Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTraffic Operations Analysis D', ] ]: J / ] Jc ] J J U ~ D oj o \ o / D o 0, o D < 1',,--,( !" , , ( '" ,\ " I ,- " '~\ " I -~ F.r \ I ) I J ", I r_ , /( , '. ii\ ' / ,,, 'l ~) I --' I" \. j IRAFFICOP'ERA liONS ANALYSIS ,. '[ . \ ~ . " . ,. '" .- , ~ ~/ ~. 'j ( : , ) I - < " / / __ \- f _ I ! I ! J " ,\ j ,- > I:! ' ~- ) , ) r) PROF-OSED ReSIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT I 146THSTREET &RIVE~ ROAD "-... t' J, I' \' \1 \ /:;;'/ ( " . .CARMEL., )IN)DI~NA ! ' Iv / ( ) ;,--- PREPARED!~OR EARLHAM COLLEGE , J ' \i\ J ~- ) FEBRUARY 2005 \ \, / , / A&FE'NGINEERING Co.. LLC CONSULTING ENGINEERS " / 8365 KEYSTONE CROSSING, SUITE 201 , (". INDIANAPOLlS,INDIAN~ 46240 (317)202-0864 J J J J J J J J J J J j J 1 1 J J j TRAFFIC OPERA liONS ANALYSIS PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 146TH STREET & RIVER ROAD CARMEL, INDIANA PREPARED FOR EARL HAM COLLEGE FEBRUARY 2005 PREPARED By: A & F ENGINEERING CO., LLC CONSULTING ENGINEERS 8365 KEYSTONE CROSSING, SUITE 201 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46240 PHONE 317-202-0864 FAX 317-202-0908 u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA 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. @2005, A&F Engineering Co., LLC. Z:\2005\05027 -Schneider\TOAdoc ~ ~ EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL, INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS ~ o LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................... .......................................... ........... ......... I CERTIFICATION........................ .............................................................................. ......... ...... ............ ............................. II INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................. ........ ................................................... ..1 PURPOSE................. ............................................................................................... ....... ................... ....................... .... ....1 SCOPE OF WORK.............................................................................................. ........... ...... ..................................... .........1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT ...................................................................................... ................ ....... ...................... ....2 STUDY AREA.... ............................................................................................... ...... ........ ................................................. 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE ABUTTING STREET SYSTEM ..........................................................................................................4 EXISTING TRAFFIC DATA .............................................. ............................................ ....... ......... ...... ......... ........ ..............4 GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................4 TABLE 1 - GENERATED TRIPS FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................4 INTERNAL TRIPS ... ................................................................................................ ........ ................ ...... ............. ..... ..........6 PASS-BY TRIPS.... ........................................................................................... .... ....... .... .......... ....................... .......... ...... 6 PEAK HOUR.. ..................................... ..................................... ................................... ............... ......................................6 ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF GENERATED TRIPS................................................................................................6 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GENERATED TRIPS ADDED TO THE STREET SYSTEM .............................................................8 CAPACITY ANALySIS................ ........................................ ................................ ......... .... ..... ...................... ...... .... ............ 8 DESCRIPTION OF LEVELS OF SERVICE...........................................................................................................................10 CAPACITY ANALYSES SCENARIOS ................................................................................................................................11 TABLE 2 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: 146TH STREET & RIVER ROAD................................................................ 14 TABLE 3 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: 146TH STREET & PROPOSED MIDDLE ACCESS (FULL ACCESS) ...............14 TABLE 4 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #1...................................................15 TABLE 5 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #2...................................................15 TABLE 6 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #3...................................................15 TABLE 7 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #4...................................................16 TABLE 8 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #5...................................................16 TABLE 9 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #6...................................................16 TABLE 10- LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #7.................................................17 CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................... ............................... ................... .17 RECOMMENDATIONS........................................ .......... .................................. ............................................................... .19 o o o U J J J J J J J J D U U LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: AREA MAP .... ....... ................................................ ...................... .......................... ........................ ..................3 FIGURE 2: EXISTING INTERSECTION SCHEMATICS ..........................................................................................................5 FIGURE 3: ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT......... 7 FIGURE 4: GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT...................................................................9 FIGURE 5: EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES ......................................................................................................................12 FIGURE 6: SUM OF EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES & GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. 13 I ~ ~ ~ u o u u U J J J J J J U U U U U EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMELt INDIANA TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS CERTIFICATION I certify that this TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS has been prepared by me and under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of traffic and transportation engineering. A&F ENGINEERING Co., INC. s1i?f~ Steven J. Fehribach, P.E. Indiana Registration 890237 / 4'Ji h R. Matt Brown, P .E. Indiana Registration 10200056 ~oVY1l 1/~ Thomas S. Vandenberg, E.I. Transportation Engineer "I I "" I 1/'"", \\",'..., j. F END'III// ~ (\, If / /) 'l "...\'\... ""UII", <T ~ ....... (_~ \." T 't, 'Y'.' ~.. v ,",,-ul S tl?("" C" ~ 2 c;:;- ........... q.. <?'~ ~ ~ ~ (No.890237\ ~ _ :. STATE : ~ - ~ ... - ~ ^' -:"" OF .........~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "''! Iv 0 I ,., ~ ~"" ~ ~ ~ ~ ""'"1""'\\ ~ ~ ////1 Ss /ONAL \.~\) ,\\\\ III ", I",,,,, JJI II I II' \111111111 1/'"" \"", "\ '\ H [W 111/// ,\ ~ & 'l ~ ~ "",IIIII"'t, 1> ~ ~ ,...' \ S T t I? I" 0 ~ ~ . ...........q..~u ("<"'" ~ ~ 20:::; ~~~ := ~ No.1 0200056 ~ ~ ~ . STATE , _ ~ .-<) -::. or ~ ~ 2 __ :<')'. / ~ " c".... ~''Z2 "" IV D I A ~ ",,,, ~.$ "/ ~ ""'11'11""\ ':\""''' 'l/////S/ONAL \.~~""\~ '""" III" II I II II u o o u o o o u o u u u o u u u u u u EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL, INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION This TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS, prepared at the request of the Schneider Corporation, on behalf of Earlham Collage, is for a proposed residential development that will be located along 146th Street and River Road in Carmel, Indiana. PURPOSE The purpose of this analysis is to determine what effect traffic generated by the proposed development, when fully occupied, will have on the existing adjacent roadway system. This analysis will identify any roadway deficiencies that may exist today or that may occur when this site is developed. Conclusions will be reached that will determine if the roadway system can accommodate the anticipated traffic volumes or will determine the modifications that will be required to the system if it is determined there will be deficiencies in the system resulting from the increased traffic volumes. Recommendations will be made that will address the conclusions resulting from this analysis. These recommendations will address feasible roadway system improvements which will accommodate the proposed development traffic volumes such that there will be safe ingress and egress, to and from the proposed development, with minimal interference to traffic on the public street system. SCOPE OF WORK The scope of work for this analysis is as follows: First, to obtain peak hour manual traffic volume counts at the intersection of 146th Street and River Road. Second, to estimate the number of new trips that will be generated by the proposed residential development. Third, to assign the generated traffic volumes to the driveways and/or roadways that will serve to provide access to the proposed development. 1 U D EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS D U D J J Fourth, to distribute the generated traffic volumes from the proposed development onto the public roadway system and intersections that have been identified as the study area. Fifth, to prepare a capacity analysis and level of service analysis for each intersection included in the study area considering each of the following scenarios: . Existing Traffic Volumes - Based on existing roadway conditions and traffic volumes. . Existing + Proposed Development - New traffic volumes that will be generated by the proposed development added to the existing traffic volumes. f) ~ 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. j J U U U lJ U U U ~ ~ DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT The proposed development is to be located along 146th Street and River Road in Carmel, Indiana. As proposed, the development will consist of approximately 1,100 single-family homes. Figure 1 is an area map showing the location of the proposed development and its associated access drives. STUDY AREA The study area has been defined to include the following intersections: . 146th Street & River Road . All proposed access points Figure 1 is an area map showing the location of the study intersections. 2 , " , ) I ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ :> ~ .. I ~ ~ ~ 5 :> OJ !: 5 n I ~ ~ " :> :> ;l- :.; EARLHAM COLLEGE CARMEL, IN 146TH ST. PROPOSED RIGHT -IN/ RIGHT-OUT ACCESS PROPOSED FUll ACCESS PROPOSED RIGHT -IN/ RIGHT -OUT ACCESS EXISTING TRAmC SIGNAL FIGURE 1 AREA MAP @A &: r Engineering Co., lie 2005 "ALL Rights Reserved" ~-- II :DOI IDOl :DCJI Il II ----------- 3 u [j D EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS IW DESCRIPTION OF THE ABUTTING STREET SYSTEM This proposed development would be served by the public roadway system that includes 146th Street and River Road. W U U U U D U U D '0 D o o o D I 46TH STREET - is an east/west four lane, divided roadway that travels through Carmel. The posted speed limit along this roadway in the vicinity of the site is 45 mph. RIVER ROAD - is a north/south two lane roadway that travels from 116th Street and past 146th Street. The posted speed limit along this roadway in the vicinity of the site is 40 mph. 146th Street & River Road - This intersection is controlled with an automatic traffic signal. The northbound and southbound approaches each consist of a left-turn lane, a through lane and a right-turn lane. The eastbound and westbound approaches each consist of a left-turn lane, two through lanes and a right-turn lane. Figure 2 shows the existing intersection schematics. EXISTING TRAFFIC DATA Peak hour manual turning movement traffic volume counts were made by A&F Engineering Co., LLC at 146th Street and River Road for a previous study in 1999. The counts include an hourly total of all "through" traffic and all "turning" traffic at the intersections. Computer printouts of the traffic volume counts are included in Appendix A. GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The estimate of traffic to be generated by the proposed development is a function of the development size and of the character of the land use. Trip Generation] report was used to calculate the number of trips that will be generated by the proposed development. This report is a compilation of trip data for various land uses as collected by transportation professionals throughout the United States in order to establish the average number of trips generated by various land uses. Table 1 is a summary of the trips that will be generated by the proposed development. TABLE 1 - GENERATED TRIPS FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION GENERA TED TRIPS ITE AM AM PM PM LAND USE CODE SIZE ENTER EXIT ENTER EXIT Residential 210 1,100 DU 195 585 584 343 I Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Seventh Edition, 2003. 4 u o D U U U o iD U U U D U D~ "" Di 146TH STREET Q ~ ~ rt+l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 146TH STREET AND RIVER ROAD ii iOi .... I ..... D~ :?- ffi c [ij z o D~ :g It) 8 D~ EARLHAM COLLEGE CARMEL, IN 5 t FIGURE 2 EXISTING INTERSECTION SCHEMATICS @A &: f Engineering Co., LLC 2004 "ALL Rights Reserved" I I !U I U D U D U U IU IU U U U U U U D D U D EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS INTERNAL TRIPS An internal trip results when a trip is made between two land uses without accessing the public roadway system. The proposed development will consist of single-family homes only. Therefore, internal trip reductions were not applied. PAss-BY TRIPS Pass-by trips are trips already on the public roadway system that are captured by the proposed development. Residential developments do not typically generate a significant amount of pass-by trips. Therefore, pass-by trip reductions were not applied. PEAK HOUR Based on the existing traffic volumes that were collected for this analysis, the adjacent street peak hours occur from 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM and 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM. Therefore, the volumes collected during these hours will be used for all analyses contained within this study. ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF GENERATED TRIPS The study methodology used to determine the traffic volwnes, from the proposed development, that will be added to the street system is defined as follows: 1. The volwne of traffic that will enter and exit the site must be assigned to the various access points and to the public street system. Using the traffic volwne data collected for this analysis, traffic to and from the proposed new site has been assigned to the proposed driveways and to the public street system that will be serving the site. 2. To determine the volwnes of traffic that will be added to the public roadway system, the generated traffic must be distributed by direction to the public roadways at their intersection with the driveway. For the proposed development, the distribution was based on the location of the development, the existing traffic patterns and the assignment of generated traffic. The assignment and distribution of the generated traffic volumes for the proposed development are shown on Figure 3. 6 LEGEND 00 = INBOUND TRAFFIC [00] = OUTBOUND TRAFFIC · = NEGUGIBLE EARLHAM COLLEGE CARMEL, IN 146TH ST. "'17% ~-- II :DOI IDOl :Dol Il II FIGURE 3 ASSIGNMENT & DISTRIBUTION OF GENERA TED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT @A &: F Engineering Co., LLC 2005 "AU Rights Reserved" 7 U IU U U IU I iU I I 'D ,U I U U U D IU U U I :0 U 'w U EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GENERATED TRIPS ADDED TO THE STREET SYSTEM Generated traffic volumes that can be expected from the proposed development have been prepared at each of the study area intersections. The peak hour generated traffic volumes for the proposed development are shown on Figure 4. These data are based on the previously discussed trip generation data, assignment of generated traffic, and distribution of generated traffic. 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 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2000. 8 146TH ST. ~-- II :DOI IDOl :Dol Il II LEGEND 00 = A.... PEAK HOUR (OO) = P.... PEAK HOUR · = NEGUGIBLE . FIGURE 4 \ I I GENERA TED TRAFFIC VOLUMES ! FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT EARLHAM COLLEGE CARMEL, IN @A Be r Engineering Co., LLC 2005 "ALL Rights Reserved" 9 I I I U iW ! U I ,U I IW I 'U I D ~ U U BARHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL, INDIANA 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. tU I , i U ! ,U IU D !U U iW U U 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. 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: 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 Level of Service 10 u .. l U ! U I 'U i 'U U I IU IW U !U I U I I 'U U I ,U I ,0 o o ,0 [ :U I EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS CAPACITY ANALYSES SCENARIOS To evaluate the proposed developments' 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 has been made for the AM peak hour and PM peak: hour for each of the study intersections considering each of the following scenarios: SCENARIO 1: Existing Traffic Va/urnes - Figure 5 is a summary of these traffic volumes at the study intersections for the peak: hours. SCENARIO 2: Existing Traffic Volumes + Proposed Deve/opment Generated Traffic Va/urnes - Figure 6 is a summary of these traffic volumes at the study intersections for the peak hours. The requested analyses have been completed and the computer solutions showing the level of service results are included in Appendix A. The tables that are included in this report are a summary of the results of the level of service analyses and are identified as follows: Table 2 - 146th Street & River Road Table 3 -146th Street & Proposed Middle Access (Full Access) Table 4 - River Road & Proposed Access #1 Table 5 - River Road & Proposed Access #2 Table 6 - River Road & Proposed Access #3 Table 7 - River Road & Proposed Access #4 Table 8 - River Road & Proposed Access #5 Table 9 - River Road & Proposed Access #6 Table 10 - River Road & Proposed Access #7 II .J i: " " !. " I " !!. :> ~ " ~ " I ~ ~ 5 " ~ 5 ~ I ~ " ~ " ~ ;:!. >l LEGEND 00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR (00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR · = NEGUGIBLE EARLHAM COLLEGE CARMEL, IN - _<"I In~:: e:;;::- ~ 72 (151) -0>'" () ...... - - '-382 391 tI f ~ .e 175 (74) (54) 39 ~ ~ t ,. (450) 360'" ...... ~ ~ (17) 33 ~ e-;;;--;n- 0> 0 -<"I - 146TH ST. PROPOSED RIGHT -IN/ RIGHT -OUT ACCESS RIVER ROAD ACCESS 11 IVER ROAD ACCESS 12 EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROPOSED fULL ACCESS ~-- II :DOI IDOl :Dol Il II ----------- -.- l SITE C I ~ I ) RIVER ROAD ACCESS #3 RIVER ROAD ACCESS 14 12 r I I t FIGURE 5 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES @A &: F Engineering Co., U.C 2005 "AU. Rights Reserved" ,. .., on 146TH ST. ~-- II :DOI IDOl :Dol Il II LEGEND 00 = A.M. PEAK HOUR (00) = P.M. PEAK HOUR · = NEGUGIBlE EARLHAM COLLEGE CARMEL, IN 13 --I I I I - _N on_ .....on_ .:!.:;-; -t. 72 (1 51 ) on 0.., () ..... N - .... 401 449 ~ + ~ ~197 (138) (61) 51" ~ t ,. (498) 442'" ... CD CD on on on (64) 49... __- .... CD 0 ......... ..,ON -- ... -N - - CI> .., _N ao- '::"0 CD :=: , ~+ ( (10) 17" ~ t N CI> ... (3) 6~ e:' ClQ CD .., - .... 507 (453) ~ 23 (70) ~ ,. (611) 505'" ~ ~ (41) 13 ~ -:::- .., - ,. N - i SITE C I ~ I ) FIGURE 6 SUM OF EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES. GENERA TED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT @A &: F' Engineering Co., LLC 2005 "ALL Rights Reserved" u u [J u u u u u u EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TABLE 2 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: l46TH STREET & RIVER ROAD TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS AM PEAK HOUR MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 Northbound Approach B B Southbound Approach B B Eastbound Approach B B Westbound Approach B B Intersection B B PM PEAK HOUR MOVEMENT SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 Northbound Approach B B Southbound Approach B B Eastbound Approach B B Westbound Approach B B Intersection B B SCENARIO 1 : Existing Traffic Volumes with the Existing Traffic Signal and Existing Intersection Geometries Sum of Existing Traffic Volumes and Generated Traffic Volumes with the Existing Traffic Signal and Existing Intersection Geometries SCENARIO 2: u u u [j u u U D [j o TABLE 3 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: 1 46TH STREET & PROPOSED MIDDLE ACCESS (FULL ACCESS) SCENARIO 2 MOVEMENT AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Northbound Approach B C Westbound Left-Turn A A SCENARIO 2: Sum of Existing Traffic Volumes and Generated Traffic Volumes with Proposed Access Conditions* * The proposed access conditions include the following: . Stop sign control with the proposed access stopping for l46th Street. . The construction of a westbound left-turn lane within the existing median of l46th Street to accommodate vehicles entering the access. . The proposed access constructed with two outbound lanes and at least one inbound lane. 14 IU I 'u I I :U I EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS TABLE 4 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #1 SCENARIO 2 U D U U U U U U U U U D o D U D MOVEMENT AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Northbound Left-Turn A A Eastbound Approach B B SCENARIO 2: Sum of Existing Traffic Volumes and Generated Traffic Volumes with Proposed Access Conditions. * The proposed access conditions include the following: . Stop sign control with the proposed access stopping for River Road. . The proposed access constructed with at least one outbound lane and at least one inbound lane. TABLE 5 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #2 SCENARIO 2 MOVEMENT AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Southbound Left-Turn A A Westbound Approach B B SCENARIO 2: Sum of Existing Traffic Volumes and Generated Traffic Volumes with Proposed Access Conditions* * The proposed access conditions include the following: . Stop sign control with the proposed access stopping for River Road. . The proposed access constructed with at least one outbound lane and at least one inbound lane. TABLE 6 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #3 SCENARIO 2 MOVEMENT AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Northbound Left-Turn A A Eastbound Approach B B SCENARIO 2: Sum of Existing Traffic Volumes and Generated Traffic Volumes with Proposed Access Conditions* * The proposed access conditions include the following: . Stop sign control with the proposed access stopping for River Road. . The proposed access constructed with at least one outbound lane and at least one inbound lane. 15 u u u u u U iU I U U U U U U U U U D o o EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS TABLE 7 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #4 SCENARIO 2 MOVEMENT AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Southbound Left-Turn A A Westbound Approach B B SCENARIO 2: Sum of Existing Traffic Volumes and Generated Traffic Volumes with Proposed Access Conditions* * The proposed access conditions include the following: . Stop sign control with the proposed access stopping for River Road. . The proposed access constructed with at least one outbound lane and at least one inbound lane. TABLE 8 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #5 SCENARIO 2 MOVEMENT AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Northbound Left-Turn A A Eastbound Approach B B SCENARIO 2: Sum of Existing Traffic Volumes and Generated Traffic Volumes with Proposed Access Conditions* * The proposed access conditions include the following: . Stop sign control with the proposed access stopping for River Road. . The proposed access constructed with at least one outbound lane and at least one inbound lane. TABLE 9 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #6 SCENARIO 2 MOVEMENT AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Southbound Left-Turn A A Westbound Approach B B SCENARIO 2: Sum of Existing Traffic Volumes and Generated Traffic Volumes with Proposed Access Conditions* * The proposed access conditions include the following: . Stop sign control with the proposed access stopping for River Road. . The proposed access constructed with at least one outbound lane and at least one inbound lane. 16 'U I I U U iU I :0 ,U I U U U U U U U U U o D D U BARHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS TABLE 10 - LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #7 SCENARIO 2 MOVEMENT AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Northbound Left-Turn A A Southbound Left-Turn A A Eastbound Approach B B Westbound Approach C B SCENARIO 2: Sum of Existing Traffic Volumes and Generated Traffic Volumes with Proposed Access Conditions. · The proposed access conditions include the following: . Stop sign control with each access drive stopping for River Road. . The addition of a northbound left-turn treatment along River Road. . The addition of a southbound right-turn treatment along River Road. . Each access drive constructed with two outbound lanes and at least one inbound lane. CONCLUSIONS The conclusions that follow are based on existing traffic volume data, trip generation, assignment and distribution of generated traffic, capacity analyses, and the 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 levels of service are adequate during these time periods, it can generally be assumed that the remaining 22 hours will have levels of service that are better than the peak hours, since the existing street traffic volumes will be less during the other 22 hours. 1. 146m STREET & RIVER ROAD Existing Traffic (Scenario 1) - A review of the level of service for each of the intersection approaches, with the existing traffic volumes and existing intersection conditions, has shown that this intersection operates at acceptable levels of service during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. Existing Traffic + Proposed Development (Scenario 2) - When the traffic volumes from the proposed development are added to the existing traffic volumes, this intersection will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service during the peak hours with the existing intersection geometries. 17 u u u u EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA 2. 146m STREET AND PROPOSED WEST ACCESS (RIGHT-IN /RIGHT-OUT) TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS The proposed access conditions include the following: . This access constructed as a right-in / right-out access with one outbound lane and one inbound lane. IU I ;U U U U U U U U U U D D U U 3. 146m STREET AND PROPOSED MIDDLE ACCESS (FULL ACCESS) Existing Traffic + Proposed Development (Scenario 2) - When the traffic volumes from the proposed development are added to the existing traffic volumes, all approaches to this intersection will operate at acceptable levels of service during the peak hours with the proposed access conditions that include the following: . Stop sign control with the proposed access stopping for 146th Street. . The construction of a westbound left-turn lane within the existing median of 1 46th Street to accommodate vehicles entering the access. . The proposed access constructed with two outbound lanes and at least one inbound lane. 4. 146m STREET AND PROPOSED EAST ACCESS (RIGHT -IN / RIGHT-OUT) The proposed access conditions include the following: . This access constructed as a right-in / right-out access with one outbound lane and one inbound lane. 5. RIvER ROAD AND PROPOSED ACCESS #1 THROUGH ACCESS #6 Existing Traffic + Proposed Development (Scenario 2) - When the traffic volumes from the proposed development are added to the existing traffic volumes, all approaches to each of these intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service during the peak hours with the proposed access conditions that include the following: . Stop sign control with each proposed access stopping for River Road. . Each proposed access constructed with at least one outbound lane and at least one inbound lane. 6. RIvER ROAD AND PROPOSED ACCESS #7 Existing Traffic + Proposed Development (Scenario 2) - When the traffic volumes from the proposed development are added to the existing traffic volumes, all approaches to this intersection will operate at acceptable levels of service during the peak hours with the proposed access conditions that include the following: 18 u u U I U D I I U I I U EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS . Stop sign control with each access drive stopping for River Road. . The addition of a northbound left-turn treatment along River Road. . The addition of a southbound right-turn treatment along River Road. . Each access drive constructed with two outbound lanes and at least one inbound lane. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on this analysis and the conclusions, the following recommendations are made to ensure that the roadway system will operate at acceptable levels of service if the site is developed as proposed. u 1 46TH STREET & RIvER ROAD The existing intersection geometrics will adequately serve the additional traffic generated by the proposed site. Therefore, no improvements are necessary at this intersection due to the proposed development. u u u u u u u u U D U 1 46TH STREET & PROPOSED WEST ACCESS (RIGHT-IN / RIGHT-OUT) The following access conditions are recommended if the site is developed as proposed: . This access constructed as a right-in / right-out access with one outbound lane and one inbound lane. 1 46TH STREET & PROPOSED MIDDLE ACCESS (fuLL ACCESS) The following access conditions are recommended if the site is developed as proposed: . Stop sign control with the proposed access stopping for 146th Street. . The construction of a westbound left-turn lane within the existing median of 146th Street to accommodate vehicles entering the access. . The proposed access constructed with two outbound lanes and at least one inbound lane. 146TH STREET & PROPOSED EAST ACCESS (RIGHT-IN / RIGHT-OUT) The following access conditions are recommended if the site is developed as proposed: . This access constructed as a right-in / right-out access with one outbound lane and one inbound lane. RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #1 THROUGH ACCESS #6 The following access conditions are recommended for River Road Access #1, #2, #3, #4, #5 and #6 if the site is developed as proposed: . Stop sign control with each proposed access stopping for River Road. · Each proposed access constructed with at least one outbound lane and at least one inbound lane. 19 U D !D U 'D U o U EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #7 The following access conditions are recommended if the site is developed as proposed: . Stop sign control with each access drive stopping for River Road. . The addition of a northbound left-turn treatment along River Road. . The addition of a southbound right-turn treatment along River Road. . Each access drive constructed with two outbound lanes and at least one inbound lane. u 'U I U U U U D U U D U 20 U D o D D U o o u u u U D U U U o D U TRAFFIC OPERA liONS ANALYSIS ApPENDIX A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 146TH STREET & RIVER ROAD CARMEL, INDIANA PREPARED FOR EARL HAM COLLEGE FEBRUARY 2005 PREPARED By: A & F ENGINEERING CO., LLC CONSULTING ENGINEERS 8365 KEYSTONE CROSSING, SUITE 201 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46240 PHONE 317-202-0864 FAX 317-202-0908 U D o il U :0 :0 I :0 U U U U U U o U U 'U o U EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL, INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS ApPENDIX A This document contains the traffic data that were used in the TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS for the proposed residential development. Included are the traffic volume counts and the intersection capacity analyses. l 10 D D D D 10 o o u u u u u o D D D o D EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL, INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS ApPENDIX A TABLE OF CONTENTS 146TH STREET & RIvER ROAD ........................................................................................................................................1 146TH STREET & PROPOSED MIDDLE ACCESS (FULL ACCESS)........................................................................................ 9 RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #1.........................................................................................................................12 RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #2 ......................................................................................................................... 15 RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #3 ......................................................................................................................... 18 RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #4 .........................................................................................................................21 RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #5 ............................................................................. ............................................24 RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #6 ............................. ........................ .................................................................... 27 RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #7 ......................................................................................................................... 30 1 I U U D 'u U U U U U U U U U U U o o D o EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL, INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERAnoNsANALYSIS 146TH STREET & RIvER ROAD INTERSECTION DATA TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS AND CAPACITY ANALYSES 1 IU [J U ! U I I :u U :u I iU I U iU I I IU I U U U o o o D o CLIENT LOCATION DATE A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC. TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY nobl-tJiliJl<.. 146TH STREET & RIVER ROAD f~ol/" 5/12/99 NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND SOunlBOUND WESTBOUND PEAK HOUR DATA I I AM PEAK OFF PEAK I PM PEAK I HR BEGIN 7:15 AM I HR BEGIN 4:00 PM I L T R TOT L T" R TOT I L T R TOT I I I 6 38 78 122 I 8 - 79 174 261 I 33 305 28 366 I 46 381 14 441 I 116 166 60 342 I 95 37 30 . 162 I 148 324 61 533 I 63 331 128 522 I I I HOUR SUMMARY HOUR NB SB NB+SB EB WB EB+WB TOTAL - AM - 6- 7 39 109 148 125 203 328 476 7- 8 104 353 457 350 535 885 1342 8- 9 74 129 203 171 236 407 610 - PM - 4- 5 261 162 423 441 522 963 1386 5- 6 323 140 463 389 490 879 1342 TOTAL 801 893 1694 1476 1986 3462 5156 15.5% 17.3% 32.9% 28.6% 38.5% 67.1% 100.0% - AM PEAK VOLUMES - 15-MIN 42 104 96 151 HOUR 142 353 366 535 PHF 0.85 0.85 0.95 0.89 - PM PEAK VOLUMES - 15-MIN 93 48 132 135 HOUR 323 163 441 522 PHF 0.87 0.85 0.84 0.97 2 u o U !U I I U I 1 U U U U I I :U I I U I I U U U 0' U D U U CLIENT LOCATION DATE DIRECTION OF TRAVEL A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC. TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY J\oblt5"illt. ", : 146TH STREET & RIVER ROAD (.{)lj 5/12/99 NORTHBOUND HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOT AM 6- 7 5 0 5 9 2 11 23 0 23 37 2 3 7- 8 4 1 5 17 8 25 70 4 74 91 13 10, 8- 9 8 0 8 20 5 25 36 5 41 64 10 7 PM 4- 5 8 0 8 74 5 79 156 18 174 238 23 26 5- 6 16 0 16 119 3 122 179 6 185 314 9 32 PASSENGER 41 239 464 744 97.6% 91.2% 93.4% 92.9% TRUCK 1 23 33 57 2.4% 8.8% 6.6% 7.1% BOTH 42 262 497 801 5.2% 32.7% 62.0% 100.0% DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : EASTBOUND HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOT AM 6- 7 6 1 7 105 5 110 8 0 8 119 6 12 7- 8 5 18 23 282 19 301 24 2 26 311 39 35 8- 9 3 20 23 121 16 137 10 1 11 134 37 17 PM 4- 5 34 12 46 343 38 381 13 1 14 390 51 44 5- 6 42 8 50 298 24 322 16 1 17 356 33 38 PASSENGER 90 1149 71 1310 60.4% 91.8% 93.4% 88.8% TRUCK 59 102 5 166 39.6% 8.2% 6.6% 11. 2% BOTH 149 1251 76 1476 10.1% 84.8% 5.1% 100.0% 3 I I U iU ! U IU I :U I i :U I IU IU I :U iU U U U U U U U D U CLIENT LOCATION DATE DIRECTION OF TRAVEL A & F ENGINEERING CO., INC. TRAFFIC VOLUME SUMMARY ~ ""_'~lfttl. ... -- ~ "'J;u~'211. .o\IL t..:'_--__. _ _ . 146TH STREET & RIVER ROAD I~OLJ 5/12/99 SOUTHBOUND . _ . _ a_ __ .. ~- .....~..;...'. :.;"1.! :.-; "_0._0'. _. _ .. HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOT] AM 6- 7 40 14 54 31 1 32 14 9 23 85 24 10: 7- 8 84 42 126 149 19 168 28 31 59 261 92 35: 8- 9 32 24 56 34 12 46 4 23 27 70 59 12~ PM 4- 5 55 40 95 32 5 37 22 8 30 109 53 16: 5- 6 55 23 78 28 1 29 24 9 33 107 33 14C PASSENGER 266 274 92 632 65.0% 87.8% 53.5% 70.8% TRUCK 143 38 80' 261 35.0% 12.2% 46.5% 29.2% BOTH 409 312 172 893 45.8% 34.9% 19.3% 100.0% - DIRECTION OF TRAVEL : WESTBOUND HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOTH PASS TRUCK BOn AM 6- 7 53 3 56 95 5 100 23 24 47 171 32 202 7- 8 150 14 164 257 47 304 21 46 67 428 107 53~ 8- 9 54 13 67 117 21 138 9 22 31 180 56 23E PM 4- 5 56 7 63 306 25 331 92 36 128 454 68 52:;; 5- 6 69 1 70 284 _24 308 89 23 112 442 48 49C PASSENGER 382 1059 234 1675 91.0% 89.7% 60.8% 84.3% TRUCK 38 122 151 311 9.0% 10.3% 39.2% 15.7% BOTH 420 1181 385 1986 21.1% 59.5% 19.4% 100.0% 4 iU I IU I iU I U ;U I I U U I U U I , IU I IU I U U U U D o U U Short Report Page I of I SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information ~nalyst TSV Intersection 146th St & River Rd ~gency or Co. A&F Engineering ~rea Type All other areas Date Performed 2/1112005 Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Time Period AM Peak ~alysis Year S1 - Existing Traffic Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume (vph) 39 360 33 175 382 72 7 45 92 137 196 71 % Heavy veh 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ~ctuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ~rrival type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 16 0 36 0 46 0 35 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 ParkinglGradelParking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parkinglhr Bus stopslhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasina Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 ~ming G= 7.0 G = 20.0 G= G= G= 7.0 G = 13.0 G= G= y= 3 y= 5 y= y= y= 3 y= 5 y= y= Duration of Analysis (hrs = 0.25 Cvcle Lenath C = 63.0 Lane Group Ca~ acitv. Control Delay. and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB !Adj. flow rate 43 400 19 194 424 40 8 50 51 152 218 40 Lane group cap. 437 1094 781 448 1094 781 354 373 610 420 373 610 ~/c ratio 0.10 0.37 0.02 0.43 0.39 0.05 0.02 0.13 0.08 0.36 0.58 0.07 ~reen ratio 0.48 0.32 0.51 0.48 0.32 0.51 0.37 0.21 0.40 0.37 0.21 0.40 Unif. delay d1 9.2 16.6 7.7 10.1 16.7 7.8 13.1 20.4 11.9 14.2 22.6 11.8 Delay factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.18 0.11 ncrem. delay d2 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.5 2.4 0.0 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 9.3 16.8 7.7 10.7 17.0 7.9 13.2 20.6 11.9 14.7 24.9 11.8 Lane group LOS A B A B B A B C B B C B Apprch. delay 15.7 14.6 16.0 19.8 Approach LOS B B B B Intersec. delay 16.3 Intersection LOS B HCS2000™ Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved 5 Version4_le file:1 Ie :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ T emp\s2k... 2/1112005 1 U IU [J U U U U U U U I U U IU U U U U U U Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst TSV Intersection 146th St & River Rd Agency or Co. A&F Engineering Area Type All other areas Date Performed 2/1112005 Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Ifime Period PM Peak Analysis Year S1 - Existing Traffic Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB 5B LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume (vph) 54 450 17 74 391 151 9 93 205 112 44 35 % Heavv veh 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. areen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 8 0 75 0 102 0 17 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stopslhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing Exct. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G- 7.0 G - 25.0 G= G= G= 7.0 G = 11.0 G= G= y- 3 Y= 5 Y= y= Y= 3 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis (hrs -0.25 Cycle Length C = 66.0 Lane Group Cal acity, Control Delav, and LOS Determination EB WB NB 5B Adj. flow rate 60 500 10 82 434 84 10 103 114 124 49 20 Lane group cap. 484 1305 862 452 1305 862 361 302 536 352 302 536 v/c ratio 0.12 0.38 0.01 0.18 0.33 0.10 0.03 0.34 0.21 0.35 0.16 0.04 Green ratio 0.53 0.38 0.56 0.53 0.38 0.56 0.32 0.17 0.35 0.32 0.17 0.35 Unif. delay d1 7.8 14.9 6.4 8.1 14.6 6.7 15.6 24.3 15.1 16.7 23.6 14.2 Delay factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.0 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 7.9 15.1 6.4 8.3 14.7 6.8 15.7 25.0 15.3 17.4 23.8 14.2 Lane group LOS A B A A B A B C B B C B Apprch. delay 14.2 12.7 19.7 18.7 IApproach LOS B B B B Intersec. delay 15.0 Intersection L05 B HCS2000™ Copyright (;) 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved 6 Version4.le file:1 Ie :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ T emp\s2k... 2/1 1/2005 1 iU I IU I I U I :U I 'U ! :U I U :U I :U I i U U U 'U U o U U U U Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst TSV Intersection 146th St & River Rd Agency or Co. A&F Engineering Area Type All other areas Date Performed 2/1112005 Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Time Period AM Peak Analysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Gen Traf Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT IT TH RT Num. ot Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume (vph) 51 442 49 197 401 72 54 56 156 137 200 75 % Heavv veh 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. oreen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 24 0 36 0 78 0 37 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stopslhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasina Excl. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 7.0 G = 18.0 G= G= G= 7.0 G = 13.0 G= G= y= 3 y= 5 y= y= y= 3 y= 5 y= y= Duration ot Analysis (hrs = 0.25 Cycle length C = 61.0 Lane Group CaJ acitv. Control Delav. and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Mj. flow rate 57 491 28 219 446 40 60 62 87 152 222 42 Lane group cap. 410 1017 756 391 1017 756 367 386 630 431 386 630 Iv/e ratio 0.14 0.48 0.04 0.56 0.44 0.05 0.16 0.16 0.14 0.35 0.58 0.07 ~reen ratio 0.46 0.30 0.49 0.46 0.30 0.49 0.38 0.21 0.41 0.38 0.21 0.41 Unit. delay d1 9.6 17.7 8.0 10.8 17.4 8.1 12.7 19.6 11.3 13.2 21.5 10.9 Delay factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.17 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.2 0.4 0.0 1.8 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.5 2.1 0.0 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 ~ontrol delay 9.8 18.0 8.0 12.6 17.7 8.1 12.9 19.8 11.4 13.7 23.6 11.0 lane group lOS A B A B B A B B B B C B ~pprch. delay 16.7 15.6 14.3 18.7 ~pproach LOS B B B B ntersec. delay 16.5 Intersection LOS B HCS2000™ Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved 7 Version 4_ Ie file :/IC :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ T emp\s2k... 2/11/2005 1 i U I U U U U U U U U U rU i U U U U U U U U Short Report Page I of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst TSV Intersection 146th St & River Rd Agency or Co. A&F Engineering Area Type All other areas Date Performed 2/1112005 Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Gen Traf Volume and TiminQ Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Lane group L T R L T R L T R L T R Volume (vph) 61 498 64 138 449 151 36 100 242 112 55 47 % Heavy veh 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eft. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.'0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 32 0 75 0 121 0 23 ane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus stopslhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 PhasinQ Exd. Left EW Perm 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 TIming G= 7.0 G = 24.0 G= G= G= 7.0 G = 11.0 G= G= y= 3 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 3 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis (hrs =0.25 Cycle LenQth C = 65.0 Lane Group Cal acitv. Control Delav. and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adj. flow rate 68 553 36 153 499 84 40 111 134 124 61 27 Lane group cap. 447 1272 852 422 1272 852 365 306 544 357 306 544 'rIlc ratio 0.15 0.43 0.04 0.36 0.39 0.10 0.11 0.36 0.25 0.35 0.20 0.05 [Green ratio 0.52 0.37 0.55 0.52 0.37 0.55 0.32 0.17 0.35 0.32 0.17 0.35 Unif. delay d1 8.1 15.4 6.6 8.7 15.1 6.8 15.4 23.9 14.9 16.3 23.2 13.8 Delay factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.7 0;2 0.6 0.3 0.0 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 ~ontrol delay 8.3 15.6 6.6 9.2 15.3 6.9 15.6 24.6 15.1 16.9 23.5 13.8 Lane group LOS A B A A B A B C B B C B fA,pprch. delay 14.4 13.1 18.9 18.4 Approach LOS B B B B I ntersec. delay 15.0 Intersection LOS B HCS2000™ Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved 8 Version 4.Je file:1 Ie :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFH Q\Local%20Settings\ T emp\s2k... 2/11/2005 l 10 10 10 I U U U U U U U U U U D o D o o u EARLHAM COLLEGE. CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS 146TH STREET & PROPOSED MIDDLE ACCESS (FULL ACCESS) INTERSECTION DATA CAPACITY ANALYSES 9 u u u u u u o o u u u u u u u o D ~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY 3enerallnformation Site Information Analyst TSV Intersection 146th St & Full Access ,gency/Co. &F EngineerinQ Jurisdiction Carmel, /N ate Performed V11/2005 Analysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Gen Traf nalysis Time Period M Peak Project Description Schneider EastlWest Street: 146th St INorth/South Street: Proposed Middle Access (Full) Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy 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 (vehlh) 0 505 13 23 507 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate 0 561 14 25 563 0 vehlh) Proportion of heavy 0 5 "ehicles, P HV - - - - Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 lanes 0 2 0 1 2 0 ICon figuration T TR L T Upstream SiQnal 0 0 !Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 l T R l T R 1V0lume (vehlh) 53 0 29 0 0 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate 58 0 32 0 0 0 veh/h) Proportion of heavy 5 0 5 0 0 0 r.,rehicles, P HV Percent grade (%) 0 0 ~Iared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 1C0nfiguration L R ~ontrol Delay. Queue length. Level of Service ~pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound ~ovement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ILane Configuration L L .R rvolume. v (vph) 25 58 32 lCapacity.. cm (vph) 974 386 700 r.,r/c ratio 0.03 0.15 0.05 pueue length (95%) 0.08 0.52 0.14 1C0ntrol Delay (slveh) 8.8 16.0 10.4 OS A C B Approach delay - - 14.0 s/veh) Approach LOS - - B I) U U HCS2000™ Copyright 0 2003 Unil'Uity of Florida. All Rights Reserved Version 4.ld u TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY l:i enerallnformation ite Information i)l nalyst TSV ntersection 146fh Sf & Full Access IAQencv/Co. &F Enqineerina urisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 11/2005 a.nalvsis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Gen Traf ~nalvsis Time Period M Peak Project Descriotion Schneider EastlWest Street: 146fh Sf . INorth/South Street: Prooosed Middle Access (Full) Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudv 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 rvolume (veh/h) 0 611 41 70 453 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate 0 678 45 77 503 0 vehlh) Proportion of heavy 0 5 vehicles, P HV - - - - Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration T TR L T Upstream SiQnal 0 0 N inor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 31 0 17 0 0 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate 34 0 18 0 0 0 vehni ) Proportion of heavy 5 0 5 0 0 0 vehicles, P HV 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 Control Delay. Queue Length. Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ane Configuration L L R Volume, v (vph) 77 34 18 Capacity, cm (vph) 856 310 626 vlc ratio 0.09 0.11 0.03 Queue length (95%) 0.30 0.37 0.09 Control Delay (s/veh) 9.6 18.0 10.9 1"1 U U. D U U U U o U U U U o U o o o u A C B HCS2000™ 15.6 C Copyright 0 2003 U'1'rsity of Florida. All Rights Reserved Version 4. Jd 1 !U o o D U o U EA1u.HAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #1 o u u INTERSECTION DATA CAPACITY ANALYSES fl U u u o u u u o u 12 U D o U U iO U '\ U '\ U U U U r 1 U U U U o o u Two- Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 ~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY General Information Site Information ~nalyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #1 ~gency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/1112005 Analysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Prop Traf ~nalysis Time Period AM Peak Project Description Schneider EasVWest Street: Proposed Access #1 North/South Street: River Road Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 lIehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R ~olume 2 249 0 0 440 6 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 276 0 0 488 6 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Sianal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 17 0 6 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 6 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 5 0 5 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 lared Approach N N ~torage 0 0 RT Channelized . 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~onfjguration LR Delav. Queue Lenath and Level of Service ~pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 2 24 ~ (m) (v ph) 1054 399 ~/c 0.00 0.06 ~5% queue length 0.01 0.19 Control Delay 8.4 14.6 ~OS A B Approach Delay - - 14.6 Approach LOS - - B Rights Reserved Copyright 0 2003 Universitf Jf Florida, All Rights Reserved Version4.ld file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ Temp\u2k... 2/18/2005 u u o u U I U ~l U U , \ U , '\ U U U r 1 U U U U o D U Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information l\nalyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #1 l\gency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/11/2005 l\nalysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Prop Traf l\nalysis Time Period PM Peak Project Description Schneider EastlWest Street: Proposed Access #1 North/South Street: River 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 6 368 0 0 239 18 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 6 408 0 0 265 20 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Sianal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 l T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 10 0 3 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 11 0 3 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 5 0 5 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N ~torage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gonfiguration LR Delay. Queue Length and Level of Service ~pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound ~ovement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 lane Configuration LT LR ~ (vph) 6 14 ~ (m) (vph) 1260 447 ~/c 0.00 0.03 ~5% queue length 0.01 0.10 Control Delay 7.9 13.3 LOS A B ~pproach Delay - - 13.3 Approach LOS - - B Rights Reserved Copyright 0 2003 Universit\.4f Florida, All Rights Reserved Version4.Jd file://C :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20SettingS\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005 1 iU U o iW U U IU EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #2 u INTERSECTION DATA u i I 1.1 CAPACITY ANALYSES u . 1 ~I r 1 U o o u o u u 15 u U iD U U U o U U U r\ U U -1 U U U U U U U Two-Way Stop Control Page I of2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information $ite Information I\nalyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #2 I\gency/Co. A&F Engineering ~urisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/11/2005 ~nalysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Prop Traf I\nalysis Time Period AM Peak Proiect Description Schneider EastlWest Street: Proposed Access #2 lNorth/South Street: River 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 lVolume 0 234 2 6 440 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 260 2 6 488 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 5 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 ~onfiguration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 6 0 17 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 6 0 18 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 Length and Level of Service I\pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR II (vph) 6 24 C (m) (vph) 1285 604 II/C 0.00 0.04 95% queue length 0.01 0.12 Control Delay 7.8 11.2 LOS A B 6.pproach Delay - - 11.2 6.pproach LOS - - B Rights Reserved Copyright 0 2003 Universi16 Florida, All Rights Reserved Version4.Jd file:/ /C :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005 1 tu 11 !U IU n lJ o o iD U U U U II W U U U U U U U Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #2 Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/11/2005 ~nalysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Prop Traf AnalYsis Time Period PM Peak Project Description Schneider EastlWest Street: Proposed Access #2 North/South Street: River Road Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudv Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adiusbnents Maior Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6. L T R L T R Volume 0 364 6 17 225 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 404 6 18 250 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 5 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 3 0 10 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 3 0 11 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 N6 S6 Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR >I (vph) 18 14 C (m) (vph) 1133 565 >lIe 0.02 0.02 35% queue length 0.05 0.08 Control Delay 8.2 11.5 LOS A B Approach Delay - - 11.5 Approach LOS - - B Rights Reserved Copyright Ci 2003 Universil f1 Florida, All Rights Reserved Version4.1d file:1 IC :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005 u u u U D U U U U U U U U D o D D D o EARLIIAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #3 INTERSECTION DATA CAPACITY ANALYSES 18 U D D U U U U U U U U U U U D o D U o Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 ~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #3 Agency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/11/2005 Analysis Year S2 - Ex Trat + Prop Trat Analysis Time Period AM Peak Proiect Description Schneider EastlWest Street ProDOSed Access #3 INorth/South Street: River 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 Volume 4 224 0 0 442 4 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 248 0 0 491 4 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 Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ~olume 0 0 0 12 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 13 0 13 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 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 r.r (vph) 4 26 ~ (m) (vph) 1053 452 ~/c 0.00 0.06 95% queue length 0.01 0.18 ~ontrol Delay 8.4 13.5 LOS A B Approach Delay - - 13.5 Approach LOS - - B Rights Reserved Copyright C> 2003 Universil} fJ Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.ld tile:1 IC :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005 u u u u u u o u u [j u u u u u o o D U Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information A.nalyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #3 A.gency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/11/2005 Analysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Prop Traf A.nalysis Time Period PM Peak Proiect Description Schneider EastlWest Street: Proposed Access #3 North/South Street: River 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 iVolume 12 363 0 0 217 11 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 13 403 0 0 241 12 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 ....anes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 7 0 7 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 7 0 7 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 5 0 5 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N ~torage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes .0 0 0 0 0 0 ~onfiguration LR Delay. Queue Length and Level of Service ~pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR r" (vph) 13 14 ~ (m) (vph) 1295 538 'rJ/c 0.01 0.03 ~5% queue length 0.03 0.08 ~ontrol Delay 7.8 11.9 LOS A B fA,pproach Delay - - 11.9 Approach LOS - - B Rights Reserved Copyright (;) 2003 Universi~W Florida, All Rights Reserved Version4.ld file:/ /C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005 [ !u U U U U U U U U U U U U U D U o D o TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #4 INTERSECTION DATA CAPACITY ANALYSES 21 u u u u u U : U U U U U U U U U U D U D Two-Way Stop Control Page I of2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ~ite Information Analyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #4 Agency/Co. A&F Engineering ~urisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/11/2005 ~nalysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Prop Traf Analvsis Time Period AM Peak Proiect Description Schneider EastlWest Street: Proposed Access #4 INorth/South Street: River Road Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudv 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 0 205 4 8 446 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 227 4 8 495 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 5 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 11 0 23 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 12 0 25 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 Length and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT Lk v (vph) 8 37 C (m) (vph) 1319 588 v/c 0.01 0.06 95% queue length 0.02 0.20 Control Delay 7.7 11.5 LOS A B Approach Delay - - 11.5 ~pproach LOS - - B Rights Reserved Copyright 0 2003 Universi~!f Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.ld file:1 IC :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005 I iU I iU U U U Ii U U U :u U U U U U U U U U U Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 ~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #4 Agency/Co. A&F Engineering ~urisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/11 i2005 ~nalysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Prop Traf Analvsis Time Period PM Peak Proiect Descriotion Schneider EastlWest Street: ProDosed Access #4 North/South Street: River Road Intersection Orientation: North-South Study 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 Volume 0 361 11 23 201 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 401 12 25 223 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 5 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Uostream Sional 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 7 0 14 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 7 0 15 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 lConfiguration LR Delav. Queue Lenoth and Level of Service !Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR r.t (vph) 25 22 ~ (m) (vph) 1130 538 ~/c 0.02 0.04 ~5% queue length 0.07 0.13 Control Delay 8.3 12.0 LOS A B Approach Delay - - 12.0 Approach LOS - - B Rights Reserved Copyright 0 2003 Unjversi~Jf Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id file:/ /C :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005 u u u u u u u U 'l U U U U U U U U U U U TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA RIVER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #5 INTERSECTION DATA CAPACITY ANALYSES 24 u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u U D U U Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 ~O-WAYSTOPCONTROlSUMMARY General Information Isite Information ~nalyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #5 fAgency/Co. A&F Engineering ~urisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/11i2005 ~nalysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Prop Traf Analvsis Time Period AM Peak Proiect Description Schneider EastlWest Street: Proposed Access #5 INorth/South Street: River 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 Volume 6 203 0 0 455 2 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 6 225 0 0 505 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream SiQnal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 6 0 17 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 6 0 18 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 NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 6 24 C (m) (vph) 1043 499 v/c 0.01 0.05 95% queue length 0.02 0.15 Control Delay 8.5 12.6 LOS A B Approach Delay - - 12.6 Approach LOS - - B Rights Reserved Copyright 0 2003 Universi2~Florida, All Rights Reserved Version4.ld file:1 IC :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005 u u u u u u u [j u u u u u u u u u o u Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 ~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY General Information Site Information IAnalyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #5 IAgency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/11/l005 Analysis Year S2 - Ex Trat + Prop Trat IAnalysis Time Period PM Peak Proiect Description Schneider EastlWest Street: Proposed Access #5 INorth/South Street: River Road Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period (hrs): 0.25 ~ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Maior Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Wolume 17 369 0 0 202 6 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 18 410 0 0 224 6 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 ~onfiguration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 3 0 10 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 11 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 lConfiguration LR Delay, Queue Length and Level of Service IApproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR Iv (vph) 18 14 Ie (m) (vph) 1320 667 IV/c 0.01 0.02 195% queue length 0.04 0.06 !control Delay 7.8 . 10.5 LOS A B IApproach Delay - - 10.5 IApproach LOS - - B Rights Reserved Copyright" 2003 Universi12 (!I Florida, All Rights Reserved Version4.Jd file:/ /C: \Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFH Q\Local%20Settings\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005 o i U U U o U r -1 U D U U U U U U U U U o U EARLHAM COLLEGE - CARMEL. INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #6 INTERSECTION DATA CAPACITY ANALYSES 27 'U I U U U ['-1 \.J U o U U U LJ U U U o [J D o U Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY . General Information ~ite Information ~nalyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #6 ~gencyICo. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/1112005 ~nalysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Prop Traf ~nalvsis Time Period AM Peak Proiect Description Schneider EastlWest Street: Proposed Access #6 INorth/South Street: River 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 0 197 6 4 468 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 218 6 4 520 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 5 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Sional 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 18 0 12 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 20 0 13 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 5 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Rared Approach N N IStorage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~onfiguration LR Delay. Queue Length and Level of Service ~pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR ~ (vph) 4 33 C (m) (vph) 1327 475 vlc 0.00 0.07 95% queue length 0.01 0.22 Control Delay 7.7 13.1 LOS A B Approach Delay - - 13.1 Approach LOS - - B Rights Reserved Copyright 0 2003 UniversiQ8f Florida, All Rights Reserved Version4.Jd file:/IC :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFH Q\Local%20Settings\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005 u '-I U U U o u o u u u u u u u o u o o o Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information lSite Information IAnalyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #6 Vo,gency/Co. A&F Engineering !Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/11i2005 IAnalysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Prop Traf Vo,nalysis Time Period PM Peak Project Description Schneider EastlWest Street: Proposed Access #6 North/South Street: River Road Intersection Orientation: North-South !Study 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 0 379 18 12 200 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 421 20 13 222 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 5 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ~olume 11 0 7 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 12 0 7 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 onfiguration LR elav. Queue Lenath and Level of Service pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR ~ (vph) 13 19 ~ (m) (vph) 1103 466 ~/c 0.01 0.04 ~5% queue length 0.04 0.13 ~ontrol Delay 8.3 13.1 LOS A B ~pproach Delay - - 13.1 ~pproach LOS - - B Rights Reserved Copyright 0 2003 Unjversi~9r Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Jd file:1 IC :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20SettingS\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005 U D U U o U o rl W U EA1u.HAM COLLEGE - CARMEL, INDIANA TRAFFIc OPERATIONS ANALYSIS RIvER ROAD & PROPOSED ACCESS #7 INTERSECTION DATA : 1 U U CAPACITY ANALYSES r I U f -1. U u o u u u o 30 u [J r~ U U o D r~ U U U U U r I U i \ l.J U U U U U D Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY lGenerallnformation Site Information IAnalyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #7 IAgency/Co. A&F Engineering ~urisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/1112005 ~nalysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Gen Traf !Analysis Time Period AM Peak Proiect Description Schneider EastlWest Street: Proposed Access #7 North/South Street: River Road Intersection Orientation: North-South ~tudy Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments aior Street Northbound Southbound ovement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R rvolume 10 160 4 2 451 33 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 11 177 4 2 501 36 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 ~onfiguration L TR LT R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 12 5 6 37 5 29 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 13 5 6 41 5 32 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 5B Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LT L TR L TR v (vph) 11 2 13 11 41 37 C (m) (vph) 1016 1376 302 503 334 521 vie 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.12 0.07 5% queue length 0.03 0.00 0.13 0.07 0.42 0.23 Control Delay 8.6 7.6 17.5 12.3 17.3 12.4 LOS A A C B C B Approach Delay - - 15.1 15.0 Approach LOS - - C B Rights Reserved Copyright 0 2003 Universiii If Florida, All Rights Reserved Version4.ld file:/ IC :\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005 u o o u 1-1 u u u u u u ',' \ U --\ U o - l U U o U U {J Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of2 ~O-WAYSTOPCONTROLSUMMARY General Information Site Information ~nalyst TSV Intersection River Rd & Prop Access #7 ~gency/Co. A&F Engineering Jurisdiction Carmel, IN Date Performed 2/1112005 Analysis Year S2 - Ex Traf + Gen Traf ~nalysis Time Period PM Peak Project Description Schneider EastlWest Street: Proposed Access #7 North/South Street: River 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 29 354 12 6 163 42 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 32 393 13 6 181 46 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 - - 5 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration L TR LT R Upstream Si~mal 0 0 ~ inor Street Westbound Eastbound rlI ovement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 7 5 3 40 5 17 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 7 5 3 44 5 18 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N ~torage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 ~onfiguration 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 LT L TR L TR v (vph) 32 6 7 8 44 23 C (m) (vph) 1324 1137 335 419 358 663 v/c 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.12 0.03 95% queue length 0.07 0.02 0.06 0.06 0.42 0.11 Control Delay 7.8 8.2 16.0 13.8 16.5 10.6 LOS A A C B C B Approach Delay - - 14.8 14.5 Approach LOS - - B B Rights Reserved Copyright 0 2003 Unjversi~~FJorida, All Rights Reserved Version4.Jd file:/ /C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\tvandenberg.AFHQ\Local%20Settings\ T emp\u2k... 2/18/2005