The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTraffic Impact Study TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY PROPOSED GAS STATION WITH CONVENIENCE MARKET 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD CARMEL, INDIANA ________________________________________________ PREPARED FOR _________________________________________________ JUNE 2015 8 3 6 5 K e y s t o n e C r o s s i n g , S u i t e 2 0 1 I n d i a n a p o l i s , I N 4 6 2 4 0 P h o n e : ( 3 1 7 ) 2 0 2 -0 8 6 4 F a x : ( 3 1 7 ) 2 0 2 -0 9 0 8 GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA COPYRIGHT This analysis and the ideas, designs, concepts and data contained herein are the exclusive intellectual property of A&F Engineering Co., LLC and are not to be used or reproduced in whole or in part, without the written consent of A&F Engineering Co., LLC. 2015, A&F Engineering Co., LLC GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA II TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................................... II LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................................................... III CERTIFICATION ............................................................................................................................................................ IV INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 PURPOSE ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 SCOPE OF WORK............................................................................................................................................................. 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ...................................................................................................................... 2 STUDY AREA .................................................................................................................................................................. 5 DESCRIPTION OF THE ABUTTING STREET SYSTEM .......................................................................................................... 5 EXISTING TRAFFIC DATA & PEAK HOUR........................................................................................................................ 5 GROWTH RATE & HORIZON YEAR PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES ............................................................................... 5 GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................... 9 TABLE 1 – TOTAL GENERATED TRIPS FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT....................................................................... 9 PASS-BY & INTERNAL TRIPS .......................................................................................................................................... 9 TABLE 2 – TRIP REDUCTIONS FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................ 9 GENERATED TRIPS ADDED TO THE STREET SYSTEM .................................................................................................... 10 TURN LANE ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................................. 17 CAPACITY ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................................... 17 CAPACITY ANALYSIS SCENARIOS ................................................................................................................................. 18 TABLE 3 – LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD ................................................................ 21 TABLE 4 – LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: GRAY ROAD & PROPOSED FULL ACCESS DRIVE ................................... 21 TABLE 5 – LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: 146TH STREET & PROPOSED RIRO ACCESS DRIVE ................................ 22 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................................................................. 22 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................................................... 23 GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA III LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1A: AREA MAP (CONFIGURATION A) ................................................................................................................ 3 FIGURE 1B: AREA MAP (CONFIGURATION B) ................................................................................................................. 4 FIGURE 2: EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS .......................................................................................................... 6 FIGURE 3: EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES ........................................................................................................................ 7 FIGURE 4: HORIZON 2020 TRAFFIC VOLUMES ................................................................................................................ 8 FIGURE 5A: ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION OF GENERATED NON PASS -BY TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (CONFIGURATION A) ................................................................................................ 11 FIGURE 5B: ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION OF GENERATED NON PASS-BY TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (CONFIGURATION B) ................................................................................................ 12 FIGURE 6A: ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION OF GENERATED PASS-BY TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (CONFIGURATION A) .................................................................................................................. 13 FIGURE 6B: ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION OF GENERATED PASS-BY TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (CONFIGURATION B) .................................................................................................................. 14 FIGURE 7A: TOTAL GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (CONFIGURATION A) ................ 15 FIGURE 7B: TOTAL GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (CONFIGURATION B) ................. 16 FIGURE 8A: SUM OF HORIZON YEAR 2020 AND GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FROM PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (CONFIGURATION A) ........................................................................................................................................... 19 FIGURE 8B: SUM OF HORIZON YEAR 2020 AND GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FROM PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (CONFIGURATION B) ........................................................................................................................................... 20 GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA IV CERTIFICATION I certify that this TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY has been prepared by me and under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of traffic and transportation engineering. A&F ENGINEERING CO., LLC R. Matt Brown, P.E. Indiana Registration 10200056 James O. Ensley, E.I. Traffic Engineer GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 1 INTRODUCTION This TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, prepared for the City of Carmel and Hamilton County, on behalf of Giant Eagle, is for a proposed gasoline service station with convenience market to be located in the southeast corner of the intersection of 146th Street & Gray Road in Carmel, Indiana. PURPOSE The purpose of this analysis is to determine what affect the traffic generated by the proposed development will have on the existing adjacent roadway system. This analysis will identify any roadway deficiencies that may occur when this site is developed. Conclusions will be reached that will determine if the roadway system can accommodate the anticipated traffic volumes or will determine the modifications that will be required to the system if there will be deficiencies in the system resulting from the increased traffic volumes. Recommendations will be made that will address the conclusions resulting from this analysis. These recommendations will address feasible roadway system improvements that will accommodate the proposed development traffic volumes such that there will be safe ingress and egress, to and from the proposed development, with minimal interference to traffic on the public street system. SCOPE OF WORK The scope of work for this analysis is as follows: First, obtain peak hour turning movement traffic volume counts between the hours of 6:00 AM and 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM and 7:00 PM during a typical weekday, at the intersection of 146th Street & Gray Road. Second, project the Horizon Year 2020 traffic due to growth in the study area that will be utilizing the roadway system independent of the proposed development being constructed. Third, estimate the number of peak hour trips that will be generated by the proposed development. Fourth, assign and distribute the generated peak hour traffic volumes from the proposed development to study intersection and driveways that will serve to provide access to the site. Fifth, prepare a capacity analysis and level of service analysis for each of the study intersections for each of the following scenarios: GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 2 SCENARIO 1: Existing Traffic Volumes – These are the existing peak hour traffic volumes currently utilizing the existing roadway system within the study area, with the existing intersection geometrics and conditions. SCENARIO 2: Horizon Year 2020 Traffic Volumes– These are the projected peak hour traffic volumes for the Horizon Year 2020 that will be utilizing the existing roadway system within the study area, with the existing intersection geometrics and conditions, independent of the construction of the proposed development. SCENARIO 3A: Configuration A: 2020 + Proposed Generated Traffic Volumes – These are the traffic volumes generated by the proposed development, assigned and distributed to the roadway network, added to the Horizon Year 2020 Traffic Volumes, with a Full Access Drive on Gray Road and a right-in/right-out Access Drive on 146th Street. SCENARIO 3B: Configuration B: 2020 + Proposed Generated Traffic Volumes – These are the traffic volumes generated by the proposed development, assigned and distributed to the roadway network, added to the Horizon Year 2020 Traffic Volumes, with a Full Access Drive on Gray Road and no access on 146th Street. Sixth, prepare recommendations for the roadway cross-sections that will be needed to accommodate the total volumes for each of the scenarios previously identified. Finally, prepare a TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY documenting all data, analyses, conclusions and recommendations to best provide for the safe and efficient movement of traffic through the study area. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed development will include a gasoline/service station with 14 vehicle fueling positions and a convenience market. There are two proposed site configurations for this proposed development. Configuration A includes a proposed Full Access Drive along Gray Road that will be approximately 500’ south of 146th Street and a proposed RIRO access along 146th Street that will be approximately 750’ east of Gray Road. Configuration B includes a proposed Full Access Drive along Gray Road that will be approximately 500’ south of 146th Street and no access along 146th Street. These configurations are shown on Figure 1A and Figure 1B. 3 4 GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 5 STUDY AREA The study area for this analysis has been defined to include the following intersections: • 146th Street & Gray Road • All access driveways Figure 2 shows the existing intersection geometrics at the intersection of 146th Street & Gray Road . DESCRIPTION OF THE ABUTTING STREET SYSTEM The proposed development will be served by the public roadway system that includes 146th Street and Gray Road. 146TH STREET – is an east/west, four-lane divided roadway near the proposed project site with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. According to the current FHWA Functional Classification Plan, 146th Street is classified as a Principal Arterial. GRAY ROAD – is a north/south, two-lane roadway near the proposed project site with a posted speed limit of 30 mph. According to the City of Carmel’s Thoroughfare Plan, Gray Road is classified as a Secondary Arterial. EXISTING TRAFFIC DATA & PEAK HOUR Peak Hour turning movement traffic volume counts were conducted at the study intersection by A&F Engineering Co., LLC. The counts include an hourly total of all "through" traffic and all "turning" traffic at the intersection. The counts were made between the hours of 6:00 AM and 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM and 7:00 PM in June 2015. Based on the existing traffic volumes collected for this analysis, the AM Peak hour occurs between 8:00 AM and 9:00 AM and the PM Peak hour occurs between 4:45 PM and 5:45 PM. A summary of the AM and PM peak hour intersection counts is shown in Figure 3. The count output summary sheets for the study intersection is included in the Appendix. GROWTH RATE & HORIZON YEAR PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES In order to determine the growth in traffic volumes that would occur during the year 2020, a 2.0% per year (non-compounded) traffic growth rate has been estimated to occur in this area as determined by the developers. Therefore a growth rate factor of 1.1 is applied to the existing traffic volumes used in this study in order to analyze each scenario with Horizon Year 2020 projected traffic volumes. A summary of the Horizon Year 2020 AM and PM peak hour intersection counts is shown in Figure 4. 6 7 8 GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 9 GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The estimate of newly generated traffic is a function of the development size and of the character of the land use. The ITE Trip Generation Manual 1 was used to calculate the number of trips that will be generated by the proposed development. This report is a compilation of trip data for various land uses as collected by transportation professionals throughout the United States in order to establish the average number of trips generated by those land uses. Table 1 summarizes the total trips that will be generated by the proposed development. TABLE 1 – TOTAL GENERATED TRIPS FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION GENERATED TRIPS LAND USE ITE CODE SIZE AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ENTER EXIT ENTER EXIT Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market 945 14 VFP 71 71 95 94 PASS-BY & INTERNAL TRIPS Pass-by trips are trips that are already in the existing traffic stream along the adjacent public roadway system that enter a site, utilize the site, and then return back to the existing traffic stream. A significant number of the generated trips for the proposed development will be pass-by trips. Therefore, the pass-by trip procedures outlined within the ITE Trip Generation Handbook2 were used to estimate the pass-by trips. An internal trip results when a trip is made between two or more land uses without traversing the external public roadway system. The proposed development is a single land use only. Thus, internal trips are not included in this analysis. A summary of the pass-by trip reductions for the proposed development is shown in Table 2. TABLE 2 – TRIP REDUCTIONS FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION GENERATED TRIPS LAND USE ITE CODE SIZE AM PEAK PM PEAK ENTER EXIT ENTER EXIT Gasoline/Service Station 945 14 VFP 71 71 95 94 Gasoline/Service Station External Pass-by Trips (62%/56%) 44 44 53 53 Gasoline/Service Station External Non Pass-by Trips (38%/44%) 27 27 42 41 1 Trip Generation Manual, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Ninth Edition, 2012. 2 Trip Generation Handbook, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2004. GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 10 ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF GENERATED TRIPS The study methodology used to determine the traffic volumes from the site that will be added to the street system is defined as follows: 1. The volume of traffic that will enter and exit the proposed site must be assigned to the access points and to the public street system. Using the traffic volume data collected for this analysis, traffic to and from the proposed development has been assigned to the proposed driveways and to the public street system that will be serving the site. 2. To determine the volumes of traffic that will be added to the public roadway system, the generated traffic must be distributed by direction to the public roadways at their intersection with the driveways. For the proposed development, the distribution was based on the location of the development, the location of nearby population centers, the existing traffic patterns, and the assignment of generated traffic. The assignment and distribution figures for the non pass-by and pass-by generated traffic volumes from the proposed development for site Configuration A and site Configuration B are as follows: • Figure 5A – Assignment and Distribution of Generated Non Pass-By Traffic Volumes for the Proposed Development (Configuration A) • Figure 5B – Assignment and Distribution of Generated Non Pass-By Traffic Volumes for the Proposed Development (Configuration B) • Figure 6A – Assignment and Distribution of Generated Pass-By Traffic Volumes for the Proposed Development (Configuration A) • Figure 6B – Assignment and Distribution of Generated Pass-By Traffic Volumes for the Proposed Development (Configuration B) GENERATED TRIPS ADDED TO THE STREET SYSTEM The generated traffic volumes that can be expected from the proposed development have been assigned to each of the study intersections. These volumes were determined based on the previously discussed trip generation data, assignment of generated traffic and distribution of generated traffic. The total peak hour generated traffic volumes from the proposed development based on site Configuration A and site Configuration B are shown on Figure 7A and Figure 7B, respectively. 11 12 13 14 15 16 GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 17 TURN LANE ANALYSIS A turn lane analysis was conducted according to the INDOT Design Manual 3 for the proposed full access drive along Gray Road (Configuration A and Configuration B) and the proposed right-in/right-out access drive along 146th Street (Configuration A) using the sum of the Horizon Year 2020 and generated peak hour traffic volumes. According to the analysis, a right-turn lane has not been warranted at the proposed full access drive along Gray Road for neither Configuration A nor Configuration B. However, a left-turn lane has been warranted at the proposed full access drive along Gray Road for both configurations. The analysis has also shown that a right-turn lane has not been warranted at the proposed access drive along 146th Street for Configuration A. Figures depicting the necessary left-turn and right-turn warrant criteria from the INDOT Design Manual are included in the Appendix. CAPACITY ANALYSIS The "efficiency" of an intersection is based on its ability to accommodate the traffic volumes that approach the intersection. It is defined by the Level-of-Service (LOS) of the intersection. The LOS is determined by a series of calculations commonly called a "capacity analysis". Input data into a capacity analysis include traffic volumes, intersection geometry, and number and use of lanes. To determine the LOS at each of the study intersections, a capacity analysis has been made using the recognized computer program Synchro/SimTraffic4. This program allows intersections to be analyzed and optimized using the capacity calculation methods outlined within the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)5. The following list shows the delays related to the levels of service for signalized and unsignalized intersections: Level of Service Control Delay (seconds/vehicle) UNSIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED A Less than or equal to 10 Less than or equal to 10 B Between 10.1 and 15 Between 10.1 and 20 C Between 15.1 and 25 Between 20.1 and 35 D Between 25.1 and 35 Between 35.1 and 55 E Between 35.1 and 50 Between 55.1 and 80 F greater than 50 greater than 80 3 INDOT Design Manual, Indiana Department of Transportation, 2013 4 Synchro/SimTraffic 8.0, Trafficware, 2011. 5 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2010. GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 18 CAPACITY ANALYSIS SCENARIOS To evaluate the proposed development's impact on the public street system, the generated traffic volumes must be added to the existing and Horizon Year 2020 traffic volumes to form a series of scenarios that can be analyzed to determine the adequacy of the existing roadway network. An analysis has been made for the AM peak hour and PM peak hour at the study intersections for the following scenarios. SCENARIO 1: Existing Traffic Volumes – These are the existing peak hour traffic volumes currently utilizing the existing roadway system within the study area, with the existing intersection geometrics and conditions. Figure 3 shows a summary of the AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes. SCENARIO 2: Horizon Year 2020 Traffic Volumes– These are the projected peak hour traffic volumes for the Horizon Year 2020 that will be utilizing the existing roadway system within the study area, with the existing intersection geometrics and conditions, independent of the construction of the proposed development. Figure 4 shows a summary of the projected AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes. SCENARIO 3A: Configuration A: 2020 + Proposed Generated Traffic Volumes – These are the traffic volumes generated by the proposed development, assigned and distributed to the roadway network, added to the Horizon Year 2020 Traffic Volumes, with a Full Access Drive on Gray Road and a Right-in/Right-out Access Drive on 146th Street. Figure 8A shows a summary of these AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes. SCENARIO 3B: Configuration B: 2020 + Proposed Generated Traffic Volumes – These are the traffic volumes generated by the proposed development, assigned and distributed to the roadway network, added to the Horizon Year 2020 Traffic Volumes, with a Full Access Drive on Gray Road and no access on 146th Street. Figure 8B shows a summary of these AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes. 19 20 GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 21 The following tables summarize the level of service results at each of the study intersections. The Synchro (HCM 2010) intersection reports illustrating the capacity analysis results are included in the Appendix. TABLE 3 – LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD MOVEMENT AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3A Scenario 3B Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3A Scenario 3B Northbound Approach C C D D E E E E Southbound Approach C C D D D E E E Eastbound Approach B B B B C D D D Westbound Approach B C B B C C C C Intersection B C C C C D D D DESCRIPTION OF SCENARIOS: SCENARIO 1: Existing Traffic Volumes with Existing Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Signal Control with Existing Signal Timings. SCENARIO 2: Horizon Year 2020 Traffic Volumes with Existing Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Signal Control with Existing Signal Timings. SCENARIO 3A: Sum of Horizon Year 2020 and Generated Traffic Volumes from Proposed Development with Existing Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Signal Control with Optimized Signal Timings (Configuration A). SCENARIO 3B: Sum of Horizon Year 2020 and Generated Traffic Volumes from Proposed Development with Existing Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Signal Control with Optimized Signal Timings (Configuration B). TABLE 4 – LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: GRAY ROAD & PROPOSED FULL ACCESS DRIVE MOVEMENT AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Scenario 3A Scenario 3B Scenario 3A Scenario 3B Southbound Left-Turn A A A A Westbound Approach B B C C Note: Intersection level-of-service is not calculated for unsignalized intersections. DESCRIPTION OF SCENARIOS: SCENARIO 3A: Sum of Horizon Year 2020 and Generated Traffic Volumes from Proposed Development with Proposed Intersection Geometrics*A and Stop Control. SCENARIO 3B: Sum of Horizon Year 2020 and Generated Traffic Volumes from Proposed Development with Proposed Intersection Geometrics*B and Stop Control. *A: The proposed intersection geometrics include the construction of a full westbound access drive with one inbound lane and one outbound lane stopping for Gray Road with traffic volumes from Configuration A, a southbound left-turn treatment, and a northbound right-turn taper along Gray Road. *B: The proposed intersection geometrics include the construction of a full westbound access drive with one inbound lane and one outbound lanes stopping for Gray Road with traffic volumes from Configuration B, a southbound left-turn treatment, and a northbound right-turn taper along Gray Road. GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 22 TABLE 5 – LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: 146TH STREET & PROPOSED RIRO ACCESS DRIVE MOVEMENT AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Scenario 3A Northbound Approach B D Note: Intersection level-of-service is not calculated for unsignalized intersections. DESCRIPTION OF SCENARIOS: SCENARIO 3A: Sum of Horizon Year 2020 and Generated Traffic Volumes from Proposed Development with Proposed Intersection Geometrics*A and Stop Control. *A: The proposed intersection geometrics include the construction of a northbound access drive with a right- in/right-out configuration with one inbound lane and one outbound lane stopping for 146th Street with traffic volumes from Configuration A and the construction of an 100’ (min.) eastbound right-turn lane along 146th Street. CONCLUSIONS The conclusions that follow are based on existing traffic volume data, trip generation, assignment and distribution of generated traffic, capacity analyses/level of service results and a field review conducted at the site. 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD Scenario 1: Existing Traffic Volumes A review of the capacity analysis for the existing traffic volumes has shown that this intersection operates at LOS B during the AM peak hour and LOS C during the PM peak hour with the existing intersection geometrics and traffic signal control with existing signal timings. Scenario 2: Horizon Year 2020 Traffic Volumes A review of the capacity analysis for the Horizon Year 2020 traffic volumes has shown that this intersection will operate at LOS C during the AM peak hour and LOS D during the PM peak hour with the existing intersection geometrics and traffic signal control with existing signal timings. Scenario 3A: Configuration A: 2020 + Proposed Generated Traffic Volumes A review of the capacity analysis for the sum of Horizon Year 2020 and generated traffic volumes from the proposed development has shown that this intersection will continue to operate at LOS C during the AM peak hour and LOS D during the PM peak hour with the existing intersection geometrics and traffic signal control with existing signal timings. GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 23 Scenario 3B: Configuration B: 2020 + Proposed Generated Traffic Volumes A review of the capacity analysis for the sum of Horizon Year 2020 and generated traffic volumes from the proposed development has shown that this intersection will continue to operate at LOS C during the AM peak hour and LOS D during the PM peak hour with the existing intersection geometrics and traffic signal control with existing signal timings. 146TH STREET & RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT ACCESS DRIVE Scenario 3A: Configuration A: 2020 + Proposed Generated Traffic Volumes A review of the capacity analysis for the sum of Horizon Year 2020 and generated traffic volumes from the proposed development has shown that all the approaches to this intersection operate at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hour with the proposed intersection geometrics and stop control. GRAY ROAD & FULL ACCESS DRIVE Scenario 3A: Configuration A: 2020 + Proposed Generated Traffic Volumes A review of the capacity analysis for the sum of Horizon Year 2020 and generated traffic volumes from the proposed development has shown that all the approaches to this intersection operate at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hour with the proposed intersection geometrics and stop control. Scenario 3B: Configuration B: 2020 + Proposed Generated Traffic Volumes A review of the capacity analysis for the sum of Horizon Year 2020 and generated traffic volumes from the proposed development has shown that all the approaches to this intersection operate at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hour with the proposed intersection geometrics and stop control. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the analyses and the conclusions within this study, the following recommendations are made to ensure that the roadway system will operate at acceptable levels of service if the site is developed as proposed. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS • Analysis has shown that a decrease of 18 vehicles during the AM peak hour and 38 vehicles during the PM peak hour can be realized at the intersection of 146th Street & Gray Road with the addition of a right-in/right-out access along 146th Street for the proposed GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 24 development. It is recommended that a right-in/right-out access drive be constructed along 146th Street approximately 750’ east of Gray Road. 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD • No improvements are recommended at this location. GRAY ROAD & FULL ACCESS DRIVE • The proposed intersection geometrics are as follows: o Construction of the proposed full access drive with one inbound lane and two outbound lanes stopping for Gray Road, located approximately 500’ south of 146th Street. o Construction of a southbound left-turn treatment along Gray Road o Construction of a northbound right-turn taper along Gray Road. 146TH STREET & RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT ACCESS DRIVE • The proposed intersection geometrics are as follows: o Construction of the proposed northbound access drive with a right-in/right-out configuration with one inbound lane and one outbound right-turn lane located approximately 750’ east of Gray Road stopping for 146th Street. o Although a right-turn lane was not warranted at this access drive, Hamilton County will likely require the construction of an eastbound right-turn lane (minimum 100’) along 146th Street. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY APPENDIX 8365 Keystone Crossing Boulevard, Suite 201 Indianapolis, IN 46240 Phone: (317) 202-0864 Fax: (317) 202-0908 GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA ADDITIONAL FIGURES GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA TURN LANE ANALYSIS Advancing Volume (veh/h) Operating Speed (mph) Opposing Volume (veh/h) 5% Left Turns 10% Left Turns 20% Left Turns 30% Left Turns 800330240180160 600 410 305 225 200 400510380275245 200 640 470 350 305 40 100720515390340 800 280 210 165 135 600350260195170 400 430 320 240 210 200550400300270 50 100 615 445 335 295 800230170125115 600 290 210 160 140 400365270200175 200 450 330 250 215 60 100505370275240 VOLUME GUIDELINES FOR LEFT-TURN LANE ON TWO-LANE HIGHWAY Figure 46-4C According to the figure above, it has been determined that a southbound left-turn lane is warranted at the proposed access drive along Gray Road based on the volumes from Configuration A and Configuration B. The data used to determine the results of the warrant analysis are shown below. Gray Road Access Drive: Southbound Left-Turn Gray Road Access Drive: Northbound Right-Turn The northbound right-turn volume at the proposed access drive along Gray Road based on Configuration A and Configuration B does not warrant a turn lane based on the right-turn volumes NOT exceeding 40 vehicles per hour. The volumes are not shown on Figure 46-4A due to graph limits. Therefore, a NB right-turn lane is not warranted for Configuration A nor Configuration B during the AM or PM peak hour The data used to determine the reuslts is shown below. 146th Street Access Drive: Eastbound Right-Turn The eastbound right-turn volumes for the AM and PM peak hours at the proposed access drive along 146th Street based on Configuration A do not warrant a turn lane due to the right-turn volumes not exceeding 40 vehicles per hour. The volumes are not shown on Figure 46-4B due to graph limits . However, Hamilton County will likely require the construction of an EB right-turn lane for this access drive; therefore, a right-turn lane is warranted. The data used to determine the reuslts is shown below. GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD INTERSECTION DATA TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS CAPACITY ANALYSIS LTRTOTALLTRTOTALLTRTOTAL 7581114 270 61142 203 120246266 632 7914481 304 147163 310 18516888 441 6373886 887 29358 351 1891643123 1955 167125588 1510 0 122972144 1238 LTRTOTALLTRTOTALLTRTOTAL 5.3%4.9%2.6%4.1%3.3%2.8%0.0%3.0%0.0%0.8%0.8%0.6% 10.1%1.4%4.9%4.6%0.0%2.0%1.8%2.9%2.7%0.0%1.1%1.4% 4.8%5.0%1.2%4.6%0.0%0.0%3.4%0.6%0.5%2.3%0.8%2.0% 3.6%4.7%3.4%4.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%2.0%1.4%1.8% NBSBNB+SBEBWBEB+WBTOTAL TO 5414319731873110491246 TO 155373528727144621732701 TO 270304574887151023972971 TO 4903698591725114428693728 TO 62444110651933123831714236 TO 4283117391450100524553194 202119413962704070741411418076 11.2%10.7%21.9%38.9%39.1%78.1%100.0% 0.980.95 A & F ENGINEERING CO., LLC TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY WESTBOUND AM PEAK HOUR FACTORPM PEAK HOUR FACTOR APPROACH APPROACHINTERSECTION WESTBOUND SOUTHBOUND TRUCK PERCENTAGE PEAK HOUR FACTOR 0.92 0.92 0.97 0.92 PM PEAK HOUR PERCENTAGE EASTBOUND INTERSECTION 0.94 EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND AM PEAK HOUR PERCENTAGE NORTHBOUND 0.93 #DIV/0! OFF PEAK HOUR PERCENTAGE PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 0.98 0.77 4:45 PM 0.83 0.92 0.97 0.92 EASTBOUND WESTBOUND AM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES CLIENT : INTERSECTION : DATE : Giant Eagle - GetGo 146th Street & Gray Road 6/11/2015 TOTAL VEHICLES (PASSENGER CARS + TRUCKS) 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM TOTAL VOLUME PERCENTAGE OFF PEAK HOUR FACTOR APPROACHINTERSECTION OFF PEAK HOUR VOLUMES BEGINS8:00 AMBEGINSBEGINS1:45 PM HOURLY SUMMARY HOUR 9:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM COUNTED BY :MioVision/MW Release 11-18-04 DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : NORTHBOUND PASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTH 6:00 AM-7:00 AM21021120122012153154 7:00 AM-8:00 AM5305346046560561550155 8:00 AM-9:00 AM7147577481111311425911270 PASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTH 4:00 PM-5:00 PM1191120181118218441884846490 5:00 PM-6:00 PM1270127249225124422466204624 6:00 PM-7:00 PM1050105146014617431774253428 DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : SOUTHBOUND PASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTH 6:00 AM-7:00 AM2112260060601611412143 7:00 AM-8:00 AM91596159216111421163649373 8:00 AM-9:00 AM7187914221447748129014304 PASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTH 4:00 PM-5:00 PM15941631221123812833627369 5:00 PM-6:00 PM17651811781179792814338441 6:00 PM-7:00 PM13231351060106700703083311 DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : EASTBOUND PASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTH 6:00 AM-7:00 AM100102907297110113117318 7:00 AM-8:00 AM42143609176265625870720727 8:00 AM-9:00 AM60363701377388518684641887 PASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTH 4:00 PM-5:00 PM1440144140639144513511361685401725 5:00 PM-6:00 PM1831184159137162811921211893401933 6:00 PM-7:00 PM1360136117620119611801181430201450 DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : WESTBOUND PASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTH 6:00 AM-7:00 AM76278603256282412570328731 7:00 AM-8:00 AM17201721164521216553581391551446 8:00 AM-9:00 AM16161671196591255853881442681510 PASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTHPASSTRUCKBOTH 4:00 PM-5:00 PM11501158623990112441281101431144 5:00 PM-6:00 PM11821209561597114521471219191238 6:00 PM-7:00 PM1000100781187991051106986191005 7074 10.6%81.6%7.8%100.0%BOTH 7525770552 232 1.3%3.6%2.5%3.3%TRUCK 1020814 34.8%39.8%25.3%100.0% 711 PM TIME PERIOD PASSENGER TRUCK 767 96.2% HOURLEFTTHROUGH 99.2% 98.4% A & F ENGINEERING CO., LLC TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY BOTH TRUCK HOUR PASSENGER 496 100.0% 5713 501 718 802 1.0%1.0%1.6% TOTAL 1996 25 2021 98.8% 1.2% RIGHT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT 24.8%35.5%39.7% 789 99.0%99.0% 575 99.1% TOTAL AM TIME PERIOD HOUR LEFT THROUGH RIGHT TOTAL 650 5773 524 6872 97.4%98.9%97.6% 5 157 6 0.9%2.6%1.1% 2.2% 168 2.4% 481 1898 97.8%97.8% 7.5% 7040 100.0% 26 6 11 43 3.8%0.8%2.2% LEFT THROUGH RIGHT TOTAL BOTH 580 5930 530 8.2%84.2% PM TIME PERIOD PASSENGER 742 98.7% 5562 538 6842 96.4%97.5%96.7% Giant Eagle - GetGo 146th Street & Gray Road 6/11/2015 773 492 1941 CLIENT : INTERSECTION : DATE : BOTH 676 PM TIME PERIOD AM TIME PERIOD AM TIME PERIOD TRUCK AM TIME PERIOD PM TIME PERIOD PASSENGER HOUR Release 11-18-04 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing AM 3: Gray Road & 146th Street 6/16/2015 PM Peak Hour Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)637388616712558875811147914481 Number 1616521238187414 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln181018101881182718101845181018101845172718811810 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h677859117813359480861218415386 Adj No. of Lanes 121121111111 Peak Hour Factor 0.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %5514535531015 Cap, veh/h 25816478764251705879250214282283231309 Arrive On Green 0.060.480.480.080.500.500.060.120.120.070.120.12 Sat Flow, veh/h 172334381599174034381568172318101568164518811538 Grp Volume(v), veh/h677859117813359480861218415386 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln172317191599174017191568172318101568164518811538 Q Serve(g_s), s1.512.62.24.126.12.33.23.65.63.66.33.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s1.512.62.24.126.12.33.23.65.63.66.33.9 Prop In Lane1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h25816478764251705879250214282283231309 V/C Ratio(X)0.260.480.100.420.780.110.320.400.430.300.660.28 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h44817739355881773910307467501371531555 HCM Platoon Ratio1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh13.514.38.810.316.98.428.733.229.728.434.127.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh0.50.30.10.72.40.10.71.21.00.63.30.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.76.01.02.012.81.01.61.92.51.73.51.7 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh14.114.68.910.919.48.429.534.430.729.037.428.0 LnGrp LOS BBABBACCCCDC Approach Vol, veh/h 943 1607 287 323 Approach Delay, s/veh 14.0 17.8 31.5 32.7 Approach LOS B B C C Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s9.346.99.216.110.745.59.515.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s4.3* 6.53.9* 6.14.3* 6.53.9* 6.1 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s14.0* 428.0* 2314.0* 4210.0* 21 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.528.15.28.36.114.65.67.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s0.112.30.01.70.322.20.11.6 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 19.4 HCM 2010 LOS B Notes * HCM 2010 computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing PM 3: Gray Road & 146th Street 6/15/2015 PM Peak Hour Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)189164312312297214412024626618516888 Number 1616521238187414 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln188118631881188118631881190018811881186319001881 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h193167712612499214712225127118917190 Adj No. of Lanes 121121111111 Peak Hour Factor 0.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.98 Percent Heavy Veh, %121121011201 Cap, veh/h 342192410051761862955293306364236336359 Arrive On Green 0.070.540.540.050.530.530.070.160.160.090.180.18 Sat Flow, veh/h 179235391599179235391599181018811599177419001599 Grp Volume(v), veh/h193167712612499214712225127118917190 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln179217701599179217701599181018811599177419001599 Q Serve(g_s), s6.453.14.14.123.85.37.216.720.411.010.56.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s6.453.14.14.123.85.37.216.720.411.010.56.0 Prop In Lane1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h342192410051761862955293306364236336359 V/C Ratio(X)0.560.870.130.700.530.150.420.820.740.800.510.25 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h350194510152151945993304306364236336359 HCM Platoon Ratio1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh15.725.69.728.120.111.541.052.346.443.148.141.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh2.04.80.17.70.40.10.916.18.117.51.30.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln3.327.11.82.711.72.43.610.09.82.55.62.7 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh17.730.39.735.820.511.642.068.454.560.649.441.5 LnGrp LOS BCADCBDEDEDD Approach Vol, veh/h 1996 1263 644 450 Approach Delay, s/veh 27.8 21.0 57.5 52.5 Approach LOS C C E D Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s12.774.513.128.910.576.714.927.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s4.3* 6.53.9* 6.14.3* 6.53.9* 6.1 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s9.0* 7110.0* 229.0* 7111.0* 21 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s8.425.89.212.56.155.113.022.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s0.039.80.02.60.115.10.00.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 32.8 HCM 2010 LOS C Notes * HCM 2010 computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Scenario 2: 2020 AM 3: Gray Road & 146th Street 6/16/2015 PM Peak Hour 5/30/2012 Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)698129518413819783891258715889 Number 1616521238187414 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln181018101881182718101845181018101845172718811810 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h73864101196146910388951339316895 Adj No. of Lanes 121121111111 Peak Hour Factor 0.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %5514535531015 Cap, veh/h 22516168683981700881252228291288246330 Arrive On Green 0.060.470.470.080.490.490.070.130.130.070.130.13 Sat Flow, veh/h 172334381599174034381568172318101568164518811538 Grp Volume(v), veh/h73864101196146910388951339316895 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln172317191599174017191568172318101568164518811538 Q Serve(g_s), s1.714.92.64.831.72.63.64.16.34.07.24.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s1.714.92.64.831.72.63.64.16.34.07.24.3 Prop In Lane1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h22516168683981700881252228291288246330 V/C Ratio(X)0.320.530.120.490.860.120.350.420.460.320.680.29 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h41017199165421719890299452485364515550 HCM Platoon Ratio1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh16.515.89.411.418.78.629.133.930.428.734.827.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh0.80.40.10.95.00.10.81.21.10.63.30.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.97.21.22.316.11.11.82.12.81.94.01.9 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh17.316.29.512.423.78.729.935.131.629.338.228.1 LnGrp LOS BBABCACDCCDC Approach Vol, veh/h 1038 1768 316 356 Approach Delay, s/veh 15.6 21.6 32.2 33.2 Approach LOS B C C C Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s9.348.09.617.111.346.010.016.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s4.3* 6.53.9* 6.14.3* 6.53.9* 6.1 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s14.0* 428.0* 2314.0* 4210.0* 21 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.733.75.69.26.816.96.08.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s0.17.80.01.90.321.80.11.8 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 21.9 HCM 2010 LOS C Notes * HCM 2010 computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Scenario 2 - 2020 PM 3: Gray Road & 146th Street 6/15/2015 PM Peak Hour 5/30/2012 Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)2081807135134106915813227129320418597 Number 1616521238187414 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln188118631881188118631881190018811881184519001881 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h2121844138137109116113527729920818999 Adj No. of Lanes 121121111111 Peak Hour Factor 0.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.98 Percent Heavy Veh, %121121011301 Cap, veh/h 320191810011631869966278302366215319356 Arrive On Green 0.070.540.540.050.530.530.080.160.160.080.170.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 179235391599179235391599181018811599175719001599 Grp Volume(v), veh/h2121844138137109116113527729920818999 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln179217701599179217701599181018811599175719001599 Q Serve(g_s), s7.165.34.65.127.55.88.119.021.011.012.06.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s7.165.34.65.127.55.88.119.021.011.012.06.7 Prop In Lane1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h320191810011631869966278302366215319356 V/C Ratio(X)0.660.960.140.840.580.170.490.920.820.970.590.28 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h320191910011881919989278302366215319356 HCM Platoon Ratio1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh17.628.710.033.821.111.441.754.147.946.650.342.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh5.012.80.124.90.50.11.331.513.451.62.90.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln3.935.22.16.013.62.64.112.511.65.36.63.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh22.641.510.158.721.611.543.185.661.298.253.242.6 LnGrp LOS CDBECBDFEFDD Approach Vol, veh/h 2194 1389 711 496 Approach Delay, s/veh 37.7 24.1 67.3 70.0 Approach LOS D C E E Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s13.375.613.928.111.577.514.927.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s4.3* 6.53.9* 6.14.3* 6.53.9* 6.1 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s9.0* 7110.0* 229.0* 7111.0* 21 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s9.129.510.114.07.167.313.023.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s0.038.60.02.70.13.70.00.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 41.5 HCM 2010 LOS D Notes * HCM 2010 computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Scenario 3A AM (Optimized) 3: Gray Road & 146th Street 6/18/2015 PM Peak Hour 5/30/2012 Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)6781999207136794107971248816188 Number 1616521238187414 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln181018101881182718101845181018101845172718811810 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h7187110522014541001141031329417194 Adj No. of Lanes 121121111111 Peak Hour Factor 0.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %5514535531015 Cap, veh/h 22717649294091868973239233281264224307 Arrive On Green 0.050.510.510.080.540.540.080.130.130.070.120.12 Sat Flow, veh/h 172334381599174034381568172318101568164518811538 Grp Volume(v), veh/h7187110522014541001141031329417194 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln172317191599174017191568172318101568164518811538 Q Serve(g_s), s1.916.42.95.733.22.65.65.27.54.98.75.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s1.916.42.95.733.22.65.65.27.54.98.75.2 Prop In Lane1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h22717649294091868973239233281264224307 V/C Ratio(X)0.310.490.110.540.780.100.480.440.470.360.760.31 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h239176492950519871027247316353264302371 HCM Platoon Ratio1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh15.715.79.311.417.97.634.739.936.534.942.333.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh0.80.30.11.12.10.11.51.31.20.87.80.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.97.81.32.816.11.12.82.73.32.35.02.2 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh16.516.09.412.520.07.736.241.237.735.750.134.4 LnGrp LOS BBABBADDDDDC Approach Vol, veh/h 1047 1774 349 359 Approach Delay, s/veh 15.4 18.4 38.2 42.2 Approach LOS B B D D Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s9.360.411.617.912.357.410.618.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s4.3* 6.53.9* 6.14.3* 6.53.9* 6.1 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s5.7* 578.1* 1613.5* 506.7* 17 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.935.27.610.77.718.46.99.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s0.018.70.01.10.326.30.01.4 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 21.9 HCM 2010 LOS C Notes * HCM 2010 computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Scenario 3A PM (Optimized) 3: Gray Road & 146th Street 6/18/2015 PM Peak Hour 5/30/2012 Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)2061817140156105815615628129020619096 Number 1616521238187414 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln188118631881188118631881190018811881184519001881 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h2101854143159108015915928729621019498 Adj No. of Lanes 121121111111 Peak Hour Factor 0.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.98 Percent Heavy Veh, %121121011301 Cap, veh/h 32918949941821887954260288357206334390 Arrive On Green 0.070.540.540.070.530.530.060.150.150.090.180.18 Sat Flow, veh/h 179235391599179235391599181018811599175719001599 Grp Volume(v), veh/h2101854143159108015915928729621019498 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln179217701599179217701599181018811599175719001599 Q Serve(g_s), s7.067.54.97.227.15.98.420.120.211.412.46.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s7.067.54.97.227.15.98.420.120.211.412.46.5 Prop In Lane1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h32918949941821887954260288357206334390 V/C Ratio(X)0.640.980.140.870.570.170.611.000.831.020.580.25 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h429191310021821887954260288357206334390 HCM Platoon Ratio1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh17.030.010.439.520.711.946.355.948.946.250.040.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh2.115.80.134.50.50.14.252.415.067.22.50.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.00.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln3.637.12.27.513.32.61.614.611.85.86.82.9 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh19.045.810.574.021.212.050.4108.463.9113.652.540.6 LnGrp LOS BDBECBDFEFDD Approach Vol, veh/h 2207 1398 742 502 Approach Delay, s/veh 40.9 26.2 78.2 75.7 Approach LOS D C E E Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s13.676.912.329.313.377.215.326.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s4.3* 6.53.9* 6.14.3* 6.53.9* 6.1 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s16.7* 648.4* 239.0* 7111.4* 20 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s9.029.110.414.49.269.513.422.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s0.332.60.02.90.01.20.00.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 46.0 HCM 2010 LOS D Notes * HCM 2010 computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Scenario 3B AM (Optimized) 3: Gray Road & 146th Street 6/18/2015 PM Peak Hour 5/30/2012 Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)67803114207136794107971428516588 Number 1616521238187414 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln181018101881182718101845181018101845172718811810 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h7185412122014541001141031519017694 Adj No. of Lanes 121121111111 Peak Hour Factor 0.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.940.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %5514535531015 Cap, veh/h 22517589244101863971238239286265229311 Arrive On Green 0.050.510.510.080.540.540.080.130.130.070.120.12 Sat Flow, veh/h 172334381599174034381568172318101568164518811538 Grp Volume(v), veh/h7185412122014541001141031519017694 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln172317191599174017191568172318101568164518811538 Q Serve(g_s), s1.916.13.45.833.42.65.65.28.74.79.05.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s1.916.13.45.833.42.65.65.28.74.79.05.2 Prop In Lane1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h22517589244101863971238239286265229311 V/C Ratio(X)0.320.490.130.540.780.100.480.430.530.340.770.30 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h237175892450619811024246317353265301370 HCM Platoon Ratio1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh15.915.89.611.418.17.734.739.736.834.842.333.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh0.80.30.11.12.10.11.51.21.50.88.50.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.97.71.52.916.31.12.82.73.92.25.22.2 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh16.716.19.712.520.27.836.140.938.335.550.834.2 LnGrp LOS BBABCADDDDDC Approach Vol, veh/h 1046 1774 368 360 Approach Delay, s/veh 15.4 18.5 38.4 42.7 Approach LOS B B D D Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s9.360.411.618.212.357.410.519.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s4.3* 6.53.9* 6.14.3* 6.53.9* 6.1 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s5.7* 578.1* 1613.5* 506.6* 17 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.935.47.611.07.818.16.710.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s0.018.50.01.10.326.50.01.4 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 22.1 HCM 2010 LOS C Notes * HCM 2010 computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Scenario 3B PM (Optimized) 3: Gray Road & 146th Street 6/18/2015 PM Peak Hour 5/30/2012 Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)2061785173156105815615628132720119497 Number 1616521238187414 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln188118631881188118631881190018811881184519001881 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h2101821177159108015915928733420519899 Adj No. of Lanes 121121111111 Peak Hour Factor 0.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.980.98 Percent Heavy Veh, %121121011301 Cap, veh/h 32418579781841850941269302371215346403 Arrive On Green 0.070.520.520.070.520.520.070.160.160.090.180.18 Sat Flow, veh/h 179235391599179235391599181018811599175719001599 Grp Volume(v), veh/h2101821177159108015915928733420519899 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln179217701599179217701599181018811599175719001599 Q Serve(g_s), s7.166.46.47.227.66.08.719.921.211.512.56.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s7.166.46.47.227.66.08.719.921.211.512.56.5 Prop In Lane1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h32418579781841850941269302371215346403 V/C Ratio(X)0.650.980.180.860.580.170.590.950.900.950.570.25 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h42618689831911850941269302371215346403 HCM Platoon Ratio1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh17.730.711.239.121.612.444.754.849.145.149.339.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh2.216.50.130.60.60.13.438.223.947.62.30.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln3.636.62.87.313.62.61.313.614.34.76.82.9 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh19.947.211.369.722.212.548.193.073.092.751.539.7 LnGrp LOS BDBECBDFEFDD Approach Vol, veh/h 2208 1398 780 502 Approach Delay, s/veh 41.7 26.5 75.3 66.0 Approach LOS D C E E Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s13.775.412.630.113.575.715.427.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s4.3* 6.53.9* 6.14.3* 6.53.9* 6.1 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s16.9* 628.7* 249.7* 7011.5* 21 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s9.129.610.714.59.268.413.523.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s0.330.90.03.10.00.70.00.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 45.2 HCM 2010 LOS D Notes * HCM 2010 computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA GRAY ROAD & PROPOSED FULL ACCESS DRIVE CAPACITY ANALYSIS HCM 2010 TWSC Scenario 3A AM 8: Gray Road & Full Access 6/18/2015 PM Peak Hour 5/30/2012 Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh1.3 Movement WBLWBR NBTNBRSBLSBT Vol, veh/h 1835 2931339428 Conflicting Peds, #/hr00 0000 Sign Control StopStop FreeFreeFreeFree RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length 0 ---150- Veh in Median Storage, #0 -0--0 Grade, %0 -0--0 Peak Hour Factor 9292 94929294 Heavy Vehicles, %22 2222 Mvmt Flow20383121442455 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All859319 003260 Stage 1 319 ----- Stage 2 540 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.426.22 --4.12- Critical Hdwy Stg 15.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 25.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5183.318 --2.218- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver327722 --1234- Stage 1 737 ----- Stage 2 584 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver316722 --1234- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver316 ----- Stage 1 737 ----- Stage 2 564 ----- Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s13.1 0 0.7 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major MvmtNBTNBRWBLn1SBLSBT Capacity (veh/h)--5031234- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.1150.034- HCM Control Delay (s)--13.18- HCM Lane LOS --BA- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--0.40.1- HCM 2010 TWSC Scenario 3A PM 9: Gray Road & Full Access 6/18/2015 PM Peak Hour 5/30/2012 Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh1.3 Movement WBLWBR NBTNBRSBLSBT Vol, veh/h 1839 6882237449 Conflicting Peds, #/hr00 0000 Sign Control StopStop FreeFreeFreeFree RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length 0 ---150- Veh in Median Storage, #0 -0--0 Grade, %0 -0--0 Peak Hour Factor 9292 98929298 Heavy Vehicles, %22 2222 Mvmt Flow20427022440458 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All1253714 007260 Stage 1 714 ----- Stage 2 539 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.426.22 --4.12- Critical Hdwy Stg 15.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 25.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5183.318 --2.218- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver190431 --877- Stage 1 485 ----- Stage 2 585 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver181431 --877- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver181 ----- Stage 1 485 ----- Stage 2 558 ----- Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s20.1 0 0.8 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major MvmtNBTNBRWBLn1SBLSBT Capacity (veh/h)--300877- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.2070.046- HCM Control Delay (s)--20.19.3- HCM Lane LOS --CA- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--0.80.1- HCM 2010 TWSC Scenario 3B AM 8: Gray Road & Full Access 6/18/2015 PM Peak Hour 5/30/2012 Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh1.7 Movement WBLWBR NBTNBRSBLSBT Vol, veh/h 1853 2931358428 Conflicting Peds, #/hr00 0000 Sign Control StopStop FreeFreeFreeFree RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length 0 ---150- Veh in Median Storage, #0 -0--0 Grade, %0 -0--0 Peak Hour Factor 9292 94929294 Heavy Vehicles, %22 2222 Mvmt Flow20583121463455 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All900319 003260 Stage 1 319 ----- Stage 2 581 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.426.22 --4.12- Critical Hdwy Stg 15.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 25.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5183.318 --2.218- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver309722 --1234- Stage 1 737 ----- Stage 2 559 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver293722 --1234- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver293 ----- Stage 1 737 ----- Stage 2 530 ----- Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s13 0 1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major MvmtNBTNBRWBLn1SBLSBT Capacity (veh/h)--5271234- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.1460.051- HCM Control Delay (s)--138.1- HCM Lane LOS --BA- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--0.50.2- HCM 2010 TWSC Scenario 3B PM 9: Gray Road & Full Access 6/18/2015 PM Peak Hour 5/30/2012 Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh2.1 Movement WBLWBR NBTNBRSBLSBT Vol, veh/h 1876 6882174449 Conflicting Peds, #/hr00 0000 Sign Control StopStop FreeFreeFreeFree RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length 0 ---150- Veh in Median Storage, #0 -0--0 Grade, %0 -0--0 Peak Hour Factor 9292 98929298 Heavy Vehicles, %22 2222 Mvmt Flow20837022380458 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All1332713 007250 Stage 1 713 ----- Stage 2 619 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.426.22 --4.12- Critical Hdwy Stg 15.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 25.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5183.318 --2.218- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver170432 --878- Stage 1 486 ----- Stage 2 537 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver155432 --878- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver155 ----- Stage 1 486 ----- Stage 2 488 ----- Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s21.3 0 1.4 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major MvmtNBTNBRWBLn1SBLSBT Capacity (veh/h)--322878- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.3170.092- HCM Control Delay (s)--21.39.5- HCM Lane LOS --CA- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--1.30.3- GETGO FROM GIANT EAGLE 146TH STREET & GRAY ROAD – CARMEL, INDIANA 146TH STREET & PROPOSED RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT ACCESS DRIVE CAPACITY ANALYSIS HCM 2010 TWSC Scenario 3A AM 7: RIRO Access & 146th Street 6/18/2015 PM Peak Hour 5/30/2012 Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh0.1 Movement EBTEBRWBLWBT NBLNBR Vol, veh/h 10121901668 018 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0000 00 Sign Control FreeFreeFreeFree StopStop RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length -100 ---0 Veh in Median Storage, #0--0 0 - Grade, %0--0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 94929094 9292 Heavy Vehicles, %2222 22 Mvmt Flow 10772101774 020 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0010770 1964538 Stage 1 ----1077 - Stage 2 ----887 - Critical Hdwy --4.14-6.846.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.84 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.84 - Follow-up Hdwy --2.22-3.523.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver --643-55488 Stage 1 ----288 - Stage 2 ----363 - Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver --643-55488 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----55 - Stage 1 ----288 - Stage 2 ----363 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 12.7 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major MvmtNBLn1EBTEBRWBLWBT Capacity (veh/h)488--643- HCM Lane V/C Ratio0.04 ---- HCM Control Delay (s)12.7--0- HCM Lane LOS B--A- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.1--0- HCM 2010 TWSC Scenario 3A PM 7: RIRO Access & 146th Street 6/18/2015 PM Peak Hour 5/30/2012 Existing Conditions 2012 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh0.3 Movement EBTEBRWBLWBT NBLNBR Vol, veh/h 22773601370 037 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0000 00 Sign Control FreeFreeFreeFree StopStop RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length -300 ---0 Veh in Median Storage, #0--0 0 - Grade, %0--0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 98929898 9892 Heavy Vehicles, %2222 22 Mvmt Flow 23233901398 040 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0023230 30221162 Stage 1 ----2323 - Stage 2 ----699 - Critical Hdwy --4.14-6.846.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.84 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.84 - Follow-up Hdwy --2.22-3.523.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver --211-10188 Stage 1 ----60 - Stage 2 ----454 - Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver --211-10188 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----10 - Stage 1 ----60 - Stage 2 ----454 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 29.3 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major MvmtNBLn1EBTEBRWBLWBT Capacity (veh/h)188--211- HCM Lane V/C Ratio0.214 ---- HCM Control Delay (s)29.3--0- HCM Lane LOS D--A- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.8--0-