109

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    9

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility
Page 2: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) ProjectPreliminary Design and CEAA Submission

Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive

Mississauga, Ontario

October 2008

McCormick Rankin Corporation2655 North Sheridan Way

Mississauga, ON L5K 2P8Tel: 905.823.8500Fax: 905.823.8503

Email: [email protected]

Work Order No. 106964

Page 3: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page ii

McCormick Rankin Traffic Engineering Team

Project Manager Scott Fortner, P. Eng.Technical Support Sumit Bhasin

Page 4: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Table of Contents

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION 5

2. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 6

2.1 Mavis Road 6

2.2 Hurontario Street 72.3 Central Parkway East 10

2.4 Cawthra Road 122.5 Tomken Road 13

2.6 Dixie Road 142.7 Eastgate Parkway – Fieldgate Drive to Eglinton Avenue 16

2.8 Eglinton Avenue – Tahoe Boulevard to Commerce Boulevard 182.9 Renforth Drive 22

3. CONSTRUCTION STAGING TRAFFIC IMPACTS 24

3.1 Temporary Closure of Sherwoodtowne Boulevard at Hurontario 24

3.2 Temporary Closure of Commerce Boulevard at Eglinton Avenue East 273.3 Temporary Closure of Explorer Drive at Eglinton Avenue East 30

3.4 Temporary Closure of Spectrum Way at Eglinton Avenue East 33

4. BUILT FACILITY TRAFFIC IMPACTS 37

4.1 Dixie Road 374.2 Rathburn Road Bus Rapid Transit Access 41

4.3 Eglinton Avenue Lane Reductions 42

TECHNICAL APPENDICES

A. Existing Conditions Capacity Analysis OutputB. Construction Staging Capacity Analysis OutputC. Built-Facility Capacity Analysis Output

Page 5: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Table of Contents

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page iii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Existing Traffic Volumes: Mavis Road 6Figure 2 Existing Traffic Volumes: Hurontario Street 8

Figure 3 Existing Traffic Volumes: Central Parkway East 11Figure 4 Existing Traffic Volumes: Cawthra Road 12

Figure 5 Existing Traffic Volumes: Tomken Road 13Figure 6 Existing Traffic Volumes: Dixie Road 16

Figure 7 Existing Traffic Volumes: Eastgate Parkway 17Figure 8 Existing Traffic Volumes: Eglinton Avenue 19

Figure 9 Existing Traffic Volumes: Renforth Drive 22Figure 10 Staging Scenario Traffic Volumes: Hurontario Street 25

Figure 11 Commerce Boulevard Staging Scenario Traffic Volumes: Eglinton Avenue 28Figure 12 Explorer Drive Staging Scenario Traffic Volumes: Eglinton Avenue 30

Figure 13 Spectrum Drive Staging Scenario Traffic Volumes: Eglinton Avenue 34Figure 14 Built Facility Conditions: Dixie Road 38

Figure 15 Built Facility Traffic Volumes: Rathburn Road 41

Page 6: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Table of Contents

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page iv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Mavis Road 7Table 2 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Hurontario Street 9

Table 3 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Central Parkway 10Table 4 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Cawthra Road 13

Table 5 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Tomken Road 14Table 6 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Dixie Road 14

Table 7 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Eastgate Parkway 18Table 8 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Eglinton Avenue 20

Table 9 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Renforth Drive 22Table 10 Intersection Levels of Service: Hurontario Street Construction Staging 26

Table 11 Intersection Levels of Service: Commerce Boulevard Construction Staging 29Table 12 Intersection Levels of Service: Explorer Drive Construction Staging 32

Table 13 Intersection Levels of Service: Spectrum Way Construction Staging 35Table 14 Built Facility Levels of Service: Dixie Road 39

Table 15 Built Facility Levels of Service: Dixie Road Bus Access 40Table 16 Built Facility Levels of Service: Rathburn Road Bus Access 42

Table 17 Built Facility Levels of Service: Eglinton Avenue Lane Reductions 43

Page 7: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Introduction

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 5

1. INTRODUCTION

Traffic analysis was carried out to reflect existing conditions throughout the BRT corridorbetween Mavis Road and Renforth Drive. Specifically, the analysis identified operating levels ofservice for the following road sections:

• Mavis Road between Rathburn Road and Huntington Ridge Drive• Hurontario Street between Robert Speck Parkway and Kingsbridge Garden Circle• Central Parkway between Rathburn Road and Laurentian Avenue• Eastgate Parkway between Cawthra Road and Eglinton Avenue• Eglinton Avenue between Eastgate Parkway and Matheson Boulevard East

The existing conditions analysis reflected the current traffic signal control timing plans providedby the City of Mississauga, the Region of Peel and the City of Toronto. The traffic analysisassessed conditions sufficiently upstream and downstream along the road facilities in the vicinityof the BRT to ensure that vehicle arrivals at intersections adjacent to the planned transit servicewere appropriately modelled.

Future operating conditions associated with the improvements implemented to accommodate theBRT and the incremental transit and commuter traffic generated by the facility i.e. the ‘built-facility’ conditions were assessed, as required, to support the preliminary design. Similarly,detailed evaluations of the impacts related to proposed construction staging configurations wereundertaken to confirm the adequacy of temporary operating conditions. This analysis alsodetermined the magnitude of any required traffic diversion away from the construction zonewhere capacity constraints will be encountered.

The traffic impact evaluation of existing conditions and conditions related to the built facility andconstruction staging reflects two levels of analysis. A capacity analysis was first carried outusing Synchro 7 to assess the degree of capacity utilization and this was supplemented by adetailed micro-simulation analysis (using VISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impactsin the vicinity of the planned facility. Each of these analysis tools was applied to evaluateweekday operational impacts during the morning and afternoon peak hours.

Page 8: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 6

2. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS

2.1 Mavis Road

The existing lane configuration and travel demand on Mavis Road at Highway 403 are illustratedbelow in Figure 1. A brief description of the current operating conditions at the ramp terminalintersections is also provided and reflects the detailed level-of-service calculations summarizedin Table 1. Volume-to-capacity ratios reflect output from Synchro 7 while the reported delaysand corresponding levels of service reflect the results of detailed micro-simulation analysiscarried out using VISSIM. The detailed capacity analysis output generated by Synchro 7 isincluded in the Technical Appendix. We note that turning movement data reflects conditions inFebruary 2008 and that the recent extension of Confederation Parkway across Highway 403 maylikely have had an impact on travel patterns between Mavis Road and Hurontario Street. To thisend, any possible traffic diversion from the Mavis Road corridor has not been reflected in thetraffic analysis.

Figure 1 Existing Traffic Volumes: Mavis Road

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Operating conditions during the weekday afternoon peak hour reflect a westbound right-turncapacity constraint at the south ramp terminal intersection. The current demand approaches 600vehicles and right-turns are prohibited on a red signal indication given the proximity to theHighway 403 S-E Ramp. Corresponding vehicle queues on Centre View Drive extend nearly

Page 9: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 7

200 metres and average vehicle delays reflect a level-of-service ‘D’. The southbound throughtraffic volume at this intersection is also approaching capacity during the afternoon peak hour.Operating conditions at the south ramp terminal intersection during the weekday morning peakhour are comparatively better.

Operating conditions at the north ramp terminal intersection reflect good levels of service duringboth the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours. The analysis indicates that criticalmovement volume-to-capacity ratios are no greater than 0.80 and average delays reflect levels-of-service ‘D’ or better with the exception of the westbound left-turn movement, which operateswith a level-of-service ‘E’ during the morning peak hour.

Table 1 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Mavis RoadLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Mavis Rd at Hwy 403 E-N/S RampWestbound LeftWestbound RightNorthbound ThroughSouthbound Through

0.680.740.640.60

57 s10 s

4 s12 s

EAAB

57 m 14 m 35 m 97 m

0.600.770.800.68

52 s16 s10 s

7 s

DBAA

71 m 36 m 103 m 37 m

Mavis Rd at Hwy 403 W-N/S Ramp/Centre View

Eastbound LeftEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound RightNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound Through

0.620.550.070.770.620.55

55 s5 s

47 s57 s

4/3 s9 s

DADE

A/AA

56 m 7 m 11 m 69 m 27 m 101 m

0.450.470.100.970.760.91

38 s12 s35 s53 s

11/4 s14 s

DBCD

B/AB

67 m 28 m 19 m 187 m 53 m 126 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

2.2 Hurontario Street

The existing lane configuration and travel demand at intersections along Hurontario Street andRathburn Road are illustrated in Figure 2. The level-of-service calculations are summarizedbelow in Table 2 and detailed capacity analysis output is included in the Technical Appendix.

We note that turning movement data reflects conditions between May and September 2007 andthat the recent extension of Confederation Parkway across Highway 403 may likely have had animpact on travel patterns between Mavis Road and Hurontario Street. To this end, any possibletraffic diversion from the Hurontario Street corridor has not been reflected in the traffic analysis.

The Hurontario Street corridor is currently operating at capacity during both the weekdaymorning and afternoon peak hours and travel demand is intermittently greater than criticalintersection capacity, particularly through the Highway 403 ramp terminal intersections. Thispeaking results in demand that is not always served during individual signal cycles.

Peak direction southbound traffic flow approaching the Highway 403 north ramp terminalintersection during the morning peak hour is at capacity. Corresponding turning movements

Page 10: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 8

from the westbound off-ramp are also capacity-constrained with left and right-turn demands ofover 1,000 vehicles each. The northbound through movement at the south ramp terminalintersection also operates at capacity while right-turning traffic approaching Hurontario Streetfrom Sherwoodtowne Boulevard approaches capacity. Notwithstanding the morning peak hourcapacity constraints at these intersections, queuing and delay impacts are manageable. Theeastbound left/through movements at the south ramp terminal intersection operate with a level-of-service ‘E’ during the morning peak hour while all other movements at the two ramp terminalintersections operate with a levels-of-service ‘D’ or better.

Figure 2 Existing Traffic Volumes: Hurontario StreetAM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Morning peak hour traffic operations along Hurontario Street at Square One Drive and RobertSpeck Parkway reflect adequate levels of service with periodic southbound left-turn queuingimpacts at Robert Speck Parkway. The observed left-turn demand is 450 vehicles and the

Page 11: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 9

estimated 95th percentile queue length extends approximately 25 metres into the adjacentthrough lane. With the exception of left-turn levels-of-service ‘E’ at Robert Speck Parkway, allother movements at these intersections operate with a level-of-service ‘D’ or better.

Table 2 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Hurontario StreetLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Hurontario St at Hwy 403 E-N/S RampWestbound Left/RightNorthbound ThroughSouthbound Through

1.220.571.06

39/21 s21 s19 s

D/CCB

151 m 122 m 116 m

0.920.920.93

42/14 s14 s27 s

D/BBC

86 m 172 m 165 m

Hurontario St at Hwy 403 W-N/S RampEastbound Left/ThroughEastbound RightWestbound RightNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound Through

0.450.290.911.090.010.86

58/60 s47 s33 s17 s

9 s5 s

E/EDCBAA

59 m 32 m 50 m 155 m 0 m 44 m

1.050.691.460.870.020.79

62/64 s34 s49 s22 s13 s

9 s

E/ECDCBA

84 m 41 m 103 m 252 m 0 m 86 m

Hurontario St at Square One DrEastbound LeftEastbound RightWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.410.160.420.170.480.590.16

38 s4 s

13 s3 s4 s

15 s9 s

DABAABA

19 m 19 m 0 m 0 m 43 m 167 m 0 m

0.660.260.400.150.730.560.14

38 s4 s

18 s8 s

14 s24 s17 s

DABABCB

37 m 37 m 0 m 0 m 208 m 173 m 5 m

Hurontario St at Robert Speck ParkwayEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.760.240.220.320.170.380.470.770.220.860.48

0.40

63 s44 s

3 s57 s47 s

9 s23 s28 s

4 s65 s13 s

5 s

EDAEDACCAEBA

65 m 26 m 0 m 22 m 19 m 14 m 18 m 115 m 0 m 152 m 58 m 0 m

0.760.210.340.340.190.920.580.920.040.720.770.44

48 s42 s

4 s38 s48 s22 s28 s34 s

6 s67 s12 s

5 s

DDADDCCCAEBA

106 m 28 m 9 m 36 m 24 m 85 m 21 m 149 m 0 m 60 m 49 m 0 m

Rathburn Rd at Centre View DrEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightWestbound Left/Through/Right (H.St.Off-Ramp)Northbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.030.690.620.120.740.790.040.281.070.39

20 s 27/18 s

34 s 20/10 s46/44/28 s

74 s39 s

4 s55 s

40/38 s

CC/BC

B/AD/D/C

EDAD

D/D

4 m 80 m 38 m 20 m 53 m 51 m 13 m 13 m 81 m 32 m

0.160.531.110.780.891.100.280.440.17

0.02

56 s 29/16 s

47 s 26/23 s 47/45/35

61 s46 s20 s49 s

39/0 s

EC/BD

C/CD/D/D

EDBD

D/A

6 m 55 m 96 m 150 m 87 m 75 m 55 m 55 m 16 m 6 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

Page 12: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 10

Notwithstanding adequate morning peak hour levels of service at the Rathburn Road intersectionwith City Centre Drive, the southbound left-turn movement onto Rathburn Road operates atcapacity with a demand approaching 300 vehicles. With the exception of the northbound left-turn level-of-service ‘E’, all other movements at the Rathburn Road/City Centre Driveintersection operate at a level-of-service ‘D’ or better.

During the afternoon peak hour, operating conditions approach capacity at the Highway 403north ramp terminal intersection. The eastbound left/through and westbound right-turnmovements at the south ramp terminal intersection operate at capacity and although thenorthbound through movement only approaches capacity, 95th percentile northbound vehiclequeues extend to Square One Drive. The eastbound left/through movements at the south rampterminal intersection operate with a level-of-service ‘E’ during the afternoon peak hour while allother movements at the ramp terminal intersections operate with a levels-of-service ‘D’ or better.

Notwithstanding adequate capacity at the Hurontario Street intersection with Square One Drive,afternoon peak hour northbound queues approaching the intersection extend nearly to RobertSpeck Parkway. We note that this is not an extension of the queuing impacts at the Highway 403south ramp terminal intersection, but is related to the impact of the westbound right turningtraffic from Robert Speck Parkway. Although this right-turn movement and the northboundthrough movement at Robert Speck Parkway each approach capacity during the afternoon peakhour, average vehicle delays and queuing are manageable. With the exception of the southboundleft-turn level-of-service ‘E’, all other movements operate with a level-of-service ‘D’ or better.

The westbound (Rathburn Road) and northbound left-turn movements at the Rathburn Roadintersection with City Centre Drive currently operate at capacity during the afternoon peak hour.With the exception of northbound and eastbound left-turn levels-of-service ‘E’, all othermovements at this intersection operate at levels-of-service ‘D’ or better. We note that theeastbound left-turn volume is less than 15 vehicles.

2.3 Central Parkway East

The existing lane configuration and travel demand on Central Parkway between Rathburn Roadand Laurentian Avenue are illustrated in Figure 3. A brief description of the current operatingconditions is also provided and reflects the level-of-service calculations summarized in Table 3and detailed capacity analysis output is included in the Technical Appendix.

Table 3 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Central ParkwayLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Central Parkway E at Laurentian AveEastbound Left/Through/RightWestbound Left/Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.210.530.030.450.010.32

50/50/13 s 47/29/7 s

8 s4/3 s13 s

3/1 s

D/D/BD/C/A

AA/A

BA/A

12 m 24 m 0 m 35 m 0 m 21 m

0.160.370.070.460.060.49

62/30/10s 53/44/6s

10 s3/2 s

9 s3/3 s

E/C/AD/D/A

AA/A

AA/A

8 m 15 m 0 m 19 m 0 m 29 m

Page 13: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 11

Table 3 (Cont’d) Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Central ParkwayLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Central Parkway E at Rathburn RdEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.780.410.070.290.290.440.140.530.110.620.250.15

50 s30 s

4 s34 s29 s

8 s18 s21 s

4 s29 s16 s

4 s

DCACCABCACBA

58 m 39 m 0 m 14 m 27 m 18 m 10 m 61 m 0 m 54 m 39 m 6 m

1.100.190.090.260.860.580.510.680.080.530.890.32

78 s22 s

7 s34 s35 s14 s24 s29 s

4 s32 s37 s16 s

ECACDBCCACDB

67 m 26 m 4 m 22 m 131 m 31 m 16 m 69 m 5 m 30 m 126 m 23 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

Figure 3 Existing Traffic Volumes: Central Parkway EastAM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Page 14: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 12

Operating conditions during the morning peak hour reflect levels-of-service ‘D’ or better at eachof the Central Parkway East intersections with Laurentian Avenue and Rathburn Road.Corresponding volume to capacity ratios for all movements are less than 0.80.

The eastbound left-turn movement from Rathburn Road onto Central Parkway operates atcapacity with a level-of-service ‘E’ during the afternoon peak hour. All other movements withthe exception of the eastbound left-turn from Laurentian Avenue, which operates at a level-of-service ‘E’ (demand less than 10 vehicles) operate at a level-of-service ‘D’ or better during theafternoon peak hour.

2.4 Cawthra Road

The existing lane configuration and travel demand at the Cawthra Road intersection withEastgate Parkway are illustrated in Figure 4. The detailed level-of-service calculations aresummarized below in Table 4 and the capacity analysis output is provided in the TechnicalAppendix.

Figure 4 Existing Traffic Volumes: Cawthra Road

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

The current operating conditions at the Cawthra Road intersection with Eastgate Parkway reflectsome capacity constrained movements during each of the morning and afternoon peak hours.The eastbound through movement is operating at capacity during the morning peak hour whilethe northbound through and opposing southbound left-turn movements also approach capacity.The eastbound left-turn and through movements operate with levels-of-service ‘E’ andcorresponding 95th percentile queue lengths extend more than 300 metres.

During the afternoon peak hour, the westbound through and opposing eastbound left-turnmovements are capacity constrained and westbound vehicle queues extend to over 200 metres.Eastbound and westbound left-turn movements operate with levels-of-service ‘F’ and thewestbound through movement operates at level-of-service ‘E’ during the afternoon peak hour.All other movements operate at levels-of-service ‘D’ or better during each of the peak hours.

Page 15: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 13

Table 4 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Cawthra RoadLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Cawthra Rd at Eastgate PkwyEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.730.970.480.280.530.460.640.920.950.670.29

61 s62 s12 s42 s52 s16 s33 s

35/33 s53 s31 s

7 s

EEBDDBC

C/CDCA

83 m 330 m 22 m 13 m 69 m 35 m 32 m 150 m 53 m 87 m 1 m

1.030.640.240.720.980.180.710.830.640.710.25

103 s42 s

8 s 104 s

61 s26 s24 s

29/27 s38 s28 s11 s

FDAFECC

C/CDCB

66 m 78 m 9 m 106 m 221 m 0 m 31 m 97 m 32 m 93 m 11 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

2.5 Tomken Road

The existing lane configuration and travel demand at the Tomken Road intersection areillustrated in Figure 5. The level-of-service calculations are summarized in Table 5 and thecapacity analysis output is provided in the Technical Appendix.

Figure 5 Existing Traffic Volumes: Tomken Road

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

The current operating conditions at the Tomken Road intersection with Eastgate Parkway aresimilar to those at Cawthra Road, particularly during the morning peak hour when the eastboundthrough and southbound left-turn movements are operating at capacity. Notwithstanding the95th percentile eastbound queues that extend approximately 170 metres, adequate levels ofservice are experienced by all movements during the morning peak hour.

Page 16: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 14

The westbound and southbound through movements are capacity constrained during theafternoon peak hour and corresponding 95th percentile westbound and southbound vehiclequeues extend approximately 160 and 180 metres, respectively. Current operating conditionsreflect individual movement levels-of-service ‘D’ or better during the afternoon peak hour.

Table 5 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Tomken RoadLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Tomken Rd at Eastgate PkwyEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.640.940.070.180.390.310.730.821.000.590.22

31 s27 s13 s35 s18 s

9 s40 s

37/33 s47 s33 s

7 s

CCBCBAD

D/CDCA

57 m 166 m 0 m 5 m 42 m 14 m 50 m 107 m 23 m 68 m 3 m

0.840.550.160.720.980.260.410.520.230.940.37

46 s33 s

9 s37 s41 s17 s37 s

31/24 s36 s37 s15 s

DCADDBD

C/CDDB

44 m 74 m 0 m 50 m 154 m 9 m 18 m 76 m 12 m 181 m 19 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

2.6 Dixie Road

The existing lane configuration and peak hour travel demand at intersections along Dixie Roadbetween Eastgate Parkway and Crestlawn Drive are illustrated in Figure 6. The level-of-servicecalculations are summarized in Table 6 and the detailed capacity analysis output is provided inthe Technical Appendix.

Table 6 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Dixie RoadLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Dixie Road at Eastgate ParkwayEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.610.840.330.620.240.040.830.620.610.180.400.23

41 s42 s19 s75 s45 s

7 s70 s19 s12 s48 s26 s

3 s

DDBEDAEBBDCA

69 m 168 m 12 m 14 m 32 m 0 m 57 m 102 m 39 m 9 m 50 m 0 m

0.840.190.480.770.900.090.770.370.080.071.020.48

47 s50 s27 s58 s56 s11 s67 s16 s

1 s23 s24 s10 s

DDCEEBEBACCA

54 m 32 m 62 m 148 m 152 m 0 m 40 m 47 m 0 m 5 m 165 m 10 m

Page 17: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 15

Table 6 (Cont’d) Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Dixie RoadLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Dixie Road at South Gateway RoadEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.210.260.140.100.340.050.440.040.810.20

60 s 48/8 s

50 s59 s

9 s8 s1 s2 s

20 s1/1 s

ED/ADEAAAAB

A/A

10 m 1 m 11 m 11 m 6 m 0 m 19 m 0 m 13 m 9 m

0.270.340.660.050.320.450.270.060.410.57

61 s 33/13 s

61 s59 s

5 s40 s

3 s2 s

13 s 10/9 s

EC/BEEADAAB

A/A

19 m 8 m 34 m 6 m 0 m 3 m 17 m 0 m 14 m 90 m

Dixie Road at Crestlawn DriveEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.670.250.060.170.280.440.190.29

63 s 44/6 s

58 s 21/13 s

11 s3/2 s18 s

4/4 s

ED/A

EC/BB

A/AB

A/A

39 m 7 m 8 m 0 m 12 m 29 m 2 m 27 m

0.660.780.060.120.940.290.140.59

60 s 63/13 s

56 s 55/10 s

34 s4/3 s12 s

6/6 s

EE/BE

D/AC

A/AB

A/A

49 m 27 m 7 m 7 m 13 m 22 m 2m 60 m

The current morning peak hour operating conditions at the Dixie Road intersection with EastgateParkway reflect volume-to-capacity ratios less than 0.85 and levels-of-service ‘D’ or better withthe exception of the westbound and northbound left-turn movement levels-of-service ‘E’.During the afternoon peak hour, the southbound through movement operates at capacity and thewestbound through movement approaches capacity. Corresponding southbound and westboundqueue lengths extend approximately 170 and 150 metres, respectively. The westbound andnorthbound left-turn and westbound through movements operate at a level-of-service ‘E’ whileall other movements operate at a level-of-service ‘D’ or better during the afternoon peak hour.

Operating conditions at the Dixie Road intersection with South Gateway Road reflect amplecapacity as lower side-street volumes place less demand on intersection capacity. Operatingconditions reflect similar capacity utilization and levels of service at the Dixie Road intersectionwith Crestlawn Drive. The only exception to this is that the unprotected northbound left-turnmovement approaches capacity during the afternoon peak hour. The corresponding demand isless than 80 vehicles, but the opposing flow reflects the peak direction and permissive capacity islimited. Notwithstanding the constraint, there is an opportunity to provide protected-permissivephasing for this movement to accommodate a higher demand.

The side-street left-turn movements at South Gateway Road and Crestlawn Drive operate withlevels-of-service ‘E’ during each of the peak hours. The eastbound through movement atCrestlawn Drive and the westbound through movement at South Gateway Road operate withlevels-of-service ‘E’ during the afternoon peak hour. We note that the corresponding through

Page 18: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 16

volumes are less than 10 vehicles in each case. All other movements at these intersectionsoperate at a level-of-service ‘D’ or better during the peak hours.

Figure 6 Existing Traffic Volumes: Dixie Road

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

2.7 Eastgate Parkway – Fieldgate Drive to Eglinton Avenue

The existing lane configuration and travel demand at intersections along Eastgate Parkwaybetween Fieldgate Drive and Eglinton Avenue are illustrated in Figure 7. The level-of-servicecalculations are summarized in Table 7 and detailed capacity analysis output is included in theTechnical Appendix.

The Fieldgate Drive approach to Eastgate Parkway currently operates at capacity during themorning peak hour. The right-turn volume from Fieldgate Drive exceeds 500 vehicles andreflects, in part, the discontinuity of Rathburn Road. Notwithstanding the greater southbound

Page 19: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 17

left-turn demand of 700 vehicles during the afternoon peak hour, the volume-to-capacity ratio iscomparatively lower given the nominal opposing through traffic volume.

Current operating conditions at the Eastgate Parkway intersection with Tahoe Boulevard reflectgood levels of service during each of the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours. Allmorning peak hour volume-to-capacity ratios are less than 0.50, reflecting the nominal side-streettraffic volumes. Notwithstanding the heavier side-street volume during the afternoon peak hour,all critical movement volume-to-capacity ratios are below 0.80.

Figure 7 Existing Traffic Volumes: Eastgate Parkway

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

With the exception of morning peak hour westbound and southbound levels-of-service ‘E’ and‘F’, respectively at the Eglinton Avenue intersection with Eastgate Parkway, all othermovements operate at levels-of-service ‘D’ or better. Aside from the southbound left-turnvolume-to-capacity ratio of 0.97 (with a corresponding demand of less than 70 vehicles) all othermovements operate with volume-to-capacity ratios below 0.85.

Page 20: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 18

Notwithstanding that the northbound left-turn movement from Eastgate Parkway onto EglintonAvenue operates at capacity during the afternoon peak hour, the corresponding demand is only80 vehicles and the volume-to-capacity ratio of the opposing southbound through movement isonly 0.82. Similarly, where the westbound left-turn movement approaches capacity, theopposing through movement operates with a volume-to-capacity ratio of only 0.40.

Table 7 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Eastgate ParkwayLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Fieldgate Dr at Eastgate PkwyEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.310.020.401.100.020.890.530.07

36 s 29/4 s

43 s 38/16 s

13 s 15/16 s

25 s6/3 s

DC/AD

D/BB

B/BC

A/A

9 m 1 m 32 m 63 m 0 m 166 m 16 m 10 m

0.230.160.330.470.030.170.780.55

47 s 46/14 s

52 s 25/5 s

18 s 7/11 s

11 s6/4 s

DD/BD

C/AB

A/BB

A/A

10 m 8 m 13 m 0 m 0 m 18 m 58 m 35 m

Tahoe Blvd at Eastgate PkwyEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.000.000.120.090.000.460.290.410.07

0 s0/0 s47 s

0/6 s1 s4 s5 s

11 s2/0 s

AA/AD

A/AAAAB

A/A

0 m 0 m 12 m 0 m 0 m 35 m 14 m 10 m 6 m

0.060.120.750.220.040.090.050.020.77

43 s0/6 s44 s

13/4 s27 s14 s

3 s15 s

18/0 s

DA/AD

B/ACBAB

B/A

5 m 0 m 54 m 0 m 0 m 18 m 0 m 0 m 140 m

Eglinton Ave at Eastgate PkwyEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.590.520.220.380.230.220.340.830.450.970.11

28 s20 s

4 s69 s18 s

8 s42 s43 s13 s

110 s 33/10 s

CBAEBADDBF

C/A

57 m 67 m 2 m 20 m 30 m 21 m 36 m 113 m 0 m 37 m 16 m

0.290.400.420.910.640.131.040.160.180.500.82

19 s29 s10 s75 s20 s

6 s74 s33 s

7 s45 s

44/39 s

BCAEBAECAD

D/D

9 m 44 m 15 m 101 m 73 m 17 m 31 m 24 m 27 m 42 m 116 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

2.8 Eglinton Avenue – Tahoe Boulevard to Commerce Boulevard

The existing lane configuration and travel demand at intersections along Eglinton Avenuebetween Tahoe Boulevard and Commerce Boulevard are illustrated in Figure 8. The level-of-service calculations are summarized in Table 8 and detailed capacity analysis output is includedin the Technical Appendix.

Page 21: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 19

Figure 8 Existing Traffic Volumes: Eglinton AvenueAM Peak Hour

PM Peak Hour

Page 22: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 20

Table 8 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Eglinton AvenueLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Tahoe Blvd at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.150.550.100.670.210.180.120.550.140.12

9 s5 s4 s

62 s5 s4 s

61 s 60/16 s

64 s 51/6 s

AAAEAAE

E/BE

D/A

3 m 30 m 0 m 43 m 24 m 5 m 6 m 23 m 7 m 2 m

0.080.320.020.610.700.010.310.300.800.32

14 s7 s2 s

68 s10 s

3 s58 s

0/5 s60 s

60/21 s

BAAEAAE

A/AE

E/C

0 m 32 m 0 m 28 m 94 m 0 m 23 m 2 m 49 m 28 m

Spectrum Way at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound Left/Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.920.690.240.630.700.100.090.12

24 s 14/14 s

22 s 10/9 s37/38/26s

38 s33 s

6 s

CB/BC

A/AD/D/C

DCA

36 m 141 m 5 m 68 m 47 m 8 m 9 m 0 m

0.580.570.211.000.400.570.050.84

25 s9/7 s14 s

7/5 s37/32/20s

37 s34 s15 s

CA/A

BA/A

D/C/CDCB

4 m 61 m 5 m 61 m 32 m 41 m 7 m 27 m

Satellite Dr at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound Left/Through/Right

1.330.450.250.490.220.250.28

61 s4/7 s20 s

7/12 s39 s

39/10 s 33/36/8 s

EA/A

BA/BD

D/AC/D/A

130 m 20 m 7 m 63 m 12 m 12 m 11 m

0.550.550.220.730.750.17

1.13dr

29 s5/5 s13 s

5/4 s44 s

32/10 s36/35/23s

CA/A

BA/AD

C/AD/C/C

10 m 44 m 2 m 35 m 18 m 10 m 68 m

Orbitor Dr at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.830.440.050.690.970.560.270.050.09

13 s4/3 s33 s

31/29 s46 s

32/26 s44 s24 s

6 s

BA/A

CC/CD

C/CDCA

24 m 18 m 6 m 110 m 93 m 50 m 12 m 8 m 0 m

0.300.620.770.770.920.070.240.950.45

18 s 11/9 s

12 s6/6 s61 s

26/9 s49 s51 s10 s

BB/AB

A/AE

C/ADDA

6 m 66 m 8 m 35 m 20 m 12 m 18 m 151 m 14 m

Explorer Dr at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughWestbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Right

0.360.310.530.090.15

26 s2 s

7/6 s37 s

6 s

CA

A/ADA

21 m 8 m 41 m 10 m 0 m

0.140.430.640.590.39

9 s9 s

3/2 s40 s

9 s

AA

A/ADA

4 m 66 m 19 m 31 m 7 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

Page 23: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 21

Table 8 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Eglinton Avenue (Continued)Level of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Commerce Blvd at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/ RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/ Right

0.440.350.060.310.500.320.040.070.620.20

35 s6 s2 s

10 s7 s5 s

37 s 37/7 s

39 s 38/3 s

CAAAAAD

D/AD

D/A

21 m 28 m 0 m 12 m 42 m 13 m 4 m 2 m 30 m 9 m

0.220.990.020.120.910.120.100.111.250.19

32 s18 s

6 s33 s25 s

6 s17 s

21/8 s36 s

19/5 s

CBACCAB

C/AD

B/A

6 m 92 m 0 m 4 m 134 m 6 m 11 m 6 m 231 m 11 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

The Eglinton Avenue intersection with Tahoe Boulevard currently operates with volume-to-capacity ratios less than 0.80 during each of the peak hours. With the exception of some left-turnand side-street through movement levels-of-service ‘E’, all other movements operate with levels-of-service ‘D’ or better during each of the peak hours.

The eastbound left-turn movement at the Eglinton Avenue intersection with Spectrum Waycurrently approaches capacity during the morning peak hour and the westbound throughmovement operates at capacity during the afternoon peak hour. All individual movementsoperate at levels-of-service ‘D’ or better during each of the peak hours.

The eastbound left-turn movement at the Eglinton Avenue intersection with Satellite Drive iscurrently operating at capacity during the morning peak hour and the southbound right-turnmovement operates at capacity during the afternoon peak hour (the curb lane operates as a de-facto right-turn lane). All individual movements operate at levels-of-service ‘D’ or better duringeach of the peak hours with the exception of an eastbound left-turn level-of-service ‘E’ duringthe morning peak hour.

The northbound left-turn movement at the Eglinton Avenue intersection with Orbitor Drivecurrently operates at or near capacity during the morning and afternoon peak hours and thesouthbound through movement approaches capacity during the afternoon peak hour. With theexception of northbound left-turn level-of-service ‘E’ during the afternoon peak hour, all othermovements operate at levels-of-service ‘D’ or better during each of the peak hours.

All movements at the Eglinton Avenue intersection with Explorer Drive operate with volume-to-capacity ratios less than 0.65 and levels-of-service ‘D’ or better during the peak hours. The sameis true for the morning peak hour operating conditions at Commerce Boulevard. However,eastbound and westbound through movements at Commerce Boulevard operate at or nearcapacity during the afternoon peak hour. The southbound left-turn movement also operates atcapacity during the afternoon peak hour with a demand of over 800 vehicles. All individualmovements operate at levels-of-service ‘D’ or better during each of the peak hours.

Page 24: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 22

2.9 Renforth Drive

The existing lane configuration and travel demand at intersections in the vicinity of RenforthDrive are illustrated in Figure 9. The level-of-service calculations are summarized in Table 9and detailed capacity analysis output is included in the Technical Appendix.

Figure 9 Existing Traffic Volumes: Renforth DriveAM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Table 9 Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Renforth DriveLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Renforth Dr at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/ RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.660.210.130.720.750.370.500.720.640.210.98

49 s20 s

2 s60 s33 s

3 s35 s

34/36 s73 s35 s

5 s

DBAECAC

C/DECA

61 m 26 m 0 m 28 m 62 m 0 m 55 m 90 m 24 m 23 m 8 m

0.920.640.530.190.960.550.470.560.740.750.45

48 s27 s

7 s57 s41 s

8 s32 s

30/28 s91 s38 s

6 s

DCAEDAC

C/CFDA

79 m 88 m 24 m 8 m 99 m 6 m 21 m 63 m 68 m 81 m 0 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

Page 25: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Existing Traffic Conditions

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 23

Table 9 (Cont’d) Existing Intersection Levels of Service: Renforth DriveLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Matheson Blvd East at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughWestbound ThroughWestbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Right

0.050.190.380.850.530.14

14 s3 s

10 s12 s47 s

1 s

BAABDA

1 m 15 m 93 m 137 m 31 m 0 m

0.010.560.390.181.040.62

13 s9 s9 s4 s

62 s4 s

BAAAEA

0 m 99 m 44 m 6 m 143 m 0 m

Renforth Dr and Hwy 401 W-N/S RampEastbound Left/ThroughEastbound RightNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through

0.511.440.930.170.470.87

46 s96 s25 s

7 s21 s19 s

DFCACB

52 m 376 m 152 m 0 m 8 m 149 m

0.441.031.090.340.720.54

25/30 s32 s25 s13 s23 s

9 s

C/CCCBCA

37 m 98 m 192 m 0 m 21 m 50 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

The southbound right-turn movement from Renforth Drive operates at capacity during themorning peak hour. The eastbound left-turn and westbound through movements operate at ornear capacity during the afternoon peak hour. The westbound left-turn movement operates witha level-of-service ‘E’ during each of the peak hours and the southbound left-turn movementoperates with levels-of-service ‘E’ and ‘F’ during the morning and afternoon peak hours,respectively. All other movements operate with a level-of-service ‘D’ or better.

The left-turn movement from Matheson Boulevard onto Eglinton Avenue currently operates atcapacity with a level-of-service ‘E’ during the afternoon peak hour. All other movementsoperate with a level-of-service ‘D’ or better during each of the peak hours.

The right-turn movement from the Highway 401 eastbound off-ramp at Renforth Drive is clearlyat capacity (with an estimated 95th percentile queue length of 376 metres and a level-of-service‘F’) during the morning peak hour. The analysis assumes that all right-turn-on-red traffic yieldsto southbound through traffic, notwithstanding the southbound auxiliary lane between thefreeway ramp terminal and the ramp connection to Matheson Boulevard. Field observationsconfirmed that most right-turning traffic does yield under these circumstances given the potentialweaving impacts south of the intersection. However, maximum queue lengths observed over aperiod of approximately five cycles during the morning peak hour extended approximately 250metres – somewhat less than the 95th percentile queue length identified by the analysis. Giventhe estimated capacity utilization and queue length, it may be that a portion of the right-turningtraffic negotiates the turning movement more aggressively. Regardless of the analysisassumptions, it is reasonable to state that the movement is at its operational capacity and thatdrivers experience a poor level of service during the morning peak hour. During the afternoonpeak hour, the eastbound right-turn and northbound through movements operate at capacity.With the exception of the eastbound right-turn movement from the ramp during the morningpeak hour, all other intersection movements operate with a level-of-service ‘D’ or better.

Page 26: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 24

3. CONSTRUCTION STAGING TRAFFIC IMPACTS

3.1 Temporary Closure of Sherwoodtowne Boulevard at Hurontario

The construction of the proposed bus rapid transit access on Rathburn Road immediately east ofthe Hurontario Street structure requires the temporary closure of Sherwoodtowne Boulevardopposite the Highway 403 W-N/S Ramp terminal. The evaluation of the impact of this closurewas carried out by first estimating the proportion of westbound traffic passing through theresidential and office development along Sherwoodtowne Boulevard to access Hurontario Streetfrom Rathburn Road. Through traffic and traffic that is locally generated (by uses alongSherwoodtowne Boulevard) was then reassigned to the surrounding road network to reflect thetemporary closure of the Sherwoodtowne Boulevard connection to Hurontario Street.

Establishing the estimated through traffic volume incorporated the following approach andassumptions:

• Low-level office uses along Sherwoodtowne Boulevard share approximately 890 surfaceparking spaces and were assumed to represent 800 employees.

• High-level office uses in two buildings have an estimated gross floor area of approximately12,000 m2 and 400 employees, assuming approximately 30m2 per employee.

• An adjacent residential condominium is assumed to contain an estimated 200 units.

• The estimated combined office and residential trip generation was compared to the totalnumber of trips entering and leaving Sherwoodtowne Boulevard via Hurontario Street andRathburn Road. The difference provided a basis for estimating the number of through tripsin the westbound direction (100 trips and 150 trips during the morning and afternoon peakhours, respectively).

Traffic that currently turns onto Hurontario Street from Sherwoodtowne Boulevard (120 tripsand 175 trips during the morning and afternoon peak hours, respectively) was reassigned in thefollowing manner to reflect the temporary closure:

• One third of the locally-generated traffic was reassigned to Central Parkway and the balancewas reassigned to Rathburn Road west of City Centre Drive and Hurontario via RathburnRoad, City Centre Drive and Square One Drive based on available capacity.

• Half of the through traffic was assumed to originate from each of Shipp Drive and westboundRathburn Road based on existing turning movement distribution. Through traffic originatingfrom Shipp Drive was reassigned to Hurontario Street via Robert Speck Parkway. Throughtraffic originating from the east was reassigned based on an equal split between CentralParkway and Hurontario Street via Rathburn Road, City Centre Drive and Square One Drive.

• Traffic entering Sherwoodtowne Boulevard from the Highway 403 W-N/S Ramp and fromnorthbound Hurontario Street was reassigned to Robert Speck Parkway via Hurontario Street.

The adjusted turning movement volumes based on the assumptions described above are reflectedin the peak hour traffic volumes summarized in Figure 10. Capacity and micro-simulationanalysis was carried out to assess the morning and afternoon peak hour impacts related to theassumed redistribution of existing Sherwoodtowne Boulevard traffic. The corresponding level-

Page 27: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 25

of-service impacts are summarized in Table 10. We note once again that existing turningmovement data reflects conditions in 2007 and that the recent extension of ConfederationParkway across Highway 403 may likely have had an impact on travel patterns between MavisRoad and Hurontario Street. To this end, any possible traffic diversion from the HurontarioStreet corridor has not been reflected in the traffic analysis.

Figure 10 Staging Scenario Traffic Volumes: Hurontario Street

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

The temporary closure of Sherwoodtowne Boulevard at Hurontario Street results in improvedoperating conditions at each of the Highway 403 Ramp terminal intersections. Diversion of aportion of the existing right-turning traffic from Sherwoodtowne Boulevard (to Central Parkwayand west along Rathburn Road) and the conversion of the shared lane configuration on the W-N/S Ramp to a double left-turn lane serve to improve operating conditions.

Page 28: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 26

Table 10 Intersection Levels of Service: Hurontario Street Construction StagingLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Hurontario St at Hwy 403 E-N/S RampWestbound Left/RightNorthbound ThroughSouthbound Through

1.210.541.06

41/19 s13 s19 s

D/BBB

174 m 79 m 121 m

0.920.870.93

41/14 s9 s

24 s

D/BAC

88 m 68 m 158 m

Hurontario St at Hwy 403 W-N/S RampEastbound LeftEastbound RightNorthbound ThroughSouthbound Through

0.600.700.960.76

58 s49 s21 s

5 s

EDCA

61 m 50 m 189 m 54 m

0.730.930.900.82

58 s45 s22 s11 s

EDCB

77 m 70 m 255 m 104 m

Hurontario St at Square One DrEastbound LeftEastbound RightWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.660.100.420.230.540.660.17

38 s4 s

20 s2 s5 s

20 s14 s

DABAABB

38 m 38 m 0 m 0 m 45 m 203 m 0 m

0.770.180.400.220.810.630.15

40 s4 s

25 s7 s

13 s24 s16 s

DACABCB

67 m 67 m 0 m 0 m 136 m 189 m 3 m

Hurontario St at Robert Speck ParkwayEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.760.240.220.320.170.450.500.870.260.820.48

0.40

61 s46 s

3 s56 s44 s

9 s27 s30 s

4 s73 s10 s

4 s

EDAEDACCAEAA

64 m 26 m 0 m 25 m 19 m 16 m 19 m 116 m 0 m 168 m 47 m 0 m

0.810.190.320.310.150.980.570.960.070.990.780.43

54 s41 s

5 s40 s45 s20 s28 s35 s

8 s82 s13 s

4 s

DDADDBCCAFBA

110 m 29 m 10 m 38 m 24 m 92 m 20 m 148 m 0 m 93 m 52 m 0 m

Rathburn Rd at Centre View DrEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightWestbound Left/Through/Right (H.St.Off-Ramp)Northbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.030.790.870.130.810.630.030.240.880.32

30 s 35/30 s

48 s 26/22 s49/48/35 s

54 s37 s

8 s46 s

39/26 s

CC/CD

C/CD/D/C

DDAD

D/C

6 m 101 m 73 m 27 m 53 m 37 m 15 m 15 m 73 m 30 m

0.190.940.950.820.970.980.250.410.15

0.02

58 s 42/26 s

49 s 29/32 s 45/43/33

51 s41 s18 s46 s

38/0 s

ED/CD

C/CD/D/C

DDBD

D/A

6 m 67 m 176 m 204 m 85 m 63 m 41 m 41 m 14 m 5 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

Additional left-turning traffic from Square One Drive onto Hurontario Street can beaccommodated while maintaining all individual movement volume-to-capacity ratios below0.85. Similarly, all movements can continue to operate with a level-of-service ‘D’ or betterduring each of the peak hours. An increase in the 95th percentile southbound queue length from

Page 29: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 27

approximately 170 to 205 metres approaches the ramp exit from Hurontario Street onto RathburnRoad, but is not a prohibitive impact.

Maintaining adequate operating conditions at the Rathburn Road intersection with City CentreDrive will require the reallocation of green time from the eastbound through movement to theprotected westbound left-turn phase (from Rathburn Road). A nominal reallocation of greentime from the Hurontario Street ramp phase to City Centre Drive/Centre View Drive approacheswill also address current capacity constraints on these approaches. With the exception of aneastbound left-turn level-of-service ‘E’ during the afternoon peak hour, all other movements willoperate with a level-of-service ‘D’ or better. We note, however, that critical movements willcontinue to operate at capacity during the afternoon peak hour.

Morning peak hour impacts at the Hurontario Street intersection with Robert Speck Parkway canbe accommodated while maintaining similar levels of service to existing conditions.Notwithstanding the reallocation of green time to accommodate increased southbound left-turndemand, individual volume-to-capacity ratios do not exceed 0.87. During the afternoon peakhour, the westbound right-turn, northbound through and southbound left-turn movements can beexpected to operate at capacity as the result of the expected traffic diversion related to theSherwoodtowne Boulevard closure. Notwithstanding a resulting level-of-service ‘F’ for thesouthbound left-turn movement, the estimated 95th percentile queue length (93 metres) can beaccommodated by the available turning bay storage. The analysis indicates that all othermovements will operate with a level-of-service ‘D’ or better during the afternoon peak hour.

Based on the assumed traffic diversion and potential for minor modifications to existing trafficsignal timings, the temporary closure of Sherwoodtowne Boulevard can be accommodated forthe purpose of constructing the bus rapid transit connection to Rathburn Road.

3.2 Temporary Closure of Commerce Boulevard at Eglinton Avenue East

The construction of the structure to accommodate the bus rapid transitway across CommerceBoulevard benefits from the temporary closure of the Commerce Boulevard approach to EglintonAvenue. The resulting traffic diversion was estimated assuming that all left and right-turningtraffic from Eglinton Avenue onto Commerce Boulevard and all right-turning traffic fromCommerce Boulevard onto Eglinton Avenue would divert to Explorer Drive. Although left-turning traffic from Commerce Boulevard onto Eglinton Avenue was assumed to divert toExplorer Drive during the morning peak hour, the demand is greater than 800 vehicles during theafternoon peak hour and the traffic analysis had to assume that there would be a redistribution ofleft-turn demand to Explorer Drive, Orbitor Drive and Satellite Drive. The nominal throughtraffic between Commerce Boulevard and the opposing commercial entrance on the south side ofEglinton Avenue was assumed to divert to Explorer Drive.

The adjusted turning movement volumes based on the assumptions described above are reflectedin the peak hour traffic volumes summarized in Figure 11. Capacity and micro-simulationanalysis was carried out to assess the morning and afternoon peak hour impacts related to theassumed redistribution of existing traffic and the corresponding level-of-service impacts aresummarized in Table 11.

Page 30: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 28

Figure 11 Commerce Boulevard Staging Scenario Traffic Volumes: Eglinton AvenueAM Peak Hour

PM Peak Hour

Page 31: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 29

Table 11 Intersection Levels of Service: Commerce Boulevard Construction StagingLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Satellite Dr at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound Left/Through/Right

1.330.450.260.490.220.250.29

49 s4/8 s21 s

7/13 s41 s

39/12 s 37/35/7 s

DA/A

CA/BD

D/BD/C/A

105 m 19 m 8 m 68 m 11 m 13 m 9 m

0.700.580.260.780.550.14

0.96dr

37 s 11/10 s

15 s6/6 s49 s

38/11 s42/40/26s

DB/AB

A/AD

D/BD/D/C

12 m 82 m 3 m 53 m 18 m 11 m 83 m

Orbitor Dr at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.830.440.050.690.970.560.270.050.09

12 s4/4 s31 s

31/30 s45 s

32/25 s42 s26 s

6 s

BA/A

CC/CD

C/CDCA

21 m 21 m 6 m 115 m 91 m 50 m 14 m 6 m 0 m

0.320.640.910.760.890.060.540.840.40

29 s 26/24 s

60 s 21/19 s

93 s 25/13 s

45 s44 s11 s

CC/CE

C/BF

C/BDDB

11 m 137 m 44 m 164 m 31 m 12 m 64 m 171 m 16 m

Explorer Dr at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughWestbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Right

0.810.330.780.430.32

35 s2 s

10/9 s39 s

6 s

CA

A/ADA

40 m 9 m 57 m 21 m 3 m

0.370.640.840.910.43

20 s18 s

9/7 s39 s10 s

BB

A/ADA

7 m 125 m 44 m 111 m 15 m

Commerce Blvd at Eglinton AveEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughNorthbound LeftNorthbound Right

0.340.060.300.550.070.07

6 s2 s

10 s6 s

39 s6 s

AAAADA

40 m 0 m 10 m 52 m 7 m 0 m

0.790.030.150.480.350.37

12 s8 s

31 s2 s

49 s20 s

BACADB

131 m 0 m 0 m 16 m 30 m 19 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

Estimated traffic diversion during the morning peak hour affects only the Commerce Boulevardand Explorer Drive intersections. The impact of the additional turning movement volumes atExplorer Drive can be accommodated while maintaining volume-to-capacity ratios below 0.85and levels-of-service ‘D’ or better. Operating conditions at the Commerce Boulevardintersection improve with the temporary closure of the north approach.

Impacts during the afternoon peak hour affect each of the Satellite Drive, Orbitor Drive andExplorer Drive intersections. An increase in cycle length and reallocation of green time to theSatellite Drive approach to Eglinton Avenue (to accommodate diverted southbound left-turningvehicles) results in similar levels of service to existing conditions, while maintaining volume-to-capacity ratios below 0.80. All movements are expected to operate at a level-of-service ‘D’ orbetter at this intersection.

Page 32: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 30

A similar increase in cycle length and reallocation of green time to the Orbitor Drive approach toEglinton Avenue can accommodate all movements during the afternoon peak hour. Thewestbound left-turn movement is expected to operate with a volume-to-capacity ratio of 0.91 anda level-of-service ‘E’. The northbound left-turn movement is expected to operate with a volume-to-capacity ratio of 0.89 and a level-of-service ‘F’, but the total demand is less than 70 vehiclesand the estimated 95th queue length is less than 35 metres. All other movements are expected tooperate with volume-to-capacity ratios below 0.85 and levels-of-service ‘D’ or better.

The same increase in the afternoon peak hour cycle length and reallocation of green time to theside street approaches at Satellite Drive and Orbitor Drive was applied to Explorer Drive. Withthe exception of the southbound left-turn volume-to-capacity ratio of 0.91, all other movementswill operate with volume-to-capacity ratios below 0.85. All movements will operate with levels-of-service ‘D’ or better during the afternoon peak hour.

Based on the assumed traffic diversion and potential for modifications to existing traffic signaltimings, the temporary closure of Commerce Boulevard can be accommodated for the purpose ofconstructing the bus rapid transit crossing.

3.3 Temporary Closure of Explorer Drive at Eglinton Avenue East

The construction of the structure to accommodate the bus rapid transitway across Explorer Drivealso benefits from the temporary closure of the side-street connection to Eglinton Avenue. Theanalysis reflects the assumption that all left and right-turning traffic entering Explorer Drivediverts to the upstream intersection. All right-turning traffic from Explorer Drive is assumed todivert to Orbitor Drive, while left-turning traffic was split evenly between Orbitor Drive andSatellite Drive.

The adjusted turning movement volumes based on the assumptions described above are reflectedin the peak hour traffic volumes summarized in Figure 12. Capacity and micro-simulationanalysis was carried out to assess the morning and afternoon peak hour impacts related to theassumed redistribution of existing traffic and the corresponding level-of-service impacts aresummarized in Table 12.

Figure 12 Explorer Drive Staging Scenario Traffic Volumes: Eglinton Avenue

AM Peak Hour

Page 33: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 31

Figure 12 (Cont’d) Explorer Drive Staging Scenario Traffic Volumes: Eglinton AvenueAM Peak Hour

PM Peak Hour

The temporary closure of Explorer Drive results in no noticeable impacts at the CommerceBoulevard intersection. Given the current afternoon peak hour capacity constraints onCommerce Boulevard approaching Eglinton Avenue, traffic diversion from Explorer Drive toCommerce Boulevard was limited to right-turn movements from Eglinton Avenue.

During the morning peak hour, the eastbound left-turn movement at Orbitor Drive can beexpected to approach capacity with the diversion of demand from Explorer Drive. Based on re-

Page 34: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 32

allocated green time, the shared westbound through/right-turn movement volume-to-capacityratio will rise, but remain below 0.85. All other movements are expected to operate with similarcapacity utilization to existing conditions. During the afternoon peak hour, the shared eastboundthrough/right-turn movement volume-to-capacity ratio increases to 0.88, while all otherindividual movement volume-to-capacity ratios remain below 0.85. All movements are expectedto operate with levels-of-service ‘D’ or better during each of the peak hours.

The Satellite Drive intersection with Eglinton Avenue can be expected to accommodate trafficdiversion related to the temporary closure of Explorer Drive. Notwithstanding a morning peakhour eastbound left-turn volume-to-capacity ratio of 1.45, the existing conditions analysisidentifies a corresponding volume-to-capacity ratio of 1.33 for this unprotected left-turnmovement. Although the relative increase is possibly more meaningful than the absolutecapacity utilization, providing for a protected left-turn phase would resolve any possible capacityconstraints at this location. In spite of the estimated capacity utilization, the micro-simulationanalysis confirms levels-of-service ‘D’ or better for all movements.

Table 12 Intersection Levels of Service: Explorer Drive Construction StagingLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Satellite Dr at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound Left/Through/Right

1.450.480.280.530.220.250.34

49 s3/7 s20 s

5/11 s39 s

38/10 s 38/35/7 s

DA/A

BA/BD

D/AD/C/A

106 m 20 m 6 m 44 m 12 m 12 m 13 m

0.800.630.300.840.530.13

0.89dr

25 s9/6 s30 s

18/17 s51 s

34/11 s36/33/20s

CA/A

CB/BD

C/BD/C/B

7 m 54 m 8 m 109 m 20 m 13 m 70 m

Orbitor Dr at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.950.380.060.840.970.560.380.050.15

18 s5/4 s31 s

33/30 s43 s

32/26 s42 s29 s

7 s

BA/A

CC/CD

C/CDCA

50 m 20 m 5 m 113 m 90 m 51 m 17 m 9 m 0 m

0.520.880.630.780.570.090.510.840.61

21 s 27/25 s

44 s 39/37 s

53 s 27/7 s

39 s40 s13 s

CC/CD

D/DD

C/ADDB

13 m 115 m 25 m 161 m 20 m 10 m 52 m 148 m 28 m

Commerce Blvd at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/ RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/ Right

0.380.350.060.310.460.400.040.070.620.20

31 s7 s3 s

11 s7 s6 s

40 s 28/7 s

40 s 40/2 s

CAABAAD

C/AD

D/A

21 m 35 m 0 m 12 m 36 m 17 m 5 m 4 m 30 m 8 m

0.220.990.020.120.890.150.100.111.250.19

56 s48 s25 s33 s26 s

8 s17 s

14/9 s40 s

21/7 s

EDCCCAB

B/AD

C/A

5 m 162 m 0 m 4 m 130 m 6 m 12 m 1 m 260 m 13 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

Page 35: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 33

Afternoon peak hour operating conditions at the Satellite Drive intersection reflect individualmovement volume-to-capacity ratios of less than 0.90 and levels-of-service ‘D’ or better.

Based on the assumed traffic diversion and potential for modifications to existing traffic signaltimings (and hardware), the temporary closure of Explorer Drive can be accommodated for thepurpose of constructing the bus rapid transit crossing.

3.4 Temporary Closure of Spectrum Way at Eglinton Avenue East

The impact of the temporary closure of Spectrum Way to accommodate the bus rapid transitcrossing was assessed on the basis of the following traffic diversion assumptions:

• Right-turning traffic entering Spectrum Way from Eglinton Avenue and left-turning trafficleaving Spectrum Way to travel eastbound on Eglinton Avenue will divert to Satellite Driveand Orbitor Drive in equal portions.

• Right-turning traffic leaving Spectrum Way to travel westbound on Eglinton Avenue willdivert to Creekbank Road via Matheson Boulevard and continue westbound on EglintonAvenue and southbound on Eastgate Parkway in the same proportions as the existingwestbound through and left-turn volumes at the Eglinton Avenue/EastgateParkway/Creekbank Road intersection.

• Left-turning traffic entering Spectrum Way from Eglinton Avenue will also divert toCreekbank Road and Matheson Boulevard. This traffic will divert to the northbound throughand eastbound left-turn movements at the Eglinton Avenue/Eastgate Parkway intersection inproportion to the existing northbound right-turn and eastbound through movement volumes,respectively.

• Traffic crossing Eglinton Avenue from Rakely Court to Spectrum Way will divert equally toCreekbank Road and Orbitor Drive via Eglinton Avenue. Traffic crossing from SpectrumWay to Rakely Court will divert to Satellite Drive and displace a similar demand to OrbitorDrive (given existing afternoon peak hour capacity constraints at Satellite Drive).

The adjusted turning movement volumes based on the assumptions described above are reflectedin the peak hour traffic volumes summarized in Figure 13. Capacity and micro-simulationanalysis was carried out to assess the morning and afternoon peak hour impacts related to theassumed redistribution of existing traffic and the corresponding level-of-service impacts aresummarized in Table 13.

Impacts at the Eglinton Avenue intersection with Eastgate Parkway/Creekbank Road can beaccommodated with the temporary reallocation of green time to the Eglinton Avenue left-turnphases and the Eastgate and Creekbank intersection approaches. During the morning peak hour,the southbound left-turn movement can be expected to operate with a volume-to-capacity ratio of0.91 (compared to the existing ratio of 0.97) and all other movements would operate with ratiosbelow 0.85. Corresponding level of service impacts can be expected to be similar to existingconditions. During the afternoon peak hour, the northbound left-turn movement can be expectedto continue to operate at capacity (same as for existing conditions) while all other movementswould operate with volume-to-capacity ratios below 0.90. Level of service impacts can beexpected to be similar to existing conditions during each of the peak hours.

Page 36: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 34

Figure 13 Spectrum Drive Staging Scenario Traffic Volumes: Eglinton AvenueAM Peak Hour

PM Peak Hour

Page 37: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 35

Table 13 Intersection Levels of Service: Spectrum Way Construction StagingLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Eglinton Ave at Eastgate PkwyEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.840.470.230.340.300.380.310.800.760.910.13

38 s23 s

4 s65 s28 s10 s39 s41 s19 s

107 s 29/10 s

DCAECADDBF

C/A

122 m 60 m 0 m 19 m 33 m 28 m 34 m 126 m 82 m 40 m 20 m

0.430.550.520.880.750.181.020.130.120.370.80

33 s48 s12 s68 s30 s

8 s60 s25 s

6 s37 s

36/34 s

CDBECAECAD

D/C

20 m 57 m 17 m 86 m 88 m 17 m 23 m 21 m 22 m 34 m 158 m

Tahoe Blvd at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.150.470.100.670.210.180.120.550.140.12

7 s4 s3 s

61 s5 s4 s

56 s 61/14 s

69 s 54/6 s

AAAEAAE

E/BE

D/A

3 m 27 m 0 m 43 m 21 m 3 m 6 m 18 m 8 m 2 m

0.070.310.020.610.610.010.310.290.800.32

13 s6 s4 s

68 s9 s3 s

60 s0/6 s60 s

50/21 s

BAAEAAE

A/AE

D/C

0 m 23 m 0 m 29 m 77 m 0 m 22 m 3 m 51 m 25 m

Spectrum Way at Eglinton AveEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound Left/Through/Right

0.700.520.480.72

12/10 s22 s

9/0 s 39/0/25s

B/AC

A/AD/A/C

120 m 6 m 56 m 44 m

0.500.260.860.61

7/7 s11 s

4/0 s 41/0/21s

A/AB

A/AD/A/C

61 m 4 m 39 m 32 m

Satellite Dr at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/Right

Southbound Left/Through/Right

1.330.490.290.510.220.250.32

68 s5/8 s21 s

7/14 s39 s

38/10 s 38/37/7 s

EA/A

CA/BD

D/AD/D/A

139 m 22 m 7 m 70 m 11 m 11 m 11 m

0.790.570.240.890.400.130.75

44 s 10/8 s

12 s6/4 s39 s

27/9 s32/30/20s

DA/A

BA/AD

C/AC/C/B

16 m 67 m 5 m 42 m 16 m 8 m 64 m

Orbitor Dr at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.910.460.060.820.880.510.280.050.14

18 s7/5 s38 s

40/37 s39 s

30/24 s42 s27 s

6 s

BA/AD

D/DD

C/CDCA

38 m 29 m 6 m 126 m 84 m 50 m 17 m 8 m 0 m

0.320.640.850.910.660.060.410.780.37

18 s 14/12 s

22 s 14/12 s

45 s 22/8 s

33 s33 s10 s

BB/BC

B/BD

C/ACCA

8 m 85 m 15 m 78 m 17 m 11 m 29 m 122 m 15 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

Page 38: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Construction Staging Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 36

Operating conditions at the Tahoe Boulevard intersection can be expected to remain similar toexisting conditions. In fact, the reduction in the Eglinton Avenue volumes related to trafficdiversion would result in slightly improved operating conditions. A similar improvement tooperating conditions at Spectrum Way/Rakely Court can be expected with the temporary closureof Spectrum Way and the reduce side-street green time requirements, particularly during theafternoon peak hour.

Operating conditions at the Satellite Drive intersection can be expected to be similar to existingconditions during the morning peak hour. Impacts during the afternoon peak hour can result inimproved side-street operations with the reallocation of green time from Eglinton Avenue andwhile maintaining all volume-to-capacity ratios below 0.90. Levels of service similar to existingconditions can be expected during each of the peak hours.

Reallocation of green time to the side street approaches and protected eastbound left-turn phaseat Orbitor Drive adequately accommodates impacts related to the temporary Spectrum Wayclosure. All movements can be expected to operate with volume-to-capacity ratios no greaterthan 0.91 and levels of service ‘D’ or better during each of the peak hours.

Based on the assumed traffic diversion and potential for modifications to existing traffic signaltimings, the temporary closure of Spectrum Way can be accommodated for the purpose ofconstructing the bus rapid transit crossing. We note that this analysis reflects the existing laneconfiguration at the Eglinton Avenue intersection with Eastgate Parkway. If the proposed lanereductions on Eglinton Avenue are implemented prior to the temporary closure of SpectrumWay, impacts will need to be reassessed accordingly.

Page 39: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Built Facility Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 37

4. BUILT FACILITY TRAFFIC IMPACTS

4.1 Dixie Road

The implementation of the BRT in the vicinity of Dixie Road includes a planned transit vehicleaccess to the east side of Dixie Road between Eastgate Parkway and South Gateway Road. Thisaccess will accommodate transit vehicles approaching and leaving the transitway towards thenorth only. Accordingly, traffic signal control assessed at this location as part of the trafficanalysis requires that only northbound traffic stop to accommodate southbound left-turning andwestbound right-turning transit vehicles, as required. Southbound traffic will not be required tostop at any time at this ‘half’ signal. Notwithstanding the benefit of traffic signal control at theplanned transit driveway, the traffic analysis has also considered the potential impacts withouttraffic signals.

Planned access to the commuter park and ride facility at the Dixie station will be provided fromFewster Drive and commuters will approach the facility via the Dixie Road/Crestlawn Driveintersection. Although Fewster Drive can also be accessed via the Burgoyne Street connection toEglinton Avenue, the analysis reflects a conservative assumption that all commuters will useDixie Road. The proportion of traffic generated by the park and ride facility and assumed toapproach from the north is only 10% and, therefore, any redistribution of traffic to BurgoyneStreet will have only a marginal impact at this signalized intersection.

The planned transit access north of Eastgate Parkway has been assumed to accommodate aninbound demand of 23 and 25 buses during the morning and afternoon peak hours, respectively.Similarly, the projected outbound demand during the morning and afternoon peak hours is 25and 23 buses, respectively.

Commuter park and ride traffic volumes were estimated on the basis of surveys undertaken at asimilar facility at the Mississauga City Centre. That lot has 200 parking spaces and generated130 inbound and 3 outbound trips during a two-hour morning peak period survey between 6:30and 8:30 a.m. The corresponding peak hour traffic generation was 91 inbound and 3 outboundtrips between 7:25 and 8:25 a.m. The planned parking capacity at the Dixie BRT station is also200 spaces and the traffic analysis has reflected the same morning peak hour trip generationobserved at the City Centre. The traffic analysis reflects the assumption that the correspondingafternoon peak hour traffic generation is simply the reverse of the morning i.e. 3 inbound and 91outbound trips.

The distribution of commuter park and ride traffic will be predominantly to/from the south as theland use north of the station all the way to Steeles Avenue between Highways 10 and 427 isprimarily industrial. Accordingly, the traffic analysis reflects 10% of commuter trafficapproaching from the north, 55% from south of Eastgate Parkway, 15% from Eastgate Parkwaywest of Dixie Road (via Tomken Road south of Eastgate Parkway) and 20% from EastgateParkway east of Dixie Road (via Fieldgate Drive).

The morning and afternoon peak hour traffic volumes summarized in Figure 14 reflect the sumof the existing demand and the projected transit and commuter traffic described above.Corresponding level-of-service impacts are summarized in Table 14.

Page 40: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Built Facility Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 38

Figure 14 Built Facility Conditions: Dixie Road

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Commuter traffic generation has been assumed to be new traffic on the road network where, infact, it is likely that at least a portion of this demand is already travelling along Dixie Roadand/or Eastgate Parkway. Notwithstanding this, the relative level-of-service impacts during thepeak hours can be accommodated by the existing road network.

A comparison of the existing and projected operating conditions described in Tables 6 and 14confirms that individual movement, morning peak hour volume-to-capacity ratios remain below0.85 at the Dixie Road/Eastgate Parkway intersection. A similar comparison of the afternoonpeak hour operating condtions indicates that the only movements whose volume-to-capacityratios are projected to be greater than 0.85 are the westbound and southbound throughmovements. The projected volume-to-capacity ratio (0.90) and level of service for the

Page 41: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Built Facility Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 39

westbound movement remains unchanged from existing conditions and the southbound capacityutilization increases marginally from 1.02 to 1.05. Notwithstanding this apparent constraint, thesimulation confirms an adequate level of service for this movement. Futhermore, thereallocation of 2 seconds of green time from Eastgate Parkway to Dixie Road would reduce theprojected volume-to-capacity ratio of the southbound through movement to the same levelidentified for the existing condition while maintaining sufficient capacity for the westboundthrough movement (volume-to-capacity ratio to 0.93).

Table 14 Built Facility Levels of Service: Dixie RoadLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Dixie Road at Eastgate ParkwayEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.640.840.330.620.240.090.840.640.610.210.400.23

45 s43 s20 s80 s45 s

7 s70 s20 s12 s50 s25 s

3 s

DDBEDAEBBDCA

79 m 171 m 14 m 16 m 31 m 0 m 58 m 112 m 37 m 7 m 53 m 0 m

0.840.190.480.770.900.090.770.370.080.161.050.50

50 s53 s27 s55 s55 s10 s70 s16 s

2 s24 s24 s10 s

DDCDDAEBACCA

55 m 33 m 59 m 143 m 139 m 0 m 41 m 46 m 0 m 6 m 169 m 10 m

Dixie Road at Bus AccessWestbound RightNorthbound ThroughSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through

0.250.450.150.17

4 s1 s

14 s0 s

AABA

0 m 10 m 12 m 0 m

0.110.250.090.46

2 s0 s

11 s5 s

AABA

0 m 0 m 11 m 0 m

Dixie Road at South Gateway RoadEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.210.250.140.100.340.050.460.040.920.20

62 s 64/8 s

58 s50 s

9 s10 s

2 s2 s

20 s1/1 s

EE/AEDAAAAB

A/A

11 m 1 m 10 m 10 m 8 m 0 m 20 m 0 m 14 m 12 m

0.270.340.660.050.320.510.280.060.420.60

63 s 23/13 s

60 s51 s

5 s46 s

3 s2 s

13 s9/8 s

EC/BEDADAAB

A/A

20 m 9 m 32 m 7 m 0 m 3 m 19 m 0 m 14 m 94 m

Dixie Road at Crestlawn DriveEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.670.270.060.170.480.460.210.30

62 s 39/5 s

59 s 21/12 s

17 s5/3 s17 s

5/4 s

ED/A

EC/BB

A/AB

A/A

39 m 6 m 8 m 0 m 25 m 40 m 1 m 31 m

0.540.850.060.091.190.320.160.64

59 s 50/16 s

63 s 52/10 s

40 s5/3 s13 s

7/6 s

ED/B

ED/AD

A/AB

A/A

54 m 37 m 6 m 6 m 16 m 26 m 1 m 64 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

Page 42: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Built Facility Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 40

Commuter park and ride and transit vehicle trip generation can be adequately accommodated atthe South Gateway Road intersection while maintaining similar levels of service to existingconditions. The only noted impact is that the unprotected southbound left-turn movementapproaches capacity during the morning peak hour. Although the left-turn permissive capacity islimited, the opposing northbound capacity is sufficient to accommodate a protected left-turn atsome point in the future when it becomes warranted.

The projected impacts at the Dixie Road intersection with Crestlawn Drive can also beaccommodated. With the exception of the northound left-turn movement, all other movementsoperate with volume-to-capacity ratios no greater than 0.85. The northbound left-turn movementvolume-to-capacity ratio identified by the existing conditions analysis (0.94) increases to 1.19based on the incremental demand generated by the park and ride facility and the transit vehicles.Notwithstanding this limited permissive left-turn capacity, the simulation confirms an adequatelevel of service for this movement. Futhermore, a protected left-turn phase can beaccommodated given that the projected volume-to-capacity ratio for the opposing throughmovement is less than 0.70.

Projected operating conditions at the planned transit access between Eastgate Parkway and SouthGateway Road reflect good levels of service. In fact, based on the assumed signalization of thisentrance with a cycle length equal to one half of the cycle length at the adjacent intersections,there are many instances when transit vehicles are able to advance through the intersectionwithout actuating the protected phase i.e. a short delay is assumed between vehicle detection andphase calling. A comparative analysis was undertaken to assess impacts at the bus accesswithout traffic signal control. The results of this evaluation are summarized below in Table 15.Clearly, there is a benefit of the proximity to Eastgate Parkway and the associated effect ofvehicle platooning on gap development.

Table 15 Built Facility Levels of Service: Dixie Road Bus AccessLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Bus Access at Dixie RdWestbound RightNorthbound ThroughSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through

----

5 s0 s

23 s0 s

AACA

0 m 0 m 12 m 0 m

----

3 s0 s

12 s6 s

AABA

0 m 0 m 12 m 0 m

The traffic analysis indicates that the projected impacts related to the incremental demandgenerated by the Dixie BRT Station and the proposed access can be accommodated with onlymarginal changes in the level of service with further opportunities for operational improvementsthrough the introduction of protected left-turn phases.

Page 43: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Built Facility Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 41

4.2 Rathburn Road Bus Rapid Transit Access

The planned bus rapid transitway connection to Rathburn Road on the east side of the HurontarioStreet structure will require that the median eastbound lane be dropped at the planned transitaccess to accommodate left-turn movements. Specifically, the drop is required so that vehiclepresence detectors can be installed in the lane to actuate a protected left-turn phase toaccommodate transit vehicles entering the transitway. The cross-section of Rathburn Road cannot be widened to accommodate an additional transit lane for this purpose because of theconstraints imposed by the existing Hurontario Street structure.

The conversion of the median eastbound lane to a left-turn lane for transit vehicles results in theloss of a general purpose eastbound through lane at the City View Drive intersection. Theassumption incorporated in the traffic analysis is that the two eastbound lanes west of City ViewDrive will be realigned to match the two lanes adjacent to the curb at the intersection. In thismanner, rather than developing the shared through/right-turn lane (existing condition), the curblane west of the intersection would match the shared through/right-turn lane and a third transit-only lane would be developed adjacent to the left-turn lane (in the location of the existing medianthrough lane).

Traffic signal control at the planned transitway access would include a simultaneous protectedeastbound left-turn and southbound right-turn phase that can be actuated by transit vehicles oneither approach. Delays built into the detectors on these approaches would minimize westboundthrough traffic delays while accommodating transit vehicles under peak demand periods. Wenote that transit vehicles approaching Rathburn Road are only expected to turn right and,therefore, eastbound traffic will always be faced with a green signal indication. In order toensure that there are no unexpected conflicts, we propose that the intersection design reflect achannellized southbound approach to prevent transit vehicles from turning left onto RathburnRoad.

Projected transit vehicle traffic included in the traffic analysis included 100 vehicles in eachdirection on the transitway. The traffic volumes and corresponding levels of service aresummarized in Figure 15 and Table 16, respectively. Recalling that the existing turningmovement data reflects conditions in 2007, the recent extension of Confederation Parkwayacross Highway 403 may likely have had an impact on travel patterns between Mavis Road andHurontario Street. To this end, likely shifts in study-area travel patterns have not been reflectedin the traffic analysis.

Figure 15 Built Facility Traffic Volumes: Rathburn RoadAM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Page 44: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Built Facility Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 42

The eastbound lane reduction on Rathburn Road will result in all critical movements operating atcapacity at the City View Drive intersection during each of the peak hours. With volume-to-capacity ratios at or near 1.00, it is reasonable to expect that operating conditions will be unstableduring the peak hours. The traffic analysis identifies a westbound left-turn level-of-service ‘F’(from Rathburn Road) as well as northbound and southbound left-turn level-of-service ‘E’ duringthe morning peak hour and an eastbound left-turn level-of-service ‘E’ during the afternoon peakhour. The analysis indicates that all other movements will operate with a level-of-service ‘D’ orbetter during the peak hours. Operating conditions at the proposed Rathburn Road Bus Accessreflect adequate levels of service. The limited amount of protected eastbound left-turn and side-street green time results in average westbound vehicular delays of less than 10 seconds.

Table 16 Built Facility Levels of Service: Rathburn Road Bus AccessLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Rathburn Rd at Centre View DrEastbound LeftEastbound Through/ RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/ RightWestbound Left/Through/Right (H.St.Off-Ramp)Northbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/ Right

0.030.980.960.210.960.720.040.260.970.35

26 s 30/26 s

89 s 26/12 s55/56/34 s

58 s37 s

9 s73 s

43/25 s

CC/C

FC/B

D/E/CEDAE

D/C

4 m 135 m 75 m 45 m 60 m 38 m 15 m 15 m 104 m 32 m

0.231.000.970.801.010.970.240.400.150.02

56 s 38/35 s

50 s 32/33 s 50/48/44

53 s42 s19 s47 s

45/0 s

ED/CD

C/CD/D/D

DDBD

D/A

5 m 94 m 141 m 199 m 93 m 69 m 46 m 46 m 16 m 6 m

BRT at Rathburn RdEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughWestbound ThroughSouthbound Right

0.200.410.100.24

2 s0 s1 s9 s

AAAA

0 m 0 m 6 m 12 m

0.340.320.450.51

14 s0 s7 s

31 s

BAAC

29 m 0 m 52 m 38 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

It is important to emphasize that not only does the traffic analysis not reflect the recentConfederation Parkway extension across Highway 403, but it also does not account for planneddevelopment growth in the city centre. Notwithstanding the potential benefit of theConfederation Parkway connection, it is reasonable to expect that development growth may leadto future capacity deficiencies along Rathburn Road with the removal of the median through laneeast of City View Drive.

4.3 Eglinton Avenue Lane Reductions

The Preliminary Design proposes a permanent lane reduction (to four through lanes) on EglintonAvenue between Eastgate Parkway and the existing four-lane cross-section on the east side ofEtobicoke Creek. Proposed changes to the lane configuration at Eastgate Parkway also includethe removal of the northbound-to-eastbound acceleration lane and a reduction in the length of thewestbound right-turn lane. Traffic impacts related to the Eglinton Avenue lane reductions also

Page 45: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Built Facility Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 43

incorporated a narrowing of the Spectrum Way approach to Eglinton Avenue to eliminate theseparate right-turn lane. Operating conditions based on the existing turning movement volumesidentified in Section 2.0 were reassessed based on the proposed modifications along EglintonAvenue and have been summarized in Table 17. We emphasize that this analysis does notreflect anticipated traffic growth related to development in the Airport Corporate Centre.

Table 17 Built Facility Levels of Service: Eglinton Avenue Lane ReductionsLevel of Service

WeekdayA.M. Peak Hour

WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour

Intersection/Movement

V/C Delay LOS Queue1 V/C Delay LOS Queue1

Eglinton Ave at Eastgate PkwyEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound ThroughNorthbound RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.670.820.250.380.360.240.300.721.020.660.10

29 s25 s

4 s67 s18 s

8 s44 s44 s45 s

101 s 32/11 s

CCAEBADDDF

C/B

55 m 120 m 0 m 19 m 40 m 22 m 38 m 136 m 182 m 32 m 17 m

0.340.580.420.910.920.131.040.160.180.500.82

24 s30 s11 s67 s30 s17 s72 s35 s

7 s46 s

44/40 s

CCBECBECAD

D/D

10 m 63 m 15 m 99 m 174 m 16 m 26 m 24 m 22 m 46 m 118 m

Tahoe Blvd at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound ThroughEastbound RightWestbound LeftWestbound ThroughWestbound RightNorthbound LeftNorthbound Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.150.790.100.670.300.180.120.550.140.12

8 s6 s3 s

63 s6 s4 s

62 s 62/20 s

65 s 57/7 s

AAAEAAE

E/BE

E/A

4 m 49 m 0 m 43 m 31 m 2 m 6 m 23 m 7 m 2 m

0.080.460.020.610.980.010.320.300.800.33

17 s6 s2 s

68 s15 s

7 s59 s

0/6 s60 s

61/26 s

BAAEBAE

A/AE

E/C

0 m 33 m 0 m 28 m 189 m 0 m 24 m 5 m 50 m 30 m

Spectrum Way at Eglinton AveEastbound LeftEastbound Through/RightWestbound LeftWestbound Through/RightNorthbound Left/Through/RightSouthbound LeftSouthbound Through/Right

0.930.700.250.630.700.100.20

23 s 13/11 s

20 s 10/9 s38/39/27s

37 s 34/11 s

CB/BB

A/AD/D/C

DC/B

35 m 131 m 2 m 67 m 46 m 6 m 13 m

0.580.570.221.010.840.550.86

26 s9/7 s14 s

7/6 s38/31/20s

38 s 31/17 s

CA/A

BA/A

D/C/BD

C/B

6 m 62 m 4 m 63 m 30 m 40 m 40 m

Note: 1. Queue length reflects 95th percentile conditions

The capacity and micro-simulation analyses confirm that the Eglinton Avenue intersection withEastgate Parkway will approach capacity during the afternoon peak hour with the proposed lanereductions east of the intersection. The analysis also indicates that the westbound approach toTahoe Boulevard will operate at capacity during the afternoon peak hour. The westboundapproach to Spectrum Way currently operates at capacity based on the existing two-lane cross-section. The westbound movement at Spectrum Way will continue to operate at capacity withthe proposed lane reduction on Spectrum way (to a left-turn lane and shared through/right-turn

Page 46: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Built Facility Traffic Impacts

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008 Page 44

lane). Sensitivity analysis demonstrates that increased cycle length at Spectrum Way (from 100seconds to 140 seconds) to match the cycle length at Tahoe Boulevard, while maintaining theside-street split requirement to accommdoate pedestrians has little to no benefit to through trafficon Eglinton Avenue. The total afternoon peak hour turning movement volume enteringwestbound Eglinton Avenue from Satellite Drive and Spectrum Way is over 900 vehicles. Thislocal impact is the cause of the two-lane westbound capacity constraint through the SpectrumWay and Tahoe Boulevard intersections. The effective westbound cross-section increases atEastgate Parkway with double left-turn lanes serving 650 left-turning vehicles during theafternoon peak hour. Accordingly, the westbound approach to Eastgate Parkway operatesmarginally better than at the upstream intersections, notwithstanding the greater side street trafficvolumes.

Although the traffic analysis indicates marginally adequate operating conditions with a narrowedEglinton Avenue cross-section east of Eastgate Parkway, the analysis reflects only the existingdemand and does not account for any general corrdidor traffic growth or specific developmentgrowth in the Airport Corporate Centre. We note that some of this growth is imminent and it isreasonable to expect that there may be capacity deficiencies along this section of EglintonAvenue without a mode shift to transit that is equivalent to projected growth in travel demand.

Page 47: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Technical Appendix

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008

TECHNICAL APPENDIX A

Existing Conditions Capacity Analysis Output

Page 48: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Mavis Road2: Hwy 403 W-N/S Ramp & Mavis Road Existing AM Peak hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group NBL NBR SBL SBR SET NWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 315 129 21 199 1991 2797Turn Type custom custom custom customProtected Phases 2 6Permitted Phases 8 8 4 4Detector Phase 8 8 4 4 2 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 91.0 91.0Minimum Split (s) 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 98.0 98.0Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 98.0 98.0Total Split (%) 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 70.0% 70.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 103.8 103.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.74 0.74v/c Ratio 0.62 0.55 0.07 0.77 0.55 0.62Control Delay 58.8 55.1 46.6 74.0 6.0 2.5Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 58.8 55.1 46.6 74.0 6.0 2.5LOS E E D E A AApproach Delay 6.0 2.5Approach LOS A A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 57.4 (41%), Referenced to phase 2:SET and 6:NWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 115Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.77Intersection Signal Delay: 11.0 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 111.3% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 2: Hwy 403 W-N/S Ramp & Mavis Road

Timings Mavis Road4: Mavis Road & Hwy 403 E-N/S Ramp Existing AM Peak hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SET NWT SWL SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 2175 2353 350 154Turn Type PermProtected Phases 6 2 8Permitted Phases 8Detector Phase 6 2 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 82.6 82.6 10.0 10.0Minimum Split (s) 89.6 89.6 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 89.6 89.6 50.4 50.4Total Split (%) 64.0% 64.0% 36.0% 36.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 6.0 6.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 104.7 104.7 22.3 22.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.75 0.75 0.16 0.16v/c Ratio 0.60 0.64 0.68 0.74Control Delay 10.6 8.0 61.5 73.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 10.6 8.1 61.5 73.6LOS B A E EApproach Delay 10.6 8.1 65.2Approach LOS B A E

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 47.6 (34%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.74Intersection Signal Delay: 14.9 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 89.7% ICU Level of Service EAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 4: Mavis Road & Hwy 403 E-N/S Ramp

Page 49: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Mavis Road2: Hwy 403 W-N/S Ramp & Mavis Road Existing PM Peak hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group NBL NBR SBL SBR SET NWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 501 219 65 586 2514 2614Turn Type custom custom custom customProtected Phases 2 6Permitted Phases 8 8 4 4Detector Phase 8 8 4 4 2 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 77.0 77.0Minimum Split (s) 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 84.0 84.0Total Split (s) 56.0 56.0 56.0 56.0 84.0 84.0Total Split (%) 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 60.0% 60.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 49.4 49.4 49.4 50.4 78.6 77.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.56 0.55v/c Ratio 0.45 0.47 0.10 0.97 0.91 0.76Control Delay 36.2 38.4 30.6 73.6 21.7 11.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 36.2 38.4 30.6 73.6 21.8 11.4LOS D D C E C BApproach Delay 21.8 11.4Approach LOS C B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 25.2 (18%), Referenced to phase 2:SET and 6:NWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 130Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.97Intersection Signal Delay: 24.0 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 128.1% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 2: Hwy 403 W-N/S Ramp & Mavis Road

Timings Mavis Road4: Mavis Road & Hwy 403 E-N/S Ramp Existing PM Peak hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SET NWT SWL SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 2230 2623 495 291Turn Type PermProtected Phases 6 2 8Permitted Phases 8Detector Phase 6 2 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 63.0 63.0 10.0 10.0Minimum Split (s) 70.0 70.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (%) 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 93.5 93.5 35.5 35.5Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.67 0.25 0.25v/c Ratio 0.68 0.80 0.60 0.77Control Delay 7.1 15.4 48.3 61.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 7.1 15.4 48.3 61.0LOS A B D EApproach Delay 7.1 15.4 53.0Approach LOS A B D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 37.8 (27%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.80Intersection Signal Delay: 17.4 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 86.0% ICU Level of Service EAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 4: Mavis Road & Hwy 403 E-N/S Ramp

Page 50: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Hurontario Street 10: Hurontario Street & Hwy 403 E-N/S Ramp Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SET NWT SWL SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 2161 1337 1128 1003Turn Type PermProtected Phases 6 2 8Permitted Phases 8Detector Phase 6 2 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 70.0 70.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 77.0 77.0 14.0 14.0Total Split (s) 77.0 77.0 63.0 63.0Total Split (%) 55.0% 55.0% 45.0% 45.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -2.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 4.0 4.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 71.0 71.0 59.0 59.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.51 0.51 0.42 0.42v/c Ratio 1.06 0.57 1.12 1.22Control Delay 64.9 22.0 102.7 149.5Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 64.9 22.0 102.7 149.5LOS E C F FApproach Delay 64.9 22.0 117.5Approach LOS E C F

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 5.6 (4%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 145Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.22Intersection Signal Delay: 74.6 Intersection LOS: EIntersection Capacity Utilization 109.4% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 10: Hurontario Street & Hwy 403 E-N/S Ramp

Timings Hurontario Street 20: Hurontario Street & Sherwoodtowne Boulevard Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SET NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 2811 2550 12 279 54 101 221Turn Type Perm Perm Perm customProtected Phases 6 2 4Permitted Phases 2 4 4 8Detector Phase 6 2 2 4 4 4 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 91.0 91.0 91.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 98.0 98.0 98.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0Total Split (s) 98.0 98.0 98.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0Total Split (%) 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 95.0 95.0 95.0 34.0 34.0 34.0 34.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24v/c Ratio 0.86 1.09 0.01 0.45 0.45 0.29 0.91Control Delay 16.1 75.7 1.1 48.7 48.5 43.2 87.4Queue Delay 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 16.4 75.7 1.1 48.7 48.5 43.2 87.4LOS B E A D D D FApproach Delay 16.4 75.3 47.3Approach LOS B E D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 127.4 (91%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 125Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.09Intersection Signal Delay: 46.3 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 112.0% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 20: Hurontario Street & Sherwoodtowne Boulevard

Page 51: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Hurontario Street 30: Square One Drive & Hurontario Street Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group WBR SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER2Lane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 577 2346 196 7 1932 53 19Turn Type Free Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 2 4Permitted Phases Free 6 2 4Detector Phase 6 6 2 2 4 4Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 86.8 86.8 86.8 86.8 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 93.8 93.8 93.8 93.8 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 0.0 93.8 93.8 93.8 93.8 46.2 46.2Total Split (%) 0.0% 67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 33.0% 33.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 140.0 120.7 120.7 120.7 120.7 11.5 11.5Actuated g/C Ratio 1.00 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.08 0.08v/c Ratio 0.42 0.59 0.16 0.17 0.48 0.41 0.16Control Delay 0.8 11.8 3.1 10.0 2.9 68.9 52.9Queue Delay 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 0.8 13.0 3.1 10.0 2.9 68.9 52.9LOS A B A A A E DApproach Delay 12.2 2.9 64.7Approach LOS B A E

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 63 (45%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.59Intersection Signal Delay: 8.2 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 154.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 30: Square One Drive & Hurontario Street

Timings Hurontario Street 40: Hurontario Street & Robert Speck Parkway Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 4

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 451 1459 455 113 1597 153 180 153 67 73 105 161Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 6 2 2 4 4 8 8Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 4 4 4 8 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 63.0 63.0 5.0 49.0 49.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 11.0 70.0 70.0 11.0 56.0 56.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 37.8 70.0 70.0 23.8 56.0 56.0 46.2 46.2 46.2 46.2 46.2 46.2Total Split (%) 27.0% 50.0% 50.0% 17.0% 40.0% 40.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max None None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 101.7 85.3 85.3 69.7 58.3 58.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.73 0.61 0.61 0.50 0.42 0.42 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19v/c Ratio 0.86 0.48 0.40 0.47 0.77 0.22 0.76 0.24 0.22 0.32 0.17 0.38Control Delay 61.5 3.7 1.1 20.0 39.6 7.6 72.8 47.6 10.9 50.6 46.3 8.5Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 61.5 3.7 1.1 20.0 39.6 7.6 72.8 47.6 10.9 50.6 46.3 8.5LOS E A A C D A E D B D D AApproach Delay 14.2 35.8 52.8 29.3Approach LOS B D D C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 81.2 (58%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 100Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.86Intersection Signal Delay: 26.4 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 103.3% ICU Level of Service GAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 40: Hurontario Street & Robert Speck Parkway

Page 52: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Hurontario Street 50: Centre View Drive & Rathburn Road Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 5

Lane Group SBL SBR SEL SET NWL NWT NWR2 NEL2 NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 98 248 286 251 103 10 103 11 966 165 186Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 3 4 8 2 1 6Permitted Phases 3 4 8 8 2 6Detector Phase 3 3 4 4 8 8 8 2 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 45.0 45.0 5.0 45.0Minimum Split (s) 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 52.0 52.0 8.0 52.0Total Split (s) 42.5 42.5 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 52.0 52.0 13.0 65.0Total Split (%) 30.9% 30.9% 21.8% 21.8% 21.8% 21.8% 21.8% 37.8% 37.8% 9.5% 47.3%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.5 6.5 5.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 2.0 6.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None None None None None Min Min None MinAct Effct Green (s) 23.0 23.0 24.6 23.6 23.6 23.6 23.6 46.2 46.2 62.8 58.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.37 0.37 0.50 0.47v/c Ratio 0.68 0.74 1.07 0.39 0.79 0.04 0.28 0.03 0.69 0.62 0.12Control Delay 58.9 64.0 120.7 47.1 86.3 45.0 10.4 28.2 35.5 28.2 19.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 58.9 64.0 120.7 47.1 86.3 45.0 10.4 28.2 35.5 28.2 19.6LOS E E F D F D B C D C BApproach Delay 61.4 86.1 48.2 35.4 23.6Approach LOS E F D D C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 137.5Actuated Cycle Length: 124.4Natural Cycle: 105Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.07Intersection Signal Delay: 48.9 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 134.2% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 50: Centre View Drive & Rathburn Road

Page 53: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Hurontario Street 10: Hurontario Street & Hwy 403 E-N/S Ramp Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SET NWT SWL SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 2248 2131 587 611Turn Type PermProtected Phases 6 2 8Permitted Phases 8Detector Phase 6 2 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 70.0 70.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 77.0 77.0 14.0 14.0Total Split (s) 77.0 77.0 63.0 63.0Total Split (%) 55.0% 55.0% 45.0% 45.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 74.9 74.9 54.1 54.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.39 0.39v/c Ratio 0.93 0.92 0.78 0.92Control Delay 21.0 27.1 42.8 68.1Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 21.0 27.1 42.8 68.1LOS C C D EApproach Delay 21.0 27.1 50.8Approach LOS C C D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 8.4 (6%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 125Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.93Intersection Signal Delay: 29.7 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 92.7% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 10: Hurontario Street & Hwy 403 E-N/S Ramp

Timings Hurontario Street 20: Hurontario Street & Sherwoodtowne Boulevard Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SET NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 2656 3333 18 403 91 162 324Turn Type Perm Perm Perm customProtected Phases 6 2 4Permitted Phases 2 4 4 8Detector Phase 6 2 2 4 4 4 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 105.0 105.0 105.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 112.0 112.0 112.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0Total Split (s) 112.0 112.0 112.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0Total Split (%) 80.0% 80.0% 80.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -2.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 4.5 5.0 4.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 106.0 106.0 106.0 24.0 23.5 23.0 24.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.17v/c Ratio 0.79 0.87 0.02 1.05 1.03 0.69 1.46Control Delay 7.8 17.6 2.3 123.7 120.3 68.2 267.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 7.8 17.7 2.3 123.7 120.3 68.2 267.9LOS A B A F F E FApproach Delay 7.8 17.7 108.7Approach LOS A B F

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 127.4 (91%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 150Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.46Intersection Signal Delay: 34.1 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 133.2% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 20: Hurontario Street & Sherwoodtowne Boulevard

Page 54: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Hurontario Street 30: Square One Drive & Hurontario Street Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group WBR SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER2Lane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 536 2033 161 13 2668 147 52Turn Type Free Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 2 4Permitted Phases Free 6 2 4Detector Phase 6 6 2 2 4 4Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 86.8 86.8 86.8 86.8 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 93.8 93.8 93.8 93.8 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 0.0 93.8 93.8 93.8 93.8 46.2 46.2Total Split (%) 0.0% 67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 33.0% 33.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 140.0 109.1 109.1 109.1 109.1 18.9 18.9Actuated g/C Ratio 1.00 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.14 0.14v/c Ratio 0.40 0.56 0.14 0.15 0.73 0.66 0.26Control Delay 0.8 8.3 3.6 5.0 11.7 70.1 47.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0Total Delay 0.8 8.7 3.6 5.0 11.8 70.2 47.6LOS A A A A B E DApproach Delay 8.4 11.8 64.2Approach LOS A B E

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 68.6 (49%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.73Intersection Signal Delay: 11.3 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 154.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 30: Square One Drive & Hurontario Street

Timings Hurontario Street 40: Hurontario Street & Robert Speck Parkway Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 4

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 177 1571 337 105 1754 22 386 186 179 141 141 540Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8Permitted Phases 6 6 2 2 4 4 8 8Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 3 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 40.6 40.6 5.0 40.6 40.6 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 11.0 47.6 47.6 11.0 47.6 47.6 9.0 16.0 16.0 9.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 25.2 47.6 47.6 25.2 47.6 47.6 21.0 53.2 53.2 14.0 46.2 46.2Total Split (%) 18.0% 34.0% 34.0% 18.0% 34.0% 34.0% 15.0% 38.0% 38.0% 10.0% 33.0% 33.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 4.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max None None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 75.0 58.4 58.4 67.3 54.5 54.5 55.8 37.9 37.9 45.7 30.8 30.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.42 0.42 0.48 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.27 0.27 0.33 0.22 0.22v/c Ratio 0.72 0.77 0.44 0.58 0.92 0.04 0.76 0.21 0.34 0.34 0.19 0.92Control Delay 56.6 23.8 4.8 39.5 50.2 18.2 42.5 38.3 6.2 28.6 43.0 42.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 56.6 23.8 4.8 39.5 50.2 18.2 42.5 38.3 6.2 28.6 43.0 42.9LOS E C A D D B D D A C D DApproach Delay 23.5 49.2 32.8 40.5Approach LOS C D C D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 93.8 (67%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 95Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.92Intersection Signal Delay: 36.0 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 102.9% ICU Level of Service GAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 40: Hurontario Street & Robert Speck Parkway

Page 55: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Hurontario Street 50: Centre View Drive & Rathburn Road Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 5

Lane Group SBL SBR SEL SET NWL NWT NWR2 NEL2 NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 150 460 38 13 233 85 179 12 696 343 1119Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 3 4 8 2 1 6Permitted Phases 3 4 8 8 2 6Detector Phase 3 3 4 4 8 8 8 2 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 45.0 45.0 5.0 45.0Minimum Split (s) 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 52.0 52.0 8.0 52.0Total Split (s) 42.5 42.5 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 52.0 52.0 13.0 65.0Total Split (%) 30.9% 30.9% 21.8% 21.8% 21.8% 21.8% 21.8% 37.8% 37.8% 9.5% 47.3%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 1.0 6.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min Min None MinAct Effct Green (s) 32.7 32.7 23.5 23.5 24.5 23.5 23.5 46.0 46.0 64.1 59.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.24 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.34 0.34 0.48 0.44v/c Ratio 0.84 0.89 0.17 0.02 1.10 0.28 0.44 0.16 0.53 1.11 0.78Control Delay 66.7 75.4 50.8 47.5 139.7 51.9 9.9 38.8 36.4 109.3 37.2Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 66.7 75.4 50.8 47.5 139.7 51.9 9.9 38.8 36.4 109.3 37.2LOS E E D D F D A D D F DApproach Delay 71.0 50.0 78.0 36.4 54.0Approach LOS E D E D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 137.5Actuated Cycle Length: 134.3Natural Cycle: 135Control Type: Semi Act-UncoordMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.11Intersection Signal Delay: 56.3 Intersection LOS: EIntersection Capacity Utilization 135.0% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 50: Centre View Drive & Rathburn Road

Page 56: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Central Parkway East1: Central Parkway East & Laurentian Avenue Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 3 868 11 1195 17 2 67 1Turn Type Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8Detector Phase 6 6 2 2 4 4 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 64.4 64.4 64.4 64.4 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 70.4 70.4 70.4 70.4 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 70.4 70.4 70.4 70.4 39.6 39.6 39.6 39.6Total Split (%) 64.0% 64.0% 64.0% 64.0% 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 36.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 89.7 89.7 89.7 89.7 11.5 11.5Actuated g/C Ratio 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.10 0.10v/c Ratio 0.01 0.32 0.03 0.45 0.21 0.53Control Delay 3.7 3.9 1.3 1.5 28.7 53.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 3.7 3.9 1.3 1.5 28.7 53.6LOS A A A A C DApproach Delay 3.9 1.5 28.7 53.6Approach LOS A A C D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 110Actuated Cycle Length: 110Offset: 59.4 (54%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.53Intersection Signal Delay: 4.8 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 72.3% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Central Parkway East & Laurentian Avenue

Timings Central Parkway East2: Central Parkway East & Rathburn Road Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 287 519 147 50 778 76 208 343 29 59 241 245Turn Type pm+pt Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 1 6 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 6 2 2 4 4 8 8Detector Phase 1 6 6 2 2 2 4 4 4 8 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 51.3 51.3 35.9 35.9 35.9 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 8.0 58.3 58.3 42.9 42.9 42.9 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 15.4 58.3 58.3 42.9 42.9 42.9 51.7 51.7 51.7 51.7 51.7 51.7Total Split (%) 14.0% 53.0% 53.0% 39.0% 39.0% 39.0% 47.0% 47.0% 47.0% 47.0% 47.0% 47.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 72.2 68.2 68.2 48.3 48.3 48.3 27.8 27.8 27.8 27.8 27.8 27.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.62 0.62 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25v/c Ratio 0.62 0.25 0.15 0.14 0.53 0.11 0.78 0.41 0.07 0.29 0.29 0.44Control Delay 16.6 11.9 5.0 24.6 26.2 6.1 56.1 34.4 9.0 33.5 32.5 5.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 16.6 11.9 5.0 24.6 26.2 6.1 56.1 34.4 9.0 33.5 32.5 5.7LOS B B A C C A E C A C C AApproach Delay 12.3 24.4 40.9 20.5Approach LOS B C D C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 110Actuated Cycle Length: 110Offset: 18.7 (17%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 80Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.78Intersection Signal Delay: 23.0 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 114.2% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 2: Central Parkway East & Rathburn Road

Page 57: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Central Parkway East1: Central Parkway East & Laurentian Avenue Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 15 1368 16 1218 7 1 32 3Turn Type Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8Detector Phase 6 6 2 2 4 4 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 73.2 73.2 73.2 73.2 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 79.2 79.2 79.2 79.2 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 79.2 79.2 79.2 79.2 40.8 40.8 40.8 40.8Total Split (%) 66.0% 66.0% 66.0% 66.0% 34.0% 34.0% 34.0% 34.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 102.2 102.2 102.2 102.2 9.0 9.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.08 0.08v/c Ratio 0.06 0.49 0.07 0.46 0.16 0.37Control Delay 2.9 3.8 1.4 1.6 33.0 50.8Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 2.9 3.8 1.4 1.6 33.0 50.8LOS A A A A C DApproach Delay 3.7 1.6 33.1 50.8Approach LOS A A C D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 120Actuated Cycle Length: 120Offset: 42 (35%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 95Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.49Intersection Signal Delay: 3.7 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 78.5% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Central Parkway East & Laurentian Avenue

Timings Central Parkway East2: Central Parkway East & Rathburn Road Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 144 1059 209 81 736 42 187 273 62 89 1010 384Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 8Permitted Phases 6 6 2 2 4 4 8 8Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 8 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 41.0 41.0 5.0 35.0 35.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 8.0 48.0 48.0 8.0 42.0 42.0 8.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 15.6 48.0 48.0 9.6 42.0 42.0 10.8 62.4 62.4 51.6 51.6 51.6Total Split (%) 13.0% 40.0% 40.0% 8.0% 35.0% 35.0% 9.0% 52.0% 52.0% 43.0% 43.0% 43.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max None None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 56.4 43.1 43.1 49.7 39.0 39.0 57.1 53.1 53.1 42.3 42.3 42.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.47 0.36 0.36 0.41 0.32 0.32 0.48 0.44 0.44 0.35 0.35 0.35v/c Ratio 0.53 0.89 0.32 0.51 0.68 0.08 1.10 0.19 0.09 0.26 0.86 0.58Control Delay 27.5 48.2 13.9 29.7 39.6 9.3 121.9 20.2 4.6 29.0 44.0 16.3Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 27.5 48.2 13.9 29.7 39.6 9.3 121.9 20.2 4.6 29.0 44.0 16.3LOS C D B C D A F C A C D BApproach Delay 41.0 37.2 54.7 35.9Approach LOS D D D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 120Actuated Cycle Length: 120Offset: 3.6 (3%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 100Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.10Intersection Signal Delay: 40.2 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 95.3% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 2: Central Parkway East & Rathburn Road

Page 58: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Cawthra Road1: Cawthra Road & Eastgate Parkway Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 185 830 157 173 999 329 1416 334 38 462 247Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt pm+pt Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8Permitted Phases 6 6 2 4 4 8 8Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 7 4 4 3 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 49.8 49.8 5.0 49.8 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 8.0 58.8 58.8 8.0 58.8 8.0 17.0 17.0 8.0 17.0 17.0Total Split (s) 12.6 58.8 58.8 12.6 58.8 25.2 58.8 58.8 9.8 43.4 43.4Total Split (%) 9.0% 42.0% 42.0% 9.0% 42.0% 18.0% 42.0% 42.0% 7.0% 31.0% 31.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 6.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 6.0All-Red Time (s) 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.5 0.0 0.0 -1.0 -2.0 0.0 -4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 1.5 9.0 9.0 2.0 7.0 3.0 5.0 9.0 3.0 9.0 9.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 68.5 49.9 49.9 67.3 51.8 65.6 55.8 51.8 48.5 36.0 36.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.36 0.36 0.48 0.37 0.47 0.40 0.37 0.35 0.26 0.26v/c Ratio 0.95 0.67 0.29 0.64 0.92 0.73 0.97 0.48 0.28 0.53 0.46Control Delay 84.3 41.4 6.7 29.4 47.8 34.9 59.2 11.7 26.9 47.6 13.5Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 84.3 41.4 6.7 29.4 47.8 34.9 59.2 11.7 26.9 47.6 13.5LOS F D A C D C E B C D BApproach Delay 43.5 45.4 47.7 35.3Approach LOS D D D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 128.8 (92%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 125Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.97Intersection Signal Delay: 44.5 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 110.8% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Cawthra Road & Eastgate Parkway

Page 59: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Cawthra Road1: Cawthra Road & Eastgate Parkway Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 139 964 169 177 1044 142 616 118 196 1075 91Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt pm+pt Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8Permitted Phases 6 6 2 4 4 8 8Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 7 4 4 3 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 55.4 55.4 5.0 51.2 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 8.0 64.4 64.4 8.0 60.2 8.0 17.0 17.0 8.0 17.0 17.0Total Split (s) 18.2 64.4 64.4 14.0 60.2 9.8 49.0 49.0 12.6 51.8 51.8Total Split (%) 13.0% 46.0% 46.0% 10.0% 43.0% 7.0% 35.0% 35.0% 9.0% 37.0% 37.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 6.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 6.0All-Red Time (s) 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 9.0 9.0 3.0 9.0 1.5 9.0 9.0 3.0 7.0 9.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 73.3 55.7 55.7 71.1 54.4 55.8 40.0 40.0 58.4 44.8 42.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.40 0.40 0.51 0.39 0.40 0.29 0.29 0.42 0.32 0.31v/c Ratio 0.64 0.71 0.25 0.71 0.83 1.03 0.64 0.24 0.72 0.98 0.18Control Delay 33.2 38.7 6.9 37.0 41.5 115.3 47.0 7.3 43.4 69.0 12.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 33.2 38.7 6.9 37.0 41.5 115.3 47.0 7.3 43.4 69.0 12.7LOS C D A D D F D A D E BApproach Delay 33.9 40.9 52.7 61.6Approach LOS C D D E

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 112 (80%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 120Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.03Intersection Signal Delay: 47.1 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 113.6% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 1: Cawthra Road & Eastgate Parkway

Page 60: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Tomken Road6: Tomken Road & Eastgate Parkway Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 73 533 100 214 954 281 1442 45 12 434 174Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt pm+pt Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 4 3 8 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 2 6 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 3 8 5 2 2 6 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 5.0 46.6 46.6 36.1 36.1 36.1Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 8.0 15.0 8.0 54.6 54.6 44.1 44.1 44.1Total Split (s) 39.9 39.9 39.9 10.5 50.4 10.5 54.6 54.6 44.1 44.1 44.1Total Split (%) 38.0% 38.0% 38.0% 10.0% 48.0% 10.0% 52.0% 52.0% 42.0% 42.0% 42.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 31.4 30.4 30.4 44.9 40.9 54.1 50.1 49.1 38.6 38.6 38.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.29 0.29 0.43 0.39 0.52 0.48 0.47 0.37 0.37 0.37v/c Ratio 1.00 0.59 0.22 0.73 0.82 0.64 0.94 0.07 0.18 0.39 0.31Control Delay 138.8 31.2 5.4 37.4 37.4 24.1 38.9 7.1 32.0 26.5 17.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 138.8 31.2 5.4 37.4 37.4 24.1 38.9 7.1 32.0 26.5 17.4LOS F C A D D C D A C C BApproach Delay 38.6 37.4 35.7 24.0Approach LOS D D D C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 105Actuated Cycle Length: 105Offset: 56.7 (54%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 100Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.00Intersection Signal Delay: 35.0 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 128.9% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 6: Tomken Road & Eastgate Parkway

Page 61: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Tomken Road6: Tomken Road & Eastgate Parkway Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 46 1182 247 68 711 155 556 86 235 1047 145Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt pm+pt Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 3 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 2 6 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 3 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 5.0 36.4 36.4 5.0 36.4 36.4Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 8.0 15.0 8.0 44.4 44.4 8.0 44.4 44.4Total Split (s) 51.6 51.6 51.6 12.0 63.6 12.0 44.4 44.4 12.0 44.4 44.4Total Split (%) 43.0% 43.0% 43.0% 10.0% 53.0% 10.0% 37.0% 37.0% 10.0% 37.0% 37.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 6.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 8.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 45.2 46.2 45.2 58.2 54.2 52.6 38.4 38.4 53.0 39.6 38.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.48 0.45 0.44 0.32 0.32 0.44 0.33 0.32v/c Ratio 0.23 0.94 0.37 0.41 0.52 0.84 0.55 0.16 0.72 0.98 0.26Control Delay 24.2 44.2 4.5 27.0 28.1 58.8 36.6 6.9 36.2 63.5 9.2Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 24.2 44.2 4.5 27.0 28.1 58.8 36.6 6.9 36.2 63.5 9.2LOS C D A C C E D A D E AApproach Delay 37.0 28.0 37.7 53.5Approach LOS D C D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 120Actuated Cycle Length: 120Offset: 31.2 (26%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 100Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.98Intersection Signal Delay: 40.7 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 98.5% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 6: Tomken Road & Eastgate Parkway

Page 62: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Dixie Road8: Dixie Road & Eastgate Parkway Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 15 631 122 306 1551 500 301 1077 219 34 190 15Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Perm pm+pt Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 5 2 7 4 8Permitted Phases 6 6 2 4 4 8 8Detector Phase 6 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 8 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 41.0 41.0 41.0 8.0 64.8 64.8 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 16.0 72.8 72.8 8.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 23.8 72.8 72.8 18.2 67.2 67.2 49.0 49.0 49.0Total Split (%) 35.0% 35.0% 35.0% 17.0% 52.0% 52.0% 13.0% 48.0% 48.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max None None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 48.8 48.8 48.8 15.4 72.2 72.2 56.8 51.8 51.8 33.6 33.6 33.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.11 0.52 0.52 0.41 0.37 0.37 0.24 0.24 0.24v/c Ratio 0.18 0.40 0.23 0.83 0.62 0.61 0.61 0.84 0.33 0.62 0.24 0.04Control Delay 36.1 30.8 4.5 75.6 21.7 22.3 35.3 46.5 8.8 91.9 42.4 15.1Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 36.1 30.8 4.5 75.6 21.7 22.3 35.3 46.5 8.8 91.9 42.4 15.1LOS D C A E C C D D A F D BApproach Delay 26.7 28.8 39.2 47.8Approach LOS C C D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 8.4 (6%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.84Intersection Signal Delay: 32.8 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 151.3% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 8: Dixie Road & Eastgate Parkway

Timings Dixie Road21: Dixie Road & South Gateway Road Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NWR NEL NET SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 108 731 21 1798 46 13 2 9 8 24Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 2 2 4 8 8Detector Phase 6 6 2 2 2 4 4 8 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 84.0 84.0 84.0 84.0 84.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0Total Split (%) 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 121.4 120.6 120.6 120.6 120.6 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.87 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06v/c Ratio 0.81 0.20 0.05 0.44 0.04 0.21 0.26 0.14 0.10 0.34Control Delay 58.4 1.9 1.2 1.1 0.2 69.0 27.6 66.1 63.4 47.2Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 58.4 1.9 1.2 1.2 0.2 69.0 27.6 66.1 63.4 47.2LOS E A A A A E C E E DApproach Delay 9.1 1.2 40.7 54.4Approach LOS A A D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 2.8 (2%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.81Intersection Signal Delay: 4.9 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 164.2% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 21: Dixie Road & South Gateway Road

Page 63: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Dixie Road83: Dixie Road & Crestlawn Dr Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 21 790 135 1694 99 1 5 1Turn Type Perm pm+pt Perm PermProtected Phases 6 5 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8Detector Phase 6 6 5 2 4 4 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 8.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 88.2 88.2 9.8 98.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0Total Split (%) 63.0% 63.0% 7.0% 70.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes YesRecall Mode C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 100.2 100.2 113.8 109.8 16.2 16.2 16.2 16.2Actuated g/C Ratio 0.72 0.72 0.81 0.78 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12v/c Ratio 0.19 0.29 0.28 0.44 0.67 0.25 0.06 0.17Control Delay 12.8 7.5 2.6 2.6 79.4 15.7 53.4 23.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 12.8 7.5 2.6 2.6 79.4 15.7 53.4 23.0LOS B A A A E B D CApproach Delay 7.6 2.6 56.4 28.9Approach LOS A A E C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 40Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.67Intersection Signal Delay: 7.2 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 69.2% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 83: Dixie Road & Crestlawn Dr

Page 64: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Dixie Road8: Dixie Road & Eastgate Parkway Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 15 1848 320 195 831 65 174 185 274 422 912 38Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 6 5 2 7 4 3 8Permitted Phases 6 6 2 4 4 8 8Detector Phase 6 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 3 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 48.0 48.0 48.0 8.0 66.2 66.2 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 56.0 56.0 56.0 16.0 74.2 74.2 8.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 56.0 56.0 56.0 18.2 74.2 74.2 16.8 49.0 49.0 16.8 49.0 49.0Total Split (%) 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 13.0% 53.0% 53.0% 12.0% 35.0% 35.0% 12.0% 35.0% 35.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 4.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 8.0 6.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 8.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes YesRecall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max None None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 49.2 51.2 49.2 10.5 67.7 67.7 58.3 39.5 39.5 58.4 40.6 39.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.37 0.35 0.08 0.48 0.48 0.42 0.28 0.28 0.42 0.29 0.28v/c Ratio 0.07 1.02 0.48 0.77 0.37 0.08 0.84 0.19 0.48 0.77 0.90 0.09Control Delay 22.3 63.2 12.1 81.1 21.9 3.3 63.0 38.4 16.0 41.8 60.0 11.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 22.3 63.2 12.1 81.1 21.9 3.3 63.0 38.4 16.0 41.8 60.0 11.0LOS C E B F C A E D B D E BApproach Delay 55.4 31.4 35.5 53.0Approach LOS E C D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 44.8 (32%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 120Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.02Intersection Signal Delay: 47.4 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 134.1% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 8: Dixie Road & Eastgate Parkway

Timings Dixie Road21: Dixie Road & South Gateway Road Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NWR NEL NET SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 142 2031 36 944 62 39 1 93 8 72Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 2 2 4 8 8Detector Phase 6 6 2 2 2 4 4 8 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 84.0 84.0 84.0 84.0 84.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0Total Split (%) 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 109.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 109.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11v/c Ratio 0.41 0.57 0.45 0.27 0.06 0.27 0.34 0.66 0.05 0.32Control Delay 7.0 4.8 35.4 3.6 0.5 58.9 52.8 79.3 52.4 14.5Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 7.0 4.8 35.4 3.6 0.5 58.9 52.8 79.3 52.4 14.5LOS A A D A A E D E D BApproach Delay 4.9 4.5 55.3 51.1Approach LOS A A E D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.66Intersection Signal Delay: 8.4 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 165.0% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 21: Dixie Road & South Gateway Road

Page 65: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Dixie Road83: Dixie Road & Crestlawn Dr Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 28 2002 76 970 145 6 5 5Turn Type Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8Detector Phase 6 6 2 2 4 4 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 93.8 93.8 93.8 93.8 46.2 46.2 46.2 46.2Total Split (%) 67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 102.3 102.3 102.3 102.3 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17v/c Ratio 0.14 0.59 0.94 0.29 0.66 0.78 0.06 0.12Control Delay 9.1 10.4 122.2 4.3 67.7 71.6 46.2 22.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 9.1 10.4 122.2 4.3 67.7 71.6 46.2 22.6LOS A B F A E E D CApproach Delay 10.4 12.8 70.0 26.8Approach LOS B B E C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 60Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.94Intersection Signal Delay: 17.1 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 79.6% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 83: Dixie Road & Crestlawn Dr

Page 66: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eastgate Parkway28: Eastgate Parkway & Fieldgate Drive Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 93 112 12 1516 16 3 122 7Turn Type pm+pt Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 1 6 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8Detector Phase 1 6 2 2 4 4 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 70.0 59.0 59.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 8.0 77.0 66.0 66.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 11.0 77.0 66.0 66.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0Total Split (%) 10.0% 70.0% 60.0% 60.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 74.0 70.0 59.7 59.7 26.0 26.0 26.0 28.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.64 0.54 0.54 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.25v/c Ratio 0.53 0.07 0.02 0.89 0.31 0.02 0.40 1.10Control Delay 20.2 7.1 12.1 29.6 51.8 23.3 39.7 101.1Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 20.2 7.1 12.1 29.6 51.8 23.3 39.7 101.1LOS C A B C D C D FApproach Delay 12.6 29.5 42.6 89.5Approach LOS B C D F

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 110Actuated Cycle Length: 110Offset: 61.6 (56%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 115Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.10Intersection Signal Delay: 43.7 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 119.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 28: Eastgate Parkway & Fieldgate Drive

Timings Eastgate Parkway31: Eastgate Parkway & Tahoe Boulevard Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NWR SWL SWT ø4Lane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 113 193 1 1691 358 29 0Turn Type pm+pt Perm Perm ProtProtected Phases 1 6 2 3 8 4Permitted Phases 6 2 2Detector Phase 1 6 2 2 2 3 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 46.9 37.0 37.0 37.0 5.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 8.0 53.9 44.0 44.0 44.0 10.0 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 9.9 53.9 44.0 44.0 44.0 19.8 56.1 36.3Total Split (%) 9.0% 49.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 18.0% 51.0% 33%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 98.0 96.8 82.8 82.8 82.8 8.3 8.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.89 0.88 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.08 0.07v/c Ratio 0.41 0.07 0.00 0.46 0.29 0.12 0.09Control Delay 6.1 1.8 8.0 7.7 3.5 47.5 0.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 6.1 1.8 8.0 7.7 3.5 47.5 0.7LOS A A A A A D AApproach Delay 3.4 7.0 28.2Approach LOS A A C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 110Actuated Cycle Length: 110Offset: 75.9 (69%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 80Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.46Intersection Signal Delay: 6.9 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 94.1% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 31: Eastgate Parkway & Tahoe Boulevard

Page 67: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eastgate Parkway39: Creekbank Road & Eglinton Avenue East Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 66 46 126 884 699 311 1231 177 82 530 169Turn Type Perm Perm Free pm+pt Perm Prot PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 Free 2 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 54.6 54.6 7.0 63.0 63.0Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 61.6 61.6 12.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (s) 57.4 57.4 57.4 57.4 0.0 12.6 61.6 61.6 21.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (%) 41.0% 41.0% 41.0% 41.0% 0.0% 9.0% 44.0% 44.0% 15.0% 50.0% 50.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 4.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 45.2 43.2 43.2 43.2 140.0 81.5 67.9 67.9 8.9 69.2 69.2Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.31 0.31 0.31 1.00 0.58 0.48 0.48 0.06 0.49 0.49v/c Ratio 0.97 0.11 0.34 0.83 0.45 0.59 0.52 0.22 0.38 0.23 0.22Control Delay 145.0 15.4 38.9 51.6 0.9 18.2 23.8 2.2 70.6 19.8 13.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 145.0 15.4 38.9 51.6 0.9 18.2 23.8 2.2 70.6 19.8 13.0LOS F B D D A B C A E B BApproach Delay 66.0 29.9 20.5 23.7Approach LOS E C C C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 2.8 (2%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 115Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.97Intersection Signal Delay: 26.5 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 121.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 39: Creekbank Road & Eglinton Avenue East

Page 68: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eastgate Parkway28: Eastgate Parkway & Fieldgate Drive Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 696 1330 4 173 19 14 33 1Turn Type pm+pt Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 1 6 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8Detector Phase 1 6 2 2 4 4 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 70.0 59.0 59.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 8.0 77.0 66.0 66.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 11.0 77.0 66.0 66.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0Total Split (%) 10.0% 70.0% 60.0% 60.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 90.7 86.7 59.0 59.0 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.82 0.79 0.54 0.54 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08v/c Ratio 0.78 0.55 0.03 0.17 0.23 0.16 0.33 0.47Control Delay 14.3 4.2 12.8 8.7 52.3 35.0 54.8 15.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 14.3 4.3 12.8 8.7 52.3 35.0 54.8 15.9LOS B A B A D C D BApproach Delay 7.7 8.7 42.9 26.0Approach LOS A A D C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 110Actuated Cycle Length: 110Offset: 27.5 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 95Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.78Intersection Signal Delay: 9.4 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 133.5% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 28: Eastgate Parkway & Fieldgate Drive

Timings Eastgate Parkway31: Eastgate Parkway & Tahoe Boulevard Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NWR NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 12 1569 3 244 40 6 0 446 1Turn Type pm+pt Perm Perm Perm ProtProtected Phases 1 6 2 4 3 8Permitted Phases 6 2 2 4Detector Phase 1 6 2 2 2 4 4 3 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 46.9 37.0 37.0 37.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 8.0 53.9 44.0 44.0 44.0 15.0 15.0 10.0 15.0Total Split (s) 9.9 53.9 44.0 44.0 44.0 22.0 22.0 34.1 56.1Total Split (%) 9.0% 49.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 20.0% 31.0% 51.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 72.4 68.4 64.6 64.6 64.6 8.0 8.0 20.6 27.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.62 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.07 0.07 0.19 0.25v/c Ratio 0.02 0.77 0.04 0.09 0.05 0.06 0.12 0.75 0.22Control Delay 10.1 20.6 17.7 12.0 4.8 48.8 5.2 49.4 6.3Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 10.1 20.6 17.7 12.0 4.8 48.8 5.2 49.4 6.3LOS B C B B A D A D AApproach Delay 20.5 11.1 17.4 41.8Approach LOS C B B D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 110Actuated Cycle Length: 110Offset: 40.7 (37%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 80Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.77Intersection Signal Delay: 24.1 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 74.4% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 31: Eastgate Parkway & Tahoe Boulevard

Page 69: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eastgate Parkway39: Creekbank Road & Eglinton Avenue East Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 183 702 80 168 97 46 631 225 654 1593 100Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Prot PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 8 2 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 40.6 40.6 7.0 64.4 64.4Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 47.6 47.6 12.0 71.4 71.4Total Split (s) 57.4 57.4 57.4 57.4 57.4 11.2 47.6 47.6 35.0 71.4 71.4Total Split (%) 41.0% 41.0% 41.0% 41.0% 41.0% 8.0% 34.0% 34.0% 25.0% 51.0% 51.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 8.0 8.0 6.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 4.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 44.6 44.6 46.6 44.6 44.6 57.1 46.1 46.1 30.3 72.0 72.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.32 0.32 0.41 0.33 0.33 0.22 0.51 0.51v/c Ratio 0.50 0.82 1.04 0.16 0.18 0.29 0.40 0.42 0.91 0.64 0.13Control Delay 42.7 48.9 157.2 33.6 6.2 23.8 40.3 35.2 84.9 26.7 10.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 42.7 48.9 157.2 33.6 6.2 23.8 40.3 35.2 84.9 26.7 10.6LOS D D F C A C D D F C BApproach Delay 47.9 54.5 38.2 42.2Approach LOS D D D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 33.6 (24%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 130Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.04Intersection Signal Delay: 43.6 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 110.4% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 39: Creekbank Road & Eglinton Avenue East

Page 70: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eglinton Avenue40: Tahoe Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue East Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 12 3 9 13 78 1816 103 252 761 218Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Prot PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 58.8 58.8 7.0 57.4 57.4Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 65.8 65.8 12.0 64.4 64.4Total Split (s) 43.4 43.4 43.4 43.4 32.2 65.8 65.8 30.8 64.4 64.4Total Split (%) 31.0% 31.0% 31.0% 31.0% 23.0% 47.0% 47.0% 22.0% 46.0% 46.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 105.3 94.8 94.8 16.0 106.3 106.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.75 0.68 0.68 0.11 0.76 0.76v/c Ratio 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.55 0.15 0.55 0.10 0.67 0.21 0.18Control Delay 64.2 33.1 63.8 27.2 1.9 6.4 0.8 67.8 5.1 0.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 64.2 33.1 63.8 27.2 1.9 6.4 0.8 67.8 5.1 0.9LOS E C E C A A A E A AApproach Delay 46.9 30.1 6.0 17.2Approach LOS D C A B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 26.6 (19%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 95Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.67Intersection Signal Delay: 11.2 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 80.2% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 40: Tahoe Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue East

Timings Eglinton Avenue46: Spectrum Way & Eglinton Avenue West Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 16 28 39 57 94 273 1491 29 1136Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 5 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 6.0 57.0 49.0 49.0Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 64.0 56.0 56.0Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 8.0 64.0 56.0 56.0Total Split (%) 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 8.0% 64.0% 56.0% 56.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 1.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 17.7 17.7 17.7 17.7 74.3 68.3 60.3 60.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.74 0.68 0.60 0.60v/c Ratio 0.10 0.09 0.12 0.70 0.92 0.69 0.24 0.63Control Delay 33.4 32.6 11.0 47.8 48.3 12.2 25.6 21.8Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 33.4 32.6 11.0 47.8 48.3 12.2 25.6 21.8LOS C C B D D B C CApproach Delay 22.6 47.8 17.3 21.9Approach LOS C D B C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 44 (44%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 85Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.92Intersection Signal Delay: 20.9 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 123.6% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 46: Spectrum Way & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 71: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eglinton Avenue47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 22 12 30 23 349 1132 75 1252Turn Type Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 63.0 63.0 63.0 63.0Minimum Split (s) 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (%) 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 81.6 80.0 80.0 80.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.82 0.80 0.80 0.80v/c Ratio 0.28 0.22 0.25 1.33 0.45 0.25 0.49Control Delay 19.5 44.7 26.4 183.7 0.9 3.9 5.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 19.5 44.7 26.4 183.7 0.9 3.9 5.4LOS B D C F A A AApproach Delay 19.5 33.2 41.9 5.3Approach LOS B C D A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 65 (65%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 150Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.33Intersection Signal Delay: 24.6 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 131.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Timings Eglinton Avenue50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 4

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 41 24 37 358 437 275 832 13 1012Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 5 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 10.0 60.0 47.0 47.0Minimum Split (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 13.0 67.0 54.0 54.0Total Split (s) 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 13.0 67.0 54.0 54.0Total Split (%) 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 13.0% 67.0% 54.0% 54.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.5 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.5 7.0 2.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 27.5 26.0 65.0 60.0 47.0 47.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.28 0.26 0.65 0.60 0.47 0.47v/c Ratio 0.27 0.05 0.09 0.97 0.56 0.83 0.44 0.05 0.69Control Delay 35.0 28.2 9.8 77.0 33.7 47.0 7.9 19.1 32.1Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 35.0 28.2 9.8 77.0 33.7 47.0 7.9 19.1 32.1LOS C C A E C D A B CApproach Delay 24.2 51.6 17.0 31.9Approach LOS C D B C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 99 (99%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.97Intersection Signal Delay: 31.5 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 140.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 72: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eglinton Avenue53: Explorer Drive & Eglinton Avenue West Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 5

Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 32 27 139 807 1082Turn Type Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 4 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 2Detector Phase 4 4 5 2 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 9.0 62.0 51.0Minimum Split (s) 17.0 17.0 11.0 69.0 58.0Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 11.0 69.0 58.0Total Split (%) 31.0% 31.0% 11.0% 69.0% 58.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 2.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 2.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 11.0 11.0 84.4 80.8 68.4Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.84 0.81 0.68v/c Ratio 0.09 0.15 0.36 0.31 0.53Control Delay 40.8 16.5 4.6 2.6 8.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 40.8 16.5 4.6 2.6 8.4LOS D B A A AApproach Delay 29.6 2.9 8.4Approach LOS C A A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 25 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.53Intersection Signal Delay: 6.6 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 73.5% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 53: Explorer Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Timings Eglinton Avenue55: Commerce Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue West Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 6

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 110 10 8 6 105 680 53 152 1132 361Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 51.0 51.0 51.0 6.0 60.0 60.0Minimum Split (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 9.0 67.0 67.0Total Split (s) 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 9.0 67.0 67.0Total Split (%) 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 9.0% 67.0% 67.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 61.2 61.2 61.2 74.2 70.2 70.2Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.74 0.70 0.70v/c Ratio 0.62 0.20 0.04 0.07 0.44 0.35 0.06 0.31 0.50 0.32Control Delay 52.6 14.2 33.2 19.7 17.1 9.9 3.3 5.8 8.2 1.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 52.6 14.2 33.2 19.7 17.1 9.9 3.3 5.8 8.2 1.4LOS D B C B B A A A A AApproach Delay 39.5 23.8 10.4 6.5Approach LOS D C B A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 34 (34%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.62Intersection Signal Delay: 10.0 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 122.8% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 55: Commerce Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 73: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eglinton Avenue40: Tahoe Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue East Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 143 26 58 0 10 886 14 153 2217 9Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Prot PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 71.4 71.4 7.0 77.0 77.0Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 78.4 78.4 12.0 84.0 84.0Total Split (s) 43.4 43.4 43.4 43.4 12.6 78.4 78.4 18.2 84.0 84.0Total Split (%) 31.0% 31.0% 31.0% 31.0% 9.0% 56.0% 56.0% 13.0% 60.0% 60.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 22.9 22.9 22.9 22.9 95.1 85.4 85.4 11.8 98.5 98.5Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.68 0.61 0.61 0.08 0.70 0.70v/c Ratio 0.80 0.32 0.31 0.30 0.08 0.32 0.02 0.61 0.70 0.01Control Delay 82.8 18.0 53.2 1.8 10.2 14.8 6.6 71.1 15.1 5.1Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 82.8 18.0 53.2 1.8 10.2 14.8 6.6 71.1 15.1 5.1LOS F B D A B B A E B AApproach Delay 56.5 19.2 14.6 18.7Approach LOS E B B B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 21 (15%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.80Intersection Signal Delay: 20.2 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 92.6% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 40: Tahoe Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue East

Timings Eglinton Avenue46: Spectrum Way & Eglinton Avenue West Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 168 21 297 79 15 34 1037 36 2003Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 57.0 57.0 57.0 57.0Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 64.0 64.0 64.0 64.0Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 64.0 64.0 64.0 64.0Total Split (%) 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 64.0% 64.0% 64.0% 64.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 24.6 24.6 24.6 24.6 61.4 61.4 61.4 63.4Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.63v/c Ratio 0.57 0.05 0.84 0.40 0.58 0.57 0.21 1.00Control Delay 39.5 26.8 53.5 30.8 55.0 13.3 14.1 32.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 39.5 26.8 53.5 30.8 55.0 13.3 14.1 32.6LOS D C D C E B B CApproach Delay 47.5 30.8 14.5 32.3Approach LOS D C B C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 82 (82%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 85Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.00Intersection Signal Delay: 28.9 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 101.3% ICU Level of Service GAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 46: Spectrum Way & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 74: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eglinton Avenue47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 99 50 55 15 57 1132 43 1540Turn Type Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 63.0 63.0 63.0 63.0Minimum Split (s) 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (%) 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 -2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 4.5 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 25.2 22.7 22.7 63.3 63.3 63.3 63.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.23 0.23 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63v/c Ratio 1.13dr 0.75 0.17 0.55 0.55 0.22 0.73Control Delay 49.7 90.3 13.3 29.3 7.7 4.6 8.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 49.7 90.3 13.3 29.3 7.7 4.6 8.9LOS D F B C A A AApproach Delay 49.7 48.1 8.7 8.8Approach LOS D D A A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 84 (84%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.89Intersection Signal Delay: 17.2 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 96.6% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane.

Splits and Phases: 47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Timings Eglinton Avenue50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 4

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 78 483 218 64 45 53 962 125 1319Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 5 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 6.0 60.0 51.0 51.0Minimum Split (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 9.0 67.0 58.0 58.0Total Split (s) 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 9.0 67.0 58.0 58.0Total Split (%) 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 9.0% 67.0% 58.0% 58.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 26.0 28.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 64.0 60.0 52.8 52.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.28 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.64 0.60 0.53 0.53v/c Ratio 0.24 0.95 0.45 0.92 0.07 0.30 0.62 0.77 0.77Control Delay 31.7 66.0 15.6 125.5 22.3 10.7 6.0 36.7 10.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 31.7 66.0 15.6 125.5 22.3 10.7 6.0 36.7 10.9LOS C E B F C B A D BApproach Delay 48.5 75.5 6.1 13.0Approach LOS D E A B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 31 (31%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.95Intersection Signal Delay: 20.2 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 149.6% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 75: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eglinton Avenue53: Explorer Drive & Eglinton Avenue West Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 5

Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 250 118 35 1020 1374Turn Type Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 4 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 2Detector Phase 4 4 5 2 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 6.0 62.0 54.0Minimum Split (s) 17.0 17.0 8.0 69.0 61.0Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 8.0 69.0 61.0Total Split (%) 31.0% 31.0% 8.0% 69.0% 61.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 2.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 2.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 13.6 13.6 78.4 73.4 68.4Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.78 0.73 0.68v/c Ratio 0.59 0.39 0.14 0.43 0.64Control Delay 45.7 10.5 2.3 3.6 14.2Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 45.7 10.5 2.3 3.6 14.2LOS D B A A BApproach Delay 34.4 3.5 14.2Approach LOS C A B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 89 (89%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.64Intersection Signal Delay: 12.8 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 71.7% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 53: Explorer Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Timings Eglinton Avenue55: Commerce Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue West Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 6

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 827 19 54 6 17 1241 12 20 1223 68Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 26.0 26.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 5.0 38.0 38.0Minimum Split (s) 17.0 17.0 33.0 33.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 8.0 45.0 45.0Total Split (s) 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 8.0 45.0 45.0Total Split (%) 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 37.0% 37.0% 37.0% 8.0% 45.0% 45.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.5 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 4.5 7.0 3.0 5.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 51.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 34.8 37.3 34.8 42.0 40.0 38.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.51 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.35 0.37 0.35 0.42 0.40 0.38v/c Ratio 1.25 0.19 0.10 0.11 0.22 0.99 0.02 0.12 0.91 0.12Control Delay 149.4 14.2 14.9 4.0 30.7 48.5 14.3 18.7 39.1 5.5Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 149.4 14.2 14.9 4.0 30.7 48.5 14.3 18.7 39.1 5.5LOS F B B A C D B B D AApproach Delay 130.1 8.1 47.9 37.1Approach LOS F A D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 99 (99%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 120Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.25Intersection Signal Delay: 64.0 Intersection LOS: EIntersection Capacity Utilization 95.8% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 55: Commerce Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 76: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Renforth Drive58: Renforth Drive & Eglinton Avenue West Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 67 181 827 237 650 450 272 80 79 581 516Turn Type Perm pm+ov pm+pt Prot Perm Prot FreeProtected Phases 4 5 3 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 FreeDetector Phase 4 4 5 3 8 5 2 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 32.0 32.0 6.0 6.0 43.0 6.0 48.0 48.0 6.0 30.0Minimum Split (s) 39.0 39.0 12.0 9.0 50.0 12.0 55.0 55.0 12.0 37.0Total Split (s) 39.0 39.0 33.0 11.0 50.0 33.0 55.0 55.0 15.0 37.0 0.0Total Split (%) 32.5% 32.5% 27.5% 9.2% 41.7% 27.5% 45.8% 45.8% 12.5% 30.8% 0.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 0.0 -1.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 7.0 5.0 1.0 7.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 7.0 4.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes YesRecall Mode Max Max Max None Max Max C-Max C-Max None C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 33.0 32.0 67.0 49.0 43.0 27.0 48.3 48.3 8.7 30.0 120.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.27 0.56 0.41 0.36 0.22 0.40 0.40 0.07 0.25 1.00v/c Ratio 0.64 0.21 0.98 0.50 0.72 0.66 0.21 0.13 0.72 0.75 0.37Control Delay 65.8 35.0 49.3 28.9 36.2 47.2 24.0 5.1 84.5 48.0 0.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 51.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 65.8 35.0 100.3 28.9 36.2 47.2 24.0 5.1 84.5 48.0 0.7LOS E C F C D D C A F D AApproach Delay 87.2 34.6 35.1 29.7Approach LOS F C D C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 120Actuated Cycle Length: 120Offset: 63 (53%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 120Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.98Intersection Signal Delay: 47.0 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 129.2% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 58: Renforth Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Timings Renforth Drive70: Hwy 401 W-N/S Ramp & Renforth Drive Existing AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 510 3 833 1512 105 60 1635Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 4 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 4 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 2 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 52.0 52.0 6.0 62.0Minimum Split (s) 17.0 17.0 17.0 58.0 58.0 10.0 68.0Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 58.0 58.0 10.0 68.0Total Split (%) 38.2% 38.2% 38.2% 52.7% 52.7% 9.1% 61.8%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None C-Max C-Max None C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 36.0 36.0 38.0 54.0 54.0 64.0 62.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.35 0.49 0.49 0.58 0.56v/c Ratio 0.50 0.51 1.44 0.93 0.17 0.47 0.87Control Delay 33.6 33.8 237.1 38.6 8.5 24.0 26.8Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 101.7 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 33.6 33.8 237.1 140.3 8.5 24.0 26.8LOS C C F F A C CApproach Delay 159.5 131.7 26.7Approach LOS F F C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 110Actuated Cycle Length: 110Offset: 31 (28%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 115Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.44Intersection Signal Delay: 101.5 Intersection LOS: FIntersection Capacity Utilization 111.6% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 70: Hwy 401 W-N/S Ramp & Renforth Drive

Page 77: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Renforth Drive58: Renforth Drive & Eglinton Avenue West Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 127 668 386 91 627 671 1016 464 19 834 814Turn Type Perm pm+ov pm+pt Prot Perm Prot FreeProtected Phases 4 5 3 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 FreeDetector Phase 4 4 5 3 8 5 2 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 32.0 32.0 6.0 6.0 43.0 6.0 48.0 48.0 6.0 30.0Minimum Split (s) 39.0 39.0 12.0 9.0 50.0 12.0 55.0 55.0 12.0 37.0Total Split (s) 39.0 39.0 33.0 11.0 50.0 33.0 55.0 55.0 15.0 37.0 0.0Total Split (%) 32.5% 32.5% 27.5% 9.2% 41.7% 27.5% 45.8% 45.8% 12.5% 30.8% 0.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 6.0 3.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode Max Max None None Max None C-Max C-Max None C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 32.3 32.3 66.2 47.0 43.0 27.9 57.3 57.3 7.0 32.1 120.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 0.55 0.39 0.36 0.23 0.48 0.48 0.06 0.27 1.00v/c Ratio 0.74 0.75 0.45 0.47 0.56 0.92 0.64 0.53 0.19 0.96 0.55Control Delay 65.6 46.2 14.0 31.3 32.9 63.3 27.0 9.7 57.4 64.2 1.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 65.6 46.2 14.0 31.3 32.9 63.3 27.0 9.7 57.4 64.2 1.4LOS E D B C C E C A E E AApproach Delay 37.8 32.7 34.6 33.5Approach LOS D C C C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 120Actuated Cycle Length: 120Offset: 52 (43%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 120Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.96Intersection Signal Delay: 34.7 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 130.0% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 58: Renforth Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Timings Renforth Drive70: Hwy 401 W-N/S Ramp & Renforth Drive Existing PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 177 175 497 1835 277 167 1084Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 4 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 4 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 2 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 10.0 38.0 38.0 6.0 48.0Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 44.0 44.0 10.0 54.0Total Split (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 44.0 44.0 10.0 54.0Total Split (%) 32.5% 32.5% 32.5% 55.0% 55.0% 12.5% 67.5%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -2.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 3.0 5.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None C-Max C-Max None C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 21.0 21.0 22.0 40.0 39.0 51.0 49.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.28 0.50 0.49 0.64 0.61v/c Ratio 0.41 0.44 1.03 1.09 0.34 0.72 0.54Control Delay 28.0 28.2 75.2 72.9 5.4 30.6 10.2Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 28.0 28.2 75.2 72.9 5.4 30.6 10.2LOS C C E E A C BApproach Delay 55.7 64.0 12.9Approach LOS E E B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 38 (48%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.09Intersection Signal Delay: 47.2 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 80.3% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 70: Hwy 401 W-N/S Ramp & Renforth Drive

Page 78: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Technical Appendix

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008

TECHNICAL APPENDIX B

Construction Staging Capacity Analysis Output

Page 79: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Hurontario Street 10: Hurontario Street & Hwy 403 E-N/S Ramp Construction Staging AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SET NWT SWL SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 2161 1264 1128 1003Turn Type PermProtected Phases 6 2 8Permitted Phases 8Detector Phase 6 2 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 70.0 70.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 77.0 77.0 14.0 14.0Total Split (s) 77.0 77.0 63.0 63.0Total Split (%) 55.0% 55.0% 45.0% 45.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -2.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 4.0 4.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 71.0 71.0 59.0 59.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.51 0.51 0.42 0.42v/c Ratio 1.06 0.54 1.12 1.21Control Delay 72.0 19.3 101.3 145.8Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 72.0 19.3 101.3 145.8LOS E B F FApproach Delay 72.0 19.3 115.3Approach LOS E B F

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 5.6 (4%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 145Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.21Intersection Signal Delay: 76.6 Intersection LOS: EIntersection Capacity Utilization 109.4% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 10: Hurontario Street & Hwy 403 E-N/S Ramp

Timings Hurontario Street 20: Hurontario Street & Hwy 403 W-N/S Ramp Construction Staging AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SET NWT NEL NERLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 2811 2685 279 155Turn Type customProtected Phases 6 2Permitted Phases 4 4Detector Phase 6 2 4 4Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 91.0 91.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 98.0 98.0 14.0 14.0Total Split (s) 98.0 98.0 42.0 42.0Total Split (%) 70.0% 70.0% 30.0% 30.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 107.6 107.6 21.4 21.4Actuated g/C Ratio 0.77 0.77 0.15 0.15v/c Ratio 0.76 0.96 0.60 0.70Control Delay 9.4 22.8 59.9 71.2Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3Total Delay 9.4 22.8 59.9 71.4LOS A C E EApproach Delay 9.4 22.8 64.0Approach LOS A C E

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 127.4 (91%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 115Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.96Intersection Signal Delay: 19.5 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 94.6% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 20: Hurontario Street & Hwy 403 W-N/S Ramp

Page 80: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Hurontario Street 30: Square One Drive & Hurontario Street Construction Staging AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group WBR SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER2Lane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 577 2400 196 7 1970 138 19Turn Type Free Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 2 4Permitted Phases Free 6 2 4Detector Phase 6 6 2 2 4 4Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 86.8 86.8 86.8 86.8 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 93.8 93.8 93.8 93.8 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 0.0 93.8 93.8 93.8 93.8 46.2 46.2Total Split (%) 0.0% 67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 33.0% 33.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 140.0 109.5 109.5 109.5 109.5 18.5 18.5Actuated g/C Ratio 1.00 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.13 0.13v/c Ratio 0.42 0.66 0.17 0.23 0.54 0.66 0.10Control Delay 0.8 12.4 4.8 20.1 4.6 70.5 46.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 0.8 13.0 4.8 20.1 4.6 70.5 46.4LOS A B A C A E DApproach Delay 12.3 4.7 67.5Approach LOS B A E

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 63 (45%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.66Intersection Signal Delay: 9.9 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 154.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 30: Square One Drive & Hurontario Street

Timings Hurontario Street 40: Hurontario Street & Robert Speck Parkway Construction Staging AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 4

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 505 1459 455 113 1586 165 180 153 67 73 105 211Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 6 2 2 4 4 8 8Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 4 4 4 8 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 63.0 63.0 5.0 49.0 49.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 11.0 70.0 70.0 11.0 56.0 56.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 37.8 70.0 70.0 23.8 56.0 56.0 46.2 46.2 46.2 46.2 46.2 46.2Total Split (%) 27.0% 50.0% 50.0% 17.0% 40.0% 40.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max None None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 101.7 85.3 85.3 62.4 51.0 51.0 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.73 0.61 0.61 0.45 0.36 0.36 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19v/c Ratio 0.82 0.48 0.40 0.50 0.87 0.26 0.76 0.24 0.22 0.32 0.17 0.45Control Delay 54.1 9.2 1.9 23.0 48.0 7.7 72.8 47.6 10.9 50.6 46.3 8.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 54.1 9.2 1.9 23.0 48.0 7.7 72.8 47.6 10.9 50.6 46.3 8.4LOS D A A C D A E D B D D AApproach Delay 17.2 42.9 52.8 26.6Approach LOS B D D C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 81.2 (58%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.87Intersection Signal Delay: 30.2 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 106.3% ICU Level of Service GAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 40: Hurontario Street & Robert Speck Parkway

Page 81: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Hurontario Street 50: Centre View Drive & Rathburn Road Construction Staging AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 5

Lane Group SBL SBR SEL SET NWL NWT NWR2 NEL2 NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 98 248 286 251 103 10 103 11 966 250 207Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 3 4 8 2 1 6Permitted Phases 3 4 8 8 2 6Detector Phase 3 3 4 4 8 8 8 2 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 41.0 41.0 4.0 41.0Minimum Split (s) 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 48.0 48.0 8.0 48.0Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 48.0 48.0 17.0 65.0Total Split (%) 23.0% 23.0% 28.9% 28.9% 28.9% 28.9% 28.9% 35.6% 35.6% 12.6% 48.1%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.5 6.5 5.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 2.0 6.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None None None None None Min Min None MinAct Effct Green (s) 21.7 21.7 31.2 30.2 30.2 30.2 30.2 42.2 42.2 62.9 58.9Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.32 0.32 0.48 0.45v/c Ratio 0.75 0.81 0.88 0.32 0.63 0.03 0.24 0.03 0.79 0.87 0.13Control Delay 69.7 77.7 74.3 42.6 63.1 39.7 8.7 33.0 44.1 57.1 22.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 69.7 77.7 74.3 42.6 63.1 39.7 8.7 33.0 44.1 57.1 22.0LOS E E E D E D A C D E CApproach Delay 73.5 59.4 36.1 44.0 41.1Approach LOS E E D D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 135Actuated Cycle Length: 129.9Natural Cycle: 100Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.88Intersection Signal Delay: 49.9 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 127.5% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 50: Centre View Drive & Rathburn Road

Page 82: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Hurontario Street 10: Hurontario Street & Hwy 403 E-N/S Ramp Construction Staging PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SET NWT SWL SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 2248 2020 587 611Turn Type PermProtected Phases 6 2 8Permitted Phases 8Detector Phase 6 2 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 70.0 70.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 77.0 77.0 14.0 14.0Total Split (s) 77.0 77.0 63.0 63.0Total Split (%) 55.0% 55.0% 45.0% 45.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 75.0 75.0 54.0 54.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.39 0.39v/c Ratio 0.93 0.87 0.78 0.92Control Delay 21.0 25.5 42.8 67.8Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 21.0 25.5 42.8 67.8LOS C C D EApproach Delay 21.0 25.5 50.7Approach LOS C C D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 8.4 (6%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 125Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.93Intersection Signal Delay: 29.2 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 92.7% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 10: Hurontario Street & Hwy 403 E-N/S Ramp

Timings Hurontario Street 20: Hurontario Street & Hwy 403 W-N/S Ramp Construction Staging PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SET NWT NEL NERLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 2656 3508 403 253Turn Type customProtected Phases 6 2Permitted Phases 4 4Detector Phase 6 2 4 4Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 101.0 101.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 108.0 108.0 14.0 14.0Total Split (s) 108.0 108.0 32.0 32.0Total Split (%) 77.1% 77.1% 22.9% 22.9%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 4.0 5.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 102.5 102.5 27.5 26.5Actuated g/C Ratio 0.73 0.73 0.20 0.19v/c Ratio 0.82 0.90 0.73 0.93Control Delay 10.5 18.9 60.8 92.4Queue Delay 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.0Total Delay 10.5 22.1 60.8 92.4LOS B C E FApproach Delay 10.5 22.1 73.0Approach LOS B C E

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 127.4 (91%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 135Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.93Intersection Signal Delay: 22.5 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 109.0% ICU Level of Service GAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 20: Hurontario Street & Hwy 403 W-N/S Ramp

Page 83: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Hurontario Street 30: Square One Drive & Hurontario Street Construction Staging PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group WBR SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER2Lane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 536 2124 161 13 2725 247 52Turn Type Free Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 2 4Permitted Phases Free 6 2 4Detector Phase 6 6 2 2 4 4Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 86.8 86.8 86.8 86.8 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 93.8 93.8 93.8 93.8 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 0.0 93.8 93.8 93.8 93.8 46.2 46.2Total Split (%) 0.0% 67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 33.0% 33.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 140.0 100.6 100.6 100.6 100.6 27.4 27.4Actuated g/C Ratio 1.00 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.20 0.20v/c Ratio 0.40 0.63 0.15 0.22 0.81 0.77 0.18Control Delay 0.8 15.4 5.8 10.3 13.2 67.4 40.2Queue Delay 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 0.8 16.0 5.8 10.3 13.2 67.4 40.2LOS A B A B B E DApproach Delay 15.3 13.2 62.6Approach LOS B B E

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 68.6 (49%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SET, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.81Intersection Signal Delay: 15.4 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 154.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 30: Square One Drive & Hurontario Street

Timings Hurontario Street 40: Hurontario Street & Robert Speck Parkway Construction Staging PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 4

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 268 1571 337 105 1737 40 386 186 179 141 141 615Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8Permitted Phases 6 6 2 2 4 4 8 8Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 3 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 48.8 48.8 5.0 51.0 51.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 11.0 55.8 55.8 11.0 58.0 58.0 9.0 16.0 16.0 9.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 23.0 55.8 55.8 25.2 58.0 58.0 12.0 48.0 48.0 11.0 47.0 47.0Total Split (%) 16.4% 39.9% 39.9% 18.0% 41.4% 41.4% 8.6% 34.3% 34.3% 7.9% 33.6% 33.6%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 4.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max None None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 75.1 58.0 58.0 65.0 52.0 52.0 54.0 41.0 41.0 52.0 40.0 40.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.41 0.41 0.46 0.37 0.37 0.39 0.29 0.29 0.37 0.29 0.29v/c Ratio 0.99 0.78 0.43 0.57 0.96 0.07 0.81 0.19 0.32 0.31 0.15 0.98Control Delay 97.8 21.9 3.1 35.8 55.8 11.8 50.1 37.8 6.5 30.1 37.8 60.2Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 97.8 21.9 3.1 35.8 55.8 11.8 50.1 37.8 6.5 30.1 37.8 60.2LOS F C A D E B D D A C D EApproach Delay 28.4 53.8 36.6 52.0Approach LOS C D D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 93.8 (67%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 135Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.99Intersection Signal Delay: 41.5 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 116.1% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 40: Hurontario Street & Robert Speck Parkway

Page 84: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Hurontario Street 50: Centre View Drive & Rathburn Road Construction Staging PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 5

Lane Group SBL SBR SEL SET NWL NWT NWR2 NEL2 NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 150 460 38 13 233 85 179 12 696 443 1168Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 3 4 8 2 1 6Permitted Phases 3 4 8 8 2 6Detector Phase 3 3 4 4 8 8 8 2 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 25.0 25.0 5.0 25.0Minimum Split (s) 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 32.0 32.0 8.0 32.0Total Split (s) 37.0 37.0 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 32.0 32.0 35.0 67.0Total Split (%) 26.9% 26.9% 24.4% 24.4% 24.4% 24.4% 24.4% 23.3% 23.3% 25.5% 48.7%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 1.0 6.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min Min None MinAct Effct Green (s) 30.5 30.5 27.0 27.0 28.0 27.0 27.0 26.0 26.0 65.2 60.2Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.48 0.44v/c Ratio 0.91 0.97 0.15 0.02 0.98 0.25 0.41 0.19 0.94 0.95 0.82Control Delay 81.2 95.2 47.7 44.8 105.1 48.8 8.9 55.3 72.5 66.7 38.8Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 81.2 95.2 47.7 44.8 105.1 48.8 8.9 55.3 72.5 66.7 38.8LOS F F D D F D A E E E DApproach Delay 88.0 46.9 60.9 72.2 46.4Approach LOS F D E E D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 137.5Actuated Cycle Length: 136.7Natural Cycle: 120Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.98Intersection Signal Delay: 61.4 Intersection LOS: EIntersection Capacity Utilization 113.5% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 50: Centre View Drive & Rathburn Road

Page 85: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Commerce Blvd Construction Staging47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 23 12 30 23 349 1132 76 1253Turn Type Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 63.0 63.0 63.0 63.0Minimum Split (s) 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (%) 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 81.6 80.0 80.0 80.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.82 0.80 0.80 0.80v/c Ratio 0.29 0.22 0.25 1.33 0.45 0.26 0.49Control Delay 19.6 44.7 26.4 183.7 1.1 4.0 5.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 19.6 44.7 26.4 183.7 1.1 4.0 5.4LOS B D C F A A AApproach Delay 19.6 33.2 42.0 5.3Approach LOS B C D A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 65 (65%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 150Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.33Intersection Signal Delay: 24.7 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 131.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Timings Commerce Blvd Construction Staging50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 42 24 37 358 437 275 832 13 1012Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 5 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 10.0 60.0 47.0 47.0Minimum Split (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 13.0 67.0 54.0 54.0Total Split (s) 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 13.0 67.0 54.0 54.0Total Split (%) 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 13.0% 67.0% 54.0% 54.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.5 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.5 7.0 2.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 27.5 26.0 65.0 60.0 47.0 47.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.28 0.26 0.65 0.60 0.47 0.47v/c Ratio 0.27 0.05 0.09 0.97 0.56 0.83 0.44 0.05 0.69Control Delay 35.1 28.2 9.8 77.0 33.7 47.0 7.9 19.3 35.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 35.1 28.2 9.8 77.0 33.7 47.0 7.9 19.3 35.0LOS D C A E C D A B CApproach Delay 24.4 51.6 17.0 34.8Approach LOS C D B C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 99 (99%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.97Intersection Signal Delay: 32.5 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 141.1% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 86: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Commerce Blvd Construction Staging53: Explorer Drive & Eglinton Avenue AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 152 74 244 807 1035Turn Type Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 4 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 2Detector Phase 4 4 5 2 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 9.0 62.0 48.0Minimum Split (s) 17.0 17.0 11.0 69.0 55.0Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 14.0 69.0 55.0Total Split (%) 31.0% 31.0% 14.0% 69.0% 55.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 2.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 2.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 11.5 11.5 80.5 75.5 62.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.80 0.76 0.62v/c Ratio 0.43 0.32 0.81 0.33 0.78Control Delay 44.7 13.0 46.0 3.6 13.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 44.7 13.0 46.0 3.6 13.9LOS D B D A BApproach Delay 34.3 13.5 13.9Approach LOS C B B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 25 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.81Intersection Signal Delay: 15.4 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 80.6% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 53: Explorer Drive & Eglinton Avenue

Timings Commerce Blvd Construction Staging55: Commerce Boulevard South & Eglinton Avenue AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 4

Lane Group NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 14 13 790 63 152 1493Turn Type custom Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 2 1 6Permitted Phases 8 8 2 6Detector Phase 8 8 2 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 12.0 12.0 51.0 51.0 6.0 60.0Minimum Split (s) 19.0 19.0 58.0 58.0 9.0 67.0Total Split (s) 33.0 33.0 58.0 58.0 9.0 67.0Total Split (%) 33.0% 33.0% 58.0% 58.0% 9.0% 67.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None C-Max C-Max None C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 12.0 12.0 72.6 72.6 85.6 84.4Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.73 0.73 0.86 0.84v/c Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.34 0.06 0.30 0.55Control Delay 40.1 19.6 6.8 2.2 3.5 5.3Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 40.1 19.6 6.8 2.2 3.5 5.3LOS D B A A A AApproach Delay 30.2 6.4 5.1Approach LOS C A A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 34 (34%), Referenced to phase 2:NET and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.55Intersection Signal Delay: 5.8 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 75.9% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 55: Commerce Boulevard South & Eglinton Avenue

Page 87: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Commerce Blvd Construction Staging47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 151 50 55 15 57 1132 43 1540Turn Type Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 68.0Minimum Split (s) 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0Total Split (s) 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0Total Split (%) 37.5% 37.5% 37.5% 37.5% 62.5% 62.5% 62.5% 62.5%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 -2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 4.5 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 36.7 34.2 34.2 71.8 71.8 71.8 71.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.28 0.28 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60v/c Ratio 0.96dr 0.55 0.14 0.70 0.58 0.26 0.78Control Delay 45.8 56.2 11.7 66.1 16.7 6.6 14.3Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 45.8 56.2 11.7 66.1 16.7 6.6 14.3LOS D E B E B A BApproach Delay 45.8 31.8 19.0 14.1Approach LOS D C B B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 120Actuated Cycle Length: 120Offset: 84 (70%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 95Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.82Intersection Signal Delay: 22.2 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 102.3% ICU Level of Service GAnalysis Period (min) 15dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane.

Splits and Phases: 47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Timings Commerce Blvd Construction Staging50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 203 483 218 64 45 53 1014 125 1319Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 5 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 6.0 66.0 57.0 57.0Minimum Split (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 9.0 73.0 64.0 64.0Total Split (s) 47.0 47.0 47.0 47.0 47.0 9.0 73.0 64.0 64.0Total Split (%) 39.2% 39.2% 39.2% 39.2% 39.2% 7.5% 60.8% 53.3% 53.3%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -2.0 -1.0 -1.5 -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 5.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 2.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 37.1 38.1 37.1 37.6 37.1 74.9 71.9 64.7 64.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.32 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.62 0.60 0.54 0.54v/c Ratio 0.54 0.84 0.40 0.89 0.06 0.32 0.64 0.91 0.76Control Delay 39.0 51.5 15.8 118.5 21.2 10.5 15.7 63.9 15.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 39.0 51.5 15.8 118.5 21.2 10.5 15.7 63.9 15.7LOS D D B F C B B E BApproach Delay 40.1 71.3 15.5 19.8Approach LOS D E B B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 120Actuated Cycle Length: 120Offset: 31 (26%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 105Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.91Intersection Signal Delay: 24.7 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 152.2% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 88: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Commerce Blvd Construction Staging53: Explorer Drive & Eglinton Avenue PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SER NEL NET SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 919 237 52 1180 1255Turn Type Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 4 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 2Detector Phase 4 4 5 2 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 6.0 67.0 59.0Minimum Split (s) 17.0 17.0 8.0 74.0 66.0Total Split (s) 46.0 46.0 8.0 74.0 66.0Total Split (%) 38.3% 38.3% 6.7% 61.7% 55.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 2.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 2.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 38.7 38.7 73.3 68.3 61.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.61 0.57 0.52v/c Ratio 0.91 0.43 0.37 0.64 0.84Control Delay 51.9 18.4 12.9 18.4 18.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 51.9 18.4 12.9 18.4 18.4LOS D B B B BApproach Delay 45.1 18.2 18.4Approach LOS D B B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 120Actuated Cycle Length: 120Offset: 89 (74%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 105Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.91Intersection Signal Delay: 26.6 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 92.9% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 53: Explorer Drive & Eglinton Avenue

Timings Commerce Blvd Construction Staging55: Commerce Blvd South & Eglinton Avenue PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 4

Lane Group NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 60 83 2068 31 20 1291Turn Type custom Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 2 1 6Permitted Phases 8 8 2 6Detector Phase 8 8 2 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 12.0 12.0 72.0 72.0 5.0 80.0Minimum Split (s) 19.0 19.0 79.0 79.0 8.0 87.0Total Split (s) 33.0 33.0 79.0 79.0 8.0 87.0Total Split (%) 27.5% 27.5% 65.8% 65.8% 6.7% 72.5%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 -2.5 0.0 0.0 -2.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 4.5 7.0 3.0 5.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None C-Max C-Max None C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 12.3 12.3 93.0 90.5 97.7 95.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.78 0.75 0.81 0.80v/c Ratio 0.35 0.37 0.79 0.03 0.15 0.48Control Delay 56.0 17.6 12.3 2.0 5.0 1.5Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 56.0 17.6 12.3 2.0 5.0 1.5LOS E B B A A AApproach Delay 33.7 12.1 1.6Approach LOS C B A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 120Actuated Cycle Length: 120Offset: 99 (83%), Referenced to phase 2:NET and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.79Intersection Signal Delay: 9.1 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 86.7% ICU Level of Service EAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 55: Commerce Blvd South & Eglinton Avenue

Page 89: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Explorer Dr Construction Staging47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 39 12 30 23 349 1132 76 1253Turn Type Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 63.0 63.0 63.0 63.0Minimum Split (s) 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (%) 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 77.0 75.0 75.0 75.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.77 0.75 0.75 0.75v/c Ratio 0.34 0.22 0.25 1.45 0.48 0.28 0.53Control Delay 22.8 44.9 26.4 235.0 1.4 4.3 6.5Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 22.8 44.9 26.4 235.0 1.4 4.3 6.5LOS C D C F A A AApproach Delay 22.8 33.3 53.7 6.4Approach LOS C C D A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 65 (65%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 150Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.45Intersection Signal Delay: 31.0 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 131.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Timings Explorer Dr Construction Staging50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 58 24 64 358 437 414 709 13 985Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 5 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 10.0 60.0 37.0 37.0Minimum Split (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 13.0 67.0 44.0 44.0Total Split (s) 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 23.0 67.0 44.0 44.0Total Split (%) 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 23.0% 67.0% 44.0% 44.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.5 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.5 7.0 2.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 27.5 26.0 65.0 60.0 37.2 37.2Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.28 0.26 0.65 0.60 0.37 0.37v/c Ratio 0.38 0.05 0.15 0.97 0.56 0.95 0.38 0.06 0.84Control Delay 39.1 28.2 8.3 77.0 33.7 72.9 9.9 13.5 29.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 39.1 28.2 8.3 77.0 33.7 72.9 9.9 13.5 29.0LOS D C A E C E A B CApproach Delay 23.8 51.6 31.7 28.8Approach LOS C D C C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 99 (99%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.97Intersection Signal Delay: 35.6 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 132.8% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 90: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Explorer Dr Construction Staging55: Commerce Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue West AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 110 10 8 6 105 680 53 152 1027 466Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 51.0 51.0 51.0 6.0 60.0 60.0Minimum Split (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 9.0 67.0 67.0Total Split (s) 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 9.0 67.0 67.0Total Split (%) 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 9.0% 67.0% 67.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 61.2 61.2 61.2 74.2 70.2 70.2Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.74 0.70 0.70v/c Ratio 0.62 0.20 0.04 0.07 0.38 0.35 0.06 0.31 0.46 0.40Control Delay 52.6 14.2 33.2 19.7 15.2 10.1 3.7 5.8 7.7 1.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 52.6 14.2 33.2 19.7 15.2 10.1 3.7 5.8 7.7 1.6LOS D B C B B B A A A AApproach Delay 39.5 23.8 10.4 5.8Approach LOS D C B A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 34 (34%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.62Intersection Signal Delay: 9.5 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 122.8% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 55: Commerce Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 91: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Explorer Dr Construction Staging47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 224 50 55 15 57 1132 43 1540Turn Type pm+pt Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 7 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 7 4 8 8 2 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 54.0 54.0 54.0 54.0Minimum Split (s) 9.0 30.0 18.0 18.0 61.0 61.0 61.0 61.0Total Split (s) 9.0 39.0 30.0 30.0 61.0 61.0 61.0 61.0Total Split (%) 9.0% 39.0% 30.0% 30.0% 61.0% 61.0% 61.0% 61.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 -2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.5 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 33.3 30.8 30.8 55.2 55.2 55.2 55.2Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.31 0.31 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55v/c Ratio 0.89dr 0.53 0.13 0.80 0.63 0.30 0.84Control Delay 40.5 48.9 10.2 77.1 13.0 31.3 34.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 40.5 48.9 10.2 77.1 13.0 31.3 34.9LOS D D B E B C CApproach Delay 40.5 27.7 16.0 34.8Approach LOS D C B C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 84 (84%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 95Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.85Intersection Signal Delay: 29.5 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 95.1% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane.

Splits and Phases: 47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Timings Explorer Dr Construction Staging50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 203 483 336 64 45 88 1052 125 1201Turn Type pm+pt Perm Perm pm+pt pm+ptProtected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 7 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 6.0 42.0 6.0 42.0Minimum Split (s) 9.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 9.0 49.0 9.0 49.0Total Split (s) 9.0 42.0 42.0 33.0 33.0 9.0 49.0 9.0 49.0Total Split (%) 9.0% 42.0% 42.0% 33.0% 33.0% 9.0% 49.0% 9.0% 49.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 3.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None None None None C-Max None C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 33.9 31.9 30.9 21.5 21.5 55.0 45.0 57.6 47.9Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.32 0.31 0.22 0.22 0.55 0.45 0.58 0.48v/c Ratio 0.51 0.84 0.61 0.57 0.09 0.52 0.88 0.63 0.78Control Delay 29.4 44.3 20.2 53.1 23.0 26.1 39.0 21.8 28.1Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 29.4 44.3 20.2 53.1 23.0 26.1 39.0 21.8 28.1LOS C D C D C C D C CApproach Delay 33.4 38.5 38.2 27.5Approach LOS C D D C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 91 (91%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.88Intersection Signal Delay: 33.2 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 99.9% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 92: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Explorer Dr Construction Staging55: Commerce Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue West PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 827 19 54 6 17 1241 12 20 1200 91Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 10.0 10.0 26.0 26.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 5.0 38.0 38.0Minimum Split (s) 17.0 17.0 33.0 33.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 8.0 45.0 45.0Total Split (s) 55.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 8.0 45.0 45.0Total Split (%) 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 37.0% 37.0% 37.0% 8.0% 45.0% 45.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.5 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 4.5 7.0 3.0 5.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 51.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 34.8 37.3 34.8 42.0 40.0 38.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.51 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.35 0.37 0.35 0.42 0.40 0.38v/c Ratio 1.25 0.19 0.10 0.11 0.22 0.99 0.02 0.12 0.89 0.15Control Delay 149.4 14.0 14.9 4.0 26.5 48.2 12.8 18.7 37.5 4.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 149.4 14.0 14.9 4.0 26.5 48.2 12.8 18.7 37.5 4.9LOS F B B A C D B B D AApproach Delay 130.1 8.1 47.5 35.0Approach LOS F A D C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 99 (99%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 120Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.25Intersection Signal Delay: 63.2 Intersection LOS: EIntersection Capacity Utilization 95.8% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 55: Commerce Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 93: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Spectrum Way Construction Staging39: Creekbank Road & Eglinton Avenue East AM Peak Hour

S Bhasin Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 67 57 126 983 602 486 1057 177 71 502 217Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Prot PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 8 2 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 41.0 41.0 7.0 41.0 41.0Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 48.0 48.0 12.0 48.0 48.0Total Split (s) 65.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 27.0 48.0 48.0 27.0 48.0 48.0Total Split (%) 46.4% 46.4% 46.4% 46.4% 46.4% 19.3% 34.3% 34.3% 19.3% 34.3% 34.3%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 51.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 79.3 64.2 64.2 8.5 48.8 48.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.57 0.46 0.46 0.06 0.35 0.35v/c Ratio 0.91 0.13 0.31 0.80 0.76 0.84 0.47 0.23 0.34 0.30 0.38Control Delay 122.1 12.0 33.6 45.5 20.3 31.6 25.6 2.8 66.1 32.1 24.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 122.1 12.0 33.6 45.5 20.3 31.6 25.6 2.8 66.1 32.1 24.9LOS F B C D C C C A E C CApproach Delay 47.1 35.8 25.0 33.1Approach LOS D D C C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 2.8 (2%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 90Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.91Intersection Signal Delay: 31.6 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 115.8% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 39: Creekbank Road & Eglinton Avenue East

Timings Spectrum Way Construction Staging40: Tahoe Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue East AM Peak Hour

S Bhasin Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 12 3 9 13 78 1544 103 253 770 218Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Prot PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 58.8 58.8 7.0 57.4 57.4Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 65.8 65.8 12.0 64.4 64.4Total Split (s) 43.4 43.4 43.4 43.4 32.2 65.8 65.8 30.8 64.4 64.4Total Split (%) 31.0% 31.0% 31.0% 31.0% 23.0% 47.0% 47.0% 22.0% 46.0% 46.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 105.2 94.7 94.7 16.1 106.3 106.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.75 0.68 0.68 0.12 0.76 0.76v/c Ratio 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.55 0.15 0.47 0.10 0.67 0.21 0.18Control Delay 64.2 33.1 63.8 27.2 2.6 7.8 1.5 67.8 5.1 0.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 64.2 33.1 63.8 27.2 2.6 7.8 1.5 67.8 5.1 0.9LOS E C E C A A A E A AApproach Delay 46.9 30.1 7.2 17.2Approach LOS D C A B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 26.6 (19%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 95Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.67Intersection Signal Delay: 12.3 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 80.2% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 40: Tahoe Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue East

Page 94: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Spectrum Way Construction Staging46: Spectrum Way & Eglinton Avenue West AM Peak Hour

S Bhasin Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group NWL NWT NET SWL SWT ø4 ø5Lane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 104 0 1492 58 1137Turn Type Perm PermProtected Phases 8 2 6 4 5Permitted Phases 8 6Detector Phase 8 8 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 13.0 13.0 57.0 49.0 49.0 13.0 6.0Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 64.0 56.0 56.0 20.0 8.0Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 64.0 56.0 56.0 36.0 8.0Total Split (%) 36.0% 36.0% 64.0% 56.0% 56.0% 36% 8%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 2.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 0.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None C-Max C-Max C-Max None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 18.7 67.3 67.3 67.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.67 0.67 0.67v/c Ratio 0.72 0.70 0.52 0.48Control Delay 46.2 13.1 40.3 17.8Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 46.2 13.1 40.3 17.8LOS D B D BApproach Delay 46.2 13.1 18.9Approach LOS D B B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 44 (44%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 85Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.72Intersection Signal Delay: 17.6 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 71.6% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 46: Spectrum Way & Eglinton Avenue West

Timings Spectrum Way Construction Staging47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West AM Peak Hour

S Bhasin Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 4

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 32 12 30 23 349 1162 76 1099Turn Type Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 63.0 63.0 63.0 63.0Minimum Split (s) 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (%) 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 77.0 75.0 75.0 75.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.77 0.75 0.75 0.75v/c Ratio 0.32 0.22 0.25 1.33 0.49 0.29 0.51Control Delay 21.5 44.8 26.4 183.4 1.6 4.8 6.8Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 21.5 44.8 26.4 183.4 1.6 4.8 6.8LOS C D C F A A AApproach Delay 21.5 33.3 41.6 6.7Approach LOS C C D A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 65 (65%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 150Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.33Intersection Signal Delay: 25.6 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 131.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 95: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Spectrum Way Construction Staging50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West AM Peak Hour

S Bhasin Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 5

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 51 24 65 358 437 322 824 13 921Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 5 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 10.0 55.0 37.0 37.0Minimum Split (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 13.0 62.0 44.0 44.0Total Split (s) 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 18.0 62.0 44.0 44.0Total Split (%) 38.0% 38.0% 38.0% 38.0% 38.0% 18.0% 62.0% 44.0% 44.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.5 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.5 7.0 2.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 29.0 29.0 29.0 30.5 29.0 62.0 57.0 39.5 39.5Actuated g/C Ratio 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.29 0.62 0.57 0.40 0.40v/c Ratio 0.28 0.05 0.14 0.88 0.51 0.91 0.46 0.06 0.82Control Delay 31.2 24.6 7.2 55.5 29.9 66.6 12.1 19.2 35.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 31.2 24.6 7.2 55.5 29.9 66.6 12.1 19.2 35.9LOS C C A E C E B B DApproach Delay 19.0 40.5 26.5 35.7Approach LOS B D C D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 99 (99%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 85Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.91Intersection Signal Delay: 32.9 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 128.6% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 96: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Spectrum Way Construction Staging39: Creekbank Road & Eglinton Avenue East PM Peak Hour

S Bhasin Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 183 788 80 180 85 68 609 225 568 1382 108Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Prot PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 8 2 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 7.0 36.0 36.0Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 27.0 27.0 12.0 43.0 43.0Total Split (s) 81.0 81.0 81.0 81.0 81.0 16.0 27.0 27.0 32.0 43.0 43.0Total Split (%) 57.9% 57.9% 57.9% 57.9% 57.9% 11.4% 19.3% 19.3% 22.9% 30.7% 30.7%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 8.0 8.0 6.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 4.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 61.3 61.3 63.3 61.3 61.3 45.3 32.5 32.5 27.2 53.6 53.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.44 0.45 0.44 0.44 0.32 0.23 0.23 0.19 0.38 0.38v/c Ratio 0.37 0.80 1.02 0.13 0.12 0.43 0.55 0.52 0.88 0.75 0.18Control Delay 27.1 35.1 145.0 22.2 3.6 41.6 61.6 45.5 82.6 46.4 24.8Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 27.1 35.1 145.0 22.2 3.6 41.6 61.6 45.5 82.6 46.4 24.8LOS C D F C A D E D F D CApproach Delay 34.0 46.0 56.1 55.2Approach LOS C D E E

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 33.6 (24%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 100Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.02Intersection Signal Delay: 48.5 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 95.9% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 39: Creekbank Road & Eglinton Avenue East

Timings Spectrum Way Construction Staging40: Tahoe Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue East PM Peak Hour

S Bhasin Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 143 26 58 0 10 852 14 153 1928 9Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Prot PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 71.4 71.4 7.0 77.0 77.0Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 78.4 78.4 12.0 84.0 84.0Total Split (s) 43.4 43.4 43.4 43.4 12.6 78.4 78.4 18.2 84.0 84.0Total Split (%) 31.0% 31.0% 31.0% 31.0% 9.0% 56.0% 56.0% 13.0% 60.0% 60.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 22.9 22.9 22.9 22.9 95.1 85.4 85.4 11.8 98.5 98.5Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.68 0.61 0.61 0.08 0.70 0.70v/c Ratio 0.80 0.32 0.31 0.29 0.07 0.31 0.02 0.61 0.61 0.01Control Delay 82.8 18.0 53.2 1.7 7.0 10.2 3.4 71.1 13.1 5.1Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 82.8 18.0 53.2 1.7 7.0 10.2 3.4 71.1 13.1 5.1LOS F B D A A B A E B AApproach Delay 56.5 19.1 10.0 17.3Approach LOS E B B B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 21 (15%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.80Intersection Signal Delay: 18.3 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 92.6% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 40: Tahoe Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue East

Page 97: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Spectrum Way Construction Staging46: Spectrum Way & Eglinton Avenue West PM Peak Hour

S Bhasin Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group NWL NWT NET SWL SWT ø4Lane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 87 0 1037 57 2003Turn Type Perm PermProtected Phases 8 2 6 4Permitted Phases 8 6Detector Phase 8 8 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 13.0 13.0 57.0 57.0 57.0 13.0Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 64.0 64.0 64.0 20.0Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 64.0 64.0 64.0 36.0Total Split (%) 36.0% 36.0% 64.0% 64.0% 64.0% 36%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None C-Max C-Max C-Max NoneAct Effct Green (s) 15.7 70.3 70.3 72.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.70 0.70 0.72v/c Ratio 0.61 0.50 0.26 0.86Control Delay 45.1 7.9 9.6 11.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 45.1 7.9 9.6 11.6LOS D A A BApproach Delay 45.1 7.9 11.6Approach LOS D A B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 82 (82%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 85Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.86Intersection Signal Delay: 11.6 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 76.2% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 46: Spectrum Way & Eglinton Avenue West

Timings Spectrum Way Construction Staging47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West PM Peak Hour

S Bhasin Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 4

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 183 50 55 15 57 972 43 1533Turn Type Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0Minimum Split (s) 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0Total Split (s) 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0Total Split (%) 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 -2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 4.5 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 35.8 33.3 33.3 52.7 52.7 52.7 52.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.33 0.33 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53v/c Ratio 0.75 0.40 0.13 0.79 0.57 0.24 0.89Control Delay 32.7 32.7 9.5 79.1 15.7 7.1 20.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 32.7 32.7 9.5 79.1 15.7 7.1 20.0LOS C C A E B A CApproach Delay 32.7 20.0 19.1 19.7Approach LOS C C B B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 84 (84%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 75Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.89Intersection Signal Delay: 22.1 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 93.9% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 47: Satellite Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 98: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Spectrum Way Construction Staging50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West PM Peak Hour

S Bhasin Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 5

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 162 483 239 64 45 61 878 125 1305Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 5 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 6.0 47.0 34.0 34.0Minimum Split (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 9.0 54.0 41.0 41.0Total Split (s) 46.0 46.0 46.0 46.0 46.0 13.0 54.0 41.0 41.0Total Split (%) 46.0% 46.0% 46.0% 46.0% 46.0% 13.0% 54.0% 41.0% 41.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 32.5 34.5 32.5 32.5 32.5 57.5 53.5 44.9 44.9Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.34 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.58 0.54 0.45 0.45v/c Ratio 0.41 0.78 0.37 0.66 0.06 0.32 0.64 0.85 0.91Control Delay 28.1 37.5 4.4 59.4 16.4 17.0 9.1 70.7 41.2Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 28.1 37.5 4.4 59.4 16.4 17.0 9.1 70.7 41.2LOS C D A E B B A E DApproach Delay 26.8 38.5 9.5 43.7Approach LOS C D A D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 31 (31%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 80Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.91Intersection Signal Delay: 28.4 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 124.6% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 50: Orbitor Drive & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 99: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

BRT Project Traffic Impact AnalysisMavis Road to Renforth Drive Technical Appendix

McCormick Rankin Corporation October 2008

TECHNICAL APPENDIX C

Built-Facility Capacity Analysis Output

Page 100: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Dixie Road - Built Facility10: Dixie Road & Eastgate Parkway AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 16 633 123 307 1601 500 315 1077 219 34 191 33Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Perm pm+pt Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 5 2 7 4 8Permitted Phases 6 6 2 4 4 8 8Detector Phase 6 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 8 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 41.0 41.0 41.0 8.0 64.8 64.8 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 16.0 72.8 72.8 8.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 49.0 49.0 49.0 23.8 72.8 72.8 18.2 67.2 67.2 49.0 49.0 49.0Total Split (%) 35.0% 35.0% 35.0% 17.0% 52.0% 52.0% 13.0% 48.0% 48.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max None None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 48.8 48.8 48.8 15.4 72.2 72.2 56.8 51.8 51.8 33.6 33.6 33.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.11 0.52 0.52 0.41 0.37 0.37 0.24 0.24 0.24v/c Ratio 0.21 0.40 0.23 0.84 0.64 0.61 0.64 0.84 0.33 0.62 0.24 0.09Control Delay 36.9 30.0 3.4 76.4 22.1 22.2 36.4 46.5 8.8 91.9 42.5 11.8Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 36.9 30.0 3.4 76.4 22.1 22.2 36.4 46.5 8.8 91.9 42.5 11.8LOS D C A E C C D D A F D BApproach Delay 25.9 29.0 39.4 45.1Approach LOS C C D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 8.4 (6%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.84Intersection Signal Delay: 32.7 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 151.3% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 10: Dixie Road & Eastgate Parkway

Timings Dixie Road - Built Facility20: Dixie Road & Bus Access AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET NWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 23 772 1949 25Turn Type pm+pt OverProtected Phases 1 6 2 1Permitted Phases 6Detector Phase 1 6 2 1Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0Minimum Split (s) 8.0 14.0 14.0 8.0Total Split (s) 13.0 70.0 57.0 13.0Total Split (%) 18.6% 100.0% 81.4% 18.6%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0All-Red Time (s) 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 2.0 6.0 3.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max NoneAct Effct Green (s) 67.0 70.0 60.4 6.4Actuated g/C Ratio 0.96 1.00 0.86 0.09v/c Ratio 0.15 0.17 0.45 0.25Control Delay 5.0 0.1 1.4 16.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0Total Delay 5.0 0.1 1.5 16.7LOS A A A BApproach Delay 0.2 1.5Approach LOS A A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 70Actuated Cycle Length: 70Offset: 54 (77%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 40Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.45Intersection Signal Delay: 1.3 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 50.2% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 20: Dixie Road & Bus Access

Page 101: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Dixie Road - Built Facility30: Dixie Road & South Gateway Road AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NWR NEL NET SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 108 758 22 1906 46 13 2 9 8 24Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 2 2 4 8 8Detector Phase 6 6 2 2 2 4 4 8 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 84.0 84.0 84.0 84.0 84.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0Total Split (%) 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 121.3 120.5 120.5 120.5 120.5 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.87 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06v/c Ratio 0.92 0.20 0.05 0.46 0.04 0.21 0.25 0.14 0.10 0.34Control Delay 82.9 0.5 1.4 1.4 0.3 68.5 27.2 65.6 63.0 52.1Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 82.9 0.5 1.4 1.5 0.3 68.5 27.2 65.6 63.0 52.1LOS F A A A A E C E E DApproach Delay 10.6 1.4 40.4 57.1Approach LOS B A D E

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 2.8 (2%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.92Intersection Signal Delay: 5.5 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 164.2% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 30: Dixie Road & South Gateway Road

Timings Dixie Road - Built Facility83: Dixie Road & Crestlawn Dr AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 4

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 21 814 216 1720 99 1 5 1Turn Type Perm pm+pt Perm PermProtected Phases 6 5 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8Detector Phase 6 6 5 2 4 4 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 8.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 88.2 88.2 9.8 98.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0Total Split (%) 63.0% 63.0% 7.0% 70.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 99.9 99.9 113.7 109.7 16.3 16.3 16.3 16.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.71 0.71 0.81 0.78 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12v/c Ratio 0.21 0.30 0.48 0.46 0.67 0.27 0.06 0.17Control Delay 13.8 7.7 8.6 3.4 79.4 15.4 53.2 22.3Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 13.8 7.7 8.6 3.4 79.4 15.4 53.2 22.3LOS B A A A E B D CApproach Delay 7.8 3.9 55.4 28.0Approach LOS A A E C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 123 (88%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 40Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.67Intersection Signal Delay: 8.0 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 69.7% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 83: Dixie Road & Crestlawn Dr

Page 102: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Dixie Road - Built Facility10: Dixie Road & Eastgate Parkway PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 33 1898 334 195 833 65 174 185 274 423 912 39Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Perm pm+pt Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 6 5 2 7 4 3 8Permitted Phases 6 6 2 4 4 8 8Detector Phase 6 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 3 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 48.0 48.0 48.0 8.0 66.2 66.2 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 56.0 56.0 56.0 16.0 74.2 74.2 8.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 56.0 56.0 56.0 18.2 74.2 74.2 16.8 49.0 49.0 16.8 49.0 49.0Total Split (%) 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 13.0% 53.0% 53.0% 12.0% 35.0% 35.0% 12.0% 35.0% 35.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 4.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 8.0 6.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 8.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes YesRecall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max None None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 49.2 51.2 49.2 10.5 67.7 67.7 58.3 39.5 39.5 58.4 40.6 39.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.37 0.35 0.08 0.48 0.48 0.42 0.28 0.28 0.42 0.29 0.28v/c Ratio 0.16 1.05 0.50 0.77 0.37 0.08 0.84 0.19 0.48 0.77 0.90 0.09Control Delay 23.6 69.5 10.5 81.2 21.9 3.3 63.0 38.4 16.0 42.0 60.0 10.8Queue Delay 0.0 50.7 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 23.6 120.2 11.2 81.2 21.9 3.3 63.0 38.4 16.0 42.0 60.0 10.8LOS C F B F C A E D B D E BApproach Delay 102.7 31.4 35.5 53.0Approach LOS F C D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 44.8 (32%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 120Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.05Intersection Signal Delay: 67.5 Intersection LOS: EIntersection Capacity Utilization 134.1% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 10: Dixie Road & Eastgate Parkway

Timings Dixie Road - Built Facility20: Dixie Road & Bus Access PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET NWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 25 2265 1046 23Turn Type pm+pt OverProtected Phases 1 6 2 1Permitted Phases 6Detector Phase 1 6 2 1Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 8.0 8.0 5.0Minimum Split (s) 8.0 18.0 22.0 8.0Total Split (s) 13.0 70.0 57.0 13.0Total Split (%) 18.6% 100.0% 81.4% 18.6%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 2.0 4.0 3.0All-Red Time (s) 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 2.0 6.0 3.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max NoneAct Effct Green (s) 67.0 70.0 61.3 5.5Actuated g/C Ratio 0.96 1.00 0.88 0.08v/c Ratio 0.09 0.46 0.25 0.11Control Delay 0.5 0.3 0.7 1.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0Total Delay 0.5 0.3 0.7 1.0LOS A A A AApproach Delay 0.3 0.7Approach LOS A A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 70Actuated Cycle Length: 70Offset: 38 (54%), Referenced to phase 2:NWT and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 40Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.46Intersection Signal Delay: 0.5 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 47.1% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 20: Dixie Road & Bus Access

Page 103: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Dixie Road - Built Facility30: Dixie Road & South Gateway Road PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NWR NEL NET SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 142 2140 35 972 62 39 1 92 8 72Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 2 2 4 8 8Detector Phase 6 6 2 2 2 4 4 8 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 84.0 84.0 84.0 84.0 84.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0Total Split (s) 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 91.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0 49.0Total Split (%) 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0% 35.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 109.1 109.1 109.1 109.1 109.1 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9Actuated g/C Ratio 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11v/c Ratio 0.42 0.60 0.51 0.28 0.06 0.27 0.34 0.66 0.05 0.32Control Delay 7.2 4.9 45.4 3.2 0.5 59.1 55.0 79.4 52.5 14.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 7.2 4.9 45.4 3.4 0.5 59.1 55.0 79.4 52.5 14.6LOS A A D A A E D E D BApproach Delay 5.1 4.6 56.6 51.0Approach LOS A A E D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 110Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.66Intersection Signal Delay: 8.5 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 165.0% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 30: Dixie Road & South Gateway Road

Timings Dixie Road - Built Facility83: Dixie Road & Crestlawn Dr PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 4

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 28 2025 79 994 154 6 5 5Turn Type Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 6 2 4 8Permitted Phases 6 2 4 8Detector Phase 6 6 2 2 4 4 8 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0Total Split (s) 93.8 93.8 93.8 93.8 46.2 46.2 46.2 46.2Total Split (%) 67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0%Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode C-Max C-Max C-Max C-Max None None None NoneAct Effct Green (s) 94.9 94.9 96.9 94.9 31.1 31.1 31.1 31.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.68 0.68 0.69 0.68 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22v/c Ratio 0.16 0.64 1.19 0.32 0.54 0.85 0.06 0.09Control Delay 12.6 14.7 199.5 5.9 53.9 71.1 40.6 19.3Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 12.6 14.7 199.5 5.9 53.9 71.1 40.6 19.3LOS B B F A D E D BApproach Delay 14.7 19.9 65.2 23.1Approach LOS B B E C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 4 (3%), Referenced to phase 2:NWTL and 6:SETL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 65Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.19Intersection Signal Delay: 22.4 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 81.9% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 83: Dixie Road & Crestlawn Dr

Page 104: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Rathburn Road- Built Facility24: Centre View Drive & Rathburn Road AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SBL SBR SEL SET NWL NWT NWR2 NEL2 NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 98 248 286 251 103 10 103 11 1066 165 286Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 3 4 8 2 1 6Permitted Phases 3 4 8 8 2 6Detector Phase 3 3 4 4 8 8 8 2 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 52.0 52.0 5.0 52.0Minimum Split (s) 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 59.0 59.0 8.0 59.0Total Split (s) 26.0 26.0 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 66.0 66.0 10.0 76.0Total Split (%) 18.9% 18.9% 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 25.8% 48.0% 48.0% 7.3% 55.3%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -2.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.5 6.5 5.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 2.0 6.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None None None None None Min Min None MinAct Effct Green (s) 19.5 19.5 30.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 60.0 60.0 74.0 70.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.44 0.44 0.54 0.51v/c Ratio 0.88 0.96 0.97 0.35 0.72 0.04 0.26 0.03 0.98 0.96 0.21Control Delay 93.3 111.0 96.6 47.6 76.8 43.7 9.4 22.5 57.9 84.8 19.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 93.3 111.0 96.6 47.6 76.8 43.7 9.4 22.5 57.9 84.8 19.0LOS F F F D E D A C E F BApproach Delay 101.9 73.6 43.2 57.6 42.9Approach LOS F E D E D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 137.5Actuated Cycle Length: 137.5Natural Cycle: 120Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.98Intersection Signal Delay: 63.0 Intersection LOS: EIntersection Capacity Utilization 145.8% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 24: Centre View Drive & Rathburn Road

Timings Rathburn Road- Built Facility32: BRT & Rathburn Road West AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SER NEL NET SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 100 100 1355 354Turn Type Over pm+ptProtected Phases 5 5 2 6Permitted Phases 2Detector Phase 5 5 2 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 54.0 24.0Minimum Split (s) 12.0 12.0 60.0 30.0Total Split (s) 30.0 30.0 60.0 30.0Total Split (%) 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 50.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 5.0 5.0Lead/Lag Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 9.0 57.0 60.0 46.4Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.95 1.00 0.77v/c Ratio 0.24 0.20 0.41 0.10Control Delay 1.4 1.0 0.4 2.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 1.4 1.0 0.4 2.4LOS A A A AApproach Delay 0.4 2.4Approach LOS A A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 60Actuated Cycle Length: 60Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 60Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.41Intersection Signal Delay: 0.8 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 49.2% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 32: BRT & Rathburn Road West

Page 105: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Rathburn Road- Built Facility24: Centre View Drive & Rathburn Road PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SBL SBR SEL SET NWL NWT NWR2 NEL2 NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 150 460 38 13 233 85 179 12 696 343 1219Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm pm+ptProtected Phases 3 4 8 2 1 6Permitted Phases 3 4 8 8 2 6Detector Phase 3 3 4 4 8 8 8 2 2 1 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 38.0 38.0 5.0 38.0Minimum Split (s) 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 45.0 45.0 8.0 45.0Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 34.5 34.5 34.5 34.5 34.5 45.0 45.0 22.0 67.0Total Split (%) 26.2% 26.2% 25.1% 25.1% 25.1% 25.1% 25.1% 32.7% 32.7% 16.0% 48.7%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.5 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.5 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 1.5 6.0Lead/Lag Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min Min None MinAct Effct Green (s) 29.5 29.5 28.0 28.0 28.5 28.0 28.0 39.0 39.0 65.5 61.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.20 0.20 0.28 0.28 0.48 0.44v/c Ratio 0.95 1.01 0.15 0.02 0.97 0.24 0.40 0.23 1.00 0.97 0.80Control Delay 89.6 105.6 46.8 44.0 102.6 47.9 8.7 50.1 79.8 75.5 37.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4Total Delay 89.6 105.6 46.8 44.0 102.6 47.9 8.7 50.1 79.8 75.5 38.2LOS F F D D F D A D E E DApproach Delay 97.4 46.1 59.5 79.4 46.3Approach LOS F D E E D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 137.5Actuated Cycle Length: 137.5Natural Cycle: 115Control Type: Semi Act-UncoordMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.01Intersection Signal Delay: 64.6 Intersection LOS: EIntersection Capacity Utilization 125.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 24: Centre View Drive & Rathburn Road

Timings Rathburn Road- Built Facility33: BRT & Rathburn Road West PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SER NEL NET SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 100 100 913 1474Turn Type Over pm+ptProtected Phases 5 5 2 6Permitted Phases 2Detector Phase 5 5 2 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 54.0 24.0Minimum Split (s) 12.0 12.0 60.0 30.0Total Split (s) 30.0 30.0 60.0 30.0Total Split (%) 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 50.0%Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0Total Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 5.0 5.0Lead/Lag Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 13.8 57.0 60.0 41.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.95 1.00 0.69v/c Ratio 0.51 0.34 0.32 0.45Control Delay 27.2 6.3 0.3 6.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 27.2 6.3 0.3 6.6LOS C A A AApproach Delay 0.8 6.6Approach LOS A A

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 60Actuated Cycle Length: 60Offset: 30 (50%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 60Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.51Intersection Signal Delay: 5.1 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 49.2% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 33: BRT & Rathburn Road West

Page 106: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eglinton Ave Lane Reductions - Built Facility39: Creekbank Road & Eglinton Avenue East AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 66 46 126 884 699 311 1231 177 82 530 169Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Prot PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 8 2 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 54.6 54.6 7.0 63.0 63.0Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 61.6 61.6 12.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (s) 57.4 57.4 57.4 57.4 57.4 12.6 61.6 61.6 21.0 70.0 70.0Total Split (%) 41.0% 41.0% 41.0% 41.0% 41.0% 9.0% 44.0% 44.0% 15.0% 50.0% 50.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 51.4 49.4 49.4 49.4 49.4 75.3 61.7 61.7 8.9 63.0 63.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.54 0.44 0.44 0.06 0.45 0.45v/c Ratio 0.66 0.10 0.30 0.72 1.02 0.67 0.82 0.25 0.38 0.36 0.24Control Delay 69.4 14.7 35.2 43.3 70.0 22.9 36.7 6.0 72.6 23.2 14.3Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 69.4 14.7 35.2 43.3 70.0 22.9 36.7 6.0 72.6 23.2 14.3LOS E B D D E C D A E C BApproach Delay 36.1 53.7 31.1 26.5Approach LOS D D C C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 2.8 (2%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 135Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.02Intersection Signal Delay: 39.3 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 121.7% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 39: Creekbank Road & Eglinton Avenue East

Timings Eglinton Ave Lane Reductions - Built Facility40: Tahoe Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue East AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 12 3 9 13 78 1816 103 252 761 218Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Prot PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 58.8 58.8 7.0 57.4 57.4Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 65.8 65.8 12.0 64.4 64.4Total Split (s) 43.4 43.4 43.4 43.4 32.2 65.8 65.8 30.8 64.4 64.4Total Split (%) 31.0% 31.0% 31.0% 31.0% 23.0% 47.0% 47.0% 22.0% 46.0% 46.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 105.3 94.8 94.8 16.0 106.3 106.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.75 0.68 0.68 0.11 0.76 0.76v/c Ratio 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.55 0.15 0.79 0.10 0.67 0.30 0.18Control Delay 64.2 33.1 63.8 27.2 2.3 11.5 3.3 67.8 5.8 0.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 64.2 33.1 63.8 27.2 2.3 11.5 3.3 67.8 5.8 0.9LOS E C E C A B A E A AApproach Delay 46.9 30.1 10.8 17.6Approach LOS D C B B

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 26.6 (19%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 95Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.79Intersection Signal Delay: 14.2 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 81.4% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 40: Tahoe Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue East

Page 107: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eglinton Ave Lane Reductions - Built Facility46: Spectrum Way & Eglinton Avenue West AM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 16 28 57 94 273 1491 29 1136Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 6.0 57.0 49.0 49.0Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 64.0 56.0 56.0Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 8.0 64.0 56.0 56.0Total Split (%) 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 8.0% 64.0% 56.0% 56.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 1.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 17.9 17.9 17.9 74.1 68.1 60.1 60.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.74 0.68 0.60 0.60v/c Ratio 0.10 0.20 0.70 0.93 0.70 0.25 0.63Control Delay 33.2 18.0 47.9 48.8 12.3 25.8 22.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 33.2 18.0 47.9 48.8 12.3 25.8 22.0LOS C B D D B C CApproach Delay 20.9 47.9 17.5 22.1Approach LOS C D B C

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 44 (44%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 85Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.93Intersection Signal Delay: 21.1 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 123.6% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 46: Spectrum Way & Eglinton Avenue West

Page 108: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eglinton Ave Lane Reductions - Built Facility39: Creekbank Road & Eglinton Avenue East PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 1

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 183 702 80 168 97 46 631 225 654 1593 100Turn Type Perm Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Prot PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 8 2 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 40.6 40.6 7.0 64.4 64.4Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 47.6 47.6 12.0 71.4 71.4Total Split (s) 57.4 57.4 57.4 57.4 57.4 11.2 47.6 47.6 35.0 71.4 71.4Total Split (%) 41.0% 41.0% 41.0% 41.0% 41.0% 8.0% 34.0% 34.0% 25.0% 51.0% 51.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 8.0 8.0 6.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 4.0 7.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 44.6 44.6 46.6 44.6 44.6 57.1 46.1 46.1 30.3 72.0 72.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.32 0.32 0.41 0.33 0.33 0.22 0.51 0.51v/c Ratio 0.50 0.82 1.04 0.16 0.18 0.34 0.58 0.42 0.91 0.92 0.13Control Delay 42.7 48.9 157.2 33.6 6.2 29.5 44.1 35.2 67.0 40.9 20.5Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 42.7 48.9 157.2 33.6 6.2 29.5 44.1 35.2 67.0 40.9 20.5LOS D D F C A C D D E D CApproach Delay 47.9 54.5 41.1 47.3Approach LOS D D D D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 33.6 (24%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 120Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.04Intersection Signal Delay: 46.8 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 110.4% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 39: Creekbank Road & Eglinton Avenue East

Timings Eglinton Ave Lane Reductions - Built Facility40: Tahoe Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue East PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 2

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 143 26 58 0 10 886 14 153 2217 9Turn Type Perm Perm pm+pt Perm Prot PermProtected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 80.8 80.8 7.0 86.4 86.4Minimum Split (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 87.8 87.8 12.0 93.4 93.4Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 34.0 34.0 12.6 87.8 87.8 18.2 93.4 93.4Total Split (%) 24.3% 24.3% 24.3% 24.3% 9.0% 62.7% 62.7% 13.0% 66.7% 66.7%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 6.0 7.0Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 22.8 21.8 21.8 21.8 96.2 86.4 86.4 11.8 100.6 99.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.69 0.62 0.62 0.08 0.72 0.71v/c Ratio 0.80 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.08 0.46 0.02 0.61 0.98 0.01Control Delay 84.3 19.1 55.4 1.8 7.1 14.6 6.7 71.1 33.6 5.1Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 84.3 19.1 55.4 1.8 7.1 14.6 6.7 71.1 33.6 5.1LOS F B E A A B A E C AApproach Delay 57.8 19.9 14.4 35.9Approach LOS E B B D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 140Actuated Cycle Length: 140Offset: 21 (15%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWT, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 140Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.98Intersection Signal Delay: 31.3 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 99.0% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 40: Tahoe Boulevard & Eglinton Avenue East

Page 109: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project€¦ · detailed micro-simulation analysis (usingVISSIM) to assess vehicular delay and queuing impacts in the vicinity of the planned facility

Timings Eglinton Ave Lane Reductions - Built Facility46: Spectrum Way & Eglinton Avenue West PM Peak Hour

S Fortner Synchro 7 - Report02/06/2009 Page 3

Lane Group SEL SET NWL NWT NEL NET SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 168 21 79 15 34 1037 36 2003Turn Type Perm Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 57.0 57.0 57.0 57.0Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 64.0 64.0 64.0 64.0Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 64.0 64.0 64.0 64.0Total Split (%) 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 64.0% 64.0% 64.0% 64.0%Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0All-Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max C-MaxAct Effct Green (s) 25.5 25.5 25.5 60.5 60.5 60.5 62.5Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.62v/c Ratio 0.55 0.86 0.84 0.58 0.57 0.22 1.01Control Delay 38.2 55.3 71.6 55.7 13.8 14.4 36.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 38.2 55.3 71.6 55.7 13.8 14.4 36.6LOS D E E E B B DApproach Delay 49.4 71.6 15.0 36.2Approach LOS D E B D

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 100Actuated Cycle Length: 100Offset: 82 (82%), Referenced to phase 2:NETL and 6:SWTL, Start of GreenNatural Cycle: 85Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.01Intersection Signal Delay: 32.6 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 102.4% ICU Level of Service GAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 46: Spectrum Way & Eglinton Avenue West