740 Springland Drive Transportation Impact Assessment [TIA]

Presented to:

Mr. Wally Dubyk Project Manager, Infrastructure Approvals City of Ottawa 110 Laurier Avenue West Ottawa, ON K1P 1J1

June 24th, 2019

CASTLEGLENN CONSULTANTS LTD. THIRD PARTY DISCLAIMER

This study has been prepared by Castleglenn Consultants Inc. (“CGI”) for the benefit of the Client to whom it is addressed. The information and data contained herein represents CGI’s best professional judgment in light of the knowledge and information available to CGI at the time of preparation. Except as required by law, this study and the information and data contained herein are to be treated as confidential and may be used and relied upon only by the Client, its officers and employees. CGI denies any liability whatsoever to other parties who may obtain access to this study for any injury, loss or damage suffered by such parties arising from their use of, or reliance upon, this study or any of its contents without the express written consent of CGI and the Client.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 SCOPING ...... 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 ...... 8 2.2 STUDY AREA AND TIME PERIODS ...... 8 2.2.1 Study Area ...... 8 2.2.2 Horizon Years...... 9 2.3 EXEMPTION REVIEW ...... 9 3.0 FORECASTING ...... 10 3.1 DEVELOPMENT-GENERATED TRAVEL DEMAND ...... 10 3.1.1 Trip Generation and Mode Shares ...... 10 3.1.2 Trip Distribution & Assignment ...... 12 3.2 BACKGROUND NETWORK TRAVEL DEMANDS ...... 12 3.2.1 Transportation Network Plans ...... 12 3.2.2 General Background Growth ...... 14 3.2.3 Other Area Development ...... 14 3.3 DEMAND RATIONALIZATION ...... 14 4.0 ANALYSIS / TIA STRATEGY ...... 15 4.1 DEVELOPMENT DESIGN ...... 15 4.1.1 Design for Sustainable Modes ...... 15 4.1.2 Circulation and Access ...... 15 4.2 PARKING ...... 15 4.2.1 Parking Supply ...... 15 4.3 BOUNDARY STREET DESIGN ...... 16 4.4 ACCESS INTERSECTION DESIGN ...... 18 4.4.1 Location and Design of Access ...... 18 4.4.2 Intersection Control ...... 18 4.4.3 Intersection Design ...... 18 4.5 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) ...... 18 4.5.1 Context for TDM ...... 18 4.5.2 Need and Opportunity ...... 19 4.5.3 TDM Program ...... 19 4.6 NEIGHBOURHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT (NTM) ...... 19 4.6.1 Adjacent Neighbourhood...... 19 4.7 TRANSIT ...... 21 4.7.1 Route Capacity ...... 21 4.7.2 Transit Priority ...... 21 4.8 INTERSECTION DESIGN...... 21 5.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS & CONCLUSION ...... 23

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page i DRAFT TIA June 2019

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) report is to investigate the traffic impacts associated with the proposed three apartment buildings located at 740 Springland Drive. This TIA report complied with the City of Ottawa Transportation Impact Assessment Guidelines (June 2017). The screening form assessment indicated that the development does meet the trip generation trigger (Appendix A).

2.0 SCOPING

2.1 EXISTING AND PLANNED CONDITIONS 2.1.1 Proposed Development The development will be part of the existing Norberry residential complex bordered by Springland Drive to north and west and Norberry Crescent to the east and south (See Exhibit 2-1). The residential development would comprise of two 4.5-story buildings and a single 4-story building adjacent to Norberry Crescent, for a total of 231 units. The site currently is served by four (4) accesses, three on Norberry Crescent (Accesses 1-thru-3) and a single access on Springland Drive (Access #4), which would remain the same in the future. The existing buildings also include a one-way circular driveway for drop-offs/pick-offs. The proposed site plan illustrates an addition of visitor parking spaces along the existing circular driveways. The new 231 units would use the existing accesses and no changes are proposed to the private approaches. The following provides a brief description of the proposed development: • Existing Land Use Permitted: The existing land is currently zoned as Residential Fifth Density Zone1 (R5B [2459] H (18)). • Relevant Planning Regulations: The application will be submitted as a site plan application. • Estimated Date of Occupancy: The date of occupancy is unknown at this stage. • Planned Phasing of Development: For the purpose of this traffic study, the site is anticipated to be build-out in a single phase.

1 City of Ottawa Zoning By-law 2008-250

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -1- DRAFT TIA June 2019

#4

#1

#2

#3

Exhibit 2.1: Proposed Site Plan

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -2- DRAFT TIA May 2019

2.1.2 Existing Conditions The study area is located within the urban road network of Ottawa in the mature neighborhood of Riverside Park, just east of Riverside Drive. The land use in the vicinity of the proposed site is for the most part residential. Study Area Roadways

The following provides an overview of the roadways supporting the proposed development: • Riverside Drive and Walkley Road: are defined as arterial roadways with 4-lane cross-sections. Riverside Drive (posted speed 60 km/hr.) is oriented in a north-south direction, while Walkley Road (posted speed 50 km/hr.) is oriented in the east-west direction. • Springland Drive, Ridgewood Road and Flannery Drive (North of Springland Drive): are defined as collector roadways with 2-lanes of travel (one-per-direction). Springland Drive has a posted speed limit of 40 km/hr. and provides connectivity from the Norberry Residences to the arterial road network. • Norberry Crescent: is a local road adjacent to the proposed development and connects to Springland Drive. This roadway provides for 2 lanes of travel (one-per- direction). Existing Intersections Table 2.1 below depicts the existing configuration for the study area intersections. Table 2.1: Study Area Intersections Intersections Configuration Picture Ri ve rside rside Traffic Control Signal

2-thru lanes per direction along N-S Dr

Riverside Dr / Auxiliary lanes along the N-S direction Ridgewood Ave Single lane per direction in E-W direction Ridgewood Ave Dedicated EB-LT lane Channelized RT lanes in all directions S p ri ngland Dr ngland

Ridgewood Ave / All-Way STOP Control T-Intersection

Springland Dr Single approach in all directions Ridgewood Ave

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -3- DRAFT TIA June 2019

Mooney’s Bay Pl / All-Way STOP Control Intersection Springland Dr Single approach in all directions Mooney’s Bay Pl Springland Dr Springland Dr Springland

Traffic Control Signal 2-lanes per direction with shared Walkley Rd / thru/left/right turn movements in E-W

Springland Dr direction Single approach in N-S direction with Walkley Rd dedicated SB-LT lane Flan ne ry

Dr

Flannery Dr / All-Way STOP Control Intersection Springland Dr Springland Dr Single approach in all directions

Existing Transit Provisions

Exhibit 2.2 indicates the bus routes within the general vicinity of the proposed development. There are five bus stops along Springland Drive between the two Norberry Crescent intersections that is frequented by the regular route number 87. The proposed site is also within a km of Mooney’s Bay station and Heron station and is situated west of the existing O’Train /Transitway corridor. Therefore, the community is currently well served in terms of transit provisions.

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -4- DRAFT TIA June 2019

Exhibit 2.2: Existing OC Transpo Routes (Extract from OC Transpo April 22nd, 2019 Map)

Existing Cycling Facilities

Norberry Crescent and Springland Drive have no dedicated bike facilities. Cyclists share the road with vehicular traffic. Riverside Road and Walkley Road are classified as a Spine Route in the vicinity of the proposed site. Existing Pedestrian Facilities

Sidewalks are available along Springland Drive Road, west/north side of Norberry Crescent, Ridgewood Avenue and Riverside Drive to facilitate pedestrian movements.

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -5- DRAFT TIA June 2019

Existing Collision Information

Five (5) year (January 1st, 2013 to December 31st, 2017) collision information were reviewed for the study area intersections. The collision information provides the date and time of each collision, the environmental condition at the time of the collision, the type of collision (i.e. angle collision, rear-end), the level of damage involved, vehicle details (truck, passenger vehicle, etc.), vehicle path/maneuver characteristics and the number of pedestrians involved (in the collision). The following provides a summary of the collisions: • Riverside Drive / Ridgewood Avenue: A total of 18 collisions occurred at this intersection in the past 5 years and 67% (12) of collisions were rear-end collisions (7 in the northbound direction and 5 in southbound direction). Sixteen (16) resulted in in property damage and two (2) were non-fatal. None of the collisions involved pedestrians. • Flannery Drive N / Springland Drive N (All-Way Stop Control): A total of 2 collisions occurred at this intersection in the past 5 years, where both resulted in property damage. None of the collisions involved pedestrians. • Walkley Road / Springland Drive: A total of 6 collisions (2 rear-ends, 2 turning movements, single vehicle/other and angle collisions) occurred at this intersection in the past 5 years. Five (5) resulted in property damage and a single accident was non-fatal. None of the collisions involved pedestrians. • Springland Drive / Mooney’s Bay Place: A single collision occurred at this intersection in the past five year (angle collision and non-fatal). The single collision did not involve pedestrians. • Springland Drive / Ridgewood Avenue: No collisions were recorded at this intersection in the past five years. Existing Traffic Volumes

Existing traffic counts were obtained from the City of Ottawa for the following intersections: • Riverside Drive / Ridgewood Avenue; and • Walkley Road / Springland Drive.

Traffic counts were undertaken by Castleglenn Consultants during the morning and afternoon peak periods at the following intersections: • Springland Drive / Mooney’s Bay Place (April 23rd, 2019); • Springland Drive N / Flannery Drive N (April 25th, 2019); and • Ridgewood Avenue / Springland Drive (May 30th, 2017). Exhibit 2.3 illustrates the existing traffic volumes for the study area intersections.

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -6- DRAFT TIA June 2019

Exhibit 2.3: Existing Traffic Volumes (Format: Morning Peak Hour (Afternoon Peak Hour) 740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -7- DRAFT TIA June 2019

2.1.3 Planned Conditions

A review of the City of Ottawa’s Transportation Master Plan [TMP] (Nov. 2013) (Map 5) does indicate that the rail corridor east of the proposed site would be extended further south of Leitrim Road to Riverside South. The site is also within 1.5km of the future Walkley Road Station. It also should be noted that Heron Road (between Riverside Road to Woodroffe Ave) is also a future bus rapid transit corridor with future transit stations. Other Adjacent Development Initiatives

A review of the City of Ottawa development application website was undertaken to determine if there are any adjacent developments that would impact the study area corridors and intersections. The following developments were found to be in close proximity of the proposed site: • 3071 Riverside Road (CTS/TIS – April 2017): This development would be located south of the proposed site at the south-east corner of Riverside Drive / Mooney’s Bay Place. The development would see 63 townhomes, 40 apartments, 522 senior/retirement apartments, day care and approximately 1,800 m2 of round retail. • 2887 Riverside Drive (Transportation Overview – June 2017): This development would see replacing the existing Youth Services Bureau Housing with 39 supportive housing apartments and office space. The Transportation Overview concluded that this development generates less than 75 vehicles and no significant impact is expected on traffic conditions in the study area. • 770 Brookfield Road (TIA Screening and Scoping Report – Nov. 10th, 2017): This development would be located south of Brookfield Road and east of Riverside Drive. The development would consist of two phases: • Phase 1 would consist of 355 apartment units and ground floor retail (~13,600 SF); and • Phase 2 will consist of 355 apartment units.

2.2 STUDY AREA AND TIME PERIODS

2.2.1 Study Area The study would analyze the following intersections2: • Traffic Control Signal Intersections: Walkley Road / Springland Drive and Riverside Drive / Ridgewood Avenue. • Stop Controlled Intersections: Springland Drive N / Flannery Drive N; Springland Drive / Ridgewood Avenue and Springland Drive / Mooney’s Bay Place.

2 Recommendation from Traffic Engineering Group - E-mail from Mr. Wally Dubyk, City Transportation Project Manager (April 18th, 2019)

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -8- DRAFT TIA June 2019

Time Periods

The study will analyze two-time periods (morning and afternoon peak hours) of travel demand as they were envisioned to represent the “worst-case” scenario in terms of traffic volumes.

2.2.2 Horizon Years The traffic study will analyze the build-out horizon year of the development and 5-year post development as per the City of Ottawa TIA guidelines.

2.3 EXEMPTION REVIEW

Table 2.2 is an extract from the TIA Guidelines (2017) in regards to possible reduction in scope of work of the traffic study. We would request the City to exempt sections 4.1.3, 4.2.2, 4.5 and 4.8 (given the development does not generate more than 200 person-trips) from the TIA report.

Table 2.2: Extract from TIA Guidelines (2017) Include Module In TIA Yes No Yes No, parking study was undertaken part of zoning application

Yes

Yes

No

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -9- DRAFT TIA June 2019

3.0 FORECASTING

3.1 DEVELOPMENT-GENERATED TRAVEL DEMAND The following sections represents the traffic forecasting methodology.

3.1.1 Trip Generation and Mode Shares

The TRANS Trip Generation Study (2009) was used to determine the site traffic volumes for the proposed development. Table below is an extract from the TRANS Trip Generation Study.

The proposed development falls within the Urban (Inside the Greenbelt) area. The ITE land use code 223 was used to determine the automobile trip generation: • 231 units x 0.24 = 55 vehicle trips during the AM peak hour; and • 231 units x 0.28 = 65 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour. Once the vehicle trip generations were determined, the vehicle trips were converted to persons-trip using the table below (Table 3.13 from 2009 Trans Trip Generation Study).

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -10- DRAFT TIA June 2019

• Apartment: 55 vehicle trips / 0.37 = 149 persons-trip during the morning peak hour and 65 vehicle trips / 0.40 = 163 persons-trip during the afternoon peak hour.

The 2011 Trans OD Survey Report was reviewed to get an understanding of the existing travel mode shares for the Alta Vista Area (within the location of the proposed development). Table 3.1 depicts the existing and future travel demand for the study area:

Table 3.1 Future Travel Mode Share Targets [Table 5 of the TIA] Existing Mode Share Future Mode Share Mode Share Rationale AM Peak PM Peak AM/PM Auto mode share assumed to be on average Auto Driver 50% 57% 57% similar/close to the existing condition Auto Passenger 12% 15% 12% For analysis purposes, transit share was assumed to remain close to existing condition. Transit share could increase in future: • The proposed site is within a km of Mooney’s Transit 30% 23% 28% Bay station and Heron station. • The site is also within 1.5km of the future Walkley Road Station. • Heron Road is a future bus rapid transit corridor with future transit stations. Walking 1% 1% 1% Cycling 3% 2% 2% Other 4% 1% 0% “Other” travel mode redistributed to auto driver (taxis, garbage trucks, etc.)

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -11- DRAFT TIA June 2019

The future travel mode share split was applied to the proposed development. Table 3.2 below depicts the total trips generated for each mode share. The auto mode was determined to be approximately 60 vph during the peak direction of peak hour. Table 3.2: Site Traffic Volumes by Mode Share AM PM Travel Mode Mode Share In Out Total In Out Total Auto Driver 57% 22 63 85 57 36 93 Auto Passenger 12% 5 13 18 12 7 19 Transit 28% 11 31 42 28 18 46 Walking 1% 0 1 1 1 1 2 Cycling 2% 1 2 3 2 1 3 Total Person Trips 100% 39 110 149 100 63 163 Net Auto Trips 22 63 85 57 36 93 Directional split was referenced from ITE 10th Edition, Land Use 221 • AM: 26% In / 74% Out • PM: 61% In / 39% Out

3.1.2 Trip Distribution & Assignment The site traffic volumes were distributed according to the existing travel patterns: • 25% of the site traffic volumes would head to/from west by way of Ridgewood Avenue; • 35% of the site traffic volumes would head to/from south by way of Springland Drive; and • 40% of the site traffic volumes would head to/from east-north by way of Flannery Drive.

The site traffic volumes were distributed and assigned on the road network (Exhibit 3.1).

3.2 BACKGROUND NETWORK TRAVEL DEMANDS This section of the outlines the background network travel demand assumptions.

3.2.1 Transportation Network Plans As noted in Section 2.1.3 of this TIA document, the City of Ottawa’s TMP indicate several transit initiatives within the study area that include: extension of the rail corridor east of the proposed site to Riverside South; the future Walkley Road Station; and the future BRT along Heron Road (between Riverside Road to Woodroffe Ave). The TMP also indicates that Airport Parkway is proposed to be widened from 2-to-4 lanes (Phase1: Between Hunt Club & Brookfield / Phase 2: Between Hunt Club & MacDonald-Cartier International Airport) providing additional north-south capacity.

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -12- DRAFT TIA June 2019

40%

25%

35%

Exhibit 3.1: Site Traffic Distribution and Volumes

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -13- DRAFT TIA June 2019

3.2.2 General Background Growth The Transportation Master Plan population growth for the Inner Suburbs was reviewed to determine the general growth within the study area. It was determined that on average the annual growth within the Inner Suburbs is less than 1 percent (given the area is for the most part developed and mature). To remain conservative, a one percent annual growth would be applied along Riverside Drive.

3.2.3 Other Area Development

Section 2.1.3 (Other Adjacent Developments) identifies the new adjacent developments within the study area. These adjacent developments are anticipated to have negligible impact along collector and local roads within the study area (Springland Drive, Norberry Crescent).

3.3 DEMAND RATIONALIZATION This section rationalizes the assumed future travel demands for the study area to determine if there are any auto capacity limitations of the transportation network. The initial projections (for analysis purposes assumed build-out to be 2021) indicates that the proposed site is anticipated to generate less than 25 vph during the peak direction of peak hour of travel demand on any of the main adjacent roadway links (See Exhibit 3.1). This translates to an average of a single vehicle every two minutes, which is anticipated to result in negligible traffic impacts on the study area intersections and corridors. The northbound movement at the Riverside Drive / Ridgewood Avenue intersection does operate at capacity (NB-TH = 2,080 vph / volume-to-capacity ratio = 0.92) assuming the existing morning peak hour of travel demand. This is a pre-existing condition and the impact of the site traffic volumes on the NB movement is anticipated to be negligible. As noted earlier in this TIA (section 3.2.1), additional transit and roadway infrastructure (widening of Airport Parkway) are planned within area that could reduce auto demand and provide additional roadway capacity.

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -14- DRAFT TIA June 2019

4.0 ANALYSIS / TIA STRATEGY

4.1 DEVELOPMENT DESIGN This section of the report reviews the transportation network elements within the vicinity of the proposed site to ensure they provide efficient access for all users and encourages non- auto mode share.

4.1.1 Design for Sustainable Modes The City of Ottawa’s TDM-Supportive Development Design and Infrastructure Checklist was completed for the proposed development (See Appendix “B”). The proposed site is in close proximity of five bus stops along Springland Drive between the two Norberry Crescent intersections that is frequented by the regular route number 87. The site is also within a km of Mooney’s Bay station and Heron station and is situated west of the existing O’Train /Transitway corridor. The City of Ottawa’s TMP indicate several transit initiatives within the study area that include: extension of the rail corridor east of the proposed site to Riverside South; the future Walkley Road Station; and the future BRT along Heron Road (between Riverside Road to Woodroffe Ave). Sidewalks are available along Springland Drive Road, Norberry Crescent, Ridgewood Avenue and Riverside Drive to facilitate pedestrian movements. The proposed development provides for a total of 144 bike stalls where over 40% are secure and indoor bike stalls to further encourage non-auto mode share.

4.1.2 Circulation and Access Loading, short term delivery, emergency services and garbage pick-ups would be accommodated within the internal site roads.

4.2 PARKING

4.2.1 Parking Supply The development provides the following parking supply for the entire complex based on the approved rezoning application3: • Residential Tenant Parking: A rate of 0.66 stalls-per-unit for the entire complex (761 existing units plus 231 proposed units). This translates to a tenant parking requirement of 655 stalls [0.66 x 992 units]. • Residential Visitor Parking: A rate of 0.1 per units for visitors, which translates to a visitor parking requirement of 98 stalls [0.1 x 992 units].

3 By-law No. 2018 – 159. Also, a Parking Study (Jan. 16th, 2018) was undertaken during the rezoning application to substantiate and determine the number of stalls utilized and required for the existing site and proposed buildings. The parking survey indicated that the current parking utilization was about 0.61 stalls-per-unit.

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -15- DRAFT TIA June 2019

4.3 BOUNDARY STREET DESIGN

Mobility: Multi-Modal Level of Service (MMLOS) Analysis

The Multi-Modal Level of Service (MMLOS) guidelines was used to evaluate the segment level of service for all mode of transportation (pedestrians, cyclists, transit, trucks) within the immediate study area. The streets that border the site include Springland Drive (between Norberry Crescent S and Norberry Crescent N) and Norberry Crescent. These streets were reviewed to determine the segment MMLOS guidelines. 1) Pedestrian LOS • Springland Drive accommodates a 1.5m wide sidewalk on the east/south side of corridor with at least a 2m boulevard. The corridor accommodates parking with vehicle traffic volumes (AADT) over 3,000 and posted speed of 40 km/hr. This results in a Pedestrian LOS “C”. • Norberry Crescent accommodates a 1.5m wide sidewalk on the north/east side of the corridor. The east-west section of Norberry accommodates a boulevard greater than 2m wide. The north-south segment does not accommodate a boulevard. Traffic volumes along the corridor are estimated to be low (less than 3,000 AADT). The section of the corridor with the boulevard results in a PLOS “C”, while the section without boulevard results in PLOS “E”. ° It is understood that the sidewalks fronting the proposed three buildings (along Norberry Crescent) would be improved to accommodate a 2m sidewalk width. This would result in PLOS “A” (east-west segment of Norberry with Boulevard) and PLOS “B” (north-south segment of Norberry without a boulevard) in front of the buildings. 2) Bicycle LOS

Bike facilities along Springland Drive and Norberry Crescent are limited to share use. The BLOS along Springland Drive and Norberry Crescent result in BLOS “B” and “A”, respectively. (This assumes mixed traffic with posted speeds of no more than 40 km/hr.) 3) Transit LOS

Springland Drive is a collector roadway that accommodates driveways and accesses serving the surrounding residential developments. Bus route 87 provides service along the corridor to the surrounding residents. The TLOS for the roadway segment is difficult to predict in this situation. However, the section of transit route has limited driveways and accesses, therefore TLOS can be predicted to be “D”. 4) Truck LOS

Springland Drive and Norberry Crescent are not truck routes, therefore no TkLOS was assigned to the corridors.

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -16- DRAFT TIA June 2019

5) Summary of MMLOS

Table 4.2 depicts the MMLOS for all modes of transportation for the study area corridors and provides a comparison to the target LOS shown in the MMLOS guidelines4.

Table 4.2: Segment MMLOS Summary1 Pedestrian (PLOS) Bicycle (BLOS) Transit (TLOS) Truck (TkLOS) Intersections PLOS Target BLOS Target TLOS Target TkLOS Target Norberry No C/E2 C A B D NA NA Crescent Target No Springland Drive C C B B D NA NA Target 1- OP Designation / Policy Area – General Urban Area 2- Currently the sidewalk along Norberry is 1.5m wide, which results in PLOS “C” (east-west segment of Norberry with a boulevard) and PLOS “E” (north-south segment of Norberry without a boulevard). However, the sidewalk in front of the 3 proposed buildings is proposed to be improved and width increased to 2m. This would improve PLOS to “A” (east-west segment of Norberry) and “B” (north-south segment of Norberry) in front of the 3 proposed buildings.

All modes of transportation meet or exceed the target (where available) assuming the General Urban Area except the north-south segment of Norberry Crescent. However, the north- south segment of Norberry (fronting the proposed building) would be improved to a 2m wide sidewalk resulting in a PLOS “B”, which would meet the target. Road Safety

The collision information in the past five years were reviewed for the boundary streets (such as Springland Drive) to identify any existing safety concerns. A collision pattern involves more than six collisions in similar directions and impact types. No collision patterns were identified for the boundary streets.

Neighbourhood Traffic Management (NTM)

The proposed site is anticipated to add during the peak hour of travel demand: • Approximately 30 vph along Springland Drive south of the proposed site; • Less than 35 vph along Flannery Drive north of Springland Drive; • Less than 25 vph along Ridgewood Avenue; • Less than 15 vph along Riverside Drive; Based on the above, the proposed site traffic volumes are not anticipated to result in significant impact on traffic operation.

4 Multi-Modal Level of Service Guidelines, September 15th, 2015 Exhibit 22, General Urban Area

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -17- DRAFT TIA June 2019

4.4 ACCESS INTERSECTION DESIGN

4.4.1 Location and Design of Access The proposed buildings would be served by the existing four site accesses, one from Springland Drive and three from Norberry Crescent. The clear throat length provided for the Springland Drive (Collector Road) is approximately 30m, which exceeds the minimum required throat length for apartments over 200 units5.

4.4.2 Intersection Control Vehicles exiting the site accesses would have to yield to on-coming traffic before merging onto Springland Drive and Norberry Crescent.

4.4.3 Intersection Design The existing site accesses are private driveways that would serve the entire residential complex and are anticipated to operate at satisfactory level of service.

4.5 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM)

4.5.1 Context for TDM The travel patterns for the Alta Vista within the 2011 Trans O-D Survey Report were reviewed. It was determined that: • Morning Peak Hour: Approximately 60% of trips from the District are work related and just over 20% are school related during the morning peak period. While trips within the District are work (33%) or school related (35%); and • Afternoon Peak Hour: Approximately 60% of trips to and within the District are return home trips during the afternoon peak period. Over 20% of trips to and within the District are leisure and shopping related. The trip purposes are expected to remain similar to existing patterns noted above in that trips to/from the proposed development predominately would be work / school related during peak hour of travel demand with some trips being leisure and shopping related during the afternoon peak period. The likelihood of a residential building site traffic to be higher than expected is low. The proposed development does not fall within the Transit-Oriented Development zone as per the Official Plan Annex 6 Urban map. The proposed development accommodates 231 units with 26 studio units (11%), 149 one-bedroom units (65%) and 56 two-bedroom units

5 Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads, Table 8.9.3

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -18- DRAFT TIA June 2019

(24%). To best of Castleglenn’s knowledge, the proposed development is not expected to have any age restrictions.

4.5.2 Need and Opportunity The existing and future mode share assumed for the proposed development are depicted in table 3.2. It is assumed that auto mode share would remain unchanged from today. Albeit, transit share could increase in the future (reducing auto demand) with the advent of: • Existing O’Train /Transitway corridor situated east of the site; • Mooney’s Bay station and Heron station (within a km of the site); • Future Walkley Road Station (within 1.5km of the site); and • Future bus rapid transit corridor stations along Heron Road. It should also be appreciated that: • sidewalks exist within the study area corridors to accommodate pedestrian activities; • indoor and secured bike spaces are available within the building; and • Riverside Road and Walkley Road are classified as a Spine Route in the vicinity of the proposed site. The proposed development provides sufficient parking supply that meets and exceeds the existing utilization rate (as per Additional Parking Survey Study – Jan. 16th, 2018 undertaken as part of the approved zoning application) should auto demand be higher than anticipated.

4.5.3 TDM Program Appendix “B” illustrates the TDM program checklist for the proposed development. The development is encouraged to provide transit and active mode of transportation information to its tenants for whom other modes of travel is an option. The proposed site offers opportunities for other modes of travel such as sidewalks surrounding the development, secured bike stalls and close by transit stops with regular transit service.

4.6 NEIGHBOURHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT (NTM)

4.6.1 Adjacent Neighbourhood The proposed buildings would use the current accesses that the residential complex offers. These include three access points along Norberry Crescent (local road) and a single access along Springland Drive (collector road). Springland Drive connects to Walkley Road (arterial road) and also to Flannery Drive and Ridgewood Avenue (both collector roads). Norberry Crescent connects to Springland Drive from north and south.

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -19- DRAFT TIA June 2019

Exhibit 4.1 illustrates the link volumes along the local and collector boundary roads in the vicinity of the proposed site. Norberry Crescent currently accommodates on-street parking, sharp 90-degree bend curve, stop signs on either end of the street, several driveways and accesses. All these discourage speeding and cut-through traffic through the local road. The added traffic along the local is not anticipated to result in traffic operation concerns.

Springland Drive (collector road) between Norberry Crescent S and Flannery Drive accommodates two All-Way Stop controls along with provisions for on-street parking. The added traffic on the collector road is not anticipated to be significant.

385 vph 34 vph

34 vph

3 65 vph

. 34 vph 350 vph 4 vph Bldg

160 vph

22 vph Bldg. 1 Bldg. 2

95 vph 49 vph 360 vph 31vph

Existing Traffic (two-way) Site Traffic (two-way) Exhibit 4.1: Existing and Site Link Traffic Volumes

Therefore, the role/classification of the local and collector roads (Norberry Crescent and Springland Drive) are not anticipated to change or require additional traffic management measures.

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -20- DRAFT TIA June 2019

4.7 TRANSIT

4.7.1 Route Capacity Bus service is currently provided along Springland Drive within the vicinity of the proposed site. There are five bus stops along Springland Drive between the two Norberry Crescent intersections that is frequented by the regular route number 87. The proposed site is also within a km of Mooney’s Bay station and Heron station and is situated west of the existing O’Train /Transitway corridor. The projected transit passenger demand generated by the proposed development were approximately 30 passengers in the peak direction of peak hour. As noted in Section 2.1.3 of this TIA document, the City of Ottawa’s TMP indicate several transit initiatives within the study area that include: extension of the rail corridor east of the proposed site to Riverside South; the future Walkley Road Station; and the future BRT along Heron Road (between Riverside Road to Woodroffe Ave). Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the current and future transit provisions would accommodate the future demand of the development. The TMP also indicates that Airport Parkway is proposed to be widened from 2-to-4 lanes (Phase1: Between Hunt Club & Brookfield / Phase 2: Between Hunt Club & MacDonald-Cartier International Airport) providing additional north-south capacity.

4.7.2 Transit Priority The proposed development would be served by the existing accesses located along Norberry Crescent (3) and Springland Drive (1). Three of the existing accesses are located along Norberry Crescent, a local road. The anticipated additional transit passengers are anticipated to have negligible impact on transit travel times.

4.8 INTERSECTION DESIGN Synchro 10TM software was used to analyze the study area intersections for both morning and afternoon peak hours of travel demand. For the purpose of this analysis, a volume to capacity (v/c) ratio greater than 0.90 was considered unsatisfactory.

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -21- DRAFT TIA June 2019

Table 4.3: Intersection Capacity Analysis Results Morning Peak Hour Afternoon Peak Hour Critical Approach Critical Approach Intersections Overall Overall LOS, LOS, LOS Movement LOS Movement V/C V/C Existing Traffic Analysis Riverside Dr / Ridgewood Ave B NB-TH D, 0.92 B SB-TH A, 0.78 Walkley Rd / Springland Dr A SB-LT C, 0.41 B SB-LT D, 0.83 Springland Dr / Mooney’s Bay Pl A NB A, 0.13 A SB A, 0.33 Springland Dr / Ridgewood Ave A NB A, 0.16 A SB A, 0.32 Springland Dr / Flannery Dr A EB A, 0.25 A SB A, 0.32 Build-out (2021) Traffic Analysis Riverside Dr / Ridgewood Ave C NB-TH C, 0.94 B SB-TH B, 0.77 Walkley Rd / Springland Dr A SB-LT C, 0.47 B SB-LT D, 0.83 Springland Dr / Mooney’s Bay Pl A NB A, 0.14 A SB A, 0.35 Springland Dr / Ridgewood Ave A NB A, 0.17 A SB A, 0.33 Springland Dr / Flannery Dr A EB A, 0.28 A SB A, 0.36 5-year post development (2026) Analysis Riverside Dr / Ridgewood Ave C NB-TH D, 1.02 B SB-TH B, 0.77 Walkley Rd / Springland Dr A SB-LT C, 0.47 B SB-LT D, 0.84 Springland Dr / Mooney’s Bay Pl A NB A, 0.14 A SB A, 0.35 Springland Dr / Ridgewood Ave A NB A, 0.17 A SB A, 0.33 Springland Dr / Flannery Dr A EB A, 0.28 A SB A, 0.36

All of the study area intersections operate at an overall satisfactory level of service of LOS “C” or better. The northbound movement at the Riverside Drive / Ridgewood Avenue intersection does operate at capacity (AM NB-TH = 2,080 vph / volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio = 0.92) assuming the existing morning peak hour of travel demand. This is a pre- existing condition and the impact of the site traffic volumes (less than 5 vph on the NB right- turn movement) on the NB movement is anticipated to be negligible. The v/c ratio is anticipated to increase slightly as background traffic volumes increase over time (AM NB- TH 5-year post development traffic = 2,300 vph, where 220 vph are as a result of background traffic growth). Appendix “D” illustrates the detailed Synchro intersection capacity analysis sheets along with the MMLOS estimates for the traffic-controlled signal intersections. In summary, the intersection MMLOS indicate:

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -22- DRAFT TIA June 2019

Riverside Drive / Ridgewood Avenue:

• The overall intersection pedestrian LOS results in LOS “E”. PLOS target is difficult to achieve at any intersection given the PLOS is based on multiple factors such as conflicting movements, crossing distance, cycling length, walking time, etc. It should be noted that PLOS “E” occurs at the north and south approaches predominantly due to the wide pavement width (2-lanes at each approach, auxiliary lanes, etc.). • The north-south bike LOS along Riverside Drive results in LOS “D”, which is relative to the right-turn configuration. Cyclists turning left from Riverside Drive onto Ridgewood Avenue were found to result in LOS “F” as they have to cross 2 travel lanes to make a left-turn. Despite the poor LOS, it should be emphasized that cyclists also have the option of utilizing the multi-use pathway (Rideau River Eastern Pathway) west of Riverside Drive. • For the most part, transit route 87 makes a right-turn movement from Riverside Drive onto Ridgewood Avenue to serve the residential community east of Riverside Drive. At two occasions during the peak period (once at around 7am and again at 3:20pm) route 87 takes a different route and heads northbound along Riverside Drive and turns onto Brookfield Road. The transit LOS at the northbound approach is estimated (from Synchro delay) as LOS “D” during the existing and build-out conditions. As background development progresses within the study area, this level of service could reduce to LOS “F due to the heavy northbound movement along Riverside Drive during the morning peak hour. Walkley Road / Springland Drive:

• The overall intersection pedestrian LOS results in LOS “D”, which is due to the east-west approaches (2-lanes at each approach). • There are no dedicated right-turn lanes along all approaches. Cyclists turning left from Walkley Road were found to result in LOS “D” as they have to cross a single travel lane to make a left-turn. • Transit route 290 (peak period) travels from/to Walkley and Springland Drive. The SB left-turn from Springland Drive onto Walkley Road does experience delays due to the heavy left-turn movement (~346 vph existing conditions). This results in LOS “E” during the afternoon peak hour. The frequency of buses at the SB left-turn movement was estimated to be 7 times during the 3-hour peak period (4pm to 7pm) and 3 times during the peak hour (4:30pm to 5:30pm) of travel demand.

5.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS & CONCLUSION The TIA report yields the following findings: • The proposed site traffic volumes are not anticipated to result in significant impact on traffic operation. • All of the study area intersections operate at an overall satisfactory level of service. The northbound movement at the Riverside Drive / Ridgewood Avenue intersection

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -23- DRAFT TIA June 2019

does operate at capacity. This is a pre-existing condition and the impact of the site traffic volumes on the NB movement is anticipated to be negligible. ° Additional transit and roadway infrastructure (widening of Airport Parkway) are planned within area that could reduce auto demand and provide additional roadway capacity. • All modes of transportation meet or exceed the target assuming the General Urban Area except the north-south segment of Norberry Crescent. However, the north-south segment of Norberry (fronting the proposed building) would be improved to a 2m wide sidewalk resulting in a PLOS “B”, which would meet the MMLOS target. • Northbound Route 87 along Riverside Drive was found to experience increased delays during the morning peak hour as background development progresses within the study area. • The role/classification of the local and collector roads are not anticipated to change or require additional traffic management measures. • The current and future transit provisions are anticipated to accommodate the future demand of the development. The additional transit passengers are anticipated to have negligible impact on transit travel times. The results indicate that the City of Ottawa should be encouraged to assemble the appropriate conditions that would permit the development application to proceed.

Yours Truly,

Arman Matti, P. Eng. Sr. Transportation Engineer June 2019

740 Springland Drive – Apartment Buildings Page -24- DRAFT TIA June 2019

Appendix A

Screening Form

Appendix A

Transportation Impact Assessment Screening Form

2460 Lancaster Road, Suite 200, Ottawa, Ontario, K1B 4S5 Tel: 613-731-4052

City of Ottawa 2017 TIA Guidelines Screening Form

Mr. Wally Dubyk April 17th, 2019 Project Manager, City of Ottawa 110 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa, ON, K1G 6J9

Please see below the completed screening form for the proposed Norberry residential development located at 740 Springland Drive in Ottawa. The development will consist of an addition of three buildings, 225 residential units to the existing 761-unit apartment Complex.

1. Description of Proposed Development

Municipal Address 740 Springland Drive Description of Location The development will be part of the existing Norberry residential complex bordered by Springland Drive to north and west and Norberry Crescent to the east and south Land Use Classification Residential Development Size (units) ~225 units Development Size (m2) Unknown Number of Accesses and The proposed buildings will be served by the existing four (4) Locations accesses: • three on Norberry Crescent; and • a single access on Springland Drive. Phase of Development Unknown at this stage Buildout Year Unknown

2. Trip Generation Trigger

The development will consist of about 225 units in the form of three buildings. The proposed development size is greater than the minimum threshold size (of 90 units) for apartment building and therefore, the Trip Generation Trigger is satisfied. The persons-trip were determined using Trans Trip Generation Residential Trip Rate Report, which resulted in a total of 146 persons-trip in morning and 158 person-trip in afternoon peak hours of travel demand. The Trans OD Survey was used to get an understanding of the existing travel modes within the Alta Vista area. Table below indicates the existing travel modes and the anticipated future travel modes for AM and PM peak hours. It is assumed transit mode share would remain around 30 percent given the proposed site is within a km of confederation station and Huron station and is situated west of the existing O’train /Transitway corridor. Based on the assumptions below, the auto trips are anticipated to be 80 vph and 87 vph (two-way) during the morning and afternoon peak hours of travel demand, respectively. Transportation Impact Assessment Screening Form

2460 Lancaster Road, Suite 200, Ottawa, Ontario, K1B 4S5 Tel: 613-731-4052

Existing Mode Share Future Mode Share Mode Share AM Peak PM Peak AM/PM Auto Driver 50% 57% 55% Auto Passenger 12% 15% 12% Transit 30% 23% 28% Walking 1% 1% 1% Cycling 3% 2% 2% Other 4% 1% 2%

3. Location Triggers

Yes No Does the development propose a new driveway to a boundary street that is designated as part of the City’s Transit Priority, Rapid Transit or Spine X Bicycle Networks? Is the development in a Design Priority Area (DPA) or Transit-oriented X Development (TOD) zone? * *DPA and TOD are identified in the City of Ottawa Official Plan (DPA in Section 2.5.1 and Schedules A and B; TOD in Annex 6). See Chapter 4 for a list of City of Ottawa Planning and Engineering documents that support the completion of TIA). The Location Trigger is not satisfied.

4. Safety Triggers

Yes No Are posted speed limits on a boundary street are 80 km/hr or greater? X Are there any horizontal/vertical curvatures on a boundary street limits X sight lines at a proposed driveway? Is the proposed driveway within the area of influence of an adjacent traffic signal or roundabout (i.e. within 300 m of intersection in rural conditions, X or within 150 m of intersection in urban/ suburban conditions)? Is the proposed driveway within auxiliary lanes of an intersection? X Does the proposed driveway make use of an existing median break that X serves an existing site? Is there is a documented history of traffic operations or safety concerns on X the boundary streets within 500 m of the development? Does the development include a drive-thru facility? X

Based on the answers above, the Safety Trigger was not satisfied.

Transportation Impact Assessment Screening Form

2460 Lancaster Road, Suite 200, Ottawa, Ontario, K1B 4S5 Tel: 613-731-4052

5. Summary

Yes No Does the development satisfy the Trip Generation Trigger? X Does the development satisfy the Location Trigger? X Does the development satisfy the Safety Trigger? X

Please review the above screening information and let us know your comments or questions before proceeding to the next step of the TIA (Scoping Report).

Yours Truly,

Arman Matti, P.Eng. Sr. Transportation Engineer Castleglenn Consultants Inc.

Appendix B

TDM Meraure Checklist

Appendix B

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 Buildings face Norrberry parking areas between the street and building entrances Crescent BASIC 1.1.2 Locate building entrances in order to minimize walking Bus stops within walking distances to sidewalks and transit stops/stations distances of the building BASIC 1.1.3 Locate building doors and windows to ensure visibility of Building frontage includes pedestrians from the building, for their security and windows comfort 1.2 Facilities for walking & cycling REQUIRED 1.2.1 Provide convenient, direct access to stations or major Bus stops/shelters located stops along rapid transit routes within 600 metres; within walking distances minimize walking distances from buildings to rapid to/from the proposed transit; provide pedestrian-friendly, weather-protected buildings (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 Sidewalks available along from public sidewalks to building entrances through Norberry and Springland Dr; such measures as: reducing distances between public buildings face the road 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)

1 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 Existing sidewalk available surfaces of contrasting materials or treatments to along the adjacent roads 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 Sidewalks along adjacent pedestrian connections to facilitate travel by active roads; major pathway west transportation. Provide links to the existing or planned of Riverside Rd 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 Direct walking route to building entrances to nearby transit stops transit stops via sidewalks BASIC 1.2.7 Ensure that walking routes to transit stops are secure, Walking routes along visible, lighted, shaded and wind-protected wherever collector/arterial roads have possible adequate street lights and visibility BASIC 1.2.8 Design roads used for access or circulation by cyclists NA 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)

2 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 144 stalls provided with 40% areas, sheltered from the weather wherever possible enclosed / secured (see Official Plan policy 4.3.6) 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- 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 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 62 bike stalls out of 144 are provided for a single residential building, locate at least provided in enclosed / 25% of spaces within a building/structure, a secure area secure area (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 No on-site transit stops 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

3 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, Parking Study undertaken nor less than required by zoning, unless a variance is through zoning application being applied for 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)

4 TDM Measures Checklist City of Ottawa Version 1.0 (30 June 2017)

TDM Measures Checklist: Residential Developments (multi-family, condominium or subdivision)

Legend

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 Í The measure is one of the most dependably effective tools to encourage the use of sustainable modes

Check if proposed & TDM measures: Residential developments add descriptions

1. TDM PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 1.1 Program coordinator BASIC Í 1.1.1 Designate an internal coordinator, or contract with an external coordinator 1.2 Travel surveys BETTER 1.2.1 Conduct periodic surveys to identify travel-related behaviours, attitudes, challenges and solutions, and to track progress

2. WALKING AND CYCLING 2.1 Information on walking/cycling routes & destinations BASIC 2.1.1 Display local area maps with walking/cycling Local maps recommended to be access routes and key destinations at major placed at major entrances of the entrances (multi-family, condominium) buildings 2.2 Bicycle skills training BETTER 2.2.1 Offer on-site cycling courses for residents, or subsidize off-site courses

1 TDM Measures Checklist City of Ottawa Version 1.0 (30 June 2017)

Check if proposed & TDM measures: Residential developments add descriptions

3. TRANSIT 3.1 Transit information BASIC 3.1.1 Display relevant transit schedules and route maps Transit maps recommended at at entrances (multi-family, condominium) major entrances of the buildings BETTER 3.1.2 Provide real-time arrival information display at entrances (multi-family, condominium) 3.2 Transit fare incentives BASIC Í 3.2.1 Offer PRESTO cards preloaded with one monthly transit pass on residence purchase/move-in, to encourage residents to use transit BETTER 3.2.2 Offer at least one year of free monthly transit passes on residence purchase/move-in 3.3 Enhanced public transit service BETTER Í 3.3.1 Contract with OC Transpo to provide early transit N/A services until regular services are warranted by occupancy levels (subdivision) 3.4 Private transit service BETTER 3.4.1 Provide shuttle service for seniors homes or N/A lifestyle communities (e.g. scheduled mall or supermarket runs) 4. CARSHARING & BIKESHARING 4.1 Bikeshare stations & memberships BETTER 4.1.1 Contract with provider to install on-site bikeshare station (multi-family) BETTER 4.1.2 Provide residents with bikeshare memberships, either free or subsidized (multi-family) 4.2 Carshare vehicles & memberships BETTER 4.2.1 Contract with provider to install on-site carshare vehicles and promote their use by residents BETTER 4.2.2 Provide residents with carshare memberships, either free or subsidized

5. PARKING 5.1 Priced parking BASIC Í 5.1.1 Unbundle parking cost from purchase price (condominium) BASIC Í 5.1.2 Unbundle parking cost from monthly rent (multi-family)

2 TDM Measures Checklist City of Ottawa Version 1.0 (30 June 2017)

Check if proposed & TDM measures: Residential developments add descriptions 6. TDM MARKETING & COMMUNICATIONS 6.1 Multimodal travel information BASIC Í 6.1.1 Provide a multimodal travel option information package to new residents 6.2 Personalized trip planning BETTER Í 6.2.1 Offer personalized trip planning to new residents

3

Appendix C

Forecast Traffic Volumes

Appendix C

81 81 (259) 128 128 (93) 38 38 (183) 43 43 (76)

108 (149) 91 (95) 58 (35) 33 (60) 70 70 (58) 65 65 (73) 71 71 (243) 135 135 (131) 78 78 (309) 256 256 (110)

10 (0) 1 (5) 1 67 67 (230) 10 (74) 1 (2) 11 (3) 72 (234) 0 (1) 753 753 (1789) 211 (100) 210 (96) 1 (8) 2230 2230 (968) 0 (3)

103 (47) 1 (1) (0) 0 4 (2) 4 33 33 (53) 36 36 (14) 7 (8) 7 713 (1728) 0 (1) 127 (97) 8 (10) 24 (49) 5 (12) 4 (7) 109 (87) 0 (0) 1 (5) 11 (76) 40 40 (16) 1 (1) 1 76 76 (34) 2123 2123 (914) 738 738 (1782) 121 121 (280) 2200 2200 (949) 121 121 (398) 129 129 (156) ) 121 121 (160) ) 357 2

6 (2) ( ( 57 (149) 0 0 9 (21) 9 112 (257) 0 (3) 100 100 20 20 (34) (7) 1 810 (468) 15 (35) 9 (7) 3 (2) 894 (627) 842 (507) 27 (10) 28 (45) 17 (9) 4 (9) 482 (765) 549 (1111) 4 (2) 37 (10)

7 (34) (5) 0 440 (748) 9 (6) 9 6 (11) 6 5 (7) 12 12 (5) 106 106 (145) 27 27 (1) ) ) 161 ( 12 ( 122 122 (293) 33 33 (24) 112 112 48 48

2021 Total Traffic Volumes 81 81 (259) 128 128 (93) 38 38 (183) 43 43 (76)

108 (149) 91 (95) 58 (35) 33 (60) 70 70 (58) 65 65 (73) ) 71 71 (243) 110 135 135 (131) 78 78 (309) ( 256 256 ) 230

( 10 (0) 1 (5) 1 67 67 10 (74) 1 (2) 11 (3) 72 (234) 0 (1) 842 842 (1950) 2410 2410 211 (100) 210 (96) 1 (8) 0 (3) ) 103 (47) 1 (1) (0) 0 8 4 (2) 4 ( 33 33 (53) 36 36 (14) 7 7 802 (1889) 0 (1) 127 (97) 8 (10) 24 (49) 5 (12) 4 (7) 109 (87) 0 (0) 1 (5) 11 (76) 40 40 (16) 1 (1) 1 76 76 (34) 2303 2303 (1040) 2380 2380 827 827 (1943) 121 121 (280) 121 121 (398) 129 129 (156) 121 121 (160) 6 (2) 57 (149) 0 (2) 0 9 (21) 9 112 (257) 0 (3) 100 100 (357) 20 20 (34) (7) 1 850 (491) 15 (35) 9 (7) 3 (2) 934 (650) 882 (530) 27 (10) 28 (45) 17 (9) 4 (9) ) 503 (801) 570 (1147) 4 (2) 37 (10) 145 ) 0 (5) 0 7 (34) ( 461 (784) 1 ( 9 (6) 9 6 (11) 6 5 (7) 12 12 (5) 106 106 27 27 122 122 (293) 33 33 (24) 112 112 (161) 48 48 (12)

2026 Total Traffic Volumes

Appendix D

Forecast Traffic Analysis

Appendix D

Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Analysis - AM 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave 05/24/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 4 0 1 21 0 91 1 2081 72 32 699 7 Future Volume (vph) 4 0 1 21 0 91 1 2081 72 32 699 7 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Storage Length (m) 0.0 10.0 0.0 15.0 60.0 50.0 95.0 55.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 15.0 20.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.890 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.991 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1676 1500 0 0 1556 0 1676 3353 1500 1676 3353 1500 Flt Permitted 0.515 0.934 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 909 1500 0 0 1467 0 1676 3353 1500 1676 3353 1500 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 290 99 87 87 Link Speed (k/h) 50 40 60 50 Link Distance (m) 50.0 296.4 108.5 135.8 Travel Time (s) 3.6 26.7 6.5 9.8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 4 0 1 23 0 99 1 2262 78 35 760 8 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 4 1 0 0 122 0 1 2262 78 35 760 8 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Analysis - AM 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave 05/24/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 30.8 30.8 30.8 30.8 10.8 26.6 26.6 10.8 26.6 26.6 Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 14.0 75.0 75.0 14.0 75.0 75.0 Total Split (%) 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 11.7% 62.5% 62.5% 11.7% 62.5% 62.5% Maximum Green (s) 24.2 24.2 24.2 24.2 8.2 69.4 69.4 8.2 69.4 69.4 Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 All-Red Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.1 1.9 1.9 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.8 6.8 6.8 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Min C-Min None C-Min C-Min Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 10.8 10.8 10.8 5.6 87.7 87.7 8.0 94.4 94.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.05 0.73 0.73 0.07 0.79 0.79 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.00 0.55 0.01 0.92 0.07 0.32 0.29 0.01 Control Delay 50.2 0.0 24.5 55.0 23.2 1.4 60.0 4.4 0.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 50.2 0.0 24.5 55.0 23.2 1.4 60.0 4.4 0.0 LOS DA C DCAEAA Approach Delay 40.2 24.5 22.5 6.8 Approach LOS D C C A Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 120 Offset: 100 (83%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 140 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.92 Intersection Signal Delay: 18.8 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.9% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Analysis - AM 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd 05/24/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 34 431 5 27 794 53 12 27 9 83 1 16 Future Volume (vph) 34 431 5 27 794 53 12 27 9 83 1 16 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Storage Length (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 20.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.999 0.991 0.974 0.858 Flt Protected 0.996 0.998 0.988 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3336 0 0 3316 0 0 1698 0 1676 1514 0 Flt Permitted 0.852 0.930 0.912 0.723 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2854 0 0 3090 0 0 1568 0 1276 1514 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 2 13 10 17 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 40 Link Distance (m) 168.0 259.5 56.6 331.9 Travel Time (s) 12.1 18.7 4.1 29.9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 37 468 5 29 863 58 13 29 10 90 1 17 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 510 0 0 950 0 0 52 0 90 18 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.6 3.6 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Analysis - AM 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd 05/24/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase 2 2 6 6 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 31.2 31.2 31.2 31.2 Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 34.0 34.0 31.2 31.2 31.2 31.2 Total Split (%) 52.1% 52.1% 52.1% 52.1% 47.9% 47.9% 47.9% 47.9% Maximum Green (s) 28.3 28.3 28.3 28.3 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.7 5.7 6.2 6.2 6.2 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode C-Min C-Min C-Min C-Min None None None None Walk Time (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 46.4 46.4 11.3 11.3 11.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.71 0.71 0.17 0.17 0.17 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.43 0.19 0.41 0.07 Control Delay 5.2 6.3 20.6 29.5 11.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.2 6.3 20.6 29.5 11.6 LOS A A C CB Approach Delay 5.2 6.3 20.6 26.5 Approach LOS A A C C Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 65.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 65.2 Offset: 29 (44%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.43 Intersection Signal Delay: 7.8 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HCM 6th AWSC Existing Analysis - AM 5: Springland Dr & Ridgewood Ave 05/24/2019

Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.8 Intersection LOS A

Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 57 29 52 70 38 41 Future Vol, veh/h 57 29 52 70 38 41 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 62 32 57 76 41 45 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB NB SB Opposing Approach SB NB Opposing Lanes 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Right NB EB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay 7.9 8.1 7.4 HCM LOS A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % 43% 66% 0% Vol Thru, % 57% 0% 48% Vol Right, % 0% 34% 52% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 122 86 79 LT Vol 52 57 0 Through Vol 70 0 38 RT Vol 0 29 41 Lane Flow Rate 133 93 86 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.157 0.113 0.093 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.249 4.342 3.888 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 834 830 905 Service Time 2.324 2.342 1.983 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.159 0.112 0.095 HCM Control Delay 8.1 7.9 7.4 HCM Lane LOS AAA HCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 0.4 0.3

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 6th AWSC Existing Analysis - AM 8: Flannery Dr & Springland Dr 05/24/2019

Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.3 Intersection LOS A

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 187 0 1 0 1 10 4 36 0 1 10 58 Future Vol, veh/h 187 0 1 0 1 10 4 36 0 1 10 58 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222 Mvmt Flow 203 0 1 0 1 11 4 39 0 1 11 63 Number of Lanes 010010010010 Approach EB WB NB SB Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 8.8 6.9 7.8 7.4 HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % 10% 99% 0% 1% Vol Thru, % 90% 0% 9% 14% Vol Right, % 0% 1% 91% 84% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 40 188 11 69 LT Vol 4 187 0 1 Through Vol 36 0 1 10 RT Vol 0 1 10 58 Lane Flow Rate 43 204 12 75 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.055 0.247 0.013 0.083 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.536 4.346 3.865 3.986 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 793 819 929 904 Service Time 2.54 2.409 1.875 1.99 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.054 0.249 0.013 0.083 HCM Control Delay 7.8 8.8 6.9 7.4 HCM Lane LOS AAAA HCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 1 0 0.3

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 6th AWSC Existing Analysis - AM 14: Springland Dr & Mooney's Bay 05/24/2019

Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.7 Intersection LOS A

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 4 7 3 0 6 6 99 0 0 91 9 Future Vol, veh/h 17 4 7 3 0 6 6 99 0 0 91 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222 Mvmt Flow 18 4 8 3 0 7 7 108 0 0 99 10 Number of Lanes 010010010010 Approach EB WB NB SB Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 7.6 7.2 7.8 7.7 HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % 6% 61% 33% 0% Vol Thru, % 94% 14% 0% 91% Vol Right, % 0% 25% 67% 9% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 105 28 9 100 LT Vol 6 17 3 0 Through Vol 99 4 0 91 RT Vol 0 7 6 9 Lane Flow Rate 114 30 10 109 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.13 0.037 0.011 0.122 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.098 4.399 4.117 4.036 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 871 819 874 883 Service Time 2.143 2.399 2.118 2.085 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.131 0.037 0.011 0.123 HCM Control Delay 7.8 7.6 7.2 7.7 HCM Lane LOS AAAA HCM 95th-tile Q 0.4 0.1 0 0.4

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Analysis - PM 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave 05/24/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 7 0 5 44 1 43 1 896 29 45 1694 8 Future Volume (vph) 7 0 5 44 1 43 1 896 29 45 1694 8 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Storage Length (m) 0.0 10.0 0.0 15.0 60.0 50.0 95.0 55.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 15.0 20.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.934 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.976 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1676 1500 0 0 1609 0 1676 3353 1500 1676 3353 1500 Flt Permitted 0.688 0.839 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1214 1500 0 0 1383 0 1676 3353 1500 1676 3353 1500 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 128 36 87 87 Link Speed (k/h) 50 40 60 50 Link Distance (m) 50.0 296.4 108.5 135.8 Travel Time (s) 3.6 26.7 6.5 9.8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 8 0 5 48 1 47 1 974 32 49 1841 9 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 8 5 0 0 96 0 1 974 32 49 1841 9 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Analysis - PM 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave 05/24/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 30.8 30.8 30.8 30.8 10.8 26.6 26.6 10.8 26.6 26.6 Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 14.0 75.0 75.0 14.0 75.0 75.0 Total Split (%) 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 11.7% 62.5% 62.5% 11.7% 62.5% 62.5% Maximum Green (s) 24.2 24.2 24.2 24.2 8.2 69.4 69.4 8.2 69.4 69.4 Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 All-Red Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.1 1.9 1.9 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.8 6.8 6.8 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Min C-Min None C-Min C-Min Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 12.1 12.1 12.1 5.6 83.1 83.1 8.9 93.1 93.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.69 0.69 0.07 0.78 0.78 v/c Ratio 0.07 0.02 0.56 0.01 0.42 0.03 0.40 0.71 0.01 Control Delay 48.1 0.2 45.0 55.0 9.8 0.1 61.4 10.0 0.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 48.1 0.2 45.0 55.0 9.8 0.1 61.4 10.0 0.0 LOS DA D DAAEAA Approach Delay 29.7 45.0 9.5 11.2 Approach LOS C D A B Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 120 Offset: 112 (93%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 100 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.71 Intersection Signal Delay: 11.8 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Analysis - PM 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd 05/24/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 8 733 7 10 459 132 5 1 6 346 7 33 Future Volume (vph) 8 733 7 10 459 132 5 1 6 346 7 33 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Storage Length (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 20.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.999 0.967 0.927 0.877 Flt Protected 0.999 0.999 0.981 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3346 0 0 3239 0 0 1605 0 1676 1548 0 Flt Permitted 0.947 0.939 0.936 0.749 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3172 0 0 3045 0 0 1531 0 1322 1548 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 2 69 7 36 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 40 Link Distance (m) 168.0 259.5 56.6 331.9 Travel Time (s) 12.1 18.7 4.1 29.9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 9 797 8 11 499 143 5 1 7 376 8 36 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 814 0 0 653 0 0 13 0 376 44 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.6 3.6 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Analysis - PM 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd 05/24/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase 2 2 6 6 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 31.2 31.2 31.2 31.2 Total Split (s) 39.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 31.2 31.2 31.2 31.2 Total Split (%) 55.6% 55.6% 55.6% 55.6% 44.4% 44.4% 44.4% 44.4% Maximum Green (s) 33.3 33.3 33.3 33.3 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.7 5.7 6.2 6.2 6.2 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode C-Min C-Min C-Min C-Min None None None None Walk Time (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 34.2 34.2 24.1 24.1 24.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.34 0.34 0.34 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.43 0.02 0.83 0.08 Control Delay 14.9 12.3 10.0 37.2 6.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.9 12.3 10.0 37.2 6.5 LOS B B A DA Approach Delay 14.9 12.3 10.0 34.0 Approach LOS B B A C Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 70.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 70.2 Offset: 29 (41%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.83 Intersection Signal Delay: 18.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HCM 6th AWSC Existing Analysis - PM 5: Springland Dr & Ridgewood Ave 05/24/2019

Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.8 Intersection LOS A

Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 33 49 66 58 183 74 Future Vol, veh/h 33 49 66 58 183 74 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 36 53 72 63 199 80 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB NB SB Opposing Approach SB NB Opposing Lanes 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Right NB EB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay 8.2 8.5 9.1 HCM LOS A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % 53% 40% 0% Vol Thru, % 47% 0% 71% Vol Right, % 0% 60% 29% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 124 82 257 LT Vol 66 33 0 Through Vol 58 0 183 RT Vol 0 49 74 Lane Flow Rate 135 89 279 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.17 0.113 0.321 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.528 4.551 4.133 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 794 788 874 Service Time 2.547 2.576 2.133 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.17 0.113 0.319 HCM Control Delay 8.5 8.2 9.1 HCM Lane LOS AAA HCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 0.4 1.4

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 6th AWSC Existing Analysis - PM 8: Flannery Dr & Springland Dr 05/24/2019

Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.5 Intersection LOS A

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 83 3 1 1 2 0 2 14 0 5 74 209 Future Vol, veh/h 83 3 1 1 2 0 2 14 0 5 74 209 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222 Mvmt Flow 90 3 1 1 2 0 2 15 0 5 80 227 Number of Lanes 010010010010 Approach EB WB NB SB Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 8.5 7.8 7.6 8.5 HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % 12% 95% 33% 2% Vol Thru, % 88% 3% 67% 26% Vol Right, % 0% 1% 0% 73% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 16 87 3 288 LT Vol 2 83 1 5 Through Vol 14 3 2 74 RT Vol 0 1 0 209 Lane Flow Rate 17 95 3 313 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.022 0.123 0.004 0.32 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.492 4.693 4.787 3.685 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 802 753 752 961 Service Time 2.492 2.789 2.788 1.769 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.021 0.126 0.004 0.326 HCM Control Delay 7.6 8.5 7.8 8.5 HCM Lane LOS AAAA HCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 0.4 0 1.4

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 6th AWSC Existing Analysis - PM 14: Springland Dr & Mooney's Bay 05/24/2019

Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.9 Intersection LOS A

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 2 34 2 3 2 11 126 5 2 245 21 Future Vol, veh/h 9 2 34 2 3 2 11 126 5 2 245 21 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222 Mvmt Flow 10 2 37 2 3 2 12 137 5 2 266 23 Number of Lanes 010010010010 Approach EB WB NB SB Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 7.8 7.9 8.4 9.3 HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % 8% 20% 29% 1% Vol Thru, % 89% 4% 43% 91% Vol Right, % 4% 76% 29% 8% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 142 45 7 268 LT Vol 11 9 2 2 Through Vol 126 2 3 245 RT Vol 5 34 2 21 Lane Flow Rate 154 49 8 291 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.187 0.061 0.01 0.332 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.354 4.494 4.849 4.103 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 829 800 741 865 Service Time 2.354 2.503 2.862 2.189 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.186 0.061 0.011 0.336 HCM Control Delay 8.4 7.8 7.9 9.3 HCM Lane LOS AAAA HCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 0.2 0 1.5

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forecast Build-out AM 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 4 0 1 24 0 103 1 2123 76 33 713 7 Future Volume (vph) 4 0 1 24 0 103 1 2123 76 33 713 7 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Storage Length (m) 0.0 10.0 0.0 15.0 60.0 50.0 95.0 55.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 15.0 20.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.890 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.991 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1676 1500 0 0 1556 0 1676 3353 1500 1676 3353 1500 Flt Permitted 0.453 0.934 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 799 1500 0 0 1467 0 1676 3353 1500 1676 3353 1500 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 284 112 87 87 Link Speed (k/h) 50 40 60 50 Link Distance (m) 50.0 296.4 108.5 135.8 Travel Time (s) 3.6 26.7 6.5 9.8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 4 0 1 26 0 112 1 2308 83 36 775 8 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 4 1 0 0 138 0 1 2308 83 36 775 8 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forecast Build-out AM 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 30.8 30.8 30.8 30.8 10.8 26.6 26.6 10.8 26.6 26.6 Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 14.0 75.0 75.0 14.0 75.0 75.0 Total Split (%) 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 11.7% 62.5% 62.5% 11.7% 62.5% 62.5% Maximum Green (s) 24.2 24.2 24.2 24.2 8.2 69.4 69.4 8.2 69.4 69.4 Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 All-Red Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.1 1.9 1.9 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.8 6.8 6.8 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Min C-Min None C-Min C-Min Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 11.1 11.1 11.1 5.6 87.5 87.5 8.1 94.2 94.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.05 0.73 0.73 0.07 0.78 0.78 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.00 0.58 0.01 0.94 0.07 0.32 0.29 0.01 Control Delay 50.2 0.0 24.5 55.0 25.9 1.7 60.2 4.5 0.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 50.2 0.0 24.5 55.0 25.9 1.7 60.2 4.5 0.0 LOS DA C DCAEAA Approach Delay 40.2 24.5 25.1 6.9 Approach LOS D C C A Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 120 Offset: 100 (83%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.94 Intersection Signal Delay: 20.7 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.1% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forecast Build-out AM 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 37 440 5 27 810 57 12 27 9 100 1 20 Future Volume (vph) 37 440 5 27 810 57 12 27 9 100 1 20 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Storage Length (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 20.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.999 0.990 0.974 0.857 Flt Protected 0.996 0.999 0.988 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3336 0 0 3316 0 0 1698 0 1676 1512 0 Flt Permitted 0.842 0.930 0.915 0.723 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2820 0 0 3087 0 0 1573 0 1276 1512 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 2 13 10 22 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 40 Link Distance (m) 168.0 259.5 56.6 331.9 Travel Time (s) 12.1 18.7 4.1 29.9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 40 478 5 29 880 62 13 29 10 109 1 22 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 523 0 0 971 0 0 52 0 109 23 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.6 3.6 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forecast Build-out AM 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase 2 2 6 6 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 31.2 31.2 31.2 31.2 Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 34.0 34.0 31.2 31.2 31.2 31.2 Total Split (%) 52.1% 52.1% 52.1% 52.1% 47.9% 47.9% 47.9% 47.9% Maximum Green (s) 28.3 28.3 28.3 28.3 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.7 5.7 6.2 6.2 6.2 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode C-Min C-Min C-Min C-Min None None None None Walk Time (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 45.7 45.7 11.9 11.9 11.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.70 0.70 0.18 0.18 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.45 0.18 0.47 0.08 Control Delay 5.7 6.9 19.6 30.1 10.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.7 6.9 19.6 30.1 10.3 LOS A A B CB Approach Delay 5.7 6.9 19.6 26.6 Approach LOS A A B C Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 65.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 65.2 Offset: 29 (44%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.47 Intersection Signal Delay: 8.5 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HCM 6th AWSC Forecast Build-out AM 5: Springland Dr & Ridgewood Ave 06/05/2019

Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8 Intersection LOS A

Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 58 33 65 70 38 43 Future Vol, veh/h 58 33 65 70 38 43 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 63 36 71 76 41 47 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB NB SB Opposing Approach SB NB Opposing Lanes 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Right NB EB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay 8 8.3 7.4 HCM LOS A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % 48% 64% 0% Vol Thru, % 52% 0% 47% Vol Right, % 0% 36% 53% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 135 91 81 LT Vol 65 58 0 Through Vol 70 0 38 RT Vol 0 33 43 Lane Flow Rate 147 99 88 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.174 0.12 0.098 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.272 4.358 4.005 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 829 827 900 Service Time 2.354 2.363 2.005 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.177 0.12 0.098 HCM Control Delay 8.3 8 7.4 HCM Lane LOS AAA HCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 0.4 0.3

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 6th AWSC Forecast Build-out AM 8: Flannery Dr & Springland Dr 06/05/2019

Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.5 Intersection LOS A

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 210 0 1 0 1 10 4 36 0 1 10 67 Future Vol, veh/h 210 0 1 0 1 10 4 36 0 1 10 67 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222 Mvmt Flow 228 0 1 0 1 11 4 39 0 1 11 73 Number of Lanes 010010010010 Approach EB WB NB SB Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 9.1 7 7.9 7.5 HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % 10% 100% 0% 1% Vol Thru, % 90% 0% 9% 13% Vol Right, % 0% 0% 91% 86% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 40 211 11 78 LT Vol 4 210 0 1 Through Vol 36 0 1 10 RT Vol 0 1 10 67 Lane Flow Rate 43 229 12 85 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.056 0.278 0.013 0.095 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.61 4.362 3.917 4.038 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 781 814 916 893 Service Time 2.614 2.435 1.929 2.04 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.055 0.281 0.013 0.095 HCM Control Delay 7.9 9.1 7 7.5 HCM Lane LOS AAAA HCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 1.1 0 0.3

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 6th AWSC Forecast Build-out AM 14: Springland Dr & Mooney's Bay 06/05/2019

Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.8 Intersection LOS A

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 4 7 3 0 6 6 106 0 0 112 9 Future Vol, veh/h 17 4 7 3 0 6 6 106 0 0 112 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222 Mvmt Flow 18 4 8 3 0 7 7 115 0 0 122 10 Number of Lanes 010010010010 Approach EB WB NB SB Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 7.6 7.2 7.8 7.8 HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % 5% 61% 33% 0% Vol Thru, % 95% 14% 0% 93% Vol Right, % 0% 25% 67% 7% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 112 28 9 121 LT Vol 6 17 3 0 Through Vol 106 4 0 112 RT Vol 0 7 6 9 Lane Flow Rate 122 30 10 132 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.139 0.038 0.011 0.148 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.114 4.465 4.184 4.051 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 866 807 860 879 Service Time 2.167 2.465 2.185 2.104 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.141 0.037 0.012 0.15 HCM Control Delay 7.8 7.6 7.2 7.8 HCM Lane LOS AAAA HCM 95th-tile Q 0.5 0.1 0 0.5

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Build-out Analysis - PM 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 7 0 5 49 1 47 1 914 34 53 1728 8 Future Volume (vph) 7 0 5 49 1 47 1 914 34 53 1728 8 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Storage Length (m) 0.0 10.0 0.0 15.0 60.0 50.0 95.0 55.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 15.0 20.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.934 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.975 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1676 1500 0 0 1607 0 1676 3353 1500 1676 3353 1500 Flt Permitted 0.668 0.838 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1179 1500 0 0 1381 0 1676 3353 1500 1676 3353 1500 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 127 35 87 87 Link Speed (k/h) 50 40 60 50 Link Distance (m) 50.0 296.4 108.5 135.8 Travel Time (s) 3.6 26.7 6.5 9.8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 8 0 5 53 1 51 1 993 37 58 1878 9 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 8 5 0 0 105 0 1 993 37 58 1878 9 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Build-out Analysis - PM 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 30.8 30.8 30.8 30.8 10.8 26.6 26.6 10.8 26.6 26.6 Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 14.0 75.0 75.0 14.0 75.0 75.0 Total Split (%) 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 11.7% 62.5% 62.5% 11.7% 62.5% 62.5% Maximum Green (s) 24.2 24.2 24.2 24.2 8.2 69.4 69.4 8.2 69.4 69.4 Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 All-Red Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.1 1.9 1.9 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.8 6.8 6.8 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Min C-Min None C-Min C-Min Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 12.7 12.7 12.7 5.6 81.9 81.9 9.5 92.5 92.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.05 0.68 0.68 0.08 0.77 0.77 v/c Ratio 0.06 0.02 0.59 0.01 0.43 0.04 0.44 0.73 0.01 Control Delay 47.1 0.2 47.3 55.0 10.6 0.1 62.1 10.9 0.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 47.1 0.2 47.3 55.0 10.6 0.1 62.1 10.9 0.0 LOS DA D DBAEBA Approach Delay 29.1 47.3 10.3 12.3 Approach LOS C D B B Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 120 Offset: 112 (93%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 100 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.73 Intersection Signal Delay: 12.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.4% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Build-out Analysis - PM 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 10 748 7 10 468 149 5 1 6 357 7 34 Future Volume (vph) 10 748 7 10 468 149 5 1 6 357 7 34 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Storage Length (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 20.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.999 0.964 0.927 0.877 Flt Protected 0.999 0.999 0.981 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3346 0 0 3229 0 0 1605 0 1676 1548 0 Flt Permitted 0.944 0.939 0.937 0.749 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3162 0 0 3035 0 0 1533 0 1322 1548 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 2 80 7 37 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 40 Link Distance (m) 168.0 259.5 56.6 331.9 Travel Time (s) 12.1 18.7 4.1 29.9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 813 8 11 509 162 5 1 7 388 8 37 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 832 0 0 682 0 0 13 0 388 45 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.6 3.6 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Build-out Analysis - PM 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase 2 2 6 6 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 31.2 31.2 31.2 31.2 Total Split (s) 39.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 31.2 31.2 31.2 31.2 Total Split (%) 55.6% 55.6% 55.6% 55.6% 44.4% 44.4% 44.4% 44.4% Maximum Green (s) 33.3 33.3 33.3 33.3 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.7 5.7 6.2 6.2 6.2 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode C-Min C-Min C-Min C-Min None None None None Walk Time (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 33.6 33.6 24.7 24.7 24.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.35 0.35 0.35 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.46 0.02 0.83 0.08 Control Delay 15.4 12.6 10.0 37.6 6.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 15.4 12.6 10.0 37.6 6.4 LOS B B A DA Approach Delay 15.4 12.6 10.0 34.4 Approach LOS B B A C Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 70.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 70.2 Offset: 29 (41%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.83 Intersection Signal Delay: 18.6 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HCM 6th AWSC Build-out Analysis - PM 5: Springland Dr & Ridgewood Ave 06/05/2019

Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.9 Intersection LOS A

Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 35 60 73 58 183 76 Future Vol, veh/h 35 60 73 58 183 76 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 38 65 79 63 199 83 Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0 Approach EB NB SB Opposing Approach SB NB Opposing Lanes 0 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0 Conflicting Approach Right NB EB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1 HCM Control Delay 8.3 8.6 9.2 HCM LOS A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % 56% 37% 0% Vol Thru, % 44% 0% 71% Vol Right, % 0% 63% 29% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 131 95 259 LT Vol 73 35 0 Through Vol 58 0 183 RT Vol 0 60 76 Lane Flow Rate 142 103 282 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.181 0.131 0.325 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.574 4.551 4.16 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Cap 786 789 867 Service Time 2.593 2.575 2.176 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.181 0.131 0.325 HCM Control Delay 8.6 8.3 9.2 HCM Lane LOS AAA HCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 0.4 1.4

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 6th AWSC Build-out Analysis - PM 8: Flannery Dr & Springland Dr 06/05/2019

Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.8 Intersection LOS A

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 96 3 1 1 2 0 2 14 0 5 74 230 Future Vol, veh/h 96 3 1 1 2 0 2 14 0 5 74 230 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222 Mvmt Flow 104 3 1 1 2 0 2 15 0 5 80 250 Number of Lanes 010010010010 Approach EB WB NB SB Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 8.7 7.9 7.7 8.9 HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % 12% 96% 33% 2% Vol Thru, % 88% 3% 67% 24% Vol Right, % 0% 1% 0% 74% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 16 100 3 309 LT Vol 2 96 1 5 Through Vol 14 3 2 74 RT Vol 0 1 0 230 Lane Flow Rate 17 109 3 336 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.022 0.146 0.004 0.355 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.557 4.838 4.857 3.803 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 788 742 737 951 Service Time 2.572 2.859 2.882 1.803 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.022 0.147 0.004 0.353 HCM Control Delay 7.7 8.7 7.9 8.9 HCM Lane LOS AAAA HCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 0.5 0 1.6

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 6th AWSC Build-out Analysis - PM 14: Springland Dr & Mooney's Bay 06/05/2019

Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.9 Intersection LOS A

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 2 34 2 3 2 11 145 5 2 257 21 Future Vol, veh/h 9 2 34 2 3 2 11 145 5 2 257 21 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222 Mvmt Flow 10 2 37 2 3 2 12 158 5 2 279 23 Number of Lanes 010010010010 Approach EB WB NB SB Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1 Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1 HCM Control Delay 7.9 8 8.5 9.4 HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 Vol Left, % 7% 20% 29% 1% Vol Thru, % 90% 4% 43% 92% Vol Right, % 3% 76% 29% 7% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 161 45 7 280 LT Vol 11 9 2 2 Through Vol 145 2 3 257 RT Vol 5 34 2 21 Lane Flow Rate 175 49 8 304 Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1 Degree of Util (X) 0.212 0.062 0.01 0.348 Departure Headway (Hd) 4.364 4.567 4.924 4.121 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 826 788 729 858 Service Time 2.371 2.575 2.937 2.214 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.212 0.062 0.011 0.354 HCM Control Delay 8.5 7.9 8 9.4 HCM Lane LOS AAAA HCM 95th-tile Q 0.8 0.2 0 1.6

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2026 Analysis - AM 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 4 0 1 24 0 103 1 2303 76 33 802 7 Future Volume (vph) 4 0 1 24 0 103 1 2303 76 33 802 7 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Storage Length (m) 0.0 10.0 0.0 15.0 60.0 50.0 95.0 55.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 15.0 20.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.890 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.991 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1676 1500 0 0 1556 0 1676 3353 1500 1676 3353 1500 Flt Permitted 0.453 0.934 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 799 1500 0 0 1467 0 1676 3353 1500 1676 3353 1500 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 249 112 87 87 Link Speed (k/h) 50 40 60 50 Link Distance (m) 50.0 296.4 108.5 135.8 Travel Time (s) 3.6 26.7 6.5 9.8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 4 0 1 26 0 112 1 2503 83 36 872 8 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 4 1 0 0 138 0 1 2503 83 36 872 8 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2026 Analysis - AM 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 30.8 30.8 30.8 30.8 10.8 26.6 26.6 10.8 26.6 26.6 Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 14.0 75.0 75.0 14.0 75.0 75.0 Total Split (%) 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 11.7% 62.5% 62.5% 11.7% 62.5% 62.5% Maximum Green (s) 24.2 24.2 24.2 24.2 8.2 69.4 69.4 8.2 69.4 69.4 Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 All-Red Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.1 1.9 1.9 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.8 6.8 6.8 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Min C-Min None C-Min C-Min Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 11.1 11.1 11.1 5.6 87.5 87.5 8.1 94.2 94.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.05 0.73 0.73 0.07 0.78 0.78 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.00 0.58 0.01 1.02 0.07 0.32 0.33 0.01 Control Delay 50.2 0.0 24.5 55.0 43.1 1.7 60.2 4.8 0.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 50.2 0.0 24.5 55.0 43.1 1.7 60.2 4.8 0.0 LOS DA C DDAEAA Approach Delay 40.2 24.5 41.8 6.9 Approach LOS D C D A Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 120 Offset: 100 (83%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.02 Intersection Signal Delay: 32.4 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2026 Analysis - AM 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 37 461 5 27 850 57 12 27 9 100 1 20 Future Volume (vph) 37 461 5 27 850 57 12 27 9 100 1 20 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Storage Length (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 20.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.999 0.991 0.974 0.857 Flt Protected 0.996 0.999 0.988 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3336 0 0 3319 0 0 1698 0 1676 1512 0 Flt Permitted 0.840 0.930 0.915 0.723 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2814 0 0 3090 0 0 1573 0 1276 1512 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 2 13 10 22 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 40 Link Distance (m) 168.0 259.5 56.6 331.9 Travel Time (s) 12.1 18.7 4.1 29.9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 40 501 5 29 924 62 13 29 10 109 1 22 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 546 0 0 1015 0 0 52 0 109 23 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.6 3.6 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2026 Analysis - AM 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase 2 2 6 6 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 31.2 31.2 31.2 31.2 Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 34.0 34.0 31.2 31.2 31.2 31.2 Total Split (%) 52.1% 52.1% 52.1% 52.1% 47.9% 47.9% 47.9% 47.9% Maximum Green (s) 28.3 28.3 28.3 28.3 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.7 5.7 6.2 6.2 6.2 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode C-Min C-Min C-Min C-Min None None None None Walk Time (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 45.7 45.7 11.9 11.9 11.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.70 0.70 0.18 0.18 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.47 0.18 0.47 0.08 Control Delay 5.8 7.1 19.6 30.1 10.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.8 7.1 19.6 30.1 10.3 LOS A A B CB Approach Delay 5.8 7.1 19.6 26.6 Approach LOS A A B C Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 65.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 65.2 Offset: 29 (44%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.47 Intersection Signal Delay: 8.5 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2026 Analysis - PM 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 7 0 5 49 1 47 1 1040 34 53 1889 8 Future Volume (vph) 7 0 5 49 1 47 1 1040 34 53 1889 8 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Storage Length (m) 0.0 10.0 0.0 15.0 60.0 50.0 95.0 55.0 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 15.0 20.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.934 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.975 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1676 1500 0 0 1607 0 1676 3353 1500 1676 3353 1500 Flt Permitted 0.668 0.838 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1179 1500 0 0 1381 0 1676 3353 1500 1676 3353 1500 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 123 35 87 87 Link Speed (k/h) 50 40 60 50 Link Distance (m) 50.0 296.4 108.5 135.8 Travel Time (s) 3.6 26.7 6.5 9.8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 8 0 5 53 1 51 1 1130 37 58 2053 9 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 8 5 0 0 105 0 1 1130 37 58 2053 9 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2026 Analysis - PM 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 30.8 30.8 30.8 30.8 10.8 26.6 26.6 10.8 26.6 26.6 Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 14.0 75.0 75.0 14.0 75.0 75.0 Total Split (%) 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 11.7% 62.5% 62.5% 11.7% 62.5% 62.5% Maximum Green (s) 24.2 24.2 24.2 24.2 8.2 69.4 69.4 8.2 69.4 69.4 Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 All-Red Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.1 1.9 1.9 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.8 6.8 6.8 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Min C-Min None C-Min C-Min Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 12.7 12.7 12.7 5.6 81.9 81.9 9.5 92.5 92.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.05 0.68 0.68 0.08 0.77 0.77 v/c Ratio 0.06 0.02 0.59 0.01 0.49 0.04 0.44 0.79 0.01 Control Delay 47.1 0.2 47.3 55.0 11.4 0.1 62.1 12.9 0.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 47.1 0.2 47.3 55.0 11.4 0.1 62.1 12.9 0.0 LOS DA D DBAEBA Approach Delay 29.1 47.3 11.1 14.2 Approach LOS C D B B Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 120 Offset: 112 (93%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 120 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.79 Intersection Signal Delay: 14.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 3: Riverside Dr & Ridgewood Ave

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2026 Analysis - PM 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 10 784 7 10 491 149 5 1 6 357 7 34 Future Volume (vph) 10 784 7 10 491 149 5 1 6 357 7 34 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Storage Length (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 20.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.999 0.966 0.927 0.877 Flt Protected 0.999 0.999 0.981 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3346 0 0 3236 0 0 1605 0 1676 1548 0 Flt Permitted 0.944 0.939 0.937 0.749 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3162 0 0 3041 0 0 1533 0 1322 1548 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 2 75 7 37 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 40 Link Distance (m) 168.0 259.5 56.6 331.9 Travel Time (s) 12.1 18.7 4.1 29.9 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 852 8 11 534 162 5 1 7 388 8 37 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 871 0 0 707 0 0 13 0 388 45 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.6 3.6 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4 Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 2 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2026 Analysis - PM 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd 06/05/2019

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Detector Phase 2 2 6 6 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s) 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 31.2 31.2 31.2 31.2 Total Split (s) 39.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 31.2 31.2 31.2 31.2 Total Split (%) 55.6% 55.6% 55.6% 55.6% 44.4% 44.4% 44.4% 44.4% Maximum Green (s) 33.3 33.3 33.3 33.3 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.7 5.7 6.2 6.2 6.2 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode C-Min C-Min C-Min C-Min None None None None Walk Time (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 33.8 33.8 24.5 24.5 24.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.35 0.35 0.35 v/c Ratio 0.57 0.47 0.02 0.84 0.08 Control Delay 15.6 12.7 10.3 39.1 6.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 15.6 12.7 10.3 39.1 6.6 LOS B B B DA Approach Delay 15.6 12.7 10.3 35.7 Approach LOS B B B D Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 70.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 70.2 Offset: 29 (41%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.84 Intersection Signal Delay: 18.8 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 11: Springland Dr & Walkley Rd

Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 4 Intersections Riverside Dr / Ridgewood Ave Walkley Rd / Springland Dr Crossing Side North South West East North South West East Lanes 5 (72) 3 (105) 3 (105) 3 (105) 3 (105) 2 (120) 4 (88) 4 (88) Median No (-4) No (-4) No (-4) No (-4) No (-4) No (-4) No (-4) No (-4) Conflicting LT Permissive (-8) Permissive (-8) Protected (0) Protected (0) Permissive (-8) Permissive (-8) Permissive (-8) Permissive (-8) Conflicting RT Channelized Channelized Channelized Channelized Perm/Yield (-5) Perm/Yield (-5) Perm/Yield (-5) Perm/Yield (-5) Allowed (-3) [prohibited RTOR Channelized Channelized Channelized Channelized Allowed (-3) Allowed (-3) Allowed (-3) only during AM Pk 7-9am] Leading Ped Interval No (-2) No (-2) No (-2) No (-2) No (-2) No (-2) No (-2) No (-2) Right-turn "smart Channel" Right-turn "smart Right-turn "smart Right-turn "smart Corner Radius > 5m to 10m (-5) > 5m to 10m (-5) > 5m to 10m (-5) > 5m to 10m (-5) (2) Channel" (2) Channel" (2) Channel" (2) Standard transverse Standard transverse Standard transverse Standard transverse Standard transverse Standard transverse Standard transverse Standard transverse Crosswalk Treatment markings (-7) markings (-7) markings (-7) markings (-7) markings (-7) markings (-7) markings (-7) markings (-7) Pedestrian PETSI Score 53 pts 54 pts 94 pts 94 pts 71 pts 86 pts 54 pts 54 pts Ped. Exposure to traffic LOS D D A A C B D D Cycle Length 120 sec 120 sec 120 sec 120 sec 70 sec 70 sec 70 sec 70 sec Effective Walk Time 20 sec 20 24 sec 24 sec 25 sec 25 sec 20 sec 20 sec Avg Ped Delay 42 sec 42 sec 38 sec 38 sec 14 sec 14 sec 18 sec 18 sec Ped Delay LOS E E D D B B B D E E D D C B D D LOS E D Approach From North South West East North South West East Bike lane arrangment on approach Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Mixed Traffic Right-turn lane configuration RT = 25-to-50m RT = 25-to-50m Shared Shared Shared Shared Shared Shared Right turning speed Cyclists relative to RT motorists D D NA NA NA NA NA NA

Bicycle Left turn approach 2 lanes crossed 2 lanes crossed 1 lane crossed No lane crossed 1 lane crossed No lane crossed 1 lane crossed 1 lane crossed Operating speed >= 50km/h >= 50km/h <= 40 km/h <= 40 km/h < = 40 km/h 50 km/hr 50 km/hr Left turn cyclists - LOS F F B B B B D D Avg. Delay - Existing (Build-out) [5-year post development] NA 23 (25) [42] NA 25 (25) [25] 30 (30) [30] NA NA 6 (7) [7] NA D (D) [F] NA D (D) [D] D (D) [D] NA NA B (B) [B] LOS AM PK Transit - D (D) [F] D (D) [D] Avg. Delay - Existing (Build-out) [5-year post development] NA 10 (11) [11] NA 45 (47) [47] 37 (38) [39] NA NA 12 (13) [13] NA B (C) [C] NA F (F) [F] E (E) [E] NA NA C (C) [C] LOS PM PK PM

Transit - F (F) [F] E (E) [E] Effective corner radius > 15m > 15m > 15m > 15m ~10m ~10m ~10m ~10m No. of receiving lanes on departure from intersection 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 C C C A B B E E Truck LOS C E