Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive

July 2020

Transportation Impact Assessment Rev 1 Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive

TIA Report

Prepared for: Mattamy Homes 50 Hines Road, Suite 100 Ottawa, ON K2K 2M5

prepared by:

1223 Michael Street North Suite 100 Ottawa, ON K1J 7T2

July 24, 2020

476616 – 01000

TIA Plan Reports

On 14 June 2017, the Council of the City of Ottawa adopted new Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) Guidelines. In adopting the guidelines, Council established a requirement for those preparing and delivering transportation impact assessments and reports to sign a letter of certification.

Individuals submitting TIA reports will be responsible for all aspects of development-related transportation assessment and reporting, and undertaking such work, in accordance and compliance with the City of Ottawa’s Official Plan, the Transportation Master Plan and the Transportation Impact Assessment (2017) Guidelines.

By submitting the attached TIA report (and any associated documents) and signing this document, the individual acknowledges that s/he meets the four criteria listed below.

CERTIFICATION

1. I have reviewed and have a sound understanding of the objectives, needs and requirements of the City of Ottawa’s Official Plan, Transportation Master Plan and the Transportation Impact Assessment (2017) Guidelines; 2. I have a sound knowledge of industry standard practice with respect to the preparation of transportation impact assessment reports, including multi modal level of service review; 3. I have substantial experience (more than 5 years) in undertaking and delivering transportation impact studies (analysis, reporting and geometric design) with strong background knowledge in transportation planning, engineering or traffic operations; and 4. I am either a licensed1 or registered2 professional in good standing, whose field of expertise [check √ appropriate field(s)] is either transportation engineering □ or transportation planning □.

1,2 License of registration body that oversees the profession is required to have a code of conduct and ethics guidelines that will ensure appropriate conduct and representation for transportation planning and/or transportation engineering works.

City Of Ottawa Ville d'Ottawa Infrastructure Services and Community Services d 'infrastructure et Viabilité des Sustainability collectivités Planning and Growth Management Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance 110 Laurier Avenue West, 4th fl. 110, avenue Laurier Ouest Ottawa, ON K1P 1J1 Ottawa (Ontario) K1P 1J1 Tel. : 613-580-2424 Tél. : 613-580-2424 Fax: 613-560-6006 Télécopieur: 613-560-6006

Dated at ______Ottawa______this ___24___ day of ______July____, 202_0__. (City)

Name: ____Matthew Mantle______(Please Print)

Professional Title: ______Transportation Engineer______

______Signature of Individual certifier that s/he meets the above four criteria

Office Contact Information (Please Print) Address: 1223 Michael Street North, Suite 100 City / Postal Code: Ottawa, Ontario, K1J 7T2 Telephone / Extension: 613-738-4160 E-Mail Address: [email protected]

TIS REPORTS-PreQualification Letter/rc

Document Control Page CLIENT: Mattamy Homes PROJECT NAME: Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive REPORT TITLE: TIA Final Report PARSONS PROJECT NO: 476616-01000 VERSION: \\XCCAN57FS01\Data\ISO\476616\1000\DOCS\5- DIGITAL MASTER: TIA\476616_2701_Longfields_TIA_Report_2020March.docx ORIGINATOR Rani Nahas, E.I.T. REVIEWER: Matthew Mantle, P. Eng. AUTHORIZATION: CIRCULATION LIST: Josiane Gervais, P. Eng. HISTORY: Previous TIA Step 4 Strategy Report –May 10th, 2018 Resubmission TIA Step 4 Strategy Report – October 16th, 2019 Update TIA Step 4 Strategy Report to reflect City comments – December 13, 2019 Update TIA Step 4 Strategy Report to reflect City comments – March 27, 2020 Submit TIA Report to reflect City comments – July 24, 2020

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. SCREENING FORM ...... 1 2. SCOPING REPORT ...... 1 2.1. EXISTING AND PLANNED CONDITIONS ...... 1 2.1.1. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...... 1 2.1.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS ...... 3 2.1.3. PLANNED CONDITIONS ...... 6 2.2. STUDY AREA AND TIME PERIODS ...... 7 2.3. EXEMPTION REVIEW ...... 8 3. FORECASTING REPORT ...... 9 3.1. DEVELOPMENT-GENERATED TRAVEL DEMAND ...... 9 3.1.1. TRIP GENERATION RATES AND MODE SHARES ...... 9 3.1.2. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT ...... 10 3.2. BACKGROUND NETWORK TRAVEL DEMANDS ...... 11 3.2.1. TRANSPORTATION NETWORK PLANS ...... 11 3.2.2. BACKGROUND GROWTH ...... 11 3.2.3. OTHER DEVELOPMENTS ...... 12 3.3. DEMAND RATIONALIZATION ...... 13 4. STRATEGY REPORT...... 14 4.1. DEVELOPMENT DESIGN ...... 14 4.1.1. DESIGN FOR SUSTAINABLE MODES ...... 14 4.1.2. CIRCULATION AND ACCESS ...... 15 4.1.3. NEW STREET NETWORKS ...... 15 4.2. PARKING ...... 15 4.2.1. PARKING SUPPLY ...... 15 4.2.2. SPILLOVER PARKING ...... 15 4.3. BOUNDARY STREET DESIGN ...... 15 4.4. ACCESS INTERSECTION DESIGN ...... 16 4.4.1. LOCATION AND DESIGN OF ACCESS ...... 16 4.4.2. INTERSECTION CONTROL ...... 17 4.4.3. INTERSECTION DESIGN ...... 18 4.5. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT ...... 18 4.5.1. CONTEXT FOR TDM ...... 18 4.5.2. NEED AND OPORTUNITY ...... 18 4.5.3. TDM PROGRAM ...... 19 4.6. NEIGHBOURHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ...... 19 4.6.1. ADJACENT NEIGHBOURHOODS ...... 19 4.7. TRANSIT ...... 19 4.7.1. ROUTE CAPACITY ...... 19 4.7.2. TRANSIT PRIORITY ...... 19 4.8. REVIEW OF NETWORK CONCEPT ...... 19 4.9. REVIEW OF NETWORK CONCEPT ...... 19 4.9.1. EXISTING OPERATIONS ...... 19 4.9.2. PROJECTED BACKGROUND 2021 OPERATIONS ...... 20 4.9.3. PROJECTED BACKGROUND 2026 OPERATIONS ...... 21 4.9.4. FUTURE PROJECTED 2021 CONDITIONS ...... 21 4.9.5. FUTURE PROJECTED 2026 CONDITIONS ...... 23 5. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ...... 24

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report i

LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: EXEMPTIONS REVIEW SUMMARY ...... 8 TABLE 2: ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED EXEMPTIONS SUMMARY ...... 8 TABLE 3: VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION RATES ...... 9 TABLE 4: PROJECTED VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION ...... 9 TABLE 5: SITE ‘PERSON TRIPS’ GENERATED – SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ...... 9 TABLE 6: SITE ‘PERSON TRIPS’ GENERATED – TOWNHOMES ...... 9 TABLE 7: TOTAL SITE ‘PERSON TRIPS’ GENERATED – COMBINED ...... 10 TABLE 8: OD-SURVEY ESTIMATED MODAL SHARES ...... 10 TABLE 9: TOTAL SITE ‘VEHICLE TRIPS’ GENERATED USING 2011 OD-SURVEY ...... 10 TABLE 10: MMLOS –ROAD SEGMENTS ADJACENT TO THE SITE ...... 16 TABLE 11: 2021 TOTAL PROJECTED INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE – STOP CONTROL ON MINOR STREETS ...... 18 TABLE 12: MMLOS – INTERSECTIONS ...... 18 TABLE 13: TRANSIT CAPACITY AT ADJACENT TRANSIT STOPS ...... 19 TABLE 14: EXISTING INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE ...... 19 TABLE 15: PROJECTED BACKGROUND 2021 OPERATIONS AT STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS ...... 20 TABLE 16: PROJECTED BACKGROUND 2026 OPERATIONS AT STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS ...... 21 TABLE 17: TOTAL PROJECTED 2021 OPERATIONS AT STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS ...... 22 TABLE 18: TOTAL PROJECTED 2026 OPERATIONS AT STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS ...... 23

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1: LOCAL CONTEXT ...... 1 FIGURE 2: PROPOSED SITE PLAN ...... 2 FIGURE 3: AREA TRANSIT NETWORK ...... 5 FIGURE 4: EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ...... 5 FIGURE 5: LONGFIELDS DRIVE WIDENING – PRELIMINARY DESIGN ...... 7 FIGURE 6: 2741 LONGFIELDS INTERIM SIGNALIZED ROADWAY CONNECTION ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. FIGURE 7: STUDY AREA ...... 8 FIGURE 8: SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC ...... 11 FIGURE 9: 2021 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES ...... 12 FIGURE 10: 2026 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES ...... 12 FIGURE 11: 2741 LONGFIELDS DRIVE (UNIFORM) 2026 PROJECTED TRIP GENERATION ...... 13 FIGURE 12: BUS STOPS ...... 14 FIGURE 13: CITY OF OTTAWA RURAL POLICY PLAN...... 16 FIGURE 14: ADJACENT DRIVEWAYS ...... 17 FIGURE 15: 2021 TOTAL PROJECTED INTERSECTION – STOP CONTROL ON MINOR STREETS ...... 17 FIGURE 16: FUTURE PROJECTED 2021 CONDITIONS (SIGNAL) ...... 22 FIGURE 17: FUTURE PROJECTED 2021 CONDITIONS (ROUNDABOUT) ...... 22 FIGURE 18: FUTURE PROJECTED 2026 CONDITIONS (SIGNAL) ...... 23 FIGURE 19: FUTURE PROJECTED 2026 CONDITIONS (ROUNDABOUT) ...... 23

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report ii

LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A – SCREENING FORM AND CITY RESPONSES APPENDIX B – TRAFFIC COUNTS APPENDIX C – COLLISION DATA APPENDIX D – TDM CHECKLIST APPENDIX E – LONGFIELDS DRIVE WIDENING PRELIMINARY DESIGN ROLL PLANS APPENDIX F – MMLOS SEGMENT ANALYSIS APPENDIX G – TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT AND ROUNDABOUT SCREENING FORM APPENDIX H – MMLOS INTERSECTIONS APPENDIX I – OC-TRANSPO RIDERSHIP DATA APPENDIX J – EXISTING CONDITIONS SYNCHRO ANALYSIS APPENDIX K – 2021 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS SYNCHRO ANALYSIS APPENDIX L – 2026 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS SYNCHRO ANALYSIS APPENDIX M – 2021 FUTURE TOTAL CONDITIONS SYNCHRO AND SIDRA ANALYSIS APPENDIX N – 2026 FUTURE TOTAL CONDITIONS SYNCHRO AND SIDRA ANALYSIS

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report iii

TIA FINAL REPORT

Parsons has been retained by Mattamy Homes to prepare a Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) in support of a Zoning By-Law Amendment application for a residential development located at 2701 Longfields Drive. The following report represents Step 5 – TIA Final Report Submission, of the TIA process.

1. SCREENING FORM The screening form was submitted in conjunction with the Scoping Report for the subject development to the City of Ottawa staff for review and confirmation of the need for a TIA. Trip generation triggers were met based on the size of the development. The safety triggers were met based on the proposed site access connection to Longfields Drive at the existing Kilspindie Ridge intersection. The Screening Form and previous City Comments are provided as Appendix A.

2. SCOPING REPORT 2.1. EXISTING AND PLANNED CONDITIONS 2.1.1. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed residential subdivision at 2701 Longfields Drive is an expansion of the Stonebridge Community. The current lot is occupied by a golf course. The lot is zoned as Parks and Open Space (O1A) with the permitted uses including park, environmental preserve, urban agriculture, farmer’s market and golf course. The proposed development will include 184 residential units, with 94 single family homes and 90 executive townhomes, thus requiring to be rezoned prior to construction. The proposed site access is via a new west leg approach at Kilspindie/Longfields intersection with a new STOP control on the south approach. The estimated date of occupancy is 2021 with one phase of development. The local context of the site is provided as Figure 1 and the proposed Site Plan is provided as Figure 2. Figure 1: Local Context

Image retrieved from: Google Maps - https://www.google.com/maps/@45.247562,-75.7200998,880m/data=!3m1!1e3, Dec. 16, 2019.

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 1 SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS, IF ANY, SET FORTH IN OUR LETTER DATED

______.

THIS DRAFT PLAN IS APPROVED BY THE CITY OF OTTAWA UNDER SECTION 51 OF THE PLANNING ACT. THIS _ _ _ _ DAY OF ______, 20_ _.

______DON HERWEYER, MCIP RPP, MANAGER DEVELOPMENT REVIEW-SOUTH SITE PLANNING, INFRASTRUCTURE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, CITY OF OTTAWA

m m

mh m mh

mh KEY MAP

m mh NOT TO SCALE m

m m

m DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION OF

m m PART OF LOTS 7 And 8

m m m CONCESSION 2 ( RIDEAU FRONT )

mh m

m mh mh Geographic Township of Nepean

m CITY OF OTTAWA

m Prepared by Annis , O'Sullivan , Vollebekk Ltd.

mh m mh Scale 1 : 1000 40 30 20 10 0 20 40 Metres

m Metric

mh DISTANCES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE IN METRES AND m

mh CAN BE CONVERTED TO FEET BY DIVIDING BY 0.3048

mh m

SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE

mh I CERTIFY THAT : The boundaries of the lands to be subdivided and their relationship to

m m mh mh adjoining lands have been accurately and correctly shown.

mh mh

mh m

fp ______fp fp Date Andre Roy

m ONTARIO LAND SURVEYOR

fp fp fp

mh mh

m mh OWNER'S CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that we are the owners of the lands to be subdivided and that this plan was prepared in accordance with our instructions.

______Date Mattamy (Monarch) Limited I have authority to bind the corporation.

fp ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 51-17 OF THE PLANNING ACT m (a) see plan (b) see plan (c) see plan

m (d) single and multi-family residential housing, park land and open space (e) see plan (f) see plan (g) see plan (h) City of Ottawa (i) see soils report (j) see plan (k) sanitary, storm sewers, municipal water, bell, hydro, cable and gas to be available (l) see plan

AREA SCHEDULE PROPOSED USE LOT\BLOCK Square Metres SINGLE FAMILY 1 to 94 38384.2 TOWNHOMES 97 to 104 21125.2 PARK 105 7261.8 WALKWAY 106 365.0 OTHER 95 & 96 1013.2 1, 2 & 3 26405.9 STREETS promenade 11918.7 Longfields Drive

TOTAL SITE 106 474.0

14 Concourse Gate, Suite 500 Nepean, Ont. K2E 7S6 Phone: (613) 727-0850 / Fax: (613) 727-1079 Email: [email protected] Y:\MATTAMY\STONEBRIDGE\18717-18\Drawings\18717-18 Mattamy Pt Lts 7 8 C2 RF NP DPS D7.dwg

2.1.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Area Road Network The following City owned roads are within the study area network:

Longfields Drive is a north-south arterial road in Barrhaven South, extending from Bill Leathem Drive, through Barrhaven to Prince of Wales Drive. Within the proposed Study Area, Longfields Drive is a two-lane rural roadway with a posted speed limit of 70km/h. Longfields Drive is also identified as a trucking route.

Prince of Wales Drive is a north-south arterial road in Barrhaven South, generally following the Rideau River to the north and extending to the southwest before ending in North Gower. Within the proposed Study Area, Prince of Wales is a four- lane rural roadway with a posted speed limit of 80km/h. South of the Longfields intersection, Prince of Wales Drive narrows to a two-lane roadway. Prince of Wales is also identified as a trucking route.

Golflinks Drive is a two-lane collector road that loops through the Stonebridge community on the east side of Longfields Drive, connecting to the Longfields Drive and Cambrian Road roundabout and a t-intersection between Cambrian Road and Prince of Wales Drive. The road has a posted speed of 40km/h.

Kilspindie Ridge is an east-west local road that serves to provide access to the Orchard subdivision. The road has an unposted speed limit that is assumed to be 50km/h.

A residential driveway is located at 2741 Longfields Drive. Existing Study Area Intersections Golflinks/Longfields Golflinks/Longfields is an existing 3-legged intersection with stop-control on the minor approach. The southbound approach consists of a left-turn lane, through lane and a paved shoulder. The northbound approach is a shared trough/right-turn lane and a paved shoulder. The westbound approach consists of a left-turn and right-turn lane. Note this intersection is currently being reconstructed as a roundabout and will be analyzed as such for the 2021 and 2026 horizon years.

Kilspindie/Longfields Kilspindie/Longfields is an existing 3-legged intersection with stop-control on the minor approach. The southbound approach consists of a left-turn lane, through lane and a paved shoulder. The northbound approach consists of a right-turn lane and through lane. The westbound approach consists of a left-turn and right-turn lane. A bike pocket is provided in the northbound direction.

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 3

Prince of Wales/Longfields Prince of Wales/Longfields is a 4-legged signalized intersection. The northbound and southbound approaches consist of a left-turn lane, a through lane and a shared through/right-turn lane. The eastbound approach consists of a left-turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane, and the westbound approach consists of a shared through/left-turn lane and a free-flow right turn channel. Bike pockets are provided in all directions.

Existing Driveways to Adjacent Developments There is one driveway on the south side of Longfields Drive between Golflinks Drive the Prince of Wales/Longfields intersection. There are four driveways on the north side of Longfields Drive between Golflinks Drive the Prince of Wales/Longfields intersection. Pedestrian/Cycling Network Currently, no pedestrian facilities are provided along Longfields Drive, with the exception of paved/gravel shoulders. Similarly, Prince of Wales Drive only provides pave shoulders on both sides. Golflinks Drive and Kilspindie Ridge have sidewalks along both sides of the roadway. Paved shoulders for cyclists are provided on Longfields Drive and Prince of Wales Drive. Both paved shoulders become cycle-tracks further north; starting at Golflinks Drive and north for Longfields Drive; starting at Woodroffe Avenue and north for Prince of Wales Drive. There is a pocket bike lane with a lane shifting to the left of right turn at Kilspindie/Longfields intersection. Prince of Wales/Longfields intersection provides bicycle facilities at all legs. Drive and Kilspindie Ridge allow for shared-use cycling facilities.

The ultimate cycling network identifies Prince of Wales Drive as a spine route and both Longfields Drive and Golflinks Drive as local routes.

No major pathways are located within the study area, as they are located adjacent to the Rideau and Jock Rivers, and along Cambrian Road. Transit Network Transit service within the vicinity of the site is currently provided by OC Transpo ‘Local’ Route #176 which provides peak hour service in the morning and afternoon between Manotick and Barrhaven Centre. Route #176 arrives approximately every hour between 6 to 8am, and 4 to 7pm. Bus stops are located north of Kilspindie Ridge, north of Golflinks Drive, and south of Prince of Wales Drive.

‘Local’ Route #175 provides AM Midday and PM service along Golflinks Drive and along Longfields Drive north of Golflinks Drive, between Golflinks Drive and Barrhaven Centre. Route #175 arrives approximately every 30 minutes between 6:45 to 8:45am, every hour between 11am and 1pm, and 3:15 to 10pm. Bus stops are located on Golflinks Drive and on Longfields Drive north of the Golflinks Drive intersection.

‘Rapid’ bus route #75 with 24/7 service is located approximately 1.2km north of site or approximately 500 meters west of site granted pedestrian connectivity is provided via the golf course pathways to Kilbirnie Drive.

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 4

Figure 3: Area Transit Network

Image retrieved from: Google Maps - https://www.octranspo.com/en/plan-your-trip/schedules-maps/network-map/, Dec. 16, 2019.

Peak hour travel demands The existing peak hour traffic volumes within the study area were completed in 2019, obtained from the City of Ottawa and are illustrated in Figure 4. The peak hour traffic volume count data is included as Appendix B. Figure 4: Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 5

Existing Road Safety Conditions Collision history for study area roads (2012 to 2016, inclusive) was obtained from the City of Ottawa, and the collisions involved property damage (70%), and the remaining (30%) collisions involved non-fatal injuries indicating low impact speeds.

Over the five-year period, the types of collisions cited by police include: rear end (41% or 15 collisions), turning movement (32% or 12 collisions), angle (14% or 5 collisions), approaching (5% or 2 collisions), sideswipe (3% or 1 collision), single vehicle (other) (3% or 1 collision) and other (3% or 1 collision).

A standard unit of measure for assessing collisions at an intersection is based on the number collisions per million entering vehicles (MEV) at an intersection within the study area, reported collisions per MEV is as follows:  0.09 collisions/MEV at the Golflinks/Longfields intersection  0.60 collisions/MEV at the Prince of Wales/Longfields intersection

With respect to the subject site, there does not appear to be any prevailing safety issues along the Longfields Drive, although the geometry at Prince of Wales Drive may be a contributing factor to the 11 rear end and 11 turning movement collisions observed at this intersection. The widening of Longfields Drive will alter this alignment and the proposed roundabout will likely improve the safety conditions at the intersection.

The collision data as provided by the City of Ottawa and related analysis has been provided in Appendix C.

It should be noted that with the realignment and addition of the roundabouts at the intersections of Golflinks/Longfields and Prince of Wales/Longfields, the collision history may not reflect the future operations at the study intersection locations. 2.1.3. PLANNED CONDITIONS Planned Study Area Transportation Network Changes Outlined within the Ottawa Transportation Master Plan Affordable Network and the Wards 3, 21, and 22 Planned Construction Projects map, the only study area improvement is the Longfields Drive widening/realignment (formerly Jockvale Road) from Cambrian Road to Prince of Wales Drive. However, it is now understood that the widening/realignment of Longfields and the construction of the roundabouts at Longfields/Prince of Wales and Longfields/Golflinks has been delayed beyond the study’s horizon years. For purposes of this Study, the roadway network and the study area intersections will be analysed with the existing configuration and control types. i.e. Longfields will have one travel lane in either direction, Longfields/Prince of Wales is signalized and Longfields/Golflinks as an unsignalized intersection with stop control on the minor.

Once Longfield Drive is widened, the roadway is anticipated to consist of 4-lanes, a centre median, and MUP’s on both the north and south side. Included in the design, roundabouts are proposed at Blackleaf Drive, Golflinks Drive and Prince of Wales Drive. Figure 5 illustrates the preliminary design of the Longfields Drive widening.

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 6

Figure 5: Longfields Drive Widening – Preliminary Design

Other Area Development According to the City’s development application search tool, the following developments are planned within the vicinity of the subject site.

Uniform – 2741 Longfields Drive A Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-Law Amendment application for the 2741 Longfields Drive property has been submitted for a proposed residential subdivision consisting of 90 residential units comprised of 34 semi-detached bungalow dwellings and four (4) 14-unit low-rise condominium apartments and a community parkette (TBC). The development includes proposed connections to the Longfields/Golflinks intersection (roundabout) and approximately 185m south of Golflinks Drive (a right-in/right-out).

Barnsdale Lands Rezoning Official Plan Amendment (OPA) and Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) applications are currently proposing a re-designation of approximately 116 ha of land within the City of Ottawa from an ‘Agricultural Resource Area’ designation to a ‘General Rural Area’ designation and to rezone the lands from the current ‘Agricultural Zone – Subzone 2 (AG2)’, ‘Agricultural Zone – Subzone 3 (AG3)’, ‘Mineral Aggregate Resource Zone’, and ‘Mineral Aggregate Resource Zone – Subzone 1 (MR1)’, to appropriate ‘Rural Countryside (RU) Zones’.

The proposed re-zoning lands include 3552, 3680, 3806, 3818 and 3882 Barnsdale Road, 3872, 3971 and 3976 Greenbank Road, and 3894, 3910 and 3972 Prince of Wales Drive.

2.2. STUDY AREA AND TIME PERIODS For the purposes of the operational analysis it is assumed that the subject development will be fully built and occupied by 2021, at a similar timeline as the anticipated widening of Longfields Drive. This will necessitate the analysis of 2021 and 2026 horizons.

As the proposed site is a residential development, the time periods assessed with be the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours. The proposed study area is outlined below and highlighted in Figure 6.  Golflinks/Longfields;  Prince of Wales/Longfields;  Kilspindie/Longfields;  Longfields from Kilspindie to Prince of Wales;

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 7

Figure 6: Study Area

Image retrieved from: Google Maps - https://www.google.com/maps/@45.247562,-75.7200998,880m/data=!3m1!1e3, Dec. 16, 2019.

2.3. EXEMPTION REVIEW Based on the City’s TIA guidelines and the subject site, the following modules/elements of the TIA process, summarized in Table 1, are recommended to be exempt in the subsequent steps of the TIA process: Table 1: Exemptions Review Summary Module Element Exemption Consideration 4.1 Development 4.1.2 Circulation Not required for plan of subdivision. Design and Access 4.2.1 Parking Not required for plan of subdivision. Supply 4.2 Parking 4.2.2 Spillover Not required for plan of subdivision. Parking 4.6 Neighbourhood 4.6.1 Adjacent Proposed development connects directly to arterial road network and does not Traffic Management Neighbourhoods connect to adjacent neighbourhoods. Proposed development will not generate more than 200-person trips during the 4.8 Network Concept - peak hours in excess of permitted zoning.

In addition to the above recommendations of the Exemptions Review, the following exemptions are also proposed and summarized in Table 2. Table 2: Additional Recommended Exemptions Summary Module Element Exemption Consideration 4.7.2 Transit 4.7 Transit Transit priority is not designated along Longfields Drive. Priority

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 8

3. FORECASTING REPORT 3.1. DEVELOPMENT-GENERATED TRAVEL DEMAND 3.1.1. TRIP GENERATION RATES AND MODE SHARES Trip generation rates for the proposed development, consisting of 94 single family homes and 90 townhouses, were obtained from the City’s 2009 TRANS Trip Generation Report. Table 3 provides the appropriate trip generation rates for both land uses. Table 3: Vehicle Trip Generation Rates Trip Rates Land Use Data Source AM Peak PM Peak Single Family Homes TRANS T = 0.70(du) T = 0.90(du) Townhomes TRANS T = 0.54(du) T = 0.71(du) Notes: T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends

Using the TRANS Trip Generation rates, the total amount of vehicle trips generated by the proposed development was calculated. The results are summarized in Table 4. Table 4: Projected Vehicle Trip Generation AM Peak (veh/h) PM Peak(veh/h) Land Use Source Units In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Homes TRANS 94 units 19 47 66 52 33 85 Townhomes TRANS 90 units 18 31 49 33 31 64 Total Residential Vehicle Trips 37 81 115 86 64 149

As shown in Table 4, the total projected number of vehicle trips expected to be generated by the residential development is approximately 115 and 150 veh/h during the morning and afternoon peak hours, respectively. Using the TRANS Report and table 3.13, the person trips were calculated and shown in Table 5 and Table 6 for single family homes and townhomes respectively.

Table 5: Site ‘Person Trips’ Generated – Single Family Homes AM Mode AM Peak (persons/h) PM Mode PM Peak (persons/h) Travel Mode Share In Out Total Share In Out Total Auto Driver 55% 19 47 66 64% 52 33 85 Auto Passenger 11% 3 10 13 11% 10 5 15 Transit 25% 8 22 30 19% 15 10 25 Non-motorized 9% 3 8 11 6% 4 4 8 Total Person Trips 100% 33 87 120 100% 81 52 133 Table 6: Site ‘Person Trips’ Generated – Townhomes AM Mode AM Peak (veh/h) PM Mode PM Peak (veh/h) Travel Mode Share In Out Total Share In Out Total Auto Driver 55% 18 31 49 61% 33 31 64 Auto Passenger 10% 4 5 9 11% 7 5 12 Transit 27% 8 16 24 22% 12 11 23 Non-motorized 8% 2 5 7 6% 3 3 6 Total Person Trips 100% 32 57 89 100% 55 50 105

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 9

Table 7: Total Site ‘Person Trips’ Generated – Combined AM Mode AM Peak (veh/h) PM Mode PM Peak (veh/h) Travel Mode Share In Out Total Share In Out Total Auto Driver - 37 78 115 - 85 64 149 Auto Passenger - 7 15 22 - 17 10 27 Transit - 16 38 54 - 27 21 48 Non-motorized - 5 13 18 - 7 7 14 Total Person Trips 100% 65 144 209 100% 136 102 238

As the Trans Report focuses on unit type to estimate modal shares, the estimated rates may not reflect the regions travel habits. To better estimate the modal shares for the proposed location the 2011 OD-Survey for the South Nepean area will be used. Table 8 summarizes the estimated modal rates

Table 8: OD-Survey Estimated Modal Shares Travel Mode Mode Share Auto Driver 60% Auto Passenger 15% Transit 20% Non-motorized 5% Total Person Trips 100%

The estimated 2011 OD-Survey modal share rates are applied using the 2009 Trans Report Total Site generated person trips. The summarized Total Site Trip rates are displayed in Table 9. Table 9: Total Site ‘Vehicle Trips’ Generated using 2011 OD-Survey AM Mode AM Peak (veh/h) PM Peak (veh/h) Travel Mode Share In Out Total In Out Total Auto Driver 60% 36 89 125 89 54 143 Auto Passenger 15% 9 22 31 22 14 36 Transit 20% 12 30 42 30 18 48 Non-motorized 5% 3 7 10 7 5 12 Total Person Trips 100% 61 148 209 148 90 238 Total Vehicle Trips 36 89 125 89 54 143

As shown in Table 9 above, the development is projected to generate a total of approximately 125 and 145 ‘new’ vehicle trips per hour and 40 and 50 ‘new’ transit trips during the morning and afternoon peak hours, respectively. 3.1.2. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT Traffic distribution was based on the 2011 NCR Household Origin – Destination Survey, existing volume splits at study area intersections and our knowledge of the surrounding area. The resultant distribution is outlined as follows.  50% to/from the north via Longfields Drive  40% to/from the east via Prince of Wales Drive  10% to/from the west via Prince of Wales Drive Based on the foregoing distribution, ‘new’ projected site-generated trips were assigned to the study area, which is illustrated as Figure 7.

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 10

Figure 7: Site Generated Traffic

3.2. BACKGROUND NETWORK TRAVEL DEMANDS 3.2.1. TRANSPORTATION NETWORK PLANS See Section 2.1.3. 3.2.2. BACKGROUND GROWTH The background traffic volumes along Longfields Drive and Prince of Wales Drive are expected to increase at a constant rate. To account for anticipated development beyond the urban boundary (e.g. Manotick), a 4% traffic growth rate per annum was assumed for the 2021 and 2026 horizon years.

The future background volumes were calculated by superimposing other area developments on to the network and adding a background growth of 4% for the buildout year 2021 and for horizon 2026. The resulting background traffic volumes are depicted in Figure 8 and Figure 9, respectively.

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 11

Figure 8: 2021 Background Traffic Volumes Figure 9: 2026 Background Traffic Volumes

3.2.3. OTHER DEVELOPMENTS Trips generated by other area developments were accounted within the study area. See Section 2.1.3 for more detail of each development. It has been determined that only 2741 Longfields Drive (Uniform Development) will have impacts to study area intersections. Since 2741 Longfields Drive (Uniform Development) is not anticipated to be constructed until 2023, the generated vehicle traffic will be reflected in the 2026 Future Background and 2026 Future Total horizon. Figure 10 shows the distributed traffic generated by the Uniform site.

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 12

Figure 10: 2741 Longfields Drive (Uniform) 2026 Projected Trip Generation

3.3. DEMAND RATIONALIZATION The study area road network is expected to accommodate projected volumes. There is currently no anticipated capacity issues. The capacity of the roadways will be further explored in a more detailed review of the total projected traffic volumes and intersection design in the ensuing Strategy Report.

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 13

4. STRATEGY REPORT 4.1. DEVELOPMENT DESIGN 4.1.1. DESIGN FOR SUSTAINABLE MODES Within the proposed site, the 18.0m right-of-way (local roads) will require sidewalks along a single side of the roadway, and the 14.5m right-of-way window street will require a sidewalk on one side, either within the 14.5m right-of-way or on the adjacent section of Longfields Drive. If pedestrian facilities are provided along Longfields Drive, connections into the development will be required.

The local road network within the proposed site does not require specific cycling facilities and cyclists are anticipated to operate within the shared vehicle lanes.

Transit stops are currently located on both sides of Longfields Drive, just northwest of Kilspindie Ridge.

If pedestrian connectivity is provided to the golf pathway located south-west of the site, OC-Transpo bus stop #1276 and #3384 located at Kilbirnie/Stromness would be between 450 to 900 meter walk depending on the location within site, which provides access to high frequency all day and night bus route #75. Figure 11 shows the location of the discussed bus stops. Figure 11: Bus Stops

Stop #1990

Stop #1113

SITE

Stop #1276 Stop #3384

Image retrieved from: Google Maps - https://www.google.com/maps/@45.247562,-75.7200998,880m/data=!3m1!1e3, Dec. 16, 2019.

The TDM-supportive Development Design and Infrastructure Checklist has been completed and can be found in Appendix D

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 14

4.1.2. CIRCULATION AND ACCESS The plan of subdivision proposes a single access roadway connecting to Longfields Drive by adding a west leg to the existing Kilspindie/Longfields intersection (Street 1). For purposes of this report, the intersection is analysed with the following intersection control types: - Traffic Signal - Single Lane Roundabout It should be noted that the Planning Rationale outlines the following: "A road allowance is proposed to be reserved at the southern edge of the subdivision. In the event that the urban boundary is expanded, the proposed street network provides an extension to the southern edge of the subdivision." As such, should the urban boundary be expanded, Street 1 may be extended southbound. However, as the urban boundary is not expanding within the horizon years, this scenario is not analyzed within this TIA.

4.1.3. NEW STREET NETWORKS The street network within the plan of subdivision is proposed to consist of local roadways. The block lengths are short and the anticipated vehicular traffic volumes are expected to be low as the internal roadway will experience only traffic generated by the plan of subdivision. 4.2. PARKING Based on the City of Ottawa parking bylaws, the location of the development and the type of development (four or less storeys high), no off-street motor vehicle parking is required as per Part 4 – Parking, Queuing and Loading Provisions clause 4 a) in section 101 for City of Ottawa Guidelines. It is assumed that residents will park their vehicles and bicycles inside their private garage or on their driveways. 4.2.1. PARKING SUPPLY Exempt. See Section 2.3.

4.2.2. SPILLOVER PARKING Exempt. See Section 2.3. 4.3. BOUNDARY STREET DESIGN The boundary street for the development is Longfields Drive. Longfields Drive has no existing sidewalks. As part of the Longfields Drive widening, a multi-use pathway (MUP) is proposed on both sides of the roadway. A preliminary design sketch for the proposed widening, including the proposed MUP is included in Appendix E.

The existing/proposed roadway geometry consists of the following features:  Existing Longfields Drive o 1 vehicle travel lane in each direction; o No sidewalk on either side of the roadway; and, o More than 3,000 vehicles per day.  Widened Longfields Drive (uncertain on timeline) o 2 vehicle travel lanes in each direction; o MUP greater than 2 meters wide with boulevard between 0.5-2 meters; and, o More than 3,000 vehicles per day. The multi-modal level of service analysis for the subject road segments adjacent to the site is summarized in Table 10 with detailed analysis provided in Appendix F. Note that the MMLOS targets in Table 10 reflect a “General Rural Area”, as the proposed development will be located in a rural area based on the Rural Policy Plan of the City of Ottawa‘s Official Plan (Figure 12).

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 15

Table 10: MMLOS –Road Segments Adjacent to the Site Level of Service Road Segment Pedestrian (PLoS) Bicycle (BLoS) Transit (TLoS) Truck (TkLoS) PLoS Target BLoS Target TLoS Target TkLoS Target Existing Longfields Drive between No No F F D N/A D C Kilspindie & Prince of Wales Target Target Widened Longfields Drive between No No E A D N/A C C Kilspindie & Prince of Wales* Target Target Note: *The anticipated timing for widening of Longfields Drive is unknown at this time.

Figure 12: City of Ottawa Rural Policy Plan

As shown in Table 10, the MMLOS Guidelines do not provide a minimum desirable target for pedestrians, cyclists or transit for a “General Rural Area”. Nonetheless, the widening of Longfields Dr improves pedestrian LOS to ‘E’ and truck LOS to ‘C’, which meets the target TkLOS ‘C’. Providing physically separated bike lanes as part of the MUP would significantly improve BLoS from existing ‘F’ to ‘A’. The transit LOS remains unchanged with a LOS ‘D’. 4.4. ACCESS INTERSECTION DESIGN 4.4.1. LOCATION AND DESIGN OF ACCESS The proposed development will be accessed via a new leg located at on the west side of the existing Kilspindie/Longfields intersection as shown highlighted in orange in Figure 13.

The adjacent driveways/intersections (highlighted in red in Figure 13 below) and the approximate distances from 2701 Longfields Drive proposed access are as follows: - Existing Longfields/Prince of Wales intersection (~530m) - 2874 Longfields Drive (~480m). - 2848 Longfields Drive (~360m). - 2838 Longfields Drive (~330m). - 2822 Longfields Drive (~275m). - Future Uniform East Access (~80m and is proposed to be a right-in/right-out only) - Future Uniform West Access/Golflinks Dr/Longfields (~290m and is proposed to be a single lane roundabout or signalized).

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 16

Figure 13: Adjacent Driveways

SITE

Image retrieved from: Google Maps - https://www.google.com/maps/@45.247562,-75.7200998,880m/data=!3m1!1e3, Dec. 16, 2019.

The proposed access is to be designed to meet City of Ottawa and TAC Guidelines. For purposes of this study it is assumed that the new leg will be composed of a single travel lane in either direction and emergency/delivery vehicles are able to maneuver through the intersection in any direction.

4.4.2. INTERSECTION CONTROL With the addition of the new west leg at Kilspindie/Longfields and the existing traffic volumes passing through the intersection, it is anticipated that an intersection with stop control (See Figure 14) on the minor roads will experience long delays (See Table 11) on the minor roads during the peak hours and will be difficult to cross the intersection heading eastbound or westbound along Kilspindie and the new access.

Figure 14: 2021 Total Projected Intersection – Stop Control on Minor Streets

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 17

The following Table 11 provides a summary of the future 2021 projected traffic operations with stop control on the minor at the study area intersection based on the SYNCHRO (V10) traffic analysis software. The subject intersections were assessed in terms of the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio and the corresponding Level of Service (LoS) for the critical movement(s). The SYNCHRO model outputs of existing conditions are provided within Appendix M. Note that the Peak- Hour-Factor (PHF) used is 0.90 in existing conditions and 1.00 in all future conditions, based on the requirements of the TIA Guidelines. Table 11: 2021 Total Projected Intersection Performance – Stop Control on Minor Streets Weekday AM Peak (PM Peak) Intersection Critical Movement Intersection ‘as a whole’ max. v/c or LoS Movement Delay (s) LoS v/c avg. delay (s) Unsignalized Kilspindie/Longfields* F(F) 63(295) EB(EB) 17(16) A(A) - Note: Analysis of signalized intersections assumes a PHF of 0.90 and a saturation flow rate of 1800 veh/h/lane.

Upon completion of the Traffic Signal Warrant and the roundabout screening form, it is recommended that the proposed intersection of Kilspindie/Longfields is signalized or is a roundabout. The Left-turn Warrant has been completed and found that left turn lanes on Longfields Drive at the Kilspindie/Longfields intersection are warranted due to high opposing traffic volumes. The Traffic Signal Warrant, Left turn Warrant and Roundabout screening form can be found in Appendix G. 4.4.3. INTERSECTION DESIGN As stated in the MMLOS Guidelines, only signalized intersections at the frontage of the site are considered for the intersection multi-modal level of service (MMLOS) analysis. In future conditions, the intersection of Longfields/Kilspindie may be signalized. Table 12 summarizes the MMLOS analysis results at Longfields/Kilspindie, assuming total projected 2026 conditions, for each of the respective travel modes. The detailed MMLOS analyses is provided in Appendix H. Table 12: MMLOS – Intersections Level of Service Road Segment Pedestrian (PLoS) Bicycle (BLoS) Transit (TLoS) Truck (TkLoS) PLoS Target BLoS Target TLoS Target TkLoS Target No No Longfields / Kilspindie D F E N/A F C Target Target

As shown in Table 12 and previously discussed in Section 4.3, the MMLOS Guidelines do not provide a minimum desirable target for pedestrians, cyclists or transit for a “General Rural Area”. With regards to trucks, the intersection fails to meet the target LOS due to narrow turning radiuses and a single receiving lane on each leg of the intersection. 4.5. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT 4.5.1. CONTEXT FOR TDM This Plan of Subdivision is composed of townhomes and single-family units and has only one access to the development. The anticipated traffic generated by the subdivision will be the only source of traffic and is unlikely that TDM measures will be needed internally. 4.5.2. NEED AND OPORTUNITY The surrounding land uses are composed of a golf course and residential subdivisions consisting of townhouses and single unit homes. Currently Longfields Drive is composed of a rural cross-section, with one vehicle travels lane in either direction, paved shoulders, or ditches. Cyclists currently travel along Longfields Drive on the shoulder or in mix traffic conditions. Bus Stops located on Longfields Drive are accessed by sidewalk facility on the northeast corner of Kilspindie/Longfields or walking along the gravel shoulder on the northwest corner of Kilspindie/Longfields (northeast corner of the plan of subdivision).

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 18

An improvement for the access bus facilities on Longfields Drive would be to provide a sidewalk connection along the frontage of the property connecting between the proposed access to the existing bus stop.

Due to the rural nature of the location, there is limited opportunity for continuous sidewalk/pedestrian facilities or improving the cycle facilities on Longfields Drive until the widening/realignment. 4.5.3. TDM PROGRAM Given the development is an infill of a golf course community and following the context for TDM/need and opportunity, stated above, there is limited opportunity for effective TDM measures until the City widens Longfields Drive. See attached TDM Checklist in Appendix D 4.6. NEIGHBOURHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT 4.6.1. ADJACENT NEIGHBOURHOODS Exempt. See section 2.3. 4.7. TRANSIT 4.7.1. ROUTE CAPACITY Table 13 summarizes the average available seats on-vehicle for the corresponding transit routes. Given the average loads and residual capacity of routes 175 and 176, no capacity constraints are noted for the transit routes in the area. Transit information was provided by the City of Ottawa in May 2018 and is included in Appendix I. Table 13: Transit Capacity at Adjacent Transit Stops Average Boarding Average Load Available Intersection Stop Direction Route and Alighting at Departure Seats (%) AM 0 1 98% 0434 Southbound 175 PM 1 1 98% AM 1 6 89% 1990 Northbound 176 PM 0 3 95% AM Longfields Drive 1990 Northbound 305 N/A PM AM 1 3 95% 1113 Southbound 176 PM 1 5 91% AM 1113 Southbound 305 N/A PM

4.7.2. TRANSIT PRIORITY Exempt. See section 2.3. 4.8. REVIEW OF NETWORK CONCEPT Exempt. See Section 2.3.

4.9. REVIEW OF NETWORK CONCEPT 4.9.1. EXISTING OPERATIONS The following Table 14 provides a summary of the existing traffic operations at the study area intersection based on the SYNCHRO (V10) traffic analysis software. The subject intersections were assessed in terms of the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio and the corresponding Level of Service (LoS) for the critical movement(s). The SYNCHRO model outputs of existing conditions are provided within Appendix J. Note that the Peak-Hour-Factor (PHF) used is 0.90 in existing conditions and 1.00 in all future conditions, based on the requirements of the TIA Guidelines. Table 14: Existing Intersection Performance Weekday AM Peak (PM Peak) Intersection Critical Movement Intersection ‘as a whole’

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 19

max. v/c or LoS Movement Delay (s) LoS v/c avg. delay (s) Signalized Prince of Wales/Longfields F(F) 1.80(1.21) EBL(NBL) 115.6(40.2) F(D) 1.15(0.90) Unsignalized Golflinks/Longfields E(F) 49(208) WB(WB) 3(6) A(A) - Kilspindie/Longfields F(F) 61(86) WB(WB) 5(3) A(A) - Note: Analysis of signalized intersections assumes a PHF of 0.90 and a saturation flow rate of 1800 veh/h/lane.

As shown in Table 14, the signalized intersection of Prince of Wales/Longfields ‘as a whole’ currently operates above capacity with an LoS ‘F’ during morning peak hour and at an acceptable LoS ‘D’ during the afternoon peak hour. With regards to critical movements, the EBL and NBL both operate above capacity during the morning and afternoon peak hours, respectively.

The unsignalized intersections within the study area ‘as a whole’ are currently operating at a LoS ‘A’ during both peak hours. Critical movements operate at or above capacity during both peak hours at both the Golflinks/Longfields and Kilspindie/Longfields intersections.

It noteworthy to mention that significant queues are observed along Longfields Drive at the Longfields/Prince of Wales intersection, as well as, resultant storage issues for the eastbound left-turn movement. Queues extend on Longfields Drive past Kilspindie Ridge blocking the southbound turn-lane at that location. 4.9.2. PROJECTED BACKGROUND 2021 OPERATIONS The 2021 background volumes from Section 3.2.2 and Figure 8 were evaluated using Synchro and SIDRA. Results are summarized in Table 15 with detailed analyses provided in Appendix K. Table 15: Projected Background 2021 Operations at Study Area Intersections Weekday AM Peak (PM Peak) Critical Movement Intersection ‘as a whole’ Intersection max. v/c or LoS Movement Delay (s) LoS v/c avg. delay (s) Signalized Prince of Wales/Longfields F(F) 1.72(1.15) EBL(NBL) 106.9(38.2) F(D) 1.11(0.87) Unsignalized Kilspindie/Longfields E(F) 48(67) WB(WB) 4(2) A(A) - Roundabout Golflinks/Longfields B(B) 11.8(18.4) WB(WB) 4.9(5.6) A(A) - Note: Analysis of signalized intersections assumes a PHF of 1.0 and a saturation flow rate of 1800 veh/h/lane.

As shown in Table 15, the intersections operate similar to existing conditions, with slightly improved results as future horizons are analyzed with a PHF of 1.0. The morning peak at Kilspindie/Longfields improves to a LOS ‘E’ for the critical movement. The Golflinks/Longfields intersection improves to an LoS ‘B’ during peak hours with regard to critical movements with the construction of the roundabout.

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 20

4.9.3. PROJECTED BACKGROUND 2026 OPERATIONS The background 2026 volumes from Section 3.2.2 and Figure 9 were evaluated using Synchro. Results are summarized in Table 16 with detailed analyses provided in Appendix L. Note that the intersection of Golflinks/Longfields is anticipated to be signalized once the “Uniform” development is constructed in 2023. As such, the intersection is analyzed as a signal in future 2026 conditions. Table 16: Projected Background 2026 Operations at Study Area Intersections Weekday AM Peak (PM Peak) Critical Movement Intersection ‘as a whole’ Intersection max. v/c or LoS Movement Delay (s) LoS v/c avg. delay (s) Signalized Prince of Wales/Longfields F(F) 2.33(1.55) EBL(NBL) 172.5(62.6) F(F) 1.39(1.05) Unsignalized Kilspindie/Longfields F(F) 103(159) WB(WB) 7(4) A(A) - Roundabout Golflinks/Longfields B(D) 17.3(38.6) EB(WB) 5.1(7.2) A(A) - Note: Analysis of signalized intersections assumes a PHF of 1.0 and a saturation flow rate of 1800 veh/h/lane.

As shown in Table 16, study area intersections as a whole operate at an LoS ‘D’ or better during peak hours. The exception is the Prince of Wales/Longfields intersection which operates at an LoS ‘F’ during both peak hours. With regards to critical movements, the critical movements at the Prince of Wales/Longfields and Kilspindie/Longfields intersections operate above capacity at an LoS ‘F’ during both peak hours. The Golflinks/Longfields intersection continues to operate at an overall LoS ‘A’ during peak hours however, the critical WB movement is projected to operate at a LoS ‘D’ (previously LoS ‘B’) in the afternoon peak hour. 4.9.4. FUTURE PROJECTED 2021 CONDITIONS The total future projected 2021 conditions were derived by superimposing the 2021 background volumes onto the site- generated volumes and are illustrated in Figure 15 and Figure 16. Synchro results for study area intersection performance are summarized in Table 17 with detailed analyses provided in Appendix M. Note that the intersection of Kilspindie/Longfields was analyzed assuming signalized, unsignalized and roundabout traffic controls.

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 21

Figure 15: Future Projected 2021 Conditions (Signal) Figure 16: Future Projected 2021 Conditions (Roundabout)

Table 17: Total Projected 2021 Operations at Study Area Intersections Weekday AM Peak (PM Peak) Critical Movement Intersection ‘as a whole’ Intersection max. v/c or LoS Movement Delay (s) LoS v/c avg. delay (s) Signalized Prince of Wales/Longfields F(F) 1.72(1.55) EBL(NBL) 106.1(44.8) F(E) 1.11(0.91) Kilspindie/Longfields* C(C) 0.71(0.77) SBT(NBT) 12.2(9.9) B(B) 0.62(0.70) Roundabout Golflinks/Longfields B(B) 12.1(19.0) WB(WB) 4.9(5.6) A(A) - Kilspindie/Longfields* B(B) 13.2(16.8) EB(WB) 5.4(5.6) A(A) - Note: Analysis of signalized intersections assumes a PHF of 1.0 and a saturation flow rate of 1800 veh/h/lane. *Kilspindie/Longfields was analyzed in Total Projected 2021 conditions assuming signalized and roundabout control.

As shown in Table 17, the analysis results are similar to future background 2021 conditions, with a slight increase in delays and v/c ratios at the Prince of Wales/Longfields and Golflinks/Longfields intersections. With regards to the signalization of the Kilspindie/Longfields intersection, results show that the intersection operates best as a roundabout, with the intersection ‘as a whole’ operating at a LoS ‘A’ during both peak hours. Nonetheless, the signalization also provides favorable results, with the intersection ‘as a whole’ operating at a LOS ‘B’ during both peak hours.

It should be noted that while a roundabout at Kilspindie functions better than a signalized intersection, the coordination of the adjacent Prince of Wales/Longfields traffic signal with a potential roundabout upstream can be difficult due to the randomness of vehicle arrivals. Additionally, significant queues are noted from the eastbound left-turn movement at the Prince of Wales/Longfields intersection during the morning peak hour. There is potential that this queue may spill back beyond the intersection of Kilspindie Ridge and towards Golflinks Drive, causing increased delays at both intersections.

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 22

4.9.5. FUTURE PROJECTED 2026 CONDITIONS The total future projected 2026 conditions were derived by superimposing the 2026 background volumes onto the site- generated volumes and are illustrated in Figure 17 and Figure 18. Synchro results for study area intersection performance are summarized in Table 18 with detailed analyses provided in Appendix N. Note that the intersection of Kilspindie/Longfields was analyzed assuming signalized and roundabout traffic controls.

Figure 17: Future Projected 2026 Conditions (Signal) Figure 18: Future Projected 2026 Conditions (Roundabout)

Table 18: Total Projected 2026 Operations at Study Area Intersections Weekday AM Peak (PM Peak) Critical Movement Intersection ‘as a whole’ Intersection max. v/c or LoS Movement Delay (s) LoS v/c avg. delay (s) Signalized Prince of Wales/Longfields F(F) 2.33(1.95) EBL(NBL) 171.2(85.3) F(F) 1.39(1.14) Kilspindie/Longfields* D(D) 0.84(0.89) SBT(NBT) 16.2(14.2) C(D) 0.77(0.83) Roundabout Golflinks/Longfields B(D) 17.7(44.3) EB(EB) 5.2(7.6) A(A) - Kilspindie/Longfields* B(C) 16.1(26.3) EB(WB) 5.6(6.3) A(A) - Note: Analysis of signalized intersections assumes a PHF of 1.0 and a saturation flow rate of 1800 veh/h/lane. *Kilspindie/Longfields was analyzed in Total Projected 2026 conditions assuming signalized or roundabout control.

As shown in Table 18, the intersections of Prince of Wales/Longfields and Golflinks/Longfields operate similar to future background 2026 conditions, with slightly higher delays and v/c ratios. Critical movements at the intersection of Kilspindie/Longfields operate at a LOS ‘D’ with traffic signal control and a LOS ‘C’ or better with roundabout control during peak hours.

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 23

As mentioned previously, while a roundabout at Kilspindie functions better than a signalized intersection, the coordination of the adjacent Prince of Wales/Longfields traffic signal with a potential roundabout upstream can be difficult due to the randomness of vehicle arrivals. Additionally, significant queues are noted from the eastbound left-turn movement at the Prince of Wales/Longfields intersection during the morning peak hour. There is potential that this queue may spill back beyond the intersection of Kilspindie Ridge and towards Golflinks Drive, causing increased delays at both intersections.

5. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Proposed Development  The proposed development is located at 2701 Longfields Drive  The site is currently a golf course  The proposed development will consist of a single phase which consists of approximately 94 single family homes and 90 executive townhomes expected to have occupancy by 2021

Existing Conditions  Looking at the intersections ‘as a whole’, the signalized intersection of Longfields/Prince of Wales is operating at or near capacity with LoS ‘F’ or better, the unsignalized Golflinks/Longfields and Kilspindie/Longfields intersections ‘as a whole’ are operating at an acceptable LoS ‘A’  Significant queues are observed along Longfields Drive at the Longfields/Prince of Wales intersection, as well as, resultant storage issues for the eastbound left-turn movement. Queues extend on Longfields Drive past Kilspindie Ridge blocking the southbound turn-lane at that location

Background Conditions  A 4% annual growth rate was applied to study area intersections  Other nearby developments were superimposed on background volumes

Trip Generation and Parking  The proposed development was expected to generate approximately 125 and 145 vehicle trips in the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours respectively based on TRANS Trip Generation and OD-Survey Mode Share  On site vehicle and bicycle parking will be satisfied by private driveways and private parking garages. Since the development will have units equal to or less than 4 storeys in height, no off-street parking is necessary

Projected Conditions  Future traffic operations are anticipated to worsen as traffic volumes are expected to increase with time and new nearby developments  Traffic Signals and Left-turn lanes are warranted in projected conditions.  During the 2021 Horizon year, the intersections are anticipated to operate as follows: . The roundabout Golflinks/Longfields intersection is projected to operate ‘as a whole’ with a LoS ‘A’ or better during the peak hours . The signalized Prince of Wales/Longfields intersection ‘as a whole’ is projected to operate at or above capacity during peak hours . Should the Kilspindie/Longfields intersection be signalized, it is projected to operate ‘as a whole’ with a LoS ‘B’ or better during the peak hours . Should the Kilspindie/Longfields intersection operate as a roundabout, it is projected to operate ‘as a whole’ with a LoS ‘A’ or better or better during both peak hours  During the 2026 Horizon year, the intersections are anticipated to operate as follows: . The roundabout Golflinks/Longfields intersection ‘as a whole’ is projected to operate with a LoS ‘A’ or better during the peak hours . The signalized Prince of Wales/Longfields intersection ‘as a whole’ is projected to operate above capacity with LoS ‘F’ during both peak hours

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 24

. Should the Kilspindie/Longfields intersection be signalized, it is projected to operate ‘as a whole’ with a LoS ‘D’ or better during the peak hours . Should the Kilspindie/Longfields intersection operate as a roundabout, it is projected to operate ‘as a whole’ with a LoS ‘A’ or better or better during both peak hours  Note that while a roundabout at Kilspindie/Longfields functions better than a signalized intersection, the coordination with the Prince of Wales/Longfields traffic signal with a roundabout upstream can be difficult due to the randomness of vehicle arrivals . Additionally, the EBLT queue at the Prince of Wales/Longfields intersection may spill back through the Kilspindie intersection causing additional delays  The MMLoS analysis within a “General Rural Area” have no targets for PLoS, BLoS, and TLoS however TkLoS target is ‘C’. The MMLoS for the boundary road segment and for a signalized intersection at Kilspindie/Longfields is TkLoS ‘D’, which is anticipated to not meet the recommended target due to single lanes travel lanes in either direction and small effective turning radius

Transit  Site-generated transit trips is approximately 40 and 50 ‘new’ trips during the weekday morning and afternoon peak hour, respectively  The estimated transit trips could be accommodated by existing OC-Transpo bus routes  If a pedestrian connection from the south quadrant of the site to the existing golf course trails was made, high frequency ‘Rapid’ route #75 would be between 450 to 900 meters walk from the development

Site Access, Circulation and Connectivity  The proposed development will be accessed via a new west leg on to arterial Longfields Drive located at Kilspindie/Longfields intersection  Sidewalk connection is recommended along the west side of Longfields Drive between the existing bus stop located northwest of the Kilspindie Ridge intersection, through to the Kilspindie/Longfields intersection  Internal roadways consist of local roads with on-street parking, crescent style roads and a cul-de-sac  A roundabout or a traffic signal at Kilspindie/Longfields intersection would provide pedestrian and cyclist crossing facilities

Based on the foregoing, the proposed Zoning By-Law Amendment for Mattamy Homes for the development located at 2701 Longfields, is recommended from a transportation perspective.

Prepared By: Reviewed By:

Rani Nahas, E.I.T. Matthew Mantle, P.Eng. Transportation Associate Transportation Engineer

Mattamy 2701 Longfields Drive – TIA Report 25

Appendix A SCREENING FORM AND CITY RESPONSES

1223 Michael Street, Suite 100, Ottawa, Ontario, K1J 7T2 P: +1 613.738.4160 l F: +1 613.739.7105 l www.parsons.com

City of Ottawa 2017 TIA Guidelines Date 26-Apr-18 TIA Screening Form Project Mattamy - 2701 Longfields Project Number 476616-01000 Results of Screening Yes/No Development Satisfies the Trip Generation Trigger Yes Development Satisfies the Location Trigger No Development Satisfies the Safety Trigger Yes

Module 1.1 - Description of Proposed Development Municipal Address 2701 Longifleds Drive Description of location NEPEAN CON 2 RF PT LOT 7 RP;4R14256 PT PART 1 Land Use Residential Development Size 189 Units (Mixed Single and Towns) Number of Accesses and Locations One Development Phasing Single Phase Buildout Year 2021 Sketch Plan / Site Plan See attached

Module 1.2 - Trip Generation Trigger Land Use Type Single-Family Homes Development Size 189 Units Trip Generation Trigger Met? Yes

Module 1.3 - Location Triggers Development Proposes a new driveway to a boundary street that is designated as part of the City's Transit Priority, Rapid No Transit, or Spine Bicycle Networks (See Sheet 3) Development is in a Design Priority Area (DPA) or Transit- No oriented Development (TOD) zone. (See Sheet 3) Location Trigger Met? No

Module 1.4 - Safety Triggers Posted Speed Limit on any boundary road <80 km/h Horizontal / Vertical Curvature on a boundary street limits No sight lines at a proposed driveway A proposed driveway is within the area of influence of an adjacent traffic signal or roundabout (i.e. within 300 m of intersection in rural conditions, or within 150 m of intersection Yes in urban/ suburban conditions) or within auxiliary lanes of an intersection; A proposed driveway makes use of an existing median break No that serves an existing site There is a documented history of traffic operations or safety concerns on the boundary streets within 500 m of the No development The development includes a drive-thru facility No Safety Trigger Met? Yes Transportation Engineering Services Two comments were not addressed from the January 2020 circulation: a. The roundabout screening form has been corrected. a. Correct the roundabout screening form: contra‐indication 6 should be yes as b. The Planning Rationale states," "A road allowance is proposed to be rese there are significant differences in directional flows. the southern edge of the subdivision. In the event that the urban boundary b. Confirm whether street 1 will continue southbound. expanded, the proposed street network provides an extension to the south edge of the subdivision." Reference to this has been included in Section 4.1 Circulation and Access. With regards to comment #2 ‐ the answer can be found in the Planning Rationale Noted. Section 4.1.2 Circulation and Access has been revised to include this document: "A road allowance is proposed to be reserved at the southern edge of the information. subdivision. In the event that the urban boundary is expanded, the proposed street network provides an extension to the southern edge of the subdivision." However, it would be appreciated if this fact was also communicated and considered within the TIA. The TIA Strategy includes out‐of‐date information on the future of the Longfields Drive Noted. The Longfields/Golflinks intersection analysis has been updated to r and Golflinks Drive intersection. This intersection is currently under construction as a the roundabout design for the 2021 and 2026 horizon years. single lane roundabout and it should be analyzed us such for the 2021 and 2026 horizon years. Within the TIA, one of the arguments against roundabout control for the Longfields Drive Noted. This argument has been revised. and Kilspindie Ridge intersection is stated as follows: "It should be noted that while a roundabout at Kilpindie functions better than a signalized intersection, the coordination of the adjacent traffic signals with a roundabout mid‐network can be difficult due to the randomness of vehicle arrivals". With the Longfields Drive and Golflinks Drive intersection now being constructed as a roundabout, this argument is no longer entirely valid (although the proximity of the Longfields Drive and Prince of Wales Drive signal is still a concern with regards to queuing and with regards to platoons of vehicles from the signal approaching the Kilspindie Ridge roundabout). Traffic Signal Operations: a. Noted. This issue has been included in Section 4.94 and 4.95 of the revise Synchro Comments: report. a. Significant queues noted from the eastbound left turn movement during the AM b. Pedestrian volumes within the Synchro and Sidra have been increased at peak period at Prince of Wales Drive and Longfields Drive. These queues spill Kilspindie/Longfields intersection for the 2021 and 2026 years to reflect the back beyond the intersection of Kilspindie Ridge and towards Golflinks Drive. projected transit use. Presents issues regardless of control at Kilspindie Ridge or Golflinks Drive if c. Based on the 2011 O‐D Survey, the South Nepean District has a transit mo traffic is queued into the intersections or roundabouts. share of 15‐20%. It is anticipated that this level of transit service will still be b. Considering the transit modal split of 20% and location of transit stops and desired, assuming that post pandemic transit ridership will return to its prev projected transit volumes. Pedestrian volumes coded should be reflective of demand. Should a more frequent transit service be provided, these targets transit users crossing the roadway to access the stops if necessary. more likely achievable. c. Transit is currently projected to run a local service near the site which is only d. The Golflinks/Longfields intersection has been modelled as a roundabout hourly. If the service is not upgraded is 20% modal split achievable? intersection for the 2021 and 2026 horizon years. d. Confirm type of control at the intersection of Golflinks Drive and Longfields Drive, e. Traffic analysis has been completed for both a signalized or roundabout c construction of a roundabout is currently underway. at the Kilspindie/Longfields intersection to determine the most appropriate e. Confirm control type for intersection of Longfields Drive and Kilspindie Ridge, control type. The final design for this location is still underway. whether it will be a roundabout or a traffic signal. Traffic analysis appears to favour a roundabout. CGH to respond to RMA comments.

Note that previous transportation comments related to the RMA remain outstanding until a decision is reached regarding the roundabout versus traffic signal at the Longfields/Kilspindie intersection. Transportation Impact Assessment: Noted. The revised TIA has been included with the submission of these resp The Appendix and Section 4.9 referred to in the ‘Response to Comments’ document were missing from the TIA study. An updated study was requested on May 13th 2020 and the City is awaiting re‐submission. Further comments will be provided following circulation of this report. The City is in the process of reviewing a request to consider a traffic signal instead of a roundabout at the subdivision access intersection with Longfields Drive. Further comments will be provided following this review. Noise Impact Assessment: Noted. Detailed Noise Impact Assessment study is required for this site following draft approval. We have reviewed your request for constructing a traffic signal instead of a roundabout at the site access with 2701 Longfields Dr. It was determined that a single‐lane roundabout would be preferred. Would the applicant be willing to consider a front ending agreement to construct the roundabout? The estimated payback date would be in 2030/2031.

Appendix B TRAFFIC COUNTS

Transportation Services - Traffic Services Turning Movement Count - Full Study Peak Hour Diagram GOLFLINKS DR E @ JOCKVALE RD

Survey Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 WO No: 38778 Start Time: 07:00 Device: Miovision

JOCKVALE RD N

W E

1334 0 S 766 568 Total 0 736 30 0 Heavy Vehicles 0 21 3 0 35 0 0 1 Cars 0 715 27 0 533

GOLFLINKS DR E 80 1 81

0 0 0 0 0 0 138 0 0 0 AM Period 56 0 56 Peak Hour: 0 0 0 187 0 07:30 08:30 1 0 1 0 0 0 45 4 49 0 0 0 0

771 0 0 453 17 Cars 21 0 0 34 1 Heavy 1 0 0 Vehicles 0 0 487 18 Total 792 505

1297

Comments

2019-Dec-03 Page 1 of 4 Transportation Services - Traffic Services Turning Movement Count - Full Study Peak Hour Diagram GOLFLINKS DR E @ JOCKVALE RD

Survey Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 WO No: 38778 Start Time: 07:00 Device: Miovision

JOCKVALE RD N

W E

1797 0 S 773 1024 Total 0 693 80 0 Heavy Vehicles 0 12 2 0 9 0 0 0 Cars 0 681 78 0 1015

GOLFLINKS DR E 72 0 72

0 0 0 0 0 0 112 0 0 0 PM Period 40 0 40 Peak Hour: 1 0 1 267 1 16:45 17:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 152 3 155 1 0 0 0

721 0 0 942 74 Cars 12 0 0 9 1 Heavy 3 0 2 Vehicles 0 0 951 75 Total 733 1026

1759

Comments

2019-Dec-03 Page 4 of 4 Transportation Services - Traffic Services Turning Movement Count - Peak Hour Diagram JOCKVALE RD/RIDEAU VALLEY DR @ PRINCE OF WALES

Survey Date: Thursday, January 10, 2019 WO No: 38247 Start Time: 07:00 Device: Miovision

PRINCE OF WALES DR N W E

1699 0 S 368 1331 72 235 61 0 Heavy Vehicles 4 16 5 0 23 0 0 0 Cars 68 219 56 0 1308

JOCKVALE RD/RIDEAU VALLEY DR 236 5 241

11 267 151 3 154 404 278 0 0 0 AM Period 8 1 9 412 2 410 Peak Hour 595 860 07:15 08:15 0 0 0

123 4 119 181 10

47 4 43 191 582

270 0 48 662 6 Cars 21 0 4 16 1 Heavy 0 0 0 Vehicles 0 52 678 7 Total 291 737

1028

Comments

2019-Jan-29 Page 1 of 4 Transportation Services - Traffic Services Turning Movement Count - Peak Hour Diagram JOCKVALE RD/RIDEAU VALLEY DR @ PRINCE OF WALES

Survey Date: Thursday, January 10, 2019 WO No: 38247 Start Time: 07:00 Device: Miovision

PRINCE OF WALES DR N W E

1941 0 S 1366 575 454 628 284 0 Heavy Vehicles 3 9 3 0 26 0 0 0 Cars 451 619 281 0 549

JOCKVALE RD/RIDEAU VALLEY DR 138 4 142

9 692 199 6 205 359 701 0 0 0 PM Period 12 0 12 135 6 129 Peak Hour 883 1138 16:00 17:00 0 0 0

238 9 229 511 13

64 5 59 524 437

690 0 42 282 1 Cars 14 0 0 16 1 Heavy 0 0 0 Vehicles 0 42 298 2 Total 704 342

1046

Comments

2019-Jan-29 Page 4 of 4 Parsons 1223 Michael St Ottawa , ON,

Turn Count Summary

Location: Longﬁelds Drive at Kilspindie Ridge, Ottawa GPS Coordinates: Date: 2019-12-11 Day of week: Wednesday Weather: Clear Analyst: Basel Ansari Total vehicle trafﬁc

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Interval starts Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 07:15 6 112 0 30 0 7 0 63 3 0 0 0 221 07:30 7 118 1 18 0 8 1 87 2 0 0 0 242 07:45 4 118 0 25 0 8 0 94 6 0 0 0 255 08:00 2 141 0 27 0 7 0 83 5 0 0 0 265 08:15 3 137 0 19 0 7 0 77 4 0 0 0 247 08:30 10 141 0 14 0 14 0 65 6 0 0 0 250 08:45 0000010000001

Car trafﬁc

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Interval starts Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 07:15 5 112 0 30 0 6 0 53 3 0 0 0 209 07:30 5 114 0 18 0 8 1 80 2 0 0 0 228 07:45 4 115 0 24 0 8 0 88 5 0 0 0 244 08:00 1 132 0 27 0 7 0 77 5 0 0 0 249 08:15 1 135 0 19 0 7 0 68 4 0 0 0 234 08:30 9 139 0 14 0 14 0 61 3 0 0 0 240 08:45 0000010000001

Truck trafﬁc

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Interval starts Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 07:15 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 12 07:30 241000070000 14 07:45 030100061000 11 08:00 190000060000 16 08:15 220000090000 13 08:30 120000043000 10 08:45 0000000000000

Bicycle trafﬁc

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Interval starts Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 07:15 0000000000000 07:30 0000000000000 07:45 0000000000000 08:00 0000000000000 08:15 0000000000000 08:30 0000000000000 08:45 0000000000000

Pedestrian volumes

NE NW SW SE Interval starts Total Left Right Total Left Right Total Left Right Total Left Right Total 07:15 0000000000000 07:30 0000000000000 07:45 0000000000000 08:00 0000000000000 08:15 0000000000000 08:30 0000000000000 08:45 0000000000000 Intersection Peak Hour

07:45 - 08:45

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Vehicle Total 19 537 0 85 0 36 0 319 21 0 0 0 1017 Factor 0.47 0.95 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.64 0.00 0.85 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.96 Approach Factor 0.92 0.89 0.85 0.00

Peak Hour Vehicle Summary

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Vehicle Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Car 15 521 0 84 0 36 0 294 17 0 0 0 967 Truck 4 16 0 1 0 0 0 25 4 0 0 0 50 Bicycle 0000000000000

Peak Hour Pedestrians

NE NW SW SE Total Left Right Total Left Right Total Left Right Total Left Right Total Pedestrians 0000000000000 Intersection Peak Hour

Location: Longﬁelds Drive at Kilspindie Ridge, Ottawa GPS Coordinates: Date: 2019-12-11 Day of week: Wednesday Weather: Clear Analyst: Basel Ansari

SB: Longﬁelds Drive 0 537 19 WB: Kilspindie Ridge 0 36 0 0 0 85 EB: Kilspindie Ridge

0 319 21 NB: Longﬁelds Drive

Intersection Peak Hour

07:45 - 08:45

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right

Vehicle Total 19 537 0 85 0 36 0 319 21 0 0 0 1017 Factor 0.47 0.95 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.64 0.00 0.85 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.96 Approach Factor 0.92 0.89 0.85 0.00 Parsons 1223 Michael St Ottawa , ON,

Turn Count Summary

Location: Longﬁelds Drive at Kilspindie Ridge, Ottawa GPS Coordinates: Date: 2019-12-11 Day of week: Wednesday Weather: Mostly Cloudy Analyst: Basel Ansari Total vehicle trafﬁc

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Interval starts Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 16:30 11 77 0 6 0 8 1 174 15 0 0 0 292 16:45 25 151 0 8 0 7 1 198 11 0 0 0 401 17:00 13 108 0 8 0 8 0 199 15 0 0 0 351 17:15 16 95 0 1 0 6 0 196 16 0 0 0 330 17:30 13 106 0 8 0 6 0 158 10 0 0 0 301 17:45 18 121 1 6 0 13 0 178 11 0 0 0 348 18:00 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 17 1 0 0 0 27

Car trafﬁc

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Interval starts Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 16:30 10 73 0 6 0 8 1 173 15 0 0 0 286 16:45 24 147 0 8 0 7 1 196 11 0 0 0 394 17:00 12 104 0 8 0 8 0 198 15 0 0 0 345 17:15 16 94 0 1 0 6 0 193 16 0 0 0 326 17:30 13 103 0 8 0 6 0 157 10 0 0 0 297 17:45 17 121 1 6 0 13 0 178 11 0 0 0 347 18:00 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 17 1 0 0 0 27

Truck trafﬁc

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Interval starts Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 16:30 1400000100006 16:45 1400000200007 17:00 1400000100006 17:15 0100000300004 17:30 0300000100004 17:45 1000000000001 18:00 0000000000000

Bicycle trafﬁc

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Interval starts Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 16:30 0000000000000 16:45 0000000000000 17:00 0000000000000 17:15 0000000000000 17:30 0000000000000 17:45 0000000000000 18:00 0000000000000

Pedestrian volumes

NE NW SW SE Interval starts Total Left Right Total Left Right Total Left Right Total Left Right Total 16:30 0000000000000 16:45 0000000000000 17:00 0000000000000 17:15 0000000000000 17:30 0000000000000 17:45 0000000000000 18:00 0000000000000 Intersection Peak Hour

16:45 - 17:45

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Vehicle Total 67 460 0 25 0 27 1 751 52 0 0 0 1383 Factor 0.67 0.76 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.84 0.25 0.94 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.86 Approach Factor 0.75 0.81 0.94 0.00

Peak Hour Vehicle Summary

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Vehicle Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Car 65 448 0 25 0 27 1 744 52 0 0 0 1362 Truck 2 12 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 21 Bicycle 0000000000000

Peak Hour Pedestrians

NE NW SW SE Total Left Right Total Left Right Total Left Right Total Left Right Total Pedestrians 0000000000000 Intersection Peak Hour

Location: Longﬁelds Drive at Kilspindie Ridge, Ottawa GPS Coordinates: Date: 2019-12-11 Day of week: Wednesday Weather: Mostly Cloudy Analyst: Basel Ansari

SB: Longﬁelds Drive 0 460 67 WB: Kilspindie Ridge 0 27 0 0 0 25 EB: Kilspindie Ridge

1 751 52 NB: Longﬁelds Drive

Intersection Peak Hour

16:45 - 17:45

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right

Vehicle Total 67 460 0 25 0 27 1 751 52 0 0 0 1383 Factor 0.67 0.76 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.84 0.25 0.94 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.86 Approach Factor 0.75 0.81 0.94 0.00

Appendix C COLLISION DATA

Intersection Peak Hour

Location: Longﬁelds Drive at Kilspindie Ridge, Ottawa GPS Coordinates: Date: 2019-12-11 Day of week: Wednesday Weather: Mostly Cloudy Analyst: Basel Ansari

SB: Longﬁelds Drive 0 460 67 WB: Kilspindie Ridge 0 27 0 0 0 25 EB: Kilspindie Ridge

1 751 52 NB: Longﬁelds Drive

Intersection Peak Hour

16:45 - 17:45

SouthBound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Total Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right

Vehicle Total 67 460 0 25 0 27 1 751 52 0 0 0 1383 Factor 0.67 0.76 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.84 0.25 0.94 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.86 Approach Factor 0.75 0.81 0.94 0.00 Total Area Single vehicle Classification of Turning Single Vehicle Rear End Sideswipe Angle Approaching (Unattended Other Total Accident Movement (other) vehicle) P.D. only 1261411012670% Non-fatal injury 360110001130% Non reportable 0000000000% Total 151215210137100% #1 or 41% #2 or 32% #5 or 3% #3 or 14% #4 or 5% #5 or 3% #8 or 0% #5 or 3%

LONGFIELDS DR, GOLFLINKS DR to PRINCE OF WALES DR Total # 24 Hr AADT Years Days Collisions/MEV Collisions Veh Volume 2012-2016 6 10,750 1825 0.31

Single vehicle Classification of Turning Single Vehicle Rear End Sideswipe Angle Approaching (Unattended Other Total Accident Movement (other) vehicle) P.D. only 20001100467% Non-fatal injury 10001000233% Non reportable 0000000000% Total 300021006100% 50% 0% 0% 0% 33% 17% 0% 0%

LONGFIELDS DR/PRINCE OF WALES DR Total # 24 Hr AADT Years Days Collisions/MEV Collisions Veh Volume 2012-2016 29 26,350 1825 0.60

Single vehicle Classification of Turning Single Vehicle Rear End Sideswipe Angle Approaching (Unattended Other Total Accident Movement (other) vehicle) P.D. only 951400012069% Non-fatal injury 26010000931% Non reportable 0000000000% Total 111115000129100% 38% 38% 3% 17% 0% 0% 0% 3%

LONGFIELDS DR/GOLFLINKS DR Total # 24 Hr AADT Years Days Collisions/MEV Collisions Veh Volume 2012-2016 2 11,700 1825 0.09

Single vehicle Classification of Turning Single Vehicle Rear End Sideswipe Angle Approaching (Unattended Other Total Accident Movement (other) vehicle) P.D. only 110000002100% Non-fatal injury 0000000000% Non reportable 0000000000% Total 110000002100% 50% 50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Collision Main Detail Summary OnTRAC Reporting System FROM: 2012-01-01 TO: 2013-01-01 JOCKVALE RD, GOLFLINKS DR to PRINCE OF WALES DR Former Municipality: Nepean Traffic Control: No control Number of Collisions: 2 IMPACT SURFACE VEHICLE No. DATE DAY TIME ENV LIGHT TYPE CLASS DIR COND'N MANOEUVRE VEHICLE TYPE FIRST EVENT PED 1 2012-01-31 Tue 14:43 Snow Daylight Single vehicle P.D. only V1 S Wet Going ahead Automobile, station Ran off road 0

2 2012-02-24 Fri 14:36 Snow Daylight Rear end P.D. only V1 E Ice Slowing or Automobile, station Other motor vehicle 0 V2 E Ice Stopped Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle JOCKVALE RD & PRINCE OF WALES DR Former Municipality: Nepean Traffic Control: Traffic signal Number of Collisions: 4 IMPACT SURFACE VEHICLE No. DATE DAY TIME ENV LIGHT TYPE CLASS DIR COND'N MANOEUVRE VEHICLE TYPE FIRST EVENT PED 3 2012-02-24 Fri 14:33 Snow Daylight Rear end P.D. only V1 E Ice Slowing or Automobile, station Other motor vehicle 0 V2 E Ice Stopped Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle 4 2012-03-18 Sun 09:40 Clear Daylight Rear end P.D. only V1 N Dry Slowing or Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle 0 V2 N Dry Stopped Automobile, station Other motor vehicle 5 2012-07-21 Sat 20:00 Clear Daylight Turning Non-fatal V1 S Dry Turning left Automobile, station Other motor vehicle 0 V2 N Dry Going ahead Automobile, station Other motor vehicle 6 2012-07-22 Sun 15:30 Clear Daylight Rear end P.D. only V1 W Dry Going ahead Passenger van Other motor vehicle 0 V2 W Dry Stopped Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle

(Note: Time of Day = "00:00" represents unknown collision time Wednesday, May 02, 2018 Page 1 of 1 City Operations - Transportation Services Collision Details Report - Public Version

From: January 1, 2013 To: December 31, 2016 Location: GOLFLINKS DR E @ JOCKVALE RD Traffic Control: Stop sign Total Collisions: 2 Date/Day/Time Environment Impact Type Classification Surface Veh. Dir Vehicle Manoeuver Vehicle type First Event No. Ped Cond'n 2015-May-15, Fri,21:30 Rain Turning movement P.D. only Wet North Turning left Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle North Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2016-Oct-27, Thu,18:10 Snow Rear end P.D. only Loose snow South Slowing or stopping Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle South Merging Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

Location: JOCKVALE RD btwn GOLFLINKS DR & PRINCE OF WALES DR Traffic Control: No control Total Collisions: 8 Date/Day/Time Environment Impact Type Classification Surface Veh. Dir Vehicle Manoeuver Vehicle type First Event No. Ped Cond'n 2014-Dec-05, Fri,18:15 Clear SMV other P.D. only Dry East Going ahead Automobile, Animal - wild station wagon

2014-Dec-10, Wed,19:08 Snow Approaching P.D. only Loose snow East Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle West Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2014-Nov-24, Mon,16:22 Rain SMV other P.D. only Wet West Going ahead Truck - dump Other

2015-Jan-17, Sat,08:26 Clear SMV other Non-fatal injury Dry South Going ahead Pick-up truck Skidding/sliding

Wednesday, May 02, 2018 Page 1 of 6 2016-Feb-15, Mon,16:25 Snow SMV other P.D. only Slush East Going ahead Automobile, Skidding/sliding station wagon

2015-Sep-24, Thu,16:40 Clear Rear end Non-fatal injury Dry South Slowing or stopping Passenger van Other motor vehicle South Stopped Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle

2013-Jan-06, Sun,14:02 Snow Approaching Non-fatal injury Loose snow West Going ahead Automobile, Skidding/sliding station wagon East Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2013-Mar-04, Mon,16:46 Clear Rear end P.D. only Wet West Going ahead Passenger van Other motor vehicle West Going ahead Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle

Location: JOCKVALE RD/RIDEAU VALLEY DR @ PRINCE OF WALES Traffic Control: Traffic signal Total Collisions: 26 Date/Day/Time Environment Impact Type Classification Surface Veh. Dir Vehicle Manoeuver Vehicle type First Event No. Ped Cond'n 2014-May-23, Fri,19:00 Rain Rear end Non-fatal injury Wet East Slowing or stopping Truck - open Other motor vehicle East Stopped Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2015-Feb-08, Sun,09:02 Snow Rear end P.D. only Loose snow East Slowing or stopping Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle East Stopped Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle

2015-Feb-10, Tue,16:15 Clear Sideswipe P.D. only Dry South Changing lanes Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle South Turning left Passenger van Other motor vehicle

Wednesday, May 02, 2018 Page 2 of 6 2015-Mar-09, Mon,13:30 Clear Rear end P.D. only Dry West Going ahead Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle West Stopped Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle

2015-Oct-06, Tue,16:58 Clear Turning movement Non-fatal injury Dry North Turning left Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle South Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2014-Dec-31, Wed,14:11 Clear Turning movement P.D. only Dry South Turning left Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle North Going ahead Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle

2015-Jan-03, Sat,14:36 Drifting Snow Turning movement P.D. only Slush South Turning left Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle North Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2015-Feb-02, Mon,08:22 Snow Rear end P.D. only Loose snow East Slowing or stopping Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle East Stopped Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle East Stopped Unknown Other motor vehicle

2015-Jul-25, Sat,18:46 Rain Turning movement Non-fatal injury Wet North Turning left Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle South Going ahead Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle

2015-Sep-09, Wed,07:41 Clear Turning movement P.D. only Dry East Turning left Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle West Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

Wednesday, May 02, 2018 Page 3 of 6 2015-Jul-06, Mon,16:35 Clear Angle P.D. only Dry North Going ahead Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle West Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2015-Feb-10, Tue,15:55 Clear Turning movement P.D. only Dry West Turning left Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle East Going ahead Passenger van Other motor vehicle

2016-Mar-08, Tue,08:35 Clear Turning movement Non-fatal injury Dry North Going ahead Passenger van Other motor vehicle South Turning left Passenger van Other motor vehicle West Stopped Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2016-Feb-12, Fri,18:30 Snow Rear end P.D. only Loose snow East Slowing or stopping Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle East Unknown Unknown Other motor vehicle

2016-Oct-21, Fri,19:25 Rain Rear end P.D. only Wet South Turning left Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle South Turning left Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2015-Nov-15, Sun,20:35 Clear Turning movement Non-fatal injury Dry North Turning left Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle South Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2016-Feb-16, Tue,12:15 Snow Other P.D. only Loose snow South Reversing Snow plow Other motor vehicle North Stopped Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

Wednesday, May 02, 2018 Page 4 of 6 2015-Dec-24, Thu,14:07 Clear Angle P.D. only Dry North Going ahead Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle West Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2016-Jun-14, Tue,15:51 Clear Turning movement P.D. only Dry North Turning left Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle South Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2013-Jan-07, Mon,22:35 Clear Angle P.D. only Wet West Going ahead Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle North Going ahead Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle

2013-Feb-05, Tue,07:42 Clear Rear end P.D. only Dry East Turning left Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle East Turning left Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2013-Feb-08, Fri,14:35 Snow Angle P.D. only Loose snow South Turning right Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle East Stopped Pick-up truck Other motor vehicle

2013-May-23, Thu,00:30 Clear Angle Non-fatal injury Wet East Going ahead Police vehicle Other motor vehicle North Going ahead Passenger van Other motor vehicle

2013-Jul-19, Fri,17:30 Rain Rear end Non-fatal injury Wet South Slowing or stopping Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle South Stopped Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2013-Nov-20, Wed,16:31 Clear Turning movement Non-fatal injury Dry South Turning left Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle Wednesday, May 02, 2018 Page 5 of 6 North Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

2013-Dec-11, Wed,06:41 Clear Turning movement P.D. only Dry North Turning left Passenger van Other motor vehicle South Going ahead Automobile, Other motor station wagon vehicle

Wednesday, May 02, 2018 Page 6 of 6

Appendix D TDM CHECKLIST

TDM-Supportive Development Design and Infrastructure Checklist City of Ottawa Version 1.0 (30 June 2017)

TDM-Supportive Development Design and Infrastructure Checklist: Residential Developments (multi-family or condominium)

Legend

REQUIRED The Official Plan or Zoning By-law provides related guidance that must be followed

BASIC The measure is generally feasible and effective, and in most cases would benefit the development and its users

BETTER The measure could maximize support for users of sustainable modes, and optimize development performance

Check if completed & TDM-supportive design & infrastructure measures: add descriptions, explanations Residential developments or plan/drawing references

1. WALKING & CYCLING: ROUTES 1.1 Building location & access points

BASIC 1.1.1 Locate building close to the street, and do not locate parking areas between the street and building entrances

BASIC 1.1.2 Locate building entrances in order to minimize walking distances to sidewalks and transit stops/stations

BASIC 1.1.3 Locate building doors and windows to ensure visibility of pedestrians from the building, for their security and comfort 1.2 Facilities for walking & cycling

REQUIRED 1.2.1 Provide convenient, direct access to stations or major stops along rapid transit routes within 600 metres; minimize walking distances from buildings to rapid Not applicable as there are no transit; provide pedestrian-friendly, weather-protected rapid transit routes within 600m. (where possible) environment between rapid transit accesses and building entrances; ensure quality linkages from sidewalks through building entrances to integrated stops/stations (see Official Plan policy 4.3.3)

REQUIRED 1.2.2 Provide safe, direct and attractive pedestrian access from public sidewalks to building entrances through such measures as: reducing distances between public sidewalks and major building entrances; providing walkways from public streets to major building entrances; within a site, providing walkways along the front of adjoining buildings, between adjacent buildings, and connecting areas where people may congregate,

such as courtyards and transit stops; and providing

weather protection through canopies, colonnades, and

other design elements wherever possible (see Official

Plan policy 4.3.12)

TDM-Supportive Development Design and Infrastructure Checklist City of Ottawa Version 1.0 (30 June 2017)

Check if completed & TDM-supportive design & infrastructure measures: add descriptions, explanations Residential developments or plan/drawing references

REQUIRED 1.2.3 Provide sidewalks of smooth, well-drained walking surfaces of contrasting materials or treatments to differentiate pedestrian areas from vehicle areas, and provide marked pedestrian crosswalks at intersection sidewalks (see Official Plan policy 4.3.10)

REQUIRED 1.2.4 Make sidewalks and open space areas easily accessible through features such as gradual grade transition, depressed curbs at street corners and convenient access to extra-wide parking spaces and ramps (see Official Plan policy 4.3.10)

REQUIRED 1.2.5 Include adequately spaced inter-block/street cycling and pedestrian connections to facilitate travel by active transportation. Provide links to the existing or planned network of public sidewalks, multi-use pathways and on- road cycle routes. Where public sidewalks and multi-use pathways intersect with roads, consider providing traffic control devices to give priority to cyclists and pedestrians (see Official Plan policy 4.3.11)

BASIC 1.2.6 Provide safe, direct and attractive walking routes from building entrances to nearby transit stops

BASIC 1.2.7 Ensure that walking routes to transit stops are secure, visible, lighted, shaded and wind-protected wherever possible

BASIC 1.2.8 Design roads used for access or circulation by cyclists using a target operating speed of no more than 30 km/h, or provide a separated cycling facility 1.3 Amenities for walking & cycling

BASIC 1.3.1 Provide lighting, landscaping and benches along walking and cycling routes between building entrances and streets, sidewalks and trails

BASIC 1.3.2 Provide wayfinding signage for site access (where required, e.g. when multiple buildings or entrances exist) and egress (where warranted, such as when directions to reach transit stops/stations, trails or other common destinations are not obvious)

TDM-Supportive Development Design and Infrastructure Checklist City of Ottawa Version 1.0 (30 June 2017)

Check if completed & TDM-supportive design & infrastructure measures: add descriptions, explanations Residential developments or plan/drawing references

2. WALKING & CYCLING: END-OF-TRIP FACILITIES 2.1 Bicycle parking

REQUIRED 2.1.1 Provide bicycle parking in highly visible and lighted areas, sheltered from the weather wherever possible Not applicable as the development (see Official Plan policy 4.3.6) consists of multi-family homes.

REQUIRED 2.1.2 Provide the number of bicycle parking spaces specified for various land uses in different parts of Ottawa; provide convenient access to main entrances or well- N/A used areas (see Zoning By-law Section 111)

REQUIRED 2.1.3 Ensure that bicycle parking spaces and access aisles meet minimum dimensions; that no more than 50% of spaces are vertical spaces; and that parking racks are N/A securely anchored (see Zoning By-law Section 111)

BASIC 2.1.4 Provide bicycle parking spaces equivalent to the expected number of resident-owned bicycles, plus the expected peak number of visitor cyclists 2.2 Secure bicycle parking

REQUIRED 2.2.1 Where more than 50 bicycle parking spaces are provided for a single residential building, locate at least 25% of spaces within a building/structure, a secure area N/A (e.g. supervised parking lot or enclosure) or bicycle lockers (see Zoning By-law Section 111)

BETTER 2.2.2 Provide secure bicycle parking spaces equivalent to at least the number of units at condominiums or multi- family residential developments 2.3 Bicycle repair station

BETTER 2.3.1 Provide a permanent bike repair station, with commonly used tools and an air pump, adjacent to the main bicycle parking area (or secure bicycle parking area, if provided)

3. TRANSIT 3.1 Customer amenities

BASIC 3.1.1 Provide shelters, lighting and benches at any on-site transit stops

BASIC 3.1.2 Where the site abuts an off-site transit stop and insufficient space exists for a transit shelter in the public right-of-way, protect land for a shelter and/or install a shelter

BETTER 3.1.3 Provide a secure and comfortable interior waiting area by integrating any on-site transit stops into the building

TDM-Supportive Development Design and Infrastructure Checklist City of Ottawa Version 1.0 (30 June 2017)

Check if completed & TDM-supportive design & infrastructure measures: add descriptions, explanations Residential developments or plan/drawing references

4. RIDESHARING 4.1 Pick-up & drop-off facilities

BASIC 4.1.1 Provide a designated area for carpool drivers (plus taxis and ride-hailing services) to drop off or pick up passengers without using fire lanes or other no-stopping zones

5. CARSHARING & BIKESHARING 5.1 Carshare parking spaces

BETTER 5.1.1 Provide up to three carshare parking spaces in an R3, R4 or R5 Zone for specified residential uses (see Zoning By-law Section 94) 5.2 Bikeshare station location

BETTER 5.2.1 Provide a designated bikeshare station area near a major building entrance, preferably lighted and sheltered with a direct walkway connection

6. PARKING 6.1 Number of parking spaces

REQUIRED 6.1.1 Do not provide more parking than permitted by zoning, nor less than required by zoning, unless a variance is Not applicable as each residential being applied for unit contains its own driveway.

BASIC 6.1.2 Provide parking for long-term and short-term users that is consistent with mode share targets, considering the potential for visitors to use off-site public parking

BASIC 6.1.3 Where a site features more than one use, provide shared parking and reduce the cumulative number of parking spaces accordingly (see Zoning By-law Section 104)

BETTER 6.1.4 Reduce the minimum number of parking spaces required by zoning by one space for each 13 square metres of gross floor area provided as shower rooms, change rooms, locker rooms and other facilities for cyclists in conjunction with bicycle parking (see Zoning By-law Section 111) 6.2 Separate long-term & short-term parking areas

BETTER 6.2.1 Provide separate areas for short-term and long-term parking (using signage or physical barriers) to permit access controls and simplify enforcement (i.e. to discourage residents from parking in visitor spaces, and vice versa)

Appendix E LONGFIELDS DRIVE WIDENING PRELIMINARY DESIGN ROLL PLANS

V I

NK I

PRELIMINARY DESIGN L

F JOCKVALE ROAD / PRINCE OF WALES DRIVE L

WIDENING GO JUNE 2017 SCALE 1:500

OAD F LE R U KVA T JOC U R E R OAD

E V I TE R

D VA I F R A P

LE K L K C A L B UNDA D

15066-Roll-Plan.dgn 6/5/2017 12:04:21 PM K

I L

I ND

I E

I DG

ACC ESS LAN E

JO C R KVA IDEAU VALLE LE Y D RIVE ROAD

D A

R PRELIMINARY DESIGN E

U JOCKVALE ROAD / PRINCE OF WALES DRIVE T U WIDENING P F R JUNE 2017 I N C SCALE 1:500 E

I V

15066-Roll-Plan.dgn 6/5/2017 12:05:02 PM

Appendix F MMLOS SEGMENT ANALYSIS

Multi-Modal Level of Service - Segments Form Consultant Parsons Project 476616 Scenario 2701 Longfields Drive Date 17-Dec-19 Comments

Longfields Existing Longfields Widened SEGMENTS Street A 12 Sidewalk Width no sidewalk ≥ 2 m Boulevard Width n/a 0.5 - 2 m Avg Daily Curb Lane Traffic Volume > 3000 > 3000 Operating Speed > 60 km/h > 60 km/h On-Street Parking no no Exposure to Traffic PLoSE F E Effective Sidewalk Width 3.0 m Pedestrian Volume 250 ped/hr Pedestrian Crowding PLoS - A

Level of Service -E

Type of Cycling Facility Mixed Traffic Physically Separated

Number of Travel Lanes ≤ 2 (no centreline)

Operating Speed ≥ 60 km/h # of Lanes & Operating Speed LoS F -

Bike Lane (+ Parking Lane) Width Bike Lane Width LoSF - - Bike Lane Blockages Bicycle Blockage LoS - - Median Refuge Width (no median = < 1.8 m) < 1.8 m refuge No. of Lanes at Unsignalized Crossing ≤ 3 lanes Sidestreet Operating Speed >40 to 50 km/h Unsignalized Crossing - Lowest LoS B A

Level of Service FA

Facility Type Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Friction or Ratio Transit:Posted Speed D Vt/Vp ≥ 0.8 Vt/Vp ≥ 0.8

Transit Level of Service DD

Truck Lane Width ≤ 3.3 m ≤ 3.3 m Travel Lanes per Direction 1 > 1 D

Truck Level of Service DC

Appendix G TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT AND ROUNDABOUT SCREENING FORM

Input Data Sheet Analysis Sheet Re sults She e t Proposed Collision GO TO Justification: What are the intersecting roadways? LongfieldsLongfields Drive/Kilspindie Drive/Kilspindie Ridge Ridge

What is the direction of the Main Road street? North-South When was the data collected? Dec.11, 2019Dec.11, 2019

Justification 1 - 4: Volume Warrants

a.- Number of lanes on the Main Road? 1

b.- Number of lanes on the Minor Road? 1

c.- How many approaches? 3

d.- What is the operating environment? Rural Population < 10,000 AND Speed >= 70 km/hr

e.- What is the eight hour vehicle volume at the intersection? (Please fill in table below)

Main Northbound ApproachMinor Eastbound Approach Main Southbound Approach Minor Westbound Approach Pedestrians Hour Ending Crossing Main LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Road 7:00 0 367 19 22 360 0 28 0 16 0 8:00 0 367 19 22 360 0 28 0 16 0 9:00 0 367 19 22 360 0 28 0 16 0 12:00 0 367 19 22 360 0 28 0 16 0 13:00 0 367 19 22 360 0 28 0 16 0 16:00 0 367 19 22 360 0 28 0 16 0 17:00 0 367 19 22 360 0 28 0 16 0 18:00 0 367 19 22 360 0 28 0 16 0 Total 0 2,936 152 0 0 0 176 2,880 0 224 0 128 0

Justification 5: Collision Experience

Preceding Number of Collisions* Months

1-12 0 13-24 0 * Include only collisions that are susceptable to correction 25-36 0 through the installation of traffic signal control

Justification 6: Pedestrian Volume

a.- Please fill in table below summarizing total pedestrians crossing major roadway at the intersection or in proximity to the intersection (zones). Please reference Section 4.8 of the Manual for further explanation and graphical representation.

Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 (if needed) Zone 4 (if needed) Total Assisted Unassisted Assisted Unassisted Assisted Unassisted Assisted Unassisted

Total 8 hour pedestrian volume 0 000 0 000

Factored 8 hour pedestrian volume 0000

% Assigned to crossing rate 23% 34% 30% 100%

Net 8 Hour Pedestrian Volume at Crossing 0

Net 8 Hour Vehicular Volume on Street Being Crossed 2,000

b.- Please fill in table below summarizing delay to pedestrians crossing major roadway at the intersection or in proximity to the intersection (zones). Please reference Section 4.8 of the Manual for further explanation and graphical representation.

Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 (if needed) Zone 4 (if needed) Total Assisted Unassisted Assisted Unassisted Assisted Unassisted Assisted Unassisted

Total 8 hour pedestrian volume 0 000 0 000 Total 8 hour pedestrians delayed 10 10 1 6 2 4 0 0 greater than 10 seconds

Factored volume of total pedestrians 00 0 0

Factored volume of delayed 30880 pedestrians

% Assigned to Crossing Rate 23% 34% 30% 100%

Net 8 Hour Volume of Total Pedestrians 0

Net 8 Hour Volume of Delayed Pedestrians 12

Input Data Backup of OTM Book 12- Traffic Signal Justification 2007-09-28.xls 3/27/2020 GO TO Justification: Results Sheet Input Sheet Analysis Sheet Proposed Collision

Intersection: Longfields Drive/Kilspindie Ridge Count Date: Dec.11, 2019 Summary Results

Signal Justified? Justification Compliance YES NO 1. Minimum A Total Volume 100 % Vehicular FALSE TRUE Volume B Crossing Volume 24 % 2. Delay to A Main Road 100 % Cross FALSE TRUE Traffic B Crossing Road 56 % 3. Combination A Justificaton 1 24 % FALSE TRUE B Justification 2 56 % 4. 4-Hr Volume 24 % FALSE TRUE

5. Collision Experience 0% FALSE TRUE

6. Pedestrians A Volume Justification not met

Justification not met B Delay FALSE TRUE

Results Sheet Backup of OTM Book 12- Traffic Signal Justification 2007-09-28.xls 3/27/2020 GO TO Justification: Analysis Sheet Input Sheet Results Sheet Proposed Collision

Intersection: Longfields Drive/Kilspindie Ridge Count Date: Dec.11, 2019

Justification 1: Minimum Vehicle Volumes

Free Flow Rural Conditions

Guidance Approach Lanes Percentage Warrant Total Section Justification Across Percent 1 Lanes 2 or More Lanes Hour Ending

Flow FREE FLOW RESTR. FREE FLOW RESTR. FLOW FLOW Condition 7:00 8:00 9:00 12:00 13:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE

480 720 600 900 812 812 812 812 812 812 812 812 1A COMPLIANCE % 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 800 100

180 255 180 255 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 1B COMPLIANCE % 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 196 24

Free Flow Both 1A and 1B 100% Fullfilled each of 8 hours Yes FALSE No TRUE Signal Justification 1: Lesser of 1A or 1B at least 80% fulfilled each of 8 hours Yes FALSE No TRUE

Justification 2: Delay to Cross Traffic

Free Flow Rural Conditions

Guidance Approach Lanes Percentage Warrant Total Section Justification Across Percent 1 lanes 2 or More lanes Hour Ending

Flow FREE FLOW RESTR. FREE FLOW RESTR. FLOW FLOW Condition 7:00 8:00 9:00 12:00 13:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE

480 720 600 900 768 768 768 768 768 768 768 768 2A COMPLIANCE % 100 100 100 100100 100 100 100 800 100

50 75 50 75 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 2B COMPLIANCE % 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 448 56

Free Flow Both 2A and 2B 100% Fullfilled each of 8 hours Yes FALSE No TRUE Signal Justification 2: Lesser of 2A or 2B at least 80% fulfilled each of 8 hours Yes FALSE No TRUE

Justification 3: Combination

Combination Justification 1 and 2

Two Justifications Justification Satisfied 80% or More Satisfied 80% or More

Justification 1 Minimun Vehicular Volume FALSEYES TRUENO YES FALSE NO TRUE

Justification 2 Delay Cross Traffic FALSEYES TRUENO NOT JUSTIFIED

Justification 4: Four Hour Volume

Total Volume of Both Heaviest Minor Required Value Overall % Justification Time Period Approaches (Main) Approach Average % Compliance Compliance X Y (actual) Y (warrant threshold) 7:00 768 44 183 24 % 8:00 768 44 183 24 % Justification 4 24 % 9:00 768 44 183 24 % 12:00 768 44 183 24 %

Analysis Sheet Backup of OTM Book 12- Traffic Signal Justification 2007-09-28.xls 3/27/2020 GO TO Justification: Analysis Sheet Input Sheet Results Sheet Proposed Collision

Intersection: Longfields Drive/Kilspindie Ridge Count Date: Dec.11, 2019

Justification 5: Collision Experience

Overall % Justification Preceding Months % Fulfillment Compliance

1-12 0 %

Justification 5 13-24 0 % 0 %

25-36 0 %

Justification 6: Pedestrian Volume

Pedestrian Volume Analysis

8 Hour Vehicular Net 8 Hour Pedestrian Volume Volume V8 < 200 200 - 275 276 - 475 476 - 1000 >1000

< 1440 Not Justified Not Justified Not Justified Not Justified Not Justified

1440 - 2600 Not Justified Not Justified Not Justified Not Justified Justified Justification 6A 2601 - 7000 Not Justified Not Justified Not Justified Justified Justified

> 7000 Not Justified Not Justified Justified Justified Justified

Pedestrian Delay Analysis

Net Total 8 Hour Volume Net Total 8 Hour Volume of Delayed Pedestrians of Total Pedestrians < 75 75 - 130 > 130

< 200 Not Justified Not Justified Not Justified

Justification 200 - 300 Not Justified Not Justified Justified 6B

> 300 Not Justified Justified Justified

Analysis Sheet Backup of OTM Book 12- Traffic Signal Justification 2007-09-28.xls 3/27/2020 100% Satisfied "Yes" Table 19 – Justification 7 – Projected Volumes

Compliance Minimum Requirement Minimum Requirement 1 Lane Highways 2 or more lanes Sectional Justification Description Entire %

Free Flow Restr. Flow Free Flow Restr. Flow Numerical %

A. Vehicle volume, all aproaches 480 720 600 900 1099 228.96% 1. Minimum (average hour) 150.31% Vehicular Volume B. Vehicle volume, along minor 120 170 120 170 86 71.67% streets (average hour)

West leg East leg A. Vehicle volume, major street estimated estimated 480 720 600 900 1013 211.04% (average hour) pedestrian pedestrian 2. Delay to cross AHV AHV 131.52% traffic B. Combined vehicle and pedestrian volume crossing artery from minor 50 75 120 170 26 52.00% 10 10 streets (average hour) 0 Intersection AM & PM NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM 1860321191003184454585536 PM 45 1291 52 67 858 44 27 5 27 25 5 27 Longfields/Kilspindie SAT 000000000000

AHV 16 474 19 22 466 16 18 3 18 28 3 16 Advancing Traffic Opposing Traffic Left Turn Traffic Warrant Design % of Left Turning Traffic Volume (V ) Volume (V ) Volume (V ) Left Turn Speed A O L AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Lane Future Projected 2026 Kilspindie/Longfields 80 km/h 642 1388 1040 969 18 45 3% 3% Yes

Peak NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Warrant? AM 18 603 21 19 1003 18 44 5 45 85 5 36 PM 45 1291 52 67 858 44 27 5 27 25 5 27 000000000000

See MTO's nomo graphs

AM Peak Hour Volumes PM Peak Hour Volumes

642 1388 3. Roundabout Implementation Policy

The following sections describe a roundabout implementation policy developed for the City of Ottawa, in consultation with a Project Working Group, that is consistent with existing Ottawa City Council policy.

3.1 Background There are a number of roundabout implementation policies in place in certain Canadian provinces, U.S. states, and other jurisdictions. The most common type is a policy that simply states a roundabout should be “considered” when a new road or highway is built or an existing facility is widening or reconstructed. It is usually left to the service provider to determine in what manner a roundabout is considered. Another is a “roundabouts first” policy, where a roundabout is deemed preferred unless it can be demonstrated that another alternative is preferred because it will operate better or be significantly less costly. This type of policy is in place in the provinces of British Columbia and Alberta, and in several U.S. states. Another type is a policy that has been approved by Council in the Region of Waterloo, where roundabouts are considered under the following conditions: x At any new Regional Road intersection. x Where traffic signals are warranted. x Where capacity or safety problems are being experienced. If one or more of the conditions is met then the location is subjected to an initial screening. Should a roundabout pass the initial screening then an Intersection Control Study (ICS) is undertaken that compares a roundabout and one or more alternatives in terms of several economic and non- economic criteria. The economic criteria comprise construction costs and study period costs (which include maintenance costs and the human capital costs of motor vehicle collisions). The non- economic criteria may include peak hour traffic operations, speed control, access management, conditions for pedestrians and cyclists, impacts to transit services, environmental benefits, etc. After comparing the economic and non-economic evaluation the technically preferred alternative is recommended for implementation. Similar Intersection Control Studies have been undertaken elsewhere, although they may not necessarily be a requirement of the road authority. In consultation with the Project Working Group it was decided that a roundabout policy similar to the one in the Region of Waterloo would be most appropriate for the City of Ottawa.

3.2 The Roundabout Screening Tool

Similar to the Region of Waterloo, an initial screening tool was developed for the City. The intent of the tool is to provide a relatively quick assessment of the feasibility of a roundabout at a particular intersection in comparison to other appropriate forms of traffic control or road modifications. The intended outcome is to provide enough information to assist City staff in deciding whether or not to proceed with an ICS to investigate the feasibility of a roundabout in more detail.

8 | GHD | Report for The City of Ottawa - Roundabout Policy Report, 88/13078/800 The Roundabout Initial Feasibility Screening Tool asks some questions about the intersection, what traditional modifications are being proposed (i.e. installation of traffic signals, addition of auxiliary lanes, etc.), the type of roundabout that would be implemented, and why a roundabout is being considered. It then asks a series of questions related to suitability factors and contra-indications for roundabouts to aid in the decision-making process. The suitability factor questions are: x Does the intersection currently experience an average collision frequency of more than 1.5 injury crashes per year, or a collision rate in excess of 1 injury crash per 1 million vehicles entering (MVE)? x Has there been a fatal crash at the intersection in the last 10 years?

x Are capacity problems currently being experienced, or expected in the future? x Are traffic signals warranted, or expected to be warranted in the future? x Does the intersection have more than 4 legs, or unusual geometry? x Will planned modifications to the intersection require that nearby structures be widened (i.e. to accommodate left-turn lanes)? x Is the intersection located at a transition between rural and urban environments (i.e. an urban boundary) such that a roundabout could act as a means of speed transition? If “Yes” is indicated for two or more of the suitability factors, then the tool states that a roundabout should be technically feasible at the subject intersection. The contra-indication questions are: x Is there insufficient property at the intersection (i.e. less than 44 metres diameter if considering a single-lane roundabout, and less than 60 metres if considering a two-lane roundabout) or property constraints that would require demolition of adjacent structures? x Are there any instances where stopping sight distance (SSD) of a roundabout yield line may not be attainable (i.e. the intersection is on a crest vertical curve)?

x Is there an existing uncontrolled approach with a grade in excess of 4 percent? x Is the intersection located within a coordinated signal system? x Is there a closely-spaced traffic signal or railway crossing that could not be controlled with a nearby roundabout? x Are significant differences in directional flows or any situations of sudden high demand expected?

x Are there known visually-impaired pedestrians that cross this intersection? If “Yes” is indicated for one or more of the contra-indications, then the tool states that a roundabout may be problematic at the subject intersection. That is not to say that a roundabout is not possible, just that there may be difficulties or high costs. At its conclusion the tool asks for a recommendation whether to proceed with an ICS. An example of the City of Ottawa Roundabout Initial Feasibility Screening Tool, as of May 14, 2013, is provided in Appendix A.

GHD | Report for The City of Ottawa - Roundabout Policy Report, 88/13078/800 | 9 3.3 Intersection Control Studies

3.3.1 The Decision Matrix The means of conducting an Intersection Control Study in the City of Ottawa was discussed with the Project Working Group. It was decided to go with a matrix style approach that would compare economic and non-economic criteria, and be responsive to the needs of individual locations. The rationale for this was brought forward in a memo dated May 16, 2013, which is included in Appendix B.

The criteria to be examined should be relevant to the general environment, although additional criteria relevant to the specific location could be incorporated. The base criteria for rural, semi- urban/suburban and urban intersections are listed in Table 1.

Table 1 Roundabout Evaluation Criteria

Semi-Urban/Suburban Rural Intersections Urban Intersections Intersections Construction Cost Construction Cost Construction Cost Safety Safety Safety Capacity Capacity Capacity Pedestrians and Cyclists Pedestrians and Cyclists Environmental Environmental Property Impacts Access Management Transit Property Impacts

It was decided that each criteria would be assigned a weight from 1 to 4 based on its subjective importance to the particular location (with 1 being “important enough that the criteria must be considered”, and 4 being “very important for intersection control selection”). The weights would be established by a project team at the start of the ICS. Then, during the course of the ICS each criteria would be assigned a score from 1 to 5, such that the score for both alternatives would have to add to 6. An example of this evaluation for an urban intersection is seen in Table 2.

Table 2 Roundabout Evaluation Matrix – Example Urban Intersection

Weight Signalized Criteria Roundabout Intersection Construction Cost 2 5 1 Safety 4 3 3 Capacity 3 2 4 Pedestrians and Cyclists 4 4 2 Environmental 1 2 4 Access Management 2 2 4 Transit 2 4 2 Property Impacts 4 5 1 Total 78 54

10 | GHD | Report for The City of Ottawa - Roundabout Policy Report, 88/13078/800 3.3.2 Evaluating the Criteria Some of the criteria, namely Construction Cost, Property Impacts and Capacity, can be evaluated objectively using cost estimation techniques and intersection capacity analysis software. The Safety criterion should be evaluated using models to predict the frequency and severity of collisions that would occur at the intersection during a specified study period following implementation of the alternatives. A score between 1 and 5 would be assigned based on their performance relative to each other. It is suggested that the scores be based on “fatal+injury” collisions only, or be weighted to account for injury severity. The collision predictions could be further weighted by assigning human capital costs to motor vehicle collisions, as is done by the MTO and some other agencies. The Environmental criterion could be evaluated subjectively, although reasons for assigning collective scores for components of the criterion (such as vehicle noise, fuel consumption and emissions, quantity of impermeable pavement, and area available for landscaping) should be documented. The Pedestrians & Cyclists criterion would also need to be evaluated subjectively. Collisions involving pedestrians and cyclists are infrequent, as is information regarding statistical levels of safety at roundabouts. Perceived level of safety would be difficult to incorporate into a comparison. Therefore this criterion should be scored based on the “quality” of the facilities for pedestrians and cyclists proposed for each alternative. Quality should be considered a combination of convenience and accessibility. Again, reasons for assigning scores should be documented. In urban locations the criteria of Access Management and Transit could be evaluated subjectively based on locations of existing or proposed driveways, corridor operating speeds, the type and frequency of transit service, locations for bus stops, and whether there is or are plans for transit priority.

3.3.3 The Roundabout Implementation Process Similar to the Region of Waterloo, a roundabout should be considered in the City of Ottawa under the following conditions: x At any new City intersection. x Where traffic signals are warranted. x At intersections where capacity or safety problems are being experienced. If any of these conditions are met then screening for the possibility of a roundabout should be undertaken using the Roundabout Initial Feasibility Screening Tool. If the tool indicates that the feasibility of a roundabout should be investigated in more detail, City staff should proceed with an Intersection Control Study (ICS) to determine whether a roundabout or another alternative is preferred at the subject intersection.

GHD | Report for The City of Ottawa - Roundabout Policy Report, 88/13078/800 | 11 Version dated May 14, 2013 Page 1 of 3 City of Ottawa Roundabout Initial Feasibility Screening Tool

The intent of this screening tool is to provide a relatively quick assessment of the feasibility of a roundabout at a particular intersection in comparison to other appropriate forms of traffic control or road modifications including all-way stop control, traffic signals, auxiliary lanes, etc. The intended outcome of this tool is to provide enough information to assist staff in deciding whether or not to proceed with an Intersection Control Study to investigate the feasibility of a roundabout in more detail.

1 Project Name: Stonebridge Development 2701 Longfields Drive

2 Intersection: Future 4-legged Kilspindie Ridge and Longfields Drive

3 Location and Description of Mattamy Homes is proposing the development of a subdivision Intersection: consisting of 184 dwelling units with proposed single access to Lane configuration, total or approach AADT, distance to nearby Kilsplindie/Longfields intersection. The current intersection consists intersection(s), etc. Attach or sketch a of a 3-legged intersection with an AADT of approximately 19,400. diagram and include existing and/or Peak hour volumes of up to 1000vph in the peak direction have been horizon-year turning movements. If an recorded. Nearby intersections include Prince of Wales/Longfields existing intersection then indicate type of control. (530 meters east) and Golflinks/Longfields (approximately 280 meters west).

The future proposed Longfields Drive widening proposes roundabout at Golflinks/Longfields and Prince of Wales/Longfields intersections.

4 What traditional modifications STOP control on the minor approach is currently proposed; are proposed? however, Synchro analysis demonstrates that long delays (up to 5 All-way stop control, traffic signals, auxiliary lanes, etc. Attach or sketch a minutes) can be experience in horizon years with this control diagram if necessary. type. Traffic signals are considered, however, this alternative could cause back-ups on nearby proposed roundabouts.

5 What size of roundabout is Proposed single lane per approach. If widening of Longfields Drive being considered? occurs, then this roundabout should be retrofitted accordingly. Describe, and attach a Roundabout Traffic Flow Worksheet.

6 Why is a roundabout being To provide a safe crossing point for pedestrians to bus stops on both considered? sides of Longfields Drive, to improve Level of Service to vehicles entering/leaving site and to keep a consistent roundabout mainstream on Longfields Drive. Version dated May 14, 2013 Page 2 of 3

7 Are there contra-indications for If “Yes” is indicated for one or more of the contra-indications then a roundabout a roundabout? may be problematic at the subject intersection. That is not to say that a roundabout is not possible, just that there may be difficulties or high costs.

No. Contra-Indication Outcome 1 Is there insufficient property at the intersection (i.e. less than 44 metres diameter if considering a single-lane roundabout, and less than 60 metres if considering a Yes F No F two-lane roundabout) or property constraints that would require demolition of adjacent structures? 2 Are there any instances where stopping sight distance (SSD) of a roundabout yield line may not be attainable Yes F No F (i.e. the intersection is on a crest vertical curve)? 3 Is there an existing uncontrolled approach with a grade Yes F No F in excess of 4 percent? 4 Is the intersection located within a coordinated signal Yes F No F system? 5 Is there a closely-spaced traffic signal or railway crossing that could not be controlled with a nearby Yes F No F roundabout? 6 Are significant differences in directional flows or any Yes F No F situations of sudden high demand expected? 7 Are there known visually-impaired pedestrians that Yes F No F cross this intersection?

8 Are there suitability factors If “Yes” is indicated for two or more of the suitability factors then a roundabout for a roundabout? should be technically feasible at the subject intersection.

No. Suitability Factor Outcome 1 Does the intersection currently experience an average collision frequency of more than 1.5 injury crashes per Yes F No F year, or a collision rate in excess of 1injury crash per 1 million vehicles entering (MVE)? 2 Has there been a fatal crash at the intersection in the Yes F No F last 10 years? 3 Are capacity problems currently being experienced, or Yes F No F expected in the future? Long delays forecasted in horizon 4 Are traffic signals warranted, or expected to be Yes F No F warranted in the future? 5 Does the intersection have more than 4 legs, or unusual Yes F No F geometry? 6 Will planned modifications to the intersection require that nearby structures be widened (i.e. to accommodate Yes F No F left-turn lanes)?Longfields proposed widened, new south leg at Kilspindie 7 Is the intersection located at a transition between rural and urban environments (i.e. an urban boundary) such Yes F No F that a roundabout could act as a means of speed transition? Version dated May 14, 2013 Page 3 of 3

9 Conclusions/recommendation As access to the site is confined and alternate access points are not whether to proceed with an available due to site location, a single proper functioning access is Intersection Control Study: required. A roundabout at Kilspindie/Longfields would improve intersection operations, would maintain a consistent/compatible vehicle flow with future planned neighboring intersections as roundabouts and would provide pedestrian/cycling infrastructure to access both sides of Longfields Drive bus stops. Appendix H MMLOS INTERSECTIONS Multi-Modal Level of Service - Intersections Form Consultant Parsons Project 476616 Scenario Total Projected 2026 Date 17-Dec-19 Comments

INTERSECTIONS Longfields / Kilspindie Crossing Side NORTH SOUTH EAST WEST Lanes 3 4 0 - 2 0 - 2 Median No Median - 2.4 m No Median - 2.4 m No Median - 2.4 m No Median - 2.4 m

Conflicting Left Turns Permissive Permissive Permissive Permissive

Permissive or yield Permissive or yield Permissive or yield Permissive or yield Conflicting Right Turns control control control control

Right Turns on Red (RToR) ? RTOR allowed RTOR allowed RTOR allowed RTOR allowed

Ped Signal Leading Interval? No No No No

Right Turn Channel No Channel No Channel No Channel No Channel

Corner Radius 5-10m 10-15m 5-10m 10-15m Std transverse Std transverse Std transverse Std transverse Crosswalk Type markings markings markings markings Pedestrian PETSI Score 71 53 86 85 Ped. Exposure to Traffic LoS CDBB Cycle Length Effective Walk Time Average Pedestrian Delay Pedestrian Delay LoS ---- CDBB Level of Service D

Approach From NORTH SOUTH EAST WEST

Bicycle Lane Arrangement on Approach Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic

Right Turn Lane Configuration > 50 m > 50 m ≤ 50 m ≤ 50 m

Right Turning Speed ≤ 25 km/h ≤ 25 km/h ≤ 25 km/h ≤ 25 km/h Cyclist relative to RT motorists FFDD Separated or Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic

Left Turn Approach One lane crossed One lane crossed No lane crossed No lane crossed Bicycle Operating Speed ≥ 60 km/h ≥ 60 km/h > 40 to ≤ 50 km/h > 40 to ≤ 50 km/h Left Turning Cyclist FFBB FFDD Level of Service F Average Signal Delay ≤ 20 sec ≤ 40 sec ≤ 30 sec ≤ 10 sec CEDB Level of Service

Transit E Effective Corner Radius < 10 m 10 - 15 m < 10 m 10 - 15 m Number of Receiving Lanes on Departure 1111 from Intersection FEFE Truck Level of Service F

Volume to Capacity Ratio 0.81 - 0.90

Level of Service Auto D

Appendix I OC-TRANSPO RIDERSHIP DATA

Harte, Andrew

From: Stefanoff, Genya Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2018 1:24 PM To: Harte, Andrew Subject: RE: Transit Ridership Information - Longfields Drive Routes 175, 176 and 305

Hi Andrew,

Please find below ridership information for the requested routes/stops for the Sept. 2017 booking. Note that Route 305 is a shoppers route and only operates one inbound trip and one outbound trip on Fridays.

In terms of bus assignment, Routes 175 and 176 are planned to operate with 40‐foot buses.

AM Peak Period (6:00 to 9:00) Stop Route Boardings Alightings Average Load at Departure 0434 175 0 0 1 1990 176 1 0 6 1990 305 N/A N/A N/A 1113 176 1 0 3 1113 305 N/A N/A N/A

Note: Route 305 is a shopper route operating once a week, stop level data is not available.

PM Peak Period (15:00 to 18:00) Stop Route Boardings Alightings Average Load at Departure 0434 175 0 1 1 1990 176 0 0 3 1990 305 N/A N/A N/A 1113 176 0 1 5 1113 305 N/A N/A N/A

Let me know if you have any questions, or need more information.

Best regards, Genya

Genya Stefanoff, MCIP, RPP Senior Transit Planner, Service Strategy

City of Ottawa | OC Transpo | Transportation Services Department 1500 St. Laurent Blvd., Ottawa, ON K1G 0Z8 tel: 613‐580‐2424 ext. 52294 [email protected]

Appendix J EXISTING CONDITIONS SYNCHRO ANALYSIS

Timings Existing AM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields 03/25/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 607 181 9 271 241 92 678 61 235 Future Volume (vph) 607 181 9 271 241 92 678 61 235 Lane Group Flow (vph) 674 278 0 311 268 102 761 68 402 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 7 4 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Detector Phase 748882216 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 11.9 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 41.6 41.6 16.0 31.4 Total Split (s) 21.5 57.0 35.5 35.5 35.5 46.5 46.5 26.6 73.1 Total Split (%) 16.5% 43.8% 27.3% 27.3% 27.3% 35.7% 35.7% 20.4% 56.2% Yellow Time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 All-Red Time (s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Ped Ped Ped Ped Act Effct Green (s) 45.7 45.7 23.8 23.8 30.3 30.3 45.0 45.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.44 0.23 0.23 0.29 0.29 0.43 0.43 v/c Ratio 1.80 0.37 0.79 0.49 0.39 0.79 0.30 0.28 Control Delay 392.0 21.2 54.3 7.7 35.6 41.0 21.5 14.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 392.0 21.2 54.3 7.7 35.6 41.0 21.5 14.0 LOS FC DADDCB Approach Delay 283.7 32.7 40.4 15.1 Approach LOS F C D B Queue Length 50th (m) ~181.0 34.4 59.3 0.0 16.7 75.5 8.1 19.2 Queue Length 95th (m) #288.8 64.5 #106.4 21.1 34.1 103.8 16.9 30.7 Internal Link Dist (m) 525.8 356.5 519.8 1117.7 Turn Bay Length (m) 85.0 75.0 90.0 240.0 Base Capacity (vph) 374 833 486 611 350 1289 388 2077 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.80 0.33 0.64 0.44 0.29 0.59 0.18 0.19 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 130.1 Actuated Cycle Length: 104 Natural Cycle: 115 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.80 Intersection Signal Delay: 115.6 Intersection LOS: F Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Existing AM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields 03/25/2020 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: 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields

Parsons Synchro 10 Report HCM 2010 TWSC Existing AM 1: Longfields & Golflinks 03/25/2020

Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.9 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 56 81 487 18 30 736 Future Vol, veh/h 56 81 487 18 30 736 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 400 0 - - 1000 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222 Mvmt Flow 62 90 541 20 33 818

Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1435 551 0 0 561 0 Stage 1 551 ----- Stage 2 884 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 147 534 - - 1010 - Stage 1 577 ----- Stage 2 404 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 142 534 - - 1010 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 142 ----- Stage 1 577 ----- Stage 2 391 -----

Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 27.7 0 0.3 HCM LOS D

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 142 534 1010 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.438 0.169 0.033 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 48.8 13.1 8.7 - HCM Lane LOS - - E B A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 2 0.6 0.1 -

Parsons Synchro 10 Report HCM 2010 TWSC Existing AM 2: Longfields & Kilspindie 03/25/2020

Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.4 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 85 36 469 21 19 773 Future Vol, veh/h 85 36 469 21 19 773 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - 750 1200 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222 Mvmt Flow 94 40 521 23 21 859

Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1422 521 0 0 544 0 Stage 1 521 ----- Stage 2 901 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 150 555 - - 1025 - Stage 1 596 ----- Stage 2 396 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 147 555 - - 1025 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 147 ----- Stage 1 596 ----- Stage 2 388 -----

Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 61.4 0 0.2 HCM LOS F

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 188 1025 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.715 0.021 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 61.4 8.6 - HCM Lane LOS - - F A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 4.5 0.1 -

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Existing PM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields 03/25/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 213 376 12 307 142 63 298 281 628 Future Volume (vph) 213 376 12 307 142 63 298 281 628 Lane Group Flow (vph) 237 530 0 354 158 70 333 312 1455 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 7 4 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 8 2 6 Detector Phase 748882216 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 11.9 35.9 35.5 35.5 35.5 38.6 38.6 16.6 31.4 Total Split (s) 21.5 57.0 35.5 35.5 35.5 38.6 38.6 26.6 65.2 Total Split (%) 17.6% 46.6% 29.1% 29.1% 29.1% 31.6% 31.6% 21.8% 53.4% Yellow Time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 All-Red Time (s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Ped Ped Ped Ped Act Effct Green (s) 48.3 48.3 27.1 27.1 32.1 32.1 56.5 56.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.41 0.41 0.23 0.23 0.27 0.27 0.48 0.48 v/c Ratio 0.80 0.76 0.91 0.34 1.21 0.37 0.64 0.90 Control Delay 45.4 37.6 73.1 7.9 223.8 37.2 26.7 30.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 45.4 37.6 73.1 7.9 223.8 37.2 26.7 30.6 LOS DD EAFDCC Approach Delay 40.0 53.0 69.6 29.9 Approach LOS D D E C Queue Length 50th (m) 38.4 104.3 82.4 0.0 ~20.8 34.6 46.7 136.2 Queue Length 95th (m) #70.1 147.9 #134.4 16.6 #51.3 48.2 69.1 173.3 Internal Link Dist (m) 525.8 356.5 519.8 1117.7 Turn Bay Length (m) 85.0 75.0 90.0 240.0 Base Capacity (vph) 302 732 417 484 58 901 508 1677 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.78 0.72 0.85 0.33 1.21 0.37 0.61 0.87 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 122.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 118 Natural Cycle: 105 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.21 Intersection Signal Delay: 40.2 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 116.7% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Existing PM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields 03/25/2020 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: 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields

Parsons Synchro 10 Report HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM 1: Longfields & Golflinks 03/25/2020

Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.8 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 40 72 951 75 80 693 Future Vol, veh/h 40 72 951 75 80 693 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 400 0 - - 1000 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222 Mvmt Flow 44 80 1057 83 89 770

Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 2047 1099 0 0 1140 0 Stage 1 1099 ----- Stage 2 948 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 61 258 - - 613 - Stage 1 319 ----- Stage 2 377 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 52 258 - - 613 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 52 ----- Stage 1 319 ----- Stage 2 322 -----

Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 90.4 0 1.2 HCM LOS F

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 52 258 613 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.855 0.31 0.145 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 208 25.1 11.9 - HCM Lane LOS - - F D B - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 3.6 1.3 0.5 -

Parsons Synchro 10 Report HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM 2: Longfields & Kilspindie 03/25/2020

Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.9 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 27 999 52 67 666 Future Vol, veh/h 25 27 999 52 67 666 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - 750 1200 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222 Mvmt Flow 28 30 1110 58 74 740

Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1998 1110 0 0 1168 0 Stage 1 1110 ----- Stage 2 888 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 66 255 - - 598 - Stage 1 315 ----- Stage 2 402 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 58 255 - - 598 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 58 ----- Stage 1 315 ----- Stage 2 352 -----

Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 86.1 0 1.1 HCM LOS F

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 97 598 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.596 0.124 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 86.1 11.9 - HCM Lane LOS - - F B - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 2.8 0.4 -

Parsons Synchro 10 Report

Appendix K 2021 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS SYNCHRO ANALYSIS

Timings Future Background 2021 AM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 03/25/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 656 195 10 293 260 99 732 66 254 Future Volume (vph) 656 195 10 293 260 99 732 66 254 Lane Group Flow (vph) 656 270 0 303 260 99 740 66 391 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 7 4 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Detector Phase 748882216 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 11.9 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 41.6 41.6 16.0 31.4 Total Split (s) 21.5 57.0 35.5 35.5 35.5 46.5 46.5 26.6 73.1 Total Split (%) 16.5% 43.8% 27.3% 27.3% 27.3% 35.7% 35.7% 20.4% 56.2% Yellow Time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 All-Red Time (s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Ped Ped Ped Ped Act Effct Green (s) 45.1 45.1 23.3 23.3 29.6 29.6 44.3 44.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.44 0.23 0.23 0.29 0.29 0.43 0.43 v/c Ratio 1.72 0.36 0.78 0.48 0.38 0.78 0.29 0.28 Control Delay 356.7 20.7 53.1 7.7 35.2 40.3 21.1 13.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 356.7 20.7 53.1 7.7 35.2 40.3 21.1 13.8 LOS FC DADDCB Approach Delay 258.7 32.1 39.7 14.9 Approach LOS F C D B Queue Length 50th (m) ~166.9 32.5 56.5 0.0 15.9 71.7 7.7 18.0 Queue Length 95th (m) #275.5 62.2 #98.3 20.7 33.0 100.4 16.4 29.6 Internal Link Dist (m) 525.8 356.5 519.8 1117.7 Turn Bay Length (m) 85.0 75.0 90.0 240.0 Base Capacity (vph) 381 842 492 610 358 1305 395 2101 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.72 0.32 0.62 0.43 0.28 0.57 0.17 0.19 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 130.1 Actuated Cycle Length: 102.8 Natural Cycle: 115 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.72 Intersection Signal Delay: 106.9 Intersection LOS: F Intersection Capacity Utilization 102.9% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Future Background 2021 AM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 03/25/2020 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: 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley

Parsons Synchro 10 Report HCM 2010 TWSC Future Background 2021 AM 2: Longfields & Kilspindie 03/25/2020

Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 85 36 507 21 19 835 Future Vol, veh/h 85 36 507 21 19 835 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - 750 1200 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222 Mvmt Flow 85 36 507 21 19 835

Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1380 507 0 0 528 0 Stage 1 507 ----- Stage 2 873 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 159 566 - - 1039 - Stage 1 605 ----- Stage 2 409 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 156 566 - - 1039 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 156 ----- Stage 1 605 ----- Stage 2 402 -----

Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 47.7 0 0.2 HCM LOS E

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 199 1039 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.608 0.018 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 47.7 8.5 - HCM Lane LOS - - E A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 3.4 0.1 -

Parsons Synchro 10 Report MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Golflinks BG 2021 AM ]

Site Category: (None) Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HVSatn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/h South: Longfields 2 T1 554 0.0 0.365 4.3 LOS A 2.6 18.5 0.17 0.39 0.17 56.1 3 R2 19 0.0 0.365 4.0 LOS A 2.6 18.5 0.17 0.39 0.17 54.7 Approach 573 0.0 0.365 4.3 LOS A 2.6 18.5 0.17 0.39 0.17 56.0

East: Golflinks 4 L2 59 0.0 0.158 11.8 LOS B 0.9 6.2 0.61 0.71 0.61 53.0 6 R2 85 0.0 0.158 6.9 LOS A 0.9 6.2 0.61 0.71 0.61 51.8 Approach 144 0.0 0.158 8.9 LOS A 0.9 6.2 0.61 0.71 0.61 52.3

North: Longfields 7 L2 32 0.0 0.575 9.2 LOS A 6.0 42.2 0.35 0.42 0.35 55.0 8 T1 837 0.0 0.575 4.5 LOS A 6.0 42.2 0.35 0.42 0.35 55.1 Approach 868 0.0 0.575 4.7 LOS A 6.0 42.2 0.35 0.42 0.35 55.1

All Vehicles 1585 0.0 0.575 4.9 LOS A 6.0 42.2 0.31 0.44 0.31 55.1

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: SIDRA Roundabout LOS. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay per movement. Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all vehicle movements. Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard. SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2018 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: PARSONS | Processed: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 4:35:39 PM Project: H:\ISO\476616\1000\DATA\Sidra\Kilspindie & Longfields.sip8 Timings Future Background 2021 PM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 03/25/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 230 406 13 332 153 68 322 303 678 Future Volume (vph) 230 406 13 332 153 68 322 303 678 Lane Group Flow (vph) 230 515 0 345 153 68 324 303 1413 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 7 4 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 8 2 6 Detector Phase 748882216 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 11.9 35.9 35.5 35.5 35.5 38.6 38.6 16.6 31.4 Total Split (s) 21.5 57.0 35.5 35.5 35.5 38.6 38.6 26.6 65.2 Total Split (%) 17.6% 46.6% 29.1% 29.1% 29.1% 31.6% 31.6% 21.8% 53.4% Yellow Time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 All-Red Time (s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Ped Ped Ped Ped Act Effct Green (s) 47.6 47.6 26.6 26.6 32.2 32.2 56.3 56.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.41 0.41 0.23 0.23 0.27 0.27 0.48 0.48 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.74 0.90 0.34 1.15 0.36 0.61 0.87 Control Delay 42.1 36.6 71.4 8.0 208.6 36.7 25.7 28.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 42.1 36.6 71.4 8.0 208.6 36.7 25.7 28.1 LOS DD EAFDCC Approach Delay 38.3 51.9 66.5 27.7 Approach LOS D D E C Stops (vph) 149 418 311 19 46 252 188 1011 Fuel Used(l) 24 56 43 7 16 37 44 216 CO Emissions (g/hr) 452 1040 805 121 306 697 819 4009 NOx Emissions (g/hr) 87 201 155 23 59 134 158 774 VOC Emissions (g/hr) 104 240 186 28 71 161 189 925 Dilemma Vehicles (#) 0 22 14 0 0 14 0 60 Queue Length 50th (m) 36.9 99.5 79.6 0.0 ~19.8 33.4 45.1 127.7 Queue Length 95th (m) #63.3 142.0 #129.5 16.4 #49.8 47.1 66.8 162.8 Internal Link Dist (m) 525.8 356.5 519.8 1117.7 Turn Bay Length (m) 85.0 75.0 90.0 240.0 Base Capacity (vph) 308 739 420 484 59 909 515 1690 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.75 0.70 0.82 0.32 1.15 0.36 0.59 0.84 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 122.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 117.1 Natural Cycle: 105

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Future Background 2021 PM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 03/25/2020 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.15 Intersection Signal Delay: 38.2 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 123.6% ICU Level of Service H 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: 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley

Parsons Synchro 10 Report HCM 2010 TWSC Future Background 2021 PM 2: Longfields & Kilspindie 03/25/2020

Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 27 1079 52 67 719 Future Vol, veh/h 25 27 1079 52 67 719 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - 750 1200 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222 Mvmt Flow 25 27 1079 52 67 719

Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1932 1079 0 0 1131 0 Stage 1 1079 ----- Stage 2 853 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 73 265 - - 618 - Stage 1 326 ----- Stage 2 418 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 65 265 - - 618 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 65 ----- Stage 1 326 ----- Stage 2 373 -----

Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 67 0 1 HCM LOS F

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 107 618 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.486 0.108 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 67 11.5 - HCM Lane LOS - - F B - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 2.2 0.4 -

Parsons Synchro 10 Report MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Golflinks BG 2021 PM ]

Site Category: (None) Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HVSatn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/h South: Longfields 2 T1 1081 0.0 0.787 5.2 LOS A 11.7 81.6 0.59 0.46 0.59 54.1 3 R2 79 0.0 0.787 5.0 LOS A 11.7 81.6 0.59 0.46 0.59 52.8 Approach 1160 0.0 0.787 5.2 LOS A 11.7 81.6 0.59 0.46 0.59 54.0

East: Golflinks 4 L2 42 0.0 0.261 18.4 LOS B 1.9 13.4 0.96 0.93 0.96 48.6 6 R2 76 0.0 0.261 13.5 LOS B 1.9 13.4 0.96 0.93 0.96 47.6 Approach 118 0.0 0.261 15.2 LOS B 1.9 13.4 0.96 0.93 0.96 47.9

North: Longfields 7 L2 84 0.0 0.563 9.0 LOS A 6.5 45.2 0.32 0.42 0.32 55.0 8 T1 787 0.0 0.563 4.4 LOS A 6.5 45.2 0.32 0.42 0.32 55.1 Approach 872 0.0 0.563 4.9 LOS A 6.5 45.2 0.32 0.42 0.32 55.1

All Vehicles 2149 0.0 0.787 5.6 LOS A 11.7 81.6 0.50 0.47 0.50 54.0

Appendix L 2026 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS SYNCHRO ANALYSIS

Timings Future Background 2026 AM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 03/25/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 777 232 12 347 308 130 869 78 301 Future Volume (vph) 777 232 12 347 308 130 869 78 301 Lane Group Flow (vph) 777 323 0 359 308 130 879 78 464 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 7 4 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Detector Phase 748882216 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 11.9 35.9 35.5 35.5 35.5 28.6 28.6 16.0 31.4 Total Split (s) 21.5 57.0 35.5 35.5 35.5 41.6 41.6 26.6 68.2 Total Split (%) 17.2% 45.5% 28.4% 28.4% 28.4% 33.2% 33.2% 21.2% 54.5% Yellow Time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 All-Red Time (s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Ped Ped Ped Ped Act Effct Green (s) 48.7 48.7 27.1 27.1 33.8 33.8 49.0 49.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.44 0.24 0.24 0.31 0.31 0.44 0.44 v/c Ratio 2.33 0.43 0.86 0.52 0.51 0.87 0.39 0.32 Control Delay 623.7 22.8 61.1 7.4 40.7 47.6 24.4 15.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 623.7 22.8 61.1 7.4 40.7 47.6 24.4 15.5 LOS FC EADDCB Approach Delay 447.2 36.3 46.7 16.8 Approach LOS F D D B Queue Length 50th (m) ~260.3 45.3 75.5 0.0 23.6 96.7 10.0 25.4 Queue Length 95th (m) #342.6 71.7 #126.3 21.7 44.8 #134.5 19.0 37.0 Internal Link Dist (m) 525.8 356.5 519.8 1117.7 Turn Bay Length (m) 85.0 75.0 90.0 240.0 Base Capacity (vph) 334 775 450 616 268 1050 350 1804 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 2.33 0.42 0.80 0.50 0.49 0.84 0.22 0.26 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 125.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 110.8 Natural Cycle: 115 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 2.33 Intersection Signal Delay: 172.5 Intersection LOS: F Intersection Capacity Utilization 117.5% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Future Background 2026 AM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 03/25/2020 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: 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley

Parsons Synchro 10 Report HCM 2010 TWSC Future Background 2026 AM 2: Longfields & Kilspindie 03/25/2020

Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 85 36 603 21 19 1003 Future Vol, veh/h 85 36 603 21 19 1003 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - 750 1200 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222 Mvmt Flow 85 36 603 21 19 1003

Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1644 603 0 0 624 0 Stage 1 603 ----- Stage 2 1041 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 110 499 - - 957 - Stage 1 546 ----- Stage 2 340 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 108 499 - - 957 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 108 ----- Stage 1 546 ----- Stage 2 333 -----

Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 102.9 0 0.2 HCM LOS F

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 141 957 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.858 0.02 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 102.9 8.8 - HCM Lane LOS - - F A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 5.6 0.1 -

Parsons Synchro 10 Report MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Golflinks BG 2026 AM]

Site Category: (None) Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HVSatn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/h South: Longfields 1 L2 3 0.0 0.437 9.0 LOS A 3.5 24.3 0.22 0.40 0.22 55.8 2 T1 656 0.0 0.437 4.3 LOS A 3.5 24.3 0.22 0.40 0.22 55.8 3 R2 19 0.0 0.437 4.1 LOS A 3.5 24.3 0.22 0.40 0.22 54.5 Approach 678 0.0 0.437 4.3 LOS A 3.5 24.3 0.22 0.40 0.22 55.8

East: Golflinks 4 L2 59 0.0 0.176 12.7 LOS B 1.0 7.3 0.68 0.76 0.68 52.3 5 T1 1 0.0 0.176 8.0 LOS A 1.0 7.3 0.68 0.76 0.68 52.4 6 R2 85 0.0 0.176 7.8 LOS A 1.0 7.3 0.68 0.76 0.68 51.2 Approach 145 0.0 0.176 9.8 LOS A 1.0 7.3 0.68 0.76 0.68 51.6

North: Longfields 7 L2 32 0.0 0.680 9.3 LOS A 8.7 60.9 0.44 0.43 0.44 54.6 8 T1 992 0.0 0.680 4.7 LOS A 8.7 60.9 0.44 0.43 0.44 54.7 9 R2 1 0.0 0.680 4.5 LOS A 8.7 60.9 0.44 0.43 0.44 53.4 Approach 1024 0.0 0.680 4.8 LOS A 8.7 60.9 0.44 0.43 0.44 54.6

West: RoadName 10 L2 7 0.0 0.032 17.3 LOS B 0.2 1.5 0.88 0.75 0.88 48.9 11 T1 1 0.0 0.032 12.7 LOS B 0.2 1.5 0.88 0.75 0.88 49.0 12 R2 7 0.0 0.032 12.5 LOS B 0.2 1.5 0.88 0.75 0.88 47.9 Approach 16 0.0 0.032 14.8 LOS B 0.2 1.5 0.88 0.75 0.88 48.5

All Vehicles 1863 0.0 0.680 5.1 LOS A 8.7 60.9 0.38 0.45 0.38 54.8

SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2018 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: PARSONS | Processed: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 4:35:40 PM Project: H:\ISO\476616\1000\DATA\Sidra\Kilspindie & Longfields.sip8 Timings Future Background 2026 PM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 03/25/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 273 481 15 393 182 87 381 360 804 Future Volume (vph) 273 481 15 393 182 87 381 360 804 Lane Group Flow (vph) 273 622 0 408 182 87 384 360 1676 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 7 4 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 8 2 6 Detector Phase 748882216 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 11.9 35.9 35.5 35.5 35.5 38.6 38.6 16.6 31.4 Total Split (s) 21.5 57.0 35.5 35.5 35.5 38.6 38.6 26.6 65.2 Total Split (%) 17.6% 46.6% 29.1% 29.1% 29.1% 31.6% 31.6% 21.8% 53.4% Yellow Time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 All-Red Time (s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Ped Ped Ped Ped Act Effct Green (s) 50.5 50.5 29.0 29.0 32.8 32.8 58.6 58.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.41 0.41 0.24 0.24 0.27 0.27 0.48 0.48 v/c Ratio 1.03 0.88 1.02 0.37 1.55 0.43 0.77 1.03 Control Delay 96.9 48.1 97.1 7.6 347.6 39.0 33.6 56.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 96.9 48.1 97.1 7.6 347.6 39.0 33.6 56.8 LOS FD FAFDCE Approach Delay 63.0 69.5 96.0 52.7 Approach LOS E E F D Queue Length 50th (m) ~54.8 133.2 ~104.1 0.0 ~29.5 40.4 55.9 ~205.2 Queue Length 95th (m) #108.6 #202.0 #164.5 17.7 #62.5 55.3 81.3 #248.4 Internal Link Dist (m) 523.0 356.5 519.8 1117.7 Turn Bay Length (m) 85.0 75.0 90.0 240.0 Base Capacity (vph) 264 705 399 490 56 890 477 1626 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.03 0.88 1.02 0.37 1.55 0.43 0.75 1.03 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 122.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 122.2 Natural Cycle: 105 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.55 Intersection Signal Delay: 62.6 Intersection LOS: E Intersection Capacity Utilization 141.7% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Future Background 2026 PM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 03/25/2020 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: 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley

Parsons Synchro 10 Report HCM 2010 TWSC Future Background 2026 PM 2: Longfields & Kilspindie 03/25/2020

Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.9 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 27 1291 52 67 858 Future Vol, veh/h 25 27 1291 52 67 858 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - 750 1200 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222 Mvmt Flow 25 27 1291 52 67 858

Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 2283 1291 0 0 1343 0 Stage 1 1291 ----- Stage 2 992 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 44 199 - - 513 - Stage 1 258 ----- Stage 2 359 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 38 199 - - 513 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 38 ----- Stage 1 258 ----- Stage 2 312 -----

Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 158.8 0 0.9 HCM LOS F

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 66 513 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.788 0.131 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 158.8 13.1 - HCM Lane LOS - - F B - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 3.6 0.4 -

Parsons Synchro 10 Report MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Golflinks BG 2026 PM]

Site Category: (None) Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HVSatn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/h South: Longfields 1 L2 13 0.0 0.932 10.9 LOS B 26.4 185.0 1.00 0.52 1.00 52.2 2 T1 1281 0.0 0.932 6.3 LOS A 26.4 185.0 1.00 0.52 1.00 52.2 3 R2 79 0.0 0.932 6.0 LOS A 26.4 185.0 1.00 0.52 1.00 51.1 Approach 1373 0.0 0.932 6.3 LOS A 26.4 185.0 1.00 0.52 1.00 52.2

East: Golflinks 4 L2 42 0.0 0.517 38.6 LOS D 4.7 33.1 1.00 1.10 1.26 38.4 5 T1 1 0.0 0.517 34.0 LOS C 4.7 33.1 1.00 1.10 1.26 38.4 6 R2 76 0.0 0.517 33.8 LOS C 4.7 33.1 1.00 1.10 1.26 37.8 Approach 119 0.0 0.517 35.5 LOS D 4.7 33.1 1.00 1.10 1.26 38.0

North: Longfields 7 L2 84 0.0 0.674 9.2 LOS A 8.9 62.1 0.43 0.43 0.43 54.6 8 T1 937 0.0 0.674 4.6 LOS A 8.9 62.1 0.43 0.43 0.43 54.6 9 R2 4 0.0 0.674 4.4 LOS A 8.9 62.1 0.43 0.43 0.43 53.3 Approach 1025 0.0 0.674 5.0 LOS A 8.9 62.1 0.43 0.43 0.43 54.6

West: RoadName 10 L2 4 0.0 0.017 16.8 LOS B 0.1 0.8 0.86 0.70 0.86 49.2 11 T1 1 0.0 0.017 12.2 LOS B 0.1 0.8 0.86 0.70 0.86 49.2 12 R2 3 0.0 0.017 12.0 LOS B 0.1 0.8 0.86 0.70 0.86 48.2 Approach 8 0.0 0.017 14.4 LOS B 0.1 0.8 0.86 0.70 0.86 48.8

All Vehicles 2525 0.0 0.932 7.2 LOS A 26.4 185.0 0.77 0.51 0.78 52.2

Appendix M 2021 FUTURE TOTAL CONDITIONS SYNCHRO AND SIDRA ANALYSIS

Timings Total Projected 2021 AM 2: Longfields & Access/Kilspindie 07/24/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 44 5 85 5 18 507 21 19 835 Future Volume (vph) 44 5 85 5 18 507 21 19 835 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 94 0 126 18 507 21 19 853 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 48226 Detector Phase 448822266 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 Total Split (s) 35.6 35.6 35.6 35.6 54.4 54.4 54.4 54.4 54.4 Total Split (%) 39.6% 39.6% 39.6% 39.6% 60.4% 60.4% 60.4% 60.4% 60.4% Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 All-Red Time (s) 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.5 5.5 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Recall Mode None None None None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s) 14.2 14.2 38.7 38.7 38.7 38.7 38.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.39 0.07 0.42 0.02 0.04 0.71 Control Delay 16.3 24.4 6.1 7.6 1.8 5.4 13.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 16.3 24.4 6.1 7.6 1.8 5.4 13.1 LOS B CAAAAB Approach Delay 16.3 24.4 7.3 13.0 Approach LOS B C A B Queue Length 50th (m) 4.5 10.0 0.7 25.4 0.0 0.7 59.2 Queue Length 95th (m) 17.6 28.1 3.4 54.7 1.8 3.2 132.9 Internal Link Dist (m) 65.1 94.1 525.8 255.4 Turn Bay Length (m) 50.0 75.0 120.0 Base Capacity (vph) 783 709 319 1417 1131 628 1411 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.18 0.06 0.36 0.02 0.03 0.60 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 55.9 Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.71 Intersection Signal Delay: 12.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.5% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Total Projected 2021 AM 2: Longfields & Access/Kilspindie 07/24/2020 Splits and Phases: 2: Longfields & Access/Kilspindie

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Total Projected 2021 AM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 07/24/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 656 195 14 293 260 135 732 66 254 Future Volume (vph) 656 195 14 293 260 135 732 66 254 Lane Group Flow (vph) 656 284 0 307 260 135 749 66 391 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 7 4 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Detector Phase 748882216 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 11.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 28.6 28.6 11.6 28.6 Total Split (s) 21.5 57.0 35.5 35.5 35.5 41.6 41.6 26.6 68.2 Total Split (%) 17.2% 45.5% 28.4% 28.4% 28.4% 33.2% 33.2% 21.2% 54.5% Yellow Time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 All-Red Time (s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Ped Ped Ped Ped Act Effct Green (s) 45.3 45.3 23.5 23.5 29.3 29.3 43.9 43.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.44 0.23 0.23 0.29 0.29 0.43 0.43 v/c Ratio 1.72 0.38 0.79 0.49 0.53 0.79 0.29 0.28 Control Delay 357.8 20.3 53.4 7.7 40.4 41.3 21.6 14.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 357.8 20.3 53.4 7.7 40.4 41.3 21.6 14.0 LOS FC DADDCB Approach Delay 255.8 32.4 41.2 15.1 Approach LOS F C D B Queue Length 50th (m) ~169.0 34.2 57.9 0.0 22.9 73.2 7.8 18.2 Queue Length 95th (m) #263.5 60.9 95.4 20.0 45.4 102.4 16.7 30.0 Internal Link Dist (m) 525.8 356.5 519.8 1117.7 Turn Bay Length (m) 85.0 75.0 90.0 240.0 Base Capacity (vph) 381 836 488 601 312 1144 391 1932 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.72 0.34 0.63 0.43 0.43 0.65 0.17 0.20 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 125.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 102.5 Natural Cycle: 120 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.72 Intersection Signal Delay: 106.1 Intersection LOS: F Intersection Capacity Utilization 105.0% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Total Projected 2021 AM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 07/24/2020 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: 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley

Parsons Synchro 10 Report MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Golflinks FT 2021 AM]

Site Category: (None) Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HVSatn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/h South: Longfields 2 T1 600 0.0 0.393 4.3 LOS A 3.0 20.8 0.18 0.39 0.18 56.0 3 R2 19 0.0 0.393 4.0 LOS A 3.0 20.8 0.18 0.39 0.18 54.7 Approach 619 0.0 0.393 4.3 LOS A 3.0 20.8 0.18 0.39 0.18 56.0

East: Golflinks 4 L2 59 0.0 0.163 12.1 LOS B 0.9 6.6 0.64 0.73 0.64 52.7 6 R2 85 0.0 0.163 7.3 LOS A 0.9 6.6 0.64 0.73 0.64 51.6 Approach 144 0.0 0.163 9.2 LOS A 0.9 6.6 0.64 0.73 0.64 52.0

North: Longfields 7 L2 32 0.0 0.588 9.2 LOS A 6.3 44.3 0.36 0.42 0.36 55.0 8 T1 856 0.0 0.588 4.6 LOS A 6.3 44.3 0.36 0.42 0.36 55.0 Approach 887 0.0 0.588 4.7 LOS A 6.3 44.3 0.36 0.42 0.36 55.0

All Vehicles 1651 0.0 0.588 4.9 LOS A 6.3 44.3 0.32 0.44 0.32 55.1

SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2018 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: PARSONS | Processed: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 4:35:39 PM Project: H:\ISO\476616\1000\DATA\Sidra\Kilspindie & Longfields.sip8 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Kilspindie Proj2021 AM] Kilspindie Projected 2021 AM Single Lane Longfields Site Category: (None) Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HVSatn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/h South: Longfields 1 L2 18 2.0 0.371 11.0 LOS B 2.6 18.4 0.26 0.41 0.26 57.3 2 T1 507 2.0 0.371 4.3 LOS A 2.6 18.4 0.26 0.41 0.26 64.2 3 R2 21 2.0 0.371 4.6 LOS A 2.6 18.4 0.26 0.41 0.26 54.3 Approach 546 2.0 0.371 4.6 LOS A 2.6 18.4 0.26 0.41 0.26 63.5

East: Kilspindie 4 L2 85 2.0 0.127 10.0 LOS A 0.7 4.9 0.58 0.67 0.58 51.8 5 T1 5 2.0 0.127 3.7 LOS A 0.7 4.9 0.58 0.67 0.58 46.8 6 R2 36 2.0 0.127 4.6 LOS A 0.7 4.9 0.58 0.67 0.58 50.6 Approach 126 2.0 0.127 8.2 LOS A 0.7 4.9 0.58 0.67 0.58 51.2

North: Longfields 7 L2 19 2.0 0.610 11.4 LOS B 5.6 40.2 0.44 0.46 0.44 56.4 8 T1 835 2.0 0.610 4.8 LOS A 5.6 40.2 0.44 0.46 0.44 63.0 9 R2 18 2.0 0.610 5.0 LOS A 5.6 40.2 0.44 0.46 0.44 53.5 Approach 872 2.0 0.610 4.9 LOS A 5.6 40.2 0.44 0.46 0.44 62.6

West: Kilspindie 10 L2 44 2.0 0.139 13.2 LOS B 0.9 6.5 0.82 0.79 0.82 50.4 11 T1 5 2.0 0.139 7.0 LOS A 0.9 6.5 0.82 0.79 0.82 45.6 12 R2 45 2.0 0.139 7.9 LOS A 0.9 6.5 0.82 0.79 0.82 49.2 Approach 94 2.0 0.139 10.3 LOS B 0.9 6.5 0.82 0.79 0.82 49.6

All Vehicles 1638 2.0 0.610 5.4 LOS A 5.6 40.2 0.42 0.48 0.42 60.9

SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2018 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: PARSONS | Processed: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 4:35:38 PM Project: H:\ISO\476616\1000\DATA\Sidra\Kilspindie & Longfields.sip8 Timings Total Projected 2021 PM 2: Longfields & Access/Kilspindie 07/24/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 27 5 25 5 45 1079 52 67 719 Future Volume (vph) 27 5 25 5 45 1079 52 67 719 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 59 0 57 45 1079 52 67 763 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 48226 Detector Phase 448822266 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 Total Split (s) 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 74.5 74.5 74.5 74.5 74.5 Total Split (%) 32.3% 32.3% 32.3% 32.3% 67.7% 67.7% 67.7% 67.7% 67.7% Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 All-Red Time (s) 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.5 5.5 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Recall Mode None None None None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s) 10.3 10.3 70.2 70.2 70.2 70.2 70.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.31 0.10 0.77 0.05 0.26 0.55 Control Delay 28.5 27.7 3.5 11.5 1.2 6.3 6.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 28.5 27.7 3.5 11.5 1.2 6.3 6.1 LOS C CABAAA Approach Delay 28.5 27.7 10.7 6.1 Approach LOS C C B A Queue Length 50th (m) 5.1 4.8 1.6 93.3 0.2 2.8 44.6 Queue Length 95th (m) 16.4 16.0 4.5 168.8 2.6 8.4 73.5 Internal Link Dist (m) 77.5 94.1 525.8 255.4 Turn Bay Length (m) 50.0 75.0 120.0 Base Capacity (vph) 480 485 466 1406 1115 262 1388 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.77 0.05 0.26 0.55 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 110 Actuated Cycle Length: 87.1 Natural Cycle: 110 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.77 Intersection Signal Delay: 9.9 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.1% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Total Projected 2021 PM 2: Longfields & Access/Kilspindie 07/24/2020 Splits and Phases: 2: Longfields & Access/Kilspindie

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Total Projected 2021 PM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 07/24/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 230 406 22 332 153 90 322 303 678 Future Volume (vph) 230 406 22 332 153 90 322 303 678 Lane Group Flow (vph) 230 551 0 354 153 90 329 303 1413 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 7 4 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 8 2 6 Detector Phase 748882216 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 11.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 28.6 28.6 11.6 28.6 Total Split (s) 21.5 57.0 35.5 35.5 35.5 38.6 38.6 26.6 65.2 Total Split (%) 17.6% 46.6% 29.1% 29.1% 29.1% 31.6% 31.6% 21.8% 53.4% Yellow Time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 All-Red Time (s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Ped Ped Ped Ped Act Effct Green (s) 48.7 48.7 27.6 27.6 32.1 32.1 56.4 56.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.41 0.41 0.23 0.23 0.27 0.27 0.48 0.48 v/c Ratio 0.77 0.79 0.92 0.34 1.55 0.37 0.62 0.89 Control Delay 42.4 39.3 75.8 8.0 347.2 36.9 26.4 30.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 42.4 39.3 75.8 8.0 347.2 36.9 26.4 30.1 LOS DD EAFDCC Approach Delay 40.2 55.3 103.6 29.4 Approach LOS D E F C Queue Length 50th (m) 36.9 109.6 82.8 0.0 ~30.7 33.8 45.1 130.0 Queue Length 95th (m) #64.1 156.7 #137.5 16.4 #64.8 47.5 66.8 166.5 Internal Link Dist (m) 525.8 356.5 519.8 1117.7 Turn Bay Length (m) 85.0 75.0 90.0 240.0 Base Capacity (vph) 306 725 404 472 58 898 506 1646 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.75 0.76 0.88 0.32 1.55 0.37 0.60 0.86 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 122.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 118.2 Natural Cycle: 100 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.55 Intersection Signal Delay: 44.8 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 127.6% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Timings Total Projected 2021 PM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 07/24/2020 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: 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley

Parsons Synchro 10 Report MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Golflinks FT 2021 PM]

Site Category: (None) Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HVSatn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/h South: Longfields 2 T1 1109 0.0 0.805 5.3 LOS A 12.8 89.5 0.63 0.47 0.63 53.9 3 R2 79 0.0 0.805 5.0 LOS A 12.8 89.5 0.63 0.47 0.63 52.7 Approach 1188 0.0 0.805 5.2 LOS A 12.8 89.5 0.63 0.47 0.63 53.8

East: Golflinks 4 L2 42 0.0 0.277 19.0 LOS B 2.1 14.4 0.98 0.95 0.98 48.1 6 R2 76 0.0 0.277 14.2 LOS B 2.1 14.4 0.98 0.95 0.98 47.2 Approach 118 0.0 0.277 15.9 LOS B 2.1 14.4 0.98 0.95 0.98 47.5

North: Longfields 7 L2 84 0.0 0.591 9.0 LOS A 7.2 50.2 0.33 0.42 0.33 55.0 8 T1 834 0.0 0.591 4.4 LOS A 7.2 50.2 0.33 0.42 0.33 55.0 Approach 918 0.0 0.591 4.8 LOS A 7.2 50.2 0.33 0.42 0.33 55.0

All Vehicles 2224 0.0 0.805 5.6 LOS A 12.8 89.5 0.52 0.47 0.52 53.9

SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2018 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: PARSONS | Processed: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 4:35:40 PM Project: H:\ISO\476616\1000\DATA\Sidra\Kilspindie & Longfields.sip8 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Kilspindie Proj2021 PM] Kilspindie Projected 2021 PM Single Lane Longfields Site Category: (None) Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HVSatn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/h South: Longfields 1 L2 45 2.0 0.796 11.8 LOS B 10.6 75.3 0.58 0.48 0.58 55.6 2 T1 1079 2.0 0.796 5.1 LOS A 10.6 75.3 0.58 0.48 0.58 62.1 3 R2 52 2.0 0.796 5.3 LOS A 10.6 75.3 0.58 0.48 0.58 52.9 Approach 1176 2.0 0.796 5.4 LOS A 10.6 75.3 0.58 0.48 0.58 61.4

East: Kilspindie 4 L2 25 2.0 0.121 16.8 LOS B 0.9 6.3 0.95 0.85 0.95 48.2 5 T1 5 2.0 0.121 10.6 LOS B 0.9 6.3 0.95 0.85 0.95 43.8 6 R2 27 2.0 0.121 11.5 LOS B 0.9 6.3 0.95 0.85 0.95 47.1 Approach 57 2.0 0.121 13.7 LOS B 0.9 6.3 0.95 0.85 0.95 47.3

North: Longfields 7 L2 67 2.0 0.555 11.1 LOS B 4.7 33.3 0.33 0.44 0.33 56.7 8 T1 719 2.0 0.555 4.5 LOS A 4.7 33.3 0.33 0.44 0.33 63.5 9 R2 44 2.0 0.555 4.7 LOS A 4.7 33.3 0.33 0.44 0.33 53.9 Approach 830 2.0 0.555 5.0 LOS A 4.7 33.3 0.33 0.44 0.33 62.3

West: Kilspindie 10 L2 27 2.0 0.074 11.6 LOS B 0.4 3.2 0.71 0.70 0.71 51.5 11 T1 5 2.0 0.074 5.4 LOS A 0.4 3.2 0.71 0.70 0.71 46.5 12 R2 27 2.0 0.074 6.2 LOS A 0.4 3.2 0.71 0.70 0.71 50.4 Approach 59 2.0 0.074 8.6 LOS A 0.4 3.2 0.71 0.70 0.71 50.5

All Vehicles 2122 2.0 0.796 5.6 LOS A 10.6 75.3 0.50 0.48 0.50 60.9

Appendix N 2026 FUTURE TOTAL CONDITIONS SYNCHRO AND SIDRA ANALYSIS

Lanes, Volumes, Timings Total Projected 2026 AM 2: Longfields & Access/Kilspindie 07/24/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 44 5 85 5 18 603 21 19 1003 Future Volume (vph) 44 5 85 5 18 603 21 19 1003 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 94 0 126 18 603 21 19 1021 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 48226 Detector Phase 448822266 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 Total Split (s) 35.6 35.6 35.6 35.6 64.4 64.4 64.4 64.4 64.4 Total Split (%) 35.6% 35.6% 35.6% 35.6% 64.4% 64.4% 64.4% 64.4% 64.4% Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 All-Red Time (s) 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.5 5.5 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Recall Mode None None None None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s) 13.1 13.1 57.2 57.2 57.2 57.2 57.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.58 0.09 0.50 0.02 0.04 0.84 Control Delay 22.9 37.4 6.3 7.9 1.8 5.1 18.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 22.9 37.4 6.3 7.9 1.8 5.1 18.5 LOS C DAAAAB Approach Delay 22.9 37.4 7.7 18.2 Approach LOS C D A B Queue Length 50th (m) 6.9 15.4 0.7 35.0 0.0 0.7 93.3 Queue Length 95th (m) 19.9 32.2 3.7 72.3 1.9 3.4 #233.6 Internal Link Dist (m) 65.1 94.1 525.8 255.4 Turn Bay Length (m) 50.0 75.0 120.0 Base Capacity (vph) 497 479 198 1246 990 477 1242 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.19 0.26 0.09 0.48 0.02 0.04 0.82 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 81.9 Natural Cycle: 100 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.84 Intersection Signal Delay: 16.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Lanes, Volumes, Timings Total Projected 2026 AM 2: Longfields & Access/Kilspindie 07/24/2020 Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Splits and Phases: 2: Longfields & Access/Kilspindie

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Lanes, Volumes, Timings Total Projected 2026 AM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 07/24/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 777 232 16 347 308 166 869 78 301 Future Volume (vph) 777 232 16 347 308 166 869 78 301 Lane Group Flow (vph) 777 337 0 363 308 166 888 78 464 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 7 4 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 Detector Phase 748882216 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 11.9 35.9 35.5 35.5 35.5 41.6 41.6 16.0 31.4 Total Split (s) 21.5 57.0 35.5 35.5 35.5 41.6 41.6 26.6 68.2 Total Split (%) 17.2% 45.5% 28.4% 28.4% 28.4% 33.2% 33.2% 21.2% 54.5% Yellow Time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 All-Red Time (s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Ped Ped Ped Ped Act Effct Green (s) 49.3 49.3 27.7 27.7 34.0 34.0 49.3 49.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.44 0.25 0.25 0.30 0.30 0.44 0.44 v/c Ratio 2.33 0.45 0.86 0.52 0.65 0.88 0.40 0.32 Control Delay 625.6 23.1 61.6 7.4 48.1 48.6 24.8 15.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 625.6 23.1 61.6 7.4 48.1 48.6 24.8 15.7 LOS FC EADDCB Approach Delay 443.3 36.7 48.5 17.0 Approach LOS F D D B Queue Length 50th (m) ~260.1 47.5 76.8 0.0 31.8 98.0 10.0 25.4 Queue Length 95th (m) #342.5 75.3 #129.1 22.0 #60.0 #136.8 19.0 37.2 Internal Link Dist (m) 525.8 356.5 519.8 1117.7 Turn Bay Length (m) 85.0 75.0 90.0 240.0 Base Capacity (vph) 334 761 442 605 263 1039 346 1764 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 2.33 0.44 0.82 0.51 0.63 0.85 0.23 0.26 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 125.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 111.7 Natural Cycle: 115 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 2.33 Intersection Signal Delay: 171.2 Intersection LOS: F Intersection Capacity Utilization 118.7% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Lanes, Volumes, Timings Total Projected 2026 AM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 07/24/2020 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: 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley

Parsons Synchro 10 Report MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Golflinks FT 2026 AM]

Site Category: (None) Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HVSatn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/h South: Longfields 1 L2 3 0.0 0.466 9.0 LOS A 3.9 27.0 0.23 0.40 0.23 55.8 2 T1 702 0.0 0.466 4.3 LOS A 3.9 27.0 0.23 0.40 0.23 55.8 3 R2 19 0.0 0.466 4.1 LOS A 3.9 27.0 0.23 0.40 0.23 54.5 Approach 724 0.0 0.466 4.4 LOS A 3.9 27.0 0.23 0.40 0.23 55.8

East: Golflinks 4 L2 59 0.0 0.184 13.1 LOS B 1.1 7.7 0.71 0.77 0.71 52.0 5 T1 1 0.0 0.184 8.5 LOS A 1.1 7.7 0.71 0.77 0.71 52.0 6 R2 85 0.0 0.184 8.2 LOS A 1.1 7.7 0.71 0.77 0.71 50.9 Approach 145 0.0 0.184 10.2 LOS B 1.1 7.7 0.71 0.77 0.71 51.3

North: Longfields 7 L2 32 0.0 0.693 9.3 LOS A 9.2 64.1 0.46 0.43 0.46 54.6 8 T1 1011 0.0 0.693 4.7 LOS A 9.2 64.1 0.46 0.43 0.46 54.6 9 R2 1 0.0 0.693 4.5 LOS A 9.2 64.1 0.46 0.43 0.46 53.3 Approach 1043 0.0 0.693 4.9 LOS A 9.2 64.1 0.46 0.43 0.46 54.6

West: RoadName 10 L2 7 0.0 0.033 17.7 LOS B 0.2 1.6 0.89 0.75 0.89 48.7 11 T1 1 0.0 0.033 13.1 LOS B 0.2 1.6 0.89 0.75 0.89 48.7 12 R2 7 0.0 0.033 12.9 LOS B 0.2 1.6 0.89 0.75 0.89 47.7 Approach 16 0.0 0.033 15.2 LOS B 0.2 1.6 0.89 0.75 0.89 48.2

All Vehicles 1928 0.0 0.693 5.2 LOS A 9.2 64.1 0.39 0.45 0.39 54.7

SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2018 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: PARSONS | Processed: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 4:35:40 PM Project: H:\ISO\476616\1000\DATA\Sidra\Kilspindie & Longfields.sip8 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Kilspindie Proj2026 AM] Kilspindie Projected 2026 AM Single Lane Longfields Site Category: (None) Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HVSatn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/h South: Longfields 1 L2 18 2.0 0.433 11.0 LOS B 3.3 23.8 0.29 0.41 0.29 57.2 2 T1 603 2.0 0.433 4.4 LOS A 3.3 23.8 0.29 0.41 0.29 64.0 3 R2 21 2.0 0.433 4.6 LOS A 3.3 23.8 0.29 0.41 0.29 54.2 Approach 642 2.0 0.433 4.6 LOS A 3.3 23.8 0.29 0.41 0.29 63.4

East: Kilspindie 4 L2 85 2.0 0.138 10.6 LOS B 0.8 5.6 0.64 0.71 0.64 51.4 5 T1 5 2.0 0.138 4.4 LOS A 0.8 5.6 0.64 0.71 0.64 46.4 6 R2 36 2.0 0.138 5.2 LOS A 0.8 5.6 0.64 0.71 0.64 50.2 Approach 126 2.0 0.138 8.8 LOS A 0.8 5.6 0.64 0.71 0.64 50.8

North: Longfields 7 L2 19 2.0 0.723 11.6 LOS B 8.4 59.8 0.55 0.48 0.55 55.8 8 T1 1003 2.0 0.723 5.0 LOS A 8.4 59.8 0.55 0.48 0.55 62.4 9 R2 18 2.0 0.723 5.2 LOS A 8.4 59.8 0.55 0.48 0.55 53.0 Approach 1040 2.0 0.723 5.1 LOS A 8.4 59.8 0.55 0.48 0.55 62.0

West: Kilspindie 10 L2 44 2.0 0.181 16.1 LOS B 1.3 9.4 0.93 0.87 0.93 48.5 11 T1 5 2.0 0.181 9.9 LOS A 1.3 9.4 0.93 0.87 0.93 44.0 12 R2 45 2.0 0.181 10.8 LOS B 1.3 9.4 0.93 0.87 0.93 47.5 Approach 94 2.0 0.181 13.2 LOS B 1.3 9.4 0.93 0.87 0.93 47.7

All Vehicles 1902 2.0 0.723 5.6 LOS A 8.4 59.8 0.49 0.49 0.49 60.7

SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2018 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: PARSONS | Processed: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 4:35:38 PM Project: H:\ISO\476616\1000\DATA\Sidra\Kilspindie & Longfields.sip8 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Total Projected 2026 PM 2: Longfields & Access/Kilspindie 07/24/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 27 5 25 5 45 1291 52 67 858 Future Volume (vph) 27 5 25 5 45 1291 52 67 858 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 59 0 57 45 1291 52 67 902 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 48226 Detector Phase 448822266 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 Total Split (s) 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 84.5 84.5 84.5 84.5 84.5 Total Split (%) 29.6% 29.6% 29.6% 29.6% 70.4% 70.4% 70.4% 70.4% 70.4% Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 All-Red Time (s) 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.5 5.5 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Recall Mode None None None None Min Min Min Min Min Act Effct Green (s) 10.4 10.4 86.8 86.8 86.8 86.8 86.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.36 0.11 0.89 0.05 0.42 0.63 Control Delay 33.8 33.0 3.4 18.5 1.3 13.4 6.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Total Delay 33.8 33.0 3.4 18.5 1.3 13.4 7.0 LOS C CABABA Approach Delay 33.8 33.0 17.3 7.5 Approach LOS C C B A Queue Length 50th (m) 6.2 5.8 1.6 164.2 0.5 3.4 62.0 Queue Length 95th (m) 17.9 17.3 4.6 #333.0 2.8 15.5 104.6 Internal Link Dist (m) 77.5 94.1 525.8 255.4 Turn Bay Length (m) 50.0 75.0 120.0 Base Capacity (vph) 412 412 401 1452 1140 159 1437 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0000096 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.11 0.89 0.05 0.42 0.67 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 104.3 Natural Cycle: 120 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.89 Intersection Signal Delay: 14.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.8% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Lanes, Volumes, Timings Total Projected 2026 PM 2: Longfields & Access/Kilspindie 07/24/2020 Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Splits and Phases: 2: Longfields & Access/Kilspindie

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Lanes, Volumes, Timings Total Projected 2026 PM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 07/24/2020

Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 273 481 24 393 182 109 381 360 804 Future Volume (vph) 273 481 24 393 182 109 381 360 804 Lane Group Flow (vph) 273 658 0 417 182 109 389 360 1676 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 7 4 8 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 8 2 6 Detector Phase 748882216 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 11.9 35.9 35.5 35.5 35.5 38.6 38.6 16.6 31.4 Total Split (s) 21.5 57.0 35.5 35.5 35.5 38.6 38.6 26.6 65.2 Total Split (%) 17.6% 46.6% 29.1% 29.1% 29.1% 31.6% 31.6% 21.8% 53.4% Yellow Time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 All-Red Time (s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Ped Ped Ped Ped Act Effct Green (s) 50.5 50.5 29.0 29.0 32.8 32.8 58.6 58.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.41 0.41 0.24 0.24 0.27 0.27 0.48 0.48 v/c Ratio 1.05 0.94 1.37 0.38 1.95 0.44 0.77 1.05 Control Delay 102.5 56.6 221.6 7.7 504.9 39.0 34.0 62.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 102.5 56.6 221.6 7.7 504.9 39.0 34.0 62.9 LOS FE FAFDCE Approach Delay 70.1 156.6 141.0 57.8 Approach LOS E F F E Queue Length 50th (m) ~56.6 146.4 ~131.8 0.0 ~40.5 41.0 55.9 ~209.0 Queue Length 95th (m) #110.4 #222.0 #192.8 17.7 #77.0 56.0 #81.9 #252.3 Internal Link Dist (m) 525.8 356.5 519.8 1117.7 Turn Bay Length (m) 85.0 75.0 90.0 240.0 Base Capacity (vph) 260 699 305 482 56 888 474 1597 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.05 0.94 1.37 0.38 1.95 0.44 0.76 1.05 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 122.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 122.2 Natural Cycle: 105 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.95 Intersection Signal Delay: 85.3 Intersection LOS: F Intersection Capacity Utilization 145.1% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Parsons Synchro 10 Report Lanes, Volumes, Timings Total Projected 2026 PM 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley 07/24/2020 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: 3: Prince of Wales & Longfields/Rideau Valley

Parsons Synchro 10 Report MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Golflinks FT 2026 PM]

Site Category: (None) Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HVSatn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/h South: Longfields 1 L2 13 0.0 0.951 11.2 LOS B 30.7 215.2 1.00 0.52 1.00 52.2 2 T1 1309 0.0 0.951 6.6 LOS A 30.7 215.2 1.00 0.52 1.00 52.2 3 R2 79 0.0 0.951 6.4 LOS A 30.7 215.2 1.00 0.52 1.00 51.1 Approach 1401 0.0 0.951 6.6 LOS A 30.7 215.2 1.00 0.52 1.00 52.2

East: Golflinks 4 L2 42 0.0 0.550 44.3 LOS D 5.2 36.2 1.00 1.12 1.32 36.2 5 T1 1 0.0 0.550 39.7 LOS D 5.2 36.2 1.00 1.12 1.32 36.2 6 R2 76 0.0 0.550 39.5 LOS D 5.2 36.2 1.00 1.12 1.32 35.7 Approach 119 0.0 0.550 41.2 LOS D 5.2 36.2 1.00 1.12 1.32 35.9

North: Longfields 7 L2 84 0.0 0.703 9.3 LOS A 9.9 69.1 0.45 0.43 0.45 54.5 8 T1 983 0.0 0.703 4.7 LOS A 9.9 69.1 0.45 0.43 0.45 54.5 9 R2 4 0.0 0.703 4.4 LOS A 9.9 69.1 0.45 0.43 0.45 53.2 Approach 1072 0.0 0.703 5.0 LOS A 9.9 69.1 0.45 0.43 0.45 54.5

West: RoadName 10 L2 4 0.0 0.018 17.8 LOS B 0.1 0.8 0.89 0.71 0.89 48.6 11 T1 1 0.0 0.018 13.1 LOS B 0.1 0.8 0.89 0.71 0.89 48.6 12 R2 3 0.0 0.018 12.9 LOS B 0.1 0.8 0.89 0.71 0.89 47.6 Approach 8 0.0 0.018 15.4 LOS B 0.1 0.8 0.89 0.71 0.89 48.2

All Vehicles 2600 0.0 0.951 7.6 LOS A 30.7 215.2 0.77 0.51 0.79 52.0

SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2018 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: PARSONS | Processed: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 4:35:41 PM Project: H:\ISO\476616\1000\DATA\Sidra\Kilspindie & Longfields.sip8 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 101 [Kilspindie Proj2026 PM] Kilspindie Projected 2026 PM Single Lane Longfields Site Category: (None) Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. Average ID Total HVSatn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/h South: Longfields 1 L2 45 2.0 0.933 12.7 LOS B 23.5 167.5 0.97 0.54 0.97 53.8 2 T1 1291 2.0 0.933 6.1 LOS A 23.5 167.5 0.97 0.54 0.97 59.8 3 R2 52 2.0 0.933 6.3 LOS A 23.5 167.5 0.97 0.54 0.97 51.2 Approach 1388 2.0 0.933 6.3 LOS A 23.5 167.5 0.97 0.54 0.97 59.2

East: Kilspindie 4 L2 25 2.0 0.242 26.3 LOS C 2.0 14.4 1.00 0.95 1.00 43.0 5 T1 5 2.0 0.242 20.1 LOS C 2.0 14.4 1.00 0.95 1.00 39.4 6 R2 27 2.0 0.242 20.9 LOS C 2.0 14.4 1.00 0.95 1.00 42.2 Approach 57 2.0 0.242 23.2 LOS C 2.0 14.4 1.00 0.95 1.00 42.3

North: Longfields 7 L2 67 2.0 0.647 11.2 LOS B 6.8 48.5 0.41 0.44 0.41 56.4 8 T1 858 2.0 0.647 4.6 LOS A 6.8 48.5 0.41 0.44 0.41 63.1 9 R2 44 2.0 0.647 4.8 LOS A 6.8 48.5 0.41 0.44 0.41 53.5 Approach 969 2.0 0.647 5.1 LOS A 6.8 48.5 0.41 0.44 0.41 62.0

West: Kilspindie 10 L2 27 2.0 0.088 13.2 LOS B 0.6 4.1 0.81 0.75 0.81 50.5 11 T1 5 2.0 0.088 7.0 LOS A 0.6 4.1 0.81 0.75 0.81 45.6 12 R2 27 2.0 0.088 7.8 LOS A 0.6 4.1 0.81 0.75 0.81 49.3 Approach 59 2.0 0.088 10.2 LOS B 0.6 4.1 0.81 0.75 0.81 49.5

All Vehicles 2473 2.0 0.933 6.3 LOS A 23.5 167.5 0.74 0.51 0.74 59.4