design year traffic analysis - erdman anthony c1.pdfdesign year traffic analysis c.1. introduction...

APPENDIX C1

DESIGN YEAR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS

DESIGN YEAR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS

JULY 2010

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DAVID A. PATERSON, Governor STANLEY GEE, Acting Commissioner

CHEMUNG COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ANDREW P. AVERY, Director of Public Works

Highway & Bridge Project PIN 6754.12

Center at Horseheads Connector Road Chemung County

Town of Horseheads

July 2010 Appendix C PIN 6754.12

Design Year Traffic Analysis

Table of Contents

C.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ C-1

C.2. Design Year ....................................................................................................................................... C-1

C.3. Existing Traffic Volumes .................................................................................................................... C-2

C.4. Trip Generation .................................................................................................................................. C-3

C.5. Traffic Data ........................................................................................................................................ C-5

C.5.1 Traffic Speeds ...................................................................................................................... C-5

C.5.2 Traffic Flow Diagrams (No Build) ......................................................................................... C-6

C.5.3 Traffic Flow Diagrams (w/ Road) .......................................................................................... C-6

C.6. Level of Service (LOS) ...................................................................................................................... C-7

C.6.1 Level of Service Criteria ....................................................................................................... C-8

C.6.2 LOS Summary (No Build) ..................................................................................................... C-8

C.6.3 LOS Summary (W/ Road) ..................................................................................................... C-9

C.7. Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis ...................................................................................................... C-10

C.8. Conclusions .................................................................................................................................... C-11

Flow Diagrams

C3.2 .......................................................................................................................... Existing Traffic Volume

C4.3 ...................................................................................................... Trip Generation: Percent (No Build)

C4.3.1 ........................................................................................ Trip Generation: ETC, ETC+10 (No Build)

C4.3.2 ................................................................................................. Trip Generation: ETC+20 (No Build)

C4.4 ...................................................................................................... Trip Generation: Percent (W/ Road)

C4.4.1 ........................................................................................ Trip Generation: ETC, ETC+10 (W/ Road)

C4.4.2 ................................................................................................. Trip Generation: ETC+20 (W/ Road)

C5.2.0 ........................................................................................................ Traffic Forecast: ETC (No Build)

C5.2.1 ................................................................................................. Traffic Forecast: ETC+10 (No Build)

C5.2.2 ................................................................................................. Traffic Forecast: ETC+20 (No Build)

C5.3.0 ....................................................................................................... Traffic Forecast: ETC (W/ Road)

C5.3.1 ................................................................................................. Traffic Forecast: ETC+10 (W/ Road)

C5.3.2 ................................................................................................. Traffic Forecast: ETC+20 (W/ Road)


C-1

Design Year Traffic Analysis

C.1. Introduction

The following discussion is intended to clarify methods used to forecast design year traffic volumes for the project area. This study will identify the traffic impact due to projected growth at The Center at Horseheads facility. This analysis will be used to determine the appropriate geometric and control design to be considered for design alternatives. Traffic is forecasted for both the build and no build conditions to allow for informed decision-making. This traffic study encompasses the following topics:

a) Selection of appropriate design year for various aspects of this project. b) An investigation of existing traffic conditions. c) Calculation of trips generated due to development at the facility and caused by availability of

the new route. d) Calculation of ETC, ETC+10, ETC+20 and ETC+30 design year traffic volumes under build

and no build conditions. e) Determination of level of service (LOS) for segments and intersections affected by the

proposed connector road.

The exhibits that are also printed in the main body of the design report follow the design report naming convention. Exhibits unique to this appendix begin with the letter “C”.

C.2. Design Year

The following design years were selected in accordance with the NYSDOT Project Development Manual Appendix 5:

• Existing Conditions (2009)

• ETC – Estimated time of completion (2011)

• ETC+10 (2021)

• ETC+20 (2031)

• ETC+30 (2041)

The design year of the project is 2031, ETC+20, as new roadway construction is the primary work type involved. The traffic for this year is used to determine many of the design elements of this project. Geometry of the intersection, the number of lanes, the length of turn lane storage and the type of traffic control are determined using ETC+20 traffic volumes.

The ETC+10 traffic data is used to portray a gradual build out of the Center at Horseheads facility. It is used to track the growth of traffic over time. This design year is important for understanding the traffic pattern which would result if the Center at Horseheads facility never becomes fully utilized. Ideally designs will be as functional for ETC+10 as they are for ETC+20. This flexibility will provide for a strong design even if future traffic conditions are somewhat uncertain.

ETC+30 design year traffic volumes are considered for any design choices involving the proposed bridge on the new Connector Road. For all other areas the ETC+30 traffic projections have been omitted.


C-2

C.3. Existing Traffic Volumes

Exhibit C.3 is a site map which indicates the locations at which traffic volume counts were taken.

Exhibit C.3 Project Location Map

Project Study Area

TURN COUNT LOCATION

TUBE COUNT LOCATION


C-3

Existing traffic data for the project area was collected from several sources.

• Turning movement counts were performed in 2009 at the three major entrances to the Center at Horseheads warehousing facility. Specifically the intersections of Old Ithaca Road and 5

th Street,

North Main Street and 6th Street, as well as Wygant Road and A Street were crucial for analyzing

the traffic generated by the Center at Horseheads facility. The information gathered in these counts was used to help determine the distribution of future trips generated by this facility. For example because 35% of vehicles currently enter the facility from Old Ithaca Road, it is assumed that in the future, if no road is built, 35% of vehicles will continue to enter from Old Ithaca Road. Exhibit C4.3 – Trip Generation Percent (No Build) provides a breakdown of the traffic distribution pattern in terms of percent entering and exiting.

• Also turning movement counts were taken at intersections most likely to be effected by the proposed Connector Road. These were determined to be the intersections of Route 13 and East Franklin Street as well as North Main Street, Old Ithaca Road and E. Franklin Street (Hanover Square). Exhibit C3.2 – Existing Traffic Volume provides a summary of all relevant intersection traffic in the project area.

• 2004 through 2009 NYSDOT traffic counts provided additional information critical to the design of this project. These traffic counts include data on Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT), 85

th

Percentile Speed (the speed below which the 85% of traffic travels), and the Percent Heavy Vehicles. This data was found for points on NYS Route 13, North Main Street, E. Franklin Street & Wygant Road which are inside the project area. Values from these traffic counts are included in Exhibits 2.3.1.5.a and 2.3.1.6.a.

C.4. Trip Generation and Traffic Distribution

The anticipated development at the Center at Horseheads is expected to cause a significant increase in commuter and heavy vehicle traffic on the network of roads shown in the project area. To gauge the likely development at the facility, Southern Tier Economic Growth (STEG) provided information regarding the facility’s current operations, plans for development in the near future and the potential for growth as the facility reaches its desired capacity. The facility has a mix of manufacturing and industrial uses as well as 2 million square feet of warehouse and distribution space, including a Fed-Ex ground operation. The future plans for the facility include the construction of a new facility on Parcel E that will employ 400 year-round employees, a new food bank warehouse and a maintenance shop. Refer to Exhibit C4.2 for a parcel by parcel description of operations at the Center at Horseheads.

Using the estimated size of the facility and number of employees, additional future traffic volumes during the AM and PM peak hours were estimated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 7

th Edition equations. ITE Trip Generation equations are based on statistical data from

similar facilities. These trip generation projections where made for several design years based on the expected level of development. For ETC and ETC+10 it is expected that construction of the Schlumberger facility, the food bank and Kayden Industries maintenance shop will be complete and the warehouse will be 20% utilized. For ETC+20 and ETC+30 it is projected that the existing warehousing buildings will become utilized at 90% capacity. The traffic generated by each parcel due to development is shown in Exhibit C.4.1.

EliasDJ

Rectangle


C-5

Exhibit C.4.2 is a summary of these projections dividing the total trips generated into trips entering and trips exiting based on ITE statistics.

Exhibit C.4.2 Weekday Peak Hour Trips Generated by Center at Horseheads

Existing Conditions ETC, ETC+10 ETC+20, ETC+30

Total Projected Trips Generated 167 (198) 655 (559) 1129 (1118)

Trips Entering 103 (55) 459 (162) 739 (207)

Trips Exiting 64 (143) 196 (397) 390 (911) Note: AM (PM) As important as the number of trips generated by the facility is the distribution of trips throughout the roadway network. This distribution is quantified in flow diagrams 4.3 and 4.4 in terms of percent entering or exiting. The sum of all the movements entering or exiting the CHH facility is 100%. For this analysis it is assumed that if no road is built the traffic distribution will remain the same as the current distribution. To find the volume of traffic generated at a given turn movement multiply the percentage by the trips entering or exiting the facility. Flow diagrams C4.3.1 and C4.3.2 show the trips generated by the CHH facility and the path they will take on the surrounding roadway network if no road is built.

For this traffic analysis it is assumed that once the new Connector Road is constructed a large percentage of drivers will utilize the new route shifting traffic away from Hanover Square and toward the Route 13 and East Franklin Street intersection. This projected shift in traffic at each turning movement can be seen in flow diagram C.4.4 – Trip Generation: Percent (W/ Road). By comparing flow diagrams C.4.3 and C.4.4 this shift in traffic distribution can be seen. For example currently 32% percent of AM traffic enters and exits the facility at North Main Street and travels through the Hanover square intersection. This traffic consists of commuters and high levels of large trucks. With the construction of the new Connector Road it is very likely that many commuters and most large trucks will avoid this congested intersection. This impact can be seen in flow diagram C.4.4 where only 9% of traffic takes this same route. Once this shift in distribution is estimated trip generation diagrams for the (W/ Road) condition can be found using the same method described before.

It is important in this analysis not only to consider traffic generated by the facility but also traffic on the existing roadway network. A 1% compound growth rate is assumed for the existing traffic.

C.5. Traffic Data C.5.1. Traffic Speeds

Traffic speed data was taken from 2008 NYSDOT Traffic Counts.

Exhibit 2.3.1.5-A Speed Data

Street Name Posted/

Regulatory Speed

Average Speed

50th Percentile

Speed

85th Percentile

Speed Route 13

(0.4 mi. North of Franklin Street) 55 mph NB 68.2 mph SB 67.6 mph

NB 68.4 mph SB 68.1 mph 73.5 mph

Old Ithaca Road (North of Franklin Street) 40 mph N/A N/A 43 mph

5th Street/E Street (West of Old Ithaca Road) N/A N/A N/A 35 mph


C-6

C.5.2. Traffic Flow Diagrams (No Build)

Traffic flow diagrams in this appendix show the AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes. Traffic forecasts were made for design years ETC, ETC+10, and ETC+20. These were estimated by adding the trips generated by the facility to the existing traffic. Exhibits C.5.2.0, C.5.2.1 and C.5.2.2 show the traffic flow diagrams under no build conditions for ETC, ETC+10 and ETC+20 respectively.

The average annual daily traffic (AADT), design hour volume (DHV), and percent trucks are summarized in the following exhibit. Existing AADT for Route 13, Old Ithaca Road, N. Main St. and Wagant Road were obtained from tube counts and verified with turning movement data for consistency. These are calculated for the design year by applying a compound growth rate which is developed from the traffic forecast. Throughout the following exhibits, values in parentheses refer to PM volumes.

C.5.3. Traffic Flow Diagrams (W/ Road)

Changes to traffic patterns are expected to occur upon completion of the proposed connector road. Methods used to estimate these differences were discussed in section 4.0. Exhibits C.5.3.0, C.5.3.1 and C.5.3.2 show the traffic flow diagrams under build conditions for ETC, ETC+10 and ETC+20 respectively.

Exhibit 2.3.1.6-A Traffic Data Forecast (No Build)

Segment Existing (2009)

ETC (2011)

ETC+10 (2021)

ETC+20 (2031)

Route 13 (North of East

Franklin Street)

AADT 8,560 8,920 9,840 10,920 DHV 820 (790) 850 (820) 940 (910) 1,040 (1,010) Heavy Vehicles 13.8% 13.8% 13.8% 13.8% Peak Hour HV 12.0% 12.0% 12.0% 12.0%

Old Ithaca Road (Between Hanover

Square & 5th Street)

AADT 9,160 10,370 11,360 13,180 DHV 710 (710) 820 (780) 890 (860) 1,070 (1,020) Heavy Vehicles 9.4% 9.8% 9.9% 10.1% Peak Hour HV 7.4% 7.9% 8.0% 8.3%

North Main Street (Between Hanover


AADT 8,030 10,230 11,100 13,830 DHV 530 (730) 700 (900) 750 (980) 970 (1,310) Heavy Vehicles 9.4% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% Peak Hour HV 7.4% 9.0% 9.0% 9.0%

Wygant Road (Between N. Main Street & A Street)

AADT 7,170 8,380 9,150 10,840 DHV 530 (600) 640 (690) 690 (750) 760 (1,020) Heavy Vehicles 9.4% 9.4% 9.4% 9.4% Peak Hour HV 7.4% 7.4% 7.4% 7.4%

5th Street (Between Old Ithaca Road &

E Street)

AADT 605 2035 2762 3730 DHV 63 (58) 243 (164) 330 (223) 423 (323) Heavy Vehicles 14% 14% 14% 14% Peak Hour HV 12% 12% 12% 12%

E Street (Between 5th Street &

Schlumberger)



C-7

The average annual daily traffic (AADT), design hour volume (DHV), and percent trucks are summarized in the following exhibit. These are calculated for the design year by applying a compound growth rate which is developed from the traffic forecast.

C.6. Level of Service (LOS) The LOS for effected segments and intersections is found using a variety of methods. The segment LOS is found using the data in Exhibits 2.3.1.6.1-A and 3.3.1.6-A. Segments are analyzed using HCS 2000 software.

Each intersection’s LOS is found using traffic volumes from the flow diagrams. Because of the unique conditions presented by certain intersections the method of analysis varies from one intersection to the next.

Exhibit 3.3.1.6 Traffic Data Forecast (Build)

Segment Existing (2009)

ETC (2011)

ETC+10 (2021)

ETC+20 (2031)

Route 13 (North of East

Franklin Street)

AADT 8,560 11,130 12,060 15,170 DHV (2 way) 820 (790) 1,060 (1030) 1,150 (1110) 1,400 (1440) Heavy Vehicles 13.8% 13.8% 13.8% 13.8% Peak Hour HV 12.0% 12.0% 12.0% 12.0%

Old Ithaca Road (Between Hanover


AADT 9,160 8,140 8,990 10,260 DHV (2 way) 710 (710) 670 (670) 740 (740) 850 (850) Heavy Vehicles 9.4% 8.4% 8.4% 8.4% Peak Hour HV 7.4% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%

North Main Street (Between Hanover


AADT 8,030 8,580 9,450 11,200 DHV (2 way) 530 (730) 580 (770) 640 (840) 760 (1,020) Heavy Vehicles 9.4% 8.4% 8.4% 8.4% Peak Hour HV 7.4% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%

Wygant Road (Between N. Main Street & A Street)


5th Street (Between Old Ithaca Road &

E Street)

AADT 605 3,740 5,075 7,000 DHV 63 (58) 384 (364) 521 (494) 663 (737) Heavy Vehicles 14% 14% 14% 14% Peak Hour HV 12% 12% 12% 12%

E Street (Between 5th Street &

Schlumberger)


Connector Road

ETC (2011)

ETC+10 (2021)

ETC+20 (2031)

ETC+30 (2041)



C-8

Route 13 & E. Franklin Street

This intersection is signal controlled and no other control options are assessed. This intersection is analyzed using Synchro traffic signal software at design years ETC, ETC+10 and ETC+20 for both the build and no build conditions. The SYNCRO outputs are included in Appendix C2.

Route 13 & Connector Road

This proposed intersection is analyzed as a stop controlled intersection a signalized intersection and a roundabout. The stop controlled case has an eastbound right turn lane and a northbound left turn lane to prevent long queue lengths. The signalized case requires a northbound left turn lane to prevent long queue lengths. Both the stop controlled and the signalized cases are analyzed using Synchro traffic signal software. The roundabout case is analyzed using SIDRA software as directed by the 2000 DOT FHA Roundabout Guide. Both are analyzed at design years ETC, ETC+10 and ETC+20 for build conditions. The outputs are included in Appendix C2.

Old Ithaca Rd. & Connector Road

This proposed intersection is analyzed as two way stop controlled, signalized and as a roundabout. The stop controlled and signalized cases are both analyzed with and without left turn lane in the northbound and southbound legs using Synchro traffic signal software. The roundabout case is analyzed using SIDRA software as directed by the 2000 DOT FHA Roundabout Guide. All three cases are analyzed at design years ETC, ETC+10 and ETC+20 for build conditions. The outputs are included in Appendix C2.

Hanover Square

Because of this intersection’s unusual geometry, five legged with one free leg and four stop controlled legs, a specialized method of analysis is developed. This approach involves analyzing Hanover Square as two different intersections and using superposition to add the delays together. First it is analyzed as a four way stop control (AWSC), ignoring the free movement. This is done using HCS 2000 software. Then the delay caused by the free movement of vehicles on Main St. northbound is added to the (AWSC) delay to find the total delay. A detailed calculation of these delays can be seen in Appendix C2.

5th Street & E Street

The intersection on CHH property may be realigned. This intersection is analyzed as if the Connector Road continues on an east-west path onto the existing 5th Street alignment and E Street intersected it with a stop control. It is also analyzed as if the Connector Road curved to a north-south path onto the existing E Street alignment and 5th Street intersected it with a stop control. Both cases are analyzed using Synchro traffic signal software at design years ETC, ETC+10 and ETC+20 for build conditions. The outputs are included in Appendix C2.

.

C.6.1. Level of Service Criteria

Level of service is presented as a letter from A to F with A representing free flowing, unimpeded traffic with little or no delay and F representing highly congested traffic flow with long delays. For urban intersections D is the desirable minimum overall LOS.

It is important to note that LOS is not the only criteria used to determine an intersections control & geometry. Also important are delays for individual movements, queue lengths, and accident data.

C.6.2. LOS Summary (No Build)

Future no-action design year level of service findings for segments of the effected study area are provided below. These values are determined by using forecasted peak hour traffic volumes and HCS 2000 capacity analysis software.

EliasDJ

Rectangle


C-9

Exhibit 2.3.1.7-A Segment LOS Summary (No Build)

Segment ETC ETC+10 ETC+20 Route 13

(0.4 mi. North of Franklin Street) C (C) C (C) C (C)

Old Ithaca Road (North of East Franklin Street) C (C) D (C) D (D)

5th Street (Between Old Ithaca Road & E Street) A (A) A (A) A (A)

E Street (Between 5th Street & Schlumberger) A (A) A (A) A (A)

Future no-action design year level of service findings for Intersections in the effected study area are provided below.

Exhibit 2.3.1.7-B Intersection LOS/Average Delay Summary (No Build)

Intersection Geometry/Control Type ETC ETC+10 ETC+20

ETC+20 (Worst Case Approach)

Route 13 & East Franklin Street

4 leg signalized

B (B) 13.3 (10.0)

B (B) 14.4 (10.5)

B (B) 16.1 (11.3)

C (B) 24.5 (15.1)

Old Ithaca Road & 5th Street

3 leg 1 stop on 5th Street

A (A) 3.6 (3.7)

A (A) 3.9 (3.9)

E (C) 37.6 (15.2)

F (F) 267.3 (67.5)

Hanover Square 5 leg 1 free on S. Main Street

C (C) 17.5 (19.8)

C (C) 19.3 (23.3)

D (F) 30.0 (67.8)

E (F) 45.0 (151.4)

N. Main Street & 6th Street


A (A) 2.6 (6.6)

A (A) 2.7 (8.4)

A (F) 6.3 (96.8)

D (F) 29.8 (229.3)

Wygant Road & A Street

3 leg 1 stop on A Street

A (A) 1.2 (3.4)

A (A) 1.2 (3.5)

A (C) 2.4 (24.5)

C (F) 20.1 (86.7)



A (A) 7.7 (5.7)

A (A) 7.7 (5.7)

A (A) 8.9 (6.2)

B (B) 12.5 (11.1)

C.6.3. Los Summary (W/ ROAD)

Design year level of service findings for segments of the effected study area are provided below. These values were determined using forecasted peak hour traffic volumes and HCS 2000 capacity analysis software.

Exhibit 3.3.1.7-A Segment LOS Summary (Build)

Segment ETC ETC+10 ETC+20 ETC+30 Connector Road

(Between Route 13 & Old Ithaca Road) B (B) C (C) C (C) C (C)

Route 13 (0.4 mi. North of Franklin Street) C (C) D (D) D (D) --------

Old Ithaca Road (North of East Franklin Street) C (C) C (C). C (C) --------

5th Street (Between Old Ithaca Road & E Street) A (A) A (A) B (B) --------

E Street (Between 5th Street & Schlumberger) A (A) A (A) A (A) --------


C-10

Design year level of service findings for Intersections in the effected study area are provided below.

C.7. Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis A traffic signal warrant analysis is prepared to determine if a signal is justified at the proposed intersections. This analysis is prepared in accordance with the FHWA Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 2003 Edition, Chapter 4C. This warrant analysis consists of 8 different criteria based on various parameters such as normal traffic, peak hour traffic, and accidents. Using projected traffic volumes for the Estimated Time of Completion (ETC), the intersection of Old Ithaca Road and the Connector Road meets three of the eight warrants, justifying a signalized intersection. Using the same time period, the intersection of Route 13 and the Connector Road satisfies four of the eight traffic signal warrants. The Warrant Analysis calculations are included in Appendix C2.

Exhibit 3.3.1.7-B Intersection LOS/ Average Delay Summary (W/ Road)

Intersection Geometry/Control Type ETC ETC+10 ETC+20

ETC+20 (Worst Case Approach)

Route 13 & E. Franklin St.

4 leg signalized

B (A) 12.9 (8.0)

B (A) 17.1 (8.6)

C (A) 21.4 (8.6)

C (C) 28.3 (24.5)

Route 13 & Connector Rd.

3 leg w/ EBTL & NBTL 1 stop on Connector Rd.

A (A) 3.6 (4.4)

A (A) 3.8 (4.5)

A (B) 7.4 (12.6)

E (E) 35.1 (36.8)

3 leg w/ NBTL signalized

A (A) 5.5 (9.3)

A (A) 8.8 (9.6)

A (A) 8.9 (7.7)

B (A) 11.6 (9.7)

3 leg single lane Roundabout

A (A) 5.7 (5.6)

A (A) 5.7 (5.6)

A (A) 7.2 (6.2)

A (A) 7.4 (6.2)

Old Ithaca & Connector Rd.

4 leg w/ stops on Connector Rd. & 5th St.

F (F) 96.6 (>100)

F (F) >100 (>100)

F (F) >100 (>100)

F (F) >100 (>100)

4 leg w/ NBTL/SBTL Stops on Connector Rd.

& 5th St.

F (F) 93.9 (>100)

F (F) >100 (>100)

F (F) >100 (>100)

F (F) >100 (>100)

4 leg signalized

B (B) 12.9 (15.8)

B (B) 17.9 (16.1)

C (D) 32.2 (37.4)

D (E) 48.1 (57.4)

4 leg w/ NBTL/SBTL signalized

B (B) 11.7 (15.8)

B (B) 14.2 (15.6)

C (C) 32.2 (33.2)

D (D) 48.8 (47.5)

4 Leg single lane Roundabout

A (A) 7.2 (7.1)

A (A) 7.4 (7.3)

A (A) 9.3 (9.5)

B (B) 10.8 (14.0)

Hanover Square 5 leg 1 Free on Main St. NB

B (C) 14.7 (15.2)

C (C) 15.9 (16.8)

C (C) 18.5 (21.7)

D (E) 25.8 (37.7)

N. Main St. & 6th St.


A (A) 1.5 (3.9)

A (A) 1.5 (3.9)

A (A) 2.4 (5.6)

B (C) 13.9 (20.3)

Wygant Rd. & A St.

3 leg 1 stop on A Street

A (A) 1.1 (3.7)

A (A) 1.1 (4.8)

A (C) 2.2 (15.9)

C (F) 20.7 (60.1)


3 leg 1 stop on E Street

A (A) 2.6 (5.8)

A (A) 2.6 (5.8)

A (C) 3.5 (16.9)

B (D) 14.2 (30.7)



A (A) 3.1 (3.4)

A (A) 3.1 (3.4)

A (A) 3.9 (5.9)

B (C) 11.7 (19.6)


C-11

C.8. Conclusions The anticipated effect of the proposed Connector Road and projected growth from the Center at Horseheads facility on traffic patterns in the project area is determined by this traffic analysis. This analysis shows that the current traffic network will be significantly impacted with full build out of the facility if the Connector Road is not constructed. It is shown that under “no build” conditions the intersections entering and exiting the facility will experience increased delay and queues during the peak hour. In addition, much of the traffic generated from the facility travels through the historic Hanover Square intersection and causes significant delay, long queues and a failing level of service during the ETC PM peak hour.

The analysis shows that constructing the Connector Road will divert enough traffic away from the North Main Street exit of the facility and allow the Hanover Square intersection to operate at a C level of service or better in all analysis design years. It has also been determined that the proposed intersections caused by the Connector Road would require either a traffic signal or a roundabout in order to function efficiently as traffic increases.

design year traffic analysis - erdman anthony c1.pdfdesign year traffic analysis c.1. introduction...

Documents