HomeMy WebLinkAboutTraffic Operations Analysis
,~
I
('IU,
\ j
(~
I
,DC,
)
:~
J
~~\
~!~, I
, ,
/\~
~,
;/
:0
i~
. \ ,\:
'0\\'
,~
\ /
!
Q""
/" , .'
,
,
d:
~"~
,('
'y
~,
') '\
\~=.
U
\:'!,~ :
i, \/
( "
~\/.~.
, '
"-:0\0
0)
)'
. )
.,
}/
.,
'.
.J
}
Ii,
)
I
. 'i
. ,
\.,~
L
\"\
,"
I
'(
,I.
'! '
\,
/;('
1,\'
,"
'; ,I j
L','
rl "-_)
TRN~Fle/d'PERAtl,o'NS\~NA~LYSIS
1'-" '1--"
"
\
\
\ ~.
!
.-{
'-\ '
\J ' '..
)
\'
WeSr\CtAY .\
i ~!, '
/ ~-%~;
v",-;' . C'..t' Yf, ,
,1/ v' I~,,\~ I "
/&\,~ ~
~IA, i
'-'J> '~q~
\! .
',- (
""
\
"
('
--......\)
\
"
) ( \ '
'>,
\J ~
1./
)
'\
I, '
! \
:/1, "
)
/ ?
/ ..
- / ~ _r \~) '~
,:,CARMEl, INDIANA'
/'-'- '-, ,\', ,~,\~:/,!,-\,~ ~._) /)'
r~ ,/
";:J / 1\ '~~ ""
\ "
Y.
" I
, >
I'-,!''<
. "
I
J>\'--J
, ,
,~
J '~ "', i
1 - 'IV
I" . PREPARED FOR
(' /j:
'--...'-- -"-;'.<~)'--' ...:-) " ,\:'- /)
CITY OF CARMEL
,l. '<,
../),
( i
i
)-~
'/
\"0 -I I ____)
-~ ,\
'- -1.-;--
'>J
;(j
~\
t
,I.
( i
! ~"
,\
/,' / \
,\
,I"~
\
I."
( / .-'
J
I
\
/11 (
"j
, (
" I
,I l~uGysr,2002
" ,
~
, '
- .,
)_f
"
,/,
'\),
,~, ': /
i
\
.\
/
/ /jA&F~1GI~E'E~INGeo..:lle
/' CONSiJ~ -rING ENGINEERS; . ;.
( . ../ ',\!. / .;z.; - ,.J \ \,' \"
8425'!SEV:STONE CROSSI~~, SUITE 2~O'
INDIANAPOLIS,\INDIANA 4,6240, ')
~ (317) 262~0864: ~ ../ .
" 1; /' , )//
~ ,.-
",,)
", ~!
V l
. ')
'j~
/l
\ /,
, -
'. I
j
..
\
:'\.
\:\
( ,
"
((
,\ '
,,1
\ .!
(. ).
)
()
'-~
,)
I'
-\ "
Jf
~ I ,
1,/\
I
I-
"
~ .~
,I
'l i
L____
,~
,,'
/ "
I '.
r"'-~
) ';
--; \
V,
) '\
\ ;) '--(
(
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEvELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS 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.
@2002, A&F Engineering Co., LLC.
D
o
WEST CLAy DEvELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
D
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES..................................... ...................... ........... ................ ... ............. ...... .., .... ......... ...... ........ ......... ......... II
CERTIFICATION..................................................................................................................... ........................................ III
CERTIFICATION......................... ........................................................................................ ............................................ III
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... ......................................1
PURPOSE. ........................... ................... ... ............ ........ ................... ........ .......... ....... ....... ... ....... ............. ...................... ...1
SCOPE OF WORK................. ....................................... ... ................................ .... ... ............ ..... ... ........... .... .......... ....... .......1
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT ......................... ............ ............. ...................... ..... ............. ..... ......... ............... ........... .....3
TABLE 1- LAND USE DESCRIPTIONS......................................................................................................................3
STUDY AREA............................................................................................................................................... ...................3
DESCRIPTION OF THE ABUTTING STREET SYSTEM ..........................................................................................................5
TRAFFIC DATA........... .................................................................................................................................................... 6
GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................8
TABLE 2 - GENERATED TRIPS FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................8
INTERNAL TRIPS ..... ............. ......... .............................. ............. ......... ...... ....... ..... ....... ........ ......... .... ....... .... ........ ............. 8
PASS-BY TRIPs.......................................................................................................................................... .....................8
PEAK HOUR ....................... .................. ...... ........................ ........................ ...... .... .......... ....... ... ........ .......... ............... ......9
ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRmUTION OF GENERATED TRIPS................................................................................................9
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GENERATED TRIPS ADDED TO THE STREET SYSTEM ..........................................................11
YEAR 2012 PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES .................................................................................................................11
CAPACITY ANALySIS.... ..... ........ .......................... ......... ........ ..... .................... .............................................. ............ .....11
DESCRIPTION OF LEVELS OF SERVICE................................................................................ ...........................................14
CAPACITY ANALYSES SCENARIOS ............. ...... ......... ............. .................... ....................................... ........................ ....16
TABLE 3 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-116m STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD ...........................................20
TABLE 4 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-126m STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD ...........................................21
TABLE 5 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-131sT STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD............................................22
TABLE 6 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-141sT STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD............................................23
TABLE 7 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-146m STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD ...........................................24
TABLE 8 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-131ST STREET AND TOWNE ROAD.....................................................25
TABLE 9 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-136TH STREET AND TOWNE ROAD ....................................................26
TABLE 10 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-141ST STREET AND TOWNE ROAD...................................................27
TABLE 11 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-146m STREET AND TOWNE ROAD ...................................................28
TABLE 12 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-126m STREET & CENTEX I SOUTH /SCHOOL ACCESS ...................29
TABLE 13 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-126m STREET & PROPOSED ROADWA Y..........................................29
TABLE 14 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-131H STREET & KLINEMAN ACCESS..............................................29
TABLE 15 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-131H STREET & KESSLERlCENTEX I NORTH ACCESS...................30
TABLE 16 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-131H ST & TRINITY ACCESS/PROPOSED ROADWAY......................30
TABLE 17 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-136m STREET EXTENSION & SHELBOURNE ROAD.........................30
TABLE 18 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-TOWNE ROAD & ROEHLING EAST ACCESS ...................................31
TABLE 19 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-141sT STREET & CENTEX II ACCESS...............................................31
TABLE 20 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-141sT STREET & ROEHLING NORTH ACCESS .................................31
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS.... ... ..... ............................................... ......... ....... ... ........... ........... ...... ...............32
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
I
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST ClAY DEvELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1: AREA MAP .......... .................. ........................ ........ .... ...... ......... .......... .... ....... ..... ..... ............ ......... ...... .... ........4
FIGURE 2: EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS.......................... .......... ........ ........... ....... .......... ............ ...... .... ...... ...... 7
FIGURE 3: ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF AM & PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ......................................10
FIGURE 4: GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR ALL SITES AT THE EXISTING STUDY INTERSECTIONS ........................12
FIGURE 5: SUM OF EXISTING AND YEAR 2012 TRAFFIC VOLUMES...............................................................................13
FIGURE 6: EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES ......................................................................................................................17
FIGURE 7 A: SUM OF EXISTING, YEAR 2012 AND GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR ALL SITES AT THE EXISTING
STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS ...... ...... ... ............... ............ .................... ...... .... ........... .... ... ..... .......... ......... ....... ....18
FIGURE 7B: SUM OF EXISTING, YEAR 2012 AND GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR ALL SITES AT THE PROPOSED
ACCESS POINTS AND PROPOSED FUTURE INTERSECTIONS ..................................................................................19
FIGURE 8: PROPOSED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS..................... .............. ...... ... ............ ............. ...................... .......38
FIGURE 9: PROPOSED ACCESS POINT & FUTURE INTERSECTION CONDITIONS..............................................................39
II
,0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
10
o
o
o
o
WFSr CLAy DEVELOPMENT
'TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
CERTIFICATION
I certify that this TRAFFIC OPERA nONS 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.
Steven J. Fehribach, P.E.
Indiana Registration 890237
III
D
o
D
D
o
D
o
D
o
o
10
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION
This TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS, prepared at the request of the City of Carmel, will analyze
the traffic impacts that will result from the development of seven single-family residential sites and
two schools within a study area determined by the City of Carmel Department of Community
Services.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this analysis is to determine what effect traffic generated by the proposed
developments, 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 these
sites are developed.
Conclusions will be reached that will determine if the roadway system can accommodate the
anticipated traffic volumes. If the existing roadways and intersections are inadequate,
improvements will be identified so that the anticipated increase in traffic volumes can be
accommodated.
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 developments, 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:
. 116th Street & Shelboume Road
. 1 26th Street & Shelboume Road
. 131 st Street & Shelboume Road
. 141 st Street & Shelboume Road
. 146th Street & Shelboume Road
. 131 st Street & Towne Road
. 136th Street & Towne Road
1
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
D
o
ID
o
o
D
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVEWPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
. 141 st Street & Towne Road
. l46th Street & Towne Road
Second, to estimate the number of new trips that will be generated by the proposed
developments.
Third, to assign the generated traffic volumes to the driveways and/or roadways that will serve to
provide access to the proposed developments.
Fourth, to distribute the generated traffic volumes from the proposed sites onto the public roadway
system and intersections that have been identified as the study area.
Fifth, to prepare an analysis including a capacity analysis and level of service analysis for each
intersection included in the study area for each of the following scenarios:
SCENARIO 1: Existing Conditions - Based on existing roadway conditions and traffic
volumes.
SCENARIO 2: Proposed Development - Add the new traffic volumes that will be generated
by the proposed developments to the existing traffic volumes.
Finally, to prepare a TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS documenting all data, analyses,
conclusions and recommendations to provide for the safe and efficient movement of traffic
through the study area.
2
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
o
D
WEST ClAY DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
The proposed developments will be located in an area bounded by I 16th Street to the south, 146th
Street to the north, Shelboume Road to the west and Towne Road to the east. Figure 1 is an area
map showing the locations of each site and Table 1 provides descriptions of each site.
TABLE 1 - LAND USE DESCRIPTIONS
SITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Sin
Sin
Sin
Sin
Sin
SIZE
105 DU
192 DU
288 DU
53DU
111 DU
50DU
68DU
650 Students
1250 Students
STUDY AREA
The study area has been defined to include the following intersections:
. 116th Street & Shelboume Road
. 126th Street & Shelboume Road
. 131 st Street & Shelboume Road
. 14151 Street & Shelboume Road
. 146th Street & Shelboume Road
. 13151 Street & Towne Road
. 136th Street & Towne Road
. 14151 Street & Towne Road
. 146th Street & Towne Road
. All Proposed Future Intersections
. All Proposed Access Points
3
~a
6a
',' Ll:
, \=:J[
rr' n "T~~..~,~,_n_n_..!OO[
i ;;:==----'::. j ':._..~"-.-$1TE i
: ;, ': -_;:~;" O' ~\ iii. ~_.__:
I, ;, I, ;:- ---'.*1
a !*m/ !,~<~: !
~ . _~__...)_*.~ . J' __-.. .; ~...:::-- .
V "'-;:~~'_Y'=F"-~ts:-T-"--_..J
It 136TH STREET EXTENSION :tr: /,~: : I ~ -- . - : -
In ~~~~C~f-;;~=CF1~'/ 'L~~ l'iJ' I
~ ! agE! !:;,/ ! !~ll.!
I I I ;r' ~'t-- .=-.f -=;' I
. . .F, I. . ~ .
131ST S '5ET ..---j ~;.-;;..j L:.':S:_..-J
L'j , [j>>;tl ~!! ~ r
LF.--L'H':::::~..j It ...',......~
/ /;~
141ST STREET
126TH STREET
,
"
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
4
121ST STREET
PROPOSED
CONNECTION
116TH STREET
~
~
@~
~~ll
~
146TH STREET
I
I
I'
I
I
r-- .. n ,. -- n-,
I SITEj
. H .
Ln__.__._.._____.~
I
LAND USE LEGEND
CENTEX \I
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KLlNEMAN
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
CENTEX I
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
FIGURE 1
AREA MAP
~~1
:-J~
~
(I)
SITE A ·
SITE B ·
SITE C ·
SITE D ·
SITE E ·
SITE F ·
SITE Q ·
SITE H ·
@A & F Engineering Co., LLC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
D
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTION OF THE ABUTTING STREET SYSTEM
This proposed development would be served by the public roadway system that 126th Street, 13151
Street, 136th Street, 14151 Street, 146th Street, Shelboume Road and Towne Road.
116TH STREET - is an east/west two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 40 mph in the vicinity
of the development area.
126TH STREET - is an east/west two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 45 mph in the vicinity
of the development area.
13151 STREET - is an east/west two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 45 mph in the vicinity
of the development area.
136TH STREET - is an east/west two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 40 mph in the vicinity
ofthe development area.
14151 STREET - is an east/west two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 45 mph in the vicinity
of the development area.
146TH STREET - is an east/west two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 40 mph in the vicinity
of the development area.
SHELBOURNE ROAD- is a north/south two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 50 mph in the
vicinity of the development area.
TOWNE ROAD- is a north/south two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 45 mph in the
vicinity of the development area.
116th Street & Shelbourne Road - Figure 2 shows the geometries and traffic controls at this
intersection.
126th Street & Shelbourne Road - Figure 2 shows the geometries and traffic controls at this
intersection.
13rt Street & Shelbourne Road - Figure 2 shows the geometries and traffic controls at this
intersection.
141st Street & Shelbourne Road - Figure 2 shows the geometries and traffic controls at this
intersection.
146th Street & Shelbourne Road - Figure 2 shows the geometries and traffic controls at this
intersection.
5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
D
WF$T CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
13 rt Street & Towne Road - Figure 2 shows the geometries and traffic controls at this
intersection.
136th Street & Towne Road - Figure 2 shows the geometries and traffic controls at this
intersection.
14rt Street & Towne Road - Figure 2 shows the geometries and traffic controls at this
intersection.
146th Street & Towne Road - Figure 2 shows the geometries and traffic controls at this
intersection.
TRAFFIC DATA
A peak hour manual turning movement traffic volume count was made at each of the existing
study intersections by A&F Engineering Co., LLC. The traffic volume count includes an hourly
total of all "through" traffic and all "turning" traffic at each intersection. The traffic volume
counts were made during the hours of 6:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 3:00 PM to 6:00 PM in January
2002. These traffic volume counts are included in Appendix A.
6
Cl
~
lo tl
o 126TH STREET
-+
45M1'H
! 1+
i
126TH STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD
45 MPH
~
t I
~
-+
o
!
141ST STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD
'"
~
I
-'
"-
Q:
'"
o
I
""
I
'"
<:J
3:
o
I
x
w
...
o
o
'"
o
./
...
o
~
o
./
'"
o
o
'"
./
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
7
t
!
~
t I
o
~
t I
i
13I5T STREET
-+
o
U67H STREET
-+
o
t
131ST STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD
Cl 0
~
I J
t
146TH STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD
45 MPH
~
o
t ~
!
o 13I5T STREET
-+
o
131ST STREET AND TOWNE ROAD
45 MPH
~
o
Cl
t ~
~
o
14fST STREET
-+
.1-
!
o
!
141ST STREET AND TOWNE ROAD
1
t
1
\
\
45MPH
~
o
t
!
/16T1f STREET (<<1 MPH)
T
t i
~
loti
~
t
<<1 MPH
o
T
-4
116TH STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD
o t36TH STREET
-+
<<1 MPH
! 1+ s
~
136TH STREET AND TOWNE ROAD
Cl t
t ~
~
<<1 MPH 0 o U67H STREET
~
-+
0 0
! i
~
146TH STREET AND TOWNE ROAD
FIGURE 2
EXISTING INTERSECTION
GEOMETRICS
@A & F Engineering Co., LLC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
~
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
. .
GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .~"..
The estimate of traffic to be generated by the proposed developments is a function of the
development size and ofthe character of the land use. Trip Generationl report was used to calculate
the number of trips that will be generated by the proposed developments. 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 2 is a summary of the trips that will be generated by the proposed developments.
TABLE 2 - GENERATED TRIPS FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION GENERA TED TRIPS
ITE AM AM PM PM
SITE LAND USE CODE SIZE ENTER EXIT ENTER EXIT
A Single-Family Residential 210 105 DU 21 62 72 40
B Single-Family Residential 210 192 DU 36 108 124 70
C Single-Family Residential 210 288 DU 53 158 178 100
D Single-Family Residential 210 53DU 12 35 39 22
E Single-Family Residential 210 111 DU 22 65 75 42
F Single-Family Residential 210 50DU 11 33 37 21
G Single-Family Residential 210 68DU 14 43 49 27
Elementary School 520 650 111 77 0 0
H Students
1250
Middle School 522 Students 328 247 94 106
INTERNAL TRIPS
An internal trip results when a trip is made between two land uses without using the roadway
system. A small portion of internal trips will occur between the developments considered in this
study. However, these trips will be ignored and no reductions will be taken in order to create a
"worst-case" scenario.
PASs-BY TRIPS
Pass-by trips are trips already on the roadway system that decide to enter a land use. Residential
developments do not generate pass-by trips. Therefore, no reduction will be applied for pass-by
trips. On the other hand, the elementary school and middle-school will produce pass-by trips.
1 Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Sixth Edition, 1997.
8
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
D
o
o
o
WFSf CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
However, these trips will be ignored and no reductions will be taken in order to create maximize the
traffic impacts within the study area.
PEAK HOUR
Based on the existing traffic volumes that were collected for this analysis, the adjacent street peak
hour varies between the intersections. Therefore, the actual peak hour at each intersection will be
used for this analysis to represent the maximum traffic volumes at each intersection.
ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF GENERATED TRIPS
The study methodology used to determine the generated traffic volumes that will be added to the
street system is defined as follows:
1. The volume of traffic that will enter and exit the proposed sites must be assigned to the
various access points and to the public street system. Using the traffic volume data collected
for this analysis, traffic to and from the proposed sites has been assigned to the proposed
driveways and to the public street system that will be serving the sites.
2. To determine the volume of traffic that will be added to the public roadway system, the
generated traffic from each site must be distributed by direction to the public roadways at
their intersection with the proposed driveways. For each of the proposed developments, the
distribution was based on the existing traffic patterns and the assignment of generated
traffic.
The assignment and distribution of the generated traffic volumes within the study area, to and from
the proposed sites, is summarized on Figure 3.
9
141ST STREET
Q
o
It
.....
~
~
! !
L.._..j
126TH STREET
,
,
ox:
'"
~
"-
cr
N
o
I
'"
I
N
'"
30
o
:i
x
w
"
o
o
N
o
/'
..-
o
~
o
/'
N
o
o
N
/'
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
10
121ST STREET
PROPOSED
CONNECTION
116TH STREET
~
~
~~
~&l~
~
~Q
~~
e
.~[
0" :T' ":-;~"l~[
!sf-' !' .8 . II
.'. P4-"~7""~-oo-oo-l
',', ~Iri:i ! ::"U" !,n.
'. FD.,I I .: I
L .~ I iSITE i
..... ... .
!.: ! t i
L,..~ L..... .:--i
r-'-:TT~^'sliEl D6
! .,. '...0 ! ~':"~
!sIT~' ! ~:.:. Q
L-F.--L.._.;___J ((. ~
~~~
cci""?~
~--
~ -- ..
en ~ ~ '- 3.8% (1.4%)
ci~"?
-NN
I
(1.0%) 0.5% ~
-
~-
*~
'I.:::,
~ ~ t 3.4% (1.5%)
.,..-.i \
l '+ ~ 1.5% (1.3%)
( t,.
I
I
\
~~
co <D
mo
,
-i;-
--
~~
..... .....
tON
-~
~
---
~~~
3 - <D.....
.e~.e
~ ~ ~ t 0.3% (0.2%)
o en 0 ~ 1.5% (5.5%)
~ l '+ ~ 4.0% (2.4%)
(0.2%) 0.1 %.1' ~ t ,.
(3.5%) 3.7%.... ~ ~ ~
(4.6%) 9.1%~ :.:.::
'" ~~~
" co-m
et::,~
6
FIGURE 3
ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION
OF AM & PM PEAK HOUR
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
~ ~ ~ t 0.5% (2.2%)
o ...; -= ~ 2.2% (9.8%)
~ l '+ ~ 1.5% (.5%)
(0.5%) 0.6%.1' ~ t ,.
(5.6%) 6.6%.... ~ ~ ~
(1.2%) 1.5% ~ ::::.:.
~~~
_...., lO
~~e
~
co
o
l
~0.1% (0.2%)
~ 1.3% (2.1%)
t,.
146TH STREET
~l'+
(14.6%) 5.4%.1' t
lO
a
y
~
.;...
o
l
~0.1% (0.2%)
~t,.
(0.1%) 0.1%....
~~
co en
0""':
~~
lO ....,
@A & r Engineering Co., llC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
~
""!
-
~
~
--
~~
co en
""';'ci
o~
~ ~ t 0.6% (0.5%)
00 ~0.1% (0.1%)
l'+
~t
(0.2%) 0.1 %.... ~ ~
(O.2%) 0.1%~ ::::
~~
_ lO
.e.e
7
~ ~ ~ ~O.3% (1.3%)
ON 0 ~ 2.6% (11.4%)
+l l '+ ~ 1.0% (0.9%)
(0.5%) 0.5%.1' ~ t ,.
(6.4%) 7.6%.... ~ ~ ~
(1.5%) 1.9% ~ ::.:..:.
~~~
co lO <D
~~.e
roo -- .. ,. -- 00.
~ SITE:
! H !
L.._.._.._______..-l
~Q1
tll6
nJlt
~
I
LAND USE LEGEND
SITE A ·
SITE B ·
SITE C ·
SITE D ·
SITE E .
SITE F ·
SITE G ·
SITE H ·
CENTEX II
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KLlNEMAN
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
CENTEX I
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
~~~
co..-. -
cicid
---
~~~
lO...., _
.ee.e
~,
~~
<'-!ap.
O"'T"
~ l ~ 0.3% (0.4%)
(0.5%) 0.7~.1' t,.
(0.1%)0.1%.... ~~
) 0..-.
NO
--
~~
NN
~e
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
* = NEGLIGIBLE
o
D
o
D
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GENERATED TRIPS ADDED TO THE
STREET SYSTEM
Generated traffic volumes that can be expected from each of the proposed sites have been prepared
for each of the existing study area intersections. The generated peak hour volumes are summarized
on Figure 4. These volumes are based on the previously discussed trip generation data, assignment
of generated traffic, and distribution of generated traffic.
YEAR 2012 PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
To evaluate future traffic impacts on the public roadway system, the existing traffic volumes are
projected forward over a ten-year horizon. The design year used for this project is 2012. Therefore,
a 2 percent per year growth rate has been applied to the existing traffic volumes over ten years to
determine an estimate of the year 2012 traffic volumes at each study intersection. The Year 2012
projected traffic volumes are shown on Figure 5.
CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The "efficiency" of an intersection is based on its ability to accommodate the traffic volumes that
approach the intersection. The "efficiency" of an intersection is designated by the Level-of-
Service (LOS) of the intersection. The LOS of an intersection 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 level of service at each of the study
intersections, a capacity analysis has been made using the recognized computer program based
on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCMl.
2 Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2000.
11
""
:;;
~
...
a::
N
o
I
en
I
N
c.o
;;:
o
:i
x
w
...
o
o
N
o
./
...
o
o
N
o
./
N
o
o
N
./
N
126TH STREET
,
,
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
12
141ST STREET
Q
o
[t:
t-..
13
~
~
~
@~
~~~
j
136TH STREET EXTENSION ...
n. .. ...... ......r....~~~~.~.~....~~.~~.~. ..."::
i i
: SITE :
! C !
I I
131ST S ' 'EET oo_ooj
3
! !
L.._..j
121ST STREET
PROPOSED
CONNECTION
"6TH STREET
2
," -- .. ~. .. -.!
, SITE'
! H !
L.._.._______.._..-1
~~1
N~
~
Uj
~
~ --- "t. 4 (14)
~_ co -~ ~
,e-- ~ I -
N ~ ~ .-37 (125) <D .- * (1)
""N -
~. ~ ~15(10) ~ ~. ~ 5 (4) .
(5) 7" ~ t rt (6) 101""
(70) 109'" m ~ ~ (1) 11'" co Lll -......
N -N
17) 27. --- I
!
~Q
~~
19Ie~~lt
146TH STREET b
i: i.' SIJE i
! :! !
!SlIE! 'I
,.. ~---tIr:--~j
:.... : : ,..2:' :
L' .:",I,,,cccc,J.. :: I
;: ': : '':-::-..'/ :
L,:;--I L-.....;;;,~---1
1"~F'.REl . .D. ~ 6
Is: ITEl: .. /<, i, ~. ~Q
, , :'cc:cc./ . !;t ..:.
L-F.-L___..___.J 1(. d
..... ct:
1 ~~~ .
::-.::::....::::... "t. 54 (15
Lll co N
_N~
~.~
(160) 77" t
N
N
I
LAND USE LEGEND
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.t.!. PEAK HOUR
* = NEGLIGIBLE
FIGURE 4
GENERA TED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
F(!)R ALL SITES AT THE EXISTING
\ STUDY INTERSECTION
@A & F Engineering Co., LLC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
SITE A ·
SITE B ·
SITE C ·
SITE D ·
SITE E .
SITE F .
SITE G .
SITE H .
CENTEX II
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KLINE MAN
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
CENTEX I
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEt.!ENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
Q
~
ct::
....
~.
~
126TH STREET
,
,
'"
':;;
I
...J
"-
cr
N
o
I
a>
I
N
o
30
a
:i
x
w
...
o
o
N
o
./
...
o
o
N
o
./
N
o
o
N
./
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
13
141ST STREET
136TH STREET EXTENSION
. ....................r::::::-:::~.:~::~.
i i
: SITE :
! C !
I I
131ST S . 'EET .. nj
3
! !
Loo_nj
121ST STREET
PROPOSED
CONNECnON
116TH STREET
~
~
@~
l~~
j
~~1
ld~
~
~Q
~~
lE
:J[
n::-.:...~.....lG-::.iF;;1c~~~nI8[
: :: .: :.:.....:; .......,::..... :
I q' I ...... I
I~LIC;;\,):)1
".". m~ i~,~.i r .' J
I:' ...::.!::::o::..+...:.... ::!
.~;,.J L::"'D:~ 6
r-'-CT:.'S'ITE"'1 ..)...
! q, HG ! l!.:..~
islT~ ./ i a,.,. ~Q
. e . :......... . r;t..,
L-r.-L.,,;.;;::;~oo.J n: '.,'. ~
.)~
146TH STREET
,.., '\. 2 (17)
:ri ~ ~ ~ 234 (338)
+I ~ ~ -&' 136 (58)
(121) 25~ ~ t rt
(340) 250 -. N ~ ~
(11) 16. 5'-;:;;-0::::-
-,..,N
~.::::..
roo .. .. ,- oo ..-,
I SITE I
. H .
L___.._.._n______.J
I
LAND USE LEGEND
SITE A ·
SITE B ·
SITE C ·
SITE D ·
SITE E ·
SITE F ·
SITE G ·
SITE H ·
CENTEX II
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING '
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KLlNEMAN
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
CENTEX I
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
.:!- j.:::.. '\.1 (5)
- :;;; ~ ~ 125 (133)
+I J, ~ -&' 150 (29)
(1) *,~ ~ t rt
(168) 92 -. - '" 0
~ ,..,
(8) 14. .:!-~ ~
-'"
':::"0_ '\.5 (1)
* ::;, * ~ 53 (8)
+I ., ~ -&,54 (16)
(5) 11~ ~ t rt
(40) 5,-' -:ri:!
(5) 5\. eu;--;;:)
I ,..,,..,
,..,-
I -
00-
,..,~
~::::-~ '\.11 (17
'" ~::: ~29 (116)
+I ~ ~ -&' 78 (35)
(5) 4 ~ ~ t rt
(61) 83 -. ..... ~ ~
(4) 8. 5'~-;:;;-
-..........
~
..... '\. 6 (22)
;;:; ~;;:; ~56 (126)
+I ~ ~ -&' 77 (55)
(41)8~ ~ t rt
(98) 146 -. '" ~ ~
(10) 20. ~'::u;-
-LO LO
"'-
~....
~
m
~ LO
.:::..:;;~ '\. 1 (2)
~ ~ ~ ~223 (115)
+I ~ ~ -&' 199 (48)
(40) 8 ~ ~ t rt
(270) 92 -. ~ ~ ~
(19) 52.
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
* = NEGLIGIBLE
FIGURE 5
SUM OF EXISTING & YEAR
2012 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
@A & r Engineering Co., LLC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
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.
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.
14
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
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
15
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
CAPACITY ANALYSES SCENARIOS
To evaluate the proposed development's effect on the public street system, the traffic volumes
from each of the various parts must be added together to form a series of scenarios that can be
analyzed. 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 for each of the following scenarios:
SCENARIO 1: Existing Traffic Volumes - These are the traffic volumes that were obtained
in January 2002. Figure 6 is a summary ofthese traffic volumes at the study
intersections.
SCENARIO 2: Existing Traffic Volumes + Year 2012 Traffic Volumes + Proposed
Development Generated Traffic Volumes - Figures 7 A & 7B summarize
these traffic volumes at the existing and proposed study intersections for the
peak hour.
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 are a
summary of the results of the level of service analyses and are identified as follows:
Table 3 - 116th Street & Shelboume Road
Table 4 - 126th Street & Shelboume Road
Table 5 - 131 st Street & Shelboume Road
Table 6 - 141 st Street & Shelboume Road
Table 7 -146th Street & She1boume Road
Table 8 - 131 st Street & Towne Road
Table 9 - 136th Street & Towne Road
Table 10 - 141 st Street & Towne Road
Table 11- 146th Street & Towne Road
Table 12 - 126th Street & Centex I South/School Access
Table 13 - 126th Street & Proposed Roadway
Table 14 - 131 st Stret & Klineman Access
Table 15 - 13151 Street & Kessler/Centex I North Access
Table 16 - 131 st Street & Trinity Access/Proposed Roadway
Table 17 - 136th Street Extension & She1boume Road
Table 18 - Towne Road & Roehling East Access
Table 19 - 141 st Street & Centex II Access
Table 20 - 141 st Street & RoeWing North Access
16
if
"
f
126TH STREET
,
"
><
~
I
->
'"'-
cr
N
o
I
'"
I
N
'-'
3=
o
::r:'
x
.....
..
o
o
N
o
/'
..
o
o
N
o
/'
N
o
o
N
/'
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
17
141ST STREET
Q
o
It
......
~
~
I I
Loo_..j
121ST STREET
PROPOSED
CONNECnON
116TH STREET
~
~
@~
~~~
~
~Q
~~
. 19Ie~~1t
146TH STREET b
~[
roo ---r-- .~_________--, 8[
: . :..: SITE :
! : !:." B .. !
I~TE I': II
: A: :
~_..~-:-~_.._.:.-J
CW~ I</IJ
H: i isrn: i
F '+~~. H !
. . .' - ;-'.'" .
L,:,~ L......:::;.---1
[f~~El M....~ r
. .. . ::........ . ~..
L-r.--1....;.;;.;:cc::-..J .... ":'.'9:
/~
2
r" .. oo ,. -- --1
: SITE'
! H !
L.._..____.._.._..-.J
~~1
N~
~
01
I
LAND USE LEGEND
SITE A ·
SITE B .
SITE C ·
SITE D ·
SITE E .
SITE F .
SITE Q .
SITE H .
CENTEX "
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING ,
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KLlNEMAN
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
CENTEX I
SINGLE fAMILY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
r:::-
,."
:::::;:@: 't. 0 (2)
- ~ C> "'5 (6)
+l . ~ ..&' 33 (7)
(1) 1 ~ ~ t rt
(10) 4 ~ - C> ,."
~N
(3) 5~ er:::-~
en-
S: e 't. 6 (16)
co
>< ,." to ....
+l . ~ ..&' 126 (35)
trt
Ll) ,."
C> N
::....!
:@:.8:::: 't. 1 (4)
- ~\,." ... 104 (111)
+l .1 ~ ..&' 125 (24)
(1) o~ ~ t rt
(140) 77'" - Ll) Ll)
~ N
(7) 12 ~ ~,:5; r:::-
-,."
en r::-
: -'t.2(14)1
.... 264 (302) ~ g.... 308 (330)
..&' 274 (77) +l ~ I
~ rt (295) 50 ~ I
(384) 229 ~ N :2 (389) 244 ~
(9) 13 ~ ~ g
~
~
N
,."
:::::;;;8 't.9 (14)
Ll) ~ en .... 24 (97)
+l . ~ ..&' 65 (29)
(4)3 ~ ... t rt
(51) 69~ to ~ ~
(3) 7 ~ ~ <<;'-;::-
-N to
~
to 't. 5 (18)
~ ~ ~ .... 47 (105)
+l . ~ ..&' 64 (46)
(34) 7 ~ ... t rt
(82) 122 ~ Ll):;; ~
(8) 17~ ~~r:::-
- C> -.t
~-
a;-
N -.t
-=-:;:@: 't. 1 (2)
~ ~,." ....186 (96)
+l . ~ ..&' 166 (40)
(33) 7 ~ ~ t rt
(225) 77 ~ ::: ~ ~
16) 43 ~
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
· = NEGLIGIBLE
FIGURE 6
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
@A Be r Engineering Co., LLC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
141ST STREET
a
o
tt
h.
~
~
i i
L___..j
126TH STREET
,
,
'"
~
~
"-
0::
N
o
I
'"
I
N
'-'
~
o
:i
x
..,
.,.
o
o
N
o
./
.,.
o
o
N
o
./
N
o
o
N
./
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
18
121ST STREET
PROPOSED
CONNECTION
116TH STREET
2
r-- -- -- ,- -- ---,
1 SITE i
. H .
L____.__________u.J
~
~
@~
~~~
~
~Q1
~~
Wtt
~
~a
~~
C
i', !' .ITE,!
. , .' 8 .
! : !' 'I
jSlTE i i
: A :. :
~---+-~~-u-.-.....J
!(~ ! .... / TJ
"'D" I I,',' I
I ~ . . . .
1':,:'! ls':e!
I..' ....1......./:..:. ,: I
'," ..--...--- ..
L~,~ L~~:{~
:-t-:-;." "=1 '.D.)... 6
......SITE. . ~
IT \0 ! q,:, ~
!sITE ,/:: , 0:: a
. . ::.......' . !;t..
L-F.-L_''''''''::'''__.J a:: :'~
146TH STREET
C> ~ ~56 (32
~ ~ ~ ... 234 (338)
+I. ~ ~ 136 (58)
(281) 102 ~ ~ t ,.
(340) 250 -. c--.:;; ~
( 11) 16"l. 3' ~r:::-
~.nN
~~
~
.....~
-~
e:::-=- ~ 11 (33
N~~ "'37(125)
+I . ~ ~ 166 (52)
(5) 7 ~ ~ t ,.
(70) 109-' m:;:; ~
(17) 27"l. ;;-'='-;o
~ C> on
~-
e-
..., 'to51 (20 '
<0 <0
Ii'> <0
'~ ~ ~26 (16)
It,.
~ ~ 'to 1 (5)
.",
-'1 ~ ""25 (133)
+I . ~ ~151 (31)
(1) *I~ ~ t ,.
(168) 92:-. ~::: ~
(19) 21i"l. 0'-:::--;0
1 ..-""""(0
~~-
~
~ j'e 'to 5 (1)
..., ~ * "'53 (9)
+I t ~ ~59 (20)
(11) di~ ~ t ,.
(41) 6:'" -::: ~
(5) 51 00- ~
'"l. ~~.....
1m...,
~~
e...
00
<O~
E:;~ ~ 15 (19
<0 ~ ~ ... 50 (176)
+I. ~ ~'36 (61)
(7) 5 ~ ~ t ,.
(99) 136 -. ~:g:g
(54) 139"l.
I
LAND USE LEGEND
SITE A .
SITE B .
SITE C ·
SITE D .
SITE E .
SITE F .
SITE G .
SITE H .
CENTEX II
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOWPSON
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER '
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KLlNEMAN
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
CENTEX I
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SC~OOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
~
..,
<O~
N -.n
.., ~N .....
~ C> ~ "'" 13 (46
~ ~:;:; ... 88 (233)
+I . ~ ~99 (60)
(47) 17~ ~ t ,.
(159) 240 -. ~ g ~
(23) 41"l.
r:::-
~ <0
-=-::-~ 'to 1 (2)
:g ~ ~ ... 224 (117)
+I . ~ ~218 (71)
(40) 8 ~ ~ t ,.
(271) 94... ~ U; R
(19) 52"l.
LEGEND
00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR
(00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR
* = NEGLIGIBLE
FIGURE 7 A
i
SUM OF, EXISTING, YEAR 2012 & GENERA TED
TR,AFFIC VOLUMES FOR ALL SITES
A T THE EXISTING STUDY INTERSECTIONS
!
I
@A & F Engineering Co., LLC 2002
.. ALL Rights Reserved"
126TH STREET
,
,
""
~
I
--'
....
'"
N
o
I
....
I
..,
~
o
:i
x
w
....
o
o
N
o
-:;
o
o
N
o
...-
N
o
o
N
...-
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
19
~C)
~S(
t:
=1[
roo oo-r-" -:;;]-"--'--'! [
I "I - - .~- .lTE I
: : .._.. '- JI_ :
! ! -- -: --:- !
C) !SIoT&. ! .-- -~- 'I
. A . ~_ .
Q/--c:.~~"f-.";:'-'<'s:T=-oo_oo-.J
i~::=f.'~::71r\~m~..'i.n iSJ!.".:.TJj
. C. '..;.'" ,.E if'
I ! ! i{ {",.!co".c",co,' t----}'" .:) !
131ST S . 'EET ___ooj L;:;;,;--.i L~:::::::--.i
: : 3 r--'....-'.-, . -----:1 '0. )...@
L_J L,.;JC :~7E: ~...".'.~.....~.,
LF.-L...::::,.:........J 1(; ~
'.'~
141ST STREET
121ST STREET
PROPOSED
CONNECnON
116TH STREET
~
~
@~
~~~
~
146TH STREET
--
co ...., _ ....
~~~ '-1 (4)
::? ~...., '-15 (12)
~ ~ ~ .123 (27)
(15) 5.:1' ~ t rt
(6) 4.... ~::? en
(14) 66"'l-
-=-SE t4 (12)
~ It = .- 131 (251)
~ ~ ~ .8 (26)
(17) 8.:1' ~ t rt
(210) 251.... ...., It ~
(3) 1"'l- E:S-.n
,__ __ .. u .. ..-,
~"i SITE i
. H .
L..__._._____..__.~
~~1
yjct
~
I
LAND USE LEGEND
SITE A ·
SITE B .
SITE C .
SITE D .
SITE E ·
SITE F .
SITE G .
SITE H .
CENTEX II
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KLlNEMAN
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
CENTEX I
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
--
_C"IN.
e-=--=-i, t 6 (21)
N _ all
-..... -, '-130 (281)
~ ~ ~ . * (*)
(14) 4.:1', ~ t rt
(217) 281~ It ~ It
(*) * ~" 2m~
.- 152 (240)
.7 (23)
~ rt
(218) 246.... ~ ~
(17} 13"'l- 0' -;:;;-
78
SUM OF EXISTING, YEAR 2012 & GENERA TED
TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR ALL SITES
A T THE PROPOSED ACCESS POINTS
AND PROPOSED FUTURE INTERSECTIONS
I
)
@A & F Engineering Co., LLC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
o
D
o
o
D
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WFST CLAy DEVEWPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
TABLE 3 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-116TH STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD
MOVEMENT SCENARIO IA SCENARIO lB SCENARIO I C SCENARIO 2
EAST WEST
Northbound Approach B --- C B B
Southbound Approach --- C F B B
Eastbound Approach --- A A A B
Westbound Approach A --- A A B
Intersection --- --- --- B B
AM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO I A SCENARIO I B SCENARIO IC SCENARIO 2
EAST WEST
Northbound Approach C --- F B B
Southbound Approach --- C F B B
Eastbound Approach --- A A B B
Westbound Approach A --- A B B
Intersection --- --- --- B B
. . - th
PM PEAK HOUR
SCENARIO lA. EXIstmg Traffic Volumes wIth EXIstmg CondItIons (East-116 Street &
South Leg ofShelboume Road, West=116th Street & North Leg ofShelboume
Road)
SCENARIO IB: Existing Traffic Volumes with Future Geometrics* and Existing Two-Way
Stop Control with Shelboume Road Stopping for 1 16th Street.
SCENARIO lC: Existing Traffic Volumes with Proposed Geometrics** and a Proposed Traffic
Signal.
SCENARIO 2: Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic Volumes with Proposed
Geometrics** and a Proposed Traffic Signal.
* Future plans call for Shelboume Road to be aligned at the intersection of 1 1 6th Street.
However, each approach will be maintained as one lane and Shelboume Road will continue
to stop for 1 16th Street. This realignment is shown on Figure 8.
** The proposed geometries include the realignment of Shelboume Road and the addition of
left-turn lanes along all approaches. The realignment and proposed lanes are shown on
Figure 8.
20
o
o
o
o
10
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONSAN'ALYSIS
TABLE 4 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-126TH STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD
AM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2
Southbound Left-Turn A A
Westbound Approach A B
PM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2
Southbound Left-Turn A A
Westbound Approach B B
SCENARIO 1 :
SCENARIO 2:
Existing Traffic Volumes with Existing Conditions
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with Proposed Geometrics* and Existing Traffic
Control.
* The proposed geometries at this intersection include the addition of a right-
turn lane along the northbound approach, as well as a left-turn lane along
the southbound and westbound approaches. These improvements are
illustrated on Figure 8.
21
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WFST CLAy DEVEWPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
TABLE 5 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-131sT STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2A SCENARIO 2B
Northbound Approach A C B
Southbound Approach A C C
Eastbound Approach A C B
Westbound Approach A C B
Intersection A C B
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2A SCENARIO 2B
Northbound Approach B F C
Southbound Approach A B B
Eastbound Approach A B B
Westbound Approach A C B
Intersection A D C
SCENARIO 1 :
SCENARIO 2A:
Existing Traffic Volumes with Existing Conditions
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic Volumes with
Existing Geometries and Existing Traffic Control.
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic Volumes with
Proposed Geometrics* and Existing Traffic Control.
SCENARIO 2B:
* The proposed geometries include the addition of a left-turn lane along all approaches
at this intersection. These improvements are illustrated on Figure 8.
22
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CIA Y DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
TABLE 6 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-141sT STREET AND SUELBOURNE ROAD
AM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2
Northbound Left-Turn A A
Southbound Left-Turn A A
Eastbound Approach A B
Westbound Approach B B
PM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2
Northbound Left-Turn A A
Southbound Left-Turn A A
Eastbound Approach B B
Westbound Approach B B
SCENARIO 1 :
SCENARIO 2:
Existing Traffic Volumes with Existing Conditions
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with Proposed Geometrics* and Existing Traffic
Control.
* The proposed geometries include the addition of a left-turn lane along all
approaches at this intersection. These improvements are illustrated on
Figure 8.
23
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WFST Cl..A Y DEVEWPMENT
TRAFFIc QpERATIONSANALYSIS
TABLE 7 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-146TH STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD
AM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2
Northbound Approach A B
Southbound Approach B C
Eastbound Left-Turn A A
Westbound Left-Turn A A
PM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2
Northbound Approach B B
Southbound Approach B B
Eastbound Left-Turn A A
Westbound Left-Turn A A
SCENARIO 1 :
SCENARIO 2:
Existing Traffic V olurnes with Existing Conditions
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with Proposed Geometrics* and Existing Traffic
Control.
* The proposed geometries include the addition of a left-turn lane along all
approaches at this intersection. These improvements are illustrated on
Figure 8.
24
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
!O
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
TABLE 8 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-131ST STREET AND TOWNE ROAD
AM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2A SCENARIO 2B
Northbound Approach B C A
Southbound Approach C F B
Eastbound Approach B C C
Westbound Approach B B B
Intersection C F B
PM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2A SCENARIO 2B
Northbound Approach B F B
Southbound Approach B C A
Eastbound Approach B C B
Westbound Approach B C B
Intersection B D B
SCENARIO 1 :
SCENARIO 2A:
Existing Traffic Volumes with Existing Conditions
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic Volumes with
Proposed Geometrics* and Existing Traffic Control.
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic Volumes with
Proposed Geometrics* and Proposed Traffic Signal.
SCENARIO 2B:
* The proposed geometries include the addition of a left-turn lane along all approaches
at this intersection. These improvements are illustrated on Figure 8.
25
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST Q..Ay DEVEWPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
TABLE 9 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-136TH STREET AND TOWNE ROAD
AM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2A SCENARIO 2B
Northbound Approach --- A B
Southbound Approach A A D
Eastbound Approach --- D B
Westbound Approach C F B
Intersection --- _n C
PM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2A SCENARIO 2B
Northbound Approach --- A C
Southbound Approach A A B
Eastbound Approach _n C B
Westbound Approach B E B
Intersection _n _n C
SCENARIO 1:
SCENARIO 2A:
Existing Traffic Volumes with Existing Conditions
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic Volumes with
Proposed Geometries and Proposed Traffic Control*.
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic Volumes with
Proposed Geometries and Proposed Traffic Control**.
SCENARIO 2B:
* Future plans include the construction of a 136th Street extension from Towne Road
to a location west of the study area. Scenario 2A included this extension and was
conducted using one-lane approaches along each leg with the intersection controlled
as a two-way stop with 136th Street stopping.
** Future plans include the construction of a 136th Street extension from Towne Road
to a location west of the study area. Scenario 2B included this extension and was
conducted as a four-way stop intersection analysis with a left-turn lane and a shared
through/right-turn lane along all approaches. The proposed geometries and traffic
control are illustrated on Figure 8.
26
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WESf ClAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
TABLE 10 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-141ST STREET AND TOWNE ROAD
AM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2
Northbound Left-Turn A A
Southbound Left-Turn A A
Eastbound Approach B B
Westbound Approach B C
PM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2
Northbound Left-Turn A A
Southbound Left-Turn A A
Eastbound Approach B B
Westbound Approach B B
SCENARIO 1 :
SCENARIO 2:
Existing Traffic Volumes with Existing Conditions
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with Proposed Geometrics* and Existing Traffic
Control.
* The proposed geometries include the addition of a left-turn lane along all
approaches at this intersection. These improvements are illustrated on
Figure 8.
27
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WFSf CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
TABLE 11 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-146TH STREET AND TOWNE ROAD
AM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2
Northbound Approach A B
Southbound Approach B B
Eastbound Approach A B
Westbound Approach B B
Intersection B B
PM PEAK HOUR
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2
Northbound Approach B B
Southbound Approach A B
Eastbound Approach B B
Westbound Approach B B
Intersection B B
SCENARIO 1 :
SCENARIO 2:
Existing Traffic Volumes with Existing Conditions
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with Proposed Geometrics* and Existing Traffic
Control.
* The proposed geometries include the addition of a left-turn lane along all
approaches at this intersection. These improvements are illustrated on
Figure 8.
28
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
!D
o
o
o
o
o
WFST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
TABLE 12 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-126TH STREET & CENTEX I SOUTH /SCHOOL
ACCESS
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 2
AM PEAK PM PEAK
Northbound Approach B A
Southbound Approach B A
Eastbound Left-Turn A A
Westbound Left-Turn A A
SCENARIO 2:
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with the Proposed Intersection Conditions*.
* The proposed conditions are illustrated on Figure 9.
TABLE 13 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-126TH STREET & PROPOSED ROADWAY
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 2
AM PEAK PM PEAK
Southbound Approach A A
Eastbound Left-Turn A A
SCENARIO 2:
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with the Proposed Intersection Conditions*.
* The proposed conditions are illustrated on Figure 9.
TABLE 14 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-131sT STREET & KLINEMAN ACCESS
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 2
AM PEAK PM PEAK
Northbound Approach B B
Westbound Left-Turn A A
SCENARIO 2:
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with the Proposed Intersection Conditions*.
* The proposed conditions are illustrated on Figure 9.
29
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WFST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
TABLE 15 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-131ST STREET & KESSLERlCENTEX I NORTH
ACCESS
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 2
AM PEAK PM PEAK
Northbound Approach B B
Southbound Approach B B
Eastbound Left-Turn A A
Westbound Left-Turn A A
SCENARIO 2:
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with the Proposed Intersection Conditions*.
* The proposed conditions are illustrated on Figure 9.
TABLE 16 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-13tST ST & TRINITY ACCESS/PROPOSED ROADWAY
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 2
AM PEAK PM PEAK
Northbound Approach B B
Southbound Approach B B
Eastbound Left-Turn A A
Westbound Left-Turn A A
SCENARIO 2:
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with the Proposed Intersection Conditions*.
* The proposed conditions are illustrated on Figure 9.
TABLE 17 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY _136TH STREET EXTENSION & SHELBOURNE ROAD
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 2
AM PEAK PM PEAK
Northbound Left-Turn A A
Southbound Left-Turn A A
Eastbound Approach B B
Westbound Approach B B
SCENARIO 2:
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with the Proposed Intersection Conditions*.
* The proposed conditions are illustrated on Figure 9.
30
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEvELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
TABLE 18 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-TOWNE ROAD & ROEHLING EAST ACCESS
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 2
AM PEAK PM PEAK
Northbound Left-Turn A A
Eastbound Approach B B
SCENARIO 2:
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with the Proposed Intersection Conditions*.
* The proposed conditions are illustrated on Figure 9.
TABLE 19 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-141sTSTREET & CENTEXII ACCESS
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 2
AM PEAK PM PEAK
Northbound Approach A A
Westbound Left-Turn A A
SCENARIO 2:
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with the Proposed Intersection Conditions*.
* The proposed conditions are illustrated on Figure 9.
TABLE 20 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY-141sT STREET & ROEHLING NORTH ACCESS
MOVEMENT SCENARIO 2
AM PEAK PM PEAK
Northbound Approach A A
Westbound Left-Turn A A
SCENARIO 2:
Sum of Existing, Year 2012 and Generated Traffic
Volumes with the Proposed Intersection Conditions*.
* The proposed conditions are illustrated on Figure 9.
31
D
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAyDEVEWPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations that follow are based on the following:
. 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. Therefore, if the
resulting level of service is adequate during these time periodS'; it can generally be assumed the
remaining 22 hours will have levels of service that are better than the peak hour, since the existing
street traffic volumes will be less during the other 22 hours.
EXISTING STUDY INTERSECTIONS
116TH STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD
. Shelbourne Road will be aligned at this intersection in the near future. A capacity
analysis using the existing traffic volumes and the realigned roadway showed that the
southbound approach will experience unacceptable delays. In order to reach acceptable
levels of service, left-turn lanes should be added along all approaches and a traffic signal
should be installed when warranted.
. Figure 8 illustrates the proposed realignment of Shelboume Road and the proposed
improvements recommended at this intersection.
. The additional left-turn lanes and proposed traffic signal will provide the additional
capacity needed to service the existing traffic volumes as well as the additional traffic
that will be produced by the proposed developments. Therefore, no improvements are
needed at this intersection due to the added traffic from the proposed developments.
126TH STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD
. No improvements are needed to achieve acceptable levels of service with the existing
traffic volumes.
. When the projected year 2012 traffic volumes and the additional traffic volumes from
the proposed developments are added to this intersection, it will continue to operate at
acceptable levels of service with the proposed intersection geometrics and existing
traffic control. The proposed geometrics at this intersection include the addition of a
right-turn lane along the northbound approach, as well as a left-turn lane along the
32
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
WESTCl...A.yDEVELOPMENT TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
southbound and westbound approaches. These recommended geometrics are
illustrated on Figure 8.
131 ST STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD
. No improvements are needed to achieve acceptable levels of service with the existing
traffic volumes.
. When the projected year 2012 traffic volumes and the additional traffic volumes from
the proposed developments are added to this intersection, the northbound approach will
experience unacceptable delays. Therefore, left-turn lanes are recommended along all
approaches when the additional traffic is added to this intersection. These recommended
geometrics are illustrated on Figure 8.
141 ST STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD
. No improvements are needed to achieve acceptable levels of service with the existing
traffic volumes.
. When the projected year 2012 traffic volumes and the additional traffic volumes from
the proposed developments are added to this intersection, it will continue to operate at
acceptable levels of service with the proposed intersection geometrics and existing
traffic control. The proposed geometrics include the addition of a left-turn lane along
all approaches at this intersection. These improvements are illustrated on Figure 8.
146TH STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD
. No improvements are needed to achieve acceptable levels of service with the existing
traffic volumes.
. When the projected year 2012 traffic volumes and the additional traffic volumes from
the proposed developments are added to this intersection, it will continue to operate at
acceptable levels of service with the proposed intersection geometrics and existing
traffic control. The proposed geometrics include the addition of a left-turn lane along
all approaches at this intersection. These improvements are illustrated on Figure 8.
131 ST STREET & TOWNE ROAD
. No improvements are needed to achieve acceptable levels of service with the existing
traffic volumes.
. When the projected year 2012 traffic volumes and the additional traffic volumes from
the proposed developments are added to this intersection, improvements will be needed
to maintain acceptable levels of service. The improvements should consist of the
construction of left-turn lanes along all approaches and the installation of a traffic signal
when future traffic volumes meet the required warrants. These recommended
improvements are illustrated on Figure 8.
33
D
o
D
D
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
1 36TH STREET & TOWNE ROAD
. 136th Street will be extended west from Towne Road to West Street. This extension will
add a west leg to the existing three-leg intersection. This intersection should be
controlled as a four-way stop when the extension is fully constructed.
. All approaches should include a left-turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane when
the proposed 136th Street extension is constructed. The proposed intersection
geometries and controls are illustrated on Figure 8.
141 ST STREET & TOWNE ROAD
. No improvements are needed to achieve acceptable levels of service with the existing
traffic volumes.
. When the projected year 2012 traffic volumes and the additional traffic volumes from
the proposed developments are added to this intersection, it will continue to operate at
acceptable levels of service with the proposed intersection geometries and existing
traffic control. The proposed geometries include the addition of a left-turn lane along
all approaches at this intersection. These improvements are illustrated on Figure 8.
1 46TH STREET & TOWNE ROAD
. No improvements are needed to achieve acceptable levels of service with the existing
traffic volumes.
. When the projected year 2012 traffic volumes and the additional traffic volumes from
the proposed developments are added to this intersection, the westbound approach will
experience unacceptable delays. Therefore, left-turn lanes are recommended along all
approaches when the additional traffic is added to this intersection. These recommended
geometrics are illustrated on Figure 8.
PROPOSED STUDY INTERSECTIONS
1 26TH STREET & CENTEX I SOUTH /SCHOOL ACCESS
. The proposed access drives should be developed with two outbound lanes and at least
one inbound lane. These drives should stop for 126th Street.
. Eastbound and westbound right-turn lanes should be constructed along 126th Street at
the access drives. These right-turn lanes should be developed to serve as a passing
blister for through traffic along 126th Street. An illustration showing the proposed
configuration of these lanes is shown on Figure 9.
1 26TH STREET & PROPOSED ROADWAY
. The southbound approach should be developed to include a left-turn lane right turn lane.
. A right-turn lane and a passing blister should be installed along 126th Street at the
proposed roadway.
. The proposed intersection improvements are illustrated on Figure 9.
34
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
WFST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
131 ST STREET & KLINEMAN ACCESS
. The proposed access drive should be developed with two outbound lanes and at least
one inbound lane. This drive should stop for 13151 Street.
. A right-turn lane and a passing blister should be installed along 131 st Street at the access
drive location.
. The proposed access drive geometrics and roadway improvements at this location are
illustrated on Figure 9.
131 ST STREET & KESSLERlCENTEX I NORTII ACCESS
. The proposed access drives should be developed with two outbound lanes and at least
one inbound lane. These drives should stop for 131 st Street.
. Eastbound and westbound right-turn lanes should be constructed along 131 st Street at the
access drives. These right-turn lanes should be developed to also serve as a passing
blister for through traffic along 131 st Street. An illustration showing the proposed
configuration of these lanes is shown on Figure 9.
131 ST STREET & TRINITY ACCESS/PROPOSED ROADWAY
. The northbound and southbound approaches should be developed to include an
exclusive left-turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane.
. Eastbound and westbound right-turn lanes should be constructed along 13151 Street at
this location. These right-turn lanes should be developed to also serve as a passing
blister for through traffic along 13151 Street. An illustration showing the proposed
configuration of these lanes is shown on Figure 9.
136TH STREET EXTENSION & SHELBOURNE ROAD
. When the 136th Street extension is constructed, this intersection should be controlled as a
two-way stop with 136th Street stopping for Shelboume Road.
. Northbound and southbound right-turn lanes should be constructed along Shelboume
Road at this intersection. These right-turn lanes should be developed to also serve as a
passing blister for through traffic along Shelboume Road. In addition, the eastbound
and westbound approaches should be constructed to include a left-turn lane and a shared
through/right-turn lane. An illustration showing the proposed configuration of these
lanes is shown on Figure 9.
. The eastbound and westbound approaches should be constructed to include a signal lane
for all movements.
35
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
WFST C!AyDEVEWPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
TOWNE ROAD & ROEHLING EAST ACCESS
. The proposed access drive should be developed with two outbound lanes and at least
one inbound lane. This drive should stop for Towne Road.
. A right-turn lane and a passing blister should be installed along Towne Road at the
access drive location.
. The proposed access drive geometries and roadway improvements at this location are
illustrated on Figure 9.
141 ST STREET & CENTEX II NORTH ACCESS
. The proposed access drive should be developed with two outbound lanes and at least
one inbound lane. This drive should stop for 141 st Street.
. A right-turn lane and a passing blister should be installed along 1415t Street at the access
drive location.
. The proposed access drive geometries and roadway improvements at this location are
illustrated on Figure 9.
141 ST STREET & ROEHLING NORTH ACCESS
. The proposed access drive should be developed with two outbound lanes and at least
one inbound lane. This drive should stop for 141 st Street.
. A right-turn lane and a passing blister should be installed along 141 st Street at the access
drive location.
. The proposed access drive geometries and roadway improvements at this location are
illustrated on Figure 9.
ROADWAY ANALYSIS
EXISTING ROADWAYS
. Capacity analysis results have shown that all existing roadways will operate at
acceptable levels of service when the future traffic volumes are added to the roadway
network. In order to meet the minimum roadway standards set forth by the City of
Carmel, these roadways should be reconstructed in the future as a 24 foot wide two-lane
roadway with curb and gutter or a 2 foot minimum shoulder width.
PROPOSED I 36TH STREET EXTENSION
. This proposed roadway should be constructed as a two-lane roadway and should meet
the minimum roadway standards set forth by the City of Carmel.
. Several proposed residential developments will have access to this roadway. These
intersections should be controlled with the access drives stopping for 136th Street unless
further studies indicate a need for different traffic control.
36
10
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
10
10
10
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
WFST CLAy DEvELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
. All access drives along this roadway should be developed with two outbound lanes and
a minimum of one inbound lane.
PROPOSED ROADWAY (BETWEEN 126TH ST. & 131 ST ST.)
. In order to meet the minimum roadway standards set forth by the City of Carmel, this
roadway section should be constructed as a 24 foot wide two-lane roadway with curb
and gutter or a 2 foot minimum shoulder width. In addition, the before-mentioned
recommended geometries at 131 st Street and 126th Street should be included along
this roadway.
37
:r
~
'"
-'
...
Q:
'"
~
Q I AI
Q ~
~ t t Q t I t
~
~ ~ l. t ~ l. t ~ ~ l. t ~ I ~ l. t ~
~ ~ ~ I ~
ill
ill ili \ ~
ili 0 9 0 ./ ~ 0
126TH STREET 45MPH I31ST STREET 45 MPH "- I31ST STREET 40 MPH 136TH STREET
t... +- .1- +- ~ .1- +- .1-
t j t j t j t
..... T -+ T -+ T -+
/ 45MPH 0\ /0 /' 0\ ~
PROPOSED CONDfT1OIVS
. ADD A FlIGHT TURN LANE ~ ~t
ALONG NORTHSOUND 1+ 1+l 1+~
APPROACH ,. PROPOSED CONDfT1OIVS ~ ~ PROPOSED CONDfT1OIVS ~ ~ PROPOSED CONDfT1ONS ~ ~
. ADD LEFT TURN LANES . ADD LEFT TURN LANES . ADD LEFT TURN LANES . IiEsr LEG ADDED WfTH
ALONG SOUTHBOUND AND ~ ALONG ALL APPROACHES i ALONG ALL APPROACHES 136TH ST. EXTENSION
WESTlJOUND APPROACHES ~ ~ I ~
. INSTALL TRAFRC SIGNAL . CONTRoL AS A 4-WA Y STOP
WHEN WARRANTED . ADO LEFT TURN LANES
ALONG ALL APPROACHES
'/ 'I
"
I
126TH STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD 131ST STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD 131ST STREET AND TOWNE ROAD I 136TH STREET AND TOWNE ROAD
,
Q
~ t Q t Q t t
~ Q
~ l. t ~ ~ l. t ~ l. ~ ~ l. t ~
~ ~ t ~ ~
ill ~ I ~
ili ~ ~ I 0
,-0 ~ I ~
45 MPH I41ST STREET 40 MPH 146TH STREET 45 MFH I41ST STREET I 40 MPH 146TH STREET
+- .1- +- .1- +- .1- I +- .1-
\
j t j t j r i j r
T -+ T -+ T -+ i T -+
I
0' / '\ /0 '\ i 0'
0 I 0
PROPOSED CONDfT1OIVS ~ ~ 1+s PROPOSED CONDfT1ONS ~ ~ 1+~ PROPOSED 00NDfT10NS ~ ~ 1+~ , ~ ~ 1+
. ADD LEFT TURN LANES . ADD LEFT TURN LANES . ADD LEFT TURN LANES PROPOSED CONDfT1ONS
ALONG ALL APPROACHES Ii! ALONG ALL APPROACHES Ii! ALONG ALL APPROACHES ~ ~
. ADD LEFT TURN LANES
ALONG ALL APPROACHES
~
141ST smEET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD 146TH STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD 141ST smEET AND TOWNE ROAD 146TH STREET AND TOWNE ROAD
,
~~ l. t t I
~
I
40 MFH ./ "- I16TH STREET ,I
.1- I
+- I
~
j t FIGURE 8
T -+
"\ \ PROPOSED INTERSECTION
Q IMPROVEMENTS
PROPOSED CONDfT1ONS ~
. SHELBOURNE RD. ro BE ~ ~ ~ 1+ !
ALIGNED IN NEAR FUTURE
. ADD LEFT TURN LANES ~
ALONG ALL APPROACHES I
./NSTALL TRAFF1C SIGNAL ill
WEST CLAY WHEN WARRANTED ili
CARMEL, IN 116TH STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD @A & r Engineering Co., LLC 2002
.. ALL Rights Reserved"
38
N
o
I
...
o
I
'"
o
'"
~
o
:z:
x
w
...
o
o
N
o
./
...
o
o
N
o
./
N
o
o
N
./
N
..
126TH Sr. '-
I _
. r--J.150'-I--150'-I--150'-j
131ST sr.I ~ __ I
- - - - 1,- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,
l-= 1~' -l- so'
I
\
126TH Sr.
t50'l75~r '5' f'SO'
o
t
1~150,~.1
126TH STREET AND CENTEX I SOUTH ACCESS/SCHOOL ACCESS
126TH STREET AND PROPOSED ROADWA Y
I
131ST STREET AND KLINEMAN ACCESS
,
131ST Sr.
'50'1lli'5'f'SO'
- t...
t
131ST Sr.
lSO'l': -:-75' ft50'
o
t
lSO'lj; 75'f ISO'
t:
""""'" '" =--
~t+
}+
I....:
U)
~
<0
~
..
..
..
SHELBOURNE RD.
131ST STREET AND KESSLER/CENTEX I NORTH ACCESS
131ST STREET AND TRINTY/PROPOSED ROADWA Y
136TH STREET AND SHELBOURNE ROAD
SO'I'SO'=1
. 1---150' -1--150' -I--150'-j
141ST Sr.I ~ - ___ I
t
I
I
r-=' 150' -I--150'-!--150'=1
141ST Sr. I
. ----
t
~
'"
--'
"-
cr
'"
~
1--150'
TOWNE RD. I _
"""""''''-
N
'"
)
<0
N
)
N
'"
1-- --I
!--150' ---t-150' ---t-150'---j
l-='50'~:'
~ ~ T-'50,=-J
l-=,~'-l-50'
,.
I
I
)
~ ~ ~'SO,=-J
<=>
==
o
:i
x
UJ
""
'"
'"
N
'"
./
""
C)
C)
N
C)
./
N
C)
C)
N
./
N
TOWNE ROAD AND ROEHLING EAST ACCESS
141ST STREET AND CENTEX 1/ NORTH ACCESS
141ST STREET AND ROEHLING NORTH ACCESS
I
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
FIGURE 9
PROPOSED ACCESS POINT &
FUTURE INTERSECTION CONDITIONS
@A & r Engineering Co., llC 2002
"All Rights Reserved"
39
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
o
D
D
o
WFST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
APPENDIX A
This document contains the traffic data that were used in the TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS.
Included are additional figures, intersection turning movement traffic volume counts and the
intersection capacity analyses for each of the study intersections for the AM Peak Hour and PM
Peak Hour.
o
o
WFSf ClAY DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
D
D
D
o
D
o
ApPENDIX A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
o
o
D
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
ADDITIONAL FIGURES ........ ........... ..... .... ...... .... .............. ............ ... ..... ....... ... ........... ..... ... .............. ........ ...... ......... ....... ...4
116TH STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD ...........................................................................................................................1 0
126TH STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD ................... ...... ... .... ...... .................. ..... ..... ...... ......... ........ ................ ..................24
131 ST STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD .................................. ................... .......... .......... ........ .............. ............................32
141sT STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD ... ..... .................................................. ......... ............... .... ...... ..... ..........................42
146TH STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD ........ ................. ........ .................. ...... ........ ................. .... .... ......................... ........50
131sT STREET & TOWNE ROAD .......... ....... ..... ... .............. ... ......... ..... ................ ............ ...... ......... ....... ............. ....... .......58
136TH STREET & TOWNE ROAD......... .... ..... ... ............. ........ ... ..... ............ ....... .... ....... ... ....... ... .... ...... ... .... ...... .... ............. 68
141sT STREET & TOWNE ROAD.................. ................................................................................................................... 78
146TH STREET & TOWNE ROAD.......... ................ ................ .... ..... .... ........... ........ .................. ............... .............. ............ 86
126TH ST & CENTEX I SOUTH/SCHOOL ACCESS ............................................................................................................ 94
126TH STREET & PROPOSED ROADWAy..... ...... .................. ........... ......... ....... .... .................. ...... ...... ............... ............... 97
131sT STREET & KLINEMAN ACCESS ..........................................................................................................................1 00
131sT ST & KEssLERlCENTEx I NORTH ACCESS.........................................................................................................103
131sT ST & TRINITY ACCESS/PROPOSED ROADWAY ...................................................................................................106
136TH STREET EXTENSION & SHELBOURNE ROAD .............................................................. ........................................1 09
TOWNE ROAD & ROEHLING EAST ACCESS.................................................................................................................112
141sT STREET & CENTEX II ACCESS ...........................................................................................................................115
141sT STREET & ROEHLING NORTH ACCESS...............................................................................................................118
o
o
o
D
o
o
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
o
D
o
D
WEST CLAy DEvELoPMENT TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
ADDITIONAL FIGURES
1
126TH STREET
\
~
~
'"
I
'"
':;
~
'"
N
o
I
.,.
o
I
...,
o
~
o
:r'
x
w
.,.
o
o
N
o
./
.,.
o
o
N
o
./
N
o
o
N
./
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
2
136TH STREET EXTENSION
. .- . .---r:._.---;~~:~:.:.~_.~-~
i !
! SgE i
i i
131ST STREET' .. ..j
3
"'1%
Q
o
et
h.
m~2%
S
116TH STREET
YJ
~ t
~Q~
....~....
~~U
"'4% ] [
141ST STREET .4.
"'1%
1~Q
....SO
eet
146TH STREET
fA'" . SITI! I
f~;l//> ........ '~.'... 'I
. .'-::'. .
. L :: i
........!~~
!n ........!
lL;j
. .. .....SITE: ..
iT> .: G I q.: i ~
. ". : O.~
islT~ ./ > ! g::. Q
LF.---L.}l:;..:~..J l(. 0
.. ct:
12%....
LEGEND
* = NEGLIGIBLE
FIGURE A
ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION
FOR SITE A
@A & F Engineering C~t' llC 2002
>>All Rights Reserved
! !
L.._..J
2
i-- .. .. c. .. hI
i SITE i
. H :
L.._..__________..-.J
121ST STREET
....
~~.,
~
g: ~
~Q l')
(l)O ~
wet
~
LAND USE LEGEND
"'26%
r3%-
SITE A .
SITE B ·
SITE C ·
SITE D .
SITE E .
SITE F ·
SITE G .
SITE H .
CENTEX II
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KLlNEMAN
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
~fNNJl~X fAMilY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
....4%
~
5 t
~c~
:-JO'"
~~ll
~
141ST STREET
"'1%
c
o
~ 1367H STREET EXTENSION
..... ,..-..-..-....,
m .... .... ..~2%....T..................T .
~ i SITE i
. c .
i i
131ST STREET' n_nJ
3
....1%! !
Ln_nj
126TH STREET
\
~
~
'"
I
'"
~
.!.,
...
Q:
'"
o
I
...
o
I
,..,
o
~
Cl
I
x
w
...
o
o
'"
o
./
...
o
~
o
./
'"
o
o
'"
./
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
3
121ST STREET
.....
Qf.
Iii
(jJ
146TH STREET
~n __ ..
, ..'
. ::
! :: ....
jSITE
: A .
!......... !-..
j" .', i
.. ....,:SITE;I.
..,:D .
j H..'.' j
j..:: .,.,+:.
L~::~
2
roo 00 00 ". __ 00,
; SITE'
! H !
L.._n_n_n_.._..-.J
12%'"
r3%-
LAND USE LEGEND
SITE A .
SITE B ·
SITE C ·
SITE D .
SITE E .
SITE F .
SITE G ·
SITE H .
CENTEX II
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KLlNEMAN
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
CENTEX I
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
~~ ~I ~~
o en
N,.., * N* _ N *
~'I~
t I t t
\
~ ~ ~
,.., en en
N N
LEGEND
FIGURE B
ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION
FOR SITE B
@A & F Engineering Co., LLC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
116TH STREET
....26%
~
~C
~~ ~
:-J~
~
ctj
* = NEGLIGIBLE
126TH STREET
\
~
t ~Q
'il-~~
146TH STREET
~;. .. .. i:.::r'ii.l~[ *-..
!~fE;/ ! .>':':':d::'!l
136TH STREET EXTENSION ,,:'::1:.,...: r-.~dT'>"dl--;:.--;-~:d 24%-"
V0/~,f.71 .. 'SITE: . "'U"
....3% V/'/ ~)Ll"D i i ':( i
t'il-SITE ~ . !::! .... !S..I..T.:e: !
II)/C/ C') ....E " .
II) ! . !. d! .... :)!
131ST STREET Loo;...J L.::":::L.J
. 3 r-"",-:-r-.- .-"::1 .0. )... 6
-.J) I : ':...:.. :.:SITE: ....""
;/1 !T ::G ! ~..'~'
~ ~l1.jL..L.j ~:~
Q
ct::
2
roo oo oo ". oo --I
; SITE'
! H !
Loo_oo_oo__._.._...-l
.... *
141ST STREET
....
Q
~
ct::
......
m
~
121ST STREET
~.
116TH STREET
....26%
~
'"
I
'"
~
~
Ct:
N
o
I
...
o
I
...,
o
'-"
:;=
o
or:
x
w
...
o
o
N
o
/'
....
o
o
N
o
/'
N
o
~
/'
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
4
~
5 t
QQ'il-
.....~~
~~ll
II
4
26%-..
Q~
/Ji
(jJ
i 14%-
l
I
LEGEND
* = NEGLIGIBLE
FIGURE C
ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION
FOR SITE C
@A & r Engineering Coo, LLC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
~ ~
~Q ~
@~
N~
~
LAND USE LEGEND
SITE A .
SITE B ·
SITE C ·
SITE D .
SITE E .
SITE F ·
SITE G ·
SITE H ·
CENTEX II
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KLlNEMAN
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
CENTEX I
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
126TH STREET
\
,
~
'"
I
'"
~
~
...
a:
N
o
I
...
o
I
""
o
~
o
:i
x
w
...
o
o
N
o
/'
...
o
o
N
o
/'
N
o
o
N
/'
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
5
~1%
~
~ t
QQ~
...,~...
~~~
~
141ST STREET
~1%
t~Q
~~~
Iie(t
146TH STREET ~
~)'I;::cC;~"ll[
.. .~.; ~~_~nt.~'.j~:'-"..J 28%-'
.' 1 :81~ .'. iJ
. ~ ~;1 ls,l I
~"'A ! E : i
~ ......
r'~IT'\" ..~L.....;.D.~ 6
'n'n.SITE. ~
! nr F.~ ! ~!;-~
IsITE ../ ." ! g:::. Q
LF.-L.iL:;~ooJ I( '.~
.(t
Q
~
It
~
~:
~
136TH STREET EXTENSION
..............:2%.......r.:~::~.:7::1.
! SgE !
! !
131ST STREET' .. ..J
3
~2%! !
Loo_..j
22%-'
2
roo .. .. ......,
i SITE I
. H .
L.._.._.._.._oo_..~
121ST STREET
~.
II
flF
lI3%-
116TH STREET
1
~t
~ CO)
@~ ~
gj~
~
LAND USE LEGEND
~28%
SITE A .
SITE B .
SITE C ·
SITE D .
SITE E .
SITE F ·
SITE G ·
SITE H .
CENTEX II
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KlINEMAN
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
~fNNJct JAMllY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
LEGEND
· = NEGLIGIBLE
FIGURE D
ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION
FOR SITE D
@A 8c F Engineering Co., LLC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
....1%
~
5 t
2CClt
,.,JS::...
w~
~
~
141ST SmEET
....1%
C
o
It 136TH STREET EXTENSION
h. . .....r~~~.~~~~~~~;:J
~ :+-2%' i'!
~ ! SgE i
! I
131ST smEET . n_nj
3
....2%! !
L.._nj
126TH SmEET
\
~
~
><
I
><
:;;
~
...
'"
N
o
I
...
o
I
'"
o
o
3:
o
I
x
w
...
o
o
N
o
....-
...
o
o
N
o
....-
N
o
o
N
....-
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
6
121ST smEET
.....
Q~'
/~.
iIJ'
~ Clt
9: CO)
8C ~
~O
Wit
~
t~c
Clt~ 0
... ~ It
146TH smEET
r::n ..
j ,:
(1~1.,~~>:~JI 28%-
:-.:::.....I$..I~.~. ..' ~.:~.~'iJ.
i H' i ISITE~
:...../.: w'h~1
L.:.....I......~
in~:~~\t~~; r
: : .:' : Q,,-:!l::
\sITE ../ .. ! p:'. C
LF.-.i...L:::::::'nj lC .:0
.. ..It
%...
22%'"
2
roo n n ". .- "-'
i SITE i
. H :
L.._n_..__._.._..~
3%'"
fl
LAND USE' LEGEND
SITE A .
SITE B ·
SITE C .
SITE D ·
SITE E ·
SITE F ·
SITE G ·
SITE H .
CENTEX II
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON .
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KlINEMAN
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
~f:Jcl ~AMllY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
116TH smEET
....28%
~ ~ ~
~ ~28% '-:> ~
~ ~ .1%
4% ~ ... ...t~
28% .... * *~~ -~~
,.,.,~ -N
*. *.
I
LEGEND
* = NEGLIGIBLE
FIGURE E
ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION
FOR SITE E
@A & F Engineering Co., LLC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
126TH STREET
\
,
1%-'
~ ..... 42%
J ~
8%-' 12%"" ~
~~* 42% .... ~
00
8%~
42%-.
~ ~
'f> ~
~
* ~~ * ~~
..., - -N
....1%
~
5 t
@c;#!
N~'"
~o:ll
] [
4
146TH STREET
141ST STREET
....1%
t~c
;#!~ ~
: :. : SITE .[
! !: 8!
i i' . !
iSITE i.:. i
. A' :
f=-,-".~_.._....J I
". !::";:~ !..:.U.."T............----.
...~Irn I( I
! ::~: ! ! S':'=:~ !
1.....--1........1.. ,. I
N'fA"L':?. ":1L::~~D.~~ 6
~;#! .. ........SITE:
to:J/l" . : G. I ~ .......~
:00. : Q. ~
jlfiTE!./ ';': ! 9:::. C
~.,'::':':;':::".....J I(>~
'0:
c
~
0:
I-...
~
~
1367H STREET EXTENSION
.. '+2% ..... r~'~::~'~--:-:'l
i SITE i
! c !
131ST STREET' .. ..J
3
....2%! !
L.._..j
2
r"-"-" c. .. ..!
i SITE i
. H :
L.._.._.._.._.._....J
121ST STREET
2%-'
4~i
~1 ~ ~ ' T 13%-'
~c 1 ,
1f1~
gjO:
~ LAND USE LEGEND
.....
116TH STREET
~
'"
I
'"
5i
~
a:
'"
o
I
....
o
I
'"
o
<.:J
3:
o
:I
x
w
....
o
o
N
o
/'
....
o
C>
N
C>
/'
N
C>
C>
N
/'
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
....28%
SITE A .
SITE B ·
SITE C ·
SITE D .
SITE E .
SITE F ·
SITE G .
SITE H .
CENTEX II
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KlINEMAN
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
~~NJcl ~AMllY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
LEGEND
* = NEGLIGIBLE
FIGURE F
ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION
FOR SITE F
@A & F Engineering Co., LLC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
7
"'1%
~
5 t
Qc~
.....~....
~~~
~
141ST STREET
"'1%
c
Q
[f:
t.....
~.
~
136TH STREET EXTENSION
n.....2%r.:~::~.~7.:l .'
! SITE !
i C i
131ST STREET: 00 ooJ
3
...2%! !
L.._..j
126TH STREET
,
~
~
><
I
><
~
~
"'-
'"
N
o
I
~
o
I
'"
o
t:)
~
Cl
:i
x
...,
~
o
o
N
o
/'
v
o
o
N
o
/'
N
o
o
N
/'
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
8
121ST STREET
....
Q#.
/J>
116TH STREET
"'28%
~
~ ~
~Q .
IJlQ
yj[f:
~
t~Q
~~Q
119 '" ~ It [f:
146TH STREET b 2%'"
i ,,' i'" SITE I
. .: B:
i i: !
I SITE i . il
. A' :
. ~_,,+_~_oo_....J
m~ is~r ..0 mJ
~,... ..",!""",,!. ....:>. .:.' ~
!"i!~~~~ L';"~ r
!sITEff~l')~~" . !;t. Q
. c V n.n." n- ....~
L.... ----.:,r"/"_ ....... ','-'
. .,::~
8%'"
42%'"
2
roo_oo_oo_"' 00 00,
; SITE:
! H !
L.._.._.._.._.._....J
i r3%-
LAND USE LEGEND
SITE A .
SITE B .
SITE C ·
SITE D .
SITE E .
SITE F ·
SITE G ·
SITE H .
CENTEX II
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON
SINGLE FAMilY. RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KlINEMAN
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (50 OU)
~~NJtl ~AMllY RESIDENTIAL (68 OU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
LEGEND
* = NEGLIGIBLE
FIGURE G
ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION
FOR SITE G
@A & F Engineering Co., LLC 2002
"ALL Rights Reserved"
126TH STREET
\
,
1%~
~
~ *
Q)Cl
:,JO'
~ o:ll
~
141ST STREET
*~
~~C
J~o
"eo:
146TH STREET b....3%
...:1[_1%
roo .. "-r~~:::-'~ [
i.. ,..,i'~'!1
! '*'1" ~ 1'3i ,c\"j< I,
. ~ J~.n'n ..J
m~ -..ls~r-~-:j _3%
...... . 'E ~,.
i .....if!.lJ.::+:.".....i.:. j i
: t'): : .....> :
L.. L..-" -' 6 ....5%
r-~ft7.:S,'~.'El ~..'.D..~
: t') ::....... : G,.' . ~
\sITE " ': ! g:' Q
LF.---L~:;::::......J 1(':0
J"" '0:
'w.
Q
o
0:
"
m
~
136TH STREET EXTENSION
.- >.-- n. r.-:~~~~:~:.:~.~:~~."l. .
2%~ i .. I
i SITE I
:~ c :
I I
.~ .
131ST STREET' .. ..J
3
3%~
121ST STREET
.~
Q~
hi
(j~
~ 1_12%
116TH STREET
~
'"
I
'"
:E
~
L0-
a::
N
o
I
...
o
I
,..,
o
'-'
'"
o
:i
x
......
...
o
o
N
o
./
...
o
o
N
o
./
N
o
o
N
./
N
WEST CLAY
CARMEL, IN
7%~
LAND USE LEGEND
SITE A ·
SITE B ·
SITE C ·
SITE D .
SITE E .
SITE F .
SITE G ·
SITE H ·
CENTEX II
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (105 DU)
ROEHLING .
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (192 DU)
THOMPSON r
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (288 DU)
KESSLER .
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (53 DU)
TRINITY
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (111 DU)
KlINEMAN
SINGLE FAMilY RESIDENTIAL (50 DU)
~~NJtt ~AMllY RESIDENTIAL (68 DU)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (650 STUDENTS)
MIDDLE SCHOOL (1250 STUDENTS)
LEGEND
* = NEGLIGIBLE
FIGURE H
ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION
FOR SITE H
@A & F Engineering Co., LLC 2002
"All Righfs Reserved"
9
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WFSf CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
116TH STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD
INTERSECTION DATA
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS
AND
CAPACITY ANALYSES
10
/~
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
NORTHBOUND
EASTBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
WESTBOUND
HOUR
6- 7
7- 8
8- 9
3 - 4
4 - 5
5- 6
TOTAL
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
o
D
D
D
D
o
D
o
WEST CLAY
116TH STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD (00)
JANUARY 17, 2002
PEAK HOUR DATA
AM PEAK
HR BEGIN 7:15 AM
L T R TOT
OFF PEAK
PM PEAK
HR BEGIN 5:00 PM
L T R TOT
L
TOT
T R
2 29
21 208
30 .161
113 195
36 67
13 242
69 260
2 310
106 310
9 393
20 66
14 344
10 194
101 283
17 29
48 282
HOUR SUMMARY
NB SB NB+SB EB WB EB+WB TOTAL
- AM -
34 109 143 88 126 214 357
61 272 333 238 296 534 867
56 152 208 235 241 476 684
- PM -
135 71 206 209 263 472 678
226 64 290 251 314 565 855
310 66 376 393 344 737 1113
822 734 1556 1414 1584 2998 4554 D
18.1% 16.1% 34.2% 31.0% 34.8% 65.8% 100.0%
- AM PEAK VOLUMES - 0
28 73 67 82
74 272 248 310
0.66 0.93 0.93 0.95
- PM PEAK VOLUMES - 0
101 21 121 100
317 75 393 371
0.78 0.89 0.81 0.93 0
0
0
0
0
11
__ _..u_ -- ---- ---------------
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
D
D
D
o
D
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
WEST CLAY
116TH STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD (00)
JANUARY 17, 2002
NORTHBOUND
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 0 0 0 6 1 7 23 4 27 29 5 34
7- 8 2 0 2 28 0 28 29 2 31 59 2 61
8- 9 5 0 5 20 0 20 31 0 31 56 0 56
PM
3- 4 8 1 9 69 1 70 51 5 56 128 7 135
4- 5 10 0 10 139 2 141 73 2 75 222 4 226
5- 6 10 0 10 193 1 194 104 2 106 307 3 310
PASSENGER 35 455 311 801
97.2% 98.9% 95.4% 97.4%
TRUCK 1 5 15 21
2.8% 1.1% 4.6% 2.6%
BOTH 36 460 326 822
4.4% 56.0% 39.7% 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 5 0 5 78 1 79 4 0 4 87 1 88
7- 8 23 0 23 201 3 204 11 0 11 235 3 238
8- 9 21 0 21 204 4 208 5 1 6 230 5 235
PM
3- 4 21 1 22 174 6 180 7 0 7 202 7 209
4- 5 25 2 27 214 2 216 8 0 8 247 4 251
5- 6 100 1 101 279 4 283 9 0 9 388 5 393
PASSENGER 195 1150 44 1389
98.0% 98.3% 97.8% 98.2%
TRUCK 4 20 1 25
2.0% 1. 7% 2.2% 1.8%
BOTH 199 1170 45 1414
14.1% 82.7% 3.2% 100.0%
12
0
0
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY 0
CLIENT WEST CLAY
LOCATION 116TH STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD (00) 0
DATE JANUARY 17, 2002
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL SOUTHBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
AM
6- 7 9 0 9 72 0 72 28 0 28 109 0
7- 8 31 1 32 160 0 160 79 1 80 270 2
8- 9 21 0 21 90 0 90 40 1 41 151 1
PM
3- 4 14 0 14 31 2 33 21 3 24 66 5
4- 5 11 1 12 35 0 35 17 0 17 63 1
5- 6 17 0 17 29 0 29 20 0 20 66 0
PASSENGER 103 417 205 725
98.1% 99.5% 97.6% 98.8% 0
TRUCK 2 2 5 9
1. 9% 0.5% 2.4% 1. 2%
BOTH 105 419 210 734 0
14.3% 57.1% 28.6% 100.0%
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : WESTBOUND 0
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL BOTO
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
-
AM
6- 7 51 3 54 66 3 69 2 1 3 119 7 120
7- 8 103 3 106 183 5 188 2 0 2 288 8 29
8- 9 70 3 73 159 2 161 7 0 7 236 5 24
PM
3- 4 47 3 50 181 13 194 18 1 19 246 17 26Q
4- 5 43 1 44 247 3 250 20 0 20 310 4 31
5- 6 47 1 48 280 2 282 14 0 14 341 3 34
PASSENGER 361 1116 63 1540 0
96.3% 97.6% 96.9% 97.2%
TRUCK 14 28 2 44 0
3.7% 2.4% 3.1% 2.8%
BOTH 375 1144 65 1584
23.7% 72.2% 4.1% 100.0% 0
0
0
13
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
I D
D
D
D
o
o
D
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 of ]
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information Site Information
Analyst RMB Intersection 116th St & East She/bourne
AQency/Co. 4&F Enqineering Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/6/02 Analysis Year Existing
IAnalysis Time Period 4M Peak
=>roiect Description West Clay
East/West Street: 116th Street North/South Street: West She/bourne
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 50 244 0 0 308 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 55 271 0 0 342 2
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 0 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LT TR
Upstream Signal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 0 0 0 30 0 230
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 33 0 255
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 5 0 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0
Configuration LR
Delay, Queue length, and level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LT LR
~ (vph) 55 288
C (m) (vph) 1198 630
~/c 0.05 0.46
5% queue length 0.14 2.39
Control Delay 8.1 15.4
LOS A C
Approach Delay - - 15.4
Approach LOS - -- C
o HCS2000™ Copyright <!d 2000 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k3293.TMP 14
Version 4.lb
1/1102
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 ~.
Jl
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY -
General Information Site Information
!Analyst MB I Intersection 116th St & East She/bourne -
I!AQency/Co. &F Engineering lJurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/6/02 lI!Analysis Year IExisting
Analysis Time Period PM Peak III
:>roiect Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: 116th Street North/South Street: West She/bourne
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 .
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments (t
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 295 389 0 0 330 14 U
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 327 432 0 0 366 15
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - -- 0 - - U
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 {}
Configuration LT TR
Upstream SiQnal 0 0 ,
Minor Street Northbound Southbound U-
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R !
,
I
Volume 0 0 0 17 0 49 U'
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 18 0 54
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 5 0 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0 U
RT Channelized 0 0
.Lanes . 0 0 0 0 0 0
Configuration LR
Delay. Queue Length. and Level of Service -
~pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound 12il
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11
Lane Configuration LT LR
~ (vph) 327 72 D
k; (m) (vph) 1161 278
~/c 0.28 0.26
~5% queue length 1.16 1.01 U
Control Delay 9.3 22.4
LOS A C ~
~pproach Delay - - 22.4
~pproach LOS -- - C -
HCS2000™
Copyright i!) 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Version Db
file://C:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k3360. TMP
15
3/1/02
o Two-Way Stop Control
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
D
o
o
o
Page 1 of:
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
nalyst RMB Intersection 116th Street & West
Shelbourne
~aency/Co. A&F EnGineerinG urisdiction Carmel
ate Performed 2/6/02 nalysis Year ExistinG ;
nalvsis Time Period AM Peak
Proiect Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: 116th Street North/South Street: West Shelbourne
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street . Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
~olume 0 229 13 274 264 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 254 14 304 293 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- - 5 -- -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration TR LT
Uostream Sianal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 2 0 65 0 0 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 0 72 0 0 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 0 0
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0
Configuration LR
Delav. Queue Length, and level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LT LR
v (vph) 304 74
C (m) (vph) 1278 699
v/c 0.24 0.11
95% queue length 0.93 0.35
Control Delay 8.7 10.8
LOS A B
IApproach Delay - - 10.8
!Approach LOS - -- B
file://C:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k30CO.TMP
16
1/1/02 I
Two-Way Stop Control
Page I 11
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information )ite Information n
Analyst RMB Intersection 116th Street & West ...
Shelbourne
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering urisdiction Carmel n
Date Performed 2/6/02 nalysis Year :Existing ~
~nalysis Time Period PM Peak
Project Description West Clay D
EastlWest Street: 116th Street North/South Street: West She/bourne
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period hrs}: 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments {}
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R I
Volume 0 384 9 77 302 0 L
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 426 10 85 335 0 D
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - -- 5 - --
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0 il
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration TR LT
Upstream SiQnal 0 0 D
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R D
~olume 10 0 300 0 0 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 11 0 333 0 0 0 il
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 0 0
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N D
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
I....anes 0 0 0 0 0 0 ]
Configuration LR
Delay, Queue Length, and level of Service ,
IApproach EB WB Northbound Southbound 12D
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11
Lane Configuration LT LR
" (vph) 85 344
~ (m) (vph) 1108 593 -
fr.Ilc 0.08 0.58 D
~5% queue length 0.25 3.70
Control Delay 8.5 19.1
LOS A C D
IApproach Delay - - 19.1
IApproach LOS - - C
U
file://C:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k31 A 1.TMP
17
311102
o
Two-Way Stop Control
o
D
o
o
o
D
D
I D
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Page I oC
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
IAnalyst RMB Intersection 116th Street and She/bourne
IAciency/Co. A&F Enaineerina IR
I'urisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 1/21/02 nalysis Year Existina
l.i\nalvsis Time Period AM Peak
Proiect Description West Clav
EastIWest Street: 116th Street North/South Street: She/bourne Road
Intersection Orientation: East-West Studv Period Chrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
l T R l T R
!Volume 21 208 13 113 195 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 23 231 14 125 216 2
Dercent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 -- -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Uostream SiQnal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
l T R l T R
!Volume 2 29 36 30 161 69
1Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 32 40 33 178 76
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Oelav, Queue Lenath, and level of Service
~pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
Iv (vph) 23 125 74 287
lC(m) (vph) 1334 1304 417 340
~/c 0.02 0.10 0.18 0.84
95% queue length 0.05 0.32 0.64 7.58
Control Delay 7.7 8.1 15.5 53.0
LOS A A C F
Approach Delay -- - 15.5 53.0
~pproach lOS -- - C F
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k12Dl.TMP
18
~/l f()')
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 ~
n
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY -,
General Information Site Information r i
I\nalyst RMB Intersection 116th Street and Shelbourne ..
R
I\Qency/Co. 4&F Engineering .urisdiction Carmel f
Date Performed 1/21/02 nalysis Year Existing l.
I\nalysis Time Period PM Peak
Proiect Description West Clay I
EastlWest Street: 116th Street North/South Street: She/bourne Road l.
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments Uj
Major Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R U
Volume 101 283 9 48 282 14
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 112 314 10 53 313 15
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0 -0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Upstream Signal 0 0 n
Minor Street Northbound Southbound 1.1,
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 I
I
L T R L T R n'
Volume 10 194 106 17 29 20 ~
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 11 215 117 18 32 22 n
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 U
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N It
Storage 0 0 I.J
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 I
Configuration LTR LTR 1.1
Delav, Queue LenQth, and Level of Service
I\pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound I
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ..
ane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR 11
v (vph) 112 53 343 72 I
C (m) (vph) 1215 1219 271 0
vlc 0.09 0.04 1.27 n
95% queue length 0.30 0.14 16.70 l.J
Control Delay 8.3 8.1 183.6
OS A A F F r ~
I\pproach Delay -- - 183.6 ~
I\pproach LOS - - F
U
file://C:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k2370. TMP
19
3/1/02
o
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1b
[J- Analyst: RMB
Agency: A&F Engineering
Date: 2/7/02
period: AM Peak
Dproject ID: West Clay
E/W St: 116th Street
Inter.: 116th Street & Shelbourne Road
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Carmel
Year Existing
N/S St: Shelbourne Road
0 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound I Westbound 1 Northbound 1 Southbound
I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R
DNo. Lanes I I I I
I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0
LGConfig I L TR I L TR I L TR 1 L TR
Volume 121 208 13 1113 195 2 12 29 36 130 161 69
DLane Width 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
RTOR Vol I 3 I 0 I 9 I 17
DDuration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
DEB Left A I NB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A 1 Right A
Peds I Peds
DWE Left A 1 SB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru A
Right A I Right A
ONB Peds I Peds
Right I EB Right
SB Right I WB Right
Green 37.0 23.0
DYellOW 3.0 3.0
All Red 2.0 2.0
Cycle Length: 70.0 secs
DAPpr I Intersection Performance Summary
Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
OGrp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 594 1124 0.04 0.53 8.0 A
DTR 950 1797 0.25 0.53 9.1 A 9.0 A
Westbound
D~R 580 1097 0.22 0.53 9.0 A
955 1807 0.23 0.53 9.0 A 9.0 A
[!OrthbDnnd
L 330 1004 0.01 0.33 15.8 B
R 551 1678 0.11 0.33 16.5 B 16.5 B
[IOuthbound
426 1297 0.08 0.33 16.3 B
TR 573 1743 0.41 0.33 18.7 B 18.4 B
o
o
Intersection Delay = 12.2 (sec/veh)
Intersection LOS = B
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1b
20
Analyst: RMB
Agency: A&F Engineering
Date: 2/7/02
period: PM Peak
Project ID: West Clay
E/W St: 116th Street
Inter.: 116th Street
Area Type: All other
Jurisd: Carmel
Year Existing
o
:r;~:lbourne Road 0
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
D
o
D
D
o
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound
I L T R I L T R L T R 1 L T R
I I I I
I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0
I L TR I L TR I L TR I L TR
1101 283 9 148 282 14 110 194 106 117 29 20
112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
I 2 I 3 I 26 I 5
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1b
N/S St: Shelbourne Road
No. Lanes
LGConfig
Volume
Lane Width
RTOR vol
Duration
0.25
Phase Combination
EB Left
Thru
Right
Peds
WE Left
Thru
Right
Peds
NB Right
SB Right
Green
Yellow
All Red
Appr/
Lane
Grp
Lane
Group
Capacity
Eastbound
L 489
TR 927
Westbound
L 491
TR 926
Northbound
L 450
TR 593
Southbound
L 291
TR 588
Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
A I NB Left A
A I Thru A
A I Right A
I Peds
A I SB Left A
A I Thru A
A I Right A
I Peds
I EB Right
I WE Right
36.0 24.0
3.0 3.0
2.0 2.0
Cycle
Intersection Performance Summary
Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group
Flow Rate
(s) vlc g/C Delay LOS
950 0.23 0.51 9.6 A
1803 0.35 0.51 10.3 B
955 0.11 0.51 8.8 A
1800 0.35 0.51 10.3 B
1312 0.02 0.34 15.3 B
1730 0.51 0.34 19.1 B
850 0.07 0.34 15.6 B
1715 0.08 0.34 15.6 B
Length: 70.0
secs
Approach
Delay LOS
10.1
B
10.1
B
19.0
B
15.6
B
Intersection Delay ~ 12.8
(sec/veh)
Intersection LOS ~ B
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1b
21
o
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1b
U' Analyst: RMB
Agency: A&F Engineering
Date: 2/7/02
Period: AM Peak
Dproject ID: West Clay
E/W St: 116th Street
Inter.: 116th Street & Shelbourne Road
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Carmel
Year Existing+2012+Proposed
N/S St: Shelbourne Road
0 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound 1 Southbound
1 L T R 1 L T R 1 L T R I L T R
DNo. Lanes 1 I I I
I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0
LGConfig I L TR I L TR I L TR I L TR
Volume 1102 250 16 1136 234 56 12 57 43 178 221 240
DLane Width 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
RTOR Vol I 4 1 14 I 10 1 60
ODuration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
DEB Left A NB Left A
Thru A Thru A
Right A Right A
Peds Peds
OWB Left A SB Left A
Thru A Thru A
Right A Right A
DNB Peds Peds
Right EB Right
SB Right WB Right
Green 32.0 28.0
DYellOW 3.0 3.0
All Red 2.0 2.0
Cycle Length: 70.0 secs
~ppr/ Intersection Performance Summary
Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
rp Capacity (s) vlc glC Delay LOS Delay LOS
astbound
L 432 946 0.26 0.46 12.0 B
[fR 821 1797 0.35 0.46 12.6 B 12.4 B
Westbound
~R 446 976 0.34 0.46 12.7 B
808 1768 0.38 0.46 12.8 B 12.7 B
~orthbound
250 625 0.01 0.40 12.7 B
R 684 1709 0.15 0.40 13.5 B 13.5 B
aouthbound 1253 0.17 0.40 13.7
501 B
TR 675 1688 0.66 0.40 19.5 B 18.6 B
o
o
Intersection Delay = 14.8 (sec/veh)
Intersection LOS = B
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1b
22
(sec/veh)
D
Inter.: 116th Street & Shelbourne Road D.
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Carmel
Year Existing+Yr 2012+Proposed 0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
D
D
o
o
o
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1b
Analyst: RMB
Agency: A&F Engineering
Date: 2/7/02
period: PM Peak
Project ID: West Clay
E/W St: 116th Street
N/S St: Shelbourne Road
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
1 Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound 1 Southbound
I L T R 1 L T R I L T R I .L T R
I 1 1 I
No. Lanes I 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0
LGConfig I L TR I L TR 1 L TR I L TR
Volume 1281 340 11 158 338 32 112 254 127 135 49 117
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
RTOR Vol 1 2 1 8 I 31 1 29
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 I Right A
Peds I Peds
WE Left A I SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right I EB Right
SB Right 1 WB Right
Green 34.0 26.0
Yellow 3.0 3.0
All Red 2.0 2.0
Cycle Length: 70.0 secs
Intersection Performance Summary
Apprl Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 389 800 0.80 0.49 26.6 C
TR 876 1803 0.44 0.49 12.2 B 18.6 B
Westbound
L 401 825 0.16 0.49 10.2 B
TR 870 1791 0.46 0.49 12.3 B 12.0 B
Northbound
L 444 1195 0.03 0.37 14.0 B
TR 644 1735 0.60 0.37 19.4 B 19.3 B
Southbound
L 259 698 0.15 0.37 14.9 B
TR 607 1635 0.25 0.37 15.5 B 15.4 B
Intersection Delay = 16.7
Intersection LOS = B
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1b
23
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
10
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
126TH STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD
INTERSECTION DATA
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS
AND
CAPACITY ANALYSES
24
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
NORTHBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
WESTBOUND
HOUR
6- 7
7- 8
8- 9
3- 4
4- 5
5- 6
TOTAL
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
WEST CLAY
126TH & SHELBOURNE ROAD (01)
JANUARY 11, 2002
PEAK HOUR DATA
I
I
I
I
4 343"
721
5 I
I
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
OFF PEAK
AM PEAK
HR BEGIN 7:00 AM
L T R TOT
T R
TOT
PM PEAK
HR BEGIN 5:00 PM
L T R TOT
L
52
o 268
3
o 52
268
2 5
HOUR SUMMARY
NB SB NB+SB
- AM -
20 118 138
52 268 320
46 144 190
- PM -
87 46 133
176 56 232
343 72 415
724 704 1428
49.7% 48.3% 98.0%
- AM PEAK VOLUMES -
17 70
52 268
0.76 0.96
- PM PEAK VOLUMES -
98 20
343 72
0.88 0.90
25
o
2
339
72
3
WB TOTAL
2 140
5 325
5 195
3 136
9 241
5 420
29
2.0%
1457
100.0% 0
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
3
6
0.50
4
9
0.56
D
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
WEST CLAY
126TH & SHELBOURNE ROAD (01)
JANUARY II, 2002
NORTHBOUND
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 18 0 18 2 0 2 20 0 20
7- 8 52 0 52 0 0 0 52 0 52
8- 9 41 0 41 5 0 5 46 0 46
PM
3- 4 85 0 85 2 0 2 87 0 87
4- 5 169 0 169 7 0 7 176 0 176
5- 6 339 0 339 4 0 4 343 0 343
PASSENGER 704 20 724
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
TRUCK 0 0 0
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
BOTH 704 20 724
97.2% 2.8% 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 2 116 0 116 118 0 118
7- 8 0 0 0 268 0 268 268 0 268
8- 9 1 0 1 143 0 143 144 0 144
PM
3- 4 2 0 2 44 0 44 46 0 46
4- 5 0 0 0 56 0 56 56 0 56
5- 6 0 0 0 72 0 72 72 0 72
PASSENGER 5 699 704
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
TRUCK 0 0 0
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
BOTH 5 699 704
0.7% 99.3% 100.0%
26
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
WEST CLAY
126TH & SHELBOURNE ROAD (01)
JANUARY 11, 2002
WESTBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
AM
D
o
D
o
0 0 0 2 0
2 0 2 5 0
1 0 1 5 0
2 0 2 3 0
5 0 5 9 0
3 0 3 5 0
13 29
100.0% 100.0% 0
0 0
0.0% 0.0%
13 29 0
44.8% 100.0%
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
D
0
6- 7 2 0 2
7- 8 3 0 3
8- 9 4 0 4
PM
3- 4 1 0 1
4- 5 4 0 4
5- 6 2 0 2
PASSENGER 16
100.0%
TRUCK 0
0.0%
BOTH 16
55.2%
27
o
D
o
D
o
o
D
o
D
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
o
o
o >
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 of
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
IAnalyst RMB Intersection 126th Street & Shelbourne
Road
IAgency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
!Date Performed 2/4/02 Analysis Year Existing
Analysis Time Period AM Peak
Proiect Description West CIa v
EasVWest Street: 126th Street lNorth/South Street: Shelbourne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South Istudv Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments ..
Maior Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
lVolume 0 52 0 0 268 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 52 0 0 268 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration TR LT
Uostream Sienal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 3 0 2 0 0 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 3 0 2 0 0 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 0 0
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
!storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0
Configuration LR
Delav, Queue Lenath, and level of Service
!Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LT LR
W (vph) 0 5
t (m) (vph) 1535 771
vIe 0.00 0.01
95% queue length 0.00 0.02
Control Delay 7.3 9.7
LOS A A
IApproach Delay - - 9.7
!Approach LOS -- - A i
-hl_.JIr".\'l.TnTT'\r\1.'7~\"TT:'l\ ..fTl\__"ll_AAl\f ~1l. An
2A
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY 11
General Information Site Information
Analyst RMB Intersection 126th Street & Shelbourne
Road
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel 0
Date Performed 2/4/02
Analysis Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year Existing
Project Description West Clay {}
EastlWest Street: 126th Street lNorth/South Street: Shelbourne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudv Period hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments D
Maior Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R {]-
Volume 0 339 4 0 72 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 339 4 0 72 0 i1
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0 if
anes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration TR LT -
Upstream Signal 0 0 n
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
L T R L T R f[
Volume 2 0 3 0 0 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 0 3 0 0 0 ~
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 0 0 \[
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 -
Flared Approach N N i1
~torage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0 ~
I...anes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q
~onfiguration LR
Delay, Queue length, and level of Service
~pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound 1-iJ-
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11
Lane Configuration LT LR
~ (vph) 0 5 3J
G (m) (vph) 1199 649
vIe 0.00 0.01 ~
~5% queue length 0.00 0.02 I r
Control Delay 8.0 10.6 -
LOS A B -0-
fA.pproach Delay - -- 10.6
lA.pproach LOS - - B
o
Page] of
o
Two- W ay Stop Control
>
D
filp'/Ir'\WTNf)()W~\TFMP\1l?1c4?r4 TMP
29
1/1/0
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
'D
o
o
o
o
Q
o
o
o
o
0>
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 of:
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
~nalyst RMB . Intersection 126th Street & Shelbourne
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Road
Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/4/02 Analysis Year Existing+ 2012+Generated
Analysis Time Period AM Peak
Proiect Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: 126th Street lNorth/South Street: She/bourne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South Istudv Period (hrs): 0.25
Ivehicle Volumes and Adiustments
Maior Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
l T R l T R
Volume 0 203 8 66 583 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 203 8 66 583 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0
Configuration T R L T
Upstream SiQnal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 26 0 51 0 0 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 26 0 51 0 0 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 0 0
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
!Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0
Configuration L R
Delav. Queue length, and level of Service
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L R
v (vph) 66 26 51
C (m) (vph) 1342 283 830
v/c 0.05 0.09 0.06
95% queue length 0.16 0.30 0.20
Control Delay 7.8 19.0 9.6
OS A C A
IApproach Delay - - 12.8
IApproach lOS -- - B
...l~.llr.\ UTlll.lnI\U1C\'"1'I;1\ ,fD\n"l.C()()A '"1'1\.In
30
"'t/'t u"...
Two-Way Stop Control
Page I ~
n
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROlSUMMARY -
General Information Site Information D
Analyst RMB Intersection 126th Street & Shelbourne
Road
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel 0
Date Performed 2/4/02 Analysis Year Existing+ Yr 2012+Generated
fJ\nalysis Time Period PM Peak
Project Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: 126th Street INorth/South Street: Shelbourne Road I
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period hrs): 0.25 iIII
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments ft
Major Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 -,
;
L T R L T R I
Volume 0 587 31 14 198 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 587 31 14 198 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - -- 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0
Configuration T R L T
Upstream SiQnal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 16 0 20 0 0 0 {j
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 16 0 20 0 0 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 0 0 -
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 .
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0 U
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0
Configuration L R [
Delay. Queue Length, and level of Service -
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound n
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 [
Lane Configuration L L R
II (vph) 14 16 20 n
C (m) (vph) 948 339 504 W
"/c 0.01 0.05 0.04
gS% queue length 0.04 0.15 0.12
Control Delay 8.9 16.1 12.4 IIIl
LOS A C B
Approach Delay - - 14.1
Approach LOS - - B -
>
D
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k50Fl.TMP
31
3/1/02
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WFSf CLAy DEvELoPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
131 ST STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD
INTERSECTION DATA
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS
AND
CAPACITY ANALYSES
32
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
NORTHBOUND
EASTBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
WESTBOUND
HOUR
6- 7
7- 8
8- 9
3- 4
4- 5
5- 6
TOTAL
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
D
WEST CLAY
131ST STREET & SHELBORNE ROAD (02)
JANUARY 8, 2002
PEAK HOUR DATA
AM PEAK
HR BEGIN 7:00 AM
L T R TOT
OFF PEAK
PM PEAK
HR BEGIN 4:45 PM
L T R TOT
T R
TOT
L
6 19
3 69
9 156
65 24
10 228
4 51
2 32
29 97
61 299
3 58
1 35
14 140
23 48
7 79
5 170
9 98
HOUR SUMMARY
NB SB NB+SB EB WB EB+WB TOTAL
- AM -
10 89 99 34 25 59 158
48 170 218 79 98 177 395
41 85 126 78 59 137 263
- PM -
85 32 117 42 94 136 253
182 36 218 68 96 164 382
290 43 333 65 134 199 532
656 455 1111 366 506 872 1983
33.1% 22.9% 56.0% 18.5% 25.5% 44.0% 100.0%
- AM PEAK VOLUMES - D
17 50 24 32
48 183 83 106
0.71 0.92 0.86 0.83
- PM PEAK VOLUMES - 0
87 13 20 47
299 45 68 140 0
0.86 0.87 0.85 0.74
0
D
D
D
33
o
D
o
D
o
U
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
Q
o
D
o
o
o
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
WEST CLAY
131STSTREET & SHELBORNE ROAD (02)
JANUARY 8, 2002
NORTHBOUND
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 1 0 1 1 0 1 8 0 8 10 0 10
7- 8 6 0 6 19 0 19 23 0 23 48 0 48
8- 9 4 0 4 17 1 18 19 0 19 40 1 41
PM
3- 4 12 0 12 50 0 50 23 0 23 85 0 85
4- 5 8 1 9 136 0 136 37 0 37 181 1 182
5- 6 9 0 9 221 0 221 60 0 60 290 0 290
PASSENGER 40 444 170 654
97.6% 99.8% 100.0% 99.7%
TRUCK 1 1 0 2
2.4% 0.2% 0.0% 0.3%
BOTH 41 445 170 656
6.3% 67.8% 25.9% 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 1 0 1 32 0 32 1 0 1 34 0 34
7- 8 3 0 3 69 0 69 7 0 7 79 0 79
8- 9 3 0 3 65 1 66 9 0 9 77 1 78
PM
3- 4 2 G 2 37 0 37 3 0 3 42 0 42
4- 5 5 1 6 56 1 57 5 0 5 66 2 68
5- 6 3 0 3 58 0 58 4 0 4 65 0 65
PASSENGER 17 317 29 363
94 .4 % 99.4% 100.0% 99.2%
TRUCK 1 2 0 3
5.6% 0.6% 0.0% 0.8%
BOTH 18 319 29 366
4.9% 87.2% 7.9% 100.0%
34
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
"0
o
o I
o
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
: r-
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL ~
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
Jl
AM 8~
6- 7 5 0 5 72 0 72 12 0 12 89 0
7- 8 9 0 9 156 0 156 5 0 5 170 0 I~U
8- 9 5 0 5 75 0 75 5 0 5 85 0
PM
3- 4 2 0 2 25 0 25 5 0 5 32 0 32
4- 5 2 0 2 32 0 32 2 0 2 36 0 ~C
5- 6 2 0 2 39 0 39 2 0 2 43 0
WEST CLAY
131ST STREET & SHELBORNE ROAD (02)
JA..l\ffiARY 8, 2002
SOUTHBOUND
PASSENGER 25 399 31 455
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 0
TRUCK 0 0 0 0
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
BOTH 25 399 31 455 0
5.5% 87.7% 6.8% 100.0%
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : WESTBOUND 0
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL BOTO
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
AM
6- 7 16 0 16 8 0 8 1 0 1 25 0 ~O
7- 8 65 0 65 24 0 24 9 0 9 98 0
8- 9 26 0 26 30 1 31 2 0 2 58 1
PM
3- 4 19 0 19 69 0 69 6 0 6 94 0 ~D
4- 5 18 0 18 71 0 71 7 0 7 96 0
5- 6 26 0 26 94 0 94 14 0 14 134 0 134
PASSENGER 170 296 39 505 0
100.0% 99.7% 100.0% 99.8%
TRUCK 0 1 0 1 0
0.0% 0.3% 0.0% 0.2%
BOTH 170 297 39 506
33.6% 58.7% 7.7% 100.0% 0
0
0
35
o
All-Way Stop Control
Page I of
o
o
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS
General Information Isite Information
InaiVst RMB on 131st Street & She/bourne Rd.
,oencv/Co. 4&F EnqineerinQ urisdiction Carrne/
ate Performed 1/14/02 lAflalvsis Year xistina
Inalvsis Time Period 4M Peak
ProlectlD West Clay
~astlWest Street 131 st Street 1N0rth/South Street: She/bourne Road
'olume Adjustments and Site Characteristics
\OOroach Eastbound Westbound
ovement l T R l T R
Ivolume 3 69 7 65 24 9
~ Thrus left lane 50 50
AoDroach Northbound Southbound
Movement l T R l T R
VO'ume 6 19 23 9 156 5
r. Thrus left lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
11 l2 11 12 11 12 11 12
l;onfiguration LTR LTR LTR LTR
PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
low Rate 86 108 52 188
r. Heavy Vehicles 5 .5 5 5
o. lanes 1 1 1 1
eomelry Group 1 1 1 . 1
uration, T 0.25
Saturation Headwav Ad'ustment Worksheet
Prop. left-Turns 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.1
Prop. Right-Turns 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.0
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
~l T -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
~RT -adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
hadj, computed 4.65 4.65 4.65 4.65
Departure Headwav and Service Time
hd, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
. initial 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.17
hd, final value 4.65 4.65 4.65 4.65
, final value 0.11 0.14 0.06 0.24
Move-up time, m 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
ervice Time 2.7 2.7 I 2.7 I 2.7 T
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o ~apaci\y and level of Service
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
11 12 11 12 l1 12 11 12
Capacity 336 358 302 438
Delay 8.23 8.53 7.73 8.91
os A A A A
(A,pproach: Delay 8.23 8.53 7.73 8.91
LOS A A A A
Intersection Delay 8.54
~ntersection LOS A
o
o
o
h1 ~.lIr."-XTTll.1T",""TC'\ Tt::l\ AD\",")l,.c::'")().c:: Tl\ An
~f)
-""t/"'t fAr
All-Way Stop Control
o
Page 1 of
o
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS il
General Information Site Information
.nalvst RMB tersection 131st Street & Shelbourne Rd.
.<leney/Co. A&F Engineering urisdiction Carmel
late Performed 1/14/02 Vlalysis Year Fxis/ing U
llalvsis Time Period PM Peak
Project 10 West Clav
astlWest Street: 131st Street lNorth/South Street: She/bourne Road {}
'olume Adiustments and Site Characteristics
IDProach Eastbound Westbound
~ovement l T R l T R
Volume 4 51 3 29 97 14 U
lI. Thrus left lane 50 50
IDProach Northbound Southbound
"ovement l T R l T R ]
olume 10 228 61 2 32 1 L
lI. Thrus left lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound l2{}
11 l2 11 l2 11 l2 11
Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 {}
low Rate 63 154 331 38
Y. Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5
No. lanes 1 1 1 1 i1
Geometry Group 1 1 1 1
Duration, T 0.25
Saturation Headway Ad"ustment Worksheet U
Prop. left-Turns 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1
Prop. Right-Turns 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2U
hl T -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
hRT-adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 fr
hadj. computed 5.08 5.08 5.08 5.08
DeDarture Headway and Service Time
hd. initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 {}
. initial 0.06 0.14 0.29 0.03
hd. final value 5.08 5.08 5.08 5.08
. final value 0.09 0.21 0.41 0.05 ft
Move-up lime, m 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Service Time 3.1 3.1 I 3.1 I 3.1 -
Capacity and level of Service 11
Eastbound' Westbound Northbound Southbound
11 l2 11 l2 11 12 11 12
Capacity 313 404 581 288 -0-
Delay 8.57 9.27 10.61 8.23
os A A B A
II.pproach: Delay 8.57 9.27 10.61 8.23 If-
LOS A A B A l..
Intersection Delay 9.88
Intersection LOS A f}
fllp'/Ir'\ WTNf)nW~\TFMP\n71c'\7FO TMP
37
1/1/0
o
AJI-Way Stop Control
Page 1 of
o
o
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS
General Information Site Information
.nalyst RMB Intersection 131 sf Street ~ She/bourne Rd.
\geney/Co. A&F Engineering urisdiction varmel
late Perfunned 1/14/02 'Vlalysis Year Exisfina+2012+Generated
.nalvsis Time Period AM Peak
'roject 10 West Clay
asllWest Street: 131st Street lNorth/South Street: She/bourne Road
'olume Adiustments and Site Characteristics
Ipproach Eastbound Westbound
ovement l T R l T R
Ivolume 5 136 139 136 50 15
Yo Thrus lefllane 50 50
Ipproach Northbound Southbound
~ovemenl l T R l T R
olume 86 105 58 12 324 8
Y. Thrus lefllane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
11 12 11 12 11 l2 11 12
r'onfiguration LTR LTR LTR LTR
IPHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
IFlow Rate 310 222 275 381
Y. Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5
No. lanes 1 1 1 1
Geometry Group 1 1 1 1
Duration, T 0.25
Saturation Headway Ad"ustment Worksheet .
Prop. lefl-Turns 0.0 0.7 0.3 0.0
Prop. Right- T ums 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.0
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
hlT-adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
hRT -adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
~adj, computed 6.55 6.55 6.55 6.55
Departure Headwav and Service Time
~, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
~,initial 0.28 0.20 0.24 0.34
~, final value 6.55 6.55 6.55 6.55
~, final value 0.56 0.44 0.52 0.69
",""ove-up lime, m 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
ervice TIme 4.5 4.5 4.5 I 4.5
" .
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
~apacity and level of Service
o
"
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
11 12 11 12 11 12 11 12
apacity 499 437 480 520
!Delay 17.66 15.68 16.71 22.99
os C C C C
~proach: Delay 17.66 15.68 16.71 22.99
LOS C C C C
ntersection Delay 18.78
Intersection LOS - C
o
o
o
F,lp.//r.\ WTh.lf){)'\l~\T(:;1\Al>\n'}t...h{)1I '} T1\AD
38
'" '" J^'
All-Way Stop Control
01
Page 1 of
0
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANAL YSIS
~
General Information >ite Information 1 [
Inalvst RMB ntersection 131st Street & She/bourne Rd. -
\Qencv/Co. A&F Engineering urisdiction ~, . Carmel
ate Performed 1/14102 'Vlalvsis Year xisting+ YR 2012+Generated D
Inalysis Time Period PM Peak
Proiect 10 West Clay
ast/West Street: 131st Street lNorth/South Street She/bourne Road iJ
olume Adjustments and Site Characteristics
-pproach Eastbound Westbound
ovement l T R l T R
Volume 7 99 54 61 176 19 U
Yo Thrus left lane 50 50
Approach Northbound Southbound
Movement l T R l T R -n-
Volume 87 352 116 6 88 2
Yo Thrus left lane 50 50 -
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound 12 D
11 L2 11 L2 11 12 11
~onfiguration LTR LTR LTR LTR
PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 D
low Rate 177 283 615 105
Yo Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5
/'Jo. Lanes 1 1 1 1 ft
~ometry Group 1 1 1 1
!Duration, T 0.25 -
Saturation Headway Ad'ustment Worksheet
Prop. left-Tums 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 I t
Prop. Right-Turns 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 -
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2ft
rL T -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
rRT -adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -
~HV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 fr
radj, computed 6.74 6.74 6.74 6.74
Departure Headway and Service Time
hd, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 rt
~, initial 0.16 0.25 0.55 0.09
~, final value 6.74 6.74 6.74 6.74 -
~, final value 0.33 0.52 0.98 0.20 U
IV1<>ve-up time, m 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
~rvice Time 4.7 I 4.7 4.7 4.7 I
~apacitv and level of Service
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound I[
11 12 11 12 11 12 11 12-
~apacily 427 527 629 355 i1
Delay 13.05 16.71 53.50 11.59
os B C F B
Approach: Delay 13.05 16.71 53.50 11.59 -0-
LOS B C F B
Intersection Delay 34.88
Intersection LOS D
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k6150.TMP
39
3/1/0:
o
An-Way Stop Control
Page] of
D
o
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANAL YSIS
General Information ite Information
.natVst 'RMB ntersection 131st Street & Shelbourne'Rd.
.oencv/Co. ~&F Engineering urisdiction Carmel
ate Performed 1/14/02 \nalvsis Year xistino+2012+Generated
.nalvsis Time Period AM Peak
lPfoiect 10 West Clav
astlWest Street 131st Street lNorth/South Street Shetbourne Road
olume Adiustments and Site Characteristics
lDoroach Eastbound Westbound
ovement l T R l T R
Ivolume 5 136 139 136 50 15
W. Thrus left lane 50 50
Acoroach Northbound Southbound
MOvement l T R l T R
Volume 86 105 58 12 324 8
'I. Thrus left lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
11 L2 11 L2 11 L2 11 L2
Conflguralion L TR L TR L TR L TR
PHF 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00
low Rate 5 275 151 65 95 163 13 332
Y. Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0
o.lanes 2 2 2 2
Geomelry Group 5 5 5 5
Duration. T 0.25
Saturation Headwav Ad"ustment Worksheet
Iprop. left-Turns 1.0 0;0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0
IProp. Right-Turns 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0
IProp. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
"L T -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
IhRT -adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
hadj, computed 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95
DeDarture Headwav and Service Time
hd. initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
,initial 0.00 0.24 0.13 0.06 0.08 0.14 0.01 0.30
hd. final value 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95 6.95
, final value 0.01 0.49 0.30 0.12 0.18 0.29 0.02 0.59
Move-up time. m 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
ervice Time 4.6 I 4.1 4.6 4.1 4.6 I 4.1 4.6 4..1
~apacity and level of Service
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
11 L2 11 L2 11 12 11 L2
[;apacity 255 525 401 315 345 413 263 541
Delay 9.72 14.92 12.70 10.24 11.12 11.68 9.59 18.04
os A B B B B B A C
II.pproach: Delay 14.83 11.96 11.48 17.73
LOS B B B C
ntersection Delay 14.39
Intersection lOS B
o
o
o
ht...//r'.\ '17Tl\lnnUl~\'T-':;lI.Al>\n,")lr7f)()f) 'TlI.Al>
40
'") /1 /(\.
All-Way Stop Control
o
Page 1 of
o
All-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS ft
General Information ite Information
\!lalyst RMB ntersection 1315t Street & Shefbourne Rd. -
\aencv/Co. 4&F Engineerinq urisdiction - armef
ate Performed 1/14102 'VlCIIYsis Year xisting+ YR 2012+Generated U
\!lalysis Time Period M Peak
Proiect ID West Clay
astlWest Street 131st Street !North/South Street Shelbourne Road {}
olume Adiustments and Site Characteristics
DDroach Eastbound Westbound
ovement l T R l T R
Volume 7 99 54 61 176 19 U
Y.Thrus left lane 50 50
~Droach Northbound Southbound
Movement l T R l T R [}
~olume 87 352 116 6 88 2
Y.Thrus left lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound 12-o-
11 12 11 12 11 12 11
~nfiguration L TR L TR L TR L TR
[PHF 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1':0
low Rate 7 153 67 195 96 468 6
Y. Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0
iNo. Lanes 2 2 2 2 11
!Geometry Group 5 5 5 5
Duration, T 0.25 -
Saturation Headway Ad"ustment Worksheet O.oU
!Prop. Left-Turns 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0
Prop. Right-Turns 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0
!Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 f]-
,",L T -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.21
~RT -adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
~HV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7n
~adj, computed 7.02 7.02 7.02 7.02 7.02 7.02 7.02 7.02L
Departure Headway and Service Time
~d, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.2~f}
lx, initial 0.01 0.14 0.06 0.17 0.09 0.42 0.01 0.08/
ld, final value 7.02 7.02 7.02 7.02 7.02 7.02 7.02 7.02
, final value 0.01 0.28 0.13 0.35 0.17 0.75 0.01 0.16ft
~ove-up time, m 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
!service Time 4.7 I 4.2 4.7 4.2 4.7 4.2 4.7 4.2-
[Capacitv and level of Service Ir
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
11 12 11 12 11 12 11 12-
~apacity 257 403 317 445 346 614 256 34m-
[Delay 9.81 11.70 10.54 12.70 10.14 23.83 9.64 10.5
os A B B B B C A B
~proach: Delay 11.62 12.15 21.50 10.48 -0-
LOS B B C B
Intersection Delay 16.79
Intersection LOS C {}
file://C:\WTNDOWS\TEMP\u2k714o.TMP
41
1/1/0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
141ST STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD
INTERSECTION DATA
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS
AND
CAPACITY ANALYSES
42
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
NORTHBOUND
EASTBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
WESTBOUND
HOUR
6- 7
7- 8
8- 9
3- 4
4- 5
5- 6
TOTAL
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAY
141ST STREET & SHELBORNE ROAD (03)
JANUARY 9, 2002
PEAK HOUR DATA
I
AM PEAK OFF PEAK PM PEAK I
HR BEGIN 7:00 AM HR BEGIN 4:45 PM I
L T R TOT L T R TOT L T R TOT I
I
1 20 3 24 5 197 41 243 I
1 4 5 10 1 10 3 14 I
0 178 1 179 3 37 1 41 I
33 5 0 38 7 6 2 15 I
I
HOUR SUMMARY
NB SB NB+SB EB WE EB+WB TOTAL
- AM -
10 70 80 5 13 18 98
24 179 203 10 38 48 251
21 77 98 11 23 34 132
- PM -
63 27 90 7 10 17 107
146 33 179 17 20 37 216
238 41 279 11 10 21 300
502 427 929 61 114 175 1104
45.5% 38.7% 84.1% 5.5% 10.3% 15.9% 100.0%
- AM PEAK VOLUMES - 0
8 58 4 13
24 179 11 39
0.75 0.77 0.69 0.75 0
- PM PEAK VOLUMES -
77 12 7 8
243 41 19 21 0
0.79 0.85 0.68 0.66
0
0
D
D
43
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
D
o
D
o
o
o
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
WEST CLAY
141ST STREET & SHELBORNE ROAD (03)
JANUARY 9, 2002
NORTHBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 1 0 1 8 0 8 1 0 1 10 0 10
7- 8 1 0 1 20 0 20 3 0 3 24 0 24
8- 9 1 0 1 16 0 16 4 0 4 21 0 21
PM
3- 4 3 0 3 52 0 52 8 0 8 63 0 63
4- 5 3 0 3 121 0 121 22 0 22 146 0 146
5- 6 4 0 4 193 0 193 41 0 41 238 0 238
PASSENGER 13 410 79 502
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
TRUCK 0 0 0 0
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
BOTH 13 410 79 502
2.6% 81.7% 15.7% 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 0 0 3 0 3 2 0 2 5 0 5
7- 8 1 0 1 4 0 4 5 0 5 10 0 10
8- 9 0 0 0 5 1 6 5 0 5 10 1 11
PM
3- 4 1 0 1 6 0 6 0 0 0 7 0 7
4- 5 1 1 2 10 0 10 5 0 5 16 1 17
5- 6 1 0 1 9 0 9 1 0 1 11 0 11
PASSENGER 4 37 18 59
80.0% 97.4% 100.0% 96.7%
TRUCK 1 1 0 2
20.0% 2.6% 0.0% 3.3%
BOTH 5 38 18 61
8.2% 62.3% 29.5% 100.0%
AA
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
WEST CLAY
141ST STREET & SHELBORNE ROAD (03)
JANUARY 9, 2002
SOUTHBOUND
o
o
o
o
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
AM
6- 7 0 0 0 70 0 70 0 0 0 70 0 70
7- 8 0 0 0 177 1 178 1 0 1 178 1 1{J
8- 9 2 0 2 72 0 72 2 1 3 76 1
PM
3- 4 0 0 0 25 0 25 1 1 2 26 1 ~
4- 5 1 0 1 30 0 30 2 0 2 33 0
5- 6 2 0 2 38 0 38 1 0 1 41 0
PASSENGER 5 412 7 424 0
100.0% 99.8% 77.8% 99.3%
TRUCK 0 1 2 3
0.0% 0.2% 22.2% 0.7% 0
BOTH 5 413 9 427
1.2% 96.7% 2.1% 100.0%
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL WESTBOUND 0
:
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL BoLl
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
AM Q
6- 7 9 0 9 2 0 2 2 0 2 13 0
7- 8 33 0 33 5 0 5 0 0 0 38 0
8- 9 15 0 15 4 0 4 4 0 4 23 0 23
PM Q
3- 4 4 0 4 6 0 6 0 0 0 10 0
4- 5 5 1 6 12 0 12 2 0 2 19 1
5- 6 8 0 8 0 0 0 1 1 2 9 1 10
PASSENGER 74 29 9 112
98.7%
100.0%
90.0%
98.2%
TRUCK 1 0 1 2 D
1.3% 0.0% 10.0% 1.8%
BOTH 75 29 10 114 D
65.8% 25.4% 8.8% 100.0%
0
0
45
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
o
o
Two-Way Stop Control
Page I of
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information ~ite Information
Analyst RMB Intersection 141 st Street & She/bourne
Road
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 1/14/02 Analysis Year Existing
Analysis Time Period AM Peak
Project Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: 141st Street lNorth/South Street: She/bourne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25
lVehicle Volumes and Adiustments
Major Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
l T R l T R
Volume 1 20 3 0 178 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 22 3 0 197 1
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
ILanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Upstream Signal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R l T R
Volume 33 5 0 1 4 5
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 36 5 0 1 4 5
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Delay, Queue lennth, and level of Service
!Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
[Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
ane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR ..
v (vph) 1 0 41 10
C (m) (vph) 1357 1570 707 748
vlc 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.01
95% queue length 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.04
Control Delay 7.7 7.3 10.4 9.9
LOS A A B A
!Approach Delay - - 10.4 9.9
pproach LOS - -- B A
>
fitp' IIr.\ WTNn()W~\TFMP\11?1c7?71 TMP
46
':t/110 I
Two-Way Stop Control
o
Page 1 of
o
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY 11
General Information [site Information
fA,nalyst RMB Intersection 141 st Street & She/bol.Jl1.p. _
fA,gency/Co. A&F Engineering Road .
Jurisdiction Carmel 0
Date Performed 1/14/02 ~nalysis Year Existing
Analysis Time Period PM Peak
Proiect Descriotion West Clay {}
EastlWest Street: 141 st Street INorth/South Street: Shelbourne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25
lVehicle Volumes and Adiustments ~
Maior Street Northbound Southbound I.
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R D
Volume 5 197 41 3 37 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 5 218 45 3 41 1 if
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - -- 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0 -n-
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
~onfiguration LTR LTR
Uostream SiQnal 0 0 11
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 - 11 12
L T R L T R i1
lVolume 7 6 2 1 10 3
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 -
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 7 6 2 1 11 3 D
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N if
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 D
Configuration LTR LTR
Delav. Queue Lemlth, and Level of Service
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound 12{}
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11
Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
v (vph) 5 3 15 15 U
C (m) (v ph) 1548 1284 636 645
vIe 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 n
195% queue length 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.07
lControl Delay 7.3 7.8 10.8 10.7 -
LOS A A B B -0-
iApproach Delay - - 10.8 10.7
IApproach LOS - -- B B
>
o
file:/IC:\WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k7372.TMP
47
~/llO'
1
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
o >
Two-Way Stop Control
Page I of
nNO-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information Site Information
t\nalyst RMB Intersection 141 st Street & She/bourne
Road
t\gency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 1/14/02 IAnalysis Year Existing+ 2012+Generated
IAnalysis Time Period AM Peak
Project Descriotion West Clay
EastlWest Street: 141st Street North/South Street: She/bourne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
l T R l T R
!Volume 3 34 4 3 220 1
lPeak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 3 37 4 3 244 1
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration L TR L TR
Upstream Sil.:Jnal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
l T R l T R
Volume 40 8 9 1 6 7
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 44 8 10 1 6 7
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
anes 1 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration L TR L TR
Delay, Queue Lenath, and Level of Service
t\pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
!Lane Configuration L L L TR L TR
~ (vph) 3 3 44 18 1 13
~ (m) (vph) 1304 1549 631 785 627 692
~/c 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.02
~5% queue length 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.07 0.00 0.06
Control Delay 7.8 7.3 11.1 9.7 10.8 10.3
OS A A B A B B
A.pproach Delay - - 10.7 10.3
IApproach LOS - - B B
+.1~.110.\UIThTn"Ul<:'\TL'l.,fD\n,)lrQf\D 1 Tl.,fD
4R
~ /1 If)' I
Two-Way Stop Control
o
Page 1 of
o
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY D
General Information Site Information
t\nalyst RMa Intersection 141 st Street & She/bourne
Road j]
t\gency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 1/14/02 Analysis Year Existing+ Yr 2012+Generate
Analysis Time Period PM Peak
Proiect Description West C/av U
EastlWest Street: 141st Street lNorth/South Street: She/bourne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South .lStudy Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments U
Maior Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R U
Volume 7 241 49 14 53 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 7 267 54 15 58 1 D
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0 D
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
!configuration L TR L TR
Upstream SiQnal 0 0 U
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R 11
Volume 8 8 7 1 14 6
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 8 8 7 1 15 6 -rr
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 -
Flared Approach N N D
Istorage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 '...
lConfiguration L TR L TR ~
Delav, Queue LenQth, and Level of Service
IApproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound 12-D-
iMovement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11
Lane Configuration L L L TR L TR
~ (vph) 7 15 8 15 1 21 I [
Ie (m) (vph) 1526 1222 527 608 534 592-
'r-ilc 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 O.O~D
195% queue length 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.08 0.01 0.11
!Control Delay 7.4 8.0 11.9 11.1 11.8 11.3
LOS A A a a a aD
Approach Delay - - 11.4 11.3
Approach LOS - - a a I
>
o
filp./lr.nMTNT)n\M(;;:\TJ:;l\AP\n')1.rSH Ii. ') TI\AP
49
'1/1 1(\')
I
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
D
o
D
o
o
D
D
D
D
o
D
WFST CLAy DEvELoPMENT
'TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
146TH STREET & SHELBOURNE ROAD
INTERSECTION DATA
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS
AND
CAPACITY ANALYSES
50
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
NORTHBOUND
EASTBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
WESTBOUND
HOUR
6- 7
7- 8
8- 9
3- 4
4- 5
5- 6
TOTAL
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAY
146TH STREET & SHELBORNE ROAD (04)
JANUARY 10, 2002
PEAK HOUR DATA
AM PEAK
HR BEGIN 7:00 AM
L T R TOT
OFF PEAK
PM PEAK
HR BEGIN 4:45 PM
L T R TOT
L
T R
TOT
1 5
o 77
3 34
125 104
25 31
12 89
1 38
1 230
3 57 137 197
1 140 7 148
1 11 3 15
24 111 4 139
HOUR SUMMARY
NB SB NB+SB EB WB EB+WB TOTAL
- AM -
10 23 33 49 127 176 209
31 38 69 89 230 319 388
8 29 37 78 161 239 276
- PM -
51 10 61 91 90 181 242
136 10 146 118 123 241 387
181 17 198 148 131 279 477
417 127 544 573 862 1435 1979
21.1% 6.4% 27.5% 29.0% 43.6% 72.5% 100.0%
- AM PEAK VOLUMES - 0
13 14 28 62
31 44 94 230
0.60 0.79 0.84 0.93
- PM PEAK VOLUMES - 0
58 5 47 38
197 17 148 139 0
0.85 0.85 0.79 0.91
0
0
D
D
51
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
,0
o
o
o
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
WEST CLAY
146TH STREET & SHELBORNE ROAD (04)
JANUARY 10, 2002
NORTHBOUND
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 3 0 3 4 0 4 3 0 3 10 0 10
7- 8 1 0 1 5 0 5 24 1 25 30 1 31
8- 9 1 0 1 3 0 3 4 0 4 8 0 8
PM
3- 4 3 0 3 20 0 20 28 0 28 51 0 51
4- 5 12 0 12 37 0 37 87 0 87 136 0 136
5- 6 4 0 4 47 0 47 130 0 130 181 0 181
PASSENGER 24 116 276 416
100.0% 100.0% 99.6% 99.8%
TRUCK 0 0 1 1
0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 0.2%
BOTH 24 116 277 417
5.8% 27.8% 66.4% 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 0 0 40 0 40 9 0 9 49 0 49
7- 8 0 0 0 76 1 77 12 0 12 88 1 89
8- 9 3 0 3 66 2 68 7 0 7 76 2 78
PM
3- 4 2 0 2 85 0 35 4 0 4 91 0 91
4- 5 2 0 2 109 2 111 5 0 5 116 2 118
5- 6 2 0 2 139 0 139 7 0 7 148 0 148
PASSENGER 9 515 44 568
100.0% 99.0% 100.0% 99.1%
TRUCK 0 5 0 5
0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.9%
BOTH 9 520 44 573
1. 6% 90.8% 7.7% 100.0%
52
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
o
o
o
o
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
WEST CLAY
146TH STREET & SHELBORNE ROAD (04)
JANUARY 10, 2002
SOUTHBOUND
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
AM
6- 7 1 0 1 21 0 21 1 0 1 23 0
7- 8 3 0 3 34 0 34 1 0 1 38 0
8- 9 1 0 1 24 0 24 4 0 4 29 0
PM
3- 4 0 0 0 7 0 7 3 0 3 10 0
4- 5 1 0 1 6 0 6 3 0 3 10 0
5- 6 3 0 3 13 0 13 1 0 1 17 0
PASSENGER 9 105 13 127
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 0
TRUCK 0 0 0 0
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
BOTH 9 105 13 127 0
7.1% 82.7% 10.2% 100.0%
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : WESTBOUND 0
,
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL BOTD
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
AM
6- 7 65 0 65 62 0 62 0 0 0 127 0 120
7- 8 125 0 125 102 2 104 1 0 1 228 2 23 .
8- 9 70 0 70 88 2 90 1 0 1 159 2 16
PM
3- 4 16 0 16 71 1 72 2 0 2 89 1 l~D
4- 5 18 0 18 100 2 102 3 0 3 121 2
5- 6 24 0 24 103 1 104 3 0 3 130 1 131
PASSENGER 318 526 10 854 D
100.0% 98.5% 100.0% 99.1%
TRUCK 0 8 0 8 0
0.0% 1.5% 0.0% 0.9%
BOTH 318 534 10 862
36.9% 61. 9% 1.2% 100.0% 0
0
D
53
o
Two-Way Stop Control
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Page 1 of:
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
!\nalyst RMB Intersection ....... 146th Street & She/bourne -
'Road
'Qency/Co. A&F Enqineerinq I'urisdiction Carmel
late Performed 1/14/02 nalysis Year txistinq
;/1, nalysis Time Period AM Peak
Project Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: 146th Street North/South Street: She/bourne Road
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period hrs): 0.25
Wehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
~olume 0 77 12 125 104 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 85 13 138 115 1
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Upstream SiQnal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 1 5 25 3 34 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 5 27 3 37 1
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
lL.anes 0 1 0 0 1 0
~onfiguration LTR LTR
Delay, Queue Lenath, and Level of Service
~pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
II (vph) 0 138 33 41
C (m) (vph) 1454 1476 780 432
Iv/c 0.00 0.09 0.04 0.09
195% queue length 0.00 0.31 0.13 0.31
Control Delay 7.5 7.7 9.8 14.2
LOS A A A B
pproach Delay - - 9.8 14.2
Approach LOS - - A B
file://C:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k83 74. TMP
54
1/1/02 I
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 ~:
n
-
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information Site Information I
IAnalvst IRMB Intersection 146th Street & Shelbourne -
IAgency/Co. IA&F Engineering Road
I'urisdiction Carmel U
Date Performed 1/14/02 iA nalvsis Year Existinq
IAnalvsis Time Period IPM Peak
1Project Description West C/av
EastlWest Street: 146th Street orth/South Street: Shelbourne Road ..
Intersection Orientation: East-West tudv Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments U
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
l T R l T R U
Volume 1 140 7 24 111 4
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 155 7 26 123 4 {}
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0 D
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
lConfiguration LTR LTR
Upstream SiQnal 0 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
l T R L T R {}
lVolume 3 57 137 1 11 3
IPeak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 3 63 152 1 12 3 -0-
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
1Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N {}
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
anes 0 1 0 0 1 0 U
Configuration LTR LTR
Delay, Queue lenath. and level of Service [
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12-
ane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR if
v (vph) 1 26 218 16
C (m) (vph) 1441 1399 754 590
'rv/c 0.00 0.02 0.29 0.03 -0-
~5% queue length 0.00 0.06 1.20 0.08
lControl Delay 7.5 7.6 11.7 11.3
LOS A A B B JJ
IApproach Delay - -- 11.7 11.3
jApproach LOS - - B B U
file://C:\WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k9205. TMP
55
3/l/0~
o Two-Way Stop Control
o
o
D
o
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
10
o
file://C: \ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k9302.TMP
Page 1 of~
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information Site Information
IAnalyst IRMB Intersection ." 146th Street & She/bourne
!Road
IAQency/Co. f4&F Enqineerinq urisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 1/14/02 nalvsis Year IExistinq+ 2012+Generated
IAnalysis Time Period lAM Peak
Proiect Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: 146th Street North/South Street: She/bourne Road
Intersection Orientation: East-West !Study Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
lVolume 1 92 21 151 125 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 102 23 167 138 1
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration L TR L TR
Upstream Signal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
lVolume 13 11 32 4 43 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 14 12 35 4 47 1
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration L TR L TR
Delay. Queue length, and level of Service
IApproach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L L TR L TR
v (vph) 1 167 14 47 4 48
C (m) (vph) 1426 1443 329 669 344 368
vie 0.00 0.12 0.04 0.07 0.01 0.13
95% queue length 0.00 0.39 0.13 0.23 0.04 0.45
Control Delay 7.5 7.8 16.4 10.8 15.6 16.2
LOS A A C B C C
pproach Delay -- - 12.1 16.2
Approach LOS -- - B C
56
3/1/02 I
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 Jl
Jl
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY -
General Information Site Information
Analyst 'RMB Intersection 146th Street & Shelbourne -
.. ... Road
Agency/Co. A&F Engineerina
urisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 1/14/02 nalysis Year Existina+ 2012+Generated W
Analysis Time Period :PM Peak
Proiect Descriotion West Clav L..~
EastlWest Street: 146th Street North/South Street: Shelbourne Road
Intersection Orientation: East-West ~tudY Period Chrs): 0.25 !
~ehicle Volumes and Adiustments U
lMaior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 \
L T R L T R D:
~olume 1 168 19 31 133 5
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 186 21 34 147 5 D
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0 {}
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 . 0
Configuration L TR L TR
Upstream Sianal 0 0 {J
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R {}
Volume 10 71 165 1 19 4
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 11 78 183 1 21 4 il
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
lConfiguration L TR L TR ..
Delav, Queue lenath, and level of Service
IApproach EB WB Northbound Southbound 12U
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11
lane Configuration L L L TR L TRll
Iv (vph) 1 34 11 261 1 25
Ie (m) (vph) 1411 1346 503 701 299 540
Iv/c 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.37 0.00 o'O~D
95% queue length 0.00 0.08 0.07 1.73 0.01 0.15
Control Delay 7.6 7.7 12.3 13.1 17.1 12.0
lOS A A a a C aD
Approach Delay -- - 13.1 12.2
Approach LOS - - a a
U
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kA041.TMP
57
3/1/02
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
D
o
o
10
D
D
D
WF$T CLAy DEvELoPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
131ST STREET & TOWNE ROAD
INTERSECTION DATA
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS
AND
CAPACITY ANALYSES
J;A
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
NORTHBOUND
EASTBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
WESTBOUND
HOUR
6- 7
7- 8
8- 9
3- 4
4- 5
5- 6
TOTAL
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
WEST CLAY
131ST STREET & TOWNE (05)
JANUARY II, 2002
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
PEAK HOUR DATA
AM PEAK
HR BEGIN 7:15 AM
L T R TOT
OFF PEAK
PM PEAK
HR BEGIN 5:00 PM
L T R TOT
L
T R
TOT
5 97
7 122
26 406
64 47
36 1.38
17 146
26 458
5 116
12 304
34 82
10 121
46 105
47 363
8 124
18 149
18 169
HOUR SUMMARY
NB SB NB+SB EB WB EB+WB TOTAL
- AM -
55 193 248 42 39 81 329
125 474 599 137 112 249 848
129 236 365 108 74 182 547
- PM -
195 132 327 57 96 153 480
376 124 500 97 122 219 719
363 149 512 124 169 293 805
1243 1308 2551 565 612 1177 3728
33.3% 35.1% 68.4% 15.2% 16.4% 31.6% 100.0%
- AM PEAK VOLUMES - D
46 134 44 35
144 474 147 116
0.78 0.88 0.84 0.83
- PM PEAK VOLUMES - D
148 44 38 52
400 149 124 169 0
0.68 0.85 0.82 0.81
0
0
0
0
59
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
o
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
WEST CLAY
131ST STREET & TOWNE (05)
JANUARY 11, 2002
NORTHBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 3 0 3 38 2 40 12 0 12 53 2 55
7- 8 3 0 3 86 6 92 29 1 30 118 7 125
8- 9 7 1 8 91 7 98 22 1 23 120 9 129
PM
3- 4 10 0 10 152 5 157 24 4 28 186 9 195
4- 5 14 1 15 322 4 326 34 1 35 370 6 376
5- 6 12 0 12 299 5 304 46 1 47 357 6 363
PASSENGER 49 988 167 1204
96.1% 97.1'% 95.4% 96.9%
TRUCK 2 29 8 39
3.9% 2.9% 4.6% 3.1%
BOTH 51 1017 175 1243
4.1% 81.8% 14.1% 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 5 0 5 31 1 32 5 0 5 41 1 42
7- 8 8 0 8 III 4 115 14 0 14 133 4 137
8- 9 6 1 7 92 1 93 7 1 8 105 3 108
PM
3- 4 6 0 6 41 5 46 5 0 5 52 5 57
4- 5 29 0 29 57 1 58 10 0 10 96 1 97
5- 6 34 0 34 81 1 82 8 0 8 123 1 124
PASSENGER 88 413 49 550
98.9% 96.9% 98.0% 97.3%
TRUCK 1 13 1 15
1.1% 3.1% 2.0% 2.7%
BOTH 89 426 50 565
15.8% 75.4% 8.8% 100.0%
fiO
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
: I
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL I.
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
,-
AM 19~
6- 7 8 1 9 174 2 176 8 0 8 190 3
7- 8 22 1 23 406 12 418 33 0 33 461 13 470
8- 9 19 0 19 195 5 200 17 0 17 231 5 23
PM
3- 4 9 0 9 95 15 110 13 0 13 117 15 132
4- 5 7 2 9 96 4 100 14 1 15 117 7 l~C
5- 6 10 0 10 119 2 121 18 0 18 147 2 14
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFI C VOLUME SUMMARY
WEST CLAY
131ST STREET & TOWNE (05)
JANUARY 11, 2002
SOUTHBOUND
o
D
D
o
PASSENGER 75 1085 103 1263
94.9% 96.4% 99.0% 96.6% D
TRUCK 4 40 1 45
5.1% 3.6% 1. 0% 3.4%
BOTH 79 1125 104 1308 D
6.0% 86.0% 8.0% 100.0%
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : WESTBOUND D
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL BOTe
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
AM
6- 7 16 0 16 18 1 19 3 1 4 37 2 l~O
7- 8 62 2 64 44 0 44 4 0 4 110 2
8- 9 35 1 36 32 3 35 3 0 3 70 4
PM
3- 4 29 0 29 54 0 54 13 0 13 96 0 l~D
4- 5 26 2 28 80 1 81 13 0 13 119 3
5- 6 44 2 46 104 1 105 17 1 18 165 4 169
PASSENGER 212 332 53 597 D
96.8% 98.2% 96.4% 97.5%
TRUCK 7 6 2 15 0
3.2% 1. 8% 3.6% 2.5%
BOTH 219 338 55 612
35.8% 55.2% 9.0% 100.0% D
D
0
61
o
All-Way Stop Control
Page I of2
o
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS ,
General Information Site Information :
Il.nalvst RMB Intersection 131st Street & Towne Road .-
"'geney/Co. A&F Engineering :!!!isdiction Carmet
Date Performed 1/14/02 Il.nalysis Year ~xist;na
Il.nalvsis Time Period AM Peak
roject 10 West Clay
EastlWest Street: 131st Street lNorth/South Street: Towne Road
Jolume Adjustments and Site Characteristics
Ipproach Eastbound Westbound
oovement l T R l T R
Ivolume 7 122 17 64 47 5
Yo Thrus left lane 50 50
Approach Northbound Southbound
Movement l T R l T R
Volume 5 97 36 26 406 26
Y. Thrus left lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
l1 12 l1 12 l1 12 l1 12
l.;onfiguration LTR LTR LTR LTR
PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Flow Rate 160 128 152 507
Y. Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5
lNo. lanes 1 1 1 1
peometry Group 1 1 1 1
Duration, T 0.25
Saturation Headway Ad"ustment Worksheet
Prop. left-Turns 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.1
Prop. Right-Tums 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.1
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
hl T -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
hRT-adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
hadj, computed 5.98 5.98 5.98 5.98 .
. . .
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
loeparture Headway and Service Time
[hd, initial value . 3.20 3.20 3.20
. 3.20
Pt. initial 0.14 0.11 0.14 0.45
[hd. final value 5.98 5.98 5.98 5.98
. final value 0.27 0.22 0.23 0.72
Move-up time. m 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
~rvice Time 4.0 I 4.0 I 4.0 4.0 I
Capacity and level of Service
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
l1 12 l1 12 l1 12 l1 12
apacity 410 378 402 688
Delay 11.13 10.93 10.21 20.22
os 8 8 8 C
~pproach: Delay 11.13 10.93 10.21 20.22
LOS 8 8 8 C
ntersection Delay 15.82
Intersection lOS C
o
o
,0
o
o
o
fiJp'/lr'\WTNf)()W~\TFMP\ll)1cA 1 ';1 TMP
R?
~ /1 m?
All-Way Stop Control
Page 1 .0.
n
-
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS
General Information Site Information U
.nalyst IRMB Intersection 131st Street & Towne Road
,aencv/Co. IA&F Engineerinq urisdiction - Carmel i
ate Performed 1/14/02 Malvsis Year Existina
.nalysis Time Period !PM Peak I U
roiect 10 West Clay -
astlWest Street: 131st Street lNorthlSoulh Street: Towne Road
olume Adiustments and Site Characteristics U
~proach Eastbound Westbound
Ilovement l T R l T R
Volume 34 82 8 46 105 18 D
1'0 Thrus left lane 50 50
AoDroach Northbound Southbound
Movement l T R l T R
olume 12 304 47 10 121 18 U
Yo Thrus left lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound fr
l1 12 l1 12 l1 12 l1 12
Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
IPHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ft
Flow Rate 136 187 402 165
1'0 Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 ...
iNo. Lanes 1 1 1 1
lGeometry Group 1 1 1 1 U
!Duration, T 0.25
Saturation Headwav Ad"ustment Worksheet
Prop. left-Turns 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.1 U
Prop. Right-Tums 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
l T -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 U
nRT-adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 - 1.7
hadj, computed 5.92 5.92 5.92 5.92 I [
DeDarture Headwav and Service Time -
hd, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
, initial 0.12 0.17 0.36 0.15 U
hd. final value 5.92 5.92 5.92 5.92
, final value 0.22 0.30 0.58 0.25
~ove-up time, m 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 U
~rvice Time 3.9 I 3.9 I 3.9 I 3.9 I
~apacitv and level of Service
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U-
l1 12 l1 12 l1 12 l1 12
Capacity 386 437 652 415 11
Delay 10.62 11.26 15.00- 10.43
os B B B B -
IApproach: Delay 10.62 11.26 15.00- 10.43 -0-
LOS B B B B
ntersection Delay 12.70
Intersection LOS B
file://C:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kA252. TMP
63
3/1/02
o
All- Way Stop Control
Page 1 of:
o
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS
General Information Site Information
\nalvst IRMB Intersection 1315t Street & Towne Road
~!1encvICo. 1A&F Enaineerina urisdiction Carmel
ate Performed 1/14/02 Analvsis Year Exi&ina+2012+Generated
\nalvsis Time Period lAM Peak
Proiect 10 We& Clav
astlWest Street: 131& Street lNorthlSouth Street: Towne Road
"olume Adjustments and Site Characteristics
's>proach Eastbound Westbound
ovement l T R l T R
~olume 17 240 41 99 88 13
l'oThrus left lane 50 50
~Droach Northbound Southbound
Movement l T R L T R
~olume 13 150 59 51 540 34
Yo Thrus Left lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
l1 l2 l1 l2 l1 l2 l1 l2
Configuration L TR L TR L TR L TR
PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
low Rate 18 311 110 111 14 231 56 637
Yo Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
o.Lanes 2 2 2 2
eometry Group 5 5 5 5
Duration, T 0.25
Saturation Headway Ad'ustment Worksheet
Prop. left-Turns 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0
Prop. Right-Turns 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
hL T -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
hRT -adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
hadj, computed 7.85 7.85 7.85 7.85 7.85 7.85 7.85 7.85
Departure Headwav and Service Time
~, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
lx, initial 0.02 0.28 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.21 0.05 0.57
~d, final value 7.85 7.85 7.85 7.85 7.85 7.85 7.85 7.85
, final value 0.04 0.65 0.25 0.24 0.03 0.48 0.11 1.24
~ove-up time, m 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
ervice Time 5.6 I 5.3 5.6 I 5.3 5.6 I 5.3 5.6 I 5.3
Capacity and level of Service
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
l1 l2 l1 l2 l1 l2 l1 l2
ijapacity 268 470 360 361 264 469 306 637
Delay 10.87 23.43 13.58 13.13 10.79 16.86 10.83 144.41
os B C B B B C B F
Approach: Delay 22.75 13.35 16.51 133.61
LOS C B C F
ntersection Delay 71.96
Intersection LOS F
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
filw//r'\WTNDOWS\TFMP\l1?kA ~R4 TMP
f14
~ /1 f()')
All-Way Stop Control
Page 1 oQ
n
-
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS
General Information ite Information U
llalvst RMB tersection 131st Street & Towne Road
,gencv/Co. A&F El1dineerina urisdiction Carmet
ate Perfonned 1/14/02 \Ilalysis Year Existina+ Yr 2012+Generated
llalvsis Time Period PM Peak I
Proiect 10 West Clav
East/West Street 131st Street lNorth/South Street Towne Road
lVolume Adiustments and Site Characteristics I
!APproach Eastbound Westbound lIIIII
Movement l T R l T R
Volume 47 159 23 60 233 46 D
Y. Thrus left lane 50 50
\pproach Northbound Southbound
",ovement l T R l T R
olume 37 390 61 25 163 32 U
Yo Thrus left lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound il
11 12 11 12 11 l2 11 12
Configuration L TR L TR L TR L TR
PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ft
low Rate 52 201 66 309 41 500 27 216 I
Yo Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 lIIIII
No. lanes 2 2 2 2
iGeometry Group 5 5 5 5 U
Duration, T 0.25
lSaturation Headwav Ad.ustment Worksheet
Prop. left-Turns 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 U
IProp. Right-Turns 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2
IProp. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
ihLT -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 U
hRT -adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
hadj, computed 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24 I
Departure Headwav and Service Time -
hd, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
, initial 0.05 0.18 0.06 0.27 0.04 0.44 0.02 0.19U
hd, final value 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24
,final value 0.12 0.44 0.15 0.66 0.08 1.00 0.06 0.47
Move-up time, m 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 5.7 U
ervice Time . 5.9 5.7 5.9 5.7 5.9 I 5.7 5.9 I
.
~apacity and level of Service
. U
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
11 12 11 12 11 12 11 12
Capacity 302 441 316 464 291 503 277 449 J
!Delay 12.05 16.88 12.00 23.82 10.84 65.50 11.29 17.09 iT
os B C B C B F B C -
~pproach: Delay 15.88 21.74 61.35 16.44 Di
lOS c C F C
Intersection Delay 34.96 I
Intersection lOS 0 IT
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kB 1 OS.TMP
65
3/1/02
o
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1b
OAnalYS t: RMB
Agency: A&F Engineering
Date: 2/6/02
Dperiod: AM Peak
Project ID: West Clay
E/W St: 131st Street
Inter.: 131st Street & Towne Road
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Carmel
Year Existing+2012+Proposed
N/S St: Towne Road
0 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound
I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R
DNo. Lanes I I 1 1
1 1 1 0 I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0
LGConfig I L TR I L TR I L TR I L TR
Dvolume 117 240 41 199 88 13 113 150 59 151 540 34
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
RTOR Vol I 10 I 3 I 15 I 8
DDuration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 7 8
DEB Left A I NB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
[}m Peds I Peds
Left A I SB Left A
Thru A I Thru A
Right A I Right A
[1B Peds I Peds
Right I EB Right
SB Right I WB Right
crreen 21. 0 39.0
ellow 3.0 3.0
1'\11 Red 2.0 2.0
Cycle Length: 70.0 secs
~ppr I Intersection Performance Summary
Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
rp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
astbound
~~R 392 1305 0.05 0.30 17.5 B
560 1868 0.54 0.30 21.5 C 21.2 C
Westbound
[JR 253 843 0.43 0.30 20.9 C
561 1871 0.19 0.30 18.4 B 19.7 B
cIorthbound 568 0.04 0.56
316 7.1 A
R 1022 1835 0.21 0.56 7.9 A 7.8 A
O:Outhbound 1184 0.09 0.56 7.3
660 A
TR 1051 1887 0.60 0.56 11.2 B 10.9 B
o
o
Intersection Delay = 14.0 (sec/veh)
Intersection LOS = B
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1b
66
Apprl
Lane
Grp
Lane
Group
Capacity
22.0 38.0
3.0 3.0
2.0 2.0
Cycle Length: 70.0
Intersection Performance Summary
Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Flow Rate
(s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
873 0.19 0.31 17.8 B
1871 0.34 0.31 18.7 B 18.5 B
1155 0.18 0.31 17.7 B
1863 0.51 0.31 20.3 C 19.8 B
1192 0.06 0.54 7.6 A
1870 0.48 0.54 10.2 B 10.0+ B
761 0.07 0.54 7.7 A
1863 0.21 0.54 8.3 A 8.3 A
secs
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1b
Analyst: RMB
Agency: A&F Engineering
Da te : 2 I 6 I 02
period: PM Peak
Project ID: West Clay
E/W St: 131st Street
Inter.: 131st Street & Towne Road
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd: Carmel
Year Existing+Yr 2012+Proposed
N/S St: Towne Road
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound 1 Westbound I Northbound 1 Southbound
I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R
I -I I 1
I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0 1 1 1 0
1 L TR I L TR I L TR I L TR
147 159 23 160 233 46 137 390 61 125 163 32
112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
I 5 I 11 I 15 I 8
No. Lanes
LGConfig
Volume
Lane width
RTOR Vol
Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
2 3 4 5
NB Left A
Thru A
Right A
Peds
SB Left A
Thru A
Right A
Peds
EB Right
WB Right
Duration 0.25
phase Combination 1
EB Left A
Thru A
Right A
Peds
WB Left A
Thru A
Right A
Peds
NB Right
SB Right
Green
Yellow
All Red
6
7
8
Eastbound
L 274
TR 588
Westbound
L 363
TR 586
Northbound
L 647
TR 1015
Southbound
L 413
TR 1011
Intersection Delay = 13.9 (sec/veh)
Intersection LOS = B
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1b
67
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
10
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
WFSf ClAY DEvELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
136m STREET & TOWNE ROAD
INTERSECTION DATA
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS
AND
CAPACITY ANALYSES
fiR
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
NORTHBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
WESTBOUND
HOUR
6- 7
7- 8
8- 9
3- 4
4- 5
5- 6
TOTAL
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
WEST CLAY
136TH STREET & TOWNE ROAD (06)
JANUARY 10, 2002
o
o I
o
o
o
D
o
D
PEAK HOUR DATA
AM PEAK
HR BEGIN 7:00 AM
L T R TOT
OFF PEAK
PM PEAK
HR BEGIN 4:45 PM
L T R TOT
L
T R
TOT
105
6 385
126
23 128
391
6 132
270 124 394
5 133 138
35 16 51
HOUR SUMMARY
NB SB NB+SB
- AM -
36 134 170
128 391 519
82 202 284
- PM -
175 101 276
273 120 393
383 108 491
1077 1056 2133
42.9% 42.1% 85.0%
- AM PEAK VOLUMES -
49 125
135 391
0.69 0.78
- PM PEAK VOLUMES -
138 46
394 146
0.71 0.79
WB TOTAL
49 219
132 651
58 342
57 333
45 438
36 527
377
15.0%
2510 0
100.0%
D
o
D
o
o
D
o
40
132
0.83
20
66
0.83
69
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
WEST CLAY
136TH STREET & TOWNE ROAD (06)
JANUARY 10, 2002
NORTHBOUND
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 23 1 24 11 1 12 34 2 36
7- 8 103 2 105 22 1 23 125 3 128
8- 9 50 5 55 25 2 27 75 7 82
PM
3- 4 130 12 142 31 2 33 161 14 175
4- 5 211 11 222 50 1 51 261 12 273
5- 6 246 3 249 133 1 134 379 4 383
PASSENGER 763 272 1035
95.7% 97.1% 96.1%
TRUCK 34 8 42
4.3% 2.9% 3.9%
BOTH 797 280 1077
74.0% 26.0% 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 1 0 1 132 1 133 133 1 134
7- 8 6 0 6 379 6 385 385 6 391
8- 9 3 0 3 194 5 199 197 5 202
PM
3- 4 9 0 9 84 8 92 93 8 101
4- 5 3 0 3 III 6 117 114 6 120
5- 6 5 0 5 102 1 103 107 1 108
PASSENGER 27 1002 1029
100.0% 97.4% 97.4%
TRUCK 0 27 27
0.0% 2.6% 2.6%
BOTH 27 1029 1056
2.6% 97.4% 100.0%
70
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
WEST CLAY
136TH STREET & TOWNE ROAD (06)
JANUARY 10, 2002
o
o
D
o
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL WESTBOUND
6- 7 44 2 46
7- 8 124 2 126
8- 9 55 2 57
PM
3- 4 44 4 48
4- 5 33 2 35
5- 6 25 0 25
PASSENGER 325
96.4%
TRUCK 12
3.6%
BOTH 337
89.4%
3 0 3 47 2
5 1 6 129 3
1 0 1 56 2
8 1 9 52 5
10 0 10 43 2
11 0 11 36 0
38 363
95.0% 96.3% 0
2 14
5.0% 3.7%
40 377 0
10.6% 100.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
AM
71
o
Two-Way Stop Control
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
>
o
Page 1 of2
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information ~ite Information
!Analyst RMB Intersection 136th Street & Towne Road
IAgency/Co. A&F Engineering · . ~urisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 1/14/02 IAnalysis Year Existing
IAnalysis Time Period AM Peak
Project Description West Clay
EastJWest Street: 136th Street North/South Street: Towne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudv Period hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 0 105 23 6 385 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 116 25 6 427 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - -- 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration TR LT
Upstream SiQnal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 126 0 6 0 0 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 140 0 6 0 0 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 0 0
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0
Configuration LR
Delay, Queue Lenath, and Level of Service
I\pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
lane Configuration LT LR
~ (vph) 6 146
~ (m) (vph) 1424 488
~/c 0.00 0.30
~5% queue length 0.01 1.24
Control Delay 7.5 15.5
LOS A C
Approach Delay - - 15.5
Approach lOS - - C
Copyright (Q 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Version4.1b
fi]e://C:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kC265. TMP
72
311102
Two-Way Stop Control
Page I ~:
n
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information 136th Street & Towne Road. U
Analyst RMB Intersection
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction a - Carmel
Date Performed 1/14/02 Analysis Year Existing 0
Analysis Time Period PM Peak
Project Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: 136th Street lNorth/South Street: Towne Road il
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street Northbound Southbound {}
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 0 270 124 5 133 0 n
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 300 137 5 147 0 -
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 5 - - ft
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0 -
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 f[
Configuration TR LT
Upstream Signal 0 0 -
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound ft
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R -
~olume 35 0 16 0 0 0 U
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 38 0 17 0 0 0
IPercent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 0 0
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 I [
Flared Approach N N -
Istorage 0 0 if
RT Channelized 0 0
ILanes 0 0 0 0 0 0
lConfiguration LR U
Delay, Queue Length, and level of Service
iApproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12D-
Lane Configuration LT LR
~ (vph) 5 55
IC (m) (vph) 1107 548 U-
~/c 0.00 0.10
[95% queue length 0.01 0.33 fr
lControl Delay 8.3 12.3
LOS A B -
IApproach Delay - - 12.3 {}
iApproach LOS -- - B
>
Copyright @2oooUniversityofFlorida, All Rights Reserved
vers;01J1 \
file://C:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2kC393.TMP
73
3/1/0~
o
Two-Way Stop Control
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
D
o
o
>
o
Page 1 of2
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information Site Information
Analyst RMB Intersection 136th Street & T Qwne Road
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering ~urisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/4/02 fA.nalysis Year Existing+ 20 12+Generated
Analvsis Time Period AM Peak
Proiect Description West Clav
EastlWest Street: 136th Street NorthlSouth Street: Towne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments
Maior Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
~olume 9 151 44 19 496 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 10 167 48 21 551 2
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 -- -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Upstream SiQnal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 166 37 11 7 109 27
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 184 41 12 7 121 30
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
anes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Delav. Queue Lenath, and Level of Service
!Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
" (vph) 10 21 237 158
C (m) (vph) 1002 1337 187 317
"Ie 0.01 0.02 1.27 0.50
~5% queue length 0.03 0.05 13.06 2.63
Control Delay 8.6 7.7 205.2 27.1
LOS A A F 0
Approach Delay - - 205.2 27.1
Approach LOS - -- F 0
COPYTight ~ 2000 Univcrsity of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Version 4_lb
fjJe://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kDOD1.TMP
74
1/1 /02
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 ~~
n
-
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information 136th Street & Towne Road U
Analyst RMB Intersection
Agency/Co. A&"F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 1/14/02 Analysis Year Existing+ Yr 2012+Generatedn
Analysis Time Period PM Peak
Proiect Description West Clav -
EasUWest Street: 136th Street North/South Street: Towne Road ft
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments -
Major Street Northbound Southbound rr
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 31 340 156 14 174 8 11
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 34 377 173 15 193 8 -
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided J
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR U
Upstream Signal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound . Eastbound D
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 52 125 33 5 70 17
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 U
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 57 138 36 5 77 18
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 0 0
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 U
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0 il
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 -
Configuration LTR LTR iJ
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12D
Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
v (vph) 34 15 231 100
C (m) (vph) 1383 1005 307 313 U
v/c 0.02 0.01 0.75 0.32
95% queue length 0.08 0.05 5.70 1.34 ~
Control Delay 7.7 8.6 45.1 21.8 \ r
LOS A A E C -
Approach Delay - - 45.1 21.8 D
Approach LOS - - E C
>
Copyright <<) 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
versionDb
file://C:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kD 1 B5 .TMP
75
3/1102
o
All-Way Stop Control
o
Page 1 of:
o
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS
General Information Site Information
.nalvst MB Intersection 136th Street & Towne Road
.oencv/Co. &F Engineering urisdiction .- Carmel
ate Performed '4/02 '\Ilalvsis Year lExistina+2012+Generated
.nalvsis Time Period M Peak
Proiect ID West C/av
iEasl/West Street: 136th Street lNorth/South Street: Towne Road
olume Adiustments and Site Characteristics
.rloroach Eastbound Westbound
ovement l T R l T R
rvolume 7 109 27 166 37 11
Yo Thrus left Lane 50 50
Aooroach Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R
Volume 9 151 44 19 496 2
Yo Thrus Left Lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
l1 L2 l1 12 l1 L2 L1 12
Configuration L TR L TR L TR L TR
PHF 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00
Flow Rate 7 136 184 48 10 195 21 498
Yo Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0
No. Lanes 2 2 2 2
Geometry Group 5 5 5 5
Duration, T 0.25
Saturation Headwav Ad'ustment Worksheet
Prop. Left-Tums 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0
Prop. Right-Turns 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
IhL T-adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
ihRT -adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
hadj, computed 7.32 7.32 7.32 7.32 7.32 7.32 7.32 7.32
DeDarture Headwav and Service Time
hd, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
, initial 0.01 0.12 0.16 0.04 0.01 0.17 0.02 0.44
hd, final value 7.32 7.32 7.32 7.32 7.32 7.32 7.32 7.32
, final value 0.01 0.26 0.36 0.09 0.02 0.34 0.04 0.84
Move-up time, m 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
ervice Time 5.0 4.6 5.0 I 4.6 5.0 I 4.6 5.0 I 4.6
D
o
D
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
~apacity and level of Service
o
D
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
l1 12 L1 12 l1 12 L1 12
Capacity 257 386 434 298 260 445 271 590
Delay 10.12 12.04 13.85 10.06 9.61 12.36 9.27 32.03
os B B B B A B A 0
!Approach: Delay 11.95 13.07 12.23 31.11
LOS B B B 0
Intersection Delay 21.29
Intersection LOS C
o
o
file:IIC:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kD2D4. TMP
76
1/1/02
All-Way Stop Control
Page 1 ~:
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS
General Information )ite Information n
lIlalvst MB ntersection 136th Street & Towne Road
1gency/Co. &F Engineering urisdiction Carmel
ate Performed '4102 'VIalvsis Year ~xisting+ Yr 2012+Generated
lIlalvsis Time Period M Peak U
Proiect 10 West Clav
astlWest Street: 136th Street lNorthlSouth Street: Towne Road
olume Adjustments and Site Characteristics U
DProach Eastbound Westbound
ovement L T R L T R
olume 5 70 17 52 125 33 fc
l1> Thrus Left Lane 50 50
Al)oroach Northbound Southbound -
Movement L T R L T R
Volume 31 340 156 14 174 8 G
l1> Thrus Left Lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
l1 12 l1 12 l1 12 l1 L2 Jj
Configuration L TR L TR L TR L TR
PHF 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00
low Rate 5 87 57 158 34 496 15 ~82U
Yo Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 5 0 5
No. Lanes 2 2 2 2
Geometry Group 5 5 5 5 G
Duration, T 0.25
Saturation Headway Ad"ustment Worksheet
Prop. Left-Turns 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 r-
Prop. Right-Turns 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 ...
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
hL T -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 {}
hRT -adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
hadj. computed 7.09 7.09 7.09 7.09 7.09 7.09 7.09 7.090
Departure Headway and Service Time
hd, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
, initial 0.00 0.08 0.05 0.14 0.03 0.44 0.01 0.16U
hd, final value 7.09 7.09 7.09 7.09 7.09 7.09 7.09 7.09
, final value 0.01 0.16 0.11 0.28 0.06 0.76 0.03 0.31
Move-up time, m 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 {}
ervice Time 4.8 4.4 4.8 4.4 4.8 I 4.4 4.8 I 4.4
Capacity and Level of Service
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound {}
l1 12 l1 12 l1 12 l1 12
Capacity 255 337 307 408 284 642 265 432
Delay 9.86 10.67 10.39 11.67 9.07 23.73 9.27 1~46 U
os A B B B A C A
Approach: Delay 10.62 11.33 22.79 11.29 11
LOS B B C B
ntersection Delay 17.13 -
ntersection LOS C
U
file:1 IC:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kEOB3. TMP
77
3/110:
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WFST CLAy DEvELoPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
141ST STREET & TOWNE ROAD
INTERSECTION DATA
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS
AND
CAPACITY ANALYSES
78
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
NORTHBOUND
EASTBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
WESTBOUND
HOUR
6- 7
7- 8
8- 9
3- 4
4- 5
5- 6
TOTAL
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
WEST CLAY
141ST STREET & TOWNE ROAD (07)
JANUARY 8, 2002
PEAK HOUR DATA
29 316
4 41
1 100
1 21
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
AM PEAK
HR BEGIN 7:00 AM
L T R TOT
OFF PEAK
L
T R
TOT
PM PEAK
HR BEGIN 4:45 PM
L T R TOT
1 69
1 4
o 342
45 44
12 82
4 9
o 342
4 93
7 280
4 33
4 95
13 7
HOUR SUMMARY
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
u
o
o
o
D
o
D
o
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
WEST CLAY
141ST STREET & TOWNE ROAD (07)
JANUARY 8, 2002
NORTHBOUND
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 0 0 0 37 0 37 1 0 1 38 0 38
7- 8 1 0 1 66 3 69 11 1 12 78 4 82
8- 9 3 0 3 61 7 68 7 1 8 71 8 79
PM
3- 4 3 0 3 107 17 124 11 1 12 121 18 139
4- 5 9 0 9 213 15 228 21 0 21 243 15 258
5- 6 4 0 4 232 16 248 25 0 25 261 16 277
PASSENGER 20 716 76 812
100.0% 92.5% 96.2% 93.0%
TRUCK 0 58 3 61
0.0% 7.5% 3.8% 7.0%
BOTH 20 774 79 873
2.3% 88.7% 9.0% 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 1 1 2 4 1 5 0 0 0 5 2 7
7- 8 1 0 1 3 1 4 4 0 4 8 1 9
8- 9 0 1 1 7 1 8 4 0 4 11 2 13
PM
3- 4 0 1 1 9 2 11 2 0 2 11 3 14
4- 5 1 0 1 26 0 26 0 0 0 27 0 27
5- 6 5 0 5 34 1 35 5 0 5 44 1 45
PASSENGER 8 83 15 106
72.7% 93.3% 100.0% 92.2%
TRUCK 3 6 0 9
27.3% 6.7% 0.0% 7.8%
BOTH 11 89 15 115
9.6% 77.4% 13.0% 100.0%
A()
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
o
o
o
o
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
WEST CLAY
141ST STREET & TOWNE ROAD (07)
JANUARY 8, 2002
SOUTHBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
AM
6- 7 2 0 2 139 3 142 1 0 1 142 3
7- 8 0 0 0 341 1 342 0 0 0 341 1
8- 9 1 1 2 189 12 201 2 0 2 192 13
PM
3- 4 0 0 0 63 15 78 0 1 1 63 16
4- 5 3 0 3 69 12 81 1 0 1 73 12
5- 6 3 0 3 73 12 85 0 0 0 76 12
PASSENGER 9 874 4 887
90.0% 94.1% 80.0% 94.0% 0
TRUCK 1 55 1 57
10.0% 5.9% 20.0% 6.0%
BOTH 10 929 5 944 0
1.1% 98.4% 0.5% 100.0%
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : WESTBOUND 0
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL BOT[
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
AM
6- 7 14 0 14 15 2 17 1 0 1 30 2 3~
7- 8 45 0 45 43 1 44 4 0 4 92 1 9 ..
8- 9 22 1 23 17 2 19 0 0 0 39 3 4
PM
3- 4 15 1 16 5 2 7 0 0 0 20 3 ~D
4- 5 13 1 14 7 0 7 2 0 2 22 1
5- 6 12 0 12 9 1 10 1 0 1 22 1 23
PASSENGER 121 96 8 225 0
97.6% 92.3% 100.0% 95.3%
TRUCK 3 8 0 11 0
2.4% 7.7% 0.0% 4.7%
BOTH 124 104 8 236
52.5% 44.1% 3.4% 100.0% 0
0
0
81
o Two-Way Stop Control
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
, 0
o
o
o
>
o
fjle://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k163.TMP
Page 1 of:
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information Site Information
Analyst RMB Intersection 141st Street & Towne Road
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 1/14/02 I\nalysis Year Existing
!Analysis Time Period AM Peak
Project Description West Clav
EastlWest Street: 141st Street lNorth/South Street: Towne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
~olume 1 69 12 0 342 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 76 13 0 380 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Upstream Signal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 45 44 4 1 4 4 ,
i
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 50 48 4 1 4 4
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
IPercent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Delav, Queue length. and level of Service
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
ane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
Iv (vph) 1 0 102 9
~ (m) (vph) 1162 1488 502 544
v/c 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.02
95% queue length 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.05
Control Delay 8.1 7.4 14.0 11.7
LOS A A B B
Approach Delay - - 14.0 11.7
Approach LOS - - B B
Copyright @2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Version4.lb
82
3/1 /02
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 oQ
I
-
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information I
A.nalyst RMB Intersection 141 st Street & Towne Road ..
A.gency/Co. A&F Engineering Uurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 1/14/02 ~nalysis Year Existing I
A.nalvsis Time Period PM Peak
Proiect Description West Clav
EastlWest Street: 141st Street lNorth/South Street: Towne Road r
Intersection Orientation: North-South lStudv Period hrs): 0.25 I
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments
Maior Street Northbound Southbound r
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 1
L T R L T R
Volume 7 280 29 4 95 1 "
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 I
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 7 311 32 4 105 1 -
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - -- 5 - - ~
Median Type Undivided I
RT Channelized 0 0 -
I...anes 0 1 0 0 1 0 ~
~onfiguration LTR LTR I
Upstream SiClnal 0 0 -
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound ~
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 I
L T R L T R -
lVolume 13 7 1 4 33 4 ~
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 I
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 14 7 1 4 36 4 1.
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 I
Flared Approach N N -
Storage 0 0 "
RT Channelized 0 0 I
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR "
Delav. Queue lem:ath. and level of Service l.J
~pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 n
Lane Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR ~
r.- (vph) 7 4 22 44
~ (m) (vph) 1467 1199 478 505 1
~/c 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.09 --
95% queue length 0.01 0.01 0.14 0.28 il
Control Delay 7.5 8.0 12.9 12.8
LOS A A B B -
!Approach Delay - - 12.9 12.8 I]
!Approach LOS - - B B L.J
>
Copyright iD 2000 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved
Version Db
file://C:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k270.TMP
83
3/1/02
o Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 of:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
>
o
file://C:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k3B4. TMP
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information lSite Information
IAnalyst RMB Intersection 141 st Street & Towne Road
iAgency/Co. A&F Engineedng lJurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 1/14/02 IAnalysis Year Existing+ 20 12+Generated
IAnalysis Time Period AM Peak
Proiect Descriotion West Clav
East/West Street: 141 st Street lNorth/South Street: Towne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South Istudy Period hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments
Maior Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
l\1olume 1 111 19 0 436 3
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 123 21 0 484 3
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration L TR L TR
Uostream Sianal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 59 53 5 11 6 5
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 65 58 5 12 6 5
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration L TR L TR
Delav. Queue Lenath and level of Service
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L L TR L TR
v (vph) 1 0 65 63 12 11
C (m) (vph) 1061 1420 384 417 332 460
vie 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.15 0.04 0.02
195% queue length 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.53 0.11 0.07
Control Delay 8.4 7.5 16.3 15.2 16.2 13.0
LOS A A C C C B
Approach Delay - -- 15.7 14.7
Approach LOS - - C B
Copyright Ii) 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Version4.lb
84
3/I/02
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 00
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROlSUMMARY
I
lGenerallnformation Site Information 141st Street & Towne Road -D
IAnalyst RMB Intersection
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel '. I
Date Performed 1/14/02 Analysis Year Existing+ Yr 2012+Generated [I
Analysis Time Period PM Peak
Proiect Description West Clay -
EastlWest Street: 141 st Street North/South Street: Towne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments III
Maior Street Northbound Southbound Jl
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R -
Volume 8 349 37 5 133 12
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 U
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 8 387 41 5 147 13
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided U
RT Channelized 0 I 0
Lanes 1 1 0 I 1 1 0
~onfiguration L TR L TR I
Upstream SiQnal 0 0 ...
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 I
L T R L T R ~
Volume 20 9 1 11 41 5
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 I
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 22 10 1 12 45 5 ~
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 r
Flared Approach N N I.j
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0 I i
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 J
IConfiguration L TR L TR
Delav, Queue Lenath, and level of Service I I
fl\pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound -
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 n
II-ane Configuration L L L TR L TR L.J
~ (vph) 8 5 22 11 12 50 i
I
~ (m) (vph) 1401 1116 362 424 402 425 ,
~/c 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.03 0.12
~5% queue length 0.02 0.01 0.19 0.08 0.09 0040
!Control Delay 7.6 8.2 15.6 13.7 14.2 1~6Ui
LOS A A C B B
IApproach Delay 15.0- 14.5 ;
-- - i1
IApproach LOS -- - B B
-
>
Copyright ti) 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
versionOI
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2klOD3.TMP
85
3/1/02
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WFSf ClAY DEvELoPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
146TH STREET & TOWNE ROAD
INTERSECTION DATA
TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS
AND
CAPACITY ANALYSES
RR
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
NORTHBOUND
EASTBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
WESTBOUND
HOUR
6- 7
7- 8
8- 9
3 - 4
4- 5
5- 6
TOTAL
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
15-MIN
HOUR
PHF
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
o
D
o
o
o
0'
o
o
WEST CLAY
146TH STREET & TOWNE ROAD (08)
JANUARY 8, 2002
PEAK HOUR DATA
AM PEAK
HR BEGIN 7:00 AM
L T R TOT
OFF PEAK
PM PEAK
HR BEGIN 5:00 PM
L T R TOT
L
T R
TOT
11 42
7 77
3 158
166 186
36
43
32
1
30 118
33 225
3 49
40 96
101. 249
1.6 274
12 64
2 138
89
127
193
353
HOUR SUMMARY
NB SB NB+SB EB WB EB+WB TOTAL
- AM -
32 106 138 39 147 186 324
89 193 282 127 353 480 762
75 109 184 86 163 249 433
- PM -
100 44 144 106 123 229 373
202 43 245 148 119 267 512
249 64 313 274 138 412 725
747 559 1306 780 1043 1823 3129
23.9% 17.9% 41.7% 24.9% 33.3% 58.3% 100.0%
- AM PEAK VOLUMES - 0
31 55 45 107
97 193 129 353
0.78 0.88 0.72 0.82 0
- PM PEAK VOLUMES -
70 22 71 36
258 65 274 139 0
0.92 0.74 0.96 0.97
0
0
0
D
87
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
CLIENT
LOCATION
DATE
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY
WEST CLAY
146TH STREET & TOWNE ROAD (08)
JANUARY 8, 2002
NORTHBOUND
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH
AM
6- 7 9 0 9 13 1 14 8 1 9 30 2 32
7- 8 11 0 11 42 0 42 33 3 36 86 3 89
8- 9 9 1 10 31 1 32 32 1 33 72 3 75
PM
3- 4 11 1 12 48 5 53 32 3 35 91 9 100
4- 5 27 1 28 96 3 99 73 2 75 196 6 202
5- 6 30 0 30 116 2 118 97 4 101 243 6 249
PASSENGER 97 346 275 718
97.0% 96.6% 95.2% 96.1%
TRUCK 3 12 14 29
3.0% 3.4% 4.8% 3.9%
BOTH 100 358 289 747
13.4% 47.9% 38.7% 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 2 0 2 28 0 28 9 0 9 39 0 39
7- 8 7 0 7 68 9 77 39 4 43 114 13 127
8- 9 4 1 5 59 8 67 14 0 14 77 9 86
PM
3- 4 9 2 11 81 9 90 5 0 5 95 11 106
4- 5 20 0 20 113 6 119 9 0 9 142 6 148
5- 6 32 1 33 224 1 225 16 0 16 272 2 274
PASSENGER 74 573 92 739
94.9% 94.6% 95.8% 94.7%
TRUCK 4 33 4 41
5.1% 5.4% 4.2% 5.3%
BOTH 78 606 96 780
10.0% 77.7% 12.3% 100.0%
88
0
0
A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC.
TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY 0
CLIENT WEST CLAY
LOCATION 146TH STREET & TOWNE ROAD (08 ) 0
DATE JANUARY 8, 2002
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL SOUTHBOUND
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK
AM
6- 7 3 0 3 89 1 90 13 0 13 105 1
7- 8 3 0 3 153 5 158 32 0 32 188 5
8- 9 2 0 2 75 11 86 20 1 21 97 12
PM
3- 4 0 0 0 34 2 36 8 0 8 42 2
4- 5 0 0 0 38 0 38 4 1 5 42 1
5- 6 2 1 3 48 1 49 12 0 12 62 2
PASSENGER 10 437 89 536
90.9% 95.6% 97.8% 95.9% 0
TRUCK 1 20 2 23
9.1% 4.4% 2.2% 4.1%
BOTH 11 457 91 559 0
2.0% 81.8% 16.3% 100.0%
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : WESTBOUND 0
HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL
PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOT
AM
6- 7 46 0 46 100 1 101 0 0 0 146 1 14
7- 8 162 4 166 182 4 186 1 0 1 345 8 35
8- 9 49 4 53 101 7 108 2 0 2 152 11 16
PM
3- 4 24 6 30 85 4 89 4 0 4 113 10 12
4- 5 23 0 23 90 5 95 1 0 1 114 5 11
5- 6 36 4 40 92 4 96 2 0 2 130 8 13
PASSENGER 340 650 10 1000 0
95.0% 96.3% 100.0% 95.9%
TRUCK 18 25 0 43 0
5.0% 3.7% 0.0% 4.1%
BOTH 358 675 10 1043
34.3% 64.7% 1. 0% 100.0% D
0
D
89
o AII- Way Stop Control
o
Page 1 of2
o
All-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS I
I
General Information ite Information
nalvst RMB ntersection 146th Street & Towne Road
.oencv/Co. A&F Enaineerina urisdiclion IJarmel
ale Performed 1/14/02 \l1alvsis Year lExistina
\nalvsis Time Period AM Peak
Proiect 10 West Clay
EastlWest Street 146th Street !North/South Street: Towne Road
"olume Adiustments and Site Characteristics
\ooroach Eastbound Westbound
ovement L T R L T R
!volume 7 77 43 166 186 1
Y. Thrus Left Lane 50 50
Aooroach Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R
Volume 11 42 36 3 158 32
Y. Thrus Left Lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2
k:onfiguration LTR LTR LTR LTR
IPHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Flow Rate 139 391 98 213
Y. Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5
No. Lanes 1 1 1 1
Geometry Group 1 1 1 1
uration, T 0.25
Saturation Headwav Ad'ustment Worksheet
Prop. Left-Turns 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.0
Prop. Right-Turns 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.2
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
hL T -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
hRT-adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
hHV.adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
hadj, computed 5.30 5.30 . . 5.30 I I 5.30 I
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
I D~eparture Headway and Service TI+
Ihd, initial value . 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
Dlx,initial 0.12 0.35 0.09 0.19
~, final value 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30
, final value 0.20 0.56 0.15 0.33
0 Move-up time. m 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Service Time 3.3 3.3 I 3.3 I 3.3 I
CaDacitv and level of Service
0 Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2
\: Capacity 389 641 348 463
Delay 9.65 14.70 9.60 11.12
- os A B A B
r- Approach: Delay 9.65 14.70 9.60 11.12
LOS A B A B
Intersection Delay 12.37
[ Intersection LOS B
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kll Cl.TMP
90
':t /1 f()")
All-Way Stop Control
Page 1 oQ
n
-
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS
General Information site Information I
nalvst IRMB ntersection 146th Street & Towne Road I.j
IQencv/Co. ~&F Engineering urisdictic5ft'tt!" Carmel
ate Performed 1/14/02 /Vlalvsis Year 1Fxistina
Inalvsis Time Period IpM Peak I
Proiect 10 West C/av -
EastlWest Street: 146th Street .lNorthlSouth Street: Towne Road
lIolume Adiustments and Site Characteristics I
~Droach Eastbound Westbound ...
"'ovement L T R L T R
rvolume 33 225 16 40 96 2 D
Yo Thrus Left Lane 50 50
~proach Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R
rvolume 30 118 101 3 49 12 U
Yo Thrus Left Lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound il
L1 12 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2
[configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
lPHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 jl
Flow Rate 303 152 276 70
Yo Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 -
lNo. Lanes 1 1 1 1
lGeometry Group 1 1 1 1 U
Duration. T 0.25
Saturation Headwav Ad"ustment Worksheet
Prop. Left-Turns 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 U
Prop. Right-Turns 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.2
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
hL T -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 U
hRT -adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 '
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
~dj. computed 5.17 5.17 5.17 5.17 I
DeDarture Headwav and Service Time -:
~. initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
Pc. initial 0.27 0.14 0.25 0.06 U
~. final value 5.17 5.17 5.17 5.17
Pc. final value 0.43 0.23 0.39 0.11
Move-up time. m 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 I
[service Time 3.2 I 3.2 I 3.2 I 3.2
[CaDacitv and level of Service
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound U
L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2
[capacity 553 402 526 320 111
Ioelay 12.09 10.08 11.38 9.26
.....OS B B B A -
Approach: Delay 12.09 10.08 11.38 9.26 -0
LOS B B B A
Intersection Delay 11.22
Intersection LOS B
fi]e://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k 12C2.TMP
91
3/1/02
o All-Way Stop Control
o
o
o
o
o
o
Page 1 of;
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
file://C:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k2083. TMP
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS
General Information Site Information
\m3lVSt IRMB Intersection 146th Street & Towne Road
lJurisdiction . . - Carmel
\Qencv/Co. 'A &F Enaineerina
ate Perfonned 1/14/02 nalvsis Year xi~ina+2Q12+Generated
\nalvsis Time Period "AM Peak
Proiect 10 We~ Clay
IlOasllWest Street 146th Street INorthlSouth Street: Towne Road
olume Adjustments and Site Characteristics
.ooroach Eastbound Westbound
~vement L T R L T R
Volume 8 94 52 218 224 1
Yo Thrus left lane 50 50
II.pproach Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R
!volume 13 61 70 4 201 38
Yo Thrus Left Lane 50 50
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2
Configuration L TR L TR L TR L TR
PHF 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00
low Rate 8 146 242 225 14 131 4 239
Yo Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0
No. Lanes 2 2 2 2
~eometry Group 5 5 5. 5
Duration, T 0.25
[Saturation Headway Ad"ustment Worksheet
Prop. Left-Turns 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0
Prop. Right-Tums 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.2
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
hL T -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
RT -adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
hadj, computed 6.61 6.61 6.61 6.61 6.61 6.61 6.61 6.61
DeDarture Headwav and Service Time
hd, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
, initial 0.01 0.13 0.22 0.20 0.01 0.12 0.00 0.21
hd, final value 6.61 6.61 6.61 6.61 6.61 6.61 6.61 6.61
, final value 0.01 0.25 0.42 0.37 0.03 0.23 0.01 0.42
vtove-up lime, m 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
ervice Time 4.3 I 3.8 4.3 I 3.8 4.3 I 3.8 4.3 I 3.8
!caDacitv and level of Service
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2
rapacity 258 396 492 475 264 381 254 489
Delay 9.40 10.81 13.19 11.98 9.70 10.71 9.39 13.35
os A B B B A B A B
!APproach: Delay 10.73 12.61 10.61 13.29
LOS B B B B
Intersection Delay 12.20
ntersection LOS B
92
1/1/02
All-Way Stop Control
Page I 00:
n
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALYSIS
General Information ite Information U
\miivst RMB ntersection 146th Street & Towne Road
\a8ncv/Co. A&F Enqineerinq Jurisdiction Carmet
ate Performed 1/14/02 \I1alvsis Year 1=xistina+ Yr 2012+Generated il
\nalvsis Time Period PM Peak
Proiect 10 West Clav
ast/West Street 146th Street lNorth/South Street: Towne Road il
olume Adiustments and Site Characteristics
IDoroach Eastbound Westbound -
ovement L T R L T R
lVolume 40 271 19 71 117 2 {}
\'. Thrus Left Lane 50 50
lAooroach Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R ft
Ivolume 36 147 135 4 67 14
\'. Thrus Left Lane 50 50 ...
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound iJ
L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2
!configuration L TR L TR L TR L TR
IPHF 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 fr
low Rate 44 290 78 119 40 282 4 81 -1
\'0 Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 --
No. Lanes 2 2 2 2
Geometry Group 5 5 5 5 I t
Duration. T 0.25 ...
Saturation Headway Ad"ustment Worksheet
Prop. Left-Turns 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 I C
Prop. Right-Turns 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.2 ..
Prop. Heavy Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 f1
hLT -adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 I
hRT -adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 ..
hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 ft
jhadj. computed 6.23 6.23 6.23 6.23 6.23 6.23 6.23 6.23
Departure Headway and Service Time -
~. initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 i1
IK. initial 0.04 0.26 0.07 0.11 0.04 0.25 0.00 0.07 "\
~. final value 6.23 6.23 6.23 6.23 6.23 6.23 6.23 6.23 -
Ix. final value 0.08 0.48 0.14 0.20 0.07 0.45 0.01 0.14
iMove-up time, m 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 U
Iservice Time 3.9 3.6 3.9 I 3.6 3.9 I 3.6 3.9 I 3.6
Capacity and leyel of Service
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound I[
L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 -
apacity 294 540 328 369 290 532 254 331 fr
Delay 9.44 13.84 10.14 10.36 9.56 13.25 9.48 10.09l
os A B B B A B A B
Approach: Delay 13.26 10.27 12.79 10.07 {}
LOS B B B B
Intersection Delay 12.18
ntersection LOS B
file://C:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k2323. TMP
93
3/1/02
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
D
o
D
WFST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
'TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
126TH ST & CENTEX I SOUTH/SCHOOL ACCESS
INTERSECTION DATA
CAPACITY ANALYSES
94
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 Jl
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information Site Information I
IlAnalyst RMB Intersection 126th St & Centex South l.
Access
IIAQency/Co. A&F Enaineerina 'urisdiction Carmel I
Date Performed 2/5/02 Analysis Year Ex~una+2012+Proposed L
Analysis Time Period AM Peak
Proiect Description West Clav /"
EastlWest Street: 126th Street North/South Street: Centex South Access L
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound .
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R {}
~olume 5 4 66 123 15 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 5 4 73 136 16 1 n
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0 r
Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1
!Configuration LT R LT R
Upstream Sienal 0 0 U
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R n
!Volume 49 13 91 3 18 13
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 54 14 101 3 20 14 r--l
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N ~
Storage 0 0 W
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration L TR L TR .
Delav. Queue Lenath and Level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound r
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12-
...ane Configuration LT LT L TR L TR ~
v (vph) 5 136 54 115 3 34
C (m) (vph) 1581 1503 557 960 461 637 -
'r-I/c 0.00 0.09 0.10 0.12 0.01 O. o~ 1]
5% queue length 0.01 0.30 0.32 0.41 0.02 0.17
lControl Delay 7.3 7.6 12.2 9.3 12.9 11.0
LOS A A B A B B
IApproach Delay - - 10.2 11.1 ~
IApproach LOS - - B B
U
file://C:\ WTNDOWS\TEMP\u2k5134.TMP
95
3/1/02
o Two-Way Stop Control
Page I of2
o
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
0 General Information Site Information
126th St & Centex South
fA,nalvst RMB IntersectiOn Access
0 ~Qencv/Co. A&F Enaineerina urisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/5/02 nalvsis Year Ex~ffna+2012+Proposed
Analysis Time Period PM Peak
0 Project Description West Clay
EasUWest Street: 126th Street North/South Street: Centex South Access
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25
0 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
0 L T R L T R
Volume 15 16 14 27 12 4
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
0 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 16 17 15 30 13 4
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
0 RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1
Configu ration LT R LT R
0 Upstream Signal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
0 L T R L T R
Volume 16 4 28 2 3 8
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
0 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 17 4 31 2 3 8
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
C Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
L Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration L TR L TR
Delay. Queue length and level of Service
I Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
- Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12.
[ Lane Configuration LT LT L TR L TR
v (vph) 16 30 17 35 2 11
C (m) (vph) 1581 1561 809 1004 770 941
C vIe 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.01
95% queue length 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.01 0.04
Control Delay 7.3 7.4 9.5 8.7 9.7 8.9
~ LOS A A A A A A
Approach Delay - - 9.0 9.0
Approach LOS - - A A
o
file:1 le:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k5261 .TMP
96
1/1 /02
o
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
U
D
o
o
WEST Cl.A Y DEvELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
.... .
126TH STREET & PROPOSED ROADWAY
INTERSECTION DATA
CAPACITY ANALYSES
97
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 II
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information . Site Information f'
Analyst IRMB Intersection 126th St & Proposed ~
~oadwaY
Agency/Co. IA&F Enaineerina 'urisdiction Carmel n
Date Performed 2/5/02 nalvsis Year Exisuna+2012+Proposed I
Analvsis Time Period lAM Peak
Project Description West Clay ry
EastlWest Street: 126th Street North/South Street: ProDosed Roadway
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period lhrs): 0.25
lVehicle Volumes and Adiustments -D
Major Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R {}
Volume 26 72 66 123 99 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 28 80 0 0 110 1 II
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 -- -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0 il
Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1
Configuration L T T R -
Upstream Sional 0 0 II
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R il
Volume 49 13 91 1 18 40
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 1 0 44 fl
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 -
Flared Approach N N D
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 D
Configuration L R
Delav, Queue length. and level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound 12U
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11
Lane Configuration L L R
v (vph) 28 1 44 I [
C (m) (vph) 1460 722 935-
vlc 0.02 0.00 o,O~D
95% queue length 0.06 0.00 0.15
Control Delay 7.5 10.0- 9.0
LOS A A AD
Approach Delay - - 9.1
Approach LOS -- - A
U
file:lle:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k7052. TMP
98
3/1/02
o Two- Way Stop Control
o
o
D
Q
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
C
D
C
o
Page I of2
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information ~ite Information
Analyst RMB Intersection 126th St & Proposed
AQency/Co. IA&F Engineering Roadway
Ilurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/5/02 IA nalysis Year Ex~ffng+2012+Proposed
Analysis Time Period PM Peak
Project Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: 126th Street North/South Street: Porposed Roadway
Intersection Orientation: East-West \Study Period hrs}: 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
!Volume 18 28 66 123 31 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 20 31 0 0 34 1
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - -- 5 -- -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1
Configuration L T T R
Upstream Signal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 49 13 91 1 18 12
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 1 0 13
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1
Configuration L R
Delav. Queue Lenath. and Level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L R
I
. v (vph) 20 1 13
C (m) (vph) 1557 875 1031
vlc 0.01 0.00 0.01
95% queue length 0.04 0.00 0.04
Control Delay 7.3 9.1 8.5
,LOS A A A
Approach Delay - - 8.6
A.pproach LOS - - A
file://C:\WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k20 1. TMP
99
3/1/02
o
o
o
o
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
D
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
131ST STREET & KLINEMAN ACCESS
INTERSECTION DATA
CAPACITY ANALYSES
100,
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 JJ
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information Site Information I
Analyst RMB Intersection 131 st St & Klineman Access I..
Agency/Co. A&F Enaineerina Uurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/5/02 Analysis Year Ex~una+2012+ProDosed I
Analysis Time Period AM Peak I
Proiect Descriotion West C/av
East/West Street: 131st Street North/South Street: Klineman Access r
Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudY Period (hrs): 0.25 l
lVehicle Volumes and Adiustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound I
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 ~
L T R L T R
~olume 18 246 13 7 152 1 n
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 l
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 273 14 7 168 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - - n
Median Type Undivided L
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 n
Configuration T R L T I
Upstream Sianal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound n
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 I
L T R L T R
lVolume 26 13 20 1 18 12 n
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 I
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 28 0 22 0 0 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 I'
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 l
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0 n
RT Channelized 0 0 I.J
Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0
Configuration L R r
Delav. Queue Lenath. and Level of Service I.j
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 I
Lane Configuration L L R ..
v (vph) 7 28 22 rl
C (m) (vph) 1258 555 759 I
v/c 0.01 0.05 0.03
95% queue length 0.02 0.16 0.09 n
Control Delay 7.9 11.8 9.9 W
LOS A B A
Approach Delay -- - 11.0 r
Approach LOS - - B .
HCS2000™
Copyright ~ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Version Db
file://C:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k9353. TMP
101
3/1 /02
o Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 of 1
o
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
0 General Information Site Information
Analyst RMB InteFsection 131 st St & Klineman Access
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Wurisdiction Carmel
0 Date Performed 2/5/02 ~nalysis Year Ex~Ung+2012+Proposed
Analysis Time Period PM Peak
Project Description West Clay
0 EastlWest Street: 131 st Street North/South Street: Klineman Access
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
0 Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
l T R l T R
0 Volume 18 218 17 23 240 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 242 18 25 266 0
0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - -- 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0
Configuration T R L T
Upstream Signal 0 0
0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
l T R L T R
0 Volume 10 13 13 1 18 12
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 11 0 14 0 0 0
0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
0 Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0
0 Configuration L R
Delav. Queue lenath. and level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
D Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L R
r v (vph) 25 11 14
C (m) (vph) 1287 477 790
v/c 0.02 0.02 0.02
C 95% queue length 0.06 0.07 0.05
Control Delay 7.9 12.7 9.6
LOS A B A
L Approach Delay - - 11.0
t\pproach LOS - - B
OHCS2000™
Copyright <!:I 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Version4.1b
file://C:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2kA293.TMP
102
3/1/02
D
D
D
D
D
o
:D
D
D
D
D
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
131 ST ST & KESSLERlCENTEX I NORTH ACCESS
INTERSECTION DATA
CAPACITY ANALYSES
103
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 D
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY {]
General Information Site Information r
!Analyst MB Intersection 131 st St & Kess/er/Centex Acl..
!AQency/Co. &F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/5/02 Analysis Year Existing+ 2012+Pror:>osed r
IAnalysis Time Period AM Peak I
Proiect Descriotion West Clay
EastlWest Street: 131st Street North/South Street: Kess/er/Centex Access r
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period lhrs): 0.25 I
lVehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound r
Moyement 1 2 3 4 5 6 W
L T R L T R
Volume 8 251 1 8 131 4 n
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 l
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 8 278 1 8 145 4
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - - n
Median Type Undivided I
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 n
Configuration LT R LT R I
Upstream Sienal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound n
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 I
L T R L T R
Volume 3 1 23 11 1 25 n
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 I
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 3 1 25 12 1 27
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 n
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 L
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0 {]
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration L TR L TR {1
Delay. Queue lenath. and level of Service
IApproach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 I I
Lane Configuration LT LT L TR L TR -
~ (vph) 8 8 3 26 12 28 il
C (m) (vph) 1414 1267 477 738 478 8681
Iv/c 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.03
195% queue length 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.11 0.08 0.10 {J
Control Delay 7.6 7.9 12.6 10.1 12.7 9.3
LOS A A B B B A
IApproach Delay - - 10.3 10.3 Jj
IApproach LOS - - B B
HCS2000™
Copyright @2oo0 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Version U l:
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kB 1 OO.TMP
104
3/1/02
D Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 ofl
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
c
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information Site Information
IAnalyst RMB Intersection 131 st St & Kess/er/Centex Ace
IIAQency/Co. ~&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/5/02 Analysis Year Existing+ 20 12+Proposed
Analysis Time Period !PM Peak
Project Description West Clay
East/West Street: 131 st Street North/South Street: Kess/er/Centex Access
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
!Volume 17 210 3 26 251 12
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 18 233 3 28 278 13
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1
Configuration LT R LT R
Upstream SiQnal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 2 1 15 7 1 11
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 1 16 7 1 12
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration L TR L TR
Delav. Queue Lenath. and level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LT LT L TR L TR-
v (vph) 18 28 2 17 7 13
C (m) (vph) 1254 1314 379 751 379 703
vlc 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02
95% queue length 0.04 0.07 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.06
Control Delay 7.9 7.8 14.5 9.9 14.7 10.2
LOS A A B A B B
Approach Delay - - 10.4 11.8
Approach LOS - - B B
DHCS2000TM Copyright <0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kB221.TMP 105
Version4.Jb
3/1/02
o
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
o
D
o
o
WEST ClAY DEVEWPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
131ST ST & TRINITY ACCESS/PROPOSED ROADWAY
INTERSECTION DATA
CAPACITY ANALYSES
106
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 00
I
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY 1-
General Information Site Information r
IAnalyst MB Intersection 131 st St & Trinity S. Access L
IlAqency/Co. &F Enqineerinq Uurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/5/02 Analysis Year Existina+ 20 12+Proposed r
Analysis Time Period ~M Peak I
Project Description West C/av
EastlWest Street: 131st Street NorthlSouth Street: Trinitv South Access I
Intersection Orientation: East-West !Study Period hrs): 0.25 ml
lVehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound I.
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L...
L T R L T R
lVolume 4 281 1 1 130 6 r
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 I
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 312 1 1 144 6
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - - n
Median Type Undivided I
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 . 1 0 1 1 r
lConfiguration LT R LT R I
Upstream Sianal 0 0 -
Minor Street Northbound Southbound r
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 I
L T R L T R
Volume 1 26 1 19 41 12 r
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 I
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 28 1 21 45 13 -
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 r-
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 I
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0 I
RT Channelized 0 0 L-
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration L TR L TR n
Delav. Queue Lenath and Level of Service I.l
lApproach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 I
Lane Configuration LT LT L TR L TR--
v (vph) 4 1 1 29 21 58 ~
~ (m) (vph) 1413 1230 436 490 466 5421
~/c 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.05 0.11-
95% queue length 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.19 0.14 0.36n
lControl Delay 7.6 7.9 13.3 12.8 13.1 12.4 U
LOS A A B B B B
lApproach Delay - - 12.8 12.6 n
IApproach LOS - - B B I.j
HCS2000™
Copyrighll!:i 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Version 4. It
o
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kB311.TMP
107
3/1/02
o Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 of I
o
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
0 General Information Site Information
IAnalyst IRMa Intersection 131 st St & Trinity S. Access
IAgency/Co. IA&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
0 Date Performed 2/5/02 Analysis Year Existing+ 20 12+ProJXJsed
IAnalysis Time Period IPM Peak
Proiect Description West Clay
0 EastlWest Street: 131 st Street North/South Street: Trinity South Access
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
0 Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
0 Volume 14 217 1 1 281 21
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 15 241 1 1 312 23
0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
0 Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1
Configuration LT R LT R
Upstream Signal 0 0
0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
0 !Volume 1 19 1 12 12 8
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 21 1 13 13 8
0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
0 Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
0 Configuration L TR L TR
Delav. Queue lenath. and level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
0 Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LT LT L TR L TR.
D v (v ph) 15 1 1 22 13 21
C (m) (vph) 1208 1307 385 409 389 492
v/c 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.04
[ 95% queue length 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.17 0.10 0.13
Control Delay 8.0 7.8 14.4 14.3 14.6 12.6
LOS A A B a B a
L Approach Delay - - 14.3 13.4
Approach LOS - - B B
OHCS2000™
Copyright <<:i 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.1b
file://C:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k34.TMP
108
3/1/02
D
o
o
o
D
D
o
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERAll0NSANALYSIS
136TH STREET EXTENSION & SHELBOURNE ROAD
INTERSECTION DATA
CAPACITY ANALYSES
109
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 il
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information Site Information
Analyst RMB Intersection 136th Street & She/bourne
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Road
Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/5/02 Analysis Year Existing+ Yr 2012+Proposed D
Analysis Time Period AM Peak
Project Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: 136th Street INorth/South Street: She/bourne Road ,
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25 -
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Malor Street Northbound Southbound U
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 9 42 72 1 209 1 f}
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 10 46 80 1 232 1
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 -- -- D'
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 D
Configuration LT R LT R
Upstream Signal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound fl
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 126 19 3 3 42 10 n
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 I
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 140 21 3 3 46 11
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 n
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 I
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
ConfiQuration L TR L TR
Delav. Queue lenath. and level of Service
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LT LT L TR L TR ..
v (vph) 10 1 140 24 3 57
C (m) (vph) 1317 1442 567 634 576 579 il
v/c 0.01 0.00 0.25 0.04 0.01 0.10
95% queue length 0.02 0.00 0.97 0.12 0.02 0.33n
Control Delay 7.8 7.5 13.4 10.9 11.3 11.91.J
LOS A A B B B B
Approach Delay - - 13.0 11.9
Approach LOS - - B B ..
>
o
file://C:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k 136. TMP
110
3/1/02
o Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 of2
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
0>
file://C:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k280. TMP
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
Analyst RMB Intersection 136th Street & She/bourne
Road
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/5/02 Analysis Year Existing+ Yr 2012+Proposed
Analysis Time Period PM Peak
Proiect Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: 136th Street INorth/South Street: She/bourne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
~olume 3 297 77 3 46 4
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 3 330 85 3 51 4
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1
Configuration LT R LT R
Upstream SiQnal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 48 49 2 2 33 4
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 53 54 2 2 36 4
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0
Configuration L TR L TR
Delav. Queue lenath. and level of Service
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LT LT L TR L TR
v (vph) 3 3 53 56 2 40
C (m) (vph) 1531 1128 508 538 462 507
v/c 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.08
95% queue length 0.01 0.01 0.35 0.35 0.01 0.26
Control Delay 7.4 8.2 12.9 12.5 12.8 12.7
LOS A A B B B B
I Approach Delay - - 12.7 12.7
Approach LOS - - B B
111
3/1/02
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
~
~
D
D
D
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
TOWNE ROAD & ROEHLING EAST ACCESS
INTERSECTION DATA
CAPACITY ANALYSES
112
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 Jl
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY 0
General Information Site Information _n
Analyst RMB Intersection Towne Rd & Roehling E. U
- Access
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/5/02 Analysis Year Ex~ting+2012+Proposed 0
Analysis Time Period AM Peak
Project Descriotion West Clay
EastlWest Street: Roehlina East Access North/South Street: Towne Road n
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25 " U
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street Northbound Southbound U
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 7 162 0 0 498 1 -0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 7 180 0 0 553 1
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 0 -- - {J
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 D
Configuration L T T R
Uostream Signal 0 0
Minor Street Westbound Eastbound n
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 0 0 0 4 0 19 n
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 4 0 21
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 5 0 5 n
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 L
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0 -0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1
lConfiguration L R {J
Delav. Queue lenath. and level of Service
~pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 I ~
Lane Configuration L L R -
" (vph) 7 4 21 iJ
C (m) (vph) 1001 373 527 L
"/c 0.01 0.01 0.04
:l5% queue length 0.02 0.03 0.12D
Control Delay 8.6 14.8 12.1
LOS A B B
Approach Delay - - 12.5 U
Approach LOS - -- B
>
o
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kl016.TMP
113
3/1/02
D Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 of2
D
D
D
D
D
D
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
Analyst RMB Intersection Towne Rd & Roehling E.
00 Access
Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/5102 ~nalysis Year Ex~ung+2012+Proposed
Analysis Time Period PM Peak
Project Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: Roehling East Access North/South Street: Towne Road
Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudv Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
D Volume 23 356 0 0 184 5
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 25 395 0 0 204 5
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - -- 0 - -
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
D Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1
K:;onfiguration L T T R
Upstream Signal 0 0
D Minor Street Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
D Volume 0 0 0 3 0 12
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 3 0 13
D Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 5 0 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
0 ~torage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1
D Configuration L R
Delay, Queue length, and level of Service
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
D Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L R'
D v (vph) 25 3 13
C (m) (vph) 1344 422 829
v/c 0.02 0.01 0.02
0 95% queue length 0.06 0.02 0.05
Control Delay 7.7 13.6 9.4
LOS A B A
L Approach Delay - - 10.2
Approach LOS - - B
0>
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kIIFO.TMP
114
3/1/02
!o
D
D
'0
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
WEST CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
141 ST STREET & CENTEX II ACCESS
INTERSECTION DATA
CAPACITY ANALYSES
115
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 oQ
n
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY ~
General Information ;ite Information r
I),nalyst RMB Intersection 141st St & Centex North ~
I),gency/Co. 4&F Enaineering IAccess
Date Performed 2/5/02 urisdiction Carmel r'
I),nalysis Time Period 4M Peak nalysis Year Ex~tinq+2012+Prooosed I
~
Project Descriotion West Clav r"
EastlWest Street: 141 st Street North/South Street: Centex North Access I
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period hrs): 0.25 -
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments r1
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound L
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R r
Volume 18 13 1 2 60 1 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 -
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 14 1 2 66 0 r-
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - -- I
Median Type Undivided -
RT Channelized 0 0 .,
Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 I
Configuration T R L T -
Upstream Sianal 0 0 ----"
Minor Street Northbound Southbound I
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
L T R L T R I
Volume 4 13 6 1 18 12 I
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 -
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 0 6 0 0 0 ,..-.,
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 I
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 -
Flared Approach N N n
Storage 0 0 L
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 n
Configuration L R L
Delay. Queue lenath and level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound n
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~
Lane Configuration L L R
v (vph) 2 4 6 I
C (m) (vph) 1583 909 1057 111I
v/c 0.00 0.00 0.01 "
95% queue length 0.00 0.01 0.02 I
Control Delay 7.3 9.0 8.4
LOS A A A n
Approach Delay - - 8.6 W
Approach LOS - - A
o
file://C:\ WTNnOWS\ TEMP\u2k12FO. TMP
116
3/1/02
o Two-Way Stop Control
Page I of2
o
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
0 General Information Site Information
Analyst RMB Intersection 141st St & Centex North
Access
0 AQency/Co. A&F Enqineerinq urisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/5/02 nalysis Year Exmnnq+2012+Proposed
Analysis Time Period PM Peak
D Project Description West Clay
EastlWest Street: 141st Street North/South Street: Centex North Access
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25
D Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
D L T R L T R
Volume 18 57 4 6 22 1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
0 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 63 4 6 24 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - -
Median Type Undivided
0 RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0
Configuration T R L T
0 Upstream SiQnal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
0 L T R L T R
Volume 2 13 4 1 18 12
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
0 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 0 4 0 0 0
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
0 Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0
Configuration L R
Delay, Queue Lenath. and level of Service
0 IApproach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L R
D ~ (vph) 6 2 4
C (m) (vph) 1516 889 993
D ~/c 0.00 0.00 0.00
~5% queue length 0.01 0.01 0.01
Control Delay 7.4 9.1 8.6
[ LOS A A A
Approach Delay - - 8.8
pproach LOS - - A
o
file://C:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k2050.TMP
117
3/1/02
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
WFSf CLAy DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
.-~-""
141 ST STREET & ROEHLING NORTH ACCESS
INTERSECTION DATA
CAPACITY ANALYSES
118
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 cO:
-
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
General Information Site Information rI
nalyst MB Intersection .. 141st St & Roehling N. Acce~
'Qency/Co. &F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel
Date Performed 2/5/02 Analysis Year Exisffng+2012+Proposed r4
Analysis Time Period AM Peak I
Project Description West C/av
EastlWest Street: 141 st Street NorthlSouth Street: Roeling North Access f1
Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments
Major Street Eastbound Westbound fr
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 18 17 2 2 56 1 f1
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 18 2 2 62 0 -
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - - n
Median Type Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0 -
Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 11
ConfiQuration T R L T
UpstreamSiQnal 0 0 -
Minor Street Northbound Southbound J1
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R -,
!
Volume 6 13 5 1 18 12 ft
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate. HFR 6 0 5 0 0 0 -
Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5
Percent Grade (%) 0 0 I l
Flared Approach N N -
Storage 0 0 D
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0
Configuration L R D
Delay. Queue length. and level of Service
pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 r
Lane Configuration L L R
v (vph) 2 6 5
C (m) (vph) 1577 909 1052 I
vie 0.00 0.01 0.00 -
5% queue length 0.00 0.02 0.01 iJ
Control Delay 7.3 9.0 8.4
LOS A A A
pproach Delay - - 8.7 D
Approach LOS - - A
HCS2000™
Copyright <<;J 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.1t
file://C:\ WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k2124. TMP
119
o
3/1/02
o Two-Way Stop Control
o
~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY
:>ite Information
Intersection
Jurisdiction
Analysis Year
O General Information
nalyst MB
,Qency/Co. A &F Engineering
O Date Performed 2/5102
I\nalysis Time Period PM Peak
Project Description West Clay
O EasVWest Street: 141st Street
Intersection Orientation: East-West
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
O Maior Street
Movement 1
L
18
0.90
o
5
O Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
O Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type
RT Channelized
O Lanes
Configuration
Upstream SiQnal
O Minor Street
Movement
o
7
L
4
0.90
4
5
O Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
O Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (%)
Flared Approach
O Storage
RT Channelized
Lanes 1
O ~onfiguration L
Delav. Queue Lenath and level of Service
~pproach EB
D Movement 1
Lane Configuration
~ (vph)
o ~ (m) (vph)
v/c
O 5% queue length
Control Delay
LOS
1 I Approach Delay
~ Approach LOS
OHCS2000™
file://C:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\u2k21 E5.TMP
Page 1 of 1
141st St & RoelinQ tN. Access
Carmel
~xisilng+2012+Proposed
North/South Street: Roelina North Access
Study Period (hrs): 0.25
Eastbound
2
T
53
0.90
58
3
R
8
0.90
8
4
L
6
0.90
6
5
Undivided
1
T
o
Northbound
8
T
13
0.90
o
5
o
N
o
o
1
R
1
L
9
R
3
0.90
3
5
10
L
1
0.90
o
5
o
o
1
R
o
Westbound
5
T
24
0.90
26
1
T
o
Southbound
11
T
18
0.90
o
5
o
N
o
o
6
R
1
0.90
o
o
o
12
R
12
0.90
o
5
o
o
WB Northbound Southbound
4 7 8 9 10 11 12
L L R
6 4 3
1517 892 1000
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.01 0.01 0.01
7.4 9.1 8.6
A A A
- 8.9
- A
Copyright @2oo0 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
120
Version 4.1 b
3/1/02