May 29, 2020
Mr. Thomas Maistros, Jr., RA Project Manager/UD Consultant Stull and Lee, Inc. 103 Terrace Street Boston, MA 02120
Mr. Gregory Lickwola Construction Manager Norwalk Housing Authority 241/2 Monroe Street South Norwalk, CT 06854
RE: Traffic Study Proposed Addition to Colonial Village Norwalk, Connecticut MMI #7165-01-01
Dear Messrs. Maistros and Lickwola:
At your request, we have undertaken this study to evaluate the traffic implications associated with the proposed residential development expansion of the Colonial Village in Norwalk, Connecticut. Proposed are approximately 69 new apartments within several multi-family residential buildings to be located on a piece of the property north of West Cedar Street that is undeveloped aside from a small parking lot that has access at West Cedar Street just east of and opposite Price Avenue. Also proposed as part of this modest residential expansion is a small community center building for residents of Colonial Village. Primary site access for this 69-unit residential development is to be at West Cedar Street via the existing driveway, with a secondary rear driveway to connect to a separate existing parking lot that is located just east of the apex of the curvilinear Suncrest Road.
The work comprising the study consisted of a number of tasks including field reconnaissance, data collection, review of roadway and traffic conditions, estimation of site-development-generated traffic volumes, and assessment of future traffic operations at and near this new 69-apartment development. Figure 1 shows the site location map.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The key intersections surrounding the site that have been analyzed as part of this study are:
1. West Cedar Street at the existing parking lot/future main site driveway 2. West Cedar Street at Scribner Avenue/shopping plaza driveway 3. West Cedar Street at North Taylor Avenue (northerly junction)
West Cedar Street runs approximately east/west with one travel lane in each direction. The posted speed limit is 25 miles per hour (mph). There are sidewalks along the north side of West Cedar Street and portions of West Cedar Street have on-street parking adjacent to the westbound travel lane. 195 Church Street, 7th Floor, New Haven, CT 06510 | 203.271.1773 | www.MMInc.com CT | MA | ME | NH | NY | VT Messrs. Maistros and Lickwola | Page 2 May 29, 2020
Scribner Avenue runs approximately northwest/southeast with one travel lane in each direction and the posted speed limit is 25 mph. At the four-way intersection of Scribner Avenue at West Cedar Street and the shopping plaza driveway, all approaches are stop-sign controlled.
North Taylor Avenue runs approximately north/south with one travel lane in each direction; the posted speed limit is 30 mph. The north junction intersection with West Cedar Street is a t-intersection where all movements are stop-sign controlled.
South of the site, Scribner Avenue and North Taylor Avenue connect with U.S. Route 1 (Connecticut Avenue). Land use in this area of Norwalk is primarily residential and commercial.
Crash Data Summary
Data on traffic crashes near the site for the recent 3-year period of April 1, 2017, through March 31, 2020, was obtained via the Connecticut Crash Data Repository. This crash data repository is jointly run by the University of Connecticut and the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT) and includes crash data from municipal police departments. This data is summarized in Table 1 by location, crash severity, and collision type. TABLE 1 Crash Data Summary
CRASH SEVERITY TYPE OF COLLISION
REAR ON - END - - OBJECT - TO - TOTAL TOTAL ANGLE BACKING HEAD REAR DIRECTION DIRECTION FIXED REAR SERIOUS INJURY SERIOUS POSSIBLE INJURY POSSIBLE SIDESWIPE, SAME SIDESWIPE, OPPOSITE PROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY DAMAGE PROPERTY West Cedar Street: INJURY MINOR SUSPECTED At Scribner Avenue 5 5 4 1 5 At Suncrest Road 1 1 3 5 1 3 1 5 Between Suncrest Road 1 1 1 1 and Price Avenue At Price Avenue 1 1 1 1 Between Price Avenue 7 7 2 1 3 1 7 and Technology Plaza Between Cedar Crest 2 2 1 1 2 Place and Ivy Place At Ivy Place 3 3 1 1 1 3 At North Taylor Avenue 2 2 1 1 2 Between North Taylor 1 1 2 1 1 2 Avenue and Taylor Ave At Taylor Avenue 1 1 1 1 TOTAL 0 1 2 26 29 10 1 1 2 1 9 1 4 29 Source: Connecticut Crash Data Repository from April 1, 2017, to March 31, 2020.
Messrs. Maistros and Lickwola | Page 3 May 29, 2020
A total of 29 crashes were reported for this segment of West Cedar Street during this period. Approximately 90% of reported crashes resulted in property damage only. The most common collision type was the angle collision, comprising 34% of reported crashes, followed by rear-end collisions at 31%. At the off-site intersections, there do not appear to be any unusual trends in crash history.
The segment of West Cedar Street between Price Avenue and Technology Plaza, in the vicinity of the site driveway, experienced the highest number of crashes. Upon review of the roadway conditions, it is importantly noted that there is a small shopping plaza situated on the south side of West Cedar Street with head-in parking spaces that are directly in front of the storefronts, where drivers can pull directly into any of the ten or so spaces from West Cedar Street. Four of the seven crashes that occurred on this segment appear to have involved vehicles entering or exiting this parking lot colliding with westbound traffic on West Cedar Street. This apparent collision pattern appears to be an issue with the shopping plaza parking lot configuration, not with the roadway network or the Colonial Village; none of the collisions appear to have involved vehicles turning into or out of this Colonial Village driveway at West Cedar Street.
Existing/Baseline Traffic Volumes
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and its overall effect on reducing current travel and traffic patterns, new intersection turning movement traffic counts were unable to be conducted at the study intersections. Instead, baseline intersection peak-hour counts were assembled from recent past data sources that were available. Subsequent to correspondence and agreement with the City of Norwalk Transportation, Mobility and Parking (TMP) Department, pre-COVID-19-pandemic count data for the off-site study intersections was assembled from StreetLight Data – a big-data company that assembles mobility information through smart-device/smartphone geographic movement data. Next, to further calibrate the peak-hour intersection count data gained from StreetLight Data, the counts were compared to the latest available (2017) bi-directional hourly traffic monitoring data in the area from CTDOT. The StreetLight Data intersection volumes where proportionally adjusted as necessary to match the recent CTDOT traffic monitoring data for the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours of 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. respectively. Figure 2 shows the existing/baseline intersection peak-hour traffic volumes that are used in this study.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The site of the proposed 69-apartment development is approximately 7.6 acres of largely undeveloped land that is part of the larger 25.7-acre Colonial Village site. The existing Colonial Village contains approximately 200 units, which were built in 1952. Currently, the site of the proposed 69 new apartments is vacant aside from a basketball court in the north portion of the parcel and the aforementioned small existing parking lot in the south portion of the parcel with access via West Cedar Street. This current lot of around 25 parking spaces provides parking for a handful of existing residential units; as part of this development, these spaces are to be relocated nearby within what will be the expanded Colonial Village.
Once complete, the proposed development will consist of 18 buildings with 69 total residential units and associated increased site parking. Additionally, there will be the approximately 4,500-square-foot community center for the Colonial Village residents. As mentioned above, the primary access for the new 69 apartments will be via what will be a refurbished driveway at the location of the existing West Cedar Street driveway. As part of this development, on-street parking on West Cedar Street should be prohibited within 40 feet on either side of the site driveway for visibility.
Messrs. Maistros and Lickwola | Page 4 May 29, 2020
Sightlines were reviewed for a driver egressing the site driveway at West Cedar Street. Looking right, the driver's line of sight extends over 300 feet along West Cedar Street, meeting the CTDOT guideline of 280 feet for the posted speed limit of 25 mph. Looking left, the line of sight extends to the stop-controlled intersection of West Cedar Street at Technology Plaza, approximately 280 feet, also meeting the CTDOT guideline. It is noted that existing roadway traffic conditions, namely the horizontal curvature in West Cedar Street (west of the site) and the all-way stop control at Technology Plaza (east of the site), limit vehicle travel speeds for eastbound and westbound approaching vehicles, respectively. Therefore, the available sight distances are expected to remain adequate.
SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC
Site-generated peak-hour vehicle trips from the proposed 69-unit residential development were estimated using statistical data published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE).1 ITE Land Use Code (LUC) #220, multi-family housing (low-rise) was used to estimate the site-generated traffic for the proposed development during the study peak hours; these traffic estimates can be seen in Table 2.
TABLE 2 Site Development Traffic Estimates
NUMBER OF VEHICLE TRIPS
ITE WEEKDAY MORNING WEEKDAY AFTERNOON LAND USE LAND PEAK HOUR PEAK HOUR USE #
IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL Multi-family Housing (Low-Rise), 69 units 220 7 25 32 25 15 40 Source: Trip Generation, 10th Edition. Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2017
As can be seen, the proposed 69 new apartments are anticipated to generated approximately 7 entering vehicle trips and 25 exiting vehicles trips during a typical weekday morning peak hour, and approximately 25 entering vehicle trips and 15 exiting vehicle trips during a typical weekday afternoon peak hour. Part of this proposed development is also the addition of an approximately 4,500-square-foot community center for the Colonial Village residents. But note that since this community center on any given day is expected to be used predominantly by only Colonial Village residents, it is not expected to generate anything more than a negligible amount of additional off-site traffic in and of itself. Any vehicle traffic associated with this community center is expected to be internal within the larger Colonial Village.
The geographic distribution of the site-generated traffic at the off-site study intersections was estimated based on review of the roadway traffic patterns in the vicinity of the site and Journey-to-Work census data. Figure 3 shows this distribution, where it is estimated that approximately 50% of the site traffic will be oriented to/from the north via North Taylor Avenue and Scribner Avenue; 25% oriented to/from the southeast via West Cedar Street; 20% to/from the south via Scribner Avenue; and 5% to/from the west via the shopping plaza. Please note that, as a conservative measure for the purpose of this study, all of the estimated new peak-hour site traffic was routed through the study intersections even though some new motorists may utilize side streets such as Price Avenue. Likewise, all the estimated new site traffic was routed to/from the site driveway at West Cedar Street even though some motorists may sometimes utilize the secondary new rear access at Suncrest Road. Figure 4 shows the estimated site-generated traffic that
1 Trip Generation, 10th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2017
Messrs. Maistros and Lickwola | Page 5 May 29, 2020 is routed through the study intersections based on this distribution for the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours.
FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Future roadway traffic volumes were estimated both with and without the proposed residential development in place in order to determine possible traffic impacts. For the purpose of this study, the future horizon year of 2025 was used to analyze traffic scenarios with and without this proposed development.
Background traffic is reflective of future conditions in a scenario without this new development and was estimated by expanding the baseline traffic volumes to the 2025 horizon year using an annual growth rate of 0.6% per advice from CTDOT. Correspondence with the Norwalk TMP Department and CTDOT finds that there are currently no other upcoming developments in the area that are anticipated at this time to contribute to future traffic volumes near the site. The resultant estimated 2025 volumes can be seen on Figure 5 as the background traffic volumes.
The combined traffic scenario is reflective of future conditions with the proposed residential development built and opened and was estimated by adding the estimated new traffic generated by this proposed residential development (shown on Figure 4) to the future background traffic (shown in Figure 5). The resultant estimated 2025 future combined traffic volumes are shown on Figure 6.
Intersection Capacity Analysis
The future background and combined traffic scenarios were evaluated by means of capacity analysis techniques. These analyses are used to determine the anticipated quality of traffic operations at the study intersections in the future, and a comparison of background versus combined traffic operations allows for a determination of possible traffic impacts from the proposed development. The quality of operations is measured and expressed as a level of service (LOS). LOS is defined as a measure of inconvenience that motorists experience. The levels are expressed with letter designations of A through F. In many communities, peak hour LOS D or better is considered acceptable. A more detailed explanation of LOS is included in the Appendix. Table 3 summarizes the results of the capacity analysis.
As can be seen in Table 3, traffic conditions at the two off-site intersections are expected to remain good at peak hour LOS C or better. At the site driveway, motorists are expected to experience excellent LOS A. Traffic conditions between the background and combined scenarios are not expected to change during either peak hour, indicating that this proposed development is not expected to have a traffic impact and that no traffic mitigation is necessary.
Messrs. Maistros and Lickwola | Page 6 May 29, 2020
TABLE 3 Capacity Analysis Summary
WEEKDAY MORNING WEEKDAY AFTERNOON MOVEMENTS PEAK HOUR PEAK HOUR
BACKGROUND COMBINED BACKGROUND COMBINED UNSIGNALIZED West Cedar Street at Scribner Avenue Eastbound Left/Through/Right A A B B Westbound Left/Through/Right B B B B Northbound Left/Through/Right B B C C Southbound Left/Through/Right C C C C West Cedar Street at site driveway Eastbound Left A A A A Southbound Left/Right B B B B West Cedar Street at North Taylor Avenue Eastbound Left/Right B B B B Northbound Left/Through C C C C Southbound Through/Right B B B B
SUMMARY
This study was conducted to assess the transportation aspect of the proposed residential development in Norwalk, Connecticut. To determine a profile of existing conditions, detailed field reconnaissance and data assembly efforts were undertaken. Estimates of the amount of new traffic that will be generated by the proposed development were made based on industry statistical data, and intersection capacity analyses were performed comparing future traffic scenarios at and nearby the site both without and with the new development in place. Analysis of the estimated traffic added to the study intersections from this proposed residential development finds that the additional traffic can be accommodated with no perceptible impact. All movements are expected to operate at LOS C or better with no anticipated changes in LOS caused by this proposed development.
We do recommend that the sidewalks along the West Cedar Street site frontage of the proposed expansion be repaired as necessary as part of the site work for this development. Additionally, on-street parking on West Cedar Street should be prohibited via No-Parking signage within approximately 25 feet on either side of this site driveway for visibility.
We hope this report is useful to you and the City of Norwalk. If you have any questions or need anything further, please do not hesitate to contact either of the undersigned.
Very truly yours,
MILONE & MACBROOM, INC.
David G. Sullivan, PE, Associate Neil C. Olinski, MS, PTP Manager of Traffic & Transportation Planning Lead Transportation Planner
7165-01-01-m1420-ltr
COLONIAL VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SITE LOCATION MAP NORWALK, CONNECTICUT FIGURE 1
M R T
r h a r u o t t g m S D S an d Orchard St m n t a u o c Tr o lin i n n r lia o a d F e C l e i M t A n r H a e r v i y P B s e t a a ens S Butler S A t r Stev t N t k v T A r a e y v e e T lo W
r st S o n e A o L t r v u t c s e S d ie l s a l P b il illip r Nash h u lm G P t t S E ost A r Fr y v e A
v G e l C e lin n w t C o o e o n e d v d A a A r r A v D t C e v s k I o r e o e v e t r s y S b W e t P t g P l n d e Le l c es Cr Dr Site Location N an
m d T d d a R e R y
e r lo r t r F e s t r Liberty S D k t a e S A e R DonK n a r ar e c v v e e u d d n e e A l C S l Q t e u t W e t Ex S i d e v
S P c A D m G r ib r ic C n a r e m ed a m r r r e S t
u A a f F A ie v S A e e a n B llv t v v i ld a r e u A f y ie i t St P S e S rch v Ceda u d r t w Ch ie l d W t
o
w G A t S o a A rner S v r
w v T A t e e a e S r v t
e lm e e lo n a v h St E i v Sout A W P ¦¨§95 S N r t Golden Hill St e S u n r m t b S i D T r m n n a N n 1 c o Crown Ave ¡ z y A A it S i 1 r A l t r M o v o H v D e r A a t e r S v J i ll n B A a A T C e v r g S rsh v i a Mo St e n n r A t ton e Couch i M d Rd St it R K a A v 95 t ng A y ¨¦§ e e r S v C Ple
ssit e D o h h C n t t a S d u u
t h e c L h u o a ill R E n R C i a m m H t p W r a x r a Wash t D ington St R t t la hington St r Was d S S F M t h e r
it id S N W e d K ills d t D R o H C a ve in r llister A r cA t a M t Ma a Havila ill R n diso nd S e m o n St t H o r n M o s J x S
P b S t la i l F G
Miles 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 COLONIAL VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
NORWALK, CONNECTICUT FIGURE 2
e
u
n
e
v
A
r o
l
y
a
T
h
t r
o N
y a W
w
e e s
t C v i ed r a r S
t d t
n
e
m
p o l
e
v e d
d e s
o
p
o t r ree d t
P r S a da
West Ce o
R
t
s
e
r
c
n u
S
y a
w
e e
v u
i
n
r
e d
v
A
a
z r
a e
l n
p b
i LEGEND
r
g c
n S
X / Y = AM / PM Turning Movements i p
p
o
h
S
COLONIAL VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SITE TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
NORWALK, CONNECTICUT FIGURE 3
e
u
n
e
v
A
r o
l
y
a
T
h
t
r
o N
y
a W w
e e s
t C v i ed r a r S
t
d t
n
e m
p o
l e
v e d
d
e s
o
p
o t r e re d t P r S
a a
West Ced o
R
t s
e r
c n u
S y a
w
e e
v u
i
n
r
d e
v
A
a
z r
a e
l n
p b
i LEGEND
r
g c n S i X (Y) = Inbound (Outbound) Distribution
p p o h
S
COLONIAL VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SITE TRAFFIC VOLUMES
NORWALK, CONNECTICUT FIGURE 4
e
u
n
e
v
A
r o
l
y
a
T
h t
r o
N y a W
w
e e s
t C v i ed r ar
St
d t
n
e
m
p o
l e
v e d
d
e s o
p
o t r ree d t P r S
a a st Ced We
o
R
t s
e
r
c
n u
S
y a
w
e e v u
i
r n
d e
v
A a
z r
a e
l n
p b
i LEGEND
r
g c n S X / Y = AM / PM Turning Movements i p p o
h
S
COLONIAL VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES
NORWALK, CONNECTICUT FIGURE 5
e
u
n
e
v
A
r o
l
y
a
T
h
t r
o N
y a W w e
e st
C v i ed r a
r St
d
t n
e
m
p o
l e
v e d
d
e
s
o
p
o t r e re d t P r S
a a
West Ced o
R
t
s
e r
c n
u S
y a
w
e e
v u
i
r n
d e
v
A a
z r
a e
l n
p b i LEGEND
r
g c n S X / Y = AM / PM Turning Movements i p p
o
h
S
COLONIAL VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COMBINED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
NORWALK, CONNECTICUT FIGURE 6
e
u
n
e
v
A
r o
l
y
a
T
h
t r
o N
y a W w e
e st
C v i ed r a
r St
d
t n
e
m
p o
l e
v e d
d
e
s
o
p
o t r e re d t P r S
a a
West Ced o
R
t
s
e r
c n
u S
y a
w
e e
v u
i
r n
d e
v
A a
z r
a e
l n
p b i LEGEND
r
g c n S X / Y = AM / PM Turning Movements i p p
o
h
S
APPENDIX LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR
UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
ALL-WAY STOP-CONTROL (AWSC)
The criteria for AWSC intersections have different threshold values than do those for signalized intersections primarily because drivers expect different levels of performance from distinct types of transportation facilities. The expectation is that a signalized intersection is designed to carry higher traffic volumes than an AWSC intersection. Thus a higher level of control delay is acceptable at a signalized intersection for the same LOS. The level-of-service criteria are given below.
LEVEL-OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR AWSC INTERSECTIONS
1 LOS CONTROL DELAY (s/veh)
A ≤ 10
B > 10 AND ≤ 15
C > 15 AND ≤ 25
D > 25 AND ≤ 35
E > 35 AND ≤ 50
F > 50 1 For approaches and intersection-wide assessment, LOS is defined solely by control delay.
Note: LOS F is assigned to a movement if the volume-to-capacity ratio exceeds 1.0, regardless of the control delay.
Reference: Highway Capacity Manual Version 6.0, Transportation Research Board, 2016.
LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR TWO-WAY
STOP SIGN CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS
The level of service for a TWSC (two-way stop controlled) intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay and is defined for each minor movement. Level of service is not defined for the intersection as a whole. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. LOS criteria are given in the Table . LOS criteria are given below:
LEVEL-OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR AWSC INTERSECTIONS
1 LOS CONTROL DELAY (s/veh)
A ≤ 10
B > 10 AND ≤ 15
C > 15 AND ≤ 25
D > 25 AND ≤ 35
E > 35 AND ≤ 50
F > 50
Note: LOS criteria apply to each lane on a given approach and to each approach on the minor street. LOS is not calculated for major-street approaches or for the intersection as a whole. LOS F is assigned to a movement if the volume-to-capacity ratio exceeds 1.0, regardless of the control delay
Reference: Highway Capacity Manual Version 6.0, Transportation Research Board, 2016. HCS7 All-Way Stop Control Report General Information Site Information
Analyst FMF Intersection West Cedar St at Scribner
Agency/Co. Milone & MacBroom Jurisdiction
Date Performed 5/8/2020 East/West Street West Cedar St/shopping dw
Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street Scribner Ave
Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Peak Hour Factor 0.92
Time Analyzed AM
Project Description Background AM Peak Hour Lanes
Vehicle Volume and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume 3 0 3 78 4 147 8 244 21 40 349 8
% Thrus in Shared Lane
Lane L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3
Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 7 249 297 432
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 Departure Headway and Service Time
Initial Departure Headway, hd (s) 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
Initial Degree of Utilization, x 0.006 0.221 0.264 0.384
Final Departure Headway, hd (s) 6.16 5.48 5.26 5.12
Final Degree of Utilization, x 0.011 0.379 0.433 0.614
Move-Up Time, m (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Service Time, ts (s) 4.16 3.48 3.26 3.12 Capacity, Delay and Level of Service
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 7 249 297 432
Capacity 584 657 685 703
95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh) 0.0 1.8 2.2 4.2
Control Delay (s/veh) 9.2 11.8 12.2 15.9
Level of Service, LOS A B B C
Approach Delay (s/veh) 9.2 11.8 12.2 15.9
Approach LOS A B B C
Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 13.7 B
Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS ™ AWSC Version 7.8.5 Generated: 5/14/2020 1:27:45 PM Background AM.xaw HCS7 All-Way Stop Control Report General Information Site Information
Analyst FMF Intersection West Cedar St at Scribner
Agency/Co. Milone & MacBroom Jurisdiction
Date Performed 5/8/2020 East/West Street West Cedar St/shopping dw
Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street Scribner Ave
Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Peak Hour Factor 0.92
Time Analyzed AM
Project Description Combined AM Peak Hour Lanes
Vehicle Volume and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume 3 0 3 83 5 154 8 244 22 42 349 8
% Thrus in Shared Lane
Lane L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3
Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 7 263 298 434
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 Departure Headway and Service Time
Initial Departure Headway, hd (s) 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
Initial Degree of Utilization, x 0.006 0.234 0.265 0.386
Final Departure Headway, hd (s) 6.22 5.50 5.31 5.18
Final Degree of Utilization, x 0.011 0.402 0.440 0.624
Move-Up Time, m (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Service Time, ts (s) 4.22 3.50 3.31 3.18 Capacity, Delay and Level of Service
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 7 263 298 434
Capacity 578 654 678 695
95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh) 0.0 1.9 2.2 4.4
Control Delay (s/veh) 9.3 12.2 12.4 16.4
Level of Service, LOS A B B C
Approach Delay (s/veh) 9.3 12.2 12.4 16.4
Approach LOS A B B C
Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 14.0 B
Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS ™ AWSC Version 7.8.5 Generated: 5/14/2020 1:31:55 PM Combined AM.xaw HCS7 Two-Way Stop-Control Report
General Information Site Information
Analyst FMF Intersection West Cedar at site dwy Agency/Co. Milone & MacBroom Jurisdiction Date Performed 5/14/2020 East/West Street West Cedar St Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street Proposed site dwy Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Background AM Peak Hour Lanes
Major Street: East -West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR LR Volume (veh/h) 5 136 360 5 5 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type | Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways
Base Critical Headway (sec) 4.1 7.1 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 4.13 6.43 6.23 Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Follow-Up Headway (sec) 2.23 3.53 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 5 11 Capacity, c (veh/h) 1156 560 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.02 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh) 0.0 0.1 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.1 11.6 Level of Service (LOS) A B Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.3 11.6 Approach LOS B
Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS ™ TWSC Version 7.8.5 Generated: 5/14/2020 1:33:22 PM Background AM.xtw HCS7 Two-Way Stop-Control Report
General Information Site Information
Analyst FMF Intersection West Cedar at site dwy Agency/Co. Milone & MacBroom Jurisdiction Date Performed 5/14/2020 East/West Street West Cedar St Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street Proposed site dwy Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Combined AM Peak Hour Lanes
Major Street: East -West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR LR Volume (veh/h) 8 136 360 9 17 18 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type | Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways
Base Critical Headway (sec) 4.1 7.1 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 4.13 6.43 6.23 Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Follow-Up Headway (sec) 2.23 3.53 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 9 38 Capacity, c (veh/h) 1152 557 v/c Ratio 0.01 0.07 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh) 0.0 0.2 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.1 11.9 Level of Service (LOS) A B Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.5 11.9 Approach LOS B
Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS ™ TWSC Version 7.8.5 Generated: 5/14/2020 1:34:57 PM Combined AM.xtw HCS7 All-Way Stop Control Report General Information Site Information
Analyst FMF Intersection West Cedar St at N Taylor
Agency/Co. Milone & MacBroom Jurisdiction
Date Performed 5/14/2020 East/West Street West Cedar St
Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street North Taylor Ave
Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Peak Hour Factor 0.92
Time Analyzed AM
Project Description Background AM Peak Hour Lanes
Vehicle Volume and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume 44 92 229 189 257 131
% Thrus in Shared Lane
Lane L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3
Configuration LR LT TR
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 148 454 422
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 Departure Headway and Service Time
Initial Departure Headway, hd (s) 3.20 3.20 3.20
Initial Degree of Utilization, x 0.131 0.404 0.375
Final Departure Headway, hd (s) 5.62 5.01 4.76
Final Degree of Utilization, x 0.231 0.632 0.557
Move-Up Time, m (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0
Service Time, ts (s) 3.62 3.01 2.76 Capacity, Delay and Level of Service
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 148 454 422
Capacity 641 719 757
95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh) 0.9 4.5 3.5
Control Delay (s/veh) 10.3 16.2 13.6
Level of Service, LOS B C B
Approach Delay (s/veh) 10.3 16.2 13.6
Approach LOS B C B
Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 14.3 B
Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS ™ AWSC Version 7.8.5 Generated: 5/14/2020 1:41:47 PM Background AM.xaw HCS7 All-Way Stop Control Report General Information Site Information
Analyst FMF Intersection West Cedar St at N Taylor
Agency/Co. Milone & MacBroom Jurisdiction
Date Performed 5/14/2020 East/West Street West Cedar St
Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street North Taylor Ave
Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Peak Hour Factor 0.92
Time Analyzed AM
Project Description Combined AM Peak Hour Lanes
Vehicle Volume and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume 50 98 231 189 257 133
% Thrus in Shared Lane
Lane L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3
Configuration LR LT TR
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 161 457 424
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 Departure Headway and Service Time
Initial Departure Headway, hd (s) 3.20 3.20 3.20
Initial Degree of Utilization, x 0.143 0.406 0.377
Final Departure Headway, hd (s) 5.66 5.06 4.81
Final Degree of Utilization, x 0.253 0.642 0.567
Move-Up Time, m (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0
Service Time, ts (s) 3.66 3.06 2.81 Capacity, Delay and Level of Service
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 161 457 424
Capacity 636 711 748
95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh) 1.0 4.7 3.6
Control Delay (s/veh) 10.6 16.7 13.9
Level of Service, LOS B C B
Approach Delay (s/veh) 10.6 16.7 13.9
Approach LOS B C B
Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 14.6 B
Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS ™ AWSC Version 7.8.5 Generated: 5/14/2020 1:43:40 PM Combined AM.xaw HCS7 All-Way Stop Control Report General Information Site Information
Analyst FMF Intersection West Cedar St at Scribner
Agency/Co. Milone & MacBroom Jurisdiction
Date Performed 5/8/2020 East/West Street West Cedar St/shopping dw
Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street Scribner Ave
Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Peak Hour Factor 0.92
Time Analyzed PM
Project Description Background PM Peak Hour Lanes
Vehicle Volume and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume 35 11 43 44 17 78 65 326 55 71 294 69
% Thrus in Shared Lane
Lane L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3
Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 97 151 485 472
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 Departure Headway and Service Time
Initial Departure Headway, hd (s) 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
Initial Degree of Utilization, x 0.086 0.134 0.431 0.419
Final Departure Headway, hd (s) 6.69 6.45 5.48 5.49
Final Degree of Utilization, x 0.180 0.271 0.738 0.719
Move-Up Time, m (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Service Time, ts (s) 4.69 4.45 3.48 3.49 Capacity, Delay and Level of Service
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 97 151 485 472
Capacity 538 558 657 656
95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh) 0.6 1.1 6.5 6.1
Control Delay (s/veh) 11.1 11.8 22.3 21.2
Level of Service, LOS B B C C
Approach Delay (s/veh) 11.1 11.8 22.3 21.2
Approach LOS B B C C
Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 19.7 C
Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS ™ AWSC Version 7.8.5 Generated: 5/14/2020 1:30:47 PM Background PM.xaw HCS7 All-Way Stop Control Report General Information Site Information
Analyst FMF Intersection West Cedar St at Scribner
Agency/Co. Milone & MacBroom Jurisdiction
Date Performed 5/8/2020 East/West Street West Cedar St/shopping dw
Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street Scribner Ave
Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Peak Hour Factor 0.92
Time Analyzed PM
Project Description Combined PM Peak Hour Lanes
Vehicle Volume and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume 35 12 43 47 18 81 65 326 60 77 294 69
% Thrus in Shared Lane
Lane L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3
Configuration LTR LTR LTR LTR
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 98 159 490 478
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 Departure Headway and Service Time
Initial Departure Headway, hd (s) 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
Initial Degree of Utilization, x 0.087 0.141 0.436 0.425
Final Departure Headway, hd (s) 6.79 6.52 5.55 5.56
Final Degree of Utilization, x 0.185 0.288 0.756 0.739
Move-Up Time, m (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Service Time, ts (s) 4.79 4.52 3.55 3.56 Capacity, Delay and Level of Service
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 98 159 490 478
Capacity 530 552 648 647
95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh) 0.7 1.2 6.9 6.5
Control Delay (s/veh) 11.3 12.1 23.7 22.6
Level of Service, LOS B B C C
Approach Delay (s/veh) 11.3 12.1 23.7 22.6
Approach LOS B B C C
Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 20.8 C
Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS ™ AWSC Version 7.8.5 Generated: 5/14/2020 1:32:41 PM Combined PM.xaw HCS7 Two-Way Stop-Control Report
General Information Site Information
Analyst FMF Intersection West Cedar at site dwy Agency/Co. Milone & MacBroom Jurisdiction Date Performed 5/14/2020 East/West Street West Cedar St Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street Proposed site dwy Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Background PM Peak Hour Lanes
Major Street: East -West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR LR Volume (veh/h) 5 202 262 5 5 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type | Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways
Base Critical Headway (sec) 4.1 7.1 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 4.13 6.43 6.23 Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Follow-Up Headway (sec) 2.23 3.53 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 5 11 Capacity, c (veh/h) 1266 609 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.02 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh) 0.0 0.1 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.9 11.0 Level of Service (LOS) A B Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.2 11.0 Approach LOS B
Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS ™ TWSC Version 7.8.5 Generated: 5/14/2020 1:33:56 PM Background PM.xtw HCS7 Two-Way Stop-Control Report
General Information Site Information
Analyst FMF Intersection West Cedar at site dwy Agency/Co. Milone & MacBroom Jurisdiction Date Performed 5/14/2020 East/West Street West Cedar St Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street Proposed site dwy Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Project Description Combined PM Peak Hour Lanes
Major Street: East -West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR LR Volume (veh/h) 17 202 262 18 13 12 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%) 3 3 3 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade (%) 0 Right Turn Channelized Median Type | Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways
Base Critical Headway (sec) 4.1 7.1 6.2 Critical Headway (sec) 4.13 6.43 6.23 Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) 2.2 3.5 3.3 Follow-Up Headway (sec) 2.23 3.53 3.33 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 18 27 Capacity, c (veh/h) 1251 582 v/c Ratio 0.01 0.05 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh) 0.0 0.1 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.9 11.5 Level of Service (LOS) A B Approach Delay (s/veh) 0.7 11.5 Approach LOS B
Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS ™ TWSC Version 7.8.5 Generated: 5/14/2020 1:35:44 PM Combined PM.xtw HCS7 All-Way Stop Control Report General Information Site Information
Analyst FMF Intersection West Cedar St at N Taylor
Agency/Co. Milone & MacBroom Jurisdiction
Date Performed 5/14/2020 East/West Street West Cedar St
Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street North Taylor Ave
Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Peak Hour Factor 0.92
Time Analyzed PM
Project Description Background PM Peak Hour Lanes
Vehicle Volume and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume 106 96 203 268 158 59
% Thrus in Shared Lane
Lane L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3
Configuration LR LT TR
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 220 512 236
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 Departure Headway and Service Time
Initial Departure Headway, hd (s) 3.20 3.20 3.20
Initial Degree of Utilization, x 0.195 0.455 0.210
Final Departure Headway, hd (s) 5.62 5.02 5.14
Final Degree of Utilization, x 0.343 0.713 0.336
Move-Up Time, m (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0
Service Time, ts (s) 3.62 3.02 3.14 Capacity, Delay and Level of Service
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 220 512 236
Capacity 641 718 701
95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh) 1.5 6.0 1.5
Control Delay (s/veh) 11.5 19.5 10.7
Level of Service, LOS B C B
Approach Delay (s/veh) 11.5 19.5 10.7
Approach LOS B C B
Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 15.5 C
Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS ™ AWSC Version 7.8.5 Generated: 5/14/2020 1:43:10 PM Background PM.xaw HCS7 All-Way Stop Control Report General Information Site Information
Analyst FMF Intersection West Cedar St at N Taylor
Agency/Co. Milone & MacBroom Jurisdiction
Date Performed 5/14/2020 East/West Street West Cedar St
Analysis Year 2025 North/South Street North Taylor Ave
Analysis Time Period (hrs) 0.25 Peak Hour Factor 0.92
Time Analyzed PM
Project Description Combined PM Peak Hour Lanes
Vehicle Volume and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume 110 100 209 268 258 66
% Thrus in Shared Lane
Lane L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3 L1 L2 L3
Configuration LR LT TR
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 228 518 352
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 Departure Headway and Service Time
Initial Departure Headway, hd (s) 3.20 3.20 3.20
Initial Degree of Utilization, x 0.203 0.461 0.313
Final Departure Headway, hd (s) 5.94 5.27 5.29
Final Degree of Utilization, x 0.377 0.759 0.518
Move-Up Time, m (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0
Service Time, ts (s) 3.94 3.27 3.29 Capacity, Delay and Level of Service
Flow Rate, v (veh/h) 228 518 352
Capacity 606 683 680
95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh) 1.7 7.0 3.0
Control Delay (s/veh) 12.5 22.9 13.8
Level of Service, LOS B C B
Approach Delay (s/veh) 12.5 22.9 13.8
Approach LOS B C B
Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 17.8 C
Copyright © 2020 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS ™ AWSC Version 7.8.5 Generated: 5/14/2020 1:44:12 PM Combined PM.xaw