SU0004094 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Traffic Impact Study March 24,2004 Proposed RMC Pacific Mining Site Page 6 Table 4 Level of Service Characteristics for Signalized Intersections ._ Level of Description Average Vehicle Delay Service seconds A Uncongested operations;all queues clear in a single cycle. <10 B Very light congestion; an occasional phase is fully utilized. >10-20 y C Light congestion;occasional queues on approaches. >20-35 Significant congestion on critical approaches, but intersection is functional. Cars required to wait through D more than one cycle during short peaks. No long-standing >35-55 queues formed. Severe congestion with some long-standing queues on r, 6 critical approaches. Traffic queue may block nearby >55-80 intersection(s)upstream of critical approach(es). F Total breakdown,stop-and-go conditions. >80 i It is typical on state highways and in rural areas to require that a level of service C or better be maintained. In urban areas, a level of service D is often considered acceptable. The Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies indicates that Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target level of service at the transition between level of service C and level of service D. The results of the intersection level-of-service calculations are shown in Table 4, and the analysis output is included in the attached Appendices. Levels of service are presented for the intersections as a whole and for each approach. Where two-way or one-way stop conditions ` exist, the level of service for the intersection as a whole is not defined because the major street traffic is not required to stop. The levels of service were determined using the computer program .. Synchro 6, which is based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual procedures for calculating levels of service and which is listed in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies as a commonly-used program. The results of the road segment level-of-service analyses are shown in Table 5. The Florida Department of Transportation has published tables correlating peak hour volumes of roadway segments with levels of service. For this analysis, the table entitled "Table 4-6, Generalized ` Peak Hour Two-Way Volumes for Florida's Urbanized Areas" was used. The table is included in Appendix A. Freeway weaving and ramp analyses were performed using HCS2000 software for the future- with-project conditions at the study interchange ramps to identify the worst-case conditions based on the projected traffic volumes.. The analyses resulted in levels of service C or better for all future-with-project conditions. The analysis sheets are provided in the attached Appendices.