sr 289 (ninth avenue) from underwood avenue to sr 742

ESCAMBIA COUNTY FLORIDA

REQUEST FOR LETTERS OF INTEREST

SR 289 (Ninth Avenue) from Underwood Avenue to SR 742 (Creighton Road) Project Development and Environmental (PD&E) Study Solicitation Identification Number PD 09-10.057

Per The Terms and Conditions of PD 02-03.079

Letters of Interest Will Be Received Until: 11:59 p.m. CDT, Monday, June 21, 2010

Office of Purchasing, Room 11.101

213 Palafox Place, Pensacola, FL 32502 Matt Langley Bell III Building

Post Office Box 1591 Pensacola, FL 32597-1591

Attention: Paul R. Nobles, CPPO, CPPB, FCN, FCPM, FCCM

Board of County Commissioners Grover Robinson IV, Chairman Kevin W. White, Vice Chairman

Wilson Robertson Gene M. Valentino

Marie Young From:

Claudia Simmons, CPPO Purchasing Manager

All requests for assistance should be made in writing when possible. Responses will be provided to all known submitters in writing. No verbal responses will be provided. Assistance: Paul R. Nobles, CPPO, CPPB, FCN, FCPM, FCCM Purchasing Coordinator Office of Purchasing Matt Langley Bell III Building 213 Palafox Place 2nd Floor, Room 11.101 Pensacola, FL 32502 T: 850.595.4918 F: 850.595.4805 e-mail: [email protected]

NOTICE It is the specific legislative intent of the Board of County Commissioners that NO CONTRACT under this solicitation shall be formed between Escambia County and the awardee vendor until such time as the contract is executed by the last party to the transaction.

SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS: Any person requiring special accommodations to attend or participate, pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, should call the Office of Purchasing, (850) 595-4980 at least five (5) working days prior to the solicitation opening. If you are hearing or speech impaired, please contact the Office of Purchasing at (850) 595-4684 (TTY).

Escambia County Florida Request For Letters Of Interest

Proposer's Checklist SR 289 (Ninth Avenue) from Underwood Avenue to SR 742 (Creighton Road)

Project Development and Environmental (PD&E) Study Solicitation Identification Number PD 09-10.057

Per The Terms and Conditions of PD 02-03.079 How To Submit Your Proposal Please review this document carefully. Offers that are accepted by the county are binding contracts. Incomplete proposals are not acceptable. All documents and submittals must be received by the office of purchasing on or before date and hour specified for receipt. Late proposals will be returned unopened. The County has implemented a new Electronic Submittal Process, which requires the use of GovernmentForms.software®. This software, which generates and posts a customized version the Standard Form (SF) 330 along with the capability to upload other required items, can be downloaded at the following address: http://submittals.myescambia.com/

• Letter Of Interest (PDF) • GSA Standard Form 330

• Part II (PD 02-03.079, Professional Services As Governed by Florida Statute 287.055, provide if not already submitted

• Part I

PDF1 These forms are available as editable PDF documents from the website (links to these and other forms can be found at the end of this document).

The Following Submittals Are Required Upon Notice Of Award:

• Certificate Of Insurance (provide if not submitted electronically)

How To Submit A No Proposal If you do not wish to propose at this time, please respond to the Office of Purchasing providing your firm's name, address, a signature, and a reason for not responding in a sealed envelope. This will ensure your company's active status in our vendor’s list.

This form is only for your convenience to assist in filling out your proposal. Do not return with your proposal.

PD 09-10.057, SR 289 (Ninth Avenue) from Underwood Avenue to SR 742 (Creighton Road) Project Development and Environmental (PD&E) Study

1

INFORMATION PACKAGE

SR 289 (Ninth Avenue) from Underwood Avenue to SR 742 (Creighton Road) Project Development and Environmental (PD&E) Study

Solicitation Identification Number PD 09-10.057 Per The Terms and Conditions of PD 02-03.079

Scope of Work

See Attached Scope of Work (29 pages) and Design Report (164 pages) Project Development and Environmental (PD&E) Study estimate> $700,000 Anticipated Disciplines (Function Codes SF 330) for this project

Code Description 02 Administrative 05 Archeologist 06 Architect 12 Civil Engineer 16 Construction Manager 18 Cost Engineer/Estimator 23 Environmental Engineer 24 Environmental Scientist 29 Geographic Information System Specialist 33 Hydrographic Surveyor 38 Land Surveyor 47 Planner: Urban/Regional 48 Project Manager 53 Scheduler 55 Soils Engineer 58 Technician/Analyst 60 Transportation Engineer

Anticipated Experience Categories (Profile Codes SF 330) for this project Code Description A01 Acoustics, Noise Abatement A02 Aerial Photography; Airborne Data and Imagery

Collection and Analysis A04 Air Pollution Control A05 Airports; Navaids; Airport Lighting; Aircraft Fueling A06 Airports; Terminals and Hangars; Freight Handling C08 Codes; Standards; Ordinances C15 Construction Management


2

C18 Cost Estimating; Cost Engineering and Analysis; Parametric Costing; Forecasting

D05 Digital Elevation and Terrain Model Development D06 Digital Orthophotography E09 Environmental Impact Studies, Assessments or

Statements E10 Environmental and natural Resource Mapping E11 Environmental Planning E12 Environmental Remediation E13 Environmental Testing and Analysis G04 Geographic Information System Services: Development,

Analysis, and Data Collection G05 Geospatial Data Conversion: Scanning, Digitizing,

Compilation, Attributing, Scribing, Drafting G06 Graphic Design H07 Highways; Streets; Airfield Paving; Parking Lots H13 Hydrographic Surveying I04 Intelligent Transportation Systems L02 Land Surveying P05 Planning (Community, Regional, Areawide and State) P06 Planning (Site, Installation and Project) R10 Risk Analysis S01 Safety Engineering; Accident Studies; OSHA Studies S10 Surveying; Platting; Mapping; Flood Plain Studies S13 Storm Water Handling and Facilities T03 Traffic and Transportation Engineering T04 Topographic Surveying and Mapping Z01 Zoning; Land Use Studies

I. INSTRUCTIONS TO SUBMITTERS

Firms desiring to provide described Professional Services shall submit one (1) electronic copy of your firms Letter of Interest containing all of the requested information no later than the date and time listed on the cover sheet. Submittals delivered late shall not be accepted or considered. No exceptions will be made. Government Forms Software: http://submittals.myescambia.com/

All information requested must be submitted. Failure to submit all information may result in a lower evaluation of the proposal. Letters, which are substantially incomplete or lack key information, may be rejected by the County at its discretion. The selection of the short listed firms will be based on the information provided in the submittal.


3

The submittals shall be in the GSA Standard Form (SF) 330 format with two additional sections as described below (include in Letter of Interest). No other format will be acceptable. Information submitted with your letter of interest should include documentation to demonstrate your firm’s qualifications and abilities to provide the scope of services. The submittal should include sufficient information to permit a clear understanding of similar past projects, especially in Florida, staff experience and abilities, and any other additional, pertinent details to describe the team’s capabilities. A committee will review the information submitted and short-list the firms. On-site presentations, interviews, and or discussions will be requested of a short list of three or more firms. Once all review is complete, the short-listed firms will be ranked by the selection committee with the top ranked firm being scheduled for negotiations. Award(s) resulting from this solicitation shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 1-9-5, CONSULTANTS of the Ordinances of Escambia County and Procedure PP-250 VENDOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS of the Purchasing Policies and Procedures of Escambia County.

The following policy will apply to all methods of source selection:

Conduct of Participants After the issuance of any solicitation, all bidders/proposers/protestors or individuals acting on their behalf are hereby prohibited from lobbying as defined herein or otherwise attempting to persuade or influence any elected County officials, their agents or employees or any member of the relevant selection committee at any time during the blackout period as defined herein; provided, however, nothing herein shall prohibit bidders/proposers/protestors or individuals acting on their behalf from communicating with the purchasing staff concerning a pending solicitation unless otherwise provided for in the solicitation or unless otherwise directed by the purchasing manager.

Definitions Blackout period means the period between the time the bids/proposals for invitations for bid or the request for proposal, or qualifications, or information, or requests for letters of interest, or the invitation to negotiate, as applicable, are received at the Escambia County Office of Purchasing and the time the Board awards the contract and any resulting bid protest is resolved or the solicitation is otherwise canceled. Lobbying means the attempt to influence the thinking of elected County officials, their agents or employees or any member of the relevant Selection Committee for or against a specific cause related to a pending solicitation for


4

goods or services, in person, by mail, by facsimile, by telephone, by electronic mail, or by any other means of communication.

Sanctions The Board may impose any one or more of the following sanctions on a nonemployee for violations of the policy set forth herein:

(a) Rejection/disqualification of submittal (b) Termination of contracts; or (c) Suspension or debarment as provided in Sec. 46-102 of the Escambia County

Code of Ordinances. This policy is not intended to alter the procedure for Protested Solicitations and Awards as set forth in the Sec. 46-101 of the Escambia County Code of Ordinances.

II. FIRMS' EVALUATIONS AND SELECTION

The County shall follow the procedures of the Consultants’ Competitive Negotiation Act, Title XIX, Chapter 287, Section 055 of the Florida Statutes. The selection committee shall consider such factors as:

1. Experienced in PD&E and Corridor Studies

2. Experienced in FDOT and FHWA Projects

3. Permitting, Traffic Analysis, Transportation

4. Skilled Personnel in Project Management

5. Willingness to meet Project schedule and budget requirements

6. Experience with Environmental and Drainage Studies

7. Whether firms are certified minority business enterprises or their

Subcontractor

8. Recent, current, and projected workload

9. Volume of work previously awarded to firms by the County

Points 20

20

10

10

10

10

10

5

5

Award(s) resulting from this solicitation shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 1-9-5, CONSULTANTS of the Ordinances of Escambia County and Procedure PP-250 VENDOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS of the Purchasing Policies and Procedures of Escambia County.


5

1. SCHEDULE

The following schedule shall be adhered to in so far as practical in all actions related to this procurement:

Mailing date of proposals Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Letters of Interest due date 11:59 p.m. CDT, Monday, June 21, 2010

Short-Listing Meeting Tuesday, June 29, 2010

Discussions with Short-Listed Firms Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Negotiations with First Ranked Firm Wednesday, July 28, 2010Board of County Commissioners approval Thursday, August 19, 2010

2. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

The County has implemented an Electronic Submittal Process that utilizes GovernmentForms.software® (GFS) to generate a customized version of the Standard Form (SF) 330 in a specific format. Other items shall be in PDF format and must be submitted by electronic upload via GFS or manually via the County’s web site at http://submittals.myescambia.com/ Required items are described below:

1. Letter of Interest (PDF format) Letter of Interest prepared by a corporate officer or principal of the firm authorized to obligate the firm contractually.

2. Standard Form (SF) 330 – Part I (GFS format) Generated by GovernmentForms.software®, maximum 50 pages, includes: • Standard Form (SF) 330 - Part I, Section A-C

Page Limit: Typically just 1 page in length • Standard Form (SF) 330 - Part I, Section D

Not required by County for this submittal • Standard Form (SF) 330 - Part I, Section E

Page Limit: 20 pages/resumes • Standard Form (SF) 330 - Part I, Section F

Page Limit: 10 pages/projects • Standard Form (SF) 330 - Part I, Section G

Page Limit: 1 page • Standard Form (SF) 330 - Part I, Section H

Page Limit: No section limit, although total form length shall not exceed 50 pages.


6

Requirements for this section (to be included in Letter of Interest): • Proposers shall include any additional information to represent your firm

for consideration. • Proposers shall list any work which their organization failed to complete in

the last five (5) years and describe the when, where, how and why of such failure.

• Proposers shall list any officer or partner of their team who in the last five (5) years failed to complete a contract handled in his/her name and to discuss the reasons thereof.

• Proposers shall list any lawsuits in which their team (firms and individuals) is involved relative to services performed or failed to perform over the last five (5) years.

SCOPE OF SERVICES PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL (PD&E) STUDIES

Financial Project ID: TBD Work Program Item No.: N/A Federal Aid Project No.: N/A County Section No.: 48003000 Description: SR 289 (Ninth Avenue) from Underwood Avenue to SR

742 (Creighton Road) Escambia County, Florida Bridge No.: N/A

(Stage I) SOS 7-09 i FPID: TBD

EXHIBIT A

PURPOSE ........................................................................................................................... 1

STUDY OBJECTIVE ........................................................................................................... 2

STUDY REQUIREMENTS AND PROVISIONS FOR WORK ............................................. 2 Governing Regulations 2 Project Manager 3 Liaison Office 3 Key Personnel 3 Meetings and Presentations 3 Quality Control 4 Correspondence 4 Submittals 4 Computer Automation 5 Coordination with Other Consultants and Entities 5 Optional Services 5

1.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ........................................................................................... 6 1.1 Public Involvement Program 6 1.2 Public Involvement Data Collection 6 1.3 Notice of Intent 6 1.4 Advance Notification 6 1.5 Scheduled Public Meetings 6 1.6 Other (Unscheduled) Public and Agency Meetings 9 1.7 Public Hearing 10 1.8 Location and Design Concept Acceptance (LDCA) 10 1.9 Special Public Involvement Requirements 11 1.10 Quality Control 11

2.0 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND REPORTS .......................................................... 12

Data Collection 12 2.1 Field Review 12 2.2 Aerial Photography 12 2.3 Survey Coordination 12 2.4 Existing Roadway Characteristics 12 2.5 Existing Structure Characteristics 13 2.6 Traffic Data 13 2.7 Crash Data 13 2.8 Existing Signage Inventory 13 2.9 Utilities & Railroads 14 2.10 Transportation Plans 14 2.11 Soils 14 2.12 Base Map 14

(Stage I) SOS 7-09 ii FPID: TBD

Needs 14 2.13 Safety 14 2.14 Analysis of Existing Conditions 14 2.15 Purpose and Need Statement 15

Design Analysis 15 2.16 Corridor Analysis 15 2.17 Traffic Analysis 16 2.18 Typical Section Analysis 17 2.19 Roadway Design Alternatives 17 2.20 Prepare Alternative Concept Plans 17 2.21 Drainage and Floodplain Analysis 18 2.22 Structures 18 2.23 Access Management 18 2.24 Multi-modal Accommodations 18 2.25 Maintenance of Traffic Analysis 18 2.26 Geotechnical Coordination 18 2.27 Intelligent Transportation Systems 19 2.28 Utilities and Railroads 19 2.29 Other Engineering Services 19

Comparative Analysis of Alternatives 19 2.30 Comparative Analysis and Evaluation Matrix 19 2.31 Selection of Preferred Alternative(s) 19 2.32 Conceptual Design Plans (Preferred) 19 2.33 Identify Construction Segments 19 2.34 Value Engineering 19 2.35 Construction Cost Estimates 20 2.36 Right Of Way Cost Estimates 20 2.37 Typical Section Package 20 2.38 Design Exceptions and Variations: 20 2.39 Project Development Summary Report (PDSR) 20

2.40 Quality Control 20

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND REPORTS .................................................... 20 3.1 Land Use Changes 21 3.2 Social 21 3.3 Economic 21 3.4 Mobility 21 3.5 Aesthetics 21 3.6 Relocation Potential 21

Cultural Resources 21 3.7 Archaeological and Historic Resources 21 3.8 Section 4(f) 21

Natural Resources 22 3.9 Wetlands and Essential Fish Habitat 22

(Stage I) SOS 7-09 iii FPID: TBD

(Stage I) SOS 7-09 iv FPID: TBD

3.10 Water Quality 22 3.11 Special Designations 22 3.12 Wildlife And Habitat 22 3.13 Identify Permit Conditions 22 3.14 Farmlands 22

Physical 22 3.15 Noise 22 3.16 Air Quality 22 3.17 Construction Impact Analysis 22 3.18 Contamination 22

Environmental Reports 23 3.19 Class of Action Determination 23 3.20 Environmental Assessment 23 3.21 Finding Of No Significant Impact 23 3.22 Draft Environmental Impact Statement 23 3.23 Final Environmental Impact Statement 23 3.24 Quality Control 23

4.0 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES ............................................................................... 23 4.1 Contract and Project Files 23 4.2 Project Management Meetings And Coordination 24

5.0 METHOD OF COMPENSATION .............................................................................. 24

6.0 SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY THE COUNTY ............................................. 24

SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL (PD&E) STUDIES

This Exhibit forms an integral part of the agreement between the Escambia County Board of County Commissioners (hereinafter referred to as the COUNTY) and ___________________________ (hereinafter referred to as the CONSULTANT) relative to the transportation facility described as follows:

Financial Project Number: TBD Federal Aid Project No.: N/A County Section No.: 48003000 Description: SR 289(Ninth Avenue) from West of SR 742 (Creighton

Road) to East o] Underwood Avenue Escambia County, Florida

PURPOSE

The purpose of this Exhibit is to describe the scope of work and the responsibilities of the CONSULTANT and the COUNTY in connection with the Preliminary Engineering (Conceptual Design), and Environmental Studies necessary to comply with Florida Department of Transportation (herinafter referred to as the FDOT) procedures and to obtain Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Location and Design Concept Acceptance (LDCA) of proposed improvements to this transportation facility.

The Project Development Process shall follow the FDOT'S publication titled "Project Development and Environment Manual", published 02/02/07 and all subsequent revisions. Throughout this Scope of Services portion of this CONSULTANT Contract, the publication will be referred to as the "PD&E Manual". All tasks identified in this scope of work will be done in accordance with the FDOT’s PD&E Manual, unless otherwise stated.

The PD&E Manual incorporates all the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); Federal law and executive orders; applicable Federal regulations included in the Federal Highway Administration Federal-Aid Policy Guide; and applicable State laws and regulations including Chapter 339.155 of the Florida Statutes. The project documentation prepared by the CONSULTANT in accordance with the PD&E Manual shall therefore comply with all applicable State and Federal laws, executive orders, and regulations.

The CONSULTANT shall perform those engineering services required for LDCA studies, including consideration of all social, economic, environmental effects, and mitigation as required by the FHWA and/or the Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Manual, along with the required environmental documents, engineering reports, preliminary plans, public hearing, and right-of-way maps.

5/24/2010(Stage I) A-1 FPID: TBD

Sections 1 through 4 of the Scope of Services will establish which items of work described in the PD&E Manual are specifically included in this contract, and additionally which of the items of work will be the responsibility of the CONSULTANT or the COUNTY.

The COUNTY will provide contract administration and provide management services and technical reviews of all work associated with the development and preparation of the engineering/environmental study reports for the transportation facility. This document covers Phase I of this PD&E.

If the Consultant performance is acceptable to the COUNTY, then Phase II – Engineering Design Services contract will be by a negotiate fee with Escambia County.

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The CONSULTANT is to conduct a PD&E study for proposed alternative routes to alleviate the congestion and safety issues in regards to the State Road (SR) 289, also known as Ninth Avenue, Langley Avenue and Tippin Avenue intersections. The study area will include the area from Underwood Avenue to SR 742 (Creighton Road), including the surrounding side street connections for possible alternatives. The specific objective of this study is to prepare a series of reports documenting the requirements for preliminary design, including existing and predicted conditions, typical sections, environmental impacts, preparation of Type II Categorical Exclusion, and costs of the alternatives. The CONSULTANT shall consider all viable alternatives/alignments and take into consideration the previously completed Conceptual Intersection Study.

STUDY REQUIREMENTS AND PROVISIONS FOR WORK

Governing Regulations

The services performed by the CONSULTANT shall comply with all applicable COUNTY and FDOT Manuals and Guidelines. The FDOT'S Manuals and Guidelines incorporate, by requirement or reference, all applicable State and Federal regulations. The current edition, including updates, of the following FDOT Manuals and Guidelines shall be used in the performance of this work. It is understood that AASHTO criteria shall apply as incipient policy.

All issuances and related COUNTY Policies and Directrives governing the implementation of all Federal and State regualtions

Florida Statutes Florida Administrative Codes Applicable Federal Regulations, U.S. Codes and Technical Advisories Project Development and Environment Manual ETDM Planning and Programming Manual Sociocultural Effects Evaluation Handbook Public Involvement Handbook Plans Preparation Manual


Interchange Handbook (525-030-160) Design Standards (625-010-003) Highway Capacity Manual Manual on Uniform Traffic Studies (MUTS) Minimum Standards for Design, Construction, and Maintenance Streets

and Highways (Florida Greenbook) (625-000-015) Guide for the Design of Bicycle Facilities (AASHTO) Florida Pedestrian Facilities Planning & Design Handbook Right-of-Way Mapping Handbook (550-030-015) Right-of-Way Procedures Manual (575-000-000) Location Survey Manual (550-030-101) Drainage Manual FDOT’s Stormwater Facilities Handbook Structures Design Guidelines (625-020-154) CADD Manual (No. 625-050-001) CADD Production Criteria Handbook FDOT Quality/Level of Service Standards Handbook Software & Tables K-Factor Estimation Process Project Traffic Forecasting Procedure (525-030-120) FDOT Highway Landscape Guide Basis of Estimates Manual

Project Manager

The COUNTY will designate a Project Manager who shall be the representative of the COUNTY for the Project. While it is expected the CONSULTANT shall seek and receive advice from various State, regional, and local agencies, the final direction on all matters of this Project remain with the COUNTY.

Liaison Office

The FDOT will designate a Liaison Officer who shall be the representative of the FDOT.

Key Personnel

The CONSULTANT'S work shall be performed and directed by the key personnel identified in the proposal presentations by the CONSULTANT. Any changes in the indicated personnel shall be subject to review and approval by the COUNTY.

Meetings and Presentations

The CONSULTANT shall attend a Notice to Proceed Meeting with COUNTY representatives, where relevant project information will be provided by the COUNTY, along with procedures for administering the contract. The CONSULTANT and his staff shall also be available with no more than a five (5) workday notice to attend meetings or make presentations at the request of the COUNTY. Such meetings and presentations may be held at any hour between 8:00 A.M. and 12:00 midnight on any day of the week. The CONSULTANT may be called upon to provide maps, press releases, advertisements, audiovisual displays and similar material for such meetings.


Quality Control

The CONSULTANT shall be responsible for insuring that all work products conform to COUNTY AND FDOT standards and criteria. This shall be accomplished through an internal Quality Control (QC) process performed by the CONSULTANT. This QC process shall insure that quality is achieved through checking, reviewing, and surveillance of work activities by objective and qualified individuals who were not directly responsible for performing the initial work.

Prior to submittal of the first invoice, the CONSULTANT shall submit to the COUNTY'S Project Manager for approval the proposed method or process of providing Quality Control for all work products. The Quality Control Plan shall identify the products to be reviewed, the personnel who perform the reviews, and the method of documentation.

Correspondence

Copies of all written correspondence between the CONSULTANT and any party pertaining specifically to this study shall be provided to the COUNTY for their records within one (1) week of the receipt of said correspondence.

Submittals

The CONSULTANT shall provide electronic and hard copies of the required documents as listed below. These are the anticipated printing requirements for the project. This tabulation will be used for estimating purposes, and the Project Manager will determine the number of copies required prior to each submittal.

Public Involvement: Copies:

Public Involvement Plan 5 Public Hearing Transcript 5 Engineering Items: Copies:

Corridor Report 5 Design Traffic Technical Memorandum 5 First Draft Project Development Summary Report 5 Second Draft Project Development Summary Report 5 Final Project Development Summary Report (Signed and Sealed) 5 Access Management Report 5 Location Hydraulics Report 5 Drainage/Pond Siting Report 5 Conceptual Design Roadway Plan Set 5 Typical Section Package 5 Design Variations and Exceptions Package (If needed) 5

Environmental Items: Copies:


Class of Action Determination 5 Type II Categorical Exclusion 5 Section 4(f) Evaluation (If applicable) 5 Noise Study Report 5 Air Quality Report 5 Contamination Screening Evaluation Report 5 Conceptual Stage Relocation Plan 5 Endangered Species Biological Assessment 5 Wetlands Evaluation Report (utilize UMAM) 5 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Report 5

Upon completion of the study, the CONSULTANT shall deliver to the County, in an organized manner, all project files, maps, sketches, worksheets, and other materials used or generated during the study process.

Computer Automation

The project will be developed utilizing Computer Aided Drafting and Design (CADD) systems. The FDOT makes available software to help assure quality and conformance with the policy and procedures regarding CADD. It is the responsibility of the CONSULTANT to meet the requirements in the FDOT CADD Manual The CONSULTANT will submit final documents and files as described therein. Additional related information is found in the FDOT Plans Preparation Manual

All computer disks shall be scanned for viruses prior to submitting to the COUNTY.

Coordination with Other Consultants and Entities

The CONSULTANT is to coordinate their work with any ongoing and/or planned projects that may affect this study.

The CONSULTANT is to coordinate with local governmental entities to ensure design and right of way requirements for the project are compatible with local public works improvements and right of way activities.

The CONSULTANT is to coordinate with any agencies and/or entities that require further coordination through the ETDM Process.

Optional Services

At the COUNTY’S option, the CONSULTANT may be requested to provide final design and plans preparation services or expert witness services for right-of-way acquisition. The fee for these services shall be negotiated in accordance with the terms detailed in Section 5.0, Method of Compensation, for a fair, competitive and reasonable cost, considering the scope and complexity of the project(s). A supplemental agreement for the additional services shall be executed in accordance with COUNTY guidelines.


1.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

Public involvement includes communicating to and receiving input from all interested persons, groups, and government organizations regarding the development of the project. The CONSULTANT shall coordinate and perform the appropriate level of public involvement for this project as outlined in Part 1, Chapter 11, and Part 2, Chapter 9 of the PD&E Manual, the FDOT Public Involvement Handbook. The CONSULTANT will be responsible for inputting data into the FDOT’s Efficient Transportation Decision Making (ETDM) program and monitoring comments received.

The CONSULTANT shall provide to the COUNTY drafts of all Public Involvement materials (i.e., newsletters, property owner letters, advertisements, etc.) associated with the following tasks for review and approval at least five (5) business days prior to printing and / or distribution.

1.1 Public Involvement Program

The CONSULTANT will prepare the Public Involvement Program following the Notice to Proceed. The program must be consistent with Part 1 Chapter 11 of the PD&E Manual for approval by the COUNTY. The program must be in written form and incorporated into the project file. The program will include identification of the audiences, outreach activities, a comment protocol to handle and track feedback, and a public involvement evaluation process to ensure the effectiveness of the public involvement techniques being utilized. The program will be updated and amended throughout the project duration as needed.

1.2 Public Involvement Data Collection

In addition to public involvement data collection (mailing list, news/stories), the CONSULTANT shall assist the COUNTY in preparing responses to any public inquiries as a result of the public involvement process.

1.3 Notice of Intent

N/A 1.4 Advance Notification

The CONSULTANT will be responsible for inputting necessary information into ETDM.

1.5 Scheduled Public Meetings

The CONSULTANT shall provide all support necessary for the COUNTY to hold or participate in various public meetings, which may include but not limited to:

• Scoping Meetings

• TPO Meetings: The CONSULTANT shall present to the TPO prior to each public meeting.


• Elected Officials/Agency Kick-off Meeting: A notification in the form of an introductory or kickoff meeting will be held by the CONSULTANT with COUNTY and CITY OF PENSACOLA elected officials to introduce the CONSULTANT and inform local, regional and state government of the initiation of the study. The CONSULTANT shall utilize knowledgeable staff members who can present and answer questions. The presentation by the COUNTY will include an introduction covering the purpose of the kickoff meeting, need for the project study, funding available, production schedules and introduction of the CONSULTANT (approximately 5-10 minutes). The presentation by the CONSULTANT will include the basis of the PD&E study as it relates to major tasks such as data collection, traffic projections, route studies, typical section development, public involvement, etc. Contact points with government and public will be stressed (approximately 10 minutes). The COUNTY official will then summarize and entertain questions.

• County Official’s Coordination Meeting: Meetings shall be held with the Escambia County Board of County Commissioners subsequent to the Alternatives Public Workshop and again after the Public Hearing to apprise local officials of the project status, specific location and design concepts, and to receive their comments. It is specifically required that the Environmental Document show evidence of this coordination. Presentation materials for the County Officials Coordination meetings shall include conceptual design plans (when applicable), audio/visual presentation and display boards, and handouts. Additional meetings with the Escambia County Board of County Commissioners and the County Administrator are anticipated.

• Public Kick-off Meeting

• Alternatives Public Meeting: The purpose of this meeting is to present to the public the results of the study to date and obtain comments on the alternatives. It is possible that additional alternatives will be suggested by citizen involvement. These meetings will be advertised and conducted by the CONSULTANT as an Information Meeting. The CONSULTANT will prepare all necessary displays, maps, script, etc. The CONSULTANT will actively participate in all portions of the presentation. Any press release or advertisements will indicate the meetings are a COUNTY activity.

• Up to two (2) media informational meetings (prior to elected official meetings)

For any of the above type meetings, the CONSULTANT shall prepare and/or provide:

• Scripts or agenda for presentation

• Handouts

• Graphics for presentation. The CONSULTANT will prepare displays for use during the meeting. These will include typical sections, aerials, before/after renderings, charts, graphs, and visual imaging as needed. A summary handout package including project information and other pertinent


information will be provided by the CONSULTANT. All graphics will be reviewed and approved by the COUNTY 2 weeks prior to the meetings.

• Meeting equipment set-up and tear-down.

• Legal and/or display advertisements. The CONSULTANT will pay the cost of publishing.

• Notification will be made to elected and appointed officials by personal letter. This letter shall be prepared by the CONSULTANT for the County’s signature and shall be mailed by the CONSULTANT no less than 15 days before the meetings. Letters shall be on COUNTY letterhead. The CONSULTANT will pay the cost of first class postage.

• Property owners and other interested parties shall receive an announcement prepared by the CONSULTANT and approved by the COUNTY no less than 10 days before the meetings to all property owners/business operators for whose property or business lies in whole or in part within 300 feet of the centerline of the project. The CONSULTANT will pay the cost of first class postage.

• News releases will be prepared by the CONSULTANT and shall be published during the week of the Public Information meeting. Two (2) newspaper display advertisements no less than 4” x 6” with graphic will be published in the local section, the first shall be two weeks in advance of the workshop, and the second will be the day before the workshop date. This shall be developed by the CONSULTANT and approved by the COUNTY. The CONSULTANT shall pay for the ads.

• Summary notes of meetings to be provided to the COUNTY’s Project Manager no later than 14 days after the meeting.

• The meeting format and length will be decided upon and developed in a joint meeting between the CONSULTANT and the COUNTY one month prior to the meeting. Currently, the preferred COUNTY policy is a formal style meeting.

• Briefing of the COUNTY staff by the CONSULTANT (who will be on hand during the meeting) will be done twice per meeting. The first time is to be at least seven days prior to the meeting and the second time will be just before the meeting to make sure the staff is up to date on the project and understands the study well enough to discuss it with the public and to answer questions.

• Conducting the workshop will take knowledgeable CONSULTANT staff and will require enough staff members to handle the crowd anticipated for the meeting. The CONSULTANT staff shall be available for some time before and after the meeting in order to maintain public contact, etc.


• The CONSULTANT shall also provide office support personnel to ensure attendees register (CONSULTANT must provide a sign-in sheet with space available for the person’s name, address, and telephone number).

• The CONSULTANT shall provide self-addressed comment forms to allow attendees to provide written comments within 10 days after the Public Meeting. The Engineer of Record (EOR) shall be listed as the contact for all comments.

• If issues are identified at the workshop, their significance will be determined by the CONSULTANT and the COUNTY; i.e., are the issues valid enough for further consideration or do they have elements which may require further consideration.

• Addressing the issues and responding to them is also an integral part of the workshop process. This is to be accomplished by the CONSULTANT. The COUNTY shall review and approve all response letters prior to mailing. Elected Public Officials require a 48 hour response time.

• Briefing and debriefing of County staff.

The CONSULTANT will investigate potential meeting sites to advise the COUNTY on their suitability. Consideration shall be given to capacity, lighting, and other physical characteristics that may influence the selection of the site. The site shall meet ADA standards. The CONSULTANT shall ensure that Title VI requirements are met.

Room size will be based on the number of mail outs. The proposed meeting site shall be presented to the COUNTY for approval prior to the CONSULTANT negotiating use of the site.

The CONSULTANT will pay all costs for meeting site rental and insurance.

The CONSULTANT will attend the meetings with an appropriate number of personnel to assist the COUNTY'S Project Manager.

It is estimated for this project there will be seven (7) Public meetings during the study including two (2) meetings for TPO coordination, two (2) Public Information Meetings, two (2) Escambia County Board of County Commissioners meetings, and one (1) Committee of the Whole meeting.

1.6 Other (Unscheduled) Public and Agency Meetings

In addition to scheduled public meetings, the CONSULTANT may be required to participate in other meetings with the public, elected officials, special interest groups or public agencies. The CONSULTANT’S participation will be limited to participation during the meeting, note taking, and summarizing the meeting in a memo to the file. It is estimated for this project there will be two (2) meetings during the study.


1.7 Public Hearing

The CONSULTANT shall provide all the support services listed in Sections 1.2 and 1.5 above, and in addition shall prepare:

Public officials and Agency letters: The CONSULTANT will prepare the letters, insert them in envelopes, and address the envelopes. The CONSULTANT will pay for first class postage.

Property owner letters: The CONSULTANT will provide a list of the names and addresses of the property owners from county tax rolls in a format specified by the COUNTY. The CONSULTANT will prepare the letters, insert them in envelopes, and address the envelopes. The CONSULTANT will pay for first class postage.

It is anticipated for this project that there will be one (1) Public Hearing during the study.

• A draft Public Hearing Notice for publication in the Florida Administrative Weekly per PD&E Manual, Chapter 11, Section 11-2.9.3.1.

• All elements of the multi-media presentation including a script for a formal tape-recorded presentation, including synchronization with 35 mm color slides.

• Camera-ready graphics or the 35 mm color slides.

• Graphics.

• Displays of plans and report(s) for the public display to the public for 35 days prior to the hearing.

• Brochures or handouts.

• Prepare public advertisements.

• Court Reporter.

• Briefing and debriefing of County staff.

The CONSULTANT will procure a verbatim transcript of the Public Hearing. The CONSULTANT will combine the transcript with any other comments received by the COUNTY as part of the public hearing record, and affidavits of publication of legal ads, and will provide copies of the transcript for the COUNTY'S use. The CONSULTANT will also prepare a Public Hearing Summary attached to the Public Hearing Transcript.

1.8 Location and Design Concept Acceptance (LDCA)

For LDCA, the CONSULTANT shall prepare a quarter-page legal display advertisement to be published in the area newspaper having the largest daily circulation (the same newspaper the Public Hearing was advertised in). The


notice is published and paid for by the CONSULTANT. The COUNTY shall review and approve prior to the publication.

The CONSULTANT will adhere to all state and federal requirements for publication.

1.9 Special Public Involvement Requirements

In addition to section 1.7, the CONSULTANT shall collect the following data for public involvement:

• Media in the project area should be identified and placed on the mailing list to be used for new, advertisements, etc.

• The mailing list of officials and interested parties shall also include any person or institution expressing an interest in the project.

• Mailing list preparation. This process involves the identification of any affected, possibly affected and interested parties early in the study process.

• Elected and appointed officials in the area (city, state, county) and community leaders should be identified and placed on the mailing list of officials and interested parties.

• Possible permit and review agencies should be identified and placed on the mailing list of officials and interested parties.

• Other special Public Involvement requirements include preparing up to four (4) project newsletters, developing 3-D graphic renderings for public meetings and preparing a summary of public involvement activities (Comments and Coordination Report).

1.10 Quality Control

The CONSULTANT shall ensure that all work products conform to FDOT and Escambia County standards and criteria. This shall be accomplished through an internal Quality Control (QC) process performed by the CONSULTANT. This QC process shall ensure that quality is achieved through checking, reviewing, and surveillance of work activities by objective and qualified individuals who were not directly responsible for performing the initial work.

Prior to submittal of the first invoice, the CONSULTANT shall submit to the COUNTY’S Project Manager for approval the proposed method of process of providing Quality Control for all work products. The Quality Control Plan shall identify the products to be reviewed, the personnel who will perform the reviews, and the method of documentation.


2.0 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND REPORTS

The CONSULTANT shall coordinate and perform the appropriate level of engineering analysis for this project as outlined in Part 1, Chapter 4 of the PD&E Manual and the following sections.

Data Collection

Upon notice to proceed, the CONSULTANT shall begin preliminary assessments of the study corridor from an engineering standpoint. This task is largely of a data gathering nature. This activity consists of collecting various information and materials relative to the performance of engineering analyzes within the study area. The information should include all data necessary to perform adequate evaluation of the location and design of a transportation facility.

2.1 Field Review

The CONSULTANT shall conduct all anticipated field trips needed to collect engineering data

2.2 Aerial Photography

Use Aerial Photography as a basis for plotting various data necessary for both engineering and environmental analysis, alternative corridor and design studies, and the development of the preliminary plans of conceptual design. Copies of aerial photography are the prime source of information used to convey project considerations to the public at public meetings.

The COUNTY will furnish the necessary aerial photography for use in the study at a 1”=100’ scale accuracy. The aerial photography will be provided as rasterized imagery.

2.3 Survey Coordination

Land surveying and targeting services to provide adequate control for the aerial photography is not required for this project. Any other required survey services will be the responsibility of the CONSULTANT.

2.4 Existing Roadway Characteristics

The CONSULTANT shall be responsible to procure the entire engineering data list in Part 1, Chapter 4 of the PD&E Manual and other necessary data to conduct a PD&E Study and prepare a Project Development Summary Report (PDSR) as described in the ETDM Manual. The CONSULTANT shall develop a CADD database, supported by computer spreadsheets, that includes all existing highway characteristics such as project files, contract documents, right-of-way maps, straight line diagrams, Roadway Characteristics Inventory, and drainage maps.. CADD database information shall be compatible for use on aerial photography used for Public hearing displays, Corridor Base Maps, and Conceptual Design Plans.


2.5 Existing Structure Characteristics

Structures within the project limits are limited to mast arms and drainage structures.

2.6 Traffic Data

The COUNTY will furnish the following initial traffic data: Current corridor traffic counts and available turning movement counts from the Conceptual Intersection Improvement report. After consultation with FDOT and the COUNTY, the CONSULTANT shall obtain the remaining necessary initial traffic data:

• 20 year Design Corridor System Traffic with K, D & T Factors.

• Volume of trucks (medium and heavy), and buses for existing, opening, interim years and design year

• LOS "C" traffic volumes at anticipated posted speed if Level of Service D, E or F is anticipated during the life of the project (for noise study)

The CONSULTANT will analyze the traffic projections provided initially by the COUNTY, and report to the Project Manager concerning apparent inconsistencies. The CONSULTANT will provide the Project Manager with support and advice in procuring acceptable revised Traffic Projections. The CONSULTANT will furnish 24-hour traffic machine counts (approach volumes at 15-minute increments) at all signalized and unsignalized major intersections along SR 290 and other locations as necessary to evaluate the alternative corridors. Based on an analysis of the 24-hour traffic machine counts and evaluation of current and future development trends (traffic generators) the CONSULTANT will then perform 8-hour manual vehicle turning movement counts (7:00 – 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 – 6:00 p.m.) at those intersections where required.

2.7 Crash Data

The CONSULTANT shall obtain available data from FDOT'S Database and local sources for various highway segments required. Obtain data for previous five years. The data collected shall include the number and type of crashes, crash locations, number of fatalities and injuries, and estimates of property damage and economic loss.

2.8 Existing Signage Inventory

N/A


2.9 Utilities & Railroads

The CONSULTANT shall obtain information in accordance with Part 2, Chapter 10 of the PD&E Manual.

2.10 Transportation Plans

The CONSULTANT shall obtain plans for all modes of transportation including surface, transit and non-motorized modes. The following plans or studies should be obtained:

• Urban Area Transportation Study, and if applicable, County Cost Feasible and Needs Plans

• Local Comprehensive Plans; city and county

• Transit; rail, bus, other

• Non-motorized modes, including bikeways and pedestrian walkways

2.11 Soils

The CONSULTANT shall review the United States Department of Agriculture, Geological Survey, Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly Soil Conservation Service) Maps and summarize the findings.

2.12 Base Map

The CONSULTANT shall develop a CADD database that includes existing characteristics. CADD data base information shall be compatible for use on aerial photography used for public hearing presentations, corridor maps, and concept plans.

Needs

The CONSULTANT shall establish and/or verify the purpose and need for the project as outlined in Part 2, Chapter 5 of the PD&E Manual.

2.13 Safety

Based on the information obtained from the crash data the CONSULTANT shall identify project needs associated with the safety of the existing facility.

2.14 Analysis of Existing Conditions

The CONSULTANT shall analyze the existing conditions in order to identify any deficiencies that are to be identified in the Needs section.


2.15 Purpose and Need Statement

The CONSULTANT shall update and verify the purpose and need for the project from the ETDM Programming Summary Report as outlined in Part 2, Chapter 5 of the PD&E Manual.

Design Analysis

Utilizing the data collected as part of this Scope of Services, the CONSULTANT shall perform the engineering analysis necessary to complete the project development process. The task of engineering analysis will be ongoing throughout the duration of the project and will be performed with consideration to the results of the environmental impacts analysis.

After selection of viable corridor(s), the CONSULTANT shall develop and analyze alternate conceptual design alternatives. The development of the design alternatives shall consider context sensitive solutions.

The CONSULTANT shall develop and evaluate all viable alternatives in order to address the project needs.

2.16 Corridor Analysis

For some of the project limits, the existing alignment along SR 289 may be the only feasible alternative. In these areas, the CONSULTANT shall document that the existing corridor is the only feasible corridor and the reasons that other corridors were not considered.

The CONSULTANT shall investigate the area surrounding the existing facility to determine reasonable corridor alternative considerations. It is anticipated that no more than three (3) alternative corridors will be investigated and developed.

The CONSULTANT shall use aerial photography to identify possible corridor locations while giving consideration to the following alignment controls which may influence corridor location:

Available right-of-way through which an improvement providing acceptable service could be routed.

Cultural features including public and private development.

Natural features which could be impacted by the project.

Logical termini giving consideration to directness, length, and service.

The CONSULTANT shall analyze and evaluate each corridor alternate to a point of rejection or selection as a viable corridor. The impacts for each alternative shall be identified and expressed in a form suitable for comparison to other corridor alternatives. It will be necessary to analyze in sufficient detail to identify enough differences to select the most viable corridor(s) that would be in the best overall public interest.


Corridor Report:

The CONSULTANT shall prepare a Corridor Report to document the results of the corridor analysis. The Corridor report shall summarize the project need, discuss the corridors evaluated, and provide a recommendation for the best corridor.

Corridor Base Maps:

The CONSULTANT will draw Corridor Base Maps on Aerial Photography. The Base Maps will be prepared at a scale of 1”= 500’.

2.17 Traffic Analysis

Design Traffic

The CONSULTANT is responsible for developing the traffic projections to be used to establish the basic design requirements for roadway typical sections, and intersection design. The CONSULTANT will develop Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and Design Hour Volume (DHV) for the present year, the opening year, ten years and twenty years from opening the new facility. The CONSULTANT shall develop and analyze the traffic data for each viable corridor and design alternative, as appropriate.

Traffic Operational Analysis

The CONSULTANT shall also perform the following activities in connection with the Design year; twenty (20) years post construction traffic. Capacity analyses at appropriate locations.

Design Traffic Memo

After selection of viable corridor(s), the CONSULTANT will prepare a Design Traffic Technical Memorandum. This memorandum will document the methodology used in developing the traffic demand and multi-modal splits, if applicable. The memorandum shall also identify the design traffic volumes for each corridor alternate, which may include combinations with other modes of transportation. The CONSULTANT will use the results of the traffic data collection activities described in section 2.6 of this scope of services, and the initial traffic data furnished by the COUNTY. After FDOT approval of the Design Traffic Technical Memorandum, those traffic projections will be used during the study of conceptual design alternatives and for the analysis of any impacts which depend on traffic inputs (i.e. noise impacts and air quality assessments). The Design Traffic Memo will also include the traffic operational analysis of the alternatives. The design traffic will be prepared in accordance with the Project Traffic Forecasting Procedure (# 525-030-120).


2.18 Typical Section Analysis

The CONSULTANT shall develop all appropriate typical section alternatives for the project. These will include the County and FDOT’s standard typical sections, and any typical sections that may result in minimizing right of way, and incorporating context sensitive solutions.

2.19 Roadway Design Alternatives

The CONSULTANT shall develop Roadway Design Alternatives, as outlined in Part 1, Chapter 4 of the PD&E Manual, which consist of alternative roadway alignments within the selected corridor(s) identified in the PHASE 1 Corridor Studies. This work includes determining the location of each alignment alternative’s centerline, edge of pavement, and right-of-way requirements and will show the lengths and locations of structures along each alignment alternative and, where intersections need realignment, the general configuration for that realignment.

For each Design Alternative, the CONSULTANT shall determine:

• Horizontal and vertical alignment

• Typical Section

• Preliminary right-of-way costs

• Preliminary drainage to the extent of identifying required outfalls

• Traffic data

• Geometric concepts

• Existing and proposed utility location to the extent they affect the decision process

• Soils data

• Extent of improvement of all intersecting roads

• Acreage involved

• Location of detention/retention basins as may be required

• Locations of noise barriers, if applicable.

• Other such design features as may be pertinent

2.20 Prepare Alternative Concept Plans

The CONSULTANT will overlay Concept Plans on the base maps. At a minimum, the concept plans should include the proposed and existing right-of-way lines, proposed concepts for roadway and intersection improvements,


potential ponds and surrounding topography. Major intersections shall be analyzed to assess capacity needs and lane arrangements and identify right-of-way requirements.

2.21 Drainage and Floodplain Analysis

The CONSULTANT shall perform preliminary drainage design in order to determine potential outfall locations and preliminary sizes (volume and area) of required detention and/or retention facilities for storm water treatment or attenuation. The location and size of potential detention/retention areas will be determined for all viable alternate alignments.

The CONSULTANT shall prepare a Pond Siting Report for the project in accordance with the FDOT’s Stormwater Facilities Handbook.

2.22 Structures

The CONSULTANT will evaluate conceptual structures vertical and horizontal alignments, if needed.

2.23 Access Management

The CONSULTANT shall review the FDOT's State Highway System Access Management Classification System and Standards (Rule 14-97) and determine their application to the project. The CONSULTANT shall determine the proper access classification and standard to be applied to the project and coordinated with the Districts’ Access Management Review Committee.

The proposed access management plan shall be presented as part of the public involvement process. If an Access Management Classification/Reclassification Public Hearing is required, it will be combined with another public meeting.

2.24 Multi-modal Accommodations

The CONSULTANT will coordinate with transit and local government officials in order to determine what multi-modal accommodations will be studied and evaluated as part of the project alternatives. This task only includes existing and planned multi-modal facilities.

2.25 Maintenance of Traffic Analysis

The CONSULTANT will analyze the design alternatives for constructability, and the ability to maintain traffic. If the constructability analysis indicates that there will be a substantial cost to maintain traffic, the cost estimate will be included in the cost estimate for that alternative.

2.26 Geotechnical Coordination

N/A


2.27 Intelligent Transportation Systems

The CONSULTANT will coordinate with TPO and local government officials in order to determine what ITS accommodations will be studied and evaluated as part of this project.

2.28 Utilities and Railroads

Based on the coordination with the utility companies along the project the CONSULTANT shall prepare a Utility Assessment Package as described in Part 2, Chapter 10 of the PD&E Manual. The CONSULTANT will also address impacts to existing and proposed railroads.

2.29 Other Engineering Services

N/A

Comparative Analysis of Alternatives

The County will determine which viable alternative(s) to further evaluate through the public involvement process and environmental analysis. The possibility exists that the No-Build alternative may be selected at this point.

2.30 Comparative Analysis and Evaluation Matrix

After developing the viable alternatives and costs, the CONSULTANT will prepare a matrix comparing the impacts and costs of the alternatives evaluated, with a recommendation of the most viable alternative(s). The CONSULTANT shall present their recommendations to the COUNTY for consideration.

2.31 Selection of Preferred Alternative(s)

The CONSULTANT shall recommend a preferred alternative(s) based on a review and analysis of all engineering, environmental, and public involvement issues related to the project.

2.32 Conceptual Design Plans (Preferred)

The CONSULTANT will finalize concept plans for the preferred alternative that include refinements from the public hearing.

2.33 Identify Construction Segments

The CONSULTANT shall provide a recommended plan for project implementation to include the proposed construction staging, segments, financing and sequencing of plans.

2.34 Value Engineering

N/A


2.35 Construction Cost Estimates

The CONSULTANT shall develop construction cost estimates and updates for design alternatives. The cost estimates are to be developed using the FDOT’s long range estimating (LRE) program.

2.36 Right Of Way Cost Estimates

The CONSULTANT shall develop a right-of-way cost estimate for the design alternatives.

2.37 Typical Section Package

The CONSULTANT will prepare the Typical Section Package in accordance with the FDOT’s Plans Preparation Manual (excluding pavement design).

2.38 Design Exceptions and Variations:

The CONSULTANT will identify and prepare any exception and/or variations package(s) for approval in accordance with the FDOT’s Plan Preparation Manual.

2.39 Project Development Summary Report (PDSR)

The CONSULTANT will prepare a Project Development Summary Report as per Part 1, Chapter 4 of the PD&E Manual. The PDSR shall include documentation on the development of all alternatives studied during the PD&E Study process.


See section 1.10 of this document.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND REPORTS

The CONSULTANT shall coordinate and perform the appropriate level of environmental analysis for this project as outlined in the PD&E Manual and the following references.

The CONSULTANT shall utilize the Programming Summary Report and graphical information from the Environmental Screening Tool (EST) available at http://www.dot.state.fl.us/emo, or other appropriate database. Data base information shall be compatible for use on base maps used for public presentations, corridor maps, and alternative plans.

The level of effort for the following work activities shall be commensurate with the level of impact identified in the final Programming Summary Report. If the Summary Degree Of Effect from the Final Programming Summary Report is "No Involvement", or "None", for an activity, the activity will be marked N/A in the Scope of Services.


http://www.dot.state.fl.us/emo

Sociocultural Effects

The CONSULTANT shall collect data regarding the following Sociocultural issues. Pertinent data shall be collected, analyzed and summarized in the appropriate section of the Project Development Summary Report (PDSR). Pertinent data shall also be displayed on the base map, as applicable. These issues shall be analyzed in accordance with Part 2, Chapter 9 of the PD&E Manual and the Sociocultural Effects Evaluation Handbook (available at http://www.dot.state.fl.us/emo).

3.1 Land Use Changes

In accordance with Part 2, Chapter 9 of the PD&E Manual.

3.2 Social

In accordance with Part 2 Chapter 9 of the PD&E Manulal.

The CONSULTANT shall collect the data, complete the Community Characteristics Inventory (CCI), and perform the analysis necessary to determine Title VI/VII involvement, evaluate community cohesions, and community services.

3.3 Economic


3.4 Mobility


3.5 Aesthetics


3.6 Relocation Potential

The CONSULTANT shall collect the data and perform the analysis necessary to complete a Conceptual Stage Relocation Plan for the preferred alternative..

Cultural Resources

3.7 Archaeological and Historic Resources


3.8 Section 4(f)

In accordance with Part 2, Chapter 13 of the PD&E Manual, if applicable.


http://www.dot.state.fl.us/emo

Natural Resources

3.9 Wetlands and Essential Fish Habitat

In accordance with Part 2, Chapters 11 and 18 of the PD&E Manual. This includes a Conceptual Mitigation Plan, if applicable.

3.10 Water Quality


3.11 Special Designations

In accordance with Part 2, Chapters 19, 21, 23, and 26 of the PD&E Manual, respectively.

3.12 Wildlife And Habitat


3.13 Identify Permit Conditions

The CONSULTANT shall identify permit conditions and type of permits required. This task includes the review of maps and data in order to determine permit related information for the project.

3.14 Farmlands


Physical

3.15 Noise


3.16 Air Quality


3.17 Construction Impact Analysis


3.18 Contamination

The CONSULTANT shall perform the necessary analysis to complete the Contamination Screening Evaluation for all viable alternatives, and complete the Contamination Screening Evaluation Report as described in Part 2, Chapter 22, of the PD&E Manual.


Environmental Reports

The Environmental Documents prepared by the CONSULTANT will comply with the procedures listed in the PD&E Manual, Part 1, and will also follow the format and include content described in Part 2 of the PD&E Manual. The task of documentation includes the preparation of draft and interim reports prepared by the CONSULTANT for review and comment upon by the COUNTY and FDOT prior to producing final reports and documents.

3.19 Class of Action Determination

A Type 2 Categorical Exclusion is the expected level of environmental documentation required for this project. The CONSULTANT will complete the Environmental Determination Form to document the Categorical Exclusion as described in Part 1, Chapter 5, of the PD&E Manual.

3.20 Environmental Assessment


3.21 Finding Of No Significant Impact


3.22 Draft Environmental Impact Statement

N/A

3.23 Final Environmental Impact Statement

N/A


See section 1.10 of this document.

4.0 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES

4.1 Contract and Project Files

Project Management efforts for complete setup and maintenance, developing monthly progress reports, schedule updates, work effort to develop and execute sub-consultant agreements etc. Progress reports shall be delivered to the COUNTY in a format as prescribed by the COUNTY and no less than 10 days prior to submission of the corresponding invoice. The Project Manager will make judgment on whether work of sufficient quality and quantity has been accomplished by comparing the reported percent complete against actual work accomplished.


Within ten (10) days after the Notice to Proceed, the CONSULTANT shall provide a schedule of calendar deadlines accompanied by an anticipated payout curve. Said schedule and anticipated payout curve shall be prepared in a format prescribed by the COUNTY.

4.2 Project Management Meetings And Coordination

The CONSULTANT shall meet with the COUNTY as needed throughout the life of the project. It is anticipated that one (1) meeting per month will be needed. These meetings will include progress and miscellaneous review and other coordination activities with the County.

5.0 METHOD OF COMPENSATION

Payment for the work accomplished will be in accordance with Exhibit B of this contract. Invoices shall be submitted to the COUNTY in a format prescribed by the COUNTY. The COUNTY 'S Project Manager and the CONSULTANT shall monitor the cumulative invoiced billings to insure the reasonableness of the billings compared to the project schedule and the work accomplished and accepted by the COUNTY.

Payments will not be made that exceed the percentage of work identified in the approved payout curve and schedule provided in accordance with Section 4.1.

6.0 SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY THE COUNTY

The COUNTY will provide those services and materials as set forth below:

• Project data currently on file.

• All available information in the possession of the COUNTY pertaining to utility companies whose facilities may be affected by the proposed construction.

• All future information that is in possession or may come to the COUNTY pertaining to subdivision plans, so that the CONSULTANT may take advantage of additional areas that can be utilized as part of the existing right-of-way.

• Process Advance Notification and all environmental and engineering documents including the Permit Coordination Package.

• Existing FDOT and COUNTY right-of-way maps.

• The FDOT will permit the CONSULTANT to utilize the FDOT'S computer facilities upon proper authorization as described in the FDOT Procedure No. 325-060-401.



• The COUNTY and FDOT will provide available crash data.

9th Avenue at Langley Avenue and Tippin Avenue

Design Recommendation Report Escambia County, Florida

DraftContract No. PD 02-03.79

Prepared by: American Consulting Engineers of Florida, LLC 4489 Woodbine Road Pace, FL 32571

For:

Escambia County Florida

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................... 2

EXISTING CONDITIONS............................................................................................................ 3 POSTED SPEEDS...................................................................................................................... 3 PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLIST, and PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.......................................... 3 UTILITIES.................................................................................................................................. 4 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES.......................................................................... 4 ACCIDENT DATA .................................................................................................................... 5 TRAFFIC VOLUME AND LEVEL OF SERVICE................................................................... 5

SHORT TERM SOLUTIONS ....................................................................................................... 8 ACCESS MANAGEMENT ....................................................................................................... 8 SIGNAL TIMING ADJUSTMENTS......................................................................................... 9

Alternative 1............................................................................................................................ 9 Alternative 2.......................................................................................................................... 10 Alternative 3.......................................................................................................................... 11 Alternative 4.......................................................................................................................... 12

LONG TERM SOLUTIONS........................................................................................................ 13 GEOMETRIC IMPROVEMENTS........................................................................................... 13

Alternative 5.......................................................................................................................... 13 Alternative 6.......................................................................................................................... 15 Alternative 7.......................................................................................................................... 16 Alternative 8.......................................................................................................................... 16

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................... 17 Short Term Solutions ................................................................................................................ 17 Long Term Solutions ................................................................................................................ 17

INTRODUCTION SR 289 (9th Avenue) is located in Pensacola, Florida in Escambia County and is under the

jurisdiction of FDOT - District 3. Langley Avenue, Tippin Avenue, and 12th Avenue are also

located in Pensacola and are under the jurisdiction of Escambia County. The functional

classification of 9th Avenue, according to FDOT’s District 3 road inventory, is an “urban other

principal arterial”. Langley Avenue and Tippin Avenue are local collector roadways. These

streets make up what is commonly called the “triangle area” that consist of six approaches and

three traffic signals which are controlled by a master controller to provide coordinated

movements.

The purpose of this study is to review the current signal timings, accident data and traffic

volumes to determine what, if any, recommendations for short-term (signal timing adjustments,

access management improvements, and minor lane configuration changes) and long-term

(right-of-way acquisition and major roadway re-alignments) solutions can be made to improve

the traffic flow through this intersection. The intersection was also reviewed for a possible

roundabout design.

Figure 1 – Project Location Map

2

In addition to the triangle area, other intersections that were included in the study area were:

1. 9th Avenue/Creighton Road

2. 9th Avenue/McAllister Avenue

3. 9th Avenue/John Carroll Drive

4. John Carroll Drive/Tippin Avenue

5. 9th Avenue/Schwab Drive

6. Schwab Drive/Langley Avenue

7. 9th Avenue/Underwood Avenue

EXISTING CONDITIONS POSTED SPEEDS The current posted speed along this section of 9th Avenue is 40 mph. The posted speed for

Langley Avenue is 30 mph. The posted speed for Tippin Avenue (which turns into 12th Avenue)

is 35 mph south of the Langley Avenue/Tippin Avenue intersection and 30 mph north of the 9th

Avenue/Tippin Avenue Intersection. Design speeds for improvements will be 5 mph over the

posted speeds for each roadway segment.

PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLIST, and PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION From Section 25.4.19 of FDOT’s Plans Preparation Manual (PPM), pedestrian and bicycle

needs must be addressed and recommendations should be obtained from the FDOT District

Three Pedestrian/ Bicycle Coordinator (Zena Riley) for the final design.

Movement through the corridor is primarily vehicular traffic. With Pensacola Junior College

(PJC), Cordova Mall, numerous businesses and residential areas being located relatively close

to the intersections under review, pedestrians also

utilize this corridor. At the present time, access

through the corridor appears to be acceptable for

both pedestrians and bicyclists. There are sidewalks

throughout the project limits and signalized cross

walks with curb ramps are provided at all legs of the

intersections. The area is also serviced by ECAT

(Escambia County Area Transit) system.

3

UTILITIES From Section 25.4.20 of FDOT’s PPM and the Utility

Accommodation Manual (UAM), relocation or adjustment is

required if the following conditions are present:

(1) The minimum clear zone or horizontal clearance

requirements are not met.

Clear zone = 6 feet for design speeds < 45 mph,

Horizontal clearance = 4 feet back of face of curb, or

2.5 feet back of face of curb when all other alternatives

are deemed impractical)

(2) The utility system conflicts with proposed RRR

improvements and sufficient right-of-way is available.

During a field review, it was noted that the majority of the utilities are outside the limit for

adequate horizontal clearance except as noted below:

1) A power pole is located within the horizontal clearance north of the 9th/Tippin

intersection on the south side of Tippin Avenue (near the old Enterprise Rental Car

facilities).

Additional utility relocations will be required for the long term solutions and shall be designed to

accommodate the design criteria offsets per the UAM. HIGHWAY TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES From Section 25.4.24 of FDOT’s PPM, traffic control devices such as signals, signing and

markings shall be updated as required to comply with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control

Devices, the Manual on Uniform Traffic Studies, the Department’s Roadway and Traffic Design

Standards, and the ADA design guidelines.

There are three signalized intersections within the project

limits. The existing control cabinets are located in the

south east corner of 9th Avenue/Tippin Avenue

New signals required for geometric realignments will be

mast arms. Signs and markings will be upgraded as

necessary for the new geometrics.

4

5

ACCIDENT DATA An accident data summary was prepared utilizing the 2005-2008 accident data provided by

Escambia County. In summary, rear end accidents account for 51% of the total accidents,

running a red light accounts for 14% of the accidents and 18% of accidents are caused by

improper lane changes and miscellaneous movements. These accidents do not appear to be

attributed to any defects in the geometry of the intersection or timings of the signals. However,

it can be noted that the congested area and lack of space between driveways and intersections

could lead to higher accident volumes. See Appendix A for a summary of the accidents.

TRAFFIC VOLUME AND LEVEL OF SERVICE Traffic counts were performed by Southern Traffic Services, Inc. on December 11, 2008 for

Tippin Avenue at Langley Avenue, 9th Avenue at Tippin Avenue, and 9th Avenue at Langley

Avenue. Counts were performed starting at 7:00 a.m. and continued through until 6:00 p.m.

Volumes were determine for the morning peak period (7:00 a.m. to 9:45 a.m.), the afternoon

peak period (10:00 a.m. to 1:45 p.m.), and the evening peak period (2:00 p.m. to 5:45 p.m.).

Detailed traffic count information is provided in Appendix B.

The traffic counts revealed the AM Peak and PM Peak hour traffic volumes for analysis. The

peak hour periods were used in this analysis to determine capacity and level-of-service at the

study intersections. The existing peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 1.

From this information, the capacity and level-of-service (LOS) of an intersection is evaluated

based on the average vehicular delay during the peak hour periods. The vehicular delays are

directly related to the turning movement volumes, traffic composition and roadway geometrics at

the intersection. The methodology utilized in this analysis is based on the Highway Capacity

Manual (HCM), 2000 Edition. The level-of-service, as outlined in the HCM, is reported as a

letter designation of LOS A through LOS F (A is least delay and F is most delay). The traffic

volumes recorded at the study intersections during the AM and PM peak hours were analyzed

using the information provided in the HCM. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 1 on

the next page.

6

Table 1 2008 Existing Traffic Level of Service

Intersection Level of ServiceSignalized Intersection

Time Period NB SB EB WB Total Delay*

AM Peak A A D C B 14.9 Ninth Avenue/ Langley Avenue PM Peak B B D D C 19.7

AM Peak F D A B D 35.4 Ninth Avenue/ Tippin Avenue PM Peak D C B B C 25.4

AM Peak B A B B B 15.9 Langley Avenue/

Tippin Avenue PM Peak B A C C B 17.7 *HCM Average Control Delay The level-of-service analysis shows that the intersections are currently operating at acceptable

levels during both the AM and PM peak hours as independent intersections. The close proximity

of the intersections, however, presents limits on the effectiveness of the coordination and

progression through the intersection during peak hours.

The existing traffic volumes traversing the “triangle” area were evaluated to identify the major

and minor approaches of the six approaches of the three intersections. Traffic volumes for AM

and PM peak hours were totaled and compared to calculate the percentage of total traffic by

approach. The results are shown in Tables 2 and 3.

Table 2 Intersection Approach Volumes

AM Peak PM Peak Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total

Roadway Volume % of Enter Volume

% of

Exit Volume % of Total Volume

% of Enter Volume

% of

Exit Volume % of Total

9th Ave-North 1,266 38% 537 16% 1,803 27% 1,095 21% 1,697 35% 2,792 28% 9th Ave-South 382 11% 1,198 36% 1,580 24% 1,414 27% 1,022 21% 2,436 24% Langley Ave-East 872 26% 271 8% 1,143 17% 872 17% 921 19% 1,793 18% Langley Ave-West 128 4% 189 6% 317 5% 299 6% 227 5% 526 5% Tippin Ave-North 239 7% 157 5% 396 6% 296 6% 315 6% 611 6% Tippin Ave-South 437 13% 937 28% 1,374 21% 1,271 24% 698 14% 1,969 19% 3,324 3,289 6,613 5,247 4,880 10,127 Source: Neel-Schaffer, 2009.

7

Table 3 Intersection Approach Ranking

AM Peak PM Peak Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total

Roadway Rank % of Enter Rank

% of

Exit Rank % of Total Rank

% of Enter Rank

% of

Exit Rank % of Total

9th Ave-North 1 38% 3 16% 1 27% 3 21% 1 35% 1 28% 9th Ave-South 4 11% 1 36% 2 24% 1 27% 2 21% 2 24% Langley Ave-East 2 26% 4 8% 4 17% 4 17% 3 19% 4 18% Langley Ave-West 6 4% 5 6% 6 5% 5 6% 6 5% 6 5% Tippin Ave-North 5 7% 6 5% 5 6% 5 6% 5 6% 5 6% Tippin Ave-South 3 13% 2 28% 3 21% 2 24% 4 14% 3 19% Source: Neel-Schaffer, 2009.

The approach volume analysis reveals that existing traffic on 9th Avenue has the highest

volume combined entering and exiting volume in the study area in both the AM and PM peak

hours. Langley Avenue west of 9th Avenue and Tippin Avenue north of 9th Avenue consistently

contribute the least volumes of the six intersection approaches.

SHORT-TERM SOLUTIONS The objective of this section is to identify and describe multiple short-term solutions for further

consideration by Escambia County. For this report, a short-term solution is being considered as

an improvement that could be immediately implemented with no additional right-of-way

acquisition, minimal business impacts, and minimal costs. These are options that, if

implemented, will promote immediate improvement to safety and maneuverability along the

corridor.

ACCESS MANAGEMENT In reviewing the current access management it was noted during a field review that FDOT Rule

14-96 has not been followed in establishing driveway connection spacing. Due to the number of

businesses and sizes of lots, few corrections can be made to improve the flow of traffic along

the project limits. Figure 2 shows the following recommendations that could be made with little

cost to the County:

1. At the old Enterprise Car site, (south west

corner of 9th Ave./Langley Ave.), the

driveway could be narrowed down to allow

for a 24 foot right in / right-out only

entrance. This would improve the corner

opening distance from 0 feet to 97 feet.

2. In the south east corner of 9th Avenue and

Langley Avenue, the driveway entrance of

North Market Square closest to the

intersection should be closed. A second entrance to the south is already in use.

3. Along 9th Avenue, the center lane that is

hatched out should be converted to a

concrete island between the intersections

of 9th Avenue and Langley Avenue and 9th

Avenue and Tippin Avenue. This would

require the existing driveway entrances to

a dentist office and Waffle House to

become right-in / right-out only movements

and prevent left turns in the northbound

direction from trying to access the

businesses unsafely.

8

CloseRI/RO

RI/RO

CONCRETE ISLAND (PROP.)

PROPOSED CONCRETE ISLAND

EFFECTIVELY CREATES RIGHT

IN/RIGHT OUT ONLY MOVEMENT

FOR THESE TWO DRIVEWAYS

Close

RI/RO

6/12/2009 11:26:59 AM F:\Project\5089658\Misc_dgns\Acces_Management_Plan.dgn

ROAD NO. COUNTY

DESCRIPTIONDATE DESCRIPTIONDATE

REVISIONS

FINANCIAL PROJECT ID

SHEET

NO.

ESCAMBIA

USER: 5boutwt

CORDOVA

LOCK

&

SAFE

RED

DRAGON

UNOCCUPIED

BUILDING

ENTERPRISE

RENT-A-CAR

OLD SOUTH

PROPERTIES

INC.LAUNDRY MAT

& DRY

CLEANERS

PERFORMANCE

AUTOMOTIVE

NORTH

MARKET

SQUARE

MECHANIC

SHOP

WALGREEN’S

SUBWAY

BIG 10 TIRESPAPA

JOHN’S

PIZZA

PET SUPERMARKET

QUIZNO’S SUB’S

PLAY N’ TRADE

INNERLIGHT SURF & SKATE

DENTIST’S

OFFICEWAFFLE

HOUSE

N 9TH AVE. (SR 289) N 9TH AVE. (SR 289)

TIPPIN

AV

E.

TIPPIN

AV

E.

LAN

GLEY

AV

E.

LAN

GLEY

AV

E.

0 20 80

Feet

N

95’ 80’24’

RI/RO140’

100’24’92’24’100’

80’24’40’

40’ 24’ 97’

(NO CHANGE)

N

O

CHANGE

N

O

CHANGE

NO

CHA

NG

E

NO

CHANGE

36’

NO

CHANGE

26’24’

CLOSE

35’36’

NO

CHANGE

36’36’

CLOSE

’

65

’

36

NO

CHANGE

’

45

’15

’

29

CLOSE

’

24

’

36

12’

EX

IT

ONLY

ENTRANCE

ONLY

CONSIDER APPROACHING

BUSINESS TO CLOSE

AND MOVE ALL ACCESS

TO SIDESTREET

36’24’

NO

CHANGE

GOLDEN CORRAL

4. The entrance to Papa John’s Pizza in the north west corner of 9th Avenue/Tippin Avenue

should be reduced to allow for a 95 foot corner clearance and provide a 24 foot right-in /

right-out movement. We would recommend that the County approach this business to

close this driveway down completely and force all traffic for this business to utilize the

Tippin Avenue entrance.

SIGNAL TIMING ADJUSTMENTS Possible improvements that were reviewed included adjusting the signals such that left turns

were changed from permissive movements to protected movements (left turns not yielding

accounted for 10% of the accidents). Another possible improvement is to disallow right turns on

red (accounts for 2% of the accidents). These changes would not improve the Level of Service

of the roadway, however, improvements could be gained from a reduction in accidents thereby

reducing the delay time for motorists and improving the overall mobility through the

intersections.

It has been indicated by Escambia County and FDOT staff that the signals in the triangle are

working at virtually peak efficiency at the present time. In speaking with Cliff Johnson, FDOT

Traffic Operations, FDOT feels that the existing signals are working as well as can be expected

and it is not felt that timing adjustments would result in any better performance. From further

analysis, it was deemed feasible to consider certain turning movement “restrictions” or

eliminating low volume movements, thus promoting an improved traffic flow scenario and

eliminating delays for specific minor turning

movements.

Alternative 1 – Eliminate Southbound Left Turns from Tippin Avenue onto 9th Avenue Alternative 1 involves prohibiting southbound left

turns from Tippin Avenue onto Ninth Avenue.

Currently the lane assignment for this approach

includes an exclusive southbound right turn lane

and a shared through-left lane. The traffic signal

operates with a concurrent north/south phasing,

with no protected southbound left-turn movement.

The signal phase is allocated a minimal amount of

green time, and a single southbound left turning

vehicle blocks the through traffic trapped in the

9

lane behind this vehicle. Alternate routes to the north exist to enter 9th Avenue via John Carroll

Drive or Creighton Road. The left turn movement was less than 10 vehicles per hour (vph)

during the AM and PM peak hours. Traffic typically darts out of the through lane and into the

right turn lane to go around the left turning vehicle to avoid having to sit through an additional

cycle. The LOS impacts are shown in Table 4.

Table 4

Year 2008 Existing Volumes - Level of Service Alt 1 - Southbound left turns prohibited on Tippin Avenue at Ninth Avenue



AM Peak A A D C B 14.9 Ninth Avenue/ Langley Avenue PM Peak B B D D B 19.7



Tippin Avenue PM Peak B A C C B 17.7 *HCM Average Control Delay

Alternative 2 - Eliminate NB Permitted Lefts from 9th Avenue to Langley Ave

Alternative 2 involved restricting north east bound left turns from Ninth Avenue onto Tippin

Avenue to protected only phasing. Currently left turning vehicles are permitted to turn left during

the green phase of the adjacent through movement. This left turn movement has to cross a

heavy southbound through movement on 9th Avenue that has few gaps during peak hours and

when vehicles are in the southbound left turn

lanes on Ninth Avenue, the sight distance is

severely hindered for this movement. Crash

data reveals that restricting lefts to protected-

only phasing could improve safety by reducing

the number of accidents caused by this

turning movement.

The results of the analysis for Alternative 2

are provided in Table 5.

10

Table 5

Year 2008 Existing Volumes - Level of Service Alt 2 - Northbound left turns protected only on Ninth Avenue at Tippin Avenue



AM Peak A A D C B 15.0 Ninth Avenue/ Langley Avenue PM Peak B B D D C 20.2




Alternative 3 - Eliminate NB Protected Left Phase from Tippin Avenue to Langley Ave

Alternative 3 involves eliminating the northbound left turn protected phase from Tippin Avenue

onto Langley Avenue and allow only permissive left turn movement northbound. The left turn

movement was less than 10 vehicles per hour (vph) during the AM peak hour and less than 35

during the PM peak hour. Currently left turning vehicles are moving in advance of the

southbound through green phase. This modification would increase the allotted green time

given to southbound through traffic. The results of the analysis for Alternative 3 are provided in

Table 6.

11

12

Table 6 Year 2008 Existing Volumes - Level of Service

Alt 3 - Northbound left turns permissive only on Tippin Avenue at Langley Avenue Intersection Level of ServiceSignalized

Intersection Time

Period NB SB EB WB Total Delay*AM Peak A A D C B 14.8 Ninth Avenue/

Langley Avenue PM Peak B B D D B 20.2

AM Peak F D A B C 35.4 Ninth Avenue/ Tippin Avenue PM Peak D C B B C 25.4

AM Peak B A B B C 16.2 Langley Avenue/


Alternative 4-Cumulative Effect of Implementing Alternatives 1-3

Alternative 4 is a combination of Alternatives 1-3, to determine the cumulative effect of

implementing each of the three alternatives concurrently. The results of the analysis for

Alternate 4 are provided in Table 7.

Table 7 Year 2008 Existing Volumes - Level of Service

Alt 4 – Alternates 1-3 Combined Intersection Level of ServiceSignalized

Intersection Time

Period NB SB EB WB Total DelayAM Peak A A D C B 15.0 Ninth Avenue/

Langley Avenue PM Peak B B D D C 20.7


AM Peak B A B C B 16.2 Langley Avenue/


13

LONG-TERM SOLUTIONS The objective of this section is to identify and describe multiple long-term solutions for further

consideration by Escambia County. For this report, a long-term solution is being considered as

an improvement that could be implemented in the future with the acquisition of additional right-

of-way, business impacts, and higher design and construction costs. These are options that, if

implemented, will promote improvement to safety and maneuverability along the corridor in the

future as funds become available for design, construction and right of way. Construction cost

estimates of the developed alternatives for the long term solutions are provided in Appendix D

for the alternatives discussed below.

GEOMETRIC IMPROVEMENTS Possible improvements that were considered included reviewing the connecting side streets to

determine if any could be removed without adversely affecting the traffic patterns and routes of

the commuters. Other options were more involved and included realigning multiple side streets

in order to space the signalized intersections further apart and allow more queue lengths for the

turning movements and the overall operation of the intersections.

Alternative 5-Eliminate Langley Crossing of Airport Property

An evaluation of the re-routing of Langley Avenue to the east side of the airport property was

conducted to divert Langley traffic that currently crosses the north end of the airport property to

a new traffic signal at McAllister Avenue (see Figures 3 and 4). This would include

reconstruction of the existing two-lane section of McAllister Avenue to a four lane section , dual

left turns from McAllister to 9th Avenue, and a new signal. The existing section of Langley

Avenue that traverses the airport property connecting Tippin Avenue with McAllister Avenue

would be eliminated. The intersection at Ninth Avenue will be upgraded to include a north

bound right turn lane onto McAllister Avenue. The existing geometry surrounding the

Ninth/Langley/Tippin triangle would remain similar to the existing condition; however, the

southbound left turn movement from Tippin Avenue onto Ninth Avenue would be eliminated.

Traffic volumes for Alternative 5 are shown in Figure 5. The level-of-service analysis for

Alternative 5 are summarized in Table 8 and the cost estimate is summarized in Table 9.

14

Table 8 Alt 5-Langley East Re-route to new McAllister Signal

Intersection Level of Service Signalized Intersection

Time Period NB SB EB WB Total Delay

AM Peak A A C C A 5.3 Ninth Avenue/

Langley Avenue PM

Peak A A C C A 8.9

AM Peak A C B A B 11.9 Ninth Avenue/

Tippin Avenue PM Peak C B C C C 22.3

AM Peak A A A C A 1.3 Langley Ave/

Tippin Avenue PM

Peak A A C B A 2.9

AM Peak A B - C B 13.2 Ninth Avenue/

McAllister Ave PM Peak B A - C B 13.2

*HCM Average Control Delay

6/12/2009 11:28:49 AM F:\Project\5089658\Misc_dgns\LONGTERM_2.DGN

ROAD NO. COUNTY


REVISIONS


SHEET

NO.

ESCAMBIA

USER: 5boutwt

289

N

0

Feet

50 250

DATE

Natural Ground

SOD

WING

ZONEENTERPRISE

RENT-A-CAR

OL

D S

OU

TH

PR

OP

ER

TIE

S,

INC

.MECHANIC

SHOP

PERFORMANCE

AUTOMOTIVENORTH

MARKET

SQUARE

DE

NT

IST

’S

OF

FIC

E

WAFFLE

HOUSE

CORDOVALOCK

&SAFE

GOLDEN

CORRAL

REDDRAGON

PET SUPERMARKET

QUIZNO’S SUBS

PLAY N TRADE

INNERLIGHT SURF

& SKATE

PAPA

JOHN’S

PIZZA

BIG 10

TIRES

SUBWAY

WALGREEN’S

HARDEE’S

ARBY’S

LA

UN

DR

Y M

AT

&

DR

Y C

LE

AN

ER

S

9TH AVENUE 9TH AVENUE

12TH A

VENUE

TIPPIN

AV

ENU

E

LANGLEY AVENUE

LANGLEY AVENUE

MCA

LLISTER A

VEN

UE

ASPHALT REMOVAL

AIRPORT PROPERTY

NEW ROADWAY

JOH

N CA

RROLL D

R.

LA

VIS

TA

AV

E.

CONCEPTUAL INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS FOR NINTH AVE. AT LANGLEY AVE. AND TIPPIN AVE.

TABLE 9LONG TERM ALTERNATE 5(ELIMINATE LANGLEY CROSSING OF AIRPORT PROPERTY)PAY ITEM NUMBER ITEM UNITS

TOTALQUANTITY UNIT PRICE COST

101-1 Mobilization LS 1 $250,000.00 $250,000.00

MCALLISTER102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $97,571.69 $97,571.69110-1-1 Clearing and Grubbing LS/AC 4.4 $10,000.00 $44,000.00120-1 Regular Excavation CY 5,364 $4.89 $26,229.96160-4 Stabilization Type B SY 9,873 $3.60 $35,542.80285-709 Optional Base Group - 09 SY 8,441 $14.51 $122,478.91327-70-6 Milling Exist. Asph Pavt, 1.5" Avg Depth SY 2,989 $1.87 $5,589.43334-1-11 Superpave Asph Conc, Traf A, PG76-22 (165#) TN 970 $121.25 $117,612.50425-1-351 Inlets, Curb, Type P-5,<10' EA 14 $3,545.54 $49,637.56430-171-101 Pipe Culv Opt Matl, Round, 0-24", SS LF 1,744 $72.68 $126,753.92430-171-102 Pipe Culv Opt Matl, Round, 24-36", SS LF 680 $105.56 $71,780.80520-1-07 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type E LF 3,213 $14.87 $47,777.31520-1-10 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type F LF 3,830 $16.32 $62,505.60522-1 Sidewalk Concrete, 4" Thick SY 2,128 $35.19 $74,884.32570-1-1 Performance Turf SY 3,382 $1.36 $4,599.52570-1-2 Performance Turf, Sod SY 2,208 $2.36 $5,210.88700-20-11 Single Post Sign, Furnish & Install, Less than 12 AS 6 $291.76 $1,750.56711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 0.760 $3,345.00 $2,542.20711-11-124 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 18" LF 292 $2.72 $794.24711-11-125 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Sold 24" LF 42 $3.67 $154.14711-11-131 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Skip, 6" GM 0.482 $1,061.18 $511.49711-11-170 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Arrow EA 6 $57.66 $345.96711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.928 $3,326.40 $3,086.90711-11-224 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 18" LF 696 $2.77 $1,927.92

Signal at 9th/Mcallister LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000.00SUBTOTAL $1,103,288.61

LANGLEY102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $4,732.71 $4,732.71110-1-1 Clearing and Grubbing LS/AC 2.4 $10,000.00 $24,000.00120-1 Regular Excavation CY 63 $4.89 $308.07160-4 Stabilization Type B SY 116 $3.60 $417.60285-709 Optional Base Group - 09 SY 86 $14.51 $1,247.86334-1-11 Superpave Asph Conc, Traf A, PG76-22 (165#) TN 7 $121.25 $848.75520-1-07 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type E LF 158 $14.87 $2,349.46570-1-1 Performance Turf SY 11,767 $1.36 $16,003.12570-1-2 Performance Turf, Sod SY 45 $2.31 $103.95705-10-4 Object Marker, Type 4 EA 3 $165.19 $495.57711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 0.110 $3,345.00 $367.95711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.153 $3,326.40 $508.94711-11-224 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 18" LF 244 $2.77 $675.88

SUBTOTAL $52,059.86

OPTION COST = $1,405,348.47


TABLE 11LONG TERM ALTERNATE 6CUL-DE-SAC & REALIGN LANGLEY, REALIGN TIPPIN, 4 LANE URBAN SECTION MCALLISTERPAY ITEM NUMBER ITEM UNITS

TOTAL QUANTITY UNIT PRICE COST

101-1 Mobilization LS 1 $250,000.00 $250,000.00MCALLISTER102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $97,571.69 $97,571.69110-1-1 Clearing and Grubbing LS/AC 4.4 $10,000.00 $44,000.00120-1 Regular Excavation CY 5,364 $4.89 $26,229.96160-4 Stabilization Type B SY 9,873 $3.60 $35,542.80285-709 Optional Base Group - 09 SY 8,441 $14.51 $122,478.91327-70-6 Milling Exist. Asph Pavt, 1.5" Avg Depth SY 2,989 $1.87 $5,589.43334-1-11 Superpave Asph Conc, Traf A, PG76-22 (165#) TN 970 $121.25 $117,612.50425-1-351 Inlets, Curb, Type P-5,<10' EA 14 $3,545.54 $49,637.56430-171-101 Pipe Culv Opt Matl, Round, 0-24", SS LF 1,744 $72.68 $126,753.92430-171-102 Pipe Culv Opt Matl, Round, 24-36", SS LF 680 $105.56 $71,780.80520-1-07 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type E LF 3,213 $14.87 $47,777.31520-1-10 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type F LF 3,830 $16.32 $62,505.60522-1 Sidewalk Concrete, 4" Thick SY 2,128 $35.19 $74,884.32570-1-1 Performance Turf SY 3,382 $1.36 $4,599.52570-1-2 Performance Turf, Sod SY 2,208 $2.36 $5,210.88700-20-11 Single Post Sign, Furnish & Install, Less than 12 AS 6 $291.76 $1,750.56711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 0.760 $3,345.00 $2,542.20711-11-124 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 18" LF 292 $2.72 $794.24711-11-125 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 24" LF 42 $3.67 $154.14711-11-131 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Skip, 6" GM 0.482 $1,061.18 $511.49711-11-170 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Arrow EA 6 $57.66 $345.96711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.928 $3,326.40 $3,086.90711-11-224 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 18" LF 696 $2.77 $1,927.92


LANGLEY102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $17,440.40 $17,440.40110-1-1 Clearing and Grubbing LS/AC 3.0 $10,000.00 $30,000.00120-1 Regular Excavation CY 1,079 $4.89 $5,276.31160-4 Stabilization Type B SY 1,986 $3.60 $7,149.60285-709 Optional Base Group - 09 SY 1,753 $14.51 $25,436.03334-1-11 Superpave Asph Conc, Traf A, PG76-22 (165#) TN 145 $121.25 $17,581.25425-1-351 Inlets, Curb, Type P-5,<10' EA 2 $3,545.54 $7,091.08430-171-101 Pipe Culv Opt Matl, Round, 0-24", SS LF 447 $72.68 $32,487.96520-1-10 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type F LF 931 $16.32 $15,193.92522-1 Sidewalk Concrete, 4" Thick SY 407 $35.19 $14,322.33570-1-1 Performance Turf SY 8,810 $1.36 $11,981.60570-1-2 Performance Turf, Sod SY 206 $2.36 $486.16700-20-11 Single Post Sign, Furnish & Install, Less than 12 AS 1 $291.76 $291.76705-10-4 Object Marker, Type 4 EA 6 $165.19 $991.14711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 0.563 $3,345.00 $1,883.24711-11-125 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 24" LF 81 $3.67 $297.27711-11-131 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Skip, 6" GM 0.053 $1,061.18 $56.24711-11-170 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Arrow EA 8 $57.66 $461.28711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.614 $3,326.40 $2,042.41711-11-224 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 18" LF 398 $2.77 $1,102.46711-11-231 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Skip, 6" GM 0.220 $1,236.22 $271.97

SUBTOTAL $191,844.41


TABLE 11LONG TERM ALTERNATE 6CUL-DE-SAC & REALIGN LANGLEY, REALIGN TIPPIN, 4 LANE URBAN SECTION MCALLISTERPAY ITEM NUMBER ITEM UNITS


TIPPIN102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $53,077.67 $53,077.67110-1-1 Clearing and Grubbing LS/AC 1.5 $10,000.00 $15,000.00120-1 Regular Excavation CY 3,136 $4.89 $15,335.04160-4 Stabilization Type B SY 5,771 $3.60 $20,775.60285-709 Optional Base Group - 09 SY 5,198 $14.51 $75,422.98334-1-11 Superpave Asph Conc, Traf A, PG76-22 (165#) TN 429 $121.25 $52,016.25425-1-351 Inlets, Curb, Type P-5,<10' EA 6 $3,545.54 $21,273.24430-171-101 Pipe Culv Opt Matl, Round, 0-24", SS LF 968 $72.68 $70,354.24520-1-10 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type F LF 2,127 $16.32 $34,712.64522-1 Sidewalk Concrete, 4" Thick SY 1,182 $35.19 $41,594.58570-1-1 Performance Turf SY 1,474 $1.36 $2,004.64570-1-2 Performance Turf, Sod SY 459 $2.36 $1,083.24705-10-4 Object Marker, Type 4 EA 3 $165.19 $495.57711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 1.039 $3,345.00 $3,475.46711-11-125 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Sold 24" LF 200 $3.67 $734.00711-11-131 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Skip, 6" GM 0.173 $1,061.18 $183.58711-11-170 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Arrow EA 27 $57.66 $1,556.82711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.896 $3,326.40 $2,980.45711-11-224 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 18" LF 642 $2.77 $1,778.34

Signal at Tippin/New Connector LS 1 $170,000.00 $170,000.00SUBTOTAL $583,854.34

9TH102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $22,889.33 $22,889.33520-1-07 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type E LF 1,146 $14.87 $17,041.02522-2 Sidewalk Concrete, 6" Thick SY 737 $43.44 $32,015.28711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 1.037 $3,345.00 $3,468.77711-11-124 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 18" LF 583 $2.72 $1,585.76711-11-125 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 24" LF 120 $3.67 $440.40711-11-131 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Skip, 6" GM 0.608 $1,061.18 $645.20711-11-170 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Arrow EA 14 $57.66 $807.24711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.673 $3,326.40 $2,238.67711-11-224 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 18" LF 235 $2.77 $650.95

Signal at Tippin/Langley LS 1 $170,000.00 $170,000.00SUBTOTAL $251,782.61

OPTION COST = $2,350,769.96

15

Alternative 6-Eliminate Langley Crossing of Airport Property with realignments of 12th Avenue and Langley Avenue Alternative 6 (see Figure 6) is a build on to Alternative 5 that could be built at the same time or

in the future as one project. The additional work includes realigning 12th Avenue and Langley

Avenue (west leg) to the south with a new signalized intersection on 9th Avenue. The existing

west leg of Langley Avenue would have a cul-de-sac to maintain access to the businesses that

are served by the existing connection. Tippin Avenue and the east leg of Langley Avenue would

become right in/right out only connections to 9th Avenue. This alternative will require substantial

right of way acquisition and construction cost. The level-of-service is provided in Table 10 and

the cost estimate is summarized in Table 11.

Table 10 Alt 6 - New Alignment, Langley Re-route & New McAllister Signal

Level-of-Service Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Unsignalized

Intersection Time

Period Lt Th Rt Lt Th Rt Lt Th Rt Lt Th Rt

AM Peak A A - - A A C - C - - - New Langley/

Tippin Avenue PM

Peak A A - - A A C - C - - -

Intersection Level of Service Signalized Intersection


AM Peak C A C B B 11.2 Ninth Avenue/

New Langley PM Peak D C D D D 37.7

AM Peak B B C - B 18.9 Ninth Avenue/

New Tippin PM Peak C B B - C 25.7

AM Peak A B - C B 15.9 Ninth Avenue/

McAllister Ave PM Peak B B - C B 11.8

*HCM Average Control Delay

6/12/2009 12:10:47 PM F:\Project\5089658\Misc_dgns\LongTerm_1a.dgn

ROAD NO. COUNTY


REVISIONS


SHEET

NO.

ESCAMBIA

USER: 5boutwt

289

N

0

Feet

50 250

HA

RD

EE

’S ARBY’S

BIG 10

TIRESPAPA

JOHN’S

PIZZA

PET SUPERMARKET

QUIZNO’S SUBS

PLAY N TRADE

INNERLIGHT SURF

& SKATE

LA

UN

DR

Y M

AT

&

DR

Y C

LE

AN

ER

S

PERFORMANCE

AUTOMOTIVE

MECHANIC

SHOP

NORTH

MARKET

SQUAREWALGREEN’S

OL

D S

OU

TH

PR

OP

ER

TIE

S

9TH AVENUE

LANGLEY AVENUE

EN

TE

RP

RIS

E

RE

NT

-A-C

AR

WING

ZONE

GOLDEN

CORRAL

DE

NT

IST

’S

OF

FIC

E

CORDOVALOCK

&SAFE

WAFFLE

HOUSE

REDDRAGON

9TH AVENUE

12TH A

VENUE

LANGLEY AVENUE

MCA

LLISTER A

VEN

UE

9TH AVENUE

TIPPIN

AV

ENU

E

LANGLEY AVENUE

SUBWAY

JOH

N CA

RROLL D

R.

LA

VIS

TA

AV

E.

AIRPORT PROPERTY

NEW ROADWAY

ASPHALT REMOVAL

AIRPORT PROPERTY

NEW ROADWAY

ASPHALT REMOVAL

CONCRETE ISLAND

SCHAWB D

R.

EMILY

ST.

BEA

UM

ON

T ST.

16

Alternative 7-Eliminate Langley Crossing of Airport Property with realignments of 12th Avenue

utilizing La Vista Avenue, Schwab Drive, and Langley Avenue

Alternative 7 (see Figure 7) is a build on to Alternative 5 that could be built at the same time or

in the future as one project. The additional work includes realigning 12th Avenue to the south

utilizing as much of the existing La Vista Avenue right of way as possible. The west leg of

Langley Avenue will remain open, however it’s current connection to 9th Avenue will become a

right in/right out only connection. Schwab Drive will be improved to accommodate the additional

traffic volumes and turning movements. The new intersection of 9th Avenue, 12th Avenue, and

Schwab Drive will be signalized. The connection of Langley Avenue (east leg) and Tippin

Avenue will be reconstructed to allow right in/right out connections at 9th Avenue. The widening

of La Vista Avenue will require less right of way acquisition than the realignment of Langley

Avenue as shown in Alternative 6. Traffic volumes for Alternative 7 are similar to those for

Alternative 6 and were not reproduced (see Figure 8). A cost estimate is provided in Table 12.

Alternative 8 – Roundabout Design

This option involves the elimination of the North Tippin Avenue intersection and realignment of

both 9th Avenue and South Tippin Avenue to form the 4-legged roundabout (see Figure 9).

Minimal modifications would be required to Langley Avenue (East & West). Specific access

management changes would need to be implemented for appropriate operation of the roadway.

American has designed several roundabouts in the State and have found that the placement of

proper signage to “introduce the roundabout at the intersection” is critical. This option is

available but is not felt to be the best alternative for this location. The construction of a 4-legged

roundabout at this location would require additional right-of-way and will cause significant

business impacts. Based upon our discussions with the County, this option was dropped from

future discussions and right-of-way cost and cost estimates were not obtained for this option.

HA

RD

EE

’S ARBY’S

BIG 10

TIRESPAPA

JOHN’S

PIZZA

PET SUPERMARKET

QUIZNO’S SUBS

PLAY N TRADE

INNERLIGHT SURF

& SKATE

LA

UN

DR

Y M

AT

&

DR

Y C

LE

AN

ER

S

PERFORMANCE

AUTOMOTIVE

MECHANIC

SHOP

NORTH

MARKET

SQUAREWALGREEN’S

OL

D S

OU

TH

PR

OP

ER

TIE

S

9TH AVENUE

LANGLEY AVENUE

WING

ZONE

GOLDEN

CORRAL

DE

NT

IST

’S

OF

FIC

E

CORDOVALOCK

&SAFE

WAFFLE

HOUSE

REDDRAGON

12TH A

VENUE

LANGLEY AVENUE

TIPPIN

AV

ENU

E

LANGLEY AVENUE

SUBWAY

JOH

N CA

RROLL D

R.

LA

VIS

TA

AV

E.

EN

TE

RP

RIS

E

RE

NT

-A-C

AR

AIRPORT PROPERTY

NEW ROADWAY

ASPHALT REMOVAL

CONCRETE ISLAND

6/12/2009 10:52:00 AM F:\Project\5089658\Misc_dgns\LongTerm_1b.dgn

ROAD NO. COUNTY


REVISIONS


SHEET

NO.

ESCAMBIA

USER: 5boutwt

289

N

0

Feet

50 250

9TH AVENUE

SCHAWB D

R.

LE

MO

X

BO

OK

ST

OR

E

COX

COMMUNICATION


TABLE 12LONG TERM ALTERNATE 7REALIGN LANGLEY, REALIGN TIPPIN, REALIGN LA VISTA, 4 LANE URBAN SECTION MCALLISTERPAY ITEM NUMBER ITEM UNITS


101-1 Mobilization LS 1 $250,000.00 $250,000.00MCALLISTER102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $97,571.69 $97,571.69110-1-1 Clearing and Grubbing LS/AC 4.4 $10,000.00 $44,000.00120-1 Regular Excavation CY 5,364 $4.89 $26,229.96160-4 Stabilization Type B SY 9,873 $3.60 $35,542.80285-709 Optional Base Group - 09 SY 8,441 $14.51 $122,478.91327-70-6 Milling Exist. Asph Pavt, 1.5" Avg Depth SY 2,989 $1.87 $5,589.43334-1-11 Superpave Asph Conc, Traf A, PG76-22 (165#) TN 970 $121.25 $117,612.50425-1-351 Inlets, Curb, Type P-5,<10' EA 14 $3,545.54 $49,637.56430-171-101 Pipe Culv Opt Matl, Round, 0-24", SS LF 1,744 $72.68 $126,753.92430-171-102 Pipe Culv Opt Matl, Round, 24-36", SS LF 680 $105.56 $71,780.80520-1-07 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type E LF 3,213 $14.87 $47,777.31520-1-10 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type F LF 3,830 $16.32 $62,505.60522-1 Sidewalk Concrete, 4" Thick SY 2,128 $35.19 $74,884.32570-1-1 Performance Turf SY 3,382 $1.36 $4,599.52570-1-2 Performance Turf, Sod SY 2,208 $2.36 $5,210.88700-20-11 Single Post Sign, Furnish & Install, Less than 12 AS 6 $291.76 $1,750.56711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 0.760 $3,345.00 $2,542.20711-11-124 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 18" LF 292 $2.72 $794.24711-11-125 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 24" LF 42 $3.67 $154.14711-11-131 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Skip, 6" GM 0.482 $1,061.18 $511.49711-11-170 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Arrow EA 6 $57.66 $345.96711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.928 $3,326.40 $3,086.90711-11-224 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 18" LF 696 $2.77 $1,927.92


LANGLEY102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $5,876.06 $5,876.06110-1-1 Clearing and Grubbing LS/AC 2.4 $10,000.00 $24,000.00120-1 Regular Excavation CY 63 $4.89 $308.07160-4 Stabilization Type B SY 116 $3.60 $417.60285-709 Optional Base Group - 09 SY 86 $14.51 $1,247.86334-1-11 Superpave Asph Conc, Traf A, PG76-22 (165#) TN 7 $121.25 $848.75520-1-10 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type F LF 512 $16.32 $8,355.84522-1 Sidewalk Concrete, 4" Thick SY 133 $35.19 $4,680.27570-1-1 Performance Turf SY 8,810 $1.36 $11,981.60700-20-11 Single Post Sign, Furnish & Install, Less than 12 AS 1 $291.76 $291.76705-10-4 Object Marker, Type 4 EA 6 $165.19 $991.14711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 0.421 $3,345.00 $1,408.25711-11-131 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Skip, 6" GM 0.053 $1,061.18 $56.24711-11-170 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Arrow EA 2 $57.66 $115.32711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.578 $3,326.40 $1,922.66711-11-224 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 18" LF 699 $2.77 $1,936.23711-11-231 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Skip, 6" GM 0.161 $1,236.22 $199.03

SUBTOTAL $64,636.68


TABLE 12LONG TERM ALTERNATE 7REALIGN LANGLEY, REALIGN TIPPIN, REALIGN LA VISTA, 4 LANE URBAN SECTION MCALLISTERPAY ITEM NUMBER ITEM UNITS


TIPPIN102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $16,704.12 $16,704.12110-1-1 Clearing and Grubbing LS/AC 0.6 $10,000.00 $6,000.00120-1 Regular Excavation CY 1,307 $4.89 $6,391.23160-4 Stabilization Type B SY 2,405 $3.60 $8,658.00285-709 Optional Base Group - 09 SY 2,165 $14.51 $31,414.15334-1-11 Superpave Asph Conc, Traf A, PG76-22 (165#) TN 179 $121.25 $21,703.75425-1-351 Inlets, Curb, Type P-5,<10' EA 2 $3,545.54 $7,091.08430-171-101 Pipe Culv Opt Matl, Round, 0-24", SS LF 372 $72.68 $27,036.96520-1-10 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type F LF 1,204 $16.32 $19,649.28522-1 Sidewalk Concrete, 4" Thick SY 604 $35.19 $21,254.76570-1-1 Performance Turf SY 1,474 $1.36 $2,004.64570-1-2 Performance Turf, Sod SY 185 $2.36 $436.60705-10-4 Object Marker, Type 4 EA 3 $165.19 $495.57711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 0.851 $3,345.00 $2,846.60711-11-125 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Sold 24" LF 80 $3.67 $293.60711-11-131 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Skip, 6" GM 0.205 $1,061.18 $217.54711-11-170 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Arrow EA 17 $57.66 $980.22711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.776 $3,326.40 $2,581.29711-11-224 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 18" LF 2,883 $2.77 $7,985.91


9TH102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $6,125.06 $6,125.06520-1-07 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type E LF 1,146 $14.87 $17,041.02522-2 Sidewalk Concrete, 6" Thick SY 737 $43.44 $32,015.28711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 1.487 $3,345.00 $4,974.02711-11-124 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 18" LF 583 $2.72 $1,585.76711-11-125 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 24" LF 120 $3.67 $440.40711-11-131 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Skip, 6" GM 0.796 $1,061.18 $844.70711-11-170 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Arrow EA 14 $57.66 $807.24711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.870 $3,326.40 $2,893.97711-11-224 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 18" LF 234 $2.77 $648.18

Signal at La Vista LS 1 $170,000.00 $170,000.00SUBTOTAL $237,375.62

LA VISTA102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $51,588.68 $51,588.68110-1-1 Clearing and Grubbing LS/AC 1.5 $10,000.00 $15,000.00120-1 Regular Excavation CY 3,277 $4.89 $16,024.53160-4 Stabilization Type B SY 6,031 $3.60 $21,711.60285-709 Optional Base Group - 09 SY 5,344 $14.51 $77,541.44334-1-11 Superpave Asph Conc, Traf A, PG76-22 (165#) TN 441 $121.25 $53,471.25425-1-351 Inlets, Curb, Type P-5,<10' EA 6 $3,545.54 $21,273.24430-171-101 Pipe Culv Opt Matl, Round, 0-24", SS LF 855 $72.68 $62,141.40520-1-10 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type F LF 2,050 $16.32 $33,456.00522-1 Sidewalk Concrete, 4" Thick SY 1,138 $35.19 $40,046.22570-1-2 Performance Turf, Sod SY 445 $2.36 $1,050.20711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 0.484 $3,345.00 $1,618.98711-11-125 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Sold 24" LF 60 $3.67 $220.20711-11-131 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Skip, 6" GM 0.142 $1,061.18 $150.69711-11-170 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Arrow EA 20 $57.66 $1,153.20711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.309 $3,326.40 $1,027.86

Signal at Tippin LS 1 $170,000.00 $170,000.00SUBTOTAL $567,475.49

OPTION COST = $2,376,521.68

6/9/2009 12:22:21 PM F:\Project\5089658\Misc_dgns\roundabout.dgn

ROAD NO. COUNTY


REVISIONS


SHEET

NO.

ESCAMBIA

USER: 5boutwt

N

0 50

Feet

200

289

9TH AVENUE

LANGLEY AVENUE

WING

ZONE

EN

TE

RP

RIS

E

RE

NT

-A-C

AR

GOLDEN

CORRAL

REDDRAGON

CORDOVALOCK

&SAFE

DE

NT

IST

’S

OF

FIC

E

WAFFLE

HOUSE

PET SUPERMARKET

QUIZNO’S SUBS

PLAY N TRADE

INNERLIGHT SURF

& SKATE

PAPA

JOHN’S

PIZZA

BIG 10

TIRES

HA

RD

EE

’S ARBY’S

TIPPIN

AV

ENU

E

SUBWAY

WALGREEN’S

MECHANIC

SHOPL

AU

ND

RY

MA

T &

DR

Y C

LE

AN

ER

S

PERFORMANCE

AUTOMOTIVE NORTH

MARKET

SQUARE

LA

VIS

TA

AV

E.

12TH A

VENUE

4-LEGOption "A

"


LONG TERM ALTERNATE 7 FIGURE 7RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT LANGLEY, RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT TIPPIN, 4 LANE URBAN SECTION MCALLISTERPAY ITEM NUMBER ITEM UNITS


12TH AVE102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $53,077.67 $53,077.67110-1-1 Clearing and Grubbing LS/AC 3.0 $10,000.00 $30,000.00120-1 Regular Excavation CY 5,709 $4.89 $27,917.01160-4 Stabilization Type B SY 10,471 $3.60 $37,695.60285-709 Optional Base Group - 09 SY 10,507 $14.51 $152,456.57334-1-11 Superpave Asph Conc, Traf A, PG76-22 (165#) TN 866 $121.25 $105,002.50425-1-351 Inlets, Curb, Type P-5,<10' EA 8 $3,545.54 $28,364.32430-171-101 Pipe Culv Opt Matl, Round, 0-24", SS LF 968 $72.68 $70,354.24520-1-10 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type F LF 3,030 $16.32 $49,449.60522-1 Sidewalk Concrete, 4" Thick SY 2,343 $35.19 $82,450.17522-2 Sidewalk Concrete, 6" Thick SY 139 $43.44 $6,038.16570-1-1 Performance Turf SY 1,443 $1.36 $1,962.48570-1-2 Performance Turf, Sod SY 2,164 $2.36 $5,107.04705-10-4 Object Marker, Type 4 EA 0 $165.19 $0.00711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 1.070 $3,345.00 $3,579.15711-11-125 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Sold 24" LF 23 $3.67 $84.41711-11-131 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Skip, 6" GM 0.560 $1,061.18 $594.26711-11-170 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Arrow EA 18 $57.66 $1,037.88711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.647 $3,326.40 $2,152.18711-11-224 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 18" LF 664 $2.77 $1,839.28


9TH102-1 Maintenance of Traffic LS 1 $22,889.33 $22,889.33520-1-07 Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type E LF 1,595 $14.87 $23,717.65522-2 Sidewalk Concrete, 6" Thick SY 1,986 $43.44 $86,271.84711-11-111 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 6" NM 0.910 $3,345.00 $3,043.95711-11-124 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 18" LF 126 $2.72 $342.72711-11-125 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Solid 24" LF 105 $3.67 $385.35711-11-131 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Skip, 6" GM 0.786 $1,061.18 $834.09711-11-170 Thermoplastic Standard, White, Arrow EA 12 $57.66 $691.92711-11-211 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 6" NM 0.830 $3,326.40 $2,760.91711-11-224 Thermoplastic Standard, Yellow, Solid 18" LF $2.77 $0.00


OPTION COST = $2,553,999.52

17

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This design recommendation report outlines possible short term and long term improvements to

improve the traffic flow through the intersections of 9th Avenue, Langley Avenue, and Tippin

Avenue in Pensacola, Florida. These three streets make up what is commonly referred to as the

“triangle area”. 9th Avenue (SR 289) is under jurisdiction of FDOT – District 3 and is classified

as an “urban other principal arterial”. Langley Avenue and Tippin Avenue are local collector

roadways that are under jurisdiction of Escambia County.

Improvements identified in this report consist of short-term and long-term solutions. For the

purposes of this report, short-term solutions refer to improvements that could be made

immediately with no additional right-of-way, minimal business impacts, and minimal costs, for

example access management changes and signal timing adjustments. Long-term solutions refer

to options that include additional right-of-way, business impacts, and higher design and

construction costs. Long-term solutions include moving one or more legs of the triangle without

adversely affecting existing traffic patterns.

Short Term Solutions Recommendation: Although these short term recommendations do not improve the Level of Service through the

intersections, it is our belief that these improvements would reduce the number of accidents and

therefore improve the operation of the intersections. We recommend Escambia County

consider implementing some of these alternatives as low cost improvements for the short term

until a more permanent solution to improving the Level of Service can be implemented. Based

on the letter from Blair Martin, FDOT, a recommendation is made to hold a public involvement

meeting or one on one meetings with the business owners to discuss the access management

solutions before any construction is undertaken.

Long Term Solutions Recommendation: Based on meetings with Escambia County, FDOT, City of Pensacola, and the Pensacola Airport

representatives, we recommend that the long term alternatives presented in this report be

carried forward to a PD&E study to determine the preferred alignment that should be carried

forward to final design and construction. An overall general timeline has been prepared to

show the time required in order to complete the project from submittal of the Final Design

Recommendation Report submittal through construction (see Appendix E). This timeline is

based on past experience with similar projects and has been accelerated as much as possible.

As the project progresses, the timeline may need to be adjusted. Fees for the PD&E and final

design plans are provided in Appendix F.

18

Appendix A

Accident Data

Type of Accident Accident Location 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total

Rear End NB 9th Ave. at Langley Ave. 6 9 9 11 35Rear End SB 9th Ave. at Langley Ave. 6 1 5 1 13Rear End EB Langley at 9th Ave. 1 0 2 1 4Rear End WB Langley at 9th Ave. 2 0 0 2 4Rear End NB 9th Ave. at Tippin Ave. 1 1 2 3 7Rear End SB 9th Ave. at Tippin Ave. 5 9 11 3 28Rear End EB Tippin Ave. at 9th Ave. 1 5 0 1 7Rear End WB Tippin at 9th Ave. 3 7 2 4 16Rear End EB Langley at Tippin Ave. 0 0 0 1 1Rear End WB Langley atTippin Ave. 1 1 4 0 6Rear End EB Tippin Ave. at Langley Ave. 0 1 1 0 2Rear End WB Tippin at Langley Ave. 2 0 0 2 4Left Turn Didn't Yield 9th Ave. at Langley Ave. 0 3 1 2 6Left Turn Didn't Yield 9th Ave. at Tippin Ave. 6 2 1 5 14Left Turn Didn't Yield Langley Ave. at Tippin Ave. 0 3 1 0 4Right Turn Didn't Yield All Locations 4 4 1 3 12Ran Red Light All locations 11 8 10 6 35Miscellaneous (improper lane changes, backing up in lanes, etc.) All Locations 6 12 13 13 44Bicycle Involved All Locations 1 1 1 1 4Pedestrian Involved All Locations 0 0 1 0 1

Yearly Totals (all locations) 56 67 65 59 247

Summary of Crash Data9th Ave. at Langley Ave. and Tippin Ave.

19

Appendix B

December 11, 2008 Traffic Counts

Southern Traffic Services, Inc.2911 Westfield Road

Gulf Breeze, FL 32563 File Name : 8184-2~1Site Code : 00081842Start Date : 12/11/2008Page No : 1

Tippin Ave @ LangleyPensacola, FL

Groups Printed- AutomobilesTippin Ave

SouthboundLangley

WestboundTippin AveNorthbound

LangleyEastbound

StartTime Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total

Int.Total

07:00 AM 4 70 0 0 74 71 54 8 0 133 0 33 29 0 62 0 21 4 0 25 29407:15 AM 5 114 1 0 120 133 61 12 0 206 4 50 34 1 89 0 16 5 0 21 43607:30 AM 9 93 0 0 102 118 106 10 1 235 1 73 33 1 108 0 24 3 0 27 47207:45 AM 9 134 0 0 143 123 103 12 0 238 1 88 53 0 142 0 17 4 0 21 544

Total 27 411 1 0 439 445 324 42 1 812 6 244 149 2 401 0 78 16 0 94 1746

08:00 AM 5 108 0 0 113 94 87 13 0 194 1 58 41 0 100 0 25 8 0 33 44008:15 AM 9 83 0 0 92 84 73 13 0 170 3 62 42 0 107 0 38 5 0 43 41208:30 AM 5 82 0 0 87 71 42 8 0 121 1 50 23 1 75 0 20 4 0 24 30708:45 AM 5 74 0 0 79 90 50 13 1 154 3 48 38 0 89 0 12 4 0 16 338

Total 24 347 0 0 371 339 252 47 1 639 8 218 144 1 371 0 95 21 0 116 1497

*** BREAK ***

11:00 AM 4 67 0 0 71 57 52 9 1 119 14 95 49 0 158 0 27 6 0 33 38111:15 AM 6 79 0 0 85 72 43 11 0 126 9 115 61 0 185 0 30 4 0 34 43011:30 AM 9 93 0 0 102 65 32 11 0 108 11 133 78 0 222 0 31 5 0 36 46811:45 AM 2 85 0 0 87 77 53 12 1 143 7 100 69 0 176 1 38 9 0 48 454

Total 21 324 0 0 345 271 180 43 2 496 41 443 257 0 741 1 126 24 0 151 1733

12:00 PM 15 92 0 0 107 56 49 10 3 118 12 135 86 0 233 1 38 14 0 53 51112:15 PM 8 90 0 0 98 59 46 17 1 123 2 114 77 0 193 0 42 13 0 55 46912:30 PM 14 87 1 0 102 53 65 12 1 131 9 92 85 1 187 0 50 13 0 63 48312:45 PM 9 77 0 0 86 81 49 15 0 145 7 98 77 2 184 0 39 19 0 58 473

Total 46 346 1 0 393 249 209 54 5 517 30 439 325 3 797 1 169 59 0 229 1936

*** BREAK ***

04:00 PM 14 78 0 1 93 56 46 9 0 111 4 135 135 7 281 0 61 11 0 72 55704:15 PM 13 91 0 2 106 68 53 13 0 134 6 126 117 0 249 0 52 9 1 62 55104:30 PM 16 74 0 2 92 57 57 16 3 133 7 146 137 0 290 0 60 10 0 70 58504:45 PM 13 109 0 0 122 47 51 14 0 112 7 153 147 0 307 0 75 16 0 91 632

Total 56 352 0 5 413 228 207 52 3 490 24 560 536 7 1127 0 248 46 1 295 2325

05:00 PM 10 114 0 0 124 79 48 15 1 143 12 203 160 1 376 0 71 15 0 86 72905:15 PM 14 83 0 1 98 82 58 13 1 154 5 147 147 0 299 0 71 12 0 83 63405:30 PM 16 102 0 1 119 78 47 14 0 139 4 139 116 0 259 0 49 5 0 54 57105:45 PM 17 92 0 0 109 62 40 11 0 113 4 95 102 0 201 0 53 12 0 65 488

Total 57 391 0 2 450 301 193 53 2 549 25 584 525 1 1135 0 244 44 0 288 2422

GrandTotal 231 217

1 2 7 2411 1833

1365 291 14 3503 134 248

8193

6 14 4572 2 960 210 1 1173 11659

Apprch % 9.6 90.0 0.1 0.3 52.

339.

0 8.3 0.4 2.9 54.4

42.3 0.3 0.2 81.

817.

9 0.1

Total % 2.0 18.6 0.0 0.1 20.7 15.

711.

7 2.5 0.1 30.0 1.1 21.3

16.6 0.1 39.2 0.0 8.2 1.8 0.0 10.1




Tippin Ave

Lan

gley

Langley

Tippin Ave

Right2

Thru2171

Left231

Peds7

InOut Total2781 2411 5192

Right291

Thru1365

Left1833

Peds 14

Out

TotalIn

3127 3503

6630

Left134

Thru2488

Right1936

Peds14

Out TotalIn4214 4572 8786

Left2

Thru96

0 R

ight210

Ped

s1

Tota

lO

utIn

1501

11

73

2674

12/11/2008 7:00:00 AM12/11/2008 5:45:00 PM Automobiles

North




Tippin AveSouthbound

LangleyWestbound

Tippin AveNorthbound

LangleyEastbound

StartTime Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total

Int.Total

Peak Hour From 07:00 AM to 09:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Intersecti

on 07:15 AM

Volume 28 449 1 0 478 468 357 47 1 873 7 269 161 2 439 0 82 20 0 102 1892

Percent 5.9 93.9 0.2 0.0 53.

640.

9 5.4 0.1 1.6 61.3

36.7 0.5 0.0 80.

419.

6 0.0

07:45Volume 9 134 0 0 143 123 103 12 0 238 1 88 53 0 142 0 17 4 0 21 544

PeakFactor

0.869

High Int. 07:45 AM 07:45 AM 07:45 AM 08:00 AMVolume 9 134 0 0 143 123 103 12 0 238 1 88 53 0 142 0 25 8 0 33

PeakFactor

0.836

0.917

0.773

0.773

Tippin Ave

Lan

gley

Langley

Tippin Ave

Right1

Thru449

Left28

Peds0


Right 47

Thru357

Left468

Peds 1

Out

TotalIn

271 873

1144

Left7

Thru269

Right161

Peds2


Left0

Thru82

R

ight20

P

eds0

Tota

lO

utIn

365

102

467

12/11/2008 7:15:00 AM12/11/2008 8:00:00 AM Automobiles

North





LangleyWestbound


LangleyEastbound

StartTime Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total

Int.Total

Peak Hour From 10:00 AM to 01:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Intersecti

on 12:00 PM

Volume 46 346 1 0 393 249 209 54 5 517 30 439 325 3 797 1 169 59 0 229 1936

Percent 11.7

88.0 0.3 0.0 48.

240.

410.

4 1.0 3.8 55.1

40.8 0.4 0.4 73.

825.

8 0.0

12:00Volume 15 92 0 0 107 56 49 10 3 118 12 135 86 0 233 1 38 14 0 53 511

PeakFactor

0.947

High Int. 12:00 PM 12:45 PM 12:00 PM 12:30 PMVolume 15 92 0 0 107 81 49 15 0 145 12 135 86 0 233 0 50 13 0 63

PeakFactor

0.918

0.891

0.855

0.909

Tippin Ave

Lan

gley

Langley

Tippin Ave

Right1

Thru346

Left46

Peds0


Right 54

Thru209

Left249

Peds 5

Out

TotalIn

540 517

1057

Left30

Thru439

Right325

Peds3


Left1

Thru16

9 R

ight59

P

eds0

Tota

lO

utIn

240

229

469

12/11/2008 12:00:00 PM12/11/2008 12:45:00 PM Automobiles

North





LangleyWestbound


LangleyEastbound

StartTime Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total

Int.Total

Peak Hour From 02:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Intersecti

on 04:30 PM

Volume 53 380 0 3 436 265 214 58 5 542 31 649 591 1 1272 0 277 53 0 330 2580

Percent 12.2

87.2 0.0 0.7 48.

939.

510.

7 0.9 2.4 51.0

46.5 0.1 0.0 83.

916.

1 0.0

05:00Volume 10 114 0 0 124 79 48 15 1 143 12 203 160 1 376 0 71 15 0 86 729

PeakFactor

0.885


PeakFactor

0.879

0.880

0.846

0.907

Tippin Ave

Lan

gley

Langley

Tippin Ave

Right0

Thru380

Left53

Peds3


Right 58

Thru214

Left265

Peds 5

Out

TotalIn

921 542

1463

Left31

Thru649

Right591

Peds1


Left0

Thru27

7 R

ight53

P

eds0

Tota

lO

utIn

245

330

575


North



9th Ave @ LangleyPensacola, FL

Groups Printed- Automobiles9th Ave

SouthboundLangley

Westbound9th Ave

NorthboundLangley

EastboundStartTime Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total

Int.Total

07:00 AM 0 190 9 0 199 41 16 0 0 57 1 43 12 0 56 2 13 3 0 18 33007:15 AM 0 251 3 0 254 55 21 0 0 76 3 61 12 0 76 4 12 8 0 24 43007:30 AM 0 243 5 0 248 79 21 1 0 101 0 90 8 0 98 9 16 11 0 36 48307:45 AM 0 232 17 0 249 59 35 0 0 94 2 91 12 0 105 6 12 8 0 26 474

Total 0 916 34 0 950 234 93 1 0 328 6 285 44 0 335 21 53 30 0 104 1717

08:00 AM 0 197 32 0 229 44 48 0 0 92 2 93 8 0 103 9 22 11 0 42 46608:15 AM 0 151 15 0 166 48 27 0 0 75 8 78 13 0 99 13 26 13 0 52 39208:30 AM 0 191 4 0 195 25 15 0 0 40 5 96 8 0 109 8 16 10 0 34 37808:45 AM 0 198 9 0 207 34 16 0 0 50 7 94 10 0 111 3 10 7 0 20 388

Total 0 737 60 0 797 151 106 0 0 257 22 361 39 0 422 33 74 41 0 148 1624

*** BREAK ***

11:00 AM 0 200 18 0 218 41 31 0 0 72 15 196 20 0 231 13 14 10 0 37 55811:15 AM 0 239 14 0 253 31 24 0 0 55 18 246 26 0 290 11 22 15 4 52 65011:30 AM 0 260 19 0 279 26 25 0 0 51 17 220 20 0 257 23 15 14 0 52 63911:45 AM 0 260 25 0 285 36 19 0 0 55 21 270 21 0 312 19 21 14 0 54 706

Total 0 959 76 0 1035 134 99 0 0 233 71 932 87 0 1090 66 72 53 4 195 2553

12:00 PM 0 247 16 0 263 39 26 0 0 65 15 253 22 0 290 17 23 20 0 60 67812:15 PM 0 238 17 0 255 29 15 0 0 44 21 265 24 0 310 12 25 16 0 53 66212:30 PM 0 256 17 0 273 44 31 1 0 76 15 270 40 0 325 9 25 21 0 55 72912:45 PM 0 236 17 0 253 42 18 0 0 60 20 260 22 0 302 19 35 20 0 74 689

Total 0 977 67 0 1044 154 90 1 0 245 71 1048 108 0 1227 57 108 77 0 242 2758

*** BREAK ***

04:00 PM 0 180 14 0 194 32 20 0 2 54 14 302 40 7 363 20 40 17 0 77 68804:15 PM 0 199 13 0 212 31 28 0 1 60 7 294 26 0 327 15 30 22 0 67 66604:30 PM 0 222 13 2 237 36 29 0 2 67 18 305 47 0 370 19 20 16 1 56 73004:45 PM 0 205 17 0 222 29 31 0 0 60 11 286 34 0 331 25 59 17 0 101 714

Total 0 806 57 2 865 128 108 0 5 241 50 1187 147 7 1391 79 149 72 1 301 2798

05:00 PM 0 200 13 0 213 34 25 0 0 59 15 289 41 0 345 24 48 11 0 83 70005:15 PM 0 199 11 0 210 39 28 0 0 67 16 311 41 0 368 14 32 14 0 60 70505:30 PM 0 222 12 1 235 25 23 0 0 48 8 236 20 0 264 7 30 7 0 44 59105:45 PM 0 213 10 0 223 26 17 0 0 43 8 223 29 3 263 12 32 18 4 66 595

Total 0 834 46 1 881 124 93 0 0 217 47 1059 131 3 1240 57 142 50 4 253 2591

GrandTotal 0 522

9 340 3 5572 925 589 2 5 1521 267 4872 556 10 5705 313 598 323 9 1243 1404

1

Apprch % 0.0 93.8 6.1 0.1 60.

838.

7 0.1 0.3 4.7 85.4 9.7 0.2 25.

248.

126.

0 0.7

Total % 0.0 37.2 2.4 0.0 39.7 6.6 4.2 0.0 0.0 10.8 1.9 34.

7 4.0 0.1 40.6 2.2 4.3 2.3 0.1 8.9




9th Ave

Lan

gley

Langley

9th Ave

Right340

Thru5229

Left0

Peds3

InOut Total5187 5572 10759

Right 2

Thru589

Left925

Peds 5

Out

TotalIn

1154 1521

2675

Left267

Thru4872

Right556

Peds10

Out TotalIn6477 5705 12182

Left313

Thru59

8 R

ight323

Ped

s9

Tota

lO

utIn

1196

12

43

2439


North




9th AveSouthbound

LangleyWestbound

9th AveNorthbound

LangleyEastbound

StartTime Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total

Int.Total


on 07:15 AM

Volume 0 923 57 0 980 237 125 1 0 363 7 335 40 0 382 28 62 38 0 128 1853

Percent 0.0 94.2 5.8 0.0 65.

334.

4 0.3 0.0 1.8 87.7

10.5 0.0 21.

948.

429.

7 0.0

07:30Volume 0 243 5 0 248 79 21 1 0 101 0 90 8 0 98 9 16 11 0 36 483

PeakFactor

0.959


PeakFactor

0.965

0.899

0.910

0.762

9th Ave

Lan

gley

Langley

9th Ave

Right57

Thru923

Left0

Peds0


Right 1

Thru125

Left237

Peds 0

Out

TotalIn

102 363

465

Left7

Thru335

Right40

Peds0


Left28

Th

ru62

Rig

ht38

Ped

s0

Tota

lO

utIn

189

128

317

12/11/2008 7:15:00 AM12/11/2008 8:00:00 AM Automobiles

North




9th AveSouthbound

LangleyWestbound

9th AveNorthbound

LangleyEastbound

StartTime Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total

Int.Total


on 11:45 AM

Volume 0 1001 75 0 1076 148 91 1 0 240 72 105

8 107 0 1237 57 94 71 0 222 2775

Percent 0.0 93.0 7.0 0.0 61.

737.

9 0.4 0.0 5.8 85.5 8.6 0.0 25.

742.

332.

0 0.0

12:30Volume 0 256 17 0 273 44 31 1 0 76 15 270 40 0 325 9 25 21 0 55 729

PeakFactor

0.952

High Int. 11:45 AM 12:30 PM 12:30 PM 12:00 PMVolume 0 260 25 0 285 44 31 1 0 76 15 270 40 0 325 17 23 20 0 60

PeakFactor

0.944

0.789

0.952

0.925

9th Ave

Lan

gley

Langley

9th Ave

Right75

Thru1001

Left0

Peds0


Right 1

Thru 91 Left148

Peds 0

Out

TotalIn

201 240

441

Left72

Thru1058

Right107

Peds0


Left57

Th

ru94

Rig

ht71

Peds

0

Tota

lO

utIn

238

222

460


North




9th AveSouthbound

LangleyWestbound

9th AveNorthbound

LangleyEastbound

StartTime Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total

Int.Total


on 04:30 PM

Volume 0 826 54 2 882 138 113 0 2 253 60 1191 163 0 1414 82 159 58 1 300 2849

Percent 0.0 93.7 6.1 0.2 54.

544.

7 0.0 0.8 4.2 84.2

11.5 0.0 27.

353.

019.

3 0.3

04:30Volume 0 222 13 2 237 36 29 0 2 67 18 305 47 0 370 19 20 16 1 56 730

PeakFactor

0.976


PeakFactor

0.930

0.944

0.955

0.743

9th Ave

Lan

gley

Langley

9th Ave

Right54

Thru826

Left0

Peds2


Right 0

Thru113

Left138

Peds 2

Out

TotalIn

322 253

575

Left60

Thru1191

Right163

Peds0


Left82

Th

ru159

Rig

ht58

Peds

1

Tota

lO

utIn

227

300

527


North



9th Ave @ Tippin AvePensacola, FL

Groups Printed- Automobile - Trucks - Buses9th Ave

SouthboundTippin AveWestbound

9th AveNorthbound

Tippin AveEastbound

StartTime Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total

Int.Total

07:00 AM 47 194 2 0 243 0 16 20 0 36 0 45 0 0 45 0 27 20 0 47 37107:15 AM 79 239 1 0 319 0 28 33 0 61 8 52 0 0 60 1 34 21 0 56 49607:30 AM 67 228 1 0 296 0 27 62 0 89 10 86 0 0 96 1 38 16 0 55 53607:45 AM 99 241 0 0 340 0 28 60 0 88 16 88 0 0 104 0 46 27 0 73 605

Total 292 902 4 0 1198 0 99 175 0 274 34 271 0 0 305 2 145 84 0 231 2008

08:00 AM 76 235 0 0 311 0 29 56 0 85 9 95 0 0 104 3 36 16 0 55 55508:15 AM 69 156 1 0 226 0 29 42 1 72 6 91 0 1 98 3 25 14 0 42 43808:30 AM 59 180 1 0 240 0 21 34 0 55 7 100 0 0 107 0 30 22 0 52 45408:45 AM 53 180 0 0 233 0 31 43 0 74 17 87 0 0 104 0 27 21 0 48 459

Total 257 751 2 0 1010 0 110 175 1 286 39 373 0 1 413 6 118 73 0 197 1906

*** BREAK ***

11:00 AM 48 208 2 0 258 0 27 70 0 97 25 214 0 0 239 6 22 29 0 57 65111:15 AM 54 215 5 0 274 0 35 72 0 107 20 189 0 0 209 6 40 32 0 78 66811:30 AM 55 256 2 0 313 0 49 101 0 150 26 249 0 0 275 3 35 35 2 75 81311:45 AM 48 241 1 0 290 0 33 89 0 122 28 249 0 0 277 2 46 44 0 92 781

Total 205 920 10 0 1135 0 144 332 0 476 99 901 0 0 1000 17 143 140 2 302 2913

12:00 PM 71 242 1 0 314 0 47 97 0 144 29 236 0 0 265 1 40 27 0 68 79112:15 PM 65 235 0 1 301 2 29 98 0 129 25 256 0 0 281 2 33 42 0 77 78812:30 PM 67 254 4 0 325 1 30 84 0 115 29 253 0 0 282 4 35 24 0 63 78512:45 PM 57 224 2 0 283 0 40 77 0 117 33 254 0 0 287 1 22 32 0 55 742

Total 260 955 7 1 1223 3 146 356 0 505 116 999 0 0 1115 8 130 125 0 263 3106

*** BREAK ***

04:00 PM 60 173 4 1 238 0 52 108 1 161 26 309 0 0 335 3 35 23 1 62 79604:15 PM 67 192 4 1 264 1 42 87 0 130 23 287 0 0 310 1 45 23 0 69 77304:30 PM 47 218 3 1 269 0 42 126 1 169 24 276 0 0 300 2 46 31 3 82 82004:45 PM 79 210 2 0 291 0 55 123 0 178 18 314 0 0 332 2 46 21 0 69 870

Total 253 793 13 3 1062 1 191 444 2 638 91 1186 0 0 1277 8 172 98 4 282 3259

05:00 PM 87 198 3 0 288 1 65 150 2 218 18 290 0 0 308 1 45 26 0 72 88605:15 PM 57 190 1 0 248 0 50 111 0 161 34 299 0 0 333 3 45 28 0 76 81805:30 PM 70 192 0 0 262 0 44 110 0 154 11 230 0 0 241 3 42 32 0 77 73405:45 PM 63 215 2 0 280 0 33 90 0 123 7 222 0 0 229 2 46 29 2 79 711

Total 277 795 6 0 1078 1 192 461 2 656 70 1041 0 0 1111 9 178 115 2 304 3149

GrandTotal

1544

5116 42 4 6706 5 882 194

3 5 2835 449 4771 0 1 5221 50 886 635 8 1579 1634

1

Apprch % 23.0

76.3 0.6 0.1 0.2 31.

168.

5 0.2 8.6 91.4 0.0 0.0 3.2 56.

140.

2 0.5

Total % 9.4 31.3 0.3 0.0 41.0 0.0 5.4 11.

9 0.0 17.3 2.7 29.2 0.0 0.0 32.0 0.3 5.4 3.9 0.0 9.7




9th Ave

Tip

pin

Ave

Tippin Ave

9th Ave

Right

42 0 0

42 Thru

5080 25 11

5116 Left

1525 12 7

1544 Peds

4 0 0 4

InOut Total6691 6651 13342

58 37 95 15 18 33

6764 6706 13470

Right

1920 18 5

1943 Thru

871 5 6 882

Left 5 0 0 5 Peds 5 0 0 5

Out

TotalIn

2399 2801

5200 21

23 44

10 11

21 2430

2835 5265

Left446

3 0

449

Thru4723

39 9

4771

Right0 0 0 0

Peds1 0 0 1

Out TotalIn

5714 5170 10884 28 42 70 14 9 23

5756 5221 10977

Left48

1 1 50

Thru87

4 9 3 88

6 R

ight629 3 3

635

Ped

s8 0 0 8

Tota

lO

utIn

1359

15

59

2918

8

13

21

6 7

13

1373

15

79

2952

12/11/2008 7:00:00 AM12/11/2008 5:45:00 PM Automobile Trucks Buses

North




9th AveSouthbound

Tippin AveWestbound

9th AveNorthbound

Tippin AveEastbound

StartTime Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total

Int.Total


on 07:15 AM

Volume 321 943 2 0 1266 0 112 211 0 323 43 321 0 0 364 5 154 80 0 239 2192

Percent 25.4

74.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 34.

765.

3 0.0 11.8

88.2 0.0 0.0 2.1 64.

433.

5 0.0

07:45Volume 99 241 0 0 340 0 28 60 0 88 16 88 0 0 104 0 46 27 0 73 605

PeakFactor

0.906


PeakFactor

0.931

0.907

0.875

0.818

9th Ave

Tip

pin

Ave

Tippin Ave

9th Ave

Right2

Thru943

Left321

Peds0


Right211

Thru112

Left 0 P

eds 0

Out

TotalIn

475 323

798

Left43

Thru321

Right0

Peds0


Left5

Thru15

4 R

ight80

P

eds0

Tota

lO

utIn

157

239

396

12/11/2008 7:15:00 AM12/11/2008 8:00:00 AM Automobile Trucks Buses

North




9th AveSouthbound

Tippin AveWestbound

9th AveNorthbound

Tippin AveEastbound

StartTime Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total

Int.Total


on 11:30 AM

Volume 239 974 4 1 1218 2 158 385 0 545 108 990 0 0 1098 8 154 148 2 312 3173

Percent 19.6

80.0 0.3 0.1 0.4 29.

070.

6 0.0 9.8 90.2 0.0 0.0 2.6 49.

447.

4 0.6

11:30Volume 55 256 2 0 313 0 49 101 0 150 26 249 0 0 275 3 35 35 2 75 813

PeakFactor

0.976

High Int. 12:00 PM 11:30 AM 12:15 PM 11:45 AMVolume 71 242 1 0 314 0 49 101 0 150 25 256 0 0 281 2 46 44 0 92

PeakFactor

0.970

0.908

0.977

0.848

9th Ave

Tip

pin

Ave

Tippin Ave

9th Ave

Right4

Thru974

Left239

Peds1


Right385

Thru158

Left 2 P

eds 0

Out

TotalIn

393 545

938

Left108

Thru990

Right0

Peds0


Left8

Thru15

4 R

ight148

Ped

s2

Tota

lO

utIn

270

312

582

12/11/2008 11:30:00 AM12/11/2008 12:15:00 PM Automobile Trucks Buses

North




9th AveSouthbound

Tippin AveWestbound

9th AveNorthbound

Tippin AveEastbound

StartTime Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total Left Thr

uRig

htPed

sApp.Total

Int.Total


on 04:30 PM

Volume 270 816 9 1 1096 1 212 510 3 726 94 1179 0 0 1273 8 182 106 3 299 3394

Percent 24.6

74.5 0.8 0.1 0.1 29.

270.

2 0.4 7.4 92.6 0.0 0.0 2.7 60.

935.

5 1.0

05:00Volume 87 198 3 0 288 1 65 150 2 218 18 290 0 0 308 1 45 26 0 72 886

PeakFactor

0.958


PeakFactor

0.942

0.833

0.956

0.912

9th Ave

Tip

pin

Ave

Tippin Ave

9th Ave

Right9

Thru816

Left270

Peds1


Right510

Thru212

Left 1 P

eds 3

Out

TotalIn

452 726

1178

Left94

Thru1179

Right0

Peds0


Left8

Thru18

2 R

ight106

Peds

3

Tota

lO

utIn

315

299

614

12/11/2008 4:30:00 PM12/11/2008 5:15:00 PM Automobile Trucks Buses

North

&

COUNTED BY: KB

STARTTIME LEFT THRU LEFT RIGHT THRU RIGHT TOTAL

7:00 8 223 2 3 69 0 3057:15 5 354 4 9 81 1 4547:30 9 346 2 18 135 3 5137:45 12 403 1 17 138 6 577

TOTAL 34 1326 9 47 423 10 1849

8:00 7 299 2 10 178 3 4998:15 11 263 1 18 134 2 4298:30 9 255 2 12 123 1 4028:45 6 347 4 12 148 1 518

TOTAL 33 1164 9 52 583 7 1848

AM PEAK HOUR START TIME 7:15

PEAK HR TOTALS 33 1402 9 54 532 13 2043

% OF APPROACH 2.3% 97.7% 14.3% 85.7% 97.6% 2.4%

PEAK HR FACTOR

&

COUNTED BY: KB

STARTTIME LEFT THRU LEFT RIGHT THRU RIGHT TOTAL

16:00 15 241 0 15 359 2 63216:15 17 238 4 25 356 6 64616:30 13 227 4 18 381 3 64616:45 22 295 0 15 338 4 674

TOTAL 67 1001 8 73 1434 15 2598

17:00 15 276 2 14 364 4 67517:15 19 238 1 24 395 2 67917:30 16 255 1 20 335 1 62817:45 19 272 4 17 297 4 613

TOTAL 69 1041 8 75 1391 11 2595

PM PEAK HOUR START TIME 16:30

PEAK HR TOTALS 69 1036 7 71 1478 13 2674

% OF APPROACH 6.2% 93.8% 9.0% 91.0% 99.1% 0.9%

PEAK HR FACTOR 0.871 0.780 0.939

SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND

ALL VEHICLES9th Avenue McAllister Avenue 9th Avenue

COUNT DATE: 24-Feb-09FILE NAME: TO 29 tmc.xls

1315 COUNTRY CLUB RD.GULF BREEZE, FLA. 32563

INTERSECTION OF McAllister Avenue 9th Avenue

SOUTHBOUND

HSA CONSULTING GROUP, INC.

0.864 0.788 0.753

WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND

HSA CONSULTING GROUP, INC.1315 COUNTRY CLUB RD.GULF BREEZE, FLA. 32563

INTERSECTION OF McAllister Avenue 9th Avenue

COUNT DATE:FILE NAME:

24-Feb-09TO 29 tmc.xls

ALL VEHICLES9th Avenue McAllister Avenue 9th Avenue

&

COUNTED BY: WB

STARTTIME THRU RIGHT LEFT THRU LEFT RIGHT TOTAL

7:00 251 3 0 72 0 1 3277:15 333 8 1 101 0 1 4447:30 355 6 3 131 2 1 4987:45 358 6 1 149 2 4 520

TOTAL 1297 23 5 453 4 7 1789

8:00 296 5 4 159 3 1 4688:15 275 9 2 148 1 3 4388:30 254 5 3 139 4 5 4108:45 331 6 3 158 4 7 509

TOTAL 1156 25 12 604 12 16 1825


PEAK HR TOTALS 1342 25 9 540 7 7 1930

% OF APPROACH 98.2% 1.8% 1.6% 98.4% 50.0% 50.0%

PEAK HR FACTOR

&

COUNTED BY: WB


16:00 248 4 3 349 6 9 61916:15 240 8 6 366 6 4 63016:30 248 3 5 335 4 7 60216:45 247 8 0 391 5 10 661

TOTAL 983 23 14 1441 21 30 2512

17:00 233 10 5 331 5 8 59217:15 262 4 4 410 4 6 69017:30 281 5 5 322 2 3 61817:45 315 8 4 305 6 7 645

TOTAL 1091 27 18 1368 17 24 2545


PEAK HR TOTALS 1023 27 14 1454 16 27 2561

% OF APPROACH 97.4% 2.6% 1.0% 99.0% 37.2% 62.8%

PEAK HR FACTOR 0.918 0.886 0.717

SOUTHBOUND NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND

ALL VEHICLES9th Avenue 9th Avenue John Carroll Drive



INTERSECTION OF John Carroll Drive 9th Avenue

SOUTHBOUND


0.939 0.842 0.583

NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND


INTERSECTION OF John Carroll Drive 9th Avenue



ALL VEHICLES9th Avenue 9th Avenue John Carroll Drive

&

COUNTED BY: DB

STARTTIME LEFT THRU RIGHT RTOR LEFT THRU RIGHT RTOR LEFT THRU RIGHT RTOR LEFT THRU RIGHT RTOR TOTAL

7:00 13 197 25 1 28 39 10 0 22 49 5 4 12 21 27 0 4537:15 21 297 31 0 47 58 23 0 21 62 8 0 12 37 25 0 6427:30 8 271 41 1 55 73 25 0 34 89 19 3 31 22 34 0 7067:45 19 335 34 1 64 81 24 0 40 102 18 4 17 27 33 0 799

TOTAL 61 1100 131 3 194 251 82 0 117 302 50 11 72 107 119 0 2600

8:00 21 223 31 1 54 67 23 1 36 112 16 0 29 42 26 0 6828:15 11 205 35 8 38 46 13 1 36 88 13 3 35 37 25 1 5958:30 12 229 39 2 46 44 23 0 34 92 10 0 18 39 43 0 6318:45 16 250 27 0 50 61 22 0 45 96 11 1 27 44 36 0 686

TOTAL 60 907 132 11 188 218 81 2 151 388 50 4 109 162 130 1 2594


PEAK HR TOTALS 69 1126 137 3 220 279 95 1 131 365 61 7 89 128 118 0 2829

% OF APPROACH 5.2% 84.3% 10.3% 0.2% 37.0% 46.9% 16.0% 0.2% 23.2% 64.7% 10.8% 1.2% 26.6% 38.2% 35.2% 0.0%

PEAK HR FACTOR

&

COUNTED BY: DB


16:00 31 171 29 10 50 57 28 1 94 314 30 7 81 96 47 1 104716:15 38 144 39 18 44 68 18 1 99 272 33 6 98 101 43 0 102216:30 34 187 61 4 41 93 17 0 114 252 33 2 87 108 55 0 108816:45 46 243 56 3 46 88 22 1 95 283 31 1 118 135 84 6 1258

TOTAL 149 745 185 35 181 306 85 3 402 1121 127 16 384 440 229 7 4415

17:00 42 206 49 2 47 64 28 0 81 321 29 2 90 96 68 3 112817:15 44 193 45 2 52 102 18 0 81 322 40 1 123 149 61 0 123317:30 47 182 46 4 41 93 18 1 87 245 33 2 115 173 59 3 114917:45 51 179 96 9 29 57 29 0 96 256 27 3 69 111 52 1 1065

TOTAL 184 760 236 17 169 316 93 1 345 1144 129 8 397 529 240 7 4575


PEAK HR TOTALS 179 824 196 11 186 347 86 2 344 1171 133 6 446 553 272 12 4768

% OF APPROACH 14.8% 68.1% 16.2% 0.9% 30.0% 55.9% 13.8% 0.3% 20.8% 70.8% 8.0% 0.4% 34.8% 43.1% 21.2% 0.9%

PEAK HR FACTOR 0.869 0.903 0.931 0.916

SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND

ALL VEHICLES9th Avenue Creighton Rd 9th Avenue Creighton Rd



INTERSECTION OF Creighton Road 9th Avenue

SOUTHBOUND


0.858 0.880 0.860 0.863

WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND


INTERSECTION OF Creighton Road 9th Avenue



ALL VEHICLES9th Avenue Creighton Rd 9th Avenue Creighton Rd

&

COUNTED BY: SL


7:00 234 1 6 66 0 12 3197:15 308 0 6 82 0 23 4197:30 327 0 7 104 1 21 4607:45 361 4 8 113 1 15 502

TOTAL 1230 5 27 365 2 71 1700

8:00 269 0 6 149 0 14 4388:15 241 2 6 125 0 12 3868:30 264 3 0 107 0 14 3888:45 336 0 7 155 0 11 509

TOTAL 1110 5 19 536 0 51 1721


PEAK HR TOTALS 1265 4 27 448 2 73 1819

% OF APPROACH 99.7% 0.3% 5.7% 94.3% 2.7% 97.3%

PEAK HR FACTOR

&

COUNTED BY: SL


16:00 239 3 18 300 1 13 57416:15 212 2 11 307 2 18 55216:30 226 7 9 314 0 15 57116:45 231 2 14 309 2 14 572

TOTAL 908 14 52 1230 5 60 2269

17:00 246 7 20 301 1 9 58417:15 234 3 10 302 0 13 56217:30 246 1 15 292 1 10 56517:45 271 5 12 243 1 17 549

TOTAL 997 16 57 1138 3 49 2260


PEAK HR TOTALS 937 19 53 1226 3 51 2289

% OF APPROACH 98.0% 2.0% 4.1% 95.9% 5.6% 94.4%

PEAK HR FACTOR

9th Avenue Schwab Drive



EASTBOUND


INTERSECTION OF Schwab Drive 9th Avenue

ALL VEHICLES9th Avenue

COUNT DATE: 19-Feb-09

SOUTHBOUND


0.869 0.766 0.815

NORTHBOUND


INTERSECTION OF Schwab Drive 9th Avenue

FILE NAME: TO 32 tmc.xls

ALL VEHICLES9th Avenue 9th Avenue Schwab Drive

0.945 0.990 0.844

SOUTHBOUND NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND

&

COUNTED BY: KB

STARTTIME LEFT THRU RIGHT LEFT THRU RIGHT LEFT THRU RIGHT LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL

7:00 1 5 3 1 13 0 1 5 1 0 22 5 577:15 3 20 1 1 28 4 3 6 0 1 30 11 1087:30 1 20 2 0 48 1 1 5 0 1 23 6 1087:45 1 12 1 1 47 1 2 5 4 1 22 9 106

TOTAL 6 57 7 3 136 6 7 21 5 3 97 31 379

8:00 1 9 6 0 75 2 4 2 1 4 40 4 1488:15 1 6 1 2 61 3 2 5 1 6 38 10 1368:30 3 14 0 0 23 2 3 3 0 2 29 6 858:45 2 11 4 1 35 2 4 3 1 2 23 3 91

TOTAL 7 40 11 3 194 9 13 13 3 14 130 23 460


PEAK HR TOTALS 4 47 10 3 231 7 9 17 6 12 123 29 498

% OF APPROACH 6.6% 77.0% 16.4% 1.2% 95.9% 2.9% 28.1% 53.1% 18.8% 7.3% 75.0% 17.7%

PEAK HR FACTOR

&

COUNTED BY: KB


16:00 2 7 2 0 45 7 7 10 2 7 47 11 14716:15 0 7 1 2 43 6 2 14 1 5 55 9 14516:30 0 8 7 2 42 10 4 6 1 3 56 11 15016:45 3 8 5 1 38 6 4 15 3 6 63 5 157

TOTAL 5 30 15 5 168 29 17 45 7 21 221 36 599

17:00 3 6 6 1 37 4 5 14 2 4 53 8 14317:15 4 7 4 1 40 0 4 13 1 4 54 4 13617:30 5 7 4 0 35 8 8 6 2 10 64 5 15417:45 2 7 4 1 36 3 2 9 0 3 48 5 120

TOTAL 14 27 18 3 148 15 19 42 5 21 219 22 553


PEAK HR TOTALS 5 30 15 5 168 29 17 45 7 21 221 36 599

% OF APPROACH 10.0% 60.0% 30.0% 2.5% 83.2% 14.4% 24.6% 65.2% 10.1% 7.6% 79.5% 12.9%

PEAK HR FACTOR 0.781 0.935 0.784 0.939


ALL VEHICLESSchwab Drive Langley Avenue Schwab Drive Langley Avenue



INTERSECTION OF Schwab Drive Langley Avenue

SOUTHBOUND


0.663 0.782 0.727 0.759

WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND


INTERSECTION OF Schwab Drive Langley Avenue



ALL VEHICLESSchwab Drive Langley Avenue Schwab Drive Langley Avenue

&

COUNTED BY: KB


7:00 2 21 0 4 4 6 1 51 3 0 2 0 947:15 1 35 0 1 3 4 2 74 2 1 7 2 1327:30 3 45 4 4 0 4 3 53 1 1 5 2 1257:45 3 35 2 3 6 5 7 63 7 2 3 2 138

TOTAL 9 136 6 12 13 19 13 241 13 4 17 6 489

8:00 1 53 4 1 3 3 1 65 4 1 4 3 1438:15 1 31 1 3 2 5 3 50 2 2 3 5 1088:30 3 31 1 2 2 3 3 47 1 1 5 5 1048:45 3 47 4 3 6 1 14 69 3 3 2 2 157

TOTAL 8 162 10 9 13 12 21 231 10 7 14 15 512


PEAK HR TOTALS 8 168 10 9 12 16 13 255 14 5 19 9 538

% OF APPROACH 4.3% 90.3% 5.4% 24.3% 32.4% 43.2% 4.6% 90.4% 5.0% 15.2% 57.6% 27.3%

PEAK HR FACTOR

&

COUNTED BY: KB


16:00 2 77 2 6 8 4 0 59 6 3 6 7 18016:15 3 66 4 8 6 4 2 51 5 2 6 6 16316:30 7 84 3 7 6 8 2 58 4 1 9 5 19416:45 1 76 2 14 6 3 2 68 6 0 7 5 190

TOTAL 13 303 11 35 26 19 6 236 21 6 28 23 727

17:00 1 88 1 10 2 4 2 67 5 1 12 7 20017:15 3 69 3 4 5 2 3 54 5 1 4 6 15917:30 2 75 3 11 4 4 3 70 8 7 13 7 20717:45 7 46 5 5 2 1 3 48 1 1 8 6 133

TOTAL 13 278 12 30 13 11 11 239 19 10 37 26 699


PEAK HR TOTALS 7 308 9 39 17 13 10 259 24 9 36 25 756

% OF APPROACH 2.2% 95.1% 2.8% 56.5% 24.6% 18.8% 3.4% 88.4% 8.2% 12.9% 51.4% 35.7%

PEAK HR FACTOR

Tippin Avenue John Carroll Drive



EASTBOUND


INTERSECTION OF Tippin Avenue John Carroll Drive

ALL VEHICLESTippin Avenue John Carroll Drive


SOUTHBOUND


0.802 0.661 0.904 0.825



INTERSECTION OF Tippin Avenue John Carroll Drive


ALL VEHICLESTippin Avenue John Carroll Drive Tippin Avenue John Carroll Drive

0.900 0.750 0.904 0.648


&

COUNTED BY: GS


7:00 6 247 4 0 4 5 0 1 13 64 6 5 4 16 11 10 3967:15 34 295 6 0 2 8 2 2 22 83 14 13 6 23 33 12 5557:30 27 304 8 1 7 10 2 3 10 123 12 5 2 12 24 5 5557:45 26 374 4 0 7 5 5 1 11 153 15 12 4 18 21 6 662

TOTAL 93 1220 22 1 20 28 9 7 56 423 47 35 16 69 89 33 2168

8:00 14 261 5 2 6 9 5 0 11 134 12 6 2 9 17 2 4958:15 14 243 7 1 9 3 2 0 16 122 6 8 5 17 11 5 4698:30 35 244 1 0 9 15 9 2 13 114 17 14 6 17 19 2 5178:45 62 306 7 0 13 12 12 6 24 168 16 20 5 31 26 7 715

TOTAL 125 1054 20 3 37 39 28 8 64 538 51 48 18 74 73 16 2196


PEAK HR TOTALS 101 1234 23 3 22 32 14 6 54 493 53 36 14 62 95 25 2267

% OF APPROACH 7.4% 90.7% 1.7% 0.2% 29.7% 43.2% 18.9% 8.1% 8.5% 77.5% 8.3% 5.7% 7.1% 31.6% 48.5% 12.8%

PEAK HR FACTOR

&

COUNTED BY: GS


16:00 14 289 5 1 11 10 32 1 23 391 6 5 11 4 13 4 82016:15 10 207 7 2 2 16 7 1 29 295 4 4 9 9 15 5 62216:30 10 248 7 1 3 9 6 0 21 341 7 2 14 25 32 3 72916:45 7 251 4 1 6 5 12 3 13 318 12 6 7 11 18 6 680

TOTAL 41 995 23 5 22 40 57 5 86 1345 29 17 41 49 78 18 2851

17:00 9 271 4 0 8 6 10 3 19 316 5 6 4 13 13 6 69317:15 8 256 4 0 7 9 7 1 22 329 6 4 5 11 16 9 69417:30 9 280 5 1 8 9 4 2 15 328 5 5 11 15 10 9 71617:45 25 313 1 0 5 10 7 0 29 318 8 5 4 11 18 1 755

TOTAL 51 1120 14 1 28 34 28 6 85 1291 24 20 24 50 57 25 2858


PEAK HR TOTALS 51 1120 14 1 28 34 28 6 85 1291 24 20 24 50 57 25 2858

% OF APPROACH 4.3% 94.4% 1.2% 0.1% 29.2% 35.4% 29.2% 6.3% 6.0% 90.9% 1.7% 1.4% 15.4% 32.1% 36.5% 16.0%

PEAK HR FACTOR

9th Avenue Underwood Avenue



EASTBOUND


INTERSECTION OF Underwood Avenue 9th Avenue

ALL VEHICLES9th Avenue Underwood Avenue


SOUTHBOUND


0.842 0.841 0.832 0.662



INTERSECTION OF Underwood Avenue 9th Avenue


ALL VEHICLES9th Avenue Underwood Avenue 9th Avenue Underwood Avenue

0.875 0.889 0.983 0.867


20

Appendix C

SYNCHRO Models

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\existing_08am.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009

Baseline Synchro 7 - ReportPage 1

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 28 62 38 237 125 1 7 335 40 0 923 57Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1757 1681 1740 1770 3539 1583 3508Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 0.19 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1757 1681 1740 348 3539 1583 3508Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 30 67 41 258 136 1 8 364 43 0 1003 62RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 4 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 30 85 0 193 202 0 8 364 33 0 1061 0Turn Type Split Split pm+pt pm+ov PermProtected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 3 2Permitted Phases 6 6 2Actuated Green, G (s) 10.0 10.0 14.6 14.6 58.9 58.4 73.0 51.8Effective Green, g (s) 12.0 12.0 16.6 16.6 59.4 59.4 77.0 52.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.17 0.17 0.59 0.59 0.77 0.53Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.5 5.0 6.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 212 211 279 289 244 2102 1282 1852v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.05 0.11 c0.12 0.00 c0.10 0.00 c0.30v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.02v/c Ratio 0.14 0.40 0.69 0.70 0.03 0.17 0.03 0.57Uniform Delay, d1 39.4 40.7 39.3 39.3 17.1 9.2 2.7 16.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.69 0.69 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.3 7.1 7.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 1.2Delay (s) 39.7 42.0 34.3 34.3 17.1 9.4 2.7 6.5Level of Service D D C C B A A AApproach Delay (s) 41.5 34.3 8.8 6.5Approach LOS D C A A

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 14.9 HCM Level of Service BHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.8% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\existing_08am.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 3 4 6Movement NEL SWTL WBTL EBTL NETLLead/Lag Lag Lead Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 15 45 20 20 60Maximum Split (%) 15.0% 45.0% 20.0% 20.0% 60.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 33 20 20 44Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 4 4 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1 2 2 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 14 4 4 14Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 7 21 15 18Dual Entry No Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 9 64 44 24 64End Time (s) 24 9 64 44 24Yield/Force Off (s) 19.5 4 58 38 19Yield/Force Off 170(s) 19.5 97 37 23 1Local Start Time (s) 5 60 40 20 60Local Yield (s) 15.5 0 54 34 15Local Yield 170(s) 15.5 93 33 19 97

Intersection SummaryCycle Length 100Control Type Actuated-CoordinatedNatural Cycle 90Offset: 4 (4%), Referenced to phase 2:SWTL and 6:NETL, Start of Yellow

Splits and Phases: 1: Langley Av & 9th Av

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\existing_08am.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 112 211 5 154 80 43 321 0 321 943 2Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1860 1583 1770 3539 3433 3538Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1846 1583 520 3539 3433 3538Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 122 229 5 167 87 47 349 0 349 1025 2RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 157 0 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 122 72 0 172 22 47 349 0 349 1027 0Turn Type Perm pm+ov Perm pm+ov pm+pt ProtProtected Phases 4 5 8 1 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 6Actuated Green, G (s) 14.7 30.3 14.7 24.7 54.7 53.2 15.6 58.8Effective Green, g (s) 16.7 31.3 16.7 25.7 55.2 55.2 16.1 60.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.31 0.17 0.26 0.55 0.55 0.16 0.61Clearance Time (s) 6.0 4.5 6.0 4.5 4.5 6.0 4.5 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 311 495 308 470 418 1954 553 2151v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.01 c0.10 c0.10 c0.29v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.09 0.01 0.05v/c Ratio 0.39 0.14 0.56 0.05 0.11 0.18 0.63 0.48Uniform Delay, d1 37.1 24.7 38.3 27.9 11.0 11.1 39.2 10.8Progression Factor 1.49 6.94 1.00 1.00 0.55 0.51 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.1 2.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 2.4 0.8Delay (s) 56.0 171.8 40.5 28.0 6.2 5.9 41.5 11.6Level of Service E F D C A A D BApproach Delay (s) 131.5 36.3 5.9 19.2Approach LOS F D A B

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 35.4 HCM Level of Service DHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.46Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.4% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\existing_08am.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8Movement NEL SWT NBTL SWL NETL SBTLLead/Lag Lag Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-Max NoneMaximum Split (s) 17 59 24 24 52 24Maximum Split (%) 17.0% 59.0% 24.0% 24.0% 52.0% 24.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 26 24 15 40 24Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.5 4 3.5 4.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 2 1 1.5 2Minimum Initial (s) 5 6 12 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 17 20 23Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 19 60 36 60 84 36End Time (s) 36 19 60 84 36 60Yield/Force Off (s) 31.5 13 54 79.5 30 54Yield/Force Off 170(s) 31.5 2 37 79.5 10 31Local Start Time (s) 6 47 23 47 71 23Local Yield (s) 18.5 0 41 66.5 17 41Local Yield 170(s) 18.5 89 24 66.5 97 18

Intersection SummaryCycle Length 100Control Type Actuated-CoordinatedNatural Cycle 80Offset: 13 (13%), Referenced to phase 2:SWT and 6:NETL, Start of Yellow

Splits and Phases: 2: Tippin Av & 9th Av

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\existing_08am.sy73: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 82 20 468 357 47 7 269 161 28 449 1Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3434 1770 3478 1770 3539 1583 1770 3538Flt Permitted 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.42 1.00 1.00 0.49 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3434 992 3478 787 3539 1583 919 3538Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 89 22 509 388 51 8 292 175 30 488 1RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 19 0 0 10 0 0 0 65 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 92 0 509 429 0 8 292 110 30 489 0Turn Type Perm pm+pt pm+pt pm+ov pm+ptProtected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 1 7 4Permitted Phases 2 6 8 8 4Actuated Green, G (s) 13.8 47.6 47.6 34.0 32.7 62.0 39.8 35.6Effective Green, g (s) 15.3 48.1 49.1 35.0 34.2 63.0 40.8 37.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.48 0.49 0.35 0.34 0.63 0.41 0.37Clearance Time (s) 5.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 525 709 1708 293 1210 997 415 1313v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.21 0.12 0.00 0.08 0.03 c0.00 c0.14v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.01 0.04 0.03v/c Ratio 0.18 0.72 0.25 0.03 0.24 0.11 0.07 0.37Uniform Delay, d1 36.9 19.0 14.8 21.3 23.6 7.4 18.0 23.0Progression Factor 0.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.20 0.32Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 3.5 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.7Delay (s) 18.3 22.5 15.1 21.3 24.1 7.4 3.7 8.1Level of Service B C B C C A A AApproach Delay (s) 18.3 19.1 17.9 7.8Approach LOS B B B A

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 15.9 HCM Level of Service BHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.4% ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\existing_08am.sy73: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 3 4 6 7 8Movement WBL EBTL NBL SBTL WBTL SBL NBTLLead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None C-Max Max None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 30 22 15 33 52 15 33Maximum Split (%) 30.0% 22.0% 15.0% 33.0% 52.0% 15.0% 33.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 22 15 33 24.5 15 33Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 3.5 4 4 3.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 1 1.5Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 15 11 12 13Dual Entry No Yes No Yes Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 4.5 34.5 56.5 71.5 4.5 56.5 71.5End Time (s) 34.5 56.5 71.5 4.5 56.5 71.5 4.5Yield/Force Off (s) 30 51 67 99 51 67 99Yield/Force Off 170(s) 30 36 67 88 39 67 86Local Start Time (s) 5.5 35.5 57.5 72.5 5.5 57.5 72.5Local Yield (s) 31 52 68 0 52 68 0Local Yield 170(s) 31 37 68 89 40 68 87

Intersection SummaryCycle Length 100Control Type Actuated-CoordinatedNatural Cycle 85Offset: 99 (99%), Referenced to phase 4:SBTL and 8:NBTL, Start of Yellow

Splits and Phases: 3: Langley Av & Tippin Av

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\existing_08pm.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 82 159 58 138 113 0 60 1191 163 0 826 54Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1788 1681 1759 1770 3539 1583 3506Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 0.19 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1788 1681 1759 352 3539 1583 3506Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 89 173 63 150 123 0 65 1295 177 0 898 59RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 0 4 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 89 223 0 133 140 0 65 1295 128 0 953 0Turn Type Split Split pm+pt pm+ov PermProtected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 3 2Permitted Phases 6 6 2Actuated Green, G (s) 14.9 14.9 12.1 12.1 56.5 56.0 68.1 43.1Effective Green, g (s) 16.9 16.9 14.1 14.1 57.0 57.0 72.1 44.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.14 0.57 0.57 0.72 0.44Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.5 5.0 6.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 299 302 237 248 327 2017 1205 1546v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.12 0.08 c0.08 0.02 c0.37 0.01 0.27v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.07v/c Ratio 0.30 0.74 0.56 0.56 0.20 0.64 0.11 0.62Uniform Delay, d1 36.4 39.4 40.1 40.1 20.9 14.6 4.2 21.5Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.53Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 9.0 3.0 2.9 0.3 1.6 0.0 1.7Delay (s) 36.9 48.5 39.1 38.9 21.2 16.2 4.3 13.1Level of Service D D D D C B A BApproach Delay (s) 45.3 39.0 15.0 13.1Approach LOS D D B B

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 19.7 HCM Level of Service BHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.6% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\existing_08pm.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 3 4 6Movement NEL SWTL WBTL EBTL NETLLead/Lag Lag Lead Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 15 43 20 22 58Maximum Split (%) 15.0% 43.0% 20.0% 22.0% 58.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 33 20 22 44Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 4 4 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1 2 2 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 14 4 4 14Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 7 21 15 18Dual Entry No Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 91 48 28 6 48End Time (s) 6 91 48 28 6Yield/Force Off (s) 1.5 86 42 22 1Yield/Force Off 170(s) 1.5 79 21 7 83Local Start Time (s) 5 62 42 20 62Local Yield (s) 15.5 0 56 36 15Local Yield 170(s) 15.5 93 35 21 97

Intersection SummaryCycle Length 100Control Type Actuated-CoordinatedNatural Cycle 90Offset: 86 (86%), Referenced to phase 2:SWTL and 6:NETL, Start of Yellow


HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\existing_08pm.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 212 510 8 182 106 94 1179 0 270 816 9Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1859 1583 1770 3539 3433 3533Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1829 1583 591 3539 3433 3533Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 230 554 9 198 115 102 1282 0 293 887 10RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 10 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 1 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 230 544 0 207 45 102 1282 0 293 896 0Turn Type Perm pm+ov Perm pm+ov pm+pt ProtProtected Phases 4 5 8 1 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 6Actuated Green, G (s) 17.7 37.5 17.7 28.2 47.5 46.0 19.8 55.3Effective Green, g (s) 19.7 38.5 19.7 29.2 48.0 48.0 20.3 57.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.38 0.20 0.29 0.48 0.48 0.20 0.57Clearance Time (s) 6.0 4.5 6.0 4.5 4.5 6.0 4.5 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 367 609 360 526 413 1699 697 2024v/s Ratio Prot 0.12 c0.18 0.01 0.03 c0.36 0.09 0.25v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 0.11 0.02 0.09v/c Ratio 0.63 0.89 0.57 0.09 0.25 0.75 0.42 0.44Uniform Delay, d1 36.8 28.8 36.4 25.7 16.3 21.2 34.7 12.2Progression Factor 1.81 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.51 0.63 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 3.0 14.1 2.2 0.1 0.2 2.5 0.4 0.7Delay (s) 69.7 42.0 38.6 25.8 8.5 15.8 35.1 12.9Level of Service E D D C A B D BApproach Delay (s) 50.1 34.0 15.3 18.4Approach LOS D C B B

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 25.4 HCM Level of Service CHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.2% ICU Level of Service EAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\existing_08pm.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8Movement NEL SWT NBTL SWL NETL SBTLLead/Lag Lag Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-Max NoneMaximum Split (s) 15 53 32 22 46 32Maximum Split (%) 15.0% 53.0% 32.0% 22.0% 46.0% 32.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 26 32 15 40 32Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.5 4 3.5 4.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 2 1 1.5 2Minimum Initial (s) 5 6 12 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 17 20 23Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 6 53 21 53 75 21End Time (s) 21 6 53 75 21 53Yield/Force Off (s) 16.5 0 47 70.5 15 47Yield/Force Off 170(s) 16.5 89 30 70.5 95 24Local Start Time (s) 6 53 21 53 75 21Local Yield (s) 16.5 0 47 70.5 15 47Local Yield 170(s) 16.5 89 30 70.5 95 24



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\existing_08pm.sy73: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 277 53 265 214 58 31 649 591 53 380 0Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3453 1770 3426 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539Flt Permitted 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3453 590 3426 896 3539 1583 473 3539Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 301 58 288 233 63 34 705 642 58 413 0RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 24 0 0 0 161 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 344 0 288 272 0 34 705 481 58 413 0Turn Type Perm pm+pt pm+pt pm+ov pm+ptProtected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 1 7 4Permitted Phases 2 6 8 8 4Actuated Green, G (s) 18.4 40.5 40.5 42.1 37.9 55.5 45.9 39.8Effective Green, g (s) 19.9 41.0 42.0 43.1 39.4 56.5 46.9 41.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.39 0.56 0.47 0.41Clearance Time (s) 5.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 687 455 1439 427 1394 894 307 1462v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.11 0.08 0.00 0.20 c0.10 c0.01 0.12v/s Ratio Perm c0.14 0.03 0.21 0.08v/c Ratio 0.50 0.63 0.19 0.08 0.51 0.54 0.19 0.28Uniform Delay, d1 35.6 21.4 18.3 16.5 22.9 13.6 15.6 19.5Progression Factor 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 0.13Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 2.9 0.3 0.1 1.3 0.6 0.3 0.5Delay (s) 24.7 24.3 18.6 16.6 24.2 14.2 0.8 2.9Level of Service C C B B C B A AApproach Delay (s) 24.7 21.4 19.4 2.6Approach LOS C C B A


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\existing_08pm.sy73: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 3 4 6 7 8Movement WBL EBTL NBL SBTL WBTL SBL NBTLLead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None C-Max Max None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 26 20 15 39 46 15 39Maximum Split (%) 26.0% 20.0% 15.0% 39.0% 46.0% 15.0% 39.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 27.5 15 33 24.5 15 33Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 3.5 4 4 3.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 1 1.5Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 15 11 12 13Dual Entry No Yes No Yes Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 81.5 7.5 27.5 42.5 81.5 27.5 42.5End Time (s) 7.5 27.5 42.5 81.5 27.5 42.5 81.5Yield/Force Off (s) 3 22 38 76 22 38 76Yield/Force Off 170(s) 3 7 38 65 10 38 63Local Start Time (s) 5.5 31.5 51.5 66.5 5.5 51.5 66.5Local Yield (s) 27 46 62 0 46 62 0Local Yield 170(s) 27 31 62 89 34 62 87



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\scenario1_08am.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 28 62 38 237 125 1 7 335 40 0 923 57Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1757 1681 1740 1770 3539 1583 3508Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 0.19 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1757 1681 1740 348 3539 1583 3508Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 30 67 41 258 136 1 8 364 43 0 1003 62RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 4 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 30 85 0 193 202 0 8 364 33 0 1061 0Turn Type Split Split pm+pt pm+ovProtected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 3 2Permitted Phases 6 6Actuated Green, G (s) 10.0 10.0 14.6 14.6 58.9 58.4 73.0 51.8Effective Green, g (s) 12.0 12.0 16.6 16.6 59.4 59.4 77.0 52.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.17 0.17 0.59 0.59 0.77 0.53Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.5 5.0 6.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 212 211 279 289 244 2102 1282 1852v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.05 0.11 c0.12 0.00 c0.10 0.00 c0.30v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.02v/c Ratio 0.14 0.40 0.69 0.70 0.03 0.17 0.03 0.57Uniform Delay, d1 39.4 40.7 39.3 39.3 17.1 9.2 2.7 16.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.69 0.69 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.3 7.1 7.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 1.2Delay (s) 39.7 42.0 34.3 34.3 17.1 9.4 2.7 6.6Level of Service D D C C B A A AApproach Delay (s) 41.5 34.3 8.8 6.6Approach LOS D C A A


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\scenario1_08am.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 3 4 6Movement NEL SWT WBTL EBTL NETLLead/Lag Lag Lead Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 15 45 20 20 60Maximum Split (%) 15.0% 45.0% 20.0% 20.0% 60.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 33 20 20 44Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 4 4 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1 2 2 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 14 4 4 14Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 7 21 15 18Dual Entry No Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 9 64 44 24 64End Time (s) 24 9 64 44 24Yield/Force Off (s) 19.5 4 58 38 19Yield/Force Off 170(s) 19.5 97 37 23 1Local Start Time (s) 5 60 40 20 60Local Yield (s) 15.5 0 54 34 15Local Yield 170(s) 15.5 93 33 19 97



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\scenario1_08am.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 112 211 0 154 80 43 321 0 321 943 2Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1863 1583 1770 3539 3433 3538Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1863 1583 520 3539 3433 3538Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 122 229 0 167 87 47 349 0 349 1025 2RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 158 0 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 122 71 0 167 22 47 349 0 349 1027 0Turn Type pm+ov pm+ov pm+pt ProtProtected Phases 4 5 8 1 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases 4 8 6Actuated Green, G (s) 14.5 30.1 14.5 24.5 54.9 53.4 15.6 59.0Effective Green, g (s) 16.5 31.1 16.5 25.5 55.4 55.4 16.1 61.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.31 0.16 0.26 0.55 0.55 0.16 0.61Clearance Time (s) 6.0 4.5 6.0 4.5 4.5 6.0 4.5 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 307 492 307 467 419 1961 553 2158v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 0.02 c0.09 0.00 0.01 c0.10 c0.10 c0.29v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.01 0.05v/c Ratio 0.40 0.14 0.54 0.05 0.11 0.18 0.63 0.48Uniform Delay, d1 37.3 24.9 38.3 28.1 10.9 11.0 39.2 10.7Progression Factor 1.48 7.07 1.00 1.00 0.55 0.51 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.1 2.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 2.4 0.8Delay (s) 56.0 175.8 40.3 28.1 6.1 5.8 41.5 11.5Level of Service E F D C A A D BApproach Delay (s) 134.1 36.1 5.8 19.1Approach LOS F D A B


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\scenario1_08am.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8Movement NEL SWT NBT SWL NETL SBTLead/Lag Lag Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-Max NoneMaximum Split (s) 17 59 24 24 52 24Maximum Split (%) 17.0% 59.0% 24.0% 24.0% 52.0% 24.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 26 24 15 40 24Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.5 4 3.5 4.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 2 1 1.5 2Minimum Initial (s) 5 6 12 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 17 20 23Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 19 60 36 60 84 36End Time (s) 36 19 60 84 36 60Yield/Force Off (s) 31.5 13 54 79.5 30 54Yield/Force Off 170(s) 31.5 2 37 79.5 10 31Local Start Time (s) 6 47 23 47 71 23Local Yield (s) 18.5 0 41 66.5 17 41Local Yield 170(s) 18.5 89 24 66.5 97 18



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\scenario1_08am.sy73: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 82 20 468 357 47 7 269 161 28 449 1Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3434 1770 3478 1770 3539 1583 1770 3538Flt Permitted 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.42 1.00 1.00 0.49 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3434 992 3478 787 3539 1583 919 3538Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 89 22 509 388 51 8 292 175 30 488 1RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 19 0 0 10 0 0 0 65 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 92 0 509 429 0 8 292 110 30 489 0Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt pm+ov pm+ptProtected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 1 7 4Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4Actuated Green, G (s) 13.8 47.6 47.6 34.0 32.7 62.0 39.8 35.6Effective Green, g (s) 15.3 48.1 49.1 35.0 34.2 63.0 40.8 37.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.48 0.49 0.35 0.34 0.63 0.41 0.37Clearance Time (s) 5.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 525 709 1708 293 1210 997 415 1313v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.21 0.12 0.00 0.08 0.03 c0.00 c0.14v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.01 0.04 0.03v/c Ratio 0.18 0.72 0.25 0.03 0.24 0.11 0.07 0.37Uniform Delay, d1 36.9 19.0 14.8 21.3 23.6 7.4 18.0 23.0Progression Factor 0.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.21 0.33Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 3.5 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.7Delay (s) 18.3 22.5 15.1 21.3 24.1 7.4 3.8 8.2Level of Service B C B C C A A AApproach Delay (s) 18.3 19.1 17.9 7.9Approach LOS B B B A


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\scenario1_08am.sy73: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 3 4 6 7 8Movement WBL EBT NBL SBTL WBTL SBL NBTLLead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None C-Max Max None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 30 22 15 33 52 15 33Maximum Split (%) 30.0% 22.0% 15.0% 33.0% 52.0% 15.0% 33.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 22 15 33 24.5 15 33Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 3.5 4 4 3.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 1 1.5Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 15 11 12 13Dual Entry No Yes No Yes Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 4.5 34.5 56.5 71.5 4.5 56.5 71.5End Time (s) 34.5 56.5 71.5 4.5 56.5 71.5 4.5Yield/Force Off (s) 30 51 67 99 51 67 99Yield/Force Off 170(s) 30 36 67 88 39 67 86Local Start Time (s) 5.5 35.5 57.5 72.5 5.5 57.5 72.5Local Yield (s) 31 52 68 0 52 68 0Local Yield 170(s) 31 37 68 89 40 68 87



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\scenario1_08pm.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 82 159 58 138 113 0 60 1191 163 0 826 54Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1788 1681 1759 1770 3539 1583 3506Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 0.19 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1788 1681 1759 352 3539 1583 3506Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 89 173 63 150 123 0 65 1295 177 0 898 59RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 0 4 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 89 223 0 133 140 0 65 1295 128 0 953 0Turn Type Split Split pm+pt pm+ovProtected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 3 2Permitted Phases 6 6Actuated Green, G (s) 14.9 14.9 12.1 12.1 56.5 56.0 68.1 43.1Effective Green, g (s) 16.9 16.9 14.1 14.1 57.0 57.0 72.1 44.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.14 0.57 0.57 0.72 0.44Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.5 5.0 6.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 299 302 237 248 327 2017 1205 1546v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.12 0.08 c0.08 0.02 c0.37 0.01 0.27v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.07v/c Ratio 0.30 0.74 0.56 0.56 0.20 0.64 0.11 0.62Uniform Delay, d1 36.4 39.4 40.1 40.1 20.9 14.6 4.2 21.5Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.53Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 9.0 3.0 2.9 0.3 1.6 0.0 1.7Delay (s) 36.9 48.5 39.1 38.9 21.2 16.2 4.3 13.1Level of Service D D D D C B A BApproach Delay (s) 45.3 39.0 15.0 13.1Approach LOS D D B B


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\scenario1_08pm.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009





HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\scenario1_08pm.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 212 510 0 182 106 94 1179 0 270 816 9Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1863 1583 1770 3539 3433 3533Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1863 1583 591 3539 3433 3533Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 230 554 0 198 115 102 1282 0 293 887 10RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 10 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 1 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 230 544 0 198 45 102 1282 0 293 896 0Turn Type pm+ov pm+ov pm+pt ProtProtected Phases 4 5 8 1 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases 4 8 6Actuated Green, G (s) 17.7 37.5 17.7 28.2 47.5 46.0 19.8 55.3Effective Green, g (s) 19.7 38.5 19.7 29.2 48.0 48.0 20.3 57.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.38 0.20 0.29 0.48 0.48 0.20 0.57Clearance Time (s) 6.0 4.5 6.0 4.5 4.5 6.0 4.5 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 367 609 367 526 413 1699 697 2024v/s Ratio Prot 0.12 c0.18 0.11 0.01 0.03 c0.36 0.09 0.25v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 0.02 0.09v/c Ratio 0.63 0.89 0.54 0.09 0.25 0.75 0.42 0.44Uniform Delay, d1 36.8 28.8 36.1 25.7 16.3 21.2 34.7 12.2Progression Factor 1.81 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.51 0.63 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 3.0 14.1 1.5 0.1 0.2 2.5 0.4 0.7Delay (s) 69.7 42.0 37.6 25.8 8.5 15.8 35.1 12.9Level of Service E D D C A B D BApproach Delay (s) 50.1 33.3 15.3 18.4Approach LOS D C B B

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 25.3 HCM Level of Service CHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.8% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\scenario1_08pm.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009





HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\scenario1_08pm.sy73: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 277 53 265 214 58 31 649 591 53 380 0Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3453 1770 3426 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539Flt Permitted 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3453 590 3426 896 3539 1583 473 3539Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 301 58 288 233 63 34 705 642 58 413 0RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 24 0 0 0 161 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 344 0 288 272 0 34 705 481 58 413 0Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt pm+ov pm+ptProtected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 1 7 4Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4Actuated Green, G (s) 18.4 40.5 40.5 42.1 37.9 55.5 45.9 39.8Effective Green, g (s) 19.9 41.0 42.0 43.1 39.4 56.5 46.9 41.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.39 0.56 0.47 0.41Clearance Time (s) 5.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 687 455 1439 427 1394 894 307 1462v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.11 0.08 0.00 0.20 c0.10 c0.01 0.12v/s Ratio Perm c0.14 0.03 0.21 0.08v/c Ratio 0.50 0.63 0.19 0.08 0.51 0.54 0.19 0.28Uniform Delay, d1 35.6 21.4 18.3 16.5 22.9 13.6 15.6 19.5Progression Factor 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 0.13Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 2.9 0.3 0.1 1.3 0.6 0.3 0.5Delay (s) 24.7 24.3 18.6 16.6 24.2 14.2 0.8 3.0Level of Service C C B B C B A AApproach Delay (s) 24.7 21.4 19.4 2.7Approach LOS C C B A


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\scenario1_08pm.sy73: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 3 4 6 7 8Movement WBL EBT NBL SBTL WBTL SBL NBTLLead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None C-Max Max None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 26 20 15 39 46 15 39Maximum Split (%) 26.0% 20.0% 15.0% 39.0% 46.0% 15.0% 39.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 27.5 15 33 24.5 15 33Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 3.5 4 4 3.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 1 1.5Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 15 11 12 13Dual Entry No Yes No Yes Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 81.5 7.5 27.5 42.5 81.5 27.5 42.5End Time (s) 7.5 27.5 42.5 81.5 27.5 42.5 81.5Yield/Force Off (s) 3 22 38 76 22 38 76Yield/Force Off 170(s) 3 7 38 65 10 38 63Local Start Time (s) 5.5 31.5 51.5 66.5 5.5 51.5 66.5Local Yield (s) 27 46 62 0 46 62 0Local Yield 170(s) 27 31 62 89 34 62 87





Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 28 62 38 237 125 1 7 335 40 0 923 57Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1757 1681 1740 1770 3539 1583 3508Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1757 1681 1740 1770 3539 1583 3508Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 30 67 41 258 136 1 8 364 43 0 1003 62RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 4 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 30 85 0 193 202 0 8 364 33 0 1061 0Turn Type Split Split Prot pm+ovProtected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 3 2Permitted Phases 6Actuated Green, G (s) 10.0 10.0 14.6 14.6 2.1 58.4 73.0 51.8Effective Green, g (s) 12.0 12.0 16.6 16.6 2.6 59.4 77.0 52.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.17 0.17 0.03 0.59 0.77 0.53Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.5 5.0 6.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 212 211 279 289 46 2102 1282 1852v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.05 0.11 c0.12 0.00 c0.10 0.00 c0.30v/s Ratio Perm 0.02v/c Ratio 0.14 0.40 0.69 0.70 0.17 0.17 0.03 0.57Uniform Delay, d1 39.4 40.7 39.3 39.3 47.6 9.2 2.7 16.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.69 0.69 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.3 7.1 7.1 1.8 0.2 0.0 1.2Delay (s) 39.7 42.0 34.3 34.3 49.5 9.4 2.7 6.5Level of Service D D C C D A A AApproach Delay (s) 41.5 34.3 9.4 6.5Approach LOS D C A A




Phase Number 1 2 3 4 6Movement NEL SWT WBTL EBTL NETLead/Lag Lag Lead Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 15 45 20 20 60Maximum Split (%) 15.0% 45.0% 20.0% 20.0% 60.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 33 20 20 44Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 4 4 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1 2 2 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 14 4 4 14Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 7 21 15 18Dual Entry No Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 9 64 44 24 64End Time (s) 24 9 64 44 24Yield/Force Off (s) 19.5 4 58 38 19Yield/Force Off 170(s) 19.5 97 37 23 1Local Start Time (s) 5 60 40 20 60Local Yield (s) 15.5 0 54 34 15Local Yield 170(s) 15.5 93 33 19 97

Intersection SummaryCycle Length 100Control Type Actuated-CoordinatedNatural Cycle 90Offset: 4 (4%), Referenced to phase 2:SWT and 6:NET, Start of Yellow




Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 112 211 5 154 80 43 321 0 321 943 2Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1860 1583 1770 3539 3433 3538Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1846 1583 1770 3539 3433 3538Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 122 229 5 167 87 47 349 0 349 1025 2RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 157 0 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 122 72 0 172 22 47 349 0 349 1027 0Turn Type pm+ov Perm pm+ov Prot ProtProtected Phases 4 5 8 1 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases 4 8 8Actuated Green, G (s) 14.7 30.3 14.7 24.7 10.0 53.2 15.6 58.8Effective Green, g (s) 16.7 31.3 16.7 25.7 10.5 55.2 16.1 60.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.31 0.17 0.26 0.10 0.55 0.16 0.61Clearance Time (s) 6.0 4.5 6.0 4.5 4.5 6.0 4.5 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 311 495 308 470 186 1954 553 2151v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 0.02 0.00 c0.03 0.10 c0.10 c0.29v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.09 0.01v/c Ratio 0.39 0.14 0.56 0.05 0.25 0.18 0.63 0.48Uniform Delay, d1 37.1 24.7 38.3 27.9 41.1 11.1 39.2 10.8Progression Factor 1.49 6.94 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.51 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.1 2.2 0.0 0.7 0.2 2.4 0.8Delay (s) 56.0 171.8 40.5 28.0 36.1 5.9 41.5 11.6Level of Service E F D C D A D BApproach Delay (s) 131.5 36.3 9.5 19.2Approach LOS F D A B




Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8Movement NEL SWT NBT SWL NET SBTLLead/Lag Lag Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-Max NoneMaximum Split (s) 17 59 24 24 52 24Maximum Split (%) 17.0% 59.0% 24.0% 24.0% 52.0% 24.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 26 24 15 40 24Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.5 4 3.5 4.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 2 1 1.5 2Minimum Initial (s) 5 6 12 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 17 20 23Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 19 60 36 60 84 36End Time (s) 36 19 60 84 36 60Yield/Force Off (s) 31.5 13 54 79.5 30 54Yield/Force Off 170(s) 31.5 2 37 79.5 10 31Local Start Time (s) 6 47 23 47 71 23Local Yield (s) 18.5 0 41 66.5 17 41Local Yield 170(s) 18.5 89 24 66.5 97 18





Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 82 20 468 357 47 7 269 161 28 449 1Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3434 1770 3478 1770 3539 1583 1770 3538Flt Permitted 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.42 1.00 1.00 0.49 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3434 992 3478 787 3539 1583 919 3538Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 89 22 509 388 51 8 292 175 30 488 1RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 19 0 0 10 0 0 0 65 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 92 0 509 429 0 8 292 110 30 489 0Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt pm+ov pm+ptProtected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 1 7 4Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4Actuated Green, G (s) 13.8 47.6 47.6 34.0 32.7 62.0 39.8 35.6Effective Green, g (s) 15.3 48.1 49.1 35.0 34.2 63.0 40.8 37.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.48 0.49 0.35 0.34 0.63 0.41 0.37Clearance Time (s) 5.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 525 709 1708 293 1210 997 415 1313v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.21 0.12 0.00 0.08 0.03 c0.00 c0.14v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.01 0.04 0.03v/c Ratio 0.18 0.72 0.25 0.03 0.24 0.11 0.07 0.37Uniform Delay, d1 36.9 19.0 14.8 21.3 23.6 7.4 18.0 23.0Progression Factor 0.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.20 0.32Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 3.5 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.7Delay (s) 18.3 22.5 15.1 21.3 24.1 7.4 3.7 8.1Level of Service B C B C C A A AApproach Delay (s) 18.3 19.1 17.9 7.8Approach LOS B B B A




Phase Number 1 2 3 4 6 7 8Movement WBL EBT NBL SBTL WBTL SBL NBTLLead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None C-Max Max None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 30 22 15 33 52 15 33Maximum Split (%) 30.0% 22.0% 15.0% 33.0% 52.0% 15.0% 33.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 22 15 33 24.5 15 33Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 3.5 4 4 3.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 1 1.5Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 15 11 12 13Dual Entry No Yes No Yes Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 4.5 34.5 56.5 71.5 4.5 56.5 71.5End Time (s) 34.5 56.5 71.5 4.5 56.5 71.5 4.5Yield/Force Off (s) 30 51 67 99 51 67 99Yield/Force Off 170(s) 30 36 67 88 39 67 86Local Start Time (s) 5.5 35.5 57.5 72.5 5.5 57.5 72.5Local Yield (s) 31 52 68 0 52 68 0Local Yield 170(s) 31 37 68 89 40 68 87





Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 82 159 58 138 113 0 60 1191 163 0 826 54Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1788 1681 1759 1770 3539 1583 3506Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1788 1681 1759 1770 3539 1583 3506Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 89 173 63 150 123 0 65 1295 177 0 898 59RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 0 4 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 89 223 0 133 140 0 65 1295 128 0 953 0Turn Type Split Split Prot pm+ovProtected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 3 2Permitted Phases 6Actuated Green, G (s) 14.9 14.9 12.1 12.1 8.4 56.0 68.1 43.1Effective Green, g (s) 16.9 16.9 14.1 14.1 8.9 57.0 72.1 44.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.14 0.09 0.57 0.72 0.44Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.5 5.0 6.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 299 302 237 248 158 2017 1205 1546v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.12 0.08 c0.08 0.04 c0.37 0.01 0.27v/s Ratio Perm 0.07v/c Ratio 0.30 0.74 0.56 0.56 0.41 0.64 0.11 0.62Uniform Delay, d1 36.4 39.4 40.1 40.1 43.1 14.6 4.2 21.5Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.53Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 9.0 3.0 2.9 1.7 1.6 0.0 1.7Delay (s) 36.9 48.5 39.1 38.9 44.8 16.2 4.3 13.1Level of Service D D D D D B A BApproach Delay (s) 45.3 39.0 16.0 13.1Approach LOS D D B B

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 20.2 HCM Level of Service CHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.6% ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group



Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 212 510 8 182 106 94 1179 0 270 816 9Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1859 1583 1770 3539 3433 3533Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1829 1583 1770 3539 3433 3533Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 230 554 9 198 115 102 1282 0 293 887 10RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 10 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 1 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 230 544 0 207 45 102 1282 0 293 896 0Turn Type pm+ov Perm pm+ov Prot ProtProtected Phases 4 5 8 1 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases 4 8 8Actuated Green, G (s) 17.7 37.5 17.7 28.2 10.5 46.0 19.8 55.3Effective Green, g (s) 19.7 38.5 19.7 29.2 11.0 48.0 20.3 57.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.38 0.20 0.29 0.11 0.48 0.20 0.57Clearance Time (s) 6.0 4.5 6.0 4.5 4.5 6.0 4.5 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 367 609 360 526 195 1699 697 2024v/s Ratio Prot 0.12 c0.18 0.01 0.06 c0.36 0.09 0.25v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 0.11 0.02v/c Ratio 0.63 0.89 0.57 0.09 0.52 0.75 0.42 0.44Uniform Delay, d1 36.8 28.8 36.4 25.7 42.0 21.2 34.7 12.2Progression Factor 1.81 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.79 0.63 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 3.0 14.1 2.2 0.1 2.0 2.5 0.4 0.7Delay (s) 69.7 42.0 38.6 25.8 35.2 15.8 35.1 12.9Level of Service E D D C D B D BApproach Delay (s) 50.1 34.0 17.2 18.4Approach LOS D C B B




Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8Movement NEL SWT NBT SWL NET SBTLLead/Lag Lag Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-Max NoneMaximum Split (s) 15 53 32 22 46 32Maximum Split (%) 15.0% 53.0% 32.0% 22.0% 46.0% 32.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 26 32 15 40 32Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.5 4 3.5 4.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 2 1 1.5 2Minimum Initial (s) 5 6 12 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 17 20 23Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 6 53 21 53 75 21End Time (s) 21 6 53 75 21 53Yield/Force Off (s) 16.5 0 47 70.5 15 47Yield/Force Off 170(s) 16.5 89 30 70.5 95 24Local Start Time (s) 6 53 21 53 75 21Local Yield (s) 16.5 0 47 70.5 15 47Local Yield 170(s) 16.5 89 30 70.5 95 24





Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 277 53 265 214 58 31 649 591 53 380 0Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3453 1770 3426 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539Flt Permitted 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3453 590 3426 896 3539 1583 473 3539Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 301 58 288 233 63 34 705 642 58 413 0RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 24 0 0 0 161 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 344 0 288 272 0 34 705 481 58 413 0Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt pm+ov pm+ptProtected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 1 7 4Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4Actuated Green, G (s) 18.4 40.5 40.5 42.1 37.9 55.5 45.9 39.8Effective Green, g (s) 19.9 41.0 42.0 43.1 39.4 56.5 46.9 41.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.39 0.56 0.47 0.41Clearance Time (s) 5.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 687 455 1439 427 1394 894 307 1462v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.11 0.08 0.00 0.20 c0.10 c0.01 0.12v/s Ratio Perm c0.14 0.03 0.21 0.08v/c Ratio 0.50 0.63 0.19 0.08 0.51 0.54 0.19 0.28Uniform Delay, d1 35.6 21.4 18.3 16.5 22.9 13.6 15.6 19.5Progression Factor 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 0.13Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 2.9 0.3 0.1 1.3 0.6 0.3 0.5Delay (s) 24.7 24.3 18.6 16.6 24.2 14.2 0.8 2.9Level of Service C C B B C B A AApproach Delay (s) 24.7 21.4 19.4 2.6Approach LOS C C B A




Phase Number 1 2 3 4 6 7 8Movement WBL EBT NBL SBTL WBTL SBL NBTLLead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None C-Max Max None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 26 20 15 39 46 15 39Maximum Split (%) 26.0% 20.0% 15.0% 39.0% 46.0% 15.0% 39.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 27.5 15 33 24.5 15 33Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 3.5 4 4 3.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 1 1.5Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 15 11 12 13Dual Entry No Yes No Yes Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 81.5 7.5 27.5 42.5 81.5 27.5 42.5End Time (s) 7.5 27.5 42.5 81.5 27.5 42.5 81.5Yield/Force Off (s) 3 22 38 76 22 38 76Yield/Force Off 170(s) 3 7 38 65 10 38 63Local Start Time (s) 5.5 31.5 51.5 66.5 5.5 51.5 66.5Local Yield (s) 27 46 62 0 46 62 0Local Yield 170(s) 27 31 62 89 34 62 87





Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 28 62 38 237 125 1 7 335 40 0 923 57Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1757 1681 1740 1770 3539 1583 3508Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 0.19 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1757 1681 1740 348 3539 1583 3508Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 30 67 41 258 136 1 8 364 43 0 1003 62RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 4 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 30 85 0 193 202 0 8 364 33 0 1061 0Turn Type Split Split pm+pt pm+ovProtected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 3 2Permitted Phases 6 6Actuated Green, G (s) 10.0 10.0 14.6 14.6 58.9 58.4 73.0 51.8Effective Green, g (s) 12.0 12.0 16.6 16.6 59.4 59.4 77.0 52.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.17 0.17 0.59 0.59 0.77 0.53Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.5 5.0 6.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 212 211 279 289 244 2102 1282 1852v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.05 0.11 c0.12 0.00 c0.10 0.00 c0.30v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.02v/c Ratio 0.14 0.40 0.69 0.70 0.03 0.17 0.03 0.57Uniform Delay, d1 39.4 40.7 39.3 39.3 17.1 9.2 2.7 16.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.69 0.69 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.3 7.1 7.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 1.2Delay (s) 39.7 42.0 34.2 34.2 17.1 9.4 2.7 6.5Level of Service D D C C B A A AApproach Delay (s) 41.5 34.2 8.8 6.5Approach LOS D C A A




Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 112 211 5 154 80 43 321 0 321 943 2Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1860 1583 1770 3539 3433 3538Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1846 1583 520 3539 3433 3538Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 122 229 5 167 87 47 349 0 349 1025 2RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 157 0 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 122 72 0 172 22 47 349 0 349 1027 0Turn Type pm+ov Perm pm+ov pm+pt ProtProtected Phases 4 5 8 1 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases 4 8 8 6Actuated Green, G (s) 14.7 30.3 14.7 24.7 54.7 53.2 15.6 58.8Effective Green, g (s) 16.7 31.3 16.7 25.7 55.2 55.2 16.1 60.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.31 0.17 0.26 0.55 0.55 0.16 0.61Clearance Time (s) 6.0 4.5 6.0 4.5 4.5 6.0 4.5 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 311 495 308 470 418 1954 553 2151v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.01 c0.10 c0.10 c0.29v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.09 0.01 0.05v/c Ratio 0.39 0.14 0.56 0.05 0.11 0.18 0.63 0.48Uniform Delay, d1 37.1 24.7 38.3 27.9 11.0 11.1 39.2 10.8Progression Factor 1.49 6.94 1.00 1.00 0.55 0.51 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.1 2.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 2.4 0.8Delay (s) 56.0 171.8 40.5 28.0 6.2 5.9 41.5 11.6Level of Service E F D C A A D BApproach Delay (s) 131.5 36.3 5.9 19.2Approach LOS F D A B




Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8Movement NEL SWT NBT SWL NETL SBTLLead/Lag Lag Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-Max NoneMaximum Split (s) 17 59 24 24 52 24Maximum Split (%) 17.0% 59.0% 24.0% 24.0% 52.0% 24.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 26 24 15 40 24Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.5 4 3.5 4.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 2 1 1.5 2Minimum Initial (s) 5 6 12 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 17 20 23Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 19 60 36 60 84 36End Time (s) 36 19 60 84 36 60Yield/Force Off (s) 31.5 13 54 79.5 30 54Yield/Force Off 170(s) 31.5 2 37 79.5 10 31Local Start Time (s) 6 47 23 47 71 23Local Yield (s) 18.5 0 41 66.5 17 41Local Yield 170(s) 18.5 89 24 66.5 97 18





Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 82 20 468 357 47 7 269 161 28 449 1Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3434 1770 3478 1770 3539 1583 1770 3538Flt Permitted 1.00 0.58 1.00 0.47 1.00 1.00 0.48 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3434 1084 3478 882 3539 1583 899 3538Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 89 22 509 388 51 8 292 175 30 488 1RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 17 0 0 10 0 0 0 81 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 94 0 509 429 0 8 292 95 30 489 0Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+ov pm+ptProtected Phases 2 1 6 8 1 7 4Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4Actuated Green, G (s) 22.8 46.5 46.5 33.8 33.8 53.0 42.5 42.5Effective Green, g (s) 24.3 47.0 48.0 35.3 35.3 54.0 43.0 44.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.47 0.48 0.35 0.35 0.54 0.43 0.44Clearance Time (s) 5.5 4.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 834 645 1669 311 1249 855 428 1557v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.16 0.12 0.08 0.02 0.00 c0.14v/s Ratio Perm c0.22 0.01 0.04 0.03v/c Ratio 0.11 0.79 0.26 0.03 0.23 0.11 0.07 0.31Uniform Delay, d1 29.5 20.2 15.4 21.1 22.8 11.3 16.7 18.2Progression Factor 0.42 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.20 0.23Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 6.4 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.5Delay (s) 12.5 26.5 15.8 21.3 23.3 11.3 3.3 4.7Level of Service B C B C C B A AApproach Delay (s) 12.5 21.6 18.8 4.6Approach LOS B C B A




Phase Number 1 2 4 6 7 8Movement WBL EBT SBTL WBTL SBL NBTLLead/Lag Lead Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None C-Max Max None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 24 28 48 52 15 33Maximum Split (%) 24.0% 28.0% 48.0% 52.0% 15.0% 33.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 28 33 24.5 15 33Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 4 4 3.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1.5Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 15 11 12 13Dual Entry No Yes Yes Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 4.5 28.5 56.5 4.5 56.5 71.5End Time (s) 28.5 56.5 4.5 56.5 71.5 4.5Yield/Force Off (s) 24 51 99 51 67 99Yield/Force Off 170(s) 24 36 88 39 67 86Local Start Time (s) 5.5 29.5 57.5 5.5 57.5 72.5Local Yield (s) 25 52 0 52 68 0Local Yield 170(s) 25 37 89 40 68 87





Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 82 159 58 138 113 0 60 1191 163 0 826 54Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1788 1681 1759 1770 3539 1583 3506Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 0.19 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1788 1681 1759 352 3539 1583 3506Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 89 173 63 150 123 0 65 1295 177 0 898 59RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 0 4 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 89 223 0 133 140 0 65 1295 128 0 953 0Turn Type Split Split pm+pt pm+ovProtected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 3 2Permitted Phases 6 6Actuated Green, G (s) 14.9 14.9 12.1 12.1 56.5 56.0 68.1 43.1Effective Green, g (s) 16.9 16.9 14.1 14.1 57.0 57.0 72.1 44.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.14 0.57 0.57 0.72 0.44Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.5 5.0 6.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 299 302 237 248 327 2017 1205 1546v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.12 0.08 c0.08 0.02 c0.37 0.01 0.27v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.07v/c Ratio 0.30 0.74 0.56 0.56 0.20 0.64 0.11 0.62Uniform Delay, d1 36.4 39.4 40.1 40.1 20.9 14.6 4.2 21.5Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.04 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.53Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 9.0 3.0 2.9 0.3 1.6 0.0 1.7Delay (s) 36.9 48.5 44.9 44.7 21.2 16.2 4.3 13.1Level of Service D D D D C B A BApproach Delay (s) 45.3 44.8 15.0 13.1Approach LOS D D B B




Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 212 510 8 182 106 94 1179 0 270 816 9Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1859 1583 1770 3539 3433 3533Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1829 1583 591 3539 3433 3533Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 230 554 9 198 115 102 1282 0 293 887 10RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 10 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 1 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 230 544 0 207 45 102 1282 0 293 896 0Turn Type pm+ov Perm pm+ov pm+pt ProtProtected Phases 4 5 8 1 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases 4 8 8 6Actuated Green, G (s) 17.7 37.5 17.7 28.2 47.5 46.0 19.8 55.3Effective Green, g (s) 19.7 38.5 19.7 29.2 48.0 48.0 20.3 57.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.38 0.20 0.29 0.48 0.48 0.20 0.57Clearance Time (s) 6.0 4.5 6.0 4.5 4.5 6.0 4.5 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 367 609 360 526 413 1699 697 2024v/s Ratio Prot 0.12 c0.18 0.01 0.03 c0.36 0.09 0.25v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 0.11 0.02 0.09v/c Ratio 0.63 0.89 0.57 0.09 0.25 0.75 0.42 0.44Uniform Delay, d1 36.8 28.8 36.4 25.7 16.3 21.2 34.7 12.2Progression Factor 1.81 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.51 0.63 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 3.0 14.1 2.2 0.1 0.2 2.5 0.4 0.7Delay (s) 69.7 42.0 38.6 25.8 8.5 15.8 35.1 12.9Level of Service E D D C A B D BApproach Delay (s) 50.1 34.0 15.3 18.4Approach LOS D C B B




Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8Movement NEL SWT NBT SWL NETL SBTLLead/Lag Lag Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-Max NoneMaximum Split (s) 15 53 32 22 46 32Maximum Split (%) 15.0% 53.0% 32.0% 22.0% 46.0% 32.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 26 32 15 40 32Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.5 4 3.5 4.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 2 1 1.5 2Minimum Initial (s) 5 6 12 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 17 20 23Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 6 53 21 53 75 21End Time (s) 21 6 53 75 21 53Yield/Force Off (s) 16.5 0 47 70.5 15 47Yield/Force Off 170(s) 16.5 89 30 70.5 95 24Local Start Time (s) 6 53 21 53 75 21Local Yield (s) 16.5 0 47 70.5 15 47Local Yield 170(s) 16.5 89 30 70.5 95 24





Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 277 53 265 214 58 31 649 591 53 380 0Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3453 1770 3426 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539Flt Permitted 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.51 1.00 1.00 0.24 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3453 590 3426 950 3539 1583 449 3539Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 301 58 288 233 63 34 705 642 58 413 0RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 24 0 0 0 163 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 344 0 288 272 0 34 705 479 58 413 0Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+ov pm+ptProtected Phases 2 1 6 8 1 7 4Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4Actuated Green, G (s) 18.4 40.5 40.5 37.9 37.9 55.5 48.5 48.5Effective Green, g (s) 19.9 41.0 42.0 39.4 39.4 56.5 49.0 50.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.41 0.42 0.39 0.39 0.56 0.49 0.50Clearance Time (s) 5.5 4.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 687 455 1439 374 1394 894 307 1770v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.11 0.08 0.20 c0.10 0.01 c0.12v/s Ratio Perm c0.14 0.04 0.21 0.08v/c Ratio 0.50 0.63 0.19 0.09 0.51 0.54 0.19 0.23Uniform Delay, d1 35.6 21.4 18.3 19.0 22.9 13.6 14.8 14.2Progression Factor 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 0.01Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 2.9 0.3 0.5 1.3 0.6 0.3 0.3Delay (s) 24.7 24.3 18.6 19.5 24.2 14.2 0.8 0.4Level of Service C C B B C B A AApproach Delay (s) 24.7 21.4 19.5 0.4Approach LOS C C B A




Phase Number 1 2 4 6 7 8Movement WBL EBT SBTL WBTL SBL NBTLLead/Lag Lead Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None C-Max Max None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 26 20 54 46 15 39Maximum Split (%) 26.0% 20.0% 54.0% 46.0% 15.0% 39.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 27.5 33 24.5 15 33Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 4 4 3.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1.5Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 15 11 12 13Dual Entry No Yes Yes Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 81.5 7.5 27.5 81.5 27.5 42.5End Time (s) 7.5 27.5 81.5 27.5 42.5 81.5Yield/Force Off (s) 3 22 76 22 38 76Yield/Force Off 170(s) 3 7 65 10 38 63Local Start Time (s) 5.5 31.5 51.5 5.5 51.5 66.5Local Yield (s) 27 46 0 46 62 0Local Yield 170(s) 27 31 89 34 62 87





Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 28 62 38 237 125 1 7 335 40 0 923 57Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1757 1681 1740 1770 3539 1583 3508Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1757 1681 1740 1770 3539 1583 3508Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 30 67 41 258 136 1 8 364 43 0 1003 62RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 4 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 30 85 0 193 202 0 8 364 33 0 1061 0Turn Type Split Split Prot pm+ovProtected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 3 2Permitted Phases 6Actuated Green, G (s) 10.0 10.0 14.6 14.6 2.1 58.4 73.0 51.8Effective Green, g (s) 12.0 12.0 16.6 16.6 2.6 59.4 77.0 52.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.17 0.17 0.03 0.59 0.77 0.53Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.5 5.0 6.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 212 211 279 289 46 2102 1282 1852v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.05 0.11 c0.12 0.00 c0.10 0.00 c0.30v/s Ratio Perm 0.02v/c Ratio 0.14 0.40 0.69 0.70 0.17 0.17 0.03 0.57Uniform Delay, d1 39.4 40.7 39.3 39.3 47.6 9.2 2.7 16.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.69 0.69 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.3 7.1 7.1 1.8 0.2 0.0 1.2Delay (s) 39.7 42.0 34.2 34.2 49.5 9.4 2.7 6.6Level of Service D D C C D A A AApproach Delay (s) 41.5 34.2 9.4 6.6Approach LOS D C A A




Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 112 211 0 154 80 43 321 0 321 943 2Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1863 1583 1770 3539 3433 3538Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1863 1583 520 3539 3433 3538Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 122 229 0 167 87 47 349 0 349 1025 2RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 158 0 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 122 71 0 167 22 47 349 0 349 1027 0Turn Type pm+ov pm+ov pm+pt ProtProtected Phases 4 5 8 1 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases 4 8 6Actuated Green, G (s) 14.5 30.1 14.5 24.5 54.9 53.4 15.6 59.0Effective Green, g (s) 16.5 31.1 16.5 25.5 55.4 55.4 16.1 61.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.31 0.16 0.26 0.55 0.55 0.16 0.61Clearance Time (s) 6.0 4.5 6.0 4.5 4.5 6.0 4.5 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 307 492 307 467 419 1961 553 2158v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 0.02 c0.09 0.00 0.01 c0.10 c0.10 c0.29v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.01 0.05v/c Ratio 0.40 0.14 0.54 0.05 0.11 0.18 0.63 0.48Uniform Delay, d1 37.3 24.9 38.3 28.1 10.9 11.0 39.2 10.7Progression Factor 1.48 7.07 1.00 1.00 0.55 0.51 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.1 2.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 2.4 0.8Delay (s) 56.0 175.8 40.3 28.1 6.1 5.8 41.5 11.5Level of Service E F D C A A D BApproach Delay (s) 134.1 36.1 5.8 19.1Approach LOS F D A B




Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 82 20 468 357 47 7 269 161 28 449 1Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3434 1770 3478 1770 3539 1583 1770 3538Flt Permitted 1.00 0.58 1.00 0.47 1.00 1.00 0.48 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3434 1084 3478 882 3539 1583 899 3538Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 89 22 509 388 51 8 292 175 30 488 1RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 17 0 0 10 0 0 0 81 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 94 0 509 429 0 8 292 95 30 489 0Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+ov pm+ptProtected Phases 2 1 6 8 1 7 4Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4Actuated Green, G (s) 22.8 46.5 46.5 33.8 33.8 53.0 42.5 42.5Effective Green, g (s) 24.3 47.0 48.0 35.3 35.3 54.0 43.0 44.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.47 0.48 0.35 0.35 0.54 0.43 0.44Clearance Time (s) 5.5 4.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 834 645 1669 311 1249 855 428 1557v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.16 0.12 0.08 0.02 0.00 c0.14v/s Ratio Perm c0.22 0.01 0.04 0.03v/c Ratio 0.11 0.79 0.26 0.03 0.23 0.11 0.07 0.31Uniform Delay, d1 29.5 20.2 15.4 21.1 22.8 11.3 16.7 18.2Progression Factor 0.42 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.20 0.24Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 6.4 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.5Delay (s) 12.5 26.5 15.8 21.3 23.3 11.3 3.4 4.8Level of Service B C B C C B A AApproach Delay (s) 12.5 21.6 18.8 4.7Approach LOS B C B A




Phase Number 1 2 4 6 7 8Movement WBL EBT SBTL WBTL SBL NBTLLead/Lag Lead Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None C-Max Max None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 24 28 48 52 15 33Maximum Split (%) 24.0% 28.0% 48.0% 52.0% 15.0% 33.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 28 33 24.5 15 33Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 4 4 3.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1.5Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 15 11 12 13Dual Entry No Yes Yes Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 4.5 28.5 56.5 4.5 56.5 71.5End Time (s) 28.5 56.5 4.5 56.5 71.5 4.5Yield/Force Off (s) 24 51 99 51 67 99Yield/Force Off 170(s) 24 36 88 39 67 86Local Start Time (s) 5.5 29.5 57.5 5.5 57.5 72.5Local Yield (s) 25 52 0 52 68 0Local Yield 170(s) 25 37 89 40 68 87





Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 82 159 58 138 113 0 60 1191 163 0 826 54Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1788 1681 1759 1770 3539 1583 3506Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1788 1681 1759 1770 3539 1583 3506Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 89 173 63 150 123 0 65 1295 177 0 898 59RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 0 4 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 89 223 0 133 140 0 65 1295 128 0 953 0Turn Type Split Split Prot pm+ovProtected Phases 4 4 3 3 1 6 3 2Permitted Phases 6Actuated Green, G (s) 14.9 14.9 12.1 12.1 8.4 56.0 68.1 43.1Effective Green, g (s) 16.9 16.9 14.1 14.1 8.9 57.0 72.1 44.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.14 0.09 0.57 0.72 0.44Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.5 5.0 6.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 299 302 237 248 158 2017 1205 1546v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.12 0.08 c0.08 0.04 c0.37 0.01 0.27v/s Ratio Perm 0.07v/c Ratio 0.30 0.74 0.56 0.56 0.41 0.64 0.11 0.62Uniform Delay, d1 36.4 39.4 40.1 40.1 43.1 14.6 4.2 21.5Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.04 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.53Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 9.0 3.0 2.9 1.7 1.6 0.0 1.7Delay (s) 36.9 48.5 44.9 44.7 44.8 16.2 4.3 13.1Level of Service D D D D D B A BApproach Delay (s) 45.3 44.8 16.0 13.1Approach LOS D D B B




Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 212 510 0 182 106 94 1179 0 270 816 9Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1863 1583 1770 3539 3433 3533Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1863 1583 591 3539 3433 3533Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 230 554 0 198 115 102 1282 0 293 887 10RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 10 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 1 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 230 544 0 198 45 102 1282 0 293 896 0Turn Type pm+ov pm+ov pm+pt ProtProtected Phases 4 5 8 1 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases 4 8 6Actuated Green, G (s) 17.7 37.5 17.7 28.2 47.5 46.0 19.8 55.3Effective Green, g (s) 19.7 38.5 19.7 29.2 48.0 48.0 20.3 57.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.38 0.20 0.29 0.48 0.48 0.20 0.57Clearance Time (s) 6.0 4.5 6.0 4.5 4.5 6.0 4.5 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 367 609 367 526 413 1699 697 2024v/s Ratio Prot 0.12 c0.18 0.11 0.01 0.03 c0.36 0.09 0.25v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 0.02 0.09v/c Ratio 0.63 0.89 0.54 0.09 0.25 0.75 0.42 0.44Uniform Delay, d1 36.8 28.8 36.1 25.7 16.3 21.2 34.7 12.2Progression Factor 1.81 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.51 0.63 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 3.0 14.1 1.5 0.1 0.2 2.5 0.4 0.7Delay (s) 69.7 42.0 37.6 25.8 8.5 15.8 35.1 12.9Level of Service E D D C A B D BApproach Delay (s) 50.1 33.3 15.3 18.4Approach LOS D C B B

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 25.3 HCM Level of Service CHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.8% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group



Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 277 53 265 214 58 31 649 591 53 380 0Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3453 1770 3426 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539Flt Permitted 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.51 1.00 1.00 0.24 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3453 590 3426 950 3539 1583 449 3539Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 301 58 288 233 63 34 705 642 58 413 0RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 24 0 0 0 163 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 344 0 288 272 0 34 705 479 58 413 0Turn Type pm+pt Perm pm+ov pm+ptProtected Phases 2 1 6 8 1 7 4Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4Actuated Green, G (s) 18.4 40.5 40.5 37.9 37.9 55.5 48.5 48.5Effective Green, g (s) 19.9 41.0 42.0 39.4 39.4 56.5 49.0 50.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.41 0.42 0.39 0.39 0.56 0.49 0.50Clearance Time (s) 5.5 4.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 687 455 1439 374 1394 894 307 1770v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.11 0.08 0.20 c0.10 0.01 c0.12v/s Ratio Perm c0.14 0.04 0.21 0.08v/c Ratio 0.50 0.63 0.19 0.09 0.51 0.54 0.19 0.23Uniform Delay, d1 35.6 21.4 18.3 19.0 22.9 13.6 14.8 14.2Progression Factor 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 0.01Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 2.9 0.3 0.5 1.3 0.6 0.3 0.3Delay (s) 24.7 24.3 18.6 19.5 24.2 14.2 0.8 0.4Level of Service C C B B C B A AApproach Delay (s) 24.7 21.4 19.5 0.4Approach LOS C C B A




Phase Number 1 2 4 6 7 8Movement WBL EBT SBTL WBTL SBL NBTLLead/Lag Lead Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None C-Max Max None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 26 20 54 46 15 39Maximum Split (%) 26.0% 20.0% 54.0% 46.0% 15.0% 39.0%Minimum Split (s) 15 27.5 33 24.5 15 33Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4 4 4 3.5 4All-Red Time (s) 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1.5Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 12Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7Flash Dont Walk (s) 15 11 12 13Dual Entry No Yes Yes Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 81.5 7.5 27.5 81.5 27.5 42.5End Time (s) 7.5 27.5 81.5 27.5 42.5 81.5Yield/Force Off (s) 3 22 76 22 38 76Yield/Force Off 170(s) 3 7 65 10 38 63Local Start Time (s) 5.5 31.5 51.5 5.5 51.5 66.5Local Yield (s) 27 46 0 46 62 0Local Yield 170(s) 27 31 89 34 62 87



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08am.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 69 21 38 1 9 0 7 375 0 0 1109 180Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95Frt 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1684 1770 1863 1770 3539 3465Flt Permitted 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1399 1684 1863 1863 1770 3539 3465Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 75 23 41 1 10 0 8 408 0 0 1205 196RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 75 27 0 1 10 0 8 408 0 0 1390 0Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt Prot PermProtected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2Actuated Green, G (s) 12.6 7.0 2.5 1.4 1.4 53.4 47.5Effective Green, g (s) 13.1 7.5 3.5 1.9 1.9 53.9 48.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.10 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.72 0.64Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 280 168 85 47 45 2543 2218v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 c0.12 c0.40v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.00v/c Ratio 0.27 0.16 0.01 0.21 0.18 0.16 0.63Uniform Delay, d1 27.0 30.9 32.1 35.8 35.8 3.4 8.1Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.82Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.5 0.1 2.3 1.9 0.1 1.2Delay (s) 27.5 31.3 30.3 40.3 37.7 3.5 16.0Level of Service C C C D D A BApproach Delay (s) 29.3 39.4 4.1 16.0Approach LOS C D A B


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08am.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Movement NET WBL EBTL NEL SWT EBL WBTLLead/Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode C-Max None None None C-Max None NoneMaximum Split (s) 46 8.5 20.5 8.5 37.5 8.5 20.5Maximum Split (%) 61.3% 11.3% 27.3% 11.3% 50.0% 11.3% 27.3%Minimum Split (s) 20.5 8.5 20.5 8.5 20.5 8.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11 11Dual Entry Yes No Yes No Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 10.5 2 56.5 10.5 19 2 56.5End Time (s) 56.5 10.5 2 19 56.5 10.5 2Yield/Force Off (s) 52 6 72.5 14.5 52 6 72.5Yield/Force Off 170(s) 41 6 61.5 14.5 41 6 61.5Local Start Time (s) 66.5 58 37.5 66.5 0 58 37.5Local Yield (s) 33 62 53.5 70.5 33 62 53.5Local Yield 170(s) 22 62 42.5 70.5 22 62 42.5

Intersection SummaryCycle Length 75Control Type Actuated-CoordinatedNatural Cycle 75Offset: 19 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:NET and 6:SWT, Start of Green


HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08am.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 92 301 0 140 80 43 401 0 658 1209 22Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1863 1583 1770 3539 3433 3530Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1863 1583 1770 3539 3433 3530Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 100 327 0 152 87 47 436 0 715 1314 24RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 106 0 0 77 0 0 0 0 1 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 100 221 0 152 10 47 436 0 715 1337 0Turn Type pt+ov Perm Prot ProtProtected Phases 8 8 1 4 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4Actuated Green, G (s) 17.6 58.3 17.6 17.6 8.2 82.7 36.2 110.7Effective Green, g (s) 18.1 58.8 18.1 18.1 8.7 83.2 36.7 111.2Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.39 0.12 0.12 0.06 0.55 0.24 0.74Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 225 621 225 191 103 1963 840 2617v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 0.14 c0.08 c0.03 0.12 c0.21 c0.38v/s Ratio Perm 0.01v/c Ratio 0.44 0.36 0.68 0.05 0.46 0.22 0.85 0.51Uniform Delay, d1 61.3 32.2 63.1 58.4 68.4 17.0 54.0 8.1Progression Factor 1.02 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.01 0.98 1.02 1.08Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 0.4 7.8 0.1 3.2 0.3 6.3 0.5Delay (s) 64.0 36.7 70.9 58.5 72.2 16.8 61.3 9.3Level of Service E D E E E B E AApproach Delay (s) 43.1 66.4 22.2 27.4Approach LOS D E C C

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 31.6 HCM Level of Service CHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.63Actuated Cycle Length (s) 150.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.8% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08am.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8Movement SWL NET SBT NEL SWT NBTLead/Lag Lag Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Min None None C-Min NoneMaximum Split (s) 54.5 50.7 44.8 22.6 82.6 44.8Maximum Split (%) 36.3% 33.8% 29.9% 15.1% 55.1% 29.9%Minimum Split (s) 8.5 20.5 20.5 8.5 20.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11 11Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 71.1 20.4 125.6 20.4 43 125.6End Time (s) 125.6 71.1 20.4 43 125.6 20.4Yield/Force Off (s) 121.1 66.6 15.9 38.5 121.1 15.9Yield/Force Off 170(s) 121.1 55.6 4.9 38.5 110.1 4.9Local Start Time (s) 28.1 127.4 82.6 127.4 0 82.6Local Yield (s) 78.1 23.6 122.9 145.5 78.1 122.9Local Yield 170(s) 78.1 12.6 111.9 145.5 67.1 111.9



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08am.sy73: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 1 20 3 3 3 7 390 1 0 798 0Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1770 3274 1770 3539 1583 3539Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.56 1.00 0.32 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1035 3274 591 3539 1583 3539Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1 22 3 3 3 8 424 1 0 867 0RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 21 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1 1 3 1 0 8 424 1 0 867 0Turn Type Perm pm+pt Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 4 3 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6Actuated Green, G (s) 2.7 2.7 8.4 8.4 57.6 57.6 57.6 57.6Effective Green, g (s) 3.2 3.2 8.9 8.9 58.1 58.1 58.1 58.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.04 0.12 0.12 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 79 68 139 389 458 2742 1226 2742v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.00 0.00 0.12 c0.24v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 c0.00 0.01 0.00v/c Ratio 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.15 0.00 0.32Uniform Delay, d1 34.4 34.4 29.2 29.1 1.9 2.2 1.9 2.5Progression Factor 1.52 2.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.68Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.3Delay (s) 52.2 71.5 29.3 29.1 2.0 2.3 1.9 2.0Level of Service D E C C A A A AApproach Delay (s) 70.7 29.2 2.3 2.0Approach LOS E C A A

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 3.4 HCM Level of Service AHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.28Actuated Cycle Length (s) 75.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.7% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08am.sy73: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 2 3 4 6 8Movement NBTL WBL EBT SBTL WBTLLead/Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes YesRecall Mode C-Max None None C-Max NoneMaximum Split (s) 36 13.5 25.5 36 39Maximum Split (%) 48.0% 18.0% 34.0% 48.0% 52.0%Minimum Split (s) 20.5 8.5 20.5 20.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11 11Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 0 36 49.5 0 36End Time (s) 36 49.5 0 36 0Yield/Force Off (s) 31.5 45 70.5 31.5 70.5Yield/Force Off 170(s) 20.5 45 59.5 20.5 59.5Local Start Time (s) 0 36 49.5 0 36Local Yield (s) 31.5 45 70.5 31.5 70.5Local Yield 170(s) 20.5 45 59.5 20.5 59.5

Intersection SummaryCycle Length 75Control Type Actuated-CoordinatedNatural Cycle 50Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green


HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08am.sy74: McAllister Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 716 78 505 216 47 1252Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 1583 3539 1583 1770 3539Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 1583 3539 1583 1770 3539Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 778 85 549 235 51 1361RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 60 0 120 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 778 25 549 115 51 1361Turn Type Perm Perm ProtProtected Phases 2 4 3 8Permitted Phases 2 4Actuated Green, G (s) 21.7 21.7 36.1 36.1 3.7 44.3Effective Green, g (s) 22.2 22.2 36.6 36.6 4.2 44.8Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.30 0.49 0.49 0.06 0.60Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1016 469 1727 773 99 2114v/s Ratio Prot c0.23 0.16 0.03 c0.38v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.07v/c Ratio 0.77 0.05 0.32 0.15 0.52 0.64Uniform Delay, d1 24.0 18.9 11.6 10.6 34.4 9.9Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.21 3.69 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 3.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 4.5 1.5Delay (s) 27.5 18.9 14.2 39.2 38.9 11.4Level of Service C B B D D BApproach Delay (s) 26.7 21.7 12.4Approach LOS C C B


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08am.sy74: McAllister Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 2 3 4 8Movement NWL SWL NET SWTLead/Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes YesRecall Mode Min None None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 28.3 10.5 36.2 46.7Maximum Split (%) 37.7% 14.0% 48.3% 62.3%Minimum Split (s) 20.5 8.5 20.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11Dual Entry Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 43.7 72 7.5 72End Time (s) 72 7.5 43.7 43.7Yield/Force Off (s) 67.5 3 39.2 39.2Yield/Force Off 170(s) 67.5 3 28.2 28.2Local Start Time (s) 46.7 0 10.5 0Local Yield (s) 70.5 6 42.2 42.2Local Yield 170(s) 70.5 6 31.2 31.2

Intersection SummaryCycle Length 75Control Type Actuated-CoordinatedNatural Cycle 50Offset: 72 (96%), Referenced to phase 8:SWT, Start of Green

Splits and Phases: 4: McAllister Av & 9th Av

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08pm.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 187 54 58 11 22 0 60 1353 1 0 915 166Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.98Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1718 1770 1863 1770 3539 1583 3458Flt Permitted 0.74 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1381 1718 1863 1863 1770 3539 1583 3458Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 203 59 63 12 24 0 65 1471 1 0 995 180RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 203 71 0 12 24 0 65 1471 1 0 1157 0Turn Type pm+pt pm+pt Prot PermProtected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2Actuated Green, G (s) 18.9 13.3 4.1 3.0 6.4 47.1 47.1 36.2Effective Green, g (s) 19.4 13.8 5.1 3.5 6.9 47.6 47.6 36.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.18 0.07 0.05 0.09 0.63 0.63 0.49Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 419 316 125 87 163 2246 1005 1692v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.04 c0.42 0.33v/s Ratio Perm c0.05 0.00 0.00v/c Ratio 0.48 0.22 0.10 0.28 0.40 0.65 0.00 0.68Uniform Delay, d1 23.6 26.0 32.3 34.5 32.1 8.6 5.0 14.7Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.30 1.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.17Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 0.4 0.3 1.7 1.6 1.5 0.0 1.6Delay (s) 24.4 26.4 42.4 36.6 33.7 10.1 5.0 4.1Level of Service C C D D C B A AApproach Delay (s) 25.2 38.6 11.1 4.1Approach LOS C D B A


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08pm.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Movement NET WBL EBTL NEL SWT EBL WBTLLead/Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode C-Max None None None C-Max None NoneMaximum Split (s) 45.5 8.5 21 9 36.5 9 20.5Maximum Split (%) 60.7% 11.3% 28.0% 12.0% 48.7% 12.0% 27.3%Minimum Split (s) 20.5 8.5 20.5 8.5 20.5 8.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11 11Dual Entry Yes No Yes No Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 66 57.5 36.5 66 0 57 36.5End Time (s) 36.5 66 57.5 0 36.5 66 57Yield/Force Off (s) 32 61.5 53 70.5 32 61.5 52.5Yield/Force Off 170(s) 21 61.5 42 70.5 21 61.5 41.5Local Start Time (s) 66 57.5 36.5 66 0 57 36.5Local Yield (s) 32 61.5 53 70.5 32 61.5 52.5Local Yield 170(s) 21 61.5 42 70.5 21 61.5 41.5



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08pm.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 184 909 0 154 106 43 401 0 442 975 37Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1863 1583 1770 3539 3433 3520Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 1863 1583 1770 3539 3433 3520Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 200 988 0 167 115 47 436 0 480 1060 40RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 29 0 0 68 0 0 0 0 3 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 200 959 0 167 47 47 436 0 480 1097 0Turn Type pt+ov Perm Prot ProtProtected Phases 8 8 1 4 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 4Actuated Green, G (s) 30.2 50.5 30.2 30.2 2.4 15.5 15.8 28.9Effective Green, g (s) 30.7 51.0 30.7 30.7 2.9 16.0 16.3 29.4Actuated g/C Ratio 0.41 0.68 0.41 0.41 0.04 0.21 0.22 0.39Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 763 1076 763 648 68 755 746 1380v/s Ratio Prot 0.11 c0.61 0.09 0.03 c0.12 0.14 c0.31v/s Ratio Perm 0.03v/c Ratio 0.26 0.89 0.22 0.07 0.69 0.58 0.64 0.79Uniform Delay, d1 14.7 9.7 14.4 13.5 35.6 26.5 26.7 20.1Progression Factor 1.27 1.71 1.00 1.00 1.19 0.93 0.80 0.74Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 8.9 0.1 0.0 21.4 2.6 1.6 4.1Delay (s) 18.8 25.6 14.5 13.5 63.8 27.0 22.9 19.0Level of Service B C B B E C C BApproach Delay (s) 24.5 14.1 30.6 20.2Approach LOS C B C C

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 22.6 HCM Level of Service CHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.90Actuated Cycle Length (s) 75.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.0% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08pm.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8Movement SWL NET SBT NEL SWT NBTLead/Lag Lag Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Min None None C-Min NoneMaximum Split (s) 15.5 21.5 38 8.5 28.5 38Maximum Split (%) 20.7% 28.7% 50.7% 11.3% 38.0% 50.7%Minimum Split (s) 8.5 20.5 20.5 8.5 20.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11 11Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 13 66.5 28.5 66.5 0 28.5End Time (s) 28.5 13 66.5 0 28.5 66.5Yield/Force Off (s) 24 8.5 62 70.5 24 62Yield/Force Off 170(s) 24 72.5 51 70.5 13 51Local Start Time (s) 13 66.5 28.5 66.5 0 28.5Local Yield (s) 24 8.5 62 70.5 24 62Local Yield 170(s) 24 72.5 51 70.5 13 51



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08pm.sy73: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 0 2 53 2 2 1 31 1092 2 2 594 0Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1583 1770 3362 1770 3539 1583 1770 3539Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.40 1.00 1.00 0.21 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1583 856 3362 753 3539 1583 398 3539Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2 58 2 2 1 34 1187 2 2 646 0RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 54 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2 4 2 2 0 34 1187 2 2 646 0Turn Type Perm pm+pt Perm Perm PermProtected Phases 4 3 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6Actuated Green, G (s) 4.2 4.2 9.9 9.9 56.1 56.1 56.1 56.1 56.1Effective Green, g (s) 4.7 4.7 10.4 10.4 56.6 56.6 56.6 56.6 56.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.06 0.14 0.14 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 99 139 466 568 2671 1195 300 2671v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.00 0.00 c0.34 0.18v/s Ratio Perm c0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.01v/c Ratio 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.44 0.00 0.01 0.24Uniform Delay, d1 33.0 33.0 28.0 27.8 2.4 3.4 2.3 2.3 2.8Progression Factor 0.50 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.74 0.72Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.2Delay (s) 16.7 8.5 28.0 27.8 2.6 3.9 2.3 1.7 2.2Level of Service B A C C A A A A AApproach Delay (s) 8.7 27.9 3.9 2.2Approach LOS A C A A

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 3.5 HCM Level of Service AHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.40Actuated Cycle Length (s) 75.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.2% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08pm.sy73: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 2 3 4 6 8Movement NBTL WBL EBT SBTL WBTLLead/Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes YesRecall Mode C-Max None None C-Max NoneMaximum Split (s) 40 11.5 23.5 40 35Maximum Split (%) 53.3% 15.3% 31.3% 53.3% 46.7%Minimum Split (s) 20.5 8.5 20.5 20.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11 11Dual Entry Yes No Yes Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 0 40 51.5 0 40End Time (s) 40 51.5 0 40 0Yield/Force Off (s) 35.5 47 70.5 35.5 70.5Yield/Force Off 170(s) 24.5 47 59.5 24.5 59.5Local Start Time (s) 0 40 51.5 0 40Local Yield (s) 35.5 47 70.5 35.5 70.5Local Yield 170(s) 24.5 47 59.5 24.5 59.5

Intersection SummaryCycle Length 75Control Type Actuated-CoordinatedNatural Cycle 60Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green


HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08pm.sy74: McAllister Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 459 100 1653 762 94 1070Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 1583 3539 1583 1770 3539Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 1583 3539 1583 1770 3539Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 499 109 1797 828 102 1163RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 86 0 210 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 499 23 1797 618 102 1163Turn Type Perm Perm ProtProtected Phases 2 4 3 8Permitted Phases 2 4Actuated Green, G (s) 14.8 14.8 41.5 41.5 5.2 51.2Effective Green, g (s) 15.3 15.3 42.0 42.0 5.7 51.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.56 0.56 0.08 0.69Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 700 323 1982 886 135 2440v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 c0.51 c0.06 0.33v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.39v/c Ratio 0.71 0.07 0.91 0.70 0.76 0.48Uniform Delay, d1 27.8 24.1 14.7 11.9 34.0 5.4Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.98 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 3.4 0.1 6.0 2.2 21.1 0.7Delay (s) 31.2 24.2 20.3 13.9 55.1 6.1Level of Service C C C B E AApproach Delay (s) 30.0 18.3 10.0Approach LOS C B B


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed5_08pm.sy74: McAllister Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 2 3 4 8Movement NWL SWL NET SWTLead/Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes YesRecall Mode Min None None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 20.5 8.5 46 54.5Maximum Split (%) 27.3% 11.3% 61.3% 72.7%Minimum Split (s) 20.5 8.5 20.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11Dual Entry Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 51.5 72 5.5 72End Time (s) 72 5.5 51.5 51.5Yield/Force Off (s) 67.5 1 47 47Yield/Force Off 170(s) 67.5 1 36 36Local Start Time (s) 54.5 0 8.5 0Local Yield (s) 70.5 4 50 50Local Yield 170(s) 70.5 4 39 39



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08am.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 70 20 38 3 6 334 7 374 1 798 1192 182Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1681 1835 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 3469Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1681 1835 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 3469Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 76 22 41 3 7 363 8 407 1 867 1296 198RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 37 0 0 0 217 0 0 1 0 7 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 76 26 0 0 10 146 8 407 0 867 1487 0Turn Type Split Split pm+ov Prot Perm ProtProtected Phases 4 4 8 8 1 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 8 2Actuated Green, G (s) 8.1 8.1 1.4 32.5 1.4 31.4 31.4 31.1 61.1Effective Green, g (s) 8.6 8.6 1.9 33.5 1.9 31.9 31.9 31.6 61.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.37 0.02 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.68Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 169 161 39 660 37 1254 561 1205 2374v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 0.02 0.01 c0.08 0.00 0.11 c0.25 c0.43v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.00v/c Ratio 0.45 0.16 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.32 0.00 0.72 0.63Uniform Delay, d1 38.5 37.4 43.4 19.3 43.3 21.2 18.8 25.4 7.8Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.79 1.73Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 0.5 3.5 0.2 2.9 0.7 0.0 0.9 0.6Delay (s) 40.4 37.9 46.8 19.5 46.2 21.9 18.8 20.9 14.2Level of Service D D D B D C B C BApproach Delay (s) 39.2 20.2 22.3 16.6Approach LOS D C C B


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08am.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8Movement SWL NET SETL NEL SWT NWTLLead/Lag Lead Lag Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-Max NoneMaximum Split (s) 27.7 21.3 20.5 8.5 40.5 20.5Maximum Split (%) 30.8% 23.7% 22.8% 9.4% 45.0% 22.8%Minimum Split (s) 8.5 20.5 20.5 8.5 20.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11 11Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 62.3 0 21.3 62.3 70.8 41.8End Time (s) 0 21.3 41.8 70.8 21.3 62.3Yield/Force Off (s) 85.5 16.8 37.3 66.3 16.8 57.8Yield/Force Off 170(s) 85.5 5.8 26.3 66.3 5.8 46.8Local Start Time (s) 62.3 0 21.3 62.3 70.8 41.8Local Yield (s) 85.5 16.8 37.3 66.3 16.8 57.8Local Yield 170(s) 85.5 5.8 26.3 66.3 5.8 46.8



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08am.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 19 220 143 890 1952 14Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3535Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3535Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 21 239 155 967 2122 15RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 6 0 0 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 21 233 155 967 2137 0Turn Type pt+ov ProtProtected Phases 4 4 5 5 2 6Permitted PhasesActuated Green, G (s) 10.3 22.8 8.0 70.7 58.2Effective Green, g (s) 10.8 23.3 8.5 71.2 58.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.26 0.09 0.79 0.65Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 212 410 167 2800 2306v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.15 c0.09 0.27 c0.60v/s Ratio Permv/c Ratio 0.10 0.57 0.93 0.35 0.93Uniform Delay, d1 35.3 29.0 40.4 2.7 13.8Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.07 0.77 1.02Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 1.8 47.9 0.3 6.3Delay (s) 35.5 30.8 91.1 2.4 20.4Level of Service D C F A CApproach Delay (s) 31.2 14.7 20.4Approach LOS C B C


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08am.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 2 4 5 6Movement NET SEL NEL SWTLead/Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize Yes YesRecall Mode C-Min None None C-MinMaximum Split (s) 69.5 20.5 12.5 57Maximum Split (%) 77.2% 22.8% 13.9% 63.3%Minimum Split (s) 20.5 20.5 8.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11Dual Entry Yes Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 0 69.5 57 0End Time (s) 69.5 0 69.5 57Yield/Force Off (s) 65 85.5 65 52.5Yield/Force Off 170(s) 54 74.5 65 41.5Local Start Time (s) 0 69.5 57 0Local Yield (s) 65 85.5 65 52.5Local Yield 170(s) 54 74.5 65 41.5



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08am.sy73: McAllister Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 716 78 693 216 47 1250Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 1583 3539 1583 1770 3539Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 1583 3539 1583 1770 3539Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 778 85 753 235 51 1359RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 59 0 47 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 778 26 753 188 51 1359Turn Type Perm pt+ov ProtProtected Phases 2 4 4 2 3 8Permitted Phases 2Actuated Green, G (s) 27.0 27.0 39.9 71.4 9.6 54.0Effective Green, g (s) 27.5 27.5 40.4 71.9 10.1 54.5Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.45 0.80 0.11 0.61Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1049 484 1589 1265 199 2143v/s Ratio Prot c0.23 0.21 0.12 0.03 c0.38v/s Ratio Perm 0.02v/c Ratio 0.74 0.05 0.47 0.15 0.26 0.63Uniform Delay, d1 28.1 22.1 17.4 2.1 36.5 11.4Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.69 1.17 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 2.9 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.7 1.4Delay (s) 30.9 22.1 12.3 2.5 37.2 12.8Level of Service C C B A D BApproach Delay (s) 30.1 9.9 13.7Approach LOS C A B


Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08am.sy73: McAllister Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 2 3 4 8Movement NWL SWL NET SWTLead/Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize Yes YesRecall Mode Min None None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 35.8 11.5 42.7 54.2Maximum Split (%) 39.8% 12.8% 47.4% 60.2%Minimum Split (s) 20.5 8.5 20.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11Dual Entry Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 54.2 42.7 0 0End Time (s) 0 54.2 42.7 54.2Yield/Force Off (s) 85.5 49.7 38.2 49.7Yield/Force Off 170(s) 85.5 49.7 27.2 38.7Local Start Time (s) 54.2 42.7 0 0Local Yield (s) 85.5 49.7 38.2 49.7Local Yield 170(s) 85.5 49.7 27.2 38.7



HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08am.sy74: Langley Ave & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (veh/h) 1 818 330 1 5 4Sign Control Stop Free FreeGrade 0% 0% 0%Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 889 359 1 5 4PedestriansLane Width (ft)Walking Speed (ft/s)Percent BlockageRight turn flare (veh)Median type None NoneMedian storage veh)Upstream signal (ft)pX, platoon unblockedvC, conflicting volume 724 5 10vC1, stage 1 conf volvC2, stage 2 conf volvCu, unblocked vol 724 5 10tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1tC, 2 stage (s)tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2p0 queue free % 100 17 78cM capacity (veh/h) 305 1078 1610

Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2Volume Total 1 889 179 179 1 5 4Volume Left 1 0 179 179 0 0 0Volume Right 0 889 0 0 0 0 4cSH 305 1078 1610 1610 1700 1700 1700Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.83 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 249 21 21 0 0 0Control Delay (s) 16.8 21.8 7.9 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.0Lane LOS C C A AApproach Delay (s) 21.8 7.9 0.0Approach LOS C

Intersection SummaryAverage Delay 17.6Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.7% ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08pm.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 188 53 58 15 17 932 60 1351 3 597 990 167Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95Frt 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1717 1820 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 3462Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1717 1820 1583 1770 3539 1583 3433 3462Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 204 58 63 16 18 1013 65 1468 3 649 1076 182RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 26 0 0 0 15 0 0 1 0 7 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 204 95 0 0 34 998 65 1468 2 649 1251 0Turn Type Split Split pm+ov Prot Perm ProtProtected Phases 4 4 8 8 1 5 2 1 6Permitted Phases 8 2Actuated Green, G (s) 16.0 16.0 7.2 58.6 9.2 57.4 57.4 51.4 99.6Effective Green, g (s) 16.5 16.5 7.7 59.6 9.7 57.9 57.9 51.9 100.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.05 0.40 0.06 0.39 0.39 0.35 0.67Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 195 189 93 629 114 1366 611 1188 2310v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.06 0.02 c0.55 0.04 c0.41 0.19 0.36v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.00v/c Ratio 1.05 0.50 0.37 1.59 0.57 1.07 0.00 0.55 0.54Uniform Delay, d1 66.8 62.9 68.8 45.2 68.1 46.0 28.3 39.6 13.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99Incremental Delay, d2 77.1 2.1 2.4 271.5 6.7 47.1 0.0 0.3 0.6Delay (s) 143.9 65.0 71.2 316.7 74.8 93.2 28.3 33.8 13.5Level of Service F E E F E F C C BApproach Delay (s) 114.5 308.7 92.3 20.4Approach LOS F F F C

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 112.4 HCM Level of Service FHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.30Actuated Cycle Length (s) 150.0 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 115.5% ICU Level of Service HAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08pm.sy71: Langley Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8Movement SWL NET SETL NEL SWT NWTLLead/Lag Lag Lead Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None C-Max None None C-Max NoneMaximum Split (s) 55 54 20.5 16 93 20.5Maximum Split (%) 36.7% 36.0% 13.7% 10.7% 62.0% 13.7%Minimum Split (s) 8.5 20.5 20.5 8.5 20.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11 11Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 54 0 109 93 0 129.5End Time (s) 109 54 129.5 109 93 0Yield/Force Off (s) 104.5 49.5 125 104.5 88.5 145.5Yield/Force Off 170(s) 104.5 38.5 114 104.5 77.5 134.5Local Start Time (s) 54 0 109 93 0 129.5Local Yield (s) 104.5 49.5 125 104.5 88.5 145.5Local Yield 170(s) 104.5 38.5 114 104.5 77.5 134.5



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08pm.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 34 261 292 2179 1493 25Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3531Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3531Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 37 284 317 2368 1623 27RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 5 0 0 1 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 37 279 317 2368 1649 0Turn Type pt+ov ProtProtected Phases 4 4 5 5 2 6Permitted PhasesActuated Green, G (s) 7.9 25.0 12.6 58.1 41.0Effective Green, g (s) 8.4 25.5 13.1 58.6 41.5Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.34 0.17 0.78 0.55Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 198 538 309 2765 1954v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.18 c0.18 c0.67 0.47v/s Ratio Permv/c Ratio 0.19 0.52 1.03 0.86 0.84Uniform Delay, d1 30.2 19.8 31.0 5.4 14.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.97 0.64Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.8 22.4 0.3 4.0Delay (s) 30.7 20.7 50.8 5.6 12.9Level of Service C C D A BApproach Delay (s) 21.8 10.9 12.9Approach LOS C B B

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 12.4 HCM Level of Service BHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83Actuated Cycle Length (s) 75.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.6% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08pm.sy72: Tippin Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 2 4 5 6Movement NET SEL NEL SWTLead/Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize Yes YesRecall Mode C-Min None None C-MinMaximum Split (s) 54.5 20.5 17.1 37.4Maximum Split (%) 72.7% 27.3% 22.8% 49.9%Minimum Split (s) 20.5 20.5 8.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11Dual Entry Yes Yes No YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 67 46.5 29.4 67End Time (s) 46.5 67 46.5 29.4Yield/Force Off (s) 42 62.5 42 24.9Yield/Force Off 170(s) 31 51.5 42 13.9Local Start Time (s) 0 54.5 37.4 0Local Yield (s) 50 70.5 50 32.9Local Yield 170(s) 39 59.5 50 21.9



HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08pm.sy73: McAllister Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWTLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 459 100 1451 762 94 1059Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 1583 3539 1583 1770 3539Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 1583 3539 1583 1770 3539Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Adj. Flow (vph) 499 109 1577 828 102 1151RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 85 0 27 0 0Lane Group Flow (vph) 499 24 1577 801 102 1151Turn Type Perm pt+ov ProtProtected Phases 2 4 4 2 3 8Permitted Phases 2Actuated Green, G (s) 15.8 15.8 40.1 60.4 5.6 50.2Effective Green, g (s) 16.3 16.3 40.6 60.9 6.1 50.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.54 0.81 0.08 0.68Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Lane Grp Cap (vph) 746 344 1916 1285 144 2392v/s Ratio Prot 0.15 c0.45 c0.51 c0.06 0.33v/s Ratio Perm 0.01v/c Ratio 0.67 0.07 0.82 0.62 0.71 0.48Uniform Delay, d1 26.9 23.3 14.2 2.7 33.6 5.8Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.68 0.87 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 2.3 0.1 1.5 0.5 14.7 0.7Delay (s) 29.2 23.4 11.3 2.8 48.3 6.5Level of Service C C B A D AApproach Delay (s) 28.1 8.4 9.9Approach LOS C A A

Intersection SummaryHCM Average Control Delay 11.6 HCM Level of Service BHCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78Actuated Cycle Length (s) 75.0 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.4% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min) 15c Critical Lane Group

Timing Report, Sorted By PhaseC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08pm.sy73: McAllister Av & 9th Av 3/19/2009


Phase Number 2 3 4 8Movement NWL SWL NET SWTLead/Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize Yes YesRecall Mode Min None None C-MaxMaximum Split (s) 20.5 9 45.5 54.5Maximum Split (%) 27.3% 12.0% 60.7% 72.7%Minimum Split (s) 20.5 8.5 20.5 20.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1Minimum Initial (s) 4 4 4 4Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0Walk Time (s) 5 5 5Flash Dont Walk (s) 11 11 11Dual Entry Yes No Yes YesInhibit Max Yes Yes Yes YesStart Time (s) 54.5 45.5 0 0End Time (s) 0 54.5 45.5 54.5Yield/Force Off (s) 70.5 50 41 50Yield/Force Off 170(s) 70.5 50 30 39Local Start Time (s) 54.5 45.5 0 0Local Yield (s) 70.5 50 41 50Local Yield 170(s) 70.5 50 30 39



HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity AnalysisC:\projects\Projects 2009\7457-escambia\Synchro\proposed6_08pm.sy74: Langley Av & Tippin Av 3/19/2009


Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (veh/h) 3 650 930 3 3 2Sign Control Stop Free FreeGrade 0% 0% 0%Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 707 1011 3 3 2PedestriansLane Width (ft)Walking Speed (ft/s)Percent BlockageRight turn flare (veh)Median type None NoneMedian storage veh)Upstream signal (ft)pX, platoon unblockedvC, conflicting volume 2028 3 5vC1, stage 1 conf volvC2, stage 2 conf volvCu, unblocked vol 2028 3 5tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1tC, 2 stage (s)tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2p0 queue free % 86 35 37cM capacity (veh/h) 24 1081 1616

Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2Volume Total 3 707 505 505 3 3 2Volume Left 3 0 505 505 0 0 0Volume Right 0 707 0 0 0 0 2cSH 24 1081 1616 1616 1700 1700 1700Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.65 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00Queue Length 95th (ft) 10 128 118 118 0 0 0Control Delay (s) 180.2 14.4 10.9 10.9 0.0 0.0 0.0Lane LOS F B B BApproach Delay (s) 15.2 10.8 0.0Approach LOS C

Intersection SummaryAverage Delay 12.6Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.2% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15

21

Appendix D

Project Correspondence

4489 Woodbine Road • Pace, Florida 32571

Tel 850.994.9757 • Fax 850.994.9684 [email protected] • www.ace-fla.com

"A Culture of Professional Excellence"

MEETING MINUTES

Meeting Date: June 17, 2009 Date Issued: July 2, 2009

Location: Escambia County Commissioners Conference Room, Pensacola

Project Name: 9th Ave./Langley Ave./Tippin Ave.Conceptual Intersection Improvements Study

Purpose: Joint Agency Meeting

Notes by: Tracy Boutwell American Project #: 5089658

Copies to: Attendees

Attendees Representing Phone Fax or e-mailTracy Boutwell American Consulting 850-289-1004 [email protected] John Kilgore American Consulting 727-499-5764 [email protected] Jonathan Kiser Neel-Schaffer 850-549-4044 [email protected] Harris Escambia County 850-595-3434 [email protected] Brown Escambia County 850-595-3404 [email protected] Dennis Moxley Escambia County 850-595-3429 [email protected] Newsom Escambia County 850-595-3434 [email protected] Lee Smith City of Pensacola 850-436-5533 [email protected] Ronald Johnson FDOT 850-415-9427 [email protected] Spivey FDOT 850-415-9467 [email protected] Rogers FDOT 850-415-9598 [email protected] De Vries FDOT 850-981-2754 [email protected] Schmitt Pensacola Fire Dept. 850-436-5200 [email protected] Flynn Pensacola Airport 850-436-5000 [email protected] The following notes reflect our understanding of the discussions and decisions made at this meeting. If you have any questions, additions or comments, please contact us at the above address. We will consider the minutes to be accurate unless written notice is received within 10 working days of the date issued. Larry Newsom began the meeting by thanking everyone for their participation in the project to date and their willingness to be at the joint agency meeting. Larry also mentioned that this project is one that a corrective measure should be taken to reduce the number of accidents and improve the level of service (LOS) through the corridor. To date, Escambia County has paid for the conceptual study to be completed by American and that the study will be wrapping up in the next couple of months based on the outcome of this meeting. After introductions of the attendees, American presented the group with a quick background of the project’s scope of services and status of the recommendations to date. Discussions included review of the current traffic volume through the intersection (approximately 58,000 vpd) and the current LOS for the 3 intersections (ranging from LOS B-D). There have been 247 accidents over the last 4 years with 1 fatality. In comparison of other intersections in Pensacola, these 3 intersections have a higher number of accidents occurring on them. A discussion followed about possible access management improvements. It was noted that there are numerous small parcels that will prevent the Access Management Guidelines from being complexly implemented, but that with improvements, there should be an improvement in the number of accidents

mailto:[email protected]









Meeting Minutes 9th Ave./Langley Ave./Tippin Ave. Improvements Study

July 2, 2009 Page 2

F:\PROJECT\5089658\FileCabinet\B. Correspondence\B.03 Meeting Agenda-Minutes\Min_20090617_joint_mtg.doc

occurring because of the number of access points currently available. The recommendations included reducing the widths of some driveways to force movements at a certain point, closure of some driveways, adjusting the spacing of driveways from the intersection/signals, and placement of an island along 9th Ave. in some areas to prevent left in/out movements across numerous lanes. Specific information was provided in the Draft Conceptual Report (Figure 2) that was provided to each attendee. The discussions then moved forward to the short term solutions. These solutions were considered minor improvements to the intersection by adjusting signal timings, removing movements, etc. Alternative 1 recommends eliminating the south bound lefts from Tippin Avenue onto 9th Avenue. The AM peak hour shows 5 lefts vs. 154 through movements in this combined through/left lane. The PM peak hour shows 8 lefts vs. 182 through movements. It was suggested to remove the turning movement due to the low volume of turning movements, blocking traffic to make this move, and the availability of alternative routes. Alternative 2 recommends eliminating the north bound permitted lefts from 9th Avenue onto Tippin Avenue and changing the signal timings to a protected left. The AM peak hour shows 43 lefts while the PM peak hour shows 94. Although these turns are considerably more than Alternative 1, we feel that the number of accidents would be reduced due to drivers running red lights and having a sight distance issue. Alternative 3 recommends eliminating the north bound protected lefts from Tippin Avenue onto Langley Avenue. The AM peak hour movements were 7 and 31 during the PM peak hour. By removing the protected left timing, this would allow the southbound through timing to be increased. Alternative 4 reviewed the cumulative effects of implementing Alternatives 1 through 3. Although no overall improvements to the LOS was indicated through the modeling, we feel that these alternatives could help to reduce the number of accidents in the intersections. The discussion was then turned to the long term solutions. These improvements included looking at a broader picture in all directions from the intersections and what could be done if funding for design, right of way acquisition and construction could be funded. These improvements would have impacts to all of the agencies at today’s meeting, and therefore the focus of the meeting. Alternative 5 recommends removing the current crossing of Langley Avenue through the Pensacola Airport property. This would require realignment/widening of McAllister Aveunue to accommodate the additional traffic volume. A signal would be required at the intersection of 9th Avenue and McAllister Avenue. The remaining legs of the 9th Avenue, Langley Avenue, and Tippin Avenue would remain the same. The traffic models show a slight improvement to the LOS for the intersections; however it does not improve the signal spacing for the remaining legs. Alternative 6 is a build on of Alternative 5. Additional improvements would require the realignment of Tippin Avenue just north of La Vista Avenue, to be realigned to the south along with the west leg of Langley Avenue to form a new signalized intersection. Other small changes are also recommended as shown in Figure 6 of the Draft Report. It was noted that although we feel like we have a pretty good handle on how traffic might react; it is hard to now how these changes will affect the circulation patterns. Alternative 7 is also a build on to Alternative 5. This alternative utilizes the existing La Vista Aveunue and Schwab Drive right of way to realign the Tippin Avenue and Langley Avenue realignments. These improvements are shown in Figure 7 of the Draft Report.

Meeting Minutes 9th Ave./Langley Ave./Tippin Ave. Improvements Study

July 2, 2009 Page 3

F:\PROJECT\5089658\FileCabinet\B. Correspondence\B.03 Meeting Agenda-Minutes\Min_20090617_joint_mtg.doc

Cost estimates for Alternatives 5, 6, and 7 were included with the meeting handouts. It was noted that an error was included in Alternative 6’s cost estimate for the miles of solid yellow markings required. In correcting this, the new subtotal for the Tippin Avenue (12th Avenue) work was reduced from $7,012,410.32 to $512,624.72 which brings the new total alternative cost to $2,479,791.03. Assistant Fire Chief Schmitt indicated that all of the long term alternatives will affect the operation of the fire station at the corner of 9th Avenue and McAllister Avenue. It was noted that we would work with Chief Schmitt on any proposed designs so that we could improve the movements of his emergency vehicles entering/exiting the station onto either street. After the presentation, the agencies were asked to remain in the room for further discussions on whether or not the project should be carried forward, and if it should be carried forward, would a PD&E study be required or could work begin on final design. Funding issues were also to be discussed. Based on feedback from Escambia County, it appears that everyone is in favor of progressing the project to either a PD&E study or directly to design.

From: Peterfreund, Anna L.

To: Boutwell, Tracy D.;

CC:

Subject: Fw: Langley and 9th road improvements project

Date: Sunday, August 09, 2009 11:03:34 AM

Attachments:

Anna Peterfreund American Consulting Professionals, LLC 206 W. Hawthorne Street Dalton, GA 30720 706-508-4029 706-523-2520 Cell 706-529-2749 Fax [email protected] ----- Original Message ----- From: Dan Flynn <[email protected]> To: Peterfreund, Anna L. Sent: Fri Aug 07 15:03:57 2009 Subject: RE: Langley and 9th road improvements project Anna, I have spoken to Bill Farris. From the FAA's standpoint they would look at the following: 1. Right-of-way: The additional right-of-way for McAllister would need to be treated as a release of property. This would require an appraisal of the property to determine the fair market value and then would need a formal release of the property. This isn't as bad as it sounds. Do you know if the existing right-of-way for Langley was ever formally turned over to the County? I ask because if this was and it is coming back to the airport, then the fair market value of this property is used to offset the fair market value of the right-of-way needed for McAllister. 2. The County would need to complete an environmental checklist, a copy of which will be forthcoming.

mailto:/O=FIRST ORGANIZATION/OU=FIRST ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=5BURROA

mailto:/O=FIRST ORGANIZATION/OU=FIRST ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=5BOUTWT

3. Once all is said and done, the airport would need to update it's airport layout plan. Does this information help? Again, I will forward a copy of the environmental checklist once it comes to me. Dan -----Original Message----- From: Peterfreund, Anna L. [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 7:31 AM To: Dan Flynn Subject: RE: Langley and 9th road improvements project Mr. Flynn Have you gotten any response from Bill Farris? We are trying to provide the County with an update and would love to be able to explain what studies or processes they will need to follow for this project. Thanks! Anna Peterfreund American Consulting Professionals, LLC 206 W. Hawthorne Street Dalton, GA 30720 706-508-4029 706-523-2520 Cell 706-529-2746 Fax [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: Dan Flynn [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 8:47 AM To: [email protected] Cc: Melinda Crawford; Peterfreund, Anna L.; Boutwell, Tracy D. Subject: FW: Langley and 9th road improvements project Bill, Escambia County is in the process of reviewing alternatives to modify a public thoroughfare that goes across airport property on our northern side. Two alternatives are attached. Alternative 1 would involve modifying



another existing road, McAllister Avenue, and directing traffic down it rather than on Langley. In this situation, the County would need to work with the Pensacola Airport to obtain the necessary right-of-way. The right-of-way for McAllister would be modified and then the existing right-of-way for Langley would be vacated and returned to us for our use. From our standpoint, we need to start working with you to determine the FAA's requirements for something such as this. In addition, Escambia County is starting to explore funding options and is trying to determine that given the FAA's involvement, will there be any specific requirements involving permitting, environmental and engineering studies, etc... Your input would be appreciated. Thanks Bill. Dan Flynn -----Original Message----- From: Peterfreund, Anna L. [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 11:55 AM To: Dan Flynn Cc: Boutwell, Tracy D. Subject: Langley and 9th road improvements project Hello Mr. Flynn Thank you for discussing this project with me this morning. Attached please find two alternatives for the project that we are currently considering. These are both in the early stages still and are subject to change. As discussed on the phone, we would like to begin coordination with FAA on this project. Escambia County is interested in obtaining federal funds for


this project. Though we are not sure at this time if federal funds will be available, we are trying to advance the project in a manner that would allow the County to receive federal funds if they do come available. That being said, we are not sure what our obligations would be to FAA as far as permits, environmental studies, or engineering analyses and are interested in beginning communications on this, if possible. If you could pass these drawings on to Mr. Farris I would greatly appreciate it. As the project advances, I will continue to send information. Thanks! Anna Peterfreund American Consulting Professionals, LLC 206 W. Hawthorne Street Dalton, GA 30720 706-508-4029 706-523-2520 Cell 706-529-2746 Fax [email protected]

22

Appendix E

Time Line to Complete Project From Final Report Submittal to Construction

ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecess

1

2 Submit Draft "Final" Report 1 day Fri 9/11/09 Fri 9/11/09

3 Comments Due 10 days Mon 9/14/09 Fri 9/25/09 2

4 Meeting to address comments 1 day Wed 9/30/09 Wed 9/30/09

5 Submit "Final" Report 12 days Thu 10/1/09 Fri 10/16/09 4

6

7 Coordination between County & agencies 80 days Mon 10/19/09 Fri 2/5/10 5

8 PD&E Contract Negotiations 21 days Mon 2/8/10 Mon 3/8/10 7

9 PD&E Contract 415 days Tue 3/9/10 Mon 10/10/11 8

10

11 Design Contract Negotiations 20 days Tue 10/11/11 Mon 11/7/11 9

12 Design Contract 410 days Tue 11/8/11 Mon 6/3/13 11

13

14 Begin R/W Aquistion 450 days Mon 1/7/13 Fri 9/26/14

15 Advertise for Construction 15 days Mon 10/13/14 Fri 10/31/14 14

16 Selection 1 day Mon 11/10/14 Mon 11/10/14

17 Construction 425 days Tue 11/11/14 Mon 6/27/16 16

Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 22010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Task

Split

Progress

Milestone

Summary

Project Summary

External Tasks

External Milestone

Deadline

American Consulting Engineers of Florida 9th/Langley

Page 1

Project: timelineDate: Thu 9/10/09

23

Appendix F

Fee Estimate For PD&E, Design, and R/W

Note: R/W cost to be provided by FDOT by 9/30/09

ESTIMATE OF WORK EFFORT AND COST - PRIME CONSULTANT

Name of Project: 9th Ave at Langley Ave and Tippin Avenue Consult. Name: American Consulting Engineers

County: Escambia Consult. No.

FPN: TBD Date: 9/11/2009FAP No.: 0 Estimator:

SH Salary AverageBy Cost By Rate Per

$50.00 $75.00 $65.00 $50.00 $25.00 $29.00 $45.00 $20.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10.00 $0.00 Activity Activity Task

Public Involvement 1,440 288 72 72 144 288 216 0 360 0 0 0 0 1,440 $52,344 $36.35

Engineering Analysis & Report 2,495 499 125 499 624 374 250 0 125 0 0 0 0 2,496 $117,060 $46.90

Environmental Analysis & Reports 772 39 0 0 0 0 0 656 77 0 0 0 0 772 $33,010 $42.76

Miscellaneous 256 128 0 0 0 38 38 0 51 0 0 0 0 255 $9,472 $37.15

Total Staff Hours 4,963 954 197 571 768 700 504 656 613 0 0 0 0 4,963

Total Staff Cost $47,700.00 $14,775.00 $37,115.00 $38,400.00 $17,500.00 $14,616.00 $29,520.00 $12,260.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $211,886.00 $42.69

Check = $211,886.00

Survey Field Days by Subconsultant SALARY RELATED COSTS: $211,886.00OVERHEAD: 168% $355,968.48

4 - Person Crew: SUBTOTAL: $567,854.48OPERATING MARGIN: 0% $0.00

Notes: FCCM (Facilities Capital Cost Money): 1.50% $3,178.291. This sheet to be used by Prime Consultant to calculate the Grand Total fee. EXPENSES (Note 3): 12.00% $25,426.322. Manually enter fee from each subconsultant. Unused subconsultant rows may be hidden. Survey (Field - if by Prime) 0.00 4-man crew day -$ / day $0.003. Provide backup for the expense calculation in a format acceptable to the Department. Subconsultant: Pan American $5,759.00

Subconsultant: $177,750.00Subconsultant: Sub 3 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 4 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 5 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 6 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 7 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 8 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 9 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 10 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 11 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 12 $0.00SUBTOTAL ESTIMATED FEE: $779,968.09Optional Services $0.00

GRAND TOTAL ESTIMATED FEE: $779,968.09

Total Staff Hours From "SH

Summary - Firm"

Staff Classi- fication 12




Arrow Consulting

Staff Classification Designer Enviro Specialist

Admin.Project Manager

Principa;/Chief Engineer

Sr. Engineer Engineer Engineer Intern

9th-Langley-Tippin_PDE_Hrs_Est_9-11-09.xls Fee Sheet - Prime Page 1 of 1 9/11/2009 1:54 PM

5boutwt

Text Box

PD&E

ESTIMATE OF WORK EFFORT AND COST - PRIME CONSULTANT

Name of Project: Intersection Improvements for Ninth Ave. at Langley Ave. and Tippin Ave. Consultant Name: American Consulting Engineers of FL, LLCCounty: Escambia Consultant No.: FPN: N/A Date: 9/11/2009FAP No.: N/A Estimator: Tracy Boutwell

SH Salary Average

By Cost By Rate Per$75.00 $55.00 $75.00 $55.00 $28.00 $30.00 $45.00 $20.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Activity Activity Task

3. Project General and Project Common Tasks 544 27 136 0 82 82 109 0 109 0 0 0 0 545 $21,761 $39.934. Roadway Analysis 1,343 134 134 269 336 269 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,343 $69,637 $51.855. Roadway Plans 864 43 0 43 216 302 259 0 0 0 0 0 0 863 $34,556 $40.046. Drainage Analysis 622 62 31 187 124 93 124 0 0 0 0 0 0 621 $33,524 $53.987. Utilities 62 0 16 0 16 16 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 $2,688 $42.008. Environmental Permits, Compliance & Clearances 340 0 34 0 0 0 51 255 0 0 0 0 0 340 $14,875 $43.759. Structures - Misc. Tasks, Dwgs, Non-Tech. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!10. Structures - Bridge Development Report 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!11. Structures - Temporary Bridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!12. Structures - Short Span Concrete Bridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!13. Structures - Medium Span Concrete Bridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!14. Structures - Structural Steel Bridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!15. Structures - Segmental Concrete Bridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!16. Structures - Movable Span 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!17. Structures - Retaining Walls 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!18. Structures - Miscellaneous 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!19. Signing & Pavement Marking Analysis 246 25 25 49 62 49 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 247 $12,817 $51.8920. Signing & Pavement Marking Plans 64 3 0 3 16 22 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 $2,516 $39.9421. Signalization Analysis 292 29 29 58 73 58 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 291 $15,079 $51.8222. Signalization Plans 123 12 12 25 31 25 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 123 $6,380 $51.8723. Lighting Analysis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!24. Lighting Plans 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!25. Landscape Architecture Analysis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!26. Landscape Architecture Plans 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!27. Survey (Field & Office Support) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!28. Photogrammetry 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!29. Mapping 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!30. Geotechnical 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!31. Architecture Development 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!32. Noise Barriers Impact Design Assessment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!33. Intelligent Transportation Systems Analysis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!34. Intelligent Transportation Systems Plans 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 #DIV/0!

Total Staff Hours 4,548 335 417 634 956 916 878 255 109 0 0 0 0 4,500Total Staff Cost $25,125.00 $22,935.00 $47,550.00 $52,580.00 $25,648.00 $26,340.00 $11,475.00 $2,180.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $213,833.00 $47.52

Check = $213,833.00Survey Field Days by Subconsultant SALARY RELATED COSTS: $213,833.004 - Person Crew: OVERHEAD: 168% $359,239.44

OPERATING MARGIN: 0% $0.00Notes: FCCM (Facilities Capital Cost Money): 1.50% $3,207.501. This sheet to be used by Prime Consultant to calculate the Grand Total fee. EXPENSES: 12.00% $25,659.96

2. Manually enter fee from each subconsultant. Unused subconsultant rows may be hidden. Survey (Field - if by Prime) 694-man crew days @ -$ / day $0.00

SUBTOTAL ESTIMATED FEE: $601,939.90Subconsultant: Nobles Consulting Group Survey $180,520.00Subconsultant: PSI Geotech $47,420.00Subconsultant: Arrow Consulting R/W Acquisition $513,035.00Subconsultant: SSMC SUE Data $2,824.56Subconsultant: Sub 5 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 6 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 7 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 8 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 9 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 10 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 11 $0.00Subconsultant: Sub 12 $0.00SUBTOTAL ESTIMATED FEE: $1,345,739.46Geotechnical Field and Lab Testing $0.00SUBTOTAL ESTIMATED FEE: $1,345,739.46Optional Services - CEI $319,484.85GRAND TOTAL ESTIMATED FEE: $1,665,224.31

Staff Classification Designer Environ. Specialist Admin.Principal/

Chief Eng.Project

Manager Sr. Engineer Engineer Engineer Intern

Total Staff Hours From

"SH Summary- Firm"





9th_langley_tippin_design_fee.xls Fee Sheet - Prime Page 1 of 1 9/11/2009

5boutwt

Text Box

Final Design, R/W Acquisition & CEI