HomeMy WebLinkAboutTraffic StudyC
OPYRIGHT
This Analysis and the ideas, designs, concepts and data contained herein
are the exclusive intellectual property of A&F Engineering Co., LLC. and
are not to be used or reproduced in whole or in part, without the written
consent of A&F Engineering Co., LLC.
2011, A&F Engineering Co., LLC.
Z:\2011\11044S -Thompson Thrift\TOA.doc
LF...........................................................................................................................................................II
IST OF IGURES
LT.............................................................................................................................................................II
IST OF ABLES
C............................................................................................................................................................III
ERTIFICATION
I...............................................................................................................................................................1
NTRODUCTION
P .......................................................................................................................................................................1
URPOSE
SW.............................................................................................................................................................1
COPE OF ORK
DPD............................................................................................................2
ESCRIPTION OF THE ROPOSED EVELOPMENT
SA..................................................................................................................................................................2
TUDY REA
DASS..........................................................................................................4
ESCRIPTION OF THE BUTTING TREET YSTEM
TD...............................................................................................................................................................4
RAFFIC ATA
PH....................................................................................................................................................................4
EAK OUR
GTVPD...................................................................................5
ENERATED RAFFIC OLUMES FOR ROPOSED EVELOPMENT
IT.............................................................................................................................................................5
NTERNAL RIPS
P-BT...............................................................................................................................................................5
ASSYRIPS
ADGT...............................................................................................6
SSIGNMENT AND ISTRIBUTION OF ENERATED RIPS
PDGTASS............................................................6
ROPOSED EVELOPMENT ENERATED RIPS DDED TO THE TREET YSTEM
CA.....................................................................................................................................................9
APACITY NALYSIS
DLS............................................................................................................................9
ESCRIPTION OF EVELS OF ERVICE
CAS................................................................................................................................10
APACITY NALYSES CENARIOS
C..............................................................................................................................................................14
ONCLUSIONS
R....................................................................................................................................................15
ECOMMENDATIONS
F1:AM.....................................................................................................................................................3
IGURE REA AP
F2:AADGTVPD........7
IGURE SSIGNMENT NDISTRIBUTION OF ENERATED RAFFIC OLUMES FOR ROPOSED EVELOPMENT
F3:GPMPTVPD..................................................8
IGURE ENERATED EAK RAFFIC OLUMES FORROPOSED EVELOPMENT
F4:EPMPTV......................................................................................................11
IGURE XISTING EAK RAFFIC OLUMES
F5:SEPMPTV&GPMPTV
IGURE UM OF XISTING EAK RAFFIC OLUMES ENERATED EAK RAFFIC OLUMES FOR
PD..................................................................................................................................12
ROPOSED EVELOPMENT
T1-GTFPD....................................................................................... 5
ABLE ENERATED RIPS OR ROPOSED EVELOPMENT
T2-LSS:US421&RP......................................................................13
ABLE EVEL OF ERVICE UMMARYETAIL ARKWAY
T3-LSS:US421&R-I/R-OA..................................................13
ABLE EVEL OF ERVICE UMMARYIGHTNIGHTUT CCESS
II
TOA
I certify that this has been prepared by me and under my
RAFFIC PERATIONSNALYSIS
immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of traffic and
transportation engineering.
A&FEC.,I.
NGINEERING ONC
R. Matt Brown, P.E., P.T.O.E
Indiana Registration 10200056
III
TOA
This , prepared at the request of the Indiana Department of
RAFFIC PERATIONSNALYSIS
Transportation (INDOT), on behalf of Thompson ThriftDevelopment, Inc., is for a proposed
high turnover restaurant to be located in the northwest corner of the intersection of US 421 and
Retail Parkway in Carmel, Indiana.
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 conclusionsresulting 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
streetsystem.
The scope of work for this analysis is:
First, to obtain peak hour turning movement traffic volume counts at all existing study
intersections.
Second, to estimate the number of new trips that will be generated by the proposed
development.
Third, to assign the generated traffic volumes to the driveways that will provide access to the
proposed development.
1
Fourth, to distribute the generated traffic volumes from the proposed development onto the
public roadway system and intersections identified in 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:
Scenario 1: Existing Traffic Volumes - Based on existing roadway conditions and traffic
volumes.
Scenario 2:Existing + Proposed Development - New traffic volumes that will be generated
by the proposed developmentadded to the existing traffic volumes.
TOA
Finally, to prepare a documenting all data, analyses,
RAFFIC PERATIONSNALYSIS
conclusions and recommendations to provide for the safe and efficient movement of traffic
through the study area.
The proposed high turnover restaurantwill be constructed in the northwest corner of US 421
and RetailParkway in Carmel, Indiana. The proposed restaurant will serve dinner only;
therefore, the primary operation and traffic generation of this development will occur duringthe
PM peak hour. Access to the development will be provided from the west leg of Retail Parkway
and via an existing right-in/right-out access locatedalong US 421 approximately235feet north
Figure 1
of Retail Parkway.is an area map showing the location of the subject site and the
proposed accessdrives.
The study area defined for this analysis will includethe following intersections:
US 421 & Retail Parkway
US 421 & Right-In/Right-Out Access
2
The proposed development will be served by the public roadway system that includesUS 421
and Retail Parkway.
–
US421is anorth/southfour-lane state highway that serves several commercial and residential
developments throughout Hamilton County. The posted speed limit along this roadway within
the study area is 45 mph.
–
RPis an east/west roadway that serves a large retail area on the east side of US
ETAIL ARKWAY
421.The west leg of the intersection currently terminates into a vacant pieceof property. This
leg will be extendedto the north to serve the proposeddevelopment.
US 421 and Retail Parkway – This intersection is controlled by a traffic signal. The
following are the number of lanes at this intersection by approach:
Eastbound approach: One shared left-turn/through/right-turn lane.
Westbound approach: Twoleft-turn lanes and one shared through/right-turn lane.
Northbound approach: One left-turn lane, two through lanes, andone right-turn lane.
Southbound approach: One left-turn lane, one through laneand one shared
through/right-turn lane.
A&F Engineeringconducted PM peak hour traffic volume counts during a typical weekday
in November 2011 at the intersection of US 421 and Retail Parkway. The peak hour volumes
Figure 4
are graphically illustrated onand computer printouts of the “raw” data collected for
Appendix
the counts are included in the .
Based on the existing traffic volumes that were collected for this analysis the PM peak hour
occurs from 4:15 PM to 5:15 PM.The volumes collected during these hours willbe used for
all analyses contained within this report in order to represent a “maximum traffic” condition.
4
The estimate of traffic to be generated by the proposed development is a function of the
1
report was used to
development size and of the character of the land use. Trip Generation
calculate the number of trips that will be generated by the proposed development. This report is
a compilation of trip data for various land uses as collected by transportation professionals
throughout the United States in order to establish the average number of trips generated by those
Table 1
land uses. is a summary of the PM peak hour trips that will be generated by the
proposed development.
T1-GTFPD
ABLE ENERATED RIPS OR ROPOSED EVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENTINFORMATIONGENERATEDTRIPS
ITEPMPM
LAND USECODESIZEENTEREXIT
High Turnover Restaurant9326400 SF4229
An internal trip results when a trip is made between two or more land uses without traversing
the external roadway system. This site will consist of a single land use only; therefore, internal
trips are not applicable.
Pass-by trips are the trips already on the roadway system that are captured by a proposed
development. A high turnover restaurant will producepass-by trips. However, these trips have
been assumed negligiblein order to create a worst-case, maximumtrafficscenariofor analysis.
1
Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Eighth Edition, 2008, Vol. 3, pg.
1797.
5
The study methodology used to determine the traffic volumes from the proposed development
that will be added to the street system is defined as follows:
1.The volume of traffic that will enter and exit the proposed development must be
assigned to the various access pointsand to the public street system. Using the traffic
volume data collected for this analysis, traffic to and from the development has been
assigned to the proposed driveways and to the public street system that will be serving
the site.
2.To determine the volumeof traffic that will be added to the public roadway system, the
generated traffic must be distributed by direction to the public roadways at their
intersection with the driveways. For the proposed development, the distribution was
basedon the location of the development with respect to the surrounding public
roadway system, the location of near-by population centers,the existing traffic patterns
and the assignment of generated traffic.
The assignmentand distributionof generated traffic volumes forthe proposed development is
Figure 2
shown on .
Generated traffic volumes that can be expected from the proposed development have been
prepared at each of the study area intersections. The total peak hour generated traffic volumes
Figure 3
for the proposed development are shown on . The generated trafficvolumesare based
on the previously discussed trip generation data, assignment of generated traffic, and
distribution of generated traffic.
6
The "efficiency" of an intersection is based on its ability to accommodate the traffic volumes
that approach the intersection. It is defined by the Level-of-Service (LOS) of the intersection.
The LOS is determined by a series of calculations commonlycalled a "capacity analysis".
Input data into a capacity analysis include traffic volumes, intersection geometry, number
and use of lanes and, in the case of signalized intersections, traffic signal timing.To
determine the LOS at each of the study intersections, a capacity analysis has been made using
2
.This program allows multiple intersections to be
the recognized computer programSynchro
analyzed and optimized using the capacity calculation methods outlined within the Highway
3
Capacity Manual (HCM).
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.
2
Synchro 8.0, Trafficware, 2011.
3
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Transportation Research Board, National Research
Council, Washington, DC, 2010.
9
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 stop sign controlled and
roundabout controlled intersections.
Level of ServiceControl Delay (seconds/vehicle)
ALess than or equal to 10
BBetween 10.1 and 15
CBetween 15.1 and 25
DBetween 25.1 and 35
EBetween 35.1 and 50
Fgreater than 50
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 has been
made for the PM peak hour for each of the study intersections for each of the following
scenarios:
S1:Existing traffic volumes - These are the existing traffic volumes that were
CENARIO
Figure 4
collected at the study intersections.is a summary of these
traffic volumes at the study intersections for the peak hours.
S2:Existing traffic volumes + proposed development generated traffic
CENARIO
Figure 5
volumes- 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
AppendixTable 2Table 3
service results are included in the .and that follow summarize the
results.
10
T2-LSS:US421&RP
ABLE EVEL OF ERVICE UMMARYETAIL ARKWAY
PM PEAK HOUR
SCENARIO
MOVEMENT
12
Northbound ApproachBB
Southbound ApproachAB
Eastbound ApproachEE
Westbound ApproachDD
IntersectionBB
DS:
ESCRIPTION OF CENARIOS
S1: Existing Traffic Volumes with Existing Intersection Geometrics and Signal
CENARIO
Control.
S2: Sum of ExistingTraffic Volumes and Proposed Development Generated
CENARIO
Traffic Volumes withExisting Intersection Geometrics and Signal Control.
T3-LSS:US421&R-I/R-OA
ABLE EVEL OF ERVICE UMMARYIGHTNIGHTUT CCESS
PM PEAK HOUR
SCENARIO
MOVEMENT
2
Southbound ApproachA
Eastbound ApproachB
DS:
ESCRIPTION OF CENARIOS
S2: Sum of ExistingTraffic Volumes and Proposed Development Generated
CENARIO
Traffic Volumes with Proposed Intersection Geometrics and Control*.
* The proposed intersection geometrics and control include the following:
Stop controlled intersectionwith the access drive stopping for US 421.
Right-In/Right-Out only access drive with one outbound laneand one
inbound lane.
13
The conclusions that follow are based on existing traffic volume data, trip generation,
assignment and distribution of generated traffic, capacity analyses with the resulting levels of
service that have been prepared at the study intersections and the field review conducted at the
site. These conclusions apply only to the PM peak hour that wasaddressed in this analysis. This
peak houriswhen thelargest volumes of traffic will occur. Therefore, if the resulting level of
service is adequate during thistime period, it can generally be assumed that the remaining 23
hours will have levels of service that are equal to or better than the peak hour, since the existing
street traffic volumes will be less during the other 23 hours.
US421&RP
ETAIL ARKWAY
Existing traffic (Scenario 1) – A level of service review with the existing traffic volumes and
existing intersection conditionsshows that this intersection currently operates at acceptable
levels of service during the PM peak hour.
Existing traffic + proposed developmenttraffic volumes with existing intersection conditions
(Scenario 2) –When the generated traffic volumes from the proposed developmentare added to
the existing traffic volumes,this intersection will continue to operate at acceptable levels of
service during the PM peak hour with the existing intersection conditions.
US421&R-I/R-OAD
IGHTNIGHTUT CCESS RIVE
Existing traffic + proposed developmenttraffic (Scenario 2) – When the generated 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 PM peak
hour with theproposed intersection conditions.
14
Based on the analysis and the resulting conclusions, the following recommendations are made to
ensure that the roadway system will accommodate the increased traffic volumes due to the
proposed development.
US421&RP
ETAIL ARKWAY
When the projected traffic from the proposed development is added to the existing traffic
volumes, allapproachesatthis location will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service
withexisting intersection geometrics and control conditions. Therefore, no improvements are
recommended at this location.
US421&R-I/R-OAD
IGHTNIGHTUT CCESS RIVE
No significant improvements or changes need to be made to this driveway as it currently exists.
The intersection should be stop controlled with the right-in/right-out drive stopping for US 421.
Analysis has shown that a right-turn lane along US 421 is not warranted at this location based
on the projected traffic volumes.
15
US421&RP1
ETAIL ARKWAY
US421&R-I/R-OA10
IGHTNIGHTUT CCESS