0311 transportes dia 01d reporte semestral ejemplo usa
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
1/92
Countrywide
Traffic Impact Analysis
October 2006
Prepared for:
Countrywide Home Loans
For Submittal to:City of Chandler
M-M Project Number:8601.001
Prepared by:Paul E. Basha, P.E., P.T.O.E.
Andres Sotil, E.I.T., Ph.D.
80 E Rio Salado Parkway, Suite 201
Tempe, Arizona 85281Phone (480) 517-5800Fax (480) 517-5801
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
2/92
Countrywide Traffic Impact Analysis
Page i
Table of Con tents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 1Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 12Scope of Study ........................................................................................................................ 12Proposed Development ........................................................................................................... 12Surrounding Land Use ............................................................................................................ 12Study Area .............................................................................................................................. 12Surrounding Transportation System ........................................................................................ 16Existing Traffic Counts ............................................................................................................ 16Horizon Year ........................................................................................................................... 17Future Ambient Traffic ............................................................................................................. 26Signal Warrant and Multiway Stop AnalysisExisting without Site ......................................... 27Signal Warrant AnalysisAmbient without Site ...................................................................... 37Level-of-Service Analysis without Site ..................................................................................... 38Proposed SiteTrip Generation ............................................................................................. 51Proposed SiteTrip Distribution ............................................................................................. 53Signal Warrant Analysis with Site ............................................................................................ 74Level-of-Service Analysis with Site .......................................................................................... 74Turn Lane Analysis with Site ................................................................................................... 81Summary of Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 86
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
3/92
Countrywide Traffic Impact Analysis
Page ii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Ambient 2020 Recommended Lane Configurations - Adjacent Intersections .............. 3Figure 2: Ambient 2020 Recommended Lane Configurations - Western Intersections .............. 4Figure 3: Ambient 2020 Recommended Lane Configurations - Southern Intersections ............. 5Figure 4: Recommended Lane Configurations for Adjacent Intersections - 2020 with Site ........ 6Figure 5: Recommended Lane Configurations for Western Intersections - 2020 with Site ......... 7Figure 6: Recommended Lane Configurations for Southern Intersections - 2020 with Site........ 8Figure 7: Recommended Turn Lane Lengths for Adjacent Intersections - 2020 with Site .......... 9Figure 8: Recommended Turn Lane Lengths for Western Intersections - 2020 with Site ......... 10Figure 9: Recommended Turn Lane Lengths for Southern Intersections - 2020 with Site ....... 11Figure 10: Overall Vicinity Map ............................................................................................... 13Figure 11: Greater Vicinity MapAdjacent Intersections ........................................................ 14Figure 12: Greater Vicinity MapWestern Intersections ........................................................ 15Figure 13: Greater Vicinity MapSouthern Intersections ........................................................ 16Figure 14: Existing Traffic Adjacent IntersectionsDirectional Day ......................................... 18Figure 15: Existing Traffic Western IntersectionsDirectional Day .......................................... 19Figure 16: Existing Traffic Southern IntersectionsDirectional Day ........................................ 20Figure 17: Existing Turning Movements Adjacent IntersectionsAM Peak Hour .................... 21Figure 18: Existing Turning Movements Western IntersectionsAM Peak Hour .................... 22Figure 19: Existing Turning Movements Southern IntersectionsAM Peak Hour ................... 23Figure 20: Existing Turning Movements Adjacent IntersectionsPM Peak Hour .................... 24Figure 21: Existing Turning Movements Western IntersectionsPM Peak Hour .................... 25Figure 22: Existing Turning Movements Southern IntersectionsPM Peak Hour ................... 26Figure 23: Adjacent Streets Ambient 2020 TrafficDirectional Day ....................................... 28Figure 24: Western Streets Ambient 2020 TrafficDirectional Day ........................................ 29Figure 25: Southern Streets Ambient 2020 TrafficDirectional Day ....................................... 30Figure 26: Adjacent Intersections Ambient 2020 Traffic VolumesAM Peak Hour ................. 31Figure 27: Western Intersections Ambient 2020 Traffic VolumesAM Peak Hour.................. 32Figure 28: Southern Intersections Ambient 2020 Traffic VolumesAM Peak Hour ................ 33Figure 29: Adjacent Intersections Ambient 2020 Traffic VolumesPM Peak Hour ................ 34Figure 30: Western Intersections Ambient 2020 Traffic VolumesPM Peak Hour.................. 35Figure 31: Southern Intersections Ambient 2020 Traffic VolumesPM Peak Hour ................ 36Figure 32: Existing 2006 Level-of-Service Adjacent Intersections AM Peak Hour ................... 40Figure 33: Existing 2006 Level-of-Service Western Intersections AM Peak Hour .................... 41Figure 34: Existing 2006 Level-of-Service Southern Intersections AM Peak Hour ................... 42Figure 35: Existing 2006 Level-of-Service Adjacent Intersections PM Peak Hour ................... 43Figure 36: Existing 2006 Level-of-Service Western Intersections PM Peak Hour .................... 44Figure 37: Existing 2006 Level-of-Service Southern Intersections PM Peak Hour ................... 45Figure 38: Ambient 2020 Level-of-Service Adjacent Intersections AM Peak Hour ................... 46 Figure 39: Ambient 2020 Level-of-Service Western Intersections AM Peak Hour ................... 47Figure 40: Ambient 2020 Level-of-Service Southern Intersections AM Peak Hour .................. 48Figure 41: Ambient 2020 Level-of-Service Adjacent Intersections PM Peak Hour ................... 49 Figure 42: Ambient 2020 Level-of-Service Western Intersections PM Peak Hour ................... 50Figure 43: Ambient 2020 Level-of-Service Southern Intersections PM Peak Hour .................. 51Figure 44: Site Traffic Trip Distribution AM and PM ................................................................. 54Figure 45: Site Traffic Trip Distribution - Day ........................................................................... 55Figure 46: Adjacent Streets Site TrafficDirectional Day ....................................................... 56Figure 47: Western Streets Site TrafficDirectional Day ........................................................ 57Figure 48: Southern Streets Site TrafficDirectional Day....................................................... 58
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
4/92
Countrywide Traffic Impact Analysis
Page iii
Figure 49: Adjacent Intersections Site Traffic VolumesAM Peak Hour ................................. 59Figure 50: Western Intersections Site Traffic VolumesAM Peak Hour ................................. 60Figure 51: Southern Intersections Site Traffic VolumesAM Peak Hour ................................ 61Figure 52: Adjacent Intersections Site Traffic VolumesPM Peak Hour ................................. 62Figure 53: Western Intersections Site Traffic VolumesPM Peak Hour ................................. 63Figure 54: Southern Intersections Site Traffic VolumesPM Peak Hour ................................ 64Figure 55: Adjacent Streets 2020 with Site TrafficDirectional Day ....................................... 65Figure 56: Western Streets 2020 with Site TrafficDirectional Day ........................................ 66Figure 57: Southern Streets 2020 with Site TrafficDirectional Day ...................................... 67Figure 58: Adjacent Intersections 2020 with Site Traffic VolumesAM Peak Hour................. 68Figure 59: Western Intersections 2020 with Site Traffic VolumesAM Peak Hour ................. 69Figure 60: Southern Intersections 2020 with Site Traffic VolumesAM Peak Hour ................ 70Figure 61: Adjacent Intersections 2020 with Site Traffic VolumesPM Peak Hour................. 71Figure 62: Western Intersections 2020 with Site Traffic VolumesPM Peak Hour ................. 72Figure 63: Southern Intersections 2020 with Site Traffic VolumesPM Peak Hour ................ 73Figure 64: Adjacent Intersections 2020 with Site Levels-of-ServiceAM Peak Hour .............. 75Figure 65: Western Intersections 2020 with Site Levels-of-ServiceAM Peak Hour .............. 76Figure 66: Southern Intersections 2020 with Site Levels-of-ServiceAM Peak Hour ............. 77Figure 67: Adjacent Intersections 2020 with Site Levels-of-ServicePM Peak Hour .............. 78Figure 68: Western Intersections 2020 with Site Levels-of-ServicePM Peak Hour .............. 79Figure 69: Southern Intersections 2020 with Site Levels-of-ServicePM Peak Hour ............. 80
List o f Tables
Table 1: Peak Sixty-Minute Periods ........................................................................................ 17Table 2: Signal Warrant Names .............................................................................................. 27Table 3: Existing without Site Signal Warrant Analyses Summary ........................................... 27Table 4: Ambient without Site Signal Warrant Summary ......................................................... 37Table 5: Signal Warrant Satisfaction Threshold at Benson LaneFrye Road Intersection ..... 38Table 6: Level-of-Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections ................................................. 38Table 7: Employee Arrival and Departure Times ..................................................................... 52Table 8: Weekday Traffic Volume Calculation Details ............................................................. 53Table 9: 2010 with Site Signal Warrant Summary ................................................................... 74Table 10: Street Turn Lane Lengths ........................................................................................ 82Table 11: Street Turn Lane Lengths (continued) ..................................................................... 83Table 12: Street Turn Lane Lengths (continued) ..................................................................... 84Table 13: Street Turn Lane Lengths (continued) ..................................................................... 85Table 14: Street Turn Lane Lengths (continued) ..................................................................... 86
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
5/92
Countrywide Traffic Impact Analysis
Page iv
Lis t of A ppendices
Existing Traffic Volumes .......................................................................................................... ABenson Lane and Frye Road .................................................................................. A.1Ellis Street and Frye Road ...................................................................................... A.2Dobson Road and Frye Road ................................................................................. A.3Dobson Road and Chandler Boulevard .................................................................. A.4Ellis Street and Chandler Boulevard ....................................................................... A.5NB Price Road and Chandler Boulevard ................................................................ A.6SB Price Road and Chandler Boulevard ................................................................. A.7Chandler Village Drive North and Chandler Boulevard ........................................... A.8Chandler Village Drive North and Frye Road .......................................................... A.9Galleria Way and Frye Road ................................................................................ A.10SB Price Road and Frye Road ............................................................................. A.11NB Price Road and Frye Road ............................................................................. A.12Price Road and State Route 202 WB Ramp ......................................................... A.13Price Road and State Route 202 EB Ramp .......................................................... A.14Dobson Road and State Route 202 EB Ramp ...................................................... A.15Dobson Road and State Route 202 WB Ramp ..................................................... A.16Dobson Road and Pecos Road ............................................................................ A.17Turning Movement Counts ................................................................................... A.18
Pertinent Excerpts from the Chandler Transportation StudyFinal Report ............................. BTraffic Signal Warrant Analyses without Site ........................................................................... C
Existing without Site ............................................................................................. C.12020 Ambient without Site ................................................................................... C.2
Level-of-Service without Site ................................................................................................... DExisting without Site .............................................................................................. D.12020 Ambient without Site ..................................................................................... D.2LOS Adjustments .................................................................................................. D.3
Trip Generation ....................................................................................................................... EPertinent Excerpts of ITE Trip Generation.............................................................. E.1Trip Generation Results.......................................................................................... E.2
2020 with Site Traffic Signal Warrant Analyses ....................................................................... F2020 with Site Level-of-Service ............................................................................................... G
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
6/92
Madison Crossing
Execut ive Summ ary
Introduct ion
Countrywide Home Loans is planning the development of their corporate office buildings in the
City of Chandler, north of Frye Road and east of the Price Freeway (State Route 101). Theproperty size is approximately 24.4 gross acres, consisting of three buildings, eachapproximately 183,000 square feet, to serve approximately 3,429 employees. A completeTraffic Impact Analysis (TIA), including anticipated impacts and mitigation measures for theintersections in the immediate vicinity, is being prepared by Morrison-Maierle.
Resul ts
The proposed development is anticipated to generate the following weekday traffic volumes.
ENTERING EXITING TOTAL
DAY 3,648 3,648 7,296
AM PEAK HOUR 626 77 703
PM PEAK HOUR 98 552 650
Recommendat ions without the Coun trywide Development
Only the Benson Lane and Frye Road intersection (#2) is not currently signalized of theseventeen (17) existing intersections evaluated in this study. The traffic warrant analysis
indicates that the existing traffic conditions without the proposed site at this intersection doesnot satisfy warrants for a traffic signal.
However, by the ultimate year 2020, traffic conditions without the proposed development willsatisfy the warrants for a traffic signal. The required lane configurations to provide acceptablelevels-of-service at the adjacent, western and southern intersections without the proposed sitefor the ultimate year 2020 are provided inFigure 1throughFigure 3,respectively.
Only intersection #2 has the PM peak hour level-of-service at an F condition, if the stop signis not substituted by a traffic signal. Drivers on minor street approaches like northboundBenson Lane are typically delayed and no mitigation is recommended at this time. The trafficvolume at this intersection, as well as vehicle delay, should be regularly monitored to
appropriately determine if and when a traffic signal would be necessary.
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
7/92
Madison Crossing
Recommendat ions with the Coun trywide Development
The main site access on Frye Road intersection #2 should be monitored to determine ifsignalization is required. The estimated traffic volumes indicate that traffic signal warrants
would be satisfied. The level-of-service analyses also indicate that the intersection wouldoperate with unacceptable delay without a signal and with acceptable delay with a signal.However, the access will serve primarily visitors to the propertynot employees. Countrywideexperiences relatively few visitors to its office. Most importantly, a traffic signal at thisintersection would be disruptive for through traffic on Frye Road.
Traffic signal warrant analysis was performed on the four (4) additional site accesses. It wasdetermined that none of the intersections had traffic conditions that would satisfy the warrantsfor traffic signals in the ultimate year 2020 with the proposed development.
The required lane configurations to provide acceptable levels-of-service at the adjacent,western and southern intersections are provided for the ultimate year 2020 with the proposed
Countrywide development inFigure 4throughFigure 6.
The recommended lengths of the full-width turn-lanes are provided onFigure 7throughFigure9on the turn lane length diagrams. Parking spaces and parking aisles within the Countrywidedevelopment should not be located within the recommended turn-lane lengths.
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
8/92
Madison Crossing
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
4
SITE
Frye Road2
STOP
STOP
5
67
19
N.T.S.
N
Figure 1: Ambient 2020 Recommended Lane Configurations - Adjacent Intersections
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
9/92
Madison Crossing
Frye Road
Pric
eFreeway
(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVil
lageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDriveSouth
11
1413
9 810
12
N.T.S.
N
Figure 2: Ambient 2020 Recommended Lane Configurations - Western Intersections
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
10/92
Madison Crossing
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 3: Ambient 2020 Recommended Lane Configurations - Southern Intersections
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
11/92
Madison Crossing
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
4
SITE
Frye Road2 5
67
19
20
1
21
3
STOP
STOP
STOP
ST
OP
N.T.S.
N
Figure 4: Recommended Lane Configurations for Adjacent Intersections - 2020 with Site
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
12/92
Madison Crossing
Frye Road
Price
Freeway
(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDr
iveSouth
11
1413
9 810
12
N.T.S.
N
Figure 5: Recommended Lane Configurations for Western Intersections - 2020 with Site
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
13/92
Madison Crossing
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 6: Recommended Lane Configurations for Southern Intersections - 2020 withSite
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
14/92
Madison Crossing
200'
75'
75'
175'
100'
50'
325'
200'
75'
225'
325'
175' 325'
200'
350'
25
0'
350'
35
0'
175' 250'
125'
225'
225'
35
0'
375'
100' 150'
250'
175'
25
0'
200'
325'
175'
375' 1325'
475'
75'
15
0'
725'
300'
100'
50'
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoa
d
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
4
SITE
Frye Road2 5
67
19
20
1
21
3
N.T.S.
N
Figure 7: Recommended Turn Lane Lengths for Adjacent Intersections - 2020 with Site
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
15/92
Madison Crossing
425'
525'
325'
375'
55
0'
95
0'
325'
450'
50'
300'
50'
300'
45
0'
750'
75'
15
0' 125'
125'
150'
225'
150'
15
0' 475'
275'
50'
100'
525'
75'
825'
575'
525'
400'
475'
325'
775'
600'
Frye Road
Pr
iceFreeway
(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerV
illageDriveNorth
ChandlerVilla
geDriveSouth
11
1413
9 810
12
N.T.S.
N
Figure 8: Recommended Turn Lane Lengths for Western Intersections - 2020 with Site
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
16/92
Madison Crossing
1075'
300'
225'
225'
500'
325'
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
800'
425'
600'
300'
600'
1125'
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 9: Recommended Turn Lane Lengths for Southern Intersections - 2020 with Site
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
17/92
Madison Crossing
Introduct ion
Countrywide Home Loans is planning the development of their corporate office buildings in theCity of Chandler, north of Frye Road and east of the Price Freeway (State Route 101). Theproperty size is approximately 24.4 gross acres, consisting of three buildings, each
approximately 183,000 square feet, to serve approximately 3,429 employees.
Scope of Study
There are six purposes for this TIA: Analyze the existing traffic conditions Estimate the new traffic generated by the proposed Countrywide development Assign and distribute the new traffic to the surrounding street system Determine the need for auxiliary lanes at all study area intersections Evaluate the need for future traffic signals at all study area intersections Evaluate the operation of adjacent streets and intersections with the new development
Proposed Developm ent
The proposed development consists of one (1) commercial parcel. Figure 9 depicts thegeneral study area andFigure 10throughFigure 13provide the study area in more detail.
Surrounding Land Use
The land surrounding the proposed development is primarily utilized for commercial use.
Study A rea
The following intersections will be analyzed for ambient conditions and for conditions with theproposed development for the existing year and for the ultimate year 2020:
Chandler Village Drive North and Chandler BoulevardState Route 101 and Chandler Boulevard (both southbound and northbound on/off ramps)Ellis Street and Chandler BoulevardDobson Road and Chandler BoulevardChandler Village Drive North and Frye RoadGalleria Way and Frye Road
State Route 101 and Frye Road (both southbound and northbound on/off ramps)Benson Lane and Frye Road (primary site access)Ellis Street and Frye RoadDobson Road and Frye RoadDobson Road and Pecos RoadDobson Road and State Route 202 (both eastbound and westbound on/off ramps)Price Road and State Route 202 (both eastbound and westbound on/off ramps)
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
18/92
Madison Crossing
C
han
dler
Village
Dr
ive
Nor
th
SanTanFreeway (SR202)
Frye Road
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStree
t
P
rice
Freeway
(SR
101)
Do
bson
Roa
d
Pecos Road
SITE
Pr
ice
Roa
d
N.T.S.
N
BensonRoadGa
lleriaW
ay
Chan
dler
Village
Dr
ive
Sou
th
Site Map
Figure 10: General Vicinity Map
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
19/92
Madison Crossing
SOUTHERNPACIFIC
RAILROAD
Frye Road
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
SITE
Chandler Boulevard
N.T.S.
N
67
2 53
19
41
21
20
Figure 11: Vicinity Map Adjacent Intersections
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
20/92
Madison Crossing
Frye Road
PriceFree
way
(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageD
riveNorth
ChandlerVillageDriveSouth
N.T.S.
N
12
10
11
14
8
13
9
Figure 12: Vicinity Map Western Intersections
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
21/92
Madison Crossing
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
PriceRoad
DobsonRoad
N.T.S.
N
16 18
17
15
Figure 13: Vicinity Map Southern Intersections
Surroun ding Transportat ion System
The primary streets that will serve the proposed development are State Route 101 west of thesite, Chandler Boulevard to the north, Frye Road to the south, and Ellis Street east of the site.
Exist ing Traffic Counts
Traffic Research and Analysis counted current traffic volumes on Tuesday 1, Wednesday 2,and Thursday 3, August 2006. Approach and departure traffic counts at the study intersectionsfor daily and hourly intervals were obtained. Turning movement counts in fifteen-minuteintervals from 6:00 to 9:00 AM and from 3:00 to 7:00 PM were also obtained for theseintersections on Tuesday 1 and Thursday 10, August 2006.
The existing traffic volumes are provided in Appendix A to this report. Also included inAppendix A are tables providing the hourly counts by time of day, and graphs plotting the
hourly traffic counts. Appendix A.1 through Appendix A.17 contain the approach anddeparture counts for the study intersections. Also included in these appendices are tablesdetermining the maximum morning and evening hourly volumes and peak hour factors asdetermined from the approach counts, and graphs plotting the hourly traffic counts. Table 1provides the peak sixty-minute periods within the three morning and evening hours of the trafficcounts.
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
22/92
Madison Crossing
Table 1: Peak Sixty-Minute Periods
INTERSECTION AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
Chandler Village Drive North and Chandler Boulevard 11:45 to 12:45 4:30 to 5:30Chandler Village Drive North and Frye Road 11:45 to 12:45 5:00 to 5:00
Galleria Way and Frye Road 9:00 to 10:00 4:30 to 5:30
NB Price Road (SR 101) and Chandler Boulevard 7:00 to 8:00 4:30 to 5:30
SB Price Road (SR 101) and Chandler Boulevard 9:00 to 10:00 4:45 to 5:45
NB Price Road (SR 101) and Frye Road 7:30 to 8:30 4:30 to 5:30
SB Price Road (SR 101) and Frye Road 11:30 to 12:30 4:45 to 5:45
Price Road and WB SR 202 Ramps 7:00 to 8:00 4:30 to 5:30
Price Road and EB SR 202 Ramps 7:15 to 8:15 4:15 to 5:15
Ellis Street and Chandler Boulevard 9:00 to 10:00 12:15 to 1:15
Ellis Street and Frye Road 7:30 to 8:30 4:45 to 5:45Benson Lane and Frye Road 7:15 to 8:15 4:30 to 5:30
Dobson Road and Chandler Boulevard 7:30 to 8:30 4:45 to 5:45
Dobson Road and Frye Road 7:15 to 8:14 4:45 to 5:45
Dobson Road and Pecos Road 7:15 to 8:15 4:45 to 5:45
Dobson Road and WB SR 202 Ramp 7:30 to 8:30 3:45 to 4:45
Dobson Road and EB SR 202 Ramp 7:15 to 8:15 4:45 to 5:45
Figure 14 throughFigure 16 provide the existing directional daily traffic volumes for the studyintersections. Appendix A.14 contains the turning movement counts for the seventeen (17)studied intersections. Figure 17 throughFigure 22show the existing turning movement trafficcounts during the morning and evening peak hours, respectively.
Horizon Year
The horizon year selected for this analysis was 2020. The expected build out year for theproposed development is 2008. The City of Chandler requires analysis for the horizon year2020 without and with the proposed development.
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
23/92
Madison Crossing
18,252
17,377
21,781 18,418
17,731 18,987
19,017
10,886 11,49911,058
75
1,8
21
9,921
2,4
22
2,2
53
20,985
3,5
65
2,5
10
7,869
2,144
12
,921
6,261
7,991 6,943
2,933
10
,507
12
,334
7,099
9,7
07
2,281
8,692
10
,02
4
2,232
9,9
6
4
12
,802
14
,25
8
12
,05
6
12
,85
1
13
,045
13
,65
4
8,513 9,480
382
677
2,2
30
2,5
06
2,7
25
134
Frye Road
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
67
2 53
19
4
SITE
Chandler Boulevard
1
21
20
N.T.S.
N
Figure 14: Existing Traffic Adjacent IntersectionsDirectional Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
24/92
Madison Crossing
3,7
36
4,0
95
29,213
16,971
16,971
29,213
13
,967
9,359
8,723
9,076
11,467
22
,677
21,979
22,557
14
,062
9,8
57
18,788
3,9
89
5,340 5,409
3,5
25
3,4
34
3,2
29
4,954 4,9913
,677
11,341
10,366
3,8
16
12
,930
5,352 10,055
10
,104
5,753
9,359
11,467
10,970
12
,564
6,0
09
4,3
24
22,021
22,749
25,699
20,780 15,565
842
855
25
,4
81
SOUTHERNPACIFIC
RAILROAD
Frye Road
PriceFreew
ay(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDrive
South
12
10
11
14
8
13
9
N.T.S.
N
Figure 15: Existing Traffic Western IntersectionsDirectional Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
25/92
Madison Crossing
11
,141
6,4
00
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
5,509
9,73
7
10
,505
18
,128
18
,588
21
,37
0
21
,694
6,281 6,145
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
7,3
44
7,6
99
11
,141
6,4
00
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
5,096
5,812 6,539
16
,548
17
,736
18
,128
18
,588
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 16: Existing Traffic Southern IntersectionsDirectional Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
26/92
Madison Crossing
494496
6 21
13752139 2
211
79
72020
4
3139
29
21
22 9
1,122106
23 214
19
30
23
169
12
381
28
139256
20
9
61
472
122139
64
15
2 227282
140
2738
94
846
208
144
96
144
413
118 160
926
268104
479150
73
308
863
63
10
497
69
1,0
4
9
46115
Frye Road
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
67
4 5
19
SITE20
21
1 2 3
N.T.S.
N
Figure 17: Existing Turning Movements Adjacent Intersections AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
27/92
Madison Crossing
165706
441
122
479777
164
84277
21
884526
307
664
94
23
15
14 13
1,17131
12
18
4 8 4
80
32
63
96101
425
1014
26
17
393
33283
1,082
952
5
281
288
1355682
12
312
337
25
8
332
9 16
483
392
1
56
59
516
82
6
Frye Road
PriceFreew
ay(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDrive
South
12
10
11
9 8
1413
N.T.S.
N
Figure 18: Existing Turning Movements Western Intersections AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
28/92
Madison Crossing
180
1,0
87
1,4
08
262
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
212
350
14350
1
798
3843
1,2
69
78
58
321
275
1,3
69
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
793
100
507
137
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 19: Existing Turning Movements Southern Intersections AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
29/92
Madison Crossing
180434
231 637
7360
1221,410
223
283
43
65
17
38 23
26112
117
1 27
16
62
17928
7066 2
21
1,323
410142
101733
34
24
239
59
21
101
182
732
88
199
44
183
916
123
6
830
106
71
37
5343574
179
1,181
230
260
824
142
176
57
4
145
247 237
5
23834
Frye Road
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
67
4 5
19
SITE20
21
1 2 3
N.T.S.
N
Figure 20: Existing Turning Movements Adjacent Intersections PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
30/92
Madison Crossing
23
26
401
5411,428
96
41
118
97
19
583
514
25
27
1,050
122854
365
45126
605
236
15
07
9
1,774305
74
82261
115
41
42
704
529599
42522
7
278
37
0
44
17
1
21
745
668
229
225
231363
857
202
586
523
1,581
184
327
202
1,073
45
4
369
547
385
260
Frye Road
PriceFreew
ay(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDrive
South
12
10
11
9 8
13 14
N.T.S.
N
Figure 21: Existing Turning Movements Western Intersections PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
31/92
Madison Crossing
376
295
1,5
66
22342
1,9
04
1,1
52
120
484
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
208
1,4
80
515
1,5
88
407 224
294 902
385
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
45
8
17
2
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 22: Existing Turning Movements Southern Intersections PM Peak Hour
Future Amb ient Traff ic
The ambient future traffic volumes were determined using the Chandler Transportation Study
(CTS) Final Report accepted by the City Council on 24 May, 2001. Appendix B providespertinent excerpts from this study. The anticipated 2020 traffic volumes for the study roadwayswere taken from the CTS 2020 daily traffic forecasts, as directed by City of Chandler officials.For segments not provided in the CTS, growth rates were based on adjacent intersectionsusing one of the following methods:
(1) For intersections with non-shared segments, a percentage increase was assumed basedon a similar adjacent intersection whose predicted 2020 volumes are provided in the CTS.
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
32/92
Madison Crossing
(2) For intersections with shared segments, total volumes were assumed to be the same onthe segment shared by the intersection provided in the CTS and the intersection notprovided in the CTS. However, directional splits were based on existing directional splitsfor the intersection whose volume was being estimated.
Figure 23throughFigure 31 show the directional daily and the morning and evening turning
movement traffic counts for the ultimate conditions without the site in the ambient year 2020.
Signal Warrant A nalysis Exist ing w ithout Si te
The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) as published by the United StatesDepartment of Transportation is the reference for determining the need for traffic signalinstallation throughout the United States. This document establishes eight separate, relatedsets of criteria termed warrants. If none of the eight warrants are satisfied, then a signalshould not be installed. If one or more of the warrants are satisfied, then a signal might beappropriate.
Appendix C.1provides the complete traffic signal warrant analyses for the Benson Lane andFrye Road intersection (#2). Table 2 provides the names of the primary signal warrants andTable 3summarizes the analyses results of the primary warrants.
Table 2: Signal Warrant Names
WARRANT NAME
1A Minimum Vehicular Volume
1B Interruption of Continuous Traffic
1A and 1B Combination of Warrants2 Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
3B Peak Hour Volume
Table 3: Existing without Site Signal Warrant Analyses Summary
Actual number of hours met
Warrant 1A 1B 1A & 1B 2 3B WarrantRequired hours met 8 8 8 4 1 Satisfied?
Benson Lane and Frye Road (Access 2) 0 0 0 0 0 NO
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
33/92
Madison Crossing
225
13,375
10,425 11,675
475
825
19
,025
19
,388
20
,613
19
,525
20
,475
20
,488
16
,975
20
,50
0
8,800
21
,50
0
17,900
23,100
8,713
18
,600
21
,400
19
,513
9,613
10,688
10,200
3,0
13
2,6
88
4,4
13
3,0
88
2,1
88
12,213
14,125
75
24,488
23,075
21,925
13,588
25,513 25,488
24,513
7,688
9,788 8,513
24,975
25,025
2,7
13
3,0
88
3,3
13
Frye Road
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
67
2 53
19
4
SITE
Chandler Boulevard
1
21
20
N.T.S.
N
Figure 23: Adjacent Streets Ambient 2020 Traffic Directional Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
34/92
Madison Crossing
30,600
24,400 25,100
1,2
00
900
17,2
00
7,2
00
5,5
00
27,000
28,000
31,3
00
12,100
12,4
00
7,025
11,500
14,100
13,475
15,4
00
17,3
00
13,950
12,750
4,7
25
15,9
00
6,575 12,325
4,2
75
5,0
25
6,075 6,1254,5
25
4,8
75
6,525 6,675
4,5
75
4,2
25
3,9
75
29,900
11,500
10,750
11,150
14,100
24,650
25,350
27,9
00
35,900
20,800
20,800
35,900
SOUTHERNPACIFIC
RAILROAD
Frye Road
PriceFreew
ay(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDrive
South
12
10
11
14
8
13
9
N.T.S.
N
Figure 24: Western Streets Ambient 2020 Traffic Directional Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
35/92
Madison Crossing
7,700 7,500
22
,300
22
,800
26
,300
26
,600
11,400
20,2
00
21,8
00
13
,300
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
23
,100
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
22
,300
22
,800
7,100 8,000
20
,35
0
21
,75
0
10,600
23
,100
13
,300
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
20
,600
21
,400
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 25: Southern Streets Ambient 2020 Traffic Directional Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
36/92
Madison Crossing
1,6
1
5
567
163
50
1,047852
1,026184
106
339
1,7
52
69
124
758
269
1,1
53
323
172
227
15
8
836
130 176
1,298
379
373
147
235
50
634
244
250525
1545
0
50
153
684
924
167
134
109
229
66567
153
50
50
68
57
50
1,366153
50
51
84
831,452175
87
7
7 2188845
4
3414
364654
Frye Road
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
67
4 5
19
SITE20
21
1 2 3
N.T.S.
N
Figure 26: Adjacent Intersections Ambient 2020 Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
37/92
Madison Crossing
904
5271,246
122
97
190
542
169
83
337
4276252
62
365
134
167
698
680
1,414
50
418
55
284
35850
50
428
50
193468
50259
168
50
459
50
50
50
196
58
291
90
69
1,563221
50
50
50
50
50
579
805
1,678216
1821,708
730
1,118
180
743
343
806
317
Frye Road
PriceFreew
ay(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDrive
South
12
10
11
9 8
1413
N.T.S.
N
Figure 27: Western Intersections Ambient 2020 Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
38/92
Madison Crossing
1,6
08
684
1571
,324
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
3855
42
1,1
96
1,8
28
288
340
1,5
75
636
1,3
07
15
1
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
1,7
44
2,0
78
86
47
3
353
598
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 28: Southern Intersections Ambient 2020 Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
39/92
Madison Crossing
194
905
267
294 277
109
343
197
1,601
25
3
341
1,281
156
78
667
719
579
115
125
1,2
23
356462
1,4
41
242
120
201
1,4
92
563
263
135
50
906
256
1,3
88
124
1,742
502236
1111,001
50
5020
7870
70
241,138
1 38
55
86 109
84123
129
1341,932
245
311
76
132
198559
254
243
117
50
Frye Road
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
67
4 5
19
SITE20
21
1 2 3
N.T.S.
N
Figure 29: Adjacent Intersections Ambient 2020 Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
40/92
Madison Crossing
645
286
423
602
687
202
222
410
222
1,490
67
1
902
694444
943735
252
65
8
8112,015
71950 7
4
363
407
72
50
602802
50
230
80
1,012
165
87
2,253336
81
90410
245
77
0
64
1
85
6
503
50
1,229
4701,112
40
2
5034
1
50
106
51
236
107
50
87
50
606
5952,115
Frye Road
PriceFreew
ay(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDriveSouth
12
10
11
9 8
13 14
N.T.S.
N
Figure 30: Western Intersections Ambient 2020 Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
41/92
Madison Crossing
779
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
484
728
2,3
19
414
325
2,0
94
781
2,0
94
253
867
894
2,4
62
424
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
1,7
47
448 47
3
598
2,0
78
567
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 31: Southern Intersections Ambient 2020 Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
42/92
Madison Crossing
This analysis reveals that the Benson Lane and Frye Road intersection (#2) does not satisfythe warrants for traffic signal installation with the existing traffic conditions.
Signal Warrant A nalysis Ambient wi thout Si te
The MUTCD process was also utilized to determine if a signal is likely to be warranted at theBenson Lane and Frye Road intersection (#2) in the ultimate year 2020 with the proposed siteconditions. The warrants presuppose that a minimum of 16 hours of traffic counts are available.Only the ambient 2020 without site daily and peak hourly traffic volumes can be estimateddirectly. Only three of the eight MUTCD warrants can utilize estimated traffic volumes toprovide an indication of the likely need for a traffic signal at a particular location.
Three hourly volumes are necessary to analyze these three warrants the hour with thehighest traffic volumes, the hour with the fourth highest volume, and the hour with the eighthhighest volume. The peak hourly volume has been estimated from the daily volume asdescribed in the section of this report entitled Exist ing Traff ic Counts. The fourth and eighth
highest hourly volumes can be estimated from the peak hourly volume or the daily volume.
The percentages of the day and peak hour traffic arriving in the fourth highest and eighthhighest hours for intersection #2 are provided in Appendix A.1. For each intersectionapproach, the fourth highest hourly volume and the eighth highest hourly volume wereestimated as the maximum of three calculations utilizing the appropriate percentage of thedaily volume, the morning peak hourly volume, and the evening peak hourly volume.
Finally, to provide more appropriate results, the right-turn traffic volumes on minor streets orapproaches were reduced from the volumes required in the traffic warrant analysis as thismovement can typically be accommodated without a traffic signal.
Appendix C.2 provides the results of the ambient 2020 plus site signal warrant analysis forintersection #2. The results are summarized inTable 4.
Table 4: Ambient without Site Signal Warrant Summary
Warrants Satisfied?
Warrant 1A 1B 2 3B - AM 3B - PM
Benson Lane and Frye Road (Access 2) NO NO NO NO YES
Based on these analyses, a traffic signal should be warranted at the intersection of BensonLane and Frye Road. However, it was noticed in Appendix C.2that the 3BPM warrant wasmarginally satisfied (80 estimated vehicles versus 75 required vehicles) and therefore it wasdecided to evaluate when the other warrants would be satisfied, starting from the existing trafficvolume counted for this project and reported in Appendix A.1.Table 5 provides the percentincrease of the existing traffic volumes that would generate the satisfaction of the appropriatetraffic signal warrant. Based on these variable results, it is recommended that a traffic signal
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
43/92
Madison Crossing
not be installed at this intersection. Regular monitoring of traffic volumes and vehicle delay isnecessary to determine if and when a traffic signal should be installed.
Table 5: Signal Warrant Satisfaction Threshold at Benson Lane Frye Road Intersection
Existing Volume
Warrant Percent Increase
1A 190%
1B 50%
2 30%
3B - AM 100%
3B - PM 10%
Level-of-Service An alysis w ithout Si te
The ability of a transportation system to transmit the transportation demand is characterized asits level-of-service (LOS). Level-of-service is a rating system from A, representing the bestoperation, to F, representing the worst operation. Typically, level-of-service D is consideredthe minimum acceptable operation. The appropriate reference for level-of-service operation isthe Highway Capacity Manual, published by the Transportation Research Board.
This manual considers the average delay per vehicle as the measure to determine the level-of-service for both signalized and unsignalized intersections. For signalized intersections thedelay and level-of-service are calculated for the intersection, each approach, and each turningmovement. For unsignalized intersections the level-of-service is defined for each minor
movement for two-way stop controls, and is not defined for the major street approaches or forthe intersection as a whole Table 6 lists the level-of-service criteria for both signalized andunsignalized intersections as stated in the Highway Capacity Manual.
Table 6: Level-of-Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections
LEVEL-OF-SERVICEAVERAGE DELAY (seconds/vehicle)
SIGNALIZED UNSIGNALIZED
A 10 10B > 10 to 20 > 10 to 15
C > 20 to 35 > 15 to 25D > 35 to 55 > 25 to 35E > 55 to 80 > 35 to 50F > 80 > 50
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
44/92
Madison Crossing
Synchro software was utilized to calculate the average delay and level-of-service. The inputand output for these analyses are provided as Appendix D to this report, and the results aresummarized on the following pages.
Each of the existing intersections was analyzed for its level-of-service for the existing trafficvolume, traffic control, and lane configuration. Appendix D provides the complete results of
these analyses. Appendix D.1provides the results for the existing 2006 traffic volumes andAppendix D.2provides the results for the ambient 2020 without site traffic volumes.
Synchro provides calculated average delay exceeding 120 seconds per vehicle. Theequations for these delay calculations are accurate only for delays less than 60 seconds. Theequations provide reasonably accurate results for delays between 60 and 120 seconds.Calculated delay greater than 120 seconds are very exaggerated. Therefore, all calculatedaverage delay greater than 120 seconds per vehicle were reduced to 120 seconds per vehicle.This adjustment becomes particularly meaningful when a specific movement is calculated toexperience very high delay and thereby greatly exaggerates the corresponding approach delayand intersection delay. Tables of these adjustments are provided for the appropriateintersections in Appendix D.3.
Figure 32 through Figure 43 provide the existing and ambient 2020 without site level-of-service for the study intersections for the morning and evening peak hours, respectively. Asstated before, the Benson Lane and Frye Road intersection was not improved and thus itshows that the PM peak hour northbound approach has level-of-service F.
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
45/92
Madison Crossing
B
B B B B C
B B
B B
B B B B B
A A CD
AC
AB
A AB
B
C
A BB B
B
B
B B
B
B
B
B
C
B
BB
B
C
B
B
B
B
BB
B B
B
B
B
D
A
B
AA
C
B
B
C
A
A
AA
B
B
A
A
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
4
B B
AB
B
-
SITE
Frye Road2
STOP
STOP
5
67
19
N.T.S.
N
Figure 32: Existing 2006 Level-of-Service Adjacent Intersections AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
46/92
Madison Crossing
B
B B
B D
B
D B BB
A
B B
A
A
B B B
A
A
B BA
A AA
C
A AA
A
A AA
B
BB
B
C
C
AA
B A
B
B
B
B
B B
B
C
BB
BB
A
A
B
A
C
A
A
A A
B
A
B
C
B
A
B
BA
B
B
B
BC
D
BB
AB
Frye Road
Price
Freeway
(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDr
iveSouth
11
1413
9 8
B
B B
A
B
A
A
10
12
N.T.S.
N
Figure 33: Existing 2006 Level-of-Service Western Intersections AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
47/92
Madison Crossing
B B
B
B
A
B A
B
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
BB
B
A
A
B
C
A
A
A
A
B
B A
A
A
B
A
A
A
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
A
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
A
B
A
A
N.T.S.
N
Figure 34: Existing 2006 Level-of-Service Southern Intersections AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
48/92
Madison Crossing
B
B B B D C
B D
B C
B B C D B
B A CC
AC
AC
A AA
B
C
B BB B
B
B
B B
B
C
B
A
A
A
A
B
C C
A
B
F
A
A
B
B
A
C
C
B
C
C
A
C
C
C
A
BB
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
4
B C
AB
B
-
SITE
Frye Road2
STOP
STOP
5
67
19
N.T.S.
N
Figure 35: Existing 2006 Level-of-Service Adjacent Intersections PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
49/92
Madison Crossing
C
C D
C D
B
D B BB
B
B C
B
B
B B B
B
B
B BB
B CB
C
B BC
D
AB
C
C
C
CD
B
D
B
B
C
BB
B
B
B
B
B
B A
C
C
B
A
B
D
CA
B
C
D B
C
D
BB
C
C
BB
B B
B
B
C
B
BB
B
B BA
Frye Road
Price
Freeway
(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDr
iveSouth
11
1413
9 8
C
C C
B
B
B
B
10
12
N.T.S.
N
Figure 36: Existing 2006 Level-of-Service Western Intersections PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
50/92
Madison Crossing
B
A
C
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
BB
B
A
C
A
C A
B
B
B
D
A
B
A
A
A
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
A
C
C
A
A
C
C C
B
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
A
B
C
A
N.T.S.
N
Figure 37: Existing 2006 Level-of-Service Southern Intersections PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
51/92
Madison Crossing
B C DB B C
C D
B
B BD C
B B C
AD
CC
B B
C
C F
A
D
E
F B
E
DD D
D
C
DE
D
C
C
C
C
B
C
C
B
C
D
B
DC
D
C
C
E
D
C
AA
C
C
C
C
C C
C
C C
B
C
A
B
A
B
C
B
B
C
B
B
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
4
C
AC
-
SITE
Frye Road2
STOP
STOP
5
67
19
C
D
N.T.S.
N
Figure 38: Ambient 2020 Level-of-Service Adjacent Intersections AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
52/92
Madison Crossing
B
C C
C C
B
B B
B
B
B B B
B
B
B BB
B B
D
B B
D
BB
D
C
B
B
B
C
DB
C
B C
B
D
BB
B B
B
B
B
D
BC
B
C
B
B
C
CA
BA
B
C
B
B
B
B
B
B AB
C
B
C
BB
B
B
B
C
B
CD
D
C
C D
Frye Road
Price
Freeway
(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDr
iveSouth
11
1413
9 8
C
B C
B
B
B
B
10
12
N.T.S.
N
Figure 39: Ambient 2020 Level-of-Service Western Intersections AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
53/92
Madison Crossing
B
B
B
B
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
BB
A
C A
BB
B
B
A
C
A
B
A
A
B B
B
B
C
A
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
A
B
B
A
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
B
B
B
A
N.T.S.
N
Figure 40: Ambient 2020 Level-of-Service Southern Intersections AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
54/92
Madison Crossing
B D DC C D
C E
C
D CE C
B B C
AD
AC
C B
C
C E
B
C
E
F B
D
DE D
C
C
C
B
B
C
C
C C
AA
D
E
B
C
F
B
B
C
C
C
C
C
D
A
DCC
E C
D
C
C
D
C
C
C
C
D
C
D
D
CE
D
B
D
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
4
C
BC
-
SITE
Frye Road2
STOP
STOP
5
67
19
D
D
N.T.S.
N
Figure 41: Ambient 2020 Level-of-Service Adjacent Intersections PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
55/92
Madison Crossing
B
C D
D D
B
B C
B
B
B B B
B
B
B BB
C C
C
C B
D
D
C
CD
E
C
D
D
D
DA
B
C
CC
C
C
C
C
C BC
B
C
E
BC
E
BB
B B
B
B
BB
BC
D
B
C
C
D
D D
C
D
DC
E
D
C
C
D
BA
D
B
E
D
Frye Road
Price
Freeway
(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDr
iveSouth
11
1413
9 8
D
B C
C
C
B
C
10
12
N.T.S.
N
Figure 42: Ambient 2020 Level-of-Service Western Intersections PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
56/92
Madison Crossing
B
B
C
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
BB
B
A
C
B
C A
B
B
B
D
A
C
B
A
A
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
A
D
C
A
A
D
D C
B
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
B
B
C
A
N.T.S.
N
Figure 43: Ambient 2020 Level-of-Service Southern Intersections PM Peak Hour
Proposed Site Trip Generation
The estimated trip generation for the proposed Countrywide project was determinedthrough the procedures and data contained within the Institute of TransportationEngineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 7th Edition, published in 2003. This documentprovides traffic volume data from existing developments throughout North America thatcan be utilized to estimate vehicle trips that might be generated from proposeddevelopments. The traffic data are provided for 152 different categories. The estimatedtraffic volume is dependent upon independent variables defined by the characteristicsand size of each land use category.
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
57/92
Madison Crossing
There is considerable data for office developments. Seven different land use categoriesare providedGeneral Office, Corporate Headquarters, Single Tenant, Medical-DentalOffice, Office Park, Research & Development, and Business Park. The two mostappropriate land use categories for this proposed development are CorporateHeadquarters (Code 714) and Single Family Tenant (Code 715). The most readily
available and appropriate independent variables for office developments are thebuilding size in 1,000 square feet and the number of employees.
Trips can be determined utilizing an average trip generation rate or a regressionequation. Appendix E.1provides the pertinent excerpts from Trip Generation. Theseexcerpts provide graphs for each land use code, each independent variable, and eachtime period of the data from the various studies. These graphs plot the average rateline and the regression equation line. In each case, the regression equation line iscloser to the building size and the number of employees for Countrywide than is theaverage rate line. Therefore, the regression equation line was utilized for this analysis.
Countrywide employees arrive throughout a four-hour period in the morning and depart
throughout a four-hour period in the afternoon. Error! Reference source not found.provides the approximate percentage of employee arrivals and departures by hour.
Table 7: Employee Arrival and Departure Times
To ensure a conservative analysis, the total number of employees was utilized toestimate the daily traffic volume. The number of employees arriving in the highestarrival hour and departure hour was utilized to estimate the peak hourly traffic volume.
The estimate for peak hour site traffic volume was based on 40% of the totalemployees. This will ensure that the site accesses accommodate the peak periodarrival and departure volumes.
Appendix E.2provides the complete results of the trip generation calculations. Table 8provides a summary of the calculations.
TIME PERIOD PORTION OF EMPLOYEES
5:00 to 6:00 AM 10%
6:00 to 7:00 AM 15%
7:00 to 8:00 AM 40%
8:00 to 9:00 AM 35%
2:00 to 3:00 PM 10%
3:00 to 4:00 PM 15%
4:00 to 5:00 PM 40%
5:00 to 6:00 PM 35%
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
58/92
Madison Crossing
Table 8: Weekday Traffic Volume Calculation Details
Proposed Site Tr ip Distr ibut ion
The final determination related to site traffic is the direction the generated traffic utilizes to enterand exit the site. The site was examined to determine the probable routes for its traffic.Figure 44 andFigure 45provide the percentage of site traffic entering and exiting the site fromthe external streets for the daily, morning and evening peak hours. Figure 46 throughFigure 54provide the resulting site directional daily traffic as well as the morning and evening
peak hour turning movement volumes.Figure 55throughFigure 63provide the resulting 2020ambient with site directional daily traffic as well as the morning and evening peak hour turningmovement volumes.
DAY
LAND USE INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SIZE ENTERING EXITING TOTAL
Corporate Headquarters Building Area 549,000 2,113 2,112 4,225
Corporate Headquarters Employees 3,429 3,431 3,431 6,862
Single Tenant Building Area 549,000 1,656 1,655 3,311
Single Tenant Employees 3,429 3,648 3,648 7,296
MAXIMUM 3,648 3,648 7,296
AM PEAK HOUR
LAND USE INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SIZE ENTERING EXITING TOTAL
Corporate Headquarters Building Area 549,000 721 54 775
Corporate Headquarters Employees 1,372 565 42 607Single Tenant Building Area 549,000 831 103 934
Single Tenant Employees 1,372 626 77 703
MAXIMUM 626 77 703
PM PEAK HOUR
LAND USE INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SIZE ENTERING EXITING TOTAL
Corporate Headquarters Building Area 549,000 66 598 664
Corporate Headquarters Employees 1,372 55 442 497
Single Tenant Building Area 549,000 130 739 869
Single Tenant Employees 1,372 98 552 650MAXIMUM 98 552 650
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
59/92
Madison Crossing
LEGEND
AM
PM
12%
12%
12%
12%
3%3%
6%6%
3%3%
3%3%
4%4%
1%1%
2%2%
2%2%
3%3%
13%
13%
4%4%
16%
16%
15% 4%
4%
3%
3%
7%
7%
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
3%
3%
15%
3%
3%
1%1%
7%
7%
3%3%
6%6%
4%4%
3%3%
13%
13%
13%
13%
10%
3%3%
3%3%
7%7%
10%
3%3%
SanTanFreeway(SR202) 7%7%
10%
10%
Frye Road
Chandler Boulevard
Ellis
Street
PriceFreeway
(SR101)
Dobso
nRoad
Pecos Road
PriceR
oad
Benson Lane
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
15
16
18
17
19
6
5
78910
11
12 13 14 4
15
16
2 31
SITE 21
20
N.T.S.
N
Figure 44: Site Traffic Trip Distribution AM and PM
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
60/92
Madison Crossing
3%
13%
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
3%
3%
7%
2%
2%
3%
3%
7%
3%
1%
1%
16% 4%
16% 3%
4%
6%
3%
12%
6%
4%
12%
4%
3%
3%
3%
7%
13%
3%
13%
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
10%10%
7%
Frye Road
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
PriceFreew
ay(SR101)
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
PriceRoad
Benson Lane
Galleria Way
Chandler
VillageDriveNorth
15
16
18
17
19
6
5
78910
11
12 13 14 4
15
16
2 31
SITE20
21
N.T.S.
N
Figure 45: Site Traffic Trip Distribution - Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
61/92
Madison Crossing
1,0
94
1,933
1,0
21
1,933 1,021
1,021 657511
657 657
365
365
657 657
109
146
109
109
109
109
365
328
365
511
1463
28
328
693
511
109
146
255
511 255
109
146
146
328
219
547
547
219
87
6
87
6
912
657
1,131
511 146
146511
693
657657
87
6
730
730
87
6
511
511
146
109
1,131
985
146
146
693
693
511
511
Frye Road
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
67
2 53
19
4
SITE
Chandler Boulevard
1
21
20
N.T.S.
N
Figure 46: Adjacent Streets Site Traffic Directional Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
62/92
Madison Crossing
584
584 547
146
146
47
4
182
182
547
547
438
47
4
47
4
292
985
1,459
511
948
511
511
36
47
4
292
948
511182 292
109
73
73
182 292 109
36
547
985
1,933
109
109
511
547
547
511
1,933
1,459
511
511
438
SOUTHERNPACIFIC
RAILROAD
Frye Road
PriceFreew
ay(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDrive
South
12
10
11
14
8
13
9
N.T.S.
N
Figure 47: Western Streets Site Traffic Directional Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
63/92
Madison Crossing
474 365
47
4
584
948
948
255
36
5
36
5
365
109
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
47
4
584
474 365
109
109
255
109
109
365
109
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 48: Southern Streets Site Traffic Directional Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
64/92
Madison Crossing
`
19
44
613
2
2
25
2
2
13
1
136
13
2
5
4
3126
12
317
4
94
56
4
63
34
8
29
44
385
50
35
19
19
275
38
2 1
2262
38
65
31
25
4
88
31
35
44
11
125
15 8
25
50
19 19
22
157175
Frye Road
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
67
4 5
19
SITE20
21
1 2 3
N.T.S.
N
Figure 49: Adjacent Intersections Site Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
65/92
Madison Crossing
2
19
6
163
20118
1
10
88
50
169
2
19
3 1
13
4
31
88
6
31
1
2
619 2
9
5025
6
38
4
3163
7525 12
Frye Road
PriceFreew
ay(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDrive
South
12
10
11
9 8
1413
N.T.S.
N
Figure 50: Western Intersections Site Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
66/92
Madison Crossing
19
448
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
6310
10
100
19
2 5
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
19
2 8
81
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
P
riceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 51: Southern Intersections Site Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
67/92
Madison Crossing
`
2
116
7
1111
2
37
12
39
176
2
6
11
17
1
3
5
10
33
55
83
550
28
32
27
820
344
67
47
28
5
159
28
25
1,021
26
58
208
55
110
6
4
14
17
77
33
22
28
43922
5
33
1,021912
912
Frye Road
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
67
4 5
19
SITE20
21
1 2 3
N.T.S.
N
Figure 52: Adjacent Intersections Site Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
68/92
Madison Crossing
22
44
25
17
28
55
44
221
144
72
13
77
14
17
3
3
26
8
14
2
105
11
628
17
83
66
22
6 8 4
3
1
1
5
412
Frye Road
PriceFreeway(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriv
eNorth
ChandlerVillageDriveS
outh
12
10
11
9 8
13 14
N.T.S.
N
Figure 53: Western Intersections Site Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
69/92
Madison Crossing
7
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
3
55
72
72 10
16
3
17
39
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
3
13
17
55
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
P
riceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 54: Southern Intersections Site Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
70/92
Madison Crossing
1,3
19
15,308
1,0
21
12,358 11,446
11,446 12,332
475
825
11,198
12,600 12,600
365
365
14,513 14,513
17
,084
19
,17
1
19
,497
20
,722
19
,634
20
,584
20
,86
5
9,128
21
,86
5
9,223
18
,746
2,5
16
4,7
41
3,7
81
10,123
18,009
20
,633
7,943
10,298 8,768
23,209
21
,546
19
,65
8
10,528
3,2
31
547
547
2,9
06
3,5
88
3,9
63
912
12,869
14,506
26,023 25,633
24,65824,998
4,0
06
14,78214,244
3,9
63
730
730
4,1
88
3,8
23
3,5
98
23,221
22,034
14,506
1,0
60
25,121
25,171
4,0
06
3,7
81
3,8
23
3,5
98
Frye Road
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
67
2 53
19
4
SITE
Chandler Boulevard
1
21
20
N.T.S.
N
Figure 55: Adjacent Streets 2020 with Site Traffic Directional Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
71/92
Madison Crossing
31,184
24,984 25,647
1,3
46
1,0
46
17,6
74
7,3
82
5,6
82
27,547
28,547
31,7
38
12,574
12,8
74
7,317
12,485
15,559
13,986
18,2
48
14,461
13,261
4,7
61
16,3
74
6,867
16,3
48
12,8366,707 6,967
4,3
84
4,2
98
4,0
48
6,257 6,4174,6
34
4,9
11
30,447
12,485
12,683
4,6
84
5,1
34
36,411
21,347
21,347
36,411
13,083
15,559
25,161
25,861
28,3
38
SOUTHERNPACIFIC
RAILROAD
Frye Road
PriceFreew
ay(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDrive
South
12
10
11
14
8
13
9
N.T.S.
N
Figure 56: Western Streets 2020 with Site Traffic Directional Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
72/92
Madison Crossing
8,174 7,865
22
,77
4
23
,384
27
,248
27
,548
11,655
20,5
65
22,1
65
23
,465
13
,409
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
22
,77
4
23
,384
7,574 8,365
20
,45
9
21
,85
9
10,855
20
,709
21
,509
23
,465
13
,409
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
PriceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 57: Southern Streets 2020 with Site Traffic Directional Day
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
73/92
Madison Crossing
`
758
1,6
3
4
567
207
1,053865
1,027184
109
364
1,7
52
69
124
271
1,1
55
323
184
228
17
1
842
130 176
1,310
38055
4
31796
12
31
543
4
94
266
924
167
4
63
57
1
8
238
250569
19255
50
153
734
137378
166
25
4
50
77
114
267
66
636
244
17557352
50
105
57
1,03431
831,452200
4
501,366241
31
54
89
48
3414
3
98
132
22
101
91345
696
19 19
959
157
54
882Frye Road
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
67
4 5
19
SITE20
21
1 2 3
N.T.S.
N
Figure 58: Adjacent Intersections 2020 with Site Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
74/92
Madison Crossing
124
97
50
209
548
50
480
4476363
43
343
806
284
375
1,502
55
40850
50
849
418
169
698
187
83
193471
51259
168
63
463
934
337516
50
50
50
196
64
322
91
71
50
56
69 52
1,687216
579
855
755
749
134
5301,253
184
2131,771
1,638246
50
1,130
Frye Road
PriceFreew
ay(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriveNorth
ChandlerVillageDrive
South
12
10
11
9 8
1413
N.T.S.
N
Figure 59: Western Intersections 2020 with Site Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
75/92
Madison Crossing
1,6
27
728
1571,3
31
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
340
448552
1,2
06
1,9
28
288
1,5
94
636
1,3
10
156
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
1,7
63
2,0
80
94
473
353
679
16 18
17
15
DobsonRoad
P
riceRoad
N.T.S.
N
Figure 60: Southern Intersections 2020 with Site Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
76/92
Madison Crossing
`
196
916
273
294 277
109
350
197
1,612
253
352
1,283
156
78
667
722
579
122
125
1,2
23
357464
1,4
41
242
120
240
1,5
08
569
265
140
50
917
273
1,3
89
127
5
10
150
50
55
83
5284
28
628
262
1,742
510257
1141,045
567
917
28
5
15
605
28
7520
7
876
1,355
20
70
241,146
158
118
55
92 109
88123
142
1341,932
262
389
109
154
28
202598
276
5
276
Frye Road
Chandler Boulevard
EllisStreet
DobsonRoad
Pecos Road
Benson Lane
67
4 5
19
SITE20
21
1 2 3
N.T.S.
N
Figure 61: Adjacent Intersections 2020 with Site Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
77/92
Madison Crossing
667
286
468
602
687
228
427
250
1,545
715
1,123
837
294
457
1,020735
252
658
8112,029
50 74
379
410
72
233
1,038
727
50
602815
50
245
80
85
6
165
89
2,262340
92
96437
67
50
1,312
4701,178
42
4
56
34
1
77
8
64
5
503
53
106
51
236
108
50
88
611
5992,127
Frye Road
PriceFreeway(SR101)
Chandler Boulevard
Galleria Way
ChandlerVillageDriv
eNorth
ChandlerVillageDriveS
outh
12
10
11
9 8
13 14
N.T.S.
N
Figure 62: Western Intersections 2020 with Site Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour
-
8/14/2019 0311 Transportes Dia 01d Reporte Semestral Ejemplo USA
78/92
Madison Crossing
786
SanTanFreeway(SR202)
484
731
2,3
75
85
3
2,1
66 423
325
2,1
10
253
869
894
2,4
79
462
Sa