Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19-54P Gateway Develop Traffic Study A Q 9® MILONE & MACBROOM MEMORANDUM TO: Ben Tripp—Metro Realty Group, Ltd. FROM: Kwesi Brown, PE, PTOE—Milone &MacBroom, Inc. RE: Traffic Evaluation of Buckland Road Master Plan, South Windsor DATE: November 11,2019 MMI#: 3571-47-01 Milone&MacBroom, Inc. (MMI) has completed an evaluation of the traffic implications associated with the proposed Buckland Road master plan development in South Windsor,Connecticut. The site is located to the north of the existing M&R Liquors site, off Buckland Road. Based on information provided to us by your office, MMI analyzed a master plan site buildout comprising 38,800 square feet of retail and 85,700 square feet of medical office. This memorandum summarizes our traffic evaluation methodology and findings. Study Intersections For the purpose of this evaluation,three intersections(Buckland Road at Hemlock Drive, Buckland Road at Tamarack Avenue [Shops at Evergreen Walk driveway],and Buckland Road at Cedar Avenue/site driveway) were identified as study intersections and analyzed. Site Trip Generation i The site traffic associated with the master plan development was estimated using standard statistical data published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)'. The breakdown of the site trip generation is summarized in Table 1 below. TABLE 1 Site-Generated Traffic i i Retail—38,800 SF 22 14 36 71 "77 148 91 84 175 Medical Office—85,700 SF 152 43 195 83 214 297 152 114 266 subtotal 174 57 231 154 291 445 243 198 441 Internal Capture(10%) 17 6 23 15 29 44 24 20 44 Pass-by(20%of Retail Traffic) Neg. Neg. Neg. 15 15 30 20 20 40 Source: Trip Generation, 10h Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers,2017(ITE#720—Medical Office,#820—Shopping Center) i Under the proposed master plan development, it is estimated that the site would generate approximately 208 total new vehicle trips (157 entering and 51 exiting)during the morning peak hour, 371 total new vehicle trips(124 entering and 247 exiting)during the afternoon peak hour,and 357 total new vehicle trips(199 entering and 158 exiting) during the Saturday midday peak hour, f F f i Trip Generation, 101h Edition,Institute of Transportation Engineers,2017 99 Realty Drive,Cheshire,CT 06410 1203.271.1773 www.MMInc.com CTIMAIMEINHINYIVT i F i� I i i Traffic Evaluation of Buckland Road Master Plan Page 2 November 11,2019 i Future Traffic Based on discussions with your office,a 5-year planning horizon was used for our evaluation. Future (2021) buildout traffic volumes from the recently approved Aldi Supermarket project at 200 Gateway Boulevard in the vicinity of the site were projected to year 2024 utilizing an annual growth rate of 0.6 { percent per the Connecticut Department of Transportation's (CTDOT) Bureau of Policy and Planning. The projected traffic volumes constitute future background traffic without the master plan development in j place. I The estimated site traffic volumes were then added to the 2024 background traffic volumes to derive the future combined (build)traffic volumes. The combined traffic volumes constitute future volumes with the completion of the proposed master plan development. Figures 1, 2,and 3 depict the 2024 combined traffic volumes at the study intersections for the weekday morning,weekday afternoon,and Saturday midday peak hours,respectively. i r Traffic Evaluation The study intersections were evaluated by means of capacity analysis techniques. The analysis was conducted for the weekday morning,weekday afternoon,and Saturday midday peak hours. It should be noted that previously recommended traffic signalization and roadway improvements at the intersection of Buckland Road at Hemlock Avenue as part of the Aldi Supermarket and Chase Bank projects were assumed to be in place. Levels of Service(LOS),which are qualitative measures of the efficiency of i operations in terms of delay and inconvenience to motorists, were then determined. LOS is presented on f a scale of A through F. LOS A describes operations with very short average control delays per vehicle while LOS F describes operations with long average delays. LOS D is generally considered acceptable in urban environments. The findings of LOS at the study intersections under future(2024)conditions { without(background) and with(combined)the estimated master plan site traffic are summarized in Table 2. i E k I I r E (I E F r L MILONE&MACBROOM f i 4[ f i Traffic Evaluation of Buckland Road Master Plan I Page 3 November 11,2019 TABLE 2 Intersection Level of Service Eastbound Left C B C C D C Eastbound Right B -- A -- A - Eastbound Through/Right -- B -- B -- B Westbound Left -- C -- C -- C Westbound Through/Right -- B -- B -- B Northbound Left A A B C B C Northbound Through A A A B A B Southbound Left -- A -- A -- A I Southbound Through A B B C B C Southbound Right A A A A A A Overall A B B C B C Eastbound Left C B C D C D Eastbound Through/Right A B B B B C I Westbound Left B C C C C C Westbound Through/Right B B B B B B Northbound Left A A C D D D Northbound Through/Right A B C B B B Southbound Left A A B A A A Southbound Through/Right B B D C D D Overall B B C C C D Eastbound Left/Through C C D D D D Eastbound Right A A A A B B Westbound Left C C E E E E k E Westbound Through C C D D D D Westbound Right A A A A A A Northbound Left D D E E E E Northbound Through B B C C C C Northbound Right A A A A A A Southbound Left C C E E E E Southbound Through/Right B B D E F F Overall B B D D E E * Future buildout condition includes a new site driveway with a dedicated left-turn lane and shared through/right-turn lane ! arrangement. I�I Q MILONE & MACBROOM f fI I Traffic Evaluation of Buckland Road Master Plan J Page 4 November 11,2019 i Findings and Recommendations Based on the LOS analysis conducted,our findings and recommendations with regard to traffic operations at the study intersections under the proposed maximum site buildout condition are as follows: i f 1. Buckland Road at Cedar Avenue/Site Driveway—The following improvements would be required f at this intersection to operate at an acceptable LOS: • Upgrade the existing traffic signal at this location, including new equipment and timing/phasing changes to accommodate the new site driveway. • Provide a dedicated left-turn Pane and a shared through/right-turn lane arrangement on the new site driveway approach, • Restripe the Cedar Avenue approach to provide a dedicated left-turn lane and shared through/right-turn lane. 2. Buckland Road at Hemlock Drive—The intersection of Buckland Road at Hemlock Drive is expected to operate at an acceptable LOS under future(2024) maximum site buildout conditions and will therefore not require any mitigation beyond the previously recommended signalization and geometric improvements currently being implemented. 3. Buckland Road at Tamarack Avenue—The Buckland Road/Tamarack Avenue intersection under future conditions without the master plan development is expected to operate at overall LOS E during the Saturday midday peak hour. A deterioration in overall LOS is not anticipated with the proposed master plan development in place. Further discussions with CTDOT regarding current and future traffic operational needs are necessary. 4. The size of the proposed master plan development would qualify it as a major traffic generator, which would therefore require an application to the Office of the State Traffic Administration for approval. Enclosures i 3571-47-01-n 1119-memo.docx F f 4 s E s i i I MILONE& MACBROOM k i 4 a O Z N � x U SCHEMATIC Lo tiIrn L 4-7 CEDARAVENUE a� I 33 55-4 8—p $5� w c rn M co SITE SITE 0I t7 4-8 N e0 ti Cl) m N OD 4-20 �10 HEMLOCK DRIVE 'D 30 10 50 0 00 LO It co E I comM 4-35 Cl 40 TAMARACK AVENUE 20 PRIVATE DRIVEWAY 30 25--t> 100 ,f,r--Lf) N OO s U f FUTURE 2024 COMBINED TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY MORNING PEAK HOUR Proposed Buckland Road Masterplan South Windsor, Connecticut /1\ MILONE & ��, MACBROOM FIGURE 1 0 Cr 0 z N � U SCHEMATIC o o LOI�I T 4--42 i CEDAR AVENUE 4' V 'D �'165 ! 135-4 175--�, Lo N M SITE I� I 1 4--42 ! v 4 f LO 0 ocovU�Tl l 4—_50 10 HEMLOCK DRIVE V 80 225—4 10--> 250 rn L, i E I { 0 �CD LO 2 4-135 9 90 TAMARACK AVENUE 110 PRIVATE DRIVEWAY 90 t> 440 �_� LO N OO E i °z Y U c FUTURE 2024 COMBINED TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY AFTERNOON PEAK HOUR Proposed Buckland Road Masterplan South Windsor, Connecticut ! /1\ MILONE & ��, MACBROOM FIGURE 2 i f 1 o � µ � , U i l i SCHEMATIC o to� toN� 4—34 l CEDAR AVENUE v J-107 i 145-4 195� c)r f,; i N � SITE bl Q I � Ul)o o� t N LO L �D a 10 a- 0 ; HEMLOCK DRIVE 90 i 210— 10—D 4 315 r, I ,n N r r r i i i , E i �� co 4-45 i ll105 TAMARACK AVENUE `/ 155 PRIVATE DRIVEWAY 130� 100� 540 o L, M r k O � Z i Q U FUTURE 2024 COMBINED TRAFFIC VOLUMES SATURDAY MIDDAY PEAK HOUR Proposed Buckland Road Masterplan South Windsor, Connecticut 1 MILONE & VQ MACBROOM FIGURE 3 j i ! 1 I i , 1 f I , t t t i APPENDIX s E s E f 8 i i E F E f t E i 1 s i t LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS (MOTORIZED VEHICLE MODE) Level of service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of control delay,which is a measure of driver discomfort,frustration,fuel consumption,and increased travel time. The delay experienced by a motorist is made up of a number of factors that relate to control, geometrics, traffic, and incidents. Total delay is the difference between the travel time actually experienced and the reference travel time that would result during base conditions: in the absence of traffic control, geometric delay,any incidents,and any other vehicles. Specifically,LOS criteria for traffic signals are stated in terms of the average control delay per vehicle,typically for a 15-min analysis period. Delay is a complex measure and depends on a number of variables, including the quality of progression, the cycle length, the green ratio, and the v/c ratio for the lane group. The criteria are given below. LEVEL-OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS MOTORIZED VEHICLE MODE LOS By Volume-to-Capacity Ratios CONTROL DELAY(s/veh) v/c< 1.0 v/c> 1.0 A F < 10 B F > 10 AND< 20 C F >20 AND < 35 D F >35 AND < 55 E F >55 AND < 80 G F F >80 f For approach-based and intersection-wide assessments, LOS is defined solely by control delay. I i Specific descriptions of each LOS for signalized intersections are provided below: Level of Service A describes operations with a control delay of 10 s/veh and 20 s/veh and a volume- to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is low and either progression is exceptionally favorable or the cycle length is very short. If LOS A is the result of favorable progression,most vehicles arrive during the green indication and travel through the intersection without stopping. Level of Service B describes operations with control delay between 10 and 20 s/veh and a volume- to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is low and either progression is highly favorable or the cycle length is short. More vehicles stop than with LOS A. Level of Service C describes operations with control delay between 20 and 35 s/veh and a volume- to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when progression is favorable or the cycle length is moderate. Individual cycle failures(i.e.,one or more queued vehicles are not able to depart as a result of insufficient capacity during the cycle)may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many vehicles still pass through the intersection without stopping. Level of Service D describes operations with control delay between 35 and 55 s/veh and a volume- to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is high and either progression is ineffective or the cycle length is long. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable. Level of Service E describes operations with control delay between 55 and 80 s/veh and a volume- to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is high,progression is unfavorable, and the cycle length is long. Individual cycle failures are frequent. Level of Service F describes operations with control delay exceeding 80 s/veh or a volume-to- capacity ratio greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is very high,progression is very poor,and the cycle length is long. Most cycles fail to clear the queue. Reference: Highway Capacity Manual 6, Transportation Research Board, 2016. f I (f f 7 St 1 1 t f LEVEL OF SERVICE 4 FOR TWO-WAY STOP SIGN CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS The level of service for a TWSC (two-way stop controlled) intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay and is defined for each minor movement.Level of service is not defined for the intersection as a whole. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time,stopped delay,and final acceleration delay. LOS criteria are given in the Table. LOS criteria are given below: LEVEL-OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR AWSC INTERSECTIONS LOS' CONTROL DELAY (s/veh) A < 10 B > 10 AND< 15 C > 15AND < 25 i D >25 AND< 35 E >35 AND < 50 F >50 Note: LOS criteria apply to each lane on a given approach and to each approach on the minor street. LOS is not calculated for major-street approaches or for the intersection as a whole. LOS F is assigned to a movement if the volume-to-capacity ratio exceeds 1.0,regardless of the control delay Reference: Highway Capacity Manual Version 6.0 Transportation Research Board, 2016. 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Background AM Lane Configurations 3 99, Future Volume(vph) 30 25 100 20 40 35 205 715 25 35 895 35 Lane Width�ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 12 12 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95�5• -0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 art w -LO _ ti{ 0 8t1 0 994 Fit Protected 0.973 0.950 0.950 0.950 I Fit Permitted 0.973 0.950 0.950 0.950 �ad Flog frm�� a 3?ktd 158 177b 186 ` 1 J3 43 t 583 £ ��171 t 3518 a' fl Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed(mph) 25 25 40 40 Travel Time(s) 13 1 5.6 11.9 15.7 AdF�Iowv s(vph) 33 27 109 22 43 38 223� 777 27 38 973 38 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 60 109 22 43 38 223 777 27 38 1011 0 urns . Split NA „pm*au Protected Phases 8 8� 5 7 7 1 5� 2 7 1� 6 Pt� l�s s F .4,; x as S errt�l r r x Detector Phase 8 8 5 7 7 �5 2 1 6 Minimum initial(s) 8.5 8.5 51 9.0 9.0 fi 0 51 16.0 9.0 6.0 15.0 Itrnim"it Total Split(s) 1r9.0 f19.0 9.111 14.0 14.0 p 99.1 9.1 27.0 14.0 a F9.1 27.0 I Yellow Time(s) 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 Lost Time Adjust(s) 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 I . 644F'� ...31 5+0' Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag t ?l Lai � ,r .. Yes Yes YesYeS,., 'Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min None None Min i t St �U ?.. 91 117 9 6 9 G, .. l ;t, . i 4015 �r� .�. M Actuated gIC Ratio 0.18 0,23 0.19 119 0.14 0.11 0.64 0.78 012 0.46 NZ3�3 . [? ,0 Control Delay 23.0 5.8 23.5 23,6 0.9 35.6 11.4 0.0 27.6 16.6 Total Delay 23.0 5.8 23.5 23.6 0.9 35.6 11.4 0.0 27.6 16.6 yycc_ y. 1 Approach Delay 11.9 15.2 16.3 17.0 4? 5�» �.`^_-.� ���4^'� ,.,. ?. ..,.. .z...... ..„Z���' S..-,......:� �.„...., .�at6�'s�y�:' _�K.. •a��...xe �^"3>���"r Stops(vph) 47 19 20 35 0 165 375 0 34Y 661 Synchro 10 Report Page 1 I s i r r II i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan Z: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Background AM gkpq Lane Configurations Tric U iumevrji) _.. ,.k_ Future Volume(vph) i �� C^AV+1 ....- , Lane Width eft) Storage Lanes d rid ,>i Lane Util.Factor Fit Protected Satdlpwfll�t) �� ti.=�tiv0 Fiit�{Permitted 1 1J1 $atd l6lAr.E 11).. A Right Turn on Red Link Speed(mph) A8 ` Travel Time(s) Add Flow(vph), a x Lane Group Flow(vph) ITe � Protected Phases 3 arm Detector Phase ,. tiger - Minimum Initial(s) 1.0 Total Split(s) 37.0 �� Yellow Time(s) ellowTime(s)) 4.0 _ _ K:��. .., .,c t� 'Q- Lost Time Adjust(s) ��J l_tat�sit n Lead/Lag Recall Mode None Actuated g/C Ratio -m5y'� ..s.. ,:f .,..�.H-.. ...,. ...r _xs.ro:,<:�. q. .:.:�. ..,...�, a•. . .... y r.L _ �a.,:k�:,� Control Delay .3 ` ¢:.R• 15A..i...Y....WY.:A:Te t'..r.ar' .Sews..... Total Delay ME} y�or yQ as 'k-a"r "ry,y2✓z- `2^�a" `3„n ". s^F�t .., '' or ✓ .-' `* '`"`_�'�".•�_ 'r" r"r' +A Approach Delay 77-1 t 2nC :t�k* .x - 'rrrs-^,�r+"r"..ra'r�p�.�{,e'er7 r t+ "Y^uy'y': s G_'•`' tz' "✓"t'r�t°r .�.+ .,t ', Y.x r.X i Stops(vph) F Synchro 10 Report Page 2 C i i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Background AM I CO Emissions(glhr) 46 42 14 28 5 285 610 8 52 1081 VOC Emissions(911hr) 11 10 3 6 1 66 141 2 12 250 Queue Length 50th(ft) 10 0 7 14 0 43 88 0 13 173 Internal Link Dist ft) 399 124 617 842 yw Base Capacity(vph) 1075 445 368 388 303 364 2278 1255 213 1613 j Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced vlc Ratio 0.06 0.24 0.06 0.11 0.13 0.61 0.34 0.02 0.18 0.63 E ,. e a v^� 1 . v� 1 `..° e° c� `. ,,,Iffill vM yt `i g Area Type: Other 4 1 �A}ctuatted�+Cycle Length 51.4 Lt Control Type Actuated Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay. 16.3 Intersection LOS B HIM Analysis Period(min 15 _ ,r Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ti Splits and Phases; 1:Tamarack Ave 4 2 32 •403 41#07 AM i I r�5 06 i i i 3 t Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Background AM �CO Emissions(gyl{hr) VOC Emissions(glhr) p�lernr�a Uehiel�&�#) iiNf Queue Length 50th(ft) tueue Internal Link Dist(ft) Base Capacity(vph) Spillback Cap Reductn �ra�e- a Rgtlu tn.. .�. ."MMO Reduced vlc Ratio i i f i 3 i 1 G Synchro 10 Report Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 2: Hemlock Drive 2024 Future Background AM " ME,MIJ t;tad, Lane Configurations ]� '� t I;r Future Volume(vph) 45 10 50 30 10 20 80 650 45 25 890 85 ltleal Ib� Q :19�j9k 900 .x.19b' ,a t9tl0_.,,fi19Q(1 Storage Length(ft) 0 0� 0 � 0 260 0 70 0 Taper Len th ft) 25 25 25 25 Ic 1`00 1 00 1 44 161 k 10 ?9 Su 0 0, 5z - 0 9 y.._ ... z,- .... . ... ..v t, , Frt 0.850 0.900 0.990 0.98731, ! Satd.Flow(prat) 0 1790 1583 1770 1676 0 1770 3504 0 1770 3493 0 07 . Satd.Flow(perm) 0 13i32 1583 907 1676 0 305 3504 0 680 3493 0 I tirn`poted 4 Satd.Flow(RyjTOR) 105 22 9 12 I rY y..."... '. L Link Distance(ft) 255 293 922 812 ; Trro- a Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0 92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 d��� )� , '`� �4� .,� � ti 7f179 Y . Shared Lane Traffic(%) WON t< . foyv Turn Type S pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt N}A�- pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Permitted Phases 4 4 8 6 2 ` s Switch Phase M fi1rn�►���,��1 Minimum_ Split(s) 95 150 150 95 150 76 150 100 150 Tb al S' iiAM G a19;C] 16 0 A 19k0., t1ti 4 ,.. 3 ,1j0 €0 u. t 14 Q.,4s, 38r0 ' .. ..G. _fP Total Split 21 1% 17 8%f 17 8% 21 11% 17 8%0 18 9% 45 6% 15 6% 42 2% ! All-RedTime s) 0.1 2.0 2.0 01 2.0 01 2.0 0.1 2.0 i l�i kf s e.a�+S`zc-'�t�'..r'-�U �7Vi�����V� ��IK?�i•9.+"e...tr.`..'ta.,t.:t �� SG�ii�1 �}!, �1�.�:,.:C..�a''""u" Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 5.6 3.6 5.0 3.6 5.0 3.1 5.0 I dlag t ead fag ,..td. Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ' Yes Yes ton NQr . . t€lorle Nc�neN;t} Ngre{.... ... , tTorte . �"iaelitl I Act Effct Green(s) 11.2 11.2 13 9 14.5 35.5 33.7 33.2 29.0 vlc Ratio _ 0.21 0.13 0.10 0.07 0.24 0,35 0.05 0.57 00go,W.... t. 27 21 18 3 11 7t G* _. .'k ..t`. 97 ,. `A 9 v .,,_. <<.- _ , Queue Delay 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f'., 't:.'=1 HIMa . LOS C A B B A A A B 15° � ;� . . ..�°`� Approach LOS B B A B WIN i4 £ 342 t : f Fuel Used(gal) 1 0 0 0 1 9 0 15 s i Synchro 10 Report Page 5 t t i 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 2: Hemlock Drive 2024 Future Background AM w 0 OR:P., QS EO �sions.(,lhr) 4 - �' � �1>�t�' �� �R NOx Emissions(glhr) 8 2 4 3 12 124 4 200 VEusonst �ttr�, Dilemma Vehicles(#) 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 21 _ Queue Length 95th(ft) 61 8 30 23 33 165 13 272 lnr;rl�� Turn Bay Length,0) 260 70 a 6Q �� ss j Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i Ar `"e 7 gftter � � �xn ,.._�k.=. Cycle Length.:90 Natura[Cycle 60 Cdr�troi ypeIcu�fd Uicodrdmted s a s' `� 11,00 4 Maximum We Ratio:0.57 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56 5% ICU Level of Service B Splits and Phases: 2:Hemlock Drive 4 01 ''i3303 4 i i + 4— f 05 1 06 �07 V 08 I f I i E i i i Synchro 10 Report i Page 6 t t t Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 3: Cedar Ave 2024 Future Background AM t Lane Configurations tt tt r fraf(lo �I�mt( P ) . 55 65 > M � r, � � Future Volume(vph) 55 65 105 620 935 75 Storage Length(ft) 0 0 220 200 1� ay�s � torege`(ane� t ��1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Frt 0.850 0.850 Satd Flow(prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3539 1583 Satd Flow(perm) 1770 1583 443 3539 3539 1583 f FS t v .. Satd Flow(RTOR) 71 82 Llrti 6 ) Link Distance(ft) 278 812 489 A� Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0,92 0.92 II �YY(Y�.I��y� 4 ��'� i� ���J� ���Yl 4 ����...�,..��.. ,..,, ,..- � •,. -..5�L 1 - prof Shared Lane Traffic(%) � R Turn Type Prot Prot pm+pt NA NA Perm a ' � I Permitted Phases 6 2 mtk Switch Phase ril ii#ial(s)> , 1 0 0 0700.1 0 1 Minimum Split(s) 155 15.0 7.1 15.0 15.0 15.0 (f�tai � 21 2,10 1$ 4 46 46 0 `< i Total Split °/ 24 7% 24 7% 21.2% 75 3% 541% 54 1% 7me( 3p� .30° y_T77IF1 m.. .1 O.a_ � .. All Red Time 20 20 01 20 20 20 ` Total Lost Time(s� 5 0 5 0 31 5.0 5.0 5.0 `: x. _.r« w Lead Lag Optimizes Yes Yes Yes I Act Effct Green(s) 10.0 10.0 63.9 63.0 56.6 55.6 vlc Ratio 0.27 0.27 0.25 0.24 0.41 0.07 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 LOS C B A A A A �,✓r v,..�(/'�!.` r ��+.., rye �x,� ..w s" .+s .!' qz r x xr�-q..,.�. -'S ;. ,^�.�•-n y :�;d '�"�,�"w ;-� I Approach LOS C _ A A _ f' 'y�;4t -'�^:a K a- .:a '�'A'-.tr' �'.,x L �t• �w... .�-r`rs+ � '"3�"�.- ',?ram-ri'�`rx"� -�•°rr ,yam" y f Fuel Used(gal) 1 0 1 5 8 0 j Synchro 10 Report Page 7 t t 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 3: Cedar Ave 2024 Future Background AM t EPA r NOx Emissions(glhr) 10 5 12 71 113 5 �fQ��►n�ssionss(g/ttr) .. �2 ' ....,���. �..H�:���_ ....���� A1�a.,..� . �>> �. `.�... s k��,.��.4�..�t}F Dilemma Vehicles{#) 0 0 0 34 50 0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 62 35 20 59 167 15 iurnBayLen th ft) 226 200 t3a�e Casa, 1058 ... . RB Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 f Sp ANY yyS�torayg�e Cap Reductn JJAA11 0 0 0 0 0 0 tt1 Jr�rID'D M3- J z. ..' .W'+c..:i.W.. ww" O I y,mcxv_ "$� Cycle Length:85 ' �' fe LengtV�T Natural Cycle:50 ! [y uatet #_r1t�ortlmt Maximum vlc Ratio:0.41 Of MO .. Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.7% ICU Level of.Service A-Aww � f ... z,�LS..�..�...i�:.,�a ..vr�"::hk�..�= Splits and Phases: 3:Cedar Ave 01 � 02 04 ligig ;ll . . . I t S t l f f l i f E E i S I I t t Synchro 10 Report k Page 8 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Background PM IN Lane Configurations �`aff€G Volume u h � 13Q , ::���:�r�`� �.,� � `✓�. T: r." �_.�'�13tt ."�85 ,�, 1�5rz�. 7200 .6 Future Volume(vph) 130 90 440 110 _95 135 545 1130 85 155 1200 65 )deallow�yphpl� � 190Qr _9�17U Bane Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 12 12 Stor Le 2 `� 0 290 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 w�, Tapef L ►19� 2 . , �. y . . 25 l Lane Util.Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 HM�. � � e Fit Protected 0.971 0.950 0.950 0,950 �w �...". 30a33,. tuft .. 3A1 ..... 0' Fit Permitted 0.971 0.950 0.950 0.950 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed(mph) 25 25 40 40 Travel Time s� 131 5.6 11.9 15.7 92 R 0 Adj.Flow(vph) < 141 98 478 120 103 147 592 1228 92 168 1304 71 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 239 478 120 103 147 592 1228 92 168 1375 < 0 fui fYFe Split , " .'Np r pmu Split ,. � 3o�r Prat it .gym+ou! ,; Path,;'' Protected Phases 8 8 5 7 7 1 5 2 7 1 6 Detector Phase 8 8 5 7 7 5 2� �. 1 6 I , yr itch Phase ' . Minimum Initial(s) 9.0 9.0 51 9 0 9 0 6.0 51 15 0 9.0 6.0 15.0 e 9V1- a Total 1it s} 19 0 19 0 24 0 29 0 29 0 24 0 24 0 47 0 29 0 24 0 47 0 i °la k', ME 1 4°l0 8:£"I t'% t. Yellow Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1�2�cfi71[i?e'(s)3_., .. � 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 v 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag andI�±a�Optlze YesYes._.µ � _, , `?s Y �}t; yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min None None Min OtN�#� ���� Actuated g1C Ratio �0.12 0.35 0.11 0.11 0.27 0.19 0.47 0.63 0.15 0.41 ?' �����..�'.,.�,���a����R,�r,�✓.f.A�� a . Control Delay 50.4 5.6 56.5 51.3 3.9 57.0 27.3 3.4 55.7 45.4 mar. ieGDea Q 0 Q t140� 0 0OC� " _ Total Delay 50.4 5.6 56.5 51.3 3..�9 57.�0 27.3 3.4 55.7 45.4 Approach Del as 20 5 34.2 35.3 46 6 Stops(vph) 203 43 102 86 16 483 868 12 142 1074 Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Background PM Lane Configurations Future Volume(vph) )Meal 01,sa Lane Width(ft) Storage Lanes _ r Lane Util.Factor My IN P7 Fit Protected Fit Permitted _ .. � . , . _.. .... .._ , ........ ..... . .>.. .. ..,.a,.�.���.., . _A__ _ ��53....._._.. . ... �_... . __�_,._.a �..._ � '., Right Turn on Red t tt4W ITCH rm r c z � Link Speed(mph) ttk Distance Travel Time(s) - Adj.Flow(vph) ShaYedLatleTraf ��� = „ Lane Group Flow(vph) Protected Phases 3 [([ x' R'T.:,'&w�dr.. ".. ,. Detector Phase Minimum Initial(s) 1.0 Tota_l_S�lit(s) _ 37.0 l is Yellow Time(s) 4.0 / z .x"P"aK;€,,.1.,? `' Lost Time Adjust((s) LeadlLag gg 3 ` :n'^`...,.cJr.,... a...ei'..,..F ..,.....^^:..... ..c.... Recall Mode None Y - ,.Swn+a'zsn. - Actuated g/C Ratio Fir".s4 ;�_•.`+.x Control Delay �11 11eI $arY +sue Total Delay [} S 'x, >{. xed-3. a"�" '+£�"`'`. »s`" -.,��'"'+...,er-." ny, r✓�, n y - 1? - ."a. s „� ..-`«,�., .a°� 3 ".a�u'-R REM '. '' :�r H'"a` .:"_ . Approach Delay _ UN— N,., Stops(vph) i Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Background PM *- - 4% T /,0-------------- .� tm CO Emissions(glhr) 275 172 129 104 28 954 1408 40 288 2109 �1b VOC Emissions Ihr 64 40 30 24 7 221 326 9 67 �489� a_. .A MVt �< .tea 70 Queue Length 50th(ft) 78 6 76 64 0 194 329 4 105 445 .. $013 Internal Link Dist�ft) 399 124 617 842 Base Capacity(vph) 503 855 432 454 530 670 1661 1026 349 1442 , a, ., .�� ��.. � .h�... o..0 " 1 Spillback Cap Reductn U � 0 0 �� 0�� ���...0ry n_ 0 0 0 0 0 09 �p �...:;� ... Hr. � .. Y Reduced We Ratio 0.48 0.56 0.28 0.23 0.28 0.88 0.74 0.09 0.48 0.95 Area Type: Other le w{ 9tt%1 Actuated Cycle Length: 102.6 � r (Control Type: ^�Actuated-Uncoordinated , (Nkitnpt V� I\ t�}Y Q 9 #a 3 iE S 45y, .i.....z�.. . ..._..0 .� u.e.w.+. ..>..... m ..sw..vim...... a. :.. .....x i �.... Intersection Signal Delay:36.7 Intersection LOS:D _ f Analysis Period(min)15 #, W p Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:Tamarack Ave 01 tf02 A03 V07 4 g i mom : ^ ^06 E i t I y� i {f! 3 Synchro 10 Report E Page 3 l i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Background PM f Q Y��(� � � l �. a .- ,;.n. .4,.. ��• v,v.. „ ti, 3 . ��;� 3' �� � tack � .� .. .. .. .j .�-��.. .r , .. �[ .. CO Emissions(91hr) X l;(1ISSIpiS(gl c VOC Emissions glhr _ pit .. eiTlrlldV. ,�...NF.«. ., , ..... 3 Queue Length 50th(ft) Internal Link Dis nkDis ft) J R 7„ Base Capacity(vph) Ltd s)`ta �ctn t ��Sxxpillback Cap Reductn n7�0 .-�" .� ,. ., ...,...,. •.,.,a.e �.a 5�..� �����,�'�S��v, l�y -_z z "` e�� ?�.o ... .. _,,.a, w -:�.,. . .__f.,.,, Reduced vlc Ratio I i i I E C i E t t i SF S t i i i i [t E l Synchro 10 Report € Page 4 i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 2: Hemlock Drive 2024 Future Background PM. I I I I* • Lane Configurations ��raff"�c l�olu��.{ � i� r.���a. '' � �, 1Q ;��.��� _� 19�°fir•1�49.; � 8 �� ```5" T Qq Future Volume(vph) 225 10 250 80 10 50 190 1110 85 45 1100 200 IdealFlw 1'YF-`J. }. ✓V�.,.r1gt�,.. .�9b0 1 R10 xoi�Vo .. 9 ,'., Storage Length(ft) 0 0 0 0 260 0 70 0 � ��• _, f }.Al } 's(�}.p Mix `^R �,Land$ ,. .�;. � . ..r�... .�:�.�� :�` Taper Length(ft) 25 _ 25 25 25 i Ni" Frt 0,856 0.875 0.989 0.977 filtro �.fi a Q 950 � Satd Flow(prot) 1770 1595 0 1770 1630 0 1770 3500 0 1770 3458 0 FIP �ttttt'ti 2 v...�.. Satd.Flow(perm) 836 1595 0 980 1630 0 190 3500 0 218 3458 0 Satd.Flow(RTOR) 272 54 10 26 Lintsd(mg ) 25 r t. k . 40 Link Distance(ft) 255 278 922 812 x Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0 92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 A F1c�Sr uph) :s o .. 45 .,.. ....�1 ' k 3 72... {,,$ 54. 7. .5., - �2<<.F .. ,i gb,. , 195 ti r 217 (Shared Lane Traffic � roupEow(+�ph � 4F „4U s SJ��f �' K 129 4� 113 0 y Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA ed Phases 7'� 4 3Y 1 tY 0 tit ; d �b � ... - t .. Permitted Phases 4 8 6 2 i l0eteptr Phase F 7 4 3 6 f Rg .....e. ..i Switch Phase 45 0 10 0 f Minimum Slit(s) 9.5 15.0 9.5 15.0 5.0 15.0 9 5 15 0 Total Split(%) 21.1% 17.8% 21 1% 17 8% 18 9% 45 6% 1b 6% 42 2% f YeltQvrfte�(s) All Red Time(s) 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1 0 2.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5 0 L Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes E 1 e 4 Ane None� lOrre Mini { e M Act Effet Green(s) 241 13.6 16.4 10.2 481 41.0 41.2 33 6 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.57 0.31 0,26 L 0.69 0.73 0.21 0.98 a E6 a'�c.Smr+ c '�«ra aFx s 2�'r f z�'3�: y. +,rNr`.fxx4ll�r r:.,1 Vr »t, � ���,„„....�AR .-�'t:.<. � Queue Delay 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 i v ''����4 2 16'� ......... LOS C B C B C C B D 20 � ;?�� Approach LOS B C C D ✓�'.. .: '° ra+ c... r .�. �x� ra,vt'e r-fs` �yygs.'� ""` 3'e-v-n'�-r5" �-'x a ;�:y: af Fuel Used(gal) 3 1 1 0 3 22 1 29 i Synchro 10 Report i Page 5 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 2: Hemlock Drive 2024 Future Background PM }.... ..., 176 NOx Emissions(glhr) 34 17 11 6 45 294 8 398 Dilemma Vehicles(#) 0 0 0 0 0 32 0 72 Queue length 95th(ft) 173 77 68 43 130 �#434 26 #6(}5���� y Y_ g'&x' 732 Turn Bay Length(ft) 260 70 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i5a" t3jJU . z aedetn 0 H � 0 � ' Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cycle Length:90 ��tia�� Cycl�C`engtt► 8��3 � °• .,' .`. � �.���_ ��...... ,..�..._.a .. .,t�.. .. ...�.. _.�t,.��:`':��.,_ . ..� ti..� x ., ..,._.� Natural Cycle 80 Maximum vlc Ratio;0.98 3fltAm Src#1oi�tal blayt Alp i...... °........ `,. 0 , . v...'.,`. i Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.5% ICU Level of Service E ! WE ; Volume exceedscapacity,queue is theoretically infinite. Queue9�314 i�tdi4�11L1e} 9Y, l� r.. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. 1 queue Siiouytp x•r�t y 9, ��r,t+�n c cles ' � � ,` ' .._�1��.�l;�f;`� .,�_ � 3 � �'i�� Ate. �• �5 4�` � i "'.4 �f 31 55 yi � Splits and Phases: 2:Hemlock Drive k 01 k Q2'. �63 "ft+ 00� 07 08 E 1 i i r i i I Synchro 10 Report Page 6 i, Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 3: Cedar Ave 2024 Future Background PM Lane Configurations " am i .'` IIN . . Future Volume(vph) 135 175 165 1215 1155 150 deFl!hr�ypp .� 1900100IN Storage Length(ft) 0 0� 220 200 . , Taper Length(ft) 25 25 L��� "�actpr_ . . _.. .._ .. _.1�{}€t,, 1�!0 .1�0,. • �95. .,..�0;��� '1�00 „5..-.. .._., _ rt .� ., , M'� .. Frt 0.850 _ 0.850 Satd Fll]owp(prot) _11770_ 1583 �]17/7{0 3539 3539 1583 Ftt'��r•,.i�ttG.rre�efs m��^1� ' e+�'N (1i�5�P 'Y;� ? V1�M�... .. ... 2 _ }. k is .SCE�� f" t -._ Satd.Flow(perm) 1770 1583 251 3539 3539 1583 Satd,Flow(RTOR) 190 145 ik Speed(mpff 25 ti� 4 4 - ._ .., ti..,. �. Link Distance(ft) 278 812 489 045 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0,92 0.92 D 92 0.92 0, Shared Lane Traffic{%) INIT Turn Type Prot Prot pm+pt NA NA Perm 5 �rotectedllriVl3 .. . 4Y �. ?LL 5f�._i, Permitted Phases 6 2 ........... Switch Phase IIrJ[mjlm�n1 .. 10M` � Minimum Split(s) 15.0 15.0 71 15.0 15.0 15.0 iMMEW Total Split(%) 38 9% 38.9% 16 7% 61 1% 44 4% 44 4% All Red Time(s) 2.0 2.0 01 2 0 2.0 2.0 O 'Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 5.0 3.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 x - P x' .. " Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes MOKiME....., ,,,. •�»r.,,��f ?� M, x ' .. wry� .�.�"�`rs � 01, III MAE Act Effet Green(s) 114 114 52.0 501 39.5 39.5 Patio f [ 016 i3 730 70 0 55 0 5 ' vk Ratio 0.52 0.46 0.52 0.53 0.64 0.17 ­;l layx Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .EM, � ,r�. .... .. .._... LOS C A B A B A 2, Approach LOS B A B Fuel Used(gal) 2 1 2 13 15 1 Synchro 10 Report Page 7 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 3: Cedar Ave 2024 Future Background PM NQx Emissions(glhr) 23 11 24 �183 199 11 UlCt1§sin `glttr). _:. . ,'s ,,:29 Dilemma Vehicles{#) 0 0 0 85 80 0 � s : ''- Queue Length 95th(ft) 113 50 58 192 316 34 X2, Turn Bay Length 0) 220 200 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cycle Length 90 Aptu� dCc1Lnth 71 .,.,. .__ i f t M1 Natural Cycle 60 Maximum v/c Ratio:0,64 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61 1% ICU Level of Service B Splits and Phases: 3:Cedar Ave 1 t 04 �106 .. i i i i E i S E i Synchro 10 Report i E Page 8 i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Background SAT Lane Configurations ' ] 90' ,.,,10Q „_�� «x' A �}.c.tk i 5 s $t} r 7 9 r 85 Future Volume(yp h 130 100 540 155 105 45 660 1185 95 180 1295 85 ) x Y1 g0 �1.900 IOCt t f9Q _ 4 .. z, bQ9� Lane Width ft 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 12 12 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 Taper Lane Util.Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 �0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 F 0 8500 =P k _Ct5f)' 0 g9 Fit Protected 0.973 0,950 0,950 0.950 Fit Permitted 0.973 0.950 0.950 0.950 MIX- NMI . Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes ,..`.. .', Link Speed(mph) 25 25 40 40 Travel Time(s) 131 5.6 11.9 15.7 Add Flow(vph) 141 109 587 168 114 49 717 1288 103 196 1408 92 hared.'(5 n� TaiC �fQ3 z 3SSa 3 k1t@ 1 rt Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 250 �587� ��168 114 49 717 1288 103 196 1500 0 Tum Tyae......, A. . .. ... , Protected ppPhases 8 8 a5 7 7 1 5 2 7 1 6 -�""516 Detector Phase 8 8 5 7 7 5 2 1 6 .: *c Minimum Initial(s) 8.5 8.5 5.1 9.0 9.0 6.0 5.1 15.0 9.0 6.0 15.0 AM Total Split(s) 26.0 26.0 29.0 18.0 18.0 29.0 29.0 47.0 18.0 29.0 47.0 �1'4lQ Yellow Time(s) 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 i 100 f 15" 0 14 010' 3 ...,z,- `' '-`�,.1 ._ ,.. J- NE Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 o a 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 `� ....a� ...n.e ...wh.-u Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag `e531 _Y Recall Mode _ None None None None None None None Min None None Min t f- nsi 13 4. fflff Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.38 0.13 0.13 0.29 0.22 0.46 0.63 0.15 0.38 Control Delay 52.9 121 69.6 53.8 2.3 62.6 31.6 4.5 63.5 103.0 i u. �yr: ,` Q<. Total Delay 52.9 12.1 69.6 53.8 2.3 62.6 31.6 4.5 63.5 103.0 Approach Delay 24.3 54.2 40.8 98.5 I MR Stops(vph) 212 147 139 97 4 �591 944 16 167 1164 Synchro 10 Report Page 1 i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan i 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Background SAT i I S Lane Configurations Future Volume(vph) 17 Lane Width(ft) Ei Stora a Lanes RE K Lane Util.Factor IBM Fit Protected At Permitted Right Turn on Red E � �..y 5 r ,. .. .._ �........ �. Link Speed(mph) ` Travel Time(s) Adj.Flow(vph) gap Lane Group Flow(vph) Protected Phases 3 Detector Phase 1N�tC�t _, Minimum Initial(s) 1.0 � L'i Sp�►t(S/3&�i' T �J1 ' .,ed°�fie�ara.&%2...�'.' wE'�. ,.�'. ..vv3"e."a., �, a, - .. �....,�.. ... e .� n«2"1 i Total Split(s) 37.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 F {�p { r�. ..... '"`. a Lost Time Adjust(s) Lead/Lag S � twn- -�Psea�1a.. .'., �..,_... sr<ia<._ Recall Mode None t Actuated g1C Ratio c� .,'. 1.G£ Control Delay i � §� a i _ v ., _ e � ...> �., .. ......�. ... ..._. Total Delay `43a x.«`ca �. ,.. ;_'.. ,. fi?..�. ,..�`' a e ..,.,.....a_., .. s. Approach Delay _ Stops(vph) Synchro 10 Report Page 2 i I i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 4 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Background SAT fWROM 7 a CO Emissions(glhr) 296 287 210 119 8 1212 1573 48 356 3426 No ".1.� VOC Emissions(glhr) 69 66 49 28 2 281 364 yg11 83 794 Queue Length 50th(ft) 90 89 118 77 0 260 402 9 136 659 3�? ..;. Internal Link Dist(ft) 399 124 617 842 TWO l ith )..,. - . 27U .z ., 2' S. 0 `� i94 s , Base Capacity(vph) 680 862 222 234 500 770 1620 1020 397 1324 ,,..r . Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NAMAN IE' . mF...r..rr . 0 Reduced v!c Ratio 0..37 0.68 0.76 0.49 0.10 0.93 0.80 0.10 0.49 1.13 Area Type Other JIM_Lgth a r 1 �3 rk k a is Actuated Cycle Length: 111.5 f l Control Type Actuated Uncoordinated j Intersection Signal Delay:58.6 Intersection LOS E � ee3rr ICkJ `� g.F Analysis Period(min) 15 1 A h Queue shown is maximucmy after two cycles. . 3� GxN�'S�ifi+ %t! —µr .a..y.r Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. F Splits and Phases: 1:Tamarack Ave 01 f"'Q2 3 7 "?08 05 06 i t i s s t t I I i Synchro 10 Report Page 3 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Background SAT CO Emissions(g/hr) NPftlss.( . ._ �. w -_ a _. ' �]VOC Em}issionsy�(g/hr) Queue Length 50th(ft) mp Internalljl Link Dist tt} a Base Capacity(vph) 5tarvatn Cep i �ductrr ;y' r... Spillback Cap Reductn _ Reduced v/c Ratio i t f i S l t 1 F E f t c fL Synchro 10 Report Page 4 i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 2: Hemlock Drive 2024 Future Background SAT I Lane Configurations � D�l]tT�EYph). G td La� �"! Future Volume(vph) 210 10 315 90 _ 10 60 265 995 105 50 1150 245 Storage Length(ft) 0 0 0 0 260 0 70 0 I Taper Length{ft 25 25 25 25 Isn�Ut�l Faet9r �' i 100, ill . 095. . . 5.s.. . �. ...0 _ 0 �1 00 _ ., i Frt 0.855 0.872 0.986 0.974 ;MitrQfect@d t 09;5QDt t,Q Qa0.. .t r Satd,Flow(prat) 1770 1593 0 1770 1624 0 1770 3490 0 1770 3447 0 tt e i �d x'' 64 r x Q 17 Satd.Flow(perm) 864 1593 0 980 1624 0 173 3490 0 322 3447 0 M Satd.Flow(RTOR) 323 65 16 34 Link Distance(ft) 255 141 p ]'922 812 Y 1 11 0 WON" v Y #] Peak Hour Factor ,0.92 �0.92 0.92 �0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92' 0.' Shared Lane Traffic(%) AJI 6umT pe pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Permitted Phases 4 8 6 2 nSwitch Phase r/ `00 t1 i�1i1�1U111 inlb�f(g „� ,: v51�ti� 1 xxa Minimum Split(s) 9.5 15.0 9.5 15.0 9.0 15.0 9.5 15.0 k Total Split(%) 18 9% 16 7% 18 9% 16 7% 17 8% 48 9% 15 6% 46 7% '41"0..5 ..: .W4.c. All Red Time(s) 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 _ it7 �Uk� Total Lost Time(s 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 Lead{L � Lai i=eady "Lai. t .'_ Cad - head . Lag x 7- Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes nt&100 �imp Act Effct Green(s) 22.9 12.2 17.5 101 53.8 46.4 45.0 37.4 a....... v3fw'+.Lko-S:e_ ♦. eo-.... 1 to \tt`+.. �i n _ _ _� � - ... .- a vlc Ratio 0.63 0.70 0.35 0.31{ 0.90 0.63 0.19 1.00 . _. ,��I '`,'•'' �.r. '�'''.� +�'t' v^e"arc 'a'`Mu' `,'k ... Queue Delay 0.0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 i T} xa � P ram : 6� 1G3 _ 9 g6 �4G LOS C B C B D B A D pt .cf'�n� a \jr .1 d^�.P.�a✓^.. �...' ,�' ::1r '� .v�s�^'Z ! c::i r ,'�� .r 3. _w�' a.-� s m,.,w �c r !�M�t3a.�'.��� 7 F�"',.� Y :9�":7- .,� "a�:"„" 1��i,1`"��,a"��_ �� �".:��.."",,�z��r• ``°x.'�.�,�av �$8.'�'�-.....�.�'.„�'"`r�'_,�_u:::,�� t«�'..^�'s...�Wf��r ;p�' ^,�x,:i I Approach LOS C C C D Fuel Used(gal) 3 2 1 0 6 18 1 32 I t Synchro 10 Report Page 5 g Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 2: Hemlock Drive 2024 Future Background SAT oow �. NOx Emissions(glhr) 35 26 12 5 82 248 8 442 Dilemma Vehicles(#) 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 74 ueu lengr )OMEMME ( t Queue Length 95th(ft) 168 #129 78 46 #264 362 26 4633 l 2 Turn Bay Length(ft) 260 70 �apclry(upfr}__ 374 Q « `4 167 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rtlttcd v(c �Eip f s1 X7 x i Cycle Length:90 Natural Cycle:p90 _ s k5t Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.00 16tersec� cr is ti�l 1 3 6a ' I tern��..�.. �, h� _ �.. _., �;a.���.. _; Intersection Capacity Utilization 94 3% ICU Level of Service F Volume exceeds capacity,queue is theoretically infinite Q�eEe (lb twu cycles ' � Y # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. tstXimumfterfwc}% les I Splits and Phases: 2:Hemlock Drive 01 �`ILfL 1CJ.F 1 l 1*0 5 O6 07 11708 5 t i e i t i Synchro 10 Report Page 6 I Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 3. Cedar Ave 2024 Future Background SAT _J* 4,\ 1 Lane Configurations 52s?5 � j ., ..... Future Volume(vph) 145 195 190 1305 1265 165 1" al`F�aw(vphpl) 1100 � MESAW 3..,.._., . . » .., .L . . .s. .i. Storage Length(ft) 0 0 220 200 ._ 1 z.. Taper Len th 25 25 '1 -0 Frt 0,850 0.850 Satd.Flow(prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3539 1583 SRO,rnttted Satd.Flow(perm) 1770 1583 203 3539 3539 1583� Ri ttf t irn on'Red Satd.Flow(RTOR) 212 151 Linketl� ? !�)�...J Link Distance(ft) 278 �812 489 Peak Hour Factor 0.9y�2j 0..92 0..92 0..92 0..92 0.92 V � b ... Shared Lane Traffic(%) Turn Type Prot Prot pm+pt NA NA Perm j 5 � u Permitted Phases 6 2 3 Switch Phase Minimum Split(s) 15.0 15.0 71 15.0 15.0 15.0 t ::,Q t.`eM1"r"}�„". - .u'x.•- `u^i- 3' _r�,,"..,.. .7 as 3Iy"ulY'r- Total Split(%) 32.2% 32 2% 21 1% 67 8% 46 7% 46 7% All-Red Time(s) 20 20 01 20 20 20 jib Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 5.0 31 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes a Yes en ((Mo � a done. ttQria� A1c{t,{Ey�ffec[t (Green(iy[sI) 12 C2 1212 58.0 561 44 244 2 We Ratio Q.57 0.50 0.64 0,56 0.69 0.19 _ Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS D A B A B A A(}prAa �� F. Approach LOS C A B Fuel Used(gal) 2 1 2 14 17 1 Synchro 10 Report Page 7 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 3: Cedar Ave 2024 Future Background SAT p 4 ����issipns jgltlt•} ' A g r�65 , � :� . � 0't2 �173„ ti2�` � � ,� NOx Emissions(glhr) 27 13 34 197 228 12 Dilemma Vehicles(#) 0 0 0 83 80 0 i Queue Len th 95th(ft) 131 55 98 230 404 41 �aa�rn��€attk37ist(ft) � Tim Ba Len th(ft) 220 _ 200 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 i Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 ��to fl 29 tl4 44 . .c. _ � .. �,r .....n a.�a.�v =a �.�y .... FY..+..gym ... .....n..... ��...a �. a.....N...«.✓....3..a�...nr.p..y )`_' ..e.a.da_ s_. a_ MOMA � € Cycle Length:90 Natural Cycle 60 Maximum vlc Ratio:0.69 �t Intersection Capacity Utilization 65 5% ICU Level of Service C I 4 Splits and Phases: 3:Cedar Ave 1 02 04 ®6 f i i F i i s E I t f f i Synchro 10 Report Page 8 i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Combined AM i Lane Configurations r tt ' _ 3 Future Volume(vph) 30 25 100 20 40 35 205 817 25 35 925 35 ideal l✓Ibw(vph%I....:: t 1 ...1 $a .. ._ 100QE� 90 1 i9t14 tti49€!t ' QO a`� 1O.LL 19D0 . 1 Lane Width(ft) {�( 12 12 71»2 12 12 12 [�12 12 12 y 11 12 12 1715 EM 29 4li`c 1� ST Storage Lanes 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 � e�tfrt 2 - 5 Lane Util Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 t � R�.. . Flt Protected 0.973 D.950 �0.950 0.950 Flt Permitted 0.973 0.950 0.950 0.950 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed(mph) _ 25� 25 40 40 i Travel Time(s 131 5.6 11.9 15 7 �03 _.. 2 0 � Adj.�FFl�low(vph)r_ 33 27 109 22 43 38 223 888 27 38 1005 38 Lane Group Flow(vph� 0 60 109 22 43 38 223 888 27 38 1043 0 W .,yam'" ph Protected Phases 8 8 5 7 7 1� 5 2 7 1 6 � Detector Phase 8 8 5 7 7 _ 5 2 1 6 i Minimum Initial(s) 8.5 8.5 5.1 9.0 9.0 6.0 51 15.0 9.0 6.0 15 0 ?-"l? MR Total Split s) 19.0 19 0 9.1 14.0 14.0 9.1 91 27.0 14.0 91 27.0 4% Yellow Time(s) 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 � Lost Time Adust(s) 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ..-.ate:- Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag HBO,; e t1'es Y Y Vest Y�� Yee Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min None None Min N' _ Actuated g1C Ratio 0.18 0.23"h 0.�j1{j9� 0.19/{ 0{14 [0.11 0 64 (/0.78 0.122 }0.46 ., a.� 3�+^}'�+s �afr ��i;'!. 5 5'i?.R,d'+,f 1i rv'_` ,�.f._Y� t=c 2..,�a -.�,5'•SA 3 "�.--1:C�' �40 Control Delay 23.0 5.8 23.5 23.6 0.9 35.6 11.9 0.0 27.6 17.2 x43�& J .a,2 s_"_. ,. Total Delay 23 0 5.8 23 5 23.6 0.9 35.6 11.9 0.0 27.6 17.22 OE Ow V i pproach Delay 11 9 15 2 16 2 17 5 Stops(vph) 47 19 20 35 0 165 446 0 34 683 l I Synchro 10 Report ` Page 1 [ F Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Combined AM T Lane Configurations \ Future Volume(vph) Lane Width(ft) .".:, .. . Storage Lanes j T1Crlgth(fk). z t _, . .. ,t ... t s t Lane Util.Factor Fit Protected y� a Fit Permitted �p y Right Turn on Red nitt r# ft } Link Speed(mph) Travel Time((�s/)K � 9 Adj.Flow(vph) ? Lane Group Flow(vph) Protected Phases 3 Detector Phase Minimum Initial(s) 1.0 yy��i'{{fj .' i. 3.i� k Total S lit s} 37 0 .. r. v Yellow Time(s) 4 0 IIRedtw 4� ;Y Lost Time Adjust(s� 3 LeaKag La 0 tii8� � i v.�. _ . .... �. ��..� �� .t,. .. . Recall Mode None I � � R . Kid: Actuated /C Ratio _ ANRV Control Delay Total Delay ... '� .�:.«5?: £ �.�..u,a.«..":'w Anyp�pproac{h, fDelay Stops(vph) I i Synchro 10 Report Page 2 I k ? t i j Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Combined AM f USed(gal`: s , 1 1 CO Emissions(glhr) 46 42 14 28 5 285 714 8 52 1123 VOC Emissions(glhr) 11 10 3 6 1 66 166 2 12 260 Queue Length 50th(ft) 10 0 7 14 0 43 106 0 13 181 Internal Link Dist(ft) 399 124 617 842 Base Capacity(vph) 1075 445 368 388 303 364 2278 1255 213 1614 Spi!![S�lllback Cap R[edyuncttn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yz Reduced vlc Ratio 0.06 0.24 0.06 0.11 0.13 0.61 0.39 0.02 0.18 0.65 Area Type Other C�cTe Lngt : C}61 ��' Actuated Cycle Length 51.4 .r Control Type Actuated Uncoordinated �'.*£r-a?`��A� i�m��a ��:u5� •'22 { - .... '1�i ei�u� .. `� _4. . ...,,' �!'4. .....7.. „ .,. Intersection Signal Delay:16 5 Intersection LOS B ! xc Analysis Period(min)15 ���95th ercen�[e�rdl�,me ex�e� �a�acifyti.queud rya b�I � _' 1 Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:Tamarack Ave �► 1 %2 }3 A%7 f 7105 ■ L7b i i i f t E s 5 i Synchro 10 Report Page 3 4 i i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Combined AM CO Emissions(glhr) VOC Emissions(9/hr) _ ;�a,EE E Queue Length 50th(ft) Internal Link Dist(ft) Base Capacity(vph) §0att0 Spillback Cap Reductn e Reduced v/c Ratio •��� .�,� .,� y �' n� ����:� �� ��� ,pro ��� �u i I Synchro 10 Report Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 2: Hemlock Drive 2024 Future Combined AM Lane Configurations )~i Future Volume(vph) 45 Q10 5(0� 30 x(yj1�0 20 y(�80 752 � 45 2]5� 923 � 85 r»G; � �,J�7U0 �,� qp-g g,1 Storage LengthJ�ft� 0 0 0 0 260 /0y 70 0 ME IN © <x., _ . ... Taper LengthSM 25 25 25 25 n�lJftl �acfor ..��;�� Frt 0.875 0.900 0,992 0.987 W, Saatd.Flow(prot) 1770 1630 0 1770 1676 0 1770 3511 0 y{1770 3493� 0 Satd Flow(perm) 1520 1630 0 1863 1676 0 335 3511 0 555 3493 0 - W> . . 4t. Satd Flow(RTOR) 54 22 8 12 'fL'iinnk�Distance(ft) 255 293 9[2.2y 449 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0 92 0.92 „..`.... Shared Lane Traffic(%) Turn Typepm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA ((F Permitted Phases 4 8 6 2 ",n. Switch Phase Minimum Split(s) 9.5 15.0 9.5 15.0 71 15.0 9.5 15.0 f Total Split(°/°) 21 1% 17.8% 21 1% 17 8% 18 9% 45 6% 15 6% 42 2% .. All Red Time(s) 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 01 2.0 10 20 Q,f . .. . .;� 0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.0 3.1 5.0 4.5 5.0 L � �� �d. ,. t'9 i~ed Lead Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Act Effct Green(s) 10.6 11.7 10.3 11.8 38.5 37.6 35.4 31.7 l We Ratio '0.15 0.16 0.10 0.09 �0.21 �0.35 0.05 0.53 �r OF (j Queue Delay 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 , 17 , , _gab.,_.. ,. . ti ,. _........,. v <. .. ti_. ... LOS' B B C B A B A B W�'N-' SHE Approach LOS B B A - e 425_ Fuel Used(gal) 0 0 0 0 1 10 0 12 Synchro 10 Report x Page 5 i i I Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 2: HemlOck Drive 2024 Future Combined AM 7, NOx Emissions(glhr) 6 5 4 3 12 138 3 159 Dilemma Vehicles{#) 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 22 Queue Length 95th(ft) 40 38 30 29 33 213 15 287 Turn Bay Length(ft) 260 70 i AN Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �. ..... .� , a__. Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i R04ev(c Cycle Length 90 Natural Cycle 60 Cor�#ro1T RCt ted t) ebQr#tirttd r} Maximum vlc Ratio:0.53 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53 5% ICU Level of Service A 7�y�: 2-,y��y4 +.!t3 Gnbd..{ I ,� _. ..... ......�. :t;Urv'r�±3:.. .........a '.�.Cxss2 i Splits and Phases: 2:Hemlock Drive 01 �""132 1 -44 07 Cl� i i i k E i j 1 1 i Synchro 10 Report Page 6 i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 3: Cedar Ave 2024 Future Combined AM t 4N t Lane Configurations tt yF�uture Volume(vph) 55 8 65 33 3 7 105 626 39 47 935 75 1dei�l=l41A,( )) 19f10 ,. $� ._? 1 "19QOr.. 9p9 , ti_1OQ x 190Q }<.113t' 199 ,:_ 19U 9D4 Storage Length(ft) 0 0 0 0 220 {0� 70 200 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 � iQ.. f}955 Q4. Frt 0.867 0.891 0.991 0.850 ! I'(t +r�tected Q950 � , 5} u' UQ jt y ;Q}93Q j ! z 770 Satd Flow(prot) 1 a rt.. .., - .•S,-.,F 1615 0 1770 1660 0 1770 J3507 0 1770 3539 1583 Satd Flow(perm) 1432 1615 0 1863 1660 0 380 3507 0 667 3539 1583 Satd Flow(RTOR) 71 8 11 141 [ x i lean[ p pes ? p ) Link Distance(ft) 278 296 363 489 i ; Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 _ 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm t � - , Permitted Phases 4 8 6 2 2 p" Switch Phase :.NIN .s�,( ) ,..,'N.. . r 5(I 1 R.4. . .-!. .... S ? w... . 410 0 a b . `10 0 Minimum Split(s) 9.5 15 0 9.5 15,0 7.1 15.0 9.5 15.0 15.0 INA Total Split(%� 11 8% 17 6% 11 8% 17 6% 11 8% 58 8% 11 8% 58 8% 58 8% trTle. _3 a All-Red Time(s)„ 1.0 2.0 1.0 1 0 0.1 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.5 5.0 4 5 4 5 3.1 5.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 g La a � .. .� �. . . . ,., .� Lead-Lag Optimizes ^'Yes Yeses Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yeas j : l0�le ;t>. ,.1?�(SCI ? Act Effct Green(s) 110 11.6 7.8 7.2 36 4 34.4 33.3 29.9 29.9 v/c Ratio 016 019 013 0.05 0.26 0.31 0.09 0.50 0.08 Queue Delay 00 00 00 00 00 00 QQ 00 00 w LOS B B C B A A A B A I 4 100 y7A. Approach LOS B C A Fuel Used(gal) .1. 0 0 .0_ 1 , 6 �0 = 11 0 Synchro 10 Report Page 7 t i f Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 3: Cedar Ave 2024 Future Combined AM NOx Emissions(glhr) 7 6 5 1 10 82 5 148 4 Dilemma Vehicles(#) 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 6 0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 49 41 34 15 37 153 21 237 6 km Turn Bay Length(ft) 220 70 200 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 pi p Redr�c#r * {t Q p l p t7 fl ` . .1 _ . . Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 �� 0 0 0 0 0 0 �: �1 a HMO', � Cycle Length:85 ctt ! c� Lgt#t fi E 7 3 z Natural Cycle:60 Maximum We Ratio:0.50 WNW )h#e Intersection Capacity Utilization 53 0% ICU Level of Service A I Splits and Phases: 3:Cedar Ave �E , 4103 5 'tO6 "� 07 �& t t i i G I t I I i I i t 4 Synchro 10 Report Page 8 t t HCM 6th TWSC Buckland Road Masterplan 4: Site Drive 2024 Future Combined AM I Int Delay,s/veh 0 Lane Configurations �► I Future Vol,veh/h 0 8 762 63 0 1033 i Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free I <k,.-1., s��t�.:4t1. •u� '. J Storage Length 0 Grade % 0 0 ry 0 �'�al� Ur`I�r�ot�� .,. �� ..-�� > r ��' �!� •^ �� i a u���, �'�65�.,.���<.,...,.....�-i_..-n...ro x,. Y� b h 4 �„- ... ,_ . ., Heavy Vehicles % 2 2 2 2 2 2 'w- ,YMRMVN. Conflicting Flow All 448 0 0 �+ a Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Follow-up Hdwy 3.32 Pot s T IVI n t uer l `i5 � � lls Stage 1 0 0 • 'w. s#;�.�. �9si� �.3,.._ w.�v,� .,,,,,.....�„,a.,, ,� .,,.., s. ..,., �. d Platoon blocked % - OrttsW Mov Cap-2 Maneuver e )T {; " 9� r.. ..xa?L.w.i?r..«t. ..• �..,.....+. K ., �a1 i _.�....a x �. l., �, �Jmv1Rx.,a.....e s,. Y�... �a�2.-. 'di.1.+:.s:F..+Se.kxy'.-t i. Stage 2 - - - - 1� Goor � 116 HCM LOS B r , HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.016 - .,rrcM.. .s ma♦. a.Mcx�^.:�....K.�«�.Ei...�#"...�firsn,.Y`S'�'a L.,t.�t.9:.:.rk ..a.... � ,�.:Y..'"�'.A.:Pa�s£'.i?'F.nx.:.fl'"` � ..c:":'>..,Y..�...r�kF.a..,rSkd..i:.ax.'......�...ki:..k>.., _.,. .�ik,...�:s`a� HCM Lane LOS - - B i j i S F Synchro 10 Report Page 1 j Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1. Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Combined PM Lane Configurations *'t ir r t IN Future Volume(vph) 130 9(0� 440 110 90 135 {545 1211 j}85 155 1360 65 { �. �iw�yph�7} . ....ik ,._, . 1�00 3 ,190t) '(i�VO y 1�OTIj a .''t9t)� , 19.tft� f9t�z/a°.:S���t.7Qp • 1c�(�i3;2 ,�,9���t1� ' 1;E}�Z Lane Width{ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 «4 12 12 11 12 r 12 5tora a Lanes 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 ,NIP- _ ` Lane Ut=I Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0 95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 } v s 0 850 Fit Protected 0.971 0.950 0.950 0.950 i 3 1'S8 770st;3 r 1583 343 `33 µ83 ` �4... Fit Permitted 0 971 0.950 0.950 0.950 ou. z 3� lla JAN. Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes (Link Speed(mph) _ ,}2(5 25 40 4�0y 1}�k�Fs�ahce 7��..n .,}„ s � t}',r`t73, .;. e c ,- 'y'k�`. ..4. K.e�..., ,..,a.-..s.�n, •., '9t:.. ..�� e '-s` 5��1. - f . a Travel Time(s) 131 5.6 119 15.7 Pe"ak Hour Factor 092 i? .k , } x v a. ��m�,.��,a- �._ Adj.Flow(vph) 141 98 478 120 98 147 592 1316 92 168 1478 71 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 239 478 120 98 147 592 1316 92 168 1549 0 TuA`'-TYp Protected Phases 8 8 5 7 7 1 5 2 7 1 6 Detector Phase 8 8� 5 7 7 5 2 1 6 t `" kr� j� n2 �g3 Mfil LG�Qu a,,., w..:, ... - _ F4SA'.u �`".3Yca. �' .J, , .. Minimum Initial(s) 9.0 9.0 5.1 9.0 9.0 6.0 5.1 15.0 9.0 6.0 15.0 t • ......��u�(�}�'^x,.s, ;`_ _.�Fvir�*�"3r,...., ..�. I Total Split(s) 19 0 19.0 24.0 29.0 29.0 24.0 24.0 47.0 29.0 24.0 47.0 Yellow Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 10 3.0RVI i �. _ Lost Time Adjust s 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 i Talc Time.(s} R t) 4 f3 � � Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag �. . Ys Y8 Y@s es des t�'es f Recall Made None None None None None Non°'ee None Min None None Min �� a .'uKFt 3w ; 4 9r�.y'L � �F �ll d. � ' fl• 42 .'« .,. ...e� mN.. ... .:.::'.� Actuated gIC Ratio 012 0.35 011 011 0.27 019 0.47 0.63 015 0.41 Control Delay 50.4 5.6 56.5 50.5 3.9 57.0 29.2 3.7 55.7 76.6 Total Delay 50.4 5.6 56.5 50.5 3 9 57.0 29.2 3.7 55.7 76.6 's r�i�s .r '. rxe .. i sx . .• tt r F was, ,: +e ffi• x s` fi:<cArx 110, i .sus _ Fx` j ,� ,. w� w Fp { �- Approach Delay 20.5 33.7 36.2 74.6 Stops(vph) 203 43 102 81 16 483 940 13 142 1195 s E Synchro 10 Report t Page 1 I i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Combined PM Mimmkk"1-7 ME Lane Configurations �1"�filC`�a41�1�?e.i�1�hJ, `'�....��... ..°.. .aa. ,�c `_ ��•: ._ .°' _t_z � ik �,. r � ��, � i Y 1 Future Volume(vph} Lane Width(ft� tora`e L rt'tf ft 3 j ! Storage Lanes �� r9 ifs i Lane Util Factor N'' ..WE Fit3 .,.,. - Flt Protected Fit Permitted .a �€-t4 �.r Right�Turn on Red ku � (�.���.0 a,as ..w,.l,. .,_._�,-b,� ,,,.n.,o .✓...e ,'-a�, �..v... .......� aY ...z,-;�; �., e.t.$<.eo �,.r..-<<�. .Sw}.._r. _ .__,.. aa.,,..,a � Lin 1*trik deed(mph Travel Time(s) PE Ad) Flow(vph) Lane Group Flow(vph) 41 Protected Phases 3 Detector Phase 1 s Minimum Initial(s) 1.0 Total Split(s) 37.0 i Yellow Time(s) 4.0 i z Lost Time Adjust(s) UNION Lead/Lag Recall Mode None Mer 'its o�'?tp-.fie c. , ir ''.,F' r t grt" i Actuated /C Ratio _ Control Delay I OWN. .Sa. Total Delay ww_ .. 0 x Approach Delay ' .c"r". Fywr roF"iu'5..,�i+. a � +�»C'6'S" �'ta,',•-.,'�F,3`°"`"°.rl�x"^�.m `' s ''�.: 1`�g{�'�>'n.X3'�' "'T�"'.y.�C`q'.'�, ,mac N? , rC t=1�%. +' y, Stops(vph) i I Synchro 10 Report s Page 2 i t i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Combined PM Mill uef Us (g�1 4i 3 r.. CO Emissions !hr 275 172 129 97 28 954 1549 42 288 2998 VOC Emissions glhr) 64 40 30 23 7 221 359 10 67 695 f�ii�in?��f�S/ehlcle���?�.,�... Queue Length 50th(ft) 78 6 76 61 0 194 367 5 105 592 � �:y�� .��M Internal Link Dist eft) 399 124 617 842 r; Base Capacity(vph) 503 855 432 454 530 670 1661 1024 349 1443 Statra£ir#Cep'RduCtn , 0 0 =t ,i... .} Y Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced vlc Ratio 0.48 0.56 0.28 0.22 0.28 0.88 0.79 0.09 0.48 1.07 E Area Type: Other Actuated Cycle Length 102.6 Control Type Actuated Uncoordinated t Intersection Signal Delay 47.4 Intersection LOS D Jnere +���PcityUt€lizattot� �a 2°� A. MINOR` '044're . .. _..., 2.. _.,, _.. ..,... . .. Analysis Period min 15 r 4Q�U E eceds cad clef f tl#e 1 �1Qi11#fe =a 4 r r .��S k t 3 Queue shown Is maxii�mlum(after two cycles ..+�r. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. I Splits and Phases: 1:TAve' ♦amarack Av 01 I0237 9 I I 05 7 06 I i i i i i t I i Synchro 10 Report Page 3 i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Combined PM Biel lls�d(ga1�,,.. . ., .._. .... , �•.'.. ...� . . .. . . . ._ .� ., i'�...,.....ti.�'4��;5 t.���: � m. ,,'"�`,�.,_�.�... �.. � , . z CO Emissions(glhr) 3�. ls56ns �!�) VO_C Emissions(glhr) Queue Length 50th(ft) Ow Internal Link Dist(ft) Base Capacity(vph) Spillback Cap Reductn ON"dap Rr O ... ... Reduced vlc Ratio i Ii I i l i i I E i i I f ! i E t I ; i ! Synchro 10 Report i Page 4 E ! ! t Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 2: Hemlock Drive 2024 Future Combined PM ' t �► t Lane Configurations Future Volume(vph) 225 10 250 80 10 50 190 1191 85 45 1260 200 Storage Length(ft) 0 0 0 0 260 0 70 _0 o �at M, y ,Taper Length(ft) 25 25 25 25 AlA. � Frt 0.856 0.875 0.990 0.979 �It J�t�te�ted Satd.Flow(prot) 1770 1595 0 1770 1630 0 1770 3504 0 1770 3465 0 r Satd.Flow(perm) 833 1595 0 993 1630 0 158 3504 0 220 3465 0 I Satd.Flow(RTOR) 215 54 12 27 3irllpeedTrf? Link Distance(ft) 255 293 922 449 <af?., .�`e�-Z .." .�.... ...� i:�T}. �3 �jZ.4 v_ .. Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 � o i 2451 272 Shared Lane Traffic Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NAp pm+pt NAG pm+pt NA ! Permitted Phases 4 8 6 2 Switch Phase y 1 7 / 54l..tim1�V Minimum Split(s) 9.5 15.0 9.5 15.0 5.0 15.0 9.5 15.0 I � p4s)... ,.. ,o.. ..j , Total Split(%) 14 4%° 20 0% 11 1% 16 7% 15 6%'j 55 6% 13 % 53 3%° tAll-Red Time(s) {/ (1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 [2].0 1 0 2.0 i k^� ;N i Total Lost Time(s) 4.5 6.0 4,5 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 AN Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes bane'° o'i °` 1ot� .. �? x .. 'Nipe. m Act Effct Green(s) 19 4 12.5 13.5 10.2 54.4 47.8 48.5 410 We Ratio 0.83 0.68 0.41 027 0 76 0.69 0.20 0.93 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS D B C B D B A C NI Approach LOS D C B C Fuelllsed(gal) 4 2 1 0 4 21 0 26 I Synchro 10.Report Page 5 i F i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 2: Hemlock Drive } 2024 Future Combined PM NOx Emissions(glhr) 50 25 13 6 48 286 5 352 „A Dilemma Vehicles(#) 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 J 68 .: N1 •a.' Queue Length 95th(ft) #188 119 77 43 #168 409 21 #605 Turn Bay Length ft) 260 70 4 � 7 ._ Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 psi y.p f. 'Kiliffill I III - : 1 Cycle LeJngth:p90 LC 5 tctufed � enr� k� k x x,AYS`is ...Pb r Natural Cycle 90 Maximum vlc Ratio;0.93 Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.9% ICU Level of Service E # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. _ Splits and Phases: 2:Hemlock Drive ,r M 4\01 N i 1*0 41t06 �07 "08 � i a 1 E i d Synchro 10 Report Page 6 i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 3- Cedar Ave 2024 Future Combined PM Lane Configurations I T+ 0 1 tt Tffrclolume(vP ) 135 Future Volume(vph) 135 6 175 165 13 42 165 1247 36 42 1125 150 Storage Length(ft) 0 0 0 0 220 0 70 200 Taber Length(ft 25 25� 25 25 Labe 11#li 'ct23I ,...1 Frt _ >0.855 0.885 0.996 0.850 Satd.Flow(prot) 1770 1593 0 1770 1649 0 1770 3525 0 1770 3539 1583 Satd Flow(perm) 1201 1593 0 957 1649 0 194 3525 0 210 3539 1583 LLSatd.Flow(+pRTOR) 190 46 4 163 Link Distance((ft) 278 296 363 996 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 > 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 w 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 i9.t�,135. :. Shared Lane Traffic(%) Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm oh yes 7 4 _ . Permitted Phases 4 8 6 22y 2 e4a7e,r„a. ,,,9. r - ,_.,' ;ted:;.«<_ ., >. u :. ., ...z<,... �g� 3�Y ,z:.•. .x~..r .. 7t.a....ti--,'_ . Switch Phase l`rn 1t4)' s 5 0 10 0 10 Q =k1 i-cry Minimum Split(s) 9.5 15.0 9.5 10.0 7.1 15,0 9,5 15A 15.0 !t A;2 ft i. Cl F S 4 £1 5Q 0NNW £t Total Split(%) 13.3% 16 7% 13.3% 16 7% 14.4% 55 6% 14.4% 55.6% 55. % All Red Time(s) 01 2.0 01 1.0 01 2.0 0.1 2.0 2.0 -43 U St TIr Ad S S.(4 Total Lost Time(s) 31 5.0 31 4.0 3.1 5.0 31 5.0 5.0 e +' Lead I,a „ eat" � =Led wL a .., . 9, ...__... . {_ _ �,. - - Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes IIUQ ?�NdOe, ne " Foe1Vone 'mat Nr�t�e .. .. fiz M� �. � � Act Effct Green(s) 21.3 10.2 19.2 12.8 46.3 39.5 42.3 34.0 34.0 ,�y"°+� �,.F a s� ,�c6 ,�,.a..-.�{' �S. - •- x �1 "'� g�4 ks � L1as�v Gil ... .. 1.. .. . .,..:�+ t `L � `Lt i!U7 Q vlc Ratio 0.35 0.53 0.54 0.19 0.65 0.77 0.19 0.79 0.21 Queue Delay �? 0.0 0.0 0.0{ 0.0 0.80 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS C B C B C B A C A Approach LOS B C B B i Fuel Used(gal) 1 1 2 0 2 18 1 21 1 i i Synchro 10 Report Page 7 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan I Cedar Ave 2024 Future Combined PM AVA NOx Emissions(glhr) 19 14 30 6 26 240 7 292 17 v.. Difemma Vehicles(#) 0 0 0 0 0 62 0 20 0 Queue Length 95th(ft} 119 66 143 43 96 391 19 341 30 Turn Bay Length(ft) 220 70 200 ` 7 209� 1004 Starvation Cap Reductn _ 0 0� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cycle Length:90 _ � n Natural Cycle:70 Maximum We Ratio:0.79 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.5% ICU Level of Service D .._. ... . .. S lits and Phases: 3:Cedar Ave �r r m5 Qo 07 178 8 ; i I t Ef4 1 E ftI 1 Synchro 10 Report I Page 8 E HCM 6th TWSC Buckland Road Masterplan 4: Site Drive 2024 Future Combined PM Int Delay,slveh 0.2 Lane Configurations r 0 tt Future Vol,vehlh 0 42 1141 55 0 1490 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Storage Length 071 - YW rl t , y�qra Grade,% 0 y�y0�� y� 0 M Heavy Vehicles % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Conflicting Flow All 650 0 0 Sta(�g{�e2 �.,i.,..l-.. .. �n.. .v...� .ai.v .� _aL.W � �.r,r=� .�...� � -. •,.. „tea � .. Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - "}� Fallow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - - ��t�C�p Stage 1 0 0 Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 2 N - � r M Cot#tt yI L?pp Y .5jFT Ma#Az sY.x_#`tiKc:'.v. ly HCM LOS B i HCM Lane VIC Ratio - - 0.111 - ,1�1�,.l�Yiia ka.�rx���z'4irr'.�?�..�lw]fl� '.�_-.,' ,2.uc.M,?,..�.^a~ax.,���Y.w D2�.a :aac�.,�`,:3....-...,rr'�.xrk.u:,=:�,«...E.,..� �...�s �t?-:r.r���,.>w:`:,'.��.,.a...,2.a•.e� -'.' ._....... .... .. ... .�c.,,.«�'3��,_...c�`�»': ' HCM Lane LOS - B j I a i I Synchro 10 Report Page 1 { Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckiland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Combined SAT Lane Configurations ]� } 100, t. '•'r 15 ,3'..3''105 ' ' ; ti µ 184 197 r a $5 Future Volume(vph) 130 100 540 155 105 45 660 1315 95 180 1397 85 i�e�IFtb�.{arph�at� :,-� ., . ;1900 ..:.'f80A 90Q. 19QI;►. 1�(1���x3':�t90Q�k Y1' 6 `��� 0�,� �0(� � 1'�Ok1 a 1�E1� 19�. Lane Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 12 12 Storage Lanes D 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 1400 fh tt..) f� � ,� ., Lane Util.Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 [{}J1.}0t0 0.97 0.95 1.00 _1.00 0.95 0.95 Fit Protected 0.973 0.950 0,950 0.950 Fit Permitted 0.973 0.950 0.950 0.950 dX�.(6et�t�A... .x. .° 0 ` FB x °y�. :1863,t $ ....,. ,, Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed(mph) 25 25 40 40 i Travel Times 131 5.6 11.9 15.7 Adj.Flow(vph) 141 109 587 168 114 49 717 1429 103 196 1518 92 �e Line �rafhG(��n� £ mac.. r y 4t r r Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 250 587 168 114 49 717 1429 103 196 1610 0 l .. ..... . �I , Protected Phases 8 8 5 7 7 1 5 2 7 1 6 p 1 ,._ Detector Phase 8 8 5 7 7 5 2 1 6 Minimum Initial(s) 8.5 8.5 51 9.0 9.0 6.0 51 15 0 9,0 6 0 15.0 Total Split(s) 26.0 26.0 29.0 18.0 18.0 29.0 29.0 47.0 18.0 29.0 47.0 a T z : Q fl 6 Q ( �6;�� ARM 1$�/0 1 5� ,115/o ti1$�ilo Yellow Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 ORN Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 67 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Recall Mode None None None None None None None Mtn None None Mtn °42 40 j4 03fi 2'S d � r Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.38 0.13 0.13 �0.29 0.22 0.46 0.63 0.15 0.38 t . MY ` <j stib A9" '01Q ,v.vv4 0 93 '�HIN622 t Control Delay 52.9 121 69 6 53.8 2.3 62.6 36.4 4.9 63.5 136.5 Ok Total Delay 52.9 12.1 69.6 53.8 2.3 62.6 36.4G 4.9 63.5 136.5 t Off; .* Approach Delay 24.3 54.2 43.3 128.6 'u ON Stops(vph) 212 , 147 139 97 t4 591 1073 18 167 1215 Synchro 10 Report Page 1 i i I i I Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Combined SAT Lane Configurations ' , 3 Future Volume(vph) Fd Lane Width(ft) St, r�ge L Y Storage Lanes Lane Util.Factor �} a Fit Protected Fit Permitted Right Turn on Red i �x Link Speed(mph) Travel Time(s) ROTWx �� z �� cto� x: �._ a� ' . .., ._ _ ` ...�,�kPIC } Add Flow(vph) Lane Group Flow(vph) s W Protected Phases 3 I Detector Phase I y" .._ Minimum Initial(s) 1.0 I Total S it s) 37.0 I OMMI Yellow Time(s) 4 0 p Lost Time Adjust(s) TOWS .ta` �` . v Fy. t t a,aw � ` oat. . i Lead/Lag Recall Mode None # �A�/c�,tupatyed gIC Ratio YI„ l� ` -�. '.^�-'�^-�, ;i ;5, ".. £^;.:X`;";:`"`�,�,'°'...'"4 Control Delay Elk Total Delay F� .h,�w .+�,..x.��'��.� .G'°c"`. �'.a.+��..rr^?.�_»,-,..,.-?,..""-. '3•_.�.��41`.��-?.�'i:3.:'�.�'^F�.�_::'�:.:�eti�e` *"�T _. ...�r;i�v^.4��3i4^s^„ �µ.�.�`^."`sM,�...-�",� Approach Delay k Stops(vph) I Synchro 10 Report Page 2 F I I f Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Combined SAT Ue tlsed(ga1 _;` tfi 3. 2 t 3 I ,r 1 ._ CO Emissions(91hr) 296 287 210 119 8 1212 1853 50 356 4359 VOC Emissions{,qIhr) 69 66 49 28 2 281 429 12 83 1010 Queue Length 50th(ft) �90 89 118 77 0 260 476 10 136 —747 v xZ10z 99. Internal Link Dist(ft) 399 124 617 842 Base Capacity(vph) 680 862 222 234 500 770 1620 1018 397 1324 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced vlc Ratio 0.37 0.68 0.76 0.49 0.10 �0.93 0.88 0.10 0.49 1.22 } Area Type: Other ICytFgth Actuated Cycle Length 111.5 Control Type Actuated Uncoordinated M Xiri1 ►0.v/c(atib L2F, Intersection Signal Delay 70.4 Intersection LOS E Analysis Period min)15 lfgfumece�ds c Paclty,Wgu ' Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. _ Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ff Splits and Phases: 1:Tamarack Ave s 4�. i '470, 02 -403 �f @7 ft8 s I t 05 06 i i I i i i i s Synchro 10 Report Page 3 i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 1: Tamarack Ave 2024 Future Combined SAT 6041} CO Emissions(glhr) VOC Emissions(glhr) s Queue length 50th(ft) Internal Link Dist(ft) _ J ' gB�ytase Capacityh(vpph.�), y 5 t3.2 I' a��Y�Siy4l�iln`....°..,� e^� e......e,3�����,.�,a�, ., .�::i�s. �,��`•<�.,. ''.-«.. ,s���,.7 ,.t�kF�.. �.�.� �. �i�3�h� _: �� .>.�. ��.. .�,. r.....�. f Spillback Cap Reductn OnNo t ��� Reduced vlc Ratio t j I I r tt� t F s i i t t i t 1 1 r Synchro 10 Report k Page 4 I Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 2- Hemlock Drive 2024 Future Combined SAT :. '° ;; Lane Configurations T�affc Vglume(uph) x,. 10 315t r 1t){z , SO 265. t T125 ) 5. . .. °. (.25 :°.. .24 Future Volume(vph) 210 10 315 90 10 60 265 a 1125 105 50 1252 245 Id � FIC�uphpl) i90a ) 9D0.... 9€)0 . 190(}, t _ ( 190 f9�(T, =100 f90 19aQ90Q Storage Length(ft) 0 0 0 0 260 0 70 0 Taper Length T) 25 25 25 25 LAW,I Frt 0.855 0.872 0.987 1975 F!t Rrotected u 4 950 � _ fl , Satd.Flow(prot) 1770 1593 0 1770 1624 0 1770 3493 0 1770 3451 0 1f Pm?►i#ect 0 47$ Satd.Flow(perm) 890 1593 0 967 1624 0 168 3493 0 231 3451 0 �Trnron Red z e .0712� Xes. r' .:yet Satd.Flow(RTOR) 294 65 14 32 Link Distance(ft) 255 293 922 449NO MIA Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 _0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 pup?? Shared Lane Traffic(%) �G� k".i-. _� !: )...a.a...... .. ....-.,,r , r..: v 3.-3 .-..P}. R.�e� r. ''c. .5.... ✓. � d..: S.: _. .s..f4... Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Permitted Phases 4 8 6 22 Switch Phase fir)inum Init�aG.(s}. is �0 0 �0 1t� 5 b 1n�St f . b��.Minimum Split(s) 9.5 15.0 9.5 15.0 _ 9.0 15.0 9.5 15.0 � a> EoZ t 9 k � 5-06 Total Split(%) 16 7% 16 7% 16 7% 16 7% 17 8% 51 1% 15 6% 4$9% (' l All-Red Time(s) 1.0 2.0 �1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 ��fiflt� R(5} rL�ar0, Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 dlLaged Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Kali"TOk N �... fl None orl Y r , •..� .� .. _ � �e .,._.�. ..�..,, � F. ..�x Mi Nang Act Effct Green(s) 20.6 11.1 17.4 101 55.7 46.4 46.9 39.3 �� #uac�lfitr �.. . y �t U 2Q 12k4 . .;�. .. . fl 54 645 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.77 0.35 0.31 0.90 0.71 0.22 1.02 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 x 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ! LOS ��€ 3 D C C B �D B A D ir�c rb Q��y�y .s� �'T"c x' '�'��.�"i`'c.'.... 'y"� �fr�K- "�w� '+;xA'`•3'�s:..,= "uee^`�"`'w '"` ��7 .�+�i ' Approach LOS C C C D Fuel Used(gal) 3 2 1 0 6 21 0 33 Synchro 10 Report i Page 5 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 2: Hemlock Drive 2024 Future Combined SAT * .. w 7 NOx Emissions(glhr) 39 32 14 7 82 291 6 450 Dilemma Vehicles(#) 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 78 Queue Length 95th(ft) #189 #165 81 46 #262 408 24 #681 lnter� l link�tst( j .. (7a� r .r : 2....�� . . ...` 69 Turn Bay Length(ft) 260 70 x Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 0 {� Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced arc Rdkib 0 70AMR At � �e X xthGr` 1 {45 f� a Cycle Length:90 - �iufer�[e . Natural Cycle:90 O�t�v ��OA-6 Maximum We Ratio:1.02 �i��s��►A�] f fifi 1 De�d�j �7 4 ` F �y{.Q j .a..L_,x Y�-.��?�.e. ej n. v,� a.4...v3. � `• � Intef��t��fl-t, D �'44�.:<nw n .. .. t �i. .. r _ ..i S Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.1% ICU Level of Service F Atrlys�s PenAd "Ss. h i G S ' 4Y f Volume exceeds capacity,queue is theoretically infinite. lvw �ro+ max{iriur � rr tw��:cyG1 s r # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer NO Splits and Phases: 2:Hemlock Drive t \*fly 4O6 07 L38 I E i i Synchro 10 Report Page 6 s i Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 3: Cedar Ave 2024 Future Combined SAT Lane Configurations ► tt r Future Volume(vph) 145 9 195 107 8 34 190 1279 55 65 1260 165 NO flaw{vphpl} 10 i9€l0 ' '900 „„a(9�T) 9 � �3t � .. 98614� f90 �190 13t?Q Storage Length(ft) 0 0 0 0 220 0 70 200 WON Ta er Length(ft) 25 25 25 25 tllR.,Factor $ ``. ...�„1:� .. . :):0 WOTJ 0_.... .00_ 00°, ;10t? , ;fi 0(1.. .'B • 9 # 95 „ 10{L 0 1 O Frt 0.857 0.879 0.994 0.850 Satd.Flow(prot) 1770 1596 0 1770 1637 0 1770 3518 _ 0 1770 3539 1583 00pt ,,.,..� .. 0417 , 446 � 4 Satd.Flow(perm) 777 1596 0 1330 1637 0 179 3518 0 194 3539 1583 �tORA-urp Satd.Flow(RTOR) 212 37 7 179 Link Distance(ft) 278 296 363 489 =. A: � Peak Hour Factor 0.92 °0.92 0.92 0.92 �0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0:92 0:92 0.92 6.92 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm 5 Permitted Phases 4 8 6 2 2 .,...� .,4�BE Switch Phase iimuml � 0 :10 0 f Minimum Split(s) 9 5 15,0 9.5 15.0 7.1 15.0 9 5 15 0 15.0 at! } , . .. 1 ,1F. ,. _ , a i3 0 Total Split(%) 13 3% 16 7% 13 3% 16 7% i 14 4% 55 6% 14 4% 55 6% 55.6% Moire 5 33 0 MAINE== All Red Time(s) 1.0 2.0 10 1 0 01 2 0 01 2,0 2.0 l LotiteAdjusf( )AMp, Total Lost Time(s) 4.5 5 0 4.5 4.5 31 5.0 31 5.0 5.0 Lit or � ..... .. .. pr; Lead., Lead Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes { r YJ. ..ka-l�o s,_ .. 1� R4r k x rye f Qrl <. N4� 1f1 N�fi' 111 fU IJ Act Effct Green(s) 17.4 10.5 131 8.4 51.2 42.3 46.4 37.6 37.6 ` c�:� k. ...a.. �„w.' 3✓. x� +.�... %s�x iQ Pe. vic Ratio 0.50 0.56 0.45 0.22 0 71 0 77� 0 29 ~- 0 � RM 1 ffip -M, Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.:e_.....:.,:.�....e. .."«�eww_,•.'..� WT N.:t.i:Rz M LOS C B C B C B A C A Approach LOS C C C C r Fuel Used(gal) 2 1 1 0 2 18 1 20 1 t Synchro 10 Report Page 7 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Buckland Road Masterplan 3: Cedar Ave 2024 Future Combined SAT ARM Y ": ,.f NOx Emissions(glhr) 24 16 18 4 34 250 8 271 11 /Q rricssions°(g>hr) ... 29 .._s i�' 22 Q k 98 20 .1 Dilemma Vehicles(#) 0 0 0 0 0 64 0 37 0 00 ...':� �.� ��.. .t T .. Queue Length 95th ff #145 72 99 36 #149 424 26 406 31 )nfe4t► M�i�JnlD� .O� 18 Turn Bay Length 220 70 200 j Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cycle Length:90 Natural Cycle 70 ttrQlr,T- 4 "Y 2 Maximum vlc Ratio:0.82 ' w 6 !ttfer#;etsfiort S�glaY`i9 Q s Irersecton L x _ . r Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.2% ICU Level of Service D I # 95th ;gnalysi�_``i�er'i�d percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. r i � Queue 9hr�wn?S tnakirY)t�Cn'�fter tlhia CyCl�5 '. Y 4� ��' �� � 4 I Splits and Phases 3:Cedar Ave 01 7`")2 04 -� 1*05 �rt35 �37 `' fd8 i i t f i F S i Synchro 10 Report Page 8 i i i s HCM 6th TWSC Buckland Road Masterplan 4: Site Drive 2024 Future Combined SAT Int Delay,slveh 0.2 Lane Configurations Future Vol,vehlh 0 29 1305 90 0 1562 Gbnlrc �' fiCi� Os,#lhr 0 0 (I r �` Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Thrrlrze'd' Storage Length 0 �1 i Metlrantorae,.# 0. df . .. ., . y „ Grade,% , 0 0 _ : - 0 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2�� 2 Conflicting Flow All 758 0 0 - - Stage 2 - - - - - fil Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - ieliwY,. �. .. Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - NEW Mar�euue- s� E 0_ x . ,.�,.�"a" Stage 1 0 0 �Y � x B Platoon blocked,% - - 21 �'` MEN Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - Stage 2 -IM MS - - - - - HCM LOS C W R HCM Lane VIC Ratio - - 0,09INE - s�s e f 33hmjk Yx �^ � tF.rOTltl � it.v :r>r'ksxxF "'-�`.^a 1 " ywa:f+ranr 'r- u.t 'r " f ": ,xU`i.:*� ..:._ ..a.....,:i •c.,,.s e..w°s+.—..<.._.:fi s .......r..,.. ,_,...,..:;.tl'"......z P.ahwtc,'k..,«+_a,,,:.,_. "4, HCM Lane LOS C Synchro 10 Report Page 1