Planning & Zoning Commission - 387 (06/13/2023)
agenda center attachment
| Board/Commission | Planning & Zoning Commission |
|---|---|
| Meeting Date | June 13, 2023 |
| Pages | 66 |
| File Size | 3.8 MB |
| OCR Status | Searchable (OCR processed) |
| Source URL | Original |
Document Preview
Full Text (OCR Extracted)
Prepared by:
KWH Enterprise, LLC
March 2023 Revised
Traffic Impact Study
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane
Waterford, Connecticut
Prepared for:
Freehold Real Estate
Traffic Impact Study
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane
Waterford, Connecticut
This study examines the traffic impact of a proposed affordable housing development in
Waterford, Connecticut. Levels of Service (LOS) for traffic flows under 2022 existing
and 2025 no-build and build traffic conditions were analyzed to identify any deficiencies
in existing and future traffic operations at area intersections. For the purpose of this
traffic study, 2025 was assumed to be the year during which the construction is
completed and the dwelling units are occupied.
I. Summary
The affordable housing development is estimated to generate 18 vehicular trips
during the weekday morning peak hour of streets and 27 vehicular trips during
the weekday afternoon peak hour of streets. These represent increases of two
percent in traffic volumes on Clark Lane during the two peak hours.
Peak-hour turning counts were collected at area intersections in November 2022.
The counts were seasonally adjusted to reflect August traffic volumes when area
schools resume classes.
The traffic impact of the development will be limited. After the housing units are
built and occupied, traffic leaving the northern driveway on Clark Lane will
operate at the favorable LOS A, B, and C during the peak hours. The site traffic
will increase intersection-level delays at the Clark Lane and Route 1 intersection
by 0.1 second, 0.3 second, and 1.3 seconds during the three analyzed peak
hours.
Recent-year accident records for the segment of Clark Lane near the
development were reviewed. No abnormal accident patterns were identified.
At the intersection of Fog Plain Road, Clark Lane, and Chester Street, the traffic
approaches controlled by two stop signs experience relatively long delays and
queueing during the peak hours. We evaluated the need for a traffic signal
control at this location. Using MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices) published by the Federal Highway Administration, we determined that a
traffic signal is warranted and recommend that one be installed by the Town of
Waterford. The delays and queuing and the need for a traffic signal at this
intersection are existing conditions and are not a result of the proposed housing
development.
II. Project Description
The development site is located on the east side of Clark Lane and north of the Clark
Lane Middle School in Waterford, Connecticut. 47 affordable housing units are
1
Traffic Impact Study for Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane
proposed on two undeveloped parcels. There will be two driveways on Clark Lane: the
southern driveway will be for entries only, and the northern driveway will allow both
entries and exits. The posted speed limit on Clark Lane is 30 mph.
III. Existing Traffic Conditions
To evaluate the quality of traffic operation in the vicinity of the development, the
following signalized and unsignalized intersections were analyzed for the study:
The two future site driveway intersections on Clark Lane;
Clark Lane, the park driveway, and the northern middle school driveway;
Clark Lane, the park driveway, and the southern middle school driveway;
Clark Lane and Route 1 (Boston Post Road).
Peak-hour traffic volumes were collected during weekday morning and afternoon peak
hours on Thursday, November 3, 2022. The weekday peak hours for the traffic analysis
were 7:00 am-8:00 am, 2:30 pm-3:30 pm for the afternoon peak hour of the adjacent
middle school, and 4:00 pm-5:00 pm for the afternoon peak hour of streets. The
November traffic volumes were seasonally adjusted to volumes for August when
schools resume classes. The resulting 2022 volumes are shown in Figures 1, 2a, and
2b.
Capacity Analysis
To assess the quality of traffic flow, intersection capacity analysis was conducted for the
existing, future no-build and future build traffic conditions. Capacity analysis provides
an indication of how well roadway facilities serve the traffic demands placed upon them.
Synchro 10, a software package that includes the evaluation criteria of the 2000
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2000) and the Highway Capacity Manual, Sixth Edition
(HCM 6), was used to analyze the intersections.
Level of service (LOS) is the term used to describe the different operating conditions
that occur on a given roadway segment or intersection under various traffic conditions.
It is a qualitative measure of the effects of a number of factors including roadway
geometry, speed, travel delay, freedom to maneuver, and safety. Six levels of service
can be defined for each type of facility. Each level of service (LOS) is given a letter
designation from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and
LOS F representing the worst.
LOS at intersection is measured in terms of average control delay. For signalized
intersections and all-way stop-controlled intersections, the analysis considers the
operation of all traffic entering the intersection, and an overall condition is reported in
addition to individual movements. For two-way stop-controlled (TWSC) intersections
where side street traffic has to stop for main street traffic, the analysis assumes that
through traffic on the main street is not affected by traffic on side streets. Thus, LOS is
calculated for the main street left-turn and side street approaches, and no overall
intersection LOS is defined for TWSC intersections.
2
Traffic Impact Study for Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane
Table 1 that follows shows the capacity analysis results for the analyzed intersections
under the 2022 existing traffic conditions. All intersection approaches operated at
acceptable LOS D or better during the weekday morning peak hour. During the
afternoon peak hour of the school, traffic exiting the southern driveway of the middle
school and the opposite park driveway experienced delays. During both afternoon peak
hours, the left-turn movement turning from eastbound Route 1 to Clark Lane
experienced average delays of about one minute and LOS E.
The configuration of the intersection of Clark Lane, Fog Plain Road, and Chester Street,
which is controlled by one stop sign on Clark Lane, one stop sign on Fog Plain Road,
and no stop sign on Chester Street, is not covered by the analysis method of the
Highway Capacity Manual. As a result, the Synchro software cannot generate delays
and LOS for this intersection. Traffic on the two stopped approaches of the intersection
was observed to experience relatively long delays and queuing during the peak hours.
These delays and queuing are existing conditions and are not a result of the proposed
affordable housing development.
24-hour traffic data collected for this project in October and December 2022 were used
to evaluate the need for a traffic signal at this T intersection. A summary table for a
signal warrant analysis using MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices)
published by the Federal Highway Administration is included in the Appendices. Criteria
for traffic signal warrant 1 using eight-hour volumes could not be met in the analysis.
Criteria for warrant 2 (four-hour volumes) and warrant 3 (peak hour volumes) were
satisfied. Based on this analysis, we recommend that the Town of Waterford install a
traffic signal at this intersection. The need for a traffic signal is based on existing traffic
volumes independent of the proposed housing development.
3
Traffic Impact Study for Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane
Table 1
Capacity Analyses for Existing Conditions
EB
Eastbound
WB
Westbound
NB
Northbound
SB
Southbound
LOS
Level of Service
IV. Future Traffic Conditions
For the purpose of this traffic impact study, it was assumed that the dwelling units will
be built and occupied in 2025.
As a comparison for demonstrating the traffic impact of the project, a 2025 no-build
scenario is included in the study. Figures 3, 4a, and 4b show the 2025 no-build traffic
volumes, which were generated by using an annual background traffic growth rate of
0.8 percent for Waterford that was recommended by the CTDOT, or 2.4 percent over
three years between 2022 and 2025.
Delay
(sec)
LOS Delay
(sec)
LOS Delay
(sec)
LOS
Clark Ln., Park Driveway (N), and Middle School
Driveway (N) (Unsignalized)
NB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.2
A
9.0
A
8.8
A
NB Clark Ln. Through and Right Turn
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
EB Park Driveway (N)
18.0
C
13.0
B
18.2
C
SB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.7
A
8.9
A
8.8
A
SB Clark Ln. Through and Right Turn
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
Clark Ln., Park Driveway (S), and Middle School
Driveway (S) (Unsignalized)
NB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.2
A
9.5
A
8.9
A
NB Clark Ln. Through and Right Turn
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
EB Park Driveway (S)
17.9
C
35.0
E
14.1
B
WB Middle School Driveway (S)
33.6
D
221.8
F
25.5
D
SB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.3
A
9.2
A
8.7
A
SB Clark Ln. Through and Right Turn
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
Commercial Driveway, Clark Ln., and Route 1
(Signalized)
EB Route 1 Left Turn
9.9
A
59.3
E
60.6
E
EB Route 1 Through and Right Turn
8.8
A
11.7
B
12.4
B
WB Route 1 Left Turn
10.8
B
11.8
B
11.3
B
WB Route 1 Through and Right Turn
15.6
B
29.6
C
33.5
C
NB Commercial Driveway Left Turn and Through
23.4
C
23.3
C
25.8
C
NB Commercial Driveway Right Turn
23.4
C
22.2
C
22.7
C
SB Clark Ln. Left Turn and Through
38.7
D
52.6
D
45.4
D
SB Clark Ln. Right Turn
18.0
B
16.8
B
18.2
B
Intersection
15.4
B
29.6
C
30.4
C
Intersection
2022 Existing Conditions
Weekday
AM Peak
Hour
Weekday
PM Peak
Hour of
School
Weekday
PM Peak
Hour of
Streets
4
Traffic Impact Study for Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane
Table 2 details the capacity analysis results for the 2025 no-build traffic conditions.
Traffic exiting the southern driveway of the middle school will experience relatively long
delays during the weekday morning peak hour and the weekday afternoon peak hour of
the school. At the Clark Lane and Route 1 intersection, traffic turning from eastbound
Route 1 to Clark Lane will continue to experience delays. During the weekday afternoon
peak hour of the school, the left lane of the southbound Clark Lane approach of the
Route 1 intersection will operate at LOS E.
Table 2
Capacity Analyses for No-Build Conditions
EB
Eastbound
WB
Westbound
NB
Northbound
SB
Southbound
LOS
Level of Service
Delay
(sec)
LOS Delay
(sec)
LOS Delay
(sec)
LOS
Clark Ln., Park Driveway (N), and Middle School
Driveway (N) (Unsignalized)
NB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.3
A
9.0
A
8.8
A
NB Clark Ln. Through and Right Turn
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
EB Park Driveway (N)
18.4
C
13.1
B
18.7
C
SB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.8
A
9.0
A
8.9
A
SB Clark Ln. Through and Right Turn
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
Clark Ln., Park Driveway (S), and Middle School
Driveway (S) (Unsignalized)
NB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.2
A
9.6
A
8.9
A
NB Clark Ln. Through and Right Turn
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
EB Park Driveway (S)
18.3
C
37.1
E
14.3
B
WB Middle School Driveway (S)
35.6
E
252.5
F
26.3
D
SB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.3
A
9.2
A
8.8
A
SB Clark Ln. Through and Right Turn
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
Commercial Driveway, Clark Ln., and Route 1
(Signalized)
EB Route 1 Left Turn
10.8
B
67.5
E
86.8
F
EB Route 1 Through and Right Turn
8.9
A
11.9
B
12.6
B
WB Route 1 Left Turn
10.9
B
11.8
B
11.3
B
WB Route 1 Through and Right Turn
16.0
B
31.3
C
36.5
D
NB Commercial Driveway Left Turn and Through
23.4
C
23.3
C
25.7
C
NB Commercial Driveway Right Turn
23.3
C
22.2
C
22.6
C
SB Clark Ln. Left Turn and Through
39.6
D
56.2
E
47.4
D
SB Clark Ln. Right Turn
18.0
B
16.9
B
18.5
B
Intersection
15.8
B
31.8
C
35.5
D
Intersection
2025 No-Build Conditions
Weekday
AM Peak
Hour
Weekday
PM Peak
Hour of
School
Weekday
PM Peak
Hour of
Streets
5
Traffic Impact Study for Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane
Trip Generation
The peak-hour vehicular trips generated by the affordable housing development (Table
3) were based on data from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. On weekdays, the
development will generate 18 and 27 trips during the respective morning and afternoon
peak hours of streets. The manual does not contain trip information for the weekday
afternoon peak hour of the middle school; we assumed that the trips will be half of those
for the weekday afternoon peak hour of adjacent streets. During the weekday afternoon
of streets when the development will generate the most traffic of 27 trips, these site trips
will represent only two percent of the existing traffic on Clark Lane.
Table 3
Trip Generation for Affordable Housing Development (vph)
vph Vehicles per hour
Table 4 depicts the distribution of the site-generated trips along area routes. The
distribution takes into account the relative traffic volumes of area roadways and the
development patterns in this part of Waterford.
Table 4
Trip Distribution
Traffic volumes for the 2025 build conditions, which combine no-build volumes and site
trips, are presented in Figures 7, 8a, and 8b.
Capacity Analysis
Table 5 shows the capacity analysis results for the 2025 build traffic conditions.
Because of the limited number of peak-hour trips generated by the development, the
incremental changes in average delays at intersections will be negligible. For example,
at the signalized intersection of Clark Lane and Route 1, the development will increase
the intersection-level delay by 0.1 second during the weekday morning peak hour, by
0.3 second during the weekday afternoon peak hour of the school, and by 1.3 seconds
during the weekday afternoon peak hour of streets; the development will not change the
LOS of the traffic approaches of the intersection of Route 1 and Clark Lane.
Entry
Exit
Entry & Exit
Weekday AM peak hour of adjacent streets
4
14
18
Weekday PM peak hour of school*
9
5
14
Weekday PM peak hour of adjacent streets
17
10
27
* Assumed that the trips for the w eekday afternoon peak hour of the school are half of those for the w eekday
afternoon peak hour of adjacent streets.
Mobile Home Park(LU 240) (47 Units), 11th Edition of Trip Generation Manual
To / From Route
Entry and Exit
West: Fog Plain Road
5%
West: Route 1
30%
East: Chester Street
50%
East: Route 1
15%
Total
100%
6
Traffic Impact Study for Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane
Table 5
Capacity Analyses for Build Conditions
EB
Eastbound
WB
Westbound
NB
Northbound
SB
Southbound
LOS
Level of Service
At the northern driveway of the development, traffic will operate at favorable LOS C or
better during all three peak hours. The traffic impact of the development will be limited
because the housing development will generate few peak-hour trips and these few trips
will result in negligible changes to traffic operations at area intersections.
Delay
(sec)
LOS Delay
(sec)
LOS Delay
(sec)
LOS
Clark Ln., Park Driveway (N), and Middle School
Driveway (N) (Unsignalized)
NB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.3
A
9.0
A
8.8
A
NB Clark Ln. Through and Right Turn
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
EB Park Driveway (N)
18.6
C
13.2
B
18.9
C
SB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.8
A
9.0
A
8.9
A
SB Clark Ln. Through and Right Turn
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
Clark Ln., Park Driveway (S), and Middle School
Driveway (S) (Unsignalized)
NB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.2
A
9.6
A
8.9
A
NB Clark Ln. Through and Right Turn
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
EB Park Driveway (S)
18.4
C
37.4
E
14.4
B
WB Middle School Driveway (S)
36.3
E
262.1
F
27.0
D
SB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.3
A
9.3
A
8.8
A
SB Clark Ln. Through and Right Turn
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
Clark Ln. and Site Driveway (N) (Unsignalized)
WB Site Driveway (N)
15.1
C
22.9
C
20.2
C
SB Clark Ln. Left Turn
8.5
A
8.9
A
8.8
A
SB Clark Ln. Through
0.0
A
0.0
A
0.0
A
Commercial Driveway, Clark Ln., and Route 1
(Signalized)
EB Route 1 Left Turn
10.8
B
70.9
E
94.3
F
EB Route 1 Through and Right Turn
8.9
A
11.9
B
12.7
B
WB Route 1 Left Turn
10.9
B
11.8
B
11.3
B
WB Route 1 Through and Right Turn
16.0
B
31.4
C
36.9
D
NB Commercial Driveway Left Turn and Through
23.4
C
23.2
C
25.6
C
NB Commercial Driveway Right Turn
23.3
C
22.1
C
22.5
C
SB Clark Ln. Left Turn and Through
40.2
D
55.6
E
47.7
D
SB Clark Ln. Right Turn
18.1
B
17.0
B
18.6
B
Intersection
15.9
B
32.2
C
36.8
D
Intersection
2025 Build Conditions
Weekday
AM Peak
Hour
Weekday
PM Peak
Hour of
Streets
Weekday
PM Peak
Hour of
School
7
Traffic Impact Study for Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane
V. Traffic Accident Record Summary
Traffic accident records for Clark Lane between the Fog Plain Road and Norman Street
intersections during 2017-2020 are summarized in Table 6.
A total of 12 accidents were recorded for the segment of Clark Lane. Most were at
intersections or near the middle school driveways. No accidents occurred at the
locations of the two proposed driveways for the housing development. Four were angle
accidents, and four were front-to-rear accidents.
Table 6
Accident Record Summary
Source: Connecticut Crash Data Repository
Location
Clark Lane, between
Fog Plain Road and
Norman Street
Year
2017
4
2018
4
2019
3
2020
1
Total
12
Accident Severity
Fatality
0
Injury (No Fatality)
4
Property Damage Only
8
Total
12
Type of Collision
Sideswipe-Same Direction
2
Angle
4
Front to Rear
4
Fixed Object
1
Other
1
Total
12
Weather Condition
Clear
11
Rain
1
Total
12
Road Surface Condition
Dry
10
Wet
2
Total
12
Light Condition
Daylight
11
Dark-Not Lighted
1
Total
12
8
Traffic Impact Study for Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane
Based on the numbers and locations of the accidents over the four-year period and the
accident categories in the table, no abnormal accident patterns were identified from
these records. Because this housing development will generate a limited number of site
trips during the weekday peak hours, it is not expected to adversely affect the safety
conditions of the adjacent roadways.
VI. Conclusions
Area traffic operation was analyzed for a 47-unit affordable housing development under
2022 existing and 2025 no-build and build traffic conditions. The development will
generate a limited number of site trips during the busiest weekday peak hours; the
increases in delays at area intersections as a result of the development will be
negligible. Traffic exiting the development will operate at favorable LOS A, B, or C at the
northern site driveway on Clark Lane. The affordable housing development is expected
to produce limited traffic impact on area roadways.
Kermit Hua, PE, PTOE
Principal
KWH Enterprise, LLC
(203) 606-3525
kermit.hua@kwhenterprise.com
9
Technical Appendices
03/06/2019
STATION(S): 7, 12, 24, 30, 31, 32, 53, 54
AVG.
WEEKDAY
FRIDAY
SATURDAY
SUNDAY
JANUARY
1.08
1.03
1.21
1.41
FEBRUARY
1.04
0.96
1.13
1.45
MARCH
1.05
0.93
1.05
1.21
APRIL
0.99
0.91
1.03
1.17
MAY
0.94
0.83
0.98
1.10
JUNE
0.95
0.90
0.99
1.08
JULY
0.95
0.91
0.97
1.08
AUGUST
0.94
0.86
0.99
1.06
SEPTEMBER
0.99
0.89
0.99
1.08
OCTOBER
0.98
0.90
1.00
1.12
NOVEMBER
0.98
0.98
1.03
1.13
DECEMBER
1.00
0.96
1.04
1.22
GROUP - 2 * * RURAL * *
STATION(S): 4, 10, 16, 20, 50, 51
AVG.
WEEKDAY
FRIDAY
SATURDAY
SUNDAY
JANUARY
1.12
1.08
1.17
1.48
FEBRUARY
1.12
1.05
1.16
1.55
MARCH
1.08
1.04
1.06
1.32
APRIL
1.05
0.95
0.94
1.29
MAY
0.95
0.89
0.95
1.04
JUNE
0.91
0.80
0.87
0.95
JULY
0.93
0.84
0.87
0.98
AUGUST
0.89
0.83
0.90
0.93
SEPTEMBER
0.97
0.88
0.91
1.02
OCTOBER
0.98
0.88
0.97
1.08
NOVEMBER
1.00
1.02
1.09
1.21
DECEMBER
1.08
1.09
1.11
1.29
AVG.
WEEKDAY
FRIDAY
SATURDAY
SUNDAY
JANUARY
1.02
1.10
1.25
0.99
FEBRUARY
0.86
0.81
1.02
1.22
MARCH
1.46
0.91
0.94
0.93
APRIL
1.22
0.96
1.00
1.00
MAY
1.07
0.73
0.99
0.90
JUNE
1.04
0.84
0.96
0.71
JULY
0.98
0.84
0.80
0.74
AUGUST
0.81
0.75
0.89
0.79
SEPTEMBER
1.11
1.09
1.13
0.81
OCTOBER
1.04
1.06
1.30
0.99
NOVEMBER
1.26
1.24
1.15
0.64
DECEMBER
1.14
0.33
0.43
0.79
GROUP - 1 * * INTERSTATE * *
GROUP - 3 * * INTERSTATE * *
STATION(S): 27 (I-84 FROM ROUTE 195 TO MASS. STATE LINE)
CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BUREAU OF POLICY & PLANNING - ROADWAY INFORMATION SYSTEMS
TRAFFIC DATA COLLECTION & VERIFICATION SECTION
FACTORS FOR EXPANDING 24-HOUR COUNTS TO
ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(BASED ON 2018 CONTINUOUS COUNT STATION DATA)
A1
03/06/2019
STATION(S): 8, 9, 11, 15, 17, 22, 23, 28, 47, 48, 52
AVG.
WEEKDAY
FRIDAY
SATURDAY
SUNDAY
JANUARY
1.03
1.00
1.18
1.46
FEBRUARY
1.03
0.95
1.14
1.49
MARCH
0.97
0.94
1.07
1.30
APRIL
0.98
0.90
1.03
1.26
MAY
0.92
0.83
1.01
1.21
JUNE
0.91
0.85
1.01
1.15
JULY
0.95
0.89
1.06
1.22
AUGUST
0.95
0.89
1.09
1.23
SEPTEMBER
0.96
0.88
1.03
1.20
OCTOBER
0.95
0.86
1.05
1.16
NOVEMBER
0.97
0.97
1.08
1.27
DECEMBER
0.99
0.96
1.06
1.24
GROUP - 5 * *NORTHWEST RECREATIONAL * *
STATION(S): 1
(Station 18 not available on 2018)
AVG.
WEEKDAY
FRIDAY
SATURDAY
SUNDAY
JANUARY
1.29
1.18
1.05
1.21
FEBRUARY
1.24
1.10
1.02
1.34
MARCH
1.28
1.06
1.14
1.24
APRIL
1.04
0.88
0.96
0.85
MAY
1.00
0.83
0.78
0.80
JUNE
0.96
0.80
0.79
0.77
JULY
0.91
0.80
0.71
0.61
AUGUST
0.94
0.75
0.76
0.71
SEPTEMBER
0.99
0.85
0.69
0.73
OCTOBER
0.95
0.71
0.69
0.68
NOVEMBER
1.15
1.05
1.08
1.06
DECEMBER
1.13
1.11
1.09
1.25
AVG.
WEEKDAY
FRIDAY
SATURDAY
SUNDAY
JANUARY
1.24
1.08
1.05
1.22
FEBRUARY
1.17
1.00
0.98
1.21
MARCH
1.19
0.98
0.93
1.06
APRIL
1.13
0.91
0.86
1.00
MAY
1.04
0.85
0.84
0.92
JUNE
1.00
0.80
0.81
0.88
JULY
0.91
0.77
0.75
0.79
AUGUST
0.92
0.75
0.77
0.80
SEPTEMBER
1.07
0.89
0.84
0.92
OCTOBER
1.10
0.89
0.93
0.98
NOVEMBER
1.17
0.97
0.93
1.04
DECEMBER
1.16
1.00
0.97
1.15
FACTORS FOR EXPANDING 24-HOUR COUNTS TO
ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(BASED ON 2018 CONTINUOUS COUNT STATION DATA)
GROUP - 4 * * URBAN * *
GROUP - 6 * * SOUTHEAST RECREATIONAL * *
STATION(S): 5, 33, 44, 46
CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BUREAU OF POLICY & PLANNING - ROADWAY INFORMATION SYSTEMS
TRAFFIC MONITORING & DATA ANALYSIS SECTION
A2
393
Land Use: 240
Mobile Home Park
Description
A mobile home park generally consists of manufactured homes that are sited and installed on
permanent foundations. The mobile home park typically includes community facilities such as a
recreation room, swimming pool, and laundry facilities.
Additional Data
The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, and the 2000s in Delaware, Indiana, Oregon,
Virginia, and West Virginia.
Source Numbers
155, 169, 252, 936, 1066
General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000–399)
A3
Mobile Home Park
(240)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m.
Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies: 9
Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 150
Directional Distribution: 21% entering, 79% exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate
Range of Rates
Standard Deviation
0.39
0.26 - 0.59
0.12
Data Plot and Equation
0
100
200
300
400
500
0
100
200
Average Rate
Study Site
Fitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.30(X) + 14.45
R²= 0.84
X = Number of Dwelling Units
T = Trips Ends
395
General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000–399)
A4
Mobile Home Park
(240)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies: 9
Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 150
Directional Distribution: 62% entering, 38% exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate
Range of Rates
Standard Deviation
0.58
0.33 - 1.04
0.15
Data Plot and Equation
0
100
200
300
400
500
0
100
200
300
Average Rate
Study Site
Fitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.57(X) + 0.35
R²= 0.91
X = Number of Dwelling Units
T = Trips Ends
396
Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 3
A5
45
121
357
90
84
388
11
399
37
9
1
4
3
463
58
1
383
19
249
3
195
129
3
8
0
116
293
178
3
583
532
1
5
3
392
21
1
3
3
Figure 1 Year 2022 Existing Traffic Volumes
Weekday Morning Peak Hour of Adjacent Streets
7:15 am-8:15 am.
Site
A6
132
59
600
51
39
567
9
629
13
0
0
1
3
606
14
1
623
6
293
36
225
58
6
0
0
66
369
218
11
625
948
28
45
9
559
8
24
29
31
2:30 pm-3:30 pm.
Figure 2a Year 2022 Existing Traffic Volumes
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour of School
Site
A7
51
65
589
31
37
532
5
592
23
4
0
6
3
565
26
1
596
1
342
23
191
27
1
0
0
21
389
134
18
614
1037
48
61
8
566
1
55
32
32
4:00 pm-5:00 pm.
Figure 2b Year 2022 Existing Traffic Volumes
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour of Adjacent Streets
Site
A8
46
124
366
92
86
397
11
409
37
9
1
4
3
474
58
1
392
19
255
3
200
129
3
8
0
116
300
182
3
597
545
1
5
3
401
21
1
3
3
Figure 3 Year 2025 No-Build Traffic Volumes
Weekday Morning Peak Hour of Adjacent Streets
Site
A9
135
60
615
52
40
581
9
644
13
0
0
1
3
621
14
1
638
6
300
37
230
58
6
0
0
66
378
223
11
640
971
29
46
9
573
8
25
30
32
Figure 4a Year 2025 No-Build Traffic Volumes
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour of School
Site
A10
52
67
603
32
38
545
5
606
23
4
0
6
3
579
26
1
610
1
350
24
196
27
1
0
0
21
398
137
18
629
1062
49
62
8
580
1
56
33
33
Figure 4b Year 2025 No-Build Traffic Volumes
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour of Adjacent Streets
Site
A11
1
1
0
0
2
8
0
6
1
7
0
0
6
1
0
2
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
6
0
4
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
Figure 5 Trip Generation
Weekday Morning Peak Hour of Adjacent Streets
Site
A12
2
3
0
0
5
2
0
3
0
2
0
0
3
2
0
4
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
3
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
Assumed that the trips for the weekday afternoon peak hour of school
are half of those for the weedday afternoon peak hour of adjacent
streets.
Figure 6a Trip Generation
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour of School
Site
A13
4
5
0
0
8
5
1
5
0
5
0
0
5
4
0
8
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
5
0
3
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
5
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
Figure 6b Trip Generation
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour of Adjacent Streets
Site
A14
459
1
46
124
368
8
92
6
87
404
483
0
464
1
483
2
11
415
37
9
1
4
3
476
58
1
398
19
259
3
202
129
3
8
0
116
301
183
3
597
545
1
5
3
403
21
1
3
3
Figure 7 Year 2025 Build Traffic Volumes
Weekday Morning Peak Hour of Adjacent Streets
Site
A15
669
3
135
60
620
2
52
3
40
583
621
0
670
2
621
4
9
647
13
0
0
1
3
625
14
1
641
6
302
37
231
58
6
0
0
66
381
224
11
640
971
29
46
9
577
8
25
30
32
Figure 8a Year 2025 Build Traffic Volumes
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour of School
Site
A16
639
5
52
67
611
5
33
5
38
550
583
0
640
4
583
8
5
611
23
4
0
6
3
587
26
1
615
1
353
24
198
27
1
0
0
21
403
140
18
629
1062
49
62
8
588
1
56
33
33
Figure 8b Year 2025 Build Traffic Volumes
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour of Adjacent Streets
Site
A17
HCM 6th TWSC
10: Clark Ln. & Park Drveway (N)/Middle School Driveway (N)
03/06/2023
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane, 2022 Existing Conditions Weekday AM Peak Hour
Synchro 10 Report
KWH Enterprise, LLC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
0.6
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h
9
1
4
0
0
0
3
463
58
37
399
11
Future Vol, veh/h
9
1
4
0
0
0
3
463
58
37
399
11
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
Storage Length
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
-
- 16979
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
Heavy Vehicles, %
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Mvmt Flow
10
1
4
0
0
0
3
498
62
40
429
12
Major/Minor
Minor2
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
1050
1081
435
441
0
0
560
0
0
Stage 1
515
515
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
535
566
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.43
6.53
6.23
4.13
-
-
4.13
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.43
5.53
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.43
5.53
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.527 4.027 3.327
2.227
-
- 2.227
-
-
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
251
217
619
1114
-
-
1006
-
-
Stage 1
598
533
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
585
506
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
-
-
-
-
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
237
0
619
1114
-
-
1006
-
-
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
237
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 1
596
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
554
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Approach
EB
NB
SB
HCM Control Delay, s
18
0
0.7
HCM LOS
C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBL
NBT
NBR EBLn1
SBL
SBT
SBR
Capacity (veh/h)
1114
-
-
293
1006
-
-
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.003
-
- 0.051
0.04
-
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
8.2
0
-
18
8.7
0
-
HCM Lane LOS
A
A
-
C
A
A
-
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
-
-
0.2
0.1
-
-
A18
HCM 6th TWSC
13: Clark Ln. & Park Driveway (S)/Middle School Driveway (S)
03/06/2023
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane, 2022 Existing Conditions Weekday AM Peak Hour
Synchro 10 Report
KWH Enterprise, LLC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
8.2
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h
3
0
3
116
8
129
3
392
21
19
383
1
Future Vol, veh/h
3
0
3
116
8
129
3
392
21
19
383
1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
Storage Length
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
Heavy Vehicles, %
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
Mvmt Flow
3
0
3
120
8
133
3
404
22
20
395
1
Major/Minor
Minor2
Minor1
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
928
868
396
858
857
415
396
0
0
426
0
0
Stage 1
436
436
-
421
421
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
492
432
-
437
436
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy
7.17
6.57
6.27
7.17
6.57
6.27
4.17
-
-
4.17
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
6.17
5.57
-
6.17
5.57
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
6.17
5.57
-
6.17
5.57
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.563 4.063 3.363 3.563 4.063 3.363 2.263
-
- 2.263
-
-
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
243
285
643
271
289
627
1136
-
-
1107
-
-
Stage 1
589
571
-
600
580
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
549
574
-
589
571
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
-
-
-
-
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
183
278
643
264
281
627
1136
-
-
1107
-
-
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
183
278
-
264
281
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 1
587
558
-
598
578
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
425
572
-
573
558
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SB
HCM Control Delay, s
17.9
33.6
0.1
0.4
HCM LOS
C
D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBL
NBT
NBR EBLn1WBLn1
SBL
SBT
SBR
Capacity (veh/h)
1136
-
-
285
376
1107
-
-
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.003
-
- 0.022 0.694 0.018
-
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
8.2
0
-
17.9
33.6
8.3
0
-
HCM Lane LOS
A
A
-
C
D
A
A
-
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
-
-
0.1
5
0.1
-
-
A19
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: Commercial Driveway/Clark Ln. & Route 1 (Boston Post Rd.)
03/06/2023
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane, 2022 Existing Conditions Weekday AM Peak Hour
Synchro 10 Report
KWH Enterprise, LLC
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)
293
583
1
5
532
178
1
3
3
195
3
249
Future Volume (vph)
293
583
1
5
532
178
1
3
3
195
3
249
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Total Lost time (s)
4.0
6.3
4.0
6.3
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Frt
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.96
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.85
Flt Protected
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.99
1.00
0.95
1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)
1752
3504
1752
3373
1822
1568
1758
1568
Flt Permitted
0.27
1.00
0.41
1.00
0.94
1.00
0.73
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
498
3504
763
3373
1737
1568
1341
1568
Peak-hour factor, PHF
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.93
Adj. Flow (vph)
315
627
1
5
572
191
1
3
3
210
3
268
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
0
0
0
40
0
0
0
2
0
0
106
Lane Group Flow (vph)
315
628
0
5
723
0
0
4
1
0
213
162
Heavy Vehicles (%)
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
Turn Type
pm+pt
NA
pm+pt
NA
Perm
NA
Prot
Perm
NA
pt+ov
Protected Phases
1
6
5
2
4
4
4
1 4
Permitted Phases
6
2
4
4
Actuated Green, G (s)
48.0
42.8
34.8
33.6
15.8
15.8
15.8
31.1
Effective Green, g (s)
48.0
42.8
34.8
33.6
15.8
15.8
15.8
26.2
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.64
0.57
0.46
0.45
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.35
Clearance Time (s)
4.0
6.3
4.0
6.3
4.9
4.9
4.9
Vehicle Extension (s)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
492
1999
369
1511
365
330
282
547
v/s Ratio Prot
c0.09
0.18
0.00
0.21
0.00
0.10
v/s Ratio Perm
c0.32
0.01
0.00
c0.16
v/c Ratio
0.64
0.31
0.01
0.48
0.01
0.00
0.76
0.30
Uniform Delay, d1
7.1
8.4
10.8
14.5
23.4
23.4
27.8
17.7
Progression Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Incremental Delay, d2
2.8
0.4
0.0
1.1
0.0
0.0
10.9
0.3
Delay (s)
9.9
8.8
10.8
15.6
23.4
23.4
38.7
18.0
Level of Service
A
A
B
B
C
C
D
B
Approach Delay (s)
9.2
15.6
23.4
27.2
Approach LOS
A
B
C
C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay
15.4
HCM 2000 Level of Service
B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio
0.70
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
75.0
Sum of lost time (s)
15.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization
66.9%
ICU Level of Service
C
Analysis Period (min)
15
c Critical Lane Group
A20
HCM 6th TWSC
10: Clark Ln. & Park Drveway (N)/Middle School Driveway (N)
03/06/2023
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane, 2022 Existing Conditions Weekday PM Peak of School
Synchro 10 Report
KWH Enterprise, LLC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
0.1
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
606
14
13
629
9
Future Vol, veh/h
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
606
14
13
629
9
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
Storage Length
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
-
- 16979
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
Heavy Vehicles, %
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Mvmt Flow
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
652
15
14
676
10
Major/Minor
Minor2
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
1375
1382
681
686
0
0
667
0
0
Stage 1
709
709
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
666
673
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.41
6.51
6.21
4.11
-
-
4.11
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.41
5.51
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.41
5.51
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.509 4.009 3.309
2.209
-
- 2.209
-
-
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
161
145
452
912
-
-
927
-
-
Stage 1
490
439
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
513
456
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
-
-
-
-
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
156
0
452
912
-
-
927
-
-
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
156
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 1
488
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
501
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Approach
EB
NB
SB
HCM Control Delay, s
13
0
0.2
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBL
NBT
NBR EBLn1
SBL
SBT
SBR
Capacity (veh/h)
912
-
-
452
927
-
-
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.004
-
- 0.002 0.015
-
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
9
0
-
13
8.9
0
-
HCM Lane LOS
A
A
-
B
A
A
-
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
-
-
0
0
-
-
A21
HCM 6th TWSC
13: Clark Ln. & Park Driveway (S)/Middle School Driveway (S)
03/06/2023
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane, 2022 Existing Conditions Weekday PM Peak of School
Synchro 10 Report
KWH Enterprise, LLC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
20.9
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h
6
0
11
66
0
58
9
559
8
6
623
1
Future Vol, veh/h
6
0
11
66
0
58
9
559
8
6
623
1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
Storage Length
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
8
0
14
86
0
75
12
726
10
8
809
1
Major/Minor
Minor2
Minor1
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
1619
1586
810
1588
1581
731
810
0
0
736
0
0
Stage 1
826
826
-
755
755
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
793
760
-
833
826
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy
7.12
6.52
6.22
7.12
6.52
6.22
4.12
-
-
4.12
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
6.12
5.52
-
6.12
5.52
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
6.12
5.52
-
6.12
5.52
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218
-
- 2.218
-
-
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
83
108
380
87
109
422
816
-
-
870
-
-
Stage 1
366
387
-
401
417
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
382
414
-
363
387
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
-
-
-
-
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
66
103
380
~ 81
104
422
816
-
-
870
-
-
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
66
103
-
~ 81
104
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 1
357
380
-
391
407
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
306
404
-
343
380
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SB
HCM Control Delay, s
35
221.8
0.1
0.1
HCM LOS
E
F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBL
NBT
NBR EBLn1WBLn1
SBL
SBT
SBR
Capacity (veh/h)
816
-
-
142
130
870
-
-
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.014
-
- 0.155 1.239 0.009
-
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
9.5
0
-
35 221.8
9.2
0
-
HCM Lane LOS
A
A
-
E
F
A
A
-
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
-
-
0.5
9.9
0
-
-
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
A22
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: Commercial Driveway/Clark Ln. & Route 1 (Boston Post Rd.)
03/06/2023
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane, 2022 Existing Conditions Weekday PM Peak of School
Synchro 10 Report
KWH Enterprise, LLC
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)
369
625
28
45
948
218
24
29
31
225
36
293
Future Volume (vph)
369
625
28
45
948
218
24
29
31
225
36
293
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Total Lost time (s)
4.0
6.3
4.0
6.3
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Frt
1.00
0.99
1.00
0.97
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.85
Flt Protected
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.98
1.00
0.96
1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)
1787
3551
1787
3474
1839
1599
1803
1599
Flt Permitted
0.12
1.00
0.39
1.00
0.77
1.00
0.72
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
223
3551
729
3474
1443
1599
1345
1599
Peak-hour factor, PHF
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
Adj. Flow (vph)
393
665
30
48
1009
232
26
31
33
239
38
312
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
4
0
0
27
0
0
0
25
0
0
29
Lane Group Flow (vph)
393
691
0
48
1214
0
0
57
8
0
277
283
Heavy Vehicles (%)
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
Turn Type
pm+pt
NA
pm+pt
NA
Perm
NA
Prot
Perm
NA
pt+ov
Protected Phases
1
6
5
2
4
4
4
1 4
Permitted Phases
6
2
4
4
Actuated Green, G (s)
46.4
38.4
33.7
29.7
17.4
17.4
17.4
35.0
Effective Green, g (s)
46.4
38.4
33.7
29.7
17.4
17.4
17.4
30.1
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.62
0.51
0.45
0.40
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.40
Clearance Time (s)
4.0
6.3
4.0
6.3
4.9
4.9
4.9
Vehicle Extension (s)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
402
1818
383
1375
334
370
312
641
v/s Ratio Prot
c0.17
0.19
0.01
0.35
0.00
0.18
v/s Ratio Perm
c0.44
0.05
0.04
c0.21
v/c Ratio
0.98
0.38
0.13
0.88
0.17
0.02
0.89
0.44
Uniform Delay, d1
20.8
11.1
11.7
21.0
23.0
22.2
27.9
16.3
Progression Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Incremental Delay, d2
38.6
0.6
0.1
8.5
0.2
0.0
24.8
0.5
Delay (s)
59.3
11.7
11.8
29.6
23.3
22.2
52.6
16.8
Level of Service
E
B
B
C
C
C
D
B
Approach Delay (s)
28.9
28.9
22.9
33.7
Approach LOS
C
C
C
C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay
29.6
HCM 2000 Level of Service
C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio
0.99
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
75.0
Sum of lost time (s)
15.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization
87.3%
ICU Level of Service
E
Analysis Period (min)
15
c Critical Lane Group
A23
HCM 6th TWSC
10: Clark Ln. & Park Drveway (N)/Middle School Driveway (N)
03/06/2023
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane, 2022 Existing Conditions Weekday PM Peak of Streets
Synchro 10 Report
KWH Enterprise, LLC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
0.3
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h
4
0
6
0
0
0
3
565
26
23
592
5
Future Vol, veh/h
4
0
6
0
0
0
3
565
26
23
592
5
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
Storage Length
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
-
- 16979
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
Heavy Vehicles, %
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Mvmt Flow
4
0
6
0
0
0
3
595
27
24
623
5
Major/Minor
Minor2
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
1289
1302
626
628
0
0
622
0
0
Stage 1
674
674
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
615
628
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.41
6.51
6.21
4.11
-
-
4.11
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.41
5.51
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.41
5.51
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.509 4.009 3.309
2.209
-
- 2.209
-
-
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
182
162
486
959
-
-
964
-
-
Stage 1
508
455
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
541
477
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
-
-
-
-
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
174
0
486
959
-
-
964
-
-
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
174
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 1
505
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
520
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Approach
EB
NB
SB
HCM Control Delay, s
18.2
0
0.3
HCM LOS
C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBL
NBT
NBR EBLn1
SBL
SBT
SBR
Capacity (veh/h)
959
-
-
283
964
-
-
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.003
-
- 0.037 0.025
-
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
8.8
0
-
18.2
8.8
0
-
HCM Lane LOS
A
A
-
C
A
A
-
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
-
-
0.1
0.1
-
-
A24
HCM 6th TWSC
13: Clark Ln. & Park Driveway (S)/Middle School Driveway (S)
03/06/2023
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane, 2022 Existing Conditions Weekday PM Peak of Streets
Synchro 10 Report
KWH Enterprise, LLC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
1.2
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h
1
0
18
21
0
27
8
566
1
1
596
1
Future Vol, veh/h
1
0
18
21
0
27
8
566
1
1
596
1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
Storage Length
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
1
0
19
23
0
29
9
609
1
1
641
1
Major/Minor
Minor2
Minor1
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
1286
1272
642
1281
1272
610
642
0
0
610
0
0
Stage 1
644
644
-
628
628
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
642
628
-
653
644
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy
7.12
6.52
6.22
7.12
6.52
6.22
4.12
-
-
4.12
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
6.12
5.52
-
6.12
5.52
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
6.12
5.52
-
6.12
5.52
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218
-
- 2.218
-
-
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
141
168
474
142
168
494
943
-
-
969
-
-
Stage 1
461
468
-
471
476
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
463
476
-
456
468
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
-
-
-
-
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
131
165
474
134
165
494
943
-
-
969
-
-
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
131
165
-
134
165
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 1
455
467
-
464
469
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
430
469
-
437
467
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SB
HCM Control Delay, s
14.1
25.5
0.1
0
HCM LOS
B
D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBL
NBT
NBR EBLn1WBLn1
SBL
SBT
SBR
Capacity (veh/h)
943
-
-
417
227
969
-
-
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.009
-
- 0.049 0.227 0.001
-
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
8.9
0
-
14.1
25.5
8.7
0
-
HCM Lane LOS
A
A
-
B
D
A
A
-
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
-
-
0.2
0.8
0
-
-
A25
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: Commercial Driveway/Clark Ln. & Route 1 (Boston Post Rd.)
03/06/2023
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane, 2022 Existing Conditions Weekday PM Peak of Streets
Synchro 10 Report
KWH Enterprise, LLC
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)
369
614
48
61
1037
134
55
32
32
191
23
342
Future Volume (vph)
369
614
48
61
1037
134
55
32
32
191
23
342
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
1900
Total Lost time (s)
4.0
6.3
4.0
6.3
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Frt
1.00
0.99
1.00
0.98
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.85
Flt Protected
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.97
1.00
0.96
1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)
1787
3536
1787
3513
1824
1599
1801
1599
Flt Permitted
0.12
1.00
0.37
1.00
0.59
1.00
0.68
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
223
3536
701
3513
1113
1599
1282
1599
Peak-hour factor, PHF
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
Adj. Flow (vph)
410
682
53
68
1152
149
61
36
36
212
26
380
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
7
0
0
13
0
0
0
28
0
0
29
Lane Group Flow (vph)
410
728
0
68
1288
0
0
97
8
0
238
351
Heavy Vehicles (%)
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
Turn Type
pm+pt
NA
pm+pt
NA
Perm
NA
Prot
Perm
NA
pt+ov
Protected Phases
1
6
5
2
4
4
4
1 4
Permitted Phases
6
2
4
4
Actuated Green, G (s)
47.0
37.7
35.0
29.7
16.8
16.8
16.8
35.0
Effective Green, g (s)
47.0
37.7
35.0
29.7
16.8
16.8
16.8
30.1
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.63
0.50
0.47
0.40
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.40
Clearance Time (s)
4.0
6.3
4.0
6.3
4.9
4.9
4.9
Vehicle Extension (s)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
417
1777
403
1391
249
358
287
641
v/s Ratio Prot
c0.17
0.21
0.01
0.37
0.01
0.22
v/s Ratio Perm
c0.44
0.07
0.09
c0.19
v/c Ratio
0.98
0.41
0.17
0.93
0.39
0.02
0.83
0.55
Uniform Delay, d1
21.3
11.7
11.1
21.6
24.7
22.7
27.7
17.2
Progression Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Incremental Delay, d2
39.4
0.7
0.2
11.9
1.0
0.0
17.6
1.0
Delay (s)
60.6
12.4
11.3
33.5
25.8
22.7
45.4
18.2
Level of Service
E
B
B
C
C
C
D
B
Approach Delay (s)
29.7
32.4
24.9
28.7
Approach LOS
C
C
C
C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay
30.4
HCM 2000 Level of Service
C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio
0.98
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
75.0
Sum of lost time (s)
15.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization
84.5%
ICU Level of Service
E
Analysis Period (min)
15
c Critical Lane Group
A26
HCM 6th TWSC
10: Clark Ln. & Park Drveway (N)/Middle School Driveway (N)
03/07/2023
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane, 2025 No-Build Conditions Weekday AM Peak Hour
Synchro 10 Report
KWH Enterprise, LLC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
0.6
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h
9
1
4
0
0
0
3
474
58
37
409
11
Future Vol, veh/h
9
1
4
0
0
0
3
474
58
37
409
11
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
Storage Length
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
-
- 16979
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
Heavy Vehicles, %
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Mvmt Flow
10
1
4
0
0
0
3
510
62
40
440
12
Major/Minor
Minor2
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
1073
1104
446
452
0
0
572
0
0
Stage 1
526
526
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
547
578
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy
6.43
6.53
6.23
4.13
-
-
4.13
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
5.43
5.53
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
5.43
5.53
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.527 4.027 3.327
2.227
-
- 2.227
-
-
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
243
210
610
1103
-
-
996
-
-
Stage 1
591
527
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
578
500
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
-
-
-
-
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
229
0
610
1103
-
-
996
-
-
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
229
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 1
589
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
547
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Approach
EB
NB
SB
HCM Control Delay, s
18.4
0
0.7
HCM LOS
C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBL
NBT
NBR EBLn1
SBL
SBT
SBR
Capacity (veh/h)
1103
-
-
283
996
-
-
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.003
-
- 0.053
0.04
-
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
8.3
0
-
18.4
8.8
0
-
HCM Lane LOS
A
A
-
C
A
A
-
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
-
-
0.2
0.1
-
-
A27
HCM 6th TWSC
13: Clark Ln. & Park Driveway (S)/Middle School Driveway (S)
03/07/2023
Affordable Housing Development on Clark Lane, 2025 No-Build Conditions Weekday AM Peak Hour
Synchro 10 Report
KWH Enterprise, LLC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
8.5
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h
3
0
3
116
8
129
3
401
21
19
392
1
Future Vol, veh/h
3
0
3
116
8
129
3
401
21
19
392
1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sign Control
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
RT Channelized
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
-
- None
Storage Length
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Veh in Median Storage, #
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
Heavy Vehicles, %
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
Mvmt Flow
3
0
3
120
8
133
3
413
22
20
404
1
Major/Minor
Minor2
Minor1
Major1
Major2
Conflicting Flow All
946
886
405
876
875
424
405
0
0
435
0
0
Stage 1
445
445
-
430
430
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
501
441
-
446
445
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy
7.17
6.57
6.27
7.17
6.57
6.27
4.17
-
-
4.17
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
6.17
5.57
-
6.17
5.57
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
6.17
5.57
-
6.17
5.57
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.563 4.063 3.363 3.563 4.063 3.363 2.263
-
- 2.263
-
-
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
236
278
635
264
282
619
1127
-
-
1099
-
-
Stage 1
583
566
-
594
575
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
543
568
-
582
566
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Platoon blocked, %
-
-
-
-
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
177
270
635
257
274
619
1127
-
-
1099
-
-
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
177
270
-
257
274
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 1
581
553
-
592
573
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
419
566
-
566
553
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Approach
EB
WB
NB
SB
HCM Control Delay, s
18.3
35.6
0.1
0.4
HCM LOS
C
E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBL
NBT
NBR EBLn1WBLn1
SBL
SBT
SBR
Capacity (veh/h)
1127
-
-
277
367
1099
-
-
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.003
-
- 0.022 0.711 0.018
-
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
8.2
0
-
18.3
35.6
8.3
0
-
HCM Lane LOS
A
A
-
C
E
A
A
-
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
-
-
0.1
5.3
0.1
-
-
A28
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: Commercia