Planning & Zoning Commission

PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Thursday, July 9, 2020

Telephonic Meeting Regular Session & Workshop 6:00 PM

TOLL-FREE DIAL-IN NUMBER: 1-888-475-4499

Meeting ID: 992 2363 0283

Agenda

Chair

Ross Gordon

Vice Chair Commissioner Commissioner

Mike Axelrad Mike Baker John T. Klug

Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner

Marc Steinberg Weldon Taylor Pamela Nelson

City of Bellaire Texas Page 1 of 181 Agenda Planning & Zoning Commission July 9, 2020

REGULAR SESSION - 6:00 P.M.

NOTICE OF TELEPHONIC MEETING

Pursuant to Section 418.016 of the Texas Government Code, on March 16, 2020, the Governor of the State of Texas granted the Office of the Attorney General's request for the temporary suspension of certain provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act to allow for telephonic or videoconference meetings of governmental bodies that are accessible to the public in an effort to reduce in-person meetings that assemble large groups of people, as a precautionary measure to contain the spread of novel coronavirus COVID-19.

Accordingly, this Regular Session and Workshop of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Bellaire, Texas, will be conducted telephonically in furtherance of this important and necessary objective to protect the public health and welfare in our community.

Members of the public will be entitled to participate and address the Planning and Zoning Commission in the telephonic meeting at the time for general comments. Any person desiring to address the Commission must submit their request via e-mail to [email protected]. The request must be received prior to the start of the meeting and include the speaker's full name and the phone number from which they will be calling in to participate in the meeting. Speakers will be recognized during the comment period in the order their requests are received.

Members of the public may view a live broadcast of the meeting by visiting the City's website: https://bellairetx.new.swagit.com/views/21, U-Verse Channel 99, Comcast Channel 16, and the City's Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/bellairetx.gov.

The toll-free dial-in number to participate remotely in the telephonic meeting is 1-888-475-4499, Meeting ID: 992 2363 0283. An electronic copy of the agenda packet for this Regular Session is posted online at https://bellairetx.civicweb.net/Portal/MeetingInformation.aspx?type=26.

A recording of the telephonic meeting will be made and will be posted online at https://bellairetx.civicweb.net/Portal/MeetingInformation.aspx?type=26.

I. Call to Order, Announcement of a Quorum, and Introduction to Meeting

II. Pledge to the Flag (US and Texas)

A. U.S. Pledge of Allegiance:

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

B. Pledge to the Texas Flag:

Honor the Texas flag; I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible.

III. Approval of Minutes From Past Meeting(s)

1. Planning & Zoning Commission - Jun 11 2020 - Minutes - Pdf

City of Bellaire Texas Page 2 of 181 Agenda Planning & Zoning Commission July 9, 2020

IV. City Council Liaison Report

V. Reminder to Persons Desiring to Address the Commission

VI. General Public Comments

A. Persons at the meeting who have indicated their desire to be heard on matters of general interest to the Commission, by submitting the form provided shall have (3) three minutes each to present their comments. The Commission is not permitted to fully discuss, debate, or consider items that are not on the agenda. Questions presented to the Commission may be referred to staff.

VII. Current Business (Items for Discussion, Consideration, and/or Possible Action)

A. Docket SU-2020-01: Consideration and possible action on an application filed by Bagel Realty, LLC, for a specific use permit as required by the City of Bellaire Code of Ordinances, Chapter 24, Planning and Zoning, Section 24-605, Application for Specific Use Permit, to operate a one-lane drive-through window on the east side of the property for a restaurant and catering business, as provided for in section 24-536 B. (2) c) of the City of Bellaire Zoning Code. The property is located within the Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Zoning District.

Agenda Statement Report - Pdf

B. Approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission's Report and Recommendation to City Council on the application filed by Bagel Realty, LLC, on a request for a Specific Use Permit to operate a drive-through window for a restaurant and catering business at the property located at 5422 Bellaire Blvd.

Memo to Council-5422 Bellaire Blvd-Drive-Through SUP-DRAFT

C. Approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation letter to the Building and Standards Commission on a request to review garage floor heights and elevations.

Proposed Letter from PZ to BSC - Elevated Garages and Driveways

D. Update on the status of the Chair's proposed revisions to the working draft of the new North Bellaire Special Development District.

VIII. Committee Reports

IX. Correspondence

X. Requests for New Business, Announcements and Comments

A. Staff liaison report on the status of projects previously addressed by the commission as well as projects for future meetings.

B. The Chair shall recognize any Commissioner who wishes to bring New Business to the attention

City of Bellaire Texas Page 3 of 181 Agenda Planning & Zoning Commission July 9, 2020

of the Commission. Consideration of New Business shall be for the limited purpose of determining whether the matter is appropriate for inclusion on a future agenda of the Commission or referral to Staff for investigation.

XI. Adjournment

WORKSHOP SESSION - IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE REGULAR SESSION

I. Call to Order and Announcement of a Quorum

II. Discussion on possible changes to Chapter 24, Sec. 24-531 - R-1 Residential District, Sec. 24-532 - R-3 Residential District, Sec. 24-533 - R-4 Residential District, and Sec. 24-534 - R-5 Residential District of the City of Bellaire's Code of Ordinances regarding the maximum residential building height.

III. Adjournment

City of Bellaire Texas Page 4 of 181

MINUTES Planning & Zoning Commission - Jun 11 2020 Thursday, June 11, 2020 @ 6:00 PM Telephonic Meeting

PRESENT: Weldon Taylor, Michael Axelrad, Michael Baker, Pam Nelson, John Klug, Marc Steinberg, and Ross Gordon; also present: Ashley Parcus, Zachary Petrov, Marleny Campos, Nathan Wesely, and ChaVonne Sampson

ABSENT:

REGULAR SESSION - 6:00 P.M.

I. Call to Order, Announcement of a Quorum, and Introduction to Meeting

Chair Gordon called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. and announced a quorum was present consisting of all seven members of the Commission. He stated the Regular Session was being conducted telephonically by the authority of the Governor in an effort to contain the spread of the coronavirus for the welfare of the community. Chair Gordon informed the telephonic meeting was being broadcast live over the City's usual channels, including the City's website, cable television, and the City's Facebook page. He noted the presentation slides associated with each agenda item would be shown on the live broadcast.

II. Pledge to the Flag (US and Texas)

Chair Gordon led the pledges to the US and Texas flags.

III. Approval of Minutes From Past Meeting(s)

A. Planning & Zoning Commission - Mar 12 2020 - Minutes - Pdf

Motion:

To approve the minutes from the Commission's meeting on March 12, 2020. {Moved by Michael Baker, Commissioner, and seconded by Michael Axelrad, Vice Chair} RESULT: APPROVED. MOVER: Michael Baker, Commissioner SECONDER: Michael Axelrad, Vice Chair AYES: Weldon Taylor, Commissioner, Michael Axelrad, Vice Chair, Michael Baker, Commissioner, John Klug, Commissioner, Marc Steinberg, Commissioner, and Ross Gordon, Chair ABSTAINED: Pam Nelson, Commissioner

IV. City Council Liaison Report

City of Bellaire Texas Page 1 of 7

Page 5 of 181 Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission June 11, 2020

Council Member Nathan Wesely informed City Council has not had any in-person meetings and mentioned review of the Comprehensive Plan has not yet been taken up by Council, but could be possible when in-person meetings resume.

V. Reminder to Persons Desiring to Address the Commission

Chair Gordon stated requests to speak during telephonic meetings must have been submitted via email before the start of the meeting.

VI. General Public Comments

There were no requests to speak for general public comments.

VII. Current Business (Items for Discussion, Consideration, and/or Possible Action)

A. Public Hearing

Docket SU-2020-01: A public hearing on an application filed by Bagel Realty, LLC, for a specific use permit as required by the City of Bellaire Code of Ordinances, Chapter 24, Planning and Zoning, Section 24-605, Application for Specific Use Permit, to operate a restaurant and catering business with a drive-through window on the east side of the property, as provided for in section 24-536 B. (2) c) of the City of Bellaire Zoning Code. The property is located within the Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Zoning District.

i. Opening Statement by the Chair

Chair Gordon read the agenda caption and gave a brief overview of the application.

ii. Presentation of the Public Hearing Process

Attorney Zachary Petrov presented the public hearing process.

iii. Presentation by the Applicant

Bill Stone, the applicant's representative, introduced the property owners (Sion and Michael Saghion, Bagel Realty, LLC), the traffic consultant (Sampson Ukaegbu, Traff Data & Associates, Inc.), and the architect (Sammy Reese, Reese Design Services) who would

City of Bellaire Texas Page 2 of 7

Page 6 of 181 Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission June 11, 2020

all be available on the call to answer questions from the Commission. Mr. Stone stated they have met all requirements for the SUP application. He provided information regarding the property, such as the zoning district, proximity to the City of Houston, the previous uses of the building, and the uses of the adjacent properties and businesses. Mr. Stone pointed out the property is surrounded by commercial and far away from Bellaire residences. He added there had been no complaints or issues with the operation of the drive-through in the past. He stated that even though both lanes of the drive- through had been used before, they are only applying for approval of the lane closest to the building. The second lane would be used for through traffic only. Mr. Stone also stated reopening the window would not require extensive construction. The drive- through would help service customers in times of bad weather, the elderly or those with mobility issues, parents who cannot easily maneuver with their children or infants, and in situations where social distancing safety measures should be observed.

Mr. Stone referred to the traffic impact analysis report where there was a comment letter from the City's traffic engineer, Jones & Carter, and noted there were no concerns from the City's Public Works Department. There were also no immediate concerns voiced by the City's Development Review Committee. Mr. Stone mentioned the note from ARKK Engineers stating if changes are made to the existing parking lot, any impervious coverage resulting from that disturbance would require detention. He then went through current photos of the property and renderings of the use of the drive-through. He stated the City's Future Land Use Map anticipates the Corridor Mixed Used will continue its zoning designation.

iv. Staff Findings

Ashley Parcus, Development Services Coordinator, provided staff findings on the SUP request to operate one lane of an existing drive-through. She informed the property was formerly Money Mart Pawn and CVS Pharmacy before that. Ms. Parcus stated the applicant intends to bring a restaurant and catering business to the site, as well as a bagel and coffee shop with one drive-through lane.

Ms. Parcus reviewed the traffic circulation plan in which customers can enter the site through Bellaire Blvd. or Chimney Rock Rd. The plan encourages vehicles to exit through the northern driveway on Chimney Rock, and the plan complies with the stacking requirements. Ms. Parcus informed the traffic engineer comments were sent to the applicant and will need to be addressed before consideration. She restated the Public Works Department had no concerns or comments on the traffic impact analysis. She noted a landscape plan is usually required with a SUP application but was waived in this instance because the request is for a drive-through on an already existing building. There is existing landscaping on the property and the applicant is prepared to make replacements or improvements when needed. The Commission can require additional landscaping from the applicant as a condition if approved.

Ms. Parcus reiterated Mr. Stone'e earlier points that the site is located in the CMU zoning district and surrounded by commercial properties except for an apartment complex that is within the City of Houston. The Development Review Committee reviewed the

City of Bellaire Texas Page 3 of 7

Page 7 of 181 Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission June 11, 2020

application and did not voice any concerns. The Bellaire Fire and Police Departments were not aware of any complaints. An additional DRC meeting will be held to address any of the concerns that arise from the meeting. Two written comments were received in favor of the request, and they were sent out to the Commissioners via email.

v. Public Comments

There were no speakers for public comment.

vi. Response of Applicant

The applicant did not have any further comments to make.

vii. Questions from the Commission

Commissioner Taylor inquired about Jones & Carter's comment stating a left turn from Chimney Rock into the parking lot may be required. Mr. Ukaegbu replied he spoke with Jones & Carter earlier in the day and the comment was only a reference point and not of significant concern. Commissioner Taylor then referred to ARKK Engineering's comment regarding the parking lot and Mr. Stone confirmed if the parking lot were to change, detention issues would have to be addressed. Commissioner Taylor asked Director of Development Services, ChaVonne Sampson, if this would be checked during the building permit process and she confirmed. Ms. Sampson added the plans would be routed for review to the engineering department to make the determination.

Chair Gordon mentioned the letter from Jones & Carter anticipates a PM peak demand of 169 cars, asking how it compares to other drive-through businesses and where the number came from. Mr. Ukaegbu replied the stall will generate less traffic and most of the traffic will come from the Bellaire area, not from Houston. He does not believe it will create a significant impact. Chair Gordon asked about the number of cars going through the stall. Mr. Ukaegbu responded the overall traffic includes the restaurant, drive- through coffee shop, and stall, but not all traffic is going through the stall.

Commissioner Axelrad requested clarification if the outer second lane would be used for service, and Mr. Reese responded the second lane drive-through lane would only be used for bypassing.

viii. Invitations for Written Comments, if applicable

Administrative Assistant, Marleny Campos, announced the deadline for written comments regarding the application is Wednesday, July 1, 2020, at 5 p.m., and that written comments can be sent to [email protected].

ix. Closure of the Public Hearing

Motion:

City of Bellaire Texas Page 4 of 7

Page 8 of 181 Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission June 11, 2020

To adjourn the public hearing. {Moved by Marc Steinberg, Commissioner, and seconded by John Klug, Commissioner} RESULT: APPROVED. MOVER: Marc Steinberg, Commissioner SECONDER: John Klug, Commissioner AYES: Weldon Taylor, Commissioner, Michael Axelrad, Vice Chair, Michael Baker, Commissioner, Pam Nelson, Commissioner, John Klug, Commissioner, Marc Steinberg, Commissioner, and Ross Gordon, Chair

The public hearing was adjourned.

VIII. Committee Reports

There were no committee reports.

IX. Correspondence

There was no correspondence.

X. Requests for New Business, Announcements and Comments

A. Staff liaison report on the status of projects previously addressed by the commission as well as projects for future meetings.

Ms. Sampson stated the application from AT&T is ongoing and the City continues to work with the property owners to see what next steps are before bringing it back before the Commission. She informed the applicants were going to petition to go before the Board of Adjustment but was no longer needed. The City Attorneys determined an amendment to the planned development would not be required since, historically, other planned developments did not amend. Ms. Sampson said she has received a text amendment application for the Evelyn's Park parking lot and is working with the applicant to complete a SUP application.

Chair Gordon asked what the final determination of the AT&T application was, and Attorney Zachary Petrov answered the code, as written, doesn't distinguish between single- or multi- tenant office use and there were no issues related to zoning or the code. He confirmed the building could be sold for a multi-tenant office and it would not change the site plan.

Commissioner Steinberg asked what the applications from Evelyn's Park are requesting. Mr. Sampson replied the applications request to add a definition for public (accessory) parking and then add it as a specific use in the R-5 zoning district. The use would be for both park and commercial. Though the code allows parking for City parks, the City does not have a lease with

City of Bellaire Texas Page 5 of 7

Page 9 of 181 Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission June 11, 2020

Centerpoint Energy for the parking area - only with Evelyn's Park. The City would have to enter a lease agreement with CenterPoint. Commissioner Steinberg asked if the application is requesting permission to share the parking lot with Southside Commons, and Ms. Sampson replied yes, that is how the application has been submitted.

B. The Chair shall recognize any Commissioner who wishes to bring New Business to the attention of the Commission. Consideration of New Business shall be for the limited purpose of determining whether the matter is appropriate for inclusion on a future agenda of the Commission or referral to Staff for investigation.

Chair Gordon requested for an update for the joint workshop with the Building and Standards Commission (BSC) regarding residential building height maximums. Ms. Sampson replied she has talked to the Chair of BSC, Dan Collins. Since BSC already held a workshop with the same information, the Planning and Zoning Commission can move forward with their own workshop.

Commissioner Baker requested the Commission consider a discussion on residential garage floor heights as well. He noted seeing garages being built above crawl space and steep driveway ramps. Ms. Sampson responded it would be an item for BSC to consider. Chair Gordon asked Commissioner Baker to draft a letter to BSC and have the Commission approve it at the next meeting.

XI. Adjournment

Motion:

To adjourn the regular session of the Planning and Zoning Commission. {Moved by Pam Nelson, Commissioner, and seconded by Michael Axelrad, Vice Chair} RESULT: APPROVED. MOVER: Pam Nelson, Commissioner SECONDER: Michael Axelrad, Vice Chair AYES: Weldon Taylor, Commissioner, Michael Axelrad, Vice Chair, Michael Baker, Commissioner, Pam Nelson, Commissioner, John Klug, Commissioner, Marc Steinberg, Commissioner, and Ross Gordon, Chair

The regular session adjourned at 6:58 p.m.

WORKSHOP SESSION - IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE REGULAR SESSION

I. Call to Order and Announcement of a Quorum

Chair Gordon called to order of workshop at 6:59 PM and announced a quorum was present of all 7 commissioners.

II. Discussion with Kendig Keast Collaborative regarding the proposed amendments to Section 24-544, Technical Research Park District (TRPD), for the purpose of creating a new zoning district, North

City of Bellaire Texas Page 6 of 7

Page 10 of 181 Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission June 11, 2020

Bellaire Special Development (NBSD) District.

Chair Gordon introduced the item with background information, stating the amendments to create a new zoning district were a Commission-led initiative and supported by Kendig Keast Collaborative (KKC), the City's zoning consultant. Chair Gordon outlined the topics for discussion which included a high-level discussion on KKC's memorandum and district language, purpose and vision of the district, planned development (PD) considerations, permitted uses, maximum development intensities and lot coverages, maximum heights, items to defer to the planned development or other City authority, and any additional items of interest regarding the amendments.

The Commission agreed with KKC's comments to refine and add more depth to the purpose statement of the zoning district. Gary Mitchell and David Baird, of KKC, discussed PD-only districts and the purpose of a PD. The Commission expressed a desire for all applications in the new zoning district to be done through a PD. Regarding uses, the consensus of the Commission was to not include a list of prohibited or specific uses, only “allowable” uses which would need to be proposed through the PD process. The Commission decided to remove "office plaza" from "allowable uses" (currently named "permitted uses" in the draft language), and also agreed to not list multi-family uses as "allowable use". In discussing maximum lot coverage, the Commission felt it should be around 80 percent per PD application for the property. With regard to the allowable height, the Commissioners felt that an 85- foot max allowance should be in place for the portion of the property located along 610, with lower height allowances for the rest of the site. The Commission then considered setbacks and whether the City’s standard height-setback plane is sufficient, or if a different calculation should be created specifically for this district. Another topic that was discussed was the minimum acreage that would be required for each planned development application, for which the Commission decided on 2 acres in order to not make it too restrictive.

Chair Gordon will draft the language and purpose statement of the proposed zoning district and will consult no more than two members of the Commission for input. Once complete, a public hearing will be held.

III. Adjournment

Motion:

To adjourn the workshop of the Planning and Zoning Commission. {Moved by Michael Axelrad, Vice Chair, and seconded by Marc Steinberg, Commissioner} RESULT: APPROVED. MOVER: Michael Axelrad, Vice Chair SECONDER: Marc Steinberg, Commissioner AYES: Weldon Taylor, Commissioner, Michael Axelrad, Vice Chair, Michael Baker, Commissioner, Pam Nelson, Commissioner, John Klug, Commissioner, Marc Steinberg, Commissioner, and Ross Gordon, Chair

The workshop adjourned at 8:37 p.m.

City of Bellaire Texas Page 7 of 7

Page 11 of 181 AGENDA STATEMENT City of Bellaire

MEETING: Planning & Zoning Commission - Jul 09 2020 PREPARED BY: Ashley Parcus DEPARTMENT: Development Services

ITEM TITLE: Docket SU-2020-01: Consideration and possible action on an application filed by Bagel Realty, LLC, for a specific use permit as required by the City of Bellaire Code of Ordinances, Chapter 24, Planning and Zoning, Section 24-605, Application for Specific Use Permit, to operate a one-lane drive-through window on the east side of the property for a restaurant and catering business, as provided for in section 24-536 B. (2) c) of the City of Bellaire Zoning Code. The property is located within the Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Zoning District.

RECOMMENDATION: Finding that the application meets the standards set forth in Section 24-615 of the City's Code of Ordinances for a specific use permit, the Development Services Department recommends approval of the applicant's request to utilize a one-lane drive-through at the property located at 5422 Bellaire Boulevard.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: On June 11, 2020, a public hearing was held before the Commission on a request for a specific use permit (SUP) to utilize one-lane of an already existing drive-through facility at 5422 Bellaire Boulevard. The property is located within the City's Corridor Mixed-Use (CMU) Zoning District, which allows for commercial uses to have a drive-through with the approval of an SUP. The applicant plans to open a bagel shop, restaurant, and catering facility within the existing building and would like to offer drive- through service to their customers.

During the public hearing, there were no concerns or comments voiced by residents. Staff has received a total of 4 public comments in support of this application, and they are included in your packet materials.

Summary: The Development Services Department has focused on three major categories for the consideration of this request. The categories are not listed in any particular order.

Consideration One: Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan highlights that this site is auto-oriented and welcomes commercial, retail, office, and service uses along a highly traveled corridor. The CMU Zoning District encourages land use compatibility and increased aesthetics, both of which the applicant will achieve through the re-

Page 12 of 181 purposing of this property. This application does not create an adverse effects on the adjacent properties, and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

Consideration Two: Impact to Residential Properties Many of the non-residential properties located within the CMU Zoning District directly impact residential properties because they are located immediately adjacent to a residential zoning district. However, that is not the case for this site. 5422 Bellaire Boulevard is bordered to the north, east, and south by other properties located within the CMU, and to the west by the City of Houston. Since this property is surrounded by commercial properties within the corridor mixed-use zoning district, residential properties are not directly impacted by this development.

Traffic. A Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared for this request, and has been reviewed and approved by the City's Traffic Engineer and Public Works Department. The report and comments from the Traffic Engineer are attached. The TIA indicates that the traffic generated by this request is comparable to that for other similar uses, which are allowable under the CMU Zoning District, and should not have measurable impact on the surrounding roadway network. The conclusion indicates that the utilization of the drive-through facility will not cause any adverse impacts to the surrounding area.

Screening and Buffering. While there are requirements set forth within the City's Code of Ordinances and Comprehensive Plan for the CMU Zoning District, the request is simply to utilize an already existing drive-through facility, and therefore, does not require that any additional landscaping be installed. However, a condition regarding the requirement of landscaping can be added to the approval of the request if the Commission deems it necessary. The site already contains some landscaping elements, which the applicant has no intention of removing.

Consideration Three: Land Use Compatibility As was previously stated, this property is surrounded on all sides by other commercial businesses, with the exception of an apartment complex to the northwest, which is located within the City of Houston. It is also important to note that a drive-through is listed as being an allowable use within the CMU, with the approval of an SUP. There are not any land use compatibility issues with the approval of this request.

CITY ATTORNEY REVIEW:

☐ Yes ☑ No

Page 2 of 168

Page 13 of 181 Page 3 of 168

Page 14 of 181 APPLICATION FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT PURSUANT TO SECTION 24-605 BELLAIRE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES

To: Ashley Parcus Development Services Coordinator Development Services City of Bellaire 7008 South Rice Avenue Bellaire, Texas 77401

March 20, 2020

) (1 Name and Address of Applicant: Bagel Realty LLC 5208 Bissonnet Street, Bellaire, Texas 77401.

(2) Applicable Bellaire City Ordinance: Section 24-605 as recently amended in 2019.

(3) Legal Description and Street Address: The street address is 5422 Bellaire Boulevard, Bellaire, Texas 77401, and the legal description is:

1.166 acres or 50,779 square feet of land situated in the W.J. Brown Survey, Abstract Number 132, Harris County, Texas, being all of that certain called Unrestricted Reserve “A” of CHIMNEY ROCK SE, a subdivision shown in map or plat and recorded in Film Code Number 423050 of the Map Records of Harris County, Texas, said 1.166 acres or 50,779 square feet of land being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at a 5/8 inch iron rod with cap set at the intersection of the Easterly right-of-way line of Chimney Rock Road (90 foot wide) as shown on map or plat recorded under Volume 3, Page 60 of the Map Records of Harris County, Texas, with the Northerly right-of-way line of Bellaire Boulevard (120 foot wide) as shown on map or plat recorded under Volume 3 Page 60 of the Map Records of Harris County, Texas; THENCE N 02 deg. 25 min. 50 sec. W, along the Easterly right-of-way line of said Chimney Rock Road, a distance of 329.66 feet to a 5/8 inch rod with cap found for the most Westerly Southwest corner of Unrestricted Reserve “B” of said CHIMNEY ROCK SE subdivision; THENCE N 87 deg. 30 min. 57 sec. E along a Southerly line of said Unrestricted Reserve “B,” a distance of 153.81 feet to a 5/8 inch iron rod with cap found for an interior corner of said Unrestricted Reserve “B;” THENCE S 02 deg. 29 min. 03 sec. E, partially along a Westerly line of said Unrestricted Reserve “B” and the Westerly line of that certain called 75 foot X 270 foot tract as described in deed and recorded in he Official Public Records of Real Property of Harris County, Texas under County Clerk’s File Number P954975, a distance of 329.96 feet to a 3/8 inch iron rod found in the Northerly right-of-way line of said Bellaire Boulevard for the Southwesterly corner of said 75 foot X 270 foot tract;

Page 4 of 168

Page 15 of 181 THENCE S 87 deg. 37 min. 40 sec. W along the Northerly right-of-way line of said Bellaire Boulevard a distance of 154.12 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 1.166 acres or 50,779 square feet of land.

(4) Statement of Ownership: The subject property is owned by Bagel Realty, LLC, a Texas limited partnership (LP) via a Special Warranty Deed with Vendor’s Lien executed December 6, 7 and 10, 2019. The initial registered agent for the LLC is Michael Saghian, 5422 Bellaire Boulevard, Bellaire, Texas 77401. Attached is the Certificate of Formation, showing a filing date of October 9, 2019, and a City Planning Letter from Fidelity National Title prepared on January 6, 2019 with an effective date of December 29, 2019.

(5) Proposed Specific Use: Applicant is the new owner in fee simple of the property described above. Applicant intends to put in a restaurant and move its current catering business (Voss Catering) and establish a new restaurant (New York Bagels and Coffee Shop) to this new location at 5422 Bellaire Boulevard, Bellaire, Texas 77401. The current building was formerly an auto parts store (Advance Auto Parts), a drug store (CVS), and after that a pawn shop (Money Mart Pawn and/or Half Price Pawn). The drug store operated a drive in window there, and it still exists. Applicant wants to utilize this drive in window for its customers and that is the purpose of this application. The drive through area has two lanes, but Applicant only wants to use the lane that is next to the building (left lane), and not the far lane (right lane) on the East side of the property. That right lane will be open and will allow not only for vehicles to exit the area for regular non drive through customers, but also for those few times when vehicles might stack up. When that occurs, those vehicles will be free to exit the left drive through lane by driving into the right lane and either leave the site or park in the regular parking spaces to go inside and purchase food, etc.

(6) Survey: Attached is the survey from Hovis Surveying Company/Harry H. Hovis, Registered Professional Land Surveyor No. 1814, dated September 10, 2002 (Notes) and November 5, 2002 (Certification bottom right of survey)

(7) Scaled Site Plan: Attached is an overall site plan prepared by Reese Design Services.

(8) A Landscape Plan: Landscaping already exists at the site. It consists of around 19 small crepe myrtle trees, 2 Mexican Fan Palms, 3 unknown trees along the fence line on the East side of the property, and waist high bushes along the North, South and West sides of the property and along some of the parking fronting Bellaire

Page 5 of 168

Page 16 of 181 Boulevard. None of the current landscaping will be removed. Applicant may in the future improve on landscaping as needed.

(9) A Traffic Impact Analysis or Trip Generation Report: Attached is our Traffic Impact Analysis titled Commercial Development Located at the Northeast Quadrant of Chimney Rock Road and Bellaire Boulevard, City of Bellaire, Texas 77401. The analysis was prepared by Traff Data & Associates, Inc. in December 2019 for Reese Design Services.

(10) Environmental Assessment Statement: The amount of impact on the site and all surrounding properties should be minimal with regards to this request to utilize the drive in window. This drive in window is on the East side of the property and the accompanying drive to the window and exit from the window are already in place. All that needs to be done is to remove the boards over the current window, make any necessary repairs or upgrade the glass and/or the side of the building to make the pickup window operable.

Attached is an environmental assessment titled Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, dated January 19, 2012 prepared by Terracon Consultants, Inc. of Houston, Texas for the prior occupant of the subject property.

(11) The Names and Addresses of All Owners of the Property Required to be Notified Under Article 24-605: See attached Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. We think that there are 70 properties in Bellaire, Texas within 500 feet of Applicant’s property. We went a bit beyond the required radius. The list does not include City of Houston property owners to the West of the subject property on the other side of Chimney Rock Road, and does not include property North of Dashwood Street, which also is in Houston, Texas.

Page 6 of 168

Page 17 of 181 Page 7 of 168

Page 18 of 181 DESCRIPTION

Page 8 of 168

Page 19 of 181 Page 9 of 168

Page 20 of 181 Page 10 of 168

Page 21 of 181 Page 11 of 168

Page 22 of 181 Page 12 of 168

Page 23 of 181 Page 13 of 168

Page 24 of 181 Page 14 of 168

Page 25 of 181 Page 15 of 168

Page 26 of 181 Page 16 of 168

Page 27 of 181 Page 17 of 168

Page 28 of 181 Page 18 of 168

Page 29 of 181 Page 19 of 168

Page 30 of 181 Page 20 of 168

Page 31 of 181 Page 21 of 168

Page 32 of 181 A B C D E F G H I J CITY OF BELLAIRE, TEXAS WESTPARK DRIVE

1 LOOP CENTRAL DRIVE 1

PIN OAK PARK

2 2

NEWCASTLE TRAIL

GLENMONT DR. GLENMONT DRIVE CENTERPOINT ENERGY

PIN OAK Scale: 1"= 600' MIDDLE SCHOOL August 2017

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Feet

3 Graphic Scale JOE GAITHER 3 PARK CENTERPOINT SERVICE CENTER Street Index CHEVRON FACILITY WEST LOOP 610 SO. RICE AVE.

GULFTON ST.

4 4 ASHBROOK DR. EPISCOPAL HIGH SCHOOL WARE FAMILY PARK

ELM ST.

MANDARIAN CHINESE LANGUAGE IMMERSION MAGNET SCHOOL PARK

PALMETTO ST. MULBERRY 5 BLDGS. 5

FELD PARK

BLDGS. CLAREWOOD ST. VIC DRISCOLL PARK BLDGS. LOCUST PARK 6 6 MAPLERIDGE

Post Office Main Branch BLDGS. EVELYN'S PARK CHIMNEY ROCK ROAD 7 PASEO PARK 7

BISSONNET

LOFTIN PARK

GYM CTS. CONDIT SCHOOL 8 POOL ELEMENTARY 8 CITY HALL BALL FIELD

FIRE STATION Southern Pacific Railroad

JESSAMINE

ASPEN

9 HUISACHE 9 PARK RUSS PITMAN GRAND LAKE

EVERGREEN PARK

10 10 WEST LOOP 610

KINDLE FIELD

RENWICK DRIVE HORN ELEMENTARY 11 SCHOOL 11 HOLLY STREET TRAIL

BELLAIRE SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

CITY PROPERTY LAFAYETTE PARK

12 PUBLIC WORKS 12 SERVICE CENTER WASTEWATER TREATMENT NEWCASTLE TRAIL PLANT 7322 Southwest Freeway, Suite 1040 Houston, Texas 77074 (713) 400-2755 Fax (713) 400-2754 www.arkkengineers.com TX PE Firm No. 13872 A B C D E F G H I J

Page 22 of 168

Page 33 of 181 Page 23 of 168

Page 34 of 181 Page 24 of 168

Page 35 of 181 Page 25 of 168

Page 36 of 181 Page 26 of 168

Page 37 of 181 Page 27 of 168

Page 38 of 181 Page 28 of 168 Page 39 of 181 Page 29 of 168 Page 40 of 181

APPENDIX E

Site Photographs

Page 30 of 168

Page 41 of 181 MONEY MART PAWN 92117676 JANUARY 16, 2012

Photo #1 View of the southern site limits Photo #2 Eastern site limits as viewed looking west. looking north.

Photo #3 View of the northern site limits Photo #4 Western site limits as viewed looking east. looking south.

Photo #5 View of the east side of the Photo #6 View of the north side of the subject building. subject building.

Page 31 of 168

Page 42 of 181 MONEY MART PAWN 92117676 JANUARY 16, 2012

Photo #7 View of the west side of the Photo #8 View of retail sales area. subject building.

Photo #9 View of the warehouse portion Photo #10 Another view of the warehouse. of the subject building.

Photo #11 View of a second floor storage Photo #12 View of the parking area located area. on the southern portion of the site.

Page 32 of 168

Page 43 of 181 MONEY MART PAWN 92117676 JANUARY 16, 2012

Photo #13 View of the dumpster enclosure Photo #14 View of three transformers positioned on the north side of located along the northern site the subject building. limits.

Photo #15 View of M&M Hobby located Photo #16 View of adjoining property east, north of the site. a medical office building.

Photo #17 View of the Bellaire Triangle Photo #18 View of a building under Shopping Center located on construction on adjacent adjacent property south. property west.

Page 33 of 168

Page 44 of 181 Page 34 of 168

Page 45 of 181 Page 35 of 168

Page 46 of 181 Page 36 of 168

Page 47 of 181 Page 37 of 168

Page 48 of 181 Page 38 of 168

Page 49 of 181 Page 39 of 168

Page 50 of 181 Page 40 of 168

Page 51 of 181 Page 41 of 168

Page 52 of 181 Page 42 of 168

Page 53 of 181 Page 43 of 168

Page 54 of 181 Page 44 of 168

Page 55 of 181 Page 45 of 168

Page 56 of 181 Page 46 of 168

Page 57 of 181 Page 47 of 168

Page 58 of 181 Page 48 of 168

Page 59 of 181 Page 49 of 168

Page 60 of 181

Page 61 of 181 of 61 Page Page 50 of 168 of 50 Page 1

SITE PLAN

THRU DRIVE- THRU THRU DRIVE- DRIVE- THRU

DRIVE- BAGEL

CATERING

KITCHEN RESTAURANT

ONE WAY NOTE: SITE CONDITIONS ARE EXISTING TO REMAIN. SITE PLAN SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. NO WORK IS INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. ALL BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGES:

NOT FOR REGULATORY APPROVAL, PERMITTING

OR CONSTRUCTION SITE PLAN A101 RESTAURANT REESE DESIGN SERVICES

5422 BELLAIRE BLVD, REESE DS, INC. BELLAIRE, TX 77401 ARCHITECTURE & INTERIOR DESIGN 6420 RICHMOND, SUITE #345, HOUSTON, TX 77057 P (713) 572-5200 [email protected] www.reeseds.com Page 51 of 168

Page 62 of 181 7UDIILF,PSDFW$QDO\VLV

&RPPHUFLDO'HYHORSPHQW /RFDWHGDWWKH1RUWKHDVW4XDGUDQWRI &KLPQH\5RFN5RDGDQG%HOODLUH%RXOHYDUG &LW\RI%HOODLUH7H[DV

3UHSDUHG)RU

6XEPLWWHG7R

3UHSDUHG%\ 7UDII'DWD $VVRFLDWHV,QF 5HJLVWUDWLRQ) 0D\

Page 52 of 168

Page 63 of 181 Traffic Impact Analysis

Commercial Development Located at the Northeast Quadrant of Chimney Rock Road and Bellaire Boulevard, City of Bellaire, Texas 77401

Prepared For:

Submitted To:

Prepared By: Traff Data & Associates, Inc. Registration # F-4119 May 2020

Page 53 of 168

Page 64 of 181 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. a (713) 446-8167 Traffic Engineering Advocacy Group

TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents 1

Executive Summary 2

Traffic Impact Analysis Introduction Site Description 3 Study Methodology 3 Study Area Site Accessibility 4 Area Roadways 4 Existing Traffic Volumes and Conditions 4 Projected Traffic Growth 5

Analysis Capacity Analysis 5 Site Traffic Characteristics 6 Trip Generation 7 Trip Distribution and Assignment 7 Traffic Safety Investigation and Observations 7 Left-Turn Lane Analysis 8 Traffic Impact Assessment 8 Operations Analysis 8 Conclusion Summary of Findings and Recommendations 9

Appendix Appendix A: Exhibits 10 Appendix B: Tables 18 Appendix C: Traffic Data 21 Appendix D: Left-Turn Lane Warrant Analysis 30 Appendix E: Synchro Report 53

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Table of Contents May 2020 Page 1 Page 54 of 168

Page 65 of 181 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. a (713) 446-8167 Traffic Engineering Advocacy Group

Executive Summary This report presents a summary of findings of a Traffic Impact Analysis performed by Traff Data & Associates for Reese Design Services to assess the traffic impacts of the proposed Restaurant and Bagel/Coffee Shop with drive-Through which was previously used as a Pharmacy/Drugstore and determine the following:

 Document the transportation impacts of the proposed development on the area roadway network and to examine the critical elements, which might affect site accessibility.

The scope of this study included collection of available existing traffic data along Chimney Rock Road, Bellaire Boulevard and Dashwood Drive, determining an estimate of the number of trips that may be generated by the proposed development, documenting the transportation impacts of the proposed development on the area roadway network and examining the critical elements, which might affect site accessibility with respect to on-site circulation.

With current emphasis on safety and the efficient operation of existing facilities, the need to implement projects that provides optimum traffic control has assumed increased importance. This has resulted in the requirement for engineers, technicians, and other design and operations personnel to design, implement, and provide improvements to ensure that they are effective. The developer has recognized that access management will be an especially critical part of traffic operations along Chimney Rock Road, Bellaire Boulevard and Dashwood Drive and the immediate vicinity, and have applied good access management in the proposed development.

Capacity analysis performed as part of this development indicates that the critical intersections within the immediate vicinity of the proposed development will continue to operate at an acceptable level of service for an urban area with or without the development.

Based on in-depth field investigation and Traffic impact analysis performed as a result of this development, it is evident that this development will not have adverse impact on the adjacent roadway system.

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Executive Summary May 2020 Page 2 Page 55 of 168

Page 66 of 181 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. a (713) 446-8167 Traffic Engineering Advocacy Group

INTRODUCTION Traff Data and Associates, Inc. (TDAI) was retained by Reese Design Services to assess the traffic impacts of the proposed Restaurant and Bagel/Coffee Shop with drive-through which was previously used as a Pharmacy/Drugstore and determine the following:  Document the transportation impacts of the proposed connection on the area roadway network and to examine the critical elements, which might affect accessibility.

Site Description The proposed development is located at the northeast quadrant of Bellaire Boulevard and Chimney Rock Road in the City of Bellaire, Harris County, Texas 77401. Exhibit 1 (Appendix A) illustrates the project location relative to area roadway network (Key Map 531-F). Exhibit 2 (Appendix A) shows the aerial photograph of the site location and surrounding area. The development will comprise of an 8,496 square feet Fast Casual Restaurant and a 2,552 square feet Bagel Shop. Exhibit 3 (Appendix A) shows the site plan of the proposed development.

Study Methodology The traffic impacts of the proposed development were established through the following sequence of activities:  A field reconnaissance of the roadways in the vicinity of the site was conducted for the purposes of gaining insight into existing travel patterns and characteristics.  Turning movement counts were collected at critical intersections within the immediate vicinity of the site during AM and PM peak hour.  24-hour bi-directional counts were collected along Chimney Rock Road within the immediate vicinity of the site.  Calculation of the trip generation estimates of the development for the AM and PM peaks th hours using the 10 Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual.  Distribution and assignment of the generated trips to the area roadway system based on the orientation of populations and their future growth, as well as area travel patterns.  Traffic safety evaluation along the immediate vicinity of the proposed site.

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Traffic Impact Analysis May 2020 Page 3 Page 56 of 168

Page 67 of 181 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. a (713) 446-8167 Traffic Engineering Advocacy Group

STUDY AREA Site Accessibility Factors that affect accessibility of a site are its geographic location (with respect to other areas of activity), the efficiency of the roadways system serving the site, and planned roadway improvements. Roadway systems efficiency is a function of traffic volumes and available roadway capacity.

Area Roadways The proposed development will be provided with access from a local and regional standpoint. Access to the development will be provided via Chimney Rock Road, Bellaire Boulevard and Dashwood Drive.

Chimney Rock Road is a four-lane, divided boulevard that provides north/south mobility to the proposed development. The posted speed limit on Chimney Rock Road is 35 mph within the vicinity of the site.

Bellaire Boulevard is a six-lane divided boulevard that provides east-west mobility to the proposed development. The posted speed limit on Bellaire Boulevard is 35 mph within the vicinity of the site.

Dashwood Drive is a four-lane undivided street that that provides east/west mobility to the proposed development. The posted speed limit on Dashwood Drive is 30 mph.

Existing Traffic Volumes and Conditions A baseline condition for existing traffic operations was established to measure the impact of the proposed re-development along Chimney Rock Road, Bellaire Boulevard and Dashwood Drive. Turning movement’s counts were collected during the AM and PM peak hours at the intersections deemed critical to the study on December 4 and December 5, 2019. Exhibit 4 (Appendix A) shows the existing AM and PM turning movement counts collected within the immediate vicinity of the site. Details of the AM and PM manual turning movement counts conducted for two hour-peak periods (6:30 AM to 8:30 AM and 4:30 PM to 6:30 PM) are

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Traffic Impact Analysis May 2020 Page 4 Page 57 of 168

Page 68 of 181 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. a (713) 446-8167 Traffic Engineering Advocacy Group presented in Appendix C. 24-hour bi-directional counts were collected along Chimney Rock Road on December 5, 2019. Details of the 24-hour counts are presented in Appendix C. Current traffic patterns and the existing street network provides a basis for analysis of the traffic impact of the proposed development. These factors must be considered with expected traffic generation characteristics of this project and others within the study area.

Projected Traffic Growth In order to obtain a better understanding on the traffic impact that a new development has on a roadway network, it is necessary to identify future traffic conditions with the trips generated by the new development and potential traffic diversion as a result of the proposed development. For this purpose, background traffic is increased by the annual growth rate for the future year that matches the anticipated build-out year of the proposed development. Considering the overall pace of development and construction of other thoroughfares and undeveloped properties within the surrounding area, a 2% per year growth rate is assumed to capture normal growth and development in the area from year 2019 when the project is anticipated to start to the anticipated build out year 2024 when the immediate vicinity will be fully developed. Exhibit 5 (Appendix A) shows projected traffic volume in year 2024.

ANALYSIS Capacity Analysis A capacity analysis was performed at the key critical intersection that provides access to the proposed development to determine the current traffic operating conditions. This intersection was analyzed using SYNCHRO, a traffic analysis software package. Synchro has the ability to model signalized and unsignalized intersections and calculate useful measures of effectiveness such as delay and queue lengths.

The results of the analysis are expressed as Level of Service (LOS). Level of Service is a quantitative measure used to identify how effective an intersection is at accommodating traffic. Intersection LOS ranges from LOS A (light traffic with no delays) to LOS F (extremely heavy traffic with long delays). Level of Service D is generally considered to be an acceptable level of

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Traffic Impact Analysis May 2020 Page 5 Page 58 of 168

Page 69 of 181 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. a (713) 446-8167 Traffic Engineering Advocacy Group service during peak hours. The general characteristics associated with each level of service for signalized and unsignalized intersection are presented in Tables 1 and 2.

The results from Synchro simulation give many measures of effectiveness (MOE’s), but the most meaningful for this analysis were average vehicle delay and level of service (LOS). Traffic volume analysis gives better understanding of the general nature of traffic in an area, but by itself does not indicate the ability of the roadway network to carry additional traffic or the quality of service given by the roadway facility. Because of this, the concept of level of service has been developed to describe traffic performance at intersections. An explanation of the concept of level of service is that it is similar to grades in school, A is best, F is the worst.

The unsignalized intersection level of service calculation evaluates each movement separately to identify problems (typically left turn from side streets). The calculation is based on the average stopped delay per vehicle for stop controlled movements. Level of service F indicates that there are insufficient gaps of suitable size to allow minor street traffic to safely enter or cross the major street. This is generally evident by long delays and queuing on the minor street. Level of service F may also result in more aggressive driving, with side street vehicles accepting shorter gaps. In such cases, some increase in conflicts and disruption to major street traffic can result. It should be noted that the major roadway traffic can still move effectively when LOS F is indicated for side street left turns, and that the side street volume may be only a small percentage of the total intersection volume. It is for this reasons that level of service results must be interpreted differently for signalized and unsignalized locations. The detailed analysis worksheets are provided in the Appendix E.

Site Traffic Characteristics To accurately evaluate the impacts of site generated traffic on the area’s roadway system, several factors must be considered. These factors include the identification of the appropriate time periods for analysis, the number of trips generated during the critical time period, the directional distribution of the site generated traffic, and the specific routes motorists will use when accessing

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Traffic Impact Analysis May 2020 Page 6 Page 59 of 168

Page 70 of 181 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. a (713) 446-8167 Traffic Engineering Advocacy Group the site.

Trip Generation The number of trips generated by a parcel of land is primarily a function of the land use contained on the site, the density of the individual land uses, and the intersection of the different land uses. Trip generation rates for the development were derived from the 10th edition of Trip Generation published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The trip generation estimates are shown in Table 3 (Appendix B).

Trip Distribution and Assignment The trip distribution for the generated trips was primarily based upon the directions from which vehicles will approach and depart the site. The directions depend on the efficiency and directness of the roadway network surrounding the site, the distribution of population and employment within the market area, and the location of competing land uses within the market area. Changes in distribution of population or the introduction of new competing land uses within the market area can change the directional distribution of vehicles over time. Existing traffic patterns and field observations were used to determine the directional distribution of site-generated traffic. Based on the determined directional distribution and the “split” of traffic entering and exiting the Shopping center, the distribution percentages were allotted to the most logical corresponding external development access points and then assigned to the local street network. Exhibit 6 (Appendix A) illustrates the trip distribution and assignment of the proposed development.

Traffic Safety Investigation and Observations An in-depth field review was conducted within the immediate vicinity of the proposed development. This review involves an inspection of the physical condition of the location and an observation of traffic operations along Chimney Rock Road, Bellaire Boulevard and Dashwood Drive during the critical peak hour. Information obtained from this field review in conjunction with review of Traffic Data collected by TDAI was used to analyze any potential existence of physical deficiencies. No sight distance obstructions exist within the immediate vicinity of the proposed entrances.

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Traffic Impact Analysis May 2020 Page 7 Page 60 of 168

Page 71 of 181 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. a (713) 446-8167 Traffic Engineering Advocacy Group

Left-Turn Lane Analysis The projected traffic volumes along Chimney Rock Road at the proposed site entrance, Driveway “C” were analyzed to determine if a southbound left-turn deceleration lane would be required. Some jurisdictions have published guidelines for evaluation of turn lanes. The criteria involve the number of left turn vehicles and the number of vehicles which are traveling in the opposing direction which the left turns must yield to in order to make their maneuver. Exhibit 7 (Appendix A) shows the number of vehicles used to calculate the left-turn lane warrant at the proposed entrance. Based on the projected left-turn volume (9 vph) and opposing traffic volume (858 vph) during the critical peak hour, a left-turn lane is not warranted as shown on Figure 5 of attached Left Turn Lane Installation Guidelines in Appendix D of this report.

Traffic Impact Assessment The traffic impacts generated by a proposed development are typically assessed in terms of the ability of the area roadway system to accommodate the existing background traffic plus site generated traffic, particularly at the site access drives and adjacent critical intersections. The non-site background or existing traffic and site generated traffic volume estimates were combined to establish an estimate of total traffic volumes. The total traffic projections are used to analyze future traffic conditions and determine roadway and intersection needs.

Operations Analysis The capacity analysis was conducted during the critical peak hour for the following conditions. 1. Existing Traffic 2. Projected Background Traffic Year 2024 (No Development) 3. Future Traffic Year 2024 with Development The results of the capacity analysis for the weekday peak hours are presented in Table 4 (Appendix B) and illustrated in Exhibits 4, 5 and 7 (Appendix A) respectively. Details of the simulation results are presented in Appendix E.

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Traffic Impact Analysis May 2020 Page 8 Page 61 of 168

Page 72 of 181 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. a (713) 446-8167 Traffic Engineering Advocacy Group

CONCLUSION Summary of Findings and Recommendations The following is a summary of the findings and recommendations obtained from the Traffic Impact Analysis performed along Chimney Rock Road, Bellaire Boulevard and Dashwood Drive for the proposed development.

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Traffic Impact Analysis May 2020 Page 9 Page 62 of 168

Page 73 of 181

Appendix A

Exhibits

Exhibit 1: Key Map 531-F 11

Exhibit 2: Aerial photograph 12

Exhibit 3: Site Plan 13

Exhibit 4: Existing Traffic 14

Exhibit 5: Future Background Traffic Year 2024 without Development 15

Exhibit 6: Trip Distribution & Assignment 16

Exhibit 7: Future Traffic Year 2024 with Development 17

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Appendix A: Exhibits May 2020 Page 10 Page 63 of 168

Page 74 of 181 &YIJCJU ,FZ.BQ'

Site Location

Page 64 of 168

Page 75 of 181 Page 65 of 168

Page 76 of 181

Page 77 of 181 of 77 Page Page 66 of 168 of 66 Page 1

SITE PLAN

THRU DRIVE- THRU THRU DRIVE- DRIVE- THRU

DRIVE- BAGEL

CATERING

KITCHEN RESTAURANT

ONE WAY NOTE: SITE CONDITIONS ARE EXISTING TO REMAIN. SITE PLAN SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. NO WORK IS INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. ALL BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGES:

NOT FOR REGULATORY APPROVAL, PERMITTING

OR CONSTRUCTION SITE PLAN A101 RESTAURANT REESE DESIGN SERVICES

5422 BELLAIRE BLVD, REESE DS, INC. BELLAIRE, TX 77401 ARCHITECTURE & INTERIOR DESIGN 6420 RICHMOND, SUITE #345, HOUSTON, TX 77057 P (713) 572-5200 [email protected] www.reeseds.com Page 67 of 168

Page 78 of 181 Page 68 of 168

Page 79 of 181 Page 69 of 168

Page 80 of 181 Page 70 of 168

Page 81 of 181

Appendix B

Tables

Table 1: LOS Definitions for Signalized Intersections 19 Table 2: LOS Definitions for Stop Controlled Intersections 19 Table 3a: Previous Land Use Trip Generation for Commercial Development 20 Table 3b: Proposed Land Use Trip Generation for Commercial Development 20 Table 4: Capacity Analysis for Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development 20

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Appendix B: Tables May 2020 Page 18 Page 71 of 168

Page 82 of 181 Table 1

Level of Service (LOS) Definitions for Signalized Intersections (1)

Level of Service Interpretation Delay (LOS) (2) Uncongested operations and progression is extremely A favorable; most vehicles arrive during the green phase and 0.00 - 10.0 do not stop at all. Uncongested operations and represents good progression; B 10.1 - 20.0 some vehicles may be stopped during the red phase. Light congestion and fair progression; occasional backups C 20.1 - 35.0 on critical approaches. Congestion on critical approaches is more noticeable. D Vehicles required to wait through more than one cycle 35.1 - 55.0 during short peaks. No long-standing lines formed. Severe congestion with poor progression; some long- standing lines on critical approaches. Blockage of E 55.1 - 80.0 intersection may occur if traffic signal does not provide for protected turning movements. F Total breakdown with stop-and-go operations. 80.1 +

(1) Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2010

(2) Intersection Signal Delay is Measured in seconds

Table 2

Level of Service (LOS) Definitions for Stop Controlled Intersections (1)

Level of Service Interpretation Delay (LOS) (2) Uncongested operations and progression is extremely A favorable; most vehicles arrive during the green phase and 0.00 - 10.0 do not stop at all. Uncongested operations and represents good progression; B 10.1 - 15.0 some vehicles may be stopped during the red phase. Light congestion and fair progression; occasional backups C 15.1 - 25.0 on critical approaches. Congestion on critical approaches is more noticeable. D Vehicles required to wait through more than one cycle 25.1 - 35.0 during short peaks. No long-standing lines formed. Severe congestion with poor progression; some long- standing lines on critical approaches. Blockage of E 35.1 - 50.0 intersection may occur if traffic signal does not provide for protected turning movements. F Total breakdown with stop-and-go operations. 50.1 +

(1) Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2010

(2) Stop Controlled Intersection Delay is Measured in seconds

Page 72 of 168

Page 83 of 181 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. a (713) 446-8167 Traffic Engineering Advocacy Group

TABLE 3A PREVIOUS LAND USE TRIP GENERATION COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AT BELLAIRE & CHIMNEY ROCK

ITE Land Use Name Units AM PM Code VPH IN OUT VPH IN OUT 11, 377 Pharmacy/Drugstore with Drive-Thru CVS 881 sq.ft 44 23 21 117 59 59

TABLE 3B PROPOSED LAND USE TRIP GENERATION COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AT BELLAIRE & CHIMNEY ROCK

ITE Land Use Name Units AM PM Code VPH IN OUT VPH IN OUT Fast Casual Restaurant 930 Restaurant 8,496 sq.ft 18 12 6 120 66 54 Bread/Donut/Bagel Shop with Drive- NY Bagel 2,551 sq.ft Thru* 940 99 49 49 49 24 25 11,047 TOTAL sq.ft 117 61 55 169 90 79

NB*: The drive-thru for the Bagel Shop adjoins the Restaurant Building to serve coffee for patrons of the restaurant. This would enhance accessibility and enable a seamless circulation plan.

Table 4 Capacity Analysis of Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development

AM PM

Intersection

Growth Growth Growth Existing Traffic Existing Traffic Existing Traffic With Development With Development With Development No Development 2% No Development 2% No Development Future Traffic Year 2024 Future Traffic Year 2024 Future Traffic Year 2024 Future Traffic Year 2024

1: Chimney Rock at Bellaire C | 31.5 D | 35.6 D | 39.6 D | 41.8 D | 45.7 D | 47.4

2: Chimney Rock at Dashwood Dr A | 5.1 A | 5.3 A | 5.4 A | 6.2 A | 6.7 A | 6.7

3: Chimney Rock at Driveway "C" A A A A A A

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Appendix B: Tables May 2020 Page 73 of 168 Page 20

Page 84 of 181

Appendix C

Traffic Data

Turning Movement Count: Chimney Rock Road at Bellaire Boulevard 22 Turning Movement Count: Chimney Rock Road at Dashwood Drive 24 Turning Movement Count: Chimney Rock Road at Driveway “C” 26 24 Hour Traffic Volume: Chimney Rock Road North of Bellaire Boulevard 28

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Appendix C: Traffic Data May 2020 Page 21 Page 74 of 168

Page 85 of 181 Turning Movement Count (TMC)

Intersection: Chimney Rock Road and Bellaire Boulevard Wednesday, December 4, 2019 6:30 AM to 8:30 AM Street Chimney Rock Road Bellaire Boulevard Direction Page 75of168 NorthboundSouthbound Eastbound Westbound Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Configuration 6:30 to 6:45 7 44 1 23 26 10 18 277 3 1 96 5 6:45 to 7:00 19 90 2 21 26 18 19 229 3 2 100 10 7:00 to 7:15 18 76 2 32 43 24 19 289 9 5 130 16 7:15 to 7:30 22 99 2 30 56 16 32 336 12 7 119 18 7:30 to 7:45 27 156 11 27 65 39 33 454 19 6 148 30 7:45 to 8:00 41 153 7 40 47 28 57 388 16 14 131 24 8:00 to 8:15 52 145 5 34 64 44 35 404 16 9 131 34 8:15 to 8:30 40 148 9 34 54 23 51 344 22 8 133 20 AM Peak Hour 160 602 230 134 176 1590 73 37 543 108 7:30 to 8:30 32 135

Wednesday, December 4, 2019 4:30 PM to 6:30 PM Street Chimney Rock Road Bellaire Boulevard Direction NorthboundSouthbound Eastbound Westbound Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Configuration 4:30 to 4:45 42 90 6 37 137 47 52 269 23 35 290 17 4:45 to 5:00 22 79 7 49 135 45 20 288 36 19 262 22 5:00 to 5:15 27 97 7 50 152 50 21 228 31 36 322 30 5:15 to 5:30 32 83 19 37 152 29 15 293 40 25 304 30 5:30 to 5:45 31 120 7 49 156 44 33 318 35 22 265 26 5:45 to 6:00 35 106 9 35 132 37 27 288 47 25 275 32 6:00 to 6:15 31 75 7 36 134 48 38 311 34 33 318 40 6:15 to 6:30 33 97 5 36 138 36 30 287 18 27 311 30 574 158 113 1210 156

Page 86of181 PM Peak Hour 5:15 to 6:15 129 384 42 157 105 1162 128 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. Turning Movement Count (TMC)

Intersection: Chimney Rock Road and Bellaire Boulevard Peak Hour Traffic: AM Peak: 6:45 AM to 7:45 AM PM Peak: 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM Street Chimney Rock Road Bellaire Boulevard Page 76of168 Direction NorthboundSouthbound Eastbound Westbound Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right AM Peak 160 602 32 135 230 134 176 1590 73 37 543 108 PM Peak 129 384 42 157 574 158 113 1210 156 105 1162 128

Peak Traffic

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800 AM Peak PM Peak Number of Vehicles 600

400

200

0 Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Chimney Rock Road Bellaire Boulevard Page 87of181

Traff Data & Associates, Inc. Turning Movement Count (TMC)

Intersection: Chimney Rock Road and Dashwood Drive Thursday, December 5, 2019 6:30 AM to 8:30 AM Street Chimney Rock Road Dashwood Drive Direction Page 77of168 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Configuration 6:30 to 6:4517962553446414 6:45 to 7:00 4 93 6 3 44 5 5 7 16 1 3 2 7:00 to 7:15 2 104 11 8 88 4 5 11 11 4 5 4 7:15 to 7:30 2 156 16 4 93 5 6 9 17 3 2 1 7:30 to 7:45 5 160 11 11 121 8 22 10 18 8 4 5 7:45 to 8:005218121110889119928 8:00 to 8:15 4 166 18 8 123 5 13 14 15 2 4 3 8:15 to 8:30 4 190 18 11 89 6 11 13 10 5 8 6 AM Peak Hour 24 18 7:30 to 8:30 18 734 59 41 441 27 55 48 52 22 Thursday, December 5, 2019 4:30 PM to 6:30 PM Street Chimney Rock Road Dashwood Drive Direction Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Configuration 4:30 to 4:45 12 158 11 6 225 24 11 11 19 21 19 10 4:45 to 5:00 6 158 11 9 200 21 22 17 16 21 26 10 5:00 to 5:15 10 145 3 10 224 14 8 7 6 21 16 13 5:15 to 5:30 8 105 7 6 259 22 9 9 20 12 10 16 5:30 to 5:4571902527015577845 5:45 to 6:00 8 192 1 8 213 11 10 1 9 8 17 8 6:00 to 6:15 4 138 5 7 220 13 8 7 2 11 9 9 6:15 to 6:30 2 101 8 8 206 12 13 7 14 9 10 18

Page 88of181 PM Peak Hour 31 908 81 50 44 61 75 71 49 4:30 to 5:30 36 566 32 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. Turning Movement Count (TMC)

Intersection: Chimney Rock Road and Dashwood Drive Peak Hour Traffic: AM Peak: 6:45 AM to 7:45 AM PM Peak: 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM Street Chimney Rock Road Dashwood Drive Page 78of168 Direction Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right AM Peak 18 734 59 41 441 27 55 48 52 24 18 22 PM Peak 36 566 32 31 908 81 50 44 61 75 71 49

Peak Traffic

1000

900

800

700

600

500 AM Peak 400 PM Peak Number of Vehicles 300

200

100

0 Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Chimney Rock Road Dashwood Drive Page 89of181

Traff Data & Associates, Inc. Turning Movement Count (TMC)

Intersection: Chimney Rock Road and Driveway Thursday, December 5, 2019 6:30 AM to 8:30 AM Street Chimney Rock Road Driveway Direction Page 79of168 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Configuration 6:30 to 6:4518203600100000 6:45 to 7:0028800591001000 7:00 to 7:153121001001002000 7:15 to 7:301173011091003000 7:30 to 7:453168001360001000 7:45 to 8:008223021072302000 8:00 to 8:150181001390202000 8:15 to 8:30220501982001000 AM Peak Hour 13 777 0 3 480 7:30 to 8:30 4506000 Thursday, December 5, 2019 4:30 PM to 6:30 PM Street Chimney Rock Road Driveway Direction Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Configuration 4:30 to 4:452185002472202000 4:45 to 5:004157022381100002 5:00 to 5:156145002130103001 5:15 to 5:303146012370000000 5:30 to 5:453172002414000001 5:45 to 6:002201002260204000 6:00 to 6:154153002310000000 6:15 to 6:302123022230001000 0

Page 90of181 PM Peak Hour 5:15 to 6:15 12 672 0 193542040 1 Traff Data & Associates, Inc. Turning Movement Count (TMC)

Intersection: Chimney Rock Road and Driveway Peak Hour Traffic: AM Peak: 6:45 AM to 7:45 AM PM Peak: 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM Street Chimney Rock Road Driveway Page 80of168 Direction Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right AM Peak13777034804506000 PM Peak12672019354204001

Peak Traffic

1000

900

800

700

600

500 AM Peak 400 PM Peak Number of Vehicles 300

200

100

0 Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Chimney Rock Road Driveway Page 91of181

Traff Data & Associates, Inc. 24 Hour Traffic Volume

Chimney Rock Road North of Bellaire Boulevard Northbound Thursday, December 5, 2019

TIME 0:00 0:15 0:30 0:45 TOTAL 0:00 6 13 8 5 32 1:00 1 11 3 6 21 2:00 426315 3:00 128516 4:00 8 7 15 13 43 5:00 20 17 21 39 97 6:00 31 61 86 99 277 7:00 117 184 180 230 711 8:00 178 201 173 164 716 9:00 148 118 125 133 524 10:00 104 110 90 115 419 11:00 117 118 97 121 453 12:00 136 140 128 135 539 13:00 139 157 142 153 591 14:00 135 153 139 128 555 15:00 119 151 134 126 530 16:00 143 184 170 156 653 17:00 143 142 150 184 619 18:00 136 121 120 98 475 19:00 95 82 79 82 338 20:00 75 64 53 63 255 21:00 62 51 41 49 203 22:00 44 28 22 28 122 23:00 24 18 20 15 77 TOTAL: 8,281

Chimney Rock Road North of Bellaire Boulevard Northbound 800

700

600

500

400

300

Number of Vehicles 200

100

Time

Traff Data & Associates, Inc. Page 81 of 168

Page 92 of 181 24 Hour Traffic Volume

Chimney Rock Road North of Bellaire Boulevard Southbound Thursday, December 5, 2019

TIME 0:00 0:15 0:30 0:45 TOTAL 0:00 967830 1:00 846321 2:00 8 10 4 4 26 3:00 03148 4:00 4 9 6 15 34 5:00 13 26 26 42 107 6:00 44 46 58 78 226 7:00 125 133 143 144 545 8:00 142 123 97 123 485 9:00 121 124 104 125 474 10:00 99 140 134 133 506 11:00 148 144 143 137 572 12:00 167 136 155 163 621 13:00 159 124 130 161 574 14:00 133 148 162 172 615 15:00 212 184 225 237 858 16:00 244 248 238 283 1013 17:00 291 336 336 309 1272 18:00 287 282 236 236 1041 19:00 236 220 121 109 686 20:00 111 93 80 80 364 21:00 60 82 62 71 275 22:00 61 45 43 47 196 23:00 25 26 26 22 99 TOTAL: 10,648

Chimney Rock Road North of Bellaire Boulevard Southbound 1400

1200

1000

800

600

Number of Vehicles 400

200

Time

Traff Data & Associates, Inc. Page 82 of 168

Page 93 of 181

Appendix D

Left-Turn Lane Warrant Analysis

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Appendix D: Left-Turn Lane Warrant Analysis May 2020 Page 30 Page 83 of 168

Page 94 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 1

Left-Turn Lane Installation Guidelines

Kay Fitzpatrick Research Engineer Texas Transportation Institute, 3135 TAMU College Station, TX 77843-3135 phone: 979/845-7321, fax: 979/845-6481 email: [email protected]

Tim Wolff Graduate Assistant Researcher Texas Transportation Institute, 3135 TAMU College Station, TX 77843-3135 phone: 979/845-9903, fax: 979/845-6481 email: [email protected]

Submitted for 2nd Urban Street Symposium Sponsored by Transportation Research Board July 2003

ABSTRACT

The addition of a left-turn lane can improve the operations and safety at an intersection. Guidelines as to when to include a left-turn lane in intersection design are plentiful. Because of the quantity of methods, questions are asked regarding which method to use. This paper reviewed eight selected techniques and a number of criteria present in state manuals. Methods based on delay typically do not recommend a left-turn lane at lower left or through volumes when compared to methods based on conflict avoidance or safety. Because of the high benefits for crash reductions provided by left-turn lanes, a method that results in a recommendation at lower volumes would be preferred. The Harmelink model is a widely accepted approach that is based on conflict avoidance. The procedure was first proposed in 1967 and includes assumptions that may need to be revised. Findings from current research would suggest a critical gap of 5.5 sec (rather than 5.0 sec), a time to make left turn of 4.3 sec (rather than 3.0 sec), and a time to clear the lane of 3.2 sec (rather than 1.9 sec). A table was developed that lists suggested guidelines for installing left-turn lanes for operating speeds of 30, 50, and 70 mph (50, 80, and 110 km/h).

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 84 of 168

Page 95 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 2

BACKGROUND

The addition of a left-turn lane can improve the operations and safety at an intersection. A recent FHWA study found that the addition of a left-turn lane can result in reductions of crashes from 7 to 48 percent.1 Other studies have demonstrated the benefits of delay reductions with the installation of a left-turn lane on two-lane highways.2 Guidelines as to when to include a left- turn lane in intersection design are plentiful. Some are based on minimizing conflicts in terms of the occurrence of a through vehicle arriving behind a turning vehicle; others are based on decreasing the amount of delay to through vehicles, and some are based on consideration of safety. Because of the quantity of methods, questions are asked regarding which method to use. For example, are certain techniques better for a rural versus an urban setting? Do the evaluations differ for number of lanes and for type of intersection? This paper reviewed eight selected techniques and a number of criteria present in state manuals. Some of the assumptions used in the techniques will be reviewed, and suggestions on changes to selected guidelines will be made.

Common terms are used in several of the techniques. Figure 1 graphically shows the following movements that are used to determine the need for a left-turn lane in several of the guidelines: x Advancing Volume (VA) – the total peak hourly volume of traffic on the major road approaching the intersection from the same direction as the left-turn movement under consideration. x Left-Turn Volume (VL) – the portion of the advancing volume that turn left at the intersection. x Percent Left Turns (PL) – the percentage of the advancing volume that turn left; equal to the left-turn volume divided by the advancing volume (PL = VL y VA). x Straight Through Volume (VS) – the portion of the advancing volume that travel straight through the intersection (VL + VS = VA). x Opposing Volume (VO) – the total peak hourly volume of vehicles opposing the advancing volume.

Left-Turning Volume Opposing Volume (VL) (VO) Advancing Volume Straight Through (VA) Volume (VS)

Figure 1. Volumes for Use in Left-Turn Lane Warrant Methods.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 85 of 168

Page 96 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 3

GUIDELINES REVIEWED

A review of the literature was performed on many sources, including research reports, state and federal design manuals, and handbooks. Although many techniques are currently in use by various organizations to determine the need for left-turn lanes, several are either very similar or identical. Details are provided below on those methods that appeared to have distinctive results.

Harmelink

The oldest research found on evaluating the need for left-turn lanes at unsignalized intersections was that of M.D. Harmelink3 in a paper that was published in 1967. His research provided the foundation for many current left-turn guidelines. Harmelink based his work on a queuing model in which arrival and service rates are assumed to follow negative exponential distributions. He states that the probability of a through vehicle arriving behind a stopped, left-turning vehicle should not exceed 0.02 for 40 mph (64 km/h), 0.015 for 50 mph (80 km/h), and 0.01 for 60 mph (96 km/h). He presented his criteria in the form of graphs, 18 in all. To use his graphs, the advancing volume, opposing volume, operating speed, and left-turn percentage need to be known. Graphs for speeds of 40, 50, and 60 mph (64, 80, and 96 km/h) were given, as well as 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, and 40 percent left-turn volumes. An example graph of Harmelink’s criteria for determining the need for left-turn lanes is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Harmelink – Left-Turn Lane Warrant Graph, 40 mph (64 km/h), 5% Left Turns, 1967.3

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 86 of 168

Page 97 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 4

AASHTO Green Book

AASHTO’s Green Book4 contains a table for use in determining the need for a left-turn lane on two-lane highways (see Table 1). Similar tables were also present in the 1984,5 1990,6 and 19947 editions of the Green Book. The values in the table are based upon Harmelink’s work.

Table 1. AASHTO – Guide for Left-Turn Lanes on Two-Lane Highways, 2001.4 Opposing Advancing Volume (vph) Volume (vph) 5% Left Turns 10% Left Turns 20% Left Turns 30% Left Turns 40 mph (60 km/h) operating speed 800 330 240 180 160 600 410 305 225 200 400 510 380 275 245 200 640 470 350 305 100 720 515 390 340 50 mph (80 km/h) operating speed 800 280 210 165 135 600 350 260 195 170 400 430 320 240 210 200 550 400 300 270 100 615 445 335 295 60 mph (100 km/h) operating speed 800 230 170 125 115 600 290 210 160 140 400 365 270 200 175 200 450 330 250 215 100 505 370 275 240

NCHRP Report 279

In 1985, the Transportation Research Board published NCHRP Report 279, Intersection Channelization Design Guide.8 In that report, data from Harmelink’s work were used to establish guidelines for determining the need for a left-turn lane. The following advice was provided for unsignalized intersections:

1. Left-turn lanes should be considered at all median cross-overs on divided, high-speed highways. 2. Left-turn lanes should be provided at all unstopped (i.e., through) approaches of primary, high-speed rural highway intersections with other arterials or collectors. 3. Left-turn lanes are recommended at approaches to intersection for which the combination of through, left, and opposing volumes exceeds the warrants shown in Figure 3. 4. Left-turn lanes on stopped or secondary approaches should be provided based on analysis of the capacity and operations of the unsignalized intersection. Considerations include minimizing delays to right turning or through vehicles and total approach capacity.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 87 of 168

Page 98 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 5

Figure 3. NCHRP 279 – Left-Turn Lane Guidelines, 1985.8

Oppenlander and Bianchi (ITE Technical Committee)

ITE Technical Committee 4A-22 in the 1980s undertook the task of developing criteria for the provision of separate left-turn lanes at unsignalized and signalized intersections.9 The work performed by ITE Committee 4A-22 expanded the Harmelink model to include additional speeds (30- and 70-mph [48 and 113 km/h] roadways) and to include additional left turn percentages. An example of one of the guideline graphs produced is shown in Figure 4.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 88 of 168

Page 99 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 6

Figure 4. Oppenlander and Bianchi – Left-Turn Lane Guidelines; Unsignalized, Two-Lane, 30 mph (48 km/h) Operating Speed, 1990.9

NCHRP Report 348

F. J. Koepke and H. S. Levinson provided two methods for determining the need for left-turn lanes in NCHRP Report 348.10 The first method is shown in Figures 5 and 6; however, Koepke and Levinson state that in most cases, left-turn lanes should be provided where there are more than 12 left turns per peak hour. The second method presents the values included in the Green Book for determining whether a left-turn lane should be provided. They also stated that “left- turn lanes should be provided when delay caused by left-turning vehicles blocking through vehicles would become a problem.” They emphasize the fact that separate left-turn lanes not only increase intersection capacity, but also increase vehicle safety.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 89 of 168

Page 100 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 7

Figure 5. NCHRP Report 348 – Left-Turn Lane Guidelines for 30-35 mph (48-56 km/h), 1992.10

Figure 6. NCHRP Report 348 – Left-Turn Lane Guidelines for 40-45 mph (64-72 km/h), 1992.10

Modur et al.

A Texas study by Modur et al. examined the choice of median design and developed a set of guidelines for determining when to recommend left-turn lanes for arterial streets with speeds less than 45 mph (72 km/h).11 The guidelines were developed using delay data generated from a simulation model. Table 2 shows the developed guidelines. The authors noted that sections with left-turn treatments are better than the sections with no treatments, and they recommended that left-turn treatments be used in sections with a disproportionately large number of crashes even though not warranted due to the operational criteria.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 90 of 168

Page 101 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 8

Table 2. Modur et al. – Left-Turn Lane Warrant Chart, 1990.11 Opposing 400-600 <200 Hourly Traffic 200-400 Left-Turn Volume per 0-200 Traffic Lane per 400-600 200-400 Volume Hour 200-400 0-200 400-600 400-600 200-400 0-200 0-150 150-300 300-450 Hourly Straight Through Traffic Volume per Lane Black boxes denote that a left-turn treatment is desirable, provided it can be accommodated within the available right-of-way and pavement width. Gray boxes mean that an operational left-turn treatment may be considered. Left-turn lane or raised median is satisfactory based on individual site considerations. White boxes signify that no left-turn treatment is required based on operational considerations.

Hawley and Stover

Hawley and Stover also used delay to generate guidelines on when to install a left-turn lane on four-lane undivided arterials.12 They considered the delay to though vehicles and asked under what volumes turning vehicles would seriously impact through traffic. They then evaluated the proposed guidelines with a conflict analysis that was based on the probability of two vehicles arriving at the intersection at the same time to assess the safety aspects of the guidelines. A probability of 0.01 was selected as the maximum likelihood of a conflict. The philosophy of the new guidelines focuses on recommending a left-turn lane above a set directional volume rather than a set turn volume. Figure 7 is a graph of the curves recommended.

Figure 7. Hawley and Stover – Left-Turn Lane Guidelines for Four-Lane Undivided Arterial Street with Nonplatoon Flow, 1996.12

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 91 of 168

Page 102 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 9

NCHRP Report 457

In 2001, Bonneson and Fontaine13 in NCHRP Report 457 discussed the determination of when to consider a left-turn lane. They sited work by Neuman8 (which was based on the Harmelink model) and recreated the Harmelink model as an interactive spreadsheet (available on the Internet as Figure 2-5 in the NCHRP report at: http://trb.org/trb/publications/nchrp/esg.pdf).

State Manuals

Several state manuals also include information on when to consider a left-turn lane. The Texas Department of Transportation Roadway Design Manual14 contains the same table of criteria as the values included in the Green Book4 for determining the need for a left-turn lane. The Mississippi Department of Transportation’s Roadway Design Manual15 recommendations for the inclusion of left-turn lanes uses graphs similar to those presented in NCHRP Report 279 (which is based on Harmelink’s work).

Chapter 5 of the New York State Department of Transportation’s Highway Design Manual16 refers readers to the AASHTO Green Book for traffic volume criteria to be considered in determining the need for left-turn lanes. It also includes discussion on the potential to reduce crashes with the installation of a left-turn lane and states that sight distance on the major road is another factor that can create a need for an exclusive left-turn lane.

In the Project Development Manual,17 the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) considers left-turn lanes to be necessary where the number of left-turning vehicles is 100 vph or more during the peak hour. Two-lane left turns are considered when volumes exceed 300 vph. MoDOT also states that the AASHTO Green Book should be used as a guide and that left-turn lanes should be considered at intersections where traffic volumes do not warrant but poor visibility or crash records indicate a need.

In its Location and Design Manual,18 the Ohio Department of Transportation recommends that left-turn lanes be installed when left-turn design volumes: x Exceed 20 percent of total directional approach design volumes, or x Exceed 100 vehicles per hour in peak periods.

In Utah, left-turn movements are the only deciding factors for determining the need for an exclusive left-turn lane in rural areas. The Roadway Design Manual of Instruction19 states that in rural areas where there are 25 or more left-turn movements for the main highway in the peak hour, left-turn lanes should be considered. The need for left-turn lanes at signalized intersections is determined by capacity analysis and the acceptable level of service designated for the facility.

The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) performed a study on left-turn lanes in regards to speed, volume, sight distance, passing opportunity, number of anticipated turning movements, and crash history.20 From that study, ITD determined that the need for left-turn lanes should be established by considering the advancing volume, left-turn volume, and the operating speed, as shown in Figure 8.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 92 of 168

Page 103 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 10

(1 mi = 1.61 km/h) Figure 8. Idaho Transportation Department – Left-Turn Lane Warrant Graph, 1994.20

COMPARISON OF METHODS

Several methods use the Harmelink model as the basis of their guidelines, such as the guidelines present in the AASHTO Green Book and in several NCHRP reports. These guidelines require the knowledge of volumes on each major approach along with the left-turning volume or percentage.

Some of the guidelines, especially a sample of those in state manuals, are based on design hour volumes. The use of design hour volume or left-turn design hour volume lends itself to easier use in a planning stage since volumes on individual major road approaches are not required. The identified procedures can also be subdivided by number of lanes and by speed (which could imply an urban and rural categorization).

Tables 3 and 4 summarize selected techniques from the literature and state manuals, respectively. Figures 9 and 10 show a comparison of the methods for a 40-mph (64 km/h) operating speed and a 55-mph (89 km/h) operating speed, respectively, for a two-lane roadway with 10 percent left turns. Figure 11 shows a comparison of the methods for four-lane roadways.

When the various methods are compared (as shown in Figures 9 and 10), the methods presented in the AASHTO Green Book and the NCHRP Reports 279 and 457 overlap, as expected. Not expected was the difference between the AASHTO methods and the numbers provided by Oppenlander and Bianchi. These lines should also have overlapped since they were based on the same methodology. The reason for the difference is not apparent. Other methods available for two-lane highways that use similar criteria as AASHTO would recommend left-turn lanes at lower volumes (see the curve for IDT on Figure 10 as an example). The different methods available for four-lane highways show greater diversity for when a left-turn lane would be recommended (see Figure 11).

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 93 of 168

Page 104 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 11

Table 3. Summary of Selected Left-Turn Lane Literature Guidelines. Method AASHTO NCHRP Oppenlander Modur et al. NCHRP 348 Hawley and (2001,4 1994,7 279 (1985),8 and Bianchi (1990)11 (1992)10 Stover (1996)12 1990,6 19845) NCHRP (1990)9 457 (2001)13 Roadway Two-lane Two-way Two-lane Urban Any Four-lane Type stop unsignalized (roadways less unsignalized undivided controlled than 45 mph [70 km/h]) Developed Minimize conflict Minimize Minimize Delay Not specified Delay with conflict conflict and consideration safety of: Key Feature Based on Based on Used Used Would Used results from Harmelink’s 1967 Harmelink’s Harmelink’s simulation to recommend for simulation to study. Developed 1967 study. model and determine lower left-turn determine value. table of values for NCHRP 457 expanded to guidelines. volumes than various speeds includes a additional other methods. and left turn spreadsheet speed ranges. percentages. to perform Also added calculations. consideration of crashes. Crashes “…safety States that Crashes by “Sections with “Separate Guidelines considerations are there are approach that left-turn turning checked against sufficient to benefits in would involve treatments are lane…promote maximum warrant them.” crash a left-turning always better the safety of all probability of reduction vehicle: 4 per than the traffic.” conflict of 0.01. when left- year at sections with Recommends that turn lane is unsignalized no treatment.” the designer added. and 5 per year consider potential at signalized. crashes.

Table 4. Summary of State Methods. State Primary Method Also Include Consideration of Texas Green Book Mississippi Harmelink Crashes and sight distance New York Green Book Crashes and sight distance Left turn exceeds 100 vph Missouri Crashes and sight distance Green Book Left turn exceeds 100 vph in peak period or Ohio 20% of total directional approach design volumes Utah Left turn exceeds 25 vph Unique graphs, in many cases 12 to 25 design Crashes (4 per year on an existing Idaho hour volume of left turns approach)

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 94 of 168

Page 105 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 12

800

600

400 Opposing Volume (vph) Opposing 200

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Advancing Volume (vph)

UT AASHTO NCHRP 279 & 457 Oppenlander & Bianchi NCHRP 348 IDT Figure 9. Comparison of Left-Turn Lane Installation Guidelines for 10% Left Turns, 40 mph (64 km/h), Two-Lane Highways.

800

600

400 Opposing Volume (vph) Volume Opposing 200

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Advancing Volume (vph)

AASHTO NCHRP 279 & 457 Oppenlander & Bianchi IDT

Figure 10. Comparison of Left-Turn Lane Installation Guidelines for 10% Left Turns, 55 mph (89 km/h), Two-Lane Highways.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 95 of 168

Page 106 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 13

800

600

400 Opposing Volume (vph) Opposing 200

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Advancing Volume (vph)

NCHRP 279 & 457 Oppenlander & Bianchi, Undivided Oppenlander & Bianchi, Divided IDT, for inside lanes Hawley and Stover

Figure 11. Comparison of Left-Turn Lane Installation Guidelines for 10% Left Turns, 55 mph (89 km/h), Four-Lane Highways.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 96 of 168

Page 107 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 14

Several state methods only use a left-turn requirement; hence those methods are not shown in Figures 9 and 10 because advancing or opposing volume requirements are not included. They are shown in Figures 12 and 13 with left-turn volume being on the y axis for 40 and 55 mph (64 and 89 km/h), respectively. The left-turn lane should be considered when the volume plots above or to the right of a curve. In most cases, the methods that use only left-turn volumes recommend a left-turn lane at lower volumes than the method present in the AASHTO Green Book.

220

200

180

160

140

120

100

80 Left-Turn Volume (vph) 60

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Advancing Volume (vph)

Utah NCHRP 279 & 457 AASHTO Oppenlander & Bianchi Missouri Idaho NCHRP 348 Modur et al. Ohio Figure 12. Comparison of Left-Turn Lane Installation Guidelines for Opposing Volume of 400 vph, 40 mph (64 km/h), Two-Lane Highways.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 97 of 168

Page 108 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 15

220

200

180

160

140

120

100

80 Left-Turn Volume (vph) 60

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Advancing Volume (vph) Utah NCHRP 279 & 457 AASHTO Oppenlander & Bianchi Missouri Idaho Ohio Figure 13. Comparison of Left-Turn Lane Installation Guidelines for Opposing Volume of 400 vph, 55 mph (89 km/h), Two-Lane Highways.

UPDATING OF ASSUMPTIONS

In many design manuals, a procedure based on the Harmelink model is the accepted approach. The guidelines developed by Harmelink include the following assumptions: x Probability of a through vehicle arriving behind a stopped left-turning vehicle should not exceed 0.02 for 40 mph (64 km/h), 0.015 for 50 mph (80 km/h), and 0.010 for 60 mph (96 km/h). x Arrival-time and service-time distributions are negative exponential. x Average time required for making a left turn is 3.0 sec for two-lane highways and 4.0 sec for four-lane highways as determined from field studies. x Critical headway in the opposing traffic stream for a left-turn maneuver is 5.0 sec on two- lane highways and 6.0 sec on four-lane highway as determined from field studies. x Average time required for a left-turning vehicle to clear or “exit” from the advancing lane is 1.9 sec as determined from field studies.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 98 of 168

Page 109 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 16

Probability of Through Vehicle Arrival

Harmelink’s assumption for avoiding the arrival of a vehicle behind a left-turning vehicle was scaled to the speed of the facility. He had a lower probability for the higher speed roadways. This assumption should be reflected in calculations for other operating speeds, such as using 0.025 for 30 mph (48 km/h) and 0.005 for 70 mph (113 km/h).

Critical Headway

Several recent research projects have determined the critical gap for use in intersection sight distance calculations and unsignalized intersection capacity analysis. As reported by Harwood et al.,21 Kyte et al. recommended a critical gap value of 4.2 sec for left turns from the major road by passenger cars for inclusion in the unsignalized intersection analysis procedures of the Highway Capacity Manual.22 A heavy-vehicle adjustment of 1.0 sec for two-lane highways and 2.0 sec for multilane highways was also recommended.

A study in Pennsylvania by Miscky and Mason recorded critical gap data for two intersections. They used logistic regression and found critical gaps for a 50 percent probability of acceptance of 4.6 and 5.3 sec.23 They also found 85th percentile gaps of 5.5 and 5.9 sec at the two intersections.

It is reasonable that design policies should be more conservative than operational criteria such as the Highway Capacity Manual. Using a higher critical gap value, such as the value accepted by 85 percent of the drivers rather than the gap accepted by only 50 percent of the drivers, would result in a more conservative, design-oriented approach. With that philosophy the authors of the 1996 intersection sight distance guidelines recommended a 5.5 sec gap value for use in intersection sight distance.21 This gap value should be increased to 6.5 sec for single-unit trucks, 7.5 sec for combination trucks, and an additional 0.5 sec for cars and 0.7 sec for trucks should be added when crossing an additional opposing lane.

Harmelink’s assumption of 5.0 sec for the critical gap value is near to the values identified in more recent research. If a more conservative gap value for use in design is desired, then the critical gap value should be increased to 5.5 or 6.0 sec. If heavy trucks are a concern at the site, then a higher critical gap should be considered, generally on the order of 0.5 to 1.0 sec increase in the value assumed for passenger cars.

Time to Make a Left Turn

The 1994 AASHTO Green Book7 included information on the amount of time to accelerate and clear an intersection. Assuming minimum travel path and crossing one lane, Miscky and Mason calculated that a left-turning vehicle would travel approximately 47 ft (14.3 m) to clear the opposing lane. Using Figure IX-33 in the 1994 Green Book, the estimated time is 4.3 sec for a passenger car accelerating from a stop (which would be the more critical situation). Miscky and Mason also found the travel time for left-turning vehicles at two intersections in Pennsylvania. The mean values were 4.0 and 4.3 sec while the 85th percentile values were 4.6 and 5.1 sec at the

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 99 of 168

Page 110 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 17 two intersections. The authors noted that the longer turning time at the one intersection was caused by vehicles starting farther back than what is assumed in the theoretical model.

Vehicles turning left were recorded at a rural T-intersection in Texas. The major roadway had 11-ft (3.4 m) lanes and no shoulders with a 55 mph (89 km/h) speed limit. The data were collected between 7 to 9 am or 2 to 4 pm on two consecutive days. A total of 307 vehicles were recorded making left turns during the 8-hour period with 71 beginning the turn from a stopped position. The times when a left-turning vehicle began the turn, completely cleared the advancing lane, and completely cleared the opposing lane were recorded. For the vehicles beginning the turn from a stopped position, 85 percent cleared the intersection in 4.1 seconds (see Figure 14).

In his field studies, Harmelink found that only 3.0 sec was needed to make the left-turn. Using the 1994 AASHTO Green Book results in a value of 4.3 sec, recent research at two Pennsylvania intersections found 5.1 sec (85th percentile value) for the time to cross the opposing lane, and data from a Texas intersection found 4.1 sec. While the more recent research was performed at only three locations, it appears that Harmelink’s assumption of 3.0 sec is low.

100

40 Percent of Vehicles of Percent

30 d 85th %-ile = 4.1 seconds 4.1 = %-ile 85th

20 Average = 3.4 = Average 10

0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Time (sec)

Figure 14. Percentile Values for Time to Clear the Opposing Lane When Making a Left Turn.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 100 of 168

Page 111 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 18

Time Required to Clear

Data on the amount of time to clear the advancing lane that is more recent than the value reported by Harmelink were not found except for the data available from the one rural Texas T- intersection discussed above. For the vehicles beginning the turn from a stopped position, 85 percent used 3.2 seconds to clear the lane as shown in Figure 15.

100

40 Percent of Vehicles of Percent 30 85th %-ile = 3.2 seconds 3.2 = %-ile 85th

10 Average = 2.6 seconds 2.6 = Average 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Time (sec)

Figure 15. Percentile Values for Time to Clear the Advancing Lane When Making a Left Turn.

Comparison Using New Assumptions

Using more recent findings, suggested assumptions for use in the Harmelink model are: x Critical headway for a left-turn maneuver is 5.5 sec. x Time to complete the left turn and clear the opposing lane is 4.3 sec. x Time to clear the advancing lane is 3.2 sec.

Figure 16 illustrates the change in the curves when the above assumptions are used.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 101 of 168

Page 112 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 19

800

600

400 veh/h

200

Opposing Volume (Vo), Volume Opposing 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Advancing Volume (Va), veh/h

30 mph proposed 30 mph existing 70 mph proposed 70 mph existing

Figure 16. Comparison of Existing to Proposed Guidelines (Example Uses 10% Left Turns).

CONCLUSIONS

Several methods are available for determining when to include a left turn lane in the design at an intersection. Methods based on delay typically do not recommend a left-turn lane at lower left or through volumes when compared to methods based on conflict avoidance or safety. Because of the high benefits for crash reductions provided by left-turn lanes, a method that results in a recommendation at lower volumes would be preferred. The Harmelink model is a widely accepted approach that is based on conflict avoidance. The procedure first proposed by Harmelink in 1967 includes assumptions that may need to be revised. Findings from current research on the time to clear an intersection and on critical gaps suggest that Harmelink guidelines should be modified. Table 5 lists suggested guidelines for installing left-turn lanes for operating speeds of 30, 50, and 70 mph (50, 80, and 110 km/h).

If the Harmelink approach is preferred and the operating speed of interest (or number of lanes) is not provided in Table 5, the reader can use the interactive spreadsheet included as part of NCHRP 457 (http://trb.org/trb/publications/nchrp/esg.pdf). The assumptions need to be changed to match those at the intersection of interest or to reflect more recent research findings such as using a critical gap of 5.5 sec, a time to make left turn of 4.3 sec, and a time to clear of 3.2 sec.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 102 of 168

Page 113 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 20

Table 5. Guidelines for Installing Left-Turn Lanes on Two-Lane Highways. Vo Percent Left Turns 10 20 40 30 mph (50 km/h) 800 197 148 121 700 217 162 133 600 238 178 146 500 261 196 160 400 286 215 175 300 314 236 193 200 345 259 211 100 380 285 232 0 418 313 256 50 mph (80 km/h) 800 153 115 94 700 168 126 103 600 184 138 113 500 202 152 124 400 222 166 136 300 244 183 149 200 268 201 164 100 294 221 180 0 323 243 198 70 mph (110 km/h) 800 88 66 54 700 97 73 59 600 106 80 65 500 117 88 71 400 128 96 78 300 141 105 86 200 154 116 95 100 170 127 104 0 187 140 114

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This paper is from research conducted as part of a project sponsored by the Texas Department of Transportation and performed by the Texas Transportation Institute of the Texas A&M University System. The contents of this paper reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or polices of TxDOT. The authors would like to thank Jim Bonneson for providing us a copy of his original spreadsheet of the Harmelink model.

REFERENCES

1. Harwood, D. W., K. M. Bauer, I. B. Potts, D. J. Torbic, K. R. Richard, E. R. Kohlman Rabbani, E. Hauer, and L. Elefteriadou. Safety Effectiveness of Intersection Left- and Right-Turn Lanes, Report No. FHWA-RD-02-089, Federal Highway Administration, July 2002.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 103 of 168

Page 114 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 21

2. Harwood, D. and C. Hoban, Low Cost Methods for Improving Traffic Operations on Two- Lane Roads: Informational Guide, Report No. FHWA/IP-87/2, Midwest Research Institute, January 1987. 3. Harmelink, M., “Volume Warrants for Left-Turn Storage Lanes at Unsignalized Grade Intersections,” Highway Research Record 211, Highway Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1967. 4. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (2001). 5. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (1984). 6. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (1990). 7. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (1994). 8. Neuman, T., Intersection Channelization Design Guide, NCHRP Report 279, AASHTO, FHWA, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, November 1985. 9. Oppenlander, J. C., and J. C. Bianchi. “Guidelines for Left-Turn Lanes. ITE Compendium of Technical Papers, 60th Annual Meeting, Orlando, Florida. August 1990. 10. Koepke, F., Access Management Guidelines for Activity Centers, NCHRP Report 348, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 1992. 11. Modur, S., R. Machemehl, and C. Lee, “Criteria for the Selection of a Left-Turn Median Design,” Research Report 1138-1F, University of Texas, Austin, January 1990. 12. Hawley, P. and V. Stover, Guidelines for Left-Turn Bays at Unsignalized Access Locations, Second National Access Management Conference, Colorado Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Transportation Research Board, 1996. 13. Bonneson, J. and M. Fontaine, Engineering Study Guide for Evaluating Intersection Improvements, NCHRP Report No. 457, http://trb.org/trb/publications/nchrp/esg.pdf Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 2001. 14. Texas Department of Transportation, Roadway Design Manual, Texas Department of Transportation, February 2001, revised April 2002. 15. Roadway Design Manual, Mississippi Department of Transportation, January 2001, http://www.gomdot.com/business/roadwaydrawings/manual.htm, accessed February 18, 2003. 16. Highway Design Manual, New York State Department of Transportation, August 2001, http://www.dot.state.ny.us/cmb/consult/hdmfiles/hdm.html, accessed February 18, 2003. 17. Project Development Manual, Missouri Department of Transportation, February 2003, http://www.modot.state.mo.us/design/ppdm/files/start.pdf, accessed February 18, 2003. 18. Location and Design Manual, Volume 1, Ohio Department of Transportation, November 2002, http://www.dot.state.oh.us/roadwayengineering/L&D%20Vol1_link.htm, accessed February 21, 2003. 19. Roadway Design Manual of Instruction, State of Utah Department of Transportation, July 1998, http://www.udot.utah.gov/esd/Manuals/Roadway/rw-design1.htm, accessed February 21, 2003. 20. Idaho Transportation Department, Traffic Manual, Idaho Transportation Department, Boise, Highway Approaches, August 1994.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 104 of 168

Page 115 of 181 Fitzpatrick and Wolff 22

21 Harwood, D. W., J. M. Mason, R. E. Brydia, M. T. Pietrucha, and G.L. Gittings. Intersection Sight Distance. NCHRP Report 383. 1996. 22 TRB Special Report 209: Highway Capacity Manual, 3rd ed., Transportation Research Board (1994). 23. Miscky, R. J., and J. M. Mason, Jr., “Sight Distance For Vehicles Turning Left Off Major Roadway” 1996 National Conference on Access Management, Vail Colorado. August 1996.

2nd Urban Street Symposium (Anaheim, California) — July 28-30, 2003 Page 105 of 168

Page 116 of 181

Appendix E

Synchro Report

Chimney Rock at Bellaire Commercial Development Appendix E: Synchro Report May 2020 Page 53 Page 106 of 168

Page 117 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Traffic - AM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2019 - No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 176 1590 73 37 543 108 160 602 32 135 230 134 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 150 0 260 0 75 0 100 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 80 40 150 120 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.993 0.975 0.992 0.945 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 5050 0 1770 4958 0 1770 3511 0 1770 3345 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 5050 0 1770 4958 0 1770 3511 0 1770 3345 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 11 55 7 146 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 1036 1578 357 365 Travel Time (s) 20.2 30.7 7.0 7.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 191 1728 79 40 590 117 174 654 35 147 250 146 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 191 1807 0 40 707 0 174 689 0 147 396 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(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 6 20 6 20 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(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6666 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 Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 1

Page 107 of 168

Page 118 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Traffic - AM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2019 - No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 17.0 29.0 8.0 20.0 12.0 22.0 11.0 21.0 Total Split (%) 24.3% 41.4% 11.4% 28.6% 17.1% 31.4% 15.7% 30.0% Maximum Green (s) 13.0 25.0 4.0 16.0 8.0 18.0 7.0 17.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None Max None Max Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0000 Act Effct Green (s) 11.2 25.6 4.0 15.0 8.0 18.0 7.0 17.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.38 0.06 0.22 0.12 0.27 0.10 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.94 0.38 0.62 0.82 0.73 0.80 0.41 Control Delay 37.3 32.5 42.4 24.5 63.3 28.2 63.6 15.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 37.3 32.5 42.4 24.5 63.3 28.2 63.6 15.0 LOS DC DC EC EB Approach Delay 33.0 25.5 35.2 28.1 Approach LOS CCDC Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 70 Actuated Cycle Length: 67.3 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.94 Intersection Signal Delay: 31.5 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 2

Page 108 of 168

Page 119 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Existing Traffic - AM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2019 - No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 176 1590 73 37 543 108 160 602 32 135 230 134 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 176 1663 0 37 651 0 160 634 0 135 364 0 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.98 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.94 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 5142 0 1805 5047 0 1805 3590 0 1805 3418 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes Yes Yes Reference Time (s) 11.7 38.8 0.0 2.5 15.5 0.0 10.6 21.2 0.0 9.0 12.8 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 15.7 42.8 0.0 8.0 19.5 0.0 14.6 25.2 0.0 13.0 16.8 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1714 120 1682 120 1795 120 1709 Reference Time A (s) 175.5 38.8 36.9 15.5 159.6 21.2 134.6 12.8 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 175.5 36.9 159.6 134.6 Adj Reference Time (s) 179.5 40.9 163.6 138.6 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 11.7 38.8 2.5 15.5 10.6 21.2 9.0 12.8 Ref Time Seperate (s) 11.7 37.1 2.5 12.9 10.6 20.1 9.0 8.1 Reference Time (s) 38.8 38.8 15.5 15.5 21.2 21.2 12.8 12.8 Adj Reference Time (s) 42.8 42.8 19.5 19.5 25.2 25.2 16.8 16.8 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) 50.8 38.2 Permitted Option (s) 179.5 163.6 Split Option (s) 62.3 42.0 Minimum (s) 50.8 38.2 89.0 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.1% ICU Level of Service D Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 3

Page 109 of 168

Page 120 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Traffic - AM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2019 - No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 55 48 52 24 18 22 18 734 59 41 441 27 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 80 0 80 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 110 110 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.949 0.949 0.989 0.991 Flt Protected 0.983 0.982 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3302 0 0 3298 0 1770 3500 0 1770 3507 0 Flt Permitted 0.841 0.809 0.465 0.319 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2825 0 0 2717 0 866 3500 0 594 3507 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 57 24 25 18 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 1051 1181 296 338 Travel Time (s) 23.9 26.8 5.8 6.6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 60 52 57 26 20 24 20 798 64 45 479 29 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 169 0 0 70 0 20 862 0 45 508 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(ft) 0 0 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 6 20 6 20 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(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6666 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 4826 Permitted Phases 4826 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 4

Page 110 of 168

Page 121 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Traffic - AM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2019 - No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (%) 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 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 None None None None Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 6.8 6.8 21.1 21.1 21.1 21.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 v/c Ratio 0.27 0.12 0.04 0.39 0.12 0.23 Control Delay 8.4 7.6 4.3 4.8 5.2 4.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 8.4 7.6 4.3 4.8 5.2 4.1 LOS A A AA AA Approach Delay 8.4 7.6 4.8 4.2 Approach LOS AAAA Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 40 Actuated Cycle Length: 33.3 Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.39 Intersection Signal Delay: 5.1 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 5

Page 111 of 168

Page 122 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Existing Traffic - AM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2019 - No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 55 48 52 24 18 22 18 734 59 41 441 27 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 0 155 0 0 64 0 18 793 0 41 468 0 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.93 0.85 0.95 0.93 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 0 3375 0 0 3367 0 1805 3577 0 1805 3586 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed No No Yes Yes Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 1.2 26.6 0.0 2.7 15.7 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 8.0 30.6 0.0 8.0 19.7 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 0 112 0 112 120 1789 120 1793 Reference Time A (s) 0.0 58.7 0.0 25.7 18.0 26.6 40.9 15.7 Adj Saturation B (vph 0 1668 0 1660 NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) 11.7 9.6 9.6 6.3 NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 11.7 9.6 26.6 40.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 15.7 13.6 30.6 44.9 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.0 5.5 0.0 2.3 1.2 26.6 2.7 15.7 Ref Time Seperate (s) 3.7 1.7 1.6 0.7 1.2 24.6 2.7 14.8 Reference Time (s) 5.5 5.5 2.3 2.3 26.6 26.6 15.7 15.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.5 9.5 8.0 8.0 30.6 30.6 19.7 19.7 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) NA 38.6 Permitted Option (s) 15.7 44.9 Split Option (s) 17.5 50.3 Minimum (s) 15.7 38.6 54.3 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.2% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 6

Page 112 of 168

Page 123 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Traffic - AM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2019 - No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50600013777034804 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.921 0.999 Flt Protected 0.980 0.999 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1681 0 1863 1863 0 0 3536 0 0 3536 0 Flt Permitted 0.980 0.999 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1681 0 1863 1863 0 0 3536 0 0 3536 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 208 193 365 296 Travel Time (s) 4.7 4.4 7.1 5.8 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) 50700014845035224 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 12 00000859005290 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(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 7

Page 113 of 168

Page 124 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Existing Traffic - AM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2019 - No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50600013777034804 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 0 11 00000790004870 Lane Utilization 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 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 0 1705 0 1805 1900 0 0 3615 0 0 3612 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed No No No No Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 0 212 941 1900 0 1202 0 1533 Reference Time A (s) 0.0 6.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 36.8 0.0 18.6 Adj Saturation B (vph 0 0 0 1900 NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) 8.3 8.8 8.0 0.0 NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 6.2 0.0 36.8 18.6 Adj Reference Time (s) 10.2 8.0 40.8 22.6 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.2 0.0 16.2 Ref Time Seperate (s) 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 25.8 0.2 15.9 Reference Time (s) 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.0 26.2 26.2 16.2 16.2 Adj Reference Time (s) 8.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 30.2 30.2 20.2 20.2 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) NA NA Permitted Option (s) 10.2 40.8 Split Option (s) 8.0 50.4 Minimum (s) 8.0 40.8 48.8 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.7% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 8

Page 114 of 168

Page 125 of 181 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Traffic - AM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2019 - No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 50600013777034804 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% 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 Hourly flow rate (vph) 50700014845035224 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 365 296 pX, platoon unblocked 0.85 0.85 0.99 0.85 0.85 0.84 0.99 0.84 vC, conflicting volume 981 1403 263 1147 1405 422 526 845 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 539 1037 223 734 1040 0 490 433 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 100 99 100 100 100 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 356 191 770 255 191 910 1054 943 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 12 0 0 436 422 264 265 Volume Left 5 0 0 14 0 3 0 Volume Right 7000004 cSH 504 1700 1700 1054 1700 943 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.25 0.00 0.16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2001000 Control Delay (s) 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 Lane LOS BAAA A Approach Delay (s) 12.3 0.0 0.2 0.1 Approach LOS B A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 9

Page 115 of 168

Page 126 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Traffic - PM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2019 - No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 113 1210 156 105 1162 128 129 384 42 157 574 158 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 150 0 260 0 75 0 100 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 80 40 150 120 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.983 0.985 0.985 0.968 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 4999 0 1770 5009 0 1770 3486 0 1770 3426 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 4999 0 1770 5009 0 1770 3486 0 1770 3426 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 36 29 18 54 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 1036 1578 357 365 Travel Time (s) 20.2 30.7 7.0 7.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 123 1315 170 114 1263 139 140 417 46 171 624 172 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 123 1485 0 114 1402 0 140 463 0 171 796 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(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 6 20 6 20 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(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6666 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 Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 1

Page 116 of 168

Page 127 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Traffic - PM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2019 - No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 9.0 23.0 9.0 23.0 10.0 22.0 11.0 23.0 Total Split (%) 13.8% 35.4% 13.8% 35.4% 15.4% 33.8% 16.9% 35.4% Maximum Green (s) 5.0 19.0 5.0 19.0 6.0 18.0 7.0 19.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None Max None Max Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0000 Act Effct Green (s) 5.0 19.0 5.0 19.0 6.0 18.0 7.0 19.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.29 0.08 0.29 0.09 0.28 0.11 0.29 v/c Ratio 0.90 1.00 0.84 0.94 0.86 0.47 0.90 0.77 Control Delay 90.7 47.7 78.1 37.0 74.9 20.7 77.0 25.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 90.7 47.7 78.1 37.0 74.9 20.7 77.0 25.4 LOS FD ED EC EC Approach Delay 51.0 40.1 33.3 34.6 Approach LOS DDCC Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 65 Actuated Cycle Length: 65 Natural Cycle: 65 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.00 Intersection Signal Delay: 41.8 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 2

Page 117 of 168

Page 128 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Existing Traffic - PM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2019 - No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 113 1210 156 105 1162 128 129 384 42 157 574 158 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 113 1366 0 105 1290 0 129 426 0 157 732 0 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.98 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.97 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 5087 0 1805 5099 0 1805 3564 0 1805 3500 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes Yes Yes Reference Time (s) 7.5 32.2 0.0 7.0 30.4 0.0 8.6 14.3 0.0 10.4 25.1 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 11.5 36.2 0.0 11.0 34.4 0.0 12.6 18.3 0.0 14.4 29.1 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1696 120 1700 120 1782 120 1750 Reference Time A (s) 112.7 32.2 104.7 30.4 128.6 14.3 156.6 25.1 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 112.7 104.7 128.6 156.6 Adj Reference Time (s) 116.7 108.7 132.6 160.6 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 7.5 32.2 7.0 30.4 8.6 14.3 10.4 25.1 Ref Time Seperate (s) 7.5 28.5 7.0 27.3 8.6 12.9 10.4 19.7 Reference Time (s) 32.2 32.2 30.4 30.4 14.3 14.3 25.1 25.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 36.2 36.2 34.4 34.4 18.3 18.3 29.1 29.1 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) 47.2 41.7 Permitted Option (s) 116.7 160.6 Split Option (s) 70.6 47.4 Minimum (s) 47.2 41.7 88.9 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.1% ICU Level of Service D Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 3

Page 118 of 168

Page 129 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Traffic - PM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2019 - No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 44 61 75 71 49 36 566 32 31 908 81 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 80 0 80 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 110 110 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.941 0.962 0.992 0.988 Flt Protected 0.984 0.981 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3277 0 0 3340 0 1770 3511 0 1770 3497 0 Flt Permitted 0.806 0.799 0.230 0.405 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2684 0 0 2720 0 428 3511 0 754 3497 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 39 53 17 28 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 1051 1181 296 338 Travel Time (s) 23.9 26.8 5.8 6.6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 54 48 66 82 77 53 39 615 35 34 987 88 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 168 0 0 212 0 39 650 0 34 1075 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(ft) 0 0 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 6 20 6 20 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(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6666 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 4826 Permitted Phases 4826 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 4

Page 119 of 168

Page 130 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Traffic - PM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2019 - No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (%) 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 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 None None None None Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 7.2 7.2 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 v/c Ratio 0.27 0.33 0.15 0.31 0.07 0.51 Control Delay 8.8 8.9 6.5 4.8 5.0 6.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 8.8 8.9 6.5 4.8 5.0 6.0 LOS A A AA AA Approach Delay 8.8 8.9 4.9 6.0 Approach LOS AAAA Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 40 Actuated Cycle Length: 32.3 Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.51 Intersection Signal Delay: 6.2 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 5

Page 120 of 168

Page 131 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Existing Traffic - PM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2019 - No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 44 61 75 71 49 36 566 32 31 908 81 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 0 155 0 0 195 0 36 598 0 31 989 0 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.93 0.85 0.95 0.94 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 0 3349 0 0 3414 0 1805 3589 0 1805 3573 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed No No Yes Yes Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 2.4 20.0 0.0 2.1 33.2 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 8.0 24.0 0.0 8.0 37.2 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 0 112 0 114 120 1794 120 1787 Reference Time A (s) 0.0 53.7 0.0 79.1 35.9 20.0 30.9 33.2 Adj Saturation B (vph 0 1651 0 1698 NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) 11.3 9.6 13.0 10.9 NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 11.3 13.0 35.9 33.2 Adj Reference Time (s) 15.3 17.0 39.9 37.2 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.0 5.6 0.0 6.9 2.4 20.0 2.1 33.2 Ref Time Seperate (s) 3.3 1.6 5.0 2.5 2.4 18.9 2.1 30.5 Reference Time (s) 5.6 5.6 6.9 6.9 20.0 20.0 33.2 33.2 Adj Reference Time (s) 9.6 9.6 10.9 10.9 24.0 24.0 37.2 37.2 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) NA 45.2 Permitted Option (s) 17.0 39.9 Split Option (s) 20.4 61.2 Minimum (s) 17.0 39.9 56.9 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.4% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 6

Page 121 of 168

Page 132 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing Traffic - PM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2019 - No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 20400112672019354 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.910 0.850 0.999 Flt Protected 0.984 0.999 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1668 0 1863 1583 0 0 3536 0 0 3536 0 Flt Permitted 0.984 0.999 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1668 0 1863 1583 0 0 3536 0 0 3536 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 208 193 365 296 Travel Time (s) 4.7 4.4 7.1 5.8 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) 20400113730011016 4 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0600100743001021 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(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 7

Page 122 of 168

Page 133 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Existing Traffic - PM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2019 - No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 20400112672019354 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 0600100684009400 Lane Utilization 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 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.89 0.85 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 0 1682 0 1805 1615 0 0 3614 0 0 3615 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed No No No No Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 0 273 722 1615 0 1173 0 1755 Reference Time A (s) 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 32.5 0.0 32.0 Adj Saturation B (vph 0 0 0 1615 NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) 8.1 8.4 8.0 0.1 NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 2.6 0.1 32.5 32.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 8.0 8.0 36.5 36.0 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 22.7 0.0 31.2 Ref Time Seperate (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 22.3 0.1 31.0 Reference Time (s) 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.1 22.7 22.7 31.2 31.2 Adj Reference Time (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 26.7 26.7 35.2 35.2 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) NA NA Permitted Option (s) 8.0 36.5 Split Option (s) 16.0 61.9 Minimum (s) 8.0 36.5 44.5 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.1% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 8

Page 123 of 168

Page 134 of 181 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Traffic - PM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2019 - No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 20400112672019354 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% 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 Hourly flow rate (vph) 20400113730011016 4 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 365 296 pX, platoon unblocked 0.89 0.89 0.85 0.89 0.89 0.91 0.85 0.91 vC, conflicting volume 1413 1777 510 1271 1779 365 1021 730 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 760 1168 63 602 1170 98 665 500 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 100 99 100 100 100 98 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 260 169 838 337 168 853 780 963 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 7 0 1 378 365 509 512 Volume Left 2 0 0 13 0 1 0 Volume Right 4010004 cSH 481 1700 853 780 1700 963 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.30 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1001000 Control Delay (s) 12.6 0.0 9.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS BAAA A Approach Delay (s) 12.6 9.2 0.3 0.0 Approach LOS B A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 4 Synchro 8 Report Page 9

Page 124 of 168

Page 135 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background Traffic - AM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 194 1755 81 41 600 119 177 665 35 149 254 148 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 150 0 260 0 75 0 100 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 80 40 150 120 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.993 0.975 0.993 0.945 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 5050 0 1770 4958 0 1770 3514 0 1770 3345 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 5050 0 1770 4958 0 1770 3514 0 1770 3345 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 10 49 6 138 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 1036 1578 357 365 Travel Time (s) 20.2 30.7 7.0 7.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 211 1908 88 45 652 129 192 723 38 162 276 161 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 211 1996 0 45 781 0 192 761 0 162 437 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(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 6 20 6 20 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(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6666 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 Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 1

Page 125 of 168

Page 136 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background Traffic - AM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 36.0 8.0 24.0 13.0 24.0 12.0 23.0 Total Split (%) 25.0% 45.0% 10.0% 30.0% 16.3% 30.0% 15.0% 28.8% Maximum Green (s) 16.0 32.0 4.0 20.0 9.0 20.0 8.0 19.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None Max None Max Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0000 Act Effct Green (s) 13.3 32.1 4.0 19.3 9.0 20.1 8.0 19.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.42 0.05 0.25 0.12 0.26 0.10 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.94 0.49 0.61 0.92 0.83 0.88 0.47 Control Delay 42.0 33.3 56.0 26.3 83.4 36.4 78.8 18.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 42.0 33.3 56.0 26.3 83.4 36.4 78.8 18.9 LOS D C E C F D E B Approach Delay 34.1 28.0 45.9 35.1 Approach LOS CCDD Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 76.8 Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.94 Intersection Signal Delay: 35.6 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 2

Page 126 of 168

Page 137 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Future Background Traffic - AM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 194 1755 81 41 600 119 177 665 35 149 254 148 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 194 1836 0 41 719 0 177 700 0 149 402 0 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.98 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.94 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 5141 0 1805 5047 0 1805 3590 0 1805 3418 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes Yes Yes Reference Time (s) 12.9 42.9 0.0 2.7 17.1 0.0 11.8 23.4 0.0 9.9 14.1 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 16.9 46.9 0.0 8.0 21.1 0.0 15.8 27.4 0.0 13.9 18.1 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1714 120 1682 120 1795 120 1709 Reference Time A (s) 193.5 42.9 40.9 17.1 176.5 23.4 148.6 14.1 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 193.5 40.9 176.5 148.6 Adj Reference Time (s) 197.5 44.9 180.5 152.6 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 12.9 42.9 2.7 17.1 11.8 23.4 9.9 14.1 Ref Time Seperate (s) 12.9 41.0 2.7 14.3 11.8 22.2 9.9 8.9 Reference Time (s) 42.9 42.9 17.1 17.1 23.4 23.4 14.1 14.1 Adj Reference Time (s) 46.9 46.9 21.1 21.1 27.4 27.4 18.1 18.1 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) 54.9 41.3 Permitted Option (s) 197.5 180.5 Split Option (s) 67.9 45.5 Minimum (s) 54.9 41.3 96.2 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.1% ICU Level of Service D Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 3

Page 127 of 168

Page 138 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background Traffic - AM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 61 53 57 26 20 24 20 810 65 45 487 30 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 80 0 80 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 110 110 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.950 0.949 0.989 0.991 Flt Protected 0.983 0.982 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3305 0 0 3298 0 1770 3500 0 1770 3507 0 Flt Permitted 0.838 0.806 0.441 0.280 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2818 0 0 2707 0 821 3500 0 522 3507 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 62 26 25 19 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 1051 1181 296 338 Travel Time (s) 23.9 26.8 5.8 6.6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 66 58 62 28 22 26 22 880 71 49 529 33 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 186 0 0 76 0 22 951 0 49 562 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(ft) 0 0 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 6 20 6 20 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(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6666 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 4826 Permitted Phases 4826 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 4

Page 128 of 168

Page 139 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background Traffic - AM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (%) 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 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 None None None None Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 6.9 6.9 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 v/c Ratio 0.29 0.13 0.04 0.43 0.15 0.26 Control Delay 8.3 7.5 4.5 5.2 5.8 4.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 8.3 7.5 4.5 5.2 5.8 4.3 LOS A A AA AA Approach Delay 8.3 7.5 5.2 4.4 Approach LOS AAAA Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 40 Actuated Cycle Length: 33 Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.43 Intersection Signal Delay: 5.3 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 5

Page 129 of 168

Page 140 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Future Background Traffic - AM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 61 53 57 26 20 24 20 810 65 45 487 30 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 0 171 0 0 70 0 20 875 0 45 517 0 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.93 0.85 0.95 0.93 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 0 3375 0 0 3368 0 1805 3577 0 1805 3586 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed No No Yes Yes Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 1.3 29.4 0.0 3.0 17.3 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 8.0 33.4 0.0 8.0 21.3 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 0 113 0 112 120 1789 120 1793 Reference Time A (s) 0.0 65.1 0.0 27.8 19.9 29.4 44.9 17.3 Adj Saturation B (vph 0 1668 0 1661 NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) 12.1 10.1 9.7 6.5 NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 12.1 9.7 29.4 44.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 16.1 13.7 33.4 48.9 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.0 6.1 0.0 2.5 1.3 29.4 3.0 17.3 Ref Time Seperate (s) 4.1 1.9 1.7 0.7 1.3 27.2 3.0 16.3 Reference Time (s) 6.1 6.1 2.5 2.5 29.4 29.4 17.3 17.3 Adj Reference Time (s) 10.1 10.1 8.0 8.0 33.4 33.4 21.3 21.3 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) NA 41.4 Permitted Option (s) 16.1 48.9 Split Option (s) 18.1 54.7 Minimum (s) 16.1 41.4 57.4 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.8% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 6

Page 130 of 168

Page 141 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background Traffic - AM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 60700014858035304 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.928 0.999 Flt Protected 0.977 0.999 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1689 0 1863 1863 0 0 3536 0 0 3536 0 Flt Permitted 0.977 0.999 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1689 0 1863 1863 0 0 3536 0 0 3536 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 208 193 365 296 Travel Time (s) 4.7 4.4 7.1 5.8 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) 70800015933035764 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 15 00000948005830 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(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 7

Page 131 of 168

Page 142 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Future Background Traffic - AM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 60700014858035304 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 0 13 00000872005370 Lane Utilization 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 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 0 1706 0 1805 1900 0 0 3615 0 0 3613 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed No No No No Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 0 209 953 1900 0 1213 0 1556 Reference Time A (s) 0.0 7.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.4 0.0 20.2 Adj Saturation B (vph 0 0 0 1900 NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) 8.4 8.9 8.0 0.0 NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 7.5 0.0 40.4 20.2 Adj Reference Time (s) 11.5 8.0 44.4 24.2 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.9 0.0 17.8 Ref Time Seperate (s) 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 28.5 0.2 17.6 Reference Time (s) 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.0 28.9 28.9 17.8 17.8 Adj Reference Time (s) 8.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 32.9 32.9 21.8 21.8 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) NA NA Permitted Option (s) 11.5 44.4 Split Option (s) 8.0 54.8 Minimum (s) 8.0 44.4 52.4 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.6% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 8

Page 132 of 168

Page 143 of 181 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Background Traffic - AM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 60700014858035304 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% 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 Hourly flow rate (vph) 70800015933035764 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 365 296 pX, platoon unblocked 0.83 0.83 0.97 0.83 0.83 0.81 0.97 0.81 vC, conflicting volume 1082 1548 290 1265 1550 466 580 933 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 516 1081 208 739 1084 0 507 451 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 100 99 100 100 100 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 360 175 775 246 175 880 1023 897 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 14 0 0 482 466 291 292 Volume Left 7 0 0 15 0 3 0 Volume Right 8000004 cSH 505 1700 1700 1023 1700 897 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.27 0.00 0.17 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2001000 Control Delay (s) 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 Lane LOS BAAA A Approach Delay (s) 12.3 0.0 0.2 0.1 Approach LOS B A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 9

Page 133 of 168

Page 144 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background Traffic - PM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 125 1336 172 116 1283 141 142 424 46 173 634 174 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 150 0 260 0 75 0 100 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 80 40 150 120 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.983 0.985 0.985 0.968 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 4999 0 1770 5009 0 1770 3486 0 1770 3426 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 4999 0 1770 5009 0 1770 3486 0 1770 3426 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 27 22 12 40 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 1036 1578 357 365 Travel Time (s) 20.2 30.7 7.0 7.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 136 1452 187 126 1395 153 154 461 50 188 689 189 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 136 1639 0 126 1548 0 154 511 0 188 878 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(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 6 20 6 20 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(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6666 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 Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 1

Page 134 of 168

Page 145 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background Traffic - PM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 12.0 34.0 11.0 33.0 13.0 28.0 17.0 32.0 Total Split (%) 13.3% 37.8% 12.2% 36.7% 14.4% 31.1% 18.9% 35.6% Maximum Green (s) 8.0 30.0 7.0 29.0 9.0 24.0 13.0 28.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None Max None Max Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0000 Act Effct Green (s) 8.0 30.0 7.0 29.0 9.0 24.6 12.4 28.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.33 0.08 0.32 0.10 0.27 0.14 0.31 v/c Ratio 0.87 0.97 0.92 0.95 0.87 0.53 0.78 0.80 Control Delay 86.3 46.4 102.1 43.5 82.7 29.7 59.7 33.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 86.3 46.4 102.1 43.5 82.7 29.7 59.7 33.9 LOS FD FD FC EC Approach Delay 49.5 47.9 42.0 38.4 Approach LOS DDDD Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 90 Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.97 Intersection Signal Delay: 45.7 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.4% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 2

Page 135 of 168

Page 146 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Future Background Traffic - PM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 125 1336 172 116 1283 141 142 424 46 173 634 174 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 125 1508 0 116 1424 0 142 470 0 173 808 0 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.98 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.97 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 5087 0 1805 5099 0 1805 3564 0 1805 3501 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes Yes Yes Reference Time (s) 8.3 35.6 0.0 7.7 33.5 0.0 9.4 15.8 0.0 11.5 27.7 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 12.3 39.6 0.0 11.7 37.5 0.0 13.4 19.8 0.0 15.5 31.7 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1696 120 1700 120 1782 120 1750 Reference Time A (s) 124.7 35.6 115.7 33.5 141.6 15.8 172.5 27.7 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 124.7 115.7 141.6 172.5 Adj Reference Time (s) 128.7 119.7 145.6 176.5 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 8.3 35.6 7.7 33.5 9.4 15.8 11.5 27.7 Ref Time Seperate (s) 8.3 31.5 7.7 30.2 9.4 14.3 11.5 21.7 Reference Time (s) 35.6 35.6 33.5 33.5 15.8 15.8 27.7 27.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 39.6 39.6 37.5 37.5 19.8 19.8 31.7 31.7 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) 51.3 45.1 Permitted Option (s) 128.7 176.5 Split Option (s) 77.1 51.5 Minimum (s) 51.3 45.1 96.4 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.4% ICU Level of Service D Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 3

Page 136 of 168

Page 147 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background Traffic - PM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 55 49 67 83 78 54 40 625 35 34 1003 89 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 80 0 80 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 110 110 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.941 0.962 0.992 0.988 Flt Protected 0.984 0.981 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3277 0 0 3340 0 1770 3511 0 1770 3497 0 Flt Permitted 0.798 0.793 0.213 0.379 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2658 0 0 2700 0 397 3511 0 706 3497 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 27 59 17 28 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 1051 1181 296 338 Travel Time (s) 23.9 26.8 5.8 6.6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 60 53 73 90 85 59 43 679 38 37 1090 97 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 186 0 0 234 0 43 717 0 37 1187 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(ft) 0 0 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 6 20 6 20 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(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6666 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 4826 Permitted Phases 4826 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 4

Page 137 of 168

Page 148 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background Traffic - PM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (%) 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 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 None None None None Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 7.4 7.4 19.6 19.6 19.6 19.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.35 0.18 0.34 0.09 0.56 Control Delay 9.6 9.0 7.3 5.1 5.2 6.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.6 9.0 7.3 5.1 5.2 6.7 LOS A A AA AA Approach Delay 9.6 9.0 5.2 6.7 Approach LOS AAAA Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 40 Actuated Cycle Length: 32.5 Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.56 Intersection Signal Delay: 6.7 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 5

Page 138 of 168

Page 149 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Future Background Traffic - PM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 55 49 67 83 78 54 40 625 35 34 1003 89 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 0 171 0 0 215 0 40 660 0 34 1092 0 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.93 0.85 0.95 0.94 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 0 3350 0 0 3414 0 1805 3589 0 1805 3573 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed No No Yes Yes Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 2.7 22.1 0.0 2.3 36.7 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 8.0 26.1 0.0 8.0 40.7 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 0 112 0 114 120 1794 120 1787 Reference Time A (s) 0.0 59.1 0.0 87.5 39.9 22.1 33.9 36.7 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA 0 1698 NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA 13.5 11.6 NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 59.1 13.5 39.9 36.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 63.1 17.5 43.9 40.7 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.0 6.1 0.0 7.6 2.7 22.1 2.3 36.7 Ref Time Seperate (s) 3.7 1.8 5.5 2.8 2.7 20.9 2.3 33.7 Reference Time (s) 6.1 6.1 7.6 7.6 22.1 22.1 36.7 36.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 10.1 10.1 11.6 11.6 26.1 26.1 40.7 40.7 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) NA 48.7 Permitted Option (s) 63.1 43.9 Split Option (s) 21.7 66.7 Minimum (s) 21.7 43.9 65.6 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.6% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 6

Page 139 of 168

Page 150 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background Traffic - PM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 20400113742011032 4 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.910 0.850 0.999 Flt Protected 0.984 0.999 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1668 0 1863 1583 0 0 3536 0 0 3536 0 Flt Permitted 0.984 0.999 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1668 0 1863 1583 0 0 3536 0 0 3536 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 208 193 365 296 Travel Time (s) 4.7 4.4 7.1 5.8 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) 20400114807011122 4 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0600100821001127 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(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 7

Page 140 of 168

Page 151 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Future Background Traffic - PM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 20400113742011032 4 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 0600100755001037 0 Lane Utilization 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 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.89 0.85 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 0 1682 0 1805 1615 0 0 3614 0 0 3615 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed No No No No Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 0 273 722 1615 0 1182 0 1760 Reference Time A (s) 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 35.7 0.0 35.2 Adj Saturation B (vph 0 0 0 1615 NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) 8.1 8.4 8.0 0.1 NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 2.6 0.1 35.7 35.2 Adj Reference Time (s) 8.0 8.0 39.7 39.2 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 25.1 0.0 34.4 Ref Time Seperate (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 24.6 0.1 34.3 Reference Time (s) 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.1 25.1 25.1 34.4 34.4 Adj Reference Time (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 29.1 29.1 38.4 38.4 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) NA NA Permitted Option (s) 8.0 39.7 Split Option (s) 16.0 67.5 Minimum (s) 8.0 39.7 47.7 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.7% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 8

Page 141 of 168

Page 152 of 181 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Background Traffic - PM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2024 - 2% Growth, No Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 20400113742011032 4 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% 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 Hourly flow rate (vph) 20400114807011122 4 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 365 296 pX, platoon unblocked 0.87 0.87 0.81 0.87 0.87 0.89 0.81 0.89 vC, conflicting volume 1559 1961 563 1402 1963 403 1126 807 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 755 1218 0 575 1220 73 692 527 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 100 100 100 100 100 98 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 254 152 880 341 152 865 730 919 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 7 0 1 417 403 562 565 Volume Left 2 0 0 14 0 1 0 Volume Right 4010004 cSH 483 1700 865 730 1700 919 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.24 0.00 0.33 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1001000 Control Delay (s) 12.6 0.0 9.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS BAAA A Approach Delay (s) 12.6 9.2 0.3 0.0 Approach LOS B A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 5 Synchro 8 Report Page 9

Page 142 of 168

Page 153 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Traffic - AM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2024 - With Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 209 1755 81 52 611 119 177 683 35 156 261 148 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 150 0 260 0 75 0 100 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 80 40 150 120 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.993 0.976 0.993 0.946 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 5050 0 1770 4963 0 1770 3514 0 1770 3348 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 5050 0 1770 4963 0 1770 3514 0 1770 3348 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 9 41 6 115 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 1036 1578 357 365 Travel Time (s) 20.2 30.7 7.0 7.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 227 1908 88 57 664 129 192 742 38 170 284 161 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 227 1996 0 57 793 0 192 780 0 170 445 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(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 6 20 6 20 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(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6666 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 Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 1

Page 143 of 168

Page 154 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Traffic - AM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2024 - With Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 24.0 40.0 8.0 24.0 17.0 28.0 14.0 25.0 Total Split (%) 26.7% 44.4% 8.9% 26.7% 18.9% 31.1% 15.6% 27.8% Maximum Green (s) 20.0 36.0 4.0 20.0 13.0 24.0 10.0 21.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None Max None Max Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0000 Act Effct Green (s) 15.9 36.0 4.0 22.4 12.3 24.0 10.0 21.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.41 0.05 0.25 0.14 0.27 0.11 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.97 0.71 0.62 0.78 0.81 0.85 0.49 Control Delay 46.7 40.1 88.1 30.6 60.0 38.4 75.5 23.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 46.7 40.1 88.1 30.6 60.0 38.4 75.5 23.6 LOS DD FC ED EC Approach Delay 40.8 34.5 42.6 37.9 Approach LOS DCDD Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 88.4 Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.97 Intersection Signal Delay: 39.6 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 2

Page 144 of 168

Page 155 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Future Traffic - AM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2024 - With Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 209 1755 81 52 611 119 177 683 35 156 261 148 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 209 1836 0 52 730 0 177 718 0 156 409 0 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.98 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 5141 0 1805 5049 0 1805 3591 0 1805 3421 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes Yes Yes Reference Time (s) 13.9 42.9 0.0 3.5 17.3 0.0 11.8 24.0 0.0 10.4 14.3 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 17.9 46.9 0.0 8.0 21.3 0.0 15.8 28.0 0.0 14.4 18.3 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1714 120 1683 120 1796 120 1711 Reference Time A (s) 208.4 42.9 51.9 17.3 176.5 24.0 155.6 14.3 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 208.4 51.9 176.5 155.6 Adj Reference Time (s) 212.4 55.9 180.5 159.6 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 13.9 42.9 3.5 17.3 11.8 24.0 10.4 14.3 Ref Time Seperate (s) 13.9 41.0 3.5 14.5 11.8 22.8 10.4 9.2 Reference Time (s) 42.9 42.9 17.3 17.3 24.0 24.0 14.3 14.3 Adj Reference Time (s) 46.9 46.9 21.3 21.3 28.0 28.0 18.3 18.3 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) 54.9 42.4 Permitted Option (s) 212.4 180.5 Split Option (s) 68.2 46.3 Minimum (s) 54.9 42.4 97.2 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.0% ICU Level of Service D Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 3

Page 145 of 168

Page 156 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Traffic - AM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2024 - With Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 61 53 57 26 20 24 21 828 66 45 493 30 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 80 0 80 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 110 110 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.950 0.949 0.989 0.991 Flt Protected 0.983 0.982 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3305 0 0 3298 0 1770 3500 0 1770 3507 0 Flt Permitted 0.838 0.806 0.438 0.272 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2818 0 0 2707 0 816 3500 0 507 3507 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 62 26 25 19 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 1051 1181 296 338 Travel Time (s) 23.9 26.8 5.8 6.6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 66 58 62 28 22 26 23 900 72 49 536 33 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 186 0 0 76 0 23 972 0 49 569 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(ft) 0 0 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 6 20 6 20 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(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6666 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 4826 Permitted Phases 4826 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 4

Page 146 of 168

Page 157 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Traffic - AM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2024 - With Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (%) 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 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 None None None None Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 6.9 6.9 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 v/c Ratio 0.29 0.13 0.05 0.44 0.16 0.26 Control Delay 8.3 7.5 4.4 5.3 5.9 4.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 8.3 7.5 4.4 5.3 5.9 4.3 LOS A A AA AA Approach Delay 8.3 7.5 5.3 4.4 Approach LOS AAAA Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 40 Actuated Cycle Length: 33 Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.44 Intersection Signal Delay: 5.4 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 5

Page 147 of 168

Page 158 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Future Traffic - AM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2024 - With Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 61 53 57 26 20 24 21 828 66 45 493 30 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 0 171 0 0 70 0 21 894 0 45 523 0 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.93 0.85 0.95 0.93 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 0 3375 0 0 3368 0 1805 3578 0 1805 3586 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed No No Yes Yes Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 1.4 30.0 0.0 3.0 17.5 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 8.0 34.0 0.0 8.0 21.5 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 0 113 0 112 120 1789 120 1793 Reference Time A (s) 0.0 65.1 0.0 27.8 20.9 30.0 44.9 17.5 Adj Saturation B (vph 0 1668 0 1661 NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) 12.1 10.1 9.7 6.5 NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 12.1 9.7 30.0 44.9 Adj Reference Time (s) 16.1 13.7 34.0 48.9 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.0 6.1 0.0 2.5 1.4 30.0 3.0 17.5 Ref Time Seperate (s) 4.1 1.9 1.7 0.7 1.4 27.8 3.0 16.5 Reference Time (s) 6.1 6.1 2.5 2.5 30.0 30.0 17.5 17.5 Adj Reference Time (s) 10.1 10.1 8.0 8.0 34.0 34.0 21.5 21.5 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) NA 42.0 Permitted Option (s) 16.1 48.9 Split Option (s) 18.1 55.5 Minimum (s) 16.1 42.0 58.0 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.4% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 6

Page 148 of 168

Page 159 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Traffic - AM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2024 - With Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 6 0 7 14 0 14 14 858 9 9 530 4 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.928 0.850 0.998 0.999 Flt Protected 0.977 0.950 0.999 0.999 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1689 0 1770 1583 0 0 3529 0 0 3532 0 Flt Permitted 0.977 0.950 0.999 0.999 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1689 0 1770 1583 0 0 3529 0 0 3532 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 208 193 365 296 Travel Time (s) 4.7 4.4 7.1 5.8 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) 7 0 8 15 0 15 15 933 10 10 576 4 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 15 0 15 15 0 0 958 0 0 590 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(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 7

Page 149 of 168

Page 160 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Future Traffic - AM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2024 - With Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 6 0 7 14 0 14 14 858 9 9 530 4 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 0 13 0 14 14 0 0 881 0 0 543 0 Lane Utilization 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 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 0 1706 0 1805 1615 0 0 3609 0 0 3611 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed No No No No Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 0 209 953 1615 0 1215 0 1197 Reference Time A (s) 0.0 7.5 1.8 1.0 0.0 40.7 0.0 25.4 Adj Saturation B (vph 0 0 0 1615 NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) 8.4 8.9 8.9 1.0 NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 7.5 1.8 40.7 25.4 Adj Reference Time (s) 11.5 8.0 44.7 29.4 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.0 29.3 0.0 18.0 Ref Time Seperate (s) 0.4 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.9 28.5 0.6 17.6 Reference Time (s) 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 29.3 29.3 18.0 18.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 33.3 33.3 22.0 22.0 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) NA NA Permitted Option (s) 11.5 44.7 Split Option (s) 16.0 55.3 Minimum (s) 11.5 44.7 56.2 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.8% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 8

Page 150 of 168

Page 161 of 181 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Traffic - AM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2024 - With Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 6 0 7 14 0 14 14 858 9 9 530 4 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% 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 Hourly flow rate (vph) 7 0 8 15 0 15 15 933 10 10 576 4 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 365 296 pX, platoon unblocked 0.82 0.82 0.97 0.82 0.82 0.81 0.97 0.81 vC, conflicting volume 1110 1571 290 1283 1568 471 580 942 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 534 1094 202 745 1090 0 502 454 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 100 99 94 100 98 99 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 340 171 780 242 172 877 1025 891 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 14 15 15 482 476 298 292 Volume Left 7 15 0 15 0 10 0 Volume Right 8 0 15 0 10 0 4 cSH 489 242 877 1025 1700 891 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.06 0.02 0.01 0.28 0.01 0.17 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2511010 Control Delay (s) 12.6 20.9 9.2 0.4 0.0 0.4 0.0 Lane LOS B C A A A Approach Delay (s) 12.6 15.0 0.2 0.2 Approach LOS B C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 9

Page 151 of 168

Page 162 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Traffic - PM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2024 - With Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 148 1336 172 132 1299 141 142 452 46 183 644 174 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 150 0 260 0 75 0 100 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 80 40 150 120 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.983 0.985 0.986 0.968 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 4999 0 1770 5009 0 1770 3490 0 1770 3426 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 4999 0 1770 5009 0 1770 3490 0 1770 3426 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 30 24 13 43 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 1036 1578 357 365 Travel Time (s) 20.2 30.7 7.0 7.1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 161 1452 187 143 1412 153 154 491 50 199 700 189 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 161 1639 0 143 1565 0 154 541 0 199 889 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(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 6 20 6 20 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(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6666 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 Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 1

Page 152 of 168

Page 163 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Traffic - PM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2024 - With Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 11.0 30.0 11.0 30.0 12.0 23.0 16.0 27.0 Total Split (%) 13.8% 37.5% 13.8% 37.5% 15.0% 28.8% 20.0% 33.8% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 26.0 7.0 26.0 8.0 19.0 12.0 23.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None Max None Max Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0000 Act Effct Green (s) 7.0 26.0 7.0 26.0 8.0 19.5 11.5 23.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.32 0.09 0.32 0.10 0.24 0.14 0.29 v/c Ratio 1.05 1.00 0.93 0.95 0.87 0.63 0.78 0.88 Control Delay 124.6 49.3 95.8 40.4 79.1 30.3 55.6 37.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 124.6 49.3 95.8 40.4 79.1 30.3 55.6 37.3 LOS FD FD EC ED Approach Delay 56.0 45.1 41.1 40.6 Approach LOS E D D D Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.05 Intersection Signal Delay: 47.4 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.5% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 2

Page 153 of 168

Page 164 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Future Traffic - PM 1: Chimney Rock Rd & Bellaire BLVD 2024 - With Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 148 1336 172 132 1299 141 142 452 46 183 644 174 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 148 1508 0 132 1440 0 142 498 0 183 818 0 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.98 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.97 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 1805 5087 0 1805 5100 0 1805 3567 0 1805 3502 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed Yes Yes Yes Yes Reference Time (s) 9.8 35.6 0.0 8.8 33.9 0.0 9.4 16.8 0.0 12.2 28.0 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 13.8 39.6 0.0 12.8 37.9 0.0 13.4 20.8 0.0 16.2 32.0 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 120 1696 120 1700 120 1784 120 1751 Reference Time A (s) 147.6 35.6 131.6 33.9 141.6 16.8 182.5 28.0 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 147.6 131.6 141.6 182.5 Adj Reference Time (s) 151.6 135.6 145.6 186.5 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 9.8 35.6 8.8 33.9 9.4 16.8 12.2 28.0 Ref Time Seperate (s) 9.8 31.5 8.8 30.6 9.4 15.2 12.2 22.1 Reference Time (s) 35.6 35.6 33.9 33.9 16.8 16.8 28.0 28.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 39.6 39.6 37.9 37.9 20.8 20.8 32.0 32.0 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) 52.3 45.5 Permitted Option (s) 151.6 186.5 Split Option (s) 77.5 52.8 Minimum (s) 52.3 45.5 97.8 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.5% ICU Level of Service D Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 3

Page 154 of 168

Page 165 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Traffic - PM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2024 - With Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 55 49 67 83 78 54 41 650 36 34 1012 89 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 80 0 80 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 110 110 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.941 0.962 0.992 0.988 Flt Protected 0.984 0.981 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3277 0 0 3340 0 1770 3511 0 1770 3497 0 Flt Permitted 0.798 0.793 0.213 0.368 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2658 0 0 2700 0 397 3511 0 685 3497 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 26 59 17 27 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 1051 1181 296 338 Travel Time (s) 23.9 26.8 5.8 6.6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 60 53 73 90 85 59 45 707 39 37 1100 97 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 186 0 0 234 0 45 746 0 37 1197 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(ft) 0 0 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 6 20 6 20 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(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6666 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 4826 Permitted Phases 4826 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 4

Page 155 of 168

Page 166 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Traffic - PM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2024 - With Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (%) 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 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 None None None None Max Max Max Max Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 7.4 7.4 19.6 19.6 19.6 19.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.35 0.19 0.35 0.09 0.57 Control Delay 9.7 9.0 7.4 5.2 5.3 6.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.7 9.0 7.4 5.2 5.3 6.8 LOS A A AA AA Approach Delay 9.7 9.0 5.3 6.7 Approach LOS AAAA Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 40 Actuated Cycle Length: 32.5 Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.57 Intersection Signal Delay: 6.7 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 5

Page 156 of 168

Page 167 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Future Traffic - PM 2: Chimney Rock Rd & Dashwood Dr 2024 - With Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 55 49 67 83 78 54 41 650 36 34 1012 89 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 0 171 0 0 215 0 41 686 0 34 1101 0 Lane Utilization Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.93 0.85 0.95 0.94 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 0 3350 0 0 3414 0 1805 3589 0 1805 3574 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed No No Yes Yes Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 2.7 22.9 0.0 2.3 37.0 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 8.0 26.9 0.0 8.0 41.0 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 0 112 0 114 120 1795 120 1787 Reference Time A (s) 0.0 59.1 0.0 87.5 40.9 22.9 33.9 37.0 Adj Saturation B (vph NA NA 0 1698 NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) NA NA 13.5 11.6 NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 59.1 13.5 40.9 37.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 63.1 17.5 44.9 41.0 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.0 6.1 0.0 7.6 2.7 22.9 2.3 37.0 Ref Time Seperate (s) 3.7 1.8 5.5 2.8 2.7 21.7 2.3 34.0 Reference Time (s) 6.1 6.1 7.6 7.6 22.9 22.9 37.0 37.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 10.1 10.1 11.6 11.6 26.9 26.9 41.0 41.0 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) NA 49.0 Permitted Option (s) 63.1 44.9 Split Option (s) 21.7 67.9 Minimum (s) 21.7 44.9 66.6 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.5% ICU Level of Service B Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 6

Page 157 of 168

Page 168 of 181 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Traffic - PM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2024 - With Development

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2 0 4 20 0 21 13 742 14 10 1032 4 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.910 0.850 0.997 0.999 Flt Protected 0.984 0.950 0.999 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1668 0 1770 1583 0 0 3525 0 0 3536 0 Flt Permitted 0.984 0.950 0.999 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1668 0 1770 1583 0 0 3525 0 0 3536 0 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 208 193 365 296 Travel Time (s) 4.7 4.4 7.1 5.8 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) 2 0 4 22 0 23 14 807 15 11 1122 4 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 6 0 22 23 0 0 836 0 0 1137 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(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0000 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 7

Page 158 of 168

Page 169 of 181 Intersection Capacity Utilization Future Traffic - PM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2024 - With Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2 0 4 20 0 21 13 742 14 10 1032 4 Pedestrians Ped Button Pedestrian Timing (s) Free Right No No No No Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Green (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Refr Cycle Length (s) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 Volume Combined (vph) 0 6 0 20 21 0 0 769 0 0 1046 0 Lane Utilization 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 Turning Factor (vph) 0.95 0.89 0.85 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Saturated Flow (vph) 0 1682 0 1805 1615 0 0 3605 0 0 3614 0 Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Frequency (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Protected Option Allowed No No No No Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Adj Reference Time (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Permitted Option Adj Saturation A (vph) 0 273 722 1615 0 1187 0 1410 Reference Time A (s) 0.0 2.6 3.3 1.6 0.0 36.2 0.0 42.8 Adj Saturation B (vph 0 0 0 1615 NA NA NA NA Reference Time B (s) 8.1 8.4 9.3 1.6 NA NA NA NA Reference Time (s) 2.6 3.3 36.2 42.8 Adj Reference Time (s) 8.0 8.0 40.2 46.8 Split Option Ref Time Combined (s) 0.0 0.4 1.3 1.6 0.0 25.6 0.0 34.7 Ref Time Seperate (s) 0.1 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.9 24.7 0.7 34.3 Reference Time (s) 0.4 0.4 1.6 1.6 25.6 25.6 34.7 34.7 Adj Reference Time (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 29.6 29.6 38.7 38.7 Summary EB WB NB SB Combined Protected Option (s) NA NA Permitted Option (s) 8.0 46.8 Split Option (s) 16.0 68.3 Minimum (s) 8.0 46.8 54.8 Right Turns Adj Reference Time (s) Cross Thru Ref Time (s) Oncoming Left Ref Time (s) Combined (s) Intersection Summary Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.7% ICU Level of Service A Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 8

Page 159 of 168

Page 170 of 181 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Traffic - PM 3: Chimney Rock Rd & Driveway C 2024 - With Development

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 2 0 4 20 0 21 13 742 14 10 1032 4 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% 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 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 0 4 22 0 23 14 807 15 11 1122 4 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 365 296 pX, platoon unblocked 0.87 0.87 0.81 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.81 0.87 vC, conflicting volume 1600 1996 563 1429 1990 411 1126 822 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 742 1196 0 546 1189 37 682 507 tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 100 100 94 100 97 98 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 252 156 876 356 157 898 733 921 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 7 22 23 417 418 572 565 Volume Left 2 22 0 14 0 11 0 Volume Right 4 0 23 0 15 0 4 cSH 480 356 898 733 1700 921 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.02 0.25 0.01 0.33 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1521010 Control Delay (s) 12.6 15.8 9.1 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.0 Lane LOS B C A A A Approach Delay (s) 12.6 12.4 0.3 0.2 Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15

Traff Data & Associates Exhibit 7 Synchro 8 Report Page 9

Page 160 of 168

Page 171 of 181

MEMO TO: Ashley Parcus - City of Bellaire FROM: Colby W. Wright, P.E., PTOE, RSP1 – Jones|Carter DATE: June 21, 2020 RE: 5422 Bellaire Blvd. - Traffic Impact Analysis

Jones|Cater has reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the 5422 Bellaire Blvd. Commercial Development dated May 13, 2020.

The proposed project is for a proposed Restaurant and Bagel/Coffee Shop with drive through which was previously used as a Pharmacy/Drugstore. The proposed 11,047 square foot developed is expected to generate 117 trips in the weekday AM peak hour and 169 trips in the weekday PM peak hour. The project will utilize one existing right-in/right-out driveway on Bellaire Blvd., one existing right-in/right- out driveway on Chimney and one full access driveway on Chimney Rock. The TIA projects all intersections will operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS) D or better in future traffic year 2024 with the development.

The TIA and provided comments were discussed with the applicants traffic engineer. The applicant feels confident with the trip distributions shown in the TIA based on previous business experience with similar types of developments.

Jones|Carter offers no objections to further permitting of this project.

Page 161 of 168

Page 172 of 181 Page 162 of 168

Page 173 of 181 From: Edward Schreiber < > Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:35 PM To: Zoning Subject: [EXTERNAL] Bagel drive in at chimney rock and Bellaire

I support this request. I want drive in bagels Ed Schreiber 505 south third st 77401

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT

This email and any documents transmitted with it may contain information that is confidential or proprietary to BXS Insurance or is subject to legal privilege and is solely for the use of the individuals or entities to whom this email was addressed or intended. If you received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and delete the message and any attachments from your computer or other device. Any other use, retention, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email (or any portion of it) is strictly prohibited.

Coverage cannot be bound or changed by an email to BXS Insurance. Coverage can only be bound or changed when the insured receives written confirmation of coverage, or a change to coverage, from BXS Insurance.

EXTERNAL email: Exercise caution when opening. Do not click on links or open attachments without verifying the sender's intent.

1 Page 163 of 168

Page 174 of 181 From: Ashley Parcus Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2020 1:32 PM To: Marleny Campos Subject: FW: 5422 Bellaire Boulevard

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

Marleny,

He didn't include you on his response to my explanation...it is below.

Ashley Parcus Development Services Coordinator Development Services

City of Bellaire 7008 South Rice Avenue | Bellaire, TX 77401 O: (713) 662-8240 | F: (713) 662-8233 https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bellairetx.gov%2F&data=02%7C01%7C MCampos%40bellairetx.gov%7Ca23f524e78d8444e6eab08d80e35b2a9%7Cb49ef85ab0cb4f728274f75abb9364b8%7C0 %7C0%7C637274971092761756&sdata=RINO7%2BOaAfDlaYMDYCBg36arh2IhYgMXJT3YI%2BgGn%2B0%3D&r eserved=0

-----Original Message----- From: Kenny Meyer [mailto: ] Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 4:31 PM To: Ashley Parcus Subject: RE: 5422 Bellaire Boulevard

Ashley - all correct on the addresses. We must have misplaced the material; sorry for the confusion. Kenny.

-----Original Message----- From: Ashley Parcus Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 3:52 PM To: Kenny Meyer < > Cc: ; Marleny Campos Subject: RE: 5422 Bellaire Boulevard

[EXTERNAL] This Message Came From an External Source

1 Page 164 of 168

Page 175 of 181

Mr. Meyer,

Thank you for your comments. Attached is the mailing list of properties located within 500 feet of 5422 Bellaire Blvd that was submitted to the City by the applicant, along with the mailing labels that were created by staff in order to send out the notices. MC Management is listed on both of the documents with an address of 6802 Mapleridge St. # 210, and it looks like tenants of the Bellaire Triangle are included in the spreadsheet as well. If this address is incorrect, it most likely means that HCAD or another database that was used in order to obtain the information is not updated.

Let me know if you have any questions and/or concerns.

Thank you,

Ashley Parcus Development Services Coordinator Development Services

-----Original Message----- From: Kenny Meyer [mailto: ] Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 2:34 PM To: Ashley Parcus Cc: ; Kenny Meyer Subject: FW: 5422 Bellaire Boulevard

Ashley -

Please be advised that I am Manager for FKM Partnership, Ltd. (FKM) who is the owner of the Bellaire Triangle Center at the southeast corner of Bellaire Blvd and Chimney Rock in the City of Bellaire. I do not recall receiving notice of this specific use meeting per the attached document, but be that as it may, please know FKM does not object to the applicant having the drive-through window for which the applicant is applying.

I can be reached at or by e-mail at should you have questions regarding FKM's position.

Thank you for your time in this matter. Kenny Meyer.

-----Original Message----- From: William E. Stone III < > Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 2:12 PM To: Kenny Meyer < >

2 Page 165 of 168

Page 176 of 181 Cc: William E. Stone < > Subject: 5422 Bellaire Boulevard

[EXTERNAL] This Message Came From an External Source

Kenny,

Thanks for speaking with me just now.

You might ask Ashley Parcus about whether notice went to you and whether they have your correct address.

If you do not object to our application/request, you can state same to Ms. Parcus at:

[email protected]

She is with the Bellaire Development Office.

Lastly, here is the P &Z agenda for tomorrow night’s phone hearing (no physical hearing at City Hall). Most of it is the Traffic Impact Study.

Thank you very much,

Bill

EXTERNAL email: Exercise caution when opening. Do not click on links or open attachments without verifying the sender's intent. EXTERNAL email: Exercise caution when opening. Do not click on links or open attachments without verifying the sender's intent.

3 Page 166 of 168

Page 177 of 181 From: Ashley Parcus Sent: Friday, June 12, 2020 10:53 AM To: Marleny Campos; Zoning Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL] 5422 Bellaire Blvd

From: Charlotte Duncan [mailto: ] Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2020 10:29 PM To: Ashley Parcus Subject: [EXTERNAL] 5422 Bellaire Blvd

I am a Bellaire resident and operate a business within 500 feet of the above subject property and do not object to a drive through window at 5422 Bellaire blvd.

Thank you, Charlotte Duncan, 6802 Mapleridge #101, Bellaire, Tx 77401

EXTERNAL email: Exercise caution when opening. Do not click on links or open attachments without verifying the sender's intent.

1 Page 167 of 168

Page 178 of 181

From: Ashley Parcus Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 10:59 AM To: Zoning Cc: Marleny Campos Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL] Bagel Realty 5422 Bellaire Blvd

From: Dana Parker [mailto: ] Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 10:54 AM To: Ashley Parcus Subject: [EXTERNAL] Bagel Realty 5422 Bellaire Blvd

Ashley

I am emailing you in support of the application submitted to your office for the drive thru access located at 5422 Bellaire Blvd. I understand the drive thru is going to be on the East side of the building, with exit onto Chimney Rock Rd. This backs up to our empty lot and we welcome this business into our neighborhood.

Please advise if you require anything else from me on this issue.

Thank you for your time.

Dana Parker Managing Partner/National Marketing Coordinator

O: M:

The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been mov ed, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.

www.inservio3.com

EXTERNAL email: Exercise caution when opening. Do not click on links or open attachments without verifying the sender's intent.

1 Page 168 of 168

Page 179 of 181 City of Bellaire

Planning and Zoning Commission

To: Mayor and City Council From: Ross Gordon, Chair, Planning & Zoning Commission CC: ChaVonne Sampson, Director of Development Services Subject: Report and Recommendation on an application for Specific Use Permit at 5422 Bellaire Blvd.

On June 11, 2020, the Planning & Zoning Commission held a public hearing for the purpose of reviewing an application filed by Bagel Realty, LLC on a request to operate a restaurant and catering business with a drive-through window on the east side of the property as provided for in Section 24-536 B. (2) c) of the City of Bellaire Zoning Code.

Notifications regarding the public hearing were mailed out to all addresses within five-hundred (500) feet of the property. Any and all persons desiring to be heard in connection with the Specific Use Permit Application were invited to speak before the Commission, but there were no speakers at the hearing. A total of four (4) public comments were received and all were in favor or had no objections to the application.

During the public hearing, the Commission briefly discussed the traffic impact analysis in regards to the amount of traffic expected around peak demand times and the use of the existing second drive-through lane, but there were no major concerns.

CONSIDERATION

RECOMMENDATION

On July 9, 2020, after due consideration and discussion, the Commission found that the application was ______with the criteria and standards set forth in Section 24-615 of the City of Bellaire Code of Ordinances, and voted _____ to recommend approval of the Specific Use Permit at 5422 Bellaire Boulevard to City Council, with the following conditions

1. 2. 3.

VOTE OF THE COMMISSION

Members present and voting FOR this recommendation to City Council:

Members present and voting AGAINST this recommendation to City Council:

Members absent:

Page 180 of 181 City of Bellaire

July 9, 2020

Building and Standards Commission The City of Bellaire 7800 South Rice Bellaire, TX 77401

Commissioners:

The Planning and Zoning Commission has observed new construction residential structures with elevated (above grade) garage floors. Raising the garage floor above grade generally requires the developer to build up the driveway to facilitate ingress and egress to the garage. The Planning and Zoning Commission has the following concerns:

 Concern over compliance with no-net-fill floodplain ordinances, specifically whether these garages and driveways are correctly being accounted for in no-net-fill calculations.  Concern over whether these elevated driveways should be considered and/or regulated as structures placed in front of the building line, similar to the way front steps are handled.  Concern over general uniformity within Residential Zones, including the potentially extreme scenarios which may occur in the absence of any further restrictions.

The Planning and Zoning Commission politely requests that the Building and Standards Commission consider these concerns and, if warranted, review current Ordinances and applicable sections of Chapter 9 to assess whether existing regulations are sufficient or if revisions may be necessary to better regulate this newer design/construction approach.

If so desired, the Planning and Zoning Commission would be available for a joint workshop.

Thank you for your review and consideration.

On behalf of the Commission,

Ross Gordon Chair, Planning and Zoning Commission

Page 181 of 181