HomeMy WebLinkAboutTraffic Impact Analysis
r
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
PROPOSED RETAIL DEVELOPMENT
CARMEL, INDIANA
PREPARED FOR
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
NOVEMBER 2001
PREPARED By:
;<:0S;L[12;7::),
I ,. A. \./ \
/ "~/ 2.:' \./~\
i\,_ (i RECEIVED. \.~-~,\
!--i tifP 18 ~1r:tJ" F:.
i,!J, t. ,
DOCS k;/
\:/>.. ,f'-......... J
'. / " //''-' /
c.. >" #-:,""'...........7
". / ..>--. ~ .^ "',~....~/
"'-( 1,,,,>/,,-,-;0-'\ \ ,/
~'-'~:-L~~~\.
A & F ENGINEERING CO., LLC
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
8425 KEYSTONE CROSSING, SUITE 200
INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46240
PHONE 317-202-0864
FAX 317-202-0908
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACf ANALYSIS
COPYRIGHT
This Analysis and the ideas, designs and concepts 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.
@2001, A&F Engineering Co., LLC.
LAum PROPERTY GR.OUP
TRAFFIc IMPACl' ANALYSIS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................................................. ........ ....................... II
CERTIFICATION.............................. ............................................................................................................... ................ III
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................. .............................. 1
PURPOSE.......................................................................................................... ............................................................... 1
SCOPE OF WORK...................................................................................................................................... ....................... 1
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT ..... ................ ......... ... ...... ...... ..... ........ ........... ..... ....... .................. ... .... ........ ... ...... ...... ...... 2
STUDY AREA.... ......... ..... ............. ..... ...... ... .... ....... ..... .... ................. ........... ................. ....... .... ... ......... ..... ........... ... ..........2
DESCRIPTION OF THE ABU1TING STREET SYSTEM ..........................................................................................................4
TRAFFIC DATA....... ....... .... ............. .... ......... .... ........... ........... ..... ............... ............ ................ ......... .... ............ ....... ......... 5
GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................6
TABLE 1 - GENERATED TRIPS FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................6
INTERNAL TRIPs..... .............. ...... ....................... ...... ...... ............. ...... ....... ........ ...... .......... ........... ....... ..... ..... ................... 6
PASs-BY TRIPS .. ................ ......... ............ ........ ............ ......... .......... ......... ...... ......... ..... ....... ............. ...... ................. ......... 6
TABLE 2 - GENERATED TRIPS FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH PASS-By REDUCTIONS .....................................7
PEAK HOUR. ........ .... .... .., .... ............................................. ..... ........ .............. ......... ..... ......... ............................ .......... .......7
ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRffiUTION OF GENERATED TRIPS ........................ ................................................ ........................7
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GENERATED TRIPS ADDED TO THE STREET SYSTEM ............................................................9
YEAR 2011 TRAFFIC VOLUMES........ ...... ........... ................... .......... ........... .............. ......... ........ .... ... .... .................. .........9
CAPACITY ANALYSIS ......... ........... ............. ...... ........... ................. ..... ...... ..... ................... ....... ....... ..... .......... .................11
DESCRIPTION OF LEVELS OF SERVICE................. ....... ...... .... ............ ....... ............... ................. ..... ..... ...... ..... .................11
CAPACITY ANALYSES SCENARIOS .......... ...... .................. ..... ......... ...... ........ ........................... ............ ..... .............. ...... ..13
TABLE 3 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: U.S. 31 AND GREYHOUND P ASS............................................................. 17
TABLE 4 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: WESTERN WAY AND 146TH STREET ........................................................18
TABLE 5 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: U.S. 31 AND RANGELINE ROAD .............................................................19
CONCLUS IONS ......................................................................................................................................... ............... ......20
RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................................. ...... .23
I
LAUTII PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACT ANALYSIS
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1: AREA MAP ......... ... .................... .................... ......... .............. .......... ................... .... ........ ................ .................3
FIGURE 2: ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT......... 8
FIGURE 3: GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT................................................................. 10
FIGURE 4 (SCENARIO I): EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES ................................................................................................14
FIGURE 5 (SCENARIO 2): YEAR 2011 TRAFFIC VOLUMES .............................................................................................15
FIGURE 6 (SCENARIO 3): YEAR 2011 TRAFFIC VOLUMES PLUS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GENERATED TRAFFIC
VOLUMES.................... ............................ .......... ....... ....... ............. .............. ........................... .............. ....... .........16
FIGURE 7: EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS AT U.S. 31 AND GREYHOUND PASS ................................................25
FIGURE 8: EXISTING AND RECOMMENDED INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS AT WESTERN WAY AND I46TH STREET .........26
FIGURE 9: EXISTING AND RECOMMENDED INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS AT U.S. 31 AND RANGELINE ROAD ...............27
II
LAUTII PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACf ANALYSIS
CERTIFICATION
I certify that this TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS 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.
~. L c::--A
.CJJfJl F
Steven J. Fehribach, P.E.
Indiana Registration 890237
T fflr-V~~
Thomas S. Vandenberg, E.I.
Transportation Engineer
III
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACT ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION
This TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, prepared at the request of Lauth Property Group, is for a
proposed retail development which will be located southwest of U.S. 31 and 146th Street in Carmel,
Indiana.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this analysis is to detennine what effect traffic generated by the proposed
development, when fully occupied, will have on the existing adjacent roadway system. This
analysis will identify any roadway deficiencies that may exist today or that may occur when this site
is developed.
Conclusions will be reached that will detennine if the roadway system can accommodate the
anticipated traffic volumes. These conclusions will detennine the modifications required 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:
First, to obtain turning movement traffic volume counts at the following intersections:
. U.S. 31 and Greyhound Pass
. Western Way and 146th Street
. U.S. 31 and Rangeline Road
Second, to estimate the number of new trips that will be generated by the proposed development.
1
LAumPROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACT ANALYSIS
lbird, to assign the generated traffic volwnes to the driveways and/or roadways that will provide
access to the proposed development.
Fourth, to distribute the generated traffic volwnes from the proposed site onto the public roadway
system and intersections which have been identified as the study area
Fifth, to prepare a capacity analysis and level of service analysis for each intersection included in
the study area considering the following scenarios:
SCENARIO 1: Existing Conditions - Based on existing roadway conditions and traffic
volwnes.
SCENARIO 2: Year 2011 Conditions - Based on roadway conditions and traffic volwnes
that are estimated for the year 2011.
SCENARIO 3: Year 2011 Conditions and Proposed Development - New traffic volwnes
that will be generated by the proposed development added to the year 2011
traffic volwnes.
Finally, to prepare a TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS documenting all data, analyses, conclusions
and recommendations to provide for the safe and efficient movement of traffic through the study
area.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
The proposed development will be located southwest of U.S. 31 and 146th Street in Carmel, Indiana.
As proposed, the development will consist of 431,100 square feet of retail space. Figure 1 is an
area map of the proposed development.
STUDY AREA
The study area has been defined by the Carmel Department of Community Services to include the
following intersections:
. U.S. 31 and Greyhound Pass
. Western Way and 146th Street
. U.S. 31 and Rangeline Road
Figure 1 is a map of the area, including the proposed access points.
2
U GREYHOUND PASS
~
ffi~
~~
~
1-- --,
_JL_
I -II-
I II
I llei
11q:
I --11~
I =II;J
I II~
II~
I SITE II
LI _--1L_
-11-
- - --ttl
III
III
"~
\\
~
~
~ Jhr;j
/)JllO:
~ J//lr~
~ <s-i/I I gj
~
~
-'
...
0::
LEGEND
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
o
I
<0
..
o
"
~
o
:i
x
..,
~
~
o
o
N
./
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
146TH ST. ~
~--;;!
\~Ill~
~ '11~~
III~
\ jll~
\ II~~
"'- - - II~~
11Q:~
II ~
II
II
II
II
\\
\\
~
FIGURE 1
AREA MAP
@ A & F Engineering Co., LLC 2001
"ALL Rights Reserved"
3
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTION OF THE ABUTTING STREET SYSTEM
This proposed development would be served by the public roadway system that includes V.S. 31,
Greyhound Pass, Western Way and Rangeline Road.
V.S. 31 - is a north/south multi-lane highway within Hamilton County. The posted speed limit in
the vicinity of the site along this highway is 55 mph.
GREYHOUND PASS - is a four-lane roadway within Hamilton County. It intersects with both V.S. 31
and 14611\ Street. The posted speed limit in the vicinity of the site along this roadway is 25 mph.
WESlERN WAY - is a north/south two-lane roadway within Hamilton County. The posted speed
limit in the vicinity of the site along this roadway is 25 mph.
RANGLINE ROAD - is a north/south two-lane roadway within Hamilton County. The posted speed
limit in the vicinity of the site along this roadway is 30 mph.
us. 31 and Greyhound Pass - This intersection is controlled by a fully actuated traffic signal.
Figure 7 contains a schematic of the existing intersection geometrics. The existing geometrics
consist of:
. Northbound - Three through lanes, one left-turn lane and one right-turn lane. Permissive
left-turns are not allowed. A right-turn arrow exists to allow for
overlapping traffic.
. Southbound - Three through lanes, two left-turn lanes and one right-turn lane.
Permissive left-turns are not allowed.
. Eastbound - One through lane, one right-turn lane as well as one shared lane for
through and left-turn movements. Permissive left-turns are not allowed.
. Westbound - One left-turn lane, one shared lane for through and left-turn movements as
well as one shared lane for through and right-turn movements. Permissive
left-turns are not allowed.
4
LAUTII PROPER.TY GR.OUP
TRAFFIc IMPACT ANALYSIS
Western Way and 146th Street - This intersection is controlled by a fully actuated traffic signal.
Figure 8 contains a schematic of the existing intersection geometries. The existing geometries
consist of:
. Northbound - A one-lane private residential drive.
. Southbound - One lane for left-turn movements as well as one shared lane for through
and right-turn movements.
. Eastbound - One through lane, one left-turn lane as well as one shared lane for through
and right-turn movements.
. Westbound - One shared lane for through and left-turn movements as well as one shared
lane for through and right-turn movements. A concrete median
approximately twelve feet wide exists for a future left-turn lane.
U.S. 31 and Rangeline Road - This intersection is controlled by a fully actuated traffic signal.
Figure 9 contains a schematic of the existing intersection geometries. The existing geometries
consist of:
. Northbound - Two through lanes, one left-turn lane and one right-turn lane. Permissive
left-turns are not allowed.
. Southbound - Two through lanes, one left-turn lane and one right-turn lane. Permissive
left-turns are not allowed.
. Eastbound - One left-turn lane as well as one shared lane for through and right-turn
movements.
. Westbound - One right-turn lane as well as one shared lane for through and left-turn
movements.
TRAFFIC DATA
Peak hour manual turning movement traffic volume counts were made by A&F Engineering Co.,
LLC at the study area intersections. The counts include an hourly total of all "through" traffic
and all "turning" traffic at the intersection. The counts were made during the hours of 6:00 AM
to 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM to 7:00 PM in September 2001. These traffic volume counts are
summarized on Figure 6 and are included in Appendix A.
5
LAUTII PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The estimate of traffic to be generated by the proposed development is a function of the
development size and type of land use. Trip Generation) report 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 various land uses. Table 1 is a summary
of the trips that will be generated by the proposed development.
TABLE 1 - GENERA TED TRIPS FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION GENERA TED TRIPS
ITE AM AM PM PM
LAND USE CODE SIZE ENTER EXIT ENTER EXIT
Retail 820 431,100 SF 233 149 791 857
INTERNAL TRIPS
An internal trip results when a trip is made between two land uses without traversing the roadway
system. The method used to calculate trips for Retail ITE Code 820 includes reductions for internal
trips. Therefore, no additional steps are needed to take into account internal trips.
PASs-BY TRIPS
Pass-by trips are trips already on the roadway system that decide to enter a land use. The pass-by
trip equation in Trip Generation HandbooK- was used to estimate the reduction in trips for the
proposed development due to pass-by trips. The reduction in trips will only be applied to the traffic
volumes along the adjacent streets. Traffic volumes into and out of the development which are
located at the development's driveways will not be reduced. Appendix A contains figures showing
the Pass-By traffic volumes and Table 2 summarizes the pass-by trip information.
) Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Sixth Edition, 1997.
2 Trip Generation Handbook, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), March 2001.
6
LAunI PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACf ANALYSIS
TABLE 2 - GENERATED TRIPS FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH PASS-BY REDUCTIONS
DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION GENERATED TRIPS
ITE AM AM PM PM
LAND USE CODE SIZE ENTER EXIT ENTER EXIT
Retail 820 431,100 SF 233 149 791 857
Pass-By Trips (25%) 58 37 201 218
Total New Trips 175 112 590 639
PEAK HOUR
Based on the existing traffic volwnes that were collected for this analysis, the adjacent street peak
hours vary between the intersections. The peak hour is when the largest volumes of traffic will
occur. Therefore, the actual peak hour at each intersection will be used for this analysis to represent
the maximwn traffic volwnes at each intersection.
ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF GENERATED TRIPS
Traffic volwnes will be generated by the proposed development and added to the public street
system. The study methodology used to determine the traffic volwnes is defined as follows:
I. The volume of traffic that will enter and exit the site must be assigned to the various access
points and to the public street system. Using the existing traffic volume data collected for
this analysis, traffic to and from the proposed new site has been assigned to the proposed
driveways and to the pu~lic street system that will be serving the site.
2. To determine the volwnes of traffic that will be added to the public roadway system, the
generated traffic must be distributed by direction to the public roadway's intersection with
the driveway. For the proposed development, the distribution was based on the existing
traffic patterns and the assignment of generated traffic.
The assignment and distribution of the generated traffic volwnes for the proposed development are
shown on Figure 2.
7
';fl.
C'I
C")
~
6%....
., ~
~~ flfYJ
6~~ ~
~ ~~ gj
I t~
I ';fl.~
~ C'I
--'
...
0::
LEGEND
* = NEGUGIBLE
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
(5
I
ao
t
~
~
o
:z:
x
w
o
(5
./
(5
o
~
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
8
REYHOUND PASS
146TH ST. ~
~II
\~III~
~ III~~
1 II CIj
\ jll::i~
\ 11100
\ II ~~
\"- - II
- I
II ~
II ~
II
II
II
II
\\
\\
~
-+-6%
FIGURE 2
ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION
OF GENERA TED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
@ A & f Engineering Co., LLC 2001
"ALL Rights Reserved"
LAUTII PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACT ANALYSIS
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GENERATED TRIPS ADDED TO THE
STREET SYSTEM
Generated traffic volmnes that can be expected from the proposed development have been prepared
for each of the study area intersections. The peak hour generated traffic volmnes are shown on
Figure 3. These data are based on the previously discussed trip generation data, assignment of
generated traffic and distribution of generated traffic.
YEAR 2011 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
An annual growth rate was estimated for background traffic on the existing street system. A one
percent per year growth rate was applied to the existing through traffic volmnes along U.S. 31 in
order to estimate the year 2011 traffic volumes. It is assumed that by the year 2011, a shopping
center will have been developed near the intersection of Greyhound Pass and 146th Street. Traffic
that will be generated by the shopping center has been previously estimated in a study performed
by A&F Engineering Co., LLC. These traffic volumes have been taken into consideration when
estimating the year 2011 traffic volmnes and are included in Appendix A. Also, it is assumed that
the proposed U.S. 431 northbound off-ramp will be completed by the year 2011. This will affect
the traffic flow of the study area. Therefore, year 2011 traffic volmnes were redistributed to take
into account the new ramp. Figures containing the redistributed traffic volumes are included in
Appendix A.
3 Traffic Impact Analysis - Proposed Retail Development: 146'h Street and US. 31/U.S. 431,
A&F Engineering Co., LLC, September 1998, Revised November 1999
9
u; :! ~* (*)
~ J ..&"* (*)
(275) 48~ ~ t rt
(*) *.... . c:n.
(153) 27 ~ S~S
REYHOUND PASS
146TH ST. &:
\ PROPOSED III
\~ II~
~ III~~
'II~~
j 11::i(S
\ IIQ~O
\ II ~~
\'- - II
- I
II ~
II ~
II
II
II
II
\\
\\
~
~
0:
~~ flrLll
6~~ ~
~ ~~ to
~
~
~
a:
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
* = NEGUGIBLE
= EXISTING ROADS
- - -- = PROPOSED ROADS
FIGURE 3
GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
o
J
co
..
~
n
li
o
:i
x
w
~
o
./
o
o
N
./
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
@ A lie r Engineering Co., llC 2001
"All Rights Reserved"
10
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACf ANALYSIS
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, number and use of lanes
and, in the case of signalized intersections, traffic signal timing. To determine the LOS at each
of the study intersections, a capacity analysis has been made using the recognized computer
program based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCMl.
DESCRIPTION OF LEVELS OF SERVICE
The following descriptions are for signalized intersections:
Level of Service A - Describes operations with a very low delay, less than or equal to 10.0
seconds per vehicle. This occurs when progression is extremely favorable,
and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not
stop at all.
Level of Service B - Describes operations with delay in the range of 10.1 to 20.0 seconds per
vehicle. This generally occurs with good progression. More vehicles stop
than LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay.
Level of Service C - Describes operation with delay in the range of 20.1 seconds to 35.0
seconds per vehicle. These higher delays may result from failed
progression. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level,
although many still pass through the intersection without stopping.
4 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Transportation Research Board, National Research Council,
Washington, DC, 2000.
11
LAum PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACT ANALYSIS
Level of Service D - Describes operations with delay in the range of 35.1 to 55.0 seconds per
vehicle. At level of service D, the influence of congestion becomes more
noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combinations of
unfavorable progression. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of
vehicles not stopping declines.
Level of Service E - Describes operations with delay in the range of 55.1 to 80.0 seconds per
vehicle. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high .
delay values generally indicate poor progression and long cycle lengths.
Level of Service F - Describes operations with delay in excess of 80.0 seconds per vehicle.
This is considered to be unacceptable to most drivers. This condition
often occurs with oversaturation, i.e., when arrival flow rates exceed the
capacity of the intersection. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may
also be major contributing causes to such delay levels.
The following list shows the delays related to the levels of service for unsignalized intersections:
Level of Service
A
B
C
D
E
F
Control Delay (seconds/vehicle)
Less than or equal to 10
Between 10.1 and 15
Between 15.1 and 25
Between 25.1 and 35
Between 35.1 and 50
greater than 50
12
LAUTII PROPERTY GR.OUP
TRAFFIc IMPACf ANALYSIS
CAPACITY ANALYSES SCENARIOS
To evaluate the proposed development's effect on the public street system, the existing and
generated traffic volumes must be obtained to form a series of scenarios. The analysis of these
scenarios determines the adequacy of the existing roadway system. From the analysis,
recommendations can be made to improve the public street system so it will accommodate the
increased traffic volumes.
An analysis was made for the AM peak hour and PM peak hour for each of the study
intersections considering the following scenarios:
SCENARIO 1: Existing Traffic Volumes - Figure 4 is a summary of the existing traffic
volumes at the study intersections for the AM and PM peak hours.
SCENARIO 2: Year 2011 Traffic Volumes - Figure 5 is a summary of these traffic volumes
at the study intersections for the AM and PM peak hours.
SCENARIO 3: Year 2011 Traffic Volumes Plus Proposed Development Generated Traffic
Volumes - Figure 6 is a summary of these traffic volumes at the study
intersections for the AM and PM peak hours.
The requested analyses have been completed and the computer solutions showing the level of
service results are included in Appendix A. The tables that are included in this report summarize
the results of the level of service analyses and are identified as follows:
Table 3 - U.S. 31 and Greyhound Pass
Table 4 - Western Way and 146th Street
Table 5 - U.S. 31 and Rangeline Road
13
r:::-
U>
............
-~
""...........
e.~.::::- '\.46 (133)
........ ~ ()
-N~ ~38 118
~ . ~ .&' 569 (326)
(74) 55.:1" +. t tt
(128) 51.... ~ ~ ~
(256) 435 ~ N:::':::
C> ........0>
....N....
-_ CIO
N-
e
CIO
e '\. 58 (58
m ::: ~ 201 (239)
~ ~
(212) 330.:1"
(273) 210....
~
ffi~
~~
~
r::--
I
I
I
I
I SITE
I
L__,
REYHOUND PASS
146TH ST. ~
~~
\ SHOPPING
\ CENTER
~ :
~
Q:
~~ rlr~
6~~ ~
~ ~~ td
~
~
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
...J
...
Q:
o
I
CD
I
o
~
o
:z:
x
w
o
~
o
o
'"
./
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
,.\
FIGURE 4 (SCENARIO 1)
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
@ A & r Engineering Co.. LLC 2001
"ALL Rights Reserved"
14
-:;:-
0_
on -
- 0
on-.....
e:g;:: 't.109 (304)
..... on ..... ()
- N - ~38 118
~ J ~ ~680 (624)
(74) 55~ ~ t tt
(128) 51.... ,.... 00 N
on .., -
(256) 435 ~ -:::- ~ ::
-...--0
N.., ,....
-..... <0
..,........
~
REYHOUND PASS
~
ffi)..
~~
~
146TH ST. &:
~II
\~I'l~
~ :l'~
j'IClj
~ / llg~'
- I,
II
lice
II
I,
II
II
\\
\\
\
- 't. 58 (58
;l; ::: ~ 238 (362)
~ ~
(212) 330 ~
(304) 226....
Ci
Q;:
~~ I'lfW
O~~ ~
~ ~~ td
. t)
~
~
....
...
'"
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
FIGURE 5 (SCENARIO 2)
YEAR 2011 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
c;
I
00
.-
C>
..
~
o
:i
x
w
~
~
c;
C>
N
./
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
@ A & F Engineering Co., LtC 2001
.. ALL Rights Reserved"
15
r::-
eo_
-.-
__0
<0 ~",
~;o::; 't.109 (304)
~ ~ ~ "38 (118)
~ . ~ .420 (409)
(349) 103 ~ ~ t ,.
(128) 51.... ~ ~ :2
(332) 332 "l,. -:::- ~ N
N_on
-NN
~<O~
",
e
REYHOUND PASS
--
0._
o on ",
_N'" .....
~~~ '- 58 (58
~ ~::: .. 235 (350)
~ . ~ .329 (453)
(135) 200 ~ ~ t ,.
(292) 223.... ~ ~ ~
(124) 144"l,. 'N'cn':"
.N-
-......
-'-".:!"
146TH ST. ~
~II
\~IIII~
~ '1l>\~
III~
\ jlb~
\ IIIQQ
\ I' ~~
\'- ~ II
- I
II ~
II ~
II
II
II
II
\\
\\
~
....J
....
'"
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(OO) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
= EXISTING ROADS
-- - - = PROPOSED ROADS
FIGURE 6 (SCENARIO 3)
YEAR 2011 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
PLUS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
o
I
CD
..
o
"jj
~
o
:r:
x
w
o
o
./
o
o
N
./
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
@ A & r Engineering Co., LLC 2001
"ALL Rights Reserved"
16
LAum PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACT ANALYSIS
TABLE 3 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: U.S. 31 AND GREYHOUND PASS
AM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3
Northbound Approach C C B
Southbound Approach F F E
Eastbound Approach F F E
Westbound Approach F F F
Intersection F F E
PM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3
Northbound Approach E F F
Southbound Approach D D D
Eastbound Approach D F F
Westbound Approach E F F
Intersection D F F
SCENARIO 1 :
Existing Traffic Volumes with Existing Intersection Controls and Existing
Intersection Geometries
SCENARIO 2:
Year 2011 Traffic Volumes with Existing Intersection Controls and Existing
Intersection Geometries
SCENARIO 3:
Year 2011 Traffic Volumes Plus Proposed Development Generated Traffic
Volumes with Existing Intersection Controls and Existing Intersection
Geometries
The existing geometries for this intersection are shown on Figure 7.
17
LAUTII PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFICIMPACf ANALySIS
TABLE 4 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: WESTERN WAY AND 146lH STREET
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3
Northbound Approach - - B
Southbound Approach B A B
Eastbound Approach A A B
Westbound Approach A B B
Intersection A A B
AM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3
Northbound Approach - - C
Southbound Approach B B C
Eastbound Approach A A B
Westbound Approach A B C
Intersection A A C
PM PEAK HOUR
SCENARIO 1:
Existing Traffic Volumes with Existing Intersection Controls and Existing
Intersection Geometries
SCENARIO 2:
Year 2011 Traffic Volumes with Existing Intersection Controls and Existing
Intersection Geometries
Year 2011 Traffic Volumes Plus Proposed Development Generated Traffic
Volumes with Existing Intersection Controls and the Recommended
Intersection Geometries
SCENARIO 3:
The existing and recommended geometries for this intersection are shown on Figure 8. The
improvements are as follows:
. Northbound - Construct a through lane, a left-turn lane and a right-turn lane.
. Southbound - Construct a receiving through lane south of the intersection.
. Westbound - Add a left-turn lane.
18
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACf ANALYSIS
TABLE 5 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: U.S. 31 AND RANGE LINE ROAD
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2A SCENARIO 2B SCENARIO 3
Northbound Approach B B B C
Southbound Approach E F E E
Eastbound Approach D D C C
Westbound Approach E E C C
Intersection E F E E
AM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2A SCENARIO 2B SCENARIO 3
Northbound Approach D F D E
Southbound Approach D C D C
Eastbound Approach C C D B
Westbound Approach B C D C
Intersection D E D D
PM PEAK HOUR
SCENARIO 2B:
Existing Traffic Volumes with Existing Intersection Controls and Existing
Intersection Geometries
Year 2011 Traffic Volumes with Existing Intersecti.on C.ontr.ols and Existing
Intersecti.on Geometries
Year 2011 Traffic V.olumes with Existing Intersecti.on C.ontr.ols and the
Rec.ommended Intersecti.on Ge.ometrics
SCENARIO 1 :
SCENARIO 2A:
SCENARIO 3B:
Year 2011 Traffic V.olumes Plus Prop.osed Devel.opment Generated Traffic
Volumes with Existing Intersecti.on C.ontrols and the Recommended
Intersecti.on Geometries
The existing and rec.ommended geometries f.or this intersecti.on are sh.own .on Figure 9. The
improvements are as f.oll.ows:
. Eastb.ound - Add a right-turn lane.
. Westb.ound - Add a thr.ough lane. C.onstruct an additi.onal receiving thr.ough lane west
.of the intersecti.on.
19
LAUTII PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPAcr ANALYSIS
CONCLUSIONS
The conclusions that follow are based on:
. Existing Traffic Volume Data
. Trip Generation
. Assignment and Distribution of Generated Traffic
. Capacity Analysis with the Resulting Levels of Service for Each of the Study Intersections
. Field Review Conducted at the Site
These conclusions apply only to the AM peak hour and PM peak hour that were addressed in this
analysis. These peak hours are when the largest volumes of traffic will occur. If the resulting level
of service is adequate during these time periods, it can generally be assumed that the remaining 22
hours will have levels of service equal to or better than the peak hour levels of service. This occurs
because the roadway traffic volumes during the remaining 22 hours will be equal to or less than the
peak hour traffic volumes.
1. U.S.3} AND GREYHOUND PASS
Existing Traffic Volumes (Scenario 1) - A review of the level of service for each of the
intersection approaches, with the existing traffic volumes and existing geometrics, has
shown that the intersection is operating below an acceptable level during the AM peak hour
and at an acceptable level during the PM peak hour. The below acceptable level of service
during the AM peak hour is due to the amount of through traffic along u.S. 31. The
existing geometrics for this intersection are shown on Figure 7.
Year 2011 Traffic Volumes (Scenario 2) - A review of the level of service for each of the
intersection approaches, with year 2011 traffic volumes and existing geometries, has shown
that the intersection will operate below acceptable levels during the AM and PM peak hours.
The below acceptable levels of service are due to the amount of through traffic along u.s.
31.
20
LAum PROPER.TY GR.OUP
TR.AFFIc IMPACT ANALYSIS
Year 2011 Traffic Volumes Plus Generated Traffic Volumes (Scenario 3) - When the
generated traffic volumes from the proposed development are added to the year 2011 traffic
volumes, the intersection will continue to operate below acceptable levels of service during
the AM and PM peak hours with existing intersection controls and existing intersection
geometries. The below acceptable levels of service are due to the amount of through traffic
along U.S. 31.
2. WESTERN WAY AND 146m STREET
Existing Traffic Volumes (Scenario 1) - A review of the level of service for each of the
intersection approaches, with the existing traffic volumes and existing geometries, has
shown that the intersection is operating at acceptable levels during the AM and PM peak
hours. The existing geometries for this intersection are shown on Figure 8.
Year 2011 Traffic Volumes (Scenario 2) - A review of the level of service for each of the
intersection approaches, with year 2011 traffic volumes and existing geometries, has shown
that the intersection will continue to operate at acceptable levels during the AM and PM
peak hours.
Year 2011 Traffic Va/urnes Plus Generated Traffic Va/urnes (Scenario 3) - When the
generated traffic volumes from the proposed development are added to the year 2011 traffic
volumes, the intersection will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service during the
AM and PM peak hours with existing intersection controls and the recommended
intersection geometries. The recommended geometries for this intersection are shown on
Figure 8. The improvements are as follows:
. Northbound - Construct a through lane, a left-turn lane and a right-turn lane.
. Southbound - Construct a receiving through lane south of the intersection.
. Westbound - Add a left-turn lane.
21
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPAcr ANALYSIS
3. U.S.3l ANDRANGELINEROAD
Existing Traffic Volumes (Scenario I) - A review of the level of service for each of the
intersection approaches, with the existing traffic volwnes and existing geometries, has
shown that the intersection is operating below an acceptable level during the AM peak hour
and at an acceptable level during the PM peak hour. The below acceptable level of service
during the AM peak hour is due to the amount of through traffic along U.S. 31. The
existing geometries for this intersection are shown on Figure 9.
Year 2011 Traffic Volumes (Scenario 2A) - A review of the level of service for each of the
intersection approaches, with year 2011 traffic volwnes and existing geometries, has shown
that the intersection will operate below acceptable levels during the AM and PM peak hours.
The below acceptable levels of service are due to the amount of through traffic along U.S.
31.
Year 2011 Traffic Volumes (Scenario 2B) - A review of the level of service for each of the
intersection approaches, with year 2011 traffic volumes and the recommended geometries,
has shown that the intersection will operate below an acceptable level during the AM peak
hour and at an acceptable level during the PM peak hour. The below acceptable level of
service during the AM peak hour is due to the amount of through traffic along U.S. 31. The
recommended geometries for this intersection are shown on Figure 9. The
improvements are as follows:
. Eastbound - Add a right-turn lane.
. Westbound - Add a through lane. Construct an additional receiving through
lane west of the intersection.
Year 2011 Traffic Volumes Plus Generated Traffic Volumes (Scenario 3) - When the
generated traffic volumes from the proposed development are added to the year 2011 traffic
volumes, the intersection will operate below an acceptable level during the AM peak hour
and at an acceptable level during the PM peak hour. This is with existing intersection
controls and the recommended intersection geometries. The below acceptable level of
service during the AM peak hour is due to the amount of through traffic along U.S. 31. The
recommended improvements for this intersection are listed in Scenario 2B.
22
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACT ANALYSIS
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on this analysis and the conclusions, the following recommendations are made to ensure that
the roadway system will operate at the highest possible levels of service if the site is developed as
proposed.
U.S. 3 I AND GREYHOUND PASS
No feasible changes to this intersection can be recommended in order to improve the existing
levels of service or year 2011 levels of service. The below acceptable levels of service are due
to the amount of through traffic along U.S. 31. The addition of the proposed development does
not decrease the levels of service at this intersection from the year 2011 traffic volumes. In fact,
anticipated delays at this intersection will be lower due to the redistribution of traffic caused by
the proposed U.S. 431 ramp and Rangeline Road extension. Figure 7 contains a schematic of
the existing intersection geometries.
WESTERN WAY AND 146111 STREET
The existing and recommended geometries for this intersection are shown on Figure 8. The
improvements are as follows:
. Northbound - Construct a through lane, a left-turn lane and a right-turn lane.
. Southbound - Construct a receiving through lane south of the intersection.
. Westbound - Add a left-turn lane.
u.s. 31 AND RANGELINE ROAD
The existing and recommended geometries for this intersection are shown on Figure 9. The
improvements are as follows:
. Eastbound - Add a right-turn lane.
. Westbound - Add a through lane. Construct an additional receiving through
lane west of the intersection.
23
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACT ANALYSIS
RANGELINE ROAD - U.S. 31 TO 146TH STREET
It is recommended that the extension of Rangeline Road from U.S. 31 to 146tb Street be
constructed as a five lane road consisting of two through lanes in each direction with a two-
way left-turn lane.
24
--'
...
'"
AI
EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRies ~ ~
ALL SCENARIOS
"'"
ClI)
.
fI)
.
:)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t t t
GREYH~ ~
~ ~ T
~ ..&'
.4 .....
..... .....
~
J J J +. t t t It
\
LEGEND
~ = TRAFFIC SIGNAL
FIGURE 7
EXISTING INTERSECTION
GEOMETRICS AT
u.S. 31 & GREYHOUND PASS
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
o
I
'"
N
I
'"
o
II
1i
c
'"
x
....
o
o
./
o
o
N
./
N
25
EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS
SCENARIO 1 & SCENARIO 2
~
~
Z
~
UI
t;
UI
~
'H
146TH STREET
LEGEND
- -'L
~~:
~
c
i=
UlZ
=~UI
~i~
~UI~
..~a
~ = TRAFFIC SIGNAL
RECOMMENDED INTERSECTION GEOMETRies
SCENARIO 3
>-
;
Z
~
UI
...
E
~t
146TH STREET
-
-
".
LEGEND
T
~
-
-'
....
'"
i1li = ADDITIONAL
LANES
~ = TRAFFIC SIGNAL
<5
I
<5
I
ii
1i
o
:C
x
....
o
<5
/'
8
N
/'
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
26
-
-
FIGURE 8
EXISTING & RECOMMENDED
INTERSECTION GEOMETRies AT
WESTERN WAY & 146TH STREET
EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS
SCENARIO 1 & SCENARIO 2A
LEGEND
~ = TRAme SIGNAL
0 = STOP SIGN
\J = YIELD SIGN
RECOMMENDED INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS
SCENARIO 28 & SCENARIO 3
LEGEND
-'
...
0:
~::::::;:::
::::;~~:~ = ADDITIONAL
LANES
~ = TRAme SIGNAL
o = STOP SIGN
\J = YIELD SIGN
o
I
'"
N
I
0>
o
"
~
o
:i
x
....
o
~
o
o
N
./
N
FIGURE 9
EXISTING & RECOMMENDED
INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS AT
U.S. 31 & RANGELlNE ROAD
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
27
. LAumPROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFICIMPACf ANALYSIS
ApPENDIX A
This docmnent contains the traffic data that were used in the TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for the
proposed development.
Included are the intersection turning movement traffic volmne counts and the intersection capacity
analyses for each of the study intersections for the AM peak hour and PM peak hour.
LAumPROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFICIMPACl' ANALYSIS
ApPENDIX A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ADDITION AL FIGURES ....................................................................... ............................................................................. 1
U.S. 31 AND GREYHOUND PASS .............................. ........... ................................... ......... ......................... ................... ..13
WESTERN WAY AND 146TH STREET ... ................ ....... ............... ..... ...... ....... .................. ................ ........... ..... ..... ............29
U.S. 31 AND RANGELINE ROAD ............ ................. .................... ....... ......................................... ..... ...... ... .......... ........... 45
LAUTII PROPERlY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACf ANALYSIS
ADDITIONAL FIGURES
1
....
...
0::
LEGEND
* = NEGUGIBLE
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
(3
I
CD
I
o
"
~
c
Z
x
....
o
(3
-/
(3
o
N
-/
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.s. 31 & 146TH STREET
'#.
N
('l)
~
REYHOUND PASS
146TH ST. ~
~II
\~III~
~ III....~
'11~1f.
jll:::ic>
\ IIQ~Q
\ II S
\"--. - ~ II M
Il~~
II ~
II
II
II
II
\\
\\
~
~6%
., ~
~~ PlrYJ
6>>-~ ~
~ ~~ ijj
I t~
I .~
~
"
<.~
o
FIGURE A (PASS-BY)
ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION
OF GENERA TED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
@ A & r Engineering Co., LLC 2001
"ALL Rights Reserved"
2
~ ~ ..... (.)
+'. ,&'* (*)
(153) 27~ ~ t rt
(*) *... * 0> *
(153) 27 ~ Sg:S
REYHOUND PASS
~
~II
\~III~
~ 111i;~
II'"
\ jll~~
\ II~CO
\ II ;:!:~
\"-- - II
- I:F
liccli
II ~
Ii
II
II
II
\\
\\
~
Ci
0:
~~ PlrtlJ
6>>-~ ~
~ ~~ ijj
~
~
~
'"
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
* = NEGUGIBLE
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
FIGURE B (NON PASS-BY)
GENERA TED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
...FOR PROPOSED.DEVElOPMENT
<5
I
IX)
I
<>
..
~
o
:i
x
w
<>
~
<5
<>
N
./
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
@ A &. r Engineering Co., llC 2001
"ALL Rights Reserved"
3
t
('.I
I
{j
a::
~~ flrtlJ
6>>,~ ~
~ ~~ uj
~
~
.....
0.-
e>::
LEGEND
00 = A..... PEAK HOUR
(00) = P..... PEAK HOUR
* = NEGUGIBLE
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
c;
I
CD
I
o
ii
~
a
:i
x
...
~
C;
/'
C;
o
'"
/'
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
4
REYHOUND PASS
146TH ST. ~
\ PROPOSED III
\~ II~
~ III~~
III~
\ jll~~
\ 11100
\ ,I ~
\"--- - - I: ~
11ll:~
II ~
II
II
\I
II
\\
\\
~
FIGURE C (PASS-BY)
GENERA TED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMEN-'F- ..
@ A & r Engineering Co.. LLC 2001
"ALL Rights Reserved"
-:::t
o
on ........
-~
on-,..,
e:g.::::. 'to. 46 (133)
~ ~ ~ ~38 (118)
+' J ~ .569 (326)
(14) 55"" ~ t rt
(128) 51~ :;c: ~ ~
(256) 435 ~ N ~ .::
0..--0>
.., .., ..,
-.., GO
~-
~
~
ffi~
~~
~
'to. 58 (58
~ ::: ~ 201 (239)
+' ~
(212) 330""
(213) 210 ~
Ci
n:
~~ rlrYJ
6~~ ~
~ ~~ . ijj
~
~
--'
"-
It:
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(OO) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
c;
I
CD
...
o
~
o
:i
x
w
o
c;
,.-
c;
o
N
,.-
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
5
REYHOUND PASS
~il
\ SHOPPfNG
\ CENTER
~ :
" j
~--
FIGURE D
YEAR 2011 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(WITH GROWl'H- RATE AND
WITHOUT REDISTRIBUTION)
@ A &: r Engineering Co., LLC 2001
"ALL Rights Reserved"
-:;-
C)
on~
~.....
on-"'"
e:g.::::. 't.46 (133)
,..., on ..... ()
~ .......... .-38 118
~ J '+ ~ 569 (326)
(74) 55~ ~ t t+
(128) 51-' :;; ~ ~
(256) 435 ~ -:=- ~ :..
~-,...,
"",0')0
-0') II')
.....-
~
REYHOUND PASS
~
ffi~
~~
~
146TH ST. ~
~II
\~ Illll
\ CENTER III~
\\ III~
\ j 1I(Ij
'~ - - ii~g
II
Ill(
II
II
II
II
\\
\\
~
- 't. 58 (58
~ ~.- 226 (330)
~ '+
(212) 330 ~
(273) 210-'
Ci
0:
~~ rlfW
6~~ ~
~ ~:h gj
~
~
r;!
IX
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.... PEAK HOUR
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
FIGURE E
YEAR 2011 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(WITH PROPOSED U.SO-431 RAMP - -
REDISTRIBUTION)
<:;
I
GO
.,
~
1i
o
::i
x
...
C>
<:;
./
<:;
~
./
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
@ A '" r Engineering Co., LLC 2001
"ALL Rights Reserved"
6
.
..____u ...
~
o
00_
-~
00-""
e:g ~ "to 46 (133)
,." 00 ~ )
-..... ~ ....38 (118
~ J ~ .341 (196)
(74) 55:J- ~ t rt
(128) 51.... ~ ~ :;
(179) 305 ~ -:::- ~ co
....._CD
-,.,,-
-,.,,-
~
~
REYHOUND PASS
n
- ~ "to 58 (58
~ :::.... 226 (330)
~ ~ .228 (130)
(135) 200:J- ~ rt
(273) 210.... ~ :2
(71) 130 ~ -:::-
.e
146TH ST. ~
\ PROPOSED III
\~ II~
~ 'II(;)~
III~
\ jll~~
\ II~~O
\ II ~~
\"-- - I'
- I
IllC~
II ~
II
II
II
II
\\
\\
~
Ci
(C
~~ (lilt!
6~~ ~
~ ~~ lU
~
~
-'
...
Q:
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
FIGURE F
YEAR 2011 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(WITH. PROPOSED-U.S. 431 RAMp..-AND
RANGELlNE ROAD REDISTRIBUTION)
o
I
CD
I
o
~
C>
::i
x
w
~
o
./
o
o
N
./
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
@ A & r Engineering Co., llC 2001
"All Righfs Reserved"
7
-:;:-
C>~
on -
- C>
on~...,
.e~;; 't.109 (304)
:? ~:? ~ 38 (118)
~ . ~ ~420 (409)
(74) 55~ ~ t rt
(128) 51~ ~ ~:g
(179) 305 "l- -;:-~ N
....~on
-....,....
~....,~
~
~
REYHOUND PASS
- 'to 58 (58
~ ::: ~ 238 (362)
~ ~ ~ 260 (215)
(135) 200 ~ ~ rt
(304) 226 ~ ~ ~
(77) 130 "l- -;:- -
e.
~il"
\ SHOPPING A..
\ ~~ III ~
~ I I i'i~
I 11"4'
\ jll~~
\ II~QO
\ II ~~
\ "--- ' II
- I
11l(~
II ~
II
Ii
II
II
\\
\\
~
Ci
tt:
~~ #1fW
<5~~ ~
~ <$' ~ ij:f
~
~
--'
...
'"
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
FIGURE G
YEAR 2011 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(WITH PROPOSED U.S. 431. RAMP AND
RANGELlNE ROAD)
o
I
CD
..
C>
~
C>
:i
x
....
C>
o
./
o
C>
N
./
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
@ A & r Engineering Co., lLC 2001
~ ALL Rights Reserved~
8
'#.
("II
(")
~
.
~
REYHOUND PASS
~
ffi~
~~
~
146TH ST. ~
~6"
~II
\~IIII~
~ II~~
I ,I 'Of
\ jll~~
\ II~QO
\ " ~~
,"-- ~ I'
- I
Illl::~
II ~
II
II
II
II
\\
\\
~
I
· SITE
.
Lu, ! ~
I I ('I)
(j~
., ~
~~ flfW
6>>:~ ~
~ ~~ uJ
I t~
I ~~
~ ("II
"
<11%
...J
"'-
Q:
LEGEND
· = NECUGIBLE
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
FIGURE SC1
ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION
FOR PROPOSED SHOPPING CENTER
(WITH PROPOSED U.S. 431 RAMP)
<5
I
co
I
o
"
~
Cl
:i
><
....
o
<5
./
<5
o
'"
./
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
@ A &: r Engineering Co., LLC 2001
"All Rights Reserved"
9
'-" '\..63 (171)
~ ..-* (*)
~ .111 (298)
(*) *....
rt
ClO
ClO
REYHOUND PASS
r:::-
<0
~
ffi)..
~~
~
146TH ST. J~
\ PROPOSED III
\~ II~
~ ::l!~
j 11::i~
\ IIO~O
\ II ;!:~
,"--. - I'
- 10
II~~
II ~
II
II
II
\I
\\
\\
~
I
· SITE
.
Lu,
~
a::
~~ flrW
6>>-~ ~
~ ~~ ijj
~
~
~
'"
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
* = NEGUGlBlE
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
FIGURE SC2
GENERA TED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
-FOR PROPOSED SHOPPING nCENTER
(WITH PROPOSED U.S. 431 RAMP)
<3
I
~
,
o
~
o
~
x
w
~
<3 - LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
~ U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
'"
,/
N
@ A Ilc r Engineering Co., llC 2001
n All Rights Reserved"
10
'#.
N
C')
~
REYHOUND PASS
146TH ST. &:
~II
\~ IIII~
~ 1/ ~~
II'"
\ jll~~
\ II~Q
~ II~~
- / Il~~
11ll:~
II ~
II
'I
II
II
\\
\\
~
..-6%
., ~
~~ flrYJ
6~~ ~
~ ~~ ijj
I t~
I '#.~
~ N
'-.
<.%
..J
0.-
r>:
LEGEND
* = NEGUGIBLE
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
FIGURE SC3
ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION
-FOR PROPOSED -SHOPPING GENTER
(WITH PROPOSED U.S. 431 RAMP
AND RANGELlNE ROAD)
o
I
co
I
e
1i
a
:i
x
w
e
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
@ A & F Engineering Co., LlC 2001
-ALL Rights Reserved-
~
C;
o
N
./
N
11
- 't.. 63 (171)
~ ~ * (*)
'+ ~ 79 (213)
REYHOUND PASS
(*) * ~
It
.....
.....
146TH ST. ~
~II
\~III~
~ 111l:\~
III~
\ JII~~
\ 11100
\ II 5
\'- - - II 2
" ~
II ~
II
II
II
II
\\
\\
~
--'
...
0:
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
· = NEGUGIBlE
= EXISTING ROADS
- - - - = PROPOSED ROADS
FIGURE SC4
GENERATED TRAFFICYOLUMES
FOR PROPOSEDdSHOPPING CENTER-
(WITH PROPOSED U.S. 431 RAMP
AND RANGELlNE ROAD)
o
I
CD
I
C>
~
C>
:i
x
....
~
~
o
C>
N
;"
N
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 & 146TH STREET
@ A &. r Engineering Co., llC 2001
"ALL Rights Reserved"
12
LAum PROPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACF ANALYSIS
u.s. 31 AND GREYHOUND PASS
INTERSECTION DATA
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS
AND
CAPACITY ANALYSES
13
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 - GREY HOUND PASS (04)
SEPTEMBER 12, 2001
PEAK HOUR DATA
AM PEAK OFF PEAK PM PEAK
HR BEGIN 7:00 AM HR BEGIN 4:45 PM
L T R TOT L T R TOT L T R TOT
82 1125 207 1414 302 2212 839 3353
55 51 435 541 74 128 256 458
44 2324 13 2381 134 1367 55 1556
569 38 46 653 326 118 133 577
NORTHBOUND
EASTBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
WESTBOUND
HOUR SUMMARY
HOUR NB SB NB+SB EB WB EB+WB TOTAL
- AM -
6- 7 1047 1558 2605 180 286 466 3071
7- 8 1414 2381 3795 541 653 1194 4989
8- 9 1432 1902 3334 306 442 748 4082
- PM -
4- 5 2781 1470 4251 386 602 988 5239
5- 6 3287 1567 4854 458 553 1011 5865
6- 7 2180 1302 3482 474 574 1048 4530
TOTAL 12141 10180 22321 2345 3110 5455 27776
43.7% 36.7% 80.4% 8.4% 11.2% 19.6% 100.0%
- AM PEAK VOLUMES -
15-MIN 402 644 155 181
HOUR 1484 2395 541 653
PHF 0.92 0.93 0.87 0.90
- PM PEAK VOLUMES -
15-MIN 879 421 122 170
HOUR 3353 1571 458 602
PHF 0.95 0.93 0.94 0.89
14
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 - GREY HOUND PASS (04)
SEPTEMBER 12, 2001
NORTHBOUND
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 61 6 67 749 81 830 140 10 150 950 97 1047
7- 8 70 12 82 1011 114 1125 180 27 207 1261 153 1414
8- 9 112 4 116 900 137 1037 249 30 279 1261 171 1432
PM
4- 5 247 2 249 1722 103 1825 697 10 707 2666 115 2781
5- 6 312 3 315 2026 106 2132 835 5 840 3173 114 3287
6- 7 257 2 259 1261 65 1326 592 3 595 2110 70 2180
PASSENGER 1059 7669 2693 11421
97.3% 92.7% 96.9% 94.1%
TRUCK 29 606 85 720
2.7% 7.3% 3.1% 5.9%
BOTH 1088 8275 2778 12141
9.0% 68.2% 22.9% 100.0%
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : EASTBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 25 2 27 15 0 15 138 0 138 178 2 180
7- 8 50 5 55 48 3 51 424 11 435 522 19 541
8- 9 21 2 23 43 1 44 235 4 239 299 7 306
PM
4- 5 68 0 68 113 1 114 201 3 204 382 4 386
5- 6 75 1 76 121 2 123 256 3 259 452 6 458
6- 7 97 0 97 137 1 138 237 2 239 471 3 474
PASSENGER 336 477 1491 2304
97.1% 98.4% 98.5% 98.3%
TRUCK 10 8 23 41
2.9% 1.6% 1.5% 1.7%
BOTH 346 485 1514 2345
14.8% 20.7% 64.6% 100.0%
15
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
U.S. 31 - GREY HOUND PASS (04)
SEPTEMBER 12, 2001
SOUTHBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 21 3 24 1448 69 1517 15 2 17 1484 74 1558
7- 8 38 6 44 2234 90 2324 13 0 13 2285 96 2381
8- 9 46 11 57 1676 144 1820 25 0 25 1747 155 1902
PM
4- 5 100 1 101 1196 118 1314 53 2 55 1349 121 1470
5- 6 127 3 130 1265 118 1383 52 2 54 1444 123 1567
6- 7 118 8 126 1002 94 1096 80 0 80 1200 102 1302
PASSENGER 450 8821 238 9509
93.4% 93.3% 97.5% 93.4%
TRUCK 32 633 6 671
6.6% 6.7% 2.5% 6.6%
BOTH 482 9454 244 10180
4.7% 92.9% 2.4% 100.0%
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : WESTBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 239 7 246 18 0 18 21 1 22 278 8 286
7- 8 551 18 569 38 0 38 41 5 46 630 23 653
8- 9 322 19 341 47 1 48 49 4 53 418 24 442
PM
4- 5 325 15 340 126 1 127 122 13 135 573 29 602
5- 6 312 8 320 116 1 117 110 6 116 538 15 553
6- 7 308 4 312 149 0 149 110 3 113 567 7 574
PASSENGER 2057 494 453 3004
96.7% 99.4% 93.4% 96.6%
TRUCK 71 3 32 106
3.3% 0.6% 6.6% 3.4%
BOTH 2128 497 485 3110
68.4% 16.0% 15.6% 100.0%
16
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/18/01
Period: AM Peak
Project 10: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Greyhound Pass
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Greyhound Pass
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 1 - Existing
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
1 I 1 I I
No. Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 1 3 1 2 3 1
1
LGConfig LT R L LTR L T R L T R
I
Volume 155 51 435 1569 38 46 182 1125 207 144 2324 13
I
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 217 11 103 6
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
EB Left A I NB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds 1 Peds
WB Left A I SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds 1 Peds
NB Right A 1 EB Right A
SB Right A I WB Right
Green 36.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 52.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0
All Red 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0
Cycle Length: 120.0
secs
17
HCS-Siqnals t.1 File:LG01AMSl.HCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) vlc glC Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
LT 195 3351 0.61 0.06 60".4 E 90.8 F
R 244 1538 0.99 0.16 105.6 F
Westbound
L 516 1719 1.22 0.30 159.5 F
LTR 957 3190 0.08 0.30 30.2 C 144.8 F
Northbound
L 100 1719 0.91 0.06 118.1 F
T 2141 4940 0.58 0.43 26.2 C 30.1 C
R 1192 1538 0.10 0.77 3.3 A
Southbound
L 195 3335 0.25 0.06 54.7 D
T 2141 4940 1.21 0.43 131.4 F 129.6 F
R 756 1538 0.01 0.49 15.6 B
Intersection Delay = 101.0 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS F
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency /Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project ID: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/18/01
AM Peak
U.S. 31 & Greyhound Pass
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 1 - Existing
Property Group
East/West Street
Greyhound Pass
North/South Street
u. S. 31
18
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/20/01
Period: PM Peak
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Greyhound Pass
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Greyhound Pass
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 1 - Existing
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I 1 I I I
No. Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 1 3 1 2 3 1
I
LGConfig LT R L LTR L T R L T R
I
Volume 174 128 256 1326 118 133 1302 2212 839 1134 1367 55
1
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 128 33 300 27
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
EB Left A 1 NB Left A A
Thru A I Thru A A
Right A I Right A A
Peds I Peds
WB Left A I SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right A 1 EB Right A A
SB Right A I WB Right
Green 28.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 15.0 39.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
All Red 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0
Cycle Length: 120.0
secs
19
HCS-Siqnals 4.1 File:LGOIPMSl.hcs Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
LT 281 3376 0.80 0.08 68.8 E 53.6 D
R 513 1538 0.28 0.33 29.7 C
Westbound
L 401 1719 0.90 0.23 67.8 E
LTR 747 3202 0.32 0.23 38.4 D 56.0 E
Northbound
L 359 1719 0.94 0.21 78.2 E
T 2346 4940 1.05 0.47 64.1 E 55.3 E
R 1153 1538 0.52 0.75 6.6 A
Southbound
L 196 3335 0.76 0.06 71.6 E
T 1605 4940 0.95 0.32 51.6 D 52.8 D
R 628 1538 0.05 0.41 21.5 C
Intersection Delay = 54.6 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS D
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency / Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project 10: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/20/01
PM Peak
U.S. 31 & Greyhound Pass
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 1 - Existing
Property Group
East/West Street
Greyhound Pass
North/South Street
U. S. 31
20
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/20/01
Period: AM Peak
Project 10: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Greyhound Pass
Inter.: U.S. 31 and Greyhound Pass
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Carmel, IN
Year Scenario 2 - Year 2011
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I I I I I
No. Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 1 3 1 2 3 1
I
LGConfig LT R L LTR L T R L T R
I
Volume 155 51 435 1680 38 109 157 1238 212 1132 2556 13
I
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 217 27 106 6
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
EB Left A I NB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
WB Left A I SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right A I EB Right A
SB Right A I WB Right
Green 38.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 50.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 120.0
sees
21
HCS-SiqnalS 4.1 File:LCOIAMS2.HCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
LT 195 3351 0.61 0.06 60.4 E 90.8 F
R 244 1538 0.99 0.16 105.6 F
Westbound
L 544 1719 1.39 0.32 227.5 F
LTR 977 3085 0.14 0.32 29.3 C 197.8 F
Northbound
L 100 1719 0.63 0.06 67.3 E
T 2058 4940 0.67 0.42 29.1 C 28.7 C
R 1192 1538 0.10 0.77 3.3 A
Southbound
L 195 3335 0.75 0.06 71.0 E
T 2058 4940 1.38 0.42 209.1 F 201.8 F
R 731 1538 0.01 0.47 16.6 B
Intersection Delay = 147.9 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = F
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency /Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project ID: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/20/01
AM Peak
u.s. 31 and Greyhound Pass
All other areas
Carmel, IN
Scenario 2 - Year 2011
Property Group
East/West Street
Greyhound Pass
North/South Street
u.S. 31
22
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/20/01
Period: PM Peak
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Greyhound Pass
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Greyhound Pass
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 2 - Year 2011
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I I 1 I I
No. Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 1 3 1 2 3 1
I
LGConfig LT R L LTR L T R L T R
I
Volume 174 128 256 1624 118 304 1211 2433 670 1301 1504 55
I
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 128 76 335 27
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
EB Left A I NB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
WB Left A 1 SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds 1 Peds
NB Right A I EB Right A
SB Right A I WB Right
Green 34.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 49.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 120.0
secs
23
HCS-Siqrwsls 4.1 FiJe:LGOIPMS2.HCS Paqe2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
LT 197 3376 1.14 0.06 162.3 F 116.2 F
R 308 1538 0.46 0.20 43.4 D
Westbound
L 487 1719 1.42 0.28 245.1 F
LTR 878 3098 0.44 0.28 35.5 D 170.4 F
Northbound
L 172 1719 1.36 0.10 249.1 F
T 2017 4940 1.34 0.41 192.0 F 175.1 F
R 1128 1538 0.33 0.73 5.8 A
Southbound
L 334 3335 1.00 0.10 103.2 F
T 2017 4940 0.83 0.41 34.8 C 45.7 D
R 718 1538 0.04 0.47 17.4 B
Intersection Delay = 132.4 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS F
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEA PAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency/Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project ID: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/20/01
PM Peak
U.S. 31 & Greyhound Pass
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 2 - Year 2011
Property Group
East/West Street
Greyhound Pass
North/South Street
u. S. 31
24
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/26/01
Period: AM Peak
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Greyhound Pass
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Greyhound Pass
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 3-2011+Gen
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I I I 1 1
No. Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 1 3 1 2 3 1
I
LGConfig LT R L LTR L T R L T R
I
Volume 1103 51 332 1420 38 109 133 1217 85 1132 2631 13
I
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 166 27 42 6
1
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
EB Left A 1 NB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A 1 Right A
Peds I Peds
WB Left A I SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds 1 Peds
NB Right A I EB Right A
SB Right A I WB Right
Green 23.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 65.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 120.0
secs
25
HCS~Siqnals 4.1 FUe:LGOIAMS3.HCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
LT 194 3327 0.88 0.06 90.3 F 75.0 E
R 244 1538 0.75 0.16 60.8 E
Westbound
L 329 1719 1.42 0.19 254.2 F
LTR 591 3085 0.23 0.19 41.2 D 207.0 F
Northbound
L 100 1719 0.37 0.06 56.7 E
T 2676 4940 0.51 0.54 17.5 B 18.0 B
R 1192 1538 0.04 0.77 3.1 A
Southbound
L 195 3335 0.75 0.06 71.0 E
T 2676 4940 1.09 0.54 75.9 E 75.5 E
R 923 1538 0.01 0.60 9.7 A
Intersection Delay = 74.8 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = E
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency /Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project ID: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/26/01
AM Peak
U.S. 31 & Greyhound Pass
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 3-2011+Gen
Property Group
East/West Street
Greyhound Pass
North/South Street
u. S. 31
26
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/21/01
Period: PM Peak
Project 10: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Greyhound Pass
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Greyhound Pass
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 3-2011+Gen
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I I I I I
No. Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 1 3 1 2 3 1
1
LGConfig LT R L TR L T R L T R
I
Volume 1349 128 332 1409 118 304 1121 2311 252 1301 1757 55
I
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 166 204 126 27
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
EB Left A I NB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
WB Left A 1 SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right A I EB Right A
SB Right A I WB Right
Green 24.0 15.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 54.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 120.0
sees
27
HCS-Siqnals 4.1 File:LGOIPMS3.HCS Page 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) vlc g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
LT 415 3317 1.28 0.13 194.7 F 154.7 F
R 384 1538 0.48 0.25 39.3 0
Westbound
L 344 1719 1.32 0.20 211.0 F
TR 641 3202 0.38 0.20 41.9 0 152.2 F
Northbound
L 143 1719 0.94 0.08 111.1 F
T 2223 4940 1.16 0.45 108.4 F 103.5 F
R 1064 1538 0.13 0.69 6.3 A
Southbound
L 277 3335 1.21 0.08 176.6 F
T 2223 4940 0.88 0.45 34.4 C 54.6 0
R 885 1538 0.04 0.58 11.1 B
Intersection Delay = 97.0 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = F
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEA PAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency/Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project 10: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/21/01
PM Peak
U.S. 31 & Greyhound Pass
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 3-2011+Gen
Property Group
East/West Street
Greyhound Pass
North/South Street
U.S. 31
28
LAUTH PllOPERTY GROUP
TRAFFIc IMPACf ANALYSIS
WESTERN WAY AND 146TH STREET
INTERSECTION DATA
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS
AND
CAPACITY ANALYSES
29
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
: LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
: 146TH STREET & WESTERN WAY (02)
: SEPTEMBER 4, 2001
PEAK HOUR DATA
EASTBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
WESTBOUND
AM PEAK OFF PEAK PM PEAK
DR BEGIN 7:00 AM HR BEGIN 4:45 PM
L T R TOT L T R TOT L T R TOT
330 210 540 212 273 485
11 89 100 33 281 314
201 58 259 239 58 297
HOUR SUMMARY
HOUR SB EB WB EB+WB TOTAL
- AM -
6- 7 43 261 120 381 424
7- 8 100 540 259 799 899
8- 9 73 316 166 482 555
- PM -
4- 5 244 358 240 598 842
5- 6 329 455 294 749 1078
6- 7 236 344 253 597 833
TOTAL 1025 2274 1332 3606 4631
22.1% 49.1% 28.8% 77.9% 100.0%
-AM PEAK VOLUMES -
15-MIN 34 147 92
HOUR 103 540 .259
PHF 0.76 0.92 0.70
- PM PEAK VOLUMES -
15-MIN 103 124 78
HOUR 329 485 297
PHF 0.80 0.98 0.95
30
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
: LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
: 146TH STREET & WESTERN WAY (02)
: SEPTEMBER 4, 2001
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL: EASTBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 149 0 149 111 1 112 260 1 261
7- 8 330 0 330 205 5 210 535 5 540
8- 9 182 0 182 127 7 134 309 7 316
PM
4- 5 168 0 168 177 13 190 345 13 358
5- 6 198 0 198 253 4 257 451 4 455
6- 7 197 3 200 143 1 144 340 4 344
PASSENGER 1224 1016 2240
99.8% 97.0% 98.5%
TRUCK 3 31 34
0.2% 3.0% 1.5%
BOTH 1227 1047 2274
54.0% 46.0% 100.0%
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : SOUTHBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 2 0 2 38 3 41 40 3 43
7- 8 11 0 11 87 2 89 98 2 100
8- 9 5 0 5 68 0 68 73 0 73
PM
4- 5 25 0 25 217 2 219 242 2 244
5- 6 27 0 27 301 1 302 328 1 329
6- 7 19 0 19 216 1 217 235 1 236
PASSENGER 89 927 1016
100.0% 99.0% 99.1%
TRUCK 0 9 9
0.0% 1.0% 0.9%
BOTH 89 936 1025
8.7% 91.3% 100.0%
3]
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
: LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
: 146TH STREET & WESTERN WAY (02)
: SEPTEMBER 4, 2001
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : WESTBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 104 5 109 11 0 11 115 5 120
7- 8 186 15 201 57 1 58 243 16 259
8- 9 112 10 122 44 0 44 156 10 166
PM
4- 5 185 18 203 36 1 37 221 19 240
5- 6 241 0 241 53 0 53 294 0 294
6- 7 209 3 212 41 0 41 250 3 253
PASSENGER 1037 242 1279
95.3% 99.2% 96.0%
TRUCK 51 2 53
4.7% 0.8% 4.0%
BOTH 1088 244 1332
81.7% 18.3% 100.0%
32
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/14/01
Period: AM Peak
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: 146th Street
Inter.: Western Way & 146th Street
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 1 - Existing
N/S St: Western Way
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
1 I I I I
No. Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
I
LGConfig L T TR L R
I
Volume 1330 210 201 58 111 89
I
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 14 44
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
.EB Left A I NB Left
Thru A I Thru
Right I Right
Peds I Peds
WB Left I SB Left A
Thru A I Thru
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right I EB Right
SB Right I WB Right
Green 38.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 60.0
secs
33
HCS-Siqnals 4.1 File:LG02AMS1.RCS
paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 669 1057 0.55 0.63 7.1 A
T 2177 3438 0.11 0.63 4.3 A 6.1 A
Westbound
TR 2118 3345 0.13 0.63 4.4 A 4.4 A
Northbound
Southbound
L 344
1719
0.03
0.20
19.4
B
20.0- B
R
308 1538 0.16
Intersection Delay = 6.5
0.20 20.1
(sec/veh)
C
Intersection LOS
A
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency /Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project 10: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/14/01 .
AM Peak
Western Way & 146th Street
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 1 - Existing
Property Group
East/West Street
Street
North/South Street
Western Way
146th
34
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/14/01
Period: PM Peak
Project 10: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: 146th Street
Inter.: Western Way & 146th Street
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 1 - Existing
N/S St: Western Way
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
1 1 I 1 1
No. Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
1
LGConfig L T TR L R
I
Volume 1212 273 239 58 133 281
I
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 14 140
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
EB Left A 1 NB Left
Thru A I Thru
Right 1 Right
Peds I Peds
WB Left 1 SB Left A
Thru A I Thru
Right A I Right A
Peds 1 Peds
NB Right I EB Right
SB Right I WB Right
Green 33.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 60.0
sees
35
HCS.Siqnals t.1 File:LG02P11lS1.HCS
Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 558 1014 0.42 0.55 8.4 A
T 1891 3438 0.16 0.55 6.7 A 7.5 A
Westbound
TR 1847 3358 0.17 0.55 6.7 A 6.7 A
Northbound
Southbound
L 487
1719
0.08
0.28
15.8
B
17.3 B
R
436 1538 0.36
Intersection Delay = 9.1
0.28 17.7
(sec/veh)
B
Intersection LOS = A
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency / Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project 10: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/14/01
PM Peak
Western Way & 146th Street
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 1 - Existing
Property Group
East/West Street
Street
North/South Street
Western Way
146th
36
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/20/01
Period: AM Peak
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: 146th St
Inter.: Western Way & 146th St
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 2 - Year 2011
N/S St: Western Way
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I I 1 I I
No. Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
I
LGConfig L T TR L R
I
Volume 1330 226 238 58 111 64
I
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
1
RTOR Vol 14 32
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
EB Left A A 1 NB Left
.Thru A A I Thru
Right I Right
Peds I Peds
WB Left 1 SB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right I EB Right
SB Right A I WB Right
Green 14.0 19.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 60.0
sees
37
HCS-Slqnals ..1 Flle:LG02AMS2.HCS
Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 713 1719 0.51 0.60 7.1 A
T 2064 3438 0.12 0.60 5.2 A 6.3 A
Westbound
TR 1064 3357 0.29 0.32 15.6 B 15.6 B
Northbound
Southbound
L 400
1719
0.03
0.23
17.8
B
9.1 A
R
845 1538 0.04
Intersection Delay = 9.4
0.55 6.2
(sec/veh)
A
Intersection LOS = A
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency/Co.:
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project 10: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/20/01
AM Peak
Western Way & 146th St
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 2 - Year 2011
Property Group
East/West Street
North/South Street
Western Way
146th St
38
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/20/01
Period: PM Peak
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: 146th St
Inter.: Western Way & 146th St
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 2 - Year 2011
N/S St: Western Way
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I 1 I 1 1
No. Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
I
LGConfig L T TR L R
I
Volume 1212 304 362 58 133 190
1 '<
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
1
RTOR Vol 14 95
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
EB Left A A 1 NB Left
Thru A A 1 Thru
Right 1 Right
Peds 1 Peds
WB Left 1 SB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right I EB Right
SB Right A I WB Right
Green 11.0 22.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 60.0
secs
39
HCS-Siqnals 4.1 File: LG02PMS2. Hes
Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 627 1719 0.38 0.60 6.3 A
T 2063 3438 0.16 0.60 5.4 A 5.8 A
Westbound
TR 1240 3382 0.36 0.37 14.1 B 14.1 B
Northbound
Southbound
L 401
1719
0.09
0.23
18.1
B
10.7 B
R
769 1538 0.14
Intersection Delay = 9.6
0.50 8.1
(sec/veh)
A
Intersection LOS = A
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency / Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project ID: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/20/01
PM Peak
Western Way & 146th St
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 2 - Year 2011
Property Group
East/West Street
North/South Street
Western Way
146th St
40
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1a
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 11/01/01
Period: AM Peak
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: 146th St
Inter.: Western Way and 146th St
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 3 - 2011 + Gen.
N/S St: Western Way
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I I 1 I 1
No. Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
1
LGConfig L TR L TR L T R L TR
I
Volume 1200 223 144 1329 235 58 134 74 136 111 74 40
1
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
1
RTOR Vol 36 14 68 10
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
EB Left A A 1 NB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A 1 Right A
Peds I Peds
WB Left A A I SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right A I EB Right
SB Right I WB Right
Green 13.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 60.0
secs
41
HCS-Siqnals 4.180 File:LG02AMS3.HCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 702 1719 0.32 0.60 6.0 A
TR 1090 3270 0.34 0.33 15.2 B 11.8 B
Westbound
L 687 1719 0.53 0.60 7.2 A
TR 1119 3357 0.28 0.33 14.8 B 10.7 B
Northbound
L 288 1236 0.13 0.23 18.4 B
T 422 1810 0.19 0.23 18.7 B 14.1 B
R 820 1538 0.09 0.53 6.9 A
Southbound
L 297 1273 0.04 0.23 17.9 B
TR 404 1732 0.28 0.23 19.3 B 19.1 B
Intersection Delay = 12.2 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1a
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
-ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency /Co. :
pate Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project ID: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
11/01/01
AM Peak
Western Way and 146th St
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 3 - 2011 + Gen.
Property Group
East/West Street
North/South Street
Western Way
146th St
42
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1a
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 11/01/01
Period: PM Peak
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: 146th St
Inter.: Western Way and 146th St
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 3 - 2011 + Gen.
N/S St: Western Way
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
1 1 1 1 I
No. Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
1
LGConfig L TR L TR L T R L TR
1
Volume 1135 292 124 1453 350 58 1142 429 471 133 254 100
I
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 31 14 235 25
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
EB Left A A NB Left A
Thru A Thru A
Right A Right A
Peds Peds
WB Left A A SB Left A
Thru A Thru A
Right A Right A
Peds Peds
NB Right A EB Right
SB Right WB Right
Green 12.0 20.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 65.0
secs
43
HCS-Si<mals 4.14 File:LG02PMS3.HCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 569 1719 0.26 0.54 8.2 A
TR 1020 3314 0.42 0.31 18.2 B 15.6 B
Westbound
L 574 1719 0.88 0.54 24.8 C
TR 1040 3380 0.42 0.31 18.2 B 21.7 C
Northbound
.L 205 667 0.77 0.31 36.8 D
T 557 1810 0.86 0.31 33.7 C 26.6 C
R 875 1538 0.30 0.57 7.5 A
Southbound
L 120 389 0.31 0.31 18.7 B
TR 538 1748 0.68 0.31 23.1 C 22.7 C
Intersection Delay == 22.1 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS == C
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1a
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northprook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency /Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project ID: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
11/01/01
PM Peak
Western Way and 146th St
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 3 - 2011 + Gen.
Property Group
East/West Street
North/South Street
Western Way
146th St
44
LAUTH PROPERTY GR.OUP
TRAFFIc IMPACI' ANALYSIS
u.s. 31 AND RANGELINE ROAD
INTERSECTION DATA
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS
AND
CAPACITY ANALYSES
45
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
: LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
: RANGELINE ROAD & U.S. 31 (01)
: SEPTEMBER 5, 2001
PEAK HOUR DATA
NORTHBOUND
EASTBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
WESTBOUND
AM PEAK OFF PEAK PM PEAK
HR BEGIN 7:00 AM HR BEGIN 4:45 PM
L T R TOT L T R TOT L T R TOT
5 686 21 712 5 1784 50 1839
3 3 8 14 3 5 7 15
367 2008 1 2376 244 945 2 1191
71 0 164 235 44 3 547 594
HOUR SUMMARY
HOUR NB SB NB+SB EB WB EB+WB TOTAL
- AM -
6- 7 550 1359 1909 15 121 136 2045
7- 8 712 2376 3088 14 235 249 3337
8- 9 753 1724 2477 13 193 206 2683
- PM -
4- 5 1685 1136 2821 7 507 514 3335
5- 6 1833 1157 2990 20 570 590 3580
6- 7 1173 998 2171 14 409 423 2594
TOTAL 6706 8750 15456 83 2035 2118 17574
38.2% 49.8% 87.9% 0.5% 11.6% 12.1% 100.0%
-AM PEAK VOLUMES -
15-MIN 224 620 7 65
HOUR 763 2376 20 235
PHF 0.85 0.96 0.71 0.90
- PM PEAK VOLUMES -
15-MIN 496 348 8 179
HOUR 1839 1191 20 595
PHF 0.93 0.86 0.63 0.83
46
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
: LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
: RANGELINE ROAD & U.S. 31 (01)
: SEPTEMBER 5, 2001
: NORTHBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 1 1 2 474 65 539 8 1 9 483 67 550
7- 8 4 1 5 609 77 686 19 2 21 632 80 712
8- 9 3 0 3 645 86 731 17 2 19 665 88 753
PM
4- 5 9 1 10 1570 59 1629 43 3 46 1622 63 1685
5- 6 2 1 3 1717 56 1773 56 1 57 1775 58 1833
6- 7 3 0 3 1083 46 1129 40 1 41 1126 47 1173
PASSENGER 22 6098 183 6303
84.6% 94.0% 94.8% 94.0%
TRUCK 4 389 10 403
15.4% 6.0% 5.2% 6.0%
BOTH 26 6487 193 6706
0.4% 96.7% 2.9% 100.0%
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : EASTBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 0 1 1 6 0 6 7 1 8 13 2 15
7- 8 2 1 3 3 0 3 8 0 8 13 1 14
8- 9 2 0 2 3 0 3 7 1 8 12 1 13
PM
4- 5 1 0 1 5 0 5 1 0 1 7 0 7
5- 6 8 0 8 5 0 5 6 1 7 19 1 20
6- 7 2 0 2 6 0 6 6 0 6 14 0 14
PASSENGER 15 28 35 78
88.2% 100.0% 92.1% 94.0%
TRUCK 2 0 3 5
11.8% 0.0% 7.9% 6.0%
BOTH 17 28 38 83
20.5% 33.7% 45.8% 100.0%
47
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
: LAUTH PROPERTY GROUP
: RANGELINE ROAD & U.S. 31 (01)
: SEPTEMBER 5, 2001
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : SOUTHBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS. TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 159 8 167 1154 38 1192 0 0 0 1313 46 1359
7- 8 356 11 367 1956 52 2008 1 0 1 2313 63 2376
8- 9 310 18 328 1312 83 1395 1 0 1 1623 101 1724
PM
4- 5 259 2 261 799 74 873 2 0 2 1060 76 1136
5- 6 240 0 240 841 72 913 4 0 4 1085 72 1157
6- 7 217 1 218 724 56 780 0 0 0 941 57 998
PASSENGER 1541 6786 8 8335
97.5% 94.8% 100.0% 95.3%
TRUCK 40 375 0 415
2.5% 5.2% 0.0% 4.7%
BOTH 1581 7161 8 8750
18.1% 81.8% 0.1% 100.0%
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : WESTBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 34 1 35 1 1 2 82 2 84 117 4 121
7- 8 71 0 71 0 0 0 162 2 164 233 2 235
8- 9 30 2 32 3 0 3 139 19 158 172 21 193
PM
4- 5 65 2 67 2 0 2 427 11 438 494 13 507
5- 6 43 3 46 3 0 3 514 7 521 560 10 570
6- 7 51 0 51 4 0 4 350 4 354 405 4 409
PASSENGER 294 13 1674 1981
97.4% 92.9% 97.4% 97.3%
TRUCK 8 1 45 54
2.6% 7.1% 2.6% 2.7%
BOTH 302 14 1719 2035
14.8% 0.7% 84.5% 100.0%
48
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/18/01
Period: AM Peak
Project 10: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Rangeline Rd
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 1 - Existing
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I I I I I
No. Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1
I
LGConfig L TR LT R L T R L T R
I
Volume 13 3 8 171 1 164 15 686 21 1367 2008 1
I
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 2 123 15 0
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
EB Left A I NB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
WB Left A 1 SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right I EB Right
SB Right I WB Right A
Green 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.0 73.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 120.0
secs
49
HCS-Siqnals 4.1 File:LG03..MS1.HCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Apprl Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) vlc g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 106 1810 0.03 0.06 53.4 D
TR 95 1620 0.11 0.06 54.0 D 53.9 D
Westbound
LT 106 1810 0.75 0.06 81.7 F 62.2 E
R 500 1538 0.09 0.32 28.3 C
Northbound
L 387 1719 0.02 0.22 36.2 D
T 2091 3438 0.36 0.61 11.9 B 12.1 B
R 936 1538 0.01 0.61 9.2 A
Southbound
L 387 1719 1.05 0.22 107.2 F
T 2091 3438 1.07 0.61 63.9 E 70.6 E
R 936 1538 0.00 0.61 9.2 A
Intersection Delay = 57.4 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS E
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency /Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project ID: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/18/01
AM Peak
U.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 1 - Existing
Property Group
.East/West Street
Rangeline Rd
North/South Street
u. S. 31
50
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/14/01
Period: PM Peak
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Rangeline Road
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Rangeline Road
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 1 - Existing
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I 1 I 1 I
No. Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1
I
LGConfig L TR LT R L T R L T R
I
Volume 13 5 7 144 3 547 15 1784 50 1244 945 2
I
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 1 410 37 1
1
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
EB Left A 1 NB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
WB Left A I SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right 1 EB Right
SB Right I WB Right A
Green 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 33.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 60..0
secs
51
HCS-Siqnals 4.1 File:LG03PMSLHCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 211 1810 0.01 0.12 23.5 C
TR 194 1663 0.07 0.12 23.7 C 23.7 C
Westbound
LT 211 1810 0.25 0.12 24.7 C 18.2 B
R 487 1538 0.31 0.32 15.9 B
Northbound
L 201 1719 0.03 0.12 23.6 C
T 1891 3438 1.05 0.55 48.1 0 47.8 0
R 846 1538 0.02 0.55 6.1 A
Southbound
L 201 1719 1.35 0.12 212.4 F
T 1891 3438 0.56 0.55 9.1 A 50.8 0
R 846 1538 0.00 0.55 6.1 A
Intersection Delay = 47.1 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS 0
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, 1L 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency /Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project 10: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/14/01
PM Peak
u.S. 31 & Rangeline Road
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 1 - Existing
Property Group
East/West Street
Rangeline Road
North/South Street
U.S. 31
52
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/18/01
Period: AM Peak
Project 10: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Rangeline Rd
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 2A - Year 2011
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I I I 1 I
No. Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1
I
LGConfig L TR LT R L T R L T R
I
Volume 13 3 8 171 1 169 15 837 12 1371 2268 1
I
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 2 126 9 0
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
EB Left A 1 NB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru A
Right A 1 Right A
Peds , Peds
WB Left A 1 SB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right I EB Right
SB Right I WB Right A
Green 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.0 77.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length: 120.0
secs
53
HCS-Siqnals 4.1 File:LG03AMS2A.HCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 106 1810 0.03 0.06 53.4 D
TR 95 1620 0.11 0.06 54.0 D 53.9 D
Westbound
LT 106 1810 0.75 0.06 81.7 F 62.8 E
R 449 1538 0.11 0.29 31.2 C
Northbound
L 329 1719 0.02 0.19 39.4 D
T 2206 3438 0.42 0.64 10.7 B 10.9 B
R 987 1538 0.00 0.64 7.7 A
Southbound
L 329 1719 1.25 0.19 184.7 F
T 2206 3438 1.14 0.64 91.5 F 104.6 F
R 987 1538 0.00 0.64 7.7 A
Intersection Delay = 81.2 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS F
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency / Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysis Year:
Project ID: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/18/01
AM Peak
u.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario2A - Year 2011
Property Group
East/West Street
Rangeline Rd
North/South Street
U. S. 31
54
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/17/01
Period: PM Peak
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Rangeline Rd
.
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 2A - Year 2011
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I 1 1 1 I
No. Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1
I
LGConfig L TR LT R L T R L T R
I
Volume 13 5 7 144 31 557 15 2119 50 1255 1200 2
I
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 1 417 37 1
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
EB Left A I NB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
WB Left A I SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right 1 EB Right
SB Right I WB Right A
Green 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 48.0 0.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
All Red 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Cycle Length.: 80 .-0 - .
secs
55
HCS.Siqna1s 4.1 File:LG03PMS2A.HCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 158 1810 0.02 0.09 33.4 C
TR 146 1663 0.09 0.09 33.8 C 33.8 C
Westbound
LT 158 1810 0.53 0.09 38.1 D 27.8 C
R 461 1538 0.34 0.30 22.3 C
Northbound
L 258 1719 0.02 0.15 29.0 C
T 2063 3438 1.14 0.60 85.9 F 85.3 F
R 923 1538 0.02 0.60 6.5 A
Southbound
L 258 1719 1.10 0.15 118.4 F
T 2063 3438 0.65 0.60 11.2 B 29.9 C
R 923 1538 0.00 0.60 6.4 A
Intersection Delay = 60.8 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = E
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency /Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
- Analysis Year:
Project 10: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/17/01
PM Peak
U.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
.Scenario 2A _.-, Year- 2011- ---
Property Group
East/West Street
Rangeline Rd
North/South Street
U. S. 31
56
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/24/01
Period: AM Peak
Project 10: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Rangeline Road
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year : Scenario 2B - Year 2011
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I I I 1 1
No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1
I
LGConfig L T R L T R L T R L T R
1
Volume 13 3 8 171 1 169 15 837 12 1371 2268 1
1
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 4 126 9 0
1
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
EB Left A I NB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru A A
Right A 1 Right A A
Peds I Peds
WB Left A I SB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru A A
Right A I Right A A
Peds I Peds
NB Right 1 EB Right A
SB Right I WB Right A
Green 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.0 22.0 7.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
All Red 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0
.-..--...-.---.--. ---- ."- --.-- . - "-...-....---..- . ~_.- .---.. ---. -... - __u Cycle---Length-:-80-.-0
secs
57
HCS-Siqnals 4.1 File:LG03AMS2B.HCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 158 1810 0.02 0.09 33.4 C
T 158 1810 0.02 0.09 33.4 C 29.4 C
R 365 1538 0.01 0.24 23.3 C
Westbound
L 158 1810 0.50 0.09 37.3 D
T 158 1810 0.01 0.09 33.3 C 27.6 C
R 731 1538 0.07 0.47 11.4 B
Northbound
L 150 1719 0.04 0.09 33.5 C
T 1461 3438 0.64 0.43 19.1 B 19.1 B
R 654 1538 0.00 0.43 13.3 B
Southbound
L 559 1719 0.74 0.32 29.1 C
T 2192 3438 1.15 0.64 87.6 F 79.4 E
R 980 1538 0.00 0.64 5.3 A
Intersection Delay = 63.5 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = E
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency /Co. :
. Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
-- Analysis Year:
Project ID: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering Co., LLC
09/24/01
AM Peak
u.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
Scenario 28 - Year 2011~
Property Group
East/West Street
Rangeline Road
North/South Street
u.S. 31
58
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co. LLC
Date: 09/24/01
Period: PM Peak
Project 10: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Rangeline Rd
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 2B - Year 2011
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
1 I I I I
No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1
1
LGConfig L T R L T R L T R L T R
1
Volume 13 5 7 144 31 557 15 2119 50 1255 1200 2
I
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 3 300 37 1
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
EB Left A 1 NB Left A
Thru A I Thru A A
Right A 1 Right A A
Peds 1 Peds
WB Left A 1 SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A A
Right A I Right A A
Peds 1 Peds
NB Right I EB Right A
SB Right I WB Right A
Green 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 46.0 7.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
All Red 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0
_ ,._______.. .. n_.____..___..,....___.__. _ .. _ __u..__ _._._ _ .__ __,____._"., -.-- ---------- - --- uC ycl-e - he n~th:- 90-; ou_- u___u____
secs
59
HCS-Siqnals ..1 File:LG03PMS2B.HCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 141 1810 0.02 0.08 38.4 D
T 141 1810 0.04 0.08 38.5 D 35.3 D
R 325 1538 0.01 0.21 28.1 C
Westbound
L 141 1810 0.35 0.08 40.8 D
T 141 1810 0.24 0.08 39.9 D 36.1 D
R 410 1538 0.70 0.27 34.9 C
Northbound
L 134 1719 0.04 0.08 38.5 D
T 2216 3438 1.06 0.64 54.2 D 53.9 D
R 991 1538 0.01 0.64 5.7 A
Southbound
L 229 1719 1.24 0.13 176.8 F
T 2330 3438 0.57 0.68 8.0 A 37.5 D
R 1042 1538 0.00 0.68 4.7 A
Intersection Delay = 46.3 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS D
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax: (847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst: TSV
Agency/Co.: A&F Engineering Co. LLC
Date Performed: 09/24/01
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: U.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisdiction: Hamilton County, IN
- -Analysis -Ye-a-l?-:-- -------------SGenari-G---2B-.,....-~ear--20-1-1u---.--
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
East/West Street
Rangeline Rd
North/South Street
U.S. 31
60
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date: 09/26/01
Period: AM Peak
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Rangeline Road
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 3-2011+Gen
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
1 1 1 1 1
No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1
I
LGConfig L T R L T R L T R L T R
I
Volume 112 7 441 171 6 167 1225 669 12 1369 1869 1
1
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 220 125 9 0
I
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
EB Left A I NB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru A A
Right A I Right A A
Peds I Peds
WB Left A I SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A A
Right A I Right A A
Peds 1 Peds
NB Right 1 EB Right A
SB Right 1 WB Right A
Green 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 16.0 10.0 0.0
Yellow 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
All Red 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0
... --*-_. Cycle-bength: --70..0
secs
61
HCS-Siqnals 4.1 File:LG03AMS3.HCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 181 1810 0.07 0.10 28.7 C
T 181 1810 0.04 0.10 28.6 C 21.1 C
R 483 1538 0.51 0.31 20.5 C
Westbound
L 181 1810 0.44 0.10 31.3 C
T 181 1810 0.04 0.10 28.5 C 24.1 C
R 681 1538 0.07 0.44 11.2 B
Northbound
L 246 1719 1.02 0.14 91.6 F
T 1523 3438 0.49 0.44 14.1 B 33.6 C
R 681 1538 0.00 0.44 10.9 B
Southbound
L 467 1719 0.88 0.27 41.5 D
T 1866 3438 1.11 0.54 75.1 E 69.5 E
R 835 1538 0.00 0.54 7.3 A
Intersection Delay = 55.4 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS E
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEAPAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst: TSV
Agency/Co.: A&F Engineering Co., LLC
Date Performed: 09/26/01
Analysis Time Period: AM Peak
Intersection: u.s. 31 & Rangeline Rd
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisdiction: Hamilton County, IN
Analysis Year: ------Scenario-372011+Gen
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
East/West Street
Rangeline Road
North/South Street
u. s. 31
62
1
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
Analyst: TSV
Agency: A&F Engineering
Date: 09/24/01
Period: PM Peak
Project ID: Lauth Property Group
E/W St: Rangeline Road
Inter.: U.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Hamilton County, IN
Year Scenario 3-2011+Gen
N/S St: U.S. 31
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
SUMMARY
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
I I I I I
No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1
I
LGConfig L T R L T R L T R L T R
1
Volume 154 23 557 144 20 552 1752 1548 50 1249 843 2
1
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0
I
RTOR Vol 278 276 25 1
I
Duration
0.25
Area Type: All other areas
Signal
Operations
Phase Combination
EB Left
Thru
Right
Peds
WB Left
Thru
Right
Peds.
NB Right
SB Right
Green
Yellow
All Red
1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
A I NB Left A
A I Thru A A
A I Right A A
I Peds
A I SB Left A
A 1 Thru A A
A 1 Right A A
I Peds
1 EB Right A
I WB Right A
7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 7.0 32.0 0.0
3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0
-------- -------------------------------- Cycle-HLength:- --8-0.-0-- -----.--.
secs
63
HCS-Siqnals 4.1 File:LG03PMS3.HCS Paqe 2
Intersection Performance
Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 158 1810 0.38 0.09 36.0 D
T 158 1810 0.16 0.09 34.3 C 15.9 B
R 846 1538 -0.37 0.55 10.4 B
Westbound
L 158 1810 0.31 0.09 35.4 D
T 158 1810 0.14 0.09 34.1 C 24.9 C
R 538 1538 0.57 0.35 22.6 C
Northbound
L 688 1719 1.22 0.40 133.8 F
T 1891 3438 0.91 0.55 23.2 C 58.8 E
R 846 1538 0.03 0.55 8.3 A
Southbound
L 344 1719 0.81 0.20 43.6 D
T 1117 3438 0.84 0.32 30.9 C 33.8 C
R 500 1538 0.00 0.32 18.2 B
Intersection Delay = 45.7 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = D
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1
HCS-3 Data Converted by SIGNAL2000
another TEA PAC product from
Strong Concepts
1249 Shermer Road, Suite 100
Northbrook, IL 60062-4540
Phone: (847) 564-0386
E-Mail: info@StrongConcepts.com
OPERATIONAL
Fax:
(847) 564-0394
ANALYSIS
Analyst:
Agency / Co. :
Date Performed:
Analysis Time Period:
Intersection:
Area Type:
Jurisdiction:
Analysi-s-.Year.:- .-
Project ID: Lauth
TSV
A&F Engineering
09/24/01
PM Peak
U.S. 31 & Rangeline Rd
All other areas
Hamilton County, IN
._. _ -..----SGe-naI;i.o..-3=-2-O-l1--t:.Gen--- ____n__.______ -- ------
Property Group
East/West Street
Rangeline Road
North/South Street
u. S. 31
64