traffic signal management and synchronization project · pdf filetraffic signal management and...

Traffic Signal Management and Synchronization Project

City of Salt Lake City

September, 2011

Prepared for: City of Salt Lake City

349 South 200 East, Suite 450 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114

Prepared by:

1120 W. La Veta Avenue, Suite 660 Orange, CA 92868

(714) 573-0317

Project No.: JA93152

Traffic Signal Management and Synchronization Project for Salt Lake City

i

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 1

1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................ 6

2. ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ......................................................................... 7

2.1 Roadway Network ................................................................................................................................7

2.2 Traffic Signal Operation........................................................................................................................7

2.3 Queuing Observation ...........................................................................................................................8

2.4 Traffic Volume ........................................................................................................................................8

2.5 Transit ......................................................................................................................................................9

2.6 Bicycles.....................................................................................................................................................9

2.7 Uneven Lane Distribution....................................................................................................................9

2.8 Light Rail Operation........................................................................................................................... 10

3. SIGNAL TIMING OPTIMIZATION .....................................................................................11

3.1 Cycle Length Selection ...................................................................................................................... 12

3.2 Fine-Tuning of Proposed Timing Plans........................................................................................... 12

4. SYSTEM WIDE IMPROVEMENT ........................................................................................13

4.1 Corridor-Based Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs).................................................................... 13

4.2 Network-Wide Measures of Effectiveness Improvements........................................................ 21

4.3 Fuel Consumption and Pollutant Emission.................................................................................... 21

4.4 Economic Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 23

5. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A THREE TO FIVE YEARS RE-TIMING EFFORT........................25

5.1 Agency Survey ..................................................................................................................................... 25

5.2 Staffing Needs ...................................................................................................................................... 26

5.3 Traffic Signal System Improvements ............................................................................................... 27

6. PERFORMANCE COMPARISONS WITH THREE OTHER CITIES..........................................30

7. CONCLUSIONS ...............................................................................................................32


ii

List of Tables

TABLE 1 – LIST OF AFTER STUDY CORRIDORS.............................................................................................. 14

TABLE 2 – TRAVEL TIME AND DELAY STUDY, AM PEAK ............................................................................. 15

TABLE 3 – TRAVEL TIME AND DELAY STUDY, MIDDAY PEAK ...................................................................... 17

TABLE 4 – TRAVEL TIME AND DELAY STUDY, PM PEAK............................................................................... 19

TABLE 5 – NETWORK-WIDE MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS IMPROVEMENTS ............................................. 21

TABLE 6 – PEAK HOUR FUEL CONSUMPTION AND POLLUTANT EMISSION COMPARISON....................... 21

TABLE 7 – ANNUAL FUEL CONSUMPTION REDUCTION .............................................................................. 22

TABLE 8 – MOTORIST COST SAVINGS ASSOCIATED WITH DECREASED DELAY AND STOPS .................... 23

TABLE 9– BENEFIT-TO-COST RATIO ANALYSIS............................................................................................. 24

TABLE 10 – SELECTED CITIES FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATION SURVEY .................................................. 25

TABLE 11 – SUMMARY OF STAFFING NEEDS .................................................................................................. 26

TABLE 12 – RECOMMENDED STAFF RESOURCE FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL CENTER.................................... 27

TABLE 13 – MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS (MOE’S) OF FOUR CITIES ......................................................... 30

Appendices

APPENDIX A – EXISTING CYCLE LENGTH

APPENDIX B – EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS

APPENDIX C – PROPOSED CYCLE LENGTH

APPENDIX D – TRAVEL TIME AND DELAY BEFORE AND AFTER STUDY REPORTS

APPENDIX E – SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATION SURVEY


1

Executive Summary

KOA Corporation (KOA) was retained by Salt Lake City as the consultant to conduct a traffic signal coordination study for 164 intersections1 within the greater Central Business District (CBD) area of Salt Lake City, Utah. The signals within the study area are under the control of Salt Lake City and the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT). The goal of the study was to develop traffic signal management and synchronization recommendations to reduce traffic delays, pollutant emissions, and petroleum fuel consumption. Other goals included determining the optimal frequency of retiming the signals and resources needed to do so and comparing the performance of the traffic signal operation in Salt Lake City to other cities with similar characteristics. KOA completed the following tasks during this study:

• Conducted detailed field reviews of the project site • Updated the City’s original Synchro2 network with new count volumes and timing parameters • Used Synchro’s volume balancing tool to fill in the gaps at locations with no volume counts

available • Conducted field calibrations using the SimTraffic tool from Synchro • Optimized traffic signal coordination timing plans using Synchro • Fine-tuned and field-reviewed the City-installed timing plans

• Conducted the “After Study” travel time runs and compared with the “Before Study” runs • Conducted signal performance comparisons with three other cities • Researched and conducted interviews with other cities to identify the signal timing staffing needs

Traffic Signal Management Improvements Cycle Length For the AM and PM peak periods, KOA proposed to retain one uniform 120-second cycle length with the exception of those light rail intersections along Main Street that are currently running free. UDOT intersections are already operating on a 120-second cycle length. For the midday period, the cycle length was reduced at some of the city-maintained intersections to an 81-second cycle. The unusual cycle was selected to harmonize with the existing 108-second cycle length currently set for the State and some major City intersections. Intersections with the two different cycle lengths will reach a common base point every four cycles. Minimal changes are recommended to arterial corridors with light rail operation. The signalized intersections with light rail tracks in the median were previously calibrated and were optimized for the light rail operation by UDOT. Those signals also provide priority to the light rail operation. 1 – Salt Lake City has a total of 173 intersections in its system network 2 – A software application tool used in optimizing traffic signal timing


2

Signal Synchronization Measures of Effectiveness Improvements A travel time and delay “after” study was conducted along 16 corridors during the weekday AM, midday, and PM peak periods, which were compared to the results of “before” studies conducted by the City for each corridor. The corridor-based measures of effectiveness (MOE’s) performance consisted of average travel time, average speed, number of stops, and total delay. During the AM peak period, the optimized timing plans improved traffic operation by decreasing average travel time of 16 corridors by 8%, increasing average speed by 8%, decreasing number of stops by 17%, and decreasing total delay of each run by 14%. During the midday period, the comparison shows a 6% reduction in average travel time of 16 runs, with the average number of stops decreasing by 3% and total delay decreasing by 12%. The average speed increased by 3%. During the PM peak period, the comparison reports 8% reduction in the travel time, 14% reduction in number of stops and 11% reduction in total delay, the average speed increased by 5%.

In terms of network-wide improvement, with the optimized timing plans, total delay within the downtown area was reduced by 14% for AM Peak, 10% for Midday Period, and 7% for PM Peak. The number of total stops was reduced by 8% for AM Peak, 7% for Midday Period, and 8% for PM Peak. Fuel Consumption and Pollutant Emission Based on KOA’s recommendation, the Measure of Effectiveness (MOE) from Synchro shows improvements in all three time periods that result in 337,000 gallons of fuel savings per year. The results significantly exceed the target goal of 32,000 gallons for this project by a factor of ten. The daily and annual reduction in pollutant emissions are presented in the table below.

Peak Hour Network MOE Existing Optimized Reduction Fuel Consumed (gal) 4715 4437 278 (5.9%) CO Emissions (lbs) 728 683 42 (5.8%)

NOx Emissions (lbs) 141 132 9 (6.3%) AM

VOC Emissions (lbs) 168 159 11 (6.6%) Fuel Consumed (gal) 4189 4013 176 (4.2%) CO Emissions (lbs) 646 617 26 (4.1%)

NOx Emissions (lbs) 126 121 4 (3.5%) Midday


NOx Emissions (lbs) 159 152 7 (4.2%) PM

VOC Emissions (lbs) 190 181 9 (4.7%)

Daily Reduction Annual Reduction Fuel Savings (gal) 1348 337,000

CO Emissions Reductions (lbs) 203 50,700

NOx Emissions Reductions (lbs) 40 10,000

VOC Emissions Reductions (lbs) 53 13,200


3

Staffing Resources for Signal Retiming The City recently lost one staff position in its Traffic Control Center (TCC) due to budgetary constraints. Based on our survey of four other cities (Tallahassee, Amarillo, Knoxville, and Little Rock), we believe that the staffing level in the TCC, currently consisting of two staff members, is inadequate to effectively operate and maintain the signal system while performing other vital daily tasks. Maintaining communication linkage between the TCC and more than 180 signals in the field and various closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras requires substantial effort on a daily basis. Additionally, the City should budget adequate resources to conduct the retiming of the entire signal system on three-year intervals. The primary factors for needing to retime the signals are:

• Land use changes • Population growth or shifts • Change in flow profiles (volume and classification) • Compliance to changes in Federal or state standards for pedestrian clearance and other intervals

Currently, the City maintains a database of the traffic signals, including controller type and history of updates. However, the City does not have enough resource to maintain a Performance Measure of Effectiveness (MOE) database to track the operational performance within the City’s roadway network. We recommend that the City assign adequate staff resource to conduct performance survey of MOE once every other year. Performance MOE surveys will also help in identifying areas where signal retiming efforts should be initiated. As a result, it is recommended that the City budget resources to hire three additional staff – two engineers and one operator. Duties of additional staff include, but not be limited, to the following:

Resolving traffic operational issues, in particular signal timing related issues, based on citizens’ complaints.

Analyzing and assessing the City’s communication infrastructure needs for improvements necessary for the safe and efficient utilization of the roadway network.

Ensuring coverage by manning in the communication console at all times during the normal business hours in the TCC.

Coordinating and staffing major/special events requiring changes in timing plans in the TCC. Maintaining a Performance Measure of Effectiveness (MOE) database to track the operational

performance within the City’s roadway network. Determining, evaluating and recommending solutions at intersections with high accident rates. Completing the retiming of signals on every three-year intervals.

With the additional staffing, the TCC should consist of one Director, two traffic signal engineers, and two operators. Signal retiming and traffic count stations are eligible to be funded through State and Federal sources. While the Federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program is one of


4

the primary sources of funds for signal retiming projects, other sources of funds are needed to maintain the traffic count stations.

Comparison of Performance with Three Other Cities There are several features that are unique to Salt Lake City that cannot be found in other cities in the U.S. The most significant feature, perhaps, is the overall size of an average intersection. The downtown streets are unusually wide, resulting in long crosswalks and corresponding long pedestrian clearance times. Outside of the downtown area, many intersections have no pedestrian push buttons. These features result in the need to use a relatively long traffic signal cycle that, in turn, necessitates longer waits at the intersections. Furthermore, the light rail operation that runs on Main Street and 400 South and cuts through the downtown area features traffic signal controllers that provide priority to minimize delays for the light rail operation, possibly at the expense of motor vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Downtown networks of three other cities were selected for comparison. They are the City of Honolulu, Hawaii, City of Louisville, Kentucky and City of Santa Monica, California. The table summarizes the network-based measures of effectiveness (MOE's) performance for all four cities.

City Period No. of I/S

in the Network

Average Speed (mph)

Delay/Int (sec) Stops/Int

AM 173 17 9.3 833 Salt Lake City

PM 173 16 11.3 939 AM 74 12 10.7 997

Honolulu PM 74 10 15.4 1117 AM 60 14 6.4 733

Santa Monica PM 60 12 11.4 1123 AM 220 20 10.5 n/a

Louisville * PM 220 19.5 13.6 n/a

Note: *Based on a report prepared by Entran, PLC, submitted to the City on October 2009. Despite its relative large intersection sizes and having a light rail operation running through the downtown area, Salt Lake City fares well in comparison with other cities. It has the second highest average speeds for both peak periods. Salt Lake City has the lowest average delay and number of stops during the evening rush hours. Newer Central Traffic Management Software

Siemens i2 Central Traffic Management Software (TMS) has been used to manage 755 traffic signals in the Salt Lake Metropolitan area, encompassing three counties, for the past 12 years. In the near future, this software will no longer be supported by the manufacturer and will need to be replaced. Newer generations of central traffic management software are available that are easier to use; could detect,


5

quickly diagnose and correct system problems; and, provide more robust reporting. In general, they operate in more effective and efficient manners. The newer software also provides a more secured interface and supports features such as emergency and/or incident response, transit signal priority and full set of customizable features to fit individual needs of the City. A comprehensive search is needed to review these software packages in order to determine which of them best suits the needs of the Salt Lake City area’s traffic signal system. In our review of the existing Salt Lake City’s traffic signal timing, we found the City is demonstrating “good practice” strategies and philosophies while providing balanced levels of service to all modes of travel in its approach to traffic signal operations. The strategies and philosophies, that the City is using, are in line with traffic signal timing industry standards provided by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE).


6

1. Introduction

KOA Corporation was retained by the Transportation Division, Salt Lake City to develop traffic signal management and synchronization recommendations to reduce traffic delays, pollutant emissions and petroleum fuel consumption. The project is in keeping with the general guideline, established by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), an international educational and scientific association of transportation professional organization, to retime signal networks on a 3 to 5 year interval. The most recent timing update for the network had been conducted by UDOT and the City in the Fall of 2009. The goal of the 2009 effort was to optimize the coordination progress and decrease the delay on the State highways while maintaining coordination with the City streets. Salt Lake City is the central city to 1.8 million inhabitants residing in four counties that make up the Wasatch Front and that are within an hour’s drive from downtown. The majority of Utah’s 2.4 million people live in the Wasatch Front urban corridor, and 20 percent of the state’s total work force commutes to jobs located in the city limits. A significant portion of pollutants from nitrous oxides, volatile organic compounds, carbon monoxide, and small particulate matter in the Salt Lake Valley are produced by on-road vehicles.

As an idle reduction and fuel conservation strategy, this study optimized the city-wide traffic signal operation with a long-term effect of reducing fossil fuel emissions and improving air quality along the Wasatch Front.

It was hoped per the funding application that updating traffic signal timing could save an estimated 32,000 gallons or more of petroleum fuel each year by reducing traffic signal delays and reducing vehicle idling. Community residents will save in gasoline costs due to reduced starting and stopping, and idling. In addition to greenhouse gas emissions reductions, the project is anticipated to reduce volatile organic compounds emissions by more than 300 pounds per year and nitrous oxides emissions by over 400 pounds per year, resulting in air quality improvements. This report summarizes the existing signal operation analysis at the study intersections, development of updated coordination timing plans for each peak period of the day, travel time and delay before and after studies, and other findings.


7

2. Assessment of Existing Conditions

2.1 Roadway Network The study includes a total of 164 signalized intersections in Salt Lake City, east and west between 500 West and 1300 East and north and south between 600 North and 900 South. The signals within the study area are under the jurisdictions of Salt Lake City and the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT). The major study corridors are listed below.

• N Temple • 400 West • S Temple • 300 West • 200 South • West Temple • 300 South • Main • 400 South • State • 500 South • 200 East • 600 South • 300 East • 700 South • 500 East • 800 South • 600 East • 900 South • 700 East • 600 North • 1300 East

Salt Lake City’s street network in downtown CBD is primarily a grid network. The signal spacing varies between 700 feet and 900 feet. Light rail runs on 400 South, the major east-west arterial connecting the downtown CBD to the University of Utah campus.

2.2 Traffic Signal Operation

In 2009 the signals in downtown area were re-timed in a joint effort between the City and UDOT to run 164 traffic signals on the same cycle length and time-of-day schedule. A cycle length of 120 seconds was used for the AM and PM peak periods and a cycle length of 108 seconds was used during the off-peak periods. Some virtual one-way couplets were provided to favor certain directions during the peak hours such as 800 South favors westbound and 900 South favors eastbound. The existing cycle length of study intersections is shown in Appendix A. Opinions about the effectiveness of the re-timing efforts conducted in 2009 have been mixed. Some people have perceived great improvements, while others have expected better performance from the system. As a result, KOA Corporation was hired to, among other tasks, conduct field reviews of the downtown system to analyze whether significant benefits might accrue from further re-timing. The most significant feature of Salt Lake City’s downtown street system, perhaps, is the overall size of an average intersection. The downtown streets are unusually wide, resulting in long crosswalks and accompanying long pedestrian clearance times. Many intersections in the downtown area have simple


8

two phase operation, but some locations provide left turn phases. Some of these provide more efficient protected/permitted left turn phasing, while others provide fully protected left turn phases. These features, coupled with frequent pedestrian crossing usage, result in the need to use relatively long traffic signal cycles at the larger intersections. The intersection that appears to require the longest natural cycle length is State Street at 400 South. This intersection provides six lanes on each street, left turn phasing on all approaches and a light rail line in the median. This intersection and similarly large locations probably have dictated the use of the 108-second off peak cycle and the 120-second peak cycle length used throughout the downtown area.

2.3 Queuing Observation During the off peak period, overall traffic conditions appear orderly and uncongested. A detailed study of traffic volumes and alternative signal operation were conducted to determine whether significant improvements can be derived. Different cycle length combinations were tested along some of the less important streets that do not provide frequent left turn phases. The travel time and delay after study was conducted to evaluate whether the faster local operation will compensate for loss of coordinated movement between smaller and larger intersections. During peak periods, there is considerably more visible traffic congestion. The existing system-wide 120-second cycle results in relatively long queues of vehicles on heavily used through movements Optimization of signal timing will not likely improve this condition substantially, but minor improvements may be achievable. The network appears to have excessive stops that can be potentially reduced through timing adjustments. Queues were observed during the PM peak hours along 500 South, a wide one-way street traveling from downtown toward a major freeway interchange. These queues were of the type that can occur when the design coordination speed is higher than the travel speed. Initially slow moving cars were “clipped” by the yellow signal and required to stop until the next cycle. Over the peak period, these vehicles built up queues that were standing at the end of the green phase. During a typical cycle, 10 to 15 vehicles per lane could be stopped at the end of the green phase. These stopped vehicles created longer queues due to approaching vehicles in the next cycle stopping behind them. This further aggravated the travel speed and resulted in more queued vehicles at the end of the cycle. This type of congestion could often be alleviated through minor adjustments in the signal timing, either by slowing down the platoon speed if there is sufficient capacity for the approaching phase, or modifying the timing plan to expect that vehicles will be stopped.

2.4 Traffic Volume The City counted AM, midday, and PM traffic turning movement volumes at 27 study intersections in June 2010. For other locations, the City provided historical traffic counts and estimated volumes for AM, PM, and off-peak periods. KOA conducted field reviews and identified inconsistencies between peak hour traffic volumes in the field and historical data/estimated volumes. KOA manually balanced the


9

traffic volumes at critical locations using Synchro 7 models. The adjusted volumes were reviewed and approved by the City staff as shown in Appendix B.

2.5 Transit Existing light rail and bus run through the following corridors in downtown areas:

• South Temple • 200 South • 400 South • 700 South • 200 West • 400 West • 600 West • Main Street

The Siemens NextPhase traffic signal control program was customized to provide TRAX priority over the local signal operation. As agreed with the City and UDOT, signal timings were held at light rail intersections with minor split or offset adjustments. Six intersections on South Temple, twelve intersections on Main Street, ten intersections on 400 South, and seven light rail intersections fall in this category. During all periods, light rail priority generates negative impacts on signal synchronization along north-south streets, especially for State Street, 700 East, and 1300 East, as well as on the light rail corridors themselves, especially 400 South.

2.6 Bicycles Salt Lake City is recognized as a silver-level Bicycle Friendly Community by the League of American Bicyclists’ Bicycle Friendly Community program. The City continues to take steps to improve bicycle facilities, education, and encouragement. Within the project network, bike lanes are provided on the following streets:

• 200 South • 800 South • 200 West • 300 East • 1300 East

A green shared lane is provided on parts of Main Street, South Temple, and 200 South.

2.7 Uneven Lane Utilization Uneven lane distribution (when one lane is used significantly more than an adjacent lane or lanes) is usually observed at intersections where there are multiple turn lanes and a downstream traffic generator that requires traffic to use one lane more often than the other. During the PM peak hours, a great amount of traffic on 500 S tends to use the first three through lanes on the left to access the freeway. The designed through phase seems not long enough to release arrival traffic. During the peak


10

hours, the yellow signal cuts the last portion of the platoon.

2.8 Light Rail Operation In Salt Lake City, light rail travels through the core part of downtown signal system. At the intersection of Main Street and 400 South, the light rail line splits into two routes – one line heads toward University of Utah and the other trains towards the south of the study area, 13 miles south of downtown Salt Lake City. This intersection is the major bottleneck affecting traffic operations on 400 South between 200 W and State Street, and State Street between 300 S and 500 S. Passage of a light rail train may force signals to cut a traffic platoon affecting operations of auto transportation. At times during peak hours, the stopped vehicles may not be served before the next platoon arrives. The accumulated stopped vehicles can easily queue back to the upstream intersection. This makes traffic signal operation look inefficient and sluggish. The light rail intersections run on a customized controller program that provides priority to the mobility of trains. Frequent passage of rail cars may cause light rail intersections to change order of phases from normal phasing sequence or prematurely truncate the phase duration, allowing rail cars to pass through the intersection with minimal delays. When that happens, the signals take several cycles to transition back to normal operation, interrupting progression for cars. Motorists may experience more stops or delays when they try to cross light rail lines.


11

3. Signal Timing Optimization

The development of new timing plans began with an evaluation of the existing traffic conditions within the project network. The cycle lengths for the intersections along state highways and the light rail were not changed, although minor adjustments to the split or offset were provided as needed. The optimization process was performed by using the Synchro 7.0 software. The Synchro models were further adjusted to improve the Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) performance, based on the knowledge of the traffic characteristics of the network and traffic flow pattern during the different time periods of the day. The evaluation of the existing operation conditions identified several unique features of Salt Lake City downtown network that create challenges to signal coordination: large size intersections resulting in long crosswalks and accompanying long pedestrian clearance interval; light rail traveling through the core part of downtown system and forcing intersections to change order of normal phasing sequence, and protected left turn phases provided at some downtown intersections. 500 South and 600 South carry very heavy traffic during the AM and PM peak hours with the offsets set to favor these two state highways. With the light rail going through most part of 400 South, offset optimizations are limited along north-south city streets. State Street is another state street heavily used by the peak hour commuters. With the light rail crossing at 400 South, it is difficult to achieve stable coordination progression along Main Street. The following items were reviewed during the signal timing optimization:

• Existing queuing conditions • Cross arterial coordination • Queuing conditions of left turn phases • Movements with uneven lane distribution • Potential oversaturated movements • Location of high volume unsignalized intersections • Potential impacts from pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit • Bus stops locations and usage

The signal coordination analysis and development of optimized timing plans consist of the following tasks:

• Review and balance the traffic turning movement volumes • Update and calibrate the existing Synchro models • Evaluate signal grouping and free operation • Evaluate and select cycle lengths • Agency review • Review the split • Optimize the offset • Evaluate the final timing plans


12

3.1 Cycle Length Selection Cycle length selection is a critical step in the developing signal coordination plans. A longer cycle length may provide better progression along the corridors, but may most likely increase side street delay and queuing. On the other hand, decreasing the cycle length to reduce the side street delay may increase the overall delay and number of total stops. For the Salt Lake City downtown area, most intersections operate below saturated conditions. Pedestrian phases generally determine the minimum cycle length at most two-phase intersections. However, accommodating light rail operation requires increase of the cycle length along corridors. For the AM and PM peak periods, KOA concurs in using 120-second cycle length. UDOT intersections are already operating on a 120-second cycle length. Some free-running light rail intersection on Main Street and 400 South are kept as actuated-uncoordinated operation. The uniformity of cycle length would provide for better progression with minimal stops for the entire network. KOA also reviewed the flow profiles of critical intersections to identify the appropriate setting for different time of day operations. The review did not necessitate changes to any time of day operations. For the midday period, the cycle length was reduced at 48 city-maintained intersections to an 81-second cycle. The unusual cycle was selected to harmonize with the existing 108-second cycle length currently set for the State and some major City intersections. It is also close to the natural cycle length of the 48 city-maintained intersections. Intersections with the two different cycle lengths (81 seconds versus 108 seconds) would reach a common base point every four cycles (324 seconds). Further reduction below 81 seconds cycle is not feasible at most of the City intersections while accommodating pedestrian crossing times. Multiple-phase intersections were verified to operate at the lower cycle length without violating the minimum green time for any of the phases. The cycle length for each peak period is shown in Appendix C. At the City’s request, the following signal timing parameters were maintained:

• Yellow and All Red intervals • Pedestrian Walk and Flashing Don’t Walk (FDW) intervals • Vehicle Extension • Time-of-Day Schedule

3.2 Fine-Tuning of Proposed Timing Plans KOA engineers reviewed the signal system operation in the field to insure that all timing plans were inputted properly during all timing periods, as the volumes of many interior intersections in the network were based on estimation of the upstream flows and might not accurately reflect the actual flows. Furthermore, the timing plans generated by any computer model must be fine-tuned by engineers to best accommodate real-world conditions. During the implementation and fine-tuning, KOA engineers also identified some intersections that were not running according to the timing plans and some were in transition from time to time. Discrepancies could be due to the aging traffic signal system. Observed issues were reported to the City staff.


13

4. System Wide Improvement

The City conducted a travel time and delay “before” study along 46 corridors in 2008 and 2009. KOA summarized and tabulated the field data. KOA then selected 16 corridors to conduct a GPS-based floating car travel time and delay after study in May 2011. Tru-Traffic software was used to collect and process the survey data. A total of three runs were conducted for each direction of the corridor for each peak time period. The corridor-based measures of effectiveness (MOE’s) performance were summarized as:

• Average Travel Time (seconds): the total elapsed time spent driving along the study corridor from the first intersection to the last intersection. This study reports the average travel time of three runs.

• Average Speed (miles per hour): the average distance a vehicle travels within the measured amount of time.

• Number of Stops: the average number of stops during three survey runs. • Total Delay (seconds): the time difference between actual travel time and desired travel time.

The network-wide fuel consumption savings and emission decrease are reported by Synchro models using the following measures:

• Fuel Consumption (Pounds) • Carbon Monoxide Emission (Pounds) • Oxides of Nitrogen Emission (Pounds) • Volatile Organic Compounds Emission (Pounds)

The detailed travel time and delay after study reports are included in Appendix D.

4.1 Corridor-Based Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs) As show in Table 1, 16 corridors were surveyed during the weekday AM, midday, and PM peak periods. Tables 2 through 4 compared the results of before and after studies for each corridor. Optimized timing plans improved average MOE’s by approximately 8% to 17% during the peak periods.

• During the AM peak period, the optimized timing plans improved traffic operation by decreasing average travel time of 16 corridors by 8%, increasing average speed by 8%, decreasing number of stops by 17%, and decreasing total delay of each run by 14%.

• During the midday period, the comparison shows 6% reduction in average travel time of 16 runs, with the average number of stops decreasing by 3% and total delay decreasing by 12%. The average speed increased by 3%.

• During the PM peak period, the comparison reports 8% reduction in the travel time, 14% reduction in number of stops, and 11% reduction in total delay, with average speed increasing by 5%.


14

Table 1 – List of After Study Corridors

No. Corridor From To

1 South Temple 200 West 1200 East

2 100 South Main St 1300 East

3 200 South 450 West 700 East




7 400 West 600 South 900 North

8 300 West 800 South 600 North

9 200 West 900 South North Temple

10 West Temple 800 South North Temple

11 State Street 900 South North Temple

12 200 East 900 South South Temple




16 900 East 800 South 100 South

• It should be noted that three corridors were under construction during the travel time and delay “after” runs: State Street between 300 South and 500 South, 400 West north of North Temple, and 200 East between 400 South and 500 South. As these on-going constructions slowed down traffic flow and caused extra stops, traffic platoons could not follow the designed progression through multiple sets of intersections. The worst case was observed on State Street northbound between 300 South and 500 South during the AM and Midday peak periods. Northbound drivers had to make hasty lane changes before 400 South to avoid the closed curb lane. The northbound through phases could not serve all arriving traffic after the lane drop The last part of platoon was cut off and queued up between 400 South and 500 South. Vehicles often needed to wait more than one cycle to go through this segment. This explained why the after runs reported worse performance on those corridors.

• During the fine-tuning and implementation process, KOA also identified offsets that were

drifting at some intersections on State Street and 700 East during the peak hours. This worsened the after run results on these two corridors.


15

Table 2 – Travel Time and Delay Study, AM Peak

Travel Time (sec) Average Speed (mph) Number of Stops Total Delay (sec) Corridor

Before After Change Before After Change Before After Change Before After Change

EB 508 395 -22% 15.5 19.4 25% 5.2 4.3 -17% 205 139 -32% South Temple WB 419 420 0% 18.5 19.1 3% 6 5.3 -12% 133 147 11%

EB 388 414 7% 18.9 17.4 -8% 3.6 4.3 19% 132 157 19% 100 South

WB 457 488 7% 15.5 14.6 -6% 5.2 6.3 21% 179 225 26% EB 508 470 -7% 12.4 13.5 9% 7.4 4.7 -36% 256 210 -18%

200 South WB 399 401 1% 16.4 15.7 -4% 3.6 5 39% 158 156 -1% EB 405 336 -17% 13.4 16.5 23% 4.8 3.3 -31% 178 110 -38%

300 South WB 428 389 -9% 12.7 14.8 17% 6.3 4.7 -25% 197 166 -16% EB 557 541 -3% 15.7 16.2 3% 6.8 5.7 -16% 240 229 -5%

800 South WB 578 516 -11% 15 17 13% 7.4 5 -32% 260 230 -12% EB 563 537 -5% 15.5 16.3 5% 6.8 7.3 7% 235 209 -11%

900 South WB 564 459 -19% 15.6 19.3 24% 6.2 4.7 -24% 231 156 -32% NB 401 586 46% 20.3 14 -31% 5.2 5.7 10% 119 276 132%

400 West SB 483 463 -4% 17 17.8 5% 5.6 4.3 -23% 206 165 -20% NB 434 452 4% 18.2 21.5 18% 5.4 4 -26% 180 160 -11%

300 West SB 395 404 2% 19.6 23.7 21% 4.8 3.3 -31% 147 120 -18%


16

Table 2 – Travel Time and Delay Study, AM Peak (Continued)



NB 427 331 -22% 12.8 17.7 38% 6.4 4 -38% 191 122 -36% 200 West

SB 542 478 -12% 10 11.6 16% 7 6.3 -10% 323 280 -13% NB 482 379 -21% 9.7 12.5 29% 7.2 4.7 -35% 278 182 -35%

West Temple SB 379 351 -7% 12.5 13.3 6% 5.4 4.7 -13% 185 176 -5%

NB 403 408 1% 14.8 14.9 1% 3.8 6 58% 195 198 2% State Street

SB 318 226 -29% 17.7 25.5 44% 3.6 2 -44% 94 47 -50%

NB 259 230 -11% 19.2 17.6 -8% 3 3.3 10% 77 91 18% 200 East

SB 283 252 -11% 17.5 17 -3% 3 3 0% 103 108 5% NB 521 419 -20% 9.3 11.2 20% 6.8 5 -26% 313 228 -27%

300 East SB 272 280 3% 18.4 17 -8% 3.6 3 -17% 86 107 24% NB 469 320 -32% 10.7 15.7 47% 6.2 3.7 -40% 282 134 -52%

400 East SB 438 352 -20% 11.2 14.2 27% 6.2 5 -19% 245 151 -38% NB 242 264 9% 20.9 19.1 -9% 3 3 0% 69 73 6%

700 East SB 225 246 9% 22.7 19.7 -13% 2.6 3 15% 63 72 14% NB 281 180 -36% 18.2 23 26% 2.6 0.5 -81% 97 42 -57%

900 East SB 260 193 -26% 19.3 21.1 9% 3 1.5 -50% 75 63 -16%

Average 415 381 -8% 16 17 8% 5 4 -17% 179 154 -14%


17

Table 3 – Travel Time and Delay Study, Midday Peak



EB 480 425 -11% 15.9 18 13% 6 5 -17% 200 145 -28% South Temple

WB 443 447 1% 17.5 17.1 -2% 5.2 7 35% 165 150 -9% EB 375 316 -16% 19.7 23.7 20% 3.8 3.3 -13% 107 64 -40%

100 South WB 422 461 9% 17.7 16 -10% 4.4 6.3 43% 143 187 31% EB 602 503 -16% 12.2 14.7 20% 8 6.7 -16% 308 209 -32%

200 South WB 405 516 27% 18.4 14.4 -22% 3.4 6.7 97% 139 238 71% EB 470 424 -10% 14 15.4 10% 7.2 5.7 -21% 199 139 -30%

300 South WB 564 472 -16% 11.5 13.9 21% 7.2 6 -17% 291 188 -35% EB 431 476 10% 18.8 16.8 -11% 4.4 5.8 32% 141 187 33%

800 South WB 439 373 -15% 18.2 21.7 19% 5 3.5 -30% 156 94 -40% EB 431 352 -18% 16.7 20.2 21% 5.4 4 -26% 159 92 -42%

900 South WB 428 384 -10% 16.9 19.4 15% 5 4 -20% 154 139 -10% NB 337 389 15% 17.8 15.4 -13% 3.6 3.7 3% 108 165 53%

400 West SB 325 350 8% 18.6 17.4 -6% 4.6 3.3 -28% 96 119 24% NB 447 439 -2% 17.1 17.3 1% 5.8 5 -14% 188 171 -9%

300 West SB 300 327 9% 26.3 23.2 -12% 1.6 3 88% 56 71 27%


18

Table 3 – Travel Time and Delay Study, Midday Peak (Continued)



NB 460 429 -7% 12.2 12.8 5% 7 6 -14% 241 222 -8% 200 West

SB 460 390 -15% 12.2 14 15% 6.6 6.8 3% 239 166 -31% NB 366 390 7% 13.7 11.9 -13% 4.8 5.7 19% 157 200 27%

West Temple SB 480 395 -18% 10.2 12 18% 6.2 5 -19% 272 210 -23%

NB 343 367 7% 16 15.3 -4% 3.4 5 47% 132 172 30% State Street

SB 265 246 -7% 22.3 22.5 1% 2.8 3 7% 62 58 -6%

NB 252 314 25% 17.5 13 -26% 3.4 5 47% 83 147 77% 200 East

SB 301 263 -13% 14.4 15.5 8% 4 4.3 8% 141 99 -30% NB 412 352 -15% 12.1 13.8 14% 5.6 5 -11% 200 134 -33%

300 East SB 349 289 -17% 14.2 18.4 30% 4.4 3.3 -25% 142 103 -27% NB 408 355 -13% 12 14.2 18% 6.6 5 -24% 220 162 -26%

400 East SB 371 272 -27% 13.3 17.9 35% 5.8 3.7 -36% 181 86 -52% NB 279 248 -11% 18.4 19.6 7% 3.4 2.7 -21% 112 72 -36%

700 East SB 232 228 -2% 21.3 21.9 3% 2.8 3 7% 71 63 -11% NB 202 199 -1% 18.7 19.1 2% 2.6 1.7 -35% 58 58 0%

900 East SB 200 206 3% 19.9 18.5 -7% 1.8 3 67% 55 64 16%

Average 384 362 -6% 16 17 4% 5 5 -3% 156 137 -12%


19

Table 4 – Travel Time and Delay Study, PM Peak



EB 377 377 0% 20.7 20.8 0% 4.2 4 -5% 95 117 23% South Temple

WB 458 384 -16% 16.6 19.8 19% 5.8 5.3 -9% 154 104 -32% EB 272 309 14% 21.1 18.5 -12% 1.2 3.3 175% 68 100 47%

100 South WB 404 364 -10% 14 15.8 13% 4.4 3.7 -16% 190 155 -18% EB 519 438 -16% 13.1 15.6 19% 6 5 -17% 217 185 -15%

200 South WB 464 464 0% 14.9 15.2 2% 6 5 -17% 200 207 4% EB 390 404 4% 15.3 14.9 -3% 3.2 4.7 47% 150 159 6%

300 South WB 616 576 -6% 9.7 10.5 8% 7.6 7.7 1% 316 301 -5% EB 548 570 4% 16.1 15.4 -4% 6.2 5 -19% 219 262 20%

800 South WB 502 488 -3% 17.3 17.8 3% 5.8 4.3 -26% 179 191 7% EB 547 580 6% 16.1 14.9 -7% 6.2 6.7 8% 209 252 21%

900 South WB 548 564 3% 16.1 16.2 1% 7.4 6 -19% 206 245 19% NB 418 295 -29% 14.2 11.3 -20% 4.4 2.3 -48% 191 142 -26%

400 West SB 316 293 -7% 19.2 20.9 9% 3.6 2.7 -25% 83 79 -5% NB 493 454 -8% 19.5 21 8% 4.8 3.5 -27% 198 155 -22%

300 West SB 466 396 -15% 20.6 24.2 17% 4.4 2.3 -48% 165 110 -33%


20

Table 4 – Travel Time and Delay Study, PM Peak (Continued)



NB 452 540 19% 12.1 10.1 -17% 5.6 6.7 20% 238 324 36% 200 West

SB 532 362 -32% 10.2 15.3 50% 6.8 5.3 -22% 317 141 -56% NB 445 440 -1% 11.5 11 -4% 6.3 6.7 6% 210 245 17%

West Temple SB 765 398 -48% 7 12.4 77% 8.2 4.7 -43% 556 208 -63%

NB 367 265 -28% 15.2 21.1 39% 4.4 2.7 -39% 148 67 -55% State Street

SB 264 404 53% 20.5 13.5 -34% 2.4 4.7 96% 67 193 188%

NB 284 340 20% 15.2 12.2 -20% 4.2 3.7 -12% 112 185 65% 200 East

SB 337 195 -42% 12.9 21.2 64% 4.5 2 -56% 156 45 -71% NB 354 309 -13% 14.3 15.7 10% 5 4 -20% 152 109 -28%

300 East SB 414 315 -24% 12.1 15.7 30% 5.6 3.7 -34% 208 116 -44% NB 467 414 -11% 10.9 11.8 8% 6 5 -17% 275 224 -19%

400 East SB 357 302 -15% 14 16.8 20% 4.2 3.3 -21% 179 129 -28% NB 240 167 -30% 20.7 23 11% 2.8 1 -64% 64 51 -20%

700 East SB 241 229 -5% 20.5 17.2 -16% 2.2 2.7 23% 80 96 20% NB 207 223 8% 18.7 17.7 -5% 2.8 1.7 -39% 63 69 10%

900 East SB 230 310 35% 16.6 12.3 -26% 3.2 3.7 16% 80 166 108%

Average 415 380 -8% 16 16 5% 5 4 -14% 180 160 -11%


21

4.2 Network-Wide Measures of Effectiveness Improvements The tables in the previous subsection show improvements for the average run, without adjusting for the different traffic volumes on each street. Network-wide total delay and total stops improvements are reported by the Synchro Models and compared in Table 5 with each street weighted according to their current traffic volumes. With the optimized timing plans, total delay within downtown area was reduced by 14% for AM Peak, 10% for Midday Period, and 7% for PM Peak. The number of total stops was reduced by 8% for AM Peak, 7% for Midday Period, and 8% for PM Peak.

Table 5 – Network-Wide Measures of Effectiveness Improvements Total Delay (hr) Total Stops (#)

Time Period Before After Percent

Change Before After Percent Change

AM 1876 1616 -14% 155799 144101 -8%

Midday 1467 1319 -10% 151841 140711 -7%

PM 2154 1995 -7% 176230 162467 -8%

4.3 Fuel Consumption and Pollutant Emission Minimizing fuel consumption and related pollutant emissions are prime goals of this project. Fuel consumption is closely related to traveling distance, delay and stop/idle time at each intersection. For a vehicle trip of a given length, the number of stops, acceleration and deceleration cycles, and speed changes can affect Carbon Monoxide (CO), Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx), and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Emissions. Signal timing plans were optimized to reduce fuel consumption and pollutant emissions by minimizing system-wide delay and number of stops, and providing higher and steadier cruise speeds along study corridors. Table 6 presents the fuel consumption savings and emissions decrease achieved by optimizing traffic signal operation for each peak period.

Table 6 – Peak Hour Fuel Consumption and Pollutant Emission Comparison

Peak Hour Network MOE Existing Optimized Reduction Fuel Consumed (gal) 4715 4437 278 (5.9%) CO Emissions (lbs) 728 683 42 (5.8%)

NOx Emissions (lbs) 141 132 9 (6.3%) AM


NOx Emissions (lbs) 126 121 4 (3.5%) Midday


NOx Emissions (lbs) 159 152 7 (4.2%) PM

VOC Emissions (lbs) 190 181 9 (4.7%)


22

Based on a literature review, which included the document titled Methodology for the 2009 Urban Mobility Report, David Schrank, 2009, KOA used the following methodology to calculate the difference in the annual fuel consumption due to the traffic signal optimization for the downtown area:

• Difference in the fuel consumption should be based on the change in fuel consumption during AM, Mid-day and PM peak hours only. The other times of the day will remain unaffected by the recommended traffic signal coordination plans.

• The hourly gasoline consumption rate for the corresponding peak hours (AM, Mid-day, and PM) was extracted from Synchro model output.

• The number of hours that should be considered in the fuel consumption calculations are as follows:

− AM Peak Hour: 2.0 hours − Mid-day Peak Hour: 2.0 hours − PM Peak Hour: 2.0 hours

• Annual fuel consumption calculations are based on 250 weekdays and 115 weekend days. • Normally, the weekend traffic volumes are lower than weekday traffic. Therefore, the weekend

fuel consumption calculations should be based on the reduced fuel consumption rate, if the coordination plan is desired to be implemented.

Table 7 – Annual Fuel Consumption Reduction Daily Reduction Annual Reduction

Fuel Savings (gal) 1348 337,000

CO Emissions Reductions (lbs) 203 50,700

NOx Emissions Reductions (lbs) 40 10,000

VOC Emissions Reductions (lbs) 53 13,200 Table 7 presents the annual fuel consumption and emissions reduction as reported by Synchro models. The calculation only includes weekdays and assumes two hours for each peak period and 250 weekdays a year. With the traffic signal timing operation, fuel consumption is reduced by 337,000 gallons per year within the downtown area, which exceeded the reduction target of 32,000 gallon per year by a factor of ten. The daily and annual reduction in pollutant emissions also greatly exceeded their respective reduction targets.


23

4.4 Economic Analysis The motorist annual cost savings associated with signal timing optimization efforts within the study network were estimated using the following assumptions:

• Vehicle delay cost is $10.00 per vehicle hour. • Vehicle stop saving is $0.014 per vehicle stop Fuel cost is $3.00 per gallon

Based on the network-wide measure of effectiveness improvements identified in Table 5, the savings associated with decrease of total delay and total stops are presented in Table 8. A total of $3,091,137 will be saved per year by decreasing total delay and total stops within the study network through signal optimization efforts.

Table 8 – Motorist Cost Savings Associated with Decreased Delay and Stops

Peak Hour Before After Decrease

Peak Hour (hr)

Daily Decrease

Annual Savings

Total

Total Delay

AM 1876 1616 260 2

Midday 1467 1319 148 2

PM 2154 1995 159 2

1134 $2,835,000

Total Stops

AM 155799 144101 11698 2

Midday 151841 140711 11130 2

PM 176230 162467 13763 2

73182 $256,137

$3,091,137

By including the results of fuel consumption analysis, the total economic savings were calculated in Table 9. A conservative value of $3 per gallon of fuel was used for this analysis. Motorists will save $1,011,000-worth of fuel per year. As shown in Table 9, the total annual savings is $4,102,137. The cost of this project is $200,000. This yielded a one-year benefit-to-cost ratio of 21:1. Traffic signal retiming efforts are recommended by ITE to be conducted at least every three years. The three-year benefit is $12,306,411, while the project cost remains $200,000. This yields a three-year benefit-to-cost ratio of 62:1. It is assumed that the signals are properly maintained and monitored at all times, Given the tremendous benefits to cost ratio, it is important that the City allocate sufficient resources to maintain the city’s traffic signal system.


24

Table 9– Benefit-to-Cost Ratio Analysis Annual Fuel Consumption Reduction (gallon) 337,000

Dollar Value per Gallon $3.00

One-Year Benefit $1,011,000

Savings by Decrease of Delay and Stops $3,091,137

Total Annual Savings $4,102,137

Project Cost $200,000

Benefit-to-Cost Ratio 21:1

Three-Year Benefit $12,306,411

Three-Year Benefit-to-Cost Ratio 62:1


25

5. Recommendations for a Three to Five Years Re-Timing Effort

A traffic signal timing update every three year provides significant direct benefits for the traveling public. Many factors contribute to the need for updates. The major factors are listed below:

• Land use changes • Population growth • Change in flow profiles (volume and classification) • New MUTCD requirements related to signal timing • Increases in the rate of crashes along major corridors • Traffic signal equipment changes, including a new signal system

Optimal timed signals along major corridors minimize the diversion of traffic to local and residential streets, improving safety and traffic conditions. They also lead to reduced fuel consumption, reduced emissions, and improved air quality. Currently, the City maintains a database of the traffic signals, including controller type and history of updates. However, the City does not have enough resource to maintain a Performance Measure of Effectiveness (MOE) database to track the operational performance within the City’s roadway network. We recommend that the City budget adequate staff resource to conduct survey of performance MOE once every other year. The survey of performance MOE will also help in identifying areas where signal retiming efforts should be initiated. Based on the NCHRP 409 Traffic Signal Retiming Practices in the U.S. on average, 26 person hours are required to conduct signal retiming per intersection. A staffing level of five in the City’s TCC is needed to maintain operational and safety performance of the City’s roadway network and retiming of signals in three-year intervals.

5.1 Agency Survey

Many cities throughout the country are benefiting from efficient traffic signal operation within their communities and across jurisdictional boundaries. Listed in Table 10 are four other cities which are considered “comparable” to Salt Lake City in terms of population and population density. A summary of the Traffic Signal Operation Survey is presented in Appendix E.

Table 10 – Selected Cities for Traffic Signal Operation Survey

TCC City State Population

Pop Density (Per Sq.

Mile)

Signals Total Staffing

I/S Per Staffing

Yes Salt Lake City Utah 186,440 1,678 184(1) 7(2) 27 Yes Tallahassee Florida 181,376 1,809 350 13 27 No Amarillo Texas 190,695 1,917 293 14 21 Yes Knoxville Tenn 178,874 1,816 393 19 21 No Little Rock Ark 193,524 1,624 350 10 35

Note: (1) Number of the City intersections including non-system signals (2) Two in TCC and Five in Traffic Signal Maintenance


26

Four comparable cities were phone interviewed in June 2011 by KOA staff to answer 10 questions as summarized in Appendix E. The number of traffic signals operated in those four cities range from 293 to 393. Tallahassee, Amarillo and Knoxville have full control of traffic signals within the city boundary. Little Rock does not maintain County’s or State’s traffic signals, but provides timing plans for traffic signals within the city boundaries. Out of the four surveyed cities, Little Rock is the only city that has a light rail operation. However, its operation is far smaller in distance covered and patrons served compared to the light rail operation in Salt Lake City.

5.2 Staffing Needs Staffing needs for traffic signal system operations are discussed in several literature documents. As shown in the Table 11, FHWA Traffic Signal Timing Manual provides general guidelines on staffing needs for a traffic signal system as it relates to signal retiming.

Table 11 – Summary of Staffing Needs*

Position 1 to 50 Traffic Signals

51 to 100

Traffic Signals

101 to 200

Traffic Signals

201 to 500

Traffic Signals

501 to 1000

Traffic Signals

Traffic Signal Engineer 0 to 1 1 1 to 2 2 to 5 5 to 10 Traffic Signal Analyst/Technician 0 to 1 0 to 1 1 1 to 3 3 to 5 ITS Engineer - - 0 to 1 1 1 to 3 Traffic Signal Maintenance Technician 1 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 7 7 to 17 17 to 33 Electronic Specialists 1 1 1 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 9 TMC Operators - - 2 2 to 4 4 to 9 Public Relations Coordinator 0 to 1 0 to 1 1 1 2

Note: * FHWA Traffic Signal Timing Manual The ITE “Traffic Control System Operations” manual suggests that a traffic signal system should have one traffic engineer per 75 to 100 traffic signals and one signal technician per 40 to 50 traffic signals or other field devices. An NCHRP report (Synthesis 245) also suggests 38 to 43 signals per technician. The manual also provides staffing guidelines for a continuously operated TMC which includes one center manager, two supervisors, and five system operators. The unique physical and operational characteristics of Salt Lake City’s signal system may require more resources than that of a typical city with similar number of signals. The recommended staff resource for the Traffic Control Center of Salt Lake City is summarized in Table 12. To have adequate resources to handle daily operations, special events and retiming of signals on a scheduled interval, two new engineers and one additional operator are recommended to operate the 184-intersection signal system. The


27

additional operator would replace a position lost due to budget constraints. If the recommendation is followed, the TCC would have a total of 5 people, including the Director.

Table 12 – Recommended Staff Resource for Traffic Control Center

Staff Resource Traffic Signal

Engineer

ITS Engineer

TCC Operators Total

Per FHWA Guidelines 1 to 2 0 to 1 2 3 to 5

Existing 0 0 1 1

Recommended Additional Staff 2 0 1 3

Total 2 0 2 4

5.3 Traffic Signal System Improvements KOA recommends the following measures to improve the traffic signal system performance:

5.3.1 Trouble-Shoot Signal Transition Problems

The review of current signal system operations identified that some city intersections running with customized pedestrian logic may cause signal yield point drift when a controller loses the detection on minor streets. The City staff is working with Econolite engineers toward solving this problem. A few of the UDOT intersections were found to behave differently in the field to what is shown on the central i2 system. UDOT staff may need to check the controller status in the field. Routine review and troubleshooting of signal operations are recommended to keep the signal system efficiently working as designed. 5.3.2 Consistent Pedestrian Crossing Operation

Pedestrian push buttons are provided at most signals in the core CBD area, while at most intersections outside the CBD area, pedestrian push buttons are not installed. Although the pedestrian volumes are low at these intersections outside CBD, the signals are timed to accommodate pedestrian crossing. Due to the size of the intersections, a long cycle length has to be maintained, which create seemingly long delays, especially during off-peak hours. It is recommended that the City allocate funds to install pedestrian push buttons at these intersections so that the current cycle lengths can be reduced with the benefits of reducing delays for motorists.


28

5.3.3 Traffic Data Collection

Traffic volume data is important to network-wide signal operation optimization efforts. However, the data collection can be costly and time intensive. This project estimated traffic turning volumes at a great number of intersections in Synchro models. For the future operation efforts, the survey of performance MOE can help in identifying areas where traffic data needs to be updated to justify and support signal re-timing efforts. Field fine-tuning efforts identified inconsistencies between real-time traffic and estimation at some intersections. For future signal re-timing efforts, traffic count stations need to be installed to collect data to track changes of the flow profiles at major corridors. Three categories of traffic data should be considered during the data collection:

• 24-Hour tube counts can be used to evaluate the number of timing plans used during the weekdays and weekend, to decide when to transition from one timing plan to the next, and to develop adjustment factors for some timing periods without conducting other turning movement counts. Tube counts should be collected at critical locations on, but not limited to, the following corridors: − State − 700 East − 1300 East − North Temple − 400 South − 500 South − 600 South − 900 South

• Turning movement counts are typically collected at each of the study intersections in consideration of re-timing. Depending on the traffic patterns along the streets, turning movement counts are often conducted during peak periods: the weekday morning, midday, and afternoon peak hours. Tube counts should be used to identify each peak period for collecting the counts, as well as for developing adjustment factors for the weekend volume. Traffic volumes may be higher or more critical during the weekend at some locations, although that has not been observed to be the case in the Salt Lake City downtown area.

• Travel time and delay runs can be used to review the signal operation performance before and after the new timing plans are implemented. The travel time and delay runs can be collected by driving along the study corridors and recording the delay, running time, and stops using GPS-based equipment. Travel time and delay can be reported to elected officials and the public when doing signal timing optimization. The runs are also good to monitor traffic to determine the quality of existing signal operations and the need for retiming efforts. Salt Lake City is maintaining a comprehensive travel time delay runs database within the downtown area.


29

This project conducted after runs for 16 corridors: three runs for each direction each peak period.

5.3.4 Cross-jurisdictional Traffic Signal Re-Timing

The joint efforts from the City and UDOT have been contributing to the improvements of system-wide signal operations in the downtown area. For the future signal re-timing efforts, the City, UDOT and UTA should jointly discuss operational improvements at intersections with light rail operations. 5.3.5 Newer Central Traffic Management Software

Siemens i2 Central Traffic Management Software (TMS) has been used to manage 755 traffic signals in the Salt Lake Metropolitan area, encompassing three counties, for the past 12 years. In the near future, this software will no longer be supported by the manufacturer and will need to be replaced. Newer generations of central traffic management software are available that are easier to use; could detect, quickly diagnose and correct system problems; and, provide more robust reporting. In general, they operate in more effective and efficient manners. The newer software also provides a more secured interface and supports features such as emergency and/or incident response, transit signal priority and full set of customizable features to fit individual needs of the City. A comprehensive search is needed to review these software packages in order to determine which of them best suits the needs of the Salt Lake City area’s traffic signal system.


30

6. Performance Comparisons with Three Other Cities

There are several features that are unique to Salt Lake City that could not be found in other cities in the U.S. The most significant feature, perhaps, is the overall size of the average intersection. The downtown streets are unusually wide, resulting in long crosswalks and accompanying long pedestrian clearance times. Many intersections in the core and peripheral downtown area have simple two-phase operation, but some locations provide left turn phases. Some of these provide more efficient protected/permitted left-turn operation, while other left turn phases are fully protected. Outside of the core downtown area, many large intersections have no pedestrian push buttons. These features result in the need to use relatively a long traffic signal cycle which, in turn, necessitates longer waits at the intersections. Furthermore, the light rail operation that runs on Main Street and 400 South and cuts through the downtown area features traffic signal controllers that provide priority to minimize delays for the light rail operation, possibly at the expense of motor vehicular and pedestrian traffic. All these features constrain traffic signal operation and re-timing efforts within Salt Lake City downtown area. Downtown networks of three other cities were selected for comparison. They are the City of Honolulu, Hawaii, City of Louisville, Kentucky and City of Santa Monica, California. Like Salt Lake City, the three cities have traffic management centers that allow for monitoring and instant timing updates from its respective center. The average size of their intersections is smaller than that of Salt Lake City, better representing what one finds in other U.S cities. Pedestrian traffic in the cities of Santa Monica and Honolulu is significantly higher than Salt Lake City. There are significantly more one-way streets in downtown Louisville than the other three cities. Within Louisville’s project study area, there are 26 corridors, of which 18 of them are either one-way or partial one-way streets. One-way streets are more efficient movers of traffic and provide for higher travel speeds than two-way streets. Table 13 below summarizes the Measures of Effectiveness (MOE’s) of the four cities.

Table 13 – Measures of Effectiveness (MOE’s) of Four Cities

City State No. of I/S in the Network

Average Speed (mph) Delay/Int Stops/Int

AM 173 17 9.3 833 Salt Lake City

PM 173 16 11.3 939 AM 74 12 10.7 997

Honolulu PM 74 10 15.4 1117 AM 60 14 6.4 733

Santa Monica PM 60 12 11.4 1123 AM 220 20 10.5 n/a

Louisville* PM 220 19.5 13.6 n/a

Note: *Based on a report prepared by Entran, PLC, submitted to the City on October 2009.


31

Despite its relative large intersection size and having light rail operation running through the downtown area, Salt Lake City fares well in comparison with other cities. It has the second highest average speeds for both peak periods. Salt Lake City has the lowest average delay and number of stops during the evening rush hours.


32

7. Conclusions

This report documented the existing traffic signal operation analysis, optimized timing plan development, field fine-tuning and implementation, performance improvement, and fuel consumption savings associated with the signal retiming efforts within the greater CBD area in Salt Lake City. This report also surveyed and compared traffic signal system operation and management of other agencies, and provided the recommendations for the next 3 to 5-year signal retiming efforts. KOA completed the following tasks during this study:

• Attended kick off meeting and collected traffic volume and existing timing plans. KOA manually balanced the traffic volumes at critical locations using Synchro 7 models. The adjusted volumes were reviewed and approved by the City staff.

• Reviewed and updated Synchro networks for AM, midday, and PM peak periods with existing timing plans and balanced turning volumes. Existing downtown signal operation was reviewed in August 2010. Based on the field review, KOA calibrated the existing Synchro networks for three time periods.

• Optimized three signal timing plans for the weekday AM, midday, and PM periods, using calibrated Synchro networks. Different cycle lengths have been tested with the MOE comparison. KOA concurs in using 120-second cycle length for AM and PM peak periods, and proposed partially harmonic cycle lengths of 108 seconds and 81 seconds during the midday period. Minimal changes are recommended to arterial corridors with light rail operation. Splits and offsets are optimized at other intersections accordingly.

• The optimized timing plans were implemented and fine-tuned in May 2011.

• Sixteen corridors were selected to conduct after studies. A total of three runs were conducted for each direction of the corridor for each peak time period.

The conclusions and findings of the study are provided below:

• The physical and operational characteristics of Salt Lake City’s signal system require more staff resources to be adequate for signal system operation maintaining operational and safety performance of the City’s roadway network and retiming of signals in three-year intervals. As a result, KOA recommends hiring two new engineers and one additional operator are recommended to operate the 184-intersection signal system.

• The current Siemens i2 Central Traffic Management Software (TMS), which has been used to

manage traffic signals in the Salt Lake Metropolitan area for the past 12 years, needs to be replaced. In the near future, this software will no longer be supported by the manufacturer.


33

The City, together with UDOT and other users of the software, should begin a comprehensive search for a new software package that best suits the needs of the Salt Lake Metropolitan area’s traffic signal system.

• The corridor-based measures of effectiveness (MOE’s) performance collected were average travel time, average speed, number of stops, and total delay. The optimized timing plans improved average MOE’s by approximately 8% to 17% during the peak periods. The after study showed that the optimized timing plans balanced the Salt Lake City downtown roadway system with other travel modes, such as light rail. The signal coordination favors major corridors with heavy traffic volumes such as Sate Street, 500 South, and 600 South. Meanwhile, the optimized timing plans limit the number of stops and delay on the cross streets and provide better progression along the City corridors.

• In terms of network-wide improvement with the optimized timing plans, total delay within the downtown area was reduced by 14% for AM Peak, 10% for Midday Period, and 7% for PM Peak. The number of total stops was reduced by 8% for AM Peak, 7% for Midday Period, and 8% for PM Peak.

• The Synchro models estimated network-wide fuel consumption, carbon monoxide emission, oxides of nitrogen emission, and volatile Organic compounds emission decreases. With the traffic signal retiming efforts, fuel consumption is reduced by 337,000 gallon per year within the study area, exceeding the reduction target of 32,000 gallon per year by a factor of 10.

• Based on the fuel consumption decrease and MOE improvements, an economic evaluation was conducted to identify a three-year benefit-to-cost ratio of 62:1 achieved by this project.

• KOA recommends the following measures to improve traffic signal system performance: routine review and troubleshooting of signal operations, updating the traffic volume database, cross-jurisdictional traffic signal retiming, and updating to a newer generation of central traffic management system.

Considering the overall size of the intersections, light rail operation and absence of pedestrian push buttons at many intersections in the surrounding downtown area, the current traffic system with optimized cycle length, splits and offsets is operating as well as it possibly can using “good practice” strategy and a philosophy of providing transit priority and balanced service to other travel modes.


APPENDIX A

EXISTING CYCLE LENGTH

Appendix A ExistingCycle Length Timing Plan: AM

E S

tree

t

500

W

550 S

850 S

100 S

900

E90

0 E

900

E90

0 E

300 S300 S300 S300 S 30 E

300 S

200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S

600 S600 S600 S600 S600 S

W-T

empl

eW

-Tem

ple

W-T

empl

eW

-Tem

p le

Uni

vers

ity S

tU

nive

rsity

St

Mai

n M

ain

1300

E13

00 E

1300

E

900 S900 S900 S900 S900 S

700

E70

0 E

700

E

600

E60

0 E

450 S

N-Temple N-Temple N-Temple

400

W4 0

0 W

400

W50 N

S-TempleS-TempleS-TempleS-TempleS-TempleS-Temple

800

E

500 S500 S500 S500 S500 S

South Campus Dr400 S 400 S 400 S 400 S 400 S

700 S

200

W2 0

0 W

200

W

450 S

700 S700 S

300

E30

0 E

300

E30

0 E

300

E

350 S

400

E40

0 E

Sta

teS

tate

Sta

te

500

E50

0 E

500

E50

0 E

400

E40

0 E

400

E

50 W

800

E80

0 E

1100

E11

00 E

150

W

50 S50 E

150 S

250 S

Mai

n

800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S

300

W30

0 W

300

W3 0

0 W

300

W

100 S

100 S100 S100 S100 S100 S

200

E20

0 E

2 00

200

E

500 S500 SUni

vers

ity B

lvd

U

120120

120

120

120

106

94A

120

120

120

120

120

120

77A

60

120

120

120

120

112A

71A

120

71A

120

72A

120

120

120

120

71A 120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

84

70A

120

120

120

60

120

120

120

120

120

120A

120

120

120

120

120

107A

71A

113A

120

73A

120

112A

87A

120

102A

120

94A

120 120 120 120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120 120 125A 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

120 120 120

120 120

120

120

120

120

120

120


E S

tree

t

Bec

k S

t

600 N

Victory Rd

200 N

900 N


400

W4 0

0 W

400

W

50 N

500 N

50 W

300 N

Mai

n

300

W30

0 W

75A

120

60

120 120 120 120

65A

120

120

120

120 120

120

120

Appendix A ExistingCycle Length Timing Plan: Midday

E S

tree

t

500

W

550 S

850 S

900

E90

0 E

900

E90

0 E

300 S300 S300300 S 30 E

300 S

200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S

600 S600 S600 S600 S

W-T

empl

eW

-Tem

ple

W-T

empl

eW

-Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity S

tU

nive

rsity

St

Mai

n M

ain

1300

E13

00 E

900 S900 S900 S900 S900 S

700

E70

0 E

700

E

600

E6 0

0 E

450 S

N-Temple N-Temple

400

W4 0

0 W

50 N

100 S

S-Temple #1S-TempleS-Temple

800

E

500 S500 S500 S500 S

South Campus Dr

400 S 400 S 400 S

700 S

200

W20

0 W

2 00

450 S

700 S 700 S

300

E30

0 E

300

E

350 S

400

E40

0 E

Sta

teS

tate

St a

t e

500

E50

0 E

500

E

400

E40

0 E

50 W

8 00

E80

0 E

1100

E11

00 E

150

W

50 S50 E

150 S

250 S

Mai

n

800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S

S-TempleS-Temple

300

W30

0 W

300

W30

0 W

100 S

100 S100 S100 S

200

E20

0 E

2 00

E

500 SUni

vers

ity B

lvd

U

108108

108

132A

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

77A

47

108

108

108

108

112A

71A

108

71A

108

72A

108

108

108

108

71A 108

108

108

108

108

108

80

80

80

108

108

120

80

108

108

80

80

108

108

108

108

80

80

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

70A

108

94

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

120A

120

108

108

108

108

107A

71A

113A

108

73A

108

112A

87A

64A

102A

108

94A

108 108 108 108

191A

80

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

135A

108 108 110A 108 108 108 108 108 108 108

108 108 108

108 108

108

108

108

108

108

108


E S

tre e

t

900

E

Beck S

t

Beck S

t

Bec

k S

t

600 N

Victory Rd

200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S

W-T

empl

e

200 N

900 N

700

E

600

E

N-Temple N-Temple

400

W40

0 W

400

W

50 N

100 S


800

E

500 N

200

W

Sta

t e

50 W

300 N

150

W

50 S50 E

150 S

Mai

n

S-TempleS-Temple

300

W30

0 W

100 S100 S100 S

108

75A

108

108

108

132A

108

108

108

47

108

108

108

112A

71A

108

71A

108

71A 108

108

108

108

108

120

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108108

108

112A

108

108 108 108 108

90A

65A

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

Appendix A ExistingCycle Length Timing Plan: PM

E S

tree

t

500

W

550 S

850 S

900

E90

0 E

900

E90

0 E

300 S300 S300 S300 S

30 E

300 S

200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S

600 S600 S600 S600600 S

W-T

empl

eW

-Tem

ple

W-T

empl

eW

-Tem

p le

Uni

vers

ity S

tU

nive

rsity

St

Mai

n M

ain

1300

E13

00 E

1300

E

900 S900 S900 S900 S900 S

700

E70

0 E

700

E

600

E60

0 E

450 S


400

W4 0

0 W

400

W50 N

100 S

S-Temple #1S-TempleS-Temple #1S-Temple

800

E

500 S500 S500 S500 S500 S


700 S

200

W2 0

0 W

200

W

450 S

700 S700 S

300

E30

0 E

300

E30

0 E

300

E

350 S

400

E40

0 E

Sta

teS

tate

Sta

te

500

E50

0 E

500

E50

0 E

400

E40

0 E

400

E

50 W

800

E80

0 E

1100

E11

00 E

150

W

50 S50 E

150 S

250 S

Mai

n

800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S

S-TempleS-Temple

300

W30

0 W

300

W3 0

0 W

300

W

100 S

100 S100 S100 S100 S100 S

200

E20

0 E

2 00

200

E

500 S500 SUni

vers

ity B

lvd

U

120120

120

120

120

120

94A

120

120

120

120

120

120

77A

120

120

120

120

120

112A

71A

120

71A

120

72A

120

120

120

120

71A 120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

84

120

84

70A

120

120

120

60

120

120

120

120

120

120A

120

120

120

120

120

107A

71A

113A

120

73A

120

112A

87A

120

102A

120

120

120 120 120 120

191A

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120 120 125A 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

120 120 120

120 120

120

120

120

120

120

120

Appendix A ExistingCycle Length Timing Plan: PM

E S

tree

t

900

E

Beck S

t

Bec

k S

t

600 N

Victory Rd

Victory

200 N

900 N

700

E


400

W4 0

0 W

400

W

50 N

S-TempleS-Temple #1S-Temple

800

E

500 N

2 00

W

300

E

Sta

te

400

E

50 W

300 N15

0 W

50 S50 E

Mai

n

S-TempleS-Temple

300

W30

0 W

120

75A

120

120 120

120

120 112A

71A

71A 120 120 120 120 120120 120120

120 120 120 120

120

60

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120


APPENDIX B

EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS


E S

tree

t

500

W

550 S

850 S

900

E90

0 E

900

E

300 S300 S

30 E

300 S

200 S 200 S 200 S

600 S600 S

W-T

empl

eW

-Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity S

tU

nive

rsity

St

Mai

n

1300

E

900 S900 S900

700

E70

0 E

6 00

E

450 S

N-Temple N-Temple400

W4 0

0 W

50 N

S-TempleS-Temple

500 S500 S

South Campus Dr

700 S

2 00

200

200

W

450 S

700 700 S

300

E30

0 E

350 S

400

E40

0 E

St a

t e

500

E

400

E

50 W

800

E80

0 E

1100

E11

00 E

150

W

50 S

50 E

150 S

250 S

Mai

n

800 S 800 S 800 S

300

W

100 S

100 S

200

E

500 SUni

vers

ity B

lvd

50

50

6076060

1002070

139 91

822107

86773

192

100

250633523

3

50 3 00

50

5020050

2010050

100

150

150

141

350 64

3210633

249017

3 59 43 8

1 00

5 00 50

204020

304030

308030

50 300 50

50150

50

5050150

5 02 00

5 0

50 200 50

150250

50

50200150

50200

100

50 200 50

5015050

5010050

50200

50

5 0 300 5 050

25050

8040050299613

50 250125

50125

505050

1 50

5 0

41 2 50 75

1453955

2423960

37200

18

50 3 00 50

4025040

5010050

50150

5 0

200 16

9288

204540

22150

24

150 50

5025050

5035050

200

50

1 70

160

46 134

150

35046

40027299826

3 23

63

243918

6

60 350

25050

50050

15025050

5 01 50

5 0

50 700

15050

350100

5010050

100

400

50

50 50

50050

50450

100

50

100

100100

10

60204010

60

50

38 61

17769

41

940217

3826

100

90

69 78

12524

24

25155235834

24 100 27

238614

74034

5921

50 100 50

5050050

50400100

107010

120

100 20

6052060

3037020

20100

10

600

500

200

100

700150

100500

50 200 50

5045050

3015030

50100

50

50 300 50

50600

50

5040050

50100

50

50 4 00 80

5030060

5035050

50100

50

200

300

70105070

100

20

2 00

77

2901954

49

2289

27 242 2724

4633

145221

41 05

1 8

80 200 50

5040050

5040050

20100

50

100

200 50

100300100

5025050

50100

50

29 70

75034

135627

50 200 50

5040050

3012030

20100

20

50 270 50

5050050

5040050

50100

50

48 244 59

4225064

3934247

14168

38

100

300

80105050

140

80

50 50

3501500

1505050

50 200 50

5035050

50400150

50100

50

100

150 50

5030050

5020050

50100

50

30 120 30

4036040

2014020

1 01 00

1 0

50 150 30

5035050

5045050

50100

50

50 150 50

3020050

5035050

50100

50

100

260

60100050

9 09 0

15 46 18

24330

9

757615

73514

50 50 50

5030050

8025040

203020

102588

649264

258

168

50 2 50

1 0020

30020

5030050

50100

50

54 381 43

3521023

3447234

1 71 71

2 3

50 400 50

5020040

4035050

50200

50

67 632 30

1491132

1295151

400 50

300800100

50100

20 350 5050

5050

505050

50100

50

60 250 50

5030050

5040050

50100

50

29 252 38

3327733

3126114

157428

150 50 50

103020

80700100

30100

100

450300

38050350500

100450505025

050

200

1100 10050

50250

15010050

50800

50

250

1400 50

4020030

4018040

60900

60

248

1674 85

2411743

6915012

35922

47

100

100 50

50450100

40400405010

050

50 260 50

5015050

50200504014

040

65 272 31

2315743

361789

0186

14

50 360 40

4015050

5015040

40180

50

30 350 5050

35050

505050

50150

20

50 2 50 50

5045050

5040050

50100

50

50 250 50

50150

50

5030050

5 01 00

5 0

50 50 10

40180

40

2017020

301030

239

93

377291

115175

150

300 50

20180

20

505010

20370

20

73 4 84

1 10

2010452

424061540

29

70 600 50

5050

100

5020505 03 5

01 5

0

7 5 250

25050

2050

1005050

50350

100

25 50 50

1015050

5010050

255025

505020

1010050

303060

108 17

2521162

21

1647

1 00

50

75070

50700

50 1 00 50

5015050

503505

505050

50 150 50

5022030

5035050

505050

50 50 50

100500100

5050050

50100

50

100 50

5015050

5010050

300

50

150

109020

020

0 0

0100

0

350

500

300

100

40 40 70

5010050

5020050

100

50100

24 69 9014337

1020024

83 92

50

15 0 50

5045050

5040050505050

450150

150450

7550

200

350

100 10 10050

25050

5030050

5 05 05 0

1 0 400

1010

110

30

100

250 75

401000

40

5060050

50200

50

29 79 65

18295077

37600110845119

1100

700

40 10401000

110

40650190

360

24

100

700

150

100450100

503501007030

020

59 766 55

6413819

3011569

11309

28

100

310

220100

350100

200450150

561

825

10

40 500 60

20010

50300100

601030

40

50 6 00 50

60200100

503020

100

900

50

50 600

15040

17040

5010050

2 00

5 00

5 0

30 707 85

946

7

223624

79478

14

47 641

591370142

275

146

20 800

100150

1300100

2035070

50280

5

172

911

40128872

150

157

650

200

4502750150

50150

150

750 50

15050

405040

50150

50

145

868

291

1723047

19127053

469015

1349 534

315641

19117125

357

22

368

294 53

16600839

425006929

368

52 7

50 500 50

5045050

70400170

400

900

100

1 7 519

16446

13230

824941

259

563

15

150

600

10080

700100

50400505 06 0

05 0

245

1078 210

23130

63

5828126

67502

82

110

1283 86

11799552

6433847

104

434

26

212

1373

46979217

317

279

1300 50

3002250150

100

300

5012

00 30

507030

305030

40250

60

38 793 42

11141830

5141081

32235

33

72 717 31

13542528

3230354

15295

37

1 56

1680 1 3

96669762

90380647886

744

400

1950 10020

10020

7030050

1 00

7 50

1 00

5820

30 57

363360107

331941

19740

25

5020

00 20050

30050

1003001005075

010

0

5021

00 50

50150150

15020050

50800

50

85 6 01

1 98

13497740

38411190

2 02

2 81

2 3

40 600

150100

160050

5030090

100

300

100

27 231 75

1511501102

2734925

2 51 26

2 9

15 102

122

441340

50

46217254826

21 366 25

1201004

24

479812011

76 4

100

200 50

10090050

6045060

50150

70

22 1 87

19

3789140

1552025

12123

21

100

400

10070

80050

5040050

50250

50

50 100 50

5080050

500505 05 05 0

50 10 40

30850

30

150350100105050

65 441

46

95941

944523

47188

29

130

250

1501350100

200

100

50 150

501300150

5050

50 50 1001000

0

4045040

502050

200

100200

325050

50200

63 47

1402690

20

2138

136

567 67

471680

29

1940648

2 99 22 0

117

663

18162560

4496

1 00

1 00

5003750100

2060

50 100 50

501550100

5050050

906030

20 30

50180050

100

200

2 44

41

4653426

44

103

203


E S

tree

t

Bec

k S

t

600 N

Victory Rd

W-T

empl

e200 N

900 N

N-Temple N-Temple

400

W40

0 W

400

W

50 N

500 N

St a

te

50 W

Mai

n

300

W

50 400 0

105010

10100045

00

50 200 50

10020020

10010015015

025

015

0

16010

025

0 7540

100040

5060050

50200

50

29 79 65

182950

77

37600110

845119

1100

700

40 10401000

110

40650190

360

24

30350400

0

450

150

250 50

2010

250

150300100

201100

20

50 300

10050

10050

00010

012

5015

0

50 350 50

50200

50

505050

501300

50

100

310

220100

350100

200450150

561

825

10

368

294 53

16600839

425006929

368

527

550

1400

90 300 50

200200200

5035050

7 03 00

5 0


E S

tree

t

500

W

550 S

850 S

900

E90

0 E

900

900

E

300 S300300300 S

30 E

300 S

200 S 200 200 200 200 S 200 S

600 S600600600

W-T

empl

eW

-Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity S

tU

nive

rsity

St

Mai

n

1300

E

900 S900 S900900900 S

700

E70

070

0 E

600

6 00

E

450 S

N-Temple N-Temple400

W40

04 0

0 W

50 N

100

S-Temple #1S-Temple #1

800

500 S500500500

South Campus Dr400 400 400

700 S

200

200

200

W

450 S

700 700

300

E30

0 E

300

350 S

400

E40

0 E

St a

t e

500

E50

050

0

400

E40

0

50 W

800

E80

0 E

1100

E11

00 E

150

W

50 S

50 E

150 S

250 S

Mai

n

800 S 800 800 800 S 800 S

300

W30

030

030

0

100 S

100 S100100

200

E20

02 0

0

500 SUni

vers

ity B

lvd

20 20

150750100

2008040

152 96

591126

90679

219 69

85806439

5

6 0 380 6 0

5020050

7018050

80390

80

204

299 75

6719476

4427167

5 83 07

8 2

5 0 500

5 0

5010050

5015050

50400

50

50 300 50

50150

50

5050150

1 00

3 00

5 0

40 180 40

100700

50

100700100

50280

100

50 200 50

5025050

5020050

50200

50

98 1 3 231

13021

42179453012

923

100

12020

1040

150

4 0

6 8 113 6 4

1543663

5339747

68180

44

5 0 150

10050

15050

5015050

100

1 50

5 0

53 10

128411

219946

274746

200 50

50700

50

50850100

8040

240

130

30 150 59

18260

18496

18125

32

308

7 9

405121

4

50 250

15050

40050

5040090

4 02 00

4 0

50 400

10050

25050

4015040

100

300

50

70 50

25050

80250

0

0

100 50

10050

702010

030

190

150

113 72

40496

52

4653638

9041

110

190

118

111

10263

42

5828949

108

38

35 129 23

139349

2310422

124

9

50 100 50

50600100

5085050

40120

40

50 300 50

5035050

5040050

50150

50

350

400

150

100

470130

130580

40 200 40

5020050

4020040

40190

40

50 250 50

5040050

5045050

50250

50

5 0 250 5 0

5035050

5020050

50300

50

100

200

50115050

140

70

132

3 8

1431193

75

67142

28 145 16

249061

3310721

81 38

4 8

30 170 30

6032060

5046050

40150

40

100

200 50

5036050

5035050

50150

50

58 108

53241

129642

50 200 80

5020050

5020050

40150

40

40 250 40

4037040

4041040

40150

40

29 190 58

7027790

6022579

33226

38

100

200

501050100

250

100

150 50

1501050100

170

50

50 100 50

5029050

5040050

50100

50

80 100 50

4035040

5030050

40100

40

50 150 40

5025050

5025050

1 01 10

1 0

40 160 40

5034050

5037050

40150

40

50 210 40

5027080

5027050

40240

40

20 210

50100060

1 20

1 70

9 51 12

1929916

1044616

167833

50 50 50

5035050

5025020

505030

116515

583251

230

107

8 0 220

8 0

4020070

10025050

30180

40

65 374 50

2435368

4232325

3 73 33

4 7

40 380 30

5035050

5029060

50350

50

68 347 26

2679757

23189

241

300 50

15090050

50170

40 300 4040

2040

402040

30150

30

50 150 30

8020050

50400150

100

100

40

27 147 46

4625050

3522019

45111

25

40 40 10

105010

50700100

3050150

250200

100

50550140

12045050

50300

50

120

470

10050

150200

10020040

50500

50

160

700 60

50150250

4018040

50700

50

148

832 92

56218183

6316528

461083

78

120

100 50

058050

50350503010

070

40 180 40

5030050

50200405010

050

32 214 32

4217748

3419911

4206

14

40 210 40

60200100

10020050

30230

30

40 200 30

9015050

302030

60300

30

5 0 160

5 0

5045050

5045050

50280

50

40 150 50

50200

80

4020040

5 02 50

5 0

40 40 10

5030050

4020040

501050

171

104224

223

107231

50 300

10025

250100

5020010

50350

25

86

4 71

1 2721

87113

8859122142

410

50 600 50

504080

404040

50520

30

5 0 570 5 050

5050

2005050

50550

50

20 50 50

1035050

4020040

505020

5010010

1010040

4040100

86 20

1501058

12

38117

150 6 0

60050

80650

5 0 100 5 0

5040050

5030050

30100

30

50 100 50

5035050

5029050

404040

50 50 50

4059040

5050050

50100

50

200

100

5025050

5020050

100

50

200

80

100

10

10 280 10

100

100

10

250

240

240

120

50 50 50

5025050

4020040

100

2080

16 58 33

018640

12021181

438913

3 0 6 0 3 0

2045020

5045050

306030

150380

230100

1010

280

170

100 50 10050

25050

5025050

4 04 04 0

1 0 250

3020

250

25

50 50 50

5067050

5060050

50100

50

73 61 80

72607

42

4159258

435232

730

600

100 50140

450100

50450200

360

30

80 450

100

50400100

6045070

70490

20

57 534 52

457133

367041

22572

45

540

511

64350100

275150316

295

422

11

50 450 50

15050

5010040

50700

50

5 0 500

5 0

5020050

4010040

40700

40

50 550 50

5030050

5040050

5 06 50

5 0

58 545 71

316224

6711764

50613

39

90 541

1221609150

430

174

50 400 50

8080080

5076050

50300

50

123

414

56144185

248

224

600

150

2001750150

50350

50 760 50

25050

5020050

50500

50

173

656

263

33608105

393726130

138

372

64

488

2416

18173

20624944

417

26

448

437

10232

155389

5418435

131

3 84

2 8

40 560 50

10025050

200250280

260

400

120

1 8 502 8 7

266945

9635113

91566

15

50 750 50100

40070

50500504 06 4

07 0

72 713

151

51209124

8320962

69622

56

84 613

18098

83672

19163186

112

685

45

170

921

1081002211

689

415

750 30

3001300200

100

700

50 680 80

2010020

3013030

60850

60

116

641 57

10133277

10240552

55772

111

104

720 68

8231372

7933055

72867

86

212

740

131182

612189

13178757

156

996

147

270

1000 50

204020

5040050

7 01 00 0

2 00

88 956 25

300228202

252545

131031

65

5085

015

0

5025050

50450508011

0080

50 850 50

5025050

12015050

601200

70

8 2 366

100

109767

74

99711190

1 98

4 24

8 1

100

550 60

5090050

5070050

70550

100

37 174 26

6785967

6368957

3 52 12

1 6

25 131 84

3486829

80951628832

31 182 90

59950

44

8651077223

31 1

0

100

150 50

5090050

5090050

50250

50

3 0 153

5 8

5487130

5191089

94216

55

50 330 40

6085060

60100060

50350

50

100 50 50

5085050

10001006 01 0

04 0

20 20 20

5080050

2095020202020

71 257 30

68974

5083131

62274

89

120

430

601620100

230

120

70 200

50150040

100

20

0 80 120780

30

5080050

50200

50

300 50250

1900100

70200

149 56

1661699

69

3487

90 441 63

5982118

47843102

1 14

2 74

7 9

92 475

22203365

122

252

300

100

2502250

50

80150

100

100 50

10080050

5090050

40200

40

50 100

50230050

100

250

420

7 4

2542028

31

131

365


E S

tree

t

Beck S

tB

eck

St

600 N

Victory Rd

W-T

empl

e200 N

900 N

600

E

N-Temple N-Temple

400

W40

0 W

400

W

50 N

S-Temple #1

500 N

St a

te

50 W

50 S

Mai

n

300

152 96

591126

90679

50 4 00 2050

5050

0500

50400

50

25 250 25

2510050

2020025

50350

25

219 69

85806439

5

98 1 3 231

13021

42179453012

923

240

130

30 150 59

18260

18496

18125

32

70 50

25050

80250

0

350

400

150

100470

130

130580

58 108

53241

129642

116515

583251

230

107

1 50 60

60050

80650

250

240

50 50 50

50670

50

5060050

50100

50

73 61 807260742

4159258

435232

730

600

100 50140

450100

50450200

360

30

0 7504000

775400

150

650

5 050100100

5020050

25700

50

25 700 5020

1030

501020

50700

50

25 700 2525

2550

1002525

25700

25

540

511

64350100

275150316

295

422

11

50 450 50

15050

5010040

50700

50

448

437

10232

155389

5418435

131

384

2 8

40 560 50

10025050

200250280

260

400

120

750

750

50 200 50

200200200

5030050

25350

50

Appendix B ExistingTraffic Volume Timing Plan: PM

E S

tree

t

500

W

550 S

850 S

900

E90

0 E

900

E90

0 E

300 S300 S300 S300 S

30 E

300 S

200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S

600 S600 S600 S600 S

W-T

empl

eW

-Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity S

tU

nive

rsity

St

Mai

n M

ain

1300

E13

00 E

1300

900 S900 S900 S900 S900 S

700

E70

0 E

700

E

600

E60

0 E

450 S

N-Temple N-Temple

400

W4 0

0 W

400

W50 N

100 S

S-Temple #1S-Temple #1

800

E

500 S500 S500 S500 S500 S


700 S

200

W2 0

0 W

200

W

450 S

700 S 700 S

300

E30

0 E

300

E30

0 E

300

E

350 S

400

E40

0 E

Sta

teS

tate

Sta

te

500

E50

0 E

500

E50

0 E

400

E40

0 E

400

E

50 W

800

E80

0 E

1100

E11

00 E

150

W 50 S

50 E

150 S

250 S

Mai

n

800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S

300

W30

0 W

300

W3 0

0 W

100 S

100 S100 S100 S100 S100 S

200

E20

0 E

200

E20

0 E

500 S500 SUni

vers

ity B

lvd

30 20

201400

20

1206 02 0

202 82

667109

101857

352 65

110138

60362

5 0 350 5 0

5020050

1005050

40450

50

187

322 53

6423745

8030173

8 54 39

7 1

5 0 450

5 0

50100100

10010050

50500

50

50 400 50

5015050

5010050

5 04 00

1 00

40 380 30

100450

50

5040050

40380

60

50 200 50

5030050

5020050

50320

70

2 714

6 3 85211634

5324162

20158

52

50 150100

20100

200

4 0

9 7 110 4 5

1839170

7967457

46241

42

5 0 300 5 0

5020050

10025050

50300

5 0

100 60

1712114

1310146

54150

46

150

10050

40050

5045030

200

50

240

170

39 166 48

15539

234103

24149

29

304

150

11082

543

20 350 50

4045040

15065050

5 06 00

5 0

40 350 40

50200100

15030050

50450

50

100

200200

50

100320

180

200

100 40150

40

15040

160

40

150

0

78 52

17536

56

4781331

7137

150

180

102 72

1922355

9541953

131

38

37 114 30

189840

3312121

128

29

50 150 50

3050030

5080050

30150

30

50 150 50

10040050

5055050

5050150

500

400

200 50

600100

50850

50 100 50

4025040

5035050

30300

40

50 100 50

40450100

5060040

40500

100

5 0 160 5 0

5035050

5030050

50550

50

50 200

50155020

280

230

120

3 1

1231499

72

62230

38 117 2129

12960

141176

1 32 33

8 3

30 110 30

4038040

2063020

50250

50

40 150 40

5035050

3045020

40180

100

58 110591

30

110859

150

100 40

4022040

5030050

20150

20

40 250 50

4045060

6045040

50250

50

24 201 69

5936077

4224770

35344

61

50 200

50125050

150

300

70 70

1001500

207070

70 20 50

2042030

3058020

202020

50 30 30

5033050

3040020

203030

40 140 50

3022080

4039030

6 01 20

2 0

40 200 40

5045050

4034040

20300

20

30 160 30

5040050

5025050

50350

50

40 200

40105050

2 00

2 00

16 58 11

2144525

1458417

24112

40

40 50 20

4030050

3035020

20120

30

117542

78528528

510

5

5 0 250

5 0

3030030

5030050

50250

50

58 262 58

3444071

2733230

3 13 90

4 1

50 300 50

5040050

5025050

50400

50

68 347 26

2679757

23189

241

290 30

1001400

50

50150

40 200

30401030

302040

10200

10

40 160 20

3042030

3055020

50200

50

26 153 40

5029559

6329618

20221

57

20 60 20

105010

3085050

4040100

250200

10050300350

20065050

50300

50

100

500 50

50150150

15022030

20800

20

150

600 50

50150250

10020025

501000

50

114

836

10766

255249

7314619

351503

55

100

100 50

030070

5055055010

050

40 200 30

4020040

4018040

20200

40

43 257 27

2317158

561827

6258

14

100

250 5050

200150

5015050

30350

30

20 150 50200

150200

403040

60500

50

3 0 150

4 0

4040040

5055060

50600

100

50 100 50

50250

50

4025040

1 00

5 50

5 0

50 30 10

3019030

1017010

401040

279

103167

229

113312

50 360 70

10100100

7010020

50300

50

75

4 31

70

1671

107

666210

18485

15

50 550 50

5030

150

5020504055

040

5 0 600

15040

4040

2205050

30700

30

30 20 10

108080

5010050

252525

5020010

2022030

3030100

81 22

1471484

25

38224

100 5 0

62080

70870

5 0 100 5 0

5045050

3025040

60100

40

50 100 50

50350100

5030050

50100

50

100

100 50

10300100

2065040

5080100

200 50

5030050

5020050

300

50

12050

260

10

10 220 10

10180

10

250

350

230

180

40 150 40

3020030

4020050

508050

41 82 33

016459

19826870

45202

10

20 10 20

3045030

3053030

201020

25350

400

60100

250

350

100 10 10050

28050

20300205 05 05 0

1 022

0

3030

520

20

50 300 50

15065050

5095050

50200

50

88 88 7750644

66

3788983

769054

790

1000

100 0 70

40590100

40780190

100

50

60 500 60

7045080

13055080

100

700

70

45 428 38

609252

10512334

29834

66

26 764

15050

400200

335200547

313

432

50

50 850 50

15040

5015050

40700

40

5 0 850

5 0

5020050

308030

50750

50

50 800 50

5030050

150400200

5 08 50

5 0

81 746 76

176722

96105105

68823

16

69 585

1102763181

487

504

40 350 40

40800150

50128050

50650

50

93 393

136224761

539

420

400 50

502100

50

80650

30 370 50

20040

4013040

30690

30

84 348

17221

349108

38147972

85673

34

540

35313

193174

56828732

1195

29

660

920

11832

277422

38274148

165

335

49

50 900

100

10040050

150300600

100

600

100

2 1 734 9 659

10749

113115233

138

784

20

70 700 5050

50050

10070050

8 08 00

8 0

74 659

12961

203193

10523678

651058

43

93 618

112138

698134

23589899

149

1201

105

170

768

981562155

1035

425

650 50

2001700170

100

1150

40 700 40

2010020

3017030

201300

20

90 659 74

71387100

9862449

651195

237

75 670 6677

37533

8045167

641035

181

182

906 9 3

151543259

18975375

117

1780

83

250

1150 50

206020

4040040

4 01 95 0

2 50

5910

29 66

378469360

483251

281897

54

3010

50 30

5040050

5050050

602200

100

5010

00 50

6025040

5025050

502150

60

9 6 417 8 1

7857852

114857275

2 67

6 27

7 1

50 800 50

4085040

50130050

50850

100

54 199 16

5985754

95121880

3 83 95

3 4

28 75 81

2293527

127238

49157

79

36 139 64

34980

26

1100666652

91 7

4

100

150 50

10080050

50105050

50350

50

3 6 145

5 8

4877434

5299635

53333

39

50 300 50

5078030

5095050

50350

50

30 100 30

3083030

940804 01 1

04 0

50 30 50

2065020

50100050

302020

91 292 31

60477

11088835

75501

92

100

250

50270050

350

200

50 180

50220050

150

50

010

010

065050

3095050

50150

50

200 50

1002200

50

100

250

123 53

1372063

63

45122

112

365 34

4777355

57140479

8 95 74

8 4

126

491

5351053

144

575

100

100500

2300100

100

100

50 50 50

5080050

70145070

50350

50

50 100

100405050

100

350

458

6 3

2042268

49

150

479

Appendix B ExistingTraffic Volume Timing Plan: PM

E S

tree

t

Beck S

t

Bec

k S

t

600 N

Victory Rd

Victory

W-T

empl

e

200 N

900 N

N-Temple N-Temple

400

W4 0

0 W

400

W

50 N

S-Temple #1

500 N

50 W

300 N

Mai

n

300

300

W

202 82

667109

101857

505 0

0 10201020

000

10500

20

25 450 25

2510050

2510050

50350

25

352 65

110138

60362

27

146

3852

116

5324162

20158

52

240

170

39 166 48

15539

234103

24149

29

100

200200

50

100320

500

400

200 50

600100

50850

58 110591

30

110859

117542

78528528

510

5

50300

300

50

1 00 50

62080

70870

250

350

50 300 50

15065050

5095050

50200

50

88 88 7750644

66

3788983

769054

790

1000

100 0 70

40590100

40780190

100

50

1600

0 11005500

775500

200

1 10 0 5 050

50150

5010025

50700

25

2513

50 50

25100

50

5010025

50700

25

2513

50 5025125

50

2510025

50700

25

26 764

15050

400200

335200547

313

432

50

50 850 50

15040

5015050

40700

40

660

920

11832

277422

38274148

165

335

49

50 900

100

10040050

150300600

100

600

100

1400

750

150

350 25

200200100

2530020

25350

150


APPENDIX C

PROPOSED CYCLE LENGTH

Appendix C OptimizedPROPOSED CYCLE LENGTH Timing Plan: AM

KOA Corporation

E S

tree

t

500

W

550 S

850 S

100 S

900

E90

0 E

900

E90

0 E

300 S300 S300 S300 S

30 E

300 S

200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S

600 S600 S600 S600600 S

W-T

empl

eW

-Tem

ple

W-T

empl

eW

- Tem

p le

Uni

vers

ity S

tU

nive

rsity

St

Mai

n M

ain

1300

E13

00 E

1300

E

900 S900 S900 S900 S900 S

700

E70

0 E

700

E

600

E60

0 E

450 S


4 00

W40

0 W

50 N

S-TempleS-TempleS-TempleS-TempleS-TempleS-Temple

800

E

500 S500 S500 S500 S500 S


700 S

200

W2 0

0 W

200

W

450 S

700 S700 S

300

E30

0 E

300

E30

0 E

300

E

350 S

400

E40

0 E

Sta

teS

tate

Sta

te

500

E50

0 E

500

E50

0 E

400

E40

0 E

400

E

50 W

800

E80

0 E

1100

E11

00 E

150

W

50 S50 E

150 S

250 S

Mai

n

800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S

300

W30

0 W

300

W3 0

0 W

100 S

100 S100 S100 S100 S100 S

200

E20

0 E

2 00

200

E

500 S500 SUni

vers

ity B

lvd

U

120120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

77A

120

120

120

120

120

112A

71A

120

71A

120

72A

120

120

120

120

71A 120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120A

120

120

120

120

120

107A

71A

113A

120

73A

120

112A

120

120

102A

120

94A

120 120 120 120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120 120 125A 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

120 120 120

120 120

120

120

120

120

120

120

Appendix C OptimizedPROPOSED CYCLE LENGTH Timing Plan: AM

KOA Corporation

E S

tree

t

900

E

Beck S

t

Bec

k S

t

600 N

Victory Rd

Victory

200 N

900 N

700

E


400

W4 0

0 W

400

W

50 N

S-TempleS-TempleS-TempleS-TempleS-Temple

800

E

500 N

2 00

W

300

E

Sta

te

400

E

50 W

300 N15

0 W

50 S50 E

Mai

n

300

W30

0 W

120

75A

120

120 120

120

120 112A

71A

71A 120 120 120 120 120120 120120

120 120 120 120

65A

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

Appendix C OptimizedPROPOSED CYCLE LENGTH Timing Plan: Midday

KOA Corporation

E S

tree

t

500

W

550 S

850 S

900

E90

0 E

900

E90

0 E

300 S300 S300 S300 S

30 E

300 S

200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S

600 S600 S600 S600600 S

W-T

empl

eW

-Tem

ple

W-T

empl

eW

- Tem

p le

Uni

vers

ity S

tU

nive

rsity

St

Mai

n M

ain

1300

E13

00 E

1300

E

900 S900 S900 S900 S900 S

700

E70

0 E

700

E

600

E60

0 E

450 S


400

W4 0

0 W

400

W50 N

100 S

S-Temple #1S-TempleS-Temple #1S-Temple

800

E

500 S500 S500 S500 S500 S


700 S

200

W2 0

0 W

200

W

450 S

700 S700 S

300

E30

0 E

300

E30

0 E

300

E

350 S

400

E40

0 E

Sta

teS

tate

Sta

te

500

E50

0 E

500

E50

0 E

400

E40

0 E

400

E

50 W

800

E80

0 E

1100

E11

00 E

150

W

50 S50 E

150 S

250 S

Mai

n

800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S

S-TempleS-Temple

300

W30

0 W

300

W3 0

0 W

300

W

100 S

100 S100 S100 S100 S100 S

200

E20

0 E

2 00

200

E

500 S500 SUni

vers

ity B

lvd

U

81108

108

132A

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

77A

47

108

108

108

108

112A

71A

108

71A

108

72A

108

108

108

108

71A 81

81

81

81

108

108

81

81

81

81

81

81

81

108

108

81

81

81

81

81

108

81

81

81

81

81

81

108

108

81

81

81

108

108

108

108

108

81

81

81

81

81

81

81

81

81

81

81

81

81

81

120A

108

81

81

81

81

107A

71A

113A

108

73A

81

112A

87A

64A

102A

81

94A

108 108 108 108

81

81

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

135A

108 108 110A 108 108 108 108 108 108 108

108 108 108

108 108

108

108

108

108

108

108

Appendix C OptimizedPROPOSED CYCLE LENGTH Timing Plan: Midday

KOA Corporation

E S

tree

t

900

E

Beck S

t

Bec

k S

t

600 N

Victory Rd

Victory

200 N

900 N

700

E


400

W4 0

0 W

400

W

50 N

S-TempleS-Temple #1S-Temple

800

E

500 N

2 00

W

300

E

Sta

te

400

E

50 W

300 N15

0 W

50 S50 E

Mai

n

S-TempleS-Temple

300

W30

0 W

81

75A

108

108 108

47

108 112A

71A

71A 81 81 81 108 8181 81108

108 108 108 108

65A

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

108

Appendix C OptimizedPROPOSED CYCLE LENGTH Timing Plan: PM

KOA Corporation

E S

tree

t

500

W

550 S

850 S

900

E90

0 E

900

E90

0 E

300 S300 S300 S300 S

30 E

300 S

200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S 200 S

600 S600 S600 S600 S

W-T

empl

eW

-Tem

ple

W-T

empl

eW

- Tem

p le

Uni

vers

ity S

tU

nive

rsity

St

Mai

n M

ain

1300

E13

00 E

1300

E

900 S900 S900 S900 S900 S

700

E70

0 E

700

E

600

E60

0 E

450 S

N-Temple N-Temple

4 00

W40

0 W

50 N

100 S


800

E

500 S500 S500 S500 S500 S

South Campus Dr400 S 400 S 400 S 400 S

700 S

200

W20

0 W

200

W

450 S

700 S 700 S

300

E30

0 E

300

E30

0 E

300

E

350 S

400

E40

0 ESta

teS

tate

St a

t e

500

E50

0 E

500

E5 0

0 E

400

E40

0 E

4 00

E

50 W

800

E80

0 E

1100

E11

00 E

150

W

50 S50 E

150 S

250 S

Mai

n

800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S 800 S

S-TempleS-Temple

300

W30

0 W

300

W3 0

0 W 100 S

100 S100 S100 S100 S

200

E20

0 E

2 00

E20

0 E

500 S500 SUni

vers

ity B

lvd

U

120120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

77A

120

120

120

120

120

112A

71A

120

71A

120

72A

120

120

120

120

71A 120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120A

120

120

120

120

120

107A

71A

113A

120

73A

120

112A

120

120

102A

120

120

120 120 120 120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120 120 125A 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

120 120 120

120 120

120

120

120

120

120

120

Appendix C OptimizedPROPOSED CYCLE LENGTH Timing Plan: PM

KOA Corporation

E S

tree

t

900

E

Beck S

t

Bec

k S

t

600 N

Victory Rd

200 N

900 N

700

E

N-Temple N-Temple

400

W4 0

0 W

400

W

50 N

S-TempleS-Temple

800

E

500 N

2 00

W

300

E

4 00

E

50 W

300 N15

0 W

50 S50 E

Mai

n

S-TempleS-Temple

300

W30

0 W

200

E

120

75A

120

120 120

120

120 112A

71A

71A 120 120 120 120 120120 120120

120 120 120 120

60

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120


APPENDIX D

TRAVEL TIME AND DELAY BEFORE AND AFTER STUDY REPORTS

Travel Time Delay After Study Summary, AM

Corridor Length (feet) Length (mi) Direction From To Actual From Actual To Travel Time (sec) Speed (mph) No. of Stops Total Delay (sec)

11127 2.11 EB 300 West 1300 East 200 West 1200 East 395 19.4 4.3 13911127 2.11 WB 1300 East 300 West 1200 East 200 West 420 18.2 4.3 14810361 1.96 EB West Temple University Street Main St 1300 East 414 17.4 4.3 15710361 1.96 WB University Street West Temple 1300 East Main St 488 14.6 6.3 2259255 1.75 EB 500 West 900 East 450 West 700 East 470 13.5 4.7 2109255 1.75 WB 900 East 500 West 700 East 450 West 401 15.7 5 1567934 1.50 EB 400 West 1300 East 300 West 700 East 336 16.5 3.3 1107934 1.50 WB 1300 East 400 West 700 East 300 West 389 14.8 4.7 16612687 2.40 EB 300 West 1300 East 300 West 1300 East 541 16.2 5.7 229

South Temple

100 South

200 South

300 South

12687 2.40 EB 300 West 1300 East 300 West 1300 East 541 16.2 5.7 22912687 2.40 WB 1300 East 300 West 1300 East 300 West 516 17 5 23012686 2.40 EB 300 West 1300 East 300 West 1300 East 537 16.3 7.3 20912686 2.40 WB 1300 East 300 West 1300 East 300 West 459 19.3 4.7 15611884 2.25 NB 600 South 900 North 600 South 900 North 586 14 5.7 27611884 2.25 SB 900 North 600 South 900 North 600 South 463 17.8 4.3 16511092 2.10 NB 900 South Victory Road 800 South 600 North 452 21.5 4 16011092 2.10 SB Victory Road 900 South 600 North 800 South 404 23.7 3.3 1207927 1.50 NB 900 South North Temple 900 South North Temple 331 17.7 4 1227927 1.50 SB North Temple 900 South North Temple 900 South 478 11.6 6.3 2807130 1.35 NB 900 South North Temple 800 South North Temple 379 12.5 4.7 1827130 1.35 SB North Temple 900 South North Temple 800 South 351 13.3 4.7 1767933 1.50 NB 900 South North Temple 900 South North Temple 408 14.9 6 198

200 West

800 South

900 South

400 West

300 West

West Temple

State Street7933 1.50 SB North Temple 900 South North Temple 900 South 226 25.5 2 47

7144 1.35 NB 900 South South Temple 800 South South Temple 230 18.1 3 72

7144 1.35 SB South Temple 900 South South Temple 800 South 252 17 3 108

7127 1.35 NB 900 South South Temple 900 South South Temple 419 11.2 5 2287127 1.35 SB South Temple 900 South South Temple 900 South 280 16.9 3 1077129 1.35 NB 900 South South Temple 900 South South Temple 320 15.7 3.7 1347129 1.35 SB South Temple 900 South South Temple 900 South 352 14.2 5 1517132 1.35 NB 900 South South Temple 900 South South Temple 264 19.1 3 737132 1.35 SB South Temple 900 South South Temple 900 South 246 19.7 3 727127 1.35 NB 900 South South Temple 800 South 100 South 180 23 0.5 427127 1.35 SB South Temple 900 South 100 South 800 South 193 21.1 1.5 63

900 East

State Street

200 East

300 East

400 East

700 East

Travel Time Delay After Study Summary, Midday

Corridor Data Year Length (feet) Length (mi) Direction From To Actual From Actual To Travel Time (sec) Speed (mph) No. of Stops Total Delay (sec)

11127 2.11 EB 300 West 1300 East 200W 1200 East 425 18 5 14511127 2.11 WB 1300 East 300 West 1200 East 200 West 447 17.1 7 15010799 2.05 EB West Temple University Street Main St University Street 316 23.7 3.3 6410799 2.05 WB University Street West Temple University Main St 461 16 6.3 18710842 2.05 EB 500 West 900 East 450 East 900 East 503 14.7 6.7 20910842 2.05 WB 900 East 500 West 900 East 450 West 516 14.4 6.7 2389522 1.80 EB 400 West 1300 East 300 West 900 East 424 15.4 5.7 1399522 1.80 WB 1300 East 400 West 900 East 300 West 472 13.9 6 18812687 2.40 EB 300 West 1300 East 200 West 1250 East 476 16.8 5.8 18712687 2.40 WB 1300 East 300 West 1250 East 200 West 373 21.7 3.5 94

2009

2009

2009

2009

2008

South Temple

100 South

200 South

300 South

800 South12687 2.40 WB 1300 East 300 West 1250 East 200 West 373 21.7 3.5 9410340 1.96 EB 300 West 1300 East 200 West 1100 East 352 20.2 4 9210340 1.96 WB 1300 East 300 West 1100 East 200 West 384 19.4 4 1398706 1.65 NB 600 South 900 North 500 South 600 North 389 15.4 3.7 1658706 1.65 SB 900 North 600 South 600 North 500 South 350 17.4 3.3 11911092 2.10 NB 900 South Victory Road 800 South 600 North 439 17.3 5 17111092 2.10 SB Victory Road 900 South 600 North 800 South 327 23.2 3 717927 1.50 NB 900 South North Temple 900 South North Temple 429 12.8 6 2227927 1.50 SB North Temple 900 South North Temple 900 South 390 14 6.8 1667130 1.35 NB 900 South North Temple 800 South 50 North 390 11.9 5.7 2007130 1.35 SB North Temple 900 South 50 North 800 South 395 12 5 2107933 1.50 NB 900 South North Temple 900 South North Temple 367 15.3 5 1727933 1.50 SB North Temple 900 South North Temple 900 South 246 22.5 3 586350 1.20 NB 900 South South Temple 800 South North Temple 314 13 5 1476350 1.20 SB South Temple 900 South North Temple 800 South 263 15.5 4.3 99

2008

2009

2009

2009

2009

2008

2009

200 East

200 West

900 South

400 West

300 West

West Temple

State Street

6350 1.20 SB South Temple 900 South North Temple 800 South 263 15.5 4.3 997127 1.35 NB 900 South South Temple 900 South 50 South 352 13.8 5 1347127 1.35 SB South Temple 900 South South Temple 900 South 289 18.4 3.3 1037129 1.35 NB 900 South South Temple 900 South South Temple 355 14.2 5 1627129 1.35 SB South Temple 900 South South Temple 900 South 272 17.9 3.7 867132 1.35 NB 900 South South Temple 900 South South Temple 248 19.6 2.7 727132 1.35 SB South Temple 900 South South Temple 900 South 228 21.9 3 637127 1.35 NB 900 South South Temple 800 South 100 South 199 19.1 1.7 587127 1.35 SB South Temple 900 South 100 South 800 South 206 18.5 3 64

900 East

2009

2009

2008

2008

300 East

400 East

700 East

Travel Time Delay After Study Summary, PM

Corridor Data Year Length (feet) Length (mi) Direction From To Actual From Actual To Travel Time (sec) Speed (mph) No. of Stops Total Delay (sec)

11127 2.11 EB 300 West 1300 East 200W 1200 East 377 20.8 4 11711127 2.11 WB 1300 East 300 West 1200 East 200 West 384 19.8 5.3 1048374 1.59 EB West Temple University Street Main St 1040 East 309 18.5 3.3 1008374 1.59 WB University Street West Temple 1040 East Main St 364 15.8 3.7 15510054 1.90 EB 500 West 900 East 450 East 800 East 438 15.6 5 18510054 1.90 WB 900 East 500 West 800 East 450 West 464 15.2 5 2078733 1.65 EB 400 West 1300 East 300 West 800 East 404 14.9 4.7 1598733 1.65 WB 1300 East 400 West 800 East 300 West 576 10.5 7.7 30112687 2.40 EB 300 West 1300 East 300 West 1300 East 570 15.4 5 26212687 2.40 WB 1300 East 300 West 1300 East 300 West 488 17.8 4.3 191

2009

2009

2009

2008

2009

South Temple

100 South

200 South

300 South

800 South12687 2.40 WB 1300 East 300 West 1300 East 300 West 488 17.8 4.3 19112689 2.40 EB 300 West 1300 East 300 West 1300 East 580 14.9 6.7 25212689 2.40 WB 1300 East 300 West 1300 East 300 West 564 16.2 6 2458706 1.65 NB 600 South 900 North 500 South 100 North 295 11.3 2.3 1428706 1.65 SB 900 North 600 South 600 North 500 South 293 20.9 2.7 7913925 2.64 NB 900 South Victory Road 800 South 400 West 454 21 3.5 15513925 2.64 SB Victory Road 900 South 400 West 800 South 396 24.2 2.3 1107927 1.50 NB 900 South North Temple 900 South North Temple 540 10.1 6.7 3247927 1.50 SB North Temple 900 South North Temple 900 South 362 15.3 5.3 1417130 1.35 NB 900 South North Temple 800 South North Temple 440 11 6.7 2457130 1.35 SB North Temple 900 South North Temple 800 South 398 12.4 4.7 2087933 1.50 NB 900 South North Temple 900 South North Temple 265 21.1 2.7 677933 1.50 SB North Temple 900 South North Temple 900 South 404 13.5 4.7 1936350 1.20 NB 900 South South Temple 800 South 40 South 340 12.2 3.7 1856350 1.20 SB South Temple 900 South 40 South 800 South 195 21.2 2 45

2008

2009

2008

2009

2009

2009

2009

West Temple

State Street

200 East

200 West

900 South

400 West

300 West

6350 1.20 SB South Temple 900 South 40 South 800 South 195 21.2 2 457127 1.35 NB 900 South South Temple 900 South 50 South 309 15.7 4 1097127 1.35 SB South Temple 900 South South Temple 900 South 315 15.7 3.7 1167129 1.35 NB 900 South South Temple 900 South South Temple 414 11.8 5 2247129 1.35 SB South Temple 900 South South Temple 900 South 302 16.8 3.3 1295546 1.05 NB 900 South South Temple 800 South 100 South 167 23 1 515546 1.05 SB South Temple 900 South 100 South 800 South 229 17.2 2.7 967127 1.35 NB 900 South South Temple 800 South 100 South 223 17.7 1.7 697127 1.35 SB South Temple 900 South 100 South 800 South 310 12.3 3.7 166

900 East

2009

2009

2008

2008

300 East

400 East

700 East


APPENDIX E

SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATION SURVEY

Survey Questions Tallahassee Amarillo Knoxville Little Rock

1) How many signals does the City operate? 350 293 393 350

2) Do you have light rail in the City? No No No No

3) Do you have State controlled streets in downtown CBD area?

City operates all

signals within city

boundary

City operates all

signals within

city boundary

City operates all

signals within

city boundary

City operates all

signals within city

boundary

4) How many staff does the City have for signal operations and

complaints?4 7 10 4

5) Do you maintain you own signals? Yes Yes Yes Yes

6) Under what division (same as the traffic division?), approx how

many technicians9 7 9 6

7) Do you have a TMC? If no, Skip questions 8 through 10. Yes No No Yes

8) How many people work in the TMC – Supervisor, Operator,

Engineer, Technician?4 n/a n/a 8

9) Do they also take care of communication problems, signal 9) Do they also take care of communication problems, signal

timing complaintsYes n/a n/a Yes

10) Hours of Operation – M to F or including weekends Monday to Friday n/a n/a Monday to Friday

traffic signal management and synchronization project · pdf filetraffic signal management and...

Documents