Transportation Master Plan

Home , Bay of Quinte, Dundas Street, Quinte West

CITY OF QUINTE WEST TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN

MMM #16-13016 | D16-13-005

1.0 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Why Prepare a Master Plan? ...... 1 1.2 How the Master Plan was Developed ...... 1 1.2.1 Study Process ...... 1 1.2.2 Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Process ...... 2 1.2.3 Public and Stakeholder Engagement Process ...... 3 1.3 Who Developed the Master Plan? ...... 4 1.4 Organization of the Report ...... 4 2.0 Understanding the Context ...... 6 2.1 A Municipal Needs Assessment ...... 6 2.1.1 Socio-economic Profile ...... 6 2.1.2 Travel Characteristics ...... 6 2.2 The Existing Roadway Network ...... 7 2.2.1 Travel Demand Model Development ...... 7 2.2.2 2006 Base Network ...... 8 2.2.3 Dundas / Dixon Corridor Existing Intersection Analysis ...... 11 2.2.4 Roadway Classification ...... 14 2.2.5 Transit ...... 15 2.3 Active Transportation...... 16 2.4 Supportive Policies & Plans...... 19 3.0 A Vision for Transportation in Quinte West ...... 20 3.1 Problem Statement ...... 20 3.2 Transportation Vision...... 21 3.3 Transportation Principles ...... 21 3.4 Transportation Objectives...... 21 4.0 Developing the Preferred Transportation Network ...... 23 4.1 2031 Travel Forecast Model ...... 23 4.1.1 2031 Base Model ...... 23 4.1.2 2031 Trip Generation and Distribution ...... 23 4.1.3 2031 “Do Nothing” Road Network ...... 24 4.1.4 2031 Improved Road Network ...... 27 4.2 Future Traffic Analysis on Arterial Roadways ...... 31 4.2.1 Optimization of the Dundas Street and Dixon Drive Corridors ...... 31

CITY OF QUINTE WEST TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Final Draft 1 January 2014 “BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

4.3 Active Transportation ...... 34 4.3.1 Establishing Active Transportation in Quinte West ...... 34 4.3.2 Documenting Existing Conditions ...... 35 4.3.3 Selecting Candidate Routes ...... 38 4.3.4 Identifying Potential Facility Types ...... 41 4.3.5 Moving Forward: Developing a City-wide AT Network ...... 43 4.4 The Preferred Transportation Network ...... 46 4.4.1 Evaluation Framework ...... 48 5.0 Recommendations and Implementation ...... 51

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 WHY PREPARE A MASTER PLAN?

The City of Quinte West has prepared a Transportation Master Plan (TMP) in order to leverage the strengths of the existing transportation network and to provide a comprehensive 20 year direction for transportation investments. This vision is intended to establish a strategic direction for the City, and will help Quinte West plan effectively to enhance the existing vehicular transportation system connecting its urban and future growth areas. The focus of the TMP is on infrastructure needs for vehicular modes of transportation, but also considers the use of non-automobile modes such as transit and active transportation. The resulting TMP creates a viable long-term mobility plan for infrastructure improvements that will support the anticipated growth and change in the City of Quinte West over the next 20 years.

1.2 HOW THE MASTER PLAN WAS DEVELOPED

1.2.1 Study Process

The first step in the Transportation Master Plan process was to assess the existing transportation conditions throughout the City in both urban and rural areas, and to identify any existing opportunities for or challenges to mobility. Where data were available, current usage of the transportation network was analyzed and reported. The analyses included a review of the existing conditions along both the Dundas Street and Dixon Drive corridors over the Trent River, as well as a high level screenline analysis of the major arterial roads around Trenton. The screenline analysis informed the development of the travel demand forecasting model which will be described in further detail below.

Concurrent with the assessment of existing conditions was the launch of the public consultation campaign. The campaign featured a “kick-off” public engagement campaign at the Quinte West Home Show on Friday, April 19 th , 2013, and included a display board and information packages which informed the public on the major project milestones, key points of contact and also directed attendees to an online survey to provide their feedback.

The first Public Information Centre (PIC) was held on Tuesday, June 11, 2013, to gain input from the public on the pressing transportation issues and opportunities facing the City. A wide range of stakeholders have been contacted within the City, in addition to neighbouring

CITY OF QUINTE WEST TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Final Draft 1 January 2014 “BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

jurisdictions, the Ministry of Transportation, First Nations and other stakeholder groups. The first PIC also summarized the results of the existing analysis for review by the public and stakeholders.

With an understanding of the existing conditions, the project moved into the next phase to identify and test transportation strategies to address existing and future needs and opportunities within the City. Firstly, the intersection capacity model developed for Dundas Street and Dixon Drive was used to optimize the signal phasing and timing along these corridors. A comparative analysis approach was used to determine the magnitude of changes to the corridor as a result of the signal optimization process. Secondly, the travel demand forecasting model was developed using the Emme 4 transportation forecasting software package. It was validated to existing AADT counts, and then was used to project the 2031 traffic conditions based on growth forecasts obtained from the City.

These two sources of information were then used to identify a list of candidate projects which could be undertaken. A multiple account evaluation (MAE) framework was established in which to analyze these initiatives. Upon completion of the MAE process, the effect of implementing the preferred projects was again evaluated in the travel demand model in order to determine the magnitude of the benefits and note any undesirable effects. The preferred candidate projects were compiled into a future transportation scenario.

One of the more preferable future scenarios was selected and brought to the public for comment through a second PIC held on Tuesday, October 22, 2013. Stakeholders and the public were once again engaged to comment on and help refine the preferred future scenario.

Once consensus had been reached on the selected transportation scenario, the horizon year forecasts were finalized in order to develop an implementation strategy and preliminary cost estimates. Furthermore, transportation policies have been developed to support implementation of the transportation vision put forth in this TMP. The horizon year forecasts inform the prioritization of the transportation projects to ensure that the appropriate projects are planned for construction in time to accommodate the forecast population and employment growth.

The TMP report synthesizes the analysis, findings and recommendations developed throughout the analysis and consultation, and then presents a clear 20-year vision of the transportation network needed for the City of Quinte West.

1.2.2 Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Process

This TMP is being conducted under the requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) process. The Municipal Class EA (October 2000, amended in 2007 and 2011), provides a process in accordance with the Environmental Assessment Act for municipal infrastructure projects. Master plans, such as this TMP, are required to complete

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Phases 1 and 2 of the five phases of the Municipal Class EA process. These required phases include: ó Phase 1 – Identify the problem (deficiency) or opportunity; and ó Phase 2 – Identify alternative solutions to address the problem or opportunity by considering the existing environment and establishing the preferred solution.

Completion of Phases 1 and 2 of the Municipal Class EA process allows the County to move on to Phase 3 (Assessment of Design Alternatives) for the projects encompassed by this report, which fall under Schedule ‘C’ of the Class EA Document. Further consultation will be required for any of these projects.

1.2.3 Public and Stakeholder Engagement Process

One of the objectives of the study was to develop transportation recommendations for future infrastructure based on local knowledge, understanding and input. The study team, including representatives from the consultant team and the City, explored the possibility of different forms of consultation initiatives and developed a consultation strategy based on:

“Bringing the Consultation to the People”

At the beginning of the project, the study team developed a consultation strategy built around two PICs, consistent with the requirements of the City and the Class EA Process. In addition to the PICs, the strategy identified other methods of public and stakeholder consultation which were realistic and feasible for the City.

The overall goal of the strategy was to provide a variety of consultation and engagement opportunities to gather input from a wide range of public representatives. The consultation initiatives which were undertaken to inform the development of the TMP included:

ó Public Updates and Notices; ó A Public Awareness Campaign including a study promotional business card and mobile display board; ó An Online Questionnaire; and ó Two Public Information Centres. Figure 1.1 illustrates the timeline in which the public and stakeholder consultation activities occurred over the course of the study process. The information which was gathered informed the development of the TMP.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Project Project Commencement Completion May 2013 December 2013

Noti ce of Study Public Public Notice of Study Information Commencement Information Completion Centre #1 Centre #2 June 11, 2013 May 8, 2013 October 2013 December 2013

Public Outreach Online Campaign Questionnaire April 2013 May 8, 2013

Figure 1.1 – Schedule of Public & Stakeholder Initiatives

The input received from each of the public and stakeholder consultation initiatives has been documented and summarized in Appendix A . The findings have been summarized based on key themes where possible. Based on our review of input, the major transportation themes that arose over the course of the study included active transportation and transit. Most specifically, there was a clear demand from the public as well as local stakeholders and some political representatives for the City to develop and implement more active transportation facilities and invest in expansions to their existing transit linkages.

1.3 WHO DEVELOPED THE MASTER PLAN?

The project team overseeing the development of the TMP was led by a City Steering Committee and included members of the consulting team. The team consisted of: ó City of Quinte West: o John Gooding, Project and Development Coordinator ó MMM Group: o Nixon Chan, M.A.Sc., P. Eng., PTOE, PMP, Consultant Project Manager o Christopher Tam, P. Eng., Project Coordinator o Claire Basinski, MCIP, RPP, Consultation Lead

1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT

The TMP Report is organized into five chapters, with four chapters following this introductory chapter addressing the following topics:

ó Chapter 2: Understanding the Context: Presents the existing socio-economic make-up of the City and analyzes existing transportation conditions. Provides an overview of planning and policy documents that frame the transportation planning context in the City.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

ó Chapter 3: A Vision for Transportation In Quinte West: Provides the problem statement mandated by the Municipal Class EA process and then the vision, principles and objectives to address the problem statement; ó Chapter 4: Developing the Preferred Transportation Network: Details the process used to construct the transportation model, analyze alternative future scenarios and select the preferred transportation network; and ó Chapter 5: Implementing the Plan: Organizes recommended transportation improvements by short and long term horizons and identifies approximate costs for the transportation recommendations.

2.0 UNDERSTANDING THE CONTEXT

2.1 A MUNICIPAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT

2.1.1 Socio-economic Profile

The City of Quinte West is a community located along the shores of the Bay of Quinte and is bordered by Northumberland County to the west, and the City of Belleville to the east. The 2011 Federal Census reported over 43,000 residents with over 18,000 dwellings. The population has been growing moderately since 2006 and is expected to grow to over 51,000 by the year 2031. The City has experienced population growth within the 40+ age cohort that is above the provincial average, which has created age-specific transportation needs that have been considered in the development of this TMP.

The City of Quinte West is home to one of the Canadian National Forces Air Bases, 8 Wing / CFB Trenton, which plays an integral role in the community make-up of the Trenton area. CFB Trenton is a significant employer for the City and, with anticipated growth, this TMP has noted the base as a frequent destination for work-related trips.

According to the 2006 census, the two largest occupational industries in the City were manufacturing services and business services. The average household income for the City of Quinte West was $61,908 in 2005 which is approximately $7,000 lower than the provincial average household income of $69,156. The 2011 Census has not released this data to provide this study with more recent income statistics.

2.1.2 Travel Characteristics

The City of Quinte West is located along Highway 401, which allows for easy access to the surrounding localities such as Belleville or Brighton, along with large metropolitan areas like the Greater Toronto Area. The available AADT data collected and used within this study indicated that the most travelled roadways include the Dundas Street corridor, Wooler Road and Front Street.

For work-related trips, the 2006 Census reported a modal split of 92% automobile travel either as a driver or passenger. The remaining 8% covers the work-related trips traveled by active modes, such as walking or cycling, and transit. Figure 2.1 illustrates a modal split for work-related trips reported by Statistics Canada in 2006.

CITY OF QUINTE WEST TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Final Draft 6 January 2014 “BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

2% 0.5% 6%

Car, truck, van, as driver 10%

Car, truck, van, as passenger

Public transit

Walked or cycled

82% All other modes

Figure 2.1 – Quinte West - Work Related Trips Modal Split

2.2 THE EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK

For the development of this TMP, a travel demand model was developed to identify pre- existing areas of congestion within the City. Furthermore, challenges noted by City staff and residents along Dundas Street and Dixon Drive, especially at the points where these roadways cross the Trent River, resulted in a detailed intersection capacity and coordination study along these two roadways. These analyses are summarized in the following sections.

2.2.1 Travel Demand Model Development

The City of Quinte West travel demand model (Model) was developed for use determining the projected traffic flows along all roadways within the City. The Model was developed using data from the 2006 Census, since data from the 2011 Census was incomplete or lacking sufficient detail for the Model. The 2006 Census data was provided on a dissemination area level. The dissemination area data was aggregated into 80 Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) which are intended to represent different areas of land use and transportation infrastructure contained in the City, and provides the basis from which the travel forecasts are determined. Eight of the 80 TAZs represent “external” zones, or areas, which are physically outside of Quinte West, but are represented in order to reflect the trips into and out of the area analyzed by the Model. Furthermore, some of these external zones represent significant population and employment centres, such as Belleville, which have an effect on travel patterns within the City. Figure 2.2 below illustrates the TAZ structure used in the Model. The detailed development of the trip generation, trip distribution and assignment for the Model, as well as the Model validation, is provided in Appendix B.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Figure 2.2 – TAZ Structure

2.2.2 2006 Base Network

The 2006 Base Network was evaluated by reviewing the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratios on the road network. The v/c ratios provide an assessment of whether the travel demand on the road can be accommodated by the network. Figure 2.3 summarizes the v/c ratios within the City.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Figure 2.3 – 2006 Base Network v/c Ratios

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Dundas Street

Figure 2.4 – 2006 Base Network v/c Ratios (Dundas Street and Dixon Drive Bridges)

Figure 2.5 – 2006 Base Network v/c Ratios (Wallbridge-Loyalist Road)

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Based on the results, two key areas experience significant congestion in Quinte West. The first area is on the north and south sides of Highway 401 on Wallbridge-Loyalist Road, where the roadway operates close to a v/c of 1.0, indicating the road is at capacity. Given the access that this road provides to and from Highway 401 it is not surprising that this roadway experiences congestion during the p.m. peak.

The second area of congestion is at the DJ MacDonald and Veterans Skyway bridges, which are the only two crossings of the Trent River accessible by Trenton and area residents. Given the significant amount of east-west travel within the City, to and from either CFB Trenton or Belleville, these two roadways are of particular significance within the road network. These two roadways have been evaluated further in the following intersection analysis in order to identify any operational improvements which could be made.

In addition to these two key areas of congestion, both Division/Front Street and Sidney Street experience moderate levels of congestion. Since both of these roadways, along with Wooler Road, comprise of the key connections between Highway 401 and Trenton, some benefits may be realized by improving these connections either through widening or, in the case of Sidney Street, an extension to Dundas Street.

2.2.3 Dundas / Dixon Corridor Existing Intersection Analysis

The Dundas Street corridor from Wooler Road to R.C.A.F. Road and the Dixon Drive corridor from Front Street to RCAF Road were analyzed. The analysis was conducted using the Synchro 8 and SimTraffic 8 software package to determine the associated level of service (LOS) for those intersections. Synchro 8 is based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010 methodology for calculating intersection capacity and delay. SimTraffic 8 is a car- following micro-simulation model which is used to evaluate the behavior of individual vehicles on a network and has been used in this study to determine average travel times. The volumes used for the existing conditions analysis along these two corridors are shown in Figure 2.6.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Figure 2.6 - Existing Traffic Volumes 12

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

This study recognized the importance of these arterial roadways and has recommended intersection signal optimizations outlined in Section 4.2.1 to improve the efficiency of travel along these corridors. Table 2.1 displays the LOS designations.

Table 2.1 – Level of Service Designations Level of Service V/C Ratio (LOS) A =< 0.26 B >0.26 – 0.4 C >0.4 - 0.6 D* >0.6 - 0.8 E >0.8 - 1.0 F >1.0 *Note: LOS D is the threshold for acceptable road performance The existing LOS for Dundas Street and Dixon Drive are outlined in Table 2.2 below. The detailed intersection capacity analysis can be found in Appendix C .

Table 2.2 – Existing Dundas Street and Dixon Drive Intersection Levels of Service Weekday A.M. Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Peak Hour Control Intersections LOS Critical LOS Critical Type (Delay in Movements (Delay in Movements seconds) (v/c) seconds) (v/c)*

Wooler Road and Signalized B (18) -- B (19) -- Dundas St West 2 Dug Hill and Dundas Signalized B (19) -- C (21) -- St West Dufferin Ave and Signalized B (15) -- B (14) -- Dundas St West Queen St and Dundas St Signalized B (13) -- B (15) -- West Quinte St and Dundas St Signalized B (11) -- B (17) -- West Front St and Dundas St Signalized A (10) -- A (10) -- West Ontario St and Dundas Signalized B (15) -- B (16) -- St East Byron St and Dundas St Signalized B (17) -- C (29) WB-T (0.95) East Flindall St and Dundas Signalized B (13) -- B (13) -- St East Bay St and Dundas St Signalized B (13) -- B (17) --

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

East Cdn Tire Plaza and Signalized B (11) -- A (10) -- Dundas St East R.C.A.F Rd and Dundas Signalized E (66) SB-T (1.33) C (24) SB-T (0.85) St East Dixon Dr and Front St Signalized C (24) WB-T (0.87) C (35) WB-T (1.08) Dixon Dr and Marmora Signalized C (22) -- C (28) -- St Dixon Dr and Sidney St Signalized B (12) -- B (14) -- *Note: A critical movement results in a volume to capacity ratio of greater than 0.85.

The analysis indicates that while many of the intersections along the two roadway corridors are operating at acceptable LOS, specific intersections such as Byron Street / Dundas Street in the p.m. peak hour, R.C.A.F. Road / Dundas Street in both peak hours, and Dixon Drive / Front Street in both peak hours could be optimized to further improve the traffic flows at these intersections.

It should be noted that while the 2006 Model results indicate that these two roadways are operating at capacity, the Synchro analysis indicates that the intersection operates at an acceptable LOS. This is due to the fact that the 2006 Model utilizes a demand based assignment, that is, one which shows the potential number of vehicles which may utilize this corridor during the peak hour. This is different from the Synchro analysis, which only measures the delays associated with the supply of vehicles in the network. In essence, due to bottlenecks in the system likely caused by the narrowing of these roadways from four to two lanes at the bridges, as well as the poor signal coordination, the number of vehicles which would like to use the bridges does not fully materialize in the peak hour. Improving the corridor will likely not only improve on the delays shown in the above table, but will also attract more vehicles to use these two corridors.

As a result, it is recommended that the corridor be optimized and the cycle lengths be made consistent in order to provide co-ordination across the corridor. A summary of the results with these improvements in place are outlined in Section 4.2.1.

2.2.4 Roadway Classification

The roadway classification system for this TMP was derived from the City’s existing road classification system in combination with the system used by the MTO. The classifications used are outlined in Table 2.3 below.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

• Table 2.3 – City of Quinte West Road Classification System Class of AADT* Transit Surface Type Design # of Local Example Road Service Speed Lanes (km/h) Highway -- No Paved 80 2 Highway 62 Arterial > 5000 Yes / No Paved 50 – 80 2-4 Highway 2 Major 1000 – 5000 No Paved 50 – 80 2-4 Trenton- Collector Frankford Road Minor 600 – 1000 No Paved / 40 – 60 2 2 Dug Hill Road Collector Unpaved Local / < 600 Yes Paved 40 – 60 2 Front Street Street *Average Annual Daily Traffic

The results of the 2006 Model indicate that the roadway classification is generally appropriate for the City, given that the roadways with a higher classification are more utilized versus those with lower classifications.

2.2.5 Transit

The Quinte Access Transit Service available within the City serves the community with regularly scheduled A.M. and P.M. service both during the weekday and on Saturday. There is no scheduled service provided on Sundays or public holidays. The service contains multiple stops in Trenton’s downtown area with a headway of 1.5 hours operating from 6:00 A.M. to 7:30 P.M. A map illustrating the service area can be found in Figure 2.7.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Figure 2.7 – Existing Transit Conditions

In addition, a regional commuter service connecting Trenton to Belleville with stops at CFB Trenton and Loyalist college operates three times daily on weekdays, and is provided by Laidlaw Transit Limited. Finally, Coach Canada offers long distance shuttle service to Pearson International Airport in Toronto, as well as buses to Kingston and Montreal.

2.3 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

Active Transportation is defined by the Public Health Agency of Canada as:

“Any form of human-powered transportation – walking, cycling, using wheelchair, in-line skating or skateboarding”

Active modes of transportation are considered alternative forms of transportation and are typically used for commuting, utilitarian trips, fitness and recreation. In recent years there has been increased demand both province and nation-wide for enhanced active transportation infrastructure and programs. As a result, many municipalities are preparing active transportation and trail master plans for integration into their transportation master plans.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Research recently gathered by the Share the Road Cycling Coalition and Share the Road Provincial Survey Results (Summary, September 2010) indicates that:

ó 36% of Ontario residents are riding a bicycle monthly; ó 69% want to engage in cycling more often; ó 70% are looking for improvements to existing infrastructure; ó 89% are looking for increased investment in active transportation including related programs and infrastructure at the provincial or local level; and ó 40% want to see increased opportunities for children and youth to be active within their communities. By increasing investment in and development of active transportation infrastructure and programming for both urban and rural communities, there can be benefits realized at all levels, whether it be individual, community or municipal-wide. There is a strong economic case for the development of facilities and infrastructure which help to promote and facilitate active living and healthy lifestyles. Research shows that there can be significant benefits realized in the following areas, and Table 2.4 provides a summary of some of the key benefits for each of the areas:

ó Economic / Tourism; ó Community Health & Safety; ó Environmental; ó Transportation; ó Community Building; and ó Asset Management.

Table 2.4 – Active Transportation Benefits Economic / Tourism • By increasing people’s levels of activity and decreasing the amount of time spent in cars, there may be a decrease in health care costs. For example, someone who increases their activity levels may decrease their likelihood of heart disease. • Increased investment in cycling infrastructure can increase local tourism and investment. Cyclists are more willing to spend time and money in communities which support cycling. In some cases this can also be a draw for international tourism. • As routes and infrastructure are developed there is also an increase in demand for supportive amenities. Communities may wish to invest in a local bike shop or a tourism booth to promote cycling routes. In these cases, job opportunities and increased local investment may occur. Community Health & Safety • By investing in active transportation or trail development, a community can provide its residents with more opportunities for physical activity.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Table 2.4 – Active Transportation Benefits • With more opportunities to be physically active, people are more likely to lead healthy and active lifestyles. • Investment in active transportation and trail infrastructure is proven to increase a community’s quality of life and liveability. When liveability increases and people start to engage in more active forms of transportation there may be positive benefits on the community’s safety. With more eyes on the street or the trail, people of all ages and abilities may be more likely to feel safe and comfortable using the facilities. Environmental • Active forms of transportation are both energy efficient and non-polluting. • When used, active modes of transportation conserve natural resources and provide large energy savings for users as well as the community. • By engaging in active forms of transportation and producing even a 1% shift in modal distribution, there can be a significant reduction in fuel consumption levels. Transportation • By increasing investment in trail and active transportation facilities, residents and visitors are provided with more mode choices. • With an increase in the number of mode choices, residents and visitors may feel less dependent on their motor vehicles. • In some cases, an increase in investment in active transportation and trails may decrease the number of people on major roadways which can, in turn, increase the road’s lifespan. Community Building • By engaging members of the community in the design and development of AT related infrastructure, communities may see positive impacts on their sense of civic pride. • When residents become passionate and committed to an initiative there can be an increase in community spirit. • When the design standard increases for community facilities, in some cases it can enhance stewardship from local groups or engaged individuals. Asset Management • Increased investment and use of AT infrastructure can provide a means of appreciating and assisting in the protection of natural and cultural heritage resources. • Similar to the transportation benefits, by decreasing the number of people on the road, communities may be able to increase the lifespan of their community assets.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Research in support of the development of active transportation facilities can be found through numerous municipal and provincial sources, and should be used by the City and the Health Unit to prepare promotional and educational materials to be distributed community wide.

2.4 SUPPORTIVE POLICIES & PLANS

An understanding of existing policies and plans at all levels of government is required to set the context of the City’s first TMP. As one of the initial steps in developing the City of Quinte West Transportation Master Plan, the study team undertook a review of relevant policies and plans at the Federal, Provincial, County and City levels.

The documents reviewed were selected based on the role that they play in framing the development of the transportation policies and recommendations. Table 2.5 is a summary of each of the policies and plans which were summarized as part of the study process.

Table 2.5 – Summary of Relevant Policies & Plans Federal Policies ó Auditor General Act (1995) ó Federal Sustainable Development Act (2008) ó National Vision for Urban Transit to 2020 Provincial Policies ó Provincial Policy Statement (2005) ó Bill 51 Planning Reform ó Municipal Act (2001) ó Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (2005) ó Ministry of Health Promotion (now part of Health and Long-term Care) ó Ontario Trails Strategy ó Ontario Ministry of Transportation Transit Supportive Guidelines (2012) ó Ministry of Transportation Cycling Strategy (2013) ó Planning By Design – Healthy Communities County Policies ó Hastings County Official Plan City Policies ó City of Quinte West Official Plan ó City of Quinte West Strategic Plan ó City of Quinte West – Road Needs Study Update

A full summary of the policies which were reviewed as well as their relevance to the TMP can be found in Appendix D. 19

3.0 A VISION FOR TRANSPORTATION IN QUINTE WEST

As noted previously, a TMP must address Phases 1 and 2 of the Municipal Class EA Process. Phase 1 requires that the problem / deficiency or opportunity be identified. The problem statement reflects the theme of this TMP, which is to establish a strategic, connected and multimodal transportation system that meets the needs of residents, visitors and businesses. The problem statement is presented in this chapter, followed by the vision, principles and objectives designed to address the problem statement.

3.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT

The issues and opportunities facing the City of Quinte West over the next 20 years from a transportation perspective include:

Growth and Land Use Changes

Population and employment numbers are expected to continue to grow through 2031. The City has identified land to accommodate this growth. The City needs to plan for this growth and new development, and integrate land use planning with transportation planning through its first TMP.

Foster Economic Development through Mobility

As traffic increases in the City, it could affect the City’s attractiveness for business. The City needs to plan for a safe and efficient transportation system to ensure the smooth movement of goods and to create an environment conducive to business development and the tourism industry.

Protect and Enhance the Quality of Life

Residents of the City enjoy a high quality of life. The transportation system should protect and enhance the quality of life through increased connectivity to key destinations, and by providing connections through a multi-modal transportation network.

CITY OF QUINTE WEST TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Final Draft 20 January 2014 “BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Evolving Downtown

Traffic flow in the Downtown of Trenton can be optimized through strategic transportation improvements that will improve circulation and alleviate congestion.

3.2 TRANSPORTATION VISION

The City of Quinte West will establish a strategic, connected and multi-modal transportation system which builds upon the City’s current infrastructure while responding to the unique needs of residents, visitors and businesses. The transportation system will be informed by the public’s interest and input, and will respond to the City’s infrastructure requirements for vehicular as well as other modes of transportation.

3.3 TRANSPORTATION PRINCIPLES

ó Integrate Transportation and Land Uses : responds to the unique urban and rural landscape while supporting land use planning best practices. ó Support Economic Development : facilitates the efficient movement of people and goods to support vital local businesses and the tourism industry. ó Deliver Cost Effective Services: builds upon existing transportation infrastructure before adding new infrastructure, and considers capital and operating costs when confirming future investments. ó Respond to Diverse Needs : provides transportation alternatives for residents, visitors and businesses, and aims to provide an acceptable and barrier free standard of service for all travel modes while supporting the quality of life of current and future residents. ó Establish a Well-Maintained Network : facilitates ongoing municipal maintenance and to accommodates future growth in a fiscally responsible and sustainable manner. ó Provide Adequate Funding Alternatives : explores funding and partnership opportunities at all levels of government to facilitate, subsidize and finance future transportation alternatives. ó Protect the Public Interest : encourages public and stakeholder engagement during the development and implementation of the master plan to facilitate input and informed decision making.

3.4 TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIVES

To provide the City of Quinte West with a strategic, long-term Transportation Master Plan that outlines: ó An overview and remedy for existing and anticipated transportation deficiencies; ó An approach to a systematic strategy for growth and change over the next 20 years; ó Necessary Official Plan amendments; 21

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

ó An improvement plan for key roads and intersections; ó A practical implementation plan; ó A financial strategy for achieving the implementation plan including budgets and estimated costing; and ó An inclusive public consultation program that follows the Municipal Class EA process for master plans.

4.0 DEVELOPING THE PREFERRED TRANSPORTATION NETWORK

The development of the preferred transportation network was accomplished concurrently through three forms of analyses which are detailed below:

1. A travel demand forecast model for the City of Quinte West was prepared using the Emme 4 software package in order to test and analyze the need for future transportation infrastructure improvements;

2. A detailed corridor analysis was completed for Dundas Street between Wooler Road and R.C.A.F. Road, and for Dixon Drive between Division/Front Street and Marmora Street in order to identify traffic signal operational improvements along these two key corridors; and

3. An active transportation candidate route choice evaluation tool was developed in order to determine the locations where active transportation facilities could be implemented, subject to future studies.

4.1 2031 TRAVEL FORECAST MODEL

4.1.1 2031 Base Model

The validated 2006 Model, from Section 2.2.1, provides an excellent basis to forecast the horizon year travel demands and evaluate the future road network improvement requirements.

4.1.2 2031 Trip Generation and Distribution

Trip generation for the 2031 travel demand model was determined, similar to the approach used for the 2006 Model, using population and employment land use data. Information on the 2031 estimates of population was assembled from the Quinte West Official Plan as well as available development application data from City staff. The total population growth by 2031 was determined to be approximately 9,000 residents, resulting in a 2031 population of

CITY OF QUINTE WEST TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Final Draft 23 January 2014 “BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

approximately 52,000 residents. The 2031 horizon estimates for employment growth assumed that employment would grow at the same rates as the population, or approximately 21% in urban areas over 18 years, or 4% in rural areas over the same timeframe. The resulting employment increase was, therefore, calculated at approximately 1,800 jobs, and thus the total number of jobs in Quinte West will be over 17,000.

These 2031 horizon population and employment projections were applied to the trip generation rates whose derivation was described in Section 2.2.4. The linkage distribution matrices were also rebalanced for the future population and employment using the same approach as for the 2006 Model.

4.1.3 2031 “Do Nothing” Road Network

A scenario with the 2031 “Do Nothing” road network was completed in order to provide a baseline scenario with no improvements in place. At this point, a review of the volume-to- capacity (v/c) ratios was completed in concert with the information provided from the 2006 Model. The Model was used in order to identify capacity improvement projects that would address projected congestion on the future road network.

The v/c ratio plots for the 2031 base road network are shown for reference in Figures 4.1 through 4.3 .

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Figure 4.1 – 2031 “Do Nothing” Network v/c Ratios

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Dundas Street

Figure 4.2 – 2031 “Do Nothing” Network v/c Ratios (Dundas Street and Dixon Drive Bridges)

Figure 4.3 – 2031 “Do Nothing” Network v/c Ratios (Wallbridge-Loyalist Road)

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

4.1.4 2031 Improved Road Network

The 2031 Improved Road network included three improvement options to alleviate the future congestion in the City. The first improvement was to widen the DJ MacDonald Bridge and the section of Dixon Drive from the bridge to Sidney Street, to provide a continuous four-lane roadway over the Trent River. The second improvement was to widen the Veterans Skyway Bridge and the segment of Dundas Street East from the bridge to Marmora Street, providing similar benefits to the DJ MacDonald widening. Finally, the third improvement was to widen Wallbridge-Loyalist Road from Hamilton Road to Wallbridge Road in order to provide the necessary capacity to access Highway 401 on the east end of the City. These improvements and their locations are shown in Figure 4.4.

Figure 4.4 – Proposed Improvement Locations

These three improvements were implemented in the 2031 Model to develop a “Do Everything” Model. The system-wide metrics for the “Do Everything” Model are shown below

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

in Table 4.1. The v/c ratios for the “Do Everything” Model are provided in Figures 4.5 through 4.7 .

Table 4.1 – System-wide metrics for the “Do Everything” Model Measure of Effectiveness Scenario Do Nothing Do Everything Vehicle Kilometres Travelled (VKT) daily* 2,068,552 2,076,051 Vehicle Hours Travelled (VHT) daily* 30,184 29,490 Congested Daily VKT (lane-kms on links with v/c > 0.8)* 196,550 147,706 Congested Daily VHT (lane-kms on links with v/c > 0.8)* 4,382 2,996 Congested kilometres 14.78 8.3 Total kilometres 800.93 800.93 % of Congested Links with v/c > 0.8 1.8% 1.0% *Daily VKT and VHT were calculated by multiplying the peak hour values by 10

The results of the system metrics above indicate that the total number of vehicle kilometres travelled daily is increased with the “Do Everything” scenario while the total number of vehicle hours travelled is decreased, indicating an improvement in efficiency in the road network. Furthermore, the congested VKT and VHT are decreased under the “Do Everything” scenario which indicates the improvements on the congested corridors in the network. Overall, the number of congested kilometres is nearly halved under the “Do Everything” scenario. Identifying whether all of the improvements noted in this scenario are necessary will be evaluated in Section 4.4 .

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Figure 4.5 – 2031 “Do Everything” Network v/c Ratios

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Dundas Street

Figure 4.6 – 2031 “Do Everything” Network v/c Ratios (Dundas Street and Dixon Drive Bridges)

Figure 4.7 – 2031 “Do Everything” Network v/c Ratios (Wallbridge-Loyalist Road)

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

4.2 FUTURE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ON ARTERIAL ROADWAYS

Dundas Street from Wooler Road to R.C.A.F. Road and Dixon Drive from Division Street/Front Street to Marmora Street have been identified by the City staff as locations where signal timing improvements would be desirable, and could potentially provide significant benefits to the Trenton area. This is further supported upon review of the signal timing plans along these two corridors, which indicates that a common cycle length has not been adopted. The 2006 Model indicates that the demands along this corridor are the highest in Quinte West, and the lack of signal co-ordination has negatively impacted traffic operations along the two corridors and on the bridges where queues frequently spilled back to the upstream intersections. As a result, an optimization exercise was completed to determine the potential benefits. The results of this process are detailed as follows.

4.2.1 Optimization of the Dundas Street and Dixon Drive Corridors

The optimization of the traffic signal timing along these two corridors was conducted in two steps. First, the cycle length was harmonized across the corridor in order to enable progression among signalized intersections. Second, the splits were optimized to match the new cycle lengths and to better serve the existing traffic volumes. The results of the newly optimized corridor are shown in Table 4.2 and Figure 4.4 .

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Table 4.2 – Optimization Results

Weekday A.M. Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Peak Hour Control Intersections LOS Critical LOS Critical Type (Delay in Movements (Delay in Movements seconds) (v/c) seconds) (v/c) Wooler Road and Signalized B (14) -- B (12) -- Dundas St West 2 Dug Hill and Signalized B (15) -- B (15) -- Dundas St West Dufferin Ave and Signalized B (11) -- B (11) -- Dundas St West Queen St and Signalized A (6) -- A (8) -- Dundas St West Quinte St and Signalized A (7) -- B (14) -- Dundas St West Front St and Signalized B (14) -- A (8) -- Dundas St West Ontario St and Signalized B (15) -- B (15) -- Dundas St West Byron St and Signalized B (14) -- A (10) -- Dundas St West Flindall St and Signalized B (12) -- A (3) -- Dundas St West Bay St and Signalized A (4) -- B (10) -- Dundas St West Cdn Tire Plaza and Signalized A (3) -- A (8) -- Dundas St West R.C.A.F Rd and Signalized C (25) -- B (17) -- Dundas St West Dixon Dr and Signalized B (13) -- B (11) -- Front St Dixon Dr and Signalized B (18) -- C (23) -- Marmora St Dixon Dr and Signalized B (11) -- B (11) -- Sidney St

The intersections with poor LOS and capacity constraints under existing condition have been improved significantly under the optimized scenario. They include: R.C.A.F./Dundas, Byron/Dundas and Dixon/Front.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

In addition, the travel times along the corridor for the existing and optimized scenarios were compared using SimTraffic 8. The travel time summaries are provided below in Table 4.3, and the detailed SimTraffic outputs are provided in Appendix E.

Table 4.3 – Dundas Street Existing and Optimized Travel Times

Existing Travel times (s) Optimized Travel times (s) % Change Sections Eastbound Westbound Eastbound Westbound Eastbound Westbound Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Dundas West 369.2 300.3 352.8 291.1 -4% -3% Dundas East 242.3 234.4 221.2 207.3 -9% -12% Dundas Bridge 34.6 28.8 39.6 31.1 +14% +8% Overall 646.1 563.5 613.6 529.5 -5% -6% Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Dundas West 380.3 349.4 360.9 334.0 -5% -4% Dundas East 230.7 264.9 217.4 192.8 -6% -27% Dundas Bridge 35.5 31.3 33.6 30.2 -5% -4% Overall 646.5 645.6 611.9 557.0 -5% -14% The total travel time improvements for Dundas Street are expected to decrease the average travel time by 5 to 14% overall. The time saving is approximately half a minute for both directions during the weekday A.M. peak hour, and for the eastbound direction during the weekday P.M. peak hour. The time saving for westbound weekday P.M. peak hour is almost 1.5 minutes. It should be noted that a slightly longer travel time is expected in both directions in the A.M. peak hour across the Dundas Bridge. However, in absolute terms this is only a 3 to 5 second increase in travel time which is likely due to variations in the co-ordination regime.

Table 4.4 – Dixon Drive Existing and Optimized Travel Times

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

The improvements for Dixon Drive are expected to decrease the average travel time by 17% to 68%. Due to the shorter distance travelled in this corridor, this corresponds to decreases in the A.M. peak hour of 17 seconds eastbound and 44 seconds westbound, and decreases in the P.M. peak hour of 24 seconds eastbound and over two minutes westbound.

Figure 4.8 – A.M. Travel Time Improvements on the Dundas and Dixon Corridors

Figure 4.9 – P.M. Travel Time Improvements on the Dundas and Dixon Corridors

4.3 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

4.3.1 Establishing Active Transportation in Quinte West

Input gathered through the online questionnaire, study team meetings as well as public information centres identified active transportation as a clear priority for the City of Quinte West. In response to the public’s support for the development of active transportation infrastructure and facilities, the study team has undertaken some initial work which can form the basis of a future City-wide Active Transportation Network. Though not a component of the Master Plan’s original scope, the study team undertook the following steps to prepare a base of active transportation information for the City of Quinte West:

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

1 2 3 4

Collect & Develop Document Select Assemble Route Existing AT Candidate Background Selection Conditions Routes Information Criteria

The City is encouraged to use this information to develop a formal trails and active transportation network. Additional details regarding each of the steps noted above can be found in Sections 4.3.2 to 4.3.3.

4.3.2 Documenting Existing Conditions

The first step in developing an active transportation network is the consolidation and review of the relevant policies and plans as well as the development of a database of existing on and off-road active transportation conditions. As noted in Section 2.3 , the study team undertook a detailed review of relevant policies and plans from all levels of government. From this, it was confirmed that there is significant support for the development of alternative modes of transportation, including active transportation, at all levels of government.

Following the review of relevant policies, the study team worked with City staff to develop a consolidated database of existing active transportation conditions. Figures 4.10 and 4.11 illustrate the existing on and off-road facilities found throughout Quinte West. The facilities were confirmed using the City’s high-resolution mapping as well as a desktop exercise using Google Earth and Google Maps.

With regard to the City’s existing AT routes and facilities, it is clear that in previous years the focus has primarily been on the development of off-road trails. The existing system highlights areas of cultural and natural significance throughout the City including local conservation areas, along rivers as well as linear park spaces found along the waterfront. The off-road trails are typically a combination of asphalt and granular surface types to accommodate both pedestrians and cyclists. In addition to the trail facilities, the City has also implemented some paved shoulders. However, they are primarily found on County roads. The trails that have been developed as well as the total length (in kilometres) are presented in Table 4.5. In addition, a graphic illustrating the facility has been included in the table.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Table 4.5: Existing Active Transportation / Trail Facilities in Quinte West Total Trail Length Illustration (km)

Lower Trent Trail 16

Lower Trent Trail – Lock Rd. & Grates Ave.

Lake Ontario Waterfront Trail 15

Lake Ontario Waterfront Trail

Conservation Area Trails 5

Trenton Greenbelt Conservation Area

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Table 4.5: Existing Active Transportation / Trail Facilities in Quinte West Total Trail Length Illustration (km)

Centennial Park Trail 3

Centennial Park Trail

Hanna Park Trail 2

Hanna Park

Trent Greenbelt Conservation Area / Jack Lange 3 Memorial Walkway

Jack Lange Memorial Walkway

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Table 4.5: Existing Active Transportation / Trail Facilities in Quinte West Total Trail Length Illustration (km)

8-Wing CFB Trenton 5

Existing Multi-use Trail

Based on an initial review, it is estimated that there are approximately 70 km of trails throughout the City of Quinte West. One of the primary attractions for cyclists and pedestrians is the Waterfront Trail. This Province-wide trail system is a significant tourism draw for a wide range of users of different ages and abilities. The trail links the City in the south to surrounding communities, and provides cyclists and pedestrians with long-distance touring opportunities. The Waterfront Trail is considered a key recreational connection and an asset to the City. Additional links should be considered by the City to the Waterfront Trail to help facilitate City-wide connectivity as well as increased recreation and tourism opportunities.

With a strong recreational focus, there is significant opportunity for City staff and its partners to explore the development of linkages with a more utilitarian focus, and to bridge the gaps and barriers in the existing system. The second step of the AT network development process (selecting the candidate routes) focused on achieving these objectives, where possible.

The City is encouraged to use the mapping of existing conditions to update their database of route information. The information included in the database could also be used to inform a more comprehensive Trails and Active Transportation Master Plan in the future, and in the development of future tourism and outreach mapping with a focus on active transportation and trail promotion and marketing.

4.3.3 Selecting Candidate Routes

A key deliverable of the City’s active transportation strategic review was the development of a candidate route network. The candidate network is made up of a set of proposed linkages which the study team has identified. The routes which are proposed for the City’s consideration are illustrated on Figures 4.12 and 4.13 . The routes include:

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

ó Key north-south and east-west connections which are intended to facilitate connectivity within and outside of the City; ó Extensions to existing on and off-road active transportation and trail facilities; ó Urban and rural connections to help facilitate day-to-day travel within the City’s communities; ó Connections through and over existing barriers, such as the river and Highway 401; ó Off-road opportunities through parks and open spaces as well as abandoned rail corridors; and ó On-road connections proposed for routes which currently have the existing ROW width to accommodate on-road facilities such as bike lanes and paved shoulders. It is important to note that these links are not to be considered proposed routes. More detailed field investigation and analysis would need to be completed to confirm the preferred alignment and to determine the most appropriate facility type for each route segment. Once the TMP has been adopted, the City is encouraged to assess these linkages in further detail internally or with the support of an external consultant.

The candidate routes build on existing active transportation or trail linkages found throughout the City, and have been identified based on the use of a set of Route Selection Criteria and Principles. The Route Selection Criteria are a set of qualitative principles which are intended to guide the selection, and in some cases the prioritization of routes. The principles were developed to reflect current City objectives as well as best practices from projects completed of a similar scope and scale. The criteria are presented in Table 4.6.

Table 4.6: Active Transportation Route Selection Criteria and Principles Criteria or Description Principle Active Transportation routes should be a visible component of the transportation system. Active Transportation linkages should be Visible integrated with the planning, design and construction of the City’s transportation system.

The active transportation network should provide residents and visitors Connected / with connections to the urban and rural areas of the City, commercial Linked and employment areas, open spaces, significant natural, historic and recreational features, community facilities and tourist destinations.

Routes should be easily accessible from all neighbourhoods Easy to Access throughout the City. Routes should also be designed as loop connections where possible, with east-west and north-south linkages.

The network should appeal to a range of user abilities and interests. Diverse This will be achieved by providing a diverse and balanced set of on-

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Table 4.6: Active Transportation Route Selection Criteria and Principles Criteria or Description Principle road and off-road active transportation linkages.

The network should be integrated with other modes of transportation, particularly existing public transit and commuter rail lines. Routes will Integrated provide access to existing and future transit facilities including local buses and VIA Rail.

Routes should take advantage of attractive and scenic areas, views Attractive & and vistas. Routes should provide users with the opportunity to Interesting experience the cultural and natural heritage found throughout the City.

Reducing risk to users and providing comfortable facilities will be a key Comfort & consideration when selecting routes to form the network. The route Safety responds to active transportation suggestions and recommendations provided by user groups and members of the public.

Where feasible, off-road routes should be designed to meet applicable legislation and standards. It is recognized, however, that not all off- Accessible road routes will be accessible in all locations. Off-road routes should be appropriately signed to communicate the level of accessibility.

Facility design will comply with approved City standards, policies and approvals. Implementing the Plan in locations that have unique Context- features or site-specific constraints may require further investigation. Sensitive Solutions for these projects are to be developed on a site-by-site basis.

Routes will be selected with their sustainability in mind. Sustainable Considerations include route location, alignment, materials and design, operation and maintenance.

The cost to implement and maintain the active transportation network plus supporting facilities and amenities should be phased over time. It should be designed to be affordable and appropriate in scale for the Cost-Effective City, but should not compromise user safety. The timing of implementation will be assessed based on the capital and operating plans of the City and its partners.

Once the TMP has been adopted and the City is prepared to move forward with the development of a trails and active transportation network, master plan or related initiative, the

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

City should review and confirm the proposed route selection criteria. The criteria can be used to help refine the candidate route network and to prioritize routes and linkages City-wide. Next steps which could be used to identify the preferred routes and facility types can be found in Sections 4.3.4 and 4.3.5.

4.3.4 Identifying Potential Facility Types

The study team did not identify potential on and off-road facility types as part of the active transportation component of the Quinte West Transportation Master Plan. The Candidate Route Network mapping provides suggested on and off-road linkages but does not provide details on the recommended or preferred facilities.

In late 2013, the Ontario Traffic Council finalized a set of guidelines and standards in the Ontario Traffic Manual (OTM) Book 18: Cycling Facilities. The guidelines were developed by MMM Group collaboratively with the Ontario Traffic Council and representatives from a number of Ontario municipalities. The guidelines are intended to be used my municipal staff and those responsible for the planning, design and implementation of active transportation facilities province-wide. For the purposes of this study, the following facility types – consistent with OTM Book 18 – have been identified for consideration by the City.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Signed Bicycle Signed Route on Signed Bike Route route with Paved Local Road with Sharrow

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Multi-use Trail Multi-use Trail Bicycle Lanes within the Road outside the Road Right -of -way Right -of -way

As the City moves forward with the design and development of active transportation routes and facilities, staff and those responsible for the plan’s implementation are encouraged to use OTM Book 18 as the City’s primary reference and guide. The guidelines include a proposed approach and process to help select the most appropriate facility as well as details regarding the design of AT supportive facilities and amenities such as bike parking, benches, rest areas and washrooms.

The City is also encouraged to use other relevant design guidelines and standards including:

ó Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) Bikeway Control Guidelines (2012) ó Ontario Traffic Manual (OTM) Book 15: Pedestrian Facilities ó National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Bikeway Design Guidelines (2011)

4.3.5 Moving Forward: Developing a City-wide AT Network

The information included in the TMP has been developed to provide the City of Quinte West with a base understanding and information necessary to move forward with the development of a City-wide active transportation network or master plan. It is clear from the input received

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

that there is significant support for increased investment in active transportation. There is public, stakeholder as well as staff interest developing the City as a destination for active recreation while providing their residents with an equitable transportation network.

Building on the work already completed, the City is encouraged to proceed with the following steps as part of a comprehensive active transportation initiative: 1 2 3 4

Confirm Prepare Confirm Candidate Undertake Draft Route Routes & Routing Selection Field Route Investigations (Select Criteria Alignment Alignments)

5 6 7

Determine Determine Determine Facility Network Priorities Types Costing

The development of a Trails and Active Transportation Master Plan for the City will require coordination among City staff and local community partners plus a range of stakeholders. Within Quinte West, some of these stakeholders could include:

ó Hastings & Prince Edward Counties Health Unit ó Hastings County ó Surrounding Municipalities ó Quinte Conservation Authority ó Quinte West Tourism ó Ontario Trails Council ó Waterfront Regeneration Trust ó Share the Road Coalition ó Friends of the Lower Trent Trail In partnership with the organizations and groups listed above, it is suggested that the City develop a Trails and Active Transportation Master Plan terms of reference and then complete a Trails and AT Master Plan to guide future active transportation development City-wide. It will be those who have the day-to-day knowledge of the City-wide planning process, engineering, design and maintenance which will help to develop an implementable long- range AT and Trails Master Plan.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

City staff should also consider assembling a group of local stakeholders, interest groups and affected agencies to sustain the momentum of the TMP. The City should consider developing a steering committee or technical advisory committee that would help to develop a trails and AT master plan. The steering committee or technical advisory committee could also be responsible for identifying potential AT and trail opportunities as well as priority projects.

Even though infrastructure is the cornerstone of increasing levels of active transportation, it is also important to educate residents and visitors through promotion and outreach initiatives. As the City moves forward, it is suggested that a local champion, such as the Hastings & Prince Edward Counties Health Unit, be identified to be a steward for active transportation and trail promotion and outreach. As part of an Trails and Active Transportation master plan or as a separate initiative, the City, the Health Unit or the local Regional Tourism Organization should explore the development of an active transportation and trail related promotion and outreach strategy geared towards people of all ages and abilities.

There are numerous other considerations for active transportation which would need to be addressed in a master plan to ensure that a network and associated recommendations are realistic and feasible for the City. These include:

ó Route Maintenance; ó Land Acquisition & Securement Strategies; ó Implementation Tools and Strategies; and ó Partnership & Funding Strategies.

If the City is able to secure the funding and partnership commitment to proceed with these steps, they are strongly encouraged to prepare an Active Transportation and Trails Master Plan. The goal would be to prepare a long-term vision and strategic blueprint for active transportation, recreation and trail use City-wide. Potential funding opportunities which are currently available which could be explored by the City and its partners include:

ó Federal/Provincial Gas Tax; ó Transport Canada’s MOST (Moving On Sustainable Transportation) and Eco Mobility (TDM) grant programs; ó Federation of Canadian Municipalities Green Municipal Fund; ó Ontario Ministry of Health grant programs and partnership streams such as the Healthy Communities Fund and promotional initiatives related to health, active living and active transportation; ó Ontario Ministry of Environment Community Go Green Fund (CGGF); ó Ontario Ministry of Transportation Demand Management Municipal Grant program; ó Various Federal and Provincial Infrastructure stimulus programs that are offered from time to time;

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

ó The Ontario Trillium Foundation that was recently expanded in response to the money collected throughout the Province by casinos; ó Human Resources Development Canada program that enables personnel positions to be made available to various groups and organizations; and ó Potential funding that might emerge from the Province in rolling out the Ontario Trails Strategy or the #CycleON province-wide cycling strategy.

There are significant opportunities available for the residents and visitors of Quinte West to utilize active transportation and trail development as a means of highlighting the City’s natural and cultural beauty. The interest that has been generated through the TMP study should be leveraged, and those currently involved in the promotion and development of active transportation programs or facilities should be engaged in any future endeavors.

4.4 THE PREFERRED TRANSPORTATION NETWORK

The preferred transportation network was developed by identifying future transportation challenges, developing possible scenarios to address these challenges and then evaluating the scenarios by using a multiple account evaluation framework in order to determine the most appropriate transportation scenario to meet the City of Quinte West’s needs. It should be noted that the preferred network identifies the minimum level of investment required for the future road network, but does not necessarily preclude providing additional infrastructure to augment the road network. Some additional studies which are recommended to be undertaken to investigate the provision of this additional infrastructure are discussed in Section 5.0 of this document.

In order to quantify the results of the preferred transportation network, the first step was to test in the transportation model with the “Do Nothing” scenario, which as its name implies, means that no future transportation improvements would be made in the city.

The analysis of the Do Nothing scenario, in addition to the analysis of existing conditions conducted at the beginning of the TMP development process, helped to confirm where the transportation challenges of the future would lie. These analyses were summarized in the preceding sections 4.1 and 4.2. For reference, the v/c ratios for the Do Nothing scenario were provided in Figure 4.3. These analyses indicated that there were significant opportunities for improvements in signal coordination along the Dundas Street and Dixon Drive corridors. Wallbridge-Loyalist Road is expected to approach capacity, and additional lane capacity is needed to cross the Trent River.

To address these challenges, several possible transportation improvements were selected to be assessed. These include:

ó Optimization of traffic signals along the corridors of Dundas Street from Wooler Road to R.C.A.F. Road, and Dixon Drive from Division/Front Street to Marmora Street;

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

ó Widening of Wallbridge-Loyalist Road to four lanes from Hamilton Road to Wallbridge Road; ó Widening to four lanes of the DJ MacDonald Bridge and Dixon Drive from the east side of the bridge to Sidney Street; and ó Widening to four lanes of the Veterans Skyway Bridge and Dundas Street from the east side of the bridge to Marmora Street.

These four projects were included in a “Do Everything” scenario, the results TMP Alternatives

of which were detailed in Section 4.1.4. Since the “Do Everything” Do Alternative 1 scenario was completed only from a Nothing transportation perspective, it is important to evaluate the projects within this scenario against additional Do Alternative 2 “accounts” or categories such as the Everything Environment, Social Impacts and Cost Effectiveness. As a result, this scenario was further refined by Alternative 3

grouping the above noted projects into Selective three separate alternatives, and then Improvement tested in the transportation demand Alternative 4 model in order to evaluate performance. Combined with the Do Nothing Alternative, the four alternatives are described as follows:

Alternative 1: Do Nothing

No further transportation projects are constructed except for those already planned within the City of Quinte West’s existing capital works plan.

Alternative 2: Do Everything

For this alternative, all of the recommended transportation improvements identified will be undertaken to enhance the Quinte West road network. This alternative includes the optimization of signals along the Dundas Street and Dixon Drive corridors, the widening of Wallbridge-Loyalist Road to four lanes and the widening of both the Dixon Drive and Veterans Skyway Bridges crossing the Trent River.

Alternative 3: Selective Improvement – Veterans Skyway Bridge (Dundas Street)

For this alternative, the widening of Wallbridge-Loyalist Road and the optimization of the City’s traffic signals is assumed to be undertaken with the widening of the Veterans Skyway

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Bridge over the Trent River, and the widening of Dundas Street east of the bridge to Marmora Street, to accommodate higher traffic volumes through the downtown area.

Alternative 4: Selective Improvement – DJ MacDonald Bridge (Dixon Drive)

For this alternative, the widening of Wallbridge-Loyalist Road and the optimization of the City’s traffic signals will be undertaken. Additionally, the DJ MacDonald Bridge over the Trent River and Dixon Drive from east of the bridge to Sidney Street is assumed to be widened to four lanes to accommodate higher east - west traffic volumes bypassing the downtown area.

An additional alternative of a third bridge crossing of the Trent River was examined at a high level, but ultimately this option was not considered at this time due to the lack of available road connections on the east and west banks of the Trent River. It is recommended that a more comprehensive study be undertaken to examine the option of a third bridge crossing the Trent River.

4.4.1 Evaluation Framework

An evaluation framework was developed to guide the decision making process for assessing each of the four transportation improvement alternatives that reflect the Transportation Principles outlined in Section 3.3 . This framework follows a Multiple Account Evaluation (MAE) approach where each criterion represents an account. The alternatives were reviewed based on the following factors:

• Network Connectivity : increasing the number of travel routing options available such that the average distance travelled between given points in the network is reduced, as measured by the Vehicle Kilometres Travelled (VKT); • Congestion : the relative ease of travel through the network, as measured by the percentage of lane kilometres with a volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio over 0.85; • Environmental and Social Impact : whether the footprint of the road network will spread to land that is currently untouched; and • Cost Effectiveness : although detailed costing exercise is outside of the scope of this TMP study, a “yes/no” comparison was undertaken against alternative options to weight them accordingly. It should be noted that due to the lack of interaction that the signal timing optimization improvements have on the Network Connectivity and Environmental Impact accounts, and the fact that the optimization has a relatively low cost and will result in significant reductions in congestion, this improvement was not subjected to the MAE approach. Thus, it was carried directly to the recommendation stage.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

For the four alternatives noted above, each of them was analyzed within the Transportation Demand Model created for this TMP to determine the alternative’s localized performance within the road network as well as the overall performance impact on the entire road network.

The transportation demand model provides analysis of network connectivity and congestion. The results for each alternative are shown in Table 4.6.

As expected, the model shows that the “Do Everything” scenario would reduce congestion the most and result in the most efficient movement in terms of number of kilometres travelled versus number of hours travelling. The reductions in congestion and improvements in network connectivity for the two bridge widening alternatives fall between the extremes, with the results being very similar for both alternatives. The detailed results are shown in Appendix F.

A quantitative analysis was added into the criteria of environmental and social impact and cost effectiveness. This was done in order to round out the multiple account evaluation and provide the complete transportation picture as the preferred alternative is derived. The results are provided in Table 4.7.

Table 4.7: Multiple Account Evaluation of the Four Transportation Alternatives

Scenario Alternative Cost

Network Preferred Congestion Connectivity Effectiveness Environmental Alternative and Social Impact

1 Do Nothing VVV

2 Do Everything VVV VVV Selective Improvement – 3 Veterans Skyway VVV VVV Bridge

Selective 4 Improvement – DJ VVV MacDonald Bridge VVV VVV VVV VVV

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

While the Do Nothing Scenario protects the environment by not constructing transportation projects that might encroach on undeveloped land, the alternative is less than satisfactory due to increased congestion and a lack of connectivity. While there is no dollar cost associated with transportation projects for this alternative, a dollar cost could be calculated to address lost time, air pollution and a decrease in the quality of life due to traffic congestion that would be expected to result if no investments in transportation were made. Alternative 1 is not recommended.

Alternative 2 includes all transportation projects identified in this analysis. While the widening of roads will improve connectivity and address traffic congestion, there is an associated high financial cost to do so, especially considering that two bridges would need to be widened. Construction of every transportation project also encourages travel by automobile, which is considered less environmentally sustainable than other options, such as travel by active transportation. The widening of the Veterans Skyway Bridge could negatively impact the downtown area of Trenton, since Dundas Street may need to be widened through the downtown, which could change the character of the downtown area. Alternative 2 is not recommended.

Alternative 3 includes only one bridge widening project – the Veterans Skyway Bridge on Dundas Street. As stated in the analysis of Alternative 2, widening the Veterans Skyway Bridge, while addressing capacity concerns for vehicles, would be expected to have a negative effect on the urban fabric of the downtown core by making it more a thoroughfare for cars and less for people. Furthermore, based on discussions with City staff it was determined that the widening of the bridge and the acquisition of property would be extremely cost prohibitive. As a result, Alternative 3 is not recommended.

Alternative 4 includes the widening of the DJ MacDonald Bridge on Dixon Drive. Widening this bridge provides better connectivity across the Trent River. The four-lane road connecting to the west side of this bridge appears to be feasible, and land is available on the east side as well. Thus, the widening of this bridge is a more appropriate choice. Furthermore, by widening the DJ MacDonald Bridge instead of the Veterans Skyway Bridge preserves the urban fabric of the downtown. Congestion issues in the downtown will be mitigated by the optimization and coordination of the traffic signals in the Dundas Street corridor. Widening only one bridge as opposed to two bridges is also more financially manageable for the City. Using the above criteria and performance evaluations, Alternative 4 is the recommended transportation option.

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION

The preceding analysis and discussion has provided the context for the following recommendations for this Transportation Master Plan. They are broken down by category, and indicate the intended lead agency for each recommendation, as well as the approximate timeline for implementation. The category codes are as follows:

• TO – Traffic Operations

• PT – Public Transit

• DA – Data Collection

• AT – Active Transportation

The timelines are designated as short (generally 0 to 5 years) and long term (6 years and beyond). Where possible, projects have been aligned with the 2012 Quinte West 10-Year Capital Plan. Recommendation Lead Partners Timeline Public Works & TO1. Traffic signal optimization along the Engineering N/A Short Dundas Street and Dixon Drive Corridors Services Action: • The City should review the results of the Synchro analysis as described in Section 4.2 and implement the appropriate timings. • The optimization could be completed during the traffic controller upgrades scheduled for 2013 and 2015. The marginal cost for the traffic signal optimization during the controller upgrades should be insignificant. TO2. Conduct Environmental Assessment for the widening of Wallbridge-Loyalist Public Works & Road between Hamilton Road and Engineering N/A Short Services Wallbridge Road.

CITY OF QUINTE WEST TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Final Draft 51 January 2014 “BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Recommendation Lead Partners Timeline Action: • The need and justification for the widening on Wallbridge-Loyalist Road are provided in the 2031 analysis described in Section 4.1. Completion of the additional Environmental Assessment phases to determine the exact timing of the widening, the future alignment and other considerations is required prior to the actual widening. • Discussions and coordination with the City of Belleville will also be required as part of the Environmental Assessment process. • It is recommended that this study take place during the scheduled Deck Condition survey in 2014 or prior to the Structure Rehabilitation in 2015, so that if a widening is needed, it can be incorporated in the design of the rehabilitation. The costs of studying the road widening could be included as part of the overall structure rehabilitation study. TO3. Conduct Environmental Assessment Public Works & to improve the east-west connectivity and Engineering N/A Short capacity over the Trent River Services

Action: • The need and justification for the widening of the DJ MacDonald Bridge is provided in Section 4.1. This should be further augmented with a detailed environmental assessment which will determine additional alternatives to widen the bridge, such as the provision of an additional crossing of the Trent River, as well as functional designs and alignments for any work to be completed. • The 10-year capital plan indicates that the DJ MacDonald Bridge is scheduled to be rehabilitated in 2020. A study indicating which bridge should be widened should be conducted prior to this rehabilitation in order to incorporate any modifications required to the DJ MacDonald bridge during the scheduled work. • Funding for a Bridge Needs Study is allocated for 2013 and every 2 years afterwards until 2019. Portions of these funds could be used for this Environmental Assessment. TO4. Conduct Study to investigate the Public Works & need to improve connectivity from Trenton Engineering N/A Long to Highway 401 Services Action: • The existing conditions analysis indicated that Front Street and Sidney Street, two main roadways providing access to and from Highway 401, were moderately congested. A longer term study which would identify potential connectivity improvements to Highway 401, such as the extension of Sidney Street to Dundas Street, or the widening of Wooler Road, or a third bridge crossing the Trent River, may be undertaken to support future travel patterns in Quinte West. • Public Works & PT1. Investigate improving service Engineering Services frequency and routing of existing Quinte Quinte Access Short • Access Transit routes Planning & Development Services

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Recommendation Lead Partners Timeline Action: • During both of the public information centres, a desire for greater service levels and an expanded service region was indicated. • The feasibility of these service improvements will need to be investigated during a separate study. DA1. Undertake a consistent and frequent Public Works & • Planning & Short to data collection program on major Engineering Development Long roadways within Quinte West Services Services

Action: • The data collection program in Quinte West should be expanded to include data collection on major arterial roads on a rotating basis every five years. This will allow future models and analyses to utilize this information, and will feed into future studies and transportation master plans. The existing data does not include historical data nor was data available for every major roadway, which would be provided should this recommendation be carried out. • At a minimum, AADT information should be collected on the arterial roadways. Additional information collected as part of other studies should also be archived for future use. AT1. The City should build on the active and health communities initiatives already • Ignite! being initiated by the Health Unit to • Public Works & promote active forms of transportation Hastings & Prince Engineering City-wide. This could include Media Edward Counties Services Short releases for Drive and Walk with care, Health Unit • Recreation & Physical Activity Providers, Ignite!, Tourism “Getting Active in Your Community” Services Webpage, and Physical Activity Directory. Action: • The City should meet with Hasting & Prince Edward Counties Health Unit to get a better understanding of the existing active transportation and trail related initiatives which are being undertaken or explored. • Using some of the information included in the TMP report as well as information available from Share the Road Coalition, MTO and RTOs additional promotion and outreach materials should be developed to promote active transportation and trails. • Public Works & AT2. As part of a City-wide Trails and Engineering Active Transportation network, additional Waterfront Services links to the existing Waterfront Trail Route Regeneration Long • should be considered in partnership with Trust Recreation & the Waterfront Regeneration Trust. Tourism Services Action: • The City should meet to assess the existing Waterfront Trail conditions and explore the opportunity of developing connections to the trail both on and off-road. • This could be incorporated into a trails and active transportation master plan or could be explored as a separate municipal initiative. • The City should make it a priority to explore the tourism opportunities associated with investment in trails linking to a province-wide trail system.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Recommendation Lead Partners Timeline AT3. The City should use the mapping of existing trail and AT conditions prepared Public Works & for the Transportation Master Plan to • GIS / Mapping Engineering Short update their database of route information Specialist Services and be incorporated into the high- resolution mapping available online. Action: • The individuals at the City who are responsible for the City’s mapping should incorporate the AT and trails database included as part of the TMP deliverable package into the City’s municipal database. • Once the database has been updated, the City is encouraged to include the mapping of existing on and off-road AT facilities on their high resolution mapping. Public Works & AT4. The City of Quinte West should Engineering • Hastings & develop a Trails and Active Transportation Services Prince Edward Master Plan terms of reference, and then Short or Counties Health complete a trail and AT plan to guide Unit future AT related development City-wide. Recreation & Tourism Services Action: • Internal Staff should meet to discuss the possibility of establishing a budget for and availability to undertake a trails and active transportation master plan. • The City should identify the department or entity that would be responsible for leading the development of the master plan, as well as an individual who would be the master plan’s project manager. • The City should explore partnering with the Health Unit to seek additional funding sources to proceed with the development of the plan. • The suggested components of the master plan as suggested in the Transportation Master Plan Report should be a base from which to develop a terms of reference for a trails and active transportation master plan. • Planning & Development AT5. The database of routes contained in Services the City of Quinte’s Transportation Master Public Works & • City Council Plan should be used as the basis from Engineering Members Short which to develop a City-wide Trails and Services • Active Transportation Network, Master Hastings & Plan and Implementation Strategy. Prince Edward Counties Heath Unit Action: • Refer to suggested next steps for recommendation AT4. AT6. The City should use the Route Selection Criteria prepared for the AT component of the TMP, should adapt it as Public Works & • Planning & necessary based on internal discussions Engineering Development Short and use them as a means of refining the Services Services candidate route network and to prioritize routes and linkages. 54

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Recommendation Lead Partners Timeline Action: • The route selection criteria should be reviewed internally by City staff and confirmed for future use as necessary. • Should the City proceed with the development of a Trails and AT Plan (see recommendation AT4.), the route selection criteria (confirmed) are to be used to refine the candidate route network and to prioritize route linkages for implementation. • Planning & AT7. As part of a City-wide Trails and Development Active Transportation Master Plan, the Public Works & Services City should explore the development of a Engineering Short • set of trail specific design guidelines and Services Recreation & standards. Tourism Services Action: • In advance of developing a set of trail and AT specific design guidelines the City is encouraged to use OTM Book 18, OTM Book 15, TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines and any other relevant design guideline documents. • Should the City proceed with the development of design guidelines as part of a trails and AT master plan, the guidelines should rely heavily on the references note above for consistency purposes and should explore, in more detail, trail design options. AT8. For the selection and design of on- road cycling facilities as well as supportive Public Works & cycling amenities, the City should use the Engineering • N/A Short Ontario Traffic Manual Book 18: Cycling Services Facilities as well as other key references (noted in section 4.3.1.3). Action: • Once the Transportation Master Plan has been adopted and the City moves forward with the design and implementation of future on and off-road cycling facilities they should use the Ontario Traffic Manual Book 18 as their primary reference guide for facility design. • OTM Book 18 should be supplemented by other current standards and guidelines related to the design and development of pedestrian and cycling facilities such as OTM Book 15, TAC Bikeway Design Manual, NACTO Bikeway Facility Design, etc. AT9. In order to facilitate the development of a Trails and Active Transportation • Local Active Hastings & Prince Master Plan, the City should explore transportation or Edward Counties Short additional funding sources and Trail Interest Health Unit opportunities including those included in Groups the TMP report. Action: • The City should use the proposed funding and partnership opportunities identified in the Transportation Master Plan for the development of a trails and active transportation master plan or related initiatives. • In addition, the City should also identify and meet with key stakeholders and interest groups who could help to identify other potential funding and partnership opportunities.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Recommendation Lead Partners Timeline • Accessibility Advisory Committee • Conservation Authorities • Council AT10. City staff should assemble a group Members of local stakeholders, interest groups and • Public Works & Hastings & affected agencies to develop a steering Engineering Prince Edward Short committee or technical advisory committee Services Counties Health to help develop the trails and AT master Unit plan. • Recreation & Tourism Department • Planning & Development Services Department Action: • The City should use the suggested partners as a base from which to identify a trail and active transportation steering committee or technical advisory committee. • The City is encouraged to develop this committee in advance of developing the master plan. They could be engaged to help develop the terms of reference, and would also be engaged over the course of the study process. AT11. The City should identify a local • Hastings & champion such as the Hastings & Prince Public Works & Prince Edwards Edward Counties Health Unit to be a Engineering Counties Health Short steward for active transportation and trail Services Unit promotion and outreach. Action: • The City should communicate with key stakeholders and interest groups to gauge their interest in being identified as a key trail and AT champion for the community. • Once identified, they would be engaged as part of the trail and AT committee or would be asked to help identify potential promotion and outreach initiatives for future municipal consideration. • Hastings & Price AT12. The City should partner with the Edward local Health Unit to prepare promotional Engineering & Counties Health and educational materials regarding active Public Works Unit Short transportation and the role it can play in Services • Recreation & improving community health. Tourism Services

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Recommendation Lead Partners Timeline Action: • Similar to the approach taken for recommendation AT1., the City should engage with the Health Unit to document existing AT and trail related promotional materials from which to build upon. • The educational and promotional materials could be developed based on examples from other communities or province-wide organizations such as the Ontario Trails Council, Waterfront Regeneration Trust or the Share the Road Coalition. • A formal education and promotional strategy should be explored as part of a master plan or as a separate initiative for specific age groups. AT13. The City should continue to • Waterfront promote AT related tourism initiatives such Generation as the organized touring rides undertaken Recreation & Trust Short in 2013 as well as the Great Waterfront Tourism Services • Local Trail & Trail Touring ride to help promote cycling Cycling Interest as a viable form of tourism City wide. Groups Action: • The City’s recreation and tourism services department collaboratively with local interest groups should engage in discussions regarding current cycling or AT related tourism initiatives. • Once a set of current initiatives have been documented, the City should help to continue coordinating existing as well as identifying other future initiatives to promote cycle tourism.

APPENDIX A SUMMARY OF PUBLIC & STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION INPUT

A.1 WHAT WERE THE CONSULTATION / ENGAGEMENT INITIATIVES?

Table A-1 provides a more detailed description of each of the consultation initiatives.

Table A-1: Description of Public Consultation Activities Public Updates / Notices What was the To provide the public with ongoing notices to document key study Goal? timelines (e.g. commencement and PICs). What was A number of notices were prepared over the course of the study Prepared? including a notice of study commencement, notices for PIC 1 and PIC 2 and a notice of study completion. When it was The notice of study commencement was prepared in April 2013. The Prepared & document was posted online and was also made available in local Presented? publications. The same approach was used for all other notices prepared over the course of the study. What Information Information that was presented using public notices included: was Presented?  Study Description;  Public and stakeholder consultation events;  Links to the Study webpage and online questionnaire; and  Contact Information for study representatives. Public Awareness Campaign What was the To notify the public and local stakeholder, using promotional Goal? materials, of the City’s Transportation Master Plan study, explain the study process, and announce upcoming public events, meetings and additional public participation opportunities. What was The consultant team, collaboratively with the City, prepared a mobile Prepared? display board and study promotional business card with consistent study branding.

CITY OF QUINTE WEST TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Draft 12 October 2013 “BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Table A-1: Description of Public Consultation Activities When it was The mobile display board was posted at key locations (e.g. Prepared & municipal offices, arenas, community centres, etc.) throughout the Presented? City. The business cards were distributed along with the display board. The board and the cards were distributed following the publication of the notice in May 2013. What Information The mobile display board outlined information similar to what was was Presented? found on the notice of study commencement. The study business card provided key links including the study webpage and online questionnaire and also presented the contact information for key study representatives. Online Questionnaire What was the To gather input from the public and stakeholders regarding existing Goal? transportation conditions, opportunities and barriers as well as recommendations for future conditions for the transportation network. What was An online questionnaire was prepared using the online tool Prepared? SurveyMonkey (www.surveymonkey.com). The questionnaire was geared towards members of the public and was made available publically online. When it was The online questionnaires were prepared in April 2013 and were Prepared & made publically available at the beginning of May 2013. Presented? What Information The questions that were posed pertained to topics such as was Presented? demographic information (age, community in which you live, gender, etc.), current travel patterns, destination of current trips and future destinations, barriers or opportunities in the current transportation system, and areas of improvement considered for incorporation as part of the master plan. Public Information Centres What was the PIC #1: To provide members of the public with an opportunity to Goal? comment on the findings / deliverables developed for Phase 1 of the study process and to identify transportation barriers and opportunities. At the events, attendees were provided with an opportunity to speak with the study team members and were also encouraged to mark-up maps with their comments and input. PIC #2: To provide members with the public with the opportunity to review and comment on the preliminary draft transportation network for the 20 year horizon and to comment on transportation policies developed to support implementation of the future transportation network. At the event, attendees were provided with an opportunity to speak with the study team members and also were encouraged to make comments directly on the presentation boards. What was PIC #1: The study team scheduled and prepared the PIC held at the Prepared? City’s municipal offices. A set of display boards was prepared for the PICs.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Table A-1: Description of Public Consultation Activities PIC #2: Similar to the first PIC, the study team scheduled and prepared the PIC held at the City’s municipal offices. A set of display boards was prepared for the PICs. When it was PIC #1: The display boards were prepared in May 2013 and were Prepared & presented at the PIC on June 11, 2013. Presented? PIC #2: The display boards were prepared in October 2013 and were presented at the PIC on October 22, 2013. What Information PIC #1: The information presented was based on the tasks was Presented? undertaken as part of Phase 1 of the study. The display boards included documentation and illustrations of the study, vision, goals and objectives, the TMP problem statement, a review of background information, mapping of existing conditions as well as other more interactive opportunities including boards which could be marked-up to document comments and input. PIC #2: The preliminary draft transportation network was presented on display boards to the public. Associated recommended transportation policies that will support and help implement the transportation master plan also were presented on display boards.

The consultation events occurred at key milestones over the course of the study. Some initiatives, such as the online questionnaire and the public outreach campaign were considered ongoing. Both forms of consultation were initiated at study commencement and finalized at study completion. The following sections provide an overview of the input which was received form the public and stakeholder consultation initiatives.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

A.2 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC & STAKEHOLDER INPUT

A.2.1 Online Questionnaire Results

For this TMP, an online questionnaire was made available to the members of the public as a key component of the study’s consultation initiatives. As of November 19th, 2013, the questionnaire was successfully completed by 46 members of the community. These results provided the study team with the transportation-related priorities that the City’s residents support. The questionnaire assessed the types of trips, the destinations and the various modes of transportation that are utilized to move around the City of Quinte West. The following information is a summary of the online questionnaire results for the TMP:

Q: Please indicate how important each of the following reasons are for developing a long-term Transportation Master Plan for the City of Quinte West.

100% 0%3% 0%2% 0% 2%0% 2%0% 2% 0%2% 0% 2% 5% 5% 5% 0% 7% 8% 7% 7% 12% 17% 2% 90% 22% 7% 17% 80% 25% 20% 27% 27% 29% 24% 24% 70% 29% 22% 27% 60% 12% 50% 40% 68% 65% 61% 66% 61% 61% 30% 54% 59% 49% 51% 20% 10% 0% To improve the To improve To provide To provide To provide To improve To provide To provide To enhance the To provide health of connections better access to better access to better access to walking and better access to better access to sustainability of commuters residents between the schools for areas of key community cycling as commercial areas of natural the with communities of youth employement destinations transportation areas and cultural transportation transportation Quinte West options significance system alternatives Very Important Somewhat Important Neutral Not Very Important Not at all Important

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Q: What are your primary destinations in Quinte West and how often do you travel to each?

0% 100% 2% 5% 3% 2% 15% 13% 90% 20% 24% 20% 30% 80% 41% 24% 46% 70% 50% 40% 34% 60% 42% 24% 50% 46% 26% 40% 26%

30% 18% 18% 18% 34% 13% 20% 38% 11% 5% 26% 5% 21% 10% 15% 18% 11% 8% 9% 0% 0% 0% Downtown Downtown Downtown Downtown Industrial / Natural Areas Tourism Community Trenton Frankford Sidney Murray Employment Destinations Destinations Areas

Every day A few times a week A few times a month A few times a year Never

Respondents indicated that the most travelled to destinations within the City of Quinte West include Downtown Trenton, Downtown Frankford and the Industrial / Employment Areas throughout the City of Quinte West. Downtown Murray and Downtown Sidney were reported as the least popular destinations.

Q: How long does it normally take Q: How long does it normally take you to access the nearest transit you to access the nearest major stop, terminal or access point? cycling facility or trail within your community?

12% 3.2% Less than 5 Less than 5 minutes 16.1% 22.6% minutes 5 - 10 minutes 15% 41% 5 - 10 minutes

10 - 20 minutes 10 - 20 minutes

20 - 30 minutes 20 - 30 minutes 15% 29.0% 29.0% Greater than 30 Greater than 30 minutes minutes 18%

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Respondents indicated that the top three improvements that would encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation to driving include the development of more multi-use / hiking trails, the development of bike lanes / paved shoulders and an effort made to improve the connections between key destinations. Car share and carpooling program development were highly noted as being not important to this effort.

Q: What is the approximate distance Q: What are the barriers to the use of from your home to your workplace / alternative modes of transportation? school? Limited transit service

7% Lack of cycling 33% and / or walking 21% facilities 16% Limited hours of 25% Less than 1 km transit service 1 - 3 km Limited 10% information 3 - 10 km 18% Weather 10 - 20 km 8% 19% 12% 17% Greater than Travel distance 20 km 14% Other

Q: What are the top 3 roadways in the City of Quinte West that should be improved?

1. Dundas Street / Old Highway 2

2. Glen Miller Road / Sidney Street 3. Dundas Bridge

Q: What are the top 3 barriers to the use of alternative transportation modes in Quinte West?

4. Limited Transit Service 5. Lack of Cycling and / or walking facilities 6. Limited Hours of Transit Service

The development of alternative modes to personal vehicle transportation was a key takeaway from the online questionnaire results. Respondents indicated that the existing transit and active transportation facilities are major barriers to utilizing alternative modes of transportation. Understanding the priorities of the residents of Quinte West and their travel patterns / behaviour were key elements of this TMP’s public consultation initiative. 17

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

A.2.2 Public Information Centre #1

The first public information centre was held during Phase 1 of the Transportation Master Plan study and was used to gather input on the existing conditions including transportation related opportunities and barriers.

The PIC was held on July 11, 2013, at the City’s municipal offices between 6:30 PM and 8:30 PM. In advance of the PIC (at 5:30 PM), Council members were encouraged to review the materials and to provide their input. Three Council members were able to attend and discuss with study team members.

Following the “Council Meeting”, the event proceeded as a public open house. The open house received 10 attendees who actively engaged and discussed with members of the study team, providing their thoughts and input on the current state of transportation as well as opportunities for future transportation improvements. Input was documented using interactive display materials and notes taken by the study team. The following table summarizes the input gathered from this session:

Table 1-2 Summary of PIC #1 Interactive Materials What are some of the transportation What are some of the OPPORTUNITIES in ISSUES in Quinte West Quinte West  Signal coordination along Dundas St. – It was interesting to note that though people ease of flow would be good – suggest provided significant input on the looking at ‘SCOOT’ system employed transportation issues experience in the City by the City of Red Deer – intuitive there were limited notations about the system that adjusts for peaks of traffic opportunities that could be experienced or  Bus routes along Dundas St. should highlighted through the master plan. have a dedicated bus run – links /  Tourism is a big draw for cyclists and transfers to other routes and connect hikers. Transportation alternatives the core commercial areas and key should be provided to access these key employment areas destinations and highlight areas of  Put pedestrians first – there is too much cultural and natural significance. emphasis on asphalt for cars. Pedestrian links should be completed that bridge existing gaps in the system  Subdivision Design should be considered – the newest subdivision north of Hamilton Road is embarrassing given the complete lack of sidewalks / paths for pedestrians – pedestrians should not be treated as second class.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

The developer should be made to install links through the infrastructure  Costs should be considered – for the next “PIC” the consultant should try to relate the costs to ratepayers to sustain a LOS of A compared to a LOS of C / D  More parking provided at City Hall  Jog at No. 2 Highway at the airbase gates are too sharp  A regional transit system should be implemented with Belleville, Trenton, Brighton, Cobourg and Port Hope. This system would tie into with GO Transit, Metrolinx at Newcastle / Bowmanville.  Funding costs should be supported thought the issuing of bonds or shares. The comments that were received at the public information centre #1 were grouped into two key categories:

Some of the comments pertaining to these topics have been highlighted in the table above. Additional comments which were received are presented in Table 1-3:

Table 1-3 Summary Additional Active Transportation (AT) and Transit Comments Active Transportation Comments Transit Comments  Support for sidewalk development can  A VIA stop should be implemented in be an issue due to limited support from Trenton. Council.  A Regional Transit system should be  Developers must be a partner when explored providing connections to discussing future AT links. Pedestrian Greyhound and GO Transit connections. and cycling infrastructure should be  Shuttle services and mobility buses integrated into new development areas. should be explored for implementation  Innovative cycling infrastructure should throughout the City to accommodate be explored such as the Sherbourne 19

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Table 1-3 Summary Additional Active Transportation (AT) and Transit Comments Active Transportation Comments Transit Comments Cycle Tracks. elderly population.  The City should use active  The Quinte Access program should be transportation as an opportunity to live, expanded. work and play in the City.  The Public Works Committee should move forward with their goal to pave shoulders on City roadways.  Increased connectivity is required between the existing AT infrastructure. Gaps need to be bridged.  Cycling amenities should be implemented in addition to the infrastructure to support cycling and walking for utilitarian purposes.  Cycling Tours are being developed within the area and should be highlighted or coordinated.  Should explore the implementation of the “Share the Road” campaign.

In addition to the active transportation and transit themes which were clearly expressed at the PIC, attendees also provided input on a number of other demographic related issues which were considered when developing the future transportation network. These included:

 The need to accommodate a significant aging population with limited mobility and increase physical isolation.  The need for more transportation options to accommodate long distance commuters such as those who want to live in Quinte West but travel into Toronto for work.  The need for infrastructure to accommodate children cycling to school and for entertainment purposes.  The need for realistic connections between the wards of Quinte West to accommodate the employment population who live and work in the City. Attendees also acknowledged the opportunity for community partnerships which could help in the implementation of the master plan and its future initiatives. Some potential partners identified included:

 Quinte Tourism Committee;  Quinte Access;

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

 Business Improvement Area;  Hastings and Prince Edward Counties Health Unit;  School Boards; and  Local Interest Groups / Walking / Cycling Clubs. Following the PIC, each of the comments received was incorporated into a public consultation summary which forms part of the project record. The information generated helped the study team to proceed with the identification of future transportation recommendations and proposed improvements which are identified in the Transportation Master Plan Report.

A.2.3 Public Information Centre #2

The second Public Information Centre was held following the completion of Phase 2 of the Transportation Master Plan study and was used to gather input on the proposed transportation improvements and key master plan recommendations.

The PIC was held on October 22nd, 2013, at the City’s municipal offices between 5:30 PM and 8:30 PM. The PIC was promoted using local municipal publications, the mobile display board (which was posted in the front hallway of the City’s offices) and on the City’s webpage.

The open house received approximately 10 attendees including representatives from City Council as well as the City’s Health Unit. The attendees were able to discuss key issues and recommendations with the study team members and provide their comments directly on the display boards / mapping provided. The input was documented and used to refine the study findings / recommendations presented in the master plan report. Photos of the display boards including the comments received were taken following the PIC. The graphics below are some sample graphics:

Comments Provided on TMP Mapping at PIC #2

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

As was the case with the first public information centre there was a large amount of interest in how the City was planning on moving forward with Active Transportation and Transit. Table 1-4 summarizes the comments that were received regarding these two key topic areas:

Table 1-4 Summary Additional Active Transportation (AT) and Transit Comments Active Transportation Comments  A future AT network should focus on establishing potential school routes and tourism loops.  The city needs to work to develop potential route priorities for pedestrians and cyclists.  Recently a healthy communities declaration has been prepared. The document is going to Council and supports the development of infrastructure which promotes active and health living.  The Healthy Communities Department is preparing and will be posting a webpage dedicated to all issues pertaining to healthy living including information related to active transportation.  When developing a vision or objectives for active transportation one must consider equity for all users of the system.  On and off-road active transportation opportunities should be identified on both the east and west sides of the river.  Bike Lanes should be considered along Highway 2 and Old Highway 2 including crossing facilities over the river.  There is increased demand for cycling throughout the rural areas.  The City should explore future discussions and consultation with the Lower Trent Trail Organization.  There have been a number of tourism rides and races organized throughout 2013. There are considerable opportunities for future promotion and engagement.  The City should engage with local students from Loyalist College to better understand their active transportation / alternative transportation wants and needs. Transit Comments  Illumination of roadways in rural areas should be reviewed  A transit connection to Loyalist College would be beneficial  Transit should be expanded to additional areas, such as further along Highway 2 to Loyalist Collage and lower income areas  Sidney Street should be extended to connect with Dundas Street

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

In addition to the mapping boards and one-on-one conversation with study team members, attendees were also asked to provide their comments on other interactive display materials. These interactive exercises provided attendees with the opportunity to comment on proposed TMP recommendation as well as potential active transportation related facility types. Graphics of the final results are provided below along with some key themes:

Board #1: Assessment of potential TMP recommendations

Key Themes:

 That there is significant support for overall transportation improvements with the exception of a roadways widening exercise for Wallbridge-Loyalist Road.

 There proves to be most support for the City to investigate improving service frequency and routing of existing Quinte Access Transit Routes.

 There is also support for the development of a formal active transportation master plan with the exception of one vote against its development.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Board #2: Assessment of potential active transportation facility types

Key Themes:

 Respondents are generally supportive of more separated active transportation facilities including off-road multi-use trails, active transportation pathways and separated cycle tracks.

 Respondents are less comfortable with sidewalks, signed bicycle routes and signed routes with sharrows which are less separated from vehicular traffic.

 It was suggested that the City explore the implementation of paved shoulders on highway 2

It is important to note that for the potential active transportation facility types will not necessarily be used to inform the development of an AT network for the TMP. The network identified in the TMP should be considered a route network concept and should be refined by the City to develop a formal active transportation network as part of a more detailed active transportation master plan in the future.

Following the PIC, each of the comments received was incorporated into a public consultation summary which forms part of the project record. The information generated helped the study team to refine the master plan recommendations as well as the proposed improvements to the transportation network.

APPENDIX B EMME MODEL CONSTRUCTION AND VALIDATION

B.1 EMME MODEL PARAMETERS

The TAZ structure was imported into the Emme 4 travel demand modelling software, which was used to run the forecasting analysis. The roadways were classified based on the roadway classifications provided by the City, which was further augmented with data from the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO). The roadway classifications and corresponding coded capacities which were included in the Emme 4 model are provided below in Table 2.x .

Table 2-1: Roadway Type Capacity Number of Speed Classification Code (vehicles per hour Lanes (km/hr) per lane) (per direction) Freeway 1 1800 2 100 Expressway/Highway 2 1250 1 80 Arterial 3 900 1-2 60-80 Major Collector 4 800 1 60-80 Minor Collector 5 600 1 60 Local Street 6 500 1 50 Highway Ramp 7 1400 1 70 Centroid Connector* 99 9999** 1 50 *Centroid Connectors represent the local road networks within subdivisions which connect to the greater street network **It is assumed that the local road networks within subdivisions do not have capacity constraints, and centroid connectors are assumed to have maximum capacity to represent the lack of capacity constraints.

It should be noted that the Expressway/Highway classification (Type 2) only applies to Highway 62 in the northeast quadrant of the City; therefore, does not play a major role in the road network of the City of Quinte West.

B.2 TRIP DISTRIBUTION

The travel patterns between each of the TAZs was determined through data collected from the Census 2006, the Quinte West Industrial Directory, the Chamber of Commerce Business Directory and information provided by all schools within the City. These sources of information were used to determine the linkage distribution of trips, which represents the relationships between the TAZs in the form of the probabilities of travelling from one zone to another. The probabilities were determined as a function of the population, employment and school enrollment within a zone, with these variables providing input into a gravity model which utilized travel time as the cost function.

A linkage distribution matrix was prepared for each of the following trip types: Home-based Work (HBW), Home-Based School (HBS), and Non-home Based/Home-based Other (NHB/HBO). The HBW and HBS trips were further subdivided into three categories. The HBW categories were Professional, Manufacturing and Service/Other jobs, while the HBS categories were Ages 10-14, 15-17 and 18 and older. The NHB/HBO trips were not disaggregated further.

B.3 TRIP GENERATION

The linkage distribution matrices were then multiplied by the expected trip productions and attractions in each zone. In order to determine the number of productions and attractions within an area, normally a detailed survey of residents is required. Since this exercise was not within the scope of work, instead, the number of attractions and productions was based on trip generation rates derived from the data obtained from Peterborough County. This data was chosen based on Peterborough’s urban and rural land use split which is comparable to Quinte West’s, as well as the breadth and depth of information available for Peterborough through the 2006 Transportation Tomorrow Survey. The model validation detailed in below indicates that the Peterborough trip rates are generally appropriate for use in Quinte West.

B.4 MODEL VALIDATION

A model validation was completed for the 2006 Model in order to ensure that the modelled behavior was consistent with the travel patterns in the City. The validation was completed using four methods of comparison. These included a comparison with the Average Annual Weekday Traffic (AAWT) counts provided by the City, a comparison of the vehicle kilometers travelled and vehicle hours travelled between road classes, a review of the speeds in the modelled network and a calculation of the percent root mean square error (%RMSE) between the observed counts and the model volumes.

B.4.1 Comparison with Average Annual Weekday Traffic

The seven-day traffic data was summarized as an AAWT figure, from which a peak hour volume was determined. These peak hour volumes were compared with the volumes predicted by the model.

Table B.1 . below summarizes the comparison of the observed peak hour data with the predicted peak hour volumes. The GEH statistic was used to determine the relative amount of accuracy within the model.

Table B.1 Screenline Roadways GEH East of RCAF Road Hamilton Road 1.96

Curtis Road

Dundas Street East

North of Telephone Road Trenton Street 0.75

Wooler Road

West of Wooler Road Telephone Road 10.05

Dundas Street West

South of Highway 2 Wooler Road 11.19

Dufferin Avenue

The West of Wooler Road and South of Highway 2 GEH values are higher than generally acceptable levels. However, this can be attributed to the fact that the roadways representing these screenlines are classed as collectors or lower, and that the majority of the volumes on these roadways are from rural areas. The Model’s TAZ structure due to the non-capacity constrained operating conditions for these screenlines, the model tends to overestimate the volumes due to the fact that the local roadways, which people may be choosing to take in reality, are not completely represented in these areas.

B.4.2 Vehicle Kilometers Traveled and Vehicle Hours Traveled by Road Class

The Vehicle Kilometers Traveled (VKT) and Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) measure the total amount of traveled kilometers and the total amount of travel time on a given road class. These measures are used to determine whether the model is accurately portraying the travel patterns of the City, in terms of the percentage of travel which utilizes each road class. These metrics are summarized below in Table B.2 .

Table B.2 VKT VHT Roadway Type Value % of Total Value % of Total Classification Code Freeway 1 99,326 48% 1207 40% Expressway/Highway 2 267 0% 3 0% Arterial 3 55,227 27% 955 32% Major Collector 4 37,476 18% 603 20% Minor Collector 5 11,277 5% 189 6% Local Street 6 1,588 1% 36 1% Highway Ramp 7 1,694 1% 24 1% Total 206855 100% 3018 100%

The results indicate a logical breakdown of VKT on each of the roadway classifications. Again, due to the limited length of Expressway/Highway roadways within the network, it is expected that the VKT and VHT on these roadways would be very low. Excluding this category, the amount of VKT decreases logically with the road class. Furthermore, the VHT indicates that the higher speed Freeway facility requires less time for users to travel through, while there is relatively more congestion on Arterial and Major Collector road classes. These characteristics are consistent with the expected operations of these road classes in reality.

B.4.3 Vehicle Speeds The speeds in the modelled network versus the posted speeds are summarized below in Table B.3 .

Table B.3 Roadway Type Posted Speed Average Classification Code (km/hr) Speed in Network (km/hr) Freeway 1 100 92 Expressway/Highway 2 80 80 Arterial 3 60-80 66 Major Collector 4 60-80 66 Minor Collector 5 60 60 Local Street 6 50 49 Highway Ramp 7 70 70

The average speed in the network is 63 km/h, which is indicative of the low level of congestion experienced on the majority of the network. Furthermore, the majority of the roadway classifications operate with little congestion which the exception of the Freeway, where slowdowns occur at the on-ramps, and on the arterials and major collectors which are generally the busiest roads within the City.

B.4.4 Percent Root Mean Square Error

The percent root mean square error (%RMSE) is a statistical measure of how close the model volumes are to the observed counts. Comparing all of the available AWDT counts available to the model volume, the %RMSE was calculated to be 27%. FHWA Guidelines recommend that a %RMSE of less than 30% is acceptable for the number of vehicles which were counted in the AWDTs.

B.4.5 Summary of Validation

Based on these validation checks, the overall accuracy in the model is within acceptable parameters for a model of this size and levels of travel demand.

APPENDIX C EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS – SYNCHRO OUTPUTS Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Wooler Road & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 97 335 16 30 154 86 11 100 74 123 59 78 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 199.0 73.0 240.0 139.0 178.0 0.0 179.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 0.98 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.937 0.914 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1703 1845 1524 1641 1810 1482 1530 1714 0 1687 1454 0 Flt Permitted 0.626 0.517 0.662 0.593 Satd. Flow (perm) 1109 1845 1524 893 1810 1448 1066 1714 0 1053 1454 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 76 93 35 64 Link Speed (k/h) 80 80 50 50 Link Distance (m) 266.7 613.0 408.7 368.0 Travel Time (s) 12.0 27.6 29.4 26.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 6% 3% 6% 10% 5% 9% 18% 3% 5% 7% 20% 19% Adj. Flow (vph) 105 364 17 33 167 93 12 109 80 134 64 85 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 105 364 17 33 167 93 12 189 0 134 149 0 Number of Detectors 12112112 12 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 6 8 4 Detector Phase 52216688 44 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 6.0 20.0 20.0 6.0 20.0 20.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 10.0 27.0 27.0 10.0 27.0 27.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 Total Split (s) 11.0 57.0 57.0 11.0 57.0 57.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 Total Split (%) 11.0% 57.0% 57.0% 11.0% 57.0% 57.0% 32.0% 32.0% 32.0% 32.0%

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Wooler Road & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Maximum Green (s) 8.0 50.0 50.0 8.0 50.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0000 00 Act Effct Green (s) 63.9 55.2 55.2 61.7 52.5 52.5 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.64 0.55 0.55 0.62 0.52 0.52 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.14 0.36 0.02 0.06 0.18 0.12 0.05 0.42 0.51 0.36 Control Delay 7.0 14.7 0.1 6.6 13.9 3.2 29.2 28.6 40.2 20.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.0 14.7 0.1 6.6 13.9 3.2 29.2 28.6 40.2 20.6 LOS ABAABACC DC Approach Delay 12.5 9.7 28.7 29.9 Approach LOS B A C C Queue Length 50th (m) 7.2 42.5 0.0 2.2 17.9 0.0 1.9 26.0 23.6 13.8 Queue Length 95th (m) 13.4 65.3 0.0 5.5 30.5 7.9 6.6 47.2 43.4 31.7 Internal Link Dist (m) 242.7 589.0 384.7 344.0 Turn Bay Length (m) 199.0 73.0 240.0 139.0 178.0 179.0 Base Capacity (vph) 757 1018 875 621 949 803 266 454 263 411 Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000 00 Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000 00 Storage Cap Reductn 00000000 00 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.14 0.36 0.02 0.05 0.18 0.12 0.05 0.42 0.51 0.36 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Offset: 43 (43%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.51 Intersection Signal Delay: 18.3 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Wooler Road & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: 2 Dug Hill & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 17 482 11 20 268 68 9 6 45 101 13 7 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 137.0 130.0 114.0 113.0 125.0 129.0 212.0 118.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1703 3471 1188 1641 3406 1468 1357 1900 1482 1703 1900 1252 Flt Permitted 0.559 0.377 0.748 0.698 Satd. Flow (perm) 994 3471 1161 651 3406 1421 1066 1900 1482 1251 1900 1224 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 82 82 82 82 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 243.9 433.1 437.2 391.9 Travel Time (s) 17.6 31.2 31.5 28.2 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 1 1 5 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 6% 4% 36% 10% 6% 10% 33% 0% 9% 6% 0% 29% Adj. Flow (vph) 18 524 12 22 291 74 10 7 49 110 14 8 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 18 524 12 22 291 74 10 7 49 110 14 8 Number of Detectors 121121121121 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 6 8 8 4 4 Detector Phase 522166388744 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 15.0 15.0 4.0 15.0 15.0 4.0 7.0 7.0 4.0 7.0 7.0 Minimum Split (s) 7.0 20.0 20.0 7.0 20.0 20.0 7.0 12.0 12.0 7.0 12.0 12.0 Total Split (s) 18.0 35.0 35.0 18.0 35.0 35.0 18.0 35.0 35.0 18.0 35.0 35.0 Total Split (%) 17.0% 33.0% 33.0% 17.0% 33.0% 33.0% 17.0% 33.0% 33.0% 17.0% 33.0% 33.0%

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: 2 Dug Hill & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Maximum Green (s) 15.0 30.0 30.0 15.0 30.0 30.0 15.0 30.0 30.0 15.0 30.0 30.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max None Max Max None Max Max Walk Time (s) 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 48.7 44.0 44.0 48.9 44.1 44.1 43.7 35.6 35.6 50.0 46.0 46.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.42 0.42 0.46 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.34 0.34 0.47 0.43 0.43 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.36 0.02 0.06 0.21 0.12 0.02 0.01 0.09 0.17 0.02 0.01 Control Delay 15.3 23.2 0.1 15.5 21.3 4.9 15.4 25.0 2.3 16.7 19.2 0.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 15.3 23.2 0.1 15.5 21.3 4.9 15.4 25.0 2.3 16.7 19.2 0.0 LOS BCABCABCABBA Approach Delay 22.5 17.8 6.7 15.9 Approach LOS C B A B Queue Length 50th (m) 2.0 37.5 0.0 2.5 19.3 0.0 1.1 1.0 0.0 13.1 1.6 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 6.1 60.6 0.0 6.9 33.8 8.4 4.1 4.4 3.4 23.8 6.3 0.0 Internal Link Dist (m) 219.9 409.1 413.2 367.9 Turn Bay Length (m) 137.0 130.0 114.0 113.0 125.0 129.0 212.0 118.0 Base Capacity (vph) 569 1439 529 447 1416 638 543 638 552 654 824 578 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000000 Storage Cap Reductn 000000000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.03 0.36 0.02 0.05 0.21 0.12 0.02 0.01 0.09 0.17 0.02 0.01 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 106 Actuated Cycle Length: 106 Offset: 53 (50%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.36 Intersection Signal Delay: 19.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 2: 2 Dug Hill & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Tripp Boulevard & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 628 0 0 296 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 98.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 3610 0 1900 3610 1900 1900 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 3610 0 1900 3610 1900 1900 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 433.1 437.3 139.3 Travel Time (s) 31.2 31.5 10.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 683 0 0 322 0 0 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 683 0 0 322 0 0 Turn Type NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 8 2 Minimum Split (s) 21.0 20.0 20.0 12.0 12.0 Total Split (s) 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 Total Split (%) 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% Maximum Green (s) 51.0 51.0 51.0 51.0 51.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 7.0 7.0 12.0 12.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 5 8855 Act Effct Green (s) 51.0 51.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.46 v/c Ratio 0.41 0.19 Control Delay 20.4 17.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 20.4 17.8 LOS C B Approach Delay 20.4 17.8 Approach LOS C B Queue Length 50th (m) 52.2 21.8 Queue Length 95th (m) 67.4 31.2

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 5 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Tripp Boulevard & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Internal Link Dist (m) 409.1 413.3 115.3 Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1673 1673 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.41 0.19 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 110 Actuated Cycle Length: 110 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBL and 6:, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.41 Intersection Signal Delay: 19.6 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 3: Tripp Boulevard & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 6 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 4: Farley Crescent/4th Avenue & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 628 0 0 296 0000000 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3610 0 0 3610 0 0 1900 0 0 1900 1900 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3610 0 0 3610 0 0 1900 0 0 1900 1900 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 437.3 869.8 48.2 327.5 Travel Time (s) 31.5 62.6 3.5 23.6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 0 683 0 0 322 0000000 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 683 0 0 322 0000000 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4826 Permitted Phases 48266 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Total Split (s) 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5 Total Split (%) 51.4% 51.4% 51.4% 51.4% 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% Maximum Green (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 21.5 21.5 21.5 21.5 21.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.0 5.0 5.0

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 7 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 4: Farley Crescent/4th Avenue & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 15.0 15.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 12.0 8.0 8.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 16.1 16.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.30 v/c Ratio 0.64 0.30 Control Delay 19.1 14.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 19.1 14.8 LOS B B Approach Delay 19.1 14.8 Approach LOS B B Queue Length 50th (m) 31.5 13.2 Queue Length 95th (m) 40.5 19.0 Internal Link Dist (m) 413.3 845.8 24.2 303.5 Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1490 1490 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.46 0.22 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 54.5 Actuated Cycle Length: 54.5 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.64 Intersection Signal Delay: 17.8 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 4: Farley Crescent/4th Avenue & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 8 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Dufferin Avenue & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 5 504 29 68 259 11 27 71 105 13 40 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 0.992 0.995 0.850 0.976 Flt Protected 0.990 0.987 0.990 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3507 0 0 3251 0 0 1802 1524 0 2770 0 Flt Permitted 0.952 0.781 0.922 0.909 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3338 0 0 2564 0 0 1679 1499 0 2542 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 9 7 114 11 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 869.8 310.4 193.4 199.2 Travel Time (s) 62.6 22.3 13.9 14.3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 12 4 4 12 7 3 3 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 3% 4% 11% 0% 7% 3% 6% 77% 5% 40% Adj. Flow (vph) 5 548 32 74 282 12 29 77 114 14 43 11 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 585 0 0 368 0 0 106 114 0 68 0 Turn Type Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Protected Phases 2 1 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 8 4 Minimum Split (s) 18.0 18.0 13.0 18.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 13.0 44.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 Total Split (%) 42.5% 42.5% 17.8% 60.3% 39.7% 39.7% 39.7% 39.7% 39.7% Maximum Green (s) 26.0 26.0 10.0 39.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 16.0 16.0 15.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 10.0 10.0 9.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 00000 Act Effct Green (s) 26.0 39.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.53 0.33 0.33 0.33 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.25 0.19 0.20 0.08 Control Delay 19.7 9.3 18.8 4.9 15.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 19.7 9.3 18.8 4.9 15.1 LOS B A B A B Approach Delay 19.7 9.3 11.6 15.1 Approach LOS BABB Queue Length 50th (m) 33.4 13.3 10.8 0.0 2.9 Queue Length 95th (m) 48.0 20.5 22.1 10.1 7.2 Internal Link Dist (m) 845.8 286.4 169.4 175.2

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 9 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Dufferin Avenue & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1194 1448 552 569 843 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.49 0.25 0.19 0.20 0.08 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 73 Actuated Cycle Length: 73 Offset: 42 (58%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.49 Intersection Signal Delay: 14.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 5: Dufferin Avenue & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 10 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: Queen Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 517 38 61 296 9 15 28 81 10 14 8 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 Frt 0.990 0.996 0.911 0.965 Flt Protected 0.950 0.992 0.994 0.985 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1823 0 0 3309 0 0 1597 0 0 1394 0 Flt Permitted 0.517 0.749 0.973 0.922 Satd. Flow (perm) 962 1823 0 0 2497 0 0 1560 0 0 1303 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 8 6 88 9 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 310.4 123.8 212.1 196.5 Travel Time (s) 22.3 8.9 15.3 14.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 18 5 5 18 14 4 4 14 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 3% 3% 7% 8% 0% 7% 11% 5% 60% 0% 38% Adj. Flow (vph) 11 562 41 66 322 10 16 30 88 11 15 9 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 603 0 0 398 0 0 134 0 0 35 0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2684 Permitted Phases 2684 Minimum Split (s) 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Total Split (s) 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 Total Split (%) 59.4% 59.4% 59.4% 59.4% 40.6% 40.6% 40.6% 40.6% Maximum Green (s) 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 32.0 32.0 32.0 21.0 21.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.33 0.33 v/c Ratio 0.02 0.66 0.32 0.23 0.08 Control Delay 8.4 16.1 10.2 7.9 12.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 8.4 16.1 10.2 7.9 12.8 LOSABBAB Approach Delay 16.0 10.2 7.9 12.8 Approach LOS BBAB Queue Length 50th (m) 0.7 51.4 14.1 3.9 2.2 Queue Length 95th (m) 2.9 84.3 22.6 14.8 7.8 Internal Link Dist (m) 286.4 99.8 188.1 172.5

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 11 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: Queen Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 481 915 1251 571 433 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.02 0.66 0.32 0.23 0.08 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 64 Actuated Cycle Length: 64 Offset: 26 (41%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.66 Intersection Signal Delay: 13.0 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 6: Queen Street & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 12 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Quinte Street/Division Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 107 374 90 28 190 24 29 33 10 44 76 141 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 92.0 0.0 38.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 27.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.97 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.98 Frt 0.850 0.983 0.965 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1626 1881 1615 1805 1808 0 1752 1779 0 1770 1845 1417 Flt Permitted 0.574 0.523 0.703 0.726 Satd. Flow (perm) 980 1881 1564 987 1808 0 1288 1779 0 1337 1845 1389 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 98 10 11 153 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 123.8 319.0 71.2 603.8 Travel Time (s) 8.9 23.0 5.1 43.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 11 11 6 6 6 6 6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 11% 1% 0% 0% 3% 4% 3% 3% 0% 2% 3% 14% Adj. Flow (vph) 116 407 98 30 207 26 32 36 11 48 83 153 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 116 407 98 30 233 0 32 47 0 48 83 153 Number of Detectors 12112 12 121 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2684 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 8 4 4 Detector Phase 52266 88 444 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 15.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 Total Split (%) 18.1% 53.0% 53.0% 53.0% 53.0% 28.9% 28.9% 28.9% 28.9% 28.9%

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 13 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Quinte Street/Division Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Maximum Green (s) 12.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max Max Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0000 00 000 Act Effct Green (s) 56.0 53.0 53.0 44.2 44.2 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.64 0.64 0.53 0.53 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.16 0.34 0.09 0.06 0.24 0.11 0.12 0.17 0.21 0.36 Control Delay 5.3 7.9 1.6 11.2 11.7 27.5 22.3 22.3 22.4 8.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.3 8.8 1.6 11.2 11.7 27.5 22.3 22.3 22.4 8.2 LOS AAABB CC CCA Approach Delay 7.0 11.6 24.4 14.7 Approach LOS A B C B Queue Length 50th (m) 5.9 27.7 0.0 2.4 19.5 4.3 4.8 7.7 13.4 9.5 Queue Length 95th (m) 11.3 43.0 4.9 7.1 34.9 11.8 13.6 m13.4 m21.3 m17.3 Internal Link Dist (m) 99.8 295.0 47.2 579.8 Turn Bay Length (m) 92.0 27.0 Base Capacity (vph) 754 1201 1034 525 967 279 394 289 400 421 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 511 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 00000 00 000 Storage Cap Reductn 00000 00 000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.15 0.59 0.09 0.06 0.24 0.11 0.12 0.17 0.21 0.36 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 83 Actuated Cycle Length: 83 Offset: 74 (89%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.36 Intersection Signal Delay: 10.8 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

Splits and Phases: 7: Quinte Street/Division Street & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 14 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 9: Fraser Park Drive/Front Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 12 474 21 0 244 101 20 11 30 121 12 23 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 50.0 0.0 32.0 0.0 33.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.94 0.98 0.99 0.99 Frt 0.994 0.850 0.850 0.980 Flt Protected 0.950 0.969 0.963 Satd. Flow (prot) 1444 1865 0 0 1881 1599 0 1784 1615 0 1706 0 Flt Permitted 0.594 0.830 0.751 Satd. Flow (perm) 876 1865 0 0 1881 1499 0 1497 1593 0 1329 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 7 110 33 11 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 319.0 306.1 47.5 117.0 Travel Time (s) 23.0 22.0 3.4 8.4 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 18 17 17 18 22 1 1 22 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 25% 1% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 9% 0% 2% 8% 13% Adj. Flow (vph) 13 515 23 0 265 110 22 12 33 132 13 25 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 13 538 0 0 265 110 0 34 33 0 170 0 Turn Type Perm NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Perm NA Protected Phases 2684 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 8 4 Minimum Split (s) 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.5 11.5 Total Split (s) 52.0 52.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (%) 72.2% 72.2% 27.8% 27.8% 27.8% 27.8% 27.8% 27.8% 27.8% Maximum Green (s) 48.0 48.0 16.0 16.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 16.5 16.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0000000 Act Effct Green (s) 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 17.0 17.0 16.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.24 0.24 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.02 0.43 0.21 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.54 Control Delay 4.2 6.9 5.2 1.2 22.5 9.0 30.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.2 6.9 5.2 1.2 22.5 9.0 30.3 LOS AA AA CA C Approach Delay 6.8 4.0 15.8 30.3 Approach LOS A A B C

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 15 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 9: Fraser Park Drive/Front Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 0.5 29.8 12.3 0.0 3.8 0.0 19.9 Queue Length 95th (m) 2.1 47.1 21.0 4.3 10.7 6.4 39.1 Internal Link Dist (m) 295.0 282.1 23.5 93.0 Turn Bay Length (m) 32.0 33.0 Base Capacity (vph) 584 1245 1254 1036 353 401 313 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.02 0.43 0.21 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.54 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 72 Actuated Cycle Length: 72 Offset: 20 (28%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.54 Intersection Signal Delay: 9.8 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 9: Fraser Park Drive/Front Street & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 16 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 10: Ontario Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 12 583 34 2 301 4 32 4 3 21 10 17 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.998 0.990 0.953 Flt Protected 0.999 0.950 0.960 0.978 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1877 1482 1203 1877 0 0 1682 0 0 1604 0 Flt Permitted 0.992 0.258 0.808 0.900 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1863 1445 326 1877 0 0 1416 0 0 1475 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 37 1 3 18 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 306.1 236.6 67.3 104.8 Travel Time (s) 22.0 17.0 4.8 7.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 2 2 3 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 8% 1% 9% 50% 1% 0% 3% 25% 33% 14% 10% 6% Adj. Flow (vph) 13 634 37 2 327 4 35 4 3 23 11 18 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 647 37 2 331 0 0 42 0 0 52 0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2684 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 8 4 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Total Split (s) 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 Total Split (%) 58.9% 58.9% 58.9% 58.9% 58.9% 41.1% 41.1% 41.1% 41.1% Maximum Green (s) 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 00000 00 00 Act Effct Green (s) 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.34 0.34 v/c Ratio 0.67 0.05 0.01 0.34 0.09 0.10 Control Delay 17.1 3.4 9.0 11.4 16.1 12.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 17.1 3.4 9.0 11.4 16.1 12.6 LOS B A A B B B Approach Delay 16.4 11.4 16.1 12.6 Approach LOS BBBB Queue Length 50th (m) 63.9 0.0 0.1 25.8 3.7 3.3 Queue Length 95th (m) 100.2 4.0 1.1 42.3 10.3 10.4 Internal Link Dist (m) 282.1 212.6 43.3 80.8

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 17 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 10: Ontario Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 969 769 169 977 486 516 Starvation Cap Reductn 0000 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0000 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0000 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.67 0.05 0.01 0.34 0.09 0.10 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 73 Actuated Cycle Length: 73 Offset: 30 (41%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.67 Intersection Signal Delay: 14.7 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 10: Ontario Street & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 18 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 11: Dundas Street & Marmora Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 24 572 284 77 78 25 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1736 1881 1881 1482 1719 1553 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1736 1881 1881 1482 1719 1553 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 236.6 192.7 600.4 Travel Time (s) 17.0 13.9 43.2 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 4% 1% 1% 9% 5% 4% Adj. Flow (vph) 26 622 309 84 85 27 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 26 622 309 84 85 27 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 19 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 13: Byron Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 52 592 2 9 317 48 3 14 2 161 12 31 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.99 Frt 0.981 0.986 0.891 Flt Protected 0.996 0.999 0.993 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3520 0 0 3423 0 0 1760 0 1736 1537 0 Flt Permitted 0.892 0.931 0.978 0.744 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3152 0 0 3190 0 0 1733 0 1315 1537 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 1 23 2 34 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 192.7 732.6 71.0 65.4 Travel Time (s) 13.9 52.7 5.1 4.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 2 39 39 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 4% 2% 0% 22% 3% 0% 0% 7% 0% 4% 25% 3% Adj. Flow (vph) 57 643 2 10 345 52 3 15 2 175 13 34 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 702 0 0 407 0 0 20 0 175 47 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2684 Permitted Phases 2684 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 12.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 Total Split (%) 16.7% 37.5% 37.5% 37.5% 45.8% 45.8% 45.8% 45.8% Maximum Green (s) 9.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 14.0 14.0 14.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 33.0 21.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.29 0.38 0.38 0.38 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.43 0.03 0.35 0.08 Control Delay 14.6 21.1 13.6 18.8 7.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.6 21.1 13.6 18.8 7.6 LOS B C B B A Approach Delay 14.6 21.1 13.6 16.5 Approach LOS B C B B Queue Length 50th (m) 33.8 23.0 1.6 17.5 1.2 Queue Length 95th (m) 47.3 35.5 5.7 33.1 7.3 Internal Link Dist (m) 168.7 708.6 47.0 41.4

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 20 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 13: Byron Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1475 946 651 493 597 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.48 0.43 0.03 0.35 0.08 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 72 Actuated Cycle Length: 72 Offset: 45 (63%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.48 Intersection Signal Delay: 16.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 13: Byron Street & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 21 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 14: Flindall Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 8 715 23 6 362 24123110 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Frt 0.995 0.999 0.961 0.901 Flt Protected 0.999 0.999 0.972 0.990 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3519 0 0 3500 0 0 1242 0 0 1678 0 Flt Permitted 0.952 0.940 0.933 0.976 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3353 0 0 3293 0 0 1192 0 0 1654 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 6 1 2 11 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 732.6 220.1 138.5 104.5 Travel Time (s) 52.7 15.8 10.0 7.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 0% 0% 3% 0% 25% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 9 777 25 7 393 24123111 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 811 0 0 402 00700150 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2684 Permitted Phases 2684 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 Total Split (s) 10.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 Total Split (%) 12.3% 49.4% 49.4% 49.4% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 34.0 34.0 34.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 44.0 34.0 26.0 26.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.42 0.32 0.32 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.29 0.02 0.03 Control Delay 11.9 16.2 17.0 12.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.9 16.2 17.0 12.1 LOSBBBB Approach Delay 11.9 16.2 17.0 12.1 Approach LOS BBBB Queue Length 50th (m) 37.8 21.9 0.6 0.4 Queue Length 95th (m) 51.1 32.3 3.4 4.5 Internal Link Dist (m) 708.6 196.1 114.5 80.5

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 22 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 14: Flindall Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1832 1382 383 538 Starvation Cap Reductn 0000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0000 Storage Cap Reductn 0000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.44 0.29 0.02 0.03 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 81 Actuated Cycle Length: 81 Offset: 41 (51%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.44 Intersection Signal Delay: 13.3 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 14: Flindall Street & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 23 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 15: Bay Street/Driveway & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 51 642 19 3 342 11 16 8 37 41 3 14 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.996 0.995 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.996 0.968 0.955 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3496 0 0 3491 0 0 1839 1568 0 1700 1509 Flt Permitted 0.900 0.950 0.870 0.784 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3159 0 0 3317 0 0 1653 1568 0 1395 1509 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 6 5 90 90 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 30 Link Distance (m) 220.1 231.6 82.6 31.5 Travel Time (s) 15.8 16.7 5.9 3.8 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 16% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 3% 5% 33% 7% Adj. Flow (vph) 55 698 21 3 372 12 17 9 40 45 3 15 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 774 0 0 387 0 0 26 40 0 48 15 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2684 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 8 4 4 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s) 10.0 40.0 35.0 35.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 Total Split (%) 13.7% 54.8% 47.9% 47.9% 38.4% 38.4% 38.4% 38.4% 38.4% 38.4% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 34.0 29.0 29.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 14.0 14.0 14.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 000000 Act Effct Green (s) 39.0 29.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.40 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.29 0.05 0.07 0.11 0.03 Control Delay 11.3 15.6 17.8 0.8 18.7 0.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.3 15.6 17.8 0.8 18.7 0.1 LOS B B B A B A Approach Delay 11.3 15.6 7.5 14.2 Approach LOS BBAB Queue Length 50th (m) 32.2 19.2 2.6 0.0 4.9 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 44.6 29.2 7.9 1.2 12.3 0.0 Internal Link Dist (m) 196.1 207.6 58.6 7.5

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 24 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 15: Bay Street/Driveway & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1708 1320 520 555 439 537 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.45 0.29 0.05 0.07 0.11 0.03 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 73 Actuated Cycle Length: 73 Offset: 38 (52%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.45 Intersection Signal Delay: 12.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 15: Bay Street/Driveway & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 25 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 16: Canadian Tire Plaza Driveway & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 679 35 20 355 4 15 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.993 0.892 Flt Protected 0.997 0.990 Satd. Flow (prot) 3509 0 0 3468 1678 0 Flt Permitted 0.915 0.990 Satd. Flow (perm) 3509 0 0 3183 1678 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 11 16 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 231.6 575.6 114.5 Travel Time (s) 16.7 41.4 8.2 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 3% 0% 4% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 738 38 22 386 4 16 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 776 0 0 408 20 0 Turn Type NA pm+pt NA NA Protected Phases 2 1 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 Minimum Split (s) 26.0 8.0 26.0 19.0 Total Split (s) 33.0 10.0 33.0 19.0 Total Split (%) 53.2% 16.1% 53.2% 30.6% Maximum Green (s) 27.0 7.0 27.0 16.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 3.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 27.0 37.0 16.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.60 0.26 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.21 0.05 Control Delay 13.9 6.1 10.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.9 6.1 10.6 LOS B A B Approach Delay 13.9 6.1 10.6 Approach LOS B A B Queue Length 50th (m) 33.1 10.2 0.4 Queue Length 95th (m) 47.7 16.0 4.8 Internal Link Dist (m) 207.6 551.6 90.5

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 26 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 16: Canadian Tire Plaza Driveway & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1534 1917 444 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.21 0.05 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 62 Actuated Cycle Length: 62 Offset: 29 (47%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.51 Intersection Signal Delay: 11.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 16: Canadian Tire Plaza Driveway & Dundas Street

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 27 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 17: R.C.A.F Road & Dundas Street/Old Highway 2 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 78 648 2 0 301 268 0 0 0 477 1 35 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 61.0 0.0 29.0 55.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 Taper Length (m) 45.0 55.0 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.96 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.952 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 3574 0 1900 3574 1495 0 1900 0 0 1723 1568 Flt Permitted 0.491 0.727 Satd. Flow (perm) 932 3574 0 1900 3574 1463 0 1900 0 0 1316 1503 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 291 124 Link Speed (k/h) 50 60 50 60 Link Distance (m) 575.6 160.8 98.7 383.1 Travel Time (s) 41.4 9.6 7.1 23.0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 23 23 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 8% 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 3% Adj. Flow (vph) 85 704 2 0 327 291 0 0 0 518 1 38 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 85 706 0 0 327 291 000051938 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 6 8 4 4 Minimum Split (s) 11.0 22.5 11.0 22.5 22.5 12.5 12.5 28.5 28.5 28.5 Total Split (s) 24.0 46.5 19.0 41.5 41.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 Total Split (%) 23.8% 46.0% 18.8% 41.1% 41.1% 35.1% 35.1% 35.1% 35.1% 35.1% Maximum Green (s) 20.0 40.0 15.0 35.0 35.0 30.7 30.7 30.0 30.0 30.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.7 3.7 3.7 All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 6.5 4.0 6.5 6.5 4.8 5.5 5.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 14.0 14.0 14.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 000 Act Effct Green (s) 61.5 40.0 35.0 35.0 30.0 30.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 0.40 0.35 0.35 0.30 0.30 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.50 0.26 0.42 1.33 0.07 Control Delay 8.6 24.5 24.5 4.8 196.9 0.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 8.6 24.5 24.5 4.8 196.9 0.3 LOS A C C A F A Approach Delay 22.8 15.2 183.5 Approach LOS C B F

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 28 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 17: R.C.A.F Road & Dundas Street/Old Highway 2 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 6.6 56.6 25.2 0.0 ~139.6 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 12.9 74.0 36.5 17.8 #204.3 0.0 Internal Link Dist (m) 551.6 136.8 74.7 359.1 Turn Bay Length (m) 61.0 55.0 Base Capacity (vph) 740 1415 1238 697 390 533 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.11 0.50 0.26 0.42 1.33 0.07 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 101 Actuated Cycle Length: 101 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.33 Intersection Signal Delay: 65.9 Intersection LOS: E Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Splits and Phases: 17: R.C.A.F Road & Dundas Street/Old Highway 2

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 29 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 18: Front Street & Division Street/Dixon Drive 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 118 212 1 64 294 113 6 83 57 187 115 252 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.96 0.98 1.00 Frt 0.999 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.996 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1656 1637 0 1770 1696 1495 0 1825 1509 1687 1863 1538 Flt Permitted 0.250 0.424 0.995 0.694 Satd. Flow (perm) 431 1637 0 784 1696 1432 0 1823 1477 1231 1863 1538 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 123 105 274 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 603.8 498.0 189.5 106.4 Travel Time (s) 43.5 35.9 13.6 7.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 5 5 10 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 9% 16% 0% 2% 12% 8% 0% 4% 7% 7% 2% 5% Adj. Flow (vph) 128 230 1 70 320 123 7 90 62 203 125 274 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 128 231 0 70 320 123 0 97 62 203 125 274 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 6 8 8 4 4 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 12.0 8.0 12.0 12.0 9.0 12.0 12.0 9.0 12.0 12.0 Total Split (s) 13.0 22.0 13.0 22.0 22.0 14.0 34.0 34.0 14.0 34.0 34.0 Total Split (%) 15.7% 26.5% 15.7% 26.5% 26.5% 16.9% 41.0% 41.0% 16.9% 41.0% 41.0% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 18.0 10.0 18.0 18.0 10.0 30.0 30.0 10.0 30.0 30.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 5 10 10 1 1 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 29.0 18.0 29.0 18.0 18.0 40.0 30.0 40.0 30.0 30.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.22 0.35 0.22 0.22 0.48 0.36 0.48 0.36 0.36 v/c Ratio 0.43 0.65 0.18 0.87 0.30 0.11 0.10 0.31 0.19 0.38 Control Delay 21.9 39.5 17.7 57.1 7.7 10.2 1.6 12.1 19.1 4.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 21.9 39.5 17.7 57.1 7.7 10.2 1.6 12.1 19.1 4.2 LOS CD BEA BABBA Approach Delay 33.2 39.9 6.9 9.9 Approach LOS C D A A Queue Length 50th (m) 14.7 36.1 7.3 51.7 0.0 7.5 0.0 16.9 14.0 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 27.8 #60.9 15.8 #98.1 13.5 15.0 2.9 29.1 26.2 15.3 Internal Link Dist (m) 579.8 474.0 165.5 82.4

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 30 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 18: Front Street & Division Street/Dixon Drive 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 298 355 392 367 406 878 600 648 673 730 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 00000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 00000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 00000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.43 0.65 0.18 0.87 0.30 0.11 0.10 0.31 0.19 0.38 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 83 Actuated Cycle Length: 83 Offset: 55 (66%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.87 Intersection Signal Delay: 24.2 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Splits and Phases: 18: Front Street & Division Street/Dixon Drive

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 31 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 19: Marmora Street & Dixon Drive 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 91 284 61 15 272 14 79 32 12 6 26 120 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 34.0 0.0 57.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Taper Length (m) 16.0 27.0 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Frt 0.974 0.993 0.959 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.990 Satd. Flow (prot) 1641 1621 0 1504 1701 0 1530 1771 0 0 1765 1568 Flt Permitted 0.386 0.476 0.665 0.963 Satd. Flow (perm) 666 1621 0 752 1701 0 1068 1771 0 0 1715 1546 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 12 3 13 130 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 498.0 417.6 600.4 195.5 Travel Time (s) 35.9 30.1 43.2 14.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 4 4 1 2 3 3 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 10% 14% 13% 20% 11% 7% 18% 3% 0% 17% 4% 3% Adj. Flow (vph) 99 309 66 16 296 15 86 35 13 7 28 130 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 99 375 0 16 311 0 86 48 0 0 35 130 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 26844 Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 14.0 8.0 14.0 8.0 32.0 8.0 32.0 32.0 Total Split (s) 12.0 31.0 12.0 31.0 12.0 32.0 12.0 32.0 32.0 Total Split (%) 13.8% 35.6% 13.8% 35.6% 13.8% 36.8% 13.8% 36.8% 36.8%

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 32 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 19: Marmora Street & Dixon Drive 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Maximum Green (s) 9.0 25.0 9.0 25.0 9.0 26.0 9.0 26.0 26.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max None C-Max None Max None Max Max Walk Time (s) 16.0 16.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 9.0 9.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 41322 Act Effct Green (s) 39.8 35.0 35.8 27.8 41.0 38.0 28.9 28.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.40 0.41 0.32 0.47 0.44 0.33 0.33 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.57 0.04 0.57 0.16 0.06 0.06 0.22 Control Delay 15.3 24.9 13.4 30.6 13.8 11.5 22.2 5.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 15.3 24.9 13.4 30.6 13.8 11.5 22.2 5.5 LOS BC BC BB CA Approach Delay 22.9 29.7 13.0 9.0 Approach LOS C C B A Queue Length 50th (m) 9.6 46.0 1.5 46.5 8.1 3.4 4.3 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 18.9 #93.2 4.9 75.2 16.6 9.7 11.4 12.5 Internal Link Dist (m) 474.0 393.6 576.4 171.5 Turn Bay Length (m) 34.0 57.0 Base Capacity (vph) 405 659 406 545 551 780 570 600 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.24 0.57 0.04 0.57 0.16 0.06 0.06 0.22 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 87 Actuated Cycle Length: 87 Offset: 8 (9%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.57 Intersection Signal Delay: 21.6 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Splits and Phases: 19: Marmora Street & Dixon Drive

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 33 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 20: Sidney Street & Dixon Drive 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 136 169 12 0 110 25 9 53 8 68 118 165 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 34.0 0.0 63.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Taper Length (m) 15.0 29.0 15.0 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.97 Frt 0.990 0.972 0.980 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.982 Satd. Flow (prot) 1641 1656 0 1900 1490 0 1805 1794 0 0 1749 1553 Flt Permitted 0.663 0.621 0.870 Satd. Flow (perm) 1139 1656 0 1900 1490 0 1167 1794 0 0 1548 1499 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 7 21 9 179 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 417.6 263.5 277.6 95.9 Travel Time (s) 30.1 19.0 20.0 6.9 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 6 6 6 11 2 2 11 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 10% 12% 33% 0% 25% 16% 0% 4% 0% 13% 3% 4% Adj. Flow (vph) 148 184 13 0 120 27 10 58 9 74 128 179 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 148 197 0 0 147 0 10 67 0 0 202 179 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 2684 Permitted Phases 26844 Minimum Split (s) 41.5 41.5 41.5 41.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 Total Split (s) 41.5 41.5 41.5 41.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 Total Split (%) 55.3% 55.3% 55.3% 55.3% 44.7% 44.7% 44.7% 44.7% 44.7% Maximum Green (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 6 6 6 6 2 2 11 11 11 Act Effct Green (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 v/c Ratio 0.27 0.25 0.20 0.02 0.10 0.35 0.27 Control Delay 13.4 12.1 10.5 15.2 14.2 19.1 4.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.4 12.1 10.5 15.2 14.2 19.1 4.0 LOS B B B B B B A Approach Delay 12.7 10.5 14.3 12.0 Approach LOS BBBB

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 34 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 20: Sidney Street & Dixon Drive 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 12.5 15.7 10.1 0.9 5.5 21.2 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 24.5 28.5 20.6 3.9 13.3 38.0 11.8 Internal Link Dist (m) 393.6 239.5 253.6 71.9 Turn Bay Length (m) 34.0 Base Capacity (vph) 546 798 726 435 675 577 671 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.27 0.25 0.20 0.02 0.10 0.35 0.27 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 75 Actuated Cycle Length: 75 Offset: 33.5 (45%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.35 Intersection Signal Delay: 12.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 20: Sidney Street & Dixon Drive

Existing - AM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Synchro 8 Report Page 35 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Wooler Road & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 69 217 14 82 433 118 16 74 27 95 111 140 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 199.0 73.0 240.0 139.0 178.0 0.0 179.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.98 0.99 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.960 0.916 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1881 1615 1805 1881 1568 1444 1644 0 1752 1656 0 Flt Permitted 0.401 0.607 0.440 0.687 Satd. Flow (perm) 740 1881 1615 1153 1881 1534 669 1644 0 1262 1656 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 76 128 17 60 Link Speed (k/h) 80 80 50 50 Link Distance (m) 266.7 613.0 408.7 368.0 Travel Time (s) 12.0 27.6 29.4 26.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 2 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 1% 0% 0% 1% 3% 25% 14% 0% 3% 4% 6% Adj. Flow (vph) 75 236 15 89 471 128 17 80 29 103 121 152 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 75 236 15 89 471 128 17 109 0 103 273 0 Number of Detectors 12112112 12 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 6 8 4 Detector Phase 52216688 44 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 6.0 20.0 20.0 6.0 20.0 20.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 10.0 27.0 27.0 10.0 27.0 27.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 Total Split (s) 11.0 57.0 57.0 11.0 57.0 57.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 Total Split (%) 11.0% 57.0% 57.0% 11.0% 57.0% 57.0% 32.0% 32.0% 32.0% 32.0%

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Wooler Road & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Maximum Green (s) 8.0 50.0 50.0 8.0 50.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0000 00 Act Effct Green (s) 62.4 52.6 52.6 62.8 52.8 52.8 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.62 0.53 0.53 0.63 0.53 0.53 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.14 0.24 0.02 0.12 0.47 0.15 0.10 0.26 0.33 0.59 Control Delay 7.1 14.4 0.0 6.9 17.6 2.9 30.9 27.2 34.1 31.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.1 14.4 0.0 6.9 17.6 2.9 30.9 27.2 34.1 31.7 LOS ABAABACC CC Approach Delay 12.0 13.5 27.7 32.3 Approach LOS B B C C Queue Length 50th (m) 5.1 26.0 0.0 6.1 60.0 0.0 2.7 15.0 17.2 38.1 Queue Length 95th (m) 10.1 41.9 0.0 11.6 89.9 9.2 8.7 29.9 32.8 65.7 Internal Link Dist (m) 242.7 589.0 384.7 344.0 Turn Bay Length (m) 199.0 73.0 240.0 139.0 178.0 179.0 Base Capacity (vph) 547 990 886 780 993 870 167 423 315 459 Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000 00 Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000 00 Storage Cap Reductn 00000000 00 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.14 0.24 0.02 0.11 0.47 0.15 0.10 0.26 0.33 0.59 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Offset: 43 (43%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.59 Intersection Signal Delay: 19.0 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Wooler Road & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: 2 Dug Hill & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 71 290 6 33 561 155 15 11 27 257 26 37 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 137.0 130.0 114.0 113.0 125.0 129.0 212.0 118.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 3505 1615 1805 3539 1583 1805 1900 1615 1787 1900 1568 Flt Permitted 0.285 0.561 0.739 0.687 Satd. Flow (perm) 536 3505 1559 1056 3539 1505 1401 1900 1593 1290 1900 1533 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 82 168 82 82 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 243.9 433.1 437.2 391.9 Travel Time (s) 17.6 31.2 31.5 28.2 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 12 6 6 12 1 1 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 3% 0% 0% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 3% Adj. Flow (vph) 77 315 7 36 610 168 16 12 29 279 28 40 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 77 315 7 36 610 168 16 12 29 279 28 40 Number of Detectors 121121121121 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 6 8 8 4 4 Detector Phase 522166388744 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 15.0 15.0 4.0 15.0 15.0 4.0 7.0 7.0 4.0 7.0 7.0 Minimum Split (s) 7.0 20.0 20.0 7.0 20.0 20.0 7.0 12.0 12.0 7.0 12.0 12.0 Total Split (s) 18.0 35.0 35.0 18.0 35.0 35.0 18.0 35.0 35.0 18.0 35.0 35.0 Total Split (%) 17.0% 33.0% 33.0% 17.0% 33.0% 33.0% 17.0% 33.0% 33.0% 17.0% 33.0% 33.0%

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: 2 Dug Hill & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Maximum Green (s) 15.0 30.0 30.0 15.0 30.0 30.0 15.0 30.0 30.0 15.0 30.0 30.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max None Max Max None Max Max Walk Time (s) 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 49.2 41.8 41.8 46.4 38.8 38.8 39.2 31.1 31.1 50.0 44.2 44.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.39 0.39 0.44 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.29 0.29 0.47 0.42 0.42 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.23 0.01 0.07 0.47 0.26 0.03 0.02 0.06 0.41 0.04 0.06 Control Delay 17.2 23.0 0.0 15.7 28.1 5.1 15.8 27.7 0.2 19.8 20.7 0.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 17.2 23.0 0.0 15.7 28.1 5.1 15.8 27.7 0.2 19.8 20.7 0.7 LOS BCABCABCABCA Approach Delay 21.5 22.8 10.4 17.6 Approach LOS C C B B Queue Length 50th (m) 8.9 24.9 0.0 4.1 54.2 0.0 1.8 1.9 0.0 36.7 3.3 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 17.5 36.8 0.0 9.9 74.2 14.7 5.6 6.5 0.0 56.4 10.2 1.3 Internal Link Dist (m) 219.9 409.1 413.2 367.9 Turn Bay Length (m) 137.0 130.0 114.0 113.0 125.0 129.0 212.0 118.0 Base Capacity (vph) 432 1382 664 604 1294 657 690 557 525 678 791 686 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000000 Storage Cap Reductn 000000000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.18 0.23 0.01 0.06 0.47 0.26 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.41 0.04 0.06 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 106 Actuated Cycle Length: 106 Offset: 53 (50%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.47 Intersection Signal Delay: 20.9 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 2: 2 Dug Hill & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Tripp Boulevard & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 574 0 0 622 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 98.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 3610 0 1900 3610 1900 1900 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 3610 0 1900 3610 1900 1900 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 433.1 437.3 139.3 Travel Time (s) 31.2 31.5 10.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 624 0 0 676 0 0 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 624 0 0 676 0 0 Turn Type NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 Permitted Phases 8 2 Minimum Split (s) 21.0 20.0 20.0 12.0 12.0 Total Split (s) 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 Total Split (%) 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% Maximum Green (s) 51.0 51.0 51.0 51.0 51.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 7.0 7.0 12.0 12.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 5 8855 Act Effct Green (s) 51.0 51.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.46 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.40 Control Delay 19.9 20.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 19.9 20.4 LOS B C Approach Delay 19.9 20.4 Approach LOS B C Queue Length 50th (m) 46.8 51.5 Queue Length 95th (m) 61.0 66.6

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 5 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Tripp Boulevard & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Internal Link Dist (m) 409.1 413.3 115.3 Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1673 1673 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.37 0.40 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 110 Actuated Cycle Length: 110 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBL and 6:, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.40 Intersection Signal Delay: 20.2 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 3: Tripp Boulevard & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 6 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 4: Farley Crescent/4th Avenue & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 574 0 0 622 0000000 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3610 0 0 3610 0 0 1900 0 0 1900 1900 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3610 0 0 3610 0 0 1900 0 0 1900 1900 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 437.3 869.8 48.2 327.5 Travel Time (s) 31.5 62.6 3.5 23.6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 0 624 0 0 676 0000000 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 624 0 0 676 0000000 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4826 Permitted Phases 48266 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Total Split (s) 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5 Total Split (%) 51.4% 51.4% 51.4% 51.4% 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% Maximum Green (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 21.5 21.5 21.5 21.5 21.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.0 5.0 5.0

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 7 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 4: Farley Crescent/4th Avenue & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 15.0 15.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 12.0 8.0 8.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 16.0 16.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.29 0.29 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.64 Control Delay 18.3 19.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 18.3 19.2 LOS B B Approach Delay 18.3 19.2 Approach LOS B B Queue Length 50th (m) 28.4 31.3 Queue Length 95th (m) 36.8 40.2 Internal Link Dist (m) 413.3 845.8 24.2 303.5 Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1490 1490 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.42 0.45 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 54.5 Actuated Cycle Length: 54.5 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.64 Intersection Signal Delay: 18.8 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 4: Farley Crescent/4th Avenue & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 8 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Dufferin Avenue & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 11 446 30 121 562 5 43 51 103 8 70 17 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 0.991 0.999 0.850 0.974 Flt Protected 0.999 0.991 0.977 0.996 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3537 0 0 3538 0 0 1856 1615 0 3494 0 Flt Permitted 0.934 0.703 0.845 0.937 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3306 0 0 2508 0 0 1605 1589 0 3286 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 10 1 112 18 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 869.8 310.4 193.4 199.2 Travel Time (s) 62.6 22.3 13.9 14.3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 12 12 6 1 3 3 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 12 485 33 132 611 5 47 55 112 9 76 18 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 530 0 0 748 0 0 102 112 0 103 0 Turn Type Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Protected Phases 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Minimum Split (s) 18.0 18.0 13.0 18.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 13.0 44.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 Total Split (%) 42.5% 42.5% 17.8% 60.3% 39.7% 39.7% 39.7% 39.7% 39.7% Maximum Green (s) 26.0 26.0 10.0 39.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 16.0 16.0 15.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 10.0 10.0 9.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 00000 Act Effct Green (s) 26.0 39.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.53 0.33 0.33 0.33 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.51 0.19 0.19 0.09 Control Delay 19.1 11.6 18.8 4.8 14.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 19.1 11.6 18.8 4.8 14.5 LOS B B B A B Approach Delay 19.1 11.6 11.5 14.5 Approach LOS BBBB Queue Length 50th (m) 29.6 31.0 10.4 0.0 4.4 Queue Length 95th (m) 43.2 43.0 21.5 10.1 9.5 Internal Link Dist (m) 845.8 286.4 169.4 175.2

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 9 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Dufferin Avenue & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1183 1453 527 597 1092 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.45 0.51 0.19 0.19 0.09 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 73 Actuated Cycle Length: 73 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.51 Intersection Signal Delay: 14.3 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 5: Dufferin Avenue & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 10 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: Queen Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 5 516 15 108 640 5 33 34 96 6 14 9 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 Frt 0.996 0.999 0.921 0.958 Flt Protected 0.950 0.993 0.990 0.989 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1872 0 0 3525 0 0 1667 0 0 1791 0 Flt Permitted 0.300 0.688 0.943 0.944 Satd. Flow (perm) 568 1872 0 0 2440 0 0 1586 0 0 1708 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 3 1 104 10 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 310.4 123.8 212.1 196.5 Travel Time (s) 22.3 8.9 15.3 14.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 9 9 5 4 3 3 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 5% 1% 0% 6% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 5 561 16 117 696 5 36 37 104 7 15 10 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 5 577 0 0 818 0 0 177 0 0 32 0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2684 Permitted Phases 2684 Minimum Split (s) 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Total Split (s) 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 Total Split (%) 59.4% 59.4% 59.4% 59.4% 40.6% 40.6% 40.6% 40.6% Maximum Green (s) 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 32.0 32.0 32.0 21.0 21.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.33 0.33 v/c Ratio 0.02 0.62 0.67 0.30 0.06 Control Delay 8.4 15.1 15.4 8.9 11.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 8.4 15.1 15.4 8.9 11.9 LOSABBAB Approach Delay 15.0 15.4 8.9 11.9 Approach LOS BBAB Queue Length 50th (m) 0.3 47.9 37.4 6.3 1.8 Queue Length 95th (m) 1.8 78.0 56.4 19.2 7.1 Internal Link Dist (m) 286.4 99.8 188.1 172.5

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 11 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: Queen Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 284 937 1220 590 567 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.02 0.62 0.67 0.30 0.06 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 64 Actuated Cycle Length: 64 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.67 Intersection Signal Delay: 14.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 6: Queen Street & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 12 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Quinte Street/Division Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 115 408 81 36 406 27 131 123 18 50 109 222 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 92.0 0.0 38.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 27.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.97 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.96 0.97 Frt 0.850 0.991 0.981 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1900 1599 1805 1876 0 1787 1847 0 1805 1863 1538 Flt Permitted 0.378 0.506 0.681 0.656 Satd. Flow (perm) 696 1900 1545 954 1876 0 1262 1847 0 1196 1863 1493 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 88 5 8 241 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 123.8 319.0 71.2 603.8 Travel Time (s) 8.9 23.0 5.1 43.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 7 13 13 7 14 24 24 14 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 0% 1% 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 0% 0% 2% 5% Adj. Flow (vph) 125 443 88 39 441 29 142 134 20 54 118 241 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 125 443 88 39 470 0 142 154 0 54 118 241 Number of Detectors 12112 12 121 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2684 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 8 4 4 Detector Phase 52266 88 444 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 15.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 Total Split (%) 18.1% 53.0% 53.0% 53.0% 53.0% 28.9% 28.9% 28.9% 28.9% 28.9%

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 13 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Quinte Street/Division Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Maximum Green (s) 12.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max Max Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0000 00 000 Act Effct Green (s) 56.0 53.0 53.0 44.2 44.2 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.64 0.64 0.53 0.53 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.37 0.09 0.08 0.47 0.52 0.38 0.21 0.29 0.47 Control Delay 5.7 8.1 1.6 11.4 14.8 36.6 29.5 29.5 30.1 16.6 Queue Delay 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.7 9.2 1.6 11.4 14.8 36.6 29.5 29.5 30.1 16.6 LOS AAABB DC CCB Approach Delay 7.5 14.5 32.9 22.1 Approach LOS A B C C Queue Length 50th (m) 6.3 30.9 0.0 3.1 47.5 21.0 20.8 9.1 20.2 23.9 Queue Length 95th (m) 11.8 47.2 4.7 8.6 76.8 39.7 38.1 m11.5 m22.4 m26.5 Internal Link Dist (m) 99.8 295.0 47.2 579.8 Turn Bay Length (m) 92.0 27.0 Base Capacity (vph) 622 1213 1018 508 1002 273 406 259 404 512 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 510 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 00000 00 000 Storage Cap Reductn 00000 00 000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.63 0.09 0.08 0.47 0.52 0.38 0.21 0.29 0.47 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 83 Actuated Cycle Length: 83 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.52 Intersection Signal Delay: 16.6 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

Splits and Phases: 7: Quinte Street/Division Street & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 14 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 9: Fraser Park Drive/Front Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 472 11 0 487 299 12 9 14 156 17 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 50.0 0.0 32.0 0.0 33.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.96 1.00 0.87 0.99 0.99 0.99 Frt 0.997 0.850 0.850 0.982 Flt Protected 0.950 0.973 0.962 Satd. Flow (prot) 1641 1881 0 0 1900 1615 0 1555 1509 0 1757 0 Flt Permitted 0.409 0.859 0.756 Satd. Flow (perm) 677 1881 0 0 1900 1408 0 1353 1487 0 1378 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 4 325 15 10 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 319.0 306.1 47.5 117.0 Travel Time (s) 23.0 22.0 3.4 8.4 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 46 38 38 46 20 2 2 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 10% 0% 18% 0% 0% 0% 25% 11% 7% 1% 0% 4% Adj. Flow (vph) 11 513 12 0 529 325 13 10 15 170 18 28 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 525 0 0 529 325 0 23 15 0 216 0 Turn Type Perm NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Perm NA Protected Phases 2684 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 8 4 Minimum Split (s) 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.5 11.5 Total Split (s) 52.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (%) 72.2% 72.2% 72.2% 72.2% 27.8% 27.8% 27.8% 27.8% 27.8% Maximum Green (s) 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 16.5 16.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0000000 Act Effct Green (s) 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 17.0 17.0 16.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.24 0.24 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.02 0.42 0.42 0.31 0.07 0.04 0.67 Control Delay 4.3 6.7 6.8 1.4 22.2 11.3 36.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.3 6.7 6.8 1.4 22.2 11.3 36.1 LOS AA AA CB D Approach Delay 6.7 4.7 17.9 36.1 Approach LOS A A B D

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 15 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 9: Fraser Park Drive/Front Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 0.5 28.9 29.3 0.0 2.6 0.0 26.7 Queue Length 95th (m) 1.9 45.7 46.1 7.1 8.2 4.4 #55.3 Internal Link Dist (m) 295.0 282.1 23.5 93.0 Turn Bay Length (m) 32.0 33.0 Base Capacity (vph) 451 1255 1266 1047 319 362 323 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.02 0.42 0.42 0.31 0.07 0.04 0.67 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 72 Actuated Cycle Length: 72 Offset: 20 (28%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.67 Intersection Signal Delay: 9.8 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Splits and Phases: 9: Fraser Park Drive/Front Street & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 16 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 10: Ontario Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 6 523 109 19 602 8 150 15 19 21 40 35 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.93 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.99 Frt 0.850 0.998 0.986 0.951 Flt Protected 0.999 0.950 0.961 0.989 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1894 1599 1719 1895 0 0 1782 0 0 1735 0 Flt Permitted 0.993 0.313 0.732 0.918 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1883 1491 559 1895 0 0 1349 0 0 1609 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 118 1 9 38 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 306.1 236.6 67.3 104.8 Travel Time (s) 22.0 17.0 4.8 7.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 19 20 20 19 7 5 5 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 17% 0% 1% 5% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 5% 0% 3% Adj. Flow (vph) 7 568 118 21 654 9 163 16 21 23 43 38 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 575 118 21 663 0 0 200 0 0 104 0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2684 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 8 4 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Total Split (s) 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 Total Split (%) 58.9% 58.9% 58.9% 58.9% 58.9% 41.1% 41.1% 41.1% 41.1% Maximum Green (s) 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 00000 00 00 Act Effct Green (s) 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.34 0.34 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.14 0.07 0.67 0.43 0.18 Control Delay 15.2 2.4 9.6 17.2 21.1 12.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 15.2 2.4 9.6 17.2 21.1 12.3 LOS BAAB C B Approach Delay 13.0 16.9 21.1 12.3 Approach LOS B B C B Queue Length 50th (m) 53.4 0.0 1.4 65.7 20.8 6.4 Queue Length 95th (m) 83.5 7.0 4.9 102.2 39.1 16.8 Internal Link Dist (m) 282.1 212.6 43.3 80.8

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 17 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 10: Ontario Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 980 832 290 986 467 576 Starvation Cap Reductn 0000 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0000 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0000 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.59 0.14 0.07 0.67 0.43 0.18 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 73 Actuated Cycle Length: 73 Offset: 30 (41%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 45 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.67 Intersection Signal Delay: 15.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 10: Ontario Street & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 18 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 11: Dundas Street & Marmora Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 85 464 587 216 66 30 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1900 1881 1583 1805 1568 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 1900 1881 1583 1805 1568 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 236.6 192.7 600.4 Travel Time (s) 17.0 13.9 43.2 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 0% 1% 2% 0% 3% Adj. Flow (vph) 92 504 638 235 72 33 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 92 504 638 235 72 33 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 19 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 13: Byron Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 84 437 3 14 704 132 18 105 23 175 69 56 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Frt 0.999 0.977 0.979 0.933 Flt Protected 0.992 0.999 0.994 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3547 0 0 3467 0 0 1818 0 1752 1725 0 Flt Permitted 0.574 0.940 0.958 0.698 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2052 0 0 3262 0 0 1750 0 1284 1725 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 1 29 15 61 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 192.7 733.6 71.0 65.4 Travel Time (s) 13.9 52.8 5.1 4.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 7 6 6 7 14 4 4 14 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 2% 6% 1% 0% 3% 3% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 91 475 3 15 765 143 20 114 25 190 75 61 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 569 0 0 923 0 0 159 0 190 136 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2684 Permitted Phases 2684 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 12.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 Total Split (%) 16.7% 37.5% 37.5% 37.5% 45.8% 45.8% 45.8% 45.8% Maximum Green (s) 9.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 14.0 14.0 14.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 33.0 21.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.29 0.38 0.38 0.38 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.95 0.24 0.40 0.20 Control Delay 14.9 45.2 15.1 19.6 9.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.9 45.2 15.1 19.6 9.8 LOS B D B B A Approach Delay 14.9 45.2 15.1 15.5 Approach LOS B D B B Queue Length 50th (m) 26.1 65.3 13.6 19.4 6.8 Queue Length 95th (m) 37.3 #104.4 26.5 36.2 17.9 Internal Link Dist (m) 168.7 709.6 47.0 41.4

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 20 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 13: Byron Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1065 971 665 481 685 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.53 0.95 0.24 0.40 0.20 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 72 Actuated Cycle Length: 72 Offset: 45 (63%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.95 Intersection Signal Delay: 29.2 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 103.4% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Splits and Phases: 13: Byron Street & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 21 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 14: Flindall Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 12 595 29 15 823 8 16 3 12 5 2 13 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 Frt 0.993 0.999 0.947 0.910 Flt Protected 0.999 0.999 0.975 0.988 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3544 0 0 3563 0 0 1745 0 0 1688 0 Flt Permitted 0.941 0.938 0.887 0.955 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3338 0 0 3345 0 0 1583 0 0 1631 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 13 2 13 14 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 733.6 220.1 138.5 104.5 Travel Time (s) 52.8 15.8 10.0 7.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 3 3 10 5 2 2 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 13% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 13 647 32 16 895 9 17 3 13 5 2 14 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 692 0 0 920 0 0 33 0 0 21 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2684 Permitted Phases 2684 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Total Split (s) 10.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Total Split (%) 15.2% 53.0% 53.0% 53.0% 31.8% 31.8% 31.8% 31.8% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 39.0 29.0 16.0 16.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.59 0.44 0.24 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.35 0.63 0.08 0.05 Control Delay 7.3 16.6 14.8 12.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.3 16.6 14.8 12.7 LOSABBB Approach Delay 7.3 16.6 14.8 12.7 Approach LOS ABBB Queue Length 50th (m) 20.6 46.0 2.0 0.7 Queue Length 95th (m) 29.6 64.3 8.2 5.6 Internal Link Dist (m) 709.6 196.1 114.5 80.5

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 22 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 14: Flindall Street & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1990 1470 393 406 Starvation Cap Reductn 0000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0000 Storage Cap Reductn 0000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.35 0.63 0.08 0.05 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 66 Actuated Cycle Length: 66 Offset: 31 (47%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 65 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.63 Intersection Signal Delay: 12.7 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 14: Flindall Street & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 23 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 15: Bay Street/Driveway & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 116 429 54 19 731 75 65 32 43 88 33 53 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Frt 0.986 0.986 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.990 0.999 0.968 0.965 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3467 0 0 3514 0 0 1821 1615 0 1819 1615 Flt Permitted 0.571 0.930 0.754 0.733 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1999 0 0 3271 0 0 1417 1585 0 1376 1593 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 22 17 90 90 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 30 Link Distance (m) 220.1 231.6 82.6 31.5 Travel Time (s) 15.8 16.7 5.9 3.8 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 3 3 3 2 7 7 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 3% 0% 0% 3% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 126 466 59 21 795 82 71 35 47 96 36 58 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 651 0 0 898 0 0 106 47 0 132 58 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2684 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 8 4 4 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s) 10.0 40.0 35.0 35.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 Total Split (%) 13.7% 54.8% 47.9% 47.9% 38.4% 38.4% 38.4% 38.4% 38.4% 38.4% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 34.0 29.0 29.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 14.0 14.0 14.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 000000 Act Effct Green (s) 39.0 29.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.40 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.69 0.24 0.08 0.30 0.10 Control Delay 12.2 21.2 20.3 1.6 21.4 2.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.2 21.2 20.3 1.6 21.4 2.5 LOS B C CA CA Approach Delay 12.2 21.2 14.6 15.6 Approach LOS B C B B Queue Length 50th (m) 25.2 53.7 11.2 0.0 14.3 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 35.7 74.3 23.2 2.3 28.4 4.1 Internal Link Dist (m) 196.1 207.6 58.6 7.5

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 24 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 15: Bay Street/Driveway & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1158 1309 446 561 433 563 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.56 0.69 0.24 0.08 0.30 0.10 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 73 Actuated Cycle Length: 73 Offset: 38 (52%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.69 Intersection Signal Delay: 17.0 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 15: Bay Street/Driveway & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 25 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 16: Canadian Tire Plaza Driveway & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 482 77 65 790 37 45 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.979 0.926 Flt Protected 0.996 0.978 Satd. Flow (prot) 3462 0 0 3557 1721 0 Flt Permitted 0.865 0.978 Satd. Flow (perm) 3462 0 0 3089 1719 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 37 49 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 231.6 575.6 114.5 Travel Time (s) 16.7 41.4 8.2 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 3 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 2% 1% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 524 84 71 859 40 49 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 608 0 0 930 89 0 Turn Type NA pm+pt NA NA Protected Phases 2 1 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 Minimum Split (s) 26.0 8.0 26.0 19.0 Total Split (s) 33.0 10.0 33.0 19.0 Total Split (%) 53.2% 16.1% 53.2% 30.6% Maximum Green (s) 27.0 7.0 27.0 14.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 27.0 37.0 14.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.60 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.50 0.21 Control Delay 12.1 8.1 12.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.1 8.1 12.2 LOS B A B Approach Delay 12.1 8.1 12.2 Approach LOS B A B Queue Length 50th (m) 23.2 28.0 3.8 Queue Length 95th (m) 34.8 39.4 13.9 Internal Link Dist (m) 207.6 551.6 90.5

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 26 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 16: Canadian Tire Plaza Driveway & Dundas Street 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1528 1873 426 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.40 0.50 0.21 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 62 Actuated Cycle Length: 62 Offset: 29 (47%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.50 Intersection Signal Delay: 9.8 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 16: Canadian Tire Plaza Driveway & Dundas Street

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 27 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 17: R.C.A.F Road & Dundas Street/Old Highway 2 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 107 423 2 0 675 390 2 2 1 285 2 171 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 61.0 0.0 29.0 55.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 Taper Length (m) 45.0 55.0 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Frt 0.999 0.850 0.973 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.980 0.953 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3535 0 1900 3574 1495 0 1812 0 0 1632 1599 Flt Permitted 0.224 0.924 0.725 Satd. Flow (perm) 421 3535 0 1900 3574 1461 0 1706 0 0 1242 1571 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 424 1 186 Link Speed (k/h) 50 60 50 60 Link Distance (m) 575.6 160.8 98.7 383.1 Travel Time (s) 41.4 9.6 7.1 23.0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 7 7 1 3 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 2% 0% 0% 1% 8% 0% 0% 0% 11% 0% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) 116 460 2 0 734 424 2 2 1 310 2 186 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 116 462 0 0 734 424 0500312186 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 6 8 4 4 Minimum Split (s) 11.0 22.5 11.0 22.5 22.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 Total Split (s) 24.0 41.5 19.0 41.5 41.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 Total Split (%) 23.8% 41.1% 18.8% 41.1% 41.1% 35.1% 35.1% 35.1% 35.1% 35.1% Maximum Green (s) 20.0 35.0 15.0 35.0 35.0 30.7 30.7 30.0 30.0 30.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.7 3.7 3.7 All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 6.5 4.0 6.5 6.5 4.8 5.5 5.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0000 000 Act Effct Green (s) 61.5 40.0 35.0 35.0 30.7 30.0 30.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 0.40 0.35 0.35 0.30 0.30 0.30 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.33 0.59 0.54 0.01 0.85 0.31 Control Delay 9.4 22.0 29.5 5.3 22.8 55.8 5.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.4 22.0 29.5 5.3 22.8 55.8 5.6 LOS A C C A C E A Approach Delay 19.5 20.7 22.8 37.0 Approach LOS B C C D

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 28 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 17: R.C.A.F Road & Dundas Street/Old Highway 2 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 9.3 34.1 64.8 0.0 0.6 60.2 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 16.8 47.1 84.4 21.1 3.3 #108.9 15.8 Internal Link Dist (m) 551.6 136.8 74.7 359.1 Turn Bay Length (m) 61.0 55.0 Base Capacity (vph) 526 1400 1238 783 519 368 597 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.22 0.33 0.59 0.54 0.01 0.85 0.31 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 101 Actuated Cycle Length: 101 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.85 Intersection Signal Delay: 24.0 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Splits and Phases: 17: R.C.A.F Road & Dundas Street/Old Highway 2

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 29 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 18: Front Street & Division Street/Dixon Drive 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 198 229 1 99 399 268 1 159 116 193 106 188 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.99 0.98 Frt 0.999 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1861 0 1752 1845 1568 0 1827 1615 1752 1881 1583 Flt Permitted 0.222 0.386 0.647 Satd. Flow (perm) 409 1861 0 703 1845 1476 0 1827 1560 1180 1881 1546 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 291 126 204 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 603.8 498.0 189.5 106.4 Travel Time (s) 43.5 35.9 13.6 7.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 17 10 10 17 14 10 10 14 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 0% 3% 3% 3% 0% 4% 0% 3% 1% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 215 249 1 108 434 291 1 173 126 210 115 204 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 215 250 0 108 434 291 0 174 126 210 115 204 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 6 8 8 4 4 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 12.0 8.0 12.0 12.0 9.0 12.0 12.0 9.0 12.0 12.0 Total Split (s) 13.0 22.0 13.0 22.0 22.0 14.0 34.0 34.0 14.0 34.0 34.0 Total Split (%) 15.7% 26.5% 15.7% 26.5% 26.5% 16.9% 41.0% 41.0% 16.9% 41.0% 41.0% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 18.0 10.0 18.0 18.0 10.0 30.0 30.0 10.0 30.0 30.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 10 17 17 10 10 14 14 Act Effct Green (s) 29.0 18.0 29.0 18.0 18.0 44.0 30.0 40.0 30.0 30.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.22 0.35 0.22 0.22 0.53 0.36 0.48 0.36 0.36 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.62 0.29 1.08 0.53 0.18 0.20 0.33 0.17 0.30 Control Delay 33.7 38.8 19.1 103.3 7.6 10.8 4.5 12.2 18.9 4.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 33.7 38.8 19.1 103.3 7.6 10.8 4.5 12.2 18.9 4.1 LOS CD BFA BABBA Approach Delay 36.4 59.0 8.1 10.5 Approach LOS D E A B Queue Length 50th (m) 27.9 40.3 11.5 ~82.2 0.0 14.2 0.0 17.5 12.8 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) #48.1 64.2 22.4 #138.4 19.8 24.8 10.8 29.8 24.4 13.5 Internal Link Dist (m) 579.8 474.0 165.5 82.4

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 30 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 18: Front Street & Division Street/Dixon Drive 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 306 403 372 400 547 968 644 637 679 689 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 00000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 00000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 00000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.70 0.62 0.29 1.08 0.53 0.18 0.20 0.33 0.17 0.30 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 83 Actuated Cycle Length: 83 Offset: 47 (57%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.08 Intersection Signal Delay: 34.8 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.6% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Splits and Phases: 18: Front Street & Division Street/Dixon Drive

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 31 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 19: Marmora Street & Dixon Drive 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 159 326 40 21 380 16 171 99 25 16 69 185 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 34.0 0.0 57.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Taper Length (m) 16.0 27.0 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 Frt 0.984 0.994 0.970 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.991 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1805 0 1805 1864 0 1719 1777 0 0 1868 1583 Flt Permitted 0.236 0.284 0.697 0.960 Satd. Flow (perm) 442 1805 0 535 1864 0 1257 1777 0 0 1808 1559 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 7 2 15 201 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 498.0 417.6 600.4 195.5 Travel Time (s) 35.9 30.1 43.2 14.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 19 19 5 3 3 3 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 3% 5% 0% 1% 6% 5% 2% 8% 0% 1% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 173 354 43 23 413 17 186 108 27 17 75 201 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 173 397 0 23 430 0 186 135 0 0 92 201 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 26844 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 14.0 8.0 14.0 8.0 32.0 8.0 32.0 32.0 Total Split (s) 12.0 31.0 12.0 31.0 12.0 32.0 12.0 32.0 32.0 Total Split (%) 13.8% 35.6% 13.8% 35.6% 13.8% 36.8% 13.8% 36.8% 36.8% Maximum Green (s) 9.0 25.0 9.0 25.0 9.0 26.0 9.0 26.0 26.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 16.0 16.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 9.0 9.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 19 5 3 3 3 Act Effct Green (s) 37.0 25.0 37.0 25.0 38.0 26.0 32.0 26.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.43 0.29 0.43 0.29 0.44 0.30 0.37 0.30 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.76 0.06 0.80 0.31 0.25 0.14 0.33 Control Delay 20.5 38.7 13.4 41.7 15.4 22.0 15.4 5.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 20.5 38.7 13.4 41.7 15.4 22.0 15.4 5.2 LOS CD BD BC BA Approach Delay 33.2 40.3 18.2 8.4 Approach LOS C D B A

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 32 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 19: Marmora Street & Dixon Drive 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 17.5 62.1 2.1 69.2 18.6 15.7 9.3 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 30.4 #104.5 6.4 #116.6 32.0 30.3 18.4 15.2 Internal Link Dist (m) 474.0 393.6 576.4 171.5 Turn Bay Length (m) 34.0 57.0 Base Capacity (vph) 327 523 358 537 596 541 669 606 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.53 0.76 0.06 0.80 0.31 0.25 0.14 0.33 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 87 Actuated Cycle Length: 87 Offset: 8 (9%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.80 Intersection Signal Delay: 27.8 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Splits and Phases: 19: Marmora Street & Dixon Drive

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 33 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 20: Sidney Street & Dixon Drive 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 190 158 16 3 217 84 14 135 7 41 184 185 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 34.0 0.0 63.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Taper Length (m) 15.0 29.0 15.0 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.98 0.95 Frt 0.987 0.958 0.992 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.991 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1789 0 1805 1789 0 1805 1816 0 0 1853 1553 Flt Permitted 0.514 0.639 0.565 0.922 Satd. Flow (perm) 956 1789 0 1203 1789 0 1049 1816 0 0 1724 1471 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 9 36 4 201 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 417.6 263.5 277.6 95.9 Travel Time (s) 30.1 19.0 20.0 6.9 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 11 11 3 25 25 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 5% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 4% 0% 0% 2% 4% Adj. Flow (vph) 207 172 17 3 236 91 15 147 8 45 200 201 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 207 189 0 3 327 0 15 155 0 0 245 201 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 2684 Permitted Phases 26844 Minimum Split (s) 41.5 41.5 41.5 41.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 Total Split (s) 41.5 41.5 41.5 41.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 Total Split (%) 55.3% 55.3% 55.3% 55.3% 44.7% 44.7% 44.7% 44.7% 44.7% Maximum Green (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 11 11 3 3 0 0 25 25 25 Act Effct Green (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.22 0.01 0.37 0.04 0.23 0.38 0.30 Control Delay 17.0 11.6 10.3 12.4 15.4 16.8 19.4 4.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 17.0 11.6 10.3 12.4 15.4 16.8 19.4 4.0 LOS BB BB BB BA Approach Delay 14.4 12.4 16.7 12.4 Approach LOS BBBB

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 34 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 20: Sidney Street & Dixon Drive 21/11/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 19.4 14.7 0.3 25.6 1.4 15.0 26.0 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 37.7 26.7 1.6 43.9 5.1 28.0 44.6 12.6 Internal Link Dist (m) 393.6 239.5 253.6 71.9 Turn Bay Length (m) 34.0 63.0 Base Capacity (vph) 458 863 577 877 391 680 643 675 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.45 0.22 0.01 0.37 0.04 0.23 0.38 0.30 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 75 Actuated Cycle Length: 75 Offset: 33.5 (45%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.45 Intersection Signal Delay: 13.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 118.7% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 20: Sidney Street & Dixon Drive

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 35 APPENDIX D SUMMARY OF RELEVENT POLICIES & PLANS

APPENDIX D SUMMARY OF RELEVENT POLICIES & PLANS

B.1 FEDERAL PLANNING DOCUMENTS

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document Auditor General In Canada, the concept of The strategies set out goals, Act (1995) sustainable development has been objectives and specific integrated into federal legislation commitments, and are an important and into amendments to the Auditor tool by which the federal General Act in 1995, which government can advance established the Officer of the sustainable development. The Commissioner of the Environment City’s Transportation Master Plan and Sustainable Development. reflects these goals and objectives Departments are required to with the goals of sustainable future prepare sustainable development development. strategies and to table them in Parliament.

Federal The Federal Sustainable The policy allows the government of Sustainable Development Act (FSDA) requires Canada to set environmental Development the development of a federal sustainability priorities more Act (2008) sustainable development strategy. effectively and to align the work of The FSDA will strengthen federal departments to support sustainable development practices these priorities. The federal strategy within the federal government. It is includes goals and targets for a positive step towards being more sustainable development along with accountable to Canadians in the implementation strategies for each. implementation of sustainable These strategies have been environmental practices. reviewed and considered, where possible in the development of TMP for Quinte West.

CITY OF QUINTE WEST TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Draft 1 October 2013 “BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document National Vision The report, commissioned by The benefits which have been for Urban Transport Canada, supports the identified and considered when Transit to 2020 concept that public transit has developing the City’s TMP include: numerous benefits to the  A reduced need for new road environment beyond the reduction construction; in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.  Improved air quality due to less vehicles on the road;  Reduced traffic congestion;  Healthier downtowns;  Improved social mobility; and  Positive impacts on economic sectors such as tourism and export development.

B.2 PROVINCIAL PLANNING DOCUMENTS

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document Provincial The Provincial Policy Statement The PPS promotes transportation Policy (PPS) is currently under review and choices that increase mobility for all Statement will include a greater focus on modes of travel. The term (2005) healthy communities. The PPS sets “transportation systems” under the the foundation for regulating land use PPS means a system consisting of and development within the Province corridors and rights-of-way for the and supports provincial goals. The movement of people and goods and PPS provides for appropriate the associated transportation development and protects resources facilities, including cycling lanes of provincial interest. The vision of and park’n’ride lots. Policies the land use planning system in the pertaining to transportation, such as PPS is that the “long-term prosperity cycling, pedestrians and transit are and social well-being of Ontarians dispersed throughout the PPS and depend on maintaining strong will be used to inform the communities, a clean healthy development of the policies and environment and a strong economy.” recommendations of the Master Plan report.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document Bill 51 Approved in January 2007, Bill 51 Bill 51 is consistent with Ontario’s Planning reforms the Planning Act, which policy shift towards sustainable land Reform provides the legislative framework for use development and planning. For land use planning in Ontario. Bill 51 instance, Bill 51 permits incorporates changes to the planning municipalities to require process that are intended to support environmentally sustainable design intensification, sustainable for both individual buildings and development and protection of green entire neighbourhoods. It also adds space by giving municipalities greater sustainable development as a powers, flexibility and tools to use provincial interest in the Provincial land, resources and infrastructure Policy Statement. This has been more efficiently. reflected in the principles of the Master Plan report, and will be encouraged throughout the document’s recommendations.

Municipal Act The Municipal Act, 2001 gives The Municipal Act provides (2001) municipalities a broad new flexibility direction for the City when making to deal with local circumstances, and decisions regarding future to react quickly to local, economic, transportation alternatives. The City environmental or social changes. It is responsible for improvements recognizes municipalities as made on roads under their responsible and accountable jurisdiction which the TMP will governments with respect to matters address in order to inform the within their jurisdictions. The roadway classification component Municipal Act provides policies as well as development and relating to municipal jurisdiction over maintenance requirements. municipal highways and the maintenance of those highways.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document Accessibility The Accessibility for Ontarians with The Built Environment is the most for Ontarians Disabilities Act was passed on June relevant standard that can be with 13, 2005 and is a provincially applied to the planning, design and Disabilities Act legislated policy which calls on the construction of transportation (2005) business community, public sector, related facilities including not-for-profit sector and people with pedestrian crossings, public disabilities or their representatives to accesses, parking, transit stations, develop, implement and enforce transit shelters and stops, plus mandatory standards. This policy signage. The final draft of the makes Ontario the first jurisdiction in standard was submitted to the Canada to develop, implement and Minister of Community and Social enforce accessibility standards, Services in 2010 but has yet to which apply to both the private and receive final approval. The policy public sectors. These accessibility provides direction on the standards are the rules that appropriate design and location of businesses in Ontario should follow these facilities, and is a key to identify, remove and prevent reference document in the barriers of accessibility. development of the City-wide transportation network.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document Ministry of The former Ministry of Health The Ministry of Health Promotion Health Promotion and its functions have drafted a vision for trails in Ontario Promotion been integrated into the Ministry of which can be used as a reference (now part of Health and Long-Term Care, and when establishing a system of off- Health and serve as the lead Ministry for trail road facilities in City of Quinte Long-term development in Ontario. The Ministry West. The vision states: Care) has the responsibility for the co- “A world class system of trails that ordination of recreational trail issues, capture the uniqueness and beauty policy development and planning. of Ontario’s vast open spaces and The Ministry of Health and Long- natural and built cultural / heritage Term Care’s mission is to: resources. People and places are  Champion health promotion in connected through quality, diverse, Ontario, and inspire individuals, safe, accessible and organizations, communities and environmentally sensitive urban, governments to create a culture rural and wilderness experience of health and wellbeing; trails for recreational enjoyment,  Provide programs, services, tools active living and tourism and incentives that will enhance development.” health and well-being;  Make healthy choices easier;  Harness the energy and commitment of other ministries, other levels of government, community partners, the private sector, the media and the public to promote health and wellbeing for all Ontarians; and  Make Ontario a leader in health promotion within Canada and internationally.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document Ontario Trails The Provincial government has A number of goals and strategies Strategy developed the Ontario Trails Strategy have been identified to support in response to the popularity of trail each of the five strategic directions. activities and infrastructure, the The Ontario Trails Strategy desire of trail organizations for recommends that trail organizations government leadership, the need to should develop common standards protect provincial investment in trails to guide the development and use and the significant trail issues or of trails. This will help the trail challenges that confront the future of system evolve to meet the particular Ontario’s trails. needs of new users. Trail organizations also need more The Ontario Trails Strategy is a long- effective tools and better ways of term plan that will establish a distributing information to more strategic direction for government Ontarians. Since these challenges and stakeholders on the planning, require co-ordination at all levels, management, promotion and use of the provincial government and the trails, toward a healthier and more public, not-for-profit and private prosperous Ontario. Developed in sectors will continue to collaborate collaboration with other ministries on priorities, roles and and a wide range of stakeholders in responsibilities, timeframes and the community, the strategy supports methods to strengthen and enhance continued cooperation among existing and future trails in Ontario. governments and the not-for-profit The five strategic directions as well and private sectors. There are five as the goals and strategies strategic directions that comprise the identified in the document have Ontario Trails Strategy: been reviewed and referenced  Improving collaboration among when identifying the considerations stakeholders; for trail development as part of the  Enhancing the sustainability of overall transportation system in Ontario’s trails; Quinte West.  Enhancing the trail experience;  Educating Ontarians about trails; and  Fostering better health and a strong economy through trails.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document Ontario The Ministry of Transportation’s The guidelines provide direction on Ministry of Transit Supportive Guidelines, 2012, how to integrate all modes of Transportation outlines a set a guidelines to transportation when designing for Transit encourage transit-friendly planning transit to create more complete Supportive and design through all communities streets. The document also outlines Guidelines in Ontario. More specifically, the design recommendations for the (2012) policy document provides direction design of the community structure, on supportive land-use planning, enhancing transit access, designing urban design and operational complete streets and parking practices based on current best management. The document also practices. The document is intended provides improvement guidelines to be a guide for planners, specific to transit facilities including developers and others who are the integration of alternative modes involved in developing more transit- such as carpool parking, cycling supportive communities. and walking. This document is intended to complement the Master Plan and be used as a guide for the future design and development of transit facilities for the City.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document Ministry of In November 2012, the Ministry of The Cycling Strategy outlines a Transportation Transportation Ontario (MTO) provincial plan, which proposes Cycling published the Draft Cycling Strategy. cycling infrastructure, education Strategy The strategy acknowledges the and legislation including a set of (2012) importance of developing cycling proposed changes to The Highway facilities to help reduce greenhouse Traffic Act. Once finalized, the gas (GHG) emissions, ease gridlock, strategy is intended to be part of a benefit the economy, increase number of Provincial documents, tourism and increase the quality of which will help to promote and life for the residents of Ontario. The strategically develop sustainable strategy was developed based on the transportation infrastructure increasing demand for direction from province-wide. As these documents the Province on the design and are developed, the City is development of cycling facilities. The encouraged to use them as a document also addresses a number reference for future development in of the recommendations found in the the field of sustainable Coroner’s report published in 2012. transportation implementation. The TMP’s recommendations are supportive of the findings of the cycling strategy in its endeavor to provide a number of alternative modes of transportation for residents and visitors.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document Planning By In 2009, the Ontario Ministry of Section 2 of this document outlines Design – Municipal Affairs and Housing, in recommendation that could be Healthy conjunction with the Ontario considered to enhance the physical Communities Professional Planners Institute, landscape in order to reduce the developed the Planning by Design: A occurrence of disease, injuries and Healthy Communities Handbook to fatalities, such as: promote sustainable development  Create streets, paths and trails across the province. The handbook that are well-connected, explores the connections between maintained and able to safely sustainable community building and accommodate different modes health, plus the critical role that the of transportation; built environment can play in shaping the health of individuals and  Produce neighbourhoods that communities throughout Canada. The are safe, accessible, handbook outlines ways in which the aesthetically pleasing, well- current state of the built environment serviced and inclusive; and is detrimental to individuals and  Develop natural environments communities, and details changes that are resilient, provide that can be made in order to see ecosystem services, support noticeable improvements. Promoting wildlife and their habitat and are safe and healthy mobility throughout better connected to where communities is paramount to people live. improving the overall health of  The document should be used Canadians. by the County as a guide for the development and design of an urban and rural landscape that is reflective of healthy lifestyles and an increased quality of life for residents and visitors.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

B.3 HASTINGS COUNTY

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document Hastings In 2009, Hastings County Despite being geographically County Official completed their Official Plan to located within Hastings County, the Plan guide the development of the 14 City of Quinte West is not under rural and urban municipalities within Hastings County’s jurisdiction. The their jurisdiction. The purpose of objectives outlined within the this plan is to provide goals, Hastings County Official Plan were objectives and policies that take considered in the development of into account the social, economic this TMP. and environmental matters during all decision making processes. In addition to the social, economic and environmental goals, the Official Plan sets out to provide the County with a transportation network that optimizes the movement of people and goods throughout the County. The plan encourages the local municipalities to identify a functional road classification system that will be consistent with the identified demands of the local municipal roadways.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

B.4 CITY OF QUINTE WEST

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document City of Quinte In 2013, the City of Quinte West The Quinte West Official Plan is a West Official developed their Official Plan guiding document that will direct all Plan primarily as a land use planning tool developmental land and policy to guide and control future land use decisions. The objectives outlined development and redevelopment within the Official Plan were leading up to the year 2031. The considered in the development of goals, objectives and policies this TMP. outlined within this plan demonstrate the direction the City is moving towards in the effective management of economic, social, cultural and environmental forces that comprise this community. The goal outlined within this Official Plan pertaining to transportation is that a safe, efficient and cost-effective transportation network is created that optimizes the movement of people in goods throughout the City. Additionally, the plan noted the need for the road classification system to accurately reflect the function of the roadways. These goals acknowledge the various modes of transportation and recognize connectivity and efficiency as priorities which will be a guiding tool for the City.

“BUILDING MOMENTUM: A STRATEGIC AND CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM”

Policy Policy Description Relevance to Master Plan Study Document City of Quinte In 2010, the City of Quinte West The Quinte West Strategic Plan is a West Strategic updated their 1999 Strategic Plan to useful document that outlines where Plan set forth a vision for the years 2010- the priorities of the City lie moving 2015. The plan set out new into the future. The report objectives and initiatives that dealt accurately accesses the city’s with the issues the city is facing current state and their specific today in order to capitalize on them needs. Transportation is a moving into the future. 5 strategic significant component to the directions were created to guide the economic viability of the city which City’s decisions in all facets of the has been considered in the community. Within the second development on this TMP. strategic direction, the plan outlines the potential Quinte West has and takes a firm mark in recommending key economic initiatives for the community. The initiatives recognize the influence key infrastructure investments can have on economic prosperity and the importance of efficient and connected transportation corridors.

City of Quinte In 2010, the City of Quinte West The City of Quinte West Road West – Road undertook a Road Needs Study to Needs Study Update is a relevant Needs Study assess the physical condition, document to the development of Update including surface condition and this TMP. The assessment of the adequacy, and characterization of City’s road network as outlined the City’s existing road network, within this study revealed areas of including surface type, width and need within the City and was taken roadway capacity. The study into consideration for the covered all 714 km of the of City’s recommendations outlined in road infrastructure system to obtain Section 4.4.2 of this TMP. an overall system adequacy. Through a set of methodology created to assess road conditions, the study identified a prioritized list of needs for the City’s roads.

APPENDIX E OPTIMIZED SYNCHRO AND SIMTRAFFIC TRAVEL TIME RESULTS Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Wooler Road & Dundas Street West 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 69 217 14 82 433 118 16 74 27 95 111 140 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 199.0 73.0 240.0 139.0 178.0 0.0 179.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.98 0.99 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.960 0.916 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1881 1615 1805 1881 1568 1444 1644 0 1752 1656 0 Flt Permitted 0.381 0.610 0.492 0.687 Satd. Flow (perm) 701 1881 1615 1159 1881 1533 748 1644 0 1263 1656 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 95 128 22 77 Link Speed (k/h) 80 80 50 50 Link Distance (m) 266.7 613.0 408.7 368.0 Travel Time (s) 12.0 27.6 29.4 26.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 2 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 1% 0% 0% 1% 3% 25% 14% 0% 3% 4% 6% Adj. Flow (vph) 75 236 15 89 471 128 17 80 29 103 121 152 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 75 236 15 89 471 128 17 109 0 103 273 0 Number of Detectors 12112112 12 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 6 8 4 Detector Phase 52216688 44 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 6.0 20.0 20.0 6.0 20.0 20.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 10.0 27.0 27.0 10.0 27.0 27.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 Total Split (s) 10.0 42.0 42.0 10.0 42.0 42.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 Total Split (%) 12.5% 52.5% 52.5% 12.5% 52.5% 52.5% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0%

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Wooler Road & Dundas Street West 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Maximum Green (s) 7.0 35.0 35.0 7.0 35.0 35.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0000 00 Act Effct Green (s) 46.5 37.1 37.1 46.7 37.2 37.2 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.58 0.46 0.46 0.58 0.46 0.46 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 v/c Ratio 0.15 0.27 0.02 0.12 0.54 0.16 0.09 0.24 0.31 0.56 Control Delay 7.1 15.1 0.1 1.3 5.5 0.4 23.8 20.3 26.9 23.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.1 15.1 0.1 1.3 5.5 0.4 23.8 20.3 26.9 23.0 LOS ABAAAACC CC Approach Delay 12.5 4.0 20.8 24.1 Approach LOS B A C C Queue Length 50th (m) 4.4 23.4 0.0 0.8 8.4 0.2 2.1 10.8 13.2 26.4 Queue Length 95th (m) 9.4 39.3 0.0 1.6 18.8 0.3 7.1 23.9 27.0 50.7 Internal Link Dist (m) 242.7 589.0 384.7 344.0 Turn Bay Length (m) 199.0 73.0 240.0 139.0 178.0 179.0 Base Capacity (vph) 501 872 800 734 874 780 196 447 331 491 Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000 00 Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000 00 Storage Cap Reductn 00000000 00 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.15 0.27 0.02 0.12 0.54 0.16 0.09 0.24 0.31 0.56 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 40 (50%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.56 Intersection Signal Delay: 12.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Wooler Road & Dundas Street West

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: 2 Dug Hill & Dundas Street West 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 71 290 6 33 561 155 15 11 27 257 26 37 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 137.0 130.0 114.0 113.0 125.0 129.0 212.0 118.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.96 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 3505 1615 1805 3539 1583 1805 1900 1615 1787 1900 1568 Flt Permitted 0.302 0.561 0.739 0.625 Satd. Flow (perm) 569 3505 1565 1058 3539 1516 1402 1900 1594 1175 1900 1534 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 150 168 150 109 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 243.9 433.1 437.2 391.9 Travel Time (s) 17.6 31.2 31.5 28.2 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 12 6 6 12 1 1 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 3% 0% 0% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 3% Adj. Flow (vph) 77 315 7 36 610 168 16 12 29 279 28 40 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 77 315 7 36 610 168 16 12 29 279 28 40 Number of Detectors 121121121121 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 6 8 8 4 4 Detector Phase 522166388744 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 15.0 15.0 4.0 15.0 15.0 4.0 7.0 7.0 4.0 7.0 7.0 Minimum Split (s) 7.0 20.0 20.0 7.0 20.0 20.0 7.0 12.0 12.0 7.0 12.0 12.0 Total Split (s) 10.0 38.0 38.0 7.0 35.0 35.0 7.0 13.0 13.0 22.0 28.0 28.0 Total Split (%) 12.5% 47.5% 47.5% 8.8% 43.8% 43.8% 8.8% 16.3% 16.3% 27.5% 35.0% 35.0%

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: 2 Dug Hill & Dundas Street West 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Maximum Green (s) 7.0 33.0 33.0 4.0 30.0 30.0 4.0 8.0 8.0 19.0 23.0 23.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max None Max Max None Max Max Walk Time (s) 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 42.0 35.8 35.8 37.3 32.1 32.1 18.7 12.7 12.7 32.0 28.6 28.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.45 0.45 0.47 0.40 0.40 0.23 0.16 0.16 0.40 0.36 0.36 v/c Ratio 0.19 0.20 0.01 0.07 0.43 0.24 0.05 0.04 0.08 0.48 0.04 0.06 Control Delay 8.2 12.4 0.0 9.8 19.2 3.9 16.7 31.9 0.4 20.4 18.5 0.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 8.2 12.4 0.0 9.8 19.2 3.9 16.7 31.9 0.4 20.4 18.5 0.2 LOS ABAABABCACBA Approach Delay 11.4 15.6 11.6 17.9 Approach LOS BBBB Queue Length 50th (m) 4.0 15.5 0.0 2.6 38.0 0.0 1.5 1.6 0.0 30.9 2.8 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 8.6 26.8 m0.0 6.9 52.7 11.8 5.2 6.8 0.0 50.8 9.1 0.0 Internal Link Dist (m) 219.9 409.1 413.2 367.9 Turn Bay Length (m) 137.0 130.0 114.0 113.0 125.0 129.0 212.0 118.0 Base Capacity (vph) 406 1568 783 530 1421 709 347 301 379 615 679 618 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000000 Storage Cap Reductn 000000000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.19 0.20 0.01 0.07 0.43 0.24 0.05 0.04 0.08 0.45 0.04 0.06 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.48 Intersection Signal Delay: 14.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

Splits and Phases: 2: 2 Dug Hill & Dundas Street West

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Dufferin Avenue & Dundas Street West 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 11 446 30 121 562 5 43 51 103 8 70 17 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Frt 0.991 0.999 0.850 0.974 Flt Protected 0.999 0.991 0.977 0.996 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3536 0 0 3538 0 0 1856 1615 0 3494 0 Flt Permitted 0.935 0.756 0.835 0.935 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3310 0 0 2697 0 0 1586 1588 0 3279 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 11 1 112 18 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 869.8 310.4 193.4 199.2 Travel Time (s) 62.6 22.3 13.9 14.3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 12 12 6 1 3 3 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 12 485 33 132 611 5 47 55 112 9 76 18 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 530 0 0 748 0 0 102 112 0 103 0 Turn Type Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Protected Phases 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Minimum Split (s) 18.0 18.0 13.0 18.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 13.0 54.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 Total Split (%) 51.3% 51.3% 16.3% 67.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% Maximum Green (s) 36.0 36.0 10.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 16.0 16.0 15.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 10.0 10.0 9.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 00000 Act Effct Green (s) 36.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.61 0.26 0.26 0.26 v/c Ratio 0.35 0.43 0.25 0.22 0.12 Control Delay 14.9 4.8 25.2 6.3 19.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.9 4.8 25.2 6.3 19.0 LOS B A C A B Approach Delay 14.9 4.8 15.3 19.0 Approach LOS BABB Queue Length 50th (m) 27.4 6.6 12.9 0.0 5.4 Queue Length 95th (m) 39.2 14.2 25.8 11.8 11.5 Internal Link Dist (m) 845.8 286.4 169.4 175.2

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 5 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Dufferin Avenue & Dundas Street West 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1495 1736 416 499 874 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.35 0.43 0.25 0.22 0.12 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 35 (44%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.43 Intersection Signal Delay: 10.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 5: Dufferin Avenue & Dundas Street West

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 6 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: Queen Street & Dundas Street West 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 5 516 15 108 640 5 33 34 96 6 14 9 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 Frt 0.996 0.999 0.921 0.958 Flt Protected 0.950 0.993 0.990 0.989 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1873 0 0 3525 0 0 1668 0 0 1792 0 Flt Permitted 0.343 0.760 0.921 0.901 Satd. Flow (perm) 650 1873 0 0 2696 0 0 1551 0 0 1632 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 5 2 104 10 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 310.4 57.8 212.1 196.5 Travel Time (s) 22.3 4.2 15.3 14.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 9 9 5 4 3 3 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 5% 1% 0% 6% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 5 561 16 117 696 5 36 37 104 7 15 10 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 5 577 0 0 818 0 0 177 0 0 32 0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2684 Permitted Phases 2684 Minimum Split (s) 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Total Split (s) 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Total Split (%) 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% Maximum Green (s) 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 21.0 21.0 21.0 8.0 8.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.20 0.20 v/c Ratio 0.01 0.59 0.58 0.45 0.10 Control Delay 3.2 9.1 7.5 11.2 11.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 3.2 9.1 7.5 11.2 11.6 LOSAAABB Approach Delay 9.1 7.5 11.2 11.6 Approach LOS AABB Queue Length 50th (m) 0.2 23.5 40.8 4.5 1.3 Queue Length 95th (m) m0.4 48.6 38.8 16.7 6.0 Internal Link Dist (m) 286.4 33.8 188.1 172.5

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 7 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: Queen Street & Dundas Street West 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 341 985 1416 393 334 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.01 0.59 0.58 0.45 0.10 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 40 Actuated Cycle Length: 40 Offset: 38 (95%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.59 Intersection Signal Delay: 8.6 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

Splits and Phases: 6: Queen Street & Dundas Street West

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 8 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Quinte Street/Division Street & Dundas Street West 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 115 408 81 36 406 27 131 123 18 50 109 222 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 92.0 0.0 38.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 27.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.97 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.96 0.97 Frt 0.850 0.991 0.981 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1900 1599 1805 1876 0 1787 1848 0 1805 1863 1538 Flt Permitted 0.406 0.446 0.681 0.659 Satd. Flow (perm) 747 1900 1546 842 1876 0 1263 1848 0 1204 1863 1494 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 88 6 9 241 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 69.6 319.0 71.2 603.8 Travel Time (s) 5.0 23.0 5.1 43.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 7 13 13 7 14 24 24 14 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 0% 1% 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 0% 0% 2% 5% Adj. Flow (vph) 125 443 88 39 441 29 142 134 20 54 118 241 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 125 443 88 39 470 0 142 154 0 54 118 241 Number of Detectors 12112 12 121 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2684 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 8 4 4 Detector Phase 52266 88 444 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 8.0 53.0 53.0 45.0 45.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Total Split (%) 10.0% 66.3% 66.3% 56.3% 56.3% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8%

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 9 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Quinte Street/Division Street & Dundas Street West 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Maximum Green (s) 5.0 47.0 47.0 39.0 39.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max Max Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0000 00 000 Act Effct Green (s) 50.0 47.0 47.0 40.6 40.6 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.62 0.59 0.59 0.51 0.51 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 v/c Ratio 0.24 0.40 0.09 0.09 0.49 0.43 0.31 0.17 0.24 0.42 Control Delay 5.0 6.3 0.7 18.2 24.0 29.4 24.4 14.7 14.5 3.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.0 6.7 0.7 18.2 24.0 29.4 24.4 14.7 14.5 3.5 LOS AAABC CC BBA Approach Delay 5.6 23.6 26.8 8.1 Approach LOS A C C A Queue Length 50th (m) 2.8 20.4 0.2 3.8 67.2 18.9 18.5 2.9 7.0 1.0 Queue Length 95th (m) m7.0 41.4 m0.0 m6.1 100.0 36.0 34.6 m8.8 18.9 1.3 Internal Link Dist (m) 45.6 295.0 47.2 579.8 Turn Bay Length (m) 92.0 27.0 Base Capacity (vph) 529 1116 944 427 954 331 491 316 489 569 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 295 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 00000 00 000 Storage Cap Reductn 00000 00 000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.24 0.54 0.09 0.09 0.49 0.43 0.31 0.17 0.24 0.42 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 17 (21%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.49 Intersection Signal Delay: 14.4 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

Splits and Phases: 7: Quinte Street/Division Street & Dundas Street West

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 10 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 9: Fraser Park Drive/Front Street & Dundas Street West/Dundas Street East 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 472 11 0 487 299 12 9 14 156 17 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 50.0 0.0 32.0 0.0 33.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.92 0.99 0.99 0.99 Frt 0.997 0.850 0.850 0.982 Flt Protected 0.950 0.973 0.962 Satd. Flow (prot) 1641 1883 0 0 1900 1615 0 1555 1509 0 1762 0 Flt Permitted 0.363 0.868 0.757 Satd. Flow (perm) 611 1883 0 0 1900 1486 0 1374 1489 0 1385 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 4 325 27 20 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 319.0 306.1 47.5 117.0 Travel Time (s) 23.0 22.0 3.4 8.4 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 46 38 38 46 20 2 2 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 10% 0% 18% 0% 0% 0% 25% 11% 7% 1% 0% 4% Adj. Flow (vph) 11 513 12 0 529 325 13 10 15 170 18 28 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 525 0 0 529 325 0 23 15 0 216 0 Turn Type Perm NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Perm NA Protected Phases 2684 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 8 4 Minimum Split (s) 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.5 11.5 Total Split (s) 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 16.2 16.2 16.2 16.2 16.2 Total Split (%) 59.5% 59.5% 59.5% 59.5% 40.5% 40.5% 40.5% 40.5% 40.5% Maximum Green (s) 19.8 19.8 19.8 19.8 13.2 13.2 13.2 12.7 12.7 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0000000 Act Effct Green (s) 19.8 19.8 19.8 19.8 13.2 13.2 12.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.33 0.33 0.32 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.56 0.56 0.36 0.05 0.03 0.48 Control Delay 4.5 6.9 9.1 2.9 9.6 3.6 14.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.5 6.9 9.1 2.9 9.6 3.6 14.2 LOS AA AA AA B Approach Delay 6.8 6.7 7.2 14.2 Approach LOS AAAB

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 11 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 9: Fraser Park Drive/Front Street & Dundas Street West/Dundas Street East 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 0.2 12.3 24.6 1.4 1.1 0.0 10.8 Queue Length 95th (m) m0.8 21.3 49.3 18.2 4.4 1.9 25.0 Internal Link Dist (m) 295.0 282.1 23.5 93.0 Turn Bay Length (m) 32.0 33.0 Base Capacity (vph) 302 934 940 899 453 509 453 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.04 0.56 0.56 0.36 0.05 0.03 0.48 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 40 Actuated Cycle Length: 40 Offset: 32 (80%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.56 Intersection Signal Delay: 7.7 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

Splits and Phases: 9: Fraser Park Drive/Front Street & Dundas Street West/Dundas Street East

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 12 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 10: Ontario Street & Dundas Street East 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 6 523 109 19 602 8 150 15 19 21 40 35 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.93 0.98 1.00 0.99 0.99 Frt 0.850 0.998 0.986 0.951 Flt Protected 0.999 0.950 0.961 0.989 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1894 1599 1719 1894 0 0 1782 0 0 1735 0 Flt Permitted 0.993 0.354 0.730 0.912 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1883 1483 630 1894 0 0 1345 0 0 1598 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 118 2 7 36 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 306.1 236.6 67.3 104.8 Travel Time (s) 22.0 17.0 4.8 7.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 19 20 20 19 7 5 5 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 17% 0% 1% 5% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 5% 0% 3% Adj. Flow (vph) 7 568 118 21 654 9 163 16 21 23 43 38 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 575 118 21 663 0 0 200 0 0 104 0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2684 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 8 4 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Total Split (s) 53.0 53.0 53.0 53.0 53.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Total Split (%) 66.3% 66.3% 66.3% 66.3% 66.3% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% Maximum Green (s) 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 00000 00 00 Act Effct Green (s) 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 22.0 22.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.28 0.28 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.13 0.06 0.58 0.53 0.22 Control Delay 17.5 4.8 2.7 9.8 30.0 16.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 17.5 4.8 2.7 9.8 30.0 16.8 LOS BAAA C B Approach Delay 15.3 9.6 30.0 16.8 Approach LOS B A C B Queue Length 50th (m) 76.9 3.0 0.3 90.7 26.1 8.2 Queue Length 95th (m) 102.2 m6.7 m0.8 136.9 47.4 20.4 Internal Link Dist (m) 282.1 212.6 43.3 80.8

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 13 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 10: Ontario Street & Dundas Street East 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1129 937 378 1137 374 465 Starvation Cap Reductn 0000 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0000 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0000 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.13 0.06 0.58 0.53 0.22 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 13 (16%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 45 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.58 Intersection Signal Delay: 14.8 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

Splits and Phases: 10: Ontario Street & Dundas Street East

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 14 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 11: Dundas Street East & Marmora Street 07/10/2013

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 15 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 13: Byron Street & Dundas Street East 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 84 437 3 14 704 132 18 105 23 175 69 56 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 Frt 0.999 0.977 0.979 0.933 Flt Protected 0.992 0.999 0.994 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3547 0 0 3466 0 0 1818 0 1752 1724 0 Flt Permitted 0.670 0.942 0.955 0.664 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2395 0 0 3268 0 0 1744 0 1221 1724 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 1 34 12 52 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 192.7 733.6 71.0 65.4 Travel Time (s) 13.9 52.8 5.1 4.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 7 6 6 7 14 4 4 14 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 2% 6% 1% 0% 3% 3% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 91 475 3 15 765 143 20 114 25 190 75 61 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 569 0 0 923 0 0 159 0 190 136 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2684 Permitted Phases 2684 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 8.0 50.0 42.0 42.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 Total Split (%) 10.0% 62.5% 52.5% 52.5% 37.5% 37.5% 37.5% 37.5% Maximum Green (s) 5.0 44.0 36.0 36.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 14.0 14.0 14.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 44.0 36.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.55 0.45 0.30 0.30 0.30 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.62 0.30 0.52 0.25 Control Delay 9.7 2.5 21.7 29.3 14.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.7 2.5 21.7 29.3 14.7 LOS A A C C B Approach Delay 9.7 2.5 21.7 23.2 Approach LOS A A C C Queue Length 50th (m) 27.2 1.2 17.8 25.0 9.8 Queue Length 95th (m) 30.0 2.3 33.5 45.8 23.3 Internal Link Dist (m) 168.7 709.6 47.0 41.4

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 16 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 13: Byron Street & Dundas Street East 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1346 1489 531 366 553 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.42 0.62 0.30 0.52 0.25 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 56 (70%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.62 Intersection Signal Delay: 9.5 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 103.4% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 13: Byron Street & Dundas Street East

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 17 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 14: Flindall Street & Dundas Street East 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 12 595 29 15 823 8 16 3 12 5 2 13 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 Frt 0.993 0.999 0.947 0.910 Flt Protected 0.999 0.999 0.975 0.988 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3544 0 0 3562 0 0 1744 0 0 1687 0 Flt Permitted 0.938 0.938 0.885 0.955 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3328 0 0 3345 0 0 1578 0 0 1630 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 12 2 13 14 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 733.6 220.1 138.5 104.5 Travel Time (s) 52.8 15.8 10.0 7.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 3 3 10 5 2 2 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 13% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 13 647 32 16 895 9 17 3 13 5 2 14 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 692 0 0 920 0 0 33 0 0 21 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2684 Permitted Phases 2684 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Total Split (s) 8.0 58.0 50.0 50.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 Total Split (%) 10.0% 72.5% 62.5% 62.5% 27.5% 27.5% 27.5% 27.5% Maximum Green (s) 5.0 52.0 44.0 44.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 52.0 44.0 17.0 17.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.65 0.55 0.21 0.21 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.50 0.10 0.06 Control Delay 2.7 3.1 18.8 16.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 2.7 3.1 18.8 16.0 LOSAABB Approach Delay 2.7 3.1 18.8 16.0 Approach LOS AABB Queue Length 50th (m) 5.2 9.0 2.6 0.9 Queue Length 95th (m) 6.6 11.0 9.7 6.7 Internal Link Dist (m) 709.6 196.1 114.5 80.5

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 18 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 14: Flindall Street & Dundas Street East 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 2172 1840 345 357 Starvation Cap Reductn 0000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0000 Storage Cap Reductn 0000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.32 0.50 0.10 0.06 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 1 (1%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 65 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.50 Intersection Signal Delay: 3.4 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 14: Flindall Street & Dundas Street East

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 19 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 15: Bay Street/Driveway & Dundas Street East 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 116 429 54 19 731 75 65 32 43 88 33 53 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Frt 0.986 0.986 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.990 0.999 0.968 0.965 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3467 0 0 3514 0 0 1821 1615 0 1819 1615 Flt Permitted 0.610 0.931 0.750 0.730 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2136 0 0 3274 0 0 1409 1584 0 1369 1592 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 21 18 123 123 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 30 Link Distance (m) 220.1 231.6 82.6 31.5 Travel Time (s) 15.8 16.7 5.9 3.8 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 3 3 3 2 7 7 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 3% 0% 0% 3% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 126 466 59 21 795 82 71 35 47 96 36 58 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 651 0 0 898 0 0 106 47 0 132 58 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2684 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 8 4 4 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s) 8.0 51.0 43.0 43.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 Total Split (%) 10.0% 63.8% 53.8% 53.8% 36.3% 36.3% 36.3% 36.3% 36.3% 36.3% Maximum Green (s) 5.0 45.0 37.0 37.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 14.0 14.0 14.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 000000 Act Effct Green (s) 45.0 37.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.46 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.59 0.25 0.08 0.32 0.10 Control Delay 14.9 4.8 23.2 0.3 24.4 0.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.9 4.8 23.2 0.3 24.4 0.4 LOS B A CA CA Approach Delay 14.9 4.8 16.2 17.1 Approach LOS BABB Queue Length 50th (m) 30.6 11.0 12.7 0.0 16.2 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 44.0 18.0 25.6 0.0 31.2 0.6 Internal Link Dist (m) 196.1 207.6 58.6 7.5

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 20 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 15: Bay Street/Driveway & Dundas Street East 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1243 1523 422 561 410 563 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.52 0.59 0.25 0.08 0.32 0.10 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 70 (88%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.59 Intersection Signal Delay: 10.4 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 15: Bay Street/Driveway & Dundas Street East

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 21 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 16: Canadian Tire Plaza Driveway & Dundas Street East 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 482 77 65 790 37 45 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.979 0.926 Flt Protected 0.996 0.978 Satd. Flow (prot) 3461 0 0 3557 1721 0 Flt Permitted 0.855 0.978 Satd. Flow (perm) 3461 0 0 3053 1718 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 36 49 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 231.6 575.6 114.5 Travel Time (s) 16.7 41.4 8.2 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 3 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 2% 1% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 524 84 71 859 40 49 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 608 0 0 930 89 0 Turn Type NA pm+pt NA NA Protected Phases 2 1 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 Minimum Split (s) 26.0 8.0 26.0 19.0 Total Split (s) 50.0 8.0 58.0 22.0 Total Split (%) 62.5% 10.0% 72.5% 27.5% Maximum Green (s) 44.0 5.0 52.0 17.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 44.0 52.0 17.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.55 0.65 0.21 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.47 0.22 Control Delay 13.3 3.5 15.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.3 3.5 15.5 LOS B A B Approach Delay 13.3 3.5 15.5 Approach LOS B A B Queue Length 50th (m) 32.6 8.3 5.2 Queue Length 95th (m) 48.8 11.8 17.1 Internal Link Dist (m) 207.6 551.6 90.5

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 22 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 16: Canadian Tire Plaza Driveway & Dundas Street East 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 1919 1997 404 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.32 0.47 0.22 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 35 (44%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.47 Intersection Signal Delay: 7.8 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 16: Canadian Tire Plaza Driveway & Dundas Street East

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 23 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 17: R.C.A.F Road & Dundas Street East/Old Highway 2 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 107 423 2 0 675 390 2 2 1 285 2 171 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 61.0 0.0 29.0 55.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 Taper Length (m) 45.0 55.0 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Frt 0.999 0.850 0.973 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.980 0.953 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3535 0 1900 3574 1495 0 1812 0 0 1632 1599 Flt Permitted 0.259 0.929 0.725 Satd. Flow (perm) 487 3535 0 1900 3574 1462 0 1716 0 0 1242 1573 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 1 424 1 186 Link Speed (k/h) 50 60 50 60 Link Distance (m) 575.6 160.8 98.7 383.1 Travel Time (s) 41.4 9.6 7.1 23.0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 7 7 1 3 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 2% 0% 0% 1% 8% 0% 0% 0% 11% 0% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) 116 460 2 0 734 424 2 2 1 310 2 186 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 116 462 0 0 734 424 0500312186 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 6 8 4 4 Minimum Split (s) 11.0 22.5 11.0 22.5 22.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 Total Split (s) 11.0 33.0 11.0 33.0 33.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 Total Split (%) 13.8% 41.3% 13.8% 41.3% 41.3% 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 26.5 7.0 26.5 26.5 31.2 31.2 30.5 30.5 30.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.7 3.7 3.7 All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 6.5 4.0 6.5 6.5 4.8 5.5 5.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0000 000 Act Effct Green (s) 36.0 26.5 26.5 26.5 31.2 30.5 30.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.39 0.38 0.38 v/c Ratio 0.35 0.39 0.62 0.55 0.01 0.66 0.26 Control Delay 7.5 16.4 25.3 5.3 14.0 28.5 3.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.5 16.4 25.3 5.3 14.0 28.5 3.8 LOS A B C A B C A Approach Delay 14.6 18.0 14.0 19.3 Approach LOS BBBB

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 24 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 17: R.C.A.F Road & Dundas Street East/Old Highway 2 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 3.9 35.3 51.3 0.0 0.4 40.3 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 8.4 49.3 69.8 19.2 2.5 69.7 12.1 Internal Link Dist (m) 551.6 136.8 74.7 359.1 Turn Bay Length (m) 61.0 55.0 Base Capacity (vph) 332 1171 1183 767 669 473 714 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.35 0.39 0.62 0.55 0.01 0.66 0.26 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 14 (18%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.66 Intersection Signal Delay: 17.4 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 17: R.C.A.F Road & Dundas Street East/Old Highway 2

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 25 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 18: Front Street & Division Street/Dixon Drive 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 198 229 1 99 399 268 1 159 116 193 106 188 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.99 0.98 Frt 0.999 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1861 0 1752 1845 1568 0 1827 1615 1752 1881 1583 Flt Permitted 0.332 0.604 0.647 Satd. Flow (perm) 610 1861 0 1097 1845 1479 0 1827 1561 1181 1881 1546 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 291 205 204 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 603.8 498.0 189.5 106.4 Travel Time (s) 43.5 35.9 13.6 7.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 17 10 10 17 14 10 10 14 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 0% 3% 3% 3% 0% 4% 0% 3% 1% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 215 249 1 108 434 291 1 173 126 210 115 204 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 215 250 0 108 434 291 0 174 126 210 115 204 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 6 8 8 4 4 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 12.0 8.0 12.0 12.0 9.0 12.0 12.0 9.0 12.0 12.0 Total Split (s) 12.0 43.0 8.0 39.0 39.0 9.0 15.0 15.0 14.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (%) 15.0% 53.8% 10.0% 48.8% 48.8% 11.3% 18.8% 18.8% 17.5% 25.0% 25.0% Maximum Green (s) 9.0 39.0 5.0 35.0 35.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 10.0 16.0 16.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 10 17 17 10 10 14 14 Act Effct Green (s) 48.0 39.0 41.0 35.0 35.0 16.0 11.0 25.0 16.0 16.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.49 0.51 0.44 0.44 0.20 0.14 0.31 0.20 0.20 v/c Ratio 0.43 0.28 0.18 0.54 0.36 0.48 0.32 0.48 0.31 0.43 Control Delay 11.4 13.5 4.5 13.4 2.4 28.4 3.0 25.7 29.9 7.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.4 13.5 4.5 13.4 2.4 28.4 3.0 25.7 29.9 7.6 LOS BB ABA CACCA Approach Delay 12.5 8.4 17.7 19.6 Approach LOS BABB Queue Length 50th (m) 15.5 22.3 3.1 55.1 5.4 21.0 0.0 26.0 15.8 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 22.8 32.5 m4.6 m67.4 m5.8 37.2 2.9 44.8 30.5 17.1 Internal Link Dist (m) 579.8 474.0 165.5 82.4

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 26 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 18: Front Street & Division Street/Dixon Drive 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Turn Bay Length (m) Base Capacity (vph) 496 907 603 807 810 365 391 440 376 472 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 00000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 00000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 00000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.43 0.28 0.18 0.54 0.36 0.48 0.32 0.48 0.31 0.43 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 20 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.54 Intersection Signal Delay: 13.4 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.6% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

Splits and Phases: 18: Front Street & Division Street/Dixon Drive

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 27 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 19: Marmora Street & Dixon Drive 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 159 326 40 21 380 16 171 99 25 16 69 185 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 34.0 0.0 57.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Taper Length (m) 16.0 27.0 7.5 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 Frt 0.984 0.994 0.970 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.991 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1805 0 1805 1864 0 1719 1777 0 0 1868 1583 Flt Permitted 0.271 0.353 0.697 0.953 Satd. Flow (perm) 508 1805 0 665 1864 0 1258 1777 0 0 1795 1559 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 8 3 17 201 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 498.0 417.6 600.4 195.5 Travel Time (s) 35.9 30.1 43.2 14.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 19 19 5 3 3 3 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 3% 5% 0% 1% 6% 5% 2% 8% 0% 1% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 173 354 43 23 413 17 186 108 27 17 75 201 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 173 397 0 23 430 0 186 135 0 0 92 201 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 26844 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 14.0 8.0 14.0 8.0 32.0 8.0 32.0 32.0 Total Split (s) 9.0 32.0 8.0 31.0 8.0 32.0 8.0 32.0 32.0 Total Split (%) 11.3% 40.0% 10.0% 38.8% 10.0% 40.0% 10.0% 40.0% 40.0% Maximum Green (s) 6.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 5.0 26.0 5.0 26.0 26.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Walk Time (s) 16.0 16.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 9.0 9.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 19 5 3 3 3 Act Effct Green (s) 35.0 26.0 33.0 25.0 34.0 26.0 28.0 26.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.32 0.41 0.31 0.42 0.32 0.35 0.32 v/c Ratio 0.54 0.67 0.07 0.74 0.33 0.23 0.15 0.31 Control Delay 20.2 28.1 9.9 30.7 18.6 24.1 16.3 4.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 20.2 28.1 9.9 30.7 18.6 24.1 16.3 4.6 LOS CC AC BC BA Approach Delay 25.7 29.6 20.9 8.3 Approach LOS C C C A

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 28 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 19: Marmora Street & Dixon Drive 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 15.3 56.6 2.2 64.9 18.0 15.6 8.6 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 26.3 82.7 m5.4 #89.4 m32.3 m28.0 17.5 13.9 Internal Link Dist (m) 474.0 393.6 576.4 171.5 Turn Bay Length (m) 34.0 57.0 Base Capacity (vph) 318 592 345 584 563 589 630 642 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.54 0.67 0.07 0.74 0.33 0.23 0.15 0.31 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 54 (68%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.74 Intersection Signal Delay: 22.7 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

Splits and Phases: 19: Marmora Street & Dixon Drive

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 29 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 20: Sidney Street & Dixon Drive 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 190 158 16 3 217 84 14 135 7 41 184 185 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 34.0 0.0 63.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Taper Length (m) 15.0 29.0 15.0 7.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.98 0.94 Frt 0.987 0.958 0.992 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.991 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1789 0 1805 1789 0 1805 1816 0 0 1853 1553 Flt Permitted 0.513 0.639 0.556 0.922 Satd. Flow (perm) 954 1789 0 1203 1789 0 1031 1816 0 0 1724 1467 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 9 34 4 201 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 417.6 263.5 277.6 95.9 Travel Time (s) 30.1 19.0 20.0 6.9 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 11 11 3 25 25 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 5% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 4% 0% 0% 2% 4% Adj. Flow (vph) 207 172 17 3 236 91 15 147 8 45 200 201 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 207 189 0 3 327 0 15 155 0 0 245 201 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 2684 Permitted Phases 26844 Minimum Split (s) 41.5 41.5 41.5 41.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 Total Split (s) 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 Total Split (%) 56.3% 56.3% 56.3% 56.3% 43.8% 43.8% 43.8% 43.8% 43.8% Maximum Green (s) 39.5 39.5 39.5 39.5 29.5 29.5 29.5 29.5 29.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Walk Time (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 11 11 3 3 0 0 25 25 25 Act Effct Green (s) 39.5 39.5 39.5 39.5 29.5 29.5 29.5 29.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.21 0.01 0.36 0.04 0.23 0.39 0.30 Control Delay 5.1 2.7 10.3 12.5 16.7 18.1 20.8 4.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.1 2.7 10.3 12.5 16.7 18.1 20.8 4.1 LOS AA BB BB CA Approach Delay 4.0 12.5 18.0 13.3 Approach LOS ABBB

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 30 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 20: Sidney Street & Dixon Drive 07/10/2013

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Queue Length 50th (m) 3.4 2.1 0.2 27.0 1.5 16.3 28.2 0.0 Queue Length 95th (m) m5.7 m4.1 1.6 45.4 5.4 29.9 47.6 12.9 Internal Link Dist (m) 393.6 239.5 253.6 71.9 Turn Bay Length (m) 34.0 63.0 Base Capacity (vph) 471 887 593 900 380 672 635 667 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.44 0.21 0.01 0.36 0.04 0.23 0.39 0.30 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 79 (99%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.44 Intersection Signal Delay: 10.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 118.7% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

Splits and Phases: 20: Sidney Street & Dixon Drive

Existing - PM Peak Hour 22/03/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 31 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Wooler Road & Dundas Street West 07/10/2013