Apple Orchard Road Intersection · PDF file6 Conclusion ... use of current traffic volume...

Apple Orchard Road Intersection Assessment

Final Report

Northumberland County August 2015


Final Report

August 2015 | 1

Contents

1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 2

1.1 Study Purpose ........................................................................................................................... 2

1.2 Study Methodology .................................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Site Context ............................................................................................................................... 3

1.4 Potential Solutions ..................................................................................................................... 3

2 Existing Conditions .............................................................................................................................. 4

2.1 Traffic Volumes .......................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Site Visit Observations ............................................................................................................... 5

3 Traffic Operations ................................................................................................................................ 6

3.1 Signal Warrants ......................................................................................................................... 6

3.2 Level of Service and Delay Assessment ................................................................................... 7

4 Safety ................................................................................................................................................... 9

4.1 Collision History ......................................................................................................................... 9

4.2 Site Visit Observations ............................................................................................................... 9

4.3 Potential Impacts of Installing Signals ..................................................................................... 11

4.4 Safety Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 12

5 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................. 13

6 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 15

Tables

Table 3-1: Level of Service Criteria for Two-way Stop Control and All-Way Stop Control ............................ 7

Table 3-2: Synchro Assessment at the Burnham Market Driveway and Apple Orchard Road ..................... 8

Table 3-3: Delay for Vehicles Exiting Burnham Market (seconds) ................................................................ 8

Table 4-1: Site Visit Observations ................................................................................................................. 9

Exhibits

Exhibit 1-1: Burnham Family Farm Market .................................................................................................... 2

Exhibit 1-2: Site Context ................................................................................................................................ 3

Exhibit 2-1: Traffic Volumes – Saturday July 18th, 2015 ................................................................................ 4

Exhibit 2-2: Traffic Volumes – Wednesday, July 22nd

, 2015 ......................................................................... 5

Exhibit 3-1: Traffic Signal Warrants – Data from Saturday, July 18th ............................................................ 6

Exhibit 3-2: Traffic Signal Warrants – Data from Wednesday, July 22nd

....................................................... 6

Exhibit 5-1: Proposed Upgrades at Burnham Market .................................................................................. 14

Appendices Appendix A: Traffic Counts Appendix C: Synchro Reports Appendix B: OTM Traffic Signal Warrants

Apple Orchard Road Intersection Assessment Final Report

2 | August 2015

1 Introduction

1.1 Study Purpose

The purpose of this study is to assess whether the existing intersection of County Road 2 and

Apple Orchard Road / Bob Carr Road should be upgraded (with features such as traffic signals or

a roundabout) to improve access to the minor street and the Burnham Family Farm Market.

One of the key advantages of upgrading the intersection controls would be to improve access to the

Burnham Family Farm Market (see Exhibit 1-1); this, however, would also require that the Burnham

Family Farm Market driveway on County Road 2 be closed, with all site traffic diverted to Apple

Orchard Road as recommended in the Draft Environmental Study Report for County Road 2. The

Burnham Family Farm Market is located at the northeast corner of County Road 2 and Apple Orchard

Road / Bob Carr Road. The Market is generally open from May to December, from 9 AM to 6 PM from

Monday to Saturday, and from 10 AM to 5 PM on Sundays.

Exhibit 1-1: Burnham Family Farm Market

1.2 Study Methodology

Installation of traffic signals or roundabouts does not always result in improved operations or safer conditions. Therefore this assessment considers the opportunity to improve the intersection based on both the operational considerations as well as safety. The assessment has been completed with the use of current traffic volume data, historical collision data, and site observations.


Final Report

August 2015 | 3

1.3 Site Context

The existing site context is shown in Exhibit 1-2. Some key features are described below: County Road 2 has a posted speed of 80 km/hr and is free-flow Apple Orchard Road / Bob Carr Road is stop-controlled and primarily serves residential

properties along these roads The Burnham Family Farm Market has a driveway approximately 40 m to the east of Apple

Orchard Road. While the Market has a connection to Apple Orchard Road, nearly all traffic related to the Market uses the County Road 2 driveway as it is more direct

There are no dedicated left-turn lanes from County Road 2 onto Apple Orchard Road, Bob Carr Road or the Burnham Market Driveway

There is no dedicated right-turn lane from County Road 2 onto Apple Orchard Road, Bob Carr Road or the Burnham Market Driveway; however, some vehicles were observed to use the existing paved shoulder as a space to decelerate when making a right-turn

The existing through lanes on County Road 2 are each 3.75 m wide

Exhibit 1-2: Site Context

1.4 Potential Solutions

Two primary types of intersection upgrades could be considered: The installation of traffic signals The construction of a roundabout

As a result of property constraints at the intersection of County Road 2 and Apple Orchard Road (notably the existing homes on the south side of County Road 2), a roundabout is not considered feasible in this location. As a result, this memo focuses specifically on assessing the benefits and costs of installing traffic signals as a potential approach to improve operations at the intersection.


4 | August 2015

2 Existing Conditions

2.1 Traffic Volumes

HDR commissioned traffic counts on two separate days in July 2015, which is a peak month for

activity at the Burnham Family Farm Market. The traffic counts were conducted on the following

dates:

Saturday, July 18th, 2015 from 10 AM to 6 PM (total of 6 hours of data collected during this

timeframe)

Wednesday, July 22nd

, 2015 from 10 AM to 6 PM (total of 7 hours of data collected during this

timeframe)

These traffic count volumes were validated by spot counts completed by HDR during a site visit on

Saturday, July 25th between 11 AM and 1 PM. The traffic count data is provided in Appendix A.

A summary of the traffic volumes are illustrated in Exhibit 2-1 and Exhibit 2-2.

Exhibit 2-1: Traffic Volumes – Saturday July 18th

, 2015


Final Report

August 2015 | 5

Exhibit 2-2: Traffic Volumes – Wednesday, July 22nd

, 2015

2.2 Site Visit Observations

Traffic operations were observed at the intersections of Apple Orchard Road / County Road 2 and the

Burnham Market Driveway / County Road 2 during a site visit on Saturday, July 25th, 2015:

Free flow traffic operations were observed along County Road 2

Very low traffic volumes were observed at the intersection of Apple Orchard Road / County

Road 2

Exiting vehicle queues within the Burnham Market driveway did not exceed 2 vehicles at any

point during the observation period

The maximum queue behind a vehicle making a left-turn into Burnham Market from County

Road 2 did not exceed 4 vehicles; because there is no existing dedicated left-turn lane on

County Road 2, through vehicles must wait behind vehicles waiting to turn left

The intersections were generally observed to operate well

Quantitative measurements of delay were collected and are provided in Section 3.2

Additional observations are provided in Section 4.2


6 | August 2015

3 Traffic Operations

3.1 Signal Warrants

Traffic signal warrants from the Ontario Traffic Manual (OTM) were applied using the data from the

July 2015 traffic counts. A complete 8 hour traffic volume profile is required for the warrants. This was

developed by interpolating the traffic volumes for some hours of the day based on the data provided

in these counts. Traffic volumes at the Burnham Market driveway were reassigned to Apple Orchard

Road to simulate how a signal would operate at a consolidated access (i.e. if the Burnham Market

driveway was re-located to Apple Orchard Road). The results of the warrant for the Saturday and

Wednesday data are shown in Exhibit 3-1 and Exhibit 3-2, respectively.

Exhibit 3-1: Traffic Signal Warrants – Data from Saturday, July 18th

Exhibit 3-2: Traffic Signal Warrants – Data from Wednesday, July 22nd


Final Report

August 2015 | 7

As shown, the signal warrants are not justified based on this data. It is the minor road traffic volume

and delay (i.e. the volumes and delay on Apple Orchard Road) which do not meet the criteria for

justification. Sensitivity testing was undertaken to assess how the volumes would need to change in

order to warrant signals:

If all of the Saturday volumes were increased by a factor of 1.75, the 4-hour volume warrant

would be 98% satisfied

If all of the weekday volumes were increased by a factor of 2.0, the 4-hour volume warrant

would be 98% satisfied

The traffic volumes would need to be substantially higher to satisfy the signal warrants; therefore, even accounting for potential fluctuations in traffic volumes between different days of the week or months of the year, it is unlikely that signals would be warranted at this time.

3.2 Level of Service and Delay Assessment

The peak hour volumes from the traffic counts were used to model delays and Level of Service in Synchro based on the existing lane configuration and traffic control. Level of service (LOS) is a term used to qualitatively describe the driver experience, primarily based on delay. The LOS of a facility is designated with a letter, A to F, with A representing the best operating conditions and F the worst. Level of service criteria differs for unsignalized and signalized intersections since driver perception differs depending on the mode of control.

Table 3-1 show the levels of service for Two-way Stop Control and All-Way Stop Control intersections as per the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2000).

Table 3-1: Level of Service Criteria for Two-way Stop Control and All-Way Stop Control

Level of Service

Description Delay (s)

A Free-flow conditions with unimpeded maneuverability. ≤ 10

B Reasonably unimpeded operations with slightly restricted maneuverability. Stopped delays are not bothersome.

> 10 and ≤ 15

C Stable operations > 15 and ≤ 25

D Approaching unstable operations > 25 and ≤ 35

E Operations with significant intersection approach delays > 35 and ≤ 50

F Operations with extremely low speeds caused by intersection congestion, and high delay

> 50

The delay and Level of Service results for Apple Orchard Road and the Burnham Market driveway

are presented in Table 3-2.


8 | August 2015

Table 3-2: Synchro Assessment at the Burnham Market Driveway and Apple Orchard Road

Burnham Market Driveway Apple Orchard Road

Saturday Peak Hour

Wednesday Peak Hour

Saturday Peak Hour

Wednesday Peak Hour

Southbound Approach Delay (seconds)

17.9 18.9 16.1 21.6

Southbound Approach Level of Service

C C C C

Intersection Average Delay (seconds)

1.3 0.9 0.3 0.3

Intersection Level of Service

A A A A

The Synchro results indicate that the intersection is operating well; therefore, signalization would not

be required to address any operational concerns.

Delay data for vehicles exiting Burnham Market was also measured during the site visit on Saturday,

July 25th. The time that each vehicle had to wait before making either a left-turn or a right-turn out of

the driveway was measured over the course of one hour; the results are summarized in Table 3-3.

These results are generally consistent with the results modeled in Synchro.

Table 3-3: Delay for Vehicles Exiting Burnham Market (seconds)

Delays in Seconds Right Turn Out Left Turn Out

Minimum 0 0

Median 1 9

Average 3 18

85th Percentile 11 29

Max 14 100

Count 18 41

Key findings include:

Vehicles are generally able to make a right-turn out of Burnham Market with minimal delay

(average delay of 3 seconds)

There is more variability in delays for left-turns out of Burnham Market: while some vehicles

exit immediately with no delay, one vehicle had to wait 100 seconds before completing the

turn due to a lack of available gaps in through-traffic along County Road 2

The average delay for left-turns out of Burnham Market was 18 seconds (level of service C),

which is an acceptable level of delay and is consistent with the Synchro results. The 85th

percentile delay was 29 seconds, which translates to level of service D. Level of service D

indicates that operations can be monitored but that improvements are not currently

necessary.

In conclusion, the existing delays at the Burnham Market driveway and at Apple Orchard Road are

and will continue to be acceptable and do not justify the installation of a new signal.


Final Report

August 2015 | 9

4 Safety This section includes a review of the collision history, site visit observations, and theoretical findings about the impacts of installing signals.

4.1 Collision History

Safety records at the intersection of County Road 2 and Apple Orchard Road and Burnham Market have been reviewed. The following key trends were identified:

A total of 8 collisions between 2002 and 2014 were recorded at the following 3 locations: o County Road 2 and Apple Orchard Road (6 collisions) o County Road 2 and Bob Carr Road (1 collision) o County Road 2 and Burnham Market (1 collision)

Due to the close proximity of Apple Orchard Road to the Burnham Market driveway, it is possible that some collisions related to the Burnham Market were recorded as occurring at Apple Orchard Road

Four of the eight collisions occurred either outside of the Market’s operating hours, or in a month when the Market is not open (January to April)

All 8 collisions were classified as “Property Damage Only”; no “Injury” or “Fatal” collisions were recorded

The collision types are summarized below:

Collision Type Total Number of

Collisions Collisions that may be

Related to Burnham Market*

Angle 2 0

Rear-End 4 3

Sideswipe 1 0

Single Motor Vehicle 1 1

Total 8 4

*Collision occurred between 9 AM and 6 PM, from May to December

The one collision that was specifically listed as occurring at “Burnham Market” was classified as a rear-end collision, resulting from a vehicle following too close

Based on this assessment, there is not a clear pattern of collisions either at the intersection of Apple Orchard Road, or related to traffic entering or exiting Burnham Market.

4.2 Site Visit Observations

A site visit was conducted on Saturday, July 25th, 2015 between 11 AM and 1 PM. Generally, no

major safety concerns were observed; the detailed summary of site visit observations is provided

in Table 4-1.

Table 4-1: Site Visit Observations

Signage No sudden stops were observed, indicating that drivers had knowledge of the Market’s location (or had sufficient notice)

An unfamiliar driver might not see the Market until the last moment and need to stop suddenly, although this was not observed

There may be an opportunity to provide either advance signage or larger signage, particularly for the westbound approach

Queues

The maximum vehicle queue in the driveway was 2 vehicles; this occurred 4-5 times over a one hour observation period.

Often there were no vehicles queued in the Burnham Market driveway No queuing was observed for right-turning vehicles entering the market


10 | August 2015

The maximum queue of vehicles turning left into Burnham Market was 4; this occurred once (only the first vehicle was turning left into the market). As vehicles must stop in the live lane of traffic, this is a potential safety concern.

Vehicles would sometimes use the shoulder to pass a vehicle waiting to turn left into the Market

Pavement Markings

No deficiencies observed – all pavement markings are clear and in good condition

Presence of Gaps

Gaps were observed, providing vehicles with opportunities to turn into and out of the driveway

Results of delay analysis are shown in Section 3.2

Risky Driving Behaviour

Two risky driving maneuvers were observed, neither of which was related specifically to market traffic:

o One vehicle passed another on the left in the WB direction, across a solid line

o One vehicle made a U-Turn EB to WB in the intersection of CR2 and Apple Orchard.

Driver Frustration

Driver frustration was not generally observed; County Road 2 flowed well, so drivers may feel more patient when making turns onto County Road 2.

One driver was observed to make a right-turn after waiting 48 seconds to make a left-turn

Reaction Time Drivers were observed to turn with safe gaps

Sight Lines Sightlines are clear in both directions (refer to Exhibit 4-1 and Exhibit 4-2)

Acceleration / Deceleration

Drivers would generally decelerate in advance of the turn into the market, and accelerate gradually when exiting the market.

Conflicts between Apple Orchard Road and Burnham Market Driveway

No issues observed. Low vehicle volumes were observed on Bob Carr Road / Apple Orchard

Road, so there is very low potential for conflicts

Pedestrians and Cyclists

No pedestrian activity was observed Cyclist volumes were low (2 cyclists per hour)

Vehicle Types Most vehicles were sedans, SUV’s or pick-up trucks No tractor trailers were observed during the observations.


Final Report

August 2015 | 11

Exhibit 4-1: Sight Lines to the West of Burnham Market

Exhibit 4-2: Sight Lines to the East of Burnham Market


12 | August 2015

4.3 Potential Impacts of Installing Signals

Installing traffic signals does not necessarily improve safety conditions at intersections. Rather, the safety benefit of installing signals depends upon multiple context-specific factors such as existing geometric conditions at the intersection, traffic patterns, vehicle speeds, presence of pedestrians and vehicle volumes. The primary safety benefit provided by the installation of signals is the reduction in the number of angle collisions (which can be the most severe type of collision). At this location, angle collisions could occur if a vehicle making a left-turn out of Burnham Market is struck by an oncoming vehicle on County Road 2. Signals may also, however, increase the number of rear-end collisions at an intersection. As mentioned, there is no observable pattern in the collision history and it does not appear that installation of a traffic signal would have prevented the historic collisions from occurring. Unwarranted signals may increase overall congestion which can encourage drivers to behave more aggressively (i.e. running through a red light because there is no oncoming traffic). A publication by the Ohio Department of Transportation

1 states that “Intersections with signals that have very low

traffic volumes tend to tempt drivers and pedestrians to violate that red light.” A publication by the United States Federal Highways Administration (FHWA)

2 adds that “adding traffic signals would not

necessarily increase safety at an intersection … in some cases, especially when the traffic signals do not seem to be needed, some drivers may begin to ignore them or run yellow lights in an attempt to avoid delays”. A separate FHWA publication

3 regarding the removal of unwarranted signals notes that a 2005 study

reported that “removing unwarranted signals may result in a 24% decrease in all crashes, a 53% decrease in injury crashes, a 24% decrease in right-angle crashes and a 29% decrease in rear-end crashes.” In conclusion, signals do not necessarily increase the safety of an intersection and unwarranted signals can ultimately decrease the safety of the intersection.

4.4 Safety Conclusions

In conclusion, neither the site visit observations nor the review of collision data indicated any

particular safety concerns at this intersection. Additionally, unwarranted signals can decrease safety

conditions, particularly at intersections where there is not a history of angle collisions. Therefore, the

installation of signals is not expected to be beneficial from a safety perspective at the intersection of

County Road 2 and Apple Orchard Road.

1 https://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D01/PlanningPrograms/trafficstudies/Documents/Intersection-Safety-myth-versus-reality.pdf

2 http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/resources/fhwasa09027/resources/Iowa%20Traffic%20and %20Safety%20FS-%20Unsignalized%20Intersections.pdf

3 http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/resources/intsafestratbro/sa7_remove_unwarranted_signal.pdf

https://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D01/PlanningPrograms/trafficstudies/Documents/Intersection-Safety-myth-versus-reality.pdf

https://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D01/PlanningPrograms/trafficstudies/Documents/Intersection-Safety-myth-versus-reality.pdf

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/resources/fhwasa09027/resources/Iowa%20Traffic%20and

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/resources/intsafestratbro/sa7_remove_unwarranted_signal.pdf


Final Report

August 2015 | 13

5 Recommendations Based on the assessment, intersection upgrades (i.e. signalization or a roundabout) are not

recommended at the intersection of County Road 2 and Apple Orchard Road for the following

reasons:

Traffic volumes at the Burnham Market driveway and on Apple Orchard Road are generally

low, and the signal warrants are not satisfied.

There is not a history of high numbers of collisions at the intersection; additionally, the

addition of signals would not have necessarily prevented many of the collisions that occurred

Major safety or congestion issues were not observed during a site visit which took place

during a higher volume period (between 11 AM and 1 PM on Saturday, July 27th, 2015).

The signals would primarily serve one business (the Burnham Family Farm Market) which is

generally open from May to December each year; therefore, the signals would not be needed

about one third of the year (January to April)

At present, Northumberland County is not aware of any planned developments along Bob

Carr Road or Apple Orchard Road that would increase background traffic beyond existing

conditions

Installing unwarranted signals is not recommended for the following reasons:

Safety at the intersection may decrease: there may be an increase in rear-end collisions, or

vehicles may drive more aggressively (i.e. running yellow or red lights)

Increased delay and reduction in traffic flow for vehicles traveling along County Road 2: when

the signal turns red on County Road 2, all vehicles must wait.

Additional cost to Northumberland County, representing sub-optimal allocation of resources;

allocating resources to a sub-optimal initiative results in fewer available resources for more

critical County investments

Reduction in air quality, as a result of forcing more vehicles to stop and idle at the signals

Potential vehicle diversion / traffic infiltration to other roads, where there are fewer signals

and less delay

While new signals are not recommended, the County Road 2 Environmental Assessment does

propose the following upgrades that will improve access to the Burnham Market:

Re-location of Burnham Market access onto Apple Orchard Road, to consolidate access onto

County Road 2. This will improve safety by reducing conflicting turning movements between

Apple Orchard Road and the Burnham Market driveway

Provision of a dedicated southbound right turn lane on Apple Orchard Road will improve

operations by reducing queuing: vehicles will be able to make a southbound right-turn even

while vehicles are queuing to make a southbound left-turn. Additionally, there will not be

queuing within the Burnham Market driveway.

Introduction of continuous central left-turn lane which will facilitate left-turns to and from Apple

Orchard Road. Vehicles making a left-turn onto Apple Orchard Road en route to Burnham

Market will be able to wait in the dedicated lane, with less risk of rear-end collisions from

following through traffic.


14 | August 2015

These improvements are illustrated in Exhibit 5-1.

Exhibit 5-1: Proposed Upgrades at Burnham Market


Final Report

August 2015 | 15

6 Conclusion In conclusion, upgrades to the traffic control at the intersection of County Road 2 and Apple Orchard Road (such as signalization) are not recommended at this time based on the traffic volumes and delays. Burnham Family Farm Market may wish to consider larger signage, which can provide advance notice for new visitors and also increase driver awareness of the potential for vehicles turning in and out of the parking lot. It is also recommended that Northumberland County continue to monitor operations at the intersection and consult with Burnham Market on operations and safety. For example, any expansion to the size of the Burnham Market and/or parking lot could warrant additional analysis. In the future, upgrades to the intersection such as signalization can be completed by the County outside of a Class Environmental Assessment.

Appendix A

Traffic Counts

Ontario Traffic IncMorning Peak Diagram Specified Period

From:To:

10:00:0018:00:00

One Hour PeakFrom:To:

11:00:0012:00:00

Municipality:Site #:Intersection:TFR File #:Count date:

Cobourg1518400001County Rd 2 & AppleOrchard Rd918-Jul-15

Weather conditions:

Person(s) who counted:

** Non-Signalized Intersection ** Major Road: County Rd 2 runs W/E

North Leg Total:

North Entering:

North Peds:

Peds Cross:

17

11

0

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

0

5

5

0

0

0

0

0

0

6

6

0

0

11

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

0

6

6

Heavys Trucks Cars Totals

0 7 409 416


0 0 3 3

0 4 434 438

0 0 0 0

0 4 437

Peds Cross:

West Peds:

West Entering:

West Leg Total:

0

441

857

AppleOrchard Rd

County Rd 2W

N

E

SCounty Rd 2

Bob Carr Rd

East Leg Total:

East Entering:

East Peds:

Peds Cross:

862

415

0

Cars Trucks Heavys Totals

3 0 0 3

403 7 0 410

2 0 0 2

408 7 0


443 4 0 447

Cars

Trucks

Heavys

Totals

2

0

0

2

Cars

Trucks

Heavys

Totals

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

3

0

0

3

4

0

0

Peds Cross:

South Peds:

South Entering:

South Leg Total:

0

4

6

Comments

Ontario Traffic IncTotal Count Diagram


Cobourg1518400001County Rd 2 & AppleOrchard Rd918-Jul-15

Weather conditions:



North Leg Total:

North Entering:

North Peds:

Peds Cross:

87

52

2

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

1

18

19

0

0

1

1

0

0

32

32

0

1

51

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

0

35

35


0 27 2334 2361


0 0 15 15

0 29 2238 2267

0 0 8 8

0 29 2261

Peds Cross:

West Peds:

West Entering:

West Leg Total:

3

2290

4651

AppleOrchard Rd

County Rd 2W

N

E

SCounty Rd 2

Bob Carr Rd

East Leg Total:

East Entering:

East Peds:

Peds Cross:

4673

2368

1


20 0 0 20

2314 26 0 2340

8 0 0 8

2342 26 0


2276 29 0 2305

Cars

Trucks

Heavys

Totals

17

0

0

17

Cars

Trucks

Heavys

Totals

2

0

0

2

0

0

0

0

6

0

0

6

8

0

0

Peds Cross:

South Peds:

South Entering:

South Leg Total:

1

8

25

Comments

Ontario Traffic IncTraffic Count Summary

Intersection: County Rd 2 & AppleOrchard Rd Count Date: 18-Jul-15 Municipality: CobourgNorth Approach Totals South Approach Totals

East Approach Totals West Approach Totals

Includes Cars, Trucks, & Heavys Includes Cars, Trucks, & Heavys


Hour Hour

Hour Hour

Ending Ending

Ending Ending

Left Left

Left Left

Thru Thru

Thru Thru

Right Right

Right Right

Grand Grand

Grand Grand

Total Total

Total Total

Total Total

Total Total

Peds Peds

Peds Peds

North/South

East/West

Total

Total

Approaches

Approaches

Calculated Values for Traffic Crossing Major StreetHours Ending:Crossing Values:

Totals:

Totals:

10:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00:00 0 0 0 0 011:00:00 12 0 5 17 0 17 11:00:00 0 0 0 0 012:00:00 6 0 5 11 0 15 12:00:00 1 0 3 4 013:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 13:00:00 0 0 0 0 014:00:00 3 0 4 7 1 7 14:00:00 0 0 0 0 115:00:00 5 1 1 7 0 9 15:00:00 1 0 1 2 016:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:00:00 0 0 0 0 017:00:00 3 0 2 5 1 6 17:00:00 0 0 1 1 018:00:00 3 0 2 5 0 6 18:00:00 0 0 1 1 0

10:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00:00 0 0 0 0 011:00:00 1 388 6 395 0 784 11:00:00 1 386 2 389 112:00:00 2 410 3 415 0 856 12:00:00 3 438 0 441 013:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 13:00:00 0 0 0 0 014:00:00 1 416 3 420 0 808 14:00:00 4 381 3 388 015:00:00 2 397 1 400 0 837 15:00:00 2 435 0 437 216:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:00:00 0 0 0 0 017:00:00 2 406 4 412 1 756 17:00:00 3 340 1 344 018:00:00 0 321 3 324 0 613 18:00:00 2 287 0 289 0

11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:0013 7 0 3 9 0 4 3

32 1 19 52 2 60 2 0 6 8 1

8 2338 20 2366 1 4654 15 2267 6 2288 3

Ontario Traffic IncCount Date: 18-Jul-15 Site #: 1518400001

IntervalTime

Passenger Cars - North Approach Trucks - North Approach Heavys - North Approach Pedestrians

Left Left LeftThru Thru ThruRight Right Right North Cross

Cum Cum Cum Cum Cum Cum Cum Cum Cum CumIncr Incr Incr Incr Incr Incr Incr Incr Incr Incr10:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:15:00 3 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:30:00 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:45:00 8 5 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:00:00 12 4 0 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:15:00 13 1 0 0 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:30:00 15 2 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:45:00 16 1 0 0 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 012:00:00 18 2 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 012:15:00 18 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 012:30:00 18 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 012:45:00 18 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 013:00:00 18 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 013:15:00 19 1 0 0 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 013:30:00 19 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 013:45:00 20 1 0 0 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 014:00:00 21 1 0 0 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 114:15:00 23 2 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 014:30:00 24 1 1 1 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 014:45:00 26 2 1 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 015:00:00 26 0 1 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 015:15:00 26 0 1 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 015:30:00 26 0 1 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 015:45:00 26 0 1 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 016:00:00 26 0 1 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 016:15:00 26 0 1 0 15 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 116:30:00 28 2 1 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 016:45:00 29 1 1 0 16 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 017:00:00 29 0 1 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 017:15:00 30 1 1 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 017:30:00 30 0 1 0 17 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 017:45:00 31 1 1 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 018:00:00 32 1 1 0 18 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 018:15:00 32 0 1 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 018:15:34 32 0 1 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0


IntervalTime

Passenger Cars - East Approach Trucks - East Approach Heavys - East Approach Pedestrians

Left Left LeftThru Thru ThruRight Right Right East Cross



IntervalTime

Passenger Cars - South Approach Trucks - South Approach Heavys - South Approach Pedestrians

Left Left LeftThru Thru ThruRight Right Right South Cross



IntervalTime

Passenger Cars - West Approach Trucks - West Approach Heavys - West Approach Pedestrians

Left Left LeftThru Thru ThruRight Right Right West Cross



From:To:

10:00:0018:00:00


10:45:0011:45:00


Cobourg1518400001County Rd 2 & Burnham Family Mar118-Jul-15

Weather conditions:



North Leg Total:

North Entering:

North Peds:

Peds Cross:

119

54

0

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

0

17

17

0

0

37

37

0

0

54

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

0

65

65


0 0 17 17


0 0 17 17

0 0 0 0

0 0 17

Peds Cross:

West Peds:

West Entering:

West Leg Total:

0

17

34

Burnham Family Market

County Rd 2W

N

E

SCounty Rd 2

East Leg Total:

East Entering:

East Peds:

Peds Cross:

85

48

0


48 0 0 48

0 0 0 0

48 0 0


37 0 0 37

Comments




Weather conditions:



North Leg Total:

North Entering:

North Peds:

Peds Cross:

510

231

1

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

0

81

81

0

0

150

150

0

0

231

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

1

278

279


0 0 81 81


0 0 77 77

0 0 0 0

0 0 77

Peds Cross:

West Peds:

West Entering:

West Leg Total:

1

77

158

Burnham Family Market

County Rd 2W

N

E

SCounty Rd 2

East Leg Total:

East Entering:

East Peds:

Peds Cross:

352

202

2


201 1 0 202

0 0 0 0

201 1 0


150 0 0 150

Comments


Intersection: County Rd 2 & Burnham Family MaCount Date: 18-Jul-15 Municipality: CobourgNorth Approach Totals South Approach Totals




Hour Hour

Hour Hour

Ending Ending

Ending Ending

Left Left

Left Left

Thru Thru

Thru Thru

Right Right

Right Right

Grand Grand

Grand Grand

Total Total

Total Total

Total Total

Total Total

Peds Peds

Peds Peds

North/South

East/West

Total

Total

Approaches

Approaches


Totals:

Totals:

10:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00:00 0 0 0 0 011:00:00 34 0 14 48 0 48 11:00:00 0 0 0 0 012:00:00 36 0 15 51 0 51 12:00:00 0 0 0 0 013:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 13:00:00 0 0 0 0 014:00:00 21 0 15 36 0 36 14:00:00 0 0 0 0 015:00:00 33 0 14 47 0 47 15:00:00 0 0 0 0 016:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:00:00 0 0 0 0 017:00:00 17 0 20 37 1 37 17:00:00 0 0 0 0 018:00:00 9 0 3 12 0 12 18:00:00 0 0 0 0 0

10:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00:00 0 0 0 0 011:00:00 0 0 43 43 0 59 11:00:00 16 0 0 16 012:00:00 0 0 50 50 0 65 12:00:00 15 0 0 15 013:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 13:00:00 0 0 0 0 014:00:00 0 0 42 42 0 53 14:00:00 11 0 0 11 015:00:00 0 0 33 33 0 53 15:00:00 20 0 0 20 016:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:00:00 0 0 0 0 017:00:00 0 0 26 26 2 37 17:00:00 11 0 0 11 018:00:00 0 0 8 8 0 12 18:00:00 4 0 0 4 1

11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:0034 36 0 21 33 0 19 10

150 0 81 231 1 231 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 202 202 2 279 77 0 0 77 1


IntervalTime





From:To:

10:00:0018:00:00


14:15:0015:15:00


Cobourg1518400003County Rd 2 & Apple Orchard Rd1022-Jul-15

Weather conditions:



North Leg Total:

North Entering:

North Peds:

Peds Cross:

19

12

0

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

0

3

3

0

0

0

0

0

0

9

9

0

0

12

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

0

7

7


0 9 462 471


0 0 3 3

0 11 514 525

0 0 2 2

0 11 519

Peds Cross:

West Peds:

West Entering:

West Leg Total:

0

530

1001

Apple Orchard Rd

County Rd 2W

N

E

SCounty Rd 2

Bob Carr Rd

East Leg Total:

East Entering:

East Peds:

Peds Cross:

1009

473

0


4 0 0 4

459 9 0 468

0 1 0 1

463 10 0


524 12 0 536

Cars

Trucks

Heavys

Totals

2

1

0

3

Cars

Trucks

Heavys

Totals

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

2

1

1

0

Peds Cross:

South Peds:

South Entering:

South Leg Total:

0

2

5

Comments



Cobourg1518400003County Rd 2 & Apple Orchard Rd1022-Jul-15

Weather conditions:



North Leg Total:

North Entering:

North Peds:

Peds Cross:

99

47

0

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

1

20

21

0

0

1

1

0

0

25

25

0

1

46

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

3

49

52


0 82 2962 3044


0 0 13 13

0 69 3030 3099

0 0 8 8

0 69 3051

Peds Cross:

West Peds:

West Entering:

West Leg Total:

3

3120

6164

Apple Orchard Rd

County Rd 2W

N

E

SCounty Rd 2

Bob Carr Rd

East Leg Total:

East Entering:

East Peds:

Peds Cross:

6194

3059

0


35 1 0 36

2936 78 0 3014

8 1 0 9

2979 80 0


3062 73 0 3135

Cars

Trucks

Heavys

Totals

17

1

0

18

Cars

Trucks

Heavys

Totals

6

3

0

9

1

2

0

3

7

4

0

11

14

9

0

Peds Cross:

South Peds:

South Entering:

South Leg Total:

0

23

41

Comments


Intersection: County Rd 2 & Apple Orchard Rd Count Date: 22-Jul-15 Municipality: CobourgNorth Approach Totals South Approach Totals




Hour Hour

Hour Hour

Ending Ending

Ending Ending

Left Left

Left Left

Thru Thru

Thru Thru

Right Right

Right Right

Grand Grand

Grand Grand

Total Total

Total Total

Total Total

Total Total

Peds Peds

Peds Peds

North/South

East/West

Total

Total

Approaches

Approaches


Totals:

Totals:

10:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00:00 0 0 0 0 011:00:00 1 0 3 4 0 6 11:00:00 1 0 1 2 012:00:00 1 0 2 3 0 5 12:00:00 2 0 0 2 013:00:00 1 0 1 2 0 7 13:00:00 3 1 1 5 014:00:00 1 1 7 9 0 11 14:00:00 1 1 0 2 015:00:00 9 0 3 12 0 15 15:00:00 1 0 2 3 016:00:00 3 0 0 3 0 7 16:00:00 0 1 3 4 017:00:00 5 0 3 8 0 12 17:00:00 1 0 3 4 018:00:00 4 0 2 6 0 7 18:00:00 0 0 1 1 0

10:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00:00 0 0 0 0 011:00:00 1 379 10 390 0 775 11:00:00 0 385 0 385 012:00:00 1 420 5 426 0 876 12:00:00 2 447 1 450 013:00:00 2 217 4 223 0 429 13:00:00 2 203 1 206 014:00:00 1 436 6 443 0 843 14:00:00 2 398 0 400 015:00:00 3 436 3 442 0 905 15:00:00 2 459 2 463 016:00:00 0 276 1 277 0 568 16:00:00 1 290 0 291 017:00:00 1 446 3 450 0 955 17:00:00 4 498 3 505 318:00:00 0 404 4 408 0 826 18:00:00 0 417 1 418 0

11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:002 3 5 3 10 4 9 4

25 1 21 47 0 70 9 3 11 23 0

9 3014 36 3059 0 6177 13 3097 8 3118 3


IntervalTime





From:To:

10:00:0018:00:00


14:30:0015:30:00



Weather conditions:



North Leg Total:

North Entering:

North Peds:

Peds Cross:

90

44

0

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

0

18

18

0

0

26

26

0

0

44

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

0

46

46


0 0 18 18


0 0 8 8

0 0 0 0

0 0 8

Peds Cross:

West Peds:

West Entering:

West Leg Total:

0

8

26

Burnham Family Market Driveway

County Rd 2W

N

E

SCounty Rd 2

East Leg Total:

East Entering:

East Peds:

Peds Cross:

64

38

0


38 0 0 38

0 0 0 0

38 0 0


26 0 0 26

Comments




Weather conditions:



North Leg Total:

North Entering:

North Peds:

Peds Cross:

454

215

1

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

0

81

81

0

1

133

134

0

1

214

Heavys

Trucks

Cars

Totals

0

1

238

239


0 0 81 81


0 0 76 76

0 0 0 0

0 0 76

Peds Cross:

West Peds:

West Entering:

West Leg Total:

0

76

157

Burnham Family Market Driveway

County Rd 2W

N

E

SCounty Rd 2

East Leg Total:

East Entering:

East Peds:

Peds Cross:

297

163

0


162 1 0 163

0 0 0 0

162 1 0


133 1 0 134

Comments


Intersection: County Rd 2 & Burnham Family MaCount Date: 22-Jul-15 Municipality: CobourgNorth Approach Totals South Approach Totals




Hour Hour

Hour Hour

Ending Ending

Ending Ending

Left Left

Left Left

Thru Thru

Thru Thru

Right Right

Right Right

Grand Grand

Grand Grand

Total Total

Total Total

Total Total

Total Total

Peds Peds

Peds Peds

North/South

East/West

Total

Total

Approaches

Approaches


Totals:

Totals:

10:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00:00 0 0 0 0 011:00:00 17 0 18 35 0 35 11:00:00 0 0 0 0 012:00:00 29 0 7 36 0 36 12:00:00 0 0 0 0 013:00:00 12 0 9 21 0 21 13:00:00 0 0 0 0 014:00:00 14 0 8 22 0 22 14:00:00 0 0 0 0 015:00:00 16 0 10 26 0 26 15:00:00 0 0 0 0 116:00:00 18 0 11 29 0 29 16:00:00 0 0 0 0 017:00:00 23 0 12 35 1 35 17:00:00 0 0 0 0 018:00:00 5 0 6 11 0 11 18:00:00 0 0 0 0 0

10:00:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00:00 0 0 0 0 011:00:00 0 0 27 27 0 39 11:00:00 12 0 0 12 012:00:00 0 0 32 32 0 42 12:00:00 10 0 0 10 013:00:00 0 0 13 13 0 20 13:00:00 7 0 0 7 014:00:00 0 0 12 12 0 21 14:00:00 9 0 0 9 015:00:00 0 0 34 34 0 43 15:00:00 9 0 0 9 016:00:00 0 0 19 19 0 26 16:00:00 7 0 0 7 017:00:00 0 0 19 19 0 36 17:00:00 17 0 0 17 018:00:00 0 0 7 7 0 12 18:00:00 5 0 0 5 0

11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:0017 29 12 14 16 18 23 5

134 0 81 215 1 215 0 0 0 0 1

0 0 163 163 0 239 76 0 0 76 0


IntervalTime




Appendix B

OTM Traffic Signal Warrants

Input Data Sheet

What are the intersecting roadways? Apple Orchard Road / County Road 2

What is the direction of the Main Road street? When was the data collected? 2015-07-18

Justification 1 - 4: Volume Warrants

a.- Number of lanes on the Main Road?

b.- Number of lanes on the Minor Road?

c.- How many approaches?

d.- What is the operating environment? AND Speed >= 70 km/hr

e.- What is the eight hour vehicle volume at the intersection? (Please fill in table below)

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT

17 370 2 0 0 0 1 374 49 46 0 19 1

18 423 0 1 0 3 2 395 53 42 0 20 0

17 397 2 1 0 2 2 398 49 33 0 20 0

15 370 3 0 0 0 1 401 45 24 0 19 0

22 415 0 1 0 1 2 383 34 38 1 15 2

18 372 1 1 0 1 2 385 32 29 1 19 3

14 329 1 0 0 1 2 386 30 20 0 22 3

6 283 0 0 0 1 0 318 11 12 0 5 1

127 2,959 9 4 0 9 12 3,040 303 244 2 139 10

Population < 10,000

12:00

Minor Southbound Approach Pedestrians

Crossing Main

Road

Hour Ending

11:00

Main Eastbound Approach Main Westbound ApproachMinor Northbound Approach

18:00

Total

13:00

14:00

15:00

17:00

16:00

Apple Orchard Road / County Road 2

East-West

1

4

Rural

GO TO Justification:Analysis Sheet Results Sheet

1

Proposed Collision

2015-07-18

Input Data OTM Saturday Warrant.xls 7/27/2015

Results Sheet

Intersection: Apple Orchard Road / County Road 2 Count Date: 2015-07-18

YES NO

A Total Volume 100 %

B Crossing Volume 41 %

A Main Road 100 %

B Crossing Road 65 %

A Justificaton 1 41 %

B Justification 2 65 %

4. 4-Hr Volume35 % FALSE TRUE

Signal Justified?

3. Combination

2. Delay to

Cross

Traffic

FALSE TRUE

FALSE TRUE

FALSE TRUE

Summary Results

1. Minimum

Vehicular

Volume

ComplianceJustification

GO TO Justification:Input Sheet Analysis Sheet Proposed Collision

Results Sheet OTM Saturday Warrant.xls 7/27/2015

Input Data Sheet

What are the intersecting roadways? Apple Orchard Road / County Road 2

What is the direction of the Main Road street? When was the data collected? 2015-07-22

Justification 1 - 4: Volume Warrants

a.- Number of lanes on the Main Road?

b.- Number of lanes on the Minor Road?

c.- How many approaches?

d.- What is the operating environment? AND Speed >= 70 km/hr

e.- What is the eight hour vehicle volume at the intersection? (Please fill in table below)

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT

12 373 0 1 0 1 1 361 37 18 0 21 0

12 437 1 2 0 0 1 413 37 30 0 9 0

12 413 1 2 1 0 1 421 28 23 1 12 0

11 389 0 1 1 0 1 428 18 15 1 15 0

11 450 2 1 0 2 3 426 37 25 0 13 0

16 466 3 1 0 3 2 430 30 27 0 14 2

21 481 3 1 0 3 1 434 22 28 0 15 3

5 412 1 0 0 1 0 398 11 9 0 8 0

100 3,421 11 9 2 10 10 3,311 220 175 2 107 5Total

13:00

14:00

15:00

17:00

16:00

12:00

Minor Southbound Approach Pedestrians

Crossing Main

Road

Hour Ending

11:00

Main Eastbound Approach Main Westbound ApproachMinor Northbound Approach

18:00

Population < 10,000

Apple Orchard Road / County Road 2

East-West

1

4

Rural

GO TO Justification:Analysis Sheet Results Sheet

1

Proposed Collision

2015-07-22

Input Data OTM Weekday Warrant.xls 7/27/2015

Results Sheet

Intersection: Apple Orchard Road / County Road 2 Count Date: 2015-07-22

YES NO

A Total Volume 100 %

B Crossing Volume 32 %

A Main Road 100 %

B Crossing Road 48 %

A Justificaton 1 32 %

B Justification 2 48 %

4. 4-Hr Volume30 % FALSE TRUE

Summary Results

1. Minimum

Vehicular

Volume

ComplianceJustificationSignal Justified?

3. Combination

2. Delay to

Cross

Traffic

FALSE TRUE

FALSE TRUE

FALSE TRUE

GO TO Justification:Input Sheet Analysis Sheet Proposed Collision

Results Sheet OTM Weekday Warrant.xls 7/27/2015

Appendix C

Synchro Results

HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis CR2 / Apple Orchard Rd Signal Warrant

3: Bob Carr Road/Apple Orchard Road & County Road 2 Existing Conditions Saturday Pk Hr

7/27/2015 Synchro 7 - Report

HDR Corporation Page 1

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR

Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 3 438 0 2 410 3 1 0 3 6 0 5

Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop

Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

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

Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 476 0 2 446 3 1 0 3 7 0 5

Pedestrians

Lane Width (m)

Walking Speed (m/s)

Percent Blockage

Right turn flare (veh)

Median type None None

Median storage veh)

Upstream signal (m)

pX, platoon unblocked

vC, conflicting volume 449 476 940 936 476 938 934 447

vC1, stage 1 conf vol


vCu, unblocked vol 449 476 940 936 476 938 934 447

tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3

p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 99 97 100 99

cM capacity (veh/h) 1122 1097 243 266 593 244 266 616

Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1

Volume Total 479 451 4 12

Volume Left 3 2 1 7

Volume Right 0 3 3 5

cSH 1122 1097 436 337

Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.04

Queue Length 95th (m) 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.8

Control Delay (s) 0.1 0.1 13.3 16.1

Lane LOS A A B C

Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.1 13.3 16.1

Approach LOS B C

Intersection Summary

Average Delay 0.3

Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.1% ICU Level of Service A

Analysis Period (min) 15


6: County Road 2 & Burnham Driveway Existing Conditions Saturday Pk Hr



Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR

Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 17 430 398 48 37 17

Sign Control Free Free Stop

Grade 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Hourly flow rate (vph) 18 467 433 52 40 18

Pedestrians

Lane Width (m)

Walking Speed (m/s)

Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)

Upstream signal (m)


vC, conflicting volume 485 963 459



vCu, unblocked vol 485 963 459

tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3

p0 queue free % 98 86 97

cM capacity (veh/h) 1089 281 606

Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1

Volume Total 486 485 59

Volume Left 18 0 40

Volume Right 0 52 18

cSH 1089 1700 338

Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.29 0.17

Queue Length 95th (m) 0.4 0.0 4.7

Control Delay (s) 0.5 0.0 17.9

Lane LOS A C

Approach Delay (s) 0.5 0.0 17.9

Approach LOS C


Average Delay 1.3




3: Bob Carr Road/Apple Orchard Road & County Road 2 Existing Conditions Weekday Pk Hr



Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR

Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 3 525 2 1 468 4 0 0 2 9 0 3

Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop

Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

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

Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 571 2 1 509 4 0 0 2 10 0 3

Pedestrians

Lane Width (m)

Walking Speed (m/s)

Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)

Upstream signal (m)


vC, conflicting volume 513 573 1095 1093 572 1093 1092 511



vCu, unblocked vol 513 573 1095 1093 572 1093 1092 511

tC, single (s) 4.1 5.1 7.1 6.5 6.7 7.1 6.5 6.2

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 2.2 3.1 3.5 4.0 3.8 3.5 4.0 3.3

p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 95 100 99

cM capacity (veh/h) 1063 653 191 215 440 192 215 567

Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1

Volume Total 576 514 2 13

Volume Left 3 1 0 10

Volume Right 2 4 2 3

cSH 1063 653 440 230

Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06

Queue Length 95th (m) 0.1 0.0 0.1 1.4

Control Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 13.2 21.6

Lane LOS A A B C

Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 13.2 21.6

Approach LOS B C


Average Delay 0.3




6: County Road 2 & Burnham Driveway Existing Conditions Weekday Pk Hr



Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR

Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 8 528 455 38 26 18

Sign Control Free Free Stop

Grade 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 574 495 41 28 20

Pedestrians

Lane Width (m)

Walking Speed (m/s)

Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)

Upstream signal (m)


vC, conflicting volume 536 1107 515



vCu, unblocked vol 536 1107 515

tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3

p0 queue free % 99 88 97

cM capacity (veh/h) 1042 233 564

Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1

Volume Total 583 536 48

Volume Left 9 0 28

Volume Right 0 41 20

cSH 1042 1700 306

Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.32 0.16

Queue Length 95th (m) 0.2 0.0 4.1

Control Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 18.9

Lane LOS A C

Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 18.9

Approach LOS C


Average Delay 0.9



Apple Orchard Road Intersection · PDF file6 Conclusion ... use of current traffic volume...

Documents

Transcript of Apple Orchard Road Intersection · PDF file6 Conclusion ... use of current traffic volume...