99 56 312
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
200 - - 350 - -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
29 23 253 108 61 339
Minor1 Major1 Major2
714 253 0 0 253 0
253 - - - - -
461 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
398 786 - - 1312 -
789 - - - - -
635 - - - - -
- - -
375 786 - - 1312 -
375 - - - - -
789 - - - - -
599 - - - - -
WB NB SB
12.9 0 1.2
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 375 786 1312 -
- - 0.078 0.029 0.046 -
- - 15.4 9.7 7.9 0
- - C A A A
- - 0.3 0.1 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Demaree St & Pratt Rd
PM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.6 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
27 32 272 99 63 334
27 32 272 99 63 334
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
200 - - 350 - -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
29 35 296 108 68 363
Minor1 Major1 Major2
796 296 0 0 296 0
296 - - - - -
500 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
356 743 - - 1265 -
755 - - - - -
609 - - - - -
- - -
332 743 - - 1265 -
332 - - - - -
755 - - - - -
568 - - - - -
WB NB SB
13.2 0 1.3
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 332 743 1265 -
- - 0.088 0.047 0.054 -
- - 16.9 10.1 8 0
- - C B A A
- - 0.3 0.1 0.2 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Demaree St & Pratt Rd
PM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.6 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
27 32 272 99 63 334
27 32 272 99 63 334
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
200 - - 350 - -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
29 35 296 108 68 363
Minor1 Major1 Major2
796 296 0 0 296 0
296 - - - - -
500 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
356 743 - - 1265 -
755 - - - - -
609 - - - - -
- - -
332 743 - - 1265 -
332 - - - - -
755 - - - - -
568 - - - - -
WB NB SB
13.2 0 1.3
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 332 743 1265 -
- - 0.088 0.047 0.054 -
- - 16.9 10.1 8 0
- - C B A A
- - 0.3 0.1 0.2 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:5
12 11 10
0 312 56
1 0 21 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 27 4
0 233 99
7 8 9
Major Total:700
Minor High Volume:48
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:5
12 11 10
0 334 63
1 0 32 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 27 4
0 272 99
7 8 9
Major Total:768
Minor High Volume:59
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Demaree St
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Demaree St & Pratt Rd
AM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.2 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
48 60 282 32 28 237
48 60 282 32 28 237
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
200 - - 350 - -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
52 65 307 35 30 258
Minor1 Major1 Major2
625 307 0 0 307 0
307 - - - - -
318 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
449 733 - - 1254 -
746 - - - - -
738 - - - - -
- - -
436 733 - - 1254 -
436 - - - - -
746 - - - - -
717 - - - - -
WB NB SB
12.2 0 0.8
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 436 733 1254 -
- - 0.12 0.089 0.024 -
- - 14.4 10.4 7.9 0
- - B B A A
- - 0.4 0.3 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Demaree St & Pratt Rd
AM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.3 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
48 63 293 32 39 271
48 63 293 32 39 271
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
200 - - 350 - -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
52 68 318 35 42 295
Minor1 Major1 Major2
697 318 0 0 318 0
318 - - - - -
379 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
407 723 - - 1242 -
738 - - - - -
692 - - - - -
- - -
391 723 - - 1242 -
391 - - - - -
738 - - - - -
664 - - - - -
WB NB SB
12.7 0 1
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 391 723 1242 -
- - 0.133 0.095 0.034 -
- - 15.6 10.5 8 0
- - C B A A
- - 0.5 0.3 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Demaree St & Pratt Rd
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.3 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
48 63 293 32 39 271
48 63 293 32 39 271
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
200 - - 350 - -
0 - 0 - - 0
0 - 0 - - 0
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
52 68 318 35 42 295
Minor1 Major1 Major2
697 318 0 0 318 0
318 - - - - -
379 - - - - -
6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
5.42 - - - - -
5.42 - - - - -
3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
407 723 - - 1242 -
738 - - - - -
692 - - - - -
- - -
391 723 - - 1242 -
391 - - - - -
738 - - - - -
664 - - - - -
WB NB SB
12.7 0 1
B
NBT NBR WBLn1 WBLn2 SBL SBT
- - 391 723 1242 -
- - 0.133 0.095 0.034 -
- - 15.6 10.5 8 0
- - C B A A
- - 0.5 0.3 0.1 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:5
12 11 10
0 237 28
1 0 60 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 48 4
0 282 32
7 8 9
Major Total:579
Minor High Volume:108
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:5
12 11 10
0 271 39
1 0 63 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 48 4
0 293 32
7 8 9
Major Total:635
Minor High Volume:111
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 6
Country Center St & Pratt Rd
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Country Center St & Pratt Rd
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.2 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
81 14 5 51 11 7
81 14 5 51 11 7
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - 125 - 235 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
88 15 5 55 12 8
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 103 0 162 96
- - - - 96 -
- - - - 66 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1489 - 829 960
- - - - 928 -
- - - - 957 -
- - -
- - 1489 - 826 960
- - - - 826 -
- - - - 928 -
- - - - 954 -
EB WB NB
0 0.7 9.2
A
NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
826 960 - - 1489 -
0.014 0.008 - - 0.004 -
9.4 8.8 - - 7.4 -
A A - - A -
0 0 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Country Center St & Pratt Rd
PM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.2 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
86 16 5 59 14 7
86 16 5 59 14 7
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - 125 - 235 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
93 17 5 64 15 8
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 111 0 177 102
- - - - 102 -
- - - - 75 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1479 - 813 953
- - - - 922 -
- - - - 948 -
- - -
- - 1479 - 810 953
- - - - 810 -
- - - - 922 -
- - - - 945 -
EB WB NB
0 0.6 9.3
A
NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
810 953 - - 1479 -
0.019 0.008 - - 0.004 -
9.5 8.8 - - 7.4 -
A A - - A -
0.1 0 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Country Center St & Pratt Rd
PM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.2 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
86 16 5 59 14 7
86 16 5 59 14 7
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - 125 - 235 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
93 17 5 64 15 8
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 111 0 177 102
- - - - 102 -
- - - - 75 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1479 - 813 953
- - - - 922 -
- - - - 948 -
- - -
- - 1479 - 810 953
- - - - 810 -
- - - - 922 -
- - - - 945 -
EB WB NB
0 0.6 9.3
A
NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
810 953 - - 1479 -
0.019 0.008 - - 0.004 -
9.5 8.8 - - 7.4 -
A A - - A -
0.1 0 - - 0 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:6
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 81 51 5
3 14 5 4
11 0 7
7 8 9
Major Total:151
Minor High Volume:18
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:6
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 86 59 5
3 16 5 4
14 0 7
7 8 9
Major Total:166
Minor High Volume:21
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Country Center St & Pratt Rd
AM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.4 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
57 10 1 49 18 2
57 10 1 49 18 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - 125 - 235 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
62 11 1 53 20 2
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 73 0 122 67
- - - - 67 -
- - - - 55 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1527 - 873 997
- - - - 956 -
- - - - 968 -
- - -
- - 1527 - 872 997
- - - - 872 -
- - - - 956 -
- - - - 967 -
EB WB NB
0 0.1 9.1
A
NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
872 997 - - 1527 -
0.022 0.002 - - 0.001 -
9.2 8.6 - - 7.4 -
A A - - A -
0.1 0 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Country Center St & Pratt Rd
AM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.3 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
65 13 1 51 19 2
65 13 1 51 19 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - 125 - 235 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
71 14 1 55 21 2
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 85 0 136 78
- - - - 78 -
- - - - 58 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1512 - 857 983
- - - - 945 -
- - - - 965 -
- - -
- - 1512 - 856 983
- - - - 856 -
- - - - 945 -
- - - - 964 -
EB WB NB
0 0.1 9.2
A
NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
856 983 - - 1512 -
0.024 0.002 - - 0.001 -
9.3 8.7 - - 7.4 -
A A - - A -
0.1 0 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Country Center St & Pratt Rd
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1.3 EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
65 13 1 51 19 2
65 13 1 51 19 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - 125 - 235 -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
71 14 1 55 21 2
Major1 Major2 Minor1
0 0 85 0 136 78
- - - - 78 -
- - - - 58 -
- - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
- - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
- - 1512 - 857 983
- - - - 945 -
- - - - 965 -
- - -
- - 1512 - 856 983
- - - - 856 -
- - - - 945 -
- - - - 964 -
EB WB NB
0 0.1 9.2
A
NBLn1 NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT
856 983 - - 1512 -
0.024 0.002 - - 0.001 -
9.3 8.7 - - 7.4 -
A A - - A -
0.1 0 - - 0 -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:6
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 57 49 5
3 10 1 4
18 0 2
7 8 9
Major Total:117
Minor High Volume:20
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:6
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 65 51 5
3 13 1 4
19 0 2
7 8 9
Major Total:130
Minor High Volume:21
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Minor Street)
Country Center St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 7
Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 87 56 0 0 0
0 87 56 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 95 61 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 95 0 217 0
- - - - 122 -
- - - - 95 -
4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22
- - - - 5.52 -
- - - - - -
2.218 - - - 4.0183.318
- - - - 681 -
- - - - 795 -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
EB NB SB
0 0
A
NBL NBT EBL EBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - 0 - 0
- - A - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
PM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 92 64 0 0 0
0 92 64 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 100 70 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 100 0 239 0
- - - - 139 -
- - - - 100 -
4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22
- - - - 5.52 -
- - - - - -
2.218 - - - 4.0183.318
- - - - 662 -
- - - - 782 -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
EB NB SB
0 0
A
NBL NBT EBL EBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - 0 - 0
- - A - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
PM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 92 64 0 0 0
0 92 64 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 100 70 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 100 0 239 0
- - - - 139 -
- - - - 100 -
4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22
- - - - 5.52 -
- - - - - -
2.218 - - - 4.0183.318
- - - - 662 -
- - - - 782 -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
EB NB SB
0 0
A
NBL NBT EBL EBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - 0 - 0
- - A - A
- - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:7
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 87 0 4
56 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:87
Minor High Volume:56
Mooney Blvd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Mooney Blvd
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:7
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 92 0 4
64 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:92
Minor High Volume:64
Mooney Blvd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Mooney Blvd
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
AM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 57 49 0 0 0
0 57 49 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 62 53 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 62 0 169 0
- - - - 107 -
- - - - 62 -
4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22
- - - - 5.52 -
- - - - - -
2.218 - - - 4.0183.318
- - - - 724 -
- - - - 807 -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
EB NB SB
0 0
A
NBL NBT EBL EBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - 0 - 0
- - A - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
AM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 65 51 0 0 0
0 65 51 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 71 55 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 71 0 182 0
- - - - 111 -
- - - - 71 -
4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22
- - - - 5.52 -
- - - - - -
2.218 - - - 4.0183.318
- - - - 712 -
- - - - 804 -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
EB NB SB
0 0
A
NBL NBT EBL EBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - 0 - 0
- - A - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Mooney Blvd & Pratt Rd
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
0 65 51 0 0 0
0 65 51 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
0 - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 71 55 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 71 0 182 0
- - - - 111 -
- - - - 71 -
4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22
- - - - 5.52 -
- - - - - -
2.218 - - - 4.0183.318
- - - - 712 -
- - - - 804 -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
EB NB SB
0 0
A
NBL NBT EBL EBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - 0 - 0
- - A - A
- - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:7
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 57 0 4
49 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:57
Minor High Volume:49
Mooney Blvd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Mooney Blvd
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:7
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 65 0 4
51 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:65
Minor High Volume:51
Mooney Blvd
(Major Street)
Pratt Rd
(Major Street)
(Minor Street)
Mooney Blvd
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 8
Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 AWSC
8: Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.5 A
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 73 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 73 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 0 79 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
1 1 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 1 1
NB SB WB EB
1 1 1 1
0 0 7.5 7.4
- - A A
NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
0% 0% 0% 0%
100% 100% 100% 100%
0% 0% 0% 0%
Stop Stop Stop Stop
98 0 0 73
0 0 0 0
98 0 0 73
0 0 0 0
107 0 0 79
1 1 1 1
0.118 0 0 0.088
3.993 4.254 4.254 4.013
Yes Yes Yes Yes
900 0 0 894
2.007 2.329 2.329 2.032
0.119 0 0 0.088
7.5 7.3 7.3 7.4
A N N A
0.4 0 0 0.3
HCM 2010 AWSC
8: Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.5 A
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 73 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 73 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 0 79 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
1 1 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 1 1
NB SB WB EB
1 1 1 1
0 0 7.5 7.4
- - A A
NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
0% 0% 0% 0%
100% 100% 100% 100%
0% 0% 0% 0%
Stop Stop Stop Stop
98 0 0 73
0 0 0 0
98 0 0 73
0 0 0 0
107 0 0 79
1 1 1 1
0.118 0 0 0.088
3.993 4.254 4.254 4.013
Yes Yes Yes Yes
900 0 0 894
2.007 2.329 2.329 2.032
0.119 0 0 0.088
7.5 7.3 7.3 7.4
A N N A
0.4 0 0 0.3
HCM 2010 AWSC
8: Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.5 A
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 73 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 73 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 0 79 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
1 1 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 1 1
NB SB WB EB
1 1 1 1
0 0 7.5 7.4
- - A A
NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
0% 0% 0% 0%
100% 100% 100% 100%
0% 0% 0% 0%
Stop Stop Stop Stop
98 0 0 73
0 0 0 0
98 0 0 73
0 0 0 0
107 0 0 79
1 1 1 1
0.118 0 0 0.088
3.993 4.254 4.254 4.013
Yes Yes Yes Yes
900 0 0 894
2.007 2.329 2.329 2.032
0.119 0 0 0.088
7.5 7.3 7.3 7.4
A N N A
0.4 0 0 0.3
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:8
12 11 10
0 73 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 98 0
7 8 9
Major Total:171
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Akers St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:8
12 11 10
0 73 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 98 0
7 8 9
Major Total:171
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Akers St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Akers St
HCM 2010 AWSC
8: Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future
2025
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.8 A
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 107 1 0 1 131 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 107 1 0 1 131 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 116 1 0 1 142 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
1 1 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 1 1
NB SB WB EB
1 1 1 1
0 0 7.7 7.8
- - A A
NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
1% 0% 0% 1%
98% 100% 100% 99%
1% 0% 0% 0%
Stop Stop Stop Stop
109 0 0 132
1 0 0 1
107 0 0 131
1 0 0 0
118 0 0 143
1 1 1 1
0.133 0 0 0.16
4.037 4.492 4.492 4.023
Yes Yes Yes Yes
887 0 0 892
2.064 2.492 2.492 2.046
0.133 0 0 0.16
7.7 7.5 7.5 7.8
A N N A
0.5 0 0 0.6
HCM 2010 AWSC
8: Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.8 A
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 107 1 0 1 131 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 107 1 0 1 131 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 116 1 0 1 142 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
1 1 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 1 1
NB SB WB EB
1 1 1 1
0 0 7.7 7.8
- - A A
NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
1% 0% 0% 1%
98% 100% 100% 99%
1% 0% 0% 0%
Stop Stop Stop Stop
109 0 0 132
1 0 0 1
107 0 0 131
1 0 0 0
118 0 0 143
1 1 1 1
0.133 0 0 0.16
4.037 4.492 4.492 4.023
Yes Yes Yes Yes
887 0 0 892
2.064 2.492 2.492 2.046
0.133 0 0 0.16
7.7 7.5 7.5 7.8
A N N A
0.5 0 0 0.6
HCM 2010 AWSC
8: Akers St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Number of Lanes
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Lane
Vol Left, %
Vol Thru, %
Vol Right, %
Sign Control
Traffic Vol by Lane
LT Vol
Through Vol
RT Vol
Lane Flow Rate
Geometry Grp
Degree of Util (X)
Departure Headway (Hd)
Convergence, Y/N
Cap
Service Time
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th-tile Q
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
7.8 A
EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 107 1 0 1 131 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 107 1 0 1 131 0
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 116 1 0 1 142 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB
WB EB SB NB
1 1 1 1
SB NB EB WB
1 1 1 1
NB SB WB EB
1 1 1 1
0 0 7.7 7.8
- - A A
NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
1% 0% 0% 1%
98% 100% 100% 99%
1% 0% 0% 0%
Stop Stop Stop Stop
109 0 0 132
1 0 0 1
107 0 0 131
1 0 0 0
118 0 0 143
1 1 1 1
0.133 0 0 0.16
4.037 4.492 4.492 4.023
Yes Yes Yes Yes
887 0 0 892
2.064 2.492 2.492 2.046
0.133 0 0 0.16
7.7 7.5 7.5 7.8
A N N A
0.5 0 0 0.6
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:8
12 11 10
0 131 1
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
1 107 1
7 8 9
Major Total:241
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Akers St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Akers St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:8
12 11 10
0 131 1
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
1 107 1
7 8 9
Major Total:241
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Akers St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Akers St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 9
Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
9: Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
3.5184.0183.318 3.5184.0183.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 0 0 0
A A
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 0 - -
A - - A A A - -
- - - - - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
9: Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
3.5184.0183.318 3.5184.0183.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 0 0 0
A A
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 0 - -
A - - A A A - -
- - - - - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
9: Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
3.5184.0183.318 3.5184.0183.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 0 0 0
A A
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 0 - -
A - - A A A - -
- - - - - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:9
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:9
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Linwood St
HCM 2010 TWSC
9: Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
3.5184.0183.318 3.5184.0183.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 0 0 0
A A
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 0 - -
A - - A A A - -
- - - - - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
9: Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
3.5184.0183.318 3.5184.0183.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 0 0 0
A A
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 0 - -
A - - A A A - -
- - - - - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
9: Linwood St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free - - None - - None - - None - - None
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
0 0 - 0 0 - - - - - - -
7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -
3.5184.0183.318 3.5184.0183.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
EB WB NB SB
0 0 0 0
A A
NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
0 - - 0 0 0 - -
A - - A A A - -
- - - - - - - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:9
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:9
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Linwood St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 10
N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
4.6 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 1 1 5 8 0
0 1 1 5 8 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 5 9 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
7 0 - 0 5 4
- - - - 4 -
- - - - 1 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1614 - - - 1017 1080
- - - - 1019 -
- - - - 1022 -
- - -
1614 - - - 1017 1080
- - - - 1017 -
- - - - 1019 -
- - - - 1022 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.6
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1614 - - - 1017
- - - - 0.009
0 - - - 8.6
A - - - A
0 - - - 0
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.5 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 1 1 75 49 0
0 1 1 75 49 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 82 53 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
83 0 - 0 43 42
- - - - 42 -
- - - - 1 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1514 - - - 968 1029
- - - - 980 -
- - - - 1022 -
- - -
1514 - - - 968 1029
- - - - 968 -
- - - - 980 -
- - - - 1022 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.9
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1514 - - - 968
- - - - 0.055
0 - - - 8.9
A - - - A
0 - - - 0.2
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
3.5 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 1 1 75 49 0
0 1 1 75 49 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 82 53 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
83 0 - 0 43 42
- - - - 42 -
- - - - 1 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1514 - - - 968 1029
- - - - 980 -
- - - - 1022 -
- - -
1514 - - - 968 1029
- - - - 968 -
- - - - 980 -
- - - - 1022 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.9
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1514 - - - 968
- - - - 0.055
0 - - - 8.9
A - - - A
0 - - - 0.2
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:10
12 11 10
0 0 8
1 0 5 6
2 1 1 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:8
Minor High Volume:6
(Major Street)
N Chinowth St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:10
12 11 10
0 0 49
1 0 75 6
2 1 1 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:77
Minor High Volume:49
(Minor Street)
N Chinowth St
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
5.1 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 1 1 2 5 1
0 1 1 2 5 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 2 5 1
Major1 Major2 Minor2
3 0 - 0 3 2
- - - - 2 -
- - - - 1 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1619 - - - 1019 1082
- - - - 1021 -
- - - - 1022 -
- - -
1619 - - - 1019 1082
- - - - 1019 -
- - - - 1021 -
- - - - 1022 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.5
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1619 - - - 1029
- - - - 0.006
0 - - - 8.5
A - - - A
0 - - - 0
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
6.5 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 1 1 23 68 1
0 1 1 23 68 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 25 74 1
Major1 Major2 Minor2
26 0 - 0 15 14
- - - - 14 -
- - - - 1 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1588 - - - 1004 1066
- - - - 1009 -
- - - - 1022 -
- - -
1588 - - - 1004 1066
- - - - 1004 -
- - - - 1009 -
- - - - 1022 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.9
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1588 - - - 1005
- - - - 0.075
0 - - - 8.9
A - - - A
0 - - - 0.2
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: N Chinowth St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
6.5 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 1 1 23 68 1
0 1 1 23 68 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 1 1 25 74 1
Major1 Major2 Minor2
26 0 - 0 15 14
- - - - 14 -
- - - - 1 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1588 - - - 1004 1066
- - - - 1009 -
- - - - 1022 -
- - -
1588 - - - 1004 1066
- - - - 1004 -
- - - - 1009 -
- - - - 1022 -
EB WB SB
0 0 8.9
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1588 - - - 1005
- - - - 0.075
0 - - - 8.9
A - - - A
0 - - - 0.2
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:10
12 11 10
1 0 5
1 0 2 6
2 1 1 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:6
Minor High Volume:3
(Major Street)
N Chinowth St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:10
12 11 10
1 0 68
1 0 23 6
2 1 1 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:69
Minor High Volume:24
(Major Street)
N Chinowth St
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 11
Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 - 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB SB
0 0 0
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - - 0
A - - - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 41 70 29 17 0
0 41 70 29 17 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 45 76 32 18 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
108 0 - 0 137 92
- - - - 92 -
- - - - 45 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1483 - - - 856 965
- - - - 932 -
- - - - 977 -
- - -
1483 - - - 856 965
- - - - 856 -
- - - - 932 -
- - - - 977 -
EB WB SB
0 0 9.3
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1483 - - - 856
- - - - 0.022
0 - - - 9.3
A - - - A
0 - - - 0.1
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
1 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 41 70 29 17 0
0 41 70 29 17 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 45 76 32 18 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
108 0 - 0 137 92
- - - - 92 -
- - - - 45 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1483 - - - 856 965
- - - - 932 -
- - - - 977 -
- - -
1483 - - - 856 965
- - - - 856 -
- - - - 932 -
- - - - 977 -
EB WB SB
0 0 9.3
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1483 - - - 856
- - - - 0.022
0 - - - 9.3
A - - - A
0 - - - 0.1
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:11
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Coburn Ave
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:11
12 11 10
0 0 17
1 0 29 6
2 41 70 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:140
Minor High Volume:17
(Minor Street)
Coburn Ave
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
-
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
0 0 - 0 0 0
- - - - 0 -
- - - - 0 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
EB WB SB
0 0 0
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
- - - - -
- - - - -
0 - - - 0
A - - - A
- - - - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 63 21 9 26 0
0 63 21 9 26 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 68 23 10 28 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
33 0 - 0 96 28
- - - - 28 -
- - - - 68 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1579 - - - 903 1047
- - - - 995 -
- - - - 955 -
- - -
1579 - - - 903 1047
- - - - 903 -
- - - - 995 -
- - - - 955 -
EB WB SB
0 0 9.1
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1579 - - - 903
- - - - 0.031
0 - - - 9.1
A - - - A
0 - - - 0.1
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: Coburn Ave & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
0 63 21 9 26 0
0 63 21 9 26 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
- None - None - None
- - - - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
- 0 0 - 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
0 68 23 10 28 0
Major1 Major2 Minor2
33 0 - 0 96 28
- - - - 28 -
- - - - 68 -
4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
- - - - 5.42 -
- - - - 5.42 -
2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
1579 - - - 903 1047
- - - - 995 -
- - - - 955 -
- - -
1579 - - - 903 1047
- - - - 903 -
- - - - 995 -
- - - - 955 -
EB WB SB
0 0 9.1
A
EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
1579 - - - 903
- - - - 0.031
0 - - - 9.1
A - - - A
0 - - - 0.1
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:11
12 11 10
0 0 0
1 0 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:0
Minor High Volume:0
(Major Street)
Coburn Ave
Shannon Prkwy
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:11
12 11 10
0 0 26
1 0 9 6
2 63 21 5
3 0 0 4
0 0 0
7 8 9
Major Total:93
Minor High Volume:26
(Minor Street)
Coburn Ave
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Shannon Prkwy
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 12
Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.9 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
6 20 35 287 297 5
6 20 35 287 297 5
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - 175 - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
7 22 38 312 323 5
Minor2 Major1 Major2
558 326 328 0 - 0
326 - - - - -
232 - - - - -
6.63 6.23 4.12 - - -
5.43 - - - - -
5.83 - - - - -
3.519 3.319 2.218 - - -
475 714 1232 - - -
731 - - - - -
785 - - - - -
- - -
460 714 1232 - - -
460 - - - - -
731 - - - - -
761 - - - - -
EB NB SB
11 0.9 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1232 - 633 - -
0.031 - 0.045 - -
8 - 11 - -
A - B - -
0.1 - 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.4 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
6 78 134 326 319 5
6 78 134 326 319 5
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - 175 - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
7 85 146 354 347 5
Minor2 Major1 Major2
817 349 352 0 - 0
349 - - - - -
468 - - - - -
6.63 6.23 4.12 - - -
5.43 - - - - -
5.83 - - - - -
3.519 3.319 2.218 - - -
330 693 1207 - - -
713 - - - - -
597 - - - - -
- - -
290 693 1207 - - -
290 - - - - -
713 - - - - -
525 - - - - -
EB NB SB
11.7 2.4 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1207 - 630 - -
0.121 - 0.145 - -
8.4 - 11.7 - -
A - B - -
0.4 - 0.5 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
PM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.4 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
6 78 134 326 319 5
6 78 134 326 319 5
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - 175 - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
7 85 146 354 347 5
Minor2 Major1 Major2
817 349 352 0 - 0
349 - - - - -
468 - - - - -
6.63 6.23 4.12 - - -
5.43 - - - - -
5.83 - - - - -
3.519 3.319 2.218 - - -
330 693 1207 - - -
713 - - - - -
597 - - - - -
- - -
290 693 1207 - - -
290 - - - - -
713 - - - - -
525 - - - - -
EB NB SB
11.7 2.4 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1207 - 630 - -
0.121 - 0.145 - -
8.4 - 11.7 - -
A - B - -
0.4 - 0.5 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future
Intersection #:12
12 11 10
5 297 0
1 6 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 20 0 4
35 287 0
7 8 9
Major Total:624
Minor High Volume:26
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:PM Future+Project
Intersection #:12
12 11 10
5 319 0
1 6 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 78 0 4
134 326 0
7 8 9
Major Total:784
Minor High Volume:84
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
0.7 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
5 28 4 288 206 2
5 28 4 288 206 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - 175 - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
5 30 4 313 224 2
Minor2 Major1 Major2
390 225 226 0 - 0
225 - - - - -
165 - - - - -
6.63 6.23 4.12 - - -
5.43 - - - - -
5.83 - - - - -
3.519 3.319 2.218 - - -
600 814 1342 - - -
812 - - - - -
848 - - - - -
- - -
598 814 1342 - - -
598 - - - - -
812 - - - - -
845 - - - - -
EB NB SB
9.9 0.1 0
A
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1342 - 772 - -
0.003 - 0.046 - -
7.7 - 9.9 - -
A - A - -
0 - 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.2 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
5 116 33 299 240 2
5 116 33 299 240 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - 175 - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
5 126 36 325 261 2
Minor2 Major1 Major2
496 262 263 0 - 0
262 - - - - -
234 - - - - -
6.63 6.23 4.12 - - -
5.43 - - - - -
5.83 - - - - -
3.519 3.319 2.218 - - -
518 776 1301 - - -
781 - - - - -
783 - - - - -
- - -
504 776 1301 - - -
504 - - - - -
781 - - - - -
761 - - - - -
EB NB SB
10.7 0.8 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1301 - 759 - -
0.028 - 0.173 - -
7.8 - 10.7 - -
A - B - -
0.1 - 0.6 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
12: Demaree St & Shannon Prkwy
AM Future+Project with Mitigation�
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s
HCM LOS
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
Capacity (veh/h)
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
HCM Control Delay (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
646-02
Ruettgers & Schuler Civil Engineers
Synchro 9 Report
2.2 EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
5 116 33 299 240 2
5 116 33 299 240 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
- None - None - None
0 - 175 - - -
0 - - 0 0 -
0 - - 0 0 -
92 92 92 92 92 92
2 2 2 2 2 2
5 126 36 325 261 2
Minor2 Major1 Major2
496 262 263 0 - 0
262 - - - - -
234 - - - - -
6.63 6.23 4.12 - - -
5.43 - - - - -
5.83 - - - - -
3.519 3.319 2.218 - - -
518 776 1301 - - -
781 - - - - -
783 - - - - -
- - -
504 776 1301 - - -
504 - - - - -
781 - - - - -
761 - - - - -
EB NB SB
10.7 0.8 0
B
NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
1301 - 759 - -
0.028 - 0.173 - -
7.8 - 10.7 - -
A - B - -
0.1 - 0.6 - -
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future
Intersection #:12
12 11 10
2 206 0
1 5 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 28 0 4
4 288 0
7 8 9
Major Total:500
Minor High Volume:33
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Rural Peak Hour Signal Warrant
Intersection Does Not Meet Signal Warrant
Scenario:AM Future+Project
Intersection #:12
12 11 10
2 240 0
1 5 0 6
2 0 0 5
3 116 0 4
33 299 0
7 8 9
Major Total:574
Minor High Volume:121
(Major Street)
Demaree St
(Minor Street)
Shannon Prkwy
(Major Street)
Demaree St
Traffic Study 646-02
Intersection 13
Demaree St & Shannon Pkwy
HCM 2010 TWSC
13: Demaree St & Shannon Pkwy
PM Future
2025
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
Movement
Traffic Vol, veh/h
Future Vol, veh/h
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
Sign Control
RT Channelized
Storage Length
Veh in Median Storage, #
Grade, %
Peak Hour Factor
Heavy Vehicles, %
Mvmt Flow
Major/Minor
Conflicting Flow All
Stage 1
Stage 2
Critical Hdwy
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
Follow-up Hdwy
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
HCM Control Delay, s