Auburn FSR Modelling Report Rev G September 2013

TRAFFIC MODELLING

INCREASED FLOOR SPACE RATIO CONTROLS FOR CERTAIN LAND ZONED B4 MIXED USE AND R4 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITHIN

THE AUBURN LOCAL GOVERNEMENT AREA

SEPTEMBER 2013

Traffic Modelling—Increased Floor Space Ratio Controls for Certain Land Zoned B4 Mixed Use and R4 High Density Residential Within the Auburn Local Government Area

Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd-ABN 76 104 485 289

f:\aa005093\reporting\ fsr report revised_august 2013\auburn fsr_modelling report_rev g_september 2013.docx

Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd

ABN 76 104 485 289

Level 5, 141 Walker Street Locked Bag 6503 North Sydney NSW 2060 Australia

Tel: +61 2 8907 9000

Fax: +61 2 8907 9001

www.hyderconsulting.com

AUBURN CITY COUNCIL

TRAFFIC MODELLING

Increased Floor Space Ratio Controls for Certain Land Zoned B4 Mixed Use and R4 High Density Residential Within the Auburn Local Government Area

Author

Alen Krljic/Kung

Nigarnjanagool

Checker Kung Nigarnjanagool

Approver Mukit Rahman

Report No AA005093_FSR_RevG

Date September 2013

This report has been prepared for Auburn City Council in

accordance with the terms and conditions of

appointment for Traffic Modelling dated July 2012. Hyder

Consulting Pty Ltd (ABN 76 104 485 289) cannot accept

any responsibility for any use of or reliance on the

contents of this report by any third party.


Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd-ABN 76 104 485 289 Page i

f:\aa005093\reporting\fsr report revised_august 2013\auburn fsr_modelling report_rev g_september 2013.docx

REVISIONS Revision Date Description Prepared By Approved By

A and B 21 Sept 12 Internal Reviews KN, AK MR

C 28 Sept 12 Draft for Client’s Review KN, AK MR

E 8 Oct 12 Final Report MR, AK MR

F 15 Aug 13 Revised Draft Report for Client’s Review MR, AK MR

G 11 Sep 13 Revised Final Report MR, AK MR


Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd-ABN 76 104 485 289 Page i


Executive Summary Auburn City Council proposes to increase floor space ratio (FSR) controls applying to certain land zoned B4

Mixed Use and R4 High Density Residential under the Auburn LEP 2010. The Auburn City Urban Design

Study prepared by AECOM identified that if the proposed increase in FSRs were achieved there would be

capacity for an additional 6,566 dwellings and 162,864 m2 of mixed use podium gross floor area (GFA) for

employment uses. The potential development capacity was identified in Auburn, Lidcombe, Berala and

Regents Park town centres and villages.

This Traffic Modelling Study has been prepared by Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd (Hyder) assessing impact from

potential increase in development capacity on road network and provides recommendations on potential

upgrading works at critical intersections required to minimise impact from increased FSR.

The potential development capacity identified in Auburn, Lidcombe, Berala and Regents Park town centres

and villages will impact a number of key roads including:

� Parramatta Road;

� St Hillers Road / Silverwater Road;

� Olympic Drive / Joseph Street;

� Station Road;

� Rawson Street; and

� Auburn Road.

The additional development capacity is forecast to generate in the order of 5,000 to 6,300 additional vehicle

trips in one peak hour. It is likely that potential development capacity will have a wider network impact. The

maximum impact is forecast along the St Hillers Road/Olympic Drive and Rawson Street. The forecast traffic

increase on the key strategic network suggests that the potential FSR increase will have significant impacts

on traffic congestion particularly on intersection performance and their level of service. Of the seventeen

intersections assessed, capacity problems (low level of service F and high degree of saturation value) are

forecast at eleven intersections as follows:

� Vaughan Street / Olympic Drive;

� James Street / East Street;

� Station Road / Rawson Street;

� St Hilliers Road / Rawson Street;

� Rawson Street / South Parade;

� Georges Avenue / Joseph Street;

� Northumberland Road / Rawson Street;

� Station Road / Kerr Parade / Civic Road;

� Queen Street / Auburn Road / Civic Road;

� Olympic Dr / Joseph St; and

� Railway St / Arthur St.


Page ii Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd-ABN 76 104 485 289


The analysis identified the road capacity improvements that will be required to cater for the additional traffic

demand. This investigation reviewed existing infrastructure and then identified the need for additional

intersection improvements. These improvements include intersection widening, providing a clearway

condition during peak period and new traffic light. Table 3-10 in this report summarises intersection upgrade

tested. The tested intersection upgrade would provide a level of service D or better in 2021. The identified

intersection upgrade will have potential to improve traffic flow particularly at Auburn and Lidcombe town

centres should full development capacity in the planning proposal be achieved.


Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd-ABN 76 104 485 289 Page iii


CONTENTS

1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................3

1.1 Study Purpose..................................................................................................................................... 3

1.2 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 3

1.3 Study Aims and Objectives ................................................................................................................. 4

1.4 Reference Traffic Data and Model ...................................................................................................... 4

1.5 The Study Area ................................................................................................................................... 4

1.6 Report Structure .................................................................................................................................. 7

2 Traffic Forecasting Model ..........................................................................................................................8

2.1 Overview of Traffic Modelling Approach ............................................................................................. 8

2.2 Fit for Purpose..................................................................................................................................... 9

2.3 Model Software ................................................................................................................................... 9

2.4 Years and Time Periods Modelled .................................................................................................... 10

2.5 Strategic Model Calibration and Validation ....................................................................................... 10

2.6 SIDRA Model Development .............................................................................................................. 10

3 Impact Assessment ................................................................................................................................. 11

3.1 Development Potentials in B4 and R4 Zones ................................................................................... 11

3.2 Traffic Generation ............................................................................................................................. 11

3.3 Traffic Distribution ............................................................................................................................. 12

3.4 Impact on Road Network................................................................................................................... 15

3.4.1 Do Nothing Scenario ........................................................................................................ 16

3.4.2 Impact at Intersections from Do Nothing Scenario .......................................................... 17

3.5 Impact from Potential FSR Increase ................................................................................................. 21

3.5.1 Impact at Intersections from FSR Increase Scenario ...................................................... 23

3.6 Mitigation Measures .......................................................................................................................... 24

3.7 Strategic Cost Estimate..................................................................................................................... 33

4 Conclusion and Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 34

4.1 Key Study Findings ........................................................................................................................... 34

4.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 35


Page ii Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd-ABN 76 104 485 289


APPENDICES

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

Strategic Modelling Calibration and Validation

SIDRA Modelling Results

Intersection upgrade design sketches for strategic cost estimate


Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd-ABN 76 104 485 289 Page 3


1 Introduction

1.1 Study Purpose

The following document provides a Traffic Modelling Study (hereafter referred to as “the Study”)

of a proposal to increase floor space ratio (FSR) controls applying to certain land zoned B4 Mixed Use and R4 High Density Residential under the Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010

(‘the Auburn LEP 2010’). The Study has been commissioned by Auburn City Council (‘Council’)

to investigate the potential traffic implications of increasing FSRs at critical strategic roads and

intersections.

In the course of preparing this report relevant documents of the proposal have been reviewed

and potential traffic impacts on the road network have been assessed. The Study provides

recommendations to Council on potential upgrading works at critical intersections required to

minimise impacts from increased FSR. The overall outcome of the Study is a Traffic Modelling

assessment which determines the impact on the strategic road network arising from the

proposed increase in FSR.

1.2 Background

On 28 September 2011, Council submitted a planning proposal to the Department of Planning

and Infrastructure (DP&I) for assessment under the LEP making gateway process. At that time

the proposal was assessed by the DP&I and received a conditional gateway determination on

28 November 2011. As part of the conditions of the gateway determination, Council must

undertake the following:

� An Urban Design Study;

� A Traffic, Transport and Accessibility Study;

� A Study to demonstrate the proposal is consistent with the s.117 Direction 4.3 Flood Prone

Land; and

� Community Consultation (as stipulated in Gateway Determination will be undertaken by

Council.

The Auburn City Urban Design Study prepared for Auburn Council by AECOM (‘the AECOM

report’) has tested a number of potential development sites within Auburn, Lidcombe, Berala

and Regents Park. The revised AECOM study (August 2013) identified that if the proposed

increase in FSRs were achieved there would be capacity for an additional 6,566 dwellings and

162,864 m2 of mixed use podium gross floor area (GFA) for employment uses.

Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd (Hyder)’s Study has assessed traffic impact from potential

development capacity of 6,566 dwellings and 162,864 m2 of mixed use podium gross floor area

(GFA) identified in the revised AECOM report.

This report forms the traffic specific element of the above mentioned Traffic, Transport and

Accessibility Study. Auburn City Council has prepared the transport and accessibility elements

of the study.


Page 4 Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd-ABN 76 104 485 289


1.3 Study Aims and Objectives

The main purpose of this Study in relation to traffic is to undertake modelling assessment of two

distinct scenarios, assessing traffic impact on the road network and providing mitigation

measures. The following two scenarios are assessed:

� Do nothing scenario: Testing the impact of no increase in proposed FSR controls. Analysis

has been undertaken for future year 2021 taking into account background traffic growth.

� Growth scenario: Testing impact of the recommended envelop based on the Auburn City

Urban Design Study. Analysis has been undertaken for future year 2021 taking into account

additional development trips from potential capacity in residential and mixed use podium

GFA.

1.4 Reference Traffic Data and Model

For the purpose of this Study, recent traffic counts and modelling data have been sourced from

a separate LGA based traffic study being undertaken by Hyder for Auburn Council entitled

“Auburn LGA Traffic and Transport Study”. A comprehensive traffic survey was undertaken to

satisfy the need and purpose of the Auburn LGA study. They included intersection classified

turning movement counts (car and heavy vehicle) for AM and PM peak, queue length data at

critical intersections; daily automatic traffic counts for one week period, travel speed and travel

time and parking occupancy. The traffic survey was undertaken by Skyhigh in July 2012. For

this Study traffic counts data was used where appropriate.

For the purpose of this Study, Hyder has updated its Sydney Strategic Traffic Model (SSTM)1

comprising key strategic roads and intersections within the Auburn LGA area. To quantify the

future background growth and impact of the proposed FSR increase, Hyder used both strategic

and intersection models. To assess the existing and future intersection performance, Hyder

used SIDRA modelling software. For the SSTM Hyder used TransCAD software.

1.5 The Study Area

The Auburn Local Government Area (LGA) is located approximately 20 kilometres west of

Sydney CBD. In general, the Auburn LGA boundaries include the Parramatta River and Duck

River in the north and west, Homebush Bay and Powell’s Creek to the east and the Sydney

Water Supply Line to the south. The Auburn LGA shares boundaries with Parramatta,

Bankstown, Strathfield and Canada Bay LGAs.

The potential development capacity of B4 Mixed Use and R4 High Density Residential areas

were identified in two town centres and two villages including Auburn, Lidcombe, Berala and

Regents Park (hereafter referred to as “the Investigation Area”).

Figure 1-1 shows the Investigation Area. The location of key intersections assessed in this

Study is also shown in Figure 1-1. Note that only areas which the Auburn City Urban Design

Study identified as having capacity for additional growth have been mapped. As such the

Investigation Area does not match the contours of the B4 and R4 zones exactly.

A brief description of town centres and villages in the context of Investigation Area is

summarised as follows:

1 Hyder’s Sydney Strategic Model is based on travel demand from Sydney Strategic Travel Model (STM) developed and

operated by the Bureau of Transport Statistics (BTS).




� Auburn Town Centre. Auburn is the largest town centre in the Auburn LGA and is

located in the vicinity of the Auburn Railway Station. The town centre already provides a

wide range of retail, commercial and community services to Auburn area. It is well

serviced with public transport with frequent rail services directly to the Sydney CBD.

Government and private buses connect Auburn to all the centres within the Auburn LGA

as well as neighbouring suburbs such as Parramatta and Blacktown.

� Lidcombe Town Centre. Lidcombe is the second largest town centre within the Auburn

LGA. The railway line divides the centre into northern and southern parts. The centrally

located Lidcombe Railway Station provides good public transport connectivity to other

local centres within the LGA. The 2006 Journey to Work (JTW) data indicated majority of

work trips to Lidcombe originate from neighbouring areas such as Parramatta and

Blacktown and also within the Auburn LGA.

� Berala Small Village. Berala is serviced by the Berala Railway Station which is located in

the middle of the village. The majority of work trips to Berala village originate within the

Auburn LGA.

� Regents Park Small Village. Regents Park is serviced by the Regents Park Railway

Station which is to the west of the village. There are also two bus routes that connect the

village to other local centres within the LGA. The majority of work trips originate from

within the LGA and neighbouring Bankstown area.




Figure 1-1 Investigation Area and Location of Key Intersections




1.6 Report Structure

The Traffic Modelling report provides an assessment of the traffic modelling relating to the

proposed FSR increase to B4 Mixed Use and R4 High Density Residential zones under the

Auburn LEP 2010. The chapters are as follows:

� Section 1 provides an overview of the Study, background information, study objectives, and

traffic investigation area.

� Section 2 provides an overview of the strategic traffic model, its purpose, model network

assumptions and analysis. Model calibration and validation results are included in this

section.

� Section 3 provides an assessment of the predicted traffic impact that is likely to be caused

by the proposed FSR increases at key roads and intersections. This section provides an

overview of the potential capacity in residential and mixed use podium GFA. Trip generation

and distribution to and from the Investigation Area is documented. A list of potential

upgrading works at key intersections is also detailed in Section 3; and

� Section 4 summarises the key Study findings and recommendations.




2 Traffic Forecasting Model

2.1 Overview of Traffic Modelling Approach

A strategic traffic forecasting model was developed for the specific purpose of investigating

traffic impact within Auburn LGA study area. The demand is based on the Sydney-wide

Strategic Travel Model (STM) developed by the Bureau of Transport Statistics (BTS).

Hyder has produced the overall strategic traffic forecasting model for the specific project

purpose with inputs from the STM model. The STM model adopts a four-step approach for

determining transport demand.

� Trip generation – calculating the number of trips originating from each geographical area

– based on land use, population and employment forecasts;

� Trip distribution – determining the linkages between trip origins and destinations;

� Mode choice – estimating the proportion of travel by each transport mode (eg. car, public

transport) between each origin and destination;

� Assignment – determining the roads and public transport services used by each traveller

between each origin and destination.

Consistent with the STM travel zones, Hyder’s strategic traffic model is based on 2006 travel

zone system covering the Sydney Metropolitan Area. Hyder’s base and future year models were

developed using STM trip tables. The land use assumptions in STM were based on recent

population and employment forecast (October 2009 Release). The population and employment

forecast was compatible with the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (then Department of

Planning) 2008 Release Population Projections.

Hyder’s SSTM model was calibrated and validated at key regional screenlines developed by the

Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) across the Sydney road network. Considerable past effort

had been invested in Hyder’s model when assessing major strategic projects in Sydney. Hyder’s

SSTM is in progressive state of improvement. The SSTM model specifically quantifies traffic for

an average weekday, by way of modelling the morning and evening peaks explicitly, then

applying factors to expand and represent average weekday traffic.

� AM 7am to 9am; and

� PM 3pm to 6pm.

These time periods coincide with those adopted by BTS’s STM model.

For this Study relevant SSTM model updates, calibration, validation results are documented in

Appendix A.

Figure 2-1 below shows existing road network in the context of the Auburn LGA study area.




Figure 2-1 Strategic Road Network

2.2 Fit for Purpose

Hyder’s Sydney Strategic Traffic Model (SSTM) was updated for the specific purpose of

investigating traffic impact within the study area. The traffic forecasting model was developed to:

� Create a tool capable of forecasting the traffic volumes on study area under different

access and network scheme scenarios, with outputs sufficiently detailed to provide

growth estimates as input to intersection models (SIDRA); and

� Provide input for intersection geometry analysis, and to assist in the decision process

quantifying network impact of a proposal to increase floor space ratio (FSR) controls

applying to certain land zoned B4 Mixed Use and R4 High Density Residential in Auburn

Local Government Area.

2.3 Model Software

Hyder’s Sydney Strategic Model (SSTM) was built and operated in TransCAD Transportation

GIS software. Version 4.7 was used for SSTM. TransCAD fully integrates GIS with planning,

modelling and logistics applications. It combines the capabilities of digital mapping, geographic

database management and presentation graphics with sophisticated transport models.

TransCAD provides a full complement of traffic assignment procedures that are used for




modelling urban traffic. TransCAD is widely used in both the public and private sectors. Detailed

intersection modelling was undertaken using SIDRA intersection Version 5.0 (SIDRA).

2.4 Years and Time Periods Modelled

The main purpose of the Study in relation to traffic is to undertake modelling assessment of two

distinct scenarios for the 10 year period to 2021. The modelling analysis was undertaken for

2021 for two time periods comprising:

� Morning peak (7-9am); and

� Evening peak (3-6pm).

2.5 Strategic Model Calibration and Validation

A base year highway model was calibrated and validated using 2012 counts data for the AM

and PM peak period. Detailed model calibration and validation outcomes are documented in

Appendix A. The calibration and validation results in Appendix A demonstrate that Hyder’s

SSTM model has been calibrated and validated appropriately in accordance with the industry

practice acceptance criteria. A robust calibration and validation has been achieved for both AM

and PM peak periods. The strategic models therefore are fit for this Study purpose.

2.6 SIDRA Model Development

Detailed intersection modelling was undertaken using SIDRA intersection Version 5.1. SIDRA

modelling was undertaken for seventeen intersections comprising:

� Existing condition for AM and PM peak hour traffic; and

� Future year 2021 with forecast turning movements. Should the intersection have

insufficient capacity to cater for forecast traffic volumes, intersection upgrades are

proposed with consideration of Level of Service (LoS) D and Degree of Saturation (DoS)

<1.0 or better.

Detailed SIDRA modelling results for existing and future scenarios are documented in

Appendix B.




3 Impact Assessment

3.1 Development Potentials in B4 and R4 Zones

The Urban Design Study undertaken by AECOM has provided an estimate of the potential

capacity in residential and mixed use podium GFA requirements in Auburn, Lidcombe, Berala

and Regents Park. The AECOM study identified that if the proposed increase in FSRs were

achieved in B4 Mixed Use and R4 High Density Residential zones, there would be capacity for

an additional 6,566 high density dwellings and 162,864 m2 of mixed use podium gross floor area

(GFA) for employment uses. The highest development capacity was identified in Auburn town

centre followed by Lidcombe, Berala and Regent Park. The following development capacity is

proposed at each town centres including approximately:

� 3,655 dwellings and 98,364 m2 of mixed use in Auburn town centre;

� 2,820 dwellings and 64,500 m2 of mixed use in Lidcombe town centre;

� 74 dwellings in Berala village; and

� 17 dwellings in Regents Park village.

The previous Figure 1-1 showed indicative development footprints identified in the B4 and R4

zones. It is expected that a number of potential sites within the development footprint will be

identified through detailed investigation. Each stage of future investigation will determine the

detailed access requirements, internal roads/intersections and then determines the internal road

and intersection capacity needed to service the demand from each potential site. This Study has

identified and assessed the traffic implications of additional development capacity across the

external network.

3.2 Traffic Generation

The trip generation from an additional 6,566 high density dwellings and 162,864 m2 of mixed

use podium GFA have been estimated using the RMS (then RTA) Guide to Traffic Generating

Developments, Issue 2.2, October 2002. Table 3-1 below summarises RMS’s trip generation

rate and associated assumptions used in this Study.

Table 3-1 RTA’s Standard Trip Generations Rates

Land Use RTA trip generations rates

Residential: High density dwelling: 0.29 peak hour trips per dwelling.

Employment use: Retail � For Auburn Town Centre, for retail development PM peak trip

generation is 4.6 vehicle trips per hour per 100 m2 of GLFA. This rate

is proposed for retail GLFA higher than 30,000 m2.

� For Lidcombe Town Centre, for retail development PM peak trip

generation is 5.9 vehicle trips per hour per 100 m2 of GLFA. This rate

is proposed for retail GLFA range between 20,000 and 30,000 m2

Employment use: Office

and commercial

Trip generation is 2 vehicle trips per hour per 100 m2 of GFA.

Notes: In AM peak retail trip generation is expected to be significant lower than in PM peak. In AM peak retail trip

generation rate is assumed to be about 40% lower than PM peak. About 100 m2 of GFA is equal to 75 m2of

Gross Leasable Floor Area (GLFA).

Table 3-2 summarises forecast trip generation from additional development capacity identified

at each town centres.




Table 3-2 Forecast Trip Generation from Development Potentials

Town

Centre/

Village

Capacity

for

Additional

Dwellings

Capacity for

Additional

Mixed use

podium GFA

(m2)

AM Peak 1 Hour

(Vehicles)

PM Peak 1 Hour

(Vehicles)

In Out Two

Way In Out

Two

Way

Auburn 3,655 98,364 1,407 1,415 2,822 1,692 1,822 3,514

Lidcombe 2,820 64,500 1,053 1,097 2,150 1,338 1,415 2,753

Berala 74 n/a 4 17 21 17 4 21

Regents

Park 17 n/a 1 4 5 4 1 5

Total 6,566 162,864 2,465 2,533 4,998 3,051 3,242 6,293

Of the total GFA, about 65% is assumed to be retail and 35% to be office and commercial use

(source: Auburn Town Centre Retail and Economic Study 2008).

The additional development capacity is forecast to generate in the order of 5,000 to 6,300

vehicle trips in one peak hour. The afternoon peak hour trip generation is about 26% higher

than morning peak due to higher proportion of retail trips assumed in trip generation.

The highest trip generation is forecast in Auburn Town Centre in the order of 3,500 vehicle trips.

Lidcombe would generate about 2,700 peak hour trips. The forecast trip generation at Berala

and Regents Park is low in the order of 21 to 5 trips in peak hour respectively.

The trip generation data suggests that maximum traffic impact will occur in Auburn and

Lidcombe town centres. The likely impact in Berala and Regent Park is expected to be low.

3.3 Traffic Distribution

Trip distribution of additional traffic generated by the development potentials in B4 and R4

zones are key factors in determining its impact on the external road network. Trip distribution

was quantified for the B4 and R4 zones catchment area using Hyder’s Sydney Strategic Traffic

Model (SSTM). For modelling purposes it was assumed that by 2021 the full development

capacity within the B4 and R4 sites could be achieved in the town centres and villages. Figure

3-1 shows catchment travel zones identified for trip distribution purposes. The analysis has

assumed that future trip distribution from additional development will be in line with current trip

distribution observed in catchment travel zones. Figure 3-2 shows potential travel routes from

the SSTM model in the morning peak hour. A similar distribution pattern is observed in the

afternoon peak.




Figure 3-1 Catchment Travel Zones Identified in B4 and R4 Zones




Figure 3-2 Potential Travel Routes Identified in B4 and R4 Catchment Areas




The trip distribution patterns in Figure 3-2 suggest the following observations:

� The potential development capacity will impact a number of key roads including Parramatta

Road; St Hillers Road/Silverwater Road; Olympic Drive/Joseph Street; Station Road;

Rawson Street and Auburn Road.

� A strong north south trip distribution through Auburn and Lidcombe.

� A strong travel movement north between Auburn and Parramatta.

� A strong travel movement south between Auburn and Bankstown.

It is likely that potential development capacity will have a wider network impact. The maximum

impact is forecast along the St Hillers Road/Olympic Drive and Rawson Street. The following

Section 3.4 documents additional traffic impact on road network.

3.4 Impact on Road Network

The future development capacity of B4 and R4 zones will be determined by the spare capacity

available at key intersections providing access to the investigation area. The potential

development capacity identified in Auburn, Lidcombe, Berala and Regents Park town centres

will impact a number of key roads including:


� St Hillers Road/Silverwater Road;

� Olympic Drive/Joseph Street;

� Station Road;


� Auburn Road.

In general, network impacts from potential development will decline with greater distance from

the investigation area. In consultation with Council, a total 17 intersections have been identified

both within and in close proximity to the investigation area. It is anticipated that these particular

intersections will experience the most significant traffic impact should full development capacity

in the planning proposal be achieved.

Given the strategic nature of traffic investigation needed to meet the conditions of DP&I’s

gateway determination, the identified 17 intersections are considered appropriate. The following

intersections have been modelled:

� Amy Street / Kingsland Road;



� Church Street / Bachell Avenue;

� Church Street / Olympic Drive;







� Helena Street / Park Road;

� Tilba Street / Woodburn Road / Kerrs Road;

� Railway Street / Arthur Street;





� Queen Street / Auburn Road / Civic Road; and

� Station Road / Hall Street.

The previous Figure 1-1 shows 17 key intersections in and around the Investigation Area.

The road network was analysed both with and without the potential development outlined in the

planning proposal to compare the effect of impacts on road network if the planning proposal is

achieved.

Two scenarios have been tested:

� The “do nothing” scenario testing the impact of no increase in the proposed FSR controls.

Analysis has been undertaken for future year 2021 taking into account background traffic

growth.

� The growth scenario, which tests the traffic impact of the maximum predicted growth

scenarios provided in the Auburn City Urban Design Study. Analysis has been undertaken

for future year 2021 taking into account additional development trips from potential capacity

in residential and mixed use podium GFA (i.e. 6,566 dwellings and 162,864 m2 GFA).

3.4.1 Do Nothing Scenario

Future traffic conditions on key approach routes to the investigation area will be influenced by a

combination of natural background traffic and additional traffic generated by the potential

development capacity in B4 and R4 zones. The natural background growth is estimated from

predicted population and employment growth at travel zones obtained from the Bureau of

Transport Statistics (BTS). The traffic demand in Hyder’s Sydney Strategic Model (SSTM) is

based on demand from Sydney-wide Strategic Travel Model (STM) developed by BTS.

Regardless of potential development in B4 and R4 zones, some form of infill development will

occur in Auburn, Lidcombe, Berala and Regent Park. Table 3-3 shows the 10 year predicted

population and employment growth between 2011 and 2021 at relevant travel zones but

excluding potential development capacity in B4 and R4 zones.




Table 3-3 Population and Employment Growth without Potential Development in B4 and R4 Zones

2006 2011 2021 10 year growth per

annum, 2011 to 2021

Population

(persons)

29,451 69,451 74,401 0.7%

Employment

(jobs)

23,156 23,789 24,667 0.4%

Notes: All travel zones in Figure 3-1 was combined for reporting purpose.

The BTS data in Table 3-3 shows the natural population and employment growth in the order of

0.4% to 0.7% per annum between 2011 and 2021.

It is assumed that background traffic will grow in line with infill development growth. As such, a

total 5% growth over the 10 year period is assumed. For modelling the impacts of the “do

nothing” scenario, the existing traffic volumes at the seventeen intersections have been

assumed to grow by 0.5% per annum to 2021.

3.4.2 Impact at Intersections from Do Nothing Scenario

Intersection Levels of Service (LoS) was assessed using the standard RMS Level of Service

criteria for intersections (see Table 3-4 below).

Table 3-4 LoS Criteria for Intersection Capacity Analysis

Level of

Service

Average Delay per

Vehicle (secs/veh)

Traffic Signals, Roundabout Give Way & Stop

Signs

A <14 Good operation Good operation

B 15 to 28 Good with acceptable delays &

spare capacity

Acceptable delays

& spare capacity

C 29 to 42 Satisfactory Satisfactory, but

accident study

required

D 43 to 56 Operating near capacity Near capacity &

accident study

required

E 57 to 70 At capacity; at signals,

incidents will cause excessive

delays. Roundabouts require

other control mode

At capacity,

requires other

control mode

F >70 Unsatisfactory with excessive

queuing

Unsatisfactory with

excessive queuing

Source: RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments




Table 3-5 and Table 3-6 shows forecast AM and PM peak LoS results for “do nothing” scenario

for year 2021. For a comparative purpose, the existing 2012 LoS results are also showed.

Table 3-5 Forecast Level of Service Summary for Morning (AM) Peak for Do Nothing Scenario

ID Ref Intersection Control Type

Existing

(2012)

Do Nothing

Scenario (2021)

DoS Avg

Delay LoS DoS

Avg

Delay LoS

1 I-1 Amy St / Kingsland Rd (3)

Roundabout 0.60 17 B 0.64 18 B

2 I-13 Vaughan St / Olympic

Dr(2) Signal 1.01 62 E 1.06 82 F

3 I-14 James St / East St(3) Roundabout 0.87 32 C 0.92 41 C

4 I-16 Church St / Bachell Ave(3)

Signal 0.40 15 B 0.43 15 B

5 I-18 Church St / Olympic Dr(2) Signal 0.75 17 B 0.78 18 B

6 I-22 Station Rd / Rawson St(3)

Signal 0.82 29 C 0.80 33 C

7 I-37 St Hilliers Rd / Rawson

St(2)

Signal 0.89 41 C 0.93 46 D

8 I-39 Rawson St / South Pde(3) Signal 0.74 30 C 0.77 31 C

9 I-42 Helena St / Park Rd Roundabout 0.61 16 B 0.64 17 B

10 I-46 Tilba St / Woodburn Rd /

Kerrs Rd Roundabout 0.41 12 A 0.43 12 A

11 I-17 Railway St / Arthur St(3) Signal 0.54 17 B 0.56 17 B

12 I-43 Olympic Dr / Joseph St(2)

Partial Signal 1.00 7 A 1.00 7 A

13 I-44 Georges Ave / Joseph

St(2)

Signal 1.30 60 E 1.40 73 F

14 I-51 Northumberland Rd /

Rawson St(3)

Signal 0.79 38 C 0.89 42 C

15 I-47 Station Rd / Kerr Pde /

Civic Rd

Priority (Future

Signal) (1)

0.46 12 A 0.76 31 C

16 I-49 Queen St / Auburn Rd /

Civic Rd

Future Signal (five

way) (1)

n/a n/a n/a 0.72 35 C

17 I-52 Station Rd / Hall St Roundabout 0.50 18 B 0.53 19 B

Note: (1) New traffic signals are proposed by Council. Proposed intersection footprint was provided by Council. (2) State

Roads, (3) Regional Roads. The road classification was sourced from RMS.




Table 3-6 Forecast Level of Service Summary for Afternoon (PM) Peak for Do Nothing Scenario


Existing

(2012)

Do Nothing

Scenario (2021)

DoS Avg

Delay LoS DoS

Avg

Delay LoS

1 I-1 Amy St / Kingsland Rd (3)

Roundabout 0.77 19 B 0.81 20 B


Dr(2)

Signal 1.00 55 D 1.00 59 E

3 I-14 James St / East St(3) Roundabout 0.90 17 B 0.95 18 B

4 I-16 Church St / Bachell Ave(3) Signal 0.69 19 B 0.72 20 B

5 I-18 Church St / Olympic Dr(2)

Signal 0.76 32 C 0.80 34 C

6 I-22 Station Rd / Rawson St(3) Signal 0.77 32 C 0.86 31 C


St(2) Signal 0.74 32 C 0.78 33 C

8 I-39 Rawson St / South Pde(3)

Signal 0.85 33 C 0.89 34 C




11 I-17 Railway St / Arthur St(3)

Signal 0.74 25 B 0.78 26 B

12 I-43 Olympic Dr / Joseph St(2) Partial Signal 0.64 15 B 0.66 15 B


St(2) Signal 1.10 50 D 1.20 65 E


Rawson St(3) Signal 0.88 59 E 0.92 70 E


Civic Rd

Priority (Future

Signal) (1) 0.42 13 A 0.63 29 C


Civic Rd

Future Signal (five

way) (1) n/a n/a n/a 0.68 34 C

17 I-52 Station Rd / Hall St Roundabout 0.52 15 B 0.54 15 B



Council previously identified the need for new traffic light at following two intersections:


� Queen Street / Auburn Road / Civic Road (five way intersection).

Regardless of FSR planning proposal, the above two intersections will be upgraded by the

Council.




Intersection capacity analysis based on SIDRA assessment indicated high degree of saturation

(DoS), more than 0.85 is likely to occur at the following 7 intersections from the “do nothing”

scenario:






� Georges Avenue / Joseph Street; and

� Northumberland Road / Rawson Street.

While some of the high degree of saturation values do not necessarily reflect an overcapacity

situation for the entire intersection, any further increase on traffic demand arising from potential

FSR increases will have impact on future intersection performance particularly on critical

movements.




3.5 Impact from Potential FSR Increase

The additional traffic generation from the potential FSR increase has been assigned to road

network using the Hyder’s Sydney Strategic Traffic Model (SSTM). The 10 year growth in traffic

demand between 2012 and 2021 is estimated at eight key screenlines across the investigation

area. Screenlines are used to ensure that the model accurately represents the movement of

vehicles along key corridors of road network. They are designed to cover all of the logical

choices available to drivers moving between the major roads within the study area. Figure 3-3

shows the location of screenlines where traffic impact has been reported from potential FSR

increase in B4 and R4 zones.

Figure 3-3 Location of Screenlines for Traffic Impact Assessment




Table 3-7 shows the results of peak hour annual average traffic growth between 2012 and 2021

at key screenlines if full capacity in the B4 and R4 zone is achieved.

Table 3-7 Peak Hour Traffic Growth on Screenlines, Between 2012 and 2021

Screenline Screenline Description Growth Rate per

Annum

Screenline 1 To capture traffic movements into/out of the Investigation

Area north of M4 Motorway

2.6%


Area west of Duck River

2.4%


Area south of Auburn LGA boundary

1.3%

Screenline 4 To capture north-south traffic movements on Park Road and

Joseph Street

1.6%


Area east of Auburn LGA boundary

1.6%

Screenline 6 To capture traffic movements across Parramatta Road,

Boorea St and Vaughan St

1.6%

Screenline 7 To capture traffic movements across St Hilliers Road and

Station Road

3.2%

Screenline 8 To capture traffic movements across Parramatta Road and

Rawson Street

2.3%

If full development of the R4 and B4 zones is achieved, the traffic growth is forecast in the order

of 1.3% to 3.2% per annum depending on location of screenlines. The highest growth is

forecast on screenline 7 south of Parramatta Road in the order of 3.2% per annum. The

screenline growths are in line with projected traffic distribution patterns identified in previous

Section 3.3.

This growth is significantly higher than background traffic growth (0.5% per annum) alone. The

forecast growth suggests that potential FSR increase will have a significant impact particularly

on intersection performance and their level of service. The following Section 3.5.1 documents

the impacts on intersection performance.




3.5.1 Impact at Intersections from FSR Increase Scenario

Future network capacity is re-estimated for 17 intersections for 2021 for both the AM and PM

peak hours with additional projected traffic. Table 3-8 shows the intersection performance (LoS)

results for 2021 if full capacity is achieved.

Table 3-8 Forecast Level of Service Summary for FSR Growth Scenario


AM PM

DoS Avg

Delay LoS DoS

Avg

Delay LoS

1 I-1 Amy St / Kingsland Rd (3) Roundabout 0.64 18 B 0.82 20 B


Dr(2) Signal 1.17 >100 F 1.17 >100 F

3 I-14 James St / East St(3)

Roundabout 1.20 >100 F 1.07 >100 F

4 I-16 Church St / Bachell Ave(3) Signal 0.67 15 B 0.88 40 C

5 I-18 Church St / Olympic Dr(2)

Signal 0.91 27 B 0.94 52 D

6 I-22 Station Rd / Rawson St(3) Signal 1.06 74 F 1.26 >100 F


St(2) Signal 1.11 >100 F 1.01 66 E

8 I-39 Rawson St / South Pde(3)

Signal 1.16 74 F 1.08 98 F




11 I-17 Railway St / Arthur St(3)

Signal 0.83 23 B 1.00 39 C

12 I-43 Olympic Dr / Joseph St(2) Partial Signal 1.00 39 C 0.73 18 B


St(2) Signal 1.41 73 F 1.27 78 F


Rawson St(3) Signal 1.01 99 F 1.24 >100 F


Civic Rd

Priority (Future

Signal) (1) 0.97 54 D 1.00 100 F


Civic Rd

Future Signal

(five way) (1) 1.30 >100 F 1.22 >100 F

17 I-52 Station Rd / Hall St Roundabout 0.84 50 D 0.85 45 D






The previous Section 3.4.2 identified impacts from background traffic growth at seven critical

intersections. In general, the additional traffic from the FSR increase is expected to further

reduce level of service (LoS) to those intersections being identified as problematic.

Of the seventeen intersections assessed, low LoS F is forecast for nine intersections as follows:

� Vaughan Street / Olympic Driver;



� St Hilliers Road/ Rawson Street;

� Rawson Street /South Parade;



� Station Rd/Kerr Parade / Civic Road; and

� Queen Street / Auburn Road / Civic Road.

Two additional intersections have been identified showing capacity problem at particular

movement (high DoS value) as follows:



The LoS analysis indicates that the planning proposal would result in a significant impact in

overall traffic generated by 2021. Approximately eleven intersections would require some forms

of upgrading should full residential and mixed use GFA capacity be achieved.

3.6 Mitigation Measures

Analysis of trip generation and intersection modelling indicates that the FSR planning proposal

would have significant impacts on the existing road network. A maximum level of additional

dwelling and mixed use GFA would need to be supported by future road and intersection

improvements. Based on modelling investigations, Hyder has identified preliminary

improvements required at eleven intersections. These improvements include intersection

widening, providing a clearway condition during peak period and new traffic lights. The

improvements will have potential to improve traffic flow particularly at Auburn and Lidcombe

town centres should the FSR planning proposal be adopted.

Table 3-9 shows future intersection performance (LoS) results in 2021 with potential intersection

upgrades identified at eleven intersections. Modelling results suggested that identified upgrades

would provide LoS D and DoS<1.00 or better in 2021.




Table 3-9 Forecast Level of Service in 2021 after Potential Intersection Upgrades


AM PM

DoS Avg

Delay LoS DoS

Avg

Delay LoS

2 I-13

Vaughan St / Olympic

Dr(2)Vaughan St /

Olympic Dr

Signal 0.97 42 C 0.93 43 D

3 I-14 James St / East

St(3)

James St / East St New Signal 0.76 21 B 0.71 16 B

6 I-22

Station Rd / Rawson

St(3)

Station Rd / Rawson

St

Signal 0.81 32 C 0.95 53 D

7 I-37

St Hilliers Rd / Rawson

St(2)

St Hilliers Rd /

Rawson St

Signal 0.95 54 D 0.93 44 D

8 I-39

Rawson St / South

Pde(3)Rawson St / South

Pde

Signal 0.89 40 C 0.97 47 D

11 I-17 Railway St / Arthur St(3) Signal 0.67 22 B 0.88 31 C

12 I-43 Olympic Dr / Joseph St(2)

Partial Signal 0.85 23 B 0.73 18 B

13 I-44

Georges Ave / Joseph

St(2)

Georges Ave /

Joseph St

Signal 0.92 40 C 0.95 47 D

14 I-51

Northumberland Rd /

Rawson

St(3)Northumberland Rd /

Rawson St

Signal 0.72 33 C 0.88 49 D

15 I-47

Station Rd / Kerr Pde /

Civic Rd Station Rd / Kerr

Pde / Civic Rd

Priority (Future

Signal) (1)

0.89 40 C 0.91 45 D


Civic Rd

Future Signal

(five way) (1)

0.84 30 C 0.93 50 D

(1) New traffic s ignals are proposed by Council. Proposed intersection footprint was provided by Council. (2) State


Table 3-10 summarises preliminary improvements tested for eleven intersections. An indicative

schematic upgrade is shown graphically in Figure 3-4. The additional improvements are shown in

yellow colour in Figure 3-4.

It is likely that identified intersection upgrades will require some property acquisition and utility

adjustments. It is recommended that a prefeasibility study be undertaken to determine potential

site constraints and opportunities should planning proposals proceeds. Future consultation with

RMS is recommended where potential upgrades are identified at State and Regional

roads/intersections.




Table 3-10 Preliminary Improvements Tested

ID Intersect. Control Improvement Tested Potential Constraints. Indicative Upgrade Sketch

I-13

Vaughan

St /

Olympic

Dr

Signal

� Provide one additional exclusive right turn bay on

Olympic Dr northern approach.

� To accommodate double right turn from Olympic

Drive north to Vaughan St west, a c learway is

proposed during peak period on Vaughan St

western exit lane.

� Provide additional exclusive short (80 m) right

turn bays on Vaughan St both eastern and

western approaches.

� Possible removal of pedestrian crossing across

Olympic Dr northern approach. This may provide

additional capacity.

Olympic Drive is a

c lassified state road. The

identified widening may

require property acquisition

and utilities (service)

relocation.

I-14 James St

/ East St Roundabout

� Provide new tra ffic light.

� Provide exclusive short right turn bay on East St

northern approach.

� Provide exclusive short left turn bay on East St

southern approach.

� Provide exclusive short right turn bay on James

St approach.

East Street is a c lassified

regional road. Further

investigation will be

required to satisfy the RMS

warrants for a new traffic

light.





I-22

Station

Rd /

Rawson

St

Signal

� Provide clearway during peak period on Station

Rd northern approach in both directions;

� Provide additional exclusive short right turn bay

on Station St southern approach allowing double

lane right turn from Station St south to Rawson St

east;

� Provide additional exclusive (100 m) right turn

bay on Rawson St western approach;

� Provide two through lanes in westbound direction

on Rawson St west of Northumberland Rd.

� Lane discipline change on Rawson St eastern

approach allowing two through lanes (one shared

left-through and one exclusive through lane) in

westbound direction along Rawson St.

Rawson Street is a

c lassified regional road.

The identified widening

may require property

acquis ition and utilities

(service) relocation.

I-37

St Hillie rs

Rd /

Rawson

St

Signal

� Possible conversion of four leg intersection to

three -leg T-junction. This can be achieved by

closing St Hilliers Rd south approach, as this

approach carries small traffic volumes (less than

20 vehic les in one hour).

� Provide alternative access for traffic to /from St

Hilliers Rd south potentially via North Pde-

Dartbrook Rd and North Pde-Percy St.

� Provide double left turn s ignalised slip lanes on

Rawson St western approach.

St Hilliers Rd (north) and

Rawson St (east) form part

of the state road. The

possible closure of St

Hilliers Rd southern

approach will adversely

impact accessibility of

residents particularly

visitors to the Auburn

Gallipoli Mosque. A

detailed accessibility and

impact assessment should

be undertaken should this

identified upgrade

proceeds.





I-39

Rawson

St / South

Pde

Signal

� Provide two through lanes in westbound direction

on Rawson St east and west of South Pde.

� Lane discipline change on Rawson St eastern

approach allowing two through lanes (one shared

left-through and one exclusive through lane) in

westbound direction along Rawson St.


on Rawson St western approach allowing double

right turn and two eastbound exclusive through

lanes at the stop line.

Rawson Street is a


Due to adjacent railway

reserve, it may not be

possible to widen Rawson

St on the southern s ide.

Property acquisition may

be required to widen

Rawson St on the northern

s ide.

I-17

Railway

St/ Arthur

St

Signal

� Extend the length of the existing right turn bay

from 100 m to 170 m on Arthur St eastern

approach;

� Extend the length of the existing (merge) short

eastbound exit lane on Arthur St from 80 m to

120 m;

Arthur St is a c lassified

regional road.The identified

upgrade may require

utilities (service) relocation.





I-43

Olympic

Dr /

Joseph St

Partial Signal

� Extend the length of the existing right turn bay

on Joseph St southern approach.

Olympic Drive (Joseph

Street) is a c lassified state

road.

I-44

Georges

Ave /

Joseph St

Signal


on Georges Ave eastern and western

approaches allowing lane discipline change from

shared right-through lanes to excusive through

lanes in eastbound and westbound direction.

� Extend the length of existing right turn bay on

Joseph St southern approach.



acquisition and utilities






I-51

Northumb

erland Rd

/ Rawson

St

Signal

� Provide clearway condition during peak period on

Northumberland Rd in southbound direction.

� Change lane discipline on Northumberland Rd

providing one exclusive right lane and one shared

left-right turn lane allowing double right turn from

Northumberland Rd to Rawson St west.

� Provide two through exit lanes in westbound

direction on Rawson St west of Northumberland

Rd.

Rawson Street is a




acquisition and utilities


I-47

Station

Rd / Kerr

Pde /

Civic Rd

Future Signal

Recommend

ed by Council

in Auburn

Town Centre,

Improvement

Works

� Widening of existing Railway Bridge on Station St

to provide additional exclusive southbound right

turn bay allowing double-lane right turn from

Station St to Kerr Pde (west).

� Provide clearway condition during peak period on

Kerr Pde in westbound direction in order to

accommodate double-lane right turn from Station

St.

� Allow double-lane right turn from Kerr Pde (west)

to Auburn Rd (south).

Potential widening of the

existing Station Road

Railway Bridge will require

consultation with RailCorp.

It may not be feasible to

widen Railway Bridge due

to RailCorp’s current

constraints. An a lternative

railway crossing should be

investigated.





I-49

Queen St

/ Auburn

Rd / Civic

Rd

Future Signal

Recommend

ed by Council

in Auburn

Town Centre,

Improvement

Works

� Provide additional short right turn bay at Queen

St approach allowing double-lane right turn from

Queen St to Civic Rd.

� Provide two through exit lanes in southbound

direction on Auburn Rd in order to accommodate

southbound through traffic along Auburn Rd.

This upgrade requires

further changes to

proposed Auburn Town

Centre Public Doman

works.




Figure 3-4 Intersections Improvements Tested




3.7 Strategic Cost Estimate

The pre-strategic construction only costs have been used as a basis to develop the cost estimate for nominated six intersections where upgrades are proposed at regional/local roads. They are:

� James Street / East Street (I-14);

� Station Road / Rawson Street (I-22);

� Rawson Street /South Parade (I-39);

� Northumberland Road / Rawson Street (I-51);

� Station Rd/Kerr Parade / Civic Road (I-47); and

� Queen Street / Auburn Road / Civic Road (I-49).

The strategic cost estimates for each of the upgrade were provided to assist Council in

prioritising suitable infrastructure upgrades for planning proposal purpose. Cost estimates are

based on average costs per square metre for the demolition and reconstruction of concrete and

asphalt road pavements. These costs have been sourced from recent comparable projects.

Schematic design of six intersections is included in Appendix C.

Given the preliminary strategic nature of cost estimates undertaken for this study, a contingency

up to 70% has been added to cover any unforseen costs in design or construction of works. No

allowance has been made for the management / relocation of utilities, stormwater and other

infrastructure.

The cost of proposed upgrading works is estimated in the order of $7.6 million.

Table 3-11 below shows preliminary strategic cost estimates for six intersections.

Table 3-11 Strategic Cost Estimate for Infrastructure Upgrades

ID Intersections

(Refer to Table 3-10 for proposed upgrades)

Cost

I-14 James Street / East Street $560,000

I-22 Station Road / Rawson Street $1,970,000

I-39 Rawson Street /South Parade $2,280,000

I-51 Northumberland Road / Rawson Street $1,500,000

I-47 Station Rd/Kerr Parade / Civic Road $,940,000

I-49 Queen Street / Auburn Road / Civic Road $390,000

Sub-Total $7,640,000




4 Conclusion and Recommendations

4.1 Key Study Findings

This Traffic Modelling Study has been prepared by Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd (Hyder) to support

the conditions of the gateway determination of a proposal to increase floor space ratio (FSR)

controls applying to certain land zoned B4 Mixed Use and R4 High Density Residential in

Auburn Local Government Area. The Auburn City Urban Design Study prepared for Auburn

Council by AECOM has tested a number of potential development sites within Auburn,

Lidcombe, Berala and Regents Park. The revised AECOM study identified that if the proposed

increase in FSRs were achieved there would be capacity for an additional 6,566 dwellings and

162,864 m2 of mixed use podium gross floor area (GFA) for employment uses.

The main purpose of the Hyder’s Study in relation to traffic is to undertake modelling

assessment of two distinct scenarios, assessing the traffic impact on the road network and

providing mitigation measures. The following two scenarios are assessed:

� Do nothing scenario: Testing the impact of no increase in FSR controls. Analysis has been

undertaken for future year 2021 taking into account background traffic growth.

� Growth scenario: Testing impact of the recommended envelop based on the Auburn City

Urban Design Study. Analysis has been undertaken for future year 2021 taking into account

additional development trips arising from potential capacity in residential and mixed use

podium GFA development.

The future development capacity of B4 mixed use and R4 high density residential zones will be

determined by the spare capacity available at key intersections providing access to the

Investigation Area. The potential development capacity identified in Auburn, Lidcombe, Berala

and Regents Park town centres will impact a number of key roads including:


� St Hillers Road / Silverwater Road;


� Station Road;


� Auburn Road.

In consultation with Council, a total seventeen intersections have been identified within and in

close proximity to the Investigation Area (see Figure 1-1). It is anticipated that these particular

intersections will experience the most significant traffic impact should full development capacity

as outlined in the planning proposal be achieved.

The traffic modelling results suggest that potential FSR increase will have significant impact

particularly on intersection performance and their level of service in Auburn and Lidcombe town

centres. Of the seventeen intersections assessed, low level of service (LoS) F and high degree

of saturation (DoS) is forecast at eleven intersections as follows:












� Queen Street / Auburn Road / Civic Road;



A strategic cost estimates have been undertaken for six intersections where upgrades are

proposed at regional/local roads. The cost estimates are provided to assist Council in prioritising

suitable infrastructure upgrades for planning proposal purpose. The cost of proposed upgrading

works is estimated in the order of $7.6 million.

4.2 Recommendations

Achieving a maximum level of additional dwelling and mixed use GFA as outlined in the Urban

Design Study would need to be supported by future road and intersection improvements. Based

on traffic modelling investigations, Hyder has identified preliminary improvements required at

eleven intersections. These improvements include intersection widening, providing a clearway

condition during peak period and new traffic lights. Table 3-10 summarises intersection

upgrades tested. The improvements will have potential to improve traffic flow particularly in

Auburn and Lidcombe town centres should full development capacity in the planning proposal

be achieved. The identified upgrades would provide LoS D or better in 2021. It is likely that

identified intersection upgrades will require some property acquisition and utility adjustments. It

is recommended that a prefeasibility study be undertaken to determine potential site constraints

and opportunities should the planning proposal proceeds. Future consultation with the RMS is

recommended where potential upgrades are identified at State and Regional

roads/intersections.

It is recommended that Council further develops design concepts of proposed upgrades to

enable a strategic cost estimate to be completed in accordance with the RMS’s Estimating

Manual.

Auburn FSR increase Traffic Modelling Appendix A


f:\aa005093\reporting\fsr report revised_august 2013\appendix a\auburn fsr_appendix a_revb.docx

APPENDIX A

Strategic Traffic Model Calibration and Validation




A1 Traffic Forecasting Model Development

Appendix A of this report documents traffic forecasting model development, calibration and

validation. The model was developed for the specific purpose of investigating of a proposal to

increase floor space ratio (FSR) controls applying to certain land zoned B4 Mixed Use and R4

High Density Residential in Auburn Local Government Area. The section also documents future

road network improvement assumptions sourced from RMS.

A2 Network

The base network for Hyder’s model covers the Sydney Metropolitan Area. The initial source of

road networks was the network adopted by the RMS for their Greater Sydney Metropolitan

(GMA) EMME road network model. Further travel zone refinements were undertaken for the

wider Auburn LGA study area. The model was sufficiently detailed in study area for replicating

major intersection turn movements. About 21 additional travel zones were added to the study

area network that improved existing base network loading points.

Figure A-1 shows the base year road network in the context of the study area.

Figure A-1 Strategic road network




A3 Trip Tables

In general trip tables represent the travel demand or number of trips that occur between each

origin-destination (“O-D pair”). Hyder’s SSTM trip tables are based on those produced by the

BTS and use the same zoning system. The trip table comprised both car and truck travel

demand. The truck trip matrices are based on Freight Movement Model (FMM) produced by

BTS. Future year travel matrices were provided by BTS and demand data represented the

government’s forecasts on future land use development in Sydney.

Individual trip tables are developed for cars and trucks so that each can be modelled separately.

As car travel patterns differ, car trip tables are further split into three trip tables each of which

represents a different user class and travel purpose as follows:

� Commuting – travel to and from work;

� Business; and

� Other (a mix of predominantly home based personnel travel, but includes NHB personnel

trips).

BTS’s trip tables were obtained for:

� Morning peak two hours (7-9am); and

� Evening peak three hours (3-6pm).

The morning and afternoon peaks were explicitly calibrated and modelled for Auburn LGA study

area.

Trip tables are used in two key areas:

� Model calibration purposes, current year trip tables, adjusted to match observed traffic

volumes in key screenline locations and are used. Trip tables were adjusted by

undertaking a large number of select link runs on groups of roads comprising screenlines.

Adjustments to trip tables were required to match the number of crossings observed on

trip tables. The change in trip totals before and after adjustment was less than ten per

cent.

� Future year trip tables are developed to match the BTS model forecast year also taking

into account the calibration adjustment to the base year.

A4 Network Assignment

Hyder’s Sydney Strategic Traffic Model (SSTM) is a multi class vehicle assignment model

covering the Sydney Metropolitan Area. The vehicle demand obtained from Bureau of Transport

Statistics (BTS)’s Sydney Strategic Travel model (BTS). The method used to assign the trip

tables to the networks is via a standard transport planning technique: multi-class stochastic user

equilibrium assignment process (SUE). The generalised cost of travel is defined as a composite

cost, reflecting both travel time and toll, where the toll is expressed in terms of a time penalty

incurred by the use of the toll road.

A5 Model calibration and validation

The base year model was updated and validated with the 2012 turning volumes for AM and PM

peak at key intersections in the study area. Figures A-2 and A-3 show locations of model

validation. The following set of calibration and validation standards was adopted for Sydney

Strategic Model (SSTM). Hyder’s SSTM is in progressive state of improvements.




Table A-1 below summarises model calibration and validation compliance against target.

Table A-1 Summary of SSTM Model Compliance

Calibration and Validation

Objective

Target Model Compliance

AM peak period PM peak period

1 Trip table matches

observed travel demand

using screenline

comparisons (1), (2)

± 10% on major

screenlines

Most screenlines <10%

See Figure 1-2 and 1-3

for screenline locations.

Detailed comparison are

shown in Table A-2

Most screenlines <10%

See Figure 1-2 and 1-3

for screenline locations.


shown in Table A-3

2 Road traffic

characteristics lead to

realistic route choice

using scatter plot

analysis (R2) (1)

R2 > 0.85 for

observed-

modelled traffic

in screenlines

R2 > 0.98


shown in Figure A-4

R2 > 0.95


shown in Figure A-5

3 Road traffic

characteristics lead to

realistic route choice

using % Root Mean

Square Error (%RSME)

(1)

≤ 30% %RSME = 10% %RSME = 12%

4 GEH Statistics (2)

Screenline flows

≤ 5 Most

screenlines

100% 98%

Individual flows

� ≤ 5 ≥ 60% of links 100% 98%

� ≤ 10 ≥ 95% of links 100% 98%

� ≤ 20 100% of links 100% 98%

5 Validation of intersection

movement flows at key

intersections in the study

area (2)

32 intersections,

237 turn

movements

� Difference in link flow

within 100 for flows <700

vph

≥ 85% of links 90% 92%

� Difference in link flow

within 15% for flows 700-

2,700 vph

≥ 85% of links 95% 88%




Calibration and Validation

Objective

Target Model Compliance

AM peak period PM peak period

Sources:

1. Model Validation and Reasonableness Checking Manual, FHWA 1997 (USA)

2. Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB), Volume 12, Section 2, Department for Transport 1996

(UK)

3. Project Evaluation Manual, Transfund New Zealand, 2001

4. M5 West Widening Project, Environment Assessment RMS September 2010

Model code: F:\AA005093\D-Calculations\TCAD Calculations\Calibration

Figure A-2 RMS’s strategic screenline locations in Auburn LGA Study Area




Figure A-3 Study Area sub-screenline locations

Figures A-4 and A-5 compare observed flows and modelled flows at individual locations for AM

and PM peak period respectively.



f:\aa005093\reporting\ fsr report revised_august 2013\appendix a\auburn fsr_appendix a_revb.docx

Figure A-4 Scatter plot of observed versus modelled individual link flows within screenlines – AM Peak

Figure A-5 Scatter plot of observed versus modelled individual link flows within screenlines –

PM Peak

The above network model calibration and validation results provide the following outcomes:

Most statistical criteria tests have been achieved for both AM and PM peak period models.

Screenline comparisons are within the 10% target in most of cases. R2 values for are between

0.98 and 0.97 respectively, showing a very close match between counts and model at individual

site.

Validation result presented in table above indicates well matching between modelled and

surveyed turning volumes. This implies that both AM and PM peak models were adequately

validated for 2011 traffic condition and fit for the study purpose.

The calibration/validation results demonstrate that Hyder’s SSTM model has been calibrated

and validated appropriately in accordance with the industry practice acceptance criteria. A

robust calibration and validation has been achieved for both AM and PM peak period strategic

models.

The detailed calibration and validation outcomes from strategic model are shown below in Table

A-2 and A-3.




Table A-2 Screenline calibration - AM Peak

Screenline

Compariso

ns

Observed Model Achieved Values

All - AM 1Hr All - AM 1Hr All - AM 1Hr

NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB Two-way

RMS Screenline No.

R1 22,455 14,971 22,300 15,700 -1% 5% 2%

R2 32,713 37,669 32,400 36,600 -1% -3% -2%

R5 32,544 16,513 31,600 16,800 -3% 2% -1%

R11 7,453 4,989 7,600 5,200 2% 5% 3%

Auburn Sub Screenlines.

1 4,092 2,922 4,250 3,000 4% 3% 3%

2 3,804 2,468 3,920 2,590 3% 5% 4%

3 3,477 2,454 3,380 2,410 -3% -2% -2%

4 2,299 1,984 2,360 2,070 3% 5% 4%

5 4,371 2,959 3,920 2,850 -10% -4% -8%

6 3,262 2,182 3,170 2,220 -3% 2% -1%

7 3,956 4,195 3,800 3,970 -4% -5% -5%


Table A-3 Screenline calibration - PM Peak

Screenline

Comparisons

Observed Model Achieved Values

All - AM 1Hr All - AM 1Hr All - AM 1Hr

NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB Two-way

RMS Screenline No.

R1 16,329 20,988 18,000 21,200 10% 1% 5%

R2 36,817 34,798 36,400 33,100 -1% -5% -3%

R5 19,488 27,517 18,600 26,000 -5% -6% -5%

R11 5,595 7,672 6,400 7,700 14% 0% 6%

Auburn Sub Screenlines.

1 3,575 3,921 3,150 4,350 -12% 11% 0%

2 3,085 4,360 3,180 4,390 3% 1% 2%

3 2,526 3,639 2,460 3,700 -3% 2% 0%

4 2,157 2,979 2,190 2,990 1% 0% 1%

5 3,376 5,048 3,230 4,460 -4% -12% -9%

6 2,330 3,245 2,360 3,380 1% 4% 3%

7 4,281 5,274 3,730 4,890 -13% -7% -10%


f:\aa005093\reporting\fsr report revised_august 2013\appendix b\auburn fsr_appendix b_revised_august 2013.docx Appendix B

APPENDIX B

SIDRA Modelling Results

f:\aa005093\reporting\ fsr report revised_august 2013\appendix b\auburn fsr_appendix b_revised_august 2013.docx Appendix B

I-1 Amy Street/Kingsland Road

Existing 2012 Base Case

MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: AM Peak Existing 2012

I-1 Amy Street/Kingsland Road Roundabout

Movement Performance - Vehicles

Mov ID Turn Demand Flow

HV Deg. Satn Average Delay

Level of Service

95% Back of Queue Prop. Queued

Effective Stop Rate

Average Speed Vehicles Distance

veh/h % v/c sec veh m per veh km/h

South: Kingsland Rd (S)

1 L 16 0.0 0.141 14.0 LOS A 0.8 5.9 0.81 0.85 37.4

2 T 23 0.0 0.141 13.2 LOS A 0.8 5.9 0.81 0.83 37.5

3 R 21 0.0 0.141 17.1 LOS B 0.8 5.9 0.81 0.89 36.0

Approach 60 0.0 0.141 14.8 LOS B 0.8 5.9 0.81 0.86 36.9

East: Amy St (E)

4 L 5 0.0 0.603 8.6 LOS A 6.2 45.9 0.74 0.67 41.4

5 T 441 7.3 0.603 7.9 LOS A 6.2 45.9 0.74 0.64 41.2

6 R 95 1.1 0.603 11.7 LOS A 6.2 45.9 0.74 0.74 39.8

Approach 541 6.1 0.603 8.6 LOS A 6.2 45.9 0.74 0.66 41.0

North: Kingsland Rd (N)

7 L 81 6.2 0.443 13.9 LOS A 3.3 23.7 0.85 0.93 37.3

8 T 11 0.0 0.443 12.9 LOS A 3.3 23.7 0.85 0.91 37.4

9 R 143 2.8 0.443 16.9 LOS B 3.3 23.7 0.85 0.96 35.9

Approach 235 3.8 0.443 15.7 LOS B 3.3 23.7 0.85 0.95 36.5

West: Amy St (W)

10 L 83 7.2 0.588 8.4 LOS A 6.0 45.0 0.67 0.64 41.7

11 T 455 9.5 0.588 7.6 LOS A 6.0 45.0 0.67 0.60 41.6

12 R 10 10.0 0.588 11.6 LOS A 6.0 45.0 0.67 0.73 40.1

Approach 548 9.1 0.588 7.8 LOS A 6.0 45.0 0.67 0.61 41.6

All Vehic les 1384 6.6 0.603 9.8 LOS A 6.2 45.9 0.73 0.70 40.2


MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: PM Peak Existing 2012


Movement Performance - Vehicles Mov ID Turn Demand

Flow HV Deg. Satn Average

Delay Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 8 0.0 0.122 15.8 LOS B 0.7 5.2 0.87 0.88 36.1

2 T 11 0.0 0.122 15.0 LOS B 0.7 5.2 0.87 0.86 36.2

3 R 22 0.0 0.122 19.0 LOS B 0.7 5.2 0.87 0.91 34.8

Approach 41 0.0 0.122 17.3 LOS B 0.7 5.2 0.87 0.89 35.4

East: Amy St (E)

4 L 21 4.8 0.767 12.9 LOS A 12.4 90.7 0.95 0.82 38.6

5 T 582 5.5 0.767 12.1 LOS A 12.4 90.7 0.95 0.82 38.7

6 R 77 5.2 0.767 16.0 LOS B 12.4 90.7 0.95 0.84 37.2

Approach 680 5.4 0.767 12.5 LOS A 12.4 90.7 0.95 0.82 38.5


7 L 109 3.7 0.468 13.3 LOS A 3.6 25.8 0.83 0.91 37.7

8 T 19 0.0 0.468 12.4 LOS A 3.6 25.8 0.83 0.89 37.9

9 R 143 2.8 0.468 16.4 LOS B 3.6 25.8 0.83 0.95 36.3

Approach 271 3.0 0.468 14.9 LOS B 3.6 25.8 0.83 0.93 37.0

West: Amy St (W)

10 L 76 5.3 0.498 7.5 LOS A 4.8 34.5 0.55 0.60 42.0

11 T 403 3.5 0.498 6.6 LOS A 4.8 34.5 0.55 0.54 42.1

12 R 30 0.0 0.498 10.5 LOS A 4.8 34.5 0.55 0.71 40.6

Approach 509 3.5 0.498 7.0 LOS A 4.8 34.5 0.55 0.56 42.0

All Vehicles 1501 4.2 0.767 11.2 LOS A 12.4 90.7 0.79 0.75 39.2

Future 2021 Base Case

MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: AM Peak Future 2021 BC_Growth 0.5%

I-1 Amy Street/Kingsland Road Roundabout Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 17 0.0 0.155 14.5 LOS B 0.9 6.5 0.83 0.87 37.0

2 T 24 0.0 0.155 13.7 LOS A 0.9 6.5 0.83 0.85 37.1

3 R 22 0.0 0.155 17.7 LOS B 0.9 6.5 0.83 0.91 35.7

Approach 63 0.0 0.155 15.3 LOS B 0.9 6.5 0.83 0.87 36.6

East: Amy St (E)

4 L 5 0.0 0.638 8.9 LOS A 6.9 50.8 0.79 0.69 41.3

5 T 461 7.3 0.638 8.3 LOS A 6.9 50.8 0.79 0.67 41.0

6 R 99 1.1 0.638 12.1 LOS A 6.9 50.8 0.79 0.74 39.6

Approach 565 6.1 0.638 8.9 LOS A 6.9 50.8 0.79 0.68 40.8


7 L 85 6.2 0.480 15.1 LOS B 3.8 27.3 0.87 0.99 36.5

8 T 11 0.0 0.480 14.2 LOS A 3.8 27.3 0.87 0.97 36.6

9 R 149 2.8 0.480 18.2 LOS B 3.8 27.3 0.87 1.01 35.2

Approach 246 3.8 0.480 16.9 LOS B 3.8 27.3 0.87 1.00 35.7

West: Amy St (W)

10 L 87 7.2 0.620 8.6 LOS A 6.5 49.4 0.71 0.65 41.6

11 T 475 9.5 0.620 7.8 LOS A 6.5 49.4 0.71 0.62 41.4

12 R 10 10.0 0.620 11.8 LOS A 6.5 49.4 0.71 0.73 40.0

Approach 573 9.1 0.620 8.0 LOS A 6.5 49.4 0.71 0.63 41.4



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: PM Peak Future 2021 BC_Growth 0.5%

I-1 Amy Street/Kingsland Road Roundabout Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 8 0.0 0.137 16.6 LOS B 0.8 5.9 0.89 0.90 35.6

2 T 11 0.0 0.137 15.8 LOS B 0.8 5.9 0.89 0.89 35.7

3 R 23 0.0 0.137 19.7 LOS B 0.8 5.9 0.89 0.93 34.4

Approach 43 0.0 0.137 18.1 LOS B 0.8 5.9 0.89 0.91 35.0

East: Amy St (E)

4 L 22 4.8 0.812 15.2 LOS B 15.3 112.4 1.00 0.90 37.0

5 T 608 5.5 0.812 14.4 LOS A 15.3 112.4 1.00 0.90 37.1

6 R 80 5.2 0.812 18.3 LOS B 15.3 112.4 1.00 0.90 35.7

Approach 711 5.4 0.812 14.8 LOS B 15.3 112.4 1.00 0.90 36.9


7 L 114 3.7 0.503 14.5 LOS A 4.1 29.5 0.86 0.96 36.9

8 T 20 0.0 0.503 13.6 LOS A 4.1 29.5 0.86 0.95 37.1

9 R 149 2.8 0.503 17.6 LOS B 4.1 29.5 0.86 0.99 35.6

Approach 283 3.0 0.503 16.0 LOS B 4.1 29.5 0.86 0.98 36.2

West: Amy St (W)

10 L 79 5.3 0.524 7.6 LOS A 5.2 37.6 0.58 0.60 41.9

11 T 421 3.5 0.524 6.7 LOS A 5.2 37.6 0.58 0.55 41.9

12 R 31 0.0 0.524 10.6 LOS A 5.2 37.6 0.58 0.71 40.6

Approach 532 3.5 0.524 7.1 LOS A 5.2 37.6 0.58 0.57 41.9


Future 2021 Potential Development Case

MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: AM Peak Future 2021 Dev





Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 17 0.0 0.163 14.5 LOS B 1.0 6.9 0.83 0.87 37.0

2 T 25 0.0 0.163 13.7 LOS A 1.0 6.9 0.83 0.85 37.1

3 R 24 0.0 0.163 17.7 LOS B 1.0 6.9 0.83 0.91 35.6

Approach 66 0.0 0.163 15.4 LOS B 1.0 6.9 0.83 0.88 36.5

East: Amy St (E)

4 L 6 0.0 0.637 8.8 LOS A 6.9 50.5 0.78 0.69 41.3

5 T 460 7.2 0.637 8.2 LOS A 6.9 50.5 0.78 0.67 41.0

6 R 99 1.0 0.637 12.0 LOS A 6.9 50.5 0.78 0.74 39.7

Approach 565 6.0 0.637 8.9 LOS A 6.9 50.5 0.78 0.68 40.8


7 L 84 6.0 0.480 15.1 LOS B 3.8 27.2 0.87 0.99 36.5

8 T 12 0.0 0.480 14.2 LOS A 3.8 27.2 0.87 0.97 36.6

9 R 149 2.7 0.480 18.2 LOS B 3.8 27.2 0.87 1.01 35.2

Approach 245 3.7 0.480 17.0 LOS B 3.8 27.2 0.87 1.00 35.7

West: Amy St (W)

10 L 86 7.0 0.623 8.7 LOS A 6.6 49.5 0.72 0.66 41.5

11 T 476 9.5 0.623 7.9 LOS A 6.6 49.5 0.72 0.63 41.4

12 R 10 10.0 0.623 11.9 LOS A 6.6 49.5 0.72 0.73 40.0

Approach 572 9.1 0.623 8.1 LOS A 6.6 49.5 0.72 0.63 41.4



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: PM Peak Future 2021 Dev






Effective Stop Rate




1 L 8 0.0 0.137 16.5 LOS B 0.8 5.9 0.89 0.90 35.6

2 T 12 0.0 0.137 15.8 LOS B 0.8 5.9 0.89 0.89 35.7

3 R 23 0.0 0.137 19.7 LOS B 0.8 5.9 0.89 0.93 34.4

Approach 43 0.0 0.137 18.0 LOS B 0.8 5.9 0.89 0.91 35.0

East: Amy St (E)

4 L 24 4.2 0.814 15.2 LOS B 15.5 113.1 1.00 0.90 37.0

5 T 608 5.4 0.814 14.5 LOS A 15.5 113.1 1.00 0.90 37.0

6 R 80 5.0 0.814 18.4 LOS B 15.5 113.1 1.00 0.90 35.7

Approach 712 5.3 0.814 14.9 LOS B 15.5 113.1 1.00 0.90 36.9


7 L 114 3.5 0.505 14.5 LOS A 4.1 29.7 0.86 0.96 36.9

8 T 21 0.0 0.505 13.6 LOS A 4.1 29.7 0.86 0.95 37.0

9 R 149 2.7 0.505 17.6 LOS B 4.1 29.7 0.86 0.99 35.6

Approach 284 2.8 0.505 16.1 LOS B 4.1 29.7 0.86 0.98 36.2

West: Amy St (W)

10 L 79 5.1 0.524 7.6 LOS A 5.2 37.5 0.58 0.60 41.9

11 T 422 3.6 0.524 6.7 LOS A 5.2 37.5 0.58 0.55 41.9

12 R 31 0.0 0.524 10.6 LOS A 5.2 37.5 0.58 0.71 40.6

Approach 532 3.6 0.524 7.1 LOS A 5.2 37.5 0.58 0.57 41.9



I-13 Vaughan St/Olympic Dr



I-13 Vaughan St/Olympic Dr Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 147 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: Olympic Dr (S)

1 L 114 1.8 0.956 86.4 LOS F 69.3 510.4 1.00 1.13 18.7

2 T 2140 7.0 0.956 77.5 LOS F 69.4 514.7 1.00 1.15 20.2

Approach 2254 6.7 0.956 78.0 LOS F 69.4 514.7 1.00 1.15 20.1

East: Vaughan St (E)

4 L 47 0.0 0.745 72.4 LOS F 16.8 121.7 1.00 0.88 20.1

5 T 317 5.0 0.745 64.8 LOS E 16.8 121.7 1.00 0.88 18.8

6 R 111 0.9 0.745 72.3 LOS F 16.7 119.9 1.00 0.87 20.1

Approach 475 3.6 0.745 67.3 LOS E 16.8 121.7 1.00 0.88 19.2

North: Olympic Dr (N)

7 L 68 2.9 0.528 32.6 LOS C 23.7 176.8 0.70 1.02 35.3

8 T 1483 8.5 0.528 23.7 LOS B 23.7 178.2 0.70 0.63 38.7

9 R 122 6.6 1.011 153.1 LOS F 13.3 98.0 1.00 1.20 11.3

Approach 1673 8.1 1.011 33.5 LOS C 23.7 178.2 0.72 0.69 33.3

West: Vaughan St (W)

10 L 129 10.1 0.892 82.8 LOS F 23.3 171.8 1.00 1.06 19.5

11 T 359 3.1 0.892 76.6 LOS F 23.6 171.8 1.00 1.05 17.9

12 R 111 5.4 0.892 86.3 LOS F 23.6 171.0 1.00 1.04 19.0

Approach 599 5.0 0.892 79.7 LOS F 23.6 171.8 1.00 1.05 18.5

All Vehic les 5001 6.7 1.011 62.3 LOS E 69.4 514.7 0.91 0.96 22.9



I-13 Vaughan St/Olympic Dr Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 148 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)





Effective Stop Rate




1 L 139 4.3 0.861 67.1 LOS E 37.4 274.2 1.00 0.96 22.4

2 T 1396 5.9 0.861 58.1 LOS E 37.8 277.9 1.00 0.97 24.3

Approach 1535 5.8 0.861 58.9 LOS E 37.8 277.9 1.00 0.97 24.1


4 L 34 0.0 0.920 91.9 LOS F 25.2 179.3 1.00 1.13 17.2

5 T 443 2.0 0.920 84.4 LOS F 25.2 179.3 1.00 1.12 16.0

6 R 115 0.9 0.920 91.9 LOS F 25.0 177.0 1.00 1.10 17.2

Approach 592 1.7 0.920 86.3 LOS F 25.2 179.3 1.00 1.11 16.3


7 L 42 2.4 0.789 39.4 LOS C 44.8 325.7 0.88 0.98 32.3

8 T 2285 4.6 0.789 30.6 LOS C 44.9 326.6 0.88 0.81 34.4

9 R 294 3.6 1.000 3 125.4 LOS F 29.4 212.2 1.00 1.07 13.4

Approach 2621 4.4 1.000 41.3 LOS C 44.9 326.6 0.90 0.84 29.6


10 L 132 2.3 0.823 72.2 LOS F 21.5 153.2 1.00 0.97 21.4

11 T 336 2.1 0.823 66.5 LOS E 21.9 154.4 1.00 0.95 19.6

12 R 135 0.0 0.823 76.4 LOS F 21.9 154.4 1.00 0.93 20.6

Approach 603 1.7 0.823 70.0 LOS E 21.9 154.4 1.00 0.95 20.2

All Vehicles 5351 4.2 1.000 54.6 LOS D 44.9 326.6 0.95 0.92 24.6


MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: AM Peak Future 2021 BC_Gowth 0.5%

I-13 Vaughan St/Olympic Dr Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 147 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 119 1.8 0.999 124.4 LOS F 88.1 649.7 1.00 1.32 13.9

2 T 2236 7.0 0.999 115.5 LOS F 88.3 655.2 1.00 1.34 15.2

Approach 2355 6.7 0.999 115.9 LOS F 88.3 655.2 1.00 1.34 15.1


4 L 49 0.0 0.778 74.0 LOS F 17.9 129.7 1.00 0.90 19.8

5 T 331 5.0 0.778 66.4 LOS E 17.9 129.7 1.00 0.90 18.5

6 R 116 0.9 0.778 73.9 LOS F 17.8 127.8 1.00 0.90 19.8

Approach 496 3.6 0.778 68.9 LOS E 17.9 129.7 1.00 0.90 18.9


7 L 71 2.9 0.551 33.0 LOS C 25.2 188.1 0.72 1.02 35.1

8 T 1550 8.5 0.551 24.2 LOS B 25.2 189.6 0.72 0.64 38.4

9 R 127 6.6 1.056 215.8 LOS F 17.0 126.1 1.00 1.32 8.5

Approach 1748 8.1 1.056 38.5 LOS C 25.2 189.6 0.74 0.71 31.0


10 L 135 10.1 0.933 93.9 LOS F 26.6 196.1 1.00 1.15 17.8

11 T 375 3.1 0.933 87.3 LOS F 26.7 196.1 1.00 1.14 16.4

12 R 116 5.4 0.933 96.7 LOS F 26.7 193.4 1.00 1.13 17.5

Approach 626 5.0 0.933 90.5 LOS F 26.7 196.1 1.00 1.14 16.9

All Vehicles 5226 6.7 1.056 82.5 LOS F 88.3 655.2 0.91 1.06 19.0

\


MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: PM Peak Future 2021 BC Growth 0.5%

I-13 Vaughan St/Olympic Dr Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 148 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 145 4.3 0.900 74.6 LOS F 42.3 309.8 1.00 1.02 20.7

2 T 1459 5.9 0.900 65.6 LOS E 42.7 313.9 1.00 1.03 22.5

Approach 1604 5.8 0.900 66.4 LOS E 42.7 313.9 1.00 1.03 22.3


4 L 36 0.0 0.961 108.9 LOS F 29.4 208.8 1.00 1.26 15.3

5 T 463 2.0 0.961 101.4 LOS F 29.4 208.8 1.00 1.25 14.1

6 R 120 0.9 0.961 109.0 LOS F 29.1 206.1 1.00 1.23 15.2

Approach 619 1.7 0.961 103.3 LOS F 29.4 208.8 1.00 1.25 14.4


7 L 44 2.4 0.829 40.5 LOS C 48.8 354.9 0.92 0.96 31.9

8 T 2401 4.6 0.829 31.7 LOS C 48.9 356.0 0.92 0.84 33.7

9 R 294 3.6 1.000 3 125.4 LOS F 29.4 212.2 1.00 1.07 13.4

Approach 2739 4.4 1.000 41.9 LOS C 48.9 356.0 0.93 0.87 29.3


10 L 138 2.3 0.861 76.4 LOS F 23.5 167.6 1.00 1.01 20.6

11 T 351 2.1 0.861 70.5 LOS E 23.7 167.8 1.00 0.99 18.9

12 R 141 0.0 0.861 80.2 LOS F 23.7 167.8 1.00 0.97 19.9

Approach 630 1.7 0.861 73.9 LOS F 23.7 167.8 1.00 0.99 19.5

All Vehicles 5592 4.2 1.000 59.3 LOS E 48.9 356.0 0.96 0.97 23.4


MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: AM Peak Future 2021_Dev

I-13 Vaughan St/Olympic Dr Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 150 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 229 0.9 1.171 361.0 LOS F 173.5 1267.7 1.00 2.21 5.4

2 T 2351 6.6 1.171 352.2 LOS F 174.1 1288.0 1.00 2.35 6.0

Approach 2580 6.1 1.171 352.9 LOS F 174.1 1288.0 1.00 2.34 5.9


4 L 49 0.0 1.154 377.5 LOS F 74.5 538.9 1.00 2.32 5.5

5 T 380 4.5 1.154 369.9 LOS F 74.5 538.9 1.00 2.27 5.0

6 R 321 0.3 1.154 377.6 LOS F 73.3 517.1 1.00 1.95 5.5

Approach 750 2.4 1.154 373.7 LOS F 74.5 538.9 1.00 2.14 5.2


7 L 217 0.9 0.661 17.2 LOS B 15.0 109.9 0.36 0.99 45.0

8 T 1669 7.9 0.661 8.5 LOS A 15.2 113.8 0.36 0.33 53.5

9 R 162 4.7 1.129 337.5 LOS F 29.1 212.2 1.00 1.52 5.7

Approach 2048 6.9 1.129 35.5 LOS C 29.1 212.2 0.41 0.49 32.8


10 L 153 9.2 1.044 176.7 LOS F 44.7 326.3 1.00 1.41 10.8

11 T 450 2.4 1.124 240.3 LOS F 73.4 525.7 1.00 1.66 7.4

12 R 192 3.1 1.124 326.8 LOS F 73.4 525.7 1.00 1.93 6.3

Approach 795 3.9 1.124 249.0 LOS F 73.4 525.7 1.00 1.68 7.6



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: PM Peak Future 2021_Dev

I-13 Vaughan St/Olympic Dr Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 150 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)





Effective Stop Rate




1 L 245 2.4 1.098 246.1 LOS F 94.7 687.3 1.00 1.69 7.6

2 T 1566 5.6 1.098 237.2 LOS F 95.9 702.9 1.00 1.83 8.5

Approach 1811 5.1 1.098 238.4 LOS F 95.9 702.9 1.00 1.81 8.3


4 L 36 0.0 1.108 296.7 LOS F 75.3 534.2 1.00 2.05 6.8

5 T 523 1.7 1.108 289.2 LOS F 75.3 534.2 1.00 2.00 6.2

6 R 310 0.3 1.108 297.0 LOS F 73.5 517.5 1.00 1.80 6.8

Approach 869 1.2 1.108 292.3 LOS F 75.3 534.2 1.00 1.93 6.4


7 L 278 0.4 1.139 294.7 LOS F 184.1 1323.5 1.00 2.01 6.5

8 T 2731 4.2 1.139 289.2 LOS F 185.9 1346.2 1.00 2.10 7.1

9 R 247 3.1 1.021 167.9 LOS F 29.5 211.8 1.00 1.21 10.5

Approach 3256 3.7 1.139 280.4 LOS F 185.9 1346.2 1.00 2.02 7.2


10 L 142 2.1 1.038 165.0 LOS F 45.9 326.2 1.00 1.38 11.5

11 T 444 1.6 1.166 244.7 LOS F 92.8 653.1 1.00 1.62 7.3

12 R 287 0.0 1.166 397.8 LOS F 92.8 653.1 1.00 2.02 5.3

Approach 873 1.1 1.166 282.1 LOS F 92.8 653.1 1.00 1.71 6.8



I-14 James Street/East Street



I-14 James Street/East Street Roundabout




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: East St (S)

1 L 62 4.8 0.873 19.1 LOS B 21.2 152.6 1.00 1.01 34.6

2 T 762 3.0 0.873 18.3 LOS B 21.2 152.6 1.00 1.01 34.7

Approach 824 3.2 0.873 18.3 LOS B 21.2 152.6 1.00 1.01 34.7

North: East St (N)

8 T 477 6.5 0.511 5.6 LOS A 6.1 44.5 0.29 0.44 43.1

9 R 218 3.7 0.511 9.3 LOS A 6.1 44.5 0.29 0.69 40.9

Approach 695 5.6 0.511 6.8 LOS A 6.1 44.5 0.29 0.52 42.4

West: James St

10 L 224 6.7 0.699 29.4 LOS C 7.3 53.9 1.00 1.23 20.1

12 R 29 6.9 0.699 32.4 LOS C 7.3 53.9 1.00 1.23 19.8

Approach 253 6.7 0.699 29.8 LOS C 7.3 53.9 1.00 1.23 20.0

All Vehic les 1772 4.6 0.873 15.4 LOS B 21.2 152.6 0.72 0.85 35.5








Effective Stop Rate



South: East St (S)

1 L 66 3.0 0.704 13.3 LOS A 9.5 68.2 0.94 0.91 38.3

2 T 500 3.4 0.704 12.5 LOS A 9.5 68.2 0.94 0.90 38.4

Approach 566 3.4 0.704 12.6 LOS A 9.5 68.2 0.94 0.90 38.4

North: East St (N)

8 T 845 2.7 0.904 7.8 LOS A 24.2 173.7 1.00 0.53 40.1

9 R 271 3.0 0.904 11.6 LOS A 24.2 173.7 1.00 0.53 40.1

Approach 1116 2.8 0.904 8.7 LOS A 24.2 173.7 1.00 0.53 40.1

West: James St

10 L 193 1.6 0.482 13.5 LOS A 4.0 28.3 0.88 0.95 29.5

12 R 79 5.1 0.482 16.6 LOS B 4.0 28.3 0.88 0.97 28.2

Approach 272 2.6 0.482 14.4 LOS A 4.0 28.3 0.88 0.95 29.1




I-14 James Street/East Street Roundabout Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years





Effective Stop Rate



South: East St (S)

1 L 65 4.8 0.924 26.7 LOS B 30.2 217.0 1.00 1.21 30.7

2 T 796 3.0 0.924 25.8 LOS B 30.2 217.0 1.00 1.21 30.8

Approach 861 3.2 0.924 25.9 LOS B 30.2 217.0 1.00 1.21 30.8

North: East St (N)

8 T 498 6.5 0.535 5.6 LOS A 6.6 48.4 0.31 0.44 43.0

9 R 228 3.7 0.535 9.4 LOS A 6.6 48.4 0.31 0.68 40.9

Approach 726 5.6 0.535 6.8 LOS A 6.6 48.4 0.31 0.52 42.3

West: James St

10 L 234 6.7 0.776 38.2 LOS C 9.1 67.6 1.00 1.34 17.0

12 R 30 6.9 0.776 41.2 LOS C 9.1 67.6 1.00 1.34 16.9

Approach 264 6.7 0.776 38.6 LOS C 9.1 67.6 1.00 1.34 17.0

All Vehicles 1852 4.6 0.924 20.2 LOS B 30.2 217.0 0.73 0.96 32.6



I-14 James Street/East Street Roundabout Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: East St (S)

1 L 69 3.0 0.747 15.1 LOS B 11.2 81.0 0.99 0.98 37.1

2 T 523 3.4 0.747 14.3 LOS A 11.2 81.0 0.99 0.98 37.2

Approach 591 3.4 0.747 14.4 LOS A 11.2 81.0 0.99 0.98 37.2

North: East St (N)

8 T 883 2.7 0.950 8.5 LOS A 31.3 224.2 1.00 0.54 40.1

9 R 283 3.0 0.950 12.4 LOS A 31.3 224.2 1.00 0.54 39.5

Approach 1166 2.8 0.950 9.5 LOS A 31.3 224.2 1.00 0.54 39.9

West: James St

10 L 202 1.6 0.524 14.9 LOS B 4.6 32.9 0.92 1.00 28.4

12 R 83 5.1 0.524 18.0 LOS B 4.6 32.9 0.92 1.02 27.2

Approach 284 2.6 0.524 15.8 LOS B 4.6 32.9 0.92 1.01 28.0








Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: East St (S)

1 L 79 3.8 1.202 391.2 LOS F 214.8 1542.1 1.00 8.30 4.8

2 T 819 2.9 1.202 390.3 LOS F 214.8 1542.1 1.00 8.30 4.8

Approach 898 3.0 1.202 390.4 LOS F 214.8 1542.1 1.00 8.30 4.8

North: East St (N)

8 T 509 6.3 0.644 5.7 LOS A 9.8 71.4 0.37 0.43 42.7

9 R 382 2.1 0.644 9.4 LOS A 9.8 71.4 0.37 0.64 40.7

Approach 891 4.5 0.644 7.3 LOS A 9.8 71.4 0.37 0.52 41.8

West: James St

10 L 337 4.7 0.867 44.6 LOS D 14.4 105.0 1.00 1.55 15.3

12 R 30 6.7 0.867 47.6 LOS D 14.4 105.0 1.00 1.55 15.3

Approach 367 4.9 0.867 44.8 LOS D 14.4 105.0 1.00 1.55 15.3









Effective Stop Rate



South: East St (S)

1 L 84 2.4 0.950 49.4 LOS D 31.6 227.4 1.00 1.88 22.9

2 T 545 3.3 0.950 48.6 LOS D 31.6 227.4 1.00 1.88 23.0

Approach 629 3.2 0.950 48.7 LOS D 31.6 227.4 1.00 1.88 23.0

North: East St (N)

8 T 902 2.7 1.071 141.8 LOS F 167.8 1199.0 1.00 1.74 11.3

9 R 426 1.9 1.071 145.6 LOS F 167.8 1199.0 1.00 1.74 11.3

Approach 1328 2.4 1.071 143.1 LOS F 167.8 1199.0 1.00 1.74 11.3

West: James St

10 L 416 0.7 0.950 61.3 LOS E 27.2 192.5 1.00 2.01 12.1

12 R 82 4.9 0.950 64.4 LOS E 27.2 192.5 1.00 2.01 12.3

Approach 498 1.4 0.950 61.8 LOS E 27.2 192.5 1.00 2.01 12.2



I-16 Church Street/Bachell Avenue



I-16 Church Street/Bachell Avenue Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 60 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South East: Church St (E)

5 T 96 6.3 0.088 5.9 LOS A 1.2 9.0 0.46 0.37 42.5

6 R 133 4.5 0.398 16.5 LOS B 2.3 16.5 0.69 0.75 35.8

Approach 229 5.2 0.398 12.0 LOS A 2.3 16.5 0.60 0.59 38.3

North East: Bachell Ave

7 L 87 9.2 0.230 28.3 LOS B 2.2 16.5 0.86 0.76 29.8

9 R 144 11.1 0.386 29.1 LOS C 3.8 28.9 0.90 0.78 29.5

Approach 231 10.4 0.386 28.8 LOS C 3.8 28.9 0.89 0.77 29.6

North West: Church St (W)

10 L 371 3.8 0.282 6.7 LOS A 1.7 12.1 0.29 0.62 42.8

11 T 215 3.3 0.397 19.2 LOS B 5.2 37.6 0.85 0.70 32.7

Approach 586 3.6 0.397 11.3 LOS A 5.2 37.6 0.50 0.65 38.5









Effective Stop Rate




5 T 301 3.0 0.450 16.5 LOS B 6.9 49.9 0.82 0.69 34.3

6 R 68 5.9 0.212 26.8 LOS B 1.7 12.2 0.89 0.73 30.4

Approach 369 3.5 0.450 18.4 LOS B 6.9 49.9 0.83 0.70 33.5


7 L 234 2.6 0.367 17.8 LOS B 4.4 31.3 0.67 0.76 35.0

9 R 564 2.7 0.688 20.9 LOS B 13.5 96.8 0.85 0.85 33.3

Approach 798 2.6 0.688 20.0 LOS B 13.5 96.8 0.80 0.82 33.8


10 L 131 6.9 0.097 6.4 LOS A 0.4 3.2 0.23 0.59 43.1

11 T 184 2.2 0.638 28.0 LOS B 5.5 39.0 0.99 0.84 28.6

Approach 315 4.1 0.638 19.0 LOS B 5.5 39.0 0.67 0.73 33.3




I-16 Church Street/Bachell Avenue Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 60 seconds (User Given Cycle Time) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




5 T 100 6.3 0.094 6.4 LOS A 1.3 9.9 0.48 0.39 42.1

6 R 139 4.5 0.429 17.2 LOS B 2.5 18.0 0.72 0.75 35.4

Approach 239 5.2 0.429 12.7 LOS A 2.5 18.0 0.62 0.60 37.9


7 L 91 9.2 0.224 27.4 LOS B 2.2 16.8 0.85 0.76 30.2

9 R 150 11.1 0.375 28.2 LOS B 3.9 29.6 0.88 0.78 29.9

Approach 241 10.4 0.375 27.9 LOS B 3.9 29.6 0.87 0.77 30.0


10 L 388 3.8 0.293 6.7 LOS A 1.8 12.8 0.30 0.62 42.8

11 T 225 3.3 0.392 18.4 LOS B 5.4 38.5 0.84 0.69 33.2

Approach 612 3.6 0.392 11.0 LOS A 5.4 38.5 0.50 0.65 38.8




I-16 Church Street/Bachell Avenue Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 60 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




5 T 315 3.0 0.470 16.7 LOS B 7.3 52.6 0.83 0.70 34.2

6 R 71 5.9 0.225 27.0 LOS B 1.7 12.8 0.90 0.74 30.3

Approach 386 3.5 0.470 18.6 LOS B 7.3 52.6 0.84 0.71 33.4


7 L 245 2.6 0.383 17.9 LOS B 4.6 32.9 0.67 0.76 35.0

9 R 589 2.7 0.719 21.9 LOS B 14.8 105.7 0.87 0.87 32.8

Approach 834 2.6 0.719 20.7 LOS B 14.8 105.7 0.81 0.84 33.4


10 L 137 6.9 0.101 6.4 LOS A 0.5 3.4 0.23 0.59 43.1

11 T 192 2.2 0.667 28.4 LOS B 5.8 41.3 0.99 0.86 28.4

Approach 329 4.1 0.667 19.2 LOS B 5.8 41.3 0.67 0.75 33.2




I-16 Church Street/Bachell Avenue Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 60 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




5 T 339 1.9 0.310 7.4 LOS A 5.2 37.2 0.56 0.48 41.0

6 R 146 4.3 0.433 21.1 LOS B 3.1 22.6 0.81 0.77 33.1

Approach 485 2.6 0.433 11.5 LOS A 5.2 37.2 0.64 0.57 38.3


7 L 96 8.8 0.235 27.4 LOS B 2.4 17.7 0.85 0.76 30.2

9 R 213 8.4 0.520 29.0 LOS C 5.7 42.6 0.92 0.81 29.6

Approach 308 8.5 0.520 28.5 LOS C 5.7 42.6 0.90 0.79 29.8


10 L 593 2.7 0.433 6.8 LOS A 3.1 22.0 0.34 0.64 42.6

11 T 389 1.9 0.674 21.0 LOS B 10.5 74.7 0.93 0.82 31.7

Approach 982 2.4 0.674 12.4 LOS A 10.5 74.7 0.58 0.71 37.6









Effective Stop Rate




5 T 544 1.7 0.692 33.9 LOS C 28.2 200.5 0.89 0.79 26.5

6 R 75 5.6 0.438 64.2 LOS E 4.6 33.7 0.98 0.77 19.6

Approach 619 2.2 0.692 37.5 LOS C 28.2 200.5 0.90 0.79 25.5


7 L 257 2.5 0.641 26.5 LOS B 9.3 66.6 0.62 0.76 30.6

9 R 807 2.1 0.882 45.5 LOS D 51.0 363.4 0.97 0.95 23.9

Approach 1064 2.2 0.882 40.9 LOS C 51.0 363.4 0.89 0.91 25.2


10 L 202 4.7 0.145 6.1 LOS A 0.8 5.6 0.12 0.56 43.6

11 T 527 0.8 0.862 52.5 LOS D 34.7 244.3 1.00 0.99 21.3

Approach 729 1.9 0.862 39.6 LOS C 34.7 244.3 0.76 0.87 24.9

All Vehicles 2413 2.1 0.882 39.7 LOS C 51.0 363.4 0.85 0.86 25.2


I-18 Church Street/Olympic Drive



I-18 Church Street/Olympic Drive Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 150 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 104 1.0 0.747 26.8 LOS B 44.1 325.4 0.73 1.04 39.3

2 T 2657 6.9 0.747 18.0 LOS B 44.2 327.7 0.73 0.68 42.7

Approach 2761 6.7 0.747 18.3 LOS B 44.2 327.7 0.73 0.70 42.6

East: Church St (E)

4 L 249 4.0 0.469 11.8 LOS A 7.0 50.6 0.37 0.72 41.5

5 T 11 9.1 0.469 4.3 LOS A 7.0 50.6 0.37 0.33 43.1

6 R 124 4.8 0.469 44.3 LOS D 7.0 50.6 0.66 0.74 26.2

Approach 384 4.4 0.469 22.1 LOS B 7.0 50.6 0.47 0.72 34.9


7 L 154 3.9 0.432 21.6 LOS B 17.8 132.1 0.51 1.00 41.9

8 T 1421 8.8 0.432 12.7 LOS A 17.9 134.4 0.51 0.46 48.1

9 R 6 16.7 0.119 50.9 LOS D 0.3 2.7 0.72 0.73 25.7

Approach 1581 8.3 0.432 13.7 LOS A 17.9 134.4 0.51 0.52 47.4

West: Church St (W)

10 L 3 0.0 0.245 36.2 LOS C 2.6 18.7 0.88 0.77 29.4

11 T 68 0.0 0.245 28.9 LOS C 2.6 18.7 0.88 0.69 28.2

12 R 10 10.0 0.245 36.8 LOS C 2.6 18.7 0.88 0.78 29.3

Approach 81 1.2 0.245 30.1 LOS C 2.6 18.7 0.88 0.70 28.4




I-18 Church Street/Olympic Drive Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 161 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)





Effective Stop Rate




1 L 59 1.7 0.583 36.7 LOS C 30.3 220.3 0.74 1.02 33.2

2 T 1663 4.9 0.583 27.9 LOS B 30.4 221.5 0.74 0.67 36.2

Approach 1722 4.8 0.583 28.2 LOS B 30.4 221.5 0.74 0.68 36.1

East: Church St (E)

4 L 422 2.4 0.648 28.2 LOS B 30.0 214.1 0.79 0.85 32.0

5 T 12 0.0 0.648 20.7 LOS B 30.0 214.1 0.79 0.71 30.9

6 R 396 2.8 0.648 55.4 LOS D 30.0 214.1 0.91 0.85 23.2

Approach 830 2.5 0.648 41.1 LOS C 30.0 214.1 0.85 0.85 27.1


7 L 101 1.0 0.762 41.0 LOS C 45.7 332.9 0.86 0.97 31.2

8 T 2148 5.2 0.762 32.3 LOS C 45.9 335.4 0.86 0.79 33.6

9 R 11 0.0 0.111 53.0 LOS D 0.6 4.5 0.74 0.74 24.9

Approach 2260 5.0 0.762 32.7 LOS C 45.9 335.4 0.86 0.80 33.4

West: Church St (W)

10 L 27 3.7 0.326 33.1 LOS C 4.1 28.9 0.82 0.79 30.3

11 T 40 0.0 0.326 25.6 LOS B 4.1 28.9 0.82 0.67 29.1

12 R 37 0.0 0.326 33.2 LOS C 4.1 28.9 0.82 0.80 30.2

Approach 104 1.0 0.326 30.3 LOS C 4.1 28.9 0.82 0.75 29.8



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: AM Peak Future 2021 BC Growth 0.5%

I-18 Church Street/Olympic Drive Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 150 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 109 1.0 0.781 27.6 LOS B 48.3 355.8 0.77 1.03 38.8

2 T 2777 6.9 0.781 18.8 LOS B 48.3 358.2 0.77 0.72 42.0

Approach 2885 6.7 0.781 19.2 LOS B 48.3 358.2 0.77 0.73 41.9

East: Church St (E)

4 L 260 4.0 0.499 12.6 LOS A 8.1 59.2 0.40 0.73 40.9

5 T 11 9.1 0.499 5.1 LOS A 8.1 59.2 0.40 0.36 42.3

6 R 130 4.8 0.499 45.4 LOS D 8.1 59.2 0.68 0.75 25.9

Approach 401 4.4 0.499 23.0 LOS B 8.1 59.2 0.49 0.73 34.5


7 L 161 3.9 0.452 21.8 LOS B 18.9 140.6 0.52 1.00 41.7

8 T 1485 8.8 0.452 13.0 LOS A 19.0 143.1 0.52 0.47 47.9

9 R 6 16.7 0.127 55.2 LOS D 0.4 3.0 0.76 0.73 24.4

Approach 1652 8.3 0.452 14.0 LOS A 19.0 143.1 0.52 0.53 47.1

West: Church St (W)

10 L 3 0.0 0.255 36.5 LOS C 3.0 21.3 0.89 0.77 29.3

11 T 71 0.0 0.255 29.2 LOS C 3.0 21.3 0.89 0.69 28.1

12 R 10 10.0 0.255 37.1 LOS C 3.0 21.3 0.89 0.78 29.2

Approach 85 1.2 0.255 30.4 LOS C 3.0 21.3 0.89 0.70 28.3



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: PM Peak Future 2021 BC Growth 0.5%

I-18 Church Street/Olympic Drive Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 161 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 62 1.7 0.609 37.2 LOS C 32.3 234.8 0.76 1.02 32.9

2 T 1738 4.9 0.609 28.4 LOS B 32.4 236.2 0.76 0.69 35.8

Approach 1799 4.8 0.609 28.7 LOS C 32.4 236.2 0.76 0.70 35.7

East: Church St (E)

4 L 441 2.4 0.681 31.0 LOS C 33.1 236.7 0.84 0.86 30.8

5 T 13 0.0 0.681 23.6 LOS B 33.1 236.7 0.84 0.75 29.6

6 R 414 2.8 0.681 56.8 LOS E 33.1 236.7 0.93 0.85 22.9

Approach 867 2.5 0.681 43.2 LOS D 33.1 236.7 0.88 0.86 26.5


7 L 106 1.0 0.797 42.0 LOS C 49.3 358.6 0.89 0.96 30.8

8 T 2245 5.2 0.797 33.3 LOS C 49.4 361.4 0.89 0.82 33.0

9 R 11 0.0 0.127 55.0 LOS D 0.7 4.9 0.75 0.74 24.3

Approach 2362 5.0 0.797 33.8 LOS C 49.4 361.4 0.89 0.82 32.9

West: Church St (W)

10 L 28 3.7 0.344 34.3 LOS C 4.6 32.3 0.83 0.79 29.8

11 T 42 0.0 0.344 26.8 LOS B 4.6 32.3 0.83 0.68 28.6

12 R 39 0.0 0.344 34.4 LOS C 4.6 32.3 0.83 0.80 29.7

Approach 109 1.0 0.344 31.4 LOS C 4.6 32.3 0.83 0.75 29.4




I-18 Church Street/Olympic Drive Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 150 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 115 0.9 0.914 38.8 LOS C 76.2 559.0 0.94 1.01 32.6

2 T 3277 6.1 0.914 30.0 LOS C 76.3 561.9 0.94 0.92 34.6

Approach 3392 6.0 0.914 30.3 LOS C 76.3 561.9 0.94 0.92 34.5

East: Church St (E)

4 L 342 3.1 0.834 28.4 LOS B 32.1 230.0 0.84 0.91 32.0

5 T 12 9.1 0.834 21.0 LOS B 32.1 230.0 0.84 0.81 30.8

6 R 286 2.2 0.834 50.6 LOS D 32.1 230.0 0.89 0.93 24.4

Approach 640 2.8 0.834 38.2 LOS C 32.1 230.0 0.86 0.92 28.1


7 L 274 2.3 0.521 22.7 LOS B 23.4 172.1 0.56 0.94 40.6

8 T 1631 8.5 0.521 13.9 LOS A 23.5 176.7 0.56 0.51 46.7

9 R 6 16.7 0.131 75.5 LOS F 0.4 3.6 0.90 0.72 19.7

Approach 1911 7.6 0.521 15.3 LOS B 23.5 176.7 0.56 0.57 45.7

West: Church St (W)

10 L 3 0.0 0.270 45.1 LOS D 4.5 31.8 0.89 0.77 26.4

11 T 75 0.0 0.270 37.8 LOS C 4.5 31.8 0.89 0.69 25.1

12 R 11 10.0 0.270 45.7 LOS D 4.5 31.8 0.89 0.78 26.4

Approach 88 1.2 0.270 39.0 LOS C 4.5 31.8 0.89 0.70 25.3




I-18 Church Street/Olympic Drive Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 150 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)





Effective Stop Rate




1 L 65 1.6 0.747 38.7 LOS C 41.5 300.4 0.85 0.99 32.5

2 T 2145 4.2 0.747 29.9 LOS C 41.6 301.8 0.85 0.78 34.8

Approach 2211 4.1 0.747 30.1 LOS C 41.6 301.8 0.85 0.79 34.8

East: Church St (E)

4 L 632 1.7 0.932 65.9 LOS E 54.4 386.2 1.00 1.13 21.1

5 T 63 0.0 0.932 58.5 LOS E 54.4 386.2 1.00 1.13 19.6

6 R 571 2.0 0.932 84.5 LOS F 54.4 386.2 1.00 1.06 18.0

Approach 1265 1.7 0.932 74.0 LOS F 54.4 386.2 1.00 1.10 19.5


7 L 282 0.4 0.942 67.8 LOS E 78.5 566.2 1.00 1.05 22.1

8 T 2489 4.9 0.942 58.9 LOS E 78.9 575.2 1.00 1.06 24.0

9 R 12 0.0 0.173 64.4 LOS E 0.7 5.2 0.84 0.74 21.9

Approach 2783 4.4 0.942 59.8 LOS E 78.9 575.2 1.00 1.06 23.8

West: Church St (W)

10 L 29 3.6 0.442 45.9 LOS D 6.3 44.5 0.89 0.81 25.9

11 T 44 0.0 0.442 38.4 LOS C 6.3 44.5 0.89 0.73 24.6

12 R 41 0.0 0.442 46.0 LOS D 6.3 44.5 0.89 0.81 25.9

Approach 115 0.9 0.442 43.0 LOS D 6.3 44.5 0.89 0.78 25.4



I-22 Station Rd/Rawson St



I-22 Station Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 95 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: Station Rd (S)

1 L 96 3.1 0.320 19.8 LOS B 2.2 16.1 0.54 0.72 35.0

2 T 387 2.6 0.518 23.9 LOS B 13.7 98.2 0.82 0.71 30.5

3 R 265 2.3 0.567 39.3 LOS C 10.1 72.4 0.92 0.92 26.6

Approach 748 2.5 0.567 28.8 LOS C 13.7 98.2 0.82 0.79 29.5

East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 246 2.4 0.225 16.6 LOS B 5.2 37.1 0.49 0.74 30.9

5 T 540 9.4 0.821 34.8 LOS C 25.1 189.8 0.98 0.95 21.5

Approach 786 7.3 0.821 29.1 LOS C 25.1 189.8 0.82 0.89 23.5

North: Station Rd (N)

7 L 14 14.3 0.472 48.5 LOS D 5.0 35.7 0.95 0.79 24.7

8 T 236 0.8 0.472 42.3 LOS C 5.9 41.7 0.96 0.77 23.7

Approach 250 1.6 0.472 42.7 LOS D 5.9 41.7 0.96 0.77 23.7

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 31 0.0 0.505 25.4 LOS B 14.0 107.1 0.73 0.94 20.4

11 T 466 11.4 0.505 19.9 LOS B 14.0 107.1 0.76 0.66 22.2

12 R 88 4.5 0.505 43.0 LOS D 6.0 44.4 0.95 0.81 11.9

Approach 585 9.7 0.505 23.7 LOS B 14.0 107.1 0.78 0.70 20.0

All Vehic les 2369 5.8 0.821 29.1 LOS C 25.1 189.8 0.83 0.80 25.3



I-22 Station Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 115 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)





Effective Stop Rate




1 L 117 1.7 0.497 26.1 LOS B 3.7 26.4 0.61 0.73 31.7

2 T 363 1.4 0.527 31.4 LOS C 16.1 113.9 0.85 0.73 27.4

3 R 266 0.8 0.697 54.3 LOS D 13.3 93.4 0.98 1.02 22.5

Approach 746 1.2 0.697 38.7 LOS C 16.1 113.9 0.86 0.84 25.9

East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 502 2.0 0.432 18.4 LOS B 13.9 99.2 0.54 0.78 29.4

5 T 629 4.8 0.765 29.4 LOS C 29.7 216.5 0.91 0.82 23.7

Approach 1131 3.5 0.765 24.5 LOS B 29.7 216.5 0.75 0.80 25.7


7 L 42 0.0 0.625 55.9 LOS D 6.9 49.0 0.95 0.81 22.5

8 T 279 1.8 0.625 50.8 LOS D 10.1 72.0 0.98 0.80 21.4

Approach 321 1.6 0.625 51.5 LOS D 10.1 72.0 0.97 0.80 21.6

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 47 2.1 0.482 25.0 LOS B 17.1 122.1 0.67 0.96 20.5

11 T 450 2.2 0.482 17.5 LOS B 17.1 122.1 0.67 0.60 24.1

12 R 130 2.3 0.623 53.0 LOS D 7.2 51.5 1.00 0.85 9.8

Approach 627 2.2 0.623 25.4 LOS B 17.1 122.1 0.74 0.68 19.1




I-22 Station Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 95 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years





Effective Stop Rate




1 L 100 3.1 0.334 19.8 LOS B 2.3 16.9 0.54 0.72 35.0

2 T 404 2.6 0.541 24.2 LOS B 14.5 103.8 0.83 0.72 30.4

3 R 277 2.3 0.598 40.1 LOS C 10.6 75.9 0.93 0.94 26.4

Approach 782 2.5 0.598 29.2 LOS C 14.5 103.8 0.83 0.80 29.3

East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 257 2.4 0.235 16.6 LOS B 5.5 39.1 0.50 0.75 30.9

5 T 564 9.4 0.858 38.8 LOS C 28.1 212.5 0.99 1.02 20.2

Approach 821 7.3 0.858 31.8 LOS C 28.1 212.5 0.84 0.94 22.3


7 L 15 14.3 0.493 48.6 LOS D 5.2 37.5 0.95 0.79 24.7

8 T 247 0.8 0.493 42.5 LOS C 6.2 43.8 0.96 0.77 23.6

Approach 261 1.6 0.493 42.8 LOS D 6.2 43.8 0.96 0.77 23.7

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 32 0.0 0.539 25.8 LOS B 15.3 116.9 0.75 0.94 20.3

11 T 487 11.4 0.539 20.2 LOS B 15.3 116.9 0.77 0.67 22.0

12 R 92 4.5 0.539 45.3 LOS D 6.0 44.1 0.97 0.80 11.4

Approach 611 9.7 0.539 24.2 LOS B 15.3 116.9 0.80 0.71 19.7




I-22 Station Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 115 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 122 1.7 0.519 26.2 LOS B 3.9 27.7 0.61 0.73 31.7

2 T 379 1.4 0.551 31.8 LOS C 17.0 120.3 0.86 0.74 27.3

3 R 278 0.8 0.775 60.1 LOS E 14.6 102.5 1.00 1.08 21.2

Approach 780 1.2 0.775 41.0 LOS C 17.0 120.3 0.87 0.86 25.2

East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 525 2.0 0.451 18.6 LOS B 14.8 105.4 0.55 0.78 29.2

5 T 657 4.8 0.799 31.6 LOS C 32.7 237.9 0.93 0.86 22.8

Approach 1182 3.5 0.799 25.8 LOS B 32.7 237.9 0.76 0.83 25.0


7 L 44 0.0 0.499 54.7 LOS D 5.4 38.3 0.94 0.79 22.7

8 T 292 1.8 0.760 53.6 LOS D 13.1 93.0 0.99 0.87 20.8

Approach 335 1.6 0.760 53.7 LOS D 13.1 93.0 0.98 0.86 21.1

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 49 2.1 0.504 25.3 LOS B 18.2 129.6 0.68 0.96 20.3

11 T 470 2.2 0.504 17.8 LOS B 18.2 129.6 0.68 0.61 23.9

12 R 136 2.3 0.683 57.5 LOS E 7.7 55.1 1.00 0.91 9.1

Approach 655 2.2 0.683 26.6 LOS B 18.2 129.6 0.75 0.70 18.6



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: AM Peak Futute 2021_Dev

I-22 Station Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 120 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 139 2.2 0.574 24.4 LOS B 4.3 30.8 0.57 0.73 32.6

2 T 558 1.8 0.724 32.5 LOS C 27.4 194.9 0.91 0.81 27.0

3 R 455 1.3 0.919 75.5 LOS F 28.3 200.6 1.00 1.23 18.5

Approach 1152 1.6 0.919 48.5 LOS D 28.3 200.6 0.90 0.97 23.1

East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 469 1.3 0.373 15.7 LOS B 11.4 80.9 0.46 0.75 31.7

5 T 699 7.6 0.940 64.0 LOS E 52.6 392.2 1.00 1.16 14.4

Approach 1168 5.1 0.940 44.6 LOS D 52.6 392.2 0.78 1.00 18.0


7 L 26 7.7 0.892 76.5 LOS F 11.5 81.3 1.00 1.08 18.7

8 T 348 0.6 0.892 70.2 LOS E 13.5 95.3 1.00 1.08 17.7

Approach 374 1.1 0.892 70.7 LOS F 13.5 95.3 1.00 1.08 17.8

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 39 0.0 0.676 31.6 LOS C 27.2 204.6 0.81 0.94 17.5

11 T 582 9.5 0.676 24.1 LOS B 27.2 204.6 0.81 0.74 20.0

12 R 131 3.1 0.813 71.9 LOS F 8.1 58.3 1.00 1.00 7.5

Approach 752 7.8 0.813 32.8 LOS C 27.2 204.6 0.85 0.79 16.1




I-22 Station Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 115 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time)





Effective Stop Rate




1 L 171 1.2 0.661 26.7 LOS B 5.4 37.9 0.63 0.77 31.5

2 T 546 0.9 0.689 29.9 LOS C 25.1 176.9 0.88 0.79 28.0

3 R 574 0.3 1.260 506.1 LOS F 129.1 906.6 1.00 2.24 4.0

Approach 1291 0.7 1.260 241.2 LOS F 129.1 906.6 0.90 1.43 7.5

East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 792 1.3 0.669 20.8 LOS B 27.4 193.8 0.68 0.83 27.6

5 T 823 3.8 1.130 304.3 LOS F 139.4 1007.2 1.00 2.59 3.9

Approach 1615 2.5 1.130 165.3 LOS F 139.4 1007.2 0.84 1.73 6.3


7 L 55 0.0 0.992 59.9 LOS E 11.6 81.6 1.00 0.83 21.7

8 T 437 1.1 0.992 89.5 LOS F 24.7 174.4 1.00 1.25 15.1

Approach 492 1.0 0.992 86.2 LOS F 24.7 174.4 1.00 1.20 15.7

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 61 1.6 0.726 32.4 LOS C 29.9 212.5 0.86 0.93 17.2

11 T 618 1.6 0.726 25.0 LOS B 29.9 212.5 0.86 0.78 19.4

12 R 182 1.6 1.106 241.1 LOS F 25.9 183.7 1.00 1.48 2.5

Approach 861 1.6 1.106 71.2 LOS F 29.9 212.5 0.89 0.93 8.9



I-37 St Hilliers Rd/Rawson St



I-37 St Hilliers Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 138 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: St Hilliers Rd (S)

1 L 1 0.0 0.119 79.0 LOS F 0.7 4.8 0.99 0.67 18.3

2 T 9 0.0 0.119 71.8 LOS F 0.7 4.8 0.99 0.66 19.0

3 R 12 16.7 0.166 80.8 LOS F 0.8 6.6 0.99 0.68 18.6

Approach 22 9.1 0.166 77.0 LOS F 0.8 6.6 0.99 0.67 18.8

East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 10 0.0 0.295 16.1 LOS B 3.7 27.5 0.36 1.20 46.9

5 T 544 6.6 0.295 9.3 LOS A 9.6 71.2 0.40 0.40 52.0

6 R 1802 6.5 0.890 54.8 LOS D 51.6 381.2 0.97 0.94 26.4

Approach 2356 6.5 0.890 44.1 LOS D 51.6 381.2 0.83 0.82 29.7

North: St Hilliers Rd (N)

7 L 1080 7.4 0.357 21.6 LOS B 12.8 95.3 0.50 0.77 42.7

8 T 9 11.1 0.357 14.7 LOS B 12.8 95.3 0.50 0.53 43.6

9 R 229 6.1 0.357 38.4 LOS C 12.8 95.3 0.66 0.79 31.2

Approach 1318 7.2 0.357 24.4 LOS B 12.8 95.3 0.53 0.77 40.3

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 206 5.8 0.867 29.9 LOS C 8.9 65.3 0.59 0.80 34.5

11 T 614 7.2 0.867 66.7 LOS E 21.4 159.1 0.98 0.98 21.2

Approach 820 6.8 0.867 57.5 LOS E 21.4 159.1 0.88 0.94 23.5




I-37 St Hilliers Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 131 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)





Effective Stop Rate




1 L 4 0.0 0.222 76.1 LOS F 1.2 9.1 0.99 0.70 18.7

2 T 15 6.7 0.222 68.9 LOS E 1.2 9.1 0.99 0.70 19.4

3 R 23 8.7 0.287 77.2 LOS F 1.5 11.4 1.00 0.71 19.1

Approach 42 7.1 0.287 74.1 LOS F 1.5 11.4 1.00 0.70 19.2

East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 11 0.0 0.438 17.7 LOS B 6.0 43.4 0.41 1.17 45.6

5 T 793 3.7 0.438 11.5 LOS A 16.4 118.4 0.48 0.48 49.2

6 R 1407 4.2 0.743 42.7 LOS D 30.5 221.0 0.87 0.87 30.6

Approach 2211 4.0 0.743 31.4 LOS C 30.5 221.0 0.73 0.73 35.3

North: St Hillie rs Rd (N)

7 L 1705 4.8 0.560 24.5 LOS B 24.0 174.2 0.62 0.81 40.5

8 T 12 0.0 0.560 17.6 LOS B 24.0 174.2 0.62 0.63 40.4

9 R 361 4.2 0.560 41.7 LOS C 24.0 174.2 0.77 0.82 29.8

Approach 2078 4.6 0.560 27.4 LOS B 24.0 174.2 0.65 0.81 38.2

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 204 0.0 0.710 19.9 LOS B 6.9 48.8 0.50 0.79 40.5

11 T 571 3.2 0.710 50.7 LOS D 15.9 114.0 0.95 0.82 24.8

Approach 775 2.3 0.710 42.6 LOS D 15.9 114.0 0.83 0.81 27.6




I-37 St Hilliers Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 138 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 1 0.0 0.124 79.0 LOS F 0.7 5.0 0.99 0.68 18.3

2 T 9 0.0 0.124 71.8 LOS F 0.7 5.0 0.99 0.67 19.0

3 R 13 16.7 0.174 80.8 LOS F 0.9 6.9 0.99 0.68 18.6

Approach 23 9.1 0.174 77.1 LOS F 0.9 6.9 0.99 0.68 18.8

East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 10 0.0 0.308 16.1 LOS B 3.9 28.9 0.36 1.20 46.9

5 T 568 6.6 0.308 9.3 LOS A 10.2 75.3 0.40 0.40 51.9

6 R 1883 6.5 0.930 65.2 LOS E 61.8 456.9 0.99 0.98 23.6

Approach 2462 6.5 0.930 52.1 LOS D 61.8 456.9 0.85 0.85 26.9


7 L 1129 7.4 0.373 21.7 LOS B 13.6 101.0 0.50 0.77 42.6

8 T 9 11.1 0.373 14.9 LOS B 13.6 101.0 0.50 0.53 43.4

9 R 239 6.1 0.373 38.6 LOS C 13.6 101.0 0.67 0.79 31.2

Approach 1377 7.2 0.373 24.6 LOS B 13.6 101.0 0.53 0.77 40.2

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 215 5.8 0.916 28.7 LOS C 8.9 65.3 0.62 0.78 35.2

11 T 642 7.2 0.916 76.1 LOS F 24.5 182.3 0.99 1.09 19.5

Approach 857 6.8 0.916 64.2 LOS E 24.5 182.3 0.90 1.01 22.0




I-37 St Hilliers Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 131 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 4 0.0 0.232 76.1 LOS F 1.3 9.5 0.99 0.70 18.7

2 T 16 6.7 0.232 69.0 LOS E 1.3 9.5 0.99 0.70 19.4

3 R 24 8.7 0.300 77.3 LOS F 1.6 12.0 1.00 0.71 19.1

Approach 44 7.1 0.300 74.2 LOS F 1.6 12.0 1.00 0.71 19.2

East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 11 0.0 0.458 17.7 LOS B 6.3 45.7 0.42 1.17 45.6

5 T 829 3.7 0.458 11.7 LOS A 17.5 126.0 0.49 0.48 49.0

6 R 1470 4.2 0.777 44.0 LOS D 32.5 236.0 0.89 0.88 30.1

Approach 2310 4.0 0.777 32.2 LOS C 32.5 236.0 0.74 0.74 34.8


7 L 1782 4.8 0.585 24.8 LOS B 25.7 186.6 0.64 0.82 40.2

8 T 13 0.0 0.585 18.0 LOS B 25.7 186.6 0.64 0.65 40.1

9 R 377 4.2 0.585 42.0 LOS C 25.7 186.6 0.79 0.83 29.7

Approach 2172 4.6 0.585 27.8 LOS B 25.7 186.6 0.66 0.82 38.0

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 213 0.0 0.753 24.9 LOS B 8.3 58.5 0.52 0.82 37.2

11 T 597 3.2 0.753 53.2 LOS D 17.2 123.8 0.96 0.85 24.2

Approach 810 2.3 0.753 45.7 LOS D 17.2 123.8 0.85 0.84 26.6




I-37 St Hilliers Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 150 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 1 0.0 0.129 85.8 LOS F 0.7 5.2 0.99 0.67 17.3

2 T 9 0.0 0.129 78.6 LOS F 0.7 5.2 0.99 0.67 18.0

3 R 12 16.7 0.181 87.7 LOS F 0.9 7.2 0.99 0.68 17.6

Approach 22 9.1 0.181 83.9 LOS F 0.9 7.2 0.99 0.68 17.8

East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 10 0.0 0.346 15.6 LOS B 4.5 32.9 0.33 1.22 47.3

5 T 660 5.8 0.346 9.0 LOS A 12.4 91.3 0.38 0.40 52.5

6 R 2132 5.8 1.100 239.3 LOS F 155.6 1142.9 1.00 1.40 8.5

Approach 2802 5.7 1.100 184.3 LOS F 155.6 1142.9 0.85 1.16 10.5


7 L 1184 7.1 0.480 25.9 LOS B 20.6 151.0 0.58 0.80 39.6

8 T 9 11.1 0.480 19.0 LOS B 20.6 149.1 0.58 0.60 39.4

9 R 494 3.0 0.480 36.1 LOS C 20.6 149.1 0.67 0.81 32.2

Approach 1687 5.9 0.480 28.8 LOS C 20.6 151.0 0.61 0.80 37.2

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 234 2.9 1.000 3 32.0 LOS C 9.8 70.2 0.66 0.77 33.3

11 T 916 6.5 1.113 297.5 LOS F 80.0 591.3 1.00 2.03 6.8

Approach 1150 5.1 1.113 245.2 LOS F 80.0 591.3 0.93 1.40 8.5




I-37 St Hilliers Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 131 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time)





Effective Stop Rate




1 L 4 0.0 0.238 76.2 LOS F 1.3 9.8 1.00 0.70 18.7

2 T 16 6.3 0.238 69.0 LOS E 1.3 9.8 1.00 0.70 19.4

3 R 24 8.3 0.305 77.3 LOS F 1.6 12.2 1.00 0.71 19.1

Approach 45 6.8 0.305 74.2 LOS F 1.6 12.2 1.00 0.71 19.2

East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 11 0.0 0.498 17.3 LOS B 7.0 50.0 0.42 1.18 46.0

5 T 930 3.3 0.498 11.2 LOS A 19.6 140.9 0.49 0.49 49.5

6 R 1728 3.7 1.012 121.9 LOS F 77.7 561.0 1.00 1.15 15.0

Approach 2668 3.5 1.012 82.9 LOS F 77.7 561.0 0.82 0.92 19.6


7 L 1914 4.5 0.806 33.7 LOS C 41.9 300.4 0.87 0.89 34.9

8 T 13 0.0 0.806 26.9 LOS B 41.9 300.4 0.87 0.82 33.4

9 R 745 2.2 0.806 44.2 LOS D 41.9 300.4 0.90 0.89 28.8

Approach 2672 3.9 0.806 36.6 LOS C 41.9 300.4 0.88 0.89 33.0

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 304 0.0 1.000 3 24.7 LOS B 10.0 70.3 0.61 0.77 37.1

11 T 960 2.6 0.994 115.2 LOS F 48.0 343.4 1.00 1.40 14.6

Approach 1264 1.5 1.000 95.2 LOS F 48.0 343.4 0.91 0.99 17.8



I-39 Rawson Street/South Parade



I-39 Rawson Street/South Parade Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 122 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South East: Rawson St (E)

4 L 408 3.4 0.430 14.5 LOS B 7.2 51.8 0.55 0.77 41.8

5 T 420 11.9 0.674 36.7 LOS C 21.3 164.5 0.91 0.80 28.6

Approach 828 7.7 0.674 25.8 LOS B 21.3 164.5 0.74 0.79 33.7

North West: Rawson St (W)

11 T 292 12.3 0.250 9.5 LOS A 7.1 55.3 0.45 0.39 46.0

12 R 418 6.7 0.575 32.8 LOS C 6.7 49.5 0.95 0.81 30.6

Approach 710 9.0 0.575 23.2 LOS B 7.1 55.3 0.74 0.64 35.6

South West: South Pde

1 L 477 6.3 0.482 24.7 LOS B 16.9 124.9 0.65 0.80 32.5

3 R 527 5.1 0.740 53.1 LOS D 18.9 138.4 0.94 0.87 22.8

Approach 1004 5.7 0.740 39.6 LOS C 18.9 138.4 0.81 0.84 26.6









Effective Stop Rate




4 L 672 4.2 0.746 18.1 LOS B 16.1 116.7 0.71 0.82 39.0

5 T 400 8.0 0.571 37.6 LOS C 21.9 163.9 0.85 0.75 28.3

Approach 1072 5.6 0.746 25.4 LOS B 21.9 163.9 0.76 0.80 34.1


11 T 385 3.6 0.286 8.1 LOS A 9.6 69.4 0.40 0.35 47.6

12 R 720 2.6 0.852 43.8 LOS D 18.1 129.7 0.99 0.90 26.3

Approach 1105 3.0 0.852 31.4 LOS C 18.1 129.7 0.79 0.71 31.3


1 L 366 4.1 0.377 27.5 LOS B 14.5 105.0 0.62 0.79 31.2

3 R 394 0.8 0.647 62.0 LOS E 16.1 113.5 0.95 0.82 20.8

Approach 760 2.4 0.647 45.4 LOS D 16.1 113.5 0.79 0.81 24.8




I-39 Rawson Street/South Parade Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 122 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years





Effective Stop Rate




4 L 426 3.4 0.449 14.6 LOS B 7.6 54.8 0.56 0.77 41.7

5 T 439 11.9 0.704 37.2 LOS C 22.6 174.3 0.93 0.82 28.4

Approach 865 7.7 0.704 26.1 LOS B 22.6 174.3 0.75 0.79 33.5


11 T 305 12.3 0.261 9.6 LOS A 7.5 58.3 0.45 0.40 45.9

12 R 437 6.7 0.601 32.9 LOS C 7.0 52.1 0.96 0.81 30.5

Approach 742 9.0 0.601 23.3 LOS B 7.5 58.3 0.75 0.64 35.6


1 L 498 6.3 0.503 25.0 LOS B 18.0 132.7 0.66 0.81 32.3

3 R 551 5.1 0.773 55.0 LOS D 20.4 148.8 0.95 0.89 22.4

Approach 1049 5.7 0.773 40.7 LOS C 20.4 148.8 0.82 0.85 26.2




I-39 Rawson Street/South Parade Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 143 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




4 L 702 4.2 0.780 18.4 LOS B 17.3 125.4 0.73 0.83 38.8

5 T 418 8.0 0.597 38.1 LOS C 23.2 173.5 0.86 0.76 28.2

Approach 1120 5.6 0.780 25.7 LOS B 23.2 173.5 0.78 0.80 33.9


11 T 402 3.6 0.299 8.2 LOS A 10.2 73.4 0.40 0.36 47.5

12 R 752 2.6 0.891 46.4 LOS D 20.4 146.4 1.00 0.92 25.4

Approach 1155 3.0 0.891 33.1 LOS C 20.4 146.4 0.79 0.72 30.5


1 L 382 4.1 0.394 27.7 LOS B 15.3 111.0 0.63 0.79 31.1

3 R 412 0.8 0.676 62.6 LOS E 17.0 119.5 0.95 0.83 20.7

Approach 794 2.4 0.676 45.8 LOS D 17.0 119.5 0.80 0.81 24.7








Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




4 L 501 3.0 0.526 15.0 LOS B 9.4 67.8 0.59 0.79 41.3

5 T 582 8.9 0.917 60.1 LOS E 41.4 311.6 1.00 1.11 21.8

Approach 1083 6.2 0.917 39.3 LOS C 41.4 311.6 0.81 0.96 27.7


11 T 447 8.5 0.374 10.5 LOS A 12.1 91.0 0.50 0.45 44.8

12 R 801 3.6 1.159 206.0 LOS F 68.0 491.0 1.00 1.42 8.6

Approach 1248 5.4 1.159 136.0 LOS F 68.0 491.0 0.82 1.07 12.3


1 L 846 3.7 0.839 33.4 LOS C 43.1 311.1 0.90 0.91 28.7

3 R 619 4.5 0.865 63.3 LOS E 25.6 185.9 0.97 0.96 20.6

Approach 1465 4.0 0.865 46.0 LOS D 43.1 311.1 0.93 0.93 24.6




I-39 Rawson Street/South Parade Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 143 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time)





Effective Stop Rate




4 L 742 3.6 1.000 3 29.3 LOS C 27.2 196.5 0.97 0.91 32.2

5 T 638 5.7 1.082 238.6 LOS F 98.9 725.2 1.00 1.90 7.8

Approach 1380 4.5 1.082 126.1 LOS F 98.9 725.2 0.98 1.37 13.0


11 T 560 2.7 0.383 6.0 LOS A 12.8 91.4 0.36 0.33 50.0

12 R 1125 1.8 1.070 138.7 LOS F 86.6 615.5 0.95 1.19 11.9

Approach 1685 2.1 1.070 94.6 LOS F 86.6 615.5 0.76 0.90 16.2


1 L 825 1.9 0.749 29.1 LOS C 41.0 291.4 0.79 0.86 30.4

3 R 505 0.6 1.052 149.9 LOS F 39.8 279.9 1.00 1.18 11.3

Approach 1330 1.4 1.052 75.0 LOS F 41.0 291.4 0.87 0.98 18.5



I-42 Helena St/Park Rd



I-42 Helena St/Park Rd Roundabout




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: Park Rd (S)

1 L 13 0.0 0.607 7.9 LOS A 6.7 48.1 0.68 0.61 46.7

2 T 521 3.6 0.607 8.0 LOS A 6.7 48.1 0.68 0.59 47.1

3 R 150 2.0 0.607 11.9 LOS A 6.7 48.1 0.68 0.71 45.1

Approach 684 3.2 0.607 8.9 LOS A 6.7 48.1 0.68 0.62 46.6

East: Helena St (E)

4 L 121 3.3 0.360 9.3 LOS A 2.6 18.6 0.77 0.77 40.8

5 T 52 5.8 0.360 8.5 LOS A 2.6 18.6 0.77 0.75 41.0

6 R 92 1.1 0.360 13.2 LOS A 2.6 18.6 0.77 0.84 38.7

Approach 265 3.0 0.360 10.5 LOS A 2.6 18.6 0.77 0.79 40.1

North: Park Rd (N)

7 L 57 0.0 0.497 8.8 LOS A 4.2 30.1 0.69 0.70 46.9

8 T 414 3.9 0.497 8.9 LOS A 4.2 30.1 0.69 0.67 47.2

9 R 6 0.0 0.497 12.8 LOS A 4.2 30.1 0.69 0.80 44.5

Approach 477 3.4 0.497 8.9 LOS A 4.2 30.1 0.69 0.68 47.1

West: Provincial St (W)

10 L 19 0.0 0.235 12.4 LOS A 1.6 11.2 0.86 0.87 38.7

11 T 84 2.4 0.235 11.6 LOS A 1.6 11.2 0.86 0.86 38.8

12 R 15 0.0 0.235 16.5 LOS B 1.6 11.2 0.86 0.92 37.0

Approach 118 1.7 0.235 12.4 LOS A 1.6 11.2 0.86 0.87 38.6









Effective Stop Rate



South: Park Rd (S)

1 L 24 4.2 0.449 7.3 LOS A 4.2 29.8 0.52 0.57 47.6

2 T 424 2.4 0.449 7.3 LOS A 4.2 29.8 0.52 0.54 48.1

3 R 74 0.0 0.449 11.2 LOS A 4.2 29.8 0.52 0.73 45.5

Approach 522 2.1 0.449 7.8 LOS A 4.2 29.8 0.52 0.57 47.7

East: Helena St (E)

4 L 181 2.2 0.445 11.6 LOS A 3.4 24.5 0.85 0.89 39.1

5 T 56 3.6 0.445 10.7 LOS A 3.4 24.5 0.85 0.88 39.2

6 R 53 0.0 0.445 15.5 LOS B 3.4 24.5 0.85 0.94 37.3

Approach 290 2.1 0.445 12.1 LOS A 3.4 24.5 0.85 0.90 38.8

North: Park Rd (N)

7 L 90 1.1 0.532 7.3 LOS A 5.2 37.2 0.52 0.57 47.7

8 T 545 2.2 0.532 7.3 LOS A 5.2 37.2 0.52 0.54 48.2

9 R 12 0.0 0.532 11.3 LOS A 5.2 37.2 0.52 0.73 45.6

Approach 647 2.0 0.532 7.4 LOS A 5.2 37.2 0.52 0.55 48.1


10 L 14 0.0 0.078 9.4 LOS A 0.5 3.3 0.70 0.70 40.9

11 T 29 0.0 0.078 8.5 LOS A 0.5 3.3 0.70 0.66 41.2

12 R 9 0.0 0.078 13.4 LOS A 0.5 3.3 0.70 0.80 38.8

Approach 52 0.0 0.078 9.6 LOS A 0.5 3.3 0.70 0.70 40.6




I-42 Helena St/Park Rd Roundabout Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: Park Rd (S)

1 L 14 0.0 0.640 8.1 LOS A 7.4 52.9 0.73 0.62 46.5

2 T 544 3.6 0.640 8.2 LOS A 7.4 52.9 0.73 0.61 46.8

3 R 157 2.0 0.640 12.1 LOS A 7.4 52.9 0.73 0.71 45.0

Approach 715 3.2 0.640 9.0 LOS A 7.4 52.9 0.73 0.63 46.4

East: Helena St (E)

4 L 126 3.3 0.386 9.5 LOS A 2.8 20.3 0.79 0.79 40.6

5 T 54 5.8 0.386 8.7 LOS A 2.8 20.3 0.79 0.77 40.8

6 R 96 1.1 0.386 13.5 LOS A 2.8 20.3 0.79 0.85 38.5

Approach 277 3.0 0.386 10.8 LOS A 2.8 20.3 0.79 0.81 39.8

North: Park Rd (N)

7 L 60 0.0 0.527 9.0 LOS A 4.5 32.7 0.72 0.71 46.8

8 T 433 3.9 0.527 9.1 LOS A 4.5 32.7 0.72 0.69 47.0

9 R 6 0.0 0.527 13.0 LOS A 4.5 32.7 0.72 0.81 44.3

Approach 498 3.4 0.527 9.1 LOS A 4.5 32.7 0.72 0.70 47.0


10 L 20 0.0 0.260 13.0 LOS A 1.8 12.6 0.89 0.90 38.3

11 T 88 2.4 0.260 12.2 LOS A 1.8 12.6 0.89 0.88 38.4

12 R 16 0.0 0.260 17.1 LOS B 1.8 12.6 0.89 0.94 36.6

Approach 123 1.7 0.260 13.0 LOS A 1.8 12.6 0.89 0.89 38.2




I-42 Helena St/Park Rd Roundabout Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: Park Rd (S)

1 L 25 4.2 0.473 7.4 LOS A 4.5 32.2 0.54 0.58 47.5

2 T 443 2.4 0.473 7.4 LOS A 4.5 32.2 0.54 0.55 48.0

3 R 77 0.0 0.473 11.3 LOS A 4.5 32.2 0.54 0.73 45.4

Approach 545 2.1 0.473 7.9 LOS A 4.5 32.2 0.54 0.57 47.6

East: Helena St (E)

4 L 189 2.2 0.481 12.7 LOS A 4.0 28.3 0.88 0.95 38.3

5 T 59 3.6 0.481 11.9 LOS A 4.0 28.3 0.88 0.93 38.4

6 R 55 0.0 0.481 16.7 LOS B 4.0 28.3 0.88 0.98 36.6

Approach 303 2.1 0.481 13.2 LOS A 4.0 28.3 0.88 0.95 38.0

North: Park Rd (N)

7 L 94 1.1 0.560 7.4 LOS A 5.7 40.6 0.55 0.58 47.6

8 T 570 2.2 0.560 7.4 LOS A 5.7 40.6 0.55 0.55 48.0

9 R 13 0.0 0.560 11.4 LOS A 5.7 40.6 0.55 0.73 45.6

Approach 676 2.0 0.560 7.5 LOS A 5.7 40.6 0.55 0.55 47.9


10 L 15 0.0 0.084 9.6 LOS A 0.5 3.6 0.72 0.71 40.7

11 T 30 0.0 0.084 8.8 LOS A 0.5 3.6 0.72 0.68 40.9

12 R 9 0.0 0.084 13.7 LOS A 0.5 3.6 0.72 0.81 38.6

Approach 54 0.0 0.084 9.9 LOS A 0.5 3.6 0.72 0.71 40.4








Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: Park Rd (S)

1 L 14 0.0 0.754 8.8 LOS A 10.9 78.4 0.87 0.65 45.8

2 T 631 3.2 0.754 8.9 LOS A 10.9 78.4 0.87 0.64 45.9

3 R 206 1.5 0.754 12.8 LOS A 10.9 78.4 0.87 0.69 44.5

Approach 851 2.7 0.754 9.8 LOS A 10.9 78.4 0.87 0.65 45.5

East: Helena St (E)

4 L 181 2.2 0.509 12.0 LOS A 4.5 32.0 0.89 0.93 38.7

5 T 54 5.6 0.509 11.2 LOS A 4.5 32.0 0.89 0.92 38.8

6 R 96 1.0 0.509 16.0 LOS B 4.5 32.0 0.89 0.97 37.0

Approach 331 2.4 0.509 13.0 LOS A 4.5 32.0 0.89 0.94 38.2

North: Park Rd (N)

7 L 60 0.0 0.639 11.6 LOS A 7.2 51.9 0.86 0.84 44.8

8 T 499 3.4 0.639 11.7 LOS A 7.2 51.9 0.86 0.83 45.4

9 R 6 0.0 0.639 15.6 LOS B 7.2 51.9 0.86 0.89 42.3

Approach 565 3.0 0.639 11.7 LOS A 7.2 51.9 0.86 0.83 45.3


10 L 20 0.0 0.338 15.6 LOS B 2.4 17.2 0.97 0.98 36.6

11 T 88 2.3 0.338 14.8 LOS B 2.4 17.2 0.97 0.98 36.7

12 R 16 0.0 0.338 19.6 LOS B 2.4 17.2 0.97 0.99 35.2

Approach 124 1.6 0.338 15.5 LOS B 2.4 17.2 0.97 0.98 36.5









Effective Stop Rate



South: Park Rd (S)

1 L 25 4.0 0.591 7.7 LOS A 6.7 47.7 0.64 0.58 47.0

2 T 530 1.9 0.591 7.6 LOS A 6.7 47.7 0.64 0.56 47.3

3 R 137 0.0 0.591 11.5 LOS A 6.7 47.7 0.64 0.70 45.2

Approach 692 1.6 0.591 8.4 LOS A 6.7 47.7 0.64 0.59 46.9

East: Helena St (E)

4 L 259 1.5 0.721 23.6 LOS B 8.8 62.8 1.00 1.26 31.9

5 T 58 3.4 0.721 22.7 LOS B 8.8 62.8 1.00 1.26 31.9

6 R 55 0.0 0.721 27.6 LOS B 8.8 62.8 1.00 1.26 31.0

Approach 372 1.6 0.721 24.0 LOS B 8.8 62.8 1.00 1.26 31.7

North: Park Rd (N)

7 L 94 1.1 0.713 9.0 LOS A 9.0 64.3 0.81 0.67 46.4

8 T 680 1.9 0.713 9.0 LOS A 9.0 64.3 0.81 0.66 46.5

9 R 13 0.0 0.713 13.0 LOS A 9.0 64.3 0.81 0.74 44.5

Approach 787 1.8 0.713 9.1 LOS A 9.0 64.3 0.81 0.66 46.5


10 L 15 0.0 0.102 11.4 LOS A 0.6 4.5 0.81 0.78 39.4

11 T 30 0.0 0.102 10.5 LOS A 0.6 4.5 0.81 0.76 39.6

12 R 9 0.0 0.102 15.4 LOS B 0.6 4.5 0.81 0.85 37.5

Approach 54 0.0 0.102 11.6 LOS A 0.6 4.5 0.81 0.78 39.1



I-46 Tilba St/Woodburn Rd/Kerrs Rd



I-46 Tilba St/Woodburn Rd/Kerrs Rd Roundabout




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: Woodburn Rd (S)

1 L 119 3.4 0.232 8.8 LOS A 1.5 10.9 0.65 0.70 41.4

2 T 51 5.9 0.232 8.1 LOS A 1.5 10.9 0.65 0.66 41.6

3 R 16 0.0 0.232 12.2 LOS A 1.5 10.9 0.65 0.80 39.3

Approach 186 3.8 0.232 8.9 LOS A 1.5 10.9 0.65 0.70 41.2

East: Kerrs Rd (E)

4 L 32 0.0 0.292 8.4 LOS A 2.0 14.3 0.65 0.70 41.9

5 T 224 2.2 0.292 7.6 LOS A 2.0 14.3 0.65 0.66 41.8

6 R 10 0.0 0.292 11.8 LOS A 2.0 14.3 0.65 0.81 39.8

Approach 266 1.9 0.292 7.8 LOS A 2.0 14.3 0.65 0.67 41.8

North: Woodburn Rd (N)

7 L 19 5.3 0.279 8.9 LOS A 1.9 13.4 0.65 0.70 41.2

8 T 83 1.2 0.279 7.9 LOS A 1.9 13.4 0.65 0.66 41.4

9 R 126 4.0 0.279 12.3 LOS A 1.9 13.4 0.65 0.78 39.2

Approach 228 3.1 0.279 10.4 LOS A 1.9 13.4 0.65 0.73 40.1

West: Tilba S t (W)

10 L 147 1.4 0.409 6.4 LOS A 3.6 25.7 0.41 0.53 42.5

11 T 181 1.7 0.409 5.6 LOS A 3.6 25.7 0.41 0.46 42.7

12 R 136 2.9 0.409 9.9 LOS A 3.6 25.7 0.41 0.68 40.7

Approach 464 1.9 0.409 7.1 LOS A 3.6 25.7 0.41 0.55 42.0









Effective Stop Rate




1 L 118 1.7 0.270 7.8 LOS A 1.8 13.0 0.57 0.64 42.0

2 T 112 0.9 0.270 7.0 LOS A 1.8 13.0 0.57 0.60 42.0

3 R 17 0.0 0.270 11.3 LOS A 1.8 13.0 0.57 0.77 40.0

Approach 247 1.2 0.270 7.7 LOS A 1.8 13.0 0.57 0.63 41.9

East: Kerrs Rd (E)

4 L 27 0.0 0.151 8.0 LOS A 1.0 6.9 0.59 0.66 42.0

5 T 91 3.3 0.151 7.2 LOS A 1.0 6.9 0.59 0.61 42.0

6 R 20 0.0 0.151 11.4 LOS A 1.0 6.9 0.59 0.77 40.0

Approach 138 2.2 0.151 8.0 LOS A 1.0 6.9 0.59 0.64 41.6


7 L 39 2.6 0.334 9.0 LOS A 2.4 16.7 0.69 0.72 41.0

8 T 92 0.0 0.334 8.2 LOS A 2.4 16.7 0.69 0.69 41.2

9 R 134 2.2 0.334 12.5 LOS A 2.4 16.7 0.69 0.80 39.0

Approach 265 1.5 0.334 10.5 LOS A 2.4 16.7 0.69 0.75 40.0

West: Tilba St (W)

10 L 164 1.8 0.502 7.6 LOS A 4.5 32.3 0.60 0.61 41.8

11 T 214 2.3 0.502 6.8 LOS A 4.5 32.3 0.60 0.57 41.8

12 R 114 0.9 0.502 11.0 LOS A 4.5 32.3 0.60 0.72 40.2

Approach 492 1.8 0.502 8.0 LOS A 4.5 32.3 0.60 0.62 41.4




I-46 Tilba St/Woodburn Rd/Kerrs Rd Roundabout Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 124 3.4 0.247 9.0 LOS A 1.6 11.7 0.66 0.71 41.2

2 T 53 5.9 0.247 8.3 LOS A 1.6 11.7 0.66 0.68 41.5

3 R 17 0.0 0.247 12.4 LOS A 1.6 11.7 0.66 0.81 39.2

Approach 194 3.8 0.247 9.1 LOS A 1.6 11.7 0.66 0.71 41.1

East: Kerrs Rd (E)

4 L 33 0.0 0.310 8.5 LOS A 2.2 15.4 0.67 0.72 41.8

5 T 234 2.2 0.310 7.8 LOS A 2.2 15.4 0.67 0.68 41.7

6 R 10 0.0 0.310 12.0 LOS A 2.2 15.4 0.67 0.82 39.7

Approach 278 1.9 0.310 8.0 LOS A 2.2 15.4 0.67 0.69 41.7


7 L 20 5.3 0.297 9.1 LOS A 2.0 14.4 0.67 0.71 41.0

8 T 87 1.2 0.297 8.1 LOS A 2.0 14.4 0.67 0.68 41.3

9 R 132 4.0 0.297 12.5 LOS A 2.0 14.4 0.67 0.79 39.1

Approach 238 3.1 0.297 10.6 LOS A 2.0 14.4 0.67 0.74 40.0

West: Tilba St (W)

10 L 154 1.4 0.430 6.5 LOS A 3.9 27.7 0.43 0.53 42.4

11 T 189 1.7 0.430 5.7 LOS A 3.9 27.7 0.43 0.47 42.6

12 R 142 2.9 0.430 10.0 LOS A 3.9 27.7 0.43 0.68 40.7

Approach 485 1.9 0.430 7.2 LOS A 3.9 27.7 0.43 0.55 42.0




I-46 Tilba St/Woodburn Rd/Kerrs Rd Roundabout Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 123 1.7 0.286 7.9 LOS A 2.0 13.9 0.59 0.65 41.9

2 T 117 0.9 0.286 7.1 LOS A 2.0 13.9 0.59 0.61 41.9

3 R 18 0.0 0.286 11.4 LOS A 2.0 13.9 0.59 0.77 40.0

Approach 258 1.2 0.286 7.8 LOS A 2.0 13.9 0.59 0.64 41.8

East: Kerrs Rd (E)

4 L 28 0.0 0.161 8.1 LOS A 1.0 7.3 0.61 0.67 41.9

5 T 95 3.3 0.161 7.4 LOS A 1.0 7.3 0.61 0.62 41.9

6 R 21 0.0 0.161 11.6 LOS A 1.0 7.3 0.61 0.78 39.9

Approach 144 2.2 0.161 8.1 LOS A 1.0 7.3 0.61 0.65 41.6


7 L 41 2.6 0.356 9.3 LOS A 2.6 18.1 0.72 0.74 40.8

8 T 96 0.0 0.356 8.4 LOS A 2.6 18.1 0.72 0.71 41.0

9 R 140 2.2 0.356 12.7 LOS A 2.6 18.1 0.72 0.81 38.9

Approach 277 1.5 0.356 10.7 LOS A 2.6 18.1 0.72 0.76 39.9

West: Tilba St (W)

10 L 171 1.8 0.529 7.7 LOS A 4.9 35.1 0.64 0.62 41.7

11 T 224 2.3 0.529 6.9 LOS A 4.9 35.1 0.64 0.58 41.6

12 R 119 0.9 0.529 11.2 LOS A 4.9 35.1 0.64 0.72 40.1

Approach 514 1.8 0.529 8.2 LOS A 4.9 35.1 0.64 0.63 41.3








Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 124 3.2 0.247 9.0 LOS A 1.6 11.7 0.66 0.71 41.2

2 T 53 5.7 0.247 8.3 LOS A 1.6 11.7 0.66 0.68 41.4

3 R 17 0.0 0.247 12.4 LOS A 1.6 11.7 0.66 0.81 39.2

Approach 194 3.6 0.247 9.1 LOS A 1.6 11.7 0.66 0.71 41.1

East: Kerrs Rd (E)

4 L 33 0.0 0.311 8.6 LOS A 2.2 15.5 0.67 0.72 41.8

5 T 236 2.1 0.311 7.8 LOS A 2.2 15.5 0.67 0.68 41.7

6 R 10 0.0 0.311 12.0 LOS A 2.2 15.5 0.67 0.82 39.7

Approach 279 1.8 0.311 8.0 LOS A 2.2 15.5 0.67 0.69 41.7


7 L 20 5.0 0.302 9.1 LOS A 2.0 14.6 0.67 0.72 41.0

8 T 87 1.1 0.302 8.2 LOS A 2.0 14.6 0.67 0.68 41.2

9 R 133 3.8 0.302 12.5 LOS A 2.0 14.6 0.67 0.79 39.0

Approach 240 2.9 0.302 10.7 LOS A 2.0 14.6 0.67 0.75 39.9

West: Tilba St (W)

10 L 160 1.3 0.441 6.5 LOS A 4.1 28.8 0.43 0.53 42.4

11 T 197 1.5 0.441 5.7 LOS A 4.1 28.8 0.43 0.47 42.6

12 R 142 2.8 0.441 10.0 LOS A 4.1 28.8 0.43 0.68 40.7

Approach 499 1.8 0.441 7.2 LOS A 4.1 28.8 0.43 0.55 42.0









Effective Stop Rate




1 L 123 1.6 0.290 8.0 LOS A 2.0 14.1 0.60 0.66 41.9

2 T 117 0.9 0.290 7.3 LOS A 2.0 14.1 0.60 0.62 41.9

3 R 18 0.0 0.290 11.5 LOS A 2.0 14.1 0.60 0.78 39.9

Approach 258 1.2 0.290 7.9 LOS A 2.0 14.1 0.60 0.65 41.7

East: Kerrs Rd (E)

4 L 28 0.0 0.171 8.2 LOS A 1.1 7.8 0.62 0.67 41.9

5 T 103 2.9 0.171 7.4 LOS A 1.1 7.8 0.62 0.63 41.9

6 R 21 0.0 0.171 11.6 LOS A 1.1 7.8 0.62 0.78 39.8

Approach 152 2.0 0.171 8.1 LOS A 1.1 7.8 0.62 0.66 41.6


7 L 41 2.4 0.364 9.3 LOS A 2.6 18.6 0.72 0.74 40.8

8 T 96 0.0 0.364 8.4 LOS A 2.6 18.6 0.72 0.72 41.0

9 R 146 2.1 0.364 12.7 LOS A 2.6 18.6 0.72 0.81 38.9

Approach 283 1.4 0.364 10.8 LOS A 2.6 18.6 0.72 0.77 39.8

West: Tilba St (W)

10 L 173 1.7 0.533 7.8 LOS A 5.0 35.5 0.64 0.62 41.7

11 T 225 2.2 0.533 7.0 LOS A 5.0 35.5 0.64 0.59 41.6

12 R 119 0.8 0.533 11.2 LOS A 5.0 35.5 0.64 0.72 40.1

Approach 517 1.7 0.533 8.2 LOS A 5.0 35.5 0.64 0.63 41.3



I-17 Railway St/Arthur St



I-17 Railway St/Arthur St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 100 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Arthur St (E)

5 T 657 4.1 0.227 2.1 LOS A 3.7 27.1 0.23 0.20 55.6

6 R 157 5.7 0.518 50.3 LOS D 7.2 52.7 0.96 0.81 25.2

Approach 814 4.4 0.518 11.4 LOS A 7.2 52.7 0.37 0.32 45.1

North: Arthur St (N)

7 L 272 4.8 0.522 40.7 LOS C 11.2 81.7 0.89 0.83 28.4

9 R 19 10.5 0.183 60.0 LOS E 0.9 7.2 0.98 0.70 22.7

Approach 291 5.2 0.522 41.9 LOS C 11.2 81.7 0.90 0.82 27.9

West: Railway St

10 L 79 2.5 0.252 20.0 LOS B 6.0 43.0 0.50 0.93 39.8

11 T 810 3.8 0.540 12.8 LOS A 17.6 127.0 0.61 0.56 42.4

Approach 889 3.7 0.540 13.4 LOS A 17.6 127.0 0.60 0.59 42.2









Effective Stop Rate



East: Arthur St (E)

5 T 937 2.2 0.432 10.7 LOS A 12.9 92.0 0.56 0.49 44.5

6 R 324 3.4 0.715 46.7 LOS D 15.0 107.8 0.97 0.86 26.2

Approach 1261 2.5 0.715 20.0 LOS B 15.0 107.8 0.66 0.59 37.8


7 L 261 2.7 0.247 19.2 LOS B 6.2 44.1 0.52 0.77 39.3

9 R 166 1.8 0.739 44.4 LOS D 7.1 50.7 0.85 0.86 27.0

Approach 427 2.3 0.739 29.0 LOS C 7.1 50.7 0.65 0.80 33.4

West: Railway St

10 L 25 8.0 0.344 42.2 LOS C 7.3 52.2 0.82 0.90 29.0

11 T 600 1.5 0.736 34.6 LOS C 19.2 136.2 0.92 0.82 29.3

Approach 625 1.8 0.736 34.9 LOS C 19.2 136.2 0.92 0.82 29.3



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: AM Peak Future 2021_Growth 0.5%

I-17 Railway St/Arthur St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 100 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years





Effective Stop Rate



East: Arthur St (E)

5 T 687 4.1 0.238 2.1 LOS A 3.9 28.6 0.24 0.21 55.5

6 R 164 5.7 0.541 50.5 LOS D 7.5 55.3 0.96 0.81 25.1

Approach 851 4.4 0.541 11.4 LOS A 7.5 55.3 0.38 0.32 45.1


7 L 284 4.8 0.546 40.9 LOS C 11.8 86.1 0.90 0.83 28.3

9 R 20 10.5 0.192 60.1 LOS E 1.0 7.5 0.98 0.70 22.7

Approach 304 5.2 0.546 42.2 LOS C 11.8 86.1 0.90 0.82 27.8

West: Railway St

10 L 83 2.5 0.264 20.1 LOS B 6.2 45.0 0.51 0.93 39.8

11 T 846 3.8 0.564 13.0 LOS A 18.8 135.6 0.62 0.57 42.2

Approach 929 3.7 0.564 13.6 LOS A 18.8 135.6 0.61 0.60 41.9



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: PM Peak Future 2021_Growth 0.5%

I-17 Railway St/Arthur St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 100 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Arthur St (E)

5 T 979 2.2 0.451 10.9 LOS A 13.7 97.7 0.56 0.50 44.3

6 R 339 3.4 0.747 48.0 LOS D 16.0 115.5 0.98 0.88 25.9

Approach 1318 2.5 0.747 20.4 LOS B 16.0 115.5 0.67 0.60 37.5


7 L 273 2.7 0.258 19.3 LOS B 6.5 46.4 0.53 0.77 39.2

9 R 173 1.8 0.773 46.4 LOS D 7.7 54.8 0.85 0.88 26.3

Approach 446 2.3 0.773 29.8 LOS C 7.7 54.8 0.65 0.81 33.0

West: Railway St

10 L 26 8.0 0.359 42.4 LOS C 7.7 55.0 0.83 0.90 28.9

11 T 627 1.5 0.769 35.8 LOS C 20.7 147.1 0.93 0.84 28.9

Approach 653 1.8 0.769 36.0 LOS C 20.7 147.1 0.93 0.84 28.9








Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Arthur St (E)

5 T 956 2.9 0.328 2.3 LOS A 6.1 43.5 0.26 0.23 55.2

6 R 387 2.3 0.805 47.7 LOS D 18.7 133.3 0.96 0.91 25.9

Approach 1343 2.8 0.805 15.4 LOS B 18.7 133.3 0.46 0.43 41.7


7 L 435 3.2 0.584 32.9 LOS C 16.5 118.5 0.83 0.84 31.5

9 R 20 10.0 0.192 60.0 LOS E 1.0 7.5 0.98 0.70 22.7

Approach 455 3.5 0.584 34.1 LOS C 16.5 118.5 0.84 0.84 31.0

West: Railway St

10 L 82 2.4 0.389 31.0 LOS C 10.9 78.6 0.69 0.94 33.5

11 T 1015 3.2 0.832 27.2 LOS B 34.3 246.3 0.87 0.84 32.7

Approach 1097 3.1 0.832 27.4 LOS B 34.3 246.3 0.86 0.85 32.7



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: PM Peak Existing 2021_Dev






Effective Stop Rate



East: Arthur St (E)

5 T 1242 1.8 0.448 3.8 LOS A 10.9 77.6 0.35 0.32 52.7

6 R 522 2.0 1.000 3 40.3 LOS C 22.9 163.2 0.99 0.88 28.5

Approach 1764 1.9 1.000 14.6 LOS B 22.9 163.2 0.54 0.48 42.1


7 L 582 1.2 0.608 26.2 LOS B 19.8 140.0 0.76 0.84 34.8

9 R 173 1.7 0.943 62.3 LOS E 9.2 65.3 1.00 0.86 22.1

Approach 755 1.3 0.943 34.5 LOS C 19.8 140.0 0.81 0.84 30.8

West: Railway St

10 L 26 7.7 0.469 44.5 LOS D 13.7 97.2 0.82 0.93 28.2

11 T 1001 0.9 1.004 86.0 LOS F 62.8 443.3 0.95 1.35 17.3

Approach 1027 1.1 1.004 85.0 LOS F 62.8 443.3 0.94 1.34 17.5



I-43 Olympic Drive/Joseph St



I-43 Olympic Drive/Joseph St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 146 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)





Effective Stop Rate




2 T 2437 6.4 0.435 0.1 X X X X 0.00 69.8

3 R 427 1.5 1.000 3 17.0 LOS B 23.1 163.5 0.86 0.90 43.8

Approach 2864 5.4 1.000 2.6 LOS A 23.1 163.5 0.13 0.13 64.6

East: Joseph St

4 L 202 1.5 0.466 69.7 LOS E 8.2 58.0 0.95 0.79 20.2

Approach 202 1.5 0.466 69.7 LOS E 8.2 58.0 0.95 0.79 20.2


7 L 128 3.1 0.388 14.4 LOS A 12.4 92.0 0.35 1.08 48.3

8 T 1540 8.1 0.388 5.6 LOS A 12.5 93.3 0.35 0.32 57.6

Approach 1668 7.7 0.388 6.3 LOS A 12.5 93.3 0.35 0.38 56.8




I-43 Olympic Drive/Joseph St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 145 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time)





Effective Stop Rate




2 T 1573 4.3 0.276 0.0 X X X X 0.00 69.9

3 R 253 1.2 0.507 29.5 LOS C 13.5 95.5 0.82 0.89 34.7

Approach 1826 3.8 0.507 4.1 LOS A 13.5 95.5 0.11 0.12 62.0

East: Joseph St

4 L 414 2.7 0.628 57.9 LOS E 18.3 131.3 0.91 0.83 22.6

Approach 414 2.7 0.628 57.9 LOS E 18.3 131.3 0.91 0.83 22.6


7 L 70 0.0 0.636 23.8 LOS B 32.1 232.7 0.63 1.09 41.3

8 T 2318 4.7 0.636 15.0 LOS B 32.1 233.8 0.63 0.59 45.6

Approach 2388 4.5 0.636 15.3 LOS B 32.1 233.8 0.63 0.60 45.5



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: AM Peak Future 2021 BC

I-43 Olympic Drive/Joseph St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 146 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




2 T 2572 6.4 0.459 0.1 X X X X 0.00 69.8

3 R 420 1.5 1.000 3 17.6 LOS B 23.1 163.5 0.87 0.90 43.3

Approach 2993 5.4 1.000 2.5 LOS A 23.1 163.5 0.12 0.13 64.7

East: Joseph St

4 L 211 1.5 0.487 69.9 LOS E 8.6 60.8 0.96 0.79 20.2

Approach 211 1.5 0.487 69.9 LOS E 8.6 60.8 0.96 0.79 20.2


7 L 134 3.1 0.406 14.5 LOS B 13.2 98.0 0.36 1.07 48.2

8 T 1609 8.1 0.406 5.7 LOS A 13.3 99.4 0.36 0.33 57.4

Approach 1743 7.7 0.406 6.4 LOS A 13.3 99.4 0.36 0.38 56.6



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: PM Peak Future 2021 BC

I-43 Olympic Drive/Joseph St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 145 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




2 T 1644 4.3 0.289 0.0 X X X X 0.00 69.9

3 R 264 1.2 0.530 31.9 LOS C 14.1 99.8 0.83 0.90 33.4

Approach 1908 3.8 0.530 4.5 LOS A 14.1 99.8 0.11 0.13 61.5

East: Joseph St

4 L 433 2.7 0.656 58.5 LOS E 19.3 138.4 0.92 0.83 22.4

Approach 433 2.7 0.656 58.5 LOS E 19.3 138.4 0.92 0.83 22.4


7 L 73 0.0 0.664 24.3 LOS B 34.7 251.4 0.66 1.08 41.0

8 T 2422 4.7 0.664 15.5 LOS B 34.7 252.7 0.66 0.61 45.1

Approach 2495 4.5 0.664 15.8 LOS B 34.7 252.7 0.66 0.62 45.0




I-43 Olympic Drive/Joseph St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 146 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




2 T 2658 6.3 0.474 0.1 X X X X 0.00 69.8

3 R 454 1.3 1.000 3 16.9 LOS B 23.1 163.5 0.82 0.88 43.9

Approach 3112 5.2 1.000 2.6 LOS A 23.1 163.5 0.12 0.13 64.7

East: Joseph St

4 L 264 1.1 0.608 71.1 LOS F 11.0 77.4 0.97 0.80 20.0

Approach 264 1.1 0.608 71.1 LOS F 11.0 77.4 0.97 0.80 20.0


7 L 134 3.0 0.414 14.6 LOS B 13.6 101.0 0.36 1.08 48.2

8 T 1647 7.9 0.414 5.7 LOS A 13.7 102.4 0.36 0.33 57.3

Approach 1781 7.5 0.414 6.4 LOS A 13.7 102.4 0.36 0.39 56.6




I-43 Olympic Drive/Joseph St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 145 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time)





Effective Stop Rate




2 T 1691 4.1 0.297 0.0 X X X X 0.00 69.9

3 R 337 0.9 0.634 36.3 LOS C 17.0 119.6 0.82 0.93 31.2

Approach 2028 3.6 0.634 6.1 LOS A 17.0 119.6 0.14 0.15 58.8

East: Joseph St

4 L 533 2.1 0.712 55.5 LOS D 24.3 173.1 0.91 0.85 23.1

Approach 533 2.1 0.712 55.5 LOS D 24.3 173.1 0.91 0.85 23.1


7 L 73 0.0 0.726 28.7 LOS C 40.8 295.6 0.75 1.04 38.1

8 T 2487 4.5 0.726 20.0 LOS B 40.8 297.0 0.75 0.70 41.2

Approach 2560 4.4 0.726 20.3 LOS B 40.8 297.0 0.75 0.71 41.1



I-44 Georges Ave/Joseph St



I-44 Georges Ave/Joseph St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 137 seconds (User-Given Phase Times)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: Joseph St (S)

1 L 13 0.0 0.796 33.9 LOS C 43.7 321.8 0.86 0.99 35.2

2 T 2504 6.2 0.796 25.2 LOS B 43.7 322.1 0.86 0.79 37.5

3 R 373 1.9 0.985 35.1 LOS C 16.1 114.2 1.00 0.93 30.6

Approach 2890 5.6 0.985 26.5 LOS B 43.7 322.1 0.88 0.81 36.5

East: Georges Ave (E)

4 L 90 6.7 0.495 53.7 LOS D 7.1 52.0 0.86 0.79 23.7

5 T 148 2.7 0.495 56.2 LOS D 7.7 55.5 0.94 0.76 20.4

6 R 13 15.4 0.495 68.0 LOS E 7.7 55.5 0.97 0.80 21.1

Approach 251 4.8 0.495 55.9 LOS D 7.7 55.5 0.92 0.77 21.6

North: Joseph St (N)

7 L 69 1.4 0.523 28.4 LOS B 22.1 164.5 0.67 1.04 37.8

8 T 1559 8.5 0.523 19.6 LOS B 22.1 165.8 0.67 0.60 41.7

9 R 114 1.8 0.428 34.1 LOS C 4.8 34.4 0.93 0.82 32.2

Approach 1742 7.7 0.523 20.9 LOS B 22.1 165.8 0.69 0.63 40.8

West: Georges Ave (W)

10 L 194 2.1 1.000 3 56.0 LOS D 10.3 73.4 0.99 0.82 24.6

11 T 225 2.2 1.301 606.8 LOS F 78.6 560.8 1.00 2.70 3.2

12 R 78 2.6 1.301 633.4 LOS F 78.6 560.8 1.00 2.76 3.5

Approach 497 2.2 1.301 396.0 LOS F 78.6 560.8 1.00 1.98 5.1

All Vehic les 5380 5.9 1.301 60.2 LOS E 78.6 560.8 0.83 0.86 23.6








Effective Stop Rate




1 L 36 0.0 0.524 32.0 LOS C 23.7 172.0 0.70 1.05 35.7

2 T 1543 4.6 0.524 23.3 LOS B 23.7 172.7 0.70 0.63 39.1

3 R 79 2.5 0.283 35.2 LOS C 3.2 23.2 0.88 0.79 30.5

Approach 1658 4.4 0.524 24.1 LOS B 23.7 172.7 0.71 0.65 38.5


4 L 282 4.6 1.000 3 55.5 LOS D 15.8 114.7 1.00 0.85 23.1

5 T 335 0.3 1.106 280.2 LOS F 65.7 460.9 1.00 2.04 6.4

6 R 63 0.0 1.106 292.0 LOS F 65.7 460.9 1.00 2.07 6.9

Approach 680 2.1 1.106 188.1 LOS F 65.7 460.9 1.00 1.55 9.4


7 L 21 14.3 0.843 40.1 LOS C 50.3 365.2 0.92 0.97 32.3

8 T 2528 4.0 0.843 30.9 LOS C 50.5 365.3 0.92 0.85 34.2

9 R 173 1.7 0.509 25.3 LOS B 5.7 40.7 0.82 0.82 37.3

Approach 2722 3.9 0.843 30.6 LOS C 50.5 365.3 0.92 0.85 34.4


10 L 62 0.0 0.622 56.1 LOS D 6.3 44.4 0.84 0.80 24.9

11 T 125 0.8 0.622 63.1 LOS E 7.0 50.3 0.94 0.76 20.4

12 R 23 8.7 0.622 80.6 LOS F 7.0 50.3 1.00 0.80 20.1

Approach 210 1.4 0.622 63.0 LOS E 7.0 50.3 0.92 0.78 21.6




I-44 Georges Ave/Joseph St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 137 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 14 0.0 0.837 35.0 LOS C 47.9 352.9 0.90 0.97 34.7

2 T 2631 6.2 0.837 26.3 LOS B 47.9 353.2 0.90 0.83 36.8

3 R 375 1.9 1.000 3 36.8 LOS C 16.2 115.0 1.00 0.93 29.9

Approach 3020 5.6 1.000 27.6 LOS B 47.9 353.2 0.91 0.85 35.8


4 L 94 6.7 0.517 53.9 LOS D 7.4 54.5 0.87 0.79 23.7

5 T 155 2.7 0.517 56.4 LOS D 8.0 58.3 0.95 0.76 20.4

6 R 14 15.4 0.517 68.2 LOS E 8.0 58.3 0.98 0.80 21.1

Approach 262 4.8 0.517 56.1 LOS D 8.0 58.3 0.92 0.78 21.6


7 L 72 1.4 0.546 28.8 LOS C 23.5 175.2 0.68 1.03 37.6

8 T 1629 8.5 0.546 20.0 LOS B 23.5 176.6 0.68 0.62 41.4

9 R 119 1.8 0.453 36.8 LOS C 5.3 37.7 0.96 0.82 30.9

Approach 1820 7.7 0.546 21.5 LOS B 23.5 176.6 0.70 0.65 40.4


10 L 203 2.1 1.000 3 55.5 LOS D 10.3 73.4 0.99 0.82 24.7

11 T 235 2.2 1.410 818.7 LOS F 99.0 706.4 1.00 3.17 2.4

12 R 82 2.6 1.410 828.3 LOS F 99.0 706.4 1.00 3.18 2.7

Approach 519 2.2 1.410 522.3 LOS F 99.0 706.4 1.00 2.25 3.9




I-44 Georges Ave/Joseph St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 145 seconds (User-Given Phase Times) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 38 0.0 0.547 32.5 LOS C 25.2 182.9 0.71 1.04 35.5

2 T 1612 4.6 0.547 23.7 LOS B 25.2 183.6 0.71 0.64 38.8

3 R 83 2.5 0.298 37.3 LOS C 3.5 25.2 0.90 0.79 29.7

Approach 1733 4.4 0.547 24.6 LOS B 25.2 183.6 0.72 0.66 38.2


4 L 294 4.6 1.000 3 54.5 LOS D 15.7 114.2 0.96 0.86 23.4

5 T 350 0.3 1.198 435.7 LOS F 91.0 638.5 1.00 2.63 4.3

6 R 66 0.0 1.198 443.1 LOS F 91.0 638.5 1.00 2.63 4.8

Approach 711 2.1 1.198 280.4 LOS F 91.0 638.5 0.98 1.89 6.8


7 L 22 14.3 0.881 46.0 LOS D 58.3 422.7 0.96 0.98 29.7

8 T 2642 4.0 0.881 36.7 LOS C 58.4 422.7 0.96 0.92 31.4

9 R 181 1.7 0.548 26.9 LOS B 6.9 49.3 0.90 0.84 36.3

Approach 2844 3.9 0.881 36.2 LOS C 58.4 422.7 0.95 0.92 31.7


10 L 65 0.0 0.658 57.2 LOS E 6.8 47.7 0.85 0.82 24.6

11 T 131 0.8 0.658 63.8 LOS E 7.3 52.4 0.94 0.78 20.3

12 R 24 8.7 0.658 81.3 LOS F 7.3 52.4 1.00 0.82 19.9

Approach 219 1.4 0.658 63.8 LOS E 7.3 52.4 0.92 0.79 21.4









Effective Stop Rate




1 L 14 0.0 0.879 41.2 LOS C 56.8 417.8 0.94 0.99 31.6

2 T 2766 5.9 0.879 32.5 LOS C 56.8 418.2 0.94 0.91 33.3

3 R 368 1.6 1.000 3 39.3 LOS C 16.1 114.2 1.00 0.94 28.8

Approach 3148 5.3 1.000 33.3 LOS C 56.8 418.2 0.95 0.91 32.8


4 L 94 6.4 0.509 53.8 LOS D 7.3 53.7 0.87 0.79 23.7

5 T 154 2.6 0.509 56.5 LOS D 8.1 58.3 0.95 0.76 20.4

6 R 13 15.4 0.509 68.1 LOS E 8.1 58.3 0.97 0.80 21.1

Approach 261 4.6 0.509 56.1 LOS D 8.1 58.3 0.92 0.77 21.6


7 L 72 1.4 0.573 29.3 LOS C 25.3 188.1 0.70 1.03 37.4

8 T 1719 8.0 0.573 20.5 LOS B 25.3 189.5 0.70 0.63 41.0

9 R 119 1.7 0.460 39.5 LOS C 5.4 38.5 0.97 0.82 29.7

Approach 1910 7.4 0.573 22.0 LOS B 25.3 189.5 0.72 0.66 40.0


10 L 203 2.0 1.000 3 55.5 LOS D 10.3 73.4 0.99 0.82 24.7

11 T 235 2.1 1.401 802.2 LOS F 97.6 696.0 1.00 3.14 2.5

12 R 81 2.5 1.401 811.5 LOS F 97.6 696.0 1.00 3.15 2.7

Approach 519 2.1 1.401 511.6 LOS F 97.6 696.0 1.00 2.23 4.0









Effective Stop Rate




1 L 38 0.0 0.569 31.9 LOS C 26.4 191.2 0.72 1.04 35.9

2 T 1703 4.3 0.569 23.2 LOS B 26.4 191.9 0.72 0.65 39.1

3 R 119 1.7 0.423 43.4 LOS D 5.4 38.5 0.95 0.82 27.4

Approach 1860 4.1 0.569 24.7 LOS B 26.4 191.9 0.73 0.67 38.1


4 L 295 4.7 1.000 3 54.0 LOS D 15.7 114.7 1.00 0.85 23.5

5 T 350 0.3 1.270 569.5 LOS F 105.9 742.9 1.00 3.07 3.4

6 R 66 0.0 1.270 577.1 LOS F 105.9 742.9 1.00 3.07 3.7

Approach 711 2.1 1.270 356.3 LOS F 105.9 742.9 1.00 2.15 5.4


7 L 22 13.6 0.921 55.9 LOS D 70.3 509.3 1.00 1.03 26.1

8 T 2808 3.8 0.921 46.6 LOS D 70.5 509.4 1.00 1.02 27.7

9 R 181 1.7 0.548 27.7 LOS B 7.4 52.4 0.92 0.85 35.8

Approach 3011 3.7 0.921 45.5 LOS D 70.5 509.4 0.99 1.01 28.0


10 L 65 0.0 0.679 58.7 LOS E 7.1 49.8 0.86 0.84 24.3

11 T 131 0.8 0.679 64.0 LOS E 7.1 50.7 0.94 0.79 20.2

12 R 24 8.3 0.679 81.6 LOS F 7.1 50.7 1.00 0.83 19.9

Approach 220 1.4 0.679 64.4 LOS E 7.1 50.7 0.92 0.81 21.3



I-51 Northumberland Rd/Rawson St



I-51 Northumberland Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 100 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Rawson St (E)

5 T 650 11.4 0.779 26.8 LOS B 23.9 182.5 0.86 0.78 24.7

6 R 53 1.9 0.779 38.6 LOS C 23.9 182.5 0.94 0.96 30.6

Approach 703 10.7 0.779 27.7 LOS B 23.9 182.5 0.87 0.80 25.3

North: Northumberland Rd

7 L 31 6.5 0.131 44.7 LOS D 1.3 9.4 0.87 0.72 25.0

9 R 258 2.7 0.787 55.2 LOS D 13.1 93.8 1.00 0.90 23.8

Approach 289 3.1 0.787 54.0 LOS D 13.1 93.8 0.99 0.88 23.9

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 104 1.9 0.781 47.3 LOS D 18.6 139.3 0.99 0.93 12.5

11 T 666 10.5 0.781 39.8 LOS C 18.6 141.8 0.99 0.92 14.2

Approach 770 9.4 0.781 40.8 LOS C 18.6 141.8 0.99 0.92 14.0









Effective Stop Rate



East: Rawson St (E)

5 T 819 8.2 0.876 46.0 LOS D 43.9 328.2 0.91 0.99 18.1

6 R 26 0.0 0.876 59.7 LOS E 43.9 328.2 0.99 1.13 23.7

Approach 845 7.9 0.876 46.4 LOS D 43.9 328.2 0.92 1.00 18.4


7 L 46 4.3 0.228 45.7 LOS D 2.3 16.9 0.74 0.72 24.7

9 R 502 1.0 0.869 68.7 LOS E 38.0 268.3 1.00 0.94 20.7

Approach 548 1.3 0.869 66.8 LOS E 38.0 268.3 0.98 0.92 21.0

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 69 2.9 0.854 76.5 LOS F 26.3 190.6 1.00 0.97 8.3

11 T 619 4.4 0.854 68.9 LOS E 26.5 192.5 1.00 0.98 9.4

Approach 688 4.2 0.854 69.6 LOS E 26.5 192.5 1.00 0.98 9.3




I-51 Northumberland Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 90 seconds (Practical Cycle Time) Design Life Analysis (Practical Capacity): Results for 9 years





Effective Stop Rate



East: Rawson St (E)

5 T 679 11.4 0.865 32.3 LOS C 26.3 200.4 0.91 0.95 22.4

6 R 55 1.9 0.865 45.9 LOS D 26.3 200.4 0.99 1.09 27.8

Approach 735 10.7 0.865 33.4 LOS C 26.3 200.4 0.91 0.96 22.9


7 L 32 6.5 0.128 42.4 LOS C 1.2 9.1 0.88 0.72 25.7

9 R 270 2.7 0.888 60.1 LOS E 14.0 100.5 1.00 1.02 22.6

Approach 302 3.1 0.888 58.2 LOS E 14.0 100.5 0.99 0.99 22.9

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 109 1.9 0.862 51.3 LOS D 19.9 148.7 1.00 1.04 11.7

11 T 696 10.5 0.862 43.8 LOS D 19.9 151.4 1.00 1.04 13.3

Approach 805 9.4 0.862 44.8 LOS D 19.9 151.4 1.00 1.04 13.0




I-51 Northumberland Rd/Rawson St Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 150 seconds (Practical Cycle Time) Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Rawson St (E)

5 T 856 8.2 0.920 55.4 LOS D 50.9 380.2 0.92 1.08 16.0

6 R 27 0.0 0.920 71.6 LOS F 50.9 380.2 1.00 1.23 21.0

Approach 883 7.9 0.920 55.9 LOS D 50.9 380.2 0.93 1.08 16.2


7 L 48 4.3 0.238 45.7 LOS D 2.4 17.7 0.74 0.72 24.7

9 R 525 1.0 0.908 77.2 LOS F 43.1 304.5 1.00 0.97 19.2

Approach 573 1.3 0.908 74.5 LOS F 43.1 304.5 0.98 0.95 19.5

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 72 2.9 0.921 90.2 LOS F 30.8 223.2 1.00 1.10 7.1

11 T 647 4.4 0.921 82.6 LOS F 31.0 225.4 1.00 1.10 8.1

Approach 719 4.2 0.921 83.4 LOS F 31.0 225.4 1.00 1.10 8.0








Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Rawson St (E)

5 T 773 10.0 1.001 67.8 LOS E 63.1 473.0 0.86 1.04 13.8

6 R 121 0.8 1.001 97.9 LOS F 63.1 473.0 1.00 1.28 16.6

Approach 894 8.7 1.001 71.9 LOS F 63.1 473.0 0.88 1.07 14.3


7 L 34 5.9 0.184 55.4 LOS D 1.9 13.7 0.84 0.72 22.3

9 R 384 1.8 1.011 149.0 LOS F 43.0 305.8 1.00 1.21 11.7

Approach 418 2.2 1.011 141.4 LOS F 43.0 305.8 0.99 1.17 12.2

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 133 1.5 0.977 111.8 LOS F 45.2 335.3 1.00 1.27 5.8

11 T 791 9.2 0.977 104.3 LOS F 45.2 341.4 1.00 1.31 6.7

Approach 924 8.1 0.977 105.4 LOS F 45.2 341.4 1.00 1.30 6.6









Effective Stop Rate



East: Rawson St (E)

5 T 976 7.2 1.214 327.6 LOS F 181.6 1339.2 0.91 1.92 3.6

6 R 109 0.0 1.214 440.9 LOS F 181.6 1339.2 1.00 2.39 4.6

Approach 1085 6.5 1.214 339.0 LOS F 181.6 1339.2 0.92 1.97 3.8


7 L 49 4.1 0.249 48.1 LOS D 2.6 18.6 0.76 0.73 24.1

9 R 669 0.7 1.235 514.3 LOS F 162.8 1146.9 1.00 1.92 4.0

Approach 718 1.0 1.235 482.5 LOS F 162.8 1146.9 0.98 1.83 4.2

West: Rawson St (W)

10 L 104 1.9 1.183 426.5 LOS F 92.1 662.8 1.00 2.39 1.6

11 T 763 3.7 1.183 418.9 LOS F 93.0 671.2 1.00 2.42 1.9

Approach 867 3.5 1.183 419.8 LOS F 93.0 671.2 1.00 2.42 1.8



I-47 Station Rd/Kerr Pde/Civic Rd



I-47 Station Rd/Kerr Pde/Civic Rd Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: Civic Rd

1 L 68 4.4 0.353 11.6 LOS A 5.2 37.7 0.83 0.15 41.0

2 T 570 5.1 0.353 5.0 LOS A 5.2 37.7 0.83 0.00 40.7

3 R 10 10.0 0.353 11.3 LOS A 5.2 37.7 0.83 1.06 41.0

Approach 648 5.1 0.353 5.8 NA 5.2 37.7 0.83 0.03 40.7

East: Kerr Pde (E)

4 L 89 1.1 0.105 7.7 LOS A 0.4 2.8 0.48 0.70 35.5

Approach 89 1.1 0.105 7.7 LOS A 0.4 2.8 0.48 0.70 35.5

North: Station Rd

7 L 112 0.0 0.060 5.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.58 43.2

8 T 428 1.6 0.268 5.9 LOS A 3.4 24.5 0.77 0.00 41.6

9 R 29 6.9 0.268 12.6 LOS A 3.4 24.5 0.77 1.01 40.3

Approach 569 1.6 0.268 6.2 NA 3.4 24.5 0.62 0.17 41.8

West: Kerr Pde (W)

10 L 284 2.5 0.416 11.9 LOS A 2.1 15.3 0.64 0.95 38.9

Approach 284 2.5 0.416 11.9 LOS A 2.1 15.3 0.64 0.95 38.9

All Vehic les 1590 3.1 0.416 7.1 NA 5.2 37.7 0.70 0.28 40.4



I-47 Station Rd/Kerr Pde/Civic Rd Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)





Effective Stop Rate



South: Civic Rd

1 L 105 0.0 0.264 12.3 LOS A 3.5 24.5 0.87 0.10 40.1

2 T 362 0.6 0.264 5.9 LOS A 3.5 24.5 0.87 0.00 40.0

3 R 13 7.7 0.264 12.1 LOS A 3.5 24.5 0.87 1.00 40.1

Approach 480 0.6 0.264 7.5 NA 3.5 24.5 0.87 0.05 40.0

East: Kerr Pde (E)

4 L 36 0.0 0.051 8.6 LOS A 0.2 1.3 0.53 0.72 35.0

Approach 36 0.0 0.051 8.6 LOS A 0.2 1.3 0.53 0.72 35.0

North: Station Rd

7 L 145 3.4 0.080 5.7 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.58 43.2

8 T 564 2.0 0.459 5.3 LOS A 6.6 47.0 0.80 0.00 40.9

9 R 138 1.4 0.459 11.8 LOS A 6.6 47.0 0.80 1.09 40.5

Approach 847 2.1 0.459 6.4 NA 6.6 47.0 0.67 0.28 41.2

West: Kerr Pde (W)

10 L 307 0.7 0.344 9.3 LOS A 1.7 12.0 0.53 0.81 40.9

Approach 307 0.7 0.344 9.3 LOS A 1.7 12.0 0.53 0.81 40.9

All Vehicles 1670 1.4 0.459 7.3 NA 6.6 47.0 0.70 0.32 40.6



I-47 Station Rd/Kerr Pde/Civic Rd Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 85 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time)





Effective Stop Rate



South: Civic Rd

1 L 10 30.0 0.603 33.9 LOS C 12.8 93.5 0.90 0.87 28.9

2 T 716 4.1 0.603 26.7 LOS B 12.9 93.5 0.90 0.77 29.2

Approach 726 4.4 0.603 26.8 LOS B 12.9 93.5 0.90 0.77 29.2

East: Kerr Pde (E)

5 T 10 0.0 0.028 29.5 LOS C 0.4 2.5 0.83 0.57 28.1

6 R 5 0.0 0.028 45.0 LOS D 0.4 2.5 0.92 0.65 24.1

Approach 15 0.0 0.028 34.7 LOS C 0.4 2.5 0.86 0.60 26.6

North: Station Rd

7 L 344 0.0 0.583 20.9 LOS B 8.2 57.7 0.89 0.82 32.4

9 R 272 0.7 0.626 38.5 LOS C 10.4 73.0 0.95 0.83 26.0

Approach 616 0.3 0.626 28.6 LOS C 10.4 73.0 0.92 0.82 29.2

West: Kerr Pde (W)

10 L 162 4.3 0.547 25.4 LOS B 4.5 32.8 0.71 0.75 31.1

11 T 96 0.0 0.598 44.9 LOS D 4.1 29.0 1.00 0.80 23.0

Approach 258 2.7 0.598 32.6 LOS C 4.5 32.8 0.82 0.77 27.6




I-47 Station Rd/Kerr Pde/Civic Rd Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 90 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time)





Effective Stop Rate



South: Civic Rd

1 L 14 0.0 0.727 39.6 LOS C 16.0 114.4 0.96 0.90 26.5

2 T 759 2.8 0.727 33.2 LOS C 16.0 114.6 0.96 0.86 26.7

Approach 773 2.7 0.727 33.3 LOS C 16.0 114.6 0.96 0.86 26.7

East: Kerr Pde (E)

5 T 10 0.0 0.034 34.1 LOS C 0.4 2.8 0.86 0.59 26.4

6 R 5 0.0 0.034 49.0 LOS D 0.4 2.8 0.94 0.65 23.0

Approach 15 0.0 0.034 39.0 LOS C 0.4 2.8 0.89 0.61 25.2

North: Station Rd

7 L 525 1.0 0.732 22.6 LOS B 14.7 104.0 0.91 0.87 31.6

9 R 451 0.4 0.756 37.9 LOS C 18.7 131.2 0.96 0.89 26.2

Approach 976 0.7 0.756 29.7 LOS C 18.7 131.2 0.93 0.88 28.7

West: Kerr Pde (W)

10 L 115 1.7 0.359 21.6 LOS B 2.9 20.6 0.61 0.72 32.9

11 T 10 0.0 0.077 45.8 LOS D 0.4 3.0 0.96 0.65 22.8

Approach 125 1.6 0.359 23.6 LOS B 2.9 20.6 0.64 0.72 31.8




I-47 Station Rd/Kerr Pde/Civic Rd Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 106 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)





Effective Stop Rate



South: Civic Rd

1 L 23 13.6 0.950 71.5 LOS F 38.2 274.9 1.00 1.20 18.9

2 T 1107 2.8 0.950 64.7 LOS E 38.4 275.1 1.00 1.20 18.9

Approach 1131 3.0 0.950 64.8 LOS E 38.4 275.1 1.00 1.20 18.9

East: Kerr Pde (E)

5 T 45 0.0 0.833 60.5 LOS E 6.3 44.2 1.00 0.96 19.3

6 R 152 0.0 0.833 67.8 LOS E 6.3 44.2 1.00 0.95 19.0

Approach 197 0.0 0.833 66.1 LOS E 6.3 44.2 1.00 0.95 19.1

North: Station Rd

7 L 514 0.0 0.682 23.9 LOS B 16.5 115.2 0.88 0.85 30.9

9 R 596 0.4 0.921 60.3 LOS E 37.3 262.2 1.00 1.03 20.4

Approach 1109 0.2 0.921 43.5 LOS D 37.3 262.2 0.94 0.95 24.1

West: Kerr Pde (W)

10 L 273 2.7 0.974 35.9 LOS C 9.1 65.3 0.97 0.84 26.8

11 T 101 0.0 0.916 68.9 LOS E 6.2 43.4 1.00 1.04 18.0

Approach 374 2.0 0.974 44.9 LOS D 9.1 65.3 0.98 0.90 23.8




I-47 Station Rd/Kerr Pde/Civic Rd Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 168 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)





Effective Stop Rate



South: Civic Rd

1 L 20 0.0 0.992 133.4 LOS F 60.8 426.4 1.00 1.30 12.1

2 T 1014 0.2 0.992 127.0 LOS F 60.9 427.1 1.00 1.30 12.1

Approach 1034 0.2 0.992 127.1 LOS F 60.9 427.1 1.00 1.30 12.1

East: Kerr Pde (E)

5 T 25 0.0 0.999 142.2 LOS F 11.0 76.8 1.00 1.25 10.9

6 R 160 0.0 0.999 132.2 LOS F 11.0 76.8 1.00 1.08 11.9

Approach 185 0.0 0.999 133.6 LOS F 11.0 76.8 1.00 1.11 11.8

North: Station Rd

7 L 671 0.8 0.656 25.7 LOS B 30.7 216.3 0.76 0.84 30.1

9 R 946 0.2 1.009 130.4 LOS F 120.3 843.4 1.00 1.17 12.1

Approach 1617 0.5 1.009 87.0 LOS F 120.3 843.4 0.90 1.03 15.9

West: Kerr Pde (W)

10 L 240 0.7 1.000 3 41.9 LOS C 9.3 65.3 1.00 0.84 24.9

11 T 62 0.0 0.924 106.8 LOS F 5.8 41.1 1.00 1.03 13.1

Approach 301 0.7 1.000 55.2 LOS D 9.3 65.3 1.00 0.88 21.1



I-49 Auburn Rd / Civic Rd / Queen St


MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: AMPeakFuture2021BC_Growt

h0.5% I-49 Auburn Rd / Civic Rd / Queen Street 5 way Signalised intersection Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 85 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South East: Queen St

23 R 487 0.0 0.675 30.1 LOS C 16.9 118.2 0.89 0.85 28.9

Approach 487 0.0 0.675 30.1 LOS C 16.9 118.2 0.89 0.85 28.9

North: Auburn Rd

7 L 19 0.0 0.150 38.4 LOS C 1.9 13.4 0.87 0.76 26.6

8 T 211 1.9 0.672 35.5 LOS C 9.6 69.2 0.96 0.81 25.6

9 R 62 6.5 0.672 44.0 LOS D 9.6 69.2 0.98 0.86 25.1

Approach 292 2.7 0.672 37.5 LOS C 9.6 69.2 0.96 0.82 25.5

North West: Queen St

27 L 200 0.0 0.684 40.4 LOS C 7.7 54.2 0.93 0.84 25.3

28 T 39 0.0 0.153 29.8 LOS C 2.1 14.9 0.85 0.65 27.7

29 R 23 0.0 0.153 35.4 LOS C 2.1 14.9 0.85 0.75 27.4

Approach 262 0.0 0.684 38.4 LOS C 7.7 54.2 0.91 0.81 25.8



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: PMPeakFuture2021BC_Growt

h0.5% I-49 Auburn Rd / Civic Rd / Queen Street 5 way Signalised intersection Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 85 seconds (User-Given Cycle Time)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




23 R 392 0.0 0.718 37.0 LOS C 15.1 106.0 0.95 0.87 26.4

Approach 392 0.0 0.718 37.0 LOS C 15.1 106.0 0.95 0.87 26.4

North: Auburn Rd

7 L 9 0.0 0.157 33.2 LOS C 2.2 15.4 0.80 0.80 28.7

8 T 315 1.9 0.703 31.0 LOS C 13.5 96.1 0.93 0.81 27.2

9 R 90 1.1 0.703 39.7 LOS C 13.5 96.1 0.96 0.88 26.4

Approach 414 1.7 0.703 33.0 LOS C 13.5 96.1 0.94 0.82 27.0


27 L 64 0.0 0.209 34.4 LOS C 2.1 14.8 0.83 0.74 27.3

28 T 34 0.0 0.702 33.7 LOS C 12.5 87.2 0.97 0.85 25.6

29 R 43 0.0 0.702 39.3 LOS C 12.5 87.2 0.97 0.86 25.6

Approach 377 0.0 0.702 37.7 LOS C 12.5 87.2 0.91 0.80 26.4



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: AMPeakFuture2021_Dev

I-49 Auburn Rd / Civic Rd / Queen Street 5 way Signalised intersection Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 150 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)





Effective Stop Rate




23 R 569 0.0 1.021 159.5 LOS F 70.8 495.8 1.00 1.23 10.3

Approach 569 0.0 1.021 159.5 LOS F 70.8 495.8 1.00 1.23 10.3

North: Auburn Rd

7 L 19 0.0 0.229 46.3 LOS D 3.5 24.6 0.75 0.79 24.2

8 T 467 0.9 1.028 147.9 LOS F 76.7 542.6 0.97 1.36 10.7

9 R 182 2.2 1.028 168.1 LOS F 76.7 542.6 1.00 1.45 10.0

Approach 668 1.2 1.028 150.5 LOS F 76.7 542.6 0.98 1.37 10.7


27 L 42 0.0 0.209 49.3 LOS D 2.2 15.6 0.78 0.72 22.8

28 T 86 0.0 1.010 139.4 LOS F 62.0 433.7 1.00 1.27 11.1

29 R 70 0.0 1.010 145.1 LOS F 62.0 433.7 1.00 1.27 11.1

Approach 568 0.0 1.010 135.9 LOS F 62.0 433.7 0.95 1.15 12.4



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: PMPeakFuture2021_Dev

I-49 Auburn Rd / Civic Rd / Queen Street 5 way Signalised intersection Signals - Fixed Time Cycle Time = 150 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




23 R 557 0.0 1.216 481.7 LOS F 129.6 907.0 1.00 1.90 3.9

Approach 557 0.0 1.216 481.7 LOS F 129.6 907.0 1.00 1.90 3.9

North: Auburn Rd

7 L 10 0.0 0.271 46.6 LOS D 4.2 29.3 0.76 0.81 24.2

8 T 565 1.1 1.213 413.6 LOS F 164.8 1162.4 0.97 2.25 4.5

9 R 215 0.5 1.213 473.7 LOS F 164.8 1162.4 1.00 2.48 4.0

Approach 790 0.9 1.213 425.3 LOS F 164.8 1162.4 0.98 2.29 4.4


27 L 45 0.0 0.209 43.2 LOS D 2.2 15.5 0.72 0.71 24.5

28 T 75 0.0 1.209 458.6 LOS F 173.0 1210.8 1.00 2.08 4.1

29 R 84 0.0 1.209 464.3 LOS F 173.0 1210.8 1.00 2.08 4.1

Approach 795 0.0 1.209 438.8 LOS F 173.0 1210.8 0.94 1.78 5.0



I-52 Station Rd / Hall St



I-52 Station Rd / Hall St Roundabout




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 15 0.0 0.504 8.0 LOS A 4.6 32.2 0.59 0.62 42.0

2 T 373 0.0 0.504 7.2 LOS A 4.6 32.2 0.59 0.58 42.0

3 R 30 0.0 0.504 11.2 LOS A 4.6 32.2 0.59 0.74 40.2

Approach 418 0.0 0.504 7.5 LOS A 4.6 32.2 0.59 0.59 41.8

East: Hall St (E)

4 L 50 0.0 0.245 8.7 LOS A 1.4 10.1 0.54 0.68 41.5

5 T 100 0.0 0.245 7.9 LOS A 1.4 10.1 0.54 0.62 41.8

6 R 10 0.0 0.245 11.9 LOS A 1.4 10.1 0.54 0.80 39.5

Approach 160 0.0 0.245 8.4 LOS A 1.4 10.1 0.54 0.65 41.5


7 L 4 0.0 0.177 8.9 LOS A 1.0 7.1 0.56 0.69 41.4

8 T 100 0.0 0.177 8.1 LOS A 1.0 7.1 0.56 0.64 41.8

9 R 5 0.0 0.177 12.1 LOS A 1.0 7.1 0.56 0.81 39.5

Approach 109 0.0 0.177 8.3 LOS A 1.0 7.1 0.56 0.65 41.7

West: Hall St (W)

10 L 10 0.0 0.450 14.5 LOS A 3.2 22.2 0.81 0.93 37.0

11 T 100 0.0 0.450 13.7 LOS A 3.2 22.2 0.81 0.91 37.2

12 R 100 0.0 0.450 17.7 LOS B 3.2 22.2 0.81 0.98 35.7

Approach 210 0.0 0.450 15.6 LOS B 3.2 22.2 0.81 0.95 36.4



MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: PM Peak Exisitng 2012






Effective Stop Rate




1 L 95 0.0 0.515 8.3 LOS A 4.7 32.6 0.63 0.64 41.7

2 T 268 0.0 0.515 7.5 LOS A 4.7 32.6 0.63 0.60 41.7

3 R 49 0.0 0.515 11.5 LOS A 4.7 32.6 0.63 0.74 39.9

Approach 412 0.0 0.515 8.1 LOS A 4.7 32.6 0.63 0.62 41.5

East: Hall St (E)

4 L 20 0.0 0.238 10.6 LOS A 1.4 9.6 0.65 0.76 40.1

5 T 100 0.0 0.238 9.8 LOS A 1.4 9.6 0.65 0.72 40.3

6 R 10 0.0 0.238 13.8 LOS A 1.4 9.6 0.65 0.86 38.3

Approach 130 0.0 0.238 10.2 LOS A 1.4 9.6 0.65 0.74 40.1


7 L 25 0.0 0.404 10.0 LOS A 2.7 18.9 0.68 0.76 40.5

8 T 200 0.0 0.404 9.2 LOS A 2.7 18.9 0.68 0.72 40.8

9 R 18 0.0 0.404 13.3 LOS A 2.7 18.9 0.68 0.85 38.7

Approach 243 0.0 0.404 9.6 LOS A 2.7 18.9 0.68 0.74 40.6

West: Hall St (W)

10 L 10 0.0 0.396 11.4 LOS A 2.6 17.9 0.73 0.81 39.2

11 T 100 0.0 0.396 10.6 LOS A 2.6 17.9 0.73 0.78 39.4

12 R 101 0.0 0.396 14.6 LOS B 2.6 17.9 0.73 0.87 37.6

Approach 211 0.0 0.396 12.5 LOS A 2.6 17.9 0.73 0.83 38.5




I-52 Station Rd / Hall St Roundabout Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 16 0.0 0.532 8.2 LOS A 5.0 35.0 0.62 0.63 41.9

2 T 390 0.0 0.532 7.4 LOS A 5.0 35.0 0.62 0.59 41.8

3 R 31 0.0 0.532 11.4 LOS A 5.0 35.0 0.62 0.74 40.0

Approach 437 0.0 0.532 7.7 LOS A 5.0 35.0 0.62 0.60 41.7

East: Hall St (E)

4 L 52 0.0 0.260 8.9 LOS A 1.5 10.8 0.56 0.69 41.3

5 T 105 0.0 0.260 8.1 LOS A 1.5 10.8 0.56 0.64 41.6

6 R 10 0.0 0.260 12.1 LOS A 1.5 10.8 0.56 0.80 39.4

Approach 167 0.0 0.260 8.6 LOS A 1.5 10.8 0.56 0.66 41.4


7 L 4 0.0 0.188 9.1 LOS A 1.1 7.6 0.58 0.70 41.3

8 T 105 0.0 0.188 8.3 LOS A 1.1 7.6 0.58 0.65 41.6

9 R 5 0.0 0.188 12.3 LOS A 1.1 7.6 0.58 0.82 39.3

Approach 114 0.0 0.188 8.5 LOS A 1.1 7.6 0.58 0.66 41.5

West: Hall St (W)

10 L 10 0.0 0.486 15.8 LOS B 3.6 25.4 0.84 0.98 36.2

11 T 105 0.0 0.486 15.0 LOS B 3.6 25.4 0.84 0.96 36.3

12 R 105 0.0 0.486 19.0 LOS B 3.6 25.4 0.84 1.02 34.9

Approach 219 0.0 0.486 17.0 LOS B 3.6 25.4 0.84 0.99 35.6




I-52 Station Rd / Hall St Roundabout Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 9 years




Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 99 0.0 0.543 8.5 LOS A 5.1 35.5 0.66 0.65 41.6

2 T 280 0.0 0.543 7.7 LOS A 5.1 35.5 0.66 0.61 41.6

3 R 51 0.0 0.543 11.7 LOS A 5.1 35.5 0.66 0.74 39.7

Approach 431 0.0 0.543 8.4 LOS A 5.1 35.5 0.66 0.63 41.3

East: Hall St (E)

4 L 21 0.0 0.255 10.9 LOS A 1.5 10.4 0.67 0.78 39.8

5 T 105 0.0 0.255 10.1 LOS A 1.5 10.4 0.67 0.74 40.1

6 R 10 0.0 0.255 14.1 LOS A 1.5 10.4 0.67 0.87 38.1

Approach 136 0.0 0.255 10.5 LOS A 1.5 10.4 0.67 0.76 39.9


7 L 26 0.0 0.430 10.3 LOS A 2.9 20.5 0.70 0.78 40.3

8 T 209 0.0 0.430 9.5 LOS A 2.9 20.5 0.70 0.74 40.5

9 R 19 0.0 0.430 13.6 LOS A 2.9 20.5 0.70 0.86 38.5

Approach 254 0.0 0.430 9.9 LOS A 2.9 20.5 0.70 0.76 40.3

West: Hall St (W)

10 L 10 0.0 0.425 12.0 LOS A 2.9 20.0 0.76 0.84 38.7

11 T 105 0.0 0.425 11.2 LOS A 2.9 20.0 0.76 0.82 38.9

12 R 106 0.0 0.425 15.3 LOS B 2.9 20.0 0.76 0.90 37.1

Approach 220 0.0 0.425 13.2 LOS A 2.9 20.0 0.76 0.86 38.0








Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L 22 0.0 0.762 12.3 LOS A 11.9 83.3 0.92 0.77 38.9

2 T 557 0.0 0.762 11.5 LOS A 11.9 83.3 0.92 0.76 39.0

3 R 32 0.0 0.762 15.5 LOS B 11.9 83.3 0.92 0.79 37.4

Approach 611 0.0 0.762 11.8 LOS A 11.9 83.3 0.92 0.76 38.9

East: Hall St (E)

4 L 52 0.0 0.323 11.8 LOS A 1.9 13.6 0.72 0.82 39.1

5 T 92 0.0 0.323 11.0 LOS A 1.9 13.6 0.72 0.79 39.3

6 R 19 0.0 0.323 15.0 LOS B 1.9 13.6 0.72 0.89 37.4

Approach 163 0.0 0.323 11.7 LOS A 1.9 13.6 0.72 0.81 39.0


7 L 8 0.0 0.433 9.8 LOS A 3.1 21.6 0.69 0.75 40.7

8 T 222 0.0 0.433 9.0 LOS A 3.1 21.6 0.69 0.72 41.0

9 R 35 0.0 0.433 13.0 LOS A 3.1 21.6 0.69 0.84 38.9

Approach 265 0.0 0.433 9.5 LOS A 3.1 21.6 0.69 0.73 40.7

West: Hall St (W)

10 L 71 0.0 0.836 47.0 LOS D 11.1 77.5 1.00 1.45 23.4

11 T 88 0.0 0.836 46.2 LOS D 11.1 77.5 1.00 1.45 23.4

12 R 111 0.0 0.836 50.2 LOS D 11.1 77.5 1.00 1.45 23.1

Approach 270 0.0 0.836 48.1 LOS D 11.1 77.5 1.00 1.45 23.3









Effective Stop Rate




1 L 112 0.0 0.855 19.9 LOS B 19.3 134.9 1.00 0.98 34.0

2 T 480 0.0 0.855 19.1 LOS B 19.3 134.9 1.00 0.98 34.1

3 R 57 0.0 0.855 23.1 LOS B 19.3 134.9 1.00 0.98 33.0

Approach 648 0.0 0.855 19.6 LOS B 19.3 134.9 1.00 0.98 34.0

East: Hall St (E)

4 L 22 0.0 0.383 17.4 LOS B 2.5 17.2 0.86 0.97 35.4

5 T 94 0.0 0.383 16.6 LOS B 2.5 17.2 0.86 0.96 35.5

6 R 16 0.0 0.383 20.7 LOS B 2.5 17.2 0.86 1.01 34.2

Approach 132 0.0 0.383 17.3 LOS B 2.5 17.2 0.86 0.97 35.3


7 L 34 0.0 0.830 24.3 LOS B 15.0 105.1 1.00 1.20 31.7

8 T 399 0.0 0.830 23.5 LOS B 15.0 105.1 1.00 1.20 31.8

9 R 64 0.0 0.830 27.5 LOS B 15.0 105.1 1.00 1.20 30.9

Approach 497 0.0 0.830 24.1 LOS B 15.0 105.1 1.00 1.20 31.7

West: Hall St (W)

10 L 75 0.0 0.825 41.5 LOS C 11.0 77.0 1.00 1.41 24.9

11 T 95 0.0 0.825 40.8 LOS C 11.0 77.0 1.00 1.41 25.0

12 R 118 0.0 0.825 44.8 LOS D 11.0 77.0 1.00 1.41 24.5

Approach 287 0.0 0.825 42.6 LOS D 11.0 77.0 1.00 1.41 24.8


f:\aa005093\reporting\fsr report revised_august 2013\appendix c\appendix c.docx

APPENDIX C

INTERSECTION UPGRADE DESIGN SKETCHES FOR STRATEGIC COST ESTIMATE

f:\aa005093\reporting\fsr report revised_august 2013\appendix c\appendix c.docx Appendix C






Documents

Auburn FSR Modelling Report Rev G September 2013