C E P T IMPACT STUDY - Port of Vancouver · 11/12/2016 · T CENTERM EXPANSION PROJECT RAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Page ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (VFPA) is

CENTERM EXPANSION PROJECT

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY

Submitted By:

AUGUST 2016 PARSONS

DRAFT

CENTERM EXPANSION PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY

Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... ii

1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................... 1

2. STUDY AREA TRANSPORTATION NETWORK ............................................ 2

3. TRAFFIC VOLUMES ........................................................................................ 7

3.1 Port Traffic............................................................................................ 7

3.2 Municipal Background Traffic ............................................................. 24

4. ALTERATIONS TO THE ROAD NETWORK ................................................. 30

5. TRAFFIC MICRO-SIMULATION MODEL DESCRIPTION ............................ 35

6. ROUNDABOUT OPERATIONS MODEL ....................................................... 41

7. TRAFFIC MICRO-SIMULATION MODEL ANALYSIS RESULTS ................. 42

7.1 Traffic Volume Changes on Port Access Routes............................... 43

7.2 Vehicle Hours Travelled ..................................................................... 46

7.3 Point-to-Point Travel Times ............................................................... 48

7.4 Volume to Capacity Ratio and Level of Service................................. 53

7.5 Queue Length Observations .............................................................. 60

7.6 Roundabout Operations ..................................................................... 65

7.7 Traffic Volumes through the Downtown Eastside .............................. 69

8. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ............................................................................. 72

APPENDIX A: SYNCHRO REPORTS


Page ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (VFPA) is currently assessing the impacts of the

Centerm Expansion Project (CEP), which would increase the annual sustainable

throughput capacity of the Centerm container terminal from 720,000 Twenty-foot

Equivalent Units (TEU) to 1,310,000 TEU.

The purpose of this report is to document the CEP’s anticipated impacts to traffic

operations on both the restricted-access South Shore port area road network, as well as

the surrounding City of Vancouver public road network.

The Centerm Expansion Project is expected to affect traffic operations in two ways:

• The CEP will generate additional vehicle trips to and from the terminal. These

additional trips are primarily container truck trips associated with the movement of

additional containers to and from the terminal. An increase in the number of

employees on site will also create additional passenger vehicle trips, and an

increase in service vehicle trips is also anticipated. Almost all of this additional

traffic will the use City of Vancouver road network as part of the journey to and

from the terminal.

• As part of the scope of the CEP, changes will be made to road infrastructure within

the South Shore port area. Major changes include the removal of the Heatley

Avenue Overpass and the implementation of the Centennial Road Overpass

(CROP) and a roundabout at the Clark Drive / Stewart Street intersection. These

changes to the road infrastructure will impact traffic operations on the South Shore

port area road network, and will also affect the City of Vancouver road network, as

these port-area road network changes will influence which routes within the City of

Vancouver road network vehicles travelling to and from the South Shore port area

use to enter and leave the restricted-access port area.

This traffic impact study utilized a traffic micro-simulation model that had been previously

developed to assess traffic operations within South Shore port area road network. As part

of the scope of this traffic impact assessment of the Centerm Expansion Project, the traffic

micro-simulation model was updated and expanded to include additional components of

the City of Vancouver’s road network. Several additional traffic counts were also

undertaken in order to assist in calibrating the model.


Page iii

Two separate scenarios were modelled:

• Scenario 1: Anticipated future traffic operations without implementation of the

Centerm Expansion Project, referred to as the Base Case scenario; and

• Scenario 2: Anticipated future operations with implementation of the Centerm

Expansion Project, referred to as the Expansion Case scenario.

The differences in traffic operations between these two scenarios represent the net impact

of the Centerm Expansion Project.

Based on the results of the analysis, a number of key findings have emerged:

• It is estimated that upon reaching the Centerm container terminal’s increased

sustainable throughput capacity, the CEP will generate a net total increase of

approximately 1,300 container trucks per day (split evenly as an increase of

approximately 650 additional inbound and 650 additional outbound container

trucks) above and beyond what would occur if the Centerm container terminal were

to operate at its existing sustainable capacity.

• The CEP would also result in an additional roughly 250 employee and service

vehicle trips per day (split evenly as roughly 125 inbound and 125 outbound trips)

to and from the Centerm container terminal.

• With the implementation of the CEP, employee and service vehicles are

anticipated to split approximately 70% / 30% between the Clark Drive Overpass

and Commissioner Street Overpass, respectively. This pattern shift reflects both

vehicles that currently use the Heatley Street Overpass having to shift to either the

Clark Drive Overpass or Commissioner Street Overpass (the majority of which are

expected to use the Clark Drive Overpass), as well as an increase in the total

number of employee and service vehicles travelling to and from the South Shore

port area.

• Overall, the combined effects of the additional container truck, employee and

service vehicle volumes, as well as the diversion of vehicles currently using the

Heatley Avenue Overpass, were found to have a relatively minor impact on

vehicular traffic operations on the restricted-access South Shore port area road

network. The largest impacts were found at the proposed roundabout at Clark

Drive and Stewart Street which will generate queues equivalent to the length of

10+ container trucks during peak times for some approaches. However, these

queues do dissipate, as the roundabout has sufficient capacity to accommodate

the anticipated vehicle volumes. Several considerations for the next steps of

design development of the roundabout that would benefit traffic operations were

also noted.


Page iv

• With the CEP in place, no truck staging incidents that require inbound container

trucks to divert from the Clark Drive Overpass to the Commissioner Street

Overpass were observed; a result of the improved stability of traffic operations on

the South Shore port area road network. Nonetheless, significant queuing was

observed on the Clark Drive Overpass during the busiest hours for inbound

movements, with queues reaching up to 250 m long (i.e. to roughly the location

where the overpass passes over top of the Clark Drive / Powell Street intersection).




vehicular traffic operations and the City of Vancouver road network. This is

because although the CEP is generating a significant number of new vehicle trips

per day, these vehicle trips, particularly the container truck trips, are spread

throughout the day and do not necessarily “peak” during the AM and PM peak

hours when the City of Vancouver road network is busiest due to the presence of

high volumes of commuter and other traffic. In particular, the intersection of Clark

Drive and Hastings Street does not perform substantially different than at present,

as north and south through-movements are not the primary capacity constraint at

this intersection. The CEP is anticipated to have a negligible impact on vehicle

volumes on major road corridors in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver, although

it will likely reduce volumes on Heatley Avenue between Powell Street and

Hastings Street.

• The road network assumptions used in the analysis assume that an at-grade

Waterfront Road Extension (WRE) connection would not be implemented as part

of the scope of the CEP. This assumption results in a “worse case” impact in terms

of traffic volumes on the City of Vancouver road network; sensitivity testing

indicates that if the WRE is implemented, there would be a 1% - 2% reduction in

overall vehicular travel on the major east-west roads through the Downtown

Eastside of Vancouver, as some port-related traffic travelling to / from the west

could instead use the Waterfront Road Extension. Therefore, if the WRE is in fact

implemented as part of the scope of the CEP, there may be some minor

improvements to traffic operations on the City of Vancouver road network

compared to what is presented in this study.

• The results above are based on a number of assumptions that require deliberate

action on the part of the VFPA and other partners in the Centerm Expansion

Project, without which, the incremental vehicle traffic operations impacts of the

CEP could be substantially greater to both the South Shore port area and City of

Vancouver road networks. Specifically:


Page v

o Achieving the rail split assumptions in this analysis is critical to reducing

the number of container truck trips required to move containers in and out

of the Centerm container terminal. The analysis assumed a rail split that

is higher than the current split (reflecting the significant expansion of the

intermodal yard proposed as part of the scope of the CEP), but lower than

the maximum capacity of the new intermodal yard. This means that it is

also possible that the share of containers moved by rail could ultimately

be higher than what is assumed in this analysis, and that correspondingly,

the number of container truck trips could ultimately be lower than

assumed.

o The analysis assumes that the proportion of container trucks making

double-ended movements remains constant over time. Increasing the

proportion of double-ended movements would further assist with reducing

the total number of container trucks trips to and from the Centerm

container terminal.

o The analysis assumes that the CEP will entirely eliminate the potential for

train movements at the at-grade crossings along Centennial Road

between Clark Drive and the Centerm container terminal. This will be

accomplished by eliminating train operations on the Southern Railway of

BC crossing, and implementing the Centennial Road Overpass, which will

grade-separate the crossings of the Vanterm West and Alliance Grain

Terminal tracks. The elimination of these road / rail conflicts help improve

travel time reliability on the South Shore port area road network and

reduce truck staging events.

o The distribution throughout the day of arrival and departure times of

container trucks from the Centerm and Vanterm container terminals is

significantly different than what is occurring today. Specifically, the

assumed daily distribution of arrival times and departure times is

significantly more stable throughout the day, rather than the current profile,

which tends to have greater “peaks” of container truck arrivals and

departures. Without this change in operating practices, the South Shore

port area road network will likely see a significant increase in queuing of

container trucks to the Centerm container terminal, which can in turn

obstruct access for other South Shore port area road users, as the primary

corridor in the road network (Centennial Road / Stewart Street /

Commissioner Street) is only one lane in each direction in most places.

This change in operating practice will also be required to mitigate the traffic

operations impacts of the CEP on the City of Vancouver road networks.


Page vi

• All modelling analysis assumes the road network is “operating normally”; meaning

that the effects of unplanned incidents are not accounted for. Much of the South

Shore port area road network is one lane in each direction, and in some parts of

the port area, there is only one route in and out; alternative routes that would

provide network redundancy do not exist. Therefore, unplanned closures (e.g.

vehicle stalls or collisions blocking a lane, the unexpected closure of a VACS gate

or terminal gate) are a concern, as any such events could quickly create significant

queueing and delays, which can take a long time to dissipate even after the cause

of the closure has been addressed / cleared. A strong incident management plan

to both reduce the propensity for such incidents, as well as to remove, mitigate or

otherwise address such incidents is critical to ensuring day-to-day traffic

operations on the South Shore port area road network remain as stable and

consistent as realistically possible.


Page 1

1. INTRODUCTION

In response to anticipated growth in demand for container movements through West Coast

ports, the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority and terminal operator DP World are currently

investigating the potential for expanding the capacity of the Centerm container terminal. If

implemented, the proposed Centerm Expansion Project (CEP), would increase the annual

sustainable throughput capacity of the Centerm container terminal from 720,000 Twenty-

foot Equivalent Units (TEU) today to 1,310,000 TEU after completion.

The objective of the assignment is to assess the potential impacts to traffic operations on

both the restricted-access internal port road network as well as the adjacent City of

Vancouver’s public road network resulting from the additional private vehicle and container

truck traffic that is anticipated to be generated as a result of the CEP. This assignment

made use of an existing 23-hour traffic operations model of the South Shore port area of

the Burrard Inlet, which was developed as part of previous traffic planning studies of the

South Shore port area road network. As part of the current assignment, this existing model

was refined and expanded to include additional elements of the City of Vancouver’s road

network, as well as to reflect the changes to the port road network that will occur as part of

the scope of the CEP. The report focuses on the impacts that the project would create once

the CEP is operational; traffic impacts during the construction phase of the project were

not assessed. The remainder of this report discusses the modelling assumptions, analysis,

findings and recommendations.


Page 2

2. STUDY AREA TRANSPORTATION NETWORK

The Centerm container terminal is located within the City of Vancouver, on the South Shore

of Burrard Inlet and approximately one kilometre east of Canada Place. The Centerm

container terminal is one of two container terminals within the City of Vancouver; the other

being Vanterm, which is located slightly further to the east. Other businesses and port

facilities in the vicinity include grain terminals, a reduction plant, aggregates handling

facilities, fisheries / seafood plants, a train ferry, a sugar cane refinery, and a now-defunct

cruise ship terminal (Ballantyne Pier).

The geographic extents of this traffic impact study is shown in Figure 2.1. As can be seen

in Figure 2.1, a large section of the City of Vancouver road network that runs parallel to

the Burrard Inlet waterfront in east Vancouver is included in the study area. The reason for

including the parallel road network is because the South Shore port area can only be

accessed from three primary routes, all of which are located within the City of Vancouver;

Heatley Avenue, Clark Drive, and Commissioner Street. A very limited number of trips to

and from the Centerm container terminal (but not to any other South Shore port area

tenants) are also permitted to use the Dunlevy Gate, which is accessed via East Waterfront

Road.

The study area therefore extends approximately four kilometres east of the Centerm

container terminal site in order to account for the effects of Centerm container terminal

traffic joining the City of Vancouver road network via Commissioner Street. All vehicular

traffic to and from Centerm, Vanterm or any of the other tenants in the vicinity must all

make use of one of these three primary access points, or in a very limited number of cases,

via the Dunlevy Gate.

A description of all major roads within the study area is provided below. Note that roads

within the South Shore port area (including those connecting to Centerm) are restricted to

authorized vehicles only, and are not accessible to the general public.

Centennial Road / Stewart Street / Commissioner Street

This route is a continuous east-west corridor providing access to all port facilities along the

South Shore. Access to this road is restricted to authorized vehicles only. This road extends

from the Heatley Avenue Overpass in the west to the Commissioner Street Overpass in

the east. Note that the Commissioner Street Overpass itself is a publicly-accessible road

that also provides access to New Brighton Park; the Commissioner Street Vehicle Access

Control Gates (VACS) are located just west of the north end of the Commissioner Street

Overpass. Commissioner Street is one of only two accesses that container trucks are

permitted to use to travel to / from the port lands; the other is the Clark Drive Overpass.


Page 3

The Commissioner Street VACS also has an adjacent truck staging area, where container

trucks can park and queue to wait their turn to pass through the VACS. When the Clark

Drive VACS are experiencing large queues, container trucks are also redirected to make

use of the Commissioner Street truck staging area.

The completion of the Stewart Street Elevated Structure (SSES) along this corridor

between Victoria Drive and Clark Drive in 2013 improved the travel time reliability of this

road, as it allows vehicles (including container trucks) to pass over top of the ten at-grade

rail crossings located between Victoria Drive and Clark Drive that provide rail service to

individual tenant properties. Rail movements had previously been a cause of extensive

vehicle queuing when trains occupied the rail crossings along Stewart Street. Between

Clark Drive and Heatley Avenue, the at-grade rail crossing conflicts continue to exist, as

at-present there is no elevated structure to eliminate the road / rail conflicts.

McGill Street

McGill Street is a short east-west route in the northeast area of Vancouver. This road plays

a critical role in container truck movements to and from the Centerm container terminal by

providing connectivity between Commissioner Street and Highway 1. Highway 1 is a key

container trucking corridor as it facilitates connectivity between important port lands,

intermodal terminals, and cross-docking and industrial facilities throughout much of the

Lower Mainland. Highway 1 is also the main route connecting the Lower Mainland to the

rest of BC and Canada.

Powell Street / Cordova Street / Dundas Street

This route is the northernmost continuous east-west publicly-accessible corridor that spans

the majority of the study area. The Powell Street Overpass opened, which provides a

grade-separated crossing of the Burrard Inlet railway line that connects the South Shore

port area to the False Creek Flats, opened in 2014. West of the Powell Street Overpass,

this corridor runs as a couplet along Powell Street (westbound) and Cordova Street

(eastbound) into downtown Vancouver. East of the Powell Street Overpass, the road

generally runs eastward and connects to Nanaimo Street. At Nanaimo Street, this corridor

continues eastward as Dundas Street Nanaimo Street to Renfrew Street, but not as a truck

route. Within the study area, Powell Street / Cordova Street / Dundas Street is a well-used

transit corridor.


Page 4

Figure 2.1: Study Area Extents


Page 5

Hastings Street

Hastings Street is a major east-west corridor, running from downtown Vancouver in the

west to Coquitlam in the east (as Barnet Highway). In Coquitlam, Barnet Highway connects

to Lougheed Highway, which continues eastward into the Fraser Valley. Within the study

area, Hastings Street is a very heavily used transit corridor, and features peak-direction

curbside bus lanes. Between Clark Drive and the Cassiar Connector, Hastings Street is

part of the route for container trucks to travel on City of Vancouver roads between the

Commissioner Street Overpass and Clark Drive, and the Clark Drive Overpass to

Commissioner Street.

Main Street

Main Street is a major north south corridor within the City of Vancouver that runs from the

Burrard Inlet to the North Arm of the Fraser River. Although Main Street is a truck route, it

is not a major route for container truck movements to and from the South Shore port area.

Main Street is also a heavily used transit corridor. The Main Street Overpass is located at

the northern end of the road and provides access to Waterfront Road, which in turn

provides access to the Dunlevy Gate.

Waterfront Road

Waterfront Road, accessed via the Main Street Overpass (and known as West Waterfront

Road to the west of Main Street, and East Waterfront Road to the east of Main Street), is

a publicly-accessible VFPA-jurisdiction road that provides access to port facilities to the

east, and also to Crab Park and the loading / service areas for Vancouver Convention

Centre facilities to the west. Access to the Centerm container terminal is provided via the

Dunlevy Gate, which is located approximately 400 m to the east of the intersection of

Waterfront Road and the Main Street overpass. The Dunlevy Gate may only be used by

employees of the Centerm maintenance building, and the occasional service vehicle or

other visitors. All other Centerm related traffic (including Centerm office employees,

longshoremen and container trucks) are not permitted to use the Dunlevy Gate, and no

traffic to other destinations within the South Shore port area may use this gate. East

Waterfront Road also provides access to the Tymac Launch Service and Canadian Fishing

Company businesses and the Mission to Seafarers Club, none of which require use of the

restricted-access South Shore port area road network.

Heatley Avenue

Heatley Avenue is a north-south route that runs through the Downtown Eastside. This route

is a relatively minor road, but plays an important role by providing a connection between


Page 6

the major nearby east west routes in the City of Vancouver road network (Hastings Street,

Cordova Street, and Powell Street) and the South Shore port area, via the Heatley Avenue

Overpass. This overpass is for port traffic only, and is not intended for use by the general

public; a VACS is provided on the overpass itself. Container trucks may not use the Heatley

Avenue Overpass to access the port other than in exceptional circumstances; this access

is intended for other port users such as employees, authorized visitors and service trucks.

Clark Drive

Clark Drive (and Knight Street, as it is named further south) runs from the Burrard Inlet to

the North Arm of the Fraser River, where it connects to the Knight Street Bridge. The

northern end of Clark Drive provides access to the Clark Drive Overpass, which in turn

provides access to the South Shore port lands. This overpass is for port traffic only, and is

not intended for use by the general public. VACS gates are provided at the north end of

the overpass, to prevent public access to the port area. The Clark Drive / Knight Street

corridor is the main north-south container trucking route within the City of Vancouver, and

is heavily used by container trucks travelling to / from the Centerm and Vanterm container

terminals, and various port lands, cross-docking and other industrial facilities throughout

much of Metro Vancouver, particularly in Richmond and Delta. Clark Drive / Knight Street

also provides connectivity to the United States via Highways 91 and 99. The Clark Drive

Overpass is one of only two accesses that container trucks are permitted to use to travel

to / from the port lands; the other is Commissioner Street.

Nanaimo Street, Renfrew Street, Victoria Drive, Commercial Drive

These roads are all north-south roads within the City of Vancouver, although they do not

provide any direct connectivity to the South Shore port lands, nor are they major container

trucking routes.


Page 7

3. TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Traffic within the study area has been grouped into two main categories:

• Port Traffic, with the following sub-categories:

o Centerm Container Truck Traffic;

o Vanterm Container Truck Traffic; and

o Employee and Service Vehicles.

• Municipal Background Traffic, meaning all other traffic on the City of Vancouver’s

road network that is not travelling to/from the South Shore port area.

The methodology for developing traffic volumes for each of these categories is described

below.

3.1 Port Traffic

Port Traffic refers to all traffic that travels to or from the South Shore port facilities.

As noted above, Port Traffic is separated into three sub-categories:

1. Centerm container trucks.

2. Vanterm container trucks.

3. Employee and service vehicle traffic, which can be further categorized as:

a. Centerm employee and service vehicle traffic; and

b. All other non-Centerm employee and service vehicle traffic.

Port traffic is primarily generated by changes in commodity flows; increasing volumes of

goods throughput through port facilities will tend to generate additional vehicle trips to the

port. Because the CEP will enable an increase in container volumes through the port,

notwithstanding that some goods can also arrive / depart by rail. The CEP will result in an

increase in traffic volumes to and from the container terminal facility, assuming that

demand for container movements grows to match the increased terminal capacity.

Consequentially, analysis is not being undertaken for any specific future horizon year, but

rather simply the point in time at which the terminal is operating at capacity, regardless of

whatever year that may ultimately end up being.


Page 8

Therefore, two sets of traffic volumes were developed for Centerm-related traffic, including

both container trucks and employee and service vehicles:

• A Base Case, representing container truck, employee and service vehicle volumes

if the CEP project is not implemented and the Centerm terminal is operating at its

(current) annual sustainable capacity; and

• An Expansion Case, representing container truck, employee and service vehicle

volumes if the CEP is implemented and the Centerm terminal is operating at its

(increased) annual sustainable capacity.

The difference in volumes between the two sets of traffic volumes represents the

incremental traffic volumes (both container truck and employee and service vehicles) that

will be generated as a result of the CEP. Only one set of volumes was developed for all

non-Centerm related container truck, employee and service vehicle traffic.

The method for calculating volumes for each of the three Port Traffic sub-categories are

described below.

3.1.1 Centerm Container Truck Traffic

As noted in Section 3.1, Port Traffic volumes are generally tied to the volume of goods

moved through the port, and therefore two sets of traffic volumes will be developed for the

first two sub-categories:

• A Base Case, representing truck volumes if the CEP project is not implemented

and the Centerm terminal is operating at its sustainable capacity; and

• An Expansion Case, representing truck volumes if the CEP is implemented and

the Centerm terminal is operating at its (increased) sustainable capacity.

These two volumes will be based on the following Centerm container terminal throughput

capacity assumptions.

For the purposes of this assignment, it is assumed that demand for container movements

through Centerm will eventually grow to match the capacity available. In other words, if the

CEP is not implemented, then demand will grow to match the existing sustainable capacity

of 720,000 TEU, however, if the CEP is implemented then additional business will be

attracted and the demand will grow to match the new sustainable capacity of 1,310,000

TEU. Figure 3.1 shows the container throughput volumes for the Centerm container

terminal that will correspond to the different capacity scenarios. Current (2015) throughput

volumes are also provided for reference. Note that the existing 2015 conditions represents


Page 9

the actual observed throughput volume; it is not a measure of capacity (as the existing

sustainable capacity is 720,000 TEU).

Figure 3.1: Centerm Container Throughput Volumes Used for Container Truck Trip Generation

From these container throughputs, container truck volumes can be calculated. Note that

although container truck trips to and from the Centerm container terminal are related to the

container throughput capacity of the terminal, it is not a direct relationship; one container

does not equal one truck trip. Additionally, the increase in overall container terminal

throughput necessarily imply a proportional increase in truck volumes.

In developing the truck trip generation assumptions, VFPA advised the following:

• The terminal handles approximately 20% more volume than what is reported as

the terminal throughput (i.e. the 720,000 and 1,310,000 TEU sustainable capacity

figures), which is a measurement of container volume across the berth. The reason

for this is that a number of containers enter and exit the terminal via road and rail

only, without ever crossing the berth.

• The current Centerm Intermodal Yard can handle up to 65 percent of terminal

throughput on rail. With the proposed Centerm Expansion Project, the new

Centerm Intermodal Yard would be able to handle up to 70 percent of the

(expanded) terminal throughput on rail. To account for some variability in terminal

operations and to conservatively estimate truck volumes for traffic modelling, the

percentage of terminal throughput by rail is assumed to be 5% less than the

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

Existing Conditions (2015

container movements)

Base Case (sustainable capacity

without CEP)

Expansion Case (sustainable

capacity with CEP)

Co

nta

ine

r C

ap

aci

ty (

TE

U)


Page 10

maximum values above; in other words, the rail split is assumed to be 60% for the

Base Case and 65% for the Expansion Case.

• Container terminal capacity is measured in “twenty-foot equivalent units”, or TEUs;

in reality, containers come in multiple lengths, with twenty-foot long containers

being the smallest size of commonly-used container. It is assumed that the

average container truck will carry the equivalent of 1.75 TEU for each pick-up or

drop-off.

• A peaking factor of 15% is applied to all container truck volumes, to reflect the fact

that container throughput is not steady throughout the year, but tends to peak in

the autumn. Therefore, all analysis reflects container truck volumes that will occur

during the busiest time of the year, rather than an “average day” throughout the

year.

• Truck trips to the container terminal can be both single-ended and double-ended.

A single-ended container trip occurs when a truck either delivers or picks-up a

container, but not both (i.e. the truck would either depart or arrive at the terminal

without a container, respectively). A double-ended trip occurs when a truck both

delivers a container and picks-up a different container; effectively replacing two

separate single-ended truck trips with a single double-ended truck trip. The

logistics of coordinating deliveries and pick-ups means that not all container truck

movements can be double-ended. Currently, 15% of truck movements to and from

the Centerm container terminal are part of a double-ended movement. Note that

the proportion of double ended moves actually refers to the number of trucks trips

that are involved in a double-ended move, not the number of container movements

that are part of a double-ended move. For the purposes of this analysis, this

proportion is assumed to remain the same in the future. However, this proportion

of double-ended moves is lower than both other container terminals throughout the

region, as well as the VFPA’s long term policy objectives for increasing the share

of container trips made by double-ended moves. The assumption that the

proportion of double-ended remains constant represents a conservative estimate

of truck trips; in practice the proportion of double-ended movements may increase,

resulting in a decrease in total container truck trips compared to what is assumed

in this study.

The preceding assumptions provided by VFPA are summarized in Table 3.1 below, and

have been used to calculate the total number of anticipated truck trips to and from the

Centerm container terminal.


Page 11

Table 3.1: Centerm Container Truck Trip Generation Assumptions

Adjustment Factor Comments Base Case

(without CEP)

Expansion Case

(with CEP)

Total Port Ship Moves (TEUs) 720,000 1,310,000

Convert to Land Moves Multiply by 1.2 864,000 1,572,000

Moved by Rail 60% of Port Ship Moves for Base Case

65% of Port Ship Moves for Expansion

Case

432,000 851,500

Moved by Truck Land Moves less Moved by Rail 432,000 720,500

Convert to Containers Divide by 1.75 246,857 411,714

Average Weekly Containers by

Truck

Divide by 52 4,747 7,918

Average Daily Containers by

Truck

Divide by 5 949 1,584

Peak Daily Containers by Truck Multiply by 1.15 1,092 1,821

Double Ended Moves Divide by 1.15 15% 15%

Design Daily Truck Volume This volume applies to both inbound

and outbound movements. 949 1,584

Table 3.2 provides a comparison of the number of container trucks the Centerm container

terminal generates under each container throughput volume.

Table 3.2: Incremental Daily Centerm Container Truck Volumes Created by CEP

Hour Inbound Outbound Two-way Total

Base Case (without CEP) 949 949 1,898

Expansion Case (with CEP) 1,584 1,584 3,168

Incremental Impact 635 635 1,270

Container truck trips to and from the Centerm container terminal are spread throughout the

day. The distribution of container trucks arriving at the Centerm container terminal (i.e.

inbound trips) throughout the day is not based on the currently observed daily truck

distribution profile; rather it is based on a new daily truck distribution profile developed by

the VFPA as part of this traffic impact study. In this refined profile, the daily distribution of

truck arrival times to the Centerm container terminal was adjusted to provide a more stable

arrival rate throughout the day, rather than simply uniformly scaling-up the current profile,

which features higher “peaking” at certain times of the day. The rationale for using a more

stable distribution of container truck arrival rates throughout the day is as follows:

• Container trucks are not permitted to arrive at the Centerm container terminal at

any random time. There is a reservation system in place wherein container trucks


Page 12

must reserve an arrival slot to drop-off and / or pick-up a container. A reservation

slot provides a 30 minute window wherein container trucks are allowed to arrive at

the terminal.

• Currently, the terminal is not operating at capacity, and therefore, over the course

of a full day, there are more reservation slots available than there is demand by

container trucks for use of those reservation slots. However, certain times of the

day are more popular than other times of the day for container truckers to arrive at

the Centerm container terminal. Therefore, there are times of the day where all or

almost all reservation slots are being used (i.e. the terminal gates are essentially

at capacity), whereas there are other times of the day where very few reservation

slots are being used, which creates the “peaking” effect in the current profile. In

the Base Case (without CEP), in order for the terminal to achieve the sustainable

capacity, the additional truck volume will need to be accommodated in what is

currently the “off-peak” times. For this reason, the Base Case (without CEP)

assumes a more stable daily distribution of truck arrival volumes compared to

existing (2015) conditions.

• In the Expansion Case (with CEP), the throughput capacity of the terminal gates

will be increased. However, it is still not possible for the expanded Centerm

container terminal to scale up the number of reservation slots to a degree that will

allow the current “peaked” daily distribution of container truck arrivals to continue.

Therefore, the incremental increase in overall daily container truck volumes will

need to be accommodated primarily by making use of “off-peak” reservation slots.

As a result, similar to the Base Case, the overall daily container truck arrival

distribution profile will be more stable compared to today’s more “peaked” profile

in the Expansion Case.

The departure profile for trucks departing the Centerm container terminal (i.e. outbound

trips) is based on the daily arrival, and an assumption that each truck will spend an average

of 20 minutes in the Centerm container terminal. Therefore, the departure volume for a

given hour is calculated as two-thirds of the arrival volume from that same hour, plus one-

third of the volume from the previous hour.

Table 3.3 and Figure 3.2 present the hourly breakdown of container truck volumes to and

from the Centerm container terminal in tabular and graphical form, respectively. Centerm

truck gates are open Monday to Friday, from 8:00 to 1:00 (i.e. early the next morning). As

can be seen in Figure 3.2, container truck volumes quickly ramp up in the hour prior to the

gate opening, and generally stay at a relatively consistent level for most of the day. An

exception to this is the hours beginning at 12:00, 16:00 and 20:00; these correspond to

scheduled lunch breaks (12:00 and 20:30) and shift changes (16:30) for Centerm container

terminal employees.


Page 13

Note that this refined distribution of container truck volumes throughout the day is assumed

regardless of whether the CEP is implemented or not; only the actual volumes are scaled

upward as a result of the Expansion Case generating a higher overall number of truck trips

(as summarized previously in Table 3.1).

Table 3.3: Centerm Container Truck Hourly Volume Profile

Hour

(Starting)

Base Case

(without CEP)

Inbound

Base Case

(without CEP)

Outbound

Expansion Case

(with CEP)

Inbound

Expansion Case

(with CEP)

Outbound

Difference

(Inbound)

Difference

(Outbound)

0:00 0 16 0 26 0 10

1:00 0 0 0 0 0 0

2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0

3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0

4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0

5:00 0 0 0 0 0 0

6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0

7:00 47 32 79 53 32 21

8:00 62 57 104 96 42 39

9:00 69 67 115 112 46 45

10:00 62 64 104 108 42 44

11:00 66 65 111 109 45 44

12:00 22 37 37 62 15 25

13:00 57 45 95 76 38 31

14:00 65 62 109 104 44 42

15:00 66 66 111 110 45 44

16:00 22 37 37 61 15 24

17:00 66 51 110 85 44 34

18:00 86 79 144 133 58 54

19:00 70 75 116 125 46 50

20:00 15 33 24 55 9 22

21:00 58 44 97 73 39 29

22:00 66 64 111 106 45 42

23:00 47 54 79 90 32 36

Daily

Total 949 949 1,584 1,584 635 635


Page 14

Figure 3.2: Centerm Container Hourly Volume Profile

As shown in Table 3.3, the incremental effect of the CEP in terms of container truck

volumes peaks at around an additional roughly 55-60 vehicles in and out of the Centerm

container terminal facility (and hence, either coming from or going to the public road

network).

This volume is split between the two container truck accesses to the Centerm container

terminal, namely the Clark Drive / Knight Street corridor and Highway 1 via the

Commissioner Street Overpass. The proportion of trucks heading to and from each of these

two routes was developed based on the existing proportion of truck movements using each

of these two routes. The exact proportion varies throughout the day. Broadly speaking,

however, the net effect of the CEP in terms of container truck volumes can be described

as, during the busiest hour for container truck movements, the CEP represents an

incremental increase of approximately 30 container trucks per hour in each direction on

both Clark Drive and Commissioner Street.

Figures 3.3 and 3.4 show the turning movement volumes for Centerm container trucks on

the network during the AM (08:15 to 09:15) and PM (17:15 to 18:15) peak hours for the

Base Case (without CEP), and Expansion Case (with CEP) conditions, respectively. Note

that the traffic micro-simulation modelling software, Paramics, assigns vehicles to each

road in the modelled road network. Unlike other software such as Synchro, individual

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160C

on

tain

er

Tru

cks

Time of Day (hh:mm)

Base Case (without CEP) - Inbound Base Case (without CEP) - Outbound

Expansion Case (with CEP) - Inbound Expansion Case (with CEP) - Outbound


Page 15

vehicle movements at each intersection are not directly input by the user; rather, overall

origins and destinations are input into the model, and individual vehicle movements at

intersections are an outcome of the simulation. The figures below should therefore be

understood to represent an outcome of the modelling analysis described later in this report.

Finally, it should be noted that traffic operations micro-simulation model loads vehicles into

the model network using a semi-random pattern that is based on both the vehicle volume

patterns specified in the origin-distribution matrix, as well as a seeding value that is used

to develop the probabilistic distribution function. Due to the stochastic nature of the model,

simulated volumes will vary from simulation to simulation, and will even vary between two

simulation runs of the exact same scenario when a different seed value is used. Therefore,

it should be noted that there may be instances where volumes that intuitively should be

“the same” between the two scenarios are in fact slightly different; this is to be expected.

This consideration applies to all volumes shown in Section 3.


Page 16

Figure 3.3: Centerm Container Truck Volumes – Base Case (without CEP) – AM (PM)


Page 17

Figure 3.4: Centerm Container Truck Volumes – Expansion Case (with CEP) – AM (PM)


Page 18

3.1.2 Vanterm Container Truck Traffic

Similar to the Centerm container terminal, the Vanterm container terminal generates

container truck, employee and service truck trips. Vanterm container truck trip generation

assumptions are summarized in Table 3.4 below. Vanterm container terminal truck trip

arrival and departures profiles over the course of the whole day are assumed to follow the

same distribution as the Centerm container terminal. No significant increase in employee

or service vehicle trips to the Vanterm container terminal is anticipated.

Table 3.4: Vanterm Container Truck Trip Generation Assumptions

Adjustment Factor Comments Vanterm

Total Port Ship Moves (TEUs) 650,000

Convert to Land Moves Multiply by 1.2 780,000

Moved by Rail 42% of Land Moves 327,600

Moved by Truck 52% of Land Moves 452,400

Convert to Containers Divide by 1.75 258,500

Average Weekly Containers by Truck Divide by 52 4,971

Average Daily Containers by Truck Divide by 5 994

Peak Daily Containers by Truck Multiply by 1.15 1,143

Double Ended Moves Divide by 1.15 23%

Design Daily Truck Volume This volume applies to both inbound and

outbound movements. 930

Figures 3.5 and 3.6 show the turning movement volumes for container trucks travelling to

and from the Vanterm container terminal on the road network during the AM and PM peak

hours for the Base Case (without CEP) and Expansion Case (with CEP) conditions,

respectively. The total volume of Vanterm container terminal-related container trucks is the

same for both cases, because the total container movements in and out of Vanterm does

not change between these two scenarios.

Note that unlike Centerm, Vanterm trucks are not permitted to use the Clark Drive

Overpass for inbound movements, and must instead use the Commissioner Street

Overpass. Therefore, Vanterm-bound trucks approaching the South Shore port area via

the Clark Drive / Knight Street corridor must divert to Commissioner Street. The route for

this diversion is Clark Drive – Hastings Street – Cassiar Connector – Bridgeway Street –

McGill Street. Vanterm trucks are permitted to use the Clark Drive Overpass for outbound

movements.


Page 19

Figure 3.5: Vanterm Container Truck Volumes – Base Case (without CEP) – AM (PM)


Page 20

Figure 3.6: Vanterm Container Truck Volumes – Expansion Case (with CEP) – AM (PM)


Page 21

3.1.3 Employee and Service Vehicle Traffic

Employee and service vehicles include both Centerm-related and non-Centerm related

trips.

Centerm-related private vehicles and service trucks can use the Commissioner Street,

Clark Drive, Heatley Avenue and (in limited cases) Dunlevy Avenue accesses. If the CEP

is implemented, employee vehicle trips to the site are assumed to increase by 25%, based

on an increase in the number of parking spaces being proposed. If the CEP is not

implemented employee vehicle trips are assumed to remain constant. Employee vehicle

profiles are based on the VACS gate counts, and it is assumed that the Centerm container

terminal will continue to operate two shifts of 7.5 hours each in the future.

Similarly, if the CEP is implemented, service truck trips to the Centerm container terminal

are assumed to increase by 25%, but if CEP is not implemented, then service vehicle trips

will remain constant. Service vehicle trips are spread throughout the day, although it should

be noted that service vehicles represent a very small proportion of the overall daily traffic

to the terminal.

Non-Centerm related employee and service vehicle traffic relates to all other businesses

that were previously described in Section 2.0. The following assumptions are made:

• Vanterm: no growth in employee or service vehicle traffic.

• Lafarge: No significant expansion / growth.

• Columbia Container: No significant expansion / growth.

• All other South Shore employee and service traffic remains relatively constant.

These assumptions are considered to be independent of the CEP; in other words, they

apply to both the Base Case (without CEP) and Expansion Case (with CEP) scenarios.

Note than some of the other businesses (e.g. the grain terminals) have their product

delivered by rail, and therefore do not have truck movements associated with the

commodity in question (although they may have service truck visits).

Figures 3.7 and 3.8 show the turning movement volumes for all employee and service

vehicle traffic on the road network during or the Base Case (without CEP) and Expansion

Case (with CEP) conditions, respectively. These volumes include both Centerm-related

and non-Centerm related trips.


Page 22

Figure 3.7: Employee and Service Vehicle Volumes – Base Case (without CEP) – AM (PM)


Page 23

Figure 3.8: Employee and Service Vehicle Volumes – Expansion Case (with CEP) – AM (PM)


Page 24

3.2 Municipal Background Traffic

“Municipal Background Traffic” refers to any and all traffic that is not travelling to or from

the South Shore port area. Municipal Background Traffic includes personal vehicles, transit

and non-Port-bound trucks. Walking and cycling is not explicitly accounted for, although

pedestrian-actuated signals that provide opportunities for pedestrians (and cyclists) to

cross major thoroughfares are included in the micro-simulation model.

Traffic volumes were derived from several sources, including:

• Traffic counts undertaken in 2011 as part of a previous traffic analysis assignment

for the VFPA;

• Traffic counts undertaken in 2015 as part of this assignment; and

• Traffic data, including both intersection movement counts and directional volume

counts, collected over the last five years by the City of Vancouver as part of the

City’s regular data collection program.

This count data was compiled to create a synthetic origin-destination matrix for vehicular

travel through the modelled road network. Intersection movements were then extracted

from the modelled vehicle route assignments, and compared to volume count data in order

to calibrate the model.

In some cases, older traffic data was used, as data recent years (i.e. late-2012 to mid-

2014) may not be representative of current patterns. This is because during the late-2012

to mid-2014 time period, there were two major road construction projects within the study

area that created atypical traffic flows on the municipal road network. These projects are

the Stewart Street Elevated Structure and the Powell Street Overpass.

The specific impacts to traffic patterns during the construction of the Stewart Street

Elevated Structure and Powell Street Overpass are as follows:

• The Stewart Street Elevated Structure began construction in late 2012, and

opened in late 2013. During the construction of this project, container trucks were

not allowed to use the Clark Drive Overpass, and were instead redirected to

access the Centerm and Vanterm container terminals via the Commissioner Street

VACS. The route for this movement was Clark Drive – Hastings Street – Nanaimo

Street – McGill Street – Commissioner Street, although container trucks travelling

from other parts of the Lower Mainland may have simply elected to access

Commissioner Street via Highway 1 instead of the Clark Drive / Knight Street

corridor in the first place. The effect of the Stewart Street Elevated Structure

construction on traffic patterns is that truck volume counts collected during the time


Page 25

period that the Clark Drive Overpass was closed to container trucks cannot be

used for analysis, as they will show atypical container truck volumes and

movements on all of the affected roads.

• The Powell Street Overpass was constructed between mid-2013 and mid-2014.

During construction of the Powell Street Overpass, Powell Street was closed

between Clark Drive and Hawks Avenue, and therefore vehicles travelling along

the Powell Street / Cordova Street corridor were required to divert to the Hastings

Street corridor between Clark Drive and Hawks Avenue to bypass the road closure.

Other travelers may have elected to use Hastings Street for the entire length of

their east-west trip, or may have shifted their time of travel to avoid the peak hours,

or avoided travelling through the area altogether. As a result traffic volumes (for all

vehicle types) collected during the construction of the Powell Street Overpass will

be atypical of both previous (i.e. pre-construction) and current (i.e. post-

construction) conditions.

As a result of the construction-time traffic impacts of these two projects, current traffic

patterns may bear more resemblance to older traffic counts undertaken prior to

construction than they will be to more recent counts that were undertaken when the

projects were under construction.

An assumption was made that there would be no growth in Municipal Background Traffic

volumes over time (i.e. a 0% annual growth rate, in effect), and therefore existing traffic

volumes were the volumes used in model assessment for both the Base Case (without

CEP) and Expansion Case (with CEP) assessments. This assumption is consistent with

City of Vancouver policy as outlined in Transportation 2040, which sets a target that the

total number of vehicle trips made in the city will remain constant (or even decline slightly)

despite continued population and employment growth, and that incremental increases in

trip-making will be accommodated through increased walking, cycling and transit use.

This assumption is also consistent with historic trends in vehicle volumes on the City of

Vancouver road network included in the model. Historic link volumes on the 1200-block of

Hastings Street and the 1200-block of Powell Street (between Clark Drive and Vernon

Drive) were extracted from publicly available City of Vancouver traffic count data, and are

plotted in Figure 3.9 and Figure 3.10, respectively. As can be seen, there is some variation

in vehicle volumes over time; as volume information is based on single-day counts, day to

day variations in vehicle volumes is to be expected. However, given that the data spans an

18 year timeframe (from 1996 to 2014), even with day-to-day variations, some discernable

trend in vehicle volume growth should be obvious if such a trend was actually occurring.

No such trend appears to be obvious in the historic traffic volume data.


Page 26

Lastly, it should be noted that during peak hours, roads are operating near capacity, which

would not enable further growth in vehicle volumes without expanding the capacity of the

road. Road links upstream from the model network may also be operating close to capacity,

which would limit the ability of additional vehicles to enter the modelled road network in the

first place.

Figure 3.9: Historic Traffic Volumes on 1200-Block of Hastings Street

Figure 3.10: Historic Traffic Volumes on 1200-Block of Powell Street

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Ve

hic

le V

olu

me

Year

AM Peak Hour - Eastbound AM Peak Hour - Westbound

PM Peak Hour - Eastbound PM Peak Hour - Westbound

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Ve

hic

le V

olu

me

Year

AM Peak Hour - Eastbound AM Peak Hour - Westbound

PM Peak Hour - Eastbound PM Peak Hour - Westbound


Page 27

Figures 3.11 and 3.12 show the Municipal Background Traffic volumes that were

developed to represent existing volumes, and also used in the modelling analysis for both

the Base Case (without CEP) and Expansion Case (with CEP) scenarios.


Page 28

Figure 3.15: Municipal Vehicle Traffic Volume – Base Case (without CEP) – AM (PM)


Page 29

Figure 3.16: Municipal Vehicle Traffic Volume – Expansion Case (with CEP) – AM (PM)


Page 30

4. ALTERATIONS TO THE ROAD NETWORK

In addition to generating additional vehicle trips on the South Shore port area and City of

Vancouver road networks, the CEP will also result in changes in how vehicles travel

between the South Shore port area and the City of Vancouver’s road network. Specifically,

the following changes are anticipated:

• If the CEP proceeds, then the Heatley Avenue Overpass will be demolished in

order to provide space for additional port facilities. Therefore, vehicles that would

otherwise make use of this access will instead be required to use the other South

Shore port area road network access points at Clark Drive and Commissioner

Street. As noted previously, container trucks are not ordinarily allowed to use the

Heatley Avenue Overpass, so this change will primarily impact employee and

service vehicle trip routing choices.

• If the CEP proceeds, then the Centennial Road Overpass (CROP) will be

constructed. The Centennial Road Overpass will run from the Clark Drive / Stewart

Street intersection to just east of the existing SRY at-grade rail crossing in the west.

The implementation of CROP will allow container trucks and other vehicles

travelling to / from the Centerm container terminal to pass over top of the Alliance

Grain Terminal and Vanterm West tracks, and therefore no longer be delayed by

rail movements at these crossings. In conjunction with the implementation of

CROP, the intersection of Clark Drive and Stewart Street will be converted into a

multi-lane roundabout. The alignment of CROP and the roundabout are shown in

Figure 4.1.

• In both the Base Case (without CEP) and Expansion Case (with CEP) it is

assumed that rail activity at the SRY crossing (which CROP will not pass over top

of) will be discontinued in the future.

• The inbound and outbound gate system at the Centerm container terminal (not to

be confused with the VACS gates that control access to the overall South Shore

port area) will be completely reconfigured as part of the CEP. The gates layouts

and processing times used in the analysis are presented in Table 4.1. The

locations of the Centerm gates are also shown on Figure 4.1.


Page 31

Figure 4.1: Proposed Layout of Centerm Gates, CROP and Clark Drive / Stewart Street Roundabout


Page 32

Table 4.1: Expansion Case Centerm Gate Processing Times

Vehicle Type Modal Split Average Processing Times (s) Gates Used

Inbound Pre-Gate

Chassis 30% 15 #1 - #3

Containers 70% 15 #1 - #2

Other vehicles <1% 20 Exception (#3)

Inbound Main-Gate

Chassis 30% 70 #1 - #5

Containers 70% 100 #1 - #4


Outbound Pre-Gate

Chassis 54% 10 #1 - #4



Outbound Main-Gate

Chassis 54% 20 #1 - #3



These processing times were used to calculate a weighted average processing rate for

each set of gates, which recognizes that not all vehicles can use all gates, so vehicles may

queue even if another gate is theoretically available, but it is a gate they are not permitted

to use. Processing rates in the model are assumed to be as follows:

• The Inbound Pre-Gates were assumed to have three gates, with container trucks

being processed at a rate of one container truck per gate per 15 seconds at each

of the three gates.

• The Inbound Main Gates were assumed to have five gates, with container trucks

being processed at a rate of one container truck per gate per 98 seconds at four

of the gates, and one container truck per 70 seconds at the fifth gate.

• The Outbound Pre-Gates were assumed to have four gates, with container trucks

being processed at a rate of one container truck per gate per 85 seconds at three

of the gates, and one container truck per 10 seconds at the fourth gate.

• The Outbound Main Gates were assumed to have three gates, with container

trucks being processed at a rate of one container truck per gate per 20 seconds at

each of the three gates.


Page 33

The Waterfront Road Extension (WRE) is a new road that would provide a direct

connection from East Waterfront Road at the north end of the Main Street Overpass to

Centennial Road, just outside of the Centerm gates. A new VACS Gate would be

constructed along East Waterfront Road just under the Main Street Underpass, which

would result in the Tymac Launch Service, Canadian Fishing Company and Mission to

Seafarers Club all becoming part of the restricted-access South Shore port area road

network. Unlike the Dunlevy Gate, the WRE would provide access from the west to not

only to the Centerm container terminal, but also to the overall South Shore port area road

network, and therefore all tenants within the South Shore port area. Similar to the existing

Heatley Street Overpass, container trucks from Centerm and Vanterm would not be

permitted to use the Waterfront Road Extension.

The primary potential user groups of the Waterfront Road Extension are as follows:

• Centerm maintenance building employees would be able to access their parking

lot via the South Shore port area road network, and could therefore choose to enter

the restricted-access port area at Clark Drive or Commissioner Street and use

Commissioner Street / Stewart Street / Centennial Road corridor to complete their

journey, rather than using the City of Vancouver road network to access the Main

Street Overpass and East Waterfront Road.

• All port employees that live to the west of the South Shore port area would be able

to use the Main Street Overpass and Waterfront Road as part of their trip to work,

rather than having to continue east on the City of Vancouver road network to use

the Clark Drive Overpass.

• Employees of the VFPA (which has offices at Canada Place) who have access to

the restricted-access South Shore port area and commute via Highway 1 would be

able to complete their trip to work using the South Shore port area road network

rather than the City of Vancouver road network, by using the Commissioner Street

/ Stewart Street / Centennial Road / Waterfront Road corridor, rather than using

the City of Vancouver Street Network.

• Business meetings between South Shore port area tenants and the VFPA (or

between South Shore port area tenants and other downtown businesses) would

be able to use the Waterfront Road Extension as a direct route between the South

Shore port area and the VFPA offices at Canada Place. As the Heatley Avenue

Overpass will be removed, all such trips in the future would otherwise have to occur

via the Clark Drive Overpass and the City of Vancouver road network.

All of these newly-possible travel patterns would have the effect of reducing the number of

vehicle kilometres travelled on the City of Vancouver road network; however the number

of vehicles making any of these movements is minor relative to the overall volume of

vehicles on the City of Vancouver road network. Initial sensitivity testing using the Paramics

micro-simulation model suggested that the WRE would result in a decrease in overall


Page 34

vehicles volumes on the major east-west roads in the Downtown Eastside (Powell Street,

Cordova Street and Hastings Street) of up to a few hundred vehicles per direction per day

(i.e. about 1% - 2% of total volume using the road) . Given that the final decision regarding

the WRE was not made at the time of this analysis, the analysis was conducted assuming

the WRE would not be implemented, as this conditions represents a (slightly more) “worse”

case in terms of vehicular traffic volumes on the City of Vancouver road network.

For the purposes of this assignment, it is assumed that the City of Vancouver’s road

network in the study area will remain substantially unchanged. Although minor changes to

the road network can be expected, particularly on non-busy routes (e.g. the planned

introduction of a bike route along Alexander Street), these changes would not likely have

a significant impact on traffic operations within the overall study area. For potential larger,

long-term projects that would substantially reconfigure the major roads (e.g. introduction of

higher-order transit services on Hastings Street, per the City of Vancouver’s Transportation

2040 plan), it is assumed that those projects would be subject to their own traffic

assessment once their scope is more fully defined.

Changes to the road network in the northeast False Creek area (i.e. replacement of the

Dunsmuir and Georgia viaducts with a surface road) are anticipated to have a relatively

minor impact to traffic volumes within the study area.


Page 35

5. TRAFFIC MICRO-SIMULATION MODEL DESCRIPTION

As part of this assessment, two different scenarios were modelled:

• Scenario 1: Base Case (without CEP).

• Scenario 2: Expansion Case (with CEP).

The full range of traffic volume and road network changes that are assumed for each

scenario is summarized in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1: Key Paramics Model Assumptions

Parameter Assumption

Comments Base Case (without CEP) Expansion Case (with CEP)

Centerm Capacity 720,000 TEU (sustainable

capacity), resulting in 949

container truck round trips / day.

1,310,000 TEU (sustainable capacity),

resulting in 1,584 container truck round

trips / day.

See Table 3.1 for more details.

Centerm Inbound Gates 2 inbound pre-gates, with trucks

stopping for an average of 30

seconds. The third inbound gate

is used for special trips only. The

inbound main gates are not

modelled.

3 Pre-In Gates and 5 Main In Gates.

Processing rates through the gates are

calculated as mathematical averages,

based on information provided by

VFPA.

See Section 4 for further detail on

Expansion Case (with CEP) gate

processing rates.

Centerm Outbound

Gates

3 outbound gates, with trucks

stopping for an average of 30

seconds.

4 Pre-Out Gates and 3 Main Out Gates.

Processing rates through the gates are

calculated as mathematical averages,

based on information provided by

VFPA.

See Section 4 for further detail on

Expansion Case (with CEP) gate

processing rates.

Centerm Employee and

Service Vehicles

Assume no growth in employee

or service vehicle trips.

Assume 25% increase in employee and

service vehicle trips.

Based on parking capacity

increase.

Vanterm Capacity 650,000 TEU (sustainable

capacity), resulting in 930

container truck round trips / day.

No change from Base Case. See Table 3.4 for more details.

Scheduled Breaks 30 minute lunch breaks

beginning at 12:00 and 20:30.

No change from Base Case. Applies to both Centerm and

Vanterm. It is assumed that trucks

can still exit the terminal during

scheduled breaks.

Shift Changes 10 minute shift change

beginning at 16:30.

No change from Base Case. Applies to both Centerm and

Vanterm. It is assumed that trucks

can still exit the terminal during the

shift change.


Page 36



Other South Shore Port

Facilities

Assume no major changes in

terminal operations; no change

in traffic volumes for employee

or service vehicles.

No change from Base Case. Other redevelopments would

require their own traffic study.

Rail crossing events Based on MLM model SSCT1-5;

SRY train movements removed.

Based on MLM model SSCT1-5; SRY

train movements removed. Alliance

Grain Terminal and Vanterm West

crossings movements no longer impact

road traffic due to CROP.

Truck staging Staging occurs at north end of

Commissioner Street Overpass,

just outside the VACS. Staging

events are activated when

trucks occupy the Clark Drive

Overpass structure. Staging is

deactivated when queue is

eliminated.

No change from Base Case. Container trucks are supposed to

use Clark Drive / Hastings Street /

Cassiar Street / Bridgeway Street /

McGill Street to move from Clark

Drive to Commissioner Street. Due

to the extent of the model road

network, solely for Paramics

modelling purposes, trucks are

diverted along the Clark Drive /

Powell Street / Dundas Street /

Nanaimo Street / McGill Street /

Commissioner Street route, in

order to allow for dynamic rerouting

of container trucks in the model.

These container truck volumes are

then manually reassigned to the

correct route. This routing choice

also applies to Vanterm container

trucks as well.

VACS Gates Assume all vehicles stop for 10

seconds during inbound

movements. Assume all

vehicles slow down but do not

stop during outbound

movements.

No change from Base Case. Applies to Heatley Avenue, Clark

Drive and Commissioner Street

gates.

Dunlevy Avenue

Access

Mainly used as a walk-in access

for Centerm maintenance

building employees, as their

parking lot is outside the

building. Some service vehicles

and other visitors can enter the

Centerm terminal at this

location.

No change from Base Case. Not explicitly modelled; a nearby

zone captures trips to / from Tymac

Launch Service, Canadian Fishing

Company, Mission to Seafarers

Club, Centerm maintenance

building employees and any

service / other vehicles that use the

Dunlevy Avenue gate.


Page 37



Heatley Avenue Access Heatley Avenue Overpass and

Access retained per existing

configuration.

Heatley Avenue Overpass will be

demolished and this access will be

removed.

Container trucks are not allowed

on the Heatley Avenue Overpass

under normal operating conditions.

Clark Drive Access All vehicle types and movement

types allowed, except Vanterm

inbound movements container

trucks, which are prohibited.

Container trucks inbound for

Vanterm must use the

Commissioner Street access.

No change from Base Case. Vanterm inbound movement from

the Clark Drive / Knight Street

corridor to Commissioner Street

follows the same methodology

described in the write-up on Truck

Staging above.

Commissioner Street

Access

All vehicle types and movement

types allowed.

No change from Base Case.

Centennial Road

Overpass (CROP)

CROP would not be

implemented.

CROP would be implemented. The layout of the Centerm inbound

and outbound gates is also

designed to tie into west end of

CROP.

Clark and Stewart

Intersection

No change from existing. Roundabout per design provided by

VFPA.

The roundabout ties into the east

end of CROP.

Waterfront Road

Extension (WRE)

Not included. Not included.

City of Vancouver road

network

Assume same road network in

the future as existing. Signalized

intersection timings based on

current timings provided by City

of Vancouver.

No change from Base Case. Hastings Street is modelled as two

lanes per direction to reflect the use

of the curbside lanes for transit

service during peak hours.

Municipal background

traffic volumes

Assume a 0% growth rate in

background traffic.

No change from Base Case. See Section 3.2 for more details.

As noted in Section 1, the purpose of this assignment is to assess the incremental impact

of the CEP on both the South Shore port area and adjacent City of Vancouver road

networks. The incremental impact is measured as the difference in road network operations

between the two scenarios.

As part of several previous assignments, Parsons developed a 23-hour Paramics traffic

micro-simulation model of the South Shore port area (the 23:00 to midnight hour is not

included). For this assignment, the model was expanded westwards to include the Main

Street corridor, as well as refined to provide additional detail for traffic on the City of

Vancouver road network.


Page 38

The model contains the following major signalized intersections:

• Main Street / Hastings Street

• Main Street / Cordova Street

• Main Street / Powell Street

• Main Street / Alexander Street

• Heatley Avenue / Hastings Street

• Heatley Avenue / Cordova Street

• Heatley Avenue / Powell Street

• Clark Drive / Hastings Street

• Clark Drive / Powell Street

• Nanaimo Street / Dundas Street

• Commissioner Street / McGill Street

Additional traffic signals, such as for pedestrian actuated crossings, were also included

throughout the model, but are not a major focus of the assessment. Traffic signal timings

used in the model are based on the signal timing plans provided by the City of Vancouver.

Twenty traffic zones for loading vehicles onto the network were coded at the following

locations:

• 001 Centerm Truck Gate

• 002 Centerm Employee Lot

• 003 Vanterm Truck Gate

• 004 Vanterm Employee Lot

• 005 West Coast Reduction

• 006 Viterra

• 007 Commissioner Street

• 008 Dundas Street

• 009 Nanaimo Street

• 010 Hastings Street East

• 011 Clark Drive

• 012 Heatley Avenue

• 013 Main Street

• 014 Hastings Street West


Page 39

• 015 Cordova Street West

• 016 Powell Street West

• 017 Alexander Street West

• 018 Waterfront Road West

• 019 Waterfront Road East

• 020 Alexander Street

The extents of the Paramics model is shown in Figure 5.1.


Page 40

Figure 5.1: Extents of Paramics Model


Page 41

6. ROUNDABOUT OPERATIONS MODEL

Unlike the existing Stewart Street Elevated Structure, the Centennial Road Overpass would

not maintain both a continuous at-grade road that provides local access to individual

tenants as well as an elevated structure that provides through-movements without

interference from rail crossing events. Individual tenant properties that are beneath CROP

will only be accessible from one end of the CROP structure.

Therefore, in conjunction with the implementation of CROP, a roundabout is proposed at

the intersection of Clark Drive and Stewart Street, which would replace the existing

unsignalized intersection. A roundabout allows for vehicles to U-turn through the Clark

Drive / Stewart Street intersection, in order to access the tenant properties located

underneath CROP. For example, because the Vanterm entrance is west of Clark Drive

(and underneath the CROP elevated structure) the roundabout is necessary to allow

container trucks to travel between Centerm and Vanterm without having to exit and re-

enter the restricted-access port area.

The roundabout is anticipated to be a key facility that governs the capacity of the overall

South Shore port area road network. Ensuring that the roundabout can operate effectively

given the volume of vehicles anticipated to pass through this location is critical to ensure

efficient operations within the overall South Shore port area road network.

Therefore, in addition to coding the roundabout into the existing 23-hour Paramics model,

a separate roundabout model was developed in VISSIM. Paramics has advanced vehicle

route assignment capabilities, which have made it a powerful tool for undertaking traffic

micro-simulation modelling on a larger road network. However, VISSIM has strong

capabilities for modelling roundabouts, such as the proposed facility at Clark Drive and

Stewart Street. VISSIM can also provide very detailed analysis results, which are very

useful given the critical importance of this facility.

The VISSIM model includes the roundabout itself and five approaches (the at-grade and

elevated east approaches, the at-grade and elevated west approaches, and the north

approach), and also incorporates the Clark Drive VACS gates, given the inter-

dependencies of the gates and the roundabout in terms of metering traffic flow.

Roundabout analysis results will be discussed in Section 7.6.


Page 42

7. TRAFFIC MICRO-SIMULATION MODEL ANALYSIS

RESULTS

Both the Base Case (without CEP) and Expansion Case (with CEP) scenarios were run

with seven different randomly generated “seeds” to establish a level of randomness in

traffic conditions within the overall road network. The average results of all seven seeds

were used for reporting purposes. Table 7.1 shows a comparison of vehicle hours travelled

for each of the seven seeds in each of the two model runs.

Table 7.1: Comparison of Vehicle Hours Travelled By Model Seed

Seed # Base Case (without CEP) Expansion Case (with CEP)

1 9,790 10,271

2 9,726 10,085

3 9,897 10,231

4 9,758 10,260

5 9,779 10,141

6 9,791 10,095

7 9,818 10,122

Mean 9,794 10,172

Standard Deviation 54 80

5th / 95th Percentile 9,706 / 9,883 10,041 / 10,303

Difference between

5th / 95th Percentile and Mean 177 262

Assuming a normal distribution, the mean and standard deviation of the vehicle hours

travelled for each scenario is calculated, based on the seven seed results. In both

scenarios, 90% of simulations (i.e. those between the 5th and 95th percentiles) will result in

a total vehicle hours travelled that are within 2% of the mean. This suggests that the model

results are reasonably stable.

Several different metrics to assess the traffic operations impacts of the CEP are presented

and discussed below, including:

• Traffic volume changes on Port Access routes;

• Vehicle hours travelled;

• Point to point travel times;

• Volume to Capacity ratio and Level of Service;


Page 43

• Queue length observations;

• Roundabout operations at the Clark Drive and Stewart Street intersection; and

• Traffic volume changes through the Downtown Eastside.

Generally, results are presented for the AM and PM peak hours, as these are the times of

day where volumes on the City of Vancouver road network are the highest. The AM and

PM peak hours were established by examining the number of vehicles loaded into the

Paramics model within the previous 60 minutes, using 15 minute increments. Based on

this, the AM peak hour was established as being 08:15 to 09:15, and the PM peak hour

was established as being 17:15 to 18:15. Given the relative proximity of the study area to

downtown Vancouver (which features the region’s highest concentration of employment),

it is not surprising that the peak hours correspond to times that are “just before” a 09:00

work start time and “just after” a 17:00 work finish time. The traffic volumes presented in

Section 3 for the AM and PM peak hours correspond to the 08:15 to 09:15 and 17:15 to

18:15 time periods.

Volumes on the South Shore port area road network are examined over the course of the

23-hour modelled day, as peak volumes for port traffic do not necessarily correspond to

overall peak volumes on the road network, which consists primarily of municipal

background traffic.

For example, the Centerm container terminal features to working shifts per day (08:00 to

16:30, and 16:30 to 1:00), and employee trips will tend to correspond to arriving and leaving

just prior to and subsequent to these shift times. Furthermore, the Centerm container

terminal also features a steady flow of container truck trips in and out of the terminal

throughout the day (as was shown in Figure 3.2).

23-hour volumes are also provided for selected blocks within the Downtown Eastside, as

a means of assessing how the CEP is anticipated to affect that neighborhood’s overall

exposure to vehicle traffic.

7.1 Traffic Volume Changes on Port Access Routes

The CEP is anticipated to change traffic patterns to and from the South Shore port area in

two significant ways:

• By increasing in the total volume of traffic (both container trucks and personal /

service vehicles).

• Altering the routes by which traffic travels between the City of Vancouver road

network and the South Shore port area road network. This is a result of the closure


Page 44

of the Heatley Avenue Overpass; a change which is expected to directly affect

employee and service vehicles only, as container trucks are not permitted to use

the Heatley Avenue Overpass.

A comparison of anticipated changes in container truck movement volumes is presented

in Table 7.2. The volumes represent the combined totals for all container truck movements

to and from the South Shore port area (i.e. container trucks for both the Centerm and

Vanterm container terminals, as well as other movements associated with Columbia

Containers), and are broken down by scenario, by access route (Clark Drive or

Commissioner Street) and by movement type (inbound versus outbound).

Table 7.2: Comparison of Centerm and Vanterm 23-Hour Container Truck Volumes

by Port Access Route (Inbound / Outbound / Total)

Base Case (without CEP) Expansion Case (with CEP) Difference

Heatley Avenue

0 / 0 / 0 0 / 0 / 0 0 / 0 / 0

Clark Drive

423 / 870 / 1,293 775 / 1,205 / 1,980 352 / 335 / 688

Commissioner Street

1,278 / 854 / 2,132 1,624 / 1,182 / 2,806 346 / 328 / 673

Total

1,701 / 1,724 / 3,425 2,399 / 2,387 / 4,786 698 / 663 / 1,361

Several key findings emerge from the table:

• The Commissioner Street Overpass carries far more inbound container trucks than

Clark Drive Overpass. This is because Vanterm-bound container trucks are not

allowed to use the Clark Drive Overpass, resulting in all Vanterm-bound container

trucks as well as roughly half of Centerm-bound container trucks using the

Commissioner Street Overpass, with the remaining half of Centerm-bound

container trucks using the Clark Drive Overpass. In contrast, for outbound

movements, container trucks originating at both the Centerm and Vanterm

container terminals are allowed to use both the Clark Drive Overpass and the

Commissioner Street Overpass, resulting in a much more even split in outbound

movements.

• Over the 23-hour modelled time period, the Clark Drive Overpass (and hence,

likely the Clark Drive / Knight Street corridor) is anticipated to see increase of

approximately 350 extra trips per direction per day. In practice, incremental daily

volumes on this corridor will be slightly higher due to movements also occurring

during the 23:00 to midnight time period.


Page 45

• Over the 23-hour modelled time period, the Commissioner Street Overpass (and

hence, likely the Highway 1 corridor) is anticipated to see increase of

approximately 350 extra trips per direction per day. As with the Clark Drive

Overpass, actual daily volumes will be slightly higher due to movements occurring

during the 23:00 to midnight time period.

A comparison of all vehicles other than container trucks (e.g. employee and service

vehicles) travelling to and from the South Shore port area is presented in Table 7.3. Unlike

container trucks, these vehicles may use all accesses to the South Shore port area.

Therefore, employee and service vehicle flows will change due to both an increasing total

vehicle volume as well as the removal of the Heatley Avenue Overpass.

Table 7.3: Comparison of all non-Centerm and Vanterm-bound Container Truck 23-

Hour Vehicle Volume Changes by Port Access Route (Inbound / Outbound / Total)


Heatley Avenue

298 / 361 / 660 0 / 0 / 0 -298 / -361 / -660

Clark Drive

321 / 185 / 506 593 / 527 / 1119 271 / 342 / 613

Commissioner Street

424 / 301 / 725 553 / 452 / 1005 129 / 152 / 280

Total

1044 / 847 / 1891 1146 / 979 / 2124 102 / 132 / 234

Several key findings emerge from the table:

• With the implementation of the CEP resulting in the removal of the Heatley Avenue

Overpass, employee vehicles are anticipated to split approximately 70% / 30%

between the Clark Drive and Commissioner Street Overpasses, respectively. This

pattern shift reflects both vehicles that currently use the Heatley Street Overpass

having to shift to either the Clark Drive or Commissioner Street Overpass (the

majority of which are expected to use the Clark Drive Overpass), as well as an

increase in the total number of vehicles travelling to and from the South Shore port

area.

• The closure of the Heatley Avenue Overpass may have some effect on east-west

major roads in the City of Vancouver. Heatley Avenue is not a major road, and

therefore, almost all vehicles using this overpass would likely turn onto Powell,

Cordova or Hastings Streets, either heading east or west. Vehicles that currently

use the Heatley Avenue Overpass to travel to / from the east would now use either

the Clark Drive or (less likely) the Commissioner Street Overpass. These vehicles


Page 46

will be making more of their east-west trip using the South Shore port area road

network, which will correspondingly reduce volumes on Powell, Cordova and

Hastings Streets. On the other hand, vehicles that currently use the Heatley

Avenue Overpass to travel to / from the west would have to use the Clark Drive

Overpass and then double-back using the South Shore port area road network as

well as Powell, Cordova and / or Hastings Streets, which would have the effect of

increasing vehicle volumes on Powell, Cordova and Hastings Streets between

Clark Drive and Main Street. However, because a higher overall proportion of port

area employees approach Centerm from the east (or south) rather than the west,

the overall number of port-bound vehicles using these sections of the City of

Vancouver road network is expected to decline as a result of the removal of the

Heatley Street Overpass. However, the increase in total employee and service

vehicle traffic to and from the South Shore port area (as a result of the CEP) will

have the opposite effect.

7.2 Vehicle Hours Travelled

Vehicles hours travelled is a measure of the sum of the amount of time that each vehicle

simulated in the Paramics model spends within the modelled road network. Table 7.4

presents the vehicle hours travelled from each of the two modelled scenarios.

Table 7.4: Comparison of Vehicle Hours Travelled


23-Hour Day (00:00 to 23:00)

9,794 10,172 378

AM Peak Hour (08:15 to 09:15)

811 862 51

PM Peak Hour (17:15 to 18:15)

884 992 108

As can be seen, the Expansion Case scenario has a slightly higher Vehicle Hours Travelled

than the Base Case scenario. There are two reasons for this:

• Additional vehicles can congest the roadway, thereby increasing the travel time for

all other vehicles; and

• There are simply more vehicles on the network, and therefore more individual

vehicle travel times to sum up.

To assess the actual effect that the Centerm Expansion Project would have in terms of

increasing the average travel time per vehicle in the network, the total number of vehicles


Page 47

in the network must first be calculated for each scenario. The number of vehicles in the

network for each of the two modelled scenarios is given in Table 7.5.

Table 7.5: Number of Vehicles Processed


23-Hour Day (00:00 to 23:00)

103,409 105,169 1,760


7,123 7,284 162


7,624 7,661 37

By dividing the total vehicle hours travelled by the number of vehicles processed, the

average travel time of vehicles in the network can be calculated, as shown in Table 7.6.

Note that all times are rounded to the nearest 15 seconds.

Table 7.6: Average Vehicle Trip Time within Model Network


23-Hour Day (00:00 to 23:00)

5 min 45 sec 5 min 45 sec 0 sec





Several key findings can be inferred from these tables, including:

• With reference to Table 7.5, relative to the Base Case (without CEP) conditions,

the Expansion Case (with CEP) adds approximately 1,800 vehicles per day to the

modelled network, relative to a base vehicle volume of approximately 103,000.

This represents less than a 2% increase in total vehicle volumes. This is a relatively

minor variance in traffic volume, and within the day-to-day variation in vehicle

volumes on any given route.

• With reference to Table 7.6, relative to the Base Case (without CEP) conditions,

the Expansion Case (with CEP) results in a very minor increase in average travel

times for vehicles moving throughout the network during peak hours. Specifically,

an increase of approximately 30 seconds and 45 seconds relative to a base of

roughly seven minutes is anticipated in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.


Page 48

Over the course of a whole day, no significant increase in travel times from the

current average of roughly six minutes is anticipated.

It should be noted that if the additional Centerm-related trips generated by the CEP are

shorter distances than the average trip in the model area, then this could help lower the

average trip time in the model, even if average trip times are increasing for other (pre-

existing) traffic. For this reason, point to point travel times and individual intersection

operations are also assessed below.

7.3 Point-to-Point Travel Times

Point-to-point travel times were extracted from the Paramics model for several major

representative movements, namely:

• The Powell Street corridor westbound from Clark Drive to Main Street;

• The Powell Street / Cordova Street corridor eastbound from Main Street to Clark

Drive;

• The Hastings Street corridor westbound from Clark Drive to Main Street;

• The Hastings Street corridor eastbound from Main Street to Clark Drive;

• The Centennial Road / Stewart Street / Commissioner Street corridor westbound

from McGill Street to Heatley Avenue; and

• The Centennial Road / Stewart Street / Commissioner Street corridor westbound

from McGill Street to Heatley Avenue.

The results of these point-to-point travel times for the Powell Street / Cordova Street and

Hastings Street corridors are presented in Tables 7.7 through 7.10, respectively. These

point-to-point travel times are presented for the AM and PM peak hours.

As noted previously, traffic volumes to and from the South Shore port area do not follow

the typical AM and PM peak hour pattern. Therefore, point to point travel times along the

Centennial Road / Stewart Street / Commissioner Street corridor for the entire 23-hour

modelled day are presented in Figures 7.1 and 7.2.


Page 49

Table 7.7: Powell Street Westbound from Clark Drive to Main Street Point-to-Point

Travel Times (minutes)






This westbound route is the peak direction for commuting into downtown Vancouver in the

AM, and the off-peak for commuting out of downtown Vancouver in the PM. As can be

seen from the table, the CEP is anticipated to create an approximately fifteen second

increase in travel times westbound along Powell Street during the AM.

No significant change in point-to-point travel time is anticipated in the PM, as this is the

non-peak direction, and therefore comparatively non-congested.

Table 7.8: Powell Street / Cordova Street Eastbound from Main Street to Clark Drive

Point-to-Point Travel Times (minutes)






This eastbound route is the off-peak direction for commuting into downtown Vancouver in

the AM, and the peak for commuting out of downtown Vancouver in the PM. No significant

change in point-to-point travel time is anticipated in the AM, as this is the non-peak

direction, and therefore relatively non-congested.

In the PM peak hour, the CEP is anticipated to result in no significant changes to travel

times.


Page 50

Table 7.9: Hastings Street Westbound from Clark Drive to Main Street Point-to-

Point Travel Times (minutes)



9 min 0 sec 8 min 15 sec -45 sec



This westbound route is the peak direction for commuting into downtown Vancouver in the

AM, and the off-peak for commuting out of downtown Vancouver in the PM.

As can be seen from the table, in the AM the implementation of the CEP is anticipated to

result in a small decrease in vehicle travel times along Hastings Street. This is possibly

due to a reduction in vehicles using Hastings Street to reach the Heatley Avenue Overpass;

the Westbound Right Turn movement at the Hastings Street / Heatley Avenue intersection

is reduced from 105 vehicles per hour in the Base Case to 50 vehicles per hour in the

Expansion Case.

No significant change in point-to-point travel time is anticipated in the PM, as this is the

non-peak direction, and therefore comparatively non-congested.

Table 7.10: Hastings Street Eastbound from Main Street to Clark Drive Point-to-

Point Travel Times (minutes)





5 min 30 sec 5 min 15 sec -15 sec

This eastbound route is the off-peak direction for commuting into downtown Vancouver in

the AM, and the peak for commuting out of downtown Vancouver in the PM. No significant

change in point-to-point travel time is anticipated in the AM, as this is the non-peak

direction, and therefore comparatively non-congested. In the PM peak hour, the CEP is

anticipated to create a small decrease in travel times is anticipated in the eastbound

direction between Main Street and Clark Drive. This may be due to a minor reduction in

volume between Heatley Avenue and Clark Drive as a result of the elimination of the

Heatley Street Overpass.


Page 51

Figure 7.1: Centennial Road / Stewart Street / Commissioner Street Westbound

from McGill Street to Heatley Avenue Point-to-Point Travel Times (minutes)

The Centennial Road / Stewart Street / Commissioner Street corridor is only used by port

traffic, it is not publicly accessible, and is therefore not directly affected by municipal

background traffic.

Travel time information for westbound traffic is plotted based on 15-minute increments.

Nighttime (12:30 to 07:00) travel times are removed from the figure, as vehicle volumes

are extremely low during these time periods (in some cases, zero).

As can be seen from Figure 7.1, CEP is anticipated to not have a significant impact on

overall corridor travel times. In fact, the CEP may actually improve the reliability of point-

to-point travel times somewhat, as it will eliminate almost all train crossing-related delays

on the Centennial Road / Stewart Street / Commissioner Street corridor. The “spikes” in

travel times along the corridor in the Base Case generally relate to train-movement delays,

which the implementation of CROP in conjunction with the CEP almost entirely eliminates.

An exception to this occurs around 19:30, where both the Base Case and Expansion Case

travel times spike. This is due to a train movement at the at-grade crossing to Columbia

Containers, which is the only at-grade crossing that vehicles travelling from the

Commissioner Street VACS to the Centerm container terminal must cross, even in the

Expansion Case (with CEP).

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

Tra

vel

Tim

e (

Min

ute

s)

Time of Day (hh:mm:ss)


Westbound from McGill Street to Heatley Avenue

Base Case (without CEP) Expansion Case (with CEP)


Page 52

Travel times do increase slightly at between 7:00 and 8:00 and between 12:00 and 13:00;

these increases relate to a larger number of vehicles waiting at the Centerm container

terminal inbound gates for the terminal to open / re-open.

Figure 7.2: Centennial Road / Stewart Street / Commissioner Street Eastbound

from Heatley Avenue to McGill Street Point-to-Point Travel Times (minutes)

The Centennial Road / Stewart Street / Commissioner Street corridor is only used by port

traffic, it is not publicly accessible, and is therefore not directly affected by municipal

background traffic.

Similar to Figure 7.1, travel time information for eastbound traffic is plotted based on 15-

minute increments, and nighttime (12:30 to 07:00) travel times are removed from the figure.

As can be seen from Figure 7.2, CEP is anticipated to not have a significant impact on

overall corridor travel times. Similar to the westbound direction, an overall improvement in

reliability of point-to-point travel times is anticipated due to the implementation of CROP.

Unlike the westbound direction, no increase in travel times are shown between 7:00 and

8:00 and between 12:00 and 13:00; because outbound (i.e. eastbound) vehicles from the

Centerm container terminal are already beyond the Centerm outbound gates when they

reach the “start” point, and are therefore not influenced by operations at the gate.

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

Tra

vel

Tim

e (

Min

ute

s)

Time of Day (hh:mm:ss)


Eastbound from Heatley Avenue to McGill Street

Base Case (without CEP) Expansion Case (with CEP)


Page 53

Generally, point to point travel times in the eastbound direction are slightly lower than those

in the westbound direction. This is because, as noted in Table 5.1, inbound (i.e.

westbound) vehicles to the South Shore port area road network must each stop at the

Commissioner Street VACS for 10 seconds, whereas outbound (i.e. eastbound) vehicles

must simply slow down to pass through the gates.

7.4 Volume to Capacity Ratio and Level of Service

Two common measures of individual intersection performance are the Volume to Capacity

Ratio and the Level of Service. Both of these metrics can be calculated for each movement

at an intersection, for each approach at an intersection, and for the intersection as a whole.

The Volume to Capacity Ratio is the measure of the number of vehicles making a particular

movement within a given time period, relative to the number of vehicles that are able to

make that movement within the same time period. Capacity of an intersection is affected

by both the laning / sizing of the intersection, as well as the configuration of the traffic

signal.

Level of Service is a measure of the average control delay experienced by a vehicle as a

result of traffic controls at an intersection (i.e. traffic signals, stop signs, roundabouts etc.).

For signalized intersections, the Level of Service is calculated as shown in Table 7.13:

Table 7.13: Level of Service Ratings at Signalized Intersections

Level of Service Average Vehicle Control Delay

A ≤10 sec

B 10–20 sec

C 20–35 sec

D 35–55 sec

E 5–80 sec

F ≥80 sec

It is important to note that both the Volume to Capacity Ratio the Level of Service are

measures of the delay experienced by vehicles, not by people, in the sense that it does not

account for some types of vehicles (e.g. buses) having higher occupancies than others.

Nor do these metrics account for delays to pedestrians and cyclists. These metrics are

provided solely for the purposes of showing a comparison of the relative traffic operations

performance impacts of the CEP; they are not meant to inherently imply that any particular

changes to the road network are required.


Page 54

These metrics were calculated using Synchro, and make use of the outputs from the

Paramics model. All of the major signalized intersections in the study area were analyzed.

Tables 7.14 and 7.15 show the Volume to Capacity Ratio and Level of Service for the AM

peak hour, respectively, while Tables 7.16 and 7.17 show the Volume to Capacity Ratio

and Level of Service for the PM peak hour. Volume to Capacity Ratios above 0.9 and 1.0

are highlighted in yellow and red, respectively, and Levels of Service E and F are also

highlighted in yellow and red, respectively.


Page 55

Table 7.14: AM Peak Hour (08:15 to 09:15) Volume to Capacity Ratio

Intersection Scenario EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR

Commissioner Street / McGill Street Base Case n/a 0.32 0.65 0.12 0.25

Exp. Case n/a 0.33 0.71 0.15 0.37

Nanaimo Street / Dundas Street Base Case 0.59 0.48 0.76 0.42 0.54 1.11

Exp. Case 0.56 0.49 0.75 0.43 0.57 1.12

Clark Drive / Powell Street Base Case 0.30 1.17 0.78 0.40

Exp. Case 0.30 1.16 0.76 0.39

Clark Drive / Hastings Street Base Case 0.07 0.64 0.94 0.86 0.38 0.22 0.44 n/a

Exp. Case 0.14 0.63 0.98 0.96 0.43 0.21 0.53 0.02

Heatley Avenue / Powell Street Base Case 1.12 0.18 0.04

Exp. Case 1.14 0.20 n/a

Heatley Avenue / Cordova Street Base Case 0.51 0.15 0.07

Exp. Case 0.52 0.17 0.03

Heatley Avenue / Hastings Street Base Case 0.25 0.75 0.05 0.49

Exp. Case 0.24 0.78 0.05 0.48

Main Street / Alexander Street Base Case 0.12 0.11 0.57 0.16 0.21

Exp. Case 0.11 0.12 0.58 0.17 0.23

Main Street / Powell Street Base Case 0.92 0.26 0.18

Exp. Case 0.94 0.25 0.19

Main Street / Cordova Street Base Case 0.39 0.54 0.39

Exp. Case 0.40 0.53 0.38

Main Street / Hastings Street Base Case 0.54 1.07 0.46 0.32

Exp. Case 0.54 1.06 0.46 0.32


Page 56

Table 7.15: AM Peak Hour (08:15 to 09:15) Level of Service

Intersection Scenario EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Overall

Commissioner Street / McGill Street Base Case n/a A A A C A

Exp. Case n/a A A A C A

Nanaimo Street / Dundas Street Base Case C C D C B F D

Exp. Case C C D C B F D

Clark Drive / Powell Street Base Case A F C A E

Exp. Case A F C A E

Clark Drive / Hastings Street Base Case A C D C C A C n/a C

Exp. Case B C D D C A C A C

Heatley Avenue / Powell Street Base Case F C B E

Exp. Case F C n/a A

Heatley Avenue / Cordova Street Base Case B B B B

Exp. Case B B B B

Heatley Avenue / Hastings Street Base Case A B B C B

Exp. Case A B B C B

Main Street / Alexander Street Base Case A A C A B B

Exp. Case A A C A B B

Main Street / Powell Street Base Case C B C D

Exp. Case C B C D

Main Street / Cordova Street Base Case B B B B

Exp. Case B B B B

Main Street / Hastings Street Base Case B E B B D

Exp. Case B E B B D


Page 57

Table 7.16: PM Peak Hour (17:15 to 18:15) Volume to Capacity Ratio


Commissioner Street / McGill Street Base Case n/a 0.62 0.52 0.11 0.20

Exp. Case n/a 0.62 0.50 0.12 0.30

Nanaimo Street / Dundas Street Base Case 0.90 0.72 0.62 0.78 0.72 0.72

Exp. Case 0.89 0.72 0.62 0.73 0.68 0.70

Clark Drive / Powell Street Base Case 0.97 0.91 0.72 0.39 0.74

Exp. Case 0.97 0.88 0.70 0.42 0.74

Clark Drive / Hastings Street Base Case 1.10 0.77 0.38 0.68 0.41 0.58 n/a

Exp. Case 0.03 1.09 0.76 0.40 0.57 0.42 0.64 0.00

Heatley Avenue / Powell Street Base Case 0.65 0.05 0.00

Exp. Case 0.63 0.05 n/a

Heatley Avenue / Cordova Street Base Case 0.88 0.09 0.01

Exp. Case 0.89 0.09 0.01

Heatley Avenue / Hastings Street Base Case 0.57 0.38 0.08 0.51

Exp. Case 0.56 0.38 0.09 0.54

Main Street / Alexander Street Base Case 0.10 0.13 0.25 0.10 0.51

Exp. Case 0.09 0.12 0.23 0.11 0.53

Main Street / Powell Street Base Case 0.58 0.20 0.30

Exp. Case 0.57 0.20 0.30

Main Street / Cordova Street Base Case 0.85 0.61 0.57

Exp. Case 0.85 0.62 0.54

Main Street / Hastings Street Base Case 0.98 0.63 0.53 0.45

Exp. Case 0.96 0.62 0.56 0.45


Page 58

Table 7.17: PM Peak Hour (17:15 to 18:15) Level of Service

Intersection Scenario EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Overall

Commissioner Street / McGill Street Base Case n/a A A A C A

Exp. Case n/a A A A D A

Nanaimo Street / Dundas Street Base Case C C D D C B C

Exp. Case C C D C C B C

Clark Drive / Powell Street Base Case D D B C C C

Exp. Case D D B C C C

Clark Drive / Hastings Street Base Case F C A C A C n/a D

Exp. Case A F C B C B C A D

Heatley Avenue / Powell Street Base Case B B B B

Exp. Case B B n/a B

Heatley Avenue / Cordova Street Base Case C B B C

Exp. Case C B A C

Heatley Avenue / Hastings Street Base Case B A B C B

Exp. Case B A B C B

Main Street / Alexander Street Base Case A A B A B B

Exp. Case A A B A B B

Main Street / Powell Street Base Case B C B B

Exp. Case B C B B

Main Street / Cordova Street Base Case C B B B

Exp. Case C B B B

Main Street / Hastings Street Base Case D B C C C

Exp. Case D B C C C


Page 59

Several caveats exist for the results in the preceding tables:

• In the AM peak hour, the westbound lanes at the Powell Street and Clark Drive

intersection were modelled as a curbside through lane and a median shared

through/left lane. In the PM, these lanes were modelled as a curbside through lane

and a median left-only lane, because the median lane begins to act as a de-facto

left turn lane.

• At Clark Drive and Hastings Street, in some instances the Eastbound Left and

Southbound Right Turn movements were sometimes not assigned vehicle

volumes in the traffic operations micro-simulation model, and therefore have zero

vehicle volume included in the Synchro model. A review of the original traffic count

data confirms that both of these movements have relatively low observed volumes

(less than 40 vehicles per hour), and this variance in the Paramics traffic model

assignment is unlikely to be a source of significant amount of error in the

assessment of the traffic operations of the rest of the movements at this

intersection, particularly given that both of these movements have their own

dedicated turning lanes, and therefore will not obstruct through-traffic. Similarly, no

volume was assigned for the Eastbound Left movement at the McGill Street /

Commissioner Street intersection in the peak hour; in practice, these volumes are

very small during peak hours.

• With the removal of the Heatley Avenue Overpass in the Expansion Case (with

CEP) scenario, no southbound through movements are being assigned by the

Paramics model to the Heatley Avenue and Powell Street intersection. In reality,

there will likely be a minor amount of volume making this movement. These

volumes would correspond to vehicles travelling south from the Heatley Avenue /

Alexander Street intersection, rather than vehicles travelling south on the Heatley

Avenue Overpass.

The intersection of Clark Drive and Hastings Street is of particular interest, because the

CEP is anticipated to generate approximately 350 more container truck trips and 300 more

employee and service vehicle trips per direction per day through this intersection, which

represents a relatively significant increase in vehicle volumes. However, because these

volumes are spread throughout the day, the traffic operations impacts of these volumes

comparatively smaller compared to if they were more concentrated during peak hours in a

manner similar to the municipal background traffic on this corridor. As can be seen in Table

7.14 and Table 7.16, north and south through-movements along Clark Drive and Hastings

Street do experience an increase in volume to capacity ratios in the Expansion Case (with

CEP) scenario relative to the Base Case (without CEP) scenario. However, in both cases,

these specific movements are not critical movements through the intersection, and they do

have some available capacity. Therefore, as seen in Table 7.15 and Table 7.17, the actual

effect of this increase in vehicle volumes is relatively minor.


Page 60

Throughout the rest of the network, the results suggest no substantial changes in terms of

vehicular traffic flow. In particular, there are no instances where the Expansion Case (with

CEP), relative to the Base Case (without CEP) increases the V / C ratio or LOS level from

a non-critical level to a critical level (i.e. to LOS F or V / C above 1.0). Among the red-

shaded Volume to Capacity Ratios (i.e. those above 1.0), there are no instances of V / C

ratios getting significantly worse; increases in V / C ratios are limited to an incremental

0.02-point increase in the ratio.

7.5 Queue Length Observations

Queue lengths were assessed in two different ways:

• Viewing the Paramics simulation and observing the lengths of queues present.

• Modelling the scenarios in Synchro, and generating 95th percentile queue

information.

The main focus of viewing the Paramics model simulation was to observe whether trucks

on Centennial Road queue across the Clark Drive Overpass and spill over into the

intersection of Clark Drive / Hastings Street. This condition results in the activation of a

truck staging event that requires container trucks on Clark Drive to divert to access the

staging area near the Commissioner Street VACS in order to access the South Shore port

area.

Ultimately, no truck staging events were observed in either scenario. This is primarily

believed to be a result of the optimization of the daily truck arrival profile, in order to reduce

“peaking” of truck arrivals, which can create a queue at the Clark Drive VACS.

Additionally, the removal of the SRY at-grade rail crossing, which can block Centennial

Road for up to 23 minutes at a time, reduces the risk of container trucks backing up across

the Clark Drive Overpass and spilling over onto the City of Vancouver road network.

In the Base Case (without CPE) the other at-grade rail crossings (i.e. Vanterm West and

Alliance Grain Terminal) will continue to block Centennial Road, and therefore create truck

queues, although these were not observed to trigger a truck staging event. The maximum

queue from among the seven Base Case (without CEP) model seeds is shown in Figure

7.3. This queue, consisting primary of container trucks, is created by a rail event.


Page 61

Figure 7.3: Maximum Observed Clark Drive Overpass Queue for Base Case

(without CEP)

With the implementation of CROP as part of the CEP, rail movements are no longer a

concern. Figure 7.3 shows the maximum queue length from among the seven Paramics

model seeds for the Expansion Case (with CEP) that was observed on the Clark Drive

Overpass. This queue occurs between 7:00 to 08:00, and is created by the sheer volume

of vehicles (primarily employee vehicles) passing through the Clark Drive VACS.

Figure 7.4: Maximum Observed Clark Drive Overpass Queue for Expansion Case

(with CEP)

Tables 7.18 and 7.19 show the 95th percentile queue lengths for major intersections in the

study area calculated in Synchro. In very few instances did the 95th percentile queues for


Page 62

the Expansion Case (with CEP) increase by more than ten metres relative to the queues

in the Base Case (without CEP).


Page 63

Table 7.18: AM Peak Hour (08:15 to 09:15) 95th Percentile Queue Lengths (m)


Commissioner Street / McGill

Street

Base Case n/a 65 80 5 15

Exp. Case n/a 65 95 10 20

Nanaimo Street / Dundas Street Base Case 55 50 50 35 60 285

Exp. Case 50 50 50 35 60 290

Clark Drive / Powell Street Base Case 30 205 55 10

Exp. Case 30 210 55 15

Clark Drive / Hastings Street Base Case 5 55 110 180 40 15 30 n/a

Exp. Case 5 55 120 185 40 15 40 0

Heatley Avenue / Powell Street Base Case 180 30 5

Exp. Case 185 30 n/a

Heatley Avenue / Cordova Street Base Case 50 15 5

Exp. Case 50 20 0

Heatley Avenue / Hastings Street Base Case 25 100 5 45

Exp. Case 25 105 5 40

Main Street / Alexander Street Base Case 10 10 50 5 20

Exp. Case 10 10 50 5 25

Main Street / Powell Street Base Case 165 15 20

Exp. Case 170 15 20

Main Street / Cordova Street Base Case 40 20 15

Exp. Case 40 20 15

Main Street / Hastings Street Base Case 50 150 40 30

Exp. Case 50 145 35 30


Page 64

Table 7.19: PM Peak Hour (17:15 to 18:15) 95th Percentile Queue Lengths (m)


Commissioner Street / McGill Street Base Case n/a 110 50 5 10

Exp. Case n/a 110 50 5 15

Nanaimo Street / Dundas Street Base Case 140 110 35 65 70 115

Exp. Case 140 110 30 55 70 110

Clark Drive / Powell Street Base Case 175 80 125 40 90

Exp. Case 175 75 120 50 80

Clark Drive / Hastings Street Base Case 185 55 45 65 40 20 n/a

Exp. Case 5 185 55 60 60 40 40 0

Heatley Avenue / Powell Street Base Case 70 10 0

Exp. Case 70 10 n/a

Heatley Avenue / Cordova Street Base Case 145 10 5

Exp. Case 145 10 0

Heatley Avenue / Hastings Street Base Case 75 40 10 45

Exp. Case 70 40 10 45

Main Street / Alexander Street Base Case 10 15 30 0 55

Exp. Case 10 15 25 0 55

Main Street / Powell Street Base Case 60 20 30

Exp. Case 60 20 30

Main Street / Cordova Street Base Case 140 25 20

Exp. Case 140 25 20

Main Street / Hastings Street Base Case 150 40 45 50

Exp. Case 150 40 50 50


Page 65

7.6 Roundabout Operations

The VISSIM model of the Stewart Street and Clark Drive roundabout was tested for two

time periods. These time periods were the period with the overall highest number of

vehicles passing through the intersection (07:00 – 08:00) and the time period with the

highest number of container trucks passing through the intersection (18:00 – 19:00). The

volumes used were based on the average volumes of the seven seeds of the Expansion

Case (with CEP) scenario micro-simulation model. These volumes are presented in Table

7.20; rather than turning movement counts, volumes are presented in a manner that

provides an “origin-destination matrix” for movements through the roundabout, to account

for the merging required at the east and west approaches along Stewart Street.

Table 7.20: Vehicle Volumes at Clark Drive / Stewart Street Roundabout (veh)

Movement 07:00 to 08:00 18:00 to 19:00

Stewart Elevated to Vanterm 79 44

Stewart Elevated to Centerm 72 108

Vanterm to Stewart Elevated 36 43

Centerm to Stewart Elevated 116 84

Vanterm to Clark Drive 59 47

Centerm to Clark Drive 171 89

Clark Drive to Centerm 90 54

Clark Drive to Vanterm 86 32

The above volumes were incorporated into the VISSIM model, and nine VISSIM seeds

were run. The average vehicle delay result from among the nine seeds are shown in Table

7.21. Generally, outbound movements from the Centerm and Vanterm terminals (i.e.

eastbound movements on both the elevated and at-grade approaches) experience the

largest delays.


Page 66

Table 7.21: Average Vehicle Delays for Movements through Clark Drive / Stewart

Street Roundabout (sec / veh)

Movement 07:00 to 08:00 18:00 to 19:00

Stewart Elevated to Vanterm 6 6

Stewart Elevated to Centerm 3 3

Vanterm to Stewart Elevated 55 44

Centerm to Stewart Elevated 56 41

Vanterm to Clark Drive 20 23

Centerm to Clark Drive 18 23

Clark Drive to Centerm 24 26

Clark Drive to Vanterm 13 18

The resultant queue lengths for the east and west approaches along Stewart Street are

presented in Figure 7.5. Queue lengths are not presented for the north approach (from

Clark Drive), as queues here are generally governed by the presence of the VACS, rather

than the roundabout itself. Maximum queues at the Clark Drive Overpass were previously

discussed in Section 7.5.

Figure 7.5: Roundabout Queue Lengths on Stewart Street Approaches


Page 67

As can be seen in the above figure, over the course of the whole hour, queues are expected

to be relatively short, which, in conjunction with the average vehicle delay information

presented above, suggests that the roundabout has sufficient capacity to accommodate

the anticipated vehicle volumes. However, within the hour, surges in volumes at certain

times will generate short-term queues that can become quite extensive, and will result in

back-ups on both the Stewart Street Elevated Structure and the Centennial Road

Overpass, as well as the at-grade routes beneath them, since these at-grade routes must

merge into the traffic stream of the elevated routes.

The scope of the traffic impact study does not include a formal design review of the

roundabout. However because the design and traffic operations of the roundabout are

inter-related, several aspects of the design that could affect traffic operations are brought

to the attention of VFPA for further consideration. It is understood that the geometric design

will be further developed, and a road safety audit conducted, as part of further design

development if the CEP is implemented.

• The roundabout geometrics are tight, due to the right-of-way and geometric

constraints present on all sides of the roundabout. The next stages of design

development for the roundabout will need to ensure that it is possible for vehicles

(including container trucks) to use the roundabout without intruding into the

adjacent lane. Lane intrusion can reduce intersection capacity because drivers in

the lane that is being “intruded” upon may be too “intimidated” to travel in a lane

when a vehicle is in the adjacent lane (particularly if that vehicle is a container

truck).

• Traffic micro-simulation modelling cannot fully account for the impacts of grade

differences on driver sightlines. In practice, the next steps of design development

will need to ensure that outbound vehicles from Vanterm are able to see “behind

and up” the Centennial Road Overpass to see whether there is a vehicle

approaching from CROP that will have the right-of-way. The design will also need

to ensure that Clark Drive Overpass structure does not block sightlines for

eastbound vehicles on Centennial Road at-grade looking for approaching

eastbound vehicles on CROP.

• As part of their sweep path for certain movements, container trucks will need to

use the truck apron. Given the very high proportion of container trucks using the

roundabout, use of the truck apron will be a frequent, rather than an occasional

occurrence. It is suggested that frequently-intruded portions of the proposed truck

apron could potentially be paved and designed for frequent use, rather than the

more typical rollable curb (with stamped brick) design that is often used in

roundabouts that only feature occasional use by large vehicles.


Page 68

• A potential benefit to traffic operations is that the roundabout is located in a

controlled access environment, and will therefore only be used by a relatively

limited pool of drivers, rather than the general public. In particular, it is expected

that the roundabout will be used by many of the same truck drivers over and over

again. This repeated use by a limited pool of drivers will benefit traffic operations

as truck drivers will become increasingly familiar regarding how to safely and

efficiently move through the roundabout without over- or under-steering and failing

to complete the movement through the roundabout.

• Some auxiliary lanes at the approaches to the roundabout are too short for large

vehicles used in the VISSIM model (WB-65, roughly 22 m long) to queue in without

obstructing the adjacent lane. In particular, the westbound left turn lane may be

too short to accommodate a WB-65 vehicle (particularly if it is a Vanterm truck

arriving in the lane at an angle from the at-grade section of Centennial Road), and

as a result a container truck waiting to enter the roundabout to move from Centerm

or Vanterm to the Clark Drive Overpass will obstruct vehicles from making through

movements (e.g. from the west leg onto the east leg of the roundabout). This lane

obstruction effectively lowers the capacity of the roundabout. The westbound right

and left turn auxiliary lanes also have this issue, although it is anticipated that these

short lanes will be less problematic because they are less likely to have high

volumes of large vehicles such as container trucks using them.

• It is noted that the Clark Drive VACS helps meter inbound flow into the roundabout,

and ensures that there are gaps in roundabout traffic for eastbound vehicles to

enter the roundabout. Therefore, improvements in processing times for inbound

vehicles using the Clark Drive VACS (i.e. a reduction from the assumed 10

seconds) could actually have a negative impact on traffic movements for outbound

vehicles from Centerm and Vanterm, and create additional queues and delays for

these movements. On the other hand, if there are very few inbound vehicles from

Clark Drive (e.g. during a truck staging event), then there will be a steady flow rate

of vehicles entering the roundabout from the west leg, which could potentially

impact use of the roundabout by westbound vehicles approaching from the east

leg.

• As a sensitivity test, the roundabout was also subjected to a series of model runs

with a 25% increase in volumes. While average vehicle delays and queue lengths

did increase, the roundabout was nonetheless able to accommodate the vehicle

volumes without queues propagating indefinitely, which would occur if volumes

were higher than capacity.

• As an additional sensitivity test, the roundabout was tested as a single-lane

roundabout, using the original volumes. Similarly, although delays and queues did


Page 69

increase, the roundabout was above to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate

the anticipated vehicle volumes.

7.7 Traffic Volumes through the Downtown Eastside

It is understood that a key issue in terms of the impacts that the CEP could have on the

City of Vancouver’s road network relates not only to a traffic operations perspective, but

also to a community safety perspective. The major area of concern in terms of impacts in

the Downtown Eastside, which is known to have road safety concerns, particularly between

pedestrians and vehicles. For example, in 2011, the City of Vancouver reduced the speed

limit on Hastings Street to 30 km/h between Abbott Street and Jackson Avenue, with the

intent of reducing injuries and fatalities along this corridor.

The CEP creates two sources of potential impact through the Downtown Eastside:

• A general increase in traffic through the area, resulting from additional trips to and

from the Centerm container terminal; and

• The removal of the Heatley Avenue Overpass diverting traffic to use the Clark

Drive or Commissioner Street Overpasses.

Port-bound container trucks do not travel through the Downtown Eastside, nor will they in

the future (other than in exceptional circumstances). As noted previously, access to the

South Shore port area for container trucks only occurs via the Clark Drive and

Commissioner Street VACS.

As a means of gauging potential extent of increases / changes to vehicular traffic volumes

through the Downtown Eastside resulting from the CEP, 23-hour traffic volumes were

extracted for each of the five Scenarios for major road segments in the Downtown Eastside

were extracted from the model. These road segments include:

• Main Street between Cordova Street and Powell Street

• Main Street Between Hastings Street and Cordova Street

• Main Street Between Pender Street and Hastings Street

• Cordova Street from Gore Avenue to Main Street

• Powell Street from Main Street to Gore Avenue

• Hastings Street between Main Street and Gore Avenue


Page 70

The number of vehicles in the network for each modelled Scenario is given in Table 7.20.

Note that all volumes are bi-directional, except those for Cordova and Powell Streets which

are both one-way roads. Volumes are also rounded to the nearest hundred vehicles.

Table 7.20: Traffic Volumes on Major Roads through the Downtown Eastside

(00:00 to 23:00)


Main Street – Between Cordova Street and Powell Street (Two-Way)

7,700 7,700 0

Main Street – Between Cordova Street and Hastings Street (Two-Way)

9,900 9,900 0

Main Street – Between Hastings Street and Pender Street (Two-Way)

13,000 13,000 0

Powell Street – From Gore Avenue to Main Street (One-Way)

15,200 15,100 -100

Cordova Street – From Main Street to Gore Avenue (One-Way)

17,900 18,000 100

Hastings Street – Between Gore Avenue and Main Street (Two-Way)

26,100 26,100 0

As can be seen, the incremental impact of the CEP along all traffic corridors is anticipated

to be negligible. Small changes in vehicle volumes were noted on Powell Street and

Cordova Streets, however this fluctuation is very small, and well within the level of

stochasticity of vehicle release rates that is expected in a Paramics micro-simulation

model. A difference of 100 vehicles over the course of a full day is also well within the real-

world day-to-day variation in volumes on the road network.

Intuitively, these results make sense for the following reasons:

• Vehicles approaching the South Shore port area from the west currently have to

travel through these blocks in the Downtown Eastside (since even the westernmost

port access route, the Heatley Avenue Overpass, is east of this area). With the

removal of Heatley Avenue, these vehicles will simply have to continue further west

to the Clark Drive Overpass. The increase in employee and service vehicle trips to

and from the Centerm container terminal as a result of the CEP create a very minor

increase in volumes on some routes (i.e. one which still rounds down to zero).

These is because the majority of employee and service vehicle trips approach the

South Shore port area from the south and the east, rather than the west.

• Vehicles approaching the South Shore port area from the east generally do not

pass through these blocks to begin with, as even the westernmost port access


Page 71

route, the Heatley Avenue Overpass, is east of this area). With the removal of

Heatley Avenue, these vehicles will simply turn sooner in order to use the Clark

Drive Overpass.

• Although not included in the above table, the 200- and 300-blocks of Heatley

Avenue (between Powell Street and Hastings Street may see some reduction in

vehicle volumes as a result of the elimination of the Heatley Avenue Overpass.


Page 72

8. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

A total of two model scenarios were developed, modelled and assessed as part of this

traffic impact study:

• A Base Case scenario, which considers anticipated future traffic operations without

implementation of the Centerm Expansion Project; and

• An Expansion Case scenario, which considers anticipated future traffic operations

with implementation of the Centerm Expansion Project

Based on the results of the analysis, a number of key findings have emerged:

• It is estimated that upon reaching the Centerm container terminal’s increased

sustainable throughput capacity, the CEP will generate a net total increase of

approximately 1,300 container trucks per day (split evenly as an increase of

approximately 650 additional inbound and 650 additional outbound container

trucks) above and beyond what would occur if the Centerm container terminal were

to operate at its existing sustainable capacity.

• The CEP would also result in an additional roughly 250 employee and service

vehicle trips per day (split evenly as roughly 125 inbound and 125 outbound trips)

to and from the Centerm container terminal.

• With the implementation of the CEP, employee and service vehicles are

anticipated to split approximately 70% / 30% between the Clark Drive Overpass

and Commissioner Street Overpass, respectively. This pattern shift reflects both

vehicles that currently use the Heatley Street Overpass having to shift to either the

Clark Drive Overpass or Commissioner Street Overpass (the majority of which are

expected to use the Clark Drive Overpass), as well as an increase in the total

number of employee and service vehicles travelling to and from the South Shore

port area.




vehicular traffic operations on the restricted-access South Shore port area road

network. The largest impacts were found at the proposed roundabout at Clark

Drive and Stewart Street which will generate queues equivalent to the length of

10+ container trucks during peak times for some approaches. However, these

queues do dissipate, as the roundabout has sufficient capacity to accommodate

the anticipated vehicle volumes. Several considerations for the next steps of

design development of the roundabout that would benefit traffic operations were

also noted.


Page 73

• With the CEP in place, no truck staging incidents that require inbound container

trucks to divert from the Clark Drive Overpass to the Commissioner Street

Overpass were observed; a result of the improved stability of traffic operations on

the South Shore port area road network. Nonetheless, significant queuing was

observed on the Clark Drive Overpass during the busiest hours for inbound

movements, with queues reaching up to 250 m long (i.e. to roughly the location

where the overpass passes over top of the Clark Drive / Powell Street intersection).




vehicular traffic operations and the City of Vancouver road network. This is

because although the CEP is generating a significant number of new vehicle trips

per day, these vehicle trips, particularly the container truck trips, are spread

throughout the day and do not necessarily “peak” during the AM and PM peak

hours when the City of Vancouver road network is busiest due to the presence of

high volumes of commuter and other traffic. In particular, the intersection of Clark

Drive and Hastings Street does not perform substantially different than at present,

as north and south through-movements are not the primary capacity constraint at

this intersection. The CEP is anticipated to have a negligible impact on vehicle

volumes on major road corridors in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver, although

it will likely reduce volumes on Heatley Avenue between Powell Street and

Hastings Street.

• The road network assumptions used in the analysis assume that an at-grade

Waterfront Road Extension (WRE) connection would not be implemented as part

of the scope of the CEP. This assumption results in a “worse case” impact in terms

of traffic volumes on the City of Vancouver road network; sensitivity testing

indicates that if the WRE is implemented, there would be a 1% - 2% reduction in

overall vehicular travel on the major east-west roads through the Downtown

Eastside of Vancouver, as some port-related traffic travelling to / from the west

could instead use the Waterfront Road Extension. Therefore, if the WRE is in fact

implemented as part of the scope of the CEP, there may be some minor

improvements to traffic operations on the City of Vancouver road network

compared to what is presented in this study.

• The results above are based on a number of assumptions that require deliberate

action on the part of the VFPA and other partners in the Centerm Expansion

Project, without which, the incremental vehicle traffic operations impacts of the

CEP could be substantially greater to both the South Shore port area and City of

Vancouver road networks. Specifically:


Page 74

o Achieving the rail split assumptions in this analysis is critical to reducing

the number of container truck trips required to move containers in and out

of the Centerm container terminal. The analysis assumed a rail split that

is higher than the current split (reflecting the significant expansion of the

intermodal yard proposed as part of the scope of the CEP), but lower than

the maximum capacity of the new intermodal yard. This means that it is

also possible that the share of containers moved by rail could ultimately

be higher than what is assumed in this analysis, and that correspondingly,

the number of container truck trips could ultimately be lower than

assumed.

o The analysis assumes that the proportion of container trucks making

double-ended movements remains constant over time. Increasing the

proportion of double-ended movements would further assist with reducing

the total number of container trucks trips to and from the Centerm

container terminal.

o The analysis assumes that the CEP will entirely eliminate the potential for

train movements at the at-grade crossings along Centennial Road

between Clark Drive and the Centerm container terminal. This will be

accomplished by eliminating train operations on the Southern Railway of

BC crossing, and implementing the Centennial Road Overpass, which will

grade-separate the crossings of the Vanterm West and Alliance Grain

Terminal tracks. The elimination of these road / rail conflicts help improve

travel time reliability on the South Shore port area road network and

reduce truck staging events.

o The distribution throughout the day of arrival and departure times of

container trucks from the Centerm and Vanterm container terminals is

significantly different than what is occurring today. Specifically, the

assumed daily distribution of arrival times and departure times is

significantly more stable throughout the day, rather than the current profile,

which tends to have greater “peaks” of container truck arrivals and

departures. Without this change in operating practices, the South Shore

port area road network will likely see a significant increase in queuing of

container trucks to the Centerm container terminal, which can in turn

obstruct access for other South Shore port area road users, as the primary

corridor in the road network (Centennial Road / Stewart Street /

Commissioner Street) is only one lane in each direction in most places.

This change in operating practice will also be required to mitigate the traffic

operations impacts of the CEP on the City of Vancouver road networks.

• All modelling analysis assumes the road network is “operating normally”; meaning

that the effects of unplanned incidents are not accounted for. Much of the South


Page 75

Shore port area road network is one lane in each direction, and in some parts of

the port area, there is only one route in and out; alternative routes that would

provide network redundancy do not exist. Therefore, unplanned closures (e.g.

vehicle stalls or collisions blocking a lane, the unexpected closure of a VACS gate

or terminal gate) are a concern, as any such events could quickly create significant

queueing and delays, which can take a long time to dissipate even after the cause

of the closure has been addressed / cleared. A strong incident management plan

to both reduce the propensity for such incidents, as well as to remove, mitigate or

otherwise address such incidents is critical to ensuring day-to-day traffic

operations on the South Shore port area road network remain as stable and

consistent as realistically possible.


APPENDIX A

SYNCHRO REPORTS

Lanes, Volumes, Timings

1: McGill St & Commissioner St 8/12/2016

Base Case (without CEP) – AM 8/12/2016 Synchro 9 Report

Page 1

Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR

Lane Configurations

Traffic Volume (vph) 0 834 1715 145 80 0

Future Volume (vph) 0 834 1715 145 80 0

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Storage Length (m) 57.0 56.0 0.0 23.0

Storage Lanes 1 1 2 1

Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00

Frt 0.850

Flt Protected 0.950

Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 3539 3539 1583 3433 1863

Flt Permitted 0.950

Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 3539 3539 1583 3433 1863

Right Turn on Red Yes Yes

Satd. Flow (RTOR) 88

Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 1086.1 433.3 140.8

Travel Time (s) 78.2 31.2 10.1

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 907 1864 158 87 0

Shared Lane Traffic (%)

Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 907 1864 158 87 0

Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No

Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right

Median Width(m) 3.6 3.6 7.2

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0

Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8

Two way Left Turn Lane

Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Turning Speed (k/h) 25 15 25 15

Number of Detectors 1 2 2 1 1 1

Detector Template Left Thru Thru Right Left Right

Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 2.0

Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 2.0 2.0

Detector 1 Type 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

Detector 1 Queue (s) 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

Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4

Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6

Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex

Detector 2 Channel

Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0

Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Prot Perm

Protected Phases 5 2 6 4

Permitted Phases 2 6 4




Page 2


Detector Phase 5 2 6 6 4 4

Switch Phase

Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Minimum Split (s) 13.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 28.0 28.0

Total Split (s) 20.0 47.0 27.0 27.0 28.0 28.0

Total Split (%) 26.7% 62.7% 36.0% 36.0% 37.3% 37.3%

Maximum Green (s) 15.0 42.0 22.0 22.0 23.0 23.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes

Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

Recall Mode None Max C-Max C-Max None None

Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 16.0 16.0

Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0

Act Effct Green (s) 60.7 60.7 60.7 7.7

Actuated g/C Ratio 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.10

v/c Ratio 0.32 0.65 0.12 0.25

Control Delay 5.2 5.4 1.4 32.6

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 5.2 5.4 1.4 32.6

LOS A A A C

Approach Delay 5.2 5.1 32.6

Approach LOS A A C

90th %ile Green (s) 0.0 55.9 55.9 55.9 9.1 9.1

90th %ile Term Code Skip Coord Coord Coord Gap Gap

70th %ile Green (s) 0.0 57.0 57.0 57.0 8.0 8.0


50th %ile Green (s) 0.0 57.7 57.7 57.7 7.3 7.3


30th %ile Green (s) 0.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 7.0 7.0

30th %ile Term Code Skip Coord Coord Coord Min Min

10th %ile Green (s) 0.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 0.0 0.0

10th %ile Term Code Skip Coord Coord Coord Skip Skip

Stops (vph) 377 673 17 70

Fuel Used(l) 136 93 7 5

CO Emissions (g/hr) 2533 1726 121 86

NOx Emissions (g/hr) 489 333 23 17

VOC Emissions (g/hr) 584 398 28 20

Dilemma Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 0

Queue Length 50th (m) 47.6 52.2 1.9 6.3

Queue Length 95th (m) 64.1 81.2 6.0 12.5

Internal Link Dist (m) 1062.1 409.3 116.8

Turn Bay Length (m) 56.0

Base Capacity (vph) 2865 2865 1298 1052

Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0




Page 3


Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0

Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0

Reduced v/c Ratio 0.32 0.65 0.12 0.08

Intersection Summary

Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 75

Actuated Cycle Length: 75

Offset: 69 (92%), Referenced to phase 6:WBT, Start of Green

Natural Cycle: 90

Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated

Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.65

Intersection Signal Delay: 5.9 Intersection LOS: A

Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.6% ICU Level of Service B

Analysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: McGill St & Commissioner St


4: Nanaimo St & Powell St/Dundas St 8/12/2016


Page 4

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR

Lane Configurations

Traffic Volume (vph) 545 178 60 45 347 22 62 268 2 0 599 1149

Future Volume (vph) 545 178 60 45 347 22 62 268 2 0 599 1149

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Storage Length (m) 0.0 60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.0

Storage Lanes 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1

Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5

Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00

Frt 0.962 0.992 0.999 0.850

Flt Protected 0.950 0.995 0.991

Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 1792 0 0 3493 0 0 3504 0 0 3539 1583

Flt Permitted 0.950 0.995 0.713

Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 1792 0 0 3493 0 0 2521 0 0 3539 1583

Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes

Satd. Flow (RTOR) 23 7 1 59

Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 235.5 159.4 199.7 378.5

Travel Time (s) 17.0 11.5 14.4 27.3

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 592 193 65 49 377 24 67 291 2 0 651 1249


Lane Group Flow (vph) 592 258 0 0 450 0 0 360 0 0 651 1249

Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No

Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right

Median Width(m) 7.2 7.2 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Crosswalk Width(m) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8


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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15

Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1

Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right

Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0

Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0

Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex

Detector 1 Channel

Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4

Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6

Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex

Detector 2 Channel

Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm NA NA pm+ov

Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 4





Page 5


Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 4

Switch Phase

Minimum Initial (s) 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 13.0 13.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 24.0

Total Split (s) 27.0 27.0 18.0 18.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 27.0

Total Split (%) 36.0% 36.0% 24.0% 24.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 36.0%

Maximum Green (s) 22.0 22.0 13.0 13.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 22.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5


Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?

Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max Max Max None

Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 12.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 12.0

Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Act Effct Green (s) 22.0 22.0 12.6 25.4 25.4 52.4

Actuated g/C Ratio 0.29 0.29 0.17 0.34 0.34 0.70

v/c Ratio 0.59 0.48 0.76 0.42 0.54 1.11

Control Delay 25.5 23.3 38.7 21.1 19.7 80.5

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 25.5 23.3 38.7 21.1 19.7 80.5

LOS C C D C B F

Approach Delay 24.8 38.7 21.1 59.7

Approach LOS C D C E

90th %ile Green (s) 22.0 22.0 13.0 13.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 22.0

90th %ile Term Code Max Max Max Max Coord Coord Coord Coord Max

70th %ile Green (s) 22.0 22.0 13.0 13.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 22.0


50th %ile Green (s) 22.0 22.0 13.0 13.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 22.0


30th %ile Green (s) 22.0 22.0 13.0 13.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 22.0


10th %ile Green (s) 22.0 22.0 10.9 10.9 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 22.0

10th %ile Term Code Max Max Gap Gap Coord Coord Coord Coord Max

Stops (vph) 447 172 370 246 491 757

Fuel Used(l) 33 13 27 17 109 259

CO Emissions (g/hr) 612 249 500 319 2035 4826

NOx Emissions (g/hr) 118 48 97 62 393 932

VOC Emissions (g/hr) 141 57 115 74 469 1113

Dilemma Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 0 0 0

Queue Length 50th (m) 38.5 28.3 33.2 21.5 43.7 ~207.1

Queue Length 95th (m) 54.5 49.8 #50.3 33.5 61.1 #286.5

Internal Link Dist (m) 211.5 135.4 175.7 354.5


Base Capacity (vph) 1007 541 611 855 1199 1124

Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0




Page 6


Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0

Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reduced v/c Ratio 0.59 0.48 0.74 0.42 0.54 1.11


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 75


Offset: 32 (43%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL, Start of Green

Natural Cycle: 65



Intersection Signal Delay: 44.8 Intersection LOS: D

Intersection Capacity Utilization 104.5% ICU Level of Service G


~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.


Splits and Phases: 4: Nanaimo St & Powell St/Dundas St


5: Clark Dr & E. Hastings St 8/12/2016


Page 7


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00

Frt 0.975 0.986 0.850

Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.996

Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3451 0 1770 3490 0 0 3539 1583 0 3525 1863

Flt Permitted 0.200 0.232 0.892

Satd. Flow (perm) 373 3451 0 432 3490 0 0 3539 1583 0 3157 1863


Satd. Flow (RTOR) 31 15 89

Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 107.6 215.4 125.9 190.9

Travel Time (s) 7.7 15.5 9.1 13.7

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 18 503 102 511 1405 150 0 432 212 35 413 0





Median Width(m) 3.6 3.6 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15

Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1

Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Right

Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 2.0

Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0

Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex

Detector 1 Channel

Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Perm NA pm+ov

Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 1 4 5

Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 4

Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 8 8 8 1 4 4 5

Switch Phase





Page 8


Minimum Split (s) 9.0 24.0 9.0 24.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 9.0

Total Split (s) 21.0 25.0 21.0 25.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 21.0

Total Split (%) 28.0% 33.3% 28.0% 33.3% 38.7% 38.7% 38.7% 38.7% 28.0%

Maximum Green (s) 17.0 20.0 17.0 20.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 17.0

Yellow Time (s) 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0

All-Red Time (s) 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.0

Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0

Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead

Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes


Recall Mode None C-Max None C-Max Max Max Max Max None

Walk Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 13.0 13.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0

Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0

Act Effct Green (s) 26.9 20.0 42.0 38.9 24.0 45.0 24.0

Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.27 0.56 0.52 0.32 0.60 0.32

v/c Ratio 0.07 0.64 0.94 0.86 0.38 0.22 0.44

Control Delay 9.6 26.7 42.5 23.2 21.0 4.5 20.2

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 9.6 26.7 42.5 23.2 21.0 4.5 20.2

LOS A C D C C A C

Approach Delay 26.2 28.0 15.6 20.2

Approach LOS C C B C

90th %ile Green (s) 6.5 20.0 17.0 30.5 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 6.5

90th %ile Term Code Gap Coord Max Coord MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR Gap

70th %ile Green (s) 0.0 20.0 17.0 41.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0

70th %ile Term Code Skip Coord Max Coord MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR Skip

50th %ile Green (s) 0.0 20.0 17.0 41.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


30th %ile Green (s) 0.0 20.0 17.0 41.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


10th %ile Green (s) 0.0 20.0 17.0 41.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


Stops (vph) 11 451 272 1029 294 48 377

Fuel Used(l) 1 38 31 78 18 4 22

CO Emissions (g/hr) 16 702 578 1449 330 76 415

NOx Emissions (g/hr) 3 136 112 280 64 15 80

VOC Emissions (g/hr) 4 162 133 334 76 18 96

Dilemma Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Queue Length 50th (m) 1.1 39.5 49.3 90.7 25.8 7.1 32.3

Queue Length 95th (m) 3.7 56.7 #109.7 #182.1 38.2 15.9 m31.3


Turn Bay Length (m)

Base Capacity (vph) 505 943 545 1817 1132 985 1010

Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reduced v/c Ratio 0.04 0.64 0.94 0.86 0.38 0.22 0.44




Page 9


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 75


Offset: 45 (60%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of Green

Natural Cycle: 75



Intersection Signal Delay: 24.7 Intersection LOS: C

Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.0% ICU Level of Service E




m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

Splits and Phases: 5: Clark Dr & E. Hastings St


18: Clark Dr & Powell St 8/12/2016


Page 10

Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR

Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.999 0.850

Flt Protected 0.990 0.950

Satd. Flow (prot) 3536 0 0 3504 1770 1583

Flt Permitted 0.683 0.950

Satd. Flow (perm) 3536 0 0 2417 1770 1583


Satd. Flow (RTOR) 1 217


Link Distance (m) 314.9 210.2 190.9

Travel Time (s) 22.7 15.1 13.7

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 650 5 348 1384 329 217




Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right





Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00


Number of Detectors 2 1 2 1 1

Detector Template Thru Left Thru Left Right

Leading Detector (m) 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 2.0

Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Size(m) 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0

Detector 1 Type 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

Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type NA pm+pt NA Prot Perm


Permitted Phases 6 8

Detector Phase 2 1 6 8 8

Switch Phase

Minimum Initial (s) 11.0 5.0 11.0 8.0 8.0




Page 11


Minimum Split (s) 22.0 9.0 22.0 23.0 23.0

Total Split (s) 32.0 20.0 52.0 23.0 23.0

Total Split (%) 42.7% 26.7% 69.3% 30.7% 30.7%

Maximum Green (s) 26.0 16.0 46.0 18.0 18.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0.0 2.5 1.5 1.5

Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag Lag Lead

Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes

Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

Recall Mode C-Max None C-Max Max Max

Walk Time (s) 11.0 11.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0

Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0

Act Effct Green (s) 46.0 46.0 18.0 18.0


v/c Ratio 0.30 1.17 0.78 0.40

Control Delay 7.3 101.9 34.9 5.6

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 7.3 101.9 34.9 5.6

LOS A F C A


Approach LOS A F C

90th %ile Green (s) 46.0 0.0 46.0 18.0 18.0

90th %ile Term Code Coord Skip Coord MaxR MaxR

70th %ile Green (s) 46.0 0.0 46.0 18.0 18.0


50th %ile Green (s) 46.0 0.0 46.0 18.0 18.0


30th %ile Green (s) 46.0 0.0 46.0 18.0 18.0


10th %ile Green (s) 46.0 0.0 46.0 18.0 18.0


Stops (vph) 261 1264 166 30

Fuel Used(l) 42 229 17 5

CO Emissions (g/hr) 790 4253 323 96




Queue Length 50th (m) 21.6 ~164.6 29.0 0.1

Queue Length 95th (m) 30.1 #206.7 m#55.1 m11.4


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 1.17 0.78 0.40




Page 12


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 75


Offset: 40 (53%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBTL, Start of Green

Natural Cycle: 130



Intersection Signal Delay: 66.1 Intersection LOS: E

Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.1% ICU Level of Service F







Splits and Phases: 18: Clark Dr & Powell St


21: Heatley Ave & Powell St 8/12/2016


Page 13


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.975


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 0 3536 0 0 1781 0 0 1816 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 0 3536 0 0 1408 0 0 1816 0


Satd. Flow (RTOR) 5

Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 126.5 178.2 100.7 201.4

Travel Time (s) 9.1 12.8 7.3 14.5

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 22 1736 2 93 9 0 0 22 5





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15


Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Thru




Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 2 Position(m) 9.4 9.4 9.4

Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6

Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex

Detector 2 Channel

Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0

Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA NA

Protected Phases 6 8 4



Switch Phase





Page 14


Minimum Split (s) 28.0 28.0 20.0 20.0 20.0

Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 31.0 31.0 31.0

Total Split (%) 52.3% 52.3% 47.7% 47.7% 47.7%

Maximum Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?


Recall Mode C-Max C-Max Max Max Max

Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 16.0 16.0 8.0 8.0 8.0


Act Effct Green (s) 29.0 26.0 26.0

Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.40 0.40

v/c Ratio 1.12 0.18 0.04

Control Delay 82.2 21.5 10.6

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 82.2 21.5 10.6

LOS F C B


Approach LOS F C B

90th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

90th %ile Term Code Coord Coord MaxR MaxR MaxR

70th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


50th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


30th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


10th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


Stops (vph) 1345 88 14

Fuel Used(l) 160 4 1

CO Emissions (g/hr) 2976 82 19

NOx Emissions (g/hr) 574 16 4

VOC Emissions (g/hr) 686 19 4

Dilemma Vehicles (#) 0 0 0

Queue Length 50th (m) ~138.6 13.3 1.6

Queue Length 95th (m) #179.6 m28.4 5.9


Turn Bay Length (m)

Base Capacity (vph) 1577 563 729

Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0

Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0

Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0

Reduced v/c Ratio 1.12 0.18 0.04




Page 15


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65


Offset: 27 (42%), Referenced to phase 6:WBTL, Start of Green

Natural Cycle: 60




Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.0% ICU Level of Service C







Splits and Phases: 21: Heatley Ave & Powell St


24: Heatley Ave & E. Hastings St 8/12/2016


Page 16


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.998 0.994 0.907


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3532 0 0 3511 0 0 1690 0 0 1792 0

Flt Permitted 0.951 0.923 0.754

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3359 0 0 3247 0 0 1690 0 0 1405 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 148.7 176.7 92.6 111.3

Travel Time (s) 10.7 12.7 6.7 8.0

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

Adj. Flow (vph) 2 477 5 46 1332 53 0 8 18 152 41 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15

Number of Detectors 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2

Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru

Leading Detector (m) 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0 2.0 10.0

Trailing Detector (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Position(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6

Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex

Detector 1 Channel

Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA NA Perm NA


Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4

Detector Phase 2 2 6 6 8 8 4 4

Switch Phase

Minimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0




Page 17


Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Total Split (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Total Split (%) 65.3% 65.3% 65.3% 65.3% 34.7% 34.7% 34.7% 34.7%

Maximum Green (s) 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 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) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?

Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max Max Max Max Max

Walk Time (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0

Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Act Effct Green (s) 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0


v/c Ratio 0.25 0.75 0.05 0.49

Control Delay 7.8 14.5 12.0 27.6

Queue Delay 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 7.8 14.6 12.0 27.6

LOS A B B C

Approach Delay 7.8 14.6 12.0 27.6

Approach LOS A B B C

90th %ile Green (s) 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0

90th %ile Term Code Coord Coord Coord Coord MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR

70th %ile Green (s) 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


50th %ile Green (s) 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


30th %ile Green (s) 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


10th %ile Green (s) 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


Stops (vph) 197 911 11 147

Fuel Used(l) 13 57 1 9





Queue Length 50th (m) 16.4 74.2 0.9 23.9

Queue Length 95th (m) 24.0 100.7 6.4 43.5


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.25 0.77 0.05 0.49




Page 18


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 75



Natural Cycle: 60



Intersection Signal Delay: 14.2 Intersection LOS: B

Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.9% ICU Level of Service D


Splits and Phases: 24: Heatley Ave & E. Hastings St


29: Main St & Powell St 8/12/2016


Page 19


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95

Frt 0.979 0.997


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 0 3444 0 0 3532 0 0 3529 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 0 3444 0 0 3323 0 0 3529 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 258.0 132.7 100.7 104.8

Travel Time (s) 18.6 9.6 7.3 7.5

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 227 1384 267 11 212 0 0 167 3





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15




Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 21.0 21.0 21.0

Total Split (s) 43.0 43.0 22.0 22.0 22.0

Total Split (%) 66.2% 66.2% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8%

Maximum Green (s) 38.0 38.0 17.0 17.0 17.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?

Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 12.0 7.0 7.0 7.0




v/c Ratio 0.92 0.26 0.18



Total Delay 44.8 16.1 20.2




Page 20


LOS D B C


Approach LOS D B C

Stops (vph) 1333 122 128

Fuel Used(l) 81 7 7





Queue Length 50th (m) 98.3 9.8 10.3

Queue Length 95th (m) #163.4 14.0 17.6


Turn Bay Length (m)







Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 60

Control Type: Pretimed







Splits and Phases: 29: Main St & Powell St


33: Main St & E. Cordova St 8/12/2016


Page 21


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00

Frt 0.985 0.919


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3469 0 0 0 0 0 3253 0 0 3507 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3469 0 0 0 0 0 3253 0 0 2980 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 257.3 142.2 104.6 100.7

Travel Time (s) 18.5 10.2 7.5 7.3

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 77 565 73 0 0 0 0 148 173 72 326 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15


Detector Template Left Thru Thru Left Thru




Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type Perm NA NA pm+pt NA

Protected Phases 2 4 3 3 8



Switch Phase

Minimum Initial (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0




Page 22

Lane Group Ø8

Lane Configurations

Traffic Volume (vph)

Future Volume (vph)

Ideal Flow (vphpl)

Lane Util. Factor

Frt

Flt Protected

Satd. Flow (prot)

Flt Permitted

Satd. Flow (perm)

Right Turn on Red

Satd. Flow (RTOR)

Link Speed (k/h)

Link Distance (m)

Travel Time (s)

Peak Hour Factor

Adj. Flow (vph)


Lane Group Flow (vph)

Enter Blocked Intersection

Lane Alignment

Median Width(m)

Link Offset(m)

Crosswalk Width(m)


Headway Factor

Turning Speed (k/h)

Number of Detectors

Detector Template

Leading Detector (m)

Trailing Detector (m)

Detector 1 Position(m)

Detector 1 Size(m)

Detector 1 Type

Detector 1 Channel

Detector 1 Extend (s)

Detector 1 Queue (s)

Detector 1 Delay (s)


Detector 2 Size(m)

Detector 2 Type

Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type

Protected Phases 8

Permitted Phases

Detector Phase

Switch Phase

Minimum Initial (s) 7.0




Page 23


Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 12.0 12.0

Total Split (s) 28.0 28.0 24.0 13.0

Total Split (%) 43.1% 43.1% 36.9% 20.0%

Maximum Green (s) 23.0 23.0 19.0 8.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0

Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag Lead Lag


Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None None

Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 12.0

Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0



v/c Ratio 0.39 0.54 0.39



Total Delay 10.1 15.4 11.1

LOS B B B


Approach LOS B B B

90th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 12.0 7.0

90th %ile Term Code Coord Coord Gap Min

70th %ile Green (s) 33.1 33.1 9.9 7.0


50th %ile Green (s) 34.5 34.5 8.5 7.0


30th %ile Green (s) 36.0 36.0 7.0 7.0

30th %ile Term Code Coord Coord Min Min

10th %ile Green (s) 36.0 36.0 7.0 7.0


Stops (vph) 359 124 199







Queue Length 95th (m) 41.0 19.0 m16.9


Turn Bay Length (m)









Page 24

Lane Group Ø8

Minimum Split (s) 23.0

Total Split (s) 37.0

Total Split (%) 57%

Maximum Green (s) 32.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5

Lost Time Adjust (s)

Total Lost Time (s)

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?

Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0

Recall Mode None

Walk Time (s) 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0

Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0

Act Effct Green (s)

Actuated g/C Ratio

v/c Ratio

Control Delay

Queue Delay

Total Delay

LOS

Approach Delay

Approach LOS

90th %ile Green (s) 24.0

90th %ile Term Code Hold









Stops (vph)

Fuel Used(l)

CO Emissions (g/hr)

NOx Emissions (g/hr)

VOC Emissions (g/hr)

Dilemma Vehicles (#)

Queue Length 50th (m)


Internal Link Dist (m)

Turn Bay Length (m)

Base Capacity (vph)

Starvation Cap Reductn

Spillback Cap Reductn

Storage Cap Reductn

Reduced v/c Ratio




Page 25


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65


Offset: 18 (28%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:, Start of Green

Natural Cycle: 50




Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.2% ICU Level of Service A



Splits and Phases: 33: Main St & E. Cordova St


34: Main St & Alexander St 8/12/2016


Page 26


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.948 0.930 0.850 0.981

Flt Protected 0.993 0.992 0.997 0.999

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1754 0 0 1718 0 0 1857 1583 0 1826 0

Flt Permitted 0.968 0.962 0.979 0.993

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1709 0 0 1667 0 0 1824 1583 0 1815 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 69.6 113.2 104.8 145.1

Travel Time (s) 5.0 8.2 7.5 10.4

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 14 46 38 15 29 48 23 361 104 3 122 20





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15


Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru




Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA




Switch Phase





Page 27


Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0

Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0

Total Split (%) 55.4% 55.4% 55.4% 55.4% 44.6% 44.6% 44.6% 44.6% 44.6%

Maximum Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?


Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max Max Max Max Max Max

Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0

Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Act Effct Green (s) 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0

Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.37 0.37 0.37

v/c Ratio 0.12 0.11 0.57 0.16 0.21

Control Delay 6.8 5.8 21.4 6.8 13.7

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 6.8 5.8 22.1 6.8 13.7

LOS A A C A B

Approach Delay 6.8 5.8 18.9 13.7

Approach LOS A A B B

90th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0

90th %ile Term Code Coord Coord Coord Coord MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR

70th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


50th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


30th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


10th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


Stops (vph) 31 25 272 36 78

Fuel Used(l) 3 2 15 2 7

CO Emissions (g/hr) 65 34 287 42 124

NOx Emissions (g/hr) 13 7 55 8 24

VOC Emissions (g/hr) 15 8 66 10 29

Dilemma Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 0 0

Queue Length 50th (m) 3.9 2.8 37.5 0.0 11.0

Queue Length 95th (m) 10.9 9.5 m52.4 m4.3 22.4


Turn Bay Length (m)

Base Capacity (vph) 834 820 673 650 678

Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 93 0 0

Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0

Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0

Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.11 0.66 0.16 0.21




Page 28


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 50







Splits and Phases: 34: Main St & Alexander St


43: Main St & E. Hastings St 8/12/2016


Page 29


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95

Frt 0.976 0.982 0.960

Flt Protected 0.997 0.991 0.989

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3444 0 0 3507 0 0 3437 0 0 3398 0

Flt Permitted 0.805 0.642 0.770

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2781 0 0 2272 0 0 2676 0 0 3398 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 254.2 155.9 105.5 104.6

Travel Time (s) 18.3 11.2 7.6 7.5

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 37 464 95 237 1111 0 95 284 53 0 289 105





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15

Turn Type Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA NA



Minimum Split (s) 28.0 28.0 9.0 28.0 26.0 26.0 25.0

Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 10.0 44.0 31.0 31.0 31.0

Total Split (%) 45.3% 45.3% 13.3% 58.7% 41.3% 41.3% 41.3%

Maximum Green (s) 29.0 29.0 6.0 39.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 0.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead


Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 15.0


Act Effct Green (s) 29.0 39.0 26.0 26.0


v/c Ratio 0.54 1.07 0.46 0.32

Control Delay 19.0 64.9 19.9 15.7

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 19.0 64.9 19.9 15.7




Page 30


LOS B E B B

Approach Delay 19.0 64.9 19.9 15.7

Approach LOS B E B B

Stops (vph) 386 784 280 210

Fuel Used(l) 30 98 16 13

CO Emissions (g/hr) 556 1820 304 236




Queue Length 50th (m) 33.2 ~87.0 24.4 18.2

Queue Length 95th (m) 48.8 #148.1 37.5 29.0


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.54 1.07 0.46 0.32


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 75



Natural Cycle: 75










Splits and Phases: 43: Main St & E. Hastings St


44: Heatley Ave & E. Cordova St 8/12/2016


Page 31


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.971 0.989

Flt Protected 0.987

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3437 0 0 0 0 0 1842 0 0 1839 0

Flt Permitted 0.938

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3437 0 0 0 0 0 1842 0 0 1747 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 131.1 176.4 111.3 100.7

Travel Time (s) 9.4 12.7 8.0 7.3

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 3 648 153 0 0 0 0 100 9 13 35 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type Perm NA NA Perm NA




Switch Phase





Page 32


Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0

Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 31.0 31.0 31.0

Total Split (%) 52.3% 52.3% 47.7% 47.7% 47.7%

Maximum Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0




v/c Ratio 0.51 0.15 0.07



Total Delay 13.4 12.2 14.9

LOS B B B


Approach LOS B B B

90th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


70th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


50th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


30th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


10th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


Stops (vph) 465 56 28

Fuel Used(l) 27 3 2








Turn Bay Length (m)









Page 33


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65


Offset: 60 (92%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL, Start of Green

Natural Cycle: 40







Splits and Phases: 44: Heatley Ave & E. Cordova St



Base Case (without CEP) – (PM) 8/12/2016 Synchro 9 Report

Page 1


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Storage Length (m) 57.0 56.0 0.0 23.0



Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00

Frt 0.850

Flt Protected 0.950

Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 3539 3539 1583 3433 1863

Flt Permitted 0.950

Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 3539 3539 1583 3433 1863




Link Distance (m) 1086.1 433.3 140.8

Travel Time (s) 78.2 31.2 10.1

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1799 1516 150 62 0









Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00







Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 2.0 2.0


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 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




Detector 2 Channel








Page 2



Switch Phase


Minimum Split (s) 13.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 28.0 28.0

Total Split (s) 20.0 52.0 32.0 32.0 28.0 28.0

Total Split (%) 25.0% 65.0% 40.0% 40.0% 35.0% 35.0%

Maximum Green (s) 15.0 47.0 27.0 27.0 23.0 23.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5


Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0





Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 16.0 16.0


Act Effct Green (s) 66.0 66.0 66.0 7.4


v/c Ratio 0.62 0.52 0.11 0.20


Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 8.8 3.7 1.0 34.9

LOS A A A C


Approach LOS A A C

90th %ile Green (s) 0.0 61.6 61.6 61.6 8.4 8.4


70th %ile Green (s) 0.0 62.5 62.5 62.5 7.5 7.5


50th %ile Green (s) 0.0 63.0 63.0 63.0 7.0 7.0


30th %ile Green (s) 0.0 63.0 63.0 63.0 7.0 7.0


10th %ile Green (s) 0.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 0.0 0.0


Stops (vph) 801 402 12 51

Fuel Used(l) 276 70 6 3

CO Emissions (g/hr) 5132 1310 113 64




Queue Length 50th (m) 92.8 34.1 1.2 4.8

Queue Length 95th (m) m109.0 50.4 4.8 10.5








Page 3




Reduced v/c Ratio 0.62 0.52 0.11 0.06


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 80



Natural Cycle: 80











Page 4


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Storage Length (m) 0.0 60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.0


Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5

Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00

Frt 0.983 0.984 0.989 0.850

Flt Protected 0.950 0.995 0.995

Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 1831 0 0 3465 0 0 3483 0 0 3539 1583

Flt Permitted 0.950 0.995 0.723 0.954

Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 1831 0 0 3465 0 0 2531 0 0 3376 1583



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 235.5 159.4 199.7 378.5

Travel Time (s) 17.0 11.5 14.4 27.3

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 1309 502 63 28 209 28 52 443 38 1 654 887





Median Width(m) 7.2 7.2 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm NA Perm NA pm+ov






Page 5



Switch Phase


Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 13.0 13.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 24.0

Total Split (s) 39.0 39.0 15.0 15.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 39.0

Total Split (%) 48.8% 48.8% 18.8% 18.8% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 48.8%

Maximum Green (s) 34.0 34.0 10.0 10.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 34.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5


Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 12.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 12.0


Act Effct Green (s) 34.0 34.0 9.6 21.4 21.4 60.4


v/c Ratio 0.90 0.72 0.62 0.78 0.72 0.72

Control Delay 31.3 25.1 38.7 36.2 29.2 11.0

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 31.3 25.1 38.7 36.2 29.2 11.0

LOS C C D D C B

Approach Delay 29.5 38.7 36.2 18.8

Approach LOS C D D B

90th %ile Green (s) 34.0 34.0 10.0 10.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 34.0


70th %ile Green (s) 34.0 34.0 10.0 10.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 34.0


50th %ile Green (s) 34.0 34.0 10.0 10.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 34.0


30th %ile Green (s) 34.0 34.0 9.8 9.8 21.2 21.2 21.2 21.2 34.0


10th %ile Green (s) 34.0 34.0 8.0 8.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 34.0

10th %ile Term Code Max Max Min Min Coord Coord Coord Coord Max

Stops (vph) 1031 415 215 422 539 374

Fuel Used(l) 79 31 16 32 116 137

CO Emissions (g/hr) 1471 576 294 603 2149 2548




Queue Length 50th (m) 96.9 71.2 20.3 41.0 51.2 50.8

Queue Length 95th (m) #140.7 109.7 32.7 #65.8 70.8 113.0








Page 6




Reduced v/c Ratio 0.90 0.72 0.60 0.78 0.72 0.72


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 80



Natural Cycle: 65












Page 7


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00

Frt 0.986 0.986 0.850

Flt Protected 0.950 0.997 0.994

Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 3490 0 1770 3490 0 0 3529 1583 0 3518 1863

Flt Permitted 0.125 0.900 0.752

Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 3490 0 233 3490 0 0 3185 1583 0 2661 1863



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 107.6 215.4 125.9 190.9

Travel Time (s) 7.7 15.5 9.1 13.7

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1236 126 310 697 71 38 608 357 53 409 0





Median Width(m) 3.6 3.6 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA pt+ov Perm NA pm+ov



Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 8 8 8 1 4 4 5

Switch Phase





Page 8


Minimum Split (s) 9.0 24.0 9.0 24.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 9.0

Total Split (s) 26.0 30.0 21.0 25.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 26.0

Total Split (%) 32.5% 37.5% 26.3% 31.3% 36.3% 36.3% 36.3% 36.3% 32.5%

Maximum Green (s) 22.0 25.0 17.0 20.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 22.0

Yellow Time (s) 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0

All-Red Time (s) 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.0


Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0





Walk Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 13.0 13.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0


Act Effct Green (s) 28.1 47.0 46.0 24.0 41.9 24.0


v/c Ratio 1.10 0.77 0.38 0.68 0.41 0.58

Control Delay 85.9 28.5 9.8 28.8 9.8 20.4

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 85.9 28.5 9.8 28.8 9.8 20.4

LOS F C A C A C

Approach Delay 85.9 15.2 22.1 20.4

Approach LOS F B C C

90th %ile Green (s) 0.0 25.0 17.0 46.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


70th %ile Green (s) 0.0 25.0 17.0 46.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


50th %ile Green (s) 0.0 27.4 14.6 46.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0

50th %ile Term Code Skip Coord Gap Coord MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR Skip

30th %ile Green (s) 0.0 30.0 12.0 46.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


10th %ile Green (s) 0.0 33.3 8.7 46.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


Stops (vph) 983 177 351 504 141 328

Fuel Used(l) 141 16 28 32 10 22

CO Emissions (g/hr) 2629 298 514 587 178 404




Queue Length 50th (m) ~135.0 29.3 31.5 47.4 23.4 16.3

Queue Length 95th (m) #186.7 56.5 43.1 66.0 39.0 m18.1


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 1.10 0.67 0.38 0.68 0.39 0.58




Page 9


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 80



Natural Cycle: 80















Page 10


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.991 0.850


Satd. Flow (prot) 3507 0 1770 1863 1770 1583


Satd. Flow (perm) 3507 0 186 1863 1770 1583




Link Distance (m) 314.9 210.2 190.9

Travel Time (s) 22.7 15.1 13.7

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 1441 89 312 857 154 418









Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00







Detector 1 Size(m) 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel






Switch Phase





Page 11


Minimum Split (s) 22.0 9.0 22.0 23.0 23.0

Total Split (s) 42.0 15.0 57.0 23.0 23.0

Total Split (%) 52.5% 18.8% 71.3% 28.8% 28.8%

Maximum Green (s) 36.0 11.0 51.0 18.0 18.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0.0 2.5 1.5 1.5


Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 4.0 6.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag Lag Lead




Walk Time (s) 11.0 11.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0


Act Effct Green (s) 36.0 53.0 51.0 18.0 18.0


v/c Ratio 0.97 0.91 0.72 0.39 0.74

Control Delay 38.6 51.6 14.2 25.8 28.4

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 38.6 51.6 14.2 25.8 28.4

LOS D D B C C


Approach LOS D C C

90th %ile Green (s) 36.0 11.0 51.0 18.0 18.0

90th %ile Term Code Coord Max Coord MaxR MaxR

70th %ile Green (s) 36.0 11.0 51.0 18.0 18.0


50th %ile Green (s) 36.0 11.0 51.0 18.0 18.0


30th %ile Green (s) 36.0 11.0 51.0 18.0 18.0


10th %ile Green (s) 36.0 11.0 51.0 18.0 18.0


Stops (vph) 1195 158 510 137 288

Fuel Used(l) 146 29 57 8 22

CO Emissions (g/hr) 2718 531 1067 157 407




Queue Length 50th (m) 119.8 32.0 81.4 25.6 54.4

Queue Length 95th (m) #173.6 #80.1 126.4 m39.1 #87.9


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.97 0.91 0.72 0.39 0.74




Page 12


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 80



Natural Cycle: 90













Page 13


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.998

Flt Protected 0.950

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 0 3532 0 0 1770 0 0 1863 0

Flt Permitted 0.757

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 0 3532 0 0 1410 0 0 1863 0


Satd. Flow (RTOR) 2

Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 126.5 178.2 100.7 201.4

Travel Time (s) 9.1 12.8 7.3 14.5

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 1012 11 28 0 0 0 2 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type NA Perm NA NA




Switch Phase





Page 14


Minimum Split (s) 28.0 28.0 20.0 20.0 20.0

Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 31.0 31.0 31.0

Total Split (%) 52.3% 52.3% 47.7% 47.7% 47.7%

Maximum Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 16.0 16.0 8.0 8.0 8.0




v/c Ratio 0.65 0.05 0.00



Total Delay 16.4 16.0 12.0

LOS B B B


Approach LOS B B B

90th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


70th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


50th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


30th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


10th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


Stops (vph) 689 26 3

Fuel Used(l) 43 1 0








Turn Bay Length (m)









Page 15


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 50










Page 16


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.995 0.896


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3539 0 0 3514 0 0 1669 0 0 1779 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3539 0 0 3145 0 0 1669 0 0 1326 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 148.7 175.8 92.6 111.3

Travel Time (s) 10.7 12.7 6.7 8.0

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

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1236 4 23 688 26 0 9 30 167 12 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


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 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type NA Perm NA NA Perm NA




Switch Phase





Page 17


Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Total Split (s) 54.0 54.0 54.0 54.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Total Split (%) 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5%

Maximum Green (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 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) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0


Act Effct Green (s) 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0


v/c Ratio 0.57 0.38 0.08 0.51

Control Delay 10.5 8.5 11.4 31.4

Queue Delay 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 11.2 8.5 11.4 31.4

LOS B A B C

Approach Delay 11.2 8.5 11.4 31.4

Approach LOS B A B C

90th %ile Green (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


70th %ile Green (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


50th %ile Green (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


30th %ile Green (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


10th %ile Green (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


Stops (vph) 631 314 13 139






Queue Length 50th (m) 55.8 27.7 1.1 24.4

Queue Length 95th (m) 73.2 38.4 8.2 44.5


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.75 0.38 0.08 0.51




Page 18


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 80



Natural Cycle: 55










Page 19


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95

Frt 0.987 0.993


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 0 3462 0 0 3490 0 0 3514 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 0 3462 0 0 2817 0 0 3514 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 258.0 132.7 100.7 104.8

Travel Time (s) 18.6 9.6 7.3 7.5

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 199 758 92 52 127 0 0 323 16





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15




Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 21.0 21.0 21.0

Total Split (s) 39.0 39.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Total Split (%) 60.0% 60.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0%

Maximum Green (s) 34.0 34.0 21.0 21.0 21.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?

Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 12.0 7.0 7.0 7.0




v/c Ratio 0.58 0.20 0.30



Total Delay 12.2 24.1 16.9




Page 20


LOS B C B


Approach LOS B C B

Stops (vph) 601 144 255






Queue Length 50th (m) 42.7 11.2 20.3

Queue Length 95th (m) 59.6 m17.5 30.5


Turn Bay Length (m)







Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 45











Page 21


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00

Frt 0.988 0.889


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3486 0 0 0 0 0 3146 0 0 3500 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3486 0 0 0 0 0 3146 0 0 2170 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 257.3 142.2 104.6 100.7

Travel Time (s) 18.5 10.2 7.5 7.3

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 78 1255 120 0 0 0 0 100 285 122 407 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel






Switch Phase





Page 22

Lane Group Ø8

Lane Configurations


Future Volume (vph)

Ideal Flow (vphpl)

Lane Util. Factor

Frt

Flt Protected

Satd. Flow (prot)

Flt Permitted

Satd. Flow (perm)

Right Turn on Red

Satd. Flow (RTOR)

Link Speed (k/h)

Link Distance (m)

Travel Time (s)

Peak Hour Factor

Adj. Flow (vph)




Lane Alignment

Median Width(m)

Link Offset(m)

Crosswalk Width(m)


Headway Factor

Turning Speed (k/h)

Number of Detectors

Detector Template




Detector 1 Size(m)

Detector 1 Type

Detector 1 Channel





Detector 2 Size(m)

Detector 2 Type

Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type

Protected Phases 8

Permitted Phases

Detector Phase

Switch Phase





Page 23


Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 12.0 12.0

Total Split (s) 32.0 32.0 20.0 13.0

Total Split (%) 49.2% 49.2% 30.8% 20.0%

Maximum Green (s) 27.0 27.0 15.0 8.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag Lag Lead









v/c Ratio 0.85 0.61 0.57



Total Delay 21.7 18.3 12.0

LOS C B B


Approach LOS C B B

90th %ile Green (s) 28.1 28.1 13.9 8.0

90th %ile Term Code Coord Coord Gap Max

70th %ile Green (s) 30.4 30.4 11.6 8.0


50th %ile Green (s) 32.0 32.0 10.0 8.0


30th %ile Green (s) 33.7 33.7 8.3 8.0


10th %ile Green (s) 35.0 35.0 7.0 8.0

10th %ile Term Code Coord Coord Min Max

Stops (vph) 1016 180 237






Queue Length 50th (m) 77.5 13.5 15.2

Queue Length 95th (m) #138.6 24.1 20.7


Turn Bay Length (m)









Page 24

Lane Group Ø8



Total Split (%) 51%


Yellow Time (s) 3.5



Total Lost Time (s)

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?


Recall Mode None

Walk Time (s) 7.0



Act Effct Green (s)

Actuated g/C Ratio

v/c Ratio

Control Delay

Queue Delay

Total Delay

LOS

Approach Delay

Approach LOS











Stops (vph)

Fuel Used(l)

CO Emissions (g/hr)







Turn Bay Length (m)

Base Capacity (vph)



Storage Cap Reductn

Reduced v/c Ratio




Page 25


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 60












Page 26


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.916 0.986 0.850 0.984

Flt Protected 0.999 0.977 0.996 0.993

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1705 0 0 1794 0 0 1855 1583 0 1820 0

Flt Permitted 0.997 0.868 0.969 0.937

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1701 0 0 1594 0 0 1805 1583 0 1717 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 69.6 113.2 104.8 145.1

Travel Time (s) 5.0 8.2 7.5 10.4

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 2 30 52 46 43 10 12 157 63 47 243 40





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel






Switch Phase





Page 27


Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0

Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0

Total Split (%) 55.4% 55.4% 55.4% 55.4% 44.6% 44.6% 44.6% 44.6% 44.6%

Maximum Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5


Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0


Act Effct Green (s) 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


v/c Ratio 0.10 0.13 0.25 0.10 0.51

Control Delay 5.1 9.2 18.2 9.3 18.9

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 5.1 9.2 18.2 9.3 18.9

LOS A A B A B



90th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


70th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


50th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


30th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


10th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


Stops (vph) 20 43 109 26 221

Fuel Used(l) 3 3 6 2 17

CO Emissions (g/hr) 51 48 114 29 324




Queue Length 50th (m) 2.0 5.9 15.7 0.0 30.5



Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.10 0.13 0.25 0.10 0.51




Page 28


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 50











Page 29


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95

Frt 0.994 0.978 0.993

Flt Protected 0.998 0.990 0.992

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3511 0 0 3504 0 0 3434 0 0 3514 0

Flt Permitted 0.898 0.515 0.765

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3159 0 0 1823 0 0 2648 0 0 3514 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 254.2 155.9 105.5 104.6

Travel Time (s) 18.3 11.2 7.6 7.5

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 48 1176 50 137 541 0 73 337 71 0 507 26





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15




Minimum Split (s) 28.0 28.0 9.0 28.0 26.0 26.0 25.0

Total Split (s) 38.0 38.0 10.0 48.0 32.0 32.0 32.0

Total Split (%) 47.5% 47.5% 12.5% 60.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0%

Maximum Green (s) 33.0 33.0 6.0 43.0 27.0 27.0 27.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 0.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5





Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 15.0


Act Effct Green (s) 33.0 43.0 27.0 27.0


v/c Ratio 0.98 0.63 0.53 0.45

Control Delay 44.2 14.4 22.7 21.9

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 44.2 14.4 22.7 21.9




Page 30


LOS D B C C

Approach Delay 44.2 14.4 22.7 21.9

Approach LOS D B C C

Stops (vph) 1001 336 327 362

Fuel Used(l) 91 24 20 21

CO Emissions (g/hr) 1685 441 363 395




Queue Length 50th (m) 101.8 30.4 30.3 34.0

Queue Length 95th (m) #151.3 41.9 45.3 48.2


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.98 0.63 0.53 0.45


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 80



Natural Cycle: 70












Page 31


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.984 0.942

Flt Protected 0.962

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3483 0 0 0 0 0 1755 0 0 1792 0

Flt Permitted 0.894

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3483 0 0 0 0 0 1755 0 0 1665 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 131.1 176.4 111.3 100.7

Travel Time (s) 9.4 12.7 8.0 7.3

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1491 176 0 0 0 0 28 21 4 1 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type NA NA Perm NA




Switch Phase





Page 32


Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0

Total Split (s) 40.0 40.0 25.0 25.0 25.0

Total Split (%) 61.5% 61.5% 38.5% 38.5% 38.5%

Maximum Green (s) 35.0 35.0 20.0 20.0 20.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0




v/c Ratio 0.88 0.09 0.01



Total Delay 28.7 11.4 19.6

LOS C B B


Approach LOS C B B

90th %ile Green (s) 35.0 35.0 20.0 20.0 20.0


70th %ile Green (s) 35.0 35.0 20.0 20.0 20.0


50th %ile Green (s) 35.0 35.0 20.0 20.0 20.0


30th %ile Green (s) 35.0 35.0 20.0 20.0 20.0


10th %ile Green (s) 35.0 35.0 20.0 20.0 20.0


Stops (vph) 1198 22 7

Fuel Used(l) 70 1 0






Queue Length 95th (m) #142.7 9.3 3.2


Turn Bay Length (m)









Page 33


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 60











Expansion Case (with CEP) - AM 8/12/2016 Synchro 9 Report

Page 1


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Storage Length (m) 57.0 56.0 0.0 23.0



Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00

Frt 0.850

Flt Protected 0.950

Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 3539 3539 1583 3433 1863

Flt Permitted 0.950

Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 3539 3539 1583 3433 1863




Link Distance (m) 1086.1 433.3 140.8

Travel Time (s) 78.2 31.2 10.1

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 872 1875 179 149 0









Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00







Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 2.0 2.0


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 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




Detector 2 Channel








Page 2



Switch Phase


Minimum Split (s) 13.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 28.0 28.0

Total Split (s) 20.0 47.0 27.0 27.0 28.0 28.0

Total Split (%) 26.7% 62.7% 36.0% 36.0% 37.3% 37.3%

Maximum Green (s) 15.0 42.0 22.0 22.0 23.0 23.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5


Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0





Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 16.0 16.0


Act Effct Green (s) 56.3 56.3 56.3 8.7


v/c Ratio 0.33 0.71 0.15 0.37


Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 6.7 7.1 1.7 33.0

LOS A A A C


Approach LOS A A C

90th %ile Green (s) 0.0 54.1 54.1 54.1 10.9 10.9


70th %ile Green (s) 0.0 55.5 55.5 55.5 9.5 9.5


50th %ile Green (s) 0.0 56.4 56.4 56.4 8.6 8.6


30th %ile Green (s) 0.0 57.3 57.3 57.3 7.7 7.7


10th %ile Green (s) 0.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 7.0 7.0


Stops (vph) 504 835 20 120

Fuel Used(l) 135 99 7 8

CO Emissions (g/hr) 2511 1844 139 149




Queue Length 50th (m) 46.1 58.8 2.4 10.7

Queue Length 95th (m) 62.9 93.5 7.6 18.6








Page 3




Reduced v/c Ratio 0.33 0.71 0.15 0.14


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 75



Natural Cycle: 90










Page 4


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Storage Length (m) 0.0 60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.0


Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5

Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00

Frt 0.965 0.992 0.998 0.850

Flt Protected 0.950 0.995 0.990

Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 1798 0 0 3493 0 0 3497 0 0 3539 1583

Flt Permitted 0.950 0.995 0.693 0.952

Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 1798 0 0 3493 0 0 2448 0 0 3369 1583



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 235.5 159.4 199.7 378.5

Travel Time (s) 17.0 11.5 14.4 27.3

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 562 203 62 45 372 22 72 278 5 5 649 1266





Median Width(m) 7.2 7.2 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm NA Perm NA pm+ov






Page 5



Switch Phase


Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 13.0 13.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 24.0

Total Split (s) 27.0 27.0 18.0 18.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 27.0

Total Split (%) 36.0% 36.0% 24.0% 24.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 36.0%

Maximum Green (s) 22.0 22.0 13.0 13.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 22.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5


Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 12.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 12.0


Act Effct Green (s) 22.0 22.0 12.5 25.5 25.5 52.5


v/c Ratio 0.56 0.49 0.75 0.43 0.57 1.12

Control Delay 25.0 23.7 38.1 21.2 19.2 86.3

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 25.0 23.7 38.1 21.2 19.2 86.3

LOS C C D C B F

Approach Delay 24.6 38.1 21.2 63.5

Approach LOS C D C E

90th %ile Green (s) 22.0 22.0 13.0 13.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 22.0


70th %ile Green (s) 22.0 22.0 13.0 13.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 22.0


50th %ile Green (s) 22.0 22.0 13.0 13.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 22.0


30th %ile Green (s) 22.0 22.0 12.9 12.9 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 22.0


10th %ile Green (s) 22.0 22.0 10.6 10.6 27.4 27.4 27.4 27.4 22.0


Stops (vph) 420 180 364 242 504 840

Fuel Used(l) 31 14 26 17 110 270

CO Emissions (g/hr) 575 259 486 315 2045 5021




Queue Length 50th (m) 36.1 29.6 32.3 21.2 44.4 ~212.3

Queue Length 95th (m) 51.5 51.6 47.8 33.2 62.4 #292.0








Page 6




Reduced v/c Ratio 0.56 0.49 0.72 0.43 0.57 1.12


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 75



Natural Cycle: 90














Page 7


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00

Frt 0.975 0.986 0.850 0.850

Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.999 0.995

Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3451 0 1770 3490 0 0 3536 1583 0 3522 1583

Flt Permitted 0.200 0.237 0.939 0.864

Satd. Flow (perm) 373 3451 0 441 3490 0 0 3323 1583 0 3058 1583



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 107.6 215.4 125.9 190.9

Travel Time (s) 7.7 15.5 9.1 13.7

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 35 497 100 538 1410 148 11 449 210 50 464 15





Median Width(m) 3.6 3.6 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA pt+ov Perm NA pm+ov



Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 8 8 8 1 4 4 5

Switch Phase





Page 8


Minimum Split (s) 9.0 24.0 9.0 24.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 9.0

Total Split (s) 21.0 25.0 21.0 25.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 21.0

Total Split (%) 28.0% 33.3% 28.0% 33.3% 38.7% 38.7% 38.7% 38.7% 28.0%

Maximum Green (s) 17.0 20.0 17.0 20.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 17.0

Yellow Time (s) 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0

All-Red Time (s) 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.0


Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0





Walk Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 13.0 13.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0


Act Effct Green (s) 27.2 20.0 42.0 34.6 24.0 45.0 24.0 35.2

Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.27 0.56 0.46 0.32 0.60 0.32 0.47

v/c Ratio 0.14 0.63 0.98 0.96 0.43 0.21 0.53 0.02

Control Delay 10.3 26.5 51.8 38.2 21.7 4.4 22.0 5.2

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 10.3 26.5 51.8 38.2 21.7 4.4 22.0 5.2

LOS B C D D C A C A

Approach Delay 25.6 41.7 16.3 21.5

Approach LOS C D B C

90th %ile Green (s) 7.2 20.0 17.0 29.8 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 7.2


70th %ile Green (s) 6.5 20.0 17.0 30.5 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 6.5


50th %ile Green (s) 6.1 20.0 17.0 30.9 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 6.1


30th %ile Green (s) 0.0 20.0 17.0 41.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


10th %ile Green (s) 0.0 20.0 17.0 41.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


Stops (vph) 20 443 288 1061 319 46 429 5

Fuel Used(l) 2 37 36 95 19 4 26 0

CO Emissions (g/hr) 30 690 675 1770 358 74 487 8

NOx Emissions (g/hr) 6 133 130 342 69 14 94 2

VOC Emissions (g/hr) 7 159 156 408 83 17 112 2

Dilemma Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Queue Length 50th (m) 2.1 39.0 54.1 ~138.5 28.1 6.8 37.7 0.0

Queue Length 95th (m) 5.8 55.9 #118.5 #185.5 41.2 15.6 m39.8 m0.7


Turn Bay Length (m)

Base Capacity (vph) 505 943 548 1619 1063 986 978 982

Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reduced v/c Ratio 0.07 0.63 0.98 0.96 0.43 0.21 0.53 0.02




Page 9


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 75



Natural Cycle: 75















Page 10


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.998 0.850


Satd. Flow (prot) 3532 0 0 3507 1770 1583


Satd. Flow (perm) 3532 0 0 2460 1770 1583




Link Distance (m) 314.9 210.2 190.9

Travel Time (s) 22.7 15.1 13.7

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 633 7 333 1416 323 211









Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00







Detector 1 Size(m) 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel






Switch Phase





Page 11


Minimum Split (s) 22.0 9.0 22.0 23.0 23.0

Total Split (s) 32.0 20.0 52.0 23.0 23.0

Total Split (%) 42.7% 26.7% 69.3% 30.7% 30.7%

Maximum Green (s) 26.0 16.0 46.0 18.0 18.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0.0 2.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag Lag Lead




Walk Time (s) 11.0 11.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0


Act Effct Green (s) 46.0 46.0 18.0 18.0


v/c Ratio 0.30 1.16 0.76 0.39

Control Delay 7.3 98.0 33.9 6.6

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 7.3 98.0 33.9 6.6

LOS A F C A


Approach LOS A F C

90th %ile Green (s) 46.0 0.0 46.0 18.0 18.0


70th %ile Green (s) 46.0 0.0 46.0 18.0 18.0


50th %ile Green (s) 46.0 0.0 46.0 18.0 18.0


30th %ile Green (s) 46.0 0.0 46.0 18.0 18.0


10th %ile Green (s) 46.0 0.0 46.0 18.0 18.0


Stops (vph) 253 1279 170 42

Fuel Used(l) 41 226 17 5

CO Emissions (g/hr) 770 4206 315 101




Queue Length 50th (m) 20.9 ~165.3 28.0 0.1

Queue Length 95th (m) 29.3 #207.5 m#54.3 m12.7


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 1.16 0.76 0.39




Page 12


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 75



Natural Cycle: 120















Page 13


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 0 3536 0 0 1770 0 0 1863 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 0 3536 0 0 1410 0 0 1863 0


Satd. Flow (RTOR)

Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 126.5 178.2 100.7 201.4

Travel Time (s) 9.1 12.8 7.3 14.5

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 20 1778 0 114 0 0 0 0 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA




Switch Phase





Page 14


Minimum Split (s) 28.0 28.0 20.0 20.0 20.0

Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 31.0 31.0 31.0

Total Split (%) 52.3% 52.3% 47.7% 47.7% 47.7%

Maximum Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 16.0 16.0 8.0 8.0 8.0


Act Effct Green (s) 29.0 26.0

Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.40

v/c Ratio 1.14 0.20

Control Delay 92.1 22.1

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 92.1 22.1

LOS F C

Approach Delay 92.1 22.1

Approach LOS F C

90th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


70th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


50th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


30th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


10th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


Stops (vph) 1367 102

Fuel Used(l) 176 5

CO Emissions (g/hr) 3272 94

NOx Emissions (g/hr) 631 18

VOC Emissions (g/hr) 755 22

Dilemma Vehicles (#) 0 0

Queue Length 50th (m) ~144.1 15.5

Queue Length 95th (m) #185.1 31.6


Turn Bay Length (m)

Base Capacity (vph) 1577 564

Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0

Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0

Storage Cap Reductn 0 0

Reduced v/c Ratio 1.14 0.20




Page 15


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 60



Intersection Signal Delay: 87.9 Intersection LOS: F











Page 16


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.996 0.989 0.907


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3525 0 0 3497 0 0 1690 0 0 1788 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3525 0 0 3245 0 0 1690 0 0 1380 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 148.7 176.7 92.6 111.3

Travel Time (s) 10.7 12.7 6.7 8.0

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

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 482 14 42 1332 113 0 8 18 157 29 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


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 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel






Switch Phase





Page 17


Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Total Split (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Total Split (%) 65.3% 65.3% 65.3% 65.3% 34.7% 34.7% 34.7% 34.7%

Maximum Green (s) 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 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) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0


Act Effct Green (s) 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0


v/c Ratio 0.24 0.78 0.05 0.48

Control Delay 7.7 15.2 12.0 27.5

Queue Delay 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 7.7 15.4 12.0 27.5

LOS A B B C

Approach Delay 7.7 15.4 12.0 27.5

Approach LOS A B B C

90th %ile Green (s) 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


70th %ile Green (s) 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


50th %ile Green (s) 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


30th %ile Green (s) 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


10th %ile Green (s) 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


Stops (vph) 200 972 11 140






Queue Length 50th (m) 16.6 79.0 0.9 23.0

Queue Length 95th (m) 24.1 107.4 6.4 42.1


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.24 0.79 0.05 0.48




Page 18


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 75



Natural Cycle: 60










Page 19


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95

Frt 0.978 0.994


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 0 3441 0 0 3532 0 0 3518 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 0 3441 0 0 3327 0 0 3518 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 258.0 132.7 100.7 104.8

Travel Time (s) 18.6 9.6 7.3 7.5

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 217 1420 284 10 209 0 0 171 7





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15




Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 21.0 21.0 21.0

Total Split (s) 43.0 43.0 22.0 22.0 22.0

Total Split (%) 66.2% 66.2% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8%

Maximum Green (s) 38.0 38.0 17.0 17.0 17.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?

Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 12.0 7.0 7.0 7.0




v/c Ratio 0.94 0.25 0.19



Total Delay 53.9 16.0 20.1




Page 20


LOS D B C


Approach LOS D B C

Stops (vph) 1368 118 135

Fuel Used(l) 86 7 7





Queue Length 50th (m) 103.1 9.5 10.7

Queue Length 95th (m) #169.8 13.6 18.2


Turn Bay Length (m)







Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 60












Page 21


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00

Frt 0.985 0.920


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3469 0 0 0 0 0 3256 0 0 3507 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3469 0 0 0 0 0 3256 0 0 3008 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 257.3 142.2 104.6 100.7

Travel Time (s) 18.5 10.2 7.5 7.3

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 76 579 72 0 0 0 0 146 166 68 320 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel






Switch Phase





Page 22

Lane Group Ø8

Lane Configurations


Future Volume (vph)

Ideal Flow (vphpl)

Lane Util. Factor

Frt

Flt Protected

Satd. Flow (prot)

Flt Permitted

Satd. Flow (perm)

Right Turn on Red

Satd. Flow (RTOR)

Link Speed (k/h)

Link Distance (m)

Travel Time (s)

Peak Hour Factor

Adj. Flow (vph)




Lane Alignment

Median Width(m)

Link Offset(m)

Crosswalk Width(m)


Headway Factor

Turning Speed (k/h)

Number of Detectors

Detector Template




Detector 1 Size(m)

Detector 1 Type

Detector 1 Channel





Detector 2 Size(m)

Detector 2 Type

Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type

Protected Phases 8

Permitted Phases

Detector Phase

Switch Phase





Page 23


Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 12.0 12.0

Total Split (s) 28.0 28.0 24.0 13.0

Total Split (%) 43.1% 43.1% 36.9% 20.0%

Maximum Green (s) 23.0 23.0 19.0 8.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag Lead Lag









v/c Ratio 0.40 0.53 0.38



Total Delay 10.1 15.5 10.6

LOS B B B


Approach LOS B B B

90th %ile Green (s) 31.1 31.1 11.9 7.0


70th %ile Green (s) 33.2 33.2 9.8 7.0


50th %ile Green (s) 34.6 34.6 8.4 7.0


30th %ile Green (s) 36.0 36.0 7.0 7.0


10th %ile Green (s) 36.0 36.0 7.0 7.0


Stops (vph) 367 123 187









Turn Bay Length (m)









Page 24

Lane Group Ø8



Total Split (%) 57%


Yellow Time (s) 3.5



Total Lost Time (s)

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?


Recall Mode None

Walk Time (s) 7.0



Act Effct Green (s)

Actuated g/C Ratio

v/c Ratio

Control Delay

Queue Delay

Total Delay

LOS

Approach Delay

Approach LOS











Stops (vph)

Fuel Used(l)

CO Emissions (g/hr)







Turn Bay Length (m)

Base Capacity (vph)



Storage Cap Reductn

Reduced v/c Ratio




Page 25


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 50











Page 26


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.949 0.927 0.850 0.984

Flt Protected 0.993 0.992 0.997 0.996

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1755 0 0 1713 0 0 1857 1583 0 1826 0

Flt Permitted 0.966 0.962 0.975 0.966

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1708 0 0 1661 0 0 1816 1583 0 1771 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 69.6 113.2 104.8 145.1

Travel Time (s) 5.0 8.2 7.5 10.4

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 14 45 36 16 30 54 26 362 112 11 123 18





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel






Switch Phase





Page 27


Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0

Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0

Total Split (%) 55.4% 55.4% 55.4% 55.4% 44.6% 44.6% 44.6% 44.6% 44.6%

Maximum Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5


Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0


Act Effct Green (s) 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


v/c Ratio 0.11 0.12 0.58 0.17 0.23

Control Delay 6.9 5.6 21.4 6.5 14.1

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 6.9 5.6 22.1 6.5 14.1

LOS A A C A B



90th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


70th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


50th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


30th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


10th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


Stops (vph) 31 28 272 37 86

Fuel Used(l) 3 2 16 2 7

CO Emissions (g/hr) 63 37 289 44 133




Queue Length 50th (m) 3.8 3.0 37.7 0.1 11.8



Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.11 0.12 0.67 0.17 0.23




Page 28


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 50











Page 29


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95

Frt 0.977 0.980 0.963

Flt Protected 0.997 0.991 0.989

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3447 0 0 3507 0 0 3430 0 0 3408 0

Flt Permitted 0.815 0.643 0.770

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2818 0 0 2276 0 0 2671 0 0 3408 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 254.2 155.9 105.5 104.6

Travel Time (s) 18.3 11.2 7.6 7.5

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 35 470 92 232 1105 0 96 275 58 0 291 96





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15




Minimum Split (s) 28.0 28.0 9.0 28.0 26.0 26.0 25.0

Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 10.0 44.0 31.0 31.0 31.0

Total Split (%) 45.3% 45.3% 13.3% 58.7% 41.3% 41.3% 41.3%

Maximum Green (s) 29.0 29.0 6.0 39.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 0.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5





Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 15.0


Act Effct Green (s) 29.0 39.0 26.0 26.0


v/c Ratio 0.54 1.06 0.46 0.32

Control Delay 19.0 61.3 19.7 15.6

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 19.0 61.3 19.7 15.6




Page 30


LOS B E B B

Approach Delay 19.0 61.3 19.7 15.6

Approach LOS B E B B

Stops (vph) 386 780 277 206

Fuel Used(l) 30 94 16 12

CO Emissions (g/hr) 557 1742 301 231




Queue Length 50th (m) 33.3 ~84.4 24.0 17.8

Queue Length 95th (m) 48.8 #144.4 37.0 28.6


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.54 1.06 0.46 0.32


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 75



Natural Cycle: 75














Page 31


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.970 0.989

Flt Protected

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3433 0 0 0 0 0 1842 0 0 1863 0

Flt Permitted

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3433 0 0 0 0 0 1842 0 0 1863 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 131.1 176.4 111.3 100.7

Travel Time (s) 9.4 12.7 8.0 7.3

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 651 161 0 0 0 0 113 10 0 20 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type NA NA NA




Switch Phase





Page 32


Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0

Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 31.0 31.0 31.0

Total Split (%) 52.3% 52.3% 47.7% 47.7% 47.7%

Maximum Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0




v/c Ratio 0.52 0.17 0.03



Total Delay 13.4 12.5 10.1

LOS B B B


Approach LOS B B B

90th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


70th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


50th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


30th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


10th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


Stops (vph) 468 64 6

Fuel Used(l) 27 4 0








Turn Bay Length (m)









Page 33


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 40










Expansion Case (with CEP) - (PM) 8/12/2016 Synchro 9 Report

Page 1


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Storage Length (m) 57.0 56.0 0.0 23.0



Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00

Frt 0.850

Flt Protected 0.950

Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 3539 3539 1583 3433 1863

Flt Permitted 0.950

Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 3539 3539 1583 3433 1863




Link Distance (m) 1086.1 433.3 140.8

Travel Time (s) 78.2 31.2 10.1

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1797 1451 155 101 0









Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00







Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 2.0 2.0


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 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




Detector 2 Channel








Page 2



Switch Phase


Minimum Split (s) 13.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 28.0 28.0

Total Split (s) 20.0 52.0 32.0 32.0 28.0 28.0

Total Split (%) 25.0% 65.0% 40.0% 40.0% 35.0% 35.0%

Maximum Green (s) 15.0 47.0 27.0 27.0 23.0 23.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5


Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0





Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 16.0 16.0


Act Effct Green (s) 65.4 65.4 65.4 8.0


v/c Ratio 0.62 0.50 0.12 0.30


Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 9.3 3.9 1.1 35.4

LOS A A A D


Approach LOS A A D

90th %ile Green (s) 0.0 60.3 60.3 60.3 9.7 9.7


70th %ile Green (s) 0.0 61.5 61.5 61.5 8.5 8.5


50th %ile Green (s) 0.0 62.3 62.3 62.3 7.7 7.7


30th %ile Green (s) 0.0 63.0 63.0 63.0 7.0 7.0


10th %ile Green (s) 0.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 0.0 0.0


Stops (vph) 807 394 12 83

Fuel Used(l) 276 68 6 6

CO Emissions (g/hr) 5140 1260 117 105




Queue Length 50th (m) 93.2 33.6 1.2 7.8

Queue Length 95th (m) m109.9 51.5 5.2 14.8








Page 3




Reduced v/c Ratio 0.62 0.50 0.12 0.10


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 80



Natural Cycle: 80











Page 4


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Storage Length (m) 0.0 60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.0


Taper Length (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5

Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00

Frt 0.987 0.985 0.990 0.850

Flt Protected 0.950 0.994 0.996

Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 1839 0 0 3465 0 0 3490 0 0 3539 1583

Flt Permitted 0.950 0.994 0.752

Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 1839 0 0 3465 0 0 2635 0 0 3539 1583



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 235.5 159.4 199.7 378.5

Travel Time (s) 17.0 11.5 14.4 27.3

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 1303 516 51 30 205 27 46 435 36 0 649 853





Median Width(m) 7.2 7.2 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm NA NA pm+ov






Page 5



Switch Phase


Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 13.0 13.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 24.0

Total Split (s) 39.0 39.0 15.0 15.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 39.0

Total Split (%) 48.8% 48.8% 18.8% 18.8% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 48.8%

Maximum Green (s) 34.0 34.0 10.0 10.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 34.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5


Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 12.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 12.0


Act Effct Green (s) 34.0 34.0 9.5 21.5 21.5 60.5


v/c Ratio 0.89 0.72 0.62 0.73 0.68 0.70

Control Delay 31.0 25.2 38.5 33.2 27.8 10.4

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 31.0 25.2 38.5 33.2 27.8 10.4

LOS C C D C C B

Approach Delay 29.2 38.5 33.2 17.9

Approach LOS C D C B

90th %ile Green (s) 34.0 34.0 10.0 10.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 34.0


70th %ile Green (s) 34.0 34.0 10.0 10.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 34.0


50th %ile Green (s) 34.0 34.0 10.0 10.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 34.0


30th %ile Green (s) 34.0 34.0 9.7 9.7 21.3 21.3 21.3 21.3 34.0


10th %ile Green (s) 34.0 34.0 8.0 8.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 34.0

10th %ile Term Code Max Max Min Min Coord Coord Coord Coord Max

Stops (vph) 1025 418 211 412 525 342

Fuel Used(l) 78 31 16 30 114 131

CO Emissions (g/hr) 1458 580 289 566 2112 2437




Queue Length 50th (m) 96.3 71.8 20.1 39.1 50.1 46.0

Queue Length 95th (m) #139.6 110.7 32.3 57.2 69.1 110.4








Page 6




Reduced v/c Ratio 0.89 0.72 0.59 0.73 0.68 0.70


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 80



Natural Cycle: 65












Page 7


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00

Frt 0.986 0.986 0.850 0.850

Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.994

Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3490 0 1770 3490 0 0 3539 1583 0 3518 1583

Flt Permitted 0.361 0.124 0.762

Satd. Flow (perm) 672 3490 0 231 3490 0 0 3539 1583 0 2697 1583



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 107.6 215.4 125.9 190.9

Travel Time (s) 7.7 15.5 9.1 13.7

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 10 1232 122 304 696 70 0 602 362 58 457 2





Median Width(m) 3.6 3.6 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6 2.0


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Perm NA pm+ov



Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 8 8 8 1 4 4 5

Switch Phase





Page 8


Minimum Split (s) 9.0 24.0 9.0 24.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 9.0

Total Split (s) 26.0 30.0 21.0 25.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 26.0

Total Split (%) 32.5% 37.5% 26.3% 31.3% 36.3% 36.3% 36.3% 36.3% 32.5%

Maximum Green (s) 22.0 25.0 17.0 20.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 22.0

Yellow Time (s) 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0

All-Red Time (s) 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.0


Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0





Walk Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 13.0 13.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0


Act Effct Green (s) 35.0 28.3 47.0 44.0 24.0 41.7 24.0 34.7

Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.35 0.59 0.55 0.30 0.52 0.30 0.43

v/c Ratio 0.03 1.09 0.76 0.40 0.57 0.42 0.64 0.00

Control Delay 8.4 81.4 28.0 11.6 26.1 10.0 23.2 0.0

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 8.4 81.4 28.0 11.6 26.1 10.0 23.2 0.0

LOS A F C B C A C A

Approach Delay 80.9 16.3 20.1 23.1

Approach LOS F B C C

90th %ile Green (s) 6.2 25.0 17.0 35.8 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 6.2


70th %ile Green (s) 0.0 25.1 16.9 46.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


50th %ile Green (s) 0.0 27.6 14.4 46.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


30th %ile Green (s) 0.0 30.3 11.7 46.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


10th %ile Green (s) 0.0 33.4 8.6 46.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0


Stops (vph) 6 976 172 383 449 145 386 0

Fuel Used(l) 0 136 16 29 28 10 26 0

CO Emissions (g/hr) 8 2534 290 545 518 182 478 1

NOx Emissions (g/hr) 2 489 56 105 100 35 92 0

VOC Emissions (g/hr) 2 584 67 126 119 42 110 0

Dilemma Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Queue Length 50th (m) 0.6 ~132.7 28.4 31.5 42.4 24.1 28.1 0.0

Queue Length 95th (m) 2.5 #185.2 54.9 58.5 59.0 39.7 m39.2 m0.0


Turn Bay Length (m)

Base Capacity (vph) 696 1242 462 1923 1061 926 809 1018

Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reduced v/c Ratio 0.01 1.09 0.66 0.40 0.57 0.39 0.64 0.00




Page 9


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 80



Natural Cycle: 80















Page 10


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.991 0.850


Satd. Flow (prot) 3507 0 1770 1863 1770 1583


Satd. Flow (perm) 3507 0 186 1863 1770 1583




Link Distance (m) 314.9 210.2 190.9

Travel Time (s) 22.7 15.1 13.7

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 1451 95 295 832 166 413









Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00







Detector 1 Size(m) 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel






Switch Phase





Page 11


Minimum Split (s) 22.0 9.0 22.0 23.0 23.0

Total Split (s) 42.0 15.0 57.0 23.0 23.0

Total Split (%) 52.5% 18.8% 71.3% 28.8% 28.8%

Maximum Green (s) 36.0 11.0 51.0 18.0 18.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 2.5 0.0 2.5 1.5 1.5


Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 4.0 6.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag Lag Lead




Walk Time (s) 11.0 11.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0


Act Effct Green (s) 36.2 53.0 51.0 18.0 18.0


v/c Ratio 0.97 0.88 0.70 0.42 0.74

Control Delay 39.1 45.1 13.6 28.3 29.1

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 39.1 45.1 13.6 28.3 29.1

LOS D D B C C


Approach LOS D C C

90th %ile Green (s) 36.0 11.0 51.0 18.0 18.0


70th %ile Green (s) 36.0 11.0 51.0 18.0 18.0


50th %ile Green (s) 36.0 11.0 51.0 18.0 18.0


30th %ile Green (s) 36.0 11.0 51.0 18.0 18.0


10th %ile Green (s) 37.2 9.8 51.0 18.0 18.0

10th %ile Term Code Coord Gap Coord MaxR MaxR

Stops (vph) 1202 150 481 147 283

Fuel Used(l) 148 26 55 9 22

CO Emissions (g/hr) 2753 476 1023 175 405




Queue Length 50th (m) 121.9 28.8 77.0 27.7 52.9

Queue Length 95th (m) #176.4 #73.6 119.3 47.5 #79.6


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.97 0.87 0.70 0.42 0.74




Page 12


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 80



Natural Cycle: 80












Page 13


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt

Flt Protected 0.950

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 0 3539 0 0 1770 0 0 1863 0

Flt Permitted 0.757

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 0 3539 0 0 1410 0 0 1863 0


Satd. Flow (RTOR)

Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 126.5 178.2 100.7 201.4

Travel Time (s) 9.1 12.8 7.3 14.5

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 3 998 0 27 0 0 0 0 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA




Switch Phase





Page 14


Minimum Split (s) 28.0 28.0 20.0 20.0 20.0

Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 31.0 31.0 31.0

Total Split (%) 52.3% 52.3% 47.7% 47.7% 47.7%

Maximum Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 16.0 16.0 8.0 8.0 8.0


Act Effct Green (s) 29.0 26.0

Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.40

v/c Ratio 0.63 0.05

Control Delay 16.2 16.0

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 16.2 16.0

LOS B B

Approach Delay 16.2 16.0

Approach LOS B B

90th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


70th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


50th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


30th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


10th %ile Green (s) 29.0 29.0 26.0 26.0 26.0


Stops (vph) 671 25

Fuel Used(l) 42 1

CO Emissions (g/hr) 783 21

NOx Emissions (g/hr) 151 4

VOC Emissions (g/hr) 181 5

Dilemma Vehicles (#) 0 0

Queue Length 50th (m) 49.0 2.9

Queue Length 95th (m) 67.8 10.4


Turn Bay Length (m)

Base Capacity (vph) 1578 564

Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0

Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0

Storage Cap Reductn 0 0

Reduced v/c Ratio 0.63 0.05




Page 15


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 50










Page 16


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.995 0.895


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3539 0 0 3514 0 0 1667 0 0 1781 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3539 0 0 3120 0 0 1667 0 0 1326 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 148.7 175.8 92.6 111.3

Travel Time (s) 10.7 12.7 6.7 8.0

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

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1222 2 25 672 25 0 9 32 175 14 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


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 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel






Switch Phase





Page 17


Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Total Split (s) 54.0 54.0 54.0 54.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Total Split (%) 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 32.5%

Maximum Green (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 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) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0


Act Effct Green (s) 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0


v/c Ratio 0.56 0.38 0.09 0.54

Control Delay 10.5 8.4 11.1 32.2

Queue Delay 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 11.0 8.4 11.1 32.2

LOS B A B C

Approach Delay 11.0 8.4 11.1 32.2

Approach LOS B A B C

90th %ile Green (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


70th %ile Green (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


50th %ile Green (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


30th %ile Green (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


10th %ile Green (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0


Stops (vph) 619 305 14 148






Queue Length 50th (m) 54.7 27.1 1.1 26.0

Queue Length 95th (m) 71.7 37.5 8.5 47.1


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.74 0.38 0.09 0.54




Page 18


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 80



Natural Cycle: 55










Page 19


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95

Frt 0.985 0.993


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 0 3455 0 0 3483 0 0 3514 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 0 3455 0 0 2757 0 0 3514 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 258.0 132.7 100.7 104.8

Travel Time (s) 18.6 9.6 7.3 7.5

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 192 743 103 58 121 0 0 321 16





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15




Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 21.0 21.0 21.0

Total Split (s) 39.0 39.0 26.0 26.0 26.0

Total Split (%) 60.0% 60.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0%

Maximum Green (s) 34.0 34.0 21.0 21.0 21.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?

Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 12.0 12.0 7.0 7.0 7.0




v/c Ratio 0.57 0.20 0.30



Total Delay 12.0 24.3 17.1




Page 20


LOS B C B


Approach LOS B C B

Stops (vph) 588 144 261






Queue Length 50th (m) 42.0 11.3 20.8

Queue Length 95th (m) 58.6 m17.5 31.4


Turn Bay Length (m)







Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 45











Page 21


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00

Frt 0.987 0.888


Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3483 0 0 0 0 0 3143 0 0 3500 0


Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3483 0 0 0 0 0 3143 0 0 2177 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 257.3 142.2 104.6 100.7

Travel Time (s) 18.5 10.2 7.5 7.3

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 76 1255 121 0 0 0 0 102 301 116 400 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel






Switch Phase





Page 22

Lane Group Ø8

Lane Configurations


Future Volume (vph)

Ideal Flow (vphpl)

Lane Util. Factor

Frt

Flt Protected

Satd. Flow (prot)

Flt Permitted

Satd. Flow (perm)

Right Turn on Red

Satd. Flow (RTOR)

Link Speed (k/h)

Link Distance (m)

Travel Time (s)

Peak Hour Factor

Adj. Flow (vph)




Lane Alignment

Median Width(m)

Link Offset(m)

Crosswalk Width(m)


Headway Factor

Turning Speed (k/h)

Number of Detectors

Detector Template




Detector 1 Size(m)

Detector 1 Type

Detector 1 Channel





Detector 2 Size(m)

Detector 2 Type

Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type

Protected Phases 8

Permitted Phases

Detector Phase

Switch Phase





Page 23


Minimum Split (s) 24.0 24.0 12.0 12.0

Total Split (s) 32.0 32.0 20.0 13.0

Total Split (%) 49.2% 49.2% 30.8% 20.0%

Maximum Green (s) 27.0 27.0 15.0 8.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag Lag Lead









v/c Ratio 0.85 0.62 0.54



Total Delay 22.4 18.6 11.5

LOS C B B


Approach LOS C B B

90th %ile Green (s) 27.7 27.7 14.3 8.0


70th %ile Green (s) 30.1 30.1 11.9 8.0


50th %ile Green (s) 31.7 31.7 10.3 8.0


30th %ile Green (s) 33.4 33.4 8.6 8.0


10th %ile Green (s) 35.0 35.0 7.0 8.0

10th %ile Term Code Coord Coord Min Max

Stops (vph) 1020 191 227






Queue Length 50th (m) 78.5 14.4 14.4

Queue Length 95th (m) #140.0 25.2 19.5


Turn Bay Length (m)









Page 24

Lane Group Ø8



Total Split (%) 51%


Yellow Time (s) 3.5



Total Lost Time (s)

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?


Recall Mode None

Walk Time (s) 7.0



Act Effct Green (s)

Actuated g/C Ratio

v/c Ratio

Control Delay

Queue Delay

Total Delay

LOS

Approach Delay

Approach LOS











Stops (vph)

Fuel Used(l)

CO Emissions (g/hr)







Turn Bay Length (m)

Base Capacity (vph)



Storage Cap Reductn

Reduced v/c Ratio




Page 25


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 60












Page 26


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.918 0.979 0.850 0.984

Flt Protected 0.999 0.981 0.997 0.993

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1708 0 0 1789 0 0 1857 1583 0 1820 0

Flt Permitted 0.996 0.895 0.973 0.941

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1703 0 0 1632 0 0 1812 1583 0 1725 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 69.6 113.2 104.8 145.1

Travel Time (s) 5.0 8.2 7.5 10.4

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 2 28 46 38 45 15 10 145 72 47 252 39





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Detector 2 Size(m) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6


Detector 2 Channel






Switch Phase





Page 27


Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0

Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0

Total Split (%) 55.4% 55.4% 55.4% 55.4% 44.6% 44.6% 44.6% 44.6% 44.6%

Maximum Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5


Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0


Act Effct Green (s) 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


v/c Ratio 0.09 0.12 0.23 0.11 0.53

Control Delay 5.2 8.7 17.2 8.7 19.1

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 5.2 8.7 17.2 8.7 19.1

LOS A A B A B



90th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


70th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


50th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


30th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


10th %ile Green (s) 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0


Stops (vph) 19 40 95 28 228

Fuel Used(l) 3 2 5 2 18

CO Emissions (g/hr) 47 46 101 32 334




Queue Length 50th (m) 1.9 5.5 13.7 0.0 31.5



Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.09 0.12 0.23 0.11 0.53




Page 28


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 50











Page 29


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95

Frt 0.994 0.980 0.991

Flt Protected 0.998 0.990 0.992

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3511 0 0 3504 0 0 3441 0 0 3507 0

Flt Permitted 0.897 0.513 0.750

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3156 0 0 1816 0 0 2601 0 0 3507 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 254.2 155.9 105.5 104.6

Travel Time (s) 18.3 11.2 7.6 7.5

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 49 1159 49 133 534 0 79 353 66 0 498 32





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15




Minimum Split (s) 28.0 28.0 9.0 28.0 26.0 26.0 25.0

Total Split (s) 38.0 38.0 10.0 48.0 32.0 32.0 32.0

Total Split (%) 47.5% 47.5% 12.5% 60.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0%

Maximum Green (s) 33.0 33.0 6.0 43.0 27.0 27.0 27.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 0.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5





Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 15.0


Act Effct Green (s) 33.0 43.0 27.0 27.0


v/c Ratio 0.96 0.62 0.56 0.45

Control Delay 41.8 14.2 23.5 21.8

Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Delay 41.8 14.2 23.5 21.8




Page 30


LOS D B C C

Approach Delay 41.8 14.2 23.5 21.8

Approach LOS D B C C

Stops (vph) 986 328 345 359

Fuel Used(l) 87 23 21 21

CO Emissions (g/hr) 1622 431 383 392




Queue Length 50th (m) 99.7 29.8 32.1 33.6

Queue Length 95th (m) #148.2 41.1 47.6 47.8


Turn Bay Length (m)





Reduced v/c Ratio 0.96 0.62 0.56 0.45


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 80



Natural Cycle: 70












Page 31


Lane Configurations



Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 0.984 0.938

Flt Protected

Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3483 0 0 0 0 0 1747 0 0 1863 0

Flt Permitted

Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3483 0 0 0 0 0 1747 0 0 1863 0



Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50

Link Distance (m) 131.1 176.4 111.3 100.7

Travel Time (s) 9.4 12.7 8.0 7.3

Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1502 184 0 0 0 0 27 23 0 3 0





Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



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 (k/h) 25 15 25 15 25 15 25 15






Detector 1 Size(m) 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 0.6


Detector 1 Channel


Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0




Detector 2 Channel


Turn Type NA NA NA




Switch Phase





Page 32


Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0

Total Split (s) 40.0 40.0 25.0 25.0 25.0

Total Split (%) 61.5% 61.5% 38.5% 38.5% 38.5%

Maximum Green (s) 35.0 35.0 20.0 20.0 20.0

Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5



Lead/Lag

Lead-Lag Optimize?



Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Flash Dont Walk (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0




v/c Ratio 0.89 0.09 0.01



Total Delay 31.4 11.0 7.0

LOS C B A


Approach LOS C B A

90th %ile Green (s) 35.0 35.0 20.0 20.0 20.0


70th %ile Green (s) 35.0 35.0 20.0 20.0 20.0


50th %ile Green (s) 35.0 35.0 20.0 20.0 20.0


30th %ile Green (s) 35.0 35.0 20.0 20.0 20.0


10th %ile Green (s) 35.0 35.0 20.0 20.0 20.0


Stops (vph) 1216 22 1

Fuel Used(l) 72 1 0






Queue Length 95th (m) #145.6 9.2 m0.1


Turn Bay Length (m)









Page 33


Area Type: Other

Cycle Length: 65



Natural Cycle: 60










C E P T IMPACT STUDY - Port of Vancouver · 11/12/2016 · T CENTERM EXPANSION PROJECT RAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Page ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (VFPA) is

Documents